He proceeded to ridicule the idea of the extinction of jacobinism, which had been adduced as a reason for consolation under our disappointments. He asked, did the first consul meditate no hostile designs against this country? Was he incapable of fomenting discord and discontent in Ireland? Had he shown no tenderness for Napper Tandy, a foul and convicted traitor? Was there not an English paper called "The Argus," set up in Paris, under the controul, like the other journals, and perhaps under the protection, of the French government? Its columns were filled with dull sedition; and one of the numbers plainly told Ireland that she owed no allegiance to the king of Great Britain. So much, continued he, for the extinction of jacobinism. He adverted, finally, to the defenceless state of this country and of Ireland; and declared, that as to the question of peace or war, he had only to say that we should keep arms in our hands, and retain possession of what was not yet ceded to France: we were fully justified in assuming that attitude; for with the succession of power and resources which France had received, he asked, was there any thing like a rational hope of peace? Sir Francis Burdett admitted, that the honourable gentleman who had just sat down, had depicted, with great truth, the melancholy state of the country, arising out of the gigantic aggrandisement and -accumulating resources of France. But at the same time that he confessed this, should he not be permitted to observe, how extraordinary it was, that those who had > accumulated against us this moun-tain of dangers and difficulties, - should be the most forward to exaggerate them? that they should

be the loudest in stating the result of their own conduct and counsels; and the most studious in detailing the perils with which their impru dence, their obstinacy, or their infatuation, had encompassed the country. He went on to ask-but after all, what was the blame now imputed to ministers? That they made peace without foreseeing what advantages France would derive from peace: and that they did not now hold a bold and blustering language; while it was confessed that, if they again tried the chances of war, there would be scarcely any hope of their doing any thing ef fectual. Would to God that no greater faults could be imputed to the present or to the late administration! The honourable baronet next proceeded to state his more particular objections to the preposed address. It stated, that we should look with watchfulness to the state of Europe; and seemed to intimate that we should catch at an opportunity of renewing hostilities. Such an expression he could not but consider as imprudent; for it argued an inclination, without a consciousness of ability, to give it effect: in such language there was little of wisdom or of dignity. The other passage he had to object to was that which alluded to the advantages of the union with Ireland. Ireland had reaped no advantages from what had been commonly called the union; but which, in truth, should be called her subjugation: if any advantage were derived from it, it was experienced only by ministers, who drew from it an additional phalanx to strengthen their ranks in that house. He proceeded, if it were really the wish of ministers to rally and unite all honest men in defence of the constitution and country, let them hold

forth

--could fill their places much better. This then being the noble lord's opinion, why not bring the question before the house, and put it fairly at issue; instead of drawing a gloomy picture of our aflairs, and exaggerating the dangers of the country with a view to make it discontented with the present administration? They did not come into office, he said, by cabal or intrigue. Whatever might be their deficiencies, it would at least be said of them, that they gave peace to the country, and that it had suffered no dishonour or calamity in

their hands.

Mr. Fox also felt the most sincere pleasure, that the noble lord had so frankly confessed the views and objects of the gentlemen with whom he acted. It was rather uncandid, however, in the noble lord's friends, to call in to their aid every popular topic, every subject likely to inflame the popular feelings, when they had nothing in contemplation but their own advancement. If they felt that the present ministers had misconducted the public affairs, let a fair appeal be made to the public opinion, to the judgement of that house; every patriot would go impartially to the discussion: but let not charges be thus indirectly advanced. Though he was not disposed to join the noble lord's friends in their censure of the present ministers, yet, if these ministers were, as report stated, introduced into office in . order to stand in the way of a great act of justice to the majority of the Irish people, and to a large proportion of the inhabitants of England, most undoubtedly they deserved censure; but if such were the ground of the noble lord's abuse, why not avow it? The 5 mode by which ministers got into

power was certainly mysterious; it was not yet explained. If it were such as he had already alluded to, the noble lord's proposition would not be ill received, though ministers might plead the peace they had concluded as a set-off against this charge. He could not help expressing his surprise at the dreary picture which the noble lord and his friends had drawn of the state of this country, compared with that of France; and his regret for the terms in which they were in the habit of speaking of the French people and their government. It was not becoming the dignity or policy of this country to use such language, nor was the comparison consistent with justice. Nothing but the spirit of exaggeration or consummate blindness could imagine it. Mr. Fox then discussed, at some length, most of the topics which had already been urged as arguments for the recommencement of hostilities; and showed, that such a conclusion was not fairly deducible from any one of them, or from all together. He was afraid that ministers indulged a rivalry, bordering on hatred, against the French; and fancied all should join in their alarms; without considering that the fears of many of the states of Europe were as much directed against our ascendency by sea, as against the extraordinary power of France on the continent: and he had no doubt, that were there an assembly in France of the same nature as that house, the formidable power of our navy would be as much the subject of jealous remark and apprehension, as the continental strength of France was now to us. He recommended the avoidance of those unmanly libels, which both in and out of parliament were

