Star.
London, England, 1802-12-09 00:00:00

777

fort of charge than the conititon place rept-Oath.
that I am the Apologia of France. That
kind of topic may do very well for thofe who
ute it ;—the places where it is ufed ; —and thofe
it is intended to pleafe but I fhould exped.fome-
thing better here. The Apologia of France !
And is not this the reproach ,that is ufed 'in every
war, the grounds of which are at all dilinred ? If
this be a war not only with France, but with Ruf-
fia (perhaps that may be a cafe in which in a for-
nier war I did receive a bribe!), thofe who think
that other countries are not tb much in the wrong
as to juftify a war, mull lay their account with
being expofed to the hacknied charge of being the
apologia of enemies. Differ ing from thole who
are for large eftablifliments. I hope it will not be
expeded that I Orould clear myfelf of a dclign
to invite the French to invade this country. I
remember, that a near and very refpedable rela-
tion of mine, the Duke of Ricblnond, was ac-
cufect, during the American War, of having, it
as a favourite objet to procure the French to in-
vade Sulks. Proceeding in the way of in.
formation, his Grace had an-opportunity of de-
nying the charge on oath, and making an affidavit
that it was no favourite plan of his that the French
fhould invade Strifes. Now, as I have no oppor-
tunity of fwearing that I do not intend to invite
the French to invade this country, I hope Gen-
tlemen will take it ,n my wore. To come to the
queftion of the eflablithment of the Army, it
may be confidered, whether a fmall or a great
army be belt fuited to the defence of the country ?
I find it faid, 'that, at formerly, alliances funer-
feded the neceffity of large e 'abliffiments, now,
having no alliances, we fliorld have a large ar-
my. Now, I believe the arguments in former
times to have been diredly the reverfe. It was
becanfe we had connedions with the Continent,
and not for our own defence, that ftanding ar-
mies were propofed ; and this the Preamble of
every Mutiny Bill, fince King William's reign,
Rates. It would have routed the pride and indig-
nation of our anceftors, if they had.been told that
a large (landing army was neceffary for their in-
ternal defence. No, it was on account of our
continental alliances, that a (landing army was kir-
tified. Not thinking the policy of our anceltors
wrong in regard to continental affairs, I cannot al-
together difapprove a (landing army, an objea cer-
tainly of great jealoufy. But how does the argu-
ment apply ? What are the moft glorious wars in
which this country has been engaged for the laft
century ? They are thofe that are called the War
of Succeffion, and the Seven years War. Ndw it
is certain that previous to thefe wars, our Peace
Eltablifhment was lower than the Peace Elta-
Yifhments previous to other wars in which we
were lefs fuccefsful. The Peace Eftablifhment
after the peace of Utrecht, a period of the
longeft ceffation of war, was likewife very low.
But it may be faid, that the Eftablithments of
France were even proportionably low. If relative
proportion be made the rule, it will not be eafy to
apply it fatisfa&orily. The truth is, that the
power of France is different in its principle, from
the power of Great Britain, and hence arifes a
neceffary variation in the principle of our offenftve
and defenfive war. It is not a ratio of 30, or 40, or
60,000 men, to any given number in France, that
. will enable us to judge when our Eftablifhment
• is adequate. An Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Banks) al.
luded to the eftablifhment in 63 and in 83—Of the
latter, which out of doors was ftyled a fcandaloufly
low eftablifhment, I, as one df the advifer,s of it,
am willing to take the refponfibility. It was men-
tioned by the Secretary at War, that then we
had not Holland againft us. But in fad, at the
time of that eftablifhment, Holland was as much
in the hands of France as the is now. In effed,
France, who had her colonies, made the peace for
her, and under the influence of France, Holland
remained till the events of 1787 overthrew it. We
now come to the power of France—and really I
am doubtful whether thofe who fpeak of that power
in the moft exaggerated terms, are not in fad fpeak-
ing what is more agreeable and more ufeful to the
French Government, than thofe who talk of that
power with greater moderation. Regardlefs of the
certainmifreprefentation to which I (hall be fubjea,
and the probable charge of maintaining paradoxes,
I will maintain that the government of France is lets
in a fituation than formerly to make any attempt
upon this country ; if it be by invafions that we are
to be menaced, and if it be againft invafion that high
eftablifhment is intended. If we confider the (late
of the French navy, compared with our own, we
mu ft fee that for this fpecies of attack there cannot,
for feveral yearsat lealt,be any well founded alarm.
The acquifition of Switzerland has been baled
upon as {hewing a hoftile fpirit. But is this the firft
time we knew that the Government of France, part,
as well as prefent, were aauated by ambition ? But
it is admitted, that the condud of France to Swit-
zerland, which touches the feelings of all fo much,
and of which no man can entertain a (Ironger fenfe
than I do, does not form an aggreffion againft this
country. Why then fhould it be an argument for
adding twenty or thirty thoufand men to our efta-
blifhment ? How is the danger of our fituation,
which my Hon. Friend, as well as others, labour-
ed by admirable powers of declamation fo much
to exaggerate, encreafe.i by that meafure ? Is
201000 men added to our expences,a remedy againft
the French attack on Switzerland ? Is men's talk
ing bravely then to be the remedy ? Brave words
are eafily fpoken, and prove no courage. " He
did fpeak prase words in the preach," lays Captain
Fluellen, in Henry V. of Piftol, who impofed
upon the honeft Welchman with fine words. But
inftead of augmenting our army now, might not,
upon the old foundation of our army, as many
more troops be added in a thort fpaee as any emer-
gency might require ? Is the danger of invafion
to be feared ? In 1779 and 1780, I was apprehen-
five of invafion, becaufe the fitperiority by fea be-
ing then doubtful, the French having landed an
army, might have been able to fend reinfoicee
ments, and compel us to fullain a war upon Eng-
ground, though I have no doubt that the
fpirit and courage of the country might have finally
prevailed. But now our fuperiority by fea is uro,
queftionable' and mu ft fo continue for acleaft fora,'
time. The French then mutt eoade.,-cor
They might, perhaps. finned AFAMdijoit.OP