not have failed to discover itself in some other mode of hosti. lity. Their whole history, since the accession of Philip the Fifth, is a continued proof of a rooted antipathy to the name of Englishman; and I am justified, by a series of indisputable facts, in affirming that, from the Treaty of Utrecht to this hour, there has never been a single instance of common justice or decency, much less of cordiality or friendship, in the conduct of the court of Madrid towards this country. Lord Sandwich declared a month ago in full parliament, that Gibraltar was a place of no consequence, and immediately afterwards the Princess Dowager makes him secretary of state. Whoever compares the sale of Dunkirk with this nobleman's character, must be very much of a sceptic, if he entertains any doubt about the fate of Gibraltar. But neither this sacrifice, nor even that of Jamaica, would be sufficient to produce a solid, permanent union with Spain. They may despise us more, but they will never hate us less.

By the Princess Dowager's management, instead of avoiding a war, we make it certain. A little spirit at first might perhaps have intimidated the Spaniards. Our notorious weakness and shameful submission have only served to encourage and confirm them in their resolution. In point of honour we have let the proper moment of resentment pass away. The royal and national honour is so irretrievably stained, that it cannot now be recovered by the most vigorous measures of revenge. From her Royal Highness's government in time of peace, we may well conclude in what manner she will conduct a war. Gifted as she is, she could hardly fail of success, if the quarrels of nations bore any resemblance to domestic feuds, or could be conducted upon the same principles. The genius of Queen Elizabeth united the nation, collected the strength of the people, and carried it forward to resistance and victory. When the demon of discord sits at the helm, what have we to expect but distraction and civil war at home, disgrace and infamy abroad?

DOMITIAN.

LETTER LXXXVIII.

TO THE PRINTER OF THE PUBLIC ADVERTISER.

SIR, February 13, 1771. I READ with astonishment, and no small indignation, a letter which is at last got into your paper; I mean that from Lord Weymouth to Mr. Harris. The copy which you have procured

This letter refers to the much-agitated dispute concerning the Malouine, or Falkland's Islands, which, without any formal recognition, had, for many years after their first occupation by Captain Byron in 1765, been quietly suffered by Spain to remain in the hands of his Britannic Majesty, who had erected a small fort on the coast of the chief of them, named Port Egmont. In June, 1769, however, without any complaint or notice on the part of the Spanish government to the court of St. James's, a forcible debarkation was effected on the coast of Port Egmont, by a Spanish armament from Port Solidad in Buenos Ayres; the whole mass of islands was claimed by the commander of the expedition in the name of his Most Catholic Majesty, whose right was formally asserted to the whole Magellanic region; the small body of English troops stationed at Port Egmont was compelled to submit, and turned adrift from the island in two English frigates which chanced to be in the harbour, to make the best of their voyage home, and relate the history of this extraordinary adventure.

The English ministry heard the account with indignation; and the letter from Lord Weymouth to Mr. Harris, the resident minister at the court of Madrid, referred to above, was the result. The court of Madrid had offered a convention, or conditional restoration, and his Lordship's letter purports to be a reply to such offer; it was dated Oct. 17, 1770, and the following is the most important passage contained in it :

"His Majesty cannot accept, under a convention, that satisfaction to which he has so just a title, without entering into any engagements to procure it. The idea of his Majesty's becoming a contracting party upon this occasion is entirely foreign to the case; for, having received an injury and demanded the most moderate reparation of that injury that his honour will permit him to accept, that reparation loses its value, if it is to be conditional, and to be cbtained by any stipulation whatsoever on the part of his Majesty."

Yet in direct violation of this demand of an unconditional restoration and Acknowledged sovereignty, the following declaration and acceptance were mutually acceded to at London, Jan. 22, 1771.

Translation of the Declaration signed and delivered by Prince de Maserano, Ambassador Extraordinary from his Catholic Majesty, dated the 22nd day of June, 1771.

