try, as might have amicably terminated the dispute, to be the true and immediate cause of the rupture which followed. Nor can we forbear to remark, that the pretences, under which his majesty's ministers then haughtily refused such authorized communication, have been sufficiently exposed, by their own conduct, in since submitting to a similar intercourse with the same government. "The misguided policy, which thus rendered the war inevitable, appears to have actuated the ministers in their determination to continue it at all hazards. At the same time we cannot but observe, that the obstinacy with which they have adhered to their desperate system is not more remarkable than their versatility in the pretexts upon which they have justified it. At one period the strength, at another the weakness, of the enemy, have been urged as motives for continuing the war: the successes as well as defeats of the allies have contributed only to prolong the contest; and hope and despair have equally served to involve us still deeper in the horrors of war, and to entail upon us an endless train of calamities. in the internal government of France was too manifest not to rouse into active hostility the national zeal of that people; but their particular projects were too equivocal to attract the confidence, or procure the co-operation, of those Frenchmen who were disaffected to the then government of their country. The nature of these plans was too clear not to provoke formidable enemies, but their extent was too ambiguous to conciliate useful friends. "We beg leave farther to represent to your majesty, that at subsequent periods, your ministers have suffered the most favourable opportunities to escape of obtaining an honourable and advantageous pacification: they did not avail themselves, as it was their duty to have done, of the unbroken strength of the great confede racy which had been formed against France, for the purpose of giving effect to overtures for negotiation: they saw the secession of several powerful states from that confederacy; they suffered it to dissolve without an effort for the attainment of a general pacification: they loaded their country with the odium of having engaged with the most questionable views, without availing themselves of that combination for procuring favourable conditions of peace. That, from this fatal neglect, the progress of hostilities has only served to establish the evils which might certainly have been avoided by negotiation, but which are now confirmed by the events of the war. We have felt that the unjustifiable and impracticable attempts to establish royalty in France, by force, has only proved fatal to its unfortunate supporters. We have seen, with regret, the subjugation of Holland and the aggrandizement of the French republic; and we have to lament the alteration in the state of Europe, not only from the successes of the French, but from the formidable acquisition of some of the allied powers on the side of "After the original, professed, objects had been obtained, by the expulsion of the French armies from the territories of Holland and the Austrian Netherlands, we find his majesty's ministers influenced either by arrogance or by infatuated ambition and vain hope of conquests, which, if realized, could never compensate to the nation for the blood and treasure by which they must be obtained; rejecting, unheard, the overtures made by the executive council of France, at a period when the circumstances were so eminently favourable to his majesty and his allies, that there is every reason to suppose that a negotiation, commenced at such a juncture, must have terminated in an honourable and advantageous peace. To the prospects arising from such an opportu-Poland; acquisitions alarming from their nity they preferred a blind and obstinate perseverance in a war, which could scarce have any remaining object but the unjustifiable purpose of imposing upon France a -government disapproved of by the inhabitants of that country. And such was the infatuation of these ministers, that, far from being able to frame a wise and comprehensive system of policy, they even rejected the few advantages that belonged to their own unfortunate scheme. The general existence of a design to interpose [VOL. XXXII.] magnitude, but still more so from the manner in which they have been made: so fatally has this war operated to destroy, in every part of Europe, that balance of power for the support of which it was undertaken, and to extend those evils which it was its professed object to avert. "Most cordially, therefore, did we assure his majesty, this his faithful Commons heard with the sincerest satisfaction, his majesty's most gracious message of the 8th of December, wherein his majesty [4 C] affairs of the kingdom, but by the adoption of a system radically and fundamentally different from that which has produced our present calamities. acquaints them that the crisis, which was depending at the commencement of the present session, had led to such an order of things as would induce his majesty to meet any disposition to negotiation, on the part of the enemy, with an earnest desire to give it the fullest and speediest effect, and to conclude a general treaty of peace whenever it could be effected on just and suitable terms for himself and his allies. That from this gracious communication, they were led to hope for a speedy termination to this most disastrous contest; but that, with surprise and sorrow, they have now reason to apprehend that three months were suffered to elapse be-projects, which they have been compelled fore any steps were taken towards a negotiation, or any overtures made by his majesty's servants. "With equal surprise and concern they have observed, when a fair and open conduct was so peculiarly incumbent on his majesty's ministers, considering the prejudices and suspicions which their previous conduct must have excited in the minds of the