[ocr errors]

Mr. Grattan might be, for any thing I know to the contrary," peculiarly interesting and impressive;" but the reasoning appears to me to have been worth very little indeed. Upon the reading of this passage, who would not suppose, that the speaker had thought himself carried back to the year 1775 Separating Great Britain and Ame"rica! Why Mr. Baring (who knows much more of the disposition of America than Mr. Grattan ever knew), tells us, in justification of America, that it is naturally her policy to throw her weight into the scale of" France," until England is deprived of her maritime superiority; that is to say, in plain words, until England be upon the eve of subjäigation. That the American Government views the matter in the same light that Mr Baring does is evident from its conduct; from its notorious and flagrant partiality to France; from its officers, civil and military, in all its sea-port towns, giving open encouragement to the inveigling away of our seamen; from the pertinacity which it has shown with respect to its demand upon us to give up oar right of searching for seamen, a demand which could have no important motive, other than that of enfeebling of our naval force, and a demand, too, which, in all probability, was made, if not at the instigation, at least with the decided approbation of France. To compel us to submit to this demand an act of congress has been passed, while which act existed the late ministers had the meanness to treat with America, and they have since blamed the present ministry for not resuming the nego ciation upon the same basis. From all this, from the publications, tolerated by the government of America, inviting our seamen to desert, and proposing public subscriptions to reward them for so doing; from the thousands of instances of American envy and hatred of England; from the multitude of proofs that no concessions on our part are capable of abating this implacable.hostility: from all this, it abundantly appears, that Mr. Baring is better acquainted with the policy of America than Mr. Grattan is, and that to express alarm at the idea of separating Great Britain from America," would, if it had come from any one but a member of parliament, merit an epithet, which, from the deep sense of respect which I bear towards the honourable house, I shall here forbear to apply, Mr. Grattan appears to be surprisingly affected, at the idea of di"viding and weakening the only force" (the force of Great Britain and America) that remains in the world to sustain the "character of liberty, and to hold out hopes

[ocr errors]

“to ine continent of Europe." But, before Mr. Grattan bad given way to his feelings of sorrow upon this score, and especially before he had made an attempt to communicate them to his honourable fellow lawgivers, it might have been worth his while to ascertate the point, how, in what way, the force of Great Britain and America can now be said to be united; because, unless two things can, with propriety, be said to be joined together, it appears to me to be pretty nearly, if not quite, nonsense, to talk of dividing them. Did Mr. Grattan mean, that the two nations were, though not directly, yet indirectly, in co-operation? The fact is notoriously the reverse, as has been before shown; and, does he think, that, from the former state suf things, when Americans carried on the trade for France between her and her colonies and her dependent states; when Americans made sham purchases of French merchant ships and so prevented the loss of the use of those ships to France; when› Americans were frequently detected in evading our blockades of French ports, and in conveying to our enemy naval and military stores, when Americans were seen, in the ports of France, and (the moment Russia became our enemy) in the ports of Russia, toasting the perpetuity of the union between our enemies and America, and " success to their efforts against the tyrants of the seas:" does Mr. Grat an think, that, from this state of things, from this line of conduct, on the part of America, the oppressed part of the continent of Europe could entertain a hope of deliverance? Does he think that America here acted the part of endeavouring to sustain the character of liberty in the “world ?"—No, sir, that which is lost


by America is not gained by France." If América loses by her being blockaded, if she cease to send out her ships, France loses too, because she is thereby cut off from all communication, with her colonies, which colonies must go to rapid decay. America loses by being prohibited from fraudulently covering Freuch ships, and cargoes, with her flag; but does not France lose by the same prohibition? America ioses, in short, by every measure that prohibits, or restricts, her commerce with France and her allies but, France and her allies lose in a much greater degree. It is not true, then, that what is lost by America is gained by France: they were, and they are, in every thing, except in open arms, united, and, as far as relates to matters of commerce, the loss of the one, in the way we are speaking of, is the loss of the other Nó, Sir; nʊ, Mr. Grattan, the way to convert America from her obsti



