know my Government to have so much at heart, of the unfortunate differences which have arisen between the French and Portuguese Governments on the subject of the above mentioned vessel. I likewise referred your Excellency to a further message of the 16th instant from the Earl of Malmesbury, repeating his former advice to drop the prosecution." instant, which limited the proposal of mediation | vernment for an amicable settlement, which I to the question of the amount of the indemnity for the interested parties, from admitting it for the whole question. As Earl Cowley had in his despatch of the 13th instant, a copy of which was enclosed to me in your Lordship's despatch of the 16th instant (received on the 22nd), reported Count Lavradio's proposal, as learnt from him, as extending the mediation to the legality of the seizure of the vessel....I called upon the Marquis de Lisle and urged him to agree to extend the mediation to the whole question." On turning to the noble Earl's despatch of the 16th, what did he find? A mere transmitting despatches without one word of comment or instruction. Of course, our Minister, being without instructions, or rather worse than without instructions, for he had been told to answer that the prosecution should be dropped, could only come to the conclusion that the course pursued by the Portuguese Government was not approved by Her Majesty's Government. He was wrong; the noble Earl did send some instructions on the day in ques tion; he sent a telegraphic despatch on the 16th, for the production of which he (Lord Wodehouse) was now moving. There could be no doubt, however, of the tenor of that despatch, for Mr. Howard, in his letter of the 21st of October, said : 66 I likewise referred your Excellency to a further message of the 16th instant, from the Earl of Malmesbury, repeating his former advice to drop the prosecution." Drop the prosecution!-that was the only instruction sent by the noble Earl. For God's sake give up the vessel which had been seized by the French, and let there be no more trouble about the matter. Our Minister at Lisbon, who it appeared to him had acted throughout the matter with ability and judgment, had no alternative, under these circumstances, but to write a letter to M. de Loulé, which few persons, he (Lord Wodehouse) thought, could read without shame, in which he said : "I am without instructions from my Government concerning the particular proposals in question, but that having already communicated to your Excellency a message of the 9th inst., from the Earl of Malmesbury, by which, whilst announcing to me that Her Majesty's Government would gladly give their good offices to prevent a collision between France and Portugal, and stating that they had no decisive information on the subject, his Lordship directed me to recommend to His Most Faithful Majesty's Government to drop the prosecution, if there were informalities during or after the capture, I considered that I should be only acting up to the spirit of those instructions in now giving my opinion in favour of the acceptation, by His Most Faithful Majesty's Government, of the present proposals of the French Go So the "good offices" of this country offered by the noble Earl resulted only in telling the Portuguese Government that they had better give up the vessel and yield the whole question, and that if they did not do so, they would probably be compelled. The Portuguese Government then had no other alternative but to give up the vessel under the pressure of superior force; but they had this consolation they had vindicated the honour and dignity of their country throughout the transaction, and he (Lord Wodehouse) was convinced that the verdict of Europe would be with them. At this point the drama naturally concluded; but as some managers thought it good policy to vary the tone of their entertainments, and after a tragedy to give a farce, the noble Earl accordingly, moved to vigorous action, four days after the news of the surrender of the vessel had been published in the Moniteur, saw the French Ambassador in this country, and wrote the magniloquent despatch, a portion of which he would read. It was dated October 30, addressed to Lord Cowley, and was as follows: "While in attendance upon Her Majesty at Windsor, I took the first opportunity which occurred, the day before yesterday, of addressing some observations to the Duke of Malakoff relative to the manner in which the Government of His Imperial Majesty had enforced their demands upon the Portuguese Government for the release of the Charles et Georges and her captain. I began by expressing the satisfaction I felt that the dispute appeared to be terminated, and that Her Majesty's Government, not being in possession of all the facts of the case, it was not my intention, as, indeed, it was not my province, to enter into the contending views of the two parties." What satisfaction the noble Earl could have felt, how it was that he was not in possession of information as to the facts of the case, and why it was not his province to enter into the contending