The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1803-05-25 00:00:00

. JII 0 NUMBILit 1241 IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. violation of public faith, is of itself a ground for WAR will not go through the whole coarse of what is called the proofs of the .system of aggran disement, on the part of France. I will say nothing of tics annexation of Piedmont, I will not observe that it was the country of a Prince to whom, and to whose states, we stood as dire el guarantees. I have heard, since the Treaty of Amiens, that different per sons have entertain:al different views and opinions on that point. I do not, however, think it necessary now to question whether the. King of Sardinia was entitled to the guarantee of this country; it is enough to state my opinion that the annexation of any part of the dominions of the King of Sardinia to France, was that which we were guarantees to have pre vented. I will not dwell upon the suhjeet of the in velar* of Switzerland; it is one which the most difficult to discuss, without mixing with it those con siderations which I stated it was my purpose to avoid. hhould not be able to go much into such a subjelt, without trenching on that line I marked out in the commencement of my observat a ms. It is not because I consider Switzerland as offering less ground of war, but for the purpose Cif those I can enihr into, without trespassing qn the line I first pro posed, and for the purpose of shewiog what I believe cannot be doubted, the causes of war on our part are so reumerous, that no man need adopt them all ; but that it is enough to seled either for the conve nience of the mode of arguing the question. But, Sit, although it is not nly purpose to go into much length on the subjed, either on the general arrange menu of the German Empire, the annexation of Piedmont, the violation of the independence of Switzerland, or the annexation of the Batavian Republic ; yet I will :,ay, that they are all proofs of such a system of aggrandizement on the pact of France, that they do every one of them fur nish a cause of war stronger than any grounds which have in former times been thought necessary.— What arc the grounds of those Gentlemen who at tempt to give to this argument less weight than I think it is entitled to. There has been an inclination, on the part of some Gentleman who have spoken, to teach the House, that what might have been considered k just cause of war is weakened, because, they say, that at the time the Treaty of Amiens was made, did any man doubt the influence of France in Batavia ? or, that Piedmont, in a military point of view, was subjeft to the French Government ? or, that such was the case with resped to Switzerland, that no other could beexpeeted, than that it should yield its independence to the first appearance of a French force I Could any man, they say, doubt, that the power of the arms of France, brought up to the Ba tavian Republic, could be resisted ? or, that that country was not, at the time of the treaty, actually subject to, and in the power of, France ? I do beg leave to remark, as to the state in which we are placed by the Treaty of Amien.—What was the leading argument that recommended the Treaty of Amiens? It was said, that the tone and temper in which it was made, was an assurance of its continu ance. We were told, that one invitation to Minis ters acceding to the Treaty of Amiens was, the pa cific disposition of the French Government, and the reasonable ground of hope there was, that the French would cease from pursuing objeets of aggrandize ment and ambition. What was the hope held out to us, if it was good for any thing ? We were told to look to the general hope of the permanency of peace, and that by making certain sacrifices we might purchase a pacific temper on the part of France. The hope thus held out to us meant, if any thing at all, ti.at France should observe the treaties by which she was bound. It meant that France, being bound by treaty to Batavia, would respell the rights of Batavia ; that France being bound by treaty to Switzerland, would resped the indepen dence of Switzerland ; that the French Government would not have annexed Piedmont to France ; and now, when all these hopes axe deceived, and when all these violations and aggressions, and twenty more, have been committed by France, it is to be contended that these are not causes of complaint be cause it is said every reasonable man must, at the time of signing the treaty of Amiens, have seen, that France would ad .. : as she has done, and that the countries she has taken possession of had no means of resistance. 