uniform fpirit by which the French government has been actuated, contrary to the practice of the civilized nations of Europe in every former war. If your Committee were to extend their inquiries fo far back as the time of Robespierre, they could bring forward evidence of atrocities of a moft fhocking nature, fuch as the poifoning of the water of prifon wells, by which many lives were facrificed, and other fimilar enormities; but as the tranfactions of that period are but too well known, it will be fufficient to relate what appears to have been the conduct of the French to..wards their prifoners fince their government has taken a more regular form. In November 1796, Mr. Swinburne was appointed agent at Paris for the relief of prifoners:-he fignified to the French government, that his inftructions were to vifit all the pri fons, and adminifter relief to fuch prifoners as were in need; and although he added, that this indulgence was allowed in the fullest extent to the French agent in England, yet this application feems to have been totally difregarded or evaded, fo as to preclude him from the means of obtaining any perfonal knowledge of their fituation and circumftances. How far the language of condefcenfion which Mr. Swinburne ufed in thefe circumstances, might contribute to increase the haughtiness of the French government, your Committee do not prefume to determine; but they feel it a matter of deep regret, that a conduct was not held during that period, of which the enemy could have taken less advantage. The first paper relative to the treatment of prisoners before the Committee, is a letter from a merchant at Dunkirk to Mr. Swinburne, giving a melancholy account of the perfons imprisoned at Air, he ftates, that forty fick were pent up in a fmall room with the prifoners in health, without permiffion to enjoy the benefit of the fresh air, and that numbers died daily from the filth and ftench. From fubfequent papers and documents it appears that the treatment of British prifoners in most of the prifons was bad. At Dunkirk few blankets could be ob. tained for them, and at Amiens none at all.-At the latter place the British agent found it neceffary to order bedsteads of rough planks, raised from the ground, to protect the prisoners from the damp, and the expenfe of which was defrayed by the British government. At Pontanezan prifon, near Breft, fixty mafters of merchant-fhips and paffengers were confined with about nine hundred feamen; they were not allowed to go into the open yard, and their confinement was aggravated by the brutal behaviour of the commiffary, and by a want of provifions and neceffaries.

A declaration, figned by three refpectable perfons, confined for four months, in the beginning of 1797, in Pontanezan prison, ftates the daily allowance from 10th January to have been fixteen ounces of bifcuit, of a bad quality, full of vermin and mouldy, two ounces of rotten falt beef or pork.-(This allowance ought

to

to have been two pounds and a half, but a mess for seven perfons has been known to be only fifteen ounces, and of that nearly half bone.) Their peafe-foup confifted of hot water with a few horsepease. From February 20th, in lieu of fixteen ounces of biscuit, about four ounces of rice were delivered out, together with ten ounces of black bread; and during that time many were ill and fome died, which was attributed to the copper veffels, in which the rice was boiled, not having been properly cleaned. From February 1ft, in lieu of falt meat fresh meat was allowed, which was nothing but carrion.-The foup was made with the meat before it was given out.-No vegetables of any description were delivered out to the prifoners, and during the above period of four months, at least two hundred perfons died, chiefly of the fcurvy, arifing from the badnefs of the provifions. From nine hundredto a thousand were confined in a room thirty feet wide, and from three to four hundred feet long; one hundred daily were allowed to go into the open air. Accounts of similar treatment have been repeatedly received.

Remonftrances were made to the Commiffion of Exchange on the fcanty allowance of provifions; and the agent was answered, that "If the fituation of the finances of the republic did not admit of the prifoners receiving the whole of what the law allowed them, it was not lefs true that they experienced in that refpect the benefits of the folicitude of government."

