upon ourselves. If, however, the views of France were correspondent with our own, we had every prospect of enjoying a long peace. He saw some symptoms that they were, though upon this he had no certain knowledge; but he would never rely upon personal character for the security of his country. He was inclined to hope every thing that was good, but he was bound to act as if he feared otherwise.

He concluded by giving his assent to the motion.

The question upon the address was afterwards put, and agreed to without a division.

June 3. 1803.

COLONEL PATTEN, having previously given notice of a motion of censure against. His Majesty's ministers, this day submitted to the House the following resolutions:

1. "That it appears to this House, from the declaration issued by His Majesty on the 18th day of May last, and laid before this House by His Majesty's command, that the conduct of the French republic, during the whole period which has elapsed since the conclusion of the definitive treaty of peace, is considered by His Majesty's ministers as having been altogether inconsistent with every principle of good faith, moderation, and justice; as having exhibited one continued series of aggression, violence, and insult, and as necessarily creating a thorough conviction of a system deliberately adopted by France for the purpose of degrading, vilifying, and insulting His Majesty and his government.

2. "That His Majesty's ministers having throughout the whole period, from the conclusion of the definitive treaty of peace, to the issuing of His Majesty's declaration of the 18th day of May last, neither communicated to parliament any knowledge of the sense which they now appear to have entertained respecting the conduct and system of France, nor any regular information of the particulars on which the same was founded, or of the steps taken by His Majesty's government thereupon, have thereby withheld from this House the necessary materials for a due and full discharge of its constitutional functions; and that, by encouraging throughout the country an unfounded security and confidence in the permanence of peace, they have embarrassed and perplexed our commerce, have deceived the expectations, and unnecessarily harassed the spirit of the people, and have ma terially increased and aggravated the difficulties of our actual situation.

5. "That it was the duty of His Majesty's ministers to make timely and adequate representations against such acts as have, in their judgment, constituted a series of aggressions, violence, and insult on the part of France. That, by dignified and temperate remonstrances, followed up with consistency, and sustained with firmness, either the course and progress of such acts would have been arrested, without the necessity of recurring to arms, or the determination of the French government to persist therein would have been distinctly ascertained, before His Majesty had, by the reduction of his forces, and the surrender of his conquests, put out of his hands the most effectual means of obtaining redress and reparation, That this essential duty appears to have been, in a very great degree, neglected by His Majesty's ministers; and that such their neglect and omission have been highly injurious to the public interests.

4. "That it appears to this House, that on the 17th of October last, counter-orders were dispatched by His Majesty's government, revoking the orders before given for the surrender of the Cape of Good Hope, and of the other conquests then held by His Majesty; and that the final order, by virtue of which His Majesty's forces actually evacuated the Cape, was sent on the 16th of November. That on the said 16th of November, the hostile spirit of France had (in the judgment of His Majesty's ministers, as now avowed by them) already been manifested, for more than six months, by one continued series of aggression, violence, and insult, for which neither reparation nor redress had, down to that moment, been obtained. That the offensive principle had already been distinctly advanced, of excluding His Majesty from all concern in the affairs of the Continent; that the Spanish and other priories had already been withdrawn from the Order of Malta; Piedmont, Parma, Placentia, and Elba, had been annexed to France; Switzerland had been attacked and subjugated, and the remonstrance of His Majesty's government upon that subject had been treated with indignity and contempt; the territory of the Batavian republic was at that very moment still occupied by the armies of the Chief Consul of France, and its internal administration still controlled by his interference: and the French government was then actually engaged in the pursuit of those plans and measures for the subversion of the Turkish empire, to which His Majesty's declaration refers, as a violation of the treaty of peace. That in directing, under such circumstances, the final surren der of the Cape, without having previously explained or arranged the numerous points of difference and complaint which then actually subsisted between the two governments, His Majesty's ministers acted in contradiction to the sense which they had themselves manifested of their own duty, and have improvidently exposed to danger some of the most important interests of His Majesty's dominions.

