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,