storation of the Low Countries, which you so judiciously made a sine quá non of the former negociation, at this time than at that? Or, putting that matter quite out of sight, are you nearer to any other rational pursuit now than then? Are you stronger? Is France weaker? What is it, I ask, that feeds the right honourable gentleman's fancy into a notion that the end of this war is so near at hand?

As to the late change of his majesty's servants, it is impossible for me to say whether it is a juggle or not; but, considering the genius of the right honourable gentleman's contrivances, I can see many things in such a scheme which would make it not unsuitable for him to hazard such a thing as an experiment. Blinded he would be, and under hopeless infatuation, not to feel the total impossibility of his ever reaching that goal at which he casts such a lingering look. I do not exactly charge him with positive duplicity in conducting the different treaties which he opened with the enemy; but that he was grateful even to piety for the miscarriage of them all, is not to be denied. When, then, was he to be successful or sincere, who never negociated without failing, and never failed without rejoicing? Not one single step could he take towards pacification, without stumbling upon something that must suggest to him his own humiliation, and without prompting the enemy with perpetual mistrust. Well, therefore, may the right honourable gentleman pour forth his panegyrics upon his successors, who take this task (so ignominious for him and his colleagues) off his hands, and who, at the same time, proclaim their devotion to the principles of his administration.

Now, Sir, having advanced all that I think necessary to urge in support of my honourable friend's motion, I shall beg leave to say a single word upon a topic that has been several times alluded to in this debate, namely, my personal attendance in this House. It is not for me to anticipate the determination of the House this night. If I see any reasonable grounds for thinking that my regular appearance here can be really beneficial to the public, the public shall have that benefit: but if it is demonstrable, after the seas of blood that have been shed, and the hundreds of millions wasted after such sacrifice of treasure and of reputation — after the failure of all the professed objects of this war, and after bringing immeasurable woes upon the country in consequence of it after a series of military enterprizes that excited the contempt, and some of them the horror of Europe - after the loss of all, and the ruin of many of our allies after seeing the enemy aggrandised beyond all example, by the very efforts made to abase him-after having abused the

-

matchless glories of our navy, from the true end of all justifiable warfare, a safe and honourable peace after seeing the ninth year of this direful contest advance us so little towards its close, that we see a host of new enemies commencing a new war, pregnant with mischief whether we are victorious or vanquished after all the infringements that have been made upon the English constitution, and our bitter experience that increasing the cause is not the true remedy for discontent-after all that we have seen in Ireland, and all that we feel in England - if all these things go for nothing, and the division of this night should manifest the same determined confidence of this House in that system which has produced all these effects, whether administered by its first leaders, or by their followers raised from secondary into superior offices then, Sir, sensible of the utter inutility of my exertions, I shall certainly feel myself justified in exercising my own discretion as to the degree of regularity with which I shall attend this House.

How this House feels I know not how it will act we shall shortly see. It is for the House to resolve how it will best discharge its duty; I am quite satisfied that I have discharged mine. Those who think that what I have stated are not evils, arising from any defect of wisdom, of vigour, of foresight, of prudence, or of any of the qualities that constitute the essentials to an able and capable government; but that they are only slips of conduct, mere flaws of accident, affording no presumption against the king's ministers, whom this House is constituted not to controul or call to account, but to support and justify upon all occasions such persons will of course vote against this inquiry. On the other hand, those who think that the misfortunes brought upon the country by the late ministers are the necessary consequence of original folly in the schemes, and of imbecility in the execution; who think that the primary duty of this House is to guard the rights and protect the interests of the people; who are of opinion that the dreadful state in which the country finds. itself is not more owing to the misconduct of administration than to the absence of this House from that constitutional jealousy of the influence of the crown which ought to be the first characteristic of a House of Commons, and from its uniform discountenance of all retrospect and revision - Those who think that the vice of the plans and principles that have brought the country to its present situation, has been cruelly aggravated by that boundless confidence which this House has uniformly shown, and which, instead of deterring from evil or doubtful projects by the fear of punishment, has operated as an encouragement to dangerous speculation, by the assurance of

indemnity and safety-Those who think that this question ought not to depend upon regard to the late or the present administration, to predilections or antipathies for that side of the House or this--Those who think that the reign of confidence has had full play, that the principle has been fairly tried and found wanting, who see in its sad effects that it is not more unconstitutional than impolitic, and who firmly believe that the surest method of redeeming the country in the present crisis, is for this House to resort to the good old customs of our ancestors, to resume in the worst the jealous vigilance of the best times, and to manifest that the support of government must be accompanied by inquiry into its conduct - Those who think thus will vote, as I shall, for the motion of my honourable friend.

ADDRESS ON The PreliminaARIES OF PEACE WITH THE FRENCH REPUBLIC.

THE

November 3.

