extent of possessions which she held before the Revolution, and desire, at the same time, to retain the ornamental spoils of all other countries? Is it, that there can exist a doubt of the issue of the contest or of the power of the Allies to effectuate what justice and policy require? if not, upon what principle deprive France of her late territorial acquisitions, and preserve to her the spoliations appertaining to those territories, which all modern conquerors have invariably respected, as inseparable from the country to which they belonged?

The Allied Sovereigns have perhaps something to atone for to Europe, in consequence of the course pursued by them, when at Paris, during the last year. It is true, they never did so far make themselves parties in the criminality of this mass of plunder, as to sanction it by any stipulation in their Treaties; such a recognition has been on their part uniformly refused; but they certainly did use their influence to repress at that moment, any agitation of their claims, in the hope that France, not less subdued by their generosity than by their arms, might be disposed to preserve inviolate a peace which

had been studiously framed to serve as a bond of reconciliation, between the Nation and the King. They had also reason to expect that His Majesty "would be advised voluntarily to restore a considerable proportion at least of these spoils, to their lawful owners.

But the question is a very different one now, and to pursue the same course under circumstances so essentially altered, would be, in the judgment of the Prince Regent, equally unwise towards France, and unjust towards our Allies, who have a direct interest in this question..

His Royal Highness, in stating this opinion, feels it necessary to guard against the possibility of misrepresentation.

Whilst he deems it to be the duty of the Allied Sovereigns not only not to obstruct, but to facilitate, upon the present occasion, the return of these objects to the places from whence they were torn, it seems not less consistent with their delicacy, not to suffer the position of their armies in France, or the removal of these works from the Louvre, to become the means, either directly or indirectly, of bringing within their own dominions a single article which did not of right, at the period of their conquest, belong either to their respective family collections, or to the countries over which they now actually reign.

Whatever value the Prince Regent might attach to such exquisite specimens of the fine arts, if otherwise acquired, he has no wish to become possessed of them at the expense of France or rather of the countries to which they of right belong, more especially by following up a principle in war which He considers as a reproach to the nation by which it has been adopted, and so far from wishing to take advantage of the occasion to purchase from the rightful owners any articles they might, from pecuniary considerations, be disposed to part with, His Royal Highness would on the contrary be disposed rather to afford the means of replacing them in those very temples and galleries, of which they were so long the ornaments.

Were it possible that His Royal Highness's sentiments towards the person and cause of Louis XVIII, could be brought into doubt, or that VOL. II.-1816

P

the position of His Most Christian Majesty was likely to be injured in the eyes of His own people, the Prince Regent would not come to this conclusion without the most painful reluctance; but, on the contrary, His Royal Highness believes that His Majesty will rise in the love and respect of His own subjects, in proportion as He separates Himself from these remembrances of revolutionary warfare. These spoils, which impede a moral reconciliation between France and the countries she has invaded, are not necessary to record the exploits of her armies, which, notwithstanding the cause in which they were achieved, must ever make the arms of the nation respected abroad But whilst these objects remain at Paris, constituting, as it were, the title deeds of the countries which have been given up, the sentiments of reuniting these countries again to France, will never be altogether extinct; nor will the genius of the French people ever completely associate itself with the more limited existence assigned to the nation under the Bourbons.

Neither is this opinion given with any disposition on the part of the Prince Regent to humiliate the French Nation. His Royal Highness's general policy, the demeanour of His troops in France, His having seized the first moment of Bonaparte's surrender to restore to France the freedom of her commerce, and, above all, the desire He has recently evinced to preserve ultimately to France her territorial integrity, with certain modifications essential to the security of neighbouring States, are the best proofs that, consideration of justice to others, a desire to heal the wounds inflicted by the Revolution,

and not any illiberal sentiment towards France, has alone dictated this decision.

The whole question resolves itself into this :Are the Powers of Europe now forming in sincerity a permanent settlement with the King? And if so, upon what principles shall it be concluded? Shall it be upon the conservation or the abandonment of Revolutionary Spoliations?

Can the King feel His own dignity exalted, or his title improved, in being surrounded by monuments of art, which record not less the sufferings of His own Illustrious House, than of the several Nations of Europe? If the French people be desirous of treading back their steps, can they rationally desire to preserve this source of animosity between them and all other Nations ; and, if they are not, is it politic to flatter their vanity, and to keep alive the hopes which the contemplation of these trophies are calculated to excite? Can even the Army reasonably desire it? The recollection of their campaigns can never perish. They are recorded in the military annals of Europe. They are emblazoned on the publick monuments of their own country why is it necessary to associate their glory in the field with a system of plunder, by the adoption of which, in contravention of the laws of modern war, the Chief that led them to battle, in fact, tarnished the lustre of their arms?

If we are really to return to peace and to ancient maxims, it cannot be wise to preserve just so much of the abuses of the past; nor can the King desire, out of the wrecks of the Revolution, of which His Family has been one of the chief victims, to perpetuate in His House this odious monopoly of the arts. The splendid

collection which France possessed previous to the Revolution, augmented by the Borghese collection, which has since been purchased (one of the finest in the world), will afford to the King ample means of ornamenting, in its fair proportion, the capital of His Empire and His Majesty may divest Himself of this tainted source of distinction, without prejudice to the due cultivation of the arts in France.

In applying a remedy to this offensive evil, it does not appear that any middle line can be adopted, which does not go to recognize a variety of spoliations, under the cover of Treaties, if possible more flagrant in their character than the acts of undisguised rapine, by which these remains were in general brought together.

The principle of property regulated by the claims of the territories from whence these works were taken, is the surest and only guide to justice; and perhaps there is nothing which would more tend to settle the publick mind of Europe at this day, than such an homage, on the part of the King of France, to a principle of virtue, conciliation, and peace.

(Signed)

CASTLEREAGH,