Зображення сторінки
PDF
ePub

which was demanded from ministers, and which they were not disposed to grant.

Lord Grenville, in the house of peers, asked his majesty's ministers whether Portugal was now at liberty to maintain her accustomed relations with this country, as by the treaty of Madrid she had been bound not to give any exclusive privileges to the detriment of the contracting parties.

Lord Pelham answered, that she was still at liberty to treat with this country.

Lord Grenville replied, that this question was, whether Portugal remained at liberty to maintain her former connection with us, under which we enjoyed exclusive advantages, for which we gave reciprocal privileges.

[No answer was made by ministers.]

Lord Thurlow complained of the irregularity of this conversation.

Lord Grenville said, it was by no means unusual to call for important information previous to discussing the order of the day; however, for the sake of regularity, he should move an humble address to his majesty, praying for a copy of the treaty of Madrid, signed on the 29th of September.

Lord Hobart said, that the preliminaries only respected the integrity of the territories of Portugal; commercial regulations must remain for future arrangement.

After several observations from the lord Chancellor, lord Thurlow, and other lords, the house proceeded to the order of the day.

In the house of commons, the honourable Mr. Grenville made a similar demand of information respecting the treaty of Madrid, which

he observed was more peculiarly necessary, as Portugal had signed two treaties with Spain, one at Badajos, the other at Madrid, and the house ought to know which of them was guarintied.

Lord Hawkesbury said, govern ment was not then possessed of official information on the subject, but he was ready to say, that he understood that by the treaty of Badajos, Portugal only ceded the town of Olivenza to Spain, and that by the treaty between France and Portugal there was so far an alteration of the frontier in Guyana, that for the future the river Arewara was to be the boundary.

The preliminary conversation being thus disposed of in both houses, that part of his majesty's speech relating to the preliminary articles was read.

Lord Romney moved the address in the house of lords: he began by stating, that we had now terminated the greatest and most momentous war which this country had ever been engaged in; a war, which though productive of the heaviest burdens, had been on our side a war of necessity, not only for the defence of our allies, but the prescrvation of our religion, laws, property, and constitution. And as it was on our side nesessary, so it was, as far as we were concerned, attended by the most brilliant successes. rious as that war was, in which the immortal Chatham presided at the helm of affairs, this was no less splendid. Our fleets had been victorious in a still higher degree; they had crushed the navy, and annihilated the commerce of the enemy. The whole of maritime Europe, jealous of the power of our navy, had conspired its humiliation, they

Glo

found

found their vain endeavours recoil upon themselves. He had himself been taught, by the glory that our troops had obtained in Egypt, the truth of one observation made to him formerly by a noble lord, himself an ornament to the military profession (lord Moira), who told him that he might rely upon it, that, British soldiers, when they had an equal opportunity of distinguishing themselves, would not fall short of British sailors. Egypt had lately witnessed such glorious exertions of British troops, as the annals of history could not surpass. We had then to contend with a completely disciplined army, more numerous than our own, inured to the climate, and commanded by a most skilful and experienced general. The chosen troops of France, who had gained so many brilliant victories against the Austrians, and deemed themselves" invincible," found, for the first time, that they were not invincible when they came to close quarters with British soldiers. Success however was the best season for concluding peace. In no former war has the victorious party insisted on retaining all its acquisitions. In the war which lord Chatham had so gloriously conducted, the object was to secure our American colonies: that being effected, we restored, at the peace, Martinico, Guadaloupe, the Havannah, and Pondicherry. In the American war, when France had succeeded in detaching from us these colonies, she did not hesitate to restore several islands and settlements she had taken from us during the war. We now have secured the great object of the war, our religion, laws, constitution, property, and independence. We had displayed greater resources, both military and

pecuniary, than this country was sup posed to possess, and so far the impor tant objects of the war had been secured. His lordship then dwelt on the importance of the islands of Ceylon and Trinidada (both from their situation and capability of improvement), as also on the vast conquests which had been made in India, fron Tippoo Sultan, the old ally of France, and the deliverance of Egypt from the French dominion. He concluded by giving his opinion that we had done all that could have been done for our allies, and that we had laid a foundation for British security, which held out a promise of permanent peace. He then read his motion for the adaddress.

