duct of the executive government. If the House are of opinion that the business cannot be safely left in the hands of ministers, the proper step would be to address his majesty to remove them from their situation; and not to endeavour to interrupt the affairs of government by calling on the House of Commons to interfere with the functions of executive authority. The hon. gentleman himself seemed to be aware of this, as he admitted the principle to be correct; he said he did not contend against the constitutional degree of confidence which an executive government ought to have from the legislative power, while its conduct was unexceptionable.-The hon. gentleman says that he does not confide in ministers: on that ground he has been led to give an uniform opposition to their measures during the war; and on the same ground he now expresses his distrust of the sincerity of their wishes respecting peace. Unquestionably the hon. gentleman, who places no confidence in ministers, is entitled to oppose their mea sures and to question their sincerity; but he is bound to conform to established rules, and not to effect any change in a constitutional question. I mean, whenever this House, adopting a motion like the present, instead of addressing his ma jesty to remove his ministers, apply in order to take the business into their own hands, they deprive the country of every chance for a successful negotiation. it as a ground for his motion. I trust, however, that the state of this country is far different, and that no temporary reverse in the fortune of war, no internal pressure in our domestic situation, has yet produced this mortifying humiliation, this dreadful alternative. But the hon. gentleman, as an impeachment of the sincerity of ministers with respect to peace, has alluded to an argument, which was formerly supported from this side of the House that we could not make peace without humbling ourselves to the enemy, and without discovering that we were baffled in our attempts and exhausted in our resources. From this he no doubt meant to insinuate that ministers were at no time sincere in their wishes for peace, and were disposed to throw every obstacle in its way. He does not think proper to mention, that this argument was made use of at a time when the opponents of the war, availing themselves of a series of misfortunes and disappointments which had befallen the confederacy, took the opportunity to press their motion for an immediate peace. We then contended, that the evil was not so great as to exclude hope, or to damp enterprize, that no circumstances had taken place under which a firm and manly resistance became impracticable, and that we might still look with confidence to the effect of a vigorous and persevering prosecution of the war. In proportion as this truth has become manifest to the enemy themselves, do we feel ourselves inclined to adopt a more conciliating tone. In proportion as the situation of things is inverted, the objection, which we formerly made, is superseded. That situation which the hon. gentleman chose only to suppose as theoretical, I contend to be practical; that our successes have been such as to obviate any obstacle to negotiation on the score of national honour; and so far I undoubtedly am of opinion, that the difficulty is infinitely diminished. In stating, however, generally, my own sentiments, and those of his majesty's ministers, I must protest against the prac. tice of being called upon from day to day, from week to week, from time to time to declare what are precisely our views on the posture of affairs, or what are the steps, which we may think it necessary in consequence to adopt. The progress of the measures, which such a situation of affairs as the present may render necessary, can only be left safely to the con[VOL. XXXII.] a On question so critical, I am afraid lest I should overstep the line of my duty, by entering too much into detail. It is a subject on which it is impossible to descant so minutely as the hon. gentleman seems to expect, without breaking in upon that principle which has guided every discreet minister in treating subjects of this nature. If I felt that generally, as applicable to subjects of this kind, how much more must I feel it on this particular occasion, considering, as I must, the peculiar situation of the country at this moment?-Let gentlemen look at the situation of affairs on the continent; let them look at the situation of our enemy; what has been their plan and practice? what has been the case in this respect since the hon. gentleman reminded the House of the matter? What, I would ask, has been the effect of the separation of the general confederacy against France, and the weakening of the power of that confederacy?-power, that long [3 A] if such be the case, it is important for them to consider whether the measures which they may wish to persuade government to adopt, be such as may oblige the country to give up the chance of a successful peace altogether, or to take it on terms inconsistent with the honour of the nation. If we receive propositions of peace on the terms of the honourable gentleman, the considerations ere this, might have achieved much advantage, had they kept in union. Recollect what has happened upon the appearance of that separation, and then conjecture what might have been the effect, had the confederacy remained entire. The destruction of the enemy, perhaps, or at least the diminution of its strength to such an extent as to have brought forward an honourable repose and lasting tranquillity to Europe. Let" speedy and honourable," then become me ask the House, whether or not every separated. We must, in that case, choose man did not believe it was the policy and the alternative: if we adopt the motion, the aim of France to use all endeavours a peace, "speedy and honourable" we to separate the confederacy against her? cannot have. But an honourable peace Let me ask, whether she did