182] 
seemed continually to vary in those 
whom it ‘principally behoved to 
free it from uncertainty.. Prompted 
by motives of this nature, the prin- 
cipal members of the opposition, in 
both houses, resolved to renew their 
endeavours to procure the govern. 
ment’s assent to their motions for 2 
negotiation with France. So carly 
as the sixth of January, carl Stan- 
hope moved, in the house of lords, 
that a declaration should be made, 
purporting that Great Britain nei- 
ther ought nor would interfere in 
the internal affairs of France. He 
supported this motion witha va- 
riety ofarguments : he particularly 
insisted on the numbers, the disci- 
pline, and the excellent condition of 
the French armies, which consisted 
of more than a million of men, and 
had vanquished, during the course of 
a single campaign, the bravest and 
most expert veterans in Europe. He 
stated their pecuniary resources at 
fourhundred millionssterting,exclu- 
sive of their possessions in land, He 
compared the depreciation of their 
paper-money to what had happened 
in America, which, notwithstanding 
the hopes conceived in this country 
from that circumstance, had main- 
tained its ground agajust all the 
boasted might of our treasures, It 
was absurd, he said, to pretend that 
ourstrengthwas unimpaired,and that 
we lad suffered no loss. Had we not 
dost Holland, and the Netherlands ? 
Had not upwards of ofe. hundred 
and thirty thousand of the choicest 
troops of our allies, either fallen in 
battle, or been made prisgners? 
Were not these mortifying circum- 
stances toa people whose reputation 
iad stood so high previously to this 
unfortunate contest ? But what was 
its object ? ong shat ought to cover 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 1795. 
the British nation with shame : tode- 
“prive the French of a government, 
erected by them on the ruins of 
their former servitude. Were we 
the only people entitled to be tree ? 
The pretence for this quarrel was a 
resolution passed in the convention, 
which hed been rescinded the mo. 
ment they found ic had given of- 
fence to oar government. On these, 
and other aliegations of a similar 
import, lord Stanhope moved the 
propriety of entering into a pacific 
negotiation with France. 
The earls of Abingdon and Car, 
lisle opposed the motion, for the 
many reasons that had already been 
alleged in preceding debates against 
treating with France. Lord Auck- 
land seconded them, and attributed 
the disasters of the foregoing cam- 
paign to the bad management of the 
allies, and the want of concert in 
their operations. Nevertheless, it 
were, he said, bad policy to betray 
despdndency, and:prudence dittated 
perseverance in the contest, until 
we could terminate it honourably. 
Were it once made evident that 
France had renounced the ambitious 
designs she had unquestionably been 
prosecuting, in consequence of the 
unexpected successes, no objections 
could lie toa fair and just negotia- 
tion with her on sate and equitable 
terms: but till this were unequivo. 
cally manifested, our only security 
was to continue the war with vigour. 
He did not mean, however, that 
the restoration of monarchy should 
be insisted on at all hazards to this 
country; butonly that while hostili- 
ties lasted, we should employ our 
whole strength to restore it, as that 
species of goverament which would 
best answer the purposes of general 
peaceand safety to all the powers 
f in 
‘ 
