Initial commit

author: nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> 2025-02-07 15:22:56 -0800
committer: nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> 2025-02-07 15:22:56 -0800
commit: e7490c3c6fc016e4543c3612e79c283fbf0bb2a5 (patch)
tree: 9b07f299823cb9f1e005d1204e5f9a75aec8b0c6
5 files changed, 15836 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/55490-0.txt b/55490-0.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c4cf63f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/55490-0.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,6391 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of Representative British Orations with
+Introductions and Explanatory Notes,, by Charles Kendall Adams
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
+other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
+whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
+the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
+www.gutenberg.org.  If you are not located in the United States, you'll have
+to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook.
+
+Title: Representative British Orations with Introductions and Explanatory Notes, Volume II (of 4)
+
+Author: Charles Kendall Adams
+
+Release Date: September 6, 2017 [EBook #55490]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: UTF-8
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK REPRESENTATIVE BRITISH ORATIONS, VOL 2 ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Larry B. Harrison, Charlie Howard, and the
+Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
+(This file was produced from images generously made
+available by The Internet Archive)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Uniform with British Orations
+
+
+    AMERICAN ORATIONS, to illustrate American Political
+      History, edited, with introductions, by ALEXANDER
+      JOHNSTON, Professor of Jurisprudence and Political
+      Economy in the College of New Jersey. 3 vols., 16 mo,
+      $3.75.
+
+    PROSE MASTERPIECES FROM MODERN ESSAYISTS, comprising
+      single specimen essays from IRVING, LEIGH HUNT,
+      LAMB, DE QUINCEY, LANDOR, SYDNEY SMITH, THACKERAY,
+      EMERSON, ARNOLD, MORLEY, HELPS, KINGSLEY,
+      RUSKIN, LOWELL, CARLYLE, MACAULAY, FROUDE, FREEMAN,
+      GLADSTONE, NEWMAN, LESLIE STEPHEN. 3 vols., 16 mo,
+      bevelled boards, $3.75 and $4.50.
+
+    G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS, NEW YORK AND LONDON
+
+
+
+
+    REPRESENTATIVE
+    BRITISH ORATIONS
+
+    WITH
+    INTRODUCTIONS AND EXPLANATORY NOTES
+
+    BY
+    CHARLES KENDALL ADAMS
+
+    _Videtisne quantum munus sit oratoris historia?_
+                              —CICERO, _DeOratore_, ii, 15
+
+
+                                   ✩✩
+
+
+    NEW YORK & LONDON
+    G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS
+    The Knickerbocker Press
+    1884
+
+
+
+
+    COPYRIGHT
+    G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS
+    1884.
+
+
+    Press of
+    G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS
+    New York
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS.
+
+
+                                                                    PAGE
+    WILLIAM PITT                                                       1
+
+    WILLIAM PITT                                                      19
+        ON HIS REFUSAL TO NEGOTIATE WITH NAPOLEON BONAPARTE; HOUSE
+          OF COMMONS, FEBRUARY 3, 1800.
+
+    CHARLES JAMES FOX                                                 99
+
+    CHARLES JAMES FOX                                                108
+        ON THE REJECTION OF NAPOLEON BONAPARTE’S OVERTURES OF
+          PEACE; HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEBRUARY 3, 1800.
+
+    SIR JAMES MACKINTOSH                                             176
+
+    SIR JAMES MACKINTOSH                                             185
+        IN BEHALF OF FREE SPEECH. ON THE TRIAL OF JEAN PELTIER,
+          ACCUSED OF LIBELLING NAPOLEON BONAPARTE; COURT OF
+          KING’S BENCH, FEBRUARY 21, 1803.
+
+    LORD ERSKINE                                                     262
+
+    LORD ERSKINE                                                     273
+        ON THE LIMITATIONS OF FREE SPEECH; DELIVERED IN 1797
+          ON THE TRIAL OF WILLIAMS FOR PUBLICATION OF PAINE’S
+          “AGE OF REASON.”
+
+
+
+
+WILLIAM PITT.
+
+
+The younger Pitt was the second son of Lord Chatham, and was seven
+years of age when his father in 1766 was admitted to the peerage. The
+boy’s earliest peculiarity was an absorbing ambition to become his
+father’s successor as the first orator of the day. His health, however,
+was so delicate as to cause the gravest apprehensions. Stanhope tells
+us that before he was fourteen “half of his time was lost through ill
+health,” and that his early life at Cambridge was “one long disease.”
+There is still extant a remarkable letter that reveals better than any
+thing else the fond hopes of the father and the physical discouragement
+as well as the mental aspirations of the son. Chatham wrote: “Though
+I indulge with inexpressible delight the thought of your returning
+health, I cannot help being a little in pain lest you should make more
+haste than good speed to be well. How happy the task, my noble, amiable
+boy, to caution you only against pursuing too much all those liberal
+and praiseworthy things, to which less happy natures are perpetually
+to be spurred and driven. I will not tease you with too long a lecture
+in favor of inaction and a competent stupidity, your two best tutors
+and companions at present. You have time to spare; consider, there
+is but the Encyclopædia, and when you have mastered that, what will
+remain?” The intimations of precocity here given were fully justified
+by the extraordinary progress made by the boy notwithstanding his
+bodily ailments. He entered the University of Cambridge at fourteen,
+and such was his scholarship at that time that his tutor wrote: “It is
+no uncommon thing for him to read into English six or eight pages of
+Thucydides which he had not previously seen, without more than two or
+three mistakes, and sometimes without even one.”
+
+At the university, where he remained nearly seven years, his course
+of study was carried on strictly in accordance with his father’s
+directions and was somewhat peculiar. His most ardent devotion was
+given to the classics; and his method was that to which his father
+always attributed the extraordinary copiousness and richness of his
+own language. After looking over a passage so as to become familiar
+with the author’s thought, he strove to render it rapidly into elegant
+and idiomatic English, with a view to reproducing it with perfect
+exactness and in the most felicitous form. This method he followed for
+years till, according to the testimony of his tutor, Dr. Prettyman,
+when he had reached the age of twenty, “there was scarcely a Greek or
+Latin writer of any eminence _the whole of whose works_ Mr. Pitt had
+not read to him in this thorough and discriminating manner.” This was
+the laborious way in which he acquired that extraordinary and perhaps
+unrivalled gift of pouring out for hour after hour an unbroken stream
+of thought without ever hesitating for a word or recalling a phrase
+or sinking into looseness or inaccuracy of expression. The finest
+passages even of the obscurer poets he copied with care and stored
+away in his memory; and thus he was also qualified for that aptness of
+quotation for which his oratory was always remarkable.
+
+With his classical studies Pitt united an unusual aptitude and
+fondness for the mathematics and for logic. To both of these he gave
+daily attention, and before he left the university, according to the
+authority above quoted, he was master in mathematics of every thing
+usually known by young men who obtain the highest academical honors.
+In logic, Aristotle was his master, and he early acquired the habit
+of applying the principles and methods of that great logician to a
+critical examination of all the works he studied and the debates he
+witnessed. It was probably this course of study which gave him his
+unrivalled power in reply. While still at Cambridge it was a favorite
+employment to compare the great speeches of antiquity in point of
+logical accuracy, and to point out the manner in which the reasoning
+of the orator could be met and answered. The same habit followed him
+to London and into Parliament. His biographers dwell upon the fact,
+that whenever he listened to a debate he was constantly employed in
+detecting illogical reasoning and in pointing out to those near him
+how this argument and that could easily be answered. Before he became
+a member of Parliament, he was in the habit of spending much time in
+London and in listening to the debates on the great subjects then
+agitating the nation. But the speeches of his father and of Burke, of
+Fox, and of Sheridan seemed to interest him chiefly as an exercise for
+his own improvement. His great effort was directed to the difficult
+process of retaining the long train of argument in his mind, of
+strengthening it, and of pointing out and refuting the positions that
+seemed to him weak.
+
+It would be incorrect to leave the impression that these severe courses
+of study were not intermingled with studies in English literature,
+rhetoric, and history. We are told that “he had the finest passages
+of Shakespeare by heart,” that “he read the best historians with
+care,” that “his favorite models of prose style were Middleton’s Life
+of Cicero, and the historical writings of Bolingbroke,” and that
+“on the advice of his father, for the sake of a copious diction, he
+made a careful study of the sermons of Dr. Barrow.” Making all due
+allowance for the exaggerative enthusiasm of biographers, we are still
+forced to the belief that no other person ever entered Parliament with
+acquirements and qualifications for a great career equal on the whole
+to those of the younger Pitt.
+
+The expectations formed of him were not disappointed. It has frequently
+happened that members of Parliament have attained to great and
+influential careers after the most signal failures as speakers in
+their early efforts. But no such failure awaited Pitt. He entered
+the House of Commons in 1781, at the age of twenty-two, and became a
+member of the opposition to Lord North, under the leadership of Burke
+and Fox. His first speech was in reply to Lord Nugent on the subject
+of economic reform, a matter that had been brought forward by Burke.
+Pitt had been asked to speak on the question; but, although he had
+hesitated in giving his answer, he had determined not to participate in
+the debate. His answer, however, was misunderstood, and therefore at
+the close of a speech by Lord Nugent, he was vociferously called upon
+by the Whig members of the House. Though taken by surprise, he finally
+yielded and with perfect self-possession began what was probably the
+most successful _first_ speech ever given in the House of Commons.
+Unfortunately it was not reported and has not been preserved. But
+contemporaneous accounts of the impression it made are abundant. Not
+only was it received with enthusiastic applause from every part of the
+House; but Burke greeted him with the declaration that he was “not
+merely a chip of the old block, but the old block itself.” When some
+one remarked that Pitt promised to be one of the first speakers ever
+heard in Parliament, Fox replied, “He is so already.” This was at the
+proudest era of British eloquence, and when Pitt was but twenty-two.
+
+During the session of 1781–82 the powers of Burke, Fox, and Pitt
+were united in a strenuous opposition to the administration of Lord
+North. After staggering under their blows for some weeks, the ministry
+fell, and Lord North was succeeded by Rockingham in February of 1782.
+Rockingham’s ministry, however, was terminated by the death of its
+chief after a short period of only thirteen weeks. Lord Shelburne
+was appointed his successor, and he chose Pitt as the Chancellor of
+the Exchequer and leader of the House of Commons. Thus Burke and
+Fox were passed by, and not only the responsible leadership of the
+Commons, but also the finances of the empire, were entrusted to a
+youth of twenty-three. The reason of this preference certainly was
+not an acknowledged pre-eminence of Pitt; but rather in the attitude
+he had assumed in the course of his attacks on the administration
+of North. He had not inveighed against the king, but had attached
+all the responsibility of mismanagement to the ministry, where the
+Constitution itself places it. Fox, on the other hand, had allowed
+himself to be carried forward by the impetuosity of his nature, and had
+placed the responsibility where we now know it belonged—upon George
+III. The consequence had been that the enraged king would not listen
+to the promotion of Fox, though by constitutional usage he was clearly
+entitled to recognition. That Fox was offended was not singular, but it
+is impossible even for his most ardent admirers to justify the course
+he now determined to take. He had been the most bitter opponent of
+Lord North. He had denounced him as “the most infamous of mankind,”
+and as “the greatest criminal of the state.” He had declared of his
+ministry: “From the moment I should make any terms with one of them, I
+should rest satisfied to be called the most infamous of mankind.” He
+had said only eleven months before: “I could not for a moment think of
+a coalition with men who, in every public and private transaction as
+ministers, have shown themselves void of every principle of honor and
+honesty.”[A] And yet, notwithstanding these philippics, which almost
+seem to have been delivered as if to make a coalition impossible, Fox
+now deserted his old political companions, and joined hands with the
+very object of his fiercest denunciation. The Coalition thus formed
+voted down the Shelburne ministry in February, 1783.
+
+    [A] Fox’s Speeches, II., 39.
+
+The debate which preceded the final vote was one of the most remarkable
+in English history. The subject immediately at issue was a vote of
+censure of Shelburne’s government for the terms of the treaty closing
+the American war. North assailed the treaty, as bringing disgrace upon
+the country by the concessions it had made. Fox spoke in the same
+strain, having reserved himself till the latter part of the night, with
+the evident purpose of overwhelming the young leader of the House by
+the force and severity of his presentation. But the moment he sat down,
+Pitt arose and grappled with the argument of his opponent in a speech
+that has seldom been surpassed in the history of parliamentary debate.
+Lord North spoke of its eloquence as “amazing,” and, although the
+Coalition was too strong to be broken, it made such an impression that
+there could no longer be any doubt that Pitt was now the foremost man
+of his party.
+
+In the course of the speech Pitt intimated that even if the vote of
+censure came to pass, the king might not feel called upon to accept
+the decision. He declared it an unnatural Coalition, which had simply
+raised a storm of faction, and which had no other object than the
+infliction of a wound on Lord Shelburne. Then in one of his impassioned
+strains he exclaimed: “If, however, the baneful alliance is not already
+formed,—if this ill-omened marriage is not already solemnized, I know
+a just and lawful impediment,—and in the name of the public safety, I
+here forbid the banns.”
+
+But all availed nothing. The vote of censure was passed, and
+Shelburne’s ministry tendered their resignation. The king hesitated.
+He was unwilling to bring the Coalition into power, because he had an
+insurmountable repugnance to Fox. He sent for Pitt, and urged him in
+the most pressing terms to accept the position of Prime-Minister. But
+Pitt, with that steadfast judgment which never deserted him, firmly
+rejected the flattering offer. The most he would consent to do was to
+remain in the office he then held till the succession could be fixed
+upon. The king was almost in despair; and thought seriously of retiring
+to Hanover. It was Thurlow that dissuaded him from taking so dangerous
+a step. “Nothing is easier than for your Majesty to go to his Electoral
+dominions;” said the old Chancellor, “but you may not find it so easy
+to return when you grow tired of staying there. James II. did the same;
+your Majesty must not follow his example.” He then assured the king
+that the Coalition was an unnatural one, and could not long remain
+in power without committing some fatal blunder. After six weeks the
+king reluctantly submitted, and appointed the Duke of Portland as the
+Prime-Minister, and North and Fox as the Chief Secretaries of State.
+
+The end came sooner than Thurlow had dared to anticipate. The Coalition
+ministry was formed on the second day of April, 1783. During the first
+week of the following session Fox brought forward his East India bill,
+which had for its object the entire remodelling of the government of
+the English domains in the East. The measure was in direct defiance of
+the wishes of the king. In view of the circumstances of Fox’s coalition
+with the Tories, it is not singular that many thought the scheme a
+desperate measure to intrench the Coalition so firmly in power that
+the king could not remove them. Pitt opposed the measure with great
+energy, and with so much skill that it soon became evident that he
+spoke the sentiments of the thinking men of the nation. The debate on
+the question lasted twelve days, and was closed by a masterly review
+of the question by Fox. The Coalition was so strong in the lower House
+that the final vote was 217 to 103 in favor of the measure.
+
+But in the House of Lords its fortune was different. At an interview
+with Lord Temple, a kinsman of Pitt’s, the king commissioned him to
+say to the members of the House “that whoever voted for the India bill
+were not only not his friends, but that he should consider them his
+enemies.” This message was widely but secretly circulated among the
+Lords. Thurlow denounced the bill in unqualified terms. Though the
+ministry fought for the measure as best they could, when the question
+came to a final issue, it was rejected by a vote of ninety-five to
+seventy-six. At twelve o’clock on the following night a messenger
+conveyed the orders of the king to the chief ministers to deliver up
+the seals of their offices, and to send them by the under secretaries,
+“as a personal interview on the occasion would be disagreeable to
+him.” The following day the other ministers were dismissed with like
+evidences of disfavor.
+
+Pitt now, on the 22d of December, 1783, became Prime-Minister at the
+age of twenty-four. The situation was one that put all his powers to
+the severest test. In the last decisive vote in the House of Commons
+the majority against him had been more than two to one. Fox was
+inflamed with all the indignation of which his good-nature was capable.
+He declared on the floor of the House that “to talk of the _permanency_
+of such an administration would be only laughing at and insulting
+them”; and he alluded to “the _youth_ of the Chancellor of the
+Exchequer and the weakness incident to his early period of life as the
+only possible excuse for his temerity.” And yet with such consummate
+tact did Pitt ward off the blows, and with such skill and power did
+he in turn advance to the assault, that the majority against him at
+once began to show signs of weakening. Fox threatened to cut off the
+supplies; whereupon Pitt met him with an unwavering defiance. Rapidly
+the majority went down till, on a test vote on the 8th of March, the
+opposition had only one majority. Pitt immediately decided to dissolve
+Parliament and appeal to the people. The result more than justified his
+determination. The question everywhere was “Fox or Pitt?” The cry “for
+Pitt and the King” carried the day by an overwhelming majority, and a
+complete revolution in the House of Commons was the result. More than a
+hundred and sixty of “Fox’s martyrs” lost their seats. The triumph was
+the most complete that any English minister ever obtained. It not only
+placed Pitt in power, but it gave him a predominance in authority that
+was only once interrupted in the course of more than twenty years.
+
+Within the next few years several subjects of national importance were
+brought forward by the ministry. But these are usually forgotten or
+regarded as insignificant when compared with the absorbing questions
+connected with the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars. It is
+as the leader and guide of what may be called the English policy in
+that memorable era that Pitt’s name will longest be remembered. Though
+that policy was not without strenuous opposition, it was carried
+consistently through to the end, and it was what contributed more
+than any thing else to break the power of Napoleon. It is for this
+reason that Pitt’s most elaborate speech on the policy of the English
+Government in relation to France is selected not only as a favorable
+specimen of his eloquence, but as having an influence of commanding
+importance on the stupendous affairs of the time. This speech is still
+the best exponent of the English view of the Napoleonic wars.
+
+Notwithstanding all his greatness, there was one weak point in Pitt’s
+line of policy. He made the mistake of constantly underestimating
+the power of the enthusiasm awakened by the revolutionary ideas in
+France. This was equivalent to attaching too low an estimate to the
+strength of the enemy. It was in consequence of this error that he
+formed coalition after coalition, only to see them all shattered by
+Napoleon and his enthusiastic followers. When his last great coalition
+was broken by the battle of Austerlitz the blow was too much for his
+declining health; and, worn out with toil and anxiety, he sank rapidly,
+and expired on the 26th of January, 1806.
+
+It is the judgment of Alison that “Considered with reference to
+the general principles by which his conduct was regulated, and the
+constancy with which he maintained them through adverse fortune, the
+history of Europe has not so great a statesman to exhibit.”
+
+
+
+
+WILLIAM PITT.
+
+ON HIS REFUSAL TO NEGOTIATE WITH NAPOLEON BONAPARTE. HOUSE OF COMMONS,
+FEBRUARY 3, 1800.
+
+
+  On the day after Bonaparte was inaugurated as First Consul of
+  France, December 25, 1799, he addressed a personal letter to the
+  King of England, asking for peace. The English Government, however,
+  entertained a keen resentment at what they regarded the evasive
+  and insulting conduct of the French Directory during the last
+  negotiations. Accordingly, the reply of Lord Grenville, then Minister
+  of Foreign Affairs, rejected the proposed opening of negotiations
+  for peace. The Government justified its attitude by referring to the
+  course of the French during the war. It declared that its beginning
+  had been an “unprovoked attack” on the part of the French, that the
+  “system” which inspired the war “continued to prevail,” that England
+  could present “no defence but that of open and steady hostility” to
+  the system, that “the best and most natural pledge of the reality and
+  permanence of peace” had been rejected by the French, that although
+  the English “did not claim to prescribe to France what shall be her
+  form of government” yet they desired security for future peace, and
+  that “unhappily no such security hitherto exists, no sufficient
+  evidence of the principles by which the new government will be
+  directed, no reasonable ground by which to judge of its stability.”
+  To this letter Talleyrand wrote a spirited reply; and Lord Grenville
+  closed the correspondence with a reaffirmation of his Government’s
+  former position.
+
+  The correspondence was called for, and was placed before the Commons
+  on the 3d of February, 1800. Mr. Dundas immediately proposed an
+  Address to the Throne approving of the course taken by the ministry.
+  This opened the whole subject of the attitude of England toward
+  Napoleon for debate. Whitbred, Canning, and Erskine complained in
+  strong terms of the discourteous language used by Lord Grenville.
+  Pitt made no defence on this point, but took up the subject on the
+  broadest scale. He reviewed not only the origin of the war, but also
+  the atrocities of the French in overrunning a large part of Europe,
+  the instability of the successive French governments, his own motives
+  in treating with the French on a former occasion, and the character
+  of Bonaparte as a military commander. The speech is at once the most
+  important and the most elaborate ever delivered by Pitt. It expressed
+  and defined the policy of the nation in the great struggle which as
+  yet had only begun. As a parliamentary oration, designed at once to
+  inform and inspire, it has probably never been surpassed.
+
+
+SIR,—I am induced, at this period of the debate, to offer my sentiments
+to the House, both from an apprehension that at a later hour the
+attention of the House must necessarily be exhausted, and because
+the sentiment with which the honorable and learned gentleman [Mr.
+Erskine] began his speech, and with which he has thought proper to
+conclude it, places the question precisely on that ground on which I
+am most desirous of discussing it. The learned gentleman seems to
+assume as the foundation of his reasoning, and as the great argument
+for immediate treaty, that every effort to overturn the system of the
+French Revolution must be unavailing; and that it would be not only
+imprudent, but almost impious, to struggle longer against that order
+of things which, on I know not what principle of predestination, he
+appears to consider as immortal. Little as I am inclined to accede
+to this opinion, I am not sorry that the honorable gentleman has
+contemplated the subject in this serious view. I do, indeed, consider
+the French Revolution as the severest trial which the visitation of
+Providence has ever yet inflicted upon the nations of the earth; but
+I cannot help reflecting, with satisfaction, that this country, even
+under such a trial, has not only been exempted from those calamities
+which have covered almost every other part of Europe, but appears
+to have been reserved as a refuge and asylum to those who fled from
+its persecution, as a barrier to oppose its progress, and perhaps
+ultimately as an instrument to deliver the world from the crimes and
+miseries which have attended it.
+
+Under this impression, I trust the House will forgive me, if I
+endeavor, as far as I am able, to take a large and comprehensive view
+of this important question. In doing so, I agree with my honorable
+friend [Mr. Canning] that it would, in any case, be impossible to
+separate the present discussion from the former crimes and atrocities
+of the French Revolution; because both the papers now on the table,
+and the whole of the learned gentleman’s argument, force upon our
+consideration the origin of the war, and all the material facts which
+have occurred during its continuance. The learned gentleman [Mr.
+Erskine] has revived and retailed all those arguments from his own
+pamphlet, which had before passed through thirty-seven or thirty-eight
+editions in print, and now gives them to the House embellished by the
+graces of his personal delivery. The First Consul has also thought fit
+to revive and retail the chief arguments used by all the opposition
+speakers and all the opposition publishers in this country during
+the last seven years. And (what is still more material) the question
+itself, which is now immediately at issue—the question whether, under
+the present circumstances, there is such a prospect of security from
+any treaty with France as ought to induce us to negotiate, can not be
+properly decided upon without retracing, both from our own experience
+and from that of other nations, the nature, the causes, and the
+magnitude of the danger against which we have to guard, in order to
+judge of the security which we ought to accept.
+
+I say, then, that before any man can concur in opinion with that
+learned gentleman; before any man can think that the substance of his
+Majesty’s answer is any other than the safety of the country required;
+before any man can be of opinion that, to the overtures made by the
+enemy, at such a time and under such circumstances, it would have been
+safe to return an answer concurring in the negotiation—he must come
+within one of the three following descriptions: He must either believe
+that the French Revolution neither does now exhibit nor has at any time
+exhibited such circumstances of danger, arising out of the very nature
+of the system, and the internal state and condition of France, as to
+leave to foreign powers no adequate ground of security in negotiation;
+or, secondly, he must be of opinion that the change which has recently
+taken place has given that security which, in the former stages of the
+Revolution, was wanting; or, thirdly, he must be one who, believing
+that the danger exists, not undervaluing its extent nor mistaking its
+nature, nevertheless thinks, from his view of the present pressure on
+the country, from his view of its situation and its prospects, compared
+with the situation and prospects of its enemies, that we are, with our
+eyes open, bound to accept of inadequate security for every thing that
+is valuable and sacred, rather than endure the pressure, or incur the
+risk which would result from a farther prolongation of the contest.[1]
+
+In discussing the last of these questions, we shall be led to consider
+what inference is to be drawn from the circumstances and the result
+of our own negotiations in former periods of the war; whether, in the
+comparative state of this country and France, we now see the same
+reason for repeating our then unsuccessful experiments; or whether
+we have not thence derived the lessons of experience, added to the
+deductions of reason, marking the inefficacy and danger of the very
+measures which are quoted to us as precedents for our adoption.
+
+Unwilling, sir, as I am to go into much detail on ground which has been
+so often trodden before; yet, when I find the learned gentleman, after
+all the information which he must have received, if he has read any of
+the answers to his work (however ignorant he might be when he wrote
+it), still giving the sanction of his authority to the supposition that
+the order to M. Chauvelin [French minister] to depart from this kingdom
+was the cause of the war between this country and France, I do feel it
+necessary to say a few words on that part of the subject.
+
+Inaccuracy in dates seems to be a sort of fatality common to all who
+have written on that side of the question; for even the writer of the
+note to his Majesty is not more correct, in this respect, than if
+he had taken his information only from the pamphlet of the learned
+gentleman. The House will recollect the first professions of the French
+Republic, which are enumerated, and enumerated truly, in that note.
+They are tests of every thing which would best recommend a government
+to the esteem and confidence of foreign powers, and the reverse of
+every thing which has been the system and practice of France now for
+near ten years. It is there stated that their first principles were
+love of peace, aversion to conquest, and respect for the independence
+of other countries. In the same note it seems, indeed, admitted that
+they since have violated all those principles; but it is alleged that
+they have done so only in consequence of the provocation of other
+powers. One of the first of those provocations is stated to have
+consisted in the various outrages offered to their ministers, of which
+the example is said to have been set by the King of Great Britain in
+his conduct to M. Chauvelin. In answer to this supposition, it is only
+necessary to remark, that before the example was given, before Austria
+and Prussia are supposed to have been thus encouraged to combine in
+a plan for the partition of France, that plan, if it ever existed at
+all, had existed and been acted upon for above eight months. France
+and Prussia had been at war eight months before the dismissal of M.
+Chauvelin. So much for the accuracy of the statement.
+
+I have been hitherto commenting on the arguments contained in the
+Notes. I come now to those of the learned gentleman. I understand him
+to say that the dismissal of M. Chauvelin was the real cause, I do not
+say of the general war, but of the rupture between France and England;
+and the learned gentleman states particularly that this dismissal
+rendered all discussion of the points in dispute impossible. Now I
+desire to meet distinctly every part of this assertion. I maintain,
+on the contrary, that an opportunity was given for discussing every
+matter in dispute between France and Great Britain as fully as if a
+regular and accredited French minister had been resident here; that
+the causes of war which existed at the beginning, or arose during the
+course of this discussion, were such as would have justified, twenty
+times over, a declaration of war on the part of this country; that all
+the explanations on the part of France were evidently unsatisfactory
+and inadmissible, and that M. Chauvelin had given in a peremptory
+ultimatum, declaring that if these explanations were not received as
+sufficient, and if we did not immediately disarm, our refusal would
+be considered as a declaration of war. After this followed that scene
+which no man can even now speak of without horror, or think of without
+indignation; that murder and regicide from which I was sorry to hear
+the learned gentleman date the beginning of the legal government of
+France.
+
+Having thus given in their ultimatum, they added, as a further
+demand (while we were smarting under accumulated injuries, for which
+all satisfaction was denied) that we should instantly receive M.
+Chauvelin as their embassador, with new credentials, representing
+them in the character which they had just derived from the murder of
+their sovereign. We replied, “he came here as the representative of
+a sovereign whom you have put to a cruel and illegal death; we have
+no satisfaction for the injuries we have received, no security from
+the danger with which we are threatened. Under these circumstances we
+will not receive your new credentials. The former credentials you have
+yourself recalled by the sacrifice of your King.”
+
+What, from that moment, was the situation of M. Chauvelin? He was
+reduced to the situation of a private individual, and was required
+to quit the kingdom under the provisions of the Alien Act, which,
+for the purpose of securing domestic tranquillity, had recently
+invested his Majesty with the power of removing out of this kingdom
+all foreigners suspected of revolutionary principles. Is it contended
+that he was then less liable to the provisions of that act than any
+other individual foreigner, whose conduct afforded to government just
+ground of objection or suspicion? Did his conduct and connections here
+afford no such ground? or will it be pretended that the bare act of
+refusing to receive fresh credentials from an infant republic, not
+then acknowledged by any one power of Europe, and in the very act of
+heaping upon us injuries and insults, was of itself a cause of war?
+So far from it, that even the very nations of Europe whose wisdom and
+moderation have been repeatedly extolled for maintaining neutrality,
+and preserving friendship with the French Republic, remained for years
+subsequent to this period without receiving from it any accredited
+minister, or doing any one act to acknowledge its political existence.
+
+In answer to a representation from the belligerent powers, in December,
+1793, Count Bernstorff, the minister of Denmark, officially declared
+that “it was well known that the National Convention had appointed
+M. Grouville Minister Plenipotentiary at Denmark, but that it was
+also well known that he had neither been received nor acknowledged
+in that quality.” And as late as February, 1796, when the same
+minister was at length, for the first time, received in his official
+capacity, Count Bernstorff, in a public note, assigned this reason
+for that change of conduct: “So long as no other than a revolutionary
+government existed in France, his Majesty _could_ not acknowledge the
+minister of that government; but now that the French Constitution is
+completely organized, and a regular government established in France,
+his Majesty’s obligation ceases in that respect, and M. Grouville will
+therefore be acknowledged in the usual form.” How far the Court of
+Denmark was justified in the opinion that a revolutionary government
+then no longer existed in France it is not now necessary to inquire;
+but whatever may have been the fact in that respect, the _principle_ on
+which they acted is clear and intelligible, and is a decisive instance
+in favor of the proposition which I have maintained.
+
+Is it, then, necessary to examine what were the terms of that ultimatum
+with which we refused to comply? Acts of hostility had been openly
+threatened against our allies; a hostility founded upon the assumption
+of a right which would at once supersede the whole law of nations. The
+pretended right to open the Scheldt we discussed at the time, not so
+much on account of its immediate importance (though it was important
+both in a maritime and commercial view) as on account of the general
+principle on which it was founded.[2] On the same arbitrary notion they
+soon afterward discovered that sacred law of nature which made the
+Rhine and the Alps the legitimate boundaries of France, and assumed
+the power, which they have affected to exercise through the whole
+of the Revolution, of superseding, by a new code of their own, all
+the recognized principles of the law of nations. They were, in fact,
+actually advancing toward the republic of Holland, by rapid strides,
+after the victory of Jemappes and they had ordered their generals to
+pursue the Austrian troops into any neutral country, thereby explicitly
+avowing an intention of invading Holland. They had already shown their
+moderation and self-denial by incorporating Belgium with the French
+Republic. These lovers of peace, who set out with a sworn aversion to
+conquest, and professions of respect for the independence of other
+nations; who pretend that they departed from this system only in
+consequence of your aggression, themselves, in time of peace, while
+you were still confessedly neutral, without the pretence or shadow
+of provocation, wrested Savoy from the King of Sardinia, and had
+proceeded to incorporate it likewise with France.[3] These were their
+aggressions at this period, and more than these. They had issued a
+universal declaration of war against all the thrones of Europe, and
+they had, by their conduct, applied it particularly and specifically
+to you. They had passed the decree of the 19th of November, 1792,
+proclaiming the promise of French succor to all nations who should
+manifest a wish to become free; they had, by all their language as
+well as their example, shown what they understood to be freedom; they
+had sealed their principles by the deposition of their sovereign; they
+had applied them to England by inviting and encouraging the addresses
+of those seditious and traitorous societies, who, from the beginning,
+favored their views, and who, encouraged by your forbearance, were even
+then publicly avowing French doctrines, and anticipating their success
+in this country—who were hailing the progress of those proceedings in
+France which led to the murder of its king; they were even then looking
+to the day when they should behold a National Convention in England
+formed upon similar principles.[4]
+
+And what were the explanations they offered on these different
+grounds of offence? As to Holland: they told you the Scheldt was too
+insignificant for you to trouble yourselves about, and therefore it was
+to be decided as they chose, in breach of positive treaty, which they
+had themselves guaranteed, and which we, by our alliance, were bound
+to support. If, however, after the war was over, Belgium should have
+consolidated its liberty (a term of which we now know the meaning, from
+the fate of every nation into which the arms of France have penetrated)
+then Belgium and Holland might, if they pleased, settle the question of
+the Scheldt by separate negotiation between themselves. With respect
+to aggrandizement, they assured us that they would retain possession
+of Belgium by arms no longer than they should find it necessary to
+the purpose already stated, of consolidating its liberty. And with
+respect to the decree of the 19th of November, 1792, applied as it was
+pointedly to you, by all the intercourse I have stated with all the
+seditious and traitorous part of this country, and particularly by the
+speeches of every leading man among them, they contented themselves
+with asserting that the declaration conveyed no such meaning as was
+imputed to it, and that, so far from encouraging sedition, it could
+apply only to countries where a great majority of the people should
+have already declared itself in favor of a revolution: a supposition
+which, as they asserted, necessarily implied a total absence of all
+sedition.
+
+What would have been the effect of admitting this explanation? to
+suffer a nation, and an armed nation, to preach to the inhabitants of
+all the countries in the world that they themselves were slaves and
+their rulers tyrants; to encourage and invite them to revolution by
+a previous promise of French support to whatever might call itself a
+majority, or to whatever France might declare to be so. This was their
+explanation; and this, they told you, was their ultimatum.
+
+But was this all? Even at that very moment, when they were endeavoring
+to induce you to admit these explanations, to be contented with the
+avowal that France offered herself as a general guaranty for every
+successful revolution, and would interfere only to sanction and
+confirm whatever the free and uninfluenced choice of the people might
+have decided, what were their orders to their generals on the same
+subject? In the midst of these amicable explanations with you came
+forth a decree which I really believe must be effaced from the minds
+of gentlemen opposite to me, if they can prevail upon themselves for
+a moment to hint even a doubt upon the origin of this quarrel, not
+only as to this country, but as to all the nations of Europe with whom
+France has been subsequently engaged in hostility. I speak of the
+decree of the 15th of December, 1792. This decree, more even than all
+the previous transactions, amounted to a universal declaration of war
+against all thrones, and against all civilized governments. It said,
+wherever the armies of France shall come (whether within countries then
+at war or at peace is not distinguished) in all those countries it
+shall be the first care of their generals to introduce the principles
+and the practice of the French Revolution; to demolish all privileged
+orders, and every thing which obstructs the establishment of their new
+system.[5]
+
+If any doubt is entertained whither the armies of France were intended
+to come; if it is contended that they referred only to those nations
+with whom they were then at war, or with whom, in the course of this
+contest, they might be driven into war; let it be remembered that at
+this very moment they had actually given orders to their generals to
+pursue the Austrian army from the Netherlands into Holland, with whom
+they were at that time in peace. Or, even if the construction contended
+for is admitted, let us see what would have been its application, let
+us look at the list of their aggressions, which was read by my right
+honorable friend [Mr. Dundas] near me. With whom have they been at war
+since the period of this declaration? With all the nations of Europe
+save two (Sweden and Denmark), and if not with these two, it is only
+because, with every provocation that could justify defensive war, those
+countries have hitherto acquiesced in repeated violations of their
+rights rather than recur to war for their vindication. Wherever their
+arms have been carried it will be a matter of short subsequent inquiry
+to trace whether they have faithfully applied these principles. If in
+_terms_ this decree is a denunciation of war against all governments;
+if in _practice_ it has been applied against every one with which
+France has come into contact; what is it but the deliberate code of
+the French Revolution, from the birth of the Republic, which has never
+once been departed from, which has been enforced with unremitted rigor
+against all the nations that have come into their power?
+
+If there could otherwise be any doubt whether the application of this
+decree was intended to be universal, whether it applied to all nations,
+and to England particularly; there is one circumstance which alone
+would be decisive—that nearly at the same period it was proposed [by
+M. Baraillon], in the National Convention, to declare expressly that
+the decree of November 19th was confined to the nations with whom
+they were _then_ at war; and that proposal was _rejected_ by a great
+majority, by that very Convention from whom we were desired to receive
+these explanations as satisfactory.
+
+Such, sir, was the nature of the system. Let us examine a little
+farther, whether it was from the beginning intended to be acted upon
+in the extent which I have stated. At the very moment when their
+threats appeared to many little else than the ravings of madmen, they
+were digesting and methodizing the means of execution, as accurately
+as if they had actually foreseen the extent to which they have since
+been able to realize their criminal projects. They sat down coolly to
+devise the most regular and effectual mode of making the application
+of this system the current business of the day, and incorporating it
+with the general orders of their army; for (will the House believe it!)
+this confirmation of the decree of November 19th was accompanied by an
+exposition and commentary addressed to the general of every army of
+France, containing a schedule as coolly conceived, and as methodically
+reduced, as any by which the most quiet business of a justice of peace,
+or the most regular routine of any department of state in this country
+could be conducted. Each commander was furnished with one general
+blank formula of a letter for all the nations of the world! The people
+of France to the people of ——, Greeting, “We are come to expel your
+tyrants.” Even this was not all; one of the articles of the decree of
+the fifteenth of December was expressly, “that those who should show
+themselves so brutish and so enamored of their chains as to refuse
+the restoration of their rights, to renounce liberty and equality, or
+to preserve, recall, or treat with their prince or privileged orders,
+were not entitled to the distinction which France, in other cases,
+had justly established between government and people; and that such
+a people ought to be treated according to the rigor of war, and of
+conquest.” Here is their love of peace; here is their aversion to
+conquest; here is their respect for the independence of other nations!
+
+It was then, after receiving such explanations as these, after
+receiving the ultimatum of France, and after M. Chauvelin’s
+credentials had ceased, that he was required to depart. Even at that
+period, I am almost ashamed to record it, we did not on our part shut
+the door against other attempts to negotiate, but this transaction
+was immediately followed by the declaration of war, proceeding not
+from England in vindication of her rights, but from France, as the
+completion of the injuries and insults they had offered. And on a war
+thus originating, can it be doubted by an English House of Commons
+whether the aggression was on the part of this country or of France?
+or whether the manifest aggression on the part of France was the
+result of any thing but the principles which characterize the French
+Revolution?[6] * * *
+
+I will enlarge no farther on the origin of the war. I have read and
+detailed to you a system which was in itself a declaration of war
+against all nations, which was so intended, and which has been so
+applied, which has been exemplified in the extreme peril and hazard
+of almost all who for a moment have trusted to treaty, and which has
+not at this hour overwhelmed Europe in one indiscriminate mass of
+ruin, only because we have not indulged, to a fatal extremity, that
+disposition which we have, however, indulged too far; because we have
+not consented to trust to profession and compromise, rather than to our
+own valor and exertion, for security against a system from which we
+never shall be delivered till either the principle is extinguished, or
+till its strength is exhausted.
+
+I might, sir, if I found it necessary, enter into much detail upon
+this part of the subject; but at present I only beg leave to express
+my readiness at any time to enter upon it, when either my own strength
+or the patience of the House will admit of it; but I say, without
+distinction, against every nation in Europe, and against some out of
+Europe, the principle has been faithfully applied. You cannot look at
+the map of Europe, and lay your hand upon that country against which
+France has not either declared an open and aggressive war, or violated
+some positive treaty, or broken some recognized principle of the law of
+nations.
+
+This subject may be divided into various periods. There were some
+acts of hostility committed previous to the war with this country,
+and very little, indeed, subsequent to that declaration, which
+abjured the love of conquest. The attack upon the papal state, by
+the seizure of Avignon, in 1791, was accompanied with specimens of
+all the vile arts and perfidy that ever disgraced a revolution.
+Avignon was separated from its lawful sovereign, with whom not even
+the pretence of quarrel existed, and forcibly incorporated in the
+tyranny of one and indivisible France.[7] The same system led, in the
+same year, to an aggression against the whole German Empire, by the
+seizure of Porentrui, part of the dominions of the Bishop of Basle.
+Afterward, in 1792, unpreceded by any declaration of war, or any
+cause of hostility,[8] and in direct violation of the solemn pledge
+to abstain from conquest, they made war against the King of Sardinia,
+by the seizure of Savoy, for the purpose of incorporating it, in like
+manner, with France. In the same year, they had proceeded to the
+declaration of war against Austria, against Prussia, and against the
+German Empire, in which they have been justified only on the ground
+of a rooted hostility, combination, and league of sovereigns, for the
+dismemberment of France. I say that some of the documents brought to
+support this pretence are spurious and false. I say that even in those
+that are not so, there is not one word to prove the charge principally
+relied upon, that of an intention to effect the dismemberment of
+France, or to impose upon it, by force, any particular constitution.
+I say that, as far as we have been able to trace what passed at
+Pilnitz, the declaration there signed referred to the imprisonment of
+Louis XVI.; its immediate view was to effect his deliverance, if a
+concert sufficiently extensive could be formed with other sovereigns
+for that purpose. It left the internal state of France to be decided
+by the king restored to his liberty, with the free consent of the
+states of his kingdom, and it did not contain one word relative to the
+_dismemberment_ of France.[9]
+
+In the subsequent discussions, which took place in 1792, and which
+embraced at the same time all the other points of jealousy which had
+arisen between the two countries, the Declaration of Pilnitz was
+referred to, and explained on the part of Austria in a manner precisely
+conformable to what I have now stated. The amicable explanations which
+took place, both on this subject and on all the matters in dispute,
+will be found in the official correspondence between the two courts
+which has been made public; and it will be found, also, that as long as
+the negotiation continued to be conducted through M. Delessart, then
+Minister for Foreign Affairs, there was a great prospect that those
+discussions would be amicably terminated; but it is notorious, and has
+since been clearly proved on the authority of Brissot himself, that the
+violent party in France considered such an issue of the negotiation
+as likely to be fatal to their projects, and thought, to use his own
+words, that “war was necessary to consolidate the Revolution.” For the
+express purpose of producing the war, they excited a popular tumult in
+Paris; they insisted upon and obtained the dismissal of M. Delessart. A
+new minister was appointed in his room, the tone of the negotiation was
+immediately changed, and an ultimatum was sent to the Emperor, similar
+to that which was afterward sent to this country, affording him no
+satisfaction on his just grounds of complaint, and requiring him, under
+those circumstances, to disarm. The first events of the contest proved
+how much more France was prepared for war than Austria, and afford
+a strong confirmation of the proposition which I maintain, that no
+offensive intention was entertained on the part of the latter power.
+
+War was then declared against Austria, a war which I state to be a war
+of aggression on the part of France. The King of Prussia had declared
+that he should consider war against the Emperor or empire as war
+against himself. He had declared that, as a coestate of the empire, he
+was determined to defend their rights; that, as an ally of the Emperor,
+he would support him to the utmost against any attack; and that, for
+the sake of his own dominions, he felt himself called upon to resist
+the progress of French principles, and to maintain the balance of power
+in Europe. With this notice before them, France declared war upon the
+Emperor, and the war with Prussia was the necessary consequence of this
+aggression, both against the Emperor and the empire.
+
+The war against the King of Sardinia follows next. The declaration
+of that war was the seizure of Savoy by an invading army—and on what
+ground? On that which has been stated already. They had found out, by
+some light of nature, that the Rhine and the Alps were the natural
+limits of France. Upon that ground Savoy was seized; and Savoy was also
+incorporated with France.
+
+Here finishes the history of the wars in which France was engaged
+antecedent to the war with Great Britain, with Holland, and with
+Spain. With respect to Spain, we have seen nothing which leads
+us to suspect that either attachment to religion, or the ties of
+consanguinity, or regard to the ancient system of Europe, was likely to
+induce that court to connect itself in offensive war against France.
+The war was evidently and incontestably begun by France against Spain.
+
+The case of Holland is so fresh in every man’s recollection, and so
+connected with the immediate causes of the war with this country, that
+it cannot require one word of observation. What shall I say, then, on
+the case of Portugal? I cannot, indeed, say that France ever declared
+war against that country. I can hardly say even that she ever made
+war, but she required them to make a treaty of peace, as if they had
+been at war; she obliged them to purchase that treaty; she broke it as
+soon as it was purchased; and she had originally no other ground of
+complaint than this, that Portugal had performed, though inadequately,
+the engagements of its ancient defensive alliance with this country in
+the character of an auxiliary—a conduct which cannot of itself make any
+power a principal in a war.
+
+I have now enumerated all the nations at war at that period, with the
+exception only of Naples. It can hardly be necessary to call to the
+recollection of the House the characteristic feature of revolutionary
+principles which was shown, even at this early period, in the personal
+insult offered to the King of Naples, by the commander of a French
+squadron riding uncontrolled in the Mediterranean, and (while our
+fleets were yet unarmed) threatening destruction to all the coast of
+Italy.
+
+It was not till a considerably later period that almost all the
+other nations of Europe found themselves equally involved in actual
+hostility; but it is not a little material to the whole of my argument,
+compared with the statement of the learned gentleman, and with that
+contained in the French note, to examine at what period this hostility
+extended itself. It extended itself, in the course of 1796, to the
+States of Italy which had hitherto been exempted from it. In 1797
+it had ended in the destruction of most of them; it had ended in
+the virtual deposition of the King of Sardinia; it had ended in the
+conversion of Genoa and Tuscany into democratic republics; it had ended
+in the revolution of Venice, in the violation of treaties with the new
+Venetian Republic; and, finally, in transferring that very republic,
+the creature and vassal of France, to the dominion of Austria. * * *
+
+Let these facts and these dates be compared with what we have heard.
+The honorable gentleman has told us, and the author of the note from
+France has told us also, that all the French conquests were produced
+by the operations of the allies. It was, when they were pressed on
+all sides, when their own territory was in danger, when their own
+independence was in question, when the confederacy appeared too strong,
+it was then they used the means with which their power and their
+courage furnished them, and, “attacked upon all sides, they carried
+everywhere their defensive arms.”[10] * * *
+
+Let us look at the conduct of France immediately subsequent to this
+period. She had spurned at the offers of Great Britain; she had
+reduced her continental enemies to the necessity of accepting a
+precarious peace; she had (in spite of those pledges repeatedly made
+and uniformly violated) surrounded herself by new conquests on every
+part of her frontier but one. That one was Switzerland. The first
+effect of being relieved from the war with Austria, of being secured
+against all fears of continental invasion on the ancient territory
+of France, was their unprovoked attack against this unoffending and
+devoted country. This was one of the scenes which satisfied even those
+who were the most incredulous that France had thrown off the mask,
+“_if indeed she had ever worn it_.” It collected, in one view, many
+of the characteristic features of that revolutionary system which I
+have endeavored to trace—the perfidy which alone rendered their arms
+successful—the pretexts of which they availed themselves to produce
+division and prepare the entrance of Jacobinism in that country—the
+proposal of armistice, one of the known and regular engines of the
+Revolution, which was, as usual, the immediate prelude to military
+execution, attended with cruelty and barbarity, of which there are few
+examples. All these are known to the world. The country they attacked
+was one which had long been the faithful ally of France, which, instead
+of giving cause of jealousy to any other power, had been for ages
+proverbial for the simplicity and innocence of its manners, and which
+had acquired and preserved the esteem of all the nations of Europe;
+which had almost, by the common consent of mankind, been exempted
+from the sound of war, and marked out as a land of Goshen, safe and
+untouched in the midst of surrounding calamities.
+
+Look, then, at the fate of Switzerland, at the circumstances which led
+to its destruction. Add this instance to the catalogue of aggression
+against all Europe, and then tell me whether the system I have
+described has not been prosecuted with an unrelenting spirit, which can
+not be subdued in adversity, which cannot be appeased in prosperity,
+which neither solemn professions, nor the general law of nations, nor
+the obligation of treaties (whether previous to the Revolution or
+subsequent to it) could restrain from the subversion of every state
+into which, either by force or fraud, their arms could penetrate.
+Then tell me, whether the disasters of Europe are to be charged upon
+the provocation of this country and its allies, or on the inherent
+principle of the French Revolution, of which the natural result
+produced so much misery and carnage in France, and carried desolation
+and terror over so large a portion of the world.
+
+Sir, much as I have now stated, I have not finished the catalogue.
+America, almost as much as Switzerland, perhaps, contributed to that
+change which has taken place in the minds of those who were originally
+partial to the principles of the French Government. The hostility
+against America followed a long course of neutrality adhered to under
+the strongest provocations, or rather of repeated compliances to
+France, with which we might well have been dissatisfied. It was on the
+face of it unjust and wanton; and it was accompanied by those instances
+of sordid corruption which shocked and disgusted even the enthusiastic
+admirers of revolutionary purity, and threw a new light on the genius
+of revolutionary government.[11]
+
+After this, it remains only shortly to remind gentlemen of the
+aggression against Egypt, not omitting, however, to notice the capture
+of Malta in the way to Egypt. Inconsiderable as that island may
+be thought, compared with the scenes we have witnessed, let it be
+remembered that it is an island of which the government had long been
+recognized by every state of Europe, against which France pretended
+no cause of war, and whose independence was as dear to itself and
+as sacred as that of any country in Europe. It was in fact not
+unimportant, from its local situation to the other powers of Europe;
+but in proportion as any man may diminish its importance, the instance
+will only serve the more to illustrate and confirm the proposition
+which I have maintained. The all-searching eye of the French Revolution
+looks to every part of Europe, and every quarter of the world, in
+which can be found an object either of acquisition or plunder. Nothing
+is too great for the temerity of its ambition, nothing too small or
+insignificant for the grasp of its rapacity. From hence Bonaparte and
+his army proceeded to Egypt. The attack was made, pretences were held
+out to the natives of that country in the name of the French King,
+whom they had murdered. They pretended to have the approbation of the
+Grand Seignior, whose territories they were violating; their project
+was carried on under the profession of a zeal for Mohammedanism; it
+was carried on by proclaiming that France had been reconciled to the
+Mussulman faith, had abjured that of Christianity, or, as he in his
+impious language termed it, of _the sect of the Messiah_.[12]
+
+The only plea which they have since held out to color this atrocious
+invasion of a neutral and friendly territory, is that it was the road
+to attack the English power in India. It is most unquestionably true
+that this was one and a principal cause of this unparalleled outrage;
+but another, and an equally substantial, cause (as appears by their own
+statements) was the division and partition of the territories of what
+they thought a falling power. It is impossible to dismiss this subject
+without observing that this attack against Egypt was accompanied
+by an attack upon the British possessions in India, made on true
+revolutionary principles. In Europe the propagation of the principles
+of France had uniformly prepared the way for the progress of its arms.
+To India the lovers of peace had sent the messengers of Jacobinism,
+for the purpose of inculcating war in those distant regions on Jacobin
+principles, and of forming Jacobin clubs, which they actually succeeded
+in establishing; and which in most respects resembled the European
+model, but which were distinguished by this peculiarity, that they were
+required to swear in one breath hatred to tyranny, the love of liberty,
+and the destruction of all kings and sovereigns, except the good and
+faithful ally of the French Republic, _Citizen_ Tippoo![13]
+
+What, then, was the nature of this system? Was it any thing but what
+I have stated it to be? an insatiable love of aggrandizement, an
+implacable spirit of destruction against all the civil and religious
+institutions of every country. This is the first moving and acting
+spirit of the French Revolution; this is the spirit which animated it
+at its birth, and this is the spirit which will not desert it till
+the moment of its dissolution, “which grew with its growth, which
+strengthened with its strength,” but which has not abated under its
+misfortunes, nor declined in its decay. It has been invariably the
+same in every period, operating more or less, according as accident
+or circumstances might assist it; but it has been inherent in the
+Revolution in all its stages; it has equally belonged to Brissot, to
+Robespierre, to Tallien, to Reubel, to Barras, and to every one of the
+leaders of the Directory, but to none more than to Bonaparte, in whom
+now all their powers are united. What are its characters? Can it be
+accident that produced them? No, it is only from the alliance of the
+most horrid principles, with the most horrid means, that such miseries
+could have been brought upon Europe. It is this paradox which we must
+always keep in mind when we are discussing any question relative to
+the effects of the French Revolution. Groaning under every degree of
+misery, the victim of its own crimes, and as I once before expressed
+in this House, asking pardon of God and of man for the miseries which
+it has brought upon itself and others, France still retains (while it
+has neither left means of comfort nor almost of subsistence to its own
+inhabitants) new and unexampled means of annoyance and destruction
+against all the other powers of Europe.
+
+Its first fundamental principle was to bribe the poor against the
+rich by proposing to transfer into new hands, on the delusive notion
+of equality, and in breach of every principle of justice, the whole
+property of the country. The practical application of this principle
+was to devote the whole of that property to indiscriminate plunder,
+and to make it the foundation of a revolutionary system of finance,
+productive in proportion to the misery and desolation which it created.
+It has been accompanied by an unwearied spirit of proselytism,
+diffusing itself over all the nations of the earth; a spirit which can
+apply itself to all circumstances and all situations, which can furnish
+a list of grievances and hold out a promise of redress equally to all
+nations; which inspired the teachers of French liberty with the hope of
+alike recommending themselves to those who live under the feudal code
+of the German Empire; to the various states of Italy, under all their
+different institutions; to the old republicans of Holland, and to the
+new republicans of America; to the Catholic of Ireland, whom it was to
+deliver from Protestant usurpation; to the Protestant of Switzerland,
+whom it was to deliver from Popish superstition; and to the Mussulman
+of Egypt, whom it was to deliver from Christian persecution; to the
+remote Indian, blindly bigoted to his ancient institutions; and to the
+natives of Great Britain, enjoying the perfection of practical freedom,
+and justly attached to their Constitution, from the joint result of
+habit, of reason, and of experience. The last and distinguishing
+feature is a perfidy which nothing can bind, which no tie of treaty,
+no sense of the principles generally received among nations, no
+obligation, human or divine, can restrain. Thus qualified, thus armed
+for destruction, the genius of the French Revolution marched forth, the
+terror and dismay of the world. Every nation has in its turn been the
+witness, many have been the victims of its principles; and it is left
+for us to decide whether we will compromise with such a danger, while
+we have yet resources to supply the sinews of war, while the heart and
+spirit of the country is yet unbroken, and while we have the means of
+calling forth and supporting a powerful co-operation in Europe.
+
+Much more might be said on this part of the subject; but if what I
+have said already is a faithful, though only an imperfect, sketch of
+those excesses and outrages which even history itself will hereafter
+be unable fully to represent and record, and a just representation of
+the principle and source from which they originated, will any man say
+that we ought to accept a precarious security against so tremendous a
+danger? Much more—will he pretend, after the experience of all that has
+passed in the different stages of the French Revolution, that we ought
+to be deterred from probing this great question to the bottom, and from
+examining, without ceremony or disguise, whether the change which has
+recently taken place in France is sufficient now to give security, not
+against a common danger, but against such a danger as that which I have
+described?
+
+In examining this part of the subject, let it be remembered that there
+is one other characteristic of the French Revolution as striking as
+its dreadful and destructive principles: I mean the instability of
+its government, which has been of itself sufficient to destroy all
+reliance, if any such reliance could at any time have been placed on
+the good faith of any of its rulers. Such has been the incredible
+rapidity with which the revolutions in France have succeeded each
+other, that I believe the names of those who have successively
+exercised absolute power, under the pretence of liberty, are to be
+numbered by the years of the Revolution, and by each of the new
+Constitutions, which, under the same pretence, has in its turn been
+imposed by force on France, all of which alike were founded upon
+principles which professed to be universal, and were intended to be
+established and perpetuated among all the nations of the earth. Each of
+these will be found, upon an average, to have had about two years as
+the period of its duration.
+
+Under this revolutionary system, accompanied with this perpetual
+fluctuation and change, both in the form of the government and in the
+persons of the rulers, what is the security which has hitherto existed,
+and what new security is now offered? Before an answer is given to
+this question, let me sum up the history of all the revolutionary
+governments of France, and of their characters in relation to other
+powers, in words more emphatical than any which I could use—the
+memorable words pronounced, on the eve of this last Constitution, by
+the orator who was selected to report to an Assembly, surrounded by a
+file of grenadiers, the new form of liberty which it was destined to
+enjoy under the auspices of General Bonaparte. From this reporter, the
+mouth and organ of the new government, we learn this important lesson:
+
+“It is easy to conceive why peace was not concluded before the
+establishment of the constitutional government. The only government
+which then existed described itself as revolutionary; it was, in fact,
+only the tyranny of a few men who were soon overthrown by others, and
+it consequently presented no stability of principles or of views, no
+security either with respect to men or with respect to things.
+
+“It should seem that that stability and that security ought to have
+existed from the establishment, and as the effect of the constitutional
+system; and yet they did not exist more, perhaps even less, than they
+had done before. In truth, we did make some partial treaties; we signed
+a continental peace, and a general congress was held to confirm it;
+but these treaties, these diplomatic conferences, appear to have been
+the source of a new war, more inveterate and more bloody than before.
+
+“Before the 18th Fructidor (4th September) of the fifth year, the
+French Government exhibited to foreign nations so uncertain an
+existence that they refused to treat with it. After this great event,
+the whole power was absorbed in the Directory; the legislative body
+can hardly be said to have existed; treaties of peace were broken, and
+war carried everywhere, without that body having any share in those
+measures. The same Directory, after having intimidated all Europe, and
+destroyed, at its pleasure, several governments, neither knowing how
+to make peace or war, or how even to establish itself, was overturned
+by a breath, on the 13th Prairial (18th June), to make room for other
+men, influenced perhaps by different views, or who might be governed by
+different principles.
+
+“Judging, then, only from notorious facts, the French Government must
+be considered as exhibiting nothing fixed, neither in respect to men
+nor to things.”
+
+Here, then, is the picture, down to the period of the last revolution,
+of the state of France under all its successive governments!
+
+Having taken a view of what it was, let us now examine what it is. In
+the first place, we see, as has been truly stated, a change in the
+description and form of the sovereign authority. A supreme power is
+placed at the head of this nominal republic, with a more open avowal
+of military despotism than at any former period; with a more open and
+undisguised abandonment of the names and pretences under which that
+despotism long attempted to conceal itself. The different institutions,
+republican in their form and appearance, which were before the
+instruments of that despotism, are now annihilated; they have given
+way to the absolute power of one man, concentrating in himself all the
+authority of the state, and differing from other monarchs only in this,
+that (as my honorable friend [Mr. Canning] truly stated it) he wields
+a sword instead of a sceptre. What, then, is the confidence we are to
+derive either from the frame of the government, or from the character
+and past conduct of the person who is now the absolute ruler of France?
+
+Had we seen a man of whom we had no previous knowledge suddenly
+invested with the sovereign authority of the country; invested with the
+power of taxation, with the power of the sword, the power of war and
+peace, the unlimited power of commanding the resources, of disposing
+of the lives and fortunes, of every man in France; if we had seen at
+the same moment all the inferior machinery of the Revolution, which,
+under the variety of successive shocks, had kept the system in motion,
+still remaining entire,—all that, by requisition and plunder, had given
+activity to the revolutionary system of finance, and had furnished the
+means of creating an army, by converting every man who was of age to
+bear arms into a soldier, not for the defence of his own country, but
+for the sake of carrying the war into the country of the enemy; if we
+had seen all the subordinate instruments of Jacobin power subsisting in
+their full force, and retaining (to use the French phrase) all their
+original organization; and had then observed this single change in
+the conduct of their affairs, that there was now _one man_, with no
+rival to thwart his measures, no colleague to divide his powers, no
+council to control his operations, no liberty of speaking or writing,
+no expression of public opinion to check or influence his conduct;
+under such circumstances, should we be wrong to pause, or wait for the
+evidence of facts and experience, before we consented to trust our
+safety to the forbearance of a single man, in such a situation, and
+to relinquish those means of defence which have hitherto carried us
+safe through all the storms of the Revolution, if we were to ask what
+are the principles and character of this stranger, to whom fortune has
+suddenly committed the concerns of a great and powerful nation?
+
+But is this the actual state of the present question? Are we talking
+of a stranger of whom we have heard nothing? No, sir, we have heard
+of him; we, and Europe, and the world, have heard both of him and
+of the satellites by whom he is surrounded, and it is impossible to
+discuss fairly the propriety of any answer which could be returned to
+his overtures of negotiation without taking into consideration the
+inferences to be drawn from his personal character and conduct. I know
+it is the fashion with some gentlemen to represent any reference to
+topics of this nature as invidious and irritating; but the truth is,
+that they rise unavoidably out of the very nature of the question.
+Would it have been possible for ministers to discharge their duty,
+in offering their advice to their sovereign, either for accepting or
+declining negotiation, without taking into their account the reliance
+to be placed on the disposition and the principles of the person on
+whose disposition and principles the security to be obtained by treaty
+must, in the present circumstances, principally depend? Or would they
+act honestly or candidly toward Parliament and toward the country if,
+having been guided by these considerations, they forbore to state,
+publicly and distinctly, the real grounds which have influenced their
+decision; and if, from a false delicacy and groundless timidity, they
+purposely declined an examination of a point, the most essential toward
+enabling Parliament to form a just determination on so important a
+subject?
+
+What opinion, then, are we led to form of the pretensions of the
+Consul to those particular qualities for which, in the official note,
+his personal character is represented to us as the surest pledge of
+peace? We are told this is his second attempt at general pacification.
+Let us see, for a moment, how his attempt has been conducted. There
+is, indeed, as the learned gentleman has said, a word in the first
+declaration which refers to general peace, and which states this to
+be the second time in which the Consul has endeavored to accomplish
+that object. We thought fit, for the reasons which have been assigned,
+to decline altogether the proposal of treating, under the present
+circumstances, but we, at the same time, expressly stated that,
+whenever the moment for treaty should arrive, we would in no case
+treat but in conjunction with our allies. Our general refusal to
+negotiate at the present moment does not prevent the Consul from
+renewing his overtures; but are they renewed for the purpose of general
+pacification? Though he had hinted at general peace in the terms of
+his first note; though we had shown by our answer that we deemed
+negotiation, even for general peace, at this moment inadmissible;
+though we added that, even at any future period, we would treat only
+in conjunction with our allies, what was the proposal contained in his
+last note? To treat for a separate peace between Great Britain and
+France.
+
+Such was the second attempt to effect _general pacification_—a proposal
+for a _separate_ treaty with Great Britain. What had been the first?
+The conclusion of a separate treaty with Austria; and there are two
+anecdotes connected with the conclusion of this treaty, which are
+sufficient to illustrate the disposition of this pacificator of Europe.
+This very treaty of Campo Formio was ostentatiously professed to be
+concluded with the Emperor for the purpose of enabling Bonaparte to
+take the command of the army of England, and to dictate a separate
+peace with this country on the banks of the Thames. But there is this
+additional circumstance, singular beyond all conception, considering
+that we are now referred to the treaty of Campo Formio as a proof of
+the personal disposition of the Consul to general peace. He sent his
+two confidential and chosen friends, Berthier and Monge, charged to
+communicate to the Directory this treaty of Campo Formio; to announce
+to them that one enemy was humbled, that the war with Austria was
+terminated, and, therefore, that now was the moment to prosecute
+their operations against this country; they used on this occasion the
+memorable words: “_The kingdom of Great Britain and the French Republic
+can not exist together._”[14] This, I say, was the solemn declaration
+of the deputies and embassadors of Bonaparte himself, offering to
+the Directory the first-fruits of this first attempt at general
+pacification.
+
+So much for his disposition toward general pacification. Let us look
+next at the part he has taken in the different stages of the French
+Revolution, and let us then judge whether we are to look to him as
+the security against revolutionary principles. Let us determine what
+reliance we can place on his engagements with other countries, when
+we see how he has observed his engagements to his own. When the
+Constitution of the third year was established under Barras, that
+Constitution was imposed by the arms of Bonaparte, then commanding the
+army of the triumvirate in Paris. To that Constitution he then swore
+fidelity. How often he has repeated the same oath, I know not, but
+twice, at least, we know that he has not only repeated it himself,
+but tendered it to others, under circumstances too striking not to be
+stated.
+
+Sir, the House cannot have forgotten the Revolution of the 4th of
+September, which produced the dismissal of Lord Malmesbury from
+Lisle. How was that revolution procured? It was procured chiefly
+by the promise of Bonaparte, in the name of his army, decidedly to
+support the Directory in those measures which led to the infringement
+and violation of every thing that the authors of the Constitution
+of 1795, or its adherents, could consider as fundamental, and which
+established a system of despotism inferior only to that now realized
+in his own person. Immediately before this event, in the midst of the
+desolation and bloodshed of Italy he had received the sacred present
+of new banners from the Directory; he delivered them to his army with
+this exhortation: “Let us swear, fellow-soldiers, by the names of the
+patriots who have died by our side, eternal hatred to the enemies of
+the Constitution of the third year,”—that very Constitution which he
+soon after enabled the Directory to violate, and which at the head
+of his grenadiers he has now finally destroyed. Sir, that oath was
+again renewed, in the midst of that very scene to which I have last
+referred; the oath of fidelity to the Constitution of the third year
+was administered to all the members of the Assembly then sitting, under
+the terror of the bayonet, as the solemn preparation for the business
+of the day; and the morning was ushered in with swearing attachment to
+the Constitution, that the evening might close with its destruction.
+
+If we carry our views out of France, and look at the dreadful catalogue
+of all the breaches of treaty, all the acts of perfidy at which I have
+only glanced, and which are precisely commensurate with the number of
+treaties which the Republic has made (for I have sought in vain for any
+one which it has made and which it has not broken); if we trace the
+history of them all from the beginning of the Revolution to the present
+time, or if we select those which have been accompanied by the most
+atrocious cruelty, and marked the most strongly with the characteristic
+features of the Revolution, the name of Bonaparte will be found allied
+to more of them than that of any other that can be handed down in the
+history of the crimes and miseries of the last ten years. His name
+will be recorded with the horrors committed in Italy, in the memorable
+campaign of 1796 and 1797, in the Milanese, in Genoa, in Modena, in
+Tuscany, in Rome, and in Venice.
+
+His entrance into Lombardy was announced by a solemn proclamation,
+issued on the 27th of April, 1796, which terminated with these words:
+“Nations of Italy! the French Army is come to break your chains;
+the French are the friends of the people in every country; your
+religion, your property, your customs shall be respected.” This was
+followed by a second proclamation, dated from Milan, 20th of May,
+and signed “_Bonaparte_,” in these terms: “Respect for property and
+personal security; respect for the religion of countries—these are the
+sentiments of the government of the French Republic and of the army
+of Italy. The French, victorious, consider the nations of Lombardy as
+their brothers.” In testimony of this fraternity, and to fulfil the
+solemn pledge of respecting property, this very proclamation imposed
+on the Milanese a provisional contribution to the amount of twenty
+millions of livres, or near one million sterling, and successive
+exactions were afterward levied on that single state to the amount, in
+the whole, of near six millions sterling. The regard to religion and
+to the customs of the country was manifested with the same scrupulous
+fidelity. The churches were given up to indiscriminate plunder. Every
+religious and charitable fund, every public treasure, was confiscated.
+The country was made the scene of every species of disorder and
+rapine. The priests, the established form of worship, all the objects
+of religious reverence, were openly insulted by the French troops; at
+Pavia, particularly, the tomb of St. Augustin, which the inhabitants
+were accustomed to view with peculiar veneration, was mutilated and
+defaced; this last provocation having roused the resentment of the
+people they flew to arms, surrounded the French garrison and took
+them prisoners, but carefully abstained from offering any violence
+to a single soldier. In revenge for this conduct, Bonaparte, then on
+his march to the Mincio, suddenly returned, collected his troops, and
+carried the extremity of military execution over the country. He burned
+the town of Benasco, and massacred eight hundred of its inhabitants; he
+marched to Pavia, took it by storm, and delivered it over to general
+plunder, and published, at the same moment, a proclamation of the 26th
+of May, ordering his troops to shoot all those who had not laid down
+their arms and taken an oath of obedience, and to burn every village
+where the tocsin should be sounded, and to put its inhabitants to death.
+
+The transactions with Modena were on a smaller scale, but in the same
+character. Bonaparte began by signing a treaty, by which the Duke
+of Modena was to pay twelve millions of livres, and neutrality was
+promised him in return; this was soon followed by the personal arrest
+of the Duke, and by a fresh extortion of two hundred thousand sequins.
+After this he was permitted, on the payment of a farther sum, to sign
+another treaty, called a _convention de sureté_, which of course was
+only the prelude to the repetition of similar exactions.
+
+Nearly at the same period, in violation of the rights of neutrality and
+of the treaty which had been concluded between the French Republic and
+the Grand Duke of Tuscany in the preceding year, and in breach of a
+positive promise given only a few days before, the French army forcibly
+took possession of Leghorn, for the purpose of seizing the British
+property which was deposited there and confiscating it as a prize; and
+shortly after, when Bonaparte agreed to evacuate Leghorn, in return
+for the evacuation of the island of Elba, which was in possession of
+the British troops, he insisted upon a separate article, by which,
+in addition to the plunder before obtained, by the infraction of the
+law of nations, it was stipulated that the Grand Duke should pay the
+expense which the French had incurred by this invasion of his territory.
+
+In the proceedings toward Genoa we shall find not only a continuance
+of the same system of extortion and plunder, in violation of the
+solemn pledge contained in the proclamations already referred to,
+but a striking instance of the revolutionary means employed for the
+destruction of independent governments. A French minister was at that
+time resident at Genoa, which was acknowledged by France to be in
+a state of neutrality and friendship; in breach of this neutrality
+Bonaparte began, in the year 1796, with the demand of a loan. He
+afterward, from the month of September, required and enforced the
+payment of a monthly subsidy, to the amount which he thought proper
+to stipulate. These exactions were accompanied by repeated assurances
+and protestations of friendship; they were followed, in May, 1797, by
+a conspiracy against the government, fomented by the emissaries of the
+French embassy, and conducted by the partisans of France, encouraged
+and afterward protected by the French minister. The conspirators failed
+in their first attempt. Overpowered by the courage and voluntary
+exertions of the inhabitants, their force was dispersed, and many
+of their number were arrested. Bonaparte instantly considered the
+defeat of the conspirators as an act of aggression against the French
+Republic; he despatched an aid-de-camp with an order to the Senate
+of this independent State; first, to release all the French who were
+detained; secondly, to punish those who had arrested them; thirdly, to
+declare that _they had no share in the insurrection_; and fourthly,
+to disarm the people. Several French prisoners were immediately
+released, and a proclamation was preparing to disarm the inhabitants,
+when, by a second note, Bonaparte required the arrest of the three
+inquisitors of state, and immediate alterations in the Constitution. He
+accompanied this with an order to the French minister to quit Genoa,
+if his commands were not immediately carried into execution; at the
+same moment his troops entered the territory of the Republic; and
+shortly after, the councils, intimidated and overpowered, abdicated
+their functions. Three deputies were then sent to Bonaparte to receive
+from him a new Constitution. On the 6th of June, after the conferences
+at Montebello, he signed a convention, or rather issued a decree, by
+which he fixed the new form of their government; he himself named
+provisionally all the members who were to compose it, and he required
+the payment of seven millions of livres as the price of the subversion
+of their Constitution and their independence. These transactions
+require but one short comment. It is to be found in the official
+account given of them at Paris; which is in these memorable words:
+“General Bonaparte has pursued the only line of conduct which could be
+allowed in the representative of a nation which has supported the war
+only to procure the solemn acknowledgment of the right of nations to
+change the form of their government. He contributed nothing toward the
+revolution of Genoa, but he seized the first moment to acknowledge the
+new government, as soon as he saw that it was the result of the wishes
+of the people.”
+
+It is unnecessary to dwell on the wanton attacks against Rome, under
+the direction of Bonaparte himself, in the year 1796, and in the
+beginning of 1797, which terminated first by the treaty of Tolentino
+concluded by Bonaparte, in which, by enormous sacrifices, the Pope was
+allowed to purchase the acknowledgment of his authority as a sovereign
+prince; and secondly, by the violation of that very treaty, and the
+subversion of the papal authority by Joseph Bonaparte, the brother and
+the agent of the general, and the minister of the French Republic to
+the Holy See. A transaction accompanied by outrages and insults toward
+the pious and venerable Pontiff, in spite of the sanctity of his age
+and the unsullied purity of his character, which even to a Protestant
+seem hardly short of the guilt of sacrilege.
+
+But of all the disgusting and tragical scenes which took place in
+Italy in the course of the period I am describing, those which passed
+at Venice are perhaps the most striking and the most characteristic.
+In May, 1796, the French army, under Bonaparte, in the full tide of
+its success against the Austrians, first approached the territories of
+this Republic, which from the commencement of the war had observed a
+rigid neutrality. Their entrance on these territories was, as usual,
+accompanied by a solemn proclamation in the name of their general:
+
+
+BONAPARTE TO THE REPUBLIC OF VENICE.
+
+    “It is to deliver the finest country in Europe _from the iron
+    yoke of the proud house of Austria_, that the French army has
+    braved obstacles the most difficult to surmount. Victory in
+    union with justice has crowned its efforts. The wreck of the
+    enemy’s army has retired behind the Mincio. The French army, in
+    order to follow them, passes over the territory of the Republic
+    of Venice; but it will never forget that ancient friendship
+    unites the two republics. Religion, government, customs, and
+    property shall be respected. That the people may be without
+    apprehension, the most severe discipline shall be maintained.
+    All that may be provided for the army shall be faithfully paid
+    for in money. The general-in-chief engages the officers of the
+    Republic of Venice, the magistrates, and the priests, to make
+    known these sentiments to the people, in order that confidence
+    may cement that friendship which has so long united the two
+    nations. Faithful in the path of honor as in that of victory,
+    the French soldier is terrible only to the enemies of his
+    liberty and his government.
+
+            “BONAPARTE.”
+
+This proclamation was followed by exactions similar to those which
+were practised against Genoa, by the renewal of similar professions of
+friendship, and the use of similar means to excite insurrection. At
+length, in the spring of 1797, occasion was taken, from disturbances
+thus excited, to forge in the name of the Venetian Government, a
+proclamation hostile to France, and this proceeding was made the ground
+for military execution against the country, and for effecting by force
+the subversion of its ancient government and the establishment of the
+democratic forms of the French Revolution. This revolution was sealed
+by a treaty, signed in May, 1797, between Bonaparte and commissioners
+appointed on the part of the new and revolutionary government of
+Venice. By the second and third secret articles of this treaty, Venice
+agreed to give as a ransom, to secure itself against all further
+exactions or demands, the sum of three millions of livres in money,
+the value of three millions more in articles of naval supply, and
+three ships of the line; and it received in return the assurances
+of the friendship and support of the French Republic. Immediately
+after the signature of this treaty, the arsenal, the library, and the
+palace of St. Marc were ransacked and plundered, and heavy additional
+contributions were imposed upon its inhabitants. And, in not more than
+four months afterward, this very Republic of Venice, united by alliance
+to France, the creature of Bonaparte himself, from whom it had received
+the present of French liberty, was by the same Bonaparte transferred,
+under the treaty of Campo Formio, to “_that iron yoke of the proud
+house of Austria_,” to deliver it from which he had represented in his
+first proclamation to be the great object of all his operations.
+
+Sir, all this is followed by the memorable expedition into Egypt,
+which I mention, not merely because it forms a principal article in
+the catalogue of those acts of violence and perfidy in which Bonaparte
+has been engaged; not merely because it was an enterprise peculiarly
+his own, of which he was himself the planner, the executor, and
+the betrayer; but chiefly because when from thence he retires to a
+different scene, to take possession of a new throne, from which he is
+to speak upon an equality with the kings and governors of Europe, he
+leaves behind him, at the moment of his departure, a specimen, which
+cannot be mistaken, of his principles of negotiation. The intercepted
+correspondence which has been alluded to in this debate, seems to
+afford the strongest ground to believe that his offers to the Turkish
+Government to evacuate Egypt were made solely with a view to gain time;
+that the ratification of any treaty on this subject was to be delayed
+with the view of finally eluding its performance, if any change of
+circumstances favorable to the French should occur in the interval.
+But whatever gentlemen may think of the intention with which these
+offers were made, there will at least be no question with respect to
+the credit due to those professions by which he endeavored to prove
+in Egypt his pacific dispositions. He expressly enjoins his successor
+strongly and steadily to insist, in all his intercourse with the Turks,
+that he came to Egypt with no hostile design, and that he never meant
+to keep possession of the country; while, on the opposite page of the
+same instructions, he states in the most unequivocal manner his regret
+at the discomfiture of his favorite project of colonizing Egypt, and
+of maintaining it as a territorial acquisition. Now, sir, if in any
+note addressed to the Grand Vizier or the Sultan, Bonaparte had claimed
+credit for the sincerity of his professions, that he came to Egypt with
+no view hostile to Turkey, and solely for the purpose of molesting the
+British interests, is there any one argument now used to induce us
+to believe his present professions to us, which might not have been
+equally urged on that occasion? Would not those professions have been
+equally supported by solemn asseveration, by the same reference which
+is now made to personal character, with this single difference, that
+they would have then had one instance less of hypocrisy and falsehood,
+which we have since had occasion to trace in this very transaction?
+
+It is unnecessary to say more with respect to the credit due to his
+professions, or the reliance to be placed on his general character.
+But it will, perhaps, be argued that whatever may be his character,
+or whatever has been his past conduct, he has now an interest in
+making and observing peace. That he has an interest in making peace
+is at best but a doubtful proposition, and that he has an interest
+in preserving it is still more uncertain. That it is his interest to
+negotiate, I do not indeed deny. It is his interest, above all, to
+engage this country in separate negotiation, in order to loosen and
+dissolve the whole system of the confederacy on the continent, to palsy
+at once the arms of Russia, or of Austria, or of any other country
+that might look to you for support; and then either to break off his
+separate treaty, or, if he should have concluded it, to apply the
+lesson which is taught in his school of policy in Egypt, and to revive
+at his pleasure those claims of indemnification which _may have been
+reserved to some happier period_.
+
+This is precisely the interest which he has in negotiation. But on what
+grounds are we to be convinced that he has an interest in concluding
+and observing a solid and permanent pacification? Under all the
+circumstances of his personal character, and his newly acquired power,
+what other security has he for retaining that power but the sword? His
+hold upon France is the sword, and he has no other. Is he connected
+with the soil, or with the habits, the affections, or the prejudices of
+the country? He is a stranger, a foreigner, and a usurper. He unites
+in his own person every thing that a pure republican must detest; every
+thing that an enraged Jacobin has abjured; every thing that a sincere
+and faithful royalist must feel as an insult. If he is opposed at any
+time in his career, what is his appeal? _He appeals to his fortune_;
+in other words, to his army and his sword. Placing, then, his whole
+reliance upon military support, can he afford to let his military
+renown pass away, to let his laurels wither, to let the memory of his
+trophies sink in obscurity? Is it certain that with his army confined
+within France, and restrained from inroads upon her neighbors, that he
+can maintain, at his devotion, a force sufficiently numerous to support
+his power? Having no object but the possession of absolute dominion, no
+passion but military glory, is it to be reckoned as certain that he can
+feel such an interest in permanent peace as would justify us in laying
+down our arms, reducing our expense, and relinquishing our means of
+security, on the faith of his engagements? Do we believe that, after
+the conclusion of peace, he would not still sigh over the lost trophies
+of Egypt, wrested from him by the celebrated victory of Aboukir, and
+the brilliant exertions of that heroic band of British seamen, whose
+influence and example rendered the Turkish troops invincible at Acre?
+Can he forget that the effect of these exploits enabled Austria and
+Russia, in one campaign, to recover from France all which she had
+acquired by his victories, to dissolve the charm which for a time
+fascinated Europe, and to show that their generals, contending in a
+just cause, could efface, even by their success and their military
+glory, the most dazzling triumphs of his victorious and desolating
+ambition?
+
+Can we believe, with these impressions on his mind, that if, after a
+year, eighteen months, or two years of peace had elapsed, he should be
+tempted by the appearance of fresh insurrection in Ireland, encouraged
+by renewed and unrestrained communication with France, and fomented by
+the fresh infusion of Jacobin principles; if we were at such a moment
+without a fleet to watch the ports of France, or to guard the coasts
+of Ireland, without a disposable army, or an embodied militia, capable
+of supplying a speedy and adequate re-enforcement, and that he had
+suddenly the means of transporting thither a body of twenty or thirty
+thousand French troops; can we believe that, at such a moment, his
+ambition and vindictive spirit would be restrained by the recollection
+of engagements or the obligation of treaty? Or if, in some new crisis
+of difficulty and danger to the Ottoman Empire, with no British navy in
+the Mediterranean, no confederacy formed, no force collected to support
+it, an opportunity should present itself for resuming the abandoned
+expedition to Egypt, for renewing the avowed and favorite project
+of conquering and colonizing that rich and fertile country, and of
+opening the way to wound some of the vital interests of England, and
+to plunder the treasures of the East, in order to fill the bankrupt
+coffers of France,—would it be the interest of Bonaparte, under such
+circumstances, or his principles, his moderation, his love of peace,
+his aversion to conquest, and his regard for the independence of other
+nations—would it be all or any of these that would secure us against an
+attempt which would leave us only the option of submitting without a
+struggle to certain loss and disgrace, or of renewing the contest which
+we had prematurely terminated, without allies, without preparation,
+with diminished means, and with increased difficulty and hazard?
+
+Hitherto I have spoken only of the reliance which we can place on
+the professions, the character, and the conduct of the present First
+Consul; but it remains to consider the stability of his power. The
+Revolution has been marked throughout by a rapid succession of new
+depositaries of public authority, each supplanting its predecessor.
