THOUGHTS ON FRENCH AFFAIRS, &c. &c. IN N all our transactions with France, and at all periods, we have treated with that state on the footing of a monarchy. Monarchy was considered in all the external relations of that kingdom with every power in Europe as its legal and constitutional government, and that in which alone its federal capacity was vested. It is not yet a year since Monsieur de Montmorin, Montmoformally, and with as little respect as can be ima- rin's Letter. gined, to the king, and to all crowned heads, announced a total revolution in that country. He has informed the British ministry, that its frame of government is wholly altered; that he is one of the ministers of the new system; and in effect, that the king is no longer his master (nor does he even call him such) but the "first of the ministers," in the new system. The Acceptance of the constitution ratified. The second notification was that of the king's acceptance of the new constitution; accompanied with fanfaronades in the modern style of the French bureaus, things which have much more the air and character of the saucy declamations of their clubs, than the tone of regular office. It has not been very usual to notify to foreign courts, any thing concerning the internal arrangements of any state. In the present case, the circumstance of these two notifications, with the observations with which they are attended, does not leave it in the choice of the sovereigns of Christendom to appear ignorant either of this French revolution, or (what is more important) of its principles. We know that very soon after this manifesto of Monsieur de Montmorin, the king of France, in whose name it was made, found himself obliged to fly, with his whole family; leaving behind him a declaration, in which he disavows and annuls that constitution, as having been the effect of force on his person and usurpation on his authority. It is equally notorious that this unfortunate prince was, with many circumstances of insult and outrage, brought back prisoner, by a deputation of the pretended national assembly, and afterwards suspended by their authority, from his government. Under equally notorious constraint, and under menaces of total deposition, he has been compelled to accept accept what they call a constitution, and to agree to whatever else the usurped power, which holds him in confinement, thinks proper to impose. His next brother, who had fled with him, and his third brother, who had fled before him, all the princes of his blood, who remained faithful to him, and the flower of his magistracy, his clergy, and his nobility, continue in foreign countries, protesting against all acts done by him in his present situation, on the grounds upon which he had himself protested against them at the time of his flight; with this addition, that they deny his very competence, (as on good grounds they may) to abrogate the royalty, or the antient constitutional orders of the kingdom. In this protest they are joined by three hundred of the late assembly itself, and in effect, by a great part of the French nation. The new government (so far as the people dare to disclose their sentiments) is disdained, I am persuaded, by the greater number; who, as M. de la Fayette complains, and as the truth is, have declined to take any share in the new elections to the national assembly, either as candidates or electors. In this state of things (that is in the case of a divided kingdom) by the law of nations, Great Britain, like every other power, is free to take any part she pleases. She may decline, with more or * See Vattel, b. ii. c. 4. Sect. 56. and b. iii. c. 18. sect. 296. less less formality, according to her discretion, to acknowledge this new system; or she may recognise it as a government de facto, setting aside all discussion of its original legality, and considering the antient monarchy as at an end. The law of nations leaves our court open to its choice. We have no direction but what is found in the well understood policy of the king and kingdom. This declaration of a new species of government, on new principles, (such it professes itself to be) is a real crisis in the politicks of Europe. The conduct which prudence ought to dictate to Great Britain, will not depend (as hitherto our connexion or quarrel with other states has for some time depended) upon merely external relations; but in a great measure also upon the system which we may think it right to adopt for the internal government of our own country. If it be our policy to assimilate our government to that of France, we ought to prepare for this change, by encouraging the schemes of authority established there. We ought to wink at the captivity and deposition of a prince, with whom, if not in close alliance, we were in friendship. We ought to fall in with the ideas of Mons. Montmorin's circular manifesto; and to do business of course with the functionaries who act under the new power, by which that king, to whom his majesty's minister has been sent to reside, has been deposed |