for a march to Paris. With all that you have gained, you surely will not say that the prospect is brighter now than it was then. What have you gained but the re covery of a part of what you before lost? One campaign is successful to you-another to them; and in this way, animated by the vindictive passions of revenge, hatred, and rancour, which are infinitely more flagitious, even, than those of ambition and the thirst of power, you may go on for ever; as, with such black incentives, I see no end to human misery. And all this without an intelligible motive, all this because you may gain a better peace a year or two hence! So that we are called upon to go on merely as a speculation-We must keep Buonaparté for some time longer at war, as a state of probation. Gracious God, Sir, is war a state of probation? Is peace a rash system? Is it dangerous for nations to live in amity with each other? Is your vigilance, your policy, your common powers of observation, to be extinguished by putting an end to the horrors of war? Cannot this state of probation be as well undergone without adding to the catalogue of human sufferings?" But we must pause!" What! must the bowels of Great Britain be torn out-her best blood be spilt her treasure wasted-that you may make an experiment? Put yourselves-oh! that you would put yourselves in the field of battle, and learn to judge of the sort of horrors that you excite. In former wars a man might at least, have some feeling, some interest, that served to balance in his mind the impressions which a scene of carnage and of death must inflict. If a man had been present at the battle of Blenheim, for instance, and had inquired the motive of the battle, there was not a soldier engaged who could not have satisfied his curiosity, and even, perhaps, allayed his feelings they were fighting to repress the uncontrolled ambition of the grand monarque. But, if a man were present now at a field of slaughter, and were to inquire for what they were fighting-" Fighting!" would be the answer; "they are not fighting, they are pausing." "Why is that man expiring? Why is that other writhing with agony? What means this implacable fury?" The answer must be, "You are quite wrong, Sir, you deceive your selfThey are not fighting-Do not dis turb them-they are merely pausing !this man is not expiring with agony

that man is not dead he is only pausing! Lord help you, Sir! they are not angry with one another; they have now no cause of quarrel-but their country thinks that there should be a pause. All that you see, Sir, is nothing like fightingthere is no harm, nor cruelty, nor blood. shed in it whatever-it is nothing more than a political pause!—it is merely to try an experiment to see whether Buona. parté will not behave himself better than heretofore; and in the mean time we have agreed to a pause, in pure friendship!" And is this the way, Sir, that you are to show yourselves the advocates of order? You take up a system calculated to uncivilize the world, to destroy order, to trample on religion, to stifle in the heart, not merely the generosity of noble sentiment, bu the affections of social nature; and in the prosecution of this system, you spread terror and devastation all around you..

Sir, I have done. I have told you my opinion. I think you ought to have given a civil, clear, and explicit answer to the overture which was fairly and handsomely made you. If you were desirous that the negotiation should have included all your allies, as the means of bringing about a general peace, you should have told Buonaparté so; but I believe you were afraid of his agreeing to the proposal. You took that method before, "Aye, but, you say, "the people were anxious for peace in 1797." I say they are friends to peace now; and I am confident that you will one day own it. Believe me, they are friends to peace; although, by the laws which you have made, restraining the expression of the sense of the people, public opinion cannot now be heard as loudly and unequivocally as heretofore. But I will not go into the internal state of this country. It is too afflicting to the heart to see the strides which have been made, by means of, and under the miserable pretext of this war, against liberty of every kind, both of speech and of writing; and to observe in another kingdom the rapid approaches to that military despotism which we affect to make an argument against peace. I know, Sir, that public opinion, if it could be collected, would be for peace, as much now as in 1797, and I know that it is only by public opinionnot by a sense of their duty-not by the inclination of their minds that ministers will be brought, if ever, to give us peace. I conclude, Sir, with repeating what

I said before; I ask for no gentleman's vote who would have reprobated the compliance of ministers with the proposition of the French govenment; I ask for no gentleman's support to-night who would have voted against ministers, if they had come down and proposed to enter into a negotiation with the French; but I have a right to ask-I know, that in honour, in consistency, in conscience, I have a right to expeet, the vote of every gentleman who would have voted with ministers in an address to his majesty, diametrically opposite to the motion of this night. The House divided:

