the reasoning of the honourable gentleman was exceedingly thort. The motion appeared to be altogether unneceffary. He was not aware of any good end that could be an fwered, nor of any blame that could be fixed on minifters, in confequence of a French general being referred to a letter, which, evidently, on the face of the tranfaction, muft have been written before government was acquainted with the convention alluded to having been figned by any British of ficer. The letter therefore could not fiate any new fact: nor had Mr. Jones offered any thing in addition to what he had urged unfuccefsfully in the laft feffion of parliament. As foon as it was known in England, that the French general had the faith of a British officer pledged to him, and was difpoled to act upon it, instructions were fent out to have the convention executed, though the officer in queftion had, in fact, no authority to fign it. The contents of lord Keith's letter were far from being a fecret. It was printed, quoted, and univerfally known in July laft, when Mr. Jones brought forward a queftion on the fame fubject, which the house thought proper to negative. The next thing for the house to confider, was, in what manner the prefent fubject was connected with the late correfpondence between France and this country relative to an armistice. By the obfervations accompanying the motion, it was fhewn, that, in making the propofal, the French government meant to derive great advantage from the relief it might be enabled to fend both to Malta and Egypt; a relief which it could not hope for, while our fleets and ar

mies purfued their operations against them: and thus, it was evident that France fet great value on reinforcing thofe places, which we had an equal intereft in preventing them from doing. As we had, fince the convention of El-Arith, taken Malta from the enemy, we were, in a degree proportionate to the importance of that ifland, masters of preventing them from fending any reinforcements to Egypt, the maritime places of which were, befides, blocked by our fleets. So far then it was plain, that, in respect to Egypt, France was not on higher ground, now that we were in poffeffion of Malta, than it was at the time when general Kleber firft entered into the capitulation. And he could not conceive what it was that gentlemen thought they could complain of. When parliament confidered the conduct of his majefty's minifters, in refufing to acquiefce in a convention which they did not know to have had the fanc tion of a British officer, it fhould difcufs that conduct with a reference to what was the state of Kleber's army at the time; with a reference to the condition of the war in Italy at the beginning of the campaign, when it was extremely doubtful whether the iffue might be favour able to one fide or the other; and moft of all in this doubtful state of the termination of the conteft, with a reference to the effect which such a reinforcement as that of the army of Egypt might be likely, under all the circumftances, to have on the war on the continent.

Mr. Grey, in answer to thefe pofitions, refpecting the pofition of Kleber's army, the state of the bel ligerent armies in Italy, and the exifting circumftances of the war,

all together, faid, that the prefent motion did not preclude the confleration of any of these topics, but calv aked for fuch information as would enable the house to judge of admiral Keith's inftructions. It was not to be fuppofed, that the prefent motion would ftand alone; but, if carried, be followed by others of a more comprehenfive With respect to fir Sidney Smith's powers, it was not neceffary for him to be specially inftructed, either to sanction or to reject a convention. Sir Sidney was the British officer commanding on the fpot. And nothing was more undeniable, than that every military commandant had power to accept any flipulations, which his prudence might direct him to agree to with the enemy, without having any fpecial authority for the purpofe. On fuch occafions, government were bound, in good faith, to admit what their officers ftipulated: and, if it were otherwife, the confequences would be fubverfive of those principles on which war was now conducted between civilized nations. On thefe and other grounds, Mr. Grey defended the propriety and the neceflity of the motion: which he confidered as a preliminary step to farther inquiry into the the conduct of minifters on this important and interefting fubject. Mr. Grey's obfervations on the powers of fir Sidney Smith, were fupported by Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Tierney, and Mr. Hobhoufe. Mr. Sheridan obferved, that the houfe of commons could not, with out a neglect of its duty, omit entering into an inquiry into the matter before them: for he held it as a principle, which fhould never be loft fight of, that when an officer,

