of the Dniester, the allies can not propose any terms to them. What answer do they receive? An unequivocal rejection of every one of their propositions; accompanied, however, with a declaration, to which I shall soon return, that the navigation of that river shall be free to all the world, and a reference to those maxims of policy which have invariably actuated the Empress of Russia in her intercourse with neutral nations, whose commerce she has at all times protected and encouraged. With this declaration the British plenipotentiaries declare themselves perfectly contented; nay, more, they engage that if the Turks should refuse these conditions, and continue obstinate longer than four months, the allied courts "will abandon the termination of the war to the events it may produce." And here ends forever all care for the Ottoman empire, all solicitude about the balance of power. The right honorable gentleman will interpose no further to save either, but rests the whole of a measure, once so indispensable to our safety, upon this doubtful issue, whether the Turks will accept in December those very terms which in July the British ministers could not venture to propose to them! would have found him absent from his station, under the pretense of attending his duty in this House, though he does not choose often to make his appearance here. Instead of this, however, they increased the dishonor that they doomed us to suffer, by sending a gentleman endowed with every virtue and accomplishment, who had acquired, in the service of the Empress of Russia, at an early period of his life, a character for bravery and enterprise that rendered him personally esteemed by her, and in whom fine talents and elegant manners, ripened by habit and experience, had confirmed the flattering promise of his youth. Did they think that the shabbiness of their message was to be done away by the worth of the messenger? If I were to send a humiliating apology to any person, would it change its quality by being intrusted to Lord Rodney, Admiral Pigot, my honorable friend behind me [General Burgoyne], Lord Cornwallis, Sir Henry Clinton, Sir William Howe, or any other gallant and brave officer? Certainly not. It was my fortune, in very early life, to have set out in habits of particular intimacy with Mr. Faulkener, and however circumstances may have intervened to suspend that intimacy, circumstances arising from wide differences in political opin- Sir, we may look in vain to the events of forion, they never have altered the sentiments of pri- mer times for a disgrace parallel to vate esteem which I have uniformly felt for him; what we have suffered. Louis the and with every amiable and conciliating quality Fourteenth, a monarch often named that belongs to man, I know him to be one from in our debates, and whose reign exwhom improper submissions are the least to be hibits more than any other the exexpected. Well, sir, these gentlemen, Mr. Whit- tremes of prosperous and of adverse fortune, nevworth and Mr. Faulkener, commence the nego-er, in the midst of his most humiliating distresstiation by the offer of three distinct propositions, each of them better than the other, and accompany it with an expression somewhat remarkable, namely, that this negotiation is to be as unlike all the others as possible, and to be "founded in perfect candor." To prove this, they sub-ures, and deluged the earth with the blood of the mit at once to the Russian ministers "all that their instructions enable them to propose." Who would not have imagined, according to the plain import of these words, that unless the Empress had assented to one of these propositions, all amicable interposition would have been at an end, and war the issue? The "perfect candor" promised in the beginning of their note, leads them to declare explicitly, that unless the fortifications of Oczakow be razed, or the Turks are allowed, as an equivalent, to keep both the banks 14 Lord Auckland is understood to have been the object of this fierce attack, which was certainly unfair and ungentlemanly, as directed against one who, not being present, had no opportunity to speak in his own defense. Mr. Pitt, in his reply, asked Mr. Fox whether "it was decent or manly to go out of his way to allude, in an unhandsome manner, to an honorable gentleman in his absence, who was supposed to have been employed in a diplomatic capacity;" and declared that "no man who had been honored with the office of a minister at foreign courts had ever discharged his duty more ably, more honestly, or in a manner more creditable to himself, or advantageous to his country, than the honorable gentleman so illiberally alluded to."