HISTORY OF EUROPE. 



189 



expiilsion of Frrnchmen from Bri- 

 tain, the confiscation of their mer- 

 chandize in neutral bottoms, the 

 violation of the commercial treaty 

 between Great Britain and France, 

 — and, to complete these inimical 

 measures, the contemptuoas dis- 

 mission of its minister at our 

 court ? Were not these deeds of 

 open and undeniable enmity ? As 

 to the verbal declaration of war on 

 the part of France, would any 

 ipan of candour say, ^that the va- 

 rious ste[is taken by the British go- 

 vernment against France, ante- 

 cedently to that declaration, were 

 ■not, without declaring them such, 

 manifest acts of hostility ? Did not 

 the French, notwithstanding these 

 infringements of_ peace, abstain 

 from all violence, and earnestly so- 

 licit for amity and a good under- 

 standing between fhem and this 

 country ? But long had our minis- 

 try determined to cast them off 

 as unworthy of their friendship. 

 We now were entering on a sc- 

 .cond campaign ; but what was the 

 object proposed ? Had we not 

 obtained the main point in contest, 

 the gjEcurity of our allies ? It could 

 not Tbe supposed that the French, 

 were they, conformably to tlieir 

 demands, to remain unmolested in 

 their domestic arrangements, would 

 refuse to agree to reasonable terms. 

 Were they to be guilty of so rash 

 *a refusal, then indeed the British 

 ipinistry would stand acquitted in 

 prosecuting the war against them 

 with the utmost vigour, and hold- 

 ing th-m out as perversely inclined 

 to be our enemies. But if cir- 

 -cunistances were duly consulted, 

 this fatal war was meditated by 

 ministry. The IVtnch attack upon 

 4he Dutcli was no other than a 

 jpirclciice^ and, as it were/ -a signal 



for commencing hostilities. The 

 motive ostensibly held out to the 

 British nation, was the preservation 

 of laws, religion, property, of all, 

 in short, that is dear to civilized 

 society. This was a cause in which 

 our ministers insisted that it was 

 incumbent on all Europe to parti- 

 cipate in common. Such being 

 the case, and allowing ministers 

 to be earnest in this declaration, 

 why should they palliate the re- 

 solution they had most certainly , 

 taken, to engage in a war wliicli, 

 on such grounds, was neither unjust 

 nor unnecessary ; and for which, « 

 instead of blame, they were entitled 

 to praise ? But these were the real 

 motives that led them to undertake 

 this war ? Until this were fairly 

 proved, it still remained incontro- 

 vertible, that they were the pri- 

 mary aggressors in a ruinous and ^ 

 unjustifiable war, since no otiier 

 motives could defend it. The ag> 

 gresston was clearly imputed to 

 tiiem, even by tiieir allies, who 

 demanded, in consequence of it this ^ 

 immense pecuniarj supply; which 

 they could not have claimed with 

 any colour of equity, had Great 

 Britain been first attacked. But 

 whatever were the real or pretend- 

 ed motives of ministry, or of their 

 allies, the French still remained 

 unsubdued. That p^ace and safety "^ 

 for which the confederacy was 

 fighting, did not seem obtainable 

 by their arms. The French had 

 resisted them so successfully, that '^^ 

 peace, when it canie, would proba- 

 bly be concluded on their own 

 terms. What a prospect did this '• 

 afford to the moveri of tlie war 1 

 Whatever ministers could say upon 

 this subject, facts spoke decisively 

 against them. They had rot . i 

 made that impression upon France ♦ 

 # which 



