-ger, they will be ready to give to the King of France, and to the French nation, or to any other Government that shall be attacked, as soon as they shall be called upon, all the assistance requisite to restore public tranquillity, and to make a common cause against all those who should undertake to compromise it. The present Declaration inserted in the Register of the Congress assembled at Vienna, on the 13th March, 1815, shall be made public. Done and attested by the Plenipotentiaries of the High Powers who signed the Treaty of Paris, Vienna, 13th March, 1815.

Austria.-Prince Metternich, Baron Wissenberg.

France. Prince Talleyrand, the Duke of Dalberg, Latour du Pin, Count Alexis and Noailles.

<<Great Britain.-Wellington, Clancarty, Cathcart, Stewart. Portugal. Count Palmella Saldanha Lobs.

Prussia. Prince Hardenberg, Baron Humboldt.

>>Russia.-Count Rusumowsky, Count Staeckelberg, Count Nesselrode.

Spain.-P. Gomez Labrador.
Sweden.—Lafmenhelm.

225. Now, besides the next to impossibility of all these people having had time to be duly informed of the landing of NAPOLEON; there is a perfect physical impossibility, that WELLINGTON, and his assessors, should have received any instructions upon the subject from their government; unless we allow that government to have been gifted with the power of foreseeing events. There were only eleven days, observe. The news did not reach England until the 15th of March, or thereabouts; so that it is absolutely impossible that WELLINGTON and his assessors could have received any instructions on the subject on the 13th of March. How came WEL

of the nations of Europe: next, you had, at present, means of opposing that system which you could not reasonably hope to possess at a future time; and the question was, whether, under these circumstances, it was not incumbent upon you to take advantage of this state of things, and oppose so PERNICIOUS A SYSTEM, whilst the amplest means of resistance were in your power.........That we had a right to say, that France shall not have a government which threatens the repose of other nations...... that we ought not to refuse to join in crushing one of the greatest evils that ever existed.

Lord GRENVILLE said, was it nothing now to be desired to sanction a system under which Europe had so long groaned, with such an army and such a chief at its head? If his disposition was said to have undergone some change, his situation again was now changed; and as the army was formerly upheld by spoliation and plunder, so now, for the same objects, he was recalled by his former instruments, who alone could maintain him in his regained power. As to new constitutions, he was firmly of opinion, that a good constitution could only be formed by the adaptation of remedies from time to time, under the circumstances which required them. That seemed the only means of accomplishing that difficult work. The only instance of exception mentioned was that of America: but that did not apply. The founders of that constitution acted with great wisdom. It was framed so as to produce as little change as possible in the existing laws and manners under the altered form of government, which, though a republic, was constructed as nearly as the difference would admit, on the monarchical form of our OWN CONSTITUTION.

Lord CASTLEREAGH observed, that in this case it is impossible to separate the government from the nation.

Mr. GRATTAN said, that the French government is a stateocracy that the French constitution was war, and that Buonaparte was the man best calculated to support it........that with Mr. Burke's authority, with Mr. Fox's practice, and with the opinions and conduct of others whom it would wear out a day to name, he was against a treaty founded on the chances of Buonaparte's giving liberty to France, at the certain hazard of the independence of Europe. If we had no right to dictate a government to France, we had a right to say to France,

"You shall not choose a government, the object of which is to raise all your strength against Europe." As to the government of Louis XVIII., which he would rather speak of as interrupted than subverted, it was mildness itself compared to that of Buonaparte. It was free under it to discuss all questions of church or ministry, or political or religious intolerance, and the science of government and philosophy, and intoleration advanced under it, and there was at least an amenity in France that rendered a great nation amiable. It was now proposed to subject that race of people to a pure oriental despotism. There was a sort of monstrous unreality in the revived system of government, that stated nothing as it is, and every thing as it was not. (Hear.) The whole state was corrupted. He would ask whether by treaty they would confirm in the heart of Europe a military domination founded on triumph over civil rights, and which had made the experiment of governing a great nation without any religion, and which aimed at governing Europe by means of breaking oaths and deposing Kings? (Hear.) If they would agree to confirm that system,-if they would degrade the honour of England,—if they would forget the value of morals, and despise the obligations of religion,—if they would astonish all our allies by such a confirmation, would not Europe exclaim against us, and say, "You have kindly assisted and "generously contributed to our deliverance; and do you at "the most urgent moment fall back? In vain have you so long opposed and borne up against the flying fortunes of the "world; in vain have you taken the eagles from the hands of "the invaders; in vain have you snatched invincibility from "the standards of the foe! Now, when all Europe is ready "to march, are you, who were in the front before, the fore"most to take the lead in desertion?"

