nd apprehenfion of peace, in the governing party in the French republic. His majefty's declaration, on this fubject, was laid before the houfe of lords, by lord Grenville, on the 27th of December. The fubstance of this declaration was, "that the rupture of the negociation did not arife from the failure of any fincere attempt on the part of France; but from the determination of that government (meaning the French government) to reject all means of peace, by an obftinate adherence to a claim which never could be admitted; a claim, which that government refted on the conftitution of its own country, to be received by all nations as paramount to every principle and law in Europe, as fuperior to the obligations of treaties, the ties of common intereft, and the moft urgent confiderations of general fecurity. His majefty, who had entered into this treaty, with good faith, had now only to lament its abrupt termination; and to declare, in the face of Europe, that whenever his enemies fhould he difpofed to enter on the work of general pacification, nothing fhould be wanting, on his part, to contribute to the accomplishment of that great object, which was only retarded (meaning retarded only) by the exorbitant pretenfions of his enemies." A fimilar meffage, on the fame fubject, was fent from his majefty to the houfe of commons. Authentic copies of all the papers, relative to the negociation, having been printed for the ufe of the members, his majefty's meflage, on that fubject, was, on the 30th of December, taken into confideration, in both houfes of parliament.

This melage being read in the houfe of lords, lord Grenville, after

lamenting the failure of the negocition, proceeded to fhew the fincerity of his majefty in that business, on the one part, and the infincerity of the French republic on the other. In conclufion, he moved an address to his majefty, containing affurances that "the lords were perfectly fatiffied with his majefty's conduct in the whole of the negociation, and that he might place the fulleft confidence in the wifdom and firmness of his parliament, on the tried valour of his forces by fea and land, and on the zeal, public fpirit, and refources of his kingdoms, for vigorous and effectual fupport in the profecution of a contest, which it did not depend on his majesty to terminate, and which involved in it the fecurity and permanent interefts of this country.

The earl of Guildford declared, that, in his opinion, the prefent was the moft unfortunate day this country had ever experienced, that only excepted which had plunged us into the calamities of the prefent war. If the ftatus quo ante bellum had been the principle agreed on, he was ready to admit that the French had departed from that principle: but this was by no means the cafe. The principle that was to from the bafis of the negociation, was that of proportional reftitution: and was there any man being, who could fay, that what we offered to be restored to France, was an equivalent to what we afked of her to reftore to our allies? His lordfhip concluded his fpeech, by propofing an amendment to the addrefs, ftating what he conceived to be blameable in the conduct of his majefty's minifters during the whole courfe of the war, charging them with infincerity in every part of the negociation, and

moving that a committee might be appointed to inquire into the prefent calamitous ftate of the country.

The earl of Derby denied, as he always had done, any neceffity, on our part, of going into the prefent war. He defcribed the prefent diftrefsful ftate of the country; and expreffed his fufpicions that the miniftry were infincere in their late fhew of negociation. His lordship thought that Pondicherry in the Eaft Indies, and Martinico, St. Lucia, and Tobago, in the West Indies, could never be confidered as an equivalent for the Milanefs and the Auftrian Netherlands.

The earl of Liverpool faid, that what we had offered to the French, was, in reality, an equivalent to what we afked of them to be given up. It was reported, that the revenue they received from their WeftIndia iflands, generally amounted to ten millions annually.-Why did not the French directory, when they were diffatisfied with the propofals from the British court, bring forward fome counter-project of their own?

Lord Auckland declared, that, though he, from the beginning of this bufinefs, firmly believed that it would not be attended with any fuccefs, had yet been of opinion that it was right that the experiment fhould be made, for the fatiffaction of the country. The experiment had been made, and the refult was fuch as he had expected. He declared his conviction, that the defenders of the French republic were in fuch a fate of diftrefs, as not to be able to go through anoher campaign.

The earl Fitzwilliam faid, that no circumflance had occurred to conwince him, that the former proud

and dangerous principles of the French did not now exift in their full force. There could be no fafety in fraternizing with fuch a people.

