fit down after voting his firft refolution; yet he begged to be understood that he meant to move the others which he had mentioned.

Mr. Pitt now moved, "That in cafe either of the two « high contracting parties fhall think proper to establish "prohibitions, or to augment the import duties upon any

goods or merchandise of the growth or manufacture of "the other, which are not specified in the tariff, fuch pro"hibitions or augmentations fhall be general, and fhall "comprehend the like goods and merchandifes of the other "moft-favoured European nations, as well as those of either "ftate: and in cafe either of the two contracting parties "fhall revoke the prohibitions, or diminish the duties, in "favour of any other European nation, upon any goods or "merchandise of its growth or manufacture, whether on "importation or exportation, fuch revocations or diminu"tions fhall be extended to the fubjects of the other party, "on condition that the latter fhall grant to the fubjects "of the former the importation and exportation of the like "goods and merchandises under the fame duties; the cafes ❝ reserved in the seventh article of the prefent treaty always "excepted. That all articles of manufacture and com

merce, not enumerated in the tariff, be admitted from "France, on paying the fame duties as the fame articles 66 pay on importation from the most favoured nation."

Mr. Fox remarked, that he felt himfelf impelled to rife, Mr. Fox. by a confciousness that it was now become indifpenfably his duty not to fail embracing the earlieft opportunity of delivering his opinions concerning point, of which the present afpect feemed certainly of all others the most detrimental to the policy, the revenue, and the commerce of this ifland. So impreffed was he with this idea, that he should not hefitate to open his fentiments, with a declaration that no former Minister had ever laboured to introduce a measure more beneficial to the country than that which was the present object of parliamentary investigation. With regard to what the right honourable gentleman had obferved respecting its political tendency to cement in bonds of peace and commerce the friendship of both countries, and that he conceived it not impoffible, by these means, to destroy that enmity which had fubfifted between the two nations, he must beg leave entirely to diffent. France was the inveterate and unalterable political enemy of Great Britain. No ties of affection or mutual intereft could poffibly eradicate what was fo deeply rooted in her conftitution. What could demonftrate it more than the invariable fyftem of her policy towards this ifland? Was not her whole conduct towards this country an unwearied and fyftematic feries of meafures, either diftin

A a 2

guifhed

guished for their finifter intrigue or declared hoftility? He did not mean to fay this enmity arofe from any vindictive princples; it was not that she adopted her measures for our annihilation in remembrance of Creffey or Agincourt; no, her policy of diminishing our power and profperity arises from her own inordinate ambition of univerfal monarchy; and thus are we her natural enemies. It is from us fhe fears the diminution of her powers to obtain this defirable object of her inordinate ambition. From us alone do the other powers of Europe hope for protection, to maintain that balance of power which can preferve their respective liberties from her encroachments. We are therefore not her foe from enmity or ambition; we are only her enemy in her attempts to destroy that fyftem of policy on which the other ftates of Europe muft depend for their liberties as well as their exiftence. When the attempts encroachments on the barriers of European liberty, it is then Great Britain is her enemy, and no longer; and while this is the object of her ambition, fo we fhall ever remain; and when had we not reafon to look upon France with this jealoufy and circumfpection? View the tenor of all our hiftory. While she practifed these political intrigues of ambition, we were always the only power able and ready to check, punish, and counteract her defigns. From the period of Henry the VIth to Charles II. he acknowledged that we did not feel this jealoufy towards France. She was not during this time in a capacity to alarm any of the other powers of Europe with her ambitious encroachments. We had therefore no cause for the continuance of our exertions against her machinations and encroaching hoftilities. Such were the general principles on which Great Britain and France were naturally unalterable enemies. A variety of treaties would ferve to prove that it was the principle of each of them not to admit her to a participation of our commercial advantages, except during the reigns of the two Stuarts.

The Houfe were not ignorant that in the treaty of Utrecht in the year 1713, which was as much the cenfure of that day as it has been decried ever fince, the Ministry, who had the entire affection, confidence, and reverence of the People and Parliament, did attempt to enter into a commercial connection with France. But fuch was the policy of the Whig party, that very fuccefsfully for this country, by their exertions and oppofition, they fubverted the plan which would otherwife have been adopted, and would then have ruined the profperity of this country, and deftroyed the liberties most probably of every other in Europe. For had our powers been diminished, we fhould not have poffeffed that strength which has ever been and must be their protection, This was

