Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

quire into the Public Records of this | So then, as long as any other country reKingdom, and of such other public instru- 'tained Jacobinical principles, even though ments, rolls, books, and papers, as they France renounced them, so long must shall think proper; and to report to the Great Britain remain deprived of the House the nature and condition thereof, Habeas Corpus act! This was the greatest together with what they shall judge fit to insult that could be offered to the nation. be done for the better arrangement, pre- Better give up the Habeas Corpus enservation, and more convenient use of the tirely! Was there any appearance of same."-The Master of the Rolls seconded treason now in the country? And yet the motion, and a Select Committee was though nothing of a seditious nature had accordingly appointed. passed, this suspension was to be continued. Not one of the imprisoned persons had been brought to trial. And how many had been taken up since April 1799? Only one Irishman and one Swedish baron. He thought it peculiarly unjust, that persons should be kept for years in prison without being brought to trial, because proof sufficient could not be brought against them. The only reason why more people were not taken up was, because ministers were convinced that no conspiracy existed.

Debate in the Commons on the Habeas Corpus Suspension Bill.] Feb. 13. The Attorney General (Sir John Mitford) rose to move for the renewal of the act to en

able his majesty to secure and detain persons suspected of conspiring against his person and government; which act would expire on the 1st of March next. Since the last passing of the bill, the disposition of the country was not changed with regard to the machinations of those persons who were to be the objects of the bill; and therefore if the House thought it a fit and proper measure last year, they must think so now. The country might be in a state of greater safety than it was a year or two ago; but it was impossible to read the report of the committee of that House, published last year, without being convinced that there were persons in this country who would disturb the peace of it, if any opportunity presented itself. The peace of the country had been already preserved by the powers which this act vested in the hands of go-ject he must contend, that we were not vernment. Conceiving it necessary, therefore, to continue the same powers, he would move, "That leave be given to bring in a bill for further continuing, for a time to be limited, the said act."

Mr. Jones conceived the loyalty of the country to be so great, as to render the bill unnecessary. He never would place unlimited power in the hands of ministers over the liberties and lives of the whole country. It would be better to repeal the Habeas Corpus act at once.

Mr. Buxton believed it was to the suspension of that act that members owed the liberty of sitting there. The war was carried on against Jacobin principles, and as long as they continued in France, so long must it endure.

Mr. Sheridan said, that at no time should he be easily persuaded to vote for this bill; and less than ever when the plea was, not the disaffection in this country, but the dangerous principles in another.

Mr. Windham said, that the hon. gen. tleman had always opposed the suspension, and he would not be consistent with himself if he did not oppose it now. But the question was not what the hon. gentleman might do, but what the House should do upon this subject; and in the determination of that, another question arose, which was, whether any such change has taken place since the last suspension, as to require measures different from those which parliament has hitherto pursued, by way of general safety? Now upon that sub

warranted in saying there was no symp-
toms remaining of the mischief which we
formerly dreaded, and that therefore the
Habeas Corpus act should not now be
suspended; but he was very far from being
sure, that such manner of reasoning was
to be adopted, or that the reverse was
not to be in some measure taken up, be-
cause the very cessation of the mischief
proved, to a certain extent, the efficacy of
the remedy, and therefore the non-ap-
pearance of the evil, instead of being a
reason for taking off the remedy, was a
reason for its continuance, otherwise the
House must come to this sort of reason;
"We will repeal the act, because we
have found it to be efficacious."
case was, indeed, open to two ways of
reasoning; for he believed that both were
in a degree true. He believed that the
quiet of the country was partly owing to
this act, and he believed also that there
was a change in the dispositions of some

The

He did not mean to say, that the metropolis of Great Britain had ever been exposed to the same danger; nor that these considerations made up the strongest reasons for the continuance of the suspension; but he did say these were some reasons for it. The number of disaffected persons was not so great as it had been; but he did not believe the disposition of the disaffected to all establishments in the world was altered; he believed it was in full vigour still, and therefore he hoped that this bill would be continued.