nate, foolish and base partiality to France, is not that of concession and forbearance. We have tried fifteen years of concessions (see Register, Vol. XII. page 961 and the following;) we have shown forbearance, such as was never before shown by any nation in the world, which had the power to resent injuries and insults; and, the consequence has been, new demands, fresh injuries and fresh insults. I beg the reader to refer to Vol. XII page 961. The facts there stated cannot be denied, and, with those facts before us, shall we make new concessions? and shall we exercise still further forbearance ? The late ministers attempted it. The president sent his envoys to negociate with us upon several points; and, in order to give effect to his demands, he procured an act of non-importation to be passed, ready to be put in execution against us, if those demands were refused. Our late ministers were such ... .......... I dare not say what they were for submitting to trea: under such circumstances, and I will not wrong my indignation by an inadequate phrase. They submitted to treat; they who talked so much about national honour, and the dignity of their Royal Master, submitted to treat in his name, with the threat of "Tho


mas Jefferson" hanging over his head. They did not stipulate away our right of search; but, they reserved the point for future discussion, and they did pledge their "Royal Master" to do something more, with respect to the right of search, than to take care that there should be noabuse in the exercise of it. What more they would have done we were, happily, prevented from knowing, by their dismission from office. But "Tho66 mas Jefferson," was not to be put off by vague promises. He saw our allies fast falling before Napoleon, upon the continent of Europe, and, by way, I suppose, of illus trating Mr. Grattan's doctrine of union between England and America, in opposition to France, he seized upon that moment of our alarm, as he imagined, to send back the treaty unratified, and to point out the alterations and additions, that he insisted upon being introduced, just, as has been before observed, as a beseiging general sends back. an offer of capitulation. But, as his adverse fate would have it, the commanders of the garrison had, in the mean time, been changed; and, the new ones, whatever other faults they might have (and those were not either few in number or trifling in magnitude), they had not that of foolish fondness for Jefferson and his freuchified facere they so basely complaisant to den of commerce, as to be

[ocr errors]

ready to sacrifice the honour of the nation at the shrine of such despicable interests, The rejected treaty, the returned articles of capitulation, were received with an assurance given to the American minister here, that the negociation should not be resumed, and that no new negociation should be begun upon the same basis; for which manly conduct the present ministers have been censured by Lord Grenville, censure, however, which they will, I dare say, make shift to survive.- Here ended, I hope, the long chapter of concessions and forbearance to America; a nation that has repaid every new benefit with a new injury, every new act of kindness with a new insult, every caress with a kick and every blessing with a


"Tender-handed press a nettle,

And it stings you for your pains;
Press it, like a man of mettle,

And it soft as silk remains.
'Tis the same with vulgar natures,
Use them kindly, they rebel;
But, be rough as nutmeg-graters,

And the rogues obey you well."

The truth of this maxim, which I applied to the Americans wher we were face to face, has been strikingly verified by them. Under the English government which towards them, at least, was mild in the extreme, they showed an uncommon jealousy of all authority; they resented every thing, which could be possibly construed into an attempt upon their liberties. Their present rulers knew them well, and knowing them, they scruple nct to give them the nutmeg-grater pretty freely. Their governors and judges do things, with perfect impunity, that would raise an open rebellion in England, even at this day. It is a notorious fact, that a man, imprisoned for an assault upon his wife, was forgotten in one of their prison cells, and when the keeper recollected him, was found dead, and half devoured by the rats. Yet, no stir did this make. There was no public proceeding of any sort instituted. Another man was sent to prison, upon sus picion of robbing the bank. He was committed by one of the bankers, The real criminal was soon found out. Yet was the first man, without any oath made against him, kept in jail for a long while, and amongst felons too, npon the ground, that he had been employed about the locks of the bank, and was, therefore, a dangerous man. A man who had been charged with a libel upon Jefferson, died in jail, in Virginia, committed by a justice of the peace, because he could not find bail to keep the peace and le of good behaviour, and this, observe,

