by rendering the maritime police more effectual, by treaties with native chiefs, and other expedients, he hoped that next year it would be seen that the measures taken for the diminution of the slave hade had not been so unsuccessful ** some had imagined. On every ground, both of expediency and paple, he objected to the mo

tion as injurious on the score of humanity, and as leading to a restoration of the principle of protection, which would be injurious to our commercial relations and fatal to the industry of this country.

Sir E. Buxton replied, and the House divided, when the motion was negatived by 275 against 234.

Y far the most important question of foreign policy which engaged the attention of Parliament during the present Session was the affair which arose out of our relations with Greece. Early in the year intelligence arrived that, in consequence of the refusal of the Greek Government to afford compensation to certain demands which our Government had made on account of the claims of certain British subjects, Admiral Sir Wm. Parker had been directed to proceed to Athens, and not obtaining the satisfaction which he required, had resorted to the strong measure of blockading the Pireus. The news of these events occasioned on their first arrival considerable dissatisfaction, many persons regarding so peremptory a line of policy towards a friendly and weaker Power as unworthy of the dignity, and discreditable to the reputation, of a country like England. Upon the meeting of Parliament the prevalent feeling of the public soon found an expression in the Legislature, and gave occasion to a controversy which was not set at rest until, a few months later, it shook the Whig Government of Lord John Russell to its foundations. In the present chapter we shall trace the progress of the discussions which from time to time arose out of the Greek transactions, until in their further development they involved the pacific relations of this country with France, and became preg nant with very important political consequences. The first notice that occurred of the subject was in the House of Lords, on the 4th of February, when, in a tone of much earnestness, Lord Stanley adverted to these events as being of no inconsiderable importance. It appeared

to him that we had proceeded to an act of unjustifiable violence towards a foreign State, the very weakness of which demanded forbearance on our part, and the peculiar standing of which, with respect to other nations, required that our acts should be regulated by discretion and moderation, rather than rashness or precipitation. He recapitulated the facts as he found them in the ordinary channels of information, with a running commentary; characterising the expedition to the Dardanelles as an ill-advised expedition, and the demands made on the Greek Minister as of unusual character; and expressing a hope that the language attributed in some of the accounts to our Minister had never been used by him. He hoped that it was impossible that a British Minister should have said," Be they just or not, his demands must be complied with." It was stated that, compliance with our demands having been refused, the British fleet had been employed to enforce compliance; that the Piræus was blockaded, and a notification published that all Greek vessels of war would be seized if they ventured to leave that port; that the mediation of Russia and France had been tendered, and been refused by the British Minister. Lord Stanley asked information on several points; among others, whether at the time Her Majesty's Ministers declared that we were on terms of peace and amity with all Foreign Powers," orders had been sent out by them, leaving no discretion either to Minister or Admiral, and commanding them to commit acts of hostility against a friendly and weakly Power?

The Marquess of Lansdowne said he would willingly give all the

satisfaction in his power, both now and by the production of information hereafter.

The proceeding, which had assumed somewhat of a hostile character from the share that Sir William Parker had taken in it, was founded on the previous proceedings of many years. The best and highest legal authorities declared our claims to be well founded. The Greek Government had made promises which were never fulfilled, or intended to be fulfilled-had put us off with one evasion after another, and had at last given a flat denial of the redress to which we were entitled. Every other measure having failed, our representative at Athens had been empowered to solicit the presence of Sir William Parker in the waters of Greece. The Admiral was returning from the Dardanelles, and arrived under circumstances in no way derogatory to the Government of Greece, if it had been disposed of its own accord to do an act of justice; and on his arrival he conducted himself in the most courteous manner towards the Government of Greece, tendering his respects both to the Sovereign and to the Minister. Negotiations on the differences ensued; verbal explanations proved unsatisfactory, and were changed for written explanations, and these resulting in a denial of our claims, Sir William Parker resorted to the mildest course which could be adoped under such circumstances: for it was not true that he instituted a blockade of the Piræus; he only served a notice on a Greek vessel of war then in that port, that it would not be allowed to leave until our demands were complied with. The information of the Government did not extend beyond that point. With regard

to the offer of the French and Russian Ministers at Athens to mediate, that offer was made without authority from their respective Courts, and seemed only made for purposes of delay. Our Minister had acted with great discretion and good sense in refusing it.

