STATE PAPERS. 
Elector isthere avowedly promised, 
tiers and his states should be infring- 
ie: case the tranquillity of his fron- 
ed, notwithstanding the wise mea- 
sures of that prince in adopting the 
same regulations which were put in 
force in the Austrian Low Coun- 
tries ;’ and when at the same time, 
in my second note of 5th January, 
the declaration on our part, of 
assistance, is positively limited to the 
case of an invasion taking place, 
** in defiance of the moderate and 
prudent precautions of the princes 
of the empire, in observing a con- 
duct similar to that pursued by the 
government of the I.ow Countries.” 
If such manifest indications were 
not sufficient to clear all doubt, and 
if, in respect to himself, it were pos- 
sible to suppose the Emperor would 
support armaments which he has 
forbidden in his own estates, what 
could remain to be desired, after the 
letter that the Count de Mercy ad- 
dressed you on the 7th of January, 
and of which, Sir, you acquaint- 
ed me that you had made an 
exact communication to M. Deles- 
sart ; by which this ambassador en- 
joins you “ to communicate to the 
French minister, that the Emperor 
had declared he would grant no as- 
sistance to the Elector, if he did not 
fully satisfy the demand of France, 
not to permit in his states assem- 
blages of emigrants, nor any prepa- 
rations, nor hostile steps of any kind 
whatever ; but that he should adopt 
in every respect the same impartial 
conduct which has always been ob- 
served in the LowCountries towards 
the French emigrants ?” ‘This offi- 
cial explanation, together with the 
above indications, is confirmed by 
the fact, and by the reportsof Mons. 
‘de St. Croix on the execution of 
the orders given to prevent these 
29t 
assemblages. Did it not therefore 
place in the hands of the minister 
sufficient motives of satisfaction to 
dissipate the most confirmed and 
malevolent mistrust ? 
How, therefore, can Mons. De- 
lessart confine the motives for the 
orders given to Marshal Bender to 
the supposition of some violence, 
and some incursions committed by 
the municipalities? Why does he 
pass over in silence the other mo- 
tives which my note of the 21st 
December specified, “* that daily 
experience does not give sufficient 
assurances of the stability and pre- 
ponderance of moderate measures in 
France, and a regular subordination. 
of powers, especially of the provin- 
ces and municipalities??? Of all 
this passage, the last word only is 
caught up. Is it that the other mo- 
tives which it expresses, and which 
are found at length in my note of 
the 5th of January, but on which 
he also observes silence, are not 
equally true as important? It is 
assuredly easier to pass them over, 
than to combat their justice and 
reality. 
It was therefore clearer than day 
that the Emperor, far from being 
inclined tothreaten France,was only 
inclined toremind her of the obliga- 
tions he was under, as chief of the 
‘Germanic body, as a co-estate and 
neighbour, to succour another state 
of the empire against unjust attacks 
which evidently were to be appre- 
hended from the extreme violence 
manifested in the temper of the 
national assembly, as well as of the 
nearest departments and municipa- 
lities, joined to such a precipita- 
tion and disproportion of measures, 
as did not permit any delay in the 
orders for eventual assistance. And 
as it is equally evident, that there 
T2 did 
