i I MA'.: \ ■ >,:f: d«*, \'\{f^ THE FOREIGN POLICY OF GREAT BRITAIN FKOM 1790 TO 1865 LONDOJJ PRINTED BY 8POTTI8WOODE AND CO. NEW-STREET SQUARE INTERVENTION AND NON-INTERVENTION THE FOREIGN POLICY OF GREAT BRITAIN FROM 1790 TO 1805 AUGUSTUS GRANVILLE STAPLETON AXJTHOR OF ■ GEORGE CAfTK'IXG AND Hlf: TIMKS LONDON JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET 1866 The -nnltf nf trnnolation is reserved 57 IH^i PREFACE I BEGAN this work more than two years and a half ago, and the larger portion of it was in Mr. Murray's hands some time before the death of Lord Palmerston. The great amount of popularity which that statesman acquired during the latter years of his career, and the skill with which for the most part during those years he conducted the internal affairs of this country, will make the vast majority of the British public unwilling to scan too closely any defects, if defects there were, in his management of our foreign relations. If I were not deeply impressed with the conviction that the consequences of those defects are still making themselves seriously felt throughout the world — and if I did not conscientiously believe that it is of the utmost importance to my country that their nature should be clearly understood, this book would never have seen the light. It is no pleasant task to find fault witli one wlio has passed away, and, with few sympathizers, to run vi PREFACE. counter to a strong public opinion. But I know that these pages contain the truth, and nothing but the truth : and I am encouraged to their pubhcation by the following passage written by Dr. Stanley, the present Dean of Westminster : ' A single mind, loving the truth only, has before now ' brought the whole mind of a nation round to itself. ' . . . A single voice raised honestly in behalf of truth, ' justice, and mercy, has ruined for ever practices which ' were once universal.' A. G. S. Warbrook, eversley : Jan. 1866. CONTENTS PAET I. EUROPE. CHAPTER I. International Law ....... page 3 CHAPTER II. Adherence of the British Government to the Non-interference Principle from the Breaking out of the French Revolution in 1790 to the Settlement of Europe by the Treaties of Vienna in 1815 16 CHAPTER III. The History of the Non-intervention Principle from the Treaties of Vienna in 1815 to the Passing of the Reform Act in 1831 . 27 CHAPTER IV. Belgian Revolution — Separation of Holland and Belgium — Conduct of the Reform Ministry of Great Britain with respect to the Kingdom of the Netherlands . . . . . ,37 CHAPTER V. Spain and Portugal — The Quadruple Treaty between Spain, Portugal, France, and Great Britain ....... 48 CHAPTER VI. Turkey — Forcible Interference by Great Britain with iicr Internal Aftkirs 02 viii CONTENTS. CHAPTER VII. Affairs of Portugal — Affairs of Naples and Sicily — Summary PAGE 76 CHAPTER VIII. Greece — The Affair of Don Pacifico and others — Debates thereon 92 CHAPTER IX. Russian Interference in Hungary — French Occupation of Rome — Russian Interference in Turkey . . . . .116 CHAPTER X. Treaty Law ......... 131 PART ir. ASIA. CHAPTER I. International Law . . . . . . . .157 CHAPTER 11. The War in Affghanistan 163 CHAPTER HI. India — Lord Dalhotisie's Policy — The Mutiny . . . 170 CHAPTER IV. China — Lord Napier — Opiiun Hostilities — Treaty of Nankin 193 CHAPTER V. Hostilities at Canton, followed by general Hostilities against China — Peace of Tiensin — Third Series of general Hostilities against the Chinese Empire — Cajjtui-e of Pekin — Restoration of Peace . 216 CHAPTER VI. Burmah — Persia — Siuni — Japan ...... 242 CONTENTS. PART III. A M E E I C A—A F E I C A. CHAPTER I. America — Mexico — Brazil — Africa — Slave Trade I'AGE 250 Conclusion PART IV. 269 APPENDIX. Spain and Portugal Alien Laws CHAPTER I. CHAPTER II. 279 286 The Crimean War CHAPTER HI. 295 Spain and Chili CHAPTER IV. CHAPTER V. Fast Day Letter, 1857 304 307 P A E T I. EUROPE. NON-INTERVENTION • VERSUS INTERVENTION. cJOic CHAPTEB I. INTERNATIONAL LAW. The laws which regulate the external intercourse of nations differ in one all-important respect from those which regulate their internal relations. Both are pro- fessedly founded on the eternal principles of justice ; but the difference between them is this — in the case of the internal relations of an independent State there exists some supreme authority within it to determine what is, or what shall be the law of the land; whilst in the case of the external intercourse between inde- pendent States, there exists no supreme authority to decide, in disputed cases, what is or what shall be tlie law of nations. There are certainly many rules of international law which are generally recognised as obhgatory ; but it may be doubted whether there be any one distinct principle laid down by the most celebrated writers on B 2 4 EUROPE. [PAKT I. the subject, the binding authority of which, at some time or another, has not been called in question and denied by some one Power amongst those which com- pose the great family of nations. For instance, the most opposite doctrines have been maintained at one and the same time by some of the most powerful States on the principle, or the law known in maritime warfare under the title of ' Free ships, free goods.' In the arguments which have been used re- specting it, all parties take the high ground, that the view of each is dictated by strict principles of right. Still, since there is no supreme authority, to which all nations must bow, authoritatively to decide, the natural consequence follows — each claims to be in the right, and each acts on its own opinion. Whatever may be the inconvenience arising out of this uncertainty, it is in the nature of things impossible to devise for it any complete remedy. And it may therefore happen, and in point of fact it does often happen, that Governments set up, as principles of inter- national law, dogmas suited to tlieir own convenience at the moment, but which are not really founded on the dictates of truth and justice. Now, the only check which can be placed on this mode of proceeding — the only test which can be apphed to try the sincerity and honesty of a State which lays down a principle of law as one which ought to regulate the intercourse of nations, is this — that when the time comes, however powerful the State may be, it shall submit to having applied to itself the same rule which it has applied to others. If such submission be refused. CH. I.] NON-INTERVENTION. 5 then is it certain that selfish interests, and not the love of fair play and justice, have been the motives in which have originated its previous enunciation and enforcement. If then a nation be desirous of holding a high place in the estimation of surrounding countries — if it wish to exercise a powerful, salutary, and healing influence over the afiairs of foreign nations, it must be indeed careful what principles it proclaims as those of international law ; but when it has proclaimed them, and when it has acted upon them for a course of years — when it has (almost unanimously) condemned other Governments for their violation, it behoves that nation, if it have any regard for its own honour, credit, and consistency, through good report and through e\dl report, whether adherence to it be advantageous or disadvantageous in the particular matter to which it is applicable, to adhere to it with righteous tenacity, and proudly to submit to any evils which adherence to it may entail. This is the duty of an upright and honourable State — a duty to be performed at whatever cost, because it is a duty. Not but what in the long run it is the soundest policy. For, as Lord Macaulay sagaciously remarks, ' the greatest advantage a Government can possess is ' to be the one trustworthy Government in the midst of * Governments which no one can trust.' A nation which possesses this moral influence, es- pecially if it be physically one of the most powerfid on earth, stands as a beacon before the world — its word is accepted : other States, its equal in physical power. 6 EUKOPE. [part i. quail before it, and find themselves yielding to its influence, they hardly know how or why. This results from the majesty of law — from a sense of right, before which, in spite of themselves, the would-be wrongdoers bow : a standard of right has been set up, by which to measure ; and those who fain would grovel, find them- selves compelled to be guided by the disinterested example which is placed before them. Of all the principles in the code of international law, the most important- — the one on which the independent existence of all weaker States must depend — is this : no State has a right forcibly to interfere in the internal concerns of another State, unless there exists a casus belli against it. For, if every powerful State has a right at its pleasure forcibly to interfere with the internal affairs of its weaker neighbours, it is obvious no weak State can be really independent. The constant and general violation of this law would be, in fact, to establish the law of the strongest. This principle as here laid down is the true principle of ' non-intervention.' But, by leaving out the word forcible, and by then applying it, without hmitation or explanation, much confusion respecting it has arisen. It is essential therefore that it should be correctly defined ; for, taking it in the broad sense in which it is sometimes taken, as forbidding all kinds of intervention in the internal affairs of neighbouring States, it is neither defensible in theory nor harmless in practice. Misconceptions on this head are frequent. For ex- ample : an able and intelhgent member of Parhament, late Finance Minister for India, congratulated his con- CH. I.] NON-INTERVENTION. 7 stitueiits* on what lie called 'the final establishment ' of the great principle of" non-intervention" as a maxim ' of our future policy.' For examples of the application of this principle by the British Government he cited three instances : ' Poland, Denmark, and America.' It is true that the phrase ' non-intervention ' will cover these three cases ; but, since they all three, in their nature, differ essentially from each other, you cannot go one step further in explaining the meaning of this ' non-intervention principle ' without discovering that when explained so as to adapt it to each case, it has essentially different significations. Thus, non-interven- tion, as bearing on Poland, means, in Mr. Laing's view, abstinence from exercising the right of war to avenge the violation of treaties ; secondly, as bearing on Denmark, it means abstinence from exercising the right of war arising, first from the violation of treaty, second from an unjust war which confers on all States the right of resisting the aggressors ; thirdly, as bearing on the United States of North America, it means absti- nence from forcible interference in the internal concerns of an independent State against which Great Britain has no casus belli. That the principle, as applicable to cases like the United States, shoidd be finally established as a maxim of our future ' policy,' would be indeed a matter of congratulation ; but that it should be other than a matter of disgrace and shame to tliis nation ' finally to estabhsh as a maxim of our future policy ' that Great Britain is henceforth on every occasion Mr. Laing, vido Times, Sept. 24, 1864, 8 EUROPE. [PAET I. humbly to submit to having the treaties which she has made with other States trampled under foot — that slie is never to exercise her right of war to redress wrong, when an unjust war is being carried on, however flagrant may be the conduct of the oppressor — would be to degrade her in the scale of nations, and to falsify all the glories of her past history. Much confusion, too, arises from enunciating this principle, omitting the essential word forcible ; for the omission of that word extracts the sting. Even celebrated statesmen have fallen into this error, men of whom it might least be expected ; for instance, at the close of the session of 1849, Lord Brougham moved three resolutions on the subject of our foreign policy : the second resolution was as follows : — ' That it is inconsistent with the general interests and ' duty of this country to interfere in the concerns of ' foreign nations, as between their Governments and ' their subjects.' Now the principle set forth in this resolution is not the true principle of non-intervention. For assuredly it is not inconsistent with the interests and the duty of England to interfere in the concerns of foreign nations, and certainly it never has been contrary to her practice. Whenever the interests of this country de- mand it, or whenever there is a reasonable prospect of benefiting a people, it is the duty of this country, and it is in perfect accordance with the sound principles of international law, to interfere by advice and by ex- hortation, provided no attempt is made by force to compel the adoption of that advice. CH. I.] NON-INTERVENTION. 9 To abstain would be to tlirovv away the best means which a powerful State possesses of being extensively- useful, whilst it would be leaving to any Governments, little scrupulous as to their means, the opportunity of embroiling those affairs which it is fitting that a just and powerful State should control by its influence, and influence by its example. Thus Mr. Canning sent Lord Fitzroy Somerset in 1823 to endeavour to obtain from the Spanish Govern- ment such modifications of the new constitution as, by satisfying the demands of France — demands which he nevertheless disapproved — would avert the threatened invasion. And in 1836 the Duke of Wellington sent Lord Eliot to Don Carlos, who was then contending for the succession to the throne of Spain, to negotiate the mer- ciful convention which still bears the name of the ne- gotiator — a convention which, from the skill with which he accomplished a most difiicult task, wiU ever entitle him to the gratitude of the Spanish people. Sound and friendly advice, or measures even evincing marked displeasure — such as the cessation of diplomatic intercourse — are therefore perfectly compatible with the most complete respect for the rights of an indepen- dent nation. It is only when that advice is forcibly imposed upon a weak and unwilling State by its more powerful neighbour that its independent rights are attacked, and that the law of nations, as for a long series of years it was proclaimed, interpreted, and fought for by England, is set at nought and outraged. Of course the propriety of giving any advice must 10 EUKOPE. [part 1. depend on the fitness of the opportunity and the charac- ter of the advice. For the abstract right of amicable interference is one thing, its judicious exercise another. Again, Lord Eussell, in the preface to the new edition of his ' Essay on the British Constitution,' * in complaining 'of the obscurity which prevails in the ' minds of men as to the principles by which British ' policy has been guided in the past, and will be guided ' in the future,' wholly misses the point which occasions the confusion. He says that the obscurity ' arises from ' the double sense which is attached to the term " inter- ' vention," ' which term he thus explains : ' The usual and more proper meaning of the term " intervention " is interference in the internal affairs of ' other nations, ' The neiv and less accurate application of the term ' is to all interference in the disputes of independent ' nations.' After citing two cases, (1) French intervention in Spain in 1823, (2) Enghsh intervention in Portugal in 1826, which he describes as examples of the two kinds of interference which he has thus defined, and after correctly pointing out that ' great confusion must arise ' from using the same term and applying the same argu- ' ment to these two kinds of interference,' because they were based on wholly different grounds, he observes : ' The first kind of interference should as a rule be forbidden and avoided.' Now this remark would have been just, if he had qualified the rule by the word forcible, coupled with absence of offence ; but the I'ule * Introduction^ p. 81. CH. I.] NON-INTERVENTION, 11 as he has laid it down exchides all interference, amicable as well as forcible, even in cases where offence has been given. The omission of these quahfications therefore only serves to intensify the obscurity whicli creates the confusion which he deplores. Lord Eussell further remarks : ' It is true that France * has interfered in the internal affairs of Mexico and ' Eome, and that England has interfered in the internal ' affairs of China, but in these instances it has been ' declared that the intervention was exceptional and ' temporary, and was contrary to the general principles ' on which the foreign policy of England and France ' was founded' The appropriateness of the assertion that ' interven- ' tion is contrary to the general principles on which the ' foreign policy of England is founded,' will be better appreciated when the reader has arrived at the con- clusion of this work. But when Lord Eussell describes France as having ' interfered in the internal affairs of Mexico and Eome,' as if the interference was undertaken on the same grounds in both cases, it is evident that he does not rightly apprehend the principle which he undertakes not only to lay down, but to explain. Lord Eussell truly says that ' all pubhc writers have * declared that a nation has a right to settle its own form ' of government, provided that it does not injure other ' nations in its mode of doincf so.' Now the forcible interference of France in the inter nal affairs of Eome was never attempted to be justified by the French Government on the ground of France having received any injury from Eome ; on the contrary, 12 EUROPE. [part i. the Prince President distinctly stated that it was decided on because it was ' necessary in order to maintain the pohtical influence of France,' — a plea which is most unjust. But the forcible interference in Mexico was defended on the just and legitimate grounds, that France had received such provocation from the Mexican Gov- ernment and people as gave her a right of war against them, and these provocations were such as gave France a right to interfere for the establishment of such a Government in Mexico as would secure her from a repetition of them. In the case of Eome, therefore, the interference was a gross violation of the true rule of non-intervention. In the case of Mexico, the rule, whether correctly or incorrectly laid down, is not applicable. A larger question was at issue — viz. a question as to the right of war against an offending State : acquire that right, and it of course must contain the minor right of for- cible internal interference. Therefore thus to confound the cases of Mexico and Eome by placing them in the same category, serves only to obscure and confuse as to the true principles of the law of nations. Lord Palmerston himself seems not to have had any clearer idea of the true principle of non-intervention than his noble colleague. For on the occasion of the debate on Chinese affairs (May 20, 1864) he observed : ' My honourable friend (Mr. Buxton) said that the ' principle on which the British Government ought to ' act is that of non-intervention in the affairs of other States ; a very plausible principle, and one which in CH. I.] NON INTERVENTION. IS ' many cases ought to be strictly adhered to : but my ' honourable friend forgets that there are cases in which ' we have treaty rights, and there are cases in which ' we have national interests ; and if his doctrine were to ' be applied rigidly in every case, our treaty rights ' would be abandoned, and our national interests would ' be sacrificed.' Now what is the principle which Lord Palmerston and his honourable friend were discussing ? If it be the correct non-intervention principle, viz., ' abstinence from forcible interference in the internal ' concerns of an independent State which injures not its ' neighbours,' his remarks about treaty rights are obviously irrelevant. For the violation of treaty obhgations, if the State with whom the obligations are contracted requires their fulfilment, is an injury con- stituting a casus belli. To the abandonment or to the enforcement of treaty rights, the true non-intervention principle, to which the absence of injury is essential, is simply inapplicable. Not so to what Lord Palmerston describes as ' the sacrifice of national interests ; ' because, if all that is necessary to justify forcible intervention be the promo- tion of national interests, and if each State has the rio-ht to judge of its own national interests, and to promote them at the expense of its neighbours, then the non- intervention principle, if so to be applied, is not even a ' plausible principle ; ' it is in fact no principle at all. For that maxim can neither be a 'fundamental truth, nor a tenet on which morality is founded,'* which on one day • Vide Johnson's definition of ' Principle' 14 EUROPE. [part i. ' ought to be strictly adhered to,' and on the next to be cast aside as ' a narrow-minded prejudice,' according as supposed national interests may require. When quoted by those who so use it, it is not even a specious pretext. Here then is a first principle, on the breach or on the observance of which the whole intercourse of nations essentially depends. And yet the most con- fused and imperfect apprehension of it appears to prevail in quarters in which it could be least expected, and in which more particularly it is important for the safe, just, and consistent management of our foreign affairs that it should be rightly and clearly understood. Doubtless it is a public misfortune that so it should be, but more or less it accounts for the fact that the British people, with regard to this principle, are for the most part dead to its real significance. It has, however, been already stated that there are cases in which forcible interference with the internal concerns of an independent State is justifiable ; and those cases are when the condition of those internal concerns is the cause of external injury of sufficient gravity to justify war upon the State inflicting it. Such were the grounds of justification of the Greek treaty in 1827, into which the principle of applying force entered. For if one nation has a right of war against another for unredressed grievances, it has of course a right to adopt any measure, short of war, whereby redress may be obtained. Every nation then has a right to manage its own concerns as it pleases, so long as it injures not its neigh- cm I.] NON-INTERVENTION. 15 hours. This is the one great principle of international law on which, far more than on any other, depends the free and independent existence of all the less powerful States which form part of the great family of nations. It is one which every Government and every people having a proper sense of law and justice ought resolutely to maintain. Kepeated violations of it can only lead to the re-establishment of that law — if law it can be called — which marked the barbarous ages of the world, viz., the law of the strongest ; a law which, it has been proudly boasted, had been stamped out and extinguished by the united influences of Christianity and civilisation. N'oTE. — When the Prince de Talleyrand was Ambassador at the court of St. James's, a lady asked him the meaning of non- intervention. He sarcastically replied: 'Madame, non- * intei-vention est un mot diplomatique et ^nigmatique, qui * signifle a peu pres la meme chose qiC intervention.'' 16 EUROPE. [pAm t. CHAPTEE II. ADHERENCE OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT TO THE NON-INTER- VENTION PRINCIPLE FROM THE BREAKING OUT OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTION IN 1790 TO THE SETTLEMENT OF EUROPE BY THE TREATIES OF VIENNA IN 1815. Although, according to the principles of truth and justice, the non-intervention principle ought to be encrrossed in the code of international law, and to be acknowledged by all nations, yet it cannot be denied that certain European States have constantly refused to recognise its validity. Such refusal, of course, increases the difficulty of en- forcing this principle ; but it is a difficulty (as has been already shown) inherent to all international laws, no supreme authority existing to decide, in case of differ- ence, what they are, or what they ought to be. Much, however, may be done towards overcoming this difficulty. For a powerful State can do a great deal towards securing the general recognition of an international law which is really founded in right, by asserting it, and by adhering to it, in its dealings with other States ; and especially by submitting to it, whether advantageous or disadvantageous to its own interest, whenever the time may come that it shall be applicable to itself en. II.] NON-INTERVENTION. 17 With regard, then, to this principle of non-interven- tion. Great Britain has not always been of the number of those States which have refused to recognise its bind- ing force. On the contrary, it was proclaimed by the Government of Mr. Pitt before this country mingled in the French revolutionary w^ars ; and for the long period of forty years it was resolutely maintained by the British Government, of whatever party it was composed. To this principle, therefore, this nation was deeply pledged ; not only by affirming it and obeying it, but by denouncing those nations which dared to infringe it. By this just and consistent conduct the British Government acquired that greatest of advantages whicli a Government can possess, viz. being the one ' trust- ' worthy Government in the midst of Governments ' which no one could trust.' Those, then, who wish to comprehend the real nature of the position of England amongst foreign nations in the year of our Lord 1864, in the which Denmark was trampled on and despoiled by the two great German Powers — those, then, who wish to find out the causes in which originated that position, and who desire to understand why England had no influence with her German alhes — why her remonstrances were disregarded, and the fierce Parhamentary denuncia- tions of her ministers against the injustice and atrocities which the German nations were perpetratmg on the Danes were treated with contempt, must go a long way further back than to the Danish treaty of 1852. If they would learn why it is that tlie Britisli Govern- c 18 EUROPE. [parti. meiit, which for a long period had been the one trust- worthy Government in the midst of Governments which no one could trust, had fallen into the latter category, and become a Government which no one did trust — they must begin their historical retrospect from the breaking out of the French revolution at the be- ginning of the tenth decade of the eighteenth centuiy. They will then see that the v^ars of the world, since then, have mainly arisen in consequence of the dis- regard or the rejection, by the different Governments of Europe, of this non-intervention principle ; and that the great war, in which all Europe was involved from 1792 to 1815, originated in the defiance of it by the great German Powers. For, the first important foreign official document which touches on the great social changes in France openly sets at nought this principle. This document is known in history as ' the declaration of Pilnitz ; ' it bears date August 21, 1791. In that State paper the Emperor of Germany and the King of Prussia proclaimed their intention forcibly to interfere in the internal affairs of France ; for, in the words of the declaration, ' they invoked other Powers, conjointly * with themselves, to employ their forces in order to put ' the King of France in a situation to lay the foundation ' of a monarchical Government conformable ahke to the ' rights of sovereigns and the wellbeing of the French ' nation.' It is true that this declaration became a dead letter, subsequent events in France having created a temporary belief in the minds of the German monarchs, that the King of France might maintain himself at the head of a constitutional monarchy ; but no sooner had en. 11.] NON-INTERVENTION. 19 this liope passed away, than we find that tlie same intentions were again avowed : and the ultimatum (March 1792) offered by Austria to France, as the con- dition of abandoning liostile preparations, contained demands materially affecting the internal concerns of the latter kingdom, viz. (1) the re-estabhshment of the monarchy on a different footing from the one then existing, (2) the restitution to the clergy of their property of which they had been deprived. This ultimatum was at once rejected ; and its rejection was followed, in the succeeding month, by a declaration of war by France against Austria. France justified this war to the world, on the grounds which Condorcet states in his celebrated de- fence of it. ' The French people,' he remarks, ' free to ' fix the form of their Government, can in no respect ' have injured, wdiile using this power, either the safety ' or the honour of foreign crowns. Are the rulers of ' other countries to include in the number of their pre- ' rogatives a right to oblige the French nation to give to ' the head of their Government the same power which ' they themselves exercise in their own dominions? <■ Because they have subjects, do they mean to prevent ' the existence of freemen elsewhere ? How is it that they ' do 7iot see that in allowing themselves to do everything '- for what they call the safety of crowns^ they declare law- '' ful everything that a nation can in like manner do for ' the liberty of another people ? ' It appears, therefore, that the commencement of a war which lasted nearly a quarter of a century mainly originated in the declared intention to violate this non- c 2 20 EUEOPE. [part i. interference principle by Austria and Prussia. For, although it cannot be denied that the mass of tlie French people at that time were eager for war, yet it is equally certain that the avowed intentions of foreign nations to interfere in their internal concerns materially increased their eagerness ; whilst at the same time it gave such strength to the war revolutionary party as enabled them to dethrone the King and to seize the government. Thus Brissot, in his well-known journal ('Patriote Frangais,' Sept. 22, 1792), boasted that ' without the ' war the revolution of the 10th of August never would ' have taken place, — without the war France never ' would have become a repubhc' In July (1792) this policy was followed up by the celebrated manifesto of the Duke of Brunswick, in which the same mientions forcibly to interfere were still more haughtily proclaimed. The dethronement and public execution of the unfortunate Monarch (on whose behalf the Allies were interfering), and the decree of the Convention (Nov. 19, 1792) declaring that ' the French ' nation would grant fraternity and assistance to all ' people who wish to recover their liberty,' followed up by orders to the French generals 'not to allow ' even a shadow of the ancient authorities to remain,' were the practical answers which the French nation returned to the Duke's manifesto. During all this period the |)olicy pursued by the British Government was strictly neutral. On the 12th of May, 17 92, before the King was dethroned, M. Chauvelin, the French Envoy, assured the Foreign Secretary, Lord Grenville, that ' France rejected all ideas of aggrandize- CH. II.] NON-INTERVENTION, 21 ' ment. Slie will preserve her limits, her liberty, her ' constitution, her inalienable right of reforming herself, ' whenever she may think proper ; she will never con- ' sent that, under any relation, foreign Powers should ' attempt to dictate, or even dare to nourish a hope of ' dictating, laws to her. But this very pride, so natural ' and so just, is a sure pledge to all Powers from w^hom ' she shall have received no provocation, not only of her ' constantly pacific disposition, but also of the respect ' which the French well know how to show at all times ' for the laws, the customs, and all the forms of govern- ' ment of different nations. The Kins; indeed wishes it ' to be known that he would publicly and severely dis- ' avow all those of his agents at foreign courts in peace ' witli France, who should dare to depart an instant ' from that respect, either by fomenting or favouring in- ' surrections against established order, or by interfering ' in any manner whatever in the internal policy of ' such States, under pretence of proselytism, which, ' exercised in the dominions of friendly Powers, would ' be a real violation of the law of nations.' On this declaration Mr. Pitt relied for maintaining neutrahty, and even cultivating friendly relations with the newly constructed Government of France. He withheld his countenance from Austria and Prussia, when they threatened/(9rcz(^/^ interference in her internal affairs. Even after the decree of the Convention of November 19, which Avas a virtual declaration of war against all established Governments, the language of Lord Grenville was clear and decisive. ' The terms of ' continued peace,' said the noble Lord, in a despatch 22 EUROPE. [part i. to the British Ambassador at St. Petersburg (Dec. 20, 1792), ' should be the withdrawing their arms within ' the hmits of the French territory, the abandoning their- ' conquests, the rescinding any acts injurious to the ' rights and sovereignty of any other nation, and the ' giving, in some unequivocal manner, a pledge of their ' intention no longer to foment trouble, or to excite ' disturbances against other Governments. In return ' for these stipulations, the different Powers of Europe, ' who should be parties to the measure, might engage ' to abandon all measures of hostility against France, or ' interference in her internal affairs^' &c. These were the principles avowed by Great Britain at the outset of this great contest, and to them throughout its whole duration she steadfastly adhered. Not only did she abjure any right forcibly to interfere in the Internal concerns of France, but so sacred did she hold the rights of an independent State to manage its own internal affairs unmolested, so long as its neighbours were left uninjured, that she claimed the right to require from France 'the rescinding of any acts ' injurious to the rights or sovereignty of any other ' nation.' In defence of this sacred right Great Britain fought and bled. To the last Mr. Pitt was most anxious to avoid the war ; but the French revolutionary Government were resolved on it, as a measure of policy, in order to main- tain their power. As the war with Germany had served to overthrow the monarchy and to establish a repubhc, so the war with England was deliberately entered upon to support the republic they had created. CH. II. NON-INTERVENTION. 23 To read, however, the letters of M. Chauvelm addressed to the British Government, it might be thought that peace was their object ; but to compare the language of the French agent with the acts of the French Government, it would almost seem as if that language referred to some other period of history, so little conformity had it with the actual events which M. Chauvelin professed to be discussing. There have been, however, many who have main- tained that Mr. Pitt unnecessarily plunged this country into the war with Finance in order to put down the revolutionary and anarchical principles which then prevailed there. When the Whig party first came into poAver in 1831 the great increase to the debt which the war occasioned was a favourite topic of declamation with Lord John Eussell, in order to disparage his opponents, and to hold up the Tory party to public odium for the extravagance which had laid so heavy a burden on the finances of this country, in a war which might have been avoided ; and yet there are few historical facts more certain than that Mr. Pitt laboured hard to avert the war, and that his negotiations for the maintenance of peace were cut short only by the French Government declaring war against England. ' We were forced into the war against our will,' was Mr. Pitt's emphatic declaration in Parliament, two years after its commencement. But whether it was an avoidable or unavoidable war, the grounds on which it was justified by Mr. Pitt had nothing whatever to do with the internal condition 24 EUEOPE. [part i. of France. To effect any change in that internal condi- tion was never set forth as the object at which ^Mr. Pitt was aiming. It is true that that great man Mr. Burke justified his warhke advice on these grounds ; but Lord John Eussell in calmer moments has confessed that Mr. Pitt ' disregarded Burke's advice, and took a totally ' different view of the objects and nature of the war. ' Mr. Pitt was ready to admit that we had nothing to do ' with the internal Government of France, provided its ' rulers were able and willing to maintain friendly rela- * tions with foreign Governments. He sought to confine ' France within her ancient limits — to obhge her to ' respect estabhshed treaties, and to renounce her con- ' quests. He sought by expeditions to the West Indies ' an indemnity for the expenses of the war. In sliort, ' he treated Piobespierre and Carnot as he would have ' treated any other French rulers whose ambition was ' to be resisted, and whose interference in the affairs ' of other nations was to be checked and prevented.' * And, from the commencement of the war to the period of his death, Mr. Pitt, whether negotiating at Paris or at Lille, was always true to the principle that, if France abstained from injuring her neighbours, those neigh- bours had no right to interfere with her internal affairs. Mr. Pitt's successors, of whatever party, followed his example. Neither at Amiens in 1802, when Mr. Ad- dington was the minister — nor at Paris, when overtures for peace were made by Mr. Fox, then Foreign Secre- tary — nor at Cambray, when Lord Castlereagh was the * Memoirs of Charles J. Fox, by Lord John Eussell, p. 32, vol. iii. en. II.] XOX-IXTERVEXTIOX. 25 negotiator, were any attempts made by the British Government to impose any conditions on France as to the form of the Government or as to the selection of the individual who was to be the chief ruler ; save that^ it having been proved beyond dispute that the continuance of Napoleon's reign was incompatible with the peace and security of the world, the British Government joined with its alhes in peremptorily objecting to its prolonga- tion : but England never set up as a condition of peace with the French nation that the Bourbons should be restored ; or that, if restored by the will of the people, they should be required to adopt any particular form of Government. If, at the end of the war, the arrangements made by the Congress at Vienna were not such as can be com- mended — if, in the reconstruction of the different States of Central and Northern Europe, far too little consideration was manifested for the rights, the interests, and the feelings of their inhabitants, still it must not be forgotten that the ties of allegiance and nationality had been so broken up by Napoleon, that a really equit- able solution of the comphcations which had arisen, by an equitable adjustment of territory, was a work almost hopeless of accomplishment. Nevertheless, the differ- ence between deciding, after a long war of unexampled confusion, what territories should constitute a State, and interfering forcibly in the constitution of its Govern- ment and its internal arrangements when tlius indepen- dently constituted, is so great, that it is evident, whatever principle may be involved in this matter, the principle of non-interference cannot be affected by it. 26 EUROPE. [part i. So far, then, as Great Britain is concerned, she left nothing undone during the war, or at its conclusion, firmly to engraft this principle in the code of inter- national law, not only by proclaiming that on the unchanging principles of justice there it must neces- sarily be, but in showing her own practical recognition of it by undeviating obedience to it. en. HI.] NON-INTERVENTION. 27 CHAPTEE III. THE HISTORY OF THE NON-INTERVENTION PRINCIPLE FROJI THE TREATIES OF VIENNA IN 1815 TO THE PASSING OF THE REFORM ACT IN 1831. The views taken of the non-intervention principle by the great continental Powers were very different from those which it has been shown Great Britain enter- tained. During the patriotic fervour whicli Napoleon's aggressions on the rights and independence of all the nations of foreign Europe had excited in men's minds, and when kings and peoples were united in one com- mon bond for the defence of their common country, the sovereigns of Germany, in the exuberance of their joy, promised hberal institutions to their subjects. They had even gone the length of incorporating this promise in one of the articles of the Act of Federation signed shortly after the peace ; but the ink with which it had been signed was hardly dry before the principal signers began to prepare measures to enable them to evade its performance. When the hour of danger had passed, the great continental Monarchs found that their absolute thrones were maintained in opposition to the advocates of those popular principles which pre- vailed, not only amongst their own subjects, but more or less amongst all the other nations of Europe. 28 EUROPE. [part i. Whether it was from the mere dread of the pre- valence of these opinions that the Holy Alliance originated, or whether it arose, as Lord Castlereagh indicates in his despatches, out of an insane and pious fanaticism with which at that time the mind of the Emperor Alexander seems to have been affected, certain it is that that memorable treaty was signed before the Congress separated ; and whether it was or was not intended by its Imperial originator to work as it did, there can be no doubt that in fact this Alliance was nothing else but an union of despotic sovereigns in order to aid each other in protecting their absolute authority from the popular encroachments of their own subjects. For this end they acted as a sort of European police, first, as far as possible to prevent any popular outbreak ; but if that failed, then to join in suppressing it in every country where it might happen to triumph. For some time their efforts for prevention were successful; but in the fourth year of their exis- tence, constitutional privileges were demanded by the people, and conceded by the Sovereigns of Naples, Piedmont, Spain, and Portugal. Forthwith the Holy Alliance determined that Eng- land's principle of abstinence from forcible interference should be no impediment to their forcible interposition ; and at the Congresses of Troppau and Laybach measures were concerted for putting down the newly granted constitutional privileges of Piedmont and Naples, and restoring absolute power to their respective sovereigns. At this crisis Great Britain held fast to her principle. A Tory Government was in power. Lord Castlereagh CH. III.] NON-INTERVENTION. 29 was then Foreign Secretary. He never was accused of too great a predilection for popular privileges, or of unfriendly feelings towards the great continental Powers ; but he did not hesitate to issue a document, in the name of the British Government, affirming that the principle on which these proceedings were founded was ' in direct repugnance to the fundamental laws of ' this kingdom, and such as could not be safely ad- ' mitted as the foundation of a system of international ' law.' The principle thus firmly denounced was that on which was founded ' the notion entertained by the ' Holy Alliance of revising, limiting, or regulating the ' course of experiments of casting anew their Govern- ' ments, in which several States of Europe were then ' engaged, either by foreign force or foreign council.' The protest of Great Britain, however, did not deter the Alliance from executing their projects. Both in Piedmont and Naples the constitutions were overthrown by force of arms, and absolute government was restored. And if it be asked, of what use were these despatches of Lord Castlereagh ? a more just or wiser answer can- not be given to the question than that Lord Ptussell gave on July 2, 1864. ' My belief,' said the noble Lord, ' is that the assertion of sound principles of freedom ' and justice by a British minister on the part of his * Government, and their assertion also in Parhament, ' are by no means without effect, although at any par- ' ticular moment it may not be advisable to enforce these ' principles' [Lord EusseU was speaking of the principle of non-intervention] ' by arms ; yet if they are just and 30 EUEOPE. [part I. ' sound, they will have their effect, and Avill finally per- ' vade the general policy of Europe.' The declared principles of the British Government were thus proclaimed to be in direct opposition to those of the Holy Alliance. It remained to be seen which of the two were to prevail, and which were ' finally to pervade the general policy of Europe.' Not long after this despatch was written by Lord Castlereagh, he died. Mr. Canning was his successor. He found the Holy Alliance with greater power than it had ever before arrived at. Flushed with its success in overthrowing the newly established Govern- ments in the Italian peninsula, it seemed but too probable that the new Spanish constitution would not long be left unmolested. Another Congress was again about to meet at Vienna, ostensibly on the affairs of Greece. It met, and it did not finally separate, after its adjournment to Verona, without an attempt to secure a combined movement for the overthrow of the Spanish constitution. Through Mr. Canning's exertions (who, then fresh in office, had not acquired the influence which he subsequently ob- tained) this combined movement was abandoned : but ultimately the French King (who had been a member of the Holy AlUance since the Congress at Aix-la- Chapelle in 1818) singly undertook the task. Against this undertaking on the part of France, Mr, Canning energetically protested, declaring that ' the principle on ' which the British Government so earnestly deprecated ' the war against Spain was that every nation has the ' right to change or to modify its internal institutions,' en. III.] NON-INTERVENTION. 81 not merely to modify them in a popular sense, but the abstract right to modify tliem as they chose. Perhaps there never was an occasion on which tlie opinions of the British people were so united as they were in condemnation of this aggression by France on Spain, and of the grounds on which its authors ven- tured to justify it. The strongest indignation was felt and expressed by men of all sides in politics — whether Whig, Tory, or Eadical, they were Englishmen, and they felt, in political justice, tliat that national indepen- dence in another country ought to be respected, which, in case of civil commotion, they would look to have respected in their own. Durinof the remainder of ]\Ir. Cannins^'s life* he never ceased to maintain and to put forward this prin- ciple ; and it was chiefly by his persevering condemna- tion of its violation he contrived virtually to dissolve that Holy AUiance which was founded in o]3position to it. No considerations of interest or present expediency could induce him to swerve from it ; and although the danger to the peace of Europe from the Greek struggle, during the first four years after he accepted office, was very great, he nevertheless, though most anxious to interfere, yet positively declined to do so, until sohcited by one of the belligerents ; and then, when he had in consequence of such solicitation agreed witli Eussia as to the terms of that interference, he did not contemplate pressing their adoption by any forcible intervention. * He died August «, 1827. 32 EUROPE. [part i. It was not until the mode in which hostilities were conducted by the Turkish general, Ibrahim Pacha, became at variance with the recognised rules of civilised warfare, so as to give every European State a right of war against Turkey, that he entertained the idea of a forcible intervention. It was evident that the Pacha was carrying on a war of extermination — wherever there was the slightest resistance, he massacred all the males, and sent the women and children into slavery in Egypt. He was labouring to blot out of existence a whole Christian people, and to establish a new Barbary State on the shores of the Mediterranean, in the very midst of Europe. Mr. Canning held this to be a casus belli, giving all nations a right to interfere by force, and accordingly he consented to the Greek treaty, which admitted of a forcible interference, if necessary to j)revent the consummation of this atrocious design. And so with regard to the celebrated expedition to Portugal. There was no point which he so earnestly laboured to impress upon the public mind, than that that expedition was sent, not to defend the constitution recently granted by Don Pedro against internal foes, but to defend the Portuguese nation from external enemies. ' Let us fly,' he said, ' to the aid of Portugal, ' by whomsoever attacked, because it is our duty to do ' so, and let us cease our interference where that duty * ends. We go to Portugal, not to rule, not to dictate, ' not to prescribe constitutions, but to defend and pre- ' serve the independence of an ally.' Perhaps there is no event in his official career which so raised Mr. Canning in public estimation, botli CH. iiT.J NON-INTERVENTION. 33 at home and abroad, as his unflinching and successful support of this vital principle on which tlie indepen- dence of nations essentially depends, against the league of absolute Monarchs, who had made the assertion of the opposite principle their actual bond of union. Mr. Canning lived to see ' the effect of the assertion ' of sound principle by a British Minister.' The Holy Alliance was dissolved in all but in form, and its several members became willing cordially to cooperate with the British Government in affairs of mutual interest. During his Hfe there were no more forcible interfer- ences in the internal concerns of unoffending indepen- dent States, and this principle ' finally,' at least so far as finality can attach to affairs continually going on, for some time 'pervaded the general policy of Europe.' Mr. Canning died in August 1827. Shortly after he was succeeded by the Duke of Wellington. His Grace was no admirer of Mr. Canning's policy, yet he knew the value of this principle, which had so long, througli good report and through evil report, whether advan- tageous or disadvantageous to England's immediate interests, been identified with the fame, the fortune, and the honour of his country. Accordingly, when Charles X., in consequence of acts marked with the extreme of rashness and folly, was driven into exile, and a Prince was elevated to the vacant throne by the popular voice, the Duke made no inquiries into the legitimacy of his title ; nor did he wait to see what course other Governments would take, but at once he manfully set the example of recognising the newly established monarcli as King of the French. D 34 EUEOPE, [part i. When, however, a few months after, the insurrection at Brussels took place against the House of Orange, there arose a very different state of things, with which the British Government had to deal. The Dutch Belgic Kingdom of the Netherlands had been created in 1815 by the Congress at Vienna. Its forcible divarication, whether by internal commotion or by foreign aggres- sion, affected the maintenance of existing treaties. Great Britain consequently was not a free agent ; she was compelled by good faith to take some decided part in the future settlement of those countries. Accordingly Lord Aberdeen, who was then Foreign Secretary, "was meditating a conference with the other Allies, parties to the treaties of Vienna, with a view to an ' amicable interference,' when the Government of the Duke of Wellington was outvoted in the House of Commons, and resigned. This event did not take place before those of tljeir opponents who were destined to be their successors had not only expressed their opinions on this particular question of the Netherlands, but had also (following in the steps of their former celebrated leader, Mr. Fox) stamped with their unequivocal approbation this non- interference principle. Some, indeed, as may be seen by the following quo- tations, went much further than the Tory Ministers ; for they required abstinence from even ' amicable in- terference.' 'We are not bound,' said the future Premier, Earl Grey (Nov. 8, 1830), 'to interfere by any obligation ' whatever. If we are not so bound, I repeat, my en. III.] NON-INTERVENTION. 35 * Lords, that in my opinion sound policy, justice, and ' respect for the independence of other people, as well ' as regard for the interests of this country, enjoin us on ' the present occasion not to interfere with tlie internal ' affairs of Belgium.' Lord Lansdowne, afterwards President of the Council in Lord Grey's Government, on the same occasion deprecated tlie ' appearance of intervention even by way ' of advice, unless required by the people of that ' country themselves.' And Lord Palmerston, the then future Foreign Secre- tary, with his usual neatness and clearness of expression, affirmed that ' every nation has a right to manage its ' own internal affairs as it pleases, so long as it injures ' not its neighbours.' It is impossible, therefore, to imagine any people more deeply pledged to a principle of international law, and to a course of conduct founded on it, than was the British nation. For more than forty years it had been made an undeviating rule in their dealings with foreign nations. British statesmen had proclaimed it, not once, not twice, but on every imaginable occasion. When set at nought and violated by neighbouring States, in Parha- ment and out of Parhament the conduct of those States had been made the subject of indignant vituperation. Everything had been done that men could do to stamp on it a sacred character of inviolabiUty. The faith, the honour, the fair fame of the nation were deeply pledged to adherence to it. All parties vied with each other in the vehemence with which they affirmed that the nation was bound to a strict observance of it. When, therefore, D -2 36 EUROPE. [PABT T, the Whigs succeeded to the power which the Tories had held, with a brief interruption, for upwards of sixty years, the chnracter of Great Britain in the European Continent had attained that high position which Macaulay truly says 'is the greatest advantage which ' any Government can possess, viz. to be the one ' trustworthy Government in the midst of Governments ' which no one can trust.' Note. — The substance of these last two chapters will be found in a series of letters by the author, signed ' Lex Publica,' which were inserted in the ' Morning Herald ' between the 5th and the 10th of April, 1850. The author had the satisfaction of finding all which the letters contained confirmed by the late Sir Eobert Peel three months after, at the conclusion of the last speech which he ever delivered in the House of Commons (June 29, 1850). CH. IV.] THE NETHERLANDS. 37 CHAPTEK IV. BELGIAN REVOLUTION SEPARATION OF HOLLAND AND BELGIUM CONDUCT OF THE REFORM M^JISTRY OF GREAT BRITAIN WITH RESPECT TO THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS. The first important question of foreign policy with which the new Ministers had to deal related to the complications which arose out of the popular outbreaks throughout that half of the kingdom of the Netherlands now known as the kingdom of Belgium. The Premier (Earl Grey), the President of the Council (Lord Lansdowne), the Foreign Secretary (Lord Palmerston) had solemnly recorded their opinions as to what British policy ought to be on this question. They did so immediately preceding the resignation of the Duke of Wellington and their own accession to office. ' We are not bound,' said Lord Grey, ' to interfere ' by any obligation whatever. If we are not so bound, ' I repeat, sound policy, justice, and respect for the inde- ' pendence of other people, as well as regard for the ' interests of this country, enjoin us not to interfere with ' the internal affairs of Belgium.' 'I cannot help feeling surprise at what the noble ' Earl (Aberdeen*) stated,' said Lord Lansdowne, ' that ' the Government only contemplated amicable interfer- ' ence such as would be beneficial to the Low Countries * Tliuu Foreign Secretary. 38 EUROPE. [part I. ' and conducive to the interests of Great Britain ; for ' that interference, in times Hke the present, is contrary ' to the usual policy pursued by this country, must be ' pernicious to its interests, and can only lead to the ' most dangerous results.' Lord Palmerston laid down the principle of non- interference in the clearest way ; and Mr. Brougham denounced the idea of a Cofigress, or any interference whatever. On the other hand, the Duke of Wellington con- sidered that the Powers parties to the treaties of Vienna ' would doubtless claim their indisputable right to give ' their opinions on the future explanations of the ' articles. But he would assure the House that there ' was no intention on the part of His Majesty's minis- ' ters, nor on the part of any other Power, to interfere ' by means of arms with the arrangements respecting ' the Netherlands.' All parties thus repudiated the idea of interference by means of arms ; but the Duke took the correct view : for, ' No doubt the Powers parties to the treaties of ' Vienna had an indisputable right ' to consult with each other, and to urge strongly on the belhgerents the adoption of such recommendations as the Powers might deem it advisable to make for a settlement of their differences. Treaty conferred tliis right, although neither of them solicited advice. But the King of the Netherlands did appeal to his Allies to assist him in settling the disorders which prevailed in the Belgian portion of his dominions, and to aid him in restoring his authority. CH. iv.J THE NETHERLANDS. 