The Sun.
London, England, 1803-06-17 00:00:00

very slight equivoque, that the Government of His BR tr
WIC MAJESTY, on the hypothesis which it bas taken pa:us
to indicate, was disposed to judge without rigour, and, to e::-
cose with goodness the Government of the French Republic.
What xnagnaninvlus condeseension ! The .Engli3ll Govern-
nient had pardoned France ! And what did it pardon ? It.
vigilance, its greatness, its glory.. 1 t is difficult to believe it
hitt for what consideration did it shoo so much indulgence
in favour of the recent existencd of her Government -? This,
consideration deserves to be weighed.

" The English Government is not of great antiquity, and
if it is true that Princes can - only be naturalized by glory,
it might be asked whether the branch of the lionse of Bruns-
wick; which reigns in England, is not yet foreigiO jx
might be asked, what has caused aad constituted a naturali-
ratiOn ? It is doubtful, Whether in time to come the diffe-
rence of date between the accession of C EORCE the First,
King of G reat
~/3ritain, and the Election of BoN'Arisivrz,
called 'by the French People to be. First Consul of France,
will rnakeany great sensation in the History of Europe."

[Another period of the Declaration respeffing
the system of aggression on the part of the French
Government.)

" This accusation of violence and ambition, direaed against
all the Govhtunetits which have existed in France since the
Revolution, the. affeaation of not wishing to.make any 44-
tinction, the -comparison between the Government of tilts
First Consul and those which preceded it, aflbrd reason to
believe that the British Government was not wholly uncon-
ncled with the System of Otience and !Insult employed with
the most virulent perseverance by the English lournalists in
the short interval of t'eace ciltich took place. Since it now
Copies their Libels, is there not reason to believe that it tire-
tated secretly to those Periodical Writers the outrages which
it now permits itself openly to avow ?"

[Respeding the French Army in liolttnal

" French Army has not remained in Holland in defi-
ance of stipulations, but in conformity with the stipulations
ofa Preaty 'with the Government of that Itepubne. The
notions transmitted by the English Cabinet to Parliament,
must they infringe upon -engagements consented to, in order,
to make known the true intentions of a Government I` • And t
these notions, all insufficient, all mice' tain as they appear:
to be, what are they ? From what source are they derived?
to the English Government ? fly whom have Ministers been t
informed that there were no :stipulations between Holland:
and France ? These questions' have been addreased to them
in Parliament, awl they have eluded the answer, nor have-
they offered even a single dispatch of their Minister: We
see, however, in outlining the Official Papers, that they.
know iIQW to arrange them according to their views, when
they find things that they judge convenient to.suppress."

r The violation of the Independence' of Switzer.
land.]

•c We will venture to ask the English Government, if it
is the fudge, Commentator, Guarantee, and Avenger of the
Treaty of Luticvillei As all Europe was tratignillized by
the benefits of that memorable Treaty ; what interest or
what right had a Power who did not wish to interfere in the
Negotiation, who, unless for the sake of animosity or ambi-
tion, was at that time entirely separated from all the Con-
trading States, to raise its voice in behalf of a Treaty which
Was foreign to it, and which had for "its guarantee the
greatest Powers of the Continent ? Is this a contempt of
thoSe Powers ? Is this a pretension of European stipremacy,
or rather is it not an expression of regret that irCailllOt now
prevent Europe from being at Peace by the force of a Treaty
which it was not in.the power of England to hinder?"

Severalbther passages of the Declaration are then
adverted to in a similar style i-. The condud of Eng.,
land is condemned with resped to the King of Sar.
dinia and Switzerland ; the PossestionS of this
Country in India are commented upon ; the conduft
of the English Government is condemned with re.
sped to Malta, and not making representations as
to the grievances alledged ; the Report of .Stans.
TIANI is defended, as bring unconnected with ahy
political relation, and much abuse is levelled against
the Etilish Journalists; (Or their free comments
upon the conduit of the Fr asT.CoNstm.
rAnorber reference is 'made to, the statement in
the British Declaration, of the behaviour of the
Fra.sT CONSUL, to Lord WHITWORTH, at an au-
dience in the -.presence of the greater part of the
European Ambassadors.]

The French Decimation proceedi to irate;

'4 ft4ecling the alledged conversation between the FIRST
Corraut. and the Criglish Ambassador, and his words to the
latter, we scarcely know which to credit, the extract from
the Hamburg,' journal, or the letter No. 38, of the Official
Colleelion, attributed to Lord Whitworth. the hliaistets
have given to those pieces an equal share of importance, by
including them in the same colleelion-7and, by their rc.
pee.tive dares, they are entitled to an equal share of credit,

",The-credibility Of those kind of things, is left to be
.de"fendedby the journals.—When Ministers,, meet on such
a ground, they forget every consideration of political roe.
trimly—they suppress fads of which they arefully apprised,
and advance assertions in lieu of proof.
" Titus, even conversations, of which the rie.ality is,doubt.
are classed among political ollizexs-..+Staiew cannot in.
jure themselves, but by unjust proceeiiiitgs, and in these the
English are well versed ; but conversations Arvid the %Yea-
pons,of Govertunektis, still less should, they be the colkjeds of
complaint at a long period after their 4ttpp...x.t existence.

ie Two conversations aro animadverted un by the British
Ministers, one bytween the English Envoy and an ILun
burgh journsliss, (a curious matter of charge' against the
French); and that set forth by LortiiVtiz r woar as before-
mentiontd."

' On this conversation thejournalist proceeds to ani.
madvert in strong terms, on the general grounds
above stated, and then goes. on to assert that the
Conversation which klually took place between the
FIRST CONSUL and the British Ambassador, was
full Of conciliation on tire pas t of the former, who
Was animated by a desire to obviate every ddliculty.
By WO views and motives was the conduit of the
FIRST CONSUL guided At the time.
"ii thC 0101)AtCh which has appeared wider his name has
not been altered by the malversations of his Government,
Lord W HIT WOR Trt has no ground for complaint ; but, if it
has been mutilated, amplified, and perverted, awarding to
the views of theiMinisters to whom it was written,. it is
greatly unfortunate with. respea to him, that the regards of
truth and propriety shoul4 be sacrificcit to the interest of his
King.