in the course of the bufinefs of Parliament during the prefent feffion. What was then fufpicion, is now, to my con viction, proved. The papers which they have laid before Parliament, exhibit, to my mind, abundant proofs that our affairs have been grofsly mifmanaged. The production of these papers appears to me not only to afford the natural opportunity, but to throw down a challenge to all those who have, like myself, expreffed a ftrong prefumptive opinion against the conduct of Ministers, to repeat or retract that expreffion now that their conduct is fully before us, And it is, as I think, a challenge which, fo fituated, we have hardly the option to decline. I confider myfelf bound, therefore, to comply with the demand of my noble Friend, and, much as I lament (which I fincerely do), that one for whom I feel fo much perfonal regard as I do for him, is involved in the iffue of the decifion, I will at leaft do him the juftice which he requires, by voting in the first in ftance against a propofition which (however justifiable on the grounds on which it is offered) would prevent that decifion, which Minifters are undoubtedly entitled to expect on the part of those who are prepared and pledged to come to it,

Sir, I have faid that I am fully prepared to declare my entire affent to all, and every part of the refolutions upon your table. After the manner in which they have been argued by my right hon. Friend oppofite to me (Mr. Gren ville), and the anfwer, if anfwer it can be called, which his able and perfpicuous fpeech has received from the right hon. Gentleman below me (Mr. Addington), it cannot be neceffary, even if at this time of night, and after the turn which this debate has taken, it were poffible for me to de tain the House by any detailed argument, in fupport of the refolutions, Allow me only very fhortly to exprefs my ad. herence to every principle on which they are founded, and to every allegation which they contain.

Mr. Canning then proceeded to take a rapid furvey of the feveral refolutions. The firft, he obferved, was a mere truifm, ftating in the words of the declaration itfelf the fense which Minifters appear, by that declaration, to have entertained of the conduct of France. To this he appre hended no objection could be urged, as in that none had been attempted. The fecond refolution contrafted the con duft which Minifters had thought proper to hold, and the language which they had ufed, and the impreffions which they had ftudioully created throughout the country, wh what now appeared to have been all along their own real

8

opinions

opinions a contratt and contradiction not more difgraceful to Minifters themselves, than mischievous to the country which had been duped by it. Could any man reflect with indignation on the deception and delufton fo long practifed upon Parliament and upon the people? Could any man recall to his mind, without difguft, the canting profeffions of belief in the continuance of peace, and amity, and goodwill between this country and France, uttered in that Houfe almoft daily, before Chriftmas, nay, even up to the very moment, it might be faid, to within ten days, of the declaration of war, or, what was nearly the fame thing, of the King's meffage-uttered at moments (as it now appeared) when the fecret thoughts and internal convictions of Minifters were directly at variance with the af fertions which they made? Could any man confider the confequences of this fyftem of deceit, and not think fome marked cenfure upon thofe who had dared to employ it, abfolutely neceffary, to mark the refentment of Parliament? Should it be borne that Parliament fhould have been called upon to vote under falfe pretences? that Members should have been fent down among their conftituents (as had hap pened at the Chriftmas recefs) to fpread falfehood and error throughout the country; and that the confiding country fhould have been misled into incorrect and groundless views, and deluded into vifionary hopes, only that it might feel more ferioufly the blow of difappointment? For what purpofe could it be that Minifters had thought this fyftem of deception, this trick upon the nation, advifeable? Was it defign? What potlible good could arife from it? Are men better prepared for action when they are rouzed out of a fleep, and, as they fancy, fecure flumber? or was it in fport only that Minifters fpread thefe gav delufions? Was it matter of amufement to them to engage the commerce of the country in wide fpeculations, and hazardous enterprizes, that they might fee how men would look, when a fudden and unexpected check wrefted their progrefs, or prevented their expected returns? or was it theer ignorance? Did they not know what they were about? Is their excufe for having duped England, that they were themselves the dupes of France? Had they in their poffeffion, had they before their eyes, and in their minds, thole documents which they have now at length put into the hands of Parliament, thofe records of infult, injury, and aggreffion, fufficient, o fhould think, to awaken the most fluggish fufpicion; and did they suspect nothing of the infecurity of their peace!

There

There was but this alternative, either they must have been deceived themselves, or they muft wilfully and wantonly, and most audaciously have impofed upon the public; in reprefenting as folid, fubftantial, and durable, that peace, whofe bafelefs fabric was at that very moment crumbling under their feet. He would not refer to the inftances which had been particularly quoted, to thofe expreffions of the right hon. Gentleman below him in particular (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) fo rafhly hazarded, and now fo ingeniously explained. He did not fay, "profound peace." Did he not? The many who thought they heard him muft have been wonderfully miftaken; or if he did say "profound," (he might have faid it then, it appeared) it was only becaule profound" and "peace" were fo apt to come together. Happy, dignified, and fatisfactory explanation! He would not dwell upon this point. He would content himfelf with expreffing his hearty adoption of every word, of a refolution, which went to mark with cenfure, repro bation, and contempt, a fyftem fo unworthy of the Govern ment of a country like this; a fyftem which must lower that Government in the eyes of all the world, and especially of the enemy we had to contend with; and which tended, to unnerve and unprepare the minds of the people for the crifis which they were to meet, and the exertions which they must neceffarily make to meet it. Unprepared, he; fill trufted, they would not be found: but if not, it was only because the fpirit, courage, and magnanimity of the. nation were fuperior to all the efforts of their Government to extinguish and overlay them.

