est foe that England ever knew. Sooner | disaffected in England; and that this than support such objects, or such a pro- peaceful and prosperous country might ject, he would rather violate the proud return to that state of applauded neufeelings which he shared in common with trality which we have just thanked his the House, and petition for peace, with any majesty for adhering to, this we must anconcession, and almost by any sacrifice. swer, "Go, thou mean wretch, thou beBut he trusted no such dilemma impend- trayer of the pride and dignity of the ed. The real object of the war was one crown and of the nation, thou contamithing; the fiery declaration which was to nated man, debased by intercourse with whet our valour was another.-Mr. She- the agents of robbers, ruffians, murderers, ridan now adverted to the strange situa- and atheists-we only dissembled when tion in which the House might bring it- we applauded your neutrality; we detest self, by indulging this furious spirit of de- your peace, and we meant to dupe our clamation, against the meanness and in- sovereign when we called on him to prefamy of holding any sort of treaty and serve it." Would the House make this intercourse with France. It was in the answer, should such happy intelligence first place a libel on his majesty's speech, be brought them, and will they own that and upon our own address. His majesty they played the hypocrite in their address had encouraged us to hope, that notwith- to their king?-Mr. Sheridan then declastanding his armament, he might yet pro- red, that from the commencement of the cure to us the blessing of peace; and we revolution, he had been of opinion, that had thanked and encouraged him in his if there had been a statesman-like admigracious intention. How was this to be nistration, they would have considered achieved? Disputes and cause of com- the post of minister at Paris, as the situaplaint existing without some sort of tion which demanded the first and ablest communication, it was impossible. How talents of the country. Happy, he bewas this to be carried on? Was there lieved, it would have been for both counany sort of dumb crambo, by which the tries, and for human nature itself, if such parties might come to understand each had been the opinion of government in other; and yet the form of negociation be this country; and highly as he valued his slipt from, and the moral dignity of Great right hon. friend, unparalleled as he Britain be preserved? A right hon. thought his talents were, he should not gentleman, indeed, had warned the House hesitate to declare, that, as minister in to be tender of advising his majesty in Paris, there was scope and interest for the exercise of his prerogative; yet he the greatest mind that ever warmed a huhimself had actually usurped the first pre- man bosom. The French had been unirogative of the crown; and in contradic- formly partial, and even prejudiced, in tion to the king's express declaration, de- favour of the English. What manly clared the nation to be actually at war. sense, what generous feeling, communiBut what was to be said, if, after all this, cating with them, might have done, and the minister, when he returned to his above all, what fair truth and plain dealseat in that House, should bring us the ing might have effected, he believed it happy intelligence, that, in consequence was not easy to calculate; but the withof explanation and treaty, the calamities holding all these from that nation in our of war were actually averted? Mr. She- hollow neutrality, he was sure, was an erridan asserted peremptorily, that, at the ror which would be for ever to be lavery moment in which the House was mented. urged to a flame at the idea of our stooping to the contamination of treating with France, the minister was actually negociating, not only through Holland, but directly with agents from the French executive council. Should his efforts be successful, observe how you must treat him on his return: if he should tell you that a temperate explanation has taken place; that the French had abandoned all idea of attacking our ally; that they had rescinded the incendiary decrees and declarations which had countenanced the

Mr. Dundas said, that when the hon. gentleman who spoke last rose, he thought all the arguments that were used had been fully answered on the former night, all the facts in the proclamation, and the speech from the throne, the House had already decided on. One assertion, that of a negociation now depending, was of a nature which a minister could not safely answer; because, whether he admitted or denied it, he disclosed what might be unfit to be disclosed. All, therefore, that he could say on the subject was, that the

the House, in the course of this discussion, had evinced an indecent exultation at the abolition of monarchy in France, and the subsequent calamities which every man of feeling ought to lament and abhor. The only benefit that could accrue to this country from that event, was the dissolution of the family compact. But, alas! that advantage was absorbed in the alarming extension of the territories of the French republic, which, if recognized by us, would excite the resentment of every power in Europe, and pave the way to render Great Britain a province of France. Was not this the time for Englishmen to join heart and hand in maintaining our independence and supporting our importance in the political scale of Europe? They had likewise exulted in another event, which ought rather to be a subject of condolence and regret, namely, the retreat of the combined armies, whose leaders were actuated by the laudable motives of humanity, whose object was, to stop the effusion of blood, and prevent those excesses incident to a fero cious people, who had thrown off all restraint of government, and relinquished every social and moral obligation, and reverted to a state of nature, of anarchy and confusion. He described the men who composed the legislative and executive government of France, and reprobated the idea of sending a minister to negociate with rebels, assassins, and regicides, whose ambition seemed stimulated by rapine, havoc, and devastation. With such a junto, a member of the British House of Commons had the hardihood to propose an embassy, which always implied a parity of manners, and a reciprocity of interest. He would ask the right hon. gentleman, who would go upon this diplomatic expedition? No man that was loyal to his king and faithful to his country, would undertake an embassy to which so much danger and responsibility was at tached; for sure he was, that a disparity of political sentiments would expose any person of that description to the ferocity of a licentious mob, who might perhaps imbrue their hands in his blood before they permitted him to deliver his credentials to those immaculate gentlemen who were placed at the helm of affairs in France. Indeed, the subject in discussion appeard to him.

