CHAPTER XXI.

{GEORGE III. 1794–1795}

Meeting of Parliament..... The Militia augmented.....

Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act..... Agitation in

England and Scotland..... introduction of Foreign

Troops..... The Slave-trade Question..... Motion on behalf

of La Fayette..... Motion of Inquiry into the recent

Failures of our Armies..... The Trial of Warren

Hastings..... The Prorogation of Parliament..... Ministerial

Appointments..... Embassy to China, &e...... Corsica annexed

to the Crown of England..... Lord Howe’s Naval Victory.....

British Conquests in the West Indies..... Disputes in

America..... Military Operations on the Continent..... The

internal Condition of France..... Convention with Sweden

and Denmark..... The State of Poland..... Meeting of

Parliament.

{A.D. 1794}

MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.

THE British parliament assembled on the 21st of January. In his opening

speech, the king observed, that he and his subjects were engaged in a

momentous contest, on the issue of which depended the maintenance of the

constitution, laws, and religion of the country, and the security of

all civil society. Having mentioned the advantages obtained by the

confederated powers, he added, that the circumstances by which their

progress had been impeded not only proved the necessity of vigour and

perseverance, but confirmed the expectation of ultimate success. Their

enemies, he said, had derived the means of temporary exertion from a

system which enabled them to dispose of the lives and property of the

people; but these efforts, which were productive of internal discontent

and confusion, would tend to exhaust the national and real strength of

the country. His majesty regretted the necessity of continuing the war;

but he thought that he should ill consult the interests of his people,

if he desired peace on any grounds exclusive of a due provision for

their permanent safety, and for the independence and security of Europe.

An attack had been made on him and his allies, founded on principles

tending to the destruction of all property, to the subversion of

the laws and religion of every civilized nation, and to the general

introduction of a horrible system of rapine, anarchy, and impiety.

Amendments to the address were moved in both houses, but they were

rejected by large majorities; in the lords, by ninety-seven against

twelve, and in the commons, by two hundred and seventy-seven against

fifty-nine. Fox, Sheridan, Lords Lansdowne and Lauderdale, and others,

persevered in maintaining the inexpediency of war, as well as the

improbability of success; they denied that France had been hostile

to England; they foretold her career of conquests, and predicted

disappointment to the nation, similar to that which had been experienced

at the close of the American war; they repeated all their arguments

in favour of peace: but it was all to no purpose; the majority in both

houses were convinced that there could be no radical peace, except

France was humbled. On every occasion, though sure of exhibiting their

numerical weakness at every division, Fox and his friends attacked

the war measures of government. On the vote for augmenting the navy

to 85,000 men, they agreed with ministers, but when it was proposed to

raise the regular army to 60,000, they renewed their opposition with all

their vigour. At a subsequent date, the 17th of February, the Marquess

of Lansdowne moved an address to “represent to his majesty the extreme

improbability of conquering France; that the dismemberment of France, if

attainable, would augment the strength of the powers most to be

dreaded; that opinions cannot be controlled by arms; that experience has

demonstrated the futility of every attempt to interfere in the internal

government of France, even if the justice were problematical; and that

we must incur the keenest reproaches, if we encouraged further revolts

in a country where we had been unable to save those who put confidence

in us from extermination and ruin—therefore to implore his majesty to

declare, without delay, his disposition to make peace upon such just,

disinterested, and liberal terms as were calculated to render the peace

lasting, and that he would signify this intention to his allies, that

a stop might be put to the effusion of human blood.” This motion was

seconded by the Duke of Grafton, but it was negatived by one hundred and

three against thirteen. Every effort of the opposition, indeed, to stem

the tide of war proved fruitless. It was resolved to carry it on with

vigour; and, to meet the extraordinary exertions, a loan of £11,000,000

was voted by parliament, and some new taxes granted.

THE MILITIA AUGMENTED, ETC.

On the 6th of March Pitt moved for an augmentation of the militia, and

for the levy of a volunteer force of horse and foot; intimating that the

chances of war might expose Britain to an invasion. During the debate

which followed this motion, Fox and his party taunted ministers with

having produced such a prospect by their war measures; and strong

objections were taken to a requisition circulated by ministers, and to

a subscription entered into by country gentlemen and others, for the

purpose of providing arms and other necessaries for the volunteer corps.

Sheridan moved “That it was dangerous and unconstitutional for the

people of this country to make any loan of money to the crown without

consent of parliament;” but the previous question was carried by a

large majority. Subsequently, Pitt brought in a bill to enable French

royalists and emigrants to enlist in the service of the king of Great

Britain on the continent of Europe, and to employ French officers as

engineers, under certain restrictions. Two amendments were offered: one

by the attorney-general, to exact the oath of allegiance from those

who enlisted; the other by Sheridan, to limit the number of such French

troops at any time stationed in the kingdom, to 5,000. Both these

amendments were adopted; and, notwithstanding the opposition of Fox and

his party, the bill was carried in the commons by the usual majority,

and it subsequently passed the Lords. About this time, parliament was

informed, by royal message, that a large subsidy had been granted to the

King of Prussia. This was criticised and condemned by opposition in the

severest manner, as were all the subsidiary treaties concluded with

some of the powers of the coalition, who were too poor to maintain the

expenses of the war without English money. But every motion on these

subjects was carried by a large majority. On the other hand, every

motion tending to put an end to the war was negatived by overwhelming

numbers. Thus, when, on the 30th of May, the Duke of Bedford moved a

series of resolutions to this end, in the lords, and Fox in the commons,

the former was defeated by one hundred and thirteen against twelve, and

the latter, by two hundred and eight against fifty-five. By this time

opposition had still further reverses on the theatre of war to urge

against its continuance, but these arguments were rendered futile by the

intelligence which came, at the same time, of the augmented and still

augmenting atrocities in France, which encouraged members of parliament

to believe that such a system could not sustain itself for any length of

time. And this feeling was prevalent among the people. On hearing of the

reverses, opposition, and men of the same principles in private life,

made great efforts to get up popular petitions for a peace; but the

majority of the people had conceived a horror of the French republicans,

and, except among some political clubs, no progress was made in this

business; and the petitions got up among such clubs were, of course,

unheeded.

SUSPENSION OF THE HABEAS CORPUS ACT.

On the 12th of May a royal message was delivered, referring to the

seditious practices of democratic societies, and intimating the

necessity of taking measures for baffling their dangerous designs. The

message stated that seditious practices had been carried on by societies

in London in correspondence with other societies, for the purpose of

assembling a convention to represent the people, in defiance of and

in opposition to parliament, and on principles subversive of our

constitution, and calculated to introduce anarchy similar to that in

France; that the papers of these societies had been seized, and would be

laid before parliament; and that his majesty recommended them carefully

to examine these papers, and to adopt such measures as might appear

necessary. These papers were produced on the next day, and Pitt moved

an address of thanks to the king, and proposed that the papers should

be referred to a committee of secrecy, consisting of twenty-one persons,

who should be chosen by ballot. This was agreed to, and on the 16th of

May Pitt produced the report of this committee of secrecy. This report

did not reveal anything very mysterious, for it merely contained the

report of the two London societies from the year 1731, most of which

had been already published, by the societies themselves, in the public

papers. Yet Pitt, on the strength of this report, demanded the immediate

suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, as necessary to the salvation of

the country. In this demand he was supported by Burke, who said that

it was the best means of preventing the vast and imminent dangers with

which we were menaced; and by Windham, who observed that if these evils

could not be averted by the laws in being, other laws, more stringent,

must be framed. The bill was carried, through all its stages, by

overwhelming majorities, and it also passed the lords, though not

without a strong-protest from the Duke of Bedford, and the Earls

Stanhope, Lauderdale, and Albemarle. An address was moved in the upper

house, on the 13th of June, by Lord Grenville, to assure the king of

their lordships’ loyalty and determination to punish the participators

in the conspiracy which had been laid before them, and to invest his

majesty, if needful, with additional power for the suppression of

attempts against government. This was warmly opposed by Lord Lauderdale;

but the address was carried, and sent to the commons for their

approval. Fox—after endeavouring to show that there was no ground for

apprehension; that though seditious language might have been uttered,

it would be imprudent to notice it;—moved to omit that part of the

address which expressed the conviction that a conspiracy had been

carried on against the constitution, but his amendment was rejected, and

the house concurred in the address as sent down by the lords.

