Mr. J. P. Grant observed, that the duty on law poceedings in Scotland, would do away all actions for small debts. The expense would be so great, that no person would originate an action in the Court of Session, unless for sums of great magnitude.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, May 23.

ADDRESS ON THE PRINCE REGENT'S MESSAGE RELATING TO FRANCE.] The order of the day for taking into consideration the Prince Regent's Message being read, the Message was read by the clerk at the table. After which,

The Earl of Liverpool rose and observed, that when he stated that the question he was about to submit to their lordships' consideration was that of peace or war,

Mr. Horner was surprised that the right hon. gentleman should think of increasing the Stamp-duties on the law proceedings of Scotland, particularly as they were already so extremely heavy in that country. Sir S. Romilly declared, that the pro-it was unnecessary to say more to conposed increase would operate as a total denial of justice to the inhabitants of Scotland, where law proceedings were already so extremely expensive, and where, in particular, it should least be imposed. The effect would be to render litigation an instrument of vengeance in the hands of the rich to oppress the poor, as none but the opulent could support the weight of law-suits.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer spoke in a low tone of voice, but we understood him to recommend an assimilation of the Stamp-duties in Scotland with those of England.

vince them that the subject was the most momentous that could possibly come before them for discussion and determination: but, momentous as that question was at all times, and under any circumstances, he was ready to admit, that at this particular period it was more peculiarly important and awful. Deeply feeling, as he did, that war was an alternative always to be avoided if possible, that urgent necessity alone could justify any government in having recourse to it, and that the existence of such a necessity was ever to be seriously deplored, he was aware that, independent of these considerations-independent of the general desire that ought always to prevail to avoid that extremity, there were circumstances which rendered the alternative of war more peculiarly to be deprecated. After the protracted course of hostilities in which this country had been engaged, after the years, the long series of years, in which we had been driven to carry on the contest almost without intermission,

Sir J. Newport deprecated such a determination, which was not justified by the peculiar circumstances of the two countries. Mr. J. P. Grant said, that from the nature of the law proceedings in Scotland differing essentially from those in England, an assimilation of the Stamp-duties would be an extreme hardship to the former. He therefore entreated the Chancellor of the Exchequer to postpone the consideration of the question, and in-when at length the period arrived which form himself, by means of the law officers of the crown, on the true state of the

case.

Mr. Horner desired to know how the money to be derived from such a measure would be employed, and whether it was intended for the increase of the salaries of the law officers? He understood that the salary of the Lord Advocate of Scotland was lately raised to 3,000l. per annum, and that of the Solicitor General for Scotland to 1,600l.; he desired to know whether the report of such a misapplication of the public money was correct?

The Chancellor of the Exchequer replied, that the report was correct, as the former salaries of those officers did not seem adequate.

The Report was ordered to be re-committed on Friday.

promised the nation a secure and glorious rest from its toils, when the tempest which had convulsed the civilized world to its foundation had at last subsided, and left behind it the animating prospect of a long and peaceful serenity to repair its ravages; it was undoubtedly most deeply to be lamented that any thing should have occurred to destroy these hopes of tranquillity, and compel us again to have recourse to arms, and to renew the contest against that power and that system which had been the parent of such tremendous calamities. He himself was deeply impressed with this feeling, and he was sure the House must be impressed with the same feeling, that after an incessant struggle of between 23 and 24 years, after the convulsions which had agitated the nations of Europe, the changes which had taken

lordships undoubtedly to deliberate well, before they yielded to the conviction, that the awful necessity existed of again engaging in war, and adding to those burthens which war had already laid upon the country. Their lordships would take care not to give their sanction to the revival of

avoided consistently with the honour and safety of the nation. Such being his own feelings as to that view of the question, he was ready at the same time to declare his opinion on the other hand, that, if the circumstances of the case were such that it was impossible to rely for a moment on the disposition of the existing Government of France to refrain from aggression, so as to permit this country to enjoy the advantages of peace with safety, then no im. politic love of repose should deter us from boldly looking at our real situation, and manfully meeting the difficulty, even if it could only be met by war.