+What grounds have we to believe that this new usurpation, more odious
+and more undisguised than all that preceded it, will be more durable?
+Is it that we rely on the particular provisions contained in the code
+of the pretended Constitution, which was proclaimed as accepted by
+the French people as soon as the garrison of Paris declared their
+determination to exterminate all its enemies, and before any of its
+articles could even be known to half the country, whose consent was
+required for its establishment?
+
+I will not pretend to inquire deeply into the nature and effects of a
+Constitution which can hardly be regarded but as a farce and a mockery.
+If, however, it could be supposed that its provisions were to have any
+effect, it seems equally adapted to two purposes: that of giving to its
+founder, for a time, an absolute and uncontrolled authority; and that
+of laying the certain foundation of disunion and discord, which, if
+they once prevail, must render the exercise of all the authority under
+the Constitution impossible, and leave no appeal but to the sword.
+
+Is, then, military despotism that which we are accustomed to consider
+as a stable form of government? In all ages of the world it has been
+attended with the least stability to the persons who exercised it,
+and with the most rapid succession of changes and revolutions. In
+the outset of the French Revolution, its advocates boasted that it
+furnished a security forever, not to France only, but to all countries
+in the world, against military despotism; that the force of standing
+armies was vain and delusive; that no artificial power could resist
+public opinion; and that it was upon the foundation of public opinion
+alone that any government could stand. I believe that in this instance,
+as in every other, the progress of the French Revolution has belied
+its professions; but, so far from its being a proof of the prevalence
+of public opinion against military force, it is, instead of the proof,
+the strongest exception from that doctrine which appears in the history
+of the world. Through all the stages of the Revolution military force
+has governed, and public opinion has scarcely been heard. But still
+I consider this as only an exception from a general truth. I still
+believe that in every civilized country, not enslaved by a Jacobin
+faction, public opinion is the only sure support of any government. I
+believe this with the more satisfaction, from a conviction that, if
+this contest is happily terminated, the established governments of
+Europe will stand upon that rock firmer than ever; and, whatever may
+be the defects of any particular Constitution, those who live under
+it will prefer its continuance to the experiment of changes which may
+plunge them in the unfathomable abyss of revolution, or extricate them
+from it only to expose them to the terrors of military despotism. And
+to apply this to France, I see no reason to believe that the present
+usurpation will be more permanent than any other military despotism
+which has been established by the same means, and with the same
+defiance of public opinion.
+
+What, then, is the inference I draw from all that I have now stated?
+Is it that we will in _no case_ treat with Bonaparte? I say no such
+thing. But I say, as has been said in the answer returned to the
+French note, that we ought to wait for “_experience and the evidence
+of facts_” before we are convinced that such a treaty is admissible.
+The circumstances I have stated would well justify us if we should be
+slow in being convinced; but on a question of peace and war, every
+thing depends upon degree and upon comparison. If, on the one hand,
+there should be an appearance that the policy of France is at length
+guided by different maxims from those which have hitherto prevailed;
+if we should hereafter see signs of stability in the government which
+are not now to be traced; if the progress of the allied army should
+not call forth such a spirit in France as to make it probable that
+the act of the country itself will destroy the system now prevailing;
+if the danger, the difficulty, the risk of continuing the contest
+should increase, while the hope of complete ultimate success should be
+diminished; all these, in their due place, are considerations which,
+with myself and, I can answer for it, with every one of my colleagues,
+will have their just weight. But at present these considerations all
+operate one way; at present there is nothing from which we can presage
+a favorable disposition to change in the French councils. There is the
+greatest reason to rely on powerful co-operation from our allies; there
+are the strongest marks of a disposition in the interior of France
+to active resistance against this new tyranny; and there is every
+ground to believe, on reviewing our situation and that of the enemy,
+that, if we are ultimately disappointed of that complete success which
+we are at present entitled to hope, the continuance of the contest,
+instead of making our situation comparatively worse, will have made it
+comparatively better.
+
+If, then, I am asked how long are we to persevere in the war, I can
+only say that no period can be accurately assigned. Considering the
+importance of obtaining complete security for the objects for which we
+contend, we ought not to be discouraged too soon; but, on the contrary,
+considering the importance of not impairing and exhausting the radical
+strength of the country, there are limits beyond which we ought not to
+persist, and which we can determine only by estimating and comparing
+fairly, from time to time, the degree of security to be obtained by
+treaty, and the risk and disadvantage of continuing the contest.
+
+But, sir, there are some gentlemen in the House who seem to consider
+it already certain that the ultimate success to which I am looking is
+unattainable. They suppose us contending only for the restoration of
+the French monarchy, which they believe to be impracticable, and deny
+to be desirable for this country. We have been asked in the course
+of this debate: Do you think you can impose monarchy upon France,
+against the will of the nation? I never thought it, I never hoped it,
+I never wished it. I have thought, I have hoped, I have wished, that
+the time might come when the effect of the arms of the allies might so
+far overpower the military force which keeps France in bondage, as to
+give vent and scope to the thoughts and actions of its inhabitants. We
+have, indeed, already seen abundant proof of what is the disposition
+of a large part of the country; we have seen almost through the whole
+of the Revolution the western provinces of France deluged with the
+blood of its inhabitants, obstinately contending for their ancient
+laws and religion. We have recently seen, in the revival of that war,
+fresh proof of the zeal which still animates those countries in the
+same cause. These efforts (I state it distinctly, and there are those
+near me who can bear witness to the truth of the assertion) were not
+produced by any instigation from hence; they were the effects of a
+rooted sentiment prevailing through all those provinces forced into
+action by the “law of the hostages” and the other tyrannical measures
+of the Directory, at the moment when we were endeavoring to discourage
+so hazardous an enterprise. If, under such circumstances, we find them
+giving proofs of their unalterable perseverance in their principles;
+if there is every reason to believe that the same disposition prevails
+in many other extensive provinces of France; if every party appears at
+length equally wearied and disappointed with all the successive changes
+which the Revolution has produced; if the question is no longer between
+monarchy, and even the pretence and name of liberty, but between the
+ancient line of hereditary princes on the one hand, and a military
+tyrant, a foreign usurper, on the other; if the armies of that usurper
+are likely to find sufficient occupation on the frontiers, and to be
+forced at length to leave the interior of the country at liberty to
+manifest its real feeling and disposition; what reason have we to
+anticipate, that the restoration of monarchy under such circumstances
+is impracticable?
+
+In the exhausted and impoverished state of France, it seems for a time
+impossible that any system but that of robbery and confiscation, any
+thing but the continued torture, which can be applied only by the
+engines of the Revolution, can extort from its ruined inhabitants more
+than the means of supporting in peace the yearly expenditure of its
+government. Suppose, then, the heir of the house of Bourbon reinstated
+on the throne, he will have sufficient occupation in endeavoring, if
+possible, to heal the wounds, and gradually to repair the losses of
+ten years of civil convulsion; to reanimate the drooping commerce,
+to rekindle the industry, to replace the capital, and to revive the
+manufactures of the country. Under such circumstances, there must
+probably be a considerable interval before such a monarch, whatever
+may be his views, can possess the power which can make him formidable
+to Europe; but while the system of the Revolution continues, the case
+is quite different. It is true, indeed, that even the gigantic and
+unnatural means by which that revolution has been supported are so
+far impaired; the influence of its principles and the terror of its
+arms so far weakened; and its power of action so much contracted and
+circumscribed, that against the embodied force of Europe, prosecuting
+a vigorous war, we may justly hope that the remnant and wreck of this
+system cannot long oppose an effectual resistance.
+
+But, supposing the confederacy of Europe prematurely dissolved;
+supposing our armies disbanded, our fleets laid up in our harbors,
+our exertions relaxed, and our means of precaution and defence
+relinquished; do we believe that the Revolutionary power, with this
+rest and breathing-time given it to recover from the pressure under
+which it is now sinking, possessing still the means of calling suddenly
+and violently into action whatever is the remaining physical force of
+France, under the guidance of military despotism; do we believe that
+this revolutionary power, the terror of which is now beginning to
+vanish, will not again prove formidable to Europe? Can we forget that
+in the ten years in which that power has subsisted, it has brought more
+misery on surrounding nations, and produced more acts of aggression,
+cruelty, perfidy, and enormous ambition than can be traced in the
+history of France for the centuries which have elapsed since the
+foundation of its monarchy, including all the wars which, in the course
+of that period, have been waged by any of those sovereigns, whose
+projects of aggrandizement and violations of treaty afford a constant
+theme of general reproach against the ancient government of France? And
+if not, can we hesitate whether we have the best prospect of permanent
+peace, the best security for the independence and safety of Europe,
+from the restoration of the lawful government, or from the continuance
+of revolutionary power in the hands of Bonaparte?
+
+In compromise and treaty with such a power placed in such hands as
+now exercise it, and retaining the same means of annoyance which it
+now possesses, I see little hope of permanent security. I see no
+possibility at this moment of such a peace as would justify that
+liberal intercourse which is the essence of real amity; no chance of
+terminating the expenses or the anxieties of war, or of restoring to us
+any of the advantages of established tranquillity, and, as a sincere
+lover of peace, I cannot be content with its nominal attainment. I must
+be desirous of pursuing that system which promises to attain, in the
+end, the permanent enjoyment of its solid and substantial blessings
+for this country and for Europe. As a sincere lover of peace, I will
+not sacrifice it by grasping at the shadow when the reality is not
+substantially within my reach.
+
+Cur igitur pacem nolo? Quia infida est, quia periculosa, quia esse non
+potest.[15]
+
+When we consider the resources and the spirit of the country, can
+any man doubt that if adequate security is not now to be obtained by
+treaty, we have the means of prosecuting the contest without material
+difficulty or danger, and with a reasonable prospect of completely
+attaining our object? I will not dwell on the improved state of public
+credit; on the continually increasing amount, in spite of extraordinary
+temporary burdens, of our permanent revenue; on the yearly accession of
+wealth to an extent unprecedented even in the most flourishing times of
+peace, which we are deriving, in the midst of war, from our extended
+and flourishing commerce; on the progressive improvement and growth
+of our manufactures; on the proofs which we see on all sides of the
+uninterrupted accumulation of productive capital; and on the active
+exertion of every branch of national industry which can tend to support
+and augment the population, the riches, and the power of the country.
+
+As little need I recall the attention of the House to the additional
+means of action which we have derived from the great augmentation of
+our disposable military force, the continued triumphs of our powerful
+and victorious navy, and the events which, in the course of the last
+two years, have raised the military ardor and military glory of the
+country to a height unexampled in any period of our history.
+
+In addition to these grounds of reliance on our own strength and
+exertions, we have seen the consummate skill and valor of the arms of
+our allies proved by that series of unexampled successes in the course
+of the last campaign, and we have every reason to expect a co-operation
+on the continent, even to a greater extent, in the course of the
+present year. If we compare this view of our own situation with every
+thing we can observe of the state and condition of our enemy—if we can
+trace him laboring under equal difficulty in finding men to recruit
+his army, or money to pay it—if we know that in the course of the last
+year the most rigorous efforts of military conscription were scarcely
+sufficient to replace to the French armies, at the end of the campaign,
+the numbers which they had lost in the course of it—if we have seen
+that that force, then in possession of advantages which it has since
+lost, was unable to contend with the efforts of the combined armies—if
+we know that, even while supported by the plunder of all the countries
+which they had overrun, those armies were reduced, by the confession
+of their commanders, to the extremity of distress, and destitute not
+only of the principal articles of military supply, but almost of the
+necessaries of life—if we see them now driven back within their own
+frontiers, and confined within a country whose own resources have long
+since been proclaimed by their successive governments to be unequal
+either to paying or maintaining them—if we observe that since the last
+revolution no one substantial or effectual measure has been adopted
+to remedy the intolerable disorder of their finances, and to supply
+the deficiency of their credit and resources—if we see through large
+and populous districts of France, either open war levied against the
+present usurpation, or evident marks of disunion and distraction, which
+the first occasion may call forth into a flame—if, I say, sir, this
+comparison be just, I feel myself authorized to conclude from it, not
+that we are entitled to consider ourselves certain of ultimate success,
+not that we are to suppose ourselves exempted from the unforeseen
+vicissitudes of war, but that, considering the value of the object
+for which we are contending, the means for supporting the contest,
+and the probable course of human events, we should be inexcusable,
+if at this moment we were to relinquish the struggle on any grounds
+short of entire and complete security; that from perseverance in our
+efforts under such circumstances, we have the fairest reason to expect
+the full attainment of our object; but that at all events, even if we
+are disappointed in our more sanguine hopes, we are more likely to
+gain than to lose by the continuation of the contest; that every month
+to which it is continued, even if it should not in its effects lead
+to the final destruction of the Jacobin system, must tend so far to
+weaken and exhaust it, as to give us at least a greater comparative
+security in any termination of the war; that, on all these grounds,
+this is not the moment at which it is consistent with our interest or
+our duty to listen to any proposals of negotiation with the present
+ruler of France; but that we are not, therefore, pledged to any
+_unalterable_ determination as to our future conduct; that in this we
+must be regulated by the course of events; and that it will be the duty
+of his Majesty’s ministers from time to time to adapt their measures
+to any variation of circumstances, to consider how far the effects of
+the military operations of the allies or of the internal disposition
+of France correspond with our present expectations; and, on a view of
+the whole, to compare the difficulties or risks which may arise in the
+prosecution of the contest with the prospect of ultimate success, or of
+the degree of advantage to be derived from its farther continuance, and
+to be governed by the result of all these considerations in the opinion
+and advice which they may offer to their sovereign.
+
+
+
+
+CHARLES JAMES FOX.
+
+
+Mr. Fox, one of the most celebrated of English orators, was the second
+son of the first Lord Holland, and was born in 1749. His father, though
+a man of dissolute habits, was an influential member of Parliament,
+indeed for many years was regarded as the most formidable opponent of
+the elder Pitt in the House of Commons. The elder Fox received, as
+a mark of royal favor, the most lucrative office in the gift of the
+Government, that of Paymaster of the Forces; and he administered the
+duties of this position so much to the satisfaction of the king, that
+he was soon advanced to the peerage. His great wealth and his marriage
+with Lady Georgiana Lennox, a very accomplished daughter of the Duke
+of Richmond, made Holland House what it continued to be for three
+generations, the favorite resort of whatever of culture and fashion
+allied itself to the cause of its own political party.
+
+It was in the atmosphere of this society that the lot of young Fox
+was cast. The eldest son was afflicted with a nervous disease which
+impaired his faculties, and consequently all the hopes of the house
+were concentrated upon Charles. The father’s ambition for his son
+was twofold: He desired that his boy should become at once a great
+orator and a leader in the fashionable and dissolute society of the
+day. In the one interest he furnished him with the most helpful and
+inspiring instruction; in the other he personally introduced him to
+the most famous gambling-houses in England and on the continent. The
+boy profited by this instruction. He made extraordinary progress. His
+biographer tells us that before he was sixteen he was so thoroughly
+acquainted with Greek and Latin, that he read them as he read English,
+and took up Demosthenes and Cicero as he took up Chatham and Burke. The
+father paid his gambling bills with as much cheerfulness as he heard
+him recite an ode of Horace or the funeral oration of Pericles. At the
+university the young scholar furnished his mind with abundant stores
+of literature and history, but he paid no attention to those great
+economic questions which, under the influence of Adam Smith were then
+beginning to play so large a part in national affairs. Even late in
+life he confessed that he had never read the “Wealth of Nations.”
+
+Leaving Oxford at seventeen, Fox went to the continent, where the
+prodigal liberality of his father encouraged him in a life of unbounded
+indulgence. He not only lost enormous sums of ready money, but his
+father was obliged to pay debts amounting to a hundred thousand pounds.
+To distract the boy’s attention from further excesses, Lord Holland
+resolved to put him into the House of Commons. The system of pocket
+boroughs made the opportunity easy; and, as no troublesome questions
+were asked, the young profligate took his seat in May of 1768, a year
+and eight months before he arrived at the eligible age.
+
+By education and early political alliance Fox was a Tory, and it is
+not singular therefore that the Government of Lord North hastened to
+avail itself of his talents. In 1770 he was made a Junior Lord of
+the Admiralty, and a little later found a seat on the bench of the
+Treasury. But his wayward spirit would not brook control. He even went
+so far as to take the floor in opposition to the Prime-Minister. This
+violation of party discipline brought its natural result, and in 1774
+Fox was contemptuously dismissed.
+
+The blow was deserved, and was even needed for the saving of Fox
+himself. His excesses in London and on the continent had become so
+notorious that the public were fast coming to regard him simply as
+a reckless gambler, whose favor and whose opposition were alike of
+no importance. It was this contempt on the part of the ministry and
+the public which stung him into something like reform. Though he did
+not entirely abandon his old methods, he devoted himself to his work
+in the House with extraordinary energy. All his ambition was now
+directed to becoming a powerful debater. He afterward remarked that
+he had literally gained his skill “at the expense of the House,” for
+he had sometimes tasked himself to speak on every question that came
+up, whether he was interested in it or not, and even whether he knew
+any thing about it or not. The result was that in certain important
+qualities of a public speaker, he excelled all other men of his time.
+Burke even said of him, that “by slow degrees he rose to be the most
+brilliant and accomplished debater the world ever saw.”
+
+While this process of rising “by slow degrees” was going on, Fox was
+also acquiring fixed ideas in regard to governmental affairs. The
+contemptuous dismissal of Lord North probably stimulated his natural
+inclinations to go into the opposition. As the American question was
+gradually developed, Fox found himself in warm sympathy with the
+colonial cause. He denied the right of the mother country to inflict
+taxation, and was the first to denounce the policy of the Government
+in the House of Commons. He enjoyed the friendship of the ablest men
+among the Whigs, and he resorted to them, especially to Burke, for
+every kind of political knowledge. Indeed, his obligations to that
+great political philosopher were such, that in 1791, at the time of
+their alienation on the question of England’s attitude toward the
+French Revolution, he declared in the House that “if he were to put
+all the political information which he had learned from books, all
+he had gained from science, and all which any knowledge of the world
+and its affairs had taught him, into one scale, and the improvement
+which he had derived from his right honorable friend’s instruction and
+conversation in the other, he should be at a loss to decide to which to
+give the preference.” Under this influence all his aspirations came to
+be devoted, as he once said “to widen the basis of freedom,—to infuse
+and circulate the spirit of liberty.” This subject it was that in one
+form or another drew forth the most inspiring strains of his eloquence.
+
+Fox’s political morality is not without one very dark stain. For
+some years he had been the leader of the opposition to Lord North’s
+administration. Under his repeated and powerful blows the great Tory
+ministry was obliged to give way. Fox had been so conspicuously at the
+head of the opposition that everybody looked to see him elevated to the
+position of First Minister. But the king had been scandalized by the
+irregularities of Fox’s life, and probably was quite willing to find an
+excuse for not calling so able a Whig into power. Lord Shelburne was
+appointed instead, and Fox refused to take office under him. But that
+was not all. He not only refused to support Shelburne, but within six
+months even formed a coalition against him with Lord North. Cooke, in
+his “History of Party,” characterizes his action as “a precedent which
+strikes at the foundation of political morality, and as a weapon in
+the hands of those who would destroy all confidence in the honesty of
+public men.” This characterization is not too severe; for the ability
+and the lofty integrity of Lord Shelburne were such as to forbid us to
+suppose that Fox’s action was the result of any other motive than that
+of personal pique and disappointment. He carried his ardent followers
+with him; and so shocked were the thinking men of the time, that there
+was a general outcry either of regret or of indignation.
+
+Lord Shelburne was of course defeated, and the Coalition ministry,
+which it was afterward the great work of Pitt to break, came into
+power. The popular sentiment was shown in the fact that, in the first
+election that followed, a hundred and sixty of Fox’s friends lost their
+seats in the House, and became, in the language of the day, “Fox’s
+Martyrs.”
+
+The views of Fox in regard to the French Revolution were so opposed to
+those of Burke, that in 1791 their intimacy and even their friendship
+were broken violently asunder. Of that memorable and painful incident
+it is not necessary here to speak, other than to say that both of the
+orators were wrong and both of them were right. Time has shown that
+the evils predicted by Burke as the result of the Revolution were
+scarcely an exaggeration of what actually followed; but it has also
+shown that Fox was right in continually maintaining that nations,
+however wrong may be their principles and methods, should be left to
+conduct their internal affairs in their own way. It was this position
+of Fox that led him to oppose the general attitude of England in regard
+to the course of Napoleon. In the House of Commons he was always
+listened to with pleasure; but his habits were such as to prevent his
+gaining that confidence of the public which otherwise he might easily
+have enjoyed.
+
+
+
+
+CHARLES JAMES FOX.
+
+ON THE REJECTION OF NAPOLEON BONAPARTE’S OVERTURES OF PEACE; HOUSE OF
+COMMONS, FEBRUARY 3, 1800.
+
+
+  The following speech was delivered immediately after that of Pitt on
+  the same subject, given above, and in answer to it.
+
+
+MR. SPEAKER:
+
+At so late an hour of the night, I am sure you will do me the justice
+to believe that I do not mean to go at length into the discussion of
+this great question. Exhausted as the attention of the House must be,
+and unaccustomed as I have been of late to attend in my place, nothing
+but a deep sense of my duty could have induced me to trouble you at
+all, and particularly to request your indulgence at such an hour.
+
+Sir, my honorable and learned friend [Mr. Erskine] has truly said, that
+the present is a new era in the war, and the right honorable gentleman
+opposite to me [Mr. Pitt] feels the justice of the remark; for, by
+travelling back to the commencement of the war, and referring again to
+all the topics and arguments which he has so often and so successfully
+urged upon the House, and by which he has drawn them on to the support
+of his measures, he is forced to acknowledge that, at the end of a
+seven years’ conflict, we are come but to a new era in the war, at
+which he thinks it necessary only to press all his former arguments
+to induce us to persevere. All the topics which have so often misled
+us—all the reasoning which has so invariably failed—all the lofty
+predictions which have so constantly been falsified by events—all the
+hopes which have amused the sanguine, and all the assurances of the
+distress and weakness of the enemy which have satisfied the unthinking,
+are again enumerated and advanced as arguments for our continuing the
+war. What! at the end of seven years of the most burdensome and the
+most calamitous struggle in which this country ever was engaged, are
+we again to be amused with notions of finance, and calculations of
+the exhausted resources of the enemy, as a ground of confidence and
+of hope? Gracious God! were we not told five years ago that France
+was not only on the brink and in the jaws of ruin, but that she was
+actually sunk into the gulf of bankruptcy? Were we not told, as an
+unanswerable argument against treating, “that she could not hold
+out another campaign—that nothing but peace could save her—that she
+wanted only time to recruit her exhausted finances—that to grant her
+repose was to grant her the means of again molesting this country, and
+that we had nothing to do but persevere for a short time, in order
+to save ourselves forever from the consequences of her ambition and
+her Jacobinism?” What! after having gone on from year to year upon
+assurances like these, and after having seen the repeated refutations
+of every prediction, are we again to be gravely and seriously assured,
+that we have the same prospect of success on the _same identical
+grounds_? And, without any other argument or security, are we invited,
+at this new era of the war, to conduct it upon principles which, if
+adopted and acted upon, may make it eternal? If the right honorable
+gentleman shall succeed in prevailing on Parliament and the country
+to adopt the principles which he has advanced this night, I see no
+possible termination to the contest. No man can see an end to it; and
+upon the assurances and predictions which have so uniformly failed,
+we are called upon not merely to refuse all negotiations, but to
+countenance principles and views as distant from wisdom and justice, as
+they are in their nature wild and impracticable.
+
+I must lament, sir, in common with every genuine friend of peace,
+the harsh and unconciliating language which ministers have held to
+the French, and which they have even made use of in their answer to
+a respectful offer of a negotiation. Such language has ever been
+considered as extremely unwise, and has ever been reprobated by
+diplomatic men. I remember with pleasure the terms in which Lord
+Malmesbury, at Paris, in the year 1796, replied to expressions of this
+sort, used by M. de la Croix. He justly said, “that offensive and
+injurious insinuations were only calculated to throw new obstacles in
+the way of accommodation, and that it was not by revolting reproaches
+nor by reciprocal invective that a sincere wish to accomplish the great
+work of pacification could be evinced.” Nothing could be more proper
+nor more wise than this language; and such ought ever to be the tone
+and conduct of men intrusted with the very important task of treating
+with a hostile nation. Being a sincere friend to peace, I must say with
+Lord Malmesbury, that it is not by reproaches and by invective that we
+can hope for a reconciliation; and I am convinced, in my own mind, that
+I speak the sense of this House, and, if not of this House, certainly
+of a majority of the people of this country, when I lament that any
+unprovoked and unnecessary recriminations should be flung out, by which
+obstacles are put in the way of pacification. I believe it is the
+prevailing sentiment of the people, that we ought to abstain from harsh
+and insulting language; and in common with them, I must lament that
+both in the papers of Lord Grenville, and this night, such license has
+been given to invective and reproach.
+
+For the same reason, I must lament that the right honorable gentleman
+[Mr. Pitt] has thought proper to go at such length, and with such
+severity of minute investigation, into all the early circumstances
+of the war, which (whatever they were) are nothing to the present
+purpose, and ought not to influence the present feelings of the
+House. I certainly shall not follow him through the whole of this
+tedious detail, though I do not agree with him in many of his
+assertions. I do not know what impression his narrative may make on
+other gentlemen; but I will tell him fairly and candidly, he has not
+convinced me. I continue to think, and until I see better grounds for
+changing my opinion than any that the right honorable gentleman has
+this night produced, I shall continue to think, and to say, plainly
+and explicitly, “that this country was the aggressor in the war.”
+But with regard to Austria and Prussia—is there a man who, for one
+moment, can dispute that they were the aggressors? It will be vain
+for the right honorable gentleman to enter into long and plausible
+reasoning against the evidence of documents so clear, so decisive—so
+frequently, so thoroughly investigated. The unfortunate monarch,
+Louis XVI., himself, as well as those who were in his confidence,
+has borne decisive testimony to the fact, that between him and the
+Emperor [Leopold of Austria] there was an intimate correspondence and
+a perfect understanding. Do I mean by this that a positive treaty
+was entered into for the dismemberment of France? Certainly not. But
+no man can read the declarations which were made at Mantua[16] as
+well as at Pilnitz, as they are given by M. Bertrand de Molville,
+without acknowledging that this was not merely an intention, but a
+_declaration_ of an intention, on the part of the great powers of
+Germany, to interfere in the internal affairs of France, for the
+purpose of regulating the government against the opinion of the people.
+This, though not a plan for the partition of France, was, in the eye
+of reason and common-sense, an aggression against France. The right
+honorable gentleman denies that there was such a thing as a treaty of
+Pilnitz. Granted. But was there not a declaration which amounted to
+an act of hostile aggression? The two powers, the Emperor of Germany
+and the King of Prussia, made a public declaration that they were
+determined to employ their forces, in conjunction with those of the
+other sovereigns of Europe, “to put the King of France in a situation
+to establish, in perfect liberty, the foundations of a monarchical
+government equally agreeable to the rights of sovereigns and the
+welfare of the French.” Whenever the other princes should agree to
+co-operate with them, “_then, and in that case_, their majesties were
+determined to act promptly and by mutual consent, with the forces
+necessary to obtain the end proposed by all of them. In the meantime,
+they declared, that they would give orders for their troops to be
+ready for actual service.” Now, I would ask gentlemen to lay their
+hands upon their hearts, and say with candor what the true and fair
+construction of this declaration was—whether it was not a menace and an
+insult to France, since, in direct terms, it declared, that whenever
+the other powers should concur, they would attack France, then at
+peace with them, and then employed only in domestic and in internal
+regulations? Let us suppose the case to be that of Great Britain. Will
+any gentleman say that if two of the great powers should make a public
+declaration that they were determined to make an attack on this kingdom
+as soon as circumstances should favor their intention; that they only
+waited for this occasion, and that in the meantime they would keep
+their forces ready for the purpose, it would not be considered by the
+Parliament and people of this country as a hostile aggression? And is
+there any Englishman in existence who is such a friend to peace as to
+say that the nation could retain its honor and dignity if it should sit
+down under such a menace? I know too well what is due to the national
+character of England to believe that there would be two opinions on
+the case, if thus put home to our own feelings and understandings.
+We must, then, respect in others the indignation which such an act
+would excite in ourselves; and when we see it established on the most
+indisputable testimony, that both at Pilnitz and at Mantua declarations
+were made to this effect, it is idle to say that, as far as the Emperor
+and the King of Prussia were concerned, they were not the aggressors in
+the war.
+
+“Oh! but the decree of the 19th of November, 1792.”[17] That, at least,
+the right honorable gentleman says, you must allow to be an act of
+aggression, not only against England, but against all the sovereigns
+of Europe. I am not one of those, sir, who attach much interest to the
+general and indiscriminate provocations thrown out at random, like this
+resolution of the 19th of November, 1792. I do not think it necessary
+to the dignity of any people to notice and to apply to themselves
+menaces without particular allusion, which are always unwise in the
+power which uses them, and which it is still more unwise to treat with
+seriousness. But if any such idle and general provocation to nations
+is given, either in insolence or in folly, by any government, it is
+a clear first principle that an _explanation_ is the thing which a
+magnanimous nation, feeling itself aggrieved, ought to demand; and if
+an explanation be given which is not satisfactory, it ought clearly
+and distinctly to say so. There should be no ambiguity, no reserve,
+on the occasion. Now, we all know, from documents on our table, that
+M. Chauvelin [the French minister] did give an explanation of this
+silly decree. He declared, “in the name of his government, that it was
+never meant that the French Government should favor insurrections;
+that the decree was applicable only to those people who, after having
+acquired their liberty by conquest, should demand the assistance of
+the Republic; but that France would respect not only the independence
+of England, but also that of her allies with whom she was not at war.”
+This was the explanation of the offensive decree. “But this explanation
+was not satisfactory.” Did you _say so_ to M. Chauvelin? Did you tell
+him that you were not content with this explanation? and when you
+dismissed him afterward, on the death of the King [of France], did
+you say that this explanation was unsatisfactory? No. You did no such
+thing; and I contend that unless you demanded _further_ explanations,
+and they were refused, you have no right to urge the decree of the
+19th of November as an act of aggression. In all your conferences and
+correspondence with M. Chauvelin did you hold out to him _what terms
+would satisfy you_? Did you give the French the power or the means of
+settling the misunderstanding which that decree, or any other of the
+points at issue, had created? I maintain that when a nation refuses to
+state to another the thing which would satisfy her, she shows that she
+is not actuated by a desire to preserve peace between them; and I aver
+that this was the case here. The Scheldt, for instance. You now say
+that the navigation of the Scheldt was one of your causes of complaint.
+Did you explain yourself on that subject? Did you make it one of the
+grounds for the dismissal of M. Chauvelin? Sir, I repeat it, that _a
+nation, to justify itself in appealing to the last solemn resort,
+ought to prove that it has taken every possible means, consistent
+with dignity, to demand the reparation and redress which would be
+satisfactory; and if she refuses to explain what would be satisfactory,
+she does not do her duty, nor exonerate herself from the charge of
+being the aggressor_.
+
+But “France,” it seems, “then declared war against us; and she was the
+aggressor, because the declaration came from her.” Let us look at
+the circumstances of this transaction on both sides. Undoubtedly the
+declaration was made by them; but is a declaration the only thing which
+constitutes the commencement of a war? Do gentlemen recollect that, in
+consequence of a dispute about the commencement of war, respecting the
+capture of a number of ships, an article was inserted in our treaty
+with France, by which it was positively stipulated that in future, to
+prevent all disputes, the act of the _dismissal_ of a minister from
+either of the two courts should be held and considered as tantamount to
+a declaration of war?[18] I mention this, sir, because when we are idly
+employed in this retrospect of the origin of a war which has lasted so
+many years, instead of turning our eyes only to the contemplation of
+the means of putting an end to it, we seem disposed to overlook every
+thing on our own parts, and to search only for grounds of imputation on
+the enemy. I almost think it an insult on the House to detain them with
+this sort of examination. Why, sir, if France was the aggressor, as the
+right honorable gentleman says she was _throughout_, did not Prussia
+call upon us for the stipulated number of troops, according to the
+article of the definitive treaty of alliance subsisting between us,
+by which, in case that either of the contracting parties was attacked,
+they had a right to demand the stipulated aid? and the same thing again
+may be asked when we were attacked. The right honorable gentleman
+might here accuse himself, indeed, of reserve; but it unfortunately
+happened, that _at the time_ the point was too clear on which side the
+aggression lay. Prussia was too sensible that the war could not entitle
+her to make the demand, and that it was not a case within the scope of
+the defensive treaty. This is evidence worth a volume of subsequent
+reasoning; for if, at the time when all the facts were present to their
+minds, they could not take advantage of existing treaties, and that too
+when the courts were on the most friendly terms with one another, it
+will be manifest to every thinking man that _they were sensible they
+were not authorized to make the demand_.
+
+I really, sir, cannot think it necessary to follow the right honorable
+gentleman into all the minute details which he has thought proper to
+give us respecting the first aggression; but that Austria and Prussia
+were the aggressors, not a man in any country, who has ever given
+himself the trouble to think at all on the subject, can doubt. Nothing
+could be more hostile than their whole proceedings. Did they not
+declare to France, that it was her internal concerns, not her external
+proceedings, which provoked them to confederate against her? Look back
+to the proclamations with which they set out.[19] Read the declarations
+which they made themselves to justify their appeal to arms. They did
+not pretend to fear her ambition—her conquests—her troubling her
+neighbors; but they accused her of new-modelling her own government.
+They said nothing of her aggressions abroad. They spoke only of her
+clubs and societies at Paris.
+
+Sir, in all this, I am not justifying the French; I am not trying to
+absolve them from blame, either in their internal or external policy. I
+think, on the contrary, that their successive rulers have been as bad
+and as execrable, in various instances, as any of the most despotic
+and unprincipled governments that the world ever saw. I think it
+impossible, sir, that it should have been otherwise. It was not to be
+expected that the French, when once engaged in foreign wars, should
+not endeavor to spread destruction around them, and to form plans of
+aggrandizement and plunder on every side. Men bred in the school of the
+house of Bourbon could not be expected to act otherwise. They could
+not have lived so long under their ancient masters without imbibing
+the restless ambition, the perfidy, and the insatiable spirit of the
+race. They have imitated the practice of their great prototype, and,
+through their whole career of mischiefs and of crimes, have done
+no more than servilely trace the steps of their own Louis XIV. If
+they have overrun countries and ravaged them, they have done it upon
+Bourbon principles; if they have ruined and dethroned sovereigns, it
+is entirely after the Bourbon manner; if they have even fraternized
+with the people of foreign countries, and pretended to make their cause
+their own, they have only faithfully followed the Bourbon example. They
+have constantly had Louis, the Grand Monarque, in their eye. But it
+may be said, that this example was long ago, and that we ought not to
+refer to a period so distant. True, it is a remote period applied to
+the man, but not so of the principle. The principle was never extinct;
+nor has its operation been suspended in France, except, perhaps, for
+a short interval, during the administration of Cardinal Fleury; and
+my complaint against the Republic of France is, not that she has
+generated new crimes—not that she has promulgated new mischief—but
+that she has adopted and acted upon the principles which have been
+so fatal to Europe under the practice of the House of Bourbon. It
+is said, that wherever the French have gone they have introduced
+revolution—they have sought for the means of disturbing neighboring
+states, and have not been content with mere conquest. What is this but
+adopting the ingenious scheme of Louis XIV.? He was not content with
+merely overrunning a state. Whenever he came into a new territory, he
+established what he called his chamber of claims, a most convenient
+device, by which he inquired whether the conquered country or province
+had any dormant or disputed claims—any cause of complaint—any unsettled
+demand upon any other state or province—upon which he might wage war
+upon such state, thereby discover again ground for new devastation, and
+gratify his ambition by new acquisitions. What have the republicans
+done more atrocious, more Jacobinical than this? Louis went to war
+with Holland. His pretext was, that Holland had not treated him with
+sufficient _respect_. A very just and proper cause for war indeed!
+
+This, sir, leads me to an example which I think seasonable, and worthy
+the attention of his Majesty’s ministers. When our Charles II., as a
+short exception to the policy of his reign, made the triple alliance
+for the protection of Europe, and particularly of Holland, against the
+ambition of Louis XIV., what was the conduct of that great, virtuous,
+and most able statesman, M. de Witt, when the confederates came to
+deliberate upon the terms upon which they should treat with the French
+monarch? When it was said that he had made unprincipled conquests, and
+that he ought to be forced to surrender them all, what was the language
+of that great and wise man? “No,” said he; “I think we ought not to
+look back to the origin of the war so much as the means of putting an
+end to it. If you had united in time to prevent these conquests, well;
+but now that he has made them, he stands upon the ground of conquest,
+and we must agree to treat with him, not with reference to the origin
+of the conquest, but with regard to his present posture. He has those
+places, and some of them we must be content to give up as the means
+of peace; for conquest will always successfully set up its claims to
+indemnification.” Such was the language of this minister, who was the
+ornament of his time; and such, in my mind, ought to be the language
+of statesmen, with regard to the French, at this day; and the same
+ought to have been said at the formation of the confederacy. It was
+true that the French had overrun Savoy; but they had overrun it upon
+Bourbon principles; and, having gained this and other conquests before
+the confederacy was formed, they ought to have treated with her rather
+for future security than for past correction. States in possession,
+whether monarchical or republican, will claim indemnity in proportion
+to their success; and it will never so much be inquired by what
+right they gained possession as by what means they can be prevented
+from enlarging their depredations. Such is the safe practice of the
+world; and such ought to have been the conduct of the powers when the
+reduction of Savoy made them coalesce. The right honorable gentleman
+may know more of the secret particulars of their overrunning Savoy
+than I do; but certainly, as they have come to my knowledge, it was a
+most Bourbon-like act. A great and justly celebrated historian, I mean
+Mr. Hume, a writer certainly estimable in many particulars, but who is
+a childish lover of princes, talks of Louis XIV. in very magnificent
+terms. But he says of him, that, though he managed his enterprises
+with great skill and bravery, he was unfortunate in this, _that he
+never got a good and fair pretence for war_. This he reckons among
+his misfortunes. Can we say more of the republican French? In seizing
+on Savoy I think they made use of the words “_convénances morales et
+physiques_.” These were her reasons. A most Bourbon-like phrase. And I
+therefore contend that as we never scrupled to treat with the princes
+of the House of Bourbon on account of their rapacity, their thirst
+of conquest, their violation of treaties, their perfidy, and their
+restless spirit, so, I contend, we ought not to refuse to treat with
+their republican imitators.
+
+Ministers could not pretend ignorance of the unprincipled manner in
+which the French had seized on Savoy. The Sardinian minister complained
+of the aggression, and yet no stir was made about it. The courts of
+Europe stood by and saw the outrage; and our ministers saw it. The
+right honorable gentleman will in vain, therefore, exert his power to
+persuade me of the interest he takes in the preservation of the rights
+of nations, since, at the moment when an interference might have been
+made with effect, no step was taken, no remonstrance made, no mediation
+negotiated, to stop the career of conquest. All the pretended and
+hypocritical sensibility “for the rights of nations, and for social
+order,” with which we have since been stunned, can not impose upon
+those who will take the trouble to look back to the period when this
+sensibility ought to have roused us into seasonable exertion. At that
+time, however, the right honorable gentleman makes it his boast that he
+was prevented, by a sense of neutrality, from taking any measures of
+precaution on the subject. I do not give the right honorable gentleman
+much credit for his spirit of neutrality on the occasion. It flowed
+from the sense of the country at the time, the great majority of which
+was clearly and decidedly against all interruptions being given to the
+French in their desire of regulating their own internal government.
+
+But this neutrality, which respected only the internal rights of the
+French, and from which the people of England would never have departed
+but for the impolitic and hypocritical cant which was set up to arouse
+their jealousy and alarm their fears, was very different from the
+great principle of political prudence which ought to have actuated the
+councils of the nation, on seeing the first steps of France toward a
+career of external conquest. My opinion is, that when the unfortunate
+King of France offered to us, in the letter delivered by M. Chauvelin
+and M. Talleyrand, and even entreated us to mediate between him and
+the allied powers of Austria and Prussia, they [ministers] ought to
+have accepted of the offer, and exerted their influence to save Europe
+from the consequence of a system which was then beginning to manifest
+itself.[20] It was, at least, a question of prudence; and as we had
+never refused to treat and to mediate with the old princes on account
+of their ambition or their perfidy, we ought to have been equally
+ready now, when the same principles were acted upon by other men. I
+must doubt the sensibility which could be so cold and so indifferent
+at the proper moment for its activity. I fear that there were at that
+moment the germs of ambition rising in the mind of the right honorable
+gentleman, and that he was beginning, like others, to entertain hopes
+that something might be obtained out of the coming confusion. What
+but such a sentiment could have prevented him from overlooking the
+fair occasion that was offered for preventing the calamities with
+which Europe was threatened? What but some such interested principle
+could have made him forego the truly honorable task, by which his
+administration would have displayed its magnanimity and its power? But
+for some such feeling, would not this country, both in wisdom and in
+dignity, have interfered, and, in conjunction with the other powers,
+have said to France: “You ask for a mediation. We will mediate with
+candor and sincerity, but we will at the same time declare to you our
+apprehensions. We do not trust to your assertion of a determination
+to avoid all foreign conquest, and that you are desirous only of
+settling your own constitution, because your language is contradicted
+by experience and the evidence of facts. You are Frenchmen, and you can
+not so soon have forgotten and thrown off the Bourbon principles in
+which you were educated. You have already imitated the bad practice of
+your princes. You have seized on Savoy without a color of right. But
+here we take our stand. Thus far you have gone, and we can not help
+it; but you must go no farther. We will tell you distinctly what we
+shall consider as an attack on the balance and the security of Europe;
+and, as the condition of our interference, we will tell you also
+the securities that we think essential to the general repose.” This
+ought to have been the language of his Majesty’s ministers when their
+mediation was solicited; and something of this kind they evidently
+thought of when they sent the instructions to Petersburgh which they
+have mentioned this night, but upon which they never acted. Having not
+done so, I say they have no right to talk now about the violated rights
+of Europe, about the aggression of the French, and about the origin
+of the war in which this country was so suddenly afterward plunged.
+Instead of this, what did they do? They hung back; they avoided
+explanation; they gave the French no means of satisfying them; and I
+repeat my proposition—when there is a question of peace and war between
+two nations, _that government finds itself in the wrong which refuses
+to state with clearness and precision what she should consider as a
+satisfaction and a pledge of peace_.
+
+Sir, if I understand the true precepts of the Christian religion, as
+set forth in the New Testament, I must be permitted to say, that there
+is no such thing as a rule or doctrine by which we are directed, or can
+be justified, in waging a war for religion. The idea is subversive of
+the very foundations upon which it stands, which are those of peace and
+good-will among men. Religion never was and never can be a justifiable
+cause of war; but it has been too often grossly used as the pretext and
+the apology for the most unprincipled wars.
+
+I have already said, and I repeat it, that the conduct of the French to
+foreign nations can not be justified. They have given great cause of
+offence, but certainly not to all countries alike. The right honorable
+gentlemen opposite to me have made an indiscriminate catalogue of all
+the countries which the French have offended, and, in their eagerness
+to throw odium on the nation, have taken no pains to investigate the
+sources of their several quarrels. I will not detain you, sir, by
+entering into the long detail which has been given of their aggressions
+and their violences; but let me mention Sardinia as one instance which
+has been strongly insisted upon. Did the French attack Sardinia when
+at peace with them? No such thing. The King of Sardinia had accepted
+of a subsidy from Great Britain; and Sardinia was, to all intents
+and purposes, a belligerent power. Several other instances might
+be mentioned; but though, perhaps, in the majority of instances,
+the French may be unjustifiable, is this the moment for us to dwell
+upon these enormities—to waste our time and inflame our passions by
+criminating and recriminating upon each other? There is no end to such
+a war. I have somewhere read, I think in Sir Walter Raleigh’s “History
+of the World,” of a most bloody and fatal battle which was fought by
+two opposite armies, in which almost all the combatants on both sides
+were killed, “because,” says the historian, “though they had offensive
+weapons on both sides, they had none for defence.” So, in this war of
+words, if we are to use only offensive weapons—if we are to indulge
+only in invective and abuse, the contest must be eternal.
+
+If this war of reproach and invective is to be countenanced, may not
+the French with equal reason complain of the outrages and horrors
+committed by the powers opposed to them? If we must not treat with the
+French on account of the iniquity of their former transactions, ought
+we not to be as scrupulous of connecting ourselves with other powers
+equally criminal? Surely, sir, if we must be thus rigid in scrutinizing
+the conduct of an enemy, we ought to be equally careful in not
+committing ourselves, our honor, and our safety, with an ally who has
+manifested the same want of respect for the rights of other nations.
+Surely, if it is material to know the character of a power with whom
+you are about only to treat for peace, it is more material to know the
+character of allies with whom you are about to enter into the closest
+connection of friendship, and for whose exertions you are about to pay.
+Now, sir, what was the conduct of your own allies to Poland? Is there
+a single atrocity of the French, in Italy, in Switzerland, in Egypt,
+if you please, more unprincipled and inhuman than that of Russia,
+Austria, and Prussia, in Poland? What has there been in the conduct of
+the French to foreign powers; what in the violation of solemn treaties;
+what in the plunder, devastation, and dismemberment of unoffending
+countries; what in the horrors and murders perpetrated upon the subdued
+victims of their rage in any district which they have overrun, worse
+than the conduct of those three great powers in the miserable, devoted,
+and trampled-on kingdom of Poland, and who have been, or are, our
+allies in this war for religion and social order, and the rights
+of nations? “Oh! but you regretted the partition of Poland!” Yes,
+regretted! you regretted the violence, and that is all you did. You
+united yourselves with the actors; you, in fact, by your acquiescence,
+confirmed the atrocity. But they are your allies; and though they
+overran and divided Poland, there was nothing, perhaps, in the manner
+of doing it which stamped it with peculiar infamy and disgrace. The
+hero of Poland [Suwarroff], perhaps, was merciful and mild! He was “as
+much superior to Bonaparte in bravery, and in the discipline which he
+maintained, as he was superior in virtue and humanity!”[21] He was
+animated by the purest principles of Christianity, and was restrained
+in his career by the benevolent precepts which it inculcates. Was
+he? Let unfortunate Warsaw, and the miserable inhabitants of the
+suburb of Praga in particular, tell! What do we understand to have
+been the conduct of this magnanimous hero, with whom, it seems,
+Bonaparte is not to be compared? He entered the suburb of Praga, the
+most populous suburb of Warsaw; and there he let his soldiery loose
+on the miserable, unarmed, and unresisting people. Men, women, and
+children, nay, infants at the breast, were doomed to one indiscriminate
+massacre! Thousands of them were inhumanly, wantonly butchered! And for
+what? Because they had dared to join in a wish to meliorate their own
+condition as a people, and to improve their constitution, which had
+been confessed by their own sovereign to be in want of amendment. And
+such is the hero upon whom the cause of religion and social order is to
+repose! And such is the man whom we praise for his discipline and his
+virtue, and whom we hold out as our boast and our dependence; while the
+conduct of Bonaparte unfits him to be even treated with as an enemy?
+
+But the behavior of the French toward Switzerland raises all the
+indignation of the right honorable gentleman, and inflames his
+eloquence. I admire the indignation which he expresses, and I think he
+felt it, in speaking of this country, so dear and so congenial to every
+man who loves the sacred name of liberty. “He who loves Liberty,” says
+the right honorable gentleman, “thought himself at home on the favored
+and happy mountains of Switzerland, where she seemed to have taken up
+her abode under a sort of implied compact, among all other states,
+that she should not be disturbed in this her chosen asylum.” I admire
+the eloquence of the right honorable gentleman in speaking of this
+country of liberty and peace, to which every man would desire, once in
+his life at least, to make a pilgrimage! But who, let me ask him, first
+proposed to the Swiss people to _depart from the neutrality_, which was
+their chief protection, and to join the confederacy against the French?
+I aver that a noble relation of mine [Lord Robert Fitzgerald], then the
+Minister of England to the Swiss Cantons, was instructed, in direct
+terms, to propose to the Swiss, by an official note, to break from the
+safe line they had laid down for themselves, and to tell them, “in such
+a contest neutrality was criminal.” I know that noble Lord too well,
+though I have not been in habits of intercourse with him of late, from
+the employments in which he has been engaged, to suspect that he would
+have presented such a paper without the express instructions of his
+court, or that he would have gone beyond those instructions.
+
+But was it only to Switzerland that this sort of language was held?
+What was our language also to Tuscany and Genoa? An honorable
+gentleman [Mr. Canning] has denied the authenticity of a pretended
+letter which has been circulated, and ascribed to Lord Harvey. He says,
+it is all a fable and a forgery. Be it so; but is it also a fable that
+Lord Harvey did speak in terms to the Grand Duke, which he considered
+as offensive and insulting? I can not tell, for I was not present; but
+was it not, and is it not, believed? Is it a fable that Lord Harvey
+went into the closet of the Grand Duke, laid his watch on the table
+and demanded, in a peremptory manner, that he should, within a certain
+number of minutes (I think I have heard within a quarter of an hour),
+determine, aye or no, to dismiss the French Minister, and order him
+out of his dominions, with the menace, that if he did not, the English
+fleet should bombard Leghorn? Will the honorable gentleman deny this
+also? I certainly do not know it from my own knowledge; but I know that
+persons of the first credit, then at Florence, have stated these facts,
+and that they have never been contradicted. It is true that, upon the
+Grand Duke’s complaint of this indignity, Lord Harvey was recalled;
+but was the _principle_ recalled? was the mission recalled? Did not
+ministers persist in the demand which Lord Harvey had made, perhaps
+ungraciously? and was not the Grand Duke forced, in consequence, to
+dismiss the French Minister? and did they not drive him to enter into
+an unwilling war with the republic? It is true that he afterward made
+his peace, and that, having done so, he was treated severely and
+unjustly by the French; but what do I conclude from all this, but that
+we have no right to be scrupulous, we who have violated the respect
+due to peaceable powers ourselves, in this war, which, more than any
+other that ever afflicted human nature, has been distinguished by the
+greatest number of disgusting and outrageous insults by the great to
+the smaller powers? And I infer from this, also, that the instances not
+being confined to the French, but having been perpetrated by every one
+of the allies, and by England as much as by others, we have no right,
+either in personal character, or from our own deportment, to refuse to
+treat with the French on this ground. Need I speak of your conduct to
+Genoa also? Perhaps the note delivered by Mr. Drake was also a forgery.
+Perhaps the blockade of the port never took place. It is impossible
+to deny the facts, which were so glaring at the time. It is a painful
+thing to me, sir, to be obliged to go back to these unfortunate
+periods of the history of this war, and of the conduct of this country;
+but I am forced to the task by the use which has been made of the
+atrocities of the French as an argument against negotiation. I think I
+have said enough to prove, that if the French have been guilty, we have
+not been innocent. Nothing but determined incredulity can make us deaf
+and blind to our own acts, when we are so ready to yield an assent to
+all the reproaches which are thrown out on the enemy, and upon which
+reproaches we are gravely told to continue the war.
+
+“But the French,” it seems, “have behaved ill everywhere. They seized
+on Venice, which had preserved the most exact neutrality, or rather,”
+as it is hinted, “had manifested symptoms of friendship to them.” I
+agree with the right honorable gentleman, it was an abominable act.
+I am not the apologist, much less the advocate, of their iniquities;
+neither will I countenance them in their pretences for the injustice.
+I do not think that much regard is to be paid to the charges which a
+triumphant soldiery bring on the conduct of a people whom they have
+overrun. Pretences for outrage will never be wanting to the strong,
+when they wish to trample on the weak; but when we accuse the French
+of having seized on Venice, after stipulating for its neutrality, and
+guaranteeing its independence, we should also remember the excuse that
+they made for the violence, namely, that their troops had been attacked
+and murdered. I say I am always incredulous about such excuses; but I
+think it fair to hear whatever can be alleged on the other side. We
+can not take one side of a story only. Candor demands that we should
+examine the whole before we make up our minds on the guilt. I can not
+think it quite fair to state the view of the subject of one party
+as indisputable fact, without even mentioning what the other party
+has to say for itself. But, sir, is this all? Though the perfidy of
+the French to the Venetians be clear and palpable, was it worse in
+morals, in principle, and in example, than the conduct of Austria? My
+honorable friend [Mr. Whitbread] properly asked: “Is not the receiver
+as bad as the thief?” If the French seized on the territory of Venice,
+did not the Austrians agree to receive it? “But this,” it seems, “is
+not the same thing.” It is quite in the nature and within the rule of
+diplomatic morality, for Austria to receive the country which was
+thus seized upon unjustly. “The Emperor took it as a compensation.
+It was his by barter. He was not answerable for the guilt by which
+it was obtained.” What is this, sir, but the false and abominable
+reasoning with which we have been so often disgusted on the subject
+of the slave-trade? Just in the same manner have I heard a notorious
+wholesale dealer in this inhuman traffic justify his abominable trade.
+“I am not guilty of the horrible crime of tearing that mother from her
+infants; that husband from his wife; of depopulating that village; of
+depriving that family of their sons, the support of their aged parents!
+No, thank Heaven! I am not guilty of this horror. I only bought them in
+the fair way of trade. They were brought to the market; they had been
+guilty of crimes, or they had been made prisoners of war; they were
+accused of witchcraft, of obi, or of some other sort of sorcery; and
+they were brought to me for sale. I gave a valuable consideration for
+them. But God forbid that I should have stained my soul with the guilt
+of dragging them from their friends and families!” Such has been the
+precious defence of the slave-trade, and such is the argument set up
+for Austria in this instance of Venice. “I did not commit the crime
+of trampling on the independence of Venice; I did not seize on the
+city; I gave a _quid pro quo_. It was a matter of barter and indemnity;
+I gave half a million of human beings to be put under the yoke of
+France in another district, and I had these people turned over to me
+in return!”[22] This, sir, is the defence of Austria, and under such
+detestable sophistry is the infernal traffic in human flesh, whether
+in white or black, to be continued, and even justified! At no time has
+that diabolical traffic been carried to a greater length than during
+the present war, and that by England herself, as well as Austria and
+Russia.
+
+“But France,” it seems, “has roused all the nations of Europe against
+her”; and the long catalogue has been read to you, to prove that she
+must have been atrocious to provoke them all. Is it true, sir, that
+she has roused them all? It does not say much for the address of his
+Majesty’s ministers, if this be the case. What, sir! have all your
+negotiations, all your declamation, all your money, been squandered
+in vain? Have you not succeeded in stirring the indignation, and
+engaging the assistance, of a single power? But you do yourselves
+injustice. Between the crimes of France and your money the rage _has_
+been excited, and full as much is due to your seductions as to her
+atrocities. My honorable and learned friend [Mr. Erskine] was correct,
+therefore, in his argument; for you can not take both sides of the
+case; you can not accuse France of having provoked all Europe, and at
+the same time claim the merit of having roused all Europe to join you.
+
+You talk, sir, of your allies. I wish to know who your allies are?
+Russia is one of them, I suppose. Did France attack Russia? Has the
+_magnanimous_ Paul taken the field for social order and religion, or on
+account of personal aggression?[23] The Emperor of Russia has declared
+himself Grand Master of Malta, though his religion is as opposite to
+that of the Knights as ours is; and he is as much considered a heretic
+by the Church of Rome as we are. The King of Great Britain might, with
+as much reason and propriety, declare himself the head of the order of
+the Chartreuse monks. Not content with taking to himself the commandery
+of this institution of Malta, Paul has even created a married man a
+Knight, contrary to all the most sacred rules and regulations of the
+order; and yet this ally of ours is fighting for religion! So much for
+his religion. Let us see his regard to social order! How does he show
+his abhorrence of the principles of the French, in their violation of
+the rights of other nations? What has been his conduct to Denmark? He
+says to her: “You have seditious clubs at Copenhagen; no Danish vessel
+shall therefore enter the ports of Russia!” He holds a still more
+despotic language to Hamburg. He threatens to lay an embargo on her
+trade; and he forces her to surrender up men who are claimed by the
+French as their citizens, whether truly or not, I do not inquire. He
+threatens her with his own vengeance if she refuse, and subjects her
+to that of the French if she comply. And what has been his conduct to
+Spain? He first sends away the Spanish minister from Petersburgh, and
+then complains, as a great insult, that his minister was dismissed from
+Madrid! This is one of our allies; and he has declared that the object
+for which he has taken up arms is to replace the ancient race of the
+house of Bourbon on the throne of France, and that he does this for the
+cause of religion and social order! Such is the respect for religion
+and social order which he himself displays, and such are the examples
+of it with which we coalesce.
+
+No man regrets, sir, more than I do, the enormities that France has
+committed; but how do they bear upon the question as it at present
+stands? Are we forever to deprive ourselves of the benefits of peace
+because France has perpetrated acts of injustice? Sir, we can not
+acquit ourselves upon such ground. We _have_ negotiated. With the
+knowledge of these acts of injustice and disorder, we have treated
+with them twice; yet the right honorable gentleman can not enter into
+negotiation with them again; and it is worth while to attend to the
+reasons that he gives for refusing their offer. The Revolution itself
+is no more an objection now than it was in the year 1796, when he did
+negotiate. For the government of France at that time was surely as
+unstable as it is at present. * * *
+
+But you say you have not refused to treat. You have stated a case in
+which you will be ready immediately to enter into a negotiation, viz.,
+the restoration of the House of Bourbon. But you deny that this is
+a _sine qua non_; and in your nonsensical language, which I do not
+understand, you talk of “limited possibilities,” which may induce
+you to treat without the restoration of the House of Bourbon. But do
+you state what they are? Now, sir, I say, that if you put one case
+upon which you declare that you are willing to treat immediately, and
+say that there are other possible cases which may induce you to treat
+hereafter, without mentioning what these possible cases are, you do
+state a _sine qua non_ of immediate treaty. Suppose I have an estate
+to sell, and I say my demand is £1,000 for it. For that sum I will
+sell the estate immediately. To be sure, there may be other terms upon
+which I may be willing to part with it; but I mention nothing of them.
+The £1,000 is the only condition that I state at the time. Will any
+gentleman assert that I do not make the £1,000 the _sine qua non_ of
+the immediate sale? Thus you say the restoration of the Bourbons is not
+the only possible ground; but you give no other. This is your project.
+Do you demand a counter project? Do you follow your own rule? Do you
+not do the thing of which you complained in the enemy? You seemed to be
+afraid of receiving another proposition; and, by confining yourselves
+to this one point, you make it in fact, though not in terms, your _sine
+qua non_.
+
+But the right honorable gentleman, in his speech, does what the
+official note avoids. He finds there the convenient words, “experience
+and the evidence of facts.” Upon these he goes into detail; and
+in order to convince the House that new evidence is required, he
+reverts to all the earliest acts and crimes of the Revolution; to
+all the atrocities of all the governments that have passed away; and
+he contends that he must have experience that these foul crimes are
+repented of, and that a purer and a better system is adopted in France,
+by which he may be sure that they will be capable of maintaining the
+relations of peace and amity. Sir, these are not conciliatory words;
+nor is this a practicable ground to gain experience. Does he think it
+possible that evidence of a peaceable demeanor can be obtained in war?
+What does he mean to say to the French consul? “Until you shall, in
+_war_, behave yourself in a _peaceable_ manner, I will not treat with
+you!” Is there not in this something extremely ridiculous? In duels,
+indeed, we have often heard of such language. Two gentlemen go out and
+fight, when, having discharged their pistols at one another, it is not
+unusual for one of them to say to the other: “Now I am satisfied. I
+see that you are a man of honor, and we are friends again.” There is
+something, by-the-by, ridiculous, even here. But between nations it is
+more than ridiculous. It is criminal. It is a ground which no principle
+can justify, and which is as impracticable as it is impious. That two
+nations should be set on to _beat_ one another into friendship, is
+too abominable even for the fiction of romance; but for a statesman
+seriously and gravely to lay it down as a system upon which he means to
+act, is monstrous. What can we say of such a test as he means to put
+the French Government to, but that it is hopeless? It is in the nature
+of war to inflame animosity; to exasperate, not to soothe; to widen,
+not to approximate. So long as this is to be acted upon, I say it is in
+vain to hope that we can have the evidence which we require.
+
+The right honorable gentleman, however, thinks otherwise; and he points
+out four distinct possible cases, besides the re-establishment of the
+Bourbon family, in which he would agree to treat with the French.
+
+(1) “If Bonaparte shall conduct himself so as to convince him that
+he has abandoned the principles which were objectionable in his
+predecessors, and that he will be actuated by a more moderate system.”
+I ask you, sir, if this is likely to be ascertained in war? It is the
+nature of war not to allay, but to inflame the passions; and it is not
+by the invective and abuse which have been thrown upon him and his
+government, nor by the continued irritations which war is sure to give,
+that the virtues of moderation and forbearance are to be nourished.
+
+(2) “If, contrary to the expectations of ministers, the people of
+France shall show a disposition to acquiesce in the government of
+Bonaparte.” Does the right honorable gentleman mean to say, that
+because it is a usurpation on the part of the present chief, that
+therefore the people are not likely to acquiesce in it? I have not
+time, sir, to discuss the question of this usurpation, or whether
+it is likely to be permanent; but I certainly have not so good an
+opinion of the French, nor of any people, as to believe that it will
+be short-lived, _merely_ because it was a usurpation, and because
+it is a system of military despotism. Cromwell was a usurper; and
+in many points there may be found a resemblance between him and the
+present Chief Consul of France. There is no doubt but that, on
+several occasions of his life, Cromwell’s sincerity may be questioned,
+particularly in his self-denying ordinance, in his affected piety,
+and other things; but would it not have been insanity in France and
+Spain to refuse to treat with him because he was a usurper or wanted
+candor? No, sir, these are not the maxims by which governments are
+actuated. They do not inquire so much into the means by which power
+may have been acquired, as into the fact of where the power resides.
+The people did acquiesce in the government of Cromwell. But it may be
+said that the splendor of his talents, the vigor of his administration,
+the high tone with which he spoke to foreign nations, the success of
+his arms, and the character which he gave to the English name, induced
+the nation to acquiesce in his usurpation; and that we must not try
+Bonaparte by his example. Will it be said that Bonaparte is not a man
+of great abilities? Will it be said that he has not, by his victories,
+thrown a splendor over even the violence of the Revolution, and that
+he does not conciliate the French people by the high and lofty tone
+in which he speaks to foreign nations? Are not the French, then, as
+likely as the English in the case of Cromwell, to acquiesce in his
+government? If they should do so, the right honorable gentleman may
+find that this possible predicament may fail him. He may find that
+though one power may make war, it requires two to make peace. He may
+find that Bonaparte was as insincere as himself in the proposition
+which he made; and in his turn he may come forward and say: “I have
+no occasion now for concealment. It is true that, in the beginning of
+the year 1800, I offered to treat, not because I wished for peace,
+but because the people of France wished for it; and besides, my old
+resources being exhausted, and there being no means of carrying on
+the war without ‘a new and solid system of finance,’ I pretended to
+treat, because I wished to procure the unanimous assent of the French
+people to this ‘new and solid system of finance.’ Did you think I was
+in earnest? You were deceived. I now throw off the mask. I have gained
+my point, and I reject your offers with scorn.”[24] Is it not a very
+possible case that he may use this language? Is it not within the right
+honorable gentleman’s _knowledge of human nature_?[25] But even if this
+should not be the case, will not the very test which you require, the
+acquiescence of the people of France in his government, give him an
+advantage-ground in the negotiation which he does not now possess. Is
+it quite sure, that when he finds himself safe in his seat, he will
+treat on the same terms as at present, and that you will get a better
+peace some time hence than you might reasonably hope to obtain at
+this moment? Will he not have one interest less to do it? and do you
+not overlook a favorable occasion for a chance which is exceedingly
+doubtful? These are the considerations which I would urge to his
+Majesty’s ministers against the dangerous experiment of waiting for the
+acquiescence of the people of France.
+
+(3) “If the allies of this country shall be less successful than they
+have every reason to expect they will be in stirring up the people of
+France against Bonaparte, and in the further prosecution of the war.”
+And,
+
+(4) “If the pressure of the war should be heavier upon us than it
+would be convenient for us to continue to bear.” These are the other
+two possible emergencies in which the right honorable gentleman would
+treat even with Bonaparte. Sir, I have often blamed the right honorable
+gentleman for being disingenuous and insincere. On the present occasion
+I certainly can not charge him with any such thing. He has made
+to-night a most honest confession. He is open and candid. He tells
+Bonaparte fairly what he has to expect. “I mean,” says he, “to do
+every thing in my power to raise up the people of France against you;
+I have engaged a number of allies, and our combined efforts shall be
+used to excite insurrection and civil war in France. I will strive
+to murder you, or to get you sent away. If I succeed, well; but if I
+fail, then I will treat with you. My resources being exhausted; even
+my ‘solid system of finance’ having failed to supply me with the means
+of keeping together my allies, and of feeding the discontents I have
+excited in France, then you may expect to see me renounce my high tone,
+my attachment to the House of Bourbon, my abhorrence of your crimes, my
+alarm at your principles; for then I shall be ready to own that, on the
+balance and comparison of circumstances, there will be less danger in
+concluding a peace than in the continuance of war!” Is this political
+language for one state to hold to another? And what sort of peace does
+the right honorable gentleman expect to receive in that case? Does he
+think that Bonaparte would grant to baffled insolence, to humiliated
+pride, to disappointment, and to imbecility the same terms which he
+would be ready to give now? The right honorable gentleman can not have
+forgotten what he said on another occasion:
+
+                “Potuit quæ plurima virtus
+    Esse, fuit. Toto certatum est corpore regni.”[26]
+
+He would then have to repeat his words, but with a different
+application. He would have to say: “All our efforts are vain. We have
+exhausted our strength. Our designs are impracticable, and we must sue
+to you for peace.”
+
+Sir, what is the question to-night? We are called upon to support
+ministers in refusing a frank, candid, and respectful offer of
+negotiation, and to countenance them in continuing the war. Now I
+would put the question in another way. Suppose that ministers had
+been inclined to adopt the line of conduct which they pursued in 1796
+and 1797, and that to-night, instead of a question on a war address,
+it had been an address to his Majesty to thank him for accepting the
+overture, and for opening a negotiation to treat for peace, I ask the
+gentlemen opposite—I appeal to the whole five hundred and fifty-eight
+representatives of the people—to lay their hands upon their hearts and
+to say whether they would not have cordially voted for such an address.
+Would they, or would they not? Yes, sir, if the address had breathed a
+spirit of peace, your benches would have resounded with rejoicings, and
+with praises of a measure that was likely to bring back the blessings
+of tranquillity. On the present occasion, then, I ask for the vote
+of no gentlemen but of those who, in the secret confession of their
+conscience, admit, at this instant, while they hear me, that they would
+have cheerfully and heartily voted with the minister for an address
+directly the reverse of the one proposed. If every such gentleman were
+to vote with me, I should be this night in the greatest majority that
+ever I had the honor to vote with in this House. I do not know that
+the right honorable gentleman would find, even on the benches around
+him, a single individual who would not vote with me. I am sure he would
+not find many. I do not know that in this House I could single out
+the individual who would think himself bound by consistency to vote
+against the right honorable gentleman on an address for negotiation.
+There may be some, but they are very few. I do know, indeed, one most
+honorable man in another place, whose purity and integrity I respect,
+though I lament the opinion he has formed on this subject, who would
+think himself bound, from the uniform consistency of his life, to vote
+against an address for negotiation. Earl Fitzwilliam would, I verily
+believe, do so. He would feel himself bound, from the previous votes
+he has given, to declare his objection to all treaty. But I own I do
+not know more in either House of Parliament. There may be others, but
+I do not know them. What, then, is the House of Commons come to, when,
+notwithstanding their support given to the right honorable gentleman in
+1796 and 1797 on his entering into negotiation; notwithstanding their
+inward conviction that they would vote with him this moment for the
+same measure; who, after supporting the minister in his negotiation
+for a solid system of finance, can now bring themselves to countenance
+his abandonment of the ground he took, and to support him in refusing
+all negotiation! What will be said of gentlemen who shall vote in this
+way, and yet feel, in their consciences, that they would have, with
+infinitely more readiness, voted the other?
+
+Sir, we have heard to-night a great many most acrimonious invectives
+against Bonaparte, against all the course of his conduct, and
+against the unprincipled manner in which he seized upon the reins of
+government. I will not make his defence. I think all this sort of
+invective, which is used only to inflame the passions of this House and
+of the country, exceedingly ill-timed, and very impolitic. But I say
+I will not make his defence. I am not sufficiently in possession of
+materials upon which to form an opinion on the character and conduct
+of this extraordinary man. On his arrival in France, he found the
+government in a very unsettled state, and the whole affairs of the
+Republic deranged, crippled, and involved. He thought it necessary to
+reform the government; and he did reform it, just in the way in which
+a military man may be expected to carry on a reform. He seized on the
+whole authority for himself. It will not be expected from me that I
+should either approve or apologize for such an act. I am certainly
+not for reforming governments by such expedients; but how this House
+can be so violently indignant at the idea of military despotism, is,
+I own, a little singular, when I see the composure with which they
+can observe it nearer home; nay, when I see them regard it as a
+frame of government most peculiarly suited to the exercise of free
+opinion, on a subject the most important of any that can engage the
+attention of a people. Was it not the system which was so _happily_
+and so _advantageously_ established of late, all over Ireland, and
+which even now the government may, at its pleasure, proclaim over
+the whole of that kingdom? Are not the persons and property of the
+people left, in many districts, at this moment, to the entire will of
+military commanders? and is not this held out as peculiarly proper and
+advantageous, at a time when the people of Ireland are freely, and with
+unbiassed judgments, to discuss the most interesting question of a
+legislative union? Notwithstanding the existence of martial law, so far
+do we think Ireland from being enslaved, that we presume it precisely
+the period and the circumstances under which she may best declare her
+free opinion? Now, really, sir, I can not think that gentlemen who talk
+in this way about Ireland, can, with a good grace, rail at military
+despotism in France.
+
+But, it seems, “Bonaparte has broken his oaths. He has violated his
+oath of fidelity to the constitution of the third year.” Sir, I am not
+one of those who hold that any such oaths ought ever to be exacted.
+They are seldom or ever of any effect; and I am not for sporting with
+a thing so sacred as an oath. I think it would be good to lay aside
+all such oaths. Who ever heard that, in revolutions, the oath of
+fidelity to the former government was ever regarded, or even that,
+when violated, it was imputed to the persons as a crime? In times of
+revolution, men who take up arms are called rebels. If they fail, they
+are adjudged to be traitors; but who before ever heard of their being
+perjured? On the restoration of King Charles II., those who had taken
+up arms for the Commonwealth were stigmatized as rebels and traitors,
+but not as men forsworn. Was the Earl of Devonshire charged with being
+perjured, on account of the allegiance he had sworn to the House of
+Stuart, and the part he took in those struggles which preceded and
+brought about the Revolution? The violation of oaths of allegiance was
+never imputed to the people of England, and will never be imputed to
+any people. But who brings up the question of oaths? He who strives
+to make twenty-four millions of persons violate the oaths they have
+taken to their present constitution, and who desires to re-establish
+the House of Bourbon by such violation of their vows. I put it so,
+sir, because, if the question of oaths be of the least consequence, it
+is equal on both sides! He who desires the whole people of France to
+perjure themselves, and who hopes for success in his project only upon
+their doing so, surely can not make it a charge against Bonaparte that
+he has done the same!
+
+“Ah! but Bonaparte has declared it as his opinion, that the two
+governments of Great Britain and of France can not exist together.
+After the treaty of Campo Formio, he sent two confidential persons,
+Berthier and Monge, to the Directory, to say so in his name.” Well, and
+what is there in this absurd and puerile assertion, if it were ever
+made? Has not the right honorable gentleman, in this House, said the
+same thing? In this at least they resemble one another! They have both
+made use of this assertion; and I believe that these two illustrious
+persons are the only two on earth who think it! But let us turn the
+tables. We ought to put ourselves at times in the place of the enemy,
+if we are desirous of really examining with candor and fairness the
+dispute between us. How may they not interpret the speeches of
+ministers and their friends, in both Houses of the British Parliament?
+If we are to be told of the idle speech of Berthier and Monge, may they
+not also bring up speeches, in which it has not been merely hinted,
+but broadly asserted, that “the two constitutions of England and
+France could not exist together?” May not these offences and charges
+be reciprocated without end? Are we ever to go on in this miserable
+squabble about words? Are we still, as we happen to be successful on
+the one side or the other, to bring up these impotent accusations,
+insults, and provocations against each other; and only when we are
+beaten and unfortunate, to think of treating? Oh! pity the condition of
+man, gracious God, and save us from such a system of malevolence, in
+which all our old and venerated prejudices are to be done away, and by
+which we are to be taught to consider war as the natural state of man,
+and peace but as a dangerous and difficult extremity!
+
+Sir, this temper must be corrected. It is a diabolical spirit, and
+would lead to an interminable war. Our history is full of instances
+that, where we have overlooked a proffered occasion to treat, we
+have uniformly suffered by delay. At what time did we ever profit
+by obstinately persevering in war? We accepted at Ryswick the terms
+we refused five years before, and the same peace which was concluded
+at Utrecht might have been obtained at Gertruydenberg; and as to
+security from the future machinations or ambition of the French, I
+ask you what security you ever had or could have? Did the different
+treaties made with Louis XIV. serve to tie up his hands, to restrain
+his ambition, or to stifle his restless spirit? At what time, in old or
+in recent periods, could you safely repose on the honor, forbearance,
+and moderation of the French Government? Was there _ever_ an idea of
+refusing to treat, because the peace might be afterward insecure?
+The peace of 1763 was not accompanied with securities; and it was no
+sooner made than the French court began, as usual, its intrigues. And
+what security did the right honorable gentleman exact at the peace of
+1783, in which he was engaged? Were we rendered secure by that peace?
+The right honorable gentleman knows well that, soon after that peace,
+the French formed a plan, in conjunction with the Dutch, of attacking
+our India possessions, of raising up the native powers against us, and
+of driving us out of India; as they were more recently desirous of
+doing, only with this difference, that the cabinet of France formerly
+entered into this project in a moment of profound peace, and when they
+conceived us to be lulled into a perfect security. After making the
+peace of 1783, the right honorable gentleman and his friends went out,
+and I, among others, came into office. Suppose, sir, that we had taken
+up the jealousy upon which the right honorable gentleman now acts, and
+had refused to ratify the peace which he had made. Suppose that we had
+said—No! France is acting a perfidious part; we see no security for
+England in this treaty; they want only a respite in order to attack
+us again in an important part of our dominions, and we ought not to
+confirm the treaty. I ask you would the right honorable gentleman have
+supported us in this refusal? I say, that upon his present reasoning
+he ought. But I put it fairly to him, would he have supported us in
+refusing to ratify the treaty upon such a pretence? He certainly ought
+not, and I am sure he would not; but the course of reasoning which
+he now assumes would have justified his taking such a ground. On the
+contrary, I am persuaded that he would have said: “This security is a
+refinement upon jealousy. You have security, the only security that you
+can ever expect to get. It is the present interest of France to make
+peace. She will keep it, if it be her interest. She will break it, if
+it be her interest. Such is the state of nations; and you have nothing
+but your own vigilance for your security.”
+
+“It is not the interest of Bonaparte,” it seems, “sincerely to enter
+into a negotiation, or, if he should even make peace, sincerely to
+keep it.” But how are we to decide upon his sincerity? By refusing to
+treat with him? Surely, if we mean to discover his sincerity, we ought
+to hear the propositions which he desires to make. “But peace would
+be unfriendly to his system of military despotism.” Sir, I hear a
+great deal about the short-lived nature of military despotism. I wish
+the history of the world would bear gentlemen out in this description
+of it. Was not the government erected by Augustus Cæsar a military
+despotism? and yet it endured for six or seven hundred years. Military
+despotism, unfortunately, is too likely in its nature to be permanent,
+and it is not true that it depends on the life of the first usurper.
+Though half of the Roman emperors were murdered, yet the military
+despotism went on; and so it would be, I fear, in France. If Bonaparte
+should disappear from the scene, to make room, perhaps, for Berthier,
+or any other general, what difference would that make in the quality
+of French despotism, or in our relation to the country? We may as
+safely treat with a Bonaparte, or with any of his successors, be they
+whom they may, as we could with a Louis XVI., a Louis XVII., or a
+Louis XVIII. There is no difference but in the name. Where the power
+essentially resides, thither we ought to go for peace.
+
+But, sir, if we are to reason on the fact, I should think that it is
+the interest of Bonaparte to make peace. A lover of military glory, as
+that general must necessarily be, may he not think that his measure of
+glory is full; that it may be tarnished by a reverse of fortune, and
+can hardly be increased by any new laurels? He must feel that, in the
+situation to which he is now raised, he can no longer depend on his own
+fortune, his own genius, and his own talents, for a continuance of his
+success. He must be under the necessity of employing other generals,
+whose misconduct or incapacity might endanger his power, or whose
+triumphs even might affect the interest which he holds in the opinion
+of the French. Peace, then, would secure to him what he has achieved,
+and fix the inconstancy of fortune. But this will not be his only
+motive. He must see that France also requires a respite—a breathing
+interval, to recruit her wasted strength. To procure her this respite,
+would be, perhaps, the attainment of more solid glory, as well as the
+means of acquiring more solid power, than any thing which he can hope
+to gain from arms, and from the proudest triumphs. May he not, then, be
+zealous to secure this fame, the only species of fame, perhaps, that
+is worth acquiring? Nay, granting that his soul may still burn with
+the thirst of military exploits, is it not likely that he is disposed
+to yield to the feelings of the French people, and to consolidate
+his power by consulting their interests? I have a right to argue in
+this way when suppositions of his insincerity are reasoned upon on
+the other side. Sir, these aspersions are, in truth, always idle, and
+even mischievous. I have been too long accustomed to hear imputations
+and calumnies thrown out upon great and honorable characters, to be
+much influenced by them. My honorable and learned friend [Mr. Erskine]
+has paid this night a most just, deserved, and eloquent tribute of
+applause to the memory of that great and unparalleled character, who
+is so recently lost to the world.[27] I must, like him, beg leave
+to dwell a moment on the venerable GEORGE WASHINGTON, though I know
+that it is impossible for me to bestow any thing like adequate praise
+on a character which gave us, more than any other human being, the
+example of a perfect man; yet, good, great, and unexampled as General
+Washington was, I can remember the time when he was not better spoken
+of in this House than Bonaparte is at present. The right honorable
+gentleman who opened this debate [Mr. Dundas] may remember in what
+terms of disdain, or virulence, even of contempt, General Washington
+was spoken of by gentlemen on that side of the House. Does he not
+recollect with what marks of indignation any member was stigmatized
+as an enemy to his country who mentioned with common respect the name
+of General Washington? If a negotiation had then been proposed to be
+opened with that great man, what would have been said? Would you treat
+with a rebel, a traitor! What an example would you not give by such
+an act! I do not know whether the right honorable gentleman may not
+yet possess some of his old prejudices on the subject. I hope not: I
+hope by this time we are all convinced that a republican government,
+like that of America, may exist without danger or injury to social
+order, or to established monarchies. They have happily shown that they
+can maintain the relations of peace and amity with other states. They
+have shown, too, that they are alive to the feelings of honor; but
+they do not lose sight of plain good sense and discretion. They have
+not refused to negotiate with the French, and they have accordingly
+the hopes of a speedy termination of every difference. We cry up their
+conduct, but we do not imitate it. At the beginning of the struggle,
+we were told that the French were setting up a set of wild and
+impracticable theories, and that we ought not to be misled by them;
+that they were phantoms with which we could not grapple. Now we are
+told that we must not treat, because, out of the lottery, Bonaparte
+has drawn such a prize as military despotism. Is military despotism
+a theory? One would think that that is one of the practical things
+which ministers might understand, and to which _they_ would have no
+particular objection. But what is our present conduct founded on but
+a theory, and that a most wild and ridiculous theory? For what are we
+fighting? Not for a principle; not for security; not for conquest;
+but merely for an experiment and a speculation, to discover whether a
+gentleman at Paris may not turn out a better man than we now take him
+to be. * * *
+
+Sir, I wish the atrocities, of which we hear so much, and which I
+abhor as much as any man, were, indeed, unexampled. I fear that they
+do not belong exclusively to the French. When the right honorable
+gentleman speaks of the extraordinary successes of the last campaign,
+he does not mention the horrors by which some of these successes were
+accompanied. Naples, for instance, has been, among others, what is
+called _delivered_; and yet, if I am rightly informed, it has been
+stained and polluted by murders so ferocious, and by cruelties of
+every kind so abhorrent, that the heart shudders at the recital. It
+has been said, not only that the miserable victims of the rage and
+brutality of the fanatics were savagely murdered, but that, in many
+instances, their flesh was eaten and devoured by the cannibals, who
+are the advocates and the instruments of social order! Nay, England is
+not totally exempt from reproach, if the rumors which are circulated
+be true. I will mention a fact, to give ministers the opportunity, if
+it be false, to wipe away the stain that it must otherwise affix on the
+British name. It is said, that a party of the republican inhabitants of
+Naples took shelter in the fortress of the Castel de Uovo. They were
+besieged by a detachment from the royal army, to whom they refused
+to surrender; but demanded that a British officer should be brought
+forward, and to him they capitulated. They made terms with him under
+the sanction of the British name. It was agreed that their persons and
+property should be safe, and that they should be conveyed to Toulon.
