ment did not devise some means of preventing the circulation of the seditious and treasonable writings, of the daring and atrocious libels which were constantly published in a multitude of shapes, it would be impossible to answer for the security of the government, and the preservation of the constitution. The country might be armed, and its income expended, but every effort was useless if this intestine ulcer was suffered to prey upon its vitals. No one regretted more than he did the licentiousness of the press, and feeling these sentiments, the noble lord might be assured that he sincerely joined with him in the propriety of making his complaint of the misrepresentation to which he had been subjected. He did not wonder that he should be anxious to disclaim all acquaintance with Mr. O'Connor. It was, indeed, very singular that the noble lord who only knew him eleven years ago, should have been called upon to give evidence at Maidstone in favour of that gentleman. But he believed it was not unfortunate for Mr. O'Connor that such persons as his lordship should have been called in that way. His lordship's evidence was a good evidence for Mr. O'Connor. With regard to the treatment of the state prisoners, it was only within a few days that it had come to his knowledge that any complaint was made upon this subject. It was, however, one which had already been before the public, and was likely to undergo farther discussion, and he was convinced, that whenever it should be completely investigated, it would appear that no unnecessary severity had been exercised either on the part of government, or of the persons to whose care the prisoners had been entrusted. With regard to the bill, he should only repeat, that the causes which formely existed for adopting a similar measure were not yet removed. Lord Holland said, their lordships were informed that the same reasons existed now as were urged when this bill was before the House on a former day; to which he would answer, that the reasons could not be the same, for the situation of the country and of its enemies was very different now from what it was then. To show the truth of this, he should read a passage out of the proclamation of April fast: Whereas it appears that the preparation for the embarkation of troops and warlike stores are now carried on with considerable and increasing activity in the ports of France, Flanders, and Holland, with the avowed design of attempting the invasion of his majesty's dominions; and that in this the enemy is. encouraged by the correspondence and communications of traitorous and disaffected persons and societies of these kingdoms." Did ministers mean to assume that it was notorious there were traitorous designs now carrying on in this country, or that the enemy were preparing an invasion, with considerable and increasing activity? He should think it an insult if such a reason was stated. Was the Habeas Corpus act to be suspended for the fourth time, though the reason for its suspension had ceased? Of the importance of that act he had no occasion to say much: there could be no man who did not know that it was to that act he owed his personal freedom. He trusted there was no man so dead to duty as to abandon the bulwark raised by our ancestors for the preservation of the coun⚫ try, without the most imperious necessity. If such necessity did exist, let it be proved; it would be for their lordships to consider whether any such proof had been adduced. And here he must state it as his opinion, that nothing which had taken place for the last four years justified the suspension of an act so valuable to the liberty of the subject. Probably he might be told to night, that there were the same reasons for suspending it, as had ever been considered sufficient. It might be said, the designs of our enemies were manifest; that it was necessary to sacrifice some part of our constitution to preserve the rest. He might be told of the detestable consequences of French principles; that there were men in this country, who had so rooted an aversion to its government and constitution, that nothing would serve them but overturning it. But even admitting all this, he could not consider it as sufficient for suspending the Habeas corpus act. He was, however, ready to declare that there might be circumstances of a peculiar nature to justify its suspension; but he never could allow that the warlike preparations of an enemy, or the disaffection of the people, the natural consequence of a war, were reasons weighty enough to induceparliament to give up so important a privilege into the hands of ministers. He firmly believed the constitution was adequate to its own protection. Who would have supposed, six years ago, that the suspension of the Habeas Corpus act would ever have been demand ed by ministers as a mere matter of course? | tertain any doubt as to the dispositions of The existence of a few men dissatisfied the people of this country, after the events with the government, or tainted with what of last year? Would they not allow, that were called Jacobinical principles, was the people at the period to which he alnot sufficient to authorize a suspension of luded, although they were then labouring this act; neither, if French principles did under burthens unparalleled, had made prevail among any part of the people, was sacrifices to the utmost extent of their it the way to meet them, to draw a line means, certainly beyond the most sanof distinction which should separate the guine expectations, the moment they rich from the poor, and withdraw protec- were apprized of danger? After a people tion from the one while it was afforded to had so exerted themselves, it was insultthe other. The House had got so much ing their feelings to allow a bill filled with into the argument of sacrificing a part to calumnies and libels on them, to pass to preserve the rest, that they seemed to its last stage, without an