Lord Limerick seconded the address. He thought it augured well of the peace, that almost all ranks and descriptions of men in the country approved of it. He was sorry, however, to find that many of the highest characters in point of abilities and integrity thought differently upon that subject. The situation of this country was, as he thought, decidedly better than at the late peace. At the last peace we lost our finest colonies, and several most important islands and fortresses had been taken from us in the war which preceded it; but in this the character of the country as well as its territories were preserved inviolate: Britain had also successfully interfered for its allies, Turkey and Portugal. His lordship then expatiated on the glorious achievements of our troops in Egypt, and regretted the loss of that hero, who led on those troops to victory and immortal ho

our. His spirit, however, did not die; it fell upon those gallant offi

cors

cers who succeeded him, and whose conduct best spoke their eulogium. He hoped the house would pardon his national vanity in mentioning, that many of them came from the same part of the united kingdom with himself, and were his particular friends. He spoke this with particular pleasure, from the recollection of the disaffected and dangerous spirit which prevailed too much amongst the inferior orders of people in that country. To this subject he thought the attention of government should be directed, and that above all things a large peace establishment must be kept up. He concluded by generally approving of the conduct of ministers, but particularly for procuring for the nation such preliminaries of peace as the present.

Earl Spencer lamented the necessity he felt himself under from his sense of duty, to deliver an opinion opposite to that of the two noble lords who had last spoke. If he did not feel himself called upon by his sense of duty, he should much rather have deplored in silence the calamity of the present peace, and the enthusiastic joy with which the people had received it. He shou'd rather have suppressed the mortification he felt at the degradation of his country: he felt peculiar pain at opposing the measures of men with whom he had so long acted, and with whom he was connected by the ties of friendship; but his opinion on this subject was diametrically opposite to theirs. He thought that no single object of the war had been obtained, and that we had sacrificed all means of protection. We had in every part of the world made cessions of countries which the valour of our forces

by land and sea had conquered, and which would have secured us from the effects of the aggrandizement of France upon the continent. It had been said that we had protected our allies. What was the fact? How had we protected Portugal? It appeared that it was only a portion of her territory whose integrity was to be preserved. A part of the important province of Olivenza was to be ceded: our ally the Prince of Orange was not even named in the preliminaries, although from his faithful attachment to us he had lost both his territories and his station. Could it be said that Ceylon and Trinidad gave either sufficient indemnity for the past, or security for the future? In India the bravery of our army had subdued Tippoo Saib, and placed that country out of danger; but by this peace, which surrenders to the enemy the Cape of Good Hope and Cochin, we afford them an entrance into Malabar; while in South America we have permitted Portugal to cede to France a strong military position at the mouth of the river of Amazons. In the West Indies we had surren dered Martinico, and left the French in possession of St. Domingo. In the Mediterranean we had surren dered every thing and excluded ourselves. In Malta the French were to have equal footing with ourselves. In short, he saw nothing but a precarious peace. It was said it was the interest of France to maintain this peace, but who had learned to calculate the interest of an usurper? If ever peace was precarious, this was that peace. ever precarious peace was dangerous, this was that peace. The French principles are triumphant, and

If

adorned

[ocr errors]

adorned with all the attraction and dignity of success. He felt sorry to differ from ministers, and considered it now most peculiarly his duty to support such measures of vigour as might give the country a chance of safety.

The duke of Clarence supported the peace. He considered that we had as much security as could be expected in those revolutionary times, from a government of the nature of the French republic. His royal highness took an able review of the events of the last wat: after bestowing the warmest encomiums on our fleets, he paid the highest tribute of applause to the gallantry of the British soldiers during the course of the war. In this respect he traced the glory of the British arms, not only in gallant exploits achieved upon the continent of Europe, but in the conquest of the enemy's colonies, and in the overthrow and destruction of Tippoo Saib. While the British arms were attended with such glory and success, a gigantic enterprise of the present first consul of France threatened for a time to interrupt their progress. 40,000 of the best troops of the French republic embarked on the expedition to Egypt. This plan not only menaced all our possessions in the East, but threatened the existence of the Turkish government.