-Parliamentary History, xxix., 998. Comparison of duct with that of Louis XIV. ing circumstan in the most try ces. es, stooped to so despicable a sacrifice of all that can be dear to man. The war of the succession. unjustly begun by him, had reduced his power, had swallowed up his armies and his navies, had desolated his provinces, had drained his treas best and most faithful of his subjects. Exhausted by his various calamities, he offered his enemies at one time to relinquish all the objects for which he had begun the war. That proud monarch sued for peace, and was content to receive it from our moderation. But when it was made a condition of that peace, that he should turn his arms against his grandson, and compel him by force to relinquish the throne of Spain, humbled, exhausted, conquered as he was, misfortune had not yet bowed his spirit to conditions so hard as these. We know the event. He persisted still in the war, until the folly and wickedness of Queen Anne's ministers enabled him to conclude the peace of Utrecht, on terms considerably less disadvantageous even than those he had himself proposed. And shall we, sir, the pride of our age, the terror of Europe, submit to this humiliating sacrifice of our honor? Have we suffered a defeat at Blenheim? Shall we, with our increas ing prosperity, our widely diflused capital, our navy, the just subject of our common exultation, ever-flowing coffers, that enable us to give back to the people what, in the hour of calamity, we were compelled to take from them; flushed with a recent triumph over Spain [respecting Nootka Pretenses for continuing the armament: (1.) That the Emperor might have imposed harder conditions on the Turks. Sound], and yet more than all, while our old rival delay, as an answer from the Russian court and enemy was incapable of disturbing us, shall might have been had in five or six weeks. Was it be for us to yield to what France disdained in it reasonable in ministers to suppose, that bethe hour of her sharpest distress, and exhibit our- cause, in the early part of the negotiation, the selves to the world, the sole example in its an- Empress had shown so much regard to us as nals of such an abject and pitiful degradation ?15 actually to give up whatever pretensions she had VII. But gentlemen inform us now, in justifi- formed to other provinces of the Turkish empire, cation, as I suppose they mean it, solely with the view of obtaining our concurof all these measures, that to ef- rence to the principle on which she offered to fect a peace between Russia and make peace, she would revert to those very prethe Porte was only the ostensible tensions the instant she had obtained that concause of our armament, or at least currence on our part, for the benefit of which was not the sole cause; and that ministers were she had sacrificed them? Surely, as I have said, under some apprehension lest the Emperor of it was worth while to make the experiment; but Germany, if the allies were to disarm, should in- simple and obvious as this was, a very different sist on better terms from the Turks than he had course was adopted. Oczakow, indeed, was reagreed to accept by the convention of Reichen- linquished before the armament began, as we bach. This I can not believe. When his Maj- may find by comparing the date of the pressesty sends a message to inform his Parliament warrants with that of the Duke of Leed's resigthat he thinks it necessary to arm for a specific nation. As soon as the King's message was purpose, I can not suppose that a falsehood has delivered to Parliament, a messenger was disbeen put into his Majesty's mouth, and that the patched to Berlin with an intimation of the resoarmament which he proposes as necessary for lution to arm. This, perhaps, was rashly done one purpose is intended for another! If the right as the ministry might have foreseen that the honorable gentleman shall tell me, that although measure would probably meet with opposition, the war between Russia and the Porte was the and much time could not have been lost by waitreal cause of equipping the armament, yet that ing the event of the first debate. No sooner being once equipped, it was wise to keep it up was the division [upon the debate] known, than when no longer wanted on that account, because a second messenger was sent off to overtake and the Emperor seemed inclined to depart from the stop the dispatches of the first; and this brings convention of Reichenbach; then I answer, that me to another argument, which I confess appears it was his duty to have come with a second mes- to me very unlikely to help them out. They tell sage to Parliament, expressly stating this new us, that the King of Prussia having object, with the necessary information to enable armed in consequence of our assurthe House to judge of its propriety. Another of ances of support, we could not disthe arguments for continuing the arm- arm before we knew the sentiments ament after the object was relinquish- of the court of Berlin, without the imhave risen in ed, is, that Russia might have insisted putation of leaving our ally in the lurch. on harder terms, not conceiving herwe wait for the sentiments of that court to deself bound by offers which we had refused to ac-termine whether Oczakow was to be given up cept. I perfectly agree with gentlemen, that after the repeated offer of those terms on the part of Russia, and the rejection of them by us, the Empress was not bound to adhere to them in all possible events and contingencies. If the war had continued, she would have had a right to further indemnification for the expense of it. But was it not worth the minister's while to try the good faith of the Empress of Russia, after she had so solemnly pledged herself to all Europe that she would not rise in her demands? The experiment would have been made with little trouble, by the simple expedient of sending a messenger to ask the question. The object of his armament would have suffered little by the (2) That the Empress of Russia might her demands. armament was (3.) That a continuance of the necessary, until Prussia could be known. Did the views of