Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

the Catholic body before, and I now repeat it, that unless they adopt a spirit of conciliation, they will never succeed. I will say further, that conciliation is not only necessary to their interest, but essential to their duty, both to the State, and to one another. If Catholic emancipation should not finally be carried, it will be owing, not to the want of candour and consideration on the part of the legislature, but to the want of prudence and discretion on the part of some Catholics, who do not assist the Protestant friends of their cause by expressing their ready concurrence in the adoption by Parliament of such securities as to its feelings may appear necessary, and which at the same time may not be inconsistent with the Catholic religion."

The House at length divided, when the votes were, for going into a committee 147; against it 228; majority, 81.

In the House of Lords, Lord Donoughmore, who had presented a petition from the Roman Catholics of Ireland, rose on June the 8th, to make a motion on its subject. After an introductory speech, in which he discussed the several points, of the causes demanding an inquiry at the present time; the relief which ought to be given to the Catholics: the additional securities that had been thought necessary; and the objections arising from the inflamed state of the Catholic body; he moved for a committee of the whole House to take the matter into consideration. In the suc cceding debate, some of the opposers of the motion having intiinated a willingness to enter upon

the question at a future period, rather than at so advanced a time in the Session, Lord Donoughmore proposed as an amendment of his motion, that the House should resolve into a committee on the question at an early period of the next Session. The House dividing upon it in the amended form, the votes were Non-contents 86; Contents 60: Majority against the motion 26.

On May 22, a message was delivered to both Houses of Parliament from the Prince Regent to the following effect: "That in consequence of the events which had occurred in France, in direct contravention of the treaties concluded at Paris in the course of the last year, his Royal Highness had judged it necessary to enter into engagements with his Majesty's allies, for the purpose of forming such a concert as present circumstances indispensably require; and as may prevent the revival of a system which experience has proved to be incompatible with the peace and independence ofthe nations of Europe.” It was then said, that copies of the treaties concluded would be laid before the two Houses, and that the Prince Regent confidently relied on their support in all the measures which it might be necessary for him to adopt, in conjunction with his allies, against the common enemy, at this important crisis.

The papers produced before parliament were, treaties signed at Vienna, on March 25, 1815, between his Britannic Majesty, the Emperor of Russia, and the King of Prussia. By their tenor, each of the contracting parties,

in conjunction with the Emperor of Austria, engaged to unite their, resources for the purpose of maintaining entire the conditions of the peace of Paris in May, 1814, and the stipulations of the congress of Vienna, and preserving them against all infringement, particularly from the designs of Napoleon Buonaparte. Each of them agreed to keep 150,000 men in the field; but by a separate article, his Britannic Majesty was to have the option either of furnishing his contingent in men, or of supplying his deficiency by the payment of 301. per ann. for every cavalry soldier, and 20l. per ann. for every infantry soldier. His most Christian Majesty was to be invited to become a party in this alliance. By an additional convention, his Britannic Majesty engaged to furnish a subsidy of five millions sterling, for the service of the year ending April 1, 1816, to be divided in equal proportions among the other three powers. Other papers were, a letter from M. de Caulaincourt to Lord Castlereagh, dated Paris, April 4, 1815, announcing, in triumphant language, the resumption of the government of France by the Emperor (Buonaparte), and his desire of maintaining peace with all other sovereigns. Another letter from Caulaincourt, containing the Emperor's request, that the above should be presented to the Prince Regent; and a note of Lord Castlereagh, acquainting him with the Prince Regent's declining to receive it. There followed, a letter from Lord Castlereagh to the Earl of Clancarty, enclosing the overture of Caulaincourt, with a direction to com

municate it to the allied Sovereigns, and their Plenipotentiaries at. Vin enna; and Lord Clancarty's an- 8 swer dated from Vienna, May 6. The latter paper, after mentioning a similar address from Buonaparte to the Emperor of Austria, to which no answer was returned, states the views and reasons of the allied powers in the war about to be commenced. The following is the most material passage on this topic: In this war, they do not desire to interfere with any legitimate right of the French people; they have no design to oppose the claim of that nation to choose their own form of government, or an intention to trench, in any respect, upon their independence as a great and free peo. ple: but they do think they have a right, and that of the highest nature, to contend against the reestablishment of an individual, as the head of the French government, whose past conduct has invariably demonstrated, that in such a situation he will not suffer other nations to be at peace,-whose restless ambition,-whose thirst for foreign conquest, and whose disregard for the rights and independence of other states, must expose the whole of Europe to renewed scenes of plunder and devastation." Together with these documents was presented a declaration on the part of the Prince Regent, signed by Lord Castlereagh, May 18, purporting, that the eighth article of the treaty of March 25, wherein his most Christian Majesty is invited to accede under certain stipulations, is to be understood as binding the contracting powers, upon principles of mutual security, to a

common

common effort against the power of Napoleon Buonaparte; but is not to be understood as binding his Britannic Majesty to prosecute the war with a view of imposing upon France any particular go

vernment.

