draw his motion, and added, that some of the opinions lately maintained by Mr. Fox were highly dangerous, although the right hon. gentleman might not understand them to be so, and said, that if called upon to do so, he would point them out. Mr. For said, it would ill become him to interrupt a business before the House, by calling for a debate on his own opinions; but if the hon. gentleman or the House chose to appoint a time for examining his opinions, he was ready to meet the discussion, and to thank them for it, confident that it would only afford him an opportunity of removing misconception. There were certain forms and phrases which, at present, every gentleman who rose to speak was required to repeat; all these, whether "Church and State," or "God save the King," or any thing else, he begged to be understood as having said or sung. As those who had read Italian operas might recollect to have seen prefixed an advertisement by the author, that when he introduced the names of the heathen gods and goddesses he meant nothing against the holy catholic religion; so he must advertise the House, that when he made use of the words liberty, equality, impartiality, he used them only in the true sense of the British constitution, and not as understood, or supposed to be understood, in any other country. This was the more necessary, as the first thing he had to do was to implore them to be equal and impartial; for it was not for the dignity of the government or of the House, to prosecute seditious publications on one side, and pass by those on the other. He had always advised never to connect riots and insurrections with seditious writings, and to repress and punish the criminal acts. His advice was not followed; libels on one side were connected with acts and prosecuted; if the same course was not pursued with respect to libels on the other side, surely there was neither impartiality nor equality. For how stood the facts? Libels against the constitution had been published, but no riot had followed these libels, no mob had taken the Rights of Man for their watch-word; yet these libels had been prosecuted. Libels against the dissenters had been published, riots had ensued, directed solely against the dis senters, of which church and king was the signal, and none of these libels were prosecuted. Were the dissenters, in this respect equally protected? Had they not a right to say, "You give every thing to the imaginary fears of others, and nothing to our real sufferings."-Mr. Fox paid a handsome compliment to the worth and character of Mr. Walker, who, he said, entertained opinions respecting the constitution of which he did not approve; but that was no reason for withdrawing his good opinion, while his life and conduct were irreproachable. It was their duty to take into their minds, not toleration, but that on which toleration was founded, sympathy for human infirmity and human error, and to recollect that those who differed from us might be right, although we could not see it. He expressed his doubts of the legality of the associations and subscriptions for criminal prosecutions; not of those for aiding the civil magistrate in suppressing riot or insurrection. Of one of this sort he should be ready to become a member, and to assist the magistrate in person if necessary, for it was the duty of every man to do so. Such associations might do good if there was danger, and could only excité a little unnecessary alarm if there was none. But these associations were at present made an instrument of tyranny over men's minds, almost as bad as the clubs in France, that went about, as often as they thought fit, requiring men to renew their civic oath on pain of proscription for incivism. Papers were handed about for signatures, and the names of those who signed, and of those who did not, were taken down with the mark of incivism fixed on the latter. To such persons in the lower ranks of life as had consulted him, he had said, “I shall sign none of these papers, those who offer them will probably do me no harm; but you they will deprive of your customers or your employers, and therefore whether you think them useful associations, or idle, I advise you to sign them." He remarked on various inflammatory handbills, circulated under pretext of calling meetings, and mentioned one for a meeting at Staines, concluding with-" Destruction to Fox and all his Jacobin crew." Now, it so happened, that his house was within three or four miles of Staines, and perhaps it might have been the purpose of the author of the handbill to serve his house as it had been attempted to serve Mr. Walker's. Of this, however, he was not much afraid: for although misrepresentation had often made him unpopular where he was not known, he had the good fortune never to have been unpopular in his own neighbourhood. He exhorted the House, by adopting the motion, or by some resolution declaring their equal disapprobation of riots on all pretexts, to save the country from the possible disgrace of driving a body possessing such talents, such industry, such invariable loyalty to the house of Brunswick, as the dissenters, to emigration. Mr. Windham said, that the House had directed no prosecutions on either side, and therefore could not be charged with partiality. The law was equally open in all cases. The indignation excited against Mr. Walker was much more fairly imputable to his political opinions, than to his being a dissenter. It was natural and even justifiable for men to feel indignation against those who promulgated doctrines, threatening all that was valuable and dear in society; and if there were not means of redress by law, even violence would be justifiable. But we had laws, therefore violence ought to be punished; and on this ground he defended the as sociations, as tending to prevent violence by