lectures, and, with little variation, were directed to the same objects as before. Discussions of this nature in the hands by which they were taken up, and with the audience to whom they were addressed, were employed to attack all religion, government, and society; and though in the outset they may not so directly lead to the consequences which it was the object of the conspirators of this country to attain, they ultimately tend to prepare the minds of men for those horrors and calamities, which are the infallible consequences of those principles against which it is our duty to provide. To prevent such dangerous abuses, it will be a part of the proposed measure to extend the provisions against seditious lectures and political discussions, to all places where money is taken at the door, making this the criterion, and putting them upon the footing of disorderly houses, unless where a license has been previously taken out, and where they are subject to the inspection of the magistrate. By this regulation I conceive no innocent pursuit or amusement will be obstructed, and the public will be protected from an evil, of a danger far beyond the importance of those from whom it proceeds.

The provisions which I shall have the honour to propose, will likewise be directed against another part of that plan, pursued with no less industry to poison the minds of the ignorant and unwary. It has been the proud and distinguishing principle of the law of England, that the liberty of the press has been cherished as the most invaluable bulwark of liberty. It certainly is one from which, when not abused, the greatest advantages might be derived, but when abused and perverted, it has led to the greatest mischiefs. It has, therefore, been the object of the law of this country, without imposing any previous restraint, to secure a subsequent responsibility in the author and publisher, if they should be guilty of private libels or public treason. Those publications of a higher order, under the laws of the country, and the prevalent spirit of loyalty in the people, are tolerably sure of being subjected to punishment for their libels, at least those of a more flagrant nature. Happily those libels, formerly so prevalent, are, owing to these causes, more restrained. Unfortunately,

[APRIL 19. most calculated to pervert and mislead the lower orders. Instead of being employed to communicate knowledge and instruction, it has been perverted to give false and imperfect representations of facts, and inadequate or improper discussions of subjects in nowise adapted to those to whom they were addressed, and fitted to produce the greatest mischief to those who are the immediate objects, and ultimately to the public itself. Hence has been prosecuted to such an extent the plan of disseminating hand-bills, tending to poison the minds of the people, to deprave their morals, to pervert their loyalty, and to undermine their religion. Against this species of mischief some new provisions are necessary, the object of which will be always to have responsible the author or publisher. This regulation is strictly in the spirit of the constitution. If in its application it is new, it is because the evil is likewise new, while the remedy is so unexceptionable in its nature, that it must be approved by all who value public morals and public tranquillity.

A provision, the object of which is so legitimate, cannot be felt as a restraint by those who are engaged in the regular trade connected with the press. What is required, is to have the name of a publisher affixed to every hand-bill, as in every other species of publication. To prevent their being issued from private presses, it will be necessary to obtain some knowledge of those who may have such implements in their possession. To obtain this, it is proposed to have a register kept at those places where types are fabricated, (which are not very numerous,) to discover who acquire them, to make those who now have presses register them, and make it necessary for every publication circulated to bear the name of the publisher affixed to it. This regulation, I am sure, will not injure the cause of science, literature, and improvement, or even interfere with any innocent amusement, while it will secure the public against the circulation of anonymous treason, sedition, or impiety, by which, in the quarters most exposed, the pillars of morality, religion, and government are attacked.

Such is the third object of the measure which I shall propose. The report of the committee will remain for further consider

ation, and it will be for the House to consider whether the nature of the dangers to which we are exposed, demands any fresh precautions. The circumstances of the times require a vigilance always ready to accommodate our measures of security to the degree of malignity which danger may assume, and to vary their remedies with the changing character of the evil by which we are threatened. Fortunate shall we be if the wise, moderate, and salutary provisions already adopted or proposed, shall prove adequate to the inveteracy of the disease, the virulence of which neither detection nor punishment, nor a sense of the blessings we enjoy, nor of the horrible calamities with which the principles of jacobinism have desolated Europe, has been able to abate. In spite of every discouragement and every obstacle, treason has pursued its purposes. Happily, this country has been shielded from the calamities of French principles and French treasons, by the well-tempered vigour of its government, and the prevalent active loyalty of its people. Yet, against all this opposition conspiracy has struggled. Vigilance and energy are still requisite to secure the blessings so firmly maintained. Upon every occasion it has been the honourable character of parliament to have exerted a vigour limited to the necessity of the case. It has kept up to the urgency of the danger, and never overstepped the bounds of moderation. Preserving the liberties of the country sacred and unimpaired, it has displayed an energy proportioned to the magnitude of the crisis; and, guided by the same principles, I trust it will continue to pursue that course which has secured the constitution, the liberties, the prosperity, and the happiness of this country. I shall now move, Sir, "That it is the opinion of this committee, that a bill be brought in to renew and amend the bill passed in the thirty-eighth of His present Majesty, for securing and detaining persons accused of treason and sedition; and that a bill be brought in to suppress seditious societies and seditious practices."

