of the houfe. An inftant and effectual remedy could alone vindicate the character of the country where fo flagrant an act of cruelty had been committed. It had happened in Cold-Bath-Fields' prifon; that notorious fcene of perfecution, where the most inhuman practices had been too long fuffered to prevail, and where, while the committee appointed to inquire into the ftate of that prifon were fuppofed to be exercifing their duty, the fame, barbarous treat ment was continued and increafed.

The incident to which he now requested the attention of the houfe had happened on Sunday last, when one of the prifoners, Jofeph Hudfon, was attacked in one of the yards of the jail by one of the governor's abominable emiffaries, employed to feek pretences for the infliction of tortures, and was commanded to furrender a public paper he had in his poffeffion. Hudfon refufed: the jailor's hireling infifted; and, to compel it, gave Hudson a kick in the belly; and, attempting to ufe a broomftick near him, a fcuffle enfued, which foon ended: but at noon the governor's fon entered the yard, ordered all the prifoners to be locked up, and laid hold of Hudfon, whom he and another dragged about the yard till the man was provoked to refift, which was all that the jailor's fon wanted: he took a large bludgeon, and fo unmercifully beat the poor man, as to give him contufions which produced a burning fever, in which ftate he was now confined in a dungeon, loaded with bolts, refufed medical aid, and with no other relief than cold water. He conceived this cafe fufficiently afflicting to intereft every member in the house, as it muft excite uni

'verfal indignation abroad. It was an appeal to the humanity of the houfe, and it could not be fufpected that fuch a cafe would be pafted by without notice and redrefs. He knew not the best way to apply for relief. He thought it ufele's to apply to the magiftrates.

He fhould make no specific motion; but thought the belt ftep might be to move an addrefs to his majefty for the removal of the governor of that prifon, and to appoint another till an inquiry into the affair fhould be made.

He concluded by faying that he fhould leave the house to act as they fhould think right, for the maintenance of their character.

On the 12th of February fir William Elford rofe to flate to the houfe the refult of an inquiry he had made into the fubject of ColdBath-Fields' prifon. [Here was a cry of order; and the fpeaker faid it would be irregular to proceed, unless he chofe to make a motion.]

Sir William Elford then faid that he would make a motion, as it was important for the public to be undeceived.

The fpeaker thought this improper; and that it were better to wait, and to bring the fubject forward in fome other thape.

Sir William Elford then commented on what an honourable baronet (fir F. B. Jones) had stated on a former evening, relative to the fuppofed cruelty to one Hudfon confined in the prifon of ColdBath-Fields. In confequence of what the honourable baronet had stated, he went himself on the next day to the prifon, to make a minute inquiry into the particulars. He had examined the governor, the two perfons mentioned as his affiftants, Hudfon himself, and the furgeon who attended him. Hud

fon

would have been, that the ferjeant at arms fhould take him into cuftody; and that the house fhould refolve itself into a committee, to investigate his conduct.

Sir W. Geary disapproved the original motion, and refolved to fupport the previous question.

Mr. Martin said he was surprised, that though the ill conduct of this gaoler was univerfally admitted, and many facts were proved against him, he had ftill been fuffered to retain his fituation. He did not hesitate to pronounce it a fcandal to the government of the country, and difrefpectful to the public, that fuch a man had not been difmiffed from the office.

Mr. Percival faid, that the motion of the honourable colonel was not likely to promote the object of its fupporters. He would afk, whether, if Governor Aris were at the bar for examination, they would rely on any anfwer concerning his own mifconduct? Could any man be expected to criminate himself? He concluded by refolving to vote for the previous queftion.

Mr. Hobhoufe denied the abfolute neceffity of giving previous notice of any motion. He thought that his honourable friend, fir F. B. Jones, had been rather unfairly treated.

The honourable member who brought forward the motion averred, that it was done only to answer a fpeech of his honourable friend's on a former day; and when the honourable baronet's fpeech was finished, a noble lord (Hawkefbury) rofe to fay, that the motion was irregular without a previous notice; and that the gentleman who feconded it, influenced by the noble lord's fentiments, revoked the fupport of the motion, which

now was attempted to be fuper feded by the previous queftion.

He faid there was more of ingenuity than candour in fuch contrivance.

Lord Hawkesbury defended himfelf against the charge of unfairnefs. He had opposed the motion, because he thought that the house ought not to be taken by furprise on fubjects of deep importance, which was done by bringing forward motions without the ufual notice. The precedent would be improper.

Mr. W. Dundas pleaded guilty to the charge, that he was induced by the noble lord's arguments to withdraw the fupport of his honourable friend's motion: he was influenced by the noble lord's fuperior knowledge of the rules and forms of the house. It was complained that his friend had attempted to make a fpeech when no queftion was before the house; but this was not urged when the honourable baronet occupied the houfe with an account devoid of any mark of authenticity.

Mr. Pierrepoint concluded the converfation by execrating the conduct of Governor Aris. It had been faid to be exceptionableIt was infamous, fcandalous, and fhocking. The motion had his hearty support.

The houfe then divided.-For the original motion 21.-Against it 40.-Majority 19.

