-

for the numerous and weighty losses and calamities of the reign of George the Third. The people of Scotland had their own Church established; they were not compelled to contribute to the support of the Church of England. There was none of those odious and galling distinctions left remaining, which, in spite of names and forms, keep different parts of a kingdom effectually divided, divided in heart,

all family disputes, strongly disposing the weaker party to throw himself into the hands of the enemy, be he who he may, of the stronger party. In short, such a state of things presents to the stronger party this sole alternative, either of put

kneeling in the dirt round about the walls. Į served, in some measure, to compensate While this is the case, things may possibly go on; Ireland may be held to England, and we may use the title of United Kingdom; but, I think, that every reasonable man must be convinced, that Ireland never will be tranquil, and that the Union will exist only in name.--- That dissenting Protestants in Ireland (of whom the number is very considerable) would gladly see such a measure adopted, there can be no doubt; and, as to the Protes-separated by feeling, and, as is the case in tants of the established Church, though they might regret the loss of predominance as a religious sect, they would feel an ample compensation in the relief, in which they too would share, from the burthen and vexations of a tythe system, such as that existing in Ireland, and of which anting the weaker party upon a fair footing English cultivator cannot form any thing with himself, or keeping him in subjection like an adequate idea. - -The scruples of by force.- -As to matters of trade and those Protestants, who would consider such commerce, there ought to be, in no way a change as tending to foster the Catholic whatever, any distinction. If Ireland posreligion, and to prevent the chance of sess any natural advantages superior to Converting Catholics to the true faith, I wish England, let her have the full benefit of to treat with all possible tenderness; but, them. Why should she not, seeing that when they consider, that we have been her strength and wealth would belong to two hundred years at this work of conver- the whole kingdom? It would be as foolsion, and that we have made such trifling ish to make any distinctions, in this reprogress therein, they must, I should ima- spect, between Northumberland and Susgine, be disposed to think that we have sex, as between England and Ireland. If been pursuing a wrong plan, and be ready Ireland has a fine port, why not have one to agree with me, that a change of plan, of our great dock-yards and arsenals even with this object in view, is dictated there? Would the French hope to seduce by sound policy; and that, at any rate, as Ireland, if she were placed upon such a far as relates to the work of conversion, footing? Ireland abounds with timber, no change of system can be for the worse. why should not that timber be converted, Is there any one, who objects solely upon the spot, into ships of war? And, upon the ground that I propose an innova- how foolish as well as unjust would it be tion? What have we seen but innovations in us to grudge her a share in these advanfor the last twenty years? And what tages and honours? But, if we have any have we heard in justification of them, but feelings of this sort; if we find it impossithat the times were such as rendered ex- ble to divest ourselves of such feelings, let traordinary measures necessary to the us, for decency sake, not be guilty of the safety of the state?" Are not the laws flagrant injustice of railing against the above-mentioned, now existing in Ireland, Irish for appearing to be impatient of our an innovation? Are they the settled laws of predominance. -In whatever light, the land? Was not the Union itself an in- therefore, that I view the matter, whether novation? And, is it a less thing to take I consider what is in justice due to this away the legislature of Ireland, than part of the kingdom, or, taking a more to make a change in the disposition of narrow and selfish view, confine myself to the property of the church ?--It is the interests of England; whether I take acknowledged, on all hands, that the justice or policy for my guide, I am led to reign of QUEEN ANNE was the most the firm conviction of the wisdom of adoptglorious that England ever saw; but, bling the measures that I have here prothe Union with Scotland was by far the posed, and of any other measures, which, most glorious act of that glorious reign; to a person of greater knowledge and exand, if the Union with Ireland had been perience, may present themselves as likebottomed upon the same principles (with ly to have the same tendency, namely, some few exceptions) the latter would have that of gaining the people of Ireland by

1

when they reflect, that these are the people, all the people, whom they call Burdettites; and, with this reflection in their minds, they cast their eyes across the channel. The Livery of London are a fair specimen of all the men of sinews in England, and what is to become of England, if all men of sinews are Burdettites, and all the Burdettites traitors?These accusers are, therefore, now in a very sad dilemma.There was a time when their accusations were attended with no apparent danger. But, now the matter grows a little serious. They cannot now deny, that imminent danger from without is approaching. They feel it too; and, though they mortally hate the Burdettite Livery," they are aware, that the time may come, when "the Burdettite Livery" may be wanted. --Would they not do well, then, to bethink them, while there is time, of a change of tone; or, at least, of a suspension of their accusations? Let us hope, however, that we are now going to see, a change of system; let us hope, that, there will now be a trial made of the effects of conciliation; let us hope, that, as far as it is possible, we shall now see undone what was done by "the great statesman now no "more;" let us hope, that these accusations will now cease, and that those who ask for nothing but their rights will no longer be exposed to the accusation of treason; let us hope, that Englishmen will be once more united in wishes for the defence of their country by having nothing to tempt to hold cheap that most import-of 1794 and 1795, in a cold damp cell, ant object. This is amongst the benefits which we have a right to expect from men not wedded to the system of "the great "statesman now no more."

