STATE E> Pi A PvE RS: 
Fenteur dans les negotiations, qu’elles a- 
voient montré de Vardeur pour les termi- 
ner. Lobferved to them, that I had 
orders from my court to afk a pre- 
cife explanation, whether this accu- 
fation of delay was meant to apply 
to the manner in which his Ma- 
jefty had conducted the negotiation 
at Lifle; and if it was fomeant, to 
declare that no accufation was ever 
more deftitute of foundation, nor a 
wider deviation from the real fact. 
I faid I was perfectly ready to abide 
by their determination on_ this 
point, convinced that it was impof- 
fible for them not to acknowledge 
that the delay (if there had been 
any blameable delay) refted with 
the French government, and not 
_ with his Majefty. The French 
Plenipotentiaries admitted this to 
be moft ftriétly true ; that the phrafe 
I had quoted was an ill-judged one 
and mal redigée; but that it could 
not in any point of view whatever 
be conftrued as applying to Eng- 
land; and they were ready to fay, 
that when it was written, the Di- 
rectory alluded folely to the court 
of Vienna; that they could affiire 
me they had been very faithful,in 
their reports, and that when they 
had faid this, it was faying in other 
words that I had carried on the ne- 
gotiation with as much expedition 
as poffible ; and that if it had pro- 
ceeded flowly for this laft month, 
the flownefs arofe on their fide, 
and not on mine. 
I faid, I could not for an inftant 
call in queftion their feclings on 
this point; it was the infinuation 
‘-conveyed in the meflage, and which 
had gone over Europe, that was 
“neceflary for me to clear up, and 
‘to know whether the Directory 
thought and felt as they did.. One 
of the French minifters, with very 
Vor. XXXIX. 
209 
ftrong expreffions affured me the 
Directory certainly did think and 
feel like them; that no unfair or 
infidious allufion was meant, and 
added, que ce meffage etoit pour ftimuler 
les confeils. I.went on, by obferving 
it was very effential for me to have 
this fully explained, and that I 
fhould give them ina note to this 
effe&t; they requefted.1 would not, 
as it would lead to difagreeable dif-. 
cuffions, and would not an{wer the 
end I propofed. They would take 
upon themfelves now to aflure me, 
in the name of the Directory, that 
nothing at all fimilar to the con- 
ftruction I put on the phrafe was 
intended; and that as foon as: they 
could receive an anfwer to the re- 
port they fhould make of to-day’s 
converfation, they would fay the 
fame from the Diretory itfelf. 
Thope, my Lord, I have, theré- 
fore, by obtaining this very precife 
and formal difavowal of an inten- 
tion to fix any imputation of delay 
on his Majefty’s government, ful- 
filled the object of my inftruétions 
on this particular point. If when 
the French Plenipotentiaries {peak 
from the Direétory, the difavowal 
fhould not be equally fatisfa¢tory 
and complete, I then will not fail, 
according to your Lordfhip’s order, 
to givein a note. . 
I have the honour to be, &c. 
(Signed) MaLMesspury. 
Right Honourable Lord Grenville. 
(No. 33.): 
Extra& of a Difpatchfrom Lord Malme/- 
bury to Lord Grenville, dated Lifle, 
Aig. 22, V79T. 
THE four conferences I have 
held with the French Plenipoten- 
tiaries fince I laft wrote to your 
oO Lord- 
