"all those who shall thus unconstitutionally "misuse him."--One word here with Mr. Judge Blackstone. Not for the purNot for the purpose of justifying all the deeds of King Charles the Second; but, for the purpose of denying that broad assertion, that he "de"serves no commendation from posterity." Had the King any thing to do in passing these beneficent laws; or had he not? If he had not, it is extremely unjust to blame him for the evil deeds of his reign; if he had, he does, notwithstanding those evil deeds, deserve great commendation, from posterity. Gold-mith, whose history I happen now to refer to, says of the habeas corpus act, that "this law alone would have been sufficient "to endear the parliament that made it to "posterity." Was it, then, made in spite of the King? And in spite of his ministers too? Surely, then, he could not be so very arbitrary a King; or, which would be rather strange, he must have selected and continued in his confidence, ministers bearing singular attachment to the liberties and privileges of the people. Having thus entered my protest against an attempt to blacken the memory of that king, from under whose hand we received those laws which are our greatest boast, I will now return to my subject.— The passages I have quoted from Blackstone furnish us with a true description of the nature, tendency, and use of the habeas corpus act. From them, therefore, we may form a judgment of the magnitude and val of that

part of the constitution, of which, by the suspension law, the people of Ireland are deprived; and, as there is no just and reflecting Englishman that would wish to deal to the people of Ireland a measure that he would not like to be dealt to himself, it must, with every such man, be a subject of regret, that the people of Ireland are so deprived. Nevertheless, it may be necessary that this deprivation should have existed, and that it should still exist. This is agreed to on all hands. In America they have defined the cases, when it shall be constitutional to suspend the habeas corpus act; and, they are, I believe, only two; namely, those of actual invasion and of actual rebellion in arms. Such a restriction may be unwise; and, if a third case of great emergency were to arise, all that the Americans would have to do, would be to alter the constitution itself first, and then alter the act. There can be no such thing as an unalterable law. It is the spirit of the constitution which statesmen and legislators must take for their guide; and, therefore, the present suspension of the habeas corpus act in Ireland must be justified, if at all, by the necessity and urgency of the

case, and by showing that, in such cases, the habeas corpus act has heretofore been, and is always expected to be, suspended. "Some

times," says Blackstone, "when the state "is in real danger, even this may be a necessary measure. But the happiness of our "constitution is, that it is not left to the exe"cutive power to determine when the danger "of the state is so great as to render this

66

measure expedient. For the parliament only, or legislative power, whenever it "sees proper, can authorise the crown, by "suspending the habeas corpus act for a "short and limited time, to imprison suspect"ed persons without giving any reason for so doing. As the Senate of Rome was wont to have recourse to a dictator, a magistrate of absolute authority, when they judged the republic in any imminent danger. The decree of the Senate, which "usually preceded the nomination of this magistrate, "dent operam consules, nequid

86

66

66

66

res publica detrimenti capiat," was called the "Senatus Consultum ultima necessitatis. "In like manner this experiment ought only "to be tried in cases of extreme emergency; "and in these the nation parts with its li"berty for a while, in order to preserve it "for ever." (Book I. Ch. 1.) Now, as to the nature of the case in Ireland, we know nothing for certain; nor does the parliament, that we know of, know any thing. When, therefore, the bill for continuing the suspension, was offered to the House of Commons, Sir John Newport made a motion for a previous inquiry, by a secret committee of 21 members, as to the necessity of such continuation. No, said the ministers, we have, unfortunately, but too certain information; we are perfectly satisfied of the absolute necessity of the measure." But," says Blackstone," the happiness" [mark his words!] "the happiness of our constitution is, that it "is not left to the executive power to deter"mine when the danger of the state is so "great as to render this measure expedient." In the reign of a king who deserves" no "commendation of posterity," it might not, perhaps; but, it is pretty evident, I think, that things are now somewhat changed. Not a jot, say the ministers. Not a jot: it is not left to the executive power now: parliament has determined; and that, too, upon such thorough conviction, that the standing order of the House of Lords was repealed, in order that the bill might pass through all the three stages in one day! Really? Well that is something more than ordinary! But, though we are to suppose, that this conviction has been experienced, we, the people I mean, have not perceived the source whence it was