+They were accordingly put on board a vessel; but, before they sailed,
+their property was confiscated, numbers of them taken out, thrown into
+dungeons, and some of them, I understand, notwithstanding the British
+guaranty, actually executed![28]
+
+Where, then, sir, is this war, which on every side is pregnant with
+such horrors, to be carried? Where is it to stop? Not till we establish
+the House of Bourbon! And this you cherish the hope of doing, because
+you have had a successful campaign. Why, sir, before this you have had
+a successful campaign. The situation of the allies, with all they have
+gained, is surely not to be compared now to what it was when you had
+taken Valenciennes, Quesnoy, Condé, etc., which induced some gentlemen
+in this House to prepare themselves for a march to Paris. With all that
+you have gained, you surely will not say that the prospect is brighter
+now than it was then. What have you gained but the recovery of a part
+of what you before lost? One campaign is successful to you; another to
+them; and in this way, animated by the vindictive passions of revenge,
+hatred, and rancor, which are infinitely more flagitious, even, than
+those of ambition and the thirst of power, you may go on forever; as,
+with such black incentives, I see no end to human misery.
+
+And all this without an intelligible motive. All this because you may
+gain a better peace a year or two hence! So that we are called upon to
+go on merely as a speculation. We must keep Bonaparte for some time
+longer at war, as a state of probation. Gracious God, sir! is war a
+state of probation? Is peace a rash system? Is it dangerous for nations
+to live in amity with each other? Are your vigilance, your policy,
+your common powers of observation, to be extinguished by putting
+an end to the horrors of war? Can not this state of probation be as
+well undergone without adding to the catalogue of human sufferings?
+“But we must _pause_!” What! must the bowels of Great Britain be torn
+out—her best blood be spilled—her treasure wasted—that you may make an
+experiment? Put yourselves, oh! that you would put yourselves in the
+field of battle, and learn to judge of the sort of horrors that you
+excite! In former wars a man might, at least, have some feeling, some
+interest, that served to balance in his mind the impressions which a
+scene of carnage and of death must inflict. If a man had been present
+at the battle of Blenheim, for instance, and had inquired the motive
+of the battle, there was not a soldier engaged who could not have
+satisfied his curiosity, and even, perhaps, allayed his feelings. They
+were fighting, they knew, to repress the uncontrolled ambition of the
+Grand Monarch. But if a man were present now at a field of slaughter,
+and were to inquire for what they were fighting—“Fighting!” would be
+the answer; “they are not fighting; they are _pausing_.” “Why is that
+man expiring? Why is that other writhing with agony? What means this
+implacable fury?” The answer must be: “You are quite wrong, sir;
+you deceive yourself—they are not fighting—do not disturb them—they
+are merely _pausing_! This man is not expiring with agony—that man
+is not dead—he is only _pausing_! Lord help you, sir! they are not
+angry with one another; they have now no cause of quarrel; but their
+country thinks that there should be a _pause_. All that you see, sir,
+is nothing like fighting—there is no harm, nor cruelty, nor bloodshed
+in it whatever; it is nothing more than a _political pause_! It is
+merely to try an experiment—to see whether Bonaparte will not behave
+himself better than heretofore; and in the meantime we have agreed to a
+_pause_, in pure friendship!” And is this the way, sir, that you are to
+show yourselves the advocates of order? You take up a system calculated
+to uncivilize the world—to destroy order—to trample on religion—to
+stifle in the heart, not merely the generosity of noble sentiment, but
+the affections of social nature; and in the prosecution of this system,
+you spread terror and devastation all around you.
+
+Sir, I have done. I have told you my opinion. I think you ought to
+have given a civil, clear, and explicit answer to the overture which
+was fairly and handsomely made you. If you were desirous that the
+negotiation should have included all your allies, as the means of
+bringing about a general peace, you should have told Bonaparte so.
+But I believe you were afraid of his agreeing to the proposal. You
+took that method before. Ay, but you say the people were anxious for
+peace in 1797. I say they are friends to peace now; and I am confident
+that you will one day acknowledge it. Believe me, they are friends
+to peace; although by the laws which you have made, restraining the
+expression of the sense of the people, public opinion can not now be
+heard as loudly and unequivocally as heretofore. But I will not go into
+the internal state of this country. It is too afflicting to the heart
+to see the strides which have been made by means of, and under the
+miserable pretext of, this war, against liberty of every kind, both of
+power of speech and of writing, and to observe in another kingdom the
+rapid approaches to that military despotism which we affect to make an
+argument against peace. I know, sir, that public opinion, if it could
+be collected, would be for peace, as much now as in 1797; and that it
+is only by public opinion, and not by a sense of their duty, or by the
+inclination of their minds, that ministers will be brought, if ever, to
+give us peace.
+
+I conclude, sir, with repeating what I said before: I ask for no
+gentleman’s vote who would have reprobated the compliance of ministers
+with the proposition of the French Government. I ask for no gentleman’s
+support to-night who would have voted against ministers, if they had
+come down and proposed to enter into a negotiation with the French. But
+I have a right to ask, and in honor, in consistency, in conscience, I
+have a right to expect, the vote of every honorable gentleman who would
+have voted with ministers in an address to his Majesty, diametrically
+opposite to the motion of this night.
+
+
+  This speech of Fox is said to have made a deep impression on the
+  House; but it appears scarcely to have weakened the opposition to
+  Napoleon’s measures as set forth in the speech of Pitt. The address
+  approving of the Government’s course was carried by the overwhelming
+  majority of 265 to 64. It was the reasoning of Pitt and the vote
+  which followed the debate that determined the general line of English
+  policy till Napoleon was landed at St. Helena. The speech of Fox,
+  though not successful in defeating the governmental policy, was the
+  ablest presentation ever made of the Opposition view.
+
+
+
+
+SIR JAMES MACKINTOSH.
+
+
+Born on the 24th of October, 1765, James Mackintosh was fifteen years
+younger than Erskine, and thirty-five younger than Burke. He early
+showed a remarkable fondness for reading, and when he was ten years
+of age was regarded in the locality of his birth near Inverness, in
+Scotland, as “a prodigy of learning.” His favorite amusement at this
+period of his life appears to have been to gather his school-fellows
+about him and entertain them by delivering speeches in imitation of Fox
+and North, on the American war,—then the great question of the day. At
+fifteen, he entered King’s College, Aberdeen, where he soon established
+a friendship with Robert Hall, which continued through life. Their
+tastes were similar, and they devoted themselves with great
+earnestness to the study of the classics, and to the more abstruse
+forms of philosophical reasoning. They were in the habit of studying
+together and discussing the works of Berkeley, Butler, and Edwards, as
+well as those of Plato and Herodotus. This exercise, kept up during
+a large part of their collegiate course, appears to have exerted a
+great influence on the formation of their minds and tastes. Mackintosh
+afterward declared that he learned more from those discussions “than
+from all the books he ever read”; and Hall testified to the great
+ability of his companion, by saying that “he had an intellect more like
+that of Bacon than any other person of modern times.”
+
+After spending four years at Edinburgh in the study of medicine,
+Mackintosh repaired to London with a view to the practice of his
+profession. His heart seems, however, not to have been very fully
+enlisted in the work, and he was soon driven to the public press as a
+means of support. His first great work, published in 1791, commanded
+immediate attention, not only for its elegant and expressive as well
+as keen and trenchant style, but also for the enthusiastic daring with
+which a young man of twenty-six grappled with the most powerful and
+accomplished writer of the day. The volume was nothing less than a
+“Defence of the French Revolution against the Accusations of the Right
+Honorable Edmund Burke.” In point of style the work is certainly not
+equal to that of his great antagonist; and no more than four years
+later, Mackintosh himself was so frank as to say to some Frenchmen who
+complimented him: “Ah, gentlemen, since that time you have entirely
+refuted me.” But, in spite of its obvious faults, its great qualities
+as a piece of literary workmanship made a prodigious impression. Fox
+quoted it with enthusiastic approbation in the House of Commons; and
+Canning, who ridiculed the Revolution, is said to have told a friend
+that he read the book “with as much admiration as he had ever felt.”
+Three editions were immediately called for; and it may be doubted
+whether even to the present day it is not the most successful as well
+as the most powerful argument that has ever been made in opposition to
+the more celebrated treatise.
+
+The publication of this masterly review showed plainly enough that
+another great writer had appeared. The reception the work received
+encouraged Mackintosh in the gratification of his tastes; and, finding
+himself irresistibly inclining to questions of political philosophy,
+he now abandoned the profession he had already entered, and turned his
+attention to the study of law. In 1795 he was admitted to the bar. Four
+years later he produced the second great literary impression of his
+life in the publication of the “Introduction to a Course of Lectures
+on the Law of Nature and of Nations.” The remarkable impression made
+by this single lecture was expressed by Campbell, when he said: “Even
+supposing that essay had been recovered only imperfect and mutilated—if
+but a score of consecutive sentences could be shown, they would bear
+a testimony to his genius as decided as the bust of Theseus bears to
+Grecian art among the Elgin marbles.”
+
+Mackintosh’s lectures, in the spring of 1799, at Lincoln’s Inn Hall,
+were attended by an auditory such as had never before met in England
+on a similar occasion. “Lawyers, members of Parliament, men of
+letters, and gentlemen from the country crowded the seats; and the
+Lord Chancellor, who, from a pressure of public business, was unable
+to attend, received a full report of each lecture in writing, and was
+loud in their praise.” The introductory lecture, the only one that
+was written out and preserved, is as remarkable for its eloquence as
+for the depth of its learning and the vigor and discrimination of its
+thought.
+
+Mackintosh now devoted himself to the practice of his profession with
+every prospect of the most flattering success. Regarding himself as
+more perfectly fitted for a position upon the bench than at the bar,
+he aspired to a judicial appointment at Trinidad or in India. The
+appointment was under contemplation, when he was engaged to defend
+M. Jean Peltier, a Frenchman who resided in London and published
+a newspaper opposed to the rising fortunes of Bonaparte. There is
+an English statute against “libel on a friendly government”; and
+Bonaparte, who was now for the moment at peace with England, demanded
+that the statute should be enforced. Action was brought against
+Peltier, and when the case came on for trial Mackintosh delivered the
+speech selected from his works for this volume. He labored under the
+disadvantage of having the law clearly against him; but he regarded
+the equities of the case as entirely on the side of Peltier, and
+therefore he devoted his remarkable powers to the discussion of the
+general principles involved in the case. It was a plea in behalf of
+freedom of the English press—its privilege and its duty to comment on
+and to criticise the crimes even of the proudest tyrants. The jury,
+under the law, was obliged to convict; but seldom before an English
+court has a speech made a greater impression. Of this fact we have the
+most conclusive evidence in the testimony of the greatest of English
+advocates. Erskine was present during its delivery, and before going to
+bed he sent to Mackintosh the following remarkable note:
+
+    “DEAR SIR:—I can not shake off from my nerves the effect of
+    your powerful and most wonderful speech, which so completely
+    disqualifies you for Trinidad or India. I could not help saying
+    to myself, as you were speaking: ‘_O terram illam beatam quæ
+    hunc virum acciperit, hanc ingratam si ejicerit, miseram si
+    amiserit._’ I perfectly approve the verdict, but the manner in
+    which you opposed it I shall always consider as one of the most
+    splendid monuments of genius, literature, and eloquence.
+
+            “Yours ever,      T. ERSKINE.”
+
+And Robert Hall, scarcely inferior to Erskine as a judge of what is
+worthy of praise in human speech, wrote to his old friend concerning
+it: “I speak my sincere sentiments when I say, it is the most
+extraordinary assemblage of whatever is most refined in address,
+profound in political and moral speculation, and masterly eloquence,
+which it has ever been my lot to read in the English language.”
+
+A few months after the defence of Peltier, Mackintosh received the
+honor of knighthood and was appointed Recorder at Bombay. This position
+took him to India, where he passed the next eight years, devoting his
+time to the duties of the bench and the pursuits of literature. On his
+return in 1812 to England he entered the House of Commons, and for
+four years was a firm supporter of the Whigs. In 1818 he accepted the
+Professorship of Law and General Politics in the newly established
+Haileybury College, a position which he filled with great distinction
+until 1827.
+
+During all this period he did not relax his interest in the active
+affairs of government, nor in the questions that agitated the House
+of Commons. His speeches in the House, of which he continued to be
+a member, were remarkable for their wisdom; though perhaps not for
+their persuasive power. He will be remembered, not so much for his
+parliamentary services, as for his unrivalled plea in behalf of free
+speech, and for the many essays on philosophical and political subjects
+with which he enriched the literature of our language. Until his
+death in 1832, he was one of the most highly esteemed writers of the
+“Encyclopedia Britannica” and of the _Edinburgh Review_.
+
+
+
+
+SIR JAMES MACKINTOSH.
+
+IN BEHALF OF FREE SPEECH, ON THE TRIAL OF JEAN PELTIER, ACCUSED OF
+LIBELLING NAPOLEON BONAPARTE; COURT OF KING’S BENCH, FEBRUARY 21, 1803.
+
+
+GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY:
+
+The time is now come for me to address you in behalf of the unfortunate
+gentleman who is the defendant on this record.
+
+I must begin with observing, that though I know myself too well to
+ascribe to any thing but to the kindness and good nature of my learned
+friend, the Attorney-General, the unmerited praises which he has been
+pleased to bestow on me, yet, I will venture to say, he has done me
+no more than justice in supposing that in this place, and on this
+occasion, where I exercise the functions of an inferior minister of
+justice, an inferior minister, indeed, but a minister of justice still,
+I am incapable of lending myself to the passions of any client, and
+that I will not make the proceedings of this court subservient to any
+political purpose. Whatever is respected by the laws and government of
+my country shall, in this place, be respected by me. In considering
+matters that deeply interest the quiet, the safety, and the liberty of
+all mankind, it is impossible for me not to feel warmly and strongly;
+but I shall make an effort to control my feelings however painful
+that effort may be, and where I can not speak out but at the risk of
+offending either sincerity or prudence, I shall labor to contain myself
+and be silent.
+
+I can not but feel, gentlemen, how much I stand in need of your
+favorable attention and indulgence. The charge which I have to defend
+is surrounded with the most invidious topics of discussion; but they
+are not of my seeking. The case and the topics which are inseparable
+from it are brought here by the prosecutor. Here I find them, and here
+it is my duty to deal with them, as the interests of Mr. Peltier seem
+to me to require. He, by his choice and confidence, has cast on me a
+very arduous duty, which I could not decline, and which I can still
+less betray. He has a right to expect from me a faithful, a zealous,
+and a fearless defence; and this his just expectation, according to
+the measure of my humble abilities, shall be fulfilled. I have said a
+fearless defence. Perhaps that word was unnecessary in the place where
+I now stand. Intrepidity in the discharge of professional duty is so
+common a quality at the English bar, that it has, thank God, long
+ceased to be a matter of boast or praise. If it had been otherwise,
+gentlemen, if the bar could have been silenced or overawed by power, I
+may presume to say that an English jury would not this day have been
+met to administer justice. Perhaps I need scarce say that my defence
+_shall_ be fearless, in a place where fear never entered any heart but
+that of a criminal. But you will pardon me for having said so much when
+you consider who the real parties before you are.
+
+I. Gentlemen, the real prosecutor is the master of the greatest
+empire the civilized world ever saw. The defendant is a defenceless,
+proscribed exile. He is a French Royalist, who fled from his country
+in the autumn of 1792, at the period of that memorable and awful
+emigration, when all the proprietors and magistrates of the greatest
+civilized country in Europe were driven from their homes by the
+daggers of assassins; when our shores were covered, as with the
+wreck of a great tempest, with old men, and women, and children, and
+ministers of religion, who fled from the ferocity of their countrymen
+as before an army of invading barbarians.
+
+The greatest part of these unfortunate exiles, of those, I mean,
+who have been spared by the sword, who have survived the effect of
+pestilential climates or broken hearts, have been since permitted to
+revisit their country. Though despoiled of their all, they have eagerly
+embraced even the sad privilege of being suffered to die in their
+native land.
+
+Even this miserable indulgence was to be purchased by compliances, by
+declarations of allegiance to the new government, which some of these
+suffering Royalists deemed incompatible with their consciences, with
+their dearest attachments, and their most sacred duties. Among these
+last is Mr. Peltier. I do not presume to blame those who submitted,
+and I trust you will not judge harshly of those who refused. You will
+not think unfavorably of a man who stands before you as the voluntary
+victim of his loyalty and honor. If a revolution (which God avert) were
+to drive us into exile, and to cast us on a foreign shore, we should
+expect, at least, to be pardoned by generous men, for stubborn loyalty
+and unseasonable fidelity to the laws and government of our fathers.
+
+This unfortunate gentleman had devoted a great part of his life to
+literature. It was the amusement and ornament of his better days. Since
+his own ruin and the desolation of his country, he has been compelled
+to employ it as a means of support. For the last ten years he has been
+engaged in a variety of publications of considerable importance; but
+since the peace he has desisted from serious political discussion,
+and confined himself to the obscure journal which is now before you;
+the least calculated, surely, of any publication that ever issued
+from the press, to rouse the alarms of the most jealous government;
+which will not be read in England, because it is not written in our
+language; which cannot be read in France, because its entry into that
+country is prohibited by a power whose mandates are not very supinely
+enforced, nor often evaded with impunity; which can have no other
+object than that of amusing the companions of the author’s principles
+and misfortunes, by pleasantries and sarcasms on their victorious
+enemies. There is, indeed, gentlemen, one remarkable circumstance in
+this unfortunate publication; it is the only, or almost the only,
+journal which still dares to espouse the cause of that royal and
+illustrious family which but fourteen years ago was flattered by every
+press and guarded by every tribunal in Europe. Even the court in which
+we are met affords an example of the vicissitudes of their fortune.
+My learned friend has reminded you that the last prosecution tried in
+this place, at the instance of a French Government, was for a libel on
+that magnanimous princess, who has since been butchered in sight of her
+palace.
+
+I do not make these observations with any purpose of questioning the
+general principles which have been laid down by my learned friend. I
+must admit his right to bring before you those who libel any government
+recognized by his Majesty, and at peace with the British empire. I
+admit that, whether such a government be of yesterday, or a thousand
+years old; whether it be a crude and bloody usurpation, or the most
+ancient, just, and paternal authority upon earth, we are _here_ equally
+bound, by his Majesty’s recognition, to protect it against libellous
+attacks. I admit that if, during our usurpation, Lord Clarendon had
+published his history at Paris, or the Marquess of Montrose his verses
+on the murder of his sovereign, or Mr. Cowley his “Discourse on
+Cromwell’s Government,” and if the English ambassador had complained,
+the President De Molí, or any other of the great magistrates who then
+adorned the Parliament of Paris, however reluctantly, painfully,
+and indignantly, might have been compelled to have condemned these
+illustrious men to the punishment of libellers. I say this only for
+the sake of bespeaking a favorable attention from your generosity and
+compassion to what will be feebly urged in behalf of my unfortunate
+client, who has sacrificed his fortune, his hopes, his connections, his
+country, to his conscience; who seems marked out for destruction in
+this his last asylum.
+
+That he still enjoys the security of this asylum, that he has not
+been sacrificed to the resentment of his powerful enemies, is perhaps
+owing to the firmness of the King’s government. If that be the fact,
+gentlemen; if his Majesty’s ministers have resisted applications to
+expel this unfortunate gentleman from England, I should publicly
+thank them for their firmness, if it were not unseemly and improper
+to suppose that they could have acted otherwise—to thank an English
+Government for not violating the most sacred duties of hospitality; for
+not bringing indelible disgrace on their country.
+
+But be that as it may, gentlemen, he now comes before you, perfectly
+satisfied that an English jury is the most refreshing prospect that the
+eye of accused innocence ever met in a human tribunal; and he feels
+with me the most fervent gratitude to the Protector of empires that,
+surrounded as we are with the ruins of principalities and powers, we
+still continue to meet together, after the manner of our fathers, to
+administer justice in this, her ancient sanctuary.
+
+II. There is another point of view in which this case seems to me to
+merit your most serious attention. I consider it as the first of a long
+series of conflicts between the greatest power in the world and the
+only free press remaining in Europe. No man living is more thoroughly
+convinced than I am that my learned friend, Mr. Attorney-General, will
+never degrade his excellent character; that he will never disgrace
+his high magistracy by mean compliances, by an immoderate and
+unconscientious exercise of power; yet I am convinced, by circumstances
+which I shall now abstain from discussing, that I am to consider
+this as the first of a long series of conflicts between the greatest
+power in the world and the only free press now remaining in Europe.
+Gentlemen, this distinction of the English press is new; it is a proud
+and melancholy distinction. Before the great earthquake of the French
+Revolution had swallowed up all the asylums of free discussion on the
+continent, we enjoyed that privilege, indeed, more fully than others;
+but we did not enjoy it exclusively. In great monarchies, the press has
+always been considered as too formidable an engine to be intrusted to
+unlicensed individuals. But in other continental countries, either by
+the laws of the state, or by long habits of liberality and toleration
+in magistrates, a liberty of discussion has been enjoyed, perhaps
+sufficient for most useful purposes. It existed, in fact, where it
+was not protected by law; and the wise and generous connivance of
+governments was daily more and more secured by the growing civilization
+of their subjects. In Holland, in Switzerland, in the imperial towns
+of Germany, the press was either legally or practically free.
+Holland and Switzerland are no more; and since the commencement of
+this prosecution, fifty imperial towns have been erased from the list
+of independent states by one dash of the pen. Three or four still
+preserve a precarious and trembling existence. I will not say by what
+compliances they must purchase its continuance. I will not insult the
+feebleness of states, whose unmerited fall I do most bitterly deplore.
+
+These governments were in many respects one of the most interesting
+parts of the ancient system of Europe. Unfortunately for the repose of
+mankind, great states are compelled, by regard to their own safety, to
+consider the military spirit and martial habits of their people as one
+of the main objects of their policy. Frequent hostilities seem almost
+the necessary condition of their greatness; and, without being great,
+they cannot long remain safe. Smaller states exempted from this cruel
+necessity—a hard condition of greatness, a bitter satire on human
+nature—devoted themselves to the arts of peace, to the cultivation of
+literature, and the improvement of reason. They became places of refuge
+for free and fearless discussion; they were the impartial spectators
+and judges of the various contests of ambition which from time to time
+disturbed the quiet of the world. They thus became peculiarly qualified
+to be the organs of that public opinion which converted Europe into
+a great republic, with laws which mitigated, though they could not
+extinguish, ambition; and with moral tribunals to which even the most
+despotic sovereigns were amenable. If wars of aggrandizement were
+undertaken, their authors were arraigned in the face of Europe. If acts
+of internal tyranny were perpetrated, they resounded from a thousand
+presses throughout all civilized countries. Princes, on whose will
+there were no legal checks, thus found a moral restraint which the most
+powerful of them could not brave with absolute impunity. They acted
+before a vast audience, to whose applause or condemnation they could
+not be utterly indifferent. The very constitution of human nature, the
+unalterable laws of the mind of man, against which all rebellion is
+fruitless, subjected the proudest tyrants to this control. No elevation
+of power, no depravity however consummate, no innocence however
+spotless, can render man wholly independent of the praise or blame of
+his fellow-men.
+
+These governments were, in other respects, one of the most beautiful
+and interesting parts of our ancient system. The perfect security of
+such inconsiderable and feeble states, their undisturbed tranquillity
+amid the wars and conquests that surrounded them, attested, beyond
+any other part of the European system, the moderation, the justice,
+the civilization to which Christian Europe had reached in modern
+times. Their weakness was protected only by the habitual reverence
+for justice, which, during a long series of ages, had grown up in
+Christendom. This was the only fortification which defended them
+against those mighty monarchs to whom they offered so easy a prey.
+And till the French Revolution, this was sufficient. Consider, for
+instance, the situation of the Republic of Geneva. Think of her
+defenceless position, in the very jaws of France; but think also of her
+undisturbed security, of her profound quiet, of the brilliant success
+with which she applied to industry and literature, while Louis XIV.
+was pouring his myriads into Italy before her gates. Call to mind, if
+ages crowded into years have not effaced them from your memory, that
+happy period, when we scarcely dreamed more of the subjugation of the
+feeblest republic of Europe than of the conquest of her mightiest
+empire; and tell me if you can imagine a spectacle more beautiful to
+the moral eye, or a more striking proof of progress in the noblest
+principles of true civilization.
+
+These feeble states—these monuments of the justice of Europe—the
+asylum of peace, of industry, and of literature—the organs of public
+reason—the refuge of oppressed innocence and persecuted truth, have
+perished with those ancient principles which were their sole guardians
+and protectors. They have been swallowed up by that fearful convulsion
+which has shaken the uttermost corners of the earth. They are destroyed
+and gone forever.
+
+One asylum of free discussion is still inviolate. There is still one
+spot in Europe where man can freely exercise his reason on the most
+important concerns of society, where he can boldly publish his judgment
+on the acts of the proudest and most powerful tyrants. The press of
+England is still free. It is guarded by the free constitution of our
+forefathers. It is guarded by the hearts and arms of Englishmen, and
+I trust I may venture to say that if it be to fall, it will fall only
+under the ruins of the British empire.
+
+It is an awful consideration, gentlemen. Every other monument of
+European liberty has perished. That ancient fabric which has been
+gradually reared by the wisdom and virtue of our fathers still stands.
+It stands, thanks be to God! solid and entire; but it stands alone, and
+it stands amid ruins.
+
+In these extraordinary circumstances, I repeat that I must consider
+this as the first of a long series of conflicts between the greatest
+power in the world and the only free press remaining in Europe. And
+I trust that you will consider yourselves as the advanced guard
+of liberty, as having this day to fight the first battle of free
+discussion against the most formidable enemy that it ever encountered.
+You will therefore excuse me, if, on so important an occasion, I remind
+you, at more length than is usual, of those general principles of law
+and policy on this subject which have been handed down to us by our
+ancestors.
+
+III. Those who slowly built up the fabric of our laws never attempted
+any thing so absurd as to define, by any precise rule, the obscure and
+shifting boundaries which divide libel from history or discussion.
+It is a subject which, from its nature, admits neither rules nor
+definitions. The same words may be perfectly innocent in one case, and
+most mischievous and libellous in another. A change of circumstances,
+often apparently slight, is sufficient to make the whole difference.
+These changes, which may be as numerous as the variety of human
+intentions and conditions, can never be foreseen nor comprehended under
+any legal definitions, and the framers of our law have never attempted
+to subject them to such definitions. They left such ridiculous attempts
+to those who call themselves philosophers, but who have, in fact,
+proved themselves most grossly and stupidly ignorant of that philosophy
+which is conversant with human affairs.
+
+The principles of the law of England on the subject of political libel
+are few and simple, and they are necessarily so broad, that, without
+a habitually mild administration of justice, they might encroach
+materially on the liberty of political discussion. Every publication
+which is intended to vilify either our own government or the government
+of any foreign state in amity with this kingdom, is, by the law of
+England, a libel.
+
+To protect political discussion from the danger to which it would be
+exposed by these wide principles, if they were severely and literally
+enforced, our ancestors trusted to various securities—some growing out
+of the law and constitution, and others arising from the character of
+those public officers whom the constitution had formed, and to whom
+its administration is committed. They trusted, in the first place, to
+the moderation of the legal officers of the crown, educated in the
+maxims and imbued with the spirit of a free government; controlled by
+the superintending power of Parliament, and peculiarly watched in all
+political prosecutions by the reasonable and wholesome jealousy of
+their fellow-subjects. And I am bound to admit that, since the glorious
+era of the Revolution [1688], making due allowance for the frailties,
+the faults, and the occasional vices of men, they have, upon the whole,
+not been disappointed. I know that in the hands of my learned friend
+that trust will never be abused. But, above all, they confided in the
+moderation and good sense of juries, popular in their origin, popular
+in their feelings, popular in their very prejudices, taken from the
+mass of the people, and immediately returning to that mass again. By
+these checks and temperaments they hoped that they should sufficiently
+repress malignant libels, without endangering that freedom of inquiry
+which is the first security of a free state. They knew that the offence
+of a political libel is of a very peculiar nature, and differing in
+the most important particulars from all other crimes. In all other
+cases, the most severe execution of law can only spread terror among
+the guilty; but in political libels it inspires even the innocent with
+fear. This striking peculiarity arises from the same circumstances
+which make it impossible to define the limits of libel and innocent
+discussion; which make it impossible for a man of the purest and most
+honorable mind to be always perfectly certain whether he be within the
+territory of fair argument and honest narrative, or whether he may not
+have unwittingly over stepped the faint and varying line which bounds
+them. But, gentlemen, I will go further. This is the only offence where
+severe and frequent punishments not only intimidate the innocent, but
+deter men from the most meritorious acts, and from rendering the most
+important services to their country. They indispose and disqualify
+men for the discharge of the most sacred duties which they owe to
+mankind. To inform the public on the conduct of those who administer
+public affairs requires courage and conscious security. It is always
+an invidious and obnoxious office; but it is often the most necessary
+of all public duties. If it is not done boldly, it can not be done
+effectually, and it is not from writers trembling under the uplifted
+scourge that we are to hope for it.
+
+There are other matters, gentlemen, to which I am desirous of
+particularly calling your attention. These are the circumstances in
+the condition of this country which have induced our ancestors, at
+all times, to handle with more than ordinary tenderness that branch
+of the liberty of discussion which is applied to the conduct of
+foreign states. The relation of this kingdom to the commonwealth
+of Europe is so peculiar, that no history, I think, furnishes a
+parallel to it. From the moment in which we abandoned all projects
+of continental aggrandizement, we could have no interest respecting
+the state of the continent but the interests of national safety and
+of commercial prosperity. The paramount interest of every state—that
+which comprehends every other—is _security_. And the security of Great
+Britain requires nothing on the continent but the uniform observance
+of justice. It requires nothing but the inviolability of ancient
+boundaries and the sacredness of ancient possessions, which, on these
+subjects, is but another form of words for justice. A nation which is
+herself shut out from the possibility of continental aggrandizement
+can have no interest but that of preventing such aggrandizement in
+others. We can have no interest of safety but the preventing of those
+encroachments which, by their immediate effects, or by their example,
+may be dangerous to ourselves. We can have no interest of ambition
+respecting the continent. So that neither our real nor even our
+apparent interests can ever be at variance with justice.
+
+As to commercial prosperity, it is, indeed, a secondary, but it is
+still a very important, branch of our national interests, and it
+requires nothing on the continent of Europe but the _maintenance of
+peace_, as far as the paramount interest of security will allow.[29]
+
+Whatever ignorant or prejudiced men may affirm, no war was ever gainful
+to a commercial nation. Losses may be less in some, and incidental
+profits may arise in others. But no such profits ever formed an
+adequate compensation for the waste of capital and industry which all
+wars must produce. Next to peace, our commercial greatness depends
+chiefly on the affluence and prosperity of our neighbors. A commercial
+nation has, indeed, the same interest in the wealth of her neighbors
+that a tradesman has in the wealth of his customers. The prosperity of
+England has been chiefly owing to the general progress of civilized
+nations in the arts and improvements of social life. Not an acre of
+land has been brought into cultivation in the wilds of Siberia or on
+the shores of the Mississippi which has not widened the market for
+English industry. It is nourished by the progressive prosperity of the
+world, and it amply repays all that it has received. It can only be
+employed in spreading civilization and enjoyment over the earth; and
+by the unchangeable laws of nature, in spite of the impotent tricks of
+government, it is now partly applied to revive the industry of those
+very nations who are the loudest in their senseless clamors against its
+pretended mischiefs. If the blind and barbarous project of destroying
+English prosperity could be accomplished, it could have no other effect
+than that of completely beggaring the very countries who now stupidly
+ascribe their own poverty to our wealth.
+
+Under these circumstances, gentlemen, it became the obvious policy of
+the kingdom, a policy in unison with the maxims of a free government,
+to consider with great indulgence even the boldest animadversions of
+our political writers on the ambitious projects of foreign states.
+
+Bold, and sometimes indiscreet as these animadversions might be, they
+had, at least, the effect of warning the people of their danger, and
+of rousing the national indignation against those encroachments which
+England has almost always been compelled in the end to resist by arms.
+Seldom, indeed, has she been allowed to wait till a provident regard to
+her own safety should compel her to take up arms in defence of others.
+For as it was said by a great orator of antiquity that no man ever was
+the enemy of the republic who had not first declared war against him,
+so I may say, with truth, that no man ever meditated the subjugation
+of Europe who did not consider the destruction or the corruption of
+England as the first condition of his success.[30] If you examine
+history, you will find that no such project was ever formed in which it
+was not deemed a necessary preliminary, either to detach England from
+the common cause or to destroy her. It seems as if all the conspirators
+against the independence of nations might have sufficiently taught
+other states that England is their natural guardian and protector;
+that she alone has no interest but their preservation; that her safety
+is interwoven with their own. When vast projects of aggrandizement are
+manifested, when schemes of criminal ambition are carried into effect,
+the day of battle is fast approaching for England. Her free government
+can not engage in dangerous wars without the hearty and affectionate
+support of her people. A state thus situated can not without the
+utmost peril silence those public discussions which are to point the
+popular indignation against those who must soon be enemies. In domestic
+dissensions, it may sometimes be the supposed interest of government
+to overawe the press. But it never can be even their apparent interest
+when the danger is purely foreign. A king of England who, in such
+circumstances, should conspire against the free press of this country,
+would undermine the foundations of his own throne; he would silence the
+trumpet which is to call his people round his standard.
+
+Our ancestors never thought it their policy to avert the resentment of
+foreign tyrants by enjoining English writers to contain and repress
+their just abhorrence of the criminal enterprises of ambition. This
+great and gallant nation, which has fought in the front of every battle
+against the oppressors of Europe, has sometimes inspired fear, but,
+thank God, she has never felt it. We know that they are our real, and
+must soon become our declared foes.[31] We know that there can be no
+cordial amity between the natural enemies and the independence of
+nations. We have never adopted the cowardly and short-sighted policy
+of silencing our press, of breaking the spirit and palsying the hearts
+of our people for the sake of a hollow and precarious truce. We have
+never been base enough to purchase a short respite from hostilities by
+sacrificing the first means of defence; the means of rousing the public
+spirit of the people, and directing it against the enemies of their
+country and of Europe.
+
+Gentlemen, the public spirit of a people, by which I mean the whole
+body of those affections which unites men’s hearts to the commonwealth,
+is in various countries composed of various elements, and depends on
+a great variety of causes. In this country, I may venture to say that
+it mainly depends on the vigor of the popular parts and principles of
+our government, and that the spirit of liberty is one of its most
+important elements. Perhaps it may depend less on those advantages
+of a free government which are most highly estimated by calm reason,
+than upon those parts of it which delight the imagination and flatter
+the just and natural pride of mankind. Among these we are certainly
+not to forget the political rights which are not uniformly withheld
+from the lowest classes, and the continual appeal made to them in
+public discussion, upon the greatest interests of the state. These are
+undoubtedly among the circumstances which endear to Englishmen their
+government and their country, and animate their zeal for that glorious
+institution which confers on the meanest of them a sort of distinction
+and nobility unknown to the most illustrious slaves who tremble at
+the frown of a tyrant. Whoever were unwarily and rashly to abolish or
+narrow these privileges, which it must be owned are liable to great
+abuse, and to very specious objections, might perhaps discover too
+late that he had been dismantling his country. Of whatever elements
+public spirit is composed, it is always and everywhere the chief
+defensive principle of a state. It is perfectly distinct from courage.
+Perhaps no nation, certainly no European nation, ever perished from an
+inferiority of courage. And undoubtedly no considerable nation was ever
+subdued in which the public affections were sound and vigorous. It is
+public spirit which binds together the dispersed courage of individuals
+and fastens it to the commonwealth. It is, therefore, as I have said,
+the chief defensive principle of every country. Of all the stimulants
+which arouse it into action, the most powerful among us is certainly
+the press; and it can not be restrained or weakened without imminent
+danger that the national spirit may languish, and that the people may
+act with less zeal and affection for their country in the hour of its
+danger.
+
+These principles, gentlemen, are not new—they are genuine old English
+principles. And though in our days they have been disgraced and abused
+by ruffians and fanatics, they are in themselves as just and sound as
+they are liberal; and they are the only principles on which a free
+state can be safely governed. These principles I have adopted since I
+first learned the use of reason, and I think I shall abandon them only
+with life.
+
+IV. On these principles I am now to call your attention to the libel
+with which this unfortunate gentleman is charged. I heartily rejoice
+that I concur with the greatest part of what has been said by my
+learned friend, Mr. Attorney-General, who has done honor even to his
+character by the generous and liberal principles which he has laid
+down. He has told you that he does not mean to attack _historical
+narrative_. He has told you that he does not mean to attack _political
+discussion_. He has told you, also, that he does not consider every
+intemperate word into which a writer, fairly engaged in narration or
+reasoning, might be betrayed, as a fit subject for prosecution. The
+essence of the crime of libel consists in the malignant mind which the
+publication proves, and from which it flows. A jury must be convinced,
+before they find a man guilty of libel, that his intention was to
+libel, not to state facts which he believed to be true, or reasonings
+which he thought just. My learned friend has told you that the liberty
+of history includes the right of publishing those observations
+which occur to intelligent men when they consider the affairs of
+the world; and I think he will not deny that it includes also the
+right of expressing those sentiments which all good men feel on the
+contemplation of extraordinary examples of depravity or excellence.
+
+One more privilege of the historian, which the Attorney-General has
+not named, but to which his principles extend, it is now my duty to
+claim on behalf of my client; I mean the right of _republishing_,
+_historically_, those documents, whatever their original malignity
+may be, which display the character and unfold the intentions of
+governments, or factions, or individuals. I think my learned friend
+will not deny that a historical compiler may innocently republish
+in England the most insolent and outrageous declaration of war ever
+published against his Majesty by a foreign government. The intention of
+the original author was to vilify and degrade his Majesty’s government;
+but the intention of the compiler is only to gratify curiosity,
+or, perhaps, to rouse just indignation against the calumniator
+whose production he republishes. His intention is not libellous—his
+republication is therefore not a libel. Suppose this to be the case
+with Mr. Peltier. Suppose him to have republished libels with a merely
+historical intention. In that case it can not be pretended that he is
+more a libeller than my learned friend, Mr. Abbott [junior counsel for
+the crown, afterward Lord Tenterden], who read these supposed libels to
+you when he opened the pleadings. Mr. Abbott republished them to you,
+that you might know and judge of them—Mr. Peltier, on the supposition I
+have made, also republished them, that the public might know and judge
+of them.
+
+You already know that the general plan of Mr. Peltier’s publication
+was to give a picture of the cabals and intrigues, of the hopes and
+projects, of French factions. It is undoubtedly a natural and necessary
+part of this plan to republish all the serious and ludicrous pieces
+which these factions circulate against each other. The ode ascribed to
+Chenier or Ginguené I do really believe to have been written at Paris,
+to have been circulated there, to have been there attributed to some
+one of these writers, to have been sent to England as their work, and
+as such to have been republished by Mr. Peltier. But I am not sure that
+I have evidence to convince you of the truth of this. Suppose that I
+have not; will my learned friend say that my client must necessarily be
+convicted? I, on the contrary, contend that it is for my learned friend
+to show that it is not an historical republication. Such it professes
+to be, and that profession it is for him to disprove. The profession
+may indeed be “a mask”; but it is for my friend to pluck off the mask,
+and expose the libeller, before he calls upon you for a verdict of
+guilty.
+
+If the general lawfulness of such republications be denied, then I must
+ask Mr. Attorney-General to account for the long impunity which English
+newspapers have enjoyed. I must request him to tell you why they have
+been suffered to republish all the atrocious official and unofficial
+libels which have been published against his Majesty for the last ten
+years, by the Brissots, the Marats, the Dantons, the Robespierres, the
+Barrères, the Talliens, the Reubells, the Merlins, the Barrases, and
+all that long line of bloody tyrants who oppressed their own country
+and insulted every other which they had not the power to rob. What
+must be the answer? That the English publishers were either innocent,
+if their motive was to gratify curiosity, or praiseworthy, if their
+intention was to rouse indignation against the calumniators of their
+country. If any other answer be made, I must remind my friend of a
+most sacred part of his duty—the duty of protecting the honest fame
+of those who are absent in the service of their country. Within these
+few days we have seen, in every newspaper in England, a publication,
+called the Report of Colonel Sebastiani, in which a gallant British
+officer [General Stuart] is charged with writing letters to procure
+assassination. The publishers of that infamous report are not, and will
+not be prosecuted, because their intention is not to libel General
+Stuart. On any other principle, why have all our newspapers been
+suffered to circulate that most atrocious of all libels against the
+king and people of England, which purports to be translated from the
+_Moniteur_ of the ninth of August, 1802—a libel against a prince who
+has passed through a factious and stormy reign of forty-three years,
+without a single imputation on his personal character; against a
+people who have passed through the severest trials of national virtue
+with unimpaired glory—who alone in the world can boast of mutinies
+without murder, of triumphant mobs without massacre, of bloodless
+revolutions, and of civil wars unstained by a single assassination.
+That most impudent and malignant libel which charges such a king of
+such a people, not only with having hired assassins, but with being
+so shameless, so lost to all sense of character, as to have bestowed
+on these assassins, if their murderous projects had succeeded, the
+highest badges of public honor, the rewards reserved for statesmen
+and heroes—the order of the Garter—the order which was founded by the
+heroes of Cressy and Poitiers—the garter which was worn by Henry the
+Great and by Gustavus Adolphus, which might now be worn by the hero
+who, on the shores of Syria [Sir Sydney Smith]—the ancient theatre of
+English chivalry—has revived the renown of English valor and of English
+humanity—that unsullied garter which a detestable libeller dares to say
+is to be paid as the price of murder.
+
+If I had now to defend an English publisher for the republication
+of that abominable libel, what must I have said in his defence? I
+must have told you that it was originally published by the French
+Government in their official gazette; that it was republished by the
+English editor to gratify the natural curiosity, perhaps to rouse the
+just resentment, of his English readers. I should have contended,
+and, I trust, with success, that his republication of a libel was
+not libellous; that it was lawful, that it was laudable. All that
+would be important, at least all that would be essential, in such a
+defence, I now state to you on behalf of Mr. Peltier; and if an English
+newspaper may safely republish the libels of the French Government
+against his Majesty, I shall leave you to judge whether Mr. Peltier,
+in similar circumstances, may not with equal safety republish the
+libels of Chenier against the First Consul. On the one hand you have
+the assurances of Mr. Peltier in the context that this ode is merely a
+republication—you have also the general plan of his work, with which
+such a republication is perfectly consistent. On the other hand, you
+have only the suspicions of Mr. Attorney-General that this ode is an
+original production of the defendant.
+
+But supposing that you should think it his production, and that you
+should also think it a libel, even in that event, which I cannot
+anticipate, I am not left without a defence. The question will still
+be open, “Is it a libel on Bonaparte, or is it a libel on Chenier or
+Ginguené?” This is not an information for a libel on Chenier; and
+if you should think that this ode was produced by Mr. Peltier, and
+ascribed by him to Chenier, for the sake of covering that writer with
+the odium of Jacobinism, the defendant is entitled to your verdict of
+not guilty. Or if you should believe that it is ascribed to Jacobinical
+writers for the sake of _satirizing_ a French Jacobinical faction,
+you must also, in that case, acquit him. Butler puts seditious and
+immoral language into the mouth of rebels and fanatics; but “Hudibras”
+is not for that reason a libel on morality or government. Swift, in
+the most exquisite piece of irony in the world (his argument against
+the abolition of Christianity), uses the language of those shallow,
+atheistical coxcombs whom his satire was intended to scourge. The
+scheme of his irony required some levity and even some profaneness
+of language. But nobody was ever so dull as to doubt whether Swift
+meant to satirize atheism or religion. In the same manner Mr. Peltier,
+when he wrote a satire on French Jacobinism was compelled to ascribe
+to Jacobins a Jacobinical hatred of government. He was obliged, by
+dramatic propriety, to put into their mouths those anarchical maxims
+which are complained of in his ode. But it will be said, these
+incitements to insurrection are here directed against the authority
+of Bonaparte. This proves nothing, because they must have been so
+directed, if the ode were a satire on Jacobinism. French Jacobins
+must inveigh against Bonaparte, because he exercises the powers of
+government. The satirist who attacks them must transcribe their
+sentiments and adopt their language.
+
+I do not mean to say, gentlemen, that Mr. Peltier feels any affection
+or professes any allegiance to Bonaparte. If I were to say so, he would
+disown me. He would disdain to purchase an acquittal by the profession
+of sentiments which he disclaims and abhors. Not to love Bonaparte is
+no crime. The question is not whether Mr. Peltier loves or hates the
+First Consul, but whether he has put revolutionary language into the
+mouth of Jacobins with a view to paint their incorrigible turbulence,
+and to exhibit the fruits of Jacobinical revolutions to the detestation
+of mankind.
+
+Now, gentlemen, we can not give a probable answer to this question
+without previously examining two or three questions, on which the
+answer to the first must very much depend. Is there a faction in France
+which breathes the spirit, and is likely to employ the language, of
+this ode? Does it perfectly accord with their character and views? Is
+it utterly irreconcilable with the feelings, opinions, and wishes of
+Mr. Peltier? If these questions can be answered in the affirmative,
+then I think you must agree with me that Mr. Peltier does not in this
+ode speak his own sentiments, that he does not here vent his own
+resentment against Bonaparte; but that he personates a Jacobin, and
+adopts his language for the sake of satirizing his principles.
+
+These questions, gentlemen, lead me to those political discussions
+which, generally speaking, are in a court of justice odious and
+disgusting. Here, however, they are necessary, and I shall consider
+them only as far as the necessities of this cause require.
+
+Gentlemen, the French Revolution—I must pause after I have uttered
+words which present such an overwhelming idea. But I have not now to
+engage in an enterprise so far beyond my force as that of examining
+and judging that tremendous Revolution. I have only to consider the
+character of the factions which it must have left behind it.
+
+The French Revolution began with great and fatal errors. These errors
+produced atrocious crimes. A mild and feeble monarchy was succeeded by
+bloody anarchy, which very shortly gave birth to military despotism.
+France, in a few years, described the whole circle of human society.[32]
+
+All this was in the order of nature. When every principle of authority
+and civil discipline, when every principle which enables some men
+to command, and disposes others to obey, was extirpated from the
+mind by atrocious theories, and still more atrocious examples; when
+every old institution was trampled down with contumely, and every new
+institution covered in its cradle with blood; when the principle of
+property itself, the sheet-anchor of society, was annihilated; when in
+the persons of the new possessors, whom the poverty of language obliges
+us to call proprietors, it was contaminated in its source by robbery
+and murder, and it became separated from that education and those
+manners, from that general presumption of superior knowledge and more
+scrupulous probity which form its only liberal titles to respect; when
+the people were taught to despise every thing old, and compelled to
+detest every thing new, there remained only one principle strong enough
+to hold society together, a principle utterly incompatible, indeed,
+with liberty and unfriendly to civilization itself, a tyrannical and
+barbarous principle; but in that miserable condition of human affairs,
+a refuge from still more intolerable evils. I mean the principle of
+military power which gains strength from that confusion and bloodshed
+in which all the other elements of society are dissolved, and which,
+in these terrible extremities, is the cement that preserves it from
+total destruction.
+
+Under such circumstances, Bonaparte usurped the supreme power in
+France. I say _usurped_, because an illegal assumption of power is a
+usurpation. But usurpation, in its strongest moral sense, is scarcely
+applicable to a period of lawless and savage anarchy. The guilt
+of military usurpation, in truth, belongs to the author of those
+confusions which sooner or later give birth to such a usurpation.
+
+Thus, to use the words of the historian: “By recent as well as all
+ancient example, it became evident that illegal violence, with whatever
+pretences it may be covered, and whatever object it may pursue, must
+inevitably end at last in the arbitrary and despotic government of a
+single person.” But though the government of Bonaparte has silenced the
+revolutionary factions, it has not and it can not have extinguished
+them. No human power could re-impress upon the minds of men all those
+sentiments and opinions which the sophistry and anarchy of fourteen
+years had obliterated. A faction must exist which breathes the spirit
+of the code now before you.
+
+It is, I know, not the spirit of the quiet and submissive majority of
+the French people. They have always rather suffered than acted in the
+Revolution. Completely exhausted by the calamities through which they
+have passed, they yield to any power which gives them repose. There
+is, indeed, a degree of oppression which rouses men to resistance; but
+there is another and a greater, which wholly subdues and unmans them.
+It is remarkable that Robespierre himself was safe till he attacked his
+own accomplices. The spirit of men of virtue was broken, and there was
+no vigor of character left to destroy him, but in those daring ruffians
+who were the sharers of his tyranny.
+
+As for the wretched populace who were made the blind and senseless
+instrument of so many crimes, whose frenzy can now be reviewed by a
+good mind with scarce any moral sentiment but that of compassion; that
+miserable multitude of beings, scarcely human, have already fallen into
+a brutish forgetfulness of the very atrocities which they themselves
+perpetrated. They have already forgotten all the acts of their drunken
+fury. If you ask one of them, Who destroyed that magnificent monument
+of religion and art? or who perpetrated that massacre? they stupidly
+answer, the Jacobins! though he who gives the answer was probably one
+of these Jacobins himself; so that a traveller, ignorant of French
+history, might suppose the Jacobins to be the name of some Tartar horde
+who, after laying waste France for ten years, were at last expelled by
+the native inhabitants. They have passed from senseless rage to stupid
+quiet. Their delirium is followed by lethargy.[33]
+
+In a word, gentlemen, the great body of the people of France have been
+severely trained in those convulsions and proscriptions which are
+the school of slavery. They are capable of no mutinous, and even of
+no bold and manly political sentiments. And if this ode professed to
+paint their opinions, it would be a most unfaithful picture. But it
+is otherwise with those who have been the actors and leaders in the
+scene of blood. It is otherwise with the numerous agents of the most
+indefatigable, searching, multiform, and omnipresent tyranny that ever
+existed, which pervaded every class of society which had ministers and
+victims in every village in France.
+
+Some of them, indeed, the basest of the race, the sophists, the
+rhetors, the poet-laureates of murder, who were cruel only from
+cowardice and calculating selfishness, are perfectly willing to
+transfer their venal pens to any government that does not disdain their
+infamous support. These men, Republican from servility, who published
+rhetorical panegyrics on massacre, and who reduced plunder to a system
+of ethics, are as ready to preach slavery as anarchy. But the more
+daring, I had almost said, the more respectable ruffians, can not so
+easily bend their heads under the yoke. These fierce spirits have not
+lost
+
+          “The unconquerable will,
+    And study of revenge, immortal hate.”
+
+They leave the luxuries of servitude to the mean and dastardly
+hypocrites, to the Belials and Mammons of the infernal faction. They
+pursue their old end of tyranny under their old pretext of liberty.
+The recollection of their unbounded power renders every inferior
+condition irksome and vapid; and their former atrocities form, if
+I may so speak, a sort of moral destiny which irresistibly impels
+them to the perpetration of new crimes. They have no place left for
+penitence on earth. They labor under the most awful proscription of
+opinion that ever was pronounced against human beings. They have
+cut down every bridge by which they could retreat into the society
+of men. Awakened from their dreams of Democracy, the noise subsided
+that deafened their ears to the voice of humanity; the film fallen
+from their eyes which hid from them the blackness of their own deeds;
+haunted by the memory of their inexpiable guilt; condemned daily to
+look on the faces of those whom their hands made widows and orphans,
+they are goaded and scourged by these _real_ furies, and hurried into
+the tumult of new crimes, which will drown the cries of remorse, or, if
+they be too depraved for remorse, will silence the curses of mankind.
+Tyrannical power is their only refuge from the just vengeance of
+their fellow-creatures. Murder is their only means of usurping power.
+They have no taste, no occupation, no pursuit but power and blood. If
+their hands are tied, they must at least have the luxury of murderous
+projects. They have drunk too deeply of human blood ever to relinquish
+their cannibal appetite.
+
+Such a faction exists in France. It is numerous; it is powerful; and it
+has a principle of fidelity stronger than any that ever held together
+a society. _They are banded together by despair of forgiveness, by
+the unanimous detestation of mankind._ They are now contained by a
+severe and stern government. But they still meditate the renewal of
+insurrection and massacre; and they are prepared to renew the worst
+and most atrocious of their crimes, that crime against posterity and
+against human nature itself, that crime of which the latest generations
+of mankind may feel the fatal consequences—the crime of degrading and
+prostituting the sacred name of liberty.
+
+I must own that, however paradoxical it may appear, I should almost
+think not worse, but more meanly of them if it were otherwise. I must
+then think them destitute of that which I will not call courage,
+because that is the name of a virtue; but of that ferocious energy
+which alone rescues ruffians from contempt. If they were destitute of
+that which is the heroism of murderers, they would be the lowest as
+well as the most abominable of beings.
+
+It is impossible to conceive any thing more despicable than wretches
+who, after hectoring and bullying over their meek and blameless
+sovereign and his defenceless family, whom they kept so long in a
+dungeon trembling for their existence—whom they put to death by a
+slow torture of three years, after playing the Republican and the
+tyrannicide to women and children, become the supple and fawning slaves
+of the first government that knows how to wield the scourge with a firm
+hand.
+
+I have used the word Republican because it is the name by which this
+atrocious faction describes itself. The assumption of that name is one
+of their crimes. They are no more Republicans than Royalists. They are
+the common enemies of all human society. God forbid that by the use
+of that word I should be supposed to reflect on the members of those
+respectable Republican communities which did exist in Europe before
+the French Revolution. That Revolution has spared many monarchies,
+but it has spared no republic within the sphere of its destructive
+energy. One republic only now exists in the world—a republic of English
+blood, which was originally composed of Republican societies, under the
+protection of a monarchy, which had, therefore, no great and perilous
+change in their internal constitution to effect; and of which, I speak
+it with pleasure and pride, the inhabitants, even in the convulsions of
+a most deplorable separation, displayed the humanity as well as valor
+which, I trust I may say, they inherited from their forefathers.
+
+Nor do I mean by the use of the word “Republican” to confound this
+execrable faction with all those who, in the liberty of private
+speculation, may prefer a Republican form of government. I own that,
+after much reflection, I am not able to conceive an error more gross
+than that of those who believe in the possibility of erecting a
+republic in any of the old monarchical countries of Europe, who believe
+that in such countries an elective supreme magistracy can produce any
+thing but a succession of stern tyrannies and bloody civil wars. It
+is a supposition which is belied by all experience, and which betrays
+the greatest ignorance of the first principles of the constitution of
+society. It is an error which has a false appearance of superiority
+over vulgar prejudice; it is, therefore, too apt to be attended with
+the most criminal rashness and presumption, and too easy to be inflamed
+into the most immoral and anti-social fanaticism. But as long as it
+remains a mere quiescent error, it is not the proper subject of moral
+disapprobation.
+
+    [Mr. Mackintosh then proceeds to a somewhat minute analysis of
+    the publications of Peltier for the purpose of showing: first,
+    that it was highly probable that the articles complained of
+    were not written by Peltier; secondly, that if written by him,
+    they purported to be not his own sentiments but those more
+    or less prevalent at Paris; thirdly, that the publications
+    were not untrue representations; fourthly, that there was no
+    evidence of any thing more nearly approaching to malice than
+    a justifiable indignation; and, fifthly, that the passages
+    complained of were aimed not so much at Napoleon as at others.
+    This analysis, though very ingenious, is of no interest except
+    from its bearing on the verdict, and is therefore here omitted.
+    After concluding his discussion of the evidence, the advocate
+    proceeded.]
+
+Here, gentlemen, I think I might stop, if I had only to consider the
+defence of Mr. Peltier. I trust that you are already convinced of his
+innocence. I fear I have exhausted your patience, as I am sure I have
+very nearly exhausted my own strength. But so much seems to me to
+depend on your verdict, that I can not forbear from laying before you
+some considerations of a more general nature.
+
+Believing, as I do, that we are on the eve of a great struggle; that
+this is only the first battle between reason and power; that you
+have now in your hands, committed to your trust, the only remains of
+free discussion in Europe, now confined to this kingdom—addressing
+you, therefore, as the guardians of the most important interests of
+mankind; convinced that the unfettered exercise of reason depends more
+on your present verdict than on any other that was ever delivered by
+a jury, I can not conclude without bringing before you the sentiments
+and examples of our ancestors in some of those awful and perilous
+situations by which divine Providence has in former ages tried the
+virtue of the English nation. We are fallen upon times in which it
+behooves us to strengthen our spirits by the contemplation of great
+examples of constancy. Let us seek for them in the annals of our
+forefathers.
+
+The reign of Queen Elizabeth may be considered as the opening of the
+modern history of England, especially in its connection with the modern
+system of Europe, which began about that time to assume the form that
+it preserved till the French Revolution. It was a very memorable
+period, of which the maxims ought to be engraven on the head and heart
+of every Englishman. Philip II., at the head of the greatest empire
+then in the world, was openly aiming at universal domination, and his
+project was so far from being thought chimerical by the wisest of
+his contemporaries that, in the opinion of the great Duke of Sully,
+he must have been successful, “if, by a most singular combination of
+circumstances, he had not at the same time been resisted by two such
+strong heads as those of Henry IV. and Queen Elizabeth.” To the most
+extensive and opulent dominions, the most numerous and disciplined
+armies, the most renowned captains, the greatest revenue, he added also
+the most formidable power over opinion. He was the chief of a religious
+faction, animated by the most atrocious fanaticism, prepared to second
+his ambition by rebellion, anarchy, and regicide in every Protestant
+state. Elizabeth was among the first objects of his hostility. That
+wise and magnanimous princess placed herself in the front of the battle
+for the liberties of Europe. Though she had to contend at home with
+his fanatical faction, which almost occupied Ireland, which divided
+Scotland, and was not of contemptible strength in England, she aided
+the oppressed inhabitants of the Netherlands in their just and glorious
+resistance to his tyranny; she aided Henry the Great in suppressing
+the abominable rebellion which anarchical principles had excited
+and Spanish arms had supported in France, and after a long reign of
+various fortune, in which she preserved her unconquered spirit through
+great calamities and still greater dangers, she at length broke the
+strength of the enemy, and reduced his power within such limits as to
+be compatible with the safety of England and of all Europe. Her only
+effectual ally was the spirit of her people, and her policy flowed
+from that magnanimous nature which in the hour of peril teaches better
+lessons than those of cold reason. Her great heart inspired her with
+a higher and a nobler wisdom—which disdained to appeal to the low and
+sordid passions of her people even for the protection of their low and
+sordid interests, because she knew, or, rather, she felt, that these
+are effeminate, creeping, cowardly, short-sighted passions, which
+shrink from conflict even in defence of their own mean objects. In a
+righteous cause, she roused those generous affections of her people
+which alone teach boldness, constancy, and foresight, and which are
+therefore the only safe guardians of the lowest as well as the highest
+interests of a nation. In her memorable address to her army, when the
+invasion of the kingdom was threatened by Spain, this woman of heroic
+spirit disdained to speak to them of their ease and their commerce, and
+their wealth and their safety. No! She touched another chord—she spoke
+of their national honor, of their dignity as Englishmen, of “the foul
+scorn that Parma or Spain _should dare_ to invade the borders of her
+realms.” She breathed into them those grand and powerful sentiments
+which exalt vulgar men into heroes, which led them into the battle
+of their country, armed with holy and irresistible enthusiasm; which
+even cover with their shield all the ignoble interests that base
+calculation and cowardly selfishness tremble to hazard, but shrink
+from defending. A sort of prophetic instinct, if I may so speak, seems
+to have revealed to her the importance of that great instrument for
+rousing and guiding the minds of men, of the effects of which she had
+no experience, which, since her time, has changed the condition of the
+world, but which few modern statesmen have thoroughly understood or
+wisely employed; which is, no doubt, connected with many ridiculous and
+degrading details, which has produced, and which may again produce,
+terrible mischiefs, but of which the influence must, after all, be
+considered as the most certain effect and the most efficacious cause of
+civilization, and which, whether it be a blessing or a curse, is the
+most powerful engine that a politician can move—I mean the press. It is
+a curious fact that in the year of the Armada, Queen Elizabeth caused
+to be printed the first gazettes that ever appeared in England; and I
+own, when I consider that this mode of rousing a national spirit was
+then absolutely unexampled, that she could have no assurance of its
+efficacy from the precedents of former times, I am disposed to regard
+her having recourse to it as one of the most sagacious experiments,
+one of the greatest discoveries of political genius, one of the most
+striking anticipations of future experience that we find in history. I
+mention it to you to justify the opinion that I have ventured to state
+of the close connection of our national spirit with our press, even our
+periodical press. I can not quit the reign of Elizabeth without laying
+before you the maxims of her policy, in the language of the greatest
+and wisest of men. Lord Bacon, in one part of his discourse on her
+reign, speaks thus of her support of Holland: “But let me rest upon the
+honorable and continual aid and relief she hath given to the distressed
+and desolate people of the Low Countries—a people recommended unto
+her by ancient confederacy and daily intercourse, by their cause so
+innocent and their fortune so lamentable!” In another passage of the
+same discourse, he thus speaks of the general system of her foreign
+policy as the protector of Europe, in words too remarkable to require
+any commentary. “Then it is her government, and her government alone,
+that hath been the sconce and fort of all Europe, which hath let this
+proud nation from overrunning all. If any state be yet free from his
+factions erected in the bowels thereof; if there be any state wherein
+this faction is erected that is not yet fired with civil troubles; if
+there be any state under his protection that enjoyeth moderate liberty,
+upon whom he tyrannizeth not, it is the mercy of this renowned Queen
+that standeth between them and their misfortunes!”
+
+The next great conspirator against the rights of men and of nations,
+against the security and independence of all European states, against
+every kind and degree of civil and religious liberty, was Louis XIV. In
+his time the character of the English nation was the more remarkably
+displayed, because it was counteracted by an apostate and perfidious
+government. During great part of his reign, you know that the throne of
+England was filled by princes who deserted the cause of their country
+and of Europe, who were the accomplices and the tools of the oppressor
+of the world, who were even so unmanly, so unprincely, so base, as to
+have sold themselves to his ambition; who were content that he should
+enslave the continent, if he enabled them to enslave Great Britain.
+These princes, traitors to their own royal dignity and to the feelings
+of the generous people whom they ruled, preferred the condition of
+the first slave of Louis XIV. to the dignity of the first freemen of
+England[34]; yet even under these princes, the feelings of the people
+of this kingdom were displayed, on a most memorable occasion, toward
+foreign sufferers and foreign oppressors. The revocation of the Edict
+of Nantes threw fifty thousand French Protestants on our shores. They
+were received as I trust the victims of tyranny ever will be in this
+land, which seems chosen by Providence to be the home of the exile, the
+refuge of the oppressed. They were welcomed by a people high-spirited
+as well as humane, who did not insult them by clandestine charity;
+who did not give alms in secret lest their charity should be detected
+by the neighboring tyrants! No! They were publicly and nationally
+welcomed and relieved. They were bid to raise their voice against
+their oppressor, and to proclaim their wrongs to all mankind. They
+did so. They were joined in the cry of just indignation by every
+Englishman worthy of the name. It was a fruitful indignation, which
+soon produced the successful resistance of Europe to the common enemy.
+Even then, when Jeffreys disgraced the bench which his Lordship [Lord
+Ellenborough] now adorns, no refugee was deterred by prosecution for
+libel from giving vent to his feelings, from arraigning the oppressor
+in the face of all Europe.
+
+During this ignominious period of our history, a war arose on the
+continent, which can not but present itself to the mind on such an
+occasion as this; the only war that was ever made on the avowed ground
+of attacking a free press. I speak of the invasion of Holland by Louis
+XIV. The liberties which the Dutch gazettes had taken in discussing
+his conduct were the sole cause of this very extraordinary and
+memorable war, which was of short duration, unprecedented in its avowed
+principle, and most glorious in its event for the liberties of mankind.
+That republic, at all times so interesting to Englishmen—in the worst
+times of both countries our brave enemies; in their best times our most
+faithful and valuable friends—was then charged with the defence of a
+free press against the oppressor of Europe, as a sacred trust for the
+benefit of all generations. They felt the sacredness of the deposit,
+they felt the dignity of the station in which they were placed, and
+though deserted by the un-English government of England, they asserted
+their own ancient character, and drove out the great armies and great
+captains of the oppressor with defeat and disgrace. Such was the result
+of the only war hitherto avowedly undertaken to oppress a free country
+because she allowed the free and public exercise of reason. And may the
+God of justice and liberty grant that such may ever be the result of
+wars made by tyrants against the rights of mankind, especially against
+that right which is the guardian of every other!
+
+This war, gentlemen, had the effect of raising up from obscurity the
+great Prince of Orange, afterward King William III., the deliverer
+of Holland, the deliverer of England, the deliverer of Europe; the
+only hero who was distinguished by such a happy union of fortune and
+virtue that the objects of his ambition were always the same with the
+interests of humanity; perhaps the only man who devoted the whole of
+his life exclusively to the service of mankind. This most illustrious
+benefactor of Europe, this “hero without vanity or passion,” as he
+has been justly and beautifully called by a venerable prelate [Dr.
+Shipley, Bishop of St. Asaph], who never made a step toward greatness
+without securing or advancing liberty, who had been made Stadtholder
+of Holland for the salvation of his own country, was soon after made
+King of England for the deliverance of ours. When the people of Great
+Britain had once more a government worthy of them, they returned to the
+feelings and principles of their ancestors, and resumed their former
+station and their former duties as protectors of the independence of
+nations. The people of England, delivered from a government which
+disgraced, oppressed, and betrayed them, fought under William as
+their forefathers had fought under Elizabeth, and after an almost
+uninterrupted struggle of more than twenty years, in which they were
+often abandoned by fortune, but never by their own constancy and
+magnanimity, they at length once more defeated those projects of guilty
+ambition, boundless aggrandizement, and universal domination, which
+had a second time threatened to overwhelm the whole civilized world.
+They rescued Europe from being swallowed up in the gulf of extensive
+empire, which the experience of all times points out as the grave of
+civilization; where men are driven by violent conquest and military
+oppression into lethargy and slavishness of heart; where, after their
+arts have perished with the mental vigor from which they spring,
+they are plunged by the combined power of effeminacy and ferocity
+into irreclaimable and hopeless barbarism. Our ancestors established
+the safety of their own country by providing for that of others, and
+rebuilt the European system upon such firm foundations that nothing
+less than the tempest of the French Revolution could have shaken it.
+
+The arduous struggle was suspended for a short time by the peace of
+Ryswick. The interval between that treaty and the war of the succession
+enables us to judge how our ancestors acted in a very peculiar
+situation, which requires maxims of policy very different from those
+which usually govern states. The treaty which they had concluded was
+in truth and substance only a truce. The ambition and the power of
+the enemy were such as to render real peace impossible. And it was
+perfectly obvious that the disputed succession of the Spanish monarch
+would soon render it no longer practicable to preserve even the
+appearance of amity. It was desirable, however, not to provoke the
+enemy by unseasonable hostility; but it was still more desirable,
+it was absolutely necessary, to keep up the national jealousy and
+indignation against him who was soon to be their open enemy. It might
+naturally have been apprehended that the press might have driven
+into premature war a prince who, not long before, had been violently
+exasperated by the press of another free country. I have looked over
+the political publications of that time with some care, and I can
+venture to say that at no period were the system and projects of Louis
+XIV. animadverted on with more freedom and boldness than during that
+interval. Our ancestors and the heroic prince who governed them, did
+not deem it wise policy to disarm the national mind for the sake of
+prolonging a truce. They were both too proud and too wise to pay so
+great a price for so small a benefit.
+
+In the course of the eighteenth century, a great change took place
+in the state of political discussion in this country. I speak of the
+multiplication of newspapers. I know that newspapers are not very
+popular in this place, which is, indeed, not very surprising, because
+they are known here only by their faults. Their publishers come here
+only to receive the chastisement due to their offences. With all their
+faults, I own I can not help feeling some respect for whatever is a
+proof of the increased curiosity and increased knowledge of mankind;
+and I can not help thinking that if somewhat more indulgence and
+consideration were shown for the difficulties of their situation, it
+might prove one of the best correctives of their faults, by teaching
+them that self-respect which is the best security for liberal conduct
+toward others. But however that may be, it is very certain that the
+multiplication of these channels of popular information has produced
+a great change in the state of our domestic and foreign politics.
+At home, it has, in truth, produced a gradual revolution in our
+government. By increasing the number of those who exercise some sort
+of judgment on public affairs, it has created a substantial democracy,
+infinitely more important than those democratical forms which have been
+the subject of so much contest. So that I may venture to say, England
+has not only in its forms the most democratical government that ever
+existed in a great country, but in substance has the most democratical
+government that ever existed in any country; if the most _substantial_
+democracy be that state in which the greatest number of men feel an
+interest and express an opinion upon political questions, and in which
+the greatest number of judgments and wills concur in influencing public
+measures.
+
+The same circumstances gave great additional importance to our
+discussion of continental politics. That discussion was no longer, as
+in the preceding century, confined to a few pamphlets, written and
+read only by men of education and rank, which reached the multitude
+very slowly and rarely. In newspapers an almost daily appeal was
+made, directly or indirectly, to the judgment and passions of almost
+every individual in the kingdom, upon the measures and principles not
+only of his own country, but of every state in Europe. Under such
+circumstances, the tone of these publications, in speaking of foreign
+governments, became a matter of importance. You will excuse me,
+therefore, if, before I conclude, I remind you of the general nature
+of their language on one or two very remarkable occasions, and of the
+boldness with which they arraigned the crimes of powerful sovereigns,
+without any check from the laws and magistrates of their own country.
+This toleration, or rather this protection, was too long and uniform to
+be accidental. I am, indeed, very much mistaken if it be not founded
+upon a policy which this country can not abandon without sacrificing
+her liberty and endangering her national existence.
+
+The first remarkable instance which I shall choose to state of the
+unpunished and protected boldness of the English press, of the freedom
+with which they animadverted on the policy of powerful sovereigns, is
+the partition of Poland in 1772; an act not, perhaps, so horrible in
+its means, nor so deplorable in its immediate effects, as some other
+atrocious invasions of national independence which have followed
+it; but the most abominable in its general tendency and ultimate
+consequences of any political crime recorded in history, because it was
+the first practical breach in the system of Europe, the first example
+of atrocious robbery perpetrated on unoffending countries which have
+been since so liberally followed, and which has broken down all the
+barriers of habit and principle which guarded defenceless states. The
+perpetrators of this atrocious crime were the most powerful sovereigns
+of the continent, whose hostility it certainly was not the interest of
+Great Britain wantonly to incur. They were the most illustrious princes
+of their age, and some of them were, doubtless, entitled to the highest
+praise for their domestic administration, as well as for the brilliant
+qualities which distinguished their characters. But none of these
+circumstances, no dread of their resentment, no admiration of their
+talents, no consideration for their rank, silenced the animadversion of
+the English press. Some of you remember, all of you know, that a loud
+and unanimous cry of reprobation and execration broke out against them
+from every part of this kingdom. It was perfectly uninfluenced by any
+considerations of our own mere national interest, which might perhaps
+be supposed to be rather favorably affected by that partition. It was
+not, as in some other countries, the indignation of rival robbers, who
+were excluded from their share of the prey. It was the moral anger of
+disinterested spectators against atrocious crimes, the gravest and the
+most dignified moral principle which the God of justice has implanted
+in the human heart; that of which the dread is the only restraint on
+the actions of powerful criminals, and of which the promulgation is
+the only punishment that can be inflicted on them. It is a restraint
+which ought not to be weakened. It is a punishment which no good man
+can desire to mitigate.
+
+That great crime was spoken of as it deserved in England. Robbery
+was not described by any courtly circumlocutions. Rapine was not
+called policy; nor was the oppression of an innocent people termed _a
+mediation_ in their domestic differences. No prosecutions, no criminal
+informations followed the liberty and the boldness of the language then
+employed. No complaints even appear to have been made from abroad, much
+less any insolent menaces against the free constitution which protected
+the English press. The people of England were too long known throughout
+Europe for the proudest potentate to expect to silence our press by
+such means.
+
+I pass over the second partition of Poland in 1792. You all remember
+what passed on that occasion, the universal abhorrence expressed by
+every man and every writer of every party, the succors that were
+publicly preparing by large bodies of individuals of all parties for
+the oppressed Poles.
+
+I hasten to the final dismemberment of that unhappy kingdom, which
+seems to me the most striking example in our history of the habitual,
+principled, and deeply rooted forbearance of those who administer the
+law toward political writers. We were engaged in the most extensive,
+bloody, and dangerous war that this country ever knew; and the parties
+to the dismemberment of Poland were our allies, and our only powerful
+and effective allies. We had every motive of policy to court their
+friendship. Every reason of state seemed to require that we should not
+permit them to be abused and vilified by English writers. What was
+the fact? Did any Englishman consider himself at liberty, on account
+of temporary interests, however urgent, to silence those feelings of
+humanity and justice which guard the certain and permanent interests
+of all countries? You all remember that every voice, and every pen,
+and every press in England were unceasingly employed to brand that
+abominable robbery. You remember that this was not confined to private
+writers, but that the same abhorrence was expressed by every member
+of both Houses of Parliament who was not under the restraints of
+ministerial reserve. No minister dared even to blame the language
+of honest indignation which might be very inconvenient to his most
+important political projects; and I hope I may venture to say that no
+English assembly would have endured such a sacrifice of eternal justice
+to any miserable interest of an hour. Did the law-officers of the crown
+venture to come into a court of justice to complain of the boldest of
+the publications of that time? They did not. I do not say that they
+felt any disposition to do so. I believe that they could not. But I do
+say that if they had; if they had spoken of the necessity of confining
+our political writers to cold narrative and unfeeling argument; if
+they had informed the jury that they did not prosecute history, but
+invective; that if private writers be at all to blame great princes, it
+must be with moderation and decorum, the sound heads and honest hearts
+of an English jury would have confounded such sophistry, and declared
+by their verdict that moderation of language is a relative term, which
+varies with the subject to which it is applied; that atrocious crimes
+are not to be related as calmly and coolly as indifferent or trifling
+events; that if there be a decorum due to exalted rank and authority,
+there is also a much more sacred decorum due to virtue and to human
+nature, which would be outraged and trampled under foot by speaking of
+guilt in a lukewarm language, falsely called moderate.
+
+Soon after, gentlemen, there followed an act, in comparison with
+which all the deeds of rapine and blood perpetrated in the world are
+innocence itself—the invasion and destruction of Switzerland, that
+unparalleled scene of guilt and enormity; that unprovoked aggression
+against an innocent country, which had been the sanctuary of peace and
+liberty for three centuries; respected as a sort of sacred territory
+by the fiercest ambition; raised, like its own mountains, beyond the
+region of the storms which raged around on every side; the only warlike
+people that never sent forth armies to disturb their neighbors; the
+only government that ever accumulated treasures without imposing
+taxes, an innocent treasure, unstained by the tears of the poor, the
+inviolate patrimony of the commonwealth, which attested the virtue of
+a long series of magistrates, but which at length caught the eye of
+the spoiler, and became the fatal occasion of their ruin! Gentlemen,
+the destruction of such a country, “its cause so innocent, and its
+fortune so lamentable!” made a deep impression on the people of
+England. I will ask my learned friend, if we had then been at peace
+with the French Republic, whether we must have been silent spectators
+of the foulest crimes that ever blotted the name of humanity! whether
+we must, like cowards and slaves, have repressed the compassion and
+indignation with which that horrible scene of tyranny had filled our
+hearts? Let me suppose, gentlemen, that ALOYS REDING, who has displayed
+in our times the simplicity, magnanimity, and piety of ancient heroes,
+had, after his glorious struggle, honored this kingdom by choosing it
+as his refuge; that after performing prodigies of valor at the head
+of his handful of heroic peasants on the field of Morgarten, where
+his ancestor, the _Landmann Reding_, had, five hundred years before,
+defeated the first oppressors of Switzerland, he had selected this
+country to be his residence, as the chosen abode of liberty, as the
+ancient and inviolable asylum of the oppressed; would my learned friend
+have had the boldness to have said to this hero, “that he must hide his
+tears” (the tears shed by a hero over the ruins of his country!) “lest
+they might provoke the resentment of _Reubell_ or _Rapinat_! that he
+must smother the sorrow and the anger with which his heart was loaded;
+that he must breathe his murmurs low, lest they might be overheard
+by the oppressor!” Would this have been the language of my learned
+friend? I know that it would not. I know that by such a supposition I
+have done wrong to his honorable feelings, to his honest English heart.
+I am sure that he knows as well as I do, that a nation which should
+_thus_ receive the oppressed of other countries would be preparing its
+own neck for the yoke. He knows the slavery which such a nation would
+deserve, and must speedily incur. He knows that sympathy with the
+unmerited sufferings of others, and disinterested anger against their
+oppressors, are, if I may so speak, the masters which are appointed
+by Providence to teach us fortitude in the defence of our own rights;
+that selfishness is a dastardly principle, which betrays its charge and
+flies from its post; and that those only can defend themselves with
+valor who are animated by the moral approbation with which they can
+survey their sentiments toward others, who are ennobled in their own
+eyes by a consciousness that they are fighting for justice as well as
+interest; a consciousness which none can feel but those who have felt
+for the wrongs of their brethren. These are the sentiments which my
+learned friend would have felt. He would have told the hero: “Your
+confidence is not deceived; this is still that England, of which the
+history may, perhaps, have contributed to fill your heart with the
+heroism of liberty. Every other country of Europe is crouching under
+the bloody tyrants who destroyed your country. _We_ are unchanged; we
+are still the same people which received with open arms the victims
+of the tyranny of Philip II. and Louis XIV. We shall not exercise a
+cowardly and clandestine humanity! Here we are not so dastardly as to
+rob you of your greatest consolation. Here, protected by a free, brave,
+and high-minded people, you may give vent to your indignation; you
+may proclaim the crimes of your tyrants; you may devote them to the
+execration of mankind; there is still one spot upon earth in which they
+are abhorred, without being dreaded!”[35]
+
+I am aware, gentlemen, that I have already abused your indulgence, but
+I must entreat you to bear with me for a short time longer, to allow
+me to suppose a case which might have occurred, in which you will
+see the horrible consequences of enforcing rigorously principles of
+law, which I can not counteract, against political writers. We might
+have been at peace with France during the whole of that terrible
+period which elapsed between August, 1792 and 1794, which has been
+usually called the reign of Robespierre!—the only series of crimes,
+perhaps, in history which, in spite of the common disposition to
+exaggerate extraordinary facts, has been beyond measure underrated in
+public opinion. I say this, gentlemen, after an investigation which,
+I think, entitles me to affirm it with confidence. Men’s minds were
+oppressed by atrocity and the multitude of crimes; their humanity and
+their indolence took refuge in skepticism from such an overwhelming
+mass of guilt; and the consequence was, that all these unparalleled
+enormities, though proved not only with the fullest historical but with
+the strictest judicial evidence, were at the time only half believed,
+and are now scarcely half remembered. When these atrocities were daily
+perpetrating, of which the greatest part are as little known to the
+public in general as the campaigns of Genghis Khan, but are still
+protected from the scrutiny of men by the immensity of those voluminous
+records of guilt in which they are related, and under the mass of which
+they will be buried till some historian be found with patience and
+courage enough to drag them forth into light, for the shame, indeed,
+but for the instruction of mankind—when these crimes were perpetrating,
+which had the peculiar malignity, from the pretexts with which they
+were covered, of making the noblest objects of human pursuit seem
+odious and detestable; which have almost made the names of liberty,
+reformation, and humanity synonymous with anarchy, robbery, and
+murder; which thus threatened not only to extinguish every principle
+of improvement, to arrest the progress of civilized society, and to
+disinherit future generations of that rich succession which they were
+entitled to expect from the knowledge and wisdom of the present, but to
+destroy the civilization of Europe, which never gave such a proof of
+its vigor and robustness as in being able to resist their destructive
+power—when all these horrors were acting in the greatest empire of the
+continent, I will ask my learned friend, if we had then been at peace
+with France, how English writers were to relate them so as to escape
+the charge of libelling a friendly government?
+
+When Robespierre, in the debates in the National Convention on the
+mode of murdering their blameless sovereign, objected to the formal
+and tedious mode of murder called a trial, and proposed to put him
+immediately to death, “on the principles of insurrection,” because,
+to doubt the guilt of the king would be to doubt the innocence of the
+Convention; and if the king were not a traitor, the Convention must
+be rebels; would my learned friend have had an English writer state
+all this with “_decorum and moderation_?” Would he have had an English
+writer state that though this reasoning was not perfectly agreeable to
+our national laws, or perhaps to our national prejudices, yet it was
+not for him to make any observations on the judicial proceedings of
+foreign states?
+
+When Marat, in the same Convention, called for two hundred and seventy
+thousand heads must our English writers have said that the remedy did,
+indeed, seem to their weak judgment rather severe; but that it was not
+for them to judge the conduct of so illustrious an assembly as the
+National Convention, or the suggestions of so enlightened a statesman
+as M. Marat?
+
+When that Convention resounded with applause at the news of several
+hundred aged priests being thrown into the Loire, and particularly
+at the exclamation of Carrier, who communicated the intelligence,
+“What a revolutionary torrent is the Loire”—when these suggestions
+and narrations of murder, which have hitherto been only hinted and
+whispered in the most secret cabals, in the darkest caverns of
+banditti, were triumphantly uttered, patiently endured, and even loudly
+applauded by an assembly of seven hundred men, acting in the sight of
+all Europe, would my learned friend have wished that there had been
+found in England a single writer so base as to deliberate upon the most
+safe, decorous, and polite manner of relating all these things to his
+countrymen?
