appeal to the sense of the people." So that, if there were a number of seats at "the disposal of those who advised the dis"solution" of 1807, there must have been a number of seats at the disposal of you and your colleagues, when you advised the dissoÍution of 1806. There is no getting out of this. Every word said against your opponents, upon this score, cuts both ways; and only serves to convey conviction into the minds of the people; and, that that convic tion may, before it be too late, produce an effect salutary to the country, is my earnest hope. II. IRISH INSURRECTION BILL.

This bill, this fearful bill, passed through a committee of the House of Commons, on the 24th of last month. The reader was before apprized, that it enables the Lord Lieutenant, upon receiving a memorial from the magistrates of a county, stating that disturbanse. exist therein, to proclaim that county in a disturbed state; whereupon the bill compels every man, woman and child in that county, to remain within their houses from sun-set at night until sun rise in the morning, though it is notorious, that between before sun-rise and after sun-set affords some of the best hours for husbandry labour. Good God! What a life to lead! But, the being shut up in this way is a trifle. The magistrates, that is to say, persons selected by the government, have, after the issuing of such proclamation, a right, either by them selves or their officers, to inake forcible entry, at any time in the night, into any house, to see if its inhabitants are at home, and to take up and'imprison all those who may be caught out of their houses. To this nobody in the House of Commons seems to have objected; but, it was proposed so to qualify the clause as to compel the house-searchers to give ten minutes to the people within to prepare for the visit. It was stated, that women ought to have a few minutes to rise and dress themselves. But, ten minutes was thought to be too much, and the words reasonable time," a charmingly indefinite phrase, was introduced in the stead thereof.

-But, the most strongly characteristic part of this bill is the clause suspending the Common Law, as to redress against the magistrates and others, in cases where they may, under colour of this act, be guilty of unlawful violences against the people. As the law, thank God, stands, in this country, as yet, every magistrate and other peace officer is liable to be punished for going beyond the law, under pretence of executing the law, except in cases where the revenue is concerned Pantsthe Common Law, that law our refers were go

verned, and of which we have the impudence to boast, is, in a great degree, abrogated by statutes, by those statutes, which William the Third's system of funding and taxing introduced. In other matters, however, we have, as yet, a jury to appeal to against magistrates and other persons in authority, who, under pretence of executing the law, may commit acts of injustice against us; but, how the Irish will now be situated in this respect, the following clause of the bill in question will enable the reader to judge. It is the 5th clause from the end of the bill." Provided always, and be it "further enacted, That when a verdict shail "be given for the plaintiff in any action to "be brought against any justice of the peace, peace officer, or other person, for taking or imprisoning, or detaining any person, or for seizing arms, or entering "houses under colour of any authority "given by this act, and it shall appear to "THE JUDGE OR JUDGES before "whom the same shall be tried, that there was a PROBABLE CAUSE for doing the "act complained of in such action, and the judge or court shall certify the same on "record, then and in that case the plaintiff "shall not be entitled to more than sixpence

64

66

66

damages, nor to any costs of suit: provi"ded also, that where a verdict shall be "given for the plaintiff in any such action

as aforesaid, and the judge or court before "whom the cause shall be tried, shall certi

66

fy on the record that the injury for which "such action is brought was wilfully and "maliciously committed, the plaintiff shall "be entitled to treble costs of suit."Thus, as the reader will perceive, though a man, injured by the magistrates, or their underlings, should obtain a verdict from the jury, the judge may set that verdict aside, and the injured person, by way of redress, may have to pay his own costs! It is really difficult to see how a jury can be, in such a case, of any use at all-There was a debate upon this clause, of which I shall give an account.Mr. Brand moved for the whole clause to be expunged, as being

grossly unjust and unconstitutional." Mr. Percevol admitted that the clause was not one which he could have wished to see introduced, "but, when the necessity of the case "was considered; when it was recollected "that the state of Ireland required that very "irksome and disagreeable duties should be

imposed on the magistrates, which they "would be unwilling to perform, and "which, in fact, it would be dangerous for "them to perform with the zeal and fideli"ty required, unless they were protected

"from the effects of unintentional errors "into which, from appearances, they might "be led; when, in short, it was considered "that the very jurors in such actions of da"mages might be persons against whom it "had been necessary for them to exercise "the enactments of this act, and whose "minds might, on that account, be in"flamed against them; when all these "things were considered, it was the opinion "of those best acquainted with the state of "Ireland, that the act must be imperfectly "executed, unless the magistrates were se "cured by a clause like the present."This is a pretty good confirmation of my Lord Hawkesbury's assertions, respecting "the unanimity that prevails in Ireland, " and the well known readiness of the Irish to join heart and hand, as one man, against "the enemies of the constitution!"- -Sir Arthur Pigot, the late Attorney General, in answer to Mr. Perceval said, that he was decidedly of opinion, that the provision · "now objected to, would be a disgrace to "the statute book. Were they, by this "most extraordinary bill, to give extraordi