1 would ask, whether there ought to be a moment in which this country should not be prepared for war, while the system of France is such as to be continiatlly adding something to it ? Is it to be sad that we are nut to endeavour to resist the ambitious system cif the French Government, be cause having, at the Treaty of Amiens, had a pow erful military force, it is now exercised in destroying the independence of the countries around it ? That, because she had a military power in Batavia, we ought not to resist her attempts agaiast that coun try ? That, because Switzerland was unable to ile fend herself, we must not, therefore, resist her possess ing herself of Switzerland? I maintain that these aas tnken singly, make each of them a jest cause of war, .such as, in all former periods in tile history of this country, would have been sided upon by Parliament vigoroasly, manfully, and, I trust, successfully. If these grounds of war were wanting, I should call the attention of the House to the subjeet of k;gypt and here I desire to call the consideration of the 1 louse to the -case of Egypt, and what relates to jt, as it appears to my mind it is a case of a dired breach of the Treaty of Amiens. By the Treaty of Amiens, the French were bound to guarantee the integrity of the Turkish dominions, which became of essential consequence to us, not only hi our rela tions to Turkey, but because the Val- had shewn that the integrity of the Turkish dominions would be necessary, in the event of a future war, to our own possessions in India; in that view it *as, that, when our own victorious arms had dirtied the de liverance of Egypt, we demanded the solemn assu-. ranee of a treaty to pioted us from attack in that part of the world. We, having driven the French from Egypt, were content to evacuate it ourselves, on a reliance, tlut the French would not, as _soon as we had evacuated it, resume the hostile intention occupying it again with the view of carrying on a; ar upia wane tow. V%:‘AaiUU trUl Last la myself to the House on the present question. it is from an apprehension that if I delay it longer, owing to accidental circumstances, I might be pre vented from being heard. and I are extremely anxious for saying the very few words I have to say while I have voice enough to make myself distin.t. When I came to the House yesterday, I own I thought I should not have had much to offer to the indulgence of the House, for it did appear to me that there wire powerful and invincible motives fret so confining the course of the debate, as not to let it range over the whole of the subjea lithe ettent of which it is capable, should any one 646 to moulder it in enlarged point of view. There bee many mrs. tines which have induced me to think that it is the wish of the House to have a more limited course of debate ; the House is aware that it is a subje4l of snch an extensive kind as almost to exclude the possibility ef eeferring to it in all the various branches it is capable of embracing: the extent of the subjes is one great reason why the House must have wished it to be discussed in a way which renders it more tangible and more within the tcope of observation. Bett e Sir, I should do very little justice indeed to the real and strong grounds on which I would call t:se attenpon of the House ; and I think I should not aft right if I limited myself in my view of the subjed for no other put pose than the convenience of debate. A more powerful motive influences my mind—a sense of imperious duty. When I loOk to the situation of the country, and reflect what is the consideration we are now engaged upon, I confess it appears to me there is one case so predominant over every other, one consideration so commanding, and so much above the reach of every other, that ' those who feel as I do, will feel that motive alone determining them in the course they ought to adopt, end of inducing them to confine themselves to the discharge of that pressing duty they are called upon to fulfil. His Majesty has told his people and his Parliament that the aggressions of the French have forced him into a war. If there is anr man who can teach himself to believe, or who can hesi tate to believe, that there is a just ground of war, a ground which has justly provoked the L'eclaration on the pert of His Majesty, that man may take the ireneral view of the subjea which I am describing . !hose, on the contrary. who think there is a just cause of war, and will think it is their first duty to remove from the tEscussion every possible conside ration whatever that can interfere one moment in preventing that strong, cordial, unanimous expres sion of the Parliament of this country (bear! hear! exclaimed many), which may enable His Majesty to fight manfully the great cause in which he is en-' gaged. It is therefore the duty of every man to put out of his mind every consideration which can stand in the way of the necessary and important duty which this House is called upon to discharge.