a moment feel the genuine sense of permanent security unless we could contemplate without emotion the rapid progress of the arms and principles of France in the territories of our allies; unless we could be hold without anxiety the rapid approaches of the same danger threatening the British dominions; unless we could sit at ease with the axe suspended over our heads, and wait with tranquillity of mind the moment, when these formidable enemies, after the extinction of every element of order and regular government in their own country, after the subjugation of every foreign power whose alliance might assist us in our last struggles, strengthened by additional resources, animated by the prospect of new plunder, and flushed with the triumphant success of their prosperous crimes, should turn their whole force against the British monarchy, and complete their victory over the interests of civil society, by the final destruction of that fair fabrick of government, under which these happy kingdoms have so long enjoyed the inseparable advantages of substantial liberty, settled order, and established law.

No part of the speech from the throne more fully meets my sentiments on this important question, than that in which his majesty recommends it to us to bear in mind the true grounds and origin of the present war We cannot have forgotten, that before the French had declared war against us, we had seen in their conduct views of aggrandizement, projects of ambition, and principles of fixed hostility against all established government: and we had been convinced, that unless the foundation of our complaints should be removed, by a total alteration in their system with respect to foreign nations, war on our part would become at length inevitable. We cannot have forgotten, that instead of endeavouring to remove our just apprehensions, their explanations afforded fresh motives of jealousy, and their conduct aggravated every cause of offence; until at length, they interrupted all negotiation by a sudden declaration of war, attended by circumstances of unexampled

perfidy and violence. At that time we declared, at the foot of the throne, "that we considered whatever his majesty's subjects held most dear and sacred, the stability of our happy constitution, the security and honour of his majesty's crown, and the preservation of our laws, our liberty, and our religion, to be all involved in the issue of the present contest, and we pledged ourselves, that our zeal and exertions should be proportioned to the importance of the conjuncture, and to the magnitude and value of the objects for which we had to contend." Impressions conceived after such deliberate examination, assurances so solemnly pledged in the face of the nation, and of all Europe, will not be abandoned by the wisdom and firmness of this house upon such suggestions as have hitherto been offered in this debate. Before we can be justified in relinquishing the principles by which our proceedings have hitherto been governed, we shall require satisfactory proof, either that the impressions which we had originally conceived of the views of France were erroneous; or, that by the course of subsequent events, the success of the war is become desperate and impracticable; or, that from some improvement in the system and principles which prevail in France, and in the views and characters of those who now exercise the powers of government there, the motives of justice and necessity which compelled us to enter into the war, no longer continue to operate.

On each of these propositions separately, and on the combined result of the whole, I shall endeavour to bring this question to a fair issue.

Although the question of the original justice and necessity of the war was so fully examined in the last session of parliament, yet to relinquish the blessings of peace is a measure of such serious and grave importance, that I am confident we shall not be unwilling, during any period of the contest, carefully and anxiously to revise the grounds on which it was adopted. In the present moment, however superfluous it may appear to search for any additional justification

of our conduct, or to endeavour to throw any new light on a question already so well understood, yet it cannot but prove satisfactory to us, that a variety of occurrences since the commencement of the war, and many new and striking proofs have concurred to confirm the wisdom and justice of our decision, not merely on general grounds, but precisely on the very grounds on which it was originally founded. If I could bring to your bar the most malignant, the most active, and the most able enemy of the British name in the national convention, the author of the most scandalous official libels against the views, interests, and power of Great Britain, the author of the most inflammatory speeches tending to provoke the war in which we are engaged, the author of the declaration of war itself, and the inventor of all the pretences by which it has since been palliated both in France and in England; if I could bring him to a cross examination in your presence, confront him with his own reports, speeches, and manifestoes, as well as with those of his colleagues in office, and comparing the result of the whole, with concurrent and subsequent events, convict him and his associates of falsehoods, treachery, and prevarication in all their pretended explanations, of their own designs, as well as in all their affected complaints, of the supposed views of his majesty's councils, I am persuaded that you would not reject an investigation, the issue of which must tend to confirm the confidence of the nation in the original justice of our cause: such is the nature of the proof which I am about to offer to you.

Brissot, the leader of the diplomatick committee, Brissot, the main spring of the French government, at the breaking out of the war falling into disgrace and danger, addressed to his constituents a defence of all his measures, in which he reveals the whole secret and mystery of the French revolution, and makes an open confession of the principles by which France was directed in her intercourse with the other powers, of the means which she employed, and of the ends which she pursued. From the unquestionable testi

mony of this production, from the evidence of the principal actor in these transactions, I propose to examine the truth of our complaints, the justice of the conduct of France, and the validity of the arguments which have been used on either side.

The views which we attributed to France previous to the war, were views of aggrandizement and ambition, connected with the propagation of principles, incompatible with the existence of any regular government.

The particular acts by which those views had been manifested, were, 1st, the decree of the 19th of November, in which France made (according to her own language) a grant of universal fraternity and assistance, and ordered her generals every where to aid and abet those citizens who had suffered, or might suffer hereafter in the cause of (what she called) liberty. Her sense of liberty, as applied to England, was shown by the reception of seditious and treasonable addresses, and by the speeches of the president of the national convention, expressing his wish for the auspicious institution of a British convention, founded, as such an institution must have been, upon the destruction of every branch of our happy constitution.

2d. The conduct of France, in incorporating the territories of other powers with her own, under colour of voluntary acts of union, pretended to have been freely voted by the people; particularly in the cases of Savoy, and of the Netherlands, of both which countries France had assumed the sovereignty.

3d. The opening of the Scheldt, in direct violation of the most solemn treaties guarantied by France herself. And lastly, her general designs of hostility against Holland.

When the decree of the 19th of November was complained of here, the executive council replied, that," It would be injurious to the national convention, to charge them with the project of protecting insurrections."

Brissot, in his confessions, is pleased to admit, that, "the decree of the 19th of November was absurd and impolitick, and justly excited uneasiness in foreign cabinets." You shall now hear the wise, politick, and conciliatory exposition of the principles of France, which he opposes to that decree. "What was the opinion of enlightened men, of men who were republicans before the 10th of August, who desired liberty, not only for their own country, but for all Europe? They thought that liberty might be established every where, by exciting those for whom government is administered against those who administer it, and by proving to the people the facility and advantages of such insurrections." This theory of universal liberty founded upon universal insurrection, this system of exciting the people against all regular government of whatever form, against all authority of whatever description, this plan for the instruction of the mob in the advantages of disorder, and in the facility of outrage and plunder, is deliberately applauded by Brissot, as the established doctrine of the most moderate men in France, to which no one could object on account of its absurdity or impolicy, or of its tendency to excite uneasiness in foreign cabinets.

You may perceive that the authors of the decree of the 19th of November, and the enlightened republicans of whom Brissot speaks, were equally animated by the great principle of desiring liberty (as they are pleased to style it) for all Europe; their only difference consisted in the mode of carrying their common views into speedy and effectual execution. This will appear more clearly in the passages which I shall now read to the house: "but how can the people be led to that point? By zealous efforts to spread the spirit of liberty among them. This system was pursued at first. Excellent pamphlets from the pen of Condorcet had prepared all people for liberty. The understandings of the Belgians ought to have been enlightened by good writings, we ought to have sent missionaries among them." The house will find no difficulty in understanding what is meant by good