property and the earnings of the rest of the community. It had closed the contest by making it the interest of English people of fortune to go and live upon that fortune in France, in order to be more at their ease, and to enjoy greater happiness than they could, with the same means, enjoy at home. These were the permanent effects which the Pitt system had produced, before the return of Napoleon; and, I believe, that few men of any knowledge as to these matters, will be found to say, that we should have been able, without some very great change at home, to have gone on for any length of time in peace. It is notorious, that the distresses of the country were never so great as during the last twelve months. That the merchant, the manufacturer, the shop-keeper, the artisan, never experienced so great a degree of distress; and, we have recently heard it declared in the House of Commons, that the County Jails are now crowded with the Cultivators of the Land. This is what was never before known in England. It is a new, and the most conclusive proof, of national distress. While England was in this state, France afforded to all who went thither, proofs of great internal prosperity. Her agriculture was pouring its super-abundance upon us, and was producing that cheapness which our people wanted, which the necessities of the government could not allow it to permit them to have. The land in France, comparatively, little burdened, was sending forth its products to cause cheapness here, and to carry back the means of frucfication in its own bosom. The French loaf was driving our own out of the market, and compelling our government either to exclude it from our country, or to abstain from taking from the land in England the means of paying the interest of the debt, occasioned by that war, which had terminated in re-placing the Bourbons on the throne of France, and, as was thought, in extinguishing "French principles." It was manifest to all men, capable of reasoning upon such subjects, that the result, if peace had continued, even with the Bourbons in France, would have been the most deplorable distress in England. It was manifest, that a large part of the rents' of land, and of the dividends on stock, would have been drawn from England and expended in France; that the undiminished taxes would have fallen wholly upon those persons who remained, and whose means of paying taxes would have been diminished daily; that the demand for labour, in all branches, would have decreased; that the nation would have be-, come more and more languid and feeble; and this, too, while the means of France, from the migration of English of all sorts, not excepting the ablest of manufacturers, would have increased in a like proportion; and while America, our war with whom was the natural consequences of, and, in-. deed, made a part of, the Pitt system, had established manufactories to a great extent, and was coming forth, fresh, vigorous, elated, full of reputation, of hope, and of means, to enter upon a rivalship with us, not only in maritime commerce, but also in naval power. Such was the result; such were the effects of the Pitt system, even as things stood previous to Napoleon's departure from Elba. Such were the effects, upon the supposition that "French principles" had really been extinguished in Europe. If any one deny the facts which I have stated, he will, of course, reject the conclusion at which I have been aiming; but if no one can deny these facts, no one can deny, that the Pitt system has been the most fatal that England ever saw; and that, even while the Bourbons were on the throne of France, you were justified in maintaining, that your opposition to the war had been, by the result, proved to have been founded in wisdom: not only in justice and a love of freedom, but in sound policy, having in view solely the prosperity and power of England. But it may be said, and by some persons it will be said, that though the fact be incontestibly proved, that England has lost greatly by the war against France; though it be proved, that even with the Bourbons on the throne, her prosperity was sapped, her force greatly impaired, her people plunged in distress, and her financial overthrow clearly approaching: though all this be proved, she had by war avoided a revolution. If by revolution is meant a reform in Parliament, I agree to the assertion. But I will not, at present, contend upon this head. Granted, that we must have had a revolution, in the Pitt sense of the word, if we had not had war. And what then? Why, if we had had a revolution, we should, at any rate, not have been worse off than the people of and far more important, is, that it was by endeavouring to subvert these principles, that the Bourbons, in a very few months, lost their throne. It is clear, therefore, that even with the Bourbons on the throne of France, we had not been able to extinguish French principles; nay, even at that time, such was the force of the exam France; and, as we now see, the people of France are better off than they were before the revolution, and, as is agreed on all hands, I think, better off than we now are. This is proved, not by what travellers say only, but by the notorious fact, that hundreds and thousands of families went from England to live in France; and (oh! deep disgrace to the Pitt system!)ple, that our own Landholders began by the petitions of the English Landholders themselves, who, amongst their grounds for demanding a Corn Bill, stated, with perfect truth, that they were unable to contend with the French corn-growers, because these latter were so lightly taxed in comparison with us, and because they were relieved from tythes. If, then, the French