HISTORY OF EUROPE. 



257.: 



casioned a motion in the House of 

 Peers, oa the 26th of May, by the 

 Marqnis of Lansdowne ,for "An 

 address to the King, requesting his 

 jVlajesty to direct cojiies to be laid 

 before the House, of the instruc- 

 tions sent to l.ord Dorchester rela- 

 tive '.o all difi'erences between this 

 country and America, and such 

 communications as had been made 

 of conferences with the Indian 

 tribes north-we'^t of the Ohio.'' 



Lord Gienviile represented the 

 necessity of annoying the enemy by 

 all means, consistent with the law 

 of nations: according to which the 

 detention of sliips going to France 

 withprovi?ions was justified, on pay- 

 I, ment of the cargo and also freights; 

 iconditions that were fully perform- 

 ed. These being valued, and ho- 

 restly paid for, the American ships 

 were released : an indulgence not 

 allowed to other neutral states. 

 The Americans had certainly no 

 real cause to be otFcnded at our de- 

 taining their ships for the sole pur- 

 pose of purchasing their cargoes in- 

 tended for ov;r enemies j and which 

 were paid for in British guineas in- 

 stead of French assignats. 



After some observation from the 

 Marquis of Lansdowne, who stated 

 that the law of nations did not au- 

 thorize lis to starve whole nations, 

 nor interrupt the commeice of an 

 independent people, his motion 

 was negatived by b'Q against 9. 



A motion of the like tendency 

 was made by Mr. Sheridan on the 

 same day, in the House of Com- 

 mons. Little stress was laid by 

 opposition on the detention of the 

 American vessels : aad, for the af- 

 fairs of Canada, Mr. Dundas posi- 

 tively asserted, that no instructions 

 of an unfriendly kind to thij Ame- 

 ricans had been given to JxjrdDor- 

 Vo^. XXXVI, 



Chester ; on which Mr. Sheridan 

 withdrew his motion. 



Four days after, a debate of more 

 importance took place in the House 

 of Lords.— The Duke of Bedford, 

 on the 30th of May, produced a 

 series of resolutions for terminating 

 the war with Fiance. He pre- 

 faced them by a retrospective of the 

 principal events that had occasioned 

 its commencement and continu- 

 ance ; stating the various views 

 professed, at different times, by It:* 

 promoters and abettors. He le- 

 quested the House to examine the 

 domestic and foreign situation of 

 affairs ; and whether, from tlie ■ 

 measures pursued, there was any 

 likelihood of compassing the end 

 proposed, of compelling France to 

 submit to our terms. He then pro- 

 ceeded to the reading of his reso- 

 lutions. From the facts on which 

 these were founded, it appeared, he 

 said, that the first ostensible motive 

 of ihe war, was to oppose the navi- 

 gation of the Scheldt, and to pro- 

 tect the Dutch from a French in' 

 vasion: these ends having com- 

 pletely been accomplished, terms 

 of pacification might have ensued 

 on our pavt, instead of impru- 

 dently prolonging a contest, the 

 profest object of which was attain - 

 ed ; but our ministry had deter- 

 mined to interfere in the affairs of 

 France, and declared accordingly 

 for the, re-establishmeiit of mo- 

 narchy. The French were charged 

 with having first declared war ; but 

 had we not first given the provo- 

 cation .' After- engaging in this 

 war, on being promised the conr 

 curring aid of the other powers 

 that formed the coalition, circum- 

 stances induced government so- 

 lemnly to declare that, provided 

 France established a government 

 i" gn 



