صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

moft vulgar professions, gave up a confiderable portion of their time and occupations in attending the numerous meetings that were called in every part of the kingdom, to the profeffed intent of counteracting this attempt of the ministry.

The whig club, comprifing not a few individuals of the first rank and property in the kingdom, led the way in this celebrated oppofition. It met on the eleventh of November, and was prefided by the duke of Bedford. All the members of both houses of parliament belonging to the club attended on this occafion. The speeches and opinions delivered were uncommonly spirited and refolute. After mature deliberation, it was unanimously refolved, that they would give every aid to the civil magiftrate in detecting, and bringing to punishment, the perfons concerned in the daring attack made upon the king, in his passage to parliament, on the first day of the feffion: that, lamenting, as they did, thi nefarious act, they faw, with the utmost concern, that it had been used as a pretext for introducing into parliament a bill, striking at the liberty of the press, and the freedom of public difcuffion, in fubstance and effect destroying the right of the fubject to petition the branches of the legiflature for redress of grievances, and utterly fubverfive of the genuine principles of the conftitution; and for propofing another meafure, calculated to produce fimilar effects, by means ftill more exceptionable. That it was therefore highly expedient, that meetings of the people, in their respective districts, should be immediately called, to confider this important subject, and for the purpose of petitioning parliament against the faid bill, or any other measure which

10

might tend to infringe the just rights of the people of Great Britain.

The corresponding fociety's numerous members, together with an immenfe multitude of their adherents and well-wishers, aflembled on the twelfth of November, in the fields near Copenhagen-houfe. Here they folemnly denied all intentions of raising commotions, and difproved, by the strongest arguments they could adduce, the charge brought against them by miniftry, of being concerned in the outrages committed against the king. They framed three petitions, one to the king, and the two others to the lords and commons, stating them to be the unanimous petitions of nearly four hundred thousand British fubjects, met together to communicate their fentiments, and express them freely, as authorised to do by the bill of rights, on the measures of miniftry, which tended to invade the liberties vested in them by the conftitution. They supplicated, therefore, the king to exert his royal authority, in the prefervation of his people's rights, directly threatened by the two bills brought forward by his ministers; and they requested the two houses to interfere in behalf of the public, againft the minifterial attempt to procure their paffing.

The livery of London, the electors of Westminster, and the freeholders of Middlesex, agreed to remonftrances and petitions of the like nature, and were followed by a number of counties, and almost every town of note in the kingdom. In the public meetings, held for those purposes, people were nearly unanimous in their oppofition to the bills: but they were fecretly counteracted by the agents of ministry, who circulated clandeftinely

counter

1

counter-addresses in their favour. It was strongly afferted, at the time, that these were figned by none but minifterial dependents, fuch as officers of the customs and excife, and military men. So great was the repugnance of the people at large afferted to have been, that the fignatures of youth at fchool was reforted to. But with all these exertions, the petitions, on the fide of the miniftry, did not exceed fixtyfour fubfcribed by about thirty thousand individuals of the above defcription, while the addresses against the bills, amounted to near one hundred, and the subscribers to upwards of one hundred and thirty thousand.

Among those who fignalized their adherence to miniftry, were the members of the association, formed, with the countenance and aid of government, by Mr. Reeves, at the close of 1792, and the commencement of 1793, against republicans and levellers. They ftood forward on this occafion, with extraordinary zeal, in fupport of the two bills, of which they expressed the highest approbation in the address which they prefented to the king.

But, notwithstanding the difproportion of numbers against them, ministry perfifted, with unremitting refolution, in carrying forward their defigns. However, oppofed by the majority of the nation, they were fecure of a fupport in parliament, that would enable them to compass the point proposed. The popular opinions were, in the mean time, represented by those who argued in defence of the bills, as the mere ebulitions of party zeal, and dictated to the people by the leaders of parliamentary oppofition, who hoped to excite fuch complaints and clamours against the conduct of government,

as might deter it from the prosecution of its plans. These, they afferted, were, in the opinion of the judicious and the more respectable part of the community, neceffary for the internal tranquillity of the kingdom, and could only be disapproved by those factious and difaffected people, who fought, for malicious purposes, to throw the country into confufion.

While the nation at large was thus agitated, its reprefentatives were taken up with no less violent debates on the petitions now prefented to them from every quarter. That from the correfponding fociety was laid before the house on the twenty-third of November, by Mr. Sturt, who warmly exculpated that fociety from the imputations of treason or fedition. In order to shew at the fame time, the malevolent intentions of miniftry, and its partizans, he produced a performance, attributed to Mr. Reeves, the framer and prefident of the affociations against republicans and levellers, wherein it was unequivocally maintained, "that the government of England was a monarchy; that the monarch was the ancient stock from which have sprung those goodly branches of the legislature, the lords and commons; that these, however, were ftill only branches, and that they might be lopped off, and the tree be a tree still, thorn indeed, of its honours, but not, like them, caft into the fire."

So flagrant a violation of the fundamental principles of the Englith conftitution, excited the indignation, not only of the oppofition, but of many of the members friendly to ministers. The public loudly proclaimed it, a stab aimed at the vitals of the conftitution, and loaded the author with the most opprobri

ous

ous epithets. So universal was the detestation of the principles contained in this performance, that it was judged requifite, in order to appease the public, formally to vote it a libel on the constitution, and to direct the attorney-general to profecute the author. But so weak and faint was the prosecution, in the opinion of the public, that they stigmatised the profecutors, as acting knowingly under the controul of directors, who certainly would not fuffer so valuable an inftrument of their designs, to fuffer an injury for having acquitted himself so much to their fatisfaction.

