• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 January, 1821
 February, 1821
 March, 1821
 April, 1821
 Finance accounts for the year ended...
 Index to debates in the House of...
 Index to debates in the House of...
 Index of names - House of...
 Index of names - House of...














Group Title: Parliamentary debates (1820-1829)
Title: The parliamentary debates
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00073533/00004
 Material Information
Title: The parliamentary debates
Uniform Title: Parliamentary debates (1820-1829)
Physical Description: 20 v. : ; 25 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Great Britain -- Parliament
Hansard, T. C ( Thomas Curson ), 1776-1833
Publisher: Published under the superintendence of T.C. Hansard
Place of Publication: London
Publication Date: 1820-1829
 Subjects
Subject: Politics and government -- Periodicals -- Great Britain -- 1820-1830   ( lcsh )
 Notes
Dates or Sequential Designation: New ser., v. 1 (1820)-v. 20 (1829).
Numbering Peculiarities: Covers Mar. 1820-Feb./Mar. 1829.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00073533
Volume ID: VID00004
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 07655703
lccn - sn 85062629
 Related Items
Preceded by: Parliamentary debates for the year 1803 to the present time
Succeeded by: Hansard's parliamentary debates

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Title Page
    Table of Contents
        Table of Contents 1
        Table of Contents 2
        Table of Contents 3
        Table of Contents 4
        Table of Contents 5
        Table of Contents 6
    January, 1821
        Page 1-2
        House of Lords - Tuesday, January 23
            Page 1-2
            Page 3-4
            Page 5-6
            Page 7-8
            Page 9-10
            Page 11-12
            Page 13-14
            Page 15-16
            Page 17-18
            Page 19-20
            Page 21-22
            Page 23-24
        House of Commons - Tuesday, January 23
            Page 25-26
            Page 27-28
            Page 29-30
            Page 31-32
            Page 33-34
            Page 35-36
            Page 37-38
            Page 39-40
            Page 41-42
            Page 43-44
            Page 45-46
            Page 47-48
            Page 49-50
            Page 51-52
            Page 53-54
            Page 55-56
            Page 57-58
            Page 59-60
            Page 61-62
            Page 63-64
        House of Commons - Wednesday, January 24
            Page 65-66
            Page 67-68
            Page 69-70
            Page 71-72
            Page 73-74
            Page 75-76
            Page 77-78
            Page 79-80
            Page 81-82
            Page 83-84
            Page 85-86
            Page 87-88
            Page 89-90
            Page 91-92
            Page 93-94
            Page 95-96
            Page 97-98
            Page 99-100
            Page 101-102
        House of Lords - Thursday, January 25
            Page 103-104
            Page 105-106
            Page 107-108
            Page 109-110
            Page 111-112
            Page 113-114
            Page 115-116
            Page 117-118
        House of Commons - Friday, January 26
            Page 119-120
            Page 121-122
            Page 123-124
            Page 125-126
            Page 127-128
            Page 129-130
            Page 131-132
            Page 133-134
            Page 135-136
            Page 137-138
            Page 139-140
            Page 141-142
            Page 143-144
            Page 145-146
            Page 147-148
            Page 149-150
            Page 151-152
            Page 153-154
            Page 155-156
            Page 157-158
            Page 159-160
            Page 161-162
            Page 163-164
            Page 165-166
            Page 167-168
            Page 169-170
            Page 171-172
            Page 173-174
            Page 175-176
            Page 177-178
            Page 179-180
            Page 181-182
            Page 183-184
            Page 185-186
            Page 187-188
            Page 189-190
            Page 191-192
            Page 193-194
            Page 195-196
            Page 197-198
            Page 199-200
            Page 201-202
            Page 203-204
            Page 205-206
            Page 207-208
            Page 209-210
            Page 211-212
            Page 213-214
            Page 215-216
            Page 217-218
            Page 219-220
        House of Commons - Wednesday, January 31
            Page 221-222
            Page 223-224
            Page 225-226
            Page 227-228
            Page 229-230
            Page 231-232
            Page 233-234
            Page 235-236
            Page 237-238
            Page 239-240
            Page 241-242
            Page 243-244
            Page 245-246
            Page 247-248
            Page 249-250
            Page 251-252
            Page 253-254
            Page 255-256
            Page 257-258
            Page 259-260
            Page 261-262
            Page 263-264
            Page 265-266
            Page 267-268
            Page 269-270
            Page 271-272
            Page 273-274
            Page 275-276
            Page 277-278
    February, 1821
        Page 279-280
        House of Commons - Tuesday, February 1
            Page 279-280
            Page 281-282
            Page 283-284
            Page 285-286
            Page 287-288
            Page 289-290
            Page 291-292
            Page 293-294
            Page 295-296
            Page 297-298
            Page 299-300
            Page 301-302
            Page 303-304
            Page 305-306
            Page 307-308
            Page 309-310
            Page 311-312
            Page 313-314
            Page 315-316
            Page 317-318
            Page 319-320
            Page 321-322
        House of Commons - Friday, February 2
            Page 323-324
            Page 325-326
            Page 327-328
            Page 329-330
            Page 331-332
            Page 333-334
            Page 335-336
            Page 337-338
            Page 339-340
            Page 341-342
            Page 343-344
            Page 345-346
            Page 347-348
        House of Lords - Monday, February 5
            Page 349-350
            Page 351-352
            Page 353-354
            Page 355-356
            Page 357-358
        House of Commons - Monday, February 5
            Page 359-360
            Page 361-362
            Page 363-364
            Page 365-366
            Page 367-368
            Page 369-370
            Page 371-372
            Page 373-374
            Page 375-376
            Page 377-378
            Page 379-380
            Page 381-382
            Page 383-384
            Page 385-386
            Page 387-388
            Page 389-390
            Page 391-392
            Page 393-394
            Page 395-396
            Page 397-398
            Page 399-400
            Page 401-402
            Page 403-404
            Page 405-406
            Page 407-408
            Page 409-410
            Page 411-412
            Page 413-414
            Page 415-416
            Page 417-418
            Page 419-420
        House of Commons - Tuesday, February6
            Page 421-422
            Page 423-424
            Page 425-426
            Page 427-428
            Page 429-430
            Page 431-432
            Page 433-434
            Page 435-436
            Page 437-438
            Page 439-440
            Page 441-442
            Page 443-444
            Page 445-446
            Page 447-448
            Page 449-450
            Page 451-452
            Page 453-454
            Page 455-456
            Page 457-458
            Page 459-460
            Page 461-462
            Page 463-464
            Page 465-466
            Page 467-468
            Page 469-470
            Page 471-472
            Page 473-474
            Page 475-476
            Page 477-478
            Page 479-480
            Page 481-482
            Page 483-484
            Page 485-486
            Page 487-488
            Page 489-490
            Page 491-492
            Page 493-494
            Page 495-496
            Page 497-498
            Page 499-500
            Page 501-502
            Page 503-504
            Page 505-506
            Page 507-508
            Page 509-510
        House of Commons - Thursday, February 8
            Page 511-512
            Page 513-514
            Page 515-516
            Page 517-518
            Page 519-520
            Page 521-522
            Page 523-524
            Page 525-526
            Page 527-528
            Page 529-530
            Page 531-532
            Page 533-534
            Page 535-536
            Page 537-538
            Page 539-540
        House of Commons - Friday, February 9
            Page 541-542
            Page 543-544
            Page 545-546
            Page 547-548
            Page 549-550
            Page 551-552
            Page 553-554
            Page 555-556
            Page 557-558
            Page 559-560
            Page 561-562
            Page 563-564
            Page 565-566
            Page 567-568
            Page 569-570
            Page 571-572
            Page 573-574
            Page 575-576
            Page 577-578
        House of Commons - Monday, February 12
            Page 579-580
            Page 581-582
            Page 583-584
            Page 585-586
            Page 587-588
            Page 589-590
            Page 591-592
            Page 593-594
            Page 595-596
            Page 597-598
            Page 599-600
            Page 601-602
            Page 603-604
            Page 605-606
        House of Commons - Tuesday, February 13
            Page 607-608
            Page 609-610
            Page 611-612
            Page 613-614
            Page 615-616
            Page 617-618
            Page 619-620
            Page 621-622
            Page 623-624
            Page 625-626
            Page 627-628
            Page 629-630
            Page 631-632
            Page 633-634
            Page 635-636
            Page 637-638
            Page 639-640
            Page 641-642
            Page 643-644
            Page 645-646
            Page 647-648
            Page 649-650
            Page 651-652
            Page 653-654
            Page 655-656
            Page 657-658
            Page 659-660
            Page 661-662
            Page 663-664
        House of Commons - Wednesday, Februrary 14
            Page 665-666
            Page 667-668
            Page 669-670
            Page 671-672
            Page 673-674
            Page 675-676
            Page 677-678
            Page 679-680
            Page 681-682
            Page 683-684
            Page 685-686
        House of Commons - Thursday, February 15
            Page 687-688
            Page 689-690
            Page 691-692
            Page 693-694
            Page 695-696
            Page 697-698
            Page 699-700
            Page 701-702
            Page 703-704
            Page 705-706
            Page 707-708
            Page 709-710
            Page 711-712
            Page 713-714
            Page 715-716
        House of Commons - Friday, February 16
            Page 717-718
            Page 719-720
            Page 721-722
            Page 723-724
            Page 725-726
            Page 727-728
            Page 729-730
            Page 731-732
            Page 733-734
            Page 735-736
            Page 737-738
            Page 739-740
        House of Lords - Monday, February 19
            Page 741-742
            Page 743-744
            Page 745-746
            Page 747-748
            Page 749-750
            Page 751-752
            Page 753-754
            Page 755-756
            Page 757-758
            Page 759-760
            Page 761-762
            Page 763-764
            Page 765-766
            Page 767-768
            Page 769-770
            Page 771-772
            Page 773-774
            Page 775-776
            Page 777-778
            Page 779-780
            Page 781-782
            Page 783-784
            Page 785-786
            Page 787-788
            Page 789-790
            Page 791-792
            Page 793-794
        House of Commons - Monday, February 19
            Page 795-796
        House of Lords - Tuesday, February 20
            Page 797-798
            Page 799-800
            Page 801-802
        House of Commons - Tuesday, February 20
            Page 803-804
