Continent; and, calling in the doctrines of the writers
upon the Law of Nations to your aid, you are for beginning
with the conquest of Sicily, and so on, through Italy,
Switzerland, &c. &c. Now it does not appear to
me, though I should rejoice heartily to see a British
army march from Calabria, triumphantly, to the heart
of the Alps, and from Holland to the centre of Germany,—yet
it does not appear to me that the conquest and permanent
possession of these countries is necessary either
to produce those resources of men or money which the
security and prosperity of our country requires.
All that is absolutely needful, for either the one
or the other, is a large, experienced, and seasoned
army, which we cannot possess without a field
to fight in, and that field must be somewhere upon
the Continent. Therefore, as far as concerns
ourselves and our security, I do not think that so
wide a space of conquered country is desirable; and,
as a patriot, I have no wish for it. If I desire
it, it is not for our sakes directly, but for the
benefit of those unhappy nations whom we should rescue,
and whose prosperity would be reflected back upon
ourselves. Holding these notions, it is natural,
highly as I rate the importance of military power,
and deeply as I feel its necessity for the protection
of every excellence and virtue, that I should rest
my hopes with respect to the emancipation of Europe
more upon moral influence, and the wishes and opinions
of the people of the respective nations, than you appear
to do. As I have written in my pamphlet, ’on
the moral qualities of a people must its salvation
ultimately depend. Something higher than military
excellence must be taught as higher; something
more fundamental, as more fundamental.’
Adopting the opinion of the writers upon the laws of
Nations, you treat of conquest as if conquest
could in itself, nakedly and abstractedly considered,
confer rights. If we once admit this proposition,
all morality is driven out of the world. We conquer
Italy—that is, we raise the British standard
in Italy,—and, by the aid of the inhabitants,
we expel the French from the country, and have a right
to keep it for ourselves. This, if I am not mistaken,
is not only implied, but explicitly maintained in
your book. Undoubtedly, if it be clear that the
possession of Italy is necessary for our security,
we have a right to keep possession of it, if we should
ever be able to master it by the sword. But not
because we have gained it by conquest, therefore may
we keep it; no; the sword, as the sword, can give no
rights; but because a great and noble Nation, like
ours, cannot prosper or exist without such possession.
If the fact were so, we should then have a
right to keep possession of what by our valour we had
acquired—not otherwise. If these things
were matter of mere speculation, they would not be
worth talking about; but they are not so. The
spirit of conquest, and the ambition of the sword,