+
+When Carrier ordered five hundred children under fourteen years of
+age to be shot, the greater part of whom escaped the fire from their
+size, when the poor victims ran for protection to the soldiers, and
+were bayoneted clinging round their knees! _would my friend_—but I
+can not pursue the strain of interrogation. It is too much. It would
+be a violence which I can not practise on my own feelings. It would
+be an outrage to my friend. It would be an insult to humanity. No!
+Better, ten thousand times better, would it be that every press in
+the world were burned; that the very use of letters were abolished;
+that we were returned to the honest ignorance of the rudest times,
+than that the results of civilization should be made subservient to
+the purposes of barbarism, than that literature should be employed to
+teach a toleration for cruelty, to weaken moral hatred for guilt, to
+deprave and brutalize the human mind. I know that I speak my friend’s
+feelings as well as my own when I say God forbid that the dread of
+any punishment should ever make any Englishman an accomplice in so
+corrupting his countrymen, a public teacher of depravity and barbarity!
+
+Mortifying and horrible as the idea is, I must remind you, gentlemen,
+that even at that time, even under the reign of Robespierre, my learned
+friend, if he had then been attorney-general, might have been compelled
+by some most deplorable necessity to have come into this court to ask
+your verdict against the libellers of Barrère and Collot d’Herbois.
+Mr. Peltier then employed his talents against the enemies of the human
+race, as he has uniformly and bravely done. I do not believe that any
+peace, any political considerations, any fear of punishment would
+have silenced him. He has shown too much honor, and constancy, and
+intrepidity, to be shaken by such circumstances as these.
+
+My learned friend might then have been compelled to have filed a
+criminal information against Mr. Peltier, for “wickedly and maliciously
+intending to vilify and degrade Maximilian Robespierre, President of
+the Committee of Public Safety of the French Republic!” He might have
+been reduced to the sad necessity of appearing before you to belie his
+own better feelings, to prosecute Mr. Peltier for publishing those
+sentiments which my friend himself had a thousand times felt, and a
+thousand times expressed. He might have been obliged even to call for
+punishment upon Mr. Peltier for language which he and all mankind would
+forever despise Mr. Peltier if he were not to employ. Then, indeed,
+gentlemen, we should have seen the last humiliation fall on England;
+the tribunals, the spotless and venerable tribunals, of this free
+country reduced to be the ministers of the vengeance of Robespierre!
+What could have rescued us from this last disgrace? _The honesty and
+courage of a jury._ They would have delivered the judges of this
+country from the dire necessity of inflicting punishment on a brave and
+virtuous man, because he spoke truth of a monster. They would have
+despised the threats of a foreign tyrant, as their ancestors braved the
+power of oppression at home.
+
+In the court where we are now met, Cromwell twice sent a satirist
+on his tyranny to be convicted and punished as a libeller, and in
+this court, almost in sight of the scaffold streaming with the blood
+of his sovereign, within hearing of the clash of his bayonets which
+drove out Parliament with contumely, two successive juries rescued
+the intrepid satirist [Lilburne] from his fangs, and sent out with
+defeat and disgrace the usurper’s attorney-general from what he had
+the insolence to call _his_ court! Even then, gentlemen, when all law
+and liberty were trampled under the feet of a military banditti; when
+those great crimes were perpetrated on a high place and with a high
+hand against those who were the objects of public veneration, which,
+more than any thing else, break their spirits and confound their moral
+sentiments, obliterate the distinctions between right and wrong in
+their understanding, and teach the multitude to feel no longer any
+reverence for that justice which they thus see triumphantly dragged at
+the chariot-wheels of a tyrant; even then, when this unhappy country,
+triumphant, indeed, abroad, but enslaved at home, had no prospect
+but that of a long succession of tyrants wading through slaughter to
+a throne—_even then, I say, when all seemed lost, the unconquerable
+spirit of English liberty survived in the hearts of English jurors_.
+That spirit is, I trust in God, not extinct; and if any modern tyrant
+were, in the drunkenness of his insolence, to hope to overawe an
+English jury, I trust and I believe that they would tell him: “Our
+ancestors braved the bayonets of Cromwell; we bid defiance to yours.
+_Contempsi Catilinæ gladios—non pertimescam tuos!_”
+
+What could be such a tyrant’s means of overawing a jury? As long as
+their country exists, they are girt round with impenetrable armor.
+Till the destruction of their country, no danger can fall upon them
+for the performance of their duty, and I do trust that there is no
+Englishman so unworthy of life as to desire to outlive England. But
+if any of us are condemned to the cruel punishment of surviving our
+country—if, in the inscrutable counsels of Providence, this favored
+seat of justice and liberty, this noblest work of human wisdom and
+virtue, be destined to destruction, which I shall not be charged with
+national prejudice for saying would be the most dangerous wound ever
+inflicted on civilization; at least let us carry with us into our sad
+exile the consolation that we ourselves have not violated the rights
+of hospitality to exiles—that we have not torn from the altar the
+suppliant who claimed protection as the voluntary victim of loyalty and
+conscience!
+
+Gentlemen, I now leave this unfortunate gentleman in your hands.
+His character and his situation might interest your humanity; but,
+on his behalf, I only ask justice from you. I only ask a favorable
+construction of what can not be said to be more than ambiguous
+language, and this you will soon be told, from the highest authority,
+is a part of justice.
+
+
+  Notwithstanding the great impression made by his speech, the charge
+  of Lord Ellenborough made it necessary that the jury should render
+  a verdict of guilty. In his instructions his Lordship said that
+  under the law of England “any publication which tended to degrade,
+  revile, and defame persons in considerable situations of power and
+  dignity, in foreign countries, may be taken and treated as a libel,
+  and particularly where it has a tendency to interrupt the pacific
+  relations of the two countries.”
+
+  The jury found Peltier guilty; but as war was almost immediately
+  declared, he was not brought up for sentence, but was set free.
+
+
+
+
+LORD ERSKINE.
+
+
+“As an advocate in the forum, I hold him to be without an equal in
+ancient or modern times.” This is the judgment of the author of “The
+Lives of the Lord Chancellors,” in regard to Thomas, Lord Erskine.
+But for the modern student, Erskine was not merely the most powerful
+advocate that ever appealed to a court or a jury, but what is more
+important, he was, in a very definite sense, so closely identified
+with the establishment of certain great principles that lie at the
+foundation of modern social life, that a knowledge, at least, of some
+of his speeches is of no little importance. The rights of juries,
+the liberty of the press, and the law of treason were discussed by
+him not only with a depth of learning and a power of reasoning which
+were absolutely conclusive, but at the same time with a warmth and a
+brilliancy of genius which throw a peculiar charm over the whole of the
+subjects presented.
+
+Thomas Erskine was the youngest son of the Earl of Buchan, the
+representative of an old Scotch house, whose ample fortune had wasted
+away until the family was reduced to actual poverty. Just before the
+birth of the future Lord Chancellor, the Earl of Buchan abandoned his
+ancient seat, and with wife and children took up his abode in an upper
+flat of a lofty house in the old town of Edinburgh. Here Erskine was
+born on the 10th of January, 1750. The poverty of the family made it
+impossible for him to acquire the early education he craved. Some years
+at the schools in Edinburgh, and a few months in the University of St.
+Andrews, completed his academic days. He gained a very superficial
+knowledge of Latin, and, if we may believe Lord Campbell, “little of
+Greek beyond the alphabet.” In the rudiments of English literature,
+however, he was well instructed; and he seems, even while at the
+university, to have acquired something of that freedom and nobleness of
+manner which so much distinguished him in after-life.
+
+The condition of the family, however, made it impossible for him to
+complete the course of studies at the University; and accordingly, at
+fourteen, he was placed as a midshipman in the navy. Here he remained
+four years, during which time he visited different parts of the globe,
+including the Indies and the English colonies in North America. At the
+end of his term he determined, like the elder Pitt, to enter the army;
+and, taking the whole of his small patrimony for the purpose, he bought
+an ensign’s commission in the Royals or First Regiment of Foot. Here
+he remained from the time he was eighteen till he was twenty-five.
+At twenty he was married to a lady of respectability, though without
+fortune. But this step, which, with most persons, would have been
+the sure precursor of poverty and obscurity, turned out in the case
+of Erskine to be a means of inspiration and assistance. His mind was
+balanced, and his vivacity was reduced to earnestness. As the regiment
+was in garrison, he had abundant leisure, and he applied himself in
+the society of his wife to the systematic study of the masterpieces
+of English literature. The best parts of Milton and Shakespeare he
+acquired such mastery of that he continued to know them by heart
+throughout life. It is evident that his attainments were beginning to
+attract attention; for, in April of 1772, Boswell speaks of him as
+dining with Johnson, and characterizes him as “a young officer in the
+regimentals of the Scotch Royals, who talked with a vivacity, fluency,
+and precision which attracted particular attention.”
+
+It was not until two years after this time that we find Erskine
+interested in the proceedings of the courts. He subsequently declared
+that, while a witness of judicial proceedings, it often occurred to
+him in the course of the argument on both sides how much more clearly
+and forcibly he could have presented the points and urged them on the
+minds of the jury. It was this consciousness that led him one day,
+while dining with Lord Mansfield, to ask: “Is it impossible for me to
+become a lawyer?” The answer of the Lord Chancellor did not utterly
+discourage him; and he became a student of Lincoln’s Inn at the age
+of twenty-five. In order to abridge his term of study, he determined
+to take a degree at one of the universities, as, being a nobleman’s
+son, he was entitled to do on examination and without residence. In
+fulfilment of this design, he became a member of Trinity College, at
+Cambridge, in 1776, while he was prosecuting his legal studies in
+London, and still holding his commission in the army as a means of
+support. In July of 1778, when in his twenty-ninth year, he was called
+to the bar.
+
+A singular combination of circumstances almost immediately brought him
+forward into great prominence. He had been retained as junior counsel
+with four eminent advocates for the defence of one Captain Bailie,
+who had disclosed certain important corruptions of the government
+officials in charge of Greenwich Hospital. Bailie was prosecuted
+for libel, and the influence of the government was so great, that
+the four older counsellors advised him to accept of a compromise by
+withdrawing the charges and paying the costs. From this opinion Erskine
+alone dissented. Bailie accepted the advice of the young advocate
+with enthusiasm, and thus threw upon him the chief responsibility of
+conducting the cause. The result was one of the most extraordinary
+triumphs in the history of forensic advocacy. Erskine’s power revealed
+itself, not only in the remarkable learning and skill which he showed
+in the general management of the cause, but in the clearness with which
+he stated the difficult points at issue, and the overpowering eloquence
+with which he urged his positions on the court and the jury. It was his
+first cause. He entered Westminster Hall in extreme poverty; before
+he left it he had received thirty retainers from attorneys who had
+been present at the trial. Demand for his services continued rapidly
+to increase, till within a few years his income from his profession
+amounted to 12,000 pounds a year.
+
+It was but natural that so great success at the bar should carry
+Erskine, at an early day, into the House of Commons. In 1783 we find
+him on the benches of the House as a supporter of the newly formed
+Coalition of North and Fox. His fame as an orator had become so great,
+that the Coalition hoped and the Opposition feared much from his
+eloquence. But he disappointed his friends, and showed as soon as he
+took the floor, that his manner was suited to the courts and not to the
+legislature. Croly, in his “Life of George IV.,” relates that great
+expectations were raised when it was announced that Erskine was to make
+his maiden speech. Pitt evidently intended to reply, and sat, pen in
+hand to take notes of his formidable opponent’s arguments. He wrote,
+however, but a few words. As Erskine proceeded, his attention relaxed;
+and finally, with a contemptuous expression, he stabbed his pen through
+the paper and threw them both on the floor. “Erskine,” says Croly,
+“never recovered from this expression of disdain; his voice faltered,
+he struggled through the remainder of his speech and sank into his seat
+dispirited, and shorn of his fame.” It was not until late in life, that
+he was able to recover the equanimity lost on that night in the House
+of Commons. But, although after some years, he made several eloquent
+parliamentary speeches, all his legislative efforts were far surpassed
+by the brilliancy of his speeches in Westminster Hall.
+
+From 1783 till 1806 Erskine adhered to the liberal political doctrines
+advocated by Fox. His influence in Parliament, however, was not great,
+and his principal energies were expended in the courts; when, in 1806,
+Grenville and Fox came into power, Erskine received the highest award
+to which an English attorney can aspire. But, he had not long to enjoy
+his new honors as Lord Chancellor, for Pitt soon came once more into
+power. The usages of the legal profession in England did not allow
+Erskine to return to the bar, and therefore the remaining years of
+his life were unimportant, and not without disappointment. The great
+advocate died November 17, 1823, in the seventy-fourth year of his age.
+
+Erskine was not only the greatest of English advocates, but he is
+entitled to the still higher distinction of having given so clear an
+exposition of some of the most subtle principles at the basis of human
+liberty, as to cause them to be generally recognized and accepted.
+It was his lot to be much more frequently employed in defence, than
+in prosecution, and many of his arguments in behalf of his clients
+are marvels of clear and enlightened exposition of those fundamental
+rights on which English liberty is established. His speeches in behalf
+of Gordon, Hadfield, Hardy, and Tooke, constitute, as a whole, the
+clearest exposition ever made of the law of treason. Of the speech in
+defence of Gordon, Lord Campbell goes so far as to say: “Here I find
+not only great acuteness, powerful reasoning, enthusiastic zeal, and
+burning eloquence, but the most masterly view ever given of the English
+law of high treason, the foundation of all our liberties.” The plea
+in behalf of Stockdale, commonly considered the finest of Erskine’s
+speeches, is perhaps a still more felicitous exposition of the
+principles involved in the law of libel. Of his speech on the rights
+of juries, Campbell says that it displayed “beyond all comparison
+the most perfect union of argument and eloquence ever exhibited
+in Westminster Hall.” His address in behalf of Paine, if somewhat
+less successful than the great efforts just alluded to, was still a
+remarkable presentation of the principles of free speech. But the most
+noteworthy characteristic of Erskine was that notwithstanding the depth
+and ingenuity and learning of his arguments, his whole presentation was
+so illumined by the glow of his genius, that his address was always
+listened to with the greatest popular interest. His speech in behalf
+of Hardy was seven hours in length, but the crowd of eager auditors
+not only heard him to the end, but “burst out into irrepressible
+acclamations which spread through the vast multitude outside and were
+repeated to a great distance around.”
+
+It need scarcely be added that for students of English law, Erskine is
+the most important of all the English orators.
+
+
+
+
+LORD ERSKINE.
+
+ON THE LIMITATIONS OF FREE SPEECH, DELIVERED IN 1797 ON THE TRIAL OF
+WILLIAMS FOR THE PUBLICATION OF PAINE’S “AGE OF REASON.”
+
+
+  Nearly all of Erskine’s speeches were several hours in length and so
+  logically constructed as not to admit of abridgment or excision. The
+  more elaborate of them, therefore, are not adapted to the purposes
+  of this collection. It happens, however, that one of the briefest of
+  his forensic addresses was the one on which he himself looked with
+  most satisfaction. Of the speech delivered on the prosecution of
+  Williams he is reported to have said: “I would rather that all my
+  other speeches were committed to the flames, or in any manner buried
+  in oblivion, than that a single page of it should be lost.” Erskine’s
+  “Speeches,” Am. ed., vol. i., p. 571.
+
+  It is an interesting fact that the same great advocate who gave all
+  his powers to the defence of Paine for publishing the “Rights of
+  Man,” was equally earnest in the prosecution of Williams for the
+  publication of the same author’s “Age of Reason.” But the explanation
+  is easy. In the former work the author criticised, in what Erskine
+  regarded as a legitimate way, the character and methods of the
+  English Government; in the latter he assailed what the advocate
+  regarded as the very foundations of all government and all justice.
+  The difference between the two is pointed out in the following
+  speech with a skill that will give the reader a good example of the
+  orator’s method.
+
+
+GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY:
+
+The charge of blasphemy, which is put upon the record against the
+publisher of this publication, is not an accusation of the servants of
+the crown, but comes before you sanctioned by the oaths of a grand jury
+of the country. It stood for trial upon a former day; but it happening,
+as it frequently does, without any imputation upon the gentlemen named
+in the panel, that a sufficient number did not appear to constitute
+a full special jury, I thought it my duty to withdraw the cause from
+trial, till I could have the opportunity of addressing myself to you
+who were originally appointed to try it.
+
+I pursued this course from no jealousy of the common juries appointed
+by the laws for the ordinary service of the court, since my whole
+life has been one continued experience of their virtues; but because
+I thought it of great importance that those who were to decide upon a
+cause so very momentous to the public, should have the highest possible
+qualifications for the decision; that they should not only be men
+capable from their educations of forming an enlightened judgment, but
+that their situations should be such as to bring them within the full
+view of their country, to which, in character and in estimation, they
+were in their own turns to be responsible.
+
+Not having the honor, gentlemen, to be sworn for the king as one of his
+counsel, it has fallen much oftener to my lot to defend indictments
+for libels than to assist in the prosecution of them; but I feel no
+embarrassment from that recollection. I shall not be bound to-day to
+express a sentiment or to utter an expression inconsistent with those
+invaluable principles for which I have uniformly contended in the
+defence of others. Nothing that I have ever said, either professionally
+or personally, for the liberty of the press, do I mean to-day to
+contradict or counteract. On the contrary, I desire to preface the
+very short discourse I have to make to you, with reminding you that
+it is your most solemn duty to take care that it suffers no injury in
+your hands. A free and unlicensed press, in the just and legal sense
+of the expression, has led to all the blessings, both of religion
+and government, which Great Britain or any part of the world at this
+moment enjoys, and it is calculated to advance mankind to still higher
+degrees of civilization and happiness. But this freedom, like every
+other, must be limited to be enjoyed, and, like every human advantage,
+may be defeated by its abuse.
+
+Gentlemen, the defendant stands indicted for having published this
+book, which I have only read from the obligations of professional duty,
+and which I rose from the reading of with astonishment and disgust.
+Standing here with all the privileges belonging to the highest counsel
+for the crown, I shall be entitled to reply to any defence that shall
+be made for the publication. I shall wait with patience till I hear it.
+
+Indeed, if I were to anticipate the defence which I hear and read of,
+it would be defaming by anticipation the learned counsel who is to
+make it; since, if I am to collect it from a formal notice given to
+the prosecutors in the course of the proceedings, I have to expect
+that, instead of a defence conducted according to the rules and
+principles of English law, the foundation of all our laws, and the
+sanctions of all justice, are to be struck at and insulted. What gives
+the court its jurisdiction? What but the oath which his lordship, as
+well as yourselves, has sworn upon the gospel to fulfil? Yet in the
+King’s Court, where his Majesty is himself also sworn to administer
+the justice of England—in the King’s Court—who receives his high
+authority under a solemn oath to maintain the Christian religion, as
+it is promulgated by God in the Holy Scriptures, I am nevertheless
+called upon as counsel for the prosecution to “produce a certain book
+described in the indictment to be the Holy Bible.” No man deserves to
+be upon the rolls, who has dared as an attorney to put his name to such
+a notice. It is an insult to the authority and dignity of the court of
+which he is an officer; since it calls in question the very foundations
+of its jurisdiction. If this is to be the spirit and temper of the
+defence; if, as I collect from that array of books which are spread
+upon the benches behind me, this publication is to be vindicated by
+an attack of all the truths which the Christian religion promulgates
+to mankind, let it be remembered that such an argument was neither
+suggested nor justified by any thing said by me on the part of the
+prosecution.
+
+In this stage of the proceedings, I shall call for reverence to the
+Sacred Scriptures, not from their merits, unbounded as they are, but
+from their authority in a Christian country; not from the obligations
+of conscience, but from the rules of law. For my own part, gentlemen,
+I have been ever deeply devoted to the truths of Christianity; and my
+firm belief in the Holy Gospel is by no means owing to the prejudices
+of education, though I was religiously educated by the best of parents,
+but has arisen from the fullest and most continued reflections of
+my riper years and understanding. It forms at this moment the great
+consolation of a life, which, as a shadow passeth away; and without it,
+I should consider my long course of health and prosperity, too long
+perhaps and too uninterrupted to be good for any man, only as the dust
+which the wind scatters, and rather as a snare than as a blessing.
+
+Much, however, as I wish to support the authority of Scripture from a
+reasonable consideration of it, I shall repress that subject for the
+present. But if the defence, as I have suspected, shall bring them
+at all into argument or question, I must then fulfil a duty which I
+owe not only to the court, as counsel for the prosecution, but to the
+public, and to the world, to state what I feel and know concerning the
+evidences of that religion, which is denied without being examined, and
+reviled without being understood.
+
+I am well aware that by the communications of a free press, all the
+errors of mankind, from age to age, have been dissipated and dispelled;
+and I recollect that the world, under the banners of reformed
+Christianity, has struggled through persecution to the noble eminence
+on which it stands at this moment, shedding the blessings of humanity
+and science upon the nations of the earth.
+
+It may be asked, then, by what means the reformation would have been
+effected, if the books of the reformers had been suppressed, and the
+errors of now exploded superstitions had been supported by the terrors
+of an unreformed state? or how, upon such principles, any reformation,
+civil or religious, can in future be effected? The solution is easy:
+let us examine what are the genuine principles of the liberty of the
+press, as they regard writings upon general subjects, unconnected with
+the personal reputations of private men, which are wholly foreign to
+the present inquiry. They are full of simplicity, and are brought as
+near perfection, by the law of England, as perhaps is attainable by any
+of the frail institutions of mankind.
+
+Although every community must establish supreme authorities, founded
+upon fixed principles, and must give high powers to magistrates
+to administer laws for the preservation of government, and for the
+security of those who are to be protected by it; yet as infallibility
+and perfection belong neither to human individuals nor to human
+establishments, it ought to be the policy of all free nations, as
+it is most peculiarly the principle of our own, to permit the most
+unbounded freedom of discussion, even to the detection of errors in
+the constitution of the very government itself; so as that common
+decorum is observed, which every state must exact from its subjects and
+which imposes no restraint upon any intellectual composition, fairly,
+honestly, and decently addressed to the consciences and understandings
+of men. Upon this principle I have an unquestionable right, a right
+which the best subjects have exercised, to examine the principles
+and structure of the constitution, and by fair, manly reasoning, to
+question the practice of its administrators. I have a right to consider
+and to point out errors in the one or in the other; and not merely
+to reason upon their existence, but to consider the means of their
+reformation.
+
+By such free, well-intentioned, modest, and dignified communication of
+sentiments and opinions, all nations have been gradually improved,
+and milder laws and purer religions have been established. The same
+principles which vindicate civil controversies, honestly directed,
+extend their protection to the sharpest contentions on the subject
+of religious faiths. This rational and legal course of improvement
+was recognized and ratified by Lord Kenyon as the law of England,
+in the late trial at Guildhall, where he looked back with gratitude
+to the labors of the reformers, as the fountains of our religious
+emancipation, and of the civil blessings that followed in their train.
+The English constitution, indeed, does not stop short in the toleration
+of religious opinions, but liberally extends it to practice. It
+permits every man, even publicly, to worship God according to his own
+conscience, though in marked dissent from the national establishment,
+so as he professes the general faith, which is the sanction of all our
+moral duties, and the only pledge of our submission to the system which
+constitutes the state.
+
+Is not this freedom of controversy and freedom of worship sufficient
+for all the purposes of human happiness and improvement? Can it be
+necessary for either, that the law should hold out indemnity to those
+who wholly abjure and revile the government of their country, or the
+religion on which it rests for its foundation? I expect to hear in
+answer to what I am now saying, much that will offend me. My learned
+friend, from the difficulties of his situation, which I know from
+experience how to feel for very sincerely, may be driven to advance
+propositions which it may be my duty with much freedom to reply to; and
+the law will sanction that freedom. But will not the ends of justice
+be completely answered by my exercise of that right, in terms that
+are decent, and calculated to expose its defects? Or will my argument
+suffer, or will public justice be impeded, because neither private
+honor and justice nor public decorum would endure my telling my very
+learned friend, because I differ from him in opinion, that he is a
+fool, a liar, and a scoundrel, in the face of the court? This is just
+the distinction between a book of free legal controversy, and the book
+which I am arraigning before you. Every man has a right to investigate,
+with decency, controversial points of the Christian religion; but no
+man consistently with a law which only exists under its sanctions has a
+right to deny its very existence, and to pour forth such shocking and
+insulting invectives as the lowest establishments in the gradation of
+civil authority ought not to be subjected to, and which soon would be
+borne down by insolence and disobedience, if they were.
+
+The same principle pervades the whole system of the law, not merely
+in its abstract theory, but in its daily and most applauded practice.
+The intercourse between the sexes, which, properly regulated, not only
+continues, but humanizes and adorns our natures, is the foundation
+of all the thousand romances, plays, and novels, which are in the
+hands of everybody. Some of them lead to the confirmation of every
+virtuous principle; others, though with the same profession, address
+the imagination in a manner to lead the passions into dangerous
+excesses; but though the law does not nicely discriminate the various
+shades which distinguish such works from one another, so as to suffer
+many to pass, through its liberal spirit, that upon principle ought
+to be suppressed, would it or does it tolerate, or does any decent
+man contend that it ought to pass by unpunished, libels of the most
+shameless obscenity, manifestly pointed to debauch innocence and to
+blast and poison the morals of the rising generation? This is only
+another illustration to demonstrate the obvious distinction between
+the work of an author who fairly exercises the powers of his mind
+in investigating the religion or government of any country, and him
+who attacks the rational existence of every religion or government,
+and brands with absurdity and folly the state which sanctions, and
+the obedient tools who cherish, the delusion. But this publication
+appears to me to be as cruel and mischievous in its effects, as it
+is manifestly illegal in its principles; because it strikes at the
+best—sometimes, alas!—the only refuge and consolation amidst the
+distresses and afflictions of the world. The poor and humble, whom it
+affects to pity, may be stabbed to the heart by it. They have more
+occasion for firm hopes beyond the grave than the rich and prosperous
+who have other comforts to render life delightful. I can conceive a
+distressed but virtuous man, surrounded by his children looking up
+to him for bread when he has none to give them; sinking under the
+last day’s labor, and unequal to the next, yet still, supported by
+confidence in the hour when all tears shall be wiped from the eyes
+of affliction, bearing the burden laid upon him by a mysterious
+Providence which he adores, and anticipating with exultation the
+revealed promises of his Creator, when he shall be greater than the
+greatest, and happier than the happiest of mankind. What a change
+in such a mind might be wrought by such a merciless publication?
+Gentlemen, whether these remarks are the overcharged declamations of
+an accusing counsel, or the just reflections of a man anxious for the
+public happiness, which is best secured by the morals of a nation, will
+be soon settled by an appeal to the passages in the work, that are
+selected by the indictment for your consideration and judgment. You are
+at liberty to connect them with every context and sequel, and to bestow
+upon them the mildest interpretations. [Here Mr. Erskine read and
+commented upon several of the selected passages, and then proceeded as
+follows:]
+
+Gentlemen, it would be useless and disgusting to enumerate the other
+passages within the scope of the indictment. How any man can rationally
+vindicate the publication of such a book, in a country where the
+Christian religion is the very foundation of the law of the land, I am
+totally at a loss to conceive, and have no ideas for the discussion of.
+How is a tribunal whose whole jurisdiction is founded upon the solemn
+belief and practice of what is here denied as falsehood, and reprobated
+as impiety, to deal with such an anomalous defence? Upon what principle
+is it even offered to the court, whose authority is contemned and
+mocked at? If the religion proposed to be called in question, is not
+previously adopted in belief and solemnly acted upon, what authority
+has the court to pass any judgment at all of acquittal or condemnation?
+Why am I now or upon any other occasion to submit to his lordship’s
+authority? Why am I now or at any time to address twelve of my equals,
+as I am now addressing you, with reverence and submission? Under what
+sanction are the witnesses to give their evidence, without which there
+can be no trial? Under what obligations can I call upon you, the jury
+representing your country, to administer justice? Surely upon no other
+than that you are sworn to administer it, under the oaths you have
+taken. The whole judicial fabric, from the king’s sovereign authority
+to the lowest office of magistracy, has no other foundation. The whole
+is built, both in form and substance, upon the same oath of every one
+of its ministers to do justice, as God shall help them hereafter. What
+God? And what hereafter? That God, undoubtedly, who has commanded kings
+to rule, and judges to decree justice; who has said to witnesses, not
+only by the voice of nature but in revealed commandments, “Thou shalt
+not bear false testimony against thy neighbor”; and who has enforced
+obedience to them by the revelation of the unutterable blessings which
+shall attend their observance, and the awful punishments which shall
+await upon their transgression.
+
+But it seems this is an age of reason, and the time and the person are
+at last arrived that are to dissipate the errors which have overspread
+the past generations of ignorance. The believers in Christianity
+are many, but it belongs to the few that are wise to correct their
+credulity. Belief is an act of reason, and superior reason may,
+therefore, dictate to the weak. In running the mind over the long list
+of sincere and devout Christians, I can not help lamenting that Newton
+had not lived to this day, to have had his shallowness filled up with
+this new flood of light. But the subject is too awful for irony, I
+will speak plainly and directly. Newton was a Christian; Newton, whose
+mind burst forth from the fetters fastened by nature upon our finite
+conceptions; Newton, whose science was truth, and the foundations
+of whose knowledge of it was philosophy; not those visionary and
+arrogant presumptions which too often usurp its name, but philosophy
+resting upon the basis of mathematics, which, like figures, can not
+lie; Newton, who carried the line and rule to the uttermost barriers
+of creation, and explored the principles by which all created matter
+exists and is held together. But this extraordinary man, in the mighty
+reach of his mind, overlooked, perhaps, the errors which a minuter
+investigation of the created things on this earth might have taught
+him. What shall then be said of Mr. Boyle, who looked into the organic
+structure of all matter, even to the inanimate substances which the
+foot treads upon? Such a man may be supposed to have been equally
+qualified with Mr. Paine to look up through nature to nature’s God;
+yet the result of all his contemplations was the most confirmed and
+devout belief in all which the other holds in contempt, as despicable
+and drivelling superstition. But this error might, perhaps, arise from
+a want of due attention to the foundations of human judgment, and
+the structure of that understanding which God has given us for the
+investigation of truth. Let that question be answered by Mr. Locke,
+who to the highest pitch of devotion and adoration was a Christian;
+Mr. Locke, whose office was to detect the errors of thinking, by going
+up to the very fountains of thought, and to direct into the proper
+track of reasoning the devious mind of man, by showing him its whole
+process, from the first perceptions of sense to the last conclusions of
+ratiocination; putting a rein upon false opinion, by practical rules
+for the conduct of human judgment.
+
+But these men, it may be said, were only deep thinkers, and lived
+in their closets, unaccustomed to the traffic of the world, and to
+the laws which practically regulate mankind. Gentlemen, in the place
+where we now sit to administer the justice of this great country,
+the never-to-be-forgotten Sir Mathew Hale presided; whose faith in
+Christianity is an exalted commentary upon its truth and reason, and
+whose life was a glorious example of its fruits; whose justice, drawn,
+from the pure fountain of the Christian dispensation, will be, in all
+ages, a subject of the highest reverence and admiration. But it is said
+by the author, that the Christian fable is but the tale of the more
+ancient superstitions of the world, and may be easily detected by a
+proper understanding of the mythologies of the heathens. Did Milton
+understand those mythologies? Was he less versed than Mr. Paine in the
+superstitions of the world? No; they were the subject of his immortal
+song; and, though shut out from all recurrence to them, he poured them
+forth from the stores of a memory rich with all that man ever knew, and
+laid them in their order as the illustration of real and exalted faith,
+the unquestionable source of that fervid genius which has cast a kind
+of shade upon most of the other works of man:
+
+   “He pass’d the flaming bounds of place and time:
+    The living throne, the sapphire blaze,
+    Where angels tremble while they gaze,
+    He saw, but blasted with excess of light,
+    Closed his eyes in endless night.”
+
+But it was the light of the body only that was extinguished: “The
+celestial light shone inward, and enabled him to justify the ways of
+God to man.” The result of his thinking was, nevertheless, not quite
+the same as the author’s before us. The mysterious incarnation of our
+blessed Saviour, which this work blasphemes in words so wholly unfit
+for the mouth of a Christian, or for the ear of a court of justice,
+that I dare not, and will not, give them utterance. Milton made the
+grand conclusion of his “Paradise Lost,” the rest from his finished
+labors, and the ultimate hope, expectation, and glory of the world.
+
+   “A virgin is his mother, but his sire,
+    The power of the Most High; he shall ascend
+    The throne hereditary, and bound his reign
+    With earth’s wide bounds, his glory with the heavens.”
+
+The immortal poet having thus put into the mouth of the angel the
+prophecy of man’s redemption, follows it with that solemn and beautiful
+admonition, addressed in the poem to our great first parent, but
+intended as an address to his posterity through all generations:
+
+   “This having learn’d, thou hast attain’d the sum
+    Of wisdom; hope no higher, though all the stars
+    Thou knew’st by name, and all th’ ethereal powers,
+    All secrets of the deep, all nature’s works,
+    Or works of God in heaven, air, earth, or sea,
+    And all the riches of this world enjoy’dst,
+    And all the rule, one empire; only add
+    Deeds to thy knowledge answerable, add faith,
+    Add virtue, patience, temperance, add love,
+    By name to come call’d charity, the soul
+    Of all the rest; then wilt thou not be loth
+    To leave this paradise, but shalt possess
+    A paradise within thee, happier far.”
+
+Thus, you find all that is great, or wise, or splendid, or illustrious,
+amongst created things; all the minds gifted beyond ordinary nature, if
+not inspired by its universal Author for the advancement and dignity of
+the world, though divided by distant ages, and by clashing opinions,
+yet joining as it were in one sublime chorus, to celebrate the truths
+of Christianity; laying upon its holy altars the never-fading offerings
+of their immortal wisdom.
+
+Against all this concurring testimony, we find suddenly, from the
+author of this book, that the Bible teaches nothing but “lies,
+obscenity, cruelty, and injustice.” Had he ever read our Saviour’s
+sermon on the mount, in which the great principles of our faith and
+duty are summed up? Let us all but read and practise it, and lies,
+obscenity, cruelty, and injustice, and all human wickedness, will be
+banished from the world!
+
+Gentlemen, there is but one consideration more, which I cannot possibly
+omit, because I confess it affects me very deeply. The author of this
+book has written largely on public liberty and government; and this
+last performance, which I am now prosecuting, has, on that account,
+been more widely circulated, and principally among those who attached
+themselves from principle to his former works. This circumstance
+renders a public attack upon all revealed religion from such a writer
+infinitely more dangerous. The religious and moral sense of the people
+of Great Britain is the great anchor which alone can hold the vessel
+of the state amidst the storms which agitate the world; and if the
+mass of the people were debauched from the principles of religion, the
+true basis of that humanity, charity, and benevolence, which have been
+so long the national characteristic, instead of mixing myself, as I
+sometimes have done, in political reformations, I would retire to the
+uttermost corners of the earth, to avoid their agitation; and would
+bear, not only the imperfections and abuses complained of in our own
+wise establishment, but even the worst government that ever existed in
+the world, rather than go to the work of reformation with a multitude
+set free from all the charities of Christianity, who had no other
+sense of God’s existence, than was to be collected from Mr. Paine’s
+observations of nature, which the mass of mankind have no leisure to
+contemplate, which promises no future rewards to animate the good in
+the glorious pursuit of human happiness, nor punishments to deter the
+wicked from destroying it even in its birth. The people of England are
+a religious people, and, with the blessing of God, so far as it is in
+my power, I will lend my aid to keep them so.
+
+I have no objections to the most extended and free discussions upon
+doctrinal points of the Christian religion; and though the law of
+England does not permit it, I do not dread the reasonings of deists
+against the existence of Christianity itself, because, as was said by
+its divine author, if it be of God, it will stand. An intellectual
+book, however erroneous, addressed to the intellectual world upon so
+profound and complicated a subject, can never work the mischief which
+this indictment is calculated to repress. Such works will only incite
+the minds of men enlightened by study, to a closer investigation of a
+subject well worthy of their deepest and continued contemplation. The
+powers of the mind are given for human improvement in the progress of
+human existence. The changes produced by such reciprocations of lights
+and intelligencies are certain in their progression, and make their
+way imperceptibly, by the final and irresistible power of truth. If
+Christianity be founded in falsehood, let us become deists in this
+manner, and I am contented. But this book has no such object, and no
+such capacity; it presents no arguments to the wise and enlightened;
+on the contrary, it treats the faith and opinions of the wisest with
+the most shocking contempt, and stirs up men, without the advantages
+of learning, or sober thinking, to a total disbelief of every thing
+hitherto held sacred; and consequently to a rejection of all the laws
+and ordinances of the state, which stand only upon the assumption of
+their truth.
+
+Gentlemen, I can not conclude without expressing the deepest regret
+at all attacks upon the Christian religion by authors who profess to
+promote the civil liberties of the world. For under what other auspices
+than Christianity have the lost and subverted liberties of mankind in
+former ages been reasserted? By what zeal, but the warm zeal of devout
+Christians, have English liberties been redeemed and consecrated? Under
+what other sanctions, even in our own days, have liberty and happiness
+been spreading to the uttermost corners of the earth? What work of
+civilization, what Commonwealth of greatness, has this bald religion of
+nature ever established? We see, on the contrary, the nations that have
+no other light than that of nature to direct them, sunk in barbarism,
+or slaves to arbitrary governments; whilst under the Christian
+dispensation, the great career of the world has been slowly but clearly
+advancing, lighter at every step from the encouraging prophecies of
+the gospel, and leading, I trust, in the end to universal and eternal
+happiness. Each generation of mankind can see but a few revolving links
+of this mighty and mysterious chain; but by doing our several duties in
+our allotted stations, we are sure that we are fulfilling the purposes
+of our existence. You, I trust, will fulfil yours this day.[36]
+
+
+
+
+ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES.
+
+
+NOTE 1, p. 24.—This is not quite a correct representation of Mr.
+Erskine’s declaration. He had not said that all discussion was rendered
+“impossible,” but that the treatment of the French minister by the
+English Government was “so harsh and irritating as to defeat all the
+objects of negotiation.” As a matter of fact, informal communications
+continued to pass between the two governments. But the agents of France
+were not accredited, and this fact threw upon England, in the judgment
+of the French, the responsibilities of the war. See “Parliamentary
+History,” xxxiv., 1289.
+
+NOTE 2, p. 30.—By the Treaty of Westphalia, which in 1648 established
+the international relations of modern Europe, the river Scheldt was
+closed to general commerce out of consideration for Holland. It
+remained thus closed till 1792, when after the battle of Jemappes,
+in which the French defeated the Austrians and Prussians, a passage
+was forced by the French down to the sea. As England was the especial
+protector of Holland it was but natural that Pitt should protest
+against the act, not only as a national affront, but also as an
+expression of willingness on the part of France to set aside at her
+convenience the provisions of the great Treaty of Westphalia.
+
+NOTE 3, p. 31.—The cause of this incorporating of Savoy was the famous
+meeting at Mantua in May of 1791. The Count d’Artois, brother of Louis
+XVI., the Emperor of Austria, the King of Spain, and the King of
+Sardinia, had secured an agreement from those monarchs to send 100,000
+men to the borders of France in the hope that the French, terrified by
+the alliance and by such an army, would seek peace by submitting to the
+Bourbon king, and asking for mediation. Though the plan was rejected by
+Louis, it none the less showed the animus of the allies. The details
+may be seen in Mignet, 101, and in Alison, tenth ed., ii., 412. On
+the 27th of November, 1792, the National Convention annexed Savoy and
+erected it into a department of France in direct opposition to the
+Constitution of the Republic, which declared that there should be no
+extension of the territory.
+
+NOTE 4, p. 32.—By the decree alluded to, the National Convention
+declared that they would “grant fraternity and assistance to all those
+peoples who wish to procure liberty.” They also charged their generals
+to give assistance to such peoples, and to defend all citizens that
+have suffered or are now suffering in the cause of liberty. Within ten
+days after the passage of this decree an English society sent delegates
+to Paris, who presented at the bar of the Convention a congratulatory
+address on “the glorious triumph of liberty on the 10th of August.”
+The President of the Convention replied in a grandiloquent speech, in
+which among other things he said: “The shades of Hampden and Sydney
+hover over your heads, and the moment without doubt approaches when
+the French will bring congratulations to the National Convention of
+Great Britain. Generous Republicans! your appearance among us prepares
+a subject for history!” By nonsense of this kind the French were
+constantly deceived in regard to the attitude of England.
+
+NOTE 5, p. 35.—This was not the language of exaggeration. The decree
+of December 15, 1792, required the French generals wherever they
+marched, to proclaim “the abolition of all existing feudal and manorial
+rights, together with all imposts, contributions, and tithes”; to
+declare “the sovereignty of the people and the suppression of all
+existing authorities”; to convoke the people “for the establishment of
+a provisional government”; to place “all property of the prince and
+his adherents, and the property of all public bodies, both civil and
+religious, under the guardianship of the French Republic”; to provide,
+as soon as possible, “for the organization of a free and popular form
+of government.” This was literally a declaration of war against all
+governments then existing in Europe. The decree is given in the _Ann.
+Reg._, xxxiv., 155.
+
+NOTE 6, p. 39.—The orator then proceeds to explain certain causes
+of misunderstanding which are of no general interest, and therefore
+are omitted. To this explanation he also attaches further proofs of
+the hostile purpose of France, and of the fact that England had no
+connection with Austria and Prussia at the time of their first attack.
+The passage seems to be an unnecessary elaboration of what has gone
+before, and therefore is also omitted.
+
+NOTE 7, p. 41.—This province, which, from 1305 to 1377, was the
+residence of the popes, continued till the French Revolution to belong
+to the papal government. It was seized in 1790, and the next year was
+incorporated into France, where it has since remained.
+
+NOTE 8, p. 41.—This is not quite accurate. The meeting at Mantua had
+been held, and the monarchs of Austria, Spain, and Sardinia had made
+the agreement already described above. That the army of 100,000 did not
+march against France, was not from any lack of purpose on their part,
+but from the irresolution of Louis XVI.
+
+NOTE 9, p. 42.—In this statement, too, Pitt was not correct. The
+Declaration of Pilnitz did not leave “the internal state of France to
+be decided by the king restored to his liberty, _with the free consent
+of the states of the kingdom_;” but asked that the other powers would
+not refuse to employ jointly with their Majesties the most efficacious
+means, in proportion to their forces, to place the King of France “in
+a state to settle in the most perfect liberty the foundations of a
+monarchical government, _equally suitable to the rights of sovereigns_
+and the welfare of the French.” They made no allusion to the “states
+of the kingdom”; but did indicate a purpose to settle the foundations
+of the government in accordance with the rights of sovereigns—that is
+to say, their own rights. Fox’s statement, given in the speech that
+follows, was far better. He said: “It was a declaration of an intention
+on the part of the great powers of Germany to interfere in the internal
+affairs of France, for the purpose of regulating the government against
+the opinion of the people.” The Declaration of Pilnitz was made by the
+Emperor of Austria and the King of Prussia, in consequence of their
+belief that “the situation of the King of France was a matter of common
+interest to all the European sovereigns.” The Declaration is given at
+length in Alison, 10th ed., ii., 415.
+
+NOTE 10, p. 47.—Mr. Pitt then entered into a criticism of some
+expressions uttered by Erskine, not only in his speech, but also in a
+pamphlet on the subject of the war. The criticism brought out a reply
+and a rejoinder which are of little interest and are therefore omitted.
+
+NOTE 11, p. 50.—Reference is here made to the fact that when in 1797
+America demanded redress from France for her wanton attacks on American
+commerce, the officers of the French Government hinted that the payment
+of £50,000 by the Americans to the French officials would, perhaps,
+secure immunity. The letters proposing the payment of bribes, known as
+the “X. Y. Z. Correspondence,” were ordered published by Congress, in
+April of 1798. The English sent them everywhere throughout Europe to
+excite feeling against France. In America the indignation aroused by
+the suggestion of bribes gave rise to the cry: “Millions for defence,
+not a cent for tribute.”
+
+NOTE 12, p. 51.—When Bonaparte landed in Egypt in December, 1798, he
+issued a proclamation in which, among other things, he exhorted the
+teachers in the mosques to assure the people he had come in fulfilment
+of prophecy: “Since the world has existed it has been written, that
+_after having destroyed the enemies of Islamism, and destroyed the
+cross_, I should come, etc.” This proclamation was published in the
+_Annual Register_, (xi., 265,) and not unnaturally made considerable
+sensation in England and in Europe.
+
+NOTE 13, p. 52.—The French in Pondicherry sent emissaries throughout
+India to organize societies for the propagation of their doctrines. The
+members were bound by a series of oaths to do what they could for the
+destruction of all kings and sovereigns. Hyder Ali and his son, Tippoo
+Saib, were the agents and allies of the French in accomplishing this
+work. These designs of the French in India were brought to an end by
+the victories of Lord Cornwallis.—Green’s “English People,” Eng. ed.,
+iv., 332.
+
+NOTE 14, p. 65.—The treaty of Campo Formio was not negotiated by
+the accredited ministers of the Directory, but by Napoleon on his
+own responsibility. In explaining his haste, he gave as one of his
+reasons the necessity of being free to act directly against England.
+In one of his confidential letters he said: “It is indispensable for
+our government to destroy the English monarchy”; and again: “Let us
+concentrate all our activity on the marine and destroy England; that
+done, Europe is at our feet.”—Confidential letter to the Directory,
+Oct. 18, 1797. Alison, 10th ed., iv., 347.
+
+NOTE 15, p. 94.—The orator in this connection then proceeds to give at
+some length his reasons for attempting negotiations in 1796–97. These,
+as having no direct bearing on the subject discussed, are omitted.
+
+NOTE 16, p. 113.—For an explanation of what was done at Mantua, see
+Note 3, p. 31. On the Declaration of Pilnitz, see Note 9, p. 42.
+
+NOTE 17, p. 116.—See notes 4 and 5 above.
+
+NOTE 18, p. 119.—Reference is here made to the Treaty of September 26,
+1786. Mr. Fox argued this question at greater length in a letter to his
+Westminster constituents. Pitt maintained that England in 1800 was not
+bound by that treaty inasmuch as the French Government which had made
+the treaty had been destroyed by the Revolution. In reply Fox declared
+that if the Revolution had swept away the obligation to obey that
+treaty, it must have also swept away the obligation to obey all others.
+But Pitt had often acknowledged the binding force of obligations
+entered into before the Revolution. Hence the treaty of 1786 was
+still in force; and according to it the dismissal of M. Chauvelin was
+equivalent to a declaration of war.
+
+NOTE 19, p. 121.—When the Duke of Brunswick invaded France in July
+of 1792 at the head of the Austrian and Prussian forces he published
+a manifesto which did every thing possible to put his masters in the
+wrong. The burden of the proclamation was that the French had usurped
+the reins of administration in France, had disturbed order, and had
+overturned the legitimate government. He declared that the allied
+armies were advancing “to put an end to anarchy in France, to arrest
+the attacks made on the altar and the throne, and to restore to the
+king the security and liberty he was deprived of.” The manifesto
+furthermore said that the “inhabitants of towns who dared to stand on
+the defensive would instantly be punished as rebels with the rigors of
+war, and their houses demolished and burned.” This proclamation not
+only showed that the principal object of the war was an interference
+with the domestic policy of France, but it greatly inflamed the
+animosities of the French against the foreign powers. See Mignet, “Fr.
+Rev.,” 143; v. Sybel, ii., 29.
+
+NOTE 20, p. 128.—It is an interesting fact that in the early part of
+1792 Louis XVI. sent to the King of England, through Chauvelin and
+Talleyrand, asking the English Government to intercede to prevent
+military action on the part of Austria and Prussia. Louis appears to
+have seen that war on the part of the German powers, though intended to
+restore Louis himself to his former influence and authority, could only
+result in evil. Louis said: “I consider the success of the alliance,
+in which I wish you to concur with as much zeal as I do, as of the
+highest importance; I consider it as necessary to the stability of the
+respective constitutions of our two kingdoms; and I will add that our
+union ought to command peace to Europe.” The proposal was rejected, and
+a few weeks later Louis made a second attempt. He now asked the King to
+interpose, and by his wisdom and influence, “avert, while there is yet
+time, the progress of the confederacy formed against France, and which
+threatens the peace, the liberties, and the happiness of Europe.” This
+proposition, too, was rejected July 8, 1792, and before the end of the
+month France was invaded by the allied armies under Brunswick.
+
+NOTE 21, p. 134.—General Suwarroff, one of the most extraordinary men
+of his time, had begun his career in the days of Frederick the Great,
+and had contributed much to the fame of the Russians for bravery at
+the terrible battle of Kunnersdorf. Though now nearly seventy years of
+age he showed an energy that made his name a terror wherever he went.
+The campaign against Praga is described in Alison, 10th ed., iii., 517
+_seq._ For his far more remarkable campaign in Italy, see vol. v., 45
+_seq._
+
+NOTE 22, p. 142.—The allusion here is to the Treaty of Campo Formio,
+signed Oct. 17, 1797, by which a large part of the Venetian territory
+was turned over to Austria in consideration of the annexation of
+Belgium and Lombardy to France. The machinations by which this
+transaction was brought about were among the most perfidious in the
+whole career of Napoleon. In regard to the alleged reason of giving up
+Venice Napoleon wrote to the Directory: “I have purposely devised this
+sort of rupture, _in case you may wish to obtain five or six millions
+from Venice_.” See Lanfrey’s “History of Napoleon,” 1, 100; and Adams’
+“Democracy and Monarchy in France,” 162.
+
+NOTE 23, p. 143.—The Emperor Paul I., father of Alexander I. and of
+Nicholas, was probably already insane at the time Fox was speaking. He
+had long shown a meddlesome disposition, and had interfered with the
+internal concerns of nearly all the countries on the Baltic as well as
+with those of Spain. Pitt on a former occasion had said of him: “There
+is no reason, no ground, to fear that this magnanimous prince will ever
+desert a cause in which he is so sincerely engaged.” But in spite of
+this prediction he did desert the allies and make peace with France. In
+view of these facts Fox’s ironical use of the word “magnanimous” was a
+peculiarly forcible hit.
+
+NOTE 24, p. 151.—In this conjecture Fox was not far from the language
+subsequently used by Napoleon. He said: “I then had need of war;
+a treaty of peace which should have derogated from that of Campo
+Formio, and annulled the creations of Italy, would have withered every
+imagination.” He then went on to say that Pitt’s answer was what he
+desired, that “it could not have been more favorable,” and that “with
+such impassioned antagonists he would have no difficulty in reaching
+the highest destinies.”—“Memoirs,” i., 33.
+
+NOTE 25, p. 151.—In a speech some months before, Pitt had defended
+his action in regard to Holland by saying that “_from his knowledge
+of human nature_” he knew that it must be successful. It proved a
+lamentable failure, hence the irony of Fox’s emphasis.
+
+NOTE 26, p. 154.—Virgil (Æneid, xi., 313): “Valor has done its utmost;
+we have fought with the embodied force of all the realm.”
+
+Pitt on a former occasion had said that the contest ought never to be
+abandoned till the people of England could adopt those words as their
+own.
+
+NOTE 27, p. 167. References to Washington were made from the fact that
+news of his death, which occurred December 14, 1799, had just been
+received in England. In the passage that follows, Fox alludes to the
+time Dundas was a member of North’s Government, and when it was the
+fashion of his party to denounce Washington.
+
+NOTE 28, p. 170.—The facts as stated by Fox were only too true, and
+the British officer alluded to was none other than Lord Nelson. The
+insurgents had capitulated, on condition that persons and property
+should be guaranteed, and the articles had been signed by the Cardinal,
+the Russian commander, and even by Captain Foote, the commander of
+the British force. Nelson arrived with his fleet about thirty-six
+hours afterward, and at once ordered that the terms of the treaty be
+annulled. The garrison were taken out under the pretence of carrying
+the treaty into effect, and then were turned over as rebels to the
+vengeance of the Sicilian Court. Southey in his “Life of Nelson” (vi.,
+177) calls this deplorable event “A stain upon the memory of Nelson
+and the honor of England. To palliate it would be in vain; to justify
+it would be wicked; there is no alternative for one who will not make
+himself a participator in guilt, but to record the disgraceful story
+with sorrow and with shame.” Lady Hamilton, with whom Nelson was
+infatuated and who was the favorite of the Queen of Naples, was the one
+who led Nelson into committing the outrage.
+
+NOTE 29, p. 253.—The following portion of Mackintosh’s argument has
+been universally admired. It was the common impression in England that
+if the prosecution of Peltier was not energetically carried on by the
+government, Napoleon would make the fact a pretext for declaring war.
+The advocate probably supposed that the jury shared that belief. He
+did not deem it wise to allude to it directly, but he proceeds with
+great ingenuity and force to dwell on the advantages of peace, and then
+having established a coincidence of feeling between himself and the
+jury, he leads them to see that peace can in no way be so effectually
+promoted as by sustaining the cause of justice throughout Europe, and
+that in no way can justice be so surely maintained as by substantial
+freedom of the press.
+
+NOTE 30, p. 205.—Reference is made to the boastful question of Cicero,
+in the second oration against Anthony: “How has it happened, Conscript
+Fathers, that no one has come out as an enemy of the Republic, for
+these last twenty years, who did not at the same time declare war
+against me?”
+
+NOTE 31, p. 207.—Mackintosh was wise enough to see that war was
+inevitable. It came sooner, perhaps, than he anticipated. Only a few
+days after the conclusion of the trial, the King sent a message to
+Parliament that war could not be avoided, and hostilities broke out May
+18, 1803. Under the circumstances the impressive passage that follows
+on “the public spirit of a people” was peculiarly suggestive.
+
+NOTE 32, p. 219.—The passage on the inherent characteristics of the
+French Revolution is peculiarly interesting, as showing how completely
+Mackintosh had changed his opinion since he wrote the Reply to
+Burke. Probably he is the more explicit, because his pamphlet was so
+universally known.
+
+NOTE 33, p. 223.—This passage and what follows on the rule of the
+Jacobins is the one of which Madame de Staël wrote in her “Ten Years
+of Exile”: “It was during this stormy period of my existence that I
+received the speech of Mr. Mackintosh; and there read his description
+of a Jacobin, who had made himself an object of terror during the
+Revolution to children, women, and old men, and who was now bending
+himself double under the rod of the Corsican, who tears from him, even
+to the last atom, that liberty for which he pretended to have taken
+arms. This _morceau_ of the finest eloquence touched me to my very
+soul; it is the privilege of superior writers sometimes unwittingly
+to solace the unfortunate in all countries and at all times. France
+was in a state of such complete silence around me, that this voice,
+which suddenly responded to my soul, seemed to me to come down from
+heaven—_it came from a land of liberty_.”
+
+NOTE 34, p. 236.—Allusion is made to the fact, humiliating to every
+Englishman, that Charles II. and James II. both received pensions from
+Louis XIV.
+
+NOTE 35, p. 252.—Aloys Reding, the Burgomaster of Schweitz, in 1798,
+put himself at the head of a few followers and attacked the invading
+French with so much energy that he broke their ranks and repelled them.
+Afterward, however, he was overpowered and taken prisoner. After being
+held in prison for a time he was driven into exile.
+
+NOTE 36, p. 296.—At the conclusion of the trial, the jury without
+hesitation found a verdict of “guilty.” But the subsequent history
+of the case is one of peculiar interest. The judges decided that the
+defendant Williams should suffer one year’s imprisonment at hard
+labor. But before sentence was to be pronounced, Erskine declined
+to go forward with the case and returned his retainer. The reason
+was never made public till Erskine himself explained the matter in a
+letter written in February of 1819 to the editor of Howell’s “State
+Trials.” He was one day walking in a narrow lane in London when he felt
+something pulling him by the coat, and, turning around, he saw a woman
+in tears and emaciated with disease and sorrow. The woman pulled him
+forward into a miserable hovel where in a room not more than ten or
+twelve feet square were two children with confluent small-pox and the
+wretched man whom he had just convicted. The man was engaged in sewing
+up little, religious tracts, which had been his principal employment
+in his trade. Erskine was convinced that Williams had been urged to
+the publication of Paine by his extreme poverty and not by his will.
+The advocate was so deeply affected by what he saw and heard that he
+believed the cause for which he had pleaded would best be subserved by
+the policy of mercy. He wrote to the Society in whose behalf he had
+been retained by the crown urging such a course. His advice, after
+due consideration, was rejected, whereupon Erskine abandoned the case
+and returned the fees he had received. The incident is an admirable
+illustration of the great advocate’s high ideal of professional ethics.
+Erskine’s letter is given in Howell’s “State Trials,” xxvi., 714; and,
+in part, in Erskine’s “Works,” i., 592.
+
+
+
+
+Transcriber’s Notes
+
+
+Punctuation and spelling were made consistent when a predominant
+preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed.
+
+Simple typographical errors were corrected; occasional unbalanced
+quotation marks corrected.
+
+Ambiguous hyphens at the ends of lines were retained; occurrences of
+inconsistent hyphenation have not been changed.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Representative British Orations with
+Introductions and Explanatory Notes,, by Charles Kendall Adams
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK REPRESENTATIVE BRITISH ORATIONS, VOL 2 ***
+
+***** This file should be named 55490-0.txt or 55490-0.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        http://www.gutenberg.org/5/5/4/9/55490/
+
+Produced by Larry B. Harrison, Charlie Howard, and the
+Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
+(This file was produced from images generously made
+available by The Internet Archive)
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
+be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
+law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
+so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
+States without permission and without paying copyright
+royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
+of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
+concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
+and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive
+specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
+eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
+for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
+performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given
+away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks
+not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the
+trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
+
+START: FULL LICENSE
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
+Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
+www.gutenberg.org/license.
+
+Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+
+1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
+destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
+possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
+Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
+by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
+person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
+1.E.8.
+
+1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
+paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
+agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
+Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
+of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
+works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
+States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
+United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
+claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
+displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
+all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
+that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
+free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
+works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
+Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
+comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
+same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
+you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
+in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
+check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
+agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
+distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
+other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
+representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
+country outside the United States.
+
+1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
+immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
+prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
+on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
+performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
+
+  This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
+  most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
+  restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
+  under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
+  eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
+  United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you
+  are located before using this ebook.
+
+1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
+derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
+contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
+copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
+the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
+redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
+either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
+obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
+trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
+additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
+will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
+posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
+beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
+any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
+to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
+other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
+version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site
+(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
+to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
+of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
+Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
+full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+provided that
+
+* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+  the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+  you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
+  to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
+  agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
+  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
+  within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
+  legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
+  payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
+  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
+  Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
+  Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+  you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+  does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+  License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
+  copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
+  all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
+  works.
+
+* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
+  any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+  electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
+  receipt of the work.
+
+* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+  distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
+are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
+from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The
+Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
+Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
+contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
+or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
+intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
+other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
+cannot be read by your equipment.
+
+1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
+with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
+with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
+lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
+or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
+opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
+the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
+without further opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
+OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
+LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
+damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
+violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
+agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
+limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
+unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
+remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
+accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
+production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
+including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
+the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
+or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
+additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
+Defect you cause.
+
+Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
+computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
+exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
+from people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
+generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
+Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
+www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+
+Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
+U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the
+mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its
+volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous
+locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
+Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to
+date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
+official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
+
+For additional contact information:
+
+    Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+    Chief Executive and Director
+    gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
+DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
+state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
+donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
+
+Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
+freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
+distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
+volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
+the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
+necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
+edition.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
+facility: www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
diff --git a/55490-0.zip b/55490-0.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d9742f1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/55490-0.zip
diff --git a/55490-h.zip b/55490-h.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..47b4130
--- /dev/null
+++ b/55490-h.zip
diff --git a/55490-h/55490-h.htm b/55490-h/55490-h.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..833158a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/55490-h/55490-h.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,9445 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+  <head>
+    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
+    <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
+    <title>
+      The Project Gutenberg eBook of Representative British Orations, Volume II (of 4), by Charles Kendall Adams.
+    </title>
+    <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" />
+    <style type="text/css">
+
+body {
+    margin-left: 2.5em;
+    margin-right: 2.5em;
+}
+
+h1,h2 {
+    text-align: center;
+    clear: both;
+    margin-top: 2.5em;
+    margin-bottom: 1em;
+}
+
+h1 {line-height: 2; margin-top: 0;}
+
+h2+p {margin-top: 1.5em;}
+h2 .subhead {display: block; margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em;}
+
+.transnote h2 {
+    margin-top: .5em;
+    margin-bottom: 1em;
+}
+
+.subhead {
+    text-indent: 0;
+    text-align: center;
+    font-size: 75%;
+    max-width: 80%; margin-left: 10%;
+}
+
+p {
+    text-indent: 1.75em;
+    margin-top: .51em;
+    margin-bottom: .24em;
+    text-align: justify;
+}
+.caption p {text-align: center; text-indent: 0;}
+p.center {text-indent: 0;}
+
+.p1 {margin-top: 1em;}
+.p2 {margin-top: 2em;}
+.p4 {margin-top: 4em;}
+.vspace {line-height: 1.5;}
+
+.in0 {text-indent: 0;}
+.in4 {padding-left: 4em;}
+
+.small   {font-size: 70%;}
+.smaller {font-size: 85%;}
+.larger  {font-size: 125%;}
+.large   {font-size: 150%;}
+.xlarge  {font-size: 175%;}
+
+.center  {text-align: center;}
+
+.smcap    {font-variant: small-caps;}
+.smcap.smaller {font-size: 75%;}
+
+.bold {font-weight: bold;}
+
+hr {
+    width: 33%;
+    margin-top: 4em;
+    margin-bottom: 4em;
+    margin-left: 33%;
+    margin-right: auto;
+    clear: both;
+}
+
+table {
+    margin: 1em auto 1em auto;
+    max-width: 80%;
+    border-collapse: collapse;
+}
+
+.tdl {
+    text-align: left;
+    vertical-align: top;
+    padding-right: 1em;
+    padding-left: 1.5em;
+    text-indent: -1.5em;
+}
+
+.tdr {
+    text-align: right;
+    vertical-align: bottom;
+    padding-left: .3em;
+    white-space: nowrap;
+}
+#toc .tdl, #toc .tdr {padding-top: 1em;}
+#toc tr.sub .tdl {padding-top: .25em;}
+#toc .tdl.notpad, #toc .tdr.notpad {padding-top: 0;}
+tr.sub .tdl {
+    font-size: 90%;
+    text-align: justify;
+    padding-left: 3em;
+    text-indent: -1.5em;
+}
+
+.pagenum {
+  position: absolute;
+  right: 4px;
+  text-indent: 0em;
+  text-align: right;
+  font-size: 70%;
+  font-weight: normal;
+  font-variant: normal;
+  font-style: normal;
+  letter-spacing: normal;
+  line-height: normal;
+  color: #acacac;
+  border: 1px solid #acacac;
+  background: #ffffff;
+  padding: 1px 2px;
+}
+
+.footnotes {font-size: 95%;}
+
+.footnotep {
+    border: thin dashed black;
+    margin: 1.5em 10%;
+    padding: .5em 1em .5em 1.5em;
+    font-size: 90%;
+}
+
+.footnote {margin-top: 1em;}
+.footnote p, .footnotep p {text-indent: 1em;}
+.footnote p.in0 {text-indent: 0;}
+
+.fnanchor {
+    vertical-align: 60%;
+    line-height: .7;
+    font-size: smaller;
+    text-decoration: none;
+}
+.footnote .fnanchor {font-size: .8em;}
+.fnanchor.smaller {font-size: .5em; vertical-align: text-top;}
+.footnotes .fnanchor {
+    vertical-align: inherit;
+    line-height: inherit;
+    text-decoration: underline;
+    font-size: 110%;
+}
+
+blockquote {
+    margin-left: 5%;
+    margin-right: 5%;
+    font-size: 95%;
+}
+blockquote.end {margin-left: 2%; margin-right: 2%; margin-top: 2em; font-size: 92.5%;}
+
+blockquote.inhead p, blockquote.hang p {padding-left: 1.5em; text-indent: -1.5em;}
+blockquote.inhead.center p {padding-left: 0; text-indent: 0; text-align: center;}
+.ad blockquote {margin-left: 0; padding-left: .5em;}
+
+.hang {
+    text-align: justify;
+    padding-left: 1.5em;
+    text-indent: -1.5em;
+}
+
+.poem-container {
+    text-align: center;
+    font-size: 98%;
+}
+
+.poem {
+    display: inline-block;
+    text-align: left;
+    margin-left: 0;
+}
+
+.poem .stanza{padding: 0.5em 0;}
+.poem .stanza-attrib {padding-bottom: 0;}
+
+.poem .attrib {margin-right: -2em; text-align: right;}
+
+.poem span.iq     {display: block; margin-left: -.5em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+.poem span.i0     {display: block; margin-left: 0em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+.poem span.i6     {display: block; margin-left: 3em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+.poem span.i12     {display: block; margin-left: 5em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+
+.transnote {
+    background-color: #EEE;
+    border: thin dotted;
+    font-family: sans-serif, serif;
+    color: #000;
+    margin-left: 5%;
+    margin-right: 5%;
+    margin-top: 4em;
+    margin-bottom: 2em;
+    padding: 1em;
+}
+
+.sigright {
+     margin-right: 2em;
+     text-align: right;}
+
+.gesperrt {
+    letter-spacing: 0.2em;
+    margin-right: -0.2em;
+}
+
+.ad {
+    margin-top: 4em;
+    display: inline-block; max-width: 20em; text-align: center;
+    border: thin solid black; padding: 1em;}
+.narrow {display: inline-block; max-width: 35em; text-align: center;
+    padding: .2em;}
+.bordout {border: .25em solid red; padding: .3em;}
+.bordin {border: .1em solid black; padding: 1.5em;}
+.sans {font-family: sans-serif, serif;}
+p.sal {text-indent: 0; padding-top: .5em; margin-bottom: 0; font-size: 125%;}
+p.sal+p {margin-top: 0;}
+
+@media print, handheld
+{
+    h1, .chapter, .newpage {page-break-before: always;}
+    h1.nobreak, h2.nobreak, .nobreak {page-break-before: avoid; padding-top: 0;}
+
+    p {
+        margin-top: .5em;
+        text-align: justify;
+        margin-bottom: .25em;
+    }
+
+    table {width: 100%; max-width: 100%;}
+
+    .tdl {
+        padding-left: 1em;
+        text-indent: -1em;
+        padding-right: 0;
+    }
+
+    .ad {
+        margin-top: 4em; margin-left: 10%;
+        display: block; max-width: 20em; text-align: left;
+        border: thin solid black; padding: 1em;}
+    .narrow {display: block; max-width: 35em; text-align: center;
+        padding: .2em; margin-left: 10%;}
+    .bordout {border: .25em solid red; padding: .3em;}
+    .bordin {border: .1em solid black; padding: 1.5em;}
+
+}
+
+@media handheld
+{
+    body {margin: 0;}
+
+    hr {
+        margin-top: .1em;
+        margin-bottom: .1em;
+        visibility: hidden;
+        color: white;
+        width: .01em;
+        display: none;
+    }
+
+    blockquote {margin: 1.5em 3% 1.5em 3%;}
+
+    .poem-container {text-align: left; margin-left: 5%;}
+    .poem {display: block;}
+    .poem .attrib {max-width: 25em; margin-right: 0;}
+    .poem .stanza {page-break-inside: avoid;}
+
+    .hang {margin: .5em 3% 2em 3%;}
+
+    .transnote {
+        page-break-inside: avoid;
+        margin-left: 2%;
+        margin-right: 2%;
+        margin-top: 1em;
+        margin-bottom: 1em;
+        padding: .5em;
+    }
+
+}
+  </style>
+  </head>
+
+<body>
+
+
+<pre>
+
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of Representative British Orations with
+Introductions and Explanatory Notes,, by Charles Kendall Adams
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
+other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
+whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
+the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
+www.gutenberg.org.  If you are not located in the United States, you'll have
+to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook.
+
+Title: Representative British Orations with Introductions and Explanatory Notes, Volume II (of 4)
+
+Author: Charles Kendall Adams
+
+Release Date: September 6, 2017 [EBook #55490]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: UTF-8
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK REPRESENTATIVE BRITISH ORATIONS, VOL 2 ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Larry B. Harrison, Charlie Howard, and the
+Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
+(This file was produced from images generously made
+available by The Internet Archive)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+</pre>
+
+
+<div class="center"><div class="ad">
+<p class="center sans">Uniform with British Orations</p>
+
+<blockquote class="hang">
+
+<p>AMERICAN ORATIONS, to illustrate
+American Political History, edited, with
+introductions, by <span class="smcap">Alexander Johnston</span>,
+Professor of Jurisprudence and Political
+Economy in the College of New Jersey.
+3 vols., 16 mo, $3.75.</p>
+
+<p>PROSE MASTERPIECES FROM MODERN
+ESSAYISTS, comprising single specimen essays
+from <span class="smcap">Irving</span>, <span class="smcap">Leigh Hunt</span>, <span class="smcap">Lamb</span>, <span class="smcap">De
+Quincey</span>, <span class="smcap">Landor</span>, <span class="smcap">Sydney Smith</span>, <span class="smcap">Thackeray</span>,
+<span class="smcap">Emerson</span>, <span class="smcap">Arnold</span>, <span class="smcap">Morley</span>, <span class="smcap">Helps</span>,
+<span class="smcap">Kingsley</span>, <span class="smcap">Ruskin</span>, <span class="smcap">Lowell</span>, <span class="smcap">Carlyle</span>, <span class="smcap">Macaulay</span>,
+<span class="smcap">Froude</span>, <span class="smcap">Freeman</span>, <span class="smcap">Gladstone</span>, <span class="smcap">Newman</span>,
+<span class="smcap">Leslie Stephen</span>. 3 vols., 16 mo, bevelled
+boards, $3.75 and $4.50.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p class="p2 center"><span class="smcap">G. P. Putnam’s Sons, New York and London</span></p>
+</div></div>
+
+<div class="newpage p4 center"><div class="narrow bordout">
+<div class="bordin">
+<h1><span class="small">REPRESENTATIVE</span><br />
+BRITISH ORATIONS</h1>
+
+<p class="p2 center vspace">WITH<br />
+INTRODUCTIONS AND EXPLANATORY NOTES</p>
+
+<p class="p2 center vspace">BY<br />
+<span class="large">CHARLES KENDALL ADAMS</span></p>
+
+<div class="p2 poem-container">
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza-attrib">
+<span class="i0"><i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Videtisne quantum munus sit oratoris historia?</i></span></div>
+<div class="attrib">
+—<span class="smcap">Cicero</span>, <cite>DeOratore</cite>, ii, 15</div>
+</div></div>
+
+<p class="p1 center xlarge">✩✩</p>
+
+<p class="p1 center vspace">NEW YORK &amp; LONDON<br />
+<span class="larger gesperrt">G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS</span><br />
+<span class="bold">The Knickerbocker Press</span><br />
+1884
+</p>
+</div></div></div>
+
+<p class="newpage p4 center vspace smaller">
+COPYRIGHT<br />
+G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS<br />
+1884.</p>
+
+<p class="p2 center vspace smaller">Press of<br />
+<span class="smcap">G. P. Putnam’s Sons</span><br />
+New York
+</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_iii">iii</span></p>
+
+<div class="chapter">
+<h2 id="CONTENTS">CONTENTS.</h2>
+</div>
+
+<table id="toc" summary="Contents">
+  <tr class="small">
+    <td> </td>
+    <td class="tdr">PAGE</td></tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td class="tdl notpad"><span class="smcap">William Pitt</span></td>
+    <td class="tdr notpd"><a href="#WILLIAM_PITT">1</a></td></tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">William Pitt</span></td>
+    <td class="tdr"><a href="#WILLIAM_PITT2">19</a></td></tr>
+  <tr class="sub">
+    <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">On his Refusal to Negotiate with Napoleon Bonaparte; House of Commons, February 3, 1800.</span></td></tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">Charles James Fox</span></td>
+    <td class="tdr"><a href="#CHARLES_JAMES_FOX">99</a></td></tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">Charles James Fox</span></td>
+    <td class="tdr"><a href="#CHARLES_JAMES_FOX2">108</a></td></tr>
+  <tr class="sub">
+    <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">On the Rejection of Napoleon Bonaparte’s Overtures of Peace; House of Commons, February 3, 1800.</span></td></tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">Sir James Mackintosh</span></td>
+    <td class="tdr"><a href="#SIR_JAMES_MACKINTOSH">176</a></td></tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">Sir James Mackintosh</span></td>
+    <td class="tdr"><a href="#SIR_JAMES_MACKINTOSH2">185</a></td></tr>
+  <tr class="sub">
+    <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">In Behalf of Free Speech. On the Trial of Jean Peltier, Accused of Libelling Napoleon Bonaparte; Court of King’s Bench, February 21, 1803.</span></td></tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">Lord Erskine</span></td>
+    <td class="tdr"><a href="#LORD_ERSKINE">262</a></td></tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">Lord Erskine</span></td>
+    <td class="tdr"><a href="#LORD_ERSKINE2">273</a></td></tr>
+  <tr class="sub">
+    <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">On the Limitations of Free Speech; Delivered in 1797 on the Trial of Williams for Publication of Paine’s “Age of Reason.”</span></td></tr>
+</table>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_1">1</span></p>
+
+<div class="chapter">
+<h2 id="WILLIAM_PITT">WILLIAM PITT.</h2>
+</div>
+
+<p>The younger Pitt was the second son of Lord
+Chatham, and was seven years of age when his
+father in 1766 was admitted to the peerage.
+The boy’s earliest peculiarity was an absorbing
+ambition to become his father’s successor as the
+first orator of the day. His health, however,
+was so delicate as to cause the gravest apprehensions.
+Stanhope tells us that before he
+was fourteen “half of his time was lost through
+ill health,” and that his early life at Cambridge
+was “one long disease.” There is still extant
+a remarkable letter that reveals better than
+any thing else the fond hopes of the father and
+the physical discouragement as well as the
+mental aspirations of the son. Chatham wrote:
+“Though I indulge with inexpressible delight
+the thought of your returning health, I cannot
+help being a little in pain lest you should make<span class="pagenum" id="Page_2">2</span>
+more haste than good speed to be well. How
+happy the task, my noble, amiable boy, to
+caution you only against pursuing too much all
+those liberal and praiseworthy things, to which
+less happy natures are perpetually to be spurred
+and driven. I will not tease you with too long
+a lecture in favor of inaction and a competent
+stupidity, your two best tutors and companions
+at present. You have time to spare; consider,
+there is but the Encyclopædia, and when you
+have mastered that, what will remain?” The
+intimations of precocity here given were fully
+justified by the extraordinary progress made
+by the boy notwithstanding his bodily ailments.
+He entered the University of Cambridge at
+fourteen, and such was his scholarship at that
+time that his tutor wrote: “It is no uncommon
+thing for him to read into English six or eight
+pages of Thucydides which he had not previously
+seen, without more than two or three mistakes,
+and sometimes without even one.”</p>
+
+<p>At the university, where he remained nearly
+seven years, his course of study was carried on<span class="pagenum" id="Page_3">3</span>
+strictly in accordance with his father’s directions
+and was somewhat peculiar. His most ardent
+devotion was given to the classics; and his
+method was that to which his father always
+attributed the extraordinary copiousness and
+richness of his own language. After looking
+over a passage so as to become familiar with
+the author’s thought, he strove to render it
+rapidly into elegant and idiomatic English, with
+a view to reproducing it with perfect exactness
+and in the most felicitous form. This
+method he followed for years till, according to
+the testimony of his tutor, Dr. Prettyman, when
+he had reached the age of twenty, “there was
+scarcely a Greek or Latin writer of any eminence
+<em>the whole of whose works</em> Mr. Pitt had not read
+to him in this thorough and discriminating manner.”
+This was the laborious way in which he
+acquired that extraordinary and perhaps unrivalled
+gift of pouring out for hour after hour
+an unbroken stream of thought without ever
+hesitating for a word or recalling a phrase or
+sinking into looseness or inaccuracy of expression.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_4">4</span>
+The finest passages even of the obscurer
+poets he copied with care and stored away in
+his memory; and thus he was also qualified for
+that aptness of quotation for which his oratory
+was always remarkable.</p>
+
+<p>With his classical studies Pitt united an unusual
+aptitude and fondness for the mathematics
+and for logic. To both of these he gave
+daily attention, and before he left the university,
+according to the authority above quoted,
+he was master in mathematics of every thing
+usually known by young men who obtain the
+highest academical honors. In logic, Aristotle
+was his master, and he early acquired the
+habit of applying the principles and methods of
+that great logician to a critical examination of
+all the works he studied and the debates he
+witnessed. It was probably this course of
+study which gave him his unrivalled power in
+reply. While still at Cambridge it was a favorite
+employment to compare the great speeches of
+antiquity in point of logical accuracy, and to
+point out the manner in which the reasoning<span class="pagenum" id="Page_5">5</span>
+of the orator could be met and answered. The
+same habit followed him to London and into
+Parliament. His biographers dwell upon the
+fact, that whenever he listened to a debate he
+was constantly employed in detecting illogical
+reasoning and in pointing out to those near
+him how this argument and that could easily
+be answered. Before he became a member of
+Parliament, he was in the habit of spending
+much time in London and in listening to the
+debates on the great subjects then agitating the
+nation. But the speeches of his father and of
+Burke, of Fox, and of Sheridan seemed to interest
+him chiefly as an exercise for his own improvement.
+His great effort was directed to
+the difficult process of retaining the long train
+of argument in his mind, of strengthening it,
+and of pointing out and refuting the positions
+that seemed to him weak.</p>
+
+<p>It would be incorrect to leave the impression
+that these severe courses of study were not intermingled
+with studies in English literature,
+rhetoric, and history. We are told that “he<span class="pagenum" id="Page_6">6</span>
+had the finest passages of Shakespeare by
+heart,” that “he read the best historians with
+care,” that “his favorite models of prose style
+were Middleton’s Life of Cicero, and the historical
+writings of Bolingbroke,” and that “on
+the advice of his father, for the sake of a copious
+diction, he made a careful study of the sermons
+of Dr. Barrow.” Making all due allowance for
+the exaggerative enthusiasm of biographers, we
+are still forced to the belief that no other person
+ever entered Parliament with acquirements
+and qualifications for a great career equal on
+the whole to those of the younger Pitt.</p>
+
+<p>The expectations formed of him were not
+disappointed. It has frequently happened that
+members of Parliament have attained to great
+and influential careers after the most signal
+failures as speakers in their early efforts. But
+no such failure awaited Pitt. He entered the
+House of Commons in 1781, at the age of
+twenty-two, and became a member of the opposition
+to Lord North, under the leadership
+of Burke and Fox. His first speech was in reply<span class="pagenum" id="Page_7">7</span>
+to Lord Nugent on the subject of economic
+reform, a matter that had been brought
+forward by Burke. Pitt had been asked to
+speak on the question; but, although he had
+hesitated in giving his answer, he had determined
+not to participate in the debate. His
+answer, however, was misunderstood, and therefore
+at the close of a speech by Lord Nugent,
+he was vociferously called upon by the Whig
+members of the House. Though taken by surprise,
+he finally yielded and with perfect self-possession
+began what was probably the most
+successful <em>first</em> speech ever given in the House
+of Commons. Unfortunately it was not reported
+and has not been preserved. But contemporaneous
+accounts of the impression it
+made are abundant. Not only was it received
+with enthusiastic applause from every part of
+the House; but Burke greeted him with the
+declaration that he was “not merely a chip of
+the old block, but the old block itself.” When
+some one remarked that Pitt promised to be
+one of the first speakers ever heard in Parliament,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_8">8</span>
+Fox replied, “He is so already.” This
+was at the proudest era of British eloquence,
+and when Pitt was but twenty-two.</p>
+
+<p>During the session of 1781–82 the powers of
+Burke, Fox, and Pitt were united in a strenuous
+opposition to the administration of Lord
+North. After staggering under their blows for
+some weeks, the ministry fell, and Lord North
+was succeeded by Rockingham in February of
+1782. Rockingham’s ministry, however, was
+terminated by the death of its chief after a
+short period of only thirteen weeks. Lord
+Shelburne was appointed his successor, and he
+chose Pitt as the Chancellor of the Exchequer
+and leader of the House of Commons. Thus
+Burke and Fox were passed by, and not only
+the responsible leadership of the Commons,
+but also the finances of the empire, were entrusted
+to a youth of twenty-three. The
+reason of this preference certainly was not
+an acknowledged pre-eminence of Pitt; but
+rather in the attitude he had assumed in
+the course of his attacks on the administration<span class="pagenum" id="Page_9">9</span>
+of North. He had not inveighed against
+the king, but had attached all the responsibility
+of mismanagement to the ministry, where
+the Constitution itself places it. Fox, on the
+other hand, had allowed himself to be carried
+forward by the impetuosity of his nature, and
+had placed the responsibility where we now
+know it belonged—upon George III. The
+consequence had been that the enraged king
+would not listen to the promotion of Fox,
+though by constitutional usage he was clearly
+entitled to recognition. That Fox was offended
+was not singular, but it is impossible even for
+his most ardent admirers to justify the course
+he now determined to take. He had been
+the most bitter opponent of Lord North. He
+had denounced him as “the most infamous of
+mankind,” and as “the greatest criminal of
+the state.” He had declared of his ministry:
+“From the moment I should make any terms
+with one of them, I should rest satisfied to be
+called the most infamous of mankind.” He
+had said only eleven months before: “I could<span class="pagenum" id="Page_10">10</span>
+not for a moment think of a coalition with men
+who, in every public and private transaction as
+ministers, have shown themselves void of every
+principle of honor and honesty.”<a id="FNanchor_A" href="#Footnote_A" class="fnanchor">A</a> And yet,
+notwithstanding these philippics, which almost
+seem to have been delivered as if to make
+a coalition impossible, Fox now deserted his
+old political companions, and joined hands
+with the very object of his fiercest denunciation.
