THE SECRET PROPOSAL, OF PEACE. 
67 
nizing the futility of further pacific overtures, sought merely to direct 
the conferences into such a channel as would display the honor and 
dignity of his government to the disadvantage of France. In this, 
thanks to his superiority in diplomatic maneuvering, he was entirely 
successful and forced the French diplomats to state their proposals in 
terms most unreasonable and in manner most offensive, while English 
honor and sincerity were sustained in Malmesbury’s proud refusal to 
disclose his instructions. Grenville was elated at this outcome, writ¬ 
ing to Buckingham, “ The Directory have done everything they could 
to play our game.”* * * § Malmesbury, on his arrival in England, was 
surprised to find a complete change in the temper of the public, and 
that in the Cabinet nearly every one rejoiced f that the negotiations 
had been broken off, while Pitt himself seemed relieved. J Malmesbury 
was convinced by several conversations with Grenville that he had been 
correct in his early suspicion of Grenville’s attitude, and that the latter 
was ‘ ‘ invariably against peace from the beginning. ’ ’ § 
THE SECRET PROPOSAL OF PEACE. 
August 10 to October, 1797. 
During the period immediately subsequent to Maret’s secret pro¬ 
posals of delay, another and still more secret negotiation was begun in 
London. In this also Grenville, exhibiting now grudging acquiescence, 
now stubborn refusal, played an important part in determining the 
final outcome. The London proposal apparently had no connection 
whatever with that of Maret at Lille, save as the French agents em¬ 
ployed in the former made use of their knowledge of what was taking 
place at Lille to convince Pitt of their relations with the French gov¬ 
ernment and hence of their ability to sell peace to England. Before* 
Malmesbury left England a man named Potter had suggested to the 
government in London that peace on favorable terms to England might 
be assured if a secret bribe were paid to certain members of the Direc¬ 
tory. Potter claimed to be authorized to conduct such a transaction, 
but his offer was not seriously considered. Later, on August 22, 
*Sept. 20, 1797. Court and Cabinets , II, 383. 
f Malmesbury’s diary, Sept. 20, 1797. Malmesbury, III, 580. 
X Sept 27, 1797. Ibid., 591. 
§ Oct. 4, 1797. Ibid., 595. Lord Ashburton, in writing of these events in 1845, 
speaks of “ the desponding view of affairs taken both by him [Pitt] and Canning, 
checked by the dogged obstinacy of Grenville.” Croker, II, 238. 