argument to have forgot that there were laws for pu- show its necessity. Every one must feel nishing treason, without suspending the the necessity of confidence between the Habeas Corpus act. There was but one governors and the governed; but what state of circumstances he knew of which confidence could exist, if the enthusiasm could justify it, and that was where a con- displayed by the people was met with spiracy existed, so artful in its arrange- coldness; if the chearfulness with which ment, wherein the nature, extent, and they paid taxes, unequal and oppressive object of it were so difficult to be deve- as they were, was received with disgust? loped, that the discharging any one per- What could be expected from such treatson who had been taken up on suspicion, ment? Would they not naturally argue, would necessarily inform all the parties that those persons were unworthy of the concerned, and give them an opportunity confidence of the people who seemed to of eluding the justice of the country. have so little regard for theirs?-Thus, But even in that case he would be cautious then, it appeared, from the comparative to whom such power was entrusted. It state of public affairs, this year and the would be to those who had wisdom to un- last, that the reason for suspending the derstand the power, and resolution not to Habeas Corpus act no longer existed, the abuse it. He would tell them that by preamble of the bill no longer applied. putting such a power in their hands it was Thanks to the rashness of the enemy; not intended they should indiscriminately thanks to the bravery and skill of British arrest all persons they pleased, those even seamen; and, above all, thanks to the against whom they had no evidence; but victory obtained by lord Nelson; and merely, that they were to delay the trials thanks, no less, to the vigour and activity of those against whom they had evidence, of the Admiralty, the danger of invasion but whom it would be imprudent to bring was not only removed, but wholly desto immediate trial. Unless they fully un-troyed. The plea, therefore, founded derstood this, no danger however alarming, no conspiracy however extensive, should induce him to suspend the Habeas Corpus act, so long as there were tribunals in the country for the peaceful administration of justice, so long as there remained a semblance of law and government. See whether it was necessary at this period. To prove it was, some documents should have been produced, if for nothing else, at least to have preserved the character of the House, and to have convinced the people they did not wantonly wrest from them what their ancestors had considered necessary for their security. But no one document had been offered; all the materials on which the House could proceed, consisted in the suggestions of ministers as to the state of public affairs. Could their lordships en on the apprehension of invasion, was at an end, and no other remained but that of the conspiracies of the very people who had so chearfully met the demands of government.-But then followed the argument, that the executive government were the best judges of the necessity, and that the House must know they had not brought forward, nor ever would bring forward, a proposition to suspend the Habeas Corpus act, unless they were convinced of the existence of a conspiracy. With respect to that argument, he wished to know in what chapter of the constitution of this country there was any thing to be found to oblige parliament to believe ministers when they were recommending what was to place additional power in their hands. They might say, it was not their interest to misuse the served. He trusted the people would, to the satisfaction of Europe and of poste Lord Grenville said, that if the debate on this bill had depended on the merits of the individuals who compose the present administration, he should certainly have no hope, perhaps no ambition, to convince the noble lord of the propriety of any part of the measure-indeed, it would, perhaps, be difficult to persuade that noble lord of the propriety of any measure of his majesty's ministers. He had acted uniformly, as if he thought them wrong in every thing; but although ministers had not the approbation of that noble lord, they had repeatedly received the support of a considerable part of the House. As to the trial of the persons who were acquitted at the Old Bailey, he thought the point had been given up, and that it was never to be insisted upon again that the acquittal of these persons invalidated the reports of the two Houses of parliament relative to the existence of a conspiracy against the government of this country. Were we to be told, after all that had happened, that the acquittal, the honourable acquittal, of persons indicted for high treason, was a proof of entire innocence? Were we now to learn that it was impossible for any man to be acquitted, and afterwards prove to be guilty of high treason? So far was the event of these trials from negativing the assertion of the reports of the existence of a conspiracy, that it tended to confirm it. power entrusted to them; but to this he would observe, there were men possessed of a depraved appetite that could bear nority, contradict those calumnies; and he restraint; men, whose thirst for power trusted also, that their actions would soon was such, that they cared not how unne- contradict another calumny, namely, that cessary any measure of rigour was, pro- of their being intended by administration vided it tended to increase their power. to assist their views against themselves, The constitutional words, jealousy of mi- and through the medium of alarm to benisters, should lead the House to withcome a party supporting the attacks of hold confidence, and to refuse to resign ministers against their own liberty, freepower out of their hands, unless where dom, and independence. the necessity was fully proved. He could