vital importance, would not be induced to abandon the engagements of the treaty of Paris. Therefore, his calculations upon the result of the Congress had no affinity to that of the noble lord. On these grounds he could not give his unqualified support to the Address; and although he did not mean to propose any amendment, he had felt it his duty to express his opinion upon the subject. Viscount Melville said, that he felt himself called upon to trouble their lordships with a few remarks, in consequence of what had fallen from the noble earl, relative to the naval administration of the war with the United States of America. He had not, however, a little to complain of the manner in which that noble earl had stated his charges, they being of that general character that he knew not what precise point it was that was aimed at by the noble earl, nor to what particular period or circumstances the noble earl alluded. If the noble earl meant to refer to the general conduct of the naval war with the United States of America, it was certainly true that America having no fleet, there could be no splendid victories obtained. If, however, the results of the contest in naval captures were looked to, the noble earl must surely be convinced that there was no ground whatever for censuring the Admiralty, or the conduct of the navy. When it was known, as was the fact, that upwards of 200 of the enemy's vessels of war and armed vessels, had, since the commencement of the war, been captured, it must at once be evident that our navy had not been inactive. The noble earl, he trusted, would bear this fact in his mind when he brought the subject under consideration. As to the statement of the noble lord, that wherever we had a naval contest with the Americans with an equal force, it had uniformly been to our disadvantage; he could assure the noble earl, that although accidents might sometimes happen, it was entirely a mistake; and he would ask the noble lord whether it was any proof of the inefficiency or inactivity of the British navy, that since the commencement of the war with America, it had captured 38 of the enemy's vessels of war, from the largest to the least size, and 199 private armed vessels of all descriptions. Did the noble earl mean to urge that the commercial marine of the enemy had not been sufficiently attended to? If so, he could tell him, that of the enemy's commercial vessels, it was as certained that 900 had been captured since the commencement of the war, and brought into the ports of the United Kingdom. With respect to this number the accounts were certain, though some of them not official; but it was also known from other statements, which might be relied upon, that the whole number of commercial vessels captured from the enemy amounted to 1,900. It was also a fact, that 20,000 American seamen were now lodged in British prisons. He asked, then, whether the noble earl, with these facts before him, could justly charge the Admiralty with inactivity or inefficiency. Did the noble earl mean to charge the Admiralty with not sufficiently protecting the commerce of our merchants? He was aware that much had been said upon this subject; but he was also aware, that whatever might be said, the Admiralty were fully acquitted of all blame. It must inevitably be the case when the whole force of an enemy was devoted to privateers, that our entire fleet, wherever stationed, could not prevent the capture of some, of our merchant vessels. Their lordships were aware, that a situation of affairs similar to this occurred in the war at the accession of his present Majesty. He did not refer to this period with any view of arguing, that if there was misconduct on the part of the Admiralty then, it would justify misconduct on the part of the Admiralty now; all he meant to urge was, that similar causes would produce similar effects. The year 1759 their lordships need not be ashamed to compare with the most brilliant period of the late war, for successes of importance obtained over the enemy; the navy of France was annihilated, and their whole force devoted to privateering. The consequence was, that the next year a number of our commercial vessels were captured. This was a period, their lordships were well aware, that would bear no comparison with regard to extent of commerce with the present; and yet he had found upon inquiry, that the captures at the present were little more numerous than those at the former period. But let the whole number be inquired into, that were said to make up the loss from the peace of Paris down to the last month. No regular returns had, it was true, been yet received; but the number and nature of those losses might be pretty fairly ascertained from Lloyd's List, and other sources; they were said to amount to 172. Noble lords knew that the ships going to foreign parts alone, were liable to be forced to sail with convoy; the coasting trade had none. Yet of the ships which left the British ports, many were running ships, which went off without waiting for protection, and ran all hazards. Their loss had, of course, nothing to do with the care or negligence of the navy. Of the 172 missing, it was ascertained that no less than 94 were running ships: of the rest there sailed and separated, whether from stress of weather or wilfully, no less than 38; and it was known perfectly, that no convoy returned without perpetual complaints on the part of the officers, of ships breaking away from their protection. During this time, the whole number of the coasting vessels captured, whilst under the protection of the Admiralty, amounted to eleven. He felt as if he was detailing all this unasked but till he heard some distinct question, he could not know what to answer. One observation, indeed, the noble earl made, which he could understand. It was actually asserted, that wherever our ships met with an equal force of the enemy, they were beaten, except in a few instances. He could assure the noble