34) 
name could be affixed sufficiently 
descriptive of so vile a character? 
He cited the case of those informers 
at the Old Bailey, who fall under 
this description, and he reminded 
the house of the cruel treatment of 
Mr. Walker, of Manchester, who, 
though liberated on the proof of 
perjury in his accuser, received 
however no compensation for his 
sufferings. The depravity of mi- 
nisterial agents required indubitably 
to be checked, no less than the mis- 
demeanours of those whose conduct 
they were employed to inspect. 
With sorrow, said Mr. Fox, he 
found himself compelled to bear 
witness to a melancholy truth, 
which was, that the freedom of 
.the subject had been considerably 
abridged since the commencement 
of the present reign. It was vain 
to deny the discontent of the people 
at the conduct of ministers :~where- 
ever popular meetings were held, 
this conduct was warmly and una- 
nimously reprobated, as the cause 
of public calamities. He had, Mr, 
Fox said, been strongly impressed 
with the reality of this* persuasion 
throughout the generality, by the 
unanimous marks of approbation he 
had met with that very morning 
from an assembly in Westminister, 
consisiing of thirty thousand indivi« 
duals at least, whom he bad addres- 
sed to the same futent for which be 
was now speaking to the house, and 
who were apparently, almost toa 
man, convinced that he spoke the 
sense of the nation at large. 
-The motion for an inquiry was 
opposed by Mr. Pitt and the ate 
torney-general, as creating a delay 
that might be productive of much 
danger, The tranquillity of the 
public required the promptest mea- 
sures. The latter expressed great 
solicitude in vindicating his conduct 
aes 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 1796. 
athe late trials: he insisted on 
the propriety of the bill in question, 
which, he sar, would, at the worst; 
prove the adoption of a lesser evil, 
to prevent a greater. ‘The present 
laws of the land were, in his opis 
nion, inadequate to prevent the ap- 
pearance of such publications as he 
had read, and of such meetings as 
had been held; new laws were of — 
consequence necessary. ‘Fhe debate 
closed by twenty-two votes for Mr. 
Sheridan’s motion; and one hundred | 
and sixty-seven against it. 
The second reading of the bill © 
took place on the seventeenth of © 
November. The liberty of speech — 
was acknowledged by the solicitors 
general to be a peculiar blessing of — 
the English constitution, but it had _ 
lately been perverted by ill-design- — 
ing men, in so glaring a mannery — 
that the safety of the state required | 
it should be so regulated, as to pres — 
vent the mischiefs wherein they © 
Were aiming to render it instru- 
mental. So far, in bis judgment, 
were the provisions of the bill suf- 
ficiently restrictive, for the purpose’ — 
of curbing the licentiousness of the © 
people, that they demanded ad- 
ditional restraints on the intemper- 
ance of speech, daily increasing 
among the commonalty. The pro- 
visions enacted by the bill would, 
he asserted, confine the people with- 
in the salutary limits of lawful dis- 
cussions, and effectually obviate 
those riotous proceedings, that were 
the inevitable result of assemblies 
held by the vulgar classes, without 
some restraint to keep them in ors 
der. The presence of a magistrate 
would completely effect this, with- 
out entrenching on their privilege 
to meet for the purpose of laying 
their grievances before the legis- 
Jature, and petitioning for redress. 
While this right remained ae 
ed; 
