country under discussion, with the view of inducing the House to come to a resolution on the propriety of commencing a negotiation for peace with France at the present moment. Accordingly, on the 16th of February, Mr. Whitbread rose, pursuant to notice, to move for certain papers, necessary to be before the house, previous to the discussions which he intended to introduce on Monday se'nnight. Minis ters, after various transactions, in which they had been engaged in the course of last summer, had laid upon the table, notes, dispatches, and extracts of dispatches, explanatory of their conduct. This he considered as deficient ; and his design was, to call on ministers to make up the chasm. His first motion would be for copics and extracts of dispatches from the secretary of state for foreign affairs to our ministers at Vienna, relative to the proffered mediation of Austria, as he understood that this was to be granted, he would say nothing on that point. His second motion was of great and paramount importance. It was for an extract of the dispatch containing the substance of the conversation that took place between the emperor of Russia, and lord Hutchinson, on the 23d of August 1807, relative to the offer of the Russian mediation for peace, &c. It had been insinuated, that it was a breach of duty, in any accredited minister, to mention the conversations he might have had with a sovereign. This was not the case in all circumstances; but at any rate, lord Hutchinson, a most distinguished individual, renowned for his military talents, and not less celebrated for his high sense of honour, was not

an accredited minister: though, as a private individual, he maintained a communication with the emperor of Russia, with the knowledge of our accredited minister. The conversation which he held with the emperor on the 23d of August, was known well at the time, and had been conveyed to this country in a dispatch from lord Leveson Gower, to whom it had been communicated for this express purpose. Why then should it not be communicated in an authentic and regular form to the house? The emperor confiding in the judgment and integrity of lord Hutchinson, asked him, whether, considering the situation of affairs, peace ought not to be concluded. Lord H. asserted that it ought. The emperor then said that he had offered his mediation for a peace with England, stating at the same time, that, from what he knew, peace might be concluded on honourable terms. Was not this document necessary? Could there be any thing indiscreet in communicating it? The noble lord was not prevented by any obligation whatever of duty or expediency, to conceal the conversation. He then proceeded to state instances in which communications of conversations with sovereigns had been laid before the house. Mr. W. also wanted to have the substance of the verbal assurances, relative to peace between Russia and France, mentioned in the note of our ambassador of the 30th of June, 1807; the dispatch, containing assurances of satisfaction for a promised cooperation after a change of ministry; with several other papers, relative to the Russian loan, Sweden, &c. After a short debate, Mr. Whitbread withdrew his first mo

tion, which related to the proffered mediation of Austria. The second, calling for extracts from lord Leveson Gower's dispatch, containing the assurances referred to Mr. Budberg, 28th of June, was negatived. That, for copies of all assurances of co-operation given to the courts of St. Petersburgh and Stockholm, was, with some modifications acceded to, as were all the others.

House of Commons, February 29th.-Mr. Whitbread rose to make his announced motion, for entering immediately into a negotiation for peace. After some prefatory observations respecting the acknowledged danger of the present crisis, he said that his present intention was, to take a review of the information now before the house, respecting the conduct of ministers in refusing to enter into negotiation with France, thereon to ground a resolution expressive of what the state of the country might have been, had a different course been pursued. He had, a month ago, stated some of the symptoms of the present crisis of the country. Since that time, several petitions had been presented to the House, of which the statements were most distressing, the prayer most moderate, and the general tone most patriotic. He did not bring forward the motion he was about to make, in consequence of these petitions; but he was not sorry that they had been presented, because he was a friend to petitioning; much good had been produced by petitions. It was by the petitions of the people, that an end had been put to the Ameri can war; and if the petitions of the people had been attended to in the early part of the last war against France, our situation now would 仆

have been far different from what it was. All projects were now given up of obtaining indemnity for the past, of dictating a constitution to France, or of curbing the power and ambition of Buonaparte. Our only aim now was, to defend ourselves. And what probability was there of obtaining a more honourable peace than might be concluded at the present moment? He called the attention of the house to the present situation of the country with regard to foreign powers. The peace of Tilsit had been treated in his majesty's declaration, and in the speech of the commissioners as most disastrous to Russia, and represented as the effect of despondency and alarm. But Mr. W. contended, that this peace had been the salvation of Russia, and had prevented the army from being totally and completely extinguished. Before the peace of Tilsit, however, was concluded, an offer had been made by Russia, to mediate a peace between Great Britain and France: an offer which he had always considered as an effusion of Alexander's heart towards this country. Here Mr. Whitbread entered into a detailed analysis of the papers which had been laid on the table relative to this offer, on the part of Russia, and the refusal of ministers to accept of it. In the course of many observations and comments, he adverted to general Budberg's letter of the 20th June, in

which he complains of Russia having been left unaided in the con

test.

