now past. The insurrection was tried and failed. Now, sir, what better proof can there be of the excellence of the present laws? An attempt was made to overturn them; the people refused to join in it, and it was immediately quelled. What better evidence could we desire of the sufficiency of the constitution to repel the dangers which menace it." With regard to reform, he thought the best mode by which the House could preserve the respect of the people would be, that, while they were ready to sanction a new code in favour of the crown, they should not refuse all innovation in favour of the people.

After some remarks from Mr Courtenay in favour of the bill, Sir Francis Burdett expressed his satisfaction at the speech of the noble lord. The name of Russell was dear to every Englishman; and in the defence of these rights his revered ancestor had lost his life. He did not believe that the proposed measure was designed for the benefit either of the crown or the people. In his opinion, it was calculated solely for the benefit of the ministers, who having brought the country into inextricable difficulties, found a general demand for retrenchment of their profligate expenditure. The extravagance of which ministers had been guilty, was tenfold more destructive of the landed property of the kingdom, than the newly raised and visionary mischief apprehended from the disciples of a weak man who died twenty years ago, who never dreamed that he should make such a noise in the world, and from whose absurd tracts no real danger could ever be anticipated. The Expencean party, as he would denominate them, came to the same point as the Spenceans, whom they denounced. The honourable and learned gentleman had contended, that it was necessary to arm ministers with this despotic, de

testable, and mischievous power, because, he said, there were criminal persons in the country, the guilt of whom government had not the means of proving. According to him, men were to be punished, not because they were guilty, but because there were no means of proving them guilty. Was there ever doctrine more odious and more abominable, held in any assembly, or under any tyrant on earth? This country had nothing to do with the political scenes of the French revolution, and with regard to its impiety, he knew nothing that could equal it, but the impiety which had lately been practised in this country, in the prayer which, in solemn mockery, implored of heaven to guard the Prince Regent from the pestilence that walked by day. He (Sir F. B.) knew of no pestilence except that pestilence which met the people at every corner, which visited their firesides, which partook of their meals, which accompanied them to their beds, which contaminated every thing they touched-the pestilence of insupportable taxation. The Attorney-General possessed already enormous power over the press, and if he did not prosecute, it could only be because there was no proof of any offence. The noble lord might fine and imprison, he might erect a gallows in Palace-yard, or in the lobby of the House of Commons, but he could not physically gag the mouths of the people. If it was true that the great mass of the population of the empire was infected with the principles reprobated by the noble lord, could he shut it up? Had he prisons sufficiently capacious? Buonaparte erected eight additional bastiles in France; but the noble lord must do much more, for our gaols were already overflowing. The execution of this act had been attended with many gross instances of cruelty and oppression,

and far from agreeing to it for even a few months, he would not agree to it for a few hours.

Lord Castlereagh said, that with all his respect for the rank and talents of the honourable baronet, it appeared to him that his speech tended rather to the destruction than the salvation of the British constitution. The substance of that speech, the attempt in it to treat with ridicule the present alarming state of the country, was only consistent with the honourable baronet, who had many years ago, during the late war, endeavoured to ridicule those treasons, which if they had been treated as lightly by parliament as they had been by the honourable baronet, the constitution would long ago have been overturned, and that House would now have lain prostrate, the victim of treason and rebellion, under the mask of reform. He begged pardon for having detained the House on a subject foreign to the question before it. But really it was matter for serious consideration to find the dangers which now threatened the country talked lightly of; to hear even ridicule endeavoured to be thrown on the attempts against the person of his Royal Highness the Prince Regent attempts of a nature so criminal, so abhorrent to human nature, as scarcely to be credited as having been made in any civilized country; to hear those plots attempted to be made the subject of laughter which threatened the subversion of the constitution, and which had threatened the lives and properties of the people of England. He disclaimed any use of the bill for the purposes of punishment, but thought it essential to the safety of the state. He believed that a conspiracy existed in the country, for the subversion of the constitution. He was convinced that that conspiracy was great in point of numbers; that the members were bound together by oaths, involving the

