DA 
 
 .12 
 
 V/4K55 
 1818 
 
 I 
 
^:-57 
 
 A 
 
 LETTER 
 
 TO 
 
 THE DUKE OF WELLINGTON, 
 
 4rc. Sfc, Sfc, 
 
 Price Two Shillings, 
 
CHARLES WOOD, Printer, 
 Poppin's Court, Fleet Street, London, 
 
A 
 
 LETTER 
 
 TO 
 
 THE DUKE OF WELLINGTON, 
 
 ON 
 
 THE ARREST OF M. MARINET. 
 
 BY 
 
 LORD KINNAIRD 
 
 " II n'y a point de plus cruelle tyrannic que celle que Ton exerce 
 a Tombre des lois et avec les couleurs de la justice, lorsqu'on va 
 pour ainsi dire noyer des malheureux sur la planche meme sur la- 
 quelle ils s'etoient sauv^s." 
 
 Grand, et Dec. des Romains, chap, xir. 
 
 SECOND EDITION. 
 
 ftontfon: 
 
 PRINTED FOR JAMES RIDGWAY^ PICCADILLY. 
 
 1818. 
 
1:^ I ^ 
 
 LETTER, 
 
 London^ May 16, 1818, 
 MY LORD DUKE$ 
 
 I OWE no apology to your Grace 
 for this public Address. My appeal to the 
 French Government in favour of an indi- 
 vidual imprisoned on your account, and, 
 as it now appears, with your concurrence, 
 has been met by a reference to your Grace's 
 authority, and decided by your peremptory 
 denial of its justice*. Upon that decision, 
 
 * See the Appendix A, which contains the Report 
 made to the Chamber of Peers. * (' 
 
 177 
 
and upon the share your Grace has taken 
 in it, I must be allowed to comment. I 
 shall not condescend to dwell upon the 
 personal WTong which has been done me, 
 but I am boutid to protect my own cha- 
 racter against any imputation that may be 
 made against its sincerity, by openly pro- 
 testing against the statement you have 
 made. Although I could be content to 
 leave the argument as it now stands be- 
 tween us, yet there are many, who, knowing 
 py-}t^ilUngn^ss; .at; ;^li < times publicly to 
 defend: my conduct,, might consider silence 
 Upoi^ Jhis occasion tp be an acquiescence 
 ih a pj^oceeding which I equally condemn 
 and depliiHre. 
 
 1 will not waste tirne in commenting 
 upon the Report itself ;, not from any want 
 of respect for the Chamber of: Pe^rs in 
 France, which has done itself honour by 
 its ready attention to the claim of a 
 
& 
 
 stranger, but because I attribute the un- 
 satisfactory result of that appeal to the in* 
 complete information which was furnished 
 to that assembly. The whole weight of 
 the refusal falls upon your Grace, who 
 must have decided unwillingly (so the Re- 
 porter observes) between a fellow coun- 
 tryman standing in the relation in which 
 I did to you, and a Government honoured 
 with your special good will and protection. 
 ot: The question lies in a small compass. 
 
 Your Grace justifies the Minister of 
 the French Police, and, identifying your- 
 self with him in an act of arbitrary autho- 
 rity, you declare, that ^^ you were not a 
 party to any agreement, authorizing the 
 man who had warned you of a medi- 
 tated attempt against your person to pro- 
 ceed to Paris." 
 
 Upon this point we are at issue. 
 
 I assert, that on the l/th of February, 
 
 b2 
 
4 
 
 an extract of a letter from your Grace was 
 communicated to me by the British Se- 
 cretary of Legation at the Hague, in the 
 presence of the Duke of Richmond, and 
 of the Attorney General of the Low Coun- 
 tries, which extract stated *^ the offer of 
 the French Government to treat with the 
 Informer'^ I assert, that this extract, 
 tvithout any context or comment what^ 
 ever, was shown to me as a security to be 
 offered to the indiridual alluded to, and as 
 an inducement to him to fulfil the promise 
 he had made, by removing all fear of per- 
 sonal risk and danger. 
 
 I solemnly declare, that it was to the 
 unanimous opinion of the gentlemen pre- 
 sent, who considered the personal safety of 
 the Informer was sufficiently guaranteed by 
 t\\^ phrase quotedy that I yielded my natural 
 distrust of the good faith of the French 
 ]\Iinister; and I will fairly add, that the 
 
i 
 
 confidence felt by the Duke of Richmond 
 (whose energetic manner of expressing it 
 I have strong in my recollection), that 
 your Grace would compel the faithful 
 execution of the agreement^ was necessary 
 to remove from my mind certain recollec- 
 tions, of a nature which made me some* 
 what less sanguine as to the support which 
 might eventually be expected from your 
 Grace. 
 
 I declare, too, that, urged by the con- 
 fident opinion of all who assisted at that 
 meeting, that the presence of Marinet at 
 Paris might be essential to the preserva- 
 tion of your life, I did not hesitate to offer 
 to that person your protection as the 
 ground of his security ; and to the con- 
 fidence so created I unequivocally attri- 
 bute his ready determination to fulfil the 
 promise he had n^ade. 
 