previous to conviction. The bail demanded was greater than it could reasonably be expected that the man should obtain; though their constitution expressly enjoins, that excessive bail shall, in no case, be demanded. The tyrannical acts of the Oligarchy which now reigns in America, under the name and form of a republican government, are not to be described in a small compass. The rulers are, for the greater part, lawyers, and lawyers, too, observe, very different indeed from the lawyers in England, taken in general. A set of men, who unite, without exception, the profes sion of the attorney with that of the barrister; who have no sort of shame in asking for a job, and in under bidding one another; who are versed in all the arts of chicanery and fraud; and, who, when they arrive at stations of great power and influence, exercise, under the name of law and justice, oppression such as despotism never dreamt of, to all which the people submit like spaniels, while they have, at the same time, the front to invite our sailors to "partake "of their liberty and happiness," thus exhibiting to the world a striking instance of that harmony, which is always found to subsist between the sister vices, baseness and insolence.--In the conduct of the nation towards France, on the one hand, and towards England, on the other, we perceive all the marks of the same disposition. There is scarcely any one sort of wrong, which they have not received at the hands of France. They have had their property siezed; they have been captured at sea; their ships have been shot at, afterwards boarded, and made to pay so much for each shot fired at them; they have been detained in the French colonies; their property has been taken, by order of the French commanders in the West-Indies, and paid for in bills upon France, which have been refused payment; their government, even Washington, has been nosed and threatened by the French envoy; they have discovered that envoy treating with their Secretary of State for a bribe; they, in the intercepted dispatches of the French envoy, find themselves described as the most corrupt and villainous people upon earth; some scores of them have been taken and flogged by the French; in short, they have been kicked and cuffed and buffeted and spit upon, till the French appear to have been wearied with the exercise. And yet, the consequence, as we see, is a decided, and even a growing partiality for France, while a precisely opposite conduct towards them, on the part of England, has inspired them, as towards her, with a

[ocr errors]

spirit of aggression and of insolence.Such a nation, Mr. Grattan, is not to be won by concession, mildness, and forbearance; and, be you assured, Sir, that if we are to remain at peace with America, which, upon proper terms, I desire full as much as you (and have, I am pretty certain, greater personal reasons for desiring it), we shall have to thank the naval and military force, now assembled and assembling at Bermuda. It is in vain to disguise this fact. It is foolish to fear that we shall produce irritation by openly avowing our opinions We have to deal with a nation by no means delicate, and who, in short, are to be induced to act justly and moderately by nothing but force. Mr. PONSONBY, in the report of the debate of the 10th instant, is represented as having ridiculed the idea of reducing Napoleon to reasonable terms of peace, by the means of the regulations Laid down in the Orders of Council, and to have asked in a most triumphant tone: "Did "the destruction of Lyons, the first silk "manufacturing town in France, produce

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

any serious effect upon the resources of "that country? Was the loss of St. Do"mingo, the finest colony in the world, "of such serious consequences to the in"terests of France?" I answer both questions in the negative. Why, this is my own doctrine, Mr. Ponsonby; for, have I not, when the resources arising from foreign trade have been talked of, said, "look at "France, who has become strong and great "in proportion as she has become less com"mercial." This was a most powerful argument; but, then, it was directly at war with the petition of the Sharpes and the Barings, and with all the long speeches (good God how long!) intended to show, that the Orders in, Council, if persevered in, would prove the overthrow of Mauchester and Birmingham,, and would thereby greatly injure the country, diminish its resources, enfeeble it, and pave the way for its subjugation. Yes, Sir, this argnment of yours was a complete auswer to the speeches of your commercial friends, particularly Lord Henry Petty; also to the pamphlets of Messrs. Baring and Roscoe. These gentlemen all vehemently contend, that commerce is the life-blood of the nation; and that, as the Orders of Council will diminish, and nearly, destroy, commerce, these Orders will, of course, be the ruin of the nation. But you, to whose department it fell to shew that the Orders would, by diminishing the commerce of the enemy, do him no harm, laugh at the idea of a nation being injured by the diminution or

