The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1803-06-03 00:00:00

NW f 4 and Melly have yon been perseceted ! and how ho nourable in your sufferings." The next outrage to which he adverted was the manifesto published by the French Minister at Hambnrgh, which for some time became the centre and focus of the plots and .conspiracies of rebels. The hostile mind of the First Consul was in no instance more glar ing than in the person he selected for this mission to I lansburgh Was he a Tyro, a perfeet novice in plots and machinations ?He was Rheinard, con versant in all the scenes of the French Revolution, and who possessed the confideuce, and was the ac iomplice of all the leaders, from the sanguinary committee of Robespierre to the time of the throne being occupied by his friend the First ConsuL His Lotthhip, after enlarging on a variety of aggra vating circumstances, through which we have not now time or room to follow him, concluded with announcing his intention to give his negative to the proposed resolutions. The Earl of GROSVENOR also expressed his approbation of many of Abe principles advanced by Earl Fitzwilliam, which appeared to him so incon testible, particularly what regarded the right of that house to offer its advice to his Majesty ; that he mint to move the previous question in preference to meeting the motion with a direCt negative. He admitted also, and enumerated many justifiable causes of war, of which Ministers might have • availed themselves if they had not been Influenc ed, by a strong desire to maintain that peace to which they had acceded. He argued upon many points .to slew, that . the conslie9 of our adversaries left us no alternative, but that of accepting the quarrel; and that, though we should have stood upon grounds of .more advan tage before we made so many important cessions, than it was possible for us now to do, after having made so many important cessions ; yet, we had no little reason to congratulate ourselves on Malta re maining still in our possession. He would, by no means, give his assent to the present resolutions, which, if carried, would, consistently with the Noble Lord's own professed determination, be certainly fol lowed up by a direa impeachment. • For this reason, and seeing no fair ground of charge against the Ministers, at the same time, that all the resolutions could not well be negatived, he considered himself as following the best course in moving the previous question. Lord DARNLEY thought it his duty to oppose the last motion, and support resolutions proposed Isy his Noble Friend. He animadverted on the con :Met of Ministers in framing the address of the Douse in reply to his Majesty's Message, in such a manner as to secure the unanimous concurrence of them all. In some cases, he allowed, that unanimity might be of advantage, but he could not see that it was equally nesirabk at a time when there was more need of discussion and deliberation. The li stistei s had not, in his opinion, properly sustained the national dignity and charafkr which he conceived to have been compromised in many instances ; and in the case of Switzerland, it would have certainly been more dignified to have altogether abstained from any open ipterference, when it was not he. tended to put it to extremities, and no apparent chance of its being otherwise successful. After dwelling on many of the topics which had before been argued upon, he concluded with declaring, that he should vote in favour of the motion. Lord BORINGDON said, he should be happy to concur in any measure that might give Ministers more strength and energy ; at the same time, that he did not think they had compromised the dignity or interests of the nation by forbearance. In the year 1795, the House had carried to the throne its expressions of regret for the failure of the negotine titer for peace at Paris. Again, it carried to the throne its expressions of regret for the failure of the peace at Lisle ; and, in 1800, it repeated the same expressions of regret fur the failure of the negotia. tion of peace at London. It must be thence pre-. sumed, that there was a desire, on the part of this country, to preserve peace ; and it consequently be came the duty of Ministers to take their measures accordingly, and not to be precipitate, or to break off the negotiation in a hurry. Modoration and forbearance, therefore, were the course which sound policy required they should pursue. So far from weakening the country by such a proce dure, it had produced a contrary effect. It was true, indeed, we had given up possessions, we had surrendered the Cape and Martinique, but, it was no less true that by waiting, and our system cif moderation and forbearance, we had got with us the heart of the country, which was , worth fifty islands or territorial acquisitions to any : extent. Notwithstanding, fifty ads of insult and aggression committed against Europe in general, and thus country in particular, there was not one, until Malta come in question, on account of which the country would have gone heart and hand to war with France. A Noble Earl had asked, whe ther the designs of France upon Egypt were of a novel nature ? He admitted they were nut. The conquest of Egypt was an old and favourite plan of the Cabinet of Versailles ; it was a speculation of France during the whole of the last century, and it was very natural that Bonaparte should entertain a peculiar predelkiion for that colony; but previous to the Report of Sebastian;, and the conversations of Bonaparte and Talleyrand with Lord Whitworth, these