We cannot but lament that on any occafion the fufpenfion of the act of habeas-corpus fhould ever have appeared neceffary. We lament that the whig parliament, after the glorious revolution, were influenced fo far by terror as to make a temporary breach in the conftitution, and to eftablish a precedent, upon which a bad minifter in bad times

might act so as to effect its deftruction. We have indeed our doubts whether fuch a measure can at any period be neceffary. So correct is the adminiftration of justice in this country, and the magiftrates are fo fully invefted with powers to prevent the spread of treafon and fedition, that it would perhaps be always right to refpect what are justly termed the bulwarks of the conftitution, and to depend rather on the vigilance of the executive government than legislatively to interfere when every falutary effect may be obtained in the ufual courfe of justice.

been allowed to expire. He trusted that the house would confide in the committee's opinion, that they would not advise fevere measures without their abfolute neceffity. The country had already owed its quiet to these measures; and, if its fafety were again endangered, the fame ought to be adopted. He then mentioned the report laid be fore the Irish parliament in 1798, of the practices which led to the rebellion in Ireland, and alfo to the other report brought before the British parliament in 1799. The ftanding committee was then held at Hamburg, which communicated with the difaffected in this country, and with the enemy abroad. If the house fhould fee that thofe treasonable perfons were dejected and confounded by fuch meatures as were now proposed; and that, as foon as thofe laws expired, those perfons arofe to fresh exertions for the deftruction of the country, by collecting the lower claffes, and binding them by oaths to refift the government; no time ought to be loft for re-enacting thofe laws

Whether to the folly or the evil intentions of the late adminiftration we are to afcribe the majority of their pernicious measures, it is, perhaps, fcarcely a time to decide; we are inclined to attribute them to the former principle. For the prefent adminiftration, a much wider fcope is open for apology. They found thefe acts in full operation; and it might feem too violent a measure to act in immediate oppofition to the fyftem which had fo long been purfued with the concurrence of the house. As the arguments on both fides are, however, before the public, we fhall not further anticipate them, but proceed immediately to the debates on this important subject.

On Tuesday, 14th of April, Mr. Pelham moved the order of the day for confidering the report of the fecret committee for inquiring into the ftate of Ireland, and the conduct of perfons in England, tending to treafon and fedition. The order and report being read,

Mr. Pelham rofe to ftate his reafons for the motion he had made the day before. The houfe, he faid, would then perceive the neceflity of reviving those laws which had

which had fruftrated their machinations. The fufpenfion of the habeas-corpus act was always to be lamented; but it became occafionally a step of prudence and neceffary precaution, and always laid upon minifters additional refponfibility. He now moved that leave be given for a bill to continue the act lately expired for fufpending the habeas-corpus.

Mr. M. A. Taylor was forry that the houfe fhould be called on to decide fo haftily on fo important a matter. Stronger proof than the report of the committee was required before they should affent at a day's notice to an act depriving the country of the palladium of the conftitution. He complained of

the

the manner of forming the committee. It was faid to be by ballot: he wifhed it fimilar to thofe for elections, and not compofed merely of members on one fide of the house. The country would then confide more in it. No names were now to be found but what were connected with the former minifters. He feared that Mr. Addington would be advised to imitate his predeceffor; but he reminded the houfe that the acts of the late administration were violent and undeferving of confidence; at leaft, the houfe fhould paufe till all the evidence admitted by the committee were before it. It was, at beft, only the opinion of twenty-one gentlemen: and, fuppofing matters ever fo bad, why arm minifters with fuch power r? Might not fuSpected perfons be apprehended without it? Yes; but then they must be brought foon to trial. But they wish to detain perfons beyond the legal period. This has been done for two or three years, and then the prifoners have been admitted to bail, with no charge against them. When refponfibility fhould be moved for, the houfe would be told that this fhould be granted when convenient. There were perfons now confined for certain publications, &c. Why not lay them before the houfe? The evidence was detailed in the Irish committee: Why not here? The houfe would then fee on what grounds they acted. Befides, many members were abfent, and not aware of fo fudden a measure. As for the other bills propofed, he would only fay that their real object was to intimidate those who wifhed their conftituents to confider their country's grievances. By thefe bills any one magiftrate might prevent meetings for that purpofe. They

might coerce, but not conciliate; yet conciliatory measures were now abfolutely neceffary. The houfe was indebted to the country for its firmness and perfeverance under its hardships, and its love till evinced to the king and conftitution. The house, then, had no right to confign the people to any minifier's mercy He would confent to no fuch measure without full proof of its neceflity.

Mr. Curwen affirmed, that he would not affent to this measure without the clearest grounds of its neceflity. The conftitution ought not to be wantonly violated. This was the first act of the new adminiftration, whofe conduct would fhow whether the change was of men or mcafures. This act was quite in the fpirit of the late adminiitration, however the new minifters might otherwife fwerve from their predeceflors. If the danger was as great as infinuated, why fuffer the houfe to adjourn? Had the danger fo rapidly increafed in eight days as to make that measure necellary which was needlefs before the recefs? lle faid, he never witneffed more patience than what now marked the poorer clafies. Until proofs of the country's danger fhould appear, he would not furrender the beft rights of the people. He therefore called upon Mr. Addington to come forward and state why the house ought to agree to the motion.

The chancellor of the exchequer faid, that the honourable gentleman had referred to him fo pointedly, that he thought it abfolutely neceffary for him to rife. The honourable gentleman had asked, whether any great danger was to be feared from the papers before the fecret. committee? He certainly thought the danger was very great: and

what