Star. — London, England, 1803-05-25 00:00:00

NMMIN es ir of at that, howevey nnjuftifiable the la was that it had in it any inaredient of hoftility to this Country ? If every which France takes to advance her power or coufequence is to be deemed a proof of hanky towards us, it would lead to a principle of the moll extravagant kind indeed, tending to produce alarm upon every improvement that might take place in her finances, manufaaures, or coon coerce, in every department of her civil or political economy. In truth this is the plain tranflation of the fentiments of fome Gentlemen, and it is a principle which muff always urge to war, but can never lead us to peace; it muff pufh on to extermination, for no. thing fhort of it can allay the fears of thofe who look at every advancement in the fources and power of France as intended hoftility towards Great Britain. But to return to the fubjea of Switzerland, I repeat, that a war upon the ground of the violence of the Fiat Conful toward that country, would not prima facie be juftifiable. I would be very forty that it fhould have been thought of, under the then peculiarly unfavourable circumftances of Europe; but even were thofe circumftances much left unfavourable, I fhould deprecate a war, though I would have cheerf u lly taken any other meafures in the power of the coun try to relieve the Swifs. I would not even go to war to affift the gallant ftruggles for liberty, hecaufe I ,fhould be perfuaded that our efforts could not avail • ' for although you fhouldfucceed in perfuading the Axil: trians to join you in fuch a war, I would not approve of it, for this reafon, that I know your prsfifed (+tied would be to reftore the Swift to their liberties; and as I would be convinced of the hypocrify of fuch a profeOon, I could not like it. goodnefs of a caufe, if that caufe be alledged merely as a pretence, can have no weight with me. I cannot, therefore, attend much to the lofty language now held with re fpea to Switzerland, and other topics, which appear to be preffed into the fervice of Minifters for a parti cular purpofe. They ferve to fwell the lift of charges againft France, and to give a colour of popularity to the objeas of the war; and they alto afford fome variety to the fubjea of debate. We fhould grow dull if we were to he always talking of Malta ; it was not thought of fufficient magnitude to intereft us or the country, and therefore Switzerland is called in as an auxiliary; though, had the Minut esm prefented by Lord Whitwoi th to the French Go vernment been agreed to, the poor Swift would have been quite forgotten, they would have been left in the lurch. There is alto another fubjea referred to by the advocates for the Addrefs, which to this country is much more a queftion of immediate intereft—l mean Holland—and the revere injuftice done to that country by France. was certainly not to be equalled by any thing, unlefs where the difference of colour alone has Phut up the hearts of mem The behaviour of the French Government towards Holland is un doubtedly the blackell fpot in itsc.haraiter—to make that country a depot for its trooptcagainft apofitive treaty, and Merely for the pitiful purpofe, as I fin. cerely believe, of having them paid and fupported by the Dutch, and to five the French Government that amount of expence. An Honourable Gentle man had. called Holland the out-poll 9£ Great Bri tain—how far that term is applicable, or of whit particular confequence that country really ti to Eng land, is a queftion which I (hall net now difcufs, nor !hall I dwell on the fttange reafoning, that the French had their troops in Holland by way of lira tagem, in order to prevent any alarm in this caontry when they fhould fed it neceffary, for any treache 'Mos purpofe, to introduce a larger number in that quarter with any view to location, &c. But I will fay, that Minifters ought to have taken the higheft grounds in remonftrating upon this fubjea. What ought to have been their precife courfe I cannot now judge. The people of Holland ought at all events to have been confulted ; but the main thing to attend to was the time of remonftrating and the manner. It Mould not have been deferred until after his Majefty's Melfage was delivered to Parliament, for after that the French Government muff naturally be prefumed rather unwilling to concede to it ; and as to the man ner, it ought to have been public and open, and it ought to have been communicated to every Court in Europe. It would Rill, I admit, be a problem whe ther the defired effea would be p roduced ? but fuch a • mode of proceeding would at kart promife a more favourable iffuc than keret or verbal communications. It