On May 23, being the day for taking into consideration the message of the Prince Regent, the Earl of Liverpool rose in the House of Lords, and said, that the question he was about to submit to their Lordships being that of peace or war, it was unnecessary for him to use words to convince them that the subject was the most momentous that could be brought for their determination. Of his Lordship's succeeding speech, and of those which followed on each side, events have taken off so much of the interest, that a very concise notice of them will suffice. Lord L. began with shewing in what manner Buonaparte had fundamentally violated his treaty with the allies, so as to render the war with him a just one. He proceeded to consider whether it was necessary on our part; and referring to that person's past conduct, he asked, if any thing had since occurred which could induce a reasonable expectation that any change had taken place in his disposition? To the argument, that a limited government being now established in France, we might look to that government for the security of peace; he replied, that its stability under a Ruler, who must always depend upon the sword for his own security, could by no means be caleulated upon. He then dwelt upon the peculiar advantage of an attempt to overthrow this dange

rous power, whilst the confederacy of allies was subsisting in entire unanimity, and were fully prepared to act in concert. To the objection that might be raised against the war on account of the offer made by the allies of concluding a peace with Buonaparte at Chatillon, it was replied, that he was then the undisputed Sovereign of France, and was in possession of many of the principal military holds in Europe. After auguring fairly of the conclusion of the contest, his Lordship closed with moving for an address in correspondence with the Regent's message.

Of the copious and argumentative speech of Lord Grey in reply, no adequate idea could be given in a few words; and the predictive part has been so decisively refuted by the event, that its authority in a political view probably does not at present stand high. Its substance was a direct attack as well on the justice, as the necessity and expediency of a war; and it concluded with a proposed amendment of the address, of which the followingwere the principal points: To assure his Royal Highness of their desire to assist him in fulfilling such treaties with foreign powers as may have been entered into for the protection of their respective rights against foreign aggression; but to declare, that they do not think themselves justified in approving the engagements which his Royal Highness appears to have contracted for maintaining the stipulations of the congress of Vienna, of which they are as yet wholly uninformed. To state, that approving as they do of a defensive system for preserv

ing the equilibrium and independence of Europe, they feel themselves bound to represent to his Royal Highness, that they do not think a war undertaken for personally proscribing the present Ruler of France, necessary for accomplishing those ends; but, on the contrary, that such a war appears to them questionable in its principles, and fraught with the greatest danger; and to entreat his Royal Highness to open new communications with the allies for engagements on a defensive principle.

This amendment was opposed by Lord Bathurst, and also by the noble mover's closest political ally on other occasions, Lord Grenville, who declared most unequivocally his conviction of the necessity of a war. On a division, the amendment was rejected by a majority of 156 to 44, and the address was carried.

In the proceedings relative to the address to the Prince Regent, moved on May 25th in the House of Commons, Lord Castlereagh began with informing the House, in answer to an objection drawn from the want of the Emperor of Austria's conclusive accession to the treaty, that he on that morning exchanged ratifications with the Austrian ambassador, thereby rendering the act complete. His lordship also read a note signed by Prince Metternich, expressing the full concurrence of the Emperor of Austria in the explanation by the British government of the 8th article of the Treaty, which declared, that it was not intended to prosecute the war for the purpose of imposing any particular government on the people VOL. LVII.

of France. The subsequent debate was exactly the counterpart of that in the House of Lords.The same address was moved, and the same amendment to it; and there was the same defection of members who usually voted with the opposition; among whom Mr. Grattan was distinguished by the eloquence of his speech in favour of the war. The amendment was rejected by 331 to 92...

On May 26, the House of Commons being in a committee for considering that part of the Prince Regent's message which related to the engagements for subsidizing the allied powers, Lord Castlereagh rose to make a statement of the extent of the charges under that head likely to be imposed on this country in the present session. He began with making a distinction between subsidy and pecuniary arrangement, in the instance of Holland, for whose colonies retained by us we were, by way of compensation, to pay the half of certain charges which would otherwise fall upon Holland alone; and he intimated that parliament would be called upon in the course of the present year for one million on that account. Another arrangement not in the nature of a specific grant, was for the interest of a loan obtained in Holland by Russia, and applied towards the fortifications in the Low-countries, which was to be borne jointly by Great Britain and the King of the Netherlands.Having explained the nature and purposes of this agreement, his lordship proceeded to the conditions of the treaty between the allies, binding each to bring into the field a contingent of 150,000 men. [D]

He

He stated that Austria, Russia, and Prussia were all prepared to contribute to the common cause a much larger force than they had engaged for, and that several of the inferior powers were also to furnish very considerable contingents. Of the whole collective force, he gave the following state

ment :Austria.... Russia.

Prussia...

300,000

His lordship concluded with mov – ing, "That a sum not xceeding five millions be granted to his Majesty to make good the engagements entered into with the Eniperor of Austria, the Emperor of Russia, and the King of Prussia.”

Being asked various questions respecting the distribution of the sum to be disposed of among the smaller powers, Lord C. said he 225,000 was not empowered to give spe236,300 cific answers; nor did he choose 150,000 to pledge government to limit it50,000 self to the sum of 2 millions assigned for the above purpose.Mr. Bankes then rose and objected Total.....1,011,000 at some length to the dispropor

States of Germany..
Great Britain..
Holland....

50,000

As we only furnished 50,000 men, we were to pay for 100,000, which would amount to 2,500,000l. The same sum was to be applied in aid of the confederacy in such manner as would be calculated to produce the most satisfaction.

tionate share of the burden to be taken by this country in a war for a common cause. The sense of the House, however, in favour of the greatest possible exertion at this crisis, was shewn by the division, in which the motion was carried by 160 votes to 17.

CHAPTER

« AnteriorContinuar »