of October, 1790, together with the expences of the late armament, were presented to both houses of parliament. On the 13th, a motion was made in the House of Commons for the production of all the papers relative to the affair of Nootka Sound, on the ground that culpability might be fixed where it ought, if the convention should appear to be a bad one; or if a good one, that the House might be enabled to testify an approbation, which would be valuable in proportion to the minuteness of its inquiry. To this motion it was objected, that the production of papers was not only unnecessary, but that it might be mischievous, by communicating negociations with our allies, and with other courts, which it would not be proper to bring under the public eye. On a division, the numbers for the question were 134; against it 258; majority 124. A similar motion, by Lord Kinnoull, in the House of Peers, met with the same fate.

Mr. Duncombe, one of the members for Yorkshire, having mentioned how little interruption the dispute with Spain had occasioned to trade and manufactures, a circumstance with which he was more immediately acquainted, from the commercial situation of his constituents, and expatiated on the value of a connexion between this and that country, moved in the House of Commons on the 14th of December, an address to his Majesty, on the late negociation with the court of Madrid. The principal arguments in favour of Mr. Duncombe's motion, were the great commercial advantages likely to

accrue to Britain from the stipulations acceded to on the part of Spain, particularly those relating to the whale fishery and the fur trade.

But Mr. Fox observed, that in this negociation the two objects principally to be considered were, 1st, Reparation for the insults received. 2ndly, The arrangements that had been made for the prevention of future disputes. In the altercation respecting the Falkland Islands in 1771, reparation was the only object in view, and it was obtained in its fullest extent; Spain on that occasion agreed to place all the matters in dispute in the same situation as before the insult committed; and she punctually fulfilled her agreement. In that case there was a complete restoration; in the present only the declaration of a disposition to restoration. The restitution promised, appeared to Mr. Fox, at best, but incomplete; nor, he said, had even the little that was promised been performed. On the subject of the arrangements made for the prevention of future disputes, he declared his opinion, that these consisted more of concessions on our part than that of Spain. Previously to the commencement of the present dispute, we had possessed and exercised the free navigation of the Pacific Ocean, as well as the right of fishing in the South Seas, without restriction. But the admission of a part only of these rights was all that had been obtained by the convention. Formerly, we had claimed the privilege of settling in any part of South or North-west America, from which we were not precluded by previous preoccupancy.

Now

Mainwaring, and seconded by Mr. Carew, Mr. Fox, disclaiming any intention to oppose, could not adopt the principles, nor give his sanction to all the collateral observations advanced by the honourable gentlemen who supported the address. He proceeded to consider the object first notified in his Majesty's speech, the Spanish convention:He agreed in opinion with Mr. Mainwaring, that the convention was not a fit matter for consideration on that day, as the papers relating thereto were not yet laid before the House. He declared, however, that, in his opinion, peace was preferable to war, under almost any circumstances, and most especially desirable for this country in the present moment. He next of course, adverted to what had been said on the subject of the Austrian Netherlands :-It had been stated, that it was good policy in this country to promote the return of the Netherlands to the dominion of the House of Austria, in order to prevent them from falling into the hands of another power, likely to prove dangerously inimical to this country. He conceived that the power alluded to must be France. But how had France so suddenly become a greater object of terror to us now than at any other period? The interference of the French nation, for obvious reasons, in the present conjuncture, was very little to be dreaded. With regard to the affairs of Europe in general, the interests of different powers had taken so new and singular a turn, that it was the undoubted duty of his Majesty's ministers not to overlook this circumstance, but to convert it to the public good.

If ever there was a period when this country might pick and chuse her allies, it was the present. She had nothing to do but to ascertain what number of foreign allies it was absolutely necessary that we should have, and then proceed immediately to form such alliances, and on such conditions, as to their best judgment should appear adviseable. As to India, no more was intended than to defend our ally when attacked: this line of conduct would meet with his hearty approbation. But if, under the pretext of a quarrel between two native princes, our object was to obtain for ourselves new territorial acquisitions, he should enter his determined protest against the injustice of such proceedings.