too

too frequently levelled at the French government. He noticed the war of words which existed between the newspapers of this country and of France: but, said he, let the Moniteur and the Morning Post, the Times and the Argus, go on in their hostile language; it was easier to be endured than a war of bayo nets. He should decline supporting the extended establishment which was thought necessary; because he considered a large standing army, independent of considerations of expense, to be the most dangerous instrument of influence in the hands of the crown. The apprehension that French industry would injure our commerce, was a subject for ridicule. If the first consul should order Genoa to rival London, Amsterdam to rival Liverpool, as commercial orders were always obeyed, the circumstance would be very alarming; but would war remedy the evil (a laugh), or would not greater evils arise out of it? To go to war on principles of commercial rivalship, would be an act of madness and folly.

Mr. Windham-commended the brilliancy of Mr. Fox's speech; though it was a brilliancy without force, as almost every thing the speech contained was fallacious. The war of France was not a paper war; it was a war of measures, of deeds, most calamitous to Europe. With respect to what had been said of the " aggressions" of France, he believed the word aggressions had not been used, at least in the sense given to it by the honourable, gentleman. Without actual aggressions, there might be acts committed by another state which might justify war. It was said too, that the acts complained of on the part of the French government had existed at the time

of the treaty; but even admitting that to be true, the argument founded on them, if it did not apply to ministers now, would still apply to the dangerous situation of the country owing to the peace. It was asked, what was the cure even for the danger, if admitted?—was it war? He would say that, in the comparison of war, as the cure, with peace, it might fairly be contended, that every thing we should not lose would be gain. It was to prevent, not to cure, that he wished. In comparing the war with peace as a cure, he contended, that peace had enlarged the sphere of Bonaparte's ambition, by allowing it to extend to every quarter of the globe, while war had confined it to Europe. As to the advantages of peace for commerce, the question was, what security had we for that commerce and the wealth it gave? If poverty were a security against robbery, surely wealth was in itself a bad protection against the robber. After pursuing the comparison of the safety of peace with the safety of war to a considerable length, from which he inferred that war would have enabled us to secure more than peace gave us a chance of securing, he adverted with severity to the language which had been held as to continental connexions; that we were too honest to deal with the princes of the continent, &c. It was not true that Austria abandoned us. She gave up the con test, not yielding, but as it were driven out of the line.

The chancellor of the exchequer observed, that the purpose of the arguments of the right honourable gentleman (Mr. Windham) was to establish the proposition that, upon the whole, war more desirable than peace. The C 2

was

right

right honourable gentleman spoke of the evils which would have been averted, had the country remained in the former situation; that the French would not at present be in possession of Louisiana or St. Domingo, and that the British fleet would retain the superiority in the Mediterranean. But he contended, that the true question for the consideration of the house was, whe ther upon the whole it were better for the sake of averting those comparatively lesser evils, to plunge the country again into the calamities of war? The effect of the right honourable gentleman's arguments was not to renew, but to render the war perpetual; namely, that it should be prosecuted till it so operated upon the power of France, as to produce, on her part, an incapacity of further hostilities. It had been asserted by a noble lord (Temple), that it was impossible hostilities should be renewed. To this proposition he would ever oppose a decided negative. On the first discussion of the question of peace, the house would do him the justice to recollect that he had expressly stated, that the war was not discontinued on account of any deficiency in the means of carrying it on. He therefore would have no hesitation in asserting, that were the honour of the country touched, or its security in danger, it would not only be possible to renew hostilities, but it possessed the means of supporting a contest of seven or eight years duration, without imposing any burdens upon the people, but such as would, under all the circumstances of the case, be borne with cheerfulness. He then proceeded to repel the imputation of a want of vigour in the measures of ministers. He could with con fidence defy the noble lord (Tem

ple) to point out a single instance where the conduct of ministers betrayed a want of promptitude or vigour. He hoped the noble lord would condescend expressly to state the grounds upon which he brought the charge he had asserted. With respect to what had fallen from an honourable gentleman opposite to him (Mr. Fox), relative to the language which had lately appeared in the public prints of the respective countries, he concurred in all his observations. At the same time he wished not to be understood to say, that a finger should be laid upon the British press upon that account; God forbid ! as the worst consequences the imprudence of news writers could produce, were light and insignificant, compared to the effect of such an outrage! However, language not less reprehensible proceeded from the other side of the water than what issued from the press of this country. He had, on a former occasion, stated his apprehensions from the language of those whose exaggerated statements went to place the country in a state of warfare; on the other hand, apprehensions were to be entertained from the lime of conduct recommended by those who would make any com-. promise for the preservation of peace. It was the duty and intention of those who administered his majesty's government, to steer between both extremes; and to observe a line of moderation founded upon those principles in which they deemed the honour and security of the country to consist. In pursuing that course, they relied upon the approbation of their country, and the support of that house; and from such a course they would not be diverted. On the great and salutary objects they had in view,

they