HISTORY OF EUROPE. 
ing, that the many men of intre- 
pidity, with which the parliament 
and nation abounded, would tamely 
permit him, and his associates, to 
trample on their rights, and submit 
to become the passive instruments 
of their violation. Mr. Windham 
replied only by a smile. Mr. Cur- 
wen’s motion was, nevertheless, out- 
voted by two hundred and sixty-nine 
against seventy. ‘ 
On the twenty-seventh of Novem- 
ber, the house went into a com- 
mittee on the bill for preventing 
seditious meetings, when Mr. Fox, 
Mr. Grey, Mr. Whitbread, Mr. 
Lambton, and all the other mem- 
bers of the opposition, Mr. Sheri- 
dan excepted, left the house. Even 
Mr. Sheridan declared, that he did 
not remain for the end of proposing 
any alterations in the bill. To do 
justice to the public, itought, he said, 
to be negatived in every part of its 
contents. 
The secession of the minority un- 
derwent a variety of discussions on 
its propriety. Many were, indeed, 
of opinion, that well knowing their 
presence could be no impediment to 
the passing of the bill, a formal se- 
cession from an assembly, that was, 
in their judgment, resolved to de- 
stroy the liberty of the nation, would 
make a greater impression upon the 
public, than if they were to continue 
sitting in the house, and opposing 
the ministers, as usual, to no pure 
‘pose. Lut many were of a different 
Opinion, and thought, by their pre- 
sence and resistance, notwithstanding 
that the bills would have past, they 
ymust have been divested of much of 
\the severity with which they were 
them, atall events, to dispute every 
inch of the ground, of which, by 
their retreat, the ministry would now 
me undisturbed possessors: 
accompanied, and that it became . 
[43 
The bill was, of course, carried 
through the house without opposi-+ 
tion, and without any other modi- 
fications than its supporters thougat 
necessary to render it less odious to 
the public. It was proposed, by 
the solicitor-general, on reading the 
third clause against the meeting of 
more than fifty persons, that if twelve 
of them remained together, one hour 
after being ordered to disperse, it 
should be adjudged death, without 
benefit of clergy. But an amend- 
ment was moved, making it only 
punishable as a misdemeanour. This 
was seconded by Mr. Wilberforce, 
Mr. Stanley, Mr. Banks, and Sir 
W. Dolben: but the severity of the 
solicitor-general prevatied, and his 
motion was carried by eighty votes 
against only thirteen; so completely 
was the house devoted to the ins 
exorable disposition of the framers 
of this bill. 
This was evinced no less glaringly, 
on discussing that clause which em- 
powered the magistrate present at 
any popular meeting to dissolve it 
immediately, should he be of opi- 
nion, thatany subject brought for- 
ward were unlawiul, or of a sedi- 
tious tendency. The clause was 
confirmed, and the magistrate also 
authorized to seize and commit the 
person whom he judged guilty of 
such offence. 
The last clause respected the du- 
ration of the bill. The solicitor- 
general, consistently with the severe 
system he had embraced, moved that 
it should last three years. Mr. Stan- 
ley endeavoured to reduce it to 
one, or at most to no more than 
two, but the majority continued 
immoveable in its compliance with 
the solicitor, and the term of three 
years was voted by forty-six against 
only two, 
The 