destruction of its trade and commerce. There was, I must confess, a great difficulty to overcome. It was the business of the whole faction to make the people believe, if they could, that this measure of their opponents was injurious to England, and not at all injurious to France. It was not easy to do this amongst men of impartiality and plain sense; because, it was alledged by you, that the measure would diminish the commerce of England, and we all knew that it would go near to produce the utter annihilation of all the remaining commerce in France. The effect in both countries was of precisely the same nature; the difference was only in the degree; and, as it was evident, that whatever might be the amount of the evil in England, it would be surpassed by the amount of the evil in France, the balance, it was equally evident, was in our favour. Such being the case, the course which, I think, wisdom pointed out, was, to make the most of the evils which England would experience from the measure, and to say not a word about its operation with respect to France, But, this is what a faction, in or out of place, never yet did. They never yet contented themselves with what told in their favour. They must always have more. Every thing which they oppose must be black and white alternately, as it may suit their purpose so to consider it.- -After all, however, Mr. Ponsonby appears to view the Orders of Coun. cil in a light very different from that, in which they are regarded by me. It is evident, that the measure will produce great distress in France and in all her dependent states, and the consequences of this distress cannot but be favourable to us. But, the light in which I love to look at it, is that of a declaration, issued in the face of the world, that England is resolved to command the sea, and that no nation shall navigate upon it without her permission, or without exposing themselves to punishment at her hands. It was high time to do something of this sort, unless we chose to sink quietly under the domination of France. No man supposes, that Napoleon will be induced to listen to equitable terms of peace, merely because his commerce is totally ruined; but, if, by this maritime measure, we convince him that we are resolutely bent upon exercising exclusive dominion upon the sea as long as he continues to exercise such dominion upon the 1d, he will be disposed, if any thing can dispose him, to enter upon negociations for peace upon ternis compatible with our honour and our safety. It is, I allow it, a calamity, that the civilized world should be divided between two great master states, all

the others being, more or less closely, dependent upon their will; but, this is a calamity now not to be removed by us. Our enemy may remove it whensoever he pleases; we are ready to give up the rigid exercise of our power by sea; but this we cannot do, while he holds all the laud in subjection-America, if she were disposed to act justly and wisely, might soon put an end to the contest. By uniting in the war with us; by securing to our colonies an ample supply of provisions and lumber; by putting every one at ease with respect to manufactures and commerce, and by leaving France and her dependent states no hope of embarrassing us by a continuation of the war; by these means, she would obtain the glory of giving peace to the world. But these are means, which she will never employ,till necessity shall compel her to shake off the raneourous faction, under which she is now sinking from disgrace to disgrace. MR. DAVIES, one of the most able and most worthy men in America, has observed, in his excellent work upon geography, lately published in Philadelphia, that "the nations of Europe cannot view with "indifference a nation of transatlantic tra"ders that discover no sympathy in the con

[ocr errors]

vulsions of a whole continent, no anxiety "about the sufferings of other nations, as "long as those sufferings open new chau"nels of commerce, and swell the revenues "of the state." Certainly, the nations of Europe cannot view such a people with indifference. Mr. Davies has given a just picture of his nation, and a most unamiable one it is. One great reason, that the partiality to France (at all times evinced by the rulers of America) is viewed with approbation by the people, good as well as bad, is this; that France being an irritable power, there is more danger of a disturbance of commerce from any offence given to her than from an offence given to England. As if they said:

[ocr errors]