views of the parties he (Lord Wodehouse) was at a loss to understand. The noble Earl, however, proceeded, and wrote that sentence in the despatch which would probably be immortal. After referring to the Protocol of Paris, the noble Earl said: "I pointed out to his Excellency how highly Her Majesty's Government valued the great prin ciple established by the 23rd Protocol of Paris, which was signed by all the Plenipotentiaries on 14th of April, 1856. We had always considered that act as one of the most important to civilization, and to the security of the peace of Europe; for although it left the propounders and adherents of that principle undoubtedly free to act with all the vigour of independent nations, it recognised and established the immortal truth that time, by giving place for reason to operate, is as much a preventive as a healer of hostilities." When he (Lord Wodehouse) read that sentence he was reminded of some lines of one of our poets,— "Can it be Fortune's work that in your head The curious net that is for fancies spread would agree with him that of the three States which were engaged in this question, England remained in the most unsatisfactory position. Portugal had nothing to regret in the course she took. She had maintained throughout her own dignity and honour. France, if she had incurred the reproach of having compelled a weaker State by force to yield to her demands, had acted as she thought best suited her own at least, in the words of Count Walewski, honour, and had not been deterred by any fear of consequences from pursuing her own course. To England alone remained the discredit, that after having strongly Lets through its meshes every meaner thought, urged a course of policy by which Portugal While rich ideas there are only caught; was involved in antagonism with a stronger Power, she offered to Portugal her good to a mockery, or rather to a virtual abanoffices in such a manner as to amount really donment of an old and faithful Ally. The noble Lord concluded by moving"That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, for Copy of the Telegraphic Despatch of the 16th of October, 1858, referred to in Mr. Howard's Despatch of the 27th of October, to the Earl of Malmesbury, as printed in the Correspondence respecting the Charles et Georges." The noble Earl transmitted to Lord Cowley on account of his conversation with the Duke of Malakoff, and directed him to read his despatch to Count Walewski. Count Walewski was naturally struck with a passage which referred to the existence of treaties between this country and Portugal. This would have been a very proper reference during the progress of the transaction, but after the affair was concluded it was, to say the least of it, injudicious. It produced from Count Walewski a sharp reply, to the effect that France would always do what she thought right, and would vindicate her honour without any fear of consequences. The noble Earl then took another step. He resolved that his good offices towards Portugal should be acknowledged, and finding that nothing was said about it in the King of Portugal's Speech, he wrote to Mr. Howard, and asked why no reference was made in the King's Speech to the gool offices which had been exercised by this country in that matter. It might, however, have occurred to the noble Earl that no reference to those good offices had been made, because, in fact, they had been afforded in such a manner as to be wholly illusory. The Portuguese Government, however, was too magnanimous to say so, and they gave the noble Earl a certificate of good con-liament. duct, which was of about as much value as a vote of thanks to a chairman of a public meeting, or a testimonial to a retiring parish officer. This concluded what he must call an extremely painful case. He had endeavoured to make his observations as brief and in as moderate a tone as possible, but upon a calm review of all the circumstances, he thought their Lordships THE EARL OF MALMESBURY said, -My Lords, I certainly, as a Member of Her Majesty's Government, do not at all find fault with the noble Lord for bringing forward this subject. It is his duty, as a member of the Opposition, to watch carefully whether the Ministers of the Crown faithfully maintain the honour of the country and the faith of treaties. I will go further, and thank the noble Lord personally for having brought forward this subject, because I do not remember any case which has been more mistaken and misapprehended than this. to him for giving me an opportunity of I am therefore obliged setting the House and the country right upon many points involved in this case, upon which, as I have said, there have been grave misapprehensions. I will begin by explaining why the despatch for which the noble Lord has moved was omitted from the papers placed before ParThat despatch was in the same sense as The explanation is very simple. the one of the 15th of October, to which the noble Lord has referred, and was, in fact, a telegraphic despatch, which anticiments in a necessarily abbreviated form. pated the