A I 
 
 A ^^ 
 
 
 ■^— 
 
 — c 
 
 A^ 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 (= 
 
 — 
 
 JO 
 
 ^ 
 
 33 
 
 6 — 
 
 CD 
 
 Z 
 
 7 = 
 
 
 2 = 
 
 ^^ CD 
 
 
 
 = 
 
 ^^ 33 
 
 8 — 
 
 ^^^ -n 
 
 |9 — 
 
 ^^— J 1 
 
 ■ -H 
 
 1 f\ ^^s 
 
 ^SS "*■ 
 
 u 

 
 17 9 3 AND 18 5 3, 
 
 IN 
 
 THREE LETTERS. 
 
 BY 
 
 RICHAKD COBDEN, ESQ., M.P. 
 
 " The passions were excited ; democratic ambition was awakened ; the 
 " desire of power under the name of Reform was rapidly gaining ground 
 " among the middle ranks, and the institutions of the country were threatened 
 " with an overthrow as violent as that which had recently taken place in the 
 " French monarchy. In these circumstances, the only mode of checking the 
 " evil was by engaging in a foreign contest, by drawing off the ardent spirits 
 " into active service, and, in lieu of the modern desire for innovation, rousing 
 *' the ancient gallantry of the British nation." — Alison, vol. iv. p. 7. 
 
 P I F TIf ' S'B I T I C--N. 
 
 LONDON: 
 JAMES RIDGWAY, PICCADILLY. 
 
 « 1853. 
 
 9 8 S ^
 
 „ • > » ,'^ „■>, •"■•
 
 LETTER I. 
 
 
 iT MR. COBDEN TO THE REVEREND 
 
 $• 
 ^ 
 
 ■^ 
 
 >- 
 
 >« December, 1852. 
 
 My dear Sir, 
 
 Accept my thanks for your kindness in 
 forwarding me a copy of your Sermon upon the 
 ^ death of the Duke of WeUington. 1 am glad to 
 2° observe, that like nearly all the commentators upon 
 the achievements of the great warrior, you think it 
 necessary to assume the fact that the war of the 
 French Revolution was on our side defensive in its 
 origin, and had for its object the vindication of the 
 rights and liberties of mankind. A word or two 
 upon that question by and by. But let us at least 
 ^ rejoice, that, thanks to the progress of the spirit of 
 Christianity, we have so far improved upon the age 
 of Froissart, as no longer to lavish our admiration 
 upon warriors, regardless of the cause to which 
 they may devote themselves. It is not enough now 
 that a soldier possesses that courage which Gibbon 
 designates " the cheapest and most common qua- 
 lity of human nature," and which a still greater* 
 authority has declared to be the attribute of all 
 men, he must be morally right, or he fights without 
 our sympathy — he must present better title-deeds 
 
 oo 
 
 
 CC 
 Q_ 
 
 * " I believe every man is brave." — Duke of Wellington, 
 
 C3 
 
 a 
 
 ^ House of Lords, June 1.0, 18.52. 
 
 A 2
 
 than the record of his exploits, written in blood 
 with the point of the sword, before he can lay claim 
 to our reverence or admiration. This, at least, is 
 the doctrine now professed ; and the profession of 
 such a faith, even if our works do not quite cor- 
 respond, is an act of homage to an advanced civili- 
 zation. 
 
 The Sermon with which you have favoured me, 
 and which is, I presume, but one of many thousands 
 written in the same spirit, takes still higher ground; 
 it looks forward to the time when the religion of 
 Christ shall have so far prevailed over the w^icked- 
 ness of this world, that men will " beat their swords 
 into ploughshares and their spears into pruning- 
 hooks : nation shall hot lift up sword against nation, 
 neither shall they learn war any more." In the 
 mean time, it condemns all war, excepting that 
 which is strictly defensive, and waged in behalf of 
 the dearest interests of humanity; it professes no 
 sympathy for warriors, no admiration for the pro- 
 fession of arms, and sees less glory in the achieve- 
 ments of the most successful soldier than in the calm 
 endurance of the Christian martyr, or the heroism 
 of him who first ventures alone and unarmed as 
 the ambassador of Jesus Christ among the heathen. 
 " But," says the sermon, " an occasion may un- 
 doubtedly arise when a resort to arms is necessary 
 to rescue the nations of Europe from a tyrant who 
 has trodden their liberties under foot. At such 
 times God has never failed to raise up an instru- 
 ment to accomplish the good work : such an occa- 
 sion undoubtedly was the usurpation of Napoleon,
 
 5 
 
 and his deadly hostility to this country, and such 
 an instrument was the Duke of Wellington." 
 
 It is impossible to deny that the last extract 
 gives exjjression to the opinion of the majority of 
 the people of this country,— or at least to a majority 
 of those who form opinions upon such matters,— as 
 to the orioin of the last war. 
 
 It we were discussing" the wars of the Heptarchy, 
 the question would not, as Milton has truly ob- 
 served, deserve more consideration at our hands 
 than a battle of kites and crows. But the impres- 
 sion that exists in the public mind respecting the 
 origin and history of the last French war may affect 
 the question of peace or war for the future: — it is 
 already giving a character to our policy towards 
 the government and people of France. There is 
 a prevalent and active belief among us that that 
 war arose from an unprovoked and unjust attack 
 made upon us; that we were desirous of peace, but 
 were forced into hostilities ; that in spite of our 
 pacific intentions, our shores were menaced with a 
 French invasion ; and that such having been our 
 fate, in spite of all our efi'orls to avoid a rupture, 
 what so natural as to expect a like treatment from 
 the same quarter in futu-re? and, as a rational de- 
 duction from these premises, we call for an increase 
 of our '* national defences." 
 
 Now, so far is this from being a true statement 
 of the case, it is, I regret to say, the very opposite 
 of the truth. I do not hesitate to athrm that 
 nothing was ever more conclusively proved by 
 evidence in a court of law than the fact, resting
 
 6 
 
 upon historical documents, and official acts, that 
 England was the aggressor in the last French war. 
 It is not enough to say that France did not provoke 
 hostilities. She all but went down on her knees 
 (if I may apply such a phrase to a nation) to avert 
 aruplure with tliis country. Take one broad fact 
 in illustration of the conduct of the two countries. 
 On the news of the insurrection in Paris, on the 
 10th of August, 1792, reaching this country, our 
 ambassador was immediately recalled ; not on the 
 ground that any insult or slight had been offered to 
 him, but on the plea, as stated in the instructions 
 transmitted to him by the foreign minister, a copy 
 of which was presented to Parliament, that the King 
 of France having been deprived of his authority, 
 the credentials under which our ambassador had 
 hitherto acted were no longer available ; and at the 
 same time we gave the French ambassador at 
 London notice that he would no longer be officially 
 recognized by our government, but could remain 
 in England only in a private capacity. How far 
 the judgment of the present age sanctions the 
 course our government pursued on that occasion 
 may be known by comparing our conduct then 
 with the policy we adopted in 1848, when our 
 ambassador at Paris found no difficulty, after the 
 flight of Louis Philippe, in procuring fresh creden- 
 tials to the French Republic, and remaining at his 
 post during all the successive changes of rulers, 
 and when our own povernment hastened to receive 
 the ambassador of France although he was no 
 lon<i;er accredited from a crowned head.
 
 7 
 
 But France being in 1792 already involved in a 
 war with Austria and Prussia, whose armies were 
 marching upon her frontiers, and menaced at the 
 same time by Russia, Sweden, Spain, and Sardinia, 
 being in fact assailed openly or covertly by all the 
 despotic powers of the Continent, nothing was so 
 much to be dreaded by her as a maritime war with 
 England, for which owing to the neglected state of 
 her navy she was wholly unprepared.* By the 
 Treaty of 1786, which then regulated the inter- 
 course of the two countries, it was stipulated 
 tliat the recalling or sending away their respective 
 ambassadors or ministers should be deemed to be 
 equivalent to a declaration of war between the two 
 countries. Instead of seizing the opportunity of a 
 rupture afforded by the conduct of England, the 
 French government redoubled their efforts to main- 
 tain peace. Their ambassador remained in London 
 from August till January following, in his private 
 capacity, holding frequent correspondence with our 
 foreign minister. Lord Grenville, submitting to any 
 condition however humiliating, in order to procure 
 a hearing, and not even resenting the indignity of 
 having had two of his letters returned to him, one 
 of them through the medium of a clerk in the 
 Foreign office. At length upon the receipt of the 
 intelligence of the execution of Louis XVlth, the 
 French Ambassador received on the 24th January, 
 1793, from Lord Granville, an order of the Privy 
 
 * England had, in 1792, 153 ships of the line ; and France, 86. 
 — James' Naval History.
 
 8 
 
 Council peremptorily requiring Iiim to leave the 
 kingdom in eight clays. 
 
 The sole ground alleged by the British govern- 
 ment for this step was the execution of the French 
 King. England* which had 140 years before been 
 the first to set the example to Europe of decapitat- 
 ing a monarch, England which, as is observed by 
 Madame de Stael, has dethroned, banished, and 
 executed more kings than all the rest of Europe, 
 was suddenly seized with so great a horror for regi- 
 cides as to be unable to tolerate the presence of the 
 French ambassador 1 
 
 The war which followed is said by the sermon 
 before me to have been in defence of the liberties 
 of Europe. Where are they? Circumspice ! — 1 
 can only say that I have sought for them from 
 Cadiz to Moscow without having been so fortunate 
 as to find them. When shall we be proof against the 
 transparent appeal to our vanity involved in the 
 " liberties-of-Europe" argument? We had not 
 forty thousand British troops engaged on one field 
 of battle on the Continent during the whole war. 
 Yet we are taught to believe that the nations of 
 Europe, numbering nearly two hundred millions, 
 
 * The Marquis of Lansdowne speaking of the probable exe- 
 cution of the King of France, said " Such a King was not a fit 
 object for punishment, and to screen him from it every nation 
 ought to interpose its good offices ; but England, above all, was 
 bound to do so, because he had reason to believe that what had 
 encouraged the French to bring him to trial was the precedent 
 established by England in the unfortunate and disgraceful case 
 of Charles 1st."— Dec. 21, 1/92.
 
 9 
 
 owe their liberty to our prowess. If so, no better 
 proof could be given that they are not worthy of 
 freedom. 
 
 But, in truth, the originators of the war never 
 pretended that they were fighting for the liberties of 
 the people anywhere. Their avowed object was to 
 sustain the old governments of Europe. Th advo- 
 cates of the war were not the friends of popular free- 
 dom even at home. The liberal party were ranged on 
 the side of peace — Lansdowne, Bedford, and Lauder- 
 dale, in the Lords ; and Fox, Sheridan, and Grey, 
 in the Commons — were the strenuous opponents of 
 the war. They were sustained out of doors by a 
 small minority of intelligent men who saw through 
 the arts by which the war was rendered popular. 
 But, (and it is a mournful fact,) the advocates of 
 peace were clamoured down, their persons and pro- 
 perty left insecure, and even their families exposed 
 to outrage at the hands of the populace. Yes, the 
 whole truth must be told, for we require it to be 
 known, as some safeguard against a repetition of the 
 same scenes ; the mass of the people, then wholly 
 uneducated, were instigated to join in the cry for 
 war against France. It is equally true, and must be 
 remembered, that when the war had been carried on 
 for two years only, and when its effects had been 
 felt, in the high price of food, diminished employ- 
 ment, and the consequent sufferings of the working 
 classes, crowds of people surrounded the King's 
 carriage, as he proceeded to the Houses of Parlia- 
 ment, shouting, " Bread, bread ! peace, peace ! " 
 But, to revert to the question of tiie merits of the
 
 10 
 
 last French war. The assumption put forth in the 
 Sermon that we were engaged in a strictly defen- 
 sive war is, I regret to say, historically untrue. If 
 you will examine the proofs, as they exist in the un- 
 changeable public records, you will be satisfied of 
 this. And let us not forget that our Iiistory will 
 ultimately be submitted to the judgment of a tri- 
 bunal, over which Englishmen will exercise no in- 
 fluence beyond that which is derived from the truth 
 and justice of their cause, and from whose decision 
 there w ill be no appeal. I allude, of course, to the 
 collective wisdom, and moral sense, of future genera- 
 tions of men. In the case before us, however, not 
 only are we constrained, by the evidence of facts, to 
 confess that we were engaged in an aggressive war, 
 but the multiplied avowals and confessions of its au- 
 thors and partisans themselves leave no room to 
 doubt that they entered upon it to put down opinions 
 by physical force, one of the worst, if not the very 
 worst, of motives with which a people can embark 
 in war. The question, then, is, shall we, in esti- 
 mating the glory of the general who commands in 
 such a war, take into account the antecedent merits 
 of the war itself? The question is answered by the 
 Sermon before me, and by every other writer upon 
 the subject, professing to be under the influence of 
 Christian principles ; they all assume, as the condi- 
 tion precedent, that England was engaged in a 
 defensive uar. 
 
 There are two ways of judging the merits of a 
 soldier : the one, by regarding solely his genius as 
 a commander, excludino: all considerations of the
 
 11 
 
 justice of the cause for which he fights. This is the 
 ancient mode of dealing witli the subject, and is 
 still followed by professional men, and others of easy 
 consciences in such matters. These critics will, for 
 example, recognise a higher title to glory, in the 
 career of Suwarrovv than in that of Kosciusko, be- 
 cause the former gained the greater number of im- 
 portant victories. 
 
 There is another and more modern school of 
 commentators which p7^ofesses to withhold its admi- 
 ration from the deeds of the military hero, unless 
 they be performed in defence of justice and huma- 
 nity. With these the patriot Pole is greater than 
 the Russian general, because his cause was just, he 
 having been obviously engaged in a defensive con- 
 tent, and contending, too, for the dearest rights of 
 home, family and country. 
 
 Now, the condition which I think we may fairly 
 impose upoii the latter description of judges is, 
 that they take the needful trouble to inform them- 
 selves of the merits of the cause in hand, so as to be 
 competent to give a conscientious judgment upon 
 it. In the case of the Duke of Wellington, the 
 wars which he carried on with so much ability and 
 success on the Continent, were in their character 
 precisely tlie opposite of that upon which the Ser- 
 mon ought, accoi-ding to its own principle, to in- 
 voke the approbation ji' heaven. 
 
 The Duke himself did not evidently recocrnize 
 the responsibility of the commander for the moral 
 character of his campaigns. His theory of "duty"
 
 12 
 
 gave him military absolution, and separated most 
 completely the man from the soldier. 
 
 Some of the Duke's biographers have hardly 
 done him justice, in the sense in which they have 
 eulogised him for the strict performance of his 
 duty. Nor have they acted with more fairness 
 towards their countrymen, for, by implication, 
 they would lead us to infer that it is an exception 
 to the rule when an Englishman does his duty. 
 In the vulgar meaning they have attached to this 
 trait in his character, thev have lowered him to the 
 level of the humblest labourer who does his duty 
 for weekly wages. Duty with the Duke meant 
 something more It was a professional principle, 
 — the military code expressed in one word. He 
 was always subordinate to some higher autho- 
 rity, and acted from an impulse imparted from 
 without ; just as an army surrenders will, reason, 
 and conscience to some one who exercises all 
 these powers in its behalf. Sometiuies it was the 
 Queen ; sometimes the public service ; or the 
 apprehension of a civil war ; or a famine which 
 changed his course, and induced him to take up a 
 new position ; but reason, or conscience, or will, 
 seemed to have no more to do in the matter than in 
 the manoeuvres of an army. We did not know to 
 his death what were the Duke's convictions upon 
 Free Trade, Reform, or Catholic Emancipation, 
 In his public capacity he never seemed to ask him- 
 self — what ought I to do ? but whdii must I do? 
 Tills principle of subordination, which is the very
 
 13 
 
 essence of military discipline, is at the same time 
 the weak part and blot of the system. It deprives 
 us of the man, and gives us instead a machine ; and 
 not a self-acting machine, but one requiring power 
 of some description to move it. The best that can 
 be said of it is, that when honestly adhered to, as 
 in the case of the Duke, it protects us against the 
 attempts of individual selfishness or ambition. He 
 would never have betrayed his trust, so long as he 
 could find a power to whom he was responsible. 
 That was the only point upon which he coidd have 
 ever felt any difficulty. Had he been, like Monk, 
 in the command of an army in times of political 
 confusion, he would have gone to London to disco- 
 ver the legal heir to his " duty," whether it was the 
 son of the Protector, or the remains of the Rump Par- 
 liament; but he would never have dreamed of selling 
 himself to a Pretender, even had he been the son of 
 a king. Should the time ever come (which Heaven 
 forbid) when the work which the Duke achieved 
 needs to be repeated, it is not likely that there will 
 be found one who will surpass him in the ability, 
 courage, honesty and perseverance which he brought 
 to the accomplishment of the task. But amongst 
 all his high merits — and they place him in dignity 
 and moral worth immeasurably above Marlborougli 
 or even Nelson — he would have been probably the 
 last to have claimed for himself tlic3 title of the 
 champion of the liberties of any people. No atten- 
 tive reader of his dispatches will fall into any such 
 delusion as to his own views of his mission to the 
 Peninsula. Or if any doubt still remain, let him 
 consult the classic pages of Napier.
 
 14 
 
 Let me only refer you to the accompanying ex- 
 tracts from the History of the Peninsular War: — 
 
 '' But the occult source of most of these difficulties 
 is to be found in the inconsistent attempts of the 
 British Cabinet to uphold national independence 
 with internal slavery against foreign aggression, 
 with an ameliorated government. The clergy, who 
 led the mass of the people, clung to the English be- 
 cause they supported aristocracy and church domi- 
 nation. * * * * The English ministers 
 hating Napoleon, not because he was the enemy of 
 England, but because he was the champion of 
 equality, cared not for Spain unless her people were 
 enslaved. They were willing enough to use a liberal 
 Cortes to defeat Napoleon, but they also desired to 
 put down that Cortes by the aid of the clergy, and 
 of the bigoted part of the people/' — Vol. iv. p. 259. 
 
 " It was some time before the church and aristo- 
 cratic party discovered that the secret policy of 
 England was the same as their own. It was so, 
 however, even to the upholding of the inquisition 
 which it was ridiculously asserted had become ob- 
 jectionable only in name." — Vol. iv. p. 350. 
 
 I could, also, refer you to another instructive 
 passage (vol. iii. p. 271), telling us, amongst other 
 things, that the " educated classes of Spain shrunk, 
 from the British Government's known hostility to all 
 free institutions," But I have carried my letter 
 already to an unreasonable length, and so I con- 
 dude. Yours ftiithfuUy, 
 
 R. COBDEN. 
 To the Reverend .
 
 15 
 
 LETTER II. 
 
 MR. COBDEN TO THE REVEREND 
 
 December, 1852. 
 My dear Sir, 
 
 You ask me to direct you to the best sources 
 of information for those particulars of the origin of 
 the French war to which I briefly alluded in my last 
 letter. What an illustration does this afford of our 
 habitual neglect of the most important part of 
 history, — namely, that wliich refers to our own 
 country, and more immediately affects the destinies 
 of the generation to which we belong ! If you feel 
 at a loss for the facts necessary for forming a judg- 
 ment upon the events of the last century, how much 
 more inaccessible must that knowledge be to the 
 mass of the people In truth, modern English 
 history is a tabooed study in our common schools, 
 and the young men of our Universities acquire a far 
 more accurate knowledge of the origin and progress 
 of the Punic and Peloponnesian wars, than of the 
 wars of the French revolution. 
 
 The best record of facts, and especially of State 
 papers, referring to our modern history is to be found 
 in the Annual Register. These materials have been 
 digested by several writers. The Pictorial History 
 of England is not conveniently arranged for refer- 
 ence; and, although the facts are carefully given, 
 the opinions, with reference to the events in ques- 
 tion, have a strong Tory bias. The earliest and
 
 16 
 
 latest periods of this history are written in a liberal 
 and enlightened spirit ; but that portion which 
 embraces the American and French revolutions fell 
 somehow under tlie control of politicians of a more 
 contracted and bigoted school. Alison, of whose 
 views and principles I shall not be expected to 
 approve, has given the best narrative of the events 
 which followed the French revolution down to the 
 close of the war. His work, which has passed 
 through many editions, is admirably arranged for 
 reference. Scott's Life of Napoleon is the most 
 readable book upon the subject, but not the most 
 reliable for facts and figures. 
 
 But if you would really understand the motives 
 with which we embarked upon the last French war, 
 you must turn to Hansard, and read the debates 
 in both Houses of Parliament upon the subject 
 from 1791 to 1796. This has been with me a 
 favourite amusement ; and I have culled many ex- 
 tracts which are within reach. Shall I put them 
 together for you ? They may probably be of use 
 beyond the purposes ©f a private letter. But there 
 is one condition for which I will stipulate. There 
 must be a very precise and accurate attention to 
 dates in order to understand the subject in hand. 
 Banish from your mind all vague floating ideas 
 founded upon a confusion of events extending over 
 the twenty-two years of war. Our business lies 
 with the interval from 1789, when the Constituent 
 Assembly of France met, till 1793, when war com- 
 menced between England and France. Bear in 
 mind we are now merely investigating the origin
 
 17 
 
 and cause of the rupture between the two 
 countries. 
 
 The period from the close of the American war 
 in 1783 to the commencement of the war with 
 France in 1793, was characterised by great prosperity. 
 To the astonishment of all parties the separation of 
 the American Colonies which had been dreaded as 
 the signal for our national ruin was followed by an 
 increased commercial intercourse with the mother 
 country. The mechanical inventions connected 
 with the cotton trade and other manufactures, and 
 the recent improvement in the steam engine were 
 adding rapidly to our powers of production ; and 
 the consequent demand for labour, and accumula- 
 tion of capital diffused general comfort and well- 
 beins: throuo-hout the land. Such a state of thino;s 
 always tends to produce political contentment, and 
 n€ver were the people of this country less disposed 
 to seek for reforms, still less to think of revolution, 
 than when the attention of Europe was first drawn 
 to the proceedings of the Constituent Assembly 
 of France in 1789. The startling reforms effected 
 by that body, and the captivating appeals to first prin- 
 ciples made by its orators soon attracted the sympa- 
 thies of a certain class of philosophical reformers in 
 this country, who, followed by a few of the more in- 
 telligent and speculative amongst the artisan class 
 in the towns, began to take an active interest in 
 French politics. Amongst the most influential of the 
 leaders of this party were Doctor Price and Doctor 
 Priestley, and the Dissenters generally were ranked 
 amongst their adherents. But the great mass of 
 
 B
 
 18 
 
 the population were strongly, almost fanatically on 
 the side of the Church, which was of course op- 
 posed to the doctrines of the French Assembly ; 
 the spirit of hostility to dissenters broke forth in 
 many parts of the country, and in Birmingham 
 and other manufacturing places, it led to riots, and 
 a considerable destruction of property. " It was 
 not," said Mr. Fox,* " in his opinion a republican 
 spirit that we had to dread in this country; there 
 was no tincture of republicanism in the country. 
 If there was any prevailing tendency to riot, it was 
 on the other side. It was the high church spirit, 
 and an indisposition to all reform which marked 
 more than anything else the temper of the times." 
 Such was the state of the public mind when Mr. 
 Burke pubHshed his celebrated Reflections on the 
 French Revolution^ a work which produced an in- 
 stant and most powerful effect not only in England 
 but upon the governing classes on the Continent. 
 This production was given to the world in 1790 : 
 the date is all important ; for bear in mind that the 
 Constituent Assembly had then been sitting for a 
 year only ; that its labours had been directed to 
 the effecting of reforms compatible with the preser- 
 vation of a limited monarchy ; and that such men 
 as Lafayette and Necker had been taking a lead in 
 its deliberations. Do not confound in your mind 
 the proceedings of this body with those of the Le- 
 gislative Assembly which succeeded to it the next 
 
 * House of Commons, May 25, 1792. All the speeches from 
 which I have quoted were delivered in Parliament, and the quo- 
 tations are from Hansard.
 
 19 
 
 year ; or the National Convention wliicli followed 
 the year after. Do not disturb your fancy with 
 thoughts of the Reign of Terror : that did not begin 
 till four years later. Burke's great philippic con- 
 tains no complaint of t!ie Constituent x^ssembly 
 having interfered with us, or meditated forcing its 
 Reforms upon other countries. It gives utterance 
 to no suspicion of a warlike tendency on the side of 
 the French. On the contrary, the author of the 
 Reflections, in a speech upon the army estimates in 
 the House of Commons on the 9th of February of 
 this vear, had declared that " the French army was 
 rendered an army for every other purpose than that 
 of defence ;" describing the French soldiers " as 
 base hireling mutineers, and mercenary sordid de- 
 serters, wholly destitute of any honourable princi- 
 ple;" alleging on the same occasion, "that France 
 is at this time in a political light to be considered 
 as expunged out of the system of Europe ;" and he 
 asserted that the French " had done their business 
 for us as rivals in a way in which twentv Ramilies 
 or Blenheims could never have done it." 
 
