in Glasgow, which had communications | Believing, therefore, that the conspiracy with societies in this country. That con- was widely extended in Scotland, and not spiracy was held together by means of a confined to Glasgow, he never delivered secret oath which he would read to the a more conscientious opinion than that House:the passing of the present bill was necessary, to prevent the effusion of the blood of the citizens of this country. The whole mass of the population was so contaminated, that if a riot were to commence, it would be impossible to foresee what might be its termination. He deeply lamented the great misfortune which called for such a measure; but in the best days of our constitution it had been resorted to, for the purpose of protecting that freedom we now enjoyed. No man venerated the principles of the revolution of 1688 more than he did, and it was because he did so venerate them, that he implored the House to suspend for a time that great bulwark of our constitution [Hear, bear!]. "In the awful presence of God, I, A. B. do voluntarily swear, that I will persevere in my endeavours to form a brotherhood of affection amongst Britons of every description, who are considered worthy of confidence; and that I will persevere in my endeavours to obtain for all the people of Great Britain and Ireland, not disqualified by crimes or insanity, the elective franchise at the age of 21, with free and equal representation and annual parliaments; and that I will support the same to the utmost of my power, either by moral or physical strength as the case may require: and I do further swear, that neither hopes, fears, rewards, or punishments, shall induce me to inform or give evidence against any member or members collectively or individually, for any act or expression done or made in or out of this or similar societies, under the punishment of death, to be inflicted on me by any member or members of such society. So help me God and keep me steadfast." [Hear! hear! from all sides of the House.] a Lord Milton said, he felt no regret at charge made against him that he had been duped by the papers laid before the committee of secrecy. He still retained his opinion as to the nefariousness of certain designing persons in the country, nor did he want the assertion of the learned lord to convince him of the dangerous nature of the proceedings of the disaffected. That oath was administered to many He was, indeed, considerably surprised at hundred individuals in the city of Glasgow the course taken by that learned lord, for and its neighbourhood. Notwithstanding, if he recollected right, the members of the however, the communication of that intel- committee of secrecy had, at the express ligence, it was not in a form which autho- request of that learned person, agreed to rized him, at that time, to give directions expunge from their report the oath which for arresting the parties. To show their he had now divulged. This was extraormalignant intentions, he would mention the dinary, and required explanation. He did following fact. Some persons to whom not know, however, but circumstances the oath was about to be administered, might since have arisen to render its publifelt scrupulous upon that part which relat-cation less likely to prove detrimental to ed to the using of physical strength, and to that which declared the penalty of death if any thing was divulged. A meeting was immediately called, and a motion made to leave out those words; but it was rejected unanimously, and the original oath adhered to. The result, however, had been, that a variety of persons were now apprehended; but he should be imposing on the House, if he were to state, that because those individuals were taken, onetenth of the persons were apprehended who were implicated. He pledged his character as a public officer, that it was known to government when those individuals were taken, that there were others moving in a very different sphere of life connected with the conspiracy, some of whom he trusted would yet be apprehended. the public service [Hear, hear! from ministers]. Still it looked like a coup de main, and as if the oath had been kept out of view to be brought forward on the present occasion [No, no! from ministers]. He had stated before, that he had no doubt of the nefarious objects of many designing men throughout the country; but he denied that the intentions of such persons, however wicked, were a sufficient ground for removing the great bulwark of our liberties. It was not sufficient to say, that bad men had, in their vain imagina. tions, contemplated the overthrow of the government; for when was the time that some persons did not exist whose desperate folly or wickedness would lead them to subvert all established order? It ought to be made out, that the danger likely to portance of that conspiracy and the designs of the present plotters against the state? At that time the duke of Norfolk, the earl of Orrery, and the lord North and Grey, were among the conspirators, and the well-known duke of Ormond was himself to head an army of foreign invaders? Such was the motive, and no less a motive was sufficient to induce sir Robert Walpole to suspend the constitution; and for this reason, as well as for many others, none could doubt that sir Robert Walpole was a great man. In the year 1744, there was another suspension of the Habeas Corpus act; on which occasion lord Chatham and lord Lyttleton (then Mr. Pitt and Mr. Lyttleton), and another person, whose name it was not necessary for him to mention, had strenuously opposed it. Yet the suspension was then only for three months; and, indeed, so great had the jealousy always been of preserving this great prop of our liberties, that even in that dangerous year, after the Revolution, parliament would not suffer it to be suspended for more than three months, and that by successive renewals of a month each time. All these circumstances made a strong impression on his mind, that our ancestors set a greater