would, at all events, intereft by its magnanimity, sad probably conciliate the co-operation of fome of the other powers of Europe ; it would alto gratify the feelings of the Dutch people, and would, in cafe a war fhoold ante, thew to the people of France that the un jolt perfeverance of its Government in keeping troops in Holland, was the cattle. Thofe material conk quenees might have been produced had Minifters not miffed the proper opportunity for the attempt to pafs by. The detention of the French troops in Holland was not left unjuft, than the attempt to reduce the Viand of St. Domingo to its former Rate of fish jugation was abfurd. Sending out troops on that expedition was not left an imputation upon the pru• dance of the French Government than keeping troops In Holland was a Rigma on its character and claims to rept*. He agreed with Miniften, and of courfe dif fered with the Right Hon. Gentleman on the lower bench (Mr. Windham) that looking only to objeas of pulley, this Country had no reafon to murmur at that expedition. It was indeed on the whole a very indifereet and culpable projea for France, and their conduit to the man who once commanded them, I mean Teufaiot, was the deepen charge upon the re putation of the French Government. That expedi tion, when the French and Britith Governments were on good terms, afforded to Minifters a fine opportu sky, of which, had the bah habits, had the habitual wickedoefs of Europe permitted, they might have availed themfelves to ure the complete exter• urination of that dreadrr evil the Have trade, but it does sot teem that Minifters have been in gene ral very judicious in the choice of their time and objeas. All the complaints which Gentlemen now dwell on, including the occupation of Parma and Placentia, are of little comparative weight, in my judgment, with the condua I have alluded to relative to Holland. Now ' as to the intuits to this country, raid to have been offered by France, I (hall fire notice that with refpea to the Liberty of the Pres.— Iltis is a privilege I cannot be fufpeacd of a willing- Deft to furrender. Far from giving it up to a foreign Government. I would not content to give it up to our own. The propofition of France upon this point, no doubt, betrayed a complete ignorance of the princi ple of our oonbtotion, but t the propoGuon was tcf et,' and France acquierced in the reilifal. This propori-P tion, therefore, is not now to be mentioned for an in fult, or evidence of hoftile mind. France, however, I mutt fay, has much reafon to complain of the liberty or rather licentioufnefs of the Prefs, in this country, and fc, perhaps, has this country too—yet, I would endure a partial evil rather than fuller this invaluable privilege to be curtailed. But the Prefs certainly has, for fome time back, contributed its utmoft in duftry to excite difgult and irritation in the public mind of both countries, and produced a bitternefs, a feeling that tended to do away, in a great meafure, the effeets of peace, and prepared the people for war. I Lhould be glad, however, if hoftilities were con fined to this reciprocity of abufe among the papers of both countries. In the belt poems of the belt poets, there is a portage which defcribes two combatants engaged, and the Goddefs of Wifdom interfered, advifing them ftrongly to lay abide their fwords, to ceafe that kind of conteft, but that they might go on in ahufing each other as much as they pleafed.— Such was the advice of the Goddefs of Reafott herelf, [A laugh], and fuch was that which I gave fome time fence in this Houfe to both countries, and I would to GOD my advice had been followed. That abufe had been the only warfare between them; and they might, to site a phrafe from the Poet I have already referred to, interchange as many fhip loads of abufe as they pleated. Here the Hon. Gentleman took notice of the retaliation of the French Newfpapers on the abufe contained in the journal., of this country. As to the demand, to fend the French refugees out of this country, he reprobated in the molt forcible terms the idea of acceding to any fuch requeft t it would lead, probably, to a dreadful reciprocity of expul- i lion, including every man in each country who WAS an exile for his principles. If the French were fo fent from this country, the Irifh fugitives would, no doubt, , from gratitude on the part of the French Govern-I ment, be fent from France, and perhaps both thole Governments, uniting their influence, would be able to hunt both thefe unfortunate claffes of men from every flate in Europe, and to render it impollible for them to procure an afylum any where. It could not be fuppofed that he had any very great refpekt for the family of the Bourbons ; but yet he would rather engage in aftual war, than confent to refute the rights of hofpitality to the worft man of that family, if there was a bad man among them. Yet however ! much he regarded the rights of isofpitality, he would I obferve, that it would be very correct in Government to afk borne explanation of any foreigners of creep tionable charaEler who might be found in the country. And he underltood it to be generally (toted among the people at Paris, that there were three perfons refl. dent in this country who were concerned in the at tempt on the Firft Conful, by meansof the infernal ma chine.