places in parliament; and that garbled, statement which they have presented to both Houses with so much form and solemnity I think it my duty to reject; because it is offered as conclusive evidence against the people of these countries, for whom evidence was offered to be produced at the bar of both Houses of Parliament. But ministers refused to hear a word in their defence, and are now prepared to complete this the last act of outlawry against them, on the mere uncorroborated statement of their inveterate prosecutors, the ministers of the Prince Regent, and without a tittle of such evidence as would, or ought to be received, in any court of justice. My first and main objection then to these measures is, because a sufficient parliamentary ground has not been laid to authorize so serious a proceeding as the stripping the subject of any part of his constitutional privileges. I have another objection against the conduct of ministers, in urging the enacting of these heavy penalties as general measures, because, upon the showing of the ministers themselves, they were devised as the cure for insubordination and turbulency in a very few districts only, and those very particularly circumstanced-and because ministers have, notwithstanding, prevailed upon the parliament to pass a general sweeping system of coercion against the whole community. I have a farther ground of objection, because Ireland has been included in the wide-spreading proscription-whereas her acknowledged tranquillity and peaceable demeanor ought to have made her a very unfitting object for any new measures of severity, and inasmuch as the present measures cannot by any possibility affect her present situation, or even bear upon her former habits, when she deserved less well of the general community than she does at present; and because there has been nothing to justify suspicion against her in the remotest degree, or to prepare her for this cruel infliction, except, perhaps, her having been recently honoured by the panegyric of the ministers. The very principle on which these measures are founded, strikes my mind as in the highest degree objectionable, inasmuch as they draw a wide line of demarcation between the different orders in society, between the many and the few, the rich and the poor, the task-masters and the effective part of the population, teaching to the people this worst of all possible lessons, that in the eye of the parliament (VOL. XLI.)

at least, their interests, and those of the higher orders, are inconsistent with each other and again, because in these their lines of demarcation, ministers have overlooked that most appropriate of all distinctions, the separation of the innocent from the guilty.-My lords, I object to the whole of the machinery with which ministers have preceded and accompanied these extraordinary measures. They have taken the head of the state from that digni. fied retirement in which he is placed in the sanctuary of the constitution-from which he is produced to the view of his people in his own proper person, only for the purpose of exercising the high function of giving or refusing his sanction to the enactments of both Houses of Parliament, or the higher function still, of dispensing the heavenly prerogative of mercy. But ministers have broken into the sanctuary. They have brought the illustrious person to give a precipitate approval of the massacre of his father's subjects, and to influence thereby, as has been too fatally proved, the conduct of magistrates, and, as I fear, of juries too; thus closing the door of justice against the unfortunate victims in the tragedy which was exhibited at Manchester, on the 16th of August last. And lastly, I object to those measures, because some of their most eloquent advocates have thought it indispensable for them, in arguing their necessity, to vilify and to degrade that important part of the constituency, the people, even below the humble rank which they are acknowledged to hold in the community of the state. This may, perhaps, have been a popular topic for the moment, according to the extra-aristocratic feeling of the present day. But this argument, if it deserves the name, could surely have been intended for no other purpose but to exhibit the happy dexterity of the elegant artist in the most vivid colours, whilst he left the case just where he found it. But, according to my view of the subject, the just composition of the state assigns to that reprobated thing, the people,no inconsiderable place. The people form the great body of the social community. It is from them that it receives its form and consistency. They are the sinews of the nation's strength in war; and in peace, the humble instruments of its commercial prosperity. It was that reprobated thing, the people, which fought us through the long and arduous contest which has crowned with glory the British and the Irish name; and (5 1)

The Duke of Athol said, he had most conscientiously voted for these measures, being thoroughly satisfied that they were imperiously required by the state of the country. He was satisfied they would prove highly satisfactory to the great majority of the country.

The Earl of Harrowby observed, that no one could have anticipated the occurrences which took place during the recess, and that ministers, by waiting until now, only showed a disposition to trust to the existing laws, as long as they could do so with safety. Besides, the refusal of the noble lords on the other side to assent to them even now, was a proof of the difficulties that must have attended their proposal at any former period. With the exception of London, Westminster and Southwark, no petition or remonstrance had been presented against them. The silence of the people could not be disputed; and if ever there was an occasion to which the hackneyed quotation dum tacent clamant might be applied, it was the occasion of which he was speaking. From this disposition he augured favourably of the future tranquillity of the country, and thought that government, by looking the danger in the face, had pursued the only practicable measure of conciliation, that of providing for the safety of the well-disposed subjects of the Crown.

