The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-05-01 00:00:00

STATESMAN

particles of Ministers, who under the spurious principles
'of neutrality, were nploilding the most odious and abo-
minable system, so impiously called the Holy Alliance.
—(Hear, hear.) Those would he his sentiments it he
were a Spaniard, and such were his feelings as. an. Eii-
glishm +n.—(Cheers.) He nould, for the sake of argu-
ment, reverse the state of France and Spain. lie nimbi
suppose Spain to be invading France, on the grounds of
the Constitutional Charter of France being infringed—
which was as good ground as that of invading Spain at
present. What would he in that ease the conduct of our
Government ? Would they tamely atid passivelv look on
as they did now—and would they allow Spain to invade
France ? No ; but they would use language worthy of
the dignity of Great Britain.—(Hear, hear.) As the
night Hon. Chancellor of the Exeltepier did not linoie
what that languafe ought to he, he would telt him—
(Cheers and laughing.) what language the Bight Hon.
Secretary would use on such an occasion, and it would
be this—" As soon as the Spanish standard is planted
on the French territory, England that moment makes
common cattse with France; dot then proceed at your
peril."—([And cheers.) Such would be the line:nage
and the conduct of the Government. What nould he
the effect of such language ? Spain would not invade
France with impunity. Why was not such language
used on the late occasion: Notwithstanding our pro-
fessions of neutrality, there s-as a disposition towards
France which contracted that neutrality. It appeared
as if our Government was lulled into a false security by
the conduct of those negociatinns. With the permission
of the House be would put another case. Suppose Spain
could defeat the French army in the present struggle,
and in retaliation should march her valoroas troops and
invade France, what would he the conduct of our Go.
verument then ? They would remonstrate with Spain,
and advise her to withdraw her troops, and remain con-
tent pith expelling her enemies. Spain would reply,
" We have done by invading France, no more than
France did in attacking us." Government would say,
" Yes, but France invaded Spain in support of a legiti-
mate King, and Strain invades France to oppose a legi-
timate King." His definition of this boasted neutrality,
so extolled to the skies was this—it was neither one
thing nor the other (held laughing), for it would ulti-
mately resolve itself into a war. If war was inevitable,
he would say that the sooner, and the more vigorously
it was entered on, the greater prospect there would be of
putting a speedy termination to it. He was no ft bind to
tear, and lie would tell the Hon. Member fur Corfi—Castle
so. He WAS never for war, if it tvald he avoided without
compromising the honour of the country. The conduct
of Ministers was not such as to prevent war, but the
rearing of the British lion through the late negotia-
tions !melt have prevented it.—Cheers awl laughing.)
He supposed the only toast drank-fit the alinis:erial din-
ners was " Neutrality, strict neutrality, and nothing but
neutrality.."—(Laughing.) Perhaps in a few days they
might see in the newspapers an advertisement, noticing,
among other modern fashions, " neutrality bonnets."—
(Much laughing.) To the advertisement, perhapn, also
would be added, Grit the new manufacture was patron-
ized by the Richt Hun Goad Irian the Secretary far Fo•
reign Affairs (more laughine) ; but he was sure it would
not take, for neutrality was no favourite with the ladies—
(Loud and long continued laughing.) [la would beg
leave to ask the Right lion. Gentleman what his darling
system of neutrality had ever effected ? In the words of
the Poet, he would tell nit—