dividual, whom the French government, and also sir James Campbell, had refused to employ on account of his misconduct, sir T. Maitland took into the public service, at the same time that he dismissed from it Fiamboriale and four other senators, whom he stigmatized in one of his proclamations as inert and corrupt. Fiamboriale was a man of unblemished character, and was afterwards reinstated in his office in consequence of a letter from lord Bathurst to the lord commissioner; but was now in a dungeon at Zante, because he had signed a petition to his Britannic majesty, complaining of the arbitrary conduct of sir T. Maitland. Not long afterwards, sir T. Maitland left Corfu for England, to prepare and concert with government the constitution for the islands. On his return he was received with addresses and adulatory effusions of all kinds, though he had expressly stated in his correspondence his utter detestation of every thing like external pomp and parade. These addresses were got up by persons always ready to worship the rising sun, and the flattery was in truth of the most nauseating kind. In a short time various public testimonies of applause were voted: a triumphal arch of the Ionic order was erected in Corfu, to perpetuate services of scarcely two months' continu

Great Britain has manifested, and the costly sacrifices she has made in vindicating in this instance the rights and happiness of our fellow creatures; yet we cannot reflect without remorse, that we ourselves were so long among the very foremost in carrying on this guilty commerce. Since we are now aware of its real character, it becomes us to be earnest and incessant in our

ance; a colossal statue of sir T. Maitland was raised in Cephalonia; a bust of him, by Canova, was placed in a public situation in Zante; in Ithaca a monument was inscribed to him, and in Santa Maura he was honoured with a second triumphal arch. The consequence was, that those, who had been active in procuring these testimonials, were selected for reward and office; and it was a fact not to be denied, that sir T. Maitland had made use of public employments and honours to obtain individual subserviency to his purpose. The insolence of the remonstrating senators was not to be endured; a spirit favourable to representative government was growing and must be suppressed; and accordingly on the 18th April, 1817, sir T. Maitland assembled all the authorities, and with great solemnity declared, that a conspiracy was on foot, and that the first blow of a revolution was about to be struck. British officers were employed to arrest the most respectable individuals in Corfu as disaffected traitors; yet it turned out that there were but two persons guilty, and they were the individuals who had fabricated this supposed plot of treason and revolution. One of them was named Lapinocchi, a young man of desperate fortune, who, aided by another equally abandoned, had contrived the

endeavours to impress the truth on others who may have been misled by our example; and as we contributed so largely to prolong the misery and barbarism of the Africans, we should now be proportionally earnest in using the means with which Providence has endowed us for promoting their civilization and happiness.”

whole story. When the matter was sifted, it was discovered that not a tittle of credible evidence could be produced against the individuals arrested, and whose papers had been seized and carried to the palace of the lord high commissioner. A commission, consisting of the principal public officers, was named to inquire into the foundation of the plot; and that commission reported, that the whole was the mere invention of Lapinocchi and his accomplice. The court condemned Lapinocchi to death; but the lord high commissioner commuted the sentence into nine years' imprisonment, one of which was to be solitary. Not long afterwards, however, this wretch was found at large, in one of the islands, acting as secretary to a British captain. He was then placed in the Lazaretto at Cephalonia; and whether he was now dead or living, did not appear. The whole transaction, Mr. Hume contended, was matter of serious charge against sir T. Maitland, who clearly had not acted with due caution.

Mr. Hume next entered into a criticism on the constitutional charter of the Ionian islands, of which we shall say nothing, because it is perfectly clear that the demerits of the charter ought not to be ascribed to the lord high commissioner. Having finished his political disquisitions, he went on to accuse sir Thomas Maitland of having imposed arbitrary taxes-a tyrannical procedure, which, aggravated by the circumstance that all the public situations in the island were filled by Sicilians, had produced the insurrection in Santa Maura. The hon. member next descended to instances of private oppression.