His Britannic Majesty having complained of the violence which was committed on the 10th of June, 1770, at the island commonly called the Great Malouine, and by the English Falkland's Island, in obliging by force the ommander and subjects of his Britannic Majesty to evacuate the port by

I know to be authentic, having read it amongst the papers laid by administration before both Houses. It is the most comthem called Egmont, a step offensive to the honour of his crown, the Prince de Maserano, Ambassador Extraordinary of his Catholic Majesty, has received orders to declare, and declares, that his Catholic Majesty, considering the desire with which he is animated for peace, and for the maintenance of good harmony with his Britannic Majesty, and reflecting that this event might interrupt it, has seen with displeasure this expedition tending to disturb it; and in the persuasion in which he is of the reciprocity of sentiments of his Britannic Majesty, and of its being far from his intention to authorize anything that might disturb the good understanding between the two courts, his Catholic Majesty does isavow the said violent enterprise ; and in consequence the Prince de Maserano declares that his Catholic Majesty engages to give immediate orders that things shall be restored in the Great Malouine, at the port called Egmont, precisely to the state in which they were before the 10th of June, 1770; for which purpose his Catholi Majesty will give orders to one of his officers to deliver up to the officer authorized by his Britannic Majesty the port and fort called Egmont, with all the artillery, stores, and effects of his Britannic Majesty and his subjects, which were at that place the day above-named, agreeable to the inventory which has been made of them.

The Prince de Maserano declares, at the same time, in the name of the King his master, that the engagement of his said Catholic Majesty to restore to his Britannic Majesty the possession of the fort and port called Egmont, cannot, nor ought, any wise to affect the question of the prior right of sovereignty of the Malouine Islands, otherwise called Falkland's Islands. In witness whereof, I, the underwritten Ambassador Extraordinary, have signed the present declaration with my usual signature, and caused it to be sealed with our arms. London, the twenty-second day of January, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-one.

(L.. 8.) (Signed) LE PRINCE DE MASERANO. Translation of the Earl of Rochford's Acceptance, dated the 22nd day of January, 1771, of the Prince de Maserano's Declaration of the same date.

His Catholic Majesty having authorized the Prince of Maserano, his Ambassador Extraordinary, to offer in his Majesty's name to the King of Great Britain a satisfaction for the injury done to his Britannic Majesty by dispossessing him of the port and fort of Port Egmont; and the said Ambassador having this day signed a declaration, which he has just delivered to me. expressing therein that his Catholic Majesty, being desirous to restore the good harmony and friendship which before subsisted between the two crowns, does disavow the expedition against Port Egmont, in which force has been used against his Britannic Majesty's possessions, commander, and subjects; and does also engage that all things shall be immediately restored to the precise situation in which they stood before the 10th of June, 1770; and that his Catholic Majesty shall give crders, in consequence, to one of his officers to deliver up to the officer authorized by his Britannic Majesty the port and fort of Port Egmont, as also all his Britannic Majesty's artillery,

plete and unanswerable condemnation of the infamous convention with Spain that the mind of man can suggest.

The

stores, and effects, as well as those of his subjects, according to the inventory which has been made of them; and the said Ambassador having moreover engaged, in his Catholic Majesty's name, that what is contained in the said declaration shall be carried into effect by his said Catholic Majesty; and that duplicates of his Catholic Majesty's orders to his officers shall be delivered into the hands of one of his Britannic Majesty's principal secretaries of state within six weeks; his said Britannic Majesty, in order to show the same friendly dispositions on his part. has authorized me to declare that he will look upon the said declaration of Prince de Maserano, together with the full performance of the said engagement, on the part of his Catholic Majesty, as a satisfaction for the injury done to the crown of Great Britain. In witness whereof, I, the underwritten, one of his Britannic Majesty's principal secretaries of state, have signed these presents with my usual signature, and caused them to be sealed with our arms. London, the 22nd day of January, 1771.

(L. S.)

(Signed) ROCHFORD.

