The Sun.
London, England, 1803-05-25 00:00:00

press the satisfafuion of the Muse at His Majesty's
affording every facility for the restoration of Peace;
Mr.GRENFILLE again rose: when, he said, he
came to the House on the preceding day, he did not
think there could be much to say upon the subject,
conceiving that the ground would be so narrowed,
that no range would be left wide enough for any
thing like -an enlarged discussion. Many motives
had concurred to induce him to wish that the
Debate might be 'thus limited, as by this mode
another very important question would be rendered
more tangible, and more fit for subsequent discus-
sion. He should, however, do injustice to the ques.
don if ;he confined such a wish to the mere conve-
nience of Debate, since he was actuated in this
instance much more by a sense of public duty.—
When a call like the preient, so superior to any
other, was made upon the CoUntry,'he thought that
a sufficient motive for confining themselves stridly
to the great and pressing duty which was then be.:
fore them. His Majesty had told the House. that
.the aggression* and-insults offered to this Ctitintry
;by'Tratice, hid forced His ,Majesty to commence
Hostilities ,against that Power ; if any man could ,
bring himlilf to believe that there, was not a Just
ground for War, then' he would take the side he
had described. Those an the contrary, who thought
with him, that it was their, first duty to remove
from the question every point which might prevent
that unanimity which was so desirable to enable
His Majesty to prosecute the Contest with that
vigour and energy which the occasion required,
would .put out of their consideration any thing
cept the important..duty •which they had to dis.
charge. After complaining so often of the want of
information,' he ought to be the first to congratulate
the House on the full informatiOn which they were
now in possession of, but the duty he had spoken
of, was so far transccndant, that he should cal-
cider himself as blameable, there. being sufficient
information to enable them to discuss what were the
causes of the War, if he embarrassed the question
with the consideration of any other points. The first
questiOn for consideration was, whether this Coon.
try had a right to go to War with France ? and
the second, whether, having a just cause for. War,
there was such a want of expediency in pursuing it,
that notwithstanding the justice of the causevit
would not be politic to carry it on ? Ever since the
Treaty of Amiens, there had been one continued
system, on the part of France, to vilify and insult
the British Government and People, a deliberate
system of ambition and aggrandizement on the part
of the French Republic ; and when he considered
whether there were just grounds of War, his
difficulty consisted rather in the abundance from
which he- was to chuse. If he took the first
att, that of sending persons here with the appear.
ance of a Commercial character, in the cha-
ratter of peace, and claiming the rights of hospi.
talky anti protedion, whilst their real views had
for their object the ascertainment of the means of
destroying this Country, he thought it was so un-
precedented and unparalleled an insult and injury,
that it furnished of itself a sufficient cause for War;
it was so gross a violation of public faith, that it
was certainly a sufficient ground for hostilities. He
would not go through the whole of the grounds for
War, it was unnecessary ; lie would not treat upon
the annexation of Piedmont, of which country we
were the dired guarantees, nor upon the subject
of Switzerland. These was amply sufficient grounds
for \Var without going through them Al. But al-
though he would not dwell upon the subjeds of the
Indemnities in the German Empire, the annexation of
Piedmont, the invasion of Switzerland, or of the
Batavia) Republic; yet all these were such suffi-
► cient proofs of the ambition of the French Repub.
tic, as nut less than at other periods to excite a dis.
position on the part of this Country to,resist the
ambition and aggrandizement of France. It had
been doubted by some, how far some of these were
just grounds for War ; it had been saitl, that they
were not, because at the period of signing the
Treaty of Amiens, Fiends Troops were in Hof.
land, Piedmont. was really annexed to France, and
Switzerland might be considered to be so : could
any man doubt at that period, it had been asked,
that Switzerland and Holland must become sub.
jest to the power of France, whenever the latter
chose to make an effort for that purpose ? The
great argument used in support of the Treaty of
Atniens, was the tone and temper in which it was
made, from which, if any thing was 'to be inferred,
it was that a disposition was beginning.ao arise in
France, to ad upon the principles adopted by re.
gular Governments, and a hope to find in that this.
position reasonable grounds for believing that
ranee would observe the Treaties she had made :
nosy, when there was a general system of ambition
and aggrandizement on the part of France,
so';
was
said it was no subject, of complaint : be it but
should this Country not be prepated to check that
ambition ? To say that the influence of France
was. 40 great in Holland and Switzerland, that
therefore it.ought nut to be resisted, was so strange
an argument, that he did not think it necessary to
pursue it any farther. All these ads were not
only altogether, but each of them a sufficient
cause for War, and such as in other times
'had been tided upon vigorously and success.
fully. Here tie wished to recur to what re_
lated to Egypt, in which there was a diced breach
of the Treaty of Amiens. By' that Treaty the
French Republic was solemnly bound to 'guarantee
the integrity of the Turkish Dominions, which
became a great objea, to us, nor only in itself, but
because of the great necessity which existed for it,
for the security of our.own possessions. In that
view he conceived that we demanded security from
France against, any attempt in that quarter. Egypt
was evacuated by our Troops, iind the evacuation

WEDNESDAY,, MAY 25, 1803.