 I verily believe, that no man of honour 
 can doubt that we fairly interpreted the 
 
communication then made, and least of 
 all did any one imagine, that the diffi- 
 culty, if any should be created, could be 
 started by your Grace. 
 
 But since you have been plea;sed to 
 contradict the accuracy of the meaning 
 then assigned to your Letter (although 
 you have not condescended to add ivhat 
 you did mean), it becomes my duty to 
 prove, in the face of all cavil and special 
 pleading whatever, that I was entitled to 
 hold out the promise of security to Ma- 
 rin et, and above all that he was induced 
 by that offer to afford you the assistance 
 you required. 
 
 Your Grace asserts, that in the letter, 
 of which oiily the eoctract already quoted 
 was communicated to me, you say no- 
 thing about the journey, and that you 
 declare you leave all to official and judicial 
 proceedings. 
 
 For what purpose then, my Lord, did 
 
you think it right to inform Lord Clan- 
 carty (whose secretary was empow^ered to 
 repeat the words to me), that the French 
 Government was ready to treat tvitli the 
 Informer? --'^^ 
 
 Was not this lui extra-judicial and aA 
 extra-official measme employed hy your 
 Grace to procure* the assistance of Ma- 
 rinet ? 
 
 This j?Ara^^^ as the Reporter Calls it, 
 must have had some meaning, and the 
 communication of it to me could not have 
 been made without an object. 
 
 The ohject of the communication is 
 manifest. To me, who had the secret of 
 the Informer's name, it was imparted in 
 order' ta' 'tranquillize my dcruple$ as to 
 the da;nger of revealingjt ;:and to Marinet 
 it ^as offered as an^ inducement *to cofty*'^ 
 j>lete tlie information he had volu^tarilj^ 
 announced. 
 
8 
 
 But if the objecty in thus selecting a 
 phrase of your Grace's letter for my 
 edification, is clear, can the meaning of 
 the phrase itself be equivocal ? Let us 
 first inquire, what it could not mean. It 
 is impossible, that your Grace could have 
 used it as a trap by which to obtain un-r 
 conditional surrender, or in the hope that 
 I could be thereby induced to forfeit my 
 word, trusting to a capricious explanation 
 of the offer at a future period. 
 
 Such a supposition is incompatible 
 with the great respect I have for your 
 Grace's character, and that of the per- 
 sons engaged in the inquiry on your 
 behalf. 
 
 Why, then, something it must mean. 
 Now, as the proposals of the Informer 
 were in the hands of your Grace since the 
 8th of February, and as his personal 
 safety in Paris and return to Brussels 
 
9 
 
 was the eondltlon s'me qud non of the 
 arrangement, could any man of common 
 sense and honour doubt that this condition 
 at least was undisputed by the French 
 Government ? Was it to be believed, 
 that when your Grace informed us, that 
 the French Government was ready to treaty 
 you supposed it could be upon the condi- 
 tion that the party it treated with might 
 bargain to be hanged or imprisoned ? 
 
 Was it meant to persuade me to say 
 to the man, whose testimony was the 
 object of your research, '' The French 
 Government is ready to treat with you — 
 which phrase means, that it will accept 
 your assistance, then act towards you as 
 it shall think fit, or accordingly as the 
 Duke of Wellington shall afterwards be 
 content or not with your intelligence ?" 
 
 Finally, does your Grace believe, that, 
 knowingly y I would have induced any man 
 
10 
 
 to abide the capricious clemency of the 
 French Government ; or that, knowingly ^ 
 Marinet did consent to serve your Grace 
 at the risk of his own life and liberty ? 
 
 Why then it is clear as the sun at mid- 
 day, that the communication of that single 
 passage in your letter^ not weakened or 
 modijied by any parenthesis whatever, did 
 produce in the minds of the Duke of Rich- 
 mond and of myself, the conviction of its 
 offering personal security to Marinet, 
 and did obtain from him the ready con- 
 sent to fulfil the engagement he had 
 made to go to Paris, whenever that 
 condition should be granted. I believe 
 that we were entitled so to interpret it; 
 but that we did so interpret it, and that 
 your assurance alone was the ground of 
 our acting, is placed beyond the possibility 
 of a doubt. Here then your Grace can 
 not repeat the argument by which you de- 
 
II 
 
 feated the claims of the French autho- 
 rities that negociated the Convention of 
 Paris; namely^ that the parties themselves 
 had not counted upon the indemnity they af- 
 terwards claimed. In the present instance, 
 it would have been treachery on my part^ 
 imbecility on that of the Duke of Rich- 
 mond, and madness on the part of Marinet, 
 if we had advised and acted upon any 
 other conviction than that we had ob- 
 tained not only the positive engagement of 
 the French Government, but moreover^ 
 that we were backed by the good faith and 
 certain assistance of the person most ca- 
 pable of enforcing its fulfilment. 
 