+The Coalition thus formed voted down
+the Shelburne ministry in February, 1783.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotep">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_A" href="#FNanchor_A" class="fnanchor">A</a> Fox’s Speeches, II., 39.</p></div>
+
+<p>The debate which preceded the final vote
+was one of the most remarkable in English
+history. The subject immediately at issue was
+a vote of censure of Shelburne’s government
+for the terms of the treaty closing the American
+war. North assailed the treaty, as bringing
+disgrace upon the country by the concessions
+it had made. Fox spoke in the same
+strain, having reserved himself till the latter
+part of the night, with the evident purpose
+of overwhelming the young leader of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_11">11</span>
+House by the force and severity of his presentation.
+But the moment he sat down, Pitt
+arose and grappled with the argument of his
+opponent in a speech that has seldom been
+surpassed in the history of parliamentary debate.
+Lord North spoke of its eloquence as
+“amazing,” and, although the Coalition was
+too strong to be broken, it made such an
+impression that there could no longer be any
+doubt that Pitt was now the foremost man of
+his party.</p>
+
+<p>In the course of the speech Pitt intimated
+that even if the vote of censure came to pass,
+the king might not feel called upon to accept
+the decision. He declared it an unnatural
+Coalition, which had simply raised a storm
+of faction, and which had no other object
+than the infliction of a wound on Lord Shelburne.
+Then in one of his impassioned strains
+he exclaimed: “If, however, the baneful alliance
+is not already formed,—if this ill-omened
+marriage is not already solemnized, I know a
+just and lawful impediment,—and in the name
+of the public safety, I here forbid the banns.”</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_12">12</span>
+But all availed nothing. The vote of censure
+was passed, and Shelburne’s ministry tendered
+their resignation. The king hesitated.
+He was unwilling to bring the Coalition into
+power, because he had an insurmountable repugnance
+to Fox. He sent for Pitt, and
+urged him in the most pressing terms to accept
+the position of Prime-Minister. But Pitt, with
+that steadfast judgment which never deserted
+him, firmly rejected the flattering offer. The
+most he would consent to do was to remain in
+the office he then held till the succession could
+be fixed upon. The king was almost in despair;
+and thought seriously of retiring to Hanover.
+It was Thurlow that dissuaded him from
+taking so dangerous a step. “Nothing is easier
+than for your Majesty to go to his Electoral
+dominions;” said the old Chancellor, “but you
+may not find it so easy to return when you
+grow tired of staying there. James II. did the
+same; your Majesty must not follow his example.”
+He then assured the king that the
+Coalition was an unnatural one, and could not<span class="pagenum" id="Page_13">13</span>
+long remain in power without committing some
+fatal blunder. After six weeks the king reluctantly
+submitted, and appointed the Duke of
+Portland as the Prime-Minister, and North and
+Fox as the Chief Secretaries of State.</p>
+
+<p>The end came sooner than Thurlow had
+dared to anticipate. The Coalition ministry
+was formed on the second day of April, 1783.
+During the first week of the following session
+Fox brought forward his East India bill, which
+had for its object the entire remodelling of the
+government of the English domains in the
+East. The measure was in direct defiance of
+the wishes of the king. In view of the circumstances
+of Fox’s coalition with the Tories,
+it is not singular that many thought the scheme
+a desperate measure to intrench the Coalition
+so firmly in power that the king could not
+remove them. Pitt opposed the measure with
+great energy, and with so much skill that it soon
+became evident that he spoke the sentiments of
+the thinking men of the nation. The debate
+on the question lasted twelve days, and was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_14">14</span>
+closed by a masterly review of the question by
+Fox. The Coalition was so strong in the lower
+House that the final vote was 217 to 103 in
+favor of the measure.</p>
+
+<p>But in the House of Lords its fortune was
+different. At an interview with Lord Temple,
+a kinsman of Pitt’s, the king commissioned
+him to say to the members of the House “that
+whoever voted for the India bill were not only
+not his friends, but that he should consider
+them his enemies.” This message was widely
+but secretly circulated among the Lords.
+Thurlow denounced the bill in unqualified
+terms. Though the ministry fought for the
+measure as best they could, when the question
+came to a final issue, it was rejected by a vote
+of ninety-five to seventy-six. At twelve o’clock
+on the following night a messenger conveyed
+the orders of the king to the chief ministers to
+deliver up the seals of their offices, and to send
+them by the under secretaries, “as a personal
+interview on the occasion would be disagreeable
+to him.” The following day the other<span class="pagenum" id="Page_15">15</span>
+ministers were dismissed with like evidences of
+disfavor.</p>
+
+<p>Pitt now, on the 22d of December, 1783, became
+Prime-Minister at the age of twenty-four.
+The situation was one that put all his powers
+to the severest test. In the last decisive vote
+in the House of Commons the majority against
+him had been more than two to one. Fox was
+inflamed with all the indignation of which his
+good-nature was capable. He declared on the
+floor of the House that “to talk of the <em>permanency</em>
+of such an administration would be only
+laughing at and insulting them”; and he alluded
+to “the <em>youth</em> of the Chancellor of the
+Exchequer and the weakness incident to his
+early period of life as the only possible excuse
+for his temerity.” And yet with such consummate
+tact did Pitt ward off the blows, and
+with such skill and power did he in turn advance
+to the assault, that the majority against
+him at once began to show signs of weakening.
+Fox threatened to cut off the supplies; whereupon
+Pitt met him with an unwavering defiance.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_16">16</span>
+Rapidly the majority went down till, on
+a test vote on the 8th of March, the opposition
+had only one majority. Pitt immediately decided
+to dissolve Parliament and appeal to the
+people. The result more than justified his
+determination. The question everywhere was
+“Fox or Pitt?” The cry “for Pitt and the
+King” carried the day by an overwhelming
+majority, and a complete revolution in the
+House of Commons was the result. More than
+a hundred and sixty of “Fox’s martyrs” lost
+their seats. The triumph was the most complete
+that any English minister ever obtained.
+It not only placed Pitt in power, but it gave
+him a predominance in authority that was only
+once interrupted in the course of more than
+twenty years.</p>
+
+<p>Within the next few years several subjects
+of national importance were brought forward
+by the ministry. But these are usually forgotten
+or regarded as insignificant when compared
+with the absorbing questions connected with
+the French Revolution and the Napoleonic<span class="pagenum" id="Page_17">17</span>
+wars. It is as the leader and guide of what
+may be called the English policy in that memorable
+era that Pitt’s name will longest be
+remembered. Though that policy was not
+without strenuous opposition, it was carried
+consistently through to the end, and it was
+what contributed more than any thing else to
+break the power of Napoleon. It is for this
+reason that Pitt’s most elaborate speech on the
+policy of the English Government in relation
+to France is selected not only as a favorable
+specimen of his eloquence, but as having an influence
+of commanding importance on the
+stupendous affairs of the time. This speech
+is still the best exponent of the English view
+of the Napoleonic wars.</p>
+
+<p>Notwithstanding all his greatness, there was
+one weak point in Pitt’s line of policy. He
+made the mistake of constantly underestimating
+the power of the enthusiasm awakened by
+the revolutionary ideas in France. This was
+equivalent to attaching too low an estimate to
+the strength of the enemy. It was in consequence<span class="pagenum" id="Page_18">18</span>
+of this error that he formed coalition
+after coalition, only to see them all shattered
+by Napoleon and his enthusiastic followers.
+When his last great coalition was broken by the
+battle of Austerlitz the blow was too much for
+his declining health; and, worn out with toil
+and anxiety, he sank rapidly, and expired on
+the 26th of January, 1806.</p>
+
+<p>It is the judgment of Alison that “Considered
+with reference to the general principles by
+which his conduct was regulated, and the constancy
+with which he maintained them through
+adverse fortune, the history of Europe has not
+so great a statesman to exhibit.”</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_19">19</span></p>
+
+<div class="chapter">
+<h2 id="WILLIAM_PITT2">WILLIAM PITT.<br />
+
+<span class="subhead">ON HIS REFUSAL TO NEGOTIATE WITH NAPOLEON
+BONAPARTE.<br />HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEBRUARY
+3, 1800.</span></h2>
+</div>
+
+<blockquote class="end">
+
+<p>On the day after Bonaparte was inaugurated as First Consul
+of France, December 25, 1799, he addressed a personal letter
+to the King of England, asking for peace. The English Government,
+however, entertained a keen resentment at what
+they regarded the evasive and insulting conduct of the French
+Directory during the last negotiations. Accordingly, the reply
+of Lord Grenville, then Minister of Foreign Affairs, rejected
+the proposed opening of negotiations for peace. The Government
+justified its attitude by referring to the course of the
+French during the war. It declared that its beginning had
+been an “unprovoked attack” on the part of the French, that
+the “system” which inspired the war “continued to prevail,”
+that England could present “no defence but that of open and
+steady hostility” to the system, that “the best and most
+natural pledge of the reality and permanence of peace” had
+been rejected by the French, that although the English “did
+not claim to prescribe to France what shall be her form of
+government” yet they desired security for future peace, and
+that “unhappily no such security hitherto exists, no sufficient
+evidence of the principles by which the new government will
+be directed, no reasonable ground by which to judge of its
+stability.” To this letter Talleyrand wrote a spirited reply;<span class="pagenum" id="Page_20">20</span>
+and Lord Grenville closed the correspondence with a reaffirmation
+of his Government’s former position.</p>
+
+<p>The correspondence was called for, and was placed before
+the Commons on the 3d of February, 1800. Mr. Dundas immediately
+proposed an Address to the Throne approving of
+the course taken by the ministry. This opened the whole subject
+of the attitude of England toward Napoleon for debate.
+Whitbred, Canning, and Erskine complained in strong terms
+of the discourteous language used by Lord Grenville. Pitt
+made no defence on this point, but took up the subject on the
+broadest scale. He reviewed not only the origin of the war,
+but also the atrocities of the French in overrunning a large
+part of Europe, the instability of the successive French governments,
+his own motives in treating with the French on a
+former occasion, and the character of Bonaparte as a military
+commander. The speech is at once the most important and
+the most elaborate ever delivered by Pitt. It expressed and
+defined the policy of the nation in the great struggle which as
+yet had only begun. As a parliamentary oration, designed at
+once to inform and inspire, it has probably never been surpassed.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>SIR,—I am induced, at this period of the debate,
+to offer my sentiments to the House, both
+from an apprehension that at a later hour the
+attention of the House must necessarily be exhausted,
+and because the sentiment with which
+the honorable and learned gentleman [Mr.
+Erskine] began his speech, and with which he
+has thought proper to conclude it, places the
+question precisely on that ground on which I
+am most desirous of discussing it. The learned<span class="pagenum" id="Page_21">21</span>
+gentleman seems to assume as the foundation
+of his reasoning, and as the great argument for
+immediate treaty, that every effort to overturn
+the system of the French Revolution must be
+unavailing; and that it would be not only imprudent,
+but almost impious, to struggle longer
+against that order of things which, on I know
+not what principle of predestination, he appears
+to consider as immortal. Little as I am inclined
+to accede to this opinion, I am not sorry that
+the honorable gentleman has contemplated the
+subject in this serious view. I do, indeed, consider
+the French Revolution as the severest
+trial which the visitation of Providence has ever
+yet inflicted upon the nations of the earth; but
+I cannot help reflecting, with satisfaction, that
+this country, even under such a trial, has not
+only been exempted from those calamities which
+have covered almost every other part of Europe,
+but appears to have been reserved as a refuge
+and asylum to those who fled from its persecution,
+as a barrier to oppose its progress, and
+perhaps ultimately as an instrument to deliver
+the world from the crimes and miseries which
+have attended it.</p>
+
+<p>Under this impression, I trust the House will
+forgive me, if I endeavor, as far as I am able, to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_22">22</span>
+take a large and comprehensive view of this important
+question. In doing so, I agree with my
+honorable friend [Mr. Canning] that it would,
+in any case, be impossible to separate the
+present discussion from the former crimes and
+atrocities of the French Revolution; because
+both the papers now on the table, and the whole
+of the learned gentleman’s argument, force
+upon our consideration the origin of the war,
+and all the material facts which have occurred
+during its continuance. The learned gentleman
+[Mr. Erskine] has revived and retailed all those
+arguments from his own pamphlet, which had
+before passed through thirty-seven or thirty-eight
+editions in print, and now gives them to
+the House embellished by the graces of his
+personal delivery. The First Consul has also
+thought fit to revive and retail the chief arguments
+used by all the opposition speakers and
+all the opposition publishers in this country
+during the last seven years. And (what is still
+more material) the question itself, which is now
+immediately at issue—the question whether,
+under the present circumstances, there is such
+a prospect of security from any treaty with
+France as ought to induce us to negotiate, can
+not be properly decided upon without retracing,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_23">23</span>
+both from our own experience and from that
+of other nations, the nature, the causes, and the
+magnitude of the danger against which we have
+to guard, in order to judge of the security which
+we ought to accept.</p>
+
+<p>I say, then, that before any man can concur
+in opinion with that learned gentleman; before
+any man can think that the substance of his
+Majesty’s answer is any other than the safety of
+the country required; before any man can be
+of opinion that, to the overtures made by the
+enemy, at such a time and under such circumstances,
+it would have been safe to return an
+answer concurring in the negotiation—he must
+come within one of the three following descriptions:
+He must either believe that the French
+Revolution neither does now exhibit nor has at
+any time exhibited such circumstances of
+danger, arising out of the very nature of the
+system, and the internal state and condition of
+France, as to leave to foreign powers no adequate
+ground of security in negotiation; or, secondly,
+he must be of opinion that the change
+which has recently taken place has given that
+security which, in the former stages of the Revolution,
+was wanting; or, thirdly, he must be
+one who, believing that the danger exists, not<span class="pagenum" id="Page_24">24</span>
+undervaluing its extent nor mistaking its nature,
+nevertheless thinks, from his view of the present
+pressure on the country, from his view of
+its situation and its prospects, compared with
+the situation and prospects of its enemies, that
+we are, with our eyes open, bound to accept of
+inadequate security for every thing that is valuable
+and sacred, rather than endure the pressure,
+or incur the risk which would result from a farther
+prolongation of the contest.<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">1</a></p>
+
+<p>In discussing the last of these questions, we
+shall be led to consider what inference is to be
+drawn from the circumstances and the result of
+our own negotiations in former periods of the
+war; whether, in the comparative state of this
+country and France, we now see the same
+reason for repeating our then unsuccessful experiments;
+or whether we have not thence
+derived the lessons of experience, added to the
+deductions of reason, marking the inefficacy
+and danger of the very measures which are
+quoted to us as precedents for our adoption.</p>
+
+<p>Unwilling, sir, as I am to go into much detail
+on ground which has been so often trodden
+before; yet, when I find the learned gentleman,
+after all the information which he must have
+received, if he has read any of the answers to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_25">25</span>
+his work (however ignorant he might be when
+he wrote it), still giving the sanction of his
+authority to the supposition that the order to
+M. Chauvelin [French minister] to depart from
+this kingdom was the cause of the war between
+this country and France, I do feel it necessary
+to say a few words on that part of the subject.</p>
+
+<p>Inaccuracy in dates seems to be a sort of
+fatality common to all who have written on
+that side of the question; for even the writer
+of the note to his Majesty is not more correct,
+in this respect, than if he had taken his information
+only from the pamphlet of the learned
+gentleman. The House will recollect the first
+professions of the French Republic, which are
+enumerated, and enumerated truly, in that note.
+They are tests of every thing which would best
+recommend a government to the esteem and
+confidence of foreign powers, and the reverse
+of every thing which has been the system and
+practice of France now for near ten years. It
+is there stated that their first principles were
+love of peace, aversion to conquest, and respect
+for the independence of other countries. In
+the same note it seems, indeed, admitted that
+they since have violated all those principles;
+but it is alleged that they have done so only in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_26">26</span>
+consequence of the provocation of other powers.
+One of the first of those provocations is stated
+to have consisted in the various outrages offered
+to their ministers, of which the example is said
+to have been set by the King of Great Britain
+in his conduct to M. Chauvelin. In answer to
+this supposition, it is only necessary to remark,
+that before the example was given, before
+Austria and Prussia are supposed to have been
+thus encouraged to combine in a plan for the
+partition of France, that plan, if it ever existed
+at all, had existed and been acted upon for
+above eight months. France and Prussia had
+been at war eight months before the dismissal
+of M. Chauvelin. So much for the accuracy of
+the statement.</p>
+
+<p>I have been hitherto commenting on the
+arguments contained in the Notes. I come
+now to those of the learned gentleman. I
+understand him to say that the dismissal of M.
+Chauvelin was the real cause, I do not say of
+the general war, but of the rupture between
+France and England; and the learned gentleman
+states particularly that this dismissal rendered
+all discussion of the points in dispute
+impossible. Now I desire to meet distinctly
+every part of this assertion. I maintain, on the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_27">27</span>
+contrary, that an opportunity was given for
+discussing every matter in dispute between
+France and Great Britain as fully as if a regular
+and accredited French minister had been resident
+here; that the causes of war which existed
+at the beginning, or arose during the course of
+this discussion, were such as would have justified,
+twenty times over, a declaration of war on
+the part of this country; that all the explanations
+on the part of France were evidently
+unsatisfactory and inadmissible, and that M.
+Chauvelin had given in a peremptory ultimatum,
+declaring that if these explanations were not
+received as sufficient, and if we did not immediately
+disarm, our refusal would be considered
+as a declaration of war. After this followed
+that scene which no man can even now speak
+of without horror, or think of without indignation;
+that murder and regicide from which I
+was sorry to hear the learned gentleman date
+the beginning of the legal government of
+France.</p>
+
+<p>Having thus given in their ultimatum, they
+added, as a further demand (while we were
+smarting under accumulated injuries, for which
+all satisfaction was denied) that we should instantly
+receive M. Chauvelin as their embassador,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_28">28</span>
+with new credentials, representing them in
+the character which they had just derived from
+the murder of their sovereign. We replied,
+“he came here as the representative of a sovereign
+whom you have put to a cruel and illegal
+death; we have no satisfaction for the injuries
+we have received, no security from the danger
+with which we are threatened. Under these
+circumstances we will not receive your new credentials.
+The former credentials you have
+yourself recalled by the sacrifice of your King.”</p>
+
+<p>What, from that moment, was the situation
+of M. Chauvelin? He was reduced to the situation
+of a private individual, and was required
+to quit the kingdom under the provisions of
+the Alien Act, which, for the purpose of securing
+domestic tranquillity, had recently invested
+his Majesty with the power of removing out of
+this kingdom all foreigners suspected of revolutionary
+principles. Is it contended that he was
+then less liable to the provisions of that act
+than any other individual foreigner, whose conduct
+afforded to government just ground of objection
+or suspicion? Did his conduct and
+connections here afford no such ground? or will
+it be pretended that the bare act of refusing to
+receive fresh credentials from an infant republic,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_29">29</span>
+not then acknowledged by any one power
+of Europe, and in the very act of heaping upon
+us injuries and insults, was of itself a cause of
+war? So far from it, that even the very nations
+of Europe whose wisdom and moderation have
+been repeatedly extolled for maintaining neutrality,
+and preserving friendship with the
+French Republic, remained for years subsequent
+to this period without receiving from it any accredited
+minister, or doing any one act to
+acknowledge its political existence.</p>
+
+<p>In answer to a representation from the belligerent
+powers, in December, 1793, Count Bernstorff,
+the minister of Denmark, officially declared
+that “it was well known that the National
+Convention had appointed M. Grouville
+Minister Plenipotentiary at Denmark, but that
+it was also well known that he had neither been
+received nor acknowledged in that quality.”
+And as late as February, 1796, when the same
+minister was at length, for the first time, received
+in his official capacity, Count Bernstorff,
+in a public note, assigned this reason for that
+change of conduct: “So long as no other than
+a revolutionary government existed in France,
+his Majesty <em>could</em> not acknowledge the minister
+of that government; but now that the French<span class="pagenum" id="Page_30">30</span>
+Constitution is completely organized, and a
+regular government established in France, his
+Majesty’s obligation ceases in that respect, and
+M. Grouville will therefore be acknowledged in
+the usual form.” How far the Court of Denmark
+was justified in the opinion that a revolutionary
+government then no longer existed in
+France it is not now necessary to inquire; but
+whatever may have been the fact in that respect,
+the <em>principle</em> on which they acted is clear
+and intelligible, and is a decisive instance in
+favor of the proposition which I have maintained.</p>
+
+<p>Is it, then, necessary to examine what were
+the terms of that ultimatum with which we refused
+to comply? Acts of hostility had been
+openly threatened against our allies; a hostility
+founded upon the assumption of a right which
+would at once supersede the whole law of nations.
+The pretended right to open the Scheldt
+we discussed at the time, not so much on account
+of its immediate importance (though it
+was important both in a maritime and commercial
+view) as on account of the general principle
+on which it was founded.<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">2</a> On the same arbitrary
+notion they soon afterward discovered
+that sacred law of nature which made the Rhine<span class="pagenum" id="Page_31">31</span>
+and the Alps the legitimate boundaries of
+France, and assumed the power, which they
+have affected to exercise through the whole of
+the Revolution, of superseding, by a new code
+of their own, all the recognized principles of
+the law of nations. They were, in fact, actually
+advancing toward the republic of Holland, by
+rapid strides, after the victory of Jemappes and
+they had ordered their generals to pursue the
+Austrian troops into any neutral country, thereby
+explicitly avowing an intention of invading
+Holland. They had already shown their moderation
+and self-denial by incorporating Belgium
+with the French Republic. These lovers of
+peace, who set out with a sworn aversion to
+conquest, and professions of respect for the independence
+of other nations; who pretend that
+they departed from this system only in consequence
+of your aggression, themselves, in time
+of peace, while you were still confessedly neutral,
+without the pretence or shadow of provocation,
+wrested Savoy from the King of Sardinia,
+and had proceeded to incorporate it likewise
+with France.<a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">3</a> These were their aggressions at
+this period, and more than these. They had
+issued a universal declaration of war against all
+the thrones of Europe, and they had, by their<span class="pagenum" id="Page_32">32</span>
+conduct, applied it particularly and specifically
+to you. They had passed the decree of the 19th
+of November, 1792, proclaiming the promise of
+French succor to all nations who should manifest
+a wish to become free; they had, by all
+their language as well as their example, shown
+what they understood to be freedom; they had
+sealed their principles by the deposition of their
+sovereign; they had applied them to England
+by inviting and encouraging the addresses of
+those seditious and traitorous societies, who,
+from the beginning, favored their views, and
+who, encouraged by your forbearance, were
+even then publicly avowing French doctrines,
+and anticipating their success in this country—who
+were hailing the progress of those proceedings
+in France which led to the murder of its
+king; they were even then looking to the day
+when they should behold a National Convention
+in England formed upon similar principles.<a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">4</a></p>
+
+<p>And what were the explanations they offered
+on these different grounds of offence? As to
+Holland: they told you the Scheldt was too
+insignificant for you to trouble yourselves about,
+and therefore it was to be decided as they chose,
+in breach of positive treaty, which they had
+themselves guaranteed, and which we, by our<span class="pagenum" id="Page_33">33</span>
+alliance, were bound to support. If, however,
+after the war was over, Belgium should have
+consolidated its liberty (a term of which we
+now know the meaning, from the fate of every
+nation into which the arms of France have penetrated)
+then Belgium and Holland might, if
+they pleased, settle the question of the Scheldt
+by separate negotiation between themselves.
+With respect to aggrandizement, they assured
+us that they would retain possession of Belgium
+by arms no longer than they should find it
+necessary to the purpose already stated, of consolidating
+its liberty. And with respect to the
+decree of the 19th of November, 1792, applied
+as it was pointedly to you, by all the intercourse
+I have stated with all the seditious and traitorous
+part of this country, and particularly by
+the speeches of every leading man among them,
+they contented themselves with asserting that
+the declaration conveyed no such meaning as
+was imputed to it, and that, so far from encouraging
+sedition, it could apply only to countries
+where a great majority of the people should
+have already declared itself in favor of a revolution:
+a supposition which, as they asserted,
+necessarily implied a total absence of all sedition.</p>
+
+<p>What would have been the effect of admitting<span class="pagenum" id="Page_34">34</span>
+this explanation? to suffer a nation, and
+an armed nation, to preach to the inhabitants
+of all the countries in the world that they themselves
+were slaves and their rulers tyrants; to
+encourage and invite them to revolution by a
+previous promise of French support to whatever
+might call itself a majority, or to whatever
+France might declare to be so. This was their
+explanation; and this, they told you, was their
+ultimatum.</p>
+
+<p>But was this all? Even at that very moment,
+when they were endeavoring to induce
+you to admit these explanations, to be contented
+with the avowal that France offered
+herself as a general guaranty for every successful
+revolution, and would interfere only to
+sanction and confirm whatever the free and uninfluenced
+choice of the people might have decided,
+what were their orders to their generals
+on the same subject? In the midst of these
+amicable explanations with you came forth a
+decree which I really believe must be effaced
+from the minds of gentlemen opposite to me, if
+they can prevail upon themselves for a moment
+to hint even a doubt upon the origin of this
+quarrel, not only as to this country, but as to
+all the nations of Europe with whom France<span class="pagenum" id="Page_35">35</span>
+has been subsequently engaged in hostility. I
+speak of the decree of the 15th of December,
+1792. This decree, more even than all the
+previous transactions, amounted to a universal
+declaration of war against all thrones, and
+against all civilized governments. It said,
+wherever the armies of France shall come
+(whether within countries then at war or at
+peace is not distinguished) in all those countries
+it shall be the first care of their generals to
+introduce the principles and the practice of the
+French Revolution; to demolish all privileged
+orders, and every thing which obstructs the
+establishment of their new system.<a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">5</a></p>
+
+<p>If any doubt is entertained whither the armies
+of France were intended to come; if it is contended
+that they referred only to those nations
+with whom they were then at war, or with
+whom, in the course of this contest, they might
+be driven into war; let it be remembered that
+at this very moment they had actually given
+orders to their generals to pursue the Austrian
+army from the Netherlands into Holland, with
+whom they were at that time in peace. Or,
+even if the construction contended for is admitted,
+let us see what would have been its application,
+let us look at the list of their aggressions,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_36">36</span>
+which was read by my right honorable
+friend [Mr. Dundas] near me. With whom
+have they been at war since the period of this
+declaration? With all the nations of Europe
+save two (Sweden and Denmark), and if not
+with these two, it is only because, with every
+provocation that could justify defensive war,
+those countries have hitherto acquiesced in repeated
+violations of their rights rather than
+recur to war for their vindication. Wherever
+their arms have been carried it will be a matter
+of short subsequent inquiry to trace whether
+they have faithfully applied these principles.
+If in <em>terms</em> this decree is a denunciation of war
+against all governments; if in <em>practice</em> it has
+been applied against every one with which
+France has come into contact; what is it but
+the deliberate code of the French Revolution,
+from the birth of the Republic, which has never
+once been departed from, which has been enforced
+with unremitted rigor against all the nations
+that have come into their power?</p>
+
+<p>If there could otherwise be any doubt
+whether the application of this decree was
+intended to be universal, whether it applied
+to all nations, and to England particularly;
+there is one circumstance which alone would<span class="pagenum" id="Page_37">37</span>
+be decisive—that nearly at the same period it
+was proposed [by M. Baraillon], in the National
+Convention, to declare expressly that the decree
+of November 19th was confined to the nations
+with whom they were <em>then</em> at war; and that
+proposal was <em>rejected</em> by a great majority, by
+that very Convention from whom we were desired
+to receive these explanations as satisfactory.</p>
+
+<p>Such, sir, was the nature of the system. Let
+us examine a little farther, whether it was from
+the beginning intended to be acted upon in the
+extent which I have stated. At the very moment
+when their threats appeared to many little
+else than the ravings of madmen, they were digesting
+and methodizing the means of execution,
+as accurately as if they had actually foreseen
+the extent to which they have since been
+able to realize their criminal projects. They
+sat down coolly to devise the most regular and
+effectual mode of making the application of
+this system the current business of the day,
+and incorporating it with the general orders of
+their army; for (will the House believe it!) this
+confirmation of the decree of November 19th
+was accompanied by an exposition and commentary
+addressed to the general of every<span class="pagenum" id="Page_38">38</span>
+army of France, containing a schedule as coolly
+conceived, and as methodically reduced, as any
+by which the most quiet business of a justice of
+peace, or the most regular routine of any department
+of state in this country could be conducted.
+Each commander was furnished with
+one general blank formula of a letter for all the
+nations of the world! The people of France to
+the people of ——, Greeting, “We are come
+to expel your tyrants.” Even this was not all;
+one of the articles of the decree of the fifteenth
+of December was expressly, “that those who
+should show themselves so brutish and so enamored
+of their chains as to refuse the restoration
+of their rights, to renounce liberty and
+equality, or to preserve, recall, or treat with
+their prince or privileged orders, were not entitled
+to the distinction which France, in other
+cases, had justly established between government
+and people; and that such a people
+ought to be treated according to the rigor of
+war, and of conquest.” Here is their love of
+peace; here is their aversion to conquest; here
+is their respect for the independence of other
+nations!</p>
+
+<p>It was then, after receiving such explanations
+as these, after receiving the ultimatum of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_39">39</span>
+France, and after M. Chauvelin’s credentials
+had ceased, that he was required to depart.
+Even at that period, I am almost ashamed to
+record it, we did not on our part shut the door
+against other attempts to negotiate, but this
+transaction was immediately followed by the
+declaration of war, proceeding not from England
+in vindication of her rights, but from
+France, as the completion of the injuries and
+insults they had offered. And on a war thus
+originating, can it be doubted by an English
+House of Commons whether the aggression
+was on the part of this country or of France?
+or whether the manifest aggression on the part
+of France was the result of any thing but the
+principles which characterize the French Revolution?<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">6</a>
+* * *</p>
+
+<p>I will enlarge no farther on the origin of the
+war. I have read and detailed to you a system
+which was in itself a declaration of war against
+all nations, which was so intended, and which
+has been so applied, which has been exemplified
+in the extreme peril and hazard of almost all
+who for a moment have trusted to treaty, and
+which has not at this hour overwhelmed Europe
+in one indiscriminate mass of ruin, only
+because we have not indulged, to a fatal extremity,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_40">40</span>
+that disposition which we have, however,
+indulged too far; because we have not
+consented to trust to profession and compromise,
+rather than to our own valor and exertion, for
+security against a system from which we never
+shall be delivered till either the principle is
+extinguished, or till its strength is exhausted.</p>
+
+<p>I might, sir, if I found it necessary, enter into
+much detail upon this part of the subject; but
+at present I only beg leave to express my
+readiness at any time to enter upon it, when
+either my own strength or the patience of the
+House will admit of it; but I say, without distinction,
+against every nation in Europe, and
+against some out of Europe, the principle has
+been faithfully applied. You cannot look at
+the map of Europe, and lay your hand upon
+that country against which France has not
+either declared an open and aggressive war,
+or violated some positive treaty, or broken
+some recognized principle of the law of nations.</p>
+
+<p>This subject may be divided into various periods.
+There were some acts of hostility committed
+previous to the war with this country,
+and very little, indeed, subsequent to that declaration,
+which abjured the love of conquest.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_41">41</span>
+The attack upon the papal state, by the seizure
+of Avignon, in 1791, was accompanied with
+specimens of all the vile arts and perfidy that
+ever disgraced a revolution. Avignon was separated
+from its lawful sovereign, with whom not
+even the pretence of quarrel existed, and forcibly
+incorporated in the tyranny of one and indivisible
+France.<a id="FNanchor_7" href="#Footnote_7" class="fnanchor">7</a> The same system led, in the
+same year, to an aggression against the whole
+German Empire, by the seizure of Porentrui,
+part of the dominions of the Bishop of Basle.
+Afterward, in 1792, unpreceded by any declaration
+of war, or any cause of hostility,<a id="FNanchor_8" href="#Footnote_8" class="fnanchor">8</a> and in
+direct violation of the solemn pledge to abstain
+from conquest, they made war against the King
+of Sardinia, by the seizure of Savoy, for the
+purpose of incorporating it, in like manner,
+with France. In the same year, they had proceeded
+to the declaration of war against Austria,
+against Prussia, and against the German Empire,
+in which they have been justified only on the
+ground of a rooted hostility, combination, and
+league of sovereigns, for the dismemberment of
+France. I say that some of the documents
+brought to support this pretence are spurious
+and false. I say that even in those that are
+not so, there is not one word to prove the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_42">42</span>
+charge principally relied upon, that of an intention
+to effect the dismemberment of France,
+or to impose upon it, by force, any particular
+constitution. I say that, as far as we have been
+able to trace what passed at Pilnitz, the declaration
+there signed referred to the imprisonment
+of Louis XVI.; its immediate view was to
+effect his deliverance, if a concert sufficiently
+extensive could be formed with other sovereigns
+for that purpose. It left the internal state of
+France to be decided by the king restored to
+his liberty, with the free consent of the states
+of his kingdom, and it did not contain one
+word relative to the <em>dismemberment</em> of France.<a id="FNanchor_9" href="#Footnote_9" class="fnanchor">9</a></p>
+
+<p>In the subsequent discussions, which took
+place in 1792, and which embraced at the same
+time all the other points of jealousy which had
+arisen between the two countries, the Declaration
+of Pilnitz was referred to, and explained on
+the part of Austria in a manner precisely conformable
+to what I have now stated. The
+amicable explanations which took place, both
+on this subject and on all the matters in dispute,
+will be found in the official correspondence between
+the two courts which has been made public;
+and it will be found, also, that as long as
+the negotiation continued to be conducted<span class="pagenum" id="Page_43">43</span>
+through M. Delessart, then Minister for Foreign
+Affairs, there was a great prospect that those
+discussions would be amicably terminated; but
+it is notorious, and has since been clearly proved
+on the authority of Brissot himself, that the violent
+party in France considered such an issue of
+the negotiation as likely to be fatal to their
+projects, and thought, to use his own words,
+that “war was necessary to consolidate the
+Revolution.” For the express purpose of producing
+the war, they excited a popular tumult
+in Paris; they insisted upon and obtained the
+dismissal of M. Delessart. A new minister was
+appointed in his room, the tone of the negotiation
+was immediately changed, and an ultimatum
+was sent to the Emperor, similar to that
+which was afterward sent to this country, affording
+him no satisfaction on his just grounds of
+complaint, and requiring him, under those circumstances,
+to disarm. The first events of the
+contest proved how much more France was prepared
+for war than Austria, and afford a strong
+confirmation of the proposition which I maintain,
+that no offensive intention was entertained
+on the part of the latter power.</p>
+
+<p>War was then declared against Austria, a war
+which I state to be a war of aggression on the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_44">44</span>
+part of France. The King of Prussia had
+declared that he should consider war against
+the Emperor or empire as war against himself.
+He had declared that, as a coestate of the empire,
+he was determined to defend their rights;
+that, as an ally of the Emperor, he would support
+him to the utmost against any attack; and
+that, for the sake of his own dominions, he felt
+himself called upon to resist the progress of
+French principles, and to maintain the balance
+of power in Europe. With this notice before
+them, France declared war upon the Emperor,
+and the war with Prussia was the necessary consequence
+of this aggression, both against the
+Emperor and the empire.</p>
+
+<p>The war against the King of Sardinia follows
+next. The declaration of that war was the
+seizure of Savoy by an invading army—and on
+what ground? On that which has been stated
+already. They had found out, by some light of
+nature, that the Rhine and the Alps were the
+natural limits of France. Upon that ground
+Savoy was seized; and Savoy was also incorporated
+with France.</p>
+
+<p>Here finishes the history of the wars in which
+France was engaged antecedent to the war with
+Great Britain, with Holland, and with Spain.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_45">45</span>
+With respect to Spain, we have seen nothing
+which leads us to suspect that either attachment
+to religion, or the ties of consanguinity,
+or regard to the ancient system of Europe,
+was likely to induce that court to connect itself
+in offensive war against France. The war was
+evidently and incontestably begun by France
+against Spain.</p>
+
+<p>The case of Holland is so fresh in every
+man’s recollection, and so connected with the
+immediate causes of the war with this country,
+that it cannot require one word of observation.
+What shall I say, then, on the case of Portugal?
+I cannot, indeed, say that France ever
+declared war against that country. I can hardly
+say even that she ever made war, but she required
+them to make a treaty of peace, as if
+they had been at war; she obliged them to purchase
+that treaty; she broke it as soon as it was
+purchased; and she had originally no other
+ground of complaint than this, that Portugal
+had performed, though inadequately, the engagements
+of its ancient defensive alliance with
+this country in the character of an auxiliary—a
+conduct which cannot of itself make any power
+a principal in a war.</p>
+
+<p>I have now enumerated all the nations at war<span class="pagenum" id="Page_46">46</span>
+at that period, with the exception only of Naples.
+It can hardly be necessary to call to the recollection
+of the House the characteristic feature
+of revolutionary principles which was shown,
+even at this early period, in the personal insult
+offered to the King of Naples, by the commander
+of a French squadron riding uncontrolled
+in the Mediterranean, and (while our
+fleets were yet unarmed) threatening destruction
+to all the coast of Italy.</p>
+
+<p>It was not till a considerably later period
+that almost all the other nations of Europe
+found themselves equally involved in actual hostility;
+but it is not a little material to the whole
+of my argument, compared with the statement
+of the learned gentleman, and with that contained
+in the French note, to examine at what
+period this hostility extended itself. It extended
+itself, in the course of 1796, to the
+States of Italy which had hitherto been exempted
+from it. In 1797 it had ended in the
+destruction of most of them; it had ended in
+the virtual deposition of the King of Sardinia;
+it had ended in the conversion of Genoa and
+Tuscany into democratic republics; it had
+ended in the revolution of Venice, in the violation
+of treaties with the new Venetian Republic;<span class="pagenum" id="Page_47">47</span>
+and, finally, in transferring that very republic,
+the creature and vassal of France, to
+the dominion of Austria. * * *</p>
+
+<p>Let these facts and these dates be compared
+with what we have heard. The honorable gentleman
+has told us, and the author of the note
+from France has told us also, that all the French
+conquests were produced by the operations of
+the allies. It was, when they were pressed on
+all sides, when their own territory was in danger,
+when their own independence was in question,
+when the confederacy appeared too strong,
+it was then they used the means with which
+their power and their courage furnished them,
+and, “attacked upon all sides, they carried
+everywhere their defensive arms.”<a id="FNanchor_10" href="#Footnote_10" class="fnanchor">10</a> * * *</p>
+
+<p>Let us look at the conduct of France immediately
+subsequent to this period. She had
+spurned at the offers of Great Britain; she had
+reduced her continental enemies to the necessity
+of accepting a precarious peace; she had
+(in spite of those pledges repeatedly made and
+uniformly violated) surrounded herself by new
+conquests on every part of her frontier but one.
+That one was Switzerland. The first effect of
+being relieved from the war with Austria, of
+being secured against all fears of continental<span class="pagenum" id="Page_48">48</span>
+invasion on the ancient territory of France,
+was their unprovoked attack against this unoffending
+and devoted country. This was one
+of the scenes which satisfied even those who
+were the most incredulous that France had
+thrown off the mask, “<em>if indeed she had ever
+worn it</em>.” It collected, in one view, many of
+the characteristic features of that revolutionary
+system which I have endeavored to trace—the
+perfidy which alone rendered their arms successful—the
+pretexts of which they availed
+themselves to produce division and prepare the
+entrance of Jacobinism in that country—the
+proposal of armistice, one of the known and
+regular engines of the Revolution, which was,
+as usual, the immediate prelude to military execution,
+attended with cruelty and barbarity,
+of which there are few examples. All these
+are known to the world. The country they attacked
+was one which had long been the faithful
+ally of France, which, instead of giving cause
+of jealousy to any other power, had been for
+ages proverbial for the simplicity and innocence
+of its manners, and which had acquired and
+preserved the esteem of all the nations of Europe;
+which had almost, by the common consent
+of mankind, been exempted from the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_49">49</span>
+sound of war, and marked out as a land of
+Goshen, safe and untouched in the midst of surrounding
+calamities.</p>
+
+<p>Look, then, at the fate of Switzerland, at the
+circumstances which led to its destruction.
+Add this instance to the catalogue of aggression
+against all Europe, and then tell me
+whether the system I have described has not
+been prosecuted with an unrelenting spirit,
+which can not be subdued in adversity, which
+cannot be appeased in prosperity, which neither
+solemn professions, nor the general law of nations,
+nor the obligation of treaties (whether
+previous to the Revolution or subsequent to
+it) could restrain from the subversion of every
+state into which, either by force or fraud, their
+arms could penetrate. Then tell me, whether
+the disasters of Europe are to be charged upon
+the provocation of this country and its allies,
+or on the inherent principle of the French Revolution,
+of which the natural result produced
+so much misery and carnage in France, and
+carried desolation and terror over so large a
+portion of the world.</p>
+
+<p>Sir, much as I have now stated, I have not
+finished the catalogue. America, almost as
+much as Switzerland, perhaps, contributed to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_50">50</span>
+that change which has taken place in the minds
+of those who were originally partial to the
+principles of the French Government. The
+hostility against America followed a long course
+of neutrality adhered to under the strongest
+provocations, or rather of repeated compliances
+to France, with which we might well have been
+dissatisfied. It was on the face of it unjust
+and wanton; and it was accompanied by those
+instances of sordid corruption which shocked
+and disgusted even the enthusiastic admirers of
+revolutionary purity, and threw a new light on
+the genius of revolutionary government.<a id="FNanchor_11" href="#Footnote_11" class="fnanchor">11</a></p>
+
+<p>After this, it remains only shortly to remind
+gentlemen of the aggression against Egypt,
+not omitting, however, to notice the capture of
+Malta in the way to Egypt. Inconsiderable as
+that island may be thought, compared with the
+scenes we have witnessed, let it be remembered
+that it is an island of which the government
+had long been recognized by every state of
+Europe, against which France pretended no
+cause of war, and whose independence was as
+dear to itself and as sacred as that of any country
+in Europe. It was in fact not unimportant,
+from its local situation to the other powers of
+Europe; but in proportion as any man may<span class="pagenum" id="Page_51">51</span>
+diminish its importance, the instance will only
+serve the more to illustrate and confirm the
+proposition which I have maintained. The all-searching
+eye of the French Revolution looks
+to every part of Europe, and every quarter of
+the world, in which can be found an object
+either of acquisition or plunder. Nothing is
+too great for the temerity of its ambition, nothing
+too small or insignificant for the grasp of
+its rapacity. From hence Bonaparte and his
+army proceeded to Egypt. The attack was
+made, pretences were held out to the natives of
+that country in the name of the French King,
+whom they had murdered. They pretended to
+have the approbation of the Grand Seignior,
+whose territories they were violating; their
+project was carried on under the profession of
+a zeal for Mohammedanism; it was carried on
+by proclaiming that France had been reconciled
+to the Mussulman faith, had abjured that of
+Christianity, or, as he in his impious language
+termed it, of <em>the sect of the Messiah</em>.<a id="FNanchor_12" href="#Footnote_12" class="fnanchor">12</a></p>
+
+<p>The only plea which they have since held out
+to color this atrocious invasion of a neutral and
+friendly territory, is that it was the road to attack
+the English power in India. It is most
+unquestionably true that this was one and a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_52">52</span>
+principal cause of this unparalleled outrage;
+but another, and an equally substantial, cause
+(as appears by their own statements) was the
+division and partition of the territories of what
+they thought a falling power. It is impossible
+to dismiss this subject without observing that
+this attack against Egypt was accompanied by
+an attack upon the British possessions in India,
+made on true revolutionary principles. In
+Europe the propagation of the principles of
+France had uniformly prepared the way for the
+progress of its arms. To India the lovers of
+peace had sent the messengers of Jacobinism,
+for the purpose of inculcating war in those distant
+regions on Jacobin principles, and of forming
+Jacobin clubs, which they actually succeeded
+in establishing; and which in most respects
+resembled the European model, but which
+were distinguished by this peculiarity, that they
+were required to swear in one breath hatred to
+tyranny, the love of liberty, and the destruction
+of all kings and sovereigns, except the good
+and faithful ally of the French Republic, <em>Citizen</em>
+Tippoo!<a id="FNanchor_13" href="#Footnote_13" class="fnanchor">13</a></p>
+
+<p>What, then, was the nature of this system?
+Was it any thing but what I have stated it
+to be? an insatiable love of aggrandizement,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_53">53</span>
+an implacable spirit of destruction against all
+the civil and religious institutions of every
+country. This is the first moving and acting
+spirit of the French Revolution; this is the spirit
+which animated it at its birth, and this is the
+spirit which will not desert it till the moment
+of its dissolution, “which grew with its growth,
+which strengthened with its strength,” but
+which has not abated under its misfortunes, nor
+declined in its decay. It has been invariably
+the same in every period, operating more or less,
+according as accident or circumstances might
+assist it; but it has been inherent in the Revolution
+in all its stages; it has equally belonged
+to Brissot, to Robespierre, to Tallien, to Reubel,
+to Barras, and to every one of the leaders
+of the Directory, but to none more than to
+Bonaparte, in whom now all their powers are
+united. What are its characters? Can it be
+accident that produced them? No, it is only
+from the alliance of the most horrid principles,
+with the most horrid means, that such miseries
+could have been brought upon Europe. It is
+this paradox which we must always keep in
+mind when we are discussing any question relative
+to the effects of the French Revolution.
+Groaning under every degree of misery, the victim<span class="pagenum" id="Page_54">54</span>
+of its own crimes, and as I once before expressed
+in this House, asking pardon of God
+and of man for the miseries which it has brought
+upon itself and others, France still retains (while
+it has neither left means of comfort nor almost
+of subsistence to its own inhabitants) new and
+unexampled means of annoyance and destruction
+against all the other powers of Europe.</p>
+
+<p>Its first fundamental principle was to bribe
+the poor against the rich by proposing to transfer
+into new hands, on the delusive notion of
+equality, and in breach of every principle of
+justice, the whole property of the country.
+The practical application of this principle was
+to devote the whole of that property to indiscriminate
+plunder, and to make it the foundation
+of a revolutionary system of finance, productive
+in proportion to the misery and desolation
+which it created. It has been accompanied
+by an unwearied spirit of proselytism, diffusing
+itself over all the nations of the earth; a spirit
+which can apply itself to all circumstances and
+all situations, which can furnish a list of grievances
+and hold out a promise of redress equally
+to all nations; which inspired the teachers of
+French liberty with the hope of alike recommending
+themselves to those who live under<span class="pagenum" id="Page_55">55</span>
+the feudal code of the German Empire; to the
+various states of Italy, under all their different
+institutions; to the old republicans of Holland,
+and to the new republicans of America; to the
+Catholic of Ireland, whom it was to deliver
+from Protestant usurpation; to the Protestant
+of Switzerland, whom it was to deliver from
+Popish superstition; and to the Mussulman of
+Egypt, whom it was to deliver from Christian
+persecution; to the remote Indian, blindly bigoted
+to his ancient institutions; and to the
+natives of Great Britain, enjoying the perfection
+of practical freedom, and justly attached to
+their Constitution, from the joint result of
+habit, of reason, and of experience. The last
+and distinguishing feature is a perfidy which
+nothing can bind, which no tie of treaty, no
+sense of the principles generally received among
+nations, no obligation, human or divine, can
+restrain. Thus qualified, thus armed for destruction,
+the genius of the French Revolution
+marched forth, the terror and dismay of the
+world. Every nation has in its turn been the
+witness, many have been the victims of its principles;
+and it is left for us to decide whether
+we will compromise with such a danger, while
+we have yet resources to supply the sinews of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_56">56</span>
+war, while the heart and spirit of the country is
+yet unbroken, and while we have the means of
+calling forth and supporting a powerful co-operation
+in Europe.</p>
+
+<p>Much more might be said on this part of the
+subject; but if what I have said already is a
+faithful, though only an imperfect, sketch of
+those excesses and outrages which even history
+itself will hereafter be unable fully to represent
+and record, and a just representation of the
+principle and source from which they originated,
+will any man say that we ought to accept
+a precarious security against so tremendous a
+danger? Much more—will he pretend, after
+the experience of all that has passed in the different
+stages of the French Revolution, that we
+ought to be deterred from probing this great
+question to the bottom, and from examining,
+without ceremony or disguise, whether the
+change which has recently taken place in
+France is sufficient now to give security, not
+against a common danger, but against such a
+danger as that which I have described?</p>
+
+<p>In examining this part of the subject, let
+it be remembered that there is one other characteristic
+of the French Revolution as striking
+as its dreadful and destructive principles: I<span class="pagenum" id="Page_57">57</span>
+mean the instability of its government, which
+has been of itself sufficient to destroy all reliance,
+if any such reliance could at any time
+have been placed on the good faith of any of its
+rulers. Such has been the incredible rapidity
+with which the revolutions in France have succeeded
+each other, that I believe the names of
+those who have successively exercised absolute
+power, under the pretence of liberty, are to be
+numbered by the years of the Revolution, and
+by each of the new Constitutions, which, under
+the same pretence, has in its turn been imposed
+by force on France, all of which alike were
+founded upon principles which professed to be
+universal, and were intended to be established
+and perpetuated among all the nations of the
+earth. Each of these will be found, upon an
+average, to have had about two years as the
+period of its duration.</p>
+
+<p>Under this revolutionary system, accompanied
+with this perpetual fluctuation and
+change, both in the form of the government
+and in the persons of the rulers, what is the
+security which has hitherto existed, and what
+new security is now offered? Before an answer
+is given to this question, let me sum up
+the history of all the revolutionary governments<span class="pagenum" id="Page_58">58</span>
+of France, and of their characters in relation to
+other powers, in words more emphatical than
+any which I could use—the memorable words
+pronounced, on the eve of this last Constitution,
+by the orator who was selected to report to
+an Assembly, surrounded by a file of grenadiers,
+the new form of liberty which it was destined
+to enjoy under the auspices of General Bonaparte.
+From this reporter, the mouth and
+organ of the new government, we learn this
+important lesson:</p>
+
+<p>“It is easy to conceive why peace was not concluded
+before the establishment of the constitutional
+government. The only government which
+then existed described itself as revolutionary; it
+was, in fact, only the tyranny of a few men who
+were soon overthrown by others, and it consequently
+presented no stability of principles or
+of views, no security either with respect to men
+or with respect to things.</p>
+
+<p>“It should seem that that stability and that
+security ought to have existed from the establishment,
+and as the effect of the constitutional
+system; and yet they did not exist more, perhaps
+even less, than they had done before. In
+truth, we did make some partial treaties; we
+signed a continental peace, and a general congress<span class="pagenum" id="Page_59">59</span>
+was held to confirm it; but these treaties,
+these diplomatic conferences, appear to have
+been the source of a new war, more inveterate
+and more bloody than before.</p>
+
+<p>“Before the 18th Fructidor (4th September)
+of the fifth year, the French Government exhibited
+to foreign nations so uncertain an existence
+that they refused to treat with it. After this
+great event, the whole power was absorbed in
+the Directory; the legislative body can hardly
+be said to have existed; treaties of peace were
+broken, and war carried everywhere, without
+that body having any share in those measures.
+The same Directory, after having intimidated
+all Europe, and destroyed, at its pleasure, several
+governments, neither knowing how to make
+peace or war, or how even to establish itself,
+was overturned by a breath, on the 13th Prairial
+(18th June), to make room for other men, influenced
+perhaps by different views, or who might
+be governed by different principles.</p>
+
+<p>“Judging, then, only from notorious facts, the
+French Government must be considered as exhibiting
+nothing fixed, neither in respect to men
+nor to things.”</p>
+
+<p>Here, then, is the picture, down to the period
+of the last revolution, of the state of France
+under all its successive governments!</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_60">60</span>
+Having taken a view of what it was, let us
+now examine what it is. In the first place, we
+see, as has been truly stated, a change in the
+description and form of the sovereign authority.
+A supreme power is placed at the head of
+this nominal republic, with a more open avowal
+of military despotism than at any former period;
+with a more open and undisguised abandonment
+of the names and pretences under which that
+despotism long attempted to conceal itself.
+The different institutions, republican in their
+form and appearance, which were before the instruments
+of that despotism, are now annihilated;
+they have given way to the absolute
+power of one man, concentrating in himself all
+the authority of the state, and differing from
+other monarchs only in this, that (as my honorable
+friend [Mr. Canning] truly stated it) he
+wields a sword instead of a sceptre. What,
+then, is the confidence we are to derive either
+from the frame of the government, or from the
+character and past conduct of the person who is
+now the absolute ruler of France?</p>
+
+<p>Had we seen a man of whom we had no previous
+knowledge suddenly invested with the
+sovereign authority of the country; invested
+with the power of taxation, with the power of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_61">61</span>
+the sword, the power of war and peace, the unlimited
+power of commanding the resources, of
+disposing of the lives and fortunes, of every
+man in France; if we had seen at the same moment
+all the inferior machinery of the Revolution,
+which, under the variety of successive
+shocks, had kept the system in motion, still
+remaining entire,—all that, by requisition and
+plunder, had given activity to the revolutionary
+system of finance, and had furnished the means
+of creating an army, by converting every man
+who was of age to bear arms into a soldier, not
+for the defence of his own country, but for the
+sake of carrying the war into the country of
+the enemy; if we had seen all the subordinate
+instruments of Jacobin power subsisting in their
+full force, and retaining (to use the French
+phrase) all their original organization; and had
+then observed this single change in the conduct
+of their affairs, that there was now <em>one
+man</em>, with no rival to thwart his measures, no
+colleague to divide his powers, no council to
+control his operations, no liberty of speaking or
+writing, no expression of public opinion to
+check or influence his conduct; under such circumstances,
+should we be wrong to pause, or
+wait for the evidence of facts and experience,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_62">62</span>
+before we consented to trust our safety to the
+forbearance of a single man, in such a situation,
+and to relinquish those means of defence which
+have hitherto carried us safe through all the
+storms of the Revolution, if we were to ask
+what are the principles and character of this
+stranger, to whom fortune has suddenly committed
+the concerns of a great and powerful
+nation?</p>
+
+<p>But is this the actual state of the present
+question? Are we talking of a stranger of
+whom we have heard nothing? No, sir, we
+have heard of him; we, and Europe, and the
+world, have heard both of him and of the satellites
+by whom he is surrounded, and it is impossible
+to discuss fairly the propriety of any
+answer which could be returned to his overtures
+of negotiation without taking into consideration
+the inferences to be drawn from his personal
+character and conduct. I know it is the fashion
+with some gentlemen to represent any reference
+to topics of this nature as invidious and irritating;
+but the truth is, that they rise unavoidably
+out of the very nature of the question.
+Would it have been possible for ministers to
+discharge their duty, in offering their advice to
+their sovereign, either for accepting or declining<span class="pagenum" id="Page_63">63</span>
+negotiation, without taking into their
+account the reliance to be placed on the disposition
+and the principles of the person on whose
+disposition and principles the security to be
+obtained by treaty must, in the present circumstances,
+principally depend? Or would they
+act honestly or candidly toward Parliament and
+toward the country if, having been guided by
+these considerations, they forbore to state,
+publicly and distinctly, the real grounds which
+have influenced their decision; and if, from a
+false delicacy and groundless timidity, they
+purposely declined an examination of a point,
+the most essential toward enabling Parliament
+to form a just determination on so important a
+subject?</p>
+
+<p>What opinion, then, are we led to form of the
+pretensions of the Consul to those particular
+qualities for which, in the official note, his
+personal character is represented to us as the
+surest pledge of peace? We are told this is
+his second attempt at general pacification.
+Let us see, for a moment, how his attempt has
+been conducted. There is, indeed, as the
+learned gentleman has said, a word in the first
+declaration which refers to general peace, and
+which states this to be the second time in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_64">64</span>
+which the Consul has endeavored to accomplish
+that object. We thought fit, for the reasons
+which have been assigned, to decline altogether
+the proposal of treating, under the present circumstances,
+but we, at the same time, expressly
+stated that, whenever the moment for treaty
+should arrive, we would in no case treat but in
+conjunction with our allies. Our general refusal
+to negotiate at the present moment does
+not prevent the Consul from renewing his overtures;
+but are they renewed for the purpose of
+general pacification? Though he had hinted
+at general peace in the terms of his first note;
+though we had shown by our answer that we
+deemed negotiation, even for general peace, at
+this moment inadmissible; though we added
+that, even at any future period, we would treat
+only in conjunction with our allies, what was
+the proposal contained in his last note? To
+treat for a separate peace between Great Britain
+and France.</p>
+
+<p>Such was the second attempt to effect <em>general
+pacification</em>—a proposal for a <em>separate</em> treaty
+with Great Britain. What had been the first?
+The conclusion of a separate treaty with Austria;
+and there are two anecdotes connected
+with the conclusion of this treaty, which are<span class="pagenum" id="Page_65">65</span>
+sufficient to illustrate the disposition of this
+pacificator of Europe. This very treaty of
+Campo Formio was ostentatiously professed to
+be concluded with the Emperor for the purpose
+of enabling Bonaparte to take the command
+of the army of England, and to dictate
+a separate peace with this country on the banks
+of the Thames. But there is this additional
+circumstance, singular beyond all conception,
+considering that we are now referred to the
+treaty of Campo Formio as a proof of the personal
+disposition of the Consul to general peace.
+He sent his two confidential and chosen friends,
+Berthier and Monge, charged to communicate
+to the Directory this treaty of Campo Formio;
+to announce to them that one enemy was
+humbled, that the war with Austria was terminated,
+and, therefore, that now was the moment
+to prosecute their operations against this country;
+they used on this occasion the memorable
+words: “<em>The kingdom of Great Britain and the
+French Republic can not exist together.</em>”<a id="FNanchor_14" href="#Footnote_14" class="fnanchor">14</a> This,
+I say, was the solemn declaration of the deputies
+and embassadors of Bonaparte himself,
+offering to the Directory the first-fruits of this
+first attempt at general pacification.</p>
+
+<p>So much for his disposition toward general<span class="pagenum" id="Page_66">66</span>
+pacification. Let us look next at the part he
+has taken in the different stages of the French
+Revolution, and let us then judge whether we
+are to look to him as the security against revolutionary
+principles. Let us determine what
+reliance we can place on his engagements with
+other countries, when we see how he has observed
+his engagements to his own. When the
+Constitution of the third year was established
+under Barras, that Constitution was imposed by
+the arms of Bonaparte, then commanding the
+army of the triumvirate in Paris. To that
+Constitution he then swore fidelity. How
+often he has repeated the same oath, I know
+not, but twice, at least, we know that he has
+not only repeated it himself, but tendered it to
+others, under circumstances too striking not to
+be stated.</p>
+
+<p>Sir, the House cannot have forgotten the
+Revolution of the 4th of September, which
+produced the dismissal of Lord Malmesbury
+from Lisle. How was that revolution procured?
+It was procured chiefly by the promise of
+Bonaparte, in the name of his army, decidedly
+to support the Directory in those measures
+which led to the infringement and violation of
+every thing that the authors of the Constitution<span class="pagenum" id="Page_67">67</span>
+of 1795, or its adherents, could consider as fundamental,
+and which established a system of
+despotism inferior only to that now realized in
+his own person. Immediately before this event,
+in the midst of the desolation and bloodshed of
+Italy he had received the sacred present of new
+banners from the Directory; he delivered
+them to his army with this exhortation: “Let
+us swear, fellow-soldiers, by the names of the
+patriots who have died by our side, eternal
+hatred to the enemies of the Constitution of
+the third year,”—that very Constitution which
+he soon after enabled the Directory to violate,
+and which at the head of his grenadiers he
+has now finally destroyed. Sir, that oath was
+again renewed, in the midst of that very scene
+to which I have last referred; the oath of
+fidelity to the Constitution of the third year
+was administered to all the members of the
+Assembly then sitting, under the terror of the
+bayonet, as the solemn preparation for the business
+of the day; and the morning was ushered
+in with swearing attachment to the Constitution,
+that the evening might close with its destruction.</p>
+
+<p>If we carry our views out of France, and look
+at the dreadful catalogue of all the breaches of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_68">68</span>
+treaty, all the acts of perfidy at which I have
+only glanced, and which are precisely commensurate
+with the number of treaties which the
+Republic has made (for I have sought in vain
+for any one which it has made and which it has
+not broken); if we trace the history of them all
+from the beginning of the Revolution to the
+present time, or if we select those which have
+been accompanied by the most atrocious cruelty,
+and marked the most strongly with the
+characteristic features of the Revolution, the
+name of Bonaparte will be found allied to more
+of them than that of any other that can be
+handed down in the history of the crimes and
+miseries of the last ten years. His name will
+be recorded with the horrors committed in
+Italy, in the memorable campaign of 1796 and
+1797, in the Milanese, in Genoa, in Modena, in
+Tuscany, in Rome, and in Venice.</p>
+
+<p>His entrance into Lombardy was announced
+by a solemn proclamation, issued on the 27th
+of April, 1796, which terminated with these
+words: “Nations of Italy! the French Army
+is come to break your chains; the French are
+the friends of the people in every country;
+your religion, your property, your customs shall
+be respected.” This was followed by a second<span class="pagenum" id="Page_69">69</span>
+proclamation, dated from Milan, 20th of May,
+and signed “<em>Bonaparte</em>,” in these terms: “Respect
+for property and personal security;
+respect for the religion of countries—these
+are the sentiments of the government of the
+French Republic and of the army of Italy.
+The French, victorious, consider the nations of
+Lombardy as their brothers.” In testimony of
+this fraternity, and to fulfil the solemn pledge
+of respecting property, this very proclamation
+imposed on the Milanese a provisional contribution
+to the amount of twenty millions of
+livres, or near one million sterling, and successive
+exactions were afterward levied on that
+single state to the amount, in the whole, of
+near six millions sterling. The regard to religion
+and to the customs of the country was
+manifested with the same scrupulous fidelity.
+The churches were given up to indiscriminate
+plunder. Every religious and charitable fund,
+every public treasure, was confiscated. The
+country was made the scene of every species of
+disorder and rapine. The priests, the established
+form of worship, all the objects of religious
+reverence, were openly insulted by the
+French troops; at Pavia, particularly, the tomb
+of St. Augustin, which the inhabitants were accustomed<span class="pagenum" id="Page_70">70</span>
+to view with peculiar veneration, was
+mutilated and defaced; this last provocation
+having roused the resentment of the people
+they flew to arms, surrounded the French garrison
+and took them prisoners, but carefully
+abstained from offering any violence to a single
+soldier. In revenge for this conduct, Bonaparte,
+then on his march to the Mincio, suddenly
+returned, collected his troops, and carried the
+extremity of military execution over the country.
+He burned the town of Benasco, and
+massacred eight hundred of its inhabitants; he
+marched to Pavia, took it by storm, and delivered
+it over to general plunder, and published,
+at the same moment, a proclamation of
+the 26th of May, ordering his troops to shoot
+all those who had not laid down their arms and
+taken an oath of obedience, and to burn every
+village where the tocsin should be sounded,
+and to put its inhabitants to death.</p>
+
+<p>The transactions with Modena were on a
+smaller scale, but in the same character. Bonaparte
+began by signing a treaty, by which the
+Duke of Modena was to pay twelve millions of
+livres, and neutrality was promised him in return;
+this was soon followed by the personal
+arrest of the Duke, and by a fresh extortion of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_71">71</span>
+two hundred thousand sequins. After this he
+was permitted, on the payment of a farther sum,
+to sign another treaty, called a <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">convention de
+sureté</i>, which of course was only the prelude to
+the repetition of similar exactions.</p>
+
+<p>Nearly at the same period, in violation of the
+rights of neutrality and of the treaty which had
+been concluded between the French Republic
+and the Grand Duke of Tuscany in the preceding
+year, and in breach of a positive promise
+given only a few days before, the French army
+forcibly took possession of Leghorn, for the
+purpose of seizing the British property which
+was deposited there and confiscating it as a
+prize; and shortly after, when Bonaparte agreed
+to evacuate Leghorn, in return for the evacuation
+of the island of Elba, which was in possession
+of the British troops, he insisted upon a
+separate article, by which, in addition to the
+plunder before obtained, by the infraction of
+the law of nations, it was stipulated that the
+Grand Duke should pay the expense which
+the French had incurred by this invasion of his
+territory.</p>
+
+<p>In the proceedings toward Genoa we shall
+find not only a continuance of the same system
+of extortion and plunder, in violation of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_72">72</span>
+solemn pledge contained in the proclamations
+already referred to, but a striking instance of
+the revolutionary means employed for the destruction
+of independent governments. A
+French minister was at that time resident at
+Genoa, which was acknowledged by France to
+be in a state of neutrality and friendship; in
+breach of this neutrality Bonaparte began, in
+the year 1796, with the demand of a loan. He
+afterward, from the month of September, required
+and enforced the payment of a monthly
+subsidy, to the amount which he thought
+proper to stipulate. These exactions were accompanied
+by repeated assurances and protestations
+of friendship; they were followed, in
+May, 1797, by a conspiracy against the government,
+fomented by the emissaries of the French
+embassy, and conducted by the partisans of
+France, encouraged and afterward protected
+by the French minister. The conspirators
+failed in their first attempt. Overpowered by
+the courage and voluntary exertions of the inhabitants,
+their force was dispersed, and many
+of their number were arrested. Bonaparte instantly
+considered the defeat of the conspirators
+as an act of aggression against the French Republic;
+he despatched an aid-de-camp with an<span class="pagenum" id="Page_73">73</span>
+order to the Senate of this independent State;
+first, to release all the French who were detained;
+secondly, to punish those who had arrested
+them; thirdly, to declare that <em>they had
+no share in the insurrection</em>; and fourthly, to
+disarm the people. Several French prisoners
+were immediately released, and a proclamation
+was preparing to disarm the inhabitants, when,
+by a second note, Bonaparte required the arrest
+of the three inquisitors of state, and immediate
+alterations in the Constitution. He accompanied
+this with an order to the French minister
+to quit Genoa, if his commands were not
+immediately carried into execution; at the same
+moment his troops entered the territory of the
+Republic; and shortly after, the councils, intimidated
+and overpowered, abdicated their functions.
+Three deputies were then sent to Bonaparte
+to receive from him a new Constitution.
+On the 6th of June, after the conferences at
+Montebello, he signed a convention, or rather
+issued a decree, by which he fixed the new
+form of their government; he himself named
+provisionally all the members who were to
+compose it, and he required the payment of
+seven millions of livres as the price of the subversion
+of their Constitution and their independence.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_74">74</span>
+These transactions require but one
+short comment. It is to be found in the official
+account given of them at Paris; which is in
+these memorable words: “General Bonaparte
+has pursued the only line of conduct which
+could be allowed in the representative of a nation
+which has supported the war only to procure
+the solemn acknowledgment of the right
+of nations to change the form of their government.
+He contributed nothing toward the
+revolution of Genoa, but he seized the first moment
+to acknowledge the new government, as
+soon as he saw that it was the result of the
+wishes of the people.”</p>
+
+<p>It is unnecessary to dwell on the wanton attacks
+against Rome, under the direction of
+Bonaparte himself, in the year 1796, and in the
+beginning of 1797, which terminated first by
+the treaty of Tolentino concluded by Bonaparte,
+in which, by enormous sacrifices, the
+Pope was allowed to purchase the acknowledgment
+of his authority as a sovereign prince;
+and secondly, by the violation of that very
+treaty, and the subversion of the papal authority
+by Joseph Bonaparte, the brother and the
+agent of the general, and the minister of the
+French Republic to the Holy See. A transaction<span class="pagenum" id="Page_75">75</span>
+accompanied by outrages and insults
+toward the pious and venerable Pontiff, in spite
+of the sanctity of his age and the unsullied
+purity of his character, which even to a Protestant
+seem hardly short of the guilt of sacrilege.</p>
+
+<p>But of all the disgusting and tragical scenes
+which took place in Italy in the course of the
+period I am describing, those which passed at
+Venice are perhaps the most striking and the
+most characteristic. In May, 1796, the French
+army, under Bonaparte, in the full tide of its
+success against the Austrians, first approached
+the territories of this Republic, which from the
+commencement of the war had observed a rigid
+neutrality. Their entrance on these territories
+was, as usual, accompanied by a solemn proclamation
+in the name of their general:</p>
+
+<blockquote>
+<p class="center">BONAPARTE TO THE REPUBLIC OF VENICE.</p>
+
+<p>“It is to deliver the finest country in Europe <em>from the iron
+yoke of the proud house of Austria</em>, that the French army has
+braved obstacles the most difficult to surmount. Victory in
+union with justice has crowned its efforts. The wreck of the enemy’s
+army has retired behind the Mincio. The French army,
+in order to follow them, passes over the territory of the Republic
+of Venice; but it will never forget that ancient friendship
+unites the two republics. Religion, government, customs,
+and property shall be respected. That the people may
+be without apprehension, the most severe discipline shall be<span class="pagenum" id="Page_76">76</span>
+maintained. All that may be provided for the army shall be
+faithfully paid for in money. The general-in-chief engages
+the officers of the Republic of Venice, the magistrates, and the
+priests, to make known these sentiments to the people, in order
+that confidence may cement that friendship which has so long
+united the two nations. Faithful in the path of honor as in
+that of victory, the French soldier is terrible only to the enemies
+of his liberty and his government.</p>
+
+<p class="sigright">“<span class="smcap">Bonaparte.</span>”</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>This proclamation was followed by exactions
+similar to those which were practised against
+Genoa, by the renewal of similar professions of
+friendship, and the use of similar means to excite
+insurrection. At length, in the spring of
+1797, occasion was taken, from disturbances
+thus excited, to forge in the name of the
+Venetian Government, a proclamation hostile
+to France, and this proceeding was made the
+ground for military execution against the
+country, and for effecting by force the subversion
+of its ancient government and the establishment
+of the democratic forms of the French
+Revolution. This revolution was sealed by a
+treaty, signed in May, 1797, between Bonaparte
+and commissioners appointed on the part of the
+new and revolutionary government of Venice.
+By the second and third secret articles of this
+treaty, Venice agreed to give as a ransom, to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_77">77</span>
+secure itself against all further exactions or demands,
+the sum of three millions of livres in
+money, the value of three millions more in
+articles of naval supply, and three ships of the
+line; and it received in return the assurances of
+the friendship and support of the French Republic.
+Immediately after the signature of this
+treaty, the arsenal, the library, and the palace
+of St. Marc were ransacked and plundered, and
+heavy additional contributions were imposed
+upon its inhabitants. And, in not more than
+four months afterward, this very Republic of
+Venice, united by alliance to France, the
+creature of Bonaparte himself, from whom it
+had received the present of French liberty, was
+by the same Bonaparte transferred, under the
+treaty of Campo Formio, to “<em>that iron yoke of
+the proud house of Austria</em>,” to deliver it from
+which he had represented in his first proclamation
+to be the great object of all his operations.</p>
+
+<p>Sir, all this is followed by the memorable expedition
+into Egypt, which I mention, not
+merely because it forms a principal article in
+the catalogue of those acts of violence and perfidy
+in which Bonaparte has been engaged; not
+merely because it was an enterprise peculiarly
+his own, of which he was himself the planner,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_78">78</span>
+the executor, and the betrayer; but chiefly because
+when from thence he retires to a different
+scene, to take possession of a new throne, from
+which he is to speak upon an equality with the
+kings and governors of Europe, he leaves behind
+him, at the moment of his departure, a
+specimen, which cannot be mistaken, of his
+principles of negotiation. The intercepted correspondence
+which has been alluded to in this
+debate, seems to afford the strongest ground to
+believe that his offers to the Turkish Government
+to evacuate Egypt were made solely with
+a view to gain time; that the ratification of any
+treaty on this subject was to be delayed with
+the view of finally eluding its performance, if
+any change of circumstances favorable to the
+French should occur in the interval. But whatever
+gentlemen may think of the intention with
+which these offers were made, there will at least
+be no question with respect to the credit due to
+those professions by which he endeavored to
+prove in Egypt his pacific dispositions. He expressly
+enjoins his successor strongly and steadily
+to insist, in all his intercourse with the
+Turks, that he came to Egypt with no hostile
+design, and that he never meant to keep possession
+of the country; while, on the opposite<span class="pagenum" id="Page_79">79</span>
+page of the same instructions, he states in the
+most unequivocal manner his regret at the discomfiture
+of his favorite project of colonizing
+Egypt, and of maintaining it as a territorial acquisition.
+Now, sir, if in any note addressed to
+the Grand Vizier or the Sultan, Bonaparte had
+claimed credit for the sincerity of his professions,
+that he came to Egypt with no view hostile
+to Turkey, and solely for the purpose of
+molesting the British interests, is there any one
+argument now used to induce us to believe his
+present professions to us, which might not have
+been equally urged on that occasion? Would
+not those professions have been equally supported
+by solemn asseveration, by the same reference
+which is now made to personal character,
+with this single difference, that they would have
+then had one instance less of hypocrisy and
+falsehood, which we have since had occasion to
+trace in this very transaction?</p>
+
+<p>It is unnecessary to say more with respect to
+the credit due to his professions, or the reliance
+to be placed on his general character. But it
+will, perhaps, be argued that whatever may be
+his character, or whatever has been his past conduct,
+he has now an interest in making and
+observing peace. That he has an interest in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_80">80</span>
+making peace is at best but a doubtful proposition,
+and that he has an interest in preserving
+it is still more uncertain. That it is his interest
+to negotiate, I do not indeed deny. It is his
+interest, above all, to engage this country in
+separate negotiation, in order to loosen and dissolve
+the whole system of the confederacy on
+the continent, to palsy at once the arms of
+Russia, or of Austria, or of any other country
+that might look to you for support; and then
+either to break off his separate treaty, or, if he
+should have concluded it, to apply the lesson
+which is taught in his school of policy in Egypt,
+and to revive at his pleasure those claims of indemnification
+which <em>may have been reserved to
+some happier period</em>.</p>
+
+<p>This is precisely the interest which he has in
+negotiation. But on what grounds are we to
+be convinced that he has an interest in concluding
+and observing a solid and permanent pacification?
+Under all the circumstances of his
+personal character, and his newly acquired
+power, what other security has he for retaining
+that power but the sword? His hold upon
+France is the sword, and he has no other. Is
+he connected with the soil, or with the habits,
+the affections, or the prejudices of the country?<span class="pagenum" id="Page_81">81</span>
+He is a stranger, a foreigner, and a usurper.
+He unites in his own person every thing that a
+pure republican must detest; every thing that
+an enraged Jacobin has abjured; every thing
+that a sincere and faithful royalist must feel as
+an insult. If he is opposed at any time in his
+career, what is his appeal? <em>He appeals to his
+fortune</em>; in other words, to his army and his
+sword. Placing, then, his whole reliance upon
+military support, can he afford to let his military
+renown pass away, to let his laurels wither, to
+let the memory of his trophies sink in obscurity?
+Is it certain that with his army confined within
+France, and restrained from inroads upon her
+neighbors, that he can maintain, at his devotion,
+a force sufficiently numerous to support his
+power? Having no object but the possession
+of absolute dominion, no passion but military
+glory, is it to be reckoned as certain that he
+can feel such an interest in permanent peace as
+would justify us in laying down our arms,
+reducing our expense, and relinquishing our
+means of security, on the faith of his engagements?
+Do we believe that, after the conclusion
+of peace, he would not still sigh over the
+lost trophies of Egypt, wrested from him by
+the celebrated victory of Aboukir, and the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_82">82</span>
+brilliant exertions of that heroic band of British
+seamen, whose influence and example rendered
+the Turkish troops invincible at Acre? Can he
+forget that the effect of these exploits enabled
+Austria and Russia, in one campaign, to recover
+from France all which she had acquired by his
+victories, to dissolve the charm which for a
+time fascinated Europe, and to show that their
+generals, contending in a just cause, could efface,
+even by their success and their military glory,
+the most dazzling triumphs of his victorious
+and desolating ambition?</p>
+
+<p>Can we believe, with these impressions on
+his mind, that if, after a year, eighteen months,
+or two years of peace had elapsed, he should
+be tempted by the appearance of fresh insurrection
+in Ireland, encouraged by renewed and
+unrestrained communication with France, and
+fomented by the fresh infusion of Jacobin
+principles; if we were at such a moment without
+a fleet to watch the ports of France, or to
+guard the coasts of Ireland, without a disposable
+army, or an embodied militia, capable of
+supplying a speedy and adequate re-enforcement,
+and that he had suddenly the means of
+transporting thither a body of twenty or thirty
+thousand French troops; can we believe that,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_83">83</span>
+at such a moment, his ambition and vindictive
+spirit would be restrained by the recollection of
+engagements or the obligation of treaty? Or if,
+in some new crisis of difficulty and danger to
+the Ottoman Empire, with no British navy in
+the Mediterranean, no confederacy formed, no
+force collected to support it, an opportunity
+should present itself for resuming the abandoned
+expedition to Egypt, for renewing the
+avowed and favorite project of conquering and
+colonizing that rich and fertile country, and of
+opening the way to wound some of the vital
+interests of England, and to plunder the treasures
+of the East, in order to fill the bankrupt
+coffers of France,—would it be the interest of
+Bonaparte, under such circumstances, or his
+principles, his moderation, his love of peace, his
+aversion to conquest, and his regard for the
+independence of other nations—would it be all
+or any of these that would secure us against an
+attempt which would leave us only the option
+of submitting without a struggle to certain loss
+and disgrace, or of renewing the contest which
+we had prematurely terminated, without allies,
+without preparation, with diminished means,
+and with increased difficulty and hazard?</p>
+
+<p>Hitherto I have spoken only of the reliance<span class="pagenum" id="Page_84">84</span>
+which we can place on the professions, the
+character, and the conduct of the present First
+Consul; but it remains to consider the stability
+of his power. The Revolution has been marked
+throughout by a rapid succession of new depositaries
+of public authority, each supplanting
+its predecessor. What grounds have we to believe
+that this new usurpation, more odious and
+more undisguised than all that preceded it, will
+be more durable? Is it that we rely on the
+particular provisions contained in the code of
+the pretended Constitution, which was proclaimed
+as accepted by the French people as
+soon as the garrison of Paris declared their determination
+to exterminate all its enemies, and
+before any of its articles could even be known
+to half the country, whose consent was required
+for its establishment?</p>
+
+<p>I will not pretend to inquire deeply into the
+nature and effects of a Constitution which can
+hardly be regarded but as a farce and a mockery.
+If, however, it could be supposed that its
+provisions were to have any effect, it seems
+equally adapted to two purposes: that of giving
+to its founder, for a time, an absolute and uncontrolled
+authority; and that of laying the certain
+foundation of disunion and discord, which,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_85">85</span>
+if they once prevail, must render the exercise
+of all the authority under the Constitution impossible,
+and leave no appeal but to the sword.</p>
+
+<p>Is, then, military despotism that which we
+are accustomed to consider as a stable form of
+government? In all ages of the world it has
+been attended with the least stability to the
+persons who exercised it, and with the most
+rapid succession of changes and revolutions.
+In the outset of the French Revolution, its
+advocates boasted that it furnished a security
+forever, not to France only, but to all countries
+in the world, against military despotism; that
+the force of standing armies was vain and delusive;
+that no artificial power could resist
+public opinion; and that it was upon the foundation
+of public opinion alone that any government
+could stand. I believe that in this instance,
+as in every other, the progress of the
+French Revolution has belied its professions;
+but, so far from its being a proof of the prevalence
+of public opinion against military force, it
+is, instead of the proof, the strongest exception
+from that doctrine which appears in the history
+of the world. Through all the stages of the
+Revolution military force has governed, and
+public opinion has scarcely been heard. But<span class="pagenum" id="Page_86">86</span>
+still I consider this as only an exception from a
+general truth. I still believe that in every civilized
+country, not enslaved by a Jacobin faction,
+public opinion is the only sure support of any
+government. I believe this with the more satisfaction,
+from a conviction that, if this contest
+is happily terminated, the established governments
+of Europe will stand upon that rock
+firmer than ever; and, whatever may be the
+defects of any particular Constitution, those
+who live under it will prefer its continuance to
+the experiment of changes which may plunge
+them in the unfathomable abyss of revolution,
+or extricate them from it only to expose them
+to the terrors of military despotism. And to
+apply this to France, I see no reason to believe
+that the present usurpation will be more permanent
+than any other military despotism
+which has been established by the same means,
+and with the same defiance of public opinion.</p>
+
+<p>What, then, is the inference I draw from all
+that I have now stated? Is it that we will in
+<em>no case</em> treat with Bonaparte? I say no such
+thing. But I say, as has been said in the answer
+returned to the French note, that we
+ought to wait for “<em>experience and the evidence of
+facts</em>” before we are convinced that such a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_87">87</span>
+treaty is admissible. The circumstances I have
+stated would well justify us if we should be
+slow in being convinced; but on a question of
+peace and war, every thing depends upon degree
+and upon comparison. If, on the one
+hand, there should be an appearance that the
+policy of France is at length guided by different
+maxims from those which have hitherto
+prevailed; if we should hereafter see signs of
+stability in the government which are not
+now to be traced; if the progress of the allied
+army should not call forth such a spirit in
+France as to make it probable that the act of
+the country itself will destroy the system now
+prevailing; if the danger, the difficulty, the risk
+of continuing the contest should increase, while
+the hope of complete ultimate success should
+be diminished; all these, in their due place, are
+considerations which, with myself and, I can
+answer for it, with every one of my colleagues,
+will have their just weight. But at present
+these considerations all operate one way; at
+present there is nothing from which we can
+presage a favorable disposition to change in
+the French councils. There is the greatest
+reason to rely on powerful co-operation from
+our allies; there are the strongest marks of a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_88">88</span>
+disposition in the interior of France to active
+resistance against this new tyranny; and there
+is every ground to believe, on reviewing our
+situation and that of the enemy, that, if we are
+ultimately disappointed of that complete success
+which we are at present entitled to hope,
+the continuance of the contest, instead of making
+our situation comparatively worse, will have
+made it comparatively better.</p>
+
+<p>If, then, I am asked how long are we to persevere
+in the war, I can only say that no period
+can be accurately assigned. Considering the
+importance of obtaining complete security for
+the objects for which we contend, we ought not
+to be discouraged too soon; but, on the contrary,
+considering the importance of not impairing
+and exhausting the radical strength of the
+country, there are limits beyond which we
+ought not to persist, and which we can determine
+only by estimating and comparing fairly,
+from time to time, the degree of security to be
+obtained by treaty, and the risk and disadvantage
+of continuing the contest.</p>
+
+<p>But, sir, there are some gentlemen in the
+House who seem to consider it already certain
+that the ultimate success to which I am looking
+is unattainable. They suppose us contending<span class="pagenum" id="Page_89">89</span>
+only for the restoration of the French monarchy,
+which they believe to be impracticable,
+and deny to be desirable for this country. We
+have been asked in the course of this debate:
+Do you think you can impose monarchy upon
+France, against the will of the nation? I never
+thought it, I never hoped it, I never wished it.