This evafive language affords ftrong ground to fufpect that the diftreffed fituation of the British prifoners was not without an object on the part of the French government; and this fufpicion is confirmed by its appearing, from evidence delivered in to your Committee, that every effort was made to induce the British feamen to go on board the French fleet, particularly at the time of the expedition against Ireland. The provifions allowed were purpofely bad and fcanty, the confinement rigorous; and during this ftate of fuffering, the paffions of the men were inflamed, by being told that their own country had given them all up for the fake of one man (Sir Sidney Smith), and that till he fhould be liberated, the British government would not confent to an exchange of prisoners. All efforts were used to inveigle them; they were frequently threatened to be ftarved, and at other times liquor was given to them, and advantage was taken of them when in a state of intoxication.

When the combined force of all these various temptations and incitements is fairly confidered, it cannot be matter of wonder, that the conftancy and courage even of British feamen fhould have fometimes yielded. Many were induced to enter into the French fervice, under the hope and promife of being landed in Ireland; and feveral applied to their own officers (prifoners with them) for leave to enter, but were refufed. Three or four hun

dred

dred were debauched into the fcheme, under the expectation of being fent home for exchange.

It might perhaps be imagined, that this arbitrary and unprincipled measure had arifen from the neceffity of the moment, and the want of feamen in the French navy, had it not appeared that it is a part of the fyftem of France to force fubjects to ferve against their own countries. And here your Committee cannot forbear referring to the inftructions given by General Hoche to Colonel Tate, previous to his landing on the coast of Wales, in the beginning of 1797 (and which were found on his perfon), as tending to explain the conduct of the French towards their prifoners. Colonel Tate was ordered to encourage all deferters and prifoners to enter into the new companies (which were to be commanded by French officers); "fhould fuch prisoners refufe, he will have their heads and eye-brows, and if they are taken again in arms, they are to be shot."

The fyftem of ill treating and of oppreffing prifoners was not confined exclufively to the English who were in the prifons of Pontanezan, Nantes, and elfewhere, but was extended to the officers who were on parole in the interior parts of the country. On their march from the fea-ports, they were not only obliged to pay their own expenfes, but were also under the neceffity of defraying the expenses of the guards who had the care of them.

In October the French stopped the allowance of clothing to the British prifoners, and about that time Captain Cotes fucceeded Mr. Swinburne at Paris, with orders to vifit all the depôts of prifoners in France. An arreté of the Directory declared that he fhould be allowed, in the difcharge of his duties, all the accommodations and facilities which the French commiffary fhould receive in London; notwithstanding this, when he applied for a passport to go to Pon. tanezan, he was informed that it would be perfectly unneceffary, as the prisoners had orders to remove to the depôts provided for them by the new arrangement: thefe he understood were to be near Paris, though he could get no fatisfactory anfwer to his quef tion on that fubject :-in the mean time the prisoners were labouring under heavy difficulties. It appears that they were at the mercy of the French agents, and, among other hardships, when their provifions were delivered out to them, the liver, lights, jaws, and part of the horn, and even the offals of bullocks, were included in their allowance.

On the ft February 1798, the new agreement took place, by which each government was to maintain its own countrymen. A fcheme of victualling was fent by the Transport Board to Capt. Cotes, by which the daily allowance to each perfon was one quart of beer, one pound and a half of bread, three quarters of a pound of beef (except on Saturday, when four ounces of butter, or fix of cheefe, were given in lieu), one-third of an ounce of falt; four

times a week, half a pint of peafe, or one pound of greens, prepared for boiling; each prifoner was allowed two ounces of foap per week. If good beer was not to be had, a quart of found cider or a pint of wine was given in lieu. The meat was to be delivered to the prifoners in clean quarters, hind and fore alternately. Befides this allowance, the former one in money was continued. All British officers in the fea or land fervice, on parole, or in prifon, were to be paid eighteen pence per diem in lieu of ration of provifions; and all other ranks entitled to parole, nine pence per diem, if they fhould prefer fuch allowance to the rations.

