XVI. 1794. 8. by Opposition. debates in both houses of Parliament. On the part of CHAP. the Opposition, it was urged by Mr Fox and Mr Sheridan, "That the conduct of government, since the war commenced, had been a total departure from the principles of Argument moderation, on which they had so much prided themselves wat Mr before it broke out. They then used language which Fox and the breathed only the strictest neutrality, and this continued even after the King had been dethroned, and many of the worst atrocities of the Revolution had been perpetrated: but, now, even though we did not altogether reject negotiation, we put forth declarations evidently calculated to render it impossible, and shake all faith in our national integrity. The Allies had first by Prince Cobourg issued a proclamation, in which they engaged to retain whatever strongholds they might conquer, merely in pledge for impossible to do any thing without some blood, and he hoped to see Mr Pitt's and the King's heads upon Temple Bar;" whereupon all the meeting rose up and shook hands with him. These, and similar documents and proceedings, left no room as to the objects of the Association; but still there was great legal difficulty in bringing the case of the prisoners within the rule as to overt acts, either showing an intent to compass the king's death, or levy war against him, or depose him from his government. Accordingly, many able lawyers think the acquittal of the prisoners of the high treason charged, how clearly soever they were found guilty of sedition, was a fortunate circumstance, as it at once saved the law and stopped the treason.-See State Trials, October 26, 1794; and Twiss's Life of Lord Eldon, i. 240-261. George III., whose strong natural sagacity had made him averse to the prosecution of these offences as high treason from the beginning, was rejoiced at the acquittals. Addressing Lord Chancellor Loughborough, who was understood to have taken a leading part in recommending them, he said "You have got into the wrong box, my lord; you have got into the wrong box: constructive treason won't do, my lord; constructive treason won't do."LORD CAMPBELL's Lives of the Chancellors, vi. 267. The English lawyers were landed in this serious dilemma, from the obvious defect of the law, which recognised no medium between sedition, punishable only by imprisonment, and high treason, to which the highest pains were attached. The true medium was familiar to the Scotch law, which held the more serious cases of sedition-those in which civil war and a forcible change of government were recommended or pointed at-as punishable by transportation-a penalty certainly not too heavy for so dangerous a delinquency. The infliction of this penalty on the leading delinquents in Scotland, was so long made the subject of invective by the English democratic party, because it was so necessary and effectual-it hit incohate treason between wind and water; and hence the clamour raised against it, as the roar against all effective remedies of favourite public delusions. VOL. III. 2 B XVI. 1794. CHAP. Louis XVII.; and five days afterwards, to their eternal disgrace, they revoked that very proclamation, and openly avowed the intention, since uniformly acted upon, of making a methodical war of conquest on France. Supposing that the British government should be able to clear itself of all share in this infamous transaction, what was to be said of the declaration issued by Lord Hood on the 23d August, on the capture of Toulon, wherein he took possession of the town on the express conditions of maintaining the constitution of 1789, preserving the fleet of Louis XVII., and protecting all Frenchmen who repaired to our standard? after which came a dark enigmatical declaration from his Majesty, which, stripped of the elegant rubbish with which it was loaded, amounted merely to this, that the restoration of monarchy was the only condition on which we would treat with France. "Has any thing occurred to alter the probability of success in the war? Have the triumphs of the coalition in Flanders been so very brilliant, the success of Lord Moira's expedition to Granville so decisive, the efforts at Toulon so victorious, as to afford more cheering prospects than were held out at its commencement? Has the internal condition of that country, and the prospects of the Royalist party, improved so much under the system of foreign attack, as to render it advisable to continue the contest for their sakes? Is not the internal state of France so divided, that it is impossible to say that the Royalist party, even in the districts most attached to monarchical principles, could agree on any form of government? And what have we done to support them? Liberated the garrisons of Valenciennes and Mayence, when they were shut up within their walls, and given them the means, by the absurd capitulation which we granted, of acting with decisive effect against their Royalist fellow-citizens in the west of France! All the treaties we have entered into contained a clause, by which the contracting parties bound themselves not to XVI. 1794. lay down their arms while any part of the territory of CHAP. either of them remained in the hands of the enemy. How have they adhered, or are likely to adhere, to this stipulation? How has Prussia adhered? Why, she publicly declared her intention of laying down her arms, at the very time when large parts of her allies' territories were in the occupation of the enemy, because she had discovered that the war was burdensome. The Emperor has refused to agree to this