bill to empower His Majesty to arrest and detain persons whom he might suspect of conspiring against his person and Government; in short, what is popularly called a suspension of the Habeas Corpus; expressly recognizing the propriety of not bringing to trial those who might be so arrested and detained. Such was the first proceeding on this subject of a Whig Parliament, a Whig Ministry, and a Whig King.

To call for inquiry, therefore, or in other words, for trial, in the instances of those persons who have been detained under the Suspension Act, is plainly and simply to argue retrospectively against the Act itself; to call upon Parliament to retrace its steps, or, more unjustifiably still, to try the conduct of Ministers by a rule the very reverse of that which Parliament has laid down for them. I repeat, if Ministers have abused the power which this Act furnishes them with, far be it from me to say that they ought not to be called to account, but it is for the abuse only, not for the use of that power-the power of detention without trial-that they are responsible.

It is complained, Sir, that the House has neglected the remonstrances of the people, that the injured and oppressed are driven from the bar unheard, and that men who have grievously suffered are not permitted to obtain redress. No doubt every man who has been arrested under

the Suspension Act will come to the bar and swear-no, not swear, but say that he had been most cruelly and unjustly treated; that he was the most innocent and the most injured of mankind, and that his merits only had pointed him out for persecution; that he had been exposed to the most cruel tortures, and that all his calamities were to be attributed to Oliver the spy. In the head and front of this phalanx of petitioners, (and it is to be supposed that the honourable members on the other side have not been so far wanting in Parliamentary tactics as not to select the best case to make the first impression) stands that renowned gentleman, and instigator of murder,. Mr. Francis Ward. True it is, that he is now abandoned, "deserted in his utmost need," because his friends, or rather the supporters of his petition, find it convenient for their argument to do so; not, however, before his crimes have been detected, and his character blasted; then, and not till then, he was expelled from their company; and instead of calling, as they had done, for the sympathy of the House, for its compassion, for its tears, over the sufferings of this admirable and amiable being, the other side have dropped his name entirely, or merely insist that the merits or demerits of this Luddite-this hirer of assassins-this instigator to murder and rebellion, have nothing to do with the other petitioners. Assuredly the case of Mr. Ward was not pre

cisely that on which the House of Commons would think fit to impeach the Government. Ward and all his patient sufferings being thus abandoned, next, with all the pomp of eloquence, and all the flexibility of pathos was introduced, the revered and ruptured Ogden;* his

It is but proper and befitting that some explanatory observations should accompany this passage of Mr. Canning's speech, as a construction has been eagerly assigned to it by his enemies, different and remote from its obvious and intended meaning. In the first place, it is right to state that this speech was not revised by Mr. Canning. Secondly, it should be borne in mind, by those who may object to this passage of it as one at variance with the elegance and propriety of taste which distinguish his speeches, that the topic was not of Mr. Canning's own choosing, but was suggested, and forced upon his attention, by Ogden's petition, the details of which were as disgusting as they were false.

The Morning Chronicle was the only newspaper in which, on the morning after the debate, the epithet "ruptured" was reported. The reports in the other morning newspapers substantially accord with the passage as it is reported in the Morning Chronicle, only that in the Times and Morning Post "the ever-to-be revered and unhappy" and "the revered" appear, as the sentence is severally reported in these newspapers.-This discrepancy in the reports has given rise to some doubt whether Mr. Canning uttered the epithet "ruptured." It is now retained in the text, because it is undoubtedly the correct one. Mr. Canning did not disavow it.

There is no expression that ever fell from his lips, which has been more industriously misrepresented than this. It is impossible, however to read this part of the speech, and not to see that Mr. Canning's ridicule was not directed (as represented by his enemies) at the sufferings of an afflicted individual; but at those, who founded a grave accusation against the Government, upon the false averment in Ogden's Petition, that his rupture had been pro

1

name was pronounced with all the veneration belonging to virtuous age and silver hairs; and yet, on inquiry, what did his case turn out to be, but that he had been cured of a rupture at the

duced by the severity of his confinement, when, in reality, it had been of many years standing, and moreover was cured during that confinement.

26

In 1820, Mr. Canning was charged on the hustings at Liverpool with having spoken this passage of his speech on the Indemnity Bill, in the spirit of an unseasonable and unworthy ridicule. His manly refutation of the charge furnishes a satisfactory explanation of the scope and tendency of his observations: it satisfied his constituency at the time that the mockery of human infirmity was foreign from his mind, and in the dispassionate estimation of every candid person must rescue his character and memory from the disgrace of so cruel and unjust an imputation. It is the best and most obvious commentary that can be made upon the text of this passage:

66

"From the enactments and debates of the last session, the honour"able gentleman (Mr. Rushton) has gone back still farther, to the "discussions of a former session; and has taxed me, quite fairly, I "allow, and not uncivilly, though with all the vehemence with which "it was natural that he should insist upon a topic which has been "made, for some years, a subject of calumny against me. He has "taxed me with certain expressions of mine, respecting the case "of an individual taken up under the suspension of the Habeas Corpus. I will state to the honourable gentleman, for he seems to "be altogether uninformed of it, the course of my argument on that "occasion. I was exposing the frauds and falsehoods which had been "palmed upon the House of Commons in certain statements which "had been made to them, and in certain petitions which had been presented from individuals, complaining of the treatment which "they had endured under the Suspension Act. Of these falsehoods I selected three, as peculiarly gross and unjustifiable, and as, fortu"nately, susceptible of being brought to the test of the most decisive

public expense? The greater part of the petition of this ill-used personage consisted of a nice and particular description of the manner in which his extruded bowels writhed round the knife of the surgeon; and it is impossible to forget the general

66

"contradiction. The third is that to which the gentleman has alluded; "and the particulars of which were as follow:-A petition had been "presented from a man whose name he has mentioned, stating that "the irons with which he had been loaded, when taken into custody, "had brought on that complaint under which he described himself as labouring. It was distinctly stated in that petition, not that, "having such a complaint upon him, he was nevertheless taken up, "(as the gentleman seems to imagine,) but that the apprehension "and restraint had produced on this poor man so terrible a calamity. "The petition went on to describe the process of an operation, "rendered necessary in this case, with all the disgusting detail of "chirurgical particularity. It was quite obvious, that this descrip❝tion was intended to inflame the minds of all who should hear it "against the supposed authors of the calamity under which the poor "man laboured, and, by necessary inference, of the sufferings inci"dent to the treatment of it. I made inquiry into the matter of this "petition, and communications were voluntarily made to me, from "which I learnt, to my infinite astonishment, that, so far from its "being the effect of his irons, and the immediate consequence, there"fore, of his confinement, the man had been afflicted with his com"plaint for about twenty years; and that, so far from being aggra"vated by his imprisonment, he had, during that imprisonment, been "cured at the public expense. Nay, I learnt, on what I believed, "and still believe, to be incontestible authority, that, in the first "moment of his liberation, he had expressed his gratitude for the "care which had been taken of him; and that it was not till some "time afterwards, and upon mature reflection or advice, that he was "induced to accuse government as the author of his long-standing "disease. Could any thing be more gross than such an imposture?