country. If, indeed, the hon. gentleman's arguments on this part of the subject were founded, then there would be reason to despond-then there would be some reason for the calumny which the enemy had insolently thrown out against this country, that we were a nation of shopkeepers, and that we would at any time sell our most valuable interests for a profit of two per cent. It was not by acting upon such narrow principles as these that the French had risen to their present power, and had become an object of so much terror to the gentlemen on the other side of the House. Those gentlemen weighed the conduct of the two countries by very unequal measures. They contended for the greatness of Buonaparté and of the French nation: but if they were great, it was not by the adoption of such conduct as that which was now recommended, that they had become $0. If they were in that situation which had been represented, it was because they were not driven into despondency by every reverse of fortune, nor gave up great designs because, in some instances, their efforts were unsuccessful. Gentlemen had talked of the commerce of the country: but did they suppose that the commerce was created by the present military and naval exertions of the country, or that it could exist without them? Most undoubtedly if our commerce was not protected by our power, it would become an easy prey to our rivals. An hon. gentleman had, rather unfortunately for his argument, asked how king William preserved the confederacy of which he was the head? He would tell the hon. gentleman: it was by adhering strictly to his engagements; it was, by not suffering himself to be driven from his purposes by the mere rumour of a defeat. But now gentlemen were at once for going into a committee, without knowing the circumstances of that defeat about which they were so much alarmed, and without knowing any thing about the disposition or the resources of that ally which we were going to abandon. Gentlemen had always spoken of our allies as if they had been of no assistance to this country; but there was no man who considered the subject fairly, who would not admit, that the advantages we had received from our allies were great, even though in every instance they might not fully answer our expectations. There was, however, upon this, as well as upon many other parts of this subject, something very singular in the mode of reasoning adopted by the gentlemen opposite; for in the first place they had endeavoured to demonstrate the absurdity of attempting to keep any great confederacy together and immediately after they considered the defection of some of our allies as a matter of charge against his majesty's ministers. Another accusation which had been made was, that ministers had been mistaken in their predictions; now, in the first place, he did not recollect that any predictions had been made. His majesty's ministers had stated that which was obvious to all the world, namely, that they were going to enter into a most arduous and doubtful conflict: but that they were about to enter into it with every advantage, from the number and discipline of the troops of our allies and the skill of the generals by whom they were commanded. Now, in such a contest one party must fail; just as when two men rode upon a horse, one must ride behind; but no predictions were made, though great expectations might have been formed, from the advantages we possessed. Gentlemen, however, judging by the event, now contended that the Austrians must have been defeated; but he did not recollect, that before the event they hazarded any prediction of that kind; they had, indeed, declared generally against the war, and now laid hold of these reverses, which they had not foreseen to prove the wisdom of their observations. His majesty's ministers knew, as well as the gentlemen opposite, that such a contest could not be conducted without danger; but the question was, whether they had not taken every means which human prudence could suggest to prevent it? Allusions had been made upon this occasion, as well as upon many others, to the negotiations at Paris and at Lisle. His opinion respecting then could have but little weight in the councils of the country; but surely those very negotiations were a proof that ministers were willing to enter into a negotiation whenever they saw there was the least probability of effecting an honourable peace and, showed that ministers did not think that any such opportunity now presented, or they would not have neglected it. He would, however, state, with respect to those negotiations, that if ever, during the progress of the present war, this country was really in danger, it was at the period when they not concerned. He looked upon the establishment of the old government as an unattainable object: he believed it was the only thing which Buonaparté could not do. The character of this country had suffered by its inflexible perseverance in the present war; even our allies had said, that the English had covered Germany with blood and gold. He trusted, we should now seriously endeavour to obtain a general peace. Mr. I. H. Browne said, he never would allow this to be stiled an unnecessary or unsuccessful war, without entering his protest against both these opinions. The glory of this country was never raised so high as it had been during the whole course of this war. An honourable and lasting peace must be the wish of every man; but a vote of this House to force ministers to make peace, would be laying ourselves at the feet of the enemy. were carrying on; it was, that the enemy would have acceded to the terms which we then proposed. He was firmly of opinion that if we had made peace