Mr. Pitt admitted, that to vote for the address did not imply an approbation of the convention with Spain. On the subject of foreign alliances, he said, his Majesty's ministers were neither so idle nor so inattentive to their duty as to overlook any favourable opportunities that might occur for the improvement of former, or the promotion of new treaties. As to the affairs of India, he did not determine it either just or prudent to make war for the purpose of extending territory; but contended that, in case of a fortunate termi nation of the war, we should have a right to demand a reasonable indemnification for ourselves, and an adequate compensation for our injured ally.

On the 3rd of December, copies of the declaration and counterdeclaration, exchanged at Madrid, July 24th, 1790; and of the convention with Spain, signed the 28th

of

of October, 1790,* together with the expences of the late armament, were presented to both houses of parliament. On the 13th, a motion was made in the House of Commons for the production of all the papers relative to the affair of Nootka Sound, on the ground that culpability might be fixed where it ought, if the convention should appear to be a bad one; or if a good one, that the House might be enabled to testify an approbation, which would be valuable in proportion to the minuteness of its inquiry. To this motion it was objected, that the production of papers was not only unnecessary, but that it might be mischievous, by communicating negociations with our allies, and with other courts, which it would not be proper to bring under the public eye. On a division, the numbers for the question were 134; against it 258; majority 124. A similar motion, by Lord Kinnoull, in the House of Peers, met with the same fate.

Mr. Duncombe, one of the members for Yorkshire, having mentioned how little interruption the dispute with Spain had occasioned to trade and manufactures, a circumstance with which he was more immediately acquainted, from the commercial situation of his constituents, and expatiated on the value of a connexion between this and that country, moved in the House of Commons on the 14th of December, an address to his Majesty, on the late negociation with the court of Madrid. The principal arguments in favour of Mr. Duncombe's motion, were the great commercial advantages likely to

accrue to Britain from the stipulations acceded to on the part of Spain, particularly those relating to the whale fishery and the fur trade.

But Mr. Fox observed, that in this negociation the two objects principally to be considered were, 1st, Reparation for the insults received. 2ndly, The arrangements that had been made for the prevention of future disputes. In the altercation respecting the Falkland Islands in 1771, reparation was the only object in view, and it was obtained in its fullest extent; Spain on that occasion agreed to place all the matters in dispute in the same situation as before the insult committed; and she punctually fulfilled her agreement. In that case there was a complete restoration; in the present only the declaration of a disposition to restoration. The restitution promised, appeared to Mr. Fox, at best, but incomplete; nor, he said, had even the little that was promised been performed. On the subject of the arrangements made for the prevention of future disputes, he declared his opinion, that these consisted more of concessions on our part than that of Spain. Previously to the commencement of the present dispute, we had possessed and exercised the free navigation of the Pacific Ocean, as well as the right of fishing in the South Seas, without restriction. But the admission of a part only of these rights was all that had been obtained by the convention. Formerly, we had claimed the privilege of settling in any part of South or North-west America, from which we were not precluded by previous preoccupancy.

Now

Mainwaring, and seconded by Mr. Carew, Mr. Fox, disclaiming any intention to oppose, could not adopt the principles, nor give his sanction to all the collateral observations advanced by the honourable gentlemen who supported the address. He proceeded to consider the object first notified in his Majesty's speech, the Spanish convention :He agreed in opinion with Mr. Mainwaring, that the convention was not a fit matter for consideration on that day, as the papers relating thereto were not yet laid before the House. He declared, however, that, in his opinion, peace was preferable to war, under almost any circumstances, and most especially desirable for this country in the present moment. He next of course, adverted to what had been said on the subject of the Austrian Netherlands :-It had been stated, that it was good policy in this country to promote the return of the Netherlands to the dominion of the House of Austria, in order to prevent them from falling into the hands of another power, likely to prove dangerously inimical to this country. He conceived that the power alluded to must be France. But how had France so suddenly become a greater object of terror to us now than at any other period? The interference of the French nation, for obvious reasons, in the present conjuncture, was very little to be dreaded. With regard to the affairs of Europe in general, the interests of different powers had taken so new and singular a turn, that it was the undoubted duty of his Majesty's ministers not to overlook this circumstance, but to convert it to the public good.

