country, which have contributed in any degree to accelerate or retard the progrefs of freedom. Even if they have had no influence of this kind, it would be of importance to afcertain. their inefficacy in this refpect. The focieties, which go under the name of "Reeves's Affociations," might on this occafion be mentioned, as, by promoting public difcuffion, they unwittingly, but materially, promote the cause of freedom.

Affociations for the purpofe of amending the present inadequate fyftem of reprefentation, have long ago been recommended by Mr. Burgh, * (an able writer, endeared to me, as the inftructor of my youth) and commenced and fupported with the most deliberate and fyftematic fpirit by the Chiefs † of

that

*Political Difquifitions, V. 3. P. 428 to 434.

Extract from the Courier of July 12, 1794.-"After fo much dif pute about the letters of the Secretary of the Friends of the People; after the anxiety of the Society, and the laudable eagerness of the Members of that Society to prove the Committee of Secrecy of the Houfe of Commons wrong, it is natural to conclude that thofe letters contain fomething of an inflammatory, feditious, or, perhaps, traitorous tendency. It has already been obferved, that no Member of the Friends of the People has in the leaft difapproved of their contents; and as for the danger with which the Secret Committee may infinuate them to be fraught, What is it? It is only, at most, an admiffion that a Convention of Delegates from the different Societies inftituted for the purpose of obtaining a Parliamentary Reform, may be at fome period a proper measure. Such a Convention, when connected with, and fupported by, Correfponding Societies all over the kingdom, is, however, faid to be dangerous and unlawful. If it is fo, it must be proper to know who first fet this dangerous unlawful example. Leaving the notorious conduct of Mr. Pitt and the Duke of Richmond out of the question, I will fhew, that the very men who now condemn these measures, were the original promoters of them, and that while Mr. Pitt and the Duke of Richmond have been, by some unaccountable overfight, made the scape-goats on this subject, the real blame, if there is any blame belonging to it, attaches, where it seems to be thought leat merited, to Mr. Burke, Mr. Windham, the Duke of Portland, Earl Spencer, and the other Whig Alarmists, who now fo zealously fupport Government.

"In the year 1780, Affociations were formed in most of the counties, cities, and towns throughout England, for the purpefe of petitioning the House of

Commons

that party, who are now attempting to ftigmatize focieties of this defcription by charges of fedition, and of treasonable practices.

The

Commons to reform the expenditure of public money, and to reform Parliament. Thefe Affociations appointed Committees of Correfpondence, (i. e. Correfponding Societies), fome of which confifted of more than one hundred members; and they alfo voted for a National Affociation of Deputies, (i. e. a National Convention.) In illuflration of the spirit and object of these meetings, I fhall quote the fpeech of Mr. Baker at that of Middlesex, 7th January, 1780, who now votes for the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, and is a bitter enemy to Conventions and Corresponding Societies. “He faid, that to give a validity and fuccefs to this Petition, and that it might not be treated with infolent neglect, it was judged neceffary to come to fome further Refolutions, fimilar to those agreed to by the county of York. He faid, the reason why the former Petitions of Middlefex and other counties had failed of fuccefs, was, that they had not followed them up, and given them fupport, either by Affociations or Refolutions of fome ftrong nature." He therefore moved" for a National Affociation of Delegates, and a Committee of Correfpondence, (i. e. a National Convention and a Correfponding Society,") which motions were unanimously agreed to. (See Remembrancer, vol. ix. p. 108.

"Most of the other counties and towns came to refolutions fubftantially the fame. The following is a copy of that paffed in Weminter Hall:

"Resolved nemine contradicente, That this meeting do approve of a National Affociation, on legal and conftitutional grounds, to promote a reform in the expenditure of public money, to reduce all exorbitant emoluments, to refcind and abolith all finecure places and unmerited penfions, and to restore and fecure to the people the freedom and independence of Parliament, as indifpenfibly neceflary to the State." A Committee of one hundred and three was then appointed, among whom were the following Gentlemen, who accepted the office- that is, they became Members of the Westminster Correfponding Society, instituted for the purpose of procuring a Reform of Parliament, &c. by means of a National Convention, viz. Duke of Portland, Lord Temple, Lord Egremont, Lord Cholmondeley, prefent Lord Sydney, Mr. Burke, Lord Bulkeley, Mr. Baker, Mr. Hume, Mr. Almon, Mr. Adair, Mr. Thomas Grenville, &c.

"Mr. Burke was alfo a member of the Correfponding Society in Buckingbamfhire, and the Duke of Portland was the most busy in promoting them all over the kingdom. Befides being a member of more than a dozen of thefe

bodies,

The London Conftitutional Society, having the fame object, was, for a long time, connected with those county,

and

bodies, he was the Chairman of the Correfponding Society of the county of Nottingham.

