dicted by their endeavours not only to annihilate the power of the ancient fovereigns of the country, but even the will of the people. Look to the conduct of the French, not to their profeffions; look to the triumph of the deliverer of the Netherlanders to the entry of Dumourier -to the illuminations enforced by martial law, and to the free election of the members for the primary affemblies, in the hollow fquare of French troops. To prove ftill further her aggrandizing views, he referred them to the conduct of France with relpect to Hainault, to the deputies from which a regular fyftem for all nations to claim fraternity with France was laid down. Their decree of the 19th of November ftated, that France would grant fraternity and affiftance to all people who were defirous of regaining their freedom; to whom this grant was offered, it was not difficult to afcertain: it was ordered to be printed in all languages, for the ufe of Englishmen of courfe-for, as it was to be printed in Eglifh, it was not to be fuppofed that England was to be excluded from the advantage of French fraternity. It was true, that M. Chauvelin had given what had been termed an explanation of this decree, but which explanation, inftead of being fatisfactory, was an aggravation of the offence, and a confirmation of the object of France to propagate their fraternizing principles over the whole world; and poffefling this organizing diforganizing principle, their fyftem would be defective as long as one king was left on the earth-for they had profcribed royalty as a crime, and the bloody hand of the affaffin that had been fuccefsfully raised against one unfortunate monarch, was extended in the principle to our own, and to every monarch exifting. But to put the intentions of France with refpect to ourfelves beyond controverfy, the national affembly had applied their principles to ourselves by name-every addrefs of treafon and difaffection, from whatever body in England, however contemptible, however doubtful the authority, was thank fully received at their bar, and applauded. He next difcuffed their conduct, with refpect to the rights of our allies: they had profeffed an intention to hold facred thofe rights; but that profeffion, like the others, they had broken through by their conduct with refpect to the Scheld. France had no right to interfere but as claiming the fovereignty of the Ne-couraged complaints from bodies of men, therlands, or as the arbitrefs of the rights of Europe. In her conduct relative to the Scheld, he had exhibited a concentrated violation of treaties, not to be met with in the annals of the world. She was herself bound as a guarantee to maintain the exclufive navigation of that river to the Dutch; and if the claimed a fovereignty over Brabant, he was doubly bound as a guarantee to that exclufive night, for it was alfo guaranteed by the Brabant government. In queftioning this right of the Dutch, France had violated her profeffions to this country, and had attacked the intereits of our ally. But he had been called upon to fhew a requifition from the Dutch for our interference to fupport them in the maintenance of this right; and he had anfwered, that no fuch requifition had been made; but it was not to be paffed over, that the Dutch had made a formal proteft against the conduct of the French in forcing the navigation. The houfe could not pretend to the maintenance of the good faith of the country, if fuch a tranfaction were to be overlooked, which tranfaction the Dutch had a right, at any moment, to declare to be an act of hoftility committed against them by France; though from reasons of fear, or of prudence, when the enemy was at their gates, they might not have deemed it fit to declare a determination to refift, and not have called on us for the affiftance we were bound by treaty to afford them. But, independently of all treaty, was it fitting for us to fuffer country after country to be buried by the ambition of France, leading on, unchecked, to the ruin of England and of all Europe.The whole of the explanations made by France amounted to the poffibility of com niencing a negotiation at an indefinite period when what France deemed the eftablifhment of the liberty of the Netherlands thould be effected. She had in no degree receded on the fubject of the Scheld, nor given any fatisfactory explanation relative to her interference in the internal government of this country. On the contrary, the decrce of fraternity ftill remaining in force, the advertifed the world for encour agement to treafon and rebellion. The houfe was not to be told, as an explanation of that decree, that France would not countenance the complaints of the individuals of a country, but only fuch complaints as might be made by the will of a nation, when it was notorious that the national affembly had received and en 7 treated in this country, by fome gentlemen, as infignificant, and even too con temptible 6 for the maintenance of but ftill, to temptible for the application of the law. Lord Beauchamp feconded the motion. He contended, that the poffeffion