Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

ANSWER of the BRITISH GOVERNMENT to the SPANISH DECLARATION of WAR *.

THE open aggreffions of Spain, the violences committed against the perfons, and property of his majefty's fubjects, and the unprovoked declaration of war on the part of that power, have at length compelled his majefty to take the neceffary measures for repelling force by force, and for vindicating the dignity of his crown, and the rights and interefts of his people.

At the moment of adopting these meafures, his majefty feels it due to himfelf to remove every doubt which can be thrown on the indifputable juftice of his caufe; and it will be eafily proved from the very reafons adduced by the court of Madrid in fupport of its declaration of war, that all the calamities which may enfue are folely to be attributed to the conduct of his enemies.

A fimple reference to that declaration, and a bare enumeration of the vague and frivolous charges which it contains, would indeed be fufficient to fatisfy all reasonable and impartial minds, that no part of the condu of Great Britain toward Spain has afforded the malleft ground of complaint, much lefs any motive fufficiently powerful for adding to the prefent calami ties of Europe, all the evils of a new and complicated war.

The only difficulty of a detailed reply arifes not from the strength and importance of the complaints alleged, but from their weakness and futility-from the confufed and unintelligible' fhape in which they are brought forward, and from the impoffibility of referring them to any eftablished principle or rule of juftice, to any ufual form or topic of complaint between independent governments, or to any of thofe motives which can alone create the painful duty of an appeal to arms.

The acts of hoftility attributed to his majefty in the manifefto of Spain, confift either of matters perfectly innocent and indifferent in their nature, or ot imputed opinions and intentions of which no proof is adduced, nor any effect alleged, or laftly, of complaints of the mifconduct of unauthorised individuals; refpecting all which his majesty has never failed to inftitute inquiry, where inquiry was neceffary, and to caufe juftice to be done in the regu

lar courfe of judicial proceedings. The very nature of fuch complaints affords a fufficient anfwer to the conclufion attempted to be drawn from them by Spain; and his ma efty might have been well juftified in declining all further difcuffion on points, on which it was manifeft that no just mo. tive of hoftility could be grounded.

Such, however, was not his conduct. Anxious to avert from both kingdoms the calamities of war, he has repeatedly and vainly proposed to adjust, by friendly dif cuffion, all points of difference which could fubfift between the governments of two nations whofe real intereft were the fame, and who had an equal concern in oppofing the progrefs of a common enemy.

This difcuffion having always been stu dioufly avoided by the court of Madrid, it now remains only for his majesty to vindicate, in this public manner, his own cause, and to prove the futility of those pretences by which that court now seeks to colour its aggreffion.

The first point brought forward to fup port an accufation of ill-faith is, the conduct of the king's admiral at Toulon; who is charged with having destroyed thofe fhips and naval ftores' of the enemy which he could not carry away with him and with having afterward undertaken an expedition to Corfica without the knowledge or participation of the Spanish admiral. To an accufation of fuch a nature, alleged as a ground for war between two great nations, it can hardly be expected that a ferious anfwer fhould be given. It is, perhaps, the first time that it had been imputed as a crime to one of the commanding officers of two powers acting in alliance, and making common cause in war, that he did more than his proportion of mifchief to the common enemy. And if it be really true that fuch a fentiment was entertained at Madrid, certainly no other juftification can be neceffary for not inviting the officers of that court to join in fubfequent expeditions against the fame enemy: at all events, it cannot be pretended that a cooperation between two allies (however cordial and fincere) in any one particular enterprite, could afterward reftrain either of them

See our Magazine for November, page 554.

from undertaking feparately any other, to which his own force appeared in itself to be adequate.

The fecond inftance of ill-faith attri buted to his majesty, is the conclufion of a treaty of amity and commerce with the United States of America; a power with whom both Great Britain and Spain were at peace; with whom the king, as well as his catholic majefty, was perfectly free to contract any fuch engagements; and with whom the court of Madrid has actually concluded a fimilar treaty, with this difference only, that the ftipulations of the British treaty can give no ground of offence or injury to any other power, while the Spanish treaty contains an article (that refpecting the navigation of the Miffiffippi) which, if it could have any force or effect at all, would be, on the part of Spain, a direct breach of treaty with Great Britain, and a grofs violation of the important and unqueftionable rights of his majefty and his people.

