SEIZURE OF ARMS BILL. (Hansard, 6 December 1819)

§ Earl Grey
rose to express his sentiments upon the bill. He objected to it not only as it stood part of an obnoxious system, but as being in itself uncalled for and dangerous. It conferred upon the magistrate a power of breaking open houses by night or by day—a power which was liable to great abuse, and which might be dangerous in the execution of the means employed to carry it into effect, while it would be perfectly inefficient for the" purpose for which it was intended. He objected to it likewise in principle. It was a principle of the law of England, asserted and declared in the Bill of Rights, that every man was entitled to the possession of his arms, not only for defence against the assassin or the midnight robber, but to enforce his constitutional right of resistance to oppression, if deprived of the benefit of the laws. He was anxious to express this constitutional view, as that right had been asserted and recognized at the period of the Revolution, and had been too much lost sight of since. He could not, therefore, surrender it, without the most urgent necessity; and he saw no grounds of necessity established. It had, indeed, been said, that arms had been provided for the purposes of insurrection and rebellion; but the papers on the table, which contained the only information on which He could proceed, stated nothing precise or satisfactory on the subject. Where any thing specific was stated, he found that it related to a few pikes, which had been fabricated at the desire of the persons who gave the information. On such a ground he could not surrender an essential right of Englishmen. But the scanty statements contained in the papers had been attempted to be completed by the accounts that were heard in the House. Arms, to an extraordinary ex-tent, were said to be made and distributed in the part of the country with which he was connected; and a near and dear relative of his, it was added, had been obliged to leave his home from the fear of an armed insurrection, and to retire with his family to Newcastle, as a place of safety. That his relative had left his home he could not deny {whether from a misconceived alarm, would best appear from what he had to state. His relative had since written him a letter in which he said that the alarm was false; that the reports of the state of the country were exaggerated; but that he did 750 not feel himself justified in neglecting to take the step that he had taken from affection to his family, whose wishes he was obliged to consult. That the principles of reform were widely diffused in that country, he could not deny: that the Radical Reformers were numerous, he believed; that their attempts to carry Radical Reform into execution would be zealous, he likewise believed; and that they had divided themselves, as had been represented, into different sections, for the purpose of receiving information and communicating with each other, was also true. The numbers were differently stated; but that they were very numerous, was a fact from which he could not withhold his belief. Admitting all this, however, he was prepared to say that much exaggeration had prevailed on the subject. The House had been told that a meeting took place at Newcastle, which was attended by 30,000 people; but the whole population of the place did not consist of more than 28,000. Allowing for the numbers that came from Shields and other places, he had been informed, that not more than 7,000 or 8,000 attended the meeting, and that they dispersed without the least disturbance. The noble duke (of Northumberland) had spoken much about arms the other day. Now with respect to arms, it ought to be recollected, that great numbers of people in the neighbourhood of Newcastle, possessed arms, without any reference to the purposes of insurrection; that many of them had received them during the war, and had retained them afterwards. But that any arms had been made for present purposes he was enabled to deny. With respect to the number of men prepared for insurrection, it had been said by a noble duke, that 100,000 were ready to rise in arms between the Weir and the Tyne; but the whole population of Northumberland and Durham would not furnish 100,000 adult males. This was a proof of the great exaggerations that had gone abroad. He did not wish to deceive their lordships; he believed that reform was demanded by a great body of the people— not by the poor and the distressed alone, but by the middle classes of society, possessed of competence, disposed to industry, and capable of discussing public measures. He would entreat their lord-ships, therefore, to consider, whether measures similar to the present were likely 751 to operate upon them, and to reconcile them to the want of that reform, of the necessity of which they might consider those measures the best proof. He must pause before he gave his assent to a statement which said, that by being Radical Reformers, or sharing doctrines held by the late duke of Richmond, they necessarily aimed at the subversion of society, and a division of property. He had heard, indeed, that the duke of Northumberland's tenants, whom he assembled at Alnwick for the defence of the county, had, in the wantonness of festivity, talked of the division of his property. He only stated this to show how reports might spread; and if this one was unfounded, it was likely that many others on the opposite side were as unfounded. The bill before the House, he was convinced, would be entirely nugatory and inefficient, while its enforcement must be very vexatious. Its provisions had been many days before the public already; it would still be some days before that House, some days in the other House, and some days might intervene before it received the royal assent. Would: the persons who possessed arms which it would authorize the magistrates to seize, be such idiots as not previously to have disposed of them? With regard to them, therefore, it would be inefficient; with regard to others it would be oppressive and irritating. He would appeal to those who knew Ireland, whether the irritation of that country was, not, at the commencement of the rebellion, more fomented by the search for arms than by any other measure.

