The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1819-09-01 00:00:00

violeatly to disperse unarmed sad peaceable men,
lest they should commit a breach of the peace I.
" la the secood place, had circumstances justi-
fied the interference of thki.lirgistrates, both hu-
manity and policy would have urged men, Who
did not seek an opportunity of shedding blood, to
prevent the Meeting from being held, rather than
to disperseit by force after it was called. This the
Magistrates could have easily done had they chosen,
end they cannot say that a single edventage result-
ed from allowing the people to meet. Hunt could
have been. apprehended with at much ease before
or after ,the Meeting, as in the midst of it. The
Meeting furnished no new proofs of guilt in him or
his associates, nor can it' he pretended that a 'Mode
event happened which might not have hero fairly
anticipated from the mere fact of bolding the
Meeting, except that the persons prevent behaved
1 with a degree of moderation and propriety a Lich
•
undoubtedly disappointed their enemies.
" In the third place, hail there been good
grounds for dissolving the Mettles, this could have
furnished no justification tit the steps taken. flay-
iog suffered the Meeting to be field when they could
have prevented it, they were not entitled to regard
the mere holding of the Meeting as • breach of the
peace, nor to interfere till a riotous disposition was
manifested. When the Magistrates and their apo-
logists speak of menacing boils% as proofs of stirh
a disposition, and seditious flags, and persons
in the multitude carrying their sticks shouldered
like muskets, when it is known that not one person
iti twenty hail a stick, it is ooly telling us that they
have no proofs to offer. But even had riotous quip-
toms appeared, which cannot be alleged a ith • sha-
dow of truth, the forms which the law prescribes
should have been observed. Neutral permits ex-
press their belief that the Riot Act was never
read ; the Magistrates say it was ; but it is certain
that the form was not gone through in such a way
us to NM the iiitention of the law. It is clear that
not one person in a hundred knew that he was con iti i t-
tint an illegal act in remaining on the ground, and
that. nearly the whale multitude were ignorant of
the danger which hung over their heads. It is ab-
surd to regard the reading of * paper in air t.bsciire
Corner as a legal intimation to a vast multitude in a
matter affecting their liver. Yet care was token
to establish • • inunicstion, by a file of con-
stables, from the house where the Magistrates were
to the hustings; snd it is perfectly plaits, that by
this means they had the power oh' making any thing
they plearecl known to the assembled multitude.
Still snore, had riotous symptoms uppeared, the Blot
Act been publicly read, and the multitude warned
of their danger, no reasonable man would have con-
sidered this as authorising the easployntent or fool.,
any further than was necessary, to disperse the
Meeting, and to seize the ringleaders. it did nor
give a license to cut and trample down indiscrimi-
nately women and children, and all who were
p vont.
" Altogether, we believe, the facts of the present
case to he unparalleled. Force has often been eon-
ployed iu this mad other cuuntrirs to disperse mobs
assembled without any ostensible purpose hut that
of mischief, and lives have been lost, perhaps tin-
avoidably. But in no imitative, so far as we know,
hss it ever happened that a itouther of men called
together by public notice, with the knowledge of
the civil Magistrate, for an avowed und lawful pur-
pose, proceeding quietly in that business, have
been exposed to military violence, sabred and
trodden down by those who could hare prevented
the Meeting, if they had thought fit, and who
cannot allege that a single outrage was commit-
ted, or that a single circumstance happened which
did not necessurily follow calling the people to-
gether. We know not how to explain such extra-
ordinary transactions. If we were to trust iu ap-
pearances, we should conclude that the people were
suffered to meet in fancied security, thist a terrible
example might he made with ihe greater ethic', toy
a violation of the laws. Circumstances seem to
warrant this construct. ; but we by no messes
impute such conduct to the parties colicerued. Ire-
cause we do not believe there are oily Magistrates
in this country who would act such a pert. For
the honour of the national charm ter we are glad to
lipid that, except among the most slavish advocates
of power, these acts are regertled with feelings of
uniningled horror sod indignation."

THE BRITI S PRESS.