Star. — London, England, 1808-02-09 00:00:00

Thi con . ally were obliged orce of the enemy. incalculable influ llowed, and which, Mated in the peace with Russia might ittack upon Copen was astonished how :ould have been put igain repeat, that he 'fight not have taken pinion that her hos- The attack upon :ontributc to confirm , C 461 10 alienation mind . _ Emperor of Russia ' 1 this country in the , which, he would admit, might toted its first foundation in other causes. On the of July h e left Memel, and arrived at St. Peters- I I 0 1 the 17th of the month fol lowin g . Two hurg on - iree d a ys after his arrival, the Emperor sent I c' r o a admitted him to an audience, in , for wh i c h a conversation to the following effect took place. The a E m peror began with asking him , whether l i he h a d rot adm itted to Count Strogonoff, three days he t he battle of Friedland, the necessity of makin peace ? He allowed that he had. Upon this poii c bseri ed his Majesty , we are b oth a g reed. The then , E m peror then com municated to him, that he had of e.ee his mediation between France and England ; that in (104 so he was actuated by no vain g lor y (004 was the French word), but by an earnest de ire to restore to Europe that repose which it so much I observed," replied his Lordship, " that :vented. sufficient time had not been allowed to my Govern meat; that the events of the war, as far as respected England, were highly favourable ; and that I was convinced no comlitiore c f peace, but such as were e mo urabie, and likely to be followed by permanent tranquillity, would be listened to. The Emperor said, that the time made no difference ; that provided his mediation was accepted, the negotiation need not be hurr i e d ; that it might take place in the course of three or four months ; and that, from what he knew of the French Emperor's sentiments, it would be attended with less difficulty than might be sup posed." Oa the 4th of September he had another interview with his Imperial Majesty, when he asked him what he thought of the attack upon Copenhagen? His Lordship answered, that he was persuaded his Government would be able to justify the measure. He replied, that it would be impossible ; " that if I recollected the conversations at Bartenstein, I must be convinced of the Crown Prince's determination to maintain his neutrality. His Majesty asserted, that there was no connection between the French aed Danish Governments ; and that the determined character of the Crown Prince was a sufficient guaran tee that he would not lend himself to such designs as ;ere imputed to him. I observed to him," said Lord Hutchinson, " that Lord G. L Gower had delivered a Note on the subject." He answered, that he was aware he had, but that it was nugatory. His Ma jesty then stated, in the most peremptory tone and language, that he would have satisfaction ; that he was bound to Denmark by the most solemn engage ments, and that he would adhere to them. He sup posed, he said, that we intended to make an attack npm :onstadt : let us ;he would defend it with the best means in his power ; and, whether that defence was successful or not, he would, navertheless, fulfil the high destiny to which he had bean called. He again expressed his determination to adhere to Den= mark, to protect the independence of the Baltic, and concluded by again declaring, in a most emphatic man ner, that he would ha ve satiyaction." After these con versations, can it, said his Lordship, be maintained by any one, that the . attack upon Copenhagen had no effect upon the Emperor of Russia? He would never ceav to assert, as long as he existed, that that attac k was the immediate cause of the war with Russia. The substance of these conversations he had commu i nicated to his Majesty's Ministers. Why was it not • given to the public, among the other documents which they had laid before Parliament? Because they well i knew the attack upon Copenhagen was the immediate cause of the hostility of Russia, and of the interruption 1 of those relations of amity and friendship, which, if r . that unfortunate transaction had not occurred, might have been preserved. There were, he would admit,, parties in Russia, as well as in other countries ; but there was not an enlightened man in Russia with whom he had conversed, who did not regret and condemn 1 1 that transaction. If such were the feelings of his I, Imperial Majesty, it might be asked why he did' . not declare war immediately? He would state the reason, because Russia had then two fleets at sea. tt But he would ask whether Ministers werenot apprised that it was then a question, whether an embargo should is not be laid on the British shipping in the ports of Rus e- ua,and whether that vas not to be considered as a proof id of the dissatisfaction of his Imperial Majesty. He had, td to his very great mortification, while abroad, read of some observations in the papers of this country, the 1 1 style and tendency of which he reprobated with in er dignation. These libellous effusions were directly ld aimed at his Russian Majesty : they held him out to ak the contempt of Europe, and of his own country. ms There was a time when such daring and insolent ce, libels would not he permitted. He was astonished D3e *low any one could have asserted that the Continent of id not feel indignant at the attack upon Constanti aid .nople. Have the nations of Europe no wish for an its interval of repose ? The measure, he had learned, he vas at present popular in a certain degree ' • but ere sooner or later England would wake fre m her dein te eon, and that rash and ill-advised