ing, that the many men of intrepidity, with which the parliament and nation abounded, would tamely permit him, and his affociates, to trample on their rights, and fubmit to become the paffive inftruments of their violation. Mr. Wyndham replied only by a fmile. Mr. Curwen's motion was, nevertheless, outvoted by two hundred and fixty-nine against feventy.

On the twenty-feventh of November, the houfe went into a committee on the bill for preventing feditious meetings, when Mr. Fox, Mr. Grey, Mr. Whitbread, Mr. Lambton, and all the other members of the oppofition, Mr. Sheridan excepted, left the houfe. Even Mr. Sheridan declared, that he did not remain, for the end of propofing any alterations in the bill. To do jaltice to the public, it ought, he faid, to be negatived in every part of its

contents.

The feceffion of the minority underwent a variety of difcuffions on its propriety Many were, indeed, of opinion, that well knowing their prefence could be no impediment to the paffing of the bill, a formal feceffion from an affembly, that was, in their judgement, refolved to deftroy the liberty of the nation, would make a greater impreffion upon the public, than if they were to continue fitting in the houfe, and oppofing the minifters, as ufual, to no purpofe. But many were of a different opinion, and thought, by their prefence and refiftance, notwithstanding that the bills would have paft, they maft have been divefted of much of the feverity with which they were accompanied, and that it became them, at all events, to difpute every inch of the ground, of which, by their retreat, the miniftry would now become undisturbed poffeffors.

The bill was, of courfe, carried through the house without oppofition, and without any other modifications than its fupporters thought neceflary to render it lefs odious to the public. It was propofed, by the folicitor-general, on reading the third claufe against the meeting of more than fifty perfons, that if twelve of them remained together, one hour after being ordered to difperfe, it fhould be adjudged death, without benefit of clergy. But an amendment was moved, making it only punishable as a mildemeanour. This was feconded by Mr. Wilberforce, Mr. Stanley, Mr. Banks, and Sir W. Dolben: but the feverity of the folicitor-general prevailed, and his motion was carried by eighty votes against only thirteen; to completely was the houfe devoted to the inexorable difpofition of the framers of this bill.

This was evinced no lefs glaring ly, on difcuffing that claufe which empowered the magiftrate prefent at any popular meeting to diffolve it immediately, fhould he be of opinion, that any fubject brought forward were unlawful, or of a feditious tendency. The claufe was confirmed, and the magiftrate alfo authorized to feize and commit the perfon whom he judged guilty of fuch offence.

The laft claufe refpected the duration of the bill. The folicitorgeneral, confiftently with the fevere fyftem he had embraced, moved that it fhould laft three years. Mr. Stanley endeavoured to reduce it to one, or at moft to no more than two, but the majority continued immoveable in its compliance with the folicitor, and the term of three years was voted by forty-fix ag int only two.

The

The bill was read a third time, according to form, on the third of December, and carried up to the house of lords on the fame day.

The bill for the fecurity of the fovereign, was, on the thirtieth of November, taken into confideration by a committee of the whole houfe of commons, when Mr. Erikine op-, pofed it by a variety of reafonings. He obferved, that the bill diminished the liberty of the fubject, without adding to the safety of the king's perfon. It was a political maxim of long standing, that the best government was that which produced the greateft fecurity with the feweft reftraints, and that the worst was that which increafed penalties without undifputed evidence of their propriety. Another maxim, of equal force, was to preserve ancient laws in their primitive fimplicity, till experience had proved them inadequate to their intended purposes. The ftatute of Edward III. concerning treason, had not been proved, but merely afferted, to be unequal to the punishment of the outrages referred to in the two bills. In the opinion of one of the greatest luminaries of the law in this country, the lord-chief-juftice Hale, that important ftatute had been enacted, as a remedy against former oppreffion, and to fecure the fubject against illegal profecution. To compafs, or even to imagine, the death of the king, was, by that fta. tute, declared high treafon: could words be found of ftronger import, or of plainer meaning? To levy war against the king, or to grant comfort and protection to his enemies was, by that ftatute, made equally criminal; but it did not make the compaffing to levy war against him high treafon, because the legiflators of that day did not confider a confpiracy to levy fuch

a war as more than a misdemeanour, which, like many others, might not deferve material notice, while no clear and overt act could be adduced to prove it, and without which act no treasonable intentions could lawfully be prefumed. Mr. Erskine argued, from the decifion of lord-chiefjuftice Holt, that overt acts alone, properly established, ought to be admitted as proofs of guilt in trials for high treafon. The bill in contemplation would, he explicitly affirmed, extend the crime of high treafon to fuch a multitude of trivial cafes, that every petty misdemeanour might be brought within its conftruction. After a variety of other arguments had been used on both fides, the debate closed by two hundred and three votes, for the commitment of the bill, against forty.

On the third reading of this bill, the tenth of December, it was oppofed in the fame manner, and maintained with the fame reafonings as antecedently, but it pafled, with all its clauses, after fome ineffectual objections to that in particular, which enacted its duration till the demife of the king.

The bill to prevent feditious meetings was read a first time on the third of December, and its fecond reading took place on the ninth, when lord Grenville urged a multiplicity of reafons in its favour. He declared it neceffary for the preservation of the lives and property of individuals, and for the fecurity of the conftitution, and liberties of the people, for which he alleged that the laws in being had not fufficiently provided.

