I fear, the advantage upon this point 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 government 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 direct-lieve that the destruction of the public ing the pressure of it from government buildings has tended to unite against us against government, and preventing the the American people. I trust it will be a infliction of misery upon unoffending and lesson to us for the future, to endeavour, innocent individuals. This object had at all times, to mitigate the horrors of war, been in a great degree accomplished, if we cannot lessen its evils. 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 buildings 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, not one week, nay, I will say, not one day, has elapsed before the opening of the Congress, without a corresponding detriment to the interests of this country, and a diminution of our influence on the negociations. I cannot deny that the delay has been unavoidable, for I know nothing of its cause; but, if avoidable, it is (C) much to be censured; and if it has been unavoidable, it is an unavoidable but a very great calamity-a calamity as to our political interests in the negociation-a still greater calamity as to the future interests of Europe; for I know not one power, the interests of which would not have been better settled, if they could have been settled at an earlier period. That such is the case will be obvious to every person, on looking at the subject with faculties unshackled. On another ground, this delay is much to be deplored. In the Speech from the throne, the omission most surprising is this: the approbation of parliament has been called for, on the conduct of the American war, and their congratulation on the state of affairs in Europe; and yet, a most extraordinary fact has not even been alluded to; namely, that after the conclusion of a definitive treaty of peace, under the pressure of taxation, which the continuance of the American war entails, we are actually keeping on foot, on the continent, an army of 40,000 men. What is the reason of this continuance of warlike exertions? What examples can be shown in former times of the maintenance in time of peace, 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 expenditure of the country, and the necessity of reducing the burthens which press on the community was strongly urged on the government, we were told, that enough would be done; that we should judge the government by its acts; that when we again met we should see that enough would have been done to meet our wishes. But was one word said to hint, that in the interval a new army was to be formed in time of peace on the continent? I will not say that no circumstances can justify the formation of this army; I will not even say that the circumstances of the present times do not justify it—but I will affirm, that nothing can justify its being concealed from parliament. If such a measure was taken, it should have been done by parliament; at least, the intention should not have been concealed from parliament; and least of all when parliament was assembled, should we be informed of the state of the war in America, of the state of our affairs in Europe, and yet left in ignorance of this most stupendous fact, that an immense army is kept on foot by us on the continent, in the midst of perfect peace in this quarter of the globe. 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 cur rency, 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 advisers of his Royal Highness did not think would be fulfilled, such a descrip tion was true. But he thought it was much more consistent with the respect due to parliament and to the country, that they should not put forth promises which they might not be able to accomplish, but to trust to the opinion that there existed in his Majesty's ministers every disposi taxes which are paid by them. In the present state of our circulation is to be found the origin of all those difficulties, which some persons have improvidently attempted to remove by imposing duties on the import of the necessaries of life. These attempts for two years together parliament has most prudently checked. I hope it will ever discourage them. I, for one, will ever raise my voice against them. Ition to avoid war, when war could with will never consent to remedy the artificial difficulties which have been created by the neglect of parliament, by imposing a tax on the subsistence of the labouring classes of this community. I will never consent to pass laws which not only are utterly impolitic and unjust to the community, but which strike at the very root of the interests which they affect to protect. For, far from assisting the farmer or supporting the landholder, I believe that if all the catalogue of proposed measures were searched, there is not one which more certainly would bring ruin on both these classes, than the imposing great duties on the importation of grain. That the agriculture of this country labours under great difficulties, I do not deny; it is unfortunately too perfectly shown by the reports on your table. But the true cause of this depression is in the state of the circulation of the country-the true remedy is, that, unterrified by the magnitude of the subject, and not on that account indefinitely postponing it, we should proceed to the discussion, meeting with firmness the difficulties which must attend it. If, therefore, to this subject the passage in the Speech applies, I cannot but applaud it. Being on the ground, I must state, that though I cannot concur in the Address, I do not wish to be understood to object to the general complimentary part, still less to the grief expressed at the melancholy indisposition of his Majesty. Though I have objections, and irreconcileable objections to the Address, I shall not propose any amendment, since my observations principally apply to the general, profuse, and warlike character of the Speech. The Earl of Liverpool rose to reply to the observations made by the noble baron who had preceded him, on the several topics which were referred to in the Address which had been moved. He saw no ground for the assertion of the noble baron, that the Speech was of a profuse and warlike cast. If it was meant that it did not hold out expectations which the honour be avoided; that they would The war on suppose that they turned on points which were not known to be the subjects of discussion. The Prince Regent had told them from the throne that they were still pending, and till they shall have produced some result, it would be obviously improper to enter into the discussion of the subject. By the expression in the Speech, that his Royal Highness would be willing to conclude peace on just and honourable terms -it was not meant terms honourable or just towards ourselves alone, but to both parties. These terms might, of course, differ according to circumstances; but it was meant to express, that notwithstanding the character of the aggression on the part of the United States, at a moment when we were struggling against a powerful and inveterate foe, that the Prince Regent, even under these circumstances, was possessed with no desire to grasp at extraor dinary advantages, or to require more than was due in justice to the country, and to his own honour. In the allusion of the Speech to the severe pressure on the inhabitants of the United States, it was not intended to imply that such a pressure on any set of persons was in itself subject of pleasure to us, but that the circumstances which had occurred had given the subjects of the United States an idea of the cruelty of the war into which their rulers had plunged them-of horrors not peculiar to this war, but common to all such contests. The noble baron had alluded to some of the events of the campaign, and especially to the conduct of the officers, after the capture of Washington, with disapprobation. Now he could boldly affirm, that there