Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

French should be the first to sue for peace, as ministers presumptuously asserted?

The amendment brought forward by the duke of Bedford was strongly oppose by earl Spencer, who contended that in so extensive a war, waged in almost every part of the globe, it could not be expected that the mercantile shipping of this country would always escape the vigilance of an enemy, whose only and perpetual object at sea was depredation. It was indeed more surprising that his captures were so few, when it was considered that we carried on nearly the whole trade of Europe. He gave a satisfactory account of the naval transactions during the preceding season, and made it appear that the mischances which had befallen the commercial feets were owing to unavoidable accidents and not to misconduct. He justi fied the employment of Mr. Puis saye, as a person through whose means the principal communication was kept up with France, where he headed a considerable party of royalists.

The duke of Norfolk spoke for

the amendment, and the lord chan. cellor in opposition to it. The duke of Bedford in resuming the subject, recurred to the expressions used by lord Grenville, which were, that "in case the constitution now of fered to the people of France, should be found likely to establish itself in such a form as to secure a government that might preserve the relations of peace and amity, bis objections to treat with them would be entirely removed."

The substance of what had been spoken by lord Grenville, was conformable to the words taken down by the duke of Bedford; but the former declared himself of opinion, that it was not parliamentary to make the words of a peer, uttered in the course of the debate, a formal ground of proposing or of recalling a motion. Hereon the duke consented to withdraw his amendment; refusing however his approbation to that part of the address which asserted an improvement in the ituation of public affairs. The address was then finally moved, and

carried in the affirmative.

CHAP.

CHAP. II.

A Proclamation offering a large pecuniary Reward for the Discovery of any Persons guilty of the recent Outrages against the Person of the King.Conference between the Lords and Commons on this Subject.-A Bill for the Safety and Preservation of the King's Person and Govenment.Debates thereon in both Houses of Parliament.-A Bill for the Prevention of Seditious Meetings.-Debates thereon.-The two Bills under Discussion in Parliament occasion a general Alarm, and much Opposition with out Doors. In this Opposition the lead was taken by the Whig-Club.Which was followed by the Corresponding Societies and other Associations. -As well as different Bodies legally incorporated.-The Ministry still persevere in their Measures.-Debates on the numerous Petitions against the two Bills now pending in Parliament.-General Indignation against the Principles and Objects of these.-The two Bills passed into Laws.

[ocr errors]

N the mean time the indignities

ject of universal discourse, and high-
ly reprobated by the prudent and
moderate, as precursory of far grea-
ter evils than had hitherto been ex-
perienced by those who vented
their discontent in this outrageous
manner. On the last day of Octo-
ber, a proclamation was issued, of-
fering a thousand pounds for the
discovery of any person guilty of
those outrages.
On the fourth of
November it was followed by ano-,
ther wherein it was said, that pre-
viously to the opening of parlia-
ment, multitudes had been called
together by hand-bills and adver-
tisements, who met in the vicinity
of the metropolis, where inflamma-
tory speeches were made, and di-
vers means used to sow discontent
and excite seditious proceedings.
These meetings and discourses were
followed three days after by the
most daring insults to the king, by

which his person had been imminent

been spread, that assemblies were to be held by disaffected people for illegal purposes. In consequence of those proceedings, it was enjoined by the proclamation to all magistrates, and well affected subjects, to exert themselves in preventing and suppressing all unlawful meetings, and the dissemination of seditious writings.

So great had been the alarm and indignation, created by the treatment of the king, that as soon as he had gone through the reading of his speech, and had left the house, it was immediately ordered to be cleared of all strangers, and a consultation held by the lords, in what manner to proceed upon so extraordinary an occasion. An address to the king was resolved upon, and a conference with the house of commons to request their concur rence therein. The majority agreed

[ocr errors]

in this measure; but the marquis of Lansdowne accused the ministers of intending to seize this opportu nity to work upon the passions and fears of the people, and to lead their representatives into concessions derogatory to the public liberty, and debasing to their character, in order to confirm their own power at the expence of the

constitution.

A conference with the commons was held accordingly in the course of the day, and witnesses were examined in relation to the outrages committed. Their evidence was communicated to the commons, and both houses unanimously concurreds in the addresses proposed.

On the sixth of November, lord Grenville brought forward a bill, for better securing the king's person and government. The motive he alleged, was the necessity of preventing abuses similar to those that had taken place on the opening of the session. He explicitly attributed them to the licentious language and maxims held forth in the audacious meetings, which had been so long suffered, without due notice on the part of the legislature, but which were now arrived to such a degree of insolence, that they required immediate restriction. He would recur, on this occasion, he said, to precedents framed in approved times, the reign of Elizabeth, and the commencement of the reign of Charles II. He entertained no doubt that the house coincided with bis opinion, that a remedy ought instantly to be applied to the danger that threatened monarchy, in the attack so daringly made on the ung's person. In order more effectually to obviate so great an evil, he would move the passing of a bill, VOL. XXXVIII.

which he produced, and which was entitled "an act for the safety and preservation of his majesty's person and government against treasonable and seditious practices and attempts."