89 The Duke of Wellington and Lord Aberdeen there- fore judged wisely in causing England to join the Conference of the Allies on the affairs of Belgium ; and although the new ]\iinisters had condemned this course, they also acted wisely in continuing, when in office, to follow it. And had they used their influence to restrain the Congress within the hmits of amicable advice, all would have been in perfect keeping with ' sound policy, ' justice, and respect for the independence of other ' people,' as well as with ' the usual policy ' hitherto ' pursued by this coinitry.' But instead, they allowed themselves to be drawn into becoming consenting parties to an authoritative, arbitrary award, affecting not only the common rights of Holland and Belgium as a united Kingdom, but the rights of Holland neces- sarily appertaining to her as a separate and independent State. This was the first step in tlie wrong direction. If it were right to make an authoritative award, and to demand submission to it, it could hardly be wrong to take the measures necessary for its enforcement. It bore too close a resemblance to the decrees of the Holy Alhance at Troppau and Laybach, which were enforced by arms. The award turned out to be equally distasteful to both parties, but the Conference pronounced it to be ' fundamental and irrevocable.' On this determination of the Conference beino; communicated to the two bel- ligerents, Holland, though sorely against her inchnation, at once consented to accept it. But Belgium repudiated it altogether. Holland, however, by thus acting, and by doing what was required of her in accepting the 40 EUROPE. [part i. proffered terms, concluded a contract with the Allies ; and six several times did the Conference declare that they were bound in honour and good faith to adhere to the contract. They could, therefore, be honour- ably released from the obhgation only by the act of Holland. This ' fundamental and irrevocable ' award was, how- ever, set aside by a fresh one, not more in favour of Holland, as a reward for comphance, but somewhat perversely in favour of Belgium, which had spurned the authority of the Conference. Some of the requirements of this new award were intrinsically unjust towards Holland ; inasmuch as Belgium was to have the privilege of navigating Dutch waters, and making canals through territories which were wholly Dutch. Such conditions the Conference had no right to impose upon an independent State. Next — the citadel of Antwerp was to be surrendered to Belgium without any equivalent. Thirdly — the Duchy of Luxembourg was to be annexed to Belgium. This Duchy had, in conse- quence of certain arrangements at the Congress at Vienna, been made part of the German Confederation. The King of Holland was its Grand Duke. It belonged to the House of Nassau, and was not connected, except through its Duke, with the United Kingdom of the Netherlands. It never had belonged to either Holland or Belgium. To this country the insurgent Belgians laid claim ; for when the insurrection took place in Belgium, and was successful, the inhabitants of Luxem- bourg revolted, and were equally successful in throwing en. IV.] THE NETHERL.INDS. 41 off the authority of their Grand Duke, the Dutcli King. Therefore it was agreed that if the Belgians were allowed to throw off the dommion of the House of Orange, and declare their independence, it was unfair to the inhabi- tants of Luxembourg to deny them the same privilege. Here then the mischievous consequences of the first false step — the joining in making an authoritative award, and demanding submission to it — become manifest. For in order to deal fairly by the people of Luxembourg, the Conference had to break faith with the King of Holland. The Conference had declared, in the course of their deliberations, that the claim of the Belgians to the Duchy was inadmissible ; but, by the new arrange- ment, they assigned the greater part of the Duchy to Belgium. This fresh award the King of Holland indignantly rejected. In vain did his Dutch Majesty demand the fiilfilment of the original agreement. The only answer which he could obtain was, that the new award was, like the last, ' fundamental and irrevocable.' The Ejno- then renewed hostilities. He would have o entirely succeeded in restoring his authority — for the boastful Belgians fled, like sheep from a dog, before the Prince of Orange — had not France sent an army to their rescue. On hearing of this French interference the King ordered his son to withdraw his forces. Then came the almost inevitable sequence to the first wrong step. The King was undisguisedly told that, if necessary, compulsion would be used in order to enforce comphance. England thus declared her readiness to take up arms, 42 EUROPE. [parti. and thereby to set at nought the non-intervention prin- ciple which her statesmen had so recently asserted ; and, what was far worse, in so doing she broke the faith which she had plighted, and the pledges which she had given to the King of Holland. In point of fact, the award was not carried out without the employment of force. Whilst the city of Antwerp had been from the begin- ning in the hands of the Belgians, the citadel remained in the possession of Holland. The Dutch King, dis- regarding the threats of tlie Conference, refused to surrender it. It was then proposed at the Conference to employ force to compel its surrender. Eussia, Austria, and Prussia refused to join in any forcible measures. But the British Ministers had no scruples. In conjunction with France they proceeded to act. They were not content with merely sending a fleet to Antwerp to cooperate with the French army in laying siege to the citadel, the possession of which it was the object to gain, but they had recourse to other acts of hostility ; for they laid an embargo on Dutch vessels in British ports. After a gallant defence the fortress succumbed to the overwhelming forces of the assailants ! Thus did those statesmen, who, just before they came into power, shuddered at even the ' appearance of in- ^ tervention ' of any kind, go on, step by step, from acts of inconsistency to acts of injustice, from acts of in- justice to acts of bad faith, till at last they involved their country in an act of lawless violence, and levied war on a weak ally, who had not given the shghtest cause of oilcnce to the British nation ! CH. IV.] THE NETHERLANDS. 43 The real motives which actuated the conduct of the British Government in these transactions may be sur- mised : I beheve they have never been openly avowed. The affinities between France and Belgium were many and various : there was a very large party, proba- bly the largest, amongst the Belgians who wished for a union with France. Both nations had very recently succeeded in overthrowing their respective Governments, and hberty and freedom were their common watch- words ; they had for the most part a common language, and within the century Belgium had actually formed an integral part of the ' Grande Nation.'' The advantages to Belcrian trade and commerce from the connection were by many thought likely to be great. The danger of so great an accession to the power of France seemed imminent; and the temptations to avert it, if possible, were strong. Perhaps too the ' grand conception' (as it was called), which afterwards was developed, was already working in the mind of the Foreign Secretary. From a strong Tory, he had become a convert to Eeform. In his zeal for his new calling, he had conceived the idea of uniting all the Western constitutional Powers — Portugal, Spain, France, and Great Britain — in one comiuon league against the absolute monarchies in the East of Europe, viz. Prussia, Austria, and Eussia. To this pohtical object was added the supposed necessity for concihating the French people. Such were the probable tempta- tions which served to banish from the minds of the members of the British Cabinet their natural regard for consistency, honour, and good faith. 44 EUROPE. [parti. They were prepared to declare war against France had the French King consented to accept for his son, the Due de Nemours, the Belgian crown, when it was offered to him ; but, that danger avoided, anything was to be done to avert the greater danger of a regular in- corporation with each other of the two countries. All other considerations were accordingly set aside, for the sake of conciliating the King of the French, and of preventing the crisis from terminating in the absorption of Belgium by France. For this object war was waged against Holland, and Antwerp was besieged. For this object the Belgian fortresses — those barrier fortresses which Marlborough and Eugene in the last century, and Wellington in this, considered as essential to protect Europe from French aggression — which were constructed, in a great measure, at the expense of England, Austria and Prussia — were com- plimented away ; the British Government actually sug- gesting that five of them should be dismantled, and accepting in their stead a paper guarantee. ' It was absurd,' said the Duke of Wellington, ' to talk of a ' guarantee of neutrality being a valid security for the ' independence of the new kingdom. Those who in ' 1814 annexed Belgium to Holland, knew there could ' be no permanent guarantee save what the means of ' warlike resistance afforded. They therefore assisted in ' creating the frontier fortresses: and if the two kingdoms ' of the Netherlands required this barrier of defence, still ' more would the new kingdom, the weaker and smaller, ' require every internal security.' The guarantee given by the British Government was CH. IV.] THE NETHERLANDS. 45 for the ' perpetual inviolability, integrity, and neutrality ' of the Belgian territory.' Now Belsrium is a weak State — so weak that she was held to be incapable of mamtaining and defending the fortresses within her own dominions — the fortresses which had been trusted by Europe to her keeping. A defensive alhance binds the State contracting it to go to the aid of its ally, in case of an unprovoked attack upon his dominions, and to make in his behalf every reasonable and practicable exertion — practicable in extent and reasonable in duration ; but a guarantee knows no limits, either of time or of degree. The in- tegrity of the territory of that Ally must be maintained, at whatever cost the effort to maintain it be prolonged — nay, though the guaranteed Power should contribute almost nothing to the maintaining it. Such are the obligations which this country is at present under. Are we prepared to fulfil them should the occasion arise? May not some one of the very parties to the guarantee be the cause of our being called upon to execute our contract ? If Great Britain should call on the other guaranteeing States to join her in the effort, as they are bound by treaty to do, is it probable that tliey will go the length of ever fulfilling the obligations of a defensive alliance, by exertions practicable in extent and reasonable in dm-ation, to maintain the territorial integrity of Belgium ? Is it at all likely that they will go, as they are bound to go, so far as to exhaust their life-blood for such an object? The position, then, in which Great Britain is placed by this undertaking, is in every respect most embarrassing. 46 EUEOPE. [PAKT I. Should any seizure of Belgian territory take place, by any neiglibouring Power, this country is bound by treaty not only to commence but to continue hostihties till the conquered territory is restored — however hopeless that restoration may be. If it be said that that would be impossible, and that we cannot be called upon to perform impossibilities — then why did the Government thus hamper the good faith of the country ? why thus lightly, for the sake of temporary gain, pledge the honour of the British nation to pursue a course which, if she were to persevere in it, might be attended with discomfiture and ruin ? British honour and good faith ought to be the first thing which British statesmen should vigilantly guard. Whatever engagements they enter into should be rigidly fulfilled. This country in former times stood unrivalled amongst the other nations of Europe in the fulfilment of her engagements. Her statesmen ought, therefore, carefully to avoid entering into compacts calculated, from the difiiculty of their fulfilment, to deprive her of this proud preeminence, nor ought they to be lured into contracting them by the example or solicitation of unscrupulous Powers. What moral weight did not she derive from the behef which once prevailed, that what England under- takes that she will perform, that ' where the standard ' of England is planted there foreign dominion shall not ' come.' * Considerations such as these, however, had httle weight with statesmen who could be parties in pledg- * Mr. Canning s speech on Portugal, Dec. 10, 1805, en. rv.] THE NETHERLANDS. 47 ing themselves to the King of Holland, by oft-repeated promises, to adhere to a compact into which they had voluntarily entered, but who on the very first tempta- tion did not hesitate to break through it. To all this it is no answer to point to the general advantages which have arisen from the settlement which was then made of Belgian affairs. It may be quite true that Belgium has flourished greatly since the establishment of her independence — that in 1848 she remained unshaken amidst the convulsions of surround- ing nations, and that a settlement which has lasted so long can hardly have been an unwise one. But Belgium presents more than one important aspect to England and to Europe. Her internal prosperity and tranquiUity are doubtless important, but the power to resist external aggression is still more important. The state of peace which has for so long prevailed, and the rule of a sagacious King, which has so long existed, have been eminently favourable to the former ; but that very state of peace has prevented the latter being tested, nor will it be tested till a general war once again brings the armies of France into the field. Moreover it is certain that, if France had not forci- bly interfered, Belgium would have remained umted with Holland. But, whether the arrangement were wise or unwise, it is certain that the unfortunate course taken by the British ministers on this Holland and Belgiimi question struck the first blow at the proud position which Great Britain held as ' the one trusted Government ' in the world. 48 EUROPE. [PAET I. CHAPTEE V. SPAIN AND PORTUGAL THE QUADRUPLE TREATY BETWEEN SPAIN, PORTUGAL, FRANCE, AND GREAT BRITAIN. The question of foreign policy which next occupied the attention of the Eeform Administration arose out of the affairs of Spain and Portugal, It thus originated. By the constitution of the old Castilian monarchy, and after the union of the three kingdoms of Castile, Arragon, and Navarre under the Austrian dynasty, females could succeed to the Spanish crown ; but when, in 1699, the dynasty was changed (in consequence of the extinction of the reigning family in the person of Charles 11. ), and a member* of the French house of Bourbon mounted the throne, in conformity with the custom of that royal house the Salic Law was established for regulating the Spanish succession. In the year 1830 the health of the then king, Ferdinand VIL, began to fail. He had recently married a young Princess, and as yet had had no children. His wife, being a woman of lively imagination and ambitious temperament, exercised great influence over him ; and, being alarmed at the prospect of all power departing from her in case of his death, she deemed it advisable, in order to guard against such contingency, to prevail * PhiUp V. CH. v.] SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. 49 on the King to issue a Carta Legia (March 30, 1830) abohshing the Sahc Law, thereby admitting to the throne any daughter she might bear to her husband. On this contingency occurring, Don Carlos, the King's brother and next heir to the tlirone, would be deprived of his right to the succession. Shortly after this act, the birth of a princess justified the precaution of the Queen. Two years afterwards, Ferdinand being supposed to be at the point of death, the partisans of Don Carlos persuaded His Majesty to revoke this Carta Legia ; but on his recovery, when he found out what he had done, he cancelled the instrument of revocation, and called the Cortes together to register his new decree. Shortly after this act the King died. Whether the purport of this last Carta Legia was within the scope of legality — wdiether, if it were, it passed through the forms neces- sary to establish its legality — are to this day disputed points on which those well versed in Spanish law hold opposite opinions. It is hardly possible for an English statesman to arrive fairly at a decided conclusion on the merits of a case in which the arguments on either side are so nicely balanced ; for it must be admitted that a Spaniard, without being consciously guilty of any act of treason, might attach himself to either side, and honestly beUeve that he had chosen the right one. The other reigning branches of the house of Bourbon protested against the decree, and Don Carlos, when strongly urged by his brother, refused to recognise its validity. It was certainly not one of those clear E 50 EUROPE. [part i. cases in which one side was evidently in the right and the other evidently in the wrong. Before Ferdinand died, his queen had another daughter. His death at once brought into active antagonism the supporters of Isabella, his eldest daughter, and the sup- porters of Don Carlos, who had once been recognised without dispute as next and presumptive heir to the Spanish throne in case no son was born to his brother. Ferdinand's widow, Queen Christina, forthwith as- sumed the Eegency, in accordance with the King's will, in the name of her eldest daughter, Queen Isabella, and she forthwith proceeded to perform acts of sovereignty. The most remarkable of them was the summoning of the Cortes, whereby she secured the support of the liberal party, which was then the more powerful one at Madrid, as well as in most other parts of Spain. Don Carlos protested against his exclusion. He was the representative of the absolutist party. His partisans were chiefly in the north, but more especially in the Basque provinces, where he was supported not only as the legitimate king, but as the maintainer of those much valued privileges ( fueros) possessed by the inhabi- tants, and which it soon appeared the Queen Eegent and the Cortes were bent on destroying. Both parties were ahke desirous to secure the friend- ship of Great Britain, and both were equally anxious to avoid giving to her any cause of offence. Civil war commenced, and if ever there was a case of intestine strife in which — owing to the great uncertainty as to which party was in the right, to the extreme barbarity with which the contest was conducted, CH. v.] SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. 51 and to the entire absence of offence — there did not exist a shadow of an excuse for authoritative, nuich less forcible interference on the part of a foreign State, it was in these internal disputes in the Spanish portion of the Peninsula. The case of Portugal, though in some points strangely similar to that of Spain, was in one respect essentially different. There also a young girl was on the throne, and her uncle was the Pretender to it — but then no reasonable doubt could be entertained that the lawful Sovereign was the young Queen, Donna Maria de Gloria. She was the daughter of Don Pedro, Emperor of Brazil, who was the eldest son of John VI. king of Portugal. The Pretender Don Miguel was the younger brother of Don Pedro ; he had been obliged to quit Portugal in his father's lifetime, in consequence of an unsuccessful attempt which he made to dethrone his lather, and to make himself master of the government. When the King died, Don Pedro was immediately re- cognised by all as King of Portugal : and when the news of his father's death reached Brazil, the new King granted a constitution to Portugal, and then abdicated in favour of his daughter, Donna Maria, on the condition that the constitution should be accepted. The cause of the young Queen, as in the case of Spain, thus became identified with the cause of liberal institutions. For Donna Isabella, a sister of Don Pedro, having been made Eegent at her father's death — Don Pedro continued her as Eegent, and under her rule the constitution as octi^oyee by Don Pedro was accepted by the Portuguese nation. E 2 52 EUROPE. [part i. It was on the occasiou of Spain endeavouring by force to overthrow this constitution that Mr. Canning's expedition to Portugal was sent in December 1827. For some months it was a matter of debate, whether Don Miguel, who was residing at Vienna, should be allowed to return to Lisbon ; but as he had taken the oath to tlie constitution in due form in the presence of the Portuguese ambassador at that court, and as he bound himself to renew the oath on his arrival at Lisbon, it was thought that to allow him to return would perhaps be the least dangerous course : ac- cordingly no opposition was made to his setting out for and returning to Lisbon. He had not, however, been there many months before he contrived to overthrow the constitution, and to make himself absolute King. After a time Don Pedro returned to Portugal, carried on successful hostilities against his brother Miguel, and replaced his daughter on the throne. Towards tlie end of the contest, but whilst Don Miguel was still possessed of some of the fortresses in Portugal, and still had a small army under his command, Don Carlos was driven out of Spam and took refuge with Don Miguel. Both, however, nearly at the same time quitted the Peninsula, but before their departure a step was taken by the British Government of most unusual import. Great Britain, in conjunction with France, entered into a treaty with the two Queens of Spain and Portugal, in which the two first named Powers agreed to assist the two latter in expelling from the Peninsula the two claimants to their respective thrones, and to adopt measures for the purpose of depriving them of the means of giving further annoyance. Cfl. v.] SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. 53 Now, whatever excuse might have been set up for British proceedings in the Netherlands, in consequence of Great Britain being a party to the treaty by which that kingdom had been constituted, nothing of the kind can be urged in palhation of this quadruple treaty, which was an undisguised and unquestionable violation of the non-intervention principle. Assuredly this country had not the slightest right forcibly to interfere in the intestine quarrels of Spain and Portugal. Everything in the condition of Spain ought to have prevented a British statesman from involving his country in such a conflict. The nation was not even divided into distinct parties. The Carlists, on one side, were indeed united amongst themselves : but the Christinos, the supporters of the throne of Isabella, were at variance amongst themselves. The Queen Eegent was at the mercy of the various factions which surrounded her. The new constitution had no stability ; the legislature was at first the old Cortes, constituted by the Estatudo Real. But within a year from its establishment, an armed force broke into the palace of the Queen at St. Ildefonso (August 12, 1836), compelled her with threats of death to sign a decree abolishing the Estatudo Eeal, to maintain which she had solemnly sworn, and to establish the more democratic Cortes of 1820 in its stead. The Prime Minister, Quesada, was driven from Madrid, and murdered in cold blood, by an infuriated populace, in an obscure inn where he had taken refuge, at a short distance from the capital. At Barcelona, at Saragossa, at Cadiz, at Valencia, at Malaga, and in various other parts of the 54 EUROPE. [part i. country, scenes of riot and bloodshed were of daily occurrence. Convents and monasteries were burnt down ; monks were murdered by scores, when escaping from their burning homes ; and anarchy almost every- where triumphed. Such was the condition of those portions of Spain not in possession of Don Carlos and his partisans. The mode of warfare harmonised with these excesses. Prisoners on both sides, when taken, were shot. As one specimen out of many of the ferocious nature of the strife, take the proclamation of General Mina, on assuming the command of the Queen's army. ' Death,' said the General, ' without pity shall be the ' lot of all who shall show any favour to the cause of ' the insurgents ; and let me add, I know how to keep ' my word . . . The village of Lecaroz was faithless ' to Her Majesty, and sustained her enemies. This ' afternoon I delivered over this village to the flames, ' and have shot one out of every five of the inhabitants, ' as a punishment for their crimes.' With such a cause, led by such men, the Government of Great Britain thought fit to identify their country ! Don Carlos having returned to the Basque Provinces, the British Government further bound itself to supply the Spanish Queen with such arms and ammunition as she might ' stand in need of, and if necessary, to assist her with a naval force. Objectionable and indefensible as were all the pro- visions of this treaty, they were carried out in a still more unjustifiable manner. Tiie cause of the Carlists prospered — that of the CH. v.] SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. 55 Queen retrograded. Then the Government at Madrid applied for further aid from the British Cabinet in the sliape of an armed force of the regular army. The Cabinet had not the manliness or the courage openly to comply Avith this request. They said— If France chose to supply troops she \Yas welcome so to do. They would make no objections ! The French King refused. Then it was that the request was made to allow the agents of the Spanish Government to raise a force in England. This was forbidden by law ; but the King had the power, by proclamation, to suspend the pro- hibition. This degrading step the IViinister? resolved on taking. Accordingly a proclamation was issued for an unilateral suspension of the law. Thus it became lawful to raise troops for the service of the Queen of Spain, but not for the service of Don Carlos. Forthwith the streets of London and the sea-ports were traversed by parties of recruits ; they were paraded below the windows of the Horse Guards, under the very eyes of the Ministry. A body of about 8,000 British mercenaries were thus collected through the special encouragement of the Government. The metropolis had never before witnessed a similar scene. If former Governments had encouraged Britons to fight, at any rate it was in the d.efence or in the service of their own country, not as mercenaries in a foreign cause. The news of these armaments reached the ears of Don Carlos and his advisers, who, in order to deter men from enlisting in the service against him, to take part in a quarrel in which they had no interest, nor, according to the law of nations, any right to interfere. 56 EUROPE. [part t. issued a decree warning any foreigner who should be found in the ranks of his rebelhous subjects, that he would be held to be out of the pale of civilised warfare, and would, if made prisoner, be immediately shot. However unjustifiable this decree, still it must be re- membered that a foreign mercenary who volunteers to meddle in a civil war is far less entitled to compassion, if he meet with such a fate, than the natives themselves, who, by the cry that ' He that is not with us is against ' us,' are forced to belong to one party or the other. Be that however as it may, the contents of this decree obviously presented most appalling considerations to the gallant men who were enrolled in the service of the Queen of Spain, under the command of Colonel Evans. Hearts ready to endure all the hardships and to brave all the dangers of ordinary warfare, might well quail before the prospect of being led out, as criminals, to execution, and dying certainly without glory, hardly without disgrace. Under these novel circumstances there were two courses which the Government might have pursued — (1). They might have used every exertion (a shght one would have been sufficient) to ascertain whether the decree was genuine, and if it were foiuid to be so, they might have at once made known the fact in all the quarters of the new recruits ; fairly warning them of this new and unlooked-for addition to their dangers, and affording to them the option of abandoning the enterprise. (2). Or, they might have done their utmost to discredit the belief that the decree had really been issued. CH. v.] SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. 57 Unfortunately they eliose the latter course. When questioned on the subject by Lord London- derry, the Premier (Lord Melbourne) declared that he did ' not believe the decree was genuine, he thought ' it was a forgery : ' and the Foreign Secretary, Lord Palmerston, reiterated in the House of Commons this opinion of the Premier. Further they stated, not as a matter of belief, but as a matter of fact, that the British soldiers woidd be protected by Lord Eliot's convention. On the faith of these assurances nearly 8,000 Britons went to Spain ; but, alas ! were they protected by the convention? Let Lord Melbourne answer. ' Don Carlos,' he said (February 13), ' has, in spite of ' all remonstrances, persevered in this decree. I believe ' that many cases have occurred in which that decree has ' been carried into execution, and whenever any commu- ' nication has taken place with officers attached to Don ' Carlos, and they have been asked whether that decree ' had been relaxed, the answer has uniformly been, that ' the decree is still in force, and that it would continue ' to be carried into execution.' In some degree this army of mercenaries helped the Queen's cause ; but its end was as deplorable as its origin was ignominious. The officers and men, indeed, who composed the Legion, behaved with the usual gallantry of British soldiers. But although the British Ministry had done everything to encourage the expe- dition, it seems they held that they neither were respon- sible for its fate, nor was it their duty to take any steps to preserve it from ruin. The men were ' volunteers,' they need not have gone unless they liked it ! Little 58 EUROPE. [part i. had the poor fellows foreseen tlie true nature of the expedition, in which their Government had enticed them to engage ! They meUed away, hke snow in the sini- shme, under the hardships which they had to encounter. Death in its varied forms of disease, of cold and of famine, and, tliough last, not least, death by the hands of Don Carlos's executioners, befel the great majority. Perhaps the living were more to be pitied than the dead: without clothes, without food, vdthout shelter, and without pay — viewed with jealousy by the Spanish Queen's Generals with whom they came to cooperate, no condition could have been more forlorn. And yet this was only what ought to have been fore- seen, and provided against, by the authors and encour- agers of the expedition. In the treatment of the Duke of Wellington's armies by the Spaniards, (when, as is well known, those armies must have perished, had even his mighty genius been left to depend exclusively on Spanish funds, provisions, and cooperation,) ample warn- ing had been given, which ought to have been taken and acted on, but all responsibility was repudiated, and the British Ministers displayed nothing but indifference. Colonel Evans returned to England leaving his followers in a woful plight, and the remnant of them were brought back to their native land in a still more deplorable condition. They had done some service to the cause which they went to support ; but nevertheless upwards of two years elapsed after their departure from Spain before the civil war was ended. Such was the fate of this mongrel expedition — sufficientlv British to discredit Great Britain by its en. v.] SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. 59 failure — sufficiently Spanish to secure to Spain the exclusive glory of success, had success attended it. Dishonouring to all concerned in it, save the brave officers and men, who thought that they were serving their country, and who did not know how to draw the refined distinction, wliich the Ministers drew, between what the King's Government itself undertakes, and what it only encourages to be undertaken by others. If it please God to grant that so ignoble and so unworthy an experiment shall never again be tried, the bitter experience to be derived from this one will not be without its value. The treatment of the Legion, however, did not induce the Ministry to withdraw from this fratricidal contest. To the last, the Spanish Queen was ' assisted ' by the naval forces ' of Great Britain, and ' such arms ' and ammunition of war as her ally stood in need of *■ were supplied ' by the British Government. In carrying out this quadruple treaty, so far as Portugal was concerned, there did not occur any trans- actions such as those which have been detailed, and which occurred with regard to Spain. The Pretender, Don Miguel, after he left the shores of his native land, did not again return to them, and the civil war, so far as it was identified with his cause, entirely ceased. But the unfortunate volunteers, who, before the quadruple treaty, and without any encouragement from their own Government, had joined the ranks of Don Pedro, met with no better fate than their fellow- countrymen of tlie Spanish Legion. The arrears due to them were left unpaid — the men. 60 EUROPE. [part i. on whose bravery sole dependence was placed when danger threatened, were left to wander through the streets of Lisbon in poverty and rags, prolonging a miser- able existence on scanty rations of beans and bread, with the occasional addition of a morsel of salt fish. ' Such are the rewards,' observes a cotemporary historian, 'which await adventurers or zealots, who ' hire themselves out to be the mercenary supporters of ' foreign revolutionary Governments.' After, however, the exile of Lon Miguel, Portugal suffered from similar scenes of anarchy and bloodshed to those which prevailed in Spain. Eevolutionary attempts to overthrow the Government were more than once made, in one instance successfully. The Eeform Administration had now taken two great steps to overthrow the principle of non-interven- tion, which, as was observed by the Duke of Wellington (July 9, 1834), ' the noble Earl (Grey), on the very night ' on which he accepted office, had declared should be ' one of the three great principles on which his govern- ' ment should be conducted.' ' My Lords,' said his Grace, ' I do say that this country ' has no right to interfere in the affairs of Spain and ' Portugal. The object of the quadruple treaty is, of ' all others that I have ever seen, the most opposed to ' the political system on which tliis country has ever ' acted. It tends to introduce foreign arms into Portugal ' and Spain, not of interference casually, but for the ' purpose of perpetual interference in the internal affairs ' of those countries,' cu. v.] SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. 61 ' I am sorry to say,' added the Duke, ' that England ' has now lost the position which she formerly occupied ' in the councils of Europe — the great influence and ' benevolent position which enabled her not only to ' preserve peace by her advice, but to preserve harmony ' and a good understanding between the Powers.' Notwithstanding, however, this protest of the Duke of Welhngton, by many, probably by the pubUc in general, the quadruple treaty was looked upon as a master-stroke of sound policy. They fancied that the alliance of the four Western powers, each enjoying what were called ' free institutions,' would serve as a counterpoise to the union of the three great Powers in the north and east of Europe. In the cant phrase of the day, this pohcy was described as a ' grand conception.' 62 EUROPE. [part i. CHAPTER VI. TURKEY — FORCIBLE INTERFERENCE BY GREAT BRITAIN WITH HER INTERNAL AFFAIRS. The relations of the Ottoman Porte with its too powerful subject, Mehemet Ah, Pacha of Egypt, had, for some time previous to the year 1838, been of a very unfriendly character ; but in that year the Sultan, Mahmoud, could no longer endure the daring pretensions of the Pacha, wdiom he accused, not only of refusing to pay tribute, but of venturing to assume to himself some of the attributes which belong exclusively to the Sultan. Mehemet Ali had actually taken under his superin- tendence the administration of the ' holy ' cities of Mecca and Medina. On matters affecting the Mahommetan religion a Turkish Sultan was sure to be sensitively jealous, and it was therefore not to be wondered at that a man of so determined a character as Sultan Mahmoud, consi- deiiug liimself thus aggrieved, should resolve to put down his refractory vassal by force, rather than brook any longer his haughty and insubordinate demeanour. Accordingly the Sultan collected a very powerful army under the command of Hafiz Pacha, the Seras- kier, on the eastern bank of the Euphrates, to menace en. VI.] ■ TURKEY. 63 Syria, a province under the sway of Meheinet Ali by a former treaty, which had received the sanction of Great Britain. Various efforts were made to dissuade the Suhan from pushing matters to extremities, but in vain ; the Seraskier received orders to cross the river, and to drive his foe before him. A fierce battle ensued between the two armies, at Nezib, when the Egyptian forces under the command of the celebrated Ibrahim Pacha, the son- in-law of Mehemet Ali, completely defeated the Sultan's troops. The tidings of the disaster, however, never reached his ears. He had for some time been in a declining state of health, and died on the 1st of July, 1839, and was succeeded by his sou, Abdul-Medjid. The young Sultan was of a very different character from his father. Weak and sensual, the change at such a moment augured ill for the future of the empire, which had long shown symptoms of decay, and which many thought was fast tottering to its ruin. The new reign had hardly commenced when the Porte received a fresh and still heavier blow. Sultan Mahmoud had not only collected an army, but he had equipped a formidable fleet to operate against his re- bellious vassal. Ill as he was, he had accompanied it down the Bosporus on board the ship of the Capitan Pacha, to whom he had entrusted the command. Now this man was a traitor ; he treacherously carried over the whole fleet to Mehemet Ah, and placed it at the Pacha's disposal in the port of Alexandria. The Egyptian Viceroy, already triumphant on land, through the prowess of his ovm arms, was thus made 64 EUROPE. [part i. all-powerful at sea by the desertion to him of his master's fleet. Notwithstanding however the strong position in which the Pacha thus found himself, he was still de- sirous of terminating the quarrel. Whether he had any misgivings as to the course which the great Powers might adopt towards him, if he made any serious attempt to seize the government at Constantinople for himself, or whether he was overawed by the sanctity which necessarily surrounds, in the eyes of a Mahom- metan, the throne of a Sultan, may be doubtful. But certain it is that he made propositions of peace to the Porte, to which the Divan was inclined to accede. When suddenly, at this crisis, an important concerted step was taken by the five great Powers — Eussia, Prussia, Austria and France, and also Great Bi^itain ! (for this country had now become an active member of that conclave, from participating whose designs and practices her former statesmen had religiously kept her.) It was on the 27th of July (1839) that the diplomatic representatives of the Jive great Powers presented to the Porte the following collective note : — ' The undersigned received this morning instructions ' from their respective Governments in pursuance of •• which they have the honour to inform the Sublime ' Porte that the five Powers have agreed to discuss and ' settle together the Eastern Question. They accordingly t invite the Divan to suspend a definitive arrangement ' without their concurrence, and to confide in the bene- ' volent intentions of the mediating Powers.' The motives which induced the British Cabinet to en. Ti.] TURKEY. 65 promote and to join in this proceeding were openly- avowed. Both Great Britain and France dreaded, and not without reason, tliat if the Porte were overpowered by the Egyptian Pacha, Eussia would send, as before in 1832, an army to the rescue ; being indeed bound so to do by the treaty of Unkiar Skelessi. The British Ministers feared that the Eussian army, once again there, would not again retire ; and that the Czar would seize for himself the prey which he would have rescued from the grasp of Mehemet Ali. For tamely submitting to such an aggrandizement of Eussian power neither France nor England were prepared ; and a Eussian war seemed in their eyes but too probable if these events took place ; a war in which Eussia would have tlie great advantage of commencing it with possession al- ready secured. These were dangers against which a prudent English statesman would naturally wish to guard, and so strong an influence had they over Lord Palmerston that he evidently thought that it would be expedient to adopt almost any measures whereby they might be averted. When Eussia therefore was prevailed upon to join in a combined authoritative mandate to the contending parties (although it would probably lead ultimately to employing force), his Lordship doubtless congratu- lated himself on the success of his policy. He had involved England already in a forcible interference in the internal affairs of Spain and Portugal. Why not therefore in those of Turkey, when such strong motives existed for doing so ? But were there no stronger motives which ought to 66 EUROPE. [part i. have made a British statesman long hesitate before taking such a step ? That Eussian statesmen have ever coveted the an- nexation of Turkey, is certain. Situated as are the dominions of the Czar, on the shores of the Euxine, it cannot but be a source of regret that the access to those shores should be under the control of a foreign Power. If the Czar did not covet the command of that access he would be hardly Eussian. Had then the danger been really as great, and the opportunity as inviting to the Czar, as the British Ministers seemed to suppose it was, what could have been the gain to Eussia — what could h^^ve been the inducement to her statesmen to give up taking advantage of an opportunity for which they had so long been looking ? Possibly they thought the ' sick man ' was not as yet ' sick ' even unto death. Probably they were not inclined at that moment to run the hazard of a war with France and England. Possibly they thought that by weaken- ing the resources of the most powerful vassal of the Sultan, who in time of need might fly to his assistance, the Turkish power would in reahty be crippled ; but whatever might have been the view which they took of the question, there was one view which assuredly they did not take, and that view was that in whatever measures they joined, they would not be such as to contribute to promote the objects of the British Ministers, viz., the consolidation of the independence and integrity of the Ottoman empire. Of one gain, however, they were certain. By con- senting to join in this authoritative interference (which CH. VI.] TURKEY. 67 indicated ultimate force) in the internal affairs of an independent State which gave no cause of offence to its neighbours, Eussian statesmen well knew a fresh proof would be given, on the part of the British Government, of the abandonment of those long- maintained professions and principles which England had so perse veringly asserted. They knew too well that she would give the sanction of her example to a course of action against which her best and greatest statesmen had proudly and firmly protested. To beguile this country into openly joining the Holy Alliance, Eussian statesmen too well knew, would be a concession to the doctrines and policy of that Alhauce, which was worth no incon- siderable sacrifice. The treaties of Vienna had afforded justification for some kind of interference with the Netherlands ; and the alliance with France, Spain, and Portugal had been sought to be justified or excused by being de- scribed as a combination of freedom against despotism. But there were no treaties with the Porte necessitating interference, and there were no liberal institutions either in Turkey or in Egypt to sustain ; therefore a forcible interference in the internal concerns of such a State would be a pubhc avowal that, in the opinion of the Government of Great Britain, it was no longer wrong, nor unadvisable, nor at variance with the prin- ciples of international law, that a standing corporate authority should be established in Europe for regulating after its own will, and according to its own view of its own interests, the internal affairs of all the weaker nations of the world. p 2 08 EUROPE. [part i. These in all probability were the real motives which induced the Czar to join in the collective note to the Porte. That note promised ' the discussion and settle- ment of the Eastern question.' It so happened, however, that ' the benevolent dispositions of the mediating Powers,' in which the Sublime Porte ' was invited to confide,' were not quite as harmonious as could have been wished. France was disposed to require that the Sultan should be called upon to fulfil his engage- ments with Mehemet Aii, and should allow him to retain the PachaHc of Syria, as had been settled by a previous treaty; but to this the other mediating Powers would not agree. Now, while the discussions which these differences occasioned were being carried on, a disposition was again manifested at Constantinople to come to terms with the Pacha. The Grand Vizier, Kliosrew Pacha, his great enemy, was dismissed, and it was then hoped that the fleet would have been sent back and peace restored. But Mehemet Ali, secretly encouraged by the French King to look for French support, continued to hold out. The five Powers, in the meanwhile, were unable to agree on the award which was to be binding on both parties. The French Ambassador rejected every pro- position : the object of France was delay, but delay did not suit the objects of the other Powers. Then it was that Lord Palmerston boldly (or rashly, as many thought) resolved on making a separate treaty wdth the three other Powers, without the consent and also without the knowledge of France. The four Powers, thus united, lost no time in agreeing CH. VI.] TURKEY. 69 to and making their award : the terms of which, when communicated, were accepted by the Sultan, who called on Mehemet Ali to accede to them. The Pacha did not reject them, but tried the middle course of opening, on his own account, negotiations with the Divan. His offers not giving satisfaction, the Sultan, in his wrath, deposed Mehemet Ali from his Pachalic, and sent his firman to Alexandria to notify his act. On this the Pacha made up his mind for the worst. He said that he would not be the aggressor, but that he would resist force by force. The collective note, followed by the award, then produced its natural result. The four Powers re- solved on their parts on the employment of force ; and accordingly a powerful British fleet was sent in hostile array to blockade the coasts of Syria, and, wherever it could be done, to cooperate with the forces of the Sul- tan. The siege of St. Jean d'Acre, that powerful fortress which successfully resisted the first Napoleon, was taken by a coup de main by the British fleet ; other defeats followed, and Mehemet Ali was soon compelled to submit. He consented to the terms required, if the Sultan would only grant him the hereditary Pachahc of Egypt. The Sultan, however, was obstinate, and refused to annul the deposition of the Pacha. And now constraint, in his turn, was to be imposed on the Monarch's will. The allied Powers set at nought his determination. They determined that Mehemet Ali should have confirmed to him the hereditary Pachalic (Dec. 6, 1840) on the condition of his giving up Syria, restoring the fleet, and 70 EUROPE. [PAET I withdrawing his troops from the ' Holy ' Cities. The Sultan was accordingly compelled to yield, but he im- posed as a condition on the hereditary succession, that the Porte should choose the successor from the family of Mehemet Ali. But in consequence of an appeal to the four Powers against it by the Pacha, and their de- cision in his favour, the Sultan was forced to abandon this condition. Thus by alternately forcibly coercing, first the Pacha and then the Sultan, the four allied Powers succeeded in setthng, for a time, the internal affairs of the Turkish empire. Now, whatever advantages Great Britain and Europe may have derived, at the moment, from the accomphsh- ment of this settlement, it cannot be doubted but that, so far as this country was concerned, the advantages were transitory and questionable, whilst the disadvan- tages were permanent and certain. These proceedings afforded an additional example of the abandonment of the principle of non-intervention ; they went one step further, for they showed that Great Britain had become not merely a member of the Holy Alliance, but that her Government was content, like France in 1822, to be the actual instrument for executing its decrees. No advantages could compensate for the loss of character which this course of policy involved. The debates which took place at the opening of the next session of Parliament in 1841 showed, on the part of a few speakers, a just estimate of the position in which this country had been placed before the world by the abandonment of her ancient principles. CH. VI.] TURKEY. 71 But, for the most part, it was not of a violatiou of those principles of which complaint was made. The censures were chiefly applied to the unfriendly feeling which had been produced in France, as well by her having been left out of the treaty, as by the manner in which the Foreign Secretary had effected that omission. In the House of Lords, Lord Brougham condemned the policy, because there seemed to him no advantage in interfering, at all sufficient to compensate for the ill-will of France, whilst the Duke of Wellington did not disapprove of what had been done. Li the Commons, Mr, Grote elaborately condemned the whole policy of the Government in this matter. He ' denied that there were any mischiefs so intolerable ' or any dangers so imminent as to constitute a case of ' imperious necessity to call on the Foreign Secretary to ' force forward a new settlement at all hazards.' He said that the old settlement made by ' the Convention of ' Kutayah (1833) was one to which the noble Lord had ' been a consenting party ' and that ' he had officially ' announced to Parhament that that settlement had been ' made, and that he hoped it would continue undisturbed : ' but now, when the Sultan tried to break that settlement, * and was defeated, the noble Lord rushed in and em- ' ployed the King's naval forces to accomplish its over- ' throw.' He therefore ' recorded his deliberate protest ' against going beyond the limit of amicable mediation ' for trying to reconcile contending parties.' Lord John Kussell made a very able and plausible speech in favour of the course pursued, justifying it on 72 EUROPE. [part i. the ground of what would have been had a different course been followed. Unfortunately for such a defence, it has no certainty, it rests on conjecfure, and is of course destitute of proof ; it is always open to opponents to meet such arguments by substituting conjectures of their own, and each set of conjectures is adopted or rejected according to the antecedent views of those who have to deal with them. To the credit of Mr. Joseph Hume, he condemned the proceedings on the true ground. He ' denounced it, ' not only as bad but wicked ; for it had carried ruin ' and devastation into the Syrian provinces. All the * mischiefs which had occurred, he affirmed, had arisen ' from the abandonment of the principle of non-inter- ' vention.' Sir Kobert Peel suspended his judgement till he had received fiu^tlier information. He spoke of the exercise of our ' moral influence ' with approbation, but did not condemn the exercise of our physical force, and con- templated a case in which ' the general interests and ' welfare of Europe might require an active intervention.' He censured the way in which France had been treated by the Foreign Secretary, deprecated the enormous mischiefs which had arisen to the world from this treatment of France, and deplored the vast amount of capital which had been everywhere wasted in prepara- tions for war. Lord Palmerston's justification of the course pursued is contained in the following sentence : — ' The Sultan ' having shown himself unable to resist in the field the ' attacks of the Pacha, it became necessary for him to CH. VI.] TURKEY. 73 ' throw himself on some other Power, and the only choice ' we and the other Powers had, was to give by common * consent to the Sultan the general protection of the ' Powers of Europe, or to allow him, as in 1832, to ' resort to the support of one Power, wliich, by affording ' him assistance under such circumstances, would after- ' wards acquire an undue preponderance in its future ' relations with Turkey.' For this justification, as a matter of policy apart from principle, to be of any real avail, two things are neces- sary, — (1) that it was indisputable that Mehemet Ali was resolved to carry the war against the Sultan to extremities ; (2) that nothing short of actual forcible intervention could have prevented his doing so. With respect to the first, facts are all the other way. The war was begun by the Sultan, and at no period, as is evident from the preceding narrative, did Mehemet AH show a disposition to press his advantages to the overthrow of his master's throne. With regard to the second, it is equally clear that the Pacha would have abstained from further aggression on the remonstrances of the great Powers being ad- dressed to him. Lord Palmerston's plea, therefore, must be set down as insufficient, and even if it could be reasonably accepted as true, it would not prove that the crisis was so imminent, the danger so urgent against which he had to guard, as to excuse the decided violation of the principles of international law which was perpetrated by this Syrian expedition. By it this country was converted into an instrument of the Holy Alliance, the cordial 74 EUROPE. ' [PAKT I. understanding with France was imperilled, and the 'grand conception' was recklessly scattered to the winds. How can such poHcy be accounted for ? Apparently simply from not taking a sufficiently comprehensive view of the bearings, future as well as present, of the foreign policy of this great country. Looking at the affairs of Turkey, the Foreign Secre- tary saw nothing else but the danger from Eussia that was to be guarded against. He considered, as he told his audience, so lately as the 25th of August, 1864, that ' true pohtical wisdom consists not in enunciating a pohcy ' in sonorous terms, but in applying to each question as ' it occurs ' (not the recognised principles of international law and justice, but) ' the rules of common sense and ' prudence.' But when Lord Falmerston lays down as the attribute of ' true wisdom,' the ' application to each question as ' it occurs of the rules of common sense and prudence,' he assuredly ' enunciates ' a very decided ' poHcy,' if not 'in sonorous terms.' It is a ' pohcy ' which can only lead to confusion and inconsistency. This was not the first time that he enunciated it. Li the month of June 1850, in reply to a question, he said in the House of Commons, ' Our ' demands were founded on the circumstances of each ' particular case, and did not involve any general pro- ' position.' In other words, the recognised established principles of international law ought to be cast aside, and the so-called rules of common sense and prudence, which may be one thing to-day and another to-morrow, CH. VI.] TURKEY. 75 ought to regulate the dealings of this nation with foreign States. It is as if one of Her Majesty's Judges were to discard all reference to the law of the land, and to decide each case according to his own notions of ' common sense and prudence.' This is what has been done in directing the foreign affairs of this country. If a ' poUcy ' has not been enun- ciated * in sonorous terms,' at any rate principles have been laid down as rules for conduct when they have seemed to suit with 'common sense and prudent' views — principles which have been lightly rejected, when they have not answered the desired end. This has been done so repeatedly that it may be truly said that there has been established a new system, the system of appealing to international law when it serves the required purpose, and ruthlessly setting it aside whenever it does not. But it is a system which injm'es this country in the eyes of foreign nations, and which the sooner it is abandoned, the better for the honour and the welfare of Great Britain and for the true interests of the world. 76 EUROPE. [PAKT I. CHAPTER VII. AFFAIRS OF PORTUGAL — AFFAIRS 6f NAPLES AND SICILY SUMMARY. The year 1846 witnessed the outbreak of a formidable insurrection against the Queen and her Government in Portugal. It is not necessary here to discuss at large the causes which produced the discontent which led to this rebellion — it is enough to state that there were undoubtedly some grievances of which those who took part in it justly complained, and that the partisans of the Pretender, Don Miguel, to a certain extent favoured the rebels. For some time neither party were strong enough to gain any decided advantages over their opponents, and the civil war continued, although somewhat languidly ; so that there did not appear any immediate prospect of its wearing itself out. But towards the end of the year the Queen's general, the Marquis de Saldanha, gained a decided victory over the rebel forces at Torres Vedras. In the following year the civil war went on, but still without any fur- ther decisive success on either side. The rebel forces continued in the possession of Oporto, and early in March, Saldanha arrived on the banks of the Douro with a force little more than 5,000 strong, whilst the rebels had a force of full 6,000. CH. VII.] PORTUGAL, 77 Meanwhile the agents of the British Government were trying in vain to persuade the Queen to accept British mediation. But when Sa da Bandeira, one of the rebel chiefs, had sailed from Oporto with a small force, and landed in the Algarves, where the people were strongly Mguelite, and when a new ministry had been appointed under Count Tojal, Her Majesty re- lented, accepted the proffered mediation of the British Government, and agreed to open negotiations with the rebel Junta at Oporto. Accordingly terms were offered by Her Majesty, through a British subject, which terms the Junta rejected. The civil war had now lasted only nine months. It Was a purely intestine quarrel ; doubtless highly inju- rious to the Portuguese themselves, but still the two contending parties had given no offence and done no injury to their neighbours, least of all to Great Britain. Nevertheless Lord Palmerston deemed it a case for this country to interfere by force. Having obtained the consent of the great Powers, he called together a con- ference in London of the representatives of France, Spain, Portugal, and Great Britain, when the members authoritatively laid down the conditions which the Queen was to tender to the Oporto Junta. The conditions were fair and equitable for both sides, no undue partiality for either ; but then followed the now too ordinary conclusion — they were to be imposed on the belligerents by force. As usual, the British fleet was the chosen instrument, and the four Powers came to the following resolution : — ' They have determmed and engage that ' the naval forces of their respective Governments, at 78 EUROPE. [PART I. ' present stationed on the coast of Portugal, shall take ' part conjointly and instantly with the naval forces of ' Her Most Faithful Majesty, in any operation deemed ' necessary or opportune by the commanders of the com- ' bined forces to attain the object of this common act.' In conformity with this resolution, the British squad- ron appeared before Oporto : but the Junta did not at once yield. Nevertheless one of the commanders, Das Antas, prepared to evacuate the city with his troops. Steamers in the service of the Junta were permitted to enter the harbour, the troops were embarked in them, and on saihng out, and being summoned by the British admiral to surrender, did so without resistance. Their commander, Das Antas, on coming on board the British admiral's ship, presented him with a protest against ' this act of hosti]itj, perpetrated witJiout declar- ation and without pretext.