Turkish government? Would not those prófes sions have been equally supported by solemn asseveration, by the same reference which is now made to personal character, with this single difference, that they would then have been accompanied with one instance less of that perfidy which we have had occasion to trace in this very trans* action.

It is unnecessary to say more with respect to the credit due to his professions, or the reliance to be placed on his general character: but it will, perhaps, be argued, that whatever may be his character, or whatever has been his past conduct, he has now an interest in making and observing peace. That he has an interest in making peace is at best but a doubtful proposition, and that he has an interest in preserving it, is still more uncertain. That it is his interest to negotiate, I do not indeed deny; it is his interest above all to engage this country in separate negotiation, in order to loosen and dissolve the whole system of the confederacy on the Continent, to palsy, at once, the arms of Russia or of Austria, or of any other country that might look to you for support; and then either to break off his separate treaty, or if he should have concluded it, to apply the lesson which is taught in his school of policy in Egypt; and to revive, at his pleasure, those

claims

claims of indemnification which may have been reserved to some happier period.

This is precisely the interest which he has in negotiation, but on what grounds are we to be convinced that he has an interest in conclud ing and observing a solid and permanent pacification? Under all the circumstances of his personal character, and his newly-acquired power, what other security has he for retaining that power but by the sword? His hold upon France is the sword, and he has no other. Is he connected with the soil, or with the habits, the affections, or the prejudices of the country? He is a stranger, a foreigner, and an usurper; he unites in his own person every thing that a pure republican must detest; every thing that an enraged jacobin has abjured; every thing that a sincere and faithful royalist must feel as an insult. If he is opposed at any time in his career, what is his appeal? He appeals to his fortune; in other words, to his army and his sword. Placing, then, his whole reliance upon military support, can he afford to let his military renown pass away, to let his laurels wither, to let the memory of his achievements sink into obscurity? Is it certain that, with his army confined within France, and restrained from inroads upon her neighbours, he can maintain, at his devotion, a force sufficiently nu€ 2

merous

merous to support his power? Having no object but the possession of absolute dominion, no passion but military glory, is it certain, that he will feel such an interest in permanent peace, as would justify us in laying down our arms, reducing our expense and relinquishing our means of security, on the faith of his engagements?

No.

No. III.

CHARACTER OF BUONAPARTE.

Extracted from the Appendix to Mr. Windham's Speech, delivered in the House of Commons, on the 4th of November, 1801, on the Report of an Address to the Throne, approving of the Preliminaries of Peace with the Republic of France.

The topic here alluded to is so closely connected with this subject, that the argument is evidently defective without it. An opinion indeed prevails, and is insisted upon by persons of much apparent wisdom and gravity, that any inquiry into the conduct and merits of the First Consul is unbecoming and improper; unsuited to the dignity of a great assembly, and incapable of being made conducive to any useful purpose. To many, however, it may seem, that just the contrary of this is the fact of the world, an instance can hardly be found of any one, whose personal qualities were so much a subject of general concern, and consequently so proper an object of inquiry; and

that in the history

that

that the occasion of all others, when such inquiry must be most proper and necessary, was that in which we were preparing to sign a treaty of peace with the person in question, founded expressly upon our confidence in his character, and entrusting to the issue of our judgment in that respect, the whole of the interests, welfare, independence, and even existence of a great empire.

Without inquiring generally into the history of the person thus confided in, let us recur only to a few of those passages of his life, which apply most immediately to the trust, which we are here reposing. A detailed and most masterly exposition of these is to be found in Mr. Pitt's speech of the 3d February, 1800, in which among other particulars, an account is given of his proceedings towards the people and govern ments of the several states of Milan, Modena, Genoa, Tuscany, the Pope, Venice, and Egypt. Of all these it may be said generally, and as it should seem without exception,-such was pur posely the profusion of engagements, and such the uniform and systematic breach of them,that not a single act was done, which was not in violation of some engagement, and certainly not a single engagement contracted, or profes sion made, that was not, in every part of it,

grossly