AGITATION IN ENGLAND AND SCOTLAND.

Although government had scarcely so much cause of alarm at the movements

of political bodies as it exhibited, yet that there was some cause for

fear there can be no reasonable doubt. This is manifest from the state

trials which occurred at this period. One of the first of these trials

took place at the Lancaster spring assizes. Mr. Thomas Walker, of

Manchester, a strenuous advocate for parliamentary reform, at whose

house meetings for political purposes were occasionally held, was

indicted, with nine other persons, for conspiracy to overturn the

constitution by arms, and to assist the French in case of an invasion.

The principal evidence adduced was a person of the name of Dunn; but his

testimony was so contradictory that the prosecution was abandoned, and

Dunn was committed to prison to take his trial for perjury. Soon after

this a rumour was raised of a design to assassinate the king, and some

persons were arrested and committed for trial; but they were soon

after liberated, and the story fell into contempt under the popular

designation of the “Pop-gun Plot;” it being averred that the king’s

death was to be encompassed by shooting him with an instrument

resembling a walking-stick. More important proceedings subsequently

took place in the Sessions-House at Clerkenwell. At this time the

London Corresponding Society counted more than 30,000 members in

its association, and it fully justified its title by entering into

correspondence with every seditious club in the kingdom. According to

a Jacobinical expression, it soon affiliated itself with the

Constitutional Society; their respective secretaries—Thomas Hardy, a

shoemaker, and Daniel Adams, an under-clerk—making known to the world

the results of their deliberations, signed and sanctioned by their names

and authorities. Hardy’s club, that of the London Corresponding Society,

however, exercised a species of metropolitan jurisdiction over all. By

means of the handbills and pamphlets which this club circulated, and by

means of its lecturers and the meetings it concocted, a union of all

the clubs was formed; and this union finally arrived at a complete

organization, with a central board in London, a division into provinces

and districts, and a list of members, approaching to half a million, in

correspondence or direct connexion. Government thought it high time now

to interfere; and, suspecting the machinations of the ringleaders, they

adopted the usual policy under such circumstances, of employing spies

to become members, in order to betray the secrets with which they may

be entrusted. The morality of such a practice may be questioned; but

policy, and not morality, is too frequently the doctrine of even the

best-regulated states. The scheme, however, succeeded. In consequence

of the discoveries of these spies, Hardy, Adams, Martin, an attorney,

Loveit, a hair-dresser, the Rev. Jeremiah Joyce, preceptor to Lord

Mahon, John Thelwall, the political lecturer, John Home Tooke, the

philologist, Thomas Holcroft, the dramatist, Steward Kydd, a barrister,

with several others, were all arraigned at the Old Bailey. The papers of

Hardy and Adams had been seized, and an indictment was made out, which

contained no less than nine overt acts of high-treason, all resolving

themselves into the general charge, that the prisoners conspired to

summon delegates to a national convention, with a view to subvert the

government, to levy war against the existing authorities of the country,

and to depose the king. The evidence adduced, however, did not bear out

this strong indictment. Hardy, Home Tooke, and Thelwall were tried

and acquitted; and then the crown lawyers abandoned all the other

prosecutions, and those who had been indicted were liberated.

In the mean time some trials had taken place in Scotland which resulted

in a different manner to those which had occurred in the Old Bailey.

Thomas Muir, a Scotch barrister, and the Rev. Fysche Palmer, a Unitarian

preacher at Dundee, had been tried for sedition, convicted, and

sentenced to transportation. This excited considerable alarm among their

friends and associates in England, and attracted the attention of some

members of parliament. Early in the session Mr. Adams moved, in the

house of commons, for leave to bring in a bill for making some important

alterations in the criminal law of Scotland; and this being refused, he

gave notice that he would bring forward a motion for the relief of

Muir and Palmer, in another form. In the meantime Sheridan presented a

petition from Palmer, representing that he conceived the sentence

passed upon him by the high-court of justiciary, from which there was no

appeal, to be unjust. Dundas startled those who were about to plead for

the prisoners, by intimating that the sentence was already executed,

and that the warrant for the transportation of Palmer was both signed

and issued. Nevertheless Pitt found himself compelled to allow the

reception of the petition. But petitions on the table of the house of

commons are not always successful in their prayer. On the 10th of March

Mr. Adams moved for a copy of the record to be laid before the house,

upon the ground of which he meant to question the legality of the

sentence. He undertook to prove that, by the law of Scotland, the

crime imputed to them, of “lease-making,” was only subject to fine,

imprisonment, or banishment, and not to transportation; and that the

acts attributed to Muir and Palmer did not even amount to that crime.

Adams supported his legal positions with extensive knowledge, both

judicial and historical; endeavouring to establish them by statute,

analogy, and precedent, as well as by civil and political reasons. He

showed that the acts, cases, and decisions which he brought forward were

not detached and isolated, but all resulting from the same spirit

and principles, established in the best times and by the highest

authorities. He also contended that transportation was not a part of the

Scottish law before the union, and that since the union no act had

been passed allowing Scotch courts to transport in cases of sedition.

Finally, he forcibly stated the evils, moral and political, which must

result from a perversion of the law. The Scottish court and its sentence

were defended by the lord-advocate, who had officially acted against

Muir and Palmer, and by Pitt and Windham, while Fox supported Mr. Adams.

The lord-advocate contended that the Scotch laws were better than the

English for the punishment of libels and the suppression of seditious

practices; and the majority of the house seemed to agree with him,

for the motion was negatived by one hundred and seventy-one against

thirty-two. Motions made in favour of the two convicts in the upper

house, by Earls Lauderdale and Stanhope, were not more successful; and

the lord-chancellor afterwards carried a resolution that “there were no

grounds for interfering with any of the criminal courts as administered

under the constitution, and by which the rights, liberties, and

properties of all ranks of subjects were protected.”

INTRODUCTION OF FOREIGN TROOPS.

On the 27th of March a message from his majesty informed the house of

commons that a body of Hessians was placed in temporary winter-quarters

at Portsmouth and the Isle of Wight, with a view to co-operate with the

royalists in Brittany and the neighbouring districts. As similar cases

had occurred at different periods, and as the cause and necessity of

such a measure were obvious, it was concluded by government that the

usual communication of the fact to parliament would be satisfactory;

but opposition contended that Pitt ought to have moved for a bill of

indemnity; and he was charged with having violated the Bill of Rights

and the Act of Settlement. Mr. Grey moved, as a resolution of the house,

that to employ foreigners in any situation of military trust, or to

bring foreign troops into the kingdom, without the consent of parliament

first had and obtained, is contrary to law. This motion, however, was

negatived; and propositions made in both houses, at a subsequent

date, for a bill of indemnity, met with no better success, ministers

contending that it would be absurd to indemnify measures which were in

themselves both justifiable and constitutional.

THE SLAVE-TRADE QUESTION.

In the course of this session, a bill, brought forward by Wilberforce

and supported by Pitt, for the abolition of that branch of the

slave-trade by which we had supplied the islands, was passed by the

commons, despite the strenuous opposition of the West Indian interest.

It was, however, thrown out in the house of lords, and a motion for

referring to a committee the further hearing of evidence concerning the

slave-trade was likewise negatived.

MOTION ON BEHALF OF LA FAYETTE.

On the 17th of March General Fitzpatrick moved for an addresss to his

majesty, beseeching him to intercede with the King of Prussia for the

release of La Fayette, who was confined in one of his prisons. The

situation of La Fayette and his companions excited the sympathy of many

persons; but there were others who had no fellow-feeling for them. Burke

said, that La Fayette, instead of being termed an “illustrious exile,”

was then, and ought always to be, an outcast of the world; who, having

no talents to guide or influence the storm which he had laboured to

raise, fled like a coward from the bloodshed and massacre in which he

had involved so many thousands of unoffending persons and families. Pitt

denied that La Fayette’s conduct had ever been friendly to the genuine

cause of liberty; and affirmed that the interference required would

be setting up ourselves as guardians of the consciences of foreign

potentates. The motion was negatived by a large majority.

MOTION FOR INQUIRY INTO THE RECENT FAILURES OF OUR ARMIES.