If ever there was a period when this country might pick and chuse her allies, it was the present. She had nothing to do but to ascertain what number of foreign allies it was absolutely necessary that we should have, and then proceed immediately to form such alliances, and on such conditions, as to their best judgment should appear adviseable. As to India, no more was intended than to defend our ally when attacked: this line of conduct would meet with his hearty approbation. But if, under the pretext of a quarrel between two native princes, our object was to obtain for ourselves new territorial acquisitions, he should enter his determined protest against the injustice of such proceedings.

Mr. Pitt admitted, that to vote for the address did not imply an approbation of the convention with Spain. On the subject of foreign alliances, he said, his Majesty's ministers were neither so idle nor so inattentive to their duty as to overlook any favourable opportunities that might occur for the improvement of former, or the promotion of new treaties. As to the affairs of India, he did not determine it either just or prudent to make war for the purpose of extending territory; but contended that, in case of a fortunate termination of the war, we should have a right to demand a reasonable indemnification for ourselves, and an adequate compensation for our injured ally.

On the 3rd of December, copies of the declaration and counterdeclaration, exchanged at Madrid, July 24th, 1790; and of the convention with Spain, signed the 28th

of

of October, 1790,* together with the expences of the late armament, were presented to both houses of parliament. On the 13th, a motion was made in the House of Commons for the production of all the papers relative to the affair of Nootka Sound, on the ground that culpability might be fixed where it ought, if the convention should appear to be a bad one; or if a good one, that the House might be enabled to testify an approbation, which would be valuable in proportion to the minuteness of its inquiry. To this motion it was objected, that the production of papers was not only unnecessary, but that it might be mischievous, by communicating negociations with our allies, and with other courts, which it would not be proper to bring under the public eye. On a division, the numbers for the question were 134; against it 258; majority 124. A similar motion, by Lord Kinnoull, in the House of Peers, met with the same fate.

Mr. Duncombe, one of the members for Yorkshire, having mentioned how little interruption the dispute with Spain had occasioned to trade and manufactures, a circumstance with which he was more immediately acquainted, from the commercial situation of his constituents, and expatiated on the value of a connexion between this and that country, moved in the House of Commons on the 14th of December, an address to his Majesty, on the late negociation with the court of Madrid. The principal arguments in favour of Mr. Duncombe's motion, were the great commercial advantages likely to

accrue to Britain from the stipulations acceded to on the part of Spain, particularly those relating to the whale fishery and the fur trade.

But Mr. Fox observed, that in this negociation the two objects principally to be considered were, 1st, Reparation for the insults received. 2ndly, The arrangements that had been made for the prevention of future disputes. In the altercation respecting the Falkland Islands in 1771, reparation was the only object in view, and it was obtained in its fullest extent; Spain on that occasion agreed to place all the matters in dispute in the same situation as before the insult committed; and she punctually fulfilled her agreement. In that case there was a complete restoration; in the present only the declaration of a disposition to restoration. The restitution promised, appeared to Mr. Fox, at best, but incomplete; nor, he said, had even the little that was promised been performed. On the subject of the arrangements made for the prevention of future disputes, he declared his opinion, that these consisted more of concessions on our part than that of Spain. Previously to the commencement of the present dispute, we had possessed and exercised the free navigation of the Pacific Ocean, as well as the right of fishing in the South Seas, without restriction. But the admission of a part only of these rights was all that had been obtained by the convention. Formerly, we had claimed the privilege of settling in any part of South or North-west America, from which we were not precluded by previous preoccupancy.

Now