or not? Sir, when that measure was resolved upon, the right honorable gentleman actually had abandoned his ally; and that such was the sense of the court of Berlin, I believe can be testified by every Englishman who was there at the time. No sooner did the second messenger arrive, and the contents of his dispatches become known, than a general indignation rose against the conduct of the right honorable gentleman; and I am well enough informed on the subject to state to this House, that not an Englishman could show his face in that capital without exposing himself to mortification, perhaps to insult. But, between the 28th of March, 1791, when the message was brought down to this House, and the 2d or 3d of April, when the second messenger was dispatched with the news that ministers had abandoned the object of it, the armament could not have been materially advanced. Why, then, was it persisted in? The right honorable gentleman can not argue that he kept up the armament in compliance with his engagements with Prussia, when the armament, in fact, did not exist, and when it had been begun but four or five days previous to his renouncing the object of it. That could not have been his motive. What, 1792.] THE RUSSIAN ARMAMENT. then, was the motive? Why, that he was too | public, something that we may use against the proud to own his error, and valued less the mon- minority; that minority whom we have endeavYou can ey and tranquillity of the people than the appear- ored to represent as your allies. We have sacance of firmness, when he had renounced the rificed our allies, the Turks, to you. If I had been to advise the Emreality. False shame is the parent of many do no less than sacrifice your allies, the minorcrimes.16 press on the subject, I would have counseled her to grant the British minister something of this sort. I would even have advised her to raze the fortifications of Oczakow, if he had insisted on it. I would have appealed from her policy to her generosity, and said, "Grant him this as an apology, for he stands much in need of it. His. whole object was to appear to gain something, no matter what, by continuing the armament; and even in this last pitiful and miserable object. he has failed." If, after all, I ask, whether these terms are contained in the peace that we have concluded for the Turks, or, rather, which the Turks concluded for themselves, the answer is, "We have no authentic copy of it." Is this what we have got by our arms, by distressing our commerce, dragging our seamen from their homes and occupations, and squandering our money? Is this the efficacy of our interference, and the triumph of our wisdom and our firmThe Turks have at length concluded By false shame a man may be tempt-ity, to us ?" ed to commit a murder, to conceal a robbery. Influenced by this false shame, the ministers robbed the people of their money, the seamen of their liberty, their families of support and protection, and all this to conceal that they had undertaken a system which was not fit to be pursued. If they say that they did this, apprehensive that, without the terror of an armament, Russia would not stand to the terms which they had refused to accept, they do no more than acknowledge that, by the insolence of their arming and the precipitancy of their submission, they had either so provoked her resentment, or excited her contempt, that she would not even condescend to agree to her own propositions But however they when approved by them. might have thought her disposed to act on this subject, it was at least their duty to try whether such would have been her conduct or not. Dniester no real gain. a peace, of which they do not even condescend VIII. To prove that the terms to which they The free navi agreed at last were the same withness? gation of the those they before rejected, all I feel it necessary for me to observe is, that the free navigation of the River Dniester, the only novelty introduced into them, was implied in proposing it as a boundary; for it is a wellknown rule that the boundary between two powing us! ers must be as free to the one as to the other. True, says the minister, but we have got the free navigation for the subjects of other powers, particularly for those of Poland. If this be an advantage, it is one which he has gained by concession; for if he had not agreed that the river should be the boundary, the navigation would not have been free. The Turks offered no such stipulation, had they been put in possession of both the banks. Besides which, as a noble Duke, whom I have already quoted, well observed, it is an advantage, whatever may be its value, It is which can subsist only in time of peace. not, I suppose, imagined that the navigation will be free in time of war. They have, then, got 66 modificanothing that deserves the name of a tion," a term, I must here observe, the use of which is not justified even by the original memorial, where the sense is more accurately expressed by the French word "radoucissement." Was it, then, for some radoucissement [softening] Was it that they continued their armament? to say to the Empress, when they had conceded every thing, "We have given you all you asked, give us something that we may hold out to the 16 The reader can not fail to remark how adroitly this mention of Mr. Pitt's pride and false shame is used by Mr. Fox to introduce anew some of the leading topics of reproach-lavish