It cannot be denied that your arguments respecting the inconveni ences to which France would be subject by a short-lived peace, are well-founded: But on the other hand, those which we should suffer would likewise be very considerable. It is perhaps natural, that in such cases each nation exaggerates its own dangers, or at least that she examines them more minutely, and with a more penetrating eye than those of others.

With respect to the interposition of a foreign power, one cannot refrain from observing, that in whatever relates to peace and war between England and France, Russia can never be considered a foreign power, inasmuch as she is in actual alliance

with England, and at war with France. For which reason the interposition of the emperor Alexander was proposed in my letter, not as a mediator, but as a party. Your excellency, in the last paragraph of your dispatch, acknow ledges, that the peace" ought to be honourable, not only for England and France, but also for their respective allies." This being the case, it appears to us impossible, considering the close alliance subsisting botween the two governments, that that of England can commence any other than a provisionary negotiation, without the concurrence, or, at the very least, the previous consent of her ally.

As to what relates to the integrity and independence of the Ottoman empire, no difficulty can present itself, those objects being equally dear to all the parties interested in the present discussion.

It is perhaps true, that the power of France on land, compared with

3

that of the rest of Europe, is not equal to the superiority that we possess at sea, considered in the same point of view: But it can no longer be concealed, that the project of combining the whole of Europe against France, is to the last degree chimerical; besides, it is in truth carrying the apprehension of what may happen hereafter rather too far, to consider the alliance between England and Russia, (the two powers of Europe the least calculated to attack France by land) as tending to produce such a consequence.

Nor can the intervention of Rus sia in the negotiation, be considered as the formation of a congress, either in appearance or in reality, inasmuch as there will be only two parties, England and Russia on one side, and France on the other. A congress might be desirable in many respects, after the signature of preliminaries, in case all the contracting parties should be of that opinion; but this is a proposition that may be freely and amicably discussed, after the principal points shall. have been arranged.

Thus, Sir, I have laid before you, with all the clearness in my power, the sentiments of the British ministry upon the ideas which you have suggested. I entertain the gratifying persuasion that there remains only one essential point upon which we are not agreed.

As soon as you consent that we shall treat provisionally until Russia can take a part in the negotiation, and from that moment, conjointly with her, we are ready to begin without the delay of a single day, at whatever place, and in whatever form, the two parties may judge best adapted to bring to an happy

issue

SIR, Paris, April 16, 1806. I have taken the pleasure of his majesty the emperor and king, before whom I lost no time in lay. ing the dispatch which your excellency did me the honour of writing to me, under date of the 8th instant.

It appeared to his majesty, that, admitting as you do the principle of equality, you nevertheless still per sist in requiring a form of negotiation which cannot accord with that principle. When in a discussion between two equal powers, one of them calls for the interference of a third, it is evident that she seeks to destroy that equilibrium so favourable to a fair and free discussion of their interests. It is manifest that she is not willing to content herself with the advantages and the rights of equality. I am ready to believe, sir, that in entering for the last time upon this discussion, I shall succeed in persuading your excellency, that, under no plea and on no accouut, should Russia be called upon to take part in the proposed negotiation between England and France.

When the war broke out between the two countries, Russia was at peace with France. This war has produced no alteration in the relations which existed between her and us. She first proposed her media.

tion; and afterwards, in consequence of circumstances foreign to the war which divides us, a coolness arose between the cabinets of St. Petersburgh and the Thuilleries; the emperor Alexander thought proper to suspend his political relations with France; but at the same time declared in the most positive manner, that it was his intention to take no part in the existing disputes between us and England.

We do not think that the conduct which Russia has since held has in the smallest degree altered this determination. She has, it is true, concluded a treaty of alliance with you; but it is easy to see from what has been made public of this treaty, from the object it had in view, and still more from the consequences of it, that it had no connection with the war which has been carrying on nearly two years between us and England.

It was

This treaty was an agreement to take a part in a war of a different nature, more extensive and more general than the first. From this war the third coalition sprung, in which Austria was a principal and Russia an auxiliary power. only in intention that England par. ticipated in this war. We have never had to oppose her forces in conjunction with those of her allies. Russia acted only a secondary part in it. No declaration addressed to France informed us that she was at war with us; and it is only upon the field of battle where the third coalition was destroyed, that we have been officially informed that Russia was a party to it.

