assembled a meeting at Castle Hill, Sheffield, whom he addressed, in strong and inflammatory language, upon the corruptions of the House of Commons, and the necessity for parliamentary reform. The proceedings at this meeting were subsequently printed and published: but it was not proved that Mr. Yorke was concerned in the publication, nor that it contained an accurate report of his speech. Not long afterwards, he was arrested on a charge of high treason. After a long imprisonment, this charge was abandoned: but in July 1795, he was at length brought to trial at the York Assizes, on a charge of conspiracy to defame the House of Commons, and excite a spirit of disaffection and sedition amongst the people. He spoke ably in his own defence; and Mr. Justice Rooke, before whom he was tried, admitted in his charge to the jury that the language of the prisoner, presuming it to be correctly reported,would have been innocent at another time and under other circumstances: but that addressed to a large meeting, at a period of excitement, it was dangerous to the public peace. The jury being of the same opinion, found a verdict of guilty; and the defendant was sentenced to a fine of 200l., and two years' imprisonment in Dorchester gaol1

Distress and riots, 1795.

6

The year 1795 was one of suffering, excitement, uneasiness, and disturbance: the time was out of joint.' The pressure of the war upon industry, aggravated by two bad harvests, was already beginning to be felt.

Want of employment

St. Tr., xxv. 1003.

and scarcity of food, as usual, provoked political discontent; and the events of the last three years had made a wide breach between the government and the people. Until then, the growth of freedom had been rapid: many constitutional abuses had already been corrected; and the people, trained to free thought and discussion, had been encouraged by the first men of the age,—by Chatham, Fox, Grey, and the younger Pitt himself,-to hope for a wider representation as the consummation of their liberties. But how had the government lately responded to these popular influences? By prosecutions of the press,-by the punishment of political discussion as a crime,-by the proscription of parliamentary reformers, as men guilty of sedition and treason, and by startling restraints upon public liberty. Deeply disturbed and discontented was the public mind. Bread riots, and excited meetings in favour of parliamentary reform, disclosed the mixed feelings of the populace. These discontents were inflamed by the mischievous activity of the London Corresponding Society,2 emboldened by its triumphs over the government, and by demagogues begotten by the agitation of the times. On the 26th of October a vast meeting was assembled by the London Corresponding Society at Copenhagen House, at which 150,000 persons were said to have been present. An address to the nation was agreed to, in which, among other stirring appeals, it was

1 Ann. Reg., 1796, p. 7; History of the Two Acts, Introduction. 2 See their addresses to the nation and the king, June 29th, 1795, in support of universal suffrage and annual parliaments.— Hist. of the Two Acts, 90-97.

said 'We have lives, and are ready to devote them, either separately or collectively, for the salvation of the country.' This was followed by a remonstrance to the king, urging parliamentary reform, the removal of ministers, and a speedy peace. Several resolutions were also passed describing the sufferings of the people, the load of taxation, and the necessity of universal suffrage and annual parliaments. The latter topic had been the constant theme of all their proceedings; and however strong their language, no other object had ever been avowed. The meeting dispersed without the least disorder.

Attack upon

the king, Oct. 29th,

Popular excitement was at its height, when the king was about to open Parliament in person. On the 29th of October, the Park 1795. and streets were thronged with an excited multitude, through which the royal procession was to pass, on its way to Westminster. Instead of the cordial acclamations with which the king had generally been received, he was now assailed with groans and hisses, and cries of 'Give us bread,'— 6 No Pitt,'No war,'-No famine.' His state carriage was pelted, and one missile, apparently from an air-gun, passed through the window. In all his dominions, there was no man of higher courage than the king himself. He bore these attacks upon his person with unflinching firmness; and proceeded to deliver his speech from the throne, without a trace of agitation. On his return to St. James's, these outrages were renewed, the glass panels and windows

Hist. of the Two Acts, 98-108.

of the carriage were broken to pieces; and after the king had alighted, the carriage itself was nearly demolished by the mob. His Majesty, in passing from St. James's to Buckingham House in his private carriage, was again beset by the tumultuous crowd; and was only rescued from further molestation by the timely arrival of some horse-guards, who had been dismissed from duty.2

tions and

These disgraceful outrages, reprobated by good men of all classes, were made the occasion Proclamaof further encroachments upon the political addresses. privileges of the people. Both Houses immediately concurred in an address to his Majesty, expressing their abhorrence of the late events. This was suc

ceeded by two proclamations,-one offer- Oct. 31st, ing rewards for the apprehension of the 1795. authors and abettors of these outrages; and the other adverting to recent meetings near the metropolis, followed by the attack upon the king; and Nov. 4. calling upon the magistrates and all good subjects to aid in preventing such meetings, and in apprehending persons who should deliver inflammatory speeches or distribute seditious papers. Both these proclamations were laid before Parliament, and Lord Grenville introduced into the House of Treasonable Lords a bill founded upon them, for the Bill, Nov. 'preservation of his Majesty's person and 4th. government against treasonable practices Nov. 6th. and attempts.'

Practices

When a stone was thrown at one of his glasses in returning home, the king said, "That is a stone,-you see the difference from a bullet."-Lord Colchester's Diary, i. 3.

2 Ann. Reg., 1796, p. 9; History of the Two Acts, 1796, 4-21; Lord Colchester's Diary, i. 2.

This bill introduced a new law of treason, at variance with the principles of the existing law, the operation of which had gravely dissatisfied the government, in the recent state trials.

The proof of overt acts of treason was now to be dispensed with; and any person compassing and devising the death, bodily harm, or restraint of the king, or his deposition, or the levying of war upon him, in order to compel him to change his measures or counsels, or who should express such designs by any printing, writing, preaching, or malicious and advised speaking, should suffer the penalties of high treason.1 Any person who by writing, printing, preaching, or speaking should incite the people to hatred or contempt of his Majesty, or the established government and constitution of the realm, would be liable to the penalties of a high misdemeanour; and on a second conviction, to banishment or transportation. The act was to remain in force during the life of the king, and till the end of the next session after his decease.

It was at once perceived that the measure was an alarming encroachment upon freedom of opinion. Its opponents saw in it a statutory prohibition to discuss parliamentary reform. The most flagrant abuses of the government and constitution were henceforth to be sacred from exposure. To speak of them at all would excite hatred and contempt; and silence was therefore to be imposed by law. Nor were the arguments by which this measure was

The provision concerning preaching and advised speaking was afterwards omitted.