of Savoy and the Netherlands by France were ob jects that rendered a war abfolutely neceffary; as the poffeffion of Savoy would fubject all Italy to France, and make her miftrefs of the Mediterranean, and the poffeffion of the Netherlands enable her to be the dictatrefs of the government of Holland. Lord Wycombe contended, that neither the rights of his majefty, nor the fecurity of the state ware threatened by the French 3 that they were defirous to maintain peace with us; that their explanations had been fufficient; and that the Scheld not being deemed by the Dutch a fufficient inducement for them to declare war, that we could not justify it on that ground. Mr. Whitbread, jun. attributed the cruelties committed in France, to the conduct of the combined armies, and to the execrable manifefto of the duke of Brunfwick. He charged adminiftration with not having exerted themfelves to avert a war, and with having by their haughtinefs provoked it. The only reafon he could fee of our going to war, was to overturn the prefent government of France; a government founded on the will of the people, and with which we had no right to intermeddle. He contended that the French conquefts were no fair ground for a war: they were not the aggreffors, but had been attacked. Their aggrandizement, however, was to be oppofed: but the aggrandizement of Ruffia was to be paffed by unnoticed. The reafon, he fuppofed, was, that Ruffia being a defpotić power, her aggrandizements were not deemed alarming. Mr. Fox faid, that the service in which he was engaged, was a fervice of honour, as well as danger; and he would not be deterred from declaring his fentiments, by a fear that it would be faid, that he approved of the proceedings of the French. He took notice of the execution of Louis XVI, which he esteemed most cruel and unjuft, and directly contrary to that republican magnanimity by which the convention fhould have been actuated. The condemnation of the king was not only not according to law, but it was again the pofitive regulations of their conftitution. He did not think it neceffary for the house to make any obfervation upon this murder, in their addrefs to his majefty; for the crimes committed within one ftate were not cognizable in another. The crimes of Portugal and of Spain, when the streets of Lifbon and Madrid were polluted with blood, by the autos da fée, did not preclude us from holding amicable intercourfe with thefe nations. The war entered into by France had been termed an offenfive war on our part. But the contrary was true. It had been faid, that Austria was not the aggreffor in the war with France. The treaty of Pilnitz, by which feveral of the princes of Europe, among the reft the king of Pruffia and the emperor of Germany, had agreed to attack France, and change the internal form of her government, as foon as it fhould be convenient to them, would prove the reverfe. How fhould we like it, if we were to have a difpute with any of our fovereigns, as we formerly had with the Stuarts, and if a set of the defpots of Europe were to fend in their armies to influence our deliberations, or to make us take whatever conftitution they thought proper to give us? He thought the duke of Brunfwick had been guilty of more execrable frauds in obtaining money froin the pealants of France, than M. Dumourier had committed while he was in Brabant. The former borrowed money, and gave bills payable by the king of France when he fhould regain the throne, which bills he obliged the French to accept under confiderable penalties. The French confif cated the property where they carried their arms. The caufes alleged by the minifter for war were totally infufficient. If, by our interference, we would draw the Dutch into a war against their will, we should act contrary to the fpirit of our treaties; for then, inftead of defending, we should materially injure them.-It was infolent and abfurd to defire the French to withdraw their troops from Brabant. We defired them, in the midst of a war, to admit the enemy to the gates of their cities. Our neutrality, as ministers had termed it, was like that of a man who fees two others boxing, and tells one of them, I will be neutral between you both, but the inftant you ftrike your antagonist, I fhall knock you down. Ministers had faid, that they would not defift from their prefent purfuits until they obtained fecurity from France, not to disturb the peace of Europe. What fecurity did they mean? The law of the 19th of November repealed? That would not do; for it might be re-enacted the day after.