parts of the country. The numbers of the disaffected he took to be altered, because the state of the stock which supported [disaffection was higher at some times than at others, like the state of stock in another country; but he had no doubt, that if Buonaparte were to be successful, in reviving, to its utmost height, the pride and confidence of French power, the spirit which accompanied it before would appear again; and he thought it would be quite childish in the House to suffer itself to be misled in this way. He believed indeed that Jacobinism was on the de- Sir Francis Burdett said, that ministers cline, nor did he apprehend the principles seemed to pass this bill, as a matter of of the rights of man to be so popular as course, without assigning the reasons that they had been; but he hoped the House induced them to have recourse to such a would not be off its guard; by thinking measure. The general reason of Jacobin that all danger was at an end; for many principles-principles, not even yet defined of these things disappeared for the-furnished them hitherto with pretexts purpose of giving them more effect when they should appear again. Here the disaffected stood upon the badness of their own character, by saying, "We are so degraded that nobody will give us credit, and therefore it is quite unnecessary to make any provision against us." He hoped, however, the House would not act upon any confidence of this kind. The smallness of the number of Jacobins in this country arose, in a great measure, from the discretion of these persons; for they felt that by the act they were subject to punishment, and therefore they were silent. Beside this, it took away the power of those men, whom nothing but the want of power would render harmless. He knew of a man who was put upon his trial, and on which the jury (for proper reasons no doubt) acquitted him; but he would not be so childish as to say, that he was tied down by that decision of the jury (though acquitted rightly and properly, perhaps, from a defect of evidence, accidentally happening, or otherwise) from saying that he might still be of opinion he was really guilty, and he would therefore wish to put such a person in a situation in which it would not be in his power to do any more mischief. Besides, every thing being quiet at this moment, was no proof that there was no plot in existence. What was the case in Ireland? A plot was discovered by information of an accomplice, and other means, which if it had not, within twenty-four hours the capital might have been in ashes and streaming in blood--it was a plot that was discovered at once, as by lemon juice hidden characters are rendered legible. $

for depriving the subject of one of his most estimable privileges. This reason he was inclined to think, was done away, and he wished to know upon what grounds they were now to proceed. He was at a loss to comprehend what was meant by Jacobin principles being on the decline in this country, unless they meant the principles of liberty. The secretary at war, had asked, Was there nothing to dread from the contagion of French principles, and the mischiefs which they almost every where produce? He in return would ask, Was there nothing to dread from breaking down the barriers of the constitution, erecting of barracks throughout the kingdom, perverting the purposes of the militia, and perpetually passing the suspension of this act, which secured to the subject his freedom? He had not language to express what he felt at the repeated suspension of the Habeas Corpus. If any part of our constitution was preferable to another, it was this act; which when removed, left very little difference between one government and another. Was not two years imprisonment sufficient for those unhappy persons who were in confinement: and did not their detention from justice argue a fear in ministers to bring them to trial? He said their innocence was the cause of their detention, and in proof of that he asked to have them brought to trial. To whom was the power to be given which this bill called for? To those who had already abused it. To those who, upon illegal warrants, upon the warrants of clerks in offices, powers not known to the constitution were passed into the hands of Bow

street ruffians, who, under their authority | throughout Europe, and had produced went down to Manchester, and dragged such mighty mischiefs, and that the hon. from their own houses, at night, and baronet should profess his ignorance of amidst the cries of their families, the them, gifted as he was with considerable masters of those families, hand-cuffed and talents, and considerable powers of eloloaded with irons, to Clerkenwell prison, quence, he considered as a grave and sewhere they were lodged, under torture of rious caution to gentlemen, lest they mind and body. When out of their should be imposed on as the hon. baronet hands, they applied to the humanity of certainly was, when he confessed that the the gaoler for relief, in consequence of only conjecture he could make of those the swellings of their legs, occasioned by principles was, that they were principles the treatment of these savages. What of liberty; when the hon. baronet knew, would the father of the chancellor of the as he certainly must know, that by those exchequer have said on the recital of principles the governments of Europe had such oppression? Would he not have been overthrown: that by those principles said, that the cottage of the peasant was aided by the sword, and the sword edged as sacred as the palace of the prince? in turn by those principles, not only the That, though humbly thatched it was se- governments that were free, but even the cure, and the king could not lay a finger strongest despotisms, had been attacked on it? Yet this asylum was violated. If and shaken; for on them the storm had that illustrious character were now alive, most heavily fallen. Yet after all this the thunder of his eloquence would shake waste and desolation, this country was safe. the House about their ears, and the ave- The hon. baronet was of opinion, that there nues would be crouded with auditors im- was no security in the country, because it patient for the decision. He would raise had resisted what he called principles a storm from which the members would of freedom. What the operation of those be glad to hide their heads, and hasten to principles were, all could judge. What their homes. But he (Sir Francis) was his right hon. friend had said, was, not not so inexperienced as not to know the that the great mass was infected in this character of that House ;-he knew it was country, for they were sound; but that power, not language: and that majorities factions still remained, who were looking in that House did not depend upon rea- round for a wide range for their ambition, soning [The Speaker here interposed, and who, on invitation, were ready to suggesting the impropriety of the expres- ruin their country. The events on the sion], Sir Francis resumed his speech, continent furnished to such factions hopes in reference to the conduct of the Attor- and views for their ambitious projects. ney General, and said, he did not forget For these two or three years there was his predecessor (sir J. Scott) in that sta- nothing in France that could either ention. He had passed to power through courage or prompt ambition. But now the gradations of similar services to those there was the example of one man, for the the present directed his attention to, and first time risen to the height of power. In was now on the way to the first high sta- former attempts all who had enterprised tion in the kingdom. Sir Francis said he for eminence, or intrigued for power, had would yet do his utmost to stop that sys been indiscriminately swept off to the tem of tyranny and corruption which fas- scaffold. If ever there was an excuse for tened on the country; and though there ambition it was now. The Jacobin prinwas much cause to complain of the 8,000 ciples had gained an ascendant in the prisoners delivered up on the failure of present usurper. Had Buonaparté rethe late expedition, yet he did not nounced the conduct and crimes of his complain so much of the surrender of predecessors? Certainly not. So far was these men, as he did of those who were he from dismissing the accomplices of illegally, unjustly, and cruelly confined. those crimes, that he kept them about his person. Though a military despot, he was a Jacobin in his heart. In him Jacobin principles have a certain pledge for all the mischiefs they can produce. An hon. gentleman had put a question on the conduct of foreign princes towards their subjects, and had asked, whether in case of their misconduct, we should impute a