at that time, with the general despondency which then prevailed, but which subsequent events had fortunately dissipated, they would not now be sitting to discuss the state of the nation. Gentlemen recommended ministers to enter into a negotiation for peace, with a confession that they were unable to carry on the war; but surely every rational man must admit, that a peace concluded under such circumstances must destroy the interests and dignity of the country. The present war had-upon this and upon former occasions, been compared with the American war; but he did not see how two wars could be well compared together, or how gentlemen could argue from the past events of one, to the probable events of another. The hon. gentleman had stated, that the present war, like that with America, was founded in delusion, had been conducted without ability, and would end in defeat. There was, however, one point in which the two wars were similar; and that was, that they both were civil wars, in which men for the first time learnt to wish well to the enemies of their country. He was ready to confess, that he was a well-wisher to the Americans. They had been our fellow subjects; they were, he might almost say, our countrymen; their object was not the complete destruction of this country. He confessed that during the American war, he thought the success of the Americans essential to the interests of this country; and he begged leave to ask the gentlemen on the other side, if they now entertained the same sentiments with respect to the French? Upon the whole, the question for the consideration of the House was, whether there had been laid before them sufficient grounds to induce them to go into the committee. It appeared to him, that no sufficient ground had been laid down for the interference proposed, and therefore he should give the motion his most decided negative. Mr. Nicholls said, that if the doctrine which had been laid down during this debate, of the necessity of continuing the war till the old government of France was restored, was not contradicted, the public would know that they were engaged in a bellum internecinum, and that for an object in which their interests were Mr. Buxton opposed the motion, because no satisfactory ground had been stated in favour of it. Ministers must be anxious to obtain a peace, if it could be done on terms consistent with the honour and safety of the nation; and he trusted there was not an Englishman who would not rather die in the last ditch defending his country, than submit to any other terms. Sir F. Burdett Jones, in supporting the motion, took a hasty view of the conduct of administration with respect to Ireland, the state prisoners, and the general plan of the war. The enormities and cruelties committed in the sister kingdom, he said, exceeded any thing done by Nero or Caligula; and the hardships to which the state prisoners had been subjected, were, in many instances, unexampled. If the House would consider what had been the fate of the successive expeditions undertaken against the enemy, strong ground would be furnished for agreeing to the motion. All the expeditions, from that to Quiberon down to the one to the coast of Holland, had failed. These were matters for a committee. Mr. Elliston could not support the motion. It appeared to him, that gentlemen were willing to give up the country to the enemy, and abet and support trea son. He voted in the pure spirit of independence, but could not help thinking that many of those who supported the motion spoke the language of party. Mr. Hobhouse said:-The hon. mover of the present question has confined his ob servations to the unhappy war in which we are engaged. I shall imitate his conduct. Is it not of the utmost consequence to ascertain the object for which this disastrous war is continued? The chancellor of the exchequer, whenever that question has been put to him, has always answered, "It is for security we fight, and for that alone." Although such a reply may satisfy some gentlemen, it will not content me. Security is a loose word, unless we be informed in what that security consists. No longer the constitution of 1789; no longer the constitution of 1795; but the ancien regime of France, with the sceptre in the hands of a Bourbon, is our favourite object. To replace that line of princes on the throne of France, and to invest them with the same despotic powers enjoyed by their ancestors, is the avowed object of our preference. Is it not made the sine qua non of immediate negotiation; and is not this condition alone pointed out as capable of removing all obstacles to negotiation? If, then, ministers have never seemed to be long agreed upon that form of French government which would place the English nation in a state of safety, but have professed attachment to constitutions so very different from each other, is it not of the highest moment, to enter upon an investigation of the actual object for which the country is condemned still to suffer the calamities of war? Should it appear that there is no other motive for the prosecution of the contest, than a desire to repress the grasping ambition of France, and reduce her power within certain limits, then a question will arise, which it may be difficult for ministers to answer, namely, why they rejected, within the space of a few weeks, two successive overtures of pacification which seem to have been made in the very spirit of conciliation; for how could they know that Buonaparté, had they heard his terms, would not have offered such as were not incompatible with the security of the other European nations? Or, should it appear that we are at war merely to check the prevalence of opinions which