The Earl of Aberdeen admitted the great blame to which the Greek Government was liable for the nonfulfilment of its engagements, and its evasion of our demands with the most pesevering duplicity. But our claims were not indisputable, though they might be just; and our proceedings had been violent. Going into a criticism of the points connected with the disputed cession of the islands Elaphonisi and . Sapienza, he observed that France and Russia had guaranteed the integrity of Greece, and Greece might not think that she ought to place in our possession the islands we claimed without the consent of the guaranteeing Powers. It might be better for our Government to "be in possession of Sapienza; but even wisdom is only to be obtained by legitimate means.' (Laughter.) With regard to the blockade, the French Minister, at any rate, considered that we had been doing what was equivalent to a blockade.

Lord Lansdowne explained, that our claim to the two islands had formed no part of the peremptory claim which the British Minister and the British Admiral were then enforcing. That question, it was admitted, must be the subject of further explanations.

Lord Aberdeen admitted that, if the fact were so, his observations about the cession of the two islands had no application.

Lord Brougham threw some ridicule on the insignificance of the

islands-one of them supported three goats, and the other supported a single hare. He added a remark on the proper distinction to be made between redressing injuries to the person, and injuries only to the property of a subject. In the former case you are bound to demand reparation and compensation for outrage; but, in respect to debts, he should be loth to interfere, and should leave the party to his remedy at law, in all except

extreme cases.

Lord Lansdowne assured his noble and learned Friend that he would have the satisfaction to find, from the papers to be laid before the House, that this line had been ⚫ strictly observed.

In the House of Commons the subject was first mooted by Mr. M. Gibson, whose inquiries Lord Palmerston answered by a statement nearly similar to that of Lord Lansdowne. Subsequently, upon Mr. Disraeli reverting to the topic, and requiring more specific information, the noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs thus described the grievances for which redress had been demanded :

66

In the first place there is a Mr. Finlay (a British subject), who has been long established in Greece, and who some time since had lands there, part of which was taken forcibly from him for the purpose of forming a portion of the gardens of the palace which King Otho was then building. Mr. Finlay has been for a long course of time, supported by Her Majesty's representatives, endeavouring to obtain proper payment for the land so taken. That payment, however, has never been got. The other case is that of a British subjectnot a Portuguese Jew, as stated by my honourable Friend-of the

name of Pacifico. His house in Athens was violently broken into at midday by a mob, of which part were soldiers in the service of the King of Greece, and some gendarmes, the son of the Minister of War encouraging them. There were, besides, Ionian subjects, who upon different occasions were the victims either of plunder or of corporeal ill-usage, for whom also compensation and indemnity have been required."

With respect to the other and separate question about the two islands of Elaphonisi and Sapienza, Lord Palmerston made this statement:

"By the treaty between Russia and the Porte, signed in 1800, the Ionian State was constituted with the consent of the Sultan: and the State was to consist of certain islands therein named, and of all other islands and islets lying between those islands and the coast of Greece, up to a certain point. In pursuance of that treaty, the two islands in question, Elaphonisi and Sapienza-two very small islands, though from circumstances one of them is of importancewere by name aggregated to two of the larger islands named in the treaty, and those islands have ever since been considered by the Porte, and have been considered by the Sovereign of Greece, as part of the Ionian States. When the treaty of 1830 was signed, by which the Greek State was constituted, the territories of that State were specified as consisting of certain portions of the Continent, and of certain islands; those islands did not include the islands of Elaphonisi and Sapienza. There can, therefore, be no doubt whatever that those islands have been ever since the treaty of 1800, confirmed