many gentlemen who now heard him, to consider what the principles were on which they approved the peace; and whether any thing had taken place since the treaty was concluded, which would authorise them to give their vote on the present occasion, for breaking the treaty and recommencing hostilities. Supposing for a moment that war was to be renewed, gentlemen would do well to reflect in what manner hostilities would be conducted. On this part of the subject he would not go into detail; but it was obvious, that our means of annoying the enemy would consist simply in retaking the places which, by the treaty, we had agreed to cede, or in retaining those still in our hands. Now, to violate the treaty of peace for such an object as this (and under the present circumstances there was no other object which would be obtained) would be to place the ministers of this country and the members of the last parliament, who had approved of the treaty, in a situation to excite the ridicule of all Europe. The continuance of peace, he contended, was infinitely desirable; he felt its importance in the strongest manner. Adverse, how ever, as he was to the renewal of hostilities, he did not mean to assert that no circumstances might have followed the peace, which would fully justify ministers for refusing to comply with its provisions. He was not ashamed to avow an opinion for which he had not unfrequently been exposed to ridicule; and now explicitly to declare, that he considered the preservation of national honour to be almost the only legitimate cause of war. This doctrine he held on the plain principle, that honour is directly and inseparably connected

1803.

with self-defence. If it could be proved to him that the national honour had been insulted, or the national dignity disgraced, he would without hesitation declare his opinion; which was,--this would be a fair and legitimate cause of recommencing hostilities. Though he contended that honour is the only legitimate foundation of war, he did not mean to deny that other circumstances may come in aid of its force. As to the present circumstances of Europe, he saw no ground of war as far as this country was concerned. It was his own firm conviction, that there was on the part of the French people, as well as the French government, a strong desire to restore their commerce to new activity, and their manufactures to new life ; and this, he believed, was the field in which, if any contest was to be carried on betwixt the two countries, they wished the dispute to be conducted. Of the result of such a rivalship, we had surely very little room for apprehension. We had got so much the start of them that we must take the lead; and if they had the start of us, our supe riority was so great that we could not fail speedily to overtake them. In this contest we should be certain of victory; and every intermediate step in our progress would only afford new facilities for increasing our superiority and augmenting our improvement. It would be absurd indeed to pretend that this fair prospect would not be marred; but of this he was perfectly convinced, that it must be a very strong case which would justify the recommencement of hostilities, instead of employing our resources in cultivating the arts of peace. Was there a man in the house, he asked, or in the country,

who, after the disasters which had been sustained during the progress of a wild and destructive contest, would, without continental support, again renew a contest with France, without any support but that derived from the co-operation of a few German princes, whose troops might be subsidized to engage in our cause? He trusted that so extravagant a project would not again be adopted. If, contrary to every suggestion of expediency, and every dictate of policy, it should be embraced, it required little political sagacity to foresee that the result would be incalculably disastrous. The first and grand object, continued Mr. Fox, which we ought to have in view, is security. But there could be no true security which was not upheld by honour. There could be no true dignity which was not supported by character. An honourable gentleman, however, found a new ground of war in the character of the French government. He was surprised to find it not so friendly or conciliating as he expected at the time the treaty was concluded. Did the honourable gentleman really expect that the French government was henceforth to entertain towards this country no feelings but those of friendship? Did he imagine that we might expect from it every interchange of civility and kindness; that our government would find in it a powerful and disinterested ally? If such were the honourable gentleman's ideas, he confessed himself at a loss to know on what they were grounded. By those high in office, a very different prospect was held out to the house and the country. A noble lord opposite (lord Hawkesbury) made use of a very remark able expression, when describing