expenditure, pressing of seamen, &c. He thus keeps the great points of his case continually in view, at one time by incidental references in passing, at another by extended and formal repetitions. К к 17 We This is what: Scilicet, ut Turno contingat regia conjux, That Turnus may obtain a royal spouse, The lines are taken from the Eneid of Virgil, book xi., line 371, and are part of Drances' speech in which he charges Turnus with sacrificing the such conduct to destroy confidence in the English Constitution. of their representatives, or inquiring into it afterward, unless we can make out ground for a criminal charge against the executive government. Let us disclaim these abuses, and return to the Constitution. IX. The minister gained, or thought he was Tendency of to gain, an excuse for his rashness and misconduct; and to purchase this excuse was the public money and the public quiet wantonly sacrificed. There are some effects, which, to combine with I am not one of those who lay down rules as their causes, is almost sufficient to drive men universal and absolute; because I think there is mad! That the pride, the folly, the presump- hardly a political or moral maxim which is unition of a single person shall be able to involve a versally true; but I maintain the general rule to whole people in wretchedness and disgrace, is be, that before the public money be voted away, more than philosophy can teach mortal patience the occasion that calls for it should be fairly to endure. Here are the true weapons of the stated, for the consideration of those who are the enemies of our Constitution! Here may we proper guardians of the public money. Had the search for the source of those seditious writings, minister explained his system to Parliament bemeant either to weaken our attachment to the fore he called for money to support it, and ParConstitution, by depreciating its value, or which liament had decided that it was not worth suploudly tell us that we have no Constitution at porting, he would have been saved the mortificaall. We may blame, we may reprobate such tion and disgrace in which his own honor is indoctrines; but while we furnish those who cir- volved, and, by being furnished with a just exculate them with arguments such as these; cuse to Prussia for withdrawing from the prosewhile the example of this day shows us to what cution of it, have saved that of his Sovereign and degree the fact is true, we must not wonder if his country, which he has irrevocably tarnished. the purposes they are meant to answer be but Is unanimity necessary to his plans? He can be too successful.18 They argue, that a Constitu- sure of it in no manner, unless he explains them tion can not be right where such things are pos- to this House, who are certainly much better sible; much less so when they are practiced judges than he is of the degree of unanimity without punishment. This, sir, is a serious re- with which they are likely to be received. Why, flection to every man who loves the Constitution then, did he not consult us? Because he had of England. Against the vain theories of men, other purposes to answer in the use he meant to who project fundamental alterations upon grounds make of his majority. Had he opened himself to of mere speculative objection, I can easily defend the House at first, and had we declared against it; but when they recur to these facts, and show him, he might have been stopped in the first inme how we may be doomed to all the horrors of stance: had we declared for him, we might have war by the caprice of an individual who will not held him too firmly to his principle to suffer his even condescend to explain his reasons, I can only receding from it as he has done. Either of these fly to this House, and exhort you to rouse from alternatives he dreaded. It was his policy to deyour lethargy of confidence into the active mis-cline our opinions, and to exact our confidence; trust and vigilant control which is your duty and your office. Without recurring to the dust to which the minister has been humbled, and the dirt he has been dragged through, if we ask, for what has the peace of the public been disturbed? For what is that man pressed and dragged like a felon to a service that should be honorable? we must be answered, for some three quarters of a mile of barren territory on the banks of the Dniester! In the name of all we value, give us, when such instances are quoted in derogation of our Constitution, some right to answer, that these are not its principles, but the monstrous abuses intruded into its practice. Let it not be said, that because the executive power, for an adequate and evident cause, may adopt measures that require expense without consulting Parliament, we are to convert the exception into a rule; to reverse the principle; and that it is now to be assumed, that the people's money may be spent for any cause, or for none, without either submitting the exigency to the judgment people in a useless war, simply that he might receive Lavinia as his bride. 