^ Shortly after the other insurgent general gave in, and the Spanish forces, which had been cooperating by land with the British naval force, entered Oporto, whilst the Castle of Foz was handed over to the custody of the British. The objects of the British Government were thus for a time attained. But so little permanence had the arrangement, that, within four years of its being made, the Queen of Portugal was compelled to dismiss her favourite minister at the dictation of one of her own generals, heading her own rebelhous army. The abdi- cation of the Queen in favour of her eldest son was at that period a scheme much favoured by the opposition party as the only effectual remedy for the grievances CH. VII.] PORTUGAL, 79 of which they complamed. ' The evils,' said tlie ' Times,' ' which might ensue from so revohitionary a proceeding ' are manifest. The abdication of the Queen would be ' termed her deposition by the party interested in another ' intervention in Portugal. The Spanish Government ' would be strongly prompted to act on such an emer- ' gency,' &c. It is true this contingency did not happen. But supposing it had occiu-red. What would have been the position of this country ? Bound by treaty to save Portugal from foreign aggression (as had been done by Mr. Canning in 1826), but having no treaty conferring on England the exclusive right of forcibly intervening in the internal affairs of Portugal, with what consistency could the British Government have opposed the forcible interference of the Spanish Government for the supposed interests of Spain, after having set the example of for- cibly interfering for the supposed interests of England ? The position of the British Government would have been this. If the obligations of treaty were fulfilled, she set up a monstrous claim to the exclusive right of interference — if that claim were not set up, the obli- gations of treaty were left unfulfilled. The conduct of the British Government had been such that, whichever course it took, it would be inevitably in the wrong. It needs not, however, to be denied that the objects sought to be gained by interference were good. But the question is, are good objects to be sought for by unjustifiable means ? Is there to be in the code of international law one rule for the weak and another for the strong? Portugal is not a powerful State — 80 EUROPE. [part r. and England has nothing to fear from her resentment, and on the whole the termination of the civil war con- ferred a decided benefit on her people. But if the rule of intervention be good for Portugal, why is it not good for the United States ? At one time, all Europe thought that no greater act of kindness could have been con- ferred on them, than a forcible interference by a foreign Power to stop their desolating warfare. Why then did the British Government act on principles so different towards them, from those which guided it in the treatment of Portugal ? The civil war in Portugal inflicted little or no injury on this country — the civil war in the United States inflicted on us the most serious injury. It reduced, for a time, hundreds of thousands of prosperous artisans to pauperism. But the British Government collected no Conference on North American afiairs, nor did it attempt to impose any authoritative awards on the contending parties, by the aid of hostile armaments. In what then does the difference consist ? Simply that one of these nations is weak, and that the other is strong ; that England dealt after her own fancy with the weak, but that she dechned to meddle with the strong. What is this but establishing one law for a weak nation, and another for a strong one ? It is to act, neither according to the ' rules of prudence,' nor of ' common sense.' For surely it may still be believed that consistency, impartiality, and justice are not yet at variance with ' prudence and common sense,' and surely it is to be hoped that, in guiding the destinies of a nation, more * true wisdom ' is displayed in making ' its Government en. VII.] PORTUGAL— NAPLES— SICILY. 81 ' the one trusted Government amongst others which no ' one can trust,' than in maiving it a by-word for bad faith and inconsistency throughout the world, the terror instead of the protector of weak States, the object of disUke or contempt to the haughty and the powerful. It is not, however, meant to be maintained that this country ought to have mingled in such a contest as deso- lated North America. God forbid. But if this country were justified in forcibly interfering with feeble Portugal, it is impossible not to believe but that our Government abstained from forcibly interfering with tlie United States solely because they are too formidable a Power to meddle with in safety. It is true that it does not follow that because a State has a right of forcible interference, therefore it is necessary that it should exercise it ; because, for either one or the other, two things are necessary — (1) that there is a right, (2) that it is expedient to use it. But the justification for abstinence from forcible interference with the United States has not been that. Great Britain having the rio-ht to interfere, her Govern- ment have deemed it impolitic to use it ; but the reason put forth for the strict neutrality which has been observed has been, that we have not the right to assist either side. In short, the doctrine of non- intervention has been ostentatiously proclaimed to excuse our abstaining from meddling with a powerful State, whilst in our dealings with weak States it has been ostentatiously violated. The Two Sicilies. — The year 1848 was a year wlien most of the Governments of Europe were rudely shaken G 82 EUROPE. [PAKT I. by the violence of popular outbreaks. Amongst others a rebellion burst forth in Sicily against the authority of the King. ' To His Sicilian Majesty,' Lord Palmerston on December 16, 1847, through Lord Minto, ' conveyed ' the strongest assurances of the earnest desire of Her ' Majesty's Government to maintain, and, if possible, ' draw still closer the bonds of friendship which have so ' long united the crowns of Great Britain and the Two ' Sicilies.' But no sooner had the rebellion broken out on the 10th of the following month (Jan. 1848) than the Foreign Secretary forgot his ' strongest assurances.' In order to help the insurgents, he consented to a trans- action (for which he had to express his regret, as his colleagues would not sanction it) for enabling cannon to be furnished to the Provisional Government of Sicily — he gave to that Government every encouragement : and when there seemed to him a chance of the Sicilians dethronino; their own Kino; and choosino- a Sardinian Prince (the Duke of Genoa), he directed the Sardinian Government to be informed, in order to induce it to accept the offer, that, if the Duke Avere chosen, at the proper time, and when H.E.H. was in possession of the Sicilian throne, ' he would be recognised by Her ' Majesty's Government.'* The defence afterwards made for this sudden and violent departure by the Foreign Secretary from the ' strong assurances' which he had voluntarily given to His Sicihan Majesty, mainly con- sisted in descriptions of the misrule and tyranny which, he asserted, prevailed in the Sicilian half of his domi- nions : but if the King were really such a tyrant and oppressor as he was described, it is much to be regretted * May 8, 1849. en. Tii.] NAPLES— SICILY. 83 that the Foreign Secretary volunteered to give the ' strongest assurances of the earnest desire of his Govern- ' ment,' not only ' to maintain, but, if possible^ to draw ' closer, the bonds of friendship' with so vile a ruler. Surely conduct such as this on the part of a Government is ill-calculated to elevate any nation in the eyes of the world, or to create confidence in its honour and good faith. Well might Lord Brougham exclaim — ' Oh, how feeble the most ancient ties of the firmest ' political friendship ! when the ink was hardly dry ' with which the profession was made of the earnest ' deshe to draw more closely, if it were but possible, the ' bonds which united us to the King of the Two Sicilies, * that Her Majesty's Government should, behind his ' back and without a word of notice, avow their in- ' tention deliberately, but instantly, to acknowledge the ' usurper, upon whose head his insurgent subjects were ' about to place the crown which they had wrested from ' the brow of their lawful Sovereign.' The Ministry, however, on this occasion did not ostensibly go the length of sending instructions to the fleet to interfere in the contest (July 20, 1849) — ' the British Government not deeming the case to be ' one which justified a forcible interference on their * part to prevent the King of Naples from employing ' the means at his command for tlie purpose of rees- ' tabhshing his authority in Sicily.' No opposition was therefore raised to the saihng of an expedition from Naples to put down tlie Sicilian insurgents. Accordingly the operations of the Neapolitan troops against Messina were begun and carried on without interruption, G 2 84 EUROPE. [PAET T. and with such success that the authority of the King was on the eve of restoration. It was then, however, alleged that if hostilities had been conducted according to the usual practice of civihsed nations, and had solely been directed against armed opponents, instead of being equally aimed at the extermination of the unresisting and helpless inhabitants, the naval commanders would have continued to preserve their neutral position. But the barbarities, said to have been committed at Messina, revolted the tender feelings of the French admiral, who persuaded the British admiral not to stand by and remain a passive spectator of such cruel scenes. Accord- ingly those officers took upon themselves the responsi- bility of forcibly interposing and calling on the con- tending parties to establish a suspension of hostilities, with a view to negotiation, under the ' auspices of their ' two Governments, such armistice to last until it was ' known that this their act would be sanctioned by their ' Governments.'* The British and French Governments, on reference, confirmed the steps taken by their naval commanders. The two Governments then undertook to negotiate be- tween tlie King's Government at Naples, and the Provi- sional Government at Palermo ; and they obtained from the King such concessions as even in tlieir opinion the Sicilians would have done wisely in accepting. Accord- ingly they exerted all their influence to induce them to do so. They therefore warned the Provisional Govern- ment that in case a favourable issue to the negotiation * Mr. Temple's explanation to the Neapolitan Goverameut of the cause and character of the interference. CH. VII.] NAPLES— SICILY. 85 did not take place, they were not prepared to insist on a suspension of liostilities beyond the day originally fixed. The Provisional Government unwisely rejected the favourable terms which were thus proffered to them. Hostihties were renewed, and in a very short time the progress of the Eoyal arms was such as to compel the Sicihans to an unqualified submission to the King's authority. On these transactions, so far as they bear upon the principle of non-intervention, little need be said. It would have been creditable to the humanity of the two admirals that their indignation at cruelty prevailed over the fear of any responsibility which might attach to them for a proceeding for which they had no autho- rity, if the peculiar circumstances under wliich the interposition took place did not throw some suspicion on the alleged motives. In the first place, it occurred at the identical moment when the complete and immediate triumph of the Eoyal cause was at hand, and the admirals and their Governments were undisguisedly favourers of the insurgents. In the next place, ' a number of consuls sign a state- ' ment that " all the inhabitants had left Messina when ' the bombardment was being carried on," ' * which statement militates strongly against the charge of revolt- ing ' cruelty ' which aimed at the extermination of the unresisting and helpless inhabitants ; since it appears, * Lord Brougham's speech, July 20, 1849. 86 EUROPE. [part i. according to the consuls, that the inhabitants had fled, and there were consequently none to exterminate. But, after the forcible interference on the part of Great Britain under the direct sanction of her Govern- ment, on so many recent occasions, it was not to be exjDected that the ministers would do otherwise than confirm with their approbation the steps taken by the British admiral ; but by so doing they accepted the responsibility. The withdrawal of their forcible repression when the Provisional Government rejected the liberal and conciliatory offers of the King, was fair and right : so that if the real motives of the admirals were simply to stop atrocities, and not to assist the insurgent cause, there would be comparatively little censure due to this instance of forcible interference — save that every fresh instance serves as an additional example to establish as a practice the violation of that principle which ought to be held sacred and inviolable. At the same time it must not be forgotten that the approbation given by the British Government to their admiral furnished a most dangerous precedent, of a different kind ; viz. it sanctioned a British commander using tlie fleet under his command forcibly to act, on the spot, on the spur of the moment, on his own view, without the authority of his Government, In the present instance it cannot be denied that the excuse tendered, if a true one, was in itself righteous and merciful. But the mischief arising from such a precedent will be shown in the second part of this work, when we consider how, in another quarter of the globe, it en. VII.] SUMMARY. 87 was turned to account in doincj deeds to wliicli tlie epitliets ' righteous ' and ' merciful ' are the very last which can with accuracy be applied. Siimmari/. — Thus, by one example after another, Lord Palmerston broke down and destroyed, as the rule of international law contended for by Great Britain, the great principle of abstinence from forcible interference in tlie internal affairs of independent States which injure not their neighbours — a principle to which the British Government had pledged itself for upwards of forty years ; and to which, wlien he and his colleagues accepted office, they publicly pledged themselves, in tlie strongest language, most faithfully to adhere. In the five examples, of which, in this and the preceding chapters, the history has been impartially sketched, are to be found specimens of almost every species of interference. The first was a forcible interference to effect tlie separation of two kingdoms which had been united to each other. It was in support of rebellious subjects against their lawful Monarch. The second was a forcible interference on behalf of two constitutional Monarch s to settle disputed succes- sions, claimed by those who would have been absolute Kino's. The third was a forcible interference on behalf of an absolute Monarch against a rebellious vassal ; and not free from coercion towards the Monarch liiraself. The fourth was an award forcibly imposed upon insurgent subjects. 88 EUROPE. [part i. The fifth was a forcible interference in favour of rebels. These several measures have therefore set the seal of England's present approbation on all those similar proceedings which she had previously condemned — on the conduct of the Allied Sovereigns towards France, in 1792 and '93 — on the decree of the French Con- vention, November 19, 1792, offering assistance to the discontented of all nations aorainst their rulers — on the proceedings of the Holy Alliance in Naples and Pied- mont in 1821, against which the British Government and people had so vehemently protested — and on the French invasion of Spain in 1822-23, which at the time all parties, Whig, Radical and Tory, had united in strongly condemning. Whether therefore it be for Q-ood or whether it be for evil, no fact is more certain than that Lord Palmerston's policy has effected an all-important change in the public law of Europe, as previously recognised and assented to by Great Britain. And although it is not in the nature of things that the unanimous assent of any number of States can really alter the law of nations — that law being founded, not on the decrees of man, but on the unalter- able principles of truth and justice — yet nations may agree in disregarding those principles, just as a corrupt Go\'ernraent may enact a corrupt law : still it is not in the power of man to convert into riglit that which is intrinsically wrong. Nevertheless it is in man's power to obscure what is right, and to give those around erroneous noti(,)ns of the truth. So long, therefore, as England stood 1 CH. VII.] SUMMARY. 89 alone testifying to that truth, so long she raised no in- considerable impediment to the perpetration of evil — and so long there was a reasonable hope that truth might prevail and be recognised by the whole com- munity of nations, of which she is so powerful a member. But now that she has, after a long resistance, deliberately gone over to the side of error, assm-edly any general recognition of the truth is delayed till a period too distant to foresee. It matters not, in this view, that Lord Palmerston may be able to boast (May 20, 1864) that ' we inter- ' fered with great success in the affairs of other ' countries, and with great benefit to the countries con- ' cerned. We so interfered in the affairs of Belgium, ' and established Belgium as a separate State. We in- ' terfered in the affairs of Portugal, and enabled her to ' obtain a free and parliamentary constitution. We ' interfered in the affaks of Spain, with like success and ' with a similar result. We interfered in the affairs of ' Turkey and Egypt, and maintained the independence of ' the Ottoman empire.' Success, however, is but a poor substitute for honour and good faith, and cannot com- pensate for the abandonment of those sacred principles to which this country was pledged. The real questions are, not whether this country interfered successfully, but whether it was not wrong and unjustifiable forcibly to interfere at all — whether during forty years British statesmen were in error in maintaining that the principle of non-intervention was the only safe and just principle for regulating the intercourse of nations. 90 EUROPE. [PARXI. If they were right, then it is of no avail to point to any increase of power and influence gained, or supposed to be gained, at the expense of sound principle. Such advantages are surreptitiously acquired — and if we have gained something in one way, we have largely lost in another. The power and influence of England used not to be exclusively based on her physical strength and physical daring; it used to rest no less on the moral grandeur of her character, as the asserter of international law, the defender of the oppressed, and the scourge of the oppressor. The upholders of right have an immense influence, not only with the just, whom they inspke with confidence, but also with the unjust, for even the unjust cannot help being awed by the prestige of moral uprightness. Whilst Great Britain scrupulously maintained the non-intervention principle — whilst with uncompromising morality she rejected the varying and capricious estimates of right and wrong which supposed expediency is ever ready to suggest, the weaker nations of the world looked up to her with confidence for pro- tection. They felt that at any rate one of the most powerful countries in existence preferred the main- tenance of international law either to the promotion of its own selfish interests or to indulging in the luxury of supporting by force arrangements or institu- tions even in themselves beneficial. As it is. Great Britain has abandoned her high position, and has joined all the powerful States in setting at nought that one principle, the abolition of which places all weaker States at their mercy. Disguise it as we may, this is a true description of CH. vii.] STJMMARY. 91 the real state of the law, if law it can be called, which prevails throughout Europe ; and this deplorable state of lawlessness is really the work of England — the work of that popular statesman who, for so long a period of years, controlled her destinies, either as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, or as the First Minister of the British Crown. These are assuredly the positive results of what Lord Pahnerston called his 'successful forcible interferences' in the internal concerns of weak and unoffending States. They are most disastrous, for sure it is when great principles are set at nought, sooner or later, if not in their direct and immediate, at all events in their wider and more lasting effects, they will avenge themselves on those who venture to defy them. And this mighty change has been brought about, strange to say, without the British ])ublic having any dis- tinct notion that a revolution so complete has been actu- ally accomplished ! Perhaps some day or other the light may break in upon them, and they may awake to what is the real position of their country. For, as the ' Times ' newspaper too truly observes (September 16, 1865), ' We are perpetually making the discovery that we have ' been pursuing a course of policy of which we have ' never heard, and tliat we have changed in the most ' unaccountable manner, without being in the least ' aware that we have chano-ed at all.' EUROPE. [part I. CHAPTEE Vm. GREECE THE AFFAIR OF DON PACIFICO /ND OTHERS — DEBATES THEREON. The practical abandonment by the British Government of the non-intervention principle was not compen- sated for by the respect which was paid to other rules of international law of somewhat less extensive apphcation. The truth of this remark is exemplified by the treat- ment of the newly estabhshed kingdom of Greece, re- specting some claims for indemnity to British subjects which were made by the British Government on the Greek Government in the year 1850. They were briefly as follows : — (1). A certain man, known by the name of Don Pacifico, who was an Ionian by birth and was consequently a subject of the Crown of England, sustained some injuries to his pro- perty during a riotous disturbance at Athens occasioned by the mob being prevented from burning a represen- tation of Judas Iscariot on Easter Sunday. The hin- drance really arose out of the desire of the Greek Government to pay a compliment to Baron C. M. de Eothschild ; but it was supposed to have been instigated by Don Pacifico. What was the real value of his losses ^s very doubtful ; but he certainly was entitled to the en. vni.] GREECE. 93 honest aid of the Greek Government to recover his property and to punish the offenders. (2). An Enghshman, of the name of Finlay, claimed compensation for hind taken from him for the Eoyal Palace, when the new State received a King in 1836. (3). Six Ionian boats were plundered in 1846 by robbers on the coast of Greece. (4). In 1847 some lonians were arrested, and were said to have been maltreated by the Greek pohce. (5). A similar case. (6). A boat's crew from a Queen's ship were arrested by mistake by the Greek police, but released on iden- tification. Such was the list of grievances which the British Government had against the Greek Government, and for which they sought redress by diplomatic representations. It must be admitted, in five out of the six cases it was not obtained. Now, every Government not only has the right, but it is its bounden duty, to afford protection from oppres- sion to its subjects in foreign countries. In certain cases it may be justifiable to resort to force in order to effect this obj ect. For instance, if a foreign Government clearly suspends or violates the laws of its own land to the ex- clusive injury of the stranger, tlien the coimtry to wliich that stranger belongs may forcibly insist on redress, because when a stranger voluntarily enters a foreign land, he does so under the implied understanding that while he is subject to its laws he is also entitled to the protection which those laws afford. Trying the six cases above enumerated by this rule. 94 EUROPE. [part i. it appears that in the first and most important case, that of Don Pacifico, the question is, had he received the pro- tection from the laws of Greece to which he was entitled, or had they been suspended or violated to his exclusive injury ? His statement was, that he had been personally ill- treated by a Greek mob, and that his house had been pillaged. The Greek police claimed to have used every effort to save the house from being plundered and to bring the offenders to justice ; they admitted that they had been unsuccessful. But the Greek Government held that Don Pacifico's remedy lay in a civil suit. The answer to this was, that, according to Don Pacifico, the police had not made every effort to bring the offenders to justice ; and that, though he pointed them out, the pohce continued to evade arresting them, because they were young Greek noblemen, connected with the Greek Ministry, who headed the riot. These then were questions of fact. The Greek police asserted that which Don Pacifico denied. That the assertions of the police were to be taken for granted, probably no one, who knows anything of an Eastern police, would venture to affirm. But, on the other liand, neither the character of Don Pacifico nor his con- duct in these transactions were such as to justify giving implicit credence to his statements. Don Pacifico was a Jew, and there were some reports abroad injurious to his character ; and as to the honesty of his conduct in making his claims, it maybe judged of by the facts that when the French Minister, Baron Gros, set on foot an en. vm.] GREECE. 95 inquiry, he reported, on careful consideration, that the Don's claim for 4,900/. was extravagant, and that 1,000/. ought to satisfy everything ; and as to his further claim for a much larger sum on account of the destruction, in the riot, of papers concerning transactions with the Portu- guese Government, it subsequently appeared that though he claimed, on account of these papers, upwards of 21,000/., yet a mixed commission of three commission- ers, English, Portuguese and Greek, after a long exami- nation, reduced the claim to 150/. as full and ample compensation. Such being, as ultimately shown, the real character of the claims, it is evident that any absolute decision in their favour, even on principle, on the part of a foreign Government must have been hasty and premature ; nor had that foreign Government a right to decide without the clearest proof that Don Pacifico ought to be believed, and that the Greek police ought not. Further, the Greek Government said, Don Pacifico has not had recourse to all the remedies which the law allows him. He ought to institute a civil suit, in which they said he would probably be successful, as he affirmed that he knew the guilty parties. Don Pacifico thought otherwise, and declined to appeal to the Greek courts, on the grounds tliat tlie conduct of tlie police had, in all probability, spoilt the case for the prosecution. Now before the English Government took the quasi judicial step of enforcing redress, they were bound by the ordinary rules of justice, as in an English court of law, to leave the minimum of the foundation of its 96 EUROPE. [part i. decision to probabilities, and to acquire the maximum of certainty attainable. If the English Government thought that Don Pacifico's case presented a prima facie case sufficient to warrant such aid, they might have supplied the funds necessary to try the course pointed out by the Greek Government. For, as there were two processes open, until both had failed, and the failure of both had been brought home to the conduct of the Greek officials, the right of exacting redress by force would not accrue to the Enghsh Government. (2). The case of Mr. Finlay was brought into discussion at the time, and served to swell the list of those who were refused compensation by the Greek Government ; but it ought not to have been inserted, for it was con- clusively arranged with the joint consent of the Greek Government and Mr. Finlay at the express desire of the latter, by a reference to two persons, with power in case of difference to choose an umpire. (3). The six Ionian boats plundered by robbers at Salcina in 1846 were plundered by a band of brigands, who overpowered the Greek authorities them- selves. It appears that the boats' crews were decoyed on shore by the brigands — so that going on shore was a voluntary^ although, as it turned out, an incautious act on their part. In this case assuredly the Greek Government did not suspend the laws to the exclusive injury of the stranger. (4). The lonians said to be maltreated by the Greek police were keepers of a coffee house, who on a festival stuck up the flags of different nations as ornaments over their shop. The police having received orders to CH. viii.] CtBEECE, 97 prevent a crowd assembling, proceeded to take the flags down. The lonians resisted, and were in conse- quence marched off to the pohce-office, where it being found that they had only been guilty of a trifling violation of police regulations, they were at once dis- missed. (5). Some lonians were taken up for sleeping in the streets, and were marched off to the authorities, who, according to their own account, flogged and turned them out. When, however, they were required to allow their statement to be verified by an examination of their persons for marks of the alleged ill-treatment, they were unwilhng to stand the test and were not forthcoming. (6). The boat's crew of one of Her Majesty's ships landed in the dark in a prohibited place; the officer in command not being in uniform, was arrested with the crew ; but the moment that it was discovered lie was a British officer, he with his crew were released with excuses. The affair took place in 1848. Such is the list of grievances whicJi, in the beginning of the year 1850, Great Britain liad against the feeble and newly established kingdom of Greece. The course pursued respecting them was this. The Foreign Secretary arbitrarily decided that all these claims were, in principle, founded m justice. He there- fore sent an imposing force of fifteen sail of tlie line to Athens, requiring of the Greek Government immediate payment of the compensation which he demanded. This powerful squadron accordingly appeared before the Piraeus, seized forty-seven ships — two belonging t(j H 98 EUROPE. [part i. the Government, which with five others were secured at Corfu ; these seven alone were vakied at 7,000^. The Greek Government being quite unable to re- sist, paid tlie required sum, about 8,000/., protesting, however, against the discourtesy and injustice with which it considered that it was treated. Now, whether these violent proceedings were or were not consistent with that dignified forbearance which a strong State owes to a weak one — whether the trumpery character of the cases in dispute was such as to lower the prestige of a State adopting such imposing measures to deal with them — whether the demonstration gave the impression to Europe that the spectacle afforded to the world was that of a mighty and powerful State bullying a weak one — are questions which may be put aside ; the real question here being, whether the employment of force was in conformity with, or opposed to, the rules of international law. Wlien first Lord Palmerston was questioned in the House of Commons on this matter, he rather put aside the law of nations, and sought by his argument to withdraw these dealings with Greece from the cate- gory of any general law. ' It is impossible to maintain,' he said,* ' that in all * cases foreigners are entitled to compensation from ' the Government of the country in which the injuries ' and losses are sustained. On the other hand, it is ' impossible to maintain that there may not be cases ' in which such compensation will be justly due. ' Our demand,' he observed, ' was specifically founded * June 4, 1850. CH. VIII.] GREECE. 99 ' Oil tlie circumstances of the particular case, aiitl did ' not involve any general proposition.' Now it is quite true that there may be cases in which abstractedly compensation may be justly due, although it may not be due from the Government of the country in which the injury to the stranger has been inflicted. For, a State is not bound to afford redress to a voluntary alien sojourner, when neither the injury nor the failure of redress for it arise from the conduct of its Government or from that of their servants. For forcible interference in Don Pacifico's case it was therefore necessary that his charge against the police should have been verified — a verification which Lord Palmerston did not or could not obtain. The diflaculties of redress arising from the violence having been the work of a mob, or from his poverty, are difficulties for which the Greek Government was not responsible. And as to the difficulty arising out of the probability of the judges showing partiality to young noblemen connected with the Government, before pleading it as a justifica- tion for force it ought to have been established as a certainty. Debates took place in both Houses of Parhament on the subject of these proceedings at Athens. Lord Stanley* introduced the subject in the House of Lords, and moved the following resolution : — * That while the House fully recognised the right of the ' G-overnment to secure to Her Majesty's subjects residing ' in foreign States the full protection of the laws of those * States, it regrets to find, by the correspondence recently laid * Present Lord Derby. H 2 100 EUROPE. Ipakti. ' upon the table by Her Majesty's command, that various ' claims against the Grreek Government, doubtful in point * of justice and exaggerated in amount, have been enforced * by coercive measures directed against the commerce and ' people of Greece, and calculated to endanger our friendly ' relations with other Powers.' This motion was carried by a majority of forty-seven. In order to counteract the effects of this censure, Mr, E-oebuck moved in the House of Commons the followino; counter-resolution : — * That the principles on which the foreign policy of Her ' Majesty's Government has been regulated, have been such ' as were calculated to maintain the honour and dignity of * this country, and, in times of unexampled difficulty, to ' preserve peace between England and the various nations of ' the world.' This comprehensive resolution covered all the past foreign policy of the Government. It gave approval, not only to the particular case of the proceedings on behalf of Don Pacifico and others in Greece, but to all the forcible interferences in the internal concerns of imoffending independent States, which had taken place under the directions of the different Liberal administra- tions during the preceding twenty years. The motion was carried by a majority of forty-six. * In this debate Lord Palmerston distinctly laid down the principle on which he had acted in the Greek affair. 'In the first instance,' he said, 'redress should be ' sought for from the law courts of the country ; but in ' cases where redress cannot be so had, to confine a ' British subject to that remedy only would be to ' deprive him of the protection which he is entitled to * June 20, 1850, en. viTi.] GREECE, 101 ' receive. In cases where no confidence can be placed ' in the tribunals, who is to be the judge whether the ' tribunals are corrupt or not — the British Government ' or the Government of the State from which you ' demand justice?' And then he ' denies the proposi- * tion ' that ' British subjects are to have that protection ' only which the law and the tribunal of the land in ' which they happen to be may give them.' The corollaries from these propositions are two : — (1). That the Government of a foreign State has not only a right to sit in judgment on the laws of another State, and on the mode in which those laws are carried out by its constituted tribunals, but also to give effect to that judgment, if unfavourable, by coercive measures. (2). That the Government of a foreign State has a right to give a protection to its own subject beyond what may be given by the laws of that other State in which its subject sojourns. Now the law on this point, as laid down by Vattel, is clear and unmistakeable. It is as foUows : — ' Every foreigner, in those countries where he may ' freely enter, is supposed to be allowed access by ' the Sovereign only on the tacit condition that he is ' subject to the laws. The public safety, the rights ' of the Nation and of the Prince, necessarily require ' this condition ; and the foreigner tacitly submits to it ' as soon as he has entered the country, as he cannot ' presume that he has access upon any other footing.'* Lord Clarendon, when Foreign Secretary, in 1853, confirmed this doctrine, when (in the case of Miss * B. II. ch. «, .s 101. 102 EUROPE. [PAKT I. Cunningham — a zealous young lady, who by distri- buting Protestant tracts in Tuscany had acted contrary to the law of the land) he said, 'No British subject ' has a right to go into another country and not ' observe the laws in force in that country. Those laws ' might be as cruel and barbarous as possible, but if ' British subjects went of their own accord and hved * under them, they must not disobey those laws.' These were the very grounds on which the Greek Government rested their defence. They said, 'The ' Ministry of Justice, having been consulted on this ' business, gave it as their opinion that, according to ' principles admitted everywhere and at all times, ' subjects of a foreign country have not the right to ' claim, either in Greece or elsewhere, any rights ' superior to the natives themselves.' Now, although these quotations refer, in the first instance, to the duty of the foreigner to the State within whose territories he dwells, yet they necessarily imply what is the correlative duty of the State to the foreigner ; viz. to secure for the foreigner rights equal to those given by the law to the natives. A British subject therefore, on the one hand, entering voluntarily into a foreign land, is bound to submit him- self to its laws, whether they are or are not what he or his Government may consider consonant with justice, and whether the mode of administering those laws may or may not be fair and just. And, on the other, the Government of that foreign land is bound to secure for that British subject the full protection which its laws and tribunals afford to its own subjects : but no moi'C. en, VIII.] GREECE. 103 Take for instance the treatment of an accused person in France, — that treatment is founded on principles diametrically opposed to those which obtain in England. In England, judges, magistrates, counsel, policemen, cautiously guard the prisoner against criminatmg him- self. In France the main object of the ministers of the law is to extract from the lips of the accused some words which will establish his guilt. This mode of conducting criminal jurisprudence is in English eyes full of palpable injustice, but England would not there- fore have a right to have recourse to force to prevent an Englishman, accused of crime in France, and having voluntarily gone there, from being dealt with according to those principles of French law which are applied to all the natives of France. Take the reverse case of a Frenchman, engaged in trade in England, suffering some wrong, for which he souo;ht to obtain redress from the Eno-lish Court of Chancery. Supposing (and it was in old times no improbable supposition) that year after year rolled on without his being able to obtain any decision in his cause — that he beheld his property gradually dwindling away, and that at the end of some ten or twelve years the prospect of redress seemed as hopeless as ever, — would this nation tolerate France chargino; us with 'shuffling and evasion,' and insisting on the English Government withdrawing the case from the Court of Chancery and giving such pecuniary compensation as to the French Government seemed fit? Would not the British Government reply to France as the Greek Government replied to us? ' Subjects of a foreign couiitr}^ 104 EUROPE, [part i. ' have not the right to claim, either in England or else- ' where, rights superior to the natives themselves.' And if France sent an armament to enforce her demands, would not England to a man resist force by force ? The case quoted by Lord Palmerston as an example of England's readiness to give compensation is not to the point. It was given to the owners of an Austrian vessel ' shipwrecked on the coast of Ireland and plun- dered by the people of the district.' For the crew of the Austrian vessel did not voluntarily place themselves for their own purposes within British territory. They were driven there by an Almighty agency which they could neither resist nor control, and they were en- titled by the law of nations to succour and protection. If then, instead of protection and succour, they met w^ith outrage and plunder at the hands of British subjects, for whose conduct the British Government was responsible, on that Government the sufferers had a just and indisputable claim for special and direct compensation. But if, on the other hand, that vessel had been, for purposes of trade, placed voluntarily by its crew within a British port, and had there been plundered, either furtively, through a want of police, or openly, owing to popular riots, the only claim to compensation on which Austria would have a right forcibly to insist would have been such compensation as the laws of this country would afford to its own subjects under similar circumstances. ' He (Lord Brougham) denied that mere injury to the ' property or even to the person of an individual re- ' siding voluntarily in a foreign country gave any right en. Yiii.] GREECE. 105 ' to the Government of which the injured individual ' was a subject to demand redress.' But the law or general proposition on which Great Britain acted towards Greece was a law which, however convenient to the great Powers of the world, was one w^hich must be fatal to all the weaker Powers — for the weak can neither act upon it themselves, nor success- fully resist it when acted upon by their stronger neighbours. A strong State wiU never allow a weak State to sit in judgment either on its laws or on its mode of administering those laws, and will never give redress to the subject of that weak State according to the notions of justice such a weak State may entertain, more especially if they happen to be at variance with its own. The law, therefore, which these proceedings at Athens would set up, is one opposed to all the sound principles on which international law is founded ; it will not stand the test which would prove its justice, viz, that it is a law which, if the strong enforce it upon the weak, the strong will obey when it becomes appli- cable to themselves — therefore it is deficient in one thing essential to a just law. The Eussian Government saw this blot m the argu- ment, and took advantage of it severely to rebuke the British Ministry. After remonstrating against all these proceedings in Greece, Count Nesselrode thus concluded : — ' The reception which may be given to our represen- ' tations may have considerable influence on the nature ' of the relations we are henceforth to expect from 106 EUROPE. [part i. ' England — let me acid, on the position to all the Powers ' of Europe, great or small, whose coast exposes them to ' a sudden attack. It remains, indeed, to be seen ' whether Great Britain, abusing the advantages which ' are afforded her by her immense maritime superiority, ' intends hencefor wards to pursue an isolated policy, ' without caring for those engagements which bind her ' to the other Cabinets, — whether she intends to dis- ' engage herself from every obligation as well as from ' all community of action, and to authorise all great ' Powers, on every fitting opportunity, to recognise ' towards the weak no other rule but their own will, * no other right but their own physical strength.'* In adhering to the true principle of international law there need be no abandonment by Governments of the duty which requires them to throw their protection over those of their subjects who sojourn in foreign lands. For if the laws and practices of a nation are intrinsically oppressive and unjust, against such op- pression and injustice a Government has a right to remonstrate on behalf of its subjects, to refuse to main- tain with it any friendly relations, to suspend all commercial intercourse, and to withhold all privileges which are matters of grace and favour ; in short, until it amends its evil ways, to adopt all means of obtaining redress short of the employment of actual force. Something of this kind was done towards the Bourbon King of Naples. But the most effectual protection which a Govern- ment can afford to its subjects in foreign lands, is to be * Count Nesselrode to Baron Briinow, Feb. 19, 1850. CH. viii.] GREECE. 107 found in the influence and the power to be derived from an inflexible adherence to those principles of inter- national law which, in the face of the world, it has proclaimed to be the true ones. Before known disin- terestedness and acknowledged justice selfishness and injustice will be sure to quail. At the conclusion of Lord Palmerston's speech, which was the most telling one that he ever made in the House of Commons, he contrived to divert the minds of his auditors from the real issue on which, with regard to the proceedings in Greece, they had to decide. ' I fearlessly challenge,' said the noble Viscount in conclusion, ' the verdict which the House may give on ' the question which is now brought before it, as a ' political, as a commercial, as a constitutional country, ' whether the principles which have governed the ' foreign policy of Her Majesty's Government — whether ' the duty of affording protection to our subjects abroad ' — which we have considered the guide of our conduct, ' are proper and fitting in those who are charged with ' the government of England, and whether, as in days ' of old a Eoman held himself to be free from indignity ' when he could say Civis Romanus sum, a British ' subject shall consider himself in foreign countries as ' protected by the vigilant eye and strong arm of his ' Government against injustice and wrong.' Now these words imply that the proceedings in Greece were condemned, because protection had been afforded to British subjects residing there ; they imply that the question in dispute was one of protection or no protec- tion, and that the result of his conduct being censured 108 EUROPE. [part i. would be, that, for the future, British subjects abroad must not look to their own Government to guard them against insult or injury, but that they must tamely submit to all sorts of petty tyranny and injustice. The appeal wliich these words contained had the effect of working on national pride on the one hand, and na- tional fear on the other. It was, in fact, calling for a decision on a false issue. The resolution of the House of Lords had distinctly affirmed 'the right and duty ' of Her Majesty's Government to secure the ftill pro- ' tection of the laws to British subjects m foreign coun- ' tries,' and no speaker had disputed this right. The real questions were, — When is forcible interference allowable in order to protect ? and what rules should regulate that interference ? But it was the celebrated phrase, Civis Romanus sum^ which took captive the hearts of a Liberal majority of the House of Commons. It seemed a grand idea, to bid British subjects invoke ■ ' the vigilant eye and the strong arm of their Govem- ' ment,' as the Eomans of old invoked the terror of the Eoman name : and most accurately did these words describe the policy of England's Foreign Secretary. British subjects were to do as was done by the Eomans of old — they were to appeal to the terror of over- whelming might. They were not to do as Britons in better days were wont to do. Time was when their protection in aU quarters of the globe was their be- longing to a people who it was known would assert the majesty of international law, even to its own detriment — time was when a willing deference was paid to British subjects, because they belonged to a CH. viii.] GREECE. 109 nation which was felt and acknowledged to be the most impartial and the most just. Those times, alas ! are past — and Civis Romanus sum, and the ' vigilant * eye and the strong arm ' too truly describe the sort of protection which Britons must now invoke. Mr. Eoebuck's resolution, as has been already pointed out, covered not only the proceedings m Greece, but the general system of foreign pohcy which the Foreign Secretary had inaugurated. It was so accepted by the House. Accordingly Lord Palmerston went through all the different examples of forcible interferences by Great Britain, which have been detailed in these pages, in order to their justification. In so doing he did not attempt to dispute the fact that he had deliberately set at nought the non-intervention principle. He justified his proceedings undisguisedly on the ground that their results had been for the interest of England, and for .the advantage of the States in whose internal affairs England had forcibly interfered. He gloried in what he had done, and seemed to have no misgivings that there might be another side to the picture. In speaking of our forcible interference in the affairs of Spain and Portugal in 1834, he observed, ' We ' looked upon the question, not as a simple choice be- ' tween one Sovereign and another, but (as it was in ' reahty) absolute government on the one hand and ' constitutional government on the other ; ' and then having argued to prove that constitutional government m the Peninsula was advantageous to British interests, he claimed great ' merit for having been above all ' narrow-minded prejudices ' in determining 'on an act 110 EUROPE. [PAET I. * of forcible interference for the purpose of giving those ' countries the blessing of constitutional government.' Now this, I beheve, was the first formal and pubhc avowal of the abandonment by the British Government of the non-intervention principle. It is true, as has been shown at length, that in practice it had been long abandoned ; but then, it was pleaded that those occasions were only exceptions to the rule, arising out of ' the circumstances of each particular case, and that ' they did not involve any general proposition.' For, when occasions suited, the Foreign Secretary had ac- tually enunciated with clearness the non-intervention principle, as one by which Great Britain would be guided. It was a novelty, therefore, for a member of the Cabinet to denounce this principle as ' a narrow-minded ' prejudice,' and to avow having set it at nought because conformity to it would have been, in his view, disad-. vantageous to British interests. Sir Kobert Peel and Mr. Cobden at once perceived the mischiefs likely to arise from this formal repudiation by the Government of such a principle. The latter clearly saw that if a constitutional Government may interfere in a foreign country on behalf of a constitution, an absolute Government may by this same rule inter- fere on behalf of a despotism. ' We do not ask you,' wisely exclaimed Mr. Cobden, ' to help us and to come ' to our assistance : all we ask is, that you will estabhsh ' the principle that we are not interfered with by others. ' If,' he continued, ' the British Government were always 'to act upon the principle of non-intervention, we should CH. viii.J GREECE. Ill ' see the law of nations declaring itself as clearly against ' the invasion of foreign countries as it has spoken out ' against the extradition of political refugees. Let us ' only begin and set the example to foreign nations of ' this non-intervention, and our example and protest ' would exercise some influence over the Governments * of Eussia and Austria : but what possible moral inilu- ' ence can this country have with these States when 'the Government goes abroad to interfere with the ' domestic affairs of other countries ?' Sir Eobert Peel was more decided still in condemnina; the new system which the Government had adopted. Sir Eobert contended for that non-intervention principle for which, he affirmed, ' every statesman of eminence ' for the preceding fifty years had contended. ' ' I 'remonstrate,' he emphatically observed, ' against the ' principle of forcible interference approved by Mr. 'Eoebuck's resolution. You are departing,' he said, addressing the Ministerial bench, ' from the established ' policy of England — you are involving yourselves in ' difficulties, the extent of which you can hardly ' conceive.' The following were the last words which fell from his lips in the House of Commons : — 'I protest against tlie resolution, the carrying of ' which will give a false impression with respect to the ' dignity and the honour of this country, and will ' establish a principle which you cannot carry into ' execution without imminent danger to the best ' interests of your country.' These strong words of warning gave a turn to the 112 EUROPE. [PAET r. debate, which rendered it no longer safe for the Govern- ment to pursue the same line with which they had set out. Then occurred one of those curious episodes in Parhamentary strife, for enacting which the then Premier is famed. With that coolness which rarely deserts him. Lord John Eussell calmly told the House that ' the latter part 'of Sir Eobert's speech was entirely unsuited to the ' question before it. There is a despatch,' he continued, ' in which the principles which have regulated the ' foreign policy of the Government are laid down, and ' it will be seen that they are very different from those ' to which the right honourable gentleman referred as ' being opposed to those " enunciated by every states- ' man of eminence for the last fifty years." ' ' In that despatch my noble friend Lord Palmerston ' says : — ' " The Austrian Government has recently asked and ' has received the assent of the British Government to ' the principle that the several States into which Italy ' is divided are entitled to maintain and defend their ' independence ; and that this independence ought to ' be respected and to be held inviolate by the other ' Powers of Europe : and Her Majesty's Government, ' in expressing their assent to this indisputable proposi- ' tion, couple with it another, which they conceive to be ' equally undeniable — that every independent Sovereign ' has a right to make within his own dominions such 'reform and improvements as he may judge conducive ' to the welfare of the people whom he governs, and that CH. VIII.] GREECE. 113 ' no other Government can be entitled to forbid or to ' restrain such an exercise of one of the proper attributes 'of independent sovereignty: and Her Majesty's Goveni- ' ment are convinced that the Cabinet of Vienna must ' be ready to acknowledge so plain a political truth." ' These are the principles,' said Lord John, dehbe- rately, 'on which the policy of the Government is ' founded.' In this extract two general principles are set forth — (1) ' that the several States into which ' the world 'is ' divided are entitled to maintain and to defend their ' independence ; and that this independence ought to ' be respected and held inviolable by all other Powers ;' (2) that ' every independent Sovereign has a right to ' make within his own dominions such reforms and 'improvements as he may judge conducive to the ' welfare of his people — and that no other Government ' can be entitled to forbid or to restrain such an exercise ' of the proper attributes of independent sovereignty.' The second principle thus laid down, if taken by itself, would be a somewhat curious one to be put forth by Liberal statesmen ; for, standing alone, it indi- cates that ' reforms and improvements ' in a State must originate with the Sovereign to entitle them not to be * forbidden or restrained by other Governments.' But the first principle extends this privilege to the State as a whole ; so that from whatever quarter the ' reforms ' and improvements,' or the changes (for who are to be the judges, save the country itself, whether the change be or be not improvement ?) may proceed, the State itself is entitled to ' defend its independence,' which ought 114 EUHOPE. [PART I. to be ' held inviolable by all other Powers.' And these, according to Lord John, were really ' the principles ' on which the policy of the British Government had ' been founded ;' although, instead of ' respecting ' and ' holding inviolate ' the independence of the Netherlands, of Turkey, of Spain and Portugal, and of the Two Sicilies, Lord Palmerston had been boasting that the British Government had employed the national arma- ments in forcibly interfering in their internal concerns, and in taking part in their intestine strifes. Even in this very same debate, in which Lord John Eussell ventured on this bold assertion, his noble colleague had taken credit to himself for having ' been above all ' narrow-minded prejudices, in having forcible/ inter- 'fered to establish a constitutional Government in ' Portugal ' — a State which had given no offence what- ever to this country. But what did the inconsistency signify ? The vote was to be gahied at all hazards. Still, a more curious specimen of dashing Parliamentary tactics (especially on the part of a First Minister) is not to be found in the annals of the House of Commons. Nevertheless these tactics answered to their end. They puzzled the majority of the Liberal party, which at that period of the debate had lost all clear ideas as to what tliey ought to believe, and what they ought not. The discussion had lasted four nights, during which they had heard so much that was contradictory from the Ministerial bench, that they had no definite notions as to what were really the principles ' on which the ' policy of tlie Government was founded.' en. VIII.] GREECE. 