As all the efforts of opposition to procure a termination of the war, or

a dissolution of alliances with foreign potentates, had failed, they now

proceeded to inquire how far the objects proposed had been obtained,

and what was the probability of ultimate success. After reviewing the

measures and events of the last campaign, in a speech of considerable

ability, Major Maitland moved for a committee to inquire into the causes

which led to the failure of the army under the Duke of York, and to the

evacuation of Toulon. In reply it was urged, that though the possession

of Dunkirk would have been a valuable acquisition, its conquest was

impracticable, from the enormous efforts of the French; and that the

same cause occasioned the evacuation of Toulon. On a general view of the

campaign it was stated that the British arms had acquired great glory;

and the house seemed to be of this opinion, for the motion was negatived

by a great majority.

THE TRIAL OF WARREN HASTINGS.

On the 5th of March, Burke moved for a committee to inspect the

journals of the lords relative to the proceedings of the trial of Warren

Hastings; and to report the facts and observations on them to the house.

Leave being given, he diligently set to work, and the report, occupying

nearly two hundred pages, was made on the 17th of April; and it is said,

by competent judges, to be one of the most able and elaborate papers

that have come from his pen. It was published, without authority, in

form of a pamphlet; and Lord Thurlow embraced an early opportunity of

venting his indignation against both its publication and its

contents. He characterised it as “disgraceful and indecent, tending to

misrepresent and vilify the conduct of judges and magistrates intrusted

with the administration of justice and the laws of the country.” Burke

made a pointed reply to this charge on the following day, in his seat

in the house of commons. He remarked:—“It accuses the judges neither

of ignorance nor corruption: whatever it says, it does not say it

calumniously; that kind of language belongs to persons whose eloquence

entitles them to a free use of epithets. The report states that

the judges had given their opinion secretly, contrary to the almost

uninterrupted tenor of parliamentary usage. It states that the opinions

were given, not on the law, but on the case. It states that the mode of

giving opinions was unprecedented, and contrary to the privileges of

the house of commons. It states that the committee did not know on what

rules and principles the judges had decided in those cases, as they

neither heard them, nor are they entered on the journals. It is very

true that we were and are extremely dissatisfied with those opinions,

and the consequent determination of the lords; and we do not think such

a mode of proceeding at all justified by the most numerous and best

precedents. The report speaks for itself: whenever an occasion shall

be regularly given to maintain everything of substance in that paper, I

shall be ready to meet the proudest name for ability, learning, or

rank, which this kingdom contains on that subject.” This reply of Burke

contains an allusion to the result of this long-pending trial, as will

be seen. Hastings was acquitted. As for the gauntlet which Burke threw

down, no one seemed inclined to take it up; and Burke soon after quitted

the house of commons for ever, he accepting the Chiltern Hundreds. But

before Burke left the house, Pitt moved the thanks of the commons to him

and the other managers, “for their faithful management in discharge of

the trust reposed in them.” This motion was carried; and Burke in his

reply observed, that prejudices against himself, arising from personal

friendship or obligations to the accused, were too laudable for him to

be discomposed at them. He had thrown out no general reflections on the

Company’s servants; he had merely-repeated what Mr. Hastings himself

had said of the troops serving in Oude, and the house had marked

their opinion of the officers in the very terms he used. As for other

expressions attributed to him, they had been much exaggerated and

misrepresented. This was the last day that this philosophical statesman

took his seat in the house of commons. Among his last words were a

warning to the country to beware of the fate of France. But this warning

was now scarcely needed. He had sounded the trumpet of alarm with such

effect for several sessions, that the nation was roused to a sense

of danger, and was prepared to ward off the blow by its most vigorous

efforts. He had rendered a noble service, not only to his own

generation, but to posterity—not only to his own country, but to every

nation in Europe.

THE PROROGATION OF PARLIAMENT.

Parliament was prorogued on the 11th of July. In his speech his majesty

congratulated the lords and commons on the victory obtained over the

French at sea on the 1st of June, and the acquisitions made in the East

and West Indies. He also took occasion again to urge the two houses to

persevere with increased vigour and exertion in the present contest,

against a power irreconcilably hostile in its principles and spirit to

all regular and established governments.

MINISTERIAL APPOINTMENTS.

At the conclusion of the session, the Portland party joined the

ministerial ranks. The Duke of Portland received a blue riband, with

the office of third secretary of state; Earl Spencer accepted the privy

seal, which he soon laid aside to preside over the admiralty; and Mr.

Windham, was made secretary at war. Before the close of the year, Lord

Fitzwilliam was promoted to the vice-royalty of Ireland, in the place of

Lord Westmoreland; the Earl of Mansfield succeeded to the presidency

of the council; and Lord Chatham, brother to the premier, was made

lord privy-seal. About the same time ten new peers were created. These

measures greatly strengthened the administration; and at the same time

confirmed the existing disunion of the old whig party.

EMBASSY TO CHINA, ETC.

Government had some time ago despatched Lord, Macartney on an embassy to

China, and about this time the result of his mission became known. The

embassy had been fitted out without any reasonable ground of success;

but it was still expected that it might be the means of establishing a

communication with that great empire. But the event did not answer these

expectations. His lordship was received with suspicion, and ordered to

depart as soon as he had made some costly presents, and received some

trifling ones in return, being refused even a few days’ delay. As one

of the ambassador’s suite observed, “They entered Pekin like paupers,

remained in it like prisoners, and quitted it like vagrants.”

CORSICA ANNEXED TO THE CROWN OF ENGLAND.

The nation was somewhat consoled for this failure by the annexation

of Corsica to the crown of Great Britain; an event which, from its

political importance, was a topic of ministerial exultation. After the

disaster at Toulon, Lord Hood sailed to this island, which was in

a state of revolt against the government. He landed three thousand

soldiers and marines, and these nearly effected the reduction of the

island by the capture of Bastia, which capitulated on honourable terms.

Calvi, the only remaining-stronghold of the republicans, was then

besieged, and on the 1st of August it surrendered to the British arms.

Paoli and the aristocratical party then offered the cession of the

island to the King of Great Britain, which was accepted. Efforts were

made to confer the blessings of the British constitution on the rude

islanders, but they were not successful; while one party looked to

England, the other cast their eyes on France.

LORD HOWE’S NAVAL VICTORY, ETC.

About the middle of April, the ships composing the Channel fleet,

commanded by Lord Howe, assembled at St. Helen’s. It consisted of

thirty-two sail of the line and nine frigates; but six of the ships of

the line and four frigates were detached under Rear Admiral Montague,

to escort some outward-bound convoys off Cape Finisterre. With the

remainder of the fleet Lord Howe proceeded to Ushant, to look after

the Brest fleet and a French convoy which were expected to arrive from

America and the West Indian Islands. The French convoy escaped Howe’s

vigilance, and arrived safely in the French ports; but he caught sight

of the French fleet on the 28th of May, and on the evening of that day

he attacked a part of their line. As it grew dark the firing ceased; but

the two fleets kept within sight of each other until the 1st of June,

when they came to a regular engagement. In the size of their vessels,

in the aggregate number of their guns, and in the weight of metal, the

French had a considerable superiority; and they had also twenty-six

ships of the line, while, at the time of the engagement, Lord Howe had

twenty-five—one, the “Audacious,” having separated, on the 28th, in a

shattered condition. Lord Howe, however, having discovered the French

early on the morning of the 1st of June, about three or four miles to

leeward, in order of battle, immediately stood towards them. At about

seven in the morning, he was abreast of them, and then he wore to the

larboard tack, the French awaiting his approach in the same position.