secession, and Prussia has been retained an unwilling and feeble combatant on our side, only by the bribe of enormous subsidies. It is evident what the result will be our allies will one by one drop off, or become so inefficient as to be perfectly useless, when the contest proves either perilous or burdensome; and we shall be left alone, with the whole weight of a contest on our own shoulders, undertaken for no legitimate object, continued for no conceivable end. 9. success. "It is in vain to conceal that we have made no advance whatever towards any rational prospect of And its nonclosing the contest with either honour or advantage. In the first campaign, the Duke of Brunswick was defeated, and Flanders overrun; in the next, the most formidable confederacy ever formed in Europe has been baffled, and a furious civil war in different parts of the Republic extinguished. What have we to oppose to this astonishing exertion of vigour? The capture of a few sugar islands in the West Indies. Of what avail are they, or even the circumscribing the territorial limits of France itself, when such elements of strength exist in its interior? But let us revert to our old policy of attending to our maritime concerns, and disregarding the anarchy and civil wars of the neighbouring states; and then, indeed, the conquests in the East and West Indies would afford an excellent foundation for the only desirable object—a general pacification.1 All views of aggrandisement on 623, 632. the part of France are evidently unattainable, and must Parl. Hist. xxxi. 615, XVI. CHAP. be abandoned by that power; so that the professed object of the war-permanent security to ourselves— may now securely be obtained." 1794. 10. Pitt and Mr On the other hand, it was contended by Mr Pitt and Reply by Mr Mr Jenkinson,* "That the real object of the war from the outset had been to obtain indemnity for the past and security for the future. Are either of these objects likely to be obtained at this period? At present, there is no security for the continuance of peace, even if it were signed, for a single hour. Every successive faction which has risen to the head of affairs in France, has perished the moment that it attempted to imprint moderation on the external or internal measures of the Revolution. What overthrew the administration of Necker? Moderation! What destroyed the Orleanists, the Girondists, the Brissotins, and all the various parties which have successively risen and fallen in that troubled hemisphere ? Moderation! What has given its long lease of power to the anarchical faction of which Robespierre is the head? The total want of moderation: the infernal energy, the unmeasured wickedness, of its measures. What prospect is there of entering into a lasting accommodation with a power, or what the guarantee for the observance of treaties by a faction, whom a single nocturnal tumult may hurl from the seat of government, to make way for some other more outrageous and extravagant than itself? The campaign hitherto has only lasted a few weeks; yet in that time we have taken Landrecies, formerly considered as the key of France; and though we have lost Courtray and Menin, yet the vigour and resolution with which the whole Allied army has combated, gives good reason to hope, if not for a successful march to Paris, (which, however, is by no means improbable,) at least for such an addition to the frontier barrier as may prove at once a curb on France, and an excellent base for offensive operations. It is impossible to say what government we * Afterwards Lord Liverpool. are to propose for France, in the event of the Jacobins being overthrown, because that must depend on the circumstances of the times, and the wishes of its inhabitants; but this much may safely be affirmed, that, with the sanguinary faction which now rules its councils, accommodation is impossible. CHAP. 1794. 11. Statement of the objects "The present is not a contest for distant or contingent objects it is not a contest for power or glory: as little is it a contest for commercial advantage, or any particular of form of government. It is a contest for the security, the tranquillity, and the very existence of Great Britain, connected with that of every established government, and every country in Europe. This was the object of the war from its commencement; and every hour tends more strongly to demonstrate its justice. In the outset, the internal anarchy of France, how distressing or alarming soever, was not deemed a sufficient ground for the hostile interference of this country; but could the same be affirmed, when the King was beheaded, and a revolutionary army, spreading every where the most dangerous doctrines, overwhelmed the Low Countries? Is that danger now at an end? The prospect of bringing the war to a conclusion, as well as the security for any engagements which we may form with France, must ultimately depend upon the destruction of those principles now triumphant in that distracted country, which are alike subversive of every regular government, and destructive of all good faith. We do not disclaim any interference in the internal affairs of that country; on the contrary, should an opportunity occur where it may be practised with advantage, we will not engage to abstain from it. We only say, that such is not the primary object of the contest; and that, if attempted, it will be, as has been the case in all former wars, considered as an operation of the war. "There is no contradiction between the proclamation of Lord Hood at Toulon, and the declaration of his the war. |