            Page 805-806
            Page 807-808
            Page 809-810
            Page 811-812
            Page 813-814
            Page 815-816
            Page 817-818
            Page 819-820
            Page 821-822
        House of Lords - Wednesday, February 21
            Page 823-824
            Page 825-826
            Page 827-828
            Page 829-830
            Page 831-832
            Page 833-834
        House of Commons - Wednesday, February 21
            Page 835-836
            Page 837-838
            Page 839-840
            Page 841-842
            Page 843-844
            Page 845-846
            Page 847-848
            Page 849-850
            Page 851-852
            Page 853-854
            Page 855-856
            Page 857-858
            Page 859-860
            Page 861-862
            Page 863-864
            Page 865-866
            Page 867-868
            Page 869-870
            Page 871-872
            Page 873-874
            Page 875-876
            Page 877-878
            Page 879-880
            Page 881-882
            Page 883-884
            Page 885-886
            Page 887-888
            Page 889-890
            Page 891-892
            Page 893-894
        House of Commons - Thursday, February 22
            Page 895-896
            Page 897-898
            Page 899-900
            Page 901-902
            Page 903-904
            Page 905-906
            Page 907-908
            Page 909-910
            Page 911-912
            Page 913-914
            Page 915-916
        House of Commons - Friday, February 23
            Page 917-918
            Page 919-920
            Page 921-922
            Page 923-924
            Page 925-926
            Page 927-928
            Page 929-930
            Page 931-932
            Page 933-934
            Page 935-936
        House of Lords - Monday, February 26
            Page 937-938
        House of Commons - Monday, February 26
            Page 939-940
            Page 941-942
            Page 943-944
        House of Commons - Tuesday, February 27
            Page 945-946
        House of Commons - Wednesday, February 28
            Page 947-948
            Page 949-950
            Page 951-952
            Page 953-954
            Page 955-956
            Page 957-958
            Page 959-960
            Page 961-962
            Page 963-964
            Page 965-966
            Page 967-968
            Page 969-970
            Page 971-972
            Page 973-974
            Page 975-976
            Page 977-978
            Page 979-980
            Page 981-982
            Page 983-984
            Page 985-986
            Page 987-988
            Page 989-990
            Page 991-992
            Page 993-994
            Page 995-996
            Page 997-998
            Page 999-1000
            Page 1001-1002
            Page 1003-1004
            Page 1005-1006
            Page 1007-1008
            Page 1009-1010
            Page 1011-1012
            Page 1013-1014
            Page 1015-1016
            Page 1017-1018
            Page 1019-1020
            Page 1021-1022
            Page 1023-1024
            Page 1025-1026
            Page 1027-1028
            Page 1029-1030
            Page 1031-1032
    March, 1821
        Page 1033-1034
        House of Commons - Thursday, March 1
            Page 1033-1034
            Page 1035-1036
            Page 1037-1038
        House of Lords - Friday, March 2
            Page 1039-1040
            Page 1041-1042
            Page 1043-1044
            Page 1045-1046
            Page 1047-1048
            Page 1049-1050
            Page 1051-1052
            Page 1053-1054
            Page 1055-1056
            Page 1057-1058
            Page 1059-1060
            Page 1061-1062
            Page 1063-1064
        House of Commons - Friday, March 2
            Page 1065-1066
            Page 1067-1068
            Page 1069-1070
            Page 1071-1072
            Page 1073-1074
            Page 1075-1076
        House of Commons - Monday, March 5
            Page 1077-1078
            Page 1079-1080
            Page 1081-1082
            Page 1083-1084
            Page 1085-1086
            Page 1087-1088
            Page 1089-1090
            Page 1091-1092
            Page 1093-1094
            Page 1095-1096
            Page 1097-1098
        House of Commons - Tuesday, March 6
            Page 1099-1100
            Page 1101-1102
            Page 1103-1104
            Page 1105-1106
            Page 1107-1108
            Page 1109-1110
            Page 1111-1112
            Page 1113-1114
            Page 1115-1116
            Page 1117-1118
            Page 1119-1120
            Page 1121-1122
            Page 1123-1124
            Page 1125-1126
        House of Commons - Wednesday, March 7
            Page 1127-1128
            Page 1129-1130
            Page 1131-1132
            Page 1133-1134
            Page 1135-1136
            Page 1137-1138
            Page 1139-1140
            Page 1141-1142
            Page 1143-1144
            Page 1145-1146
            Page 1147-1148
            Page 1149-1150
            Page 1151-1152
            Page 1153-1154
            Page 1155-1156
            Page 1157-1158
            Page 1159-1160
        House of Commons - Friday, March 9
            Page 1161-1162
            Page 1163-1164
            Page 1165-1166
            Page 1167-1168
            Page 1169-1170
            Page 1171-1172
            Page 1173-1174
            Page 1175-1176
            Page 1177-1178
            Page 1179-1180
            Page 1181-1182
        House of Commons - Monday, March 12
            Page 1183-1184
            Page 1185-1186
            Page 1187-1188
            Page 1189-1190
            Page 1191-1192
            Page 1193-1194
            Page 1195-1196
            Page 1197-1198
            Page 1199-1200
            Page 1201-1202
            Page 1203-1204
            Page 1205-1206
            Page 1207-1208
            Page 1209-1210
            Page 1211-1212
            Page 1213-1214
        House of Commons - Wednesday, March 14
            Page 1215-1216
            Page 1217-1218
            Page 1219-1220
            Page 1221-1222
            Page 1223-1224
            Page 1225-1226
            Page 1227-1228
            Page 1229-1230
            Page 1231-1232
            Page 1233-1234
            Page 1235-1236
            Page 1237-1238
            Page 1239-1240
            Page 1241-1242
            Page 1243-1244
        House of Commons - Thursday, March 15
            Page 1245-1246
            Page 1247-1248
            Page 1249-1250
            Page 1251-1252
            Page 1253-1254
            Page 1255-1256
            Page 1257-1258
            Page 1259-1260
            Page 1261-1262
            Page 1263-1264
        House of Commons - Friday, March 16
            Page 1265-1266
            Page 1267-1268
            Page 1269-1270
            Page 1271-1272
            Page 1273-1274
            Page 1275-1276
            Page 1277-1278
            Page 1279-1280
            Page 1281-1282
            Page 1283-1284
            Page 1285-1286
            Page 1287-1288
            Page 1289-1290
            Page 1291-1292
            Page 1293-1294
            Page 1295-1296
            Page 1297-1298
            Page 1299-1300
            Page 1301-1302
            Page 1303-1304
            Page 1305-1306
            Page 1307-1308
            Page 1309-1310
            Page 1311-1312
            Page 1313-1314
        House of Commons - Monday, March 19
            Page 1315-1316
            Page 1317-1318
            Page 1319-1320
            Page 1321-1322
            Page 1323-1324
            Page 1325-1326
            Page 1327-1328
            Page 1329-1330
            Page 1331-1332
            Page 1333-1334
            Page 1335-1336
            Page 1337-1338
            Page 1339-1340
            Page 1341-1342
            Page 1343-1344
        House of Commons - Tuesday, March 20
            Page 1345-1346
            Page 1347-1348
            Page 1349-1350
            Page 1351-1352
            Page 1353-1354
            Page 1355-1356
            Page 1357-1358
            Page 1359-1360
            Page 1361-1362
            Page 1363-1364
            Page 1365-1366
            Page 1367-1368
            Page 1369-1370
            Page 1371-1372
            Page 1373-1374
            Page 1375-1376
            Page 1377-1378
        House of Commons - Wednesday, March 21
            Page 1379-1380
            Page 1381-1382
            Page 1383-1384
            Page 1385-1386
            Page 1387-1388
            Page 1389-1390
            Page 1391-1392
            Page 1393-1394
            Page 1395-1396
            Page 1397-1398
            Page 1399-1400
        House of Commons - Thursday, March 22
            Page 1401-1402
            Page 1403-1404
            Page 1405-1406
            Page 1407-1408
            Page 1409-1410
        House of Commons - Friday, March 23
            Page 1411-1412
            Page 1413-1414
            Page 1415-1416
            Page 1417-1418
            Page 1419-1420
            Page 1421-1422
            Page 1423-1424
            Page 1425-1426
            Page 1427-1428
            Page 1429-1430
            Page 1431-1432
            Page 1433-1434
            Page 1435-1436
            Page 1437-1438
            Page 1439-1440
            Page 1441-1442
            Page 1443-1444
        House of Commons - Monday, March 26
            Page 1445-1446
            Page 1447-1448
            Page 1449-1450
            Page 1451-1452
            Page 1453-1454
            Page 1455-1456
            Page 1457-1458
            Page 1459-1460
            Page 1461-1462
            Page 1463-1464
            Page 1465-1466
        House of Lords - Tuesday, March 27
            Page 1467-1468
            Page 1469-1470
            Page 1471-1472
        House of Commons - Tuesday, March 27
            Page 1473-1474
            Page 1475-1476
            Page 1477-1478
            Page 1479-1480
            Page 1481-1482
            Page 1483-1484
            Page 1485-1486
            Page 1487-1488
        House of Commons - Wednesday, March 28
            Page 1489-1490
            Page 1491-1492
            Page 1493-1494
        House of Commons - Thursday, March 29
            Page 1495-1496
            Page 1497-1498
            Page 1499-1500
            Page 1501-1502
            Page 1503-1504
            Page 1505-1506
            Page 1507-1508
            Page 1509-1510
        House of Commons - Friday, March 30
            Page 1511-1512
            Page 1513-1514
            Page 1515-1516
            Page 1517-1518
            Page 1519-1520
            Page 1521-1522
    April, 1821
        Page 1523-1524
        House of Commons - Monday, April 2
            Page 1523-1524
            Page 1525-1526
            Page 1527-1528
            Page 1529-1530
            Page 1531-1532
            Page 1533-1534
            Page 1535-1536
            Page 1537-1538
            Page 1539-1540
            Page 1541-1542
            Page 1543-1544
            Page 1545-1546
            Page 1547-1548
    Finance accounts for the year ended 5th January 1820
        Page 1549-1550
        Page 1551-1552
        Public income of the United Kingdom
            Page a-1-2
        Consolidated fund and permanent taxes
            Page a-3-4
            Page a-5-6
            Page a-7-8
            Page a-7-9
            Page a-11-12
        Arrears and balances of public accountants
            Page a-13-14
        Trade and navigation of the United Kingdom
            Page a-15-16
            Page a-17-18
            Page a-19-20
        Public expenditure
            Page a-21-22
        Public funded debt
            Page a-23-24
            Page a-25-26
            Page a-27-28
            Page a-29-30
            Page a-31-32
            Page a-33-34
        Unfunded debt
            Page a-35-36
        Disposition of grants
            Page a-35-36
            Page a-37-38
            Page a-39-40
            Page a-41-42
            Page a-43-44
            Page a-45-46
            Page a-47-48
    Index to debates in the House of Lords
        Page a-49-50
    Index to debates in the House of Commons
        Page a-49-50
    Index of names - House of Lords
        Page a-51-52
    Index of names - House of Commons
        Page a-51-52
        Page a-53-54
        Page a-55-56
Full Text

