revolution are so numerous and complicated that it will be the work of future ages to contemplate them, in which the fufferings of thefe innocent females will make a striking figure. To those who believe that religion is the best guide of human actions, the best foundation for moral virtue, it will be matter of wonder, when they reflect on the hardfhips of these virtuous fufferers. It will be matter of admiration for them to read of the virtuous refignation of madame de la Fayette, who became the partner of the afflictions of her husband in a difmal dungeon, and who preferred her connubial affection to her liberty and life. But what will the friends of religion fay, when they learn that all this mifery was occafioned by thofe who have from day to day hypocriti cally contended that they are armed, and that they fight in the caufe of religion and morality, but who in truth make use of these words to exercife the most wanton cruelty on virtue and helpless innocence to gratify a cold malice! We all know that in the Roman Catholic faith, it is a ceremonial of piety, and devotion to attend mafs, for the object, as the profeffors of that faith believe, to obtain pardon for fins by manifeftation of fincere repentance. Thefe ladies are of this perfuafion., They are not now permitted the exercife of this devotion, which, as Chriftians, they believe to be effential to their falvation! This has been refufed to their carneft folicitation. But of this I will fay no more; I know the House will be glad to be relieved from the further contemplation of fo afflicting a scene! Of the truth however of all thefe facts there is no doubt, although they have been denied. I know too it has been faid, that thofe who bring forward thefe matters do an injury to those whom they with to ferve. Thofe who have read what has been published in the course of this war cannot be unacquainted with the publi cation of Malet Du Pan. He has given to the public a pofitive contradiction of many of the facts which I have stated, and upon the truth of which I pledge myfelf. His publication upon this fubject I have in my hand; but as it is in French, perhaps the Houfe will excufe me from reading the original to them. The substance of it is, that he wishes for the fake of these sufferers this subject had not been agitated at all. He wishes the names of these perfons to remain in total filence till history fhall have removed the veil. It is rather an extraordinary way, I think, for a man who profeffes friendfhip for the afflicted, to fhew his friendship, by wishing that the names of the afflicted should never be mentioned until VOL. I. 1796. history 3 K history has removed the veil! He fays that the Emperor hasacted throughout this affair in a manner that is irreproachable, and adds, that to the exertions of those who have interested themselves fo much in behalf of these unfortunate perfons is owing the whole of their prefent fufferings. I do not believe that any fuch confiderations weigh in that manner with his Imperial Majesty. I do not charge the Emperor with being perfonally the author of the sufferings of these unhappy perfons. Nor do I believe that if he were, the praises of Malet Du Pan would induce the world to bestow upon the Emperor the title of Titus inftead of Nero. Whatever may be the opinion of this Houfe of the political principles of general la Fayette, I know that he is a man who would not purchase his liberty even from his present confine ment, by retracting his opinions. He gave to the world a proof of it when his liberty was offered to him on condition of his betraying the French, in whofe caufe he was then engaged. I do not believe that this Houfe will difapprove of him for refufing to betray thofe who confided in his integrity. I do not believe either, that this House, or this nation, have any refentment against him for having been the author of the plan for affembling a national guard, whofe exertions have tended fo much to establish the Republick of France. Still lefs fhould I be inclined to believe that this Houfe or this country difapprove of him, because he was the companion and the friend of the illuftrious Washington in America. I have too high an opinion of the liberality of the people of this country to suppose they would harbour a fentiment fo mean. It then becomes this House to fhew, that, as the re prefentatives of a great and powerful people, living under a free conftitution, they entertain fentiments that are much more magnanimous, and that they have hearts to feel for fuffering virtue and oppreffed innocence. I owe an apology to the Houfe for having detained it fo tong, on branches that are collateral to the question which I intended to fubmit. I reft the foundation of the motion which I fhall propofe to the House upon the fact, thas general la Fayette is not the prifoner of the Emperor ; for which I have the Emperor's own authority, by which he ftates that general la Fayette is not his prifoner, for he fays exprefsly, that "his hands are tied in this bufinefs." I hold in my hand, a letter in the handwriting of Madam la Fayette herfelf, the lady of whom I have been fpeaking, verifying the fact of this being the anfwer of his Imperial Majefty. I think it impossible to give a better a better explanation of the matter; if the Emperor's hands are tied in the bufinefs, by whom are they tied? By whom can they be tied but by his allies? To whom am I applying To a House of Parliament competent to addrefs a Monarch now in alliance with his Imperial Majefty. The King of Pruffia was an ally of the Emperor in this war; publick rumour ascribed to him the cause of general la Fayette's imprisonment. That prince, however, did not chufe to continue in the odious character of jailor to general la Fayette and his companions, and therefore he transferred them to Vienna; It has been faid indeed, that in truth they have not exchanged for the better; on which I need fay nothing. I now therefore call on this Houfe for a vindication of the British name by calling for an interference to put an end to this odious cruelty. If neither the measure I propofe, nor any other of a fimilar tendency fhall be adopted, (and if any fuch is in contemplation, I fhall be happy to withdraw mine) the odium of this cruelty muft reft with this House. The right honourable gentleman told us lately, there was not an Englishman from the highest to the lowest, who was not entitled to participate in the glory arifing from the achievements of the Auftrian arms, under the aufpices of the Archduke