men were ready to rise, and in the western 75,000 more-in all 150,000. But when asked on the subject, he contented himself with saying, that about 70,000 had been assembled at Spafields, and were no doubt all friends to the cause. Could any thing be more likely to induce the people of the country to acts of insurrection, than for a person who represented himself as the delegate from London, to tell them that the country must rise first, and that the metropolis would follow its example? He did not charge ministers with having given these orders, but he showed what were likely to be the effects of the conduct of this Oliver. He had interrogated this man himself in the committee, and had asked him-"When you talk of sending to London to ascertain the disposition of the people, do you know, or did you ever hear of any society or association there in tended to co-operate with the disaffected in the country?" The answer was; "I do not, and I never did." He asked him then; "Do you know of any gentleman in town or country of any rank and fortune, who was ready to join and assist the conspiracy?" The same answer was returned: "I do not, and I never did." "Has the name of any person been communicated to you, as the organ through whom the disaffected in town might hold a correspondence with those in the country" The reply was again; "I know of no such name, for none has ever been communicated to me." This showed how things had been worked up in the country, and how despicable the force of those persons must be, when not only no association, but no individual of any rank or fortune in the country was inclined to support them. This proved that there was no reason for making such an inroad in the constitution, as to continue for six weeks after the opening of next session the suspension of the habeas corpus. That some disposition to rise existed in certain districts was undoubtedly the case; but was that a reason why the punishment should be extended to all England? He did not think the measure proposed calculated to put an end to the disturbances. Legislation adapted to places and to offences would alone be effective. It was incumbent on his majesty's ministers to sift out to the bottom that system of Luddism, to prosecute its members without mercy, and to put down the system altogether. Until then, the country would never enjoy complete tranquillity. It would not be sufficient to hang a man or two, but to put down the system altogether; for those wretches had wrought their minds to such a degree of indifference, not only to the property, but to the lives of others, that for a small sum, even as low as twenty shillings, they would bind themselves to shoot any individual whom they had never seen before. This was the first time, in the history of England, that bands of Englishmen would hire themselves to destroy their fellow-creatures. To suspend the habeas corpus, to render every man's liberty precarious, and subject to the will of a minister of state, would not produce the intended effect. would, on the contrary, tend to increase crimes, by exciting a stronger feeling amongst the ignorant classes against a government that adopted such measures. And what good would result from taking up a suspected character, and turning him loose on the country six months after? It would be a totally mistaken legislation. The only thing necessary would be, to enact capital pe It nalties nalties for those crimes to which he had alluded. He should now ask the house, whether it did not appear that the insurrectionary proceedings in the country had been impelled by the appearance of Oliver, as a delegate from London; and whether the necessity of the measure was not lessened by the fact, that no single association or individual was found in London ready to assist the insurgents? In 1812, statements infinitely stronger, and bearing a more decided character of treason and rebellion, had been made by the secret committee, but the suspension of the habeas corpus was not thought of, as it would have been entirely inapplicable. He was convinced that there did not exist greater necessity at present for surrendering for a time the liberties of the country, than at that period. Mr. Legh Keck stated, that the magistrates, and those who were best acquainted with the local circumstances of the disturbed districts, were of opinion that the only measure which could effectively repress insurrection, was the suspension of the habeas corpus. He then vindicated the magistrates from the charge of inactivity, and contended that they exposed even their lives in the fulfilment of their duties. It was not in the power of the ordinary laws to put down Luddism. He maintained, though he did not know him personally, that Oliver's moral character was subject to no imputation. He then stated that the grand juries of Leicester, Derby and Nottingham, had recommended the reenactment of the frame breaking bill, as the only remedy capable of counteracting existing evils. Mr. Abercrombie had never heard a less convincing speech. The honourable member had dealt in assertions, but without giving any reason to prove them, or if he did, his reason went directly against the assertions which he had made. Thus he had stated that according to the opinion of the magistrates, the suspension of the habeas corpus act was the only measure which could prove effective, and then he added, that the grand juries of Leicester, Derby and Nottingham, had recommended the re-enactment of the frame breaking bill as the only remedy to existing dangers, and that at the very time when the suspension of the habeas corpus was in force. This gave a forcible contradiction