gQb


THE


PARLIAMENTARY


DEBATES:


FORMING A CONTINUATION OF THE WORK ENTITLED

" THE PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY OF ENGLAND

FROM THE EARLIEST PERIOD TO THE YEAR 1803."


PUBLISHED UNDER THE SUPERINTENDENCE OF
T. C. HANSARD.




COMMENCING WITH THE ACCESSION OF GEORGE IV.


VOL. IV.
COMPRISING THE PERIOD


FROM
THE TWENTY-THIRD DAY OF JANUARY,
TO
THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL. 182i1."




LON DON


A-


PRINTED BY T. C. HANSARD, PETERBOflfilPCOURT;,-I(g9 TTR
FOR BALDWIN, CRADOCK, AND JOY; J. BOOKEi'; LONGMAN, HURSTi REES, ORME,
AND BROWN; J. M. RICHARDSON; BLACK, KINGSBURY, PARBURY, AND ALLEN;
J. HATCHARD & SON; J. RIDGWAY & SONS; E. JEFFERY & SON; RODWELL &
MARTIN; R. H. EVANS; BUDD AND CALKIN; J. BOOTH ; AND T. C. HANSARD.


1821.


P~~ihOl/~n~












TABLE OF CONTENTS

TO

VOLUME IV.

NEW SERIES.





I. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF III. KING'S SPEECHES.
LORDS.
II. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF IV. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.
COMMONS. V. LISTS.




I. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.

1821. Page
Jan. 23. Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session... 3
25. Petitions relative to the Queen ..................................... 104
Naples-Declaration of the Allied Sovereigns at Troppau ...... 116
Feb. 5. Petition from Birmingham relative to the Decline of Trade...... 350
19. Naples-Conduct of the Allied Powers ............................. 742.
20. Queen's Annuity Bill .................................................. 797
21. Foreign Trade-Commerce of the Country ...................... 824
26. Law of Treason-Ireland ................................................ 938
Mar. 2. Naples-Conduct of the Allied Powers ............................. 1039
27. Naples .......... .......... ................ ............................ 1468


II. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Jan. 23. Motion for Papers relative to the Omission of the Queen's Name
in the Liturgy.......................................... ........... 26
Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session... 37
24. Conduct of M ministers .................................................. 65
Petitions relative to the Queen ...................................... 65
Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session... 95
The Queen-Liturgy ..................................... ....... 103
26. The King's Answer to the Address ............................. 119


___ __ I_







TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Page
Jan. 26. Petitions relative to the Queen ................................... 119
Committee of Supply ........... .................................. 138
Lord Archibald Hamilton's Motion respecting the Omission of
the Queen's Name in the Liturgy ................................ 139
31. Petitions relative to the Queen ...................................... 221
Petitions for a Reform of Parliament ................................ 222
Petitions relative to the Queen .................................... 228
Provision for the Queen-Communication from her Majesty ... 236
Feb. 1. Petitions relative to the Queen ...................................... 280
Bank Notes .............................................................. 286
Breach of Privilege-Complaint of an Address published in the
London Gazette ...................................................... 288
Revenue Accounts ................................................. 98
Provision for the Queen ......................................... 308
2. Petitions relative to the Queen......................................... 324
Breach of Privilege-Complaint of an Address published in the
London Gazette......................................................... 38
Bank of Ireland ........................................................ 339
Navy Estimates.......................................................... 342
5. Agricultural Distress.. ....................................... ...... 360
The Marquis of Tavistock's Motion relative to the Conduct of
Ministers with regard to the Proceedings against the Queen.. 361
6. Water-Works-Supply of Water to the Metropolis ............. 422
Motion for a Committee to inquire into the State of Foreign
Trade.......................................................... ....... 425
Slave Trade ........................................................... 4V8
The Marquis of Tavistock's Motion relative to the Conduct of
Ministers with regard to the Proceedings against the Queen.. 429
8. Petitions relative to the Queen ...................................... 511
Trade of Birmingham-Petition of the Merchants .............. 523
9. Timber Duties-Petition from New Brunswick in favour of ... 542
Censorship of the Press in India .................................... 553
Petitions relative to the Queen............................... .. 553
Petition from Chester, complaining of the Conduct of the Sheriff 554
Detention of a British Subject at Ghent Petition of W.
M 'D ougall.............................................................. 562
Motion for defering the Committee of Ways and Means ......... 563
Motion respecting the President of the Board of Control ...... 574
12. Machinery-Petition of Rope-makers ................................ 579
Petitions relative to the Queen .................................... 580
Grampound Disfranchisement Bill .................................... 583
Queen's Annuity Bill ............................... ........... 606
13. Petitions relative to the Queen ...................................... 608
Mr. Smith's Motion for restoring the Queen's Name to the
Liturgy ............................................................. 620
14. Laws respecting the Admission of Attorneys and Solicitors ... 666
Conduct of Sheriffs in refusing to call County Meetings ........ 667
Scotch Juries Bill ........................................................ 670
Smuggling Prevention Service ......................................... 681
*Malt Duties Bill ........................................ ..... 683