46

nary powers to magistrates, and then, af"ter they had exceeded even the powers "given them, to protect them from the ver"dict of a jury. If the right hon. gent. ་ was afraid that the persons aggrieved "might obtain a verdict while the country was in a state of irritation, why limit the "time for seeking redress to six months? If again he was afraid of the inflammable state of the jurors' minds, and that they might even have been parties in the supposed transgression, the remedy was plain "and easy-to change the venue to a more "distant county, where no dissatisfaction or "irritation of feelings had prevailed. It "had been said, that a similar act had been

intended to be proposed by the late minis"try. He would only say for one, that he " had never been consulted on, nor heard "of such an intention, nor had he ever seen "the present bill till yesterday. If the state "of Ireland was such as the right hon. gent. represented, and that a jury could not be had there whose mind were not in an inflammatory state, why not take away the "trial by jury entirely, at least suspend it, till the feelings of the people were re"stored to a greater degree of calmness and

66

" in common with judges of this part of the kingdom, with whom he was more inti "mately acquainted, possessed every ho "nourable and upright feeling and quality. "But this was a power not to be intrusted to any man. It was such a power as the "law had refused to any judge, or any set "of judges whatever."- This answer was complete in all its parts. It left no excuse for the clause.--Now, then, let us hear the defence of it by the present Attorney General, Sir Vicary Gibbs, who "con

composure? It was a mockery to continue "the trial by jury, and yet to deprive an in"jured person of the effect of a verdict af"ter it had been given in his favour. It was said, that the judges of Ireland were "fair, impartial and upright. He should be sorry to doubt it. He believed, that they

66

tended, that the enactment now objected "to was not so novel as the hon. and learn"ed baronet had supposed. He confessed "that plaintiffs in the situation alluded to

66

were to be deprived of the benefit of the "common law; but was not this already "the case in all revenue questions? Where "an officer of the revenue was sued, nothing "but the dry damage sustained by the in jured party was awarded against him. "Where it was a question of intention in

revenue cases, and no intention could be "shewn, the plaintiff could not recover; "and it had been determined, in the case "of Sutton and Johnston, that the question "of "probable cause" was a question for "the judge. There the defendant would "have an acquittal, and of course his costs

"ture,

from the plaintiff'; here the plaintiff was to have a nominal verdict, even although "the judge was of opinion that the proba "ble cause was with the defendant. The "duties which magistrates would have to "perform in the present state of Ire "land, were of a most invidious_na-* and he thought that this was "not too great an indemnity to allow "them in the discharge of such duties."— A Mr. Boyle supported the clause, upon the ground, that the same had been enacted before in Ireland, and, indeed, that a similar provision now made part of the statutes of that country; and, he asked Sir Arthur Pigot why he had not, when in place,-come forward and proposed to do it away. This was a close question. Aye, this is the rub, All these things the Whigs forgot while in place. Mr. Erskine, become Baron Erskine of Clackmanam, forgot, quite forgot those bills, against which he had so strongly protested, and so solemnly vowed to endeavour to cause to be repealed. Nay, he gave his vote for making us pay the debts of the man, by whom they had been framed, This is never to be forgotten.--Mr. White bread said, that he had indeed heare something like an attempt at a legal də "tence of the measure, by shewing th "such practices also prevailed in levenų

questions. But would that render the power more agreeable to law or to the "constitution? Was it not known and acknowledged, that our revenue laws were infractions of our constitutional liberties, and were only tolerated as acts of necessi-, ty, which, indeed, was the only attempt at a vindication of the present measure. "The necessity of the revenue laws we "must all be aware of, a great revenue "could not otherwise be expected to be "levied, but of the necessity of the pre

sent provision, he confessed he was by no means convinced. An hon. gentleman (Mr. Boyle) had, however, treat"ed the provision as part of the existing

laws of this country, and had asked, "why, if so obnoxious to his learned

At all events an enactment of the Irish parliament, could not act as a precedent for that house, or afford any such argument for now adopting it, as if they had "been re-enacting a former legislative measure of their own. There might be a general conviction of the necessity of the present act, and yet the clogging it with one clause similar to that now objected to, might render it so unpalatable that many gentlemen, who like himself, were not "otherwise unfriendly to the measure, might rather wish to see Ireland take its chance than thus relinquish one of the dearest and most valuable rights. It was hardly possible, but that in the execution of such an act as the present, innocent Their persons should suffer wrong. country, however, would still be naturally dear to them, and they would cheer "themselves with the hope that they had "still a remedy left; that they had still a jury to protect them and to redress the wrongs they had sustained. If the clause now objected to, however, should pass, they could have no such consolation. They might appeal to a jury; a jury might give them redress; but they might "then find the judge interpose, and deprive them of that recompence for their wrongs to which they were justly entitled. "He would ask, could a man in this situation have the same feelings towards his