On the justice or injustice of these complaints, he did not now mean to enter; but he contended that the language held in this note, which was that of a man who seemedito feel that he had been ill-used was itself a proof of the fidelity of

the

the emperor of Russia; or at least, of a persuasion on his part, that he had acted with fidelity in his engagements, and that his conduct was not dictated by the petu lant feelings of the moment. And even this note was concluded with an offer of mediation, accompanied not merely with a belief, but with an assurance that it would be accepted by France. He did not mean to say that lord L. Gower was empowered to accept of this mediation, or that he was wrong in not accepting of it. He only wished the house to observe, that this offer was made before the peace of Tilsit was concluded; and that it was an offer proceeding from a sincere wish, on the part of the emperor of Russia, to facilitate a pacific arrangement between this country and France, accompanied with a moral certainty of France being ready to meet us half way in the proposed negotiation. This, then, was one of those golden opportunities, which, when once lost, are irretrievable. But it had been said, that" no intimation of the basis on which France proposed to treat had been given;" on which Mr. W. observed, that if it could ever have been a matter of doubt whether the previous settlement of a basis was necessary to the hope of a successful negotiation, the experience of the last negotiation with France, would have placed that question beyond controversy. Mr. W. proceeded to animadvert on lord L. Gower's dispatches of the 2d September and on the dispatches in answer to them by Mr. Secretary Canning; and on a review of the whole, contended that ministers, instead of smoothing, had been assiduous only in raising difficulties, and acted not only contrary to

form, but to common sense. They seemed also to have confounded the character of a mediator with that of an umpire. He next proceeded to an analysis of the correspondence with Austria. If ministers had had a disposition towards peace, they would have accepted the proffered mediation of Austria, with that confidence and good-will towards her, which her former conduct towards us had merited.. But here, too, they had manifested a disposition to start instead of smoothing difficulties. The petulance of Mr. Secretary Canning, he said, the difficulties, which he was constantly raising, the obstacles he threw in the way, and the false constructions he was apt to fall into, proved clearly that no negotiation could be conducted by him with any reasonable chance of success. The ruler of France had, at three distinct periods, made offers of peace to this country, in terms unobjectionable. The first was rejected. The second was not absolutely rejected; but lord Mulgrave had written a contumelious letter, informing him, that his majesty had consulted his allies." We had then an opportunity of selling a recognition to him and we might have sold many before he had established himself as he had now done in defiance of us. Notwithstanding however, the manner in which his former offers had been treated, another offer, and that after his power had been greatly increased, had been made through the intervention of other powers. That offer had been accepted; and what did gentlemen on the other side mean to do? Were they, as was stated in the king's speech, looking about for an impartial mediator? There was no such mediator now

to

to be had, and nothing remained but a direct communication. But it would appear as if a personal hostility to Buonaparté existed: and why? because the people were told that he was ambitious and cruel, and a violator of all rights human and divine. The political conduct of princes was that alone with which other nations had to do; and of the effects of that, nations and not individuals. It was not the power of France that was formidable, but that of the French emperor. It was the talents of the emperor that consolidated the present mass. We had forced him to try the experiment of contending with all the European armies, and they had been defeated; and in proportion as we went on with the war, we were consolidating his power more and more. If another character arose, new interests, new views, and new treaties would be formed; and this would happen sooner or later. In the mean time, it was impossible to subdue Buonaparté by war; that was now obvious. Mr. W. after exposing the delusive hopes of conquering France through her finances, proceeded to show the futility of another delusion, namely, that Buonapartéwould be hated by the people and the army, and that the mass of the population of the different countries he should enter, would rise against him. All this had been proved to be completely unfounded. The last point he would touch upon was the allegation that Buonaparté had sworn the destruction of this country. He asked, where and when he had done so? Was it during his Consulate? Was it after he became emperor of France? No. For then, also, he had made an offer of

peace; yet it might be said that in all this he was insincere. This might be the opinion of some; but before that opinion could be rendered general or universal, it would be necessary to enter into a negotiation to prove it. Mr. Whitbread concluded a long and elaborate speech, by moving the following resolutions :

"That it is the opinion of this house, that the conditions stipulated by his majesty's ministers for the acceptance of the mediation offered by the emperor of Russia, were inexpedient and impolitic.

"That it is the opinion of this house, that the conduct of his majesty's ministers on the subject of the mediation of the emperor of Austria, was unwise and impolitic, and not calculated to ascertain how far the restoration of the blessings of peace might or might not have been attainable through the means of such mediation.

"That this house feels it incumbent on itself to declare, that there is nothing in the present circumstances of the war, that ought to preclude his majesty from embracing any fair opportunity of acceding to, or commencing a negotiation with the enemy, on a footing of equality, for the termination of hostilities, on terms of justice and honour."

Mr. Ponsonby concurred with his honourable friend as to his two first resolutions: and in the third, likewise, he agreed in the letter, but differed as to the spirit and effect, and as to the propriety of passing such a resolution at the present moment. The third proposition, if adopted, would bind ministers immediately to take steps towards a negotiation; which must produce

one