was no evidence whateva of any kind of a new and immediate design against Egypt upon the part of France. It was, therefore, a plain intelligible case, that un til peace became certain and secure, we should re tain Malta ler the purpose of defeating any attack upon Egypt. At the same time, however, that he said this, he admitted, that he did not approve gee nerally of the conduct of Ministers ; but notwith standiug he did not approve of every case with which they were conneaed, and though he thought the present crisis called for more abilities, yet this . should not prevent him from approving those parti cuiar measures, far which he thouo. t they deserved praise. He regretted that at su e a crisis, a greet portion of the talents of the country was excluded from power, and he .should be happy to concur in any measure for introducing it into his Majesty's councils, in tyre hope. that it would impart new vi- ; sour to the Government, and enable it to put a sipeedy and honourable end to the contest. The: Eael of FIFe spoke a few words, but in so use of to be Audible below the bar. linke cif CIiMBEILLA ND said, be was isr duced, to Os e ineptly br. one expression which fall from the .1‘ Lord who spoke. last bat one. The Noble ford Tad said, that lie did not approve saf• cheeonslusit of ;ilisistets sensually, and seemed to • • hint that the manner in which they came into power was one of the parts of their condud to which he excepted. " Never,!' said his Royal Highness, " did Ministers come in more honourably." The Earl of SUFFOLK said,if it were not for the partition of . .. Poland, a printe of the Hbnse of Bour bon would now be upon the throne of France. It was therefore to the fatal policy of Ministers who countenanced that measure, we were to impute the present state of things. He then quoted several au thorities condemning the condud of Ministers with regard to the treaty of El-Arisch, and Lord Gren ville's letter in answer to Bonaparte's proposition in 1600. With regard to the conquest of Egypt, Mi nisters could claim no merit, for it was notorious that they bad sent out orders to countermand the expedition. The whole merit therefore was due to Sir Ralph Abercromby, who had persevered in the enterprize. So much for their military talents. As to their principles he could not forget that they went into the Cabinet with Catholic emancipation in one hand, and the 89 articles in the other. He had often heard the word Jacobinism echoed within the walls of that I louse, but he did think it was of ten worse applied than it might have been, if used in relation to some parts of the condut of Mi nisters. The Earl of WESTMORELAND—" I hope I shall be excused in answering the charge brought against Ministers, if I can chew that it is not founded, - and that their conduct has not, as has been stated, tended to compromise the power, the honour, and the interests of the country. The war is a war of insult and aggression on the part of France, and has been brought on in no degree whatever by the condud of his Majesty's Ministers. ' I hope I shall not be contratlided when Tessera that France has laid it down that a refusal to surrender a place is not con trary to the words and spirit of a "Declaration of war." In the case of Malta, she has expressly con— tended for this principle. The First Consul and M.. Talleyrand have both maintained it in their several conversations. The complaint then, is not that we have commenced lipstilities, but, that we did not wait ' until it suited the convenience of France to go to war. ' Are we not denounced to Europe and the world. as the violators of treaties, and a nation with whom it is impossible to maintain peace ? Are we not de nounced to Europe and the world, as a nation whose interest France has determi..ed to subyert, as a nation over whom she would exercise external and internal dominion ? Was it then the duty of Minister; to wait patiently until the storm was colleted over their heads, and until the mo ment when it should burst upon them, or to anticipate its fury, and endeavour to guard against its effect. But admiting that we were not placed in that situation, with resped to both the letter and spirit of the Treaty, surely it should be our objet to secure Egypt and the in.lepeedenca of the lonian islands. See then. the situation in which Ministers were placed by the menace of France, to add both to its possessions!. It surely then became the duty of Minister* to consider the importance of Malta, with a view to prevent the execution of 'these threats. The importance of the place is ;not, I :,elieve, de nied by any one. It is the key of the Levant, and a belwark for the proteElion of Egypt. It is pecu liarly different from every other station. In the case of every other station, the moment you with draw your forces, the fleets of • France and Spain may . repel,/ their operations against any point within the Mediterrant an,until relief arrives tram thiscoun try ; but in the case of Malta, it stands in the way of any hostile enterprize against Egypt, in any of *he countries upon the Levant. The question now is, war with or without Malta; for war would not be long delayed, even though we should consent to surrender that island. War, with all the advantage of the means of affording preted:on to our allies, without loss of honour, and in a station for the defence ofof our most valuable possessions, or the al ternative of peace, accompanied with the sacrifice of the laws of hospitality, and the right , and liberties of the country. 