Captain Cotes, after much delay, learnt that the prisoners were to be confined at Amiens, Fontainbleau, Beauvais, and Melun, but he was pofitively refufed permiffion to vifit them till they were removed to thofe depôts; he was alfo refufed information of the probable time of their arrival, before which he was not to enter upon his functions. It was promifed, on the 6th January, that the removal fhould take place foon, but on the 9th February no steps had been taken to that effect, nor was it till the 5th or 6th of March that the prifoners left Pontanezan prifon on their way to Melun.

It appears, from the most authentic documents, that they were ill able to undertake a march on foot of near five hundred miles, and that their ill treatment, during the latter period of their captivity, has equalled what they at firft fuffered. Officers of rank and common foldiers were all confined together; their daily allowance about two ounces of pork, and fometimes that quantity of falt fish of a bad quality, and their bread was full of bran and ftraw; and from the scarcity of food, and the want of medicines, numbers died daily.

The fick and dying were frequently robbed of their clothes by the attendants of the hofpital; and it is hardly neceffary to add, that whenever prifoners were landed, they were immediately plundered of their money, clothes, and valuables.

Thefe details are fhocking to humanity; but your Committee think it their duty to lay them before the Houfe, as coming within. the limits of their inquiry; trufting that the care and attention of the British agent has by this time alleviated the fufferings of the prisoners.

Your Committee cannot conclude this part of the fubject, without expreffing their opinion of the great and important advantage arifing to both countries, from the newly-adopted fyftem of providing for the prifoners of each at the expenfe of their own governments. It appears to be a measure in the highest degree calculated to obviate all mifreprefentation, complaints, and recriminations, and to prevent any increase of animofity between two nations, whofe minds are fufficiently inflamed against each other.

VOL. VII.

3 X

The

The third and laft head of this inquiry, viz. the fteps taken by the British government for the establishment of a cartel of exchange; with the proceedings in both countries refpecting Sir Sidney Smith, and of prifoners on parole ;-contains much matter which is nearly connected with the two former. Your Committee however have endeavoured, for the fake of clearness, to keep it as a feparate part of their inquiry, though they will be obliged, in fome inftances, to refer to what they have before stated; they wish to give a concise account of facts, without turning the attention of the Houfe too much to the variable and fluctuating fentiments of the government of France, which have interpofed difficulties in the way of a mutual exchange of prisoners.

In May 1793, when the Commiffioners for fick and wounded Seamen had the care of prifoners, all officers of the ufual rank, both in the French and merchants' fervice, were admitted to parole upon the fame allowance as during the last war, viz. one fhilling per diem to commiffioned officers, and fixpence to inferior officers : this was doubled when they were fick. In May 1794, it was increased to eighteen pence and nine pence.

In 1794, after the fuccefs of the British forces in the West Indies, feveral hired tranfports, chartered by the Navy Board, were ordered by Admiral Sir John Jervis, as cartels to convey French prifoners of war to St. Maloes in France, where, upon their arrival, they were feized by the French, and the crews made prifoners of war.

Notwithstanding the little encouragement which this violent proceeding held out for promoting a cartel, in March 1795, Sir Frederick Eden was fent to France to propofe an exchange of prifoners, upon the known and cuftomary principle, which had been adopted between the two countries in 1780, viz. man for man, and rank for rank, or for an equivalent in men or money. The propofal was referred to the Commiffioners of Public Safety, and rejected, on the ground of the advantage which a restoration of prisoners would give to Great Britain, which was (as they faid) evidently in want of foldiers and failors, while France, which carried on the war with the mafs of the people, had more forces than were neceffary to complete the conqueft of all her enemies.

Nothing particular appears to have occurred on this fubject till January 1796, when the Tranfport Board undertook the management of cartels. Complaints were made by the masters of cartel fhips, of their boats being taken away from them by the French guardships, and of the thips being fent back immediately, empty, without regard to wind or weather. Soon afterwards, Mr. Charretié entered upon his functions as before mentioned, and announced himself by a propofal to the British government, that all prifoners of both nations fhould return to their respective countries, and that the regulation of the exchange fhould be deferred till the 2

return