124] ANNUAL REGISTER, 180O. 



The second reading of this bill 

 was opposed at greater length, but 

 by much the same arguments, as 

 had so often been used before, by 

 Mr. JollifF, Mr. Hobhouse, sir 

 Francis Burdett, Mr. Tierney, Mr. 

 Sheridan, and sir W. Milner. The 

 most eloquent and impressive speech 

 that was made, in the course of this 

 night's very long debate, against 

 the suspension of the greatest palla- 

 dium of our liberty, was that of 

 Mr. Hobhouse. 



Mr. Windham, it will readily be 

 recollected in the last debate on the 

 present subject, observed, that the 

 danger of treason was considerably 

 diminished, and that the present 

 tranquillity was to be ascribed to 

 the suspension of the habeas corjms 

 act. That argument of the secre- 

 tary's-at-war had been also urged in 

 favour of the suspension, by Mr. 

 Lascelles. 



Mr. Hobhouse observed, that 

 both these gentlemen had said, that 

 if the suspension were not continu- 

 ed, the traitors, should France once 

 more become successful, would shew 

 themselves in full force, and with 

 renewed activity ; and in the lan- 

 guage of one of them, a revolution 

 might burst forth as suddenly, as 

 characters inscribed with lemon- 

 juice upon paper, started into ap- 

 pearance upon being applied to the 

 fire. This argument, Mr. Hob- 

 house observed, was a little at va- 

 riance with the former : that sup- 

 posed the ground for alarm to be as 

 strong, as when the panic-struck 

 committee made their report — 

 this gave a more favourable repre- 

 sentation of the present times ; but, 

 it was curious to contemplate both 

 those modes of reasoning in a con- 

 nected point of view. Upon ap- 

 pearance of danger, the liberties of 

 the subject must be suspended; 



upon disappearance of the peril, 

 the same arbitrary powers must be 

 placed in the hands of ministers ; 

 and thus, whetlier the state were, 

 or were not, exposed to risk, an 

 individual might be committed, un- 

 der a warrant from the privy coun- 

 cil or secretary of state, and denied 

 the privilege of demanding his trial 

 within a given time. " Farewell 

 then, an eternal farewell, to the 

 blessingsof that great charterof our 

 personal freedom, the habeas corpus 

 act." It should also be remarked, 

 that this argument was not quite 

 consistent with itself. It assumed 

 that the danger was diminished, 

 and yet supposed that it was only 

 concealed, which, in fact, rendered 

 it more formidable. Traitors, but 

 for the measure now recommended, 

 it was said, would no longer lurk 

 in their hiding places, but, on the 

 first favourable opportunity, make 

 the most darinji exertions to accom- 

 plish the ruin of their country. — 

 What was this, but to contend that 

 the suspension of the habeas corpus 

 act had produced only a hollow and 

 delusive quiet, which was rather 

 thesuppressionof murmur and com- 

 plaint, than a proof of content and 

 happiness .-' Was not this a strange 

 method of demonstrating its effica- 

 cy ? As to the argument made use 

 of by Mr. Wilberforce on the pre- 

 sent subject, on a former night, 

 " That it was our duty to confide 

 in administration," Mr. Hobhouse 

 observed, that this doctrine of con- 

 fidence was extremely convenient, 

 and of universal application. If a 

 strong measure, like the present, 

 were proposed, no evidence of its ne- 

 cessity was to be given, because the 

 communication might be danger- 

 ous. But, supposing that, in some in- 

 stances, such comminiication might 

 be attended with detriment cither 



