Mr. Chancellor Pitt did not join issue with Mr. Fox, but did not consider it expedient to flash legislative freedom upon a people. He thought that if the Assembly were not rightly consolidated by the Bill, little harm was done, because there was nothing to hinder the Parliament of Great Britain from correcting any point which might hereafter appear to want correction. He did not like the elective principle of democratic governments, and with respect to the land appropriated to the clergy, like every thing else provided by the bill, it was subject to revision. Where land had been given in commutation of tithes, the proportion of one seventh had grown into an established custom. The Bill was re-committed. Next day the clauses of the Bill being put, paragraph by paragraph, Mr. Burke eloquently defended its provisions, ridiculed the "Rights of Man," and almost extinguished the light of the new lantern, which exhibited in the academies of Paris and the club-rooms of London, the constitutions of America and France as so much superior to that of Great Britain. The distinguished orator was certainly more declamatory than argumentative, and he was repeatedly called to order. It was alleged that Mr. Burke had no right to abuse the governments of France and America, as the "Quebec Bill" only was before the House. Nay, there was something like a scene. Mr. Burke complained of having been deserted by those, with whom he formerly acted, in his old age, and Mr. Fox, with tears in his eyes and strong emotion, declared that he would esteem and venerate Burke to the end of time. The same cries of "order," "order," "chair," "chair," "go on," "go on," that are heard in our most tumultuous debates, in the Assembly, were frequent in the course of the debate, and Mr. Burke was unable, on account of the tumult, to proceed with his account of "the horrible and nefarious consequences flowing from the French idea of the rights of man." The debating continued for a number of days, and the Bill was read a third time on the 18th of May. When the report of the Bill in Committee was brought up, on the 16th of May, the House divided upon an amendment by Mr. Fox, to leave out the clause of hereditary nobility, which amendment was lost by an adverse majority of forty-nine. It was then moved, in amendment to the Bill, by Mr. Chancellor Pitt, that the number of representatives in the Assemblies should be fifty instead of thirty, but that motion was also lost by an adverse majority of fifty-one.