giving vigour to the law. Mr. Serjeant Watson thought the dissenters entitled to every indulgence and protection compatible with the laws of good government. However the mode and form of their religion might differ from those of the established church, none of his majesty's subjects could possibly be more loyal. With respect to the various associations which had been lately formed, for the preservation of peace and good order, he considered them commendable in the highest degree, since their purpose was to assist the civil magistrates in the execution of the laws. Mr. Hawkins Brown was of opinion, that the paper in question ought not to be prosecuted by that House. He thought the associations highly necessary at the present moment, and that very beneficial effects had already been found to result from them; they had even gone so far as to influence favourably the public funds. Mr. Mitford declared himself as friendly as any man could be to universal toleration; but in his opinion it would be impossible to make a proposition more inimical to the peace and good government of this country, than the present one, since it was impossible at this time to separate religious from political opinions. He therefore thought, that until these religious and political opinions should cease to be united, it became him pertinaciously to resist this motion, which cast a marked reflection on government, by attributing to it a partiality for certain descriptions of people, simply on account of their religious persuasion. The church of England was, and he trusted would long continue, a great majority, when compared with the various persuasions of dissenters; and the provocations given by the latter to the members of the established church, by a variety of publications calculated to occasion much ill blood and animosity, obliged the churchmen, however unwil lingly, to show that that they were the majority. With respect to the parochial as well as other associations, at the present critical juncture, he considered them as promising to be attended by numerous advantages, and was astonished that an objection should be stated to them. Mr. Dundas defended the associations for prosecuting seditious writings as legal, and instanced the societies for prosecuting swindlers and house-breakers. He recommended it to Mr. Fox to consider the advice he had given about signing papers; for according to that doctrine, a magistrate might think himself sure of the support of a great number of persons, who, when occasion called, would refuse to aid him. Men who signed papers of which they disapproved, might soon learn to swear what they did not believe; and the signatures of traitors might appear among those of good citizens. No sufficient ground had been laid for receiving the paper, and therefore he should oppose the motion. Mr. Fox said, he kept no such company as the right hon. secretary talked of. He conversed with no men who would refuse to aid the civil magistrate; and he had no advice to give to traitors, except to become good subjects. All that he had said was, that when papers and declarations were offered to men in the way of test, containing nothing of which they positively disapproved, but only what they thought unnecessary or useless; and when their refusing to sign such papers would bring upon them a sort of proscription to the great injury of their property, if not danger to their persons, his advice was to sign them; and a stronger necessity would even justify them in signing that of which they did disapprove. Mr. D. Scott was of opinion, that it would be most prudent to treat the paper with indifference and neglect. He had seen hundreds of such papers, addressed | abuse thrown out against every human to the lower orders of the people, con- creature bearing the name of Frenchman, taining the most seditious advice; they that there existed in that country a sindied away without notice or noise, through cere disposition to listen to and respect their own insignificancy. If noticed or the opinion of the British nation. He alpunished, they might have derived an im-luded to the situation of the king now on portance that did not naturally belong to them. his trial, and of his family. He was confident that the French nation was ill-informed of the temper and feelings of the free, but generous and humane, people of Great Britain, and that if they could be in any authentic manner apprized of what he in his soul and conscience believed to be the genuine impression of the public mind on this subject, namely, that there was not one man of any description or party who did not deprecate, and who would not deplore, the fate of those persecuted and unfortunate victims, should the apprehended catastrophe take place, he was confident that such a conviction might produce a considerable influence, he wished he could venture to say a successful effect, on the public mind in Paris, and throughout France. Mr. Sheridan pressed shortly his reasons for thinking thus, and said, that among those whose hearts would be most disgusted by the unjust and inhuman act of cruelty he alluded to, he believed would be found all those who had been foremost in re Mr. Sheridan observed, that as the House was called on to vote 9,000 seamen above the number voted in the last session, some explanation might have been deemed necessary; but after what he had said on former nights, and feeling as he then did, the motion had his most hearty concurrence; and had the number moved for been 40,000, he should with equal readiness have concurred. In the present situation of Europe, he admitted the necessity of an armament; and if, unfortunately, we should be compelled to enter into a war, he hoped and trusted that it might be entered into with the ex-joicing at the destruction of the old desertion of every nerve of the empire, and