either general or admiral, was em ployed, to take it for granted, that whatever fuch an officer did in name, and on the behalf of the country he ferved, was done according to his inftructions, until the contrary was proved; otherwife nations could never. confide in any propofal. Mr. Tierney faid, that it was a part of the national compact to regard officers under government, abroad upon service in time of war, as having a certain portion of power, to be exercised according to their difcretion, for the purpofe of alleviating, or perhaps putting an end to, the horrors of war. What was oblerved by Mr. Hobhoufe, had a reference to what had been afferted by Mr. Pitt, who had spoken a fecond time in explanation, on the present fubject. Mr. Pitt, laid, that, before the order to lord Keith went out, there was no fuppofition that fir Sidney Smith was then in Egypt, nor that he would be a party to the treaty between the Ottoman Porte and the French general. When he did take a part in that tranfaction, it was not a direct part. He did not exercile any direct power: if he had done fo, he would have done it without authority. He had no fuch power from his fituation: for he was not commander-in-chief. Large powers, for obvious reasons, must be given to a commander-in-chief, fubject to the difcretion of the perfon with whom they were intrusted. But that neither was nor ought to be the cafe with every officer of inferior ftation. Such perfon, however great his talents, fhould not go beyond a fpecified point; -for otherwife he might treat for whole provinces, and counteract his fupe rior in commad. But Mr. Hob

houfe

house obferved, that if even a fubordinate officer, intrufted with the direction of a particular enterprife, entered, as fir Sidney Smith had done, into a convention, which, ftri&tly fpeaking, he had no powers to conclude, many examples could be found, of cafes in which the commander-in chief thought himfelf bound to ratify what the fubordinate officer had done, and in which government had ratified the confent of the commanding officer. Was not this the cafe at Cape Nicola Mole, when general Whitlock, though a fubordinate officer, without any specific powers, and without the confent of the commanderin chief, agreed to a convention which general Williamson, the commander-in-chief, afterwards thought himfelf bound to ratify, and which was afterwards ratified by government? An objection had been made to the form in which the motion was worded. This, indeed, Mr. Hobhoufe did not think quite fo accurate, and recommended it to his honourable friend to make fome alteration in it.

Mr. Yorke, after obferving that the motion was not of a parliamentary form, because parliament could have no power over a letter which muft be in the poffeffion of general Kleber, expreffed his aftonishment that any one could have the confidence to fay, in that houfe, that the British fleet was in the leaft degree injured by that which took place, on our behalf, in Egypt;, and that the more especially after we had been in poffeffion of the intercepted French correfpondence on that fubjec.

Mr. Percival faid, that the Englifh, after the orders from government had been communicated to

them by lord Keith, had done nos thing to break the treaty. The Englifh committed no act of hoftility. But the French, on receiving the communication from lord Keith, had chofen to break it themfelves. If there was any breach of faith, it was on the fide of the French. When government heard that the French had trufted and acted on the belief that this country would confent to the convention, it fent out orders not to ratify, but to refpect it. With regard to the motion before the houfe, he could not recollec that he had ever heard one fupported by lefs argument. He readily allowed, that the publication of a letter was not a fufficient means of information for the purpofe of founding on it any specific motion. But, if this was the intention, the fupporters of the motion ought to have argued from the contents of the letter, that it would afford ground on which to reft a motion.

Mr. Jones, as a proof that this country was a party in the convention of El-Arifh, ftated, that it was an article in this, that paffports should be given to the French by the Porte, and by its allies, Ruffia and England. As to the form of the motion, faid Mr. Jones, I am prepared. On fuch occafions as thefe, I generally go doubly armed, and now move, "That an humble addrefs be prefented to his majesty, that he will be gracioufly pleafed to give directions, that copies of all letters from the commander-in-chief of the fleet in the Mediterranean to general Kleber be laid on the table of this houfe." This motion was rejected by 80 noes against 12 ayes.

The repeated mifcarriage of Mr. Jones's motions, in the house of

commons,

commons, did not difcourage lord Holland from moving, on the 23d of December, 1800, in the house of lords, the production of certain papers relative to the evacuation of Egypt. His lordship adverted to the circumftances of the treaty of El-Arith, and concluded, from the information fuffered to tranfpire, that Kleber had neceflarily broken the convention for his own fecurity; which unhappy affair had had a material effect on the late negotiations. He cenfured the conduct of minifters in the whole tranfaction, as guided by a narrow fyftem of policy, which, in order to grafp at little advantages, fuffers occafions of important aggrandifement to go by. Being therefore perfuaded that the prefent tenure of Egypt by the French was owing to the mifconduct of his majesty's minifters, and was a principal obftacle to our enjoyment of the bleflings of peace, he thought it a duty incumbent on him to call for fuch papers as would tead to throw light on the subject. He therefore moved,

"That an humble addrefs be prefented to his majefty, entreating that his majesty would be gracioufly pleafed to order that there be laid before the house, a copy of the powers granted to fir Sidney Smith, on his million to the fublime Porte: "Copies of all letters written by the English ambafador at Confiantople to fir Sidney Smith, during his flay at Acre and El-Arith:

"Čopies of the inftructions fent out by his majesty's minifters to the Commander-in-chief of the Mediterranean fleet :

"And copies of all letters written by the commander-in-chief to any of the French generals commanding in Egypt.”

