vereignty of Banca to the Dutch govern- | ment, and received in return the sovereignty of Cochin. If we had not possessed the full sovereignty of Banca, we could not have fulfilled this agreement. The Dutch would have retained Cochin, and then Banca would have remained in the situation in which it stood before Java was taken. At that time the Dutch had an establishment at Banca, which they would have replaced; so that, consistently with the letter of the treaty, both places would have been in their power. It was true, that on the surrender of Banca by the sultan of Palembang, we had acknowledged him an independent sovereign; but it was never understood that this country was therefore to protect him against the aggressions of every other power. He did not mean to justify the conduct of the Dutch government, but only to contend that there was nothing in the treaty which imposed upon this country the duty of protecting the sovereign of Palembang. He admitted, however, that the question was one which might fairly be a subject of amicable discussion between the governments of this country and the Netherlands. He trusted that this country would always strictly maintain her engagements; but it certainly would not be prudent to search out opportunities for an unnecessary and officious interference in the concerns of other governments. With regard to the protest, he could not agree to its production. Sir Thomas Raffles had been governor of Java. Charges were brought against him for his conduct in that situation; but, on an investigation, he was fully and honourably acquitted, and was afterwards appointed to his present situation. A few days before his departure he represented, that if he went out only as head of the residency in the neighbourhood of another of which he had been governor, he would be placed in a disagreeable situation, as it might appear to many that the charges against him had been thought well founded. Upon this representation it was agreed that he should have the nominal appointment of lieutenant governor, but he was expressly instructed to consider himself in fact, as merely the commercial resident, and as having no political authority whatever. This being the case, he was surprised how any political character could be ascribed to the protest, and he would leave it to their lordships consideration, whether under such circumstances (VOL. XXXIX.) it would not be very improper to lay that document on the table. If the noble marquis would agree to confine his motion to the first instructions he should not oppose it. Lord Holland thought that the noble earl had completely failed in his answer to the statements of his noble relation. The noble earl had endeavoured to show, that in consequence of a deficiency in point of form, part of the information called for was not fit to be presented to their lordships; but he had said nothing to remove the impression produced by the speech of his noble relation, namely, that a transac tion had taken place with respect to the surrender of Java, which deserved the se rious inquiry of parliament. In moving for the instructions sent to the governor of Java, his noble friend had inferred nothing with respect to these instructions as to the subject of the treaty with the sultan of Palembang. His noble friend merely wished to ascertain whether the terms of the treaty were to be considered as absolute, or whether there had not been some understanding between the two governments on the subject of the surrender of Java, which might have served to modify those terms. Without some such understanding, there was a breach of faith with the native princes with whom treaties had been concluded. We who pretended to go about the world to teach moral lessons to mankind, were particularly called upon to give examples of good faith in the maintenance of treaties. The sultan of Palembang surrendered Banca for what he considered an equivalent, and of that compensation he was now to be deprived. The noble earl had said, that we made no promise to retain possession, of Java but did he mean to contend, that it was just to deliver over to another power a sovereign with whom we had recently made a treaty, without asking any security for the fulfilment of the engagements into which we had entered? This would be an assertion in direct contradiction with the law of nations, and, what was far more important, with the feelings and common sense of all mankind. It would have looked much better had the noble earl said, that those who made the treaty with the government of the Netherlands were ignorant of the agreement entered into with the sultan of Palembang. In that case there would be an acknowledgment of great carelessness; but the colour which the noble lord had endeavoured to (M) himself as best suited his own interest, and to take those measures most calcu put on the transaction gave it a far deeper die. He had objected to the protest, that it was unofficial: but if his noble friendlated for his protection. We did not obtained that document, his next step stipulate to guarantee him against all agwould be to move for the treaty concluded gression, and, whatever we might be diswith the sultan of Palembang. But it posed to do for him, were not to protect was said, why move for all the instruc-him in the enjoyment of the acquisition tions? The answer was, that though no- he had made. By receiving Banca in full thing appeared on the face of the treaty, sovereignty from him, and transferring to these instructions might show what really him the full sovereignty of Palembang in were the views of the two governments return, we had done all that we were with respect to this affair. The noble earl bound by treaty to perform: the convenfounded an argument on the circumstance tion was executed; the transaction was of the Dutch having had a settlement on complete; and nothing that happened the island of Banca; but the real state with a reference to the sultan, from those of the fact was, that we had obtained the that succeeded us in the government of full sovereignty of that island, on a bargain Java, imposed