With our fleet we should co-operate with of France may show a disposition and spirit in any degree corresponding to his own. And he renews, even now, and before all Europe, the solemn declaration, that in spite of repeated provocations, and at the very moment when his claims have been strengthened and confirmed by that fresh success which, by the blessing of Providence, has recently attended his arms, he is yet ready (if the calamities of war can now be closed) to conclude peace on the same moderate and equitable principles and terms which he has before proposed." I am not proposing any thing that shall bind government as to terms; I am anxious only to renew the spirit of a declaration, which, in my opinion, did honour to his majesty's councils at the time it issued. If this motion is to be negatived, it is incumbent on those who oppose it, to show what has altered the course we ought to take; for, until that be done, our sincerity in the new confederacy will be distrusted. There are but two reasons that I know of that can be applicable to the case-one is, the aggression of the French in Switzerland. No man looks at that event with more horror than I do; but, remember that that aggression, iniquitous as it was, has not the charms of novelty. Remember it was the same in the case of Venice. The next reason is the victory of admiral Nelson: it was most unquestionably great and glorious; but it should not, in my opinion, change the disposition manifested in the declaration Ifying themselves for defending it by arms; have recited, after the conference at Lisle; and it should be recollected that the declaration was made after the brilliant victory of Lord Duncan. The last objection I believe is, that this motion may operate as a notice to France, that we cannot any farther co-operate with our allies. I say, we should endeavour to to make an honourable peace; I do not say what the terms are that will en title it to that description; that I leave with his majesty's ministers, but when that is capable of being effected, I should be glad to know why this war should be continued on our part for one moment. But is it possible for England to continue the war without co-operating with other powers? I say you do co-operate by your naval exertions. Did you not most effectually cooperate with all who opposed the French last year ? Look at the French marine. The French trade also is nearly destroyed. * See Vol. 33, p. 908. But perhaps some gentlemen will say, they think this an unfavourable moment to proclaim to Europe our pacific dispositions. I think otherwise. Flourishing as our resources have been, our finances are now in a state which no man who has the interest of this country at heart can think of without anxiety. We are carrying on a war, the expence of which is 30 millions a year. In six years we have added nearly 150 millions sterling to our debt, by which we have created the necessity of adding to our annual burthens eight millions-a sum equal to the whole of our expenditure when his present majesty ascended the throne. We are called an armed nation. I feel as much pride as any Englishman ought to feel at the readiness with which my countrymen show their attachment to the country by quali but this is not a condition of things which can continue long in this country. Besides, I am apprehensive that it must increase the influence of the Crown, which is a great evil. This must be evident to any one who looks at the collection of our revenue. Remember also, that the law has now silenced every man in the country every where except in this House: that the Habeas Corpus act is suspended, and that no man can say he is free. When all these things are put together, am I speaking the truth when I say, that the constitution of England cannot weather such a storm as this much longer? Of Ireland I shall say but little; but I understand, that, notwithstanding all the efforts to curb and repress rebellion there, farther exertions are still wanted for that purpose. If we look at our establishments in the East, we there see very large expences. With respect to the situation of the enemy, they have now, if not the first, certainly the most successful general in Eu rope: he is now at the head of a large ariny in Egypt, where he has been many months without experiencing any very material check. Should he come back again to France, and turn his mind against this country, I hope we should be able to meet him; but it would be a very serious thing. Then look at the West Indies. And here the first thing that presents itself is the evacuation of St. Domingo, which is an alarming event. Within a few hours sail of our West India colonies, there is a force of no less than 50,000 blacks, disciplined and trained to arms, and inflamed with enthusiastic notions, concerning liberty. We have been concerned for six years in what is called the common cause, for no determinate object that I ever could see. It is time for us to have some separate care of ourselves, by which I do not mean any pusillanimous or dastardly desertion of the contest; but that whenever France shall, by force of arms, or otherwise, become moderate and rational in her public views, we may be in a situation to meet her on the scale of prudence and discretion. Let England pursue the same conduct as she did last year, and she may perhaps, bring about tranquillity; but if we go on with loose and indefinite notions of the deliverance of Europe, such will be the certain charge of it, that the effect will be a load which no resources we have, or can have, will enable us to bear.