The signal for action was made about half-past eight o’clock, orders

having previously been given for the fleet to close, to pass through the

French line, and engage them to leeward, van to van, rear to roar, every

ship engaging her opposite in the enemy’s line. Some of the ships, as

the “Defence,” the “Marlborough,” the “Royal George,” the “Queen,” the

“Brunswick,” and the “Nott,” were enabled thus to engage the enemy; but

the far greater part of them engaged their adversaries to windward, thus

enabling the French, when defeated, to get off before the wind. Howe’s

own ship engaged that of Villaret Joyeuse, the French admiral; and these

two opened their fire a little after nine o’clock, and at nearly the

same time the action became general in the centre. Villaret Joyeuse’s

ship mounted 120 guns, and it was so lofty that it frequently waved its

ensign over the quarter-deck of the “Queen Charlotte.” But it was soon

discovered that the French could not withstand that close fighting;

after having manfully fought for about an hour, Villaret Joyeuse gave

way, and stood off to the northward, followed by all his ships that

could carry sail. Ten of them were left behind almost totally dismasted,

and nearly surrounded by the English; and seven of these fell into the

hands of the victors. One of them had received so many shots between

wind and water, that she filled and went down almost as soon as the

English flag was hoisted on her. After securing the other six, Lord Howe

made the signal for his fleet to close round him, with the intention of

again attacking Villaret Joyeuse, if he should attempt to retrieve the

fortune of the day; but the French admiral thought of nothing but of

securing his retreat. On the side of the English the number of killed

was 279, and of wounded 877; while in the six captured ships alone the

killed were 690, and the wounded 580. More than 300 were supposed to

have gone clown in the ship which sunk, and the number of prisoners

removed is stated at 2,300. On board the French fleet was Jean Bon

Saint André, the friend and creature of Robespierre; and he was there

on commission, to remind every officer and man of the guillotine, and

of the duty he owed to the republic. Jean Bon Saint André wished himself

ashore as soon as the battle commenced; and, in bold defiance of facts

which had been witnessed by many thousands of individuals, he declared,

in his report to the convention, that the English had thirty-six ships

of the line; that the battle lasted from ten in the morning to three in

the afternoon; and that the English, after having seen several of their

ships sunk, finally sheered off with all the sail they could carry.

Barrère, the reporter and oracle of the committee of public safety,

even outstripped Bon Saint André in the strength of lying and power

of invention: he amused the national convention with an account of

the victory of the republican fleet, far more fabulous than the

commissioner’s. Some of his statements, gross and unfounded as they

were, have even been adopted by historians; especially by those who give

credit to French writers. Thus Barrère asserted, that the republicans

on board the ship which sunk soon after the English flag was hoisted

on her, refused, to a man, to seek safety by surrendering, fought their

lower-deck guns till the water reached them, and, having hoisted every

flag, pennant, and streamer, went down with her, shouting _Vive la

Republique! Vive la France!_ and that the last thing which disappeared

beneath the waves was the tri-coloured flag. This splendid fiction, or,

more properly speaking, gross falsehood, was seized upon by poets and

painters of every grade of genius; poems and pictures on it appearing in

great abundance. But the very reverse of all this was the fact. Instead

of challenging certain death and glorying in their fate, the crew of the

ship in question, the “Vengeur,” who had fought bravely, substituted the

British union-jack for the republican ensign, and spread themselves over

the sides and rigging of the ship, stretching out their hands to their

enemies, and imploring assistance. Some of them were saved; but the

crowds which attempted to spring into each boat threatening those who

came to their assistance, as well as themselves, with destruction,

checked the compassionate zeal of their conquerors, and compelled them

to leave the poor wretches to their fate. Yet there were two exceptions:

two French officers betrayed no anxiety to avail themselves of any

means of safety, but continued walking up and down the stern-gallery,

apparently engaged in conversation, until the ship, having admitted the

water into her ports, was engulfed.

Lord Howe’s fleet put to sea again on the 3rd of September. It then

consisted of thirty-seven sail of the line and seven frigates; added to

which were five ships of the line, and three frigates furnished by the

king of Portugal. The French fleet was then in Brest harbour, out of

which it did not venture to appear till Howe had returned to port; and

then it commenced a cruise, which ended in the loss of five of their

ships of line, by storms and accidents. During this year and the

preceding there were numerous contests between small squadrons and

frigates, and, in general, the superiority of the English, as sailors

and combatants on their own element, was maintained. These engagements

took place in the Channel, on the coast of France, in the Mediterranean

and Archipelago, and in the East and West Indies. In the whole of this

year the British lost only one ship of the line; and this ship, the

“Alexander,” did not surrender, until she had sustained the assault

of three French ships of the line for two hours. The spirit which the

British seamen displayed, indeed, at the commencement of this momentous

struggle, gave fair hopes of a successful issue.

{GEORGE III. 1794–1795}

BRITISH CONQUESTS IN THE WEST INDIES.

The superiority of the British navy soon began to excite public

exultation, and to produce its wonted effects on the colonial

possessions of our enemies. Tobago had been taken by a British squadron

soon after, the commencement of hostilities; and early in this year,

a fleet, under Sir John Jervis and General Sir Charles Grey, was

dispatched against Martinique, which, after a vigorous resistance, was

captured. The reduction of Martinique was followed by the conquest of

the islands of Saint Lucie and Guadaloupe. After these successes, Sir

Charles Grey returned to Martinique, leaving General Dundas to command

at Guadaloupe; but before the close of the year that island was

regained by the French.

DISPUTES WITH AMERICA.

About this time the British government became involved in a contention

with the United States of America. Soon after the commencement of

hostilities with France, orders were issued for detaining American

vessels freighted with corn for that country, and confiscating their

cargoes, though at the same time paying both for them and their freight.

The Americans were indignant at these orders, considering them to be an

attack on their independence. Their complaints, however, were not only

disregarded, but an order was afterwards issued to seize all American

vessels carrying provisions and stores to the French colonies, and also

to compel their ships sailing from the British islands to give security

for landing their cargoes in British or neutral ports. In consequence

of this measure,—vigorous, but necessary under existing

circumstances,—more than six hundred American vessels were seized in

the space of five months. Added to these causes of complaint there were

others given to the United States by the occupation of some ceded forts

on the frontiers of Canada, and by a conference which the governor, Lord

Dorchester, held with some Indian tribes. By way of retaliation, the

American government laid an embargo of thirty days on the British

shipping in their ports, and appointed Mr. Jay, its minister, to compose

the difference between the two countries. Mr. Jay delivered a memorial

on the subject, and Pitt having tendered a conciliatory answer, and both

parties being inclined to peace, the dispute was, for the time being,

compromised. But on a future day it was productive of serious effects.

MILITARY OPERATIONS ON THE CONTINENT.

While the English were in general victorious on the sea during this

year, on land, they, in common with their allies, were generally

unsuccessful. This arose from two causes: from the division of sentiment

which existed among the officers of the coalition, and from the

continued extraordinary efforts of the French republicans. Resolved to

extend their sway over the neighbouring countries, to enlarge their

own boundaries, and to obtain by plunder the means of supporting their

gigantic efforts, at the close of the year 1783 the French had nearly

one million armed men in the field, three hundred thousand of whom were

on the northern frontier of the republic. To oppose these masses, the

allies had not more than 140,000 men. And what rendered the immense

force of the French particularly formidable, was the ability, as well as

the unanimity, with which it was managed, and the military talent which

was rising up among its ranks. On the other hand, the allies, composed

of different nations, were commanded by leaders who were jealous of each

other, and were far from acting with that cordial co-operation which

was necessary, not merely to ensure success, but to prevent defeat.

The rivalry of Austria and Prussia, and the jealousy which each had

conceived of the other, became so visible, that, early in January, the

Duke of Brunswick addressed a letter to the king of Prussia, in which

he announced the resignation of his command; stating, as his motive,

the unhappy experience that want of connexion, distrust, and cabal had

disconcerted the measures adopted during the two last campaigns. After

alluding to the unanimity which existed among the French republicans,

he said: “If, instead of co-operating with similar principles, each army

acts separately and without concert with the others, without fixed plans

and without concord, the consequences to be expected are such as have

been seen at Dunkirk, at Maubeuge, at the capture of Lyons, at the

destruction of Toulon, and at the siege of Landau.” He added, in

conclusion:—“The same causes which divided the allied powers divide

them still; the movements of the armies will again suffer as they have

suffered; they will experience delay and embarrassment, and these will

prove the source of a train of misfortunes the consequences of which are

incalculable.” The Duke was succeeded in command of the Prussian army

by Field Marshal Mollendorf; but, in the month of March, a proclamation

announced that the King of Prussia had seceded from the coalition. But

this was only a _ruse_ on the part of his Prussian majesty: he wanted

English money, and when he had extracted the subsidy from Great Britain,

he again joined his allies. Great part of this subsidy, however, was

diverted from its original purpose, to forward designs on Poland, to

secure the territories which had been allotted to the King of Prussia in

the last partition, and to set up a pretension to more. His conduct on

this occasion has been well pronounced loose and spiritless; for the

troops which he furnished fell far short of the stipulated number, and

yet he pocketed more than two millions of English money. The Emperor of

Austria was equally slow in providing contingencies: he recommended the

Germanic confederation to oppose the republic by a levy _en masse_; but

he neglected to set them an example.