115 So, knowing that Mr. Eoebuck's resokition was in- tended ^o be favourable to the Government, they thought the safest course for them to pursue woukl be to vote for it, whatever principles it might happen to affirm or to repudiate. The resolution was accordingly carried by a majority of forty-six, and thus, probably unwitt- ingly, but not the less disastrously, the great principle of abstinence from forcible interference in the internal concerns of independent States which injure not their neighbours was rejected by the representatives of the British people ! This vote afforded but a poor prospect for the weaker States of Europe. By it, so far as the House of Com- mons could, they were made liable to a forcible inter- ference in their internal concerns, however careful they might be to avoid orivino; offence, should their strono-er neighbours deem it for their own interests to interfere. At the same time pretexts for interference were thus indefinitely multiphed by claiming for the subjects of strong States rights and privileges superior to the natives of weak States within whose territory they might think proper to enter. I 2 116 EUROPE, [PAKT I. CHAPTER IX. RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN HUNGARY — FRENCH OCCUPATION OF ROME — RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN TURKEY. The climax had now been reached. Lord Palmerston had estabhshed as a rule the right of forcible interfer- ence in the internal concerns of independent States, not only when it seemed advantageous to the interests of powerful States to interfere in the political dissensions of weaker neighbours, but likewise when the adminis- tration of their laws by regularly constituted authorities happened not to agree with the notions of justice entertained by the stronger State. Moreover, he had persuaded the representatives of the British people to approve and ratify these doctrines. Now, whether by example or by precept, or both combined, the ' assertion of principle by a British * Minister on the part of his Government, and its asser- ' tion also in Parliament, can rarely be without their ' effect ;' and what Lord Eussell thus predicated of ' sound ' and just principles,' unfortunately may be predicated of ' unsound and unjust ' ones, which, when so asserted, ' are sure to have their effect, and more or less per- ' vade the general policy of Europe.'* And so it was in the present instance. Encouraged * July 24, 1864. CH. IX.] AUSTRIA. 117 by the precepts and the example of England, a Eussian army had entered Hungary ! and a French army had occupied Eome ! The events of 1848 shook the Austrian Monarchy to its foundations. From the period of the treaties of Vienna to that year, Prince Metternich, a statesman of consummate ability, had contrived to keep together in tolerable tranquilhty the discordant nations and races which constitute the Austrian empire. In dealing with these different nations, the Prince held that the interests, and feelings, and habits of the peoples to be governed were so various, and in many respects were so opposed to each other, that violently to attempt to bring them under the control of one great central au- thority at Vienna would only serve to create discord and confusion throughout the whole Empire. He held therefore — and under the then existing circumstances it was probably the wisest policy — that the only safe way to govern them was to treat them as separate nations, having, as a bond of union, one common head. Nevertheless, when the turbulent spirits throughout Europe boiled up in 1848, the fabric which the Prince had raised fell before the first blast of the tempest ; and, as an exile, he had to seek an asylum in a foreign land. This collapse, however, seems to have arisen not from any inherent defects in the plan of dealing with each State separately, but rather from the way in which that separate dealing had been carried out. It was one thing to decide whether each country should be governed separately without reference to its neighbours, and another to decide the mode of government which 118 . EUEOPE. [part I. should be established in each. The first decision might have been a very wise one, and the second decision a very unwise one. It was the defect in this last which accounts for the Prince's system falling to pieces, the first moment it was openly assailed. He had done nothing during his long rule to concihate the inhabitants of the different provinces, nor to attacli them to their Sovereign's sway. Arbitrary rule, spies, and a military force were the instruments which he employed for maintaining that sway. The Milanese gentry were taken away from their native land to form an army in Hungary to keep down the Hungarians ; and the Hungarian gentry in their turn were brought to Italy to keep down the Milanese ; and so on throughout the empire. There was no endeavour tenderly and judiciously to soften asperities, and to remove differ- ences, so as gradually to prepare the way for amalga- mation ; but each nation was made the engine for oppressing the others. When, therefore, those who came into power, on the fall of Metternich, beheld how weak were the founda- tions of the fabric which he had raised, they (perhaps not unnaturally) thought it would be wise to adopt a •directly opposite course to one which had so signally failed. Without reflecting that the exact converse of wrong is very rarely right, they forthwith sought arbi- trarily to centralise at Vienna the administration of all the dominions of the Austrian Emperor, and they ad- vised His Imperial Majesty to promulgate a new common constitution. But in so doing they more or less trampled on the riglits, the pri\ilegcs, and, though last not least, en. IX.] HUNGARY. 119 the prejudices of all the Austrian provinces, and amongst others, of the ancient kingdom of Hungary — tlie most important and powerful possession of the Imperial crown. The Himgarian constitution had existed for ages. Several of the Sovereigns who had held the Austrian sceptre at various periods had vowed to preserve it inviolate. The Empress Maria Theresa had sworn that, ' should she or any of her successors at any * time infringe the privileges of the Hungarian people, ' they and their descendants should be permitted, by ' virtue of her promise, to defend themselves, without ' being treated as rebels.' In 1790 the Emperor Leopold took even a more stringent oath, to the same effect ; and in 1848 the Emperor Ferdinand I. confirmed by oath what his predecessors had bound themselves to fulfil. When, therefore, the Hungarians found that their constitution, which successive Emperors had taken their oaths to maintain, was abolished, to be replaced by a new constitution octroy ee by tlie Emperor — a con- stitution which, made by a breath, a breath might blow away,* they naturally clung to their old-estabhshed constitution. Accordingly they erected a provisional Eegency, proclaimed and acknowledged by the Hun- garian Diet, and demanded the maintenance of their ancient privileges. They did not seek to dethrone the Emperor, they only sought to preserve what of right belonged to them ; they would have acknowledged His Imperial Majesty as their King, had he been willing to recognise their rights, but they would not exchange their own ancient constitution for a new one. * This sentence was written before the late suspension of the con- stitution, 1865. 120 EUEOPE. [part i. They therefore took up arms, and never did a whole people rise in defence of a more righteous cause; they waged a doubtful conflict, in which, however, it seemed most probable that they would obtain the mastery. Then it was that in an evil hour the young Emperor of Austria called the Russians to his aid — then it was that the Czar, looking upon the question as a ' choice ' between absolute ' will ' on the one hand, and constitu- ' tional government on the other, rose above all narrow- ' minded prejudices,' and determined 'on an act of ' forcible interference for the purpose ' of compelling the Hungarians to submit to the absolute will of their Monarch. The Autocrat, it must be confessed, did the work manfully and effectually ; he had recourse to no half- and-half measures, such as had done no honour to this country in the civil contest in the Spanish peninsula. For he fearlessly poured his legions into the rebeUious province, with an audacity worthy of a better cause. He crushed the resistance of the Hungarians, and, having done so, left them to the mercy of their Emperor. But who will say that these deeds of darkness would have been perpetrated, had not the two Emperors well known that the British Government was no longer in a position to remonstrate against tliem ? Eead the indignant language of the British Ministers, in 1822, on the occasion of the invasion of Spain by France under the Due d'Angouleme, and then mark the sub- dued tone of the Foreign Secretary (July 21, 1849) on Mr. Bernal Osborn's motion on this subject. ' He ' would not,' he said, ' endeavour to pass judgment cu. IX.] HUNGAEY— HOME. 121 ' either way between the Austrian Government and the ' Hungarian Nation.' ' Her Majesty's Government have ' not in the present state of the matter thought that any ' opportunity has as yet presented itself which would ' enable them with any prospect of advantage to make 'any official communication of their opinions.' Not even in Parhament did he employ words condemnatory of the conduct of Eussia. He knew too well he could use no words in which he could protest against that conduct, without there being a protest against his own. This forcible interference in Hungary by Eussia pre- ceded the Don Paciiico affair. Another forcible interference, of no less significance and more prolonged in its duration, succeeded the Don Pacifico debate. Italy had shared the fate of other States, but more especially the States of the Church were remarkable for their revolutionary proceedings. Eome had long been governed by an army of priests, under the direc- tions of the Pope, in the lamentable way which naturally happens when the temporal authority is joined to the spiritual. When Pio Nono ascended the Papal throne the discontent of his Eoman subjects was at its height. He tried to disarm it by salutary measures, and for a season a reforming Pope was the wonder of the world. But it soon became too appa- rent that the union in one and the same person of an infallible spiritual dominion with a limited temporal sovereignty was an incompatible combination. Dis- content became again rife among the Eoman citizens. The Pope's prime minister was murdered in the Capitol. 122 EUROPE, [PAKTI. The sacred person of His Holiness seemed in danger ; and the annals of the year 1848 record the uncouth fact that the Sovereign Pontiff fled from the Vatican in the disguise of a liveried lacquey on the coach-box of a foreign ambassador accredited to his own court ! The Pope fled to the dominions of the King of the Two Sicilies, and established his residence at Gaeta. A revolutionary Triumvirate seized the reins of power — Mazzini, Amicellini, and Saffi. There seemed no pro- spect of the Pope being restored to his throne. Of the respective characters of the Pope's and the Triumvirate Governments I need give no opinion of my own. What is really important is the opinion which Lord Palmerston avowed respecting them in the House of Commons (May 6, 1856). He said that the Provisional Government was one ' which had endeavoured to the best of its power to ' mitigate all atrocities, so that the holy city had not of ' late years been better governed than it was during ' the temporary absence of the Pope.' On the other hand, the Government which the Provisional Government had superseded was even for a Eoman Government a bad one. ' It had been,' he said, ' carried on in the name of the Sovereign Pontiffj ' and it had been guilty of acts of tyranny and op- ' pression, the enormity of which could be scarcely ' exaggerated.' Such were the opinions which Lord Palmerston ex- pressed of the Papal and the Eepublican Governments respectively. Whether they were just or unjust, correct or incorrect, is nothing to the purpose. We are bound CH. IX.] ROME. 128 to accept them as those which his Lordship really entertained, and with which, therefore, as Foreign Secretary, he considered that he had to deal. At the period when the Triumvirate held sway in Eome, the reestabhshment of the Empire in France had not been accomplished. Louis Napoleon was no more than President of the French Eepublic. It was, however, by his will that a French army was sent to Eome for the express purpose of overthrowing the de facto Government there existing, and of restoring the Pope to the plenitude of his spiritual and temporal authority. For the motives which induced this deter- mination, there was no attempt at disguise on the part of tlie President. He made no complaints whatever against the conduct of the Eoman State towards France. The Triumvirate had not, indeed, given tlie slightest ground of offence to the French people. The bold and undisguised reason avowed to the French Assembly by the President of the Eepublic in the autumn of 1850 for the forcible occupation of Eome by a French army, was that that occupation was necessary, in order to ' maintain the pohtical influence of France.' It is impossible, therefore, to conceive a more striking illustration of the violation of the non-intervention principle than these proceedings afford. It was a forcible intervention ; it was not to redress a wrong ; it was simply ' to maintain the political in- fluence ' of the intervening State ; it was to over- throw one of the best Governments, comparatively, which Eome had ever had, in order to reestablish an intolerably bad one. The interference was not based 124 EUEOPE. [PAKT I. on the plea of violated order or outraged humanity, but it was against order and in support of tyranny and oppression of almost indescribable ' enormity.' How then did Lord Palmerston deal with this pro- ceeding ? In one respect, in the same way as he did with Eussian interference in Hungary. He made' no diplomatic remonstrances, and he expressed no condem- natory opinion of it in his place in Parliament. But he was not content with a passive pohcy. So, when Mr. T. S. Duncombe introduced the subject, and expressed his hope (May 9, 1851) that ' Her Majesty's Govern- ' ment did not concur in the continued occupation of ' Eome,' Lord Palmerston replied that ' that occupation ' by the French troops was a measure undertaken by ' France in her own discretion, and in the exercise of ' her own judgment. The British Government had ' been no party to this measure. France had exercised ' her own rights in regard to it, and it was not at all ' necessary that the previous concurrence of the British ' Government should have been obtained in this matter. ' The British Government had been no party to this ' aggression, and could not therefore be said to have ' concurred in it. It was a matter on which they might ' have an opinion, but in which they had no particular ' right, by treaty or otherwise, to interfere/ In this ever-memorable reply England's Foreign Secretary admits that France, in thus forcibly interfer- ing, ' only exercised her own rights' France therefore had ' rights ' of interference — and she only ' exercised ' those which she possessed. So indisputable were these rights in the estimation of the Foreign Secretary, that en. IX.] ROME. 125 Le declared that England had ' no particular right, by ' treaty or otherwise, to interfere.' On the aggression, he said, 'the British Government might have an opinion :' he did not state what it was ; he only affirmed that pos- sibly they had one. Tliis speech conveyed the direct sanction of Great Britain to these French proceedings at Eome. Now it is an axiom clearly laid down by jurists, that an unjust aggression by one State on another confers on all other States a right of intervention for the purpose of redressing a wrong. * If a Prince make an unjust ' war, everyone has a right to succour the oppressed.'* Lord Palmerston denies that England had any right of intervention, by treaty or otheewtse — that is, by the law of nations — to oppose the French proceedings : con- sequently he lays down the principle once again that a State may forcibly interfere in the internal concerns of another State from which it has received no injury, and that in so doing it is not acting unjustly, even though the motive for such forcible interference is exclusively that of self-aggrandizement and 'to maintain its political ' influence.' By this speech, therefore, the British Government carried their sanction of tlie violation of this principle one step further than had been done before. In the cases of Spain, of Portugal, and of Sicily it was a vio- lation of the non-intervention principle, for the sake of supporting (what was affirmed to be) good Governments against bad ones : but in this case of the Frencli inter- * Tattel, bk. iii. ch. iii. s. 49. 126 EUROPE. [part i. vention at Eome the right of France forcibly to intervene for the restoration of a bad Government, and the over- throw of a better, was admitted — and that on the avowed plea of maintaining her political influence. Thus was Great Britain placed on precisely the same level, with regard to her reverence for international law, on which the four great Continental Powers stood. In 1847 the Foreign Secretary had, on the 11th of September, told the Government of Austria that ' any ' aggression on the rights of independent States would ' not be viewed with indifierence by Great Britain.' In May 1851 the right of France to make an aggression on Eoman independence was acknowledged ; and more- over, it was ' viewed with ' perfect ' indifference ' by the British Ministers. A similar see-saw course was pursued by the great Continental Powers. They have not scrupled, when it has answered their end, to appeal to this non-inter- vention principle. They could set it at nought, as a body, when dealing with the newly established consti- tutional Governments of Naples, Piedmont, and Spain in 1822-23. They could set it at nought, separately, when dealing with Hungary and with Eome. They could set it at nought, in combination with this country, when dealing with Spain and Portugal in 1833, and with Turkey in 1838-9, and again in 1854, when Eussia, single and alone, brushed it aside : when the Czar, strong in his own might, and relying on the weakness of Turkey, thought that the moment was come when he might try, with safety, to add the long-coveted territories of the Porte to his own overa^rown dominions. He then CK. IX.] ROME. 12? demanded of the Sultan to concede to him the Protec- torate over some twelve millions of his subjects, who were members of the Greek Church: and when this preposterous demand was rejected, he tried to enforce compliance with it by means of a forcible intervention. Nevertheless, ever and anon, the great Powers could all, like the British Government, propound and invoke the non-intervention principle when it suited their own purposes. Thus M. Drouyn de Lhuys, the French Foreign Secre- tary, writing on the occupation of Eome, avers that that occupation ' constitutes an act of intervention contrary ' to one of the fundamental principles of our pubHc ' law.'* And the Eussian manifesto f about Naples con- tains this remarkable passage : — ' Less than ever is it ' now permitted to Europe to forget that Sovereigns ' are equals amongst themselves, and that it is not the * extent of territory but the sanctity of the rights of each ' which regulates the relations which exist between them. ' To wish to obtain from the King of Naples conces- ' sions as to the internal regime of his States by ' threatening demonstrations, is to wish to govern in his ' place, and to proclaim the right of the strong over ' the weak.' Again, similar inconsistencies are recorded of unofficial members of Parliament. Mr. Roebuck, the author of the resolution (June 24, 1850) on the Don Pacifico affair, affirming ' that the principles which have * Vide Times, Oct. 5, 1864. t Vide Mornimi Herald, Sept. 30, 185C. 128 EUROPE. [faux i. ' hitherto regulated the foreign policy of Her Majesty's ' Government are such as were calculated to preserve ' untarnished the honour and dignity of this country,' could bewail in the preceding year ' this great principle ' of international law being infringed alike by complete ' republicanism and by complete despotism ;' whilst the ' burden of most of the speeches of members of Parlia- ment during the recess in 1864 was that of congratulation ' at the estabhshment of the great principle of non-inter- vention, as a maxim of our future poUcy.' But those who held this language were deceived — they were deceived by the neutral course pursued by the British Government towards the United States during their civil war, and by the abstinence from all forcible inter- vention in the case of Denmark. But it is a sad delusion to suppose that any great principle of international law can be ' estabUshed,' as a rule, simply by proclaiming it, at a moment's notice, after a series of acts in violation of it. The only chance of a nation getting it to be generally accepted as a rule of law, is when, for a long and continuous period of years, it faithfully asserts and obeys it. For the forty years previous to 1830 the British Government had held it sacred. During the fifteen years which followed, it was set at nought on four separate occasions, and had even been described as a ' narrow-minded prejudice.' Was it possible that it could be again set up, in the case of the United States, as a principle to be held inviolate, and as a fixed rule of conduct and a justification for neutrality ? Thus it is that the public mind becomes confused. CH. IX.] LAW OF NATIONS. 120 and that so few have a correct notion of the estimation in which Great Britain is really held by the other nations of the world. In the comments which, throughout this work, have .been made on the foreign policy of Lord Palmerston, the reader should observe that little has been said to impugn the soundness and propriety of the political alhances and combinations into which he has entered in order to preserve the balance of power, or to pre- vent the spread of war, or to preserve the general peace. Whether those combinations were wise or unwise, successful or unsuccessful, has nothing to do with the questions discussed in these pages. The propositions which it has been their object to establish are these : — (1). That the course of policy which has been pursued has broken down the fundamental principles of inter- national law, by the maintenance of which alone can be permanently preserved the integrity and indepen- dence of the different States of the world who compose the great family of nations. (2). That consequently, that moral influence has been destroyed which the British nation possessed up to the year 1830. (3). That thereby have been separated the moral strength and the physical strength of Great Britain, which, when combined, render Her influence and power almost irresistible. (4). That this country has in consequence lost the respect and confidence of foreign nations, and with K 130 EUROPE. [parti. them the great power and advantages to be derived from being ' the one trusted Government in the midst ' of Governments which no one can trust.' (5). That by thus destroying the respect for inter- national law a great advance has been made towards establishing throughout Europe the law of force. CH. X.] TREATY LAW. 131 CHAPTER X. TREATY LAW, There are two kinds of law which regulate in theory the intercourse of nations : (1). International law (somewhat resembling the lex non scrij)ta, or the common law of England), which rests on the unvarying principles of right and wrong, and not on positive enactment or special agreement. (2). Treaty law (somewhat resembling our lea; scripta, or statute law), which is founded on actual agreement and imposes special obhgations according to the stipu- lations entered into. To a certain extent treaty law may supply, if need be, the place of international law ; especially if, by any unfortunate concurrence of circumstances, the affairs of nations have been so conducted as to set aside those great principles of the law of nations which are, in truth, obligatory on all States. In such a case the existence of treaties, recognised as binding, serve as a check to that lawless spirit of conquest and annexation which the general disregard of international law is but too sure to let loose. It has been clearly shown, in the preceding chapters, how international law has been dealt with by the K 2 132 EUROPE. [part I. British Government during the last thirty-five years. In this chapter it is intended to show that treaty law has received little better treatment at their hands. Before the law of force can ride rampant throughout the world, it is essential that treaty law as well as in- ternational law should be set aside. The treaties of Vienna, agreed to in 1815, were the giand foundation on which the settlement of Europe rested. That those treaties had many defects, that in many points the settlement was injudicious, needs not to be denied. But whatever their defects (and, arranged as they were under the most trying difficulties, it is not to be wondered at that there were many), still the sio"ning parties, viz. the great and many of the smaller European Powers, were pledged to maintain them. Not, however, that their stipulations were irrevo- cable — not that the Powers who were parties to tliem had not the full right by joint agreement to modify and to alter them. For a territorial settlement well adapted to the wants and the necessities of the year 1815 was little likely to be equally adapted to the wants and the necessities of all succeeding years. The advantage to Europe, however, of maintaining those treaties as they stood, until altered by competent authority (viz. the authority of the contracting parties), was very great. It was calculated to give a stability not merely to the existing settlement, but to any subse- quent modification of that settlement which the shifting interests of human affairs might render it advisable to adopt. To any advantageous modification, on the con- dition of joint consent, it would have been the duty of CH. X.] TREATY LAW. 133 a British Ministry to assent. Nor was it less their duty to withhold that assent from any alterations, brought about by violence, to which the sanction of the con- tracting parties had not been obtained. For upwards of fifteen years the arrangements of the treaties of Vienna remained undisturbed. In the year 1829 a severe shock was given to the European system by the overthrow of the elder branch of the house of Bom^bon, and the placing on the French throne of a ' Citizen King.' The faciUty with which this change was accomphshed encouraged all the discontented spirits on the Continent to endeavour to imitate the example of the French people. The excitement which everywhere prevailed was intense, and, as has been already stated, the revolutionary action next broke out in Belgium. The revolt ended in the division of the kingdom of the Netherlands into two parts, whereby the settlement made by the treaties of Vienna was departed from. But as this was done by the consent of tiie chief contracting parties, faith quoad the treaties was not de- cidedly broken ; the alteration was made by competent authority ; what remained of the treaties was still binding. The next event which affected those treaties arose out of the insurrection of the Poles against Eussian dominion. The two partitions of Poland between Eussia, Austria, and Prussia, towards the close of the last century, were undoubtedly stamped with the character of lawless violence and injustice. At the same time it must be admitted that the chronic state of turmoil in which Poland had long existed was a nuisance to her immediate neighbours. 134 EUROPE. [parti. Had the Poles known how to use their independence when they had it, it would not have been in the power of the partitioning States to deprive them of it. By the treaties of Vienna Poland was again reparti- tioned between the three Powers, and for the first time Great Britain made herself an assenting party to a par- tition. That this was a great mistake on the part of our negotiators, to say the least of it, can hardly be denied. The admissions of Lord Castlereagh lead to the conclusion that it would not have been at that period impossible to restore the independent kingdom of Poland ; but, supposing that this result could not, as was asserted, have been accomplished without producing a fresh war, to attempt it at such a sacrifice would have been perhaps inexcusable. Still there was no necessity for Great Britain becoming a contracting party to confirm this unjustifiable anniliilation of a great kingdom. Her Government ought rather to have pro- tested against it. But the British Plenipotentiaries at Vienna were evidently induced to abstain from protesting against this division of Poland, and to abandon their efibrts to restore her independence, by tlie wish to do the next best thing, viz. to obtain some treaty security for the good government of that largest portion of Poland which was assigned to the Eussian Emperor. Accordingly they persuaded that monarch to bind himself by treaty not to incorporate Poland with Eussia, and to give his Polish subjects a constitutional form of Government which might afford some security for their freedom and happiness. CH. X.] TREATY LAW— POLAND, 135 With the provisions of this treaty the Emperor com- pHed. He abstained from incorporating Poland with Eussia, and he estabhshed a constitutional Government at Warsaw. Unhappily, however, both for the Poles and for their Sovereign, his next brother, the Grand Duke Constantine, was appointed as Viceroy of the Kingdom of Poland. He was a man whose uncontrollable and vicious temper led him to disregard, without scruple, the provisions of the Constitution, which his brother, Alexander, had granted. . Had the Poles been strong enough to com- pel him to keep within constitutional bounds, all might have gone well ; but, as it was, he disregarded those securities for good government which the Constitution conceded. The Poles were consequently always con- spiring to throw off the Eussian yoke, and this conduct on their part tended to provoke the Grand Duke's anger, whilst it also served him as a pretext for his violent and unlawful proceedings. At last, in 1831, when the hopes of all the discontented in Europe were excited by the overthrow of Charles X., the explosion came, and Eussian Poland rose in insurrection against the Eussian Emperor. The avowed object of the insurrection was to secure their hberties : at first, they did not propose to depose the Czar ; but as the contest went on they unwisely, but perhaps not unnaturally, decreed his dethronement, and openly fought for a distinct and independent nationality. There is something very fascinating and imposing in this doctrine of nationalities. There is something very 136 . EUROPE. [pARxi. chivalrous and noble in the courageous and desperate efforts of the Poles to obtain this end. They sacrificed all that was dear to man, from the patriotic feeling that they did it for their country. So the Poles deserve our admiration. Still, it must not be forgotten that this doctrine of nationality, however attractive to a generous mind, would, if everywhere attempted to be carried out, infallibly plunge all the nations of the world into the vortex of civil war. The immediate cause of the outbreak was the punish- ment by flogging, on the sole authority of the Grand Duke Constanthie, of some young men whom two suc- cessive commissions of inquiry had absolved from guilt. But not so much to this outrage or to his acts, as to the intense longing for independence and the hope of foreign aid, the insurrection at that time must be attributed. It is not to the purpose here to enter into the details of the conflict. It is sufficient to state that, after a severe struggle, in which PoUsh valour and determina- tion were conspicuous, the rebellion was extinguished by the overwhelming forces which Russia brought to bear upon it. The extinction of the rebelhon brought with it, as a not unnatural consequence, the extinctioji of the constitution. The question is, was this such a violation of the treaties of Vienna, as to give the contracting Powers a right of war ? It seems difficult to affirm that it was so. The Em- en. X.] TREATY LAW— POLAND. 137 peror had in a way fulfilled his contract with the parties to the treaty ; it was the act of the Poles which abrogated the treaty. Had they confined themselves to the object which in the outset they professed to seek — viz. an amehoration in their government, with the Czar as their king, they would not have lost their right of appeal to the Powers, parties to the treaty, an essential part of the treaty bemg that the Czar should be King of Poland. But the Poles, by rashly decree- ing his deposition, changed the tenure by which His Eussian Majesty held their kingdom, from that of sti- pulation to that of conquest. It could hardly be expected of him to restore constitutional power to those who had so recently thrown off their allegiance and waged a deadly war against him. The Poles themselves threw away the shelter which those treaties afforded them, and thereby they lost the right of appeal to a protection which they had manifestly despised. To this abrogation of the Constitution, England, how- ever, never gave her sanction : so that if Eussia broke her faith and violated her treaty obligations, England had still the right to consider the Vienna treaties as binding. The next case in which deviation occurred from those treaties was in respect to the city of Cracow, which had been constituted by them a free and inde- pendent city. Such an asylum for discontented Poles was of course a source of considerable uneasiness to the three partitioning Powers. They determined, therefore, in the year 1846, that it was fitting to put an end to it, and accordingly it was settled that Austria should take 138 EUROPE. [part i. possession of the city. This was unquestionably a gross outrage on the treaties, and it gave Great Britain a right of war against the offending parties. The British Government did not deem it expedient to exercise the right ; had they done so it would not have been of any avail. What could Great Britain have done against Eussia, Austria, and Prussia, in the very heart of their respective dominions, to restore the independence of Cracow ? Wisely, therefore, did her Government con- tent itself with entering a protest against the proceeding ; but by so doing the binding efficacy of the Vienna treaties was duly asserted. The case was dealt with as it was fitting that it should be. Thus far, then, the British Government adhered to the faith of treaties. Those of Vienna still formed part of the pubhc law of Europe. But when, as has been already stated, the English Foreign Secretary took no dubious part in promoting the separation of Sicily from the kingdom of Naples, and offered, without any consultation with the Allies, to recognise as Sicilian Sovereign a Prince of the house of Savoy, he made an offer which was directly opposed to the obligations of treaty, and thus an excuse was given to other Powers to imitate so dangerous an example. It was the first unmistakeable act on the part of Great Britain calculated to set aside the treaties of 1815. It matters not that, on this occasion, nothing came of the offer. It was notorious that it was made, and thus England followed up the example set at Cracow, in show- ing her wiUingness to disregard her treaty obligations. CH. X.] TREATY LAW— NAPOLEON III. 139 This was the first blow given by England to the treaty law of Europe. The next deviation arose out of the recognition of Louis Napoleon Buonaparte as Emperor of the French by the Enghsh Government. By those treaties this country was bound to join in opposing and expelling any Buonaparte who should mount the throne of France. But Lord Malmesbury, then Foreign Secretary, agreed with the great Powers to ignore this stipulation ; and so scrupulous was he in maintaining treaty law inviolate, that he conducted an important negotiation respecting the real meaning of the assumed title of Napoleon III., which negotiation ended in the new Emperor recognising all public and international acts performed by his predecessors on the French throne, of all dynasties — just as if he had succeeded immediately after the deposition of the son of the first Napoleon. The treaties of 1815 therefore still formed part of the public law of Europe. After, however, the resignation of Lord Derby's Government, acts were done by the succeeding Govern- ment which materially diminished, if they did not alto- gether destroy, the binding force of those treaties. They had not, of course, been framed in a spirit favourable to France. The world had not sufficiently recovered, when they were made, from the shocks which it had received from the aggressions and triumphs of France in all parts of the European Continent, to lose so soon the dread of French ambition and power. The arrangements and stipulations concluded at that period were therefore by no means palatable to the 140 EUEOPE. [parti. Bourbon and Orleans dynasties ; but to a Buonaparte they could not but have been a source of considerable soreness ; and, without doubt, one of the fondest desires of the French Emperor was to trample them under foot. To regain for France a portion of her former frontiers — to destroy, in Italy, Austrian influence, and to replace it by French — but especially to rid himself of the odious treaties, were in his eyes most legitimate objects, well worth a war with Austria to obtain them. So the Emperor professed to go to war for an ' idea ' — the unity of Italy ; but the real predominant idea over which his mind brooded, was the ' rectification of one ' of the frontiers of France, notched (ebrechee) after the ' hundred days by the second treaty of Vienna.'* There can be no reasonable doubt that there was an understanding between the Emperor and King Victor Emmanuel, before a French soldier set foot in Italy, that if, by the aid of French arms, Lombardy should be torn from Austria and annexed to Piedmont, Savoy and Nice should be given up to France. How little the Emperor cared for the unity of Italy was sufficiently manifest by the treaty of Villa Franca, by which it was stipulated, after a triumphant war, that all the little Italian Potentates who had been obliged to fly should be restored to their dominions, whilst the unity which had been promised was postponed to a more convenient opportunity. Events, however, evidently went faster than the Emperor either intended or expected. The * A sentence of M. Lamartine when head of the French Government. CH. X.] TREATY LAW— ITALY. 141 people of the lesser States did really desire that Italian unity which had been the useful war-cry of His Imperial Majesty, and instead of returning to their allegiance to their former Princes, they annexed them- selves to that Italian kingdom which was now rapidly growing into shape. After a short time a large portion of the States of the Church were detached from the dominions of the Pope, and were united to Piedmont, and Garibaldi, having driven from his capital the Bourbon King of the Two Sicilies, proclaimed Victor Emmanuel as his successor. So that when the Monarch coming from the North, and the Hero from the South, met for the first time in the centre of the Peninsula, Garibaldi's celebrated salutation of Victor Emmanuel, ' Hail, King ' of Italy ! ' described not merely an ' idea ' but a reality. These consequences were assuredly not contemplated by the French Emperor, although they mainly resulted from his interference. Vast changes had thus been brought about in the territorial settlement of Italy, as arranged by the Vienna treaties. But Great Britain was not bound to have recourse to hostilities in order to maintain those treaties inviolate, and the changes in question were not such as it was her duty or her interest to oppose. She was in no way responsible for the means by which they had been effected. As a matter of policy an united Italy is desirable for British interests. Great Britain therefore not being bound in honour or good faith to have recourse to hostilities, her Government wisely decided tliat she should be neutral. 142 EUROPE. [parti. Nevertheless there were the changes, and with those changes it was necessary for her to deal. The fact of a war having broken out between France and Austria, although it might put an end to the mutual treaty obligations as existing between those two Powers, yet could not release either of them from their treaty obligations to other Powers with whom neither of them had gone to war. Neither would an unjustifiable and unprovoked attack by a strong Power on a weak Power, whereby the weaker Power should be goaded into resistance, relieve that strong Power from any treaty obligations which it might have contracted with that weak Power. To maintain the contrary would, as Lord Palmerston remarked, be a ' most preposterous doctrine, ' and if once established, any strong Power having an 'inconvenient treaty with a weak one would have ' nothing to do, in order to free itself from its engage- ' ments, but to make such unprovoked attack.'* Fully admitting that it was sound policy for this country to recognise, and to give, so far as her recog- nition could give, stability to the actual alterations, there were two ways of doing it. (1). By acting at once without regard to treaty stipulations. (2). By notifying the intention to recognise the kingdom of Italy so soon as the consent of her allies, parties to the treaties of Vienna, could be obtained. By the first course those treaties would be set aside as no longer binding. By the last course they would • Viscount Palmerston, Feb. 8, 1863. en. X.] TREATY LAW— ITALY. 14*} have been held sacred, and the treaty law of Europe would have remained in force. Unfortunately for this country and for Europe, the British Government adopted the first of these two courses. Dazzled by the exploits of Garibaldi — led away by the fascinating ' idea ' of an united Italy, they hastened to follow the example of France, and, without consultation with Eussia, Austria, and Prussia, recog- nised the new kingdom. Those Powers stood aloof To this day Austria refuses to acknowledge Victor Emmanuel as King of Italy, and although it may be true that the recognition of a de facto Government cannot be indefinitely delayed, and may, from the force of circumstances, after a time become a necessity, yet such a step should at any rate not be hastily taken, nor until every reasonable effort has been exhausted to obtain a release from the obhgations by which a nation is bound to its allies. This was the course pursued by this country towards Spain in the case of the revolt of the American colonies — and later still, towards the United States during the civil war between the North and the South. In the first case the delay turned out of no avail ; in the next the call for recognition never ripened into a necessity. More especially on this occasion of the change in the territorial distribution of Italy was great caution and deliberation required ; for, so recently as May 1849, Lord Minto, speaking of his Italian mission, affirmed tliat he had omitted no ' opportunity of stating, while ' in Italy, that, desirous as the British Government were * of seeing a wholesome reform in Italy, there was one 144 EUROPE. [part i. ' point on which their opinion and determination ' remained fixed — viz. that they would be no party *.to, and would not encourage, tolerate, or approve any ' changes of the territorial arrangements settled by the ' treaties of Vienna.' This language Lord Minto of course held in conformity with his instructions. Lord John Eussell two years before had made a similar declaration in Parliament in the debate on Cracow (March 4, 1847) : ' We have not looked to any ' interest, whether large or petty, in regard to ourselves. ' We have regarded the great interests of Europe ; we ' have desired that the settlement which put an end to ' a quarter of a century of bloodshed should remain in ' full force and vigour. We have declared that senti- ' ment to tlie world, and we trust that the reprobation ' with which this transaction has been met will, in ' future, lead all Powers, whoever they may be, who ' may be induced to violate treaties, to consider that * they will meet with the disinterested protest of ' England, so that her character shall stand before the ' world untarnished by any act of her own.' Later still, Lord Malmesbury, on the part of the Government (Jan. 10, 1859), had instructed the British Ambassador at Paris that if the territorial arrangements of the Italian peninsula were changed by violence, ' the ' treaties of 1815 must be effaced, for such redistribution ' of territory could not be effected without the consent ' of the parties to those treaties.' Statesmen, therefore, of opposite politics had solemnly recorded their, opinion that it was a duty to adhere to the Vienna treaties. Yet the same Ministry which CH. X.] TREATY LAW, 145 thus instructed Lord Minto to declare that they would not ' encourage, tolerate, or approve ' any change in these territorial arrangements, unnecessarily, not only without the consent of, but without concert with, the other parties to the treaty, hastened to bestow Her Majesty's recognition on the, at that time, imperfectly estabhshed kingdom of Italy. By this act a heavy blow was given to treaty law, and henceforth it will be almost idle to appeal to the treaties of Vienna as part of the public law of Europe. Encouraged by the offhand way in which the British Government thus disregarded the obligations of treaties, the Emperor of the French saw too clearly that he had nothing to fear from any serious obstacles which Great Britain would throw in his way should he claim from Victor Emmanuel the fulfilment of his agreement to cede to France, Nice as well as Savoy, the cradle of his house, his ancient hereditary dominions. Eumours of this cession being intended had been rife for some time, but they had been stoutly denied by Count Cavour on the part of the Sardinian Government. Now, however, that there was no fear of England, continued disguise was unnecessary. The new Kmg of Italy readily admitted the claims of the French Emperor, and forthwith, by the cession of those two countries, satisfied them. The ' notch ' in the French frontier was filled up. Thus, by a series of acts, professedly unconnected, and 'founded on the special circumstances of each ' particular case,' but still so unfortunately adapted to each other as to have all tlie inconvenient effects of a 146 EUROPE. [part i. preconceived system, did Lord Palmerston effectually break down the treaty law which prevailed in Europe when he first became the Foreign Minister of Great Britain. The natural consequences have followed. The great German Powers were not slow in follow- ing the example of tlie British and French Governments in breaking through the obligations of treaty. The Vienna treaties were some forty years old, and were in some respects hardly adapted to the altered state of affairs as existing in 1860 ; so that an alteration in them might have been not unreasonably required. But there was a treaty in existence, made as lately as the year 1852, the provisions of which were expressly framed to meet the state of things which would arise whenever Ferdinand VII., the then King of Denmark, should die. That monarch not only had no issue, but was the last of his line. The great Powers of Europe foresaw, therefore, that, on his demise, disastrous com- pUcations would be certain to ensue — owing (1) to the various tenures by which he held the sovereignty of different portions of his dominions — (2) to the disputed relations in wliich some of those portions stood towards the Germanic Confederation — (3) to there existing a claimant to the Schleswig-Holstein Duchies in the person of the Duke of Augustenbiu-g — and (4) to the disputed relations in which those Duchies stood to- wards each otlier and towards Denmark Proper. In order, therefore, to set the foreseen disputes at rest before the crisis actually arose, a solemn treaty was entered into, to which Denmark was en. X.] TREATY LAW. 147 a party (witli the consent of the claimant to the Duchies), to provide for the succession to the Danisli throne. By that treaty they agreed that Prince Chris- tian of Schleswig-Holstein Sonderburg-Ghicksburg, named by Ejng Frederick as his successor, should on the decease of King Frederick be recognised by them as King of Denmark ; and the first article declared ' his * right to succeed to the totality of the States actually * united under the sceptre of the then King of ' Denmark.* Great Britain, Austria, Prussia, France, Eussia, Swe- den, and Denmark were the contracting parties to this treaty, which was duly signed and ratified by them all in the month of May 1852. Hanover, Saxony, Wurtem- burg, Oldenburg, and Hesse -Cassel afterwards acceded to it. Now there were certain understandings or stipu- lations by which Denmark was bound to the German Powers, as to the mode of dealing with the Schleswig- Holstein Duchies. Whether Denmark honestly ful- filled those stipulations, or whether Germany had a right to make the demands which she did upon the new King, is a point which, if determined against Denmark, might justify Germany n a war to compel their fulfilment ; but assuredly it would not justify any demands beyond it. For, although had the treaty been made with Denmark alone, and had Denmark given to Germany just cause of war, the penalty of an unsuccessful war might not unjustly have been exacted from Her^ yet the order of succession to the Danish monarchy, as settled by the treaty, having been agreed L 2 148 EUKOPE. [part i. to as a matter of general policy in which all the sign- ing parties had a common interest, and having been accepted as public European law, because the integrity of the Danish monarchy was recognised as essential to European peace — however completely a just war against Denmark might have relieved the German Powers from their obligations towards Denmark to fulfil that treaty, it could not relieve them from those obligations which they had contracted with those other Powers with whom they had not gone to war. To those Powers Germany was bound. But the conduct of the two great German Powers towards Denumrk has been from the beginning as false, unjust, and oppressive as it has been faithless and inexcusable towards their other allies. They marched their troops into Denmark for one reason, retained them there on another, levied war on her on the most frivolous pretences, treated the unofiending inhabitants of Denmark Proper with shameful cruelty, pillaged them of their property, contrary to all the laws of civilised warfare, and converted a smihng and pros- perous country into a state of extreme poverty or ruin. Having grasped possession of the Duchies by force, they have held on till, finally, by a Convention (Gastein), which betrays the baseness of their motives from the beginning, and the fraudulent character of the pretences with which they begun the strife, they have with unblushing effrontery agreed with each other to divide between themselves the territories which they have lawlessly seized. Austria has appropriated Schleswig, a province undeniably Danish ; and Prussia has appropri- CH. X.] TREATY LAW. 149 ated Holstein and Lauenburg, undeniably belonging to the German Bund, as well as the port of Kiel and the control of the canal across the isthmus. The partition of Poland has thus been reenacted in what is called ' this age of progress.' Whether the British Government first encouraged Denmark to expect assistance, and then shrank back and disappointed the hopes which it had excited, whether it was for the interest or honour of this country to interfere with an armed force to prevent the dis- memberment of Denmark, need not be here discussed. The point which bears upon the purport of this work is this — that the great German Powers contemptuously defied the remonstrances of the British Government and Parhament — that it was in vain that Lord Palmerston denounced* the entrance of the Austrian and Prussian forces into Schleswig as ' an outrage and ' an injustice' — that it was in vain that he denounced their entering Jutland as an ' aggravation of the outrage.' To these remonstrances of the Premier they turned a deaf ear, and treated them with cynical indifference. They might — nay, it is very certain that they would — have been stopped in their iniquitous career by a threat of forcible resistance ; but they, not unnaturally, disre- garded simple appeals to justice and good faith, when made by a Government whose course of policy they knew had long ceased to be guided by either. Of the actual fact that treaty law is no longer consi- dered binding by the great European States, there can be no reasonable doubt. * Februaiy 13, 1865. 150 EUROPE. [PART I. Lord Eussell thus asserts it, when commenting on the Gastein Convention (Sept. 14, 1865) : — ' But all rights, old or new, whether based on a ' solemn agreement between Sovereigns, or on the clear ' and precise expression of the popular will, have been ' trodden under foot by the Gastein Convention, and ' the authority of force is the sole power which has ' been consulted and recognised.' Again, take the observations of the 'Times' of Sept. 13, 1865, on the same subject : — ' Although we cannot reproach ourselves with the * result, it is none the less deserving of consideration. ' It amounts to a demonstration, that things will be done ' in Europe such as were done in times past, unless ' some control is maintained over the passions of States ' by superior power. What Prussia has done to ' Denmark she may do to any State equally weak ; and ' what has been done by Prussia may be done by any ' State equally strong. If there is no European police, ' Europe wiU again become the scene of pohtical crimes. ' There is no security that the partition of Poland may ' not be reenacted at the expense of any people whose ' possessions are coveted by formidable neighbours. ' All that was talked about the progress of civihsation ' and the moral force of opinion was no better than a ' dream.' Would to God that the opening observation was true, that England ' cannot reproach herself with the result ' ! That result, alas ! is not confined to the Danish question. It is universal. CH. X.] TREATY LAW. 161 Eead the remarks of the ' Times' on two different questions, — on Nov. 3, 1864 : — ' Such acquisitions [as Germany has obtained from ' Denmark] are dearly purchased by the triumph of a ' pohcy which ostentatiously tramples under foot any ' considerations of right and justice, and reduces what ' was once the law of Europe, understood and acted ' upon by all nations, to the simple question of the ' longest sword.' And again, on the selfsame day, on the affairs of Poland : — ' A nation wallowing in an ocean of its own blood, ' sunk in the lowest depths of despair, and given over ' without hope and without resources to the hands of ' its bitter and exasperated enemies, who cruelly insult ' the unutterable woes of the bravest and most deeply ' wronged people of whom history gives us any account.' On behalf of this unhappy nation, which had again burst forth into rebelhon in 1863, and been again crushed as she had been before in 1832, the British Government had interceded somewhat in the same way and with precisely the same effect as they afterwards uiterceded with Austria and Prussia for Denmark. Unfortunately, in the case of Poland they based their intercession on grounds which, after what had passed, could not be sustained. Lord Eussell founded them ' on the engagements taken by Kussia by the treaty of ' Vienna.' (April 10, 1863.) Now, admitting that the Polish insurrection in 1832 did not, as I contend it did, abrogate the engagements of that treaty respectmg Poland, the acts of the British 152 EUROPE. [part i. Government, on the various occasions set forth in this chapter, in putting aside the engagements of those treaties, deprived it of the privilege of appealing to them. For, assuredly, England has no special privilege at one moment to set aside the stipulations of treaty, and the next, according as it may suit Her purpose, to claim from other Powers a fulfilment of its obligations. This was evidently the opinion of Eussian statesmen, and it is significantly shown by their mode of dealing with the propositions of Great Britain and France for the pacifi- cation of Poland. ' The principal Secretary of State ' of Her Britannic Majesty,' said Prince Gortchakoff, ' must excuse us from giving an answer to the proposed ' arrangement for the suspension of hostilities. It ' would not,' he sarcastically remarked, ' stand the test of ' a serious examination of the conditions necessary for ' carrying it into efiect.' (July 1863.) And to France the Prince wrote (Sept. 7) : — ' As ' regards the responsibility which His Majesty may as- ' sume in his international relations, those relations are ' regulated by international law. The violation of those ' fundamental principles may alone lead to a responsi- ' bility. Our august master,' he affirms, ' has always re- ' spected and observed those principles towards other ' States. His Majesty has a right to expect and to de- ' mand the same respect on the part of other Powers.' Thus Lord Eussell's diplomacy received a signal rebuff*, and he may perhaps have learnt therefrom that the only way in which the effective influence of this country can be maintained over the European commu- CH. X.] TREATY LAW. 153 nity is by fearlessly and resolutely adhering to the great principles of the law of nations, and by honestly fulfilling the special obligations imposed by the law of treaties. Eussia would never have dared to return to British remonstrances, against her dealings with her Polish sub- jects, a scornful and a jeering answer, if the Ministry of Great Britain could have addressed her invested with that moral dignity and influence which a Government derives from being ' the one trusted Government in the ' midst of Governments which no one can trust.' Austria and Prussia would never have turned a deaf ear to her remonstrances against their atrocious treatment of Denmark, had those expostulations been addressed to them by the rulers of a nation whom united Europe honoured and trusted. Let not, then, the British people disguise from them- selves this bitter truth. We are no lono;er looked upon as the one unselfish and trustworthy nation to whom the oppressed can look even for moral support. The deplorable policy detailed in these pages has rolled back the tide of Christian civilisation, and has installed throughout this quarter of the globe the only law known to the barbarians of old — the law of the strongest — the law ' of the longest sword '— the law of force. Meanwhile foreign nations have looked on and won- dered. They at least have not been blind to the down- ward process which has been going on ; and according as men's spirits have been of good or of evil, they have deplored or rejoiced at the extinction of the moral power of Britain. P A E T II. ASIA. 157 ASIA. CHAPTER I. INTERNATIONAL LAW. It is a strange notion, but nevertheless it is somewhat extensively accepted by the British pubhc, that those principles of law and justice which jurists have tried to embody in a code of international law are not applicable to transactions with the nations of Asia. This notion has been commended to the minds of men by various plausible maxims, which, since they serve to excuse our dealings with our Asiatic fellow-creatures, are soothing to men's consciences as palhating deeds otherwise inexcusable. One of the most plausible of these maxims, and one which has been sanctioned by some who should have known better,* is that ' it is an uncontrollable prin- ciple that barbarism must recede before civihsation : ' consequently if civilisation adopt the maxims, or, at any rate, the practices of barbarism, it is only what Lord Palmerston describes as ' the natural and usual ' history of the relations of a highly civilised people ' with a half civihsed one.' (May 3, 1864.) * The late Sir Eobert Peel. 158 ASIA. [part II. But assuredly there is no uncontrollable principle which necessitates either an attack on the unoffending, or a breach of faith. It is a libel on God's truth to affirm that any principle can exist which it is at once wrong to obey, and yet which it is impossible not to obey. Another maxim is, that ' the only intelligible language ' to Orientals is the language of force ; ' consequently that it is lawful to use force, when, in the judgment of those who employ it, it is expedient to use ' intelligible ' lanojuag;e.' These wise saws, and others like them, are extremely convenient to a people who have very extensive deal-, ings with the Asiatic world, and whose overwhelming forces can be employed with little risk in speaking this ' intelligible language.' Another argument which is gravely urged, is that Asiatics in general are so very wicked, so utterly false, profligate, and cruel, that it may be our ' mission ' to punish them. If so it be, and that we, like the Israelites of old, are really chosen to execute such a divine mission, in God's name let us closely examine the grounds on which we imagine that we are so ; and if satisfied with them, let us openly proclaim that we believe ourselves to be invested with the high office of God's avenger. This is what the Czar Nicholas had the courage to proclaim at the commencement of the Crimean war — with what results to himself and to his country need not be here detailed. But can any reasonable beings who are Christians honestly believe that notions and arguments such as these are valid in the eyes of God, as justifying deeds GH. I.] INTERNATIONAL LAW. 159 done ill Asia of violence and bloodshed which, if done in Europe, would be denounced as cruel, unjust, and law- less ? Can it be seriously argued that right and wrong depend on latitude and longitude, and vary with varying locahties ? ' It is indeed an absurd justice,' says Pascal, ' which ' is limited by a river or a mountain.' ' In forming my judgment,' said Lord Stowel,* ' I ' trust it has not for one moment escaped my anxious ' recollection that the duty of my station caUs me to ' consider myself, not as stationed here to deliver ' occasional and shifting opinions to serve present ' purposes of particular national interest, but to ad- ' minister with indifference that justice wliich the law ' of nations holds out without distinction to inde- ' pendent States. The seat of judicial authority is ' indeed locally here in the belligerent country accord- ' ing to the known law and practice of nations, but ' the law itself has no locality. It is my duty to deter- ' mine the question exactly as I would determine it if ' sitting at Stockholm — to assert no pretensions on the ' part of Great Britain which I would not allow to ' Sweden in the same circumstances, and to impose ' no duties on Sweden which I would not admit to ' Great Britain in the same character.' If then this doctrine, that what is right and wrong in Europe is not right and wrong in Asia, be good for anything, it is good as a justification for Eussia driving the whole Circassian people from their homes, and leaving more than half to perish on the Turkish shores * Case of * Maria,' Swedish convoy. 