1803.] 
be fufficient to tranquilize and fatisfy the 
Firft Conful, without recurring to the mea- 
fures which had been intimated to me, and 
which could not but be*¢onfidered as inconlif- 
tent with his Majefy’s dignity and honour, as 
well as with the common laws of hofpitality, 
which he could not but obferve towards fo- 
reigners within his dominions, until they 
fhould have forfeited that protection by their 
mifconduct. : 
M. Talleyrand exprefled to me in reply, 
that the Firft Conful had folicited no more 
than the Britifh Government itfelf had, at 
the time, demanded of France, when the 
Pretender was in this country, and than had 
been practifed between other Governments 
under finilar circpimftances: that he could 
not fee any humiliation in the meafure which 
he had intimated to me; that he could affure 
me it had not been fuggefted with any fuch 
idea-; and that he could only repeat, that 
the adoption of it would he m the higheft de- 
grce agreeable and fatisfa¢tory to the Firft 
Conful, and be confidered by him as the 
moft convincing proof of his Majefty’s dif- 
pofition to fee a cordial good underftanding 
eftablithed between the two countries ; con- 
cluding his anfwer with a requeft that I would 
report it to your Lordihip. 
[ rejoined upon the fubject by obferving to 
the French Minifter, that even without ad- 
verting to the ferious confideration of the 
King’s dignity and honour, the feelings of 
the people of England were to be taken into 
account on the occalion: that he muft be fen- 
fible the relative fituation, hitherto, of the - 
iwo ccuntries, efpecially in regard to trade, 
afforded his Majefty’s fubjects no room to 
reap thofe advantages which were common 
to, and which were always expected from, a 
ftate of peace; and that it therefore appeared 
to me that the Firft Conful would equally 
give a proof of his difpofition to ree harmony 
and a triendly intercourfe re-eftablithed be- 
tween the two nations, by not repeating his 
with upow a matter which would operate in 
the ftrongeft manner againft fuch an approxi- 
mation and reconciliation of fentiments, 
were it even only to come to the knowledge of 
his Majefty’s fubjetts. 
I am happy, my Lord, to fay, that M. 
Talleyrand ihewed no warmth, or any very 
marked eagernefs, in his manner of replying to 
my communication ; and that ourconverfation 
on this head terminated with the lat remarks 
I made to him, when he changed it to another 
fubjec. ANTHONY MERRY. 
Right Hon. Lord Hawketbury. 
No. 10. 
Portman-fquare, Fuly 25, 1802. 
My Lord, . 
I tranfmitted fome time ago, to Mr. Ham- 
mond, a number of Peltier, containing the 
quoft grofs calumnies againf the French Go- 
Yernment, and againit the whole nation; 
“and I obferved, that I fhould probably re- 
_Montury Mac. Ne, tot, 
Correfpondence between Great Britain and France. 
“of the liberty of the prefs. 
455 
ceive an order to demand the punifhment of 
fuch an abufe of the prefs. That order is 
actually arrived, and I cannot conceal from 
you, my Lord, that the reiterated infults of 
a {mail number of foreigners, affembled in 
London to confpire againit the French Go- 
vernment, produce the moft unfavourable 
effe&s on the good underftanding between 
the two nations. Even though the firft arti- 
cle of the treaty of Amiens had not provided 
for the maintenance of that refpect, which 
tivo independent nations owe to each other 5 
the general maxims of the law of nations 
would formally condemn fo revolting an abufe 
) It cannot be be-. 
lieved, that the law can give more latitude 
to a libellift than to any other individual, 
who, without declaration of war, fhould per- 
mit himfelf to violate the duties of good 
neighbourhood. The offence in queftion is. 
fo much the more ferious, as its object is evi- 
dently to difturb the harmony which fubfilts 
between the two Governments. 
It is not to Peltier alone, but to the edi- 
tor of the Courier Francois de Londres, to 
Cobbet, and to other writers who refemble | 
them, that I have to direct the attention of 
his Majefty’s Government. The perfidious 
and malevolent publications of thefe men 
are in open contradiGtion to the principles of 
peace, and if it could ever enter into the 
mind ef the French Government to permit 
retaliation, writers would doubtlefs be found 
in France, willing to avenge their country- 
men by filling their pages with odious reflec- 
tiens on the moft refpectable perfons, and on 
the deareft inftitutions of Great Britain. 
The want of pofitive laws again{t thefe 
forts of offences cannot palliate the violation 
ot the law of nations, according to which peace 
fhould put a ftop to all fpecies of hoftilities ;. 
and doubtlefs thofe which wound tire honour 
and the reputation of a Government, and 
which tend to caufe a revolt of the people, 
whofe interefts are confided to that Go- 
vernment, are the mof apt to lefien the ad- 
vantages of peace, and to keep up national 
reientments. _ OTTO. 
To Lord Hawkefbury. 
No. 11. ; 
Sir, Downing-freet, Fuly 28, 1802 
I have the honour to acknowledge the re- 
ceipt of your letter on the fubject of the laft 
number of Peltier. It is impoffible that his 
Majefty’s Government could perufe the arti- 
cle in queftion without the greateft difplea- 
fure, and without an anxious defire that the 
perfon who publifhed it thould fuffer the pu- 
nifhmeut he fo jufly defetves.. The calum- 
nies, however, to which his Majefty’s Go- 
verninent, and many of the beft fubje¢ts in 
this country, are frequently expofed im the 
public prints, mut neceffarily convince all 
foreign Governments of the difficulties which 
exift ina conftitation like that of Great Bri- 
tain, in preventing the abufe which 1s often 
unavoidably attendant on the greateft of all 
aN political 