are deemed hostile to religion and virtue, and subversive of social order, then it will be proper to inquire how far force is likely to succeed against principles, and whether violence have not a tendency to accelerate rather than impede the progress of those tenets which we hold in detestation. But should it be made ma nifest, that the old regal tyranny of France, in the race of the Bourbons, is the real ground for continuing the war, then it may be asked, whether we have not as much to dread from the ambition of the Bourbons as from the love of dominion in Buonaparté? whether they and the other princes of Europe have not been guilty of fraternization, and of exciting the people of a country against their rulers, as much as Buonaparté and the various governments of France since the revolution? and whether they be not as little to be depended upon for the observance of their engagements as the "faithless and perfidious monster, Buonaparté ?" It is also, Sir, indispensable to examine our means of prosecuting the war, and for this purpose to compare our past and present situation. Other highly important considerations might be submitted to such a committee as is the object of my hon. friend's motion. Might it not be inquired, whether we had not embroiled ourselves too much in affairs of the continent? Will it not be right also to discuss the propriety of subsidizing foreign princes to fight battles in which they are infinitely more interested than ourselves? The inquiries which I have proposed, are of primary importance, and demand, in my judgment, the attention of a committee of the whole House Mr. Sheridan, after taking a rapid view of the present state of the country, and of the recent successes of the French, said:-We are told that the motion of my hon. friend is unadvised and prema ture. All that we ask is, to go into the inquiry. My hon. friend has called on the House to pause, to look at the state of the country, and adopt proper mea. sures to avert the common danger. What we wish is, to show that the reign of blind, servile, and corrupt influence is over; that new vigour has been infused into the constitution; and I am far from thinking that the inquiry we propose would discourage our allies. The enemy also would see in such a measure something to cause hesitation. For, could Buonaparté, addressing his soldiers on the eve of an invasion of this country, use any topic with better effect, than that the same ministers now ruled who began and conducted the war. The people of England, indeed, must wish that the men who have brought the country to the brink of ruin may not always guide her affairs. Thus much, then, as to the effect which the motion, if carried, would | country wishes for peace: yet if the right have on the spirit of the country. Do hon. secretary is afraid of a tri-coloured we hear that the funds have risen; the cockade in the streets of London; if he is prospect of peace is the cause. With afraid that idle curiosity will take many regard to the observations of an hon. persons to Paris, who might wish to member (Mr. Wilberforce), that ministers introduce French fashions; or if he is would proceed with the work of peace fearful that persons possessing small forwhenever circumstances would allow, he tunes will emigrate to France-while could only refer to the transactions of these are fit matters to be gravely con1795, when the hon. member, by an sidered, it ought also to be remembered, amendment to a motion then made for that great and pressing evils accumulate peace, actually pledged the minister to with the war, which ought also to receive negotiate. We have heard from the grave and weighty consideration. Howsame gentleman of the wisdom and in- ever, it is not my intention to discuss tegrity of administration. But whatever the question of peace now in all its was the wisdom and integrity of the details, though if it be put on the ground ministers then, they appear to be much of security, I am ready to support the reduced in their stock of both at this war until it can be concluded with honour moment. We were told, that in 1797, and safety. I think the motion a good however, they attempted a sincere nego- one, and with a thorough conviction, tiation. This phrase was merely a trap, that if adopted it will be attended with and several have been caught in it. War national benefits, I shall cordially sup went on. No sincere efforts were made port it. to stop its progress. A loss of 150,000 lives, and about two hundred millions sterling, are the effects of the obstinacy of ministers on that occasion. The objects of the war have been various. The last we heard avowed, was the restoration of the Bourbons. In 1797, we heard of nothing but religion and morality; but these were soon lost in attempts to negotiate with advantage for Trincomale, the Cape, and some other colonies. The last object of the war was pretty distinct; but even that is now disavowed, and we are told that ministers only wish to carry on a defensive war. Offensive war is therefore given up. But if a defensive war be advisable, a committee is the only proper plan to consider of the means and the mode of carrying it on. Again, it would be necessary to consider in the committee, what effect immediate peace would have on the commerce of this country. France must divide our commerce with us; whilst, on the other hand, if we continue the war, she will be able to raise a great navy, to which her situation and her resources so much adapt her. Under these circumstances, then, I call on gentlemen to turn their minds sincerely to peace: let us seek peace cordially, with heart and hand; peace with reconciliation; such a peace as the two countries