18 Mr. Fox shows great dexterity in thus retorting apon Mr. Pitt those charges of weakening the British Constitution, which were brought against himself and friends so often at this time, in consequence of bis admiration of the French Revolution. that thus having the means of acting either way, Miscelaneous marks. X. Sir, there is yet an argument which I have not sufficiently noticed. It has been said, as a ground for his defense, that he concluding rewas prevented from gaining what he demanded by our opposition; and, but for this, Russia would have complied, and never would have hazarded a war. Sir, I believe the direct contrary, and my belief is as good as their asser tion, unless they will give us some proof of its correctness. Until then, I have a right to ask them, what if Russia had not complied? Worse and worse for him! He must have gone on, redoubling his menaces and expenses, the Empress of Russia continuing inflexible as ever, but for the salutary opposition which preserved him from his extremity of shame. I am not contending that armaments are never necessary to enforce negotiations; but it is one, and that not the least, of the evils attending the right honorable gentleman's misconduct, that by keeping up the parade of an armament, never meant to be employed, he has, in a great measure, deprived us of the use of this method of negotiating, whenever it may be necessary to apply it effectually; for if you propose to arm in concert with any foreign power, that power will answer, "What security can you give me that you will persevere in that system? You say you can not go to war, unless your people are unanimous." If you aim to negotiate against a foreign power, that power will say, "I have only to persist-the British minister may threaten, but he dare not act he will not hazard the loss of his place by a war." A right honorable gentleman [Mr. Dundas], in excuse for withholding papers, asked what foreign power would negotiate with an English cabinet, if their secrets were likely to be developed, and exposed to the idle curiosity of a House of Commons? I do not dread such a consequence; but if I must be pushed to extremes, if nothing were left me but an option between opposite evils, I should have no hesitation in choosing. "Better have no dealings with them at all," I should an swer, "if the right of inquiry into every part of a negotiation they think fit, and of knowing why they are to vote the money of their constituents, be denied the House of Commons." But there is something like a reason why no foreign power will negotiate with us, and that a much better reason than a dread of disclosing their secrets, in the right honorable gentleman's example. I declare, therefore, for the genius of our Constitution, against the practice of his Majesty's ministers; I declare that the duties of this House are, vigilance in preference to secrecy, deliberation in preference to dispatch. Sir, I have given my reasons for supporting the motion for a vote of censure on the minister. I will listen to his defense with attention, and I will retract wherever he shall prove me to be wrong. Mr. Pitt closed the debate with great ability. He insisted on the necessity of restraining the ambition of Russia, and complained that Mr. Fox "had pushed his arguments, for the purpose of aggravation, to a degree of refinement beyond all reason." The vote was then taken, and stood 244 in his favor, and 116 against him. The country acquiesced in this decision, though most persons condemned his taking a stand on such narrow ground as the occupation of Oczakow. Subsequent events have proved that Mr. Pitt's jealousy of the growing power of Russia was well founded; and it has long been the settled policy of the other powers of Europe, at all hazards to prevent the Czar from becoming master of Constantinople. SPEECH OF MR. FOX IN FAVOR OF MR. GREY'S MOTION FOR PARLIAMENTARY REFORM, DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, MAY 26, 1797. INTRODUCTION. Mr. Fox had always professed to be in favor of Parliamentary Reform, though he did not agree in the details of any of the schemes which had been hitherto proposed, and he was not, perhaps, fully persuaded that those schemes could be so modified as to accomplish the desired object. But on this occasion be seems to have given his support to Mr. Grey's motion, with a sincere desire that it might prevail. The country was in a most disastrous state; the French had subdued all their enemies on the Continent, and England was left to maintain the contest single-handed; the pressure of commercial difficulties had rendered it necessary to suspend specie payments by law; great distress prevailed throughout the nation; there was much angry feeling and despondency both in England and Scotland, and a hostility to the gov ernment in Ireland, which soon after resulted in open rebellion. Under these circumstances, Mr. Fox felt that the prospects of Great Britain were gloomy in the extreme, and that measures were called for calculated to inspire the nation with increased confidence and interest in the government. As essential to this end, he urged a reform in Parliament which should give the people their just share in the Constitution; and he took occasion, at the same time, to inveigh against the measures of Mr. Pitt as hurrying on the country to the brink of ruin. This speech bears internal evidence of having been corrected, to some extent, by Mr. Fox or his friends. While it has all the elasticity of spirit and rapidity of progress which mark his other speeches, it has greater polish and beauty than most of his parliamentary efforts, especially in an admirable passage toward the close, in which he speaks of the energy imparted to the ancient republics by the Spirit of Liberty. |