ample they have imitated-when no record will be found of their memory-nor no recollection of their names,-our illustrious Curran will be the theme of every Irish Seminary,-the bright and glowing example of political virtue, in an age of universal sycophancy, and national degradation.

The efforts of Mr. Curran, as well as the great and splendid struggles of Mr. Grattan, were in vain ;-laws of severity were preferred to measures of redress and conciliation.—The pride of the Legislature would not be seen to capitulate to a barbarous multitude, and a civil war was preferred, by the Administration of those days, to the healing balsam of parental consideration for the acknowledged sufferings and miseries of the poor.

The Riot Act was the fruit of this magnanimous spirit, possessing all the violence of the English act, with scarcely a single provision of mercy or of humanity.

To this Act, Mr. GRATTAN spoke as follows:

"MR. SPEAKER,

"Sir, it is impossible to hear to hear that bill read, or the question put on the committal of it, without animadversion. I agree that the South should be coerced. If the populace or peasantry of that district have thought proper to invade personal security, and lay the founda. tion of undermining their own liberties; if they have resorted to the exercise of torture, as relief for poverty, I lament their savage infatuation, and I assent to their punishment. I assent to it with shame; I blush at the cast of lawlessness thrown on the country, and I la. ment the necessity of a strong measure—the natural result of shabby mutiny and abortive rebellion.

"This is not the first time I have had occasion to express my concern at certain excesses of some part of our fellow subjects. See the fruit of those excesses-see the glorious effect of their laboura Riot Act, aggravated-a Riot Act, general and perpetual.-Evils which it was chance to foresee, it becomes now my duty to mitigate.

"I will agree to the strengthening of the civil magistrate within a certain limitation; I would enable the magistrate to disperse such

meetings as are notoriously for illegal purposes; and I will agree that it is proper not to admit persons to bail who had refused to disperse, as it could only furnish them with an opportunity of repeating their transgressions. I will agree that the persons who dug graves, provided gib. bets, and the like, should be punished capitally; for those who made torture their amusement, and practised such inexorable barbarity, I think merit death. I will also agree that there are several clauses in the Riot Act, which it may be proper to adopt. But in the very setting out of the bill, there is an evident departure from, and contradiction of, the Riot Act. The Riot Act stated, that if twelve or more persons, riotously, tumultuously, and unlawfully assembled, and refused to disperse, &c.; but this Act stated, if persons, to the number of twelve or more, viotously, tumultuously, or unlawfully assembled.The former was copulative; the latter disjunctive; and the difference was, that if coming within any one of the descriptions tumultuous, riotous, or unlawful, felony would ensue, though in England, to constitute the crime, each must be alleged. And when there is a deviation from the Riot Act, I am very sorry to find it is not one founded in mildness and mercy, but one founded in seve rity. Another difference from the Riot Act is,

that in England the proclamation is obliged to be read; but by this bill, nothing more was required of the magistrate than to command the rioters to disperse, in the King's name. If they did not disperse in one hour, death was the consequence; and this I consider as putting an hour glass in the hand of Time, to run a race against the lives of the people; and this is certainly a great objection.

"Another objection is, that if a magistrate was stopped, when repairing to the place of riot, the person who stopped him would be guilty of felony; that was, though the magistrate was resorting to an unlawful place, the person who obstructed him should be deemed to merit death. And if the persons did not disperse, if the ma gistrate was interrupted, the reckoning of time was to commence from the moment of his obstruction; and should they continue one hour, they would be guilty of felony, and incur the punishment of death; that is, the interception of a magistrate, at a distance in this kingdom, was to be tantamount to the reading of a proclamation on the spot in England.

This, I think one of the severest clauses that was ever brought forward, or ever adopted. But even though this had been premised of the English Riot Act, the measure of their severity should not be a measure for the legislation of

the House: if it should, it would be bad in principle, and worse in practice.

Another clause of the bill made it felony to write, print, publish, send, or carry any message, letter or notice, tending to excite insurrec tion that is, that a man, who shall write or print any letter or notice, shall be guilty-of what of felony! Like the Draconian laws,, this bill had blood blood!-felony ! felony felony in

every period and in every sentence.

Now had this bill been law for some time past, what would be the situation of every man who printed a news-paper for the last nine months?

What would be the situation of every man who had written upon the subject of Tithes? For as the right of the clergy to Tithes is acknow. ledged to be founded in law, and as the papers and writers have argued against them, what would be the consequence? Who could tell how their conduct might be construed in a court of law? or whether they might not be adjudged guilty of felony? But I will not ask who would be guilty under such a law; but I will ask who would not be guilty?

T'.

"A perpetual Mutiny-bill had been once the law of the land, and yet gentlemen, both spoke and wrote against it as dangerous, unconstitu