 What then was the ground on wliich he assailed 
 the French Governrnent with a force of invective 
 that drew from Fox six years later the following 
 tribute to its fatal influence ? 
 
 " In a most masterly performance, he has charmed 
 "all the world with the brilliancy of his genius, 
 " fascinated the country witli the powers of his elo- 
 " quehce, and in as far as that cause went to pro- 
 " duce this effect, plunged the country into all the 
 "calamities consequent upon war. I admire the 
 
 B 2
 
 20 
 
 "genius of the man, and I admit the integrity and 
 '* usefuhiess of liis long public life ; I cannot, how- 
 *' ever, but lament that his talents when in my 
 •'opinion they were directed most beneficially to 
 "the interest of his country, produced very little 
 "effect, and that when he espoused sentiments dif- 
 " ferent from those which I hold to be wise and 
 *' expedient, then his exertions should have been 
 " crowned with a success that I deplore." 
 
 Read this famous performance again ; and then, 
 having freed your mind from the effects of its gor- 
 geous imagery, and fascinating style, ask yourself 
 what grounds it affords, what facts it contains to 
 justify even an angry remonstrance, still less to lead 
 to a war. From beginning to end it is an indict- 
 ment against the representatives of the French 
 people, for having presumed to pursue a course, in 
 a strictly domestic matter, contrary to what Mr. 
 Burke and tlie English, who are assumed to be 
 infallible judges, held to be the wisest policy. 
 Everything is brought to the test of our own prac- 
 tice, and condemned or approved in proportion as it 
 is in opposition to or in harmony with British 
 example. The Constituent Assembly is charged 
 with robber}^, usurpation, imposture, cheating, 
 violence, and tyranny, for presuming to abolisli the 
 law of primogeniture, or appropriate tlieir Church 
 lands to secular purposes, making religion a charge 
 upon the State ; or limit to a greater degree than 
 ourselves the prerogative of the Crown ; or estab- 
 lish universal suffrage as the basis of their repre- 
 sentation j changes which however unsuitable they
 
 21 
 
 may have been to the habits and di.- position of 
 Englishmen were yet such as have not been found 
 incompatible with tlie prosperity of the people of 
 America, and which to a large extent are practically 
 applied in the government of our own colonies. 
 
 But let us see what was done besides by this 
 Assembly. Liberty of religious worship to its 
 fullest extent was secured ; torture abolished ; trial 
 by jury and publicity of courts of law were estab- 
 lished; lettresde- cachet abolished; the nobles and 
 clergy made liable in common with other classes to 
 taxation ; the most oppressive imposts, such as 
 those on salt, tobacco, the ta'ille, &c. suppressed; 
 the feudal privileges of the nobles extinguished ; 
 access to the superior ranks of the army, heretofore 
 monopolized by the privileged class, made free to 
 all; and the same rule applied to all civil employ- 
 ments. 
 
 I dwell on these particulars, because it was from 
 this sweeping list of reforms, effected by the Con- 
 stituent Assembly of France, and the sympathy 
 which they excited amono-st the more active and 
 intelligent of our liberal politicians, that the war 
 between the two countries really sprung. It was 
 not to put down the Reign of Terror that we entered 
 npon hostilities. That would have been no legiti- 
 mate object for a war. But the Reign of Terror 
 did not commence till nearly a year after the war 
 began. Our indignation was not excited to blows 
 in 1793, by the madness which afterwards pos- 
 sessed the National Convention, and which mani- 
 fested itself in the alteration of the Calendar, the
 
 22 
 
 abolition of Chriotianity, and, finally, in the depo- 
 sition of the Deity Himself. These were the con- 
 sequences, not the causes of war. No, the war was 
 entered upon to prevent the contagion of those prin- 
 ciples which were put forth in such captivating- 
 terms in 1789 and 1790 by the Constituent Assem- 
 bl}' of France. The ruling class in England took 
 alarm at a revolution poing: on in a nei»hbourin2: 
 state where the governing body had abolished all 
 Iiereditary titles, appropriated the Church lands to 
 State purposes, and decreed universal suffrage as 
 the basis of the representative system. "If," says 
 Alison,* " the changes in France were regarded 
 " with favour by one they were looked on with utter 
 " horror by another class of the community. The 
 *' majority of the aristocratic body, all the adherents 
 " of the Church, all the holders of ofSce under the 
 " Monarchy, in general, the great bulk of the opulent 
 " ranks of society, beheld them with apprehension 
 " or aversion.' 
 
 From this moment, the friends and opponents of 
 the French Revolution formed themselves into op- 
 posing parties, whose, conduct, says Sir W. Scott,f 
 resembled that of rival factions at a play, who hiss 
 and applaud the actors on the sttige as much from 
 party spirit as. from real critical judgment ; while 
 every instant increases the probability that they 
 will try the question by actual force. Strange that 
 to neither party should it have occurred, that to 
 ihe twentv-four millions of Frenchmen interested 
 
 * Vol. iii. p. 108. ^ f Life of Napoleon, ch, vii.
 
 23 
 
 in the issue, might be left the task of framing their 
 own government, without the intervention of the 
 people of England ; and tliat the circumstance of 
 a peculiar form of Constitution having been found 
 suitable for one country, did not necessarily prove 
 that it would be acceptable to the other ! 
 
 But the Revolution in France produced a more 
 decisive impression on the despotic powers of the 
 Continent. As spon as the democratic measures 
 of the Constituent Assembly were accomplished, 
 and the powers of the King made subordinate to 
 the will of the representative body, the neighbour- 
 ing potentates took the alarm, and began to concert 
 measures for enabling Louis XVI. to recover at least 
 a part of his lost prerogatives. The Emperor of 
 Germany, Leopold, the most able and enlightened 
 Sovereign of Europe, who, as Grand Duke of Tus- 
 cany, had carried out many of those great econo- 
 mical and legal reforms which constitute the pride 
 of modern statesmen, took the lead in these unwar- 
 rantable acts of intervention in the affairs of the 
 French people. His relationship to the Queen of 
 Louis XVI. (for they were both the offspring of 
 Maria Theresa) afforded, however, an amiable plea 
 for his conduct, which was not shared by his Royal 
 confederates. Almost every crowned head on the 
 Continent was now covertly, or openly, conspiring 
 against the principle of self-government in France ; 
 and even the Sovereign of England, under the 
 title of King of Hanover, v/as supposed to be repre- 
 sented at some of their secret conferences. The 
 result was the famous Declaration of Pilnitz, put
 
 24 
 
 fortli in the names of the Emperor and the King of 
 Prussia, in which they declare conjointly, *' That 
 " they consider the situation of the King of France 
 *' as a matter of common interest to all the Euro- 
 " pean Sovereigns. They hope that the reality of 
 " that interest will be duly appreciated by the other 
 " powers, whose assistance they will invoke, and 
 " tliat in consequence, they will not decline to em- 
 *' ploy their forces conjointly with their Majesties, 
 *' in order to put the King of France in a situation 
 •' to lay the foundation of a monarchical govern- 
 " ment, conformable alike to the rights of Sove- 
 " reio-ns and the well-being of the French nation. 
 " In that case, the Emperor and King are resolved 
 " to act promptly with the forces necessary to 
 ** attain their common end. In the mean time, 
 '* they will give the requisite orders for their troops 
 " to hold themselves in immediate readiness for 
 " active service." 
 
 It is all-important to observe ihe date of this 
 Declaration — August 27, 1791 — for upon the date 
 depends entirely the question whether France or the 
 Allied Powers were the authors and instigators of 
 the war. Up to this period the French were wholly 
 engrossed in their own internal reforms, and had 
 not given the slightest ground for suspecting that 
 they meditated an act of hostility against any foreign 
 power. " Whilst employed in the extension and 
 *' security of her liberties,'* says Mr. Baines, in his 
 able and candid history of these events, " amidst 
 " the struggle with a reluctant monarch, a discon- 
 " tented priesthood, and a hostile nobility, she was
 
 25 
 
 " menaced at tlie same time by a sudden and por- 
 " tentcus combination of the two great military 
 " states — Prussia under the dominion of Frederic 
 " Wilh'am, and Austria under the Emperor Leo- 
 " pold, brother to Maria Antoinette, queen of 
 " France." The French were wholly unprepared 
 for war. Not only were their finances in a ruinous 
 state; the army had fallen into disorder; for wliilst 
 the common soldiers were enthusiastic partisans of 
 the revolution, the officers, who were all of the 
 class of nobles, were often its violent enemies, and 
 many of them had fled the kingdom. Great as 
 was at that time the dread of French principles, no 
 foreign power felt any fear of the physical force of 
 France ; for every body shared the opinion of 
 Burke, that that country had reduced itself to a 
 state of abject weakness by its revolutionary mea- 
 sures. 
 
 But the best proof that the French government 
 had not given any good ground of offence to foreign 
 powers, is to be found in the fact that the declara- 
 tion of the Allied Sovereigns contains no complaint 
 of the kind. Their sole object, as avowed by them 
 in this and subsequent manifestoes, was to restore 
 the king to the prerogatives of which he had been 
 deprived by his people. It needs no argument 
 now to prove that this threat of an armed interven- 
 tion in the internal aff'airs of France was tanta- 
 mount to a declaration of war. Compare this 
 conduct of the despotic powers in 1791 witli the 
 abstinence fiom all interference — nay, the puncti- 
 lious disavowal of all right to interfere — in the de-
 
 26 
 
 inestic affairs of France in 1848, when the changes 
 in the government of that country were of a far 
 more sudden and startling character than those 
 which had taken place at the time of the De- 
 claration of Pilnitz. 
 
 These proceedings of the Allied Powers were not 
 sufficient to divert the French from the all-absorb- 
 ing domestic struggle in which they were involved. 
 No acts of hostility immediately followed. The wise 
 Leopold, who wished to support the authority of 
 the King of France by other means than war, now 
 exerted liimself to assemble a congress of all the 
 great powers of Europe, with a view to agree to a 
 form of government for France. Whilst busying 
 himself with this scheme, death put a sudden close 
 to his reign, and his less prudent and pacific suc- 
 cessor soon brought matters to extremities. In th(! 
 meantime Russia, Sweden, Sardinia and Spain, 
 assumed a more and more hostile attitude towards 
 France. It was, however, from the side of Ger- 
 many, where twenty thousand emigrant Frencli 
 nobles were menacing their native country witli 
 invasion, that the chief danger was apprehended ; 
 and it was to the Emperor that the French govern- 
 ment addressed itself for a categorical explanation 
 of its intentions. The Note in answer demande<l 
 the re-establishment of the French monarchy on 
 the basis which had been rejected by the nation 
 in 1789 ; it required the restoration of the Churcli 
 lands, part of which had been sold ; and it ignored 
 all that had been done by the Constituent Assem- 
 bly during the last two years. But I will give a
 
 27 
 
 description of the Note by one whose leaning to 
 the French will not be suspected.* ^' The demands 
 " of the Austrian Court went now, when fully ex- 
 " plained, so far back upon the Revolution, that 
 " a peace negotiated upon such terms must have 
 " laid France and all its various parties (with the 
 exception of a few of the First Assembly) at the 
 " foot of the sovereign, and, what might be more 
 " dangerous, at the mercy of the restored emi- 
 " grants." The consequences of this Note may 
 be described in the language of the same author. 
 " The Legislative Assembly received these extrava- 
 " gant terms as an insult on the national dignity ; 
 " and the king, wdiatever might be his sentiments 
 " as an individual, could not, on this occasion, dis- 
 " pense with the duty his office as constitutional 
 " monarch imposed on him. Louis therefore had 
 " the melancholy task of proposing^ to an Assembly 
 " filled with the enemies of his throne and person, 
 " a declaration of war against his brother-in-law:|; 
 " the Emperor." 
 
 Thus began a war which, if not the longest, was 
 the bloodiest and most costly that ever afflicted 
 mankind. Whatever faults or crimes may be fairly 
 chargeable upon the French nation for the excesses 
 and cruelties of the Revolution up to this time 
 (April, 1792), it cannot be with justice made re- 
 sponsible for the commencement of the war. What 
 
 * Scott's Napoleon. f 20th April, 1 792. 
 
 X With his too common inaccuracy, the author has overlooked 
 the previous death of Leopold.
 
 28 
 
 might liave happened if foreign governments had 
 abstained from all interference, has frequently been 
 a topic of speculation and hypothetical prophecy 
 with those who, whilst admitting that the French 
 were not the aggressors, are yet unwilling to allow 
 that war could have been avoided. If such specu- 
 lations were worth pursuing, surely the experience 
 we have since had in France and other countries 
 would lead to the conclusion that a nation, if un- 
 molested from without, is never so little prone to 
 meddle with its neighbours as when involved in the 
 difficulties, dangers and embarrassments of an in- 
 ternal revolution. But we have to deal with facts 
 and experience, and they prove that in the case 
 before us France was the aggrieved and not the 
 aggressive party. 
 
 It is true that France was the first to declare 
 war ; which is a proof that she had more respect for 
 the usages and laws of nations than her enemies ; 
 for they were making formidable preparations for an 
 invasion, under the plea of restoring order, and re- 
 establishing the king on his throne, wnth the view, 
 as they pretended, of benefiting the French people. 
 They would not have declared war against France, 
 but against the oppressors of France, as they chose 
 to term the Legislative Assembly. The resistance 
 they met with proved that they were opposed by the 
 whole French nation; and, therefore, the only plea 
 put forth in their justification fails them in the hands 
 of the historian. 
 
 On the 25th July following, the Duke of Bruns- 
 wick, when, on the eve of invading France, with an
 
 29 
 
 army of 80,000 Austrian and Prussian troops, and a 
 formidable band of emigrant French nobles, issued 
 a manifesto, in the name of Austria and Prussia, in 
 which he states his conviction that " the majority of 
 " the inhabitants of France wait with impatience the 
 " moment when succour shall arrive, to declare 
 *' themselves openly against the odious enterprises 
 " of their oppressors." To afford a full knowledge of 
 the objects of the invaders, and of the atrocious 
 spirit which animated them, I give the following 
 extract from the 8th article of this manifesto: — 
 
 "The city of Paris and all its inhabitants, witli- 
 " out distinction, shall be called upon to submit in- 
 " stantly, and without delay, to the King, to set 
 '* that prince at full liberty, and to ensure to him 
 " and all the royal persons that inviolability and 
 " respect which are due, by the laws of nature and 
 "of nations, to sovereigns; their Imperial and 
 " Royal Majesties making personally responsible for 
 " all events, on pain of losing their heads, pursuant 
 " to military trials, without hopes of pardon, all the 
 " members of the National Assembly, of the Depart- 
 " ments, of the Districts, of the Municipality, and 
 •' of the National Guards of Paris, Justices of the 
 " Peace, and others whom it may concern. And, 
 " their Imperial and Royal Majesties further de- 
 " clare, on the faith and word of Emperor and King, 
 " that if the palace of the Tuilleries be forced or 
 " insulted, if the least violence be offered, the least 
 " outrage done, their Majesties, the King, the 
 " Queen, and the Royal Family, if they be not im- 
 mediately placed in safety, and set at liberty, they 
 
 (I
 
 30 
 
 " will inflict on those who shall deserve it the most 
 " exemplary and ever memorable avenging punish - 
 " ment, hj giving up the city of Paris to military 
 " execution, and exposing it to total destruction.'* 
 
 In an additional declaration, published two days 
 later, after declaring that he makes no alteration in 
 the 8th article of the former manifesto, he adds, in 
 case the King, Queen, or any other member of the 
 Royal Family should be carried off by any of the 
 factions, that " all the places and towns whatsoever, 
 " which shall not have opposed their passage, and 
 " shall not have stopped their proceeding, shall 
 " incur the same punishments as those inflicted on 
 " the inhabitants of Paris; and the route which 
 " shall be taken by those who carry off the King 
 " and the Royal Famil}^, shall be marked with a 
 " series of exemplary punishments, justly due to the 
 " authors and abettors of crimes for which there is 
 
 *' no remission." 
 
 Let it be borne in mind that these proclamations, 
 worthy of Timoor or Attila, were issued at a mo- 
 ment when Louis XVL was still exercisino; the 
 
 & 
 
 functions of a Constitutional Sovereign in France ; 
 for it was not till the 10th of August that his palace 
 was assailed by the armed populace, and he and his 
 family were consigned to a prison. And, here, in 
 taking leave of the belligerents on the Continent — 
 for my task is confined to the investigation of the 
 origin, and not the progress of the war — let it be 
 observed that there is not a writer, whether French 
 or English, w ho, in recording historically the dismal 
 catalogue of crimes which from this time for a
 
 31 
 
 period of three years disgraced the domestic annals 
 of France, does not attribute the ferocity of the 
 people, and the atrocities committed by them, in a 
 large degree, to the proclamation of the Duke of 
 Brunswick, and the subsequent invasion of the 
 French territory. 
 
 There is nothing so certain to extinguish the 
 magnanimity, which is the natural attribute of great 
 multitudes of men, conscious of their strength, as 
 the suspicion of treacher^^ on the part of tliose to 
 whom they are opposed. It is under the excitement 
 of this passion that the most terrible sacrifices to 
 popular vengeance have been made. The names of 
 De Witt and Artevelde are remarkable among the 
 victims to popular suspicion. But never was this 
 feeling excited to such a state of frenzy as in Paris 
 on the first news of the successes of the invading 
 armies. The king, the nobility, the clergy, and all 
 the opulent classes were suspected of being in cor- 
 respondence with the foreigner ; and the terrors of 
 the populace pictured the Austrians already at the 
 gates of Paris, and the royalists pouring forth to 
 welcome them and to offer their aid in the vengeance 
 which was to follow. It was under this impression 
 of treachery that the horrible massacre of the poli- 
 tical prisoners, on the 2nd of September took place. 
 But I prefer to give the testimony of a writer, 
 who will have little sympathy, probably, for the 
 main argument of this letter : — 
 
 «' No doubt," says Alison,* " can now exist that 
 " the interference of the Allies augmented the 
 
 * A^ol. V. p. 129.
 
 32 
 
 *' horrors and added to the duration of the revolu- 
 " tion. All its bloodiest excesses were committed 
 *' during or after an alarming, but unsuccessful in- 
 " vasion by the allied forces. The massacres of 
 " September 2iid were perpetrated when the public 
 " mind was excited to the highest degree by the 
 " near approach of the Duke of Brunswick ; and 
 " the worst days of the government of Robespierre 
 " were, immediately after the defection of Dumou- 
 " rier, and the battle of Nerwinde threatened the 
 " rule of the Jacobins with destruction. Nothing 
 " but a sense of public danger could have united the 
 '* factions who then strove with so much exasperation 
 " against each other ; the peril of France, alone, 
 " could have induced the people to submit to the 
 " sanguinary rule which so long desolated its 
 " plains. The Jacobins maintained their ascen- 
 " dancy by constantly representing their cause as 
 " that of national independence by stigmatising 
 " their enemies as the enemies of the countr^'^ ; and 
 " the patriots wept and suffered in silence, lest by 
 " resistance they should weaken the state, and cause 
 *• France to be erased from among the nations.'' 
 
 If facts have any logical bearing upon human 
 affairs, I think I have shewn that the war was pro- 
 voked by the allied powers. Let us now turn to 
 the part performed by England in the events wliich 
 followed. 
 
 From the moment of the appearance of Burke's 
 famous Reflections in 1790, the character, objects, 
 and proceedings of the Assembly in Paris occupied 
 every day, more intensely the attention of the
 
 33 
 
 English public. The country took sides, and 
 politicians attacked or defended, according to their 
 own views and aspirations, the conduct of the 
 leaders of the revolution. Not only were the 
 columns of the newspapers occupied with this all- 
 engrossing topic, but the Press teemed with 
 pamphlets and volumes in support of, or in oppo- 
 sition to, Burke's production. The most masterly 
 of the latter class was the Vindkice GaUicce of Sir 
 James Macintosh, which advocated the fundamental 
 principles of freedom and humanity with a far 
 closer logic, and a style scarcely less attractive than 
 that of his great opponent. By degrees the cha- 
 racter of the liberal party, comprising the Whigs 
 and Dissenters, became involved to some extent in 
 the fate of the Revolution ; and their opponents 
 took care to heap upon them all the odium which 
 attached to the disorders and excesses of the French 
 people. When the Jacobins, as the ultra party 
 were nicknamed, became powerful in France, that 
 detestable name was assio;ned to the Enoflish 
 reformers, by their Tory enemies, who holding, as 
 they did, the stamp of fashion in their hands, could 
 give general currency to their damaging epithets. 
 
 But gradually, and almost imperceptibly, a 
 change came over the character of the controversy. 
 In a couple of years the tone of the dominant 
 classes had altered ; first, from cold criticism upon 
 the revolution, to fierce invective, then to menaces, 
 and finally, to the cry for war ; until at last the 
 Tories and Liberals, instead of being merely con- 
 tending commentators upon French politics, were 
 
 c
 
 34 
 
 ittvolved in a fierce contest with each other upon 
 the question of peace or war with the Government 
 of France. From that time, all that remained of 
 the liberal party, thinned as it was by defection, 
 and headed heroically by Fox, ranged themselves on 
 the side of peace. " The cry of peace," said AVind- 
 ham,* (Secretary at War), " proceeded from the 
 Jacobin party in this country ; and although every 
 one who wished for peace was not a Jacobin, yet 
 every Jacobin wished for peace." 
 
 There is every reason to suppose that Pittf 
 
 * May 27, 1795. 
 
 t " No one more clearly than Mr. Pitt saw the ruinous con- 
 sequences of the contest into which his new associates, the 
 deserters from the A^Tiig standard, were drawing or were driving 
 him ; none so clearly perceived or so highly valued the blessings 
 of peace as the finance minister, who had but the year before 
 accompanied his reduction of the whole national estabhshment 
 with a picture of our future prosperity almost too glowing even 
 for his great eloquence to attempt. Accordingly, it is well 
 known, nor is it even contradicted by his few surviving friends, 
 that his thoughts were all turned to peace. But the voice of 
 the court was for war ; the aristocracy was for war ; the country 
 was not disinclined towards war, being just in that state of ex- 
 citable (though as yet not excited) feeling which is dependent on 
 the Government, that is, upon Mr. Pitt, either to calm down into 
 a sufferance of peace, or roused into a vehement desire of hos- 
 tilities. In these circumstances, the able tactician, whose genius 
 was confined to parliamentary operations, at once perceived that 
 a war must place him at the head of all the power in the State, 
 and, by uniting with him the more aristocratic portion of the 
 "Whigs, cripple his adversaries irreparably ; and he preferred 
 flinging his countiy into a contest which he and his great an- 
 tagonist by uniting their forces must have prevented ; but then 
 he must also have shared with Mr. Fox the power which he was 
 determined to enjoy alone and supreme." — Brougham's States- 
 men of George III. scries i. vol. i. p. 77-79.
 
 35 
 
 would have individually preferred peace. By a 
 commercial treaty which he had entered into with 
 France, a few 3'ears previously, he had greatly 
 extended the trading relations of the two countries, 
 and it is known that he was bent upon some im- 
 portant plans of financial and commercial reform. 
 Upon the meeting of Parliament in 1792, he pro- 
 posed reduced estimates for our military establish- 
 ments, and nothing boded the approach of war. 
 The governing class in this country shared the 
 opinions of Mr. Burke as to the powerless condition 
 to which France had reduced herself by her internal 
 convulsion. A veteran army of nearly 100,000 
 men, under experienced generals, was preparing to 
 invade that country, which, torn by civil strife, 
 with a bankrupt exchequer, and with the court, 
 aristocracy, and clergy secretly favouring the enemy, 
 seemed to offer a certain triumph to its assailants. 
 Little doubt was felt that one campaign would 
 " restore order" to France. 
 
 But the Duke of Brunswick's atrocious procla- 
 mation had produced upon the French people an 
 effect very different from that which was expected. 
 It is thus described by Alison :* " A unanimous 
 " spirit of resistance burst forth in every part of 
 " France ; the military preparations were redoubled ; 
 •' the ardour of the multitude was raised to the 
 " highest pitch. The manifesto of the allied powers 
 " was regarded as unfolding the real designs of the 
 " Court and the emigrants. Revolt against the 
 
 * Vol. ii. p. 330. 
 
 c 2
 
 36 
 
 " throne appeared the only mode of maintaining their 
 " liberties, or preserving their independence ; the 
 *' people of Paris had no choice between victory or 
 " death." 
 
 The campaign which followed proved disastrous 
 to the invaders; and in September the Duke of 
 Brunswick was in full retreat from the French ter- 
 ritory. Soon afterwards Dumourier gained tlie 
 battle of Jemmappes, and took possession of the 
 Austrian Netherlands. On the Rhine, and the 
 frontier of Savoy, the French armies were also suc- 
 cessful. 
 
