Page images
PDF
EPUB

of its pernicious and criminal import than the very sentences themselves which I am to bring under your consideration.

On page 23. of the publication you will find it stated, "that "the debt, now amounting to nearly 1000 millions, has been ❝ contracted in the prosecution of unjust and unnecessary "wars, by a corrupt administration, uniformly supported by 66 a House of Commons, which cannot be said, with any jus"tice, to be a fair and equal representation of the country, "but which for the most part is composed of men put in by "a borough faction, who have usurped the rights of the peo"ple, and who, by undue means, have contrived to return "a majority of members of that House; a fact which has "not only been admitted on all hands, but which has been "unblushingly attempted to be justified by reason of its avow"ed frequency and notoriety. The meeting, therefore, have "no hesitation in asserting, the debt can never be said to be "national, nor the present taxation just, seeing the former ❝ has been contracted by men who do not represent the coun"try, and the latter raised without consent of the tax-payer; " and it is contrary to the laws and constitution of this and "every free country, that no man can be taxed but with his "own consent, or with the consent of his agent or represen "tative."

Again, at page 35. there is the following passage: "We "have these twenty-five years been condemned to incessant "and unparalleled slavery by a usurped Oligarchy, who pre"tend to be our Guardians and Representatives, while, in "fact, they are nothing but our inflexible and determined ene"mies. But happy, happy am I to think, that you have met "this day to declare," that you will suffer yourselves no "longer to be imposed upon." And a little lower down it is stated in express terms: "At present we have no represen"tatives; they are only nominal, not real; active only in "prosecuting their own designs, and at the same time telling "us that they are agreeable to our wishes." And again, at page 38., "A set of pensioned seat-buyers in the House of "Commons have deprived you of all your rights and privi"leges. They hold both emoluments and seats in that House, " contrary to the express precept of our glorious Constitu"tion, which says, "that no person holding any emolument " can have a seat in the House of Commons." Our Consti"tution also allows Parliaments only to be of one year's du"ration, and that they are to be chosen annually by the peo"ple; but they have elected themselves, and by their own "assumed and arbitrary authority have made Parliaments, "first, of three years, then of seven years' duration; and

E

[ocr errors]

with the same lawless power they may make them perpetual. Alarming to relate, they have disregarded our "Constitution, they have scoffed at her equitable precepts, "they have trampled her and her sons under their feet. I "would now ask you where is your freedom? Where is your "liberty? When we reflect on such usage, it is enough to ex"cite us with ungovernable indignation. They are, accord"ing to our glorious Constitution, culpable of treason, and "justly merit its reward. Will a nation which has been so "long famed for its liberty and heroism, suffer itself to be "duped any longer by a gang of impostors? No, it will not. "The unanimity of our sentiments and exertions, agreeably "to the Constitution, will once more dispel the cloud which "eclipses the resplendent and animating rays of liberty; and "will again make her shine forth in this once happy coun"try with unimpeded effulgence."

[ocr errors]

This

In order to remedy all this, universal suffrage and annual parliaments are recommended. Thus the publication states, (page 10.): "The House of Commons, in its original com"position, consisted only of Commoners, chosen annually by "the universal suffrage of the people. No nobleman, no elergyman, no naval or military officer, in short, none who held "places, or received pensions from Government, had any right "to sit in that House. This is what the House of Commons 66 was, what it ought to be, and what we wish it to be. "is the wanted change in our form of Government,-the ❝ Commons House of Parliament restored to its original pu"rity; and this, beyond a doubt, would strike at the root of "the greatest part of the evils we groan under at the present "day." At page 24. it states," that the only effectual means "that can be adopted to relieve the nation in some measure "from its present distresses, are, by restoring the imprescrip"tible rights of the nation by a Reform in the representa"tion of the people in the House of Commons, and by an "nual parliaments; and, until these take place, the people can "entertain no reasonable expectation of ever having their con"dition improved. But, should these salutary measures be "adopted, they are confident that such a Parliament would "always act for the good of the nation, and ensure the re"spect, confidence, and support of the whole body of the peo"ple. And it is not without justice that the meeting ascribe "to the want of a fair and equal representation of the peo❝ple in Parliament, all the wars, and their consequences, "which the people has been engaged for half a century past; "for if, at the commencement of the first American war, this country had been blessed with a House of Commons cho

[ocr errors]

"sen by the free suffrage of the tax-payers, would they have "acted consistently with the constitution of their own body, " to have gone to war with a people of the same origin and "language, merely to force taxes upon them without their "consent? Or would they have opposed the struggles of the "French nation, in endeavouring to obtain that freedom "which every Briton cherishes as his birth-right? And of "ultimately forcing upon them a hated Dynasty, contrary to "the wishes of nine-tenths of the people? The idea is truly "preposterous." In page 26. they explain what they mean by the tax-payers. Considering that of two millions of in"habitants, only 2700 have a right of voting for Members of "Parliament, the remaining 1,997,360, although tax-payers, "directly, or indirectly, having no more right of voting, than "if they were an importation of Slaves from Africa."