 Now, what is the answer of your Grace .^ 
 Not only that you did not promise any 
 thing on your own account, but that 
 you did not mean to convey any engage- 
 ment on behalf of the French Police. 
 Strange! that it should be your Grace, 
 
12 
 
 not the French Government, which denies 
 the fact of a safe conduct being given 
 The Minister of Police qualifies the agree- 
 ment. Your Grace denies it altogether. 
 How are we to reconcile these discordant 
 declarations } M. De Gazes eagerly 
 leaves the whole responsibility with you ; 
 being conscious that he did in your pre- 
 sence recognize the engagements made 
 by me, immediately on my arrival, which 
 assurance he repeated to the British Am- 
 bassador at an after period. It is to be 
 observed, that the 07ily engagement made 
 by me was upon the authority of your 
 Grace's letter, which authority the Minis^ 
 ter recognizes and you disown ! So the 
 jjhi^ase upon which I acted, and which, ac- 
 cording to your explanation of it, meant 
 nothings has in the doctrine and practice 
 of the French Government received an 
 interpretation which justifies the value we 
 
13 
 
 put upon it ; namely, that it did q^er a se* 
 curity, but that it would require 7/our sup- 
 port to insist upon the faithful execution 
 of a promise it was impossible to deny ! 
 
 Alas ! how have we been deceived in 
 the expectation of that support ! 
 
 Why, my Lord, is it necessaiy to sa- 
 tisfy any one of the intention of the French 
 Government (even if your letter to Lord 
 Clancarty did not prove that it was so) to 
 grant Marinet the condition he required? 
 Is not your Grace aware that other efforts 
 were made with that specific view, at the 
 very moment you wrote that letter? Are you 
 not aware that the French Ambassador at 
 the Hague did himself repair to Antwerp 
 for that purpose ? If, then, the French 
 Police counts another illustrious dupe on 
 its list, and has actually concealed its 
 proceedings from you, I entreat you to 
 inquire whether that Ambassador did not, 
 
15 
 
 on the 19th of February, state his autho- 
 rity to give passports to Mariiiet, and to 
 agree to the entire acceptance of the con- 
 ditions he had proposed ? If this circum- 
 stance be true, and I have no doubt of 
 being able, to prove the material parts of 
 it, what shall we say of a Minister, who, 
 with such damning proofs against him, 
 has dared to impose upon your Grace, 
 who, without the concealment of that fact, 
 would never have consented to counte- 
 nance so glaring a violation of political 
 and private faith ? 
 
 L^jOne word, my Lord, upon the docu- 
 ments which the Report states you to 
 have produced. I presume they are the 
 same which your Grace voluntarily pro- 
 mised to shew me, which promise you af- 
 terwards thought fit to retract, in order, 
 perhaps, to add by surprise to the weight 
 of the evidence which was to crush your 
 
15 
 
 countryman in his contest with the French 
 Police. These documents I collect to be, 
 
 1. Information from the British Em- 
 bassy at the Hague. 
 
 2. The declaration of the Attorney 
 General of the Low Countries ;-r-both of 
 which relate to the safe conduct I stated to 
 have been given. 
 
 With respect to the first, I know 
 that Mr. Chad cannot deny having com-? 
 municated to me the extract of your 
 letter above quoted, and having commu- 
 nicated to me that extract alone : he can- 
 not deny having liimself interpreted the 
 meaning of it as J have done, though he 
 avoided giving ahydfficial opinion; which 
 conduct I so 'entirely approved, that, ia 
 concert with the Duke of Richmond, Ir 
 declined to ask hitn to revise; the passport 
 with which I went to Paris. . ^AA » 
 
 '>fK>As/to the secQnd, ifthe Attorney Gfe.-.' 
 
16 
 
 neral pretends that I quitted Brussels (as 
 the Report insinuates) without a full com- 
 munication to him twenty-four hours be- 
 fore, and a notification made to him the 
 following forenoon, I say in the face of 
 the world that the very reverse is the fact : 
 and I have in my possession, as your Grace 
 is aware, the complete refutation of that 
 error, under the hand of the Duke of 
 Richmond, to whose honour you, as well 
 as I, are at all times ready to appeal. 
 What instructions that legal officer had 
 received I know not, but convinced as I 
 believe him to have been, that the best 
 course for the detection of the assassin 
 was followed by me, he did not exert any^ 
 of the numerous means he possessed to 
 prevent my departure. The assertion that 
 I left Brussels without his knowledge, i» 
 as false as M. De Cazes' pretence, that I 
 left Paris in a similar way, is^ to your 
 
17 
 
 Grace's knowledge, devoid of decency and 
 truth*. 
 
 But if I am indifferent to the know- 
 ledge of the documents your Grace may 
 have produced, I own I am curious to 
 know whether there are any which you did 
 not furnish for the information of the 
 Chamber of Peers. 
 