 An instantaneous change of policy now took 
 place in England. The government had looked on 
 in silence, or with merely an occasional protesta- 
 tion of neutrality, whilst the allied armies were 
 preparing to invade, and as every body believed, to 
 occupy the French territory. But no sooner did 
 the news of French victories arrive than the tone 
 of our ministers instantly changed, and even Pitt, 
 with all his cautiousness, was so thrown off his 
 guard, that he disclosed the true object of the war 
 which followed : — 
 
 " Those opinions,'* said he,* " which the French 
 '* entertained, were of the most dangerous nature ; 
 " they were opinions professed by interest, inflamed 
 " by passion, propagated by delusion, which their 
 " success had carried to the utmost excess, and had 
 " contributed to render still more dangerous. For, 
 " would the Right Honourable Gentleman tell him 
 " that the French opinions received no additional 
 
 * Jan. 4, 1 793.
 
 37 
 
 *' weight from the success of their armies ? Was it 
 " possible to separate between the progress of their 
 " opinions and the success of their armies ? It was 
 ** evident that the one must influence the other, 
 *' and that the diffusion of their principles must 
 *' keep pace with the extent of their victories. He 
 *' was not afraid of the progress of French prin- 
 " ciples in this country, unless the defence of the 
 " country should be previously undermined by the 
 " introduction of those principles/' 
 
 And in the same speech he thus particularises the 
 objects of his solicitude : — 
 
 " They had seen, within two or three years, a 
 *' revolution in France, founded upon principles 
 *^ which were inconsistent with every regular go- 
 " vernment which were hostile to hereditary mo- 
 " narchy, to nobility, to all the privileged orders, 
 *' and to every sort of popular representation, short 
 " of that which would give to every individual a 
 " voice in the election of representatives." 
 
 The militia was now suddenly embodied, and 
 Parliament was summoned to meet on the 13th of 
 December. Before, however, we refer to this, the 
 closing scene of the peace, it is necessary for a cor- 
 rect understanding of our relationship with France 
 to take a review^ of the correspondence which was 
 at the same time going on between our foreign 
 secretary, and M, Chauvelin, the French ambassa- 
 dor. Here again, we must pay particular attention 
 to dates.* 
 
 * And here let me give an extract from Scott's Life of 
 Na]^oleon, illustrative of the looseness and inaccuracy with which
 
 38 
 
 The correspondence commences witli a letter, 
 dated May 12, 1792, from M. Chauvelin to Lord 
 Grenville, explaining the cause of the war between 
 France and the Emperor, and complaining in the 
 name of the King of the French that the Emperor 
 Leopold had promoted a great conspiracy against 
 France. 
 
 On the 18th June, 1792, M. Chauvelin alludes 
 at greater length, in a letter to Lord Grenville, to 
 the coalition formed on the Continent against 
 France, and asks the British government to exert 
 its influence to stop the progress of that confederacy, 
 and especially *' to dissuade from all accession to 
 *' this project all those of the allies of England 
 *' whom it may be wished to draw into it !" 
 
 In reply to this letter, Lord Grenville declines to 
 interfere with the allies of this country, to put an 
 end to the confederacy against France, alleging 
 that '* the intervention of his counsels or of his good 
 
 history is sometimes written. I have explained the errors in 
 italics : — 
 
 " Lord Gower, the British ambassador, was recalled from 
 " Paris immediately on the King's execution." [He loas re- 
 called on the Kiuff's deposition in Avgust, his execution not 
 talcing place till January folloioing.'] '♦ The Prince to whom 
 " he was sent was no more ; and, on the same ground, the 
 " French envoy at the Court of St. James, though not dismissed 
 " by his Majesty's government, was made acquainted that the 
 " ministers no longer considered him as an accredited person." 
 [The French ambassador was peremptorily ordered to leave 
 this country in eight days, npon the news of the King^s death 
 reaching this country.'] And from these inaccurate data he 
 draws the conclusion that we are not the aggressors in the war 
 which immediately followed.
 
 39 
 
 " offices cannot be of use unless they should be 
 " desired by all the parties interested." [In 
 direct contradiction to this, was the following pas- 
 sage in the King's speech, January 31^ of this very 
 year, 1792, on opening the session : — " Our inter- 
 '* vention has also been employed with a view to 
 " promote a pacification between the Empress of 
 " Russia and the Porte ; and conditions have been 
 '* agreed upon between us and the former of these 
 ^^ powei's which we undertook to recommend to the 
 " Portcy as the re-establishment of peace on such 
 " terms appeared to be^ under all the circumstances, 
 " a desirable event for the general interests of 
 *' Europe.] 
 
 On the news of the dethronement of the King of 
 France in August, M. Chauvelin received notice, 
 as has been before seen, that he would no longer 
 be recognised by the English government in his 
 official character ; and there was an interval of 
 several months during which the correspondence 
 was suspended. On the 13th December, as before 
 stated, Parliament was hastily assembled : the 
 King's speech announced that the militia had been 
 embodied, and recommended an increase of the 
 army and navy ; it complained of the aggressive 
 conduct of the French, and their disregard of the 
 rights of neutral nations. [Not a syllable had 
 been said in disapproval of the conduct of the allied 
 powers when they began the unprovoked attack on 
 France, an attack the complete failure of which was 
 now known in England.] The speeches of the 
 ministers and the majority in Parliament in the
 
 40 
 
 debate on the address were of a most warlike cha- 
 racter. On the 27th of December, 1792, after 
 these occurrences, (do not for a moment lose sight 
 of the dates) M. Chauvelin renews the corres- 
 pondence with Lord Grenville. He begins by 
 saying that he makes his communication at the 
 request of his own government. After adducing 
 the fact of his having remained in England since 
 August, notwithstanding the recall of our ambas- 
 sador Lord Gower from Paris, as " a proof of the 
 desire the French government had to live on 
 good terms with his Britannic Majesty," he pro- 
 ceeds to complain that " a character of ill-will to 
 which he is yet unwilling to give credit," has 
 been observable in the measures recently adopted 
 by the British government, and he asks whether 
 France ought to consider England as a neutral 
 power or an enemy. " But in asking from the 
 " ministers of his Britannic Majesty a frank and 
 " open explanation as to their intentions with 
 " regard to France, the Executive Council of the 
 *' French government is unwilling they should 
 " have the smallest remaining doubt as to the dis- 
 *' position of France towards England, and as to 
 " its desire of remaining at peace with her ; it has 
 ** even been desirous of answering beforehand all 
 " the reproaches which they may be tempted to 
 " make in justification of a rupture.*' He then pro- 
 ceeds to offer explanations upon the three reasons 
 which he surmises might weigh with the English, 
 and lead them " to break with the French Re- 
 public." The first has reference to the decree of
 
 41 
 
 the National Convention of the 19th November, 
 offering fraternity to all people who wish to recover 
 their liberty ; the next, the opening of the Scheldt, 
 consequent upon the conquest of the Austrian 
 Netherlands ; and thirdly, the violation of the ter- 
 ritory of Holland. With respect to the decree of 
 the 19th November offering assistance to all people 
 wishing for liberty, he said : " The National Con- 
 " vention never meant that the French Republic 
 " should favour insurrections, should espouse the 
 " quarrels of a few seditious persons, or in a word 
 " should endeavour to excite disturbances in any 
 " neutral or friendly country whatever." He 
 then proceeds to say — '* France ought to and will 
 " respect, not only the independence of England, 
 '* but even that of those of her allies with whom 
 " she is not at war. The undersigned has there- 
 " fore been charged formally to declare that she 
 " will not attack Holland so long as that power 
 " shall on its side confine itself towards her within 
 " the bounds of an exact neutrality.'* He then 
 refers to the only other question, the opening of the 
 Scheldt, " a question irrevocably decided by reason 
 " and justice, of small importance in itself, and on 
 " which the opinion of England, and perhaps of 
 " Holland itself, is sufficiently known to render it 
 *• difficult to make it seriously the single subject of 
 " war." 
 
 M. Chauvelin says, in conclusion, " He hopes 
 *' that the ministers of his Britannic Majesty will 
 " be brought back by the explanations which this 
 " note contains, to ideas more favourable to the
 
 42 
 
 *' re-union of the two countries, and that they will 
 " not have occasion, for the purpose of returning to 
 *' them, to consider the terrible responsibility of a 
 ** declaration of war, which will incontestably be their 
 " own work, the consequences of which cannot be 
 " otherwise than fatal to the two countries, and to 
 " human nature in general, and in which a gene- 
 " rous and free people cannot long consent to 
 *^ betray their own interests, by serving as an 
 " auxiliary and a reinforcement to a tyrannical 
 " coalition.*' 
 
 The reply of Lord Grenville, dated December 
 31, begins in the following haughty fashion:—" I 
 *' have received. Sir, from you a note, in which, 
 *' styling yourself minister plenipotentiary of France, 
 '* you communicate to me, as the King's secretary 
 " of state, the instructions which you state to have 
 " yourself received from the Executive Council of 
 " the French republic. You are not ignorant, that 
 " since the unhappy events of the 10th August, the 
 *' King has thought proper to suspend all official 
 " communication with France." The rest of the 
 letter repels with little ceremony the advances of 
 the French minister, and subjects his pleas and 
 excuses to a cold and incredulous criticism. It 
 reiterates the complaints respecting the Decree of 
 the 19th November, the opening of the Scheldt, 
 and the violation of the territory of Holland. " If 
 " France," said Lord Grenville, " is really desirous 
 " of maintaining friendship and peace with Eng- 
 " land, she must shew herself disposed to renounce 
 " her views of aggression and aggrandisement, and
 
 43 
 
 " confine herself within her own territory, without 
 " insulting other governments, without disturbing 
 " their tranquillity, or violating their rights.*' [It 
 would have added much to the force of this remon- 
 strance if a similar tone had been taken a year 
 earlier, when the famous Declaration of Pilnitz was 
 published.] 
 
 M.Chauvelin, notwithstanding this repulse, again 
 addresses Lord Grenville, January 7, 1793, bringing 
 under his notice the Alien bill just introduced into 
 Parliament, and which contained, as he alleged, 
 provisions, so far as French citizens were concerned, 
 inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the treaty 
 of commerce entered into by France and England 
 in 1786 ; and he concludes by asking to be in- 
 formed whether, " under the general denomination 
 " of foreigners, in the bill on which the Houses are 
 " occupied, the government of Great Britain means 
 " likewise to include the French." This letter is 
 returned to the writer by Lord Grenville, the same 
 day, accompanied with a short note, declaring it to 
 be " totally inadmissible, M. Chauvelin assuming 
 " therein a character which is not acknowledged." 
 
 Unable to obtain a hearing in his official capacit}^, 
 M. Chauvelin abandons the former style of his 
 letters, which ran — the undersigned minister plenipo- 
 tentiary, Sfc, and now addresses a letter to Lord 
 Grenville, beginning " My Lord," and dropping all 
 allusion to his own diplomatic quality. In this 
 letter, he complains that several vessels in British 
 ports freighted with grain for the French govern- 
 ment had been stopped, contrary to law ; he states 
 that he has been informed by respectable autho-
 
 44 
 
 rities that the custom-houses had received orders to 
 permit the exportation of foreign wheat to all ports 
 except those of France; and he goes on to say, " I 
 " should the first moment of my knowing it, have 
 " waited upon you, my Lord, to be assured from 
 " yourself of its certainty, or its falsehood, if the 
 " determination taken by his Britannic Majesty, in 
 *' the present circumstance, to break off all commu- 
 *' nication between the governments of the two 
 *' countries, had not rendered friendly and open 
 *' steps the more difiicult in proportion as they 
 " became the more necessary." 
 
 And he adds : — " But I considered, my Lord, 
 " that when the question of war or peace arose 
 " between two powerful nations, that which mani- 
 " fested the desire of attending to all explanations, 
 " that which strove the longest to preserve the last 
 " link of union and friendship, was the only one 
 *' which appeared truly worthy and truly great. I 
 " beseech you, my Lord, in the name of public 
 " faith, in the name of justice and of humanity, to 
 *• explain to me facts which I will not characterise, 
 '* and which the French nation would take for 
 " granted by your silence only, or by the refusal 
 " of an answer." 
 
 Lord Grenville*s answer, dated 9th Jan., 1793, 
 evades the question: — " I do not know," says he, 
 *' in what capacity you address me the letter which 
 " I have just received ; but in every case it would 
 " be necessary to know the resolutions which shall 
 '* have been taken in France, in consquence of what 
 " has already passed, before I can enter into any new 
 " explanations, especially with respect to measures
 
 45 
 
 " founded, in a great degree, on those motives of 
 "jealousy and, uneasiness which I have ah'eady de- 
 *' tailed to you." 
 
 Nothing daunted, the indefatigable Frenchman 
 renews the correspondence on the 11th. But having 
 resumed the diplomatic style of " the undersigned 
 minister plenipotentiary," his letter, which states 
 that the " French Republic cannot but regard the 
 " conduct of the English government as a manifest 
 " infraction of the treat v of commerce concluded 
 " between the two powers, and that, consequently, 
 ** France ceases to consider herself as bound by that 
 " treaty, and that she regards it from this moment 
 " as broken and annulled," was returned to him by 
 M7\ Aust, a clerk, probably, in the Foreign Office, 
 with the following note : — 
 
 " Mr. Aust is charged to send back to M. 
 " Chauvelin the enclosed" paper received yesterday 
 " at the office for Foreign Affairs." 
 
 Next, we have a letter from M. Chauvelin to 
 Lord Grenville, written in an unofficial form, dated 
 January 12th, stating that he had just received a 
 messenger from Paris, and soliciting a personal in- 
 terview ; which request is granted, on condition 
 that the communication be put upon paper. On 
 the following day M. Chauvelin communicates to 
 Lord Grenville a copy of a paper which he had re- 
 ceived from M. Le Brun, the foreign minister of 
 France. This despatch contains the strongest ex- 
 pressions of a desire to maintain amicable relations 
 with England. '' The sentiments of the French 
 *' nation towards the English," says the foreign
 
 46 
 
 minister of France, ** have been manifested during 
 " the whole course of the revolution, in so constant, 
 " so unanimous a manner, that there cannot remain 
 " the smallest doubt of the esteem which it has 
 " vowed them, and of its desire of having them for 
 " friends." He then proceeds to discuss, at length, 
 the several topics in dispute between the two coun- 
 tries. As respects the obnoxious decree of the 19th 
 November, every effort is made to explain away its 
 offensive meaning, and it is at last admitted that 
 the object contemplated " might, perhaps, be dis- 
 '^ pensed with by the National Convention, that it 
 " was scarcely worth the while to express it, and it 
 " did not deserve to be made the object of a parti- 
 *' cular decree." 
 
 Assuming that the British Government is satisfied 
 with the declaration made on the part of the French, 
 relative to Holland, the paper proceeds, at length, 
 into the question of the opening of the Scheldt^ 
 which is justified by an appeal to the rights of 
 nature and of all the nations of Europe. The 
 Emperor of Germany concluded the treaty for 
 giving the exclusive right of the navigation of the 
 Scheldt to the Dutch without consulting the Bel- 
 gians. " The Emperor, to secure the possession of 
 '* the Low Countries, sacrificed, without scruple, 
 " the most inviolable of rights." And, further, 
 " France enters into war with the House of Austria, 
 " expels it from the Low Countries, and calls back 
 " to freedom those people whom the Court of Vienna 
 " had devoted to slavery.'* The paper proceeds to 
 say that France does not aim at the permanent oc-
 
 47 
 
 cupation of the Low Countries, and that after the 
 close of the war, if England and Holland still 
 attach some importance to the re-closing of the 
 Scheldt, they may put the affair into a direct ne- 
 gotiation with Belgium. If the Belgians, by any 
 motive whatever, consent to deprive themselves of 
 the navigation of the Scheldt, France will not op- 
 pose it. 
 
 Lord Grenville in his reply to this letter (January 
 18, 1793) begins by saying, '' I have examined, 
 " Sir, with the greatest attention, the paper 
 *' which vou delivered to me on the 13th of this 
 ** month. I cannot conceal from vou that I have 
 " found nothing satisfactory in the result of that 
 " note." The rest of the letter is either a repeti- 
 tion of the former complaints, or an attempt to 
 extract fresh sources of dispute from the preceding 
 communication. After the exchange of two other 
 unimportant letters, we come to the denouement. 
 On the 24th January, on the news reaching London 
 of the execution of Louis XVI., Lord Grenville 
 transmits to M. Chauvelin the order of the Privy 
 Council, requiring him to leave the country in eight 
 davs. 
 
 I have given these copious extracts from this most 
 portentous of all diplomatic correspondence, not to 
 exonerate you from the trouble of reading the re- 
 mainder, for every word ought to be studied 
 by those who wish to understand the origin of the 
 war, but to enable you to form a correct opinion 
 of the animus which influenced the two parties. 
 Contrast the conciliatory, the almost supplicatory
 
 48 
 
 tone of the one, with the repulsive and haughty style 
 of the other, and then ask — which was bent upon 
 liostilities, and which on peace ? Recollect that these 
 correspondents were the representatives respectively 
 of sixteen millions of British and twenty-four mil- 
 lions of French, and then say whether the insolent, 
 de-kaut-en-bas treatment received by the latter could 
 have been intended for any other purpose but to 
 provoke a war. Observe that the more urgent the 
 Frenchman became in his desire to explain away 
 the ground of quarrel the more resolute was the 
 English negotiator to close up the path to reconci- 
 liation ; — forcing upon us the conviction that what 
 the British government, really dreaded at that 
 moment was, not the hostility but, the friendship of 
 France. 
 
 And, now% a word as to the alleged grounds of the 
 rupture. It must be observed in the first place, 
 that there is no complaint on our part of any hos- 
 tile act, or even word being directed against our- 
 selves. The bombastic decree* of the National 
 Convention— one of the midnight declarations of 
 that excited body, was put prominently in the bill 
 of indictment, but it was never alleged that it was 
 specially levelled at this country. It was aimed at 
 
 * Decree of Fraternity. The National Convention declares in 
 the name of the French nation that it will grant fraternity and 
 assistance to all people who wish to recover their liberty ; and it 
 charges the Executive power to send the necessary orders to the 
 generals to give assistance to such people, and to defend those 
 citizens who have suffered or may suffer in the cause of liberty. — 
 19th November, 1792.
 
 49 
 
 the governments of tlie Continent in retaliation for 
 their conspiracies against the French revolution. 
 " If you invade us with bayonets, we will invade 
 you with liberties/* — was the language addressed 
 by the orators of the Convention to the despotic 
 powers. That this decree was, however, a fair ground 
 of negotiation by our government cannot be denied, 
 and it is evident from the desire of the French 
 minister to explain away its obnoxious meaning, 
 going so far even as to admit that " perhaps" it 
 ought not to have been passed, that a little more 
 remonstrance in an earnest and peaceful spirit, 
 would have led to a satisfactory explanation on this 
 point. In fact, within a few months of this time 
 the decree was rescinded. 
 
 With respect to the Dutch right to a monopoly 
 of the Scheldt : — if that was really one of the objects 
 of the war, the twenty-two years of hostilities might 
 have been spared ; for if there was any one thing, 
 besides the abolition of the slave trade, which the 
 Congress of Vienna effected at the close of the war, 
 to the satisfaction of all parties, and with the hearty 
 concurrence of England, it was the setting free the 
 navigation of the great rivers of Europe. Nothing 
 need be said about the remaining question of the 
 inviolability of the territory of Holland, inasmuch 
 as the French minister offered to give us a satisfac- 
 tory pledge upon that point. I may merely add 
 that the Dutch government abstained from making 
 any demand upon England to sustain its claim 
 to the exclusive navigation of the Scheldt, and 
 wisely so: — for it probably foresaw what happened 
 
 D
 
 50 
 
 in the war which followed, when the French having 
 taken possession of Holland, where they were wel- 
 comed by a large part of the population as friends, 
 and having turned the Dutch fleet against us^ in 
 less than three years, we seized all the principal co- 
 lonies of that country, and some of them (to our 
 cost) we retiain to the present day. 
 
 Whilst . through this official correspondence the 
 French government was endeavouring to remove 
 the causes of war, other and less formal means were 
 resorted tcf for accomplishing the same end. At- 
 tached to the French embassy were several indi- 
 viduals, selected for their popular address, their 
 familiarity with the English language, and their 
 talent in conversation or as writers, w'ho, by mixing 
 in society, and especially that of the Liberals, might 
 it was hoped influence public opinion in favour 
 of peace. Amongst these was one who played 
 the chief diplomatic part in the great drama which 
 was about to follow. ** The mission of M. de Tal- 
 " leyrand to London," says M. Lamartine,* " was 
 " to endeavour to fraternise the aristocratic prin- 
 " ciple of the English constitution with the demo- 
 " cratic principle of the French constitution, which 
 " it was believed could be effected and controlled 
 " by an upper Chamber. It was hoped to interest 
 " the statesmen of Great Britain in a revolution 
 *' imitated from their own, which, after having con- 
 " vulsed the people, was now being moulded in the 
 *' hands of an inteHie'ent aristocracy." 
 
 * History of Girondias, vol. i. p. 19".
 
 51 
 
 Beyond the circles of the more ardent reformers, 
 however, or the society of a few philosophical 
 thinkers, these semi-official diplomatists made ver}'' 
 little way. They were coldly, and sometimes even 
 uncivilly treated ; as the following incident, in 
 which Talleyrand played a part, will shew. " One 
 " evening all the members of the embassy, with 
 " Dumont, went to Ranelagh, which was then fre- 
 " quented by the most respectable classes of English 
 " society. As they entered, there was a murmur 
 " of voices — ' There is the French embassy !' All 
 '* eyes were fixed on them with a curiosity not 
 " mixed with any expression of good-will ; and pre- 
 *' sently the crowd fell back on both sides, as if the 
 *' Frenchmen had the plague upon them, and left 
 " them all the promenade to themselves.''* This 
 incident occurred before the dethronement of the 
 king in August ; and the writer from whom the 
 above is quoted in the Pictorial History of Eng- 
 land, after labouring through several pages to prove 
 tliat the French were the authors of the war, refutes 
 himself with great naivete by adding, " The public 
 " feeling which would have driven England into a 
 •' war in spite of any ministry, shewed itself in a 
 *' marked manner even before the horrors of the 
 " lOtli August and the massacres of September." 
 
 The feeling in France towards England was the 
 very opposite of this, up to the time when the hos- 
 tile sentiments of our government became known, 
 ' and, even then, there was a strong disposition to 
 
 * Pictorial Hist, of England, vol. iii, p. 276. 
 
 D 2
 
 52 
 
 separate the aristocracy from the people, and to 
 attribute to the former all the enmity which charac- 
 terised our policy towards them. Previously to the 
 revolution, English tastes had been largely adopted 
 in France ; and indeed so great was at one time 
 the disposition to imitate the amusements, dress, 
 equipage, &c. of Englishmen, that it had acquired 
 the epithet of Anglomania. When political reform 
 became the engrossing thought of the nation, what 
 so natural as that the French people should turn a 
 favourable eye to England, whose superior aptitude 
 for self-government, and more jealous love of per- 
 sonal liberty, they were ready then, as they are 
 now, to acknowledge. Never, therefore, was the 
 sympathy for England so strong as at the com- 
 mencement of their revolution. When the Decla- 
 ration of Pilnitz, and the hostile proceedings of the 
 emigrant nobles at Coblentz in 1791, drew fortli 
 the indignant denunciations of Brissot and other 
 orators, and induced some of them to call for war 
 as the only means of putting an end to the clan- 
 destine correspondence which was carried on be- 
 tween the " conspirators without and the traitors 
 within," uo such feeling was entertained towards 
 England ; and even after the breaking out of hosti- 
 lities with this country, so unpopular was the war, 
 that the strongest reproach that one unscrupulous 
 faction could throw upon another was in mutual 
 accusation of having provoked it. Tiiis fact was at a 
 subsequent period referred to by Lord Mornington,'^' 
 
 * January 21, 1794.
 
 53 
 
 one of Pitt's supporters, as a proof that the 
 British governmeut at least did not provoke the 
 war. " Robespierre," said he, " imputes it to 
 ** Brissot ; Brissot retorts it upon Robespierre; the 
 *' Jacobins charge it upon the Girondists; the Gi- 
 " rondists recriminate upon the Jacobins ; the 
 " mountain thunders it upon the valley ; and the 
 " valley re-echoes it back against the mountain." 
 
 ^' All facts," said Sheridan, with unanswerable 
 force, in reply, " tending to contradict the assertion 
 " which the noble Lord professed to establish by 
 " them, and making still plainer that there was no 
 " party in France which was not earnest to avoid a 
 '* rupture with this country, nor any party which we 
 " may not at this moment reasonably believe to be 
 *' inclined to put an end to hostilities." 
 
 I have said sufficient probably to satisfy you that 
 France did not desire a collision with England ; and 
 that the pretexts put forward by Lord Grenville in 
 his correspondence with M. Chauvelin were not 
 sufEcicnt grounds for the rupture. But I will now 
 redeem my pledge, and prove to you, from the 
 evidence of the partisans of the war, that their real 
 motive was to put down opinions in France, or at 
 least to prevent the spread of them in this country. 
 
