not wholly deny, Mr. Marth has prefented us with an hiftorical narrative, fupported by the diplomatic papers of the two powers, the Journals of the National Affembly, and other authentic fources of information. To enable the reader to decide on his aflertions, Mr. Marth exhibits his arguments in the greatest order, and with much learning, and inferts his proofs in notes, giving fometimes the whole and sometimes an abridgement only of the documents to which he refers. In this refpect our author has an infinite advantage over the fo phifms, the unfounded affertions, and the mifrepresentations of his adverfaries, particularly thofe of Mr. D'Archenholz, the German defender of French politics. With much able and genuine criticifm Mr. Marth has felected, from a mass of contradictions and exaggerations, the articles which really throw light on his fubject. Even periodical publications, now almoft forgotten, have not efcaped his researches: and, as he draws his information from the most authentic and unquestionable fources, he finds no great difficulty in exposing the declamations and chimerical accufations of his adverfaries, and holding out in full view the weakness of the arguments which have unfortunately had fo many admirers. He writes the German language with great purity and precision; we have not discovered more than two or three Anglicifms in the whole work.

He employs 14 fections on the intercourfe between Great Britain and France before the year 1793, and on the efforts of Great Britain to preferve peace, till France, without the flightest caufe, declared war against her: a war fhe had long before that time begun by her appeals to the people of England, and her connections and correfpondence with the revolutionary clubs in England; affecting to confider them as the organs of the nation and her legal reprefentatives. A fupplement follows, which fhews the reiterated but fruitless efforts of the English government to establish peace, even by a facrifice of all her conquests. No perfon, who reads this part of the work with attention and impartiality, will fay that England was not in earneft in thefe negotiations.

Our author examines at length the charge fo often alledged against England, of having been the principal mover of the conferences at Pilnitz; he fhews inconteftibly that England refused to enter into any alliance against France-Farther, England at that time diminished the number of her land forces; the declined renewing her treaty of fubfidy with the Landgrave of Heffe-Caffel; her naval forces were less than they generally are in the time of peace: fo that the National Allenibly had every reafon to be fatisfied of her friendly difpo

fition.

fition. Still the did every thing in her power to irritate the English nation. When the infurrection of the Blacks at Saint Domingo had reduced the white Settlers to the most melancholy fituation, they applied to the Governor of Jamaica for affiftance against the flaves, who were then in an actual state of rebellion, and France was at too great a distance to expect timely fuccour from her. The affiftance was granted, and the Governor of Jamaica supplied the Governor of St. Domingo with all the provifions he wanted and it is obfervable that they had been refufed to him by a French fhip, because he could not pay for them in ready money. The King of England informed the French government of the treatment the planters of Domingo had received at Jamaica, and affured them at the fame time, that he fully approved of the conduct of the Governor. The National Affembly took the fubject into confideration; a debate took place, and they decreed thanks not to his Majefty, or the English government, but to the English nation at large. By a ftrange perversion of fact fome French writers totally mifreprefented the conduct of England, and afferted that England excited the Negroes to infurretion, and furnished them with arms.

While England was leffening her maritime forces, France augmented hers; fo that when the rupture between the two nations took place, the French marine exceeded confiderably in number that of England. At that time there exifted in England a fociety intimately connected with the club of Jacobins at Paris: the members of which laboured inceffantly to overturn the British conftitution; and, by fpreading every where incendiary writings, to make the lower claffes of the people rife against the government. The confequence was, that, in May 1792, the publication and diftribution of feditious. writings, and all revolutionary meetings were prohibited by his Majefty's proclamation. Though this were only an affair of police, and not a word was faid of France in the proclamation, the French minifter prefented a memorial on the fubject, and even endeavoured to introduce it into the Houfe of Commons.

The French have reprefented the recall of the English minifter from Paris, after the depofition of Louis the Sixteenth, as a circumftance juftifying their declaration of war. But for this the government of England had the best reafons. Almoft all the foreign minifters had quitted Paris: and to whom could the minifter of England be accredited? The govern ment was at beft only provifional. Still, the first fecretary of the embaffy remained, and would have remained much longer, if the horrors of the Second of September, and the murder LI 2

of

of two Englishmen, on the ground that they must be arifto crats, had not made it perfonally dangerous for him to continue in Paris. In the fpeeches of the members of the National Affembly nothing was more frequent than declarations that a revolution like that of France would foon take place in England. On the 19th of November, 1792, the Convention folemnly promifed protection to every people that should revolt against its government. With equal folemnity the Convention affured the deputies of the feditious focieties by the mouth of their prefident, that royalty would foon be abolished in Europe. England at that time abounded with apostles of liberty, who, by money or by intrigues, endeavoured to deprave and inflame the public mind. The English miniftry entered into no altercation with the French government on the impropriety of these proceedings, but, quietly and without noife adopted fuch measures as were moft likely to make the defign of the difaffected fpirits of the country prove abortive: a part of the militia was called out, and London by this means was fecured againft danger from internal commotion.

In the beginning of 1793 the Alien Bill was paffed It obliged every ftranger on his arrival in England to prefent himself before the juftices of the peace, and anfwer fuck queftions as might be put to him by the magiftrate refpecting the laft place of his refidence, the object of his journey to England, and fimilar matters. This put an end to the comings and goings of the fecret emiffaries of the Convention, and to their connection with the English clubs. The Convention complained much of thefe new arrangements-but did not dare avow the real caufe of their diflike to them. They contended that it was an infraction of the treaty of commerce of 1786: but they never mentioned that the treatment which all foreigners then received at Paris was infinitely more rigorous.