French, that, instead of acting in that open and manly manner which became the wisdom, the character, and dignity, of the Brirish nation, they adopted a mode of proceeding calculated rather to excite suspicion than to inspire confidence in the enemy. Every expression which might be construed into an acknowledgment of the French republic, or even an allusion to its forms, was studiously avoided: and the minister, through whom this overture was made, was, in a most unprecedented manner, instructed to declare, that he had no authority to enter into any negotiation or discussion relative to the objects of the proposed treaty. "That it is with pain we reflect, that the alacrity of his majesty's ministers in apparently breaking off this negotiation, as well as the strange and unusual manner in which it was announced to the ministers of the various powers of Europe, affords a very unfavourable comment on their reluctance in entering upon it, and is calculated to make the most injurious impression respecting their sincerity, on the people of France. "Until his majesty's ministers shall, from a real conviction of past errors, appear inclined to regulate their conduct upon such a system, we can neither give any credit to the sincerity of their professions of a wish for peace, nor repose any confidence in their capacity for conducting a negotiation to a prosperous issue. Odious as they are to an enemy, who must still believe them secretly to cherish those unprincipled and chimerical in public to disavow, contemptible in the eyes of all Europe, from the display of insincerity and incapacity which has marked their conduct, our only hopes rest on his majesty's royal wisdom and unquestioned affection for his people, that he will be graciously pleased to adopt maxims of policy more suited to the circumstances of the times than those by which his ministers appear to have been governed, and to direct his servants to take measures, which, by differing essentially, as well in their tendency as in the principle upon which they are founded, from those which have hitherto marked their conduct, may give this country some reasonable hope, at no very distant period, of the establishment of a peace, suitable to the interests of Great Britain, and likely to preserve the tranquillity of Europe." Mr. Pitt said, that the right hon. gentleman had dwelt rather more at length than was obviously necessary, on a proposition in itself sufficiently evident, and which needed not to be enforced by the great authority of that illustrious orator of antiquity, whose name he had thought proper to quote on the occasion. The proposition was, that at certain periods it may be useful to take a review of past events, in order to apply to our present situation the lessons of experience, to examine the sources of former errors, and to trace the causes of those calamities under which the country may suffer, in order to obviate future misconduct, and, "On a review of so many instances of if possible, to procure redress for exgross and flagrant misconduct, proceed-isting evils. That such a retrospect may, ing from the same pernicious principles, in most cases, be wise and salutary, is a and directed with incorrigible obstinacy proposition which will hardly be denied. to the same mischievous ends, we deem It is evident, that an appeal to experience ourselves bound in duty to his majesty, is the best guard to future conduct, and and to our constituents, to declare, that it may be necessary to probe the nature we see no rational hope of redeeming the of the misfortune, in order to apply a fulfilled the pledge which he solemnly gave to the public, by admitting the necessity and justice of prosecuting the war under these circumstances, than by occupying a wide field of general reasoning, and entering into a minute historical detail of past events. In that case, however he might have lamented past misconduct, however he might have retained former differences of opinion, consistent with his duty as a member of parliament, and his feelings as an Englishman, he must have admitted the necessity of manly perseverance, and of vigorous exertion, if he wished to remain true to the country and just to his own principles. The right hon. gentleman, however, has thought fit studiously to avoid giving any opinion on the conduct of the enemy, or adverting to that new situation in which the country is placed by the recent communication. suitable remedy. But I shall not take up | the time of the House in discussing a point so obviously true, and so universally acknowledged. I feel the less inclination to detain their attention, as I contend that this proposition, which is so true in general, does not apply to the particular state of the country. There are some situations in which a wide and very ample survey of past events, may, perhaps, better be spared, particularly at a moment when the honour and interests of the nation demand the united concurrence of every friend to the country in the same object. and point out only one line of conduct which can consistently be pursued. Whatever may be the difference of opinions with respect to the origin and conduct of the war, whatever may be the events which have occurred during its progress, or the pressure of the calamities it has occasioned, under our present circumstances, compelled as we are to continue the war by the ambition and obstinacy of the enemy, left without the option of a safe and honourable retreat, a mere appeal to past events can neither be necessary or proper, and even prudence demands from us to dismiss all retrospect, in order to look to the means of future exertion, and the prospect of probable success. The right hon. gentleman, in the commencement of his speech, alluded to the new situation which has arisen with respect to the war, and which, I contend, renders its continuance no longer a matter of choice but of necessity. But if he consumed so much time in proving the