Sir, with regard to that apathy and supineness, I have not the slightest idea but that immediately upon the appearance of real danger, it would disappear; but there is much in previous preparation, not merely as to discipline and defence, but in the prompt avowal of the determination of the country. Sir, I have no doubt that the first drop of British blood that shall be shed by Frenchmen on British ground, will raise such a spirit of valouros fury as must be invincible and irresistible. (An universal cry of hear, hear!) — But Gentlemen have not sufficiently calculated what the effects would be of any successful impression of French force upon the country. Sir, without retracting any one opinion which I have ever held, I do not conceive that there ever was any period of our history, in which the conquest of the kingdom by a foreign power would bring such total ruin upon it, as the conquest of Great Britain by the present French Republic.
Sir, though deprecating the calamities to which the Republic has given rise, I never wished the restoration of Monarchy in France. I am not rejoicing that France has attained such power, that she arrived at it by the coalition of the powers of Europe against her, and that if she had been suffered to remain as she was, she would not have attained that power; but I am saying that the impression of French force now would be more fatal than at any former period of our history. Yet when I assert that I still hold my opinions, perhaps the Right Honourable Gentleman may not think this observation well placed, but I do think that if the unfortunate person who may be entitled to the Crown of France, should from a general spirit of loyalty in the country, and by a restoration as little expected as our own in the time of Charles the Second, be raised to the Throne, and the Emigrants who had suffered most by the Revolution, were to be called back: I say, Sir, I do not believe that it would abate one atom of the ambition of France, or induce her to give back one particle of her power. I do not believe that her councils, though composed of persons who had been most encouraged and protected in other countries, would relinquish one conquest achieved by the Republic, would give up one inch of the boundary of the Rhine, withdraw one man from Italy, abandon an acre of the low Countries, or above all, depart from the principle of doing every thing to wrest the sovereignty of the seas from Great Britain. Though I dread the Republic of France, I should not dread less the Monarchy of France; and in speaking of the Republic, I beg not to be understood as a person mixing in that spirit of personality and invective which has been adopted, and which I must express my regret at seeing continued in a clause of a Bill which has lately passed.
Sir, when we have been asking for peace with the Government of France, I do not think it wise to charge them with cruelty, injustice, and oppression. Equally too should I reprobate any idea of animating the country by the coarse expressions of Monster Hoche and Ruffian General, which have been imputed to a person in a high situation in another country. Sir, instead of resorting to such expressions, I would, on the contrary, pay the French a solid and sincere compliment, and I will tell you what that compliment should be; by knowing what they have done, and judging what they are capable of, I would omit no one human preparation that might enable us to make a successful resistance to the utmost their daring could attempt. That is the compliment I would pay them — that is the way I would meet them. It is not in any mortal power to say they shall not subdue us, but at least we may take care they shall not despise us. Sir, if I were to allude to Bounaparte, I would not recur to such invective. I would neither call him monster nor a ruffian. — He is certainly a great man, and if he takes the command of the expedition against this country, he will not tarnish his laurels by deserving those epithets. But I would at least distrust his professions —
“Right restored, freedom regained; Peace to commerce. Peace to cottages. He will come for the humane and liberal purpose of establishing liberty.”
Can any thing be more glorious, I had almost said, more godlike than this? But is there any Englishman so absurd, so besotted and befooled as to give credit to one word of it? But may not Republics be actuated by great and generous sentiments? Undoubtedly they may; but I must first look to the nature and constitution of those Republics.
In the early and virtuous times of Rome, they did conquer for glory, and to restore to people their rights. In the Spartan Republic too, I can conceive the same, and that they might conquer for fame, and not for the acquisition of those luxuries, which they considered as inimical to the Republican spirit. But let Gentleman look to the constitution and practice of the Republic of France. Do they not see that their tree of liberty is planted in the garden of monarchy, and that it bears the same luxuriant fruit? Are they not eager for all the luxuries and refinements to make their capital the school and mart of elegance for the world? What do they want? Glory? They are gorged with it. Territory? They have more, perhaps, than they will be able to retain. What is it they want? Ships, commerce, manufactures, cash, capital, and credit; or in other words, they only want the sinews, bones, marrow, and heart’s-blood of Great Britain. — [Loud and universal cries of hear! hear! accompanied with clapping of hands] Give them that, and they will give you as much liberty in return as you please. They call you a nation of merchants; well, they stile you so by way of derision; but, at least, in dealing with them for their commodity I should deal as merchants indeed; as merchants give no trust to the mere name of a commodity, but are apt to enquire into the reality of the article. No, I would have our political merchants just ask, whether the liberty they have for foreign exportation is or is not different from what they keep for their own home consumption; on this ground alone the barter must proceed. — [Laughter, hear! hear!.] But, Sir, look to what must be the policy of the French. We know how little real liberty they have at home.
