He felt himself warranted in positively repelling the imputation, because the whole tenor of his life, he hoped, at least, had proved that he was a sincere and firm friend to freedom; and, under that description, he was concerned to find that there were persons in this country who entertained theories of government not thoroughly consistent with the safety of the state, and were, perhaps, ready to transfer a part, at least, of that anarchy which prevailed in France to this kingdom, for the purpose of effectuating their own designs. Yet, if the honourable gentleman considered him as guilty, why did he not attack him as the foe of his country? As to the charge of abusing the national assembly, it might seem almost sufficient to answer, “What is the national assembly to us?" But, he declared, that he did not libel the national assembly of France, whom he considered very little in the discussion of these matters; that he thought all the substantial power resided in the republic of Paris, whose authority guided, or whose example was followed by all the republics of France. The republic of Paris had an army under their orders, and not under those of the national assembly. The honourable gentleman had asked, from whence the people of France were to expect a better constitution?—whether from Marshal Broglio, at the head of his army; or were they to look for it amidst the dungeons of the Bastille? Was that a fair and candid mode of treating his argument, or was it what he ought to have expected in the moment of departed friendship? On the contrary, was it not evident that the honourable gentleman had made a sacrifice of his friendship, for the sake of catching some momentary popularity? If the fact was such, however, even greatly as he should continue to admire the honourable gentleman's talents, he must tell him that his argument was chiefly an argument ad invidiam, and that all the applause for which he could hope from clubs, was scarcely worth the sacrifice which he had chosen to make for so insignificant an acquisition. The resolutions were then agreed to, and the house adjourned. MARCH 8. EXCISE DUTIES ON TOBACCO. MR. SHERIDAN observed, that having some reason to conclude that neither the minister, nor any of those gentlemen who were connected with him in office, would oppose the motion which he should beg leave to submit to the consideration of the house, it might appear improper to enter, for the present, into a detail of the subject. He should not, therefore, trouble the house with any long series of remarks concerning the necessity of repealing the act of the last session, subjecting the manufacturers of tobacco and snuff to the excise laws; but he would chiefly employ the few words he should use, in most earnestly entreating gentlemen to pay attention to the subject, assuring them that it was of infinite importance, and the more it was inquired into the more would its extent and magnitude display themselves, and it would be found that a matter more interesting to the first and dearest principles of the constitution had scarcely ever called for the investigation of a British house of commons. Every member must wish that, in a question where the revenue was materially concerned, the utmost candour might be preserved, and nothing which bore the smallest appearance of party spirit be suffered to prevail. In all cases of revenue, two or three instances excepted, it must be admitted that the whole house, to a man, had joined cordially and earnestly in supporting the measures in agitation, and in endeavouring, as effectually as possible, to sustain and keep up the credit of the country. In the only cases in which opposition had been maintained, more good had been done than harm, as had been evident in the case of the fustian tax and the shop tax, and he trusted that the same consequence would follow the repeal of the tobacco act; for repealed it must be, if the house would fairly and closely examine into its operation and effects. It was unnecessary for him either to dwell much upon the general inattention of that house to questions of revenue, and the absolute necessity of introducing bills of considerable importance, early in the session, so that there might be time for their full and complete discussion; or to point out the folly of reposing a blind confidence in ministers' experience respecting matters of revenue. Had the tobacco bill been introduced early in a session, it was utterly impossible that it should ever have passed at all; but protracted as it had been, purposely, to the end of the session, gentlemen had not that opportunity of examining and considering a bill of such length and complicated variety, which ought to have been given, and which alone could prevent the disgrace which the house ultimately sustained, in being obliged, the very next session after it had passed, to revise, reconsider, and amend their own act. No man (Mr. Sheridan said could pronounce him wrong in this observation, or declare that he hazarded an opinion which was doubtful; since, in passing the tobacco act, the house had passed an act that, in the judgment of the greatest law authority of the kingdom, had been called a mass of contradictions and absurdities. He did not mean to refer to the place where this declaration had been made, because he knew that the forms and customs of that house would not admit of it, and he wished not to be irregular, but he had the sanction of the first legal authority in the kingdom to declare that the bill was so ill drawn that it was impossible to be under stood; that it was full of clauses of an opposite and contradictory nature; that many of them were absolutely irreconcileable; and that the whole bill had been framed and put together by a man who could write, but who could not read. The principle of the bill led to the introduction of a general excise; and, therefore, on that ground alone, it ought to be repealed. He wished also, that if it were possible, it could be viewed so as to be regarded solely as a matter of revenue, disconnected as it were from the constitution. He knew that it was impossible in that house absolutely to disconnect the constitution and the revenue in all matters regarding the revenue; but still he wished that it might be looked on with a trading eye, and solely with a view to the reveThe excise laws would then be found likely to cut up our. resources by the roots, and to be the most fatal mode of collection, in its