FRANCE. Commercial Decree, signed Napoleon, and dated at the Thuilleries, Jan. 11, 1808; .

Napoleon, &c. upon the report of our Minister of Finances, seeing our decrees of the 23d November and 11th December, 1807; with the concurrence of our Council of State, we liave decreed and do decree as follows:-Art, 1. When a vessel shall eater into a French port, or in that of a country occupied by our armies, any man of the crew, or a passenger, who shall declare to the principal of the Custom House, that the said ship comes from England or her colonies or countries occupied by English troops, or that it has been visited by an English vessel, shall receive a third part of the produce of the net sale of the ship and cargo, if it is known that his declaration is exact.Art. 2. The principal of the Custom House, who shall receive the declaration mentioned in the preceding article, shall, in conjunction with the Commissary of Police, who shall be called on for that purpose, and the two principal custom house officers of the port, shall cause each of the crew and pas sengers to undergo, separately, the interrogatory prescribed by the second article of our decree of the 23d November, 1807.-Art. 3. Any functionary or agent of government, who shall be convicted of having favoured the contravention of our decrees of the 23d of November and 17th December, 1807, shall be prosecuted in the criminal court of the department of the Seine, which shall be formed into a special tribunal for this purpose, and punished, if convicted, as if guilty of high treason;—Art. 4. Our ministers are charged, each in bis respective department, with the execution of the present decree.

HOLLAND:-Decree against Sweden, signed by the King of Holland, and dated on the 18th of January, 1809..

Louis Napoleon, by the grace of God and the constitution of the kingdom, King of Holland, and Constable of France.Whereas we have received information that the orders adopted relative to the blockade of the British islands, have not been carried in

at war with Sweden and England, We have decreed, and hereby decree as follows:→→ Art. I. Every Swedish ship which shall enter the ports of this kingdom shall be immediately seized, and also all Swedish mer chandize shall be confiscated.II All Swe-: dish subjects, who may have heretofore exercised diplomatic functions within ourkingdom, or who may have served as consuls or commercial agents, and who still remain in Holland, are required to leave the kingdom immediately upon the publication of this decree.-III. All other Swedish sub-> jects who may be found in our ports, or other parts of our kingdom, shall immediate-d ly be arrested, and treated as prisoners of: war.-IV. The measures at present in force for the blockade of the British islands, shall, in like manner, and without exception, be made applicable to Sweden.-V. Our ministers of finance, justice, and police, are charged with the execution of the present: decree, which shall be proclaimed at all places where its publication may be neces→ sary.

PRUSSIA.Declaration against England. Dated at Munich, Dec. 1, 1807.! The King being obliged, by the 27th article of the treaty of peace of Tilsit, con- : cluded on the 9th of July, 1807, to shut, without exception, the Prussian ports and states against the trade and navigation of England, as long as the present war lasted between England and France, his Majesty has not hesitated to take progressively the most appropriate measures to fulfil bis: engagements.In directing these measures, his Majesty did not dissemble the prejudice and loss which would result to the commerce of his dominions in general and that of his subjects, who, by a long series of misfor. » tunes, have acquired new rights to his paternal solicitude and benevolence; but his Ma- . jesty yielded to the consolatory hope, that the mediation offered by Russia to England, by accelerating the return of a definitive peace between G. Britain and France, would soon bring about an order of things more congenial to the particular interests of eachr power. The King has been deceived in his jest expectation; the events that have taken place since, and which are too well known': to render it necessary to recapitulate them, far from bringing the so much desired period of general peace nearer, have only placed it! at a greater distance. All communication is: broken off between Russia and England. The declaration of his Majesty the Emperor

of all the Russias, published on the 26th Oct. proves that there is no longer any relation between those two powers. His Prussian Majesty, intimately connected by all his relations with the cause and system of the continental neighbouring and friendly powers, has no other rules of conduct than his duties founded upon the interests of his states, and the obligation contracted by a solemn treaty. -Conformably to these principles his Majesty, setting aside those considerations which he bad hitherto respected, in the vain hope for a speedy general pacification; and having refused, since the mission of Lord Hutchinson, to receive at his court any English diplomatic agent, has just ordered his legation at London to quit England as soon as possible, and return to the Continent, -His Majesty the King of Prussia, in making known the resolutions which his engagements and the interest of his monarchy impose upon him as a duty, declares by these presents, that, till the restoration of a definitive peace between the two belligerent powers, there shall be no relation between Prussia and England.-FREDERICK WILLIAM.

PORTUGAL.

·Decree by General Junot for confiscating English property. - Dec. 4, 1807.