nation has gained thus by their revolution, what reason have we to say, that we have, in avoiding a revolution, received a compensation for all the distresses heaped on us by a war carried on to keep off such à revolution? The sum of our success, then, even in February last, when the Bourbons were upon the throne, was, in its utmost extent, that we had preserved the Church property, the Feudal Rights and Titles, and the Borough system. This is the most that the Pitt system can take credit for. But, I now proceed to shew, that, even supposing it to have been most desirable to preserve all these by the extinguishment of "French principles," this was not accomplished, even if the Bourbons had remained upon the throne. The return of Napoleon has not created anew the French principles; it has not even revived those principles; it has only proved to the world, that those principles had never, for a moment, ceased to be in a state of activity. What were these dreaded French principles? That the people ought to be taxed only by their real representatives; that there ought to be no predominant church; that the people have a right to possess the property formerly belonging to the offending Noblesse and to the whole of the Church; that the King, or chief Magistrate, has no right to rule except by the will of the people. And, with the exception of a little shuffle as to the last, more in the form than the substance, did not the Bourbons solemnly agree to reign according to these principles? This is so notorious, that no one will venture to deny it; and, what is equally notorious, openly to express feelings of envy at seeing their neighbours relieved from the burden of tythes, the ridding the country of which was one of the greatest, if not the very greatest, atchievement of the French revolution. It was, really, a thing to admire: to hear the gentlemen, who had for so many years, been haranguing and marshalling their tenantry against the sacrelegious principles of the French, telling the Parliament very gravely, that the French were better off than themselves because they had got rid of fythes; and, in that word, as you will clearly perceive, is included the Bishops' revenues and the whole of the Church Establishment. Now, then, in coming towards the prospect before us, if the Pitt system had accomplished no one of the objects it contemplated, even supposing the Bourbons to have remained on the throne of France, what hope is there in continuing that same system? It would be very wonderful indecd, if we were by war to succeed in overthrowing Napoleon a second time; but, if he were to die a natural death; to be killed in battle; or, to be assassinated; what end would that answer? Is it to be believed, that amongst the Carnots, the Marats, the Fouches, the Cau'incourts, and hundreds of others; men capable of writing such papers as we have recently seen from their pens, and which papers put to shame that poverty of talent which we see opposed to them: is it to be believed, that, amongst all these famous men, none would be to be found to carry on the government and to direct its forces, in case Napoleon should lose his life? If, during the heat of the revolution, we saw assembly after assembly dissolved; committee succeed committee; changes in the chiefs; the rise of one faction over another; and still the French armies always faithful to their colours and their country. If we saw this, during so many years of internal commotion and foreign war; amidst all the turmoil of paper money, confiscation, and sometimes famine, what "take care, that they have proper Minis"ters, but we must compel them to adopt reason have we to suppose, that the safety of France and the support of her principles depend now solely upon the life of" strong measures of government; and one man? the greatest man, I allow; great beyond any man that France, or the world, ever before saw. But, I am not disposed to pay him the hyperbolical compliment to admit the supposition, that the safety and freedom of the French nation hang upon his single life, What, then, will the Pitt system have done for us, even if it should succeed in destroying the life of this wonderful man? The idea, that a nation like England should bear to be told, that its well-being requires the death of a foreign sovereign, is truly disgraceful to the human character. But, as to the fact, how could such an event tend to relieve from their fears those who are so anxious to see "French principles" extinguished? "we shall have a right so to do, because "our own safety and the safety of Europe "demand it." So that this war (for it has been going on from the year 1792) which was begun on the alleged ground of the provocation which the Convention had given in a decree for offering assistance to oppressed foreign nations, is, according to these writers, to be wound up by our not only dictating a ruler to France, but in our appointing the ministers of that ruler, and in dictating measures to those ministers! This differs, indeed, very widely from what LALLY TOLENDAL and CHATEAUBRIAND are telling the French people from the King's Council Chamber" at GHENT. They say: ❝ above all, "remember, that the rebellion once put It is impossible to say who might suc- "down, the Usurper once destroyed, no ceed Napoleon as the head of the govern-"foreign power will place itself between ment; or what form, or title, the execu-"the legitimate Prince and his faithful *tive part of that government might assume. "people, to interfere with any of the poliBut, if the Chief were called Emperor, "cal institutions, of which the proposal, King, Consul, or President, what doubt" the consideration, and the adoption, will can there be, that