value on this shield of the constitution than their careless and forgetful descendants. He said forgetful, because they appeared from their indif ference to have forgot how, and at what cost, that constitutional bulwark had been obtained. It was a curious circumstance, that the want of such a bulwark had been one of the great causes of the French revolution. The people of France had been anxious to acquire such a safeguard for their liberties, and if the monarch had not by mistaken men been induced to refuse such a concession, perhaps that revolution would never have happened. But, however that might be, he would ask, whether any man in his senses could think of com. accrue to the constitution was such as could not be resisted by any other means than by the suspension of that very constitution. This suspension act was now, for the first time, with one single exception, attempted to be passed in a period of profound peace; and the exception was itself a precedent that spoke strongly against the present measure; for it was occasioned by bishop Atterbury's plot-a plot in which a great part of the leading gentry and many of the nobility were in different degrees involved [Hear, hear! from some noble lord whom we could not see under the gallery]. The noble lord under the gallery, did not seem to relish the subject; but it was nevertheless quite certain that the nobility and gentry of that day were, to a great extent, adverse to the reigning family. And, as to the quality of the plot itself, he would read a passage from the speech of George 1st, on opening the ses sion of 1722, which would show at least on what ground the ministers of that day asked for the suspension of the great characteristic of the constitution. The speech says, that "the conspirators have by their emissaries, made the strongest instances for assistance from foreign powers, but were disappointed in their expectations. However confiding in their numbers, and not discouraged by their former ill success, they resolved once more, upon their own strength, to attempt the subversion of my government. To this end, they provided considerable sums of mo ney, engaged great numbers of officers from abroad, secured large quantities of arms and ammunition, and thought themselves in such readiness, that had not the conspiracy been timely discovered, we should, without doubt, before now have seen the whole nation, and particularly the city of London, involved in blood and confusion." [Cries of Hear!]. How different was this state of things from the present, when we were all so alarmed at the miser-paring the present state of England with able plots of these wretched Spenceans. Could any man doubt that the ministers of those days would not have acted like the ministers of the present time? In a time of real and imminent danger, they were so far from showing an eagerness to suspend the Habeas Corpus act, and so little did they distrust the loyalty of the majority of the people, that they did not come to parliament for any extraordinary powers till near six months after the discovery of the conspiracy. Could any man be blind to the immense difference between the im its state in 1795? At that time there was an active correspondence with clubs in this country, and direct incitements were held out from foreigners, that recourse should be had to physical force. Oaths were framed, and passed current, quite as terrible as that quoted by the learned lord, and depots of arms were proved to exist in different places. Under such circumstances it was thought proper to sus pend the Habeas Corpus act, and yet that suspension was suffered to expire; nor was it renewed even on the occasion of the dangerous mutiny in 1796. He could not but think that too much importance was attached to the wild notions of these visionaries, of whom so much had been said. History would show, that neither in this or other countries was the Spencean plan without a parallel. Doctrines as absurd, and equally assuming religion as their basis, had been frequently propagated. Germany had its Anabaptists-men who contemplated schemes of visionary reform with a bible in one hand, and a battle-axe in the other; and yet what became of them? They were let alone, and their opinions died away of themselves. Our own country presented instances of enthusiasts not dissimilar. There was the insurrection of Wat Tyler, which though it had not religion for its basis, yet had its origin in some scheme of general reform, of a nature not very different from that of modern times. The noble lord concluded by saying, that he should give his vote against the bill; for to do otherwise would, he thought, be voting against his country. "I feel," said the noble lord, " great pain in giving this vote, though I cannot express the cause of it" [Hear, hear!]. The noble lord sat down apparently much affected. He was supposed in the last sentence to allude to a difference of opinion between himself and his father earl Fitzwilliam. The Lord Advocate of Scotland explained. He said it was only that morning that his majesty's government had thought it advisable to publish the oath which he had read to the House. Mr. Wynn expressed his regret that parliament had not been earlier assembled to meet the difficulties with which ministers were undoubtedly surrounded. That the spirit of turbulence had not subsided was evident from daily experience; and only that morning he had seen posted a handbill with the inflammatory title of "The Triumph of Justice over Unjust Judges." He was convinced that, had government been more alert, the police might have been placed upon such a footing as to render the aid of the military necessary only in extreme cases; but no investigation of the subject had been instituted, and it might become the duty of parliament to interpose; indeed, upon a late occasion it had been his wish that the House should have taken the punishment of certain civil officers who had been grossly negligent of their duty into its own hands. He