2 ANNUAL REGISTER, 1803. 
declaration, amply justified this 
country in retaining Malta. He 
should not have considered a mere 
abstract wish of the first consul, to 
possess himself of Egypt, asa sufli- 
cient ground of war: but the con- 
duct of Sebastiani, and the avowal 
of the French minister, made it 
clear that a hostile attack was me- 
ditated, not only on Egypt, but on 
the Ionian isles, in direct violation 
of the treaty of Amiens: he knew 
no period, in which so many and 
invincible grounds of war on the 
part of this country,were so clearly 
and distinctly made out. He pre- 
ferred the original address to the 
amendment, because he thought it 
necessary to shew the greatest una- 
mimity, 
Mr. Whitbread said, he. also 
wished for unanimity: he put it 
however, to the last speaker, to Mr. 
Pitt, and other gentlemen, whether 
they could, with a safe conscience, 
vote an address, which would be a 
direct approbation of the conduct 
of his majesty’s ministers. The 
tight hon. gentleman had distinctly 
admitted, that ministers had com- 
mitted the honor of the country. 
It appeared to him, that the best 
mode of obtaining unanimity, was, 
by supporting the amendment of 
Mr. Grey, which, while it pledged 
the house to the support of the war, 
did not approve of the conduct of 
ministers. Whatever aggravated 
circumstance might have occurred 
since the peace of Amiens, he con- 
sidered that the only thing we were 
at war for now, was the terms of 
our’ ultimatum delivered to the 
French court. If we, had been 
suffered to retain Malta, all would 
have Leen well, and we would now 
enjoy peace. After taking a review 
of the whole conduct of ministers, 
both before and after the treaty of 
Amiens, he felt convinced, that they 
had no right to declare those to be 
reasons for going to war,which were 
no reasons for preventing the peace 
being signed at Amiens: he con- 
cluded by expressing a hope, that 
his majesty’s ministers might now 
avail themselves of the interference 
of Russia, and that the peace might 
be preserved. 
Mr. Dallas wished the attention 
of the house to be now confined to 
the question immediately before 
their consideration, namely, whe- 
ther the war was just or unjust? 
As to the abilities of ministers, and 
their general conduct, that was a 
separate question, which might be 
discussed at another time. He 
thought there was no doubt, but 
that, in this quarrel, the country 
was in the right; ministers had 
made every cession, required by 
the treaty of Amiens, excepting 
Malta alone, and in that instance, 
they had done every thing in their 
power to obtain the guarantees 
that were stipulated in the treaty. 
On the other hand, the conduct 
of France, with respect to Switz- 
erland, Holland, and Italy, jus- 
tified the jealousy of our govern- 
ment. ‘The first consul himself had 
avowcd his designs upon Egypt ; he 
therefore should answer the last 
speaker, who asked, ‘‘ What we are 
at war for?” by saying, ‘‘ We were 
at war for Malta, but not for Mal- 
ta only, but fory Egypt; not for . 
Kgypt only, but for India ; not for 
India alone, but for the integrity of 
the British empire, and the cause 
of justice, good faith, and freedom 
all over the world.” 
Mr. Elliot agreed in the justice 
i and 