1 hope the country is not reduced so low in spirit and means as to barter such things for such a peace. I shall now proceed to examine a few circumstances which are generally urged of late in debate, and require an answer. In the first place the inability of Ministers is a common-place eche within these walls. This discovery has been a good deal dwelt upon by a Noble Lord, who, no doubt from the greatness of his own talents, is taught to think lightly of others. The Noble Lord has disco vered this inability in the Naval Department. Now, for the refutation of the charge, look to the condud of Ministers, for it is by their conduit they wish to be tried. At the time Ministers came into power, the country was engaged in war in every part of the globe. Look then to the victory of Copenhagen, Look to the naval vigor- at Gibraltar, and to the event of the campaign in Egypt. These, 1 think, furnish a satisfatory answer to the charge of inca pacity in the Naval Department. The next point as sailed in their conilud is the treaty concluded sirith the Northern Powers. This measure, however, re ceived the approbation of Parliament, and therefore cannot be a fair objet of censure. The next charge is the Definitive Treaty ratified upon the 23d of April, and whichalsoreceivedtheapprobationof Parliament. What test, I should be glad to know, can Ministers have of their good combed, except the approbation of Parliament ? and what ad of their wise and able administration has received more approbation than the peace ? I have also to say that the peace re ceived the most zealous and universal approbation of the people. It is not, therefore, fair to censure that peace, and to wound the Minister who made it , through the sides of the Parliament and the pub lic. The next charge is, that the peace was made upon an assurance of good will and sincerity upon the part of France; in short, that we were to have a sort of a'zolden age grow up again among us. I never heard any such expression made, nor knew any such hope held out. For the contrary I appeal to the Address of this I louse upon the occasion. It was then said, that upon the whole it was better we should make peace ; that we were unable to make an impression upon France ; that it was therefore ' wise to husband our resources and wait until an f opportunity shall present itself of restraining the ambition and aggrandizement of France. In line, it ' was thought wise to make peace when we • were at the zenith of our power and glory, and in this sen timent the Parlianteatand. the country concurred. Now what was the first, act of this peace which is now -complained of ? It disbanded 70,000 militia, it disbanded 20,00 g fescibles, and all the seaman who returned home. On the 23d of May the peace received the approbation of Parliament, and yet at An time Portugal and Spa* were as mach is the power of France as the) , are at present. The terms of the treaty were, that all the cessions in Europe should take place within a month from that date, and consequently upon. the 23d of June we should have surrendered Malta. In the interval, I admit, many offensive and insulting alts were done by France ; but was it the duty of Ministers to have broken the treaty then ? What would have been the case if they had gone to war at that time on account of Malta or the many offences of France ? The country had evinced the greatest joy at the peace; Lauriston had been just draWit in triumph into London, and the town was a blaze of illuminations. What then would have been said if Ministers, at that moment, incurred the responsibility of going to war ? The next period of time at which they are charged with misconduel is the zra of the subjuga tion of Switzerland. The justice of the Swiss cause affeCted, I allow, the feelings of every man in this country. It was, however, expedient to ascertain whether the other powers of the Continent would concur in our views, and the state of this country made any attempt extremely difficult. The result, however, was, that before the end of a month, the unfortunate Swiss were unable to resist ; but still our interference had so far succeeded that the idea of annexing Switzerland to France, as originally in tended, was given up. But why retain Malta and give up the Cape? To this I answer, the Cape is not now of so great advantage with a view to the security of our possessions in India, as formerly when we had not Ceylon. It has been said to be a good station for our cruiser ;s but judging from the small number of captures made from it an the late war, there is no reason to presume that it has that advan tage, the foreign commerce of the enemy in that quarter being inconsiderable. The next period at whials it is said the peace ought to have been broken off is, the commencement of the hostile discussions that lately took place between this coun try and France. But did his Majesty make no communication at that time, which could produce an hostile feeling ? I lis Majesty stated,_ that there was something going on upon the Continent which he did not approve, and recommended that pre patations should be made to resist it. The next point at which it was said we should have gone di reCtly to war was, upon the mission of the Commer cial Consuls, or, as they would be more properly named, the Military Consuls. The tondat of Minis ters upon that occasion, cannot, I think, reflea any disgrace upon them, for they refused to admit them. Viewing then all these things in their fair and pro per light, I do think, that a little forbearance on the part of Ministers upon these several occasions was their duty, and that it was not their duty to force hostilities, or to give up the repose of peace, while their remained a chance of its continuance.