The fame ill-faith is faid to have been manifested in the unwillingness fhewn by the British government to adopt the plans propofed by Spain for haftening the conclufion of the war with France (but what thefe plans were, it is not stated) and alfo in the omitting to comply with an applieation made by Spain for pecuniary fuccours, as neceffary to enable her to act against the common enemy. The failure of fuch an application cannot certainly be matter of furprise to any one who confiders the fituation and conduct of Spain during the war. It can hardly be alleged even as an excuse for the precipitate peace concluded by Spain, not only without the knowledge of her allies, but in contradiction to repeated and pofitive affurances; but it is difficult to conceive how fuch a refufal can be made a ground of hoftility toward Great Britain, or with what conLiftency the inability of Spain to profecute the former conteft without pecuniary aid from its ally, can have become a motive of engaging gratuitously in all the expences and difficulties of a new war against that very power.

With regard to the condemnation of the St. Jago (a prize taken from the enemy by his majesty's naval forces) his majefty has only to reply to the injurious affertions on that fubject in the Spanish manifefto, that the claims of all the parties in that caufe were publicly heard and de cided according to the known law of nations, and before the only competent tribunal; one, whofe impartiality is above all fufpicion.

The conduct of his majesty respecting the naval ftores which were claimed by Spain on board Dutch veffels, has been in like manner exempt from all blame; nor was any unneceffary delay interpofed refpecting thofe cargoes till the equivocal conduct of Spain, and the strong and just fufpicion of her hoftile difpofitions, made it impoffible for his majesty to confent to fupply her from the ports of his dominions with the means of acting against himself.

The next charge relates to the alleged mifconduct of fome merchant-fhips in landing their crews on the coaft of Chili and Peru, with a view of carrying on there an illicit commerce, and of reconnoitring the country. On this it is to be obferved, that thofe views are not fupported by any fact whatever; that if any act was in truth committed by individuals in those territories against the laws of the government established there, those laws might have been enforced upon the spot, and that the court of London has always been open to receive and redress all complaints of that nature; but that what is affigned in the manifefto as a mere cover and pretext for fraud, namely, the exercife of the whale fishery by the English in thofe parts, is not, as is there afferted, a right which the English claim under the convention of Nootka.' It is one, which was not then for the first time established, but folemnly recognized by the court of Madrid, as having always belonged to Great Britain, and the full and undisturbed exercife of which was guaranteed to his majesty's fubjects in terms fo exprefs as to admit of no doubt, and in a tranf. action fo recent, that ignorance of it cannot be pretended.

[ocr errors]

Such, it feems, were the offences of the British government, and such the jealou fies and apprehenfions of Spain, during the time when the courts of London and Madrid were united in the bonds of alliance, and engaged in a common cause; and it is on motives as frivolous as these, that the court of Madrid began to project an offenfive alliance with the king's enemies; a defign which it now profeffes to have entertained from the moment when it separated itself from the common cause, but which was, long after that period, difguised under the moft pofitive and explicit affurances of neutrality.

It is infinuated, that the good offices of his catholic majefty, for bringing about a general pacification, had been tendered to Great Britain, and had been refused. What degree of impartiality could have been expected from fuch a mediation, the

difpofitions which Spain now avows herfelf to have entertained at that period fuf. ficiently fhew; his majefty exercised his undoubted right of judging for himself and for his people, how far a negociation commenced under fuch aufpices was likely to contribute to the honour and intereft of his dominions; and he now finds the propriety of his decifion confirmed beyond a doubt, by the conduct and avowals of Spain.

It is next stated, that in the profecution of the war in which Great Britain is engaged, her views feem uniformly to have been directed to the annoyance of the Spanifh poffeffions in America. In fupport of this accufation, are adduced an expedition directed against St. Domingo, the conqueft of the Dutch colony of Demerary, and the fuppofed establishment of British commercial companies on the banks of the Miffouri, formed with a view of penetrating to the South Sea.

This latter point is one to which it is impoffible to make a specific answer, becaufe the British government has no know. ledge of any fact to which it can refer. Within the Spanish territory, the Spanish government certainly poffeffes both the right and the power to prevent individuals from trading. Within the American territory his majefty's fubjects have by treaty a right to fettle and to trade; and they have alfo an exprefs right freely to navi. gate the Miffiffippi, by which the territories of Spain and of the United States are divided from each other. Unless, therefore, it can be fhewn that the British government has authorized any fettlement on the Spanish territory, this complaint can afford no pretence for hoftility against his majefty.

With regard to the expedition againft St. Domingo, and to the conquest of Demerary, it is impoffible to refrain from remarking, that however highly the rights of neutral nations ought to be refpected, and whatever delicacy his majefty might be difpofed to feel toward thofe of a power fo lately his ally, and not yet become his enemy, it is a new, and hitherto unheardof, claim of neutrality which is to be circumfcribed by no bounds either of time or place, which extends equally beyond the date and beyond the limits of poffeffion, and is to attach not to the territories of a neutral power itself, but to whatever may once have belonged to it, and to whatever may be fituate in its neighbour hood, although in the poffeffion of an actual enemy.