place in the relations and habits of the different states owing to these perpetual wars, it would have been an object most devoutly to be wished, that some respite, some few years of repose should be vouchsafed to the exhausted nations, that some time should be allowed them to recover from the fatigue of their exertions, to re-hostilities, if the evils of war could be cruit their strength, to repair their resources, and to return to the habits and comforts of peace and tranquillity. He had no difficulty in saying, that no secondary object, no minor concern, no common danger or inconvenience could, under these circumstances, form a justifiable ground for the revival of this already long. protracted and eventful contest. It would have been wise to endure much, to risk much, to put up with no small degree of inconvenience, and even injustice, as far as that could be submitted to with honour, in order to secure the blessings of repose. If the state of things in France had been settled in such a manner as to afford any Having submitted these observations as reasonable security for the continuance of to the motives which in his judgment peace, without the most imminent danger should influence the general views of the of destruction to the independence of the House upon any question of war, he had other nations of Europe, even though they now to request their lordships' attention to were not settled in that way which might the grounds upon which this particular be considered as most favourable to the question was proposed for their consideraparticular interests of France itself, as well tion. First, then, as to the justice of the as to the general interests of Europe, he war referred to in the Message; and this should say that under the circumstances justice was to be viewed with reference in which this country and many of the to the character of Buonaparté, as well continental Powers stood, hostilities ought as with regard to the nature of our renot to be re-commenced. He thought it lations with our Allies. If former disright at the outset of the observations cussions were within the recollection of which he had to submit to their lordships, the House, if the conduct of Buonaparté thus to state openly and fairly what his were not altogether forgotten, he could impression was as to the general principle; not feel that it would be at all necessary and he did so in order to show that he was to labour this part of the question. Yet not insensible to the disadvantages of en- there were some points from which he gaging in war at any time, and more par- could not properly abstain with reference ticularly at the present moment: but the to Buonaparte, especially when it was question now was, whether from the long considered, that the present state of things and lamentable experience which we had in France, which obliged us to resort to had of the system which had been inva- the alternative of war, was owing to that riably pursued by the Government now individual's resumption of the Governexisting in France, they could entertainment, in direct violation of the express any reasonable hope whatever that treaties provisions of a solemn Treaty. He was would be regarded, or that violence and aware, that it had been alleged that this aggression would be refrained from for a Treaty was violated towards Buonaparté longer period than that which would be himself; but even if that allegation were necessary effectually to prepare the means correct, he was prepared to maintain that for the renewal of the same course which it would not justify the conduct of that had already brought upon Europe such person. Into the merits of that allegation, dreadful calamities. The question now however, he was not on this occasion diswas, whether it was possible for us to re- posed to enter; but, admitting the fact of main at peace, and to enjoy the advan- the violation, still he would contend, that, tages of peace. It was the duty of their according to no established principle of

and that without any defalcation whatever on the part of the Allies towards that individual.

In order to comprehend the principle of the Treaty thus violated by Buonaparté, he had only to call their lordships' recol

political morality-according to no writer, upon the law of nations, was Buonaparté justified in violating his Treaty with the Allies, for they could not be even stated to be any party to the alleged violation towards him. Of that violation, indeed, they were not apprised, until Buonaparte'slection to the transactions which took obligations towards them were totally set aside, and therefore the violation since complained of on his part, offered no justification for his conduct with respect to them. If any representation had been made to the Allies by Buonaparté, before his departure from Elba, upon the subject of the violation complained of, and he had not in consequence obtained any redress, then he might have preferred a charge against the Allies, and pleaded that charge as some justification of his own departure from the contract. But, in point of fact, no such representation was made; and, therefore, as it was not the existence of injury, but the refusal of redress, which, in a case of this nature, could constitute any fair ground of complaint, the alleged violation of the Treaty with Buonaparté could furnish no justification for his breach of Treaty with the Allies. But the fact was, that although this alleged violation of Treaty with Buonaparté had been so much animadverted upon in France, and elsewhere, since that individual's departure from Elba, that person himself never mentioned or alluded to any such reason for his conduct in any of the proclamations which he published upon his first invasion of the French territory. On the contrary, he distinctly stated in these proclamations, that he returned to France in order to resume the authority from which he had withdrawn in a moment of difficulty. Thus no allusion whatever was made to that violation of Treaty, which had been since set up by his partisans as a justification for the conduct of Buonaparté in returning to France. But it was his firm opinion, that Buonaparté had no such justification in his view when he returned to France. On the contrary, he fully believed that that person had always that return in contemplation, even including the time when he executed the Treaty of Fontainbleau and signed his abdication. Buonaparté in fact disregarded any such justification. He had deliberately determined to violate the Treaty under which he abdicated; and in returning to France, he had committed that violation, not in any minor or comparatively unimportant provision, but radically and essentially in its very spirit and principle,

