fenfe of the continued calamities of war, and of the increafing diftreffes of France herfelf, might at length have led to more juit and pacific difpofitions, his majefty renewed in another form, and through the intervention of friendly powers, a propofal for opening negotiations for peace. The manner in which this intervention was received indicated the most hoftile difpofitions towards Great Britain, and at the fame time afforded to all Europe a ftriking inftance of that injurious and offenfive conduct which is observed on the part of the French government towards all other countries. The repeated overtures made in his majesty's name were neverthelefs of fuch a nature, that it was at laft found impoffible to perfift in the abfolute rejection of them, without the direct and undifguifed avowal of a determination to refufe to Europe all hope of the restoration of tranquillity. A channel was therefore at length indicated, through which the government of France profeffed itfelf willing to carry on a negotiation; and a readinefs was expreffed (though in terms far remote from any spirit of conciliation) to receive a minifter authorifed by his majefty to proceed to Paris for that purpose. Many circumftances might have been urged as affording powerful motives against adopting this fuggeftion, until the government of France had given fome indication of a spirit better calculated to promote the fuccefs of fuch a miffion, and to meet these advances on the part of Great Britain. The king's defire for the restoration of general peace on juft and honourable terms, his concern for the interefts of his fubjects, and his determination to leave to his enemies no pretext for imputing to him the confequences of their own ambition, induced him to overlook every fuch confideration, and to take a step which these reasons alone could juftify. The repeated endeavours of the French government to defeat this miffion in its outfet, and to break off the intercourfe thus opened, even before the first steps towards negotiation could be taken; the indecent and injurious language employed with a view to irritate; the captious and frivolous objections raised for the purpose of obftructing the progrefs of the difcuffion; all these have fufficiently appeared from the official papers which paffed on both fides, and which are known to all Europe. But, above all, the abrupt termination of the negotiation has afforded the moft conclufive proof, that at no period of it was any real with for peace entertained on the part of the French government, After repeated evafion and delay, that government had at length confented to eftablish, as the bafis of the negotiation, a principle propofed by his majesty, liberal in its own nature, equitable towards his enemies, and calculated to provide for the interefts of his allies, and of Europe. It had been agreed that compenfation fhould be made to France, by proportionable reftitutions from his majefty's conquefts on that power, for thofe arrangements to which the fhould be called upon to confent in order to fatisfy the just pretenfions of his allies, and to preferve the political balance of Europe. At the defire of the French government itself, memorials were prefented by his majesty's minifter, which contained the outlines of the terms of peace, grounded on the bafis fo eftablifhed, and in which his majefty propofed ta carry to the utmost poffible extent (K 4) the the application of a principle fo equitable with refpect to France, and fo liberal on his majefty's part. The delivery of thefe papers was accompanied by a declaration exprefsly and repeatedly made, both verbally and in writing, that his majefty's minifter was willing and prepared to enter, with a fpirit of conciliation and fairnefs, into the difcuffion of the different points there contained, or into that of any other propofal or fcheme of peace which the French government might with to fubftitute in its place. In reply to this communication, he received a demand, in form the most offenfive, and in fubftance, the most extravagant, that ever was made in the courfe of any negotiauron. It was peremptorily required of him, that in the very outfet of the business, when no anfwer had been given by the French government to his first propofal, when he had not even learnt, in any regular fhape, the nature or extent of the objections to it, and much lefs received from that government any other offer or plan of peace, he fhould in twenty-four hours deliver in a statement of the final terms to which his court would in any cafe accede a demand tending evidently to fhut the door to all negotiation, to preclude all difcuffion, all explanation, all poffibility of the amicable adjustment of points of difference a demand in its nature prepofterous, in its execution impracticable, fince it is plain that no fuch ultimate refolution refpecting a general plan of peace ever can be rationally formed, much lefs declared, without knowing what points are principally objected to by the enemy, and what facilities ne may be willing to offer in return for conceffion in thofe refpects. Having declined compliance with this demand, and explained the reafons which rendered it inad. miflible, but having, at the fame time, exprefsly renewed the declaration of his readiness to enter into the difcuffion of the propofal he had conveyed, or of any other which might be communicated to him, the king's minifter received no other anfwer than