the situation in which the peace left us with relation to the other powers of Europe. He said that the continent was in a very "unsatisfactory state," a sort of language certainly by no means calculated to suggest any ideas of friendship or cordiality on the part of the French government. The immense aggrandisement of French influ ence and French power was, doubtless, a subject of deep regret; and no man lamented it more than he did. It must be lamented by every Englishman; and this very aggrandisement was with him a grand cause of accusation against the late ministers, by whose obstinacy and misconduct it was obtained. But, he proceeded, let gentlemen who hold this language reflect, that, with the knowledge of the continent being in the state which the noble lord described, the treaty of peace had received the approbation of, the house and the country. There indeed remained a question, how far the state of the continent, in consequence of intermediate events, was more unsatisfactory than at the time when peace was concluded. These acts, whatever their nature might be, were not then before the house, and therefore he should not then speak to them. A great deal had been said about the disposition of the people of this country in favour of a renewal of the war. This he had no hesitation in affirming to be completely false. The origin of this calumny it was not difficult to trace. It arose, he affirmed, from the coalition of some newspapers, which affected to hold out this as the real disposition of the people. Their motives for such representations might be various. They might wish to gratify spleen, or to increase their circulation by contriving

some

something to excite the curiosity of their readers; but if the publishers of newspapers were to be the means of plunging the nation again into a destructive contest, it would be the most base and ignoble cause in which a people was ever engaged. But we were told, that a most considerable body in this country (the commercial interest) were strongly actuated with a desire that the war should be renewed. To this representation he was not disposed to give his assent. If, however, the fact were as gentlemen represented it, if human beings were to perish to gratify any passion of our nature, he should rather that their blood should flow to gratify the romantic ambition of Alexander, than to fill the coffers of a cold calculating body of unfeeling merchants. When there was not a single power ready to second our efforts, let us not, continued Mr. Fox, by a rash step forfeit those blessings which are in dispensably and eternally connected with a state of peace. Great enterprises, which, in his opinion, might with much more propriety be styled rash actions, were flatter. ing in prospect, but disastrous in the result-spe læta, eventu tristia. We were now in a state of domestic tranquillity, of flattering internal prosperity; and our commerce, as far as the nature of human affairs justifies anticipation, might become daily more extended., -There was one other point on which he should make one or two observations. At the commencement of the late war the house, and he believed he might add, the country, were, as it were, hurried into the contest from the expectation that the struggle was one which would not be arduous during its continuance, or protracted

in its duration. Fatal experience had, however, sufficiently demonstrated the fallacy of such anticipations. He hoped we should not again be hurried into any new war, on the expectation of its only lasting one campaign. [Here Mr. Fox looked to the place where lord Hawkesbury was seated.]-With respect to the present administration, he believed, it was almost unnecessary for him to say, that he had no sort of connexion with them. He thanked them for having made peace, and hoped they approved the treaty they formerly concluded. The power of France was unquestionably too great; but it was not increased to such a degree since the peace was concluded, as to justify a rupture. The interference of France in the German indemnities was a subject of complaint. Did ministers not know that an interference was naturally to be expected? By not being parties to the treaty of Luneville, did we not know that France would interfere in the subject of the German indemnities; and what reasonable ground of complaint now existed? The language of the late ministers was explicit. They told us, that it was not for the interests of this country to treat in conjunction with Austria. She had consulted her separate interests, and we were freed from our engagements. As we were unwilling to share in the advantages, we had no right to complain of consequences easily foreseen, and of effects easily anticipated. France, as might have been expected, did interfere in the arrangement of the German in demnities, and Russia had been in duced to join in the same object. He did not mean to go into any mi nute illustration on that subject. He would content himself with a B 2 general

general observation-which was, that this interference was in some points of view not unfavourable to the interests of this country, as they might be collaterally affected. He had only to conclude with expressing his ardent hope, that peace was the first object of the government, as he was convinced it was the strongest wish of the people. He declared he would give the address his cordial support.