The first important check which this formidable army of French invaders met, was from a handful of British troops under Sir Sidney Smith, long before the landing of that army which became in their turn the conquerors of Egypt. It was on the memorable 21st of March last, when a British army, engaged with a French army,

con

proved itself superior both in courage and capacity. The French, although superior in numbers, were very inferior in military address. After passing very high encomums on the conduct of our army, his royal highness passed to the brilliant achievements of our navy. The memorable 1st of June, 14th of February, 11th of October, and 1st of August, would be for ever brilliant and glorious in our naval history. The time was however come for making peace. Each of the powers, from their vast quests, was placed in that predicament, that no blow could be given with effect on either side. France had completely overcome every contending power on the continent. Great Britain, as far as regarded maritime affairs, was in the same state. This was therefore (as cxpressed by a distinguished personage) no common peace; but a reconciliation of differences between the two greatest powers in the world! He considered the possessions that we retained as very judiciously selected, not only from their productions and real value, but on account of their situations and the advantages we might derive from their harbours. It was the obvious policy of Great Britain to pay her principal attention to commercial stations; while an immense power like France naturally looked to continental acquisitions. His royal highness concluded by giving his hearty assent to the motion.

Lord Pelham, in vindication of the treaty, compared it with the projet which the former ministers had given in in 1797. The only difference was, that the Cape of Good Hope, which by that projet was to have been retained, is now to be

made

made a free port. This difference surely would not authorize a continuation of the war. As to no mention having been inade of the prince of Orange, it was most evident that we had not the power to reinstate him by force of arms; but certainly no opportunity would be lost in negotiating for his interests. Naples, which now was possessed by the armies of France, was to be restored to its lawful Sovereign. Malta was to be availing to neither of the contracting parties. As for Portugal, she had retained every thing that could be useful to retain, and had made no sacrifice that could be injurious. There was Bothing in the West Indies which could have justified a continuance of the struggle, and in the East the overthrow of Tippoo had completely secured our empire from annoyance. Ceylon and Trinidad were important acquisitions; but it was much more important that we had overcome the erroneous opinions prevalent in England and in Ireland. He concluded with trusting the peace would be found advantageous and safe for the country.

Lord Westmeath also spoke in favour of the address.

Lord Grenville said it would be indeed to him a matter of the most lively satisfaction and heartfelt joy, if his judgment could permit him to congratulate the house as the noble mover of the address had done, or if he could agree to an address which stated that we had brought an arduous and important contest to a successful termination. Independent of every public consideration which must have animated him, every private feeling he possessed must have rejoiced at the

attainment of that object, which for so many years of his life it was his duty continually to urge to their lordships. He feared, however, that all the pains he had bestowed upon that object, would turn out mere fruitless labour, for he was sorry to say, that, according to his view of the subject, no one of the objects for which we had so long warred had been obtained. If security was the object of the war, we now remain in a state of greater insecurity than at the commencement of the war, or at any time during its continuance. He should agree that our naval and military efforts had been crowned by success greater than at any former period: he also agreed that peace ought to have been made when it could be made on secure and honourable terms, for a secure and honourable peace is the only legitimate object of war. The question was not whether the peace should or should not be agreed to, for the honour of the nation was now pledged to the observance of its conditions; and as so many sacrifices had already been made, he should be the last man who would propose to sacrifice the national honour. The question now is, what are the merits of this treaty ? or can the house assure his majesty that the terms of it met their approbation? To this he could not agree, because he conceived the terms disadvantageous to the country, and fraught with national degradation. This was stated to be only a question about terms, and therefore it must be tried by an examination of the terms, by weighing our cessions and our conquests, and considering our relative situation. He considered that it was perfectly known to every statesman,

that

« НазадПродовжити »