TA LE OF CONTENTS.
Page
Feb. 15. Case of the Bowlitches ........................................... 687
The Queen-Church of Scotland ................................... 689
Court of Admiralty in Scotland-Compensation to Clerks ...... 715
16. Scotch Juries Bill........................................................ 717
Irish Union Duties ..................................................... 720
British Museum........................................................... 723
Mr. Hume's Motion for submitting the Ordnance Estimates in
D etail.................................................................. 726
19. Hull Poor Rates Bill ................................................ 795
20. Prevention of Bank Forgeries ......................................... 803
Nottingham Petition for the Impeachment of Ministers ......... 804
Mr. Creevey's Motion respecting the Conduct of the Sheriff of
Chester ................................................................ 811
Bill for Abolishing the African Company .......................... 823
21. The Queen-Milan Commission ....................................... 836
Naples-Conduct of the Allied Powers............................ 837
22. Agricultural Distress .................................... ......... 895
Dublin Petition complaining of the Conduct of the High Sheriff 901
Addresses for Money-Standing Order ............................. 917
Conduct of Mr. Justice Best-Petition of Thomas Davison...... 918
Ionian Islands............................................................. 933
26. Scotch Court of Admiralty-Compensation to Clerks.......... 939
Corn Averages .......................................................... 940
Capital Crimes Defence Bill ......................................... 94
27. Metropolis Turnpike Trusts............................ ............ 946
West India Dock Company ................................... ... 947
28. Execution of Murat ..................................................... 948
Petitions respecting the Roman Catholic Claims ................ 949
Mr. Plunkett's Motion for a Committee on the Roman Catholic
Claims..................................................................... 961
Mar. 1. State of Education in Ireland ........................................ 103S
2. Resolutions respecting the Roman Catholic Claims ............... 1066
Grampound Disfranchisement Bill ................................... 1068
5. Grampound Disfranchisement Bill ................................... 1077
Husbandry Horses ...................................................... 1078
Transfer of Stock ........................................................ 1082
Mr. Ellis-Duties of a Master in Chancery in Ireland ........... 108k
6. Mr. Maberly's Motion respecting the State of the Revenue, and
the Repeal of the House and Window Duties .................. 1100
7. Petition of N. Broadhurst, complaining of Ill-treatment in Lan-
caster Castle ........................................ .............. 1118
Petition of Thomas Davison-Right of Judges to fine a De-
fendant during the course of his Defence ...................... J132
Mr. Gooch's Motion for a Committee on Agricultural Distress.. 1139
Criminal Law in Ireland ............................................... 1161
9, Breach of Privilege-Complaint against The Morning Chroni-
cle."...... ....................................... 1162
Petition of Charles Hill, complaining of Ill-treatment in Ilches-
ter Gaol .................................................................. 1170
Army Estimates...................................................... 1172







TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Page
Mar. 9. Army Estimates.................................................. .. '176
12. Petitions respecting the Roman Catholic Claims ................ 1184
Army Estimates........................................................... 1186
14. Vagrant Laws ........................................................... 1216
Mr. Robert Smith's Motion respecting the Austrian Loan ...... 1219
15. Breach of Privilege-Complaint against The Morning Post".. 1246
Carlisle Election-Interference of the Military .................... 1247
Bread ......................................................... ...... 1257
Army Estimates............................................................ 1258
County Courts Rate..................................................... 1264
16. Petitions respecting the Roman Catholic Claims .................. 1265
Roman Catholic Disability Removal Bill............................. 1269
19. Bank Cash Payments Bill................................................ 1315
Grampound Disfranchisement Bill ................................... 1338
20. Petition of Captain Romeo, complaining of Ill-treatment......... 1345
Naples....................................................................... 1350
21. American Loyalists ..................................................... 1380
Repeal of the Malt Tax ................................................ 1384
22. Mr. Hume's Motion respecting Receivers-General of Land and
Assessed Taxes-and Distributors of Stamps .................. 1401
23. Roman Catholic Disability Removal Bill .......................... 1412
25. Roman Catholic Disability Removal Bill ......................... 1445
27. Roman Catholic Disability Removal Bill ........................ 1473
28. Roman Catholic Disability Removal Bill .......................... 1489
29. Napoleon Buonapart6 .................................................... 1495
Roman Catholic Disability Removal Bill .......................... 1497
Timber Duties ........................................................... 1500
80. Capital Crimes Defence Bill ................ ................... ...... 1512
Army Estimates..................................... .................... 1514
April 2. Roman Catholic Disability Removal Bill ........................ 1523



III. KING'S SPEECHES.


Jan. 23. KING'S SPEECH on Opening the Session............................. 1



IV. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.


31. Copy of the Communication from the Queen, relative to the
intended Provision for her Majesty ....................... 236
of the Circular Dispatch to his Majesty's Missions at
Foreign Courts, relative to the Discussions at Troppau
and Laybach ................................................. 283
FINANCE ACCOUNTS, for the Year 1820 ..................... App. i








TABLE OF CONTENTS.


V. LISTS.,
Page
Jan. 23. LIST of'the Minority in the House of Commons, on Mr. We.
thdrdll's Motion for Papers relating to the Omission of
the Qfueen's Name in the Liturgy .......................... 36
26. of the 1Mihority in the House of Commons, on Lord Archi-
bald Hanilton's Motion respecting the Omission of the
Queen's Name in the Liturgy ............................... 219
'Feb. 6. of the Majority, andalso of the Minority, in the House of
Commons, on theMarquis of Tavistock's Motion on the
Conduct of Ministers with regard to the Proceedings
against the Queen .............................................. 507
9. of the Minority in the House of Commons, on the Reso-
lution, in the Committee of Ways and Means, for the
Renewal of the Sugar Duties ............................... 574
13. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Mr. John
Smith's Motion for restoring her Majesty's Name to the
Liturgy............ ................................................ 665
14. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Malt
D uties Bill......................................................... 687
15. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Lord
Archibald Hamilton's Motion relative to the Order in
Council, directed to the General Assembly of the Church
of Scotland, respecting the Omission of the Queen's
Name in the Liturgy........................................... 715
of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on a Motion
for Compensation to Clerks in the Court of Admiralty in
Scotland........ ................................................. 717
16. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Mr.
Hume's Motion for submitting the Ordnance Estimates
in Detail ....................................... ............... 742
20. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on a Motion
for printing the Nottingham Petition for the Impeach-
ment of M ministers ............................................. 8 10
of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Mr.
Creevey's Motion respecting the Conduct of the Sheriff
of Chester .......................................... 822
21. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Sir James
Mackintosh's Motion respecting the Conduct of the
Allied Powers towards Naples............................... 894
22. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Lord John
Russell's Motion respecting the Conduct of the High
Sheriff of Dublin ............................................. 917
28. of the Majority, and also of the Minority, on Mr.
Plunkett's Motion for a Committee on the Roman
Catholic Claims............................................ 1030
Mar. 2. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Gram-
pound Disfranchisement Bill ................................ 1076
5. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Repeal
of the Husbandry Horses Duty ............................ 1081
6. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Mr. Ma-
berley's Resolutions respecting the State of the Revenue
and the Repeal of the House and Window Duties ...... 1127
VOL. IV. b








TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Page
Mar. 7. LIsT of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on a Motion
for receiving the Petition of N. Broadhurst, complaining
of Ill-treatment in Lancaster Castle ....................... 1131
9. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Mr. Stuart
Wortley's Complaint against The Morning Chronicle,"
for a Breach of Privilege ...................................... 1169
of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Mr.
Creevey's Amendment to a Motion for going into a
Committee of Supply ..................................... 1176
12. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Army
Estimates ........................................................ 1215
14. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Mr. Mac-
donald's Motion for reducing the Army.................... 1245
15. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Mr.
Hume's Motion for reducing the Army................. 1263
21. of the Majority, in the House of Commons, on Mr.
Western's Motion for the Repeal of the Malt Tax ...... 1400













Par lamentaryD debates


During the Second Session of the Seventh Parliament of the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, ap-
pointed to meet at Westminster, the Twenty-third Day
of January 1821, in the First Year of the Reign of His
Majesty King GEORGE the Fourth.


HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, January 23, 1821.
THE KING'S SPEECH ON OPENING THE
SESSION.] This day his Majesty came
in state to the House of Peers, and being
seated on the throne, the gentleman usher
of the Black Rod was directed to sum-
mon the Commons to attend. The Com-
mons,headed by their Speaker, having pre-
sented themselves at the bar, his Majesty
delivered the following most gracious
Speech to both Houses:
My Lords and Gentlemen:
"I have the satisfaction of acquainting
you, that I continue to receive from fo-
reign powers the strongest assurances of
their friendly disposition towards this
country.
It will be a matter of deep regret to
me, if the occurrences which have lately
taken place in Italy should eventually lead
to any interruption of tranquillity in that
quarter; but it will, in such case, be my
great object to secure to my people the
continuance of peace.
Gentlemen of the House ofCommons;
The measures by which, in the last
session of Parliament, you made provision
for the expenses of my civil government,
and for the honour and dignity of the
Crown, demand my warmest acknowledg-
ments.
I have directed that the Estimates for
the current year shall be laid before you;
VOL. IV. {J=


and it is a satisfaction to me to have been
enabled to make some reduction in our
military establishments.
'" You will observe from the Accounts
of the Public revenue, that, notwithstand-
ing the receipts in Ireland have proved
materially deficient, in consequence of
the unfortunate circumstances which have
affected the commercial credit of that part
of the united kingdom, and although ourfo-
reign trade, during the early part of this
time, was in a state of depression, the total
revenue has, nevertheless, exceeded that
of the preceding year.
A considerable part of this increase
must be ascribed to the new taxes; but in
some of those branches which are the
surest indications of internal wealth, the
augmentation has fully realized any ex-
pectation which could have been reason-
ably formed of it.
The separate provision which was
made for the queen, as princess of Wales,
in the year 1814, terminated with the de-
mise of his late majesty.
I have, in the mean time, directed ad-
vances, as authorized by law; and it will,
under present circumstances, be for you
to consider what new arrangements should
be made on this subject.
My Lords and Gentlemen;
"I have great pleasure in being able to
acquaint you, that a considerable improve-
B













Par lamentaryD debates


During the Second Session of the Seventh Parliament of the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, ap-
pointed to meet at Westminster, the Twenty-third Day
of January 1821, in the First Year of the Reign of His
Majesty King GEORGE the Fourth.


HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, January 23, 1821.
THE KING'S SPEECH ON OPENING THE
SESSION.] This day his Majesty came
in state to the House of Peers, and being
seated on the throne, the gentleman usher
of the Black Rod was directed to sum-
mon the Commons to attend. The Com-
mons,headed by their Speaker, having pre-
sented themselves at the bar, his Majesty
delivered the following most gracious
Speech to both Houses:
My Lords and Gentlemen:
"I have the satisfaction of acquainting
you, that I continue to receive from fo-
reign powers the strongest assurances of
their friendly disposition towards this
country.
It will be a matter of deep regret to
me, if the occurrences which have lately
taken place in Italy should eventually lead
to any interruption of tranquillity in that
quarter; but it will, in such case, be my
great object to secure to my people the
continuance of peace.
Gentlemen of the House ofCommons;
The measures by which, in the last
session of Parliament, you made provision
for the expenses of my civil government,
and for the honour and dignity of the
Crown, demand my warmest acknowledg-
ments.
I have directed that the Estimates for
the current year shall be laid before you;
VOL. IV. {J=


and it is a satisfaction to me to have been
enabled to make some reduction in our
military establishments.
'" You will observe from the Accounts
of the Public revenue, that, notwithstand-
ing the receipts in Ireland have proved
materially deficient, in consequence of
the unfortunate circumstances which have
affected the commercial credit of that part
of the united kingdom, and although ourfo-
reign trade, during the early part of this
time, was in a state of depression, the total
revenue has, nevertheless, exceeded that
of the preceding year.
A considerable part of this increase
must be ascribed to the new taxes; but in
some of those branches which are the
surest indications of internal wealth, the
augmentation has fully realized any ex-
pectation which could have been reason-
ably formed of it.
The separate provision which was
made for the queen, as princess of Wales,
in the year 1814, terminated with the de-
mise of his late majesty.
I have, in the mean time, directed ad-
vances, as authorized by law; and it will,
under present circumstances, be for you
to consider what new arrangements should
be made on this subject.
My Lords and Gentlemen;
"I have great pleasure in being able to
acquaint you, that a considerable improve-
B







3] HOUSE OF LORDS,
ment has taken place within the last half
year in several of the most important
branches of our Commerce and Manufac-
tures; and that, in many of the manufac-
tdring districts, the distresses which pre-
vailed at the commencement of the last
session of Parliament have greatly abated.
It will be my most anxious desire to
concur in every measure which may be
considered as calculated to advance our
internal prosperity.
I well know that, notwithstanding the
agitations produced by temporary circum-
stances, and amidst the distress which still
presses upon a large portion of my sub-
jects, the firmest reliance may be placed
on that affectionate and loyal attachment
to my person and government, of which I
have recently received so many testimo-
nies from all parts of my kingdom; and
which, whilst it is most grateful to the
strongest feelings of my heart, I shall
ever consider as the best and surest safe-
guard of my throne.
In the discharge of the important d.-
ties imposed upon you, you will, I am
confident, be sensible of the indispensable
necessity of promoting and maintaining,
to the utmost of your power, a due obedi-
ence to the laws, and of instilling into all
classes of my subjects a respect for lawful
authority, and for those established institu.
tions under which the country has been
enabled to overcome so many difficulties,
and. to which, under Providence, may be
ascribed our happiness and renown as a
nation."

His Majesty then retired and the Com-
mons returned to their own House.

ADDRESS ON THE KING'S SPEECH AT
THE OPENING OF THE SESSION.] His
Majesty's most gracious Speech having
been again read by the lord chancellor,
and also by the reading clerk at the table,
The Earl of Belmore rose for the pur-
pose of moving an Address of Thanks to
is majesty. He commenced by express-
ing his earnest hope that their lordships
would concur unanimously in the motion
which he was about to propose. He felt
most inadequate to the task which he had
undertaken, but it gave him confidence


Adress oAlhe King's S/ech [4
when he reflected that the duty he had to,
fulfil required neither argument nor per-
suasion, because it was impossible fortheir
lordships to entertain any other desire
than to approach his majesty with senti-
ments of unshaken loyalty, and a firm de-
termination to maintain the constitution,
and support the dignity of the throne.
This, it appeared to him, was not only the
paramount duty of their lordships, but of
every man in the kingdom who enjoyed
his liberty and felt the blessings of the
constitution. Entertaining as he did the
deepest feelings upon this subject, he could
not but deplore the circumstance that, in
the midst of the distress and difficulty
which had oppressed the nation, so licen-
tious and lawless a spirit should have ex-
isted among portions of his majesty's sub-
jects-a spirit which turned destruction
upon itself, and was calculated to over-
throw every establishment in the country.
If such a spirit was for a time suffered to
threaten the public welfare, how gratifying
must it be for their lordships to perceive
the strong feeling of loyalty, and attach-
ment to the constitution, which now per-
vaded every class of the community!-
The noble lord then adverted to the strong
assurances of the friendly disposition of
foreign powers towards this country. At
such a time as this such a declaration
could not but afford to their lordships the
greatest satisfaction, and he entertained
the strongest hope of the continuance of
those friendly dispositions. At the pre-
sent moment it was impossible to conceive
what would be the result of the delibera-
tions now pending on the continent. It
was most ardently to be wished, that the
tranquillity of Europe should not again be
disturbed; but it must afford satisfaction
to all classes to know, that his majesty was
most anxious that the blessings of peace
should be preserved to this country.-He
next alluded to the reduction which his
majesty had mentioned in the military es-
tablishments of the country, and observed
that this was the best pledge his majesty
could offer of his pacific intentions. He
then touched upon the improvement which
had taken place in the several branches of
the commerce and manufactures of the
country .It was, indeed, on the flourishing
state of these two branches that the national
prosperity mainly depended; but while be
congratulated their lordships, and he could
assure their lordships that he did so with
a proud satisfaction, it was to him a mat-
ter of deep regret that this prosperity did