Now, Gentlemen, after going through all this long detail of grievances, you will recollect, that unless the reforms called for are granted, and the evils complained of are redressed, the people were told that their allegiance was to be thrown off; and if allegiance be thrown off, rebellion must follow. The result, therefore, of the whole that I have read is, that as the condition of the people never could be improved till universal suffrage and annual parliaments were obtained, so unless all this was granted, resistance must be made, and insurrection against the Government and the laws must be the consequence. But, Gentlemen, you know that to resist in this country unless universal suffrage be obtained, is just, in other words, to resist until the British Constitution be fundamentally overthrown.

I am not now prepared, Gentlemen, and it would be out of place for me, to enter at length upon this important subject, on which so many persons have been so grossly deluded. But I cannot avoid pointing out, in a few sentences, that at no one period, either in England or Scotland, did universal suffrage ever prevail; and in Scotland, in particular, from the great subdivision of property, the elective suffrage was never so extended as it actually is at the present moment. It is matter of notoriety, that the history of the British Constitution is to be found in the Feudal System, and that the Constitution of Parliament in particular, while it sprung out of that system, has ever retained features which strongly mark its descent. The immediate vassals of the Crown, the Great Barons who held of the King" in capite," were the first Members of Parliament. Originally there were no persons who possessed their seats in Parliament as representatives of others; nor were any such introduced into the

[ocr errors]

Legislature until the great estates, to which the duty of attendance in Parliament was incident, having been divided, and that duty had actually become a burden upon the small proprietors, the foundation of the representative system came naturally to be laid. The first step in the progress which seems to have been made was this, that charters of exemption from Parliament were frequently solicited and obtained, but those were declared to be illegal. Accordingly, it would seem next to have grown by degrees into a law to oblige the Great Barons only to attend in person, and to permit the Lesser to attend by their representatives. This is in truth no matter of conjecture; for by a statute of our Parliament, passed in 1427, the smaller Barons were excused from coming to Parliament, provided they sent commissioners from the shires.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

In like manner, it is proved by the introduction to the laws of Robert III., that those burghs alone which held property in capite of the Crown, had the right of being represented in Parliament. It is, therefore, Gentlemen, a delusion to state, that universal suffrage ever made part of this constitution, or indeed that the right of the elective suffrage was ever broader or more extensive than at present. In fact, I know of no country in which universal suffrage, or any thing like it, ever existed, but in one, and that was in France in the year 1793. At that period, no doubt, there was an assembly elected by something like universal suffrage, and what was the result? The degradation of the nobility, the dethronement and murder of the Sovereign,the overthrow of the church,-and the extinction of religion. Is it those things, Gentlemen, that these prisoners would recommend? I have already told you, that liberty, as it was practised in France in 1793, has been held up by them as an object of admiration; and if you look to what is stated in the 32d page of their publication, you will find, that while they hold up to reprobation the higher orders of the State, the revolutionary fate of the Church does not seem to have been altogether out of their contemplation. "Their reverend hire"lings," say they, "would convince you that you are suffer"ing under the visitation of the Almighty, and therefore that you ought to be submissive to the chastening stroke." This allusion has a direct application to the established church,--its object is not more to dissuade the people from submission under their distresses than to bring the clergy and religion into contempt. It is to tell the people, that while their rulers were corrupt and oppressing them, the ministers of religion were not less base or more worthy of consideration.

But while the people are thus told in plain language to

66

66

throw off their allegiance,---while they are urged on to resistance to the Executive Government,---to overthrow the Legislature, and degrade the ministers of religion, the publication proceeds to hold out the most direct encouragement to rebellion. Look to the passage about the Army in page 32. "Your infatuated oppressors may harden themselves against your requests; they may consider themselves as fortified "behind a veteran army, which, they may imagine, will "be always ready to support them, though in an unjust cause, and by which they may conceive it possible to awe " a nation into silence and submission. But let them recol"lect that the army is still composed of men, and of Britons. "And shall they, though they have exerted their valour in "the cause of fanaticism,-though they have been led to "fight the battles of oppressors, and establish the thrones "of tyrants; shall they, in violation of the privileges of freemen,-forgetful of the glory of their country,-forgetful of "all that is dear to themselves,-contemptuous of all that "they love, and regardless of the fate of posterity,-shall "they turn their arms to destroy the Constitution of their "country? What! after displaying such feats of valour that "has immortalized them for ever, will they stoop so low as "to become instrumental in the ruin of their country, for the "sake of a faction which has cast a deep shade of disgrace "over all the splendour of their victorious achievements? I "appeal to the army itself for a reply. I hear it burst like "thunder from man to man, from line to line, from camp "to camp,-No! Never! Never! We fight not for the de"struction, but for the preservation of the rights and privi"leges of our beloved country!"

66

Now, Gentlemen, you will please here to remember, that you are told, in the outset of the publication, that under the circumstances stated, allegiance has become forfeited, and is to be thrown off; but in the passage I have just read, as if the readers might have the army in view to restrain their patriotic fury, their fears are removed, and they are encouraged with the hope, that the army will not fight against them, but will join and co-operate with their projects of insurrection. Gentlemen, I ask you, can any thing more insidious,any thing more wicked,-any thing more seditious be conceived or imagined? I will fairly tell you, that, in my opinion, there is no publication that has ever been brought before this Court of a more wicked and pernicious tendency, none better calculated to produce turbulence and commotion, than that which I have read to you.

Look to the publication for which Palmer was tried at the

« PreviousContinue »