funilar

fimilar to what had happened to the right honourable gentleman himself on a former occafion (the Irish propofitions.) It was true, he admitted, according to what he (Mr. Pitt) had obferved, this Parliament had not rejected them. But ftill they were rejected, and happily, he thought, for the intereft of both countries. But in what manner was the queftion carried in that House in favour of the right honourable gentleman? Was it not from the confidence which they placed in the intentions of the Minifter, although they diftrufted the confequences of his measures? Did not feveral gentlemen of very refpectable ability, character, and property, fay, when they gave their vote in favour of the Irish propofitions, that it was a fubject of so complex and intricate a nature, that they could not think themselves completely competent to decide; but that they gave their vote on the most unreferved confidence of the right honourable gentleman's intentions. Such we should expect would have been the conduct of that day; for never were a Ministry higher in the trufts and eftimation of the whole nation, as well as the Parliament. So great was their attachment to this Tory Adminiftration, that even the man (the Duke of Marlborough) who had carried the character of the country to the higheft exaltation of glorious conqueft, was, in conformity to the fentiments of this Miniftry, degraded and dishonoured. Is it not then an evidence incontrovertible of the idea which the nation had of the impolicy of entering into a commercial commerce with France, when they could thus reject a plan in its favour, proposed by a Minifter, to whom they gave fuch an implicit confidence, and of whom they entertained fuch an exalted opinion? And what indeed was the conduct of both countries in fucceeding treaties. Among thefe might be obferved several particulars relative to the family compact between the Houfes of Bourbon. By this compact an alliance had been formed, which feemed particularly a conjuction of power to diminish the growing vigour and profperity of Great Britain. By that it was agreed, that no Englishman should have the fame privilege in France or Spain as a Frenchinan or Spaniard fhould have in them mutually. This was therefore evidently to diminish the advantages which Great Britain formerly enjoyed in thofe nations, and to aggrandize the emoluments of their fubjects refpectively. But this difadvantage we foon controlled; for, in the treaty of Paris, in the year 1763, we ftipulated that an Englishman fhould be confidered in France as a Spaniard, and in Spain as 'a Frenchman; and, in the treaty of 1783, this object was ftill continued. Thus in both treaties particular care had been taken to restore to this country the privileges which they enjoyed in France and Spain before the

2,

paffing

paffing the family compact. But this 25th article of the compact was by the present treaty reftored to its former vigour. In this treaty between the French Minifters and the commercial plenipotentiary (Mr. Eden) it was agreed that the 25th article of the family compact fhould be again reftored. And as a compenfation we had the reserve of lowering the duties of Portugal wines, in order to enable us to preferve the Methuen treaty. But this was a reservation that could be confidered no grant of France. We had already this power; we had therefore reftored to France and Spain a power of excluding us from the advantages they granted to each other for the enjoyment of a privilege which we already poffeffed. Mr. Fox, now adverting to the fentiments of Mr. Pitt in regard to the petition from the Chamber of Commerce, remarked, that the right honourable gentleman obferved, that as a petition had been brought up to the House from fome of the moft refpectable merchants not only in this country, but in Europe, which had not stated any precife objection to the treaty, that it was rather to be received as an approbation than a remonftrance against the treaty. He did not recollect that the parties had forborne giving their opinions on the fubject until more official information was laid before them to empower them to decide. But were the modest sentiments of fuch gentlemen, whose names he must have heard read in the petition to be treated with this interpretation? Did he not read there the name of Mr. Walker, one of the greatest manufacturers in Europe in the cotton and fuftian articles? Did he not read the name of Mills and Heywood, one of the greatest houses in the clothing trade in Leeds in Yorkshire? Surely when fuch men as these had figned a petition against any measure, their fentiments were to be regarded. And although they had not advanced any particular objections, from a defire to wait for complete information, yet their prefent petition, as against the operative principle of the bill, was certainly an object worthy the right honourable gentleman's attention. Much would it become the Houfe ferioufly to contemplate the effect which this treaty might have on the revenues of the country. What were the advantages that Ministry could poffibly expect from this treaty? With regard to the prevention of fmuggling, he did not conceive how the arguments the right honourable gentleman (Mr. Pitt) had used would apply. He had faid, with respect to the brandies, that what were formerly smuggled into this country would now come under the legal duty, and thus would the revenue receive all the advantages of which it was formerly defrauded. But how did this fact really ftand? The duties on brandies made their importation to the merchant 7 s.

6 d.

per

per gallon. This was 400 per cent. Would the right honourable gentleman therefore pretend to fay, that when the duties on brandies were four hundred per cent. in the first coft, that they would not be now fmuggled in as great a proportion as they were formerly? They certainly would; for where there was fuch a temptation, there would smuggling always exift.-But, to prevent this finuggling of brandy, the right honourable gentleman had declared that he had a plan to propofe to effectuate it entirely. What was this plan? Did he mean to reduce the duties to 100 l. per cent? Would he lower the duties to 3 s. 4d. per gallon? And if he did, what affurance could he give that they would not then smuggle brandies into this country. But if he reduced the duties on brandies, the duties on rum must be reduced in proportion, otherwise the confumption of our colonial produce in the West Indies would be materially diminished. He was therefore affured that he could not, with any confiftency of policy or expediency, lower the duties beneath their prefent ftandard. If he did, he would rifk the diminution of the revenue in one inftance, and the diminution of our WeftJadia produce in the other. Therefore he could not conceive in what particular finnuggling would be diminished with regard to the exportation of brandies, under the ftipulations of the prefent treaty.

As to the commercial part of the treaty, the first object that moft materially claimed his attention was the woollen manufactory. It had been argued, that we had opened to ourselves a market, containing twenty-four millions of people, while France had only obtained a market from us of eight millions. But with refpect to the number of perfons in a market, he did not estimate the advantages to be derived on fuch a fcale of computation. The advantages were to be estimated from the confumption of the nation's produce. The raw material, were it grown in the country, and then manufactured, was certainly the estimate of one nation's profit with another in a commercial intercourfe. How was the fituation of this with regard to our woollen manufactures? As far as the woollen articles we might export to France, by virtue of this treaty, were compofed of English wool, we fhould clearly have benefit. But as we used at leaft 350,000l. of Spanish wool in our manufactories of wollen cloths, we clearly loft this advantage of the raw material. And this was not all; for this 350,000l. when manufactured into cloth, was estimated, by thofe most converfant in the trade, to amonnt to no less a fum than double, even to 700,000l. Thus fuch a value would be clearly to our difadvantage. And what yet more increased our lofs was, that Spain might give France an opportunity of importing