likely to have arisen. Notoriety, say the ministers. And, indeed, notoriety is, in many cases, capable of furnishing the strongest conviction. As, for instance, when an inva sion by the enemy has taken place; when any part of the people are assembled in open insurrection; or when, upon the spot where the parliament is sitting, there are evidently plans contriving for the subversion of the government; or for effecting treasonable purposes of a nature even less extensive in their intended and probable consequences, especially if the times, generally, are such as to render such plans more likely to be attended with success. Yet, in the case of plots and conspiracies, some information given to parliament, either at the bar of the Houses, or from the reports of their secret committees, does appear to be indispensably necessary, in order to justify the suspension of an act, which is styled, and with propriety," the bulwark of "the liberties of the people.". In the present instance, none of these sources of notoriety seem to have existed. Certainly there was no invasion; nor was there any insurrection. At the first passing of the suspension bill, there was an insurrection in Dublin, which has since been, by the ministers of Ireland themselves, repeatedly termed, "the dispute in Thomas's street." The ministers here have constantly insisted, that, notwithstanding that insurrection (for an insurrection it really was), the rest of Ireland was perfectly tranquil and loyal. Some inquiry, therefore, should have been made, something to satisfy the parliament, of the existence of facts so far beyond the sphere of the personal observation of the much greater part of its members, which circumstance of locality should always greatly add to the cantion in passing such acts as that we are now speaking of. Of the state and temper of the people of Ireland, the far greater part of the members of parliament could know very little more than the public of this country; and, I appeal to any one who may take the trouble to read these remarks, whether the newspapers, the ministerial ones in particular, have not, for several months past, invariably asserted the state of Ireland to be perfecily tranquil; the disposition of its people to be loyalty itself? A specimen may not be amiss, and it shall come from the Morning Post of the 13th of December. "6 No symp

toms of discontent have, of late, been "manifested in Ireland. The great body "of the people, in that country, are attach"ed, in a remarkable degree, to the govern"ment; and, the country in general is in a far more tranquil state than it has been for many years past. The people are actuated

"by the most sincere and ardent sentiments of loyalty; and, should the enemy succeed in "reaching the shores of that country, he will find bundreds of thousands ready to repel the "agression, and to turn the attempt to the "utter destruction of the aggressors." Such, or nearly such, has been the language of all the ministerial prints, without a single exception. But, indeed, the acknowledgments made by the Irish members themselves in parliament, upon the occasion, were such as to make it plainly a matter of great doubt, whether or not there existed any ne cessity for the measure. During the first debate, more than one of those who supported the bill, represented the part of Ire land, to which they belonged, as being in a state as tranquil as that of any county in England. Still, however, as notoriety was the ground, and as the object was to reject the proposition for inquiry, though, a motion of Lord Henry Petty would have passed the act for two months, in order to give time for inquiry, a description of Ireland, very different indeed, from that which we had so long been accustomed to contemplate, was, at last, given to the House of Commons, by Mr. Macnaughton, Mr. Bagwell. Lord de Blaquiere, Mr. May, and Doc'or Duigenan. The first stated, that the dangers of Ireland had not been mentioned in the speech from the throne, on account of the notoriety of the case; that the object was to prevent the recurrence of the horrors of 1798 and 1803; that if this act had been in force in 1803, Lord Kilwar. den would not have been murdered; that the loyal subjects had increased in Ireland, but that was no reason why they should be taken less care of now than formerly; that jacobins still existed in Ireland, and were not to be despised on account of the smallness of their numbers; that if any members could hazard so desperate an assertion as that there were no jacobins in Ireland, he cautioned the committee against them.—Mr_Bagwell said, that acts of atrocity had been committed without the possibility of the offenders being detected; and that the state of the country was such, that no one could take the lands of old occupiers, without being in danger of assassination.--Mr. May mentioned, that several gentlemen had been murdered without the possibility of bringing the offenders to justice; that the lower orders of the Catholics expected, by the aid of France, to be placed in the situation of the Protestant establishment; that these were in general a religious mob, headed by low and ignorant priests; that they had conceived hopes of being put on an equality with the Protestants, and that the suspension of the

