Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Foreign News
February 25, 1763
The New Hampshire Gazette
Portsmouth, Rockingham County, New Hampshire
What is this article about?
Extract from Alderman Heathcote's letter to the Lord Mayor of London, dated Nov. 22, arguing against peace preliminaries with France, praising a patriot minister, and posing rhetorical questions on Britain's rights to retain conquests in America and Africa after French aggressions.
Clipping
OCR Quality
95%
Excellent
Full Text
LONDON. Nov. 22.
Extract from Alderman HEATHCOTE's Letter to the Lord Mayor of London.
AFTER expressing his sentiments, and giving his opinion with great force and judgment, against making a peace on the footing of the preliminaries that have been just published, in the news-papers, and shewing the true value of our Acquisitions, by exhibiting a candid account of the produce of them, and the advantages that must accrue to the kingdom from keeping possession of them, and the evil that will ensue from giving them up; and then speaking highly in praise of that patriot Minister, through whose wisdom they were obtained, Mr. Heathcote asks the following questions:
"Whether any nation can have a right to invade another, or any of its colonies and possessions, and to butcher the people without mercy, either by themselves, or by inhuman savages?
"If any nation is so unjustly invaded and injured, has she not a right, by the laws of nature, the law of nations, and the law of God, to defend herself against such an enemy, and make reprisals; to keep what she takes in the war, to indemnify herself for all the charges of such war, entered upon in her just defence, and to distress the aggressor, so far as is necessary for her own security and peace?
"Hath not France without the least provocation from us, invaded and plundered our colonies and possessions in America, in breach of treaties, and inhumanly butchered our fellow-subjects, both by themselves, and Indian savages?
"Hath not Great-Britain the same right in common with all nations, to defend herself against such injuries done her by France, and to retain what she has taken from her in the present just and necessary war, in order to indemnify herself for the charges of it, and establish her future security and peace?
"Can Great-Britain restore any of her conquests in America or Africa to France, without restoring to her the power of endangering her security and peace and so doing a total period to her national existence?
"Hath not France been a most notorious treaty breaker, and hath she not broke every treaty she ever made with this nation?
"Can Great-Britain, consistent with her own security and peace, or any rule of policy trust that notorious treaty-breaking and perfidious nation?
"Is any one concession made by France, in the preliminaries published, that can possibly indemnify Great-Britain for the immense charges she hath been at, in defending her just rights, and protect her subjects from French violence, and herself from French slavery; and why is so material and necessary an article omitted in the preliminaries?
"Can our more than christian Samaritans and most illustrious heroes, since the day of the first warriors, whose examples they seem so closely to imitate, produce a single instance from history of any nation, that after being in a less degree than we have been, unjustly invaded and injuriously treated, restore their conquests to the offending party, if she herself was in a condition to maintain them; especially when such a restitution would have enabled her enemy to have completed her ruin; and are we not in a condition to maintain our conquests over France, and to secure ourselves for the future against the fatal effects of her boundless ambition; and must we not expect all the calamities of a conquered people, if we again trust her with those weapons, which will empower her to work our destruction, and which we are sure she will employ to that purpose?
"What national reason can be given for making concessions to conquered France, that so evidently tend to her exaltation, and the perdition of Great-Britain?
"Is it possible for any Briton in the South or North of this island, to approve of conditions so shameful, dishonourable, injurious, and fatal to his native country.
"If any such there should unhappily be, will he not justly deserve justice, which is due to the highest crimes, it is possible to commit; and a punishment adequate to the offence, is unknown to our laws, - will not a law post facto be necessary and warrantable, in order to prevent such dangerous evils for the future, by striking a proper terror into the hearts of all future Ministers
Extract from Alderman HEATHCOTE's Letter to the Lord Mayor of London.
AFTER expressing his sentiments, and giving his opinion with great force and judgment, against making a peace on the footing of the preliminaries that have been just published, in the news-papers, and shewing the true value of our Acquisitions, by exhibiting a candid account of the produce of them, and the advantages that must accrue to the kingdom from keeping possession of them, and the evil that will ensue from giving them up; and then speaking highly in praise of that patriot Minister, through whose wisdom they were obtained, Mr. Heathcote asks the following questions:
"Whether any nation can have a right to invade another, or any of its colonies and possessions, and to butcher the people without mercy, either by themselves, or by inhuman savages?
"If any nation is so unjustly invaded and injured, has she not a right, by the laws of nature, the law of nations, and the law of God, to defend herself against such an enemy, and make reprisals; to keep what she takes in the war, to indemnify herself for all the charges of such war, entered upon in her just defence, and to distress the aggressor, so far as is necessary for her own security and peace?
"Hath not France without the least provocation from us, invaded and plundered our colonies and possessions in America, in breach of treaties, and inhumanly butchered our fellow-subjects, both by themselves, and Indian savages?
"Hath not Great-Britain the same right in common with all nations, to defend herself against such injuries done her by France, and to retain what she has taken from her in the present just and necessary war, in order to indemnify herself for the charges of it, and establish her future security and peace?
"Can Great-Britain restore any of her conquests in America or Africa to France, without restoring to her the power of endangering her security and peace and so doing a total period to her national existence?
"Hath not France been a most notorious treaty breaker, and hath she not broke every treaty she ever made with this nation?
"Can Great-Britain, consistent with her own security and peace, or any rule of policy trust that notorious treaty-breaking and perfidious nation?
"Is any one concession made by France, in the preliminaries published, that can possibly indemnify Great-Britain for the immense charges she hath been at, in defending her just rights, and protect her subjects from French violence, and herself from French slavery; and why is so material and necessary an article omitted in the preliminaries?
"Can our more than christian Samaritans and most illustrious heroes, since the day of the first warriors, whose examples they seem so closely to imitate, produce a single instance from history of any nation, that after being in a less degree than we have been, unjustly invaded and injuriously treated, restore their conquests to the offending party, if she herself was in a condition to maintain them; especially when such a restitution would have enabled her enemy to have completed her ruin; and are we not in a condition to maintain our conquests over France, and to secure ourselves for the future against the fatal effects of her boundless ambition; and must we not expect all the calamities of a conquered people, if we again trust her with those weapons, which will empower her to work our destruction, and which we are sure she will employ to that purpose?
"What national reason can be given for making concessions to conquered France, that so evidently tend to her exaltation, and the perdition of Great-Britain?
"Is it possible for any Briton in the South or North of this island, to approve of conditions so shameful, dishonourable, injurious, and fatal to his native country.
"If any such there should unhappily be, will he not justly deserve justice, which is due to the highest crimes, it is possible to commit; and a punishment adequate to the offence, is unknown to our laws, - will not a law post facto be necessary and warrantable, in order to prevent such dangerous evils for the future, by striking a proper terror into the hearts of all future Ministers
What sub-type of article is it?
Diplomatic
War Report
Political
What keywords are associated?
Peace Preliminaries
French Invasions
British Conquests
Treaty Breaker
America Africa
War Indemnity
National Security
What entities or persons were involved?
Alderman Heathcote
Lord Mayor Of London
Patriot Minister
Where did it happen?
America
Foreign News Details
Primary Location
America
Event Date
Nov. 22
Key Persons
Alderman Heathcote
Lord Mayor Of London
Patriot Minister
Event Details
Alderman Heathcote expresses strong opposition to peace preliminaries with France, highlights value of British acquisitions in America and Africa, praises the patriot Minister, and poses rhetorical questions justifying retention of conquests due to French aggressions, treaty breaches, and threats to British security.