Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

had the first trial produced this conviction on his mind, he should have felt it his bounden duty to stay the proceedings; but, in the absence of such conviction, ought he to have abstained from proceeding with the second prosecution, because the first had failed?

Sir Samuel Romilly entered more at large into topics connected with the general state of public affairs. Desirable as it was that harmony should prevail on the present occasion, it was yet the privilege of members to introduce affairs which had happened during the recess, especially if they had arisen from measures sanctioned by the House-therefore, the noble lord was perfectly in order when he animadverted on the late trials, not so much as insulated events, but because they might be considered as part of the system of govern ment now exercised. They threw great light on the extraordinary act which deprived us of the more valuable part of our constitution. Parliament was now called together un der a public calamity; for what else was it, to be called together under the suspension of the best parts of the constitution? It appeared to him, that the transactions at Manchester, at Derby, and in Scotland, confuted all the grounds on which parliament had been called upon to pass the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. It was stated in both the reports, that a treasonable conspiracy of the most atrocious kind had existed at Manchester, that it had been in agitation by the idle and disaffected to attack the barracks, and to burn the manufactories, solely for the purpose of destroying the means of work, and adding, by general distress, to the numbers of those who would engage in desperate plans. In the Lords' report, the phrase was, "to make Manchester a Moscow." It was sta

ted in those reports, that some of the conspirators were in custody, and he had then suggested that these persons should be immediately brought to trial. How had they been proceeded against? The causes were remoed by certiorari to the Court of King's Bench, to prevent a disclosure of the real nature of the charge against them; and at the next assizes in Lancaster, his learned friend, (Mr Topping, who acted for the Attorney-general,) stated, that no evidence was to be produced against them. Government knew from the beginning that no evidence could be brought against them by which they could be convicted; and therefore, turning the advantage they had gained against the people, for it was so, to their own account, they took credit for clemency, because they did not produce evidence which had never existed. How otherwise could it be supposed, that persons conspiring to burn factories, attack barracks, and create a revolution, should be discharged without trial or punishment? He would say nothing at present of the extraordinary, unprecedented-unprecedented he was confident in England, and he believed even in Scotland-the unprecedented attempts to prevail upon another prisoner to give evidence against the accused. In regard to the transactions at Derby, they appeared to him to involve a clear condemnation of the suspension, since, though it had subsisted for five months, it did not prevent these disturbances: and though government declared that they had information of Brandreth having attended meetings, and formed treasonable designs, prior to the 8th of June, they did not avail themselves of this knowledge to seize his person. In his conscience he believed, from the information he had received, that the whole of that insurrection was the work of the per

sons sent by the government-not be not to prosecute, inasmuch as the indeed for the specific purpose of fomenting disaffection-but as emissaries of sedition from clubs that had never existed. In regard to Mr Hone's parodies, he admitted, that though not amounting to blasphemy, they were most offensive and indefensible. Long, however, before the prosecution began, they were entirely suppressed; and a guinea was stated to have been paid for a pamphlet which originally sold for twopence. It was the Attorney-General who had introduced them into a wider circulation than ever. He had given them a permanent place in the history of the country, he had made them a part of its judicial annals, he had given occasion to collect all the parodies that had been published in former ages, to print them in one convenient little volume, and to hand them down to posterity. At all events, nothing could justify the repetition of the trials, especially in the third, which was the least criminal instance.

In reply to these strictures, the Solicitor-General observed, that the persons discharged on their recognizances were not those accused of a design to burn Manchester, but the misled individuals who had acquired the appellation of "Blanketeers," and whose offence amounted only to a misdemeanour. The government had not known of any meetings at which Brandreth was present, prior to the 8th June; they merely inferred, from the circumstances of that day, that there must have been such meetings. In regard to the prosecution of Mr Hone, he did not conceive, that the impropriety of the libel could be made a reason against its prosecution. If that objection was to be allowed any force, the more atrocious a libel was, the more pernicious to the public morals, the more dangerous to the public peace, the more reason there would

