22
peace? As far as my information, as far as the newspaper accounts may be trusted, the more numerous the assembly, the more strict has been the good order. What were the factious and seditious speeches? Let them be specified. Are they such as Locke and Lord Somers would have disavowed? Or were they only bold and constitutional remonstrances against dark and ministerial iniquities? If not such, if they are truly factious and seditious (that is, exciting to violence) the existing laws are sufficient authority for apprehending the speakers; let them be brought forwards and examined; let them and the ministers be confronted! Let the Honourable Mr. Dundas be asked, whether or no they are among his old correspondents! or if the modesty of this senator be overpowered, spare his blushes, and in treating the Right Honourable Mr. Pitt to recover his Memory, put him upon his oath—no! not on his oath—for why should God's name be taken in vain? but closely question him, whether or no those speakers are not the "Reporters of Government? Gentlemen (as a chief Justice would express himself) who have received acknowledgements for secret services? It is highly probable, that this would appear to be the real case; and if it beonly