not seem to we may have, if we persevere in the same triumph even in the hope of being able to firm and vigorous line of conduet which effect it? Let me ask, whether any thing we have hitherto pursued. This I know, remained of the hope of France but this not from any immediate communication separation, to enable her to dictate to with the enemy, not from any commuEurope? Let me ask, whether any thing nication of their disposition for peace, could, therefore, be so desirable to France but from the statement which they have as the detaching of that confederacy themselves furnished of their defective which, for the honour and safety of Eu- and almost exhausted means for carrying rope, was formed against her? And then, on the war. On this ground I oppose let me ask, whether there ever was, or the motion. If I were not sincerely and could be, a cause in which it would be anxiously desirous of peace, I should be more the duty of every good man to pre- forfeiting my duty to the country, and vent any jealousy, or the rising of any violating the trust which I hold from suspicion, or the creating of any disu- my public situation; but I can never nion, among those who, if they remain consent to the proposition of peace, unentire, may yet give honourable and last- less the terms should be consistent with ing peace to Europe? If the directory our present honour, suitable to our prehave yet any hope of dictating terms to sent condition, and compatible with our Europe, it is, no doubt, on the same po- future security.-Having said this with the licy which they have hitherto found so general view I have of the subject of peace, beneficial, that they ground their expec- if the question be thought a necessary one, I tations of future success. If there is will say a few words as to the message from any thing by which they can expect to his majesty to parliament about two months attain this situation of proud eminence, ago, because it was said, that no step had this object of their favourite ambition, been taken since for a negotiation; I it is by being able to instil jealousy, to hope the House will recollect what I said sow the seeds of division, and engender upon that occasion. I said then, that the sources of animosity among those of the House should not compel, by its vote, confederacy, who yet remain united to the executive government to enter into a oppose their power. On preserving en- negotiation, bound down and fettered tire the remains of that confederacy, de- with any acknowledgment of our own pends the only hope of impressing on weakness: precisely the same thing do I them a conviction of the necessity of desire of the House upon the present ocyielding to reasonable terms, and of casion. Those who differ from me in bringing the war to a desirable conclu- general, and who have thought the war sion. And, perhaps, in this point of altogether unnecessary, I did not then, view, an attention to the preservation of nor do I now, expect to convince; but that confederacy becomes a duty, not the House at large thought as I do. To only for ministers, but for all those per- the House at large, therefore, I will now sons who are anxious for the public wel- say, that the question, as the hon. gen. fare, and interested in the national cha- tleman has himself stated it, is a very racter; for all those who are desirous of narrow one-" Whether, because after an honourable peace, and adverse to any having received the message from his peace purchased with dishonour: and, majesty no communication has taken place that the hon. gentleman in his speech separated negotiation from the terms. But in other passages he talked of negotiation as leading to an immediate peace. I do not hold out a prospect of immediate peace, nor do I state any period that I can ascertain for it; I only say it will not be the fault of his majesty's servants if the period is remote. The enemy must be however ready to make it on terms which we have a right to think just and honourable; it rests not on us only, but also on the enemy, whether this may lead to any negotiation at all, or whether negotiation will lead to peace. It all depends on this, whether the disposition of the enemy shall be more moderate than any we have lately seen of their professions. Sorry I am to see such a seeming disposition on the part of the enemy, as may render them, in case of success, desirous of preventing any effect to pacific dispositions, which they may now profess, or even of retracting them. Whether this may lead to a moderation in practice which I have not seen yet, I know no more of, as I have said already, than what any other gentleman has an opportunity of knowing. What has been made public I hope is not authentic; however, by what has been circulated in this country, and through the continent with industry, and what they are said to hold out as the boon of peace to the English nation, it does not appear as if they were very desirous of meeting us on honourable terms; for I have heard that they are ready to give peace, because the government of England asks it. Thus then we are to have peace if we shall sue for it; that is, if we shall abandon that for which our ancestors have fought so bravely. of any subsequent measures, the House, by adopting a motion of this sort, ought to compel the executive government, bound hand and foot, to commence a negotiation?" If the hon. gentleman entertained such distrust of the sincerity of ministers, as to suppose them disposed to take no measures to carry into effect their own declarations, I shall certainly not argue with him on that point. But in order to be consistent, the argument of the hon. gentleman must infer, either that overtures have been made on the part of the enemy, or that some favourable opportunity has occurred to this country for the purpose of commencing negotiation, which have been rejected subsequent to the period of the message.