| 
1803.] 
queftion. And the French Minifter at Berlin 
was in the fame predicament. 
No.16, 17, and 18, containthe applications 
from Switzerland for the aid of England, and 
inftru€tions from Lord Hawkefbury to Mr. 
Moore, 
No. 19, confifts of a letter from Mr. 
Moore, dated Conftance, Oftober 31, 1802, 
in which he ftates, that having received au- 
tlientic information of the fubmiffion of the 
Diet of Switzerland, aflembled at Schwitz, 
to the French arms, he had contented hims 
felf by taking up his refidence in the neigh- 
bourhood of Switzerland, and there await his 
Majefty’s farther orders. 
No. 20 confifts of a letter from Lord Hawkef- 
bury to Mr, Moore, defiring him to return 
to England. 
Nos. 2% and 22 contain letters from Mr. 
Lifton, relative to the continuance of the 
French troops in Holland, 
No. 23, 
Extra of a Difpatch from Lord Hawkefbury, 
to Lord Whitworth, dated Nov. 30th, 1802. 
His Majefty’s Government have learnt 
with fome furprife from the communications 
from General Stuart, that that officer had 
fignified to Colone} Sebattiani his inability to 
evacuate Egypt, until he fhould receive fpe- 
cific orders tor that purpofe. It is certainly 
true that no warrant has been tranfmitted to 
General Stuart, or to his predeceffor, the 
Earl of Cavan, for the evacuation of Egypt 5 
neither was it confidered to be neceflary, in- 
asmuch as his Majefty’s Government had 
already exprefled their intention to General 
Stuart, in his inftructions, that, except ina 
cafe of abfolute neceffity, the King’s troops 
fhould remain in Egypt no longer than the 
month of July laft. Jn all the inftances of 
places which have been conquered by the 
King’s forces, and of which poffeffion had 
been taken in his Majefty’s name, it has 
been ufual when they have been reftored to 
the French Republic, or its Allies, that the 
Commanding Officer fhould be furnifhed with 
a regular warrant, under the King’s fign ma- 
nual, authorifing him to make fuch reftora- 
tion. But the cafe of Egypt is different, as 
that country had never been taken poffefiion 
of in his Majetty’s name, as it had been ac- 
tually reftored to ‘the Ottoman Porte, and as 
certain ftations in it were continued to be oc- 
cupied merely as military pofts, until the 
means of removing the truops fhould be pro- 
vided. 
It is probable, that, in the prefent inftance, 
General Stuart may have been mifled by a 
doubt as to the extent of his own power; 
and by the opinion that he required a warrant 
to evacuaie Egypt, fimilar to that which had 
been granted to officers who fuperintended the 
reftitution of conquefis, of which pofleflion 
had been taken in his Majefty’s name. In 
order, however, to obviate any farther diffi- 
Culties, inftru€tions have now been fent to 
General Stuart, dire&ting him to remove the 
King’s troops from Egypt with as little delay 
Correfpondence between Great Britain and France. 459 
as poffible, and information has beer given to 
this effe& to General Andreofii. 
No. 24 and 25, contain letters (dated Ju~ 
ly 20, and Auguft 3) from Lord St. Helens, 
ftating that the French Minifter, at Peterf- 
burgh, had not received any inftructions 
from Paris, to folicit the Emperor’s guaran- 
tee of Malta. 
No. 26 contains a difpatch from the Hon, 
A. Paget, to Lord Hawkelbury, dated Vien~ 
na, 18th of July, 1802, ftating, that he 
and the French Minifter had prefented re. 
guefts to the Emperor to become one of the 
guarantees of Malta, but that the French 
Minifter had done fo without having received 
any inftruétions from his Government. 
Ne. 27 contains the Emperor’s formal gua- 
rantee. No. 28. 
Extra& of a Difpatch from Mr. Caffamajor ta 
Lord ilawkefbury, dated Berlin, Auguf} 21, 
1802. 
Having opened the fubjeét of your Lord. 
fhip’s la(t difpatch, relative to the accefliog 
of this court to the arrangement ftipulated ig 
the roth article of the Treaty of Amiens, 
to Mr. Bignon, this gentleman undertoole 
very willingly to mention the fame to hig 
Government, and has in fat already per- 
formed his promife. In feveral converfations 
with Mr. Bignon, in which I have occa- 
fionally remarked that nothing had hitherto 
been faid to me here upon the fubject of 
Malta, he has conftantly aftected the greateft 
indifference, and treated it as a bufinefs of 
too little importance to occupy the attention 
of the French Government. 
No, 29 contains a difpatch from Mr. Caffae 
major to Lotd Hawkefbury, dated Berlin, 
Auguft 31, 1802, by which it appgars that 
Mr. Bignon had received inftructions from 
the French Government, to invite the King 
of Pruffia, conjointly- with him, to accede 
to the guarantee of the independence of the 
Ifand of Malta. 
No. 30 is alfo from Mr. Caffamajor to Lord 
Hawkefbury, dated Berlin, Oftober2, 1802, 
ftating that his note upon the fubjeé of the 
guarantee of Malta remains unanfwered, 
No. 31. 
Extra® of a. Difpatch from Mr. Fackfon to 
Lord Hawkefbury, datcd Berlin, November 
25, 1802. 
At my firft interview with Count Haug- 
witz, I told him that the only fubje& in fuf- 
pence between our two courts, to which £ 
need call his immediate attention, was that 
of the guarantee of Malta, on which an ane 
fwer was ftill due from him. He adverted to 
what he told Mr, Caflamajor, of the King 
his mafter having ordered a report to be made 
to him, on the ftate of the commanderies in 
Silefia, hinting that this country took a 
very flight intereft in the fate of the ifland; 
and that he was countenanced in withholding 
its guarantee, by the example of Spain. He, 
however, added that the report in queftion 
had been made to the King, and that he only 
waited his Majefty’s commands to confer 
with me farther upon the fubject. No, 
SS 