 My reliance on the honour and firm- 
 ness of the Duke of Richmond was such, 
 that, mortified as I was by your Grace's 
 abandonment of me when I appealed to you 
 on Marinet's first arrestation, I resolved 
 to leave it to that noble person to act as 
 he should think fit, without a private ap- 
 peal to his friendship. I knew what must 
 be his sentiments upon the occasion, and 
 I was convinced he would voluntarily and 
 frankly communicate them to your Grace. 
 
 f See Appendix B. 
 C 
 
18 
 
 Was this the fact? an4 if it was, did yoil 
 aiFord to the Chamber of Peers the advan- 
 tage of so material an evidence ? I trust 
 that you did so, and that the unofficial 
 nature of that communication did not pre- 
 vent the impartial testimony of such a 
 witness being afforded to the tribunal 
 which was to decide upon my claim. 
 
 But if it were possible, which I am far 
 from allowing, that my desire and that of 
 the Duke of Richmond to contribute to 
 the preservation of your life, may have be-* 
 trayed me into a precipitate measure, even 
 then I should be less ashamed of having 
 misinterpreted a phrase than of having 
 been mistaken in the dispositions of its 
 author ; for it is manifest, that my facile 
 adoption of its favourable meaning was the 
 result of an entire confidence in the mag- 
 nanimity of your character, and of my 
 persuasion that, iii a case peculiarly your 
 
own, you would protect those, who were 
 thus compromised^ against the perfidy of 
 the French Government. Your Grace 
 may have read in Congreve, or at least in 
 Junius*, that every man who has been de- 
 ceived '^ does not commence fool immei- 
 diately." 
 
 I do not seek to know what were your 
 Grace's motives in acting as you have 
 done. I know they must have been ho- 
 nourable, although I am convinced they 
 were mistaken ; but as the French Com- 
 mission deduces the strength of your con- 
 viction from the circumstance of your con* 
 senting to abandon a fellow countryman, I 
 take leave to state on the other hand, that 
 I reckoned it no advantage in my position- 
 to have your Grace's arbitration, when I 
 was in dispute with a government still ho- 
 noured with your favour and guardianship. 
 
 * Letter liii, » 
 
 c 2 
 
20 
 
 1 must acknowledge too, arid can per-* 
 fectly account for the irritation created in 
 your mind by the conduct of the Police, 
 which made you feel that any interference 
 might be used as a pretext for continuing 
 a system already exhibiting strong appear- 
 rances of duplicity. The early and in- 
 sidious advice of the Minister, that your 
 <jrrace should ask for the pardon of the 
 assassin when he should he taken; the 
 indecent jeers permitted in the public 
 journals; the official arid judicial doubts 
 expressed as to the reality of the dan- 
 ger ; insinuations of the most offensive na- 
 ture as to the real author of the ex- 
 plosion; and in general the futility or 
 treachery of the measures pursued by 
 M. De Cazes, were but too well calcu- 
 lated to disgust you, and to make you re- 
 fuse to furnish any excuse or apology for 
 them. Still, my Lord, the consciousness 
 of having yourself, by the publicity you 
 
gave to my letter, prevented the detection 
 of the assassin, or at all events diminished 
 the chances of ascertaining the good faith 
 of the informer, must have rendered the 
 rigour of the French Government pecu- 
 liarly irksome to your feelings. Your 
 Grace excuses yourself by pleading the 
 necessity you were under of communi- 
 cating such an event to all the courts of 
 Europe, whose armies you commanded ; 
 but it is no less true, that this notion of 
 your duty did in point of fact deprive the 
 man, who had given you timely warning 
 of an approaching peril, of the means of 
 proving his own innocence and the fidelity 
 of his original report. 
 
 Of the participation of Marinet in the 
 meditated crime I have no means of judg- 
 ing, having received from no one but from 
 himself any indication or warning of that 
 crime: his guilt or innocence have however 
 nothing to do with the question of the faith 
 
£3 
 
 to be observed towards him ; and indeed in 
 all similar cases it is presumed such parti- 
 cipation may exist. One thing is clear, 
 however, that to justify the wrong already 
 done him, no effort will be spared to in* 
 volve him in the suspicion of guilt. No- 
 thing can prove this fact more clearly than 
 the sophistry by which, to justify his ar-. 
 rest, subsequent suspicions are confounded 
 with subsequent acts ; the latter being at 
 all times a legitimate cause for breaking 
 an agreement of indemnity, but the for- 
 mer being naturally in contemplation of 
 the contracting parties, and therefore 
 never to be admitted as an excuse for vio- 
 lating a safe conduct. Add to this, the 
 miserable and false pretext used, that 
 he contributed in no way to the detection 
 of the man now supposed to be the as- 
 sassin, when it is clear, that the notice 
 given by him in the first instance did turn 
 the eyes of the Police to the quarter where 
 
sa 
 
 that person was sought for, and, so it would 
 appear on the face of it, to the very person 
 himself. 
 
 When the manoeuvres of the Police 
 shall have ceased, and if a fair trial 
 fihould be granted, we shall perhaps see 
 how far other motives have operated to 
 produce his arrestation, how much since- 
 rity has been shown in the measures purr 
 sued, how many victims have been sacrir 
 ficed with the absurd and injurious notion 
 3of satisfying your Grace, bow far, in fine, 
 and at what period, the French Police 
 ^ook an interest in the affaivy and what 
 lobject it proposed to itself from the 
 crooked paths it has pursued. 
 
