to carry it away—­which was undoubtedly understood by the French general.  And in the Armistice it is expressly said, that their private property of every description shall be conveyed to France along with their persons.  What then are we to understand by the words, their private property of every description?  Equipments of the army in general, and baggage of individuals, had been stipulated for before:  now we all know that the lawful professional gains and earnings of a soldier must be small; that he is not in the habit of carrying about him, during actual warfare, any accumulation of these or other property; and that the ordinary private property, which he can be supposed to have a just title to, is included under the name of his baggage;—­therefore this was something more; and what it was—­is apparent.  No part of their property, says the Armistice, shall be wrested from them.  Who does not see in these words the consciousness of guilt, an indirect self-betraying admission that they had in their hands treasures which might be lawfully taken from them, and an anxiety to prevent that act of justice by a positive stipulation?  Who does not see, on what sort of property the Frenchman had his eye; that it was not property by right, but their possessions—­their plunder—­every thing, by what means soever acquired, that the French army, or any individual in it, was possessed of?  But it has been urged, that the monstrousness of such a supposition precludes this interpretation, renders it impossible that it could either be intended by the one party, or so understood by the other.  What right they who signed, and he who ratified this Convention, have to shelter themselves under this plea—­will appear from the 16th and 17th articles.  In these it is stipulated, ’that all subjects of France, or of Powers in alliance with France, domiciliated in Portugal, or accidentally in the country, shall have their property of every kind—­moveable and immoveable—­guaranteed to them, with liberty of retaining or disposing of it, and passing the produce into France:’  the same is stipulated, (Article XVII.) for such natives of Portugal as have sided with the French, or occupied situations under the French Government.  Here then is a direct avowal, still more monstrous, that every Frenchman, or native of a country in alliance with France, however obnoxious his crimes may have made him, and every traitorous Portugueze, shall have his property guaranteed to him (both previously to and after the reinstatement of the Portugueze government) by the British army!  Now let us ask, what sense the word property must have had fastened to it in these cases.  Must it not necessarily have included all the rewards which the Frenchman had received for his iniquity, and the traitorous Portugueze for his treason? (for no man would bear a part in such oppressions, or would be a traitor for nothing; and, moreover, all the rewards, which the French could