Habeas Corpus Act was necessary to prevent them from breaking out into violent outrages, in case they were disappointed --Lord De Blaquiere mentioned, in proof of the necessity of the measure, the resolutions of the magistrates of the county of Waterford. He also told a story, to shew the vigilance with which the Irish jacobins pursued witnesses, whom they called insurgents, and the consequent danger of requiring evidence. Some relations of his had procured a witness of the name of Hayley, and in order to keep him sate till the time of trial, they sent him with his wife to Liverpool, and from thence to London. He was pursued, however, and murdered in Piccadilly, as they usually were in Ireland. His lordship also adverted to the proceedings of the 4th of this month in the French Senate, which clearly shewed how much they depended for assistance on the Irish jacobins.-- Dr. Duigenan said, that the argument of the noble lord was, that the murder in Piccadilly had been perpetrated by Irish jacobins, and was therefore a good reason why an inquiry should not be instituted, on account of the danger to the witnesses. He asked, if gentlemen were aware of the situation of Ireland. He said, that he might be allowed to be as good a judge of that situation as any of the gentlemen on the other side, who could scarcely have the same regard for Ireland as he had; that he might from his local knowledge be allowed to be a better judge; that three or four counties were particularly disturbed; that the case of the county of Waterford was notorious, where gentlemen's houses were broken into in the night, and their arms taken from them; that they were obliged to keep a large train of servants, and all were massacred if they made any resistance; that nightly meetings were held in the county of Carlow; that the same thing was done in the counties of Kildare and Limeric; that in Dublin patroles of cavalry and infantry were obliged to scour the streets, in order to prevent murder, assassination, and plots against government; and that if all this was not notoriety, he should be glad to know what notoriety was.--Most assuredly quite enough, if all this had been upon the spot where the Parliament was sitting; because, then, it would have been notorious to the Parliament. As it was, it was not notorious to the far greater part of the parliament, and could not possibly be so -The motion of Lord Henry Peity did, however, bring forth a pretty full confession, that Ireland is in a most wretched and dangerous state; a confession that certainly will not fail to give great encouragement to the enemy, and which confession might have been entirely

avoided by the mode of inquiry proposed in the motion of Sir John Newport - Mr. Macnaughton's argument, that if the Habeas Corpus Act had been suspended previous to the month of July, 1803, Lord Kilwarden would not have been murdered, is a very good one for the repeal of the act altogether, and, therefore, good for the suspension, but only as far as the suspension can be regarded as part of a more extersive measure.--Mr. Pitt's arguments and declarations (knowing as we do that they must be perfectly consonant with those of the other Premier) are much the most interesting and most alarming." In the pre"sent case," said he, in answer to Lord Henry Petty," no one has denied the

66

necessity, although many wish for par"liamentary proof. In my opinion, the "necessity is clear, when we have a war with France, who openly threatens "that country with invasion, who relies on "internal dissensions, who has given refuge "to those Irishmen who fled for treason, "formed them into regiments to serve as "their advanced guard, and collected pilots " for their threatened expedition. When "all these things are notorious, I think "there is notoriety enough to justify strong "measures for the security of that country." And, in the debate upon Sir John Newport's motion, he confessed, that he saw little prospect of being able to recommend a discontinuance of the suspension, while we were thus situated with regard to France; but, at the same time, took no blame to himself, and could only lament, in common with others, that we had to live in such unfortunate times! The sentiment conveyed in this latter member of the sentence is one that would, if there were time, merit a remark or two. But as to our continuing the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, because there is (for I shall suppose the intelligence perfectly true) an Irish committee sitting at Paris; and because Napoleon has regiments of Irish, and has engaged Irish pilots to conduct his ships to their native country; if we act thus upon such grounds, Ireland may bid adieu to the Habeas Corpus Act for ever; for, we have now told Napoleon the exact expense at which, as far as regards the people of I eland, he may destroy that Constitution, for the preservation of which they are called upon to fight against him. The times are, indeed, different from what they used to be! When were there not Irish Regiments in the French service? Yet, did that circumstance ever embolden a minister to come to parliament for a snspension of the Habeas Corpus Act? This will never end. It