to the necessity of that measure. As to Oliver, he was astonished, after what had been heard of him this night, that any man could be found in that house to say, that his moral character was unimpeached. He objected to intrusting powers like the pre. sent to a person against whom so many constitutional questions had lately been raised. He alluded to the case of the Reading jail, lord Sidmouth's circular, and the employment of Oliver. He maintained that as long as ministers suspended the habeas corpus act, and brought on trials for constructive treason, they would obtain no convictions, but would contribute to alienate the hearts of the people from their government. Mr. Legh Keck explained. Mr. Barclay contended, that the noble lord had magnified the greatness of the evil, and diminished the strength of the laws already in existence to repress it. The report alone was sufficient to prove the total imbecility of the persons represented as combining to overturn the government. He agreed with the chancellor of the exchequer that the state of the country was improving, and thought that that improvement would act most effectively towards putting putting down insurrection, without any measure like the present. Mr. Wilberforce felt as much reluctance as any man to suspend for a while the best bulwark of our constitution, but thought in the present instance that the safety of the country rendered such a measure necessary. He contended that the disturbances in the country were not the effect of mere Luddism, but that they bore a strong political character. They were managed by men, not indeed of property, but of considerable energy of mind, who worked on a people already open to seduction by its own distresses. They might thus produce a spirit fo dissatisfaction through the vast body of the people, and that most valuable of all classes, the working class. He contended that the evidence did not deny that individuals might be connected with the insurgents in the country, but merely that Oliver knew nothing of any such person or association." If (observed the honourable gentleman) there had been no connexion with London, why should the people of Manchester and its neighbourhood have sat watching the coming in of the mails, when they hoped that the tower and the bank would be taken?" He had not found any well affected person having any strong objection to the measure. If it were entirely left at the disposal of ministers, like the lettres de cachet in a neighbouring country, then it might be dangerous, as it might more likely be abused. But he did not consider it in that point of view. He acknowledged that the measure would be stronger than when first enacted, as it would continue whilst the parliament did not sit: but any abuse would be speedily discovered and discussed in the house at its re-union. There would be great danger in allowing those persons, who had already been taken up and prevented from doing more mischief, again to be let loose among the lower order-again to return to their noxious practices-again to disturb the peace of society, and perhaps execute their plans for the subversion of the constitution. When he considered what had been already done by those persons, how much more had been attemptedthe attempts to debauch the soldiery-Members might laugh, but which of them would laugh at being reminded that by these very attempts the individuals had been brought to trial, and had so nearly paid the forfeit of their lives? And was this matter of laughter? Upon the whole question, when he considered the contents of the first report, and also of the second-when he reflected how materially the peace of society, and the existence of good order depended on furnishing the government with power to punish the disorderly-when he considered the awful responsibility incurred by government in the exercise of these powers, he could not but vote for this bill. Lord Althorpe.-The speech of the honourable gentleman who spoke last, although very eloquent, had yet completely failed in convincing him of the necessity of furnishing the executive government with the very great powers which they now demanded. He thought that ministers had entirely failed in making out such a case as to justify the necessity of granting those powers. Even if all that the reports of the committees contained was allowed to be true, a sufficient case had not been made out. But when it was considered how very much the facts alleged in the reports had been mistaken, the case against this bill was much > much stronger. In the first report it was said that the disaffected in the metropolis had assumed the French revolutionary emblems, but it had been proved that this was not the case; but on the contrary, that the flags and cockade of the rioters were not of the French colours, but green, white and red, adopted from some absurd notions about nature, truth, and justice. He trusted that many of those who had supported this bill in the early period of the session would vote against it now, for there was a wide difference between intrusting the executive with such extraordinary powers during the session of parliament, and continuing those powers du ring its prorogation. To talk of confidence in government was no argument when the question was about the safeguard of the constitution. It was also to be observed, that this act had nothing to do with the exertions of magistrates, to whom it gave no new power. On the whole, he hoped the house would see the necessity of rejecting this bill. Sir Samuel Romilly.