— Considering the many opporttmities I have had to complain in this House, of want of sufficient infor- • mation being given to enable fairly and fully to con sider the state of the country, I might be one of the first to congratulate Parliament on its having been restored to its complete funaions, and on hav ing been placed, by receiving all the necessary in formation from the Crown, in a situation capable of discharging its duty to the Public. I ought to be one of the first to go the greatest length in con gratulating you upon this occasion ; but the duty I have spoken of is so far transcendent, and beyond every other duty,that I should be blamed if I suffered any other consideration to lead me astray from that duty which I conceive to be not may to consider whether his Majesty is necessarily engaged in a war, but not to suffer the subjea to be hampered by the introduction of other pones, which cannot be import ant to the main question. Now having said so much as to the ground upon which I think it is of so much importance to separate the subjet% I feel myself relieved from the necessity of going heti any large detail. The single point necessary to be re ferred to, I take to be this: whether it dues appear to this House the country has or has not a )ust occa sion and right of war against France. 1 hat is the first great point. The next is, whether, }saving that just cause of war, tilde is such a weet of expedi ency with regard to carrying it on, that his Majesty should not, in the present state of the country, be advised so to do. Now, on what does this right of war depend? Since the Treaty of Amiens, every insult leas been offered, on the part of Irence, which could tend to vilify and degrade the British I Government ; I should say, in the words of his Ma jesty's Declaration, that, front the time of the Trea ty of Amiens, there has been an uniform proof of a system being adopted, on the part of France, for the purpose of degrading, vilifying, and insulting his Majesty's Government ; I should say, that that system had been :hewn, in the terms of the sante declaration, in defiance of every principle of good faith, moderation, and justice. Now, when I come to select and distinguish the grounds of the war, my difficulty consists rather in their abundance, than in the want of them ; but these points have been so largely discussed, that I should refrain from dwel ling upon them, if I was more able than I am to pro ducethet effed, which was productalinthis Houseyes tertiey ; buL it becomesevery man to state the principal grounds of his opinion. It I was to take the words of his Majesty's I/Mutation as the foundation of my opinion, t should say, that the mere aR of sending persons to this coontry, apparently invested with di plomatic charaaers, and under pretence of preserv ing the relations of peace, at the same time that they were aauated by motives of the most determined austerity against this country, while they were re garded and treated with all that hospitality and at tention, which their supposed sacred charaaers en tided them to ; I say that, in my mind, the mere sending persons, who, when they were receiving that hospitality which a generous nation thought it its duty to shew towards them, were at the same time tracing out the destruaion of the country, is so scan dalous, so shameful, and so unprecedented an a. 51 of aggression, the instead of questioning whether it is a just ground of war, should be rather inclined to ask, whether it has beta property resented l (Heir! Liar!) I say, Sir, dia. se gross as instates of the HOUSE OF LORDS. sotsnay„ MAY C&. Mr. Murray was heard in remainder on behalf of the Respondent ; and Mr. Adam in reply for the Apellant, in the Appeal Cause, the Carron COny rally v. Ogilvie ; after which the farther decision was deferred till to-morrow fortnight. Thirteen MU' were brought up from the Com =lns by Mr. Arley, Sir Gelber* Heathcote, and others, presented and read a first time. In the Committee on the Militia Family Bill, the Earl of Radnor moved several Amendments. Lord Rolle, Lord Auckland, and