00000000 00000000 0000000 My concern is, that so much is withheld from the public, and that a perfon, uninformed as I am, cannot pretend with clearness to unravel the thread of a negotiation, defignedly kept intricate and embarreffed. I fear you will find fome things rather obfcure; but I will endeavour to pour all the light I can on the fubject, and to diffipate every cloud of obfcurity which is meant to cover it. Had the public been gratified with the fight of the memorials and papers relating to the demand of liberty to the Spanish nation to fish on the banks of Newfoundland (a matter held facred *) and to the other claims, equally unjuft, made by the Count de Fuentes, which were moved for in the House of Commons on the 11th of December laft, we might, with a tolerable degree of accuracy, have known fomething more of the merits of the prefent quarrel with SPAIN. Not one of these appears, nor have we any paper or memorial from SPAIN (not even that delivered to Lord Bristol *You will again on this occafion let M. Wall clearly understand, that this is a matter hela facred; and that no conceffion on the part of his Majesty, fo deftructive to this true and capital intereft of Great-Britain, will be yeilded to Spain, however abetted and fupported. Mr. Pitt's letter [p. 3.] With regard to the Newfoundland Fishery, M. Wall rged, what had principally given offence here as to that article, was my being fo frequently ordered to declare, and the Conde de Fuentes having been as often told, that England would never hear of that inadmiffible pretention. Lord Bristol's letter to the Earl of Egremont, Dec. 6, 1761, [p. 53.] The declaration of the Count de Fuentes, that Mr. Pitt's ordinary and laft anfwer was, "That he would not relax in any thing, till the Tower of London was taken fword in hand," [p. 45.] is undoubtedly a grofs mifreprefentation. That expreffion must have been confined to the Spanish claim of fishing on the Banks of Newfoundland; for it is apparent from these papers, that Mr. Pitt was ready to make greater conceffions to preferve the friendfhip of Spain, than any former minifter had ventured to offer; witnefs the paragraph in Lord Bristol's letter of August 31, [p. 8.] Lastly, concerning the 0000 0000 oopam 000000004 in January last*) nor any anfwer of the court of England, fince the acceffion of his prefent Catholic Majefty (important as that period muft naturally feem to be) to the last Autumn. In vain have I wifhed for the famous memorial which the court of SPAIN returned as inadmiffible, that I might have compared it with M. de Buffy's; fince the late minister publickly declared that was the precedent he followed with refpect to the memorial of SPANISH Affairs given in by FRANCE. It is undoubtedly of much confequence to know both the matter and expreffions of that memorial returned by SPAIN, as it might probably relate to one of the three points in negotiation, Prizes, Logwood, or the Fishery. In the prefent collection (which was laid before both Houses of Parliament on the 29th of January, but not printed and delivered to the members till the 12th of February) there is not a line previous to the memorial delivered to Mr. Secretary Pitt, by M. de Buffy, July 23, 1761; nor is there any intelligence from Paris, where the Family Compact of the house of Bourbon was the difputes about the coat of Honduras, I could add nothing to the repeated declarations I had made in the King's name, of the fatisfaction with which his Majesty would receive any just overture from Spain (upon condition that France was not to be the channel of that conveyance) for terminating amicably, and to mutual fatiffaction, every reasonable complaint on this matter, by propofing fome equitable regulation for fecuring to us the long-enjoyed privilege of cutting Logwood (an indulgence confirmed by treaty, and of course, authorised in the most facred manner) ; nor could I give stronger affurances than the past, of his Majefty's feady purpose to caufe all eftablishments on the Logwood coafts, contrary to the territorial jurifdiction of Spain, to be removed. *Yet, when the file of General Wall's enclosed paper is compared with that which was given to me laft January I hope it will appear there is less peevishness at prefent here, than what was fo ftrongly exhibited fome months ago, [p. 11.] was negotiated and figned by Grimaldi, and where, it is faid, the measures to be taken against Portugal were concerted. An EXTRACT of one letter only of Mr. PITT'S is inferted, which is dated July 28, the answer to which is received September 11. Not a fyllable after that period from this court to Lord Bristol, till the 28th of October, when Lord Egremont declares he opens his correspondence * [page 20.