and I was resolved to ascertain the true could not have imagined that any men state of the question. I procured an were used in such a manner in this counorder from a magistrate, and went to see try. It is scarcely necessary to inform the prison, in company with my hon. friend the House, that the prison of which I and another gentleman, not a member of have been speaking is that which is this House, but who is distinguished by commonly called the Bastile. [Hear, his humanity. I must confess that I hear!] Do gentlemen doubt it? I can found the reports that had reached me, of assure them it is known by that name. the situation of the persons under con- When I took a coach in Oxford-road, in finement, had been exaggerated. Still, order to visit the prison, I desired the however, their situation was extremely coachmen to drive me to the Bastile. wretched, and the manner in which they Very well, sir, "was the answer. Being were treated unexampled in severity and curious to know whether he really underrigour. I found them without fire and stood the place I wanted to go to by this without candle-denied every kind of so- name, I said "You know it then?" "O ciety-exposed to the cold and rain-only yes, I know it-every body knows the allowed to breathe the air out of their cells Bastile in Cold-Bath Fields." Indeed, it for about an hour-denied every comfort, is not surprising that such a name should every innocent amusement-excluded be given to this prison, for when another from all intercourse with each other, and Bastile formerly existed under a certain every night locked up from all the rest of" regular government," which some genthe world. Now I appeal to the gentlemen who hear me, whether they could have imagined that such a practice existed in this country, and whether they think that there was any necessity for treating state prisoners in this manner? I do not believe that ministers were privy to these proceedings. Among the prisoners, I saw a gentleman, with whom I was acquainted above thirty years ago; an officer distinguished in the service; and amiable in his character and manners -I mean colonel Despard. I am happy, however, to state, that I understand his situation has since been ameliorated. I am told he has lately been put into a room with a fire: and this change I am informed, he owes to the humane interference of Mr. John Reeves. Till the 25th of last month, he was confined in a solitary cell, where even his wife was not allowed to visit him. These cells are so cold, that at this season of the year, it is scarcely possible to exist in them. The cold may, in some degree, be tempered by closing the wooden shutters; but if the unhappy prisoner wishes to be cheered by the air and the light of heaven, he must admit the rain and chilling blasts of winter at the same time. This usage appeared to me so extraordinary, that I was at some trouble in inquiring of several gentlemen, eminent in the profession of the law, if ever they had known of such practices in this country. They uniformly answered, that they never had heard of such severity; that they considered the treatment I had described to be altogether unprecedented; and that they [ XXXIV.]

tlemen pretend very much to admire, state prisoners were treated better there than they have been treated in this. Perhaps it may be inquired under whose direction this prison is placed? I understand that some reverend gentlemen are among the magistrates who manage it. Perhaps they kindly subject these prisoners to so much pain in this world, that the less punishment may be inflicted on them in the next. [Hear, hear!] Well, if this motive does not please gentlemen, let them assign a better if they can, and I will give up this; but it is the best I can think of. But it is not to persons suspected of state crimes alone that the rigour I have described is extended. Many persons, charged with offences of various descriptions, undergo the same treatment. A man sentenced to imprisonment for selling a pamphlet called the" Duties of Citizenship," has been confined in one of these cells. His name is Smith. Now I should be glad to know whether this is the mode in which a man convicted of a libel ought to be punished? To be separated from his family, and shut up in an ordinary gaol, during the time of his sentence, one would think a sufficient execution of the sentence; but under this regimen the culprit is not only prevented from exercising his industry to support a wife and children, but his health is destroyed, and perhaps his mind deranged; for it would not be at all surprising if persons in such a situation were afflicted with insanity. I must not, however, omit to state, that this poor man was some time ago, in consequence of indisposition, re[I]

moved from his cell, and placed in the | If the hon. gentleman was led from genesick ward, and, as the time of his imprisonment is nearly expired, and the sending him back to his cell might occasion a relapse, he is, I understand, to be allowed to remain in the sick-ward until he is discharged. The next person whose case I shall mention is that of a disorderly woman, one of those unfortunate creatures who walk the streets. She was not convicted of any felony, but was nevertheless confined in a cold damp cell. She was at the same time ill of that disease with which women of the town are pretty frequently afflicted. I leave it to the humanity of the House, whether it was proper to place this unfortunate woman in a situation, which, added to the virulence of her disorder, was likely to endanger her life. In another dismal cell I found a boy, confined there for disobedience to his master, a punishment which I believe, was never before heard of for an offence of the kind. Such were some of the spectacles I witnessed on this visit. I have, however, no doubt that any abuses which may exist will be corrected when they come to the knowledge of ministers. Indeed I am informed, that the state prisoners are now removed into a warm room, where they have free intercourse with each other, but what I have stated is sufficient to show that my hon. friend was not misinformed when he hinted that the state prisoners were improperly treated. I can not conclude without lamenting that an hon. gentleman, celebrated for his humanity, has not visited this prison. I am convinced that that hon. gentleman's principles of "Vital Christianity" would have induced him to exert himself to ameliorate the condition of these unhappy people. I am certain, however, that the hon. gentleman will no longer suffer it to be said by the unfortunate, "I was in prison, and you visited me not."