160 ASIA. [part II. of the inhospitable Euxine. Or, is the doctrine invaUd only where Kussia is concerned in Western Asia, viz. in Circassia, Mingrelia, and Georgia ; but valid where England is touched in Central and Eastern Asia, viz. in Persia, India, and China? Truly we are taught that ' God is the Judge of the ' whole earth ; ' and to suppose that acts which are wicked and unchristian in Europe are not wicked and unchristian in Asia, is a monstrous supposition evidently invented to hide those deeds of darkness which will not bear the light of truth. Eather should England pray : Let not our weak, unknowing hands Presume God's bolts to throw ; Nor deal damnation round the lands, On each jwe judge His foe. That Eastern nations are perfectly capable of discern- ing and duly appreciating the difference between right and wrong, might be shown from the honest and un- biassed testimony of many celebrated Englishmen whose lot it has been to have dealings with them. Take, however, as an example, the testimony of two — one. Lord Macaulay, who passed several years in India, and who studied deeply Indian affairs in England and Indian society in India. He records it as his dehberate opinion that ' English valour and English intelligence ' have done less to preserve our Oriental empire than ' English veracity. All that we could have gained by ' imitating the doublings, the evasions, the perjuries ' which have been employed against us, is as nothing * when compared with what we have gained by being CH. I.] INTERNATIONAL LAW. 161 ' the one Power in India on whose word reUunce can ' be placed.' So wrote Macauhiy in the ' Edinburgh Review,' January 1840. Did he ever again venture to pen a similar sentence ? AndSirHemyPottinger,our Minister Plenipotentiary, who concluded our first treaty with China, thus spoke at a dinner given to him by tlie Liverpool merchants shortly after his return to England : — ' I wish I were permitted to say all that I could say ' respecting the moral character and high sense of ' honour of these people. They really put me to the ' blush, when they reasoned with me on the injustice ' of the case, and on the wanton atrocities committed ' by our men. They entreated me, on my return home, ' to get my Government to restrain our sailors from ' committing such unnecessary acts of violence.' And then having detailed some of these acts, he adds : ' It is ' no wonder therefore that the Chinese have such a ' horror of the English, and that they think and call us ' " barbarians ; " for truly that term well befits the * Government influences of this country, if not its ' inhabitants.' Such is the testimony of two highly distinguished men, as to the moral qualities, and the powers of per- ception between right and wrong, possessed by the natives of Eastern Asia. It is confirmed by the ' Quar- ' terly Eeview.' ' The assertion,' says that i)eriodical, ' that the Chinese are a semi-barbarous nation, is ' denied by almost every traveller who has penetrated ' beyond their ports and lived freely among the M 162 ASIA. [part II. ' people. In the refinements of life, in courtesy, ' humanity, and domestic affection, they are at least ' our equals, and in some respect our superiors,'* Take still more recent testimony : — ' I have left the country ' (says Dr. Eennie), ' with ' the conviction that the Chinese nation, as a whole', ' is a much less vicious one than — as a consequence of ' opinions formed from a limited and unfair field of ' observation — it has become customary to represent it ; ' further, that the lower orders of the people generally ' are better conducted, more sober and industrious, and, ' taken altogether, intellectually superior to the cor- ' responding classes of our own countrymen. 'f That this Christian nation has a light to deal with such populations on different principles from those which obtain, or ought to obtain, in this quarter of the globe, I wholly deny, and I claim therefore to try British doings in Asia by the same test — viz. the law of nations — which I apply to British doings in Europe. * Quarterhj Review, No. 203, p. 16.3. t Peking and the Pekingese during the First Year of the British Embassy at Peking. 1865, CH. II. J affctHanistan. ie» CHAPTER II. THE WAR IN AFFGHANISTAN. The saddest chapter in the history of British India is the war which Great Britain entered into witli the people of Affghanistan, and their ruler Dost Mahomet Khan. The subject is so painful, so awful, so utterly de- stitute, as far as is at present known, of one single redeeming feature to afford a shadow of an excuse for our proceedings, that all reference to it here would have been gladly avoided, were it not that it forms too important a link in the chain of evidence whereby to show that it is mainly owing to the example set by England, both in Europe and in Asia, that throughout the world those restraints have been undisguisedly broken through, which the principles of justice and international law used formerly more or less to impose on the lawless violence of unprincipled and encroaching nations. Dost Mahomet Khan was the chosen ruler of the Affghans. A pretender to the throne, in the person of Shah Soojah, whom his subjects had driven away, dwelt within the dominions of British India. Forcibly to overthrow the one, and to restore the other, was M 2 164 ASIA. [part II. as if England were now to resolve, solely for her own conve7i{ence, on dethroning the present King of Portugal by force in order to bestow liis crown on the pretender Don Miguel. In point of principle there would not be the slightest difference between the two acts. But as the one was done in Asia, it excited little interest in this country ; and as the other would have to be done in Europe, it would, without doubt, were it attempted, excite an agitation and indignation here and on the Continent, such as has nevei' been surpassed during this century. It should therefore be always borne in mind, in contemplating this Affghan war, that it would be difficult to suggest a closer parallel than that which exists between these two cases. The conduct of the British Government towards the Affghans afforded a signal example of the violation of the non-intervention principle. ]^ost Mahomet had been for years the chief ruler of Affcrhanistan, owino; no allegiance and under no obligations to the British Government. Affghanistan was to all intents and purposes an independent State, and had its ruler entertained unfriendly feelings to- wards British power, provided those feelings did not betray themselves by overt acts, even then there could have existed no just cause for war against him. But it has been clearly established that Dost Mahomet's feelings were friendly to the British Government, as well as that his acts were in accordance with his feel- ings. With this Chief, however, so disposed towards this country, two members of the British Cabinet, for reasons which to this dav remain an unfathomable CH. II.] AFFGHANISTAN. 165 mystery, were determined that England should wage war ; and what makes it so mysterious, is that the reasons publicly assigned for this determination could not have been the real ones. The charge brought against Dost Mahomet was, that he was incHned to assist the Persians in injuring us — that the Persians were made the instruments of Eussia — that Russia was the moving cause to influence the Persians, ' for purposes ' avowedly unfriendly and hostile to us,' viz. to further her designs upon our Indian empire. Now that these reasons could not have been the real ones is manifest. In the first place the. British Envoy, the celebrated Alexander Burnes, who was sent to Cabool to ascertain the disposition of Dost Mahomet towards the English, reported decidedly that he entertained friendly feelings towards us, and that he was only anxious to secure our good-wiU and assistance, in case he should be attacked by the Persians. There could have been no mistake on that point by the recipients of Su- Alex- ander's despatches ; for so conscious were they that the contents of these despatches would cut from under them their accusation against Dost Mahomet, that when they laid them before Parhament it was thought necessary to ' exercise the right of prudent selection ' in order to make them convey a meaning directly opposite to the one which was really expressed by the writer. This deed, which Burnes described as one ' of pure trickery ' and fraud,' is established beyond doubt by the pubh- cation by Burnes himself of the originals in extenso, clearly showing that the two members of the Cabinet must have designedly manipulated the despatches, to 166 ASIA. [part ir. make the public imagine tliat they expressed opinions directly the reverse of the real ones. The designs of Dost Mahomet, then, were decidedly friendly to our Indian Government, and that they were so was perfectly well kno^vn to the English Ministers. But had they been the contrary, they could not have been formidable in themselves. In order to invest them with a formid- able character, it was therefore necessary to go two steps further back. Dost Mahomet was, it was asserted, inclined to assist the Persians ; and the Persians were accused of being instruments in the hands of Russia. The proof of this assertion was sought in the attack on Herat (a fortified city in Khorasan), which Persia was then besieging. If the Persians were not instruments of Russia, no danger could have arisen to our Indian dominions had they obtained possession of that place. But before our army entered AfFghanistan, the Persians had raised the siege, so that if any real dangers on that score were to be apprehended from Persia, as an in- strument of Russia, obtaining possession of that fortress, those dangers had disappeared. Therefore, if it had been true that Dost Mahomet had been inclined to assist the Persians, he could not have done it, because the opportunity had passed by. So far, then, as danger might arise to our Indian power, severally from either Persia or Aflghanistan, or from both united, all danger was over. With regard to Russia, who was accused of being the motive power which had set Persia and Affghanis- tan against us, our relations had become perfectly amicable at the period of our AfTghan invasion. en. II.] AFFGHANISTAN. 167 which was professedly undertaken to defeat the in- trigues of Eussia, by destroying the instrument by which she sought to injure us. It was this excuse, given for attacking Dost Mahomet, which probably made this nation acquiesce so tamely in the war. It appears that on October 28, 1838, the British Foreign Secretary addressed a remonstrance to the Eussian Government, complaining that ' Eussian agents ' in Persia and Affghanistan had lately been engaged ' in measures studiously concealed from the British ' Government, and planned in a spirit unfriendly to ' Great Britain, and for objects hostile to her interests.' This remonstrance was crossed in its passage by an expostulation from Eussia, accusing England of aggres- sive designs on Persia alarming to Eussia. The results of these reciprocal remonstrances are recorded in the following sentences : — ' I have great pleasure in being able to state to ' your Excellency that this communication has, in its ' result, been highly satisfactory to Her Majesty's ' Government.' * ' These explanations have afforded to the two Cabi- ' nets the opportunity of receiving and of offering, on ' either side, assurances which bear the character of ' just reciprocity, and which are inseparable from each ' other. 'f Thus on this point England and Eussia were recon- ciled. Taking, then, each link in the chain — Eussia, Persia, Affghanistan — it appears that every one of the * Lord Palmerston to Coimt Pozzo di Borgo, Dec. 20, 1838. t Count Nesselrode to Couut Pozzo di Bor<,^o, Jan. 20, 1839. 168 ASIA. [part II. assigned causes was done away with before the war hegmi. The British Government therefore entered into the war, and assigned reasons for it which those who assigned them knew were not true, and without any other apparent cause. But even if the reasons assigned had been the true ones, which it lias been shown they could not have been, they were totally inadequate to justify recourse being had to that last extremity. If the feelings of Dost Mahomet had been in reality such as were falsely imputed to him (in direct opposi- tion to the reports of our own agent), so as to give us real cause for apprehension, it is monstrous to contend that our apprehensions about the feelings of the AfFghan ruler were a just cause for war — still less would they have been a just cause for war levied for the object of not only depriving the Affghan people of the ruler of their choice, but of bringing back Shah Soojah, a sovereign whom they had expelled, and who was not without reason most odious to them. Moreover, the British Government made this war in the manner most offensive to the Affghans. The Sikhs were the deadly and hereditary enemies of the Affghans, yet we entered into a treaty with the Maharajah of the Sikhs, Eunjeet Sing ; and, as if it were on purpose to increase its offen- siveness, we made Shah Soojah a party to the treaty. The object of that treaty was the Shah's restoration. Having thus combined the dethroned Monarch of the Affghans and their deadliest enemies with ourselves, we represented our hostile proceedings as conferring on that people the greatest of benefits, the settled govern- ment of a ruler whom a great part of the people CH. II.] AFFGHANISTAN. 1G9 would gladly see restored! How utterly false were those representations subsequent events too clearly proved. This treaty, then, involved a forcible interference in the internal concerns of the independent kingdom of Affghanistan, which had given us no grounds what- ever of oflfence, and that interference was against the well-known wishes of its ruler and its people. It was, moreover, a treaty which, considering the position of the parties whom we had joined with us in its stipulations, was as insulting to the nation against whom it was directed, as it was injurious to the best interests of the country which framed it. Whether the mystery in which it is involved will hereafter ever be cleared up, it is impossible to predict, but at present its secret history remains wholly un- known to the British pubhc. Its execution resulted in a fatal and unexampled catastrophe ; but neither its failure nor its success would have altered the real features of the transaction. It afforded an example in Asia of a direct breach of international law — of all the principles of justice which ought to be held sacred ; and was one more step in advance towards establishing throughout the world the law of the strongest. 170 ASIA. [PAET II. CHAPTEE III. INDIA — LORD DALHOUSIE's POLICY.^ — THE MUTINY. Whether the other features which mark the adminis- tration of the vast empire which Great Britain now possesses in India are calculated to wipe out the black blot which still stains her good name from her dealings with Affghanistan, is tlie question which in this chapter it is proposed to discuss. The Affghan war took place during the Governor- Generalship of Lord Auckland ; and after our armies had, under his truly able successor, Lord Ellenborough, marched as conquerors and avengers over all the dis- tricts which had witnessed our disasters, the British armies were voluntarily withdrawn from aU parts of the AfFghan territories. The prestige of our power being thus restored, the ugly fact still remains, that this unjust aggression resulted in the total annihilation of a large British army — an occurrence without parallel in our history. It was thus with the Sepoy mutiny ; it was crushed by British valour, and the terrible vengeance which was taken has probably only served to strengthen our hold on our Indian possessions : but still the ugly facts remain, that for a time the whole fabric of our power was CH. III.] INDIA. 171 shaken to its foundations, and British subjects were massacred by wholesale throughout the northern pro- vinces of British India. The question therefore is — ought the general policy of our Indian Government to be held responsible for these most deplorable events, or were they the result of causes for which British statesmen must be held blameless ? Now if, in our dealings with the subject and independent nations of India, our conduct was in accordance with the principles of justice and mercy, that mutiny cannot be charged against us. But if our rule was marked by unjust acts, perpetrated for the purpose of consohdating our power and extending our dominions ; then it must be asked, whether it was not to these acts that the mutiny was owing ? Lord Hardinge succeeded Lord Ellenborough, and Lord Dalhousie Lord Hardinge. Lord Dalhousie's reign lasted for eight years. It is the pohcy pursued during those eight years which it is here needful to examine. Of the great talent and commanding intellect of that distinguished man no one can doubt. The vigour and firmness which he displayed in carrying out the system which he adopted are worthy of admiration. The question, however, remains, was the system a good and wise one ? If not, the intellectual vigour and the marvellous energy of its administrator could have only served to intensify its mischief. Of its excellence Lord Dalhousie himself was entirely convinced when he quitted India. On his return home, 172 ASIA. [part II. he composed a minute* ' for the purpose of recalHrig ' the pohtical events which had occurred, and the ' measures which had been taken, and the progress ' which had been made during the course of his admi- ' nistration.' He thought that ' the Honourable Court ' of Directors might derive from the retrospect some ' degree of satisfaction in the past, and a still larger ' measure of encourage metit for the future.'' Then, having passed all his great measures in review, he con- cludes with a hope ' that the recital, although dry, ' would yet be thought by the Honourable Court, from ' the results which it exhibits, neither unprofitable nor ' disappointing.' Within ten months of the date of this minute the mutiny of the Sepoys broke out ! Was that mutiny, or was it not, the natural result of Lord Dalhousie's system, and did he not mistake the calm which preceded the storm for an atmosphere per- manently serene ? Did not some great Indian statesmen foretell long before, as consequences of the system, the events which actually followed on its enforcement ? The main feature of that system may be described in a wQYj few words. It was to damage and to dis- credit the native independent Princes, whether Hindoo or Mahometan, and to take every colourable opportunity for annexing their territories to the dominions of Great Britain. ' The Government,' said Lord Dalhousie, in the early part of his reign,f ' is bound in duty as weU as policy ' to act on every such occasion with the purest integrity * February 28, 1856. . t April 1848. en. m.] INDIA. 173 and the most scrupulous observance of good fjiith. When even a shadow of a doubt can be shown, the claim should be abandoned. But when Vte right to territory by lapse is clear, the Government is bound to take tliat which is justly and legally its due, and to extend to that territory the benefits of our sovereignty, present and prospective. ' In like manner, while I would not seek to lay down any infallible rule with respect to adoption, I hold that on all occasions, when heirs natural shall fail, the territory shoidd be made to lapse, and adoption sliould not be permitted excepting in those cases in which some strong political reason may render it expedient to depart from this general rule. ' There may be a conflict of opinion as to the advan- tage or propriety of extending our' already vast posses- sions beyond their present limits. No man can more sincerely deprecate than I do any extension of the frontiers of our territory which can be avoided, or which may not be indispensably necessary from con- sideration of our own safety, and of the maintenance of the tranquilhty of our provinces. But I cannot conceive it possible for anyone to dispute the policy of taking advantage of every just opportunity which presents itself, for consolidating the territories which already belong to us, by taking possession of States which may lapse in the midst of them — for thus getting rid of these petty intervening principalities, which may be made a means of annoyance, but which can never, I venture to think, be a source of strength for adding to the revenues of the public treasury — and for ex- 174 ASIA. [part II. ' tending the uniform application of our system of ' government to those whose best interests we sincerely ' believe will be promoted thereby.'* Now the rights of adoption involved, in the belief of the Hindoos, all that was dear to them in this life, and their happiness or misery in another. Acting, however, on the general principles here laid down. Lord Dalhousie, ' with the purest integrity and the most scrupulous ' observance of good faith,' denied the rights of adop- tion to the Rajahs of Sattarah, Nagpore, Jhansi, Ke- rowlee,'the Carnatic, and Tanjore, the Peishwah, and the too celebrated Nana Sahib, rajah of Bithore. Had he entertained ' a shadow of a doubt ' that he was doing more than ' taking advantage of the just opportunities ' for getting rid of these petty intervening principalities, ' which may be made a source of annoyance, but never ' a source of strength for adding to the revenues of the ' public treasury,' we have his positive assurance that he would have ' abandoned oiu" claims.' * The following extract from a leading- article in the ' Times' (Dec. 5, 1865) affords a curious commentary on this minute of Lord Dalhousie : — After observing that England had 'no objection to the aggrandizement * of the United States,' it proceeds : * Of course the case is altered if the * object is to be attained by fraud, force, or intimidation. In that case, * not only is there actual -wrong done upon our own loyal fellow-subjects ' in Canada, but there is also established a prescription, a policy, and a ' temper ruinous to the future peace and even progress of the world. ' History contains some very colossal instances of annexation by continual * fraud and violence, in fact by policies constructed with a sj^ecial vieio to ^ perpetxial aggrandizement. But the event yet condemns them — the ' moral sense is opposed to them : and modern politics are mainly directed ' to -prevent the recurrence of the evil. . . . This is our English habit, our ' second nature, our historical teaching.' And then comes the explanation of all these strange and fanciful assertions, ' This is our European law.' That is, we have not tried, for a long series of years, to annex the terri- tories of our immediate neighbours in this quarter of the globe. CH. m.] INDIA. 175 Nevertheless, although the Governor-General was not troubled with doubts with respect to these numerous annexations, which Mr. Gladstone pleasantly describes as 'the provinces which the counsels of Providence ' have already assigned to us,'* there were many others, whose names are great in Indian history — for example, Henry Lawrence, George Clerk, and Sleeman — to whom this pohcy was extremely dis- tasteful. Sir George Clerk, who was Governor of Bombay, looking at the case of Sattarah and the treaty of 1819, and seeing that the British Government agreed to cede in perpetual sovereignty to the Eajah of Sattarah, 'his heirs and successors,' the territories which he held, at once declared in favour of the native Rajah. And although the members of his council looked at the question as purely one of expediency, and considered it the duty of the British Government to decide it in the manner most advantageous to itself, the Governor, in language worthy of a true British states- man, refused to admit any secondary considerations, saying, ' If it be inconsistent with justice to refuse con- ' firmation to the act of adoption, it is useless to ' inquire whether it is better for the interests of the ' people, or of the empire at large, to govern the ' Sattarah territories through the medium of a native ' Rajah or by means of our own administration.' Sir George was evidently well persuaded that a gain obtained through injustice will never ultimately prove beneficial to the interests of either the governors or the governed. * Speech on Lord Mayor's day, 1865. 176 ASIA. [part II. The frequency with which these 'just opportunities ' occurred (eight in seven years) naturally excited alarm amongst all the independent princes, whether Mahome- tan or Hindoo, and it is not to be wondered at that the greater number of them thought their only hope of safety lay in the extinction of British rule in India. But if the absorption of these smaller States created alarm, that alarm must have been very greatly in- creased by the annexation of Oude — the crowning step in the same direction, wliich marked the close of Lord Dalhousie's administration. The justification put forth for this bold step was specially calculated to increase their alarm, and to make tliem feel that the same reasons which were assigned in that case, might at any moment be assigned as conclu- sive for similar action in their own. It may be readily admitted that the kingdom of Oude was sadly misgoverned — that it had long been the sanctuary of every scoundrel, and that the vices and debauchery of its King have rarely been equalled — that life and property had httle or no protection save that derived from inherent individual strength, whilst the officers of justice were perhaps the most formidable of the tyrants whose remorseless rapacity spread terror and misery around them. Further, it may be admitted that this lamentable state of things was mainly upheld by the countenance and protection afforded by the British to the heartless and degraded occupant of the throne. It may therefore be truly said that it was both fitting and necessary to withdraw from the responsibihty of helping to sustain so odious a tyranny. cir. III.] INDIA. 177 There were two modes of doing this : — One by the dethronement of the King, to be followed by annexation. The other by simply ceasing to uphold, and leaving the King and his ministers to maintain, as they best could, the power which they abused. In defence of the first course there was the argument, that it was for the interests and well-being of the sub- ject masses of Oude that the corrupt and miserable Government should be wholly swept away. Against it there was the violation of treaty, and the solemn agreement to respect the rights of the Sovereign, and the gratitude due for loans of money in time of need, and undeviating fidelity to British interests. In favour of the second, there was fidelity to the obligations of treaty. Against it, the probability that the country would be consigned to anarchy, when every man's hand would be against every man, and the condition of all made more wretched than before. It was therefore at best but a choice of evils. And if our Indian Government had come to the choice with clean hands, much might be said to excuse, though not to justify, the first course. But if their hands were not clean — if, in several dis- tricts larger than Oude, the misgovernment and oppres- sion of British rule were hardly less intolerable than any that distracted that kingdom — if, after a century of pos- session, British rulers had not succeeded in establishing any better system of government than the one which, assuming virtuous indignation, they were taking upon N 178 ,ASLV. [part ii. themselves to put an end to in Oude, then the setting at nought of solemn treaties was a step which those who took it could not justify on the grounds which they as- signed for it ; and consequently they are exposed to the charge of breaking the plighted faith of their country for national profit and aggrandizement. The plea of humanity which they set up can only be considered as one resembling too much a hollow pretence. How could the British Government undertake to do for Oude that which they had not been able to do, or at any rate what they had not doue, for the countries so long under their sway ? Eead the elaborate minute penned by Lord Dal- housie to justify this annexation of Oude — mark well the statistical statements of crime annually perpetrated in that country — and the reader must rise from its perusal witli strong feelings of disgust and indignation, perhaps even with a still stronger feeling, that the dethronement of such a Sovereign and confiscation of his dominions were the only remedies which afforded a chance of relief. Then, when he has arrived at this conclusion, let nim take another official document, the work of Mr. Halliday, the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal — a minute on the police of that country. Now Bengal is one of the richest and most fertile provinces in all India. Bengal has been longer directly under British dominion than any other of the vast territories which now constitute British India. Englisli rule had lasted more than a century. Surely during that long period there must have been sufficient time en. III.] INDIA. 170 and opportunity to establish good government in that Presidency. Yet, what do we find ? Why, that the Lieutenant- Governor's report of the state of the country, as to the security of hfe and property, as to the atrocities of the pohce, and as to the prevalence of the most heinous crimes, is so frightful, that if the Governor-General's minute satisfied the conscience that the annexation of Oude to Bengal was not only a wise but a just measure, the minute of the Lieutenant-Governor is not less satisfactory in proving that the annexation of Bengal by the King of Oude would have been equally wise and just. ' The village police,' says the Lieutenant-Governor (Mar. 13, 1837), ' are in a permanent state of starvation ; * they are all thieves and robbers, insomuch that when ' anyone is robbed in a village it is most probable that ' the first person suspected will be the village watch- * man : it is even a question whether an order issued ' throughout the country to apprehend and confine ' them would not do more to put a stop to theft and ' robbery than any other measure which could be ' adopted. The administration of justice is little better ' than a lottery.' Again : ' In dealing with the subjects of Indian law ' and police,' says one* who well knows his subject, ' you ' are obliged to indulge either in cursing or laughter. * The tyranny is so unrestrained, the illegality so out- ' rageous, as to be really comic. Neither are matched by ' any species of rule under the sun.' So much for Bengal. * The Sepoy Revolt, by Henry Mead, p. 253. N 2 180 ASIA [part II. Next inquire into the condition of tlie millions of human beings who inhabit the territories which con- stitute the Presidency of Madras. Madras has long been under British rule. Had we contrived during that long period to establish within its precincts sometliing like good government ? Bead on the subject the report of the Parliamentary commission, of which the following is a sample: — ' The pohce estabhshment has become the bane and ' pest of society, the terror of the community, and the ' origin of half the misery and discontent that exist ' amongst the subjects of the Government. Corruption ' and bribery reign paramount throughout the whole ' estabhshment. Violence, torture, and cruelty are the ' chief instruments for detecting crime, implicating ' innocence, or extorting money.' Such is the official description of the Madras Presidency under British rule, so far as regards the administration of justice. What was its social condi- tion in other respects ? Why, there, as well as in other parts of India, the ancient nobility and large land- holders had been well nigh extinguished. It had been the systematic pohcy — a policy approved by some great names — to destroy all those classes which intervened between the great masses of the people and the British Government ; it had been carried out by two processes, too well known to the native nobihty and gentry, called settlement and resumption. The revenue department mainly did the work of extermination ; but where that department failed, the judicial department stepped in as a useful assistant. ' Many of the old landed H. in.] INDIA. 181 ' proprietors were stripped to the skin,' says Kaye, ' by * the decrees of our civil courts.'* This was called the ' levelhug system,' and though not originated by Lord Dalliousie, was confirmed by him in oiu: older provinces, and extended to those which he had himself acquired. But this system, though founded on that plausible maxim, good in theory, but truly disappointing in practice, the greatest happiness of the greatest number, seems singularly to have failed in Madras in producing happiness for the many. If, by destroying the pros- perity of the higher and middle classes, the happiness of all below them had been secured, something might be said in favour of the generally benevolent intentions of those who thus acted. But what is the condition of the millions of peasant ryots in Madras, now that they have no superiors save the official agents of the British Government ? All testimony goes to prove that they drag out their miserable existence on the smallest pittance which will enable them to preserve the lives of themselves and families, whilst out of millions and milhons of acres, not above twenty per cent, of the whole area of the Presidency is cultivated. Indigo, sugar, cotton, oil-seeds, and coffee grow to per- fection — for every pound of produce there are eager buyers — and if the whole area were cultivated, no portion of the produce would be left unsold, yet the richest tracts lie waste. The Honourable John Peter Grant, a member of tlie Supreme Government of India, explains the reason : — ' There are no such contentious * Sepoi/ War, p. 174, 182 ASIA. [part II. ' and affrays about land in Madras as are justly com- ' plained of here [Bengal]. But tliis is not due to a ' good police and judicial administration, a survey and ' registration, or the absence of a zemindary system in ' the greater part of that Presidency : it is due to the ' fact tliat in most Madras districts land is valueless by ' reason of the revenue system there in force ; the conten- ' tions there being — when a lyot is forced, not to give ' up, but to take land.' Such is the normal condition of this great Presidency as described by a member of the Supreme Government. Added to this are the sad tales revealed by the Madras Torture Commission. It is to be devoutly hoped that the facts recorded in that report were wholly unknown to any British functionary ; but it is quite evident that the use of torture to extract money from the wretched inhabitants had endured so long that the practice was 7iot abnormal ; it had become, as it were, incorporated with the system of British administration. It would not be difficult to fill volumes with stories of cruelties and oppressions perpetrated in our other long-conquered provinces, such as throw into the shade all the deeds done in Naples by King Bomba, which some years since Mr. Gladstone so indignantly and eloquently denounced. But even in the newly acquired territories of the Sikhs, a deputy commissioner (an Englishman) in the Loodianah districts, employed native agents of such vile characters, that torture by them was so common, that its application by men having no authority to make arrests disturbed the nightly sleep of quiet inhabitants, wliilst redress was so hopeless that the en. III.] INDIA. 183 people never complained to tlie commissioner on tlic subject. Such are samples of the results of British rule in India ; such are samples of the atrocious outrages per- petrated on the unoffending inhabitants of countries under British sway, by servants of that very Govern- ment which annexed Oude; and if deeds of torture were done in the recently conquered country of the warlike Sikhs, what may not be reasonably assumed with regard to the treatment of the cowardly Bengalee, and the down-trodden peasantry of Madras?* It is not, however, meant to assert that facts of an opposite nature to these may not be cited to prove that benefits have been derived by the Indian populations from the efiects of British dominion. The deeds of darkness which polluted Madras and Loodianah were, it is to be devoutly hoped, the exception, and not the rule, over the whole empire. The British Government in England, when these deeds came to their knowledge, took stringent measures to prevent their repetition. But what excuses can be made for the state of society in Bengal, where the police had long been known to the Government as robbers and dacoits? or how can be justified the deplorable condition of the Madras Pre- sidency, confessed by those in authority to be the result of ' the revenue system there in force ? ' With facts such as these staring them in the face, the British Government was not in a position (the measure was approved by the East India Directors and * The Sqmj Revolt, by Henry Mead, p. 266. 184 ASIA [part II. the Cabinet) deliberately to break through the solemn obligations of treaties, on pleas such as were put forth for the annexation of Oude. Quis tulerit Gracchos de seditione querentes ? It was indeed to behold the ' mote 'in our brother's eye without considering the beam ' which was in our own.' Against the policy of annexation there were not wanting those who protested. They had the sagacity to perceive its dangerous tendencies. So early as September 1848, Colonel Sleeman thus wrote to Lord Dalhousie : — ' I took the liberty to mention to your ' Lordship my fears that the system of annexing and ' absorbing native States, so popular with our Indian ' Services, and so advocated by a certain class of writers ' in public journals, might some day render us too ' visibly dependent on our native army : that they ' might see it, and that accidents might occur to unite ' them, or too great a portion of them, in some desperate ' act.' But the worst part of the whole transaction, and which damaged the British name more than aU the rest, was that the annexation was made ' a source of ' strength for adding to the resources of the public ' treasury.' ' Assume,' said Col. Sleeman, ' the administration of ' the country, but do not grasp at its revenues.' Sir Henry Lawrence gave the same advice. ' The measure ' itself,' says Kaye, ' made a very bad impression on the ' minds of the people of India — not because of the depo- ' sition of a King who had abused his powers — not be- ' cause of the introduction of a new system of administra- en. III.] LNDIA. 185 ' tion for the benefit of the people — but because the ' humanity of tlie act was soiled by the profit we derived ' from it. To the comprehension of the multitude it ' appeared that the good of the people which we had ' vaunted, whilst serving ourselves, was nothing more ' than a pretext and a sham ; and that we had simply ' extinguislied one of the few remaining Mahometan ' States of India, that we might add so many square ' miles to our territory, and so many miUious of rupees ' to the revenues of our empire. And who, it was ' asked, could be safe, if we thus treated one who had ' been the most faithfid of our aUies ? ' The annexation of Oude, from its size and importance, was the most signal example of the mode in which the avowed standing pohcy of annexation of the Governor- General was carried out. It filled all the independent or semi-independent Princes of India, whether Maho- metan or Hindoo, with dismay. They saw that on treaties with us they could not rely, and that they had no security whatever against overwhelming force. Every act of the British Government was consequently looked upon witli suspicion, and was mistrusted as being only a prelude to serve as an excuse for deposi- tion and annexation. It was not that treaties had never been before vio- lated by the Supreme Government, and that annexations unjustifiable, on righteous principles, had not occurred before. But these were all defended on the ground of deahng ' with the pecuhar circumstances of each par- ' ticular case,' and each Euler fondly hoped that the ' pecidiar circumstances of his case ' might save him 186 ASIA. [PAET II, from ruin. But Lord Dalhousie's terrible words — ' When ' the right to territory by lapse is clear, the British ' Government is bound to take that which is justly and ' legally its due,' and when no right of lapse had occurred in Oude, and yet Oude was annexed, a panic terror seized the hearts of all. Then, for the first time, did the full significance and the necessary consequences of the denial of the rights of adoption disclose itself to the native mind. Those precious rights, in their view, involve not merely their interests in this world, but their happiness in the next. The Hindoos believe that if certain rites and ceremonies are not performed at their death by their son, they are miserable for ever in a future life ; and if, perchance, they have no son, then their religion and their laws constrain them to adopt one, who is in all respects in the same position towards them as if he were actually a son, and the rites and ceremonies which he performs are equally efficacious. Now Great Britain was bound by no less than two hundred treaties with the Princes of India to recognise and respect this right of adoption. When, therefore, these rights were thus dis- regarded and violated, it was really equivalent to a violation of all. The policy of denying these rights of adoption was opposed by those well acquainted with India. Mr. Tucker, an East India Director, in the case of Sattarah observed : ' We are caUedupon to decide upon a claim of ' right, and I have always felt that our best poHcy is that ' which adheres most closely to the dictates of justice.' Mr. Sliepherd, another Director, says: 'We ought en. HI.] INDIA. 187 ' not to forget that during the rise and progress of our ' empire in the East our Government have continued ' to announce and proclaim to the people of India, that ' not only should all their rights and privileges which ' existed under preceding Governments be preserved ' and maintained, but that their laws, habits, customs, ' and prejudices should be respected.' The denial of these cherished rights affected the jagheerdars, or large landed proprietors, equally with the princes of India. These proceedings were of course regarded as an attack on the faith of the Hindoos — they were looked upon by them as a deep design, through the destruction of their religion, to create pretences for annexing the dominions of the one and for getting hold of the pro- perty of the other. But whatever opinions may be entertained of this poHcy — whether it be approved as a just and a wise one, or whether it be condemned as unjust and dan- gerous — there can be no question but that it was carried out, in the case of Oude, with reckless impru- dence. ' The native soldier,' said the ' Englishman,' Nov. 2, 1838, ' has long been in the habit of placing ' implicit reliance on British faith and honour ; but let ' the charm once be broken, let the conjiscation of rent- '' free land spread to those piwinces out of which our ' army is recruited, and the consequence may be that ' we shall very soon have to trust for our security to ' British troops alone.' Now the ranks of our native army Avere largely re- cruited from the men of Oude known as the Rohillas. 188 ASIA. [PART II. These men lived in families, on estates for the most part too small to maintain them all, and over these lands all the brothers had equal rights. They were generally too much attached to their property to part with their interest in it, so that it was the common practice for one or more of them to seek a hvehhood in the armies of the Company, and to leave their brothers at home to cultivate their common estate. Then, when after a certain number of years' service they had saved some considerable amount of wages, and could retire with a pension, they would return to pass the rest of their hves on the family property. Into the districts where this property was chiefly situated agents were sent to survey the land, and to inquire into the titles of those who held it. This step caused great alarm in the minds of our Sepoys, whose interests it was the duty, and ought to have been the pohcy, of the Supreme Government to identify as much as possible with their own. But not to the Eohilla soldiers alone of our native army (who at that time were supposed to number 40,000 men) were these surveyors formidable. They were equally formidable to the army of the dethroned King of Oude, amounting to 60,000 men, as well as to those armed men employed by the nobility and zemindars, who were quite as numerous. All these men hved by the musket and the bayonet. They reckoned themselves the aristocracy of the land and the actual lords of the soil. Their country was in a state of chronic warfare. Of the 60,000 of the King's forces we took into our ser- vice only 12,000 regulars and 500 artillerymen — the en. III.] INDIA. 180 rest, with arms in their hands, were sent adrift to seek their fortunes as they could ; 246 forts were left stand- ing, with 436 guns and 8,000 gunners to work them.* Such being the state of affairs, we took upon ourselves to introduce new laws, and to lay down new rules of taxation ; and having sold off* the King's horses, ele- phants, and other effects, the Supreme Government left part only of a single European regiment and two com- panies of artillery to preserve order in a country in so wild a state. Besides all these specially disturbing influences on the minds of the inhabitants of India, the whole con- tinent of Asia, from the shores of the Bosporus to those of the Yellow Sea, was in a state of ferment and dismay at the warlike doings of the British nation. Within the short period of ten years the British flag had waved in hostile array — in the Eussian provinces bordering on Asia — in Persia — in Affghanistan — in Burmah, and in China ; and one and all of these great empires had suffered defeats from our arms. An un- defined dread of what we intended, and what we might actually accomplish, had taken possession of the Asiatic mind. In that vast continent the British forces seemed ubiquitous to the suspicious and affrighted natives ; they feared that we were equally hostile to the religions of Mahomet and of Brahma — that we should be content with nothing short of universal conversion to Chris- tianity — and that, either by force or by subtlety, the rehgions of Asia were to be extinguished. * Mead's Sqxry lievoU, p. .38. 190 ASIA. [PABT II For once in the history of India, Mahometans and Hindoos were united in a common cause. All was thus prepared for an explosion. Little did the inventors of the Enfield rifle imagine, when they first produced that formidable weapon, that the invention, with its consequences, would help to produce the awful mutiny which for so long threatened the very existence of British power in India. But so it was. The new weapon, when placed in the hands of the soldiers of the native army, had to be loaded in a way difierent from that to which they had been so long accustomed. A new kind of cartridge was dealt out to them, which they were instructed to bite — the cartridge paper was greased. It was given out by a classic in the arsenal at Calcutta that it was greased with the mingled fat of cows and pigs — the cow's grease for the Hindoos, the pig's grease for the Maliometans. The lips barely touching such a composition was pollution to the Ma- hometan, loss of caste to the Hindoo — it consigned him to the lowest degradation in this life, and endless misery in the next. It was the injudicious enforcement of this order which set fire to the train. This was the ' accident,' predicted by Sleeman, which united them — or rather, 'too great a portion of them — in a desperate act.' Moreover, by the system of withdrawing officers from tlieir regiments for the purpose of employment in the Civil Service, and thereby leaving the regiments very inadequately supplied, the disciphne of our native army had been seriously compromised. Within the short space of six weeks the whole of that army CH. III.] INDIA. 191 uprose ill mutiny, from the Ilooglily to tlie Sutlej, and the ' Great Mogul ' was once more seated on the throne of Delhi. It is foreign to the purpose of this work to enter into any details of the oft-told tale of this great Indian mutiny. Wliether, if there had been more vigour shown at the outset, it might have been nipped in the bud ; whether Lord Canning, newly arrived in India, did or did not fall mto great errors when he first had to deal with the outbreak ; whether we dealt with the natives more mercifully than in the outbreak of 1862 the Eussians dealt with the Poles ; whether Kussia has or has not equal claims to Polisli allegiance which Great Britain has to Indian allegiance, are points on which no opinions need here be given. There can, however, be no question but that the calm self-reHance and courage with which Lord Canning braved the storm, when it was at its height, essentially contributed to the successful issue of the struggle. Had he quailed, his subordinates would have quailed also ; but all left his presence inspired with hopeful confidence in the results, and nerved to the performance of the stern duties which were imposed upon them. That the high hand with which the mutiny was quelled has resulted in again giving Great Britain a firm hold on her Indian dominions, seems at present most probable. God grant that hereafter those do- minions may be ruled on a very difierent system to that which prevailed previously to this disastrous mutiny. Whatever may be said in defence of that system, it 192 ASIA. [part II. cannot be defended on the ground that it was based on the principles of mercy and justice towards our Indian fellow-subjects, or on those of international law towards the native independent or semi- independent States. That being the case, Great Britain has a vast work to do to redeem her character in British India in the eyes of the civihsed world. 'We doubt,' says Macaulay, an historian whose vast stores of memory have never been surpassed, ' whether ' it be possible to mention a State which has upon the ' whole been a gainer by a breach of public faith.' CH. lY.] CHINA. 193 CHAPTEE IV. CHINA — LORD NAPIEE — OPIUM — HOSTILITIES — TREATY OF NANKIN. The empire of China comprehended, dm^ing the first forty years of this century, some of the most cultivated portions of the earth, and a population numbering one-third of the human race. Order, civilisation, and obedience to the laws prevailed generally throughout the land. The government of the Emperor at Pekin was recognised, and submitted to, in districts the most remote from its seat, as well as in those nearest to it ; and, as the natural consequences, a highly cultivated country and a great accumulation of wealth prevailed, for the most part, throughout his vast dominions. To deny that, amongst 350,000,000 of people, much of misery, much of oppression, much of carelessness of human life did not exist, would be tantamount to a denial that they were human beings. But that a greater proportion of these evils prevailed in China than prevail in all other countries in the world, com- pared with the extent of territory and the denseness of the population, there is no evidence to estabhsh ; whilst the testimony of almost every traveller who has pene- trated into the interior, and who has freely lived amongst them, bears witness to their ' being our equals, and in 194 ASIA, [part II. ' some respects our superiors, in the refinements of life, ' in courtesy, humanity, and domestic affection.' This is the more remarkable as they are not Chris- tians ; and although they worshipped idols, there is no ground for believing that this worship involved any obscene or cruel rites. They were unpractised in the arts of modern warfare ; and their mode of fighting, such as it was, was grotesque. They looked upon the outer nations of the world, not excepting Europeans, as inferior and barbarous races ; and they imposed very stringent restrictions on all intercourse with foreigners, of whom they were much afraid and extremely jealous. That these restrictions were not unreasonable has been demonstrated by the results of an enlarged intercourse during the two decades of this century which immediately succeeded the first four. With this vast community Great Britain had for nearly two centuries carried on a peaceful and highly lucrative trade. Until 1834 it was carried on by the East India Company, who held a monopoly of it. When the Company's charter was renewed in 1834, this monopoly was abolished, and the commerce was thrown open to all British subjects. Our relations with China were then withdrawn from the control of the East India Company, and placed under that of the Foreign Office — Lord Palmerston being at that time Foreign Secretary. When this alteration was made in the mode of carrying on our intercourse with China, the Govern- ment appointed certain individuals as ' Superintendents en. ^^] CHINA. 195 ' of the trade of British subjects in China.' Their duties were set fortli in instructions under the sign- manual of the King. They were ' to protect British ' trade ; ' they were to try to 'extend it.' They were to eschew ' all intemperate or menacing language.' They were to avoid all ' conduct and demeanour ' likely to excite 'jealousy and distrust.' They were ' constantly ' to impress, as occasion might offer, upon British ' subjects resident in or resorting to China, the duty of ' conforming to the laws and usages of the Chinese ' empire, so long as such laws shall be administered ' towards them with justice and good faith, and in the ' same manner in which the same are or shall be ' administered towards the subjects of China and towards ' the subjects of other foreign States resident in China.' They were to report to the Foreign Secretary, sending duplicates of their despatches to the Governor-General of India. Lord Palmerston supplemented these instructions to the Chief Superintendent (Lord ISTapier) by further instructions on some particular points (Jan. 25, 1834). By these further instructions Lord Napier was directed ' to announce his arrival at Canton by letter to the ' Viceroy.' Now the Chief Superintendent could not comply with these directions without violating the laws and usages of the Chinese empire, to which, according to the in- structions under the sign-manual, he was bound to conform. It was forbidden to foreigners to communi- cate direct with the Viceroy : the legal method of communication being through the body known by the o 2 196 ASIA. [part ir name of the Hong merchants. Whether such a mode of intercourse was or was not consistent with the dignity of so high an officer as the Chief Superintendent, is beside the question, and it miglit have been a very- fitting matter for future remonstrance or negotiation ; but in the first instance it seems obvious, that before any privileges could be claimed and pressed as due to the dignity of the British official, it was necessary to prove, according to the legal forms, that he was really the person whom he represented himself to be. The course which Lord Napier was directed to pursue was, as if an envoy from a foreign State were to send his credentials direct to the Sovereign, instead of through the accustomed channel of the Secretary of State. Now, whether this instruction proceeded from inad- vertence or design, it may be difficult to determine. On the one hand, if it were from inadvertence, it was a curious inadvertency for a British Foreign Secretary, constantly accustomed to the practice of similar cere- monial observances, to fall into. On the other, knowing as he must have done that he was giving the Chief Superintendent directions to disregard the laws and usages of China, it is singular that he should have, as it were in one and the same breath, given instructions so directly opposed to each other. In another part of the additional instructions some light perhaps is thrown upon this enigma. Lord Palmerston probably had already conceived the idea of opening up to British adventure the whole internal commerce of China, by causing local colhsions between the Chinese and the British, which might grow into CH. IV.] CHINA. 