The Sun.
London, England, 1819-12-18 00:00:00

Th take place in 'the very Metroptilis, which no'
steps had beets taken to prevent, tit put down.
As to Ireland, he contended this Bill was an in-
sult upon her, and could only be intended as an
'ee Noble Lord (Castlereagh) who had
introduced thosessmeasures, knew tha4.,..tshere was
nothirrg in t)tb sasate country to esl)4'cli tfie•
nriavisions of this Bill were applicable. Because
in- England the mal-contents were so indiscreet
as to disturb and frighten the peaceable part of
thecimentosity,, by pat ailing the streets with ban-
ners and in military order, did it hillow that the
Irish were likely to folloW their example ;
in lrelapd they knew better how to manage mat-
ters ; they conducted all this kind of turbulent
business in I ooms-t-'-(1-Iear, and a laugh !)—They
left it to'the Radicals to destroy the Constitution of
'the country by such means as seditious symbols
and devices, and their lock-step, and the like pub-
lic displays. The Noble Earl concluded by de-
claring his intention to move an ins,ruction to the
,Commi tee ; but which, front his Lordship's low
tope of voice, we were unable to hear.
The Earl of Haattowhy thought that the Noble
Est!, who had. just sat down, had travelled out of
question at present before the Ilouse, which
he apprehended was, whether it alosuld go into
Committee. It Was a consoling observation, that
after all that had'bein urged since the beginning
Of the S'ession against the measures of Govern-
ment, at this period of the discussion it was plain
lhat the principal objection against the Bill at
present before their Lordships, was as to the dare
of its continuance, rather than its principle. The
Noble Earl said it was a bad Bill, and therefore
wished it to be of a short duration. But for his
part, if their Lordships thought it to be a bad
Bill, ire would rather advise them not to pass it
at all. This Bill, he contended, slid not come
forward on the tooting of another one, which lie
allbwed was, hostile to the Constitution, but as a
Bill called for by the peculiar circumstances and
danger of the country; and as it bad no princi-
ple hostile to the Constitution of the Country,
there Was no reason against its being petpetual,
'lts permanency was not opposed out the head that
`in adopting a Measure; containing provisions
-hostile toe the Constitution, it might be ex-
pedient to reverse it atter a abort period, in order
to ascertain whether it was adequate to meet the
danger for which it was framed, or if• in so do-
ing it should be subversive of any rights or prin-
ciples which it was not intended to touch. It
was., not on this ground that the Noble Eat I
.(Donoughteore) argued for its temporary enact-
meet, but because it retrenched the right of meet-.
ing altogether. One of the principal charges
which be made against Government was that it
did not disperse a .meeting which had taken place,
in'the Metropolis itself, by military force.
The Earl of 'lloNouGusioue begged to put the'
Noble Earl right on, the point. his observation
badheen Made as to the prevention rather than tlie,
'dispersion of that meeting.
The Earl of lIARROWBY continued.—lle begged
pardon if he had mistaken the Noble Eatl ; but
,some meetings might be legal in the manner they
were convened, of whatever materials they might
'lappets to be composed. Thit tight of the people
to assemble, was erroneously supposed to be guts-
rautred by the Bill of Rights. It was not from,
the Bill of Rights that they derived this,ptisilege.
It was ours independent or any .4 t from that
excellent. construction of our Constitution, which
provided, that that which W 39 not forbidden by
• law was law !—(Herir, heAr, hear !)—The meet-
ings of our ancestors, however, were not com-
posed its the.nianner of the Manchester or Spa-
fielils The evil of such meetings as
these were of till the present day. By
the present day he meant that long and eventful
day sin'ee the epoch of the French
'The only Matinee which tlle history of our coup-$
try furnished of. such large. meetiogs, Was.onn
which was formerly held at York, • the rental of
• which had' been desetibed by a contemporaryi
writer as ansounting,, to 800,0001. ri-year.—,
What 'was the meeting in Westminster 11411'
at. Which :Fox presided.? 'Was it like those
meetings which they were now told were net
eessaay to the freedom of the
.country ?- It mai,
:coMposed eXihrsively' of the inhabitans,i of
the parish. There was nothing in lite Bill'
which preventedlarge meetings from taking place.
They might be convened by the Lord Lient
teriaore: the'Chtinty,f by' the Custoi llotidaum,
Isy ;the on the authorityof the Grand.
Jiffy .ambsurely 'it was. A Wealticibjectiou 'to say
that all Were 'tinder the influence' of the Crown.;
A Noble Lord had aniniadverted on the injustice;
of putting it in.the.power; of one Justice:Gl the
.I.Veisce to dissolve,•'a meeting. If their Lorstihips'
Would take the.trouble of,referring to that part of-
the Bill, they would find that that applied .only to
such 'Meetings as we're' calletrby gi•Ving isistice
isnd,'that even io,that case., it,gives.,power,to
Magistrates only to seize persons guilty of ntter-i
ing seditious language, tied its ease of • retlirdlicei
being tuade_by,,auch persons, it was then at his
option to 'disperse the Meeting—(Hear, hear
'Tfie Noble'Earl (Dcitiotighmore) was out sitiSfied.
with the nature of evidence which Bad tires
'adduced it support of the necessity of the,peesent
Ife:snpposeal that it rested entirely los the'
,asaertiou'inede by hia (Lord Llarsow by's) side of
.the: [louse ; or otsly the' papers which hose
been Ia(►I iou'the table, relative to that subject,,
;arid which by atone were said to be scanty. It.
no asatetion had been tnade;•-or more of' these.
pa-
pers had hien broughl forward,t*ltis cOuception
it inoirell, nothing but.. eye,.% tO.ser, or ears to
hear, keorder to be convinced. of theexistence of •
-the disafietion:_stated ;. lie thought_onthing hot
deetness,Oe ss tUtul Witktiness FpOd be sere:
tical on this point---,(Hear !)s--It was notoriously;
-ktiswn that 4 'oefi:codillies werteafp.resentObligesll
to be almost in a state of siege, in order to .stmt
,peace and•nlety to the loyal inhabitants—(lleat!)
would ask the Noble :Ei4-1,,f0r What purpose
'oitety was:instituted, if iVas,notlnterideal that
individuals should suffer:an abridgment of souse
theft uatoral rights, in orOei to secure. the 'Safety
ofSlseir prispertiO fWas ii prssible:tl,►►
,Wet were, wereirather to look forward to thedioteavlien
...we4hostldlitobliged to keep an ariury
At .‘lstoL.- yesicr,
4 a it'ilil4lll iv. id t'v
spargued for such a state of things, ti;at pretended
to be the enemies of military despotism ? Wit!)
regard to the military force of the coun,sy, lie