and anxious to do what we called on other | five or tenfold, would they not require a nations to perform. proportionate increase of slaves to cultiMr. Serjeant Onslow thought the adop-vate the soil? Would any man say, that tion of the amendment would render the permitting such an application of British Bill a solemn mockery, and make it capital was not perpetuating that detestwholly nugatory. He said that Spain able traffic? But it was doing more also; and Portugal were more than usually de- it was positively affording a premium on sirous to stock their colonies with slaves, the produce of those islands, belonging to which they never could accomplish with- governments which had not yet abolished out the assistance of British capital. In the Slave-trade, and, at the same time, support of this opinion, the learned Ser- inflicting a penalty on the colonies of such jeant mentioned the sentiments of the sovereigns as had listened to the voice of Spanish ambassador. In allusion to Cuba justice and humanity, spoken to them by particularly, British capital was advanced the British nation. He was quite sure to proprietors in that island, upon mort- that the predictions of commercial loss that gages of land and other property; and would be sustained by abolishing that supby means of that, Cuba was rapidly ad-plementary and auxiliary Slave-trade, vancing in agricultural improvement, and in the increase of its slaves. If the committee did not pass the Bill as it originally stood, they would hold out a premium to other nations, to the detriment of our own colonies. But, independent of all commercial considerations, the Bill ought to receive their assent, as it would be a complete answer to all the calumnies thrown out by other countries, on the motives which influenced England in desiring the general abolition of the Slave Trade, and who said that it was a measure rather of policy than of humanity. He declared, that sooner than admit the amendment, he would reject the Bill altogether. would prove as groundless as the prophecies that were uttered when the original measure was discussed. If they rejected the principle of the clause, they might as well reject the Bill, for where the strength of temptation, and the facility of evasion were so great, nothing but making the practice penal could prevent its existence. Mr. Douglas contended, that while the Spanish trade was supported by British capital, it was England who carried on the Slave-trade; and said that it was the opinon of sir Henry Wellesley, that the Spanish trade was carried on solely by British capital. He thought the House ought to consider whether the clause was necessary, and if necessary, it ought to be adopted. For his part, he conceived it his duty to connect it with the original abolition. Mr. Baring lamented that the gentlemen who had opposed the amendment had such little practical knowledge of trade, for he was convinced that their ob Mr. Marryat thought that the other clauses of the Bill were effectual and valid provisions, and would have a beneficial operation, even though the particular one under discussion, to which he had a decided objection, were thrown out. If that clause were agreed to, it would interdict all our trade with the Brazils, the Caraccas, and Buenos Ayres; and when it was re-jections arose from misconception. He membered, according to documents before the House, that the amount of that trade was ten millions annually, would it be said it was not an object worth retaining? He was at a loss to conceive for what purpose it was introduced. It could not be for the sake of abolishing the Slave-trade, because it related to a trade which was perfectly innocent and legitimate. Sir James Mackintosh said, he really could not comprehend the proposition that British capital being vested in the transactions of foreign planters in islands where the Slave-trade was still carried on, did not tend to encourage and promote that trade. Suppose those planters, by the use and application of that capital, were enabled to increase their plantations § disclaimed every wish of increasing the Slave-trade, and believed, most conscientiously, that not an additional slave would be created by it. He could not think any commercial advantages a sufficient justification for the revival of that traffick. He said, that the Slave-trade was regarded with the utmost abhorrence by every English merchant, and nothing could induce them to afford it the least support; but he was convinced, that if the clause in the Bill were known generally, every commercial body in England would send petitions against its enactment. Sir S. Romilly argued against the amendment, which, he said was a solemn mockery, and tended to destroy the prin ciple of the Bill. He asked, would any man in lending his money insist on knowing for what purpose it was designed and contended, that by permitting money to be borrowed on any security, would facilitate the stocking of the Spanish islands with slaves. He objected to the extent of punishment proposed in the Bill; felony was much too severe, as it was at tended with the forfeiture of all a man's goods and chattels. This, he was aware, was the usual routine of legislation; but it arose from the inattention of gentlemen to its nature, and by its extreme severity, rendered many laws totally ineffectual. He thought the offence should be designated a misdemeanour, punishable by fine and imprisonment; the forfeiture being to the amount of two or three times the sum advanced. Mr. W. Smith thought that the object would be as much defeated by allowing those securities to be taken for goods sold, as if it was for money lent. It would require no great ingenuity or contrivance to lend money to promote the Slavetrade, under the appearance of sending goods to the Spanish