eari, that he was totally wrong in his statement. If any of the noble earl's allusions touched on the war in Canada, he believed that it was impossible, for the present, to give him the information which he might desire, and must be so till the regular details should arrive. At present, the only narrative was to be found in the authority of American newspapers. But when the noble lord brought forward his inquiry in a regular shape, he trusted to be able to satisfy him on the full question. As to Canada and the war on the Lakes, he would find that not only all demands and requisitions for that service had been complied with, but that they had been in almost every instance anticipated, nay, anticipated twofold. But in all observations on those distant operations, it was to be recollected, that our supplies were drawn from an immense distance, while those of the Americans were at their own doors. That war had grown into magnitude to make the efforts of the country such as they ought to be, and such as they must be, great difficulties, great delays, great expenditures must be looked to. He was, however, ready, he was prepared to meet the noble lord (Darnley) on the plain merits of the question, and he had no doubt of 'satisfying the mind of the country. Lord Grenville rose and said: My Lords, without entering into the details offered by the noble viscount, I can assure him, without any exaggeration, that a very strong and universal impression prevails, that there has been misconduct and neglect in the management of the naval war with America; but however indignant I have felt at seeing the glory of the British navy tarnished by the naval victories of the Americans-whatever regret I have felt at the impression produced in Europe by this disgrace of the hitherto-unconquered navy of Great Britain; or however I have been convinced that the impression thus produced is, in reality, most detrimental to our true interests, I can still assure the noble viscount that I will come to the inquiry;-which must of necessity take place, and that on an early day;-dispassionately, impartially, and without prejudice, to consider coolly and deliberately all the circumstances connected with these events. My lords; it has always been my wish, upon these occasions, to express, if I could, my concurrence in and approbation of the Address. Upon this occasion, however, I cannot approve of the Address; and there is one passage in it in particular in which I cannot concur. If any thing could have induced me to concur in it, it would have been the eloquent and feeling speech of my noble friend who seconded the Address, whom I congratulate upon the display he has this night made, and I also congratulate the House upon the promise therein given by one who bids fair to be one of its brightest ornaments. Notwithstanding, however, the eloquence of the noble lord, I cannot conscientiously concur in this Address. It might have been expected, after the termination of a war in which unexpected and providential events brought about results of the happiest tendency that could not previously have been calculated upon-it might have been expected, that when every one was naturally looking to the consolidation of that peace and the cessation of our gigantic efforts, the Speech from the throne would have made some allusion to the diminution of burthens and the cessation of efforts. Instead of this, we find a large expenditure mentioned, and new and increased efforts called for: not even an allusion is made to the diminution of those burthens which were laid on under a solemn pledge that they should continue no longer than until a certain period after the termination of the war. that some grounds should be laid before parliament to shew why these increased efforts are called for-why this additional expenditure is necessary? and this, of course, involving all the circumstances that relate to the conduct of the war with America. Unfortunately, too, we have nothing in the Speech from the throne to point out to us any hope of the termination of the war. The expression used indicating a readiness to make peace with the United States upon just and honourable terms, is an expression which certainly might as well have been spared. Of course, no ministry would consent to, nor would parliament or the country sanction, unjust or dishonourable terms; but the expression leads to no indication whatever as to the greater or less hope of an amicable adjustment. It might naturally have been concluded, that as by the termination of the war in Europe there was an end put, practically, to those questions which involved the cause of war with America, little remained to offer any impediment to negociation. To continue a war for the sake of an abstract theory, is idle and absurd; experience having shewn, that when a war commences, the theory, how-now informed for what the war is conti ever previously settled, becomes of no avail against the practical questions that arise out of the then situation of affairs. Is it not, then, imperative | turbed possession of the Lakes. My lords, former governments never thought of any other preponderance on the American waters, than that acquired by our naval superiority; and I can teil the noble viscount, that however indignant every one must feel, that however painful it must be to every British bosom, to see English frigates strike their flags to American frigates; that although the merchants of Britain may complain, and justly complain, that the British islands are actually blockaded by American privateers; though they may transmit representations upon representations to the noble viscount, and though, these not being sufficiently attended to or satisfactorily answered, they may carry their complaints to the foot of the throne, still that all this is far inferior in importance to the disasters we have sustained on the American waters. It will be of no avail for the noble viscount to say, that he has not the details; the