The campaign did not open under better auspices in the Netherlands.

Austrians, English, Dutch, and Hanoverians were to fight together there;

but a great number of the Dutch were inclined to democracy, and the Duke

of York quarrelled with the Austrian commanders, and refused to serve

under General Clairfait. At a general council of war held at Ath, it was

proposed that the Prince of Saxe Cobourg should continue at the head of

the grand imperial army, and that General Clairfait should command the

auxiliary forces, the Duke of York acting under his orders. This his

royal highness refused with disdain; and the dispute was only settled by

the determination that the emperor should take the field in person, and

that the supreme command should be vested in him. This ill-timed quarrel

has been generally attributed to the pride, petulance, and jealousy

of rank of the Duke of York. It would appear, however, that the young

prince had nobler reasons for objecting to the supreme command of

General Clairfait; he having evinced, on several occasions, his

indifference to the common interests of the coalition, and even a

readiness to sacrifice that interest to the views of his own government.

When the quarrel was settled it was agreed that the campaign should be

opened with vigour on the French frontier; that the heads of the columns

should be again turned towards Paris; that the army of the King of

Prussia should move from the Rhine by the valley of the Moselle,

traverse Luxembourg, and join the allies on the Sambre, or co-operate

with them on their advance; and that England should send 10,000 men,

under Lord Moira, to the coast of Brittany, in order to assist the

Vendeans, and to advance with them from the west towards Paris. It was

hoped also that the Spaniards might advance from the Pyrenees, and that

the King of Sardinia might repossess himself of Savoy, and once more

open the road to Lyons.

His imperial majesty arrived at Brussels early in April; and after

reviewing the whole army on the heights above Cateau, it marched in

eight columns to invest Landrecies. As the allies were already in

possession, on the same frontier, of Valenciennes, Coudé, and Quesnoy,

this place was not worth the trouble and time it cost to take it. The

fortress fell, after a short siege, into the hands of the Prince of Saxe

Cobourg; but while the allies were engaged here, Pichegru had penetrated

into West Flanders, where General Clairfait was stationed with a

division of the imperial army, and had captured Courtrai and Menin.

Jourdan, another republican general also, who was already stationed in

the country of Luxembourg, had, in the meantime, increased his army to

a prodigious extent; after which he fell upon the Austrian general

Beaulieu, who attempted to check his progress, and drove him from

his lines with great loss. After his conquest of Courtrai and Menin,

Pichegru wheeled round upon the Duke of York, who with about 30,000

men, English and Hanoverians, were stationed at Tournay; but here the

republican general was signally defeated. Yet, on the next day, Pichegru

attacked Clairfait, who was advancing to retake Courtrai, and compelled

him to retreat to Flanders. A few days after this Pichegru threw his

right wing under Kleber and Marceau, across the Sambre, to attack the

Austrian general Kaunitz; but he was defeated with the loss of 4.000

men.

These victories revived the spirits of the allies, and, without waiting

for the Prussians, who were not inclined to move, in a grand council of

war, they determined to envelope the left, or chief and victorious part

of the French army on the Maine, by moving upon it in five attacking

columns, from the various points they occupied. The success of these

movements depended upon the celerity and good understanding among the

commanders; and in these requisites they were sadly deficient. The Duke

of York pushed forward towards the appointed centre round which all the

columns were to meet, but when he arrived at Turcoing, where he expected

to meet General Clairfait, he was surrounded by the republican forces,

under Souham and Bonnaud, and completely defeated. The other columns now

fell into confusion, and, from the heights of Templenor, the Emperor of

Austria had the mortification of witnessing the retreat of the entire

army of the allies; after which he returned, first to Brussels, and then

to Vienna, leaving the Prince of Saxe Cobourg to command in his inline.

Although the English and Hanoverian column had suffered great loss in

the battle of Turcoing, it soon rallied, and even foiled Pichegru in

an attempt to seize upon Tournay. The Austrian general, Kaunitz, also

gained another victory over the republicans, on nearly the same ground,

and drove them across the Sambre. But these victories only served to

allure the allies on to their ruin. Every day fresh masses of men from

the armed hive of France advanced towards the Sambre, now the theatre of

war. Even Jourdan, who had been watching the Prussians on the Moselle,

finding that they would not move, repaired thither. At the same time the

reinforcements of the allies, having to be brought from great distances,

and being difficult to raise, arrived but slowly and in few numbers.

Such was the situation of the belligerents when Pichegru, after some

manouvres which perplexed the allies, struck off to the left and laid

siege to Ypres. General Clairfait marched to the relief of the besieged

town and defeated Pichegru; but he recovered the ground he had lost,

drove back his opponent, and took the town; the strong garrison therein

opening the gates to him, as so many traitors or cowards. In the

meantime Jourdan laid siege to and captured Charleroi; although in the

route thither he had been defeated in a pitched battle and driven across

the Sambre, by the hereditary Prince of Orange, who had been dispatched

with a part of the army of the coalition to oppose his designs upon that

place. The Prince of Saxe Cobourg was expected to relieve Charleroi;

but he did not arrive until after the place was reduced; and then he was

attacked by Jourdan on the plains of Fleurus, and, after an obstinate

battle, which lasted the whole day, was compelled to order a general

retreat. The prince retired in good order to Halle, and again prepared

to fight for the preservation of what remained to Austria in the

Netherlands; but the Sans-culotte portion of the Belgians now again

declared for the French. Bruges opened its gates to them; Pichegru,

aided by General Moreau, compelled the Duke of York to retreat to

Antwerp; and then the places which the English left in their rear

followed the example of Bruges. The Duke of York was joined at Antwerp

by Lord Moira with the 10,000 troops originally intended for the war

in the Vendée, but who was not ready till that war was over and the

Vendeans crushed. The two armies of the Duke of York and General

Clairfait occupied the country between Antwerp and Louvain, holding both

those towns and Mechlin which lay between them. In the meantime part

of the army of Pichegru invested Valenciennes, Condé. Quesnoy, and

Landrecies, the garrisons of all of which fortresses, overawed by the

threats of the convention, almost immediately capitulated. Pichegru

and Jourdan, about the same time, effected a junction, and marched

upon Brussels; and, after defeating the Prince of Saxe Cobourg in their

route, they entered that city amidst the welcomes of the Jacobin party.

The ancient town of Ghent also submitted to the republicans; and, on the

12th of July, the Duke of York and Lord Moira were attacked by the enemy

in great force, and compelled to take shelter in Mechlin. Three days

after he was compelled to leave Mechlin, and Clairfait was overwhelmed

near Louvain, and obliged to abandon both that city and Liege. General

Beaulieu was likewise compelled to evacuate Namur, and the citadel of

Antwerp, to which the Duke of York had repaired, was not considered a

safe retreat. After staying there a week, indeed, the English crossed

the Scheldt, and abandoned both the city and citadel to the French. The

Duke of York concentrated his forces in the neighbourhood of Breda

for the defence of Holland, while General Clairfait retired behind the

Meuse. Thus the whole of Austrian Flanders and Brabant, fell under

the dominion of the French in one brief campaign. Disheartened by

the reverses of the allies, the Prince of Saxe Cobourg, after some

altercations with the Dutch generals, who refused to risk another

battle, and after making a powerful but vain appeal to his German

countrymen on the Rhine and the Moselle, to rise _en masse_, for the

defence of all that was dear to them—of their altars and firesides, of

their emperor, their liberty, and their old Germanic honour,—retired

from the command of the imperial army. As for the emperor himself, he

was so irritated by the want of energy and disaffection of the people,

and so discouraged by the events of the war, that a notion got abroad of

his intention to abandon the coalition, and seek a separate peace

with the republicans. This report of secession, however, was probably

circulated for the same purpose as the previous report of the secession

of the King of Prussia; namely, to obtain money from England. At all

events this was the effect produced: alarmed at it, Pitt dispatched Earl

Spencer and Mr. Thomas Grenville to Vienna, and the result was, that the

emperor accepted a large subsidy, in the shape of a guarantee of four

millions, as the price of his adherence to the coalition. As for the

report that the emperor evacuated Flanders, in order that his subjects

might experience the difference between his mild government and that of

the republicans of France, it seems to be wholly without foundation. But

if it afforded him any consolation to know that the Netherlands smarted

under the republican rule, his feelings must have been gratified to

the utmost. Every young man capable of bearing arms was called into the

field of battle; the coin of the country was called in and exchanged

for assignats at par; merchandise and property of all descriptions were

seized by the freebooting republicans; and the guillotine was kept in

constant motion by commissioners sent to fraternise and unite Belgium

with France. Moreover, Ghent, Bruges, Ostend, and other towns, with the

villages, were heavily taxed, and the plunder derived from the whole

country was conveyed to Lisle and Dunkirk, for the use and service of

republican France.

