into execution for the defence of our islands, which would be the means of faving the lives of many of our countrymen, who, from not being accustomed to the climate, could not contend with its baneful influence.

His Lordship faid, he would only add to what he was aware had derained the Houfe too long already, that, however defirable peace might be, war was ever to be preferred to an infecure and difcreditable peace. By a fecure peace, he did not flatter himself with the prospect of that impracticable peace of the Abbé of St. Pierre, which was to embrace all countries at all times; the world was, he feared, not yet ripe for fo beautiful but vifionary a theory; but he meant a peace comparatively fecure and lafting, and so we must ever reason on a fubject that depends in a great degree on human paffion and human caprice. When fuch a peace can be obtained, which will be felt by all claffes of the community to be honourable and fecure, and which this country can alone accede to, then may we with confidence and gratitude return the fword into the fcabbard; then may we retire into the bofoms of our families, and refume the occupations of peace, fully compenfated for our paft facrifice. And such a peace we should obtain, unless fear feized on the Councils, and defpair the hearts of the country: but that could never happen; and therefore he looked forward to fuch a peace at no very diftant day, either from the reftoration of the Bourbon family, or fome other combination of circumstances which might lead to fufficient fecurity, with a humble but fanguine hope, but at the fame time with entire refignation to the Supreme Difpofer of all human events.

Colonel ELFORD faid, that the motion before the Houfe was fo worded, that it was almoft impoffible for the Houfe to adopt or reject it, and preserve the appearance of confiftency in its proceedings, or without getting into a dilemma; if the honourable gentleman intended it, he was entitled to credit for his skill!-if the House refused to affent to this motion, it would then seem that they thought it was juft and neceffary to carry on the war for the purpose of restoring Monarchy to France-if the Houfe adopted this motion, then another motion might follow, that the House fhould refolve that the war fhould not be purfued until a Monarchy might be restored in France. Here lay the fallacy of the matter. Suppofe any body fhould move, that it was unjust and unneceffary for Government to declare war against the Emperor of China; if the Houfe fhould negative that motion, it would then appear that the House came to that vote under an idea that Government was about

to enter into a war with the Emperor of China; and by agreeing to the motion, they would feem alfo to be conveying an idea that fome fuch thing was in contemplation by Government, but that it was neceffary for the Houfe to stop it by a vote. Now he could not agree to this motion, becaufe he did not believe that Government was carrying on this war for the purpose of restoring the Monarchy of France: he believed that Government was not carrying on the war for that purpose, because he was fo affured by the declarations of His Majefty's Minifters; he believed that Government was not carrying on the war for fuch purpose, because, in addition to the declaration of Minifters, he had documents on which to rely, which declared, that although the restoration of Monarchy was a defirable object, yet it was not a fine qua non. As to the argument of the honourable gentleman, that this motion ought to be adopted to calm the minds of the people, he believed there was no neceffity for any fuch meafure; for he believed the opinion of the people was not different from the opinion of that House, and that the affertion of a difference in fentiment between the People and the Houfe of Commons upon the fubject of the war, was a groís and foul calumny, not on the People, but on the Houfe of Commons. He believed the People not only had full confidence in their reprefentatives, but also in the adminiftration of the Government; for thefe reafons he fhould vote for paffing to the order of the day. He did not wish to vote for or against the motion, for the reafons he had already given; but as he was convinced there was no foundation for fufpecting that Minifters carried on the war for the purpose of restoring Monarchy to France, he felt himself perfectly right in voting for paffing to the order of the day.

Mr. HAWKINS BROWNE faid, that the war was not for the restoration of the Bourbons, but for our own defence. The refolution moved by the honourable gentleman, if agreed to, would tend to difarm us of one of our belt weapons, and deprive us of the aid of thofe in France who were attached to the caufe of Monarchy. He thought the restoration of Monarchy defirable, because it would give a greater fecurity than any form of Government which we could hope to fee rife out of the convulfions of the Revolution. As to the crines of the Bourbons, an honourable gentleman (Mr. W. Smith) had endeavoured, in a review of a period of one hundred and fifty years, to place them in the most odious point of view; but were thefe, with all the exaggerations, to be compared with the horrors the Revolution had produced in the fhort fpace of ten years? At any rate, he thought that another campaign like the laft would bring

The mo

us much nearer the period of safe and honourable peace. tion was in one view fuperfluous, and in the other dangerous. He therefore was for the previous question.