The duke of Bedford, among other fhrewd remarks, obferved, that lord Malmesbury, in his converfation with M. de la Croix, by hinting at an equivalent for the Netherlands, had, in a manner, admitted the plea of the directory, and that, in contradiction to the treaties fubfifting between Great Britain and her allies. The French minifter, at the fame time, by converfing about an equivalent, proved that he virtually admitted that fome equivalent might be accepted.→→ Lord Malmesbury, he observed, had requested a contre projet, whilft, at the fame time, he perfifted in refufing to enter upon any treaty in which the French were to retain poffeffion of the Netherlands. From thefe circumstances, as well as that of lord Malmesbury being left without a difcretionary power in any matter of importance, his grace inferred, that minifters were not fincere in the proposed negociations for peace. He thought that before a renewal of the negociation, minifters ought to have fatisfied themselves, that the French directory had departed from the principle they avowed, when they refused to treat with Mr. Wickham. In his opi nion, minifters had not only created fufpicions, as to the fincerity of their intentions, but even afforded juft grounds for accufation. They had acted on a principle of augmenting the power of great ftates, at the expence of those which

were

weaker; fuch, he faid, was their idea of remunerative juftice! By confenting to fuch a principle, Europe would fink into a miferable labyrinth

labyrinth of defpotic arrogance; "a principle on which," faid his grace, "I fhall make no comment, but leave it to your confcience to decide."

The earl Spencer denied that lord Malmesbury, in his converfation with de la Croix, had propofed any ultimatum. The last note of the directory was actually the beginning of negociation on their part. And, what was their propofal? "You fhall accept the bafis of our new-formed conftitution, which engrafts a conquered country into an integral part of our territories. The principle advanced by force, would go to fubvert all the acknowledged laws of nations. Whilft the directory were requiring an ultimatum from us, they were in fact giving one themselves.

The lord chancellor faid, that the amendment in detail was nothing elfe than an exaggeration of the power of the enemy, encouraging to them, and depreffing to the interefts of this country. The inference to be drawn from it was, that this country muft fubmit to whatever terms the enemy chofe to impofe. He denied the earl of Guildford's affertion, that the memorial prefented to the French directory, was of a fophiftical nature: for what could contain, in plainer terms, a more ingenious declaration of what England was difpofed to furrender, and what to demand in behalf of her allies? But whatever might be the relative value of the compenfations propofed, they had never, in fact, been brought under difcuffion. The propofals of England towards the enemy was generous and liberal: though France had made no conquefts from us, yet England propofed to furrender back all the con

quefts made by that power, only on condition of her making fuitable returns of the conquefts made from the emperor. His lordship remarked, that the government of France had made no reply to the memorial which had been prefented; the queftion of reciprocal compenfations had never been fairly difcuffed: inftead of this they required an ultimatum within twenty-four hours; and, in the very act of doing fo, they recalled the very basis of the nego ciation, to which they had previously agreed. He would put out of view the infolence and arrogance of the language they had úfed, and content himself with obferving that their whole conduct and language difcovered, on their part, a determination to avoid all difcuffion. his lordship, have the government of France barred and double barred the door of negociation against you. He proceeded to illuftrate, what he called, the "immenfity of our national wealth and profperity." He concluded his fpeech, by a repetition of an obfervation he had made in the outfet of it, that, at no former period of English hiftory, when negociations were broken off, as at Gertruydenburg, in the reign of queen Anne, did thofe who then oppofed the miniftry ever think of bringing forward a motion like that thing which he held in his hand.

Thus, faid

On a divifion of the houfe, the amendment, propofed by the earl of Guildford, was rejected, by 86 against 8.

The earl Fitzwilliam, after a brief recapitulation of fome of the arguments he had, on fundry occafions, urged before, for irreconcileable hoftility to the French republic, moved an amendment to the ad

drefs; in substance, reprefenting their dangerous principles, the neceffity of perfevering in the conteft in which we were at prefent engaged, and the impropriety of courting any negociation of peace with France in its prefent ftate. Lord Fitzwilliam's motion was negatived without a divifion.

