quirer adds, that " upon the first public news of the "Vienna treaty at Madrid, the discourses of many were taught to run that way, and to dwell upon "that fame popular topic."

''

The fecond of thefe arguments is this:-If the news of fending back the infanta from France, and of Great Britain's refufing the fole mediation, bad both come to Madrid before Ripperda was fent from thence; even this " could not have really been, and "would not have been pretended to have been the "motive of what was afterwards done at Vienna." And why, pray? Because when the news of our refufing the fole mediation did come, the court of Spain acknowledged it to be a reasonable proceeding. This, you fee, is built on the principles laid down in the laft article, and deserves no farther notice. But on the news coming to Madrid, that the infanta was fent home, he confeffes that the court of Spain might, by fuch circumflances, be induced to try what honorable terms "the Emperor would come to." This conceffion goes farther than he is aware of; for I defire to know if it is reasonable to believe that Spain would have treated with the Emperor, when the cafe had happened, why it is unreafonable to believe that Spain did begin to treat with him on almost a certain profpc& that the cafe would happen; which is the great point we have been contending about? Ay, but Spain would not have treated with the Emperor to hurt Holland and Britain, becaufe Spain had been hurt by France; nor would the Emperor have entered into a treaty to hurt them, who had no part in the affront to Spain and never injured the Emperor. Again; much less would the King of Spain fend a minifter to Vienna to enter into and finifh treaties, which fhould hurt other nations, upon a fufpicion that France would hereafter affront him. I could make feveral reflections on fome of

the

the expreffions in this place; and on the turn, which the author takes, of putting fome very odd arguments into my mouth, and, what is ftill more, into the mouths of the Emperor and the King of Spain. But I forbear; and content myself with faying twothings, which will effectually blunt the point of all the wit employed in this paragraph, and fully anfwer the whole of what is faid farther upon this fub. ject, in the Defence of the Enquiry.

First then; as far as I am from being, or pretending to be, a mafter in politics, which degree this writer feems to have taken long ago, I never imagined that the affront, confidered merely as an affront, precipitated Spain into all the engagements fhe took with the Emperor; though, by the way, he mistakes very much, if he thinks, as he fays, that he may deny new fresh refentments to determine the conduct of princes, exactly upon the fame grounds, as I have denied that old ftale refentments have this effect. What I imagined, what I faid, and what I proved, was, that this affront, confidered as a neceffary breach with France, at leaft for a time, would throw Spain into fuch circumftances of diftrefs, as fhe was to prevent by all poffible means; and that therefore reafon of flate determined in this cafe; though no doubt the affront, at the fame time, provoked the Spaniards. Thus I am confiftent with myfelf; and the author might have fpared himfelf the trouble of writing this elaborate paragraph, if he had adverted to my fenfe, inftead of playing with my words.

Secondly; as to the emperor, our author is guilty of begging the queftion; for the emperor will infift, as he has infifted, that his engagements were not engagements to injure any body; that he entered into no offenfive alliance; and that, when he exacted from Spain the guaranty of the Oftend trade, and of his fucceffion, he exacted the guaranty of no

thing

thing but of that, which he judges he has an inde pendent right to eftablish and fecure. As to Spain, it will be likewife faid, that when his catholic majefty treated with the Emperor, he never meant to hurt other nations, but to fecure his own interefts; that if his guaranty of the Oftend trade hurts the Dutch or us, he is forry for it; but could no more avoid that engagement than he could feveral others extremely difadvantageous to himfelf, and into which he was however obliged to enter, because he was obliged to purchale the Emperor's alliance at any rate; that therefore we must not blame him, who oppofed the eftablishment of the Oftend company, whilft he could do it, without any fupport from us; who never gave his guaranty to it, till he was forced to do fo, by the neceflity of his affairs; into which neceflity he was falling for above a year together, without feeing the hand of Britain once. ftretched forth to hinder it. Such anfwers as these would certainly be given; and, in the mouths of the imperialifts and the Spaniards, they would be just.

If, after all that has been faid, this gentleman is unable, upon my notions, to account for the King of Spain's refolute flying from the mediatorfhip of France, I am fure it is not my fault. A few facrifices did indeed help to pacify Spain, and to reconcile her to France; and a few facrifices might, for aught I know, have reconciled our quarrels; or, which is better, have prevented them. But as no one can foresee now when fuch facrifices will be made here; fo neither could Spain, at the time when fhe fent to Vienna, foresee when fuch facrifices would be made in France.

Upon the whole matter, and to conclude this te dicus article; if the way in which I have endea vored to account for the refolution taken by Spain

to abandon the mediation of Cambray, and to treat at Vienna, be not right, I fhould be glad to know what the right way is. No other, which this gentleman, or any reafonable man will venture to fupport, has been yet pointed out. But I apprehend the account I have given to be a juft one; becaufe it is built on fact and reafon; because the event hath, in every refpect, confirmed it; and because it thews not only why Spain broke with France, and applied to the Emperor; but why Spain entered into thefe new meafures after the death of the Duke of Orleans, which it cannot be pretended the ever thought of doing, while that prince was alive. If now this account be a juft one, many melancholy but ufeful truths refult from it.

But I need not point out these things. The world will difcover them, without any help of mine, and will judge how well the Enquiry hath been vindicated, by the author and defender of it upon this head.'

The next point, upon which my reafonings and imputations are to be tried at his tribunal, is that of Gibraltar; and here he fets out, by accufing me, not in terms indeed, but in a manner almost as plain, of lying, of direct, premeditated lying. I will keep my temper, though a field large enough is opened to me, and though the provocation is not a little aggravated by the folemn air with which this accufation is brought, by the pretences to patience and meeknefs and candor, and by all the appeals to God with which my accufer hath, in feveral parts of his treatise, endeavored to captivate the good opinion of mankind, and to eftablish his own reputation, that he might make fure of ruining that of others. He calls to my mind the charaster of Mopfus in Taffe's Aminta.

-di

-di quel Mopfo

Ch' a ne la lingua melate parole,
E ne le labra un' amichevol ghigno,
e il rafoio

Tien fotto il manto.

I will have the decency not to tranflate the verfes into English.

It is not neceffary that I fhould fay much about the jealoufies which this author feems to complain arofe at one time, left Gibraltar would be given up or artfully betrayed into the Spaniards hands; nor about the vigorous defence of it, which was made afterwards. Thus much however I will fay, that when Sir John Jennings was called home, with all the troops embarked on board his squadron, just before the fiege, and even from the neighborhood of Gibraltar; when the Spaniards were fuffered, under Sir Charles Wager's eyes, to tranfport by fea many things neceflary for the attack of the place; and when it was known that the town wanted almoft every thing neceffary for the defence of it, people ftood a-gaze, and not without reafon. The cries of the nation precipitated at last the fupplies, and the vigor of the garrifon made a glorious ufe of them.

I come now to the accufation brought againft me by this writer. I faid, in my letter to you, that the Spaniards ground their prefent claim to the reflitution of Gibraltar, on " private "article in a treaty made with them in 1721, "ftipulating the contents of a letter to be writen

a

ઃઃ

by the late king, and on the letter written in "purfuance of this article." This is the fact. The accufation is, that there is no fuch article in the

treaty;