-The fact was, they made ufe of an equivocal term, which would enable them to refuse all accommodation. War seemed determined upon by them, and whatever the pretexts of it might be, the true caufe was to re-establish the old government of France. The right honourable gentleman had inveighed against the conduct of the French in Brabant. So did he.But he thought the ftory of the woman caught in adultery, would be applicable. to England, France, and Pruffia. Neither the court of London nor that of Berlin could throw fafely the firft ftone.He then made fome obfervations on the fondness of mankind for war. War is the great paffion of men. In one age, wars were undertaken for conqueft; in another for religion; in a third for commerce. The old fubject of war for opinions, was now removed. He dreaded, and even forbore to mention the confequences of an unsuccessful war at the prefent crifis. Laftly, he entreated the minifter to lofe no opportunity of ftating to the government of France, what was the fpecific object of the armaments, and he promifed him an amnefty for all faults, if he would fave the country from a war. able number of marines, be employed for the year 1793. This was agreed to. Mr. Fox then gave notice, that on Thursday it was his intention to make a motion on the state of the country, which would be relative to the pending war. This motion, however, was never made, as, for the remainder of the week, it happened, that a house could not be made to ballot for an election committee. At laft, however, on Monday, Feb. 11, a house was made, when Mr. Dundas prefented the following royal message GEORGE R. His majesty thinks proper to acquaint the house of commons, that the affembly now exercifing the powers of government in France, have, without previous notice, directed acts of hoftility to be committed against the perfons and property of his majesty's fubjects, in breach of the law of nations, and of the most pofitive ftipulations of treaty; and have fince, on the moft groundless pretenfions, actually declared war against his majesty, and the united provinces ; under the circumstances of this wanton and unprovoked aggreffion, his majesty has taken the necessary steps to maintain the honour of his crown, and to vindicate the rights of his people; and his majesty relies with confidence on the firm and effectual fupport of the house of commons, and on the zealous exertions of a brave and loyal people, in profecuting a juft and neceffary war, and endeavouring, under the bleffing of Providence, to oppofe an effectual barrier to the farther progrefs of a fyftem which strikes at the fecurity and peace of all independent nations, and is pursued in open defiance of every principle of moderation, good faith, humanity, and justice. In a caufe of fuch general concern, his majesty has every reafon to hope for the cordial co-operation of those powers who are united with his majesty by the ties of alliance, or who feel an intereft in preventing the extenfion of anarchy and confufion, and in contributing to the fecurity and tranquillity of Europe. G. R.' This meffage was ordered to be taken into confideration the next day. A fimilar message had been fent to the lords. Twenty thousand feamen, including 4000 marines, were then voted, in addition to the 25,000 voted before. Mr. Haftings, who had been already fix years at the bar of the house of lords, as a breach of the beft principles of the law, which was that every perfon charged with a crime fhould have afpeedy trial-a fpeedy acquittal if innocent-and a speedy conviction if guilty, concluded by moving the appointment of a committee of the houfe to confider of the best means of expediting the trial of Mr. Haftings, and to report their opinion.-This was agreed to. Major Maitland, after dwelling upon the unprecedented length of the trial of Some converfation occurred on Tuefday, relative to the production of certain papers, and, particularly, of a treaty faid to have been concluded, in January last, between Great Britain and Pruffia and Auftria; all which were urged to be neceffary, previously to the taking of his majesty's meffage into confideration. The demands for fuch production were not acceded to; miniftry infifting, that the points alluded to, would more properly come under difcuffion the next day, to which the house had deferred the confideration of his majesty's meffage. On Friday, Feb. 11, Mr. Lambton faid, as he had been given to understand that a treaty had been entered into between the emperor, the king of Pruffia, and Great Britain in January laft, and as he had been unable to gain any answer yefterday from minifters on the existence of fuch treaty, he conceived it to be his duty to move for its production, as it would throw a light on the question which was about to be difcuffed. The treaty had been confidered by France as an aggreffion on our fide, and had been stated as fuch; for his own part, it convinced him of the duplicity with which we had treated France, and by which ministers had involved the country in a war, of a dreadful and ruinous profpe&t.