Lord Hobart, spoke in reply to the objedions offered by the Earl of Rad nor. The Committee divided on the Clause pro viding that no Militia-man shall marry while in quar ters and embodied. without the previous consent of his Commanding Officer. Contents (that the Clause stand part of the Bill) I Not Contents - 8 Majority against the Clause —7 The business on the table was regularly gone through. Lord CLIFTON (Earl of Darnley) moved for * copy of all the additional papers that had been laid before the House of Commons relative to the late negotiations, as they would be necessary to il lustrate the subject of nest Thursday's debate. Lord AUCKLAND said, he believed the Noble Lord was inaccurate in his mode of moving for the papers in question. They must be moved for dis tinaly and separately ; and indeed, if the Noble Lord would permit it, he would save him the trou ble, and move for them himself, as he had intended to do when he carne down to the House, and had written out the titles in the margin of the paper which he held in his hand. He lamented that Mi nisters were so soon to be disturbed by enquiries into their conduet ; but, he was persuaded, that they thought it their duty to institute them, :mil he was ready to admit that it was perfealy constitutional so to do. If the enquiries were to take place, certain ly the papers in question were proper to be previ- Ously produced. The papers related to four dis nnet subjeas—some to the affair of Louisiana, which were highly important in themselves, and cre atable to Ministers; others relative to the cession of the Cape of Go od Hope • and others, contain iag the orders and counter-o;ders sent out for the cession of the islands in the West Indies ; besides those the Noble Lord had moved for, relative to the capture and seizure of British ships. His Lordship moved them. But the Lord Chancellor observing, that he could not compel the House of Commons to lay an? papers before that house, The motions were re-drawn by Lord Auckland, and moved in due form. Lord CLIFTON (Earl of Daraley) said, he eras particularly anxious to see the papers relative to the seizure and detention of British ships in the ports cf France. His Lordship said, he wouli take that op portunity of restating what be had said the preced sag night at a late hour, when their Lordships were extremely impatient, and be feared he had been but little heard. He had congratulated the House on the negotiation, of the long protraCtion of which be hail more than once expressed his ittip:ltience ; that It: would give his vote for the original motion, be- C2tlSe unanimity, under such circumstances, ap peared to him, in common with the majority of the I-louse, to be extremely desirable, although he did not think that there was so much difference between the turn an& / tendency of the amendment, and the address originally moved. At any rate it did not, in his mind, at all justify the application of the line of Virgil, which a Noble and Learned Lard had made to it: " Oremus pacer, et Jextras teulLusus Memos " The papers were ordered. The 1-louse is to go up to St. James's, to present their A d dress to-mor row at two o'clock.—Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. TUUDAY, MAY WAR WITH FRAYN. The order of the day was moved fur the House to proceed with the adjourned debste on his Majesty's Message, relative to the war with France. The following is the origival Address, and the .Amendment moved by Mr. Grey. That an humble Address be primut 'el to his l'sfajesty, to ro. turn his Majesty the th %Its of tins House for his 'wok gra cious Mesvagr, and for the communication of the Mea ns' paper; wh.ch have ben laid before them, in Mrs-thence to his 141,4jestrs ColD.nands. Teasers his Majesty of the just sense we entertain of his Majesty's anxious and uinturro endeavours to preserve to his peimie the bleating' of peace, and of our perfect confident: in his Majesty's deposition to t-rroinate the e &unities of war, whenever that object,can beai conspli , hed Consistently with the honour of his Milfiesty's crown, and the interests of his people. 