tuous, though, probably, fhort-lived anarchy on the other,.. though no man would hefitate to make his choice, yet, if there be a course obvious and practicable, which, without either violence or innovation, may lead us back to the vigour we have loft, to the energy that has been ftifled, to the independence that has been undermined, and yet preferve every thing in its place, a moment ought not to be loft in embracing the chance which this fortunate provifion of the British fyftem has made for British fafety. This is my opinion, and it is not an opinion merely founded upon theory, but upon actual obfervation of what is paffing in the world, I conceive that if we are not refolved to fhut our eyes to the inftructive lessons of the times, we must be convinced of the propriety of feasonable conceffion, I fee nothing in what is called the lamentable example of France to prove to me that timely acquiefcence with the defires of the people is more dangerous than obftinate refiftance to their demands; but the fituations of Great Britain and France are so effentially different, there is fo little in common between the character of England at this day and the character of France at the commencement of the revolution, that it is impoffible to reafon upon them from parity of circumstances or of character. "It is not neceffary for me I am fure to enter into any analyfis of the effential differences between the character of a people that had been kept for ages in the barbarism of fervitude, and a people who have enjoyed for fo long a time the light of freedom. But we have no occafion to go to France for example; another country nearer to our hearts, with which we are better acquainted, opens to us a book fo legible and clear, that he must be blind indeed who is not able to draw from it warning and inftruction; it holds forth a leffon which is intelligible to dullness itfelf---let us look to the Kingdom of Ireland, and see how remarkably the arguments and reafoning of this day tally with the: arguments and reafoning that unfortunately prevailed in the Sifter Kingdom, and by which the King's Minifters were fatally able to overpower the voice of reafon and patriotism, and ftifle all attention to the prayers and application of the people. It is impoffible for any coincidence to be more perfect. We are told that there are in England, as it is faid there were in Ireland, a fmall number of perfons defirous of throwing the country into confufion, and of alienating the affections of the people from the established Government. Permit me, Mr. Speaker, in paffing, to obferve that the Right Honourable Chancellor of the Exchequer did not reprefent my Honourable Friend (Mr. Erkine) quite correctly, when he ftated that my Learned Friend admitted the existence of fuch men. On the contrary, the argument of my Learned Friend was hypothetical; he fard, if it be true, as it is fo industriously afferted, that such and such "But the Honourable Gentleman fays, that the friends of moderate Reform are few, and that no advantage is to be gained by conceding to this very fmall body what will not fatisfy the violent, which he contends is more numerous; and he vehemently demands to know whom he is to divide, whom to feparate, and what benefit he is to obtain from this surrender ?--To this I answer, he muft divide thofe who with for moderate Reform from thofe who defire the deftruction of the Conftitution. If the argument of the Right Honourable Gentleman be correct, the neceflity for concellion is more imperious; it is only by this means that you can check the fpirit of profelytism, and prevent a converfion that by and by will be too formidable for you to refift. Mark this, and fee how it applies to the precedent of Ireland. In the Report that has been made by the Parliament of that Kingdom, on the prefent diforders, it is faid, that fo long ago as the year 1791, there exifted fome men in that country, and fome focieties, who harboured the defire of feparation from England, and who wished to fet up a Republi can form of Government. The Report does not ftate what was the precise number of thofe focieties in 1791; they declare, however, that the number was mall and intignificant. From fmall beginnings, however, they have increated to the alarming number of 100,000 men. By what means have they fo increased, and who have been the converts and profelytes who thus fwelled their numbers to fo gigantic a fize? Obviously the men who had no fuch defire, no fuch feelings, no fuch defign originally; obviously the perfons who had no other object in view in all the petitions which they prefented, and in all the applications which they made, than Catholic Emancipation and Reform of Parliament. This is alfo admitted by the Report. The ipirit of Reform fpread over the country, they made humble, earnest, and repeated applications to the Caftie for redrefs, but there they found a fixed determination to refift every claim, and a rooted averfion to every thing that bore even the colour of Reform. They made their applications to all the eminent and confiderable characters in the country, who had on former occafions diftinguished themfelves by exertions in the popular caufe, and of thefe juftly eminent men I defire to speak as I feel, No. 40. 9 E with with the utmost refpect for their talents and virtues, and for the warm interest which they take in the welfare of the country. But, unfortunately, they were fo alarmed by the French Revolution and by the cry which had been fo artfully fet up by Minifters of the danger of infection, that they could not liften to the complaint. What was the confequence? These bodies of men found it in vain to expect it from the Government, the Caftle, or from the Parliament, and having no where else to recur to for redress, joined the Societies, whom the Report accuses of cherishing the defire of feparation from England, and imbibed and became converts to all thofe notions of extravagant and frantic ambition, which the Report lays to their charge, and which threatens confequences fo dreadful and alarming, that no man can contemplate them without horror and difmay. What, then, is the leffon to be derived from this example? But that the comparatively fmall Societies of 1791, became ftrong and formidable by the acceffion of the many who had nothing in common with them in the outfet. I wish it were poffible for us to draw the line more accurately between the small number that the Report defcribes to have had mischievous objects originally in view, and the numerous bodies who were made converts by the neglect of their petition for conftitutional rights. Is it improbable that the original few were not more than ten or twenty thousand in number? What, then, do I learn from this? That the unwife, impolitic, and unjuft refufal of Government, to attend to the applications of the moderate, made eighty or ninety thoufand