PITT’S SECOND PEACE PROPOSAL. 
49 
with diplomatic usage. Grenville, however, despatched in answer to 
Delacroix a written memorial, which Malmesbury was instructed to hand 
in without change. The wording of the memorial, beginning “ Quant 
aux insinuations offensantes et injurieuses que Ton a trouve dans cette 
piece,” * * * § did not foreshadow a happy ending for the negotiation. 
By November 7, the date upon which this despatch was written, 
Grenville was again the leader in directing England’s foreign policy, 
for the events of the week previous had greatly strengthened the force 
of his arguments. In that week came the news of the organization of 
‘ ‘ patriotic societies ’ ’ in Ireland, and the fear of a general rebellion passed 
away.f In that week, also, Pitt gained a decided Parliamentary vic¬ 
tory on questions of home defense,'! while intelligence from Austria 
indicated a revival of energy in that government. Pitt found that he 
had overestimated the force of the English clamor for peace and, though 
personally averse to the war, yielded to Grenville’s insistence that the 
negotiations should be carried on in such a way and for such an end as 
at least to require all of England’s original demands. On November 5 
he wrote a general letter of commendation to Malmesbury,§ but one 
containing no suggestion of concessions to France, while two days later 
Canning || also wrote, hinting that Pitt would have been better pleased 
had Malmesbury taken a stiffer tone in response to the insulting lan¬ 
guage of Delacroix.II Canning was Under Secretary of State for Foreign 
Affairs and, perhaps more than any other at the time, was acquainted 
with Pitt’s real sentiments and purposes. In the same mail Canning 
despatched Grenville’s instructions and memorial, and these, with Pitt’s 
letter, reached Malmesbury November 10. The entry in Malmesbury’s 
diary for the next day is brief, but illuminative : “ Writing—thinking 
over my new instructions— cosi, cosi. ’ ’ ** Malmesbury understood per¬ 
fectly from the tenor of Grenville’s instructions the part he was now to 
play, and he understood also from his private letters that they were in 
truth new instructions. That they were new to Malmesbury goes to 
prove that he had up to this time believed Pitt desirous of making 
peace, and in fact Malmesbury, on December 20, in an interview with 
Sandoz-Rollin, the Prussian minister in Paris, accused Grenville of. 
* Malmesbury, III, 301. 
tCharlemont MSS., II, 284-294. 
X Pitt to Malmesbury, Nov. 5, 1796. Malmesbury, III, 295. 
§ Pitt to Malmesbury, Nov. 5, 1796. Ibid. 
j{ Ibid. , 297. 
*| Masson pictures Delacroix as utterly without knowledge of proper diplomatic 
language or customs, and as permitting himself to be put entirely in the wrong by 
Malmesbury. Yet he also states that Delacroix merely followed the instructions 
of the Directory in these negotiations. Masson, 390-395. 
** Malmesbury, III, 305. 
4 
