ent and
stationed soldiers in the neighbourhood of Westminster Hall. This step
enraged the opposition, and on the 6th Dunning proposed a resolution in
the commons that "the influence of the crown has increased, is
increasing, and ought to be diminished". This resolution was carried,
with a trifling addition, by 233 to 215, and another that the house was
competent to correct abuses in the civil list was adopted without a
division. On the 10th, however, a resolution that certain officers of
the household should be disqualified from sitting in the house of
commons was carried by two only. So far did pressure from without
combined with the near prospect of a general election carry the commons,
but the majority did not desire reform and would go no further than
general resolutions. An address to the king, praying that he would not
dissolve nor prorogue parliament until measures had been taken to
diminish the influence of the crown, was rejected by a majority of
fifty-one. The struggle was over, and Fox vented his rage and
disappointment in a speech of unmeasured invective. Throughout the
session much heated language was used in parliament, and both Shelburne
and Fox fought duels in consequence of words uttered by them in debate.
On June 2 Richmond, ultra-democratic as a democratic noble is wont to
be, specially on questions not affecting his own order, was urging
annual parliaments and manhood suffrage on the lords when he was
interrupted by an outbreak of mob violence, a bitter answer to his
arguments.

[Sidenote: _THE GORDON RIOTS._]

The earlier half of the reign saw an increase in religious tolerance.
Though the whig movement for relieving dissenting ministers from
subscription to the articles was defeated by the lords in 1772 and 1773,
a bill supported by both parties granted them relief in 1779, the year
in which the Irish dissenters were relieved from the test act. The
whigs, as we have seen with reference to the Quebec act, were opposed to
any measure of relief being granted to Roman catholics, who were by law
liable to cruel oppression. The judges, indeed, and specially the great
chief-justice, Mansfield, did all they could to mitigate the rigour of
the law, yet catholics lived in insecurity, and so late as 1767 a priest
was condemned to imprisonment for life, and was actually imprisoned for
four years, for exercising his office. Whig prejudices gave way, and in
1778 Sir George Savile brought in a bill enabling ca