horrid principle of inflicting death on those who revealed them. He believed, too, that if the societies engaged in this conspiracy were not soon put down, they would be capable of struggling by force against the laws and government of this country. He believed that the conspirators thought they were strong enough on the 2d of December to accomplish their purpose; he believed they afterwards adjourned the execution of their intention to the 10th of February. He would put it to the House, whether on the eve of an insurrection, embracing many parts of the country and the metropolis, they wished the executive to sit with their arms folded, and make no effort to arrest it till it exploded against the state? Did they wish ministers to suffer it first to explode, and blood to flow in the country? Was it not humanity to snatch the leader from the head of his troops before he could lead them against his majesty's peaceful subjects?

Mr Ponsonby was placed in a hard situation between his friends, who accused him of credulity, and gentlemen opposite, who called on him to support the bill. He was still fully convinced of the existence of the alleged disaffection; but it appeared to him confined to the lower orders, and to be the effect of distress acted on by malignity. He had a reverence for this law amounting almost to superstition; he believed it the great bulwark of British liberty— that which brought home to the poorest man in the country the value of the British constitution.

Lord Lascelles supported the bill, while Lord Stanley and Lord Cochrane opposed it.

The question was now put, when there voted for the first reading of the bill

Against it,

Majority,.

273

98

175

IE

After this triumphant majority the bill was speedily carried through the different stages of the committee, and of the second and third readings. Several amendments were made, of which the only important one was that made by Sir Samuel Romilly in relation to Scotland. The power of committal was now there, as in England, to be exercised only upon a warrant signed by one of the principal secretaries of state. That power had formerly been left in the hands of even a subordinate magistrate. The third reading was carried by a majority of 265 against 103. The amendments were then car ried up to the House of Lords, and on the 3d of March were agreed to, and the bill passed.

The bill for restraining seditious meetings was also carried through, though not in so rapid a manner. On the 10th March, Sir James Mackintosh moved an amendment, by which the punishment of death, pronounced upon those who did not disperse in an hour after warning given by a magistrate, should be commuted to transportation for seven years. It was negatived by 70 to 26. Sir James moved also that, in the clause authorising the magistrate to apprehend those who stirred up the people to hatred and contempt of the government and constitution, the word government might be omitted, as being a term often used as synonymous with the existing administration. The in

ference was denied by ministers, and the clause was rejected by 43 to 16. Two clauses were however introduced, exempting the East India College and societies incorporated by royal charter or act of parliament. The third reading of the bill was carried, on the 14th of March, by a majority of 179 to 44. The bill was then carried to the Lords, where it received several amendments, of which the only important one was that which prohibited any public meetings from being held within a mile of the Houses of Parliament and Westminster-hall. The bill, however, was argued against at considerable length, particularly by Lord Erskine ; but it was carried by a majority of 111 to 23. Eight lords protested. The amendments were agreed to by the Commons, with the exception of a trifling one respecting a penalty of 501., on the principle, that the House would admit no alteration in any thing connected with money. The amendment was agreed to by the Lords, and the bill was passed on the 29th March, before the Easter holidays.

The bills for the protection of the person of the Prince Regent against treasonable practices, and for the prevention and punishment of attempts to seduce persons serving in the army and navy, passed both the Houses without a vote, and with few observations. They were both made perpetual.

E

VOL. X. PART I.

THE most important of the provisions which had now received the sanction of parliament were only to continue in force till the period when the session was to close, leaving room for their renewal or expiry, according as the country should subside into a settled and tranquil state. During this interval, however, events occurred, affording ample room for proposing the renewal of these restraints. The metropolis, indeed, exhibited no alarming symptoms, and repeated meetings took place, even on the critical spot of Spafields, without any disturbance. The country, however, disappointed in its expectation of receiving the lead from London, began to move of itself. Manchester, the metropolis of the cotton trade, was the centre of agitation; a circumstance which too clearly pointed to distress as the source of irritation, or the engine employed by the agents of disorder to produce it. Great, how ever, as was the sympathy due to the want of employment under which the manufacturers laboured, it was impossible to allow them to employ their unwelcome leisure in new-modelling the British constitution.