-He moved, accordingly, for the production of this treaty, but Mr. fecretary Dundas declaring, that he knew of no fuch treaty being in exiftence, Mr. Lambton withdrew his motion. The chancellor of the exchequer then rofe. Whatever difference of opinion, he faid, had arifen on the fubjects already difcuffed, and decided by a large majority of that houfe, and of the country at large, it was impoffible that the house fhould not now come to that unanimous refolution which was to be looked for from a British houfe of commons. The queftion was not now, what vigour it was neceffary to adopt, to meet impending danger; but whether, when war was declared by an enemy, when the option of peace or S 24 war war was no longer in our hands, we would not declare to his majefty, by an addrefs, our unanimous determination to fupport him in the defence of his dominions, and in the maintenance of the rights and liberties of his people. Before he propofed the addrefs, he would take a view of the events which had preceded and followed the communication of the former meffage from his majefty: when the house, by that meffage, had been informed of the preparations for hoftility on the part of France, and of the aggreffions which had been committed, they concurred in that meffage by an addrefs, and spoke the general feelings of the house to be a confcioufnefs of the ftrict fyftem of neutrality perfevered in, with refpect to the internal affairs of France: they felt that such conduct was entitled to a fuitable return, by a regard to the rights of the British nation and of her allies; by an avoidance on the part of France, of all views of aggrandizement; and, above all, by a careful avoidance of intermeddling in the internal affairs of neutral nations.-The houfe, however, had been convinced of the violation of each of thofe principles, which ought to have been regarded by France; they had expreffed their conviction of her diffeminating principles, which went to deftroy the fyftem of Europe, and to shake the foundation of the government of every civilized country. Their infulting decree of the 17th of November, which was called a decree of fraternity, had been felt, as a proclamation for fpreading infurrection from one end of the globe to the other. From this country they had courted at their bar every difplay of treafon. Their views of aggrandizement had been made evident; their fyftem of Profelytism and of Jacobinifm was to be feen in all their proceedings; and their fixed determination was clearly, to make the end of the war productive of an extenfion of their empire, and the means of carrying over all Europe the diffemination of principles destructive to its peace, and to its existence in any ftate of good government. By the former meflage the house were called on to prevent the completion of thofe intentions of France; and by the address of the house it had been declared, that war was preferable to the quiet admiffion of thofe principles; and that a war upon fuch an occafion, was the fhortest way to a fure and permanent peace.-The bleffings of peace would be annihilated, if we had no fecurity for its permanence, and fuch fe curity could not be had in a peace obtained by the admiffion of thole principles.-If, therefore, we valued our commerce, if we wifhed an increase of our revenue for the purpofe of alleviating the public burdens, thofe principles mutt be refifted; for our property and fafety would be more completely hazarded, by fubmitting to the views of aggrandizement on the part of France, than by meeting the danger at once by open war, in which, by fuccefs, we might deftroy the views of our enemy. Having thus itated the principal points which induced the house to vote the last addrefs, he ftated the fubfequent facts which had taken place. The firft was, the difmiffion of M. Chauvelin, whose powers had ceafed, and whom his majesty did not choofe to accredit upon new ones, as minifter plenipotentiary from the republic of France: but notwithstanding his difmiffion, he knew that there continued a wifh, on the part of his majesty's minifters, to admit, in every way confiftent with the honour of the nation, any explanation that could tend to avert the calamity of war; but no explanation had been made, and though M. Maret had arrived as chargé des affaires, he had never made a fingle communication. The next account received by administration was, of an embargo, without notice given, having been laid on the fhipping of British fubjects in the ports of France, which meafure might have been deemed an act of hoftility. This act was the first on the part of France, which had taken place subsequent to the laft addrefs; a measure not only contrary to exprefs treaty, but contrary to the law of nations. Confidering this conduct, he felt no reason to fear cenfure for precipitate measures against France; but the contrary, for having acted too flowly in vindication of the honour of their country: for even on this aggreffion, the channel of communication for explanation was not clofed, for it so happened that, as a proof of the pacific with of his majesty's minifters, on the very day of receiving the account of that outrageous measure, there arrived from our minifter at the Hague an exprefs, ftating, that a propofition had been made by Dumourier for an interview on the frontiers of Holland, to avert a war, if poffible, by negotiation. This propofition had been accepted by administration; and our ambasador at the Hague had been authorized to receive Dumourier's propofals. In doing this, no time had been loft to maintain peace; but before it was poffi ble |