inequality that exifted under the old Government, when if a man, though truly refpectable otherwife, acquired his property in trade, it was deemed an infult if he proposed marriage with a woman of a noble family. Do you fuppofe that, having destroyed that inequality, France will return under the yoke to the toils and humiliations of the Monarchy ? And if you should fucceed, will it be believed that the old Monarchy, with all its appendages and trappings, would not be restored? Will it be believed, that that abominable tyranny will not be restored."-[Mr. Windham repeated the words ⚫ abominable tyranny.']" I call it an abominable tyranny, Sirand Sir, would not that be a moft tyrannical Government under which, with all his talents for war, and great they are undoubtedly, the right honourable gentleman could not have rifen to his present place?"-"A laugh." He would want the charm of noble birth to make his ascent eafy, nay practicable. From what I know of the right honourable gentleman, I confider such a barrier to getting into place no trivial one, even in his mind, against the resurrection of that tyranny. But, Sir, it will be faid that we are to subdue France by force. The force of Ruffia? Ruffia cannot bring force fufficient. We cannot now fend as great armies into the field as we have in the beginning of the conteft. We in vain expect to fucceed by distracting France in the interior. Against all experiments of this fort we have experience and the evidence of facts, accumulated in a fruitlefs (fruitful indeed in difafters!) feven years

war.

We have seen all kinds of revolutions in the Republic, but not one of them has brought back the Monarchy." Here the honourable gentleman returned to the confideration of the juftice and neceffity of the war, and asked again, "Suppose we fail? The Emperor of Ruffia will go home; we can have no reliance on Germany; we shall be at the mercy of a people we have irritated, whom we have been always irritating--with what temper will they treat? To please you, perhaps, they would have removed the Corfican Adventurer, as you call him, for the fake of peace. And here, Sir, I must observe, that it was not worthy of the Prime Minifter of a great nation to descend to personal invective and altercation with the Great Conful of France-invective that was only remarkable from the fplendour of diction, from the captivating fascination of that eloquence of which the right honourable gentleman is fo confummate a master. I do not fay, Sir, that the final objec of Minifters may not justly be the restoration of Royalty; my only defire is, that we should this night record it, as the determination of this Houfe, not to carry on the war with that for its immediate object. I hope gentlemen do not mean to meet my motion with

the previous question. If they do, I shall lament it, because I believe the country would rather that the House should at once declare that the war is carried on exclufively for the restoration of Monarchy in France, than find the object of it unavowed and undeclared. I do not ask Ministers to change their sentiments of the origin of the war, or to give up their invective against Bonaparte : I ask for a diftinct vote, declaratory of a precife object.-[The honourable Member now recapitulated the topics of his speech, and concluded, I hope the right honourable gentleman will agree to my motion-I hope he will not reply to me in terms like thefe, I am afraid if the Houfe adopts the motion of the honourable Member, he will acquire fuch a degree of honour, that it will be imprudent in me at any time to oppofe him.'" A laugh."-I move you, Sir, "That it is the opinion of this Houfe, that it is both unjust and unneceffary to carry on the war for the purpose of reftoring Monarchy in France."

The motion being read by the Speaker, was feconded by

Mr. JONES, who, in conformity to his fentiments, and in the full poffeffion of that portion of reafon and judgment which God had been pleased to give him, could not but recommend and ap prove the motion of his honourable friend. No man, he said, more condemned the French Revolution, nor bore greater enmity to Jacobinical principles, than he did. He could not, however, approve of the continuance of war for the purpose of reinftating the Bourbon family, which appeared at prefent to be its oftenfible object; a family, he faid, by whofe mifconduct all the horrors of the Revolution had been produced. He had voted at one time against peace with France; but there was a wide difference between asking for peace, and acceding to an offer of negotiation which might lead to it. After eight years of expenfive war, the propositions of the First Conful of France for peace were contumaciously rejected; in preference to which, Minifters chofe to lavith the blood and treasure of this country on the precarious hope of reinftating the expatriated people of France in all their antient rights and privileges. He did not fpeak this out of any difrefpect to the Emigrants; he had known and refpected many, and, as far as he was able, fome he had relieved. While Jacobinical principles remained, no man fupported the war more ftrenuoufly than he did; and if they should again revive, he would again be an advocate for the like expedient to prevent their growth; but at prefent he believed them to be pretty nearly extinct. We, he said, had contributed to place a defpotic Monarch on the throne of France, who could therefore more than any other decide promptly on any mea