-The hon. gentleman concluded with moving, "That it is the duty of his majesty's ministers to advise his majesty, in the present crisis, against entering into engagements which may prevent or impede a negotiation for peace, whenever a disposition shall be shown, on the part of the French republic, to treat on terms consistent with the security and interests of the British empire." Mr. Canning rose and said:-If I might judge, Sir, of the impression made by the hon. gentleman's speech from the manner in which it has been received, and particularly from the unusual degree of apathy and languor which has prevailed on that side of the House on which he sits; I should be led to believe, that the ardour manifested on this side of the House by my noble and hon. friends who rose at the same time with me, was, perhaps, more than the occasion required:-and I assure you, Sir, I should not have pressed myself upon your attention, if I had thought the occasion one which de[VOL. XXXIV.] manded abilities like theirs ;—if I had not felt, that what arguments I have to state in opposition to the hon. gentleman's motion, are so clear and plain in themselves, as to require little aid from any talents in the person who states them. The motion of the hon. gentleman cannot be denied to be of an extraordinary nature; and he has certainly treated it in a very extraordinary manner. I conceive it to be consonant as well to the rules of the House, as the reason of the thing, that the House should not be urged to the adoption of a new and unusual measure, without its being, in the first place, established, that there exists some necessity for adopting it, or that some advantage may be gained by doing so. I did expect, therefore, from the hon. gentleman, rather some solid reasons for the measure which he has proposed, than an anticipation of the objections which he thought might be urged against it. He has contented him. self, however, with endeavouring to destroy the validity of several arguments which he has heard out of doors, and which he expects to hear to-night against the motion that he has made; but he has omitted, what seemed to me to be more peculiarly incumbent upon him, an explanation of the motives which induced him to make it. I admit that the hon. gentleman has been not unsuccessful in anticipating several of the most obvious and prominent objections against his motion; I cannot think that he has been equally fortunate in removing them. I shall certainly have occasion, in the course of what I have to say, to restate many or most of those which he has anticipated, and not without the hope of establishing them to the conviction of the House. I shall follow him through these objections, as nearly as I can in the same order in which he has brought them forward. The first objection which he expects to hear, but upon which I am certainly not inclined to lay the greatest stress, is the point of constitutional form. It is by no means my intention to contend, that the nature of the hon. gentleman's motion, though extraordinary, is wholly unprecedented,-much less to deny the power and the right of the House of Commons, to offer its advice to his majesty, on any subject, either of negotiation, or of war. I know they have at several times interfered in both. It is, indeed, somewhat singular, that the hon. gentleman should not himself have cited any of the former [D] would not of themselves be sufficient to justify the hon. gentleman's motion. It would, I presume, be farther necessary for him to show (as was shown, or attempted to be shown, in all former instances), that some necessity at present exists, which calls for such an interference of the House of Commons. I can conceive such a necessity to arise only from one of two circumstances: either from the circumstance of some opening for peace now presenting itself, of which ministers do not show themselves enough disposed to take advantage; or from ministers having at former periods evinced a disposition generally hostile to peace, which this motion is intended to censure or to control. That any such opening now exists, the hon. gentleman has not attempted to argue. I must, therefore, naturally have remaining on his mind of the conduct of ministers in former negotiations :-I must have conceived, that he retained a confused and perplexed recollection of what had passed at Lisle,-that he remembered something indistinctly of an embarrassment having been thrown in the way of the negotiation by a question about allies, instances of such an exereise of the right of parliament. Perhaps he has some recollection, that a peculiar sort of fatality has, in almost every instance, seemed to attend interferences of this nature; that in almost every instance, from the Revolution to our own time, they have been either nugatory or mischievous. I will mention two only, out of the few that have occurred during this period: the first, that which was nearest, in point of time, to the Revolution; the other, that which is nearest to our own time; the first, an interference tending to prolong a war; the other, intended to accelerate a peace. The first, the warlike measure, was the famous vote of the House of Lords in 1707, "That no peace could be safe or honourable which should leave Spain and the Spanish West Indies in the possession of the house of Bourbon." It is hardly ne-attributed his motion to a false impression cessary to remind gentlemen, that this vote, carried by the heat and violence of party, had no effect whatever; that no manner of regard was paid to it, in the peace which was afterwards negotiated: And, whatever might be the faults of that peace, or however loud the cry against the ministers who made it, I do not think that any man, who looks fairly and im--but utterly forgot that the allies who partially at that peace now, will say, that it was any very great crime in those ministers, that they did omit to carry this vote into execution. The second example to which I refer, is, the resolution voted by the House of Commons, respecting the "Independence of