Mr. Canning said, that if any gentleman could bring himself to think that Jacobin principles had ceased to produce their mischievous effects, or could imagine for a moment that they were shamed or run down in this country, the hon. baronet's speech would remove the delusion. That those principles had raged

YEAS

NOES

Tellers.

Mr. Canning
Mr. Buxton
SMr. Sheridan

[ocr errors]

·

Sir Francis Burdett

}

69

9

[ocr errors]

Feb. 19. On the order of the day for the second reading of the bill,

similar attempt to our monarch at home? | justice; and he thought that such gentleHe had no objection to this question, had men, if they did not confess their being he put it distinctly. Had any monarch imposed on, should at least refrain from been seduced by the example of foreign the discussion. There was another falpotentates so as to infringe the laws, and lacy that he wished to correct, which was, attempt to destroy the constitution (as that when yon take away the Habeas in the instance of James the 2nd), the Corpus act you take away all. This was country would certainly now, as it did not true. Many valuable rights remained. then, interfere in defence of its laws and The liberty of the press remained, and constitution. He would then call upon even to a degree of licentiousness. The the hon. baronet, and ask him if religion, liberty of speech also remained. If the under the most black and malignant ef- liberty of the subject was dammed up one fects of its superstition, was at all compa-way, it was open another. rable to the bigger mischiefs produced by The House divided: this horrible superstition that overturned thrones, powers, and principalities, together with all their dependencies, wherever it went? This contagion still continued to rage, and it was our duty to guard against the example; for that was enough to produce the effect. When it was asserted, that in two years ministers had taken up but two or three persons, this proved that they were not inclined to abuse their trust. One of these was a Swedish baron, who had been naturalized, and this furnished a hint to the legislature to be sparing of that favour in future. The hon. baronet's charge of cruelty in the arrest of the persons at Manchester, might furnish language for a modern novel. He did not know why a warrant should not be executed by night as well as by day. The officers arrived there at night, and to prevent an escape secured their prisoners. The house was entered by legal instruments, and they acted according to law. He admitted that the cottage should be equally sccure as the palace; and one of the main objects of the war was to maintain that equal security; but the French had made one indiscriminate wide waste of cottages and palaces. Thanks to parliament, in this country it had been so, and would continue so, as long as we could preserve the higher ranks from the infection of Jacobin principles, and the lower from the seduction of them.

Mr. Wilberforce said, that ministers were entitled to confidence, unless there appeared from their confidence and character reasons for refusing it. Parliament would also consider whether the persons who opposed this bill might not be imposed on, and whether they had not, under such imposition, been led solemnly to attest upon oath the characters of persons who were afterwards convicted of crimes from which they had escaped. This testimony had been given solemnly in a court of

Mr. Jolliffe said, he had great objection to the renewal of this act. At any rate it ought first to expire, were it only for a day, rather than that it should be renewed year after year, like the Mutiny or Landtax bill, as a matter of course, and thus become a part of the constitution.