colonies, which were to be secured by mortgage. Mr. Marryat said, that it was often necessary, in payment for goods sent out, to take such security as could be got. No British merchant would voluntarily lend money on the security of Spanish plantations, as the legal rate of interest there would not reimburse them. To prevent British merchants, however, from getting any security for the payment of goods sent out there, would be highly injurious to the general interests of British trade. Mr. Forbes stated his reasons for sup porting the amendment; he conceived that the original clause was attended with many disadvantages, without attaining the great object it professed to have in view. He was aware that no British merchant would advance capital to support the Slave-trade, but there was nothing to prevent the application of it indirectly to that purpose. Sir J. Newport supported the clause. This country, he said, had already made great and meritorious sacrifices for the destruction of the trade. In order to convince the other nations of Europe that we were thoroughly sincere, he thought we should not object to this further sacrifice. Mr. Barham complained that gentlemen would not assist him in framing such amendments as would attain the object of their general wishes. He would, however, with a desire of gratifying all, pro. pose to the committee, that no security should be taken of lands, houses, slaves, or growing crops, leaving still open all the floating capital. This, he hoped, would meet their approbation. Mr. Wilberforce supported the clause. As to what had been said of the Spanish laws being an obstruction to British mer, chants lending on such security, it must be recollected, that the Spaniards could alter their laws when it suited their interests. They had very lately, in the case of the Slave-trade, altered their laws, so as to allow slaves to be imported in foreign ships. Mr. Serjeant Onslow said, that a persevering legislature would bear down every attempt to evade their enactments. He thought that if they now showed themselves determined to apply a remedy to the evil pointed out to them, there was no danger of their not being able to prevent an evasion of their laws. The Committee divided: For the Amendment 7; Against it 52. Mr. Barham then proposed his amendment on the original clause, to which Mr. Baring objected, and proposed to amend the amendment, by leaving out growing crops and buildings.' Sir James Mackintosh said, the whole object of the clause would be defeated, if it did not apply to growing crops. He hoped the amendment would be negatived. Mr. Marryat said, that if the Bill were to pass without this amendment, it would destroy the foundation of all our commerce with the Spanish and Portuguese colonies. The great advantage possessed by Great Britain in trading with these colonies consisted in the power of making advances. Mr. Barham thought the conduct of the gentlemen who opposed the clause was most extraordinary. He had agreed to leave out ships, buildings, and other matters which they considered objectionable, but this would not satisfy them; they now demanded that growing crops should be exempted from the operation of the Bill; to which he could not consent. Mr. Baring contended, that the exemption of growing crops, while it would be a great convenience to the commerce of the country, would not at all interfere with the object of the hon. gentleman. Mr. Serjeant Onslow opposed the amendment. Mr. Finlay conceived, if the security of the growing crop were not excepted, the effect would be to curtail very important branches of commerce. The Committee then divided: For the Amendment 11; Against it 49. Sir James Mackintosh moved an amend ment to the clause, providing that persons offending against the Act should be treated as felons, which went to enact that they should be punished by fine and imprisonment; the fine in all cases to be three times the amount of the sum lent; a moiety of it to go to the King, and the other moiety to the informer, provided the information should be given within five years after the commission of the offence. A desultory conversation took place between sir J. Mackintosh, Mr. Serjeant Onslow, and Messrs. Bathurst, J. P. Grant, Baring, Finlay, and Marryat, which ended in sir J. Mackintosh agreeing to substitute three years instead of five, and omitting any mention of action for debt. The clause, thus amended, was carried. On the clause, pointing out the mode of trial for offenders against the provisions of the Bill, being read, Mr. Baring objected to it, as trenching on the liberty of the subject. Unless some learned gentleman could explain it satisfactorily to him, he should divide the committee on it. After some observations from Mr. Barham, Mr. J. P. Grant, and sir J. Mackintosh, the Committee divided: For the clause 33; Against it 11. The House then resumed, and the report was ordered to be received on Tuesday. OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION TO THE RUS SIAN AMBASSADOR RELATIVE TO THE DELI. 1. To rescue from the dominion of verance and SECURITY OF EUROPE.] Lord France those countries which it has subCastlereagh moved, That an humble jugated since the beginning of the RevoAddress be presented to his royal high-lution, and to reduce France within its ness the Prince Regent, that he will be former limits, as they stood before that pleased to give directions, that there be time. laid before the House a paper, intituled "Official Communication made to the Russian Ambassador at London on the 19th of January 1805, explanatory of the views which his Majesty and the Emperor of Russia formed for the deliverance and security of Europe." The motion was agreed to, the said Paper was laid on the table of the House, and is as follows: OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION made to the Russian Ambassador at London, on the 19th January, 1805, explanatory (VOL. XXXI.) of the views which his Majesty and the Emperor of Russia formed for the deliverance and security of Europe. The result of the communications which have been made by Prince Czartoriski to his Majesty's Ambassador at St. Peters burgh, and of the confidential explana tions which have been received from your Excellency, has been laid before the King; and his Majesty has seen with inexpressible satisfaction, the wise, dignis fied, and generous policy, which the Emperor of Russia is disposed to adopt, under the present calamitous situation of Europe. His Majesty is also happy to perceive, that the views and sentiments of the Emperor respecting the deliverance of Europe, and providing for its future tranquillity and safety, correspond so en tirely with his own. He is therefore desirous of entering into the most explicit and unreserved explanations on every point connected with this great object, and of forming the closest union of coun cils, and concert of measures, with his Imperial Majesty, in order, by their joint influence and exertions, to insure the cooperation and assistance of other Powers of the continent, on a scale adequate to the magnitude and importance of an undertaking, on the success of which the future safety of Europe must depend. For this purpose, the first step must be, to fix as precisely as possible, the distinct objects to which such a concert is to be directed. These, according to the explanation given of the sentiments of the Emperor, in which his Majesty entirely concurs, appear to be three: 2. To make such an arrangement with respect to the territories recovered from France, as may provide for their security and happiness, and may at the same time constitute a more effectual barrier in future against encroachments on the part of France. 3. To form, at the restoration of peace, a general agreement and guarantee for the mutual protection and security of dif ferent Powers, and for re-establishing a general system of public law in Europe. The first and second objects are stated (N) generally, and in their broadest extent; but neither of them can be properly considered in detail without reference to the nature and extent of the means by which they may be accomplished.-The first is certainly that to which, without any modification or exception, his Majesty's wishes, as well as those of the Emperor, would be preferably directed, and nothing short of it can completely satisfy the views which both Sovereigns form for the deliverance and security of Europe. Should it be possible to unite in concert with Great Britain and Russia, the two other great military Powers of the Continent, there seems little doubt that such a union of force would enable them to accomplish all that is proposed. But if (as there is too much reason to imagine may be the case) it should be found impossible to engage Prussia in the Confederacy, it may be doubted whether such operations could be carried on in all the quarters of Europe, as would be necessary for the success of the whole of this project. The second point of itself involves in it many important considerations. The views and sentiments by which his Majesty and the Emperor of Russia are equally animated in endeavouring to establish this concert, are pure and disinterested. The first view, therefore, with respect to any of the countries which may be recovered from France, must be to restore, as far as possible, their ancient rights, and provide for the internal happiness of their inhabitants; but in looking at this object, they must not lose sight of the general security of Europe, on which even that separate object must principally depend. Pursuant to this principle, there can be no question that, whenever any of these countries are capable of being restored to their former independence, and of being placed in a situation in which they can protect it, such an arrangement must be most congenial to the policy and the feelings on which this system is founded: but there will be found to be other countries among those now under the dominion of France, to which these considerations cannot apply, where either the ancient relations of the country are so completely destroyed that they cannot be restored, or where independence would be merely nominal, and alike inconsistent with security for the country itself, or for Europe happily, the larger number is of the first description. Should the arms of the Allies be successful to the full extent of expelling France from all the dominions she has acquired since the Revolution, it would certainly be the first object, as has already been stated, to re-establish the republics of the United Provinces and Switzerland, the territories of the King of Sardinia, Tuscany, Modena, (under the protection of Austria), and Naples. But the territories of Genoa, of the Italian republic, including the three Legations, Parma, and Placentia; and on the other side of Europe, the Austrian Netherlands, and the States which have been detached from the German Empire on the left bank of the Rhine, evidently belong to the second class. With respect to the territories enumerated in Italy, experience has shown, how little disposition existed in some, and how little means in any, to resist the aggression or influence of France. The King of Spain was certainly too much a party to the system of which so large a part of Europe has been a victim, to entitle the former interests of his family in Italy to any consideration; nor does the past conduct of Genoa, or any of the other States, give them any claim, either of justice or liberality. It is also obvious that these separate petty sovereignties would never again have any solid existence in