to discharge his Irish committees and corps. What in all the world could have induced an English minister thus to raise into real, into great, into lasting consequence, a set of men, whom it ought to have been his wish to make all the world forget, particularly the people of Ireland?

SINKING FUND.-The insertion, in the preceding part of this sheet, of the annual report of the American Secretary of the Treasury, suggests the utility of borrowing, from the American mode of reducing the national debt of that country, an illustration of the nature and tendency of the famous fund, which we have, or think we have, for a similar purpose, with regard to our own national debt. I have repeatedly stated, and, I think, proved, that our sinking fund does not at all lessen the national debt; that it has not the least tendency to lessen that debt; and that the words, reduce, redeem, liquidate, &c. &c. as applied to the effects of that fund, are totally misapplied, and are intended to deceive the people, or, which is more likely to be the case, are made use of from the deception under which those who make use of them do themselves labour.-My position is this: that as the national debt is felt by the people only in the interest, which they are annually called upon to provide in taxes, the amount of that interest is the only measure of the magnitude of the debt; and, that, as the operation of the sinking fund has not, and cannot, lessen the amount of the interest, it cannot lessen the magnitude of the debt. We are told, that the Sinking Fund has accumulated to such an extent, that it has already redeemed 70 millions of the debt. But, how has it redeemed ic? How can these 70 millions be said to be redeemed, while we have annually to pay interest on them? So long as we have to pay interest upon the whole of the debt, what is it to us, whether we pay it to individuals or into the hands of ministerial Commissioners? What signifies the name that we give to it, whether redeemed or unredeemed debt, so that we are still compelled to pay the interest upon it; so that it lays just as heavy upon us, as it would have done, if no trick, like that of the Sinking Fund had been devised? This is so evident to every man of common sense, that the people in general (I may say nine hundred and ninetynine out of every thousand) have enter tained hopes of relief from the Sinking Fund, only because they understood, and firmly behieve, that the effect of that fund was gradually to lessen the amount of the interest and

on account of the national debt, and consequently to lessen the taxes raised upon them on account of debt. Into this error they were deluded by the use, or rather abuse of words, which had never before been used but for the purpose of expressing the act of making a real diminution in the quantity of the thing spoken of. When they were told, that the sinking fund was to reduce, to redeem, to liquidate, to clear off, to pay off. &c. &c. such and such portions of the national debt annually, how were they to avoid supposing, that the interest of the debt would go on diminishing with the principal? This they did believe, and this they do, for the far greater part, believe now. They feel, indeed, that the taxes come on them incessantly; but, they ascribe this to any thing rather than the national debt, because most of them, even down to footmen and chambermaids, have something in the funds. So general is the persuasion, that the sinking fund reduces the interest of the debt, that, no longer than about eighteen months ago, the fact was asserted to me by a merchant of considerable eminence, and one who possessed at the time from thirty to forty thousand pounds in funded property. When I insisted, that the sinking fund produced no relief to us; that it did not, and would not, in the least lessen the annual charge upon us on account of interest of the debt; he not only expressed his aŝtonishment, but contested the point with me, till I brought him to my house, and shewed him the accounts, where he saw, that, since the year 1791, the annual interest (including charges) of the national debt, had gone on increasing from 10 to 25 millions, and that the sinking fond had not tended to check its increase even in the smallest degree; where he saw all the stock still continue in existence, just the same as if there had been no sinking fund, only that part of it was said to be held by government commissioners instead of being held by individuals, but that interest must still, he clearly saw, be continued to be paid upon it all, or else the whole of the paper fabrick would instantly vanish. Now, if a person like this was so completely deceived, what must we naturally suppose to be the case with the public in general? With the footmen and chambermaids who are the creditors of the government? [Here I am obliged to break off; but the subject shall be continued in my next sheet; and I do flatter myself, that I shall succeed in plac ing it in a clear and true light.]