prosecution of the offence was certain to extend the circulation. The successive trials had reference not to identical libels, but to three distinct offences. If a man committed three different murders on the same night, in the same house, would the acquittal on one murder constitute an argument against future prosecutions on the other indictments? That difference existed in the case of Mr Hone: the offences were to be proved by distinct evidence. He was prepared to assert, that if a man sold three libels in the same shop, he might be prosecuted on an indictment which comprehended all the libellous publications. Yet, if such a course had been pursued by the Attorney-General, it would no doubt have been considered as extremely severe, and calculated to embarrass and confuse the defence of the accused. The libels had by no means been so completely suppressed as had been represented; on the contrary, they were republished, and circulating in various parts of the country.

Lord Folkestone rose, and made a speech in that high tone of popular invective which he is accustomed to indulge. He verily believed that the persons set at liberty were the identical persons who had been accused of conspiring to burn Manchester. As to the trials at Derby, he verily believed, that the crime for which those unfortunate men suffered, was as much the production of Mr Oliver

-was as much the effect of the measures taken by his Majesty's ministers -as any other transaction in which Mr Oliver had taken a part. "I believe it was the work of Mr Oliverthe agent of Lord Sidmouth-the instrument of ministers; and, if it was so, I do not envy them the triumph which seems to fill them with so much pride, of having convicted and exe

cuted those three miserable indivi- on the House of Brunswick-which has deprived it of its greatest ornament." The feeling manifested on this occasion, must do away, he conceived, with the idea of that disaffection with which the country had been charged. "I am sure, Sir, if the last and greatest plague of Egypt had fallen on this country-if, on the breaking of the morning, we found house-the sorrow one dead in every of the people could not have been more poignant, or more generally expressed. If any persons believe that there are enemies to the House of Brunswick-if any persons think that disaffection towards it exists-they must be taught, by the uniform conduct of the people on this melancholy occasion, that it is not directed against that part of it which is dignified by virtue."

duals. Now, sir," said Lord Folkestone, "to come to the address. I cannot entirely agree to the sentiments contained in it. There is one part of it, which contains an expression of the approbation of the House of the measures of his Majesty's government, and attributes the present improved state of the public feeling to their conduct. (Cries of 'No, no!) It so struck me, when it was read; and most indubitably, I do not agree in such a sentiment. (Cries of 'No, no!') I understand there is no such thing in the address, and therefore I shall pursue the subject no farther." The address, moreover, appeared to him flat, bearing on no specific objects, and dealing only in generalities. The honourable gentleman who seconded it says, "there is nothing in the address that can be objected to, and therefore I recommend it to the House." This is not the way in which addresses were formerly voted. The speech used formerly to contain a general view of the state of the country, both foreign and domestic; and two or three days had been suffered to elapse before an answer was returned. Now we are called on to decide, without having any opportunity of considering the speech or address; and the apology always is, "O! it contains nothing; it pledges you to nothing; and therefore you may agree to it.' He could have wished that a separate address had been voted on the subject of the Princess Charlotte; and that the grief of the House had been more decidedly marked. He had been unjustly represented as an enemy to the House of Brunswick. "I never was an enemy to that House; and therefore, I wish to state my unfeigned feelings of regret at the deplorable event which has filled the country with griefwhich has fallen with dreadful violence

[ocr errors]

Lord Castlereagh did not intend to discuss at present the numerous and irrelevant topics which had been touched upon in the course of the debate. Nothing could be farther indeed from his thoughts than to complain of the allusions made to that awful calamity, which the nation deplored. But topics of a very different nature had been introduced; and attempts had been made to create a feeling, as if the insurrection at Derby had been excited by the agents of government. This was not the proper time to enter into a full refutation of the calumny. But such a time would come, and he would undertake then to disprove the assertion as strongly and as completely, as that which was not the truth could be disproved. In the mean time, he would assert, that there was not a scintilla of evidence produced during the trials to implicate Oliver in the transactions of the criminals; nor was there any one circumstance connected with the whole proceedings, which in any way implicated Oliver, excepting the last words