 Parliament, as I before stated, was hastily sum- 
 moned for the 13th December, 1792. The country 
 stood on the verge of the most fearful calamity 
 that could befall it. But the mass of the people, 
 whose passions and prejudices had been roused 
 against their old enemies the French, did not see 
 the danger before them, and tliey were ready for a
 
 64 
 
 war, At the same time, to quote the words of Sir 
 Walter Scott,* " the whole aristocratic party, com- 
 " manding a very large majority in both Houses of 
 " Parliament, became urgent that war should be 
 " declared against France ; a holy war, it said, 
 " against treason, blasphemy, and murder, and a 
 " necessary war in order to break off all connexion 
 " betwixt the French government and the discon- 
 '* tented part of our own subjects, who could not 
 ** otherwise be prevented from the most close, con- 
 ** stant, and dangerous intercourse with them." To 
 add to the excitement, tales of plots and conspi- 
 racies were circulated; additional fortifications were 
 ordered for the Tower of London ; and a large 
 armed force was drawn round the metropolis. 
 Speaking of the efforts that were made to create a 
 panic in the public mind, Lord Lauderdale^ at a 
 later period observed: — " But is there a man in 
 *' Enoland io-norant that the most wicked arts have 
 *' been practised to irritate and mislead the multi- 
 ** tude? Have not hand-bills, wretched songs, in- 
 " famous pamphlets, false and defamatory para- 
 *' graphs in newspapers been circulated with the 
 *' greatest assiduity, all tending to rouse the indig- 
 " nation of this country against France, with w^hom 
 " it has been long determined I fear to go to war ? 
 " To such low artifices are these mercenaries re- 
 *' duced, that they have both the folly and audacity 
 " to proclaim that the New River water has been 
 ** poisoned with arsenic by French emissaries." 
 
 * Life of Napoleou, ch. xv. t February 12, 1/93.
 
 55 
 
 It must not be forgotten that at the very mo- 
 ment when all this preparation was being made 
 ao-ainst an attack from the French, and when this 
 panic in the public mind was thus artfully created, 
 M. Chauvelin was besieging the Foreign Office 
 with proposals for peace, and, wlien denied admit- 
 tance at the front door, entering meekly at the back, 
 asking only to know on what terms, however hu- 
 miliating, war with England might be averted. 
 The public knew nothing of this at the time, for 
 diplomacy was then, as now, a secret art ; hut the 
 government knew it. 
 
 The King's speech, at the opening of the session, 
 began by saying, that having judged it necessary to 
 embody a part of the militia, he had, according to 
 law, called Parliament together. He then alluded 
 to seditious practices and a spirit of tumult and dis- 
 order, " shewing itself in acts of riot and insurrec- 
 tion, which required the interposition of a military 
 force." Then followed an allusion to "our happy 
 constitution," which seems a little misplaced in. the 
 midst of riot and insurrection ; but the King re- 
 lied on the firm determination of Parliament "to 
 " defend and maintain that constitution which has 
 " so long protected the liberties, and promoted the 
 *' happiness of every class of my subjects." Next, 
 there was a complaint against France for "exciting 
 disturbances in foreign countries, disregarding the 
 rights of neutral nations, and pursuing views of 
 conquest and aggrandizement." The speech then 
 announced an augmentation of the naval and military 
 force, as " necessary in the present state of affairs,
 
 56 
 
 ** and best calculated, both to maintain internal 
 " tranquillity, and to render a firm and temperate 
 " conduct effectual for preserving the blessings of 
 *' peace/' 
 
 The address, in reply to the speech, was 
 carried "without a division. The members who 
 ^vere opposed to the war, spoke under the dis- 
 couraging consciousness that so far from having that 
 popular support and sympathy which could alone 
 make their opposition formidable, the advocates of 
 peace were in as small a minority in the country as 
 in Parliament. On the first night of the session, 
 after denouncing the panic which had been artfully 
 created, Mr. Fox said, " I am not so ignorant of the 
 *' present state of men's minds, and of the ferment 
 " artfully created, as not to know that I am nowad- 
 " vancing an opinion likely to be unpopular. It is 
 " not the first time I have incurred the same 
 " hazard." And, on a subsequent occasion, in a 
 still more dejected tone, he said,* — " I have done 
 " my duty in submitting my ideas to the House j 
 ** and in doing this, I cannot possibly have had 
 " any other motives than those of public duty. 
 '* What were my motives ? Not to court the favour 
 " of ministers, or those by whom ministers are sup- 
 *' posed to be favoured ; not to gratify my friends, 
 ♦' as the debates in this House have shewn ; not to 
 " court popularity, for the general conversation, 
 " both within and without these walls, has shewn 
 " that to gain popularity I must have held the op- 
 
 * December 15th, 1792.
 
 57 
 
 " posite course. The people may treat my house 
 " as they have done that of Dr. Priestley— as it is 
 " said they have done more recently that of Mr. 
 " Walker.* My motive only vvas that they might 
 " know what was the real cause of the war into 
 " which they are likely to be plunged ; and that 
 " they might know that it depended on a mere 
 *' matter of form and ceremony." 
 
 It is impossible to read the speeches of Fox, at 
 this time, without feeling one's heart yearn with ad- 
 miration and gratitude for the bold and resolute 
 manner in which he opposed the war, never yielding 
 and never repining, under the most discouraging 
 defeats ; and, although deserted by many of liis 
 friends in the House, taunted with having only a 
 score of followers left, and obliged to admitf that 
 he could not walk the streets without being insulted 
 by hearing the charge made against him of carrying- 
 on an improper correspondence with the enemy in 
 France, yet bearing it all with uncomplaining man- 
 liness and dignity. The annals of Parliament do 
 not record a nobler struggle in a nobler cause. 
 
 It may naturally be asked, why, with the popular 
 opinions running thus strongly against " French 
 principles," did the government resort to such arts 
 
 * A highly respectable inhabitant of Manchester, -whose bouse 
 was assailed by a "church and king" mob, upon the charge of 
 being a " Jacobin," or " Republican and Leveller." His son, who 
 inherits his liberal principles, but whose good fortune it has been 
 to live in times when popular intelligence can discriminate be- 
 tween friends and foes, is an alderman and magistrate of that city. 
 
 f. February 7th, 1793.
 
 58 
 
 as have been described, for creating a still greater 
 panic in men's minds, or where was the motive for 
 going to war with the French RepubHc ? But " the 
 wicked fleeth when no man pursueth." The 
 vaunted " Constitution " of that time was, so far 
 as the House of Commons was concerned, an insult 
 to reason, an impudent fraud, which would not bear 
 discussion ; and the " boroughmongers," as they 
 were afterwards called, were trembling lest its real 
 character might be exposed, if people were left at 
 leisure to examine it. What that character was, we 
 have been, with infinite naivete^ informed by one of 
 its admirers. " The government of Great Britain," 
 says Alison,* " which was supposed, by theoretical 
 " observers, to have been, anterior to the great 
 " change of 1832, a mixed constitution, in which 
 " the Crown, the Nobles, and the Commons mu- 
 " tually checked and counteracted each other, was 
 *' in reality an aristocracy, having a sovereign for 
 " the executive, disguised under the popular forms 
 " of a republic." Although this government of 
 false pretences had the two extremes of society, the 
 interested few and the ignorant many on its side, 
 yet there was a small party of parliamentary re- 
 formers who, though stigmatised as "Jacobins," 
 " Levellers," and '^ Republicans," were active, ear- 
 nest, and able men, comprising in their body much 
 of the intellect of the age ; and it was from the 
 chimerical fear that these men would put themselves 
 under the influence of French politicians that the 
 
 * Vol. iii. p. 101.
 
 59 
 
 two countries were to be rent asunder by war. 
 
 Upon this point we have the ingenuous avowal of a 
 
 young statesman, who lived to fill the highest office 
 
 in the state. Mr. Jenkinson* (afterwards Lord 
 
 Liverpool), said,— "He had heard it frequently 
 
 ' urged that this was a period particularly un- 
 
 ' favourable to a war with France, on account of 
 
 ' the number of discontented persons amongst us 
 
 ' in correspondence with the seditious of that 
 
 ' country, who menaced and endangered our go- 
 
 ' vernment and constitution. That there was a 
 
 ' small party entertaining such designs he had very 
 
 ' little doubt ; and, from their great activity, he 
 
 • also considered them as dangerous ; but he con- 
 ' fessed that this very circumstance, so far from de- 
 ' terrins: him from war, became a kind of induce- 
 ' ment. They might be troublesome in times of 
 ' peace — they might be tranquil in time of war ; for 
 
 * as soon as hostilities were commenced, the corres- 
 ' pondence with the French must cease, and all the 
 < resource they had would be to emigrate to that 
 ' country, which would be a good thing for this ; 
 ' or, remaining where they are, to conduct thcm- 
 ' selves like good citizens, as that correspondence 
 ' which by law was not punishable now, would in 
 ' time of war be treason.'* 
 
 The same motive for the war was at last avowed 
 by him who had performed the part of Peter the 
 Hermit, in rousing the warhke spirit of the nation. 
 Edmund Burke, who from the year 1789, was pos- 
 
 * December lotb, 1792.
 
 60 
 
 scssed by a species of monamaiiia upon the Frcncli 
 revolution, took a prominent part in these discus- 
 sions; indeed whatever was the subject before the 
 House, if called upon to discuss it, he was pretty 
 certain to mount his favourite hobby before he re- 
 sumed his seat. " Let the subject, the occasion, the 
 * ' argument be what it may," said Mr. Francis,* " he 
 " has but one way of treating it. War and peace, 
 " the repair of a turnpike, the better government of 
 " nations, the direction of a canal, and the security 
 " of the constitution are all alike in his contempla- 
 " tion : the French revolution is an answer to every- 
 " thing; the French revolution is his everlasting 
 *' theme, the universal remedy, the grand specific, 
 *' the never failing panacea, the principal burden of 
 " his song ; and with this he treats us from day 
 " to day ; a cold, flat, insipid hash of the same 
 *' dish, perpetually served up to us in diflerent 
 " shapes, till at length with all his cookery the taste 
 " revolts, the palate sickens at it.*' 
 
 At length, on the discussion of the Alien Bill,t 
 Burke's powers of reason and judgment seemed to 
 be entirely overborne by a frenzied imagination. 
 Drawing forth a dagger and brandishing it in the 
 air, he cast it with great vehemence of action on 
 the floor : " It is my object," said he, " to keep the 
 " French infection from this country ; their princi- 
 '' pies from our minds, and their daggers from our 
 *' hearts ! 1 vote for this bill, because 1 believe it 
 *' to be the means of saving my life and all our lives 
 
 * May 7, 1793. t Dec. 28, 1792.
 
 " from the Innds of assassins; I vote for it because 
 '• it will break the abominable system of the mo- 
 " dern pantheon, and prevent the introduction of 
 ** French principles and French daggers. When 
 *' they smile I see blood trickling down their faces ; 
 " I see their insidious purposes, — I see that the 
 *' object of all their cajoling is blood ! I now 
 " warn my countrymen to beware of these execrable 
 **' philosophers, whose only object it is to destroy 
 " everything that is good here, and to establish im- 
 " morality and murder by precept and example ! !" 
 
 And on a subsequent occasion,* immediately 
 after the declaration of hostilities, he declared his 
 fixed opinion that " if we continued at peace with 
 " France, there would not be ten years of stability 
 " in the government of this country." Thus did 
 lie who first sounded the toscin of war, and led the 
 public mind through each successive phase of hos- 
 tility, until he triumphed in the deadl}^ struggle 
 which had now begun, avow that the object he 
 sou2;ht was to avert the danorer with which French 
 principles menaced the institutions of this country. 
 
 But it is at a somewhat later period that we dis- 
 cover more clearly the real motives of the war as 
 acknowledged by its authors. In 1795, when hos- 
 tilities had been carried on for two years, with but 
 little impression upon the enemy, and when the cry 
 for peace became general, there was less reserve in 
 avowing the objects for which we had entered upon 
 war. In a speech in favour of peace, Mr. Wilber- 
 
 * Feb, 18, 1793.
 
 62 
 
 force* said : " With regard to the probable conse- 
 
 " quences of pursuing the war, he considered thein 
 
 " to be in their nature uncertain. Heretofore it 
 
 " might justly be said to he carried on in order to 
 
 " prevent the progress of French principles ; but 
 
 " now there was much more danger of their being 
 
 " strengthened by a general discontent, arising from 
 
 •' a continuance of the war, than from any impor- 
 
 " tation of the principles themselves from France." 
 
 On a subsequent occasion, after the government 
 
 of France had undergone a change, and had 
 
 passed into the hands of the Directory, and when 
 
 the British ministry was constrained by the general 
 
 discontent, to make a profession of willingness to 
 
 negotiate for peace, they were obliged, in order to 
 
 justify themselves for having formally advocated 
 
 war, to point to the altered, and as they alleged 
 
 more settled state of the French government, as 
 
 the cause of the change in their policy. Mr. Pittf 
 
 said — '' I certainly said that the war was not like 
 
 " others, occasioned by particular insult, or the 
 
 " unjust seizure of territory, or the like, but under- 
 
 " taken to repel usurpation^ connected with principles 
 
 " calculated to subvert all government, and which 
 
 " while they flourished in their original force and 
 
 malignity, were totally incompatible with the 
 
 accustomed relations of peace and amity. We 
 
 " professed also that many persons in that country 
 
 " felt the pressure of the calamities under which it 
 
 " laboured, and were ready to co-operate for the de- 
 
 " struction of the causes which occasioned them." 
 
 * May 27, 1795. t Dec. 9, 1795. 

 
 (< 
 
 (( 
 
 63 
 
 In the debate in the House of Lords, which fol- 
 lowed this pacific message from the King, a more 
 undisguised statement was made by one who, as a 
 cabinet minister, had the fullest opportunity of 
 knowing the motives of those who entered upon 
 the war. Earl Fitzwilliam* said : — '* The present 
 *' war was of a nature different from all common 
 " wars, It was commenced, not from any of the 
 *' ordinary motives of policy and ambition. It 
 " was expressly undertaken to restore order in 
 France^ and to effect the destruction of the abo- 
 minable system that prevailed in that country. 
 Upon this understanding it was that he had sepa- 
 " rated from some of those with whom he had long 
 " acted in politics, and with other noble friends had 
 " lent aid to his Majesty's ministers. Upon this 
 " understanding he had filled that situation which 
 " he some time since held in the Cabinet. Know- 
 " ing then on such authority the object of the war to 
 " have been to restore order in France, he was some- 
 " what surprised at the declaration in the message 
 " that his Majesty was now prepared to treat for 
 ** peace." 
 
 The Fitzwilliams have always had the habit of 
 plain-speaking, though not of invariably foreseeing 
 all the logical consequences of what they say. 
 Their honesty has however been proverbial ; and as 
 in this case the speaker went to the unusual length 
 of giving evidence as a cabinet minister against his 
 former colleagues, and vpas not contradicted, we 
 
 * December 14, 1/95.
 
 61 
 
 may take his statement as conclusive proof upon 
 the question in hand. But what must we think of 
 the conduct of the government, hnd especially of 
 Mr. Pitt and Lord Grenville, in having thrown the 
 responsibility of the war upon France upon such 
 pretences as the closing of the navigation of the 
 Scheldt, whilst at the same time we have over- 
 whelming evidence to shew that they were deter- 
 mined to provoke a collision for totally different 
 objects ? What will be said of it when our history 
 is written by some future Niebuhr ? I could mul- 
 tiply quotations of a similar tendency to the above, 
 but I forbear from a conviction that nothing further 
 of the kind is required to prove my case. 
 
 But there is one ac^ of our government, illustra- 
 tive of its motives in entering upon the war, which 
 I must not omit to mention. Shortly after the 
 commencement of hostilities (November 1793) our 
 naval forces took possession of Toulon, when 
 Admiral Hood and the British Commissioners 
 published a proclamation in the name of the 
 King of England to the people of France, in 
 which they declared in favour of monarchy in 
 France in the person of Louis XVII. But not a 
 word did they say about the opening of the naviga-' 
 tion of the Scheldt, or the pretended objects of the 
 war. And about the same time* the King of Eng- 
 land published a declaration to the French nation, 
 in which he promises the " suspension of hostilities, 
 ** friendship, and security and protection to all 
 
 * October 29, 1793.
 
 65 
 
 '* those who by declaring for monarchical govern- 
 " ment shall shake off the yoke of a sanguinary 
 " anarchy." It is strange that our government 
 did not see that this was as much an act of inter- 
 vention in the internal concerns of another people 
 as any thing which had been done by the French 
 Convention, and that, in fact, it was affording a jus- 
 tification for every act of the kind perpetrated on 
 the Continent, from the Declaration of Pilnitz to 
 that moment. 
 
 In drawing this argument to a close, I have done 
 nothing but prove the truth of a statement made 
 by a writer who has devoted far more time, labour, 
 and learning to the investigation of the subject 
 than it is in my power to bestow. Considering 
 that he is a partisan of the war, and an admirer of 
 the political system which it was designed to 
 uphold, I cannot but marvel at his candour, which 
 I should the more admire if I were sure that he has 
 fully appreciated the logical consequences that flow 
 from his admissions. The following are the re- 
 marks of Sir A. Alison upon the origin of the 
 war: — 
 
 •' In truth, the arguments urged by government 
 *' were not the only motives for commencing the 
 *' war. The danger they apprehended lay nearer 
 ** home than the conquests of the republicans : it 
 " was not foreign subjugation so much as domestic 
 *' revolution that was dreaded if a pacific inter- 
 *' course were any longer naintained with France. 
 ^' ' Croyez-moi,' said the Empress Catherine to 
 
 £
 
 66 
 
 " Segur, in 1789, * uiie guerre seule pent changer 
 " ' la direction des esprits en France, les reunir. 
 " ' donner un but plus utile aux passions et re- 
 " ' veiller le vrai patriotisme.'* In this observation 
 " is contained the true secret, and the best vindica- 
 " tio?i of the revolutionary war. The passions were 
 *' excited ; democratic ambition was awakened ; the 
 " desire of power under the name of reform was 
 " rapidly gaining ground among the middle ranks, 
 " and the institutions of the country were threatened 
 " with an overthrow as violent as that which had 
 *' recently taken place in the French monarchy. In 
 " these circumstances^ the only mode of checking 
 " the evil was by engaging in a foreign contest, by 
 •' drawing off the ardent spirits into active service, 
 " and, in lieu of the modern desire for innovation, 
 " rousing the ancient gallantry of the British 
 
 " nation."! 
 
 Of the moral sense which could permit an ap- 
 proval of the sentiments of the imperial patroness 
 of Suwarrow, 1 would rather not speak. But I 
 wish that a copy of this extract could be possessed 
 by every man in England, that all might under- 
 stand the *' true secret" of despots, which is to 
 employ one nation in cutting the throats of another, 
 so that neither may have time to reform the abuses 
 in their own domestic government. I would say on 
 
 * Believe me, a war alone can change the direction of men's 
 minds in France, re-unite them, give a more useful aim to the 
 passions, and awaken true patriotism. 
 
 f Vol. iv. p. 7.
 
 (3? 
 
 the contrary, tlie true secret of tlie people is to 
 remain at peace : and not only so, but to be on 
 their guard against false alarms about the intended 
 ao-p-ressions of their neiohbours, which when too 
 credulously believed, give to government all the 
 political advantages of a war, without its risks ; for 
 they keep men's minds in a degrading state of fear 
 and dependence, and afford the excuse for conti- 
 nually increasing government expenditure. 
 
 One word only upon the objection that the 
 French were the first to declare war. In the pre- 
 sent case, as in that of tlie Allied Powers on the 
 continent, to which we before alluded, we were 
 o-ivino- to ourselves all the advantao-es of a belli- 
 gerent power by our warlike preparations, without 
 affording to the French the fair warning of a decla- 
 ration of war. The government of France acted 
 more in accordance with the recognised law of 
 nations in publishing the reasons why they were, 
 contrary to their own wishes, at war with England. 
 The language and acts of Mr. Pitt were a virtual 
 declaration of war. Half as much said or done by 
 a prime minister now would be enough to plunge 
 all Europe in flames. We have seen that the 
 militia was embodied, and the Parliament suddenly 
 assembled on the 13th December, 1792, when 
 the King's speech recommended an augmentation 
 of the army and navy. On the 28th January, 
 1793, upon the arrival of the news of the execution 
 of the French king, not only was M Chauvelin, 
 the French minister, ordered to leave the kingdom 
 in eight days, but the King's message, which was 
 
 E 2
 
 G8 
 
 sent to the House of Commons announcing this fact, 
 recommended a further augmentation of the land 
 and sea forces. This increased armament was not 
 now wanted, as was professed to be the case on the 
 13th December, for " preserving the blessings of 
 peace," but, to quote the words of the Message, " to 
 " enable his Majesty to take the most effectual mea- 
 *' sures, in the present important conjuncture, for 
 " maintaining the security and rights of his own 
 " dominions ; for supporting his allies ; and for op- 
 " posing views of aggrandisement and ambition on 
 " the part of France, which would be at all times 
 " dangerous to the general interests of Europe, but 
 " are peculiarly so, when connected with the pro- 
 " pagation of principles which lead to the violation 
 " of the most sacred duties, and are utterly subver- 
 " sive of the peace and order of all civil society." 
 Once more I must beg your attention to dates. This 
 message was delivered on the 28th January, 1793. 
 Up to this time the French government had given 
 undeniable proofs of desiring to preserve peace with 
 England. And it was not till after the delivery of 
 this message to Parliament, after a peremptory order 
 had been given to their ambassadoi" to leave Eng- 
 land ; after all these preparations for war ; and after 
 the insulting speeches and menaces uttered by Mr. 
 Pitt and the other ministers in Parliament, which, 
 as will be seen by referring to the debates of this 
 time, were of themselves sufficient to provoke hosti- 
 lities, that the French Convention, by a unanimous 
 vote, declared war against England on the 1st 
 February, 1793.
 
 69 
 
 On the lltli February the King sent a message 
 to Parliament, in which he said he " relied with 
 " confidence on the firm and effectual support of the 
 " House of Commons, and on the zealous exertions 
 " of a brave and loyal people in prosecuting a 
 " [when was war ever acknowledged to be other- 
 *' wise?] just and necessary war." 
 
 The wisdom of the advice of the Czarina Cathe- 
 rine was exemplified in what followed. The war 
 diverted men's minds from every domestic griev- 
 ance. Hatred to the French was the one passion 
 henceforth cultivated. All political ameliorations 
 were postponed ; Reform of Parliament, a question 
 which had previously been so ripe that Pitt him- 
 self, in company with Major Cartvvright, attended 
 public meetings in its favour, was put aside for forty 
 years ; and even the voice of Wilberforce, pleading 
 for the slave, was for several successive sessions 
 mute, amidst the death struggle which absorbed all 
 the passions and sympathies of mankind. 
 
 And now, my dear Sir, if you have done me the 
 honour to read this long letter, I will conclude with 
 an appeal for your candid judgment upon the merits 
 of the question- between us. Recollect that we 
 are not discussing the professional claims of the 
 Duke of Wellington to our admiration. He and 
 his great opponent were brought forth and educated 
 by the war of the Revolution. They were the 
 accidents, not tlie cause of that mio-htv strua-o-le. 
 The question is — was that war in its origin just and 
 necessary on our part ? Was it so strictly a defen-
 
 70 
 
 sive war that we are warranted in saying that God 
 raised up the Duke as an instrument for our pro- 
 tection ? I humbly submit that the facts of the 
 case are in direct opposition to this view ; and that 
 it is only by pleading ignorance of the historical 
 details whicli 1 have narrated that we can hope to 
 be acquitted of impiety in attributing to an all-wise 
 and just Providence an active interposition in favour 
 of a war so evidently unprovoked and aggre.-sive. 
 
 And I remain faithfully yours, 
 
 RiCHD. COBDEN. 
 To the Eev. .
 
 71 
 
 LETTER [II. 
 MR. COBDEN TO THE REVEREND 
 
 January, 1853. 
 
 My dear Sir, 
 
 I AM afraid you very much understate the 
 case in saying that not one in a thousand of the 
 population of this country has ever doubted the 
 justice and necessity of our last war with France. 
 There is all but a unanimous sentiment upon the 
 subject; and it is easily accounted for. The present 
 generation of adults have been educated under cir- 
 cumstances which forbade an impartial judgment 
 upon the origin of the war. They were either born 
 during the strife of arms, when men's hopes and 
 fears were too much involved in the issue of the 
 strusforle to find leisure for a historical inquiry into 
 the merits of the quarrel, or after the conclusion of 
 the peace, when people were glad to forget every 
 thing connected with the war, excepting our victo- 
 ries, and the victors. There are no men now living, 
 and still engaged in the active business of life, who 
 were old enough to form an opinion upon the ques- 
 tion, and to take a part in the controversy, when 
 peace or war trembled in the balance in 1792 : and 
 our histories have been written too much in the in- 
 terest of the political party which was at that time 
 in power to enable our youth to grow up with sound
 
 72 
 
 opinions upon the conduct of the authors of the 
 war. 
 