war was long anticipated, a long period has occurred since, and it was the imperative duty of the ministers to have secured, by every means, the British preponderance upon the Lakes, which is of the most essential importance. He ought, however, to be My lords; it is said that America was the aggressor, and in this I sincerely concur. When, by the repeal of the unjust Orders in Council-and which I shall ever characterise as unjust-the causes of war were in fact removed, I entirely agree, that America, in then making war, became the aggressor; and that is my decided opinion. Her making the grounds of war also questions which struck directly at our maritime rights, rendered it, on our part, the war of the whole country in support of those rights; and I believe upon that point there was but one opinion in parliament and the country. Let it, however, be ever so much a war of aggression, that is no reason why it should not be terminated amicably by negociation. The practical questions that were in dispute were done away by the termination of the war in Europe; and there seemed to remain little else than for each party to return to a state of peace and amity. If any new questions have arisen, we have upon this point no information. Report has alluded to a supposed demand on our part of a new frontier, to secure to us the undisT nued; its legitimate object ought to be the attainment of peace. I trust the war is not continued for the gratification of resentment or revenge, or to shew, as has been said, what the power of this country can effect. The questions which were the original grounds of the war have passed away. If the war is continued for another object, information upon that point ought to be laid before parliament, in order that parliament may be enabled to judge of its expediency, or whether it is fitting that further efforts on the part of the people should be called for its prolongation. My lords; with respect to the military enterprise during the late campaign in America, it is my wish to do ample justice to the skill, the courage, and the valour of our commander, our officers, and our forces; all the military qualities attendant upon the gallant enterprize against the city of Washington excite my highest admiration, and lead me deeply to lament the subsequent fall of the gallant commander. Notwithstanding, however, all my admiration of the enterprize, there were some circumstances attending it, which, however painful the task, I feel it my conscientious duty to advert to. It I fear, the advantage upon this point There is, in truth, too much reason to believe that the destruction of the public buildings has tended to unite against us the American people. I trust it will be a lesson to us for the future, to endeavour, at all times, to mitigate the horrors of war, if we cannot lessen its evils. My lords; in stating what I have said on this subject, I greatly deplore, nor had I foreseen the necessity of mentioning it at all. I had concluded that the moment when peace was signed in Europe would have been the term of the war between America and this country. I cannot divine what grounds can subsist for the continuance of the contest between the two nations. But if, from the continuance of the unjust spirit in which the American. government began the war, that war has not yet ceased, I implore your lordships not to neglect or abandon to chance these two violations of two distinct principles, on which the wars of modern times have been conducted-the first, that private or non-military buildings shall be respected; the second, that the efforts of the govern❤ ment and the commanders should be employed to lessen instead of increasing the calamities of war; and that their exertions should be directed, not against unoffending individuals, who have no share in the hostilities, but against the governments which are, the causes, In this situation, ignorant as I am of the grounds on which the war with America rests, I shall make no remarks on the great expenditure which its continuance renders necessary; but I must observe, that in this, as in the former contest with America, the difficulties of such a contest have been considerably under-rated; and that they are not yet sufficiently apprehended I have reason to believe, from the triumphant language made use of in this country: such language I have always deplored. has been for centuries the great object of the powers of Europe to mitigate as much as possible the horrors of war, by directing the pressure of it from government against government, and preventing the infliction of misery upon unoffending and innocent individuals. This object had been in a great degree accomplished, and your lordships will recollect, that though, during the last twenty years, nearly all the capitals of Europe have been successively in the hands of an enemy, and most of them in the hands of that enemy whom we justly accused of again giving to war that savage and ferocious character, from which it had long been sedulously endeavoured to rescue it; yet, in no instance, except in the case of the Kremlin of Moscow, were any unmilitary buildings destroyed. With respect to the destruction of the Kremlin, it may perhaps be justified, on the ground that Buonaparté had himself converted it to military purposes; but the conflagration of it may be more justly attributed to the anger of disappointed ambition.. In the case of Washington, our force first proceeded to destroy the naval arsenal, in which they were fully justified by all the laws of war; they also, as it is said, destroyed a house from whence our troops were fired upon, after the protecting military force had withdrawn, and we were understood to be in quiet possession of the city; in this, likewise, they were fully justified. They next, however, proceeded to destroy the house of assembly, where the congress or legislative body of the United States assembled, and the palace where the chief executive magistrate