The Lord Chancellor said, he had voted for the present measures, because he conceived that their necessary tendency was, to secure the peace of the country, and to promote the happiness of the people. This was the end and aim of all just government; but he must deny to those who were endeavouring to disturb society the character of being the people. Upon that understanding he would say, that the bills in question were calculated to add to the happiness, and to defend all the constitutional rights and interests of the subject. The meeting of parliament ought, indeed, in the present state of the country, to be regarded as a blessing, independently of these measures. How often had it been asserted and resolved in public places, that a certain meeting had been a legal meeting? Yet, was there one man in either House of Parliament who had dared to avow such an opinion? Other meetings, however, had been held in such numbers as to produce terror, and thereby alone

banners were carried bearing the inscription of " Liberty or death," and the old song" Give us death or liberty," was sung in full chorus. So he said too; he joined in the sentiment; he hoped an Englishman always would be found to prefer death to the loss of liberty. But what sort of liberty was intended, or what could be fairly represented by bloody flags, and black flags, by inscriptions of "Vengeance," and "Let him who has not a sword sell his garment and buy one?" He muss confess, that before parliament had assembled, his alarm was great; but the majorities which had supported these measures, and the quiet produced already, showing the confidence which was reposed in parliament, had put an end to his alarm. He would now shortly advert to these proceedings, one of which was, to prevent men from assembling together, as they had done, in numbers from 30,000 to 50,000. This the noble earl called coercion. He could not understand how such a term could apply to such a law. Was it possible that these multitudes could carry on any thing like debate, that they could calmly discuss their grievances, or make any rational progress towards their removal? The bill authorized men still to meet-to meet with those whom they knew, in a manner calculated to answer the purposes of debate, and to enable them to come to a right conclusion. Then again with regard to drilling and training, were not these practices which ought to be put down? Though the subject had certainly a right to keep arms for his own defence, he had no right to keep arms for any other purpose. By the express language of the Bill of Rights, which confirmed the general principle as to the subject's right, the right also of the legislature to interfere was asserted. With respect to the traverse bill, it had undoubtedly in its progress received improvements, which reflected great credit on a noble lord (Holland). It had been observed in another place, that the noble lord was a Whig of the first distinction, but that he (lord Eldon) was no Whig at all. In the modern acceptation of the term, he was certainly not a Whig; but he nevertheless hoped he had always followed in the path marked out to him by the example of lord Somers, and those truly great men who brought about the Revolution. Not one inch would they ever go beyond the strict necessity of the

that a law so unnecessary and so inconsistent with the principles of public freedom, would produce a quite contrary effect. From the beginning of his life, he had uniformly exerted himself for the liberty of the press, having always considered the people as degraded whilst the government was contemptible and insecure, in proportion as it had been fettered; but the bill before them went beyond any attack upon it, which he ever expected to witness. What, for instance, could be said for the clause requiring recognizances, which seemed to consider every printer as a suspected and dangerous person? Could any thing but discontent and disaffection be expected to follow from such an unprecedented violation of the constitution? And after all the impolicy and injustice of this unaccountable innovation, it would be of no manner of use, as the restraints, in many ways quite obvious, might and would be invaded, as the periods of the proscribed publications, and the number of sheets in them might be altered. Lord E. concluded by saying, that he was the more earnest that such a law should be rejected by the House of Lords, as it had been hitherto respected even by those who unfortunately distrusted and libelled the other House of Parliament. To have the confidence and affection of an enlightened people was the only possible way of securing their obedience.

case, and by the same rule would he always govern his public conduct. Referring now to the bill for regulating the press, he was ready to admit that the liberties of Englishmen had not only been sustained and supported, but in some degree obtained by the freedom with which it exercised its powers. For the same reason, it was important to take care that it should not be destroyed by the same means. Blame had been cast on a learned person who had filled an office which he himself once had the honour to hold, for not having prosecuted libels more effectually. For his own part, he did not know how that learned person could have acted with more effect. The late publications were quite a novelty in this country. When he was in office, he never heard of waggons filled with seditious papers, in order to be distributed through every village, to be scattered over the highways, to be introduced into cottages. Such things were formerly unknown; but there was now scarcely a village in the kingdom that had not its little shop in which nothing was sold but blasphemy and sedition. He understood that some persons wished a distinction to have been drawn between blasphemy and sedition; but the fact was, that one was now resorted to for the sake of the other. The publications he was adverting to were made up of seditious_blasphemy, and blasphemous sedition. By no other means could a people who for fifty years had shown themselves to be the most moral and religious in the world, be seduced into a conspiracy for overthrowing the constitution of their country. It was necessary that their religion and their morals should first be undermined. He wished that they could be separated, but he feared it was impossible.