 But the truth must be told to the people of this 
 country. I have no fear that they will refuse to 
 hear it. Even were they so disposed, it would not 
 aifect the final verdict of mankind upon the ques- 
 tion. The facts which I have narrated, together 
 with many more leading to the same conclusion, to 
 say nothing of the reserve of proofs which Time 
 has yet to disclose, will all be as accessible to the 
 German and American historians as ourselves. Mr, 
 Bancroft is approaching the epoch to which we 
 refer, and can any one who has followed him thus 
 far in his great historical work, and observed his 
 acute appreciation of the workings of our aristocra- 
 tic system, doubt, that, should he bring his industry 
 and penetration to the task, he will succeed in 
 laying bare to the light of day all the most 
 secret motives which impelled our government to 
 join the crusade against the revolution of 1789 ? 
 
 But the whole truth must be told, and the public 
 mind thoroughly imbued with the real merits of 
 the case, not as the solution of a mere historical 
 problem, but in the interest of peace, and as the 
 best and, indeed, only means of preparing the way 
 for that tone of confidence and kindness which every 
 body, excepting a few hopelessly depraved spirits, 
 believes will one day characterise the intercourse 
 of France and England. For if in science and 
 morals a truth once established be fruitful in 
 other truths, and error, when undetected, be cer- 
 tain to multiply itself after its own kind, how
 
 73 
 
 surely must the same principle apply to the case 
 before us. 
 
 If England be under the erroneous impression 
 that the sano;uinary feud of twenty-two years, 
 which cost her so many children, and heaped upon 
 her such a load of debt and taxation, was forced 
 upon her by the unprovoked aggression of France, 
 it is, 1 fear, but too natural that she should not 
 only cherish feelings of enmity and resentment 
 against the author of such calamities, but that there 
 should be always smouldering in her breast dark 
 suspicions that a similar injury may again be in- 
 flicted upon her by a power which has displayed so 
 great a disregard of the obligations of justice. The 
 natural result of this state of feeling is that it leads 
 us to remind the offending party pretty frequently 
 of the disastrous results of their former attacks, to 
 thrust before their eyes memorials of our prowess, 
 and to warn them from time to time that we are 
 preparing to repel any fresh aggressions which they 
 may be meditating against us. 
 
 If, on the other hand, the real origin of the war 
 be impressed upon the mind of the present genera- 
 tion, and it be known, popularly known, that far 
 from having been, as we are told it was, undertaken 
 in behalf of liberty, or for the defence of our own 
 shores, it was hatched upon the Continent in the 
 secret counsels of depotic courts, and fed from the 
 industry of England by her then oligarchical go- 
 vernment ; that its object was to deprive the French 
 people of the right of self-government, and to place 
 their liberties at the disposal of an arbitrary king.
 
 74 
 
 a corrupt church, and a depraved aristocracy ; then 
 the opinion of the country, and its language and 
 acts will be totally different from what we have just 
 described. Instead of feelings of resentment, there 
 will be sentiments of regret; far from suspecting 
 attacks from the French, the people of England, 
 seeing through, and separating themselves from the 
 policy by which their fathers were misled, will be 
 rather disposed to level their suspicion at those who 
 call upon them again, without one fact to warrant 
 it, to put themselves in an attitude of defiance 
 against their unoffending neighbour ; and in lieu 
 of constantly invoking the memory of their own 
 exploits, or the reverses of their opponents, the 
 English people will, under the circumstances which 
 I have supposed, be anxious only for an oblivion of 
 all memorials of an unjust and aggressive war. 
 
 Can any doubt exist as to which of these condi- 
 tions of public opinion and feeling is most likely to 
 conduce to peace, and which to war? 
 
 But, moreover, the truth must be known in order 
 that the people of England may be the better able 
 to appreciate the feelings of the French towards 
 them. The precept ' do unto others as ye would 
 that others should do unto you,' is applicable to 
 thought as well as act. Before we condemn the 
 sentiments entertained by the people of France with 
 resjjcct to our conduct in tlie last war, let us en- 
 deavour to form an opinion as to what our own feel- 
 ings would be under similar circumstances. To do this 
 we must bear in mind that whilst our historians 
 give us a flattering and partial account of the con-
 
 75 
 
 duct of our government at the breaking out of the 
 last war, the French writers, as may naturally be 
 supposed, lose no opportunity of recording every 
 fact which redounds to our disadvantage. I have 
 abstained from giving quotations from these au- 
 thorities, because they would be open to the charge 
 of being partial and prejudiced. But it ought to be 
 knov/n to us that not only do these writers make the 
 European powers who conspired against the liberties 
 of France responsible for the war, they invariably 
 assign to England the task of stimulating the flag- 
 ging zeal of the Continental despots, and of bribing 
 them to continue their warlike operations when all 
 other inducements ffiiled. The least hostile of these 
 writers, M. Thiers, the favourite of our aristocracy, 
 in speaking of our preparations for the campaign of 
 1794, says—" England was still the soul of the 
 coalition, and urged the powers of the continent 
 to hasten to destroy, on the banks of the Seine, a 
 revolution at which she was terrified, and a rival 
 which was detestable to her. The implacable son 
 of Chatham had this year made prodigious efforts 
 for the destruction of France.'' It is to the energies 
 of Pitt, wielding the power of England, that France 
 attributes the tremendous coalitions which again 
 and again brought nearly all Europe in hostile 
 array against her. Thus does M. Thiers describe 
 the spirit which animated him. " In England a 
 revolution which had only half regenerated the 
 social state, had left subsisting a crowd of feudal in- 
 stitutions which were objects of attachment for the 
 court and aristocracy, and of attack for the opposi-
 
 76 
 
 tion. Pitt had a double object in view ; first to 
 allay the hostility of the aristocracy, to parry the 
 demand for reform, and thus to preserve his ministry 
 by controlling both parties; secondly— to overwhelm 
 France beneath her own misfortunes, and the hatred 
 of all the European governments." 
 
 These quotations afford but a faint idea of the 
 tone in which the historical writers of that country 
 deal with the subject. We are held up generally 
 to popular odium as the perfidious and machiavel- 
 lian plotters against the liberties of the French 
 people. 
 
 But it will probably be asked — and the question 
 is important — ^what are the present opinions of the 
 French people of their own Revolution out of which 
 the war sprung? There is nothing upon which we 
 entertain more erroneous views. When lue speak of 
 that event, our recollection calls up those occurrences 
 only, such as the Reign of Terror, the rise and fall 
 of Napoleon, the wars of conquest carried on by 
 him, and the final collapse of the territory of France 
 within its former boundaries, which seem to stamp 
 with failure, if not with disgrace, the entire character 
 of the Revolution. The Frenchman, on the con- 
 trary, directs his thoughts steadily to the year 17S9. 
 He finds the best excuse he can for the madness of 
 1794 ; he will point, with pride, to the generous 
 magnanimity of the populace of Paris, in 1830, and 
 1848, as an atonement for the Reign of Terror ; he 
 throws upon foreign powers, and especially upon 
 England, the responsibility for the long wars which 
 desolated so many of the countries of Europe; but
 
 77 
 
 towards the Constituent Assembly of 1789, and the 
 principles which they established, his feelings of 
 reverence and gratitude are stronger than ever ; he 
 never alludes to them but with enthusiasm and 
 admiration. This feeling is confined to no class, 
 as the following extract from a speech addressed by 
 M. Thiers on the 29th June, 1851, to that most 
 conservative body, the National Assembly, and the 
 response which it elicited, will show. It is taken 
 verbatim from a report published by himself: — 
 
 " M . Thiers. Let us do honour to the men who 
 have maintained in France, since 1789, real civil 
 equality — equality of taxation, which we owe to our 
 admirable and noble revolution, (notre belle et 
 honorable revolution.)— (Assent and agitation.) 
 
 A voice on the left. Settle that with your friends. 
 (Oh, oh I murmurs.) 
 
 A voice on the right. Don't mistake; it is not the 
 revolution of 1848 that is referred to. 
 
 M. Thiers. I speak of the revolution of 1789, 
 and I trust we are all of one mind upon that. (The 
 left. Yes ! yes ! laughter.) 
 
 M. Charras. Talk to the right. 
 
 M. Thiers. I have a better opinion than you of 
 my country, and of all our parties, and I am con- 
 vinced that no one will encounter coldness or dis- 
 approbation from any quarter when praising the 
 revolution of 1789. (Marks of approbation from a 
 great number of benches.") 
 
 There is no greater proof of the predominant 
 favour in which any opinions are held in France 
 than to find them advocated by M. Thiers. But
 
 78 
 
 \vhilst employed upon this letter, a recent pro- 
 duction from the pen of my accomplished friend, 
 M. Michel Chevalier, has met my eye, in which he 
 speaks of "the immortal principles" of "our 
 glorious Constituent Assembly of I789." Where 
 two men of such eminent authority, but of such 
 diametrically opposite views upon economical 
 principles, agree in their admiration of a particular 
 policy, it is a proof that it must have irresistible 
 claims upon public approbation. Men of the 
 highest social position in France — even they whose 
 fathers fell a sacrifice to tlie Reign of Terror, 
 admit that to the measures of 1789 (they were in 
 substance described in my last letter) which have 
 elevated the millions of their countrymen, from a 
 condition hardly superior to that of the Russian 
 serf, to the rank of citizens and proprietors of the 
 soil, France is indebted for a more rapid advance 
 in civilization, wealth, and happiness, than was ever 
 previously made by any community of a similar 
 extent, within the same period of time. 
 
 This feeling, so universally shared, has not been 
 impaired by the recent changes in France, for it is 
 directed less towards forms of government, or poh"- 
 tical institutions, than to the constitution of society 
 itself. And here let me observe again upon the 
 erroneous notions we fall into as to the state of 
 public opinion in France, because we insist upon 
 judging it by our own standard. Assuredly, if the 
 French have the presumption to measure our habits 
 and feelings by theirs, they must commit as great 
 blunders. Our slorv is that the franchises and
 
 79 
 
 charters gained by our forefathers have secured us 
 an amount of personal freedom that is not to be 
 surpassed under any form of government. And it 
 is the jealous patriotic unselfish love of this free- 
 dom, impelling the whole community to rush to 
 the legal rescue of the meanest pauper if his 
 chartered personal liberties be infringed by those 
 in power, that distinguishes us' from all European 
 countries ; and I would rather part with every sen- 
 timent of liberty we possess than this, because, witli 
 it, every other right is attainable. 
 
 But the French people care little for a charter of 
 habeas corpvs, else, during their many revolutions, 
 when power has descended into the streets, why 
 has it not been secured ? and the liberty of the 
 press, and the right of association, and public meet- 
 ing, have been violated by universal suffrage almost 
 as much as by their emperors and kings. That 
 which the French really prize, and the English 
 trouble themselves little about, is the absence of 
 privileged inequality in their social system. Any 
 violation of this principle is resisted with all the 
 jealousy which we display in matters of individual 
 freedom. It was this spirit which baffled the 
 design of Napoleon, and Louis the XVIIIth, to 
 found an aristocracy by the creation of entails. 
 Now the Revolution of 1789, besides securing 
 liberty of worship, and establishing probably the 
 fairest system of government taxation (apart from 
 the protective policy of the nation) at present to be 
 found in the world, has divided the rich land of 
 France amongst its whole population. It is these
 
 80 
 
 measures, coupled with the abolition of hereditary 
 rank, and of the law of entail, which have chiefly 
 contributed to gain for the Constituent Assembly 
 the gratitude of a people so jealous of privilege, 
 and so passionately attached to the soil. Yet it 
 cannot be too strongly impressed upon our minds 
 that it was against the principles of this very 
 Assembly that Burke, in 1790, launched his fiery 
 declamation, in which we find the following 
 amongst many similar invectives ; — " You would not 
 " have chosen to consider the French as a people of 
 " yesterday, as a nation of low-born servile wretches, 
 " until the emancipating year of 1789;" and we 
 are equally bound to remember that it was with the 
 intention of overthrowing the system of government 
 established by that Assembly that the despotic 
 powers marshalled their armies for the invasion of 
 France, and when, upon the failure of the attack, we 
 threw the weight of England into the scale of des- 
 potism. Having fully realised to ourselves the case 
 of the French people, let us ask — what would be 
 our feelings under their circumstances ? 
 
 Why, I fear, in the first place, we should, like 
 them, still remember with some bitterness the un- 
 provoked attack made upon us by the nations of 
 Europe, and that we should be sometimes tempted 
 to call that country in particular " perfidious," 
 which, whilst professing to be free itself, and to have 
 derived its freedom from a revolution, yet joined 
 the despots of the Continent in a coalition against 
 the liberties of another people: we who have just 
 paid almost pagan honours to the remains of a
 
 81 
 
 general who fought the battles of that unrighteous 
 coalition — what would we have done in honour of 
 those soldiers who beat back from our frontiers con- 
 federate armies of literally every nation in Chris- 
 tian Europe, except Sweden, Denmark, and Swit- 
 zerland ? Should we not, if we were Frenchmen, 
 be greater worshippers of the name of Napoleon, if 
 possible, than we are of Wellington and Nelson — 
 and with greater reason ? Should we not forgive 
 him his ambition, his selfishness, his despotic 
 rule? would not every fault be forgotten in the 
 recollection that he humbled Prussia, who had 
 without provocation assailed us when in the 
 throes of a domestic revolution, and that he dic- 
 tated terms at Vienna to Austria, who had 
 actually begun the dismemberment* of our own 
 territory ? Should not we in all probability still 
 feel so much under the influence of former dano-ers 
 and disasters as to cling for protection to a large 
 standing army;— and might not that centralised 
 government which alone enabled us to preserve our 
 independence still find favour in our sight ? And 
 should we not indulge a feeling of proud defiance 
 in electing for the chief of the state the next heir 
 to that great military hero, the child and champion 
 of the Revolution, whose family had been espe- 
 cially proscribed by tlie coalesced Powers before 
 whom he finally fell? Yes, however wise men 
 might moralize, and good men mourn, these would, 
 under the circumstances, I am sure, be the feelings 
 
 * At Valenciennes and Concle. 
 
 F
 
 82 
 
 and passions of Englishmen, aye, and probably, in 
 even a stronger degree than they are now cherished 
 in France. 
 
 What then are the results which I anticipate 
 from the general diffusion of a true knowledge of 
 the origin and character of the last French war ? 
 In the first place, a more friendly and tolerant 
 feeling towards the French people. The maxim of 
 Rochefoucault, that we never forgive those we have 
 injured, if it be not unjust as applied to individuals, 
 does not certainly hold good with respect to com- 
 munities. Great nations may be proud, and even 
 vain, but they are ever magnanimous ; and it is 
 only meanness which could lead us to visit upon 
 our victim the penalty of our own injustice. Besides, 
 the maxim is not intended to apply, even in indivi- 
 duals, to generous natures, and generosity is the 
 invariable attribute of great masses of men. 
 
 But, in the next place, I should expect from a 
 more correct knowledge of our error of sixty years 
 ago, that we shall be less likely to repeat it now. 
 Is it certain that the lesson will not be required ? 
 Are there no symptoms that we have spirits 
 amongst us who want not the will, if the power and 
 occasion be afforded, to play the part of Burke in 
 our day ? He excited the indignation of his coun- 
 trymen against a Republic which had decapitated a 
 King ; now our sympathies are roused in behalf of 
 a Republic which has been strangled by an Emperor. 
 However inconsistent, in other respects, our conduct 
 at the two epochs may be, we seem in both cases 
 likely to fall into the error of forgetting that the
 
 83 
 
 French nation are tlie legitimate tribunal for dis- 
 posing of the grievance. To forget this is indeed a 
 more flagrant act of intervention on our part than 
 was that of our forefathers, inasmuch, as whilst 
 they usurped the functions of twenty-four millions 
 of French only, we are now in danger of treating 
 thirty-six millions with no greater considera- 
 tion. 
 
 I have said that we are not without imitators of 
 the Reflections, A small volume of " Letters of 
 * an Englishman,^ on Louis Napoleon, the Empire, 
 and the Coup cVEtat, reprinted with large addi- 
 tions from The Times,'' is lying before me. I 
 know a cynical person who stoutly maintains the 
 theory that we are not progressive creatures ; that, 
 on the contrary, we move in a circle of instincts ; 
 and that a given cycle of years brings us back 
 again to the follies and errors from which we 
 thought mankind had emancipated itself. And, 
 really, these Letters are calculated to encourage him 
 in his cynicism. For here we have the very same 
 invectives levelled at Louis Napoleon which were 
 hurled at the Constituent Assembly sixty years 
 ago — the style, the language, the very epithets are 
 identically the same. Take a couple of morsels by 
 wa}' of illustration — the one speaking of the Con- 
 stituent Assembly of 1789 ; and the other of Louis 
 Napoleon in 1852 : 
 
 BURKE, 1790. ENGLISHMAN, 1852. 
 
 " How came the Assembly " The banquets to the sub- 
 
 by their present power over the officers, the champagne, the 
 army? Chiefly, to be sure, by toasts, and the reviews, dis- 
 
 F 2
 
 84 
 
 debauching the soldiers fronj 
 their officers." 
 
 closed a continuity of purpose, 
 and a determination to de- 
 bauch the soldiery, calculatecl 
 to open the eyes of all." 
 
 So much for a specimen of specific accusation. 
 Now for a sample of general invective: — 
 
 ENGLISHMAN, 1852, 
 
 Speaking of Louis Napoleon. 
 
 " A self-convicted perjurer, 
 an attainted traitor, a conspi- 
 rator successful by the foulest 
 treachery, the purchase of the 
 soldiery, and the butchery of 
 thousands, he must, if not cut 
 short in his career, go all length 
 of tyranny. For him there is 
 no halt, for his system no 
 element] of 'either stabiHty or 
 progress. It is a hopeless and 
 absolute anachronism." 
 
 BURKE, 1790, 
 Bpealcing of the Constituent 
 Assembly. 
 " When all the frauds, im- 
 postures, violences, rapines, 
 burnings, murders, confisca- 
 tions, compulsory paper cur- 
 rencies, and every description 
 of tyranny and cruelty em- 
 ployed to bring about and to 
 uphold this Revolution, have 
 their natural effect, that is, to 
 shock the moral sentiments of 
 all virtuous and sober minds, 
 the abettors of this philosophic 
 system immediately strain their 
 throats in a declamation against 
 the old monarchical government 
 of France." 
 
 Considering that the result of Burke's declama- 
 tion was a war of twenty-two years, first to put 
 down the French Republic, and afterwards Napoleon 
 Bonaparte, both in the interest of the Bourbons, 
 that the war cost us some five hundred millions of 
 debt, and that the result is, this present year 1 853, 
 a Bonaparte, whose family we proscribed, sitting 
 upon the French throne, and the Bourbons, whom 
 we installed at the Thuilleries, fugitives from the 
 soil of France — remembering these things, and be-
 
 85 
 
 holding this not altogether unsnccessful attempt 
 at an imitation of the " Reflections," it does cer- 
 tainly afford a triumph to my cynical acquaintance, 
 so far at least as to raise a doubt whether progres- 
 sive wisdom be an element of our foreign policy. I 
 could give many specimens of declamatory writing 
 from the LetterSy not inferior to Burke in style, and 
 some of them surpassing him in the vigour of their 
 invective. Take the following as an illustration 
 of the lengths to which the writer's vehemence 
 carries him, and let it be borne in mind that these 
 letters have had a far wider circulation than 
 Burke's great philippic with all its popularity could 
 boast of; I invite attention to those passages 
 marked by me in italics. " The presidential chair 
 or the imperial throne is set upon a crater — the 
 soil is volcanic, undermined and trembling — the 
 steps are slippery with blood — and the darkening 
 steam of smouldering hatred, conspiracy and ven- 
 geance — is exhaling round it. Each imrty can fur- 
 nish its contingents for tyrannicide; the assassin dogs 
 him in the street ; and even at the balls or banquets 
 of the Ely see he may find the fate of Gustavus. He 
 who has been false to all must only look for false- 
 hood, and is doomed to daily and to nightly fears 
 of mutinies, insurrections, and revenge. Conscience 
 cannot be altogether stifled, and will sometimes 
 obtrude, in her horrible phantasmagoria, the ghastly 
 corpses of the Boulevards." 
 
 Nobody will suppose that I would deny to any 
 one the right of publishing his views upon
 
 86 
 
 French or any other politics. So far am I from 
 wishing to restrain the liberty of the press^ it 
 is my constant complaint that it is not free 
 enough. The press, in my opinion, should be 
 the only censor of the press ; and in this spirit I 
 would appeal to public opinion, against the evil 
 tendency of these and similar productions. We all 
 know how the strictures of Burke began with criti- 
 cism, grew into menace, and ended in a cry for 
 war. The " Englishman's'* Letters are here again 
 an exact counterpart of their great original. The 
 volume contains ten letters : the two first, penned 
 in a style of which I have given specimens, are 
 furious attacks upon Louis Napoleon, and his 
 government ; with passing condemnations of the 
 majority of the Legislative Assembly, the Orleanists, 
 the bourgeoisie, the peasantry, the soldiers, and the 
 priests; in fact there is hardly any party in France 
 which escapes his brilliant vituperation. Next 
 comes letter the third, headed, most appropriately, 
 after all this provoking abuse, *' The National 
 Defences;' which subject he discusses with his 
 telling style, and, upon the whole, with great good 
 sense. Having thus provided against accidents, 
 and ascertained that he was ensconced in something 
 better than a "glass house," he resumes his voca- 
 tion of pelting with the hardest and sharpest words 
 he can find, in his copious vocabulary of invective, 
 Louis Napoleon in particular, and all sorts of men 
 in general, at home and abroad. After indulging 
 himself in this way through four more letters, we
 
 87 
 
 come to the eighth, which bears the title — somewhat 
 out of place in such company — of " Peace at all 
 price '^ It would seem that Mr. Burritt, and Mr. 
 Fry, having taken alarm at the hostile tone of the 
 English press, had set on foot a scheme for counter- 
 acting the mischief. Addresses^ containing assu- 
 rances of friendship and peace^ were drawn up in 
 several of our towns, signed by the inhabitants, and 
 forwarded to various places in France. This move- 
 ment, than which nothing could be more amiable, 
 and certainly nothing more harmless, draws down 
 upon the heads of poor Messrs. Burritt, and Fry, and 
 the Peace party generally, such a volley of vituperative 
 epithets, that they might almost excite the jealousy 
 of M. Bonaparte himself — speaking of the peace ad- 
 vocates — '* They require," says he, " keepers, not 
 reporters — their place is Han well, not the London 
 Tavern — and their Chairman should be Doctor 
 Conolly !" 
 
 Now, in the course pursued by the " Englisli- 
 man," we have an epitome of the conduct of all 
 such writers : — they begin with denunciations of the 
 French government ; they then call for more " de- 
 fences" as a protection against the hostility which 
 they instinctively feel such language naturally 
 excites ; and they end in an onslaught upon the ad 
 vocates of peace because they do not join in the cry. 
 
 Before indulging this expensive propensity for 
 scolding, this determination to grumble not only 
 for ourselves but also for thirty-six millions of 
 Frenchmen, it behoves us to ask, not only whether 
 any benefit will arise, but whether positive injury
 
 88 • 
 
 may not be done, even to the people we wish to 
 serve, by our uncalled for interference. It is 
 hardly necessary that I should declare, that, were 
 Louis Napoleon an Englishman, or I a Frenchman, 
 however small a minority of opponents he might 
 have, I should be one of them :— that is all I have 
 to say in the matter ; for anything more would in 
 my opinion be mere impertinence towards the 
 French people, who, for reasons best known to them- 
 selves, acquiesce in his rule. But admitting for the 
 sake of argument that all that is said of the tyranny, 
 treachery, and wickedness of Louis Napoleon be 
 true ; those are precisely the qualities in despotic 
 monarchs, to which we are indebted for our liber- 
 ties. Why should not the French be allowed the 
 opportunity of deriving some of the advantages 
 ■which we have gained from bad sovereigns ? 
 Where would our charters and franchises have been, 
 if our John's and James's had not reigned, and mis- 
 governed ? Nobody pretends that the French em- 
 peror is quite so bad as our eighth Henry ; yet we 
 contrived to owe to him our Protestantism. If half 
 that is alleged against Louis Napoleon be true, the 
 French people will have him at a great disadvantage 
 in any controversy or struggle they may be engaged 
 in with him. One thing alone could prevent this 
 — the popularity which will assuredly follow from 
 continued attacks in the English press, such as I 
 have just quoted. 
 
 But here let me warn you against the belief into 
 which so many fall, that the hostile tone adopted by 
 writers of this country towards the French govern-
 
 89 
 
 ment, and the cry of an invasion, liave reference to 
 the present despotic ruler of France only. That is 
 one of the many shapes which the cry has assumed. 
 But it was first heard when Louis Philippe, the 
 " Napoleon of Peace," was on the throne. The 
 letter of the Duke of Wellington, to Sir John Bur- 
 goyne, which has been made the text-book for 
 panic-mongers ever since, was written when the 
 King of the French had given seventeen years proof 
 of his pacific policy, and when that representative 
 form of government, which we are now told was the 
 guarantee of peace, was still subsisting in France : 
 it made its appearance in 1847, when we were 
 \lready spending more upon our warlike arma- 
 nents than in any of the previous thirty years ; more 
 by two millions of money than the most terrified 
 invasionist now proposes to expend : and yet at that 
 time, and under those circumstances, the cry for 
 more defences against the French was as active, 
 and the clamour against the peace party who re- 
 sisted it, as strong, as at any later time; and the 
 very same parties who now advocate increased ar- 
 maments to protect our shores against Louis Napo- 
 leon, were amongst the loudest of those who swelled 
 the panic cry in 1847. 
 
