was desired by the chair to confine himself strictly to explanation. Mr. Sheridan then said, that the right honourable gentleman had attempted to ridicule his explanation; to which, in explanation, he wished to state, that the right honourable gentleman's argument was perfectly ridiculous. [Here a great part of the house laughed.] Mr. Sheridan resumed his argument once more, and the house calling "chair! chair!" in which cry Mr. Pitt joined, and the speaker thereupon again desiring that Mr. Sheridan would confine himself to explanation, Mr. Sheridan answered, that he would take care that in future the right honourable gentleman should be as strictly confined to explanation, when he spoke a second time, as he had been. Mr. Pitt bowed, and sat down.

The bill was then ordered to be committed for the morrow.

JUNE 25.

REFORM OF ROYAL SCOTCH BURGHS.

MR. SHERIDAN, adverting to the case of the royal Scotch. burghs, begged leave to remind the house that the bill, for bringing in of which he designed to move, was precisely of that nature which the house had given leave to have introduced in a former session of parliament; and as he understood there was no objection to the principle of it, and that those who meant to oppose the bill intended to make their stand at the second reading, it was unnecessary for him to trouble the house with more than a very few words, just to state that the conduct of the town councils of the several royal burghs of Scotland, as it now prevailed, was not more contradictory to their original charter than repugnant to every one of those principles of justice and propriety to which men, of a delegated trust, ought strictly to adhere. On the second reading of the bill he would fully state the objects of it, and the reasons why the means of attaining those. objects which the bill provided were by him deemed such as the house ought to adopt; for the present, he considered it as sufficient to move,

"That leave be given to bring in a bill for regulating the internal government of the royal burghs in Scotland."

Mr. Dundas remarked that, reserving himself for a future opportunity, he should now only declare, that whenever the honourable gentleman came forward

with his reasons for thinking the bill udvisable, and that it was becoming by one short clause to pronounce upon the constitutions of the royal burghs of Scotland, which had continued uninterruptedly ever since the year 1400, as what ought not to continue; he would be ready to assign his reasons for differing totally in opinion from the honourable gentleman upon the subject. He hoped, therefore, that the honourable gentleman would name a precise day for the second reading, and keep to that day when he had named it, that the bill might not be kept hanging in the wind as a matter IN TERROREM.

Mr. Sheridan answered, that the right honourable and learned gentleman had no occasion to be in such very great haste, because he ought to recollect that they had waited a good while for him, while he was canvassing in Scotland.

REVOLUTION COMMEMORATION BILL.

Mr. Sheridan agreed completely with the honourable gentleman (Mr. J. H. Browne), that the fittest time to establish a commemoration of the revolution was, when parties, otherwise opposite, concurred in endeavouring which should best commemorate that important event. But he differed from the worthy baronet (Sir Joseph Mawbey) in one respect, because, so far from thinking the gentlemen on the other side would not subscribe to their column, they reckoned on their subscribing largely, as they were ready to subscribe to their thanksgiving; but from what the honourable baronet had said in favour of their column plan, should there be a deficiency, they had now learnt that they might look up to him for large resources. With regard to the trouble the bill would give the parsons, when it was considered how essentially benefitted the church had been by the revolution, it surely could not be improper to oblige the ministers of it once a year to put themselves, as well as their congregations, in mind of that event from which the church had derived such very important advantages. As to whether the wording of the preamble should stand, as the amendment had been first proposed by an honourable gentleman near him, or whether it should run "That God's providence upon the virtuous efforts of our ancestors," &c. &c. Mr. Sheridan said, appeared to him to be a matter of immaterial signification; and the contending about such a trifle reminded him, if it were not thought too ludicrous a comparison for the occasion, of what Dogberry said in Shakspeare's play of “Much Ado about Nothing," when, in the examination of Conrade and

Borachio, he says, "Write God first; for God defend, but God should go before such villains."

The bill was directed to be reported on the 29th.

JUNE 26.

BILL FOR REGULATING ROYAL SCOTCH BOROUGHS.

MR. SHERIDAN brought in this bill for regulating the royal Scotch boroughs, which was read a first time, and upon motion ordered to be read a second time.

Sir James Johnstone declaring that much reform was wanted in Scotland, but, in a variety of particulars, that reform which the bill held out was needless; and, therefore, unless the honourable gentleman would say that he introduced the bill merely to amuse the house, and did not mean seriously to urge it, he would count the house.

Mr. Sheridan assured the honourable baronet that he had not brought in the bill merely to amuse the house, but with a serious intention of endeavouring to get it passed into a law. He hoped, therefore, that the honourable baronet would not put an end to it, and interrupt the other important business of the day, by counting the house. If the worthy baronet could prove that the grievance complained of did not exist, let him come to the point, and do so on the second reading. The petitioners for the bill were ready to prove every fact which the bill stated as an existing evil.