effect, to which it was possible to resort. In the case of tobacco they were wholly inapplicable; and, in fact, he would lay it down as a principle in the broadest and most unequivocal manner that the extension of the excise system would be just as applicable to the cloth which we wore on our backs, the buckles in our shoes, and any and every other article of our manufacture as tobacco and snuff. In conclusion, Mr. Sheridan moved : nue. "That the several petitions which have been presented to this house, in this session of parliament, praying for a repeal or alteration of the act passed in the last session of parliament, for laying excise duties on tobacco, be referred to a committee of the whole house, and that such of the said petitioners as desire, be heard by their counsel in support of their said petitions." Mr. Pitt answered, but did not oppose the motion. Mr. Sheridan replied, that he should not go into any general arguments in answer to the tartness and asperity manifested by the right honourable gentleman, whom he was sorry to perceive so sore upon the subject, but however the right honourable gentleman might lose his temper, he was determined to keep his own, and adhere to the moderation with which he began. As to the general observation that he had made, respecting the consequence of bringing in great and important bills at the end of the session, and passing them in a hurry, it was a justifiable one, surely, since the first law authority in the kingdom had said that the bill was unintelligible, and pronounced it a mass of contradictions, absurdity, and oppression. Had he wished to speak of bringing in the bill with any sort of severity, he might have charged the right honourable gentleman with having, in the course of the preceding session, informed the house that the bill was nearly ready; and then having, the next year, premeditatedly and designedly protracted it till the end of the session, when a sufficient number of gentlemen were not in town, or did not attend to give it the necessary examination. Adverting to the chancellor of the exchequer's observation respecting the want of analogy between broad cloth and tobacco, Mr. Sheridan declared that he had never dreamt of any, but merely talked of the applicability of the excise laws to two opposite articles of manufacture. The right honourable gentleman had asserted that he had sought the best information in his power, and that the manufacturers had engaged to send him an account of their grievances, but they had failed to make good their word. Mr. Sheridan contradicted the assertion, and said, that luckily the matter did not rest on his evidence, but a third party, the manufacturers themselves. He confessed he was not present at the meeting, but he spoke upon their authority. It was true the right honourable gentleman saw them, and asked them to state their grievances specifically in writing; they told him that was a matter of information they could not afford to give him, but wished to give all the information in their power to the representatives of the people. There was nothing extraordinary in this; and yet, because they would not privately communicate their case to the right honourable gentleman, he had charged them with having declined the performance of a promise, which the manufacturers not only never made, but to which they expressly refused to accede. For his own part, he could positively affirm that the petitioners had not had recourse to the exciting any sort of clamour, but were ready to come to the bar of that house and prove, by evidence, that they laboured under a very great op pression and inconvenience. This was the proper mode of proceeding, and it should be considered that the manufacturers were men of character and respectability, in every sense of the words; when they came to the bar the house would be able to know who and what they were, and how the facts actually stood. The motion passed. Mr. Sheridan rose again to name the day, but begged the honourable member for Hull to declare whether he did not know that the whole of the bill had not been put in force? A material part of the evidence would go to prove that the bill was so impracticable, that parts of it had been obliged to be suspended. Mr. Thornton answered, that the surveys were made more frequently in the country than in town (only once in six weeks in the latter, but once every fortnight in the former), and, therefore, the inconvenience of the act would have been felt more severely in the country than in town. The ensuing Thursday was moved for the day of the committee's meeting. APRIL 16. EXCISE DUTIES ON TOBACCO. Mr. Sheridan moved the order of the day for the house to resolve itself into a committee on the several petitions, praying for a repeal of the act for excising tobacco; which being complied with, MR. SHERIDAN observed, that, in despite of the little consideration to which several honourable members might think the subject of the ensuing debate entitled, he felt himself thoroughly convinced that the great importance of its nature merited the closest attention, and the most serious investigation of the committee; and, therefore, upon such a ground, he should take the liberty to put in his earnest claim to the favour of an unprejudiced and patient hearing. The matter, indeed, would scarcely admit of being enlivened or dignified by the manner of discussion; yet it was deeply interesting; for it involved within it points which were exceeding material to the existence of the constitution itself. He was, however, too well persuaded, that before he could succeed in making some members of the committee view the question in the same light in which it appeared to him, there were some prejudices which it would be necessary for him to endeavour to remove. Of late he had observed that, whenever revenue was mentioned in parliament, it seemed to be understood that every other consideration was to give way to it; and that even constitutional principles were made subordinate to an increase of revenue. This had grown into a kind of prejudice; and a man would run the hazard of being thought an enemy to the credit of the nation, who should venture to oppose a plan, however injurious it might prove to the rights of the subject, if it purported to hold out a prospect of an increase of revenue. Yet still should he presume to oppose that prejudice, at the same time that he professed himself to be among the foremost of those |