This was rendered impracticable by a sudden swell of the river, and the army becoming greatly distressed by want and disease, it was necessary to give up the attempt against Seringapatam for that season. Directions were sent to General Abercrombie to return to the Malabar coast, and Lord Cornwallis marched back to Bangalore. 445 A. D. 1792. YEAR OF GEORGE III. 32 & 33. - PARLIAMENT 2 & 3. - Parliament. King's Speech.- Prosperous State of the Finances. Lottery opposed. - Motion on the Slave Trade Abolition. - Police of the Metropolis.- Royal Burghs of Scotland.-Friends of the People. Proclamation against Seditious Meetings and Publications.Prosecutions.-Designs of Austria and Prussia against France. Death of the Emperor Leopold. War declared against Austria by France. · First Attack on the Austrian Netherlands. Tumults in France. Louis refuses to sanction the Decrees of the Legislative Assembly. — The Nation declared in Danger. — Duke of Brunswick's Declarations. Attack on the Tuilleries and Massacre of the Swiss Guards.- King and Queen confined in the Temple.- Fayette flies and is made Prisoner by the Austrians. - Advance of the Allied Armies. Dreadful Massacre at the Prisons. Duke of Brunswick obliged to retreat. National Convention assembles. Republicanism established. Savoy reduced.- Custine's Success in Germany, and Dumouriez's in the Low Countries. - Battle of Jemappe. — Fraternity offered by the Convention. - Trial of Louis. Measures of the Empress of Russia and King of Sweden. Assassination of the latter. Affairs of Poland. Measures in England. - Association against Republicans and Levellers.- Royal Proclamation.Militia called out, and anticipated assembling of Parliament.King's Speech and Debates. — Alien Bill. Conclusion of the War with Tippoo. - Embassy to China. PARLIAMENT opened on January 31st. The speech from the throne was chiefly remarkable from the prediction of a continuance of the tranquillity at present enjoyed by this country, inferred from the friendly assurances received from foreign powers, and the general state of Europe. This prospect was said to justify some immediate reduction in the naval and military establishments, and to afford the hope of a gradual relief from a part of the existing taxes. The debates on the address, and several succeeding discussions in both Houses, principally turned upon the line of policy pursued by the ministry in their interference in the quarrel between Turkey and Russia, and in the hostility they had displayed towards the latter power. All interest on that subject being at an end, it would be useless to recite the particulars of those debates; one circumstance, however, was so remarkable an exemplification of the political sentiments at that time entertained by the government, that it may deserve to be recorded. Mr. Jenkinson (now Earl of Liverpool) in a maiden speech much admired for its extensive views of the existing state of Europe as bearing upon this country, said, "the strength and influence of France being at an end, we had no further danger to apprehend from that once formidable rival; but a power had succeeded to France, no less deserving of attention from its restless politics and ambitious views. this was Russia." In a committee of the House of Commons to consider the state of the finances, Mr. Pitt gave a most encouraging statement of the national prosperity. The revenue of the last year had so much exceeded the average of the last four years, that the permanent income would surpass the permanent expenditure, including the annual million for extinguishing the national debt, by 400,000l.; whence, he said, government would be enabled to take off taxes which bore chiefly upon the poorer classes, to the amount of 200,000l. and to apply the other 200,000l. to the increase of the sinking fund. As future prosperity would greatly depend upon the continuance of peace, he did not hesitate to confirm the language of the King's speech by asserting that "unquestionably there never was a time when a durable peace might more reasonably be expected, than at the present moment." When, in the committee of supply, the minister proposed the raising of more than 800,000l. by lottery, he was severely reflected on by Mr. M. A. Taylor for having recourse, at such a time, to a method of levying money so extremely pernicious to the morals and happiness of the people. Several other members joined in the reprobation of lotteries, and a petition against them was presented from the grand jury of Middlesex. The impression made on the House from these representations was such, that a committee was appointed for enquiring into the evils arising from this source. In this session the question of the abolition of the slave trade was again agitated in parliament, and all the force of argument was adduced on both sides in the different discussions which it underwent. The House of Commons having gone into a committee of examination on the subject, Mr. Wilberforce, ever the most active and zealous friend of the oppressed Africans, after a minute exposure of the evils and cruelties attending the slave trade, moved for its immediate and total abolition. After a keen debate, in which some members, among whom were Mr. Fox and Mr. Pitt, spoke in favour of the motion as it stood; others supported the trade throughout; and others, among whom Mr. Dundas was the leader, argued for a gradual abolition; the latter measure was carried by a majority of 68. On a following day the subject of debate was the period at which its total cessation should take place. Much of the same ground was again gone over, and the friends of the trade endeavoured to defer the abolition as long as possible. At length, a compromise being agreed on, the term was fixed for January 1st, 1796. The resolutions of the Commons being carried to the House of Lords, it appeared that there was much less zeal for the abolition in that assembly. After a debate, in which the ministerial lords in general spoke against that measure, and a prince of the blood, the Duke of Clarence, openly avowed himself a friend to the slave trade, a motion was carried for the appointment of a committee for the hearing of evidence on the subject at the bar of the House; and thus the means were given of an indefinite protraction of a decision. The police of the metropolis, especially of that largest portion of it which lies beyond the verge and jurisdiction of the city of London, being notoriously insufficient for preserving order among such a vast population, a bill was brought into the House of Commons for the estab lishing of five different offices in Westminster and the adjacent parts, at each of which three justices, paid by an annual salary, were to sit; and also for vesting a power in constables to apprehend such persons as did not give a satisfactory account of themselves. Although the necessity of some regulation of the police could not be controverted, yet objections were made to this bill as adding to the power of the crown, and as authorising a dangerous infringement of personal liberty. It was however approved by the majority, especially as its proposed duration was only for a limited time; and it passed into a law. An enquiry was moved by Mr. Sheridan, April 18th, into the grievances complained of in petitions from the Royal Burghs of Scotland. These were, in substance, infringements of the rights and properties of the burghs, through the authority of self-elected magistrates, against whose usurpations the law had provided no remedy. The case was strongly made out, and the deficiency of a tribunal to judge of the proceedings of the magistrates was admitted by the Lord Advocate of Scotland; but a peculiar aversion to any reforming project of the popular kind subsisting at this period, the motion for referring the petitions to a committee was negatived. A similar fortune attended a motion from Mr. Fox for the repeal of certain penal statutes particularly levelled against persons of Unitarian principles. On the other hand, an extension of toleration to the Scotch episcopalians was carried in both houses without opposition. A bill declaratory of the rights of juries in matter of libel, namely, that they are empowered to give a general verdict of guilty or not guilty upon the whole matter put to issue, which had been introduced by Mr. Fox in the last session, but postponed, was again brought in by him; and notwithstanding the opposition of the lawlords it passed into a law. Whilst the dread of that innovating spirit which the French revolution had fostered, operated as a motive with many to oppose every thing that bore the name of reform, there were others who thought that the safest |