Mr.Baker and their partizans in this country, the Revolution and the Unitarian Socities, had told us, that they had erected a great monument for the inftruction of mankind. This was certainly done, not without a view to imitation. Let us fee what we were to be called on to imitate; what were the lait acts of the contrivers of this glorious form of Government. There were here no doubts of the facts, forthey were related by the authors; and there were cafes in which the falfeft of men might be believed, namely, when they gave a true character of themfelves. When they had got a conftitution, moulded according to the newest pattern of the rights of man; when they had got a King, who was every thing in name, and nothing in reality, over whom, as a State prifoner, the Marquis de la Favette, the chief jailer of Paris, mounted guard: he was defirous of taking a little fresh air, and a little recreation in the country, and they granted him a day rule to go five miles from Paris. But then recollecting, as it is the quality of the rights of men never to be fecure, that this temporary releafe from imprifonment might afford the means of elcape, they furrounded his carriage, commanded him to ftop, and one of the grenadiers of his faithful and loyal body guard prefented his bayonet to the breaft of the fore horfe Mr. Baker here called Mr. Burke to order. He faid he had fat many years in Parliament, and no man entertained a higher opinion of the integrity and abilities of the right honourable gentleman than he did. His eloquence was great, and his powers, on many occafions, had been irrefiftible. His abilities might enable him to involve the House in unneceflary altercation: this, perhaps, the right honourable gentleman might do unwittingly for others, and not to ferve any purpose of his own; he himfelf, perhaps, might be the unwilling inftrument, and might involve the country itself in a contest with another nation; he could not, therefore, fit any longer, without calling him to order; and he should infift upon every perfon adhering to the queftion, and that the Chairman ftate what the queftion before the Committee was. He faid he had no objection, on any occafion, when questions of this fort came properly before the House, fairly and fully, openly and explicitly, to ftate his opinion. He had called the right honourable gentleman to order, merely for the fake of the House, and of the peace of the country; and he had a right to fay, that the right honourable gentleman's conduct was inconfiftent with the order of debate, and the regularity of the proceedings of that House. The Chairman ftated that the queflion before the Committee was, whether the clauses of the Quebec bill fhould be read paragraph by paragraph. Mr. Mr. Fox now role and faid, that he conceived his right Mr. Fox. honourable friend could hardly be faid to be out of order. It feemed that this was a day of privilege, when any body might stand up, felect his mark, and abufe any govern ment he pleased, whether it had any reference or not to the point in queftion. Although no body had faid a word on the fubject of the French revolution, his right honourable friend had gotten up and abused that event. He might have treated the Gentoo government, or that of China, or the government of Turkey, or the laws of Confucius, precifely in the fame manner, and with equal appofitenefs to the queftion before the Houfe. Every gentleman had a right that day to abufe the government of every country as much as he pleafed, and in as grofs terms as he thought proper, or any government, either antient or modern, with his right honourable friend. Mr. Mr. Burke replied that, the honourable gentleman's conclufion was very ill drawn from his premifes. If he was Burke, diforderly he was forry for it. His right honourable friend had alfo accufed him of abufing governments in very grofs terms. He conceived his right honourable friend meant to abufe him in unqualified terms. He had called him to an account for the decency and propriety of his expreffions. Mr. Burke faid he had been accufed of creating diffention among nations. He never thought the National Affembly was imitated fo well as in the debate then going on. Cazales could never utter a fingle fentence in that Affembly without a roar. M. Mr. M. A. Taylor fpoke to order. He thought the difcuffion was carried forward to no good purpofe. He faid, he revered and refpected the character of his friend. They came to argue the queftion on the Quebec bill; they were not difcuffing the English conftitution, but whether, in fact, they ought to give the British conftitution to Canada; and if they ought to give it, whether the prefent bill gave it. When he should be permitted to give his opinion, he should endeavour to fhew that the bill did not give our conftitution to that country. He faid, he muft infift on the rule of order. They were then difcuffing whether it would be right to give Canada our own conftitution; and fecondly, if it were right to give it, whether that bill had given it. Mr. M. A. Tay lor. Mr. Mr. Burke fubmitted to the Committee whether he was or was not in order. The queftion was, whether the bill Burke. was then to be read paragraph by paragraph. It was in a fair way in reasoning to fee what experiments had been made in other countries. His right honourable friend had faid that no body had the leaft idea of borrowing any thing of the French revolution in the bill. Mr. Burke afked how his Tt 2 right Mr. right honourable friend knew that? For any thing he knew, he, (Mr. Burke) himself, might mean to infert fome claufe. If he were to be ftopped, he asked, why was it not in the beginning, and before he had fully declared the French revolution to be the work of folly and not of wifdom? It was the work of vice and not of virtue. If the Committee would permit him to go on, he should endeavour to meet the most captious ideas of order. He declared he would not fuffer friend nor foe to come between his affertion and his argument, and thereby to make him a railer. His honourable friend had faid that, although he did not do it himself, he was probably, though unwittingly, the inftrument of fome other people's folly. He declared, he had not brought forward this bufinefs from any views of his own. If they did not fuffer the affair to be difcuffed, if they fhewed a reluctance to it Here Mr. St. John called Mr. Burke to order, and said, St. John. the difcuffion could not be brought forward with any regard to order. He really afked it as a favour of his right honourable friend, that he would fix a day on which he would bring on the difcuffion of the French conftitution. He faid he knew the English constitution; he admired it; he daily felt the bleffings of it. He fhould be