I will not take upon myself to judge how far, in a revolutionary state these measures may or may not be necessary: I am willing to grant, that if the men are entrusted with the will of the majority of France, whose desire is that France shall be a Republic, they must do that which is requisite to fulfil that end. But then, Sir, without throwing any blame on those men, I would ask whether they would let us have more liberty in England than they possess in France? Would they leave us, unimpaired, the important right of the trial by Jury? Would they — in short, Sir, would they leave this country to be a contrast to the violence practised in France, and to be an eternal and marked reproach to the conduct of the Directory? No, they would be madmen if they did.
Well, Sir, after having considered what would be their policy, we must look to another motive; we must consider the nature of their enmity. Again, I will avoid saying any thing harsh upon the provocations given them; I will do nothing but regret the personalities that have been used, both individually and generally. I purposely refrain from all comments; but that we have provoked and insulted them beyond human patience is the fact. I will not now discuss whether we were the aggressors or not; but the more I think we were so — the more I think we indulged in personalities — the more must I give them credit for the sincerity of their revenge against this country. Will any man believe that vengeance would be discriminating or moderate? Sir, with this view of the consequences of any successful impression upon the part of the French, unquestionably the next consideration is, what measures are necessary to ensure a successful resistance.
Without asking any person to lay aside animosities to Government, who I should trust, have too much spirit to steal an indemnity from those who may arraign their conduct, I think it should be manifested throughout the country, that upon this point of resisting the enemy, there is but one heart and one opinion. If I should hear persons say, we would do every thing to oppose the French, but how can we do it without supporting Ministers? I would say, I cannot stop to discuss that point now — I will oppose the French first, and then I will talk with you upon it. If there are persons who assert, that they who brought us into this situation ought to bring us out of it, I should reply; that I do not object to their logic; but I object a good deal to their prudence. Because, if they say that our pre
sent situation is owing to the incapacity of his Majesty’s Ministers, and if they wish to resist the French, they must be sure that the French will be foiled, and in that case they do not believe in the incapacity of Ministers, or, if they do believe in their incapacity, they are not sincere in wishing the French to be resisted
There are Gentlemen who are decidedly adverse to the French, yet they will not come with their whole zeal against them. They measure off so much of their enmity to the French, against so much of their enmity to Ministers. They say they feel great grievances against the present Government, and yet that they think a French invasion the worst of all evils that can befall the country; if such men do not think it necessary to do their utmost to resist that evil, they have no more common sense than they who think the present to be the best of all possible Governments. Sir, it is childish in any person to say that they will wait till the French have effected a landing. In God’s name, if the enemy are to be resisted, let us do it effectually. It is no part of effectual resistance that the mind of the country should be manifested and the preparations be prompt: Sir, to say that we will not pledge ourselves but in the last extremity, is pledging ourselves only to a modified opposition, and to a diluted spirit; it is lending the left arm to our country, but saying that we reserve the right — It is taking the field with a pistol, but declaring to go the length of a musquet. On these grounds it is, that I wish to behold a higher zeal manifested than at present seems to pervade the country, though I confess I see such a zeal rising. And at the same time, when I wish to see private party give way to public duty, I must also hope, that the same principle will influence the conduct of Government, and that whoever offers his services, in whatever rank, or situation he may offer them, they shall be joyfully accepted. Services from the highest station have been offered, and from the most gallant and approved officers.
Sir, I will not mark more strongly what I have alluded to, and I hope no person will find it necessary to recur to the observation. There are many matters of detail connected with this measure, to which, undoubtedly, Ministers will turn their minds. Without making large masses of idle men, there are great bodies who might produce a considerable force. To these the attention of Government should be immediately directed. It is idle to see persons asking what will become of us, with two hulking fellows behind their coaches! There is, Sir, another description of persons, who I am conscious do not want spirit, but the idea has not yet occurred to them, whom I should be glad to see employed in another way. I mean those young Gentlemen of high rank, who pass their time in forageing the fruit shops, in patrolling Bond-street and Piccadilly, previous to their taking the field in Rotten-row. Sir, I am not saying that indulgence in these luxuries is to be condemned, nor will any one suspect me, I believe, of being a too rigid censor. No man is more disposed to give credit to those persons; and sure I am, that in the hour of peril, they will be seen at their posts, and not found to be dependant emigrants.
