most interesting and important subject; on the result of which, perhaps, depended the peace and tranquillity of Europe; and of no country more than England?

their own security, on which subject they might have opportunities of judging, which this country could not possess, and on which it would have no right to interpose. He repeated, that he begged not to be Lord Castlereagh professed himself ununderstood as giving any opinion on that able to give any precise answer to the question in the present instance; but he question of the hon. gentleman. It could was quite sure, from what had fallen from not be expected of any member of his maan hon. gentleman of so enlarged a mind,jesty's government, in the discharge of and whose candid mode of discharging his public duty, to communicate any of his parliamentary duty did him so much the circumstances that might have reached honour, that he could not be at all ac-him on such an occasion; while the transquainted with the data on which alone any observations on the present state of affairs in Naples could justly be founded. The circumstances of the recent transaction in that kingdom were certainly most interesting and important. The hon. gentleman, however, seemed to have run away with an assumption of facts relative to the internal condition of Naples, wholly different froming the larger European question would those which had been represented to him (lord C.) or those which had attended the transactions in question.

Mr. Warre remarked, that the noble lord had now repeated those observations which he had made in his speech yesterday, and which were strongly calculated to arrest attention and to excite alarm. He would take the opportunity, before he sat down, of asking the noble lord a question on the subject of Naples, to which the noble lord would of course give or withhold an answer, as he should think proper. A great deal of what had fallen from the hon. gentleman near him, appeared to him to be extremely worthy of the noble lord's consideration. It was with great regret he heard the noble lord hold it out as a probability, that any consideration of safety to the Austrian dominions, as that subject might be viewed by the Austrian government, might justly operate to render the gallant, noble, and justifiable effort of the Neapolitan people to assert their independence, the means of exposing them to the aggressions of foreign powers. With respect to the question that he wished to ask the noble lord, he felt himself especially justified in putting it; because some of his majesty's ships of war had been employed on a service connected and interwoven with the recent transactions in the kingdom of Naples: he meant in transporting the king of Naples to Leghorn. He therefore begged to ask the noble lord if he could foresee the probable time when he would be able to furnish the House with information, either in the shape of documents or otherwise, on this VOL. IV.

action to which those circumstances related was still pending. If the hon. member would, at a subsequent period, move for any information which he might wish for as to the course pursued by this country in the transaction, there could be no difficulty in producing it; but he would himself see, that any communication respect

be attended with more difficulty. This, however, he had no hesitation in distinctly declaring, that the course which had been pursued by this country on the subject, in no way rendered it a party to the proceedings, whatever they might be of the three great powers assembled at Laybach. Although there had certainly been no difficulty on the part of the English admiral on the station, to afford the king of Naples every possible facility for his voyage from Naples to Leghorn-yet it ought not to be inferred from that interference, that England had any participation either in the invitation of his majesty, the king of Naples, to Laybach, or in any other part of the policy of the three great powers on the subject. It was unquestionably a matter of great delicacy, and one on which he could not be called on prematurely, to disclose the policy by which the powers in question were actuated.

Sir Robert Wilson said, he had been given to understand that a Neapolitan of high rank and character had been sent to the English court by the constitutional government recently established in Naples ; but that having tendered his credentials, he was, though received with the noble lord's usual urbanity, not recognised in his character of envoy; on the ground that it was impossible for the British government to recognise any act of the new government at Naples, until the allied powers had come to some decision on the negociation then carrying on at Troppau, and since at Laybach. On that ground, after remaining three weeks here, he understood that the individual in question H

not fail instantly to resent. It was the more ignoble on the part of the British government, that the act was directed against a nation too feeble to express its sense of the injury. He knew the noble lord would say, that a Neapolitan minister was at present resident in London; but he resided here only because the existing government of Naples were desirous, that if the minister whom they had accredited to the court of London should not be received, all intercourse with that court should not be therefore suspended. In this he confessed he thought they acted unwisely; because he thought that they would have done much better boldly to assert all their rights as an independent nation; and if they must perish, at least to perish without the slightest compromise of their dignity and their honour.