During this campaign, a new treaty was concluded with the Duke of

Brunswick, who engaged to furnish his Britannic majesty with a body of

2,289 troops, upon condition of receiving the same liberal remuneration

as the Hessians, and granting over and above to the noble duke an annual

subsidy of £16,000 sterling. This treaty, however, was made too late in

the year for the troops to be of any service, and they were, moreover,

contemptible in number, compared with the hundreds of thousands which

the French poured forth against their enemies. But the King of Prussia

appears to have been the grand obstacle in the way of the success of

the allied armies. Early in the year, the Germanic diet had agreed to a

_conclusum_ for a general armament of the people of the empire—of the

burghers and peasantry of all the circles, states, principalities, and

electorates comprised in the league; but Frederick William declared

that if this _conclusum_ were not withdrawn, he would withdraw his

troops; as he could not expose them to the danger which would result

from such a measure. The reasons he gave in a declaration for his

opposition were, that, by employing the peasantry against the enemy,

agriculture would suffer; that arms were wanting for such a mass of

people that it was impossible to teach the manual exercise to the

inhabitants in so short a time; that, to be victorious, the soldiers

exposed to the French must be perfectly exercised; and that it was

dangerous, at a time like the present, when the French were watching

their opportunity to insinuate their principles, to assemble such a mass

of men, whose ideas of government must be various, and among whom, from

that cause, dissensions might arise, disastrous in their consequences,

not only to the armies, but to the empire. These were Frederick

William’s promulgated reasons; but it would rather appear, that, as many

parts of his kingdom were dissaffected to the house of Brandenberg,

he feared that if the population were armed they might assert their

independence, or struggle to be restored to the states to which they

formerly belonged. Be that as it may, the opposition of Frederick

William to this measure was successful, for the _conclusum_ of the diet

was not carried into effect. And yet it was manifestly the only measure

which, if it could have been accomplished, could have successfully

stemmed the torrent of French conquests.

Although the Prussians were not wholly inactive during this campaign,

yet they did not act with much vigour. Early in the year the French army

on the Rhine advanced and took the fort of Kaiserslautern, the town

of Spires, and several other towns and fortresses. They intrenched

themselves at Kaiserslautern; and early in May the Prussian general

Mollendorf drove them from thence with great slaughter. But from this

time, the French having been shortly after reinforced, the Prussians

and their allies did nothing of any consequence. A battle was fought in

July, which was maintained, at different points, four whole days; but

after both sides had suffered greatly, the imperialists crossed the

Rhine, and the Prussians retreated down the left bank of the river to

Mayence, leaving the republicans in the possession of territory sixty

miles in length. Thus successful, the French marched to the reduction of

Treves, and then poured down in great numbers to the Netherlands, first,

to assist in the war there, and after that to conquer Holland.

The armies of the republic were also successful in Spain and Italy. In

Spain, early in the year, the French having penetrated into the province

of Catalonia, a battle was fought near Saint Jean de Luz, in which they

were victorious. In May, also, another victory was gained near Ceret;

and soon afterwards a third, of still greater importance, over the

principal Spanish army posted in the vicinity of Collioure. On the

western side, moreover, the towns of Fontarabia and Saint Sebastian fell

into the hands of the republicans: the latter, partly by feat of arms,

and partly by the treachery of some of the notabilities of that place.

By these successes the French had obtained a good basis of operations;

but they still had to fight desperately for every foot of ground. During

the month of October the French general Moncey received the orders of

the convention to overrun the whole of the Basque provinces, occupy

Navarre, seize Pampeluna, and transfer his camp to the banks of the

Ebro. In compliance with these orders, Moncey led his columns into

Roncesvalles, that deep valley, formed by the Pyrenees of Navarre,

between Pampeluna and Saint Jean Pié-de-Port, on the French frontier,

and after sustaining a loss of 3,000 men, he gained possession of it.

But winter was fast approaching, provisions were falling short, and

unless he could force his way to Pampeluna, he saw that he must retreat

to Saint Jean Pié-de-Port. The Spaniards now occupied excellent ground

at the head of the pass between the French army and Pampeluna; and here

Moncey attacked them in vain: his left wing was completely defeated, and

he was compelled to leave Roncesvalles and to winter his army; some in

that part of Guipuscoa of which he had obtained possession in the valley

of Bastan, and some at Saint Jean Pié-de-Port.

In Italy the Piedmontese had, at the command of the King of Sardinia,

risen _en masse_, but being destitute of the enthusiasm of liberty, they

constituted a body without a soul. Before the middle of April, the army

of the Alps amounted to 75,000 men, opposed to which were only 40,000

Piedmontese and 10,000 Austrian auxiliaries. The committee of public

safety enjoined their commanders to drive the enemy over the mountains

and to seize the passes; and by the middle of May the whole ridge of

the Alps between Savoy and Piedmont, and the key of Italy, fell into the

hands of the republicans. On the frontier of Nice, the operations of the

French leaders were directed by Napoleon Buonaparte, whose design was to

turn Saorgio by its left, and cut off the retreat of its garrison by the

great road from over the Col di-Tende. The attacking army was divided

into three columns: the first, of 20,000 men, under Massena, advanced on

the first of April, intending to pass between Saorgio and the sea; the

second, under Dumerbion, of 10,000 men, remained in front of the enemy;

while the third, of equal force, directed its course to the upper

extremities of the valleys of the Vesabia, to communicate with the army

of Savoy by Isola. These movements were eminently successful: the rocky

citadel of Saorgio, surrounded by the French, surrendered at the first

summons; while the French, who ascended the Vesabia, drove the allies

back to the Col de Finisterre, and General Serurier cleared the valley

of the Tinea and established a communication with the army of Savoy by

Isola. Subsequently, the republicans became masters of all the passes

in the maritime Alps; and while from the summit of Mont Cenis they

threatened a descent on the valley of Susa and Turin from the Col di

Tende, they could advance to the siege of the fortress of Coni. It was

Napoleon’s wish to push on to the conquest of Italy; but the convention

withdrew 10,000 men from the army of the Alps, in order to support that

of the Rhine, and the remainder were left to repose in their aerial

citadels.

In the meantime the Duke of York had been assisting the hereditary

Prince of Orange to cover the United Provinces; but their forces

were miserably insufficient, while the democratic party was again

corresponding with the French republicans, and giving them every

assistance. In Dutch Flanders, Cadsandt and Sluys were reduced before

the end of August, and by the beginning of October, after defeating the

imperialist general Clairfait, with the exception of Mayence, the French

became masters of every place on the left bank of the Rhine between

Landau and Nimeguen. On the Maes the strong fortress of Venloo had been

allowed to be captured by a _coup-de-main_, and Bois-le-Duc surrendered

after a short siege. The Duke of York, who was stationed at Nimeguen,

was now cut off from all hope of reinforcement from Germany; but he,

nevertheless, resolved to cover that place, the possession of which

would greatly facilitate the advance of the French into the heart

of Holland. But his force was insufficient for that purpose: after

sustaining two severe assaults, he was compelled to withdraw his troops;

and then Nimeguen fell into the hands of the republicans. The Duke

retreated across the Waal and the Rhine, and stationed himself at

Arnheim in the province of Guelderland, still hoping to arrest the

progress of the French arms in Holland. About the same time, Kléber,

after a siege of five weeks’ duration, obtained possession of the

fortress of Maestricht, although it was garrisoned by 8,000 Dutchmen and

Germans in the pay of the States-general, and was, moreover, well stored

with provisions and everything necessary for sustaining a long siege.