A native of the name of Valerio Stai was, he said, suspended from a responsible situation without inquiry, and refused every opportunity of justifying his conduct, although by the constitution he was entitled to have his case carried before the tribunal. Signor Alessandro Pataglio, who was the inheritor of Church-abbey lands, which had for a long course of years been in his family, was another victim of arbitrary power. The estate had been confiscated from an abbot 150 years before. Pataglio complained loudly of the revision of his title to this property, and demanded that the matter might be legally investigated before the regular judicial tribunals. At length sir Thomas Maitland [agreed, that the case should be referred to two natives and two Englishmen, appointed by both parties. The arbitrators did not concur in opinion; two were for referring the case to the lower tribunal, and two for the adoption of a different course. The equality of voices led to the introduction of sir Thomas Maitland as umpire; and he, in an elaborate letter, dated the 12th April, 1820, filling several pages, and containing the most extraordinary view of the whole case, decided against the complainant, upon the authority of an act passed by the Senate of Venice, in the year 1412, which declared that church property was inalienable. In vain did the complainant urge the length of time, during which this property had been in the possession of his family; in vain did he point out, that, when they got it, the land was uncultivated, and that it had been made productive by the application of their own capital and industry.

In May 1820, continued Mr. Hume, an act was passed by the influence of sir Thomas Maitland, for the appointment of an administrator-general to superintend ecclesiastical domains. This su-, pervision was of course to extend to all the property of the church; and the person appointed to exercise the office was colonel Robertson, a captain of marines. The appointment was signed on the 30th of May, 1820; and, its announcement was considered as proclaiming no less than universal confiscation. This measure took away from the inhabitants all the rights, which were previously vested in them. The high commissioner's authority was to be every thing; and from it there was to be no appeal. On the 26th of June an order came, which might be put in comparison with the most arbitrary decree that had ever been issued in any country. The administrator of convents enacted, that all convents not having four inmates, ought to be abolished. This violent and arbitrary proceeding created a considerable sensation, and much opposition on the part of the people; when, in the most wanton and unjustifiable manner, one of the richest and most respectable inhabitants of Zante, whose name was Martinengo, was seized by armed men in the middle of the night in his bed, hurried to a ship and transported to Corfu, where he was kept in confinement. The final sentence was as harsh and unjustifiable, as the previous proceeding was cruel and unprecedented. He was doomed to 12 years' imprisonment in the island of Santa Maura, which, considering his advanced age of 66, and the unhealthy nature of the place

of his confinement, might be regarded as imprisonment for life. His majesty's ministers had lately changed his punishment to three years' exile into any of the islands he might select.

Mr. Hume went on to state the hardships of those, who, having signed petitions for instituting inquiries into the late disturbances, had in consequence been arrested and thrown into prison. Thirtytwo persons were in this predicament. Another body of 50 had presented a petition to colonel Ross, and were in a similar manner arrested and punished. One of them, who was a member of the legislature, had been degraded and was to be tried for high treason; while signor Rossi, who was a magistrate, and who had signed the first petition, had likewise been degraded and ordered for trial. The hon. member then restated the list of grievances of which the people of the Ionian islands complained. The monopoly of corn, which had been at first abolished as unwise and impolitic, was re-established on the 27th of April, 1819. The effect of the measure was to raise the price of grain from six to ten piasters, and to threaten the islands with a scarcity. In the second place, a great partiality was shown in the treatment of different individuals. For instance, while some persons were detained on board during the regular time of quarantine, others were allowed to land immediately. A third grievance was the exaction on salt, which was severely felt by all classes. A fourth was the employment of foreigners in the police; thus furnishing in every village the sign and evidence of degradation. The police establishment in these is

lands was a system of revolting espionnage. No one durst speak his mind, because every expression, however idle, might be reported and punished. The last grievance he should mention was excessive taxation to support useless officers. Within these few years 16,292. had been levied for additional salaries. Colonel Robertson received a half per cent. on the whole revenue of the islands, amounting to 432,408, which was equivalent to 21,671 dollars. Sir T. Maitland himself held appointments to the amount of 10,000l. a year, and resided in the Ionian islands, while his presence was required at Malta, of which he likewise held the governorship. The members of the senate, who were the creatures of sir T. Maitland, were paid, in all, 36,000 dollars. Mr. Hume coneluded with moving an address for the appointment of a commission to proceed to the Ionian islands and inquire into their condition.