necessity of a retrospect, so much time in the retrospect itself, and so little on that new situation in which the country is placed; if, on the former topics he had recourse to a detached and elaborate argument, while he so slightly touched on the point of more immediate interest, and pressing urgency, it is because he felt that he must disappoint the public in withholding his opinion in the present crisis, after the declaration of those sentiments which he has repeatedly uttered. If by the refusal of the enemy to accede to fair and honourable terms of peace, that period is now arrived, which he formerly declared would secure his cordial support to the continuance of the war-that period which, by exhibiting in the strongest light the unjust policy and unreasonable ambition of the enemy, he then pronounced would undoubtedly have the effect to unite all England, and to divide all France, he would have better Under this protest, that the time which the right hon. gentleman has chosen for retrospect is that precise period when retrospect might have been most conveniently spared, because we have now no option between war and peace, because we are now called upon not to decide on the past, but to act for the future, I shall not enter at large into the long, historical detail which the right hon. gentleman has brought forward, but shall call your attention to that part of the subject which he has omitted, namely, the situation in which the country at present stands, and the points, now at issue between us and the enemy. Under this protest, however, I have no objection to follow the right hon. gentleman through the leading points of his retrospect. The points on which he chiefly insisted, come under the following heads: First, that we should retract past errors, and confess that we have made an unjust aggression in a contest which we formerly declared to have originated in the unprincipled policy and insolent ambition of the enemy, and which was rendered necessary on our part for self-preservation, and the security of our dearest interests. Secondly, That we should admit that the cause of the war, as we undertook it, was the restoration of monarchy in France. Thirdly, that during the progress of hostilities, many better opportunities have occurred for restoring tranquillity, and much more favourable terms might have been had than, can now be hoped for. Fourthly, That we should be prepared to state, that our resources right hon. gentleman dwells on the retrospect rather rapturously, though it seemed but little to affect him at the time it was enjoyed. In bringing forward that budget he remarks, that I held out a prospect of fifteen years peace, and afterwards seems to attach a degree of insincerity to the declarations of ministers on that subject. What can countenance such an accusation, I am at a loss to discover. For at the periods alluded to, every motive of public duty, every consideration of personal ease, must have induced me to exert the best of my endeavours to promote a peace, by which alone I could be enabled to effect the favourite objects I had in view, of redeeming the public debt and the 4 per cents as alluded to by the right hon. gentleman. No stronger proof could be given of the sincerity of government to promote and insure peace, than was then given by ministers; and if they were disappointed, the fault is not with them; their conduct must be justified by the imperious necessity, which, in 1793, compelled them to resist an unprovoked aggression. As to the accusations urged against us of not offering our me diation, or even resisting it when solicited, they are equally of little weight. Are ministers to be blamed, for what it would be hazardous in them to have attempted, namely, to propose a mediation, where both parties were not ready to agree? To have erected ourselves into arbiters could only expose us to new difficulties and disputes, if we were determined, as we ought to be, to enforce that mediation on the parties who refused to admit it. And what is the great use which the right hon. gentleman seems to be so eager to derive from peace, if it had been so are exhausted, and that all hope from the adoption of vigorous measures ought to be abandoned. Fifthly, That we should allow, that from our former conduct and repeated declarations, the enemy are fully justified in their distrust of our sincerity with regard to peace, and that, on that ground, their answer to a late communication is strictly defensible. These were the leading points on which the right hon. geutleman insisted, stated very generally as specific propositions; but in arguing which, he went into long details filled up with a great deal of rich and glowing colouring. First, I must remark, that the right hon. gentleman, who wished by the declaration which he proposed, that ministers should acknowledge all past errors, must have forgotten that he was also calling upon the House to rescind all the decisions which they had come to in the course of four years. His majesty's ministers are accused of having plunged the nation unnecessarily in a most bloody and expensive war, a charge in which parliament were implicated, because they have, upon the most mature consideration, declared that they considered the present, to be a just and necessary war. The right hon. gentleman has not, upon this occasion, trusted to his usual arguments, to prove, that we were in fact the aggressors in this war; he has laid his ground much higher, and attempted to prove, à priori, that the war on our part was unjust. He has endeavoured to prove the war was unjust on our part, because it was unexpected; and to prove that it was unexpected, he goes back to 1792, and refers to a speech made by me on the opening of the budget for that year, which he describes as having been uttered in a tone of great satisfac-secured? Why that we should go to war tion, triumph, and exultation. It is true, indeed, that I felt much