페이지 이미지
PDF

“the most violent opposition on the part “of those who are any thing but loyal. “Instead of complying with the request, “ the Oppositionists answer it with a cry “ of “ Millions be free o’’ and rising with “ their hats on, place themselves in the “ most menacing a titude of defiance. This “act of INDECENCY has frequently led ** to blows, and individuals in the boxes “have been obliged to seek their personal “safety by leaping into the pit, while “ those in the pit have placed themselves “in array against the boxes, and a general “contest or tuinuit has been the result. * In several instances tickls have been distributed, gratis, to the amount of several “pounds, with a view to beat down the loyal parly ly main force, in consequence * of which several OFFICERS have been “insulted, and mal-treated, particularly * on Wednesday evening last, when a * number of those desperadoes surrounded * Brigade-Major Hu Mr HRys, on coming “out of the Theatre, hooted him along * the streets to his quarters, and threw a “bottle in his fice which cut him severely. “Brigade-Major Huxtruky's is a most gen“tlemanly character, who had never taken “any part whatever in the disturbances, “out that he was a military officer was “quite sufficient. On another occasion, a “ party way-laid an officer of the 2d So“inerset Militia who had been forward in “displaying his zeal and loyalty to his “King at the Theatre, in the Park, late “ in the evening, and beat him in a most ** inhuman inanner. Several have been “compelled to enter into recognizances for “ their good behaviour, and two or three “ are bound over to appear at the Quarter * Sessions, for the assault committed on “ the officer in the Park. This evening ** was fixed for the benefit of Mr. Robert*son, one of our highly respected Ma“nagers, who calculated upon a net re“ceipt of at least £100. ; but by the ab“rupt closing of the Theatre, his benefit “is necessarily postponed until after the “races, which it is supposed will be a “great loss to him.” Now, reader, if you examine this matter, you will find, that, even upon their own showing, the God-save-the-King party have been the 2ggressors. What right, I should like to know, has one part of an audience at a public theatre to compel the other part, however small that other part may be, to sland up, or to pull off their hals, upon the playing of a tune or the singing of a song, called sea -o-, --- *

by the former? And, if

this right exists in no case, it surely cannot exist when, as appears to have been the case here, the party, taking upon them to give the command is the least numerous. Well might the theatre be shut up, if the manager would suffer the few amongst his audience to hector over the many. This writer calls the tune of God save the King “ the NATIONAL air.” But, lie has not cited to us any law by which we are compelled to rise and pull off our hats at the playing of it. He may like it, and so may the Officers at Nottingham, though the language is a rare specimen of stupid verbosity and tautology; though some of the sentiments, as far as they can be called sentiments, are at once malignant, abject, and impious ; and though the whole, when considered with reference to the unfortunate personage whose name is the chief burden of the song, amounts to a species of burlesque the most disgusting that can be conceived, still it may accord with the taste of the military officers quartered at Nottingham, and they may, if they choose, consider the air as national and have it played accordingly at their mess-rooms. But, if we leave them to their taste, we shall not agree to subject the people of Nottingham thereto; we shall not agree that they have a right to cram their sentiments down the throats of the people of that town, or any other town or county. Observe, reader, that it is not the people who begin the quarrel. The others call for the tune; it is played; no interruption is given by the people. But, this is not enough. The people must not only sit and hear that which they disapprove of; but, they must, at the word of command, pull off their hats, as a mark of approbation of that which they are known to disapprove of, and that, too, at the order of a comparatively small part of the audience. Can subservience; can slavery, go lower than this? And, if the people of Nottingham were compelled to submit to this, what impudence would it be in them to affect to revile any other people as slaves | To this last stage of servility the people of Nottingham were not, it seems, disposed to submit; but, in answer to the word of command, they rose and exclaimed, “ MILLIONS BE FREE: “placing themselves, at the same time, “in a most menacing attitude of DEFI“ANCE.” Of defiance, mind. Not of aggression. And, what could be more proper ? Yet this hireling calls it an “act

