HISTORY OF EUROPE. 
eounter-addresses in their favour. 
It was strongly asserted, at the 
time, that these were signed by 
none but ministerial dependents, 
such as officers of the customs and 
excise, and military men. So great 
was the repugnance of the people 
at large asserted to have been, that 
the signatures of youth at school was 
resorted to. But with all these ex- 
ertions, the petitions, on the side 
of the ministry, did not exceed sixty- 
four subscribed byabout thirty thou- 
sand individuals of theabove descrip- 
tion, while the addresses against the 
bills,amounted to near one hundred, 
and thesubscribers to upwards of one 
hundred and thirty thousand. 
“Among those who signalized 
their adherence to ministry, were 
the members of the association, 
formed, with the countenance and 
aid of government, by Mr. Reeves, 
at the close of 1792, and the com- 
mencement of 1793, against re- 
publicans and levellers, ‘hey 
Stood forward on this occasion, 
with extraordinary zeal, in sup- 
port of the two bills, of which 
_ they expressed ‘the highest approba- 
tion in the address which they 
presented to the king. 
But, notwithstanding the dispro- 
portion of numbers against them, 
_ ministry persisted, with unremitting 
resolution, in carrying forward their 
designs. However, opposed by the 
majority of the nation, they were 
secure of a support in parliament, 
that would enable them to compass 
the point proposed. ‘The popular 
Opinions were, in the mean time, 
represented by those who argued 
in defence of the bills, as the mere 
ebullitions of party zeal,and dictated 
to the people by the leaders of par- 
liamentary opposition, who hoped to 
excite such complaints and clamours 
against the conduct of government, 
[41 
as might deter it from the prosecu- 
tion of its plans. These, they as- 
serted, were, in the opinion of the 
judicious and the more respectable 
part of the community, necessary 
for the internal tranquillity of the 
kingdom, and could only be disap- 
proved by those factious and disaf- 
fected people, who sought, for ma- 
licious purposes, to throw the coun~ 
try into confusion. 
While the nation at large was 
thus agitated, its representatives 
were taken up with no less violent 
debates on the petitions now pre- 
sented to them from every quarter. 
That from the corresponding so- 
ciety was laid before the house on 
the twenty-third of November, by 
Mr. Sturt, who warmly exculpated 
that society from the imputations of 
treason or sedition. In order to 
shew, at the same time, the maleyu- 
lent intentions of ministry, and its 
partizans, be produced a perform. 
ance, attributed to Mr. Reeves, the 
framer and president of the associa- 
tions against republicans and le- 
vellers, wherein it was unequivo- 
cally maintained, ‘* that the goverr- 
ment of England was a monarchy ; 
that the monarch was the ancient 
stock from which have sprung those 
goodly branches of the legislature, 
the lordsand commons ; that these, 
however, were still only branches, 
and that they might be lopped off, 
and the tree bea tree still, shorn 
indeed of its honours, but not, like 
them, cast into the fire.” 
So flagrant a violation of the 
fundamental principles of the Eng- 
lish constitution excited the indig- 
nation, not only of the, oppositions 
but of many of the members friendly 
to ministers. The public loudly 
proclaimed it a stab aimed at the 
vitals of theconstitution, and loaded 
the author with the most opprobri- 
ous 
j 