But the Dutch generally fraternized with the republicans, and even the

Dutch troops would, in the main, rather have fought against their allies

than with the French. Disaffection, treachery, and corruption everywhere

prevailed; which sufficiently accounts for the ease and rapidity with

which the republicans made conquests in Holland. Early in December, the

Duke of York, conceiving that the campaign was finished, set out for

England; leaving to General Walmoden the perilous task of protecting the

country against superior troops who were already flushed with victory.

The elements, also, assisted the French. After several attempts to

cross the Waal, about the middle of December a hard frost set in, which

enabled them to cross that river, and the Dutch were driven from their

posts, while sixty pieces of cannon and nearly 2,000 prisoners, fell

into the hands of the republicans. They made themselves masters of

several posts on the Waal; but as the ice did not permit the passage of

heavy artillery, Pichegru, who was charged by the convention with the

conquest of Holland, withdrew his forces again to the left bank,

where Grave was captured and Breda invested. Thus threatened, the

States-general, imagining that it was possible for them to negociate a

separate peace, sent ambassadors to request the ruling faction at Paris

to grant such terms as their _known good faith and generosity_ should

dictate. The convention flattered the ambassadors with hopes of peace,

while at the same time they sent their orders to Pichegru to force his

way to Amsterdam. They depended on the disaffection of the people to

accelerate their advances, more than the most formidable inundations

could check them; in which opinion they were confirmed by frequent

invitations sent from the principal towns in every part of the United

States, with promises of a cordial reception. It is a notorious fact,

indeed, that the English who were defending them were considered by the

Dutch people in general to be their enemies, rather than the French who

invaded their country; and their antipathy to their defenders was seen

in the total inattention paid to their comforts. At this time, from the

increasing severity of the weather, sickness greatly prevailed in the

English camp; but scarcely any accommodations were prepared for the sick

in the hospitals, a scanty allowance of straw only being obtained for a

covering. It is said that hundreds were found dead on the banks of the

rivers and canals, and that a straggling Englishman, finally, at the

close of this campaign, became an object, not only of ill treatment, but

of frequent assassination.

THE INTERNAL CONDITION OF FRANCE.

It has been seen that the French had decreed that there was no God:

a day soon arrived which demonstrated, not only to France, but to

all Europe, that there is a God, and that He is “the Judge of all the

earth.” Hitherto the Jacobins had been one and indivisible as regards

crime; but shortly after this display of madness, they split into two

contending parties. Danton, the cruel Danton, became sated with

blood, and wished to stop its effusion. But not so did his colleague

Robespierre; and, fearing his vengeance, Danton retired into the

country, and left his colleague to rule in cruelty alone. His vengeance

first fell upon the heads of Rousin, Vincent, Chaumette, the apostle

of reason, Hébert, the apostate archbishop of Paris, and Anacharisis

Clootz; these were arrested on a charge of conspiring to overturn

the government, and were hurried from the bar of the tribunal of the

Jacobins, Robespierre being at their head, to the scaffold. Then fell

Hérault-d-Séchelles, the friend of Danton, who was guillotined for

sheltering a suspected person. Danton was then hunted down, with

Desmoulins, editor of the _Vieux Cordelier_, Phelippean, Lacroix,

Chabot, Baziere, and Fabre d’Eglantine: he was brought before the

tribunal, and all perished on the scaffold. The death of these leaders

of the revolution was followed by that of the innocent. The massacres

which daily took place are too numerous for recital: the rage of the

terrorists spared neither rank, nor age, nor sex. Nobles, magistrates,

generals, ladies, and peasants, all in their turns, were guillotined

without mercy. Nor was it in the capital alone that such scenes were

committed. At Arras, Orange, and Nantes, the tribunals were equally

guilty. At Nantes, Carrier still seemed to outrival Robespierre: the

very fish of the river became unfit for food, from feeding on the

carcases of his victims. Thus Robespierre and his party triumphed over

all who dared oppose them. But, by a righteous retribution, they were

soon made the instruments of their own punishment. Like Danton, it would

appear that Robespierre became sated with blood; that he saw there

was necessity for the cessation of these tragical scenes, and the

establishment of order in the republic. He devised a plan for making the

convention decree the existence of a Supreme Being, he deeming atheism

the natural religion of the lazy and the rich. By his efforts, a fêté

was ordained in honour of that Deity whom they had so long and so

flagrantly despised. Robespierre was president of the convention for

that day, and hence high-priest of the ceremonial. It was a proud day

for him, but his career was to end in blood. Mad with envy, there

were those who, in lieu of incense, saluted his ears with this ominous

allusion: “The capitol is near the Tarpeian rock.” Robespierre thought,

that by denouncing atheism, men might be disposed to become more

orderly; in other words, that the Parisians and the nation at large

would quietly submit to his rule. But he had accustomed the people

to scenes of horror and bloodshed, so that their minds had become

familiarised with them. There was danger in his own camp. At this time

there was a committee of “general surety,” subordinate to the committee

of “public safety:” and from this committee went forth all accusations

and arrests which were tantamount to condemnation.. Against these

Robespierre now turned his power, but as they had been accustomed to

act as they pleased, as they had been allowed to send victims to the

scaffold even out of mere wanton cruelty, this act of Robespierre gave

them offence, and they resolved upon his overthrow. It was reported by

them, that Robespierre had demanded the heads of half the assembly, and

this alarmed the major part into resistance. Foreboding the approaching

storm, Robespierre, with his confidants, especially Saint Just and

Couthon, made out new lists of proscription. But it was too late. In

a session of the convention, Tallien suddenly fell upon him with

denunciations, and a fierce cry of “Down with the tyrant,” arose on

every hand. Robespierre and his friends made impotent attempts to defend

themselves, but their voices were drowned in the cry of “Down with

the tyrant.” A decree for their arrest was passed and executed; but

Robespierre, with the aid of the Jacobins, escaped from custody, and

proceeded to the Hotel de Ville, where his adherents assembled around

him. The municipality, the populace, and Henriot, the furious commandant

of the citizen guards, were all on his side. Had Robespierre acted

vigorously, the convention would have been lost. Henriot, indeed, caused

the hall of assembly to be surrounded, and pointed the cannon against

it; but, before this, the assembly decreed Robespierre, Henriot, and

their adherents to be “out of the law,” and this vigorous proceeding

decided the fate of the day. The cannoneers refused to fire; the

convention resumed the offensive; and the armed sections, under the

command of Barras, surrounded the Hotel de Ville, intent upon the

destruction of the Jacobins. Robespierre discharged a pistol at his own

head and fractured his jaw; the younger Robespierre threw himself out

from a window, but survived the fall; Lebon stabbed himself; Couthon did

the same, but without fatal effect; and Henriot was flung from a window

into a drain and mutilated: all the rest were taken unhurt; and on the

morrow, Robespierre, and all that survived, were all executed amidst the

acclamations and applause of the citizens. On the two following days,

likewise, eighty-three heads, mostly of municipal councillors and

revolutionary judges, were decapitated. All Paris and France resounded

with triumph. But the victory was not yet complete: the partisans of the

system of terror were still numerous, both in the convention itself

and throughout the city and the country. Their present leaders, indeed,

Billaud-Varennes and Collot d’ Herbois, were no less sanguinary than the

ferocious Robespierre himself. Hence the storm of passion and the work

of strife did not cease with that tyrant’s fall. There was a cessation

of strife, but the parties composing the convention soon came again into

collision. These parties are known in history as the Thermidorians and

the Jacobins. In one thing, both these parties were agreed; that since

death was sworn to liberty by foreign and intestine enemies, terror

only promised salvation. But the motives for this resolution were very

dissimilar. The Thermidorians adhered with pure zeal to the republic,

and regarded it as a duty to sacrifice all other interests to those

of liberty; while the Jacobins sought only their own interests and

paramount influence. From the opposition of these parties arose

an undecided, and often contradictory course by the members of the

convention. On the one hand, many prisoners were liberated, a milder

form given to the revolutionary tribunal, and the power of the committee

of safety restricted; while, on the other hand, the Jacobin club, which

had been closed at the fall of Robespierre, was opened anew, executions

were continued, the forms of the revolutionary government retained, and

every assault averted from the leaders of the terrorists. Gradually,

however, moderation got the upper hand; or, in other words, the

Thermidorians triumphed. Their power was manifested by the execution of

the monster Carrier, together with some of his infamous accomplices, and

by a decree of investigation which finally passed against the highest

heads—against Billaud-Varennes, Collot d’Herbois, and Rarrère, with

some of their assistants. In the meantime their predominence was also

shown in many beneficial decrees, as in those which abolished the

_maximum_ and arbitrary requisitions, put the relatives of the executed

in the possession of their property, and prevented Vandalism in arts and

sciences, and the profanation of churches. The provinces, also, felt the

powerful influence of this new system. The Vendée again rose out of

its ashes; bands of soldiers were again collected there to resist the

republicans, as well as in Upper Poitou, and among the Chouans. Such

were the results of this year of the revolution. At its close sentiments

of humanity, long unknown, began to appear in the French government;

but there was no relaxation in that energy and spirit which pushed its

armies on to conquest. Revolutionary France still defied all Europe.

