Lords Sitting of 22 May 1815

PRINCE REGENT'S MESSAGE RELATING TO FRANCE.
The Earl of Liverpoolpresented to the House a Message from the Prince Regent. The Message [for which see the proceedings of the Commons] was read by lord Ellenborough, who sat on the woolsack, and for the time acted for the Lord Chancellor, who was indisposed. The earl of Liverpool moved
[286
that the Message be taken into consideration tomorrow, and that the Lords be summoned.
Earl Greydid not rise to state objections at any length to the proposition which the noble earl had just made to their lordships. He still, however, notwithstanding all he had heard or seen on the subject, remained of opinion that before they were called upon to concur in an Address, founded on a treaty purporting to be made in support of certain stipulations and arrangements, they ought to know what those stipulations and arrangements were. This at present they did not know; and they were placed in this awkward predicament, that they must thus incidentally pledge the faith of the House to the approval and support of arrangements and stipulations of which they could know nothing. That, however, was not the point to which he now wished to call their lordships attention. He rose for the purpose of requesting the noble earl opposite to state precisely in what situation the country stood. Were we actually at war, or were we not? and in what light, with reference to the subject of war or peace, was the Message and the Address about to be moved in consequence to be regarded? He trusted the noble earl would not feel it inconsistent with his duty to give the desired explanation upon that head.
The Earl of Liverpoolsaid, that he was just on the point of presenting the treaties and other papers connected with this subject, when the noble earl spoke [his lordship then handed them in], and from these, he trusted, would be derived all the requisite information as to those points which they would be called upon to consider tomorrow: with respect to the matters touched upon by the noble earl who had just spoken, he did not conceive that the House, by the Address which he should, propose, would be at all pledged to the approval or support of the stipulations and arrangements to which the noble earl referred; for the question, whether their lordships would concur in such measures as it might be necessary to adopt against the common enemy, and a system proved by experience to be incompatible with the peace and independence of nations, was entirely distinct from the question, whether their lordships should approve or not of these arrangements and stipulations. He did not conceive, therefore, that the House would be at all pre-judged

287]
in that respect by agreeing to the Address which he proposed tomorrow to submit for their consideration. With regard to the question, in what situation was the country placed, were we at peace, or were we actually at war? he was perfectly ready to give the noble earl and their lordships such an explanation on that head as, he trusted, would be found satisfactory. If the noble earl wished to know whether hostilities had really commenced, that is, whether letters of marque had been issued and ships captured, or any blow had been actually struck, he had to answer, that in that sense hostilities had not yet actually commenced: but he should deceive the noble earl, and deceive the House, if he were not distinctly to avow, that this Message was brought down with a view to the commencement of hostilities against the system mentioned in the Message, as soon as it should be found expedient to do so. He was aware that the expediency of beginning the war at an earlier or later period might depend upon various circumstances; but as to the nature and object of the Message, it was certainly to be regarded as a war message; and in concurring in the Address which he should have the honour to propose tomorrow, their lordships would be understood to concur in the propriety of commencing hostilities in concert with our Allies against the system to which he had adverted, as soon as, in point of expediency, it might be judged proper to begin the war. This was undoubtedly the nature and purport of the Message, and he wished it to be so understood.
Earl Greyasked whether the treaty had been ratified by Austria.
The Earl of Liverpoolreplied, that it was not as yet ratified by that power; that the ratification had not yet arrived, but was every day expected. The noble earl would find, however, in one of the papers now laid on the table enough to show, that there could be no doubt as to the intention of Austria to ratify the Treaty.
The motion was then agreed to.