- —There is a circumftance which appears to me throughout the whole of the dikulllons to have been totally overlooked. It is not now my intention to dwell on it ; but it may not be unimportant to recall it to the Tecate:ion of the Houfe. I mean to allude to a fpeech of the Firft Conful to the Swifs Deputies, in which he tells them that there is to exult no fort of connexion betwixt this Country and England. I do not affirm pofitively that fuch language was eniployed. I have read it in an Engliflt newfpaper ; and all that ' , have to remark on fuch language is, that I think it prefented a very fair ground of more remonhance.— I mention the circumllance incidentally, and do not with at prefent to prefs it. Minifters, by prefenting Weft a remonarance, would have taught the Firft Conful the propriety of henceforth abftaining from language of fuch an offeofive defcription. There are two other incidental points on which I with to offer a very few obfervations. The one of thofe is the paffage in the expole of the Elate of the Republic, prefented by order of the Government to the Legiflative Body, in which an opinion is expreffed, that England fingle handed is unable to contend with France. I confefs that I ftrongly condemn all expreffions of this kind. They only encourage and keep alive a mutual fpirit of afperity and recrimination. In his opinion it was much more wife and dignified to pafs them over with the contempt which they merited. 3ut if they were at all to be taken notice of, it difcovered much greater magnanimity to make them the ground of an immediate demand for fatisfaltion, than to buffer them to be rankling in the minds of the people, and allow them to be brought forward from time to time as a fource of irritation. In the one cafe, there is at lea(' a difplay of keen fenfibility of anger again(' in built. In the other there is the expreffion of no manly feeling. The other point to which I allude, is a part of the Report of Colonel Sebaltiani. In one paffage of this report there is brought forward a charge, conveying a direEt accufation again(' Ge neral Stuart for incapacity. Such an accufation I cannot but confider highly unmanly on the part of the individual by whom it was adduced, as it is a charge of that kind which, while it cannot but deep. ly wound the feelings of him to whom it is applied, it may not admit of any precife anfwer. Fortunately, in the prefent cafe, the charge is one which admits an eafy refutation, for the charaBer of General Stuart, as an able and experienced officer, was inch, 1 that he could not buffer from any malignant infirm tions thrown out with the molt finifler purpofes.— I The other charge brought again(' General Stuart, for giving encouragement to affiaffination, is one of ra more ferious mum% and one which affuredly de manded, on the part of Minifters, a fatisfaCtory ex planation from the French Government. Whether Miniflers demanded or obtained this explanation, I have not the means of afcertainiag ; but I have no fort of difficulty in baying, that the charge was of that ferious kind which made a remonffiance highly l expedient. I have thus briefly gone through the review of the conduit of the French Government, to far as foreign States are concerned, and the inftances of peculiar infults which are alledged to have been offered to this country by the ufe of reprehenfible language. I have now to advert to two others of a very different nature. Now, Sir, fir& as to the in juries offered to our (hips, and the refufal to grant adequate redrefs : In judging of the extent of thofe pretended infults and injuries, it is neeeffiary to al: certain how far they arofe nut of the operation of inimical laws, or from the feverity of their applica tion. In the firft place, I contend, if the exiftence of inch law is made a ground of complaints, thofe complaints are unwife and impolitic. I Hand up for the rights of all independent nations to eftablifis fuch excluffwe laws for the potation of their commerce, as may appear to them to be molt calculated to in. fuze