upon us the necessity of with the sultan of Palembang, and had af- interfering in his behalf. The British goterwards ceded that sovereignty to the vernment, however, had entered into nes Dutch, leaving the sovereign from whom gotiations with that of the Netherlands on we received it without any security for the subject, and what rendered those the stipulation into which we had entered transactions complicated, and appeared to with him. He must consider the honour of countenance the Dutch colonial administhe country very much sacrificed, if the tration in the steps it had taken was, that government did not insist on the fulfilment the Dutch, before 1803, had a factory at of that stipulation by the Dutch. It Palembang, and by the treaty of Paris in might, perhaps, be thought by persons of 1814, the possessions within their domiauthority in some other countries, that a nion at the former epoch, and subsegreat advantage was to be obtained by quently conquered by us, were to be relowering the character and credit of Great stored. The question now under discusBritain. It might suit their policy to say sion between the two governments was, to nations in remote parts of the globe, had the right of the Dutch to this settle"You see what you gain by entering into ment been restored at the peace? He agreements with the English. Whatever suggested, that the noble marquis, in stipulations they may make with you, order to have complete information, should they are certain to sacrifice you to their amend his motion, by adding to it," the general system of policy, whenever they treaty concluded between the lieutenantmake peace with their neighbours in Eu. governor of Java and the present sultan of rope." This was a consideration which, Palembang, by which the sovereignty of he thought, ought to induce their lord- Banca was ceded to us in exchange for ships to insist on the production of the that of Palembang." information asked by his noble friend, in order that the whole matter might undergo a full investigation. Lord Holland contended, that if we had received the sovereignty of Banca for that of Palembang, and if we still retained what was given as the equivalent, we were bound to support the sultan in the rights which he had acquired by the transfer. Earl Bathurst in explanation, said, that the question of our right to interfere in favour of the sultan of Palembang might, be determined by the nature of the trans- The Earl of Liverpool said, that the action between him and the government treaty and the instructions in question of Java, by which he acquired the sove- might be granted, but the protest could reignty of which the Dutch threatened to not, and for this plain reason that it was dispossess him. If the treaty was a finished not an official document, it being made by transaction, if the exchange of the sove- a person who had no right to make it. In reignty of Palembang against that of the discussion that might arise after the Banca was completely executed; then we other papers were laid on the table, in conhad done all that on our part we were sequence of the present motion, the subbound to do. After he acquired from us ject might be considered in all its bearthe sovereignty of Palembang by cedingings, with as much information and latiBanca, our part of the engagement was tude as if the protest was actually profulfilled. He was then left to conductduced. He would not refer to the other parts of the question, till the papers moved for were laid on the table. He must, however, animadvert on an omission in the noble lord's observations, in reply to his noble friend. The noble lord had argued as if the government of this country had done nothing; whereas, his noble friend had mentioned, that discussions on the subject were even now going forward between the two governments. The noble lord opposite had proceeded on the idea that we could have withheld the cession of Java and its dependencies till the king of the Netherlands agreed to receive these dominions, subject to the engagements into which, during our temporary possession, we had entered with the native princes. This point could not be maintained, when it was recollected, that the treaty of Paris was entirely unconditional. To have refused the restoration of these colonies, therefore, till the Dutch government entered into our compacts, or submitted to any proposed conditions, would have been on our part a breach of faith. He did not mean to enter now into the general question, but he could not help entering his protest against a doctrine advanced by the noble lords opposite, or implied in their observations, which went to militate against one of the clearest and most generally recognized laws of nations. The doctrine he alluded to was, that conquest gives sovereignty, and that by conquering the islands or colonies of our enemy, we were entitled to consider them as our own in perpetuity. Now he would, on the contrary, maintain, that the conquest of colonies gave us no right to consider them as appropriated; and that the sovereignty resided in the state from which they were conquered, till their final cession by treaty, after peace. All arrangements of such possessions, and all engagements entered into, as administrator of them, by the conquerors, could only be regarded as temporary and conditional, and might cease to be binding after their restoration, unless specially provided for by particular treaties. Nothing had happened in these eastern colonies, nor was any thing authorized by the government, to allow a conclusion to be drawn regarding them, different from what was forced upon us in other cases. They were conquered by us in the same manner as we had conquered other colonies, they were held by us as a conquest: it was contemplated that they might be restored at the peace, and, therefore, any engagements that we entered into as their temporary possessors, could only be considered as temporary, unless specially guaranteed by treaties independent of our temporary rights. The Marquis of Lansdowne said, he would withdraw so much of his motion as referred