107 Imperial warfare. That something of this sort was passing in liis mind, seems more than probable from Lord Napier, a post captain in the navy, being directed to ' inquire whether there be any and what places at ' which ships might find requisite protection in the event ' of hostihties in the Chinese seas,' What more likely to bring about such an ' event ' than, at the very outset of the intercourse between the new finictionary and the authorities at Canton, for him to attempt to set aside the laws and usages of the Chinese empire ? The result of the direction so to do could hardly have been otherwise than what it was ; for as soon as ever Lord Napier arrived at Canton the altercations began. He landed at Canton without permission, in the middle of the night, and announced his arrival by letter to the Viceroy. The Viceroy refused to receive it, except through the regular channel. ' Whether Lord ' Napier be an officer or a merchant,' said the Viceroy, ' there are no means of ascertaining. But, having come ' for afiairs of commerce to the Celestial Empire, it is ' incumbent on him to obey and to keep the laws and ' statutes. It is an old saying,' he adds, ' When you ' enter a frontier, inquire respecting the prohibitions : ' when you enter a country, inquire into its customs.' Lord Napier, however, still persisted, in obedience to his instructions, in demanding direct communication with the Viceroy, who at last ordered all intercourse to be suspended until the questions which the Chief Superintendent had raised were settled. This suspen- sion continued for some weeks, until the complaints of the merchants on account of the stagnation of trade 198 ASIA. [part II. determined Lord Napier to act. Accordingly he first threatened the Viceroy with hostihties, assuring him that ' we were perfectl^^ prepared.' Hostihties therefore had been so far contemplated that preparations must have been made for carrying them on. This threat being disregarded, he then ordered two frigates to force their way to Whampoa. This was done accordingly, and having silenced, in passing, the Bogue forts (with loss of life on both sides), a guard of marines was landed at Canton. Here, then, was an actual hostile aggression on the part of this country, made by ' the Chief Superinten- ' dent of the trade of British subjects in China,' simply because the Chinese authorities refused at his dicta- tion to suspend 'the laws and usages' of China, to which Lord Napier's Sovereign had directed him to confom. These deeds of violence, however, were unavailing. The Chinese authorities triumphed. Lord Napier be- came a prisoner in their hands, and he was at last re- leased by the Viceroy, on the urgent representations of his medical adviser, and on the interference of a Hong merchant ; only, however, to retu"e to Macao — to die. But before his death he had written bitter complaints both to Lord Palmerston and Lord Grey (then Premier), against the Foreign Office, for the perplexities in which he had been involved by the contradictory character of his double instructions. Of these complaints Lord Palmerston took no notice : nor were they noticed by the Foreign Office in any way, until in 1835 the Duke of Wellington acknowledged then- receipt (during his temporary occupation of that office), calling at the same en. IV.] CHINA. 199 time Lord Napier's attention to Lord Palmerston's in- structions, but more particularly to those articles in the sign-manual instructions which inculcated conformity to Chinese laws and usages. His Grace added these memorable words : ' It is not by force and violence ' that Her Majesty intends to establish a commercial ' intercourse in China, but by the other conciliatory ' means so strongly inculcated in all the instructions ' you have received.' When the Duke wrote these words — which, it appears, he did in haste, to catch a ship just departing — he evidently only remembered the general effect of the instructions, which, ostensibly, were as he described them. For in a memorandum which he left behind him when, shortly after, he left the Foreign Office, he recorded it as his opinion that ' it was ' quite obvious the attempt made to force upon the ' Chinese authorities at Canton an unaccustomed mode ' of communication with an authority, with whose ' powers and of whose nation they had no knowledge ' — which began its proceedings by an assumption of ' power hitherto unadmitted, had completely failed ; ' and it is obvious that such an attempt must invariably ' fail, and lead again to national disgrace : and as it ' appears that as soon as Lord Napier had withdrawn ' from Canton to Macao the trade had been opened, ' the time is come for the Cabinet to consider the ' means of manag-insj the intercourse in future.' ' It is quite obvious,' he added, ' that the pretext for ' jealousy of Lord Napier was his high-sounding titles ' — the reality was his pretension to fix himself at ' Canton without previous permission, or even com- 200 A-STA. [part ii. ' munication, and that he should communicate directly ' with the Viceroy. It does not much signify, as far as ' the Chinese are concerned, what we call an officer in ' our language. But he must not go to Canton with- ' out their permission. He must not depart from the ' accustomed mode of communication.' After Lord Napier's death (October 1834) the trade, having been resumed as usual, was carried on with reciprocal good- will for nearly two years, under the guidance of Sir George Eobinson, whom, in December 1836, Lord Palmerston superseded, appointing Captain Elliot, E.N. to the post of Chief Superintendent. This appointment was the signal for the renewal of alter- cations with the Chinese authorities at Canton — pre- tentions on the part of the Chief Superintendent which were not admitted by the Chinese, and which ended in the submission of that officer. Apparently, however, the Foreign Secretary was only biding his time, and waiting for the inevitable crisis which thus arose. The revenue of the British Government in India had for a considerable period very largely depended on opium, wliich was regularly cultivated by the Govern- ment for the purposes of exportation. The greater part, if not the whole, was sent to China, where each year vast numbers of the Chinese were fascinated by its too delightful but enervating and deadly effects. This traffic had been carried on for a long period, in despite of the laws prohibiting its introduction, and not only merchants but even mandarins had been active in introducing it. During the monopoly by the East India Company of the China trade, the supercargoes at en. IV.] CHINA. 201 Canton liad power to impose complete restrictions on British smugglers of opium ; for if they did not comply with the directions of the supercargoes, their license was withdrawn, and they themselves were sent away. But when the trade was thrown open to all British subjects, the supercargoes ceased to exist, and in tlieir place were sent the superintendents of the trade of » British subjects in China ; but, whether by accident or design, these officials were left without any real power to control the trade which they were sent to superin- tend. The natural consequences of this state of things ensued. The opium trade increased with fearful rapidity, till nearly the whole of the foreign community at Canton had become participators in it. The evil was rapidly spreading in all parts of the empire, and the use of the drug was ' tending to the destruction of the ' constitutions and faculties of hundreds of thousands ' of people.'* The Emperor and his advisers began to feel seriously alarmed at the ever-growing mischief, and effort after effort was made by the Government to extirpate the traffic. Tlie superintendents clearly foresaw to what pass things were drifting, and that unless some measures were taken to put a stop to the commerce, a collision between the British and Chinese was, sooner or later, inevitable. Now there were two ways of extinguishing this com- merce, both of which were in the power of the British Government : (1) to forbid the Indian Government to * Sir Stephen Lusliiiigton, House of Commons, April 9, 1840. 203 ASIA. [part ii. cultivate the drug — (2j to give authority to the super- intendents to seize and confiscate all vessels laden with opium. The first was the easiest, the most efiectual, and the most in conformity with Christian duty — for no right- thinking man can imagine that it is consistent with a due regard to the most sacred obligations that subsist between nation and nation, and between man and man, . that a State should foster and encourage, for its own pecuniary advantage, a trade which inflicts misery and ruin on countless subjects of another State. The second, in tlie opinion of the superintendents, might have been made perfectly effectual. Accordingly, in all their despatches to the Foreign Ofiice, they represented the extreme difficulties in which they were placed, and implored for instructions how they were to act. Lord Palmerston, however, sent them none. When, in the course of his correspondence, he slightly adverted to the subject, his observations only tended to confuse. It is perhaps not to be wondered at that Lord Pal- merston thus acted. His position was a difficult one. To employ British agents in China to seize and to confiscate the commercial produce of the British Go- vernment in Lidia, which brought into the cofiers of the State nearly one quarter of the whole revenue, would surely have been, to say the least, most absiuxl and inconsistent conduct — at once unjust and hypo- critical. A committee of the House of Commons, in 1832, had declared it 'inexpedient to rehnquish the ' revenue arising from the cultivation of opium to be CH. IV.] CPIINA. 203 ' sent to China : ' and inexpedient it certainly would have been, inasmuch as thereby a large deficit would have been created in that revenue. Lord Palmerston therefore preferred not meddling in these delicate matters. He remained passive, and evidently considered that he could not fairly be called to account for doing nothing. A man of a different temperament, more scrupulous, and with a stronger sense of the responsibility attaching to him for the well-doing of affairs entrusted to his management, would have acted differently. Foreseeing, as every man must have foreseen in his position, the inevitable crisis, he would have called on Parliament for a decision, and he would have recommended to the Legislature to get rid of the dilemma at all costs, by prohibiting the continued cultivation of opium by the Indian Government. But, judging of the views of the Foreign Secretary by his views on other similar questions, it seems but too probable that he regarded a quarrel with China rather with satisfaction than with dismay. He probably thought that to give the boastful and too arrogant Chinese a 'good thrashing' — to teach them that terrestrial 'bar- ' barians ' on the opposite side of the globe could really do, with very Httle effort, pretty much what they pleased with the vapouring celestials on the other, w^ould be no bad stroke of policy, and would eventually open up to British adventure the seas and rivers of China, with their vast population and enormous wealth. So he left the superintendents in their puzzle, allow^ed things to go by default, and tli^ crisis came. 204 ASIA. [part ii. The port of Canton was filled with chests of opium ; the mischiefs arising from its use had become intolerable. The Government at Pekin exhibited just moderation in the measures which it adopted : by serious warnings — by constant confiscation of opium found in the posses- sion of natives — by the unexampled step of executing a native, close by the British factory, for being concerned in the trade, it sought to prove the sincerity of its en- deavours to crush the illegal traffic. That it had as perfect a right to put an end to it as the British Govern- ment has to put down, if possible, any contraband trade on its own coasts, is not disputed : but the superinten- dents of British trade had no powers, and day by day the smuggling increased. At last the Supreme Government at Pekin sent down a mandarin of very high rank, High Commissioner Lin, with orders at all hazards to stop the trade. He accor- dingly required of Captain Elliot that all the opium in the port of Canton should be delivered up to the authorities. The Captain pleaded the truth, viz. that he had no power, Liu probably imagined that if Captain Elhot's own Government had omitted to confer on their agent the required powers, the best course for him to adopt would be for him to confer those powers on him- self. Accordingly he surrounded the factory with troops, and kept the Captain with 200 of the principal mer- chants in close confinement. Their position was critical: it was said they trembled for their lives. Lin's bold deed, however, produced the effect which he intended. Captam Elliot assumed the power which legally he had not, and ordered all the opium chests to, be surrendered. en. IV.] CHINA. 205 He did so with too little consideration; for he caused many- more to be given up than Lin had required. Captain Elliot and his fellow-prisoners were then released. The captain then issued a public notice to British subjects at Canton to quit the city, and they accordingly retired to Macao. A series of petty hostilities ensued, and the Chinese authorities did, as was naturally to be expected, far more than they had any right to do. But we had goaded them to madness — and, hke a Spanish bull-fight, having unfurled and waved the red flag in their faces, when they turned to gore we claimed the right to kill. Whether the Cliinese did or did not give sufficient provocation by their feeble and impotent attacks on British shipping, and their incarceration of the Chief Superintendent and the 200 merchants, to justify war, is a disputed and doubtful point ; but the British Cabinet do not appear to have so considered it. Lord Palmer- ston must have long before received an affirmative answer to the inquiry which in his very first instructions he desired Lord Napier to make. He must have been told that there ' were many places at which ships ' might find requisite protection, in the event of hos- ' tilities in the Chinese seas ; ' and being at ease on that point, he did not throw away the opportunity which the policy which he had pursued for so many years had at last placed within his reach. Accordingly a powerful armament was despatched from England, which in due course arrived in the Chinese seas ; but before relating what it did there, it will be well to cite some few of the opinions which were expressed in 206 ASIA. [part ii. Parliament on the proceedings thus far of the British Government. Sir James Graham brought forward (April 7, 1840) a resolution condemnatory of those proceedings. The debate lasted four nights. The main charge of the speakers in opposition was, that the course pursued by the British Government in ' leaving, in spite of the most frequent and urgent re- ' monstrances, the Chief Superintendent not only wholly ' without instructions, but wholly without power to deal ' with the opium trade, was specially calculated to ' lead to those results which actually did follow, viz, a ' colhsion with the Chinese authorities, to be followed ' up by w^ar.'* That Lord Palmerston and his col- leagues could not deny the truth of this accusation, is evident from the facts ; but it is somewhat curious, and not very creditable to the House of Commons of that day, that both parties combined to keep the real reason out of sight, viz. that it was absm-d, hypocritical, and inconsistent to employ British agents in China to con- fiscate merchandise which was produced and sent to the Chinese markets by the representatives of the British Government in Lidia. In such a state of things, the course pursued by Lord Palmerston in leaving the superintendent without instructions and without power was excusable to a certain extent ; but where liis Lord- ship was blameable, was in tolerating the continued existence of such a state of things. Doubtless the diffi- culty of the Lidian revenue was great, and that had * Sir W. Follett. en. IV.] CHINA. 207 he tried he might not have overcome it ; at any rate he ought to have tried : but it is evident he had no desire to overcome it. ' Colhsion with the Chinese authorities, ' to be followed by war,' seemed with him a desirable result. Tlie readiness which was shown to profit by the occasion of offence — the alacrity with which the expedition was despatched — the orders which must have been given to the commanders, betrayed beyond a doubt the secret bias of the author of the expedition. The Chinese officials, it was said, had long treated with great annoyance and caprice the British residents at Canton. Sometimes the trade was stopped on frivolous pretences, and there is no denying that their self-con- ceit led them to treat foreigners in a very aggravating Avay. To convince these people how immeasurably inferior they were in real power to those on whom they looked down so contemptuously, would be as much for their advantage as for ours, and to give them a gentle chastisement would be beneficial to all parties. Such, in point of fact, was the recorded reasoning of some of the most influential merchants of the United Kingdom. But before these views could be acted upon with justice, it was essential that some serious offence should be given, and that of no . ordinary degree. By the cultivation of opium in India for consumption in China, we were setting at nought, according to Sir Stephen Lushington, ' the most sacred obligations that subsisted ' between nation and nation, and between man and ' man.' The Chinese, therefore, had a standing right of war against this country. Great Britain, as a nation, 208 ASIA. [part ii, was living in a chronic state of aggression against China. Was it, then, befitting the British Government to be extreme to mark what they did amiss ; and because they resented too violently these standing aggressions, had we a right to levy war upon them ? The opinions on this point were divided. Sir James Graham thought we had no right; but it was Mr. Gladstone who put forth all his eloquence in denounc- ing in unmeasured terms those who had thus committed this country to a war with China. He charged Lord Palmerston with ' bringing down a collection of ex- ' tracts carefully culled from the documents which had ' since been laid before the House, in which there was ' no information as to the state of the opium trade, or ' as to the determination of the Chinese Government ' to put it down.' He condemned the hypocrisy of our pretexts, and as- serted the ' sincerity, the moral right, and the laudable ' efforts of the Chinese authorities to put down the ' opium trade.' He averred that ' a war more unjust in ' its origin, and more calculated to cover this country ' with permanent disgrace, he did not know and he ' had never read of ; ' and then followed that celebrated burst, which was so highly creditable to the man who uttered it. ' Last night,' he said, ' an honourable gentleman ' spoke of the British flag waving in glory at Canton, ' and of the animating effects which have been pro- ' duced on the minds of our sailors — that in no country ' under heaven was it permitted to be insulted. All ' know the animating effects produced on the minds of CH. IV.] CHINA. ^09 ' British subjects on many occasions when that flag has ' been unfurled in the battle-field, but how comes it ' to pass that the sight of that flag always raises the ' spirit of Englishmen ? It is because it has been asso- * ciated with the cause of justice, with opposition to ' oppression, with respect for national rights, with ' honourable commercial enterprise : but now, under ' the auspices of the noble Lord (Pahnerston), that flag ' is hoisted to protect an infjimous contraband traffic ; ' and if it were never to be hoisted except as it is now ' hoisted on the coast of China, we should recoil from ' its sight with horror, and should never again feel our ' hearts thrill with emotion when it floats proudly and ' magnificently on the breeze.' Sir Eobert Peel, whilst strongly blaming the Govern- ment, and ' praying to God to avert from us the ' calamities which, from the neglect and the incapacity ' of oin* rulers, we should most righteously deserve,' did not denounce so strongly as l^vlr. Gladstone the in- justice of the war ; he went the length of admitting that ' war, if engaged in, must be conducted with ' vigour, but,' he added, ' for God's sake, if we were ' going to enter into hostihties with an unwarlike ' nation amounting to 350,000,000, let it not be in a ' revengeful spirit,' — and then adapting his arguments to the feelings of his audience, reminded them that ' every blow we struck in the contest would recoil on ' ourselves. We could ravage no place in China ' without in some degree injuring some manufacture ' at home. Do not forget,' he said, ' the peculiar .' character of the people with whom you liave to deal, p 210 ASIA. [part II. ' and so temper your measures that as little evil as ' possible may remain.' Sir Stephen Lushington, a great authority on inter- national law, did not hesitate to admit ' that the Chinese ' had a right to say, If you persist in your endeavours ' to carry on the opium trade which we have prohibited, • we will exclude you from all other trade ; and after * due warning they had a right to seize and to punish, ' according to their own law^ every British subject in the ' act of carrying on that trade.' They therefore had a right to put British opium smugglers to death, for that was the penalty awarded for the offence by the laws of China. They never, however, carried these rights to extremities ; for had they done as this eminent judge affirmed they had a right to do, full three quarters of the number of British merchants at Canton might have been justly executed. Sir Stephen, however, was on the side of the Government, to whom he intended to give his vote ; so he had to justify his vote, which he did by saying that the ' trade had gone on so long, it was ' impossible to know wliether they were in earnest or ' not.' How the Chinese could prove tlieir earnestness more effectuahy than they did, by remonstrances, by confiscating the opium in the hands of natives, and, as a last resource to prove their determination, taking the unusual step of executing a native for opium-smugghng close by the walls of the British factory, it is difficult to divine, and Sir Stephen does not attempt to point out any more effectual way for their showing that they were in earnest than that which they had adopted ; but though he arrives at the conclusion ' that the conduct ' of the Chinese in imprisoning the Chief Superinten- CH. n-.] CHINA. 211 ' dent and the 200 factory merchants, and threatening ' their lives by starvation, was ample justification for ' the course which the Government liad taken ; and ' when he considered all the causes which had led to ' the rupture, he held that the position was quite clear ' that, by every principle of right and justice, England ' was entitled, and that by the authority of God and ' man, to demand redress^ but^ be it understood, not for a * war of blood and of reprisals' Lord Palmerston's defence was characteristic. He did not deny the miseries produced on the population by the effects of the drug — he did not deny the right of the Chinese Government to prohibit its importation — nor did he justify our conduct in growing it for the Chinese markets and smuggling it into its ports : but the Chinese Government were hypocritical. ' Why,' he asked, ' did they not prohibit the growth of the ' poppy in their own country ? It was not the morals ' of the people tliat they cared for, but to preserve a ' monopoly in the growth of opium to their own ' subjects, and to prevent the export of sycee silver to ' pay for foreign opium.' Be it so ; admitting that these were their motives, had they not as perfect a right to prohibit the importation of opium, because they wished to protect their own opium growers, and to retain their sycee silver, as because they cared for the morals of their people ? The latter motive was the more praise- worthy ; but at any rate, if not the true motive, it was a valid reason. Tiie importation of opium was indis- putably most injurious to the health and the morals of the people, and being so, the Chinese authorities had a p 2 212 ASIA. [part II. perfect right to assign it as a justification for their con- duct ; nor was it the less a justification, although it was neither the real motive nor an exclusive reason. The division gave a considerable majority in favour of the Government. And now, what were the proceedings of the British expedition in the Chinese seas? The Duke of Wel- lington had laid down that ' it was not the intention of ' His Majesty to establish a commercial intercourse ' with China by force and violence.' Sir Eobert Peel had implored that ' the peculiar character of the people ' with whom we had to deal might not be forgotten, ' and that our measures should be so tempered that ' as little evil as possible should remain.' Mr, Gladstone had declared that ' a war more unjust in its origin, and ' more calculated to cover this country with permanent ' disgrace, he did not know and had never read of.' Sir Stephen Lushington had laid down, that though ' England was entitled, and had the authority of God ' and man to demand redress, hu% he it understood^ not ''for a war of blood and of reprisals." The instructions to the commanders of the expedition must be inferred from their acts. Without the cus- tomary communication being sent down from the Crown to Parhament — without any such declaration of war as the law of nations peremptorily requires to stamp hos- tilities with a legal character — without any attempt to ' demand redress ' from the Imperial Government at Pekin* — the British armament at once plunged 'into * Lord Dalhousie thus lays down this preliminary step, as a duty, in the case of Burmah : — ' The refusal of the Governor of Rausroon to en. IV.] CHINA. 213 a war of blood and of reprisals,' wliicli the judge of the High Court of Admiralty had emphatically declared that ' the authority of God and man ' denied that we had a right to wage. We captured Chusan and its capital ; we ' battered down forts and houses, killing hundreds at Amoy ; '* we took Shanghai ; we destroyed various other forts ; we besieged and took Cliin-kiang-foo ; we inspected the public buildings after the contest was over, set fire to them, and marched on. Our soldiers witnessed the most heart-rending scenes ; the wretched people killing all whom they best loved, and then committing suicide. '■ We planted field-pieces loaded with grape at the ends ' of long narrow streets thronged Avith men, women, and ' children — we mowed them down like grass, and the ' gutters flowed with their innocent blood. 'f We in- flicted such ' an amount of sufferino; on the Chinese ' people, in consequence of the prosecution of hostilities, ' which,' when described in a despatch to Lord Ellen- borough, then Governor-General of India, ' he durst ' not publish : nor did he ever make generally known ' the details of the horrors which then came under liis ' accede to a demand of reparation for a distinct breach of the treaty ' with Ava, if it should he upheld hy his Government, would doubtless ' entitle the Government of India to exact reparation by force of arms, ' or to inflict such punishment on the Burmese State as circumstances ' might seem to require. But the Government of India could not, with 'Jttstice, proceed to such extremities imtil it had communicated with the ' Court of Ava respecting the conduct of its servants, and had thereby ' afforded it an opportimity of disavowing his acts, and of making the 'reparation which he had refused to concede.' — Papers presented to Par- liament, June 4, 1852, p. 13. * Loch's Closing Scenes of the Chinese War. t Sir Hem-y Pottinger's speech at Liverpool shortly after his return. 214 ASIA. [PAET II ' notice.' * Lastly, we forced our way to Nankin, the ancient capital of the empire, and there dictated our own terms of peace to our affrighted and vanquished enemies. And all these deeds of darkness were done, so help- less were our victims, with hardly any loss to ourselves. They were done piratically to a people with whom we were not even legally at war. For such was the unanimous decision of the Court of Common Pleas : f the point being so clear that no attempt was ever made to reverse the decision. By the treaty the Chinese were compelled, contrary to all their principles of policy and all their national prejudices, to open the ports of Canton, Amoy, and three others, to British merchants, and to cede the island of Hong Kong in perpetuity to Great Britain. Further, we looted from them twenty-one millions of dollars, to be paid in the course of four years, as an indemnity to this great nation for the expenses of the war! ! ' The Chinese Plenipotentiaries left the ship on board ' of which the treaty was signed,' says an eye-witness J of the scene, ' doubtless with humbled pride, but just ' satisfaction at having saved their ancient city, and ' perhaps their monarch's throne ; but long will it be, ' if ever, before his complete supremacy will again be ' felt — long will it be before the lament of the father- ' less, the anarchy and starvation, and misery of the * Lord Ellenborough's speech, Mar. 30, 1860. t Evans v. Hatton, Court of Common Pleas, Nov. 9, 1842. X Captain Locli, p. 188. CH. IV.] CHINA. 215 ' houseless wanderers over the richest portions of his ' vast empire, becomes a forgotten tale.' Thus ended this unjust and inglorious war — a war which, as predicted by Mr. Gladstone, ' has covered ' this country with permanent disgrace,' Unjust in its origin, and condemned, as unlawful, in its every stage, by English Judges — stained with wanton and revolting cruelty in its progress, and with brigand avarice at its end, the infamy which it has fastened on Great Britain can only, if ever, be effaced through the agency of unborn generations. 21() ASIA. [PAKT II. CHAPTEE V. HOSTILITIES AT CANTON, FOLLOWED BY GENERAL HOS- TILITIES AGAINST CHINA PEACE OF TIENSIN — THIRD SERIES OF GENERAL HOSTILITIES AGAINST THE CHINESE EMPIRE CAPTURE OF PEKIN RESTORATION OF PEACE. The first article in the treaty of peace, signed at Nan- kin, was an agreement for lasting peace and friendship between the two empires of Great Britain and China. Sir Henry Pottinger having afterwards negotiated a treaty of commerce, issued a proclamation calling on all British subjects to obey its stipulations. The Chinese High Commissioner, on his side, issued also an amicable proclamation expressing his hopes that hence- forth amity and good-will might ever continue. In this commercial treaty no mention was made of the opium trade, about which the hostilities had originated. But the British Plenipotentiary, before leaving Hong Kong, denounced it in no measured terms. Moreover, in the course of 1842, a memorial was presented to the then Premier, Sir Eobert Peel, from two hundred of the leading merchants and manufac- turers in England and Scotland, representing that ' to ' British subjects engaged in honourable commerce ' with China, to the growers and importers of wool and ' cotton, and to the thousands of operatives in their CH. v.] CHINA. 217" ' employ, the illicit trade in opium was grievously pre- ' judicial.' Nevertheless, no measures were taken by the British Government to regulate or to abolish it. The diffi- culty of the Indian revenue still remained ; and between what was right on the one hand, and what was profit- able on the other, the Government had not the courage to decide. The whole question was, therefore, ignored, and was allowed to take its own course, although, by the twelfth article of the supplementary treaty, this country contracted to put down smuggling to the best of its power. We fulfilled this stipulation by doing our best to encourage smuggling ; and by the protection which Hong Kong afforded, we enabled a fleet of lorchas to be created especially to carry on this smuggling trade. It was owing to one of these lorchas that hostilities were renewed between the two countries, and that ' the lasting peace and friendship,' stipulated for in the first article of the treaty of Nankin, was broken. The provisions of that treaty and the commercial treaty had been honourably fulfilled by the Chinese, with one exception. That exception was the non- admission of foreigners into the city of Canton. The Chinese authorities did not repudiate the obhgation, nor did they positively refuse to fulfil it. They en- treated the British Plenipotentiary to forbear from enforcing the demand, because they affirmed that it could not be carried out without all the foreign resi- dents in Canton having their lives endangered, from the prejudices and exasperation of the population in the 218 ASIA. [part II. city, from whicli the authorities would not have the power to protect them. Tlie validity of this excuse was recognised by the French, Dutch, American, and Portuguese consuls. It was also admitted by Sir John Davis, the Governor of Hong Kong. Moreover, Sir George Bonham, the British Plenipotentiary, in 1849. wrote to Lord Palmerston as follows : — ' It is my belief ' that no material advantage to our commerce would ' be gained by British subjects being admitted indis- ' criminately to Canton : at all events, none commen- ' surate with the danger to be risked of involving the ' British Government in hostile discussions with that ' of China.' The Home Government wisely approved of this con- ciliatory course ; and Sir George Bonham made known to High Commissioner Yeh their decision, saying, ' The ' matter shall be no more discussed between your Ex- ' cellency and myself.' This point being thus amicably settled, the transac- tions between the two countries went on smoothly ; the Chinese submitting without remonstrance to our normal violation of the smuggling article ; and when occasions for discussion arose, evincing good-will and moderation. It appears by the official papers that all the cases, from 1846 to 1856, which had been discussed between the two nations, were acknowledged by the British authorities to have been satisfactorily arranged. There were, during those years, only fourteen in number, some serious and some of small importance. It appears by the corre- spondence that on every occasion the Chinese authorities did their best to afford redress and to punish offenders. CH. v.] CHINA. 210 The most serious case was the murder of six young Englishmen, who, having gone into a Chinese village where it was known the inhabitants were particularly unfriendly to foreigners, armed with pistols, a fray arose, in whicli they fired, kilhng one and wounding another Chinese. The mob then attacked, overpowered, and murdered them. For this outrage four Chinese were hanged, and eleven condemned to the heaviest punishments. The British authorities asked that the village wliere the conflict took place should be razed to the ground, but the authorities of Canton declined to punish the innocent with the gmlty. The deed was done Dec. 5, 1847; and before Jan. 20 in the following year,. 1848, the punishments had been inflicted, and every reparation made within the power of the authorities. In the cases of all the other insults offered by the native Chinese to British subjects, the British authori- ties record in their despatches their satisfaction with the conduct of the Chinese authorities. ' I took occa- sion,' said Sir John Davis to Lord Palmerston (Sept. 23, 1847), 'to express my own acknowledgments for the ' uniform good faith and firmness with which Com- ' missioner Keying had punished casual infractions of ' the pence since the dates alluded to up to the present ' time.' In a proclamation issued by High Commissioner Keying to the natives, the term ' barbarians,' as applied to the foreigners, was omitted ; and this was considered by the British authorities as a 'good sign' for the growth of friendly relations between the two nations. The last case was brought to an end on Oct. 6, 1856. It was one in whicli a British missionary wilfully and 220 ASIA. [part ii. deliberately violated tlie treaty, and gave the Chinese authorities a riglit to demand his punishment. They abstained from so doinsf. Native merchants became his security, and Consul Parkes, writing to Sir John Bowring, states that High Commissioner Yeh, in man- aging the matter, had shown a commendable mode- ration in not calling upon him to take a more stringent notice of that infraction of the treaty.* Prom Dec. 1851, to Feb. 1855, Lord Palmerston was out of office. In Peb. 1855 he became Premier, Within less than a year and three-quarters the friendly intercourse between Canton and Hong Kong met with a rude interruption. Sir George Bonham had retired from the scene, and had been replaced by Dr. (afterwards Sir John) Bowring as Governor of Hong Kong. Sir Michael Seymour had been appointed Admiral in the Chinese Seas, and Mr. Parkes was British Consul at Canton. It was on Oct. 8, 1856, only two days after the set- tlement of the missionary question, that a small vessel, or lorcha, caUed the Arrow, was at anchor in the river below the city of Canton. The lorcha was built in China, was owned by a Chinese, and had on board a crew composed entirely of Chinese, with a foreign commander. Hong Kong being a British colony, it was competent for the owner of any vessel of any country, having obtained the requisite security, to make application, through the proper official channel, to the supreme au- thority, for a colonial register. Under this the vessel * Mr. Gladstone's speech, March 3, 1857. CH. v.] CIITXA. 221 hoists a British ensign, and tlie register once issued, she has a right to be regarded by the British authorities in all respects as a British vessel, save in respect to such rights and allegiance as may be due to the foreign nation to which she belongs. For, said Secretary Sir George Grey, just at the very period of this lorcha affair, ' no certificate or other act ' of naturalisation, granted, by the British Government ' to an alien, places him beyond the lawful power and ' control of his native country, unless he has received ' from the Government of such country a certificate of ' denationalisation^ or been released from his original ' obligations as a subject in some other legal way,' The lorcha, it appears, had obtained a British cer- tificate of colonial registration ; but as the vessel was of Chinese build, was manned by an entirely Chinese crew, and belonged to a Chinese owner, who had not obtained for her, from the Government of China, ' any release, in some legal way,' from the original obligations which a vessel so built, so manned, and so owned owed to the Chinese Government, the register so obtained could not place her beyond the lawful power and control of the authorities of the nation to which she belonged. This register (or certificate of colonial registration) was limited as to time, and, as is shown by the papers. Sir John Bowring made known to Mr. Consul Parkes .on Oct. 1 1 that its time had expired, ' It appears,' said Sir John, ' on exammation, that the Arrow had no ' right to hoist the British flag : the hcense to do so ' expired on Sept. 27, from which period slie has not ' been entitled to protection.' 222 ASIA. [part ii. It is evident, therefore, on the whole, that even if this lorcha's registry had not expired, so far as the Chinese authorities were concerned she was to all in- tents and purposes a Chinese vessel ; but, according to the Governor's own showing in his letter to the British Consul, she had lost all claims to be considered as a British vessel, ' to hoist the British flag, or to be en- ' titled to British protection.' But even on the suppo- sition that the lorcha was a British vessel and the crew Chinese, it is recorded by Dr. BowTing himself (May 17, 1852) that ' it has been decided by the law ofiicers ' of the Crown that the circumstance of Chinamen being ' engaged in the service of subjects of Her Majesty does ' not remove them from the jurisdiction of the native ' authorities.' * The Chinese authorities seized the crew of the lorcha. The motives which induced them to do so were most just. They did it to punish and to put down murder and piracy, which had given rise to complaints, and were therefore such as ought to have produced not only gratitude on the part of the British authorities, but assistance and cooperation. It is a disputed point whether or no the British flag was puUed down by the Chinese pohce when they boarded the lorcha. Admitting that it was, then they were justified in doing so, even on board a British vessel, for keeping the flag flying in harbour was con- trary to the ' estabhshed regulations ' of the port : but the vessel having no right to hoist it at all, but hoisting * Blue Book, Insults in China, p. 200. cu. v.] CHINA. 223 it as a cover for })irates, the act was insulting to the nation whose Hag was thus profaned, and the Chinese authorities would naturally have been fearful lest they might be called to account for allowino; a Chinese vessel to offer such an affront to their ally in their own harbour. Such being all the material facts of the case, as re- vealed in the papers laid before Parliament, it remains to be seen how they were dealt with by the Britisli Governor, Admiral, and Consul. As soon as the arrest of the lorcha's crew came to the knowledge of Mr. Consid Parkes, he made a represen- tation (Oct. 28) to High Commissioner Yeh, in which he asserted ' that a grave violation of national rights ' had been committed by Chinese officials on board the ' British lorclia Arrow.' Next day High Commissioner Yeh replied, ' The lorclia is not a foreign vessel.' On the 10 th, the High Commissioner again acquainted the Consul that the Arrow ' had no right to hoist the ' British flag.' The Consul had also learnt from Sir John Bowring that her hcense having expired, ' she was not ' entitled to British protection.' On the 12th, after he had received the Governor's letter, the Consul contra- dicts Yeh, and persists in twice describing, in a threat- ening letter to Yeh, the lorcha as a British vessel. Terrified at the language of the Consul, the High Com- missioner gave up the captured pupates and the lorcha crew, in obedience to the requisitions made to him, but under protest, and renewing his denial that the lorcha was a foreign vessel. The High Commissioner further gave an assurance, at the same time, that all foreign 224 ASIA. [part ii. flags should be respected — an assurance which even Mr. Consul Parkes admitted ' might perhaps be con- ' sidered as sufficient.' These points conceded, an apology was demanded for the insult to the British flag. To this demand the reply was to the effect that no apology could be given for an offence which could not have been committed, as the British flag was not flying, and could not there- fore have been haided down. But ' the occasion bemg auspicious,' as Sir John Bowling observed, the opportunity was then taken to insist on that provision of the supplementary treaty of Nankin which gave the right of admission to foreigners into the city of Canton, the right which had been deliberately placed in abeyance by the British authori- ties under the sanction of the Home Government. This point not being conceded, instead of applying to the Emperor of China, as by every principle of the law of nations they were bound to do, these three men — the Governor, the Admiral, and the Consul — determined at once, on their own responsibility, on proceeding to extremities. They accordingly com- menced active hostilities against the city — a city with narrow streets, with a dense population, partly consist- ing of defenceless children, and women unable to walk, from the unnatural size to which their feet had been artificially contracted. It has been calculated that it would take a fortnight to remove the population of this city, and of course such a removal would involve a miUion of human beings in destitution and famine. Unhappily for the wretched inhabitants of Canton, Sir en. v.] CHINA. 225 Michael Seymour bore no resemblance to the tender- hearted British admiral at Messina, whose compassionate feehngs made him interpose to put a stop to the horrors which he witnessed. In this case (after an interval of only two days !) hostilities were begun. On the 23rd of October, the Admiral reports that various Chinese forts had been captured, ' their guns rendered imser- ' viceable, and their ammunition destroyed ; fire had ' been opened upon the High Commissioner's com- ' pound, a large space of ground within tlie old city ; ' a clear passage had been opened to the wall of the ' city by the conflagration of a large portion of the ' houses in our line of attack ; a breach had been made ' in the city wall, which was deemed practicable ; the ' gate [of the city] had been blown to pieces with two ' large charges of gunpowder; and the Admiral had the ' satisfaction of entering the city through the gate, and ' accompanied by the Commodore, Her Majesty's Con- ' sul, and a portion of the force, visited and inspected ' the house and premises of the High Commissioner.' Further, ' a second fire had broken out in the suburbs, ' bordering on the first one, which consumed a large ' number of houses.' All this devastation and bloodshed having been accomplished on an almost imresisting foe, the Admiral ' judged it expedient personally to address the High ' Commissioner, in the hope of inducing him to accede ' to our demands.' And in so doing the Admiral said. ' I pomted out that the steps which had been taken ' were occasioned by his refusal to afford reparation in ' the case of the Arrow.' Q 226 ASIA. [part it. On the 1st of November, Mr. Consul Parkes put forth a 'Notification to the Chinese, issued by order for ' removal of misconceptions by declaration of the Truths ' to the end that confidence might be restored to the ' pubhcmind; ' and the v^hole of the justification of our violent and merciless attack turned, in this ' notifica- tion,' on the lorcha Arrow being a ' British vessel,' and ' consequently entitled to British protection.' Lastly, Sir John Bo wring justifies all our hostile proceedings, on the ground ' of the Chinese having '• violated the ninth article of the supplementary treaty, ' which requires that all malfaisants in British ships ' shall be claimed through the British authorities.' After reading these several declarations of the British authorities, and knowing, what they all must have known at the time when they made them, that the lorcha was not a British vessel, with bewildered sorrow and shame one cannot help asking, with Pilate, ' What is truth ? ' The conflict thus begun on pretences acknowledged by those who put them forth to be false, some idea may be formed of the spirit which influenced the actors in it, by the following threat addressed by the Admired to the Governor of the city : 'I have now one remark to make, to which I request ' your Excellency's particular attention. The lives and ' property of the entire city population are at my ' mercy, and could be destroyed by me at any moment ' that any event might impose on me so sad a necessity. ' The prevention of such a necessity is entirely in the ' hands of your Excellency.' CH. v.] CHINA. 227 How deeply is it to be lamented that a British Admiral coiild conceive the notion, that* ' any event ' could impose on him the necessity of destroying ' the lives and property of a million of human beings who were utterly unable to offer any resistance worthy to be so called. Neither the civil war in the United States, nor the rebellion in Poland, have produced any threat so sanguinary or so awful, and so entirely without any provocation to paUiate its enormity. Wlien the documents detailing these proceedings reached the Admiralty, it is evident that they were looked upon as recording events to rejoice at and not to sorrow over. In the exultation of the moment they were published in the ' Gazette,' without undergoing the process of ' judicious selection ; ' and the consequence was, that some well-meaning official let the fact trans- pire that the British authorities at Canton perfectly well knew that the Arrow was not a British vessel, and was not entitled to British protection. That these transactions were gross violations of in- ternational law and every recognised principle of jus- tice and mercy, does not admit of question. When they were first published the Conservative Press lost not a day in denouncing them. The Liberal Press dealt in generalities, imported all sorts of irre- levant matters into the discussion, and left loopholes in thek comments through which it might be possible to creep. To the credit of the general public be it remembered that the popular voice condemned the outrages which had been committed ; and so loud was this outcry, that it is beheved on very good grounds, a 2 228 ASIA. [part ii. that when the Cabinet first met, all the Ministers, with one exception, thought that nothing could be done, save to condemn the proceedings, and to shake off all responsibihty for or participation in them. That ex- ception was the Premier, Having heard all that his colleagues had to say, it is said that he told them that they were all mistaken — that by talking of an insult to the British flag, he would rouse the British Lion, and turn the popular current in favour of these hostilities. His opinion prevailed. The Government accordingly decided to support the Anglo-Chinese authorities, and agreed to describe the transactions at Canton in Her Majesty's speech at the opening of the Session in the following words : — ' Her Majesty commands us to inform you that acts of ' violence, insults to the British flag, and infraction of ' treaty rights committed by the local Chinese authorities ' at Canton, and ix pertinacious refusal of redress, have ' rendered it necessary for Her Majesty's oflEicers in ' China to have recourse to measures of force : those ' measures have been taken with great forbearance.'' Lord Palmerston afterwards described these same transactions at a Lord Mayor's banquet as follows :— ' We felt that great wrong had been inflicted on this ' country ; we felt that our countrymen in a distant part ' of the globe had been exposed to every sort of insult, ' outrage, and atrocity ; that a treaty with this country ' had been broken, and that those who were locally ' charged with the defence of our interests were not ' only justified in resorting, but were bound to resort, ' as far as the means at their command enabled them. CH. v.] CHINA. 2-29 ' to the measures requisite for their vindication. We ' felt that we should have been basely betraying a trust ' which our Sovereign and the country had reposed in ' us, if we had not approved proceedings wliicli we ' thought right, and which, if we liad been placed in ' similar circumstances, we should certainly have deemed ' it om' duty to adopt.' ' Our countrymen,' Lord Palmerston then affirmed, ' had been exposed to every sort of insult, outrage, and ' atrocity.' But the blue book presented by his Govern- ment affirmed that for seven years preceding these hostilities, the few cases which had been discussed between the two nations were all satisfactorily ar- ranged : the last of them, as has been shown, afforded a remarkable example of forbearance on the part of the Chinese authorities. It is true that aftei' the desolation and bloodshed which the proceedings of the British Admiral had carried into the heart of the city- — after the dismay created in the minds of the inhabitants by the bom- bardment, and the vast conflagrations which were its consequence — the Chinese authorities had recourse to those miserable and detestable contrivances to destroy their enemies, which their weakness taught them, and which, if they had been resorted to without provocation, might justly be complained of as unpardonable outrages and atrocities ; but outrasres and atrocities committed after the hostilities could be no justification for com- mencing them. When Lord Palmerston made his speech, those subsequent atrocities had indeed been committed ; but surely it was a sad error on his part to 30 ASIA. [rAKTii. put them forth as justifying a war which was begun long before they were perpetrated. The news of the bombardment of Canton reached this country in November 1856. As soon as Parha- ment met in the following year, the subject was brought before the two Houses, by Lord Derby in the House of Lords, and by Mr. Cobden in the Commons. In the Commons, Lord John Eussell thus spoke of these transactions : — ' We used to hear of the character, of the reputation, ' of the honour of England. I trust. Sir, they are dear ' to us all ; but if the prestige of England is to be ' separate from those qualities, then I, for one, have no ' wish to retain it. To those who argue, " It is true we ' " have a bad cause, it is true we were in the wrong, ' " it is true we have committed injustice, but per- ' " severe we must, continue we must to act unjustly, ' " lest the Chinese should think that we are afraid," — ' to these I say, be just and fear not.' The late Sir James Graham said : — ' I, for one, will wash my hands of the innocent blood ' which in my opinion has been shed. ... In my ' opinion the debate has proved that whether you ' regard this as a question of policy, or a question of ' humanity, whether you regard it in connection with ' the most solemn of all obligations, and by the light of ' our Christian principles, these operations at Canton are ' utterly indefensible.' Mr. Gladstone said : — ' There is not war witli China, but what is there ? ' There is hostility, there is bloodshed, there is the CH. v.] CHINA. 231 trampling down of the weak by the strong — there is the terrible and abominable retaliation of the weak upon the strong. You are now occupied in this house by revolting and harrowing details about a Chinese baker who has poisoned bread — by proclama- tions offering rewards for the capture of British heads, and for tlie waylaying of a postal steamer, and tliese things you think strengthen your cause. Wliy^ they deepen your guilt. They place you more completely in the wrong. War, taken at its best, is a frightful scourge to the human race ; but, because it is so, the wisdom of ages has surrounded it with strict laws and usages, and has requu-ed formalities to be ob- served which shall act as a curb on the wild passions of man, to prevent the scourge from being let loose unless under circumstances of full, deliberate, and absolute necessity. You have dispensed with all these precautions, you have turned a Consul into a diplomatist, and that metamorphosed Consul is, for- sooth, to be at liberty to direct the whole weight of England against the lives of a defenceless people. While war is a scourge and a curse to man, it is yet attended with certain compensations. It is attended with heroic self-sacrifice and unbounded daring; it is ennobled by a consciousness that you are meeting equals in the field, and that while you challenge the issue of life and death, you at least enter into a fair en- counter. But you go to China and make war on those who stand before you as women and children ; they try to resist you, they call together their troops, they load their guns, they kill one man and wound another 232 A.SIA. [part ii. ' in action, and wliilst they are so doing you kill ' thousands. They are unable to meet you in the field : ' you earn no glory in such warfare ; it is those who ' put the British flag to such uses who stain it, and it ' is not from them that we ought to hear rhetorical ' exaggerations of the allegiance which we owe to the ' national standard.' If such be the deliberate and publicly avowed judg- ment of Whig and Liberal British statesmen on these British doings at Canton, how think we that they are regarded by nations jealous of our power and hostile to our fame, and too glad to have an honest opportunity of reviUng us with truth ? The House of Commons did its duty — it passed a resolution condemning what had been done. With pain and grief it must be confessed that a similar resolution was rejected by a majority of the House of Lords. The majority against the Government in the Com- mons necessitated, however, a dissolution. The con- stituencies, by their returns, backed, the vote of the House of Lords against the vote of the House of Commons. They probably did not consider dates, and they gave too much credit to Lord Palmerston's asser- tion at the Lord Mayor s feast, that in ' the insults, the ' outrages, and the atrocities of every sort, to which our ' countrymen had been exposed in a distant part of the ' globe,' had originated the monstrous vengeance we had taken. But the real motive for the hostilities was assuredly not the Arrow. Lord Palmerston and Dr. Bowring CH. v.] CHINA. •2Sii were evidently bent on forcing the admission of foreigners into the city of Canton ; and tlie article of the treaty conceding it, which the British Government had consented not to press, was to be carried out at whatever cost. The British were strong, and the Chinese were weak. The lorcha was, in fact, a mere sham — ^pity it was that we did not wait for the chance of some real offence beina; o-iven, which would have afforded a colourable pretence. That this is no erroneous view is evident from what Mr. Consul Parkes stated at an interview which he had with the Canton British merchants on November 15. ' If,' he said, ' ample reparation for outrage in the Arrow case ' had been all we required, the Admiral would doubtless ' have been Ions; ago satisfied with what had been done : ' but a principle was at stake which could not be aban- ' doned,' and that principle, he proceeded to state, was access to the authorities and city of Canton. On this part of the case Lord John Eussell thus comments : — ' But when the Government received the account that ' hostihties had been continued, that Sir John Bowring ' and the Admiral had on their own authority under- ' taken to raise this great question, upon which the ' whole of our amicable intercourse with Canton ' depended — viz. that of our entrance into the city — and ' that without giving time for a reference to Pekin, or ' for a determination of the British Government, the ' Admiral had at once proceeded to attack the forts, ' and to destroy the fleets, it does seem to me that Her ' Majesty's Government should have considered that ' these officials had committed a serious offence against 234 ASIA. [part ii. ' the interests of this country — that they had, without ' cause, put in jeopardy our amicable relations with a ' great and populous empire, and had presumed to take ' upon themselves the solution of a question which ' three different Secretaries of State had declared in the ' most explicit and clearest language should not be ' decided without reference home, and without due ' deliberation by Her Majesty's Government.' Can it, however, be beheved that the Governor and the Admiral did these things without secret encouragement from home ? But, whether they did or not, it is certain that they are in no way at variance with the whole system of British foreign policy which has been so long everywhere carried out. Thus originated the war witli China which ter- minated in the peace of Tiensin — a war of which the annals of history afford no examples of one prose- cuted on more unjust and untenable grounds. We again, as before, after the custom of banditti, extorted a large sum of money as indemnification for the expenses of a war in which we were the sole aggressors. By this new treaty, the feelings or the prejudices of the Chinese were also fiulher trampled on, by com- pelhng their consent to receive an ambassador at Pekin. In the carrying out this stipulation originated the thhxl war which, in the short space of ten years. Great Britain waged against the Chinese empire. The British ambassador proceeded to the mouth of the Peiho, with a powerful armament, and desired to be allowed to journey to the capital by the way which he himself CH. v.] CHINA. 