other, containing the same sentiYour Lordships are aware that diplomatic correspondence is now conducted somewhat differently from what used formerly to be came to their knowledge subsequently? When the point first came before me I could not discover whether the captain of the vessel was aware at the time of the new proclamation that had been issued against the slave trade. It is probable, indeed, that he was not, for that proclamation was not issued until the 20th of November, and the vessel was seized on the 27th of that month. There is the statement of Mr. Howard on the 28th of August upon that point : the case, much of it being conveyed through imprisoning the captain. Now, my Lords, the telegraph; and there is this inconve- what are the proofs that came before nience involved, that it would be difficult, the Government at the time, and what if not impossible, for a Minister to produce to Parliament entire and faithful copies of those despatches, for this reason-that he would run a very great risk of allowing our cipher to be discovered-a consequence of too great importance not to be deeply considered. In laying such papers before Parliament, therefore, a Minister is obliged to alter the terms and expressions, at the same time that he furnishes, as far as possible, a true and faithful outline of the sense of the despatch. In that, of course, Parliament must trust to the honour of the Minister to give the real sense; and I am sure any Minister of this country will be always willing, if it is supposed that he has mistaken or imperfectly stated the sense of a particular despatch, to show the exact terms to any Member who may desire it. But it is much more difficult to alter the terms of any despatch, if written at any length and placed in juxtaposition with another despatch, as this was with that of the 15th of October. I can only say that if the noble Lord wishes to see that despatch, which I hold in my hand at this moment, it is at his service, and that of any noble Lords opposite; or, if it should be thought likely to be for the benefit of the public service, I will have it printed and added to the papers before Parliament. My Lords, will now enter upon the case of the Charles et Georges, to which the noble Lord has called attention. In the first place I must remark that if the Government is to be judged justly for its action in these proceedings, they must be judged according to the knowledge which they had at the time, and not by the facts which have become subsequently known to them. The noble Lord has alluded to several points connected with the case of the Charles et Georges which have become known since the matter has been settled and which were not known at the period when those matters were under discussion. The whole couduct of the Government depends upon the truth of their allegation and truth it is-that the case was at the time utterly obscure and uncertain. We had only one side of the case, and that full of contradiction from beginning to end, so that it was impossible to find any evidence upon which to decide whether Portugal had entirely right on her side, or whether she could justify the peremptory step she had taken of scizing the ship and "It is necessary that I should here state that the late Governor of Mozambique, Senhor Menezes, not having given due effect to the prohibicontained in the Portarias of the Minister of tion of the exportation of negroes as free labourers, Marine and Colonies of February 27, 1855, and July 30, 1856, was recalled on that account, as I reported at the time, and Colonel Tavarez d'Alde Sa for the express purpose of enforcing that meida was sent out as governor by the Viscount prohibition, and of otherwise suppressing the slave trade. Colonel Almeida arrived, it appears, at Mozambique about fifteen days or three weeks before the affair of the Charles et Georges took place, and it was under his directions that the measures for her apprehension were taken." Your Lordships perceive that the new governor only arrived a fortnight or three weeks before, and it was by his direction that these measures were taken. At page 8 your Lordships will find that the date of the proclamation was November 20, and the vessel was seized on the 27th, many miles away from the Mozambique. It struck me that the first point to consider was, whether the captain might not have been ignorant of the policy of the new Governor, the former Governor having been dismissed for conniving at, if he had not actually taken part in the slave trade. At page 48 of the papers there is the French account of the matter: "What had happened, his excellency said, was received orders from the Governor of Réunion to this: The captain of the Charles et Georges had procure negroes under the emigration system; but he was expressly forbidden by his instructions to take any from Mozambique, the Portuguese Government having prohibited all emigration from thence. The captain, however, received information that this prohibition did not extend to the district of Matabane, the Sheik of which had authority from the Portuguese Government to furnish negroes for emigration. He went there accordingly, and the Sheik furnished a certain number.' Well, then there was the custom-house question; for your Lordships must remem 66 My impression has always been that when a man-of-war is in sight of several ships or boats and also in sight of land, and if he does not hoist his flag, he ought at least to have the streamers of his nation ?