conducted with an energy that might convince all Europe, that when compelled to endure that calamity, we were determined to pursue it not in a lingering and protracted, but in a decisive manner. He had however still to congratulate the people, that the prospect of peace was not so completely closed, as the arguments of several gentlemen on former nights went to establish; on the contrary, the motion now before the House, held out the same hope as had been held in his majesty's speech, that there still existed a chance of a war being avoided, and that our preparations might operate to continue to us the blessings of peace. The opinion that he had held on former nights he still held, that we ought to negociate with the governing power of any country, whatever that governing power might be and had that policy been adopted, it might have led to the prevention of that catastrophe which every man in the kingdom not only feared but would deprecate as wicked, unjust and abominable. He was convinced, notwithstanding the gross and indiscriminate potism of France, and who had eagerly hoped and expected that to whatever extremes, as to principles of government, a momentary enthusiasm might lead a people new to the light ofliberty; that however wild their theories might be, yet there would have appeared in the quiet, deliberate acts of their conduct, those inseparable characteristics of real liberty, and of true valour, justice, magnanimity, and mercy. He would not take upon him to give any opinion as to the manner in which the public sentiment of England might be expressed on this subject, but he was more and more convinced, from the latest intelligence from France, that the opportunity ought not to be neglected. Mr. Burke was not one who looked up to the leaders of the Revolution in France for justice, magnanimity, or mercyhe was not willing to apply to them in any way, for the exercise of those virtues. The hon. gentleman, in the course of his speech, had insinuated that he had in former debates argued as if peace was out of the question, and had shown that he had neither stood forward as one in the secrets of ministers, nor in the interests of his country: that he was not in the secrets of ministers he admitted, but that was not matter of reproach, and his not standing forward for the interests of his country was an assertion unfounded, indecent, and impertinent. The hon. gentleman, in holding up those who governed in France as possessors of magnanimity, justice, and mercy, might as well have sung Ca Ira, as it would have been equally to the question. From what he had seen of those men, he saw nothing to admire, unless murder and treason were deeds to be praised. He had given his vote on a former night, from a conviction that war was inevitable, and that opinion he had founded upon the domestic dangers he had seen, and the situation of foreign affairs, and not from any knowledge of the secrets of his majesty's ministers. It was true, therefore, that in respect to those secrets, he spoke in the dark. But the hon. gentleman had spoken pretty boldly of the intentions of those on the other side of the water, and equally in the dark with himself, unless he was in the secrets of the French ministers. His opinion was, that the disposition of the French people was dangerous to Europe. He knew nothing of the gentlemen of the phalanx, he should leave them to themselves. But he must repeat, that he could not rely on the justice, the magnanimity, or the mercy of the French, particularly when they charged their king as a criminal for offences for which that House would not call the meanest individual in the country to their bar to answer. The truth was, the king was in the custody of assassins, who were both his accusers and his judges, and his destruction was inevitable. Mr. Sheridan said, that a grosser misrepresentation, and a more unjustifiable insinuation had never before been made in parliament than had been made by the right hon. gentleman who had just sat down. He then recapitulated the principal points of his former speech, asserting that he had not held up the French ministers as examples of magnanimity, justice, and mercy, but had merely stated it to be his opinion, that were the French nation to be made acquainted with the unanimous sentiments of the British empire, they would not shock those who looked up to the zealous promoters of liberty, for the possession of magnanimity, justice, and virtue, by a proceeding that would render them detestable to all Europe. Mr. Fox said, he did not rise to misrepresent any gentleman, or to throw out unwarrantable insinuations; he had no knowledge of the intentions of the leaders in another country, but as that event had been introduced which every man of humanity must equally dread and deprecate, he declared it to be his sincere opinion, that it would, if it should unfortunately take place, revolt the feelings of the whole nation, and of Europe, as an act the reverse of mercy, justice, and magnanimity; for it would be an act of the grossest and most foul injustice, cruelty, and pusillanimity. He agreed fully with what had fallen from his hon. friend, that not only those who held the government in France, but that the whole people would, if they could obtain it, pay great respect to, and be influenced by what he was confident was the unanimous sense and feeling of every man in this empire. Could no means be suggested to communicate that unanimous sentiment? Could not some mode be proposed for obtaining an unanimous vote of both Houses, conveying the unanimous opinion of the country. If any could, he, for one, should be happy to give it his hearty support, and should be glad, and obliged to any gentleman, to give him such an opportunity of doing away one of the cruelly unjust misrepresentations which had been made of his conduct. In speaking immediately to the question before the House, it had his hearty support, and with equal alacrity he would have voted for 40,000 seamen; he would not, however, move an increase of the number, as it was to be presumed that ministers knew what was necessary for the present exigencies, and as the House, by the present vote, were by no means precluded from an additional vote whenever that addition should unfortunately be necessary.