 Thus much I will venture to say, that 
 
 if its object has been to hring to justice 
 
 •the assassin, it has followed a most devious 
 
 course, and time will ^how whether it has 
 
 - not paralised, I will not yet say designedly, 
 
 the powerful means it possessed for that 
 
purpose. If, on the other hand, the 
 Minister's object has been political ; if he 
 has grasped at an opportunity to persecute 
 French subjects in a foreign country; if 
 he has sought a pretext for interference 
 in, and for the exertion of, an indecent 
 influence over a neighbouring and inde* 
 pendent Government ; if he has found, 
 in the warning given and the plot pre* 
 sumed, some secret pohtical profit, then 
 indeed a suflicient reason is found for the 
 tortuous and unjust proceedings of the 
 French Government, 
 
 Until judgment is passed, I will not 
 be tempted even by the example of a 
 British Minister to pronounce, to whai 
 quarter we are to look, to what cause is to 
 be assigned the imagining of such a crime. 
 I cannot consent to follow Lord Castle- 
 reagh's example*, by attributing to the 
 
 * See Lord Castlereagh's Speech on the renewal of 
 the Alien Bill, May 15, ISJfi. 
 
25 
 
 bad conduct of the Government of the 
 Netherlands the existence of that conspi^ 
 racy ! I cannot, Hke his Lordship, libel 
 the Sovereign of that country, in whom I 
 long witnessed the desire to imitate the 
 conduct and to maintain the principles of 
 his venerated ancestors, the determination 
 to resist the imposition of fetters unworthy 
 his name, and the will to uphold the in- 
 dependence of his crown, by affording to 
 persons of all nations the protection of a 
 Constitutional Government. Lord Castle- 
 reagh attributes the meditated assassina- 
 tion of your Grace to the adoption of this 
 liberal policy. It may be so, and though 
 I may be indulged in expressing my ad- 
 miration of what tvas, yet I shall not 
 presume to give any opinion of what isy 
 now that certain improvements are intro- 
 duced in the system, the whole of which', 
 it may be hoped, if not owing to his 
 counsels, receive at least his Lordship'-? 
 
countenance and approbation. Perhaps^ 
 indeed, his Lordship's profound knowledge 
 might have furnished him with the fact, 
 that the power of sending away aliens, 
 if it does exist nowy did from the beginning 
 exist in the constitution of that country ; 
 and his sagacity might have suggested to 
 him, that as we have no evidence of 
 any plots during several years in which 
 the King did 7wt exert that power, it 
 is scarcely advantageous to the defence 
 of such a measure to quote the plot 
 against your Grace, which, if imaginecl 
 there at all, must have been formed during 
 the period when the law against aliens ha$ 
 been constantly and vigorously put in 
 force. 
 
 I repeat, that, awaiting with patience 
 the promised trial, I will not hazard a 
 conjecture on the reality of the conspiracy 
 denounced by Lord Castlereagh, nor will 
 I examine the more probable suspicion. 
 
that the Police of France, taking advan* 
 tage of the warning communicated to your 
 Grace, did itself procure the explosion, 
 with a view to produce certain effects on 
 your mind, and to justify its own operations 
 in other countries. I will fairly acknow- 
 ledge, however, that having repeatedly de- 
 clared to your Grace, that, from observa- 
 tions I had made, I was convinced that 
 the detection of the assassin was a minor 
 consideration with the French Minister of 
 Police, whose intrigues in Belgium were 
 & constant source of influence with him 
 %t home, I was not a little struck with 
 the coincidence, when I heard Lord 
 Castlereagh make a similar use of your 
 Grace's name to influence the deliberations 
 of Parliament. How far that was indica- 
 tive of a general scheme I pretend not to 
 decide; but so bold an assertion, prejudg- 
 ing a case of such magnitude, recalled to 
 
1?8 
 
 niy mind the many stratagems to which I 
 have been witness elsewhere, having for 
 their object, hke the arrestation of Mari- 
 net, not the punishment of a crime, but 
 the advancement of a political ma- 
 noeuvre. 
 
 To conclude. An unsought for confi- 
 dence offered the probable means of pre* 
 serving your life; a fortunate chance af- 
 forded me the counsel of the person whom, 
 above all others, your Grace as well as I 
 would have chosen to advise in so delicate 
 a situation. We acted in complete unison, 
 and agreed in considering your Grace to 
 be pledged to maintain the engagement 
 made by us. Your Grace disavows the 
 interpretation we gave to your communis 
 cation, and has refused the aid we called 
 upon you and expected you to afford. 
 
 The conviction, that in defending the 
 rights of others, whom in honour I never 
 
29 
 
 can abandon, I am called upon to justify 
 my own character (which would deservedly 
 suffer had I acted without reflection, and 
 without suflicient authority in such a mat- 
 ter), imposed upon me the painful duty to 
 dispute the wisdom and justice of your 
 Grace's conduct upon this occasion. But 
 the confidence in my strong right, as it 
 destroys the asperity, which a sense of the 
 manner in which my personal feelings have 
 been disregarded might perhaps excuse, 
 has, I trust, excluded all symptoms of irri- 
 tation from this address. 
 