The third refolution no man could compare first with. the papers upon the table, and fecondly with the avowals extorted this night from his Majefty's Ministers, without feeling a painful conviction of its truth-of a truth even more afflicting and more difcreditable even than that refolution ftates it. Not only did it appear, beyond contradiction, that opportunities had been loft, for checking the aggrethons of France by timely representation and firm and dignified remonftrance-not only had the groffeft infults been paffed by without any attempt to obtain reparation, the most flagrant violations of treaty fuffered to continue without obfervation; but it appeared now, from the avowal of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that thefe omiffions, on the part of his Majefty's Government, had been omiffions" not of negligence, not of inadvertency, but of defign. They had, it feems, been remtis upon fyftem: they had ftudi VOL. IV. 1802-3.

H

oufly

oufly fuffered their wrongs to accumulate; they had dili-. gently noted them, to be fure, as they occurred, but that was all-they noted them for their own private fatisfaction only, not with any idea of applying for redrefs-and why? the reafon was truly admirable-why-because they thought, in their profound wifdom, they thought the Government of Bonaparte entitled to peculiar indulgence; that it did not become any regular eftablished Government to find fault with the accidental extravagancies and eccentricities of fo extraordinary and undefinable a power. With other governments they would have been all courage, and vigilance, all high point of honour, and quick refentment of injury. But Bonaparte, truly, was to be treated with forbearance; Bonaparte was not to be bound to common rules, or expected to conform himfelf to the ordinary relations of political intercourfe! His green and raw ufurpation was entitled to privileges and indulgences which' would have been denied to hereditary monarchy, and antient, recognized, legitimate fway! I am glad, Sir, (faid Mr. Canning) that the right hon. Gentleman has fairly avowed his fyftem. It is exactly what I have all along sufpected it to be; though I own I did not fufpect that he would fo openly have avowed it. I fay, Sir, that this is the very error, the fundamental fault, the radical vice and mifchief of the fyftem upon which the conduct of our Government towards France has been regulated; and in my confcience I believe it is to this that we are in a great meafure to attribute the ftruggle in which we are now involved. I do not mean to fay that fooner or later that ftruggle might not at all events have come. But I do fay that it has been haftened, that it has been enfured, that it has been provoked (not wilfully-far be it from me to impute to the prefent Government defign, or at least successful defign, defign which has actually produced the object to which it was directed) by a fyftem of conduct the moft diametrically oppofite to that which ought to have been adopted; to that which every feeling of honour, of prudence, and of safety, plainly recommended. Our ftand ought to have been made not on the laft infult, but on the firft; be it what it might. Unusual indulgence to Bonaparte! He ought to have been watched; and to have known that he was watched with unufual jealousy. The first moment that he outstepped, with regard to this country, the line of refpect, of decency, of honourable confideration to which we feel ourselves entitled (at least I hope we continue to feel ourfelves), he

fhould have been met with firmness-with temper, to be fure, with moderation, if you will-but with firmness above: all, and plainly given to understand that it was not fo that Great Britain was accustomed to be treated; that fuch. was not the footing of intercourfe upon which the was picpared to place herfelf; that the would herfelf refpect a power with whom she had made peace, but that the expected, and would demand, urge, and, if neceffary, would enforce, equal, reciprocal refpect in her turn. Would you then have precipitated the war? In my confcience 1 believe I fhould have retarded, poffibly have prevented it.' One infult tamely borne is an invitation to a fecond. An injury helplessly acquiefced in, is a fignal for more. Temperately and steadily oppofed in his first attempt upon our interefts, or upon our honour, Bonaparte would have hefitated before he tried a fecond experiment. As it was, he had nothing to deter him. He had every temptation to proceed. He faw plainly enough that he was confidered, as the right hon. Gentleman now owns he did confider him, as a privi-. leged perfon-that an untitled ufurper was in the eyes of the Britith Miniftry a favoured power-and he ufed his privilege, accordingly. I do not wonder at him. I hardly blame him,, Fleth and blood-at least a tyrant's fleth and blood, could. hardly refift the temptation of trampling upon unrefifting im becility. But for my country I do complain, that its ho-. nour has been facrificed, and its interefts trifled with, in a vain and foolish attempt to propitiate violence by fubmiffion,, and to repel aggrellion by tamenefs and indulgence. I do complain, that instead of having taken the best chance of avert-,ing war altogether, by a timely notice of our determination, to encounter it rather than submit to oppreffion, or to shame, we have, I fay, enfured the war, fuch as it now comes upon. us, and have gained by our fyftem of forbearance no other, advantage than this whining catalogue of unredreffed griev ances, to which the right hon. Gentleman appeals, as a proof of his wildom and moderation, but which I confider as the ftrongeft evidence of weakness and mifconduct.

With regard to the fourth refolution, which related to the furrender of the Cape of Good Hope, at the time, and under the circumstances of its final furrender-while Holland, to which it was nominally restored, was yet occupied by Frencharmies, which our temporary retention of the Cape had furnished a pretext for re-inforcing-while many ma erial points were in difcuffion between the two Governments-when that