The

Neither is it my defign to dwell upon the mifconduct of the parties concerned, any farther than is neceffary to fhew the behaviour of the ministry in its true light. I would make every compaffionate allowance for the infatuation of the prisoner, the false and criminal discretion of one officer, and the madnefs of another. I would leave the ignorant foldiers entirely out of the question. They are certainly the least guilty, though they are the only perfons who have yet suffered, even in the appearance of punishment. * fact itself, however atrocious, is not the principal point to be confidered. It might have happened under a more regular government, and with guards better difciplined than ours. The main question is, in what manner have the ministry acted on this extraordinary occafion. A general officer calls upon the king's own guard, then actually on duty, to rescue him from the laws of his country; yet at this moment he is in a fituation no worse, than if he had not committed an offence, equally enormous in a civil and military view.-A lieutenant upon duty designedly quits his guard, and fuffers it to be

A few of them were confined,

B3

drawn

drawn out by another officer, for a purpose, which he well knew (as we may collec from an appearance of caution, which only makes his behaviour the more criminal) to be in the highest degree illegal. Has this gentleman been called to a court martial to anfwer for his conduct? No. Has it been cenfured? No. Has it been in any shape inquired into? No.-Another lieutenant, not upon duty, nor even in his regimentals, is daring enough to order out the king's guard, over which he had properly no command, and engages them in a violation of the laws of his country, perhaps the most fingular and extravagant that ever was attempted.— What punishment has be fuffered? Literally none. Suppofing he should be prosecuted at common law for the refcue, will that circumftance, from which the ministry can derive no merit, excufe or justify their suffering fo flagrant a breach of military discipline to pass by unpunished, and unnoticed? Are they aware of the outrage offered to their fovereign, when his own proper guard is ordered out to ftop by main force, the execution of his laws? What are we to conclude from fo fcandalous a neglect of their duty,

but

but that they have other views, which can only be answered by fecuring the attachment of the guards? The minifter would hardly be fo cautious of offending them, if he did not mean, in due time, to call for their affiftance.

WITH refpect to the parties themselves, let it be observed, that these gentlemen are neither young officers, nor very young men. Had they belonged to the unfledged race of enfigns, who infeft our streets, and difhonor our public places, it might perhaps be fufficient to fend them back to that discipline, from which their parents, judging lightly from the maturity of their vices, had removed them too foon. In this cafe, I am forry to fee, not so much the folly of youth, as the spirit of the corps, and the connivance of government. I do not queftion that there are many brave and worthy officers in the regiments of guards. But confidering them as a corps, I fear, it will be found that they are neither good foldiers, nor good subjects. Far be it from me to infinuate the most diftant reflection upon the army. On the contrary, I honour and esteem the profeffion; B 4

and

and if these gentlemen were better soldiers, I am fure they would be better fubjects. It is not that there is any internal vice or defect in the profeffion itself, as regulated in this country, but that it is the spirit of this particular corps, to despise their profeffion, and that while they vainly affume the lead of the army, they make it matter of impertinent comparison and triumph over the bravest troops in the world (I mean our marching regiments) that they indeed ftand upon higher ground, and are privileged to neglect the laborious forms of military discipline and duty. Without dwelling longer upon a moft invidious fubject, I fhall leave it to Imilitary men, who have seen a fervice more active than the parade, to determine whether or no I speak truth.

How far this dangerous spirit has been encouraged by government, and to what per ́nicious purposes it may be applied hereafter, well deferves our moft ferious confideration. I know indeed, that when this affair happened, an affectation of alarm ran through the miniftry. Something must be done to save appearances. The cafe was too flagrant to be

paffed

paffed by abfolutely without notice. But how have they acted? Inftead of ordering the officers concerned, (and who, ftrictly speaking, are alone guilty,) to be put under arreft, and brought to trial, they would have it underflood, that they did their duty completely, in confining a ferjeant and four private soldiers, until they fhould be demanded by the civil power; fo that while the officers, who ordered or permitted the thing to be done, escape without cenfure, the poor men who obeyed those orders, who in a military view are no way responsible for what they did, and who for that reafon have been difcharged by the civil magiftrates, are the only objects whom the miniftry have thought proper to expose to punifhment. They did not venture to bring even thefe men to a court martial, because they knew their evidence would be fatal to fome perfons, whom they were determined to protect. Otherwise, I doubt not, the lives of these unhappy, friendlefs foldiers would long fince have been facrificed without fcruple to the fecurity of their guilty officers.

I HAVE been accused of endeavouring to. enflame the paffions of the people.-Let me

now