+I have thought, I have hoped, I have wished,
+that the time might come when the effect of
+the arms of the allies might so far overpower
+the military force which keeps France in bondage,
+as to give vent and scope to the thoughts
+and actions of its inhabitants. We have, indeed,
+already seen abundant proof of what is
+the disposition of a large part of the country;
+we have seen almost through the whole of the
+Revolution the western provinces of France
+deluged with the blood of its inhabitants, obstinately
+contending for their ancient laws and
+religion. We have recently seen, in the revival
+of that war, fresh proof of the zeal which still
+animates those countries in the same cause.
+These efforts (I state it distinctly, and there are
+those near me who can bear witness to the truth
+of the assertion) were not produced by any
+instigation from hence; they were the effects
+of a rooted sentiment prevailing through all<span class="pagenum" id="Page_90">90</span>
+those provinces forced into action by the “law
+of the hostages” and the other tyrannical
+measures of the Directory, at the moment when
+we were endeavoring to discourage so hazardous
+an enterprise. If, under such circumstances,
+we find them giving proofs of their unalterable
+perseverance in their principles; if there is
+every reason to believe that the same disposition
+prevails in many other extensive provinces
+of France; if every party appears at length
+equally wearied and disappointed with all the
+successive changes which the Revolution has
+produced; if the question is no longer between
+monarchy, and even the pretence and name of
+liberty, but between the ancient line of hereditary
+princes on the one hand, and a military
+tyrant, a foreign usurper, on the other; if the
+armies of that usurper are likely to find sufficient
+occupation on the frontiers, and to be
+forced at length to leave the interior of the
+country at liberty to manifest its real feeling
+and disposition; what reason have we to anticipate,
+that the restoration of monarchy under
+such circumstances is impracticable?</p>
+
+<p>In the exhausted and impoverished state
+of France, it seems for a time impossible that
+any system but that of robbery and confiscation,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_91">91</span>
+any thing but the continued torture, which
+can be applied only by the engines of the Revolution,
+can extort from its ruined inhabitants
+more than the means of supporting in peace
+the yearly expenditure of its government. Suppose,
+then, the heir of the house of Bourbon
+reinstated on the throne, he will have sufficient
+occupation in endeavoring, if possible, to heal
+the wounds, and gradually to repair the losses
+of ten years of civil convulsion; to reanimate
+the drooping commerce, to rekindle the industry,
+to replace the capital, and to revive the
+manufactures of the country. Under such circumstances,
+there must probably be a considerable
+interval before such a monarch, whatever
+may be his views, can possess the power which
+can make him formidable to Europe; but while
+the system of the Revolution continues, the
+case is quite different. It is true, indeed, that
+even the gigantic and unnatural means by which
+that revolution has been supported are so far
+impaired; the influence of its principles and
+the terror of its arms so far weakened; and its
+power of action so much contracted and circumscribed,
+that against the embodied force of
+Europe, prosecuting a vigorous war, we may
+justly hope that the remnant and wreck of this<span class="pagenum" id="Page_92">92</span>
+system cannot long oppose an effectual resistance.</p>
+
+<p>But, supposing the confederacy of Europe
+prematurely dissolved; supposing our armies
+disbanded, our fleets laid up in our harbors, our
+exertions relaxed, and our means of precaution
+and defence relinquished; do we believe that
+the Revolutionary power, with this rest and
+breathing-time given it to recover from the
+pressure under which it is now sinking, possessing
+still the means of calling suddenly and violently
+into action whatever is the remaining
+physical force of France, under the guidance of
+military despotism; do we believe that this
+revolutionary power, the terror of which is now
+beginning to vanish, will not again prove formidable
+to Europe? Can we forget that in the
+ten years in which that power has subsisted, it
+has brought more misery on surrounding nations,
+and produced more acts of aggression,
+cruelty, perfidy, and enormous ambition than
+can be traced in the history of France for the
+centuries which have elapsed since the foundation
+of its monarchy, including all the wars
+which, in the course of that period, have been
+waged by any of those sovereigns, whose projects
+of aggrandizement and violations of treaty<span class="pagenum" id="Page_93">93</span>
+afford a constant theme of general reproach
+against the ancient government of France?
+And if not, can we hesitate whether we have
+the best prospect of permanent peace, the best
+security for the independence and safety of
+Europe, from the restoration of the lawful government,
+or from the continuance of revolutionary
+power in the hands of Bonaparte?</p>
+
+<p>In compromise and treaty with such a power
+placed in such hands as now exercise it, and
+retaining the same means of annoyance which
+it now possesses, I see little hope of permanent
+security. I see no possibility at this moment
+of such a peace as would justify that liberal
+intercourse which is the essence of real amity;
+no chance of terminating the expenses or the
+anxieties of war, or of restoring to us any of
+the advantages of established tranquillity, and,
+as a sincere lover of peace, I cannot be content
+with its nominal attainment. I must be desirous
+of pursuing that system which promises to
+attain, in the end, the permanent enjoyment of
+its solid and substantial blessings for this country
+and for Europe. As a sincere lover of
+peace, I will not sacrifice it by grasping at the
+shadow when the reality is not substantially
+within my reach.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_94">94</span>
+Cur igitur pacem nolo? Quia infida est,
+quia periculosa, quia esse non potest.<a id="FNanchor_15" href="#Footnote_15" class="fnanchor">15</a></p>
+
+<p>When we consider the resources and the
+spirit of the country, can any man doubt that if
+adequate security is not now to be obtained by
+treaty, we have the means of prosecuting the
+contest without material difficulty or danger,
+and with a reasonable prospect of completely
+attaining our object? I will not dwell on the
+improved state of public credit; on the continually
+increasing amount, in spite of extraordinary
+temporary burdens, of our permanent
+revenue; on the yearly accession of wealth to an
+extent unprecedented even in the most flourishing
+times of peace, which we are deriving, in
+the midst of war, from our extended and
+flourishing commerce; on the progressive improvement
+and growth of our manufactures;
+on the proofs which we see on all sides of
+the uninterrupted accumulation of productive
+capital; and on the active exertion of every
+branch of national industry which can tend to
+support and augment the population, the riches,
+and the power of the country.</p>
+
+<p>As little need I recall the attention of the
+House to the additional means of action which
+we have derived from the great augmentation<span class="pagenum" id="Page_95">95</span>
+of our disposable military force, the continued
+triumphs of our powerful and victorious navy,
+and the events which, in the course of the last
+two years, have raised the military ardor and
+military glory of the country to a height unexampled
+in any period of our history.</p>
+
+<p>In addition to these grounds of reliance on
+our own strength and exertions, we have seen
+the consummate skill and valor of the arms of
+our allies proved by that series of unexampled
+successes in the course of the last campaign, and
+we have every reason to expect a co-operation
+on the continent, even to a greater extent, in
+the course of the present year. If we compare
+this view of our own situation with every thing
+we can observe of the state and condition of
+our enemy—if we can trace him laboring under
+equal difficulty in finding men to recruit his
+army, or money to pay it—if we know that in
+the course of the last year the most rigorous
+efforts of military conscription were scarcely
+sufficient to replace to the French armies, at
+the end of the campaign, the numbers which
+they had lost in the course of it—if we have
+seen that that force, then in possession of
+advantages which it has since lost, was unable
+to contend with the efforts of the combined<span class="pagenum" id="Page_96">96</span>
+armies—if we know that, even while supported
+by the plunder of all the countries which they
+had overrun, those armies were reduced, by
+the confession of their commanders, to the extremity
+of distress, and destitute not only of
+the principal articles of military supply, but
+almost of the necessaries of life—if we see them
+now driven back within their own frontiers, and
+confined within a country whose own resources
+have long since been proclaimed by their successive
+governments to be unequal either to
+paying or maintaining them—if we observe that
+since the last revolution no one substantial or effectual
+measure has been adopted to remedy the
+intolerable disorder of their finances, and to supply
+the deficiency of their credit and resources—if
+we see through large and populous districts
+of France, either open war levied against
+the present usurpation, or evident marks of disunion
+and distraction, which the first occasion
+may call forth into a flame—if, I say, sir, this
+comparison be just, I feel myself authorized to
+conclude from it, not that we are entitled to
+consider ourselves certain of ultimate success,
+not that we are to suppose ourselves exempted
+from the unforeseen vicissitudes of war, but
+that, considering the value of the object for<span class="pagenum" id="Page_97">97</span>
+which we are contending, the means for supporting
+the contest, and the probable course of human
+events, we should be inexcusable, if at
+this moment we were to relinquish the struggle
+on any grounds short of entire and complete
+security; that from perseverance in our efforts
+under such circumstances, we have the fairest
+reason to expect the full attainment of our
+object; but that at all events, even if we are
+disappointed in our more sanguine hopes, we
+are more likely to gain than to lose by the continuation
+of the contest; that every month to
+which it is continued, even if it should not in its
+effects lead to the final destruction of the Jacobin
+system, must tend so far to weaken and exhaust
+it, as to give us at least a greater comparative
+security in any termination of the war; that, on
+all these grounds, this is not the moment at which
+it is consistent with our interest or our duty to
+listen to any proposals of negotiation with the
+present ruler of France; but that we are not,
+therefore, pledged to any <em>unalterable</em> determination
+as to our future conduct; that in this we
+must be regulated by the course of events; and
+that it will be the duty of his Majesty’s ministers
+from time to time to adapt their measures to
+any variation of circumstances, to consider how<span class="pagenum" id="Page_98">98</span>
+far the effects of the military operations of
+the allies or of the internal disposition of
+France correspond with our present expectations;
+and, on a view of the whole, to compare
+the difficulties or risks which may arise in the
+prosecution of the contest with the prospect of
+ultimate success, or of the degree of advantage
+to be derived from its farther continuance, and
+to be governed by the result of all these considerations
+in the opinion and advice which they
+may offer to their sovereign.</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_99">99</span></p>
+
+<div class="chapter">
+<h2 id="CHARLES_JAMES_FOX">CHARLES JAMES FOX.</h2>
+</div>
+
+<p>Mr. Fox, one of the most celebrated of English
+orators, was the second son of the first
+Lord Holland, and was born in 1749. His
+father, though a man of dissolute habits, was
+an influential member of Parliament, indeed for
+many years was regarded as the most formidable
+opponent of the elder Pitt in the House of
+Commons. The elder Fox received, as a mark
+of royal favor, the most lucrative office in the
+gift of the Government, that of Paymaster of
+the Forces; and he administered the duties of
+this position so much to the satisfaction of the
+king, that he was soon advanced to the peerage.
+His great wealth and his marriage with
+Lady Georgiana Lennox, a very accomplished
+daughter of the Duke of Richmond, made
+Holland House what it continued to be for
+three generations, the favorite resort of whatever<span class="pagenum" id="Page_100">100</span>
+of culture and fashion allied itself to the
+cause of its own political party.</p>
+
+<p>It was in the atmosphere of this society that
+the lot of young Fox was cast. The eldest
+son was afflicted with a nervous disease which
+impaired his faculties, and consequently all the
+hopes of the house were concentrated upon
+Charles. The father’s ambition for his son was
+twofold: He desired that his boy should become
+at once a great orator and a leader in the
+fashionable and dissolute society of the day.
+In the one interest he furnished him with the
+most helpful and inspiring instruction; in the
+other he personally introduced him to the most
+famous gambling-houses in England and on the
+continent. The boy profited by this instruction.
+He made extraordinary progress. His
+biographer tells us that before he was sixteen
+he was so thoroughly acquainted with Greek
+and Latin, that he read them as he read English,
+and took up Demosthenes and Cicero as
+he took up Chatham and Burke. The father
+paid his gambling bills with as much cheerfulness<span class="pagenum" id="Page_101">101</span>
+as he heard him recite an ode of Horace
+or the funeral oration of Pericles. At the
+university the young scholar furnished his
+mind with abundant stores of literature and
+history, but he paid no attention to those great
+economic questions which, under the influence
+of Adam Smith were then beginning to play so
+large a part in national affairs. Even late in
+life he confessed that he had never read the
+“Wealth of Nations.”</p>
+
+<p>Leaving Oxford at seventeen, Fox went to
+the continent, where the prodigal liberality of
+his father encouraged him in a life of unbounded
+indulgence. He not only lost enormous
+sums of ready money, but his father was
+obliged to pay debts amounting to a hundred
+thousand pounds. To distract the boy’s attention
+from further excesses, Lord Holland resolved
+to put him into the House of Commons.
+The system of pocket boroughs made the opportunity
+easy; and, as no troublesome questions
+were asked, the young profligate took his seat
+in May of 1768, a year and eight months before
+he arrived at the eligible age.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_102">102</span>
+By education and early political alliance Fox
+was a Tory, and it is not singular therefore
+that the Government of Lord North hastened
+to avail itself of his talents. In 1770 he was
+made a Junior Lord of the Admiralty, and a
+little later found a seat on the bench of the
+Treasury. But his wayward spirit would not
+brook control. He even went so far as to take
+the floor in opposition to the Prime-Minister.
+This violation of party discipline brought its
+natural result, and in 1774 Fox was contemptuously
+dismissed.</p>
+
+<p>The blow was deserved, and was even needed
+for the saving of Fox himself. His excesses
+in London and on the continent had become
+so notorious that the public were fast coming
+to regard him simply as a reckless gambler,
+whose favor and whose opposition were alike
+of no importance. It was this contempt on the
+part of the ministry and the public which stung
+him into something like reform. Though he
+did not entirely abandon his old methods, he
+devoted himself to his work in the House with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_103">103</span>
+extraordinary energy. All his ambition was
+now directed to becoming a powerful debater.
+He afterward remarked that he had literally
+gained his skill “at the expense of the House,”
+for he had sometimes tasked himself to speak
+on every question that came up, whether he
+was interested in it or not, and even whether
+he knew any thing about it or not. The result
+was that in certain important qualities of a
+public speaker, he excelled all other men of
+his time. Burke even said of him, that “by
+slow degrees he rose to be the most brilliant
+and accomplished debater the world ever saw.”</p>
+
+<p>While this process of rising “by slow degrees”
+was going on, Fox was also acquiring
+fixed ideas in regard to governmental affairs.
+The contemptuous dismissal of Lord North
+probably stimulated his natural inclinations to
+go into the opposition. As the American question
+was gradually developed, Fox found himself
+in warm sympathy with the colonial cause.
+He denied the right of the mother country to
+inflict taxation, and was the first to denounce<span class="pagenum" id="Page_104">104</span>
+the policy of the Government in the House of
+Commons. He enjoyed the friendship of the
+ablest men among the Whigs, and he resorted
+to them, especially to Burke, for every kind of
+political knowledge. Indeed, his obligations
+to that great political philosopher were such,
+that in 1791, at the time of their alienation on
+the question of England’s attitude toward the
+French Revolution, he declared in the House
+that “if he were to put all the political information
+which he had learned from books, all he
+had gained from science, and all which any
+knowledge of the world and its affairs had
+taught him, into one scale, and the improvement
+which he had derived from his right
+honorable friend’s instruction and conversation
+in the other, he should be at a loss to decide to
+which to give the preference.” Under this influence
+all his aspirations came to be devoted,
+as he once said “to widen the basis of freedom,—to
+infuse and circulate the spirit of liberty.”
+This subject it was that in one form or another
+drew forth the most inspiring strains of his
+eloquence.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_105">105</span>
+Fox’s political morality is not without one
+very dark stain. For some years he had been
+the leader of the opposition to Lord North’s
+administration. Under his repeated and powerful
+blows the great Tory ministry was obliged
+to give way. Fox had been so conspicuously
+at the head of the opposition that everybody
+looked to see him elevated to the position
+of First Minister. But the king had been
+scandalized by the irregularities of Fox’s life,
+and probably was quite willing to find an
+excuse for not calling so able a Whig into
+power. Lord Shelburne was appointed instead,
+and Fox refused to take office under him.
+But that was not all. He not only refused to
+support Shelburne, but within six months
+even formed a coalition against him with
+Lord North. Cooke, in his “History of Party,”
+characterizes his action as “a precedent which
+strikes at the foundation of political morality,
+and as a weapon in the hands of those who
+would destroy all confidence in the honesty of
+public men.” This characterization is not too<span class="pagenum" id="Page_106">106</span>
+severe; for the ability and the lofty integrity
+of Lord Shelburne were such as to forbid us to
+suppose that Fox’s action was the result of any
+other motive than that of personal pique and
+disappointment. He carried his ardent followers
+with him; and so shocked were the
+thinking men of the time, that there was a
+general outcry either of regret or of indignation.</p>
+
+<p>Lord Shelburne was of course defeated, and
+the Coalition ministry, which it was afterward
+the great work of Pitt to break, came into
+power. The popular sentiment was shown in
+the fact that, in the first election that followed,
+a hundred and sixty of Fox’s friends lost their
+seats in the House, and became, in the language
+of the day, “Fox’s Martyrs.”</p>
+
+<p>The views of Fox in regard to the French
+Revolution were so opposed to those of Burke,
+that in 1791 their intimacy and even their
+friendship were broken violently asunder. Of
+that memorable and painful incident it is not
+necessary here to speak, other than to say that
+both of the orators were wrong and both of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_107">107</span>
+them were right. Time has shown that the evils
+predicted by Burke as the result of the Revolution
+were scarcely an exaggeration of what actually
+followed; but it has also shown that Fox
+was right in continually maintaining that nations,
+however wrong may be their principles
+and methods, should be left to conduct their internal
+affairs in their own way. It was this position
+of Fox that led him to oppose the general
+attitude of England in regard to the course of
+Napoleon. In the House of Commons he was
+always listened to with pleasure; but his habits
+were such as to prevent his gaining that confidence
+of the public which otherwise he might
+easily have enjoyed.</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_108">108</span></p>
+
+<div class="chapter">
+<h2 id="CHARLES_JAMES_FOX2">CHARLES JAMES FOX.<br />
+
+<span class="subhead">ON THE REJECTION OF NAPOLEON BONAPARTE’S
+OVERTURES OF PEACE;<br />HOUSE OF COMMONS,
+FEBRUARY 3, 1800.</span></h2>
+</div>
+
+<blockquote class="end">
+
+<p>The following speech was delivered immediately after that
+of Pitt on the same subject, given above, and in answer to it.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p class="sal"><span class="smcap">Mr. Speaker:</span></p>
+
+<p>At so late an hour of the night, I am sure
+you will do me the justice to believe that I do
+not mean to go at length into the discussion of
+this great question. Exhausted as the attention
+of the House must be, and unaccustomed
+as I have been of late to attend in my place,
+nothing but a deep sense of my duty could
+have induced me to trouble you at all, and particularly
+to request your indulgence at such an
+hour.</p>
+
+<p>Sir, my honorable and learned friend [Mr.
+Erskine] has truly said, that the present is a
+new era in the war, and the right honorable
+gentleman opposite to me [Mr. Pitt] feels the
+justice of the remark; for, by travelling back to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_109">109</span>
+the commencement of the war, and referring
+again to all the topics and arguments which he
+has so often and so successfully urged upon the
+House, and by which he has drawn them on to
+the support of his measures, he is forced to
+acknowledge that, at the end of a seven years’
+conflict, we are come but to a new era in the
+war, at which he thinks it necessary only to
+press all his former arguments to induce us to
+persevere. All the topics which have so often
+misled us—all the reasoning which has so invariably
+failed—all the lofty predictions which
+have so constantly been falsified by events—all
+the hopes which have amused the sanguine, and
+all the assurances of the distress and weakness
+of the enemy which have satisfied the unthinking,
+are again enumerated and advanced as
+arguments for our continuing the war. What!
+at the end of seven years of the most burdensome
+and the most calamitous struggle in which
+this country ever was engaged, are we again to
+be amused with notions of finance, and calculations
+of the exhausted resources of the enemy,
+as a ground of confidence and of hope? Gracious
+God! were we not told five years ago
+that France was not only on the brink and in
+the jaws of ruin, but that she was actually<span class="pagenum" id="Page_110">110</span>
+sunk into the gulf of bankruptcy? Were we
+not told, as an unanswerable argument against
+treating, “that she could not hold out another
+campaign—that nothing but peace could save
+her—that she wanted only time to recruit her
+exhausted finances—that to grant her repose
+was to grant her the means of again molesting
+this country, and that we had nothing to do
+but persevere for a short time, in order to save
+ourselves forever from the consequences of her
+ambition and her Jacobinism?” What! after
+having gone on from year to year upon assurances
+like these, and after having seen the
+repeated refutations of every prediction, are we
+again to be gravely and seriously assured, that
+we have the same prospect of success on the
+<em>same identical grounds</em>? And, without any
+other argument or security, are we invited, at
+this new era of the war, to conduct it upon
+principles which, if adopted and acted upon,
+may make it eternal? If the right honorable
+gentleman shall succeed in prevailing on Parliament
+and the country to adopt the principles
+which he has advanced this night, I see no possible
+termination to the contest. No man can
+see an end to it; and upon the assurances and
+predictions which have so uniformly failed, we<span class="pagenum" id="Page_111">111</span>
+are called upon not merely to refuse all negotiations,
+but to countenance principles and views
+as distant from wisdom and justice, as they are
+in their nature wild and impracticable.</p>
+
+<p>I must lament, sir, in common with every
+genuine friend of peace, the harsh and unconciliating
+language which ministers have held to
+the French, and which they have even made
+use of in their answer to a respectful offer of a
+negotiation. Such language has ever been considered
+as extremely unwise, and has ever been
+reprobated by diplomatic men. I remember
+with pleasure the terms in which Lord Malmesbury,
+at Paris, in the year 1796, replied to expressions
+of this sort, used by M. de la Croix.
+He justly said, “that offensive and injurious
+insinuations were only calculated to throw new
+obstacles in the way of accommodation, and
+that it was not by revolting reproaches nor by
+reciprocal invective that a sincere wish to accomplish
+the great work of pacification could
+be evinced.” Nothing could be more proper
+nor more wise than this language; and such
+ought ever to be the tone and conduct of men
+intrusted with the very important task of treating
+with a hostile nation. Being a sincere friend
+to peace, I must say with Lord Malmesbury,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_112">112</span>
+that it is not by reproaches and by invective
+that we can hope for a reconciliation; and I am
+convinced, in my own mind, that I speak the
+sense of this House, and, if not of this House,
+certainly of a majority of the people of this
+country, when I lament that any unprovoked
+and unnecessary recriminations should be flung
+out, by which obstacles are put in the way of
+pacification. I believe it is the prevailing sentiment
+of the people, that we ought to abstain
+from harsh and insulting language; and in
+common with them, I must lament that both
+in the papers of Lord Grenville, and this night,
+such license has been given to invective and
+reproach.</p>
+
+<p>For the same reason, I must lament that the
+right honorable gentleman [Mr. Pitt] has
+thought proper to go at such length, and
+with such severity of minute investigation, into
+all the early circumstances of the war, which
+(whatever they were) are nothing to the present
+purpose, and ought not to influence the present
+feelings of the House. I certainly shall not
+follow him through the whole of this tedious
+detail, though I do not agree with him in many
+of his assertions. I do not know what impression
+his narrative may make on other gentlemen;<span class="pagenum" id="Page_113">113</span>
+but I will tell him fairly and candidly, he
+has not convinced me. I continue to think,
+and until I see better grounds for changing my
+opinion than any that the right honorable
+gentleman has this night produced, I shall continue
+to think, and to say, plainly and explicitly,
+“that this country was the aggressor in the
+war.” But with regard to Austria and Prussia—is
+there a man who, for one moment, can dispute
+that they were the aggressors? It will be
+vain for the right honorable gentleman to enter
+into long and plausible reasoning against the
+evidence of documents so clear, so decisive—so
+frequently, so thoroughly investigated. The
+unfortunate monarch, Louis XVI., himself, as
+well as those who were in his confidence, has
+borne decisive testimony to the fact, that between
+him and the Emperor [Leopold of Austria]
+there was an intimate correspondence
+and a perfect understanding. Do I mean by
+this that a positive treaty was entered into
+for the dismemberment of France? Certainly
+not. But no man can read the declarations
+which were made at Mantua<a id="FNanchor_16" href="#Footnote_16" class="fnanchor">16</a> as
+well as at Pilnitz, as they are given by M.
+Bertrand de Molville, without acknowledging
+that this was not merely an intention, but a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_114">114</span>
+<em>declaration</em> of an intention, on the part of the
+great powers of Germany, to interfere in the
+internal affairs of France, for the purpose of
+regulating the government against the opinion
+of the people. This, though not a plan for
+the partition of France, was, in the eye of
+reason and common-sense, an aggression against
+France. The right honorable gentleman denies
+that there was such a thing as a treaty of Pilnitz.
+Granted. But was there not a declaration
+which amounted to an act of hostile aggression?
+The two powers, the Emperor of
+Germany and the King of Prussia, made a public
+declaration that they were determined to
+employ their forces, in conjunction with those
+of the other sovereigns of Europe, “to put the
+King of France in a situation to establish, in
+perfect liberty, the foundations of a monarchical
+government equally agreeable to the rights
+of sovereigns and the welfare of the French.”
+Whenever the other princes should agree to co-operate
+with them, “<em>then, and in that case</em>, their
+majesties were determined to act promptly and
+by mutual consent, with the forces necessary to
+obtain the end proposed by all of them. In the
+meantime, they declared, that they would give
+orders for their troops to be ready for actual<span class="pagenum" id="Page_115">115</span>
+service.” Now, I would ask gentlemen to lay
+their hands upon their hearts, and say with candor
+what the true and fair construction of this
+declaration was—whether it was not a menace
+and an insult to France, since, in direct terms,
+it declared, that whenever the other powers
+should concur, they would attack France, then
+at peace with them, and then employed only in
+domestic and in internal regulations? Let us
+suppose the case to be that of Great Britain.
+Will any gentleman say that if two of the great
+powers should make a public declaration that
+they were determined to make an attack on
+this kingdom as soon as circumstances should
+favor their intention; that they only waited for
+this occasion, and that in the meantime they
+would keep their forces ready for the purpose,
+it would not be considered by the Parliament
+and people of this country as a hostile aggression?
+And is there any Englishman in existence
+who is such a friend to peace as to say
+that the nation could retain its honor and dignity
+if it should sit down under such a menace?
+I know too well what is due to the national
+character of England to believe that there
+would be two opinions on the case, if thus put
+home to our own feelings and understandings.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_116">116</span>
+We must, then, respect in others the indignation
+which such an act would excite in
+ourselves; and when we see it established on
+the most indisputable testimony, that both at
+Pilnitz and at Mantua declarations were made
+to this effect, it is idle to say that, as far as the
+Emperor and the King of Prussia were concerned,
+they were not the aggressors in the
+war.</p>
+
+<p>“Oh! but the decree of the 19th of November,
+1792.”<a id="FNanchor_17" href="#Footnote_17" class="fnanchor">17</a> That, at least, the right honorable
+gentleman says, you must allow to be an act of
+aggression, not only against England, but
+against all the sovereigns of Europe. I am not
+one of those, sir, who attach much interest to
+the general and indiscriminate provocations
+thrown out at random, like this resolution of
+the 19th of November, 1792. I do not think it
+necessary to the dignity of any people to notice
+and to apply to themselves menaces without
+particular allusion, which are always unwise in
+the power which uses them, and which it is still
+more unwise to treat with seriousness. But if
+any such idle and general provocation to nations
+is given, either in insolence or in folly, by
+any government, it is a clear first principle that
+an <em>explanation</em> is the thing which a magnanimous<span class="pagenum" id="Page_117">117</span>
+nation, feeling itself aggrieved, ought to
+demand; and if an explanation be given which
+is not satisfactory, it ought clearly and distinctly
+to say so. There should be no ambiguity, no
+reserve, on the occasion. Now, we all know,
+from documents on our table, that M. Chauvelin
+[the French minister] did give an explanation
+of this silly decree. He declared, “in the name
+of his government, that it was never meant that
+the French Government should favor insurrections;
+that the decree was applicable only to
+those people who, after having acquired their liberty
+by conquest, should demand the assistance
+of the Republic; but that France would respect
+not only the independence of England, but also
+that of her allies with whom she was not at
+war.” This was the explanation of the offensive
+decree. “But this explanation was not
+satisfactory.” Did you <em>say so</em> to M. Chauvelin?
+Did you tell him that you were not content with
+this explanation? and when you dismissed him
+afterward, on the death of the King [of France],
+did you say that this explanation was unsatisfactory?
+No. You did no such thing; and I
+contend that unless you demanded <em>further</em> explanations,
+and they were refused, you have no
+right to urge the decree of the 19th of November<span class="pagenum" id="Page_118">118</span>
+as an act of aggression. In all your conferences
+and correspondence with M. Chauvelin
+did you hold out to him <em>what terms would
+satisfy you</em>? Did you give the French the
+power or the means of settling the misunderstanding
+which that decree, or any other of the
+points at issue, had created? I maintain that
+when a nation refuses to state to another the
+thing which would satisfy her, she shows that
+she is not actuated by a desire to preserve peace
+between them; and I aver that this was the
+case here. The Scheldt, for instance. You
+now say that the navigation of the Scheldt was
+one of your causes of complaint. Did you explain
+yourself on that subject? Did you make
+it one of the grounds for the dismissal of M.
+Chauvelin? Sir, I repeat it, that <em>a nation, to
+justify itself in appealing to the last solemn resort,
+ought to prove that it has taken every possible
+means, consistent with dignity, to demand the
+reparation and redress which would be satisfactory;
+and if she refuses to explain what would
+be satisfactory, she does not do her duty, nor exonerate
+herself from the charge of being the
+aggressor</em>.</p>
+
+<p>But “France,” it seems, “then declared war
+against us; and she was the aggressor, because<span class="pagenum" id="Page_119">119</span>
+the declaration came from her.” Let us look
+at the circumstances of this transaction on both
+sides. Undoubtedly the declaration was made
+by them; but is a declaration the only thing
+which constitutes the commencement of a war?
+Do gentlemen recollect that, in consequence of
+a dispute about the commencement of war,
+respecting the capture of a number of ships, an
+article was inserted in our treaty with France,
+by which it was positively stipulated that in
+future, to prevent all disputes, the act of the
+<em>dismissal</em> of a minister from either of the two
+courts should be held and considered as tantamount
+to a declaration of war?<a id="FNanchor_18" href="#Footnote_18" class="fnanchor">18</a> I mention
+this, sir, because when we are idly employed in
+this retrospect of the origin of a war which has
+lasted so many years, instead of turning our
+eyes only to the contemplation of the means of
+putting an end to it, we seem disposed to overlook
+every thing on our own parts, and to search
+only for grounds of imputation on the enemy.
+I almost think it an insult on the House to
+detain them with this sort of examination.
+Why, sir, if France was the aggressor, as the
+right honorable gentleman says she was <em>throughout</em>,
+did not Prussia call upon us for the stipulated
+number of troops, according to the article<span class="pagenum" id="Page_120">120</span>
+of the definitive treaty of alliance subsisting
+between us, by which, in case that either of the
+contracting parties was attacked, they had a
+right to demand the stipulated aid? and the
+same thing again may be asked when we were attacked.
+The right honorable gentleman might
+here accuse himself, indeed, of reserve; but it
+unfortunately happened, that <em>at the time</em> the
+point was too clear on which side the aggression
+lay. Prussia was too sensible that the war
+could not entitle her to make the demand, and
+that it was not a case within the scope of the
+defensive treaty. This is evidence worth a
+volume of subsequent reasoning; for if, at the
+time when all the facts were present to their
+minds, they could not take advantage of existing
+treaties, and that too when the courts were
+on the most friendly terms with one another, it
+will be manifest to every thinking man that
+<em>they were sensible they were not authorized to
+make the demand</em>.</p>
+
+<p>I really, sir, cannot think it necessary to
+follow the right honorable gentleman into all
+the minute details which he has thought proper
+to give us respecting the first aggression; but
+that Austria and Prussia were the aggressors,
+not a man in any country, who has ever given<span class="pagenum" id="Page_121">121</span>
+himself the trouble to think at all on the subject,
+can doubt. Nothing could be more hostile
+than their whole proceedings. Did they not
+declare to France, that it was her internal concerns,
+not her external proceedings, which provoked
+them to confederate against her? Look
+back to the proclamations with which they set
+out.<a id="FNanchor_19" href="#Footnote_19" class="fnanchor">19</a> Read the declarations which they made
+themselves to justify their appeal to arms.
+They did not pretend to fear her ambition—her
+conquests—her troubling her neighbors; but
+they accused her of new-modelling her own
+government. They said nothing of her aggressions
+abroad. They spoke only of her clubs
+and societies at Paris.</p>
+
+<p>Sir, in all this, I am not justifying the
+French; I am not trying to absolve them from
+blame, either in their internal or external policy.
+I think, on the contrary, that their successive
+rulers have been as bad and as execrable,
+in various instances, as any of the most despotic
+and unprincipled governments that the
+world ever saw. I think it impossible, sir, that
+it should have been otherwise. It was not to
+be expected that the French, when once engaged
+in foreign wars, should not endeavor to spread
+destruction around them, and to form plans of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_122">122</span>
+aggrandizement and plunder on every side.
+Men bred in the school of the house of Bourbon
+could not be expected to act otherwise.
+They could not have lived so long under their
+ancient masters without imbibing the restless
+ambition, the perfidy, and the insatiable spirit
+of the race. They have imitated the practice
+of their great prototype, and, through their
+whole career of mischiefs and of crimes, have
+done no more than servilely trace the steps of
+their own Louis XIV. If they have overrun
+countries and ravaged them, they have done it
+upon Bourbon principles; if they have ruined
+and dethroned sovereigns, it is entirely after
+the Bourbon manner; if they have even fraternized
+with the people of foreign countries,
+and pretended to make their cause their own,
+they have only faithfully followed the Bourbon
+example. They have constantly had Louis, the
+Grand Monarque, in their eye. But it may be
+said, that this example was long ago, and that
+we ought not to refer to a period so distant.
+True, it is a remote period applied to the man,
+but not so of the principle. The principle was
+never extinct; nor has its operation been suspended
+in France, except, perhaps, for a short
+interval, during the administration of Cardinal<span class="pagenum" id="Page_123">123</span>
+Fleury; and my complaint against the Republic
+of France is, not that she has generated new
+crimes—not that she has promulgated new mischief—but
+that she has adopted and acted upon
+the principles which have been so fatal to Europe
+under the practice of the House of Bourbon.
+It is said, that wherever the French have
+gone they have introduced revolution—they
+have sought for the means of disturbing neighboring
+states, and have not been content with
+mere conquest. What is this but adopting
+the ingenious scheme of Louis XIV.? He was
+not content with merely overrunning a state.
+Whenever he came into a new territory, he
+established what he called his chamber of
+claims, a most convenient device, by which he
+inquired whether the conquered country or
+province had any dormant or disputed claims—any
+cause of complaint—any unsettled demand
+upon any other state or province—upon which
+he might wage war upon such state, thereby
+discover again ground for new devastation, and
+gratify his ambition by new acquisitions. What
+have the republicans done more atrocious, more
+Jacobinical than this? Louis went to war with
+Holland. His pretext was, that Holland had
+not treated him with sufficient <em>respect</em>. A very
+just and proper cause for war indeed!</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_124">124</span>
+This, sir, leads me to an example which I
+think seasonable, and worthy the attention of
+his Majesty’s ministers. When our Charles II.,
+as a short exception to the policy of his reign,
+made the triple alliance for the protection of
+Europe, and particularly of Holland, against
+the ambition of Louis XIV., what was the conduct
+of that great, virtuous, and most able statesman,
+M. de Witt, when the confederates came
+to deliberate upon the terms upon which they
+should treat with the French monarch? When
+it was said that he had made unprincipled conquests,
+and that he ought to be forced to surrender
+them all, what was the language of that
+great and wise man? “No,” said he; “I think
+we ought not to look back to the origin of the
+war so much as the means of putting an end to
+it. If you had united in time to prevent these
+conquests, well; but now that he has made
+them, he stands upon the ground of conquest,
+and we must agree to treat with him, not with
+reference to the origin of the conquest, but
+with regard to his present posture. He has
+those places, and some of them we must be
+content to give up as the means of peace; for
+conquest will always successfully set up its
+claims to indemnification.” Such was the language<span class="pagenum" id="Page_125">125</span>
+of this minister, who was the ornament
+of his time; and such, in my mind, ought to be
+the language of statesmen, with regard to the
+French, at this day; and the same ought to
+have been said at the formation of the confederacy.
+It was true that the French had overrun
+Savoy; but they had overrun it upon Bourbon
+principles; and, having gained this and
+other conquests before the confederacy was
+formed, they ought to have treated with her
+rather for future security than for past correction.
+States in possession, whether monarchical
+or republican, will claim indemnity in proportion
+to their success; and it will never so
+much be inquired by what right they gained
+possession as by what means they can be prevented
+from enlarging their depredations. Such
+is the safe practice of the world; and such
+ought to have been the conduct of the powers
+when the reduction of Savoy made them coalesce.
+The right honorable gentleman may
+know more of the secret particulars of their
+overrunning Savoy than I do; but certainly, as
+they have come to my knowledge, it was a most
+Bourbon-like act. A great and justly celebrated
+historian, I mean Mr. Hume, a writer certainly
+estimable in many particulars, but who is a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_126">126</span>
+childish lover of princes, talks of Louis XIV. in
+very magnificent terms. But he says of him,
+that, though he managed his enterprises with
+great skill and bravery, he was unfortunate in
+this, <em>that he never got a good and fair pretence
+for war</em>. This he reckons among his misfortunes.
+Can we say more of the republican
+French? In seizing on Savoy I think they
+made use of the words “<i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">convénances morales et
+physiques</i>.” These were her reasons. A most
+Bourbon-like phrase. And I therefore contend
+that as we never scrupled to treat with the
+princes of the House of Bourbon on account of
+their rapacity, their thirst of conquest, their
+violation of treaties, their perfidy, and their
+restless spirit, so, I contend, we ought not to
+refuse to treat with their republican imitators.</p>
+
+<p>Ministers could not pretend ignorance of the
+unprincipled manner in which the French had
+seized on Savoy. The Sardinian minister complained
+of the aggression, and yet no stir
+was made about it. The courts of Europe
+stood by and saw the outrage; and our ministers
+saw it. The right honorable gentleman
+will in vain, therefore, exert his power to
+persuade me of the interest he takes in the
+preservation of the rights of nations, since, at<span class="pagenum" id="Page_127">127</span>
+the moment when an interference might have
+been made with effect, no step was taken, no
+remonstrance made, no mediation negotiated,
+to stop the career of conquest. All the pretended
+and hypocritical sensibility “for the
+rights of nations, and for social order,” with
+which we have since been stunned, can not impose
+upon those who will take the trouble to
+look back to the period when this sensibility
+ought to have roused us into seasonable exertion.
+At that time, however, the right honorable
+gentleman makes it his boast that he was prevented,
+by a sense of neutrality, from taking
+any measures of precaution on the subject. I
+do not give the right honorable gentleman much
+credit for his spirit of neutrality on the occasion.
+It flowed from the sense of the country
+at the time, the great majority of which was
+clearly and decidedly against all interruptions
+being given to the French in their desire of
+regulating their own internal government.</p>
+
+<p>But this neutrality, which respected only the
+internal rights of the French, and from which
+the people of England would never have
+departed but for the impolitic and hypocritical
+cant which was set up to arouse their jealousy
+and alarm their fears, was very different from<span class="pagenum" id="Page_128">128</span>
+the great principle of political prudence which
+ought to have actuated the councils of the
+nation, on seeing the first steps of France toward
+a career of external conquest. My opinion
+is, that when the unfortunate King of France
+offered to us, in the letter delivered by M.
+Chauvelin and M. Talleyrand, and even entreated
+us to mediate between him and the
+allied powers of Austria and Prussia, they
+[ministers] ought to have accepted of the offer,
+and exerted their influence to save Europe
+from the consequence of a system which was
+then beginning to manifest itself.<a id="FNanchor_20" href="#Footnote_20" class="fnanchor">20</a> It was, at
+least, a question of prudence; and as we had
+never refused to treat and to mediate with the
+old princes on account of their ambition or
+their perfidy, we ought to have been equally
+ready now, when the same principles were acted
+upon by other men. I must doubt the sensibility
+which could be so cold and so indifferent
+at the proper moment for its activity. I fear
+that there were at that moment the germs of
+ambition rising in the mind of the right honorable
+gentleman, and that he was beginning, like
+others, to entertain hopes that something might
+be obtained out of the coming confusion. What
+but such a sentiment could have prevented him<span class="pagenum" id="Page_129">129</span>
+from overlooking the fair occasion that was
+offered for preventing the calamities with which
+Europe was threatened? What but some such
+interested principle could have made him forego
+the truly honorable task, by which his administration
+would have displayed its magnanimity
+and its power? But for some such feeling,
+would not this country, both in wisdom and
+in dignity, have interfered, and, in conjunction
+with the other powers, have said to France:
+“You ask for a mediation. We will mediate
+with candor and sincerity, but we will at the
+same time declare to you our apprehensions.
+We do not trust to your assertion of a determination
+to avoid all foreign conquest, and that
+you are desirous only of settling your own
+constitution, because your language is contradicted
+by experience and the evidence of facts.
+You are Frenchmen, and you can not so soon
+have forgotten and thrown off the Bourbon
+principles in which you were educated. You
+have already imitated the bad practice of your
+princes. You have seized on Savoy without
+a color of right. But here we take our stand.
+Thus far you have gone, and we can not help
+it; but you must go no farther. We will tell
+you distinctly what we shall consider as an<span class="pagenum" id="Page_130">130</span>
+attack on the balance and the security of
+Europe; and, as the condition of our interference,
+we will tell you also the securities that
+we think essential to the general repose.” This
+ought to have been the language of his Majesty’s
+ministers when their mediation was solicited;
+and something of this kind they evidently
+thought of when they sent the instructions to
+Petersburgh which they have mentioned this
+night, but upon which they never acted. Having
+not done so, I say they have no right to
+talk now about the violated rights of Europe,
+about the aggression of the French, and about
+the origin of the war in which this country was
+so suddenly afterward plunged. Instead of
+this, what did they do? They hung back;
+they avoided explanation; they gave the
+French no means of satisfying them; and I
+repeat my proposition—when there is a question
+of peace and war between two nations, <em>that
+government finds itself in the wrong which refuses
+to state with clearness and precision what she
+should consider as a satisfaction and a pledge of
+peace</em>.</p>
+
+<p>Sir, if I understand the true precepts of the
+Christian religion, as set forth in the New Testament,
+I must be permitted to say, that there<span class="pagenum" id="Page_131">131</span>
+is no such thing as a rule or doctrine by which
+we are directed, or can be justified, in waging a
+war for religion. The idea is subversive of the
+very foundations upon which it stands, which
+are those of peace and good-will among men.
+Religion never was and never can be a justifiable
+cause of war; but it has been too often
+grossly used as the pretext and the apology for
+the most unprincipled wars.</p>
+
+<p>I have already said, and I repeat it, that the
+conduct of the French to foreign nations can
+not be justified. They have given great cause
+of offence, but certainly not to all countries
+alike. The right honorable gentlemen opposite
+to me have made an indiscriminate catalogue
+of all the countries which the French
+have offended, and, in their eagerness to
+throw odium on the nation, have taken no
+pains to investigate the sources of their several
+quarrels. I will not detain you, sir, by
+entering into the long detail which has been
+given of their aggressions and their violences;
+but let me mention Sardinia as one
+instance which has been strongly insisted upon.
+Did the French attack Sardinia when at peace
+with them? No such thing. The King of
+Sardinia had accepted of a subsidy from Great<span class="pagenum" id="Page_132">132</span>
+Britain; and Sardinia was, to all intents and
+purposes, a belligerent power. Several other
+instances might be mentioned; but though,
+perhaps, in the majority of instances, the
+French may be unjustifiable, is this the moment
+for us to dwell upon these enormities—to
+waste our time and inflame our passions by
+criminating and recriminating upon each other?
+There is no end to such a war. I have somewhere
+read, I think in Sir Walter Raleigh’s
+“History of the World,” of a most bloody and
+fatal battle which was fought by two opposite
+armies, in which almost all the combatants on
+both sides were killed, “because,” says the historian,
+“though they had offensive weapons on
+both sides, they had none for defence.” So, in
+this war of words, if we are to use only
+offensive weapons—if we are to indulge only
+in invective and abuse, the contest must be
+eternal.</p>
+
+<p>If this war of reproach and invective is to be
+countenanced, may not the French with equal
+reason complain of the outrages and horrors
+committed by the powers opposed to them?
+If we must not treat with the French on account
+of the iniquity of their former transactions,
+ought we not to be as scrupulous of connecting<span class="pagenum" id="Page_133">133</span>
+ourselves with other powers equally
+criminal? Surely, sir, if we must be thus rigid
+in scrutinizing the conduct of an enemy, we
+ought to be equally careful in not committing
+ourselves, our honor, and our safety, with an
+ally who has manifested the same want of respect
+for the rights of other nations. Surely, if
+it is material to know the character of a power
+with whom you are about only to treat for
+peace, it is more material to know the character
+of allies with whom you are about to enter into
+the closest connection of friendship, and for
+whose exertions you are about to pay. Now,
+sir, what was the conduct of your own allies to
+Poland? Is there a single atrocity of the French,
+in Italy, in Switzerland, in Egypt, if you please,
+more unprincipled and inhuman than that of
+Russia, Austria, and Prussia, in Poland? What
+has there been in the conduct of the French to
+foreign powers; what in the violation of solemn
+treaties; what in the plunder, devastation, and
+dismemberment of unoffending countries; what
+in the horrors and murders perpetrated upon
+the subdued victims of their rage in any district
+which they have overrun, worse than the conduct
+of those three great powers in the miserable,
+devoted, and trampled-on kingdom of Poland,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_134">134</span>
+and who have been, or are, our allies in
+this war for religion and social order, and the
+rights of nations? “Oh! but you regretted
+the partition of Poland!” Yes, regretted! you
+regretted the violence, and that is all you did.
+You united yourselves with the actors; you, in
+fact, by your acquiescence, confirmed the
+atrocity. But they are your allies; and though
+they overran and divided Poland, there was
+nothing, perhaps, in the manner of doing it
+which stamped it with peculiar infamy and disgrace.
+The hero of Poland [Suwarroff], perhaps,
+was merciful and mild! He was “as
+much superior to Bonaparte in bravery, and
+in the discipline which he maintained, as he
+was superior in virtue and humanity!”<a id="FNanchor_21" href="#Footnote_21" class="fnanchor">21</a> He
+was animated by the purest principles of Christianity,
+and was restrained in his career by the
+benevolent precepts which it inculcates. Was
+he? Let unfortunate Warsaw, and the miserable
+inhabitants of the suburb of Praga in particular,
+tell! What do we understand to have
+been the conduct of this magnanimous hero,
+with whom, it seems, Bonaparte is not to be
+compared? He entered the suburb of Praga,
+the most populous suburb of Warsaw; and
+there he let his soldiery loose on the miserable,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_135">135</span>
+unarmed, and unresisting people. Men,
+women, and children, nay, infants at the breast,
+were doomed to one indiscriminate massacre!
+Thousands of them were inhumanly, wantonly
+butchered! And for what? Because they had
+dared to join in a wish to meliorate their own
+condition as a people, and to improve their
+constitution, which had been confessed by their
+own sovereign to be in want of amendment.
+And such is the hero upon whom the cause of
+religion and social order is to repose! And
+such is the man whom we praise for his discipline
+and his virtue, and whom we hold out as
+our boast and our dependence; while the conduct
+of Bonaparte unfits him to be even treated
+with as an enemy?</p>
+
+<p>But the behavior of the French toward Switzerland
+raises all the indignation of the right
+honorable gentleman, and inflames his eloquence.
+I admire the indignation which he
+expresses, and I think he felt it, in speaking of
+this country, so dear and so congenial to every
+man who loves the sacred name of liberty.
+“He who loves Liberty,” says the right honorable
+gentleman, “thought himself at home on
+the favored and happy mountains of Switzerland,
+where she seemed to have taken up her abode<span class="pagenum" id="Page_136">136</span>
+under a sort of implied compact, among all
+other states, that she should not be disturbed
+in this her chosen asylum.” I admire the eloquence
+of the right honorable gentleman in
+speaking of this country of liberty and peace,
+to which every man would desire, once in his
+life at least, to make a pilgrimage! But who,
+let me ask him, first proposed to the Swiss
+people to <em>depart from the neutrality</em>, which was
+their chief protection, and to join the confederacy
+against the French? I aver that a noble
+relation of mine [Lord Robert Fitzgerald], then
+the Minister of England to the Swiss Cantons,
+was instructed, in direct terms, to propose to
+the Swiss, by an official note, to break from the
+safe line they had laid down for themselves, and
+to tell them, “in such a contest neutrality was
+criminal.” I know that noble Lord too well,
+though I have not been in habits of intercourse
+with him of late, from the employments in
+which he has been engaged, to suspect that he
+would have presented such a paper without the
+express instructions of his court, or that he
+would have gone beyond those instructions.</p>
+
+<p>But was it only to Switzerland that this sort
+of language was held? What was our language
+also to Tuscany and Genoa? An honorable<span class="pagenum" id="Page_137">137</span>
+gentleman [Mr. Canning] has denied the authenticity
+of a pretended letter which has been
+circulated, and ascribed to Lord Harvey. He
+says, it is all a fable and a forgery. Be it so;
+but is it also a fable that Lord Harvey did
+speak in terms to the Grand Duke, which he
+considered as offensive and insulting? I can
+not tell, for I was not present; but was it not,
+and is it not, believed? Is it a fable that Lord
+Harvey went into the closet of the Grand Duke,
+laid his watch on the table and demanded, in a
+peremptory manner, that he should, within a
+certain number of minutes (I think I have
+heard within a quarter of an hour), determine,
+aye or no, to dismiss the French Minister, and
+order him out of his dominions, with the menace,
+that if he did not, the English fleet should
+bombard Leghorn? Will the honorable gentleman
+deny this also? I certainly do not know
+it from my own knowledge; but I know that
+persons of the first credit, then at Florence,
+have stated these facts, and that they have
+never been contradicted. It is true that, upon
+the Grand Duke’s complaint of this indignity,
+Lord Harvey was recalled; but was the <em>principle</em>
+recalled? was the mission recalled? Did
+not ministers persist in the demand which Lord<span class="pagenum" id="Page_138">138</span>
+Harvey had made, perhaps ungraciously? and
+was not the Grand Duke forced, in consequence,
+to dismiss the French Minister? and did they
+not drive him to enter into an unwilling war
+with the republic? It is true that he afterward
+made his peace, and that, having done so, he
+was treated severely and unjustly by the French;
+but what do I conclude from all this, but that
+we have no right to be scrupulous, we who have
+violated the respect due to peaceable powers
+ourselves, in this war, which, more than any
+other that ever afflicted human nature, has
+been distinguished by the greatest number of
+disgusting and outrageous insults by the great
+to the smaller powers? And I infer from this,
+also, that the instances not being confined to
+the French, but having been perpetrated by
+every one of the allies, and by England as much
+as by others, we have no right, either in personal
+character, or from our own deportment, to refuse
+to treat with the French on this ground.
+Need I speak of your conduct to Genoa also?
+Perhaps the note delivered by Mr. Drake was
+also a forgery. Perhaps the blockade of the
+port never took place. It is impossible to deny
+the facts, which were so glaring at the time.
+It is a painful thing to me, sir, to be obliged to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_139">139</span>
+go back to these unfortunate periods of the
+history of this war, and of the conduct of this
+country; but I am forced to the task by the
+use which has been made of the atrocities of
+the French as an argument against negotiation.
+I think I have said enough to prove, that if the
+French have been guilty, we have not been
+innocent. Nothing but determined incredulity
+can make us deaf and blind to our own acts,
+when we are so ready to yield an assent to all
+the reproaches which are thrown out on the
+enemy, and upon which reproaches we are
+gravely told to continue the war.</p>
+
+<p>“But the French,” it seems, “have behaved
+ill everywhere. They seized on Venice, which
+had preserved the most exact neutrality, or
+rather,” as it is hinted, “had manifested symptoms
+of friendship to them.” I agree with the
+right honorable gentleman, it was an abominable
+act. I am not the apologist, much less the
+advocate, of their iniquities; neither will I
+countenance them in their pretences for the injustice.
+I do not think that much regard is to
+be paid to the charges which a triumphant
+soldiery bring on the conduct of a people
+whom they have overrun. Pretences for outrage
+will never be wanting to the strong, when<span class="pagenum" id="Page_140">140</span>
+they wish to trample on the weak; but when
+we accuse the French of having seized on
+Venice, after stipulating for its neutrality, and
+guaranteeing its independence, we should also
+remember the excuse that they made for the
+violence, namely, that their troops had been
+attacked and murdered. I say I am always incredulous
+about such excuses; but I think it
+fair to hear whatever can be alleged on the
+other side. We can not take one side of a
+story only. Candor demands that we should
+examine the whole before we make up our
+minds on the guilt. I can not think it quite
+fair to state the view of the subject of one
+party as indisputable fact, without even mentioning
+what the other party has to say for itself.
+But, sir, is this all? Though the perfidy
+of the French to the Venetians be clear and
+palpable, was it worse in morals, in principle,
+and in example, than the conduct of Austria?
+My honorable friend [Mr. Whitbread] properly
+asked: “Is not the receiver as bad as the
+thief?” If the French seized on the territory
+of Venice, did not the Austrians agree to receive
+it? “But this,” it seems, “is not the
+same thing.” It is quite in the nature and
+within the rule of diplomatic morality, for<span class="pagenum" id="Page_141">141</span>
+Austria to receive the country which was thus
+seized upon unjustly. “The Emperor took it
+as a compensation. It was his by barter. He
+was not answerable for the guilt by which it
+was obtained.” What is this, sir, but the false
+and abominable reasoning with which we have
+been so often disgusted on the subject of the
+slave-trade? Just in the same manner have I
+heard a notorious wholesale dealer in this inhuman
+traffic justify his abominable trade. “I
+am not guilty of the horrible crime of tearing
+that mother from her infants; that husband
+from his wife; of depopulating that village; of
+depriving that family of their sons, the support
+of their aged parents! No, thank Heaven! I
+am not guilty of this horror. I only bought
+them in the fair way of trade. They were
+brought to the market; they had been guilty
+of crimes, or they had been made prisoners of
+war; they were accused of witchcraft, of obi,
+or of some other sort of sorcery; and they
+were brought to me for sale. I gave a valuable
+consideration for them. But God forbid that
+I should have stained my soul with the guilt of
+dragging them from their friends and families!”
+Such has been the precious defence of the
+slave-trade, and such is the argument set up for<span class="pagenum" id="Page_142">142</span>
+Austria in this instance of Venice. “I did not
+commit the crime of trampling on the independence
+of Venice; I did not seize on the
+city; I gave a <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">quid pro quo</i>. It was a matter
+of barter and indemnity; I gave half a million
+of human beings to be put under the yoke of
+France in another district, and I had these people
+turned over to me in return!”<a id="FNanchor_22" href="#Footnote_22" class="fnanchor">22</a> This, sir, is
+the defence of Austria, and under such detestable
+sophistry is the infernal traffic in human
+flesh, whether in white or black, to be continued,
+and even justified! At no time has that
+diabolical traffic been carried to a greater length
+than during the present war, and that by England
+herself, as well as Austria and Russia.</p>
+
+<p>“But France,” it seems, “has roused all the
+nations of Europe against her”; and the long
+catalogue has been read to you, to prove that
+she must have been atrocious to provoke them
+all. Is it true, sir, that she has roused them
+all? It does not say much for the address of
+his Majesty’s ministers, if this be the case.
+What, sir! have all your negotiations, all your
+declamation, all your money, been squandered
+in vain? Have you not succeeded in stirring
+the indignation, and engaging the assistance, of
+a single power? But you do yourselves injustice.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_143">143</span>
+Between the crimes of France and
+your money the rage <em>has</em> been excited, and full
+as much is due to your seductions as to her
+atrocities. My honorable and learned friend
+[Mr. Erskine] was correct, therefore, in his
+argument; for you can not take both sides of
+the case; you can not accuse France of having
+provoked all Europe, and at the same time
+claim the merit of having roused all Europe to
+join you.</p>
+
+<p>You talk, sir, of your allies. I wish to know
+who your allies are? Russia is one of them, I
+suppose. Did France attack Russia? Has the
+<em>magnanimous</em> Paul taken the field for social
+order and religion, or on account of personal
+aggression?<a id="FNanchor_23" href="#Footnote_23" class="fnanchor">23</a> The Emperor of Russia has declared
+himself Grand Master of Malta, though
+his religion is as opposite to that of the Knights
+as ours is; and he is as much considered a
+heretic by the Church of Rome as we are. The
+King of Great Britain might, with as much
+reason and propriety, declare himself the head
+of the order of the Chartreuse monks. Not
+content with taking to himself the commandery
+of this institution of Malta, Paul has even
+created a married man a Knight, contrary to
+all the most sacred rules and regulations of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_144">144</span>
+order; and yet this ally of ours is fighting for
+religion! So much for his religion. Let us
+see his regard to social order! How does he
+show his abhorrence of the principles of the
+French, in their violation of the rights of other
+nations? What has been his conduct to Denmark?
+He says to her: “You have seditious
+clubs at Copenhagen; no Danish vessel shall
+therefore enter the ports of Russia!” He holds
+a still more despotic language to Hamburg.
+He threatens to lay an embargo on her trade;
+and he forces her to surrender up men who are
+claimed by the French as their citizens, whether
+truly or not, I do not inquire. He threatens
+her with his own vengeance if she refuse, and
+subjects her to that of the French if she comply.
+And what has been his conduct to Spain?
+He first sends away the Spanish minister from
+Petersburgh, and then complains, as a great insult,
+that his minister was dismissed from
+Madrid! This is one of our allies; and he has
+declared that the object for which he has taken
+up arms is to replace the ancient race of the
+house of Bourbon on the throne of France, and
+that he does this for the cause of religion and
+social order! Such is the respect for religion
+and social order which he himself displays, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_145">145</span>
+such are the examples of it with which we
+coalesce.</p>
+
+<p>No man regrets, sir, more than I do, the enormities
+that France has committed; but how do
+they bear upon the question as it at present
+stands? Are we forever to deprive ourselves
+of the benefits of peace because France has
+perpetrated acts of injustice? Sir, we can not
+acquit ourselves upon such ground. We <em>have</em>
+negotiated. With the knowledge of these acts
+of injustice and disorder, we have treated with
+them twice; yet the right honorable gentleman
+can not enter into negotiation with them again;
+and it is worth while to attend to the reasons
+that he gives for refusing their offer. The
+Revolution itself is no more an objection now
+than it was in the year 1796, when he did
+negotiate. For the government of France at
+that time was surely as unstable as it is at
+present. * * *</p>
+
+<p>But you say you have not refused to treat.
+You have stated a case in which you will be
+ready immediately to enter into a negotiation,
+viz., the restoration of the House of Bourbon.
+But you deny that this is a <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">sine qua non</i>; and
+in your nonsensical language, which I do not
+understand, you talk of “limited possibilities,”<span class="pagenum" id="Page_146">146</span>
+which may induce you to treat without the restoration
+of the House of Bourbon. But do you
+state what they are? Now, sir, I say, that if
+you put one case upon which you declare that
+you are willing to treat immediately, and say
+that there are other possible cases which may
+induce you to treat hereafter, without mentioning
+what these possible cases are, you do state
+a <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">sine qua non</i> of immediate treaty. Suppose
+I have an estate to sell, and I say my demand
+is £1,000 for it. For that sum I will sell the
+estate immediately. To be sure, there may be
+other terms upon which I may be willing to
+part with it; but I mention nothing of them.
+The £1,000 is the only condition that I state at
+the time. Will any gentleman assert that I do
+not make the £1,000 the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">sine qua non</i> of the immediate
+sale? Thus you say the restoration of
+the Bourbons is not the only possible ground;
+but you give no other. This is your project.
+Do you demand a counter project? Do you
+follow your own rule? Do you not do the
+thing of which you complained in the enemy?
+You seemed to be afraid of receiving another
+proposition; and, by confining yourselves to
+this one point, you make it in fact, though not
+in terms, your <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">sine qua non</i>.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_147">147</span>
+But the right honorable gentleman, in his
+speech, does what the official note avoids. He
+finds there the convenient words, “experience
+and the evidence of facts.” Upon these he
+goes into detail; and in order to convince the
+House that new evidence is required, he reverts
+to all the earliest acts and crimes of the Revolution;
+to all the atrocities of all the governments
+that have passed away; and he contends
+that he must have experience that these foul
+crimes are repented of, and that a purer and a
+better system is adopted in France, by which
+he may be sure that they will be capable of
+maintaining the relations of peace and amity.
+Sir, these are not conciliatory words; nor is this
+a practicable ground to gain experience. Does
+he think it possible that evidence of a peaceable
+demeanor can be obtained in war? What
+does he mean to say to the French consul?
+“Until you shall, in <em>war</em>, behave yourself in a
+<em>peaceable</em> manner, I will not treat with you!”
+Is there not in this something extremely ridiculous?
+In duels, indeed, we have often heard
+of such language. Two gentlemen go out and
+fight, when, having discharged their pistols at
+one another, it is not unusual for one of them
+to say to the other: “Now I am satisfied. I<span class="pagenum" id="Page_148">148</span>
+see that you are a man of honor, and we are
+friends again.” There is something, by-the-by,
+ridiculous, even here. But between nations it
+is more than ridiculous. It is criminal. It is a
+ground which no principle can justify, and
+which is as impracticable as it is impious. That
+two nations should be set on to <em>beat</em> one another
+into friendship, is too abominable even for the
+fiction of romance; but for a statesman seriously
+and gravely to lay it down as a system
+upon which he means to act, is monstrous.
+What can we say of such a test as he means to
+put the French Government to, but that it is
+hopeless? It is in the nature of war to inflame
+animosity; to exasperate, not to soothe; to
+widen, not to approximate. So long as this is
+to be acted upon, I say it is in vain to hope
+that we can have the evidence which we require.</p>
+
+<p>The right honorable gentleman, however,
+thinks otherwise; and he points out four distinct
+possible cases, besides the re-establishment
+of the Bourbon family, in which he would agree
+to treat with the French.</p>
+
+<p>(1) “If Bonaparte shall conduct himself so as
+to convince him that he has abandoned the
+principles which were objectionable in his predecessors,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_149">149</span>
+and that he will be actuated by a
+more moderate system.” I ask you, sir, if this
+is likely to be ascertained in war? It is the
+nature of war not to allay, but to inflame the
+passions; and it is not by the invective and
+abuse which have been thrown upon him and
+his government, nor by the continued irritations
+which war is sure to give, that the virtues
+of moderation and forbearance are to be nourished.</p>
+
+<p>(2) “If, contrary to the expectations of ministers,
+the people of France shall show a disposition
+to acquiesce in the government of Bonaparte.”
+Does the right honorable gentleman
+mean to say, that because it is a usurpation on
+the part of the present chief, that therefore the
+people are not likely to acquiesce in it? I have
+not time, sir, to discuss the question of this
+usurpation, or whether it is likely to be permanent;
+but I certainly have not so good an opinion
+of the French, nor of any people, as to believe
+that it will be short-lived, <em>merely</em> because
+it was a usurpation, and because it is a system
+of military despotism. Cromwell was a usurper;
+and in many points there may be found a resemblance
+between him and the present Chief
+Consul of France. There is no doubt but that,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_150">150</span>
+on several occasions of his life, Cromwell’s sincerity
+may be questioned, particularly in his
+self-denying ordinance, in his affected piety,
+and other things; but would it not have been
+insanity in France and Spain to refuse to treat
+with him because he was a usurper or wanted
+candor? No, sir, these are not the maxims by
+which governments are actuated. They do not
+inquire so much into the means by which power
+may have been acquired, as into the fact of
+where the power resides. The people did acquiesce
+in the government of Cromwell. But
+it may be said that the splendor of his talents,
+the vigor of his administration, the high tone
+with which he spoke to foreign nations, the
+success of his arms, and the character which he
+gave to the English name, induced the nation
+to acquiesce in his usurpation; and that we
+must not try Bonaparte by his example. Will
+it be said that Bonaparte is not a man of great
+abilities? Will it be said that he has not, by
+his victories, thrown a splendor over even the
+violence of the Revolution, and that he does
+not conciliate the French people by the high
+and lofty tone in which he speaks to foreign
+nations? Are not the French, then, as likely
+as the English in the case of Cromwell, to acquiesce<span class="pagenum" id="Page_151">151</span>
+in his government? If they should do
+so, the right honorable gentleman may find
+that this possible predicament may fail him.
+He may find that though one power may make
+war, it requires two to make peace. He may
+find that Bonaparte was as insincere as himself
+in the proposition which he made; and in his
+turn he may come forward and say: “I have no
+occasion now for concealment. It is true that,
+in the beginning of the year 1800, I offered to
+treat, not because I wished for peace, but because
+the people of France wished for it; and
+besides, my old resources being exhausted, and
+there being no means of carrying on the war
+without ‘a new and solid system of finance,’ I
+pretended to treat, because I wished to procure
+the unanimous assent of the French people to
+this ‘new and solid system of finance.’ Did
+you think I was in earnest? You were deceived.
+I now throw off the mask. I have
+gained my point, and I reject your offers with
+scorn.”<a id="FNanchor_24" href="#Footnote_24" class="fnanchor">24</a> Is it not a very possible case that he
+may use this language? Is it not within the
+right honorable gentleman’s <em>knowledge of human
+nature</em>?<a id="FNanchor_25" href="#Footnote_25" class="fnanchor">25</a> But even if this should not be the
+case, will not the very test which you require,
+the acquiescence of the people of France in his<span class="pagenum" id="Page_152">152</span>
+government, give him an advantage-ground in
+the negotiation which he does not now possess.
+Is it quite sure, that when he finds himself safe
+in his seat, he will treat on the same terms as
+at present, and that you will get a better peace
+some time hence than you might reasonably
+hope to obtain at this moment? Will he not
+have one interest less to do it? and do you not
+overlook a favorable occasion for a chance
+which is exceedingly doubtful? These are the
+considerations which I would urge to his Majesty’s
+ministers against the dangerous experiment
+of waiting for the acquiescence of the
+people of France.</p>
+
+<p>(3) “If the allies of this country shall be less
+successful than they have every reason to expect
+they will be in stirring up the people of
+France against Bonaparte, and in the further
+prosecution of the war.” And,</p>
+
+<p>(4) “If the pressure of the war should be
+heavier upon us than it would be convenient
+for us to continue to bear.” These are the
+other two possible emergencies in which the
+right honorable gentleman would treat even
+with Bonaparte. Sir, I have often blamed the
+right honorable gentleman for being disingenuous
+and insincere. On the present occasion I<span class="pagenum" id="Page_153">153</span>
+certainly can not charge him with any such
+thing. He has made to-night a most honest
+confession. He is open and candid. He tells
+Bonaparte fairly what he has to expect. “I
+mean,” says he, “to do every thing in my power
+to raise up the people of France against you; I
+have engaged a number of allies, and our combined
+efforts shall be used to excite insurrection
+and civil war in France. I will strive to murder
+you, or to get you sent away. If I succeed,
+well; but if I fail, then I will treat with you.
+My resources being exhausted; even my ‘solid
+system of finance’ having failed to supply me
+with the means of keeping together my allies,
+and of feeding the discontents I have excited
+in France, then you may expect to see me renounce
+my high tone, my attachment to the
+House of Bourbon, my abhorrence of your
+crimes, my alarm at your principles; for then I
+shall be ready to own that, on the balance and
+comparison of circumstances, there will be less
+danger in concluding a peace than in the continuance
+of war!” Is this political language
+for one state to hold to another? And what
+sort of peace does the right honorable gentleman
+expect to receive in that case? Does he
+think that Bonaparte would grant to baffled insolence,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_154">154</span>
+to humiliated pride, to disappointment,
+and to imbecility the same terms which he
+would be ready to give now? The right honorable
+gentleman can not have forgotten what
+he said on another occasion:</p>
+
+<div class="poem-container">
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i12">“Potuit quæ plurima virtus<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Esse, fuit. Toto certatum est corpore regni.”<a id="FNanchor_26" href="#Footnote_26" class="fnanchor">26</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+</div>
+
+<p class="in0">He would then have to repeat his words, but
+with a different application. He would have to
+say: “All our efforts are vain. We have exhausted
+our strength. Our designs are impracticable,
+and we must sue to you for peace.”</p>
+
+<p>Sir, what is the question to-night? We are
+called upon to support ministers in refusing a
+frank, candid, and respectful offer of negotiation,
+and to countenance them in continuing
+the war. Now I would put the question in
+another way. Suppose that ministers had been
+inclined to adopt the line of conduct which
+they pursued in 1796 and 1797, and that to-night,
+instead of a question on a war address, it
+had been an address to his Majesty to thank
+him for accepting the overture, and for opening
+a negotiation to treat for peace, I ask the gentlemen
+opposite—I appeal to the whole five
+hundred and fifty-eight representatives of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_155">155</span>
+people—to lay their hands upon their hearts and
+to say whether they would not have cordially
+voted for such an address. Would they, or
+would they not? Yes, sir, if the address had
+breathed a spirit of peace, your benches would
+have resounded with rejoicings, and with praises
+of a measure that was likely to bring back the
+blessings of tranquillity. On the present occasion,
+then, I ask for the vote of no gentlemen
+but of those who, in the secret confession of
+their conscience, admit, at this instant, while
+they hear me, that they would have cheerfully
+and heartily voted with the minister for an address
+directly the reverse of the one proposed.
+If every such gentleman were to vote with me,
+I should be this night in the greatest majority
+that ever I had the honor to vote with in this
+House. I do not know that the right honorable
+gentleman would find, even on the benches
+around him, a single individual who would not
+vote with me. I am sure he would not find
+many. I do not know that in this House I
+could single out the individual who would think
+himself bound by consistency to vote against
+the right honorable gentleman on an address
+for negotiation. There may be some, but they
+are very few. I do know, indeed, one most<span class="pagenum" id="Page_156">156</span>
+honorable man in another place, whose purity
+and integrity I respect, though I lament the
+opinion he has formed on this subject, who
+would think himself bound, from the uniform
+consistency of his life, to vote against an address
+for negotiation. Earl Fitzwilliam would,
+I verily believe, do so. He would feel himself
+bound, from the previous votes he has given, to
+declare his objection to all treaty. But I own I
+do not know more in either House of Parliament.
+There may be others, but I do not
+know them. What, then, is the House of
+Commons come to, when, notwithstanding their
+support given to the right honorable gentleman
+in 1796 and 1797 on his entering into negotiation;
+notwithstanding their inward conviction
+that they would vote with him this moment for
+the same measure; who, after supporting the
+minister in his negotiation for a solid system of
+finance, can now bring themselves to countenance
+his abandonment of the ground he took,
+and to support him in refusing all negotiation!
+What will be said of gentlemen who shall vote
+in this way, and yet feel, in their consciences,
+that they would have, with infinitely more readiness,
+voted the other?</p>
+
+<p>Sir, we have heard to-night a great many<span class="pagenum" id="Page_157">157</span>
+most acrimonious invectives against Bonaparte,
+against all the course of his conduct, and
+against the unprincipled manner in which he
+seized upon the reins of government. I will
+not make his defence. I think all this sort of
+invective, which is used only to inflame the
+passions of this House and of the country, exceedingly
+ill-timed, and very impolitic. But I
+say I will not make his defence. I am not sufficiently
+in possession of materials upon which
+to form an opinion on the character and conduct
+of this extraordinary man. On his arrival
+in France, he found the government in a very
+unsettled state, and the whole affairs of the
+Republic deranged, crippled, and involved.
+He thought it necessary to reform the government;
+and he did reform it, just in the way in
+which a military man may be expected to carry
+on a reform. He seized on the whole authority
+for himself. It will not be expected from me
+that I should either approve or apologize for
+such an act. I am certainly not for reforming
+governments by such expedients; but how this
+House can be so violently indignant at the idea
+of military despotism, is, I own, a little singular,
+when I see the composure with which they
+can observe it nearer home; nay, when I see<span class="pagenum" id="Page_158">158</span>
+them regard it as a frame of government most
+peculiarly suited to the exercise of free opinion,
+on a subject the most important of any that
+can engage the attention of a people. Was it
+not the system which was so <em>happily</em> and so
+<em>advantageously</em> established of late, all over
+Ireland, and which even now the government
+may, at its pleasure, proclaim over the whole of
+that kingdom? Are not the persons and property
+of the people left, in many districts, at
+this moment, to the entire will of military
+commanders? and is not this held out as peculiarly
+proper and advantageous, at a time
+when the people of Ireland are freely, and with
+unbiassed judgments, to discuss the most interesting
+question of a legislative union? Notwithstanding
+the existence of martial law, so
+far do we think Ireland from being enslaved,
+that we presume it precisely the period and the
+circumstances under which she may best declare
+her free opinion? Now, really, sir, I can
+not think that gentlemen who talk in this way
+about Ireland, can, with a good grace, rail at
+military despotism in France.</p>
+
+<p>But, it seems, “Bonaparte has broken his
+oaths. He has violated his oath of fidelity to
+the constitution of the third year.” Sir, I am<span class="pagenum" id="Page_159">159</span>
+not one of those who hold that any such oaths
+ought ever to be exacted. They are seldom or
+ever of any effect; and I am not for sporting
+with a thing so sacred as an oath. I think it
+would be good to lay aside all such oaths.
+Who ever heard that, in revolutions, the oath
+of fidelity to the former government was ever
+regarded, or even that, when violated, it was
+imputed to the persons as a crime? In times
+of revolution, men who take up arms are called
+rebels. If they fail, they are adjudged to be
+traitors; but who before ever heard of their
+being perjured? On the restoration of King
+Charles II., those who had taken up arms
+for the Commonwealth were stigmatized as
+rebels and traitors, but not as men forsworn.
+Was the Earl of Devonshire charged with being
+perjured, on account of the allegiance he had
+sworn to the House of Stuart, and the part he
+took in those struggles which preceded and
+brought about the Revolution? The violation
+of oaths of allegiance was never imputed to
+the people of England, and will never be imputed
+to any people. But who brings up the
+question of oaths? He who strives to make
+twenty-four millions of persons violate the
+oaths they have taken to their present constitution,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_160">160</span>
+and who desires to re-establish the
+House of Bourbon by such violation of their
+vows. I put it so, sir, because, if the question
+of oaths be of the least consequence, it is equal
+on both sides! He who desires the whole people
+of France to perjure themselves, and who
+hopes for success in his project only upon their
+doing so, surely can not make it a charge
+against Bonaparte that he has done the same!</p>
+
+<p>“Ah! but Bonaparte has declared it as his
+opinion, that the two governments of Great
+Britain and of France can not exist together.
+After the treaty of Campo Formio, he sent two
+confidential persons, Berthier and Monge, to
+the Directory, to say so in his name.” Well,
+and what is there in this absurd and puerile
+assertion, if it were ever made? Has not the
+right honorable gentleman, in this House, said
+the same thing? In this at least they resemble
+one another! They have both made use of
+this assertion; and I believe that these two illustrious
+persons are the only two on earth who
+think it! But let us turn the tables. We ought
+to put ourselves at times in the place of the
+enemy, if we are desirous of really examining
+with candor and fairness the dispute between
+us. How may they not interpret the speeches<span class="pagenum" id="Page_161">161</span>
+of ministers and their friends, in both Houses of
+the British Parliament? If we are to be told
+of the idle speech of Berthier and Monge, may
+they not also bring up speeches, in which it has
+not been merely hinted, but broadly asserted,
+that “the two constitutions of England and
+France could not exist together?” May not
+these offences and charges be reciprocated without
+end? Are we ever to go on in this miserable
+squabble about words? Are we still, as
+we happen to be successful on the one side or
+the other, to bring up these impotent accusations,
+insults, and provocations against each
+other; and only when we are beaten and unfortunate,
+to think of treating? Oh! pity the
+condition of man, gracious God, and save us
+from such a system of malevolence, in which
+all our old and venerated prejudices are to be
+done away, and by which we are to be taught
+to consider war as the natural state of man, and
+peace but as a dangerous and difficult extremity!</p>
+
+<p>Sir, this temper must be corrected. It is a
+diabolical spirit, and would lead to an interminable
+war. Our history is full of instances
+that, where we have overlooked a proffered occasion
+to treat, we have uniformly suffered by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_162">162</span>
+delay. At what time did we ever profit by obstinately
+persevering in war? We accepted at
+Ryswick the terms we refused five years before,
+and the same peace which was concluded at
+Utrecht might have been obtained at Gertruydenberg;
+and as to security from the future
+machinations or ambition of the French, I ask
+you what security you ever had or could have?
+Did the different treaties made with Louis XIV.
+serve to tie up his hands, to restrain his ambition,
+or to stifle his restless spirit? At what time,
+in old or in recent periods, could you safely
+repose on the honor, forbearance, and moderation
+of the French Government? Was there
+<em>ever</em> an idea of refusing to treat, because the
+peace might be afterward insecure? The
+peace of 1763 was not accompanied with securities;
+and it was no sooner made than the
+French court began, as usual, its intrigues.
+And what security did the right honorable
+gentleman exact at the peace of 1783, in which
+he was engaged? Were we rendered secure
+by that peace? The right honorable gentleman
+knows well that, soon after that peace, the
+French formed a plan, in conjunction with the
+Dutch, of attacking our India possessions, of
+raising up the native powers against us, and of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_163">163</span>
+driving us out of India; as they were more
+recently desirous of doing, only with this difference,
+that the cabinet of France formerly entered
+into this project in a moment of profound
+peace, and when they conceived us to be lulled
+into a perfect security. After making the peace
+of 1783, the right honorable gentleman and his
+friends went out, and I, among others, came
+into office. Suppose, sir, that we had taken up
+the jealousy upon which the right honorable
+gentleman now acts, and had refused to ratify
+the peace which he had made. Suppose that
+we had said—No! France is acting a perfidious
+part; we see no security for England in this
+treaty; they want only a respite in order to
+attack us again in an important part of our
+dominions, and we ought not to confirm the
+treaty. I ask you would the right honorable
+gentleman have supported us in this refusal?
+I say, that upon his present reasoning he ought.
+But I put it fairly to him, would he have supported
+us in refusing to ratify the treaty upon
+such a pretence? He certainly ought not, and
+I am sure he would not; but the course of
+reasoning which he now assumes would have
+justified his taking such a ground. On the
+contrary, I am persuaded that he would have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_164">164</span>
+said: “This security is a refinement upon
+jealousy. You have security, the only security
+that you can ever expect to get. It is the
+present interest of France to make peace. She
+will keep it, if it be her interest. She will
+break it, if it be her interest. Such is the state
+of nations; and you have nothing but your
+own vigilance for your security.”</p>
+
+<p>“It is not the interest of Bonaparte,” it
+seems, “sincerely to enter into a negotiation,
+or, if he should even make peace, sincerely to
+keep it.” But how are we to decide upon his
+sincerity? By refusing to treat with him?
+Surely, if we mean to discover his sincerity, we
+ought to hear the propositions which he desires
+to make. “But peace would be unfriendly
+to his system of military despotism.” Sir, I
+hear a great deal about the short-lived nature of
+military despotism. I wish the history of the
+world would bear gentlemen out in this description
+of it. Was not the government
+erected by Augustus Cæsar a military despotism?
+and yet it endured for six or seven hundred
+years. Military despotism, unfortunately,
+is too likely in its nature to be permanent, and
+it is not true that it depends on the life of the
+first usurper. Though half of the Roman<span class="pagenum" id="Page_165">165</span>
+emperors were murdered, yet the military despotism
+went on; and so it would be, I fear, in
+France. If Bonaparte should disappear from
+the scene, to make room, perhaps, for Berthier,
+or any other general, what difference would
+that make in the quality of French despotism,
+or in our relation to the country? We may as
+safely treat with a Bonaparte, or with any of
+his successors, be they whom they may, as we
+could with a Louis XVI., a Louis XVII., or a
+Louis XVIII. There is no difference but in
+the name. Where the power essentially resides,
+thither we ought to go for peace.</p>
+
+<p>But, sir, if we are to reason on the fact, I
+should think that it is the interest of Bonaparte
+to make peace. A lover of military glory, as
+that general must necessarily be, may he not
+think that his measure of glory is full; that it
+may be tarnished by a reverse of fortune, and
+can hardly be increased by any new laurels?