their property, if no treaties of commerce are is eaißeace. This country, Sir, has always atled on * this principle. Will it be Paid, Sir, that we, at no period, have abufed this right to a degree equal, if not greater than any other power ? Is not the whole of our Navigation Act, eftablifhed by Cromwell, and ailed on by the Kings who were his fueceffors, i founded on this principle, and had it not been under the provifions i of this aft that our commerce has con tinned to maintain its afcendancy ? On the general I principle we have therefore no right to complain. If, , on the other hand, the rights and property of indivi- 1 duals have been violently and unju Illy inveded, it was t the duty of Ministers to have alked and obtained im mediate reparation. If this reparation has been afked i and obtained, I fee no reafon why thefe complaints : fhould make their appearance in the Declaration.— If the reparation has been afleed and refufed, I afk why Minifters have not made a feparate and dillind communication to the Houle on the fubjeft ? Of all I the grounds of remonftrance which could exit, any infult offered to a Britifh fubjed is one on which they might above all others reckon on fupport. As to the appearance of a number of French officers in this country, under the oftenfible name of commercial commiffioners, but under the real character of military (pies, I have no difficulty whatever in declaring that, the moment the fad was known, they ought to have been inflantly difmiffed, and their difmiffal ought to have been accompanied with a remon ftrance to the French Government, demanding a fa tiZadory explanation of the grounds of their mil lion. It may be laid by Tome perfons that it is rather extraordinary that in profeffing myfelf to be warmly the friend of peace, and who made it a point to be regular in my attendance in my duty on Parliament, with the view of contributing all in my power to its prefervation, I Mould, entertaining filch an opinion, never once bring the fubjed under conftderation.— To this, Sir, my anfwer is extremely Pimple, and it is neither more nor lefs than this—that I knew no thing at all of the circumftance, and Miniflers, by never bringing it before the Houle, gave a tacit con feflion that they did not think it a matter worthy of Parliamentary dircuilion. A good deal had been fial about the Manifeßo againft this country which appeared in one of the Hamburgh papers. I think it the lefs neceffary to take up the time of the Houle with many obfervations on this point, becaufe when our Ambaffador remonftrared on the fubjed, an af furance was given that the French Government had not countenanced the publication, and had not au thorized the Reps which the French Minifter had taken in the buftnefs. A further affarance was alfo given that his conduit fhould be ftridly inquired into, and full reparation given for the Injury received.— Now. Sir, as I have no realon for thinking that this proniife would not have been carried into died, if the Atte of the Negotiation had been favourable, I fee no ground of complaint on this part of the con duet of the French Government. The language em ployed by the Firlt Cainful in his interview with our Ambaffador, has been the fubjeft of much dil cuflion. Gentlemen teem to confider if as decifive of a fpirit of hoftility, which completely juflifies the renewal of hollilities to counteraft his ambi. tious views. There is one converfation at a pub. lie audience at the Thuilleries, which is trium• phantly held np in fupport of this opinion. This converfation has been very varioufly Rated. and certainly the accounts of feveral perfons prefent at the time when it took place, reprefent the language employed in terms confiderably different from thole in which it is defcribed in the papers on the table. But, Sir, admitting the language employed to be pre cifely what is defcribed, I do contend that it does not at all warrant the inference drawn from it. Whe ther it is really a fubjeCt of dread, that a rival whore ambitious views we contemplated with jealoufy, fhould take no pains to difclole thole views, appears to me very doubtful. But if Minifters really think that fine the Treaty of Amiens the ambitious views and infolent pretenfions have rendered the continu ation of Peace impolfible, I really am at a lots to ac count for the language which they have ufed on more than one occalion. The Houfe cannot have forgot. ten the language employed by a Right Honourable Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer). when, at the dale of the IA year, he laid before the Houfe fo flourifffing a piiture of the financial profperity of the country. It was impoffible, from