92] ANNUAL REGISTER, 1800. 



weapon, that may cut both ways. 

 The weakness of France may pro- 

 duce a desire for negociation for the 

 purpose of gauiing time, recruiting 

 her strength, and assuming a more 

 formidable attitude; but it affords 

 no proof of desire, (when her pri- 

 vate views shall be attained) to 

 conclude the negociation when en- 

 tered upon, or to observe it when 

 concluded. Are we then, I ask, 

 to stretch out our hands to nurse 

 and uphold the usurpation of Buo- 

 naparte, to assist him to consolidate 

 his power and become the instru- 

 ment of his strength, that we may 

 see it, when opportunity shall oc- 

 cur, turned against the powers that 

 created it? Sir, before this line of 

 conduct shall be adopted, I hope 

 ministers will pause and weigh well 

 the consequences to which it would 

 lead." 



Mr. Dundas admitted that within 

 these ten years past, this country 

 had twice entered into negociation 

 with France: but he contended, 

 that there was no part of adminis- 

 tration that was not deeply im- 

 pressed with a sense of danger at 

 the time in the event of such ne- 

 gociation proving successful. He 

 put the following questions: Whe- 

 ther in the event of a peace having 

 been concluded at Lisle we should 

 not be now at war ? Whether the 

 correspondence with the Irish re- 

 bellion would not have gone on 

 just as it has since done .'' Could 

 there be a doubt that the expedi- 

 tion to Egypt would have taken 

 place ? If a treaty of peace were 

 actually signed, would Britain ven- 

 ture to disarm? Row did Prussia 

 stand.!* She had to maintain a large 

 army to preserve her line of de- 

 marcation: how could we stand.? 

 We could have a garrison in every 



foreign colony; so that we would 

 have all the expense of keeping up 

 a large force, without the power of 

 exercising it. Would not a peace 

 engage us to refrain from all hosti- 

 lity against France, leaving her at 

 liberty to act against the different 

 governments of Europe, while our 

 hands were tied up, and we should 

 be held back from every thing but 

 the expense. Under these circum- 

 stances he did not think that this 

 government would act wisely, were 

 it now to enter into negociation. 



Mr. Whitbread observed, that 

 had it not been for the interference, 

 the folly, and the ambition of the 

 other powers of Europe, the French 

 revolution would, at this time, have 

 borne a very different complection : 

 but thatevery attempt to repress its 

 evils had only disseminated them 

 wider. A worse effect had follow- 

 ed; the extinction of liberty in 

 every country of Europe, under the 

 pretext of counteracting the licen- 

 tious principles of France. Mr.. 

 Dundas had said, that from the com- 

 mencement of the revolution, France 

 had shewn a sovereign contempt of 

 treaties, and within these ten years 

 past, had been at war with almost 

 every state of Europe. In saying 

 this the right honourable gentleman 

 had only pronounced his own pane- 

 gyric; for he had informed the 

 house, that he thought it his duty 

 to invite every power in Europe to 

 unite in one common cause against 

 France, the common enemy of 

 mankind. In this he had succeeded. 

 But the views of the allied powers 

 had been frustrated. The want of 

 good faith had been alleged as a 

 reason for not entering into a ne- 

 gociation with France. Mr. Whit- 

 bread asked if his majesty's minis- 

 ters had always acted on principles 