{GEORGE III. 1794–1795}

CONVENTION WITH SWEDEN AND DENMARK.

Sweden and Denmark still persevered in their determination to preserve

a strict neutrality in this eventful contest. A convention was concluded

between them on the 27th of March, by which they agreed to protect

the freedom of commerce on the Baltic, on the principles of the avowed

neutrality of 1780. Each were to equip a fleet of sixteen ships of the

line for that service; and by the tenth article the Baltic was declared

to be a neutral sea, absolutely inaccessible to the armed vessels of the

belligerent powers.

THE STATE OF POLAND.

During this year the fate of Poland was sealed. The Czarina having

demanded that its army should be reduced to 16,000 men, the Poles

resolved to resist her will, and to try once more the fate of arms. The

celebrated Kosciusko was placed at their head; but their struggle was to

no purpose; Kosciusko was defeated by the Russians, wounded, and taken

prisoner. On the refusal of the king to give up Warsaw, the capital, it

was stormed by Suwarrow, who brutally gave orders to allow no quarter.

Poland was now partitioned between the plunderers—Russia, Austria, and

Prussia—and ceased to be a kingdom; the patriots being proscribed,

their property confiscated, and Stanislaus compelled to live in Russia,

where he ended his days. “Poland fell,” says an eminent writer, “the

victim of her own dissensions; of the chimera of equality insanely

pursued, and the rigour of aristocracy unceasingly maintained; of

extravagant jealousy of every superior, and merciless oppression of

every inferior, rank. The eldest born of the European family was the

first to perish, because she had thwarted all the ends of social union;

because she had united the turbulence of democratic to the exclusiveness

of aristocratical societies; because she had the vacillation of a

republic without its energy, and the oppression of a monarchy without

its stability. Such a system neither could nor ought to be maintained;

the internal feuds of Poland were more fatal to human happiness than the

despotism of Russia; and the growth of improvement among its people was

as slow as among the ryots of Hindostan.” These are just remarks; but

the causes of Poland’s overthrow do not extenuate the guilt of the

spoliators: the dismemberment of the country is a foul blot upon the

historic page of Russia, Austria, and Prussia—a blot which can never be

wiped out.

MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.

The British parliament assembled on the 30th of December. In the speech

from the throne his majesty admitted the disasters of the last campaign;

but he urged the necessity of continuing the war, and recommended

additional efforts and vigour as the only means of producing successful

results. His majesty also admitted the desperate condition of Holland

and the United Provinces, which the Duke of York had vainly endeavoured

to defend; and he informed the houses that the States-general had been

led by a sense of present difficulties to enter into negociations with

the republicans for peace; but he added, that no established government

or independent state could, under the present circumstances, derive real

security from negociations; and that, on our part, no negociations could

be entered into without sacrificing both honour and safety to an enemy

whose chief animosity was avowedly directed against these kingdoms. The

king mentioned his acceptance of the crown and sovereignty of Corsica,

and announced the happy conclusion of a treaty of amity, commerce, and

navigation with the United States of America. He also announced the

conclusion of a treaty for the marriage of the Prince of Wales with the

Princess Caroline of Brunswick, and called upon his faithful commons to

make such provision for the heir apparent as they might deem suitable

to his rank and dignity. In the lords, the Earl of Guildford moved an

amendment to the address, and urged the impracticability of attaining

the object of the war; namely, the dictating of a government with

France. He was supported by the Marquis of Lansdowne, who said, that he

saw no difficulty in treating with France at the present period. But the

amendment was rejected by a majority of one hundred and seven against

twelve. The strength of ministers in the commons was manifested,

likewise, on this occasion, in an unequivocal manner. The address was

moved by Mr. Knatchbull, and seconded by Mr. Canning, who was fast

rising into reputation, and who particularly distinguished himself in

these debates. Mr. Canning defended ministers against every imputation

of the calamities and disasters of the war being the result of their

ignorance and mismanagement, and ridiculed the warnings and predictions

of opposition. He observed,—“It is true they have often foretold the

desertion of our allies, as well as the astonishing exertions of the

enemy; and I cannot but confess that such is unfortunately the result.

It is not, however, any difficult matter to prophesy disappointment and

ill-success: if the prediction proved false, gentlemen would feel too

much satisfaction in the success of their country to think of it; if it

proved true, those who made it would triumph, as they would certainly

feel some satisfaction for their superior sagacity. But while I thus

give credit to the opposition for their predictions, I also claim some

credit for those on my own side of the question; for when Jacobinism was

at its greatest height, when its influence circulated through every part

of the French government, and when Robespierre governed the country with

the most absolute sway, even then its fall was foretold in that house,

and happily with truth. But let me not be misunderstood. I do not mean

that by the accession of the moderates to the sovereign power in France,

the possibility of our treating with them has become greater. The only

difference between them and the Jacobins is, that they professed the

intentions, though they had not the power of the latter. Their hostility

to this country is equal to that of the Jacobins; and the house will

have an opportunity of judging what reliance can be placed on their

moderation by the terms they may give to the Dutch, who were not

instigators of the war, but compelled to join in it; and if the terms

they give to the Dutch prove hard, what might this country expect? If we

could even have a peace now with France, it would be an insecure one.

It must be a peace with all the inconveniences and expenses of a war

establishment; such a peace as this country would never assent to.”

On this occasion Pitt was mortified by the opposition of his friend

Wilberforce, who objected that the obvious tendency of the address was

to pledge the house to a prosecution of the war till there should be

a counter revolution in France. He expressed himself alarmed at the

terrible doctrines which had been promulgated from the throne and

reiterated from the ministerial side of the house. A perpetual war,

which could only cease with the restoration of the French monarchy, was

to him a startling proposition, calculated to shock his principles and

appal his feelings. Wilberforce deprecated both the speech and address,

and took an extensive view of the comparative state of both countries

after a long and sanguinary conflict, in which both had intensely

suffered; and he concluded with moving an amendment, embracing the

principal topics in the speech. Several members spoke in favour of

the amendment; and Pitt rose with excited feelings to reply. He

remarked:—“The reasons that have induced gentlemen to dissent from the

prosecution of the war, seem to have possessed a considerable influence

on the manner in which they speak of its justice and necessity at the

commencement; and their language is fainter and feebler than I had

reason to expect. Contending as these gentlemen and I did with the new

and monstrous system of cruelty, anarchy, and impiety, against

those whose principles trampled on civilised society, religion,

and law;—contending, I say, with such a system, I could not have

entertained the slightest expectation that from them would have

proceeded such an amendment. It has pleased an inscrutable Providence

that this power ef France should trample over everything that has been

opposed to it: but let us not therefore fall without any efforts

to resist it; let us not sink without measuring its strength.” Pitt

affirmed that neither the speech nor the address pledged the house

never to make peace with the republican government of France, though he

confessed that he had no idea of a secure peace till the return of the

monarchy. The change which had taken place in that government was a

change merely in the name, and not in substance; it no more deserved

the name of moderate than that under Brissot, which had provoked this

country to war. If peace could be obtained it would not place us, he

said, in a situation of confidence, and therefore precautions must

be increased. Even if disposed to peace, fear would compel the French

rulers to give their troops employment; and if we dissolved the

continental confederacy, we could not hope to see it again restored; and

then we should be exposed alone to the fury of France. In conclusion,

Pitt entered into a variety of details, showing that the French finances

were on the gulf of bankruptcy, and auguring from thence their final

overthrow, gold ever being the sinews of war. Pitt’s sentiments

prevailed the amendment was negatived by two hundred and forty-six

against seventy-three.