loan to Prince Otho had been guaranteed for a considerable time, and yet the House had not been called upon to ratify the treaty; and the reason assigned by the noble lord for this delay was, that Government wished first to lay upon the table of the House every protocol connected with the negotiations.  If Ministers pursued this conduct with respect to the Greek loan, why did they call upon the House to sanction the proposed arrangement with respect to Russia, without information?  It might be said that the money was now due, but it had been due in July, and was not then paid.  No further payment would be due until January, by which time, in all probability, pending negotiations would be brought to a close.  Why, then, force the House now to express an opinion?  He could not conceive what answer could be made to this question, in a parliamentary point of view.  Was there ever an instance in which Parliament had been called upon to vote public money, arising out of negotiations, whilst they were yet pending?  During the time these negotiations had been carried on, he and his friends had abstained from expressing any opinion concerning them, and had brought forward no motion calculated to embarrass the Government.  And yet, before the negotiations were concluded, the Government called upon the House to vote the money.  He made no objection to the amount.  He did not deny that his impression was that there might be good and sufficient reason for the payment of this money, although it was not to be found on the face of the treaty; but he contended that it was contrary to all parliamentary custom to call upon the House to pronounce an opinion on the subject before it was put into possession of any information.  The object of the arrangement professedly was, to induce Russia to unite her policy with ours, to preserve the balance of power and the peace of Europe.  He asked whether the measures which Ministers were pursuing were likely to preserve the peace of Europe?  In the second article of the treaty, now upon the table, Russia engaged, if the arrangements at present agreed upon should be endangered, not to enter into other arrangements without the concurrence of England.  The arrangements were in danger at the present moment.  Negotiations, it might be said, were yet pending; but, if that were a complete answer against the giving of information, it was also complete against calling upon the House to vote the money.  Had the ratifications of the treaties of 1831 been accompanied by any reserve?  If so, ought this important point to be concealed?  In the whole of Europe the English House of Commons was the only place where no information was to be obtained on these points.  Communications had been made to the Chambers of Holland and Belgium; every foreign newspaper had contained authentic copies of documents which were most important in explaining the policy pursued at different periods of the negotiations; the House of Commons, however, possessed not a tittle