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 petulant 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 ouce 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 assi duous 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 hinr with any reasonable chance of success, The ruler of France had, at three distinct periods, made offers of peace to this country, in terms nuobjectionable. 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 biş 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 bad, and nothing remained but a direct communication, But it would appear as if a personal hostility to Buonaparte 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 pre-, sent 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 Buonaparte by war; that was now obvious. Mr. W. after exposing the delusive hopes of conquering France through her finances, proceeded to shew the futility of another delusion, namely, that Buonaparte would 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 Buonaparte 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 ma jesty'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 negociation 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, be 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 inmediately to take steps towards negotiation; which must preduce

அ

by lord Mahon and Mr. J. Smith, who spoke with great enthusiasm in praise of the talents and independcace of Mr. Whitbread.

Ma Canning, giving Mr. Whitbread full credit for being sincere in the opinion he had expressed, contended that, admitting negotiation to be desirable and good when there was a prospect of its leading to peace, it was a mischief when it did not afford that prospect. It tended to excite deceitful hope, and to paralyze exertion. The honourable gentleman was satisfied, that when Russia said we might have honourable terms, the fact was so. But why, in that case, did not Russia state those terms? What Russia might have looked upon as honourable terms, might not be so looked upon in this country. The manuer in which Russia acted respecting Prussia; that in which she surrendered the guaranteed republic of the Seven Isles; the phrase of maritime peace," always used by France in a sense wholly inconsistent with the maritime power and strength of Great Britain; and in that sense forced into all the diplomatic papers of the powers reduced under the controul of Buonaparte: the apparent compromise of the independence of Sicily:-all these were grounds for suspecting that the terms which Russia described as honourable, might, in fact, be very far from being so on the principles that a British government was bound to act upon. A very material fact, ending to shew the disposition of Russia, and her devotion to France, was, that the inclination of the Rus

government to complete the commercial treaty with Britain, ceased on account of the influence of France, and was not concluded.

63

He had himself no doubt that the declaration on the subject of Copenhagen, was forced on Russia by France. It was thought strange, that while the mediation of Russia was deemed suspicious as between Britain and France, the mediation of that power was solicited as between Britain and Denmark. But this application was perfectly consistent with the character of Protector of the north; and by preserving any part of the independence of that state, there might yet be room to hope that all was not irrecoverably lost. The first offer of mediation from Austria was immediately subsequent to the battle of Eylau, described in the gazette, published by the late ministers, as a complete victory on the part of the allies. It was accepted without any other condition, than that it should be accepted equally by all the belligerent powers. The offer was made accordingly, but accepted by France in terms so offensive to Britain, that it would have been a question whether any negotiation upon it could have been instituted. But before this question could be brought to an issue, the battle of Friedland had totally destroyed the hopes of the allies; and when lord Pembroke mentioned the matter at Vienna, he was told that things were so changed that nothing could be done. A second offer of mediation, on the part of Austria, was afterwards made, 28th November, by prince Stahremberg. But the whole of the proceedings, on the part of Austria, respecting this second offer, wore evident marks of French dictation.

Mr. Sheridan was determined to support the whole of the three resolutions; which he would have done

had

had they been conceived in stronger terms. With regard to petitions for peace, he was decidedly of opinion that the way to put a stop to them, would be to satisfy the country that the house was strongly disposed to peace, when peace was fairly attainable. As a great deal still remained to be said upon this important question, particularly on the third resolution, into which it was now too late to enter, he moved an adjournment of the debate till

to-morrow.

Mr. Adam, requested his right honourable friend to withdraw his motion, and let the house decide upon the resolutions; for every one of which he nieant to vote affirmatively. His opinion was, that ministers, by their conduct, had put a bar to any expectation of peace being proposed by them, or to them; and until that bar should be removed by a declaration of the sentiments of that house, he very much feared there could be no hope of peace for the country. Mr. Sheridan withdrew his motion; and after a few words from Mr. J. Smith and Mr. Wilberforce, and a reply to the latter by Mr. Whitbread, the house divided upon each of the resolutions.-Upon the first the numbers were, Ayes 70-Noes 210.-Upon the second, Ayes 67-Noes 211.Upon the third, Ayes 58-Noes

217.

To the debates concerning our re-, lations to the northern powers, several resolutions moved in the house of commons by Mr. Adam, 4th of March, respecting the law of parliament, formed a kind of natural episode. Before stating the terms of his motion, he found it necessary to enter into some discussion of general principles, and to state

On

On

the facts on which he pretended to found it. His object was, to prevent the repetition of a practice which the house had witnessed on the 3d of February last, and which, stood recorded on the journals of the house on the 8th of February, he hoped for the last time. the 3d of February, certain papers had been moved for by a right honourable friend of his, Mr. Ponsonby; and in the debate which took place, the discussion embraced not only the motion for papers, but the conduct of the individuals to which those papers referred. that occasion, the secretary of state for the foreign department read extracts from two of those papers which had been moved for, for the purpose of putting the house in possession of the information necessary to enable it to form a judgment respecting the propriety of the hos tile proceedings which government had adopted against Denmark. On the 8th of February, another honourable friend of his, Mr. Whitbread, moved for the production of those very papers, from which the secretary had read extracts on the 3d of February, on the ground that the extracts conveyed a different impression from that which the writers of those dispatches, lord Howick and Mr. Garlicke, intended to convey. On the 3d of February, the reason given for not producing the whole of the papers was, that their contents could not be disclosed without detriment to the public service. And on the Sth of February, the secretary persisted in opposing their production, on the pretence that, in the extracts he had made from them, he had not misrepresented the opinions of lord Howick and Mr. Garlicke. On the