see nothing in the conduct or language of ministers to induce the House to wave that jealousy in their favour. He could look back, and see that those individuals who had been brought to trial under every disadvantage, with the prejudice of ministers against them, had been proved innocent; to the honour of the juries who had tried them, they had conquered every prejudice, and acquitted them. When he considered the result of those trials, he had little hesitation in saying, that far from thinking ministers should be indulged with additional power, there never was a time when it was less necessary. He maintained that the system by which they governed was a system of alarm: they knew they had no way of diverting the people from reflecting on the miseries of the war and their own incapacity but by raising an alarm, that all who opposed the war were Jacobins, and leagued with the French to destroy the country. This was the way in which the government had been supported, and ministers enabled to pass this and bills of a similar tendency; but he believed the juggle would not continue long he believed the cry of Jacobinism would not long take hold; but that the people of this country would enter into a serious examination of the conduct of ministers. They seemed to him to have overshot their mark. They bad rung the alarm bell so long in the people's ears, that it would no longer awaken them. Neither the failure of the object of the war, or the distresses of the people, had prevented them from evincing a line of conduct last year, when the country was threatened, that reflected the highest degree of honour on themselves. The ungenerous treatment they had received from ministers in return astonished him. So far from recanting their former assertion of disaffection among the people, they had obliquely added to them, and now continued to load them with calumnies which they knew were not de : But, it seemed, there was no evidence of any conspiracy. Did the noble lord ever hear that there existed a certain society called the Corresponding Society? The object of that society was, under the mask of parliamentary reform, to pull down the government, and to introduce a new system of things in this country on the model of the French government. These things were proved at the trials at the Old Bailey, to which the noble lord had alluded, and in which acquittals he had triumphed so much. They were so well understood to be proved, even by the counsel for Hardy, that the best defence testable on account of religion being made use of as a cloak to cover its iniquity, This plan was followed up also in England. Did any man believe that the real design of the meeting at Chalk Farm was to reconcile the people of England to a constitutional parliamentary reform? This country contained a number of disaffected men; and it had been made the depot of the treasonable endeavours of many who were concerned in the Irish rebellion. As to the idea that the people of England would conceive themselves calumniated by this bill, he did not apprehend any such thing, any more than they would think they were called murderers, because a law was made against murder. If he thought the discontent of the people of England against government was general, he should not propose this measure, because, in such a case, little could be done by the imprisonment of a few. But he was persuaded the people would view this as a bill, not for the destruction of their liberties, but for the continuance and protection of them. The House divided: Contents, 26; NotContents, 1. The bill was then passed. the learned gentlemen could make for their client was, that no man could be ignorant of the facts, but that the prisoner was a poor, harmless, simple, inoffensive man, and that if any mischief was intended by any body, he was not in the least aware of it; and the acquittal of the others turned very much on the acquittal of the first; but nobody ever thought of doubting the views entertained by some members of this society. The noble lord had asked, on what evidence ministers maintained the necessity of this bill? He would refer the noble lord to the proclamation in April last, which stated that our enemies were aided and abetted by persons in this country, &c. The evidence was last year deemed so satisfactory, that the bill then passed unanimously. But had not the fact turned out as ministers had foretold it? Was it not confirmed in the case of a person who was acquitted, honourably acquitted, at Maidstone? The House need not be told he alluded to the case of O'Connor. Had not that traitor, since his trial and honourable acquittal, thrown himself upon the mercy of that gracious sovereign whom he had conspired with other traitors to dethrone? Had he not afterwards, to obtain that mercy, detailed upon his oath circumstances which were afterwards confirmed by a rebellion? But was that all? Had not O'Coigly been convicted of treason upon the evidence of a paper, by which it appeared that a communication was to be made to the French Directory, not from any society in Ireland, but from a society in England? Was not that paper the evidence on which the jury convicted that traitor? All these things he stated to show, that the assertion of there having been a conspiracy in this country was not lightly made. What was the case at the present moment? That a treasonable conspiracy had existed in Ireland ever since the year 1791, was proved by the reports of both houses of parliament in that country. By this it was manifest that the design had been long conceived of separating Ireland from this country. This was planned by a society. The very object of that society was to put forward parliamentary reform as a cloak to the real design, but not to show that design until they thought some impression was made on the minds of the people. The mask was afterwards partly thrown off, for instead of a reform in parliament, they talked of a free parliament. Nor was this plan the less de[XXXIV.] Lord Holland's Protest against passing the Habeas Corpus Suspension Bill.] The following Protest was entered on the Jour, nals: "DISSENTIENT, 1. "Because the existence of a conspiracy, of an extent so formidable, and of a nature so complicated, that the public disclosures of the evidence necessary to the conviction of one conspirator might enable his accomplices to ascertain the information of government, and to elude the justice of the country, can alone constitute a necessity sufficient to justify a Peer of parliament in assenting to any suspension of the Habeas Corpus. 