“ of indecency!” Slave, dost thou, then,

[graphic]
[graphic]

think an act of indecency in Englishmen to answer an arbitrary and insolent command by an exclamation expressive of their love of freedom? Dost thou, then, slave as thou art, think this an act of indecency; and hast thou the impudence to give utterance and publicity to thy thought? If the people of Nottingham were to submit to this command to pull their hats off in the play-house, why not in the street? And, if to pull off their hats, why not to go down upon their knees, or to turn out their pockets? Loss of property and loss of liberty are never far asunder. As to the assaults, committed on the bodies of the two military officers, if they were unprovoked, the parties ought to be punished: But, it will be observed, that we here have but one side of the story, and that every story has two sides. The story comes, too, from a man (if one ought to call him such), who looks upon it as an act of indecency for Englishmen, when arbitrarily and insolently commanded to pull off their hats, refuse to comply, and exclaim that they are free. This being the sort of persons from whom the story comes, we ought to distrust, and,

indeed, to disbelieve every word of it that

makes against the people of Nottingham. One of these officers had, we are told, “been forward in displaying his zeal and “loyalty to his King at the theatre.” That is to say, he had been (according to this writer's previous account) forward in commanding the men of Woltingham to pull off their hats. The gentleman, whoever he is (and he is not named), might have found a better way than this of displaying his zeal and loyalty. There is very little loyalty in the bawling out of a stupid song:

but, that would have been a good in en

deavouring to conciliate the people, amongst whom he was quartered. In short, it is clear, that these rows at the theatre at Nottingham have been provoked by the un

bearable insolence of a few of those persons,

who assume to themselves the exclusive merit of loyalty. Nothing can be clearer than this, even from the statement of this hireling himsels; and, therefore, it appears to me, that the conduct of the manager of the theatre has been unjustifiable. It was for him to express his disapprobation of the

conduct of those, who were taking upon

them to give commands to the audience, and turn a place of recreation, where every man had equal rights, into a scene of political triumph of the few over the thoughts

and wishes of the many; and, in not having expressed this disapprobation, he ap-- - - ...

pears to me to have tacitly taken part with insolent commanders. I am not, therefore, at all sorry for his loss; and, I hope, that, unless he makes atonement by restoring freedom to his theatre, he will be left to exhibit his scenes to his exclusively “loyal” customers and to them only. So much for the accounts from Nottingham. Let us now hear those from other places. I shall insert them one after another without any interruption. “ Huppersfield (Yorkshire), June 25. “—Last Monday, about midnight, a great “number of armed men, with their faces “disfigured by broad black marks down “each cheek and over the forehead, as“sembled near the dwelling-house of Mr. “Fisher, a shopkeeper of Briestwistle, in “ this neighbourhood, and after firing two “guns or pistols, demanded admittance “ into Mr. Fisher's house, which he re“fascd. They then broke open the door, “ and two of them rushing into the house, “seized Mr. Fisher, who had just got out “ of bed; they each presented a pistol to “his breast, and threatened him with in“stant death is he stirred a foot. Not in“ timidated by this threat, Mr. Fisher rush“ed from them towards the door, when he “was seized by other six men, who placing “a sheet over his head, face, and arms, “ kept him in that situation while their “comrades ransacked the house, and took from his pocket-book bills to the amount “ of 1161. besides 20!, in notes and some “ cash; they also took a quantity of notes “ and cash out of a drawer, but to what amount Mr. Fisher does not exactly “know. When the depredation was completed, the leader cried out to the guard placed over Mr. Fisher, ‘Let him go; don't hurt him; we have got what we “wanted, and we will bring it back in “ three months,’ and immediately made “ off.” " “Sheffield (Yorkshire), June 27– We are sorry to learn, from the resolu“tions of the meeting of Lieutenancy and “Magistrates, that the nightly depreda“tions, and other most violent breaches of “ the peace, in a great part of the manu“ facturing districts of this Riding, still “ continue. The most effective measures “ are immediately to be taken to stop the “career of the lawless offenders.” ** STAFFORD (Staffordshire), June 27.“In the beginning of the last week, a “ strong body of those deluded men, call“ing themselves Luddites, surrounded the “ house of a lady, the widow of an ol

