flight. From all that had passed, therefore, he was convinced, that not only the soldiers, but the people, were well affected to Buonaparté. It would have been natural to expect that a man who had sacrificed so many warriors to his ambition, and dragged them to destruction amidst the snows of Russia, or under the poniards of Spain, should be unpopular in the army. He had heard officers of distinction in lord Wellington's army say, however, that they had seen French prisoners, and men who had suffered all the evils and mutilations which humanity could endure, and had never heard one say that he would not joyfully put himself under Napoleon as his captain, and suffer over again for him all that he had already undergone. If so, away went the grounds on which it was hoped to effect his overthrow, or to destroy that army and the nation. He was not singular in making use of the latter expression: for he had lately seen in a foreign paper, that France must be destroyed, and that it must be formed like Germany, into a confederation under one chief, but cease to exist as France. He reproved the loose mode in which the officers who ought to have watched Buonaparté had been instructed. He contended, that Bertrand must have known the intentions of his master at an earlier period than had been mentioned, as he understood he had been in Paris six weeks before Buonaparté had left Elba. He congratulated the noble lord on the animal spirits which he displayed while speaking of the glorious successes of the war, although he wondered that he and Jord Liverpool should not have delivered up their garters to the Prince Regent, until those successes should have been completed. He thought at all events it would be right to see what precautions Government had taken to prevent the occurrence of an event which had occasioned such alarm.

Mr. Wellesley Pole said, that at so late an hour, and after the very full and able discussion which the question had undergone, he should trespass but for a very short time upou the attention of the House. The hon. gentleman who had just sat down, had commenced his speech by an appeal to the candour of his hon. friend (Mr. Grant). He would not allow that any candour was to be found among the gentlemen who sat upon the ministerial bench. He had expressly charged them with a total absence of all candour; and yet that hon. gentleman had himself, after

complaining of want of candour in others, uncandidly and unfairly attributed to his hon. friend (Mr. Grant), one of the most horrible sentiments that ever entered into the mind of man, viz. an earnest wish that the whole French nation might be exterminated! The House, in whose recollection the able speech of his hon. friend was fresh, must know that the imputation was utterly without foundation, and would therefore be able accurately to appreciate the right of the hon. gentleman to impeach the candour of others.

It was not his intention to follow the hon. member through the various topics which he had introduced into his speech; indeed, if he had the ability, he could not do it without being disorderly; for the hon. gentleman had touched upon almost every subject that could possibly be debated, except the question before the House. He had listened, as he always did, with great attention to every part of the hon. gentleman's speech; and he declared most solemnly, that he was unable to determine whether the hon. gentleman_really approved or disapproved of the Treaty of Fontainbleau; whether he agreed with his learned friend who brought forward the motion (Mr. Abercrombie), or with the hon. and learned gentleman (sir James Mackintosh), who spoke later in the debate; for those two learned gentlemen differed most essentially in their opinions respecting that Treaty. The hon. gentleman seemed sometimes to agree with both of his learned friends in turn, and sometimes to differ from them both, so that it was almost impossible to ascertain what his real opinion was. The learned gentleman who opened the debate, had moved for certain papers; but the real, and indeed the only question before the House was this-Whether by the Treaty of Fontainbleau, this country had, or had not the right to take such measures as were necessary to prevent Buonaparte from leaving the island of Elba? This was the first time that the gentlemen on the other side of the House had brought the Treaty of Fontainbleau into question. They now called upon ministers to lay before Parliament certain papers to show what precautionary measures had been taken to prevent the escape of Buonaparté, and what information they had received respecting his intentions; but their real intention was to discuss now, for the first time, the merits of the Treaty of Fontainbleau. The gentlemen on the other side of the House were

not to have signed the Treaty under all the circumstances of the case. He begged the House to consider what was the situation of his noble friend when he arrived at Paris. He found that the Treaty had been agreed upon by the rest of the Allies, and the Provisional French Govern ment; and it was represented to him, that unless that Treaty was carried into effect, the marshals and the soldiery would not submit; and that, on the other hand, if it were agreed to, they would become good and faithful subjects to the King. If under these circumstances he had refused to accede to the Treaty, the consequences might have been most fatal, the Allies might have been placed in a situation of great peril, and the whole Coalition perhaps have been broken up.

If, then, the noble lord had acted properly in acceding to a part of the stipulations of that Treaty, the next question to consider was, whether any part of the subsequent conduct of the Allies was a breach of that Treaty? If the Treaty was a valid one, they were bound, as he had said before, to treat Buonaparté as a sovereign prince; they could not therefore set guards about his person, and treat him like a prisoner. Nothing could be a stronger proof of this, than the speech of the hon. and learned gentleman (sir James Mackintosh); for, after having laid it down in the broadest terms, that the Allies had by that Treaty a full right to adopt any measures that might be necessary to compel Buonaparté to observe its stipulations; after having reasoned at considerable length to maintain this position, he was at last so sensible of not being borne out by the terms of the Treaty in his argument, that he declared, that when he had seen the Treaty abroad, he was fully persuaded that there must be a secret article (kept back out of delicacy to Buonaparte), giving to the Allies the power to take measures for their security against his future proceedings; and that he had not conversed with one rational man who was not of the same opinion. The learned gentleman declared, that he could not conceive how the Allies should have signed the Treaty without a secret article giving to them the necessary power of coercion; it was obvious, therefore, that the learned gentleman must be of opinion that the public articles of the Treaty did not give them such a power, and that therefore the British Government could not have been justified in taking

the steps which he had contended they ought to have taken.

