We have now, Sir, entered into a debate about a measure, the event of which muft, in fome degree, influence pofterity in the judgement that they shall form of the wisdom of the British Government during His prefent Majefty's reign. The wrongs we have received from Spain have been great, and the prefent age expects, that the fatisfaction we are to receive, or the revenge we are to take for these wrongs, will be great alfo. Future ages, Sir, in cafe the present is disappointed in this expectation, will look upon us as a difpirited, mean, and corrupted people; in fhort, they will look upon us in the fame light in which fome gentlemen take the liberty to represent the Miniftry. But, Sir, if on this occafion His Majesty's Minifters have obtained more than ever on like occafions was known to be obtained; and they reconciled the peace of their country to her true intereft; if this peace, Sir, is attended with all the advantage that the most successful arms could have procured, as I hope to make appear, I will be bold to fay, that future ages, always impartial in their cenfure or praife, will confider this as the moft glorious period of our hiftory, and to do that juftice to the counfels which have produced this happy event, which every gentleman who divefts himself of paffion and prejudice is ready to do, and which I have great reafon to believe the present age, when rightly informed, will not refuse.

This Houfe, and Parliament, Sir, is His Majefty's greateft, fafeft, and beft council. A feat in this Houfe is equal to any dignity derived from pofts or titles, and the approbation of this Houfe is preferable to all that power, or even Majefty itself, can beftow: therefore, when I speak here as a Minifter, I fpeak as poffeffing my powers from His Majefty, but as being answerable to this Houfe for the exercise of thofe powers. I have often, Sir, on other occafions, profeffed my readiness to fubmit to the juftice of my country, and shall chearfully acquiefce in the judgement this Houfe

House shall form of our negotiations; because, while I do that, I am fure to fuffer no wrong. But, as the best, and moft equitable intentions may be perverted by misrepresentations of facts, and as the most impartial mind is fufceptible of prejudice when artfully inftilled, I hope it will be looked upon as a proper piece of justice done to myself, if I shall endeavour, by stating one or two facts, to fet this affair in a light that may remove all objections.

The chief confideration, Sir, that arifes from the present question is, whether, as Great Britain is now circumstanced, it had been more proper for the Government to have entered into a bloody and uncertain war, or to lay fuch a foundation for a peace, as no gentleman can regularly pronounce is not a fafe and honourable foundation. In order to confider this question rightly, we must take a view of the advantages we could propofe to ourselves, in cafe of a war with Spain, and in case that war was even to be fuccessful.

I know that gentlemen, who are otherwise very candid upon this point, are apt to imagine, from the military glory of this nation, that our arms are invincible: and I own, Sir, that this is a moft prevailing argument, especially in a popular affembly. There is fomewhat in it, that flatters the ambition which people generally entertain of acquiring fame and riches by the means that raised their ancestors. In the hiftory of our wars with Spain, we fee great navies defeated, great treasures, and ftill greater gains, acquired by our foldiers and failors. But, in the mean-while, we never reflect that the fituation of affairs betwixt Britain and Spain is entirely different from what it was then. Spain, at that time, was the dread, was the envy of Europe; as fhe had then powerful armaments, which excited the courage of the brave, and immenfe treasures, all her own, that prompted the fervice of the rich. She had not one ally in the world, who bore her with good will enough

to affift her with any zeal; and her views were fo danger ous, that her enemies borrowed courage from despair.

At prefent, Sir, if I may advance a paradox, her greatest fecurity lies in her vifible weakness. The prefervation of the Spanish monarchy, entire and undismembered, has, for almoft an age paft, feemed to be the general inclination of all the powers in Europe, because, were the riches that flow into Spain, to fall into the hands of any other people, the rest of Europe muft foon be drained of all its treasure. Whereas, at prefent, there is fcarcely any nation in Europe, who has not a larger property in her plate-fhips and galleons than she herself has. It is true, all that treafue is brought home in Spanish names, and the King of Spain generally imposes a large indulto upon it; but Spain itself is no more than the canal through which thefe treasures are conveyed all over the rest of Europe. Should we therefore pretend to feize those treafures, we could not fail to meet with a powerful oppofition. Even our beft allies, Sir, I am afraid, would look with an indifferent eye upon fuch a step, and be the first that would enter their complaints against it.