-True, but nevertheless not obligatory. "But would the ball have reached the shore if fired from the place where I was anchored?—No; but you lay on Portuguese ground with eleven or twelve fathoms of water. ber that there were two complaints made | you dropped your anchor ?—I am not compelled by the Portuguese Government, - first, to do that; the rule is, when you are within range that the municipal laws had been violated you fire your gun and board the ship. by the ship anchoring in a place where vessels were forbidden to enter; and next, that she was engaged in the slave trade. It must also be borne in mind that the Portuguese Government subsequently dropped the first ground of complaint, and confined themselves to the latter. Now, my Lords, if I may refer to subsequent proof, it seems to me to be extremely doubtful even at this moment whether the French captain violated the municipal law of Portugal, that is to say, whether his vessel was ever anchored within three miles of the shore, as alleged. In support of that view I would refer to the evidence of the captain himself, which has never been refuted by the Governor of Mozambique, or by any one else, and which has been published by the Portuguese : "Those," alluding to the negro labourers, "which I took at Matabane and Conducia were procured for me by the Sheik named Ali Kery, who holds an authorization of his Excellency the Governor General of Mozambique, dated September 25, 1856, and who has taken a commission of 6 piastres or 30f. per head." Now, it is true that the authorization in question is said to have been a forgery; but there was at the time nothing to prove to us that such was the case, and Her Ma jesty's Government could only form a judgment in the matter from the ex parte reports. The statements made by the Portuguese were met by counter statements by the French, so that your Lordships will perceive Her Majesty's Government had no data upon which they could rely in order to enable them to arrive at a correct decision as to which of the contending parties was in the right and which was in the wrong. [Earl GREY: Hear, hear!] The noble Earl cheers, because, no doubt, it is in accordance with his opinion that a rapid, and therefore, in all probability, a rash decision should be arrived at on a question of this nature. But what, my Lords, does the French captain say in answer to the questions put to him by the commander of the Portuguese cruiser? He was asked: "Was the Charles et Georges above a gunshot from the shore ?-Most assuredly, if you take in the Island of Quintangonia, which is not part of the continent. Captain, was your gun shotted? - Yes, captain. ball would not have reached the coast if fired from "The fact is, you are pretty certain that the the place where I lay, and it did not reach it from the place where you lay ?—No answer. "How far does the Portuguese territory extend to the S.E, or the S. S. from the Isle of Quintangonia? No answer." Now, I do not mean to give any opinion as to whether the French captain was right or wrong. All I say is that Her Majesty's Government had during the progress of those transactions-nay, have not up to this eleventh hour-any data upon which a sound opinion in reference to this question could be formed. The noble Lord who has just spoken has a great horror of the system of immigration with which these events are mixed up. I am as much opposed to it as he can possibly be; but the question is not a matter of mere feeling, it is whether we as responsible Ministers of the Crown were to be led away by considerations of that description, and not to form an unbiassed judgment upon the rights themselves which were involved in a case of this immense importance. You do not suppose, my Lords, that I was ignorant of the treaties which exist between this country and Portugal; nor can you, I am sure, fail to be of opinion that before we resolved to commit ourselves to a course involving serious consequences it was our duty to make ourselves perfectly certain that Portugal was in the right and France in the wrong in the dispute in which they were engaged. And, my Lords, I repeat that even up to the present moment we have been furnished with no data upon which such a decision could fairly be pronounced. Now, my Lords, what, let me ask, was the course which, under these circumstances, Her Majesty's Government adopted? I am accused by the noble Lord opposite with respect to two points. He charges me with having lost time in proceeding with this matter, and with not having written enough. Well, the first intimation which I received that this mat "Did the ball touch the shore ?