The Sun.
London, England, 1810-12-15 00:00:00

EXCILIAGE OF PRISONERS.

We yesterday, inserted a part of the official docu'
ments published by the French Government on this
sribjeFt, and the foltowing is the remainder of them.
It is evident:irom these documents that Buotsa•
fARTE, white he pretends to be anxious for the Jibe-
ration.of his captives is wholly indifferent to the
fate of his own subjeas, and' takesevery possible op=
portunity of venting his m.rlice against the ne-)ple
of this country. O the other nand, it will bg
r-gnallv apparent that the British Government lus
offered much more than could be expected
in order to effesi the restoration of °Ur countryfnen)
and, in due turn, the deliverance of all our allies.

No. VIII. After some observations, Mr. Mac•
keozie says :---The principal objection stated against
the counter-projettis, that the fulfilment of its exe-
cutinn depends upon the will of others. This is in..
evitable, in a transaction in which► so many different
Governments are interested. It is impossible to avoid
some delay, or to guarantee, under all possible cir-
cumstances, the- exeeution of al piincipie, however
general its adop-!ion may be. An objection similar
to this, advanced aainst the British counter-project,
might be well applied to the French project, since,
-note ithstanding the enunciation of the principle, of
the universal exchange in some of its arlicies,-, the
execution of this principle, as far as appert iins to the
exchange between. France sod Spain (without name.-.
inn any oilier Governnlent), depend, on the con-
sent of the respective Gov,rnment4. The only
point proposed, w.Wch should be dcfinitively. de-
cided, was the restitution to -Ftance, without
delay, and in mass, of all the French prisoners
in England, and to England of all the English
prisoners in France ; a stipulation, all the advattiage
of which, notwithstanding the singular argument
of M. Dutnoustier, is on the part of France. Even
according to the proposition last transmitted, the toll
execution ►►f the principle, as to all the French pri-
soners in Spain, and the surplus of Spanish prisoners
in France, would depend on the success of the inter-
vention of the Btittsh Government as to that of
Spain.

Dennoustier will therefore remark, that in
establishing teat the execution of a principle, adopt..
ed at the same time by the English Government and
that of France, Should not be left at the discretion
of what he thinks proper to call the Insurreetional
Goveinments of Spain, he substitutes for a principle
really adoipted, viz. the general exchange of tilt the
prisoners on all sides, the principle put forward by.
France, viz. the liberation of all the _French pri-
soners in England, together with that of ad: ttht
English prisoners in prance; and then, because
the measure proposed does not agree in certain points
with the execution of a principle 'which England
does not admit, he complains flan it awaits or
eludes the consequences the most important,
which England does not admit.

It was not within the competence of tlj rune.-
tinns with which M. Dumoustier and the under-
sieued are charged, to establish, or even to discuss
ttie, question, relative to the Government of Spain.
Tile Un tersigned, must however, observe, that a
Government cap3ble of putting armies in motion,
and capable of making prisoners of its enemies, is,
at least, competent to treat with those enemies for
the exchange of its prisoners. That Governtneat,
v. hici Great Blitain acknowledges for her ally, ,
bagot at least to be consulted by her as to'what Con-
cerns her interest, her sentiments, and her honour,
It is ,for that Government to decide, whether it
wishes to obtain the delivery of so many thousands of
Spaniards, who may cooperate in its defence, in al•
lowing for the price of that advantage the deliver-
ance of so many thousands' of Frenchmen who may
co-operate in attacking her.
It does not belong to the Undersigned to antici-
pate upon the probability of the duration, and on the
float issue of the contest.; but if the overthrow of
this Government so certain and so near, that there
is not even time to communicate the terms of a car-
tel, he cannot refrain from asking whit are become
of all the arguments employed with so much u amnia
to induce Great Britain to exchange flue French pri-
soners in her power, together with the Spanish pri-
soners in the power of France •? If the war swith
Spain is in fact so near its end, what reason can there
be thai,in such a case Great Britain should be ready
to make a sacrifice for their exchange ?
• It should still be observed, that the plan now pro.•
posed by M. Damous:ier, differs considerably, from
that proposed in the French project, by which-the
alternative was established, of sending the Spanish
prisoners into France, into England, or into the dif-
ferent towns in Spain which might Be agreed upon.
This last part of the alternative is alone admissible.
It is not just that, the embarrassment and the ex-
pence of the transport of her 'allies to their respec-
tive countries, should fall upon Great Britain. The
only propel' and equitable principle is, that each of
; • the contrading parties should engage to transport
into their respedise countries the prisoners which
are found in their possession.

The Undersigned is charged, in
,consequence,
with informing M. Dumoustier sthit this part of
the propthition contained in his . Note is not admix•
sible.,

Mr. Matitergie is further ordered to add to Mr..
Dumoustier, that the British .Government does not
feel itself bound in justice to make any addition to
the humane and liberal proposition which has
al-
ready been made,, in its name. It does n,►t tind
itselt disposed to depart in aoy degree from its
tenor.

Nevertheless, to establish the kincerity of its de-
sire to etfett an exchange and a cartel, if possible,,
in a point of view still nore clear, the Undersigned
is authorised to propose an additional article, which
ought entirely.to re hove the apprehensions of the
French/Government, of the possibility of a .00nti.
nuation of the captivity of its subjects, af.er ,all ttie
British subjeCts shall have been liberated.
M. Dumoustit.r disavows an intention of agitating
a question which he feels is misplaced, relative to
the treatment at French prisoners it') England yet,
notwiubstanding his disavowal, he enters into this
mispla,ed question. Mr. Mackenzie will not imi-
tate him, 'rat simply assures him ,that the.disous-
oion itieil is nut more misplaced, than' the *numeral..

i

(

)