-That he might not again be subjected to misrepresenta tion, he begged to declare, in terms the most explicit and sincere, that he was as eager as any man could possibly be for an armament. He deemed it indispensably necessary from the situation of Europe. He was equally ready to declare, that he was not one who with an indifferent eye saw the progress of the French arms; he felt it to be alarming to Europe, and was under considerable concern for the effects it might have on his country. Upon every ground an armament was wise and necessary. He wished that by negocia tion a war might be averted, but he was not willing that we should even negociate unarmed. If a neutrality was persevered in, he would still vote for an armament: and if war was necessary, the armament could not be too extensive and vigorous; but in either case, whether by negociation we should endeavour to preclude the necessity of a war, whether a neutrality was adopted, or whether ultimately and unfortunately a war should fall on us, the motion was expedient, and it had his sincere support. Mr. Pitt declared, that the sentiments he had that night heard, had afforded to him the most heartfelt and cordial satisfaction. It was usual, he said, to give an explanation for calling on parliament for increased forces, when sufficient explanation had not been before given; but explanations for the present vote had been given. His majesty, in his speech from the throne, had stated the necessity of an increase of his naval and military forces, for the security of the peace of Europe, interrupted by schemes of aggrandisement and conquest, for the protection of the rights of neutral nations, for the maintenance of our constitution and national safety, and for the general peace of mankind. Knowing, though not at that time a member of parliament, that such reasons had been advanced, he had not been shaken in his opinion of the general unanimity of that House, and of the country, in the measure adopted by his majesty: nor had he been shaken by those propositions which he had understood had been made, and which, had he been present, he should have exerted the utmost of his abilities in deprecating, as advancing principles, impolitic, dangerous, and disgraceful to the nation. He should have contended against the proposition for sending an ambassador to France, as a proposition which, if adopted, would have entailed eternal disgrace upon the British empire, by giving countenance to that horrid deed which had been now deprecated as abominably wicked, unjust, cruel, and pusillanimous. In his expectation of the unanimity of the House, he had in no degree whatever been shaken by the opinions of the most zealous admirers of the French revolution; for he could not have been led to the supposition that even those gentlemen would have opposed the point of a vigorous preparation. In his expectations he was happily not deceived, and from that moment he had a right to look to the unanimous, to the determined, On and vigorous support of the House. The doubt of the present vote being too small must be done away upon the consideration, that it did not preclude an increase : should war be necessary, the present was not in any degree to be considered the ultimate extent of our preparation. the question whether peace would or would not be preserved, he would not give an opinion; but if it could be preserved, consistently with national honour, consistently with good faith, consistently with our own internal security, and consistently with the safety and interest of all Europe, it would not be broken-but upon any other terms peace would be but the nominal maintenance of its blessings, at the moment that they would in reality be sacrificed. On the part of his majesty's ministers, nothing would be omitted that had an honourable tendency to avert war; but much more had been already, and on that day done, to preclude the necessity of a war, than ministers by themselves could have done. The declarations from all sides of the House, according with the unanimous sentiments of the people, must make every nation in Europe feel that this was not a safe or prudent 'moment to force the British empire into war. He had heard with infinite satisfaction sentiments from the right hon. gentleman which went to the full approval of the declaration made by his majesty, and left at Paris by his minister, as his parting voice-that voice had been confirmed by the individual sentiments of every gentleman who had spoken-it was the voice of that House, and of the country at large. Europe and the world would see it with satisfaction, and humanity would feel grateful to them.-It had been asked in what way should we intimate the unanimous sentiment of the people of England?—in any way consistently with the honour of the nation but by an ambassador was unnecessary; the king, as the representative of his people, having already by his ambassador made that declaration; those who most admired the French revolution had made the same declaration, and their sentiments, no doubt, would be communicated in the usual channels; and of the sentiments of the other part of the nation, it was impossible for a doubt to be entertained; but if some formal mode was wished to be adopted, that it might be entered on the Journals of that House, for the purpose of handing down to posterity a solemn protest by this country against |