"These proceedings had not merely a Reform of Parliament for their object. They were taken with a view to reform all other branches of the State; and they were carried on in a tone far exceeding in boldness any thing of the prefent day. The language then not only was, that Reform could never be obtained but by the efforts of the people themselves, but most of the Petitions to Parliament fet forth, that it would be derogatory from the honour and integrity of the Houfe of Commons, to grant the fupplies till the grievances were redreffed! The county of Middlesex unanimously refolved to inftruct their Representatives to take the best measures for impeaching and bringing to justice the King's Ministers; and many other counties refolved, not that it was their opinion that annual Parliaments, &c. would be good things, but they refolved that Parliaments fhall be annual. "The Rights of the People"" the Majefty of the People," were then the fafhionable expreffions, and feveral Gentlemen went fo far as to say, that Ireland had only obtained her independence by the force of 60,000 bayonets, and that if Parliament did not comply with their Petitions, it would be neceffary to take the fame means to enforce them.

"Such was the temper of these Meetings, which not only formed Correfponding Societies, but fent Delegates to a National Convention. Of that Convention which met both in March, 1780, and March, 1781, and which paffed numberlefs Refolutions in favour of Parliamentary Reform, I find by Mr. Wyvill's laft publication, that the following Gentlemen, among others, were Members: Mr. Windham, Lord Althorpe, now Earl Spencer, Mr. Baker, Mr. R. M. T. Chifwell, Mr. Thomas Grenville, Sir George Yonge, &c. &c."

"The following extract from a Protest entered by the Duke of Dorfet, Lords Afhburnham, Hampden, &c. against the proceedings of the county of Surry, will fhew that the very fame objections were then made to those measures by the friends of Government, which are now brought forward againit them by the very Alarmists who originally gave them birth.

"And we do most particularly protest against the Refolutions of appointing a Committee of Correfpondence, with the declared purpose of forming General Affociations, apparently tending to over-rule the Legislature, to

introduce

and diftrict affociations, * which met for the purpose of exciting the people to require a parliamentary reform. Nor was any blame imputed, or any punishment threatened, to the individuals who compofed these societies, at a period when their prefent perfecutors were members of them. How far the principal alarmifts in the minifterial aristocracy of the prefent day were connected with these meetings, and their proceedings, that confiftent, perfevering, and steady friend of reform, the Rev. Mr. Wyvill,+ has very properly disclosed to the public; and it would be defirable, that his account should be compleated from the earlier records of the Conftitutional Society of London. This would contribute much to fhew the tergiverfation of pretended patriots, and disclose the political character and conduct of that set of men, whofe trade it is to cajole the people, till they can spurn them.

The addreffes to and from the focieties of France, and the Revolution Society of London, the members of the last mentioned fociety have published at length, much to their honour, and much, as I think, to the credit of the perfons who appear actuated by fuch fentiments of general philanthropy and mutual good will.

introduce measures inconfi'ent with, and fubverfive of our prefent excellent Conftitution, and leading to confufion and anarchy."

"After fuch authorities as thefe, it would furely have been very prefumptuous in the Secretary of the Friends of the People to have condemned a Convention of Delegates either as illegal, or as improper at any time; and it was perhaps fetting himself too boldly forward against the example of Earl Spencer, and Mr. Windham, even to say that fuch a measure would be rafh at prefent; for when they were Members of a Convention, the country was in much more diftrefs, the people were much more difcontented, and confequently the danger was greater than at present.

"July 5, 1794.

A FRIEND OF THE PEOPLE."

* Such as the Yorkshire Affociation, the Quintuple Alliance, &c.

Political Papers, chiefly respecting the Reformation of the Parliament of Great-Britain, three Vols. Octavo, of which are already published.

The

The moft detailed, however, though not a compleat account, of the proceedings of the numerous patriotic societies, eftablished and continued within these two or three years, the public owe to the labours of the Committee of Secrecy of the Houfe of Commons, appointed in the prefent year, 1794, to examine and report upon the contents of the papers forcibly taken from the Secretaries, and others, belonging to thofe focieties. In thefe reports, fome papers are evidently omitted which the public would probably have been glad to have feen. But, in return, many of the extracts published by the Committee are clearly fuch as the forenefs and irritability of government, would not have permitted any other fet of men to have fent out into the world. The neceffary attention to common prudence would have forbidden it.

I do not know which, among the bold and the very important truths contained in those reports, are meant to be regarded as treasonable: for it is evident, that there can be no fuch crime as treason, until some overt act expreffive of the treafon, fhall make it manifeft. The effence of libel confifts in publication; and whether feditious and inflammatory fentiments be difperfed among the people, by A. or by E. feems immaterial; the crime, is, the difperfion of them among the people. How far the Gentlemen who have published thefe reports have played into the hands of their opponents, and purfued the line of conduct, which the prefumed delinquents would moft gladly have followed had they daredhow far they have been guilty of the very act they complain of, in the complaint itfelf, is not for me to determine. But furely it may be afked, if the fentiments they reprobate are improper to be published, why publish them? And if they are not improper to be published, why complain of them? At all events, however, we now know, and from the highest authority, what are the doctrines obnoxious to government; and the people are thus put into poffeffion of facts and fentiments, of which they muft form, for the prefent, their own opinion; while the future Hiftorian will rejoice at a