Vol. VII. No. 10 ]

PUBLIC PAPER. FRANCE AND GENOA.Abstract of a Convention concluded by the French Minister, Sallicetti, with the Ligurian Republic, in the name of the Emperor Napoleon, signed on the 20th of October last.

The Emperor Napoleon engages to procure a Peace for the Ligurian Republic with the Barbary Powers, and to cause the Ligurian flag to be respected by those powers. Should he, however, not be so successful in this endeavour as he expects to be, he engages to furnish the ships of the said Republic with French colours, that they may thus be protected. The Emperor of the French will further grant permission for the importation of all Ligurian commodities into Piedmont, Parma, and Placenza, only paying the small importation-toll, which was before customary, which shall begin to be in force immediately after the ratification of this convention. On the other part, the Government of the Ligurian Republic engages to furnish 6,000 seamen, during the present war, and to have 4,000 of them in readiness in a shout time.--The Ligurian Republic cedes the harbours, with the arsenal, as also the galley harbours and the dock yard, with the basin, and places them at the disposal of the French; and as it is intended to build in the said dockyard ten ships of the line for France, the Ligorian Republic engages to enlarge the ba sin suficiently for the entrance and stationing of these ships at its own expense; and as at the time of the conclusion of this convention a new built ship of the line, a frigate, and two corvettes are lying finished in the dock of Genoa, these strips shall likewise be placed at the disposal of France.

DOMESTIC OFFICIAL PAPER. ANTIGUA-By His Excellency the Right Hr. Ralph Lord Lavington, Baron of Lavington, one of His Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, Knight Companion of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath, Captain-General and Governor in Chief in and over all His Majesty's Leeward Charibbee Islands in America, Chancellor, Vice-Admiral and Ordinary of the same,

c.-A Proclamation.

The Eari amden, His Majesty's Principal

[3:4

Secretary of State for the Colonial Departmant, having, in consequence of a Report of the Committee of His Majesty's Privy Council for Trade and Foreign Plantations, communicated to me the Royal pleasure, that I should not open any of the Ports of any of the Islands over which I preside, for the admission of articles from the American States, which are not allowed to be imported by law, except in cases of real and very great necessity.-I issue this my Proclamation, notifying and declaring, that under the regulation and authority of an A&t passed in the twenty-eighth year of His Majesty's reign, and intitled, "An Act for Regulating the Trade between the subjects of His Majesty's Colonies and Plantations in North America, and in the West India Islands, and the countries belonging to the United States of America; and between His Majesty's said Subjects and the Foreign Islands in the West Indies;" I admit in the different Ports of the several lands under any command, the importation of the following articles, viz. to. bacco, pitch, tar, turpentine, hemp, flax, masi, yards, bowsprits, staves, heading, boards, timber, shingles, and lumber of any sort; horses, neat cattle, sheep, hogs, poultry, and live stock of any sort; bread, biscuit, flour, pease, beans, potatoes, wheat, rice, oats, barley, and grain of any sort; sach commodities respectively being the growth or production of any of the Territeries of the said United States of America. But whereas, in the first Section of the Act of the General Council and Assembly of the Leeward Ilands, passed in April 1798, and intitled, "An Act more effectually to provide for the support, and extend certain Regulations for the Protection of Slaves, to promote and encourage their increase, and generally to ameliorate their con. dition." It is enacted and ordained, that every Owner or Director of any Slave or Staves within the Leeward Islands, shall weekly, and every week, under the penalty of ten shillings per head, for each and every Slave under his or her direction, for every omission, purchase or provide for every said Slave or Slaves, among divers other kinds of provisions, one pound and one quarter of herrings, shad, or mackarel, or other sub.