proceeding would es- then be estimated as it deserved. So far from its Wit being approved in any part of the Continent he had iese lisited, he could, from personal observation, take up- Nee cn h i m to say, than it was universally reprobated in gtk the North of Europe. Lord ERSKINE observed, that if Ministers did the not produce proofs sufficient to satisfy the House that 1 he the attack upon Copenhagen was a case of extreme OD necessity, he had a right to presume that they had eerf he m not, and that they had no existence in point of with tact. The gre at, the only principle upon which they the could attempt to justify themselves was, that of the if: er lam of nations. By that law, and the materials before !the the House, and the materials referred to, were nee. Ministers to be tried. And what were those mate le' rials Was there a single fact contained in them e: 14 . 1 c 11 went to prove that Denmark was hostilel y in rY en--w aroes England, and that she lucent to for t 4 vied the designs of our inveterate enemy. He would say to Ministers, is this all the defence ?on hare ? It is none at all. We seek to justify the honour and cha.' ratter of the country, and we call for farther proofs. He was sorry to see the British Government degene rate into the servile imitator of the Ruler of France. The first great breach which had been made in the public moral code of Europe was by revolutionary France. That example we were following. She assigned the Treaty of Pilnitz as a reason for burit ing in upon and over-running Germany, and we as signed the Treaty of Tilsit as a cause for attacking Denmark, and seizing her fleet. So that we, who first engaged in this war, as the conservators f political morality, became in the end its flagrant violators. — Instead of being held in abhorrence by the Continent we should, if we had stood true to our principles, commanded the admiration of the world. And what &el we gain by this attack ? Instead of obtaining se curity, it was absolute ruin. The law of nations, he would allow, sanctioned the principle of self-protec- . don. If a fire took place within a short distance, an individual would be Justified to pull down his neigh bour's house to preserve his own, and to prevent the , conflagration from spreading. But if the fire began 1 at the Haymarket for instance, a person who lived at Hyde-park Corner would be hardly justifiable in pul ing down all the intervening houses. But the in -I.,ustice of this would be much stronger, if it should turn out that there was no fire—that the person was only told by some one, whose name he refused to disclose, that there was a fire—or that he ha .l heard perhaps it was the intention of some mis chievous fellow to produce one. There would be to the full as good arguments to justify the destruction of the houses, as the proofs, if such they could be cal led, produced by Ministers to justify the attack upon , Copenhagen. This atrocious instance had but one 1 parallel in the history of the world, and that instance, [ he was sorry to find, was to be found in the annals of this country. In the reign of Ethelred, an invasion was expected from Denmark, though the means of Swaine, then Sovereign of that country, were just as 1 , inadequate to that purpose as those of the Court of Copenhagen lately were. A number of Danes had I previously settled and intermarried in this country, 1 i t and Ethelred, from a fear that they would take part with their countrymen in case of an invasion, had them all assembled, under pretence of a religious ce- , remony, and barbarously murdered. This was some thing of the nature of this famous exploit for which i Ministers took such a credit to themselves. They violently seize upon the fleet of Denmark, wrap her capital in flames, expose it to all the consequences of a bombardment, and then endeavour to justify all these atrocities by their apprehensions, by their fears that Denmark would have joined with their enemy. If they must build their arguments upon these facts, on what ground do they stand ? They do that by the violence of their fleets, which France might possibly have done by the violence of her armies. They bring home the Danish Navy, and give new names to the ships, as gipsies do to the children whcm they happen to steal. Is this the manner in which a great, a proud and an exalted nation should conduct itself i Instead of following this pitiful line of conduct, we should have stood upon our maritime superiority. Our na val thunder, under the direction of our great captains, should have overwhelmed the enemy if he had ven tured to come out. Of the result there could be no fear. He called on Ministers to produce farther in formation, if they had it. Let them make it out, some sort of case. Their conduct had placed the whole world in array against us. They kad not esta blished that necessity by which alone they would be justified upon any principle of the law of nations ; for the plea of security was not sufficient for that purpose. Lord BORINGDON opposed the motion. He adverted to a dispatch written by the Noble Baron, (Lord Hutchinson) who had spoke last but one, and asked whether it was possible, after having signed his name to that fact, he could say that it was owing to the attack upon Copenhagen, and not in conse quence of the secret articl, sof the peace of Tilsit, that we were at war with Russia. The seizure of the Danish fleet was to be justified by necessity, and by necessity alone. In this sentiment he fully agreed with the Noble Lord who spoke last. No one could stand up in that House, and say that principles c r morality were to