92) 
in the act, the real family of the 
house.” So alarming a restriction 
occasioned an immediate cry of 
hear him, on the opposite side, but 
Mr. Pitt persisted in his determi- 
nation, and moved for leave to in- 
troducea bill for the prevention of 
seditious meetings. 
The motion being read, Mr. 
Fox began a long and animated 
speech, by declaring his abhorrence 
of the treatment offered to the 
king, but professed himself no less 
offended at the discourse he had 
just heard. An attempt had been 
made to found the necessity of 
framing the bill proposed on the 
proceedings of the assemblies so 
highly reprobated by ministers, 
who contended that they struck at 
the existence of parhament itself; 
but if such were the real case, 
were not those who brvached these 
rebellious tenets amenable to the 
law, and liable, on conviction, to 
condign punishment ? There was no 
evidence that the late outrages, 
though justiy complained of, o:i- 
ginated in the meetings alluded to. 
Proclamations were no evidence 5 
they were the fabrication of mi- 
nisters, frequently to serve the 
worst purposes. Public discussions, 
on national subjects, were not only 
legal, but the very life of the Ene 
glish constitution ;, without these no 
liberty could subsist. The bill, it 
was said, would not prevent, but 
only regulate them. ‘* But attend, 
said Mr. Fox; to the regulation ; I 
thought, he continued, that I knew 
the rights of men, and the rights of 
Englishmen.” A great cry arising 
of hear him: ‘ What, said he, do 
you suppose ita slip, and that the 
rights of manis a sentence without 
a meaning? have men no natural 
rights? if so, Englishmen’s aights 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 1796. 
can have no existence. The rights 
of man, I say, are clear: man has 
natural rights, and he who denies 
it is ignorant of the basis of a free 
government: he is ignorant of the 
first principles of ours, for these 
rights are connected with the best 
parts of the history of our country.” 
‘The people, Mr. Fox continued, 
had sn inalienable right to delibe- 
rate on their grievances, and to de- 
mand redress from the legislature, 
but were forbidden by this bill to 
exercise these rights without the 
attendance of a magistrate, and pre- 
vious notice to him of their inten- 
tion. _ He was empowered to arrest 
any one present, whose words he 
might think proper to call seditious, 
andevento dissolve the meeting at 
his own pleasure. ‘‘ Say then at 
once, Mr. Fox exclaimed, that a free 
constitution is no longer suitable to 
us. Conduct yourselves at once as 
the senators of Denmark did: lay 
down your freedom, ‘and acknowe 
ledge and accept of despotism, but 
do not mock the understandings and 
the feelings of mankind, by telling 
the world that you are free. Cana 
_ meeting, under such resirictions as 
the bill requires, be called a meet- 
ing of free people? is it possible to 
make the people of this country be- 
heve thatthe plan is any thing bat 
a total annihilation of their liberty?” 
After seme strictures on the number 
of persons to whom the bill limited 
henceforth all meetings ; ‘* behold, 
pursued Mr. Fox, the state of a free 
Englishman; before he can discuss 
any topic which involves his liberty, 
or bis rights, he is to send to a ma- 
gistrate, who is ¢o attend the dis- 
cussion ; that magistrate cannot pre- 
vent the meeting, but he can pre> 
vent their speakiug, because he can 
allege that what is said basa ten- 
dency 
- 