The marquis of Lansdowne, and the earls of Moira and Derby, ftrenuoufly oppofed it. They particularly reprobated that claufe which autho

rized the magiftrate to commit to immediate imprisonment whomever they thought proper to charge with feditious language, or behaviour, in any popular meeting. This they afferted was to conftitute them, at once, judges and jury. The earl of Moira took pointed notice of an expreffion that had been used by the earl of Weftmorland. The words of that nobleman were "fend the people to the loom and to the anvil, and there let them earn bread inftead of wafting their time in feditious meetings." This, faid lord Moira, was degrading men below the condition affigned to them by the Almighty, who certainly could not have intended that any part of mankind thould be doomed merely to work and eat like the beafts of the field. They too were endowed with the faculty of reafoning, and had certainly the right to use it.

Strong and cogent arguments were produced by lord Thurlow, to prove that the government of England could not, in juftice to the nation, fetter it with new laws, merely to prevent the poffible confequences, in this country, of thofe principles, the importation of which, from France, was apprehended. A ter fignifying his general difapprobation of the bill, he pointed out its variations from the provifions of the acts of Charles II. and George I. refpecting feditious proceedings. By the latter, known by the name of the riot-act, people unlawfully affembled did not, however, expose themfelves to capital punishment, unlefs they perfifted in acting in a diforderly and tumultuous manner during a whole hour after the act had been read to them. But, by the prefent bill, if people were affembled, in order to take a fubject relating to the public into confideration, and con

tinued together, however peaceably to the number of twelve perfons, an hour after proclamation made, they were adjudged guilty of felony,without benefit of clergy; and the prefiding magiftrate was authorized to ufe violence, even to death, in apprehending them. This claufe was fo unjuftifiable, that he thought himfelf bound to oppofe the bill, were it folely from this motive.

The lord chancellor made a long and elaborate reply to lord Thurlow's objections, without advancing, however, any thing new in fupport of the bill. The queftion for its going into a committee was carried by one hundred and nine votes against twenty-one.

The houfe of lords went, accordingly, into a committee upon the bill, on the eleventh of December, when the duke of Norfolk oppofed the claufe extending the operation of the bill to three years, and moved that it fhould be limited to one. He was feconded by lords Scarborough, Darnley, Radnor, and Romney. But the term of three years was fupported by lords Grenville, Spencer, and Mulgrave, and voted by forty-five to eight. On the fourteen of December, 1795, the bill was read a third time and finally paffed.

No law, enacted by the British legiflature, was ever received by the nation with fuch evident and general marks of ill will and difapprobation as thefe two celebrated bills, on which the public beftowed the appellation of the Pitt and Grenville acts, in order to fet a mark upon their authors, and hold them out to the odium of the people.

Thele two acts were confidered the moft restrictive of any that have been pafled by an English parliament fince the reigns of the Tudors; a family of which the remembrance

membrance is far from being agree able to the people of England; notwithstanding that it produced an Elizabeth, whofe tyrannical difpofition and maxims tarnished the luftre of all her great qualities. The defpofilm of that houfe was indignantly recalled to notice on this occafion, and the severity of the two acts in queftion, compared to the most arbitrary and oppreffive proceedings of the fovereigns of England, previous to the commencement of the feventeenth century.

It was owned, at the fame time, by every candid mind, that if, on the one hand, there was danger to be apprehended, from meafures tending to defpotifm, there was on the other, danger in allowing an unreftrained freedom of haranging the populace; a freedom that tended to anarchy and confufion. If, on the one hand, it be the nature of power to mount, with hafty steps, into the throne of defpotifin, it seems to be infeparable from liberty, on the other, to push its claims beyond a juft and reafonable degree of freedom. Amidst a fcarcity of grain; an accumulation of taxes; an unfuccefsful, not to fay unneceffary, war; difficulties abroad; diftreffes at home :— when the elements were troubled, and a form fo greatly threatened, filence was impofed on the fhip's crew, and each man was fixed to his particular station.

The danger to be apprehended from the operation of thofe laws did not confift so much in any immediate reftraint they might impofe on a reafonable freedom of difcuffion, and prefentation of petitions to the legiflature, whether for the redress or the prevention of grievances, as in the tendency they had to enervate the pirit of liberty. The confequences

of many, nay moft, innovations are not prevented at first: otherwise they would, in many instances, be immediately refifted. By the time that pernicious innovations are perceived, cuftom and habit have rendered them lefs odious and intolerable. Precedents, growing into authorities, rife into abfolute dominion, by flow degrees: by acceffions and diftant encroachments, each of which, fingly confidered, feemed of little importance. The vanity of resistance at laft breaks the spirit of the people, and difpofes them to unreferved fubmiflion. Their political importance being wholly gone; they are degraded, more and more, and fubjected to greater and greater oppreffions and infults.-It was obferved by many, even of those who were difpofed to admit the temporary expediency of the two unpopular and odious acts, that the greater part by far of our new laws have a reference, either to public revenue or to the fecurity of the monarchical part of the conftitution: and that few, of any extenfive operation, are of the clafs that may be denominated popular and paternal.

The only alleviation that accompanied the two acts, was the time limited for their duration. This kept up the fpirits and hopes of the people, that however their reprefentatives might have been prevailed upon to fufpend the exercife of thofe privileges, on which the national freedom depended, they were too wife, as well as too honeft, to truft them in the hands of the executive power, any longer than they might be convinced was requifite for the fermentation of the times to fubfide, and for the people to revert to their former temper.

С НА Р.