be trampled upon. He assimilated the attack upon Copenhagen to the seizure of Ma deira, and the transactions at Constantinople. There might be some little shades to distinguish them from each other, but the principle was the same. If Mi nisters had hesitated to take possession of the Danish Navy, if they had deferred the expedition one fort night longer, they would have deserved to appear as cnminals at their Lordships' bar. The Earl of BUCKINGHAMSHIRE remarked upon the inconsistency which appeared in the manner in which Ministers defended themselves. They stated one reason in their speeches for the attack upon Co penhagen, and assigned another in their public decla rations ; but it was only by the papers which they had laid before Parliament that their conduct was to be judged. He had heard, indeed, that they once had it in contemplation to justify themselves by the con duct of Prussia in the seven years war. The Noble Lord combated the fact stated by a Noble Marquis, relating to currents in the Baltic, and asserted, upon what he termed high naval authority, that large ships could at all times anchor within the Belt, and prevent the passage of troops. If the Danes felt an interest to defend Zealand against the French, the taking of it would not, as it had been said, be a mere matter of course. He trusted that the day would not arrive, when Ministers, in speaking of the spoils of Copenha gen, would have reason to exclaim with the dying warrior in the lEneid, "'Porno tempos exit, map° cum optaverit empturn " Intacturn Pallanta et spolia ipsa, diemque " Oderit." Lord HARROWBY began by referring to the dis solution of the maritime confederacy in 1801, and pre sumed that it was the recollection of that splendid :Achievement by which it was effected, which made us suppose ourselves in such profound security, and speak with such contempt of the naval power of Denmark. How were Ministers to draw the extremely nice and evanescent line, between probable and meditated hostility ? Were they to anticipate the danger, or stand with their arms folded until it came upon them ? The danger from Denmark was of that description, that it was incumbent upon Ministers to take the ear liest opportunity to ward it off. Had France pro cliuned to all the world, that it was her intention to itattelf of the maritime power of Denmark to destroy us, such a declaration would not convince him More than he was already, from the whole tenor of her conduct, that such was her intention. As to the means of resistance possessed by Denmark, he was surprised that any argument grounded upon them would be attempted. How :setzuld single, isoland Denmark expect to maintain ;Vet - independence and political existence, when al)Xontinental Europe was subdued ? For several yens that Power had mani fested a disposition far froln being friendly to this country. Had she, since France acquired an ascen dancy on the Continent, ever shewed the least incli nation to resist that power ? It was to him most extea ordinary, that some Noble Lords should manifest so ' , great a horror against our making exertions to ward off the greatest danger by which the country was ever menaced, and that they should not only approve, but advise the expedition against Constantinople. He could well conceive that a person, actuated by a truly British spirit, might have approved the expedition to Copenhagen, and condemned that against Constanti nople, or that he might have even disapproved of both, although there was this material difference between them, that one completely failed, and that the other succeeded. In what Ministers had done, lie would maintain they had violated no one principle whatever of the law of nations. But even if they had, he would still contend they were justifiable. France had destroyed the public law of Europe, and if all the na tions of Europe acquiesced in that abolition, was it b.: expected that we should adhere to it ? As it had b en said formerly of Ireland, if we go to law with the rebels, they will go to war with us. Nothing would be so convenient for France, as that we should con tinue to venerate and act upon that code which was rejected by her, or which, how much scevee she may aect to revere its obligations, she had never hesitated to break through whenever it was her interest to do so. The Earl of MOIRA thought the last speech the most extraordinary that had ever been delivered in a British House of Parliament. Were we to renounce the high principles upon which we had hitherto ac ted, and sanction, by following his example, all the enormities and outrages of the ruler of France ? There was not a doubt, he would admit, that that person had turned his mind to every me ay which he could injure this country. Thai e were no proofs necessary to convince their Lordships of that. But what proof had they of the hostile disposition of Denmark, or of the probability of her fleet being placed at the dispo sal of France ? Denmark had maintained her neu trality throughout all the wars since the commence ment of the French revolution, and sheprobably might hare continued, were it not for the recent atrocious attack upon her, to do so. This was an advantage arising rather from the relative situation of the parties in these wars, than from her own particular strength. The confidence of the Danes was, that France would not have attacked them ; that if she did, he was per suaded they would have gallantly resisted. That suc cess did not always depend upon numbers, he had only to refer for proof to the glorious atchievements of our ancestors at Cressy and Agincourt. If France had attacked Denmark, the