The Earl of Strathmore
was unwilling to trespass upon the attention of their lordships, but he felt it necessary to say a few words in answer to the ingenious arguments used by the noble earl who had just sat down. He had often given that noble earl his due tribute of praise and admiration for the great abilities which he had displayed on various occasions, but he had lived long enough to know, that there was no argument like matter of fact. The noble earl had stated that his brother had left his abode through a false alarm, but that he had again returned to it. He could assure their lordships that there was more cause for such a removal at present in that part of the country, than at any previous period. He had that morning received letters from two magistrates of the county of 752 Durham, which contained alarming accounts of the state of the country. Here the noble lord read the letters. The first stated, that in consequence of the enclosed letter from colonel French, the writer felt it his duty to apprise his lordship, as lord lieutenant of the county, that the military force was to be held in readiness to be called out, and that his lordship's cavalry were to form part of that force.'' These letters were signed Abel Askew and J. Collison and dated December 3rd 1819. It was hardly necessary after this, to say that simultaneous meetings were to be apprehended, and that the town was not in danger. Another letter was read by the noble lord, in which the magistrates were directed to be in readiness, and to keep the yeomanry ready to act on the shortest notice. If this was not sufficient to open the eyes of their lordships to the danger which threatened the country, he knew not what was. The noble earl had stated, that the object of these people was only a reform of parliament; now he, from the best information he could receive, was convinced that their object was nothing short of open rebellion. He had reason to suppose that a great portion of the inhabitants of that and other districts were ripe for the purpose. He was a good deal interested in that part of the country, and had the earliest and best information of what was passing. In one letter he was informed, that the principal object of the reformers-was plunder—that out of 15,000 persons, 14,500 might be said to have no other object than plunder and the division of property. The noble lord mentioned the names of Mackenzie and Marshal, as two persons who were venders of seditious-publications. He was aware that in the districts alluded to, as well as in several others, arms were procured to an alarming extent, not, as was stated, for the purpose of poaching, but for the furtherance of far more dangerous objects. He had this information from a source, which if the noble earl knew, he could not doubt; but he could not mention that source, as, by doing so, he should expose an innocent individual to assassination. He hoped that no time would be lost in passing this bill through the House, as upon it, and the other measures to be introduced, depended the safety of the country. An insurrection was to be dreaded, and if it took place, God knew what would be the consequence! With 753 respect to what had been said of the state of the country between Newcastle and Carlisle, he could give no opinion, as he was not so well acquainted with that part of the country. No doubt the noble duke who had made that statement would explain it. He trusted their lordships would believe, that in the part which he took on this occasion, he was actuated by no other motives than a sincere feeling for the state of the country. His sole wish was to co-operate with those who exerted themselves for the safety of the state. God forbid that, to use the words of the poet, it should be said, "Si mens non leva fuissit Anglia nunc stares."

The Duke of Northumberland
had been informed by those who were convinced of the fact, that there were 100,000 men ready to act between New-castle and Carlisle, and that arms to a considerable extent had been purchased by different individuals.

§ Earl Grey
said, in explanation, that there was no man who had a greater, objection to the radicals than he had, but yet he must have regular proof before, he could believe that there was any dangerous plan afloat to subvert the constitution of the country.

The Earl of Darnley
said, that during the discussion of the bill, he had more than once expressed his dissent from the clause which authorised the searching for arms "by night.'' He had admitted, that in the present state of the country, some measures of security were necessary, but he must still protest against the clause, and he alluded was so well understood by their lordships, that when the clause to which he alluded was read, his amendment, that it should be expunged would have been discussed. It was with surprise he now heard all the proposed alterations gone through but still the clause to which he alluded remained part of the bill. He would not undertake to say, that the, clause had been read distinctly, but it certainly was not read with an audible voice; At least he did not hear it. He should therefore now press his previously intended amendment, that the clause authorising search for arms by night be omitted.

Lord Sidmouth
said, that the noble lord was mistaken as to the manner in which the bill had been read. It had been done in an audible voice, and seemed to have been perfectly understood by their lord- 754 ships. The amendment of the noble lord could not be pressed now, the bill having been already perfected in its present stage. The noble lord, however, might move his amendment on the third reading to-morrow.

The Lord Chancellor
said, that as far as he could judge, the clause to which the noble lord alluded, had been read in an audible voice. His lordship, however, had still the opportunity left him that was suggested by the noble secretary of state, of moving his amendment upon another occasion.