Mr. S. Whitbread moved an address to his majesty, praying that he would be pleased to direct the attorney-general to enter a noli prosequi upon all indictments preferred by the society. Mr. B. Bathurst opposed the motion; expressing his conviction that the association had done much good; and, for proof of its legality, appealing to the numerous combinations existing in the country of private persons, for the prosecution of various felonies, and laying particular stress on the example of the Society for the Suppression of Vice. Dr. Lushington spoke in support of the motion with much force. To compare, said he, the association in question with the associations instituted for the prosecution of felonies, was a violent outrage upon common sense for all such associations confined their prosecutions to offences committed against their individual members. Mr. Bathurst had asked, "supposing a subscriber to one of these associations to be upon a grand jury, would he not be justified in finding a true bill against any individual whom there was sufficient evidence to implicate ?" To this question Dr. Lushington answered, that a subscriber to one of these associations might be justified in finding a true bill against an offender, because with regard to robberies and burglaries there could only be one opinion-they were moral offences, of which there could be no doubt, and upon which men could decide, without being liable to the influence of undue passion or partiality. But how stood the fact with regard to political crimes? Were they crimes upon which doubts never existed? Or were

they not crimes, upon which individuals differed most widely? Were there not cases on record, in which one jury had acquitted, and another jury had convicted, one and the same publication of libel? To place a member of the Constitutional Association upon a grand jury, would lead with a moral certainty to the conviction, in the first resort, of any individual against whom that association might think proper to present an indictment: for the affairs of the association were conducted, or at least professed to be conducted, by a committee selected by the members at large; every niember might therefore be supposed to have some confidence in the committee, which he had himself assisted to appoint, and would naturally be inclined to follow up that confidence, by sending any individual, against whom the committee had instituted a prosecution, to the courts of the country to endure a trial. There was another circumstance connected with this society, which he had also viewed with grief and astonishment. It had compelled the judges of the land to step out of their way, and to direct, that every juryman, who ascended into the box to decide upon the several prosecutions which it had instituted, should answer upon oath to the question, whether he was, or was not, one of its members. The court of King's-bench, perplexed by the unexampled na ture of this association, had been compelled to make a new precedent, in order to preserve justice. Let the House contrast the situation of this society with that of the individuals whom it selected for its victims. On one side was a society with large, he

had almost said unlimited, funds at its command, for the purpose of prosecution; and therefore able to afford fees to counsel and other necessary expenses, even though no further additions were to be made to its resources, which he was sorry to say was not likely to be the case, as he had that day seen among the subscriptions, a gift of 300l. from lord Powers

court.

On the other side were poor and needy individuals, involved in ruin and imprisonment by the mere institution of the numerous prosecutions, which this society had commenced. Now, supposing one of these individuals to be fortunate enough to free himself from the fetters, in which it had endeavoured to enthral him, and to get out of that Pandemonium, to which it was its avowed determination to consign all who were bold enough to oppose its measures and to thwart its designs, who was to answer for the injury he had sustained? against whom would he be entitled to bring his action of damages? He would frankly declare in the presence of the House, that if he thought it likely that this society would be allowed to continue its damnable proceed ings, and if he could bring himself to believe in the legality of a counter-association, he would be among the first to join such counter-association, and to do his utmost to stay the hand of oppression, which he considered to be raised at that moment for the purpose of crushing under its weight a large number of poor and

unprotected booksellers. And what would be the consequence of such confederations? Would it not be this-that the country, instead of subsiding into

peace and tranquillity, would be filled with rancour and ill-will from one end of it to the other; that man would be irritated against man, and that the same scenes would be repeated, as were exhibited at the close of the year 1793, when brother was set against brother, and each man was branding his neighbour as a republican, leveller, or jacobin?

Mr. Brougham spoke at great length on the same side. He admitted that the society might legally indict, but he asserted that it was not legal for them to use the process of the law in ter◄ rorem over the king's subjects; and, without authority from situation, without the powers or privileges of office, to go into any peaceable citizen's shop, and say to him-" If you will not agree to certain terms which I shall please to impose, I will indict you, and you shall take the consequences of resistance.” Mr.. Scarlett took the same side. The Attorney General and the Solicitor General defended the society. They held, that it was not only strictly legal, but in perfect harmony with the constitution, and denied that any of the charges brought against it had been made good. Mr. Whitbread's motion was withdrawn. It had been intended merely as. a pretext for discussing the general question; and even his own party admitted, that, whatever might be the merits or demerits of the association, it was not in that House, that the propriety of discontinuing the prosecutions instituted by it ought to be determined.

Some attempts were made, in the course of the session, to induce the House to assume to it

sented; so far from having fixed any new, or private, or arbitrary standard, the questions were full of references to the Liturgy and the 39 articles. The 48th canon required an examination of curates before they were licensed, but prescribed no particular mode of examination; and that which he, in the exercise of the discretion which the law gave him, had adopted, seemed to him to be the best calculated to detect deviations from sound doctrine. The canon, which gave him his discretionary power, was part of the law of the land; and till the law was altered, he could not be de

prived of this right of examination. He then went into a defence of the mode, in which the right had been exercised in the present instance. Lord Calthorpe, lord Grey, and lord Lansdown, without questioning the right of the bishop, expressed their opinion, that the conduct he had pursued was calculated to disturb the peace of the church. Lord Harrowby did not see, how parliament could be appealed to in such a transaction: the proper tribunal was elsewhere. The motion, that the petition be laid upon the table, was then negatived.

Tthe present year, was not HE agricultural distress of the present year, was not inferior to that of 1820. No new causes of embarrassment had sprung up but the price of corn still continued low, landlords were still reluctant to reduce their rents within natural limits, and farmers still laboured under all the difficulties arising from that diminution or destruction of their capital, which the change in the price of their commodities had occasioned. Numerous petitions for relief were presented to parliament; but it was easier to demand than to discover a remedy. Some wished the government to alter the standard of the currency; some suggested the propriety of expunging part of the national debt; some placed their hopes in the removal of taxes; and some had a perfect faith in the omnipotence of high protecting duties. All called for inquiry; and the ministers thought, that inquiry ought not to be refused to those who suffered. On the 7th of March, Mr. Gooch moved, that a select committee should be appointed, to take into consi

Both

deration the petitions relative to the distress of the agricultural interest. Sir Edward Knatchbull seconded the motion. of these gentlemen, at the same time that they exhibited in very strong colours the difficulties under which the landlord and farmer laboured, disavowed any wish to tamper with the currency, or the national debt; but they were of opinion, that something might be done in the way of diminishing our expenditure, and that the necessary taxes ought to be so modified, as not to lay an undue share of the burthen on the cultivators of the soil. Sir Edward Knatchbull thought also, that some benefit might be derived from a better system of taking the averages, from making a small addition to the duty on imported oats, and from the adoption of a graduated scale of protecting duties.

Mr. F. Robinson stated, that, when a proposition similar to the present was introduced in the former year, he had opposed it; because he was convinced, that the existing distress was not at