mation, animadverted upon the alledged impropriety of the learned gentleman's aiding, by his counsels, the efforts of the honourable baronet to exalt in the country a standard of sedition and tumult. (Cries of order, order!)

Mr. Ponsonby rose to order, and was proceeding to comment upon the highly unparliamentary language that had been resorted to by the hon. gentleman, when Captain Parker readily acknowledged, that he had been inadvertently hurried into an expression that could not at all apply to the learned gentleman, and apologized to that gentleman and the House for the error he had been momentarily betrayed into. He could not, however help expressing his wish, that the House would adopt the proper course at once, and expel sir F. Burdett. The objection to that seemed to be, that sir Francis would be returned again; but he had too good an opinion of the good sense of the electors of Westminster to believe that possible. He was satisfied, that when once they knew all the particulars of his late conduct, they would never return him to represent them again in that House.

awkward situation. When he asked for military aid, he was told, that he should have it, but that he must act at his own peril: and that if any lives were lost, and his conduct should turn out to be illegal, he might be hanged for it. It really appeared as if ministers, upon this occasion, as upon a former one (the Waicheren Expedition) first resolved upon a coup-demain: But afterwards when they heard that the hon. baronet had actually locked his door and put up the chain, this appeared to them a combination of circumstances which was not to be foreseen. Their coup-de-main had then failed; they began to consider Piccadilly as a fortress, and it required many meetings of the cabinet council to determine how it was to be attacked.

Mr. Stephen was a little surprised at the opinion of his right hon. friend (sir S. Romilly), that as there was no original offence, this Letter could not properly be called an aggravation. His right hon. and learned friend appeared to go the whole length of arguing, that sir F. Burdett ought not to be in any manner pu nished for the insults offered to the House Lord Porchester thought no language in this Letter. The amendment which decould be too strong to reproach the con- clared it an aggravation of his former duct of the hon. baronet, from beginning offence, would go so far in punishment, to end. He felt himself obliged, there- that if the hon. baronet or any body for fore, upon this occasion, to rally round him, should petition for his discharge, this the House, and the authority of the paper would then be taken into consideSpeaker and of his warrant; but at the ration in assigning the proper measure of same time he thought the calamities which punishment. As to the conduct of the had taken place proceeded as much from hon. baronet in the mode of resistance he the backwardness of ministers as from the resolved on, he was glad to find that no intemperate passions of misguided indivi- hon. member in that House approved of duals. He could not avoid condemning it; and this was a circumstance upon the opinion given by the attorney-gene- which he might congratulate the House ral, that a reprimand from that House to and the country. The hon. baronet might sir F. Burdett, would be like a reprimand have tried the legality of the warrant sain the servants' hall from his own ser- tisfactorily without adopting the mode of vants. He could not see the justice of resistance he had chosen. It appeared to this comparison, or how it could be ad- the other side of the House, that a warrant duced as an argument for imprisonment which did not allow an outer door to be instead of reprimand. It had been asked broken was absolutely nothing. They howwhether gentlemen on that side of the ever seemed to have forgotten that there House had apprehended any opposition towere many writs for debt in civil action, it, from that which had been stated in the very paper, in which the gentlemen on the other side said that he had acknowledged the right of the House to commit its members. In that very paper, however, he found fault with a warrant similar to that, under which he had been àrrested, and, therefore, there was reason to ppose that he would not submit to it. The serjeant at arms was placed in a most

which could not be enforced by breaking doors. These writs were nevertheless not reckoned as nugatory, nor did he see that it would be any impeachment of the dignity or authority of the House, if their warrant was of the same footing as many of the king's writs, which do not justify the breaking into a house to enforce them. Some hon. gentlemen had said, that they had foreseen the consequences which had

that his Majesty's ministers, so far from deserving reprobation, were, on the contrary, for the whole of their conduct, entitled to praise. But it had been tauntingly asked, on a former night, whether they call this standing by the King? To this, he should answer, yes.-To stand by the privileges of that House, was to maintain the authority of parliament; and to stand by the parliament, was to stand by the constitution, and consequently by the King. Upon the whole, he was convinced that the ministers had done their duty; and if the hon. gentlemen opposite should bring forward any motion for a direct censure against them for their conduct they would find themselves opposed by an unusually large majority.

sary to enable him to execute the warrant.