to the protest, not because he allowed the justice of the objection stated to its production, but because he did not see that it would be necessary to the discussion if the other papers were granted, and because the whole subject might thus be brought under the review of the house by other means of information. With regard to the terms of his motion regarding the instructions, they might be modified so as to include what the noble lords opposite were willing to produce. He did not move for the treaty of Paris as regarding this question, because it was already before the House. The noble earl opposite had stated, that the Dutch had a factory at Banca before 1803; but that establishment was not equivalent to the sovereignty of the island, or why was the cession of it made a particular article of the treaty, and not included in the general engagement to restore the Dutch colonies? The island was, therefore, not considered as belonging to the Dutch before 1814; it was not given them by us for nothingwe received in exchange for it a valuable consideration in perpetuity. If, then, the sovereignty of this island was transferred to us in perpetuity, and if for it we had received the permanent settlement of Cochin, how could it be contended that our engagement with the sultan was merely of a temporary nature? The noble earl who spoke last had said, that the treaty of Paris was absolute and unconditional; and was not that with the sultan of Palembang, by which we received a valuable colony, absolute too? The sultan had relied on the permanency of his acquisition as much as we did on ours; and were the advantage and security to be all on one side? The rule of the unconditional surrender of conquests could not apply to Banca, because Banca had not been conquered from the Dutch. The noble marquis concluded by reading his motion, which included copies of the two warrants, by which Java and its dependencies, and the island of Banca, were surrendered to the Dutch in 1814, and a copy of the treaty concluded between the government of Java, when under the British dominion, and the sultan of Palembang, regarding tlfe cession of Banca. The motion was agreed to. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Monday, February 1. LONDON NEW PRISON.] The sheriffs of London presented a petition from the city of London, praying for leave to appropriate a certain portion of the unclaimed dividends of the Orphan Fund, towards the liquidation of the expenses attending the building of the New Prison. Mr. Holme Sumner said, that this was a petition precisely similar to one which was presented last year. He had then said, before the city of London could claim the funds of others for their own purposes, they ought first to show that their own funds were insufficient. He had then moved for certain accounts in order to ascertain this. No answer was returned to the order for these accounts for more than three months, and at last, instead of complying with the order, the city of London presented a petition to the House to reconsider the matter: in short, rather than show the accounts, the city of London withdrew their bill. He now gave notice, that whenever they moved for leave to bring in a bill for the object in question, he should move for the production of the accounts of the city. Mr. Waithman said, he had not sat in the House last session, nor had he taken a part in the debates on the subject elsewhere. He would however say, that the corporation of London were ready to show all the accounts which, in common fairness, they were bound to show to the House; and they would make it appear, that their application in this case was founded on reason and justice. They not only supported their own prisoners, but also those of the county of Middlesex. Now, the prisoners of the county of Middlesex were, to those of the city of London, in the proportion of five to one. When it became necessary for the city of London to erect a new prison at a great expense, chiefly on account of the prisoners of the county of Middlesex, surely it was but fair and reasonable that they should derive assistance from the Orphan Fund. Mr. Serjeant Onslow admitted, that the worthy alderman was not in parliament when this subject had last come before the House. On that occasion, when the House ordered the corporation to produce their accounts, they did not do so; but they abandoned the attempt for that time. As to what had been said, relative to a gaol for the accommodation of Middlesex prisoners, if the corporation have a prison, the more regular way was, to expended money in the erection of such raise that money by a local tax. He did not comprehend why coals, one of the taxed in the counties of Surrey, Oxford, most necessary articles of life, should be Essex, and Kent, merely because the corporation of London had built a prison, in which prisoners for the county of Middlesex were confined. As a representative of the county of Surrey, to which place the tax would extend, he would protest against the prayer of the present petition on principle, and would submit to the House, that it would be impossible to entertain it for a moment until those accounts which had been formerly ordered, and which had been never furnished, should be laid before them. Ordered to lie on the table. GRESS PAPERS RELATING ΤΟ THE CON- PAPERS RELATING TO THE CONGRESS No. 1.-CONVENTION between his Britannic In the Name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity. Their majesties the emperor of Austria, the king of Prussia, and the emperor of all the and their majesties the king of the united Russias, having repaired to Aix-la-Chapelle; kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and the king of France and Navarre, having sent thither their plenipotentiaries; the ministers of the five courts have assembled in conof France having intimated, that in conseference together; and the plenipotentiary faithful execution of the treaty of November quence of the state of France, and the 20, 1815, his most Christian majesty was desirous that the military occupation stipu lated by the fifth article of the said treaty, should cease as soon as possible, the ministers of the courts of Austria, Great Britain, Prussia, and Russia, after having in concert with the said plenipotentiary of France, maturely exafluence on such an important decision, have mined every thing that could have an indeclared, that their sovereigns would admit the principle of the evacuation of the French territory at the end of the third year of the ART. III.