in

rity confided in the minister by no means implied an intention to act up to its utmost limits: and he subjoined, drawing up your answer, do not forget the force of the arguments I have used, or, in your report to your court, the affurances we have given of the earnest wish of the Directory to terminate the war." And both plenipotentiaries→→→ perhaps concerned that, by the order of their government, they were compelled to stand upon this étiquette--were moft warm in their proteftations that nothing could be less hoftile than the spirit of their commission, and that the idea of this negotiation breaking off was as far from their thoughts as their wishes. At length the conference broke up without any favorable impreffion made upon the mind of the English minifter. An official note, containing the demand fo obnoxious to the English court, was immediately tranfmitted to lord Malmesbury; to which his lordship answered, "that he neither could nor ought to treat upon any other principle than that of compensations." On the next day (September 16), another note arrived from the French commiffioners, apprizing his lordship that a decree of the Directory had paffed, fignifying, "that in cafe lord Malmesbury fhall declare himself not to have the neceffary powers for agreeing to all the reftitutions which the laws and the treaties which bind the French republic make indifpenfable, he shall be to return in four-and-twenty hours to his court, to afk for fufficient powers." To this lord Malmefbury rejoined, "that he could return no other answer to a refufal fo abfolute to continue the negotiation, on grounds which appeared to have been already agreed upon, than by demanding the neceflary passports for himself and his suite.”

The French commiffioners, in reply, fay "they think it right to obferve to lord Malmesbury, that he does not appear to have seized the real meaning of their note; that it by no means contains a refufal to continue the negotiations, but, on the contrary, the means for giving them activity, and for following them up with a fuccefs no less desirable

to

to the two nations than it would be flattering to the minifters charged with the conduct of them. The French government is so far from entertaining the intentions which the note of lord Malmesbury appears to impute to them, that the ministers plenipotentiary of the French republic have received no order to quit Lisle after the departure of the minifter plenipotentiary of his Britannic majefty."-The English ambassador, in his answer (September 17), to this obfervation, ftill perfifts in his unfortunate blunder,-for it deserves no fofter appellation,-and again repeats what had been a hundred times before said, and as often refuted, "that the question between them, in appearance, relates folely to the limits of his full powers, which are in the most ample form; but does in fact require a declaration of the whole extent of his inftructions."-This fatal mistake was the more remarkable, as M. Treilhard had taken infinite pains to demonstrate to him the difference between these two things; and had exprefsly faid, and reiterated, that they did not mean to enquire into his inftructions; and in the most intelligible manner intimated that they did not expect him to act up to the extent of his powers.

Lord Malmesbury defiring one other meeting previous to his departure, a conference for the last time took place on the 17th at noon. Nothing however paffed at this conference, but a tirefome repetition of the former arguments, and renewed proteftations from the French commiffioners, that the intention of the Directory was to accelerate peace, by removing every obftacle to its attainment."From a particular expreffion dropped by lord Malmesbury, nevertheless, in this conference, it appears fufficiently evident, that his powers were not of the full and ample nature required by the Directory: for he tells us, " that he dwelt particularly and repeatedly on his own competency to take any thing faid by the French commiffioners for REFerence." This was the very evil which the Directory meant to avoid, and which had occafioned fo much delay and difficulty in

VOL. III.

2 F

the

the former negotiation at Paris. And one of the commiffioners remarked upon it," that the full powers which authorized a minifter to hear proposals were widely from those which would enable him to accede to them, and that it was fuch full powers that the Directory required him to folicit."* The ambaffador, equally unable and unwilling to give fatisfaction to the French commiffioners as to this demand, set off from Lifle the next morning, on his return to England.

From the pertinacious manner in which the French government perfifted in this demand, it is easy to infer the extreme distrust which the Directory entertained of the ultimate purposes of England. Some facrifices were inevitable on the part of the allies; but the reluctance of the Dutch to part with their favorite fettlements of the Cape and Ceylon was extreme; and if the powers of the Englifh ambassador were limited as to the grand article of reftitution, all the address of the French negotiators to obtain more favorable conditions for Holland must have been altogether unavailing. Inftructions admitted of much greater latitude, and would be much more easily varied, according to circumstances: and the Directory were unwilling to urge upon the Dutch government the neceffity of conceffion, till they had fome clear proofs of the conciliatory difpofi tion, as well as of the fincerity, of the English court, which had fo obftinately refifted the preliminary demands of France. Such at leaft is the most probable folution of the directorial policy, as difplayed in the course of this momentous transaction.