Sir S. Romilly explained, that he had never said that he had foreseen the consequences which had resulted actually from the vote of commitment, but that he had foreseen consequences from that vote which he did not deem it proper to state at the time.

followed from the vote for the commitment of the hon. baronet. But for his own part, he never could anticipate any resistance to the execution of the warrant, because the whole of the argument against that vote went to shew that it would be a triumph to the hon. baronet to go to the Tower, from which he could issue his libels in abundance. It had been charged upon his majesty's ministers, that they had not taken sufficient measures for the security of the metropolis, as well as that they had not given to the serjeant at arms a sufficient force to enable him to execute the warrant. As to the first point, he contended, that all proper measures had been taken to insure the peace of the metropolis. It was not to be expected, that the government, in the expectation of riots, should Earl Temple stated in explanation that have stationed a military force in every he had imputed it as matter of blame to street. If they had so done their conduct his Majesty's ministers that they had not would have been most loudly condemned till Monday placed such a force at the disby the hon. gentlemen opposite, for hav-posal of the serjeant, as he deemed necesing endeavoured to put down the civil by resorting to the military power.Great credit on the contrary, was due to the government for their precautions, as well as to the military for the moderation which they had displayed, in the course of the painful duty they had to perform. As to the charge that no adequate force was placed at the disposal of the serjeant, Mr. C. W. Wynn denied that it had been that had been so often answered, that it stated as a matter of charge against his was strange it should still be repeated. Majesty's ministers, that they had not emThe warrant might unquestionably have ployed the military in the first instance. been executed either on Friday or Satur- The charge was, that the secretary of state day, without any necessity for forcing the being at the head of the civil power, had outer door; and in the end the warrant not employed it so soon as he should have had fortunately been put in execution done, and was responsible for all the danwithout any recourse to military force, or gerous consequences that might have reany effusion of blood. Whilst it was to sulted from the time lost. It would not be be apprehended that lives might be lost said that his Majesty's ministers were unacon both sides in case of executing the war- quainted with the scenes that took place, rant by force, what would have been the as they might have learned them from one opinion of gentlemen respecting the con- of their own body.-[Lord Westmoreland, duct of government, if ministers had or- who had been assailed with some mud by dered the serjeant to execute his warrant? the mob.] Ministers were culpable for If it turned out to be illegal to force the having left Piccadilly during the whole of outer door, and that lives had been lost in Friday, in the possession of a riotous cola conflict, would it have been a justifica- lection, who obliged all that passed through tion of the serjeant, on an indictment for that street to take off their hats to the mamurder, to plead the directions of his Majesty of the mob. A few constables, emjesty's ministers? When a doubt therefore, existed in the mind of any of his right hon. friends, it was perfectly right to suspend the execution of the warrant, till that doubt was removed by referring to the highest legal authority. From all the attention then which he had been able to bestow upon the subject, it was his opinion

ployed in time, would have dispersed the
assemblage of boys, scarcely fifteen, en
gaged in that riotous proceeding. The mob
that attacked the house of his hon. friend,
(sir J. Anstruther) might have been dis-
persed in the same way; as well as that
which had assailed the house of the noble.
lord (Castlereagh). None but boys were

anxious to answer that he did not regret the vote which he had given in the former instance; for however enigmatical it might appear to others, it was his opinion, that except the shedding a little blood, much good had resulted to the constitution and the country from the whole pro

F. Burdett to the Tower, because he thought his object was to overturn the constitution, and revolutionize the country. When he had used the words. "No, no," therefore, it was to shew that he was not afraid that, in case of his expulsion, the electors of Westminster would re-elect this sanguinary man; he could use no other term, because if he were not sanguinary, he might have maintained his principles without hazarding the effusion of blood. He was not to be intimidated; nor did he think the House would be intimidated by any apprehension from a mob. If he was not aware that he should not carry the feeling of the House with him, he would move for the expulsion of that hon. baHe should, therefore, vote for the amendment of the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

at first concerned in the disturbances; but when it was found that they were left so to act with impunity, others bent upon more serious mischief joined, and then their first march was to Downing-street. The military were resorted to upon that occasion, but not until the riot had come under the very noses of his Majesty's mi-ceeding. He had voted for sending sir nisters. The serjeant at arms had a right to expect that those who supported the issue of the warrant, should have pointed out to him how it was to be executed. If the serjeant had gone to consult his learned friend (Mr. Adam), he was convinced he would have received much better advice than it appeared he had received. His hon. and learned friend had very properly not considered the question on narrow grounds of legal analogy, but rested it upon much higher grounds. The House must have every power necessary to give effect to its warrant. What other court had the same power to send its officer to search the house of a witness for papers, as that House had done last year in the case of captain Sandon? The House unques-ronet. tionably possessed all the powers necessary to enforce its warrant, and it was with regret he found these powers weakened by being placed upon lower grounds than those upon which they actually rested. The warrant was an attachment of a criminal nature, as having issued upon a conviction declared by a vote of that House. With respect to the question before them, he could not help agreeing to the amendment of the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, though with a view to unanimity, he should throw out the propriety of substituting for " a high aggravation of his previous offence," the words, "that the House had received the paper with great indignation." If his hon. friends should agree to a resolution so worded, they might pass it with unanimity, but at the same time, he must add, that he had himself no objection to the words of the amendment as it then stood.

