168] 
all we should still have to restore to 
them, while they had nothing to 
restore to England, it was impos- 
sible not to consider the terms on 
which his majesty proposed peace 
to Holland as generous and liberal. 
M. Delacroix was not at all dis- 
posed to agree with me on this 
point, and said, Holland, stripped 
of these possessions, would be ru- 
ined. 
if the idea had just crossed his 
mind, the. possibility of indemni- 
fying the Dutch for their losses in, 
India, by giving them a tract of 
territory towards the Meuse, (f 
could not find out whether he 
meant Aix la Chapelle, Liege, or 
. the countries of Juliers and Berg) 
and hinted, that if this was not 
to be done, an additional sugar 
Island might, perhaps, be ceded to 
the Dutch Republic. If told him 
all thismight become a subject of 
future discussion, and I conceived, 
that if we could agree upon the 
more essential points, the treaty 
would not break off on these secon- 
dary considerations. Our conver- 
sation had now been extremely 
long, and M. Delacroix ended by 
saying, that although he had taken 
upon himself to enter with me 
thus far upon the subject, yet I 
must not consider any thing he said 
as binding, or as pledging the re- 
public, till such time as he had 
jJaid the papers { had given him 
before the Directory ; and in order 
. to do this with more aceuracy, he 
agaiu asked me, whether in his re- 
port he was to state the disuniting 
Belgium from France as a sine qud 
non from which his majesty would 
not depart. Lréplied, it most cer- 
_ tainly wasa sire qué nun from which 
his majesty would not depart ; and 
that any proposal which would 
rae the Netherlands anresed te 
He then held out, but as- 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 1796. 
Fraace, would be attended with 
much greater benefit to that power 
and lost to the allies, than the pre- 
sent relative situation of the belli- 
gerent powers could entitle the. 
French government to expect. 
M. Delacroix repeated his con- 
cern at the peremptory way in 
which I made this assertion, and 
asked. whether it would admit of 
no modification? I replied, . if 
France could, in a. contre projet, 
point out a practicable and ade. 
quate one, still keeping in view 
that the Netherlands must not be 
French, or likely again to fall into 
the hands of France, such a pro- 
posal might certainly be taken into 
consideration. 
M. Delacroix by no means en- 
couraged: me to explain myself 
more fully ; he repeatedly said, 
that this difficulty relative to the 
Netherlands was one which could 
not be overcome. 
Just as I was ee leave of 
him, he begged of me to explain 
what was meant by the words in 
the memoire (A) in the 4th para- 
graph, beginning de s’ entendre mu- ° 
tuellement surles moyens d’assurer, 
and ending at eur possessions respec~ 
tives. I told him, it referred to 
the destructive system adopted by 
France in the West Indies, and 
went to express a wish, that the 
two powers should agree on some 
general and uniform system of in- 
ternal police in the settlements 
there; which would contribute to 
the security of these possessions 
to the respective countries, and at 
the same time to the bappiness of 
every description of inhabitants in 
them. 
-M, Delacroix, a little hurt at my 
expression relative to the system 
adopted by France, endeavoured 
to reeriminate on us ; but he ended 
by 