 The freedom with which I have spoken 
 to your Grace on all subjects, during an 
 intercourse of some years, while it is a 
 sure pledge to you, that in public and in 
 private I shall at all times express entirely 
 what I think ; so it will prevent any false 
 interpretation of the motives which have 
 urged, and the manner in which I have 
 
30 
 
 conveyed, this remonstrance to the tfoticc 
 of your Grace and of the public at large* 
 I feel assured, that m a discussion affect- 
 ing public right and morals, even the pos- 
 session of well merited honours will not 
 obtain for your Grace an undue partiality 
 from that tribunal to which we have both 
 appealed ; and that, in a case involving a 
 question scarcely less national than indivi- 
 dual, all unprejudiced minds will readily 
 distinguish between the language of pas- 
 sion and of truth. 
 
 I have the honour to be. 
 
 My Lord Duke, 
 &c. &c. 
 
 (Signed) Kinnaird- 
 
«ir. 
 
 VfPHP! J 
 
 iiP, iO LiKut .•;>ii ^ 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 
 CHAMBER OF PEERS. 
 
 ADDITION TO THE SITTING OF APRIL 25. 
 
 Report made in the name of the Committee of Petitions 
 by the Ftcomte de Montmorency^ one of the Mem* 
 bers of that Committee, 
 
 GfNTLEMEN ; 
 
 Your Committee would not have wished 
 for one moment to suspend the interesting discussion^ 
 which lias been entered Into, had they not conceived 
 themselves Ixtund to render you a special account of a 
 Petition which has occupied their serious attention, and 
 which will doubtless command yours, not merely because 
 it difiera from the ordinary class of petitions, but because 
 
32 
 
 it revives the recollection of an aflair which has afflicted 
 every good Frenchman, and in which names of the highest 
 respectability stand connected with others less imposing. 
 Lord Kinnaird, a Peer of Great Britain, or, to fcpeak more 
 correctly, a Peer of Scotland, who by that title is eligible 
 to a seat in the British Parliament, has transmitted to your 
 Committee of Petitions a letter addressed to the Peers of 
 France, in which he expresses himself in the following 
 terms :— 
 
 " Gentlemen ; 
 
 " A Frenchman condemned to desith by a pre- 
 votal court, offered to prevent a meditated assassination of 
 the Duke of Wellington, some days before that crime wa» 
 attempted, in the month of February last The informer, 
 who solicited no other personal condition than a safe con- 
 duct to proceed to France, and to return to Brussels, hav- 
 ing seen in a letter from the Duke of Wellington, who 
 declared that the French Government was ready to trea>' 
 with him, a guarantee which appeared perfectly satis* 
 factory to the Duke of Richmond as well as to me, came 
 to Paris, where every thing gave reason to hope that he 
 would be of the most essential service. The Memorial 
 annexed to this Petition will explain to you, Gentlemen, 
 the proceedings by which this man, who relied on the 
 promises of his Government, has been thrown into con- 
 
33 
 
 firiement. I have in vain demanded of the King's Minis- 
 ters the strict fulfilment of the conditions entered into 
 with this man through my agency. As a Peer of Great 
 Britain, I consider it a duty incumbent on me to acquaint 
 the French Chamber of Peers with this violation of a 
 right which ought to be the most respected, and to solicit 
 the Chamber to deign to second my claim on the Minis- 
 ters of his Majesty. 
 
 " I have the honour to be, &c. 
 
 (Signed) " Kinnaird.** 
 
 « Paris, Jpril 13, 1818." 
 
 To this Letter was added a note or memorial of con- 
 siderable length, which it would occupy too much time to 
 read to the Chamber. We shall confine ourselves to 
 stating the essential fact, the only fact worthy to excite 
 interest in an affair which is in every respect foreign to 
 the jurisdiction of the Chamber, and which essentially re- 
 gards the Government and the tribunals. We allude to an 
 appeal of this kind made by a foreigner of distinction to the 
 good faith of the French nation, through the medium of 
 its hereditary magistrates. This appeal has given rise to 
 an apprehension, carried, perhaps, to too scrupulous ai^ 
 extent, that our indifference or our silence might leave 
 
 D 
 
34 
 
 an appearance, however slight, of a deviation from the 
 good faith of Frenchmen in the violation of a promise or 
 a contracted engagement. 
 
 We were led to believe, as you are, Geatlemen, that 
 the King's Government had manifested the same feeling 
 of delicacy, and had either entered into no engagements, 
 or had fulfilled them. 
 
 But being anxious, when we should come to addres« 
 you respecting this affair, to bring with us the authentic 
 confirmation, the entire certainty of that which was more 
 than probable, we thought it necessary to enter into an offi- 
 cial communication with the President of the Council of 
 Ministers. The Duke de Richelieu intended to have been 
 present in the Commiitee of Petitions, but was prevented 
 by a diplomatic conference. The Count De Cazes be- 
 came his substitute, and furnished the Committee with all 
 the information that could be desired, and the fullest ex- 
 planation of every thing that had taken place. 
 