PROCEEDINGS OF THE CONGRESS AT VIENNA.
The Marquis of Buckinghamrose, pursuant to notice, to move an Address to the Prince Regent, praying that he would be graciously pleased to lay on the table copies of the stipulations and arrangements made at the Congress at Vienna, and mentioned in the Treaty of
[288
the 25th of March, as stipulations and arrangements which it was the object of the Allies, in the approaching contest with the present ruler of France, to support. In bringing forward this motion, it would be unnecessary for him to trouble their lordships at any length, because the grounds and propriety of his motion might be explained in a very few words. His motion rested upon these words in the 1st article of the Treaty of the 25th of March: "The High Contracting Parties solemnly engage to unite the resources of their respective states for the purpose of maintaining entire the conditions of the Treaty of Peace concluded at Paris, the 30th of May, 1814, as also the stipulations determined upon and signed at the Congress of Vienna, &c." The object, then, of the parties to this alliance for the purposes mentioned in the Treaty was to maintain entire the stipulations "determined upon and signed" at the Congress of Vienna. When, therefore, their lordships were called upon to concur in the measures necessary to give effect to a treaty having for its object the maintenance of these stipulations, they ought certainly to Know what these stipulations were. The stipulations in question were said to be concluded, to be determined upon, and signed; and if ratified, they were in, a state fit to be produced, and certainly ought to be produced, and approved by their lordships before they pledged themselves to maintain them. If they were not reduced into the form of a treaty, and were not ratified, and not in a state fit to be produced, then they ought not to have been mentioned in this Treaty at all. When their lordships were thus called upon by a side-wind, as it were, to approve of these stipulations, surely it was not too much to ask that the substance of them, should be communicated, or some explanation given which would at least afford some foundation for this method of proceeding. This, then, was the ground of his motion. In the predicament in which the House was placed, it was hardly possible for them to declare their approbation of the Treaty of the 25th of March, and the objects for which it was entered into, without at the same time pledging themselves to the approval of stipulations and arrangements of which they did not, and could not, regularly know any thing. He could, therefore, say nothing with respect to them. Admit that they were the most wise, the most politic, the most

289]
just and equitable that had ever been framed; still it was contrary to every idea of propriety to call upon their lordships to approve of that of which they could regularly know nothing. With these few observations he should leave the matter for their lordships consideration, reserving to himself the liberty to make such a reply as he might think proper to the answer which might be given by the noble earl opposite. He confessed he did not see, however, how any satisfactory explanation could be given on the subject.
The Earl of Liverpoolshould, he believed, give such an explanation as would, he trusted, be satisfactory even to the noble marquis himself. He might have occasion tomorrow to go more at large into this subject; but still he could not suffer the present opportunity to pass without saying a few words on the point. The address which he should propose would not, as he had before stated, in the least compromise the opinion of the House with respect to the stipulations and arrangements made at the Congress of Vienna. Neither to those which had been concluded, nor to those which were in the course of being determined upon, would the House be in the least pledged. The object of the present Message and Address was totally distinct from any question that might arise on the subject of those stipulations and arrangements, which stood exactly on the same footing as they would have done if the unfortunate events which had given occasion to this Treaty had never arisen. Whether those arrangements were wise or the contrary—whether they were right or wrong—politic or impolitic—was nothing at all to the present question. He should be ready to show, when the proper time arrived, that they were in every respect wise and politic, and well calculated to preserve the peace and independence of nations. But his argument was, that this was not the proper time to enter into that subject, because those arrangements and stipulations had not as yet been reduced into the form of a treaty. Some of the proposed arrangements had not been finished, and none of them had been the subject of regular ratification. They were not, therefore, in a state fit to be laid before their lordships, and the House could not be called upon to give any judgment respecting them. The address would steer clear of that question altogether. It
[290
would only call upon their lordships to concur in such measures as might be necessary to prevent the revival of that system which experience had shown to be incompatible with the independence and peace of nations. What had that to do with the arrangements made at the Congress? Nothing. It would be an object equally necessary to be attended to, whatever those arrangements might be; and their lordships might be assured, that all those stipulations would be considered as completely open to animadversion, notwithstanding the concurrence of their lordships in this Address. Under these circumstances, he could not perceive what advantage could be gained by this motion of the noble marquis, and he trusted the noble marquis himself would see the expediency of withdrawing it. At any rate he was satisfied it was not a motion to which their lordships could, at the present moment, think of giving their concurrence.
The Marquis of Buckinghamthought the answer of the noble earl insufficient and unsatisfactory. Their lordships would observe, that it was expressly stated in the first article of the Treaty upon which the Address must, in a great measure, be founded, that the object of the contracting parties was to maintain entire the stipulations concluded and signed at the Congress of Vienna. Why, then, when they were called upon to concur in that address, was it not by a side wind to procure their lordships approbation of arrangements and stipulations, of the nature of which they were and must be ignorant, since they could not be regularly considered as knowing any thing about them till they were laid before them? If the sole object of the Address were to pledge their lordships to take the requisite measures to prevent the revival of a system proved by experience to be incompatible with the independence and peace of nations, perhaps there would not be a shadow of difference between him and the noble earl; but from the way in which the matter was managed, he could not well conceive how they could concur in the address, without giving by a side wind their approbation to arrangements with which they were unacquainted. It was far from his wish to delay the discussion of the main subject of the Message and the proposed Address, for he agreed that it had perhaps been already too long delayed: but, surely, in the predicament in