America." Of a transaction so recent it is hardly possible to speak with the freedom of history. I speak, probably, in the presence of many who took part in favour of that revolution, of some certainly, who opposed it. Who were right, or who were wrong, I do not presume to determine. But in one thing, I believe, those who opposed and those who promoted it will equally concur, that the vote which carried that resolution was an unfortunate vote; and that it had an influence fatal to the interest of this country, on the peace which concluded the American war. This is a proposition which those who had to make that peace must, I am sure, contend to be true; and which those who condemned that peace would find it difficult to deny. But whatever might be the force of precedents, they would not of themselves, even if their bearing was as much in favour of motions of this kind, as unfortunately it has been against them,-they created this embarrassment were the allies of France and not of Great Britain ;-and that, under this mistake, he was bringing forward the restriction in the wrong place, and applying to this country, a cure for the misconduct of the enemy. But I am prevented from admitting even this foundation for his proceeding, by the approbation which the hon. gentleman has expressed of the manifesto published by this government after the breaking off of the negotiations at Lisle. The hon. gentle man distinctly and fairly acknowledges that manifesto to have exhibited undoubted proofs of the pacific dispositions of his majesty's ministers. By And here give me leave to observe rather a singular argument, which grows out of the hon. gentleman's peculiar conduct and situation. He tells you that he brings forward this motion as an "unconnected and unsupported individual," acting with no party or set of men whatever. agreeing to the motion, therefore, the advantage which we are to gain is his individual co-operation. It is hardly to be supposed that he will be more convinced of the pacific disposition of ministers after this resolution shall have been adopted, than he was after the publication of the from any new measure that is proposed for our adoption,-I hold it no bad test to examine in what way it bears upon the interests of France, and to conclude, however unphilosophically, or illiberally, that what is good for the enemy, cannot be very good for us. manifesto, which he has so warmly com- | school,-that we are to consider not so mended. What was the first step that he much what is good for our country, as took by way of co-operation after that ma- what is good for the human race; that we nifesto was published? He voted against are all children of one large family ;—and the supply. Convinced, that his majesty I know not what other fancies and philanhad done all in his power to obtain peace; thropies, which I must take shame to my-that he had gone almost beyond what self for not being able to comprehend. I, could have been expected of him, in for- for my part, still conceive it to be the pabearance and moderation;-that he had ramount duty of a British member of parshown even after the victory of lord Dun-liament to consider what is good for Great can, the most decided disposition to make Britain: and where no immediate advanpeace, upon fair and reasonable terms;tage is pointed out as obviously arising convinced, that the abrupt conclusion of the negotiation at Lisle had been the act of the enemy exclusively;-that the continuance of the calamities of war was to be attributed to the arrogance, and wickedness, and pride, of the enemy alone; that his majesty had no choice;-that he must of necessity continue to carry on a Now, Sir, I beg to have it understood, war which the mad ambition of that ene--and I assure the hon. gentleman, that I my would not allow him to terminate ;— am very far from meaning any thing perin this conviction, to enable his majesty sonally disrespectful to him;-that I give to carry on the war, the hon. gentleman him full credit for feeling, as strongly as "unconnected and unsupported," indivi- any man, every thing that he owes to his dually, voted against the supply. I do not country, for being as ready as any man to mean to impeach the hon. gentleman's devote his talents and exertions to her conduct in this instance. He had no service. I appeal, therefore, not to his doubt his reasons for it. But I do mean feelings, but to his judgment and ingeto put it to the judgment of the House, nuity, when I desire him to consider, whether, if it should be evident (as I trust whether he could possibly devise any it will be) that no solid and general ad- measure (capable, at the present moment, vantage is to be derived to the country of being patiently entertained by this from our agreeing to the hon. gentleman's House or by the public) which should resolution, there is much temptation have a more direct and manifest tendency held out to us to do so, by the prospect to benefit France, than the motion which of his future individual co-operation; whe- he has now brought forward? What ther it is worth while to adopt an unusual, could any man-any member of this unnecessary, and much more a mischievous House (if it were possible to suppose measure to evince our desire for peace,- that there should be such a member in in order to secure the hon. gentleman's this House), most perversely devoted to vote against the supply for carrying on the the views of the enemy, and bent upon war. This, however, would certainly be exalting France at the expense of Great a very inferior consideration, if there were Britain,-what more effectual measure any utility or advantage to be derived could such a man take for such a purpose, from the measure proposed. I have not than by a motion like the present? For heard the hon. gentleman state any ad- what is it