-Almost. "But did you send the ball from the spot when ter had assumed a serious aspect was upon the 18th of September, when Mr. Howard had taken place in the language of the wrote to me to the following effect :French Government. He says: "The affair of the French vessel Charles et Georges, condemned at Mozambique as a slaver, treated of in my despatches of the 6th and 7th inst., has assumed a very serious aspect." It seems now that at a Council of Ministers held yesterday morning, and presided over by the Emperor, the fact that the vessel had been condemned as a slaver was first broached, and it was decided that the condemnation as a slaver of a That despatch was received on the 24th, and I might, perhaps, have telegraphed on that day to Lord Cowley. But be that as it may, I lost scarcely any time in the matter, inasmuch as I telegraphed to that noble Lord on the 25th. Now, Lord Cowley, as your Lordships are aware, is one of those Ministers who do not require that You will perceive from this despatch, my a long rigmarole-if I may so term it-of Lords, that the affair had assumed the phrases and instructions, which are gene- aspect in the eyes of the French Minisrally, I believe, written rather for Parlia-ter of one in which a point of national ment than for the Minister himself honour was involved. The noble Lord should be addressed to him. It was therefore quite sufficient, I am sure you will think in this instance, to inform him that our good offices were offered for the settlement of the misunderstanding between France and Portugal, and that to enter upon any lengthened explanation as to what the words "good offices" meant would be as useless as absurd. Well, my Lords, I telegraphed, as I mentioned, to Lord Cowley on the 25th, and within five days from that time he informs us-as you will observe by referring to page 17 of the papers-that the case, he believes, may be settled. He writes: French ship having a Government delegate on board, authorized to hire African labourers, was tantamount to connecting the Imperial Government with the traffic in slaves, and was derogatory to the honour of France. It was resolved, therefore, that the release of the Charles et Georges and of her captain should be peremptorily demanded and insisted upon." •Count Walewski's language was very conciliatory. I feel certain he regrets that the case has arisen, and will gladly see it settled." But the noble Lord seems to think that, having received that announcement on the 30th of September, Her Majesty's Government ought to have written some eloquent despatch, reminding the French Government of treaties in existence, and expressing in strong language the views which we entertained. Now, I do not pretend to know human nature so well as the noble Lord, who is a diplomatist, and has represented this country in that capacity at one of the great Courts of Europe; but I doubt whether, in using the petulant language which the noble Lord appears to regret we did not use, we should have been acting wisely, particularly when we were told that the language employed by the French Minister was of a most conciliatory character. But to proceed, my Lords, Her Majesty's Government had every reason to believe on the 30th of September that this question would be satisfactorily settled. Upon the 3rd of October, however, Lord Cowley complained that a change opposite, however, seems to sneer at the axiom laid down by the Government of France for it is laid down-that if a vessel has a French agent on board her, who is responsible for his acts to the Government which he represents, she is no longer to be looked upon in the light of a mere private ship, liable to be confiscated for an infringement of municipal law. That is an axiom which, in my opinion, however erroneous I may be, is borne out by international law, and the noble Lord will find that it is supported by much higher authority than mine. But there is involved in this view of the subject another point, which is of considerable importance; it is that in the case of a vessel seized for an infraction of municipal or international law, if she be a Government ship, the custom has been established by the comity of nations that the question at issue must be solved by diplomacy, and not by a peremptory Act such as that which was resorted to by the Portuguese Government. Such I believe to be the opinion of the best lawyers of our day, and if that practice were not followed, as it has been in almost every instance, constant disputes would be the result. Such questions are to be settled by argument and reason-not by force, but by international law. The Portuguese themselves have not always been so prudent on these points as they may, perhaps, expect others to be, and one of the greatest outrages committed of late years upon a British ship, has at this moment been committed by them not far from this very sea. The fact is, that this system of negro immigration is not to be put down by force; and I feel sure, that had Her Majesty's Government acted in the spirit which characterized the noble Lord's speech, the result would have been very different, and |