The affairs of St. Domingo merit more particularly confideration, because the attempt, on the part of Spain, to cede a part of that ifland to France, is a breach of that folemn treaty under which alone the crown of Spain holds any part of its American poffeffions. The conclusion of fuch an article, without the knowledge of an ally fo deeply concerned as Great Britain in that ftipulation, both in right and intereft, was therefore an act, fuch as would have juftified any measure to which the court of London could have recourfe; yet fo carneft was the king's defire to maintain peace with Spain, that he repeat edly endeavoured to fix, by amicable dif cuffion with that court, the period when the right of Spain to the territory fo ceded was to cease, in order that any operation, which it might become expedient for his troops to undertake there, might be directed against the French alone; and although no explanation could ever be obtained from the court of Madrid on this fubject, his commanders on the spot were reftrained from acting, and did not act against the Spanish part of the island, till the ceffion actually took place, by which it became, as far as the act of Spain could make it, a part of the territories France.

To the accufations which make up the greater part of the remainder of the mani fefto refpecting the detention or capture of merchant ships, or the violations of territory therein mentioned, it is fufficient to reply, that in every cafe of fuch a nature which has been brought to the knowledge of the British government, the most effectual measures have been inftantly taken for inftituting inquiry into the particu lars of the tranfaction, for collecting the proofs neceffary to afcertain the fact on which the charge is founded, and for submitting the whole to that regular courfe of proceeding in which justice is to be rendered in thefe cafes, according to the established practice throughout Europe, and to the exprefs ftipulations of the treaties between Great Britain and Spain.

Amid the wide and complicated operations of a naval war, extended over every quarter of the globe, it is not improbable that fome diforders and irregularities may have taken place, which the utmost vigilance of the government could not immediately difcover or reprefs; and that in the exercise of the undoubted right of a power at war, to fearch out and to feize the property of the enemy, the rights of neutral nations may, in fome inftances,

have been unintentionally expofed to temdorary moleftation. The fame obfervation was rot lefs applicable to Spain in her war with France; and the thort interval that has elapfed fince her declaration against Great Britain, has amply fhewn that fimilar complaints will arife from her conduct in the present war.

The utmost that can be demanded, in fuch cales, of a power at war is, that it fhould thew itself ready, on all occafions, to listen to the remonttrances and reclamations of thofe whom it may have aggrieved, and prompt and expeditious in redreffing their injuries, and in reftoring their property; and to the readiness of the British government to fulfil thefe duties, in every cafe where they have been called upon to do fo, even Spain herself may fafely be called to bear witnefs. Nor would it be eafy to cite a more ftriking proof of the friendly difpofition of the king's government, and of the particular attention manifefted toward the rights and interefts of Spain, than arifes from an impartial examination of the detail of what has paffed on this fubject. It will be found that the caufes of complaint, whether well or ill founded, which have been brought forward, are much fewer than ever have occurred within the fame pe"riod in former times. And the court of Spain, when called upon to fpecify particulars on this head, is obliged to have recourfe to an allegation of the depredation of Corfican privateers.

There remains but one ground upon which the court of Spain pretends to account to the world for the rafh and perfidious ftep which it has taken in declaring war against England, and to excufe to all Europe the calamities which cannot fail to refult from fuch a measure-the fuppofed decree of arrest afferted to have iffued against the Spanish ambassador at the court of London. The fact to which this relates must have been grofsly mistaken before it 'could be made to appear, even in the eyes of Spain, a fit motive for the flightest reprefentation or complaint, much more a juftifiable caufe of war between the two kingdoms.

By the ftrefs which is laid upon this tranfaction, who is there that would not be led to imagine that the lawfuit commenced against the Spanish ambaffador was attended with fome peculiar circum ftances of perfonal indignities that the infult was intentional, and originated with the British government? or that, on being apprised of the offence, the court of

London had fhewn fome unwillingness or delay in proceeding to the prosecution of the parties concerned in it?

Who but would be aftonished to learn,, that the process itself was no more than a fimple citation to answer at law for a debt demanded? That the fuing this process was the mistaken act of an individual, who was immediately difavowed by the government, and ordered to be profecuted for his conduct, and who made (but made in vain) repeated and fubmiffive applications to the Spanish ambaffador for forgiveness and interference on his behalf? That cafes of the fame nature have frequently arifen in England from the ignorance of individuals, and from the ready appeal to the laws which the happy conftitution of the country admits and autho, rizes, without the previous intervention or knowledge of any branch of the exe'cutive government? And that in all fi milar cafes, and particularly in one which had occurred only a few weeks before, precifely the fame meafures have been purfued by the government to vindicate the privileges of foreign minifters, and have uniformly, and without exception, been accepted as completely adequate to that object, and fatisfactory to the dignity and honour of the fovereign whom the case concerned?