 An allusion to the infirmities of a great mind, 
 however painful at the present moment, is rendered 
 absolutely necessary by those who quote the autho- 
 rity of the Duke of Wellington's declining years in 
 favour of a policy, which, in my opinion, tends 
 neither to the peace, nor the prosperity of the coun- 
 try. At the time of penning his letter to General
 
 90 
 
 Burgoyne, tlie Duke was vergino- upon his eightieth 
 year. Now, no man retains all his faculties unim- 
 paired at fourscore. Nature does not suspend her 
 laws, even in behalf of her favourite sons. The 
 Duke was mortal, and therefore subject to that 
 merciful law which draws a veil over our reason, 
 and dims the mental vision as we approach the 
 end of the vista which terminates with the tomb. 
 But the faculties do not all pay this debt of nature 
 at once, or in equal proportion. Sometimes the 
 strongest part of our nature, which may have been 
 subjected to the greatest strain, declines the first. 
 In. the Duke's case, his nervous system, his " iron" 
 characteristic gave way. He who at forty was inca- 
 pable of fear, at eighty was subject to almost infan- 
 tine alarms. This was shewn on several public 
 occasions ; but on none so strongly as in the provi- 
 sion made by him against an insurrection or a revo- 
 lution during the Great Exhibition of 1851, when, 
 as is known to those who were in authority, or in 
 connexion with that undertaking, he was haunted 
 with terrors which led him to change the entire 
 disposition of the army for the year, to refuse to the 
 household regiments the usual retreat to summer 
 quarters, and to surround the metropolis with 
 troops. No one in the full possession of a vigorous 
 intellect could have possibly fallen into the error of 
 supposing that the moment, when all people's 
 minds were wound up by a year's previous agita- 
 tion to the highest pitch of interest in a holiday 
 exhibition, would be chosen for a great and com- 
 bined political demonstration. Human nature, and
 
 91 
 
 especially English nature, is never liable to be pos- 
 sessed by two such absorbing ideas at the same 
 time. In fact, such a diversion of men's minds 
 from public affairs as the Great Exhibition afforded 
 is precisely that which despots have employed for 
 escaping the scrutiny of their own misgovernment. 
 But, as is well known, at that moment universal 
 political contentment reigned throughout England, 
 If, however, as was supposed the Duke's prepa- 
 rations were levelled at the foreigners who were 
 attracted to London, the absence of a calm and 
 vigorous reason is still more apparent. For at that 
 time political propagandism was dead even on the 
 Continent; their revolutions had failed; universal 
 reaction had succeeded to democratic fever; and 
 England was regarded as the only great country in 
 Europe where political freedom was " holding its 
 own." Besides, a moment's clear reflection would 
 have suggested the obvious answer to such fears, — 
 that the red republicans and revolutionists of the 
 continent were not the persons likely to find the 
 money for paying a visit in great numbers to Eng- 
 land. In fact, so great an obstacle did the expense 
 present, that during the whole year scarcely fifty 
 thousand foreigners, European and American, 
 above the average of annual visitors, reached our 
 shores : and it must be evident, that, against any 
 dangers, whether of mischief, or spoliation, contem- 
 plated by foreigners, or English on that occasion, a 
 good police force, which was most amply provided 
 by the Commissioners, and not an army, was the 
 only rational provision.
 
 92 
 
 But I apjDeal from the Duke's advice in 1847, to 
 his own example, when in complete possession of 
 his mental powers, in 1835. He was a member of 
 Sir Robert Peel's government in the latter year, 
 which is memorable for having witnessed the lowest 
 military expenditure since the peace. The Esti- 
 mates of that year are always quoted by Financial 
 Reformers as a model of economy. The Duke was 
 consulted by Sir Robert Peel, and became an as- 
 senting party to those estimates. What was the 
 change of circumstances which warranted so great 
 a revolution in his views in 1847? His letter 
 might lead us to suppose that steam navigation had 
 in the mean time been discovered. Does any one 
 whose memory is unimpaired forget that in 1835 
 our coasts and narrow seas swarmed with steamers, 
 that our sailing vessels were regularly towed to sea 
 by them, and that we were then discussing the 
 merits of the ports in Ireland from which steam- 
 ships should start for America ? The Duke never 
 afterwards acknowledged that he neglected the 
 defence of the country when he was in power. 
 Nobody has made such a charge against him. But 
 I and others who have advocated a return to the 
 expenditure of 1835 have been denounced for 
 wishing to leave the country defenceless. I must 
 leave my opponents to reconcile their conduct with 
 the reverence they profess to feel for the authority 
 of the Duke of Wellington. 
 
 The Duke's letter has been followed by a shoal 
 of publications, all apparently designed to tempt 
 the French to make a descent upon our shores ; for
 
 93 
 
 all are, more or less, full of arguments to prove how 
 easily it might be effected. Some of them give 
 plans of our ports, and point out the nearest road to 
 London ; others describe, in seductive phrases, the 
 rich booty that awaits them there. Foremost of 
 these is Sir Francis B. Head, who has given us a 
 thick volume under the title of " The Defenceless 
 state of Great Britain; " then we have '* Thoughts 
 on National Defence,^' by Vice- Admiral Boicles ; 
 " On the Defence of England,'* by Sir Charles J. 
 Napier, who tells us that he " believes that our 
 young soldiers pray night and day " for an inva- 
 sion ; *' A Plan for the formation of a Maritime 
 Militia,'' hy Captain Elliot ; ^^ National Defences,'* 
 by Montagne Gore, Esq. ; " Memorandum on the 
 necessity of a Secretary of State for our Defences, 
 Sfc.,*' hy Robert Carmichael Smith ; " The Defence of 
 our mercantile Sea-ports,'' by a Retired Artillery 
 Officer ; and amongst a host of others is " The Peril 
 of Portsmouth," by James Fergusson, Esq., with a 
 PLAN ; commencing most portentously :— "Few per- 
 " sons are perhaps aware that Portsmouth, which 
 " from its position and its extent, is by far the most 
 '' important station of the British Navy, is at pre- 
 " sent in so defenceless a state, that it could easily 
 '* be taken by a coup-de-main, either from the sea 
 *' or by land. Yet such is the undoubted state of 
 " the case, and it is further easy of proof that if it 
 " were to fall into the hands of an enem}^ the navy 
 " of England would, from that very circumstance, 
 " be crippled, as a defenceless element at least, to
 
 94 
 
 *' the extent of one-lialf its power ; while the hostile 
 " occupation of Portsmouth would render the inva- 
 " sion of England as simple and as easy a problem 
 " as ever was submitted to the consideration of any 
 " military man, &c. &c." Surely the French must 
 have lost all pretensions to their character for po- 
 liteness, or they would have long ago accepted these 
 pressing invitations to pay our shores a visit ! 
 
 There are two assumptions running through 
 nearly all these productions. First, that we have 
 made no provision for our defence, and, therefore, 
 offer a tempting prey to an invader ; and, next, that 
 the French are a mere band of pirates, bound by no 
 ties of civilization, and ready to pounce upon any 
 point of our coast which is left unprotected. 
 
 The first assumption may be disposed of with a 
 few figures : — we expend every year from fifteen 
 to sixteen millions in warlike preparations ; and we 
 have been, ever since the Duke of Wellington's 
 Estimates of 1835, constantly augmenting the 
 number of our armed forces. In that year tliey 
 amounted altogetlier to 145,846 — at the close of the 
 last Parliament they stood at 272,481;* thus shewing 
 an addition since 1835 of 126,635. The following 
 is a detailed list of the increase from official 
 sources: — 
 
 * In addition to this, the army in India amounts to 289,529 
 men, making altogether 562,010 men. The cost of the Indian 
 army is ten millions, which added to our fifteen millions, makes 
 .£25,000,000— the largest sum paid by any nation for a peace 
 establishment.
 
 95 
 
 Amount and description of all the Fo7'ces added since 1835. 
 
 Cavalry and Infantry added ... ... ... 20,GG() 
 
 Ordnance Corps ... ... ... ... 7,263 
 
 Sailors and Marines ... ... ... ... 12,095 
 
 Enrolled Pensioners ... ... ... ... 18,500 
 
 Dockyard Battalions (armed and drilled) ,., ... 9,200 
 
 Coast Guard (organised and drilled to the use of 
 
 Artillery since 183.5) ... ... ... ... 5,000 
 
 Irish Constabulary, increase ... ... ... 4,627 
 
 MiUtia increase voted ... ... ... ... 54,049 
 
 131,400 
 Deduct decrease of Yeomanry ... 4,765 
 
 Total increase since 1835 up to June 1852 ... 126,635 
 
 Thus stood matters at the close of the last Parlia- 
 ment, in June. But the cry was still " they come." 
 The *' invasionists" renewed their annual autumn 
 clamour ; and no sooner had the new Parliament 
 assembled in November, for the short session, than 
 there was a proposal for a further increase of our 
 " defences." The money was voted without a 
 division. Mr. Hume, who had seen many of the 
 popular organs of public opinion joining in the cry, 
 contented himself with a protest; and then, in 
 despair of any other corrective, left the cure of the 
 evil to the tax-gatherer : — and I confess for the 
 moment to have shared his sentiments. 
 
 The other argument of the invasionists, — that 
 France is ready to assail us upon any vulnerable 
 point, will be successful in proportion only to our 
 ignorance of the character and condition of the 
 French people, and of the origin and history of the 
 last war. Everything in that country is viewed by
 
 96 
 
 us through a distorted and prejudiced medium. 
 We regard France as the most aggressive and war- 
 like country on the Continent, because we have all 
 read of her invasions of other countries, without 
 recollecting that the)' were in retaliation for an un- 
 provoked attack upon her : — we view with alarm 
 the enthusiasm of the French people for their army, 
 but we cannot so far enter into their feelings as to 
 know that it springs from gratitude, because " it was 
 the army," to use the words of tlie conservative and 
 peace-loving Journal des Debats^ " which repre- 
 sented her with admirable eclat on fields of battle — • 
 that is to say, on the spot to which it was neces- 
 sary that the whole of France should repair in 
 order to defend the new life which she held from 
 1789." Doubtless there is danger to be feared 
 from this predominance of the military spirit, how- 
 ever created, a danger most to be dreaded by 
 France herself: — but let it not be forgotten that we 
 helped to plant and water the upas tree, and have 
 no right to charge with our sins those who are 
 destined to live under its shade. 
 
 Besides, we must bear in mind that the strength 
 of the army of France is only in proportion to that 
 of other continental states; and that her navy is 
 always regulated with reference to our own, gene- 
 rally about in the ratio of two- thirds of our force : 
 "We pay England the compliment," said M. 
 Thiers in the Chamber of Deputies in 1846, "of 
 thinking only of her when determining our naval 
 force ; we never heed the ships which sally forth 
 from Trieste or Venice — we care only for those that
 
 97 
 
 leave Portsmouth and Plymouth." "Oil, but," I 
 sometimes hear it very complacently said, " every 
 body knows that England is only armed in self- 
 defence, and in the interest of peace." But when 
 France looks at our 500 ships of war, our 180 war 
 steamers, and hears of our great preparations at 
 Alderney, Jersey, and other points close to her 
 shores, she has very different suspicions. She re- 
 calls to mind our conduct in 1793, when, within a 
 twelvemonth after the commencement of hostilities, 
 we had taken possession of Toulon (her Portsmouth) 
 and captured or burnt a great part of her fleet ; and 
 when we landed an expedition on the coast of 
 Brittany, and stirred up afresh the smouldering 
 fires of civil war. If we are so alarmed at the idea 
 of a French invasion, vvhich has not occurred for 
 nearly eight hundred years, may we not excuse the 
 people of France if they are not quite free from a 
 similar apprehension, seeing that not a century has 
 passed since the Norman conquest in which Me 
 have not paid hostile visits to her shores? The 
 French have a lively recollection of the terrible 
 disasters they suffered from the implacable enmity 
 of our government during the last war. They 
 found themselves assailed by a feudal aristocracy, 
 having at its command the wealth of a manufac- 
 turing and mercantile people, thus presenting the 
 most formidable combination for warlike purposes 
 to be found recorded in the world's history ; and 
 knowing as they do that political power in this 
 country is still mainly in the hands of the same 
 class, some allov. ancc must be made for ihcm if 
 
 G
 
 98 
 
 they have not quite made up their minds that 
 peace and non-intervention are to be our invariable 
 pohcy for the future. Taking this candid view of 
 the case, we shall admit that the extent of the 
 preparations in France must be in some degree 
 commensurate with the amount of our own warlike 
 armaments. 
 
 I will add a few remarks upon the present state 
 of France, as compared with her condition in 1793, 
 and endeavour to form an estimate of the proba- 
 bilities of a war between her and this countr}' ; or 
 rather, I should say, of the prospect of an invasion 
 of England by France ; for I will assume the writers 
 and declaimers about this invasion to be in earnest ; 
 I will suppose that they really mean an invasion of 
 England, and not a march upon Belgium, or any 
 other continental state; I will take for granted 
 that we have not now, as was the case in 179^, to 
 deal with false pretences, to cover other designs, 
 and that, in this discussion of a French invasion, we 
 are not witnessing a repetition of the bold dissimu- 
 lation on the one side, and gross credulity on the 
 other, which preceded the war of 1793. I will for 
 the sake of argument admit the good faith of those 
 who predict a war with France, and a consequent 
 descent upon our shores ; nay, I will go further, and 
 even not call in question the sincerity of that party 
 which foretells an invasion of England without any 
 previous declaration of war. 
 
 What are the circumstances of Europe calculated 
 to produce a war ? There is one, and only one 
 danger peculiar to our times, and it was foreseen
 
 &9 
 
 by the present Prime Minister, when he thus ex- 
 pressed himself: 
 
 "He was disposed," Lord Aberdeen*'' said, " to dis- 
 sent from the maxims which had of late years received 
 very general assent, that the best security for the 
 continuance of peace, was to be prepared for war. 
 That was a maxim which might have been applied 
 to the nations of antiquity, and to societ^un a com- 
 paratively barbarous and uncivilised state, when 
 warlike preparations cost but little, but it was not 
 a maxim which ought to be applied to modern 
 nations, when the facilities of the preparations for 
 war were very different. Men, when they adopted 
 such a maxim, and made large preparations in time 
 of peace that would be sufficient in the time of war, 
 were apt to be influenced by the desire to put their 
 efficiency to the test, that all their great prepara- 
 tions, and the result of their toil, and expense, 
 might not be thrown away. He thought, therefore, 
 that it was no security to any country against the 
 chances of war, to incur great expense, and make 
 great preparations for warlike purposes. A most 
 distinguished statesman! of France had lately em- 
 phaticiilly declared in the French Chamber his 
 desire for peace, but he added that to maintain it 
 he must have an army of 800,000 men. And what 
 he (the Earl of Aberdeen) would ask, could be ex- 
 pected from the raising of such a force but war, or 
 national bankruptcy ? He therefore dreaded the 
 intention of those who desired such extensive arma- 
 ments, notwithstanding the pacific professions they 
 * Hansard, vol. 107, p. 704. f M. Thiers. 
 
 G 2
 
 100 
 
 made ; and lie could not be at case as regarded 
 the stabilit}^ of peace until he saw a great reduction 
 in the great military establishments of Europe. 
 Such should be the great object of all governments, 
 and more especially of the government of this 
 country." 
 
 Thus spoke Lord Aberdeen in 1849. The evil 
 has not diminished since that time. Europe has 
 almost degenerated into a military barracks. It is 
 computed by Baron Yon Reden, the celebrated Ger- 
 man statistical writer, that one half of its population 
 in the flower of manhood are bearing arms. It is 
 certain that in the very height of Napoleon's wars, 
 the effective force of the Continental armies was 
 less than at present. For a long time the cuckoo- 
 cry was repeated " to preserve peace, prepare for 
 war," but the wisest statesmen of our age have con- 
 curred with the Peace party, that the greater the 
 preparation the more imminent is the risk of a col- 
 lision, ov\ing to the preponderance which is thereby 
 given in the councils of nations to those who by 
 education, taste, and even interest must be the least 
 earnestly disposed for peace. At this moment a 
 martial tone pervades the Courts and Cabinets, as 
 well as the most influential classes of the Conti- 
 nental States ; and never, even in England, since 
 the war, was the military spirit so much in the as- 
 cendant in the higher circles as at the present 
 time. To what then are we to attribute the pre- 
 servation of peace and the present prospect of its 
 continuance, in spite of this dangerous element, but 
 to the fact that, whilst governments are making iin-
 
 101 
 
 precedcntcd preparations for hostilities, all the signs 
 and symptoms of the age tend more than ever in the 
 opposite direction ? Let us see what are the facts 
 which warrant this conclusion : — ■ 
 
 The first safeguard against the emplo;^'ment of 
 these enormous standing armies in foreign wars, is 
 that they are indispensable at home to repress the 
 discontent caused in a great degree by the burden 
 which their own cost imposes on the people. Sir 
 Robert Peel foresaw this result in 1841, when he 
 said that — " the danger of aggression is infinitely 
 less than the danger of those sufferings to ichich 
 the present exorbitant expenditure must give rise*' 
 Their growing intelligence will render the people 
 every year more dissatisfied with the yoke imposed 
 on them; and athwart these armed and drilled 
 mechanical tools of despotism may be often heard 
 low mutterings, which will assuredly swell some 
 day into a shout of defiance. Internal revolutions 
 may be safely predicted of every country whose 
 government rests not upon public opinion, but the 
 bayonets of its soldiers. Those internal convulsions 
 are however no longer to be feared as the causes 
 of vTar ; — for the world has wisely resolved (and it 
 is one of the lessons learned from the last war) that 
 henceforth every nation shall be left to regulate its 
 own domestic affairs, free from the intervention of 
 strangers. It is true that, whilst during the late 
 revolutionary period, this rule was scrupulously ob- 
 served towards the Great Powers, it was flagrantly 
 outraged in the case of Hungary, Italy, and Hesse- 
 Cassel, against which acts of injustice to the smaller 
 States, the public opinion of tlic civilized world
 
 i02 
 
 ought to be brought to bear, unless we are to sit 
 down and acknowledge tliat the weak are to have 
 no rights, and the strong to be bound by no law. 
 In this change of policy, however, which will cer- 
 tainly be observed towards France, we have a secu- 
 rity against a repetition of the offence which led 
 to the last war. 
 
 There are not a few persons, especially of the 
 military class, who, ever since the peace, have been 
 haunted with the apparition of tlie late war, and 
 have advocated a state of preparation calculated to 
 meet as great efforts on the part of France as those 
 put forth by Napoleon himself. They will even go 
 so far as to predict the exact latitude where future 
 Trafalgars or Saint Vincents are to be fought, and 
 call for the construction of harbours and basins, 
 where our crippled ships may be repaired, after 
 their imaginary engagements.* Now, without laying 
 myself open to the charge of foretelling perpetual 
 peace — for nothing appears to be more offensive to 
 certain parties — 1 must say that I think the very 
 fact of the wars of the Frencli Revolution having 
 happened is an argument against their soon recur- 
 ring again. For even if I take no credit for the 
 lesson wliich that bloody and abortive struggle 
 affords, if I admit the unteachable character of 
 nations, still Nature has her own way of proceeding, 
 and she does not repeat hei'self every generation in 
 extraordinary performances of any kind. Alexan- 
 ders, Caesars, Charlemagnes, and Napoleons are 
 
 * Such arguments have been gravely urged in the House of 
 Commons by naval men ; and, what is still worse, they have been 
 acted upon.
 
 103 
 
 happily not annual, or even centennial, productions ; 
 and, like the exhausted eruptions of our physical 
 globe, they have never been reproduced upon the 
 same spot. Nowhere is the husbandman more safe 
 against a convulsion of nature than when he plants 
 his vines in the crater of an extinct volcano. The 
 very magnitude of the operations of Bonaparte, by 
 forbidding all attempts at rivalry, is rather calcu- 
 lated to check than invite imitation. "The death 
 "of Napoleon," says Chateaubriand, " inaugurated 
 " an era of peace ; his wars were conducted on so 
 " mighty a scale (it is perhaps the only good that 
 " remains of them) that they have rendered all 
 " future superiority in that career impossible. In 
 " closing the temple of Janus violently after him, 
 " he left such heaps of slain piled up behind the 
 " door that it cannot be opened again.'* But I 
 must refrain from these flights of a humane imagi- 
 nation, in deference to those who, whilst hoping and 
 desiring universal and perpetual peace, are yet im- 
 patient of any arguments which promise the fulfil- 
 ment of their aspirations. 
 
 Let us then, whilst agreeing upon the possibility 
 of such an occurrence, confine ourselves to a notice 
 of those circumstances in the present condition of 
 France which render a war on her part less likely 
 in 1853 than in 1793. Fortunately she would, in 
 common with every other European state, encounter 
 at the first step all but an insuperable obstacle in 
 the want of money. It is true that, in proportion 
 to her resources, the debt of France is less now than 
 it was in 1793. But, at the latter epoch, she had
 
 104 
 
 vast masses of landed pro})erty available for the 
 expenses of the war. 'j'lie church lands, which 
 by some writers were estimated at a fourth of the 
 soil of France ; the confiscated estates of the emi- 
 grant nobles ; the national domains, and the 
 national forests: this immense property, altogether 
 valued by different writers at from five hundred 
 millions sterling to double that sum, fell in the 
 course of four years into the hands of the revolu- 
 tionary Government, and was made by them the 
 basis of a paper money, denominated assiynats, with 
 wdiich they paid their soldiers, and were enabled 
 to make those gigantic efforts which astonished and 
 terrified the despotic governments of Europe. 
 
 There is no doubt that for a time this creation of 
 paper money gave to the French Government all 
 the power which would have been derived from a 
 foreign loan, or the most productive taxes. It 
 seemed in the eyes of the wild theorists of Paris, 
 who were at that time trampling each other down 
 in quick succession in the death struggle for power, 
 that they possessed an inexhaustible mine of riches, 
 and each one resorted- to it more freelv than his 
 predecessor. For every new campaign, fresh issues 
 of assujnats were decreed. When war was declared 
 aeainst Enoland, eio-bt hundred millions of francs 
 were ordered to be created. The result is known 
 to everybody. The more plentiful the assignats 
 were, the less became their value, or in other words 
 the dearer grew all commodities; bloody decrees 
 followed, to keep down prices ; but markets were 
 not to be permanently regulated, even by the Reign
 
 105 
 
 of Terror. Ultiinately when seven hundred millions 
 sterling of ass'ujnats had been issued, they fell to 
 one and a half per cent of their nominal value; 
 and a general at the head of an army in 1795, with 
 a pay of four thousand francs a month, was in the 
 actual receipt of eight pounds only in gold or silver. 
 But paper money had, in the mean time, enabled the 
 oovernment to overcome Pitt's first coalition. 
 
 But, in case of a war, in 1853, the French Go- 
 vernment would have none of these temporary re- 
 sources. The domains of the church, the crown^ 
 and the aristocracy, divided, and subdivided, have 
 passed into the hands of the people. There re- 
 main no great masses of landed property to seize for 
 the benefit of the state. The very name of assignat 
 conjures up visions of confiscation. In no country 
 in the world is there so great a distrust of paper 
 money as in France. To raise the funds necessary 
 for entering upon a war the government of France 
 must now impose taxes on the eight millions of pro- 
 prietors amongst whom the land is parcelled, and 
 by whom the great bulk of the revenue is contri- 
 buted. As a declaration of war would be followed 
 by an immediate falling off in the receipts of indi- 
 rect taxes from customs and excise, this defalcation, 
 as well as the extra demand for warlike purposes, 
 must fall upon the land. The peasant proprietors 
 of France, ignorant as they are in many respects, 
 know instinctively all this, and they are, therefore, 
 to a man opposed to a war ; and, hence it is, that in 
 all Louis Napoleon's addresses to them (and they in 
 the ultimate appeal really govern France), whether
 
 106 
 
 as candidate for the Assembly, tho Presidency, or 
 the Empire, he lias invariably declared himself in 
 favour of peace. 
 
 But, 1 think, I liear it objected that the French 
 often made war pay its own expenses. It is true, 
 and to a great extent, the foregoing statement ex- 
 plains how it was accomplished. Wherever the 
 French armies went, thev carried with them the 
 doctrine of liberty and equality^ and they were re- 
 ceived less as concpierors than deliverers by the 
 mass of the people ; for the populations of the in- 
 vaded countries, like the French themselves previous 
 to the revolution, were oppressed by the privileged 
 classes, and ground down to the earth by inordinate 
 and unjust taxation. Everywhere the invaders 
 found great masses of property belonging to the 
 government, the church, and exclusive corpora- 
 tions ; and, in some cases, the monastic orders were 
 still revelling in their pristine wealth and luxury. 
 These great accumulations of property were confis- 
 cated for the use of the armies of the "Republic." 
 In some cases considerable sums were transmitted 
 to Paris, for the service of the Home Government. 
 Napoleon sent home two millions sterling during 
 his first campaign in Italy ; and it is stated that the 
 large amount of specie found by the French in the 
 coffers of the frugal aristocratic government of 
 Berne was of essential service in fitting' out the ex- 
 pedition to Egypt. 
 