—The sum destined to provide for the pay, the equipment, and the clothing of the troops of the army of occupation, shall be paid, in all cases, up to the 30th of November next, on the same footing on which it has existed since the 1st of December, 1817. ART. IV. All the accounts between France and the allied powers having been France to complete the execution of the fourth article of the treaty of November 20th, 1815, is definitively fixed at 265 millions of francs. ART. V. Of this sum the amount of 100 millions, effective value, shall be paid by inscriptions of rentes on the great book of the public debt of France, bearing interest from the 22nd of September, 1818. The said inscriptions shall be received at the rate of the funds on Monday the 5th of October, 1818. occupation; and wishing to confirm this | tion, conformably to the ninth article of the resolution by a formal convention, and to convention concluded in execution of the secure, at the same time, the definitive execu- fifth article of the treaty of November 20th, tion of the said treaty of November 20, 1815. 1815, his majesty the king of the united kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, on the one part, and his majesty the king of France and Navarre on the other part, have, for this purpose, named as their plenipotentiaries, viz. His majesty the king of the united kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the right hon. Robert Stewart, viscount Castlereagh, knight of the most noble and illus-regulated and settled, the sum to be paid by trious order of the Garter, a member of the imperial parliament of Great Britain and Ireland, colonel of the Londonderry regiment of militia, a member of his Britannic majesty's most honourable privy council, and his principal secretary of state for foreign affairs, &c. &c. and the most excellent and most illustrious lord Arthur, duke, marquis, and earl of Wellington, marquis Douro, viscount Wellington of Talavera and of Wellington, and baron Douro of Wellesley: a member of his Britannic majesty's most honourable privy council, a field marshal of his forces, colonel of the royal regiment of Horse-guards, knight of the most noble and most illustrious order of the Garter, and knight grand cross of the most honourable military order of the Bath; prince of Waterloo, duke of Ciudad Rodrigo, and a grandee of Spain of the first class, duke of Vittoria, marquis of Torres Vedras, conde of Vimeira in Portugal, knight of the most illustrious order of the Golden Fleece, of the military order of Saint Ferdinand of Spain, knight grand cross of the imperial military order of Maria Theresa, knight grand cross of the military order of Saint George of Russia, of the first class, knight grand cross of the royal and military order of the Tower and Sword of Portugal, knight grand cross of the royal and military order of the Sword of Sweden, &c. &c. &c.-And his majesty the king of France and Navarre, the sieur Armand Emanuel du Plessis Richelieu, duke of Richelieu, peer of France, knight of the royal and military order of Saint Louis, of the royal order of the Legion of Honour, and of the orders of Saint Andrew, Saint Alexander Newsky, Saint Anne, Saint Wladimir, and Saint George of Russia; his first gentleman of the chamber, his minister and secretary of state for foreign affairs, and president of the council of his ministers; who, after having mutually communicated to each other their respective full powers, found to be in good and due form, have agreed upon the following articles: ART. I.-The troops composing the army of occupation shall be withdrawn from the territory of France by the 30th of November next, or sooner, if possible. ART. II.-The strong places and fortresses which the said troops occupy, shall be given up to commissioners named for that purpose by his most Christian majesty, in the state in which they were at the time of their occupa ART. VI. The remaining 165 millions shall be paid by nine monthly instalments, commencing on the 6th of January next, by bills on the houses of Hope and Co. and Baring, Brothers and Co., which, as well as the inscription of rentes, mentioned in the above article, shall be delivered to commissioners of the courts of Austria, Great Britain, Prussia, and Russia, by the royal treasury of France, at the time of the complete and definitive evacuation of the French territory. ART. VII.-At the same period the commissioners of the said courts shall deliver to the royal treasury of France the six bonds not yet discharged, which shall remain in their hands, of the fifteen bonds delivered conformably to the second article of the convention concluded for the execution of the fourth article of the treaty of November 20th, 1815. The said commissioners shall, at the same time, deliver the inscription of seven millions of rentes, created in virtue of the eighth article of the said convention. ART. VIII. The present convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications thereof exchanged at Aix-la-Chapelle in the space of a fortnight, or sooner if possible.-In witness whereof the respective plenipotentiaries have signed the same, and have thereunto affixed the seal of their arms. Done at Aix-laChapelle, the 9th day of October, in the year of our Lord 1818. (L. S.) CASTLEREAGH. (L. S.) RICHELIEU. (L. S.) WELLINGTON. No. II.-PROTOCOL between the five Cabinets, signed at Aix-la-Chapelle, the 3d of November, 1818. The Duke de Richelieu represented at the conference, that the terms for the payment of the 265 millions to be furnished by France, according to the Convention of the 9th of October, having been fixed at very near pe |