complained that efforts had been equally wanting to embody the yeomanry in the disturbed districts. Ministers might say, that some time since such a remedy would not have been proportioned to the disease; but their excuse was like that of the man who, after his house was consumed, said that he had not sent for the engines because the fire might have been extinguished at first by a wash-hand-basin of water. The real question was the degree of danger to which we were exposed. Was the danger sufficient to justify the measure? In his opinion it was; and as long as danger existed, the nature of it, whether external or internal, was of no consequence. It appeared, from undoubted evidence that the most treasonble correspondence had been carried on by means of clubs and delegates; and a connexion was thus kept up between them as the deliberative, and the people at large as the executive body. Surely this was sufficient to induce the House to arm ministers with additional power; and to those who required evidence, he should reply, that if it were disclosed all clue to detection would be destroyed. He illustrated this observation by reference to the case of Despard. Some hon. members had referred to periods of our history, when no suspension of the Habeas Corpus act was thought necessary; but at those times no such general disaffection and discontent existed as at the present moment. If it was allowed to continue unchecked, the consequences might be dreadful; the lawless scenes of 1780 might be restored; and, when once the shedding of human blood had commenced, the popular fury was uncontrollable. The noble lord who spoke last had adverted to the mutiny at the Nore as a case in point, forgetting that the mutineers had not only no correspondence at home, but none abroad; and that a cordon of troops had been stationed on the banks of the river to intercept any communication, should it be attempted. He had referred also to the Anabaptists of Germany, whose doctrines, he said, had peaceably expired, forgetting that those doctrines had existed as long as the individuals who entertained them, upon whom the most grievous tortures and the most cruel deaths had been inflicted. The instance of Wat Tyler was equally unfortunate; for the rebellion had not been terminated without the greatest personal danger to the sovereign, nor until 30,000 had taken up arms against him. Those who ridiculed the recent disturbances and the premeditated attack upon the Tower, would do well to recollect that not many years had passed since a stronger fortress in another country had yielded to the onset of an infuriated rabble. The suspension was necessary to stop the progress of the evil; and he believed that no man would wish to delay until it was necessary to meet the organized rebels in the field of battle. In the present times many dangers threatened that had not existed at any former period; and he conscientiously gave his support to the bill, because he felt convinced that it might be the means of preventing an actual rebellion. could not see where prosecutions were to end. Where they were to end, he (sir S. R.) did not pretend to decide; but it was not very difficult to determine where they ought to have begun. The libels might be numerous, but if they were, nothing had been publicly known of them till lately; and the more numerous the more urgent was the necessity that some of the authors should be severely pu. nished, as a terror and an example to the rest. He entreated the House to recur once more to the consideration of all that had occurred, previous to the suspension of the Habeas Corpus act in 1794. Very different then had been the conduct of government, for that measure had not been suggested to the House until after prosecutions had been instituted for sedition at evey quarter sessions in all cor Sir Samuel Romilly would not long occupy the attention of the House, but he could not prevail upon himself to give a silent vote upon the most im-ners of the kingdom At that period, at portant question that had been discussed least parliament had not been required to since he had had a seat in parliament. All suspend the rights of the subjects of the parties were agreed upon the inestima- crown until recourse had been had to the ble value of that part of the constitu- existing laws. He much doubted, indeed, tion which it was proposed for a time to if those laws had not been too severely annul: and there were few that denied enforced, some notorious criminals ought to that at present great evils existed, and have been selected, instead of the indiscri that those evils required a speedy remedy. minate and sweeping punishments awarded The question was therefore reduced to a against every petty offender. He was survery narrow compass, viz. Was this a prised to observe the smile of contempt on case in which it was necessary to have the face of the hon. and learned gentleman recourse to such a remedy, and was the intended as it was to deride the censure of remedy adapted to the nature of the evils? conduct directly opposite to that which he The first point must depend upon a pre- had thought fit to pursue. The learned liminary question, whether other means lord advocate of Scotland, to the surprise had been duly resorted to, and whether and dismay of his friends, had produced those means had failed of success? The an oath taken at Glasgow by some deluded noble lord had repeatedly declared, that persons, with the existence of which oath the utmost vigilance of ministers had been it appeared that ministers had been some exerted; but it was now quite clear, from time acquainted. Were they not aware subsequent intelligence, that that utmost vi- that the most severe punishment known gilance, in truth amounted to nothing. It to the law might be inflicted upon indiviwas admitted by the noble lord, that these duals subscribing that oath? Did they traitorous designs had been proceeding not know that it was felony without benefor a considerable time befere the aid of