 1st. It appears from this information that no safe con* 
 duct was either given or promised, and that whatever 
 guarantees might have been proposed were all conditional. 
 
 Nothing can be more satisfactory than the declaration 
 of the Duke of Wellington, whose decision on a point of 
 honour and generosity is unquestionable ; and who must 
 
35 
 
 have been principally interested in claiming the fulfil- 
 ment of a promise given to his countryman. 
 
 In a letter addressed to the Minister of the General 
 Police, he expresses himself in the following manner : — 
 
 " Your Excellency will judge for yourself, whether 
 my letter, of which I send you an exact copy, mentions a 
 syllable respecting the journey of the Sieur Marinet to 
 Paris, or offers him any guarantee whatever. 
 
 " You will see that I never took upon myself to make 
 promises to any one, on the part of the French Govern- 
 ment ; and that those from whom it is pretended these 
 guarantees were obtained, deny having given them." 
 
 The French Government, anxiously desiring to disco- 
 ver the criminal and the accomplices of a crime so base 
 and odious, declared their intention of entering into ne^ 
 gociations with any individual who should reveal them. 
 
 The Duke of Wellington, in his letter to the British 
 Ambassador in the Netherlands, whilst he declared this 
 mtention of our Government, added, that he would take 
 BO part in the affair on his own account, and that he would 
 confine himself to an official or judicial measure for the 
 discovery of the criminals. 
 
 This single sentence in the Duke's letter, however, 
 induced Lord Kimiaird to proceed to France with the 
 
36 
 
 Sieur Marlnet. He not only received no kind of autho*- 
 rity or encouragement from the civil or judicial authori-^ 
 ties of Brussels 5 but it is very certain that these authori- 
 ties would have adopted direct means of opposing the 
 journey, had not the parties departed privately, and with- 
 out their knowledge. 
 
 2d. It is equally certain, that the Sieur Marinet, who 
 was for several days at liberty in Paris, was not arrested 
 on any charge, either directly or indirectly, relating to his 
 former condemnation, but in consequence of being sus- 
 pected, according to posterior information, of a partici- 
 pation in the plot which he promised to discover, and con- 
 cerning which he revealed nothing of importance. He 
 was arrested in virtue of an order of the Judge of In- 
 struction. 
 
 Since we are addressing the Chamber on this afflicting 
 affair, we think it our duty to state, that the magistracy 
 have at present under confinement, but by means uncon- 
 nected with the confessions of the Sieur Marinet, the 
 man, who, there is every reason to believe, is the assassin : 
 but as it is not our place to excite any prejudices against 
 him, we shall wait for the lights which may arise out of 
 the examinations. We might confine ourselves at present 
 to passing to the order of the day, grounded on the con* 
 
«r 
 
 sideration that, this affair is foreign to the jurisdiction of 
 the Chamber ; but to enter more completely into the sen* 
 timents which we have expressed, with the confidence 
 that you will participate in them, and entertaining no 
 doubt respecting the wisdom of the measures which the 
 King's Government will adopt in this affair, we propose 
 that the whole shall be referred to the President of the 
 Council of Ministers. 
 
 The Chamber ordered this Report to be printed. 
 
 B ' 
 
 UP to the hour I quitted Paris, I had no reason to com- 
 plain of the personal treatment I received from the French 
 authorities : on the contrary, I learnt from the Duke of^ 
 Wellington, that they were not unaware of the sacrifice 
 I had made of my time and personal convenience on 
 his Grace's account ; and that, above all, they had uo^ 
 thing to object to my proceedings. 
 
 Upon my arrival at Brussels, I was summoned by the 
 Juge d* Instruction, and questioned, to my utter astonish- 
 ment, upon the manner in which I had quitted Paris, it 
 
38 
 
 having been communicated (by telegraph, I believe), tlial 
 I had departed without the proper authority^ and in spite 
 of a legal citation which I had received. It would have 
 been sufficient to show my passport ; but for my own sa- 
 tisfaction I added the following detail: — 
 
 " I had obtained my passport above a month before I 
 left Paris. It was given by the British ambassador, and vis^ 
 by the Duke of Richlieu. I was requested to remain a few 
 days, and was then asked to give my parole to remain in 
 Paris ; which, after consultation with the Ambassador and 
 the Duke of Wellington, who considered that I was not 
 called upon so to do by legal forms, I refused to give. 
 I remained, however, a fortnight, and then Sir Charles 
 Stuart officially informed the Duke of Richlieu and 
 M. De Cazes of my intended departure — no objection 
 was made. The same persons were again informed of it 
 three days before I applied to have my passport revised, 
 which was done at the Hotel of the Ministry of General 
 Police, and at the Prefecture. The next morning I 
 obtained the usual permission to use my own horses to 
 leave Paris, and quitted it at twelve o*clock. The asser- 
 tion, that I received an invitation to give evidence before 
 t^he judge, is absolutely false J* 
 
 A few days after, I found the explanation of this base 
 
d» 
 
 calumny in a new examination I underwent upon a series 
 of questions transniitted from the Minister, De Cazes, to 
 be put hy the tribunal of an independent Government^ 
 upon the subject of a conversation held by me With hi» 
 Excellency about the 22d of February. 
 