+]. It is indeed very astonishing, and gives no great idea of the vigilance or attention of administration, that while affairs were fo critical between the two nations, no directions for the conduct of Lord Bristol were sent to Madrid during fo long a period. But can it be imagined that fo acute, fo well informed a minister as Mr. Stanley certainly was, should not tranfmit from Paris any intelligence of that most alarming treaty, which was negotiating all the summer at Paris? It appears by the accounts published by the French court, that the Family Compact was figned at Versailles the 15th of Auguft, and ratified the 8th of September. Lord TEMPLE, in a great affembly, did declare that intelligence of the highest moment relative to * How can this be the Truth, when Lord Brifol writes, November 16, 1761? The messenger, Ardouin, delivered to me on the 10th Inftant, at the Efcurial, the honour of your Lordship's dispatches of the 28th past, with the feveral inclofures therein referred to; and by the laft poft I RECEIVED YOUR LETTER OF THE 20th of the fame MONTH, in which your Lordship informed me, that all mine, to the 21ft of September, had been regularly laid before his Majefty. [p. 36.] I fuppofe the Public could not be trusted with all that Letter. + All the references in this pamphlet are made to the quarto edition of the PAPERS, &c. delivered to the Members of both Houses of Parliament. How is this to be reconciled to the declaration of Lord Egremont, Mr. Pitt's fucceffor, that the New Miniftry will avoid every poffible imputation of indecifion or indolence, which ignorant prejudice might fuggeft? [p. 23.] these matters was tranfmitted to this court before the advice in writing, dated the 18th of September, which occafioned certain refignations. Nothing of this kind is published in the papers relative to the rupture with SPAIN, though undoubtedly intelligence conftitutes a moft material part of those papers. If we have not the fatisfaction of judging for ourselves from the whole of a cafe, I will do the late minifter the juftice to fay, that it cannot be imputed to him. He pressed with honeft zeal the laying before the public every paper relative to the fix years negotiation* with SPAIN, that the juftice and candour of the crown of England on the one hand, and the chicanery, infolence, and perfidy of SPAIN on the other, might be apparent to all the world: but this was refufed; for had it been granted, all the attrocious calunnies fo induftriously circulated, of his averfion to peace, and his endeavours to perpetuate and encrease the war, had been laid open to mankind, and the authors of them held in juft abhorrence. I own the appeal to fo much written evidence, fpoke to me the strongest language of confcious integrity, and I was charmed with an example which I am fure Mr. PITT did not draw from any of his predeceffors in this country.They have ever fought, like Mr. PITT's fucceffors, to cover and conceal, or at least to perplex: he wishes to lay open and reveal to the unerring public, both the motives and actions of every part of his adminiftration.- A retrofpect carries no terrors but to the guilty-to an upright minifter it must give the trueft fatisfaction-to the public that conviction it has in many cafes a right to expect. * I fhould be particularly curious, for certain reafons, to fee in what manner, and to what extent, the Spanish court had been flattered by that of London, with an impartial difcuffion of their difputes, from the year 1754, before Mr. Pitt accepted the feals, [p. 53.] 00000000 I was not a little furprized, and I own greatly concerned, at the alarm you mention, spread every where in your parts, of the melancholy and ruined state of our country, and the neceflity we were under of accepting almost any peace. The French, Lord Bristol fays, have never difcontinued affuring the Spaniards of our being exhausted by the prefent long and expenfive war; [page 29.] and they may add, that we have thofe among us (but happily for this nation, they are few, and their credit but fmall) who repine at our fucceffes, and declare they weep over our victories. This is the true picture of that most malignant and infernal fiend, ENVY, fo well defcribed by OvID: Vixque tenent lacrymas, quia nil lacrymabile cernit. And a little before he mentions what rankled at the heart: Sed videt ingratos, intabefcitque videndo Succeftus hominis. I doubt not these men do very fincerely lament the fucceffes even of their own country; for I well remember the favourite language they held a few years ago,"Give the new minifter the reins-he is equally impracti"cable as impetuous-in a very short time he must annihi"late his present credit with the public, from the failure "of every scheme he adopts."-Now heaven has given fuch glorious fucceffes to upright intentions, and well digefted plans, while the reft of their countrymen are congratulating each other on all our noble conquefts and real F acquifitions *In Europe, Cherbourg, and Belle-Ifle; in Afia, Pondicherry; in Africa, Senegal, and Goree; in America, Beau-Sejour, Louisburg, Fort du Quefne, now Pittsburg, Guadalupe, &c. Niagara, Ticonderoga, Crown-Point, Quebec, Montreal, Dominico, and, to crown the whole, we may hope Martinico. Let me add the annihilation of the French marine and commerce. All during Mr. Pitt's ministry. |