an abrupt command to quit Paris in fortyeight hours. If, in addition to fuch an infult, any further proof. were neceflary of the difpofitions of those by whom it was offered, fuch proof would be abundantly fupplied from the contents of the note in which this order was con veyed. The mode of negotiation on which the French government had itself infifted, is there rejected, and no practicable means left open for treating with effect. The bafis of negotiation, fo recently established by mutual confent, is there dife claimed; and, in its room, a principle clearly inadmiffible is reafferted, as the only ground on which France can confent to treat the very famè principle which had been brought forward in reply to his majefty's first overtures from Switzerland, which had then been rejected by his majesty, but which now appears never to have been, in fact, abandoned by the government of France, however inconfiftent with that on which they had expressly agreed to treat." It is therefore necessary that all Europe fhould understand that the rupture of the negotiation at Paris does not arife from the failure of any fincere attempt on the part of France to reconcile by fair difcullion the views and interefts of the contending powers. Such a difcuffion has been repeatedly invited, and even folicited, on the part part of his majefty, but has been, in the first instance, and abfolutely, precluded by the act of the French government. It arifes exclufively from the determination of that government to reject all means of peace, a determination which appeared but too ftrongly, on all the preliminary difcuffions; which was clearly manifefted in the demand of an ultimatum made in the very outfet of the negotiation, but which is proved beyond all poffibility of doubt by the obftinate, adherence to a claim which never, can be admittěd,- a claim that the conftruction, which that government affects to put (though, even in that refpect, unfupported by the fact) on, the. internal conftitution of its own country, fiall be received by all mination, and to renew, in the face of all Europe, the folemn decla ration, that, whenever his enemies hall be difpofed to enter on the work of a general pacification, in a fpirit of conciliation and equity, nothing fhall be wanting on his part to contribute to the accom plishment of that great object, with a view to which he has already offered fuch confiderable facrifices on his part, and which is now. retarded only by the exorbitant pretenfions of his enemies. Weftminster, Dec. 27, 1796. other nations as paramount to eve-mittee of the Whig Club, held at. At a meeting of the general comry known principle of public law in Europe, as fuperior to the obli-, the Shakspeare tavern, on Satur-, gations of treaties, to the ties of day Jan, 23, 1796, obliday common intereft, to the most The right honourable Charles James preffing and urgent confiderations. of general fecurity. On fuch grounds, it is that the French government has abruptly terminated a negotiation, which it commenced with reluctance, and! conducted with every indication to prevent its final fuccefs, Onthefe motives it is that the farther effufion of blood, the continued calamities, of war, the interruptions of peaceable and friendly intercourfe, among mankind, the prolonged diftreffes of Europe, am the accumu-, lated miferies of France itfelf, are by the government of that country to be juftified to the world, His majefty, who had entered into the negotiation, with good faith, who has fuffered no impediment to prevent his profecuting it with earneftnefs and, fincerity, has now only to lanient its abrupt ter 1 Fox in the chair, Refolved, that the following de claration be adopted and published, as The Declaration of the Whig Club. WHEN a fociety of private menfeel themfelves bound to propofe ai great national measure to the people, juftice to their own character, and refpect for the public judg ment, require that they fhould make known the reafons which have moved them to fuch a proceeding. We confefs that it isand ought to be unufual, because it can be juftified by no ordinary circumftances; but we think that the fituation of the country no longer permits us to confide the fupport of our principles to the individual exertions of our members. The Whig Club, invariably ad hering to the principles of the Britifh conftitution as established at the revolution, cannot be unconcerned fpectators of the deftruction of the most important fecurities of public liberty which were provided at that glorious æra. The conftitution can, in our judgment, now only be restored by the exercife of that just authority which the national opinion muft ever poffefs over the proceedings of the legif. lature. We therefore deem it our duty, by every means which yet are legal, to appeal to the judgment of the people, and to procure a declaration of their opinion. With this view, we have invited our fellow-fubjects to affociate for obtaining the repeal of two ftatutes paffed in the prefent feffion of parfiament. In one of these statutes, we fee, public affemblies of British fubjects, though their proceedings fhould be the moft orderly and peaceable, and their object unquestionably legal, fettered by reftrictions hitherto unknown to the law and practice of this kingdom, Thofe meetings. which fhall not fubmit to thefe new and difgraceful conditions, are fubjected to difperfion under pain of death; and thofe which fhall be held