ANNUAL REGISTER, 1794. 



231 



it were not illiberal and unjust to 

 misrepresent even an enemy. Our 

 business was not to abuse, but to 

 consider in what mariner we could 

 live in peace with them, without 

 prejudice to our character Lind our 

 interest. 



The motion recommended by 

 Lord Larisdowne was objected to 

 by tlie Dui<e of Leeds as improper- 

 ly timed, and ili founded. With- 

 out enquiring into every motive for 

 this war, it could not altogether be 

 reputed unjust. The French sys- 

 tem of government was so opposite 

 in its very nature to all the esta- 

 blished governments of Europe, 

 that it must necessarily beviewed m 

 the light of 3 constant and perpe- 

 tual enemy, that would never cease 

 to act against ail the others till it 

 had destroyedthtm, or till they had 

 brought aDout its own destruction. 

 The manifestation of a desire of 

 peace on our side, would rather tend 

 to elate the French than to recon- 

 cile them. They would attribute 

 it to timidity, and would probably 

 rise in their terms, 



Tlie Duke of Leedswasseconded 

 by lord Sydney, who observed that 

 the motion amounted to a decbt^- 

 tion that we were no longer able to 

 prosecute the war; that we placed 

 no reliance on the. coalition, aad 

 tliat we acknowledged the cause of 

 the French to be just. Peace in 

 the present stage of the contest 

 would be unstable ; and it now be- 

 came us to act with lirniness, and 

 to yield nothincT to an etjemy 

 whom we were in a situation to 

 encounter, witli every reasonable 

 hope of compelling' him to an 

 agreement ihut might prove en- 

 tirely satisfactory to the views pro- 

 nos-d by the confederacy. 



He v,as follov.cd by Lord Lau- 



derdale, who spoke with his won ted 

 warmth on the aspersions cast on 

 the opposition to ministry. Tiiey 

 were, he said, represented as the 

 Jacobins of tiiis country ; but their 

 principles were those on which the 

 constitution of Great Britain was 

 founded, and without which it 

 could not be supported nor justi- 

 fied. The Frencli were becom« 

 odious to the princes of Europe, 

 for having cast otf the burtlien of 

 absolute mon^uchy; but was that a 

 valid motive for Englisiimen to 

 coincide in that odium ? The ex- 

 cesses of which they had been guil- 

 ty, no good man would extenuate, 

 but no honest man would d.ny 

 that they were perfectly justifiable 

 in refusing to submit tothe injunc- 

 tions of other nations in the ma- 

 nagement of their affairs. 



In answer to these allegations in 

 favour of the motion. Lord Carlisle 

 asserted, that however a speeay ter- 

 mination of tlie war was desirable, 

 it could not with prudence or pro- 

 priety be attempted while the ene- 

 my remained so violent and invete- 

 rate, and while our preparations 

 were so formidable, as to excite 

 reasonable hopes of lowering his 

 airogance. Our arms had compel- 

 led him to abandon Holland, and 

 expelled him from the Austrian 

 Netherlands ; we were masters of 

 some of his strongest towns. In 

 the East Indies we had completely 

 triumphed over them. What ne- 

 cessity could therefore impel us to 

 sue for a peace, which would pro- 

 mote an intercourse the wisdom, of 

 the legislature had prohibited, bift 

 which war only could eticctuail/ 

 pxeyent ? 



I-ord Grenville spoke next a- 



gainst the motion. He considered 



the various arguments in its sup- 



^ 4 port. 