— Now, my Lords, I come to examine another part of the subject. It has been said, that his Majesty's Message of the Bth March rested upon fallacious grounds, in assigning for cause, considerable arma ments fitting opt in the ports of France and'Hol land. The armaments, which are notorious, were sufficient for .tlle purpose. In the first place, an armament was 'admitted in the Texel for the pro fessed (Ned of carrying 8,000 troops to Louisiana. Noce a fleet, that could carry 8,000 men to Louisiana, would be sufficient to carry three times as many, that is, 24,000, from the Texel to the West of Eng. land. There was also an expedition of 3,000 men fitting out at Havre, which, upon the same princi ple, could convey 9,000 troops to this country ; and another of 2,000 at Brest, which would be adequate to the conveyance of 6,000 across the channel.— To these was to be added, a large armament fitting out in the Mediterranean for the convey ance of a force of 25,000 men, so that if the First Consul meditated an attack upon this country or Ireland, he had thus the means prepared for 50,000 men to carry it into execution. And if he had the means, what security had we that he would not use them. This lover of Peace, and observer of Trea ties, this grand Pacificator, the First Consul of France, is the very man who attacked the Ottoman Porte, in violation of a treaty, and attempted to wrest from it the province of Egypt. Against such a, man, if Ministers had not prepared for resistance, what could they have said in their justification ? Upon the subjeCt of the Negotiation, it was not ne cessary to gay any thing, as the country seemed to be generally agree.' upon the propriety of its ter mination. Had we obtained Malta for only ten years, it would have been a great objed, as it would have afforded an opportunity to amend the treaty, to have obtained reparation for the insult to our honour, and stipulated in favour of Holland. But it was asked, why insist now upon the retention of Malta, when we had before agreed to its cession ? —T o this he should answer, that it was the duty of Ministers to forbear until they should be able to carry the opinion of the country along with them. We had gained many advantages by the peace. It was eying to it that the Spanish fleet is not now in the port, of Brest ; that the French fleet is dispersed and wasted. By the peace also a per feCt conviCtion has been produced in the minds of the people of France, that we do not wish to plun der their property and divide their territory, and that the peace is sacrificed to the ambition and va nity of an individual, who having enslaved a great part of Europe, cannot bear the freedom of this country, and wishes to extend his dominion to every quarter of the globe. On our part we have a fleet and army greater than at the commencement of any preceding war, and we have also this essential advantage, of having convinced the world, by our forbearance, that the present war on our part a war of necessity." Lord MULGRAVE rose and deprecated wasting the time of the House, and embarrassing the Execu tive Government, by entertaining such notions as the present, when the time of the House and of the King's servants could be so much more usefully employed in proposing and deliberating upon wise and • vigo rous measures, such as would be suited to the im portant and critical situation of the country. The Resolutions which the Noble Earl had read to the House, were retrospeBiie in their nature, and cal culated to degrade his Majesty's Ministers in the eyes of the people, as well as to hold oat to the contemplation of the - First Consul, that though that House had been unanimous in their de termination to' support his Majesty in the just and necessary war in which we were engaged, by the ut most exertions of their wisdom in calling forth the assistance of all the resources of the country, yet the very next step they took was to enter into a prelimi nary and hostile debate among themselves, upon; the consideration of what was past and irrecover able, instant of jice losing s morn4sn in going to the paramount consideration, that which was most nr• gent, and the most expeted, by the whole empire ; namely, the strengthening our military establish ment, by raising immediately' a large number of additional men, and adding to our revenue by new taxes so as to increase it to as great an extent as the circumstances of the country would admit. Sure he was, that animated as the people, and indignant a the coodud, of the First Consul of France to wards this country, disgusted with the uniform sys tem of aggrandisement, aggression, arrogance, in sult, and oppression manifested by him towards Great Britain, ever since the Treaty of AMiens was signed, they would chearfully contribute to their utmost to support the national honour and the .dignity of his Majesty's Crown and Govern ment. His Lordship pursued this theme with great energy and eloquence ; and after an abun dant display of patriotic sentiment, calculated to inspire the country in general with the most ardent spirit, said, so injurious did he feel it to waste their time, and weaken the hands of Ministry by idle and ill-timed disputes about what was past, that the most effedual and ready means to put an end to the entertaining such injudicious dis cussions, he moved, "That the House do now adjourn." He heartily wished that the motion would be immediately put, but he was conscious that he could not prevent Noble Lords from pursu ing their arguments. He hoped, however, that the motive which he had explained as the ground of his motion, would impress the House with the ex pediency of putting an end to the Debate, and therefore he moved in form, 66 That the House d. now adjourn." 