+He must feel that, in the situation to which he
+is now raised, he can no longer depend on his
+own fortune, his own genius, and his own talents,
+for a continuance of his success. He
+must be under the necessity of employing
+other generals, whose misconduct or incapacity
+might endanger his power, or whose triumphs<span class="pagenum" id="Page_166">166</span>
+even might affect the interest which he holds in
+the opinion of the French. Peace, then, would
+secure to him what he has achieved, and fix the
+inconstancy of fortune. But this will not be
+his only motive. He must see that France also
+requires a respite—a breathing interval, to recruit
+her wasted strength. To procure her this
+respite, would be, perhaps, the attainment of
+more solid glory, as well as the means of acquiring
+more solid power, than any thing which
+he can hope to gain from arms, and from the
+proudest triumphs. May he not, then, be zealous
+to secure this fame, the only species of
+fame, perhaps, that is worth acquiring? Nay,
+granting that his soul may still burn with the
+thirst of military exploits, is it not likely that
+he is disposed to yield to the feelings of the
+French people, and to consolidate his power by
+consulting their interests? I have a right to
+argue in this way when suppositions of his insincerity
+are reasoned upon on the other side.
+Sir, these aspersions are, in truth, always idle,
+and even mischievous. I have been too long
+accustomed to hear imputations and calumnies
+thrown out upon great and honorable characters,
+to be much influenced by them. My honorable
+and learned friend [Mr. Erskine] has paid<span class="pagenum" id="Page_167">167</span>
+this night a most just, deserved, and eloquent
+tribute of applause to the memory of that
+great and unparalleled character, who is so recently
+lost to the world.<a id="FNanchor_27" href="#Footnote_27" class="fnanchor">27</a> I must, like
+him, beg leave to dwell a moment on the
+venerable <span class="smcap">George Washington</span>, though I
+know that it is impossible for me to bestow
+any thing like adequate praise on a character
+which gave us, more than any other human being,
+the example of a perfect man; yet, good,
+great, and unexampled as General Washington
+was, I can remember the time when he was not
+better spoken of in this House than Bonaparte
+is at present. The right honorable gentleman
+who opened this debate [Mr. Dundas] may remember
+in what terms of disdain, or virulence,
+even of contempt, General Washington was
+spoken of by gentlemen on that side of the
+House. Does he not recollect with what marks
+of indignation any member was stigmatized as
+an enemy to his country who mentioned with
+common respect the name of General Washington?
+If a negotiation had then been proposed
+to be opened with that great man, what would
+have been said? Would you treat with a
+rebel, a traitor! What an example would you
+not give by such an act! I do not know<span class="pagenum" id="Page_168">168</span>
+whether the right honorable gentleman may
+not yet possess some of his old prejudices on
+the subject. I hope not: I hope by this time
+we are all convinced that a republican government,
+like that of America, may exist without
+danger or injury to social order, or to established
+monarchies. They have happily shown
+that they can maintain the relations of peace
+and amity with other states. They have shown,
+too, that they are alive to the feelings of honor;
+but they do not lose sight of plain good sense
+and discretion. They have not refused to
+negotiate with the French, and they have accordingly
+the hopes of a speedy termination of
+every difference. We cry up their conduct, but
+we do not imitate it. At the beginning of the
+struggle, we were told that the French were
+setting up a set of wild and impracticable theories,
+and that we ought not to be misled by
+them; that they were phantoms with which we
+could not grapple. Now we are told that we
+must not treat, because, out of the lottery,
+Bonaparte has drawn such a prize as military
+despotism. Is military despotism a theory?
+One would think that that is one of the practical
+things which ministers might understand,
+and to which <em>they</em> would have no particular objection.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_169">169</span>
+But what is our present conduct
+founded on but a theory, and that a most wild and
+ridiculous theory? For what are we fighting?
+Not for a principle; not for security; not for
+conquest; but merely for an experiment and a
+speculation, to discover whether a gentleman at
+Paris may not turn out a better man than we
+now take him to be. * * *</p>
+
+<p>Sir, I wish the atrocities, of which we hear so
+much, and which I abhor as much as any man,
+were, indeed, unexampled. I fear that they do
+not belong exclusively to the French. When
+the right honorable gentleman speaks of the extraordinary
+successes of the last campaign, he
+does not mention the horrors by which some of
+these successes were accompanied. Naples, for
+instance, has been, among others, what is called
+<em>delivered</em>; and yet, if I am rightly informed, it
+has been stained and polluted by murders so
+ferocious, and by cruelties of every kind so abhorrent,
+that the heart shudders at the recital.
+It has been said, not only that the miserable
+victims of the rage and brutality of the fanatics
+were savagely murdered, but that, in many instances,
+their flesh was eaten and devoured by
+the cannibals, who are the advocates and the instruments
+of social order! Nay, England is not<span class="pagenum" id="Page_170">170</span>
+totally exempt from reproach, if the rumors
+which are circulated be true. I will mention a
+fact, to give ministers the opportunity, if it be
+false, to wipe away the stain that it must otherwise
+affix on the British name. It is said, that
+a party of the republican inhabitants of Naples
+took shelter in the fortress of the Castel de
+Uovo. They were besieged by a detachment
+from the royal army, to whom they refused to
+surrender; but demanded that a British officer
+should be brought forward, and to him they
+capitulated. They made terms with him under
+the sanction of the British name. It was agreed
+that their persons and property should be safe,
+and that they should be conveyed to Toulon.
+They were accordingly put on board a vessel;
+but, before they sailed, their property was confiscated,
+numbers of them taken out, thrown
+into dungeons, and some of them, I understand,
+notwithstanding the British guaranty, actually
+executed!<a id="FNanchor_28" href="#Footnote_28" class="fnanchor">28</a></p>
+
+<p>Where, then, sir, is this war, which on every
+side is pregnant with such horrors, to be carried?
+Where is it to stop? Not till we establish
+the House of Bourbon! And this you
+cherish the hope of doing, because you have
+had a successful campaign. Why, sir, before<span class="pagenum" id="Page_171">171</span>
+this you have had a successful campaign. The
+situation of the allies, with all they have gained,
+is surely not to be compared now to what it
+was when you had taken Valenciennes, Quesnoy,
+Condé, etc., which induced some gentlemen in
+this House to prepare themselves for a march
+to Paris. With all that you have gained, you
+surely will not say that the prospect is brighter
+now than it was then. What have you gained
+but the recovery of a part of what you before
+lost? One campaign is successful to you;
+another to them; and in this way, animated by
+the vindictive passions of revenge, hatred, and
+rancor, which are infinitely more flagitious, even,
+than those of ambition and the thirst of power,
+you may go on forever; as, with such black incentives,
+I see no end to human misery.</p>
+
+<p>And all this without an intelligible motive.
+All this because you may gain a better peace
+a year or two hence! So that we are called
+upon to go on merely as a speculation. We
+must keep Bonaparte for some time longer at
+war, as a state of probation. Gracious God, sir!
+is war a state of probation? Is peace a rash system?
+Is it dangerous for nations to live in amity
+with each other? Are your vigilance, your
+policy, your common powers of observation, to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_172">172</span>
+be extinguished by putting an end to the horrors
+of war? Can not this state of probation be as
+well undergone without adding to the catalogue
+of human sufferings? “But we must <em>pause</em>!”
+What! must the bowels of Great Britain be
+torn out—her best blood be spilled—her treasure
+wasted—that you may make an experiment?
+Put yourselves, oh! that you would
+put yourselves in the field of battle, and learn
+to judge of the sort of horrors that you excite!
+In former wars a man might, at least, have
+some feeling, some interest, that served to balance
+in his mind the impressions which a scene
+of carnage and of death must inflict. If a man
+had been present at the battle of Blenheim, for
+instance, and had inquired the motive of the
+battle, there was not a soldier engaged who
+could not have satisfied his curiosity, and even,
+perhaps, allayed his feelings. They were fighting,
+they knew, to repress the uncontrolled
+ambition of the Grand Monarch. But if a man
+were present now at a field of slaughter, and
+were to inquire for what they were fighting—“Fighting!”
+would be the answer; “they are
+not fighting; they are <em>pausing</em>.” “Why is that
+man expiring? Why is that other writhing
+with agony? What means this implacable<span class="pagenum" id="Page_173">173</span>
+fury?” The answer must be: “You are quite
+wrong, sir; you deceive yourself—they are not
+fighting—do not disturb them—they are merely
+<em>pausing</em>! This man is not expiring with agony—that
+man is not dead—he is only <em>pausing</em>!
+Lord help you, sir! they are not angry with
+one another; they have now no cause of quarrel;
+but their country thinks that there should
+be a <em>pause</em>. All that you see, sir, is nothing
+like fighting—there is no harm, nor cruelty, nor
+bloodshed in it whatever; it is nothing more
+than a <em>political pause</em>! It is merely to try an
+experiment—to see whether Bonaparte will not
+behave himself better than heretofore; and in
+the meantime we have agreed to a <em>pause</em>, in
+pure friendship!” And is this the way, sir,
+that you are to show yourselves the advocates
+of order? You take up a system calculated to
+uncivilize the world—to destroy order—to
+trample on religion—to stifle in the heart, not
+merely the generosity of noble sentiment, but
+the affections of social nature; and in the prosecution
+of this system, you spread terror and
+devastation all around you.</p>
+
+<p>Sir, I have done. I have told you my
+opinion. I think you ought to have given a
+civil, clear, and explicit answer to the overture<span class="pagenum" id="Page_174">174</span>
+which was fairly and handsomely made you.
+If you were desirous that the negotiation should
+have included all your allies, as the means of
+bringing about a general peace, you should
+have told Bonaparte so. But I believe you
+were afraid of his agreeing to the proposal.
+You took that method before. Ay, but you
+say the people were anxious for peace in 1797.
+I say they are friends to peace now; and I am
+confident that you will one day acknowledge it.
+Believe me, they are friends to peace; although
+by the laws which you have made, restraining
+the expression of the sense of the people, public
+opinion can not now be heard as loudly and
+unequivocally as heretofore. But I will not go
+into the internal state of this country. It is
+too afflicting to the heart to see the strides
+which have been made by means of, and under
+the miserable pretext of, this war, against liberty
+of every kind, both of power of speech and
+of writing, and to observe in another kingdom
+the rapid approaches to that military despotism
+which we affect to make an argument against
+peace. I know, sir, that public opinion, if it
+could be collected, would be for peace, as much
+now as in 1797; and that it is only by public
+opinion, and not by a sense of their duty, or by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_175">175</span>
+the inclination of their minds, that ministers
+will be brought, if ever, to give us peace.</p>
+
+<p>I conclude, sir, with repeating what I said before:
+I ask for no gentleman’s vote who would
+have reprobated the compliance of ministers
+with the proposition of the French Government.
+I ask for no gentleman’s support to-night
+who would have voted against ministers,
+if they had come down and proposed to enter
+into a negotiation with the French. But I have
+a right to ask, and in honor, in consistency, in
+conscience, I have a right to expect, the vote of
+every honorable gentleman who would have
+voted with ministers in an address to his
+Majesty, diametrically opposite to the motion
+of this night.</p>
+
+<blockquote class="end">
+
+<p>This speech of Fox is said to have made a deep impression
+on the House; but it appears scarcely to have weakened the
+opposition to Napoleon’s measures as set forth in the speech of
+Pitt. The address approving of the Government’s course was
+carried by the overwhelming majority of 265 to 64. It was
+the reasoning of Pitt and the vote which followed the debate
+that determined the general line of English policy till Napoleon
+was landed at St. Helena. The speech of Fox, though
+not successful in defeating the governmental policy, was the
+ablest presentation ever made of the Opposition view.</p></blockquote>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_176">176</span></p>
+
+<div class="chapter">
+<h2 id="SIR_JAMES_MACKINTOSH">SIR JAMES MACKINTOSH.</h2>
+</div>
+
+<p>Born on the 24th of October, 1765, James
+Mackintosh was fifteen years younger than
+Erskine, and thirty-five younger than Burke.
+He early showed a remarkable fondness for
+reading, and when he was ten years of age was
+regarded in the locality of his birth near Inverness,
+in Scotland, as “a prodigy of learning.”
+His favorite amusement at this period of his
+life appears to have been to gather his school-fellows
+about him and entertain them by delivering
+speeches in imitation of Fox and
+North, on the American war,—then the great
+question of the day. At fifteen, he entered
+King’s College, Aberdeen, where he soon established
+a friendship with Robert Hall, which
+continued through life. Their tastes were
+similar, and they devoted themselves with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_177">177</span>
+great earnestness to the study of the classics,
+and to the more abstruse forms of philosophical
+reasoning. They were in the habit of studying
+together and discussing the works of Berkeley,
+Butler, and Edwards, as well as those of
+Plato and Herodotus. This exercise, kept up
+during a large part of their collegiate course,
+appears to have exerted a great influence on
+the formation of their minds and tastes. Mackintosh
+afterward declared that he learned
+more from those discussions “than from all the
+books he ever read”; and Hall testified to the
+great ability of his companion, by saying that
+“he had an intellect more like that of Bacon
+than any other person of modern times.”</p>
+
+<p>After spending four years at Edinburgh in
+the study of medicine, Mackintosh repaired to
+London with a view to the practice of his profession.
+His heart seems, however, not to have
+been very fully enlisted in the work, and he
+was soon driven to the public press as a means
+of support. His first great work, published in
+1791, commanded immediate attention, not<span class="pagenum" id="Page_178">178</span>
+only for its elegant and expressive as well as
+keen and trenchant style, but also for the
+enthusiastic daring with which a young man of
+twenty-six grappled with the most powerful
+and accomplished writer of the day. The
+volume was nothing less than a “Defence of
+the French Revolution against the Accusations
+of the Right Honorable Edmund Burke.” In
+point of style the work is certainly not equal to
+that of his great antagonist; and no more than
+four years later, Mackintosh himself was so
+frank as to say to some Frenchmen who complimented
+him: “Ah, gentlemen, since that
+time you have entirely refuted me.” But, in
+spite of its obvious faults, its great qualities as
+a piece of literary workmanship made a prodigious
+impression. Fox quoted it with enthusiastic
+approbation in the House of Commons;
+and Canning, who ridiculed the Revolution, is
+said to have told a friend that he read the
+book “with as much admiration as he had ever
+felt.” Three editions were immediately called
+for; and it may be doubted whether even to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_179">179</span>
+the present day it is not the most successful as
+well as the most powerful argument that has
+ever been made in opposition to the more
+celebrated treatise.</p>
+
+<p>The publication of this masterly review
+showed plainly enough that another great
+writer had appeared. The reception the work
+received encouraged Mackintosh in the gratification
+of his tastes; and, finding himself irresistibly
+inclining to questions of political philosophy,
+he now abandoned the profession he had already
+entered, and turned his attention to the study of
+law. In 1795 he was admitted to the bar.
+Four years later he produced the second great
+literary impression of his life in the publication
+of the “Introduction to a Course of Lectures
+on the Law of Nature and of Nations.” The
+remarkable impression made by this single
+lecture was expressed by Campbell, when he
+said: “Even supposing that essay had been
+recovered only imperfect and mutilated—if but
+a score of consecutive sentences could be
+shown, they would bear a testimony to his<span class="pagenum" id="Page_180">180</span>
+genius as decided as the bust of Theseus bears
+to Grecian art among the Elgin marbles.”</p>
+
+<p>Mackintosh’s lectures, in the spring of 1799,
+at Lincoln’s Inn Hall, were attended by an
+auditory such as had never before met in England
+on a similar occasion. “Lawyers, members
+of Parliament, men of letters, and gentlemen
+from the country crowded the seats; and
+the Lord Chancellor, who, from a pressure of
+public business, was unable to attend, received
+a full report of each lecture in writing, and was
+loud in their praise.” The introductory lecture,
+the only one that was written out and
+preserved, is as remarkable for its eloquence as
+for the depth of its learning and the vigor and
+discrimination of its thought.</p>
+
+<p>Mackintosh now devoted himself to the
+practice of his profession with every prospect
+of the most flattering success. Regarding
+himself as more perfectly fitted for a position
+upon the bench than at the bar, he aspired to a
+judicial appointment at Trinidad or in India.
+The appointment was under contemplation,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_181">181</span>
+when he was engaged to defend M. Jean
+Peltier, a Frenchman who resided in London
+and published a newspaper opposed to the
+rising fortunes of Bonaparte. There is an
+English statute against “libel on a friendly
+government”; and Bonaparte, who was now
+for the moment at peace with England, demanded
+that the statute should be enforced. Action
+was brought against Peltier, and when the case
+came on for trial Mackintosh delivered the
+speech selected from his works for this volume.
+He labored under the disadvantage of having
+the law clearly against him; but he regarded
+the equities of the case as entirely on the side
+of Peltier, and therefore he devoted his remarkable
+powers to the discussion of the general
+principles involved in the case. It was a
+plea in behalf of freedom of the English press—its
+privilege and its duty to comment on and
+to criticise the crimes even of the proudest
+tyrants. The jury, under the law, was obliged
+to convict; but seldom before an English
+court has a speech made a greater impression.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_182">182</span>
+Of this fact we have the most conclusive evidence
+in the testimony of the greatest of English
+advocates. Erskine was present during its
+delivery, and before going to bed he sent to
+Mackintosh the following remarkable note:</p>
+
+<blockquote>
+
+<p>“<span class="smcap">Dear Sir</span>:—I can not shake off from my nerves the
+effect of your powerful and most wonderful speech, which so
+completely disqualifies you for Trinidad or India. I could
+not help saying to myself, as you were speaking: ‘<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">O terram
+illam beatam quæ hunc virum acciperit, hanc ingratam si
+ejicerit, miseram si amiserit.</i>’ I perfectly approve the verdict,
+but the manner in which you opposed it I shall always
+consider as one of the most splendid monuments of genius,
+literature, and eloquence.</p>
+
+<p class="sigright">
+“Yours ever, <span class="in4"><span class="smcap">T. Erskine</span>.”</span>
+</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>And Robert Hall, scarcely inferior to Erskine
+as a judge of what is worthy of praise in
+human speech, wrote to his old friend concerning
+it: “I speak my sincere sentiments when
+I say, it is the most extraordinary assemblage
+of whatever is most refined in address, profound
+in political and moral speculation, and
+masterly eloquence, which it has ever been my
+lot to read in the English language.”</p>
+
+<p>A few months after the defence of Peltier,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_183">183</span>
+Mackintosh received the honor of knighthood
+and was appointed Recorder at Bombay. This
+position took him to India, where he passed
+the next eight years, devoting his time to the
+duties of the bench and the pursuits of literature.
+On his return in 1812 to England he
+entered the House of Commons, and for four
+years was a firm supporter of the Whigs. In
+1818 he accepted the Professorship of Law and
+General Politics in the newly established Haileybury
+College, a position which he filled with
+great distinction until 1827.</p>
+
+<p>During all this period he did not relax his
+interest in the active affairs of government,
+nor in the questions that agitated the House of
+Commons. His speeches in the House, of
+which he continued to be a member, were remarkable
+for their wisdom; though perhaps
+not for their persuasive power. He will be remembered,
+not so much for his parliamentary
+services, as for his unrivalled plea in behalf of
+free speech, and for the many essays on philosophical
+and political subjects with which he<span class="pagenum" id="Page_184">184</span>
+enriched the literature of our language. Until
+his death in 1832, he was one of the most
+highly esteemed writers of the “Encyclopedia
+Britannica” and of the <cite>Edinburgh Review</cite>.</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_185">185</span></p>
+
+<div class="chapter">
+<h2 id="SIR_JAMES_MACKINTOSH2">SIR JAMES MACKINTOSH.<br />
+
+<span class="subhead">IN BEHALF OF FREE SPEECH, ON THE TRIAL OF
+JEAN PELTIER,<br />ACCUSED OF LIBELLING
+NAPOLEON BONAPARTE;<br />COURT
+OF KING’S BENCH,<br />FEBRUARY
+21, 1803.</span></h2>
+</div>
+
+<p class="sal"><span class="smcap">Gentlemen of the Jury</span>:</p>
+
+<p>The time is now come for me to address you
+in behalf of the unfortunate gentleman who is
+the defendant on this record.</p>
+
+<p>I must begin with observing, that though I
+know myself too well to ascribe to any thing
+but to the kindness and good nature of my
+learned friend, the Attorney-General, the unmerited
+praises which he has been pleased to
+bestow on me, yet, I will venture to say, he has
+done me no more than justice in supposing that
+in this place, and on this occasion, where I exercise
+the functions of an inferior minister of
+justice, an inferior minister, indeed, but a minister
+of justice still, I am incapable of lending
+myself to the passions of any client, and that I<span class="pagenum" id="Page_186">186</span>
+will not make the proceedings of this court
+subservient to any political purpose. Whatever
+is respected by the laws and government
+of my country shall, in this place, be respected
+by me. In considering matters that deeply interest
+the quiet, the safety, and the liberty of
+all mankind, it is impossible for me not to feel
+warmly and strongly; but I shall make an
+effort to control my feelings however painful
+that effort may be, and where I can not speak
+out but at the risk of offending either sincerity
+or prudence, I shall labor to contain myself
+and be silent.</p>
+
+<p>I can not but feel, gentlemen, how much I
+stand in need of your favorable attention and
+indulgence. The charge which I have to defend
+is surrounded with the most invidious
+topics of discussion; but they are not of my
+seeking. The case and the topics which are inseparable
+from it are brought here by the
+prosecutor. Here I find them, and here it is
+my duty to deal with them, as the interests of
+Mr. Peltier seem to me to require. He, by his
+choice and confidence, has cast on me a very
+arduous duty, which I could not decline, and
+which I can still less betray. He has a right
+to expect from me a faithful, a zealous, and a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_187">187</span>
+fearless defence; and this his just expectation,
+according to the measure of my humble abilities,
+shall be fulfilled. I have said a fearless defence.
+Perhaps that word was unnecessary in
+the place where I now stand. Intrepidity in
+the discharge of professional duty is so common
+a quality at the English bar, that it has, thank
+God, long ceased to be a matter of boast or
+praise. If it had been otherwise, gentlemen, if
+the bar could have been silenced or overawed
+by power, I may presume to say that an
+English jury would not this day have been met
+to administer justice. Perhaps I need scarce
+say that my defence <em>shall</em> be fearless, in a place
+where fear never entered any heart but that of
+a criminal. But you will pardon me for having
+said so much when you consider who the real
+parties before you are.</p>
+
+<p>I. Gentlemen, the real prosecutor is the master
+of the greatest empire the civilized world
+ever saw. The defendant is a defenceless, proscribed
+exile. He is a French Royalist, who
+fled from his country in the autumn of 1792,
+at the period of that memorable and awful emigration,
+when all the proprietors and magistrates
+of the greatest civilized country in Europe
+were driven from their homes by the daggers<span class="pagenum" id="Page_188">188</span>
+of assassins; when our shores were covered,
+as with the wreck of a great tempest, with
+old men, and women, and children, and ministers
+of religion, who fled from the ferocity of
+their countrymen as before an army of invading
+barbarians.</p>
+
+<p>The greatest part of these unfortunate exiles,
+of those, I mean, who have been spared by
+the sword, who have survived the effect of pestilential
+climates or broken hearts, have been
+since permitted to revisit their country. Though
+despoiled of their all, they have eagerly embraced
+even the sad privilege of being suffered
+to die in their native land.</p>
+
+<p>Even this miserable indulgence was to be
+purchased by compliances, by declarations of
+allegiance to the new government, which some
+of these suffering Royalists deemed incompatible
+with their consciences, with their dearest
+attachments, and their most sacred duties.
+Among these last is Mr. Peltier. I do not presume
+to blame those who submitted, and I
+trust you will not judge harshly of those who
+refused. You will not think unfavorably of a
+man who stands before you as the voluntary
+victim of his loyalty and honor. If a revolution
+(which God avert) were to drive us into<span class="pagenum" id="Page_189">189</span>
+exile, and to cast us on a foreign shore, we
+should expect, at least, to be pardoned by generous
+men, for stubborn loyalty and unseasonable
+fidelity to the laws and government of our
+fathers.</p>
+
+<p>This unfortunate gentleman had devoted a
+great part of his life to literature. It was the
+amusement and ornament of his better days.
+Since his own ruin and the desolation of his
+country, he has been compelled to employ it as
+a means of support. For the last ten years he
+has been engaged in a variety of publications
+of considerable importance; but since the peace
+he has desisted from serious political discussion,
+and confined himself to the obscure journal
+which is now before you; the least calculated,
+surely, of any publication that ever issued
+from the press, to rouse the alarms of the most
+jealous government; which will not be read in
+England, because it is not written in our language;
+which cannot be read in France, because
+its entry into that country is prohibited by a
+power whose mandates are not very supinely
+enforced, nor often evaded with impunity;
+which can have no other object than that of
+amusing the companions of the author’s principles
+and misfortunes, by pleasantries and sarcasms<span class="pagenum" id="Page_190">190</span>
+on their victorious enemies. There is,
+indeed, gentlemen, one remarkable circumstance
+in this unfortunate publication; it is the
+only, or almost the only, journal which still
+dares to espouse the cause of that royal and
+illustrious family which but fourteen years ago
+was flattered by every press and guarded by
+every tribunal in Europe. Even the court in
+which we are met affords an example of the
+vicissitudes of their fortune. My learned friend
+has reminded you that the last prosecution
+tried in this place, at the instance of a French
+Government, was for a libel on that magnanimous
+princess, who has since been butchered
+in sight of her palace.</p>
+
+<p>I do not make these observations with any
+purpose of questioning the general principles
+which have been laid down by my learned
+friend. I must admit his right to bring before
+you those who libel any government recognized
+by his Majesty, and at peace with the British
+empire. I admit that, whether such a government
+be of yesterday, or a thousand years old;
+whether it be a crude and bloody usurpation,
+or the most ancient, just, and paternal authority
+upon earth, we are <em>here</em> equally bound, by his
+Majesty’s recognition, to protect it against<span class="pagenum" id="Page_191">191</span>
+libellous attacks. I admit that if, during our
+usurpation, Lord Clarendon had published his
+history at Paris, or the Marquess of Montrose
+his verses on the murder of his sovereign, or
+Mr. Cowley his “Discourse on Cromwell’s Government,”
+and if the English ambassador had
+complained, the President De Molí, or any
+other of the great magistrates who then adorned
+the Parliament of Paris, however reluctantly,
+painfully, and indignantly, might have been
+compelled to have condemned these illustrious
+men to the punishment of libellers. I say this
+only for the sake of bespeaking a favorable attention
+from your generosity and compassion
+to what will be feebly urged in behalf of my
+unfortunate client, who has sacrificed his fortune,
+his hopes, his connections, his country, to
+his conscience; who seems marked out for destruction
+in this his last asylum.</p>
+
+<p>That he still enjoys the security of this
+asylum, that he has not been sacrificed to the
+resentment of his powerful enemies, is perhaps
+owing to the firmness of the King’s government.
+If that be the fact, gentlemen; if his
+Majesty’s ministers have resisted applications
+to expel this unfortunate gentleman from England,
+I should publicly thank them for their<span class="pagenum" id="Page_192">192</span>
+firmness, if it were not unseemly and improper
+to suppose that they could have acted otherwise—to
+thank an English Government for not
+violating the most sacred duties of hospitality;
+for not bringing indelible disgrace on their
+country.</p>
+
+<p>But be that as it may, gentlemen, he now
+comes before you, perfectly satisfied that an
+English jury is the most refreshing prospect
+that the eye of accused innocence ever met in
+a human tribunal; and he feels with me the
+most fervent gratitude to the Protector of empires
+that, surrounded as we are with the ruins
+of principalities and powers, we still continue
+to meet together, after the manner of our
+fathers, to administer justice in this, her ancient
+sanctuary.</p>
+
+<p>II. There is another point of view in which
+this case seems to me to merit your most serious
+attention. I consider it as the first of a
+long series of conflicts between the greatest
+power in the world and the only free press remaining
+in Europe. No man living is more
+thoroughly convinced than I am that my learned
+friend, Mr. Attorney-General, will never degrade
+his excellent character; that he will never
+disgrace his high magistracy by mean compliances,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_193">193</span>
+by an immoderate and unconscientious
+exercise of power; yet I am convinced, by circumstances
+which I shall now abstain from discussing,
+that I am to consider this as the first
+of a long series of conflicts between the greatest
+power in the world and the only free press now
+remaining in Europe. Gentlemen, this distinction
+of the English press is new; it is a proud
+and melancholy distinction. Before the great
+earthquake of the French Revolution had swallowed
+up all the asylums of free discussion on
+the continent, we enjoyed that privilege, indeed,
+more fully than others; but we did not
+enjoy it exclusively. In great monarchies, the
+press has always been considered as too formidable
+an engine to be intrusted to unlicensed
+individuals. But in other continental countries,
+either by the laws of the state, or by long
+habits of liberality and toleration in magistrates,
+a liberty of discussion has been enjoyed,
+perhaps sufficient for most useful purposes. It
+existed, in fact, where it was not protected by
+law; and the wise and generous connivance of
+governments was daily more and more secured
+by the growing civilization of their subjects. In
+Holland, in Switzerland, in the imperial towns
+of Germany, the press was either legally or<span class="pagenum" id="Page_194">194</span>
+practically free. Holland and Switzerland are
+no more; and since the commencement of this
+prosecution, fifty imperial towns have been
+erased from the list of independent states by
+one dash of the pen. Three or four still preserve
+a precarious and trembling existence. I
+will not say by what compliances they must
+purchase its continuance. I will not insult the
+feebleness of states, whose unmerited fall I do
+most bitterly deplore.</p>
+
+<p>These governments were in many respects
+one of the most interesting parts of the ancient
+system of Europe. Unfortunately for the repose
+of mankind, great states are compelled, by
+regard to their own safety, to consider the military
+spirit and martial habits of their people as
+one of the main objects of their policy. Frequent
+hostilities seem almost the necessary condition
+of their greatness; and, without being
+great, they cannot long remain safe. Smaller
+states exempted from this cruel necessity—a
+hard condition of greatness, a bitter satire on
+human nature—devoted themselves to the arts
+of peace, to the cultivation of literature, and the
+improvement of reason. They became places
+of refuge for free and fearless discussion; they
+were the impartial spectators and judges of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_195">195</span>
+various contests of ambition which from time
+to time disturbed the quiet of the world. They
+thus became peculiarly qualified to be the organs
+of that public opinion which converted
+Europe into a great republic, with laws which
+mitigated, though they could not extinguish,
+ambition; and with moral tribunals to which
+even the most despotic sovereigns were amenable.
+If wars of aggrandizement were undertaken,
+their authors were arraigned in the face
+of Europe. If acts of internal tyranny were
+perpetrated, they resounded from a thousand
+presses throughout all civilized countries.
+Princes, on whose will there were no legal
+checks, thus found a moral restraint which the
+most powerful of them could not brave with
+absolute impunity. They acted before a vast
+audience, to whose applause or condemnation
+they could not be utterly indifferent. The very
+constitution of human nature, the unalterable
+laws of the mind of man, against which all
+rebellion is fruitless, subjected the proudest
+tyrants to this control. No elevation of power,
+no depravity however consummate, no innocence
+however spotless, can render man wholly
+independent of the praise or blame of his fellow-men.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_196">196</span>
+These governments were, in other respects,
+one of the most beautiful and interesting parts
+of our ancient system. The perfect security of
+such inconsiderable and feeble states, their undisturbed
+tranquillity amid the wars and conquests
+that surrounded them, attested, beyond
+any other part of the European system, the
+moderation, the justice, the civilization to which
+Christian Europe had reached in modern times.
+Their weakness was protected only by the
+habitual reverence for justice, which, during a
+long series of ages, had grown up in Christendom.
+This was the only fortification which
+defended them against those mighty monarchs
+to whom they offered so easy a prey. And till
+the French Revolution, this was sufficient.
+Consider, for instance, the situation of the Republic
+of Geneva. Think of her defenceless
+position, in the very jaws of France; but think
+also of her undisturbed security, of her profound
+quiet, of the brilliant success with which
+she applied to industry and literature, while
+Louis XIV. was pouring his myriads into Italy
+before her gates. Call to mind, if ages crowded
+into years have not effaced them from your
+memory, that happy period, when we scarcely
+dreamed more of the subjugation of the feeblest<span class="pagenum" id="Page_197">197</span>
+republic of Europe than of the conquest
+of her mightiest empire; and tell me if you can
+imagine a spectacle more beautiful to the moral
+eye, or a more striking proof of progress in the
+noblest principles of true civilization.</p>
+
+<p>These feeble states—these monuments of the
+justice of Europe—the asylum of peace, of industry,
+and of literature—the organs of public
+reason—the refuge of oppressed innocence and
+persecuted truth, have perished with those ancient
+principles which were their sole guardians
+and protectors. They have been swallowed up
+by that fearful convulsion which has shaken
+the uttermost corners of the earth. They are
+destroyed and gone forever.</p>
+
+<p>One asylum of free discussion is still inviolate.
+There is still one spot in Europe where
+man can freely exercise his reason on the most
+important concerns of society, where he can
+boldly publish his judgment on the acts of
+the proudest and most powerful tyrants. The
+press of England is still free. It is guarded by
+the free constitution of our forefathers. It is
+guarded by the hearts and arms of Englishmen,
+and I trust I may venture to say that if it be
+to fall, it will fall only under the ruins of the
+British empire.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_198">198</span>
+It is an awful consideration, gentlemen.
+Every other monument of European liberty
+has perished. That ancient fabric which has
+been gradually reared by the wisdom and virtue
+of our fathers still stands. It stands,
+thanks be to God! solid and entire; but it
+stands alone, and it stands amid ruins.</p>
+
+<p>In these extraordinary circumstances, I repeat
+that I must consider this as the first of a
+long series of conflicts between the greatest
+power in the world and the only free press remaining
+in Europe. And I trust that you will
+consider yourselves as the advanced guard of
+liberty, as having this day to fight the first
+battle of free discussion against the most formidable
+enemy that it ever encountered. You
+will therefore excuse me, if, on so important an
+occasion, I remind you, at more length than is
+usual, of those general principles of law and
+policy on this subject which have been handed
+down to us by our ancestors.</p>
+
+<p>III. Those who slowly built up the fabric of
+our laws never attempted any thing so absurd
+as to define, by any precise rule, the obscure
+and shifting boundaries which divide libel from
+history or discussion. It is a subject which,
+from its nature, admits neither rules nor definitions.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_199">199</span>
+The same words may be perfectly innocent
+in one case, and most mischievous and
+libellous in another. A change of circumstances,
+often apparently slight, is sufficient to make the
+whole difference. These changes, which may
+be as numerous as the variety of human intentions
+and conditions, can never be foreseen nor
+comprehended under any legal definitions, and
+the framers of our law have never attempted to
+subject them to such definitions. They left
+such ridiculous attempts to those who call
+themselves philosophers, but who have, in fact,
+proved themselves most grossly and stupidly
+ignorant of that philosophy which is conversant
+with human affairs.</p>
+
+<p>The principles of the law of England on the
+subject of political libel are few and simple,
+and they are necessarily so broad, that, without
+a habitually mild administration of justice, they
+might encroach materially on the liberty of
+political discussion. Every publication which
+is intended to vilify either our own government
+or the government of any foreign state in amity
+with this kingdom, is, by the law of England,
+a libel.</p>
+
+<p>To protect political discussion from the danger
+to which it would be exposed by these wide<span class="pagenum" id="Page_200">200</span>
+principles, if they were severely and literally enforced,
+our ancestors trusted to various securities—some
+growing out of the law and constitution,
+and others arising from the character of
+those public officers whom the constitution had
+formed, and to whom its administration is committed.
+They trusted, in the first place, to the
+moderation of the legal officers of the crown,
+educated in the maxims and imbued with the
+spirit of a free government; controlled by the
+superintending power of Parliament, and peculiarly
+watched in all political prosecutions by the
+reasonable and wholesome jealousy of their fellow-subjects.
+And I am bound to admit that,
+since the glorious era of the Revolution [1688],
+making due allowance for the frailties, the faults,
+and the occasional vices of men, they have, upon
+the whole, not been disappointed. I know
+that in the hands of my learned friend that
+trust will never be abused. But, above all, they
+confided in the moderation and good sense of
+juries, popular in their origin, popular in their
+feelings, popular in their very prejudices, taken
+from the mass of the people, and immediately returning
+to that mass again. By these checks and
+temperaments they hoped that they should
+sufficiently repress malignant libels, without endangering<span class="pagenum" id="Page_201">201</span>
+that freedom of inquiry which is the
+first security of a free state. They knew that
+the offence of a political libel is of a very peculiar
+nature, and differing in the most important
+particulars from all other crimes. In all other
+cases, the most severe execution of law can
+only spread terror among the guilty; but in
+political libels it inspires even the innocent
+with fear. This striking peculiarity arises from
+the same circumstances which make it impossible
+to define the limits of libel and innocent
+discussion; which make it impossible for a man
+of the purest and most honorable mind to be
+always perfectly certain whether he be within the
+territory of fair argument and honest narrative,
+or whether he may not have unwittingly over
+stepped the faint and varying line which bounds
+them. But, gentlemen, I will go further. This
+is the only offence where severe and frequent
+punishments not only intimidate the innocent,
+but deter men from the most meritorious acts,
+and from rendering the most important services
+to their country. They indispose and disqualify
+men for the discharge of the most sacred duties
+which they owe to mankind. To inform the
+public on the conduct of those who administer
+public affairs requires courage and conscious security.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_202">202</span>
+It is always an invidious and obnoxious
+office; but it is often the most necessary of all
+public duties. If it is not done boldly, it can
+not be done effectually, and it is not from
+writers trembling under the uplifted scourge
+that we are to hope for it.</p>
+
+<p>There are other matters, gentlemen, to which
+I am desirous of particularly calling your attention.
+These are the circumstances in the condition
+of this country which have induced our
+ancestors, at all times, to handle with more than
+ordinary tenderness that branch of the liberty
+of discussion which is applied to the conduct of
+foreign states. The relation of this kingdom
+to the commonwealth of Europe is so peculiar,
+that no history, I think, furnishes a parallel to
+it. From the moment in which we abandoned
+all projects of continental aggrandizement, we
+could have no interest respecting the state of the
+continent but the interests of national safety
+and of commercial prosperity. The paramount
+interest of every state—that which comprehends
+every other—is <em>security</em>. And the security of
+Great Britain requires nothing on the continent
+but the uniform observance of justice. It requires
+nothing but the inviolability of ancient
+boundaries and the sacredness of ancient possessions,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_203">203</span>
+which, on these subjects, is but another
+form of words for justice. A nation which
+is herself shut out from the possibility of continental
+aggrandizement can have no interest
+but that of preventing such aggrandizement in
+others. We can have no interest of safety but
+the preventing of those encroachments which,
+by their immediate effects, or by their example,
+may be dangerous to ourselves. We can have
+no interest of ambition respecting the continent.
+So that neither our real nor even our apparent
+interests can ever be at variance with justice.</p>
+
+<p>As to commercial prosperity, it is, indeed,
+a secondary, but it is still a very important,
+branch of our national interests, and it requires
+nothing on the continent of Europe but the
+<em>maintenance of peace</em>, as far as the paramount
+interest of security will allow.<a id="FNanchor_29" href="#Footnote_29" class="fnanchor">29</a></p>
+
+<p>Whatever ignorant or prejudiced men may
+affirm, no war was ever gainful to a commercial
+nation. Losses may be less in some, and incidental
+profits may arise in others. But no such profits
+ever formed an adequate compensation for
+the waste of capital and industry which all wars
+must produce. Next to peace, our commercial
+greatness depends chiefly on the affluence and
+prosperity of our neighbors. A commercial<span class="pagenum" id="Page_204">204</span>
+nation has, indeed, the same interest in the
+wealth of her neighbors that a tradesman has
+in the wealth of his customers. The prosperity
+of England has been chiefly owing to the general
+progress of civilized nations in the arts and
+improvements of social life. Not an acre of land
+has been brought into cultivation in the wilds of
+Siberia or on the shores of the Mississippi which
+has not widened the market for English industry.
+It is nourished by the progressive prosperity
+of the world, and it amply repays all that
+it has received. It can only be employed
+in spreading civilization and enjoyment over
+the earth; and by the unchangeable laws of
+nature, in spite of the impotent tricks of government,
+it is now partly applied to revive the industry
+of those very nations who are the loudest
+in their senseless clamors against its pretended
+mischiefs. If the blind and barbarous project
+of destroying English prosperity could be accomplished,
+it could have no other effect than that of
+completely beggaring the very countries who
+now stupidly ascribe their own poverty to our
+wealth.</p>
+
+<p>Under these circumstances, gentlemen, it became
+the obvious policy of the kingdom, a
+policy in unison with the maxims of a free<span class="pagenum" id="Page_205">205</span>
+government, to consider with great indulgence
+even the boldest animadversions of our political
+writers on the ambitious projects of foreign
+states.</p>
+
+<p>Bold, and sometimes indiscreet as these animadversions
+might be, they had, at least, the
+effect of warning the people of their danger,
+and of rousing the national indignation against
+those encroachments which England has almost
+always been compelled in the end to resist by
+arms. Seldom, indeed, has she been allowed to
+wait till a provident regard to her own safety
+should compel her to take up arms in defence of
+others. For as it was said by a great orator of
+antiquity that no man ever was the enemy of
+the republic who had not first declared war
+against him, so I may say, with truth, that no
+man ever meditated the subjugation of Europe
+who did not consider the destruction or the
+corruption of England as the first condition of
+his success.<a id="FNanchor_30" href="#Footnote_30" class="fnanchor">30</a> If you examine history, you
+will find that no such project was ever formed
+in which it was not deemed a necessary preliminary,
+either to detach England from the
+common cause or to destroy her. It seems as
+if all the conspirators against the independence
+of nations might have sufficiently taught other<span class="pagenum" id="Page_206">206</span>
+states that England is their natural guardian
+and protector; that she alone has no interest
+but their preservation; that her safety is interwoven
+with their own. When vast projects
+of aggrandizement are manifested, when
+schemes of criminal ambition are carried into
+effect, the day of battle is fast approaching for
+England. Her free government can not engage
+in dangerous wars without the hearty and
+affectionate support of her people. A state
+thus situated can not without the utmost peril
+silence those public discussions which are to
+point the popular indignation against those who
+must soon be enemies. In domestic dissensions,
+it may sometimes be the supposed interest
+of government to overawe the press. But
+it never can be even their apparent interest
+when the danger is purely foreign. A king of
+England who, in such circumstances, should
+conspire against the free press of this country,
+would undermine the foundations of his own
+throne; he would silence the trumpet which is
+to call his people round his standard.</p>
+
+<p>Our ancestors never thought it their policy
+to avert the resentment of foreign tyrants by
+enjoining English writers to contain and repress
+their just abhorrence of the criminal enterprises<span class="pagenum" id="Page_207">207</span>
+of ambition. This great and gallant
+nation, which has fought in the front of every
+battle against the oppressors of Europe, has
+sometimes inspired fear, but, thank God, she
+has never felt it. We know that they are our
+real, and must soon become our declared
+foes.<a id="FNanchor_31" href="#Footnote_31" class="fnanchor">31</a> We know that there can be no cordial
+amity between the natural enemies and the independence
+of nations. We have never
+adopted the cowardly and short-sighted
+policy of silencing our press, of breaking the
+spirit and palsying the hearts of our people for
+the sake of a hollow and precarious truce. We
+have never been base enough to purchase a
+short respite from hostilities by sacrificing the
+first means of defence; the means of rousing
+the public spirit of the people, and directing
+it against the enemies of their country and of
+Europe.</p>
+
+<p>Gentlemen, the public spirit of a people, by
+which I mean the whole body of those affections
+which unites men’s hearts to the commonwealth,
+is in various countries composed of various elements,
+and depends on a great variety of causes.
+In this country, I may venture to say that it
+mainly depends on the vigor of the popular
+parts and principles of our government, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_208">208</span>
+that the spirit of liberty is one of its most important
+elements. Perhaps it may depend less
+on those advantages of a free government
+which are most highly estimated by calm reason,
+than upon those parts of it which delight the
+imagination and flatter the just and natural
+pride of mankind. Among these we are certainly
+not to forget the political rights which are not
+uniformly withheld from the lowest classes, and
+the continual appeal made to them in public
+discussion, upon the greatest interests of the
+state. These are undoubtedly among the
+circumstances which endear to Englishmen
+their government and their country, and animate
+their zeal for that glorious institution
+which confers on the meanest of them a sort of
+distinction and nobility unknown to the most
+illustrious slaves who tremble at the frown of
+a tyrant. Whoever were unwarily and rashly
+to abolish or narrow these privileges, which it
+must be owned are liable to great abuse, and to
+very specious objections, might perhaps discover
+too late that he had been dismantling his
+country. Of whatever elements public spirit is
+composed, it is always and everywhere the
+chief defensive principle of a state. It is perfectly
+distinct from courage. Perhaps no nation,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_209">209</span>
+certainly no European nation, ever perished
+from an inferiority of courage. And undoubtedly
+no considerable nation was ever subdued
+in which the public affections were sound and
+vigorous. It is public spirit which binds together
+the dispersed courage of individuals and
+fastens it to the commonwealth. It is, therefore,
+as I have said, the chief defensive principle
+of every country. Of all the stimulants which
+arouse it into action, the most powerful among
+us is certainly the press; and it can not be restrained
+or weakened without imminent danger
+that the national spirit may languish, and that
+the people may act with less zeal and affection
+for their country in the hour of its danger.</p>
+
+<p>These principles, gentlemen, are not new—they
+are genuine old English principles. And
+though in our days they have been disgraced and
+abused by ruffians and fanatics, they are in themselves
+as just and sound as they are liberal; and
+they are the only principles on which a free state
+can be safely governed. These principles I have
+adopted since I first learned the use of reason,
+and I think I shall abandon them only with life.</p>
+
+<p>IV. On these principles I am now to call
+your attention to the libel with which this unfortunate
+gentleman is charged. I heartily<span class="pagenum" id="Page_210">210</span>
+rejoice that I concur with the greatest part of
+what has been said by my learned friend, Mr.
+Attorney-General, who has done honor even to
+his character by the generous and liberal principles
+which he has laid down. He has told
+you that he does not mean to attack <em>historical
+narrative</em>. He has told you that he does not
+mean to attack <em>political discussion</em>. He has told
+you, also, that he does not consider every intemperate
+word into which a writer, fairly
+engaged in narration or reasoning, might be
+betrayed, as a fit subject for prosecution. The
+essence of the crime of libel consists in the
+malignant mind which the publication proves,
+and from which it flows. A jury must be convinced,
+before they find a man guilty of libel,
+that his intention was to libel, not to state
+facts which he believed to be true, or reasonings
+which he thought just. My learned friend
+has told you that the liberty of history includes
+the right of publishing those observations
+which occur to intelligent men when
+they consider the affairs of the world; and
+I think he will not deny that it includes also
+the right of expressing those sentiments which
+all good men feel on the contemplation of extraordinary
+examples of depravity or excellence.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_211">211</span>
+One more privilege of the historian, which
+the Attorney-General has not named, but to
+which his principles extend, it is now my duty to
+claim on behalf of my client; I mean the right
+of <em>republishing</em>, <em>historically</em>, those documents,
+whatever their original malignity may be, which
+display the character and unfold the intentions
+of governments, or factions, or individuals. I
+think my learned friend will not deny that a
+historical compiler may innocently republish in
+England the most insolent and outrageous declaration
+of war ever published against his Majesty
+by a foreign government. The intention
+of the original author was to vilify and degrade
+his Majesty’s government; but the intention of
+the compiler is only to gratify curiosity, or, perhaps,
+to rouse just indignation against the
+calumniator whose production he republishes.
+His intention is not libellous—his republication
+is therefore not a libel. Suppose this to be the
+case with Mr. Peltier. Suppose him to have
+republished libels with a merely historical intention.
+In that case it can not be pretended that
+he is more a libeller than my learned friend, Mr.
+Abbott [junior counsel for the crown, afterward
+Lord Tenterden], who read these supposed
+libels to you when he opened the pleadings.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_212">212</span>
+Mr. Abbott republished them to you,
+that you might know and judge of them—Mr.
+Peltier, on the supposition I have made, also
+republished them, that the public might know
+and judge of them.</p>
+
+<p>You already know that the general plan of
+Mr. Peltier’s publication was to give a picture
+of the cabals and intrigues, of the hopes and
+projects, of French factions. It is undoubtedly
+a natural and necessary part of this plan to republish
+all the serious and ludicrous pieces
+which these factions circulate against each
+other. The ode ascribed to Chenier or Ginguené
+I do really believe to have been written
+at Paris, to have been circulated there, to have
+been there attributed to some one of these
+writers, to have been sent to England as their
+work, and as such to have been republished
+by Mr. Peltier. But I am not sure that I have
+evidence to convince you of the truth of this.
+Suppose that I have not; will my learned friend
+say that my client must necessarily be convicted?
+I, on the contrary, contend that it is
+for my learned friend to show that it is not an
+historical republication. Such it professes to
+be, and that profession it is for him to disprove.
+The profession may indeed be “a mask”; but<span class="pagenum" id="Page_213">213</span>
+it is for my friend to pluck off the mask, and
+expose the libeller, before he calls upon you for
+a verdict of guilty.</p>
+
+<p>If the general lawfulness of such republications
+be denied, then I must ask Mr. Attorney-General
+to account for the long impunity which
+English newspapers have enjoyed. I must request
+him to tell you why they have been suffered
+to republish all the atrocious official and
+unofficial libels which have been published
+against his Majesty for the last ten years, by
+the Brissots, the Marats, the Dantons, the
+Robespierres, the Barrères, the Talliens, the
+Reubells, the Merlins, the Barrases, and all that
+long line of bloody tyrants who oppressed their
+own country and insulted every other which
+they had not the power to rob. What must be
+the answer? That the English publishers were
+either innocent, if their motive was to gratify
+curiosity, or praiseworthy, if their intention was
+to rouse indignation against the calumniators of
+their country. If any other answer be made, I
+must remind my friend of a most sacred part of
+his duty—the duty of protecting the honest
+fame of those who are absent in the service of
+their country. Within these few days we have
+seen, in every newspaper in England, a publication,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_214">214</span>
+called the Report of Colonel Sebastiani, in
+which a gallant British officer [General Stuart]
+is charged with writing letters to procure assassination.
+The publishers of that infamous report
+are not, and will not be prosecuted, because
+their intention is not to libel General Stuart.
+On any other principle, why have all our newspapers
+been suffered to circulate that most
+atrocious of all libels against the king and people
+of England, which purports to be translated
+from the <cite>Moniteur</cite> of the ninth of August, 1802—a
+libel against a prince who has passed through
+a factious and stormy reign of forty-three years,
+without a single imputation on his personal
+character; against a people who have passed
+through the severest trials of national virtue
+with unimpaired glory—who alone in the world
+can boast of mutinies without murder, of triumphant
+mobs without massacre, of bloodless
+revolutions, and of civil wars unstained by a
+single assassination. That most impudent and
+malignant libel which charges such a king of
+such a people, not only with having hired assassins,
+but with being so shameless, so lost to all
+sense of character, as to have bestowed on these
+assassins, if their murderous projects had succeeded,
+the highest badges of public honor, the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_215">215</span>
+rewards reserved for statesmen and heroes—the
+order of the Garter—the order which was
+founded by the heroes of Cressy and Poitiers—the
+garter which was worn by Henry the Great
+and by Gustavus Adolphus, which might now
+be worn by the hero who, on the shores of
+Syria [Sir Sydney Smith]—the ancient theatre
+of English chivalry—has revived the renown of
+English valor and of English humanity—that
+unsullied garter which a detestable libeller dares
+to say is to be paid as the price of murder.</p>
+
+<p>If I had now to defend an English publisher
+for the republication of that abominable libel,
+what must I have said in his defence? I must
+have told you that it was originally published
+by the French Government in their official
+gazette; that it was republished by the English
+editor to gratify the natural curiosity, perhaps
+to rouse the just resentment, of his English
+readers. I should have contended, and, I trust,
+with success, that his republication of a libel
+was not libellous; that it was lawful, that it was
+laudable. All that would be important, at
+least all that would be essential, in such a defence,
+I now state to you on behalf of Mr. Peltier;
+and if an English newspaper may safely
+republish the libels of the French Government<span class="pagenum" id="Page_216">216</span>
+against his Majesty, I shall leave you to judge
+whether Mr. Peltier, in similar circumstances,
+may not with equal safety republish the libels
+of Chenier against the First Consul. On the
+one hand you have the assurances of Mr. Peltier
+in the context that this ode is merely a
+republication—you have also the general plan
+of his work, with which such a republication is
+perfectly consistent. On the other hand, you
+have only the suspicions of Mr. Attorney-General
+that this ode is an original production of
+the defendant.</p>
+
+<p>But supposing that you should think it his
+production, and that you should also think it a
+libel, even in that event, which I cannot anticipate,
+I am not left without a defence. The
+question will still be open, “Is it a libel on
+Bonaparte, or is it a libel on Chenier or Ginguené?”
+This is not an information for a libel
+on Chenier; and if you should think that this
+ode was produced by Mr. Peltier, and ascribed
+by him to Chenier, for the sake of covering
+that writer with the odium of Jacobinism, the
+defendant is entitled to your verdict of not
+guilty. Or if you should believe that it is ascribed
+to Jacobinical writers for the sake of
+<em>satirizing</em> a French Jacobinical faction, you<span class="pagenum" id="Page_217">217</span>
+must also, in that case, acquit him. Butler puts
+seditious and immoral language into the mouth
+of rebels and fanatics; but “Hudibras” is not for
+that reason a libel on morality or government.
+Swift, in the most exquisite piece of irony in
+the world (his argument against the abolition
+of Christianity), uses the language of those shallow,
+atheistical coxcombs whom his satire was
+intended to scourge. The scheme of his irony
+required some levity and even some profaneness
+of language. But nobody was ever so dull
+as to doubt whether Swift meant to satirize
+atheism or religion. In the same manner Mr.
+Peltier, when he wrote a satire on French
+Jacobinism was compelled to ascribe to Jacobins
+a Jacobinical hatred of government. He
+was obliged, by dramatic propriety, to put
+into their mouths those anarchical maxims
+which are complained of in his ode. But it will
+be said, these incitements to insurrection are
+here directed against the authority of Bonaparte.
+This proves nothing, because they must
+have been so directed, if the ode were a satire
+on Jacobinism. French Jacobins must inveigh
+against Bonaparte, because he exercises the
+powers of government. The satirist who attacks
+them must transcribe their sentiments
+and adopt their language.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_218">218</span>
+I do not mean to say, gentlemen, that Mr.
+Peltier feels any affection or professes any
+allegiance to Bonaparte. If I were to say so,
+he would disown me. He would disdain to
+purchase an acquittal by the profession of sentiments
+which he disclaims and abhors. Not to
+love Bonaparte is no crime. The question is
+not whether Mr. Peltier loves or hates the First
+Consul, but whether he has put revolutionary
+language into the mouth of Jacobins with a
+view to paint their incorrigible turbulence, and
+to exhibit the fruits of Jacobinical revolutions
+to the detestation of mankind.</p>
+
+<p>Now, gentlemen, we can not give a probable
+answer to this question without previously examining
+two or three questions, on which the
+answer to the first must very much depend. Is
+there a faction in France which breathes the
+spirit, and is likely to employ the language, of
+this ode? Does it perfectly accord with their
+character and views? Is it utterly irreconcilable
+with the feelings, opinions, and wishes of
+Mr. Peltier? If these questions can be answered
+in the affirmative, then I think you
+must agree with me that Mr. Peltier does not
+in this ode speak his own sentiments, that he
+does not here vent his own resentment against<span class="pagenum" id="Page_219">219</span>
+Bonaparte; but that he personates a Jacobin,
+and adopts his language for the sake of satirizing
+his principles.</p>
+
+<p>These questions, gentlemen, lead me to those
+political discussions which, generally speaking,
+are in a court of justice odious and disgusting.
+Here, however, they are necessary, and I shall
+consider them only as far as the necessities of
+this cause require.</p>
+
+<p>Gentlemen, the French Revolution—I must
+pause after I have uttered words which present
+such an overwhelming idea. But I have not
+now to engage in an enterprise so far beyond
+my force as that of examining and judging that
+tremendous Revolution. I have only to consider
+the character of the factions which it
+must have left behind it.</p>
+
+<p>The French Revolution began with great and
+fatal errors. These errors produced atrocious
+crimes. A mild and feeble monarchy was succeeded
+by bloody anarchy, which very shortly
+gave birth to military despotism. France, in a
+few years, described the whole circle of human
+society.<a id="FNanchor_32" href="#Footnote_32" class="fnanchor">32</a></p>
+
+<p>All this was in the order of nature. When
+every principle of authority and civil discipline,
+when every principle which enables some men<span class="pagenum" id="Page_220">220</span>
+to command, and disposes others to obey, was
+extirpated from the mind by atrocious theories,
+and still more atrocious examples; when every
+old institution was trampled down with contumely,
+and every new institution covered in its
+cradle with blood; when the principle of property
+itself, the sheet-anchor of society, was annihilated;
+when in the persons of the new
+possessors, whom the poverty of language
+obliges us to call proprietors, it was contaminated
+in its source by robbery and murder, and
+it became separated from that education and
+those manners, from that general presumption
+of superior knowledge and more scrupulous
+probity which form its only liberal titles to respect;
+when the people were taught to despise
+every thing old, and compelled to detest every
+thing new, there remained only one principle
+strong enough to hold society together, a principle
+utterly incompatible, indeed, with liberty
+and unfriendly to civilization itself, a tyrannical
+and barbarous principle; but in that miserable
+condition of human affairs, a refuge from still
+more intolerable evils. I mean the principle of
+military power which gains strength from that
+confusion and bloodshed in which all the other
+elements of society are dissolved, and which, in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_221">221</span>
+these terrible extremities, is the cement that
+preserves it from total destruction.</p>
+
+<p>Under such circumstances, Bonaparte usurped
+the supreme power in France. I say <em>usurped</em>,
+because an illegal assumption of power is a
+usurpation. But usurpation, in its strongest
+moral sense, is scarcely applicable to a period
+of lawless and savage anarchy. The guilt of
+military usurpation, in truth, belongs to the
+author of those confusions which sooner or
+later give birth to such a usurpation.</p>
+
+<p>Thus, to use the words of the historian:
+“By recent as well as all ancient example, it
+became evident that illegal violence, with whatever
+pretences it may be covered, and whatever
+object it may pursue, must inevitably end
+at last in the arbitrary and despotic government
+of a single person.” But though the government
+of Bonaparte has silenced the revolutionary
+factions, it has not and it can not have
+extinguished them. No human power could
+re-impress upon the minds of men all those
+sentiments and opinions which the sophistry
+and anarchy of fourteen years had obliterated.
+A faction must exist which breathes the spirit
+of the code now before you.</p>
+
+<p>It is, I know, not the spirit of the quiet and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_222">222</span>
+submissive majority of the French people.
+They have always rather suffered than acted in
+the Revolution. Completely exhausted by the
+calamities through which they have passed,
+they yield to any power which gives them repose.
+There is, indeed, a degree of oppression
+which rouses men to resistance; but there
+is another and a greater, which wholly subdues
+and unmans them. It is remarkable that
+Robespierre himself was safe till he attacked
+his own accomplices. The spirit of men of
+virtue was broken, and there was no vigor of
+character left to destroy him, but in those
+daring ruffians who were the sharers of his
+tyranny.</p>
+
+<p>As for the wretched populace who were
+made the blind and senseless instrument of so
+many crimes, whose frenzy can now be reviewed
+by a good mind with scarce any moral
+sentiment but that of compassion; that miserable
+multitude of beings, scarcely human, have
+already fallen into a brutish forgetfulness of
+the very atrocities which they themselves perpetrated.
+They have already forgotten all the
+acts of their drunken fury. If you ask one of
+them, Who destroyed that magnificent monument
+of religion and art? or who perpetrated<span class="pagenum" id="Page_223">223</span>
+that massacre? they stupidly answer, the Jacobins!
+though he who gives the answer was
+probably one of these Jacobins himself; so
+that a traveller, ignorant of French history,
+might suppose the Jacobins to be the name of
+some Tartar horde who, after laying waste
+France for ten years, were at last expelled by
+the native inhabitants. They have passed
+from senseless rage to stupid quiet. Their delirium
+is followed by lethargy.<a id="FNanchor_33" href="#Footnote_33" class="fnanchor">33</a></p>
+
+<p>In a word, gentlemen, the great body of the
+people of France have been severely trained in
+those convulsions and proscriptions which are
+the school of slavery. They are capable of no
+mutinous, and even of no bold and manly political
+sentiments. And if this ode professed to
+paint their opinions, it would be a most unfaithful
+picture. But it is otherwise with those who
+have been the actors and leaders in the scene of
+blood. It is otherwise with the numerous agents
+of the most indefatigable, searching, multiform,
+and omnipresent tyranny that ever existed,
+which pervaded every class of society which
+had ministers and victims in every village in
+France.</p>
+
+<p>Some of them, indeed, the basest of the race,
+the sophists, the rhetors, the poet-laureates of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_224">224</span>
+murder, who were cruel only from cowardice
+and calculating selfishness, are perfectly willing
+to transfer their venal pens to any government
+that does not disdain their infamous support.
+These men, Republican from servility, who published
+rhetorical panegyrics on massacre, and
+who reduced plunder to a system of ethics, are
+as ready to preach slavery as anarchy. But the
+more daring, I had almost said, the more
+respectable ruffians, can not so easily bend
+their heads under the yoke. These fierce spirits
+have not lost</p>
+
+<div class="poem-container">
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i6">“The unconquerable will,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And study of revenge, immortal hate.”<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+</div>
+
+<p class="in0">They leave the luxuries of servitude to the mean
+and dastardly hypocrites, to the Belials and
+Mammons of the infernal faction. They pursue
+their old end of tyranny under their old pretext
+of liberty. The recollection of their unbounded
+power renders every inferior condition irksome
+and vapid; and their former atrocities form, if
+I may so speak, a sort of moral destiny which
+irresistibly impels them to the perpetration of
+new crimes. They have no place left for penitence
+on earth. They labor under the most
+awful proscription of opinion that ever was
+pronounced against human beings. They have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_225">225</span>
+cut down every bridge by which they could retreat
+into the society of men. Awakened from
+their dreams of Democracy, the noise subsided
+that deafened their ears to the voice of humanity;
+the film fallen from their eyes which hid
+from them the blackness of their own deeds;
+haunted by the memory of their inexpiable
+guilt; condemned daily to look on the faces of
+those whom their hands made widows and
+orphans, they are goaded and scourged by
+these <em>real</em> furies, and hurried into the tumult
+of new crimes, which will drown the cries of
+remorse, or, if they be too depraved for remorse,
+will silence the curses of mankind. Tyrannical
+power is their only refuge from the just vengeance
+of their fellow-creatures. Murder is their
+only means of usurping power. They have no
+taste, no occupation, no pursuit but power and
+blood. If their hands are tied, they must at
+least have the luxury of murderous projects.
+They have drunk too deeply of human blood
+ever to relinquish their cannibal appetite.</p>
+
+<p>Such a faction exists in France. It is numerous;
+it is powerful; and it has a principle of
+fidelity stronger than any that ever held together
+a society. <em>They are banded together by
+despair of forgiveness, by the unanimous detestation<span class="pagenum" id="Page_226">226</span>
+of mankind.</em> They are now contained
+by a severe and stern government. But they
+still meditate the renewal of insurrection and
+massacre; and they are prepared to renew the
+worst and most atrocious of their crimes, that
+crime against posterity and against human
+nature itself, that crime of which the latest
+generations of mankind may feel the fatal
+consequences—the crime of degrading and
+prostituting the sacred name of liberty.</p>
+
+<p>I must own that, however paradoxical it may
+appear, I should almost think not worse, but
+more meanly of them if it were otherwise. I
+must then think them destitute of that which I
+will not call courage, because that is the name
+of a virtue; but of that ferocious energy which
+alone rescues ruffians from contempt. If they
+were destitute of that which is the heroism of
+murderers, they would be the lowest as well as
+the most abominable of beings.</p>
+
+<p>It is impossible to conceive any thing more
+despicable than wretches who, after hectoring
+and bullying over their meek and blameless
+sovereign and his defenceless family, whom they
+kept so long in a dungeon trembling for their
+existence—whom they put to death by a slow
+torture of three years, after playing the Republican<span class="pagenum" id="Page_227">227</span>
+and the tyrannicide to women and children,
+become the supple and fawning slaves of the
+first government that knows how to wield the
+scourge with a firm hand.</p>
+
+<p>I have used the word Republican because it
+is the name by which this atrocious faction
+describes itself. The assumption of that name
+is one of their crimes. They are no more Republicans
+than Royalists. They are the common
+enemies of all human society. God forbid
+that by the use of that word I should be supposed
+to reflect on the members of those
+respectable Republican communities which did
+exist in Europe before the French Revolution.
+That Revolution has spared many monarchies,
+but it has spared no republic within the sphere
+of its destructive energy. One republic only
+now exists in the world—a republic of English
+blood, which was originally composed of Republican
+societies, under the protection of a
+monarchy, which had, therefore, no great and
+perilous change in their internal constitution
+to effect; and of which, I speak it with pleasure
+and pride, the inhabitants, even in the convulsions
+of a most deplorable separation, displayed
+the humanity as well as valor which, I trust I
+may say, they inherited from their forefathers.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_228">228</span>
+Nor do I mean by the use of the word “Republican”
+to confound this execrable faction
+with all those who, in the liberty of private
+speculation, may prefer a Republican form of
+government. I own that, after much reflection,
+I am not able to conceive an error more gross
+than that of those who believe in the possibility
+of erecting a republic in any of the old monarchical
+countries of Europe, who believe that in
+such countries an elective supreme magistracy
+can produce any thing but a succession of stern
+tyrannies and bloody civil wars. It is a supposition
+which is belied by all experience, and
+which betrays the greatest ignorance of the
+first principles of the constitution of society.
+It is an error which has a false appearance of
+superiority over vulgar prejudice; it is, therefore,
+too apt to be attended with the most criminal
+rashness and presumption, and too easy to be
+inflamed into the most immoral and anti-social
+fanaticism. But as long as it remains a mere
+quiescent error, it is not the proper subject of
+moral disapprobation.</p>
+
+<blockquote>
+
+<p>[Mr. Mackintosh then proceeds to a somewhat minute analysis
+of the publications of Peltier for the purpose of showing:
+first, that it was highly probable that the articles complained
+of were not written by Peltier; secondly, that if written by
+him, they purported to be not his own sentiments but those<span class="pagenum" id="Page_229">229</span>
+more or less prevalent at Paris; thirdly, that the publications
+were not untrue representations; fourthly, that there was no
+evidence of any thing more nearly approaching to malice than
+a justifiable indignation; and, fifthly, that the passages complained
+of were aimed not so much at Napoleon as at others.
+This analysis, though very ingenious, is of no interest except
+from its bearing on the verdict, and is therefore here omitted.
+After concluding his discussion of the evidence, the advocate
+proceeded.]</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>Here, gentlemen, I think I might stop, if I
+had only to consider the defence of Mr. Peltier.
+I trust that you are already convinced of his
+innocence. I fear I have exhausted your patience,
+as I am sure I have very nearly exhausted
+my own strength. But so much seems to
+me to depend on your verdict, that I can not
+forbear from laying before you some considerations
+of a more general nature.</p>
+
+<p>Believing, as I do, that we are on the eve of
+a great struggle; that this is only the first battle
+between reason and power; that you have
+now in your hands, committed to your trust,
+the only remains of free discussion in Europe,
+now confined to this kingdom—addressing you,
+therefore, as the guardians of the most important
+interests of mankind; convinced that the
+unfettered exercise of reason depends more on
+your present verdict than on any other that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_230">230</span>
+was ever delivered by a jury, I can not conclude
+without bringing before you the sentiments and
+examples of our ancestors in some of those
+awful and perilous situations by which divine
+Providence has in former ages tried the virtue
+of the English nation. We are fallen upon
+times in which it behooves us to strengthen our
+spirits by the contemplation of great examples
+of constancy. Let us seek for them in the
+annals of our forefathers.</p>
+
+<p>The reign of Queen Elizabeth may be considered
+as the opening of the modern history of
+England, especially in its connection with the
+modern system of Europe, which began about
+that time to assume the form that it preserved
+till the French Revolution. It was a very
+memorable period, of which the maxims ought
+to be engraven on the head and heart of every
+Englishman. Philip II., at the head of the
+greatest empire then in the world, was openly
+aiming at universal domination, and his project
+was so far from being thought chimerical by
+the wisest of his contemporaries that, in the
+opinion of the great Duke of Sully, he must
+have been successful, “if, by a most singular
+combination of circumstances, he had not at the
+same time been resisted by two such strong<span class="pagenum" id="Page_231">231</span>
+heads as those of Henry IV. and Queen Elizabeth.”
+To the most extensive and opulent
+dominions, the most numerous and disciplined
+armies, the most renowned captains, the greatest
+revenue, he added also the most formidable
+power over opinion. He was the chief of
+a religious faction, animated by the most atrocious
+fanaticism, prepared to second his ambition
+by rebellion, anarchy, and regicide in every
+Protestant state. Elizabeth was among the
+first objects of his hostility. That wise and
+magnanimous princess placed herself in the
+front of the battle for the liberties of Europe.
+Though she had to contend at home with his
+fanatical faction, which almost occupied Ireland,
+which divided Scotland, and was not of contemptible
+strength in England, she aided the oppressed
+inhabitants of the Netherlands in their
+just and glorious resistance to his tyranny; she
+aided Henry the Great in suppressing the abominable
+rebellion which anarchical principles had
+excited and Spanish arms had supported in
+France, and after a long reign of various fortune,
+in which she preserved her unconquered
+spirit through great calamities and still greater
+dangers, she at length broke the strength of the
+enemy, and reduced his power within such<span class="pagenum" id="Page_232">232</span>
+limits as to be compatible with the safety of
+England and of all Europe. Her only effectual
+ally was the spirit of her people, and her policy
+flowed from that magnanimous nature which in
+the hour of peril teaches better lessons than
+those of cold reason. Her great heart inspired
+her with a higher and a nobler wisdom—which
+disdained to appeal to the low and sordid passions
+of her people even for the protection of
+their low and sordid interests, because she
+knew, or, rather, she felt, that these are effeminate,
+creeping, cowardly, short-sighted passions,
+which shrink from conflict even in defence of
+their own mean objects. In a righteous cause,
+she roused those generous affections of her people
+which alone teach boldness, constancy, and
+foresight, and which are therefore the only safe
+guardians of the lowest as well as the highest
+interests of a nation. In her memorable address
+to her army, when the invasion of the
+kingdom was threatened by Spain, this woman
+of heroic spirit disdained to speak to them of
+their ease and their commerce, and their wealth
+and their safety. No! She touched another
+chord—she spoke of their national honor, of
+their dignity as Englishmen, of “the foul scorn
+that Parma or Spain <em>should dare</em> to invade the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_233">233</span>
+borders of her realms.” She breathed into
+them those grand and powerful sentiments
+which exalt vulgar men into heroes, which led
+them into the battle of their country, armed
+with holy and irresistible enthusiasm; which
+even cover with their shield all the ignoble interests
+that base calculation and cowardly
+selfishness tremble to hazard, but shrink from
+defending. A sort of prophetic instinct, if I
+may so speak, seems to have revealed to her
+the importance of that great instrument for
+rousing and guiding the minds of men, of the
+effects of which she had no experience, which,
+since her time, has changed the condition of the
+world, but which few modern statesmen have
+thoroughly understood or wisely employed;
+which is, no doubt, connected with many ridiculous
+and degrading details, which has produced,
+and which may again produce, terrible
+mischiefs, but of which the influence must, after
+all, be considered as the most certain effect and
+the most efficacious cause of civilization, and
+which, whether it be a blessing or a curse, is the
+most powerful engine that a politician can
+move—I mean the press. It is a curious fact
+that in the year of the Armada, Queen Elizabeth
+caused to be printed the first gazettes that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_234">234</span>
+ever appeared in England; and I own, when I
+consider that this mode of rousing a national
+spirit was then absolutely unexampled, that she
+could have no assurance of its efficacy from
+the precedents of former times, I am disposed
+to regard her having recourse to it as one of the
+most sagacious experiments, one of the greatest
+discoveries of political genius, one of the most
+striking anticipations of future experience that
+we find in history. I mention it to you to
+justify the opinion that I have ventured to state
+of the close connection of our national spirit with
+our press, even our periodical press. I can not
+quit the reign of Elizabeth without laying before
+you the maxims of her policy, in the language
+of the greatest and wisest of men. Lord
+Bacon, in one part of his discourse on her reign,
+speaks thus of her support of Holland: “But
+let me rest upon the honorable and continual
+aid and relief she hath given to the distressed
+and desolate people of the Low Countries—a
+people recommended unto her by ancient confederacy
+and daily intercourse, by their cause
+so innocent and their fortune so lamentable!”
+In another passage of the same discourse, he
+thus speaks of the general system of her foreign
+policy as the protector of Europe, in words<span class="pagenum" id="Page_235">235</span>
+too remarkable to require any commentary.
+“Then it is her government, and her government
+alone, that hath been the sconce and fort
+of all Europe, which hath let this proud nation
+from overrunning all. If any state be yet free
+from his factions erected in the bowels thereof;
+if there be any state wherein this faction is
+erected that is not yet fired with civil troubles;
+if there be any state under his protection that
+enjoyeth moderate liberty, upon whom he
+tyrannizeth not, it is the mercy of this renowned
+Queen that standeth between them and their
+misfortunes!”</p>
+
+<p>The next great conspirator against the rights
+of men and of nations, against the security and
+independence of all European states, against
+every kind and degree of civil and religious
+liberty, was Louis XIV. In his time the character
+of the English nation was the more remarkably
+displayed, because it was counteracted
+by an apostate and perfidious government.
+During great part of his reign, you know that
+the throne of England was filled by princes
+who deserted the cause of their country and of
+Europe, who were the accomplices and the
+tools of the oppressor of the world, who were
+even so unmanly, so unprincely, so base, as to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_236">236</span>
+have sold themselves to his ambition; who
+were content that he should enslave the continent,
+if he enabled them to enslave Great
+Britain. These princes, traitors to their own
+royal dignity and to the feelings of the generous
+people whom they ruled, preferred the condition
+of the first slave of Louis XIV. to the dignity
+of the first freemen of England<a id="FNanchor_34" href="#Footnote_34" class="fnanchor">34</a>; yet
+even under these princes, the feelings of the
+people of this kingdom were displayed, on a
+most memorable occasion, toward foreign sufferers
+and foreign oppressors. The revocation
+of the Edict of Nantes threw fifty thousand
+French Protestants on our shores. They were
+received as I trust the victims of tyranny ever
+will be in this land, which seems chosen by
+Providence to be the home of the exile, the
+refuge of the oppressed. They were welcomed
+by a people high-spirited as well as humane,
+who did not insult them by clandestine charity;
+who did not give alms in secret lest their charity
+should be detected by the neighboring tyrants!
+No! They were publicly and nationally welcomed
+and relieved. They were bid to raise
+their voice against their oppressor, and to proclaim
+their wrongs to all mankind. They did
+so. They were joined in the cry of just indignation<span class="pagenum" id="Page_237">237</span>
+by every Englishman worthy of the
+name. It was a fruitful indignation, which soon
+produced the successful resistance of Europe
+to the common enemy. Even then, when
+Jeffreys disgraced the bench which his Lordship
+[Lord Ellenborough] now adorns, no
+refugee was deterred by prosecution for libel
+from giving vent to his feelings, from arraigning
+the oppressor in the face of all Europe.</p>
+
+<p>During this ignominious period of our history,
+a war arose on the continent, which can not
+but present itself to the mind on such an occasion
+as this; the only war that was ever made
+on the avowed ground of attacking a free press.
+I speak of the invasion of Holland by Louis
+XIV. The liberties which the Dutch gazettes
+had taken in discussing his conduct were the
+sole cause of this very extraordinary and memorable
+war, which was of short duration, unprecedented
+in its avowed principle, and most
+glorious in its event for the liberties of mankind.
+That republic, at all times so interesting
+to Englishmen—in the worst times of both
+countries our brave enemies; in their best times
+our most faithful and valuable friends—was
+then charged with the defence of a free press
+against the oppressor of Europe, as a sacred<span class="pagenum" id="Page_238">238</span>
+trust for the benefit of all generations. They
+felt the sacredness of the deposit, they felt the
+dignity of the station in which they were
+placed, and though deserted by the un-English
+government of England, they asserted their
+own ancient character, and drove out the great
+armies and great captains of the oppressor with
+defeat and disgrace. Such was the result of the
+only war hitherto avowedly undertaken to oppress
+a free country because she allowed the
+free and public exercise of reason. And may
+the God of justice and liberty grant that such
+may ever be the result of wars made by tyrants
+against the rights of mankind, especially against
+that right which is the guardian of every other!</p>
+
+<p>This war, gentlemen, had the effect of raising
+up from obscurity the great Prince of Orange,
+afterward King William III., the deliverer of
+Holland, the deliverer of England, the deliverer
+of Europe; the only hero who was distinguished
+by such a happy union of fortune
+and virtue that the objects of his ambition
+were always the same with the interests of humanity;
+perhaps the only man who devoted
+the whole of his life exclusively to the service
+of mankind. This most illustrious benefactor
+of Europe, this “hero without vanity or passion,”<span class="pagenum" id="Page_239">239</span>
+as he has been justly and beautifully
+called by a venerable prelate [Dr. Shipley,
+Bishop of St. Asaph], who never made a step
+toward greatness without securing or advancing
+liberty, who had been made Stadtholder of
+Holland for the salvation of his own country,
+was soon after made King of England for the
+deliverance of ours. When the people of
+Great Britain had once more a government
+worthy of them, they returned to the feelings
+and principles of their ancestors, and resumed
+their former station and their former duties as
+protectors of the independence of nations.
+The people of England, delivered from a government
+which disgraced, oppressed, and betrayed
+them, fought under William as their
+forefathers had fought under Elizabeth, and
+after an almost uninterrupted struggle of more
+than twenty years, in which they were often
+abandoned by fortune, but never by their own
+constancy and magnanimity, they at length
+once more defeated those projects of guilty
+ambition, boundless aggrandizement, and universal
+domination, which had a second time
+threatened to overwhelm the whole civilized
+world. They rescued Europe from being swallowed
+up in the gulf of extensive empire,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_240">240</span>
+which the experience of all times points out as
+the grave of civilization; where men are driven
+by violent conquest and military oppression
+into lethargy and slavishness of heart; where,
+after their arts have perished with the mental
+vigor from which they spring, they are plunged
+by the combined power of effeminacy and ferocity
+into irreclaimable and hopeless barbarism.
+Our ancestors established the safety of
+their own country by providing for that of
+others, and rebuilt the European system upon
+such firm foundations that nothing less than the
+tempest of the French Revolution could have
+shaken it.</p>
+
+<p>The arduous struggle was suspended for a
+short time by the peace of Ryswick. The interval
+between that treaty and the war of the
+succession enables us to judge how our ancestors
+acted in a very peculiar situation, which
+requires maxims of policy very different from
+those which usually govern states. The treaty
+which they had concluded was in truth and
+substance only a truce. The ambition and the
+power of the enemy were such as to render
+real peace impossible. And it was perfectly
+obvious that the disputed succession of the
+Spanish monarch would soon render it no<span class="pagenum" id="Page_241">241</span>
+longer practicable to preserve even the appearance
+of amity. It was desirable, however, not
+to provoke the enemy by unseasonable hostility;
+but it was still more desirable, it was absolutely
+necessary, to keep up the national
+jealousy and indignation against him who was
+soon to be their open enemy. It might naturally
+have been apprehended that the press
+might have driven into premature war a prince
+who, not long before, had been violently exasperated
+by the press of another free country.
+I have looked over the political publications of
+that time with some care, and I can venture to
+say that at no period were the system and projects
+of Louis XIV. animadverted on with
+more freedom and boldness than during that
+interval. Our ancestors and the heroic prince
+who governed them, did not deem it wise policy
+to disarm the national mind for the sake of prolonging
+a truce. They were both too proud
+and too wise to pay so great a price for so small
+a benefit.</p>
+
+<p>In the course of the eighteenth century, a
+great change took place in the state of political
+discussion in this country. I speak of the
+multiplication of newspapers. I know that
+newspapers are not very popular in this place,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_242">242</span>
+which is, indeed, not very surprising, because
+they are known here only by their faults. Their
+publishers come here only to receive the chastisement
+due to their offences. With all their
+faults, I own I can not help feeling some respect
+for whatever is a proof of the increased curiosity
+and increased knowledge of mankind; and
+I can not help thinking that if somewhat more
+indulgence and consideration were shown for
+the difficulties of their situation, it might prove
+one of the best correctives of their faults, by
+teaching them that self-respect which is the
+best security for liberal conduct toward others.
+But however that may be, it is very certain that
+the multiplication of these channels of popular
+information has produced a great change in the
+state of our domestic and foreign politics. At
+home, it has, in truth, produced a gradual revolution
+in our government. By increasing the
+number of those who exercise some sort of
+judgment on public affairs, it has created a substantial
+democracy, infinitely more important
+than those democratical forms which have been
+the subject of so much contest. So that I may
+venture to say, England has not only in its
+forms the most democratical government that
+ever existed in a great country, but in substance<span class="pagenum" id="Page_243">243</span>
+has the most democratical government that ever
+existed in any country; if the most <em>substantial</em>
+democracy be that state in which the greatest
+number of men feel an interest and express an
+opinion upon political questions, and in which
+the greatest number of judgments and wills
+concur in influencing public measures.</p>
+
+<p>The same circumstances gave great additional
+importance to our discussion of continental politics.