About this time the circulation of affignats was prohibited in England. Mr. Marsh fhews that England was deluged with that kind of paper. In effect it appears from Briffot's declarations, that affignats to the amount of feventy-five millions of livres, were fent into England in the courfe of that year. The object was to rob England, by means of thefe affignats, of all its coin. The dealers in affignats gave triple and quadruple their value for fpecie. Mr. Chalmers, in his eftimate, fhews that in the year 1792, two millions five hundred and nine ounces of gold and filver were fent from England into France; whereas in no one preceding year England had fent thither 600,000 ounces. Nor was this all; the Convention attempted to draw from England all her corn at any price. This made the English government prohibit the general exporta

tion of corn. This too was a measure of precaution, as France had long before made a fimilar regulation.

But the governing powers of France were determined upon a war with England at all events. They flattered themselves that it would be unpopular, and confequently ruinous to England: being perfuaded by their emiffaries and the deputies of the feditious focieties in England, shat the difcontented would oppose a war with the Republic, and rife in a body. In effect, the Envoy Chauvelin took occafion from fome preparations for war, which he faid were making by the British government, to threaten Lord Grenville with an appeal to the Englith nation. The common language in France at that time, was, that "the head of Louis the Sixteenth must fall, and George the Third and Mr. Pitt would then feel whether their own heads were perfectly fafe on their fhoulders." On every other occafion the leading men in France endeavoured to irritate England and to turn her into ridicule. Long before the declaration of war, Monge, the French minister of marines addreffed a circular letter to all the inhabitants of the feaport towns-he tells them," that the free part of the English nation were discontented at being armed against the French; let us fly," fays he," to their affiftance; let us make a defcent upon the ifland-let us plant there fifty thousand caps of liberty!"

The intercourfe between England and France, and the negotiations between the two powers, to the first of February 1793, are defcribed in the 13th fection of our author's work, in a very striking and convincing manner.

While, on the one hand, the English miniftry made every attempt to fet on foot negotiations with France, Le Brun inceffantly laboured to make them fail. The papers which paffed between the two governments are copied at length in Marth's work, and accompanied with valuable notes. Thefe clearly fhew that the French miniftry uniformly tried to deceive the English government; that with all their pacific proteftations they never once fhewed any attention to the wellfounded complaints of the British miniftry: all their aim was to throw the fault of the rupture upon England. When the English complained of the opening of the Scheldt, and appealed to the treaties upon which the fhutting up of the Scheldt was founded, the French minifter coolly anfwered, "that the Flemish were no parties to those treaties." Whoever will read without prejudice this part of our author's work, and the other documents, inferted in it refpecting the true caufes of the war between France and England, muft acknowledge that rance was the aggrellor. In the war of libels which has

L13

beca

been carried on in France with fo much fury, the Anarchists, the Girondins, and the Briffotines, have alternately ac, ufed each other of being the authors of the war, but none of them have accused the English miniftry of it.

The fupplement to Mr. Marth's work contains, the history of the negociations for peace, which the author fhews were three times fet on foot by Great Britain, and as often difappointed by the perveffenefs of the French. Here the moft declared enemy of Great Britain muft acknowledge, that the governing party in France never fhewed the leaft attention to the most honourable proposals that were made to them by Great Britain; but that they univerfally adhered to the principle with which they firft fet out-That they would fet fire to the four quarters of Europe and that their falvation depended on the flames."

Relation de la Déportation à Cayenne des Citoyens Barthelemy. Pichegru, Willot, La Rue, c. à la fuite de la Fournée du 18 Fructidor, 5me. Annèe, contenunt plufieurs Faits Imper tans relatifs a cette Journée, et au Voyage, Sejour, et Evafion de quelques-uns des Deportes. Par le General Ramel, Ci-devant Commandant de la Garde du Corps Legislatif, et l'un des deportés. Wright, Piccadilly, 1799. Price 4s. Pp. 271. Narrative of the Deportation to Cayenne of Barthelemy, Pichegru, Willot, Marbois, La Rue, Ramel, &c. In confequence of the Revolution of the 18th Fructidor, (Sept. 4, 1797) containing a Variety of important Facts relative to that Revolution, and to the Voyage, Refidence, and Efcape of Barthelemy, Pichegru, &c. &c. By General Ramel, Comma dint of the Ligiflative Body Guard, Svo, Pp. 215. Price 4s. Wright. Piccadilly, 1799.

HE hiftorian of the French Revolution will find himself more indebted to the diffentions among its original founders, and the acts of tyranny exercised by the various republican rulers, for a true knowledge of the caufes and confequences of its principal events, than to any other fource of information. The conduct of the Directory, in atchieving the memorable revolution of September 1797, has been already expofed by men of different principles, who were the victims of their tyranny, on that occafion. CAMILLE JORDAN, and CARNOT, have each thrown fome light upon the circumstances which preceded and attended this iniquitous tranfaction; and we have now, from the pen of RAMEL, an interefting account of the treatment experienced by the principal objects of Directorial