Mr. C. WYNNE quoted a number of historical facts, to show that it had always been necessary to curb the ambition of FRANCE, and contrasted the approaching meeting in Paris, to accept the new constitution, under the influence of a military despotism, with the FREEDOM OF ELECTION IN ENGLAND, where all the troops were removed from the spot where it took place.

The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, indeed, what other alternative was left but war, or an armed peace, almost equivalent to war in point of expense, and leaving the country in a feverish

state of anxiety as to defence? Supposing a treaty with Buonaparte, could any man contemplate a peace establishment in the old sense of that phrase? The country could only have a feverish and disturbed repose. The system of armed defence was calamitous in itself, and one of which the country had had no experience. He admitted that circumstances might exist in which an armed peace might be preferable to war; if, for instance, the powers of Europe had not been prepared, or were indisposed to the contest, in that case an armed peace would be preferable, though it would still be an ALTERNATIVE OF EXCESSIVE EVIL.

Lord BATHURST observed, that it was not possible for us to avoid war sooner or later; that, next year, Buonaparte's power would be more formidable than this year; that we went to war to secure ourselves against alarming danger.

Lord GRENVILLE said, that we were under the fatal necessity of going to war; that war was not only necessary but unavoidable; that there was no option left us, nor any long time for deliberation; that we were placed by an imperious necessity in a state to do what could not be avoided; that in this situation we were called on to adopt the means calculated to avert the greatest dangers. No words of which he was master; nothing that the page of history recorded, appeared adequate to impress on their Lordships' minds the situation in which we were now placed. If such means were required from any, to place in full view the dangers of removing the barriers against French ambition and aggression, and the necessity that must exist if they were not removed, he should despair.

What

State it

Mr. GRATTAN said, that, as to the ability of opposing aggression, he hoped none would live to see the time when England, together with the rest of Europe, would be obliged to truckle before France, and when these islands would seek an humble situation under the French Imperial Eagle. would be our situation if we abandoned our alliance? as you please, it must be first of all an armed peace. nister would venture to disarm the country in such a case. This armed peace would be followed by the evils of a corruption of manners, and a vastly increased expenditure; and that would be followed by a renewal of war. You might then have no alliance, certainly not so strong an alliance as you have; while

No Mi

*

your enemy would be confirmed in his title, and have full op. portunity to arm himself. Instead of fighting for the French crown, you would give him the chance of fighting for the English crown......... .You are not to consider about what money you must spend, BUT WHAT FORTUNES YOU MAY BE ABLE TO KEEP. On the very principle of economy, you are to consider that you will not expend more by war than by remaining at peace, with the demands of a war establishment.

Mr. PLUNKETT said, that he considered that we had, in fact, no option between peace and war. As for peace, we could have no more than a feverish, unrefreshing dream of peace still haunted by the spectre of war. In point of finances, we should find a peace with a war establishment would be much greater than war. If we did not now go to war in conjunction with all the great powers of Europe, we would soon be reduced to a war single-handed against France. If we did not now invade France, and carry on the war upon her territories, the time might come when our country would become the seat of war, and we would fall unpitied and despised. If we were now to turn our back upon the great powers that were our Allies, we would deserve that all nations should turn their backs upon us, when we began to feel the consequences of our impolicy.

Lord MILTON observed, that it was better to have war with the advantages of war, than peace without the advantages of peace; and considering, as he did, that no faith could be placed in the present ruler of France, he thought the only real security we could have was to be found in a vigorous war.

Lord CASTLEREAGH said, when the proper period arrived, he was prepared to justify them as carrying into execution, not only in substance, but almost in all the details, that plan which had been formed by a statesman, from whom he, and those who acted with him, must ever feel the highest deference and admiration-Mr. PITT. He (Mr. Pitt), when contemplating the possible success of a great confederation against France, had considered that general arrangement which had been in a great measure carried into effect, to be that which would prove most conducive to the happiness of Europe. He (Lord Castlereagh) was prepared to show, when the question came before the House, that the decisions which had been made with respect to the immediate interests of this country,