+That discussion was no longer, as in the
+preceding century, confined to a few pamphlets,
+written and read only by men of education and
+rank, which reached the multitude very slowly
+and rarely. In newspapers an almost daily appeal
+was made, directly or indirectly, to the
+judgment and passions of almost every individual
+in the kingdom, upon the measures and
+principles not only of his own country, but of
+every state in Europe. Under such circumstances,
+the tone of these publications, in speaking
+of foreign governments, became a matter of
+importance. You will excuse me, therefore, if,
+before I conclude, I remind you of the general
+nature of their language on one or two very
+remarkable occasions, and of the boldness with
+which they arraigned the crimes of powerful
+sovereigns, without any check from the laws<span class="pagenum" id="Page_244">244</span>
+and magistrates of their own country. This
+toleration, or rather this protection, was too
+long and uniform to be accidental. I am, indeed,
+very much mistaken if it be not founded
+upon a policy which this country can not abandon
+without sacrificing her liberty and endangering
+her national existence.</p>
+
+<p>The first remarkable instance which I shall
+choose to state of the unpunished and protected
+boldness of the English press, of the freedom
+with which they animadverted on the policy of
+powerful sovereigns, is the partition of Poland
+in 1772; an act not, perhaps, so horrible in its
+means, nor so deplorable in its immediate effects,
+as some other atrocious invasions of national
+independence which have followed it; but the
+most abominable in its general tendency and
+ultimate consequences of any political crime
+recorded in history, because it was the first
+practical breach in the system of Europe,
+the first example of atrocious robbery perpetrated
+on unoffending countries which have
+been since so liberally followed, and which has
+broken down all the barriers of habit and principle
+which guarded defenceless states. The perpetrators
+of this atrocious crime were the most
+powerful sovereigns of the continent, whose<span class="pagenum" id="Page_245">245</span>
+hostility it certainly was not the interest of
+Great Britain wantonly to incur. They were
+the most illustrious princes of their age, and
+some of them were, doubtless, entitled to the
+highest praise for their domestic administration,
+as well as for the brilliant qualities which
+distinguished their characters. But none of
+these circumstances, no dread of their resentment,
+no admiration of their talents, no consideration
+for their rank, silenced the animadversion
+of the English press. Some of you
+remember, all of you know, that a loud and
+unanimous cry of reprobation and execration
+broke out against them from every part of this
+kingdom. It was perfectly uninfluenced by any
+considerations of our own mere national interest,
+which might perhaps be supposed to be rather
+favorably affected by that partition. It was
+not, as in some other countries, the indignation
+of rival robbers, who were excluded from their
+share of the prey. It was the moral anger of
+disinterested spectators against atrocious crimes,
+the gravest and the most dignified moral principle
+which the God of justice has implanted in
+the human heart; that of which the dread is
+the only restraint on the actions of powerful
+criminals, and of which the promulgation is the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_246">246</span>
+only punishment that can be inflicted on them.
+It is a restraint which ought not to be weakened.
+It is a punishment which no good man
+can desire to mitigate.</p>
+
+<p>That great crime was spoken of as it deserved
+in England. Robbery was not described by any
+courtly circumlocutions. Rapine was not called
+policy; nor was the oppression of an innocent
+people termed <em>a mediation</em> in their domestic differences.
+No prosecutions, no criminal informations
+followed the liberty and the boldness of
+the language then employed. No complaints
+even appear to have been made from abroad,
+much less any insolent menaces against the free
+constitution which protected the English press.
+The people of England were too long known
+throughout Europe for the proudest potentate
+to expect to silence our press by such means.</p>
+
+<p>I pass over the second partition of Poland in
+1792. You all remember what passed on that
+occasion, the universal abhorrence expressed by
+every man and every writer of every party, the
+succors that were publicly preparing by large
+bodies of individuals of all parties for the
+oppressed Poles.</p>
+
+<p>I hasten to the final dismemberment of that
+unhappy kingdom, which seems to me the most<span class="pagenum" id="Page_247">247</span>
+striking example in our history of the habitual,
+principled, and deeply rooted forbearance of
+those who administer the law toward political
+writers. We were engaged in the most extensive,
+bloody, and dangerous war that this
+country ever knew; and the parties to the dismemberment
+of Poland were our allies, and
+our only powerful and effective allies. We had
+every motive of policy to court their friendship.
+Every reason of state seemed to require that we
+should not permit them to be abused and
+vilified by English writers. What was the fact?
+Did any Englishman consider himself at liberty,
+on account of temporary interests, however
+urgent, to silence those feelings of humanity
+and justice which guard the certain and permanent
+interests of all countries? You all
+remember that every voice, and every pen, and
+every press in England were unceasingly employed
+to brand that abominable robbery. You
+remember that this was not confined to private
+writers, but that the same abhorrence was expressed
+by every member of both Houses of
+Parliament who was not under the restraints of
+ministerial reserve. No minister dared even to
+blame the language of honest indignation which
+might be very inconvenient to his most important<span class="pagenum" id="Page_248">248</span>
+political projects; and I hope I may venture
+to say that no English assembly would
+have endured such a sacrifice of eternal justice
+to any miserable interest of an hour. Did the
+law-officers of the crown venture to come into
+a court of justice to complain of the boldest of
+the publications of that time? They did not.
+I do not say that they felt any disposition to
+do so. I believe that they could not. But I do
+say that if they had; if they had spoken of the
+necessity of confining our political writers to
+cold narrative and unfeeling argument; if they
+had informed the jury that they did not prosecute
+history, but invective; that if private
+writers be at all to blame great princes, it must
+be with moderation and decorum, the sound
+heads and honest hearts of an English jury
+would have confounded such sophistry, and
+declared by their verdict that moderation of
+language is a relative term, which varies with
+the subject to which it is applied; that atrocious
+crimes are not to be related as calmly and coolly
+as indifferent or trifling events; that if there be
+a decorum due to exalted rank and authority,
+there is also a much more sacred decorum due
+to virtue and to human nature, which would be
+outraged and trampled under foot by speaking<span class="pagenum" id="Page_249">249</span>
+of guilt in a lukewarm language, falsely
+called moderate.</p>
+
+<p>Soon after, gentlemen, there followed an act,
+in comparison with which all the deeds of rapine
+and blood perpetrated in the world are
+innocence itself—the invasion and destruction
+of Switzerland, that unparalleled scene of guilt
+and enormity; that unprovoked aggression
+against an innocent country, which had been
+the sanctuary of peace and liberty for three centuries;
+respected as a sort of sacred territory
+by the fiercest ambition; raised, like its own
+mountains, beyond the region of the storms
+which raged around on every side; the only
+warlike people that never sent forth armies to
+disturb their neighbors; the only government
+that ever accumulated treasures without imposing
+taxes, an innocent treasure, unstained by
+the tears of the poor, the inviolate patrimony
+of the commonwealth, which attested the virtue
+of a long series of magistrates, but which
+at length caught the eye of the spoiler, and
+became the fatal occasion of their ruin! Gentlemen,
+the destruction of such a country, “its
+cause so innocent, and its fortune so lamentable!”
+made a deep impression on the people of
+England. I will ask my learned friend, if we had<span class="pagenum" id="Page_250">250</span>
+then been at peace with the French Republic,
+whether we must have been silent spectators of
+the foulest crimes that ever blotted the name
+of humanity! whether we must, like cowards
+and slaves, have repressed the compassion and
+indignation with which that horrible scene of
+tyranny had filled our hearts? Let me suppose,
+gentlemen, that <span class="smcap">Aloys Reding</span>, who has
+displayed in our times the simplicity, magnanimity,
+and piety of ancient heroes, had, after
+his glorious struggle, honored this kingdom by
+choosing it as his refuge; that after performing
+prodigies of valor at the head of his handful of
+heroic peasants on the field of Morgarten,
+where his ancestor, the <em>Landmann Reding</em>, had,
+five hundred years before, defeated the first oppressors
+of Switzerland, he had selected this
+country to be his residence, as the chosen
+abode of liberty, as the ancient and inviolable
+asylum of the oppressed; would my learned
+friend have had the boldness to have said to
+this hero, “that he must hide his tears” (the
+tears shed by a hero over the ruins of his
+country!) “lest they might provoke the resentment
+of <em>Reubell</em> or <em>Rapinat</em>! that he must
+smother the sorrow and the anger with which
+his heart was loaded; that he must breathe his<span class="pagenum" id="Page_251">251</span>
+murmurs low, lest they might be overheard by
+the oppressor!” Would this have been the
+language of my learned friend? I know that it
+would not. I know that by such a supposition
+I have done wrong to his honorable feelings, to
+his honest English heart. I am sure that he
+knows as well as I do, that a nation which
+should <em>thus</em> receive the oppressed of other
+countries would be preparing its own neck for
+the yoke. He knows the slavery which such a
+nation would deserve, and must speedily incur.
+He knows that sympathy with the unmerited
+sufferings of others, and disinterested anger
+against their oppressors, are, if I may so speak,
+the masters which are appointed by Providence
+to teach us fortitude in the defence of our own
+rights; that selfishness is a dastardly principle,
+which betrays its charge and flies from its post;
+and that those only can defend themselves with
+valor who are animated by the moral approbation
+with which they can survey their sentiments
+toward others, who are ennobled in their own
+eyes by a consciousness that they are fighting
+for justice as well as interest; a consciousness
+which none can feel but those who have felt for
+the wrongs of their brethren. These are the
+sentiments which my learned friend would have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_252">252</span>
+felt. He would have told the hero: “Your
+confidence is not deceived; this is still that England,
+of which the history may, perhaps, have
+contributed to fill your heart with the heroism
+of liberty. Every other country of Europe is
+crouching under the bloody tyrants who destroyed
+your country. <em>We</em> are unchanged; we
+are still the same people which received with
+open arms the victims of the tyranny of Philip
+II. and Louis XIV. We shall not exercise a
+cowardly and clandestine humanity! Here we
+are not so dastardly as to rob you of your greatest
+consolation. Here, protected by a free,
+brave, and high-minded people, you may give
+vent to your indignation; you may proclaim
+the crimes of your tyrants; you may devote
+them to the execration of mankind; there is
+still one spot upon earth in which they are abhorred,
+without being dreaded!”<a id="FNanchor_35" href="#Footnote_35" class="fnanchor">35</a></p>
+
+<p>I am aware, gentlemen, that I have already
+abused your indulgence, but I must entreat you
+to bear with me for a short time longer, to
+allow me to suppose a case which might have
+occurred, in which you will see the horrible consequences
+of enforcing rigorously principles of
+law, which I can not counteract, against political
+writers. We might have been at peace with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_253">253</span>
+France during the whole of that terrible period
+which elapsed between August, 1792 and 1794,
+which has been usually called the reign of
+Robespierre!—the only series of crimes, perhaps,
+in history which, in spite of the common
+disposition to exaggerate extraordinary facts,
+has been beyond measure underrated in public
+opinion. I say this, gentlemen, after an investigation
+which, I think, entitles me to affirm
+it with confidence. Men’s minds were oppressed
+by atrocity and the multitude of crimes; their
+humanity and their indolence took refuge in
+skepticism from such an overwhelming mass of
+guilt; and the consequence was, that all these
+unparalleled enormities, though proved not
+only with the fullest historical but with the
+strictest judicial evidence, were at the time only
+half believed, and are now scarcely half remembered.
+When these atrocities were daily perpetrating,
+of which the greatest part are as little
+known to the public in general as the campaigns
+of Genghis Khan, but are still protected from
+the scrutiny of men by the immensity of those
+voluminous records of guilt in which they are
+related, and under the mass of which they will
+be buried till some historian be found with patience
+and courage enough to drag them forth<span class="pagenum" id="Page_254">254</span>
+into light, for the shame, indeed, but for the instruction
+of mankind—when these crimes were
+perpetrating, which had the peculiar malignity,
+from the pretexts with which they were covered,
+of making the noblest objects of human
+pursuit seem odious and detestable; which have
+almost made the names of liberty, reformation,
+and humanity synonymous with anarchy, robbery,
+and murder; which thus threatened not only
+to extinguish every principle of improvement,
+to arrest the progress of civilized society, and
+to disinherit future generations of that rich
+succession which they were entitled to expect
+from the knowledge and wisdom of the present,
+but to destroy the civilization of Europe, which
+never gave such a proof of its vigor and robustness
+as in being able to resist their destructive
+power—when all these horrors were acting in
+the greatest empire of the continent, I will ask
+my learned friend, if we had then been at peace
+with France, how English writers were to
+relate them so as to escape the charge of libelling
+a friendly government?</p>
+
+<p>When Robespierre, in the debates in the
+National Convention on the mode of murdering
+their blameless sovereign, objected to the
+formal and tedious mode of murder called<span class="pagenum" id="Page_255">255</span>
+a trial, and proposed to put him immediately to
+death, “on the principles of insurrection,” because,
+to doubt the guilt of the king would be
+to doubt the innocence of the Convention; and
+if the king were not a traitor, the Convention
+must be rebels; would my learned friend have
+had an English writer state all this with
+“<em>decorum and moderation</em>?” Would he have
+had an English writer state that though this
+reasoning was not perfectly agreeable to our
+national laws, or perhaps to our national prejudices,
+yet it was not for him to make any observations
+on the judicial proceedings of foreign
+states?</p>
+
+<p>When Marat, in the same Convention, called
+for two hundred and seventy thousand heads
+must our English writers have said that the
+remedy did, indeed, seem to their weak judgment
+rather severe; but that it was not for
+them to judge the conduct of so illustrious an
+assembly as the National Convention, or the
+suggestions of so enlightened a statesman as
+M. Marat?</p>
+
+<p>When that Convention resounded with applause
+at the news of several hundred aged
+priests being thrown into the Loire, and particularly
+at the exclamation of Carrier, who<span class="pagenum" id="Page_256">256</span>
+communicated the intelligence, “What a revolutionary
+torrent is the Loire”—when these
+suggestions and narrations of murder, which
+have hitherto been only hinted and whispered
+in the most secret cabals, in the darkest caverns
+of banditti, were triumphantly uttered,
+patiently endured, and even loudly applauded
+by an assembly of seven hundred men, acting
+in the sight of all Europe, would my learned
+friend have wished that there had been found
+in England a single writer so base as to deliberate
+upon the most safe, decorous, and polite
+manner of relating all these things to his countrymen?</p>
+
+<p>When Carrier ordered five hundred children
+under fourteen years of age to be shot, the
+greater part of whom escaped the fire from their
+size, when the poor victims ran for protection
+to the soldiers, and were bayoneted clinging
+round their knees! <em>would my friend</em>—but I can
+not pursue the strain of interrogation. It is
+too much. It would be a violence which I can
+not practise on my own feelings. It would be
+an outrage to my friend. It would be an insult
+to humanity. No! Better, ten thousand
+times better, would it be that every press in
+the world were burned; that the very use of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_257">257</span>
+letters were abolished; that we were returned
+to the honest ignorance of the rudest times,
+than that the results of civilization should be
+made subservient to the purposes of barbarism,
+than that literature should be employed to
+teach a toleration for cruelty, to weaken moral
+hatred for guilt, to deprave and brutalize the
+human mind. I know that I speak my friend’s
+feelings as well as my own when I say God
+forbid that the dread of any punishment should
+ever make any Englishman an accomplice in
+so corrupting his countrymen, a public teacher
+of depravity and barbarity!</p>
+
+<p>Mortifying and horrible as the idea is, I must
+remind you, gentlemen, that even at that time,
+even under the reign of Robespierre, my learned
+friend, if he had then been attorney-general,
+might have been compelled by some most deplorable
+necessity to have come into this court
+to ask your verdict against the libellers of Barrère
+and Collot d’Herbois. Mr. Peltier then
+employed his talents against the enemies of the
+human race, as he has uniformly and bravely
+done. I do not believe that any peace, any
+political considerations, any fear of punishment
+would have silenced him. He has shown
+too much honor, and constancy, and intrepidity,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_258">258</span>
+to be shaken by such circumstances as
+these.</p>
+
+<p>My learned friend might then have been
+compelled to have filed a criminal information
+against Mr. Peltier, for “wickedly and maliciously
+intending to vilify and degrade Maximilian
+Robespierre, President of the Committee
+of Public Safety of the French Republic!” He
+might have been reduced to the sad necessity
+of appearing before you to belie his own better
+feelings, to prosecute Mr. Peltier for publishing
+those sentiments which my friend himself had
+a thousand times felt, and a thousand times expressed.
+He might have been obliged even to
+call for punishment upon Mr. Peltier for language
+which he and all mankind would forever
+despise Mr. Peltier if he were not to employ.
+Then, indeed, gentlemen, we should have seen
+the last humiliation fall on England; the tribunals,
+the spotless and venerable tribunals, of
+this free country reduced to be the ministers of
+the vengeance of Robespierre! What could
+have rescued us from this last disgrace? <em>The
+honesty and courage of a jury.</em> They would
+have delivered the judges of this country from
+the dire necessity of inflicting punishment on a
+brave and virtuous man, because he spoke<span class="pagenum" id="Page_259">259</span>
+truth of a monster. They would have despised
+the threats of a foreign tyrant, as their ancestors
+braved the power of oppression at home.</p>
+
+<p>In the court where we are now met, Cromwell
+twice sent a satirist on his tyranny to be
+convicted and punished as a libeller, and in this
+court, almost in sight of the scaffold streaming
+with the blood of his sovereign, within hearing
+of the clash of his bayonets which drove out
+Parliament with contumely, two successive juries
+rescued the intrepid satirist [Lilburne]
+from his fangs, and sent out with defeat and
+disgrace the usurper’s attorney-general from
+what he had the insolence to call <em>his</em> court!
+Even then, gentlemen, when all law and liberty
+were trampled under the feet of a military banditti;
+when those great crimes were perpetrated
+on a high place and with a high hand against
+those who were the objects of public veneration,
+which, more than any thing else, break
+their spirits and confound their moral sentiments,
+obliterate the distinctions between right
+and wrong in their understanding, and teach
+the multitude to feel no longer any reverence for
+that justice which they thus see triumphantly
+dragged at the chariot-wheels of a tyrant; even
+then, when this unhappy country, triumphant,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_260">260</span>
+indeed, abroad, but enslaved at home, had
+no prospect but that of a long succession of
+tyrants wading through slaughter to a throne—<em>even
+then, I say, when all seemed lost, the unconquerable
+spirit of English liberty survived in the
+hearts of English jurors</em>. That spirit is, I trust
+in God, not extinct; and if any modern tyrant
+were, in the drunkenness of his insolence, to
+hope to overawe an English jury, I trust and I
+believe that they would tell him: “Our ancestors
+braved the bayonets of Cromwell; we bid
+defiance to yours. <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Contempsi Catilinæ gladios—non
+pertimescam tuos!</i>”</p>
+
+<p>What could be such a tyrant’s means of overawing
+a jury? As long as their country exists,
+they are girt round with impenetrable armor.
+Till the destruction of their country, no danger
+can fall upon them for the performance of their
+duty, and I do trust that there is no Englishman
+so unworthy of life as to desire to outlive
+England. But if any of us are condemned to
+the cruel punishment of surviving our country—if,
+in the inscrutable counsels of Providence,
+this favored seat of justice and liberty, this
+noblest work of human wisdom and virtue, be
+destined to destruction, which I shall not be
+charged with national prejudice for saying<span class="pagenum" id="Page_261">261</span>
+would be the most dangerous wound ever inflicted
+on civilization; at least let us carry with
+us into our sad exile the consolation that we
+ourselves have not violated the rights of hospitality
+to exiles—that we have not torn from
+the altar the suppliant who claimed protection
+as the voluntary victim of loyalty and conscience!</p>
+
+<p>Gentlemen, I now leave this unfortunate gentleman
+in your hands. His character and his
+situation might interest your humanity; but,
+on his behalf, I only ask justice from you. I
+only ask a favorable construction of what can
+not be said to be more than ambiguous language,
+and this you will soon be told, from the
+highest authority, is a part of justice.</p>
+
+<blockquote class="end">
+
+<p>Notwithstanding the great impression made by his speech,
+the charge of Lord Ellenborough made it necessary that the
+jury should render a verdict of guilty. In his instructions his
+Lordship said that under the law of England “any publication
+which tended to degrade, revile, and defame persons in
+considerable situations of power and dignity, in foreign countries,
+may be taken and treated as a libel, and particularly
+where it has a tendency to interrupt the pacific relations of the
+two countries.”</p>
+
+<p>The jury found Peltier guilty; but as war was almost immediately
+declared, he was not brought up for sentence, but
+was set free.</p></blockquote>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_262">262</span></p>
+
+<div class="chapter">
+<h2 id="LORD_ERSKINE">LORD ERSKINE.</h2>
+</div>
+
+<p>“As an advocate in the forum, I hold him to
+be without an equal in ancient or modern
+times.” This is the judgment of the author of
+“The Lives of the Lord Chancellors,” in regard
+to Thomas, Lord Erskine. But for the
+modern student, Erskine was not merely the
+most powerful advocate that ever appealed to
+a court or a jury, but what is more important,
+he was, in a very definite sense, so closely identified
+with the establishment of certain great
+principles that lie at the foundation of modern
+social life, that a knowledge, at least, of some
+of his speeches is of no little importance. The
+rights of juries, the liberty of the press, and
+the law of treason were discussed by him not
+only with a depth of learning and a power of
+reasoning which were absolutely conclusive, but<span class="pagenum" id="Page_263">263</span>
+at the same time with a warmth and a brilliancy
+of genius which throw a peculiar charm over
+the whole of the subjects presented.</p>
+
+<p>Thomas Erskine was the youngest son of the
+Earl of Buchan, the representative of an old
+Scotch house, whose ample fortune had wasted
+away until the family was reduced to actual
+poverty. Just before the birth of the future
+Lord Chancellor, the Earl of Buchan abandoned
+his ancient seat, and with wife and children
+took up his abode in an upper flat of a
+lofty house in the old town of Edinburgh.
+Here Erskine was born on the 10th of January,
+1750. The poverty of the family made it impossible
+for him to acquire the early education
+he craved. Some years at the schools in Edinburgh,
+and a few months in the University of
+St. Andrews, completed his academic days.
+He gained a very superficial knowledge of
+Latin, and, if we may believe Lord Campbell,
+“little of Greek beyond the alphabet.” In the
+rudiments of English literature, however, he
+was well instructed; and he seems, even while<span class="pagenum" id="Page_264">264</span>
+at the university, to have acquired something
+of that freedom and nobleness of manner which
+so much distinguished him in after-life.</p>
+
+<p>The condition of the family, however, made
+it impossible for him to complete the course of
+studies at the University; and accordingly, at
+fourteen, he was placed as a midshipman in the
+navy. Here he remained four years, during
+which time he visited different parts of the
+globe, including the Indies and the English
+colonies in North America. At the end of his
+term he determined, like the elder Pitt, to enter
+the army; and, taking the whole of his small
+patrimony for the purpose, he bought an ensign’s
+commission in the Royals or First Regiment
+of Foot. Here he remained from the
+time he was eighteen till he was twenty-five.
+At twenty he was married to a lady of respectability,
+though without fortune. But this step,
+which, with most persons, would have been the
+sure precursor of poverty and obscurity, turned
+out in the case of Erskine to be a means of inspiration
+and assistance. His mind was balanced,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_265">265</span>
+and his vivacity was reduced to earnestness.
+As the regiment was in garrison, he had
+abundant leisure, and he applied himself in the
+society of his wife to the systematic study of
+the masterpieces of English literature. The
+best parts of Milton and Shakespeare he acquired
+such mastery of that he continued to know
+them by heart throughout life. It is evident
+that his attainments were beginning to attract
+attention; for, in April of 1772, Boswell speaks
+of him as dining with Johnson, and characterizes
+him as “a young officer in the regimentals
+of the Scotch Royals, who talked with a vivacity,
+fluency, and precision which attracted particular
+attention.”</p>
+
+<p>It was not until two years after this time
+that we find Erskine interested in the proceedings
+of the courts. He subsequently declared
+that, while a witness of judicial proceedings, it
+often occurred to him in the course of the argument
+on both sides how much more clearly
+and forcibly he could have presented the points
+and urged them on the minds of the jury. It<span class="pagenum" id="Page_266">266</span>
+was this consciousness that led him one day,
+while dining with Lord Mansfield, to ask: “Is
+it impossible for me to become a lawyer?”
+The answer of the Lord Chancellor did not
+utterly discourage him; and he became a student
+of Lincoln’s Inn at the age of twenty-five.
+In order to abridge his term of study, he determined
+to take a degree at one of the universities,
+as, being a nobleman’s son, he was entitled
+to do on examination and without residence. In
+fulfilment of this design, he became a member
+of Trinity College, at Cambridge, in 1776, while
+he was prosecuting his legal studies in London,
+and still holding his commission in the army as
+a means of support. In July of 1778, when in
+his twenty-ninth year, he was called to the bar.</p>
+
+<p>A singular combination of circumstances almost
+immediately brought him forward into
+great prominence. He had been retained as
+junior counsel with four eminent advocates for
+the defence of one Captain Bailie, who had disclosed
+certain important corruptions of the
+government officials in charge of Greenwich<span class="pagenum" id="Page_267">267</span>
+Hospital. Bailie was prosecuted for libel, and
+the influence of the government was so great,
+that the four older counsellors advised him to
+accept of a compromise by withdrawing the
+charges and paying the costs. From this opinion
+Erskine alone dissented. Bailie accepted
+the advice of the young advocate with enthusiasm,
+and thus threw upon him the chief responsibility
+of conducting the cause. The result
+was one of the most extraordinary triumphs
+in the history of forensic advocacy. Erskine’s
+power revealed itself, not only in the remarkable
+learning and skill which he showed in the
+general management of the cause, but in the
+clearness with which he stated the difficult
+points at issue, and the overpowering eloquence
+with which he urged his positions on the court
+and the jury. It was his first cause. He entered
+Westminster Hall in extreme poverty;
+before he left it he had received thirty retainers
+from attorneys who had been present at the
+trial. Demand for his services continued rapidly
+to increase, till within a few years his income<span class="pagenum" id="Page_268">268</span>
+from his profession amounted to 12,000
+pounds a year.</p>
+
+<p>It was but natural that so great success at
+the bar should carry Erskine, at an early day,
+into the House of Commons. In 1783 we find
+him on the benches of the House as a supporter
+of the newly formed Coalition of North
+and Fox. His fame as an orator had become
+so great, that the Coalition hoped and the Opposition
+feared much from his eloquence. But
+he disappointed his friends, and showed as soon
+as he took the floor, that his manner was
+suited to the courts and not to the legislature.
+Croly, in his “Life of George IV.,” relates that
+great expectations were raised when it was
+announced that Erskine was to make his maiden
+speech. Pitt evidently intended to reply,
+and sat, pen in hand to take notes of his
+formidable opponent’s arguments. He wrote,
+however, but a few words. As Erskine proceeded,
+his attention relaxed; and finally, with
+a contemptuous expression, he stabbed his pen
+through the paper and threw them both on the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_269">269</span>
+floor. “Erskine,” says Croly, “never recovered
+from this expression of disdain; his voice faltered,
+he struggled through the remainder of
+his speech and sank into his seat dispirited, and
+shorn of his fame.” It was not until late in
+life, that he was able to recover the equanimity
+lost on that night in the House of Commons.
+But, although after some years, he
+made several eloquent parliamentary speeches,
+all his legislative efforts were far surpassed by
+the brilliancy of his speeches in Westminster
+Hall.</p>
+
+<p>From 1783 till 1806 Erskine adhered to the
+liberal political doctrines advocated by Fox.
+His influence in Parliament, however, was not
+great, and his principal energies were expended
+in the courts; when, in 1806, Grenville and Fox
+came into power, Erskine received the highest
+award to which an English attorney can aspire.
+But, he had not long to enjoy his new honors as
+Lord Chancellor, for Pitt soon came once more
+into power. The usages of the legal profession
+in England did not allow Erskine to return to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_270">270</span>
+the bar, and therefore the remaining years of
+his life were unimportant, and not without
+disappointment. The great advocate died
+November 17, 1823, in the seventy-fourth year
+of his age.</p>
+
+<p>Erskine was not only the greatest of English
+advocates, but he is entitled to the still higher
+distinction of having given so clear an exposition
+of some of the most subtle principles at
+the basis of human liberty, as to cause them to
+be generally recognized and accepted. It was
+his lot to be much more frequently employed
+in defence, than in prosecution, and many of
+his arguments in behalf of his clients are marvels
+of clear and enlightened exposition of
+those fundamental rights on which English liberty
+is established. His speeches in behalf of
+Gordon, Hadfield, Hardy, and Tooke, constitute,
+as a whole, the clearest exposition ever
+made of the law of treason. Of the speech in
+defence of Gordon, Lord Campbell goes so far
+as to say: “Here I find not only great acuteness,
+powerful reasoning, enthusiastic zeal, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_271">271</span>
+burning eloquence, but the most masterly view
+ever given of the English law of high treason,
+the foundation of all our liberties.” The plea in
+behalf of Stockdale, commonly considered the
+finest of Erskine’s speeches, is perhaps a still
+more felicitous exposition of the principles involved
+in the law of libel. Of his speech on
+the rights of juries, Campbell says that it displayed
+“beyond all comparison the most perfect
+union of argument and eloquence ever
+exhibited in Westminster Hall.” His address
+in behalf of Paine, if somewhat less successful
+than the great efforts just alluded to, was still
+a remarkable presentation of the principles of
+free speech. But the most noteworthy characteristic
+of Erskine was that notwithstanding
+the depth and ingenuity and learning of his
+arguments, his whole presentation was so illumined
+by the glow of his genius, that his
+address was always listened to with the greatest
+popular interest. His speech in behalf of
+Hardy was seven hours in length, but the
+crowd of eager auditors not only heard him to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_272">272</span>
+the end, but “burst out into irrepressible acclamations
+which spread through the vast multitude
+outside and were repeated to a great distance
+around.”</p>
+
+<p>It need scarcely be added that for students
+of English law, Erskine is the most important
+of all the English orators.</p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_273">273</span></p>
+
+<div class="chapter">
+<h2 id="LORD_ERSKINE2">LORD ERSKINE.<br />
+
+<span class="subhead">ON THE LIMITATIONS OF FREE SPEECH, DELIVERED<br />
+IN 1797 ON THE TRIAL OF WILLIAMS FOR<br />
+THE PUBLICATION OF PAINE’S<br />
+“AGE OF REASON.”</span></h2>
+</div>
+
+<blockquote class="end">
+
+<p>Nearly all of Erskine’s speeches were several hours in
+length and so logically constructed as not to admit of abridgment
+or excision. The more elaborate of them, therefore, are
+not adapted to the purposes of this collection. It happens,
+however, that one of the briefest of his forensic addresses was
+the one on which he himself looked with most satisfaction.
+Of the speech delivered on the prosecution of Williams he is
+reported to have said: “I would rather that all my other
+speeches were committed to the flames, or in any manner
+buried in oblivion, than that a single page of it should be
+lost.” Erskine’s “Speeches,” Am. ed., vol. i., p. 571.</p>
+
+<p>It is an interesting fact that the same great advocate who
+gave all his powers to the defence of Paine for publishing the
+“Rights of Man,” was equally earnest in the prosecution of
+Williams for the publication of the same author’s “Age of
+Reason.” But the explanation is easy. In the former work
+the author criticised, in what Erskine regarded as a legitimate
+way, the character and methods of the English Government; in
+the latter he assailed what the advocate regarded as the very
+foundations of all government and all justice. The difference<span class="pagenum" id="Page_274">274</span>
+between the two is pointed out in the following speech with a
+skill that will give the reader a good example of the orator’s
+method.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p class="sal"><span class="smcap">Gentlemen of the Jury</span>:</p>
+
+<p>The charge of blasphemy, which is put upon
+the record against the publisher of this publication,
+is not an accusation of the servants of the
+crown, but comes before you sanctioned by the
+oaths of a grand jury of the country. It stood for
+trial upon a former day; but it happening, as it
+frequently does, without any imputation upon
+the gentlemen named in the panel, that a sufficient
+number did not appear to constitute a full
+special jury, I thought it my duty to withdraw
+the cause from trial, till I could have the opportunity
+of addressing myself to you who were
+originally appointed to try it.</p>
+
+<p>I pursued this course from no jealousy of the
+common juries appointed by the laws for the
+ordinary service of the court, since my whole
+life has been one continued experience of their
+virtues; but because I thought it of great importance
+that those who were to decide upon a
+cause so very momentous to the public, should
+have the highest possible qualifications for the
+decision; that they should not only be men
+capable from their educations of forming an<span class="pagenum" id="Page_275">275</span>
+enlightened judgment, but that their situations
+should be such as to bring them within the full
+view of their country, to which, in character
+and in estimation, they were in their own
+turns to be responsible.</p>
+
+<p>Not having the honor, gentlemen, to be
+sworn for the king as one of his counsel, it has
+fallen much oftener to my lot to defend indictments
+for libels than to assist in the prosecution
+of them; but I feel no embarrassment from
+that recollection. I shall not be bound to-day
+to express a sentiment or to utter an expression
+inconsistent with those invaluable principles
+for which I have uniformly contended in
+the defence of others. Nothing that I have
+ever said, either professionally or personally,
+for the liberty of the press, do I mean to-day
+to contradict or counteract. On the contrary,
+I desire to preface the very short discourse I
+have to make to you, with reminding you that
+it is your most solemn duty to take care that it
+suffers no injury in your hands. A free and
+unlicensed press, in the just and legal sense
+of the expression, has led to all the blessings,
+both of religion and government, which Great
+Britain or any part of the world at this moment
+enjoys, and it is calculated to advance<span class="pagenum" id="Page_276">276</span>
+mankind to still higher degrees of civilization
+and happiness. But this freedom, like every
+other, must be limited to be enjoyed, and, like
+every human advantage, may be defeated by
+its abuse.</p>
+
+<p>Gentlemen, the defendant stands indicted for
+having published this book, which I have only
+read from the obligations of professional duty,
+and which I rose from the reading of with
+astonishment and disgust. Standing here with
+all the privileges belonging to the highest counsel
+for the crown, I shall be entitled to reply to
+any defence that shall be made for the publication.
+I shall wait with patience till I hear it.</p>
+
+<p>Indeed, if I were to anticipate the defence
+which I hear and read of, it would be defaming
+by anticipation the learned counsel who is to
+make it; since, if I am to collect it from a
+formal notice given to the prosecutors in the
+course of the proceedings, I have to expect that,
+instead of a defence conducted according to the
+rules and principles of English law, the foundation
+of all our laws, and the sanctions of all
+justice, are to be struck at and insulted. What
+gives the court its jurisdiction? What but the
+oath which his lordship, as well as yourselves,
+has sworn upon the gospel to fulfil? Yet in the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_277">277</span>
+King’s Court, where his Majesty is himself also
+sworn to administer the justice of England—in
+the King’s Court—who receives his high authority
+under a solemn oath to maintain the
+Christian religion, as it is promulgated by God
+in the Holy Scriptures, I am nevertheless called
+upon as counsel for the prosecution to “produce
+a certain book described in the indictment to
+be the Holy Bible.” No man deserves to be
+upon the rolls, who has dared as an attorney to
+put his name to such a notice. It is an insult
+to the authority and dignity of the court of
+which he is an officer; since it calls in question
+the very foundations of its jurisdiction. If this
+is to be the spirit and temper of the defence;
+if, as I collect from that array of books which
+are spread upon the benches behind me, this
+publication is to be vindicated by an attack of
+all the truths which the Christian religion promulgates
+to mankind, let it be remembered that
+such an argument was neither suggested nor
+justified by any thing said by me on the part of
+the prosecution.</p>
+
+<p>In this stage of the proceedings, I shall call
+for reverence to the Sacred Scriptures, not from
+their merits, unbounded as they are, but from
+their authority in a Christian country; not<span class="pagenum" id="Page_278">278</span>
+from the obligations of conscience, but from the
+rules of law. For my own part, gentlemen, I
+have been ever deeply devoted to the truths of
+Christianity; and my firm belief in the Holy
+Gospel is by no means owing to the prejudices
+of education, though I was religiously educated
+by the best of parents, but has arisen from the
+fullest and most continued reflections of my
+riper years and understanding. It forms at
+this moment the great consolation of a life,
+which, as a shadow passeth away; and without
+it, I should consider my long course of health
+and prosperity, too long perhaps and too uninterrupted
+to be good for any man, only as the
+dust which the wind scatters, and rather as a
+snare than as a blessing.</p>
+
+<p>Much, however, as I wish to support the
+authority of Scripture from a reasonable consideration
+of it, I shall repress that subject for
+the present. But if the defence, as I have
+suspected, shall bring them at all into argument
+or question, I must then fulfil a duty which I
+owe not only to the court, as counsel for the
+prosecution, but to the public, and to the world,
+to state what I feel and know concerning the
+evidences of that religion, which is denied
+without being examined, and reviled without
+being understood.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_279">279</span>
+I am well aware that by the communications
+of a free press, all the errors of mankind, from
+age to age, have been dissipated and dispelled;
+and I recollect that the world, under the banners
+of reformed Christianity, has struggled through
+persecution to the noble eminence on which it
+stands at this moment, shedding the blessings
+of humanity and science upon the nations of
+the earth.</p>
+
+<p>It may be asked, then, by what means the
+reformation would have been effected, if the
+books of the reformers had been suppressed, and
+the errors of now exploded superstitions had been
+supported by the terrors of an unreformed state?
+or how, upon such principles, any reformation,
+civil or religious, can in future be effected? The
+solution is easy: let us examine what are the
+genuine principles of the liberty of the press, as
+they regard writings upon general subjects,
+unconnected with the personal reputations of
+private men, which are wholly foreign to the
+present inquiry. They are full of simplicity,
+and are brought as near perfection, by the law
+of England, as perhaps is attainable by any of
+the frail institutions of mankind.</p>
+
+<p>Although every community must establish
+supreme authorities, founded upon fixed principles,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_280">280</span>
+and must give high powers to magistrates
+to administer laws for the preservation of
+government, and for the security of those who
+are to be protected by it; yet as infallibility
+and perfection belong neither to human individuals
+nor to human establishments, it ought
+to be the policy of all free nations, as it is most
+peculiarly the principle of our own, to permit
+the most unbounded freedom of discussion,
+even to the detection of errors in the constitution
+of the very government itself; so as that
+common decorum is observed, which every state
+must exact from its subjects and which imposes
+no restraint upon any intellectual composition,
+fairly, honestly, and decently addressed to the
+consciences and understandings of men. Upon
+this principle I have an unquestionable right, a
+right which the best subjects have exercised, to
+examine the principles and structure of the
+constitution, and by fair, manly reasoning, to
+question the practice of its administrators. I
+have a right to consider and to point out errors
+in the one or in the other; and not merely to
+reason upon their existence, but to consider the
+means of their reformation.</p>
+
+<p>By such free, well-intentioned, modest, and
+dignified communication of sentiments and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_281">281</span>
+opinions, all nations have been gradually improved,
+and milder laws and purer religions
+have been established. The same principles
+which vindicate civil controversies, honestly
+directed, extend their protection to the sharpest
+contentions on the subject of religious
+faiths. This rational and legal course of improvement
+was recognized and ratified by Lord
+Kenyon as the law of England, in the late
+trial at Guildhall, where he looked back with
+gratitude to the labors of the reformers, as the
+fountains of our religious emancipation, and of
+the civil blessings that followed in their train.
+The English constitution, indeed, does not
+stop short in the toleration of religious opinions,
+but liberally extends it to practice. It
+permits every man, even publicly, to worship
+God according to his own conscience, though
+in marked dissent from the national establishment,
+so as he professes the general faith, which
+is the sanction of all our moral duties, and the
+only pledge of our submission to the system
+which constitutes the state.</p>
+
+<p>Is not this freedom of controversy and
+freedom of worship sufficient for all the purposes
+of human happiness and improvement?
+Can it be necessary for either, that the law<span class="pagenum" id="Page_282">282</span>
+should hold out indemnity to those who wholly
+abjure and revile the government of their
+country, or the religion on which it rests for its
+foundation? I expect to hear in answer to what
+I am now saying, much that will offend me.
+My learned friend, from the difficulties of his
+situation, which I know from experience how
+to feel for very sincerely, may be driven to advance
+propositions which it may be my duty
+with much freedom to reply to; and the law
+will sanction that freedom. But will not the
+ends of justice be completely answered by my
+exercise of that right, in terms that are decent,
+and calculated to expose its defects? Or will
+my argument suffer, or will public justice be
+impeded, because neither private honor and
+justice nor public decorum would endure my
+telling my very learned friend, because I differ
+from him in opinion, that he is a fool, a liar, and
+a scoundrel, in the face of the court? This is
+just the distinction between a book of free
+legal controversy, and the book which I am
+arraigning before you. Every man has a right
+to investigate, with decency, controversial
+points of the Christian religion; but no man
+consistently with a law which only exists under
+its sanctions has a right to deny its very existence,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_283">283</span>
+and to pour forth such shocking and insulting
+invectives as the lowest establishments
+in the gradation of civil authority ought not to
+be subjected to, and which soon would be borne
+down by insolence and disobedience, if they
+were.</p>
+
+<p>The same principle pervades the whole system
+of the law, not merely in its abstract
+theory, but in its daily and most applauded
+practice. The intercourse between the sexes,
+which, properly regulated, not only continues,
+but humanizes and adorns our natures, is the
+foundation of all the thousand romances, plays,
+and novels, which are in the hands of everybody.
+Some of them lead to the confirmation of every
+virtuous principle; others, though with the
+same profession, address the imagination in a
+manner to lead the passions into dangerous excesses;
+but though the law does not nicely
+discriminate the various shades which distinguish
+such works from one another, so as to
+suffer many to pass, through its liberal spirit,
+that upon principle ought to be suppressed,
+would it or does it tolerate, or does any decent
+man contend that it ought to pass by unpunished,
+libels of the most shameless obscenity,
+manifestly pointed to debauch innocence and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_284">284</span>
+to blast and poison the morals of the rising
+generation? This is only another illustration
+to demonstrate the obvious distinction between
+the work of an author who fairly exercises the
+powers of his mind in investigating the religion
+or government of any country, and him who attacks
+the rational existence of every religion or
+government, and brands with absurdity and
+folly the state which sanctions, and the obedient
+tools who cherish, the delusion. But this
+publication appears to me to be as cruel and mischievous
+in its effects, as it is manifestly illegal
+in its principles; because it strikes at the best—sometimes,
+alas!—the only refuge and consolation
+amidst the distresses and afflictions of
+the world. The poor and humble, whom it
+affects to pity, may be stabbed to the heart by
+it. They have more occasion for firm hopes
+beyond the grave than the rich and prosperous
+who have other comforts to render life delightful.
+I can conceive a distressed but virtuous
+man, surrounded by his children looking up to
+him for bread when he has none to give them;
+sinking under the last day’s labor, and unequal
+to the next, yet still, supported by confidence
+in the hour when all tears shall be wiped from
+the eyes of affliction, bearing the burden laid<span class="pagenum" id="Page_285">285</span>
+upon him by a mysterious Providence which he
+adores, and anticipating with exultation the revealed
+promises of his Creator, when he shall
+be greater than the greatest, and happier than
+the happiest of mankind. What a change in
+such a mind might be wrought by such a merciless
+publication? Gentlemen, whether these
+remarks are the overcharged declamations of
+an accusing counsel, or the just reflections of a
+man anxious for the public happiness, which is
+best secured by the morals of a nation, will be
+soon settled by an appeal to the passages in the
+work, that are selected by the indictment for
+your consideration and judgment. You are at
+liberty to connect them with every context and
+sequel, and to bestow upon them the mildest
+interpretations. [Here Mr. Erskine read and
+commented upon several of the selected passages,
+and then proceeded as follows:]</p>
+
+<p>Gentlemen, it would be useless and disgusting
+to enumerate the other passages within the
+scope of the indictment. How any man can
+rationally vindicate the publication of such a
+book, in a country where the Christian religion
+is the very foundation of the law of the land, I
+am totally at a loss to conceive, and have no
+ideas for the discussion of. How is a tribunal<span class="pagenum" id="Page_286">286</span>
+whose whole jurisdiction is founded upon the
+solemn belief and practice of what is here denied
+as falsehood, and reprobated as impiety,
+to deal with such an anomalous defence? Upon
+what principle is it even offered to the court,
+whose authority is contemned and mocked at?
+If the religion proposed to be called in question,
+is not previously adopted in belief and solemnly
+acted upon, what authority has the court to
+pass any judgment at all of acquittal or condemnation?
+Why am I now or upon any other
+occasion to submit to his lordship’s authority?
+Why am I now or at any time to address
+twelve of my equals, as I am now addressing
+you, with reverence and submission? Under
+what sanction are the witnesses to give their
+evidence, without which there can be no trial?
+Under what obligations can I call upon you, the
+jury representing your country, to administer
+justice? Surely upon no other than that you
+are sworn to administer it, under the oaths you
+have taken. The whole judicial fabric, from
+the king’s sovereign authority to the lowest
+office of magistracy, has no other foundation.
+The whole is built, both in form and substance,
+upon the same oath of every one of its ministers
+to do justice, as God shall help them hereafter.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_287">287</span>
+What God? And what hereafter? That God,
+undoubtedly, who has commanded kings to
+rule, and judges to decree justice; who has
+said to witnesses, not only by the voice of nature
+but in revealed commandments, “Thou
+shalt not bear false testimony against thy neighbor”;
+and who has enforced obedience to them
+by the revelation of the unutterable blessings
+which shall attend their observance, and the
+awful punishments which shall await upon their
+transgression.</p>
+
+<p>But it seems this is an age of reason, and the
+time and the person are at last arrived that are
+to dissipate the errors which have overspread
+the past generations of ignorance. The believers
+in Christianity are many, but it belongs
+to the few that are wise to correct their credulity.
+Belief is an act of reason, and superior
+reason may, therefore, dictate to the weak. In
+running the mind over the long list of sincere
+and devout Christians, I can not help lamenting
+that Newton had not lived to this day, to have
+had his shallowness filled up with this new flood
+of light. But the subject is too awful for irony,
+I will speak plainly and directly. Newton was
+a Christian; Newton, whose mind burst forth
+from the fetters fastened by nature upon our<span class="pagenum" id="Page_288">288</span>
+finite conceptions; Newton, whose science was
+truth, and the foundations of whose knowledge
+of it was philosophy; not those visionary and
+arrogant presumptions which too often usurp
+its name, but philosophy resting upon the basis
+of mathematics, which, like figures, can not lie;
+Newton, who carried the line and rule to the
+uttermost barriers of creation, and explored the
+principles by which all created matter exists
+and is held together. But this extraordinary
+man, in the mighty reach of his mind, overlooked,
+perhaps, the errors which a minuter investigation
+of the created things on this earth
+might have taught him. What shall then be
+said of Mr. Boyle, who looked into the organic
+structure of all matter, even to the inanimate
+substances which the foot treads upon? Such
+a man may be supposed to have been equally
+qualified with Mr. Paine to look up through
+nature to nature’s God; yet the result of all
+his contemplations was the most confirmed and
+devout belief in all which the other holds in
+contempt, as despicable and drivelling superstition.
+But this error might, perhaps, arise from
+a want of due attention to the foundations of
+human judgment, and the structure of that understanding
+which God has given us for the investigation<span class="pagenum" id="Page_289">289</span>
+of truth. Let that question be
+answered by Mr. Locke, who to the highest
+pitch of devotion and adoration was a Christian;
+Mr. Locke, whose office was to detect the
+errors of thinking, by going up to the very
+fountains of thought, and to direct into the
+proper track of reasoning the devious mind of
+man, by showing him its whole process, from
+the first perceptions of sense to the last conclusions
+of ratiocination; putting a rein upon
+false opinion, by practical rules for the conduct
+of human judgment.</p>
+
+<p>But these men, it may be said, were only
+deep thinkers, and lived in their closets, unaccustomed
+to the traffic of the world, and to the
+laws which practically regulate mankind.
+Gentlemen, in the place where we now sit to
+administer the justice of this great country, the
+never-to-be-forgotten Sir Mathew Hale presided;
+whose faith in Christianity is an exalted
+commentary upon its truth and reason, and
+whose life was a glorious example of its fruits;
+whose justice, drawn, from the pure fountain
+of the Christian dispensation, will be, in all
+ages, a subject of the highest reverence and admiration.
+But it is said by the author, that
+the Christian fable is but the tale of the more<span class="pagenum" id="Page_290">290</span>
+ancient superstitions of the world, and may be
+easily detected by a proper understanding of
+the mythologies of the heathens. Did Milton
+understand those mythologies? Was he less
+versed than Mr. Paine in the superstitions
+of the world? No; they were the subject of
+his immortal song; and, though shut out from
+all recurrence to them, he poured them forth
+from the stores of a memory rich with all that
+man ever knew, and laid them in their order as
+the illustration of real and exalted faith, the
+unquestionable source of that fervid genius
+which has cast a kind of shade upon most of
+the other works of man:</p>
+
+<div class="poem-container">
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="iq">“He pass’d the flaming bounds of place and time:<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The living throne, the sapphire blaze,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Where angels tremble while they gaze,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">He saw, but blasted with excess of light,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Closed his eyes in endless night.”<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+</div>
+
+<p class="in0">But it was the light of the body only that was
+extinguished: “The celestial light shone inward,
+and enabled him to justify the ways of
+God to man.” The result of his thinking was,
+nevertheless, not quite the same as the author’s
+before us. The mysterious incarnation of our
+blessed Saviour, which this work blasphemes in
+words so wholly unfit for the mouth of a Christian,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_291">291</span>
+or for the ear of a court of justice, that I
+dare not, and will not, give them utterance.
+Milton made the grand conclusion of his “Paradise
+Lost,” the rest from his finished labors, and
+the ultimate hope, expectation, and glory of
+the world.</p>
+
+<div class="poem-container">
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="iq">“A virgin is his mother, but his sire,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The power of the Most High; he shall ascend<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The throne hereditary, and bound his reign<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">With earth’s wide bounds, his glory with the heavens.”<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+</div>
+
+<p class="in0">The immortal poet having thus put into the
+mouth of the angel the prophecy of man’s redemption,
+follows it with that solemn and beautiful
+admonition, addressed in the poem to our
+great first parent, but intended as an address to
+his posterity through all generations:</p>
+
+<div class="poem-container">
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="iq">“This having learn’d, thou hast attain’d the sum<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Of wisdom; hope no higher, though all the stars<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Thou knew’st by name, and all th’ ethereal powers,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">All secrets of the deep, all nature’s works,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Or works of God in heaven, air, earth, or sea,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And all the riches of this world enjoy’dst,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And all the rule, one empire; only add<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Deeds to thy knowledge answerable, add faith,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Add virtue, patience, temperance, add love,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">By name to come call’d charity, the soul<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Of all the rest; then wilt thou not be loth<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">To leave this paradise, but shalt possess<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">A paradise within thee, happier far.”<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+</div>
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_292">292</span>
+Thus, you find all that is great, or wise, or
+splendid, or illustrious, amongst created things;
+all the minds gifted beyond ordinary nature, if
+not inspired by its universal Author for the advancement
+and dignity of the world, though
+divided by distant ages, and by clashing
+opinions, yet joining as it were in one sublime
+chorus, to celebrate the truths of Christianity;
+laying upon its holy altars the never-fading
+offerings of their immortal wisdom.</p>
+
+<p>Against all this concurring testimony, we find
+suddenly, from the author of this book, that
+the Bible teaches nothing but “lies, obscenity,
+cruelty, and injustice.” Had he ever read our
+Saviour’s sermon on the mount, in which the
+great principles of our faith and duty are
+summed up? Let us all but read and practise
+it, and lies, obscenity, cruelty, and injustice,
+and all human wickedness, will be banished
+from the world!</p>
+
+<p>Gentlemen, there is but one consideration
+more, which I cannot possibly omit, because I
+confess it affects me very deeply. The author
+of this book has written largely on public
+liberty and government; and this last performance,
+which I am now prosecuting, has, on that
+account, been more widely circulated, and principally<span class="pagenum" id="Page_293">293</span>
+among those who attached themselves
+from principle to his former works. This circumstance
+renders a public attack upon all
+revealed religion from such a writer infinitely
+more dangerous. The religious and moral sense
+of the people of Great Britain is the great
+anchor which alone can hold the vessel of the
+state amidst the storms which agitate the
+world; and if the mass of the people were debauched
+from the principles of religion, the
+true basis of that humanity, charity, and benevolence,
+which have been so long the national
+characteristic, instead of mixing myself, as I
+sometimes have done, in political reformations,
+I would retire to the uttermost corners of the
+earth, to avoid their agitation; and would bear,
+not only the imperfections and abuses complained
+of in our own wise establishment, but
+even the worst government that ever existed in
+the world, rather than go to the work of reformation
+with a multitude set free from all the
+charities of Christianity, who had no other
+sense of God’s existence, than was to be collected
+from Mr. Paine’s observations of nature,
+which the mass of mankind have no leisure to
+contemplate, which promises no future rewards
+to animate the good in the glorious pursuit of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_294">294</span>
+human happiness, nor punishments to deter the
+wicked from destroying it even in its birth.
+The people of England are a religious people,
+and, with the blessing of God, so far as it is in
+my power, I will lend my aid to keep them so.</p>
+
+<p>I have no objections to the most extended
+and free discussions upon doctrinal points of the
+Christian religion; and though the law of
+England does not permit it, I do not dread the
+reasonings of deists against the existence of
+Christianity itself, because, as was said by its
+divine author, if it be of God, it will stand. An
+intellectual book, however erroneous, addressed
+to the intellectual world upon so profound and
+complicated a subject, can never work the mischief
+which this indictment is calculated to repress.
+Such works will only incite the minds of
+men enlightened by study, to a closer investigation
+of a subject well worthy of their deepest
+and continued contemplation. The powers of
+the mind are given for human improvement in
+the progress of human existence. The changes
+produced by such reciprocations of lights and
+intelligencies are certain in their progression,
+and make their way imperceptibly, by the final
+and irresistible power of truth. If Christianity
+be founded in falsehood, let us become deists<span class="pagenum" id="Page_295">295</span>
+in this manner, and I am contented. But this
+book has no such object, and no such capacity;
+it presents no arguments to the wise and enlightened;
+on the contrary, it treats the faith
+and opinions of the wisest with the most shocking
+contempt, and stirs up men, without the
+advantages of learning, or sober thinking, to a
+total disbelief of every thing hitherto held
+sacred; and consequently to a rejection of all
+the laws and ordinances of the state, which
+stand only upon the assumption of their truth.</p>
+
+<p>Gentlemen, I can not conclude without expressing
+the deepest regret at all attacks upon
+the Christian religion by authors who profess to
+promote the civil liberties of the world. For
+under what other auspices than Christianity
+have the lost and subverted liberties of mankind
+in former ages been reasserted? By what
+zeal, but the warm zeal of devout Christians,
+have English liberties been redeemed and consecrated?
+Under what other sanctions, even in
+our own days, have liberty and happiness been
+spreading to the uttermost corners of the earth?
+What work of civilization, what Commonwealth
+of greatness, has this bald religion of nature ever
+established? We see, on the contrary, the nations
+that have no other light than that of nature<span class="pagenum" id="Page_296">296</span>
+to direct them, sunk in barbarism, or slaves
+to arbitrary governments; whilst under the
+Christian dispensation, the great career of the
+world has been slowly but clearly advancing,
+lighter at every step from the encouraging
+prophecies of the gospel, and leading, I trust, in
+the end to universal and eternal happiness.
+Each generation of mankind can see but a few
+revolving links of this mighty and mysterious
+chain; but by doing our several duties in our
+allotted stations, we are sure that we are fulfilling
+the purposes of our existence. You, I trust,
+will fulfil yours this day.<a id="FNanchor_36" href="#Footnote_36" class="fnanchor">36</a></p>
+
+<hr />
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_297">297</span></p>
+
+<div class="chapter"><div class="footnotes">
+<h2 id="ILLUSTRATIVE_NOTES" class="nobreak p1">ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES.</h2>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 1</span></a>, <a href="#Page_24">p. 24</a>.—This is not quite a correct representation
+of Mr. Erskine’s declaration. He had not said that all discussion
+was rendered “impossible,” but that the treatment of
+the French minister by the English Government was “so
+harsh and irritating as to defeat all the objects of negotiation.”
+As a matter of fact, informal communications continued to
+pass between the two governments. But the agents of France
+were not accredited, and this fact threw upon England, in the
+judgment of the French, the responsibilities of the war. See
+“Parliamentary History,” xxxiv., 1289.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 2</span></a>, <a href="#Page_30">p. 30</a>.—By the Treaty of Westphalia, which in
+1648 established the international relations of modern Europe,
+the river Scheldt was closed to general commerce out of consideration
+for Holland. It remained thus closed till 1792,
+when after the battle of Jemappes, in which the French defeated
+the Austrians and Prussians, a passage was forced by
+the French down to the sea. As England was the especial
+protector of Holland it was but natural that Pitt should protest
+against the act, not only as a national affront, but also as an
+expression of willingness on the part of France to set aside at
+her convenience the provisions of the great Treaty of Westphalia.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 3</span></a>, <a href="#Page_31">p. 31</a>.—The cause of this incorporating of Savoy
+was the famous meeting at Mantua in May of 1791. The
+Count d’Artois, brother of Louis XVI., the Emperor of Austria,
+the King of Spain, and the King of Sardinia, had secured
+an agreement from those monarchs to send 100,000 men to the
+borders of France in the hope that the French, terrified by the
+alliance and by such an army, would seek peace by submitting
+to the Bourbon king, and asking for mediation. Though the
+plan was rejected by Louis, it none the less showed the animus
+of the allies. The details may be seen in Mignet, 101, and in
+Alison, tenth ed., ii., 412. On the 27th of November, 1792,
+the National Convention annexed Savoy and erected it into a
+department of France in direct opposition to the Constitution
+of the Republic, which declared that there should be no extension
+of the territory.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_298">298</span></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 4</span></a>, <a href="#Page_32">p. 32</a>.—By the decree alluded to, the National
+Convention declared that they would “grant fraternity and
+assistance to all those peoples who wish to procure liberty.”
+They also charged their generals to give assistance to such
+peoples, and to defend all citizens that have suffered or
+are now suffering in the cause of liberty. Within ten days
+after the passage of this decree an English society sent
+delegates to Paris, who presented at the bar of the Convention
+a congratulatory address on “the glorious triumph
+of liberty on the 10th of August.” The President of the
+Convention replied in a grandiloquent speech, in which
+among other things he said: “The shades of Hampden and
+Sydney hover over your heads, and the moment without doubt
+approaches when the French will bring congratulations to the
+National Convention of Great Britain. Generous Republicans!
+your appearance among us prepares a subject for
+history!” By nonsense of this kind the French were constantly
+deceived in regard to the attitude of England.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 5</span></a>, <a href="#Page_35">p. 35</a>.—This was not the language of exaggeration.
+The decree of December 15, 1792, required the French generals
+wherever they marched, to proclaim “the abolition of all
+existing feudal and manorial rights, together with all imposts,
+contributions, and tithes”; to declare “the sovereignty of the
+people and the suppression of all existing authorities”; to convoke
+the people “for the establishment of a provisional government”;
+to place “all property of the prince and his adherents,
+and the property of all public bodies, both civil and
+religious, under the guardianship of the French Republic”; to
+provide, as soon as possible, “for the organization of a free
+and popular form of government.” This was literally a declaration
+of war against all governments then existing in Europe.
+The decree is given in the <cite>Ann. Reg.</cite>, xxxiv., 155.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_299">299</span></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 6</span></a>, <a href="#Page_39">p. 39</a>.—The orator then proceeds to explain certain
+causes of misunderstanding which are of no general interest,
+and therefore are omitted. To this explanation he also attaches
+further proofs of the hostile purpose of France, and of
+the fact that England had no connection with Austria and
+Prussia at the time of their first attack. The passage seems to
+be an unnecessary elaboration of what has gone before, and
+therefore is also omitted.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_7" href="#FNanchor_7" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 7</span></a>, <a href="#Page_41">p. 41</a>.—This province, which, from 1305 to 1377,
+was the residence of the popes, continued till the French
+Revolution to belong to the papal government. It was seized
+in 1790, and the next year was incorporated into France, where
+it has since remained.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_8" href="#FNanchor_8" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 8</span></a>, <a href="#Page_41">p. 41</a>.—This is not quite accurate. The meeting at
+Mantua had been held, and the monarchs of Austria, Spain,
+and Sardinia had made the agreement already described above.
+That the army of 100,000 did not march against France, was
+not from any lack of purpose on their part, but from the irresolution
+of Louis XVI.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_9" href="#FNanchor_9" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 9</span></a>, <a href="#Page_42">p. 42</a>.—In this statement, too, Pitt was not correct.
+The Declaration of Pilnitz did not leave “the internal state
+of France to be decided by the king restored to his liberty,
+<em>with the free consent of the states of the kingdom</em>;” but asked
+that the other powers would not refuse to employ jointly with
+their Majesties the most efficacious means, in proportion to
+their forces, to place the King of France “in a state to settle in
+the most perfect liberty the foundations of a monarchical government,
+<em>equally suitable to the rights of sovereigns</em> and the
+welfare of the French.” They made no allusion to the “states
+of the kingdom”; but did indicate a purpose to settle the
+foundations of the government in accordance with the rights of
+sovereigns—that is to say, their own rights. Fox’s statement,
+given in the speech that follows, was far better. He said:
+“It was a declaration of an intention on the part of the great
+powers of Germany to interfere in the internal affairs of France,
+for the purpose of regulating the government against the opinion
+of the people.” The Declaration of Pilnitz was made by
+the Emperor of Austria and the King of Prussia, in consequence
+of their belief that “the situation of the King of
+France was a matter of common interest to all the European
+sovereigns.” The Declaration is given at length in Alison,
+10th ed., ii., 415.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_300">300</span></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_10" href="#FNanchor_10" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 10</span></a>, <a href="#Page_47">p. 47</a>.—Mr. Pitt then entered into a criticism of
+some expressions uttered by Erskine, not only in his speech,
+but also in a pamphlet on the subject of the war. The criticism
+brought out a reply and a rejoinder which are of little
+interest and are therefore omitted.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_11" href="#FNanchor_11" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 11</span></a>, <a href="#Page_50">p. 50</a>.—Reference is here made to the fact that
+when in 1797 America demanded redress from France for her
+wanton attacks on American commerce, the officers of the
+French Government hinted that the payment of £50,000 by
+the Americans to the French officials would, perhaps, secure
+immunity. The letters proposing the payment of bribes,
+known as the “X.&nbsp;Y.&nbsp;Z. Correspondence,” were ordered published
+by Congress, in April of 1798. The English sent them
+everywhere throughout Europe to excite feeling against
+France. In America the indignation aroused by the suggestion
+of bribes gave rise to the cry: “Millions for defence, not
+a cent for tribute.”</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_301">301</span></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_12" href="#FNanchor_12" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 12</span></a>, <a href="#Page_51">p. 51</a>.—When Bonaparte landed in Egypt in
+December, 1798, he issued a proclamation in which, among
+other things, he exhorted the teachers in the mosques to assure
+the people he had come in fulfilment of prophecy: “Since
+the world has existed it has been written, that <em>after having
+destroyed the enemies of Islamism, and destroyed the cross</em>, I
+should come, etc.” This proclamation was published in the
+<cite>Annual Register</cite>, (xi., 265,) and not unnaturally made considerable
+sensation in England and in Europe.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_13" href="#FNanchor_13" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 13</span></a>, <a href="#Page_52">p. 52</a>.—The French in Pondicherry sent emissaries
+throughout India to organize societies for the propagation of
+their doctrines. The members were bound by a series of oaths
+to do what they could for the destruction of all kings and sovereigns.
+Hyder Ali and his son, Tippoo Saib, were the agents
+and allies of the French in accomplishing this work. These
+designs of the French in India were brought to an end by the
+victories of Lord Cornwallis.—Green’s “English People,”
+Eng. ed., iv., 332.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_14" href="#FNanchor_14" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 14</span></a>, <a href="#Page_65">p. 65</a>.—The treaty of Campo Formio was not
+negotiated by the accredited ministers of the Directory, but
+by Napoleon on his own responsibility. In explaining his
+haste, he gave as one of his reasons the necessity of being free
+to act directly against England. In one of his confidential
+letters he said: “It is indispensable for our government to
+destroy the English monarchy”; and again: “Let us concentrate
+all our activity on the marine and destroy England;
+that done, Europe is at our feet.”—Confidential letter to the
+Directory, Oct. 18, 1797. Alison, 10th ed., iv., 347.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_15" href="#FNanchor_15" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 15</span></a>, <a href="#Page_94">p. 94</a>.—The orator in this connection then proceeds
+to give at some length his reasons for attempting negotiations
+in 1796–97. These, as having no direct bearing on the
+subject discussed, are omitted.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_16" href="#FNanchor_16" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 16</span></a>, <a href="#Page_113">p. 113</a>.—For an explanation of what was done at
+Mantua, see <a href="#Footnote_3">Note 3</a>, <a href="#Page_31">p. 31</a>. On the Declaration of Pilnitz,
+see <a href="#Footnote_9">Note 9</a>, <a href="#Page_42">p. 42</a>.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_302">302</span></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_17" href="#FNanchor_17" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 17</span></a>, <a href="#Page_116">p. 116</a>.—See notes <a href="#Footnote_4">4</a> and <a href="#Footnote_5">5</a> above.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_18" href="#FNanchor_18" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 18</span></a>, <a href="#Page_119">p. 119</a>.—Reference is here made to the Treaty of
+September 26, 1786. Mr. Fox argued this question at greater
+length in a letter to his Westminster constituents. Pitt maintained
+that England in 1800 was not bound by that treaty inasmuch
+as the French Government which had made the treaty
+had been destroyed by the Revolution. In reply Fox declared
+that if the Revolution had swept away the obligation to obey
+that treaty, it must have also swept away the obligation to
+obey all others. But Pitt had often acknowledged the binding
+force of obligations entered into before the Revolution.
+Hence the treaty of 1786 was still in force; and according to
+it the dismissal of M. Chauvelin was equivalent to a declaration
+of war.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_19" href="#FNanchor_19" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 19</span></a>, <a href="#Page_121">p. 121</a>.—When the Duke of Brunswick invaded
+France in July of 1792 at the head of the Austrian and Prussian
+forces he published a manifesto which did every thing possible
+to put his masters in the wrong. The burden of the proclamation
+was that the French had usurped the reins of administration
+in France, had disturbed order, and had overturned the
+legitimate government. He declared that the allied armies
+were advancing “to put an end to anarchy in France, to arrest
+the attacks made on the altar and the throne, and to restore to
+the king the security and liberty he was deprived of.” The
+manifesto furthermore said that the “inhabitants of towns who
+dared to stand on the defensive would instantly be punished
+as rebels with the rigors of war, and their houses demolished
+and burned.” This proclamation not only showed that the
+principal object of the war was an interference with the
+domestic policy of France, but it greatly inflamed the animosities
+of the French against the foreign powers. See Mignet,
+“Fr. Rev.,” 143; v. Sybel, ii., 29.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_20" href="#FNanchor_20" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 20</span></a>, <a href="#Page_128">p. 128</a>.—It is an interesting fact that in the early
+part of 1792 Louis XVI. sent to the King of England, through
+Chauvelin and Talleyrand, asking the English Government to
+intercede to prevent military action on the part of Austria and
+Prussia. Louis appears to have seen that war on the part of
+the German powers, though intended to restore Louis himself
+to his former influence and authority, could only result in evil.
+Louis said: “I consider the success of the alliance, in which I
+wish you to concur with as much zeal as I do, as of the highest
+importance; I consider it as necessary to the stability of the
+respective constitutions of our two kingdoms; and I will add
+that our union ought to command peace to Europe.” The proposal
+was rejected, and a few weeks later Louis made a second
+attempt. He now asked the King to interpose, and by his
+wisdom and influence, “avert, while there is yet time, the progress
+of the confederacy formed against France, and which
+threatens the peace, the liberties, and the happiness of
+Europe.” This proposition, too, was rejected July 8, 1792,
+and before the end of the month France was invaded by the
+allied armies under Brunswick.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_303">303</span></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_21" href="#FNanchor_21" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 21</span></a>, <a href="#Page_134">p. 134</a>.—General Suwarroff, one of the most extraordinary
+men of his time, had begun his career in the days of
+Frederick the Great, and had contributed much to the fame of
+the Russians for bravery at the terrible battle of Kunnersdorf.
+Though now nearly seventy years of age he showed an energy
+that made his name a terror wherever he went. The campaign
+against Praga is described in Alison, 10th ed., iii., 517 <i>seq.</i>
+For his far more remarkable campaign in Italy, see vol. v.,
+45 <i>seq.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_22" href="#FNanchor_22" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 22</span></a>, <a href="#Page_142">p. 142</a>.—The allusion here is to the Treaty of
+Campo Formio, signed Oct. 17, 1797, by which a large part
+of the Venetian territory was turned over to Austria in consideration
+of the annexation of Belgium and Lombardy to
+France. The machinations by which this transaction was
+brought about were among the most perfidious in the whole
+career of Napoleon. In regard to the alleged reason of giving
+up Venice Napoleon wrote to the Directory: “I have purposely
+devised this sort of rupture, <em>in case you may wish to
+obtain five or six millions from Venice</em>.” See Lanfrey’s
+“History of Napoleon,” 1, 100; and Adams’ “Democracy
+and Monarchy in France,” 162.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_304">304</span></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_23" href="#FNanchor_23" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 23</span></a>, <a href="#Page_143">p. 143</a>.—The Emperor Paul I., father of Alexander
+I. and of Nicholas, was probably already insane at the time Fox
+was speaking. He had long shown a meddlesome disposition,
+and had interfered with the internal concerns of nearly all
+the countries on the Baltic as well as with those of Spain. Pitt
+on a former occasion had said of him: “There is no reason,
+no ground, to fear that this magnanimous prince will ever desert
+a cause in which he is so sincerely engaged.” But in spite of
+this prediction he did desert the allies and make peace with
+France. In view of these facts Fox’s ironical use of the word
+“magnanimous” was a peculiarly forcible hit.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_24" href="#FNanchor_24" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 24</span></a>, <a href="#Page_151">p. 151</a>.—In this conjecture Fox was not far from
+the language subsequently used by Napoleon. He said: “I
+then had need of war; a treaty of peace which should have
+derogated from that of Campo Formio, and annulled the creations
+of Italy, would have withered every imagination.” He
+then went on to say that Pitt’s answer was what he desired, that
+“it could not have been more favorable,” and that “with such
+impassioned antagonists he would have no difficulty in reaching
+the highest destinies.”—“Memoirs,” i., 33.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_25" href="#FNanchor_25" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 25</span></a>, <a href="#Page_151">p. 151</a>.—In a speech some months before, Pitt had
+defended his action in regard to Holland by saying that “<em>from
+his knowledge of human nature</em>” he knew that it must be successful.
+It proved a lamentable failure, hence the irony of
+Fox’s emphasis.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_26" href="#FNanchor_26" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 26</span></a>, <a href="#Page_154">p. 154</a>.—Virgil (Æneid, xi., 313): “Valor has
+done its utmost; we have fought with the embodied force of
+all the realm.”
+</p>
+<p>
+Pitt on a former occasion had said that the contest ought
+never to be abandoned till the people of England could adopt
+those words as their own.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_305">305</span></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_27" href="#FNanchor_27" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 27</span></a>, <a href="#Page_167">p. 167</a>. References to Washington were made
+from the fact that news of his death, which occurred December
+14, 1799, had just been received in England. In the passage
+that follows, Fox alludes to the time Dundas was a
+member of North’s Government, and when it was the fashion
+of his party to denounce Washington.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_28" href="#FNanchor_28" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 28</span></a>, <a href="#Page_170">p. 170</a>.—The facts as stated by Fox were only too
+true, and the British officer alluded to was none other than
+Lord Nelson. The insurgents had capitulated, on condition
+that persons and property should be guaranteed, and the articles
+had been signed by the Cardinal, the Russian commander,
+and even by Captain Foote, the commander of the British
+force. Nelson arrived with his fleet about thirty-six hours
+afterward, and at once ordered that the terms of the treaty be
+annulled. The garrison were taken out under the pretence of
+carrying the treaty into effect, and then were turned over as
+rebels to the vengeance of the Sicilian Court. Southey in his
+“Life of Nelson” (vi., 177) calls this deplorable event “A
+stain upon the memory of Nelson and the honor of England.
+To palliate it would be in vain; to justify it would be wicked;
+there is no alternative for one who will not make himself a
+participator in guilt, but to record the disgraceful story with
+sorrow and with shame.” Lady Hamilton, with whom Nelson
+was infatuated and who was the favorite of the Queen of
+Naples, was the one who led Nelson into committing the outrage.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_29" href="#FNanchor_29" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 29</span></a>, <a href="#Page_253">p. 253</a>.—The following portion of Mackintosh’s
+argument has been universally admired. It was the common
+impression in England that if the prosecution of Peltier was
+not energetically carried on by the government, Napoleon
+would make the fact a pretext for declaring war. The advocate
+probably supposed that the jury shared that belief. He
+did not deem it wise to allude to it directly, but he proceeds
+with great ingenuity and force to dwell on the advantages of
+peace, and then having established a coincidence of feeling between
+himself and the jury, he leads them to see that peace can
+in no way be so effectually promoted as by sustaining the cause
+of justice throughout Europe, and that in no way can justice
+be so surely maintained as by substantial freedom of the
+press.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_306">306</span></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_30" href="#FNanchor_30" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 30</span></a>, <a href="#Page_205">p. 205</a>.—Reference is made to the boastful question
+of Cicero, in the second oration against Anthony: “How
+has it happened, Conscript Fathers, that no one has come out
+as an enemy of the Republic, for these last twenty years, who
+did not at the same time declare war against me?”</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_31" href="#FNanchor_31" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 31</span></a>, <a href="#Page_207">p. 207</a>.—Mackintosh was wise enough to see that
+war was inevitable. It came sooner, perhaps, than he anticipated.
+Only a few days after the conclusion of the trial, the King
+sent a message to Parliament that war could not be avoided,
+and hostilities broke out May 18, 1803. Under the circumstances
+the impressive passage that follows on “the public
+spirit of a people” was peculiarly suggestive.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_32" href="#FNanchor_32" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 32</span></a>, <a href="#Page_219">p. 219</a>.—The passage on the inherent characteristics
+of the French Revolution is peculiarly interesting, as showing
+how completely Mackintosh had changed his opinion since he
+wrote the Reply to Burke. Probably he is the more explicit,
+because his pamphlet was so universally known.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_33" href="#FNanchor_33" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 33</span></a>, <a href="#Page_223">p. 223</a>.—This passage and what follows on the
+rule of the Jacobins is the one of which Madame de Staël
+wrote in her “Ten Years of Exile”: “It was during this
+stormy period of my existence that I received the speech of
+Mr. Mackintosh; and there read his description of a Jacobin,
+who had made himself an object of terror during the Revolution
+to children, women, and old men, and who was now
+bending himself double under the rod of the Corsican, who
+tears from him, even to the last atom, that liberty for which he
+pretended to have taken arms. This <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">morceau</i> of the finest
+eloquence touched me to my very soul; it is the privilege of
+superior writers sometimes unwittingly to solace the unfortunate
+in all countries and at all times. France was in a state
+of such complete silence around me, that this voice, which
+suddenly responded to my soul, seemed to me to come down
+from heaven—<em>it came from a land of liberty</em>.”</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_307">307</span></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_34" href="#FNanchor_34" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 34</span></a>, <a href="#Page_236">p. 236</a>.—Allusion is made to the fact, humiliating
+to every Englishman, that Charles II. and James II. both
+received pensions from Louis XIV.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_35" href="#FNanchor_35" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 35</span></a>, <a href="#Page_252">p. 252</a>.—Aloys Reding, the Burgomaster of
+Schweitz, in 1798, put himself at the head of a few followers
+and attacked the invading French with so much energy that
+he broke their ranks and repelled them. Afterward, however,
+he was overpowered and taken prisoner. After being
+held in prison for a time he was driven into exile.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote">
+
+<p><a id="Footnote_36" href="#FNanchor_36" class="fnanchor"><span class="smcap">Note 36</span></a>, <a href="#Page_296">p. 296</a>.—At the conclusion of the trial, the jury
+without hesitation found a verdict of “guilty.” But the subsequent
+history of the case is one of peculiar interest. The
+judges decided that the defendant Williams should suffer one
+year’s imprisonment at hard labor. But before sentence was to
+be pronounced, Erskine declined to go forward with the case
+and returned his retainer. The reason was never made public
+till Erskine himself explained the matter in a letter written in
+February of 1819 to the editor of Howell’s “State Trials.”
+He was one day walking in a narrow lane in London when he
+felt something pulling him by the coat, and, turning around, he
+saw a woman in tears and emaciated with disease and sorrow.
+The woman pulled him forward into a miserable hovel where in
+a room not more than ten or twelve feet square were two children
+with confluent small-pox and the wretched man whom he
+had just convicted. The man was engaged in sewing up little,
+religious tracts, which had been his principal employment in his
+trade. Erskine was convinced that Williams had been urged
+to the publication of Paine by his extreme poverty and not by
+his will. The advocate was so deeply affected by what he saw
+and heard that he believed the cause for which he had pleaded
+would best be subserved by the policy of mercy. He wrote to
+the Society in whose behalf he had been retained by the crown
+urging such a course. His advice, after due consideration,
+was rejected, whereupon Erskine abandoned the case and
+returned the fees he had received. The incident is an admirable
+illustration of the great advocate’s high ideal of professional
+ethics. Erskine’s letter is given in Howell’s “State
+Trials,” xxvi., 714; and, in part, in Erskine’s “Works,” i.,
+592.</p>
+</div>
+</div></div>
+
+<div class="chapter"><div class="transnote">
+<h2 id="Transcribers_Notes" class="nobreak p1">Transcriber’s Notes</h2>
+
+<p>Punctuation and spelling were made consistent when a predominant
+preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed.</p>
+
+<p>Simple typographical errors were corrected; occasional unbalanced
+quotation marks corrected.</p>
+
+<p>Ambiguous hyphens at the ends of lines were retained; occurrences
+of inconsistent hyphenation have not been changed.</p>
+</div></div>
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+<pre>
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Representative British Orations with
+Introductions and Explanatory Notes,, by Charles Kendall Adams
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK REPRESENTATIVE BRITISH ORATIONS, VOL 2 ***
+
+***** This file should be named 55490-h.htm or 55490-h.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        http://www.gutenberg.org/5/5/4/9/55490/
+
+Produced by Larry B. Harrison, Charlie Howard, and the
+Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
+(This file was produced from images generously made
+available by The Internet Archive)
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
+be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
+law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
+so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
+States without permission and without paying copyright
+royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
+of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
+concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
+and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive
+specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
+eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
+for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
+performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given
+away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks
+not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the
+trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
+
+START: FULL LICENSE
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
+Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
+www.gutenberg.org/license.
+
+Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+
+1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
+destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
+possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
+Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
+by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
+person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
+1.E.8.
+
+1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
+paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
+agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
+Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
+of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
+works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
+States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
+United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
+claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
+displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
+all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
+that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
+free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
+works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
+Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
+comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
+same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
+you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
+in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
+check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
+agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
+distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
+other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
+representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
+country outside the United States.
+
+1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
+immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
+prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
+on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
+performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
+
+  This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
+  most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
+  restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
+  under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
+  eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
+  United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you
+  are located before using this ebook.
+
+1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
+derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
+contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
+copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
+the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
+redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
+either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
+obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
+trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
+additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
+will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
+posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
+beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
+any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
+to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
+other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
+version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site
+(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
+to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
+of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
+Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
+full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+provided that
+
+* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+  the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+  you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
+  to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
+  agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
+  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
+  within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
+  legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
+  payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
+  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
+  Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
+  Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+  you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+  does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+  License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
+  copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
+  all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
+  works.
+
+* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
+  any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+  electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
+  receipt of the work.
+
+* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+  distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
+are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
+from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The
+Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
+Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
+contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
+or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
+intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
+other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
+cannot be read by your equipment.
+
+1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
+with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
+with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
+lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
+or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
+opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
+the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
+without further opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
+OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
+LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
+damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
+violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
+agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
+limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
+unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
+remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
+accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
+production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
+including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
+the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
+or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
+additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
+Defect you cause.
+
+Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
+computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
+exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
+from people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
+generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
+Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
+www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+
+Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
+U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the
+mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its
+volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous
+locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
+Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to
+date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
+official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
+
+For additional contact information:
+
+    Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+    Chief Executive and Director
+    gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
+DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
+state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
+donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
+
+Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
+freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
+distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
+volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
+the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
+necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
+edition.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
+facility: www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+
+
+</pre>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/55490-h/images/cover.jpg b/55490-h/images/cover.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2502b49
--- /dev/null
+++ b/55490-h/images/cover.jpg
author	nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org>	2025-02-07 15:22:56 -0800
committer	nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org>	2025-02-07 15:22:56 -0800
commit	e7490c3c6fc016e4543c3612e79c283fbf0bb2a5 (patch)
tree	9b07f299823cb9f1e005d1204e5f9a75aec8b0c6