not affect equally all parts of the kingdom. peace would be continued to us, as it was
The distresses which had been felt in Ire- the only means likely to relieve our dis-
land were of a nature peculiarly severe, in tresses, revive our resources, and restore
consequence of the unfortunate circum- us to prosperity. He would not detain
stances which had affected the commercial their lordships on the subject of our inter-
credit of that part of the united kingdom; nal situation, though it was impossible not
but he sincerely hoped that that commer- to perceive that the distress of Ireland
cial prosperity which had been felt so ma- must have affected this country. There
terially here, would extend itself ulti- was another point touched on by the noble
mately to all parts of the kingdom. But earl, respecting the reduction of our mili-
while he adverted to these distresses, and tary establishment as noticed in his ma-
dwelt upon the sufferings which Ireland jesty's speech, which must afford great sa-
had endured, he could not help noticing, tisfaction to every noble lord, more espe-
in terms of high admiration, the persever- cially when coupled with his majesty's
ance and fortitude displayed by that part known desire to alleviate the burdens of
of the united kingdom. The people of his subjects in every practicable way,
Ireland had struggled through every diffi- With regard to those testimonies of loyalty
culty; and so nobly had they borne their and attachment which had flowed in from
afflictions, that misfortunes seemed to add every part of the country, they required
new vigour to their exertions: and he but avery few words; yet, when it wascon-
could declare without hesitation, because sidered that the public mind had latterly
he had himself paid peculiar attention to been in so agitated a frame, it could not
the subject, that at no time did the people be otherwise than gratifying to their lord-
of that country entertain a more zealous ships to hear such expressions of attach-
attachment to their king and constitution ment to our glorious constitution. This
than at the present moment. It was by feeling, it was worthy of remark, was cou-
entertaining such noble sentiments that pled also with declarations in favour of
the country would be enabled to surmount religion, which showed that the designs
the many difficulties by which it was so of incendiaries and atheists had failed to
grievously oppressed; it was by such feel- eradicate from the minds of the majority
ings, and such alone, that this country the seeds of morality. This was a state
would be restored to prosperity.--The of things in which their lordships had rea-
noble lord concluded by observing, that, son to rejoice, for, while such sentiments
whatever difference of opinion might exist pervaded the great body of the people,
among their lordships upon various ques- the country had nothing to fear either
tions which might come under the consi- from foreign or domestic enemies.
deration of parliament-however noble Earl Grey, in rising after the noble
peers might disagree in certain points, on mover and seconder of the address, inti-
subjects relative to the internal and exter- mated that it was not his intention to offer
nal welfare of the nation, he hoped there any opposition, in consequence of what
would be but one opinion upon the motion had fallen from these noble lords, or of
which he would now submit.-The noble what was contained in the address itself:
lord then moved an address of thanks to his He must say, however, that he could not
majesty, which embraced all the topics of concur in the address, because, though he
the Royal Speech. had no objection to make to what it con-
Lord Prudhoe roseto second theaddress, tained, both it and the Speech from the
but spoke in so low a tone of voice that throne, fell far short of what he thought
little of what he said could be collected ought to have been found in them. In
below the bar.-He remarked, that as the the Speech there was a total absence of
noble earl who had just set down had done those explanations on the state of the
full justice, in submitting the Address, to country which were to be expected from
the statements in his majesty's Speech, the throne at a period like the present.
he should not trouble their lordships with The noble earl who moved the address
many words. On the question of our fo- anticipated their lordships' concurrence in
reign connexions, he fully agreed in the the congratulations offered to the throne
sentiments expressed by the noble earl; on account of those expressions of loyalty
for, notwithstanding the pacific assurances and attachment recently received by his
of foreign powers, it became this country majesty, from all quarters of the country.
to observe their proceedings with a vigi. In this anticipation the noble lord was per-
lat eye. Hehoped atthe same time, that fectly justified; because, whatever differ-


&I thre Openingr off~r Session..


JAN. 23, 1821.;







7] HOUSE OF LORDS,


ence of opinion there might exist on the
conduct of the government, there could
be none on the subject to which the noble
lord's observation applied. That there
were persons who wished to subvert that
spirit of loyalty which prevailed through
the country, and the existence of which
noble lords now acknowledged, he be-
lieved to be true; but of this he was confi-
dent, that there was not in that or the
other House of Parliament any persons
who thought it their duty to oppose the
measures of government, who did not at
the same time cherish the most loyal,
dutiful, and affectionate attachment to the
throne. Neither from the part of the
royal Speech to which the noble lords had
directed their observations on this subject,
nor from the general language in which
the noble mover and seconder had ex-
pressed themselves, was it clear what was
the nature of the addresses to which they
alluded. Undoubtedly there never had
been a stronger expression of public opi-
nion than that lately made by the people
of this country. That their addresses had
breathed loyalty and devotion to the king
was most true; but it was also true, that
the declaration of those sentiments had
been accompanied with expressions
equally strong of universal disapproba-
tion and of dissatisfaction with regard to
the measures of the government. If,
therefore, it was intended on this, as he
knew it had been on other occasions, to
infer from addresses containing expressions
of loyalty and attachment to his majesty,
an approbation of the conduct of ministers,
such an inference was directly contrary
to fact, and totally inconsistent with the
opinions of the people of England. He
could take upon himself to say, that the
universal opinion of the country, instead
of being favourable to the government,
was, that the system should be changed.
That no indication of renouncing that
system was held out in the Speech, and
that no recommendation to that effect ap-
peared in the Address, were circumstances
which he had to regret; but he did hope
that both their lordships and the members
of the other House would see the necessity
of compelling his majesty's ministers to
recede from the system they had hitherto
pursued in the conduct of public affairs,
and which now, after six years of peace,
had produced only increasing difficulties
and distress. Hopes, it was true, of more
favourable circumstances were held out
ia the Speech. It was stated in the


Speech from the throne, that the situation
of the country was improving. With re-
spect to the revenue, it was stated, that,
as compared with that of the preceding
year, the amount had increased, It was
also stated, that considerable improve-
ment had taken place in several of the
most important branches of our trade and
manufactures. He most sincerely hoped
that these statements might not be found
fallacious. He believed some branches
of our trade had recovered a little; but
if he were to speak from his own oppor-
tunities of observation, he must say, that
there appeared to him no prospect of ge-
neral amelioration. In that part of the
country with which he was most parti-
cularly connected, he had not seen any of
those symptoms of improvement which
were alluded to. There was one great
branch of national prosperity to the state,
to which no reference was made in the
Speech-he meant agriculture; and in
that, he would take upon himself to as-
sert, there had been no improvement.
Perhaps the depression was less in some
other parts of the country than in that
with which he was acquainted; but it was
such as to be generally viewed with ap-
prehension and alarm. In this state of
things he confessed he could not under-
stand how it was possible that there could
be a considerable improvement in several
important branches of commerce and ma-
nufactures, and an increase of the public
revenue; and yet that agriculture, on
whichall thesesources ofwealthdepended,
should be in a state of the greatest decay.
It would be necessary for their lordships
and the other House of Parliament to
consider seriously, in the course of the
present session, what was to be done on
this important subject. Let it not, how-
ever, be believed that he meant to recom-
mend any additional corn laws, for he
thought the principle of those laws erro-
neous; but what he meant to say was,
that their lordships must devote to the in-
ternal situation of the country the greatest
attention and care, if they wished to avoid
an increase of the evils they already ex-
perienced. He was sorry, however, that
he could not say, that he had heard with
equal satisfaction what was stated in the
Speech upon the events which had occur-
red in Italy. Nothing was there explained
-nothing distinctly stated as to the line
which the government had taken with re.
spect to these important events. Their
lordships were left completely in the dark


Address on the King's Speech







9] at the Opening af the Session.
on a question which it was most important
for them to know at the present moment,
namely, whether the conduct of ministers
with regard to Naples had been such as
became the government of a nation which
had been raised to greatness by the enjoy-
ment of a free constitution. He must re-
gret that nothing had been stated to sa-
tisfy him that the course which justice and
true policy dictated had been adopted.
The present, he was sensible, was not the
moment for discussing this question, but
the time would soon come when he hoped
their lordships would be put in possession
of such facts as would enable them to form
an opinion. He could not, however, help
expressing his sorrow at finding that mi-
nisters had not on this occasion taken steps
which would have been worthy of the cha-
racter of the country-that they had not
adopted measures which would have put
an end to any prospect of hostilities. The
apprehension he entertained on this sub-
ject was the stronger, from the recollec-
tion of a question relating to Naples,
which had last session been put to the
noble earl at the head of his majesty's go-
vernment. Their lordships would recol-
lect that the answer given to that question
was by no means satisfactory, because,
from what the noble earl then said, it did
appear that this country had no accredited
minister at the court of Naples. This
state of things he believed still continued ;
so that while the closest bonds of union
subsisted between this government and
those powers styled the Holy Alliance,
with that power which was the object of
their threats there was no British minister
capable of carrying on the accustomed in-
tercourse between friendly states. From
the language of the Speech it might be
supposed that this country maintained a
state of strict neutrality with respect to
Naples. He did not think, however, that
strict neutrality was a state which became
the character of this country when such a
question was at issue-when a sovereign
was called before an assembly of despots
to answer for his conduct in correcting
abuses in the internal government of his
country-when he saw the arrogance
with which those powers, called the Holy
Alliance, had summoned the king of
Naples to their bar, to account for the
free constitution established in his coun-
try, he, as a friend of liberty, could not
help feeling a strong degree of suspicion
on this subject, and expressing that sus-
picion, though he knew their lordships


JAs. 23, 1821. [10
could not at present be prepared to dis-
cuss it. In the mean time he must de-
clare his opinion, that ministers had not
acted as became the government of this
country, if they stood by as indifferent
spectators of the dispute regarding Na-
ples; and that they had acted still worse
if they had given any encouragement to
what was called the monarchical prin-
ciple," by which it was pretended that
henceforth there should be no improve-
ment in government except what came
from thrones; which was plainly saying,
that the shackles of despotism should be
for ever rivetted on mankind. It would
have been much more creditable for mi-
nisters to have prevented so atrocious an
attack on the rights of nations, than to
have been cool spectators or encouragers
of it. What excuse could be set up for
such conduct ? There had been as little
violence in the Neapolitan revolution as
ever occurred in any event of the kind.
There had been some lamentable occur-
rences in Sicily; but there was nothing in
the state of Naples threatening to other
countries. In short, no reason could be
assigned for the attack on Naples, except
this-that the members of the Holy Al-
liance wished to prevent any improve-
ment in other countries, lest their own
subjects should look more narrowly at the
abuses under which they suffered, and be
thereby induced to require some amelio-
ration of their condition. Engaged by
close political ties with the powers now
threatening the independence of the Two

