Star.
London, England, 1817-06-20 00:00:00

sirs ices rendered to the Emp're. He let it his duly
ir. iest.ce tr. that Gentleman to .stake this general
saverrent. While upon Iris feet, he begged to ex-
press his hearty corcurrerce in the Bill now before
theit Lordships, which, in leis conviction, the state of
the country rendered necessary.
The Earl of DONOUGHMORE thought Mr.
Reynolds had been put too forward to society by br-
ing appointed a Grand Juror, Btc.
Viscount SIDMOUTH begged to say a few words
respecting the much talked of cities of Castle and
Oliver. They were asserted to be spies and infor-
mers, employed as such by his Majesty's Govern.
ment. In point of tact, Castle never was a spy ; and
in the latter character he voluntarily offered himself,
and for the first time, in fee or six weeks after the
241 of December. With respect to Oliver, he had
beer employed by Government Ica the purpose of
averting dangerous combirations, which at the time
began to wear a formidable appearance. Some Noble
Lords, he believed, formed and procounc.e.l their opt.
coons upon what they saw in Newspapers. He was
' convinced their Lordships, Mita they should receive
accurate information as to these facts, would be in-
duced to alter their opinions in many material re.
spects ; and he would only ask of their Lordships, in
mere justice, to suspend opinions now formed from
loose authorities, until other information Amid be
before the Public, and until then he thought all com-
mentaries upon the case must be unjust.
Lord ST. JOHN said, that amid the discussions
concerning o.iver and Castle, the question of the Bill ,
before the House remained untouched. He could not
give •-a Went vote upon such a measure. He could
not furnish any new argument on the subject, but he
could not sutler it to be discussed wittiotst entering I
his solemn protest against a Bill as unnecessary, as
it was hostile to the Constitution. He would have
expected that after the repeated expression of the pub.
tic feeling upon the question, anti otter the signal re-
sult of the late trial, Ministers could never have
thought of proposing a renewal of the Suspension
Bill. He thought they °tight rather h.tve come down
to the House clothed in sackcloth and ashes, acknow-
ledging that the Bill which they had obtained at the
commencement of the Session was totally unnecessary,
and that the grounds upon which the first, as weil
the second report WAS drawn up, were entirely false.
He thought, in a word, that they would have aban-
doned the measure ; but instead of doing so, they
;vent on, as if by some fatal and delusive power, they
were compelled to go on—like Macbeth. They could
not stop--they must proceed until they gave a deadly
blow to the Constinition—(ilear, hear, hear)—The
present Act went further even taan the last Act ; for
the povrer which was now claimed was unlimited.
The operation of the former Act was extended to a
certain determined day; but the operation of the pre-
sent Act was unbounded. It was to exist until six
weeks after the commencement of the next Session
of Parliament ; but the day of that commencement
was entirely at the discretion of Ministers, who had
the controul over the meeting of Parliament—not this
House not the other House. No, the Ministers
themselves! The date, therefore, of the expiration
of the present Act could be prolonged to an ex-
cessive and a grievous distance—(Heor, (.ear).—;
The Noble Lord then adverted to the several argu-
ments in favour of the measure. It was said that a
plot existed. If this statement depended on tee testi-
mony of Castles and Oliver, the Noble Lords opposite
must admit, thet•they suspended the liberties of Eng-
land upon evidence which their OWII feelings must
persuade thim to be false and incredible. It, indeed,
a plot really existed, better they should follow the
example of Denm irk at once, and surrender aU their
liberties to the Crown, than to tell the people they
are free, and have a right from birth to freedom, and
yet deprive them of tteeir liberties.—(Hose, hear.)—
How could the present Bill cure the distresses of the
people ? That was a question which he never heard
answered. He would retract all he had said upon
this subject if any of the Noble Lords opposite had
the ingenuity to chew him how the machinery of this
Bill could be brought to bear upon the distresses of
the country. He thought it extremely unjust that so
much credit should be given to the evidence of spies
and informers. If some few men were instigated to
deeds of violence, was that a reason that the liberties
of every Englishman should be suspended ? (Hear.)
Lord SOMERS supported the Bill, and defended
the right of Government to employ spies. He could
not allow, because there was a character of absurdity
belonging to the late conspiracies, that therefore their
consequences were not to be feared. What, in fact,
had really ensued ? Had not the result of those plots'
been a dangerous insurrection ? An insurrection little•
short of rebellion, and only short of rebellion in con.•
sequence of the vigilance of Government. Observ-
ing all those things, (amid they be justified iu disre-
garding their tendency? There were sutlicientgrounds,
in his judgment, In call for such a measure al the pie•
sent. There was the Repos tof the first Committee,
which contained ample reasons for the Bill then
brought • in. They had now the Report of another
Committee, and which Report, Ise thought, was
highly honourable to the Committee. Called upon,
es they were, to investigate matters of such conse-
quence, and finding adequate evidence to induce them
to recomn end the re-adoption el the former measure,
yet, at the same time, they candidly and fairly ad-
mitted that the Government had been obliged, as all
Governments were, to employ persona for the pur-
poseur discovering themachinationsut theconspirators.
It appeared also,. those persons had gone beyond the
ought to have confined them-
line within which they
selves. Did the.Conamittee attempt to conceal that
tact ? No. Most honourably they stated it in their
Report to their Lordships. But were they from
thence.to argue, that because a pat t of the evidence
submitted to the Committee was of that description,
they had no grounds for the conclusion to wiliest they
ultimately came ? Could it be supposed, that a Com-
mittee, so respectably composed, would, under such
circumstances, have recommended it, as essential to
tne good of the country, that additiottal powers
should be granted to the Government ? And afte r
all, what• was the proposed suspension ? Only fur a
short time. But the Noble Lord who spoke last, said
that the calling of, Parliament together depended
merely upon the will of Ministers, and that, there-
fore, the duration of the law would be as long as -
they thought proper. Good GOD ! could such
an Argument be seriously urged ? (Thar, hear.)—
It might depend vpun, the will of Ministers whethet
6e CA11.41 a Wed. ut ,