any part of his ' language on that oceafion, to draw any other infe rence than that he withed the Houfe to. believe— that there was not the kali room to apprehend the rupture of the Peace. This opinion, Sir, was proved by fans much Itronger than the recollation of any individual Member of the Houfe. The general ex peflation excited throughout the country was, that we were in a Rate of profound Peace; that there was no reafon to fear the renewal of hollilities. In addi tion to the evidence drawn from this fpeech, I might call the attention of the Houfe to the orders at that period fent out for the fecond time for the evacuation of the Cape, and the difpofition then manifefted to give up Malta in terms of the Treaty. I will not take upon myfelf to fuppore, that Minißers gave thefe orders, or difplayed this difoofition at the time when they had any real apprehenfion that the peace between the two countries thould be dilturbed. The natural queßion here preffes itfclf on our atten tion, therefore, what were the circumftances which on the Bth of March led to a Meffage preparatory to the renewal of hoftilities t I know, Sir, in anfwer to this queftion, it will be Paid, that a number of aft' which taken tingly would be infrifficient to jullify the renewal of hoßility, may form an accumulated mars of infult and injury, which will be confidered a very legitimate ground of war. This principle, in certain cafes, I am not unwilling to admit. I do not mean to deny that the left ground of complaint on which the Rand is made, may frequently not be in itfelf fo ftrong as many others which preceded it. I have not forgot the old adage—that the left ounce often breaks the horfe's back, and that a fingle feather may turn the balance. I do not fee, however. how Minitters are to bring this principle to their aid. They have not held any loch language. If the French have col lated a mail of infult, and outrages which Minifters forefaw would lead to war, the queftion cootlantly recurs—why, on to many octagons, fusee the figna ture of the Treaty, they have flattered the nation with the profpeet of continued peace, and thus pro duced confequeaces of the moll dilations kind ? But now we come to the direa ground of war as laid down by Minifters. Before I proceed particularly to advert to this fubjeft, I think it neceffary to advert to ons or two things wlf.:11 have been introduced into rthe &reunion. Opinions, Sir, hive on more than one occafion during the dircutlion of this evening, been fluted relative to the importance of retaining Malta in our poffellion. I cannot help thinking that a great deal of the language employed on this fubjett is perfectly extravagant, and nut at all founded on a fober and confiderate view of the fubjeft. An Hon. and Learned Gentleman oppofite (Mr. Dallas) . has spoken on this fubjeft with a degree of eloquence which delighted, lout did not ftsrprize me, who have had fuch numerous opportunities of knowing the ex celience of his powers. He concluded his fpeech by recalling to the attention of the Houfe, that in fight ing for Malta we fhnuld fight for it as the key of Egypt ; we should fight for Egypt as the key, of In di A—we should fight for India as the grand source of the riches, the commerce, and the profperity of the country. Now, Sir, I mull take the liberty of dif fering with the Hon.and Learned Gentleman on each of there pofitions. Ido not admit that Malta is the key of Egypt, that Egypt is the key of India, or that our Indian pofreflions were the vi t al fources of the prof perity of the Empire. On the petition of the Hon. Gentleman I (hall jug make a very few observations. —What I (hall advance ref - peeling the importance of Malta I (ball not afk the Houle to take tm my au thority. I (ball advance it on the authority of thole whofe opinion muff ever have great weight in the Houfe and the country. I will not now examine in detail the opinion this day delivered on the fubjed by an Honourable General (General Maitland), a friend of mine, but I will refer to authorities higher than any thing which relis solely on his opinion. Ido remember, at the time when the Definitive Treaty was direutred, that no lel; an authority than that of Earl St. Vincent and Lord Neli;nl were produced, to prove that the poffertim of Malta was not a confider ation worth continuing the war with a view of com manding influence in the Mediterranean, or watching the defigns of the French with retpeet to Egypt. I do alt . () recolleft that a very eminent defender of the treaty (Mr. Pitt), while he filmed that ceffions were neceffary for the purpofe of procuring peace, argued that it was better that there cenions Mould take place in the