fit of clergy, unless the person taking the parliament was required; yet, although oath, within 14 days afterwards abandoned ministers had been fully apprized of the his associates, and betrayed their purattempts upon the loyalty, the morals, poses? As to the question, whether this and the religion of the people; though suspension were adapted to the existing they had been in possession of the libel- evils, the only individual who had conlous and blasphemous publications so in- tended that it was so, was the hon. dustriously circulated among the lower member who spoke last: he contended orders; yet up to the present moment, that, as sufficient evidence could not be not a single prosecution had been insti- procured to convict, it was therefore protuted against the authors. The excuse per to give ministers unlimited power to of the attorney-general for this procrasti-imprison. As the delinquent could not be nation was most extraordinary and curious in truth, he said, the libels laid before him were so numerous, that he : brought to trial, he was to be punished without it. On the contrary, he (sir S. R.) contended, that this measure was in no way calculated to meet the evil. Government could fix upon no individual of leading influence or talent, whose arrest would check the progress of disaffection, and defeat the operations of the minor agents: all were alike insignificant, and the extent to which the infection had spread, and was spreading, was the real evil. Would the imprisonment of two or three poor wretches prevent the diffusion of the poison through all the intricate ramifications, by which it was conveyed to the public mind? If indeed they were publicly tried, regularly convicted, and exemplarily punished, something would be gained-others would be deterred, for the fact would be known; but the mere unheard of confinement of two or three mechanics would effect nothing in stopping the active mischief of particular individuals. In 1794 the state of things was widely different in another respect; then no peti tions were presented humbly praying that parliament would reform itself; but a convention existed to serve as a substitute for parliament. In 1799 it was again suspended, but the country was then threatened with invasion; the disaffected then refused to acknowledge any parliament at all, and in its place substituted the National Assembly of France, which boasted of its secret and active correspondence with this country. The object then was not to reform, but to supersede parliament. Much as he censured the adoption of this measure now, he was not one of those who thought that the Habeas Corpus act ought never to be suspended; under some circumstances, the suspension might be most wise and necessary, and those circumstances had existed when, on former occasions, persons of great consequence and influence were in league with an enemy, and when their arrest paralyzed the traitorous designs of all their dependants. But was such the case at present? Where could ministers find one man of influence or consequence among the disaffected of our day? Where could they find even a man of the middle rank of life, among the vulgar, ignorant, and deluded wretches against whom ministers were about to launch their vengeance? How then could this suspension be useful, unless indeed this government followed the example of a state it had recently supported, against the avowed wish of the people, in which not merely obnoxious individuals, but the inhabitants of whole villages and towns, had been thrown into dungeons. (VOL. XXXV.) Was not this, he confidently demanded, a most powerful reason for refusing what was now required? Would the House intrust ministers with a power by which persons of low rank and obscure occupations, in shoals, would be placed at the mercy of every truckling informer? The noble lord had adverted on a former night to the names of individuals in higher stations, who had been placed by these infatuated reformers upon what they termed the committee of safety or conservative body; but because misguided and illiterate men had had the audacity, without the slightest authority, to place upon this list persons of the most undoubted loyalty and of elevated rank, did it afford such a presumption of guilt as to justify the bold declaration of the noble lord, that in the eyes of God and man they were answerable for all the consequences of rebellion ? Undoubtedly, the names of those most respectable persons were found there, on account of the sentiments they were known to entertain; and the noble lord, and a right hon. gentleman after him, had explained the declaration as a caution to certain individuals against supporting popular doctrines; which was as much as to to say, that no man was to argue in favour of parliamentary reform, the liberty of the press, or any other topic displeasing to the other side of the House, unless he wished to fall under the dreadful denunciation of the noble lord. He [sir S. R.] was not fond of making personal allusions, and he was the more unwilling now, because the noble lord had this night shown a remarkable soreness upon some points; but he could not help just observing, that there was a period, even of the noble lord's life, when he might have had the misfortune to fall under his own denunciations, and to have been included in a list of a committee of safety. The liberality of the noble lord's opinions at one time, and the pledges of championship in the cause of parliamentary reform, given by him at an early period of his political life, before he had entered into office, or had been planted in any of the hot-beds or nurseries for young statesmen, might have rendered even him responsible in the eyes of God and man for the consequences of disaffection and rebellion. But the noble lord had got a seat in the cabinet; which put him out of the way of such perils. Reverting more immediately to the question he called upon the House not to withdraw a protection from the lower classes, to (3 B) |