On the 10th of March, Manchester became the scene of an extraordinary

commotion. The leaders of the reformers circulated proposals that the whole body, providing themselves with blankets and knapsacks, should proceed to London, and there present in person, to the Prince Regent, a statement of their grievances, with a petition for redress. They were believed to be encouraged by reports of a most numerous body of allies who were on their way from Scotland, and whose van had even entered Preston. It was expected that they would continually gather strength as they proceeded, and that in passing through Stockport, Derby, Nottingham, Coventry, Birmingham, and other large towns of this most populous part of England, they would be reinforced by a great proportion of the inhabitants, not to mention arms and other equipments with which they would be supplied. The object of all this machinery very evidently was, that the petition might be presented in such a shape as might render perilous a refusal to grant the prayer contained in it. The doubts as to the reality of this meditated expedition were dispelled by a placard which appeared on the 8th, appointing a meeting on the 10th, near St Peter's church, and expressing a hope, that all those who intended to

proceed to London should supply themselves with the requisite means "for this loyal and necessary undertaking." It concluded with stating, that persons were ready to receive contributions for the promotion of this purpose. The aspect of this undertaking was judged by the magistracy to be such, as to call for their active interference. A great number of special constables was sworn in, while four troops of cavalry, and a detachment of the 85th foot were kept on the watch. In the morning, vast crowds were seen pouring into Manchester from every direction, to the number, it has been supposed, of 60,000, which, however, is probably exaggerated, as it is admitted that there were at no time more than 10 or 12,000 present on the field. Of these a large proportion, according to instruction, were provided with blankets and knapsacks, preparations for the journey on which they were destined. About nine, a temporary stage was erected on a cart, round which the orators seated themselves, one being employed to invite as many as possible to concur in the design, while another took down the names, another received contributions, &c. On a sudden, by a dexterous movement of the magistrates and troops, the cart was surrounded, and all its contents taken into custody. A movement of the cavalry then scattered the multitude in every direction. A large body of the blanketeers, however, adhered to their purpose, and took their departure on the road to Stockport. On arriving there, they found the bridge occupied by two troops of cavalry; but a number throwing themselves into the river where it was fordable, they succeeded in turning that barrier, and entered Stockport. By the activity of the police and military, many were arrested in the streets, and most of the remainder deterred from advancing. About five hundred only penetrated, and push ed on to Macclesfield, where they were

received by another troop of dragoons, and not above twenty were supposed to reach the borders of Staffordshire. Of the great number apprehended on this occasion, most were dismissed in a few days, on expressing contrition. for their error, and promises of peaceful behaviour in future.

After the breaking up of this extraordinary explosion, the disaffected districts remained for some time in a state of apparent tranquillity. The agitators, however, were only planning in secret bolder and more desperate schemes. These were soon brought to maturity; and, before the end of March, the magistrates of Manchester announced their knowledge of a plan for a general insurrection, to take place on the 30th. By a simultaneous movement, the magistrates were to be seized, the prisons thrown open, the soldiers either surprised in their barracks, or thrown. into confusion, firing several of the factories. They expected to muster from 2 to 3000 men for the immediate execution of the plan, after which, their numbers would speedily swell to 5000. The introduction of troops, the knowledge that their plan was discovered, and the seizure of a number of the ringleaders, prevented any attempt to carry this plot into execution. After this second disappointment, the activity of their measures was for some time intermitted; but towards the end of April, its activity was renewed, though in a more secret and cautious manner. Correspondence was now avoided as much as possible, and it was strongly recommended to conceal the names of the leaders. The business was now conducted by delegates, who met in small numbers, and carried on an extensive but verbal correspondence among the disaffected. Derbyshire, Nottingham, and the West Riding of Yorkshire, appear to have become the centre of action. About the middle of May, a new expedition to London