Sicilies-with the functions of the British
minister at Naples suspended-with an
Austrian army marching on the frontiers
of that kingdom-and with a British
squadron riding in the Bay of Naples,
and appearing to be acting in concert
with the enemies of the new constitution
-whatever the intentions of ministers
might really be, their conduct, under those
circumstances, did certainly wear the as-
pect of giving encouragement to that des-
potic alliance which had assumed to itself
a right of censorship over every other go-
vernment. He sincerely hoped that peace
would not be interrupted; but he was
much more anxious that the honour of the
country should on this great question be
preserved unstained. Would it be said
that ministers could not prevent the at-
tack on Naples? Then indeed there
would be little reason to boast of the in-
fluence they possessed in Europe-an in-
fluence which it had been said their splen-







11] HOUSE OF LORDS, Address on the King's Speech [12
did successes had secured-if the corn- specting an establishment for her ma-
bined'powers could not be withheld or re- jesty: on that subject he hoped the ar-
strained from their wicked attack by any rangements would be such as justice re-
remonstrance of this government.-There quired, and as would put an end to the
were many other topics which pressed for question in dispute. If such were the in-
consideration, but which would be more tentions of his majesty's ministers, he
conveniently brought under review on any should feel great satisfaction. He only
other occasion than on a motion for ad- desired that the measures to be adopted
dressing the throne on the first day of the should be consistent with justice, and cal-
session. He was glad to find that there culated to compose the agitations of the
was to be a reduction of the army; but as country ; with sincere joy should he see
the amount was not stated, he could not his majesty's ministers changing their
judge what degree of benefit was likely to system of policy, and resorting to mea-
be derived from it. He hoped it would sures by which the tranquillity and pros-
be considerable; for it was only by re- perity of the country would be likely to
during the burthens, and conciliating the be secured.
good will of the people, that the difficul- The Earl of Liverpool observed, that as
ties of the country could be overcome, the noble earl had not opposed any thing
He was sure that by the sincere adoption in the address, but only objected to it for
of conciliatory measures, by placing con- what it did not contain; as, subject to this
fidence in the people, by a proper atten- objection, there was no statement in the
tion to their wants and their wishes, and Speech from the throne which the noble
by a departure from that system of sus- earl did not approve, it was not necessary
picion and restraint with which they had for him to detain their lordships by enter-
of late been treated, much might be done ing into any detailed reply. As, however,
by any persons who held the government he might be supposed to acquiesce in the
of this country. He was perfectly con- statements of the noble earl if he allowed
vinced, if it could be made known that his speech to pass entirely unnoticed, he
conciliation was to be the policy of go- thought it necessary to say a few words
vernment, and that considerable reduc- on some of the topics to which the noble
tions in the expenditure would take place, earl had called the attention of the House.
that the existing dissatisfaction would be In noticing the sentiments of loyalty al-
greatly diminished. He was also certain luded to in the Speech from the throne,
that, if it was wished to preserve a free the noble earl had been pleased to inti-
constitution to the country, it was abso. mate that the universal opinion of the
lutely necessary that a change should take country was, that the present system of
place, and that there should be a decided government ought to be changed. He
departure from the military system which had not, however, explained what he
ministers had adopted.-He found from meant by the system of government, or
the Speech that his majesty had been ad- what was the nature of the change sup-
vised to express his acknowledgment of posed to be required. He was ready to
the provision made last session for the allow that at public meetings a distinction
civil list. When this circumstance was was to be made between expressions of
only now noticed, their lordships surely loyalty to the throne and approbation of
could not fail to reflect on the singularity the measures of government. That the
of its having been so long deferred. He, former did not include the latter he fully
therefore, could not help alluding to the admitted, and he hoped the time never
extraordinary prorogation of parliament would come in this country, in which the
which took place at the end of the last ses- vices and errors of the government were
sion. Their lordships could not forget not separated from the throne, and the
how they were then dismissed, without distinction the noble earl contended for
any information on the state of the coun- maintained. The noble earl would, how,
try, or any notice being taken of the large ever, find himself much mistaken in the
grant which they had made to the civil opinion he had advanced. Instead of
list, and which was dictated more from wishing for a change, it was certain that
their personal regard for the sovereign all the thinking part of the country ap.
than from a consideration of the situation proved of the system on which the govern-
of the country.-There was only one topic ment was conducted, and would consider
more in the Speech to which he should any departure from it as leading toinevit-
allude, and that was what was stated re- able ruin. He was not prepared *to say








that there might not have been errors sent moment. But to what was this fall
committed in carrying on the government; in the latter case to be ascribed ? To an
but that the system on which it had been increase in our home production. This,
conducted was erroneous or wrong, he if examined, would, he was convinced, be
never would be brought to admit.-In the found a full explanation of the fall of
course of his speech, the noble earl had prices. There had been no importation
next proceeded to make some observations for the last two years, so that no part of
on the internal state of the country; and our agricultural distress could be ascribed
here he had to complain of some of the to a competition of foreign grain in our
remarks of the noble earl; he had to com- market. There was no ground for sup-
plain that he had both mistaken the pur- posing, as some did, that our warehousing
port of the Speech from the throne, and system had any share in the effect which
of the speech of his noble friend who was complained of; and if not, then the
moved the address. Neither in the one inference was irresistible, that we now
nor the other was any thing overstated, grew enough for our home consumption-
or any thing omitted that it was proper that formerly we did not, and that the
to introduce. No intention was mani- low price of grain was to be attributed to
fested to blink the question; no attempt an abundance, or an excess of produc-
was made at subterfuge or concealment. tion. This was his settled opinion-an
It was truly stated in the Speech from the opinion which he would be ready to dis-
throne that a considerable improvement cuss and support on any proper opportu-
had taken place within the last half year nity. What he would particularly caution
in several of the most important branches the House against was, that they should
of our commerce and manufactures, and not enter on the inquiry with the idea of
that in many oftthe manufacturing districts new legislative enactments. No good
the distresses which lately prevailed had could be attained by such incessant le-
greatly abated." His noble friend who gislative interference. Things would find
moved the address adverted to this state- their own level if allowed to remain free.
ment, and expressed his satisfaction at Having said thus much on the subject of
the gratifying intelligence; but he did not the internal state of the country, he would
mean to carry his congratulations further now proceed to follow the noble earl in
than they were warranted by facts. But, the observations which he had made on
said the noble earl, the subject of our the posture of our foreign relations.
agriculture was kept out of view, and our These observations were of such a nature
agriculture is in a state of depression. that he could not allow them to pass with-
True it was that our agriculture was not out some comment, though the present
alluded to by name; but the depression was not the proper time for an extended
under which it was labouring, if not ex- discussion or a full explanation. Hemust
pressly mentioned, was at least sufficiently first set their lordships and the public
hinted at in the paragraph of the Speech right on the real state of the question.
which spoke of the distress which still The Speech from the throne, and that of
presses on a large portion of the king's his noble friend who had moved the ad-
subjects." He would remind the noble dress, might have been considered as suf-
earl of former discussions, and caution the ficiently explicit. In the Speech it was
House and the public against forming any stated that his majesty received from
rash opinions on the cause of the evil, or foreign powers the strongest assurances
proposing any plausible remedies, that of their friendly disposition towards this
might increase instead of diminishing its country, and that it would be matter of
pressure. The matter was one of the deep regret to his majesty if the occur-
most serious nature: it had engaged the rences which have lately taken place in
attention of parliament several years ago ; Italy should eventually lead to any inter-
and a legislative enactment was then ruption of tranquillity in that quarter;
passed to meet a state of things which did but that in such a case it would be his
not now exist. The evil five years ago great object to secure to the people of
arose from a cause different from that this country the continuance of peace."
which was now complained of, and re- Thus, whether the tranquillity of other
quired a different remedy. The prices countries was disturbed or not, the system
had then fallen, from importation, so as to of this country was said, to be peace: our
excite alarm for our domestic agriculture; object was, to maintain peace, not only for
and they had fallen still lower at the pre- our own sake, but for that of the other


at the Opening oflthe Session.