necessary to prove that it ought to be adopted. I profess, Sir, that in bringing this subject before the House, I do not consider it as a party question. It is one that can admit of no party feeling. It is a question that in the highest degree interests every feeling for the glory of the country, every sentiment of humanity for the loss our troops have sustained, for the honour which they have to support. We are called upon by the sacred duty we owe to our constituents, to investigate a transaction, which on the face of it, presents so much argument for inquiry; and which, in its consequences, has been attended with such a waste of blood, and expense of treasure. In treating of this question, I shall not proceed upon private information, but upon the recorded accounts of ministers themselves in their own gazettes. I shall not consider the advantages of having obtained possession of the Dutch fleet. That acquisition I view, perhaps, as less important than others do. I cannot suppose, that it will be contended that there has been no failure. I cannot conceive, that the corrupt and clandestine surrender of the Dutch fleet will be viewed as the attainment of all our wishes. Yet I see, that the lord lieutenant tells the Irish parliament, that the expedition to Holland will prevent the invasion of Ireland. He speaks as if the main object of our policy was not the deliverance of the Dutch from the yoke of France; not the restoration of the house of Orange to their rights; not the protection of religion, or the defence of social order; but the capture of a few Dutch ships of war! -as if for such an acquisition we have subsidized the mercenary magnanimity of Russia, for this called into action our military strength, and strained our financial What other advantage than this have we obtained from this famed secret expedition? Secret, indeed, it was called, till the term became absolutely ridiculous. Never was an undertaking conducted with such ostentatious mystery --never did the object of a secret expedition obtain such universal notoriety. The only thing secret in the expedition was the favourable disposition of the Dutch people to our cause; a secret so well kept, that to this hour it has never been discovered.

resources.

But the gentlemen opposite are of opinion that the Dutch fleet is not the only thing we have gained. It may be so, to be sure, in a certain way. It was an ex

In answer to their complaints, we represented them in speeches and proclamations as a dull and stupid people. A noble lord, then in administration, used the extraordinary expression, that the Dutch must be "stunned into their senses." By such treatment the influence of France was increased in Holland. Perhaps too, the Dutch, in the mere view of promoting their own interests, might conceive a connexion with France more beneficial to them than one with England. At the breaking out of the present war, the Dutch, against their own wishes, were compelled to abandon their neutrality, and to take a share in the war. They were engaged in the contest by our influence, but we were not able to protect them in the moment of difficulty. From being our allies they became our enemies. But, previous to this change, what were the symptoms of cordiality and good understanding when we were endeavouring to defend Holland? Did not our troops leave that country complaining of the people, and irritated by their reproaches? After the success of the French invasion, was our conduct calculated to increase the number of our friends? Was it right, after the stadtholder had taken refuge in this country to consider him sovereign of Holland (which he never was), and to require his consent to the seizure of so much Dutch property? Were such measures conciliatory? Did they tend to promote the interest of the stadtholder? In the negotiation at Lisle, what was the conduct of ministers? The negotiation was broken off, because the French refused to allow us to retain the conquests we had made at the expense of the Dutch who had been involved in the quarrel by our obstinacy and violence. Must not the Dutch have considered us as gross hypocrites, when we lately affected such a zeal for their interests, which, in the instances alluded to, we had rendered completely subservient to our own? These are circumstances which could not fail to produce a powerful impression upon the cool and calculating Dutchman. But on entering upon the expedition for the deliverance of Holland, what means did we employ to efface the prejudice that must have existed against our disinterestedness? Look at the proclamations which were issued on our landing in Holland. Read that distributed by sir Ralph Abercromby: it holds out to the Dutch, to be sure, delightful visions of future happiness

under their ancient government; but it says not a word of the Cape of Good Hope, of Ceylon, of Trincomalee. We address the Dutch, a people cold, considerate, phlegmatic, as if they were a nation of religious fanatics or chivalrous warriors. Religion is dragged in upon all occasions; but why it is so I cannot understand. The French did not interfere with the religion of the Dutch. They do not seem, indeed, to have prevented religious worship in any country where their arms have prevailed; but least of all, had they any temptation to interfere with the poverty and simplicity of the religious institutions of the Dutch. What influence, then, could such topics produce in Holland? Every thing that could have no effect was urged-every thing that might engage them in our favour was omitted. We tell the Dutch to " forget and forgive the past." But, how will they understand this advice? Will they not consider it as a recommendation to forget that they ever had colonies, and to forgive us for taking them? The minister seems to have understood very little of Dutch human nature, if he expected such proclamations could have any success among them. If, instead of all the fine reflections upon religion, social order, and their former government, he had said, We will give you back all your colonies, the argument would have been understood, and the effect might have been favourable. Instead of this, what did we tell them, in other terms?-Be a nation without trade; take back your old government; be a province dependent upon England through the stadtholder. These are the blessings which we promise you, and which you must co-operate with us to obtain.

These considerations I have adduced, to show that ministers had not truly calculated the temper and views of the people of Holland; that they had no reason to flatter themselves with the support of that country; and that they did not pursue the course by which it was to be obtained. It was, to the last degree, arrogant and presumptuous to involve this nation in the expense of such an armament as was employed in the late expedition, upon vain speculations. The right hon. gentleman should not have put his theories of human nature to such a costly experiment. He ought to have acted, in matters of such high moment, upon authentic information and upon practical grounds,