2. "Because no measures have been taken to make such necessity apparent. 3. "Because if, from private information, or from the general circumstances of the country, the House were convinced that such necessity did actually exist, it would, nevertheless, be more consonant with the usages, and less derogatory to the dignity of parliament, to produce substantial documents, rather than the suggestions of ministers, or the vague suspi cions of individuals in justification of so extraordinary a measure. 4. "Because the alarms of ministers are always to be received with mistrust by [N] the poor-rates at three per cent. This added to the other makes 17 per cent. When we cast our eye to the necessary the legislature, when the remedy proposed is an extension of their power, and a diminution of the liberty of the subject. 5. Because these principles of jea-expenses of bailiffs, stewards, and other lousy, applicable to all times, appear to numerous incidentals to landed property, me to be peculiarly so to the present, when we cannot reasonably place less than five a system of government by alarm has been per cent to that account, which makes the resorted to year after year, and powers whole nearly 20 per cent. I have, in the similar to those required by this bill been course of the last few years, expended in obtained on the score of allegations improvements more than 15,000l.; in which subsequent events have refuted; doing which I have of course submitted a memorable example of which occurred to the privation of a great many of those in the years 1794 and 1795, when a num- comforts which persons of my rank in life ber of persons detained under the provi- may fairly be allowed to be indulged in. It sions of a bill similar to this, were all must be evident, that I have not done this either liberated without trial, or acquitted for my own personal gratification. No, my by a verdict of their country. lords; I was induced to such a line of conduct, in order that I might transmit to my son an estate as independent as the principles which I have endeavoured to instil into his mind, and which might always prove the means of enabling him to act up to them. Many other noble lords, I dare say there are, who have acted upon the same system with myself. I now call upon such noble lords, and caution them to beware how they give their sanction to a measure which falls so peculiarly heavy and oppressive on the landed interest in particular. Very different indeed is the situation of the noble lords upon the cross bench, and other parts of the House, whose situations bring them in very large emoluments, which they no doubt well deserve, for the high, important, and arduous stations they fill in the administration of the government of the country. Those noble lords, however, have only to pay their ten per cent out of the seven, eight, or ten thousand a year, which they receive. They have no salt duties, amount 6. Because the danger of an invasion (the pretence for suspending the Habeas Corpus last session) exists no longer. And it is subversive of that mutual confidence which would subsist between the government and governed, to requite with distrust in their dispositions, and a continual suspension of one of the most essential safeguards of their liberty, the affections of the people manifested in their late exertions at the moment of alarm, and in the cheerfulness with which they have submitted to burthens unparalleled in their pressure, and now confessedly unequal in their operation." (Signed) "HOLLAND." Debate in the Lords on the Income Duty Bill.] Jan. 8. On the order of the day for the third reading of the Income Duty bill, The Earl of Suffolk said :-No man, my lords, is more willing than I am, to submit to an equal and equitable tax upon income; but the present measure is nei-ing to 4 per cent, no poor-rates, bailiffs, ther equal nor equitable; and if carried into effect, will be productive of consequences mischievous to the country at large. The bill will be peculiarly oppressive on the gentlemen of landed property; so much so, indeed, that the land will never be able to bear it. This tax is calculated to affix no more than a tenth upon income; but it will, in fact, amount to nearly twenty per cent. It is said that this tax is only ten per cent upon my income; but, I beg leave to remind your lordships, that last session a tax upon salt took place, which, in Gloucestershire, Wiltshire, and other counties, upon what is called the dairy farms in particular, will, in its operation, be equal to 4 per cent. I am within bounds when I state stewards, broken farmers, and other unavoidable incidentals of that nature to affect them, They have beside a rich field of patronage open to them, wherewith to gratify the blooming hopes, and rising ambition of their younger sons and nearest relatives, in the extensive and lucrative branches of the navy, the army, and the church. These are circumstances which may make noble lords look lightly on a tax of ten per cent upon income; but when it falls in so oppressive a manner upon land, it becomes very hard indeed to those who have only their land, and what they can save from it, to support the younger branches of their several families. For my own part, my lords, I have ever prided myself in the independence of my |