that the French Directory ap. vantage as likely to arise from it to the pear, by all their conduct, by all their country. As he has affirmed nothing of publications, to dread and deprecate more this kind, I have nothing of the kind to than any other thing in the world? What deny. But there is one way of consider- is it that all their official and unofficial ing what is advantageous to this country, papers most labour to discredit? What to which I confess I am very partial; and the rather, perhaps, because it does not fall in with the new and fashionable philosophy of the day. I know it is a doctrine of that large and liberal system of ethics which has of late been introduced into the world, and which has superseded all the narrow prejudices of the ancient but the revival of a great and general confederacy in Europe, of which England should be the animating soul? Why should we co-operate with the French Di rectory? What interest can we have in common with them, that should induce us to take their work out of their hands and complete it for them? What advan tage can it be to us to daunt and dispirit | I cannot help asking, whether the present Europe; and to relieve the Directory from government of France be indeed one, the apprehension of any powerful resist- which has deserved so well of this counance, or the necessity of any extensive try,-which, to take the question more preparation; to maintain their influence candidly, has deserved so well of France, abroad, and their authority at home? in the still more large and liberal cant of the day, has deserved so well of humanity--as that we should feel ourselves called upon to take so extraordinary a step in its behalf? And I would farther ask, whether,-whatever be the present degree of weakness or stability in the government of France (upon which I give no opinion)-whether the effect of this motion must not be to prop its power, and to come to the aid of its unpopularity; whether, with this vote of security in one hand, the Directory might not boldly hold out the Gazette of lord Nelson's victory in the other, and call upon the people of France to balance what had been lost with what had been gained? I will put the question in another way. I will suppose that we were now in the last year of the monarchy of France, instead of the sixth or seventh year, or whatever it may be, of the French republic, one and indivisible. By the monarchy I mean, of course, that cruel, wicked, profligate, abominable despotism, of which we have heard so many, and, no doubt, so just complaints, which oppressed France with I know not what unheard-of cruelties, which insulted England, and desolated Europe, by crimes and calamities such as can never be imputed to the French Republic. I will suppose that this monarchy had received so formidable a blow as has been given to the Directory by the vic- But admitting, for the argument's sake, tory of the Nile;-that its fleets had been the object of the hon. gentleman's motion to disgraced and defeated, in different expedi- be advantageous to this country; it would tions against the British empire that its remain to be seen how far that object is fairest provinces were in. revolt ;-that its clearly expressed or understood, and subjects were universally discontented ;- how far the means which he suggests are that its commerce was extinguished;-its calculated for attaining it. The hon. revenue destroyed; and its finances, gentleman takes credit to himself for not by the confessions of its ablest financiers, limiting or defining, in any degree, the in a state of utter and irrecoverable ruin nature or terms of the peace which it is and bankruptcy;-that against the mo- the duty of his majesty's ministers to connarchy, thus situated, a general spirit was clude. If he had not mentioned this rising in Europe:-I will suppose that omission as a point on which he takes under these circumstances, the ministers credit to himself, it is that which I should of this country had come down to this have been tempted to select for peculiar House, and suggested the propriety of disapprobation. It seems to me at least a such a measure of abjuration and self-de-new and unusual course of policy, instead nial as is now under consideration of defining the end, to contract the means and I will ask,-what would have been of action. It would have seemed more the clamour raised on the other side of natural and more fair, to say beforehand, the House?-how pointedly would the Such or such is the peace with which question have been put to ministers, the country would be contented, and which "What are you doing? Why do you in. would be consistent with its security and terfere to arrest the downfall of this de- interests; but the mode of arriving at that testable tyranny? Look on only-do peace, is what must be left for his majesnothing and it will fall of itself. What ty's ministers to devise," this surely business is it of yours to rescue from de- would be fairer than to say, in the lanstruction a power, so inordinate in its am-guage of the present motion, "I will not bition, and so hostile to the happiness of Europe." : Such would have been the language that we should have heard, if the monarchy of France had been the object of forbearance, and if ministers had been the persons to advise us to forbear. I will not press similar interrogations in such a way as to impute to any gentleman improper and unjustifiable partialities:-but tell you what peace you ought to make; -but I will take from you one great instrument for making any peace at all." By this motion what advice do you give to ministers, or what control do you impose on them? Your advice is certainly not worth much,--when you only tell them how they shall not proceed; but say nothing of how they shall proceed, or whither they shall go. Your control |