ral humanity to pity the condition of all prisoners, or from sympathy to deplore the condition of those who were accused of sedition, his course was to have gone to some magistrate with his complaint. If he thought that the bad conduct of gaols was general, there was nothing to prevent him from bringing forward any motion he might think necessary upon the subject. In order to show that this measure ought not to be now continued, the hon. gentleman should show that there did not exist any treasonable or seditious spirit in this country. Did he mean to say there was nothing of that kind discovered at Maidstone? Upon one fact the hon. gentleman would agree with him—that at Maidstone there was only one man convicted of high treason, and that there were four acquitted: but it would not be seriously contended, that because a man had been acquitted of high treason, it was a proof that he had never been guilty of high treason. It was not on the guilt of one or two individuals that this measure was founded; it was founded on a combination of persons acting in concert at home for the destruction of the state, and whose views extended also to a concert with the enemies of this country abroad, whenever any act for that purpose could be attempted with the hope of security to its projectors.

Mr. Tierney said, that he had given his vote for the bill of last session, and he should wish to show that he was not acting inconsistently in opposing the present. His reasons for this difference of opinion were shortly these. Last session a message was brought down from his majesty, stating, that there was imminent danger of an invasion, aided by disaffected and treasonable persons in this country, and a bill of indictment had been found by a grand jury at Maidstone against five perMr. Secretary Dundas said, that the sons for high treason. Combining these two hon. gentleman had stated a number of circumstances together, it was impossible facts, which, whether they were correct for him to deny that a case was made out, or not, had certainly no earthly con- which warranted the temporary suspension nexion with the bill before the House. of the Habeas Corpus act. The situation With all the humanity which the hon. of the country was now, however, comgentleman had displayed, he believed pletely altered. No one who had read every particle of it would have remained the king's speech at the opening of the at rest if the present bill had not been present session, could suppose that minis moved: it was this bill that had caused ters had now any apprehension of an inthe hon. gentleman to summon up the hu-vasion. Then, with regard to correspon manity of the House. If there existed any abuse in the management of the gaols of this kingdom, there was an easy remedy.

dence with the enemy, he had heard of none carried on from this country. There was, however, proof of correspondence

hon. gentleman, who appeared to consider it his duty to absent himself from parliament, had not long since said of the manner in which libels were punished by the laws of this country. That hon. gen. tleman, at a time when the state of Europe was very different from what it was at present, had thought fit in a public situa tion to say, that the punishment for this offence was particularly severe; and as this reflection seriously involved the court of King's-bench, he had been led to trace the history of its proceedings in this respect. The result of his inquiries autho rized him in affirming, that never since the law took cognizance of libel were the sen tences of the courts less rigorous than they had been for the last six years. Before this offence was so much aggravated by the indiscriminate abuse of every per son and every institution in the country, that deserved to be reverenced and praised, the law of libel was administered with a severity unknown in our days. If gentlemen would compare the sentences of the court of King's-bench passed in the period he spoke of with those of any other period since the Revolution, it would be seen that the judges of our time, without neglecting their duty, had considerably softened the character of punishments in general, and that the punishment for libel in particular was not sufficiently severe. Formerly, the practice had been for the attorney-general to direct the punishment when persons were brought up for judgment; but he had acted upon a sentiment of a distinguished lawyer, the attorney-general of a former period, whom he revered and valued; he meant lord Thurlow. That great man was the first who disused the immemorial practice of directing punishment; and if the tempered and mild judgments of the Court did not wholly arise out of this circumstance, certainly much kindness and lenity suc ceeded it. Would gentlemen contend that the libels of the present day less outraged decency, and less offended against the laws? Let them look to the state trials of 1794. In those trials they would find that public meetings were in many