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

“ficer, residing in Edgeley, near Stock“ port, and, with horrid threats, demand“ed entrance, to search for arms. The “ inhabitants, under an impression of “dreadful consequences resulting from a “refusal, opened the door, when a num“ber of armed men rushed into the house, “ and after minutely searching all parts, “took away with them eight swords, “ leaving the affrighted inmates in a state “ of extreme consternation. The party “consisted of from eighty to one hundred, “variously armed, and they paid the strict“est obedience to the commands of one “who acted as the leader, and who was of “a respectable appearance. We wish we “could, with that degree of justice we owe “ to the public's information, here close “ this article; but we are sorry to say, the “lapse of each day discloses some new “object of alarm—some new act calcu“la ed to impress upon us the most alarm“ing sensations and apprehensions for the “general peace and safety of the country. “It has been told us, that assemblies “ nightly take place in secluded places, to “ the number of some hundreds, that the “ oath continues to be administered, and “ that the names of those who are parties “ to the abominable and seditious compact, “ are called over at the several places of “rendezvous with all the regularity and “appearance of system and discipline.” The acts here spoken of, if really committed, are such as call for the exertion of the lawful authorities to put a stop to them. They are unlawful, and that is enough; but, then, have we not laws? Have we not Justices and other magistrates: have we not Constables and other peace officers; have we not Sheriffs, who have power to call out all the people in their several counties to their assistance? To lament the existence of such disturbances is unavoidable; but, I cannot help thinking, that, if I were a Lord Lieutenant, or even a Sheriff, I would render, as far as my county went, an application for military force unnecessary. I cannot help observing here, that a great deal of mischief has, in all probability, been done by those who have the impudence to assume to themselves exclusively the appellation of “ loyal ** men.” These men, who, for the most part, live, in one way or another, upon the taxes, have, in the indulgence of their senseless rage against the Emperor Napo. leon, been, in fact, openly inculcating the right, and even the duty, of a people to rise in arms against their government. I

[ocr errors]

have in my eye two remarkable instances of this: one in the Couri ER, who applauded the conduct (or reported conduct) of the people in Holland in flying to arms, and even in pulling the Dutch Judges from the Bench and dragging them along the streets. The other instance was in the TIMEs newspaper, which said, not long ago, that it hoped to have to record accounts of insurrections in France. I, as the public will do me the justice to remember, remonstrated with these good hirelings at the time. I told that there was danger in the promulgating of sentiments of this sort; because, though they themselves were, doubtless, able to discriminate between an insurrection in England and an insurreetion in France, some of their readers might not. I, therefore, advised them to let France alone in this respect, stating my opinion, that they would have to repent having meddled with her. As to the remedy for the disturbances, the way to ascertain that, is, first to ascertain the cause; but, of that I must speak in my remarks upon the article of the Courtek of the 29th instant, which, as I above observed, was published for the purpose of feeling the public pulse, and which, before I proceed to my remarks, I shall, agreeably to my usual practice, insert. I shall insert the whole of it, because it will hereafter be to be referred to. We are now, I am convinced, at the dawn of a set of memorable measures and events. It is, therefore, of great consequence to note down, and to fix clearly in our minds, all the preliminary steps. History often becomes wholly useless for want of a knowledge of the little springs which first set the machine in motion. With this preface I hope the reader will enter upon the article, which is not long, with a disposition to attend to its contents. “The Message of “ the Prince Regent to both Houses on Sa“turday related to the violent proceedings “which have taken place in several counties of England. Copies of the information which has been received by Goverument, “relative to them will be laid before Parliament to-day. The intention of Government is to move an address this afternoon to the Regent, thanking him for his communication, and to refer the information to a Secret Committee of Inquiry. Of course we do not presume to state what their report will be; but it is rumoured that a suspension of the Habeas “Corpus Act will be proposed. We have, “from the country papers received this