5. "That, by all these instances of misconduct in the present ministers

of His Majesty's government, they have proved themselves unworthy of the confidence reposed in them in such an important crisis as the present." As soon as the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Addington) sat down, Mr. PITT rose:

If I possessed a full and clear opinion on the merits of the case, to the extent of either directly negativing or adopting the resolutions which have been proposed, I should, following the unbiassed dictates of my conscience, give my vote on that side to which my judgment inclined. If I agreed with my right honourable friend *, in thinking that the first steps we ought to take in duty to the public, were, by a retrospective survey of the conduct of ministers, to judge of their fitness to exercise the functions to which they are called; and if, upon that result, I were forced to conclude, that the papers on the table afforded evidence of criminality, of incapacity, of misconduct, then, however painful the sacrifice of private feelings might be, in taking such a part in the case of individuals whom I respect, I should feel myself bound to concur in an address to His Majesty for the removal of his ministers. On the other hand, if I were one of those who considered the explanation afforded by ministers upon general points so clear as to justify a decided negative of the propositions moved by the honourable gentleman over the way-a negative which would imply approbation, (for in such a matter to avoid ground of censure may be considered the same as to have deserved applause,) I should feel myself happy in joining in a decided negative to the motion. But to this extent, either of approbation or of censure, I am unable to go. I cannot concur in the latter, or in the extent of the charges involved in the propositions which have been moved.

Besides, I am aware of the inconveniences that would result from supporting any measure which has the tendency of the present motion, unless the clearest necessity exists for it. Though I do not dispute the right of this House to address the King for the removal of ministers, yet nothing is more mischievous than a parliamentary interference by declared censure, rendering the con

* Mr. Grenville.

tinuance of ministers in office impossible, unless that interference is justified by extraordinary exigency of affairs. Not disputing the right of the House, I contend that the right is to be governed by a sound discretion and by the public interest. We must look to considerations of public expediency and of public safety. There are some questions, in the discussion of which gentlemen must feel more than they can well express, and this, with regard to the interference of parliament for removing ministers, is one of them. Admitting even that there were considerable grounds of dissatisfaction at the conduct of ministers, would it tend to promote those exertions, to encourage those sacrifices, which the difficulty and danger of our situation require? Would our means of sustaining the struggle in which we are engaged, and of calling forth those resources necessary for our defence, be improved by cutting short the date of administration, and unsettling the whole system of government? To displace one administration, and to introduce a new one, is not the work of a day. With all the functions of executive power suspended; with the regular means of communication between parliament and the throne interrupted; weeks, nay months, wasted in doubt, uncertainty, and inaction, how could the public safety consent to a state of things so violent and unnatural, as would result from parliament rendering one administration incapable of exercising any public functions, without any other efficient government being obtained in its stead? I will venture to hint also, that after such a step any administration that should succeed, be it what it might, and what it would be must still depend upon the crown, would feel itself placed in a most delicate situation. To put the matter as conscientiously and delicately as possible, would any set of men feel their introduction to power in these circumstances to be such as to enable them to discharge, in a manner satisfactory to themselves, the duties which so eventful a period must impose? These are considerations for the crown and the public, and they outweigh all those which present themselves, on a partial view of the advantages which could be hoped from a prosecution of that censure

I am aware that the right honourable gentleman on the floor, and my friends on the same bench with him, must feel their situation irksome under the weight of a question so important, in which they are personally involved, remaining undecided. Nevertheless, when other sacrifices are demanded for the public interest, personal feelings must be overlooked. Those who with me have not made up their minds to the extent of censuring ministers by the adoption of the propositions, or of approving their conduct by agreeing to a direct negative, must pursue some middle course. They cannot do that which must imply approbation, when they do not find from the case made out that approbation has been deserved; neither can they vote severe censure, leading to an address for removal, when they do not consider the charges made as completely sustained.

Having stated the opposite lines of conduct which present themselves in deciding upon the propositions, I do not intend to enter into any detailed discussion of the papers. I wish, if good cannot be obtained by continuing to discuss them comparable to the evil of interrupting the course of our parliamentary duty, to suspend them altogether. Since things more urgent and more important demand our care, let us make good the parliamentary pledge we have given. I shall behold with much greater satisfaction as first proofs of our determination to support His Majesty with our lives and fortunes, you, Sir, presenting a strong bill of supply providing resources, not merely for every demand of public service, but adequate to every scale of exertion; a measure that will display and call forth the means of sustaining the struggle, not merely for one year, but till we shall have brought it to a successful issue; some measures by which we shall be enabled to complete our army, and to call into action the national strength, and give activity to all the military skill, discipline, and experience we possess. I do not know if gentlemen feel as I do upon this occasion, or if I have been successful in making my feelings understood. Impressed as I am with those feelings, and unprepared for the decisive vote which is offered in the direct negative or

*The Chancellor of the Exchequer.