with high treason; his books and papers were seized to the amount of several pounds, and are still detained, although the Privy Council, during several very long examinations, never produced any thing said to have been found in his possession to which they endeavoured to attach blame. Your petitioner hoped that he had satisfactorily repelled before them the charges preferred against him of a design to assassinate his Sovereign, and beside his own testimony some respectable friends without his knowledge voluntarily presented themselves, and were examined, to prove the strong improbability of his being engaged in such a plot. Yet he was committed to the House of Correction, in Cold Bath Fields, and treated there with the utmost brutality. On the arrest of your petitioner, his mother was told by one of the officers that they had seized enough in his possession to hang him, and that she must expect to see him no more until she saw him go to the gallows. She was put to bed and rose no more. She died in about two months. On this occasion, A. is, the keeper of the Cold Bath Fields prison, had the inhumanity to order two persons whom his deputy had directed to attend your petitioner in strong convulsions, to quit his chamber, and leave him to his fate, which they did, supposing, as they informed him on his recovery, he could never survive this treatment. Thus torn from his business, ease, and comfort, your petitioner passed the severe winter

and still he occasionally suffers by a complaint contracted in this place. His friends were refused admittance, his father and cousin (Macaire) alone excepted, even a taylor was not allowed to measure him, for mourning; all parcels coming to or going from him were closely searched in the prison, and in this examination they found their account, as they could select the articles they chose for their own wear; and when your petitioner complained, to the keeper, Aris, that he had been plundered of a month's linen, &c. he said he could do nothing in it, unless your petitioner chose searched: an indiscriminate and fruitless to have the lodgings of all the turnkeys measure, your petitioner did not consent to adopt. Robbed of health, peace, and property, your petitioner left this place on £.300 bail in May, 1795, and immediately on his liberation went to the house of the Right Hon. Wm. Pitt, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, to demand the necessary

documents in order to institute a prosecu- | charge, he had been arrested, your petitioner refused to enter into the recognizance demanded of him, until he could learn the real grounds of accusation on which he had been three years detained in various prisons. On his refusal to accede to the terms proposed, your petitioner was taken from this office to the Parliament Street Hotel, whence he wrote to the Duke of Portland, desiring to be liberated without any condition or recognizance. Your petitioner received no answer, but was committed the same afternoon to Tothill Fields prison, in which new hardships awaited him, for either he must submit to be lodged in an apartment destitute of every accommo dation, wherein to exclude the inclemencies of the season he must shut out the light, the window not being glazed, he must associate with felons at the rate of 35 shillings per week, or pay two guineas and a half per week for his board and lodging. The state of your petitioner's health demanded that he should reject the first, his character and feelings would not allow him to submit to the second, and thus he was reduced to the necessity to preserve his health, and avoid the worst society, to incur an expence in this protracted season of suffering beyond his power to discharge, without a painful dependance on friends, whose resources he had already exhausted. In this situation your petitioner again appealed to the Duke of Portland, but his Grace directed that he should be allowed only 20 shillings per week, leaving £1. 12. 6. to be paid by himself. By stat. 7 of William 3 cap.

tion against the parties, by whose machinations he had so severely suffered. After some time he was referred to the Privy Council, but his application to their lordships was unsuccessful. The following year, 1796, your petitioner was surprised with the intelligence that a bill of indictment for high treason had been found against him at the Old Bailey. He immediately surrendered to the court, and was committed to Newgate. Some weeks after this he was arraigned at the bar, when, strange as it may appear for the first time in his life your petitioner met here, a man, Crosfield, and held up his hand with him, whom to the best of his knowledge he had never seen or heard of before, but with whom he was charged with conspiring the King's death. Some months after this, your petitioner was again put to the bar and acquitted; Mr. Attorney General declaring he had no evidence to produce against him. But, your Hon. House will observe that this summary discharge did not acquit your petitioner of any of the expences of a defence, the great amount of which to a private individual without fortune is exceedingly oppressive, nor was this the whole extent of the pecuniary loss incurred by your petitioner. His agreements with Messrs. Macaire, and Co. exacted of him for every day's absence from business 9 shillings, on which account be paid upwards of an hundred guineas.-In April, 1798, your petitioner was again seized, and again committed to Newgate, on charges of "treasonable practices," where after he had been confined about a year he was attacked violently with spasms in the stomach, and, once more in a prison, his life was despaired of. Your petitioner earnestly solicited of His Grace the Duke of Portland, that he might be brought to trial, but received no answer. From this prison on the 10th August, 1799, your petitioner was removed to Reading Jail, where his spasmodic complaint again returned, on which occasion he met with the reverse of the humane treatment he had before experienced in Newgate. Your petitioner remained here until the 2d of March, 1801, when he was ordered to town, and taken before Mr. Justice Ford, in Bow Street, who offered to liberate him on condition of giving his own recognizance to appear on the first day of the ensuing term in the Court of King's Bench. But, as the Privy Council had refused to tell him on his examination in 1798, on what specific