had returned to the continent. If that was really the fact, it mattered little what bope of the preservation of peace might be expressed in his majesty's or in the ministers' speech; for here was a direct overt act of hostility against the Neapolitan government. What must be the consequence, when intelligence reached Naples, that the Neapolitan ambassador had not been received? Would it not introduce distrust, and weaken the councils of the constitutional government happily established at Naples? Would it not encourage the anti-constitutional faction? Would it not operate disadvantageously towards liberty, and would it not operate to aid and abet the tyrannous conduct of those sovereigns, who seemed determined to be as oppressive and insolent in prosperity, as they had been servile and abject in adversity; whose present measures tended not merely to the destruction of Neapolitan liberty, but to the general demoralization and debasement of mankind; and who seemed to have commenced a violent crusade against all the duties of humanity and all the principles of civilization? The noble lord, and a colleague of the noble lord, in the other House of parliament, when questioned on the subject of any pledge of this country to interfere with the establishment of the constitutional government in Spain, had expressly declared that the British government had entered into no treaty or engagement for that purpose. It was a constitution similar to that of Spain which the Neapolitans had adopted. They had only asked their Sovereign to give them that constitution which he promised them on the 1st of May, 1815. Their object was, to convert arbitrary power into constitutional autho-wished to declare, that such a plan derity; to get rid of a government supported alone by corruption; to relieve themselves from intolerable and unaccounted taxation; and to destroy superstition, and that general ignorance which he had heard advocated in that House as the best security for the allegiance and fidelity of a people! Such were the requests of the Neapolitans; and finding that it was their general wish, the king had acted as the father of his people, and acceded to them. In doing so, ought he not to be considered as acting as an independent sovereign? In sending back, however, the minister whom he had deputed to us, we had committed an act of hostility towards the Neapolitan people, which, if they were as powerful as they were brave, they would

Lord Castlereagh declared his impossibility of entering into all the details of this subject, even were he prepared himself to feel all the animation with which the gallant general appeared invariably to contemplate every possible species of revolution. He denied, however, that a reluctance to acknowledge a revolution suddenly effected in any country was a just ground of hostility. Without entering into particulars, he would merely observe, that the English government were required to recognise new forms and changes, suddenly brought about under very mysterious circumstances, and principally by one sect. It seemed tolerably evident, that the object of that sect was not confined to Naples, but extended itself to the subversion of all the existing governments in Italy, and the union of the whole into one state. He by no means

manded, or would justify, the interference of neighbouring powers. That must be a subject of much deliberation and investigation on the part of those powers, and it was a problem which, he trusted, we should not undertake to solve. He positively denied, however, that we had done any thing which the Neapolitan government were justified in considering as an act of hostility: and he could assure the gallant general that we had not done any thing which the Neapolitan government so considered. The intercourse between the two countries continued on the same footing as before the late changes. The ministers at both courts communicated as usual, and carried on the ordinary routine of diplomatic intercourse. But he protested

stances. They would have instantly sent a fleet and an army to assist their ancient allies in the establishment of their liberties. It was well known by every English gentleman who had travelled on the continent, that the conduct of the government of Austria was so execrable in Italy, that any thing

against the principle, that the British government were bound to rush forward and acknowledge every change that might be made in a foreign government without the least deliberation as to its nature. On the contrary, the British government had distinctly declared, that it could not instantly consent to a technical and formal recog-like freedom or independence was utterly nition of a state of things which required much deliberation to estimate. What the gallant general had said of his (Lord C.'s) former explanation respecting the principle of the conduct of the British government towards that of Spain, was perfectly correct, although at the time alluded to, the gallant general was inclined to push the assumption that the British government was a party to the declaration of the allied sovereigns, which it was not. All that he now wished to press on the House was, that while they held the government of this country, strictly to account for the engagements which they made with other powers, they would not interfere too frequently in the policy of other powers. Those powers were as much entitled to act independently with reference to any point in which they considered their own interests involved as this country would be under similar circumstances.

Sir R. Wilson wished to ask the noble lord, whether the non-recognition of the new Neapolitan minister was accompanied by any circumstances hostile to the new constitutional government of Naples?

Lord Castlereagh-Certainly not. Mr. James adverted to the Austrian loan, and requested to know if there was any prospect of its being repaid.

Lord Castlereagh replied, that in the early period after the contraction of that loan, there had been some payments upon it; but for a long course of years no payment had taken place; and although some communications had recently been interchanged on the subject, they were not of a nature to hold out any great prospect of a speedy repayment.

Mr. James then gave notice, that he would shortly submit to the House a motion for papers explanatory of the subject.

Sir Robert Heron was sure the question of Naples would not be treated as one of delicacy by Austria. If that House exhibited so much delicacy upon it, Naples might be over-run and annihilated before any beneficial interference could be interposed. Our ancestors would not have shewn much delicacy. under such circum

incompatible with the continuance of its power. What was the fact? Ministers had by their measures brought this country into such a state, that it was impossible we could enter upon a new war without immediate destruction to our finances. Were it not for that, there was no English heart that would not anxiously wish that this country should vigorously interfere to put down this new system of diplomacy, and counteract the designs of the three holy and royal inquisitors; who took upon themselves to sit in judgment on what they were pleased to consider the crimes of independent nations. Happy result of that most happy piece of royal blasphemy-the holy alliance!

