DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.70267#0467
SIR WILLIAM STAINES. z x ' 41$
though much more to the glory of the country, and con-
genial to the spirit and generosity of Englishmen, than
the transient gleam of a few candles, was at that, time
generally applauded, with the exception of one public
newspaper, soon after defunct. But by the more sober
part of the community, this act of suppressing a public
illumination, and probably a degree of riot, was highly
approved.—By such it was esteemed a new trait of the
superior goodness of the heart of the chief magistrate
and the soundness of his judgment; however it was not
carried into effect without some opposition On the part of
the populace, who making their appearance in the city
on the night the illumination was expected, it v as found*
necessary to order the constables to disperse them im-
mediately, and which was accordingly performed in the
course of a few minutes, though the crowd collected on
the occasion ’were both numerous and noisy. It was then,
observed, that the few people who had put up candles in
their windows immediately withdrew them.—The dif-
ference of the conduct of Sir William Staines, in thus
opposing a popular propensity from that false lenity, and
ill-timed forbearance adopted by the chief magistrate,
his predecessor in the riots of 1780, must strike the most
partial with Some dec ree of 'Conviction. But with the
x o
same general approbation with which be had filled the
City Chair, so he withdrew from it.—Sir William was no
orator, he had made use of no more than strong plain
sense, in his harangues to the Livery, and the Citizens at
large; he had never inflamed their passions.—-Yet the
populace in their way, to express their gratitude after the
resignation of his office, when he was returning from
Westminster, they drew him in his carriage. This we
mention here, because in this instance it is not credible
that a mob was hired for that purpose, or for shouting
their huzzas, as has very often been the case.—And with
re-
though much more to the glory of the country, and con-
genial to the spirit and generosity of Englishmen, than
the transient gleam of a few candles, was at that, time
generally applauded, with the exception of one public
newspaper, soon after defunct. But by the more sober
part of the community, this act of suppressing a public
illumination, and probably a degree of riot, was highly
approved.—By such it was esteemed a new trait of the
superior goodness of the heart of the chief magistrate
and the soundness of his judgment; however it was not
carried into effect without some opposition On the part of
the populace, who making their appearance in the city
on the night the illumination was expected, it v as found*
necessary to order the constables to disperse them im-
mediately, and which was accordingly performed in the
course of a few minutes, though the crowd collected on
the occasion ’were both numerous and noisy. It was then,
observed, that the few people who had put up candles in
their windows immediately withdrew them.—The dif-
ference of the conduct of Sir William Staines, in thus
opposing a popular propensity from that false lenity, and
ill-timed forbearance adopted by the chief magistrate,
his predecessor in the riots of 1780, must strike the most
partial with Some dec ree of 'Conviction. But with the
x o
same general approbation with which be had filled the
City Chair, so he withdrew from it.—Sir William was no
orator, he had made use of no more than strong plain
sense, in his harangues to the Livery, and the Citizens at
large; he had never inflamed their passions.—-Yet the
populace in their way, to express their gratitude after the
resignation of his office, when he was returning from
Westminster, they drew him in his carriage. This we
mention here, because in this instance it is not credible
that a mob was hired for that purpose, or for shouting
their huzzas, as has very often been the case.—And with
re-