-"The noble lord who opened this debate said, be thought that all those who voted for this measure in the early part of this session, must also give their vote for the bill now before the house. Indeed the noble lord went further, and calculated that some of those who had opposed the passing of the former bill must agree to the one now before the house." Under all the circumstances of the case, however, it really seemed to him, that this was a very unwarrantable assumption. For his own part, he had paid great attention to this subject; he had examined the facts, and considered with all his powers. Thus much he would say, that if he thought the measure now pro posed expedient, he would before have voted for it. But it was to be considered what the nature of the measure was. It was not merely the habeas corpus act which they were called upon to suspend; but it was the writ of habeas corpus itself-it was also to take away the trial by jury. What then was the house about to do? They were consenting to take away the benefits of the constitution for an unlimited period. This was particularly ob served with respect to the duration of the measure, that it was indefi nite. The suspension was to continue as long as it should please the executive government ;-that was to say, till parliament should meet again, and that might be till November or till January, or till March in short, as long as the government pleased. If the bill was to be passed, at least, he hoped, a clause would be introduced to limit the time of its duration till December, or some other period less distant. But the measure had been already tried, and how would experience support it? Had it been found successful? The noble lord's argument for the bill now, did not look very like this. The noble lord said, those who supported the bill before, must support it now, on account of " the augmented extent of the conspiracies," as the noble lord phrased it. So it seemed conspiracies had grown up under the operations of this bill. For his own part, this seemed to him very natural. The operations of this bill gave the people a real grievance to complain of. The designing and the mischievous had now a real handle with which to work on the minds of the ignorant. They were not now obliged to hunt back to the reign of king John for some imaginary grievance; for now trial by jury was done away with the system of government acting by spies was avowed. That things should be come to such a pass, that in the British house of commons the system of spies was openly avowed, was truly a most melancholy consideration; it was what must excite and ought to excite more discontent than such measures as this bill ought to suppress or could keep down. He was one of those on whom the first report of the secret committee had made a great impression; but upon a more minute inquiry and more grave consideration he had changed his opinion. Having compared the facts which came out in an authentic shape on the late trials, with the statements in that report, his confidence in it had been much shaken. Was it possible, that after all that was said in it about conspiracies and delegates, one circuit and one quarter sessions had taken place without one trial? that government had even avoided bringing any one case to trial! At Manchester no less than one hundred and forty persons had been arrested. Of these only a few were indicted; and even these few were not brought to trial, for the government caused writs of certiorari to be sued out to prevent the trials, and thus to prevent the good effect which must ensue from making examples of the guilty, or rather to prevent it from being seen that facts had been great ly misrepresented. But what persons had been convicted for this? What trials had there been? Only one. And that one solitary case was for a libel on the passing of the former bill-a libel, he might say, provoked (not that he meant this as any justification of that case), but in a manner provoked-certainly caused by the passing of this act. The case he alluded to was that of Wooler. In arguing against the necessity or the policy of this measure it was not necessary to go further than the last report of the committee. There were two passages in it which he must beg leave to read to the house. They were these:-"Your committee cannot contemplate what has passed in the country, even since the date of their former report, without the most serious apprehensions." "It appears to your committee, that the utmost confidence prevailed among the delegates as to the ultimate attainment of their object; that the successive arrests of several of the principal leaders, though they occasioned momentary disappointment, did not extinguish the spirit of insurrection or the hopes of success." What, then, did all this prove? Did it not show that the effects of this bill were utterly inadequate to the object in view; and that it produced no permanent good effect? It appeared that there was no want of leaders. So long as there were any disaffected, they would not want a leader. The honourable gentleman (Mr. W.) seemed to forget that by an act passed in the beginning of this session, all those delegates were made liable to transpor. tation. He then went on to confute from facts what was said about Luddism; maintaining that that unfortunate system had taken such deep root in the country, that if the bill was to be passed to put an end to that dreadful system, its duration must not be for a few months, but for several years. As to that part of the report which treated of the situation of London, it was said, that "no specific information has been laid before your committee of the existence of any body of men, associated in the metropolis, with whom the disaffected in the country appear |