The bill introduced by lord Grenville was represented, by the earl of Lauderdale, as creating new crimes and treasons, in addition to those already contained in the criminal code of this country. It tended materially to enlarge the laws respecting treason, and would effect an alarming alteration in the very nature and spirit of the constitution. There was no evidence that the insults offered to the king ori ginated in the meetings of the people in the fields near Islington, or in any other places. These meetings had been remarkably peaceable, and those who harangued the crowds, that resorted to them from all quarters of the metropolis, were particularly careful to warn them against all riotous proceedings, lest ministers should avail themselves of that pretext, to put an end to all assemblies of the people. So harsh a measure as that proposed had not therefore the least foundation in the unruly behaviour of those meetings, and were it to pass into a law, the liberty of conferring together, so long enjoyed by the English, and which they justly considered as their indubitable right, would be radically destroyed, and with it the firmest support of public freedom. The intent of ministers, in adopting so unprecedented a measure, was clearly to silence the complaints of the nation against a war that had involved it in so many calamities, and which they were determined to carry on in defiance to the general inclination to peace. The [C]

[ocr errors]

vast

vast acquisition of power, that would accrue to ministers from such a law, would enable them to strain the words and actions of individuals into treasonable meanings, whenever they were inclined to exercise vengeance on those who were obnoxious to them. For these reasons, whoever valued the constitution of this country, must consider this bill as one of the severest and most dangerous to the rights and liberties of the people that had ever been introduced."

It was asserted, in reply, by lord Grenville, that it was owing to the firmness of parliament, that the seditious principles imported from France, and industriously propogated in England, had been successfully resisted, and the constitution protected against the malevolent designs of its domestic enemies. When the provisions of the intended bill came into examination, the necessity of adopting it would be rendered manifest; nor would it prevent the people from holding legal meetings. None but evil-disposed persons could suffer by the enacting of such a law.

In answer to these allegations, the duke of Bedford, after declaring his disapprobation of the bill, expressed in strong terms his persuasion, that while it still remained in their power to meet together, the people would every where assemble to testify their averseness to so glaring an infringement on their freedom, in so explicit and resolute a manner, that he could not think the house would consent to a bill so visibly repugnant to the feelings of Englishmen.

It was observed on this occasion, by lord Radnor, that if in the old statutes of the reign of Edward III.

relating to treason, certain offences had been omitted that ought to be considered and punished as such, they ought in such case to be declared and enacted to come within that meaning, in order to put men on their guard, and prevent them from committing what they would then know to be criminal. The question was then put, and carried for the printing of the bill.

On the tenth of November, the second reading of the bill was moved by lord Grenville, who observed, that the seditious speeches and treasonable libels, circulated in the meeting that had been held near Copenhagen-house, three days only before the opening of the pre sent session, had, in the opinion of all reflecting people, prompted that audacious spirit which insulted the person of the sovereign, and bid defiance to the legislature. The purpose of the hill, he said, was to pro tect the king from similar outrages, and to punish treasonous proceedings. No punishments would be enacted by the bill for crimes not already acknowledged deserving of them; its sole intent was to include treasonable publications and discourses among them, as being no less criminal in their consequences, It was high treason to devise the king's death; to conspire against his person and government, as specified in the bill, amounted therefore to a degree of criminality that evidently merited the severest chastisement, whether such conspiracy consisted in levying civil war against him, or in encouraging foreign enemies, by publications, writings, or speeches. The provisions of the bill were conformable to the prin ciples admitted in the acts of Elizabeth and Charles II. and were as

similar

similar as circumstances would permit. Difficulties having arisen in the construction of the laws relating to treason already in force, the intent of this bill was to explain and fix the meaning of those laws. It would not prohibit any act or meeting, allowed to be legal, but only provide a more suitable punishment according to the degree of criminality, than that ordained by the laws in force, as in various cases, notwithstanding criminality was evidently proved, an apposite punishment had not been enacted. On On these grounds he moved the second reading of the bill.

It was acknowledged, by the duke of Bedford, that every man ought, in duty, to abhor the treatment offered to the king, and earnestly desire the punishment of the guilty; but the bill before the house did not tend to procure more safety to the person of the sovereign, than the laws already existing. There was no sufficient proof that the outrages committed were connected with the meetings to which they were attributed; and though ministers declared themselves convinced of this connection, that was not sufficient to induce the house implicitly to coincide with their conviction. When the habeas-corpusact was suspended, a select committee was appointed to investigate the necessity of such a measure, and the proceedings on that occasion gave them at least an appearance of deliberation; but the present measure required certainly much more consideration. It was not the temporary suspension of an act. It was the enacting of a law entirely new to the spirit of the con titution, and which was undeniably an abridgment of the liberty of the

subject. Before so dangerous an innovation should be suffered to pass, parliament ought seriously to weight its certain consequences against the mere allegations of its necessity. The pretence of the bill was the security of the king's per son; but, were the laws in being any ways deficient in that respect? The duke then adverted to the times from which the ministry had borrowed their present proceedings, the reigns of Elizabeth and Charles II. but was it not an insult to the understandings of Englishmen, to speak of such times as models fit to be copied; but even the precedents alluded to in those times would not authorise ministers to follow them. Those enacted in queen Elizabeth's reign were directed against the bulls. issued by the Pope, and those that were adopted under Charles II. passed immediately after the restoration, when it was thought indispensible to protect him by the strongest fences against the fanatic rage of those who had opposed it.

The duke of Bedford was warmly seconded by the earl of Lauderdale, · who represented the actual sufferings of the people as the causes of the outrage offered to the king. It was not astonishing, he said, that, among a hundred thousand individuals casually assembled, forty or filty of them should be prompted, by the feelings of distress, to express them in that outrageous man. ner. Oppressive and cruel laws were contrary to the disposition of the people of this country, and tended to render them averse to the government that framed them. The s'atutes of Edward Ill. were made at a time when the power of the crown was very great; yet the de [C2].

finition

« ForrigeFortsett »