of the United States resided-buildings which were not used for any military purpose. It has been alleged, that this destruction of unmilitary buildings was justified on the ground of retaliation; but no document has been published justifying it on this ground. A proclamation, issued by sir George Prevost, stated that the destruction of a town was determined upon, in retaliation for similar conduct on the part of the Americans; but this applied only to that one town, and cannot be applied to the justification of the destruction of public build-not one week, nay, I will say, not one ings at Washington. In fact, therefore, no public document whatever has appeared to justify that destruction at Washington; and the American president, in a proclamation to the people (much of which I disapprove, as being too much like some of the language used here), has, (VOL. XXIX.) The next subject of the Speech, and of the Address, relates to the delays which have attended the opening of the Congress at Vienna. The causes which have delayed this event will prove, I trust, to have been unavoidable; but not one month, day, has elapsed before the opening of much to be censured; and if it has been expenditure of the country, and the neunavoidable, it is an unavoidable but a cessity of reducing the burthens which very great calamity-a calamity as to our press on the community was strongly political interests in the negociation-a urged on the government, we were told, still greater calamity as to the future inte- that enough would be done; that we rests of Europe; for I know not one should judge the government by its acts; power, the interests of which would not that when we again met we should see have been better settled, if they could have that enough would have been done to been settled at an earlier period. That meet our wishes. But was one word said such is the case will be obvious to every to hint, that in the interval a new army person, on looking at the subject with was to be formed in time of peace on the faculties unshackled. On another ground, continent? I will not say that no cirthis delay is much to be deplored. In the cumstances can justify the formation of Speech from the throne, the omission most this army; I will not even say that the surprising is this: the approbation of par- circumstances of the present times do not liament has been called for, on the con- justify it-but I will affirm, that nothing duct of the American war, and their con- can justify its being concealed from pargratulation on the state of affairs in Eu- liament. If such a measure was taken, rope; and yet, a most extraordinary fact it should have been done by parliament; has not even been alluded to; namely, at least, the intention should not have that after the conclusion of a definitive been concealed from parliament; and treaty of peace, under the pressure of least of all when parliament was assemtaxation, which the continuance of the bled, should we be informed of the state American war entails, we are actually of the war in America, of the state of our 1 keeping on foot, on the continent, an army affairs in Europe, and yet left in ignorance of 40,000 men. What is the reason of of this most stupendous fact, that an imthis continuance of warlike exertions? mense army is kept on foot by us on the What examples can be shown in former continent, in the midst of perfect peace times of the maintenance in time of peace, in this quarter of the globe. of an army, partly British and partly foreign, on the continent of Europe? Where is there one example of such conduct? Yet this is not held of sufficient importance to communicate to parliament. We are to deliberate on the war with America; we are to deliberate on the state of Europe; yet this most important fact is concealed from us! Good God! My lords, is there an instance of such a suppression? What example is there of the adoption of such a measure, without previous application to parliament? Our ancestors have often deliberated as to the degree of interference in foreign politics, which in the government of this country is justifiable: what that degree is, I shall not pretend to determine; it is by the peculiar circumstances that it must be fixed. Yet it was never at any period asserted, that in a time of perfect peace in Europe, it would be justifiable to keep on foot an immense army on the continent. But if the power of the present circumstances is such as to overcome the almost unsurmountable objections to such a measure, there can be no circumstances which can have authorized his Majesty's ministers in not having previously communicated it to parliament. When, in the last session of parliament, anxiety was expressed as to the immense My lords; I cannot sit down without expressing it as my opinion, that an Address of unqualified exultation is utterly unsuited to the present circumstances of the country. Ere now we expected to have received the price of our great exertions by a reduction from the weight of those burthens which press so heavily on us. On the subject, however, of these our internal affairs, the only intimation of any change is contained in a paragraph at the end of the Speech-an intimation so ambiguous, that though I have attended with peculiar diligence to the Speech, to the Address, and to the remarks of my noble friend who seconded it, I cannot comprehend to what it refers. Some of my noble friends near me conceive it relates to the corn laws, others of my noble friends that it refers to the bullion question. If it refers to this last question, I applaud the resolution to enter into that most important subject, the state of the circulation. This, my lords, is the consuming canker that preys on the vitals of the state. The depreciation of our currency, which by gradual augmentation year after year has reached its present state, is, I will venture to affirm, a greater cause of the depression under which the people of this country labour than all the |