1 hat we have observed with the strongest feelings of 0144- 7ia.toll, that his Majesty's endeavours have isea frustrated by that restless spirit of ambition and domination by which the quveriitneat of France have been led to advance pretensions Lie most extravagant and injurious, and to a,ow design, as unct inconsistent 'sulk the obligations of good faith, and with the essential interests of the British Einlurc ; and that for them ladignities and provocations his Matjusty lia• in vain demanded *strife:thin and redivide. That actuated by these sentiments, we feel that the trust imposed in us liv a brave and losal peo,-le requires, ea our part, a firm determination to eiwuperate with his Mai sty in relish( forth the resources of the United Kiag.lvm, for toe vigorous sopporr of a canoe tin wui, h arc invoived the ilign ty of his Ma levity, crown, the rights awl libertiwi of his pito*, a 41 all that t*r and valuable to ua as a free and iudivendent Amendment proposed to leave out from the first paragraph to the end of the question, in order to laSett these words— To assure his Majesty of our firm determination to co operate with his Majesty in calling forth the resources of the United Kingdom fur the vigorous roweution of the war its whien we are involvcd; and I. experts to his Majesty the as tufaatoit with which his faithful Calm:eons have reeeived his Majesty's ratios* Decieretion, that he is willing to afford, as tar as may b coneiseat glib his IMO honour and the interests hm people, Imo fionlity to , soy arractereineut by which bLaglagi el poses say be rented se dr loyal subjects. Ibe Address and the Ameedenent beteg read, . Mr. T. GRENVILLE rose, and spoke to the fiJliewing sir, if 1 have p.estsased to offer ~ .~ 4, "V. _~- .r. • ~ . • - . , •,. . ' Ir * 4 • -. . • s. t AVD l i . A i • . 4.... A L_ _ 40. #1 . , : . l ' s.'' • VI - 7 4 :4 4 ' 4 114. f • ' 43 ' . e.. 4.. u...., si• 141 ) 411° TQ be 4 1 , t , rt to b • 13rie f o . 4 - 0 , • 1 ~. ~. ,i ;, ..4 . 1 i. . ;s 44 f. %)'!'-w-`' - -4, i ??.N.t•- . : Will . 0.4 i. •in ; 1111 O R, . , . • t .. 41 $ RJVI N G L ITERJRY .IDVERTISE R. .. ~. . _:,__ -.---__ . WEDNESDAY, 11IAY . 25, JBO3. [PRICE sixraxcr.. . _„_.. _ . _. • 4 . , , 1 k ~ I, . . . , i. • 1 .. * 1 1 I . o. . s ; . ol i I, l i 4 r • i 11 4 I i .1i li . t i 4 i'' 1.,' dia possessions, we therefore demanded, on the part of France, the guarantee of the integrity (Idle Turk ish empire. Such was the security we took of them. Let us see how their guarantee has been discharged. If any man can read the report of Colonel Sebes tiani, and entertained any doubt upon the subjs.& I should much despair of being able to prove that point, yet it is not on the report only that the point in question depends. In the first place, with lespeCt to the report itself, it is useless to comment upon the vain pretences under which the filet is attempted to be done away. It is absurd to see the apologies for Sebastiani's report, by calling his mission a com mercial one. It is no more commercial than the missions of the commercial Ceneuls referred to by his Majesty's Message • I desire to appeal to the highest authority ; I refer the House to the account given by Bonaparte, in his own conversation, when he calls it a military commission, and justifies it upon our infraCtions of the treaty ofAmiens. His own A ru baesador in this country, Gen. Andreossi, did net fir a moment nee the precaution of attempting to dis guise that Colonel Sebastiaui's niission was a mili tary ems, arising from the military view which a French officer had taken of what he was pleased to call an infraftion of the Treaty of Amiens. Here, then, is the report of Colonel Sebastiani, confirmed by the First Consul himself in Paris, and by his Ambassador here. Look at the remainder of the report of Colonel Sebastiani, and viewing him tra velling over the famed seven islands of the lonian Sea, and assuring the French Consul of the disposi tion of the inhabitants to receive the orders of Franee. There is a supplementary paper to that report, A which the commissary gives you an account of his having put under the protection of the First Consul the French Churches of the lonian islands, with orders that those who resorted there for the purpose of prayer, should pray for the preservation of his valuable life. (A loud laugh!) I have no doubt but that it the mosques of Cairo were to be put under the same proteCtion, that orders would be also issued • for prayers to be offered up to implore Heaven in favour of Bonaparte, with this difference only, that in Cairo, the Mahometan form of worship would be adopted instead of the Christian. Sir, thus stands the case of Egypt—had Colonel Sebastiani's report been merely an intercepted letter, I should have thought that the Government of the country, believ ing it to have been an official letter, would have been warranted in demanding an explanation of it;. and if that had not been granted, would have been justified in going to war • but now, when the report has been adopted