 I could have contented myself with refusing to answer 
 any thing to the disgraceful and unprecedented manner 
 of examining in one country upon the subject of a con- 
 versation held with the 3Iinister of Police of anot/ier. 
 The questions, which in fact were assertions, contained 
 however so many falsehoods, and substitutions of my lan- 
 guage for his own, that I thought fit to notice them in 
 the following manner : — • 
 
 " It would have been more honourable [loyal) on the 
 part of the Minister, if, during the month I passed at 
 Paris since my last interrogatory, he had caused me to be 
 examined upon a conversation held with me ten weeks ago, 
 1 then might have been confronted with his Excellency, 
 and I should have desired nothing better. But as he 
 has thought fit to let me be questioned here, as to what he 
 seems to have had some reason for declining to examine 
 me upon in Paris (namely, words uttered to him), I have 
 DO objection to answer. I declare, then, that certain 
 assertions (/ here stated them) are utterly false j that the 
 
40 
 
 words attributed to me were used by M. De Cazes himself^ 
 and the respect I entertain for the judge alone prevents 
 me from giving to those assertions the character^ which, 
 upon all other occasions, 1 should certainly assign to 
 them." But, quanta dementia est vereri, ne infameris 
 ab mfamibusi 
 
 THE END. 
 
 CHARLES WOOD, Printer, 
 Toppin's Court, Fleet Street, London. 
 
Published by J. Ridgway, Piccadilly. 
 INTERESTING FACTS 
 
 RELATING TO THE 
 
 FALL AND DEATH OF JOACHIM MURAT, 
 
 KING OF NAPLES, 
 the Capitulation of Paris, in 1815, and the Second 
 Restoration of the Bourhons ; Original Letters 
 from King Joachim to the Author; with some 
 Account of the Author, and of his Persecution 
 by the French Government. 
 
 BY FRANCIS MACIRONE, 
 Late Aide-de-camp to King Joachim, Knight of 
 
 the Order of the Two Sicilies, &c. &c. 
 
 Third Edition, with Additions, One Volume, 8vo. 
 
 Price 8vV *,n Boards. 
 
 2. 
 
 LETTERS 
 
 FROM 
 
 THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE, 
 
 i« 
 
 EEPLY TO MR. WARDEN, 
 
 with Extracts from the great Work now compiling 
 
 for Publication, under the Inspection of Napoleon. 
 
 Third Edition, price 8^. 
 
Published hy J, Ridgway, Piccadilly. 
 
 A 
 
 SKETCH 
 
 OF THE 
 
 MILITARY AND POLITICAL POWER OF RUSSIA, 
 
 IN THE YEAR 1817. 
 
 Fourth Edition, with a Map, price 8^. 
 
 4. 
 CHRISTIANITY 
 
 AND 
 
 PRESENT POLITICS, 
 
 how far reconcilable, in a Letter to the Right 
 
 Honourable W. Wilberforce. 
 
 BY ARCHDEACON BATHURST. 
 
 Price 3s. 
 
 A 
 
 LETTER MISSIVE 
 
 FROM 
 
 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS, K. B. 
 
 TO 
 
 LORD HOLLAND. 
 
 Price 3s. Qd. 
 
Published by J. Ridgway, Piccadilly. 
 
 6. 
 PLAN OF A REFORM 
 
 IN THE 
 
 ELECTION OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, 
 adopted by the Society of the Friends of the Peo- 
 ple, in 1795 ; with a new Introduction and other 
 Documents. 
 
 Republished by Sir Philip Francis, K. B. 
 Price 1*. 6d. 
 
 7. 
 
 HISTORICAL QUESTIONS 
 
 EXHIBITED IN THE 
 
 MORNING CHRONICLE 
 
 IN JANUARY, 1818. 
 
 Enlarged, corrected, and improved. Price 2s, 
 
 8. 
 LETTER 
 
 FROM 
 
 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS, KB. 
 
 TO 
 
 EARL GREY. 
 
 Second Edition. Price 2s. 
 
Published hy J. RMgway, Piccadilly. 
 9- 
 
 A 
 
 LETTER 
 
 TO THE 
 
 COMMON COUNCIL AND LIVERY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE CITY OF LONDON, 
 
 ON 
 
 THE ABUSES EXISTING IN NEWGATE; 
 
 showing the Necessity of an immediate Reform in 
 the Management of the Prison. 
 
 % the Hon. H. G. BEN NET, M. P. 
 Price 3^. 
 
 10. 
 THE SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 EARL GREY 
 
 in the House of Lords, May 12, 1817, o" 
 
 LORD SIDMOUTH'S CIRCULAR. 
 Price 3*. Qd,