66

46

sence to conduct it, and he became a "bankrupt. He afterwards went out to "America; he carried with him the "disease of the mind which had thus been "occasioned, became melancholy, his "" senses were deranged, and he made an "attempt upon his life. Another person "was apprehended in the county of Tip

66

perary, because he was guilty of having a piece of French manuscript in his pocket, "and by order of the Sheriff he was flogged, because the sheriff in his ex"treme loyal zeal concluded that the manuscript must be seditious, or it would "not have been written in French, a language which he did not understand. He "therefore intreated gentlemen to look a "little at the other side; to feel a little for "the injured individual as well as for the erring magistrates.- -Mr. Windham always considered the principle of the revenue laws a very deplorable departure "from the general principles of British legislation, and could not readily be in"duced to think that we ought to adopt "what must be in some instances an unjust exception, instead of what was an acknowledged, just, and liberal establish"ed rule. The case of Sutton and John"ston was a singular exception, not ex

was omitted all the preceding clauses might be cancelled also." Well, then, poor Ireland, you are in a hopeful state, since it is held to be absolutely necessary to give such extraordinary, such terrible powers over your people, and since even these powers are of no use, unless impunity be secured to the persons who are entrusted with the exercise of them, and who, upon

probable cause" may surpass them, no matter in what degree!Yet, I do not say, that, in order to prevent a rebellion in Ireland, such measures may not be necessary; but, I say, that the fact of such necessity but badly accords with the halcyon picture drawn by Lord Hawkesbury, and with the positive assertions, lately made in

the ministerial papers, that, at no period, was Ireland ever more loyal or tranquil.But, there are two or three points in Mr. Whitbread's speech which must not pass unnoticed. The first is the proposition, that a great revenue cannot be collected "without infraction of our constitutional "liberties." Sir Francis Burdett has said the same a thousand times, and in a thousand different shapes, and at every such time he has been called every thing short of a 'traitor. The fact is, however, exactly so; and, for this reason it is, that I wish to see the taxing system changed. Mr. Windham observed, that the revenue laws were the exception, and not the rule; but, Sir, it is a fearfully large exception; for these laws completely circumscribe us; they touch us in every part; not a man of us is exempted, or can be by any care of our own, exempted from their operation. More than a hundred thousand able men are engaged in executing them upon a population of eight millions and a half of men, children; and, I am persuaded, that, if you were to make an accurate calculation, you would find, that out of every ten able men in this country, one is, in some way or another, empowered to act under the laws of the revenue, and yet you, who dislike these laws, dislike also the result of the Westminster election," in which a spirit so opposite to these laws was manifested.Mr. Whitbread said, that it would have "been too much for his learned friend, the "late Attorney General, to have come "forward, while in place, and propose to expunge from the statute book the clause

66

ly to have deserved. He earnestly exhorted the Irish members to inculcate amongst their constituents the fundamental maxim of English policy, namely, to have nothing to do with France; which was very patriotic, to be sure; but after having heard the speech of Lord Hawkesbury, one can hardly conceive that there was much necessity for such an exhortation, seeing that “all “the Irish, to a man, are ready to join heart "and hand against the tyrant, who is sub"duing the rest of Europe." Upon the passing of the bill, in the House of Commons, on the 27th of July, Mr. Grattan, as is stated in the report of the debate, "de"clared, that he was informed, that meet"ings of a treasonable nature were held in "Ireland. He did not mean to accuse his "countrymen of treason or disaffection; "but he was certain, that there was a "French party in Ireland; it was against "them, and not against Irishmen, that the "operation of the bill was directed; and

now re-enacted." But Sir, why would it have been "too much"? and, it is this why, precisely this why, that we want to be informed of. The fact is, Sir, it would have been too much for lord Grenville; and, here is an instance wherein the people were sacrificed to the compromise of contend"ing factions", for the having said that which was the case you, Sir, attacked, in what

