The Common Council expressed much sympathy with the sufferers, whose only fault had been to assemble for the purpose of lawfully and peacefully discussing public grievances, and they petitioned the Regent for a full and immediate enquiry into the outrage and for the punishment of the authors. They assured his highness that he had been deceived by false representations, otherwise he would never have been induced to express approval of the conduct of the abettors and perpetrators of the late atrocities.[743] The Prince in reply flatly told the citizens they knew nothing about the real state of the case, and this "most gracious" answer was ordered to be entered in the Journal of the Court.[744] [Sidenote: The six Acts, 1819.] The passing of a series of suppressory enactments, known as "The Six Acts," at an autumn session, gave the Common Council another opportunity for recommending parliamentary reform. It at the same time suggested--as reformers of the present day will do well to remember--_the extension of the municipal form of government_ as a better panacea for existing evils than more drastic measures.[745] The Court of Aldermen, on the other hand, kept silence. They had, however, already passed a number of resolutions upholding the magistracy in putting down seditious meetings, and calling upon the labouring classes to have confidence in themselves, and not to be led by agitators, but to wait patiently until the present difficulties--"springing alone from the termination of a protracted war"--should pass away.[746] [Sidenote: Proceedings in Common Hall, 29 Sept., 1819.]