291]
which the House was placed, it was not too much to expect that some explanation as to those arrangements, some statement of the general nature of the stipulations, should be given, before they were thus, by implication at least, called upon to approve of them. Still, however, if it was to be understood on all hands that their lordships, by a concurrence in the Address, were not to be understood as at all pledging themselves on the subject of those stipulations and arrrangements, he was disposed not to press his motion: with this understanding, that no such pledge was to be called for, or was considered to be given either directly or indirectly, he should, with their lordships leave, withdraw it.
Earl Greysaid, he must confess be was still very little satisfied, with the explanation given by the noble earl on the subject of his noble friend's motion. If the stipulations and arrangements in question were not in a state fit to be produced—if they were not regularly ratified so as to bring them in the regular course to the notice of their lordships—why were they inserted in the present Treaty at all? As matters now stood, when they came tomorrow to discuss and decide upon a question, the perilous magnitude of which he almost trembled to think upon, it would hardly be possible not at the same time to take into consideration the subject of those arrangements and stipulations which were mentioned as a constituent part and object of the present Treaty; and though it was state that they were not regularly ratified and not in a state fit to be produced so as to enable their lordships to examine and decide upon them, yet as they were mentioned generally in the Treaty of the 25th of March, their lordships would be called upon indirectly to approve of them, though it was admitted that they could know nothing of them. But there was another most important view in which the information now required was essentially necessary. The noble earl bad stated, that the arrangements had no connexion with, and would not at all affect the question to be submitted for consideration tomorrow: But might they not affect the question as to the expediency of commencing hostilities? Might they not, to a fearful extent, affect the chances of success? If those arrangements and stipulations were in themselves just and equitable, and agreeable to those states whom they more especially affected, and
[292
satisfactory to the nations of Europe in general, would not this be a most material consideration, when they came to discuss the proposed Address, with a view to the chances of success, and the consequent expediency of thus embarking in a new war? The prospect of success must materially depend upon the cordial concurrence and support of all the Powers who were to engage in so perilous an undertaking: and was it not fitting, therefore, that their lordships should know something now of the nature, extent, and principle of those arrangements, which might, perhaps, bear so directly and powerfully upon the strength and efficiency of the means by which it was proposed to accomplish the object which now distinctly appeared to be in view? Was it not of essential consequence, when their lordships were to be called upon to concur in the propriety of entering into a new war, that they should know whether those arrangements were such as to inspire general confidence, and give strength and energy to their cause and their measures; or whether they were such as would form a source of disunion, apathy, and weakness? How could their lordships know at present, whether the stipulations mentioned; in the Treaty were such as promised cordial co-operation and success, or such as portended division and failure? And yet this was a question of the first importance in considering the expediency of commencing hostilities. There was another subject, too, with respect to which it was proper for their lordships to have some information before they came to discuss the question of tomorrow, and which he would advert to, before he sat down, that he might not again be under the necessity of addressing their lordships at this time. He had on their last day of meeting called their lordships attention to that part of the Treaty which provided that Louis the 18th should be invited to accede to it, and he had asked, whether there was any formal act of accession; and if there was, he had stated that, in his opinion, it ought to be produced. He now again contended that some information on that head ought to be laid before their lordships, as that information might be of great importance in pointing out to the House the principle upon which they were proceeding. The production of this information he now considered as the more material on account of what he had seen in one of the papers this day. He had there read a