[ocr errors]

Such are the frivolous motives, and pretended wrongs, which Spain has cholen to affign as the juftification of her declaration of war against Great Britain: fuch are the topics of complaint upon which his majefty has repeatedly offered the moft unequivocal explanation; upon which he has long and earnestly endea voured to perfuade the court of Madrid to enter into a full and amicable discussion, for the purpose of averting from his own fubjects, from thofe of his catholic majefty, and from Europe, the extremities of war.

When upon grounds of fuch a nature, and with the offer of negociation repeatedly prefented to its choice, a power has wilfully and wan only chofen a war, in which its profperity, its happinefs, and its fafety are hazarded, and in which it wil have as much to fear from the fuccefs of its allies, as from that of its enemies; it furely is not too much to prefume, that, even in its own eyes, that power is not juftified for the proceeding which it adopted, and that there must be fome unaffigned motive of irrefiftible neceffity which induces it to pursue measures alike inconfift ent with its intereft and with its honour. ̈`

It will be plain to all posterity-it is now notorious to Europe that neither to the genuine wishes, nor even to the miftaken policy of Spain, her prefent conduct is to be attributed; that not from enmity toward Great Britain, not from any refentment of paft, or apprehenfion of future injuries, but from a blind fubferviency to the views of his majefty's enemies, from the dominion ufurped over her councils and actions by her new allies, fhe has been compelled to act in a quarrel, and for interefts, not her own; to take up arms against one of thofe powers, in whofe caufe he had profeffed to feel the 1trongest interest; and even to menace with hoftility another, against whom no caufe of complaint is pretended, except its honourable and faithful adherence to its engagements.

Under thefe circumstances, his majelty forbears to enumerate the feveral grounds

[ocr errors]

of juft complaint which he has had occafion, on his part, to prefer to the court of Madrid, fince the conclufion of the peace between France and Spain-the many and grofs inftances of unjust partiality toward his enemies; and of undue protection afforded to their fhips; and of injuries committed, and allowed to be committed, on thofe of his majefty and his fubjects.

Confident of having acquitted himself to the world of any fhare in originating the prefent war, he finds, in the manifeft and unprovoked aggreffion of the enemy, a fufficient caufe for calling forth the refources of his kingdoms, and the fpirit of his fubjects; and he commits to the Divine Providence the issue of a contest, which it was to the last moment his earnest endeavour to avoid, and which he now ardently defires to bring to a speedy and honourable termination.

PROGRESS of the NEGOCIATION for PEACE: Concluded from Page 360.

NOTE from Lord MALMESBURY, In REPLY to the Letter from the Minifter of Foreign Affairs, dated Nov. 13.

THE undersigned will not fail to tranf mit to his court the note which he has just r.ceived from the minifter for foreign affairs. He alfo declares, that he thall be in the fituation (dans le cas) of expediting couriers to his court every time that the official communications which fhall be made to him shall require fpecial inftructions.

(Signed)

MALMESBURY,

Paris, Nov. 13, 1795.

NOTE from Lord MALMESBURY to the
Minifter for Foreign Affairs.

THE Court of London, informed of what paffed in confequence of the laft memorial fent by their orders to the minifter of foreign affairs, do not find there is any thing to add to the anfwer given by the underwritten to the two questions which the directory thought proper to addrefs to him.

The court of London thus ftill expects, with the greatest intereft, the explication of the fentiments of the directory refpecting the principle proposed on their part as the basis of the negociation, the adoption of which appears the most proper means of accelerating the progrefs of a difcuffion fo

important to the happiness of many na-
tions. The underwritten has, in confe-
quence received orders to renew the de-
mand of a candid and precife answer on
the fubject, in order that his court may
know exactly, and with certainty, whe-
ther the directory will accept of the faid
propofition, whether they wish to make
any changes or modifications whatever in
it, or, laftly, whether they would propofe
any other principle to answer the fame pur-
pose.
MALMESBURY.

(Signed)
Paris, Nov. 26, 1796.

ANSWER from the Minister of Foreign
Affairs to the Note from Lord
MALMESBURY.

IN answer to the note delivered yefterday, 26th Nov. (O. S.) 6 Frimaire, by lord Maimeíbury, the underwritten minifter of foreign affairs is charged by the executive directory to obferve, that the anfwers made on the 5th and 22d Brumaire, (26th October, 12th November) included the acknowledgement of the principle of compenfation: and that, to do away all pretext for further difcuffion upon that point, the underwritten, in the name of the executive directory, again makes a formal and positive declaration of the fame; in confequence of which, lord Malmesbury is again invited to give an

« AnteriorContinuar »