made a sacrifice to Peace, whilst we demanded the I
guarantee as a security for our Eastern possessions.
Let it be seen how far France was sincere. If
any man doubted the insincerity of that Power,
alter reading the Report of Sebastiani; it would
be extremely difficult to prove it. , Yet the Re.
port
,was said to be commercial : vain and idle
pretext, on which the purpo4e of it was attempted
to be done away : was it possible to conceive that
it could be a commercial mission ? If any man ,
doubted, however, upon the subjed, he desired to
refer him to higher authority, to Bonaparte himself,
who had distindly described it as a military mis-
sion, and to Andreoasy, the French Ambassador,
Who had not attempted to conceal the purpose of
the mission, under the semblance of commerce, but
who distindly designated it as a military mission.
Thus, then, the Report of Sebastiani was confirmed
in all its military charafter. But was that all ?
Look at the supplementary part ,of the Report,
view Sebastiani travelling in the Republic of the
sevena Islands ; that RepubliC was however niit
confined to .Sebastiani's Report, another Supple.
mentary account amongst the Papers on the
Table, informed them that the First Consul had
granted his protedion la the Catholic Church.
of 'the Seven Islands, and that when the Mem-
bers of that Communion prayed to God, they
must • pray for the First Consul. Thus stood
the case with resped to Egypt. If the Report of
Sebastiani had merely consisted of an intercepted
Letter, it might have been laid, that it, was not a .
sufficient aa of hostility on the part of France, to.
wards this Country, though he should have con-
tended that it was ; but when, in addition to the
Report, i: was adopted by the First Consul, and by ,
the French Ambassador here, could any reasonable
man, he asked, read that and doubt that there had
been in the mind of, Bonaparte, an hostile view
with respell to Egypt, a disposition to at
direlly contrary to his own Guarantee of the
Integrity of the Turkish Empire ? This was
even riot all; but, when, in the Declaration Of
His Majesty, it was stated that the French Go.
vernment had suggested the idea of a partition of
the Turkish Empire, he must suppose that it re-
lated to a regular proposal made by France to a
great Northern Power, for such a partitioo. With
respell to this point, no documents were offered,
but if Ministers had, not referred to it, they would
have done less, than their duty, and to have re.
ferred to it mire distinctly,, would have been more
than was celled for. Before he quitted this subjea,•
he could not help adverting to an expression that
had been used, that Ifonapatte had a desire to pos.
Bess himself of Egypt. If it was meant to be said that
there was an abstract wish on the part of the Great
Consul possessing half the world„ secretly, si-
lently, and piously to add Egypt to his domi.
niona, he could not conceive chat such a siniple,
abstract wish could be a cause fur War. But pot-
ting together facts, would any man say that it svas
a lair Interpretation of those fads, to say merely
that Bonaparte had a desire to possess himself of
Egypt ? That • desire was manifested by acts' so
manifestly in breach of the Treaty which he had
signed, that we were justified in saying, that it
was a hostile breach of faith. Seeps had been taken
by the First Consul which clearly indicated the
means by which his designs were to be executed.
From, the moment that any hostile at was com-
mitted by 'France, we were justified. in using
every means for our own security, What were
the best means by ,which the First
.Consul could
execute his projects upon Egypt ? They were
those which he thought the most necessary to
the accomplishment of his desire; they depend.
ed upon Malta, and if we had evacuated Nlalta,
we should Italie been justified, after the Report of
Sebastiani, in endeavouring to retake it. Would any
man say, that if it was just to retake it, it was not
also just to retain It when it was already in our
possession? He could not see the least difference be..
tween our retaining Malta, if France committed a
breach of faith, and our right of possessing ourselves
of it again after a breach of the Treaty of Amiens,
and having previously given it up. In this view of
the subjea, be .was not one of those who would go
into a minute disCussion respeaing the zoth Article
of the Treaty of Amiens. He would grant, that if
the stipulations of the Treaty had been fulfilled,
and we had then refused to deliver up Malta, that a
breach of chat Treaty might have been fairly al.
hedged against us ; but it appeared to him that no case
had ever been made out by France which gave her a
right to demand the evacuation of,Malta by us. He
really thought that there never was a period of
War in which•so many and such invincible grounds
of War, on the part of tlri3 Country, were so clear.
ly and distinalv made out, as in the moment when
he was aldressing the House. Before he sat down
he wished to say a word or two with reaped to the
question of expediency. It might be said that am-
ply sufficient grounds of War might exist, and yet
considelations of expediency might render it doubt-
ful whether Parliament should recommnd the pro.
seen tion of, the Wilt ; but were there or not any such
grounds of expediency at the present moment ? If
they were to say that such a War at the present mo-
ment would 'not bell a dangerous experiment, and that
it would not press heavily, in point of expence, upon
evieeir.) ~cive
ma,in3
andit)
disguisingthee
Country,
ry, they would be deceivirig
tin
he
they to consider he larnetntiettrtuhtil:. R
t their voice what had
voiceni)n
this occasion would only be a choice of great evil.
Before; however, they agreed to a change for War,
they were to consider What they would lose. WAS
it Peace that they would iose ? Would'anyman say,
that it was a change from Peace to War I It was,
On t
Truce
ee contrary,toaalate aofchange 1 a state of unequal
equal
War.(
`They.
must lock
Langer 'courageously in the Lice, anti hope with con.