by ihe First Consul himself, as well as by his Ambassador, then I ask, whe ther it is possible that any reasonable man can read the report, and entertain the slightest de gree of doubt as to there having been in the mind of Bonaparte an hostile design and view of possessing himself of the country of Egypt, in defiance of the guarantee France has given of the independence of the Turkish dominions. This iv not all, for when I read his Majesty's Declaration, r find that the French Government bas even suggested the idea of a partition of the Turkish Empire. I have no doubt but that this refers to a report which has been so current as to have obtained implicit be lief—l mean the report of a proposal on the part of France to a great Northern Power to consent to the partition of Turkey between them. Give me leave to say, this is one of those subjeets with regard to which there is no man who considefe what is the nature of any document relating to it, but must be sensible that no Government could do more than merely refer to it ; for his Majesty's Mi nisters not to have referred to it at all would bare been no departure front their duty, and to have re fereed to it more than they have dune would have been trespassing upon what was their duty. Here is, in the first place, a proposition on the part of France to another power, to engage in the partition of the Tut legit empire, the integrity of which France. herself had guaranteed. Here is a military man sent to make a military survey ; you have a con fession that lie was sent on such mission for military purposes ; you have, as I have already said, the confession of the First Consul and of his Ansbas sador, who justifies the measure as the result of a supposed infraction of the Treaty of Amiens on our part. Now I cannot help adverting to the view in which the subjeet was considered by the only Gen- . tleman by whom any thing like a distinft amend ment to the address has been made ; and I observe there was a great deal of surprise expressed by die House, that tile view he entertained upon the sub ject he should constantly have described by the word ‘, desire." If he nae.ans by the word desire an ab stract wish that the kirst Consul, having already annexed so much to Franceishould secretly, silently, patiently, and piuusly feel himself called upon to annex to his dominions the country of E g ypt ; 1 du not say that such a covetous disposition aelueting his meld would he a legitimate ground of war ; but is there any man who reads, reasons, and puts Etas together, who would believe that he has obtained the fair result of his enquiry into the faCt, if he sup. poses Bonaparte to be attuated with a desire of ob taining possessiun of Egypt ter the pious purpose of putting its mosques and churches under his gra cious proteetion ; that he is induenced by no such religious motive is demonstrated by the fact of his desire to gain possession of that country, by the breach of the most sacred treaty. If then it was seen that the First Consul was break ing the faith of his Tretty with England, be meditating the means of taking possession of Egypt after he had guaranteed its integrity ; Is it fit fur this country, or of any country, seeing a design to infringe a treaty solemnly entered into, not to exert • itself to prevent such a violation of national faith England having seen a design firmed to wrest • Egypt from the Tot kish empire e and having had evi- ' deuce of the left, by the adoption, on the part of • France, of the first steps necessary to be taken for the purpose of carrying into of any military de- •• - sign; I mean the ascertaining, 67 an expereneed • officer, the military sittietion of tl; 'country intended to be attacked ; will any man tell me that the state of this latA is teoparly clescrintod by Liie we os 6 dob 6 • . • '. - ... ' • ic A i‘ ~. _ '.. J.C. a 1. which 1 1 \ i I icit be- part of - • . 1 . sent to . t ive me if i t 's with insides . I t (' g to it, )uld do is 111i- ki hare • • ave re- , i hay." . ' • Here ‘, )art of ' t . 4 artition t ! , i 1 France. c / 7 man ) a con- t nilitary id, the 1, krebas- lO 1 • jr A " alt of a on oar r view in y Gen- . I amend- )bserve I by the r f i l le sub- e word an ab- 0 tlready ilently, tpon to t ; I d•.• tuating r ; but is faits DtaintAt i 1 he sup. . of ob- • • )ose of I ti s gra- to such • of his . . ' . , A ll by the • 1, 1 F then ; 4 ' break- , Id, by ' Egt fit fu yp r i ( sign to 0 cleft . r faith I • • %cr.:sr • I atd evi- ' 5 , r . ?art of ten for , ary de- . rienced - . i vended le state t 44 GU . I 1 41