consequence would have been, that the latter would have thrown herself into the arms of England, and that the Danes would have ultimately accepted that assistance which in the first instance had been offered to them. He would rather see double, treble the number of the Danish fleet in the possession of Bonaparte, than see the honour of the country so wounded, as it was by the atrocious at tack upon Copenhagen. Supposing that there existed a disposition in the Continent to throw off the yoke of France, where was it to fnl a rally in g point, when the nation to whom it looked up, abandoned that high honour, that unstained character which it had hitherto preserved, and entered into a contest with France, as to which should become the greatest vio lator of the public law of Europe. But the bombard ment of Copenhagen was attributed to the obstinacy of the Danes. What ! was the Governor to betray his charge ? If Ministers were to be justified, they must be justified on necessity, and that must be a strict ne cessity. To ward off danger by anticipating it, may be made the mischievous excuse for an atrocious act of tyranny or extortion. Let us look to our enemy as an enemy. We were engaged in a contest, in which a false step was certain ruin. The question before the House was one, in which the honour of the country was more involved than the interest of Mini sters. Valuing that honour as he did—considering that he and every one who heard him, and every one in the country, not excepting the meanest individual, had an interest in upholding it, he could not avoid expressing his regret that Miaisters did not make a better defence. If they had laid sufficient informa tion before Parliament, to satisfy it that Denmark was hostilely disposed, that her Navy was to be placed at the disposal of France, and justified the dreadful mea sure to which they resorted upon these grounds, they would have been entitled to the thanks of the coun try. But as they had not—as they had not produced one solitary proof of the existence of that necessity which could alone justify them, he must say, that in stead of the applause, they deserved the reprobation of the country. The Earl of LIMERICK approved of the conduct of Ministers, in not now putting their case on private information, but upon its necessity ; and he hoped they would not be goaded by any taunts or sarcasms, to lay before the House documents which appeared to their judgment to be improper to produce. He doubted whether those conversations which the Noble Baron, Lord Hutchinson, had stated, ought to have been laid before the House. It appeared, that in the late war, as well as in the present, Denmark was rather hostile than friendly to this country. She had allowed and en couraged French privateers to send in their prizes to Bergen, in Norway, where they were condemned with very little ceremony, and sold for the benefit of the captors. When Russia was in alliance with us last war, the conduct of Denmark was so suspi cious, that when the Emperor Paul sent a fleet and army to assist in the expedition to Holland, there were' apprehensions that the Danes would have resisted , their passing the Sound ; and the Emperor Paul had given particular directions in that case, that the troops should land and possess themselves of Copen hagen, the Danish fleet, and arsenal. In fact, for the last twenty years, Denmark appeared to be ac t uated by no friendly disposition to this country, but rather to have entertained an animosity to us. In such circumstances, who could deny that 20 Danish ships of the line, joined to the sixteen Russian ships in the Baltic, would have .beeu a very formidable. accession to the ramitlihe power these flied had effected a janctfon, absolutely impossible for the Kir% resisted such a combination of force. been thrown out in different deb- Ireland on account of religious , the danger to be by no means represented. He was sure the who possessed property, wouk other men to the fraternal emi and that they would be anxious to dc country from the grasp of France. He considered , that the disaffected person, in Ireland were principally the remains of the Jacobin set, the associates of the men who had been tried at . Maidstone. He did n'ot think, however, that they were sufficiently formidable to excite any very serious apprehension. The Earl of JERSEY supported the motion. He thought it very sufficient proof tat Denmark medi tated n ohostility against this count h ry, to see that she had taken no precautions against any attack - from us, but laid Zealand open and defenceless, while her army was forming a cordon in Holstein, to observe the mo tions of th! French army. The Noble Lord (Wel lessley ) had spoken of the forbearance and discre tion with which those orders had been executed : It appeared to him that the forbearance of Ministers was misapplied, and their discretion defective. We had taken away the Danish fleet, but had left their sailors ; and, for his part, he should much prefer see ing the Danish fleet manned by Danish sailors, than give 16,000 Danish sailors to man the French navy. Whatever he might believe of the wishes of Bona parte, or of his perseverance and consummate art, be never could bring himself to believe that he would have attempted to have forced Denmark to give up her navy, as such an attempt would necessarily have thrown her into the arms of England. Lord HAWKESBURY said, he never felt more desire to answer any observations made in that House, than he did several expressions which had fallen from the Noble Earl who spoke last. The Noble Earl had stated, that Ministers