never was a war carried on, under any circumstances, with more humanity than that which had been displayed by the British officers and British troops in the war in North America. In the campaign in Canada, except a solitary instance of justifiable retaliation, there was no instance in which our army had taken possession of American towns or territory, in which private property had not been respected. Quite the contrary was the conduct of the persons employed by the government of the United States. They had, in many cases, displayed a ferocity which would have disgraced the most bar. barous nations. In one instance, a town was, in the middle of December, committed by them to the flames, and the inhabitants thus driven from their habitations into the open country amidst all the severities of a Canadian winter. On ano ther occasion, when the town of York, the capital of Upper Canada, was occupied by the Americans, they burnt the public buildings, and took possession of the property of the governor as such. It was a retaliation for this excess that the public buildings at Washington were destroyed: and by the Americans themselves, in their account of the occupation of that city by our troops, it had been acknowledged that the greatest respect was paid to private property. As to the capitals of Europe, the occupation of which by hostile armies had been referred to by the noble baron, they had in most or in all instances been occupied by capitulation. Washington, on the contrary, was completely abandoned by the constituted authorities, and the plunder most complained of had been committed by the negroes and other low inhabitants of the town itself. As to the proclamation of sir Alexander Cochrane, it was issued in consequence of the advices from sir George Prevost respecting the outrages of the Americans in Canada; but as some sort of explanation of these occurrences had been made by the American government, instructions had been sent to sir Alexander Cochrane, which would prevent any steps from being taken in consequence of that proclamation. The opinion of the noble baron, that the exertions of this country against America would unite all classes there in hostility towards us, was, he had reason to believe, completely erroneous. For he had seen much stronger justifications of the conduct of our forces at Washington, which had been published in America, than any that had been published even in this country. Not only were they not more hostile to us, but the reverse was the case. In places even where the British arms had been successful the people had shown themselves in our favour, and had seemed well disposed to put themselves under our protection. Far from any thing like resentment appearing to lurk against us, the inhabitants seemed sensible that on our parts the war was a war of necessity, provoked by their own rulers, and carried on by us with all possible humanity.-The noble earl then proceeded to remark on the subject of the delays which had attended the opening of the great Congress. Although it was obvious, that the sooner the affairs of Europe were decided the better, yet if the noble baron considered from what a war we had emerged, the duration of that thing more; there would be many other opportunities, and it was difficult to say any thing on it without saying more than the present occasion would admit of. His lordship then said, that he had gone through the several topics alluded to by the noble baron, and saw no ground for his objections. The temper of the advisers of the Prince Regent was, that they were disposed to peace, yet not afraid of war. war, and what circumstances had hap-foot of a large army, the course of expened during its continuance-that such change had rapidly returned to its old alterations had taken place that it was im-state. On this subject he should say nopossible to restore Europe exactly to its former state, he would not think it surprising that some delay had occurred. So many previous explanations were necessary, that though it was desirable that each nation, and all Europe should know as soon as possible on what it had to depend, yet the time which had been consumed was not matter of astonishment.As to the continuance of a British army on the continent in time of peace, he admitted that there were no examples of a Lord Grenville spoke in explanation as similar line of conduct; but it was to be to a part of his speech which the noble observed, that neither had he any prece-earl seemed to have totally misconceived. dent for many generations, of a war which had terminated under such circumstances as the late contest. The unusually large vote of credit, which parliament last year granted, a vote which the contemplation of the continuance of the American war was not sufficient to account, was demanded by himself, and by his noble friend (lord Castlereagh) in another place, on the distinct ground of the expediency of keeping a certain force on foot on the continent, until the affairs of Europe were finally arranged. From the peculiar circumstances of the times, there did not seem to him much danger that such a measure would be drawn into a precedent. -As to the last paragraph in the Speech which seemed to the noble baron ambiguous, the object was to express the wish of his Royal Highness that the trade of the country should be put on such a settled and regular footing, as in time of war had not been practicable. The influence of the government on the commerce of the country had, in consequence of the peculiar circumstances of the late contest, been greater than perhaps in other times would be expedient. To bring this subject to a settled footing, most expedient for the public interest, was the object of this part of the Speech. As to the state of the circulation of the country, his opinions were now as different from those of the noble baron as they had been on former occasions. He had always thought that the pressure on our circulation had arisen from the peculiar circumstances of the late war, and the events of the last six months had verified his opinions to an extent which even his friends had not expected. Even under the circumstances of the great existing expenditure of the American war, and the continuance on He said, he had expressly stated his high admiration of the spirit and discipline of our troops engaged in the war with America. He had imputed no blame to sir George Prevost for the proclamation which he had issued: on the contrary, he thought most highly of that proclamation, which referred to the conduct of the Americans in destroying a particular town; than which a more villainous act was never perpetrated by the most ferocious savages. But sir George Prevost, if he recollected the proclamation, expressly confined the retaliation to that single instance: that officer said in substance, by this retaliation I have done an act painful to my feelings, and repugnant to the received principles of civilized warfare; but here will I stop, till you compel me by some new atrocity to greater acts of retaliation.' A juster or a wiser proclamation never was issued, and there the matter should have terminated, the whole object being at once accomplished. He was glad now to learn, that government, availing itself of the disclaimer of the American president, though conveyed in a most violent and intemperate paper, had sent out instructions to come to an explanation with the American government, which might put an end to such proceedings in future. Even now it had not been distinctly stated by the noble earl, that the destruction of the non-military buildings at Washington was in retaliation of what had been done at York. Sure he was, that no such declaration was issued at the time by our commander: but if the fact were so, it would not be unbecoming on the part of government to publish a declaration, in answer to the irritating and intemperate proclamation of the American president, which might convince all Europe that we |