Mr. Goulburn justified the conduct of sir Thomas Maitland. The proceedings against Fiamboriale were not at the instance of the lord high-commissioner. The period. at which the transaction occurred, was the time of the meeting of the legislative assembly. Upon Fiamboriale's landing at Corfu, that assembly, who were in possession of a paper which was afterwards made the ground of their proceeding against him, demanded, whether it was of his hand-writing or not. He replied in the affirmative; and the assembly thereupon took upon themselves to decree, that in consequence of his having in that paper libelled them, as a venal, corrupt, and oppressive body, he should

be expelled from their number. The consequence of this measure was, that Fiamboriale lost his situation under the government, and he was afterwards prosecuted for perjury. With respect to Santa Maura, a public work was to be undertaken in that island, part of the expense of which was to be defrayed from the public treasury, and the remainder from the local treasury; and for this purpose certain duties were levied, after the best evidence had been obtained as to the most proper mode of carrying the object contemplated into effect. These duties had no concern with the subsequent disturbances. The insurrection broke out in consequence of the militia fearing that they would be draughted to the West Indies, of the unwholesomeness of which they had heard a great deal. The utmost forbearance was shown to these people. On the 29th of September a large body of them appeared in arms. In such a case, the first feeling usually was to resist force by force. But what was the conduct of the commanding-officer? He desired the people to state their real or imaginary grievances. On the following day, the 30th of September, the resident induced certain persons to go among them for the purpose of tranquillizing their minds. These individuals were ill-treated, and driven back to the town; and a person, who assumed something of an official capacity, was assassinated by the peasants. It was not until the day following, that the commanding-officer sent a body of troops from Corfu. They arrived just as the insurgents had burst into the town and were about to set it on fire. The commanding

officer saw that it was necessary to put an end to the insurrection. He immediately took measures for that purpose, and when it was effected, those only were brought to justice who appeared to have been particularly active in the disturbance. The executions were confined to four individuals, and no property was confiscated, except that which belonged to persons who had fled from the island. The instances of violation of the rights of property which Mr. Hume had adduced, were, in fact, cases in which property was taken from those who had obtained wrongful possession, and was restored to the true owners. The affair of Alessandro Pataglio was decided before a legal tribunal. It involved the title to a certain estate; it came before a regular court; and the question was, whether a particular Venetian law gave to the possessor of the estate the right which he claimed; or whether, under another Venetian law, the property did not belong to the church? On this the judges were divided in opinion-two declared themselves on one side, and two on the other: it then became the duty of sir Thomas Maitland to decide: and he had given his decision according to the best of his judgment. The decree for the reclamation of church property had been issued during the absence of sir T. Maitland, who on his return caused it to be recalled. With respect to the disturbances at Zante, and the prosecutions which followed, the hon. member had contended that those prosecutions ought not to have been instituted, because the disturbances emanated from the act of government. But even if that

had been the case, he must deny that the disturbances were justified. The fact however was, that the disturbances originated, not in any alarm for the interests of the church, but in the alarm of those who feared, that the property, which they had iniquitously obtained, would be taken from them. Martinengo was undoubtedly arrested, but with other persons. The hon. member objected to the tribunal by which Martinengo was tried, as unauthorized by the law of the Ionian states; and to the prosecution itself, as exhibiting a disregard of justice. Both those positions he denied. He maintained, that the tribunal was competent, and referred to the articles of the constitution in proof of his assertion. The lord highcommissioner had referred the subject to the highest legal authorities in the Ionian states, and their opinion was, that the ordinary civil tribunals could not take cognizance of the particular crime; and that there was no alternative but that the lord high commissioner, or some one delegated by him, should act as judge on the occasion. It had been argued, that the tribunal, before which this individual was tried, was not competent to the inquiry; but even Martinengo himself had made no objection to the competency of the tribunal. He had appealed on different grounds, namely, that he had petitioned the king and government of Great Britain, and therefore he claimed, as a matter of right, that he should not be put upon his trial, until an answer to that petition had been received. The hon. gentleman might contend, that this was a legal ground of postponement; but how could it be so considered,