the basis of his autho-"belong exclusively to them." rity would be the same, that the nature of the government would undergo little change, that the rights and property of the people would remain unshaken? And, if this were the case, nothing would have been gained by war, even in the way of extinguishing French principles." Nay, the matter would be still worse; for, in all human probability, much of the imperial style, now preserved in gratitude to Napoleon, would be withdrawn, and the haters of French principles would have, staring them full in the face, a Republic in name, as the French nation now is in principle and essence. Our Times newspaper has asserted the contrary; and, really, I think the editor of that paper a better authority than Lally Tolendal or the wild old scribe, Chateaubriand, who, I think they say, has been made a Viscount. The war, we are now told, has begun. The dispatch of Lord Clancarty says, the Allies "ARE AT WAR," and all the world knows, that France has committed no act of hostility, while she still holds out the olive branch to all Europe. In the report of the Earl of Liverpool's speech, during the debate of last Monday night, he dropped, that the object of the war was "to destroy that SYSTEM," which was now existing in France. The TIMES newspaper of Tuesday last has this passage:- "La Vendee has risen! It. may be recollected, that we not long ago " noticed the sailing of a secret expedition, "consisting of several ships of war. These ships sailed from Falmouth, and were "destined to the coast of La Vendee, to supply the loyalists in that country with a quantity of arms of every description, in conformity with their earnest solicitations. According to advices received on Sunday by Government, the landing of the arms had been effected with great 66 66 But, the Pitt system proposes, perhaps, and fully expects, to place the Bourbons again upon the throne. It must do this, or, as we have seen, it does worse than nothing at all. It presumes, that it shall be able to do it, because it has done it before. But, this is an argument with two edges; for we may say, if you can put up the Bourbons, because you have done it once before, the French nation can drive“ them out again, because they have done it" twice before. To prevent this, some of our impudent and foolish writers have openly said, that, "when we have restored" 66 the Bourbons again, we must not only This is the scene of 1793 returned: all' the sovereigns of Europe combined against the French nation and its principles of government. That this is the true Pitt system no one will deny; and, we shall now see to what it will bring France, the rest of Europe, and ourselves. The preparations on both sides are enormous; all the means of destruction that Europe affords have been collected, or are collecting; all the treasures that Europe affords are ready to pour forth;-all the hostile passions are rouzed. That we shall witness carnage most horrible I have not the least doubt; that we shall again hear of very rigorous proceedings in France is to be expected; popular vengeance will again, perhaps, surpass the bounds of ordinary justice; the bosom of that fine country may again be lacerated by her own children as well as by their enemies; but I do not believe, that, let what else will happen, the Bourbons will ever again be placed on the throne of France; I do not believe, that the French people will ever again submit to their sway. "management and address, and they were to pay subsidies to the invading conti"received by the people with equal grati-nental armies. ❝tude. In the course of yesterday this "important intelligence was confirmed, 66 by the arrival of the Cephalus sloop of 66 war at Portsmouth from the coast of "France, which, according to a telegraphic 66 message to the Admiralty, did not quit "her station until it was known that the "insurrection was general, the white "cockade mounted, and the cause of "Louis XVIII. every where proclaimed. "Immense numbers trooped to the Royal "standard. Report, though probably "with some exaggeration, made them al"ready amount to 50,000. Among the "leaders are the friends, the relatives, "the avengers of those glorious men, who "fell in the cause of their country in the "field, on the scaffold, and in the dungeon. There is the son of the truly 66 great Charette: there are the associates of Sombreuil, and Georges, and Frotte." Thus, then, even before war has been declared, it is publicly announced, that we have sent arms to assist insurgents in France. How exactly the present state of things resembles the state of things in 1793 and 1794! The following is pub- I grant, that, if once entered into the lished, in the TIMES newspaper of 22d war, the stimulus to exertion and perseinstant, as an extract of a Proclamation, verance, on the part of the coalition of issued at Petersburgh on the 25th of Sovereigns, will be greater than ever it April, addressed to the French people has before been; for, if they be now com"You entered my territories, unprovoked, pelled to leave France with her princi"with fire and sword, you plundered and ples, after a war of any duration, they "destroyed wherever you came; you en- must see that those principles will not be tered my capital, which you laid waste. long in making their way over all Europe, "I entered your territories, and took even to its utmost bounds. They must "your capital, but destroyed nothing. see that this is the last war on the subject; "Again, unprovoked, you raise the the last agitation of the question. But, on "sword, and destroy the peace of nations. the other hand, the French people must "I will now enter your territories, once see that their fate depends