fure he chofe, whether of peace or hoftility. Minifters had held out as their favourite object the restoration of the antient Monarchy in France; as an Englishman, he could never approve of their conduct. Even if he had a predilection for the Bourbon line of Princes, he should be unwilling that England fhould be ruined by attempting their restoration. Two hundred millions had already been spent to accomplish that purpose, and two hundred more were understood as ready ftill to be thrown away on that fruitless endeavour. To oppofe and deprefs the Bourbon family, one hundred and fifty millions had been added to the national debt; and to reestablish them in their loft honours, we have already added to it one hundred and fifty millions more. Should Minifters at last fucceed in their endeavours, he thought there would be no better pledge of the good faith or friendship of that House than exifted in the days of its profperity and power. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer knew fomething of Dutch nature, he (Mr. Jones) knew, he believed, fomething alfo of French nature. He did not pretend to be the advocate of Bonaparte; he hoped he might prove a faviour of his country, and become a fecond Washington.. Though an ufurper, Bonaparte was not the first; nor (fhould that be the cafe) the first who had benefited his country. Cromwell had been an ufurper; yet he advanced the glory of this country, and managed all its concerns, foreign and domeftic, in a manner that would have done honour to any head that ever legitimately wore a crown. France made peace with this ufurper, without once mentioning the line of the Stuarts-fo did Holland. He did not fee, therefore, why, at this time, fo much fhould be faid about the line of the Bourbons. It had been often repeated, that there was no fecurity in treating with fo recent a ufurper as the Firft Conful, who is liable daily to be difplaced. The Protector of England, at the time when he formed treaties with foreign nations, was fo infecure in his new eminence, that he always wore a coat of mail; and there was even a book published against him, called, Killing no Murder. This, however, threw no impediment in the way of national negotiation. The House should paufe, therefore, before they wafted any more the resources of this country in consequence of any fuch punctilio as this. But grant, he faid, that Bonaparte was an ufurper, and had waded

"Thro' flaughter to a Throne;"

yet it was not the duty of Minifters therefore

"To fhut the gates of mercy on mankind.”

Whatever was the fate of the prefent bill, he hoped gentlemen. would vote, not according to their accustomed habits, but according

to their confciences, and the exifting circumftances of the times. The country at large, he was fure, were weary of the war; and its chief advocates were now found only among contractors and placemen, whose interest it would be to continue it for ever.

Mr. ELLIOT rofe. The question for the Houfe now to decide was not, he contended, whether it was just or necessary to carry on the war for the restoration of the Houfe of Bourbon. If that were the true view of it, he would have no hesitation to declare, that an attempt to impofe a Government on an independent country was both unjust and unneceffary; and this principle he would extend even to France herself, though her avowed maxim of conduct, ever fince the Revolution, had been unceafing hoftility against the Government of every other nation. But the real queftion was, whether it was neceffary to come to any Parliamentary declaration of this principle, under all the circumstances of the moment? Upon this point, the arguments of the honourable gentleman who had preceded him were totally inconclufive. What proof was there, that the people were, as that gentleman had contended, filled with alarm at the recent proceedings of Government, or that they had ceased to confide in that House for the direction of their interests? Where were the petitions which expreffed fuch difquietude and distrust? One petition, indeed, of that description, purporting to be from the Livery of London, but figned by about fifty or fixty persons only, had been laid on the table. But the House had that day received a petition of a very different tendency, figned by a very large and refpectable portion of the citizens, and leaving to the difcretion of Parliament the time and the mode of terminating the war. The House had, from the commencement of the contest, clearly and diftinctly defined its object, on our part, to be fecurity; and to that object they still adhered. If the people of England were, indeed, to read only the paffage of the note in reply to the French overtures, which the honourable gentleman had quoted, they might be induced to misconstrue the views of Government; but if they read the very next paragraph, they would be convinced, that neither Minifters nor the House had stated the return of peace to depend on the restoration of the House of Bourbon. (Here the honourable Member read, and commented upon, that part of the note in which His Majefty difclaims the prefcribing any form of Government to France.) It was contrary to the proceedings of the House to come to any refolution founded entirely upon abftract principles; and no neceffity had been urged to induce them to depart from their accuftomed rule of conduct; on that ground, therefore, he would move the previous question.

Lord HAWKESBURY rofe. He laid it gave him great pleasure to follow his honourable friend under the gallery, of whose motion he most heartily approved, and which he would as cordially fecond. The House most unquestionably had the right of active controul over the conduct of Minifters; and if they faw any thing which they confidered to be wrong in their conduct, they had the right of petitioning the Crown to remove them, and to appoint others more able or more virtuous in their place. They had the right of carrying their complaints to the foot of the Throne; and this, the House must perceive, would be the more conftitutional mode of acting, because by that they did not attempt to cramp and fetter the power of the Crown, as the honourable gentleman's motion did, by refolutions which in their nature trenched upon its prerogative; as by that mode they would request His Majesty that he would not trust power into hands which, either from want of ability or integrity, could not exercife it for the honour and intereft of the country. But to wave all objection to the form of the honourable gentleman's motion, and to go to its merits :-The honourable gentleman had fet out by affuming, that we were at war for the express purpose of reftoring the Bourbon family to the Throne of France; and that Ministers would not come to any definitive confeffion upon the fubject. In answer, he need only refer to Lord Grenville's letter -he need but refer to the many debates which had already taken place on this question, in every one of which the honourable gentleman might have heard the most unequivocal declarations, the most distinct avowals, that we were not warring for the restoration of Monarchy in France, but that we were contending for our own fecurity. However defirable that object might be, yet it was not the exclufive one of our conteft, nor the one for which alone we were carrying on the war. When he faid this in answer to the honourable gentleman, he was not fpeaking a new language; he was not making any new declaration of the profeffions of their faith. In the Autumn of 1793, the fame principles were avowed. In the Declaration iffued by His Majefty at that time, he calls upon the people of France to endeavour to re-establish their Monarchy, as the best pledge they could give of fecurity for furrounding nations; yet at the fame time declares, that he did not require this as the exclufive means; but if they adopted any other form of Government which should be capable of preserving the relations of peace and amity, he should be ever ready to enter into treaty with them. This was the language alfo which had been held during every period of the war; that we were not fighting for the restoration of the Monarchy, but for our own fafety and fecurity. The honourable VOL. X. 5 C