 But how changed is all this at the present time ! 
 An invading army instead of finding governments 
 with a stock of bullion to tempt their cupidity, or a
 
 107 
 
 good balance at their bankers, would encounter 
 nothing but debt and embarrassment, which the 
 first shock of war would convert into bankruptcy 
 and ruin ; they would find church lands, and go- 
 vernment domains parcelled among the people ; 
 and as any attempt to levy contributions must 
 bring the invaders at once into collision with the 
 mass^ of the population, it would be found far 
 cheaper and wiser to pay their own expenses, than 
 attempt to raise the money by a process which 
 w^ould convert hostilities between governments into 
 a crusade against individuals, where every house 
 would be the battle s^round in defence of the most 
 cherished rights of home, family, and property. 
 
 And, to increase the difficulty, war itself, owing 
 to the application of greater science to the process 
 of human destruction, has become a much more 
 costly pursuit. So great has been the impi^ovement 
 in the construction of horizontal shells, and other 
 contrivances in gunnery, that even Sir Howard 
 Douglas, who could recount with the utmost com- 
 placency the capabilities of Congreve rockets, 
 Shrapnell shells, grape, and canister, seems struck 
 with compunction at the contemplation of this last 
 triumph of his favourite science. But a still 
 greater discovery has been since announced by Mr. 
 Nasmyth, who offers to construct a monster mortar 
 for marine warfare, which shall lie snugly ensconced 
 in the prow of a bomb-proof floating steam vessel, 
 .and on being propelled against a ship of war, the 
 concussion shall cause an explosion with force suffi- 
 cient to tear a hole in her side " as big as a church-
 
 108 
 
 
 door." Now, I attach little importance to the ar- 
 gument that these murderous contrivances will dis- 
 incline men to war, from fear of being killed. When 
 cross-bows were first brought into use, the clergy 
 preached against them as murderous. Upon the 
 introduction of the " sight," to assist the eye in 
 taking aim with a cannon, on board ship, the old gun- 
 ners turned their quids, looked sentimental, and pro- 
 nounced the thinof no better than " murder." But 
 war lost none of its attractions b}'^ such discoveries ; 
 it is at best but gambling for "glory;" and whatever 
 be the risk, men will always take the long odds 
 against death. But I have great hopes from the 
 expensiveness of war, and the cost of preparation ; 
 and should war break out between two great nations, 
 1 have no doubt that the immense consumption of 
 material, and the rapid destruction of property, 
 would have the effect of verv soon brino-ino^ the 
 combatants to reason, or exhausting their resources. 
 For it is quite certain that the Nasmyths, Fair- 
 bairns, and Stephensons, would play quite as great 
 a part as the Nelsons and CoUingwoods, in any Ai 
 
 future wars ; and we all know that to give full scope ^ 
 
 to their engineering powers involves an almost 
 unlimited expenditure of capital. 
 
 Besides, war would now^ be felt as a much greater 
 interruption and outrage to the habits and feelings 
 of the two countries, than sixty years ago, owing to 
 the more frequent intercourse which takes place 
 between them. There is so much cant about the 
 tendency of railways, steam boats, and electric tele- 
 graphs, to unite France and England in bonds of
 
 109 
 
 peace, uttered by those who are heard, almost iri^ 
 the same breath, advocating greater preparations 
 against war and invasion, that I feel some hesitation 
 in joining in such a discordant cliorus. But when 
 we recollect that sixty years ago it took from four 
 to six days to communicate between London and 
 Paris, and that now a message may be sent in as 
 many minutes, and a journey be made in twelve 
 hours ; — that at the former time a mail started 
 twice a week only for the French capital, whilst 
 now letters may be dispatched twice a-day ; and 
 that the visiting intercourse between the two 
 countries has multiplied more than twenty-fold : — 
 recollecting all this, it cannot be doubted that it 
 would be more difficult now than in 1793 to tear 
 the two countries asunder, and render them inac- 
 cessible to each other by war. But these are moral 
 ties which I will not dwell upon. I come at last 
 to the really solid guarantee which France has 
 given for a desire to preserve peace with England. 
 
 If you had the opportunity, as I had, of visiting 
 almost daily the Great Exhibition, you must have 
 observed that whilst England was unrivalled in 
 those manufactures which owed their merit to great 
 facilities of production, and America excelled in 
 every effort where a daring mechanical genius could 
 be rendered subservient to purposes of general 
 utility, there was one country, which, in articles re- 
 quiring the most delicate manipulation, the purest 
 taste, and the most skilful application of the laws of 
 chemistry and the rules of art to manufacturing 
 purposes, was by universal consent allowed to
 
 no 
 
 hold the first rank : that country was France. And 
 it must not be forgotten that her preparation for 
 this world-wide competition was made at the time 
 when her trade and manufactures were suffering- 
 great depression and discouragement, owing to the 
 want of confidence produced by the recent revolu- 
 tion. And yet, notwithstanding this disadvantage, 
 she carried awav the hiii'hest honours for that class 
 of manufactures requiring the greatest combination 
 of intelligence and skill on the part of the 
 capitalist and artizan, and the production of which 
 is possible only in a country which has reached 
 the most advanced stao-e of civilization. Yet this 
 is the people* who, we are told, will, without pre- 
 
 * It cannot be too strongly impressed upon the mind of the 
 reader^that this cry of ' invasion without notice^ was raised when 
 Louis Philippe was still on the throne, — as the following extract 
 from a letter of remonstrance, addressed by Sir William Moles- 
 worth, Jan. J 7th, 1848, to the Editor of the Spectator, London 
 Newspaper, will plainly shew : — 
 
 "You say that 'the next attack on England will probably be 
 without notice' — ' Five thousand (Frenchmen) might inflict dis- 
 grace on some defenceless post ; 500 might insult British blood 
 at Heme Bay, or even inflict indelible shame on the empire at 
 Osborne House ! !' Good God ! can it be possible that you 
 whom I ranked so high among the public instructors of this 
 nation — that you consider the French to be rufiians, Piudarees, 
 freebooters — that you believe it necessary to keep constant watch 
 and ward against them, as our Saxon forefathers did against the 
 Danes and the Nordmen, lest they should burn our towns, 
 plunder our coasts, and put our Queen to ransom ? Are you 
 not aware that the French are as civilized as ourselves — in some 
 respects intellectually our superiors ? Have you forgotten that they 
 have passed through a great social revolution, which has equa-
 
 Ill 
 
 vious declaration of war, make a piratical attack 
 upon our shores, with no more regard for the re- 
 tributive consequences to their own interests, than 
 if they were a tribe of ancient Scandinavians, who 
 when they made a hostile expedition, carried all 
 their worldly goods to sea in their war boats with 
 them. 
 
 Let me repeat it— if for the dozenth time — such 
 an opinion would never be put forth, unless by writers 
 and speakers who presume most insultingly upon 
 the ignorance of the public. It really should be a 
 question with the Peace party, whether they could 
 do a better service to their cause than by giving 
 popular lectures upon the actual state of the popu- 
 lation of France. And let them not forget, when 
 dealing with this invasion cry, how the people were 
 told in 1792 that the French were coming to burn 
 the Tower, and put arsenic in the New River, to 
 
 lized property, abolished privilege, and converted the mass of 
 the people into thrifty and industrious men, to whom war is hate- 
 ful, and the conscription detestable? Are y on not aware that 
 they j)Ossess a constitutional government, loith the forms and 
 practice of which they are daily becoming more and more con- 
 versant ; that no measure of importance can he adopted without 
 heing first debated and agreed to in the Chambers ; and that the 
 love of peace, and the determination to preserve peace, have 
 given to the King of the French a constant majority in those 
 Chambers, and kept him in peaceable possession of his throne ? 
 Can you controvert any one of these positions?" 
 
 These writers must be judged, not by what they now say of 
 Louis Napoleon's designs, but what they said of the French 
 nation when Guizot- was Prime Minister, under a constitutional 
 king, and when we were spending tico millions more on our arma- 
 ments than anybody now proposes to spend.
 
 112 
 
 poison the metropolis, at the very moment when, 
 as we know noiu, the Frencli ambassador was humbly 
 entretiting our government not to go to war. May 
 not the historian of sixty years hence have a similar 
 account to give of the stories now put forth re- 
 specting the intentions of the French people ? But 
 I promised to give credit to those writers for sin- 
 cerity, and I i^roceed to answer them in that spirit. 
 Begging pardon of every Frenchman who may read 
 my pages for dealing seriously with such a topic. 
 
 France as a manufacturing country stands second 
 only to England in the amount of her productions, 
 and the value of her exports ; but it is an impor- 
 tant fact in its bearings on the question before us 
 that she is more dependent than England upon the 
 importation of the raw materials of her industry; 
 and it is obvious how much this must place her nt 
 the mercy of a power having the command over 
 her at sea. This dependence upon foreigners ex- 
 tends even to those right arms of peace, as well as 
 war, iron and coal. In 1851 her importation of 
 coal and coke reached the prodigious quantity of 
 2^841,900 tons : of course a large portion of itis 
 imported over-land from Belgium ; of this, 78,900 
 tons are specially entered in the official returns as 
 being for tJie steam navy ; a frank admission, in 
 reply to our alarmists, that the discovery of steam 
 navigation has given us an advantage over them. 
 The coal imported into France in 1792, the year 
 before the war, amounted to 80,000 tons onlv. 
 Now in this enormous increase, during the last 
 sixty years^ we have a proof of the great develop-
 
 113 
 
 ment of niauufacturino- indiistrv ; but in conse- 
 qiience of steam power having been applied to 
 manufacturing purposes since the latter date, the 
 importation of coal has increased in a far greater 
 I'atio than anv otiier rav/ material. Whilst cotton 
 wool, for instance, has increased seven-fold since 
 1792, coal has augmented more than thirty- fold. 
 This is a most important fact when comparing the 
 two countries ; for whilst the indigenous coal and 
 iron of England have attracted to her shores the 
 raw materials of her industry, and given her almost 
 a European monopoly of the great primary ele- 
 ments of steam power, France, on the contrary, 
 relying on her ingenuity only to sustain a compe- 
 tition with England, is compelled to purchase a 
 portion of hers from her great rival. 
 
 in the article of iron we have another illustration 
 to the same effect. In 179"2 pig iron does not 
 figure in the French tariff; but the importation of 
 iron and steel of all kinds^ wrought and unwrought, 
 amounted in that year to 6,000 tons. In 1851 
 (which was a very low year compared with the 
 years previous to the revolution of 1848) the im- 
 portation of pig iron amounted to 33,700 tons. 
 And when it is remembered that very high duties 
 are levied upon this article for the protection of 
 the home })roducer, it must be apparent that its 
 scarcity and high price impose serious disadvan- 
 tages upon all descriptions of manufactures in 
 France. But the point to which I wish to draw- 
 attention is that so large a quantity of this prime 
 necessary of life of every industry is imported from 
 
 H
 
 114 
 
 abroad ; and in proportion as the quantity for 
 which she is thus dependent upon foreigners has 
 increased since 1792, in the same ratio has France 
 given a security to keep the peace. 
 
 But there is one raw material of manufactures, 
 which, in the magnitude of its consumption, the 
 distant source of its supply, and its indispensable 
 necessity, possesses an importance be3"ond all others. 
 Upwards of two and a half millions of bales of this 
 material are annually attracted across the Atlantic, 
 from the Indian ocean, or the remotest ports of the 
 Mediterranean, to set in motion the capital and 
 industry of the most extensive manufactures ever 
 known in the world ; upon which myriads of 
 people are directly and indirectly employed, who 
 are more dependent for their subsistence upon the 
 punctual arrival in Europe, on an average, of seven 
 thousand bales of this vegetable fibre a day, than 
 they would be if their bread were the produce of 
 countries five thousand miles distant from their 
 doors. Tainted as this commodity is to a large 
 extent in its origin, it is undoubtedly the great 
 peace-preserver of the age. It has placed distant 
 and politically independent nations in mutual 
 dependence, and interested them in the preservation 
 of peace, to a degree unknown and undreamed of 
 in former ages. To those who talk glibly of war, I 
 would recommend a visit not merely to thai dis- 
 trict of which Manchester is the centre, but to the 
 valley of the Seine from Paris to its embouchure, 
 and having surveyed the teeming hive employed 
 upon the cotton manufacture, let them ask
 
 115 
 
 what proportion did the capital and labour of 
 those regions bear in 1793 to their present amount 
 and numbers, and what would now be the effect of 
 an interruption to their prosperity, by putting an 
 end to that peace out of which it has mainly grown? 
 Is there any object that could possibly be gained by 
 either country that would compensate for the loss 
 occasioned by one month's suspension of their 
 cotton trade? 
 
 The importation of this raw material into France 
 amounted in 1851 to 130,000,000 lbs. In 1792 it 
 was 19,000,000 lbs.; the increase being nearly 
 seven-fold. The consumption of that country 
 is about one-fifth to one-sixth of our own, and it 
 ranks second amongst the manufacturing states of 
 Europe. But the quantities of cotton wool con- 
 sumed in the two countries afford but an imperfect 
 comparison of the number of people employed, or 
 the value of the manufactures produced ; for it is 
 well known that whilst we spin a great part of our 
 cotton into yarns for exportation, and our manu- 
 facturers are largely employed upon common 
 qualities of cloths, the Frencli convert nearly all 
 their material into manufactures, a considerable 
 portion of which is of tlie finest quality. It was 
 stated by M. Thiers,* in his celebrated speech upon 
 the protective system, that " tlie cotton industry 
 which in 1786 represented about a million per 
 annum represents now twenty-five millions." (I 
 have converted his figures from francs into pounds 
 
 * National Assembly, 27 June, 1851, 
 H 2
 
 116 
 
 sterling). If this be a correct statement, the value 
 of the French production will be one-half of our 
 own, whilst the raw material consumed is less than 
 one-fifth. I confess I think there is some exaoo-era- 
 tion or error in the estimate ; but no doubt can 
 exist of the vital importance of the cotton industry 
 to the prosperity of France ; nor need I repeat that 
 it is wholly dependent upon the supply of a raw 
 material from abroad, the importation of which 
 would be liable to be cut off, if she were at war with 
 a nation stronger than herself at Sea. 
 
 The woollen and worsted trades of France are of 
 startling magnitude. I confess I was not aware of 
 their extent ; and have had some difl&culty in ac- 
 cepting the official report, which makes the impor- 
 tation of sheep's wool to amount, in 1851, to 
 101,201,0001bs, whilst, in 1792, it reached only 
 7,860,000lbs,, being an increase of more than 
 twelve-fold. M. Thiers, in his speech before 
 quoted, estimates the annual value of the woollen 
 cloth made in France at sixteen millions sterling. 
 
 But if the rivalry between the two countries in 
 worsted and woollen manufactures leaves a doubt 
 on which side the triumph will incline, there is no 
 question as to the superiority of the French in 
 the next manuf^icture to which I vill refer, and 
 which forms the glory of their industrial greatness ; 
 I allude, of course, to the silk trade, on which the 
 ingenuit}'', taste, and invention of the people, are 
 brought to bear with such success, that Lyons and 
 Saint Etienne fairly levy contributions upon the 
 whole civilized world ; I sa}^ fairly, because when 
 
 1
 
 117 
 
 all nations, from Russia, to the United States, bow 
 down to the taste of France, and accept her 
 fashions as the infallible standard in all matters of 
 design and costume, there can be no doubt that it 
 is a homage offered to intrinsic merit. Nothing is 
 more difficult to agree upon than the meaning of the 
 word civilization ; but, in the general accej)tation of 
 the term, that country whose language, fashions, 
 amusements, and dress, have been most widely 
 adopted and imitated, have been held to be the 
 most civilized. There is no instance recorded in 
 history of such a country suddenly casting itself 
 down to a level with Malays, and New Zealanders, 
 by committing an unprovoked act of piracy upon a 
 neighbouring nation. Yet we are told to prepare 
 ourselves for such conduct in the case of France I 
 Judging by the increase in the importation of the 
 raw material, the French have maintained as great 
 a progress in the silk as any other manufacture. 
 The raw silk imported in 1851 amounted to 
 2,291,500lbs., against 136,800lbs. in 1792, showing 
 an increase of seveiiteen-fold. In 1792, thrown 
 silk did not figure in the tariff, but it was imported 
 to the amount of l,336,8601b3. in 1851. These 
 large importations, added to the supply from her 
 own soil, furnish the raw material for^ by far, the 
 largest silk manufacture in the world. 
 
 Instead of singling out any other articles I will 
 put them in a tabular form, including the fore- 
 going, for convenience of reference, drawing your 
 attention to the enormous increase in the importa- 
 tion of linen thread. I regret that I cannot in-
 
 118 
 
 elude dye-woods ; for, owing to the account having 
 been kept in value in 1792, and quantity in 1851, 
 no comparison can be instituted. 
 
 Imports into France in 1792 and 1851. 
 
 
 1792. 
 
 1851. 
 
 Cotton wool 
 
 19,000,000 lbs. 
 
 130,000,000 lbs. 
 
 Olive oil 
 
 [16,000 tons. 
 
 31,000 tons. 
 
 Sheep's wool 
 
 7,860,000 lbs. 
 
 101,201,000 lbs. 
 
 Lead 
 
 1,010 tons. 
 
 26,100 tons. 
 
 Liueu thread 
 
 601,500 lbs. 
 
 9,421,000 lbs. 
 
 Coal 
 
 80,000 tons. 
 
 2,574,000 tons. 
 
 Ditto for steam 
 
 uavy „ „ ,, 
 
 78,900 „ 
 
 Coke 
 
 « j> »> 
 
 189,000 „ 
 
 
 Total 2,841,900 tons. 
 
 Pig iron 
 
 nil. 
 
 33,700 tons. 
 
 
 (wrought iron'and 
 
 steel) 
 
 
 6,000 tons. 
 
 
 Sulphur 
 
 3,876 „ 
 
 28,315 „ 
 
 Saltpetre 
 
 270 „ 
 
 8,673 „ 
 
 Zinc 
 
 10 „ 
 
 13,480 „ 
 
 Raw silk 
 
 136,800 lbs. 
 
 2,291,500 lbs. 
 
 Thrown silk 
 
 nil. 
 
 1,336,860 lbs. 
 
 I have confined myself, in the foregoing accounts, 
 to the imports of those articles which are required 
 for manufacturing purposes, because I wish to 
 point out the extent to which France is an indus- 
 trial nation, and also the degree of her dependence 
 on foreio-n trade for the raw material of her manu- 
 factures. I have said, elsewhere, that whilst go- 
 vernments are preparing for war, all the tendencies 
 of the age are in the opposite direction ; but that 
 which most loudly and constantly thunders in the
 
 119 
 
 ears of emperors, kings, and parliaments, the stern 
 command, "you shall not break the peace," is the 
 multitude which in every country subsists upon 
 the produce of labour applied to materials brought 
 from abroad. It is the gigantic growth which this 
 manufacturing system has attained that deprives 
 former times of any analogy with our own ; and is 
 fast depriving of all reality those pedantic displays 
 of diplomacy, and those traditional demonstrations 
 of armed force, upon which peace or war formerly 
 depended. 
 
 The above tabular statement shews that France 
 has entered upon this industrial career with all the 
 ardour which she displayed in her military enter- 
 prises, and with the prospect of gaining more 
 durable and useful triumphs than she won in the 
 battle field. I have given the quantities imported, 
 in preference to the prices, because the mode of 
 valuation frequently makes the price a delusive 
 index to quantity. I may add, however, that the 
 statistical summary of the trade of France for 1851, 
 published by authority, makes the declared value 
 of the imports and exports amount together to 
 2614 millions of francs, or £104,560,000; of 
 which the exports are put down at £60,80,000, 
 and the imports £48.760,000. But, that which I 
 would particularly allude to, is the fact, that, of all 
 the countries to which their exports are sent, Eng 
 land stands first. " Pour I'exportation, L'Angl 
 terre se presente en premiere ligne." It appears 
 that the exports of all kinds (French and foreign 
 produce) to England amounted to 354 millions of 

 
 120 
 
 francs, or £14,160,000; \vliilst the exports of 
 French produce were 278 millions of francs, or 
 £11^120,000, being 20 per cent increase upon the 
 previous year. I do not know the mode of valuing 
 the French exports : it is evident that their prices 
 do not correspond with the valuation at our Custom 
 House.* That, however, does not affect the ques- 
 tion of proportions ; and it appears that of a total 
 of £60,800,000 of exports in 1851, England took 
 £14,160,000, or nearly one fourth It might be 
 worth while to ask the honest people who sold us 
 so large an amount of commodities, what they would 
 have to say to the five or ten thousand French 
 marauders, who, we are told, are to precipitate 
 themselves upon our shores some morning, and for 
 the sake of a few hours plunder, to convert twenty- 
 eight millions of people from their best customers 
 into formidable and aveno^ino* enemies ? 
 
 But I must not omit to notice the part performed 
 by the capital of France, in the great industrial 
 movement of that country. A most interesting 
 report upon the manufactures of Paris, by my es- 
 teemed friend M. Horace Say, has been published, 
 and for which he has received the statistical medal 
 of the Academy of Sciences. It appears that its 
 population has doubled since 1793, and that, in- 
 cluding its faubourgs, it contains at present 
 1,200,000 inhabitants. Few people are aware 
 that Paris contains a greater number of manufac- 
 turing operatives than any other city in the world. It 
 
 * Our official value of French exports to this country for 1851 
 is ^8,033,112.
 
 1-21 
 
 appears that there are employed altogether in the 
 various processes of manufacture in that city 
 407,344 persons, of whom 64,816 are employers of 
 labour, or persons working- on their own account, 
 and 342,530 in the receipts of wages ; of the latter, 
 205,000 are men, and 137,530 women and children ; 
 and the annual produce of their labour amounts to 
 £58,000,000 sterling. It is estimated by M. Say 
 that 40,000 of these work-people are employed in 
 producing articles directly for exportation. A war 
 with England would not only interrupt the labour 
 of these last, but, by intercepting the supply of 
 raw materials, such as the wood used in cabinet 
 making, &c,, and obstructing the export of their 
 productions, would plunge the whole of that ex- 
 citable metropolis into confusion and misery. It is 
 fortunate for humanity that the interests of so in- 
 fluential a community are on the side of peace, and 
 we may safely leave the blouses of Paris to deal 
 with the 500 French pirates who in the imagina- 
 tion of the Spectator were to carry off the Queen 
 from Osborne. 
 
 Having thus seen that France is, with the sole 
 exception of ourselves, the greatest manufacturing 
 country in the world, and that in some branches 
 she excels us, — having also seen that in so far as 
 she requires a supply from abroad of coal and 
 iron, she is in greater dependence upon foreigners 
 for the raw materials of her industry than even 
 ourselves, I now come to her navigation ; and here 
 in the facts of her mercantile tonnage, we shall find 
 a remarkable contrast to the great development of
 
 122 
 
 her manufactures ; a fact wliich ought to give ample 
 assurance to a maritiaie state like England or 
 America against a wanton attack at her hands. 
 
 I give below an account of the Navigation of 
 France to all parts of the world, and to the fisheries, 
 in 1792 and 1851 :— 
 
 1792. 
 Arrivals, 
 8229 Ships . . 799,458 Tons 
 
 Together 
 
 Departures. { 1,412,129 Tons. 
 
 7688 Ships . . 642,671 Tons 
 
 1851. 
 
 Arrivals. 
 9175 Ships . .942,465 Tons ^^ 1,974,968 Tons. 
 
 Departures. f Increase about -10 
 
 9735 Ships . . 1,032,503 Tons j percent. 
 
 Tlius, whilst, as we have seen, the importations 
 of raw materials for her manufactures have in- 
 creased in some cases twenty-fold, her mercantile 
 lonnage has not augmented more than 40 per cent, 
 or less than one-half. Tiie increased tonnage, re- 
 quired for this large additional supply of commodi- 
 ties, has chiefly gone to swell the mercantile marines 
 of other countries ; as the foUowino; fio-ures will 
 shew: — 
 
 Foreign Tonnage engaged in the French Trade, 
 
 Departures. 
 *1787 . . . 532,687 Tons 
 1851 — 12,720 Ships . 1,510,403 Tons 
 Increase about ISO per cent. 
 
 * This is the only report near this date wliich I can find.
 
 123 
 
 It will be here seen how much greater the in- 
 crease of foreign than French tonnage lias been 
 in the trade of France ; a fact which, I may add, 
 ought to make her statesmen doubt the wisdom of 
 the protective system, by which they have sought 
 to cherish their mercantile navy. 
 