Mr. Hume, although he rather differed from his hon. friend on the question of the propriety of interference on the part of this country, thought that we ought to take every opportunity of showing our good will towards the Neapolitans. It had been stated to him, that an application had been made to our government,to know if permission would be granted to export to Naples a supply of arms, for the manufacture of which a commission had been received in this country. If such an application had been made and refused, it would show, that our government favoured the objects of Austria, Russia, aud Prussia, rather than the struggle of the Neapolitans for independence. He should be very sorry if such a disposition had manifested itself and he requested to know how the fact stood.

Mr. F. Robinson replied, that as the law at present stood, there was no obstacle to the export of arms to any part of Europe-except Spain. Power was given by law to prohibit the export of arms by an order in council; but that power had been exercised only with reference to Spain. The export of arms to Naples was therefore perfectly free.

Mr. Hume observed, that that was no answer to his question. Had any such application as that which he had described been made?

Lord Castlereagh said, that he had not heard of any such application.

Mr. Bankes then brought up the report. After it had been read a second time, and on the question for agreeing to it,

Mr. Hume, adverting to the paragraph which related to the reductions said to have been made in the military establishment of the country, said, he presumed that his majesty's ministers were prepared to say in what branches, and to what extent, those reductions had taken place.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer replied, that it was impossible for him to answer at present. The nature of these reductions would appear when the Army Estimates should be laid on the table.

Mr. Hume said, he should have supposed that ministers, before they put the passage in question into his majesty's mouth, would have the estimates before them, otherwise they had made his majesty state that, of the truth of which they

could not be assured.

he wished to be produced were, an extract from the form of prayer annexed to the act of Conformity, and a copy of the order in council for the omission of her present majesty's name. To the production of those papers he did not anticipate any opposition. He might state at the same time, that he did not want them for his own information, as he had long ago been supplied with them by a gentleman in the University of Oxford, whose attention had at an early period been directed to this order in council. The learned member concluded by moving for the documents he had mentioned.

Lord Castlereagh had no objection to the production of the documents now moved for, although at the same time he saw no necessity for the motion, as facts of a similar kind were often stated in debate, and assumed as true, without any official authentication. His opposition to the motion of the learned gentleman, on

The motion was agreed to.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Thursday, January 25.

The address was then agreed to. THE QUEEN-LITURGY.]-Mr. We-a former occasion, had proceeded from therell, in rising to submit the motion the unusual, and, as he conceived, not of which he had given notice yester- very prudent moment at which it was day, observed, that as a noble lord had brought forward. given notice of a motion which was unquestionably the most important that had been brought under the consideration of parliament since the year 1789, it was impossible for any gentleman to go into. the examination of that question until the necessary preliminary information had been given to the House. Were he to state, as an historical fact, that for three centuries the name of a queen consort had in no instance but one, that of the consort of George 1. been omitted in the Liturgy, he had no doubt that he should get credit for having stated the fact correctly; but he apprehended that, in parliamentary practice, such an important question ought not to be decided without a regular authentication of the facts by which the decision of the House was to be regulated. When he first proposed to move for certain papers on this subject, it had been supposed by the right hon. the chancellor for the duchy of Lancaster, that he intended to move for a whole magazine of prayer-books. This however, was not the case. From the reign of James 1. down to the present time, there were only seven instances in which he wished to know what the practice had been; and therefore the first branch of his motion would only require that seven short collects should be extracted. The two other documents which

PETITIONS RELATIVE TO THE QUEEN.] Lord Erskine said, he held in his hand a petition from the burgh of Banff, in Scotland, praying that parliament would oppose the institution of any further proceedings against the queen, and endeavour to procure the restoration of her majesty to all her rights. He observed, that he could pledge himself for the petition being properly and respectfully worded. The noble and learned lord also presented petitions to the same effect from the incorporated trades of Dumfries, the incorporated trades of Arbroath, the town of Montrose, the burgh of Selkirk, the city of Aberdeen, New Deer, in the county of Aberdeen, and from some other places in Scotland; and, finally, the petition of the Lord Mayor and Common Council of the city of London in Common Council assembled.

His

The Earl of Darnley rose, to present the petition of the county of Kent. lordship made some observations on the manuer in which sheriffs of counties were selected, and on the way in which they took upon themselves to refuse their assent to public meetings. In the present in