Mr. H. Lascelles considered it necessary that the hands of government should be strengthened. To such measures as the present he attributed the general tranquillity, notwithstanding the efforts used to disturb all civilized order. He saw no reason why the generality of the people, who were well affected, should not be protected from the disaffected. It might as well be argued, that because the generality of the people were honest, there should be no law against robbers.

Mr. Hobhouse pointed out the inconsistency of ministers in the arguments urged in support of this bill. Upon appearance of danger, the liberties of the subject must be suspended; upon disappearance of the peril, the same arbitrary powers must be placed in the hands of ministers; and thus, whether the state were, or were not, exposed to risk, an individual might be committed under a warrant from the privy council, or secretary of state, and denied the privilege of demanding his trial within a given time. Farewell then, an eternal farewell, to the blessings of that great charter of our personal freedom, the Habeas Corpus act! Traitors, but for this measure, it was said, would no longer lurk in hiding places,

powered the privy council, or secretary of state to detain persons after commitment, without allowing them the privilege of habeas corpus; but it gave no authority to commit without information upon oath, or having recourse to those forms which were required before a common magistrate. Had not many been sent to prison upon suspicion, on the mere warrant of the privy council, without any affidavit having been lodged against them, or the facts stated upon which the charge against them was grounded? Was not this a gross violation of the law of the land? For such conduct ministers must, at a future day, come down to the House, and pray for a bill of indemnity to shelter themselves against the punishment which they so justly merited.

but, on the first opportunity, would rush forward to accomplish the ruin of their country. What was this, but to contend that the suspension had produced only a hollow and delusive quiet? Was not this a strange method of demonstrating its efficacy? Another argument which had been brought forward originated in fears of French Jacobinism. Those destructive principles, it was observed, were still prevalent in France, and attempts had been made, to spread the poison in this country. Did the dread of French principles restrain ministers from offering three several times to negotiate with Jacobin France? It had been said, that it was essential, in considering whether the overtures of an enemy should be received, to attend to the personal character of the chief ruler. But had not ministers soli- Mr. Sturges, in a maiden speech, said, cited peace from men, whom they had that he was not so much surprised, that reprobated for the murder of their sove gentlemen who had originally opposed reign? But, it was too much to assume, this measure should now resist its continuthat Jacobinism was still prevalent in ance, as that they should expect others France. The power of Buonaparté rose to renounce the opinions they had delibeupon the destruction of the Jacobin as-rately formed, and abandon the precaucendancy. Was it not, then, the interest of Buonaparté to keep the Jacobins in the lowest state of subjection? But, notwithstanding these facts, an hon. gentleman had, in a former debate, asserted, that Buonaparte was a concealed Jacobin. How did this appear? It was one of the principles of Jacobinism to spread war and desolation among other nations, and to attempt the subversion of the most ancient monarchies. Did Buonaparté prove himself to be a Jacobin, because he had made overtures of peace to this country, and though they had been proudly and disdainfully rejected, had, without returning insult for insult, invited negotiation anions, doctrines, and principles by which all second time?-An hon. gentleman had, on a former night, contended, that it was our duty to confide in administration. This doctrine was extremely convenient; but it became the House to inquire, whether ministers were deserving of this confidence. Was not their whole conduet a system of raising false alarms, and excit ing groundless panics, with a view to acquire continued accessions of power? To grasp at illegitimate power by a system of terror, was a leading feature in the proceedings of the present administration. In such gentlemen he could place no confidence. It would be proper also to investigate how those arbitrary powers, which they now wished to be continued to them, had been exercised. This bill em[VOL, XXXIV.]

tions they had wisely taken. Such an expectation, however, was formed on the late change which had taken place in France, which the hon. gentleman contended had destroyed Jacobinism, and with it the danger of its principles. But the effect of those principles was not so easily to be removed. The French revolution was unlike others, by which the person of a governor, or even the form of a government, had been altered, which were calculated, perhaps, to remove a local evil, orproduce a local advantage, and were therefore local and partial only in their effects; but being a revolution in the opi

governments were held together, and the frame of social orders cemented, its effect was as general as its nature. It created in every state which was within its reach proselytes devoted to the authors of their creed, and professors of their faith abroad, more attached, therefore, to a foreign country than their own, and actuated by motives which became paramount to the duties of allegiance, and the obligations of natural patriotism. Hence had proceeded those professions of an enlarged patriotism too extensive for the narrow limits of our own island. Hence the numerous acts of these sectaries, from the addresses of their affiliated societies to the French Convention, in September 1792, after the deposition of the king,

[5 B]

« ZurückWeiter »