as that submitted to the house was, if not nugatory, at least unnecessary. He desired to know where was the necessity of oppressing a willing people? By the declarations of the right hon. gentleman himself, unanimity prevailed; one sentiment, one spirit, one soul seemed to actuate the people, and he believed it. Then where exists the necessity of imposing upon them a law, which, if not oppressive, must be useless and unnecessary? For his part, as he could observe no proofs of its necessity, as he could find no reason for its utility, until he saw either, or both, it should have, in every stage, his negative.

Mr. Pitt having replied,

Mr. Sheridan said, he wished to act on principle, and not on confidence; the minister said he knew the existence of a conspiracy, and admitted that he (Mr. Sheridan) did not know it; how then could he vote for this measure otherwise than upon confidence? He was told, indeed, that the French themselves had published their intention of invading this country, and that they trusted to the aid of traitors here; he did not think that much credit was due to that assertion; for the French themselves had stated that they would be joined in this country by all the friends to parliamentary reform. Taking that as a specimen, either of their judgment or veracity, there did not seem to him to be much reliance due to either. Indeed, he thought the chancellor of the exchequer desired too much, in expecting him to have no will of his own, after he had assented to the motion for the address this day. He was most clearly of opinion that this country ought to be well prepared to meet the enemy-it ought also to convince the enemy it is prepared. That could be done only by raising the spirit of the British people, to show their dignity. In his opinion, to deprive them of so material a bulwark as the habeas corpus act, was not the way to do either; for such a measure would only spread discontent among themselves, damp their spirits, and lessen their dignity in the view of foreign nations.

The question was put that the bill be read a first time—ayes 183; noes 5.

MAY 5.

SOUTHWARK ASSOCIATION.

Mr. Tierney moved, "That this house will, upon this day sen'night, resolve itself into a committee of the whole house, to take into consideration the manner in which the Act to enable his Majesty more effectually to provide for the defence and security of the realm during the present war, and for indemnifying persons who may suffer in their property by such measures as may be necessary for that purpose,' has been carried into effect in the county of Surrey.”

Mr. Dundas spoke in opposition to the motion.

MR. SHERIDAN said, it had a little excited his surprise to hear the right hon. gentleman acknowledge the importance of the present question, and yet treat it as if it was of no importance at all. In my mind (said Mr. Sheridan), in point of real importance, as it connects itself with the best interests of the country, in a crisis avowedly of real danger, than the present, there could not have been brought forward a question more entitled to the candid, full, and deliberate consideration of this house. Yet so satisfied am I with the statements made by my hon. friend, and so ably has he supported those statements by his arguments-arguments which have scarce been combated, but certainly not refuted, that I should not have troubled the house at all, but from one observation made by the right hon. gentleman in the course of his speech. Sir, the right hon. gentleman has this evening told us, nay, he has asserted it broadly as a proposition which, indeed, he has offered to maintain, that there are in this country great numbers of seditious persons, who have formed themselves into societies under the specious title of reformers, but whose real object is to overturn the constitution by assisting the French, should they ever land in this country. This, sir, is, in truth, a very broad proposition; and, without intending anything ludicrous, I must confess its capacity was not a little enlarged by the tone and gesture in which it was delivered. But the right hon. gentleman cannot wonder if I deny assertions so generally made, and propositions so wide and unlimited in their scope. I am now told there are everywhere insidious lurking persons, cherish sentiments hostile to the government. This is an accusation by no means new. It is, however, much too loose and vague to be regarded with complacency. I will admit that there may be in this country, as there ever will be in every country, a few, who, urged by I know not what spirit, a love of change-a pas

sion probably once cherished by the right hon. gentleman himself-or from worse motives, desire the overthrow of the government. But, while I am far from doubting that there may be bad men, I hope and believe they are few. It is with them, perhaps, as with the grasshopper-they will make a noise, but have too much timidity ever to be seen. Only alarmists could apprehend danger from such men. But we have often before now heard it stated in language not less confident, that in every corner of the kingdom sedition and treason in some degree exist. This, sir, is a little unaccountable. If his Majesty's ministers have not been all along deceiving us, it is not easy to imagine how, in this crisis of their mighty power, a few obscure individuals could have become so formidable. Really there is, in these matters, something of the mysterious. A short time back, so much of the constitution was taken away to defend the rest; and, for this proceeding, the reasons stated by ministers were, chiefly, that the societies were every day growing dangerous-that principles hostile to good order and morality were hourly gaining strength, and rapidly gaining on the individual mind. Strong measures were accordingly adopted; and, until lately, we have been uniformly told, that the memorable treason and sedition bills had succeeded in effectually suppressing whatever of either existed in the country. But this night we are told, that not only has the distemper re-appeared, but treason and sedition are denounced to you; and the right hon. gentleman has declared that they exist in a degree to damp the spirit and repress the ardour of the country.