Sir Robert Walpole, Feb. 1, 1739.

My Lords, as I neither fpeak from pamphlets nor papers, I cannot precisely tell your Lordships how long I shall trouble you on this occafion; it is an affair of as great importance, I will venture to fay, as ever came before this House. I have, my Lords, employed a great deal of my time in endeavouring to form a right judgement of it. I have examined it without prejudice, I have endeavoured to find fomething in it that might be justified, I have viewed it, my Lords, in all the best lights it was capable of; but still, my Lords, the more I confider, the more I view it, the more difgraceful, the more deformed, does this convention appear.

I have known, my Lords, I have read of measures of this kind, that were indeed generally difliked by the people,

and

and were difadvantageous to the nation; but ftill, my Lords, the Minifters who carried on and concluded fuch mea. fures, had fomething to fay in their juftification. The weakness of the nation, the conveniency of trade, the ftrength of our neighbours, or fome confideration of that kind, was always pleaded as an excuse. And fometimes, though a treaty was, in the main, difagreeable or dishonourable to the nation, yet there were certain particular claufes, fome advantages ftipulated, which, if they did not balance, ferved at least to excufe the reft. But, my Lords, this convention is not only disagreeable to every body without doors, but it does not contain one article that can be wrested to have fo much as a favourable aspect for this nation. To what, my Lords, can this be owing? Is it owing to the weakness of the nation? Not at all; this nation is not weak, she has strength fufficient to crush that power that crushes her. If she is poor, my Lords, the Government feels none of it; for our Minifters are as largely fupplied with treasure as thefe Minifters were under whom this nation made the power that now infults us, to humble. Our troops, my Lords, are more numerous, better clothed than those troops were, who once conquered this infolent neighbour, and filled her throne with a monarch of our own making. I fee many Lords here, who, I am fure, remember those glorious times; and if, my Lords, at that time any one had ventured to foretel that this nation would foon be reduced to the neceffity of negotiating, for the fpace of eighteen or twenty years, to obtain such a treaty as this is, was there a man in the whole nation that would have believed him!

Have our Minifters, my Lords, ought to plead in favour of this measure, because it is for the convenience of trade? My Lord, every body, who underftand what trade is, knows, that if this convention is approved of by Parlia ment, our trade must be irretrievably ruined.

O 3

Can

Can it be pleaded, my Lords, that our enemies are fo ftrong that we ought, in policy, to yield a little to their rumours? No, our enemies are weak, they are ftrong only in our fears. We, my Lords, are mafters of that element whereon the cause must be decided, and let all our enemies, either profeffed or fecret; nay, let all the neutral powers in Europe unite their naval force, we have a fleet now at fea that is able to beat them all. But, my Lords, do we behave as if we had any fuch fuperiority? Have we so much as afferted the honour of the British flag? Have we not tamely given it up, given it up without the leaft reason, fo far as appears to the world? What the reasons of our Minifters may be, my Lords, for this pufillanimity, I am entirely ignorant; and as I am ignorant, I am innocent; for, my Lords, though I am a privy counsellor, I anı as unacquainted with the fecrets of the Government as any private gentleman who hears me.

Duke of Argyle, Feb. 23, 1739.

Having before expreffed my entire fatisfaction with the terms of the peace, and already given to the House my ideas upon that subject, it were unneceffary for me again to trouble your Lordships upon the fame occafion, and the more especially fo, as I have been made to find, that that which, in preliminary articles, was matter of condemnation and cenfure to fome of your Lordships, now meets, in definitive treaties, by the veil of a profligate and abandoned faction being thrown afide, the unanimous fuffrage and confent of all. Nor, my Lords, fhould I have rifen on this day, had it not been for a speech which, not being present at the time it was spoken, I have seen and read in the public papers; a fpeech, my Lords, which whilft it would ap prove the peace, would attempt to villify and calumniate the author of it; but which, in my opinion, proving, by. its own invective, and the mode of reasoning adopted there