can bear, and as will be compatible with their mutual and joint security. There can be no security in a peace which gives exclusive advantages to one party. I then wish for peace; the The Solicitor General commented upon the different objects which gentlemen appeared to have in this motion. Some wished for peace: others wished for a dismissal of ministers: others, again, wished that it should be a committee of vigilance, to watch the conduct of the executive government. Now, before they could act upon the latter principle, they must come to a resolution that the executive government was unworthy to be trusted. If government showed a disposition to treat in 1797, why was it to be inferred that they did not now possess the same desire? But he considered the means pointed out by this motion as disgraceful in the extreme: it was telling our allies that we regarded their interests only while they were successful; but that the moment they were unfortunate, we would negotiate without them, and leave them to their fate. Even putting the worst case that could happen, that we should be obliged to contend against France alone, that case would not be new to us; we had done it before, and we had found that our fortitude and courage were equal to the contest. Gentlemen, when they talked of the sufferings of this country, should recollect the sufferings and sacrifices made by France; there it was that we ought to imitate her; and if they had borne so much evil with fortitude in a bad cause, what ought we not to bear in a good one? When gentlemen talked of the funds as a criterion of the wishes of the people, they argued from a false | on the conclusion of a peace; and hinted criterion. They proved nothing more at the probability of an armed neutrality than that some men preferred their of the northern countries to oppose the private interest to the interest of the views of Great Britain; which neutrality, community. With respect to the general if joined by America, might produce the question, whether the conduct pursued most fatal consequences to our commerce, towards France was wise and politic, the great source of our revenue. He by that depended upon a view of all the no means wished to drive ministers into a events which had taken place. For his negotiation. From the whole of their conpart, he had never repented of the vote duct, he did not conceive it practicable which he gave for the war; and the only for them to treat with success, and thereregret which he felt was, that it was not fore he could not possibly give them his sooner entered into. He had been asked, confidence. If Buonaparté sought rewhat price we had been repaid for all venge, he now possessed an abundant porthat we had advanced? In his opinion, tion of it in the humiliation of the British the re-payment had been abundant-we ministers. After all the scurrility and inhad saved our constitution. No prac- vective that had been lavished by them, tical good could result from the motion. the moment of their complete humiliation Instead of accelerating peace, it would was at length arrived. They were, howtend to delay it, and to fetter the hands ever, proud, and could not bring themof government in the prosecution of that selves to beg that peace which they had so object. lately refused from the hands of him whom Mr. Tierney did not wish by any means they termed a Corsican usurper, and to to crouch to France for peace; but if ever whose footstool they must necessarily a committee to inquire into the state of the crouch, if they should at any time become nation was necessary, it was at the present serious in their endeavours to terminate moment. The confidence which had been the war. Unless the House interfered, reposed in ministers had been grossly he saw no salvation for the country. The abused. By the reasons which a few inquiry proposed would, he doubted not, months back they had urged against en furnish ground of impeachment against tering into a negotiation with France, ministers, who had persuaded his majesty, that House had been deceived, and pre-contrary to his nature and disposition, to cipitated into a determination to continue turn a deaf ear to the cries of peace. the war. Ministers had, in that case, The House divided: betrayed their country, and deceived their sovereign. The arguments then advanced by them in support of their projects had proved wholly fallacious. No one would now argue, that the relative situation of this country with France was so favourable as it was at the period of our refusal to negotiate. It was not a committee of vigilance that was sought for. What was required, was, a committee to examine into the state of the nation; a proceeding by no means novel in that House. If we persisted in the war without taking some precaution of this kind, we should have nothing to hope, and every thing to fear. In the event of the war being continued much longer, he feared that the whole naval force of this country would not be sufficient to protect our possessions from invasion. He had no great apprehensions with respect to England itself; but the situation of Ireland rendered its safety rather precarious. He admitted the prosperous state of our revenue at present, but attributed this prosperity to the disjointed state of Europe, which would cease TELLERS. Mr. Western YEAS {Mr. Hobhouse Mr. Buxton NOES {Mr. Charles Yorke So it passed in the negative. Adair, R. Barclay, G. :} 26 148 Mostyn, sir T. Nicholls, J. North, D. Plumer, W. Russell, lord J. Russell, Lord W. Smith, W. Burdett, Jones, sir F. Sheridan, R. B. TELLERS. Western, C. C. Address on the State of the Public Records.] July 11. Mr. Abbot reported from the Committee appointed to draw up |