Mr. Beresford observed, that however indecorous or disorderly it might be for gentlemen to interrupt others when speaking, by expressing the words "yes," or "no," the House would excuse him when he admitted that he was one of those who had so interrupted an hon. and learned gent. (sir S. Romilly.) If that hon. member were then present, he should gladly make an apology to him. The ground of his interruption was, that to a question put by the hon. and learned member, he was

Lord Milton meant to confine himself in what he should say to the subject actually before the House. They had two propositions before them, one for passing over the Letter without any notice; the other a resolution, that it was a high ag gravation of the former offence. To the first he could not give his concurrence, and still less upon the arguments employed by the hon. gent., its author, in recommending it to the House, because, if good for any thing, these arguments would be good against taking any steps whatever against the hon. baronet. He agreed that it would be unworthy of the magnanimity or the dignity of the House, to be intimidated by any fear of the mob, or by the terrors of a Westminster election. But as he could not support the motion, so neither could he agree in the amendment, because whilst it agreed that the Letter was a high aggravation of the previous offence, it still stated that it was not necessary to take further notice of it at present. The Letter either was or was not an ag gravation of the former offence. If it was an aggravation, the House should notice it. In evading any notice of the Letter, the amendment would have the same effect as the motion. If it was not an ag gravation, it was better not to take any notice of it. But as all were agreed that

the Letter was an aggravation, the resolu- the strongest conviction, and a conscientition should be worded in another manner. ous sense of public duty. However painThe House was bound to take some fur-ful the task, whatever sacrifice it might ther steps, which it was not for him to point out. And here they had experience of the embarrassment resulting from their vote for commitment. Had they stopped short at reprimand, they might have still something in their hands. But they had expended all their ammunition, and had inflicted the greatest punishment at once. If they had stopped short, they might, in this instance, send the honourable baronet to the Tower. As he could not agree in either the motion or the amendment, he should not feel himself at liberty to vote for either, and should consequently vote against both.

riotous mob, successfully to resist the whole military force at the disposal of the government; and yet he had, to the great disturbance of the quiet of the metropolis, persevered in a fruitless resistance for four days.

cost him on the score of private feelings, he was still compelled, upon considerations of a higher public nature, to perform his duty. It was an imperious obligation upon him, which he was bound unanswerably and unalterably to discharge, by declaring that in his mind the case under consideration was one, which was not to be justified. He could not reconcile it to any principle of patriotism, or public spirit, that one, who professed to be the friend of liberty, and the advocate of the laws, should for four days have continued a fruitless resistance to the Speaker's warrant, at the hazard of incurring the loss Mr. Lyttleton thought, that if ever there of several lives. It was the opinion of a had been a question that called for unani- great statesman, now unfortunately no mity, it was the one under consideration. more (Mr. Fox), that nothing could justify He should not, however, travel into the resistance but the certain prospect of ultiextraneous topics which had been intro-mate success. The hon. baronet could duced into the discussion, and by none certainly have entertained no hope or more than by the hon. and learned gent.prospect of being able, by means of a (Mr. Stephen), whose compliments to the gentlemen on his side of the House, he looked upon as insults, and upon whose observations, considering his age and learning, he should not animadvert, if he had not heard them with a degree of indignation. Notwithstanding the defence. of his Majesty's ministers, which had been made by that bon. member, he was convinced that much of the guilt would fall upon them. Whatever opinion might have been entertained of the propriety of censuring the former Letter of sir F. Burdett, there could be but one opinion as to the latter. No hon. member could doubt that it was an insult to the Speaker, and through him to the House. To tell the Speaker of that House that he knew the warrant he had signed to be an illegal warrant, was a gross insult, was language which no one gentleman could be permitted to use towards another, far less to the Speaker of that House. The House was therefore bound to express its resentment at the proceeding; and so strongly did he feel on the subject, that he was bound to declare that he felt himself called on, and was determined to resent it. This sentiment he could not utter but with regret. Those gentlemen who were acquainted with the engaging and amiable manners of that hon. baronet would give him credit for the reluctance he felt on this occasion. Whatever he found himself bound to say was wrung from him by