And now, Sir, with every desire to see the most vigorous preparations made to resist the enemy, I must yet hope, that the enemy not being landed, undoubtedly, the desire for peace, so far from being checked, will be more manifest and eager. Sir, I have no hesitation in saying, though it looks, but in reality, does not detract from our means, that the real death-blow to this country, will not come from the arms of France, but from the utter impossibility, if the present scale of expence is to be persevered in, of collecting the burthens from the people. Yet if it be necessary, we must shew the enemy, (for their ruin, whatever they may boast to the contrary, would infallibly follow ours) that we can, if they destroy our resources, be as desperate as they. But the real fire and sword which, I fear, will alone lay waste the British Empire, is to be found in the pen and tongue of the British Chancellor of the Exchequer; in that pen and tongue, whose eloquence, great as undoubtedly it is, furnishes pretexts to the House to adopt all his measures. I have said thus much, in order that no preparations, however vigorous, no confidences, however great, in his resources, may deter his Majesty’s Minister from concluding peace, excepting only in one situation; and in that one, much as I wish for peace, yet I would have any Minister, unless under circumstances which I will not allude to, beware how he treats for peace with a French army landed in this country, and in arms. That would indeed break the spirit and heart of the country. We might get rid of the enemy for a week or two; but the wound would be mortal; we should break the heart of the navy for ever — (Loud cries of hear! hear! from every part of the House.) — I am glad to see that I need not press the point more.
With regard to the principles upon which I would recommend unanimity, I hope and trust no man will understand, that I mean to recommend a jobbing, shifting union with the present Administration — No, Sir, no. — There are sins on this subject which I will not now reproach, but which I never shall forget. The unanimity I wish is against the French, and it is the only unanimity which can be successful. I do say, that all public spirit, all confidence in public men has been more discouraged and crushed by those who lest the Whig party, under the pretence of assisting the cause of religion and morality, than by any men that ever lived. And here I must do the Right Honourable Gentleman and his friends the justice to say, that I have not discovered such a rage and eagerness for pensions and emoluments in them, as in those who joined the standard of religion, morality, and civil society. These, beyond all other men, should endeavour to repair the injury they have done. When, therefore, I speak of union, I mean prompt and vigorous union against the French — eternal separation from his Majesty’s Ministers. We must have no more coalitions. The country is tired of and abhors them. Men talk of the mischief of party disputes; but I say, Sir, that late party reconciliations have done more to break the spirit of the people, than all the party enmity that ever existed. I think, at the same time, that it is not necessary, if the people are properly roused to a sense of their situation, that they should look to the lead which this or that man may give them. No man thinks higher of the head and heart, the soul and spirit of my Right Hon. Friend, than I do. He, I am sure, as much as any man, looks with abhorrence at the attempts of the enemy. That these are his sentiments, I have no doubt. But I say that looking after men does not become the spirit of the people in times like these.
When I am told that in a country of eight millions of men, enlightened as they are, and who have so long enjoyed liberty, subject now undoubtedly to restrictions; when I am told, I say, that there are only one or two men who can save it, my answer is, that may be the case, but that the country is not worth saving, and cannot be saved. Some there are who may think the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite to me, others my Right Honourable Friend, and some that a Noble Earl, for whom certainly I have a high respect, are the fittest persons to save the country; but will any man tell me that there are only two or three men who can do it? I say if they do tell me so, I repeat, that it is not worth being saved, and cannot be saved. Sir, refer it to the people themselves. Ask them what they will do? I don’t want a return of legs and arms, but give me a return of the heart and spirit of the country, and I will tell you then whether it can be conquered. Nay, if all the great men were banished from the country, I do not believe that it could be hustled out of its station and importance. There would then, I have no doubt, be found men capable of preserving it.
Sir, I am ashamed to say a few words upon one subject; but we are speaking in shabby times, and I may therefore be excused. I think it right for myself to say, though I am not such a coxcomb as to hint that I was ever tempted; and Gentlemen may rise and do me the justice to suppose I act from principle; but speaking in suspicious times, I think it right, Sir, to declare that my political enmity is irreconcilable to the present Administration separately and collectively. Personal enmity I have none. That my attachment to my Right Honourable Friend is unalterable; that my determination to persist in procuring Reform is unshaken; that it is the greatest security we can have; and that the time, I trust, will yet come for calling his Majesty’s
Ministers to account for their conduct. These are the pledges which I feel it necessary to give; and by which I wish to be tried.
But I must say that I should think myself the meanest of mankind, if from preference to party praise, from enmity to the Right Hon. Gentleman, from prejudice to friends, and above all, if from a base and unmanly fear of bringing myself into a situation of peril, I should refrain from doing every thing, with my whole heart and soul, to resist the worst calamity that could befall the country.
Sir, upon this ground I think it right to call upon all persons; upon those who have profited by the war, for what in others would be patriotism, in them is duty; I call upon the personal friends of the Right Hon. Gentleman, who value his safety; I call upon those who are friends to Parliamentary Reform, and of whom it has been said that they used it only as a pretence and stalking-horse for treason, I call upon them to shew that they have been libelled. I call upon those who have pledged themselves to bring his Majesty’s Ministers to account, to prove that they are worthy of that important office.
Sir, I trust I need not say that this and every measure which tends to provide resistance against the enemy, and a remedy to the danger which surround us, shall have my warmest and most cordial support.
FINIS.
Delphi Complete Works of Richard Brinsley Sheridan Page 86