293]
manifesto of Louis 18th to the French nation, which contained this statement.
"The Powers assembled in Congress have done more. Their character, undoubtedly, and their magnanimity, known and admired by all the world, would forbid our imagining a more sacred security for their promise than their promise itself; but they have themselves conceived, that to this guarantee it might be fit to add another; that they could never sufficiently tranquillize the KING with regard to the future fate of his people, nor testify too much respect for the fidelity of the French nation under the sorrow that overwhelms it, and the hope-destroying inactivity to which it has been reduced. The Powers determined that the King's accession should be specially required to the new compact which they had recently concluded. Their Ambassadors laid before his Majesty all the communications respecting it. They presented to him, from their respective Sovereigns, new credentials, with a view to their being near the person of the only lawful Sovereign of France, wherever he might reside, and upon the verification of their powers they offered the new Treaty to his Majesty for his deliberation and his signature. Frenchmen! The King has deliberated, and he has signed it!"
These words appeared to indicate a determination to go to war fur the purpose of replacing Louis 18 on the throne of France; and if so, it was in direct contradiction to the declaration added on our part to the Treaty, and approved of by the Allies. It was desirable, too, that the powers of those ministers who were accredited to the Court of Louis 18, should be produced, that it might be seen what were the relations in which we stood with respect to that unfortunate Monarch. As to the paper to which the noble earl had referred him, on the subject of t he Austrian ratification, he did see enough there to lay a ground of hope, that the Treaty would be ratified by that Power; but he saw nothing to account for the delay which had taken place with respect to that ratification.
The Earl of Liverpoolcould only repeat what he had before said, that he considered the stipulations and arrangements at the Congress of Vienna as having nothing to do with the present question. Whether they were wise and politic, or the contrary, was for this purpose immaterial. Their lordships would, at the proper time, have full op-
[294
portunity to examine those arrangements. They were in the same state as that in which they would have been if this event had not happened. Some of the arrangements had been decided upon. Some were in progress. But none of them had been reduced into the form of a treaty; and he did not therefore consider it as at all necessary or proper to go into those matters in discussing the question which would be brought before their lordships tomorrow. There was nothing irregular or unusual in this course of proceeding. Their lordships would only be called upon to support those measures which were accessary to prevent the revival of a system destructive of the peace and independence of nations; and this was an object equally proper, whether the arrangements and stipulations at the Congress were right or wrong. The noble marquis had said, that they would be called upon by implication to vote their approbation of arrangements of which they knew nothing: but he contended, that no such vote could be implied by their concurrence in the address which he should propose, as the question in the two cases was entirely distinct. The noble earl who spoke last had contended, that the knowledge of the nature, extent, and principle of those arrangements might affect the expediency of pledging their lordships to the support of the object recommended in the Message. His answer was that the arrangements, whether right or wrong, had been adopted, and were not likely, in any material degree, to affect the question of expediency, as there could be no reasonable apprehension of disunion among the principal Powers on that ground. As to the invitation to Louis 18 to accede to the Treaty, he could only repeat what he had before stated, that there was no formal act of accession, and therefore none such could be produced. With respect to what the noble earl had stated as to the ambiguous nature of our relations with Louis 18, he saw no difficulty on that head. Our ministers were accredited to the Court of Louis 18. This was a notorious fact, which the Allies were far from being desirous to conceal. There was no ambiguity in the case which was plainly this: the Allies did not think themselves justified in attempting to impose any particular government on France, and disclaimed any such intention. Their object was to destroy that system which experience had proved to be incompatible with the peace and independence of na-

295]
tions, and there was nothing which appeared to them so likely to accomplish that object as the restoration of the legitimate sovereign to the throne of France. This restoration was, therefore, considered as a most desirable object by the Allies, and they openly avowed their wishes upon that head. They were anxious that Louis 18 should be restored to the French throne, and would co-operate within certain bounds for the attachment of that object, but without considering it incumbent upon them to insist upon that restoration as indispensable, provided the main object could be secured in another manner.
The Marquis of Buckinghamregretted extremely that any mention of these stipulations should have been introduced into the Treaty, so as to mix up two questions which ought to have been kept entirely distinct and separate. However, on the assurance that no pledge was to be required on the subject of the arrangements, he begged leave to withdraw his motion.
The motion was accordingly withdrawn.