satisfaction in exhibiting to the country the high degree of prosperity to which it had then reached not less satisfaction I am sure than the right hon. gentleman seems to feel in giving them the melancholy picture that he has now drawn of its present reduced situation; and I felt the more vivid satisfaction in viewing that prosperity, as it enabled us to prepare for, and enter into, a contest of a nature altogether unprecedented. But I must remark as a singular circumstance, now that period of prosperity is over, the See Vol. 29, p. 816, in order to prevent the partition of Poland! In general policy, I am ready to confess that this partition is unjust; but it does not go, as is said, to overturn the balance of power in Europe, for which the right hon. gentleman, as it suits his argument, expresses greater or less solicitude; for that country being nearly divided equally between three great powers, it can little contribute to the undue aggrandizement of either. But how strange does it seem in that right hon. gentleman to inveigh so strongly against the partition of Poland, who censured ministers for their endeavours to prevent the partition of Turkey; for 1 beg the House to observe, that it is the establishment of the principle, that this, country could not interfere to prevent the partition of Turkey, that precludes the possibility of any interference with respect to Poland. As to the latter transactions that have occurred between this country and France, they are too fresh in the memory of the House, to require that I should call their attention to them, The resolutions to which we have come on this subject are too sacred, the opinion too settled, and too deeply formed, to be lightly reversed. We cannot, surely, forget the first cause of complaint, allowed to be well founded, and the famous decree of the 19th of November, which was an insult and an outrage on all civilized nations. If any thing could have aggravated the letter of that act, it was the spirit which pervaded it, and the practical circumstances which accompanied it. Seditious men, delegated from this country, with treason in their mouths and rebellion in their hearts, were received, welcomed, and caressed by the legislature of France. That go vernment, without waiting until it had even established itself, declared hostilities against all the old established systems: without having scarcely an existence, it had the presumption to promise to interpose to the destruction of all the existing governments in the world. All governments alike fell under its vengeance; the old forms were contemned and reprobated, those which had stood the test of experience, whether monarchy, aristocracy, or mixed democracy, were all to be destroyed. They declared that they would join the rebellious subjects of any state to overturn their government. The right hon. gentleman contended, that this obnoxious decree was done away by a subsequent one. But what was the explanation they had given? It was, that they would not interfere in the government of another country, except they were of opinion that the majority of that country wished for a change of government. As to their declaration against aggrandizement, without stopping to argue a point that is so extremely clear, I will only refer the House to their whole conduct towards Belgium. They declared that they would not interfere in the government of Belgium, after it had consolidated its liberties;-a strange way of declining interference when a form of constitution was forced on them, bearing the pame, but not the stamp of liberty, and compelling the Belgians to consolidate and preserve it. With respect to another cause of the war, viz. the opening of the Scheldt, their explanations regarding that circumstance, and their intentions upon Holland, were equally unsatisfactory; their ultimatum was, that they would give no farther satisfaction; and their refusing a fair explanation made them the aggressors in reality, if not in form. Still, however, the channel of negotiation was not cut off by this country: as long as the king of France retained a shadow of power, M. Chauvelin continued to be received in an official capacity; and even after the cruel catastrophe of that unfortunate monarch, his majesty's minister at the Hague did not refuse to communicate with general Dumourier, when he expressed a wish to hold a conference with him relative to some proposals of peace. When all these opportunities had been offered and neglected, they declared war, and reduced us to the necessity of repelling an unjust aggression. In every point of view, therefore, they were evidently the aggressors. I cannot help wishing to recall the attention of the House to the general conclusion of what I have stated, for upon that rests all I have to say on the first part of the right hon. gentleman's propositions. If the House had been hurried by passion into the war, would it go to the enemy to atone for its misconduct, and accede to such conditions as the enemy might offer? And, yet the right hon. gentleman proposes, that we should bow down before the enemy, with the cord about our necks, when we have not felt the self-reproach of doing wrong; that we should abjure our recorded professions, and receive a sentence of condemnation, as severe as undeserved. This, I contend, would be to renounce the character of Britons. Even if, by the adverse fortune of war, we should be driven to sue for peace, I hope we shall never be mean enough to acknowledge ourselves guilty of a falsehood and injustice, in order to obtain it. The right hon. gentleman's next accusation against ministers is, that they have been guilty of a radical error, in not acknowledging the French republic. It is said, that this has been the bar to all treaty; that this has prevented every overture in subsequent situations. I admit it has so happened, that we have never acknowledged the republic; and I admit also, that no overture for peace, |