158} 
of which, though in favour of the 
accused, had, by no fixed rule, esta- 
blished their i innocence. The sus. 
icions entertained against them 
ee not been cleared up to their ad- 
_ wantage: in one particular case, 
“the jury hesitated ‘two hours. 
Would the judges, would the grand 
gory, have-countenanced the accusa- 
tion, unless it had appeared found- 
ed? but the transa€tions of the so. 
Cieties sufficiently proved their trea- 
sonable intentions. The general 
statement of a conspiracy was unde. 
miable. The same circumstances 
n. which the suspension-act was 
grounded in the preceding year, 
still existed, and no valid motive 
could be atleged for its repeal. 
In answer to Mr. Adair, it was 
asked by Mr. Fox, upon what argn- 
ment the repeal would be founded, 
the former argument having been 
degally disproved ? the decision of a 
jury, though doubtless revisable by 
parliament, could not, consistently 
‘with reason and equity, be question- 
ed without the most evident neces- 
sity. In the present cases, no ac- 
‘quittal had taken place, but afier 
the strictest and séverest trial: In 
‘that of Hardy, whitch decided the 
‘others, had a conspiracy been 
proved, hemust, unavoidably, have 
as condemned, as he was privy 
to all the transa€tions of the parties. 
accused. His-discharge was, there- 
fore, a proof that no cone 
existed. Such being the fact, what 
was to be the motive of the suspen. 
sion? the house ought to reflect, 
that they were now sitting as a jury, 
on the palladium of English liberty. 
To say, that a suspension of the 
habeas would obviate the necessity 
of bringing people to trial, was pre- 
cisely the argument urged in defence 
“of the detires de cachet, under the old 
‘moved by the attor 
ANNUAL REGISTER,: 1795. 
Sovernment of France, by which 4 
person might remain 4 prisoner for 
years, or for life. He concluded, by 
réproaching ministers for chatging 
opposition with promoting discoti- 
tents, if the same manner as they 
accused the dissenters of being bad 
sudjects, and enegura gediain ignorant 
and bigoted populs sce to treat them 
with barbarity.. 
The propriety of thebill suspend. 
ing the habeas was mgintained by 
the mast 
nestly opposed by Mr Thomson, and 
Mr. Milbanke. After a concluding 
speech in its support, by Mr. Pitt, 
the debate'closed, by 41 votes fora 
repewl of the suspension, and 185 
az rises it. 
en days after the decision of 
ms mattet, a motion for leave to 
bring in a bill, to continue the sus- » 
pension of the habeas corpus, was 
ney-general, and 
carried by 71 against 13. But the 
second reading, which was on the 
23d, met with a strong opposition. 
Mr. Lambton observed, that the 
power entrusted to the minister, by 
the intended bill, was enormous ¢ 
he might imprison individuals on 
what pretences he thought proper. 
The whole nation was in a manner 
surrendered to his discretion. “The 
worthiest’ men were liable to be 
thrown into confinement, without 
being informed of the particular 
crime or offence for which’ they 
suffered, without knowing their ac- 
cuser, and without the benefit ofa 
trial till it saited the minister’s con- 
venience. Was such treatmenr of 
the subjeét to be endured, in @ 
country, calling itself free, without 
the most glaring and ‘self-evident 
necessity? Thetrials, that had taken 
place, had proved the innocence of 
the parties accused, of every charge 
brought 
\ 
er of the rolls, and as ear- < | 
y 
i 