place at Paris in the months of April and May 1814. From those transactions, the grounds upon which Buonaparté abdicated, could be easily understood. But before the Allies entered Paris a proclamation was issued, declaratory of their resolution not to treat with Buonaparté. He did not think it necessary to enter into any defence of the conduct of the Allies at Paris; but it would be recollected, that Buonaparté's déchéance, or forfeiture of the throne of France, was proclaimed to be the fundamental condition of peace with France. This condition was, indeed, distinctly stated in the preambles to the two Treaties concluded at Paris in 1814, because the maintenance of that condition was felt to be essential to the security of peace, and upon the establishment of this condition the Allied armies consented to evacuate France. From these documents, then, and from a review of the whole of the proceedings alluded to, it would be seen that the exclusion of Buonaparté from the Government of France was the main principle of the Treaty by which that person and France were pledged to the Allies. Upon the recognition of that principle indeed, and the restoration of the Bourbons, the Allies granted much better terms to France than would otherwise have been conceded; and this grant was made under the calculation, that the change would afford such a security for the observance of the Treaty and for the general tranquillity of Europe, as could not be looked for under the Government of Buonaparté. But from the whole bearing of these transactions, as well as from the specific terms of the Treaty of Fontainbleau, it must be obvious, that the fundamental principle and main object of the Allies was the dissolution of the Government of Buonaparté. This dissolution, then, was not a minor or a subordinate part of the Treaty, but formed its very essence; and therefore Buonaparté, by his return to France, fundamentally violated his Treaty with the Allies. Thus, that individual had absolved the Allies from all obligation towards him, and furnished a full justification for placing themselves in a state of war with regard to France.

So far as to the justice of the war | fying this extraordinary pretension, by against France, upon which he trusted he concluding the Treaty of Luneville. By had satisfied the House; but, then, ano- this Treaty every reflecting man in this ther question remained to be considered, country was naturally alarmed; for such namely, whether the war would be just an extension of territory formed à just with regard to this country, that is, with cause of alarm-but the avowed object of reference to the interest of our own sub- French ambition being accomplished, jects. With a view to this branch of the some calculation was entertained of future subject, it would be for their lordships to tranquillity. What, however, was the subdecide this question, whether the war was sequent conduct of the maker of the Treaty necessary on our part. That it was of Luneville? By that Treaty, the indepen necessary under all the circumstances of dence of the Cisalpine, the Ligurian, the our situation-that the case formed a Batavian and Helvetic Republics was soparamount call upon us to engage in war lemnly recognized; but, notwithstanding from a sense of our dearest interests-from that recognition, this systematic violator a regard to our security and our honour, of treaties invaded all these Republics, was his fullest conviction; that, indeed, and either actually incorporated them that security and honour could not be with France, or placed them in a state of provided for, nor the danger with which dependence upon his own power. It was we were menaced effectually averted impossible, then, for Europe to look to without opposing the common enemy, he such a man for the observance of any had not the slightest doubt. The first ques- treaties or contracts. But, independently tion which naturally occurred to every of the conduct of Buonaparté in those thinking mind upon Buonaparte's return instances-independently of what Holland from Elba and his resumption of the Go- and Italy had suffered through his violavernment of France, was this, whether tion of faith, let their lordships look to his there could be any security for peace with proceedings throughout, and it would be that country, so long as that individual found, that no degree of friendly adheretained his power? and if not, the next rence, or even servile submission, could question was, whether it would be safe or conciliate his fidelity or gratify his ambipolitic to delay our attack upon that tion. Let their lordships look to Spain, power? As to the first question, we had where he had experienced, in fact, the the melancholy advantage of long expe- most abject subserviency, where all the rience to guide our judgment. We had naval and military force of the country ample opportunity of observing this per had been actually placed at the disposal son's conduct for fourteen years. We of France: yet those circumstances were were not called to decide upon his cha- not sufficient to neutralize the system of racter from any ordinary act of ambition Buonaparté; therefore a revolution was or instance of misconduct. No-for we excited through his machinations, by had witnessed, on the part of this indivi- which the Government was overthrown, dual, decisive proofs of the most unbounded and the present King placed upon the ambition-we had found that no Treaty throne of Spain. But let their lordships concluded by this person was observed look to his subsequent proceedings, even for a moment longer than it suited his to the Government of his own contrivance. convenience that every engagement en- The members of that Government were tered into by him was violated-that he by his treachery seduced into and comwas a man whom no success could satisfy, mitted to prison in France, while his army and whom no disappointment could in- was dispatched to invade Spain. Thus it dispose towards that system of aggrandize- was evident, that neither friendship nor ment upon which his mind was bent, and submission could disarm the purpose or which was evidently inconsistent with the avert the arbitrary views of this individual. tranquillity and general liberty of Europe. It was not with him "Parcere subjectis When the French Revolution took a turn et debellare superbos;" for he bore down towards foreign conquest-when vanity on all alike, whether weak or strong, subprompted the Revolutionists to declare missive or hostile. From the whole of what they presumptuously called the na his acts, indeed, it was obvious that the tural limits of France, extending to the desire of power, and a thirst for dominion, Alps, the Pyrenees, the Rhine, and the formed this person's predominant passion, Ocean, it was the good fortune of Buona- to which passion every consideration of parté to become the instrument for grati- morality and good faith was unreluctantly (VOL. XXXI.)

(Y)