When his Britannic majesty de. clared war against France, he had an end in view which he made known

by

by his manifestocs. This object directed the nature of the war; when, eighteen months afterwards, his Britannic majesty formed an alliance with Austria, Russia, and Sweden, he had other objects in view. This was a new war, the motives of which must be sought for in the official papers which have been published by the different pow. ers; amongst these motives the direct interests of England are never mentioned. These two wars therc. fore have no common connection: England in reality never participated in that which is terminated. Russia never took any part directly or indirectly in that which still exists. There is, therefore, no reason why England should not singly terminate a war, which she singly has waged against us. If his majesty the em. peror were now to adopt the principle of negotiating with England jointly with her new allies, he would implicitly admit the actual existence of the third coalition, the continuance of the German war, and the identity of this war with that which France sustains against England. He would implicitly accept for the basis of the negotiation the condi. tions of monsieur Novosiltzoff, which excited the astonishment of Europe, and were revolting to the character of the French people; and the conqueror of the coalition, the emperor, would voluntary place himself in the situation of the conquered.

At present, the emperor has nothing to discuss with the coalition. He is entitled to refuse his recognition of the relations which you have had with it; and in treating with you there can be no other question, than the object and the interests of the war which was entered into pre. 2

vions to your alliances, and which has survived them.

Notwithstanding only six months have elapsed since the veil which concealed the secret combinations of the last war has been removed, it is nevertheless true that the con. tinent is at peace. Your principal ally, Austria, has made a separate peace. Prussia whose armies were for some time on the war establishment, has concluded a treaty of offensive and defensive alliance with us. Sweden is not worthy a remark. As to Russia, there exist between her and us direct proposals of nego tiation. Powerful as she is, she requires the protection of no one, and she cannot call for the intervention of any court to terminate the disputes between us. Her remote position places her so entirely out of our reach, and deprives her so com pletely of all means of annoying us, that the alteration in our respective connections, occasioned by a state of war or a state of peace, is purely of a diplomatic nature. If in such a situation, the emperor were to accept the condition of negotiating jointly with England and Russia would he not resign all his advan tages? Would he not admit the existence of a war which he has glori ously terminated? Would he not, in fine, abandon, in favour of England the principle of equality already agreed upon between us? If sir, you will only examine with the discernment which belongs to you the considerations which I have the honour to lay before you, you will agree that such a negotiation would be far more prejudicial to us than war, and even than a congress.

In fact, in a congress, if England, Sweden, and Russia contended in support of the principles which

formed

formed the basis of the third coalition, Prussia, Denmark, the Porte, Persia, and America, would protest against those principles, and would require equal laws for navigation and a just division of the empire of the seas. Doubtless in this discussion, the diminution of the power of France would be frequently voted; but as frequently would the diminution of the power of England also be voted. The balance of power in the south of Europe would be demanded by some, but others would demand the balance of power in the north. Many would bring forward the balance of power for Asia; all would feel an interest in the balance of power on the seas; and if it were possible to hope that any result could be formed in the midst of such complicated and tur. bulent discussions, that result would be just because it would be complete; and certainly his majesty has declared, under every circumstance, that he would have no repugnance to make sacrifices for the public tranquillity, whenever England, Russia, and all the great powers shall be disposed to recognize established rights, to protect the weaker states, and to adopt the principles of justice, moderation and equality; but the emperor knows mankind too well to allow himself to be led away by chimerical ideas, and he feels that it would be in vain to seek for peace in a labyrinth of ten years of discussions, which during that period would perpetuate war, and would only have the effect of rendering its termination still more difficult and uncertain. It would then become necessary to change the system, and, as was done at Utrecht, leaving the allies to perplex

themselves in vain and endless disputes, to enter into a separate negotiation; to discuss, as was then done, the interests of the two powers and of their respective allies; at last to make peace for ourselves, and to make it so equitable and so honourable as to be immediately agreed to by all the powers concerned. This is the mode in which it becomes two such nations as England and France to terminate, not at the distance of ten years, but immediately, the differences which divide them, and at the same time to establish the regu lation of their rights and of the interests of their allies.

To resume, sir; I see in the proposed negotiation, only three possible forms of discussion:

Negotiation with England and the allies which she acquired at the time of the formation of the third coalition:

Negotiation with all the powers of Europe, with the addition of America :

Negotiation with England alone. The first of these forms is inadmissible, because it would subject the emperor to the influence of the third coalition, which no longer exists. The emperor would have negotiated in this manner if he had been vanquished. The second form of negotiation would eternalize the war, if the unavoidable occurrences to which it would at every instant give rise, and the passions which it would let loose without controul, did not cause the discussions to be broken off with violence a few years after they should have been entered into. The third therefore is the only one which can be desired by those who really wish for peace. His majesty is confident, that the

just