The order of the day, thirtieth of December, for taking into confideration his majesty's meffage, on the failure of the negociation for peace with France, in the house of commons, being read from the chair,

Mr. Pitt rofe up, to move an addrefs to his majefty, in confequence of his moft gracious communication to that houfe. The motion, which it was his duty, he faid, to make on that fubject, unquestionably involved in it many great and momentous confiderations. He grievoufly lamented the fudden ftop which had been put to that negociation, by which, we had fondly hoped, that, we fhould at laft have been relieved from the conteft in which, for fome time paft, we had been engaged: a conteft, into which we were forced against our will: a conteft, produced by the repeated aggreffions of an imperious enemy; a conteft, undertaken, on our part, to maintain our rights and liberties as a nation, the very exiftence of our civil and political conftitution, and the general policy and fecurity of Europe. The failure of the negociation, he confidered as a subject of regret and disappointment; but, he added, that it was regret without defpondency; difappointment without despair. When we with for peace, faid he, we wish for a fecure and permanent peace, and the fecure and permanent poffeffion of those bleffings with which peace is

10

accompanied. If, with our ardent defire of peace, we have qualified the fteps which we have taken to procure it, by a due regard to these objects, we thall not find that our endeavour has been without its advantage: we shall have proved, to all Europe, to whom ambitious and unreasonable pretenfions ought to be ascribed. We may expect to fee, as the refult of fuch a conduct, England united, and France divided. In this queftion, we fhall have to confider not only what has been the conduct of our own government, but to confider alfo the conduct of the enemy; in the manner in which our offers have been rejected, in the peremptory and abrupt manner in which the negociation has been broken off: your ambaflador infulted, your propofitions rejected, and even the femblance of terms not produced in return.

The two great confiderations for the house, Mr. Pitt observed, were, firft, what fentiments they ought to exprefs to his majefty, on the prefent occafion; and, fecondly, combining the efforts made by his majefty with the conduct adopted on the part of the enemy, what was the duty they were bound to perform, for the purpofe of fecuring happiness and profperity, liberty and independence? Mr. Pitt contrafted the fincerity and readiness with which the British government had entered into the negociation, and the reasonableness of the terms they had proposed, with the backwardnefs of the French to treat at all, and the extreme arrogance, infolence, and, indeed, abfurdity, of their conduct, in fuperfeding, in a treaty with independent powers, the law and ufages of nations, by

their

their internal regulations. In fact, he faid, in conclufion of a long and animated speech, the main tendency of which was, to rouze an indignation against the prefent government of France, "The queftion is not, how much you will give for peace? but, how much difgrace you will fuffer at the outfet, how much degradation you will fubmit to as a preliminary? In these circumftances, then, are we to perfevere in the war with a spirit and energy worthy of the British name, and of the British character? or, are we, by fending couriers to Paris, to proftrate ourselves at the feet of a ftubborn and fupercilious government, to do what they require, and to fubmit to whatever they may impofe? I hope there is not a hand in his majesty's councils which would fign the proposals, that there is not a heart in this house who would fanction the measure, and that there is not an individual in the British dominions who would act as the courier." Having faid this, he moved an addrefs to his majesty, reechoing, as usual, the fentiments exprefled in his meffage to the houfe.

The honourable Mr. Erfkine, after fome prefatory matter, refpecting his own fituation and feelings, made many remarks, of a perfonal nature, on the skill, eloquence, and general management of Mr. Pitt; and after fome forenfic maxims refpecting the proper manner of inquiring into difputes between individuals, faid, let us look back to the particular circumstances which were the original caufe of the war between Great Britain and the French republic. On the twelfth of December, 1792, his majesty met the parliament: at that time, M. Chauve

lin, the ambaffador of the French government, was then in England. His majefty, in his fpeech from the throne to both houses of parliament, complained of three things: first, "that the French had fent feditious miffionaries into this country; fecondly, they had meditated an invafion to Holland; and, thirdly, that they had interfered in opening the Scheldt." He begged the house to recollect, that, at that particular period of time, Belgium was in the poffeffion of the French, though not as now; it was not then engrafted into the territory of France as an integral. At that time, all the correfpondence between lord Grenville and the French ambassador was concealed from the house, though M. Chauvelin had given feparate and fatisfactory anfwers to all the complaints entertained by this court. He entreated that the king would bring to condign punifhment those who diffeminated feditions in his dominions, announced the determination of France to keep within her own limits, and to refpect the rights of other nations. Notwithstanding this plain and fpecific difavowal, however, of all the grounds of hoftility, war was declared upon France. At that time. Belgium was not in her poffeffion. He afked, then, whether France could be confidered as the aggreffor, who offered peace to this country, on terms, which the right honourable gentleman would be worshipped, as a god, if he could now procure?

Mr. Fox faid, after a war of four years, which was stated to have been attended with many circumftances highly honourable and advantageous to the British arms; after an addition of no less than two hun