_ HISTORY OF EUROPE. 
every thing that stood in the way 
of their proceedings, however the 
voice of the public might reprobate 
them, or experience prove them 
‘contrary to the welfare of the na- 
tion. It was become usual, he said, 
to draw precedents from France, 
by the supporters of ministerial 
measures. He too could, with 
equal propriety, cite the example 
of that country in admonition to 
those who were become the rulers 
of this. What was it, he asked, 
that plunged France into those dis- 
orders and confusions that brought 
_ about the revolution? Surely not 
the field-meetings of the people, 
nor the discussions in private clubs, 
but the profligacy of avicious court, 
and the licentious lives of the heads 
of the French nation, whose im- 
moral characters Jost them the es- 
teem and respect of their country- 
men; but the cause which princi- 
pally accelerated that event was 
the iniquitous conduct of their go- 
vernment, and the corrupt subser- 
viency of successive ministries to 
the wicked ambition of those who, 
unhappily for that kingdom, pos- 
_ sessed the confidence of weak sove- 
Teigns, and involved them in con- 
tests and wars that drained the re- 
sources of the nation, and reduced 
the people to misery. These, to- 
gether with the intolerable oppres- 
sions exercised upon the common- 
alty, excited that resentment of 
their wrongs, and that resolution to 
Oppose tyranny, which produced 
the revolution. True it was, that 
the personal character of the mo- 
march, on the British throne, was 
highly respectable and exemplary ; 
butthe perverseness of his ministers, , 
in forcing his people into a war, 
heither of their choice nor to their 
‘interest, in lavishing their money 
[31 
for its prosecution against their re- 
peated wishes for its termination, 
in creating places and emoluments 
for the abettors of this ruinous sys- 
tem, and in adopting the severest 
and most unconstitutional measures 
agaiust all who had the spirit to op- 
pose them: these and otherinstances 
of obstinacy, arrogance, and cone 
tempt of the people's rights and in- 
terests, fully justified him in calling 
their conduct unconstitutional and 
corrupt. 
Tbe duke was answered by’ lord 
Grenville,‘who went over the same 
grounds of arguments already urged 
in support of the bill. He did not 
deny the duke’s assertions respecting 
the corruption of the French court 
and government -previous to the 
revolution, the commencement of 
which had excited the expectation 
of the people of this country, that 
the French would henceforth enjoy 
the happiness of a constitution simi- 
lar to their,own. But the horrible 
events that ensued owed their causes 
to the lawless principles main- 
tained in the clubs and disorderly 
associations that took place in that 
unhappy country, and filled it with 
murder and desolation. Clubs, it 
was well known, bad been institut- 
ed in England, in imitation and 
upon the same plan as those in 
France. Like them, they taught 
principles utterly subversive of ane 
cient laws and constitutions, and 
inimical to the moral and religious 
order of things established for cene 
turies. These were certainly most 
dangerous innovations, and tended 
evidently to throw this, and any 
country, into the most fatal disor- 
ders. They ought, therefore, to 
be resisted, and it would argue fear 
orimbicility not te oppose them in 
the firmest and most effectual man- 
ners 