All goods, jewels, and silver, as well as moveable and landed property of any nature whatsoever, belonging to any individual subject to Great Britain, found in any territory of the Portuguese dominions, shall be confiscated All goods of British manufacture, of any kind whatsoever, shall be also contiscated. It is expressly ordained, that any person of whatever class, who shall have in his possession any sum or goods belonging to subjects of Great Britain, shall appear and declare the same in the course of three days, at the Secretary's Office, M. Legoy, appointed commissary ad interim, whose residence is at No. 10, opposite the Fountain of the Lorette; and in the interior parts of Portugal these declarations are to be made before the magistrate of the place.Any person who shall not make a true and exact declaration, shall forfeit ten times the sum of the object so declared, and shall receive besides corporal punishment, if the object should deserve such Any goods or property which may have been any ways concealed by either Portuguese or French merchants, or those of any other nation, shall be declared in the same manner under the like penalties. The administrator general of the finances, and the regency council, are charged with the execution of this decree, 121

PORTUGAL. -Proclamation of the Inquisitor General. Dited at Lisbon, under the Seal of the Holy Office, Dec. 22, 1807.

Don Joseph Maria de Mello, titular bishop of Algalva, inquisitor-general of this kingdom, member of her majesty's council, and her confessor.To all the faithful of the holy church, health, peace, and the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, our Saviour and God:

-The place of inquisitor general of thiskingdom which we occupy, unworthy of it as we are; the holy episcopal character with which we are invested; the exemplary zeal with which the most eminent and venerable cardinal patriarch of Lisbon has just recommended, with so touching an unction, in his last pastoral letter, the preservation of tranquillity, peace, and Christian union, necessary in all times, and above all in the present; all these considerations impose upon us the duty of concurring on our side, and as far as we can, in a salutary object, and without which we cannot hope for any happinesseither upon earth, or, which ought more to concern us, in the life to come. We address them to all the faithful of the holy church, to the inhabitants of this city and kingdom," we conjure them to be attentive and docile to the wise and pacific instructions of their venerable father and pastor, in a circumstance which concerns their present fate and their eternal happiness. We can do nothing better than to recall to them the paternal advice of that great prelate. Let them consi

der the situation in which we are, the favours which the Divine Goodness has heaped upon fis, in the midst of our tribulations : let them bless God in all things'; let them adore with an humble and contrite heart the immutable decrees of Providence, and let them be grateful for the innumerable benefits we have received from his all-powerfulhand.-Let us reckon amongst these signal benefits, the peace and good order which have and do reign in this kingdom since a great army has come to our succour-We are certain of our happiness if we know how to profit by it--we enjoy equal security botto in our houses and out.Let us not forget that we owe these advantages to the zeal and activity of the general in chief who commands us, and whose virtues we have long known; that the army which is in the midst of us is that of his Majesty the Emperor of the French and King of Italy, Napoleon the Great; that that Monarch has been sent by God to protect religion; and render people happy; that he will pour upon us the blessings of peace, if we love each other with? fraternal charity that by that means reli,!

321]

TO

WILLIAM ROSCOE, Eɔq. LETTER II.

SIR,

Before I enter upon the matter proposed to be treated of in this letter, give me leave to request your attention to the letter of a correspondent, which I shall insert by way of postscript to this, and in which, as you will perceive, the "incident" of the assassin is regarded as an invention of Mr. Fox himself. I do not say, that I adopt the opinion of my correspondent; yet, I must confess, that he has staggered me; and, however reluctant my readers may be to acknowledge an English statesman to have been guilty of such an act of meanness, they will, doubtless, be more reluctant to shut their ears against the truth. The matter ought to be cleared up. It was strange, that the assassin should be taken to Mr. Fox's, house; that he should not have been talked with in the presence of any third person; that police-officers, and not king's messengers, should have to deal with him; that there should have been no talk about the matter, at the time when he arrived, or when he was sent away; and, that the whole should remain a profound and impenetrable secret, 'till the very moment that the negociation papers were laid before parliament. I should like to have this matter inquired into. The messenger, or police-officer, who brought the assassin up from Gravesend, and who took him to and from Mr. Fox, will be able to say that he did it. Some of the police-magistrates will be able to say, that they committed the man to prison; or, at least, the jailor will be able to produce some record of the receipt and delivery of this famous person. Some inquiry of this sort is necessary, not only to the vindication of the conduct of Mr. Fox, but also to that of the character of the English government; for, what can be more injurious to that character, than the supposition, that the miniter for foreign affairs, by collusion with his colleagues, had recourse to such a stratagem for the purpose of opening the way to a negociation with the enemy? Pray, Sir, think

[322

of this; and, be assured, that, until the matter be cleared up, there will generally prevail most serious doubts, not as to whether there was any reality in the plot at Passy, but, as to whether the honour of the invention belongs to the late ministry, or to Mr. Talleyrand; for, as to its being an invention, by one or the other, there is no doubt at all. This is a subject, which, in all likelihood, would never have been agitated, had it not been for your meddling indiscretion; and, therefore, upon you it devolves as a duty to clear the matter up, so as to remove the impression which your revival of it has produced.