Sir James Johnstone answered, that he understood it was not usual to put an end to a bill in the way that he had proposed, and therefore the honourable gentleman might continue to amuse himself and the house with the bill some few days longer.

TOBACCO REGULATION BILL.

Mr. Sheridan observed that, considering the greatness of the subject, it was extremely to be lamented that it had been brought forward so near the close of the session, when unfortunately so much of the essential business of the session was before the house. In so thin a house the bill could not meet the attention which its importance deserved; and, therefore, as gentlemen did not like the trouble of attendance to hear the examination of witnesses, he wished that the right honourable gentleman (Mr. Pitt) would allow the evidence of each day to be printed, day by day, that the members of the house might have an opportunity of know

ing what passed, and enable themselves fully to understand the subject before it became necessary to vote upon it.

Mr. Pitt admitted, that it would be exceedingly idle to attempt to pass a bill of such importance to the revenue, without endeavouring at least to have it perfectly understood. He had some doubt, however, as to the propriety of printing the evidence day by day, because, as a good deal of new light was frequently obtained by cross-examination, it would not convey any complete information to the members, if the evidence of the witnesses was printed before they had been crossexamined. He had no objection to printing the evidence as fast as the examination of each witness was concluded, or so as to give very sufficient time for gentlemen to make themselves masters of it, before the report was made.

Mr. Sheridan answered that the right honourable gentleman's mode of printing the evidence would equally satisfy him. Some evidences having been examined, the house adjourned.

JULY 3.

NEWSPAPER DUTY BILL.

On coming to the clause restricting newsmen from lending out newspapers to read for hire, Mr. Pitt rose and supported it.

MR. SHERIDAN considered it as a principle too erroneous to be introduced merely for the sake of an advantage so extremely trivial. He was a friend to newspapers, not merely because they blazoned forth the virtues of the present administration, but because they proclaimed their actions. He was glad they would state that there was so thin an attendance when the most important business was before the house. He accused the chancellor of the exchequer as the cause of the thin attendance, by wilfully and systematically putting off the public business till that period of the session. The right honourable gentleman had said that those who let out newspapers derived two parts of their livelihood from newspapers, the one for their loan, the other from their sale; and, therefore, the clause would not take away their livelihood. It would nevertheless take away one part of their livelihood. It was soothing one set of men for oppressing them, by oppressing another; and as the hawkers and pedlars were sacrificed to the shopkeepers, so now the newsmen were to be sacrificed to the newspaper printers. Mr. Sheridan declared himself against the tax itself, which he thought injudicious, because it would be unproductive. He lamented the abuse of the press, but thought that it should not be checked in such a manner. The laws of this

country afforded every man who was injured by the press ample redress, and it ought not to be in the power of ministers, by unreasonable impositions, to load it so as effectually to prevent its exercise. The additional tax on advertisements was highly injudicious, and would prove a loss rather than an advantage to the revenue. It was not the casual advertisers, such as the want of a horse, the sale of a chaise, the loss of a watch, who were to be looked up to; but the staple advertisers, the auctioneers and booksellers; the latter allotted a given sum for advertising according to the price of the book; and if, by increasing the charge of each advertisement, the given sum would pay for so many advertisements short of what it would do formerly, the revenue must, consequently, lose in proportion as the number of advertisements diminish.

Colonel Phipps having remarked, that if the honourable gentleman would take the trouble to read one of the newspapers of the ensuing day, he would perceive that his arguments had most of them been answered before he entered the house, and contended that the increase of duty on the advertisements would not decrease their number.

Mr. Sheridan answered, that he would certainly look the next day to that miraculous paper the honourable gentleman talked of, but he did not before know that the Hibernian journal was printed in London; and no other paper he should have conceived would have made him answer arguments which he had never heard.

The committee divided; ayes 29; noes 9.

JULY 6.

REFORM OF THE ROYAL SCOTCH BURGHS.

Sir James Johnstone observed, that as the reform offered by the present bill was by no means wanted, he should object to its commitment. There were grievances in Scotland, but the constitutions of the royal burghs were not among the number. They had no militia, nor any triul by jury. If a man committed high treason, he must be tried by the Scotch laws, which were different in several essential respects from those of England. Another circumstance was with regard to the qualification of a justice of peace; in England a justice must have a certain qualification, in Scotland none was necessary; so that if a justice in England committed an innocent man to prison, he could obtain a remedy; in Scotland no remedy could be procured. Sir James agreed with Mr. Sheridan, that every man who received money from the public should be accountable for that money, and was willing to consent to that part of the bill. He spoke of the endless system of litigation un