A* 



HISTORY OF EUROPE. 



181 



TCrt the laws and religion of every 

 civilized nation, and to introduce 

 miiversally that wild and destruc- 

 tive system of rapine, anarchy, and 

 impiety, the effects of which, as al- 

 ready manifested in France, fur- 

 nished a dreadful but UGcfui lesson 

 f' to the present age, and to posterity. 

 Such were the most remarkable 

 particulars in the K.ir)g's spe-^ch. 



It was warmly applauded and 

 oeconded by the ministerial party; 

 which adduced a number of argu- 

 ments in support of the pro- 

 priety of the war, and the necessity 

 of concinuing it with the utmost 

 firmness and spirit ; as on its prose- 

 cution depended the preservation 

 of the national independence. 



Lord Mansfield was particularly 

 sn-enuous in recommending a spi- 

 rited continuance of the war. It 

 had been provoked by the conduct 

 of the French : and tlie motives for 

 carrying it on were, tlie restoration 

 ol an ordeily government to 

 France, and the overthrow of 

 those desperate men who had 



tpenly avowed their determination 

 revolutionize all Europe. Such 



^en were evidently the pests of 

 human society, A peace wirh such 

 men was impracticnbler The vi^ 

 cisiitudes which continually attended 

 the government of that country, 

 precluded all possibility and expec- 

 tation of concluding any durable 

 treaty with it, as the rulers of one 



fday might on the folio.ving be 

 ousted by others, who would pay 

 little regard to enga:rement'; en- 

 tered into by those w.hom they Iwd 

 displaced. The woild was mis- 

 taken in calling the present contest 

 tjnly a war between kings and na- 

 tions : It was, in tlie strictest 

 truth, the cau^e of mankind much 

 more than of monarchs, fur which 



Europe was contending with the 

 French. Were that people to suc- 

 ceed in the wild plans they had 

 formed, tiie European world would 

 be plunged into the most deplora- 

 ble confusion. It was therefore 

 the dutv, and still more the interest, 

 of all men to oppose attempts so 

 manifestly inimical to the tran- 

 quillity and well-being of society. 



L)rd Manslield was seconded by 

 Lord Grcnviile, who reminded the 

 House that Great Britain could 

 not, consistently with its honour, 

 admit those ideas of peace so cla- 

 morously insisted on by the un- 

 thinking and ill-informed part of 

 the nation. Treaties had been en- 

 tered into with foreign powers, and 

 could not be violated without the 

 loss of national reputation. But 

 who were those that ruled France, 

 and with whom some people so 

 zealously recommended, it to the 

 British ministry to treat .'' They 

 were notoiiously men who had sig- 

 nalized themselves by the ferocity 

 of their disposition, and their readi- 

 ness to shed blood, and who, by 

 such means, had acquired the con- 

 fidence of the populace whose san- 

 guinary principles and proceedings 

 required such leaders. Were the 

 British ministry inclined ro treaty 

 they must previously restore what- 

 ever had been taicen from France, 

 the Conventionhaving decreed that 

 no peace could be granted to any 

 power that rcainrd an inch of 

 French ground. Would the lofty 

 spiiit of Britain sub nil to so arbi- 

 .trary and insulting a requisition i* 



Similarto these werethe principal 

 arguments in suj)port of the ad- 

 dress urged by thuse other peera 

 in the House of Lords, who spojte 

 on the ministerial side of the ques- 

 tion. 

 2S 3 Lord 