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

“morning, extracted accounts of the situ“ation of several districts, where, we re“gret to state, the practice of stealing “arms, administering treasonable oaths, “ and assembling in large numbers night“ly, is carried on with increasing violence. “More vigorous measures have therefore become necessary. That the Govern“ment have hitherto endeavoured to put ‘‘ down these outrages without demanding “more extensive powers; that they hoped “ the laws as they stood would be sush“cient; that they trusted the trials and “punishment of some prominent offenders “would operate as a salutary example and “warning, is now adduced against them “ as a crime; and falsely imputing these “outrages to the Orders in Council, the “Opposition ask whether “it is not alarm“ing that measures of such extent should ‘‘ be brought into discussion at this season “of the year; when it is added, “almost . all the independent Representatives of : the people are on their return to the & 4 country? what: drC Incasures neces... ary to the public peace and safety not to 44 be discussed because independent Repre4. sentatives do not choose to attend their 4 : duty in Parliament? If they prefer their

own business or pleasure to the public “business, are Ministers to blame? The ‘‘ evil which it is wished to remedy has : grown to an alarming height only within ... * short time, how then was it possible to $4 bring it into discussion earlier? And 44 with respect to the Orders in Council, is * * there the least shadow of proof that the 4 : outrages were occasioned by them 2– * - Nay, is there not abundant evidence to 44 shew that they had nothing to do with & them 2 Did the Orders in Council pro44 duce the destruction of the stocking frames ... ." Nottinghamshire? Did they lead to 44 the burning of the mills in Yorkshire? & 4 Did they cause the horrible assassinations

in Lancashire? Have they produced the “Luddite Associations and the oaths of ‘‘ treason which have been the consequence “of them? Are arms seized and large “ numbers of persons drilled and disci“plined nightly because of the Orders in “Council 2 It is absurd, if not worse, to ‘‘ endeavour so to mislead the public mind. “But the Orders in Council have been re“pealed ! It is known in every part of “the disturbed counties that they have been “repealed, and yet these outrages, so far “from having abated in violence, are on the increase. TREASON is the object “of these associations, aud their weapons