66

you regarded as the most vulnerable part, the Middlesex address of Sir Francis Burdett. The Honourable House divided, as it is called, upon the clause in question, and, it is hardly necessary to say, that it was carried in the affirmative.- - After this the duration of the bill was fixed at two years and to the end of the next ensuing session of parliament. Upon this Mr Grattan made a speech full of first-rate loyalty, insomuch that he was loudly applauded, it appears, by the Honourable House., and particularly by Mr. Beresford and General Loftus, whose praises he seems most rich

sooner than run a risk of losing the con"stitution altogether, he would take upon "himself his full share in common with "his majesty's ministers, of the responsi"bility which would attach to the mea

sure."Good! Really Mr. Grattan is in a fair way of securing the praises of the friends of " regular government, social or"der, and our holy religion," as John Bowles says. No; the Honourable Gentleman did not mean to accuse his countrymen of disaffection; he thought, doubtless, with lord Hawkesbury, that they would unite, hand and heart against the enemy of their country. He was only quite sure, that there was a French party in Ireland; that was all. Mr. Sheridan, whose speech I must insert, made a speech of a very diderent sort. He said, "he could not agree to "the bill in any shape; but niost particu larly the amendments, which would "make it in some degree palatable, were

rejected. If, said he, the time of read"ing the bill a'third time had afforded me "the best possible opportunity of delivering my sentiments on it at such length as "I chose, I should not have profited by the advantage. I certainly did wish, and mean, to have selected the fittest occasion "for giving fully my reasons for the abhor"rence I feel for its principle, and the con"tempt I entertain for its provisions; but "circumstances have since embarrassed my

perhaps best that it should carry with it all its unequal proportion of deformity. "I say, I cannot but have been induced to forego my first determination, by observing that so many efforts at modification, "moved by most respectable characters, " and supported by the most unanswerable

66

arguments, have been rejected and repro"bated by insulting majorities."Oh, what a man this might be! Had I such talents, and had but a month to live, the weight of those talents should be felt. The bill passed by a majority of 106 against 8.This law is, then, by this time, in operation It is the law of Ireland; and, though I do not say, that I disapprove of it, because, for any thing that I know to the contrary, it may be necessary to prevent a rebellion, I may, I hope, be permitted to bescech the reader to consider what the state of Ireland must be, if such necessity exists. I know, that Englishmen are too much in the habit of taking no thought about the four or five millions of their fellow subjects who live in Ireland; that they are too apt to say, "do what you please with them, so "that you keep them from doing that "which will endanger us." But, is this worthy of an English mind? And, if it could be justified upon principles of morality, can it be justified upon principles of policy? We may rail against the Irish as long as we please; we may call them rebels and half-savages till we are tired; no one can prevent us from despising or hating the Irish; but I think, it is too much for us to blame them, if they should happen most cordially to hate us in return. We have before us now some of the effects of the blessed unio, which Pitt and lord Castlereagh, through means very little mysterious, effected, and which union together with the subduing of

peace of Amiens, asserted to have given to this kingdom more additional power than France had gained by all her conquests! And yet, we are compelled to pay his debts, and to erect a monument to his memory! ! II. MILITARY PLAN.This plan is neither more nor less than a return to the ballot, with additional rigour; that ballot, that very system, which all men, of all parties, had joined in reprobating. As to the making of a man, who has no thing but his labour to maintain him and his family, pay as much as a man of ten thousand or a hundred thousand a year, no thing need be said upon it. It speaks for itself. It is felt; it will be felt; and, in that respect, it will certainly be efficient. Necessity is the plea here also; and what other plea has any measure of this sort? Such measures have always been justified upon this ground; and, what measure is there, which, upon such ground, may not be justified? But, at a time when this plea is so often used, one might be permitted to ask, whence the necessity has arisen ? Who has been the cause of this dire necessity? An overruling providence, "An as Pitt most piously observed That will not do, first, because you never attribute any of your successes to an overruling providence; and next, because, if this be the cause of the necessity, it is perfectly useless to struggle against it; you are, in fact, upon this bypothesis, at war with providence itself. The piety, therefore, of Pitt and John Bowles is unavailing, and, indeed, I am afraid, that it would merit a term very different from that which has been given to it. The necessity, then, must be traced to some other cause, or causes; and, though these causes may, some of them, be remote and obscure, there can, I think, be no doubt, that the great evident cause has been Pitt, left to pursue his own views, unchecked by a Commons' House of Parliament. At any rate, deny this as long as you please, one thing you' must allow, that it is you yourselves, you, the two great factions, who have, between you, in and out of place, had the sole management and controul of the nation and its resources. The Jacobins and Level"lers" have had no hand in the matter. You have had it all to yourselves. However you have been hampered, baffled, and beaten in your projects abroad, you have triumphed over ali discontent and opposition at home. Here you have been completely masters. Well, then, do not look to the people for the cause of the necessity. This is a point, which, if I were able, I would