The resolutions were passed without a division.

June 7. 1799.

THL House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, His Majesty's message, which had been referred to the committee the preceding day, acquainting the House with the engagements entered into between His Majesty and the Emperor of Russia, was read.

Mr. PITT then rose, and in a short speech moved, "That the sum of 825,000l. be granted to His Majesty, to enable His Majesty to fulfil his engagements with Russia in such a manner as may be best adapted to the exigencies of the case."

Mr. Tierney opposed the motion on the ground of its object being undefined. He called upon ministers to declare what was the common cause they talked of, and what was meant by the deliverance of Europe; asserting, that he would not vote any sums for a purpose which he did not understand, and in aid of a power whose object he did not know, which might be appropriated to her own views exclusively, and to the injury instead of the welfare of England.

Mr. PITT. ———— I wish, Sir, to offer such an explanation on some of the topics dwelt upon by the honourable gentleman* who has just sat down, as will, I think, satisfy the committee and the honourable gentleman. The nature of the engagement to which the message would pledge the House is simply, that, ist, for the purpose of setting the Russian army in motion, we shall advance to that country 225,000l. part of which, by instalments, to accompany the subsidy to be paid when the army is in actual service. And I believe no one, who has been the least attentive to the progress of affairs in the world, who can appreciate worth, and admire superior zeal and activity, will doubt the sincerity of the sovereign of Russia, or make a question of his integrity in any compact. The 2d head of distribution is 75,000l. per month, to be paid at the expiration of every succeeding month of service; and, lastly, a subsidy of 37,500l. to be paid after the war, on the conclusion of a peace by common consent. Now, I think it strange that the honourable gentleman should charge us with want of prudence, while it cannot be unknown to him that the principal subsidies are not to be paid until the ser

* Mr. Tierney,

vice has been performed, and that in one remarkable instance the present subsidy differs from every other, in as much as a part of it is not to be paid until after the conclusion of a peace by common consent. I think gentlemen would act more consistently, if they would openly give their opposition on the principle that they cannot support the war under any circumstances of the country and of Europe, than in this equivocal and cold manner to embarrass our deliberations, and throw obstacles in the way of all vigorous co-operation. There is no reason, no ground to fear that that magnanimous prince will act with infidelity, in a cause in which he is so sincerely engaged, and which he knows to be the cause of all good government, of religion and humanity, against a monstrous medley of tyranny, injustice, vanity, irreligion, ignorance, and folly. Of such an ally there can be no reason to be jealous; and least of all have the honourable gentlemen opposite me grounds of jealousy, considering the nature and circumstances of our engagements with that monarch. As to the sum itself, I think no man can find fault with it. In fact, it is comparatively small. We take into our pay 45,000 of the troops of Russia, and I believe, if any gentleman will look to all former subsidies, the result will be, that never was so large a body of men subsidised for so small a sum. This fact cannot be considered without feeling that this magnanimous and powerful prince has undertaken to supply at a very trifling expense a most essential force, and that for the deliverance of Europe. I still must use this phrase, notwithstanding the sneers of the honourable gentleman. Does it not promise the deliverance of Europe, when we find the armies of our allies rapidly advancing in a career of victory at once the most brilliant and auspicious that perhaps ever signalised the exertions of any combination? -Will it be regarded with apathy, that that wise and vigorous and exalted prince has already, by his promptness and decision, given a turn to the affairs of the continent? Is the House to be called upon to refuse succours to our ally, who, by his prowess and the bravery of his arms, has attracted so much of the attention and admiration of Europe?