HE House proceeded to take into consideration the preliminary articles of peace between his majesty and the French republic, signed at London the 1st of October 1801. Sir Edward Hartopp moved, "That an humble address be presented to his majesty, to return his majesty the thanks of this House, for having been graciously pleased to lay before them a copy of the preliminaries of peace which have been ratified by his majesty and the French republic; and to assure his majesty, that having taken them into their most serious consideration, they reflect, with heartfelt gratitude, on the fresh proof which has been afforded on this occasion, of his majesty's paternal care for the welfare and happiness of his people, and contemplate with great satisfaction the prospect of a definitive treaty of peace, founded on conditions which, whilst they manifest his majesty's wisdom, moderation, and good faith, will, they trust, be productive of consequences highly advantageous to the substantial interests of the British empire." After the address had been supported by Mr. Lee, Lord Hawkesbury, Lord Castlereagh, Mr. Bankes, and Mr. Pitt, and opposed by Mr. Thomas Grenville and Earl Temple,

Mr. Fox rose and said: At no time, Sir, since I have had the honour of being a member of this House, did I ever give my vote with more heartfelt pleasure than I shall do on the present occasion, in support of the preliminaries of peace between this country and the French republic. And I own, Sir, that I think his majesty's ministers and the mover of the address did very wisely in taking that moderate line, and in refraining from all those topics which might have diminished the satisfaction which gentlemen must feel in assenting to the motion now before us. Yet, Sir, for my own part, I have no hesitation in saying, that had even the word "honourable" been introduced into the vote, I should not have declined assenting to it; for I will be bold to say, that unless the peace be honourable it ought not to come before us. Whether the epithets safe and honourable be convertible, I will not now inquire; but of this I am sure, that among individuals, and much more among nations, honour is the most essential means of safety, as it is the first, and I had almost said the only legitimate ground of war. With regard to another term made use of by the noble lord, I cannot so readily agree with him. I cannot conceive how the term glorious peace could be applied. A glorious peace can only ensue from a glorious war, and such an epithet I never can apply to the late war.

Those who have argued the subject before me have very fairly divided it into two heads: 1. Whether this peace be preferable to a continuance of the war? this is certainly the most material point: and 2. Whether a better peace could have been obtained? The last point cannot easily be ascertained. If we could have had a better peace without running the risk of continuing the war, his majesty's ministers would undoubtedly have been very blameable in not making a better. But I should like to have it proved to me, how ministers could have made a better. Sir, I was glad to hear the noble lord, whose speech I admired so much in all the main points of it, lay down that liberal system of policy, that what is gained does not of itself make peace so much the better; nor what is not gained, make it so much the worse. We have gained Ceylon and Trinidad; valuable acquisitions both. We have not gained the Cape, and I am not one of those who regret that we have not, for, from its destination we shall have all the benefits of that possession without any of the expence of it. Perhaps, Sir, I do not agree with the honourable gentleman, who considers any acquisitions in the Mediterranean as secondary and subordinate points to Ceylon and Trinidad. The noble lord, considering the subject in a commercial point of view, says

the Dutch did not possess Minorca, and yet they carried on the principal part of the Levant trade. But it is not in this point of view that I contemplate the question. Desiring peace most ardently, and thinking and hoping it may be a lasting one, I still cannot put entirely out of my consideration the possibility of future wars between the two countries. In any such event, surely Malta would be a more important possession than either Ceylon or Trinidad.

From this digression I return to the question, Why are we to suppose that better terms of peace could have been obtained? I wish to know, Sir, what pressure could have been made upon France that would have induced her to consent to better terms. And here I cannot help repeating, that though I admired much of the noble lord's speech, the part I most admired was that in which he applied the epithet "unsatisfactory;" an epithet chosen with singular felicity to the state of the continent, fairly confessing at the same time, that nothing gave him any reasonable hope of much mending it. But it has been urged, that France could not hurt this country. Not hurt it! That nothing can be more chimerical than the project of invading this country, I am as firmly convinced as any man can be. But are there not many other points which, at this late hour of the night, I will not discuss? Is there any man so blindly fond of the union with Ireland, so widely satisfied with the measures that have been adopted with respect to that country, as to say that the danger of a French force being in Ireland is not at least greater than the danger of an English force landing in France? The only question then is, whether by pressure of war we could prevail upon France to cede to us Malta or the Cape? Could we have prevailed upon her by pressure upon her colonies? No, for that had been already done. By pressure upon the European territory of France? That idea is absurd. By pressure upon her finances? Here, Sir, I cannot but admire the judicious conduct of his majesty's ministers. They have not sought to delude us by the jargon of their predecessors, and by senseless assertions of the French being on the brink, and in the very gulph of bankruptcy. They had too much good sense to do it. They adopted another mode of conduct. They well knew, that, by insisting upon Malta or the Cape, they must have made peace on less dignified terms, or they must have continued the war. That we might have gone on with the contest, I am not prepared to deny. I am not blind to the resources of the country. I see one resource while I am speaking. The income-tax is only mortgaged for fiftyfive millions of debt. It might have been mortgaged for as much more; but these resources, says the noble lord,