of one of the unfortunate men, and these were uttered under circumstances which must strip them of all title to notice. When the time for discussion came, he was fully prepared to justify the course adopted by his Majesty's government. No information would be withheld on this subject; and he was confident it would appear, that if the powers intrusted had been great, they had been used in mercy and in justice; and that they had been the means of conducting the country through very formidable dangers to its present tranquillity. He did not wish to lull the country into a feeling that there was now absolutely no danger, and that the peril was quite gone by. The happiness was, that it was so much diminished, that extraordinary powers were no longer necessary to overcome it. On the whole, whatever difference of opinion might prevail as to these points, he confidently expected unanimity on the subject of

the address.

After a few words from Mr Bennet, declaring his confidence of proving all that had been alleged against ministers, Mr Brougham stated his anxiety not to disturb the unanimity which prevailed in the House on such an occasion. This disposition was confirmed by the declaration of Lord Castlereagh, that it was at length the intention of ministers to produce evidence as to the state of the nation before a committee of the House. Until this inquiry took place, it would be premature to give any judgment upon the question. Meantime, he would only say, that his own opinion remained unaltered, that the evidence and the want of evidence, alike shewed those measures to be quite uncalled for.-Lord Cochrane denied all the statements of ministers as to the present state of the country. Their allegation of prosperity, and their proposition of improvement was really a

mockery of the public understanding. It was obviously impossible that any country could go on in the state in which England was at present, with a falling revenue and a starving people-with a greater degree of misery among the population, than was to be found under any arbitrary government which the British ministers might desire to imitate.

He

In the Lords, Earl Stanhope made a speech of a somewhat ultra-royal character, going probably beyond the views and wishes of ministers. drew an alarming picture of the present state of France, where he conceived Louis XVIII. and the Bourbons to be the objects of unlimited odium, so that only the presence of the allied forces prevented the nation from rising against them. Yet he highly approved the measure of imposing them upon France, as on a conquered nation, with whom we had a right to do what we pleased. We ought to keep our troops in France for the utmost period allowed by treaty, and longer if necessary, adhering rather to the spirit than the letter of that agreement. He would have preferred to have divided France, as in Cæsar's time, into three parts, and placed separate dynasties over each. At all events, ministers must now, for the very reasons which rendered Louis so unacceptable to France, support him on the throne as our only pledge of peace. That peace they had nobly conquered, and of that peace the best guarantee was Louis XVIII. His government could not be destroyed without striking at the root of social order in every surrounding nation. A revolution there would not only be attended with calamity to France and the Bourbons, but to every part of Europe; and it would be as impossible to predict what the extent of its effect might be, as it was in the year 1793. It was obvious that,

in the event of a change, the man who, by force or fraud, should attempt to gain the supreme dominion of the French people, would endeavour to effect his purpose by proposing that which was dearest to the heart of every Frenchman-foreign conquest and foreign dominion: and we should then see their armies again devastating the face of Europe, and pursuing the same course of rapine and aggression that had marked their progress during the last twenty years. Had their lordships sufficiently considered the character of that people? -a people the most unprincipled on the face of the globe-a people who had pursued the career of slaves and robbers, and were now the most abject of the human race. If the calamities of the last twenty years were to be renewed from the same quarter and to the same degree, for what purpose had we fought and bled?-for what

purpose had we triumphed ?—what was the object of all our toils, and all the privations occasioned by the burthens of war? The laurels we had reaped would but wither on our brow, and all our battles have been fought in vain.

The Marquis of Lansdowne, appearing as the organ of opposition, went over the ground agreed on by them of joining warmly in the condolence in the afflicting event in the royal house; at the same time declaring his scepticism as to the necessity of the Suspension Act, and as to the existence of any extensive or alarming conspiracy. His Lordship admitted, slowly and with hesitation, the improved state of the country; but concluded with stating his intention not to make any opposition to the address.

The address was carried in both Houses nem, con.

« AnteriorContinuar »