SHERIDAN. 535 the present occasion, that when Mr. Sheridan sat down, the whole House, as if fascinated with h i s eloquence, after a short pause, burst into a n invo luntary tumult o f applause. Mr. Burke declared i t t o b e the most extraordinary effort h e had ever witnessed; while Mr. Fox said, “all that h e had ever heard, a l l that h e had ever read, when compared with i t , dwindled into nothing, and vanished like vapour before the sun.” Even Mr. Pitt acknowledged, “that i t sur passed a l l the eloquence o f ancient o r modern times, and possessed every thing that genius o r art could furnish, t o agitate and control the human mind.” Some members, afraid o f the impulse thus given t o the question, moved for a n adjournment o f the debate, and the minister concurring, this was accordingly agreed t o , notwithstanding the assertion o f Mr. Fox, “that i t was unparliamentary t o defer coming t o a vote, for n o other reason, that had been alleged, than because members were too firmly convinced.” Next day, however, Mr. Pitt having declared that Mr. Hastings was criminal o n two great points, the violation o f the guarantee, and the seizure o f the treasures,-and that h e had greatly enhanced his guilt b y stifling the orders o f the Court o f Directors, commanding a revision o f the proceedings against the Princesses, the motion was carried b y a majority o f one hundred and seventy-five against sixty-eight. Mr. Sheridan took also a n active part i n the debates o n the affairs of the Prince o f Wales. On June 3rd, 1788, Mr. Sheridan summed u p the evidence o n the Begum charge, before the Lords i n Westminster-hall, and from that moment his character was established a s one o f the first orators and statesmen i n the House of Commons. Soon after this, the French revolution became a n object o f great importance; and o n the army estimates being moved for o n February 9 , both h e and Mr. Fox paid a tribute o f applause t o those who had produced that great event. He deprecated the unqualified abuse and abhor rence o f Mr. Burke, and conceived that revolution t o b e fully a s just, and necessary, and glorious, a s our own i n 1688. He a t the same time defended the general views and conduct o f the National Assembly, and could not un derstand what was meant b y the charge o f “having over turned the laws, the justice, and the revenues o f their country. What were their laws?—the arbitrary mandates o f capricious despotism. What their justice?—the partial adjudications o f venal magistrates. What their revenues? — national bankruptcy.” Mr. Burke, i n reply, declared,