Amongst the various grounds of complaint which he had against the hon. baronet, he could not pass over his implied promise to the Serjeant at Arms, to accompany him to the Tower. He had lived on terms of friendship with that hon. baronet: but this was an act so wholly unworthy of him, that he must for ever abjure him either as a private or a political friend. Another ground of complaint on his part against sir F. Burdett was, that from the first to the last moment of his obstinate and unconstitutional resistance, he had been attended in his house by the brother of a notorious and avowed traitor. This he could not easily forgive him. He was far, indeed, from inferring the treason of one brother from the treason of another. He did not therefore mean, by any means, to say, that Mr. Roger O'Connor was a traitor. But if, what was impossible, he had been in the situation of sir F. Burdett, he should not have associated with any man to whom even a shadow of suspicion could attach; he should not have been attended by the brother of Arthur O'Connor, that vile traitor, who employed himself in writing, in a paper published in the English lan

guage at Paris, the most foul, false, and amount to an outrage upon public feeling, scandalous libels upon the British govern- it was to say the least of it a great unment and nation: a paper printed in the kindness towards the country. When he English language no doubt with a view to had read the arguments of the hon. barobe circulated for the dissemination of his net upon that committał, kowever he did sedition and treasons, in these realms. regret the introduction of intemperate Was this the manner, by the introduction language, still he was fully decided that of foreign libels and treasons, that the li- through the whole of that argument, and berty or public spirit of the country was in every inference the hon. baronet had to be asserted and animated? All such made, he was correct. With such improceedings of the hon. baronet he should pressions upon his mind, there was nofrom the bottom of his heart disclaim, and thing in the conduct or in the arguments was determined to oppose him in every of the right hon. gentlemen opposite to instance. He had but one word more to induce him to alter his original conviction. add. He had thought that the former He would not directly say, that the reso Letter ought not to have been noticed, be- lutions against the hon. baronet were first cause he had a doubt as to the propriety introduced at the will of the ministers, of the proceeding proposed. The House, however strongly he felt the great interest however, was the best judge of its parlia- and impatience expressed by them to mentary privileges. He had never a press and precipitate a hasty decision doubt that it was an offence that might be upon that very serious subject. Believ punished by a reprimand or a prosecuing then, the House chargeable with an tion. But on this occasion he should vote for the amendment, as the stronger

measure.

Sir James Hall supported the amend

ment.

exercise of hardship against Mr. Jones, and acquiescing in the correctness of the arguments of the hon. baronet, it was impossible for him to vote for either the motion of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Curwen) or the amendment of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The former gentleman had that night cailed upon the House to rally at that crisis around the government. In answer to such an appeal, he must say, that whilst he trusted upon every occasion to prove his attachment to his Sovereign and country, he still must contend that no body of men in that House could or ought to place their confidence in any ministry who did not unequivocally make to the country specific declarations in favour of that reform which every sound mind now saw was absolutely necessary, and without which it was hopeless to look for the support and confidence of the people of these realms.

Mr. C. Hutchinson trusted that his public conduct would protect him from the imputation of speaking disrespectfully of the Commons of the united kingdom. Neither could he be supposed capable of giving his sanction to any attempt at disturbing the tranquillity of the metropolis, or of any part of the empire. Having thought it necessary to make these preliminary observations, he could not acquiesce in either of the motions now proposed, to be founded upon the Letter of the hon. baronet. Since first the discussion upon these unfortunate transactions was originated, he uniformly took a totally opposite course to that of the right hon. gentlemen who were in administration. The first opportunity that he had, Mr. Curwen trusted, that, after some he declared his opinion against the com- things which had been said in the course mittal of Mr. Gale Jones. He was not in of the debate, he should obtain a hearing. 'the House when that question was first He was charged with being afraid of the brought forward; but on a subsequent mob. Now, he could assure the hon. memoccasion he deprecated the course pur-ber who made that charge, that in subsued, and was one of a minority of 14 who mitting his motion to the House, he was voted for his liberation. Without enter- influenced by no feeling of the kind. ing into any discussion upon the exercise His object was to obtain unanimity. Con of the privilege which the House had as-sidering the transactions of the last few sumed, he did conceive that the imputed offence of Mr. Jones was the most venial, and that the exclusion of the public from the debates of that House at that particular moment, was a considerable provocation to popular discontent. If it did not

days, he felt it to be his duty, and the duty of every man who revered the constitution, to support the government. He regretted the debate had taken the turn it did, and that, instead of confining the discussion to the specific matter of complaint