Mediterranean, and that the poffeflion of Trini dad would promote Brittfh intet efts and Britith views much more effectually than the retention of Malta. I have Paid, Sir, that I did not admit that Egypt was neceltarily the key to our Indian pofreffions ; and 1 cannot but think that a degree of importance has, from national and laudable sentiments, been attach ed to it which it does not in reality pates. The invafion of Egypt by the French I always confider ed as a Sep, in every point of view, unwife and im politic. How far it was an object of importance to expel them from the country, I than not now exa mine ; but certainly there is no man who can think of the glory acquired by our troops in Egypt with greater exultation than I do, and who is at all times more convinced of the courage of our foldiers when fairly led to the field. The memory of their ex ploits in Egypt has attached to that country ideas romantic and fuperilitious, as a fpot where Bri tilh valour had been signally manifefted ; it has ac quired a value in the opinion of the public which it never in any former period poffefred. It will not be gravely afferted, that becaufe a Britith army gained an illuttrious triumph over French veterans, therefore Egypt was to be retained in our poffeffion, or religioufly protested from invafion. The battle of Blenheim is an event, the remembrance of which I need not imprefs on the Houle, yet what would be thought of a propolition for putting the field of Blenheim into our peffeflion, becaufe it was formerly the theatre of Britith glory? Aggrandizement was certainly out of the quetlion, for if France had ag grandized herfelf in Europe, Great Britain, either by death or conquest, had done the fame in India. Our defence againft the charge of ambition mutt, there fore, be of the humorous kind defci ibed in one of Foote's plays, where a Lady, whole challity was more than fufpetted, declares, u that file had never finned on this fide the Cape of Good Hope." If we were prefted by the French Government, he was afraid that we mutt recur to this geographical dlt tinalon. But it teemed, that if France ever thought of Egypt, this was a fufficient ground for War. It was not fo in 1787, when M. de Vergennes openly avowed his deligns on that country, and yet, inflead 1 of going to war, we concluded a Commercial Treaty with that Minifter. We were bound by treaty, he mu a further obferve,to give up Malta. Out of three con-• ditions two had been fulfilled. A Grand Mailer had been eleEted, and a Neapolitan garrifon had been landed. There remained only the point of the gut • rantee, which certain Powers had refuted; but why not comply with the terms of the Emperor of Ruffin? Of what importance was the Maltefe Langue, what rightly confidered, to this country, when to preferve our faith clear and unblemifhed,itwas put into the op pofite scale? There confederations, it appeared, were an deranged by the hollile rniffion of Sebaitiani to Egypt and to Syria. That the publication of that Report was politically indifcreet, he would readily allow; but he mutt diflinguins between the defire and the dears of Bonaparte to take poffe&on of that con& try. During the reign of the Bourbons, there military furveys were molt frequent; and neither in 4 9, 1763, nor 1783, could we have concluded aPeace with that country, tf filch proceedings were to be confider. ed as a fufficient came for War. Bonaparte had ez preffed his defire to petrels Egypt as a Colony, but at the fame.time had exprefsly Dated, that it would not be for his intereß to go to War for that objet. He Paid that he could have taken it, but the fleet by which this purpofe was to be accomplifhed had failed at the time for St. Domingo. This was a proof that the design, if ever tenon fl y entertained, was complete ly relinquifhed. The late Emprefs Catherine of Raf fia had avowed her &tiros upon Turkey; but if any Minificr had propoted to make war upon her on that account,firch a propofition would bethought to favour of romantic niadnefs. liad we interfered for HA. land, we fbould have flood on the generous fide, and an Europe would have been intereiled in our behalf. But it now appeared that we were playing a sordid and fclfith game for Malta, and we were in con fequence as much intolated in our politics, as in our topical &nation. Why not, he would A, fur render the yoke of Malta to Rufua :—Such a re quell could (cutely be refuted, and we &mid in conkquence have the guarantee of that molt ref - bie Potentate, not only for Malta, but Vly for the peace of Europe. It might be that = s inch an application would be produ3ive of delay k but what conic* we gain by prce:pitation ? If Fame I I t P