On the twenty-fifth of November, a motion was made, by Mr. Curwen, to poftpone, one week, the difcuffion of the two bills. He spoke, with marked vehemence, against the bill for preventing feditious meetings, as tending, in its infallible effects, to change the whole conftitution. It was only in popular meetings, he observed, that the real fentiments of the people could be manifested; and these sentiments, thus freely expressed, had hitherto, though affectedly flighted by ministers, proved an effectual restraint on their power, and stemmed that torrent of corruption with which they endeavoured to overwhelm all refistance to their measures. Were this strongeft, and almost only remaining, bulwark of the conftitution to be demolished, all oppofition must fall with it, both within, as well as without, the house; as the commons, when no longer supported, by the concurring voice of the people, would quickly experience a diminution of their own consequence, which, they must be conscious, rested entirely on the confeq uence of the people, Were these to be filenced, how could their re

presentatives, consistently, pretend to deliver the opinion of their constituents? The influence of the crown had, of late years, overweighed all the importance of the democratic part of the constitution, by depriving it of so alarming a proportion of its property, and annexing it to the aristocracy, through the creation of fuch a number of peers. If the remaining friends to the democracy valued its exiftence, and confidered it as the only folid foundation of liberty, a truth not to be denied, they would rally around it, without delay, and exert their whole ftrength to preserve it from the ruin with which it was now menaced, more obviously, and more dangeroufly, than ever.

In the course of the memorable speech, which he made on this day, Mr. Curwen took occafion to bring, to the recollection of the house, an expression that had fallen, two days before, from Mr. Windham, in a debate on the bill, for fecuring the king's person against popular infults. This gentleman, in answering a speech of Mr. Fox, had given him to understand, in explicit terms, that ministers were determined to exert a vigour beyond the law. So fingular an expression did not fail to strike the whole house with aftonishment. By the enemies to ministry, it was conftrued into an inadvertent avowal, that they were refolved to pay no regard to the laws in the execution of their projects, and would destroy such as stood in their way; and it was, in fact, blamed by both fides of the house, as equally imprudent, and intemperate.

Mr. Curwen's animadversions, on these words of Mr. Wyndham, were extremely spirited and fevere. He rebuked him, forcibly, for prefuming, 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 submit to become the patlive instruments of their violation. Mr. Wyndham replied only by a smile. Mr. Curwen's motion was, nevertheless, out voted by two hundred and fixty-nine against seventy.

On the twenty-seventh of November, the house 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 house. Even Mr. Sheridan declared, that he did not remain, for the end of propofing any alterations in the bill. To do justice to the public, it ought, he said, 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 assembly, that was, in their judgeınent, refolved to destroy the liberty of the nation, would make a greater impreffion upon the public, than if they were to continue fitting in the house, and oppofing the minifters, as usual, to no purpose. But many were of a different opinion, and thought, by their prefence and refiftance, notwithstanding that the bills would have past, they must have been divested of much of the feverity with which they were accompanied, and that it became them, at all events, to dispute every inch of the ground, of which, by their retreat, the ministry would now become undisturbed poffeffors.

The bill was, of course, carried through the house without oppofition, and without any other modifications than its fupporters thought necessary to render it lefs odious to the public. It was proposed, 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 should be adjudged death, without benefit of clergy. But an amendment was moved, making it only punishable as a mildemeanour. This was seconded 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 less glaring. ly, on difeutling that claufe which empowered the magiftrate present at any popular meeting to diffolve it immediately, thould he be of opinion, that any fubject brought forward were unlawful, or of a fedi. tious tendency. The claufe was confirmed, and the magiftrate also authorized to seize and commit the perfon whom he judged guilty of fuch offence.

The last clause respected the duration of the bill. The folicitorgeneral, confiftently with the fevere system he had embraced, moved that it should last 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 againft only two.

The

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

The bill for the security of the fovereign, was, on the thirtieth of November, taken into confideration by a committee of the whole house of commons, when Mr. Erskine opposed it by a variety of reasonings. He observed, that the bill diminished the liberty of the subject, without adding to the fafety 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 fewest restraints, and that the worst was that which increafedpenalties without undifputed evidence of their propriety. Another maxim, of equal force, was to preferve ancient laws in their primitive fimplicity, till experience had proved them inadequate to their intended purposes. The statute of Edward III. concerning treason, had not been proved, but merely aflerted, 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-justice Hale, that important statute had been enacted, as a remedy against former oppreffion, and to fecure the subject against illegal prosecution. To compass, or even to imagine, the death of the king, was, by that sta. tute, declared high treason: 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 statute, made equally criminal, but it did not make the compaffing to levy war against him high treason, because the legiflators of that day did not confider a confpiracy to levy such

a war as more than a mifdemeanour, which, like many others, might not deserve material notice, while no clear and overt act could be adduced to prove it, and without which act no treasonable intentions could lawfully be presumed. 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 treason. The bill in contemplation would, he explicitly affirmed, extend the crime of high treason to fuch a multitude of trivial cafes, that every petty mifdemeanour 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 opposed in the fame manner, and maintained with the fame reasonings as antecedently, but it pafled, with all its clauses, after some ineffectual objections to that in particular, which enacted its duration till the demite of the king.

The bill to prevent seditious 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 reasons in its favour. He declared it necessary for the prefervation of the lives and property of individuals, and for the tecurity 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, strenuoufly opposed it. They particularly reprobated that clause which autho

« السابقةمتابعة »