profelytes from moderation to violence. This is the leffon which the book of Ireland exhibits. Can you refuse your affent to the moral? Will any man argue, that if Reform had been conceded to the eighty or ninety thoufand moderate petitioners, that you would have this day to deplore the union of 100,000 men, bent on objects fo extenfive, fo alarming, fo calamitous? I wish to warn you by this example; every argument that you have heard ufed to-day was used in Dublin. In the fhort-fighted pride and obftinacy of the Govern ment, they turned a deaf ear to the fupplicant; they have now, perhaps, in the open field to brave the affertor. Unwarned, untutored by example, are you ftill to go on with the fame comtemptuous and ftubborn pride? I by no means think that Great Britain is at this moment in the fituation, or that it prefents the aspect of Ireland. I by no means think that the difcontents of this country have rifen to such a height as to make us fear for the general peace of the country; but I deprecate the courfe which was pursued in Ireland. What England is now, Ireland was in 1791. What was faid of the few, they have now applied to the many; and as there are difcontents in this country which we can neither diffemble not conceal, let us not, by an unwife and criminal difdain, irritate and fret them into violence and diforder. The difcontents may happily fubfide, but a man must be either fanguine indeed in his temper, or dull in his intellect, if he would leave to the operation of chance what he might more certainly obtain by the exercife of reafon. Every thing that is dear and urgent to the minds of Englishmen preffes upon us; in the critical moment at which I now address you, a day, an hour, ought not to elapfe, without giving to ourselves the chance of this recovery. When Government is daily prefenting itfelf in the shape of weakness that borders on diffolution, unequal to all the functions of useful strength, and formidable only in pernicious corruption; weak in power, and ftrong only in influence, am I to be told that fuch a ftate of things can go on with fafety to any branch of the Costitution? If men think that under the impreffion of fuch a fyftem we can go on without a material recurrence to first principles, they argue in direct oppofition to all theory and to all practice. Thefe discontents cannot, in their nature, fubfide under detected weaknefs and expofed incapacity. In their progrefs and increase, as increase they muft, who fhall fay that direction can be given to the torrent, or, that having broken its bounds, it can be kept from overwhelming the country? "Sir, it is not the part of statesmen, it is not the part of rational beings, to amufe ourselves with fuch fallacious dreams; we must not fet down and lament over our hapless fituation, we muft not deliver ourselves up to an embecile despondency that would animate the approach of danger; but by a feasonable, alert, and vigorous meafure of wisdom, meet it with, what we think, a fufficient and feasonable remedy. We may be dif appointed, we may fail in the application, for no man can be certain of his footing on ground that is unexplored; but we shall at least have a chance for fuccefs; we fhall at least do what belongs to Legiflators, and to rational beings on the occafion, and I have confidence that our efforts would not be in vain. I fay that we fhould give ourselves a chance, and, I may add, the beft chance for deliverance; fince it would exhibit to the country a proof that we had conquered the firft great difficulty that ftood in the way of bettering our condition. We had conquered ourselves. We had given a generous triumph to reafon over prejudice, we had given the death blow to thofe miferable dif tinctions of Whig and Tory, under which the warfare had been maintained between pride and privilege, and through the contention of our rival jealoufies, the genuine rights of the many had been gradually undermined, and frittered away. I fay, that this would be giving us the best chance, because seeing every 9 E2 thing thing go on from bad to worse, seeing the progress of the most fcandalous wafte countenanced by the most criminal confidence, and that the effrontery of corruption no longer required the mask of concealment ; feeing liberty daily infringed, and the vital fprings of the nation infufficient for the extravagance of a diffipating Government, I muft believe, that unleis the people are mad, or ftupid, they will fufpect that there is fomething fundamentally falfe and vicious in our fyftem, and which no Reform would be equal to correct. Then, to prevent all this, and to try if we could effect a Reform without touching the main pillars of the Conftitution, without changing its forms or disturbing the harmony of its parts, without putting any thing out of its place, or affecting the fecurities which we juftiy hold to be fo facred. I fay, that is the only chance which we have for retrieving our misfortunes by the road of quiet and tranquil lity, and by which national ftrength may be recovered without difturbing the property of a fingle individual. "It had been faid, that the House poffefles the confidence of the country as much as ever, this in truth is as much as to say, that his Majefty's Minifters poffefs the confidence of the country in the fame degree as ever, fince the majority of the House fupport and applaud the measures of the Government, and give their countenance to all the evils which we are deemed to endure. I was very much furprised to hear any propofition fo unaccountable advanced by any perfon connected with Ministers, particularly as the Noble Lord had but a sentence or two before acknowledged, that there had been to be fure a number of petitions prefented to his Majefty for the difmiffion of his Minifters; the one affertion is utterly incompatible with the other, unless he means to affert that the petitions which have been prefented to the Throne are of no importance. The Noble Lord can hardly, I think, fpeak in this contemptuous manner of the pet tions of Middlefex, London, Westminster, Surry, Hampfhire, York, Edinburgh, Glasgow, and many other places, unless the Noble Lord means to infinuate that they are proofs only of our very great industry, and that they are not the genuine fenfe of the diftricts from which they came. If the Noble Lord afcribes them to our industry, he gives us credit for much more merit of that kind than we are entitled to; it certainly is not the peculiar characteristic of the present opposition, that they are very industrious in agitating the public mind. But grant to the Noble Lord his pofition---be it to our industry that all these petitions are to be afcribed. If industry could procure them, was it our moderation, our good will and forbearance that has made us for fourteen years relax from this industry, and never bring forward thefe petitions until now, No, |