Charles. If it be, how will they like to have it added, that they must also participate in the fhame which arifes out of the injuftice and tyranny of keeping these unfortunate perfons, unneceffarily, wantonly, and cruelly in the moft difmal imprisonment? for fo it must be if this House refuses to interfere in the prefent inftance. Upon thefe grounds I fhall propofe an addrefs fimiliar to that which I had the honour of moving on a former occafion to another House of Commons. I am speaking in a moment which I confider as favourable to a measure of this nature. We have fet on foot a negociation, for the fuccefs of which we have the anxious wishes and the fervent prayers of fuffering humanity. Am I permitted to hope that the horrors and calamities which have too long been felt, and have filled the minds and hearts of men, are about to fubfide. That they are to be fucceeded by mild and benevolent difpofitions? Sure I am, that those who have entered into this negociation cannot give to the world at large a better pledge of their having divefted their minds of that virulence and rancour which fuch a dreadful conflict too naturally creates, than by agreeing to the measure which I fhall propofe. Shall I be permitted to fay, that on the part of our allies a compliance with our defire in this cafe will be no bad indication of their fincere wishes 3 K 2 A wishes for the reftoration of Peace? Thofe who fee the queftion in the light that I do, will agree with me in the following motion: That an humble addrefs be prefented to his Majesty, to reprefent to his Majefty, that it appears to this Houf, that the detention of general la Fayette, Bureau de Pufy, and Latour Maubourg, in the prison of his Majefty's ally, the Emperor of Germany, is highly injurious to his Imperial M jefty, and to the common cause of the Allies; and humbly to implore his Majefty to intercede in fuch manner as to his wifdom fhall feem molt proper for the delivetance of thefe unfortu nate perfons." Mr. Sheridan faid, Sir, I rife with the utmost readiness and fatisfaction to second the motion, which has just been made. But I will not for a moment prevent you from ftating the question to the Houfe, nor will I rifque the chance of weakening the impreffion made upon the understanding and feelings of the House by adding any thing to what has been fo forcibly and eloquently advanced by my honourable friend, till I hear what can poffibly be urged in oppofition to that irrefiftible appeal, which he has made to the juftice and humanity of a British legiflature. The Chancellor of the Exchequer and Mr. Windam rose nearly at the fame time; and the House loudly called on Mr. Windam, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer having obtained the preference, began, Sir, in preventing the honourable gentleman from delivering his fentiments, I am fenfible that the tafk which I have taken out of his hands, is one that neither that gentleman or myself can poffibly touch upon with any degree of fatisfaction, because, feeling what I am perfuaded I feel with every member of the house, I readily admit that a more ftriking and pathetic appeal was never made to the feelings of the House, than in the eloquent and affecting speech which introduced the motion of the honourable gentleman. Irreftible, however, as that appeal was, addreffed to the fenfibility of every individual prefent, I am aware that this is a queftion to be decided by the understanding alone, and therefore cannot decline ftating to the Houfe my reafons for negativing the motion. It is more peculiarly incumbent upon me to undertake the tafk, as the honourable gentleman, in that part of his fpeech which was the most argumentative, referred particularly to what I had faid on a former occafion. The argument indeed lies in a very narrow compafs. I hope I need not declare that if I were fatisfied of the existence of the facts, even to the tenth part of what has has been stated by the honourable gentleman, and if it depended upon me to decide whether thofe facts fhould con tinue to exift, I fhould not for a moment hesitate what courfe to purfue. I am perfuaded that if the circumftances were fuch as have been defcribed, and the cafe of a nature which came within the cognizance of the Houfe, there could not poffibly exift the fmalleft difference of opinion on the subject. But I contend that however the Houfe may be affected by the reprefentation of facts, which has reached the honour able gentleman, and which I have no doubt he has reafon to believe to be true, though I have heard a very oppofite statement of the tranfaction, that the cafe is one which does properly call for our interference. The Houfe are in poffion of no facts which authorise them to take any decided ftep on the occafion; there is nothing to fatisfy them that the detention of La Fayette is a circumftance at all to be influenced by their authority, or connected with any exertion' of their power. However their humanity be interested in the recital, confidered as a queftion of political relations, it is one, which does not at all come within their cognizance. But how does the matter ftand? The honourable gentleman has quoted a verbal report of a speech of his Imperial Majefty, who is reprefented as having faid, "That the matter did not depend upon him; that it was a very complicated affair; that his hands were bound up." He therefore fuppofes from this declaration of the Emperor, that the detention of La Fayette is an event which depends on the will of his Britanic Majefty, as an ally of that princes But upon what ground is fuch a fuppofition formed? From whatever motive of duty or obligation the Emperor may have acted in adopting this measure of the detention of La Fayette, by what inference can it be concluded that the King of Great Britain is either implicated in the motive, or a party to the engagement? As to the queftion of any fuch engagement, I now declare in the most publick, folemn and explicit manner, that I know of no obligation expreffed, implied or understood by his Majefty, as at all connected with the tranfaction. I know of no communication that has paffed on the subject between the courts of London and Vienna. No opinion has been asked from this country, nor has any reafon been offered to believe that it was a question on which we could have any influence to decide. It is a tranfaction in which his Majefty has not had the smallest participation, and with refpect to which, he can have no right to interfere. As to the colours in which the honour able |