These papers, together with the above letter of Lord Weymouth, were laid by Lord North before the House of Commons, Jan. 25, 1771, and on Feb. 4, the two following queries were moved by Lord Chatham, in the House of Lords, for the opinion of the judges:-

1. Whether, in consideration of law, the imperial crown of this realm can hold any territories or possessions thereunto helonging, otherwise than in sovereignty.

2. Whether the declaration, or instrument for restitution of the port or fort called Egmont, to be made by the Catholic King to his Majesty, under ‹ reservation of a disputed right of sovereignty expressed in the very declaration or instrument stipulating such restitution, can be accepted or carried into execution without derogating from the maxim of law before referred to, touching the inherent and essential dignity of the crown of Great Britain.

"The above queries were not referred to the judges, because Lord Mans. reld said that the answer to them was self-evident-that they answered themselves by which his Lordship was understood to mean that both queries clearly answered themselves in the negative."

On the 13th of February an address of thanks for the communication was voted in both Houses of parliament; that in the Commons, after a very long debate. was carried by a considerable majority, the numbers being for the address 271, against 157, who voted for the amendment.

The address of the Lords was much fuller of approbation than that of the Commons, and was, notwithstanding, carried through with a much greater proportional majority; it was, however, productive of the following nervous und argumentative protest, signed by not less than nineteen peers :

DISSENTIENT.

1. Because it is highly unsuitable to the wisdom and gravity of this House, and to the respect which we owe to his Majesty and ourselves, to carry up

whole culprit ministry, together with the King, plead guilty by their own unanimous voice. No secretary of state ever

to the throne an address approving the acceptance of an imperfect instrument, which has neither been previously authorized by any special full powers produced by the Spanish minister, nor been as yet ratified by the King of Spain. If the ratification on the part of Spain should be refused, the address of this House will appear no better than an act of precipitate adulation to ministers, which will justly expose the peerage of the kingdom to the indignation of their country, and to the derision of all Europe.

2. Because it is a direct insult on the feelings and understanding of the people of Great Britain, to approve this declaration and acceptance as a means of securing our own and the general tranquillity, whilst the greatest preparations for war are making both by sea and land; and whilst the practice of pressing is continued, as in times of the most urgent necessity, to the extreme inconvenience of trade and commerce, and with the greatest hardships to one of the most meritorious and useful orders of his Majesty's subjects.

3. Because the refusing to put the questions to the judges upon points of law, very essentially affecting this great question, and the refusing to address his Majesty to give orders for laying before this House the instructions relating to Falkland's Islands, given to the commanders of his Majesty's ships employed there, is depriving us of such lights as seemed highly proper for us on this occasion.

4. Because, from the declaration and correspondence laid before us, we are of opinion that the ministers merit the censure of this House, rather than any degree of commendation, on account of several improper acts, and equally improper omissions, from the beginning to the close of this transaction. For it is asserted by the Spanish minister, and stands uncontradicted by ours, that several discussions had passed between the ministers of the two courts upon the subject of Falkland's Islands, which might give the British ministers reason to foresee the attack upon that settlement that was afterwards made by the forces of Spain. Captain Hunt also, arriving from thence so early as the third of June last, did advertise the ministers of repeated warnings and menaces made by Spanish governors and commanders of ships of war; yet so obstinately negligent and supine were his Majesty's ministers, and so far from the vigilance and activity required by the trust and duty of their offices, that they did not even so much as make a single representation to the court of Madrid; which if they had done, the injury itself might have been prevented, or at least so speedily repaired as to render unnecessary the enormous expenses to which this nation has been compelled, by waiting until the blow had been actually struck, and the news of so signal an insult to the crown of Great Britain had arrived in Europe. To this wilful, and therefore culpable, neglect of representation to the court of Spain, was added another neglect, a neglect of such timely preparation for putting this nation into such a state of uefence as the menacing appearances on the part of Spain and the critical condition of Europe required. These preparations, had they been undertaken early, would have been executed with more effect and less expense; would have been far less distressing to our trade, and to our seamen; would have arthor