Mr. Canning succeeded. He was a friend to the address, on the principle that it recommended a 'system of vigour, which seemed to have been too long wanting in our national councils. He reprobated at some length the conduct of ministers in respect to Switzerland'; afterwards, he proceeded to observe, that much had been said at different times of the desperate state of public affairs when his majesty's present ministers were entrusted with their management. This observation, often repeated, he had at all times most strongly controverted. He was ready to go into a detail on every point; and to prove that, in every particular, it was unfounded. What were the circumstances under which ministers undertook a situation represented as hazardous beyond all former example? They had left to them a war with France, and the neutral question in such a state as to afford no prospect of accommodation without an appeal to the sword. But what were the means they were furnished with to meet these objects? For enforcing our right on the neutral question, they had a fleet prepared to strike an immediate and effectual blow. To finish the war with France, they had the Egyptian expedition in readiness for immediate service. They, to all the advantages arising from

success, did not unite any of the dangers connected with responsibility. They were entrusted with the government of a country in a state of complete repose. Treason in Ireland was destroyed, domestic sedition was repressed, commerce extended beyond all example, manufactures active, finances unimpaired, were the prominent circumstances in the situation of the country when they were first called to his majesty's councils; and certainly, though these duties were arduous, their facilities of performance were numerous and. striking. Mr. Canning then stated the hostile views of the French government to this country. The destruction of our independence and glory was the object never lost sight of for a moment. There was, he said, an invincible spirit of rancour, which only waited for a favourable opportunity to display itself in action. The enemy was making great preparations along the coast; could any one doubt that we should do the same? He had succeeded in making himself master of a greater and richer extent of territory than had changed hands for centuries in Europe. He was not speaking, nor was it his wish to speak, the language of alarm and trepidation; but if the person, who is at the head of the government of France, persisted in the measures calculated to excite apprehension, we were called upon to meet every exigency, by looking at his objects as he looked at them. himself. He certainly had a great grasp of mind, and it became, of course, the duty of his majesty's ministers to be proportionally vigi-. lant. It was not, he said, because he wished to meet any particularexigency that he voted for the address; it was not because he per

ceived:

eeived dangerous results from Switzerland and Malta; but because he could not help seeing them throughout Europe; because he was convinced there existed in the ruler of France a rooted and inveterate hatred to the English government; and be cause there were undoubted proofs of a constant activity employed and directed against us and our interests.

Lord Hawkesbury rose after Mr. Canning. Although, he said, he agreed with the honourable gentleman opposite (Mr. Fox) in many of the observations that had fallen from him, yet there were others in which he could not acquiesce. The aspect of affairs, at the time the definitive treaty was concluded, might widely differ from that of the present moment. He would say, and fairly maintain, that it was right to conclude peace, and close, as it were, the account of war, on the terms and conditions it was then in the power of his majesty's ministers to obtain. His right honourable friend (Mr. Canning) had asked, upon what system ministers now intended to act, and whether they had altered the system upon which they had hitherto acted? He did not hesitate to say, in answer, that they acted now on the

same system and principle which guided them in negotiating the definitive treaty of peace. At that time he contended, and still was ready to contend, that the treaty of peace, as far as it respected the separate interests of Great Britain, was right; inasmuch as it secured the integrity of the British dominions, and even added new acquisitions to them: but that, as far as the continent was concerned, it left its situation unsatisfactory, and such as might call perhaps for a stronger expression. This state of

the continent, unsatisfactory as it was, there were then no hopes of improving; for how, he asked, could continental prospects be followed up without the concurrence of continental support? It was also observed by them (ministers), that it was better to take the chances of peace than the chances of war; that it was wise to husband our resources, and reserve them for future and more successful exertion, especially as it was admitted on all sides that there were then scarcely any hopes of any successes on the continent. With these views, and on this principle, he said, ministers then acted. On the same did they now continue to act; on the same they rested the justification of their conduct.-But now, as to the circumstances of the present moment, what part wise ministers should take, had in it, perhaps, more of delicacy than difficulty to say. Their conduct, under all the considerations of the case, must be regulated by the importance of continuing the peace, while the continent was in its present situation and disposition. For he would ask any general observer, what object he thought could now be accomplished by a renewal of the war, when there was no probability of any effectual support on the continent. This point might indeed give rise to a variety of considerations. But he had no difficulty in saying, that after such a war as that in which we had been engaged, the continuance of peace, under all circumstances, was to be wished for. Yet he should rejoice, that, by some wise, temperate, and conciliatory plan, a barrier might be put to all farther encroachments.

Lord Hawkesbury then proceeded to reply to the animadversions thrown upon ministers by two of