The bill was then read a second time.

The Earl of Liverpool said, that the bill would only affect publications sold for sixpence or less. Those, therefore, that were of a higher price, were wholly exempt from its operation. As to the objection taken by the learned lord, that sureties had only hitherto been called upon to give security against a specific act, he would beg leave to observe, that with regard to a numerous and important class of persons, he meant the publicans, the principle of calling for security for their good behaviour had been long recognized and acted upon. Nor could he discover any objection to the measure of securities required under the present bill, considering the circumstances which had rendered it necessary. It was not directed against the respectable body of booksellers and printers, but against those persons who had intruded themselves into that class, and who, having neither property, respectability, nor responsibility, it became essentially necessary to prevent the mischievous consequences, that were daily increasing, of the publications sent

forth by them, to call upon them imperatively for security for their good

conduct.

Lord Ellenborough agreed as to the necessity that existed for passing the present bill; a necessity arising from those mischievous publications which had been sent forth at a cheap rate to delude and deceive the lowest classes of the people. It was not against the respectable press that this bill was directed, but against a pauper press, which, administering to the prejudices and the passions of a mob, was converted to the basest purposes, which was an utter stranger to truth, and only sent forth a continual stream of falsehood and malig. nity, its virulence and its mischief heightening as it proceeded. If he was asked whether he would deprive the lowest classes of society of all political information? he would say, that he saw no possible good to be derived to the country from having statesmen at the loom and politicians at the spinning jenny. He differed from his learned friend in his view of this bill, considering it as imperatively called for by that mischievous abuse of the public press, those cheap publications, which were comparatively of modern date, and which had for a time derived impunity and increased in virulence and malignity, in consequence of the acquittal of Hone. The mischief arising from them in the deception and delusion practised upon the lowest classes, by means of the grossest and most malignant falsehoods, was such, that it threatened the most material injury to the best interests of the country, unless some means were devised of stemming its torrent. Conceiving that the regulations contained in this measure would have the effect of extinguishing this gross and flagrant abuse of the press, that he felt it his duty to support the bill. The bill was passed.

PROTEST AGAINST THE NEWSPAPER STAMP DUTIES BILL.] The following protest against the passing of the bill was entered on the Journals:

"Dissentient,

"1. Because, by the stamps imposed by this bill, and by its further directing recognizances to be entered into by the printers and publishers of the pamphlets and papers therein mentioned, and in sums so large and disproportionate to the probable credit of such persons, or the profits of such small publications, it is

manifest (and has, indeed, been not very indistinctly admitted), that a discouragement, amounting to almost a prohibition, is thus suddenly aimed at a very large and often useful branch of trade.

"2. Because this tacit interdict has not been justified, nor even attempted to be supported, in such a manner as the House of Lords, invested with the only certain means of arriving at truth, was, in my opinion, imperiously bound to have resorted to, before it consented to a law abridging, in any manner whatsoever, the freedom of the press.

"3. Because the great mass of British subjects have no surer means of being informed of what passes in parliament, and in the courts of justice, or of the general transactions of the world, than through cheap publications, within their means of purchase; and I desire to express my dissent from that principle and opinion, that the safety of the state, and the happiness of the multitude in the laborious condi tions of life, may be best secured by their being kept in ignorance of political controversies and opinions; as I hold, on the contrary, that the government of this country can only continue to be secure whilst it conducts itself with fidelity and justice, and as all its acts shall, as heretofore, be thoroughly known and understood by all classes of the people.

"4. Because this obstruction to the sale and circulation of small periodical publications is not confined to those of a political character, but most unaccountably extends to all such as shall contain any public news, intelligence or occurrence, or any remark or observation thereon; a description which most obviously comprehends and involves all the transactions of human life upon which reasonable beings (putting national freedom wholly out of the question) can seek or desire to communicate with one another.

"5. Because it might be admitted, in perfect consistency with these objections to this bill, that considerable numbers of the publications in question may have been mischievous; but no evidence, which I can accept as satisfactory, has been laid before the House of the extent of such abuses, nor that the laws had been duly put in force to suppress them, had been found to be ineffectual or insufficient, but on the contrary, that not one information or indictment had been filed by the attorney-general throughout the whole of the year 1818, against any printer or pub