Mr. TIERNEY, in reply, obferved, that in coming forward as he had done, he merely ftated a diflinct ground on which he wifhed Minifters to declare that the war fhould not be profecuted-the line he pointed out was clear and diftinct. It was in confequence of his inquiries, and maturely confidering the fubject, that he entertained little doubt of its being the intention of Minifters, in the first instance, to profecute the war with a view to the reftoration of Monarchy in France: opinions to this effect he knew pretty generally prevailed in the country; the more especially, since the publication of Lord Grenville's letter refpecting the late overtures on the part of France. On a view of that document, and the line of conduct adopted by Ministers on the occafion, it was confidered to be a first principle with them, that the refloration of Royalty in France would afford the beft fecurity either for themfelves, or a permanent peace; and in thefe fentiments he was rather fortified by what fell from a noble Lord in the confidence of Minifters, who had spoken that night. With respect to the calculation made by the noble Lord, of the comparative number of years of peace and war within the last century, in which he stated a proportion of thirty-eight years of war during that period, to be attributed to the injuftice of France, and argued at the fame time, that, should the Republican fyftem prevail in France, a greater proportion of years of war was to be expected; this he was not difpofed to admit, at leaft to the extent contended for by the noble Lord. He was fully aware, that fecurity was the most justifiable end to be propofed in the profecution of war, and had always faid fo; and, in his conscience, he believed, that if even half the pains were taken to incline the people of France to peace which were used to ftimulate them to war, fuch a peace might be made with the Republic of France as could not be eafily broken. He was of opinion, that peace might be longer preferved. with a Republic than with an Abfolute Government; as in the latter, the question of war was more fammarily decided, and easier to be acted upon. An honourable gentleman had objected to him, that the adoption of his refolution might preclude us from availing ourfelves of any future wifhes of the French people for the reftoration of Monarchy. It could have no fuch effect. All he asked for was, a declaration that it was not juft or neceffary to profecute the war for the cbject of reftoring Monarchy in France. A declaration of this kind would be not only dictated by juftice, but policy; for as long as threats of restoring Royalty to the French

were held out, fo long would fears and jealoufies be kept alive among them, and drive the people to act upon those abstract principles of the Rights of Man to which all the misfortunes of the Revolution were to be attributed. In this view, he was careful to omit touching upon any particular form of Government. The Houfe would do him the juftice to fay, that he had not come forward with his propofition until all the fupplies for the campaign were voted, and the fubfidiary treaties arranged. He only wished that they might be applied for the end of a fecure peace. With much of what the hoble Lord had faid refpecting the state of Bonaparte's Government, he agreed; but could not coincide in his conclufions, that the refult would be favourable to the cause of Monarchy in France. There was one fpecies of fecurity which the Government of Bonaparte poffeffed, and which, in the opinion of fome gentlemen, perhaps, might not be the leaft effectual-in addition to his appointments of Grand Conful, he had the nomination of eighty perfons to falaries of one thoufand pounds per annum each; and, befides, the difpofal of five thoufand places. However, without any reference to confiderations of this kind, he thought it his duty to put fuch a plain and diftinct propofition to the confideration of the House-He here noticed the several modes in which a propofition of fuch a nature might be prefented for the adoption of Parliament, as by way of Addrefs to the Throne, as adopted in the cafe of the American war, &c. An inftance offered about four years ago, in which an abstract propofition was offered to the confideration of the Houfe, namely," that the then form of Government fubfifting in France ought not to preclude negotiation on the part of this country." In what he now preffed for, however, he did not go to fuch a length; what he propofed would not go to clash with any former vote given by any gentleman, or even be hoftile to their prejudices. All thofe who voted on the King's meffage might confiftently vote with him on the prefent occafion. He only afked of Minifters to come to one clear and specific declaration respecting one point, and which he thought not only dictated by juftice but by policy: the answer they oppofed to it was a queftion of adjournment, in carrying which they doubtlefs would be fuccefsful, and he begged leave to with them joy of their majority on that night.

Lord HAWKESBURY defired that the Proclamation of His Majefty in January 1794 might be read. This, he faid, he did to fhew that at that time His Majefty held forth to the people of France, as well as the world at large, his decided preference to a

Monarchy in that country, as likely to restore tranquillity to Europe

as well as happiness to France.

This declaration being read,

Mr. TIERNEY defired alfo the declaration upon the fubject of negotiation between His Majefty's Ambassador and the Republic of France; which was read according to his defire.

The question being then called for, the House divided,

For the previous question,

Against it, and in favour of Mr. Tierney's motion,

Majority,

The remaining orders of the day were then deferred, and at eleven o'clock the Houfe adjourned till Monday.

PRINTED BY WILSON AND CO. WILD COURT, LONDON.