he was inclined to believe he was not sincere in his intentions; for the old adage par pari gaudet was not unfrequently applicable to the rational as well as to the brute creation.—Mr. Drake then addressing himself to the opposite side of the House, broke out in a most severe invective against the gentlemen who had supported the motion, and in the most emphatic terms conjured his honourable, ever honourable, and right honourable friends, to unite heart head, and hand, in suppressing and extirpating the very semen of a revolution which was but too manifest in the volcanic, subterranean, infernal, diobolical eloquence of his inimical friends who-[Here a peal of laughter.] The hon. mover insisted that he had been interrupted in one of the most essential privileges of a British senator, viz. the freedom of speech, which he hoped the Speaker had not omitted to demand of his majesty at the opening of the present session: and if it had been obtained, he, in common with other members, had a right to avail himself of it. In order to conciliate the attention of the House, he lamented that it was necessary for members to detail their political creed. Whatever that of others might be, his was, loyalty to his king, fidelity to his country, and love to the constitution. The hon member declared, that if by theatrical gesticulation he had betrayed an excess of animation, it was but the ebullition of his heart, which obliged him to exclaim with Hamlet, that he had -"that within which passeth show; "These but the trappings and the suits of woe,"

The subject matter in debate was of vast importance, and struck to the heart of every patriotic Englishman, whose reason was unruffled by passion, unclouded by prejudice, and unwarped by party. For his part, he was an isolated man, who thought the cause of his country paramount to every other concern; he therefore trusted, that gentlemen would impute his animation to a zeal for the good of his country, which neither hope nor fear could influence him to suppress.

The motion was then put and negatived.

Debate on Mr. Grey's Complaint of a Libel intituled " One Pennyworth of Truth, from Thomas Bull to his Brother John."] Dec. 17. Mr. Grey rose to make his promised motion. He began by saying, that in a former debate Mr. Dundas had

day, which stated, that the populace had risen again, and had destroyed the houses of Messrs. Cooper and Walker. At Birmingham, also, symptoms of riots had been evinced. These effects seemed to him to have proceeded from a publication, issuing from the Association at the Crown and Anchor Tavern: it was called "A Pennyworth of Truth from Thomas Bull to his Brother John." He had sent for it to the Crown and Anchor, and was told that it was delivered to none but subscribers, but was to be had at Stockdale's; a proof that they avowed the publication. It contained the following libellous invectives against the dissenters. "Our national debt, for which we are now paying such heavy taxes, was doubled by the troubles in America, all brought upon us from the beginning by the dissenters there and here. Did not Dr. Price write for them? And did not the Birmingham Doctor (late one of the king's elect of France) encourage them, and write mob-principles of government to justify them?" Paine's Rights of Man had not produced one riot; but this invective against the dissenters seemed calculated to produce effects the most alarming. If government did not put a speedy termination to these proceedings, he was convinced that that great man, Dr. Priestley, and every other dissenter, would not be safe. He read several extracts from the paper, and concluded with moving, "That the said paper be delivered in at the table and read." This he intended as the ground of an address to the king to give directions to the attorney general to prosecute.

taken fire at an insinuation he had made, | diaries were. He had heard that an exthat the protection of the laws was not ex-press had arrived from Manchester that tended equally to all his majesty's subjects. So far, however, from receding from that insinuation, he begged to be understood, that he meant to substitute now assertion for insinuation. He was decidedly of opinion that the protection of the laws was not equally extended to all persons. In support of his opinion he adduced the riots at Birmingham, into the causes of which no inquiry had been suffered to take place. In the present instance, if administration created an alarm; if at the same time that alarm was occasioned by a general description held out, that there were persons disaffected to the constitution; if such a general description, too, were made for the express purpose of subjecting particular persons to the vengeance of the people, he conceived that he was fully justified in the assertion he had made. Several facts had been stated to justify the proclamation. These were all denied. At Dundee the tumults were over ten days before the issuing of the proclamation; besides, it was plain that government did not assemble the militia to suppress them; for if they had, the militia would not have been drawn towards London. Those tumults being suppressed without the interference of the military, he contended, that the minister had abused the term of insurrection, and had been guilty of perverting an act of parliament. If he had conceived that riots would break out he ought to have assembled the parliament, and have called for a bill of indemnity. He had not pursued this mode, because it was his interest to create alarm and excite apprehension. If there really existed disaffected persons, they should be pointed out and punished, Riots, he understood, had taken place at Cambridge. Very serious tumults had occured at Manchester; these seemed to proceed from a meeting held at Manchester on the 11th instant, for the purpose of preserving constitutional order. The same evening a mob had assembled and attacked the house of Mr. Walker. An hon. gentleman whom he saw in his place (Mr. Peel) was present at that meeting. In one of the daily papers it was stated, that he said, in his address to the meeting, that it was time for the people to rouse from their lethargy, for there were incendiaries in the country. If Mr. Peel really did utter these words, he called on him to say who those incen[VOL. XXX.]

Mr. Peel conceived that a newspaper paragraph was no foundation on which to criminate a member of that House. With regard to what was attributed to him in the paper alluded to, he disclaimed it all, except his having said "God save the King." The association he belonged to at Manchester consisted of men of independent principles; every man in it spoke his sentiments, and nothing but sentiments of loyalty were uttered. When he left the town all was quiet; and he regretted that the people afterwards broke into disorder. The hon. gentleman, had insinuated, that the riots were occasioned by the Associa tion. The objects of the Association were, to protect the laws, and to discourage any attempts to break in upon the [K]