VOL. XLIII.

Lord Grenville, on the queftion being put, faid, that he feared no contradiction in afferting, that the continuance of the French army in Egypt was not occafioned by the breach of the convention of ElArith; that they had practifed a deception on the Ottoman government, and amufed them with hopes of a negotiation which they broke. He was unwilling to fay much of the conduct of a perfon who was now no more: but he was compelled to declare, that nothing could have been more unjustifiable than the perfidious conduct of general Kleber, in the attack he afterwards made on the army of the grand vizier by furprife. That general had been guilty of the violation of the treaty of El-Arifh, by declaring afterwards that he would evacuate it, with feveral variations which circumftances rendered neceffary: whilft his aid-de-camp had affured the Kaimakan, that general Kleber would execute the engagements as foon as transports arrived. He really believed that, among all the inftances which Great Britain had given during this war of good faith, it he was called on to felect one out of the reft, he fhould be inclined to pitch upon this very refolution of the British government to abide by the convention entered into between the Turks (not the British government) and the French at El-Arifh.

Lord Hobart entreated the house to confider, what was the state of affairs on the continent of Europe at that time, and what might probably have been the confequence, if 20,000 seasoned troops, flushed with fuccefs, had been permitted to come to Egypt, and join the French army on the continent? Had [D]

the

the refult of fuch an addition to the French force been fimilar to what was unfortunately the refult of the late campaign in Italy, he would afk what blame would not, in that cafe, have been imputed to the conduct of minifters, in permitting the French army to evacuate Egypt, and join their forces in Europe? The eagerness of lord Holland to fpeak further on this fubject being reftrained by the chancellor, the houfe divided: when the motion was negatived by 12 votes against

two.

Of a debate involving fo deeply the character of the British government and nation, we have given a fuller account than might have been warranted, had not their good faith been loudly arraigned both abroad and at home: It is not our manner to interrupt our brief narrative, whether of facts or reafonings, by reflections, yet, on the prefent occafion, we cannot help remarking, that the good policy of our government, in the whole of their conduct refpecting the convention of ElArith, was as little cenfurable on the ground of policy as on that of good faith. The conduct of all minifters ought to be firictly watched; and, in this country, it still happily is fo. Some charges, however, would be fpared, if it were duly confidered that minifters poflefs, on great political queftions, the beft means of information, and the beft opportunities of contemplating events and councils in all their bearings. As, on the one hand, the public profperity is fometimes afcribed to government, when it is purely the work of fortune; fo they may be fometimes right when they are thought wrong by thofe whofe poAtions do not command a view of

the whole of the paffing scenes to be taken into confideration.

On the subject of that part of his majefty's fpeech which related to the late negotiations for peace, a motion was made in the house of commons, on the 1st of December, by

Mr. Sheridan, who, inftead of pointing out with minutenefs, as he had once intended, where minifters had been guilty of infincerity, where of prevarication, where of hypocrify, where of weakness, and endeavoured to prove from the past conduct of our allies, and their prefent views, that we ought to difentangle ourselves from all continental connexions as foon as poffible, and, by entering into a feparate negotiation, conclude a feparate peace. In doing this, he laid down two propofitions, and cftablished upon the fe two feparate conclufions. The first propofition was, that, from the commencement of the confederacy, there had exifted in the different ftates which compofed it, a mercenary fpirit, a fole view to private aggrandifement, the grofleft and most fhameful infincerity. The conlufion from hence was, that we should withdraw from it, and avoid the obftacles which it threw in the way of peace. The fecond propofition was, that there appeared the ftrong-. eft ground to fulpect, that in all the negotiations for peace which minif ters had carried on, although they might not have thwarted their plenipotentiaries, although there might have been conditions to which they would have acceded, ftiil that they had never fincerely wished for fuccefs, and never fincerely lamented the want of it. The inference from. this was plain. Since the fame minifters remained in office, the inter

ference