With regard to the supposed infractions of the Treaty, there was not the slightest foundation for any of the allegations that had been made upon that subject, unless it were as to the pecuniary part of the stipulations, with which Great Britain had nothing to do: he did not know whether it was agreed that the money should be paid quarterly; he certainly wished that it had been regularly paid; but any irre. gularity upon that subject did not warrant Buonaparté in considering the Treaty as being thereby annulled. He ought in the first instance to have remonstrated against what he conceived to be a violation of the Treaty, and if redress was not granted, he would then have been justified in having recourse to stronger measures. But he had made no remonstrance, nor had com. plained in any way, or in any quarter, that the stipulations in his favour had not been observed. With respect to what had been said about the infraction of the Treaty, as far as concerned Maria Louisa, it was equally void of foundation. When his noble friend left the Congress, he understood that she was to have the duchies of Parma, Placentia, and Guastalla, or such an equivalent for them as she should agree to accept. It was not necessary to consult Buonaparté upon the subject; the duchies were to be conferred on her in full sovereignty; and as an independent sovereign, Maria Louisa was perfectly competent to decide for herself. It had been said, that Buonaparté had urged these supposed infractions of the Treaty as a justification of his conduct in in、ading France; but that was a mistake. It was true, that after he had been some time in France, he did issue the document alluded to by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Whitbread), which, upon reflection, he probably thought might be useful in furnishing arguments, in foreign countries, to those who might be inclined to favour his cause; but in his first Proclamation after he landed in France, he stated, not that the Treaty of Fontainbleau had been violated, but that it never was valid; that he had never given up his rights; and all the time he had been in Elba, his thoughts had been turned to the wrongs sustained by his good people of France, and by himself, and to the means of redressing them. All that had been said, therefore, about the infractions of the Treaty of Fontainbleaucould not bear upon the question; for

enable them either to prepare for a vigorous war, or to insure an honourable and solid peace. The same firmness and the same spirit, he trusted, would bring matters to the same glorious result which had followed the exertions of his noble friend last year, and which he, in a great measure, attributed to his abilities, though we had been told to-night that our success was owing to a mere chance of war. If the House and the country remained true to themselves, he had the most sanguine hope that we should ride triumphant through the storm, and that our situation, notwithstanding all our difficulties, might ultimately be different indeed from that in which we should have stood, if the advice of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Whitbread), and his friends, had been taken, who loudly and repeatedly recommended a peace with Buonaparté when he was in the zenith of his power and his crimes.

Buonaparté had declared, that he never considered it as binding, and that from the time he went to Elba he was constantly watching for a favourable opportunity of breaking it, of restoring to France and the army the glory they had lost, and of returning to his old system-a system which the hon. gentleman opposite had been for years advising this country to tolerate, by suing for peace. [Mr. Whitbread cried, Hear! Hear!] He was not appealing to the candour of the hon. gentleinan; he knew him too well to make so fruitless an experiment; but he was appealing to the candour and to the good sense of the House, and the country. The House and the country would recollect, that year after year the hon. gentleman and his friends had endeavoured by their speeches to damp our hopes and paralize our exertions, by an endless series of predictions as gloomy as they were unfounded. That the hon. gentleman and his friends had despaired of the cause of the Peninsula, and had loudly called upon the Administration of this country to abandon Spain and Portugal to their fate; and that the hon. gentleman himself, not satisfied with year after year urging the House to sue for peace, had even appealed to the people in a pamphlet on the same subject.

Much had been said in the course of the debate about the momentous nature of the present crisis, and the peril to which this country and all Europe were subjected by the return of Buonaparté to power. The hon. and learned gentleman had stated this in very strong terms. He agreed, that it was impossible to use terms too strong in speaking of the momentous crisis in which we were placed, unless it were to be said that this great country was not fully competent to meet the danger, and to repel it. Great and imminent as our danger was, he was confident we were capable of meeting it; and he had no doubt but that the same spirit and the same perseverance which had been manifested in the former struggle by the people, and had been so nobly backed by this House and the Crown, would again bring us through our present difficulties. He fairly owned, that he could hardly conceive Buonaparte's remaining in power to be compatible with the safety of this country; the crisis was certainly most dangerous. But the House had already done much to avert the danger, by strengthening the hands of Government in a manner to

POSTAGE OF EAST INDIA LETTERS.] Mr. Tierney presented a Petition from the merchants, ship-owners, and others, interested in the trade of India, praying relief in a matter of which the petitioners complained relative to the postage of letters to India. He begged leave to call the attention of the House to an Act which had passed last session, subjecting letters sent to India with a charge of postage. Up to the time of the passing of that Act, the letters to India had always been carried out by the regular ships of the India Company, which were all known to have their voyages ascertained and fixed, and by which of course those who had friends, relatives, or commercial connexions in India could be certain of their letters being carried safe and direct to the place they wished to send them; or if their correspondents should happen to be in the interior of the country, they were sure their letters would be landed at the port