extremely forry if any perfon in England fhould endeavour to perfuade any man, or body of men, to alter the conftitution of the country. If his right honourable friend had made the French revolution the fubject of a diftin&t discussion, that would be bringing it on in a fair way. If his friend felt the mischiefs of the French conftitution as applicable to the English conftitution, let him appoint a day for that difcuffion. This he requested of his right honourable friend as a particular fa vour. Mr. Mr. Martin was of opinion that the right honourable genMartin. tleman (Mr. Burke) was not irregular in fpeaking of the Mr. French conftitution. He had formerly heard a right honourable gentleman fay, that the public had a right to the fentiments of public men on public meafures, and therefore he hoped the right honourable gentleman would be permitted to go on. Mr. Burke in reply faid, he meant to take the fenfe of the Burke. Committee, whether or not he was in order. He declared he had not made any reflection, nor did he mean any, on any one gentleman whatever. He was as fully convinced as he could be, that no one gentleman in that House wanted to alter the conftitution of England. The reafon why, on the firft regular opportunity that presented itself, he was anxious to make his reflections on the fubject, was, because it was a matter of great public concern, and occafion called for his obser obfervations. As long as they held to the conftitution he fhould think it his duty to act with them; but he would not be the flave of any whim that might arife. On the contrary, he thought it his duty not to give any countenance to certain doctrines which were fuppofed to exult in this country, and which were intended fundamentally to fubvert the conftitution. They ought to confider well what they were doing. Here there was a loud call of Order!-Order!-and Go on!-Go on! Mr Burke said, there was fuch an ethusiasm for order that it was not eafy to go on, but he was going to ftate what the refult of the French conftitution perfected was, and to fhew that we ought not to adopt the principles of it. He might be asked, why ftate it, when no man meant to alter the English conftitution? Why raife animofities, where none exifted? And why endeavour to ftir up paffions where all was quiet before? He confeffed a thing might be orderly, and yet that it might be very improper to difcufs it. Was there any reafon for doing this, or did they think the country was in danger? He declared he was ready to answer that queftion. He was perfectly convinced that there was no immediate danger. He believed the body of the country was perfectly found, although attempts were made to take the conftitution from their heads by abfurd theories. He firmly believed the English conftitution was enthroned in the affections of their bofoms; that they cherished it as a part of their nature; and that it was as infeparable from Englishmen, as their fouls and their bodies. Some Ministers and others had, at times, apprehended danger, even from a minority; and history had fhewn that in this way.a conftitution had been overturned. The question, he said, would be, what had they to do with the French conftitution? They had no right to have recourse to the proceedings of the National Affembly, because the government of this country had not yet recognized it. If they had, they would filence him. If the French revolutionifts were to mind their own affairs, and had fhewn no inclination to go abroad and to make profelytes in other countries, Mr. Burke declared, that neither le for one fhould have thought, nor any other Member of the House, had any right to meddle with them. If they were not as much difpofed to gain profelytes as Lewis XIVth had been to make conqueft, he fhould have thought it very improper and indifcreet to have touched on the fubject. He would quote the National Affembly itfelf, and a correspondent of his at Paris, who had declared that he appeared as the ambaffador of the whole human race.— Mr. Mr Burke Mr. An Mr. Anfiruther interrupting Mr. Burke, here spoke to ftruther. order. He faid, his right honourable friend had tranfgreffed fomething of what he looked upon to be the bounds of order in that Houfe. It was a rule of order for Members to confine themselves to the queftion in debate. When he stated this, he begged it to be understood, that if any minority in the country had any intentions to alter the conftitution, there was no man more ready to take strong and decided measures to check that minority, and to crush that fpirit Colonel then he should be Here Colonel Phipps called Mr. Auftruther to order, and Phipps. faid, that a declaration of his attachment to the conftitution, or of his gallantry in defence of it, was as much out of order as the right honourable gentleman, whom he was calling to order. Mr. An- Mr. Anftruther replied, that if the honourable gentleman Aruther. had condescended to hear him out, before he had called him to order, he would have faved himself fome trouble. The honourable gentleman would recollect, that he had faid he had heard of a defign in this country to overturn the conftitution. If fuch a defign really exifted, it was the duty of the right honourable gentleman, who had stated it, to bring forward fome fpecific meafule on the fubject. It was diforderly in the right honourable gentleman to thrust that into a debate on the Quebec bill. It fuch a defign really existed, it could not be debated on that day confiftently with regularity. The queftion before the Committee was, whether the bill fhould be read paragraph by paragraph. The right honourable gentleman had faid, how did gentlemen know but that fomebody, perhaps that right honourable gentleman himself, meant to propofe fomething of the French revolution in the bill. Let them ftop then till a clause or claufes of that fort were propofed, let them be filent till fomething like the principles of the French conftitution appeared in the bill, and then any gentleman would have a right to argue the fubject: but till then all the debate was foreign to the question. He should fay nothing to the danger, how far it was proper, how far it was decent, how far it was prudent, and how far it was wife. Gentlemen were difcuffing the French conftitution without any question before them. The queftion was the Quebec conftitution. The principle of the Quebec bill, if it had any principle, was fomething like the English conftitution. The French conftitution, for any thing we knew, might be good for them, and might be bad for us. It was neither fit nor prudent that that should be made a queftion of difcuffion in Parliament. If any intention exifted in any part of the country to introduce the conftitution of France, it should not be |