“have hitherto been burnings and assassi“nation. Are these crimes to be palli“ated or excused, and are we to charac“terize the perpetrators of them merely as “poor deluded mistaken men? They are “neither deluded nor mistaken; their ha“tred is against the whole form of our “Government, and their object is to destroy ** it. The SUSPENSION OF THE HA“BEAS CORPUS, and the PROCLA“MATION OF MARTIAL LAW may “be and are measures to be deplored, but “the question is, whether a lesser evil “shall be incurred to avoid a greater; “whether disaffection shall be put down “ and punished, or suffered to pursue its “march with impunity.” The object of this article clearly is to prepare a justification of a suspension of the Habeas Corpus, or PERSONAL LIBERTY ACT, and also of the subjecting of the people of England to MARTIAL LAW.—-Reader, English reader' Reader, of whatever country you may be, do think a little of the nature of the measures here unequivocally pointed out for adoption. As to the first, it would expose us, it would expose any of us, it would expose every man in England, TO BE PUT IN PRISON, IN 1 O ANY PRISON, AND KEPT THERE, DURING THE PLEASURE OF THE MINISTRY, WITHOUT ANY SPECIFIC CHARGE AGAINST US, AND WITHOUT EVER BEING BROUGHT TO TRIAL. This would be the effect of the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, which, by all our great lawyers, is described as the safeguard of our liberties and our lives. The other measure, the proclaiming of martial law, would SUBJECT US ALL TO BE TRIED BY COURTS-MARTIAL, AND TO BE IMPRISONED, FLOGGED, HANGED, OR SHO 1, AS SUCH COURTS-MARTIAL MIGHT ADJUDGE. I do not say, mind, that Lord Castlereagh has these measures in his budget for us. No, no : I do not say that; but, it is very clear, that the vile Editor of the Court ER news-paper is prepared to justify the proposing and the adopting of these measures, which he calls “a lesser evil” than that of suffering “disaffection to go unpunished;" and this be says, too, while he is calling upon us to fight for our liberties. However, having seen his measures, let us now see what are the grounds upon which he would justify them. He says, that “treason is “ the object of the rioters; that they are nei“ ther deluded nor mistaken; but that their hatred is against the whole form of our “government, and that their object is to “destroy it.”—This must be news indeed to the Emperor of France, who will, doubtless, be anxious to hear to how many counties of England this hatred extends itself. He will, I dare say, be amused with the reflection that a twenty years' war to keep down republicans and levellers has brought us to this; and, really, we cannot be much offended even if he should laugh at us, when he recollects that our news-papers have been expressing so anxious a desire to have to record the events of disturbances and insurrections in France.—But, where is the proof of the truth of this assertion of the Courier? Upon the strength of what evidence is it, that he sends forth these tidings so pleasing to the Emperor of France and to all the enemies of England? Where are his proofs of that treason and of that hatred of the whole form of the government, of which he talks 2 If he has the proofs, why does he not give them? And, if he has them not, how dares he make such an assertion? How dares he thus blacken the character of the people 6f the most populous and most valuable part of the kingdom?—He denies, that the Orders in Council have had any thing to do in the producing of the disturbances, though the evidence of a crowd of most respectable witnesses, given before both Houses of Parliament, prove that the Orders in Council Have been one cause, at least, of the distresses which exist in the troubled counties; and also prove, that the dislresses have been, or, at least, originally were, the cause of the disturbances. Yet does this unfeeling man endeavour to make the world believe, that distress has had nothing at all to do with the matter.—It has been proved, in the clearest possible manner, that, in the troubled counties, the people have suffered and are suffering, in a most cruel manner; that the food of many of them is of the worst sort and not half sufficient in quantity; that hundreds and thousands of poor mothers and their children are wholly destitute of bread, and that even polatoes are too dear for them to get at ; that the food of these unfortunate creatures is oatmeal and water, and that they have not a sufficiency of that. It has been proved, that many have died, actually expired for want of food. And, it has been proved, that this want has, in part, at least, arisen from the existence of the Orders in Council.—Yet, with this proof all before him, does this unseeling writer, this inexorable man, deny that any part of the disturbances has arisen from

distress, and that a treasonable intention, “a hatred to the whole form of the govern“ment and a desire to destroy it,” are the sole causes. This pampered hireling does not know what hunger is. It is charity to suppose that he is incapable of forming an idea of the sufferings of a human being under the craving of an appetite which there are not the means to satisfy. Let him read a passage in the history of Trenck, who, having travelled for two or three days without eating, and being in a house where he saw some victuals without having money to purchase any, says, he rushed out of the door lest he should commit murder in order to obtain the food, which he felt himself violently tempted to do. Let the hard-hearted hireling read this passage; let him put himself, for a moment, in the place of a father who sees a starving family around him; and, then, I should hope, that he, even he, will feel and express some compassion for the suffering manufacturers.-Far be it from me to attempt to justify people in the commission of unlawful acts. I do not wish to justify the woman who, according to the newspapers, committed highway robbery in taking some polatoes out of a cart at Manchester, and who, according to the news-papers, was HANGED FOR IT. I do not pretend to justify her conduct. But, there is, I hope, no harm in my expressing my compassion for her; and, I further hope, that my readers would think me a most inhuman brute, if I were to endeavour to deprive her and her unhappy fellow-sufferers of the compassion of the public; by asserting that she was actuated by a treasonable motive, and that she hated the whole form of our government and wished to destroy it. No, reader, I will not lend my aid to this. I allow her to have been guilty of highway robbery in forcibly taking some potatoes out of a cart at Manchester; I allow this; and I allow that the law has made highway robbery a crime punishable with death, if the judges think proper; but, I cannot and I will not allow, that her forcibly taking of some potatoes out of a cart at Manchester, was any proof of a treasonable design and of hatred against the whole form of our government.—Upon some future occasion I will give a picture of the mode of living of a poor man and his family in England, and will shew how far his wages will go with the quartern loaf at 20 pence. At present I shall add only one remark to what has been said above, and that is, that though this hired writer could see nothing but treason to arm the government against,

« 이전계속 »