the British Ministry to their entering on the proposed negotiation, in the following terms. 66 "The proposal to his Majesty to send negotiators to Paris, unaccompanied as "it is with any ostensible and unequi"vocal return on the part of France, for "the declarations already made in his Majesty's name, is so far from being a proof of any such reciprocal disposition, "that it can be construed no otherwise by His Majesty, than as implying an unjustifiable doubt of the sincerity of "his Majesty's professions." 66 On perusing this passage one is at a loss to conceive upon what possible grounds it can be justified. When two countries are at war, and a proposition has been made to each of them by a neutral state, to enter upon a pacific negotiation; when that proposition has been accepted by one of them, and such acceptance has been communicated by the mediating power to the other, who then desires that ambassadors may be appointed to enter upon the consideration of the subject, is there any thing extraordinary, or informal, in such a proceeding? or is it not, in common apprehension and common sense, the only reasonable plan that the parties can adopt for effecting their purpose? No, says Mr. Canning; as His Majesty has given a pledge of his own pacific dispositions, it is requisite that a pledge, equally solemn and authentic, should be given by France, before his Majesty can be called upon to make any further advance. Was not the wish expressed by the French government, that the British cabinet would send negotiators, a pledge? Was not the authority given by France to the Austrian ambassador to furnish such negotiators with passports, a pledge? and are not acts of more authenticity than professions? But what follows is yet more extraordinary. It is not suffi cient for the British Ministry to assert that the invitation to send ambassadors affords no pledge that the French are de sirous of entering upon a negotiation, but it is on the contrary to be considered as a positive insult, "and can be con"strued no otherwise by His Majesty, "than as implying an unjustifiable doubt "of the sincerity of His Majesty's profes"sions." What! does the express invitation to His Britannic Majesty to send ambassadors, imply an unjustifiable doubt of his sincerity? How then could the French government have testified their belief that His Majesty was sincere? Surely causes of rejection and of repul sion must have been difficult to discover, when the very act, which of all others manifests the conviction of the French government that the British Ministry are sincere, is selected as a new ground of offence, and adduced as a proof of an unjustifiable suspicion on their part of the sincerity of His Majesty's professions. Mr. Canning then proceeds to inform the Austrian ambassador, "that His Ma jesty is willing to treat with France; but he will treat only on a footing of perfect equality. equality. That he is ready to treat with the allies of France; but "the negotiation must equally embrace "the interests of the allies of Great "Britain." "That as soon as the basis of negoti"ation shall have been satisfactorily ascertained, and an unexceptionable place "of negotiation agreed upon, His Majesty "will be prepared to name Plenipoten"tiaries to meet those of the other pow"ers engaged in the war; but His Majesty will not again consent to send "his Plenipotentiaries to a hostile ca'pital." These paragraphs, separated from their context, are such as would probably have been considered by the Austrian minister as a satisfactory answer; but when combined with what precedes and what follows, cannot be adopted as the ground of any proceeding whatever. Whilst the British Ministry still insist that reference shall be had to the conditional answer given by them in April, as containing propositions indispensible to the opening a negotiation ; whilst His Majesty still conceives, that an unjustifiable doubt is entertained of his sincerity, how is it possible to found any measures on the more conciliatory sentiments here avowed? Lest however the Austrian minister, finding in the same note a great variety of discordant matter, should, in his zeal to promote his object, think himself justifiable in selecting only such as might suit the purposes of reconciliation; lest he should apply again to the French government and obtain a confirmation of his powers, a more explicit avowal of their pacific disposition, a statement of the basis of the treaty, or a change in the place proposed for the theatre of negotiation, the British Secretary of State concludes his very extraor dinary note, with an effectual prohibition against the further interference of the Austrian ambassador; informing him, "that His Majesty had not directed him " to give any authority to the Prince de Starhemberg to speak in the name of His 65 |