it is enacted that no person shall be prosecuted for treason, unless it be against the king's person three years after the fact is committed. The Habeas Corpus Act was now in force. Your petitioner therefore, having since his last arrest been confined three years, thought the law would liberate him. Lord Kenyon, was applied to for an Habeas, but he refused to grant one, and referred your petitioner to the Court of King's Bench in the ensuing term. But before the first day of term when your petitioner was to have been brought up to the Court, the Habeas Corpus Act was again suspended. Under these circumstances your petitioner submitted to the terms of liberation again offered to him through the personal medium of Mr. Ford, and was liberated on the 25th of April last. On the 11th inst. your petitioner addressed to his Grace the Duke of Portland, a memorial giving a detail of the

147]

above particulars, and requesting to be re-
To
imbursed his immediate expences.
this application no answer has been made.
-By every consideration your petitioner
is now invited to appeal to your Hon.
House. Did your petitioner feel in the
smallest degree culpable, he would court
obscurity, and silently submit to the ruin
that unavoidably follows such an age of
suffering, having been confined a great
part of the period between eighteen and
iwenty-five years of age. But your peti-
tioner assures your Hon. House, that he
has innocently incurred the injuries he has
endured, and such your petitioner humbly
submits is the presumption arising from
the protraction of imprisonment, beyond
the period limited by the statute already
alluded to for the trial of persons accused
of treason (except on the king's person,
with which your petitioner was
charged) inasmuch as were your petitioner
guilty even in the judgment of his Majesty's
then ministers, it would leave them without
excuse, and guilty themselves of a high
misdemeanour of neglect, and breach of
public duty to his Majesty and their coun-
try, for suffering a traitor to escape for
ever without bringing him to trial. Your
petitioner, therefore, humbly prays your
Hon. House to take his case into your con-
sideration, and for such relief or the adop-
tion of such measures as your Hon. House
in your wisdom these circumstances may
seem to require.--And your petitioner
-P. T. LEMAITRE.
shall ever pray.
June 1, 1801.

not

Report of Proceedings, in the Trial of an Action, brought by MR. P. T. LEMAITRE against JACKS, for defamation.-Tried, in the Court of King's Bench, Guildhall, on Wednesday, the 16th January, 1811. This was an action for words spoken in defamation of Plaintiff by defendant.

Mr. TERRY opened the pleadings.

Mr. GARROW stated the Plaintiff's case. He said it became his duty to address his Lordship and the Jury upon a case of no ordinary importance, whether it was considered in reference to the rights of an individual or of the privileges of well regulated society in general-it was indeed a case of that weight, that though, since last he had addressed a jury, he doubted much if ever he or a jury should again hear his voice within a Court of Justice, yet he had not cared if his absence had been lengthened out another day, that his Client might

have the advantage of having this cause opened to them by his Learned Friend The upon his right hand (Mr. Topping). Plaintiff in this case, Mr. Lemaitre, was well known to them; he had resided for ten years in the City of London, in the same house, surrounded by the same friends, in the same neighbourhood where he had for that time uniformly conducted himself as, and was known as a tender husband, and the decorous father of a family faithfully discharging all the duties of an honest industrious citizen. In this situation he discovers, from a communication made to his friends, that an attack, as unexpected as it was gross and unprovoked, has been made upon his character. He sees himself represented in the Newspapers as a convicted traitor, and held forth in that odious light to his fellow citizens. A charge of this nature must of course have had retrospective tendency, but it could be proved that no part of Mr. Lemaitre's antecedent life could warrant SO severe an imputation; the circumstances, however, which had been made the pretence of that charge, he should explain to the Jury. Some years ago many well meaning men had been led into an association for the laudable purpose of furthering, by all Constitutional means, what appeared to them the great and desirable object of a Reform in Parliament; of these Mr. Lemaitre was one; to these other men contrived to add themselves, professing the same ostensible object, but who were far from being influenced by the same honest views. The designs of such evil men, together with the urgent dangers of the crisis, excited more than ordinary suspicion and alarm on the part of the Government, and the then presided thought it necessary to sus pend for a time that great bulwark of the rights of Englishmen, the Habeas Corpus Act. In the midst of the alarm, Mr. Lemaitre, at that time but eighteen years of age, had become an object of the suspicion of Government, owing, no doubt, to the youthful ardour and indiscretion of his zeal in a good cause, rather than from any Mr. Leactual concern in a bad one. maitre was arrested upon suspicion of seditious practices; and upon being brought to his trial his Majesty's Attorney General acknowledged he had no evidence against him, and he was discharged. Now he would ask, were these circumstances to warrant any other man in branding him as a convicted traitor if they were, who

great men who

2