England we know, will not interrupt us, do what we will. All, therefore, that "we have to do, is to keep well with "France." This is the principle, by which the very best of the public men in America have been, all along, actuated. It is time, therefore, that we convince them, that, though not so ready to discover irritation as France is, we are not made of such lump ish materials as to be affected by no injury or insult that ingenious malice can invent; and, when they discover, that we are not disposed to brook that which they would not attempt towards France, they may, perhaps, in making up the account, find the balance of danger on the side opposite to that, on which they have hitherto thought it to rest,

and may be disposed to treat us as well, at
least, as they treat our enemy.- -As things
now stand, America must begin the work of
reconciliation. I have always said, that it
was for the ministers to consider how far
they might relax, with regard to America, in
the exercise of our maritime dominion. But,
America is the aggressor; she passed her
non-importation act two years ago. The
first step, the very first step, therefore, is the
repeal of that act. That being done, we
may, with propriety, and without loss of
character, negociate with her, as to a relax-
ation of the rules laid down in the Orders of
Council; but, until she take that step, it is
for us to remain immoveable

our present

ARMY.-The Mutiny Bill has passed the House of Commons, and with the clause spoken of in my last. Thus has the measure of Mr. Windham, decidedly the best that ever was adopted with respect to the army, been, upon only a few days notice, rendered null and void. The votes for the clause were 189, against 116, a greater minority than the ministers had before met with. Out of doors, the measure has excited great general disgust, but not greater than it merits; and, it is to be hoped, that, first or last, the authors of it will meet with their just reward.

Upon this third reading of the mutiny bill, Sir Francis Burdett moved to introduce the following clause: "that no officer in the "army should be dismissed or deprived of "his pay, otherwise than by the sentence “of a court-martial, or by address of either "House of Parliament."- -This being a question of vital importance to the remaining liberties of the country, I shall here insert the short sketch of the debate, as it is given in the newspapers, referring the reader, for a more full report, to the Parliamentary Debates.

so far as he meant to correct it, had been exercised in a manner detrimental to the honour of the crown and the interests of the army and of the country. The army itself was constitutionally looked upon as a great infringement made by the crown on the prerogatives of the people. He did not say it was an unnecessary infringement. But as the army was constitutionally an invasion of the liberties of the people, the principle of limiting in some respects the arbitrary power of the crown, with respect to the army, could not be looked upon as trenching on the prerogative of the crown, which held the army only by the indulgence of parliament. He contended that no prerogative of the crown, ought to infringe on the liberties of the people. The clause he should propose had nothing in view but to secure that justice and fair dealing which should always mark the proceedings of the crown towards the people. He proposed to restrain only that which no king if well advised, would ever do. It was due to the officers of the army, to afford them that legal protection for their fortunes and lives, and what was of still more importance to them, their characters, which persons of other classes enjoyed. They were now wholly at the mercy of those malicious whispers, by which the ears of persons high in authority, were ever liable to be abused. Officers of the army should certainly be no worse situated in this respect than the rest of his majesty's subjects. No man whatsoever ought to be condemned or punished without a hearing. Such was the principle of British justice. The honour of which military men were so tenacious, was exposed to ruin often without the possibility of guarding against it. The discipline of the army also suffered materially by the practice he wished to correct. For when those who, if brought to trial, would be found decidedly deserving of punishment, were blended in the operation of one undistinguishing stroke of power with those who, if tried, had the means of procu ring themselves an honourable acquittal, virtue and good conduct, in a great measure, lost their stimulus, and bad conduct was sheltered from a great part of that shame, which was the most effectual check upon its vicious progress. As the object he had in view was to prevent future abuse rather than to censure the past, he forbore to cast any reflection or to cite any of those cases which it would be competent to adduce. He might be told these were cases in which persons were dismissed, whom it would be hard to expose by a court martial, though it would have been highly improper to continue them in the service. Persons of this kind night be per

"Sir F. Burdett, pursuant to the notice given for him a few days since by a noble friend of his (Lord Folkestone) had to offer a clause, to prevent officers from being disInissed from the army by any other means than the sentence of a Court Martial. He thought such a provision of essential importance to the army, to the interests of crown, and those of the country. The form of the proposition he had to make was so moderate, that he did not conceive any objection could be made to it. He was not aware of any opposition being intended, except from some loose ideas that had been thrown out, of its trenching on the Prerogative." He did not think it did. But even if it were true that it did, he should not think that would be a reasonable objection with the house, if he could shew that the power,mitted to resign, and thus there would

« VorigeDoorgaan »