235 should choose. The Chinese authorities requested him to go by a different route — which he decHned, and ac- cordingly, as usual, directed the commander of the armament to force the passage which he had selected. In making this attempt the British arms sustained a severe defeat. Whether, in this case, the Ambassador was or was not in the wrong, is open to question. At all events the case cannot be compared in flagrancy with those of the two wars which originated respectively in the seizure of opium and the affair of the Arrow. But even of this third war Lord Ellenborough de- clared that he ' regarded it with horror ; that it was an ' unjust war from the beginning.'* To avenge our defeat, and to restore the prestige of our arms, it was determined to send an army, in con- junction with a French one, to Pekin, to show the Chinese that even in their own capital their Emperorwas not safe on his throne from the incursions of European enemies. Into the details of the events of that war it is unnecessary here to enter. Suffice it to say that some unfortunate British officers having been most trea- cherously seized and barbarously treated by the Chinese, in revenge the combined forces looted the Summer Palace of the Emperor — and that the Imperial city surrendered at discretion. This accomplished, we com- pelled the signature of a treaty in which an item of indemnity largely figures. Subsequently the British forces were withdrawn by degrees from China. On February 14, 1861, Lord Palmerston moved a vote * March 30, 18G0. 236 ASIA, [part ii. of thanks to the miUtary and naval forces engaged in China, in the war ending in the treaty of Pekin. His remarks are worthy to be noted. ' I trust,' he said, ' that these incidents ' [viz. the great and rapid success of our arms] ' and this punishment ' [viz., destruction of the Summer Palace], 'which has ' fallen on the Emperor of China, will teach them that ' in dealing with the Powers of Europe they must obey ' those laws of international right which prevail among ' the civilised nations of the world ' ! !! ' Now I do not know,' said Mr. Gladstone on another occasion, ' whether I shall tax unduly the patience of ' the House, if I observe how curiously, as occasion ' serves and interest prompts, nations and governments ' can accept or discover arguments which in the mouth ' of adverse Powers they have repelled the year ' before.' And now what have been the effects produced on this vast and populous empire by the unjust and indefensible wars which Great Britain has waged against it ? A correspondent of the ' Times ' (Feb. 16, 1865) thus describes the Imperial city of Nankin, the ancient capi- tal of the country: — ' A gentleman who rode through ' it the day after its capture by the Imperial troops, ' and again visited it a few days ago, states that a few ' yamums are being repaired for the residence of officials, ' but that signs of reconstruction in other tenements are ' very rare. The destruction is complete in every part ' of the city : the visitor rides through miles of ruins, ' which, by their silent testimony to former prosperity, ' only render the present desolation more striking.' This en. v.] CHINA. 237 is a description of only one city ; it is applicable to hundreds of other cities, towns, and villages. ' The opening of the new year,' says the ' Times ' correspondent at Shanghai, January 8, 1865, 'finds ' China distracted by insurrection, brigandage, and dis- ' content in almost every part of its vast territory.'* Thus anarchy, bloodshed, misery, starvation, and con- fusion have been spread by Great Britain amongst some 350 millions of the human race. The imagination shrinks from the appalling spectacle. How hardened must a man be who can contemplate such lamentation, and mourning, and woe, with calmness and compla- cency. And for what has it all been done ? Has it been to increase our commerce ? If so, we are deejDly guilty — we have committed heinous crimes. ' It is ' unlawful,' says Lord EUenborough truly, ' to make war ' for the purpose of making money.' Has it been to create throughout the world a dread of our power? Can such a dread be created by conflicts with such a people ? ' They call together their troops, ' they load their guns, they kill one man and wound ' another, and whilst they are so doing we kill thousands. ' We can earn no glory in such a warfare, and it is ' those who put the British flag to such uses who stain ' it.' Noble sentiments ! Would to God they had been listened to and obeyed ! Did Kussia gain any glory by the massacre at Si nope? Or have the Prussians gained glory or renown from their dealings with Denmark ? — rather, have they not * Times, INIarch 1, 1865. 238 ASIA. [part ii. reaped contempt and hatred for their miserable deeds ? We are ready enough with scorn and contempt to de- nounce them. But their dealings with Denmark are noble and glorious in comparison with our dealings with China; for there was something like organised resistance by the Danes, and in a former war they had been victorious. There can be no doubt but that the Taeping rebellion, which is not yet nearly extinguished, was the result of our opium war in 1840. ' When in office,' said the present Earl Grey, in bringing the China question be- fore the House of Lords in March 1860 (in an able and luminous speech, which did as much honour to his head as to his heart, which was the speech of a high- minded British statesman deeply and acutely feeling the iniquity of our proceedings), ' When in office I had ' an interesting conversation with Dr. Gutzlaff, who told ' me that it was to the war, and especially to the large ' pecuniary indemnity which England enforced, that the ' Taeping rebellion was owing — that by it the finances ' of China were crippled and paralysed, the great officers ' of state were left unpaid, and in every instance there ' was greater suffering than had ever been known be- ' fore.' This, then, is an unexaggerated and true picture of British dealings with the vast empire of China —and their consequences. On May 31, 1864, Lord Palmerston gave to the House of Commons what he described as ' the history ' of our intercourse with China.' ' It was,' he said, ' the natural and usual history of the relations of a CH. v.] CHINA. 239 ' highly civiHsed people with a half-civilised one. It ' invariably happens,' he affirmed, ' that when a highly ' civihsed race comes in contact with a half-civilised ' race, you find that they act upon different rules of ' conduct. The highly civihsed one expects good faith, ' justice, the fulfilment of engagements, honour, and an ' absence from wrong-doing. The half-civilised race, ' on the other hand, are in habit totally different. They ' apply to the civilised race that principle of conduct ' which they themselves recognise, but which cannot ' be submitted to by those who are accustomed to a ' different mode of proceeding. Hence quarrels arise ; * wars follow the quarrels ; engagements, treaties, and ' conventions put an end to this war ; the conventions ' and treaties are broken ; further quarrels arise ; and ' in that manner relations are embittered, until the ' superior strength and ascendancy of the civihsed race ' assert themselves, and then the other nation, feeling ' that it cannot with either safety or success practise ' their own rule of conduct, acquiesce in the regu- ' lations imposed on them by their more powerful an- ' tagonist.' Language such as this, considering the events to which it professes to refer, is now most painful to con- template. Nor are the feehngs of sorrow diminished by that which followed. ' The House,' he continued, ' ought to consider the ' great features of our pohcy affecting our relations with ' China. I agree with the statement that our object in ' China is simply trade ; we do not want conquest. . . . ' But those who wish to change the policy already 240 .ASIA. [part IT. ' pursued are doing their best to take the bread out of ' the 7nout]is of our working classes.' Further on in his speech he said, ' I say it is the ' duty of the Government to endeavour, by every ' means in its power, to extend tlie commerce of this ' country. ... I claim the credit of this view for ' the poHcy of this country — a pohcy which has been ' eminently successful and deserving the approval of ' the country.' Granting, then, that this policy has been eminently successful in ' extending the commerce of this country' and putting 'bread into the mouths of our working ' classes ' (albeit Mr. Cobden in the same debate proved, as far as statistics could do, that it had been quoad China, eminently unsuccessful), is this great country privileged, for the sake of its commerce and of feeding its people, to set aside all the obligations of ' good faith, 'justice, fulfilment of engagements, honour, and absence ' from wrong-doing,' as has been done in its fatal inter- course with China ? Is any nation, for these selfish objects, free to inflict anarchy, bloodshed, terror, and desolation on untold millions of the human race ? If these be the doctrines to be upheld by the ' highly ' civilised races ' of the world, then is civihsation a curse, and Christianity no better than a dream. England is happy, prosperous and contented, noiv : the marvellous impetus which the mighty discoveries of science have given to our physical strength, the enor- mous increase of our wealth, the busy hurrying lives which men now lead, whereby they are prevented from dwelling on the past and drawing those lessons CH. v.] CHINA. 241: which the past affords — the disregard of principle, and tlie unwiUingness to take any rule but expediency as a guide, all tend to give men confidence in the future, and to lead them to believe that our present prosperity is not only founded on a rock, but that it is mostly of human origin. But, whatever we may fancy, we are but children in the hand of ,God. A murrain amonsfst our cattle — ' God's great army, the palmer worm and the canker ' worm,' amongst our crops — a foreign war in which we should find few allies, might bring down our pros- perity to the lowest ebb. Such calamities might force us to ask ourselves the solemn question, Are not these chastisements such as we deserve ? For, as surely as there is a God in heaven, ' the voice of our Chinese ' brethren's blood is now crying unto Him from the ' ground ' against us. God grant that, as a nation, we may repent and mend our ways in time, that we may be spared the retribu- tion which we so richly merit, and tliat the sins of tiie fathers may not be visited upon the children luito the third and fourth o-eneration. 242 ASIA. [part it. CHAPTEE VI. BURMAH — PEESU — SUM JAPAN. Burmali. — The dealings of the Government of India with that of Burmah, previous to the war which ended in the annexation of Pegu to British India, afford a striking contrast to those of the Home Government in their deahngs with the Chinese empire as recorded in the last two chapters. All the principles which are contended for therein, as those which ought to have regulated the conduct of the British Government towards China, are set forth in bold relief in the minutes and memorandums of the then Governor-General, Lord Dalhousie. The events which brought about the war are briefly as follows : — By the first article of the commercial treaty with Ava (Nov. 23, 1826) it is agreed that ' the Govern- ' ments of both countries shaU permit ships with * cargoes to enter ports and carry on trade, giving them ' the utmost protection and security.' It appears that the masters of two British ships were illegally and oppressively dealt with by the Governor of Eangoon : and there can be no doubt that the Indian Government not only had a right, but CH. VI.] BURMAH. 248 were bound to demand redress for the treatment which those British subjects had met with at his hands. On their appeaUng to the Indian Government for protection, Lord Dalhousie promptly sent three vessels of war to Eangoon under the command of Commodore Lambert. The instructions to the Commodore were conceived by his Excellency in the true spirit of adherence to the law of nations. ' If,' they said, ' Captain Sheppard ' (one of the aggrieved parties) ' had offended against the laws of ' the kingdom of Ava, he would of course have been ' amenable to its courts, however widely they might differ ' from those of the offender s own country. But if the ' depositions are true, the Captain has committed no ' offence, and the proceedings of the Governor of ' Eangoon constitute a grievous and palpable act of ' injustice and oppression towards a British subject, ' and manifest a disregard of the obligations of treaty ' and of the law of nations.'* The Commodore is then directed to satisfy ' himself ' in the first instance of the accuracy of the depositions ' and the veracity of the deponents' (p. 13). 'The refusal of the Governor of Eangoon to ' accede to a demand for reparation, if upheld by his ' Government, would doubtless entitle the Govern- ' ment of Lidia to exact reparation by force of arms ; ' but that Government could not with justice proceed to ' such extremities imtil it had communicated with the * Parliamentary Papers, Oct. 31, 1851, p. 11. B 2 244 • ASIA. [part ir. ' Court of Ava respecting the conduct of its servant, ' and had thereby afforded it an opportunity of dis- ' avowing his acts and of making the reparation which * he had refused to concede ' (p. 13). ' Lord Dalhousie therefore directed that a letter ' should be addressed by the President in Council to ' the King of Ava, detailing the facts which have oc- ' curred, and pointing out the violation of treaty which ' they involve ' (p. 13). In conclusion came this wise and most important instruction : — ' It is to be distinctly understood that no * act of hostility is to be committed at present, though * the reply of the Governor should be unfavourable, * nor until definite instructions regarding such hostilities ' shall be given by the Government of India ' (p. 13). Armed with these instructions the Commodore pro- ceeded to Eangoon. On arriving there he was pre- sented with a list of thirty-eight cases of ' atrocity, ' injustice, and cruelty ' towards British subjects, com- mitted by the Governor, which made him doubtwhether, ' when the Governor-General came to the knowledge ' of these fresh instances, he might not consider that ' the taking satisfaction for the two cases only would not ' be sufficient, and that he might wish to take further * steps (p. 30). He therefore withheld his demands on * the Governor, and forwarded direct the letter from the ' Government of India to the King of Ava, in which ' their conviction was expressed that His Majesty would ' recognise the wisdom of removing the Governor of ■' Eangoon from the office he so unworthily filled.' The Government of India held that in thus CH. VI.] BIJEMAH. 245 acting the Commodore ' had exercised a somid dis- cretion.' ' If the King,' it was added, ' should recognise the 'justice of our representations, all difficulty will be ' happily removed for the present. It will remain ' only to guard against similar causes of complaint for ' the future.' ' At the same time, while it is the imperative duty of ' the Indian Government to maintain the rights of its ' people secured by solemn treaties, it is a duty not ' less imperative that it should endeavour to obtain ' redress by the least violent means, and that it should ' not have recourse to the terrible extremity of war ^ except ' in the last resort and after every other method has been ' tried without success ' (p. 32). The Burmese Ministers, on the receipt of the letter to the King of Ava, at once consented to dismiss the Governor of Eangoon, and also promised to settle ail the demands made on them by the Indian Government. So satisfied with the answer was Commodore Lambert, that he remarks : — ' I am of opinion that the King is sincere, and that ' his Government will fully act up to what he has pro- ' mised ' (p. 34). The new Governor arrived, removed the former one, but was far from entering upon a conciliatory course of conduct. He caused a deputation from Commodore Lambert, composed of officers in Her Majesty's service, to be treated with insult, and pertinaciously evaded (giving one excuse after another) complying with the really reasonable demands which were made upon him. l>46 ASIA. [part II. In order to bring him to reason, the Commodore, hav- ing embarked all British residents at Eangoon on l)oard the vessels in the river, seized a ship belonging to the King of Ava, which was anchored above the squadron. Little effect was, however, produced by this proceeding ; the Burmese were evidently bent on hostile measures, and were filling their stockades on the banks of the river with armed men and artillery. The merchant shipping was therefore directed by the Commodore to drop down the river, and in order to protect them he placed Her Majesty's ship, the Fox, abreast of tlie largest stockades. While there, ' the ' Hermes, with the King of Ava's ship, passed the ' Fox, when the stockade opened on the Fox a ' sharp cannonade, which was instantly returned with ' shot and shell, and the Burmese battery was in a short ' time silenced. On the smoke clearing away not a ' person was to be seen on the shore or in the boats. ' One man Avas killed on board the Fox' (p. 41). Thus hostihties were commenced with the empire of Burmah. The questions are — (1) Was tlie Commodore justi- fied in seizing the King of Ava's ship ? (2) Was he justified in taking the ship out of the river ? By those who take their view of these transactions from the singularly able pamphlet on the subject writ- ten by the late Mr. Cobden, the answer to both these questions must be in the negative. Having read that pamphlet with great care, I confess to having set down to re-peruse the Parliamentary papers, with a very Strong conviction that Commodore Lambert was greatly CH. VI.] BURMAH. 247 in the wrong, and that his proceedings ought not to have received the approval of the Government of India. But the contents of those papers entkely changed my opinion. The conduct of the new Governor of Eangoon was not only so unconciliatory, but so insulting, that it seems but too evident that the Commodore formed an erroneous opinion when he expressed his conviction that ' the King of Ava was sincere, and would fully act ' up to what he had promised.' Commodore Lambert showed great forbearance. He was not hasty in a single step. It was a judicious and justifiable step, seizing the King's ship, and one which, a priori, seemed calculated to convince the Governor of the prudence of acceding to our requirements. Having once taken the ship, and the necessities of his instructions to mstitute a blockade obliging him to move to the mouth of the river, he had no choice but to carry the King's sliip with him. Probably it was as much as their lives were worth for the Burmese authori- ties to have allowed the removal of the ship without a show of resistance ; but that was no fault of the Com- modore, who, when his ship was fired on, had no other course to take but to return the fire. This done, how- ever, no further active hostihties were attempted. The Commodore was mindful of his instructions. For although ' To bombard Eangoon would be easy, yet it would, ' in the Governor-General's judgment, be unjustijiable ' and cruel in the extreme, since the punishment would ' fall chiefly on the harmless population, who already ' sufier from the oppression of their rulers even more ' than our own subjects ' (p. 32). 248 . ASIA. [part II. How strong then the contrast between our cleahngs with Burmah, and our deahngs with China ! In the one case, the Governor-General declared that ' the Indian ' Government could not with justice proceed to the ex- ' tremity of exacting reparation by fore of arms, until ' it liad communicated with the Court of Ava.' In the other, Dr. Bowring made no attempt at previous com- munication with the Court of Pekin, before hurling our thunderbolts on the devoted city. In the one case, the Governor-General held that although it would ' be easy, yet it would be unjustiji- ' able and cruel in the extreme^ to bombard Eangoon, ' since the punishment would chiefly fall on the harm- ' less population' : — in the other, the merciless Governor of Hong Kong allowed only two days of grace before consigning the innocent inhabitants of Canton to all the horrors of a bombardment. If Lord Dalhousie were right, how unutterably wrong must Dr. Bowring have been ! The Commodore proceeded to the mouth of the river to carry on the blockade, and took nothing more upon himself, but reported what had passed to the Govern- ment of India. Lord Dalhousie, true to the prin- ciple which in the outset he had laid down, deter- mined that yet another opportunity should be given to the King to compel his servant to concede the reasonable demands which were made upon him — in the hope thereby to avert the necessity of a further prosecution of hostihties. No redress, however, could be obtained; all our requirements were evaded, evidently by design. No option was left to the Government of CH. VI.] PERSI.A.. 249 India but to exact reparation by force of arms. War was accordingly proclaimed, and an expedition sent to Eangoon. Any history of tlie conflict would be here out of place ; the only point for discussion in these pages is — was the war a just one? It assuredly was so : it ended in the signal defeat of the Burmese. Wlien peace was made, the large province of Pegu, with its capital, Eangoon, was annexed to British India, and accordingly ceased to form a part of the kingdom of the monarch, who bears the followinfy titles ; ' Meng Tarahgyee Phooye, the all-powerful Lord ' of the Universe — the Master of the Tsattang Elephant ' — the Lord of Life — and like unto the Lotus Flower.' Persia. — It is unnecessary to say much on our war with Persia in 1856. No great evils were brought down upon that country by our hostilities. Whether or no the Persian Government gave Great Britain a just cause of war need not be here discussed. The justifi- cation depended on a treaty which the British Govern- ment had left unratified for the three years before the war begun, and which they never ratified at all. But there are two points connected with this war which re- quire notice — the one as bearing upon British honour and good faith ; the other, as a specimen of the sort of way in which the defenders of these kinds of war seek to justify them to the British public. (1). Mr. Felix Jones was the political agent of the British Government at Bushke. In that capacity he received great civilities from the inhabitants, and was firmly trusted by them. He knew that a British hostile force was on its way to attack the place, and with this 250 ASIA. [PAKT II. knowledge he took advantage of the confidence reposed in him to persuade the Governor and people of Bushire (in order to keep them from preparations for resistance) that no hostile British expedition was coming against them ; and he actually boasted in his despatches of ' having been able to maintain the illusion till the last moment,' when it was dispelled by the appearance of the hostile armament before the town. It is by acts such as these, done by the represen- tatives of Great Britain abroad, that the British Government is brought into disrepute, and that the nations of the world are taught no longer to trust in British honour and good faith. (2). A justification of this Persian war was put forth at the time, by the 'Edinburgh Eeview,' January 1857. Whether that justification was made out or not, no opinion is here expressed. But it is against the course pursued by the reviewer, which is only a specimen of that too frequently adopted, that it is necessary here to protest. Before the reviewer entered into the justification of the war, he thought it expedient to give the very worst possible impression as to the character of the foe. By this com^se he aroused every prejudice against the Persians ; and, feelings of indignation being thus excited, the general reader is betrayed into thinking that war is justifiable upon any, or even upon almost no provocation. The reviewer accordingly describes the Persians and their Government as ' false to the very core, and ' assuredly httle to be expected to act up to the spirit cu. VI.] SIAM. 251 ' of the engagement which they contract ' (page 290). Be it so ; but if so it be, it must be asked, Why, if this people really are what the reviewer says they are, ' false to the very core,' and ' not to be expected to act ' up to the engagements which they contract,' — why do we induce them, or mayhap coerce them, ' to enter ' into engagements ' to which ' we do not expect them ' to act up ? ' Why force dealings on a people who, according to the reviewer, ' again and again repeat * the old story of subterfuges and evasions, lying ex- ' planations, assurances falsified, and pledges broken ? ' Certainly it is neither honest nor honourable to enter into any mutual engagement with those who, you are convmced beforehand, ' will only repeat the ' old story of lying explanations and broken pledges.' It cannot be done without degradation to those who so act. Why, then, are these things done ? The answer is too obvious. These ' engagements,' or treaties, are forced upon reluctant States, in order to furnish the pretence of ' violated pledges ' whenever British authoritfes in the East may deem it expedient, for the purpose of obtaining some long -coveted advantages, to have recourse to violent means to secure them. Such treaties, when broken, afford excuses to casuists Hke the Edinburgh reviewer, both for vituperating those weak and unfortunate Governments who break them, and for self-laudation of British virtue and good faith. Siam. — We have compelled the King of Siam to enter into a treaty with this country — by which the rights of British subjects are secured to them. A 252 ASIA. [part it. British subject accordingly proceeded to exercise his rights. He had a fancy to have a house on a ninety- nine years' lease, after the fashion of the old country, and he persuaded a Siamese lawyer to draw it up. The King of Siam heard of this proceeding, and as, in the course of his reign, he never had the good luck to hear of such a thing as a nmety-nine years' lease, and coidd not therefore exactly comprehend its bearings, he punished the lawyer for drawing it, and cancelled (no, not cancelled, he was not quite up to that, but tore up) the lease itself. Here, then, was a casus belli, A treaty had been broken: the rights secured by it to British subjects had been violated. Was it to be endured by this great nation, that a British subject resident in Siam shoidd be deprived of the lease which he fancied, because the King could not bring his narrow mind to comprehend its meaning? So we had a hostile ' demonstration' in the Siamese waters, and His Majesty was taught a wholesome lesson. He was initiated into the legal mystery of a ninety-nine years' lease ; he was compelled to acknowledge its validity, and to bind himself to concede permission to British residents in his dominions to have their lands and houses on any kind of leases which the phantasies of British law have made familiar to the inhabitants of these islands. In this way it is that the prestige of the British name has been upheld in Siam ! Japan. — The same system which has been adopted in our dealings with the other independent Oriental nations has been adopted in oiu- dealings with Japan. We first CH. VI.] JAPAN. 253 compelled the Japanese rulers to sign a treaty tliroiigli the dread of the force which we displayed before them — well knowing that they were sure soon to violate its stipulations. We thus acquired the right — if right it can be called — to have recourse to hostile operations when- ever it suited our purpose. It was well known that the Damios — the powerful and semi-independent nobles or princes — were not under the effective control of the Japanese Government. A party of English determined on carrying out their treaty rights, however offensive to the prejudices of these great nobles. They must needs ride in the same road on which one of these Damios was travelHng : an attack was made on them by his orders, and two of the party were killed. This was doubtless a great and unjustifiable outrage ; but it was a pity to affront the pride and prejudices of a semi- barbarous race. Compensation was then demanded of the Tycoon — the half sovereign who signed the treaty with Great Britam. He conceded all that was demanded of him. There the matter should have stopped ; but, contrary to all the principles of the law of nations, further com- pensation was demanded of the Damio who was supposed to have instigated the murders. Tlie arma- ment proceeded from the capital, Jeddo, where the Tycoon dwelt, to Kagosima, the capital of the Damio. He refused to concede. Acts of hostility were perpe- trated by seizing his vessels, and he was thus betrayed into resenting this hostile act by firing the first shot. He was therefore accused of being the aggressor : the British Admiral commanded a bombardment, whereby 254 ASIA. [PA.RT II. the city, supposed to contain some thousands of inhabitants, was set on fire; it was wrapt in flames, and became a heap of ruins. The Admiral's de- spatches had much of the same jubilant tone which marked those of Admiral Seymour from Canton, after he had there adopted a similar proceeding. He evidently thought he had performed a great and meritorious exploit ; and so, very likely, it would have been considered in England, but for a letter which appeared in the ' Times ' from Mr. Cobden, and which placed the transaction in its true light. The admirers of the deed then changed their tone ; they admitted that the conflagration ought to be deeply lamented, but affirmed that it was the work of ' accident.' All parties, however, in the House of Commons, when the subject was brought on, combined in deploring the untoward event ; and the consciences of those amongst the public who were indignant at the outrage were sought to be quieted by the assertion, that, after all, the number of inhabitants had been greatly exaggerated — that the houses which were burnt were constructed of wood — and that residences with so little stability tibout them, containing a population of only ten or twelve thousand, was a concern of not sufficient magnitude to justify much sympathy or regret. There is no reason, however, to suppose that even now in Japan the same system has been abandoned which was carried out in China. The same consul, Parkes, now Sir Henry Parkes, who issued at Canton that too memorable and disgrace- ful declaration, which he called ' a declaration of the CH. VI.] JAPAN. 255 truth,' has been selected as the representative of Great Britain in Japan. Tlie ' Overland China Mail ' thus writes of him on the 28th of August, 1865 : — * ' Sir Hemy Parkes has, we hear, commenced diplo- ' matic operations in Japan with his usual cheerful ' activity, firmness, and " pluck." On arriving in ' Yokohama he surveyed the state of affairs, and being ' resolved that all the treaty privileges should be ' observed, and the interests as well as the dignity of * Great Britain cared for, he soon intimated his inten- ' tion of re-estabhshing the English Legation at Jeddo, ' a post which has always been one of honour, because * of danger.' ' There was some opposition to granting our Minister ' an official residence at Jeddo, but the thing was ' insisted on and carried. This is called a step in the ' right direction — dangerous indeed for the immediate ' actors, but still more dangerous to the Japanese riders ' should any attempt at assassination or incendiarism ' again recur. The Japanese will spend a Uttle time in ' " taking the measure " of the new Minister, and on the ' results of their inspection will depend the next move ' on the board.' Can there be any doubt, after reading this paragraph, that (so far as we may be able) the same course is being pursued in Japan, which has been pursued in China ? Such then have been, and such continue to he, the dealings of our Government with the weaker nations of Asia. * Vide the Tiiiiea, October 17, I860. 256 ASIA. [part ti. It has already been shown how Great Britain has treated the more important and extensive, but hardly- more powerful nations of that vast continent. It remains to be seen whether this wicked and disastrous system is to be for all future time the basis of British policy in the East. It evidently is now in full activity in Japan. God only knows how soon we may be at war with that country, or how soon may we again witness a repetition, by British hostile armaments, of those horrors which have disgraced the British name, and have scandalised and affrighted the world. PART III. AMERICA. AFRICA. 259 CHAPTEE I. AMERICA — MEXICO — BRAZIL — AFRICA — SLAVE TRADE. United States. — In the dealings of the British Govern- ment with this powerful nation during the civil war, there does not appear to have been any breach of international law, for assuredly that Government did its best to maintain the neutrality which it proclaimed. The distinction attempted to be drawn by the Minister of the United States between beUigerent rights on land and belHgerent rights by sea cannot by possibility be sustained. Moreover, it so hap- pened that the working out of those beUigerent rights was singularly to the advantage of the Federal cause : for whereas a Federal ship could seize a British ship laden with contraband of war destined for the Confederate States, and carry it into the Federal ports for adjudication by the prize courts, a British ship laden with contraband of war for the Federal States might indeed be captured on the high seas by a Con- federate ship, but could neither be destroyed nor carried into neutral ports, nor yet into Confederate ports, owing to the strictness and general efficiency of the blockade. s 2 260 AMERICA. [part hi. The fact therefore remains that British ships laden with contraband of war for the Federal States were not seized by the Confederate cruisers. This was a singularly fortunate turn of affairs for the Federals ; and assuredly, with this great advantage in their favour, they, least of all, have a right to complain of the acknowledgment of the belligerent rights of the Confederates on the ocean. It is a misfortune that the neutrality which Great Britain tried to maintain between the contending parties was acceptable to neither of them. But the policy of neutrality was a just one ; and as, on the whole, we faithfully adhered to it, no real blame can be fairly attached^ to those by whom it was openly adopted and honestly carried out.. Mexico. — ^Wliatever may be thought of the wisdom of our embarking in conjunction with France in a warhke expedition against Mexico, and of our policy in retiring from it when it was discovered that France intended to interfere a great deal more in Mexican affairs than was agreed upon at the outset — no doubt can be entertained that the injuries which we had received from Mexico fully justified the action which we did take, and that they would have fully justified further co-operation with France had it been deemed expedient to continue it. What France has endeavoured to accomplish for Mexico would be not only an immense benefit to that land, but, considering its vast resources, its geogra- phical position, and the mischiefs arising from such a country being in a chronic state of anarchy, it en. I.] MEXICO. 261 would be also a great benefit to the whole civilised world. It has been frequently said that what has been done in Mexico is a violation of the Monroe doctrine ; but this notion must arise from a misconception of what that doctrine is. The Monroe doctrine, as laid do'^vn by the President of that name in his message to Congress in 1824, is simply this : — ' No part of the American continent is henceforth to ' be open to colonisation from Europe.' Against even this pretension the then Foreign Secre- tary, Mr. Canning, twice entered his protest ; but it is obvious that the doctrine is not applicable to the present position of alTaii^s in Mexico. No attempt has been made by France or any other European State to treat Mexico as a colony or a conquered dependency. It was not the will of the French Emperor which placed an Austrian Archduke on the Mexican throne. France gave protection to the mass of the people so as to enable them freely to choose their ruler. Happily for the Mexicans, they seem to have selected a man weU deserving of their confidence : but whether, with the materials (apparently destitute of all powers of cohesion) with which the new Monarch has to work, he will ever be able to fulfil his mission, by giving stability to his throne, or by consolidating a constitutional Government, is yet, unfortunately, a very doubtful problem. Still there is not a word in the Monroe doctrine which, either by implication or by expansion, denies 262 AMERICA. [part iir. to any of the independent States of America the right to select their own ruler, although he may- happen to be a native of Europe and a member of a reigning family in that quarter of the globe. Brazil. — There is much to lament in the way in which Great Britain has dealt with this once friendly, but not, powerful Empire. There was something peculiar in the position of that country, which should have induced British statesmen to treat it with the utmost forbearance, to do their utmost to strengthen its internal institutions, and to give weight to its influence as a nation. Of all the American colonies which have separated from their parent States and erected independent Governments of their own, Brazil is the only one which has retained the monarchical form of Government, and Brazil is the only one which has not been convulsed by civil war, and which has made a steady progress in prosperity. It was the duty of the British Government to have maintained the most friendly relations with such a Power, and to hold it up as an example to others ; but Brazil was a weak State and capable of being easily constrained. The temptation was too strong to resist. Two causes of quarrel arose with Brazil. (1). The arrest of some officers of the Eoyal Navy out of uniform. (2). Some British sailors, who were shipwrecked on the northern coast of Brazil, were supposed to have been murdered by the inhabitants. For these two deeds the British Government sought redress — they were unable to obtain it. So a British CH. I.] BRAZIL. 263 armed force entered the harbour of Eio de Janeiro, and humbled the Government by enforcing redress at the cannon's mouth. With regard to the first ground of offence, it is unnecessary to say more than that when the case was referred to the King of the Belgians, he decided it in favour of Brazil. With regard to the second, it seems that the British Government were in the right (if they could have sub- stantiated their facts) on the strict prmciples of inter- national law. If a shipwrecked crew are plundered, injured, or killed by the inhabitants, the Government of the State to which these wreckers belong is undoubt- edly answerable for their misdeeds. But in the case of the wreck on the wild Brazilian coast, in a distant province of that vast empire, where the restraints of law are of the weakest kind — where the evidence wdiich was brought forward to prove the crime was very doubtful, it was a strong measure to coerce the Brazilian Government in the harbour of its own capital, to make ourselves judge and executioner in our own cause, by employing force to wring from that Govern- ment a compensation which it denied to be justly due ; but it was singularly unfortunate that the demand was coupled with complaints about another grievance, which the arbitrator to whom the British Government consented to refer it decided was no grievance at all. The mischief which has arisen from this manifesta- tion of force has been considerable. In the first place it produced great irritation in the minds of the Bra- 264 AFRICA. [pakt hi. zilian Emperor 'and his Ministers ; and the humilia- tion to which he was subjected gave a rude shake to the stabihty of his throne, which it is the true pohcy of this country to do its utmost to support. In the second place, it was too generally considered as an additional example of the propensity of the British Government to enforce on weak States demands which it would not attempt to enforce on strong ones. Africa — Slave Trade. — On our dealings with the nations of Africa few remarks are required. We have kept up on the'coast stations on land, and a squadron by sea, in order, if possible, to destroy the slave trade — and this has been done at a lavish expenditure of the Hves of British subjects and not an inconsiderable expenditure of British money. There is something very noble and chivalrous in this proceeding, which if it stood alone would, no doubt, have helped to give us a character for disinterestedness in the eyes of foreign nations, had it not been marked with such incon- sistency in other matters connected with this trade, which amaze and puzzle other peoples, and lead them to believe that we act entirely on motives of selfishness and a regard for our own special interests. Of the two crimes, slave trading and slavery, there can be no doubt that slave trading is far more cruel, culpable, and wicked than slavery. Slavery may have its horrors, but at any rate there are some mitigations, which act exceptionally in the working of the system ; for benevolent Christian owners of slaves have often and often, by their judicious and merciful treatment of them, made their condition quite as good as that of CH. I.] SLAVE TRADE. 265 ordinary peasants, even in highly civihscd and free countries. The condition of the Irish peasantry before the famine in 1846 was far worse than that of our slaves in the West Indies at the period of their emancipation. ' Would to God that we were negroes ! ' was a forcible and not altogether inappropriate ejaculation of the late Mr. O'Connell. But in the system and practice of the slave trade there are no bright spots — no means whatever of alle- viating its horrors. It is one dead level of iniquity, cruelty, and outrage — no transient gleam of sunshine ever lights on its misera]:)le victims. The same House of Commons which gave twenty millions of the public money to emancipate our slaves, and to free the British name from the shame of holding human beings in a state of slavery, in spite of the most earnest warnings, passed a measure, for the sake of free trade and of having sugar some farthing a pound cheaper, which Lieutenant Yule, an advocate of the African squadron, truly described as one which ' might * well have been entitled a BiU for the better promotion ' of slavery and the slave trade in South latitudes.' By the Act slave-grown sugar was admitted into English markets on equal terms with sugar produced by free labour. The effect of this has been, as predicted at the time, that most of our West Indian colonies have been ruined : and, as was strongly pressed by the late Sir Eobert Peel as a certain result, Cuba and other slave- trading States have carried on the slave trade with 266 AFRICA. [pakt hi. previously unexampled vigour, and flourished under its operation. No wonder that such strange policy should puzzle the other nations of the world,and lead them to put an unfavourable interpretation on acts which are so con- tradictory, that it is difficult, if not impossible, for any one to reconcile in a satisfactory way their anomalous and inconsistent character. PAET IV. CONCLUSION. 269 CONCLUSION. Each separate subject in the preceding pages would admit of indefinite amplification. But, such is the general distaste of the British public to inform them- selves on matters of foreign pohcy, that almost the only chance that exists of drawing public attention to the subject is by condensing all the statements into as narrow a compass as shall not be incompatible with enabling the reader to form a just appreciation of the arguments. I know that had I entered more into details, I might have strengthened every argument, and rendered more forcible every conclusion. But, in order, as far as pos- sible, to secure attention, I have ehminated every fact and argument not essentially necessary for my purpose, and I have resisted constant temptations to deviate into extraneous matters. The reader must not, therefore, imagine that all has been brought forward which can be brought forward. He may rest assured that what has been omitted would, if introduced, only serve to help the arguments, and to strengthen the con- clusions. If what the preceding pages contain be not strictly accurate and true — if they contain any false, ay, and I will add, any exaggerated statements-^on the 270 CONCLUSION. [paet iv. writer must fall that scorn and contempt which is the just penalty of falsehood and exaggeration. But, as I solemnly aver that I believe that I have rather understated than overstated the case, I ask my readers if these pages do not explain the causes of the two remarkable phenomena which now puzzle this nation ? (1). That the reign of force without any real moral antagonism is now established throughout all the four quarters of the globe. (2). That Great Britain is no longer honoured and trusted as she was — her statesmen having lost that moral influence which, quite as much as physical fear, serves to restrain unscrupulous Governments in a career of wrongdoing. To those who are old enough to remember the high estimation in which Britons were held in all parts of the world before 1830 — in those bright days when Lord Palmerston in opposition emphatically laid down the principle that ' every nation has a right to regulate ' its 0"wn affairs as it pleases, so long as it injures not ' its neighbours,' and with a righteous energy called on the then Ministry strictly to adhere to it — the change which has taken place is as striking as it is painful. It is certain that the diplomatic agents of Great Britain on the Continent have not lately dared to discuss politics in mixed society, for fear of the observations which were too sure to be made derogatory to the country which they represented. It is not once nor yet twice that the policy of the British Government has been ruinous to the best interests of the world. It is not once nor yet twice that British PART IV.] CONCLUSION. 271 deeds have aroused the iiidi2;nation and horror of ' highly civihsed and half-civihsed races.' Disregard of international law and of treaty law in Europe — deeds of piracy and spoliation in Asia — one vast system of wrong and violence, have everywhere for years marked the dealings of the British Government with the weaker nations of the globe. These are indeed serious accusations. Nay, but has not their truth been proved in the preceding pages of this work ? Have I not called, as witnesses to establish my views (neither prejudiced Tories nor maudlin philan- thropists, but), such men as Lord Eussell, as Mr. Glad- stone, as Mr. Cobden, and as Sir Henry Pottinger ? Has not Burnes testified to the fraudulent manipulations of his despatches in order to deceive the British Parlia- ment and nation into sanctioning an unrighteous war ? Did not Seymour, and Bowring, and Parkes justify their Canton hostilities (such hostihties, alas ! as no offensive acts whatever on the part of the Chinese authorities could justify) by a pretext which they knew to be false at the time when they used it ? And did not tlie British Ministry give their public approval to this conduct ? Did not Mr. FeHx Jones (our political agent) boast that, having gained the coniidence of the inhabitants of Bushire, he took advantage of that con- fidence (in order to prevent preparation) to persuade them that their city was in no danger of any hostile attack, until the delusion which he had laboured to create was dispelled by the appearance of the British fleet in the ofling? And has this man been publicly and signally disowned for conduct so injurious to the honour of his country? 272 CONCLUSION. [part iv. But the worst omen which belongs to this state of affairs is this. The great majority of the people of this country, unconscious of its real position, do not care for foreign policy ; and it is generally difficult, and some- times impossible, to rouse them to a sense of its impor- tance. They feel that, generally speaking, in our internal relations we are, in comparison with others, a highly religious and moral people. They see large bodies of men, associated to propagate the Christian faith in foreign parts, collecting money throughout the realm, and through voluntary contributions raising a vast reve- nue for that purpose, and they think it impossible that the Government of a people who can so act would ever treat the objects of their religious philanthropy with cruelty, injustice, or oppression. They think that if this were really done, the members of this great society would loudly remonstrate and proclaim the futility of preaching Christianity through missionaries, when the example set by the Government of those mis- sionaries was directly antagonistic to the doctrines which they preached. Why the obstacles to their suc- cess, arising out of our foreign policy, which must meet them at every turn, have not been denounced by them long ago, it may be difficult to say ; but the fact remains that it has not been done. The society seems on these matters to be paralysed with the same lethargy Avhich, unhappily, afflicts the mass of the British people ; and the consequence is, that its laches have intensified the evil and helped to confirm the delusion created by such high-sounding phrases as that ' highly civilised races ex- ' pect justice, honour, and good faith.' The public have PART IV.] CONCLUSION. 273 thus been led to fancy that what it is asserted the highly civihsed race expects from the half-civilised one, has been practised by those who have arrived at this high degree of civilisation. The consequence is, the British people have at the eleventh hour to make ' the ' discovery that their Government has been pursuing a ' course of policy of which they have never heard,'* or at any rate which they have never understood. Now if it so happen that anyone should take up this book, and instead of looking at it from the beginning, were to open it just two pages back, and to read what is therein contained, the probability is that he would throw it down either in anger or with disgust at the author as one bringing false accusations against his country; or mayhap it might be thrown down in pity for one whom he would suppose to be not in his right mind. But if he read the pages of this book the right way, from the beginning, he will find that step by step, logically, on official authority, and on Parlia- mentary testimony, the truth has been faithfully unrolled, and that even stronger language might have been fairly used to stigmatise the deeds which they record. It is indeed a most painful task to tell damaging truths about one's own country ; but if it be asked, Cui bono? why labour to set forth and expose to man- kind the deeds which one deplores ? the answer is, that to foreign nations all these deeds are perfectly well known — to them they are no revelations. It is, alas ! to the majority of Englishmen that they are unknown. * Times, Sept. 16, 18G5. T 274 CONCLUSION. [pari iv. They have no correct notions of the true bearing of the foreign poUcy of their Government as a connected whole, nor do they trace the direful consequences really resulting from that policy to their true source. In the exposure of these misdeeds in all their naked deformity, lies, I believe, the only hope of amendment for the future. If this nation can be but once aroused to their true character, these acts would be so revolting in its eyes, that woe betide the statesman who should dare to repeat them ! It is not that the English public have approved them — it is that they have not rightly understood their nature. Once thoroughly rouse public indignation, and there is a sure and certain hope of amendment. To bring about this amendment is the one single object of this work. Japan has yet to be saved from the fate of China. A generation or more, however, must pass away ere England can reinstate herself in the high position which she held before this disastrous policy blasted her fair fame, and made her name a by-word for bad faith and violence throughout the world. The management of our foreign afiairs has now passed into other hands. A more glorious task can hardly be imagined than that of endeavouring to regain for England the respect and confidence of mankind ; but the great difficulty of the task must not be under- rated. The power to efiect any great results has been so fearfully crippled by the past, that, with the best intentions and with great abilities, the present oc- cupant* of the Foreign Office will find it a most * The Earl of Clarendon. PART IV.] CONCLUSION. 271 arduous labour to work with eiliciency, consideriug the weakness which he has inherited. For, it nuist not be forgotten that a State cannot affirm a great principle to be part of the law of nations for a long series of years, set it at nought for another long series, and then expect, by asserting it anew, that it will be at once accepted as binding by other countries. Much, however, may yet be accomplished to re-establish the reign of international law throughout the world, but it will require both time and determination. Facilis descensus Averno, Sed revocare gradum : . . . Hie labor, hoc opus est. 1 -1 APPENDIX. The following chapters relate to subjects of foreign policy, which, had they been introduced into the body of the work, would have broken the thread of the argument. 279 APPENDIX. CHAPTER I. SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. Towards the autumn of the year 1854, the strange notion was ventilated (as the phrase is) in the newspapers of the then King of Portugal being called on to mount the throne of Spain. A revolution had shortly before taken place at Madrid, which had ended in the overthrow of the power of Queen Isabella as well as in that of the unpopular camarilla who really exercised it in her name. The Queen-Mother also, of whom that camarilla were the instruments, had been forced to leave Spain and to seek refuge in a foreign land ; and for some time it was very doubtful whether the Spanish people would consent to submit to the nominal sovereignty of Queen Isabella, and whether the united influence of Espartero and O'Donnell would be able to reconcile her to her people. For some time previous to the crisis, and more especially during its progress, the correspondents of the press, both at London and Madrid, were constantly suggesting the idea that, in the event of the throne becoming vacant, the most fitting successor to the Queen would be the young King of Portugal, who, though related by descent to the Spanish royal family, was yet separated from the crown of Spain by many much nearer relations. The politicians in these two capitals were not a little surprised at these repeated announcements : well knowing, as they did, that there were no manifestations in either which could at all justify the belief that any consider- 280 APPENDIX. [ch. i, able party in either country looked with favour upon such a scheme. It was evident indeed to those who watched these manoeuvres, that it was not the manifestations of public opinion which suggested the idea, but rather that the corres- pondents were taught to suggest it to the public, putting it forth as b. feeler, to ascertain how it would be received. About this same period visits were paid to the French Emperor at Boulogne by various members of the Cobourg family ; and these visits gave rise to reports that they were connected with some designs which that family were sup- posed to entertain on the throne of Spain, in favour of so dis- tinguished a member of it as the King of Portugal. At that period Queen Isabella had only an infant daughter (the Princess of the Asturias), whose accession to the throne, in the place of her mother, it was generally supposed would not be acceptable to the Spanish nation. In the event of the infant Princess being set aside, the next heir to the Queen was her sister the Duchesse de Mont- pensier. It was known, however, that the succession of the Duchess would be very unacceptable to the Emperor of the French, as it would place in power at Madrid a member of the house of Orleans, a son of Louis Philippe, ex-King of the French, whereby there would be established at Madrid a dynasty naturally hostile to the French Emperor. Hence probably arose both the idea that His Imperial Majesty would look with favour on the King of Portugal's succession to the Spanish crown, and the reports that that succession was pressed upon him at Boulogne by the different branches of the Cobourg family. Since this period, the list of those who stand in the order of succession to the crown of Spain has been materially changed : some have disappeared through deaths — others have been added by births. But, before touching on the points connected with that succession, it may be well to consider what political effects on the position of this country would have arisen, if the scheme for placing the King of Portugal on the Spanish throne had been carried out to its completion. en. I.] SPAIN AND POETUGAL. 