upon their exermore, to conquer peace; and wherever tions and perseverance. They will all now "Imeet with resistance, I will UTTERLY be armed; the whole of that populous "DESTROY YOU FOR YOUR PER- country will be in motion; already the "FIDY." Whether this be authentic or old confederation appear to be reviving. not, as such it has gone forth to the world, If there be no neutrality allowed out of and, of course, to France. Louis, on his France, we may be assured, that none part, tells the French, that his only error will be allowed in it. If the rich be diswas too much clemency; but there are inclined to bestir themselves, the poor times, when every thing may be pardoned will take the riches along with the office but a perseverance in crimes. All this is of defending them. The men who now com. so like the proclamation of the Duke of pose the government of France are not Brunswick, and the proclamations from men to stop at the end of a part of their Coblentz, that no one can pretend that it means. 66 They will say, France must has the smallest pretensions to novelty."be defended. Without new confiscaTo wind up the whole, England has agreed❝tions; without new seizures of the £6 1 66 "wealth of egotists; without new com"mittees of surveillance; without new "revolutionary tribunals; without a new deportation of priests and ex-no"bles; without all, or any of these, if 66 possible; but, at any rate, France must "be defended." I lay little stress, therefore, on the accounts which are given us, of the respectable towns-people, the respectable proprietors, the respectable professional men, being for the King. These respectable people must march and fight, or their professions, as in the first war, will serve as a reward for those who will fight and who are without possessions. leon should resort to a similar vigour, under the circumstances that are now approaching. Our writers cry aloud against Napoleon's resorting to the levy of a million, or two, of National Guards. They call this a horrible tyranny. To be sure, because it is formidable to his enemies, who seek his destruction. CHATEAUBRIAND, from the "Council Chamber" at Ghent, talks of the danger of this disastrous conscription. Well he may. But he says, that, luckily, the invasion of France, last year, destroyed several manufactories of arms. Courage! Monsieur le Viscomte de Chateaubriand! Armless as they will be, you would not, I imagine, Napoleon is very violently abused, in care to face any one of them, even with our newspapers, for having put 50,000 Lally Tolendal at your back. This callmuskets into the hands of the artizans and ing out of the National Guard, Monsieur labourers of the suburbs of Paris, whole Viscomte calls an "immense haul; a are compared to the inhabitants of Rag-"general proscription; an extermination fair and St. Giles's. But, these writers" of the French people at a blow; a frighttell us, very often, of men charged with "ful and monstrous thing." crimes being sent by our magistrates to the fleet or the army, instead of being sent to prison as malefactors. If our country were invaded, would not the government accept of the offers of labourers and artizans? If the rich, in France, should (I do not believe they will) endeavour to remain neutral, is there any chance of our seeing them so remain with impunity? If there be one rich to five poor, and if he does not contribute the means to enable the five to act, himself setting the example, those means will, of course, be taken from him and given, in one shape or another, to the five poor. This was the principle upon which the French nation acted before; and, if necessity again puts this principle in practice, the consequences will naturally be the same as before. Turning from this sorry bombast, this ridiculous trash, we may I think, look upon it as certain, that to keep the Bourbons upon the throne of France, if once placed there, would require foreign soldiers stationed in every city, town, village and hamlet, unless those Bourbons governed upon the present principles. To conquer, in such a way, such a nation as France, is impossible. Language does not contain the words to describe the means of effecting such subjugation. All the hired troops in all Europe would not take from the people of France their lands, or make them pay tythes, or submit to feudal rights and laws. And yet, if this be not done, "French principles" remain, and the Pitt system has accomplished nothing but the distress and degra-. dation of England and the creation of an American navy. If my view of the matter be, therefore, at all near the truth, it is not a holiday war, Thus, Sir, I think, I have shewn, that on which we are about to enter. Nor is that system, which is still called the Pitt it likely to be a very halcyon time with system, has completely failed in all that those, whom we say we have for our it professed to have in view, and that it is friends in France, and of whose punish-in a fair way of completely succeeding in ment, if detected, it is impossible that we destroying all that has supported it. But, can have the face to complain. "AI must not conclude without clearly provigour beyond the law" was justified in, testing against being understood to asEngland at a time when England was not cribe this system exclusively to one of the invaded; when she had all Europe fight-two political parties who have so long ing on her side against France; when there was scarcely a possibility of an enemy setting foot on her shore. We cannot, therefore, be surprised, if Napo been striving against each other for the possession of power. The party who are now out of place, did, when they were in place, pursue precisely the same system. |