had not acted on principles of morality. It was never the intention of Ministers to, act upon principles different from those of morality, and the honour which has ever distinguished the Bri tish nation, and he would sooner lose the last drop of blood, than admit that his Majesty's Government had not proceeded on justifiable principles. A Noble Lord had accused Ministers of advancing opinions not founded on morality ; but he would say with confi dence, that Ministers had not stated opinions con trary to morality ; nor had they acted on principles not founded on the basis of morality. Much had been said respecting the violation of the laws of nations. — It had been defined by the beg writers on the laws of nations, that these laws were founded on the laws of nature. The duty due from man to man, if there was no tribunal, would be the eternal law of na ture. It was a principle of self defence, founded on benevolence. To elucidate the position, he would suppose that an individual existed adverse to all man kind. He would also suppose that this enemy of human nature, a fter destroying many, intended to op pose him. There were arms which the savage in tended to use for his destruction : could any man suppose he should not be justified in taking those arms, knowing that they were to be used to de stroy him ? He also supposed his house was likely to be attacked by robbers, and he had left servants whe would not defend the house, was he not justi fied in placing himself on the threshold to protect his premises ? It was on this principle that the Law of Nations was founded, and Ministers had not ex ceeded the limits such laws prescribed. Their Lord ships were to consider the conduct of his Majesty's Government under three heads. First, did their con duct come under the Law of Nations ? and whether that description of law was to be observed tooclosely, when the country was in danger ? Secondly, whether it was practicable for the enemy to injure the country by opposing the fleet of Denmark against us ? And, Sdly, whether the danger was of sufficient magnitude ' to permit Ministers,to deviate for the public security from established principles. Portugal had been called upon to join her fleet to theconlederacy formed against this country. Communications were made to the Portuguese Minister, and documents put into his hands, stating, that the undersigned wa s authorised to declare that the Prince of Portugal must become the enemy of England, by shutting her ports against British ships, seizing and confiscating British pro perty, and joining the fleet of Portugal to that of Denmark and France. Could Ministers believe, after this document was read, that Denmark was to be excepted in the Confederacy ? These declarations were made before the 2d of August, and Den mark must have known the designs of France before the British fleet sailed for Copenhagen. — This document made it manifest that the de sign of France was to unite the Navies of the Con tinental Powers against England (hear ! hear ! ) On the subject of the law of nations, great men who have written and described the principles of those laws, did not contemplate that nations could be placed in such a situation as many were in at present. Their Lord ships had to look at the power of Austria ; how great once ! but how little now ! In the reign of Louis XIV. and at earlier periods, few instances occurred, where there were not formidable powers to resist other powers—but the will of France had lately laid pros trate all the Powers of the Continent, and no Power remained to oppose her. Ministers, under these cir cumstances, were justified in providing against the designs of France. There was no nation in Europe governed by the strict laws of nations ; they were go verned by the laws of France, and, as he had said on a former occasion, the law of England must be the law of self-preservation. With respect to what a No ble Lord had said, relative to the difficulty France would find in attacking Zealand, the Noble Lord was rather mistaken. It was extremely difficult to prevent the enemy from approaching from the Conti nent. He had consulted professional men on the sub ject, and had been informed, that it was practicable for the enemy to land troops in boats in defiance of a fleet. He had also important naval authority for this assertion. He alluded to a very able and gallant Officer, Admiral Keats, employed some time since in the Baltic. That gallant officer, while stationed off Zealand, co mmanded' formidable flotilla. The vessels were stationed a mile asunder along the whole range of coast ; and notwithstanding the greatest diligence was observed, the enemy came out during the night v.ith boats, passed the flotilla unobserved, and esca ped. A Noble Lord had made some observation a nd yet all was una va 0,0. efforts of her and her al z i ce n-ay to the irresistible for iiese events gave France in the Negotiations which foil Lordshs all know, termii Tilsit. He never said, that war ho e talen place if the att: , had not been made, and he N an unauthorized expression co 1) his mouth. I-le would aga did say war with Russia mq b u t it was decid edl y his ()I wa s hastened by that event. collagen did most decidedly cot ,n the mind of the l er 4 owl . eitelntes ?,t , 'rots, it Vadulcl have Pe*, :ing a Sweden to hatio. orce. As to What ! bates of the dango : differences, he be r .' s as great as had Catholics of fret ld be as averse as air embrace of Bonaparte* ixious to defend their . er. eal "lir, Che of rms 1 1; i $ t e ;t e, to RS 11- ce le- Jn Lve lid ha rd- eat [V. ere her ros- wcr cir- the •ope go- ol on