with Ireland; but he learned from the same authority, that there was no connection between the societies existing in Ireland and those in Great Britain, and that any improper correspondence that might have passed between the two countries must have been through individuals only. He had a right to maintain that this fact was proved; for if the authority he alluded to was to be relied upon in one case, it was equally good in the other. The number of persons who had been arrested in consequence of the suspension of the Habeas Corpus act, had been between 70 and 80, who were now all discharged, expect a few, and these were not brought to trial, though detained in confinement since last April. This seemed to indicate that there was not much reason for continuing the measure; and it certainly was proper that some new motive should be shown before the House was called upon to agree to the bill. It had been said that the observations of his hon. friend, relative to the usage of the state prisoners, had no connexion with the bill; he, however, thought that they were very much in point. They tended to show the manner in which the powers given by that bill had been exercised. It appeared that those who were taken up under the act were not confined in the usual manner of persons merely suspected of an offence, but that they were treated as if they had been convicted of some great felony. He knew that very considerable differences of opinion prevailed among magistrates relative to the utility of solitary confinement; but he never yet heard its warmest supporters say, that an Englishman, who had been convicted of no crime, should be confined in one of those cells. He trusted that the House would feel the importance of preventing such an improper abuse of power. A man of rank, a colonel in the army, was among the persons stated to be treated with so much inhumanity. He saw no ground for continuing the suspension of the Habeas Corpus act. There might be a few lurking traitors in the country; but there was throughout Eng. land a general spirit of loyalty that would render it impossible for their arts to suc-places held for the purpose of propagating ceed.

The Attorney General said, that before he proceeded to state the reasons upon which was founded his decided approbation of the present measure, he thought it not unconnected with the present discussion, to remind the House of what an

sedition; that not merely the ministers of the crown were libelled, but every institution, religious, political, and moral, with every individual, in whatever conspicuous situation in the administration of the laws or the government of his country he may have been placed. There were at the

quired of the sheriffs, they would have found that it had been attempted to im pose upon them, and the House would never have heard the accusation of that evening. After what had passed in Ireland, was it not now evident that the persons tried at Maidstone were implicated in a design to favour the invasion of Ireland? Gentlemen might say the evidence against these men was collected from spies; but it must be remembered, that this description of persons were always the more calumniated in proportion as they spoke truth. Ministers would not be justified in not taking measures of safety on the evidence of such men. United Irishmen could make United Britons; and if as a society they did not correspond with societies here, as indivi duals they propagated their mischief.

Mr. Burdon said, that he had visited the prison complained of, and had seen nothing to justify what had been objected on the subject. Every thing seemed to be conducted in the best manner of which such an establishment was capable. The state prisoners had a liberal allowance for their support, and every where the greatest neatness, regularity, and propriety prevailed.

period he alluded to, corresponding so- | gentlemen who had visited the prisons in cieties and corresponding clubs, instituted, not for the purpose of making the members of that House responsible for their conduct, or to procure a constitutional reform of any abuses supposed to have entered into the practical part of government, but for the purpose of destroying that House, of erecting a convention on its ruins, of subverting the government, and in its stead of introducing the wild system of a neighbouring country. What, truly, was the case of Mr. Smith, of whom, in strains of lamentation, an hon. gentleman had said so much? Why this, he had been secretary of the corresponding society. He had published libel upon libel. Had the hon. gentleman ever read the book for which this man was prosecuted? He would find that every thing sacred, honourable, and good, was there blasphemously and wickedly libelled and traduced. It was a delicate subject at any time to discuss the verdicts of juries and the sentences of judges; but to comment on legal sentences in a state of perfect ignorance of the circumstances under which they were passed, showed not less of temerity than want of candour. With respect to the proceedings against Mr. Smith, and his treatment since his confinement, nothing severe had been done on the part of government or its officers. Had he made any representation to the secretary of state of unnecessary rigour, he was sure it would have been attended to.-It was reserved for our time, for the beneficent and moderate age of philosophy and the rights of man, to call those places Bastiles, which were instituted for the imprisonment of the offenders against the law. Would gentlemen look a little at the origin of this kind of scandal, and at the kind of persons by whom it was used: it claimed close kindred with the revolutionists of France, for our prisons were first called Bastiles by the orators of Copenhagen House and Pancras Fields, who used it not only in their public ha-wet weather, or after a frost, it was evirangues, but in their confidential letters, so that we traced it most distinctly to the hot-bed of anarchy. When it was known to the court that Smith had made a representation of the severities of his confinement, lord Kenyon directed an inquiry into the truth of the case, and the result was, that the governor of the prison, and the physician, both testified that every degree of attention was paid to the health and comforts of the prisoners. Had the

Sir Francis Burdett was convinced, that great severity had, in some instances, been used. The hon. gentleman who spoke last might not, in walking round the gallery of the prison, have observed any symptoms of this, and in looking into the cells he might not perceive any offensive smell, and might see that the place was clean washed. What, however, must be the situation of a cell seven feet square, after a person had been in it some hours, or when persons were confined for many weeks without being permitted to go out but for a few minutes to wash themselves? In these cells there was no wood nor paper to keep the persons confined from the contact of the wall, and in

dent that a brick wall must be so damp as to be extremely unhealthy where no fire was allowed. He agreed, however, that these matters were not strictly in point. A future opportunity might occur for that discussion, and perhaps he might feel it necessary to move an inquiry on the subject. It was the duty of the House to take care that the extraordinary powers which it granted should not be abused. The learned gentleman had de