-If a negotiation should be entered into, it is evident, that in order to give it its full effect, we should be careful not only to keep up the strict letter of our engagements with our allies, but to maintain with them full concert and harmony. I therefore, take upon me to assert, that since his majesty's message has been delivered to this House, ministers have taken every measure consistent with the general interests of the country, and with the attention and regard due to her allies, to enable his majesty to take any opportunity, either to meet overtures for negotiation, or to make such overtures as might be found most expedient. That no etiquette with respect to who should make the first overture no difficulty in finding a mode of making it, appeared to government to be an obstacle to negotiation, if in other respects there appeared to be a probability of leading to just and honourable terms; the great point being what prospect there was of obtaining such terms. Measures have been taken to ascertain these points, and are now in train; and if the enemy are sincere, they must speedily lead to a negotiation. Whether that negotiation will lead to peace I cannot say, because that depends upon whether the exhausted state of the enemy will incline them to set on foot that negotiation with a view to peace, very different as to the terms of it from any which their public declarations have for a long time past seemed to indicate: if this is not the case, I must say a speedy peace is impossible. I wish ardently for peace-but not for any but an honourable peace. The country has a right to expect it from its own strength and resources, and from a knowledge of the relative situation of France.-I admit Mr. Fox said:-Notwithstanding, Sir, the mode of arguing which the right hon. gentleman has adopted this day, in introducing matter somewhat irrelevant to the question at issue, I intend to confine myself almost entirely to the subject of my hon. friend's proposition. The House will pardon me, however, if I make a few preliminary observations upon the manner in which the right hon. gentleman commenced his speech. Far be it from me to discourage any inclination that may be shown to negotiation, or in any degree to retard the advance to peace; for whether the season for negotiation be advantageous, when compared with those which have occurred at periods which are past, it is certainly advantageous, when com pared with any that may be expected in, Who shall make the first step towards future, however numerous our victories, peace? In all wars, I think, this is a or however unprecedented our success. point of little importance; and in this I cannot, however, refrain from saying a war, I think it of less importance than alword or two upon the past, not with a most in any other. When hostilities view to exaggerate the difficulties of the commenced between the countries, the present, but merely in my own vindica- French held it out as a principle, that tion, for having proposed pacific measures, they were determined to propagate their when they were refused to be adopted. government all over Europe. How long Will it be said, that when the Low Coun- they persevered in maintaining this absurd tries are in the hands of the enemy, when principle, it is of little consequence now Holland is become a province of France, to decide. Suffice it to say, that it afand when they are in possession of St. forded a real or ostensible ground of hosLucie and St. Domingo, that we are in a tilities, and that the principle has been situation in which more honourable terms formally renounced in an official declaraof peace may be expected, than when tion, abjuring all interference in the inthey were driven out of the Dutch pro- ternal government of any country. This vinces; when they were routed in every is an example which we ought to follow; battle in Flanders; when they were com- and when the French have announced pelled to retreat within the limits of their themselves at amity with the English conown territory; when Valenciennes was stitution, the English government ought taken; when a considerable impression to abandon every idea of intermeddling in was made upon them by the Emperor in the affairs of France, or of altering any the north, and by Spain upon the south; form of government which they may in short, when they did not hold an inch think proper to adopt. Perhaps I may of ground without the boundaries of Old be told, that even if terms of peace be France? Then we were told, that it would proposed by this country, they may be be humiliating for the country to offer rejected by the French, and that this terms of peace, and that we should wait rejection may render it necessary for till the misfortunes of our foes should lay us to interfere in the settlement of them prostrate at our feet. When I pro- their form of government. But if we posed a pacification in the beginning of do not formally publish the declaration, the year 1794, I was told, that the late we may at least announce our readiness campaign had exhibited a series of to make it. And even then we do not triumphs more brilliant than any which go so far as they have done.