'I he Earl of CARLISLE reprobated the proposal of such a motion when the House were employed in the discharge of one of their highest and most im portant constitutional duties, an enquiry into the con dud ofiiis Majesty's Ministers, in the course of a ne gotiation which, through their negled, had led the country into the state in which it then stood—of adual war with France. He also implored the House to consider of what a situation they placed his Majesty's Ministers, if such a motion should be carried. They would be deprived of the oppor tunity of clearing themselves, if they could ,clear themselves of one of the heaviest sharps that ever was brought against Ministers. Wits that fair ?. Was it candid to them? To sad nothing of the at tempt to deprive the House of their undoubted right • tb exercise one of their best and most valuable con stitutional functions. His Lordship urged the necessity of' proceeding in the present debate, and allowing every Noble Lord, who thought as he did, to 'state the grounds on which they conceived his Majesty's Ministers deserved the severe censure pass ed upon their conduct, and enable them to make their defence. It was more necessary that this should be the course of proceeding, because, al though his Majesty's Ministers had talked much of their acknowledging their responsibility, and being ready to meet enquiry ; yet the word rerponsibility, sia applied to Ministers, appeared lately to have lost its meastrag. The good intentions of his Majesty's, Ministers, whenever their conduit was called in question, were set up as an excuse for it, though it was fir from being an adequate one, or a constitutional defence. The word responsibility, had been better understood by our ancestors. Cardinal Wolsey, who was undoubtedly a great Minister, towards the end of his life, felt what re sponsibility in the King's servants really was. Lord Strafford, in like manner, paid the price of re. sponsibility for his vandal. Other Ministers and great Officers of State, for their mal-prattices, paid the same price ; and k was highly necessary that the Ministers of this 'day should be taught how awful and serious a thing responsibility was.— One Noble Lord in the debate had said, if you mean that his Majesty's Ministers should be dismissed, why do not the Noble Lords who move and support the string of Resolutions, move to impeach his Majesty's Ministers at once ? Did that Noble Lord recoiled, that accord ing to the pra'lice of the Constitution, that House could not originate an Impeachment; it must be brought up from the House of Commons. His Lordship added a good deal on the incapacity of his Majesty s Ministers, and observed, the want of ca pacity was a State crime. He should, lie said, vote againt the Motion of Adjournment, and fur the original Motion. The Earl of CA RNA RVON, in a warm speech, reproaated the conduct of his Majesty's Ministers both at the time of the Definitive Treaty and dar e in g the whole of the negotiation which had since taken place. He said it appeared from the papers on the table, that they knew, when they sighed the Definitive s Treaty, that the article respeding Malta could not be carried into execution, and when they defended the Preliminary Articles, and assured the House, that the peace was likely to be safe, secure, and permanent, on the ground of their knowledge of the amicable tone and temper of the First Con sul towards this country, at the time that they could not but be aware, that the very reverse was the fait. The Definitive Treaty, therefore, in stead of having a wise, an efficient, and sincere treaty, was a treaty founded in delusion and fraud. His Lordship said, Ministers were highly Criminal for having not only deceived the House by Eiving them repeated assurances, that every thing pacific was evinced in the condo& of the Chief Con sul, where they knew to the contrary, but by uncon, stitutionally withholding, in the most unconstitutional Manner, the information which they had from time to time to have communicated to Parliament. His Lordship ended with declaring, that he should give his negative to the Motion of Adjournment, and vote for the resolutions moved by the Noble Earl. Lord ELLENBOROUGH began an animated spee F li, with a vehement attack on the Noble Lords apposite to him, who from day to day rang the changes on the hacknied charge of the incapacity of his Majesty's Ministers, their weakness, and their imbecility ; so that, forsooth, in a moment of great emergency, they were to learn capacity from the incapable, strength from the weak, and knowledge from the completely ignorant, and to be removed from their situations in order to make room for those utterly unqualified to become Ministers, and were inexperienced, and not likely to support those cha. rafters at all. With regard to what had been said of the seizures and condemnation of several Bri oirwdsaro. rn ne f i d t a by leg th it e im m at v e n c ic a i u p se Bri tish ships, that measure, he would tell the Noble opposite to N l V l al im, goVe was al Law, and was warranted; as . every country was, in afting upon her &wit laiss, in reused to the seizure and condemnation of such ships iiS eft- ... sr! ,~ .. I e .