HISTORY OF EUROPE. [89 



■vi6us to the month of November 

 last, whether it has not afforded any 

 since ? and here, I contend, if gen- 

 tlemen will take a review of that 

 interval, and all the circumstances 

 attending it, that they will not find 

 a single security in the present 

 government of that country, which 

 was not possessed by all those that 

 preceded it, and that have been 

 condemned as defective in that par- 

 ticular. Under these circumstances, 

 recent overtures are made for open- 

 ing a negociation for peace. This 

 proposition his majesty's ministers 

 have thought proper to reject, as- 

 signing at the same time, as a rea- 

 son, that, as all the former attempts 

 made for that purpose had proved 

 abortive, or, if successful, were fol- 

 lowed by violation, nothing yet pre- 

 sented itself, arising out of the pre- 

 sent revolution, that promised any 

 other termination to any negociation 

 which we might enter upon, or af- 

 ford greater security than what we 

 possessed before. To these obser- 

 vations I cheerfully subscribe. In 

 the first place, we are not certain 

 of the sincerity of the overture ; 

 and, secondly, if we were, there is 

 nothing of stability yet acquired by 

 the present government to satisfy 

 us, that, if sincere, it affords secu- 

 rity for the observance of the treaty. 

 This, then, is the outline of the 

 argument that I mean to pursue ; 

 and I wish the house to consider, 

 whether it would be consistent with 

 the line of conduct which it has 

 uniformly followed, and justified by 

 the dreadful expense of blood and 

 treasure, to which we are indebted 

 for our present situation, to risk it 

 by entering into a negociation with 

 a government of which we have 

 had no experience, and which af- 

 fords no security that wc arc aware 



of beyond any that preceded it. 

 Laying aside then all personal con- 

 siderations of Buonaparte, but view- 

 ing his government, in a general 

 and abstract point of view, as a 

 recent assumption of power, I ask, 

 what are the circumstances of con- 

 fidence that it affords? What are 

 the grounds on which we have 

 security for the due observance of a 

 treaty in the event of its conclusion? 

 To ascertain these points, we must 

 resort to the power with which we 

 have to deal for a criterion by which 

 to tiy the question. In doing this, 

 we are sometimes decided by the 

 character of the king of a country, 

 sometimes by the conduct of his 

 ministers, and sometimes by the 

 general conduct and character of 

 the government; but is there any 

 one of these criteria to be found in 

 the present case ? Is there any one 

 of its ministers, or any thing in the 

 executive power or government of 

 the country, of sufficient standing 

 to afford any of these criteria .> If, 

 then, in the present instance, we 

 have none of these rules, by which 

 experience enables us to judge in 

 treating with other powers, all rests 

 upon the assertion of the party him- 

 self, declaring that he is of a pacific 

 disposition, accredited, it is true, 

 by his minister Talleyrand; for, 

 to him he has referred, as appears 

 from the correspondence, to vouch 

 for this pacific character. It is not 

 this country's business, however, to 

 judge the private character and con- 

 duct of Buonaparte. He is the 

 repositary of the power of France, 

 and it is only as connected with that 

 situation that we feel an interest in 

 his disposition. In this view, then, 

 I shall consider it; and here let it 

 be understood, that it is far from 

 my intention to enter into any abuse 