 The return of the Tonnage of British vessels 
 entering inwards and clearing outwards in 1851, is 
 as follows : — 
 
 Inwards. Outwakds. 
 
 1851 — 4,388,245 Tons. 4,147,007 Tons. 
 
 Our Custom-house records for 1792 were destroyed 
 by fire. But it appears that our Tonnage has 
 doubled since 1803. It is however in our steam 
 vessels that we have made the greatest relative 
 progress as compared with the French. It was 
 stated by Mr. Anderson, in the House of Com- 
 mons, that for every horse-power possessed by the 
 French we had twenty ; and yet we are told that 
 the discovery of steam navigation has conferred a 
 great advantage upon France. 
 
 The strength of a people at sea has invariably 
 been measured by the extent of their mercantile 
 marine. Judged by this test, there is not even a 
 doubt as to whether England or France be the first 
 naval jjower. In fact, the French themselves do 
 not question it. It is frankly acknowledged in our 
 favour by M. Thiers, in his speech to the Assembly 
 from which I have before quoted. Nobody in that 
 country has ever pretended that they can, or ought 
 to, keep more than two-thirds of our force at sea.
 
 124 
 
 Their public men never believed in the sincerity 
 of our cry of invasion. One of the most eminent 
 of them wrote to me in 1848, and after a frank con- 
 fession of the deplorable state of their mercantile 
 tonnage, as compared with ours, complained of the 
 cry as a cruel joke, *' une mauvaise plaisanterie." 
 Intelligent men in that country cannot believe that 
 we think them capable of such folly, nay madness, 
 as to rush headlong, without provocation, and 
 without notice, into a war with the most powerful 
 nation in the world ; before whose very ports the 
 raw materials of their manufactures pass, the supply 
 of which and the consequent employment and sub- 
 sistence of millions of their population, would be 
 immediately cut off, to say nothing of the terrible 
 retribution which would be visited upon their 
 shores, whilst all the world would be calling for 
 the extermination of a community which had ab- 
 dicated its civilized rank, and become a mere band 
 of lawless buccaneers ; no, they cannot think so 
 badly of tliemselves as to believe that otliers, whose 
 opinion they respect, would ever give them credit 
 for such wickedness or insanity. 
 
 But I shall be told that the people of France are 
 entirely at the mercy of one man, and that public 
 opinion is now powerless in that country. There 
 is notliino; about which we make such mistakes as 
 in passing judgment upon our next neighbour. 
 Public opinion is as omnipotent there as in the United 
 States, upon matters with which it interests itself; 
 but it takes a different direction from our own, and 
 therefore we do not appreciate it. But it is quite
 
 125 
 
 necessary that the people, I mean the mass of our 
 people, should be better informed as to the cha- 
 racter and circumstances of the population of 
 France. Teach Englishmen to despise another 
 nation, and you have goue far towards making them 
 quarrel ; and there is nothing so sure to evoke 
 our contempt as to be told that a people have not 
 spirit to maintain their rights against the arbitrary 
 will of a usurper. Now no people have ever 
 clung with more tenacity to the essential principles 
 and main objects of a Revolution than have the 
 French. The chief aim of the Constituent As- 
 sembly of 1789 was to uproot feudalism ; to found 
 an equal system of taxation ; and to establish re- 
 ligious equality and freedom of worship, by ap- 
 propriating to the State the lands and tithes of the 
 Church, and making all religions a charge upon 
 the public revenues : very many other reforms were 
 effected by that body, but these were its leading 
 principles. The abolition of the monarchy was 
 never contemplated by the Constituent Assembly. 
 The death of Louis (which I attribute to the in- 
 terference of foreign powers) was decreed by the 
 National Convention three years later. 
 
 Now, the principles of 1789 have been main- 
 tained, and maintained by public opinion only, 
 with more jealousy than we have shewn in guarding 
 our Bill of Rights, or Habeas Corpus Act ; for the 
 latter has been suspended, whenever it suited the 
 convenience of Tory or even Whig Governments. 
 But Napoleon at the head of his victorious legions, 
 the Bourbons with a reactionary priesthood at their
 
 126 
 
 back, and the present ruler with all the advantages 
 of a Socialist hobgoblin to frighten people into his 
 arms have been compelled to own allegiance to these 
 principles. Insidious attempts have been made to 
 plant anew the genealogical tree, by the creation of 
 majorats, but the schemes were nipt in the bud by 
 public opinion, and public opinion only. 
 
 When told that the present Emperor possesses 
 absolute and irresponsible power, I answer by citing 
 three thino-s which he could not, if he would, ac- 
 complish : he could not endow with lands aitd 
 tithes one religion as the exclusively paid religion 
 of the State, although he selected for the privilege 
 the Roman Catholic Chnrch, which comprises more 
 than nine-tenths of the French people : he could 
 not create an hereditary peerage, with estates en- 
 tailed by a law of primogeniture : and he could 
 not impose a tax on successions, which should apply 
 to personal property only, and leave real estate 
 free. Public opinion in France is an insuperable 
 obstacle to any of these measures becoming law ; 
 because they outrage that spirit o^ equality, which is 
 the sacred and inviolable principle of 1789. Now, 
 if Louis Napoleon were to declare his determination 
 to carry these three measures, which a -e all in full 
 force in England, as a part of his Imperial regime, 
 his throne would not be worth twenty-four hours' 
 purchase ; and nobody knows this better than he 
 and they who surround him. I am penning these 
 pages in a maritime county. Stretching from the 
 sea, right across to the verge of the next county, and 
 embracing great part of the parish in which I sit,
 
 127 
 
 are the estates of three proprietors, which extend in 
 almost unbroken masses for upwards of twenty 
 miles. The residence of one of them is surrounded 
 with a walled park ten miles in circumference. Not 
 only could not Louis Napoleon create three such 
 entailed estates in a province of France, but were he 
 to declare himself favourable to such a state of 
 things, it would be fatal to his popularity. Public 
 opinion, by which alone he reigns, would instantly 
 abandon him. Yet this landed system flourishes 
 in all our counties, without opposition or question. 
 And why ? The poorest cottager on these estates 
 feels that his personal liberty is sacred, and he cares 
 little for equality : and here I will repeat, that I 
 would rather live in a country where this feeling in 
 favour of individual freedom is jealously cherished, 
 than be, without it, in the enjoyment of all the 
 principles of the French Constituent Assembly. 
 
 Let us, however, learn to tolerate the feelings and 
 predilections of other people, even if they are not 
 our own ; and, recollect, we require the same consi- 
 deration at their hands, for I can vouch from actual 
 experience that the intelligent natives of France, 
 Italy, and other countries, where the Code Napo- 
 leon is in force, and where, consequently, the land 
 is divided amongst the people, are very much puz- 
 zled to understand how the English submit to the 
 feudal customs which still find favour here. But I 
 have never found with them a disposition to dog- 
 matize, or insist upon making their system our 
 model. I must^ however, say that we are egre^ 
 giously mistaken if we fall into the belief, so much
 
 128 
 
 inculcated by certain parties, that we are the ad- 
 miration and envy of surrounding nations. Tell 
 the eight millions of landed proprietors in France 
 that they shall exchange their lot with the English 
 people, where the labourer who cultivates the farm 
 has no more proprietary interest in the soil than the 
 horses he drives, and they will be stricken with 
 horror; and vain will it be to promise them, as a 
 compensation, Habeas Corpus Acts, or the right of 
 public meetings — you might as well ask them to 
 exchange their little freeholds for a bon-mot, or a 
 song. Let us then spare our pity where people are 
 contented ; and withhold our contempt from a 
 nation who hold what they prize by the vigilant 
 exercise of public opinion. 
 
 But the point to which I wish to bring the fore- 
 going argument is, as you will at once see, that 
 where public opinion is thus able to guard great 
 principles which make war upon privilege of every 
 kind, it is surely not to be despised in such a ques- 
 tion as entering upon hostilities v/ith England. 
 Nobody, I believe, denies that Louis Napoleon re- 
 ceived the votes of a majority of the French people. 
 In the election which took place for the presidency, 
 when he was supported by three-fourths of the 
 electors, his opponent General Cavaignac had 
 possession of the ballot boxes, and there could be 
 no fraud to account for the majority. With what 
 view did the French people elect him Emperor ? 
 To maintain, in the first place, as he is pledged to 
 do, the principles of 1789 : and, in the next, to pre- 
 serve order, keep the peace, and enable them to
 
 129 
 
 prosper. Nobody denies that these are the objects 
 desired by France. Yet we are told that he will, 
 regardless of public opinion, plunge the country 
 into war. The same parties who make this charge 
 accuse him of keeping up the 4^ per cents to 105, 
 by all sorts of nefarious means, in order to main- 
 tain an artificial show of prosperity. And this 
 same person, we are told, will make a piratical 
 attack upon England, which would in twenty-four 
 hours bring the 4|- per cents down to 50, in three 
 months to 30, and in three years to nothing ! Last 
 year, we are told, was very inimical to the mental 
 health of the country, owing to the want of electri- 
 city : are these invasionist writers under the in- 
 fluence of this meteorological phenomenon ? 
 
 But the army ! the army, we are told, will com- 
 pel the Emperor to make war upon somebody. I 
 should humbly submit, if they wish to fight, and 
 are not particular about a quarrel, or a declaration 
 of war, that they had better march upon Holland, 
 Prussia, or Belgium, inasmuch as they could march 
 there, and, what is equally important, in the com- 
 binations of a good general, they could march hack 
 again. If our Government had any fear of the 
 kind, it is quite evident that they would bring to 
 our shores that immense fleet which is amusing 
 itself in the Mediterranean, and which it would 
 take at least a month to recal. There can be no 
 doubt, if an invasion took place, and it could be 
 proved that the Government had expected it, that 
 the Ministers would be impeached. But they keep 
 a fleet, more powerful than the whole American 
 
 I
 
 130 
 
 navy, a thousand miles otf at Malta, and therefore 
 we may be sure at least that they have no fears. 
 
 Now, as I have already said, the army of France, 
 about which we hear so much, is not larger, in 
 proportion to her population, than the armies of 
 the other powers of Europe, with which she is 
 surrounded, and, inasmuch as that country was 
 invaded, without provocation, by Prussia and 
 Austria, within the memory of man, it is rather 
 unreasonable to ask her to be the first and only 
 country to disarm. Besides, a large part of her 
 army is in Algiers, surrounded by hostile tribes j 
 and, by the way, when that colony was first seized, 
 w^e used to console ourselves that owing to that part 
 of the army being liable to be cut off by sea, and 
 offered as a sacrifice to the neighbouring tribes, we 
 had obtained a great security for peace. But, in a 
 word, every body who is acquainted with France 
 (and they are unhappily in this country but few in 
 number) knows that the army is not like ours, 
 fished out of the lees of society, but that it fairly 
 represents the people. It is, in fact, 400,000 of the 
 young men taken 80,000 a year from the farms, 
 shops, and manufactories, and to which they return 
 at the end of their service; and, such being their 
 origin and destination, their feelings and opinions 
 are identical with those of their countrymen. 
 
 The French soldier is anxious for the time of his 
 service to expire, that he may return to his little 
 family estate ; the discipline and morale of the 
 army is perfect ; but the conscription is viewed with 
 disfavour as may be known by the price (from £60
 
 131 
 
 to £80), whicli is paid for a substitute ; and any 
 thing which tended to prolong the period of ser- 
 vice, or increase the demand for men, v.'ould be 
 regarded as a calamity by the people. I have never 
 heard but one opinion — that the common soldiers 
 share in the sentiments of the people at large, and 
 do not want a war. But then the officers, — Surely 
 after Louis Napoleon's treatment of the African 
 generals, stealing them out of their warm beds in 
 the night, he will not be any longer supposed to be 
 ruled by the officers. His dependence is mainly 
 upon the peasant proprietors, from whom the mass 
 of the army is drawn. 
 
 But I must draw this long Letter to a close. — 
 What then is the practical deduction from the fticts 
 and arguments which I have presented? Why, 
 clearly, that conciliation must proceed from our- 
 selves. The people of this country must first be 
 taught to separate themselves in feeling and sym- 
 pathy from the authors of the late war, which was 
 undertaken to put down principles of freedom. 
 When the public are convinced, the Government 
 will act ; and one of the great ends to be attained, 
 is an amicable understanding, if not a formal con- 
 vention, between the two Governments, ivhatever 
 their form may be, to prevent that irrational rivalry 
 of warlike preparations which has been lately and 
 is still carried on. One word of diplomacy ex- 
 changed upon this subject between the two coun- 
 tries will change the whole spirit of the respective 
 Governments. But this policy, involving a reduc- 
 tion of our warlike expenditure, will never be in-
 
 132 
 
 augurated by an aristocratic Executive, until impel- 
 led to it by public opinion. Nay, as in the case of 
 the repeal of the Corn Law, — no minister can do it, 
 except when armed by a pressure from without. 
 
 I look to the agitation of the Peace party to ac- 
 complish this end. It must work in the manner of 
 the League, and preach common sense, justice, and 
 truth, in the streets and market places. The advo- 
 cates of peace have found in the Peace Congress 
 movement a common platform, to use an Ameri- 
 canism, on which all men who desire to avert war, 
 and all who wish to abate the evil of our hideous 
 modern armaments, may co-operate without com- 
 promising the most practical and " moderate " poli- 
 tician, or wounding the consciences of my friend 
 Mr. Sturge, and his friends of the Peace Society — 
 upon whose undying religious zeal, more than all 
 besides, I rely for the eventual success of the Peace 
 agitation. The great advance of this party, within 
 the last few years, as indicated most clearly by the 
 attacks made upon them, which, like the spray 
 dashed from the bows of a vessel, mark their 
 triumphant progress, ought to cheer them to still 
 greater efforts. 
 
 But the most consolatory fact of the times is the 
 altered feeling of the great mass of the people since 
 1793. There lies our great advantage. With the 
 exception of a lingering propensity to strike for the 
 freedom of some other people, a sentiment partly 
 traceable to a generous sympathy, and in some small 
 degree, I fear, to insular pride and ignorance, there 
 is little disposition for war in our day. Had the
 
 133 
 
 popular tone been as sound in 1792, Fox and his 
 friends would have prevented the last great war. 
 But, for this mistaken tendency to interfere by force 
 in behalf of other nations, there is no cure but by 
 enlightening the mass of the people upon the actual 
 condition of the continental populations. This will 
 put an end to the supererogatory commiseration 
 which is sometimes lavished upon them, and turn 
 their attention to the defects of their own social 
 condition. I have travelled much, and always with 
 an eye to the state of the great majority, who every- 
 where constitute the toiling base of the social py- 
 ramid ; and I confess I have arrived at the conclu- 
 sion that there is no country where so much is 
 required to be done before the mass of the people 
 become what it is pretended they are, what they 
 ought to be, and what 1 trust they will yet be, as 
 in England. There is too much truth in the pic- 
 ture of our social condition drawn by the Travelling 
 Bachelor* of Cambridge University, and lately 
 flung in our faces from beyond the Atlantic, to 
 allow us any longer to delude ourselves with the 
 idea that we have nothing to do at home, and may 
 therefore devote ourselves to the elevation of the 
 
 * Mr. Kay, in his valuable work on the education and social 
 condition of the people of the Continent, offers this sad reflection 
 in speaking of the state of things at home : — " Where the aristo. 
 cracy is richer and more powerful than that of any other coun- 
 try in the world, the poor are more oppressed, more pauperised, 
 more numerous in comparison to the other classes, more irreli- 
 gious, and very much worse educated than the poor of any other 
 European nation, solely excepting uncivilized Russia, and Turkey, 
 enslaved Italy, misgoverned Portugal, and revolutionized Spain."
 
 134 
 
 nations of the Continent. It is to this spirit of in- 
 terference with other countries, the wars to which 
 it has led, and the consequent diversion of men's 
 minds (upon the Empress Catherine's principle), 
 from home grievances, that we must attribute tlie 
 unsatisfactory state of the mass of our people. 
 
 But to rouse the conscience of the people in 
 favour of peace, the whole truth must be told them 
 of the part they have played in past wars. In every 
 pursuit in wliich we embark, our energies carry 
 us generally in advance of all competitors. How 
 few of us care to remember, that, during the first 
 half of the last century, we carried on the slave 
 trade more extensively than all the world besides ; 
 that we made treaties for the exclusive supply of 
 negroes ; that ministers of State, and even Royalty 
 were not averse to profit by the traffic. But when 
 Clarkson (to whom Fame has not yet done jus- 
 tice), commenced his agitation against this vile 
 commerce, he laid the sin at the door of the na- 
 tion ; he appealed to the conscience of the people^ 
 and made the whole community responsible for the 
 crimes which the slave traders were perpetrating 
 with their connivance ; and the eternal principles 
 of truth and humanity, which are ever present in 
 the breasts of men, however they may be for a time 
 obscured, were not appealed to in vain. AVe are 
 now with our characteristic energy, first and fore- 
 most in preventing, by force, that traffic which our 
 statesmen sought to monopolize a century ago. 
 
 It must be even so in the agitation of the Peace 
 Party. Tliey M'ill never rouse the conscience of the
 
 135 
 
 people, so long as tliey allow them to indulge the 
 comforting delusion that they have been a peace- 
 loving nation. We have been the most combative 
 and aggressive community that has existed since 
 the days of the Roman dominion. Since the Revo- 
 lution of 1688 we have expended more than fifteen 
 hundred millions of money upon wars, not one of 
 which has been upon our own shores, or in defence 
 of our hearths and homes. "For so it is," says a 
 not unfriendly foreign critic,* "other nations fight 
 on or near their own territory ; the English everv 
 where." From the time of old Froissari, who, 
 when he found himself on the English coast, ex- 
 claimed that he was among a people who " loved war 
 better than peace, and where strangers were well 
 received,"' down to the day of our amiable and 
 admiring visitor, the author of the Sketch Book, 
 who, in his pleasant description of John Bully has 
 portrayed him as always fumbling for his cudgel 
 whenever a quarrel arose among his neighbours, 
 this pugnacious propensity has been invariably re- 
 cognized by those who have studied our national 
 character. It reveals itself in our historical favourites, 
 in the popularity of the mad-cap Richard, Henry 
 of Agincourt, the haughty Chatham, and those 
 monarchs and statesmen who have been most famous 
 for their warlike propensities. It is displayed in 
 our fondness for numerous monuments to warriors, 
 even at the doors of our marts of commerce ; in the 
 frequent memorials of our battles, in the names 
 
 * A Residence at the Court of London, by Richard Rush, 
 Minister from the United States.
 
 136 
 
 of bridges, streets, and omnibuses : but above all 
 in the display which public opinion tolerates in 
 our metropolitan catliedral, whose walls are deco- 
 rated with bas-reliefs of battle scenes, of storming 
 of towns, and charges of bayonets, where horses 
 and riders, ships, cannon, and musketry, realise by 
 turns, in a Christian temple, the fierce struggle of 
 the siege, and the battle field. — I have visited, I be- 
 lieve, all the great Christian temples in the capitals 
 of Europe ; but my memory fails me, if I saw any- 
 thing to compare with it. Mr. Layard has brought 
 us some very similar works of art from Nineveh, 
 but he has not informed us that they were found in 
 Christian churches. • 
 
 Nor must we throw upon the aristocracy the 
 entire blame of our wars. An aristocracy never 
 governs a people by opposing their ruling in- 
 stincts. In Athens, a lively and elegant fancy 
 was gratified with the beautiful in Art ; in Genoa 
 and Venice, where the population were at first 
 without territory, and consequently where com- 
 merce was the only resource, the path to power was 
 on the deck of their merchantmen, or on 'Change. 
 In England, where a people possessing a powerful 
 physical organization, and an unequalled energy of 
 character, were ready for projects of daring and 
 enterprise, an aristocracy perverted these qualities 
 to a century of constantly recurring wars. The 
 Peace party of our day must endeavour to turn 
 this very energy to good account, in the same spirit 
 in which Clarkson converted a nation of man- 
 stealers into a Society of determined Abolitionists.
 
 137 
 
 Far from wishing to destroy the energy, or even the 
 combativeness which has made us such fit instru- 
 ments for the battle-field, we shall require those 
 qualities for abating the spirit of war, and correcting 
 the numberless moral evils from which society is 
 suffering. Are not our people uneducated ? juve- 
 nile delinquents uncared for ? does not drunkenness 
 still reel through our streets ? Have we not to 
 battle with vice, crime, and their parent ignorance, 
 in every form ? And may not even Charity display 
 as great energy and courage in saving life, as was 
 ever put forth in its destruction? 
 
 A famine fell upon nearly one-half of a great 
 nation. The whole world hastened to contribute 
 money and food. But a few courageous men left 
 their homes in Middlesex and Surrey and pene- 
 trated to the remotest glens and bogs of the west 
 coast of the stricken island, to administer relief 
 with their own hands. They found themselves, not 
 merely in the valley of the shadow of death — that 
 would be but an imperfect image — they were in the 
 charnel-house of a nation. Never, since the lltli 
 century, did Pestilence, the gaunt handmaid of Fa- 
 mine, glean so rich a harvest. In the midst of a scene, 
 which no field of battle ever equalled in danger, 
 in the number of its slain, or the physical sufferings 
 of the living, these brave men walked as calm and 
 unmoved as though they had been in their own 
 homes. The population sunk so fast that the living- 
 could not bury the dead ; half-interred bodies pro- 
 truded from the gaping graves ; often the wqfe 
 died in the midst of her starving children, whilst 
 
 K
 
 138 
 
 the husband lay a festering corpse by her side. 
 Into the midst of these horrors did our heroes pene- 
 trate, dragging the dead from the living with their 
 own hands, raising the heads of the famishing 
 children, and pouring nourishment into parched lips 
 from which shot fever-flames more deadly than a 
 volley of musketry. Here was courage ! No music 
 strung the nerves j no smoke obscured the immi- 
 nent danger; no thunder of artillery deadened 
 the senses. It w^as cool self-possession and resolute 
 will; calculated risk and heroic resignation. And 
 who were these brave men ? To what " gallant" 
 corps did they belong ? Were they of the horse, foot 
 or artillery force ? They were Quakers, from Clap- 
 ham, and Kingston ! If you would know what 
 heroic actions they performed, you must inquire 
 from those who witnessed them. You will not find 
 them recorded in the volume of Reports published 
 by themselves: — for Quakers write no bulletins of 
 their victories. 
 
 Will you pardon me if, before I lay down my 
 pen, I so far presume upon your forbearance as to 
 express a doubt whether the eagerness with which 
 the topic of the Duke of Wellington's career was 
 so generally selected for pulpit manifestations was 
 calculated to enhance the influence of ministers 
 of the Gospel, or promote the interests of Chris- 
 tianity itself. Your case and that of public men 
 are very dissimilar. The mere politician may 
 plead the excuse, if he yields to the excitement of 
 the day, that he lives, and moves, and has his 
 being, in the popular temper of the times. — Flung
 
 139 
 
 as he is in the mid-current of passing events, he 
 must swim with the stream, or be left upon its 
 banks ; for few have the strength or courage to 
 breast the rising wave of public feeling or passion. 
 How different is your case ! Set apart for the 
 contemplation and promotion of eternal and un- 
 changing principles of benevolence, peace, and 
 charity, public opinion would not only tolerate but 
 applaud your abstinence from all displays where 
 martial enthusiasm, and hostile passions, are called 
 into activity. But a far higher sanction than 
 public opinion is to be found for such a course. 
 When the Master whom you especially serve, and 
 whose example and precepts are the sole creden- 
 tials of your faith, mingled in the affairs of this 
 life, it was not to join in the exaltation of military 
 genius, or share in the warlike triumphs of nation 
 over nation, but to preach '* Peace on Earth and 
 good will toward Men." Can the humblest layman 
 err, if, in addressing the loftiest dignitary of the 
 Christian Church, he say, " Go thou, and do 
 
 LIKEWISE ?" 
 
 I remain, yours, 
 
 R. COBDEN. 
 
 To the Rev. 
 
 P.S. From a 'great number of extracts which I 
 had thrown aside, I must add one from a speech 
 delivered by Mr. Windham, the leading man of
 
 140 
 
 the Whig seceders, who became Pitt's Secretary- 
 at-War. It was delivered on the 1st February 
 1793, the day on which war was declared by 
 France, but before that event was known here. — 
 " He agreed that in all probability the French had 
 no wish at this moment to go to war with this country, 
 as they were not yet ready to do so ; their object 
 seemed to be to take all Europe in detail, and we 
 might be reserved to be the last." Here the whole 
 case as against ourselves is fully admitted by one 
 of the most determined advocates of the war. It 
 is needless to add, that if we were justified in goino- 
 to war because we predicted that France would go 
 to war at some future time, there never need be a 
 want of justification for a war. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 9 08S
 
 I
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below 
 
 REC'D im^ 
 
 umtm\ 
 
 Form I^-o 
 
 AT 
 LOS ANGELES 
 
 A T^'^sr
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 |l !l| |l| |l |l|l| I II Ij I HI! Il|l 
 
 AA 000 672 089 
 
 ill!