in compliance with them are made liable to fuch perpetual and vexatious interruption at the difcretion of magiftrates, that there never can be wanting an opportunity, for disturbing their deliberations, and defeating their objects. Such a law we cannot but regard as repugnant to the genius and character of this free nation. The conftitution of Great Britain is eftablished on the confent and affection of the people, and can only reft, with dignity or fafety, on thofe genuine foundations of all focial authority. When purely admini ftered, it will ever make itself refpected by its own beneficence and juftice. It has for ages inftructed the world by the example of a government which builds its strength only on its juftice, and fecures the obedience of its fubjects by their love of liberty. It can neither require the aid of a fyftem of conftraint and terror, nor even receive it without danger of deftruction. Its ruling principle is the right of the people to manifeft their opinion on their public concerns; a right of which the frequent, unreftrain ed, and fearlefs exertion, can alone create and preferve in a people that free fpirit and confcious independence, without which the forms of a free conftitution are worthlefs and unavailing. This right alone guards and protects the fecure enjoyment of every other privilege. The houfe of commons is our fecurity againft the encroachments of the crown: The king's prerogatives, and the privileges of the houfe of peers, are our fecurities againft our own reprefentatives. But no human wisdom can provide any fafeguard against a poffible com bination of all the branches of the legiflature to opprefs or betray the community, but by enabling the great body of the nation freely to pronounce their opinion on the acts and measures of government by petition and remonftrance to the king, or either house of parliament, and by fpeech and publication to their fellow-fubjects, unfettered by any previous reftraint, and fubject only to the animadverfion of the law on thofe overt acts of treafon, tumult, diforder, or fedition, which may be com mitted by individuals under pretence of exercising thefe invaluable rights. This unrestrained communication of opinion is at once the the only check to which it is pofGble to fubject fupreme power, and the wifeft means for averting popilar violences. To watch the exercise of these rights with fufpicion, to clog it with jealous and ignominious conditions, and, above all, to fubject it to the arbitrary difcretion of magiftrates appointed by the crown, is to break that fpirit from which fuch privileges derive their whole ufe and value. To impofe on them any previous reftraint, is fubftantially to take them away. They cannot be fo reftrained without being reduced to a dependance on the pleasure of that very authority upon which they are to operate as a controul, and against which they are referved as a fecurity. To reftrain is thereføre to deftroy them. But the provident wifdom of our ancestors did not leave these facred privileges to reft on the mere foundation of their own juftice and neceffity. They were folemnly af. ferted at the revolution in the inftance of petition, where they had been recently violated. The great ftatesmen and lawyers who framed the Declaration of Rights, when they afferted the right of the people to petition, did, by neceffary implication, alfo affert their right of affembling to confider fuch matters as might legally be the fubject of petition. The affertion of a right comprehends that of the means which are neceffary for its exercife. The restraints of the prefent ftatute, therefore, in our opinion, amount to an abrogation of the most important article in that folemn compact between the British nation and the new race of princes whom it rajfed to the throne. Though the other ftatute of which we complain be fpeciously intitled "An act for the fafety and. prefervation of his majesty's perfon and government," we are confident that by our oppofition to it we fhall not incur the imputation of difloyalty among honourable and: reasonable men. We have formed our principles of loyalty upon those of a parliament which had recent and ample experience of the effect of fanguinary laws; and we fhall deliver the declaration in the memorable language of their record-. "The ftate of every king, ruler, and governor of every realm, dominion, or commonalty, ftandeth and confifteth more affured by the love and favour of the fubjects towards their fovereign ruler or governor, than in the dread and fear of laws made with rigorous pains and extreme punishment *." Guided by this principle of our ancestors, which appears to us to be as full of truth and wisdom as : of humanity, we cannot view without alarm an attempt to remove thofe boundaries of treafon which were afcertained and established by the act of king Edward the Third; a law which has been endeared to Englishmen by the experience of four centuries; by a recollection of the peace and happiness which have ever prevailed in those fortunate periods when it was observed; by a review of that oppreffion of innocence, and infecurity of government, which have almoft univerfally accompanied or followed every departure from its ftrict letter; and by the zeal and ardour with which fo many fucceffive parliaments, after experience of the mifchiefs of fuch deviations, have recurred, as to a refuge from these miferies, to the fimplicity, preci-, *1 Mar. c. 1. |