ion with
societies for parliamentary reform. He and Thelwall, a lecturer, were
acquitted, and the rest were set at liberty. The general alarm was
pacified, and people rejoiced that the high character of the English
courts of justice should have been vindicated.

[Sidenote: _ACTIVITY OF THE OPPOSITION._]

When parliament met on January 21, 1794, the opposition was able to
taunt the government with the feebleness and failure of the military
operations of the past year. An amendment to the address recommending
proposals of peace was moved in both houses. In the lords it was
supported only by 12 against 97 votes, the Duke of Bedford and Lords
Lansdowne, Stanhope, and Lauderdale as usual being conspicuous in
opposition to the ministry. In the commons, Fox urged that the cruel
acts of the jacobin government should not prevent England from
negotiating with it, to which Pitt replied that no dependence could be
placed on the existing French government, and that "any alternative was
preferable to making peace with France upon the system of its present
rulers". The address was carried by 277 to 59. Votes were passed for
60,000 regular troops and a naval force of 85,000 men. Weak as the
opposition was, it lost no opportunity. Some Hessian troops sent to join
a British force arrived off the Isle of Wight before the expedition was
ready, and were landed for a short time to prevent them from suffering
from sickness. The opposition maintained that this was a violation of
the bill of rights and the act of settlement. It was easily shown that
the law had not been violated and that the course pursued was not
irregular, and both lords and commons declined to allow that the matter
called for an act of indemnity. Compared with the trifling nature of the
occurrence, the fuss made over it by the opposition can only be
explained by a desire to impede the government in the performance of its
duty at a time of national danger. An invasion was threatened. The
defence of England, Grenville said, would best be secured by her
"water-guard". It was further provided for by raising volunteers. Dundas
wrote to the lord-lieutenants of counties, recommending subscriptions
towards the expenses of the movement. Fox and Sheridan declared that
this recommendation was illegal. Their contention that it was a demand
for "benevolences" was absurd. Yet a request by the government for
money, not addressed to the house of commons, seems contrary to the
spirit of th