The

Lord Bolingbroke, in a letter to the duke of Shrewsbury, May 29, 1713. fays" I obferved to count Gyllenburg, that the Swedish minifters, who fhould be appointed to treat, should be furnished with ABSOLUTE POWERS. I convinced him that these would draw into no confequence which the king needed to apprehend; fince, by private inftructions to his minifters, he might direct them to make what use he should think fit of the authority delegated to them."

BOLINGBROKE Correspondence, Vol. II.

'The conduct of lord Malmesbury was highly approved and applauded, as he had indeed a right to expect, by the court of London, from whom he received immediate orders, on his arrival in England, to open one other dispatch to the commiffioners at Lifle, conformably to the draft fent him by lord Grenville. In this letter it was again prepofterously afferted, "that the demand of the Directory refers not to the full powers of the ambaffador, but to the extent of his inftructions;-that it is therefore only by confenting to treat upon the bafis of the projet prefented by the ambaffador, or by returning a contre-projet of a conciliatory nature, that it appears poffible to continue the negotiation."The French plenipotentiaries, after the tranfmiffion of this note to the French government, anfwer (October 1), "that when the Directory ordered its ministers to require a categorical explanation as to the powers given by the English government to its ambaffador, they had no other object than to bring the negotiation to a speedy and fuccefsful iffue;---that fuch are STILL the hopes and intentions of the Executive Directory, which enjoins the minifters plenipotentiary of the republic not to quit Lisle till the continued abfence of the negotiator fhall no longer leave any doubt of the intention of his Britannic majefty to break off all negotiation."

On the 5th of October this extraordinary correfpondence was terminated by a note from lord Malmesbury to the French commiffioners, written in terms of fome afperity; and declaring "that nothing was omitted on his part to accelerate the negotiation, which has been only retarded by the delays of the Directory, and which at this moment is only fufpended by its act.---With regard to the renewal of the conferences," continues the ambaffador, "the under-figned can only refer to his laft note, where he has explained, with frankness and precision, the only means which remain for continuing the negotiation; obferving, at the fame time, that the king could no longer

treat in an enemy's country without being certain that the customs established amongst all civilized nations, with regard to public minifters, and especially to those charged to negotiate for the re-establishment of peace, would be refpected for the future in the perfon of his plenipotentiary."

Immediately after the termination of this unfortunate negotiation, a declaration was issued by the king of England, in which his majesty was fo ill advised to affert, and fuch was no doubt his indignant belief, " that France had not fcrupled to demand the abfolute and unconditional surrender of all that the energy of his people, and the valor of his fleets and armies have conquered during the prefent war: nor was even this demand brought forward as conftituting the terms of peace, but as the price of negotiation, as the condition on which alone his majesty was to be allowed to learn what further unexplained demands were still reserved, and to what greater facrifices these unprecedented conceffions of honor and safety were to lead."*

In

To any other ambaffador than lord Malmesbury," fays the very able author of the QUESTION STATED' (p. 17)," the French probably would not have thought it neceffary to put the question, Whether he had, or had not, powers to treat on the principle of general reftitution, &c.?' They had not forgotten, that, in his former embaffy, at every communication he was in want of the advice of his court.'+-Lord Malmesbury says, ' that their question went not to the extent of his full powers, but to require of him to declare the nature of his instructions.' In the first place, he answers their question in a sense materially different from that which they attached to it: he then affirms, that the extent of his powers, and the nature of his inftructions, are one and the fame thing. But for this he affigns no reafon; nor does he at all specify or intimate what the inconvenience or disadvantage would have been if he had given them a direct answer in the affirmative, which he might have done in the terms of lord Grenville's official note of the 17th of June; viz. That his full powers included every case, and gave him the most unlimited authority to conclude any articles, treaties, &c. or, in the very terms of their own demand, understand according to the explanation with which it was accompanied. If he had faid YES, the negotiation mußt have proceeded, and poffibly might have ended with fuccefs."

De la Croix, December 19, 1796.