2] 
fullest attention of Parliament, was 
shortly after brought before the 
House by Mr. Sheridan. On the 
18th of April he moyed for an en- 
quiry into the grievances complain- 
ed of and petitioned against by the 
xoyal burghs in Scotland. The 
number of those burghs was sixty- 
six, and fifty of them had petitioned 
Parliament for redress, They cam- 
plained of infringements on their 
rights, and on their property, 
through the unlawful authority.of 
magistrates, who were self-elected, 
and against whose usurpation of 
power no formal law had provided 
a remedy. The grievances; com, 
plained of were allowed A in reality 
a be extremely oppressive, even 
y those who opposed the petition; 
but they required proof before the 
complainants demanded redress. 
The main grievance stated by 
Mr. Sheridan, was, the self-election 
of the magistrates in these burghs.; 
of which he required an abolition. 
It had been objected to him, that 
abuses of the same sort existed in 
England; but this he answered was 
no argument to justify abuses in 
either country. Courts in Scot- 
land might, it was also said, be re- 
sorted to for a remedy; but on 
consulting those who were masters 
ofthe subject, there were none. 
It had of late been usual, he said, 
to speak disparagingly of whatever 
bore the appearance of reform, 
Such a disposition implied a;deter- 
mination to support all abuses, 
however tyrannical: but it ought 
to be recollected, that the British 
constitution had heen produced 
through the gradual reform of 
abuses during a course of centuries. 
He well knee that numbers were 
deterred, by what had happened in 
France, fromcountenancing chang- 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 
1792. 
es in government; but the French 
revolution, considered in: itself, 
andabstracted from the disturbances 
which its enemies had occasioned, 
was an event beneficial both to 
France and England, The French 
were delivered from despotism; and 
if they acted with prudence and 
moderation, might be a flourishing 
people :—the English were freed 
from the fatal effects of the ambi- 
tious government of that kingdom 
while under an absolute monarehy. 
These were advantages which none 
but the prejudiced and. the undis+ 
cerning would deny or undervalue, 
We were, through this revolution, 
at leisure to take in hand the refor- 
mation’ of the many abuses that had 
through apathy and negligence 
crept into our own constitution ; 
and which, if not redressed through 
this auspicious opportunity, would 
probably become so enormous as to 
defy all other methods, of redress 
but those-of violence, and leave us 
to repent the neglect of those mild 
and pacific means that were at pa 
sent in our power. 
The Lord Advocate; fate Scotland 
denied the charges:of dilapidation 
andillegality objected to magistrates 
of those burghs. He allowed, how- 
ever, the deficiency of a tribunal ta 
judge of the propriety of their ac+ 
count, offering to joinwith Mr. She 
ridan in the establishment of one, 
provided the| system: of the Scoteh 
burghs. remained untouched, and 
conformable to the constitutional 
plans long settled in Scotland. 
As to the power of self-election, 
as it was termed, the, Lord Advo- 
cate protested he woultl never 
countenance its abolishment; and 
he asserted the accusation of un- 
lawful exactions of taxes, to be en-— 
tirely erroneous.. Were any ma- 
gistrate 