themselves, and would only serve to weaken and impair the force which ought to be, as much as possible, concentrated in the hands of the chief powers of Italy. It is needless to dwell particularly on the state of the Netherlands. Events have put out of the question the restoration of them to the House of Austria; they are therefore necessarily open to new arrangements, and evidently can never exist separate and independent. Nearly the same considerations apply to the Ecclesiastical Electorates, and the other territories on the left bank of the Rhine, after their being once detached from the Empire, and the former possessors of them indemnified. There appears, therefore, to be no possible objection, on the strictest principles of justice and public morality, to making such a disposition with respect to any of these territories as may be most conducive to the general interests; and there is evidently no other mode of accomplishing the great and beneficent object of reestablishing (after so much misery and bloodshed) the safety and repose of Europe on a solid and permanent basis. It is fortunate too that such a plan of arrangement as is in itself essential to the end proposed, is also likely to contribute, | Duchy of Tuscany (which it is proposed in the greatest degree, to secure the means by which that great end can best be promoted. It is evidently of the utmost importance, if not absolutely indispensable for this purpose, to secure the vigorous and effectual co-operation both of Austria and Prussia; but there is little reason to hope, that either of those Powers will be brought to embark in the common cause, without the prospect of obtaining some important acquisition to compensate for its exertions. On the grounds which have been already stated, his Majesty conceives that nothing could so much contribute to the general security, as giving to Austria fresh means of resisting the views of France on the side of Italy, and placing Prussia in a similar situation with respect to the Low Countries; and the relative situations of the two Powers would naturally make those the quarters to which their views would respectively be directed. In Italy, sound policy would require, that the power and influence of the King of Sardinia should be augmented, and that Austria should be replaced in a situation which may enable her to afford an immediate and effectual support to his dominions, in case of their being attacked. His Majesty sees with satisfaction, from the secret and confidential communications recently received through your Excellency, that the views of the Court of Vienna are perfectly conformable to this general principle, and that the extension at which she aims, might not only safely be admitted, but might even be increased, with advantage to the general interest. In other respects his Majesty entirely concurs in the outline of the arrangement which he understands the Emperor of Russia to be desirous of seeing effected in this quarter. His Majesty considers it as absolutely necessary for the general security, that Italy should be completely rescued both from the occupation and influence of France, and that no powers should be left within it, who are not likely to enter into a general system of defence for maintaining its independence. For this purpose, it is essential, that the countries now composing what is called the Italian Republic, should be transferred to other Powers. In distributing these territories, an increase of wealth and power should undoubtedly be given to the King of Sardinia; and it seems material that his possessions, as well as the to restore to the Grand Duke), should be brought into immediate contact, or ready. communication with those of Austria. On this principle, the whole of the territories which now compose the Ligurian Republic, might, it is conceived, be annexed to Piedmont. Supposing the efforts of the Allies to have been completely successful, and the two objects already discussed to have been fully obtained, his Majesty would nevertheless consider this salutary work as still imperfect, if the restoration of peace were not accompanied by the most effectualmeasures for giving solidity and permanence to the system which shall thus have been established. Much will undoubtedly be effected for the future repose of Europe by these territorial arrangements, which will furnish a more effectual barrier than has before existed against the ambition of France. But in order to render this security as complete as possible, it seems necessary, at the period of a general pacification, to form a treaty to which all the principal Powers of Europe should be parties, by which their respective rights and possessions, as they shall then have been established, shall be fixed and recog nized; and they should all bind themselves mutually to protect and support each other, against any attempt to infringe them :-It should re-establish a general and comprehensive system of public law in Europe, and provide, as far as possible, for repressing future attempts to disturb the general tranquillity; and above all, for restraining any projects of aggrandizement and ambition similar to those, which have produced all the calamities inflicted on Europe since the disastrous æra of the French Revolution.. HOUSE OF LORDS. Monday, May 8. The PROCLAMATION OF LOUIS 18.] Earl of Darnley said, that he wished to put a question to the noble lord opposite, on the subject of a document that had ap-. peared in the public Journals. He could not, perhaps, regularly inquire whether it were an authentic document; but he begged to be informed, whether the Declaration of Louis 18 was authorized by his Britannic Majesty? The Earl of Liverpool replied, that it was not possible for him, consistently with his public duty, to give the noble earl any |