Now for the remainder of your pamphlet. In describing the events of the last continental war, you have occasion again to speak of the conduct of Prussia, and you call her taking possession of Hanover an indecent seizure" but, we never hear you talk of any act of indecency committed by France, though you had before spoken of the cession" of that electorate to Prussia by France. How could it be an "indecent seizure, &£ it was a "cession?" All, however, are criminal in your eyes, except Napoleon. If he put a king in possession of an electorate, the act is a cession," on his part, in virtue of his "right," as conqueror; but, ou the part of the power who receives it from him, if that power fall under his displeasure, the act of receiving is "an indecent seizure." Well might you, in your preface, make an attempt to ward off the charge of partiality for France.

Having brought us down to the treaty of Tilsit you say: "of the part which Great "Britain acted in this dreadful struggle, it "is not necessary to say much. The inef-.

ficiency of that union between her and "Russia, which had been so triumphantly "dwelt upon, as likely to restrain, or over66 turn the power of France, soon became "manifest." And then you proceed to state, that we were utterly unable to send a single man to assist her, or to make any diversion in her favour. Upon this latter point there are two opinions; and, you will observe, that the Emperor of Russia, that fa

L

mous Autocrat, whose offer of mediation you choose to regard as sincere and equitable, has declared to the world, that your friends, the late ministers, might have sent him men and money and have made diversions in his favour. I, for my part, am of a contrary opinion; and, if I blame them at all for their conduct in that war, it was for sending money to Prussia, and for attempting a diversion in Egypt. But, who was it, that" dwelt so triumphantly" upon the union of England and Russia? Not I. Not the nation, who never expected any good from it. Not the then opposition; because, whatever they might think, they would take excellent care to say nothing, that might run the risk of implying approbation of the conduct of their rivals for power and profit. Who was it; then? Why, the late ministers; those men, for whom, upon every occasion that offered, during your short-lived senatorship, you voted. It was they who triumphed; and you, Sir, were one of those, who, tacitly, at least, joined in the triumph, while I was using the utmost of my endeavours to guard the nation against being deceived by the hopes and expectations, which you held forth, as the consequence of the union, of which, now that it.has failed, you stand forward to speak so contemptuously. I thought, that the union was a wild project; I thought, that the states against which France was drawing the sword, were rotten to the core; I thought, that there was a moral cause, more, powerful than her arms, working for France; I thought, that Napoleon would

"reach

Petersburgh by May day," unless the Emperor subinitted to his terms of peace. All this I thought; but, all this I said, even before the French troops began their march against Russia; and, if you had thought the same; or if you had anticipated the consequences of the union, at which you now laugh, why did you not say so, at the time and in the place, when and where your opinions might have been adopted by others? A person, not then in parliament, may, with perfect consistency now, for the first time, express his disapprobation of the refusal of the terms of France in 1806, and tell us to look at the consequences of that refusal, connected as it was with a new coalition project; but you, who were then in parliament, who said not one word in the way of disapprobation of the rupture of the negociation or of the forming of the new coalition, stand now self-accused of a want either of spirit or of principle.

The Danish Expedition is a most copious topic with you, as, indeed, might have been expected; and, to say the truth, if you haye

Difcounts. I

failed in making your readers believe, that it was marked with every character of atrocity, the fault is not in your want of good will to that purpose. According to you, the Danes have, all along, observed (a wise and temperate policy (not excepting their league with Russia and Sweden in 1801); they have maintained a firm and undeviating independence; neither influenced by intrigues nor intimidated by threats (not excepting the plea which they made of the threats of Rus sia for entering into the coalition of 1801); they were, indeed, "naturally devoted to our interests." These are falsehoods so notorious, that one is surprised how you could have expected them to pass for truths amongst any portion of even the least informed of the people of England. The Danes themselves acknowledged, nay, they pleaded in justification of their conduct, in 1801, when they joined in a coalition to compel England to give up the exercise of the right of search, that they were unable to resist the commands of Russia; and they have since acknowledged, that they withdrew their troops from the frontiers of Holstein upon the threats of France; and, with these facts, so well proved, so completely undenied, you cooly assert, that they have undeviatingly preserved a dignified independence, unmoved alike by blandishments and by threats. With a like adherence to truth you proceed through a detail of the several cir cumstances of the expedition, the merits of which having been so amply discussed already, shall now be passed over. But, there is one passage in this part of your pamphlet, which deserves particular attention. In speaking of the doctrines, which have been held, upon this occasion, you tell your readers, that a reverend divine has lately asserted, from the pulpit, in the face of a learned university," that the nations of the earth have

66

no laws in common, and that, where "there is no law, there can be no transgres"sion. That they are to be considered as so many wild beasts, and that the strong"est, when it has the power, has also the right to destroy the weakest." Now, Sir, my firm belief is, that this is a falshood of your own inventing; and, if there were no other reason for this my opinion, the false statements which I have already noticed, in other parts of your pamphlet, would be sufficient; but, why did you not name this reverend divine? Or, if that would have been to show a bad taste, why not point out the particular occasion? Why leave the designation so very bald, if not for the obvious purpose of avoiding detection? That some such words may have been made use of, by way of