-There was the annals of the country could boast. a word in the minister's speech, which, Last year a negotiation was moved for, notwithstanding all its pacific complexbefore Holland was totally lost, the reco- ion, I was sorry to hear, and which to very of which was assigned as a principal me appeared to indicate, that it is his cause of the war; and then it was said, opinion, that the present government of that any proposal on our part would be France has not arrived at that crisis which degrading to the honour of the country. was particularly described in his majesty's I hope, however, that he who thinks it speech. It was this, that the French gopossible to propose an honourable nego- vernment were perhaps disposed to grant tiation now, will no longer accuse us of to this country, as a compensation for all having entertained a wish to humiliate the the losses which it has sustained from country, by advising the government to the war-the honour of its fraternizaoffer terms of peace, under circumstances tion. But, does the French government in which it was infinitely more advanta- persevere in that system now? I hope geously situated. My argument, at pre- and trust it does not. And if it does not, sent, does not turn upon the propriety of why rake up the recollection of former proposals for peace coming from one wrongs, and renew the causes of discord country more than from another, but upon which no longer exist? The subject, howthe seasonableness of the time. I per- ever, chiefly depends upon a question of fectly agree with the right hon. gentleman, time. On the 8th of December, a mesthat the present is the most proper season sage was sent down from his majesty, which may well occur, and in the faith stating, that the affairs of France had that he is inclined to improve it, I have arrived at such a crisis, as to render negothe less disposition to press the errors of tiation possible. On the 29th of Octothe past. But here a question occurs- ber in his majesty's speech, there was a paragraph upon the subject, the meaning of which appeared to me to be by no means clear. We were told, however, that it was afterwards explained, and that the subsequent message was nothing more than the natural consequence of the king's speech. If, then, the ideas conveyed by the message were hypothetically the opinion of the minister, who was certainly to be considered as a principal assistant in framing the speech, we are to trace the measures of government back to the 29th of October. But even supposing that the 8th of December was the earliest time that the king's cabinet ministers formed any definitive opinions upon the subject, when we take into consideration, not only the lapse of time, but the very extraordinary circumstances attending that lapse of time, it is natural to ask, did it require two months (or if we date it from the 29th October, did it require three months), to come to an understand-ing with our allies; or rather, was it not reasonable to expect that something might have been done in that time? The expectation was the more reasonable, when we consider what those two months were. They were not two months in the heat of a campaign-they were not only in a season, when God and nature united to create an armistice, but when an armistice had actually taken place they were not during the sitting of the parliament, (though I am not one of those who consider the sitting of parliament as an impediment to negotiation), but during a parliamentary recess, prolonged, as the friends of the minister gave out, for the purpose of leaving him unshackled to carry on the negotiation. When these circumstances are considered I wish to know why no steps have been taken ?-I must here advert to a passage in the right hon. gentleman's speech, in which he represented it as having been the policy of France to divide the allies, and when she was on the eve of sinking beneath their combined pressure, to detach some of them from the confederacy. Perhaps I am not so well acquainted with the circumstances of the war as the right hon. gentleman, or at this moment I may not have such a lively recollection of the details of its history; but I certainly do not remember any peculiar difficulties under which the enemy had the misfortune to labour at the particular conjuncture when our allies seceded from the treaty. I do not recollect that France was in circum stances of particular difficulty, when the king of Prussia renounced the cause of the allies. I do not recollect that France was in a situation of unusual hardship when she concluded a peace with Spain. Nor do I recollect that the elector of Hanover, and the other German princes, were exulting in the abundance of their victories when they commenced a negotiation. On the contrary, I think I have heard that Spain sued for peace, not when Spain was in the unimpaired possession of her territory, but when the principal provinces of the empire were in the hands of the French. Nor from any informa, tion which I have received upon the subject, can I pay such a compliment to the king of Prussia and the princes of Germany, as to say, that they offered terms of peace to the enemy when they were in the career of conquest, and the zenith of their glory. I confess I cannot see (if the professions of the right hon. gentlemen be true) what renders an explanation of the proceedings of the government of this country a subject of so much delicacy in the present war. If he admits that he is engaged in a clandestine negotiation, of the benefit of which he means to deprive our allies, and of which, of course, he would wish to keep them ignorant, then I conceive some motive for his conduct, and I am ready on such a supposition to allow his argument, if not honourable, to be at least logical. But if, as he declares, he is really acting in concert with our allies, where would be the harm, if he were to lay all the papers which have passed upon the subject before the House? And here I cannot refrain from making one observation on the difference of situation, in which we have stood with respect to our allies in the course of this contest. I cannot help remembering a glaring defect which was pointed out last year, in the terms of the loan which was then voted to the emperor. It was then objected, that we did not bind him to persevere in the prosecution of the war longer than he thought fit. The answer was, if we bind the emperor to prosecute the war, we must ourselves come under the same restriction. And now we are told, we cannot make peace, except in concert with our allies." I mention this merely to show the different representa tions that are given of matters according to the pressure of different arguments. The right hon. gentleman has given us to understand something in his speech. It |