The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1805-02-13 00:00:00

Other what he has a right to, and, that the other
chooses to pay a price instead of retin ning it, the per-
t in to whom it belongs is always sure to set a higher
value on it, than he might otherwise have done.—
As to the treaty of lldelonso, fie also admitted, that
we had still the same sight to make it a ground of
war, which we had before, hut ire had also the same
right to waive it, it we thought proper so to do. He
then adverted to a lever from Lord Hawkesbury
to Mr. Frere, iii which he la) s down certain
points, which he diaefts him to urge at the Court
of Spain ; hut enjoins kiln, at the Sallie tune, not to
bring them to an issue. Notwithstanding this in-
junetion, it seemed that gentlemen were inclined to
contend, that their being declined or evaded by
the Spanish Government, was to invest us
with the right of making war, whenever use
thought proper. These distinctions were perfee9ly
new to him, and he was free to confess that lie never
wished England to possess rights of was upon dif-
ferent gr,ounds, so numerous and convenient, as if
they sere arranged in a bureau, and marked tight
H, right C, right I), &c. It was, no doubt, in con-
formity with these refined rights of war. founded on
a new and detestable policy, that Mr. k rere, in one
bf his letters, coefesses, that when M. Cevallus
talked to him Af the recognised neutrality of
Portugal, instead of undeceiving. he left him in his
error; and the same line of conduit was also pur-
sued 1.6 e, in regard to M. Anduaga. who, when
talking in the same way, was kept equally in the
dark by the wise statesman he was conversing v:ith,
who ailed under this system of deceit and fallacy.
He asked, what the world would think of a sinii-
hr line of proceeding, between man and man ?
A person says, " If I take this, you will he
content with fifty pounds for it ?" The other,
without answering, gives a tacit acquiescence; but
afterwards be pleads that he made no such agree-
ment. reit it seemed as if a statesman might claim
applause, for what would be deemed roguery in
another.. He declared himself to be as little satis-
fied at the c instruaion that was attempted to he
put upon what had passed upon the subjeft of ar-
maments. It appeared to him, that in every con-
versation on the armaments in the ports of Spain,
which were enquired into, Mr. Cevaliis, in de-
nying the existence of any, always spoke of them as
armaments, suited to the purposes of France, or the
arrogance of this country. Upon further explana-
tion, he-always referred to his fist note, in which,
probably, he was right, for more authority certainly
should be attached to those Atittientic documents
Clan to loose .conversations, some of them without
dates, and others to he taken on only the word or
representation of an individual, supposed not
to be very favourably disposed towards the per.
sons he was ton :sing with. He appealed to the
Right flon. and Lem red Gentleman (the Master of
the Rolls) whether such was not always the role in
law and equity ? and he contended, that ;: ought
st'so to apply in cases of this kind. From the
whole scope of the proceeding, it appeared to him
to be evident that the King of `pain was alwa)s
Kuided by the wish of not giving umbrage to the
ing of England. The constration given to that
part of the Note of M. Cevallos, he suspeded to
have arisen from the error of the translator. He
did not pretend to any particular acquaintance with
the Spanish language, but would merely suggest
that what was translated a contrary tn,' might,
in the original, have meant " inconsistent with,"
or something to that effed. There was some-
thing nut easily understood in the word convention,
which was not explained in any of the papers; but
it might, tierhaps, have meant the convention with
France, to assist it with money, instead of any
thing of an offensive nature, for the annoyance
of England ; and then the sense of it would be
plain enough, viz, that in these armaments there
was not any thing applicable to any purposes of
that kind. Adverting to what had been said
of conditional denunciations of war, he said, there
were some points of view in which he could
understand them, and in which they might be em-
ployed in many ways, such as it may be said on
' forming a truce, and if " such a thing is not done
at such a time, the truce is at an end, Sm.'
Hut, on such occasions, the conditions should be
always very simple, and extremely clear. Of a
far different description, however, must be a condi-
tional denunciation dependenton appearances, which
perhaps may turn out, in the end, to be only fah,
appearances. A great deal of argument had
been used, and a vast deal of ingenuity exercised,
in the attempt to prove that this was a hostile
armament. He did not, however, wonder at this,
for though it would be no difficult matter to
prove what every one believed, yet great dex-
terity and pains were very necessary to prove
a case, when the common consent of mankind
is against it. Upon this subject, he should be
willing to le.on the truth, and the belief of it
to any man, or men, possessed of common sense,
taking the nature of the thing, together with all the
information that coul b.: derived from personal
ingpettion, the report of travellers, and the informa-
tion that could be derived from documents, to say,
whether they could believe this to have been a hos-
tile armame.it. Little,indeed,cculd the Spanish Go-
vernment itself have ever supposed that removing a
ship halt manned, and consequently unfit for ser-
vice, from the inner to the outer dock, could
have been thought to be a hostile armament against
the naval power of Engtand ! It was asked, could
any man be so abond as to think that this armament
was intended for the conveyance of troops to Biscay?
However abeard they may think proper to represent
it, he was one of those who really did believe it.
It was not true that it was a shorter or more con-
venient route to convey troops from Ferrol to Bis-
cay by land, than by sea; but it was true that Ships
of war were very convenient for the transport of
troops coast-ways; and were it otherwise, there
was more than one proof of its having been done
in this country. Admiral Cochrane's letter was
no prof at all of what he had asserted. He
would not say that the Admiral would have
expefted any thing which he did not hear and be-
lieve • but he would say. that the Admiral was very
ill informed. To shew that he was, he need only
obser,e, that he reported the same thing to have
happened at Cadiz and Ca t a;ena, about the
same time, though the plague then raged there,
which must have put an end not only to
equipments., but even to all communication.
ll.sides, if any hostile objed was in view, it
was very suange that accounts should state the