281 If the King had abdicated his Portuguese crown in favour of his brother, and if his brother had renounced all claim to the Spanish succession, so far as Grreat Britain is concerned his taking the crown of Spain would have been but of small importance ; but if the consequence of his accepting the Spanish crown would have been then, or at any future time, that the two crowns were to be united on the same head, the union would unquestionably be very injurious to British in- terests. The independence of Portugal has ever been considered by the ablest British statesmen as of the greatest moment to this country. Were Portugal under the dominion of Spain, if Spain were hostile to England the whole peninsula would be hostile. It was the opinion of Napoleon I. that with Gibraltar ours and an ally at Lisbon, we might face the combined hostility of France and Spain without alarm. Should therefore such a combination unhappily arise, and that, as a necessary consequence of the union of the two nations of the peninsula, Portugal were our enemy and not our ally, not only the harbour of Lisbon, but the harbour of Oporto would be closed against us, and a great increase of danger and difficulty to this country would unavoidably arise. It is in the very nature of things that French influence should be more powerful at JMadrid than British, but so it is in the very nature of things that British influence should be more powerful at Lisbon than French. Let Lisbon be governed from Madrid, what becomes of British influence in the peninsula? The Earl Grrey (the Premier) urged in strong language the great danger of France possessing too great influence over the affairs of Spain as she was, and still remains ; but that danger would be of course materially increased, if to great influence over the affairs of Spain were added equal influence over those of Portugal. It may therefore be laid down as a fundamental principle of British policy that under all circumstances British Ministers ought to oppose any union of the two crowns of Spain and Portugal upon the same head. Fortunately such a union is never likely to be acceptable to the Portuguese people. 282 APPENDIX. [en. i. There is no reason to believe that their opinions on the sub- ject are at all different from what they were upwards of two hundred years ago, when, after sixty years of subjection to the yoke of Spain, they threw off m one single day the Spanish rule throughout the Portuguese dominions in Europe, Asia, Africa, and America — John, Duke of Braganza, assuming the sovereignty and permanently securing the independence of his country. This question has now gone by, but it is impossible to say that in the course of events it will not again be revived.* The principle of the separation in perpetuity of the two crowns is not recognised (I believe) by any international agree- ment, but it is not the less essential to be maintained for the preservation in Europe of an international equilibrium. Equally essential, if not even more so, is the principle that the two crowns of France and Spain ought never to be united on the same head. This principle is affirmed by the treaty of Utrecht, which was recognised as valid by the Congress of Vienna in 1815. This treaty (if treaties of any kind can any longer be appealed to by British statesmen) is still in force, and the same motives which induced the statesmen who signed it, to provide in perpetuity against the union of the two crowns of France and Spain on the same head, have ever since existed, and exist now as strongly as ever. The chances, however, of that union arising from the mar- riage of the Due de Montpensier with the Spanish Infanta, sister of Queen Isabella, it must be admitted, are greatly diminished. First, in consequence of the Queen having male issue, and her throne having obtained a more stable character than it then had. Second, in consequence of births in the Orleans family, which remove the Due de Montpensier still further from the succession than he then was, in the event of the house of Orleans again mounting the French throne. Still, in a matter of such moment, nothing ought to be left to chance. Koyal families with numerous progenies do become * It has Leen revived since tliis sentence was in print, when the King and Queen of Portugal passed through Matb-id, January 1866. CH. 1.] SPAIN AND PORTUGAL, 283 extinct, and the order of succession is often very capricious, as for instance in the case of our own Queen, who is the only child of the fourth son of Her Majesty's grandfather, Greorge III. If, then, the descendants of Queen Isabella were to become extinct, and if the Due de Montpensier were to become the heir and representative of the house of Orleans, and that that family should be restored, the contingency to be dreaded would occur — the two crowns would be united. Lord Palmerston, therefore, most wisely demanded from the Grovemmeut of Louis Philippe, at the time of the Mont- pensier marriage, that the usual course should be pursued ; and that, in compliance with the stipulations of the treaty of Utrecht, the Spanish Infanta, before, or at the time when, the celebration of the nuptial ceremony took place, should re- nounce her rights to the Spanish crown for herself and her descendants. The French King and his Minister, M. Gruizot, met that demand by a bold and unequivocal assertion that, in similar cases of the union of those who, standing in the relation of presumptive heirs to the French crown, had married princesses standing in the same relation to the crown of Spain, no such acts of renunciation had been executed by those princesses. At the period when this reply was given, no documents had seen the light which proved that this assertion of the French King and his Minister was not founded on fact. The British Foreign Secretary was therefore forced to ground his objections on the treaty of Utrecht, and to assert the ob- ligations of that treaty, even supposing that, in cases where the danger was less imminent, the fulfilment of those obligations had not been by other States required. But, since the fall of Louis Philippe, State papers have come to light which indisputably prove that the King and his Minister knew that what they asserted was not true. The renunciation had been made in 1809 by the King's own wife, a Neapolitan princess, on the occasion of their marriage. His Majesty himself, in 1842, stated in writing to M. Guizot that this renunciation was made in compliance with the 284 APPENDIX. [ch. i. stipulations of the treaty of Utrecht : — * Lots de mon ma- ' riage avec la Reine, qui a fait cette renonciation par suite ' des obligations du traite d'Utrecht, lUiis- Rev. Canox Cook — Ideology and tol. — Scripture an i Us Iiderprt- Suhscription. | tatiort, AMBER-WITCH (The). The most interesting Trial for Witch- craft ever known. Translated from the German by Ladv Uvvf Gordon. Post Svo. 2s. ARMY LIST {'^n^). Published MontMy by Authority. 18mo. l^.Gc/. ARTHUR'S (Little) History of England. By Lady Callcott. \hWi Thousand. Woodcuts. Fcap. Svo. 2s. 6rf. ATKINSON'S (Mjis.) Recollections cf Tartar Steppes aud their Inliabitants. Illustrations. Post Svo. 12s. AUNT IDA'S Walks and Talks ; a Story Book for Children. Bv a Lady. Woodcuts. 16mo. 5s. AUSTIN'S (John) Lectures on Jurisprudence; or, the Philosophy of Positive Law. 3 V<'ls. Svo. Zds. (Sarah) Fragments from German Prose Writers. With Biographical Notes. Post Svo. 10s. LIST OF WORKS of K.A.Riid K.P.D. Us. Ecliptic P. D. ) ADMIRALTY PUBLICATIONS ; Issued by direction of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty: — A MANUAL OF SCIENTIFIC ENQUIRY, for the Use of TravcHera. Edited by Sir John F. Herschel, and Kbv. Kocekt Main. Third Edition. WoodcuteJ. Post 8vo. 'Js. AIRY'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS made at Greenwich. 1836 to 18-17. Royal 4to. 50s. each. ASTRONOMICAL RESULTS. 18i8 to 1858. 4to. 8i. each. . APPENDICES TO THE ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVA- TIONS. 1836.— I. Bessel's Refraction Tables. II. Tables for converting Errors into Errors of Longitude and Eclip! 1S37.— I. Logarithms of Sines and Cosines to every Ten ) Seconds of Time. J-Si. II. Table for converting Sidereal into Mean Solar Time. ) 1842.— Catalogue of 1439 Stars. 8s. 1S45. — Longitude of Vah-ntia. Ss. 1847. — Twelve Years' Catalogue of Stars. 14s. 1S51. — Maskelyne's Le,,m9. 4to. I'.F.SSEL'S AUXILIARY TABLES FOR HIS METHOD OF CLEAR- ING LUNAR DISTANCES. 8vo. FUNDAMENTA ASTRONOMIC: iiV^tOTionJn, 1618. Folio. 60s. BIRD'S METHOD OF CONSTRUCTING MURAL QUADRANTS. London, 17G8. 4to. 2s. 6d. METHOD OF DIVIDING ASTRONOMICAL INSTRU- MENTS. London, 1767. 4to. is.Gd. COOK, KING, AND BAYLY'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS. London, 1782. 4to. 21s. ENCKE'S BERLINER .JAHRBUCH, for 1830. Berlin, 1823. 8vo. 9.s. GROOMBRIDGE'S CATALOGUE OF CIRCUMPOLAR STARS. 4to. 10s. PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. AD>URALTy Publications — continued. HANSEN'S TABLES DE LA LUNE. 4to. 20s. lIAKKfSON'S PRINCIPLES OP HIS TIME-KEEPEK. Plates 1797. 4to. 5s. IIUTTON'S TABLES OF THE PRODUCTS AND POWERS OF NUMBERS. 1781. Polio. 7s.G,t. LAX'S TABLES FOR FINDING THE LATITUDE AND LONGI- TUDE. 1821. 6vo. 10s. LUNAR OBSERVATIONS at GREENWICH. 1783 to 1819. Compared with the Tables, 1821. 4to. 7s. 6^;. MASKKLYNE'S ACCOUNT OF TUB GOING OF HARRISON'S WATCH. 1767. 4to. 2s. 6d. MAYEIIS DISTANCES of the MOON'S CENTRE from the PLANETS. 1822, 3.^.; 1S23, 4s. 6cJ. 1824 to 1835, Svo. 4s. each. THEORIA LUN^-E JUXTA SYSTEMA NEWTONIANUM. 4to. 2s. 6d. TABUL.E MOTUUM SOLIS ET LUN.E. 1770. 4to. 5.i ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS MADE AT GOT- TINGKN, from 1756 to 1761. 1826. Folio. 7s. td. NAUTICAL ALMANACS, from 1767 to 1869. Svo. 2s. S;?. each. SELECTIONS FROM THE ADDITIONS up to 1812. Svo. 5s. 1.S31-54. 8vo. 5s. SUPPLE.MENTS, 1823 to 1333, 1.837 and 1838. Svo. 2s. each. TABLE requisite to be used with the N.A. 1781. Svo. 5s. POND'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS. 1811 to 1835. 4to. 21s. each. RAMSDEN'S ENGINE for DiviDiua Mathematicai, I.vstkuments. 4to. 5s. ENGINE for Dividing Steaight Links. 4to. Gs. SABINE'S PENDULUM EXPERIMENTS to Determine the Fiquee Of THE Earth. 1825. 4to. ios. SHEPHERD'S TABLES for Cokkflcti-W Lukak Distances. 1772. 0. 21s. TABLES, GENERAL, of the MO(>N'S DISTANCE from the SUN, and 10 STARS. 17a7. Folio. 5s. 6d. TAYLOR'S SEXAGESIMAL TABLE. 1780. 4to. 15s. TABLES OF LOGARITHMS. 4to. 31. TIARK'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS for the Longitude of Madeira. 1622. 4to. 5s. CHRONOMETRICAL OBSERV.'VTIONS for Diffebences of Longitude between Dover, Pobtssiouth, and Falmouth. 1823. 4to. 5s. VENUS and JUPITER: Op.sertations of, compared with the Tables. Lmtdon, 1822. 4to. 2s. WALES' AND BAYLY'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS. 1777. 4to. 21s. WALES' REDUCTION OP ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS MADE IN THE SOUTHEKN HEMISPHERE. 1764—1771. 17SS. 4C0. los. ed. BAIKIE'S (W. B.) Narrative of an Exploring Voyage up tlja Kivers Quorra and Tshadda in 1854. Map. 8vo. 16s. LIST OF WORKS BAJf KES' (The Hon. GEOROii) Story op Corfe Castle, with docu- ments relating to the Time of the Civil Wars, &c. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 10s. 6d. BAEBAULD'S (Mrs.) Hymns in Prose for Children. With 112 Original Designs. Small 4to. 5s. Or Fine Paper, 7«. 6(Z. BARROW'S (Sir John) Autobiographical Memoir, including Keflections, Observations, and Reminiscences at Home and Abroad. From Farly Life to Advanced Age. Portrait. 8vo. 16s. Voyages of Discovery and Research within the Arctic Kegions, from 1818 to the present time. 8vo. 15s. Life, Exploits, and Voyages of Sir Francis Drake. With numerous Original Letters. Post 8vo. 2s. BARRY'S (Sir Charles) Life. By his Son, Rev. Alfred Barry, D.D. With Illustrations. Svo. (In the Presri.) BATES' (H. AV.) Records of a Naturalist on the River Amazons during eleven years of Adventure aud Travel. Second Edition. Illus- trations. Post 8vo. 12s. BEES AND FLOWERS. Two Essays. By Rev. Thomas Jame.9. Reprinted from the " Quarterly Review." Fcap. 8vo. Is. each. BERTHA'S Journal during a Visit to her Uncle in England. Containing a Variety of Interesting and Instructive Information. Seventh Edition. Woodcuts. 12mo. BIRCH'S (Samuel) History of Ancient Pottery and Porcelain : Kgyptian, Assyrian, Greek, Roman, and Etruscan. With 200 Illustra- tions. 2 Vols. Medium 8vo. 42s. BLUNT'S (Rev. J. J.) Undesigned Coincidences in the Writings of the Old and NewTestanient, an Argument of their Veracity : containing the Hooks i. Illustralions. 8vo. 18s. BLOMFIELD'S (Bishop) Memoir, with Selections fr.m his Corre- spondence. By h;8 Sod. 'ind Edition. Portrait, po.-jt Svo. J2s. PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. BOOK OP COMMON PRAYER. Illustrated with Coloured Borders, Initial Letters, and Woodcuts. A nuw edition. 8vo. ISs. cloth; 31«. G(i. calf ; 3bs. morocco. BORROWS (George) Bible ia Spain; or the Journeys, Adventures, and Imprisonments of an Englishman in an Attempt to circulate tlie Scriptui^s in the Peninsula. 3 Vols. Post 8vo. 27s.; ov Popular hduwn, 16mo, 3s. 6d. Zincali, or the Gipsies of Spain ; their Manners, Customs, Religion, and Language. 2 Vols. Post 8vo. 18ii.; or Fopular Edition, IGmo, 3s. 6d. Lavengro ; The Scholar— The Gipsy— and the Triest. Portrait. 3 Vols. Post 8vo. 30s. . Romany Rye ; a Sequel to Lavengro. Second Edition. 2 Vols. Post 8vo. 21s. Wild Wales : its People, Language, and Scenery. Popular Edition. Post Svo., ( BOSWELL'S (James) Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D. Includ- ing the Tour lo the Hebrides. Edited by Mr. Cuokek. Portraits. Koyal 8vo. 10s. BRACE'S (C. L.) History of the Races of the Old World. Post 8vo. 9s. BRAY'S (Mrs.) Life of Thomas Stothard, R.A. With Personal Reminiscences. Illustrated with Portrait and 60 Woodcuts of his chief works. 4to. BREWSTER'S (Sir David) Martyrs of Science, or the Lives of GaUleo, Tycho Brahe, aud Kepler. Fourth Edition. Fcap. Svo. 4s. U. More Worlds than One. The Creed of the Philo- sopher and the Hope of the Christian. Eighth Edition. Post 8vo. 6s. Stereoscope: its History, Theory, Construction, and Application to the Arts aud to Education. Woodcuts. 6s. 6(2. Kaleidoscope: its History, Theory, and Construction, with its application to the Fine and Useful Arts. Second Edition. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 6s. 6t2. BRINE'S (Capt.) Narrative of the Rise and Progress of the Taeping Kebelliuu in China. Plans. Post Svo. 10a. 6d. BRITISH ASSOCIATION REPORTS. Svo. York and Oxford, 1831-32, 13s. e,d. Cambridge, 1833, 12s. Edinburgh, 1834, 15s Dublin, 1835 13s. 6 Edition. Woodcuts. Fcap. Svo. 5s. DOUGLAS'S (General Sir Howard) Life and Adventure.s ; From Notes, Conversatioas, and Correspondence. By S. VV. Fullom. Portrait. Svo. 15s. Theory and Practice of Gunnery, 5th EdUiGn. Plates. Svo, 21s. Military Bridges, and the Passage of Rivers in Military Operations. Tkird Edition. Plates. Svo. "li Naval Warfare with Steam, Second Edition. Svo. 8s. Qd. Modern Systems of Fortification, with special re- ference to the Naval, Littoral, and luternal Defence of England. Plans. Svo. Vis. DRAKE'S (Sir Francis) Life, Voyages, and Exploits, by Sea and Land. By Joun Bareow. Third Edition. Post Svo. 2s. DEINKWATER'S (John) PIi.=?tory of the Siege of Gibraltar, 1779-1783. "SVith a Des!car, including a Journey to tlia Capita), with notices of Natural Uistory, .and Present Civilisation of the People. I'ijth Thousand. Map and Woodcittti. 8vo. ICs. (Mrs.) Education of Character, v.ii.h Hints on Moral Training. Post 8vo. Is. Qd. ELLESMERE'S (Lord) Two Siege? of Vienna by the Turl;s. Translated from tho German. Post Svo. 2s. Campaign of 1812 in Russia, from the German of General Carl Von Clausewitz. Map. Svo. 10s. 6ii. Poems. "With IlhistraticD.«. Crown 4to. — Essays on History, Biography, Geography, and Engineerinjj. Svo. 12s. ELPHINSTONE'S (Hon. Mountstuart) History of India— the Hindoo and Mahomedan Periods. Fijlh Edition, Itevised. Map. Svo. ISs. EXGEL'S (Carl) Music of the Most Ancient K'aiions; particularly of tiiH Assyrians^ Egyptian?, and Jiebiews. vviih Special Jiefereiice to the Discoveries in VVeutern Asin and in hgvpt. With luO Illustrations. Svo. I8s. ENGLAND (History of) from the Peace of Utrecht to t^ e Peace of Versailles, 1713— S3. By Lord Mahon (EhiI S(anhope). Library Edition,! Vols. Svo. S3s. ; ot Fopular Ediiiort, 7 YoIa. PustSvo. 35s. — From the First lavasion by the Roman.?,, down to the Present Year of Queen Victoriji's Reign. By Mes. Makkham. Sets and Cheaper Edition. Woodcuts. 12mo. is. (Thk Students Hume). From the Invasion of Julius C'ECiiir to tiie KevolntioM o( IHbS. By David ilt'jiu. Corrected and contiimed to 1958. Edited by Wm. SwrrH. LL.D. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. Cd. ■ A Smaller Historj' of England for Young Persons. By Db. Wm. Smith. Wooucuts. 18mo. 3.». 6rf. Little Arthurs History of England. By Ladt C»l.i.C0TT. VVoodcJits. 18mo. 2s. 6rf. ENGLISHWOMAIT IX AMERICA. Post Svo. 10s. Qd. ESKIMAUX and English Vocabulary, for Travellers in the Arctic Re^iions. liimo. 3s. Gd. 12 LIST OF WORKS ESSAYS FROM "THE TIMES." Being a Selection from the LiTEKARY Papers which have appeared in that Journal, Seventh Tiiousand. 2 vols. Fcap. 8vo. 8s. ETHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF LONDON, TRANSACTIONS. New Sjiies. Vols. I., II., and III. Svo. EXETER'S (Bishop of) Letters to the late Charles Butler, on the Theological parfs of his Book of the Roman Catholic Church; with Kemarks on certain Works of Dr. Milner and Dr. Lingard, and on some parts of the Evidence of Dr. Doyle. Second Edition. Svo. 16s. FAMILY RECEIPT-BOOK. A Collection of a Thousand Valuable and Useful Receipts. Fcap. Svo. 5s. &d. FARRAR'S (Rev. A. S.) Critical History of Free Thought in reference to the Christian Religion, Being the Bampton Lectures, 1832. Svo. 16s. (F. W.) Origin of Language, based on Modern Researches. Fcap. Svo. 5s. FEATHERSTONHAUGH'S (G. W.) Tour through the Slave States of North America, from the River Potomac to Texas and the Frontiers of Mexico. Plates. 2 Vols. Svo. 26s. FERGUSSON'S (James) Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis Restored. Woodc\its. Svo. 16s. — — History of Architecture in all Countries : from the Earlie-!t Times to the Present Day. Witli 1200 Illustralions. 2 Vols. Svo. Vol. I. 42s. • — ■ History of the Modern Stjles of Architecture : form- ing the Third and Concluding Volume of the above work. AVith 312 Illustrations. Svo. 31s. Qd. Holy Sepulchre and the Temple at Jerusalem ; being the Substance ot Two Lectures delivered at the Royal Institu- tion, 1862 and '65. Woodcuts. Svo. 7s. Gd. FISHER'S (Rev. George) Elements of Geometry, for the Use of Schools. Fijlh Edition. ISmo. Is. 6c?. First Principles of Algebra, for the Use of Schools. Fifth Edition. ISmo. \s.ed. FLOWER GARDEN (The). By Rev. Thos. James. Fcap. Svo. Is. FONNEKEAU'S (T. G.) Diary of a Dutiful Son. Fcap. 8vo. 4j-. ^d. FORBES' (C. S.) Iceland; its Volcanoes, Geysers, and Glaciers. Illustrations. Post Svo. 14s. FORSTER'S (John) Arrest of the Five Jlembers by Charles the First. A Chapter of Engli.sh History re-written. Post Svo. 12j. Grand Remonstrance, 1641. With an Essay on English freedom under the Plantagenet and Tudor Sovereigns. Second Edition. Post Svo. 12s. — Sir John Eliot : a Biography, 1590—1632. With Portraits. 2 Vols. Crown Svo. 30s. Biographies of Oliver Cromwell, Daniel De Foe, Sir Richard Steele, Charles Churcliill, Samuel Foote. Third Edition. Post Svo. 12s. PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 13 FORD'S (RicHARP) Handbook for Spain, Andalusia, Ronda, Valencia, Catalonia, Gr.in.ida. Gallicia, Arragon, Navarre, <5ic. Third Edition. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 30«. Gatherings from Spain. Post Svo, 3s. Gd. FORSYTH'S (William) Life and Times of Cicero. With ^elections from liii Coriespondeuce and Orations. Illustrations. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 18s. FORTUNE'S (Robert) Narrative of Two Visits to the Tea Countries of China, 1843-52. Third Edition. Woodcuts. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 18i. Third Visit to China. 1853-6. Woodcuts. Svo. Ids. ■ Yedo and Pekine-. With Notices of the As'ricul- tur« and Trnde of China, during a Fourth Visit to that Country. lUua- trations. Svo, 16«. FOSS' (Edward) Judges of England. With Sketches of their Lives, and Notices of 'Ii« Couits at Westminster, from the Conquest to the Present Time. 9 Vols. Svo. 114*. FRANCE (History of). From the Conquest by the Gauls to Kecent Times. By Mrs. Markham. Ntw ami C/iaper Edition. Wood- cuts. 12mo. 4s. (The Student's History of). From the Earliest Times to ttie Establishment fif the S-'o.oud Empire, 1852. By W. 11. Pearson. Edited by Wii. Smith, LL.D. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. (id. FRENCH (The) in Algiers ; The Soldier of the Foreign Legion— and the Prisoners of Abd-el-Kadir. Translated by Lady Duff Gordon. Post Svo. 2s. GALTON'S (Francis) Art of Travel ; or, Hints on the Shifts and Contrivances available in Wild Countries. Third Edition. Wood- cuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. GEOGRAPHY, ANCIENT (The Student's Manual of). By Rev. AV. L. Beva.v. Woodcut.s. Post 8vo. 7s. ed. ■ MODERN (The Student's Manual). By Rev. W. L. Beva.s. Woodcuti. Post Svo. In th'. Press. — ■ — Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London. Svo. GERMANY (History of). From the Invasion by Marius, to Recent times. By Airs. Markuam. New and Cheaper Edition. Woodcut.s. 12rao. 4s. GIBBON S (Edward) History of the Decline and Fall of the Koman Empire. Eriited. with Notes, by Dkav Mii.man and M.Giizot, A Niv) Edition. Preceded by his Aiitobiognipliy. Anil Edited, with Notes, by Dr. Wm. Smith. Maps. 8 Vols. Svo. 60s. (The Student's Gibbon) ; Being an Epitome of the above work.incoiporatin^ the Researches of Recent Commentators. By Dr. Wm. Smith. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. Qd. GIFFARD'S (Edward) Deeds of Naval Daring; or, Anecdotes of the Britisli Navy. New Edilioii. Fcap. Svo. ;^s. 6rf, GOLDSMITH'S (Oliver) Works. A New Edition. Printed from the last editions revl.sed by the Author. Edited by Peter Cunnino- HAM. Vignettes. 4 Vols. Svo. 30s. 14 LIST OF WORKS GLADSTONE'S (Rigut Hon.W. E.) Financial Statements oflSSS, GO, G3, xud6J; also liis Sptiechc.s on Tax-BiUs, 1861, aud ou Charities, 1S63. Second Edition. 8vo. Vis. _ Address on the Place of Ancient Greece in the Providential Order ot' the World. Fourth Edition. 8vo. 'Is. 6'.'. Wedc'wood : an Address delivered at Burslem. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 2.'!. ^i Cheap Edition, Is. GLEIG'S (Rev. G. E.) Campaigns of the British Army at Washing- ton and New Orleans. Po.st Svo. 2s. Story of the Battle of AVaterloo, Post Svo. 3s. Gd. Narrative of Sale's Brigade in AfFghanistan. Post 8vo. 25. ' Life of Robert Lord Clive. Post Svo. Zs. 6d. Life and Letters of Sir Thomas Munro. Post Svo os. Gd. GONGORA; An Historical Essay on the Times of Philip IIL and IV. of Spain. With Illustrations. By Archdeacon^ Cuurton. Por- trait. 2 vols. Poat Svo. los. GORDON'S (Sir Alex. Duff) Sketches of German Life, and Scenes from the War of Liberation. From the Qerman. Post Svo. 3s. 6d. (Lady Duff) Amber- Witch : A Trial for Witch- craft. From the German. Post Svo. 2s. ■ French in Algiers. 1. The Soldier of the Foreign Legion. 2. The Prisoners of Abd-el-Kadir. From the French, Post Svo. 2s. GOUGER'S (Henky) Personal Narrative of Two Years' Imprison- ment in Burmah.- Second Edition. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 12*. GRAMMARS (Latin and Geekk). See Cukiius ; S-mith ; King Edwakd VIth., &c. &c. GREECE (The Student's History of). From the Earliest Times to (he Koman Conquest. By Wm. tMiin, LL.D. Wood- cuts. Post Svo. 7s. ed. (A Smaller History of, for Youkg Persons). By Dk. Wm. Smith. Woodcuts. 16mo. 3s. ei. GRBNVILLE (The) PAPERS. Being the Public and Private Correspondence of George Grenville, includins!; his Puivate Diakv. Edited by W. J. Smith. 4 Vols. Svo. 16s. each. GREY (Earl) on Parliamentary Government and Reform ; -wilh SiiggesHons for the Inip7'0venient of our Repri'seiitntive Systi'ni, and an E.xamiuatiou of the Keform Bills of 1859 — 61. Jstcoud Edition. Svo. 9s. (Sir George) Polynesian Mythology, and Ancient Traditional History of the New Zealand liace. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 10.S. ed. GRUITER'S (Leatis) Brick and Terra-Cotta Buildings of Lombardy, Fcurteentli and Fifteenth Centuries. From carefiil Drawings and Eestorations, Engraved and piinted in Culours. JUustration.s. Small folio. Nearly Ready. GUISOT'3 (M.) Meditations on the Essence of Christianity, and on the Keligitus Questions of the Day. Post Svo. 9s. &d. PUBLISHED BY MR, MURRAY. 15 GROTPrS (Gkougk) History of Greece. From the Earliest Times to tlieclMseof tlio ^'.-iiei-Hlioii oinit-iinpornry v/i(h the do^Uli of Alexaiiilor the Great. Fuurth Ed'dion. Maps. Svols. Svo. ir2.«. Plato, and the otlier Companions of Socrates. 3 Vols. 8vo. 45*. (Mrs.) Memoir of Ary Scheh'er. Post Svo. Ss. Qd. Collected Papers. Svo. 10s. 6a'. HALLAM'S (Hkkky) Conatituiional History of England, from the Accession ui' Henry the Seventh to tlifl Oo.afli of Georco t.Vin Second. Seventh Edition. 3 Vols. Svo. 30s. Or Topiilar Kdititin, .'J Vols., Post 8vo, ISj.-. History of Europe during the HEiddle Ages. Tenth Edition. 3 Vols. 8vo. 30s. Or I'opular Edition, 3 Vols., Post Svo, ISs. Literary History of Europe, durinjr the 15ti), 16th and 17t.h Centuries. Jj'ourth Edition. 3 Vols. Svo. 3iis. Or Popular Edition, 4 Vols., Post Svo., i'-l.v. Literary Essays and Characters, Extracted from tiie above Work. Tcip. Svo. "s. Historical Works. Containing Hi.story of England, — Middle Ages of Europe,— Literary History of Europe. 10 Vols. Post Svo. 0),«. each, (Arthup,) Eemains; in Vcr-^e and Prose, n^ith Pre- face, Memoir, and Portrait. Fcap. Svo. 7s. Hd. HAMILTON'S (James) Wanderings in North Africa. AVith Illustra- tions. Post Svo. 12s. HART'S ARMY LIST. {Quarterly and Annualhj.) Svo. 10s. 6fZ. and 21s. o«ch. HANNAH'S (Rev. Dr.) Bampton Lectures for 1863 ; the Divine asut Ilanjan Eleaientu in lluly Scri;itnre. Svo. lOs. U./. HAY'S (J. H. Drummond) Western Barbary, its wild Tribes and savage Animals. Post Svo. 2s. HEAD'S (Sir Francis) Horse and Lis Eider. Woodcuts. Post Svo. Se. Rapid Journeys across the Pampas. Post Svo. 2s. Bubbles from the Brunneu of Nassau. With lUustra- liuns. Tost Svo, Emigrant. Fcap. Svo. Is. Qd. StokeVs and Pokers; or, I-T .-Western Railway. Post Svo. 2s. Fortnight in Ireland, ilap. Svo. 1- ^ (Sir Edmui;d) Shall and Will; or. Future Au.\iliary Vfcrbs. Fcap. Svo. 4s. KEBER'S (Bishop) Journey through the Upper Provinces of India, fiom Crflciit^a to Bumbay, witli an Arcn-iot of a Jonrncv to Madras and tlie tjoiuhi.-rn Provir.ci-s, Twelfth Editioa. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 7s. Poetical V/ork.", including Palestiiic, Europe, The Red Sea, llMnus, dc. Sijttk Editiuii. Portrait. 1- cap. Svo. 6s. HERODOTUS. A New English Version. Edited, with Notes and Essay.s, historical, etiiiiographiciil, and Keot;raphical, by Rev. G. Rawlinson, assisted by Sm Henry Kavvi.inson and Sir J. G. Wil- kinson. Second Edition. Maps and Woodcuts. 4 Vols. Svo. 4Ss. 16 LIST OF WORKS HAND-BOOK— TRAVEL-TALK. English, French, German, and Italian. 18mo. 3s. Sd. NORTH GERMANY, Holland, Belgium, and the Rhine to Switzerland. Map. Post 8vo. 10s. KNAPSACK GUIDE— BELGIUM AND THE RHINE. Post fivo. (7/1 t>ie Press.) SOUTH GERMANY, Bavaria, Austria, Styria, ?alzhp.rg, the Austrian and Bavarian Alps, the Tyrnl, Hnngary, and the Danube, from U Ira to the Black Sea. Map. PostSvo. lOs. KNAPSACK GUIDE— THE TYROL. Pest 8vo. {In the Press.) PAINTING. German, Flemish, and Dutch Schools. Edited hy Dr. Waagkn. Woodcuts. 2 Vols. Post 8vo. 24s. LIVES OF THE EARLY FLEMISH PAINTERS, with Notices of their 'Works. By Cr.oWE and Cavalcaselle. Illus- trations. Post Svo. 12s. SWITZERLAND, Alps of Savoy, and Piedmont. Maps. Post Svo. 9s. KNAPSACK GUIDE — SWITZERLAND. Post Svo. 5s. FRANCE, Normandy, Brittany, the French Alps, the Rivers Loire, Seine, Rhone, and Garonne, Dauphine, Provence, and the Pyrenees. Maps. Post Svo. 10s. KNAPSACK GUIDE - FRANCE. Post 8vo. [Uthe Press.) PARIS AND ITS Environs. Map. Post Svo. 53. SPAIN, Andalusia, Ronda, Granada, Valencia, Catalonia, Gallicia, Arragon, and Navarre. Maps. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 30s. PORTUGAL, Llsbon, kc. Map. Post 8vo. 9«. NORTH ITALY, Piedmont, Liguria, Venetia, Lonibardy, Parma, Modt-na, and Romagna. Map. Post Svo. 12s. CENTRAL ITALY, Lucca, Tuscany, Florence, The Marches, Unibiia, and the Patrimony of St. Peter's. Map. PostSvo. lo.<. ROME AND ITS Environs. Map. Pest Svo. 9s. - SOUTH ITALY, Two Sicilie-s, Naples, Pompei', Herculaneum, and Ve.^iivius. Map. Post Svo. IDs. KNAPSACK GUIDE— ITALY. Post Svo. 6s. SICILY, Palermo, Messina, Catania, Syracuse, Etno, and the Ruins of the Gretk Temples. M»p. PostSvo. 12s. PAINTING. The Italian Schools. From the German of KuGLEB. Edited by Sir Charles Eastlake, R. A. Wocdcuis. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 30s. LIVES OF THE EARLY ITALIAN PAINTERS, AND Progress of P.uxtjn<) in Itai.v, (roni Ci-mabue to JUssano. By Mrs. Jameson. A h'f.w Ediiiuu. 'Woodcuts. PostSvo. In the Prsis. NORWAY, Map, Post Svo. 5s. DENMARK, Swkden, and Norway. Maps. Post PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 17 HAND-BOOK— GEEECE, the Ionian Islands, Albania, Thessaty, and Macedonia. Maps. Post 8vo. 15s. TUEKEY, Malta, Asia Minor, Constantinople, Armenia, Mesopotamia, &c. Maps. Post Svo. EGYPT, Thebes, the Nile, Alexandria, Cairo, the Pyramids, Mount Sinai, &c. Map. Post Svo. 15s. SYEIA AND PALESTINE, Peninsula of Sinr.i, Eidom, and Syrian Desert. Maps. 2 Vols. Post Svo. iis. BOMBAY AND MADEAS. Map. 2 Vols. Poit Svo. 24s. — ETJSSIA, Poland, and Finland. Maps. Pose Svo. 12s. MODEEN LONDON. A Complete Guide to all the Sights and Objects of Interest in the Metropolis. Map. 16mo. — ^ WESTMINSTEE ABBEY. Woodcuts. 16mo. Is, KENT AND SUSSEX, Canterbury, Dover, Earns- gate, Sheernes^, Rochester, Chatham, Woolwich, Biightcii, CUichustei-, Worthing, Hahtings, Lewes, Arundel, (fee. Map. Post Svo. 10s. SUEEEY AND HANTS, Kingston, Croydon, Eei- gate, Guildford, Winchester, Southampton, Portsmouth, and Isle of Wight. Maps. Post Svo. 10s. BEEKS, BUCKS, AND OXON, AVindsor, Eton, Reading, Aylesbury, Uxbridge, AVycombe, Henley, the City and Uni- versity of Oxford, and the Descent of the Thames to Maidenhead and Windsor. Map. Post Svo. 7s. 6i. WILTS, DOESET, AND SOMEESET, Salisbury, Chippenham, Weymouth, Slierborne, Wells, Bath, Bristol, Tauiitoii, &c. Map. Post Svo. 7s. 6J. DEVON AND COENWALL, Exeter, Ilfracombe, Lintoni Sidmouth, Dawlish, Teignmoutli, Plymouth, Devoiipcu-t, I'wr- quay, Lauuceston, Truro, Penzance, Falmouth, &c. Maps. Post Svo. 10s. NOETH AND SOUTH WALES, Bangor, Car- narvon, Beaumaris, Snowdon, Conway, Menai Siraits, Cainiartheii, Pembroke, Tenby, Swansea, The Wye, &c. Maps. 2 Vols. Post Sro. 12s. SOUTHEEN CATHEDEALS OF ENGLAND— Winchester, Salisbury, Exeter, Wells, Chichester, Rochester, Canter- bury. With 110 Illustrations. 2 Vols. Crown Svo. 21s. EASTEEN CATHEDEALS OF ENGLAND — Oxford, Peterborough, Norwich, Ely, and Lincoln. With 90 Illustra- tions. Crown Svo. ISs. WESTEEN CATHEDEALS OF ENGLAND— Bristol, Gloucester, Hereford, Worcester, and Lichiield. With 50 lliu - trations. Crown Svo. 16s. FAMILIAE QUOTATIONS. From English Authors. Third Edition. Fcap. Svo. 5s. HESSEY (Eev. Dr.). Sunday — Its Origin, History, and Presciit Obligations. Being the Bampton Lectures for l!i6u. Second Edition Svo. 16s. Ot Third and Popular EdUinn. Post Svo. HICKMAN'S (Wm.) Treatise on the Law and Practice of Naval Courts-Martial. Svo. 10s. &d. c 18 LIST OF WORKS HOME AND COLONIAL LIBRAKY. A Series of Works adapted for all circles and classes of Readers, having been selected for their acknowledged interest and ability of the Authors. Post 8vo. Published at 2s. and 3s. 6d. each, and arranged uader two disticctiye heads as follows : — CLASS A. HISTORY, BIOGRAPHY, AND HISTORIC TALES SIEGE OF GIBRALTAR. By John Dkinkwater. 2s. 2. THE AMBER-WITCH. By Lady Duff Gordon. 2s. 3. CROMWELL AND BUNYAN. By Robert Southet. 2s. 4. LIFE OF Sir FRANCIS DRAKE. By John Bakrow, 2s. 5. CAMPAIGNS AT WASHING- TON. By Rev. G.R. Gleig. 2s. 6. THE FRENCH IN ALGIERS. By Lady Doff Gordon. 2s. 7. THE FALL OF THE JESUITS. 2s. 8. LIVONIAN TALES. 2.r. 9. LIFE OF CONDE. By Lord Ma- HON. 3s. 6^. 10. SALE'S BRIGADE. G. R. Gleig. 2s. By Rev. 11. THE SIEGES OF VIENNA. By Lord Ellesmere. 2s. 12. THE WAYSIDE CROSS. By Capt. Milman. 2s. 13. SKETCHES OF GERMAN LIFE. By Sir A. Gordon. 3s. 6d. 14. THE BATTLE of WATERLOO. By Rev. G. R. Gleig. 3s.6d. 15. AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF STEF- FENS. 2s. 16. THE BRITISH POETS. By Thomas Campbell. 3s. 6i. 17. HISTORICAL ESSAYS. By Lord Mahon. 3s. 6d. 18. LIFE OF LORD CLIVE. By Rev. G. R. Gleig. 3s. 6d. 19. NORTH - WESTERN RAIL- WAY. By Sir F. B. Head. 2s. 20. LIFE OF MUNRO. By Rev. G. R. Glbig. 3s. 6d. CLASS B. VOYAGES, TRAVELS, 1. BIBLE IN SPAIN. By George BoRROvr. 3s. Gd. 2. GIPSIES OF SPAIN. ByGEORQE Borrow. 3s. 6d. 3&4. JOURNALS IN INDIA. By Bishop Heiser. 2 Vols. 7s. 5. TRAVELS IN' THF, HOLY LAND. By iRBY and iM angles. 2s. 6. MOROCCO AND THE MOORS. By J. Drommond Hay-. 2s. 7. LETTERS FROM the BALTIC. By a Lady. 2s. 8. NEW SOUTH WALES. By Mrs. Meredith. 2s. 9. THE WEST INDIES'. ByM. G. Lewis. 2s. 10. SKETCHES OF PERSIA. By Sir John Malcolm. 3s. 6d. 11. MEMOIRS OF FATHER RIPA. 2s. 12. 13. TYPEE AND OMOO. By Hermann Melville. 2 Vols. 7s. 14. MISSIONARY LIFE IN CAN- ADA. By Rev. J. Abbott. 2s. i *4j* Each work may be had separately, AND ADVENTURES. 15. LETTERS FROM MADRAS. By a Lady. 2s. 16. HIGHLAND SPORTS. By Charles St. John. 3s. Gd. 17. PAMPAS JOURNEYS. By Sir F. B. Head. 2s. 18 GATHERINGS FROM SPAIN. By Richard Fobd. 3s. Gd. 19. THE RIVER AMAZON. By W. H. Edwards, 2s. 20. MANNERS & CUSTOMS OF INDIA. ByREV.C. ACLAND. 2s. 21. ADVENTURES IN MEXICO. By G. F. Ruxton. 3s. Gd. 22. PORTUGAL AND GALLICIA. By Lord Carnarvon. 3s. Gd. 23. BUSH LIFE IN AUSTRALIA. By Rev. H. W. Haygarth. 2s. 24. THE LIBYAN DESERT. By Bayle St. John. 2s. 25. SIERRA LEONE. By a Lady. 3s. G'i. PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 19 HILLARD'S (G. S.) Six Mouths in Italy. 2 Vols. Post 8vo. 16s. HOLLWAY'S (J. G.) Month in Norway. Fcap. 8vo. 2*. HONEY BEE (The). An Essay. By Eev. Thomas James. Reprinted from the " Quarterly lieview." Fcap. 8vo. Is. HOOK'S (Dean) Church Dictionary. Ninth Edition. 8vo. 168. (Theodore )Life. By J. G. Lockhart. Reprinted from the " Quarterly Keview." Fcap.Svo. Is. HOOKER'S (Dr. J. D.) Himalayan Journals ; or, Notes of an Oriental Naturalist in Bengal, the Sikkim and Nepal Himalayas, the Khasia Alountains, oic. Second Edition. Woodcuts. 2 Vols. I'ost Svo. 18s. HOPE'S (A. J. Beresford) English Cathedral of the Nineteenth Century. With Illustrations. Svo. 12s. HORACE (Works of). Edited by Dean Milman. With 300 Woodcuts. Crown Svo. 21s. (Life of). By Dean Milman. Woodcuts, and coloured Borders. Svo. 9s. HOUGHTON'S (Lord) Poetical Works. Fcap, Svo. 6s. 6d. HUME'S (The Sxpdent's) History of England, from the Invasion of Julius Cresar to the Revolution of 1CS8. Corrected and continued to 1858. E-littd by Dr. Wm. Smitu. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. HUTCHINSON (Gen.) on the most expeditious, certain, and easy Method of Dog-Breakinsr. Fourth EiUlion. Enlarged aud revised, with 40 l!lustratioiis. Ciown Svo. 15s. BUTTON'S (H.E.) Principia Grasca ; an Introduction to the Study of Greek. Comprehending Grammar, Delectus, and Exercise-booV, with Vocabularies. Third Edition, 12mo. 3s. 6rf. IRBY AND MANGLES' Travels in Egypt, Nubia, Syria, and the Holy Land. Post Svo. 2s. JAMES' (Rev. Thomas) Fables of ^sop. A New Translation, with Historical Pn-face. With 100 Woodcuts by Tenniel and Wolf. Forty-eighth Thousand. Post Svo. 2s. 6d. JAMESON'S (Mrs.) Lives of the Early Italian Painters, from Cimabue to Bassano, and the Progress of Painting in Italy. Ktw Edition. With Woodcuts. Post Svo. JESSE'S (Edward) Gleanings in Natural History. Eighth Edition. Fcp. Svo. es. JOHNSON'S (Dr. Samuel) Life. By James Boswell. Including the Tour to the Hebrides. Edited by Mr. Ckosjeb. Portraits. Royal Svo. 10s. Lives of the moat eminent English Poets. Edited by Petbb CuNsiNauAM. 3 vols. Svo. 22s. 6ii. JOURNAL OF A NATURALIST. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 95. Qd. KEN'S (Bishop) Life. By a Layman, Author of "Life of the Mes^^ialu" Second Edition. Purtiait. 2 Vols. Svo. ISs. Exposition of the Apostles' Creed, Extracted from his " Practice of Divine Love." Fcap. Is. 6ii. Approach to the Holy Altar. Extracted from his " Manuil of Prayer" aud " Practice of Divine Love." Fcap. Svo. Is. Gd. 2 20 LIST OF WORKS KENNEDY'3 (General Sir J. Shaw) Notes on the Battle of Waterloo. Witli a Memoir of his Lil'e and Services, and a Plan for the Defence of Canada, With Mai) and Flaus. Svo. Is. 6d. KING'S (Eev. S. W.) Italian Valleys of the Alps ; a Tour through all the Komantic and less frequented "Vals" of Northern Piedmont. Illustrations. Crown Svo. 18s. (Eev. C. W.) Antique Gems ; their Origin, Use, and Value, as Interpreters of Ancient History, and as illustrative of Ancient Art, Illustrations. Svo. 42s. KING EDWARD VIth's Latin Grammar; or, an Introduction to the Latin Tongue, for the Use of Schools. Sevcntetnth Edition. 12mo. 3s. Gd. — First Latin Book; or, the Accidence, Syntax, and Prosody, with an English Translation for the Use of Junior Classes. Fifth Edition. 12mo. Is.&d. KIRK'S (J. Foster) History of Charles the Bold, Duke of Bur- gundy. Portrait. 2 Vols. Svo. 30s. KERR'S (Robert) GENTLEMAN'S HOUSE ; or, How to Plan English Kesidences, from the Parsonage to the Palace. With Tables of Accommodation ;.nd Cost, and a Series of Selected Views and Plans. Second Edition. Svo. 24s. Ancient Lights ; a Book for Architects, Surveyors, Lawyers, and Landlords. Svo. 5s. 6d. KING GEORGE THE THIRD'S CORRESPONDENCE WITH LORD NORTH, 1769-82. Edi'ed, with Notes and Introduction, by W. BoDHAM Donne. 2 vnli*. Svo, Published by permission. From the Royal Library at Windsor. {In the Pres.acrificfS in Orissa. Edited by his Brotlier. "With Portrait and Illustrations. Svo. 12s. MAHON'S (Lord) History of England, from the Peace of Utrecht to the Peace of Versailles, 1713— 83. Library Ediiion, 7 Vols, Svo. 93s. Popular Edition, 7 Vols. Po.st Svo. 35s. " Forty-Five ; " a Narrative of the liebellion in Scot- land. PostSvo. 3s. History of British India from its Origin till the Peace of 1783. Post Svo. 3s. 6d. Spain under Charles the Second; 1690 to 1700, Second Edition. Post Svo. 6s. Gd. Historical and Critical Essays. Post Svo. Ss. 6d. Story of Joan of Arc. Fcap. Svo, Is. Addresses. Fcap. Svo. Is. Life of William Pitt, with Extracts from his MS. Papers. Second Edition. Portraits. 4 Vols. Post Svo. 42s. Miscellanies. Second Edition. Post Svo. 5s. 6d. Conde, surnamed the Great. Post Svo. 3s. 6d. Belisarius. Second Edition. PostSvo. 10s. 6(/. McCLINTOCK'S (Capt. Sir F. L.) Narrative of the Discovery of the Fate of Sir John Franklin and his Companions in the Arctic Seas. Twelfth Thousand. Illustrations. Svo. 16t. M<^CULLOCH'S (J. R.) Collected Edition of EicARDo'a Political Works, With Notes and Memoir, Second Edition. Svo, 16s. MaoDOUGALL (Col,) On Modern Warfare as Influenced by Modern Artillery. With Plans, Post Svo. 12s. MAINE (H. Sumner) On Ancient Law : its Connection with the Early History of Society, and its Relation to Modern Ideas. Third Edition. Svo. 12s. MALCOLM'S (Sir John) Sketches of Persia. Post Svo. 3s. 6d. MANSEL (PtEv, H. L.) Limits of Religious Thought Examined. Being the Bampton Lectures for 1S53. Fourth Edition. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. MANSFIELD (Sir Willia;ress. is. La yard's Account op Nineveh. 5«. Milman's Falt. op Jerusalem. 1«. MaHON's " l-'ORTY-FlVE." '68. Life of Theodore Hook, la. .Obeds of Naval Dauijig. 38. 6(?. ' The Honey Bee. Is. James* jEsop's Fables. 28.6i2. JNiMROD ON tue Turf. Is. 6d, Art of Dining. s.6d. H Allan's Literary Kbsays. 2«. Mahon*8 Joan of Arc. 1«, Head's Emigrant. 2«. 6d. NiMROD ON tue Road. 1«. CrOKER ON THE GUILLOTINE. Iff, Hollway's Norway. 2«, Maurel's Wellington. U. 6d. Campbell's Life of Bacoh. 2«. 6d. The Flower Garden. 1«. Lockhart's Spanish Ballads. 3«.6d. Taylor's Notes from Lips. 2*. Rejected Addresses. 1«. Pknn's Hints on Angling. 1». MUSIC AND DRESS. By a Lady. Reprinted from the « Quarterly Keview." Fcap. Svo. Is. IfAPIER'S (Sir Chas.) Life; chiefly derived from his Journals and Letters. By SiE W. Napier. Second Edition. Portraits. 4 Vols. Post Svo. 4Ss. (Sir Wm.) Life and Letters. Edited by H. A. Bruce, M.P. Portraits. 2 Vols. Crown Svo. 2S,'i. English Battles and Sieges of the Peninsular War, Fourth Edition. Portrait. Post Svo. Qs, PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. NAUTICAL ALMANACK. Royal 8vo. 2s. U. {By Authority.) NAVY LIST. {Published Quarterly, by Authority.) 16ino. 2s. 6d. NEW TESTAMENT (The) Illustrated by a Tlain Explanatory Commentary, and authentic Views of Sacred Places, from Sketches and Photographs. Edited by Arciidkacon' Churtox and Uev. Basil JoN-Es. With 110 Illustrations. 2 Vols. Crowu Svo. 30s. cloth ; 52«. 6d. calf; 63.'t. morocco. NICHOLLS' (Sir George) History of the English, Irish and Scotch Poor Laws. 4 Vols. Svo. (Eev, H. G.) Historical Account of the Forest of Dean. Woodcuts, &c. Post Svo. 10*. 6d. NICOLAS' (Sir Harris) Historic Peerage of England. Exhi- biting the Origin, Descent, and Present State of every Title of Peer- age which has existed in this Country since the Conquest. By William Courthope. Svo. 30*. NIMROD On the Chace— The Turf— and The Road. Reprinted from the " Quarterly Review." Woodcuts. Fcap. Svo. 3s. 6d. O'CONNOR'S (R.) Field Sports of France ; or, Hunting, Shooting, and Fishing on the Continent. Woodcuts. 12mo. 7s. 6d. OXENHAM'S (Rev. AY.) English Notes for Latin Elegiacs ; designed for early Proficients in the Art of Latin Versification, with Prefatory Eules of Composition in Elegiac Metre. Fourth Edition. 12mo. 3s. 6d. PARIS' (Dr.) Philosophy in Sport made Science in Earnest ; or, the First Principles of Natural Philosophy inculcated by aid of the Toys and Sports of Youth. Ninth Edition. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s.6(i. PEEL'S (Sir Robert) Memoirs. Edited by Earl Stanhope and Right lion. E. Cardwell. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. each. PENN'S (Richard) Maxims and Hints for an Angler and Chess- player. Kew Edition. Woodcuts. Fcap. Svo. Is. PENROSE'S (F. C.) Principles of Athenian Architecture, and the Optical Refinements exhibited in the Construction of the Ancient Buildings at Athens, from a Survey. With 40 Plates. Folio. 51. 5s. PERCY'S (John, M.D.) Metallurgy of Iron and Steel ; or, the Art of Extracting Metals from their Ores and adapting them to various pur- poses of Manufacture. Illustrations. Svo. 42s. PHILLIPP (Charles Spencer March) On Jurisprudence. 8yo. 12s. PHILLIPS' (John) Memoirs of William Smith, the Geologist. Portrait. Svo. 7s. 6d. Geology of Yorkshire, The Coast, and Limestone District. Plates. 4to. Part I., 20s.— Part II., 30s. Rivers, Mountains, and Sea Coast of Yorkshire. With Essays on the Climate, Scenery, and Ancient Inhabitants. Second Edition, Plates. Svo. 15s. PHILPOTTS' (Bishop) Letters to the late Charles Butler, on the Theological parts of his " Book of the Roman Catholic Church ; " with Remarks on certain Works of Dr. Milner and Dr. Limiard, and on some parts of the Evidence of Dr. Doyle. Second Edition. Svo, 16s. POPE'S (Alexander) Life and Works. A New Edition. Con- taining nearly 500 unpublished Letters. Edited, with a New Life, Introductions and Notes, by Rev. Whitwell Elwin. Portraits. Svo, [Zn the Press.) 26 LIST OF WORKS PORTER'S (Rev. J. L.) Five Years in Damascus. With Travels to Palmyra, Lebanoa and other Scripture Sites. Map and Woodcuts. 2 Vols. Post 8vo. 21s. Handbook for Syria and Palestine : includingan Account of the Geography,HiBtory,Antiquities, and Inhabitautsol these Countries, the Peninsula of Sinai, Edom, aud the Syrian Desert. Maps. 2 Vols, Post 8vo. 24i. PEAYER-BOOK (Illustrated), with 1000 Illustrations of Borders, Initials, Vignettes, &c. Edited, with Notes, by Rbv. Tiios. Jawes. Medium 8vo. 186. cloth ; X3s. Oct. calf ; 36s. morrocco. PRECEPTS FOE THE CONDUCT OF LIFE. Extracted from the Scriptures. Second Edition. Fcap. 8vo. Is. PUSS IN BOOTS. With 12 Illustrations. By Otto SpEciiTEs. 16mo. Is. 6d. or Coloured, 2s. Cd. QUARTERLY REVIEW (The). 8vo. Qs. RAMBLES in the Syrian Deserts among the Turkomans and Bedaweens. Post 8vo. 10s. %d. RAWLINSON'S (Rev. George) Herodotus. A New English Version. Edited with Notes and Essays. Assisted by Sie Hbnky Kawlinson and Sir J. G. Wilkinson. Second Edition. Maps and Woodcut. 4 Vols. 8vo. 48s. Historical Evidences of the truth of the Scripture Kecords stated anew. Second Edition. 8vo. 14s. — Five Great Monarchies of the Ancient World, Chaldaea, Assyria, Media, Babylonia, and Persia. Illustrations. 4 Vols. 8vo. 16s. each. REJECTED ADDRESSES (The). By James and Horace Smite. Fcap. 8vo. Is. EENNIE'S (D. F.) British Arms in Peking, 1860; Kagosima, 1862. PostSvo. 12s. Peking and the Pekingese : Being a Narrative of the First Year of the British Embassy iu China. Illustrations. 2 Vol-;. Post 8vo. 24s. Story of Bhotan and the Dooar War ; includ- ing Sketches of a Kesidence in thu Himalayas and Visit to Bhotan in 1805. Map and Woodcut. Post Svo. REYNOLDS' (Sir Joshua) Life and Times. Commenced by C. R. Leslie, R.A., continued and concluded by Tom Taylok. Portraits and Illustrations. 2 Vols. 8vo. 42s. ^ Descriptive Calakgue of his Works. With Notices of their present owners and localiiies. By Tom Taylor and Ciiaules W. Franks. With Illustiatious. Fcap. 4to. (In the Fress.) RICARDO'S (David) Political Works. With a Notice of his Life and Writings. By J. R. M'Culloch. New Edition. Svo. 16s. RIPA'S (Father) Memoirs during Thirteen Years' Residence at the Court of Peking. From the Italian. Post 8vo. 2s. ROBERTSON'S (Canon) History of the Christian Church, from the Apostolic Age to the Concordat of Worms, a.d. 1123. Second Mdilion. 3 Vols. Svo. 38s. PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 27 KOBINSON'S (Eev. Dr.) Later Biblical Researches in the Holy Laud. ]>eing a Journal of Travels iu 1862. Maps. 8vo. 15s. 105. Cd. Physical Geography of the Holy Land. Post 8vo. EOME (The Student's History of). From tue Earliest Times TO TUB lisTAt;LIsHJIFNT OF THE EMPIRE. By DeAX LlDDELL. Wood- cuts. Pohit Svo. 7s. 6d. (A Smaller History op, for Young Persons). By AV^i. :jitii, LL.D. Woodcuts. IGmo. 3s. 6d. ROWLAND'S (David) Manual of the English Constitution; Its Kise, Growth, and Present State. Post Svo. lOi. Cd. Laws of Nature the Foundation of Morals. Post Svo. 6*. RTJNDELL'S (Mrs.) Domestic Cookery, adapted for Private Families. New Edition. Woodcuts. Fcap. Svc. 5s. RUSSELL'S (J. Rutherfurd) History of the Heroes of Medicine. Portraits. Svo. l-!s. RUXTON'S (George F.) Travels iu Mexico; with Adventures among the Wild Tribes and Animals of the Prairies and Kocky Moun- tains. Post Svo. 3s. 6d. SALE'S (Sir Robert) Brigade in Aifghanistan. With an Account of the Defence of Jellalabad. By Rev. G. R. Gleio. Post Svo. 2s. .=5ANDW1TH'3 (Humphry) Siege of Kars. Pest Svo. 35. 6d. SCOTT'S (G. Gilbert) Secular and Domestic Architecture, Pre- sent and Future. Se.cond Edition. Svo. 9s. (Rev. Robert, D.D., Master of Baliol) Sermons, preached before the University of Oxford. Post Svo. Hs.Qd. SCROPE'S (G. p.) Geology and Extinct Volcanoes of Central Frauce. Second Edition. Illustrations. Medium Svo. 30s. SENIOR'S (N. W.) Suggestions on Popular Education. Svo. 9s. SHAFTESBURY (Lord Chancellor) ; Memoirs of his Early Life. Withhis;Letterf, &c. By W.D.Christie, Vol.1. Portrait. Svo. 10^. 6d!. SHAW'S (T. B.) Student's Manual of English Literature. Edited, with Notes and Illustrations, by Dr. Wm. Smith. Post Svo. 7s. &d. Specimens of English Literature. Selected from the Chief English Writers. Edited by Wm. Smith, LL.D. Post 7s. 6d. SIERRA LEONE ; Described in Letters to Friend:? at Home. By A Lady. Post Svo. 3s. 6d. SIMMONS (Capt. T. F.) on the Constitution and Practice of Courts-Mai tiiil ; wi'h a Summary of the Law of Evidanne as connected therewith, and sf.me Noii^e ot the Criniinsl Law of England, with reference to the Tiinl of Civil Ofteuces. blh Edition. 8vo. lis. SOUTH'S (John F.) Household Surgery ; or, Hints on Emergen- cies, HevtnteeiUh Thouiand. Woodcuts. Fcp. Svo. 4s. 6rf. 28 LIST OF WORKS SMILES' (Samuel) Lives of British Engineers ; from the Earliest Period to the Death of Robert Stephfnson ; with an account of their Pi in- cipal Works, and a History of Inland Communication in Britain. Portraits and Illustrations. 3 Vols. 8vo. 63»'. Lives of Boulton and Watt. Comprisins a History of the Invention and Introdnction of the Steam Engine. Vt'itli Portraits and 70 Illustrations. 8vo. 21s. Story of George Stephenson's Life, including a Memoir of Robert Stephenson. With Portraits and 70 Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 6s. James Brindley and the Early Engineers. With Portrait and 50 Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 6s. Self-Help. With Illustrations of Character and Conduct. Post Svo. Gs. Industrial Biography : Iron-Workers and Tool Makers. A companion volume to " Self-Help." Post Svo. 6s. Workmen's Earnings — Savings— and Strikes. Fcap. Svo. Is. 6d. SOMEEVILLE'S (Mary) Physical Geography. Fifth Edition. Portrait. Post Svo. 9s. Connexion of the Physical Sciences, Nintli Edition. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 9s. STANLEY'S (Dean) Sinai and Palestine, in Connexion with their History. Map. Svo. 16s. Bible in the Holy Land. Woodcuts. Fcap. Svo. 2s. 6.'/. St. Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians. Svo. ISs. History of the Eastern^Church. Plans. Svo. 12.9. Jewish Church. Abraham to the Captivity. 2 Yol.-'. Svo. 16». each. Historical Memorials of Canterbury. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 7s. Gd. Sermons in the East, ■with Notices of the Placis Visited. Svo. 9s. Sermons on Evangelical and Apostolical Teaching. Post Svo. 7s. Gd. Addresses and Charges of Bishop Stanley. With Memoir. Svo. 10s. Gd. SOUTHEY'S (Kobert) Book of the Church. Seventh Edition. Post Svo. 7s. Gd. Lives of Bunyan and Cromwell, Post Svo. 2s, SPECKTEK'S (Otto) Puss in Boots, With 12 Woodcuts, Square 12mo. Is. 6d. plain, or 2s. Gd. coloured. Charmed Eoe ; or, the Story of the Little Brother and Sister. Illustrated. 16mo. PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. SMITH'S (Dr. Wm.) Dictionary of the Bible; its Antiquities, Biography, Geograplij-, and Natural History. Illustraiions. 3 VoI:i. 8vo. IOjs. Concise Dictionary of tlie Bible, condensed from the above Dictionary for Families and Students. IlUistraUous. Medium, 8vo. 21«-. Dictionary of Christian Antiquities: from the Times of tlie Apostles to the Age of Charlemagne. Illustrations. Jl diiim. 8fO. (/« preparation ) . Greek and Roman Antiquities. Wood- cuts. SvQ. i2s. Greek and Eoman Biography an;l Mythology. Woodcuts. 3 Vo!s. 8vo. 51. 15s. 6d. Greek and Eoman Geography. Wood- cuts. 2 Vols. 8ro. 80s. Classical and Biblical Atlas. Small folio. {In iwpa- ration.) - Classical Dictionary for the Higher Forms in Schools compiled from the .-ihove works. With 750 Woodcuts. 8vo. 1S.<. Smaller Classical Dictionary, abridged from the above Work. Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. Smaller Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities^, compiled from the larger Work. Woodcuts. Crvwn Svo. 7s. 6d. Latin-English Dictionary for the Higher Forms in Schools. Based on the Work.-" of Forcellini and Freu.n-d. With Trthlesof the Roman Calendar, Measures, Weights, a' .d Money. 8vo. 21s. Smaller Latin-English Dictionary, abridged from the above Work. 12mo. 7s. 6(/. New English-Latin Dictionary, compiled from original sources. Svo. and l-2nio. (In the Press.) Small Classical Mythology for School?, AVith Illus- trations. 12rao. — Latin-English "Vocabulary ; for Phaedrus, Cornelius Nepos, and CaTsar. '2nd Edition. 12mo. 3s. 6d. Principia Latina— Part I. A Grammar, Delectus, and Exercise Book, with Vocabularies. 6lh Edition. 12mo. 3s. 6d. Part n. A Reading-book of Mytho- logy, Geography, Roman Antiquities, and History. With Notes and Dictionary. 3rd Edition. 12mo. 3s. Gd, Part III. A Latin Poetry Book. Hexameters and Pentameters; Eclog. Ovidianie; Latin i'rosoiiy, &c. 2nd Edition. 12mo. 3s. 6d. Part IV. Latin Prose Composition. Rales of Syntax, with Examples, E.tplanations of Syn. nyms, and Exercises on the Syntax. Second Edition. 12rao. 3s. 6d. Student's Greek Grammar for the Higher Forms. By Professor Cuktius. Post Svo. 7s. Gd. — Smaller Greek Grammar, abridged from the above Work. l-2mo. 3i. 6./. Studeut's Latin Grammar for the Higher Forms. Pos-t 8v3. 7.V. M. — Smaller Latin Grammar, abridged from the above Work. 12mo. 3s. Gd. so LIST OF WORKS STANHOPE'S (Eael) Life of William Pitt. With Extracts from his MS. Papers. Second Edition, rortraits. 4 Vol.s, Post 8vo. 42s. __ Miscellanies. Second Edition. Post 8vo. 5s. 6cZ. — Life of Belisarius. Post 8vo. 10s. Gd. Life of Conde. Post 8vo. 3s. Qd. History of England, from the Peace of Utrecht to the Peace of Vei-aailles, 1713-83. Librar;/ EiHion. 7 vols. Svo. 93s. Or Fop'xUir Edition. 7 vols. Post 8vo. Ss. L-ach. History of British India, from its origin till the Peace of 1783. Post 8vo. 3s. Qd. — " Porty-Fire ; " a Narrative of the Piebellion in Scotland. Post 8vo. 3s. — Spain under Charles the Second. Post Svo. 6s. Gd. Historical and Critical Essays. Post Svo. Ss. Gd. STUDENT'S HUME. A History of England from the Invasion of Julius Cffisar to the devolution of 1688. By David Hume. Con-cctpd and continued to 1858. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 7s. 6d. Questions on, 2s. *^* A Smaller History of England. 12iiio. 3s. Zd. HISTOKY OP FRANCE ; from the Earliest Times to the Establishmtnt of the Second Empire, 1852. lly \V. II. Pearson', M.A. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6a'. HISTORY OF GREECE ; from the Earliest Times to the Roman Conquest. With the History of Literature and Art. By Wm. Smith, LL.P. Woodcuts. Crown Svo. 7s. 6ii. (Questions. 2,i'.) *t* A Smaller History of Greece. 12mo. Ss. Qd, HISTORY OP ROME; from the Earliest Times to the Establishment of the Empire. With the History of Literature and Art. By Dean Liddell. Woodcuts. Crown Svo. 7s. Gd. "■»* A Smaller History of Rome. 12nio. 3s. 6d. GIBBON ; an Epitome of the History of the Decline and Fall df the Ruman Empire. By Edward Gibbon'. Incorporat- ing the Researches of Recent Commentators. Woodcuts. PostBvo. 7s. 6rf. MANUAL OF ANCIENT GEOGRAPHY. By Rev. W. L. Be-v'AN, M.A. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. Cd. MODERN GEOGRAPHY. By Rev. W. L. Bevan. Woodcuts. Post Svo. (/« the Press.) ENGLISH LANGUAGE. ByGEOEGE p. Marsh. Post Svo. 7s. lid. ENGLISH LITERATURE. By T. B. Shaw, M.A. Post Svo. 7s. Gd. . SPECIMENS OP ENGLISH LITE- RATURE. Selected from the Chief Writers. By Thomas B. Shav.-, M.A. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. -" SCRIPTURE HISTORY : the Old and New Testament. r.Japs and Woodcuts. 2 VoU. Post Svo. 7s. C/. e.nch. BLACKSTONE: a Systematic Abridgment of the Entire Cummentarks. By R.Malcolm Kebr, LL,D. Post, Svo. 7s. 6^. PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. 31 ST. JOHN'S (Charles) "Wild Sports and Natural History of the Highlands. Post 8vo. 3s. 6d. (Bayle) Adventures in the Libyan Desert and the Oasis of Jupiter Ammou. Woodcuts. PostSvo. STEPHENSON (Georqb and Egbert). The Stoiy of their Lives. 13y Sajhjel Smilks. With Portraits and 70 Illustrations. Medium. "Svo. 21s. Or Popular Edition, Post 8vo. 6*. STOTHAED'S (Thos.) Life. With Personal Eeminiscences. By Mrs. Bbay. "With Portrait and 60 Woodcuts. 4to. 21s. STREET'S (G. E.) Gothic Architecture in Spain. From Personal Observations during sev*iral joiinieys through that country. Illus- trations. Medium Svo. 5Cs. Brick and Marble Architecture of Italy in the Middle Ages. Plates. 8vo. 21s. SWIFT'S (Jonathan) Life, Letters, Journals, and Works. By JOHX FoBSTEa. Svo. (In Preparation.) SYME'S (Professor) Principles of Surgery. 5th Edition. Svo. 12s. TAIT'S (Bishop) Dangers and Safeguards of Modern Theology, contaiuin;; Suggestions to the Theological Student under Present Ditli- culties. Svo. 9s. TAYLOR'S (Henry) Notes from Life, in Six Essays on Money, Humility and Independence, Wisdom, Choice ia Marriage, Child.'ea, and Life Poetic. Fcap. Svo. 2s. THOMSON'S (Archbishop) Sermons, Preached ia the Chapel of Lincoln's Inn. Svo. 10s. 6d. THREE-LEAVED MANUAL OF FAMILY PRAYER; arranged 60 as to save the trouble of turning tlie Pages backwards and forwards. Royal Svo. 2s. TREMENHEERE'S (H. S.) The Franchise a Privilege and not a Right, proved by the Political Esueriynce of the Ancieuts. Fcap. Svo. 2s. 6d. TRISTRAM'S (H. B.) Great Sahara. Wanderings South of the Atlas Mountains. Map and Illustrations. Post Svo. 15s. TWISS' (Horace) Public and Private Life of Lord Chancellor Eldon, with Selections from his Correspondence. Portrait. Third Edition. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 21s. TYLOR'S (E. B.) Researches into the Early History of Mankind, and the Developnu nt of Civilization. Illustrations. Svo. 12s. TYNDALL'S (John) Glaciers of the Alps. With an account of Three Years' Observations and Experiments on their General Phe- nomena. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 14s. TYTLER'S (Patrick Eraser) Memoirs. By Rev. J. W. Burgon, M.A. Svo. 9s. VAIJGHAN'S (Rev. Dr.) Sermons preached in Harrow School. 8vo. lOs. 6d. 32 LIST OF WORKS PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. VENABLES' (Ret. R. L.) Domestic Scenes iu Russia. Post 8to. 5s. WAAGEN'S (Dr.) Treasures of Art in Great Britain. Being an Account of the Chief Collections of Paintings, Sculpture, Manuscripts, Miniatures, &c. &c., in this Country. Obtained from Personal Inspec- tion during Visits to England. 4 Vols. 8vo. WALSH'S (Sir John) Practical Results of the Reform Bill of 1832. Svo. OS. 6d. VAMBERY'S (Arminius) Travels in Central Asia, from Teheran across tlie Turkoman i')ese^^, on the Eastern Shore of the Caspian to Khiva, Bokhara, and Samarcand in 1863. Map and Illustrations. Svo. 21s. WELLINGTON'S (The Duke of) Despatches during his various Campaigns. Compiled from Official and other Authentic Documents. By CoL. GUEWOOD, C.B. 8 Vols. Svo. 21s. each. Supplementary Despatches, and other Papers. Edited by his Son. Vols. I. to XII. Svo. 20 j. each. Selections from his Despatches and General Orders. By Colonel Gdrwood. Svo. 18s. Speeches in Parliament. 2 "Vols. Svo, 42«. WILKINSON'S (Sir J. G.) Popular Account of the Private Life, Manners, and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians. New Edition. Revised and Condensed. With 500 Woodcuts. 2 Vols. Post Svo. t2s. Handbook for EgJ'pt. — Thebes, the Nile, Alex- andria, Cairo, the Pyramids, Mount Sinai, &c. Map. Post Svo. 15s. (G. B.) Working Man's Handbook to South Aus- tralia; with Advice to the Farmer, and Detailed Information for the several Classes of Labourers and Artisans. Map. 18mo. Is. 6d. WILSON'S (Bishop Daniel) Life, with E.xtracts from his Letters and Journals. By Rev. Josiah Bateman. Second Edition. llhistrations. Post Svo. 9s. (GenI'- Sir Robert) Secret History of the French Invasion of Russia, and Retreat of the French Army, 1812. Second Edition. Svo. 15s. — Private Diary of Travels, Personal Services, and Public Events, during Missions and Employments in Spain, Sicily, Turkey, Russia, Polami, Germany, &c. 1812-14. 2 Vols. Svo. 26s. — Autobiographical Memoirs. Containing an Account of his Early Life down to the Peace of Tilsit. Portrait. 2 Vols. Svo. 26s. WORDSWORTH'S (Canon) Journal of a Tour in Athens and Attica. Third Edition. Plates. Post Svo. 8s. 6