Here Mr. Dundas said, he must have been much misunderstood. What he said was, that in consequence of many improper persons having made offers to serve and the appearance of a seditious faction, the spirits of the people, and of the cssociations would be damped, if the lords lieutenants of counties, or if his Majesty's ministers, accepted of such offers of service.

Mr. Sheridan then said, we have now had the right hon. gentleman's explanation; and, I must say, that if the people, if the martial spirit of the associations, shall be damped by so small a number as the troop of seditionists are said to consist of, the country is indeed in danger, and our situation is bad beyond example. There is that, however, in the declared zeal and patriotism of the great body of the people, which must quiet every rational mind, and make the general scrutiny depend, as it ought, on the courage, the perseverance, the resources, and the unen

cumbered strength of the country. Thus far I have endeavoured to obviate the effect of that discouraging propositionthat there exist at this moment vast and formidable bodies of men hostile to government, and united to accelerate its fall. But there is one expression which it is impossible I should be able to contemplate without anxiety, or bring forward to the recollection of the hon. gentleman without regret. The right hon. secretary has told us, that he regrets the circumstances which have obliged the officers of the crown to put off the state trials; and do but attend to the very mischievous reason he has assigned for his regret that he could not lay before this house the proofs of the guilt of particular bodies, and of the existence of multiplied conspiracies. Sir, I am not one who has ever been unwilling to pay the tribute of applause justly due to an English jury; but, if ever anything could tend to influence a jury, it must be such an assertion as that of the right hon. gentleman. In the critical and awful situation of the persons in confinement at Maidstone, nothing can be more unkind, to say the least, than the using expressions towards them which may have a tendency to impress individual minds with an unfavourable opinion of their conduct. That principle of the law of England which holds a man to be innocent until he is found guilty by a jury of his peers, to my mind, conveys as sound and wise a maxim as ever was inculcated. Sir, it requires of us cautiously to avoid all occasions of expressing hastily, or in warmth, even doubts of the innocence of persons who may unfortunately stand accused of enormous crimes. If the right hon. gentleman had but given that principle of our law its full weight in his deliberations, if he had regarded anything that he owes to justice, he would not have made such a speech. But, sir, I can remember a period in our annals, characterised by circumstances not a little similar, and conduct very much like that of the present evening. The memorable epoch of the state trials is fresh in the recollection of gentlemen. To this I particularly allude. At that period, eventful enough, God knows, we were assured by the right hon. gentleman, and his friends near him, that the whole country was menaced, and in danger of being overrun by French principles, and the emissaries of the corresponding societies. I remember the proceedings in parliament in the committees that were held on this occasion. Then, sir, there were tremendous reports, whispers of dark and

insidious conspiracies, of treason, and every other monstrous crime that could interest or disquiet the mind. We were then presented with profiles, and drawings of pikes, and of male and female screws. It was then the general boast of ministers, that they possessed proofs of existing conspiracies; but they, at the same time, modestly told us, as has been insinuated this evening, they regretted, that while the trials were depending, they could not bring forward the proofs of existing conspiracies, of the treasonable mind within, and the corresponding danger from without. Happily, however, these auguries soon proved ill-founded, and the verdict of an English jury declared the innocence of the accused. I do not say that the right hon. gentleman opposite to me thinks much of the verdict of a jury; but it is no unimportant fact that the judge, who presided on that occasion, congratulated the jury on their verdict, and on the proofs that had been exhibited of those conspiracies, which once so much alarmed the public mind, being wholly without foundation, or only the chimerical offspring of a faction; men, without arms, amunition, or means of any kind, and even without zeal. Sir, I must think we are on the present occasion as little in danger of being overwhelmed with conspirators as we were then. But, though I think thus, the inference from the right hon. gentleman's observation must be obvious. It must be felt that, in substance, the right hon. gentleman had insinuated that the prisoners are guilty. I have no knowledge of any of the prisoners except Mr. O'Connor; but I, sir, regret that the trial at Maidstone was put off. I regret it for reasons very different, with feelings the reverse of those which appear to actuate the right hon. gentleman. I regret it, sir, because I am convinced Mr. Arthur O'Connor is not a traitor, and is incapable of acting hostilely against this country or its constitution. Having said this, I shall now take the liberty of making some observations on the question immediately before the house. The right hon. gentleman has assumed, as a general proposition, the discretion vested in lords lieutenants; but all servants are responsible for their conduct. The whole question is, therefore this, - Has my hon. friend made out such a case as ought to induce this house to enter into the proposed inquiry, and as requires a justification of the conduct of Lord Onslow?" I think this case has been made out; but, so far from the right hon. gentleman meeting the question fairly, he has not in

66