GENERAL HISTO RY. 



[31 



On March 3(1, the second read- 

 ing of the bill, to prevent sedi- 

 tious meetings, was moved in the 

 House of Commons by the Solici- 

 tor General. Before he made liis 

 motion, he said he would briefly 

 explain the reasons of its passing, 

 and the different enactments which 

 it contained. Of the various 

 means employed by the fomentors 

 of discontent, one of the most 

 elBcacious was to call together a 

 number of persons, to inflame 

 them by harangues, and to per- 

 suade them that the evils of the 

 times would be remedied by their 

 application to parliament, which 

 they had a right to force to com- 

 ply with their demands. Tliose 

 meetings the bill was intended 

 to control by some regulations 

 precisely of the same kind as those 

 adopted at other critical periods. 

 In the committee, however, it was 

 his intention to propose a clause, 

 which he would now mention, as 

 it partly involved new matter, 

 though by no means contrary to 

 the avowed spirit and purpose of 

 the bill. The object of the clause 

 was to prevent such meetings, 

 convened by seven liouseholders, 

 from being adjourned to any other 

 time or place tlian what shoidd be 

 at first specified ; for if that evil 

 were not guarded against, it might 

 be contended that the original 

 meeting having been declared le- 

 gal, an adjourned meeting would 

 become equally so. Another ob- 

 ject of the bill would be to prevent 

 the existence of debating societies, 

 lecture rooms, reading rooms, &c. 

 for admission to which money was 

 received. A similar measure was 

 enacted in 1796" and 1*99 ; but 

 neither of these touched the evil 

 as it existed in the societies now 

 formed. A further object would 



be to suppress a particular so- 

 ciety calling themselves the Spen- 

 ceans, or Spencean philanthropists, 

 which, whether it employed de- 

 legates or not, was condemned by 

 the very doctrines which it pro- 

 mulgated. 



After some severe remarks upon 

 parts of the proposed bill, it was 

 read a second time, and ordered 

 to be committed. 



On Marcii 10th, on the motion 

 of the Solicitor General, this bill 

 was recommitted. When the 

 clause was read, inflicting the 

 punishment of death on such per- 

 sons as shall not disperse after 

 being required so to do ; Mr. 

 Giuneij rose and declared it as his 

 decided conviction, that these 

 clauses, being abhoirent to the 

 CO iimon sense and feeling of man- 

 kind, so far from having any ten- 

 dency to secure the public tran- 

 quillity, would tend to bring the 

 legislature into that hatred with 

 the people which the act alluded to. 



Sir James Mackintosh, following 

 up this idea, said that unless he 

 received a satisfactory answer, he 

 would move to substitute trans- 

 portation to the punishment of 

 death. 



The Solicitor General saw no 

 reason for the amendment sug- 

 gested by the hon. gentleman. 

 As the object of the bill was to 

 prevent riot, it must be regarded 

 as wise and proper to put the 

 offence contemplated in the clause 

 on tlie same footing as resist- 

 ance to a proclamation under the 

 riot act. 



Mr. W. Smith said, that theie 

 was no comparison between the 

 offence against which the riot act 

 was directed, and that which is now 

 before the committee. The first 

 supposed that those against whom 



it 