JAN. 23, 1821. [14







15] HOUSE OF LORDS,
powers; and surely nothing could be more
explicit than such a declaration. Inde-
pendently of the general desire to main-
tain peace and to avert war, which would
lead this country to exert itself for the
tranquillity of Europe, he had no hesita-
tion to say, that he had other reasons for
maintaining the peace mentioned in the
Speech from the throne. If it was neces-
sary to engage in war, the system of war
in which we should be most backward to
engage, would be that which had for its
object to interfere in the internal affairs
of other states. While he said this much,
he had never maintained that the principle
of non-interference could admit of no ex-
ceptions; that there never could occur
occasions in which we ought to interpose
to prevent the adoption of certain internal
arrangements; or that there might not be
eases in which it was not only justifiable
but necessary to do so for our own secu-
rity. All that he would state was, that
the standing policy of this country was
peace, and an abstinence from intermed-
dling with the internal affairs of other
nations. This was not of course the time
for detailed explanation or specific state-
ment. There might occur an opportu-
nity of expressing his sentiments on the
subject, though it could not be expected
that he would enter on the discussion at
present. But the noble earl had argued
fora perfect neutrality in all cases. [" No,
no," from earl Grey.] The principle,
however, which the noble earl had sanc-
tioned would be any thing but neutrality.
To adopt his recommendation would be
to take a side with the one party or the
other. Though a party against interfer-
ence, still it would be taking a party.
See the consequences to which this would
lead! Without knowing all the circum-
stances that connected the revolution of
Naples with neighboring states-without
knowing how such an event might affect
them-without waiting for explanation or
defence, we were to take a side. He was
not one of those who, in determining our
policy towards revolutionized states, could
leave out of his view the circumstances
by which they were accompanied-he was
not one of those who loved revolutions
for themselves-he was not one of those
who viewed with the same eye a revolution
against an oppressive and a mild govern-
ment. In viewing such constitutional
changes, he examined the discriminating
character of each particular case: he
weighed the possibility of success: he


Address on the King's Speech [16
calculated the chances of improvement,
and he estimated the effect which the re-
volution would produce on other govern-
ments. What two countries in which
political changes occurred were placed
exactly in the same situation, and how
could a common course be chalked out
to both ? In these circumstances our ab-
stinence from all interference with either
party appeared to him to be the best po-
licy-as to interfere would be exercising
a judgment without the means of forming
a correct one. He would not enter fur-
ther into the subject at present: our ob-
ject had hitherto been to take no measure
but on the principle of neutrality; and so
far from interfering, to guard against all
interference.-The next topic of the noble
earl's observations was, the intended mili-
tary reductions; and he was glad that,
though undefined, they gave him satisfac-
tion. There were circumstances last year
which required an increase of our military
establishment; but he was happy to say,
that this year those circumstances were
altered. A considerable saving would
thus be effected; and he would mention
it as a circumstance that must give general
satisfaction, that the supplies of the year
would now be provided for without creat-
ing any new stock. He felt pleasure in
stating, that in the fifth year of peace we
could go on without additional funding-
a degree of good fortune which did not
happen to other countries, which were
frequently applied to as subjects of disad-
vantageous comparison.-The noble earl,
in his animadversions on the conduct of
ministers, had stated, that the prorogation
of parliament without a Speech from the
throne, and without thanks for the grant
of the civil-list revenue, was without pre-
cedent, and was in itself unjustifiable.
With regard to the first, if the noble earl
would refer back to the year 1785, he
would find the same course pursued as at
the termination of the last session, and
nearly in similar circumstances. Propo-
sitions that were then submitted to the
Irish parliament were rejected, and the
British parliament, which was to meet for
the despatch of business only-in the
event of their passing in Ireland, was
prorogued without a speech. But, inde-
pendent of this precedent, he had no diffi-
culty in saying that, considering a call of
the other House would have been enforced
at a most inconvenient time if parliament
had not been prorogued, and considering
that if the call had not been enforced,







at the Opening of the Session.


there would not have been a sufficient
attendance of members to receive the ex-
pression of his majesty's thanks, the most
proper course was the one that was fol-
lowed. On the last topic to which the
noble earl had alluded, he would say no.
thing. A proposition for a provision for
the Queen would soon come from the
other House, and it would then be open
for their lordships' consideration. This
was all he felt it necessary to observe at
present; for though the noble earl did not
agree in the general policy pursued by his
majesty's government, and though he
could not give his unqualified approbation
to the Speech from the throne, it was yet
a satisfaction to find, that there was nothing
either in the Speech or in the Address to
which he felt himself called upon to make
a specific objection.
Lord Holland said, it was not his inten-
tion to enter into a wide field of discussion
upon the general state of the country.
His object originally was, to put two or three
very simple questions to the noble earl on
the other side of the House; and he
should have confined himself to those ques-
tions, if it was not for the topics that had
been introduced. At the same time he
should avoid entering into any review
of the general system of the govern-
ment. The noble lord (Liverpool) had
professed not to understand what was
meant by a system of government ;
perhaps he did not. It was natural enough
that those who were in the habit of adopt-
ing measures one day, and abandoning
them the next, should find out that they
had no system whatever, and consequent-
ly bepuzzled by expressions which seemed
to imply that they had. His noble friend,
however (earl Grey), had marked out dis-
tinctly,as he thought, themeaning which he
attached to the words. What he meant by a
total change of system was, a restoration of
the confidence which used formerly to exist
between the people and their rulers; a
restoration of the oldEnglish homely good-
humoured government, which had been so
long abandoned, and so much impaired by
the practices of the present administra-
tion. Such was the change to which his
noble friend had alluded. It was not
his intention, at present, to point out how
a contrary system might be adopted, but
there was one part of the speech from the
throne, upon which, notwithstanding the
explicit commentary of the mover of thead-
dress, he should feel that he was not act-
ing as an honest man if he did not express
VOL. IV.


his dissatisfaction; it was that part which
referred to our foreign relations. In the
speech from the throne, which was the
speech of the minister, they were told
that his majesty had received assurances
from foreign powers of the existence of
amicable relations. For his own part, he
could not see what matter there was for
congratulation,-what cause the people of
England had to exult, because their mo-
narch was not called before the congress
of Laybach. Ministers had plunged this
country into wars-they had burthened it
with taxes-and now, while they were
taking credit for having delivered Europe,
the great powers of Europe, enriched by
our losses, aggrandized by the possession
of territories to which they had no right,
were proceeding to further outrages, while
we must be content with saying, we shall
feel regret if you go to war, and this shall
be the amount of our remonstrance. The
noble lord had amused the House with a
set of abstract opinions as to interference
in the government of other nations, when
it would be right, and when it would not
be right; but what they wanted to hear
was, whether he approved, aye or no, of
the principles adopted by his pretended
allies, who were boundby treaty tocommu-
nicate and to consult with the government
of this country. He did not think, ill as
the noble lord had conducted the affairs
of this country, and almost contempta-
ble as his counsels had made it in the eyes
of Europe, still he did not think, that if
a proper remonstrance had been made, it
would have proved unavailing. Sucha re-
monstrance would not be an interference
with the government of another country
but an effort to prevent the interference of
those who intruded it. To compare small
things with great, for with all his feeling
for Naples, he could not help feeling
that her cause was still inferior to that of
France; but still, to make the compari-
son, he remembered that the very same
language which they heard that day had
been used when the duke of Brunswick
was on his march towards Paris. He
would rather become a party to the infa-
mous designs of those proud conspirators
againstliberty, than exhibit the meanness of
mere regret when successful interposition
was practicable. At all events, it would
be better to say to Naples, we have been
exhausted by wars until we are able to go
to war no longer; these despots have got
our money, and we can only give you our
good wishes. The present condition of
C


JAN. 23, 1821. [18







19] HOUSE OF LORDS,


ministers reminded him of some verses,
which he knew not whether he ought to
Quote in that august assembly-
"The doctor understood the call,
But had not always wherewithall"
This brought him to the other part of his
subject. It appeared from the correspon-
dence of the Neapolitan government, that
a treaty was concluded on the 12th of
June, 1815, between the king of Naples
and the allies. It further appeared, that
Austria at present claimed the observance
of a stipulation in that treaty, which,
though not acknowledged by the govern-
'ment, was admitted by the duke of Cam-
pochiaro. It was a secret article, by
which Naples was bound not to make any
alterations in her government injurious to
the interests of monarchy; and that the
king was not to introduce any change which
was contrary to thesystem (for these powers
knew very well what their system meant,
though the noble lord opposite and his col-
leagues, did not profess to understand it)
which the emperor of Austria adopted to-
wards his Italian states. Now if his ma-
jesty's ministers were aware of this article,
he maintained that they had dealt most
unfairly with the people of this country in
not making it known. They were most
unjust in agreeing to it, if it was known to
them; for it was in direct hostility to the
principle upon which they now went-that
they would not attempt any interference in
the internal arrangements of any country.
*But he could not think that his majesty's
ministers were aware of this secret article,
for he could not bring himself to believe
that they were sunk so low as that, if they
had known it, they would not have remon-
strated against it at the time. They were
bound to do so now, and it was their duty
as the ally of Austria-as well as of Naples,
to remonstrate with the .government of
Austria on the steps which she seemed
about to pursue towards Naples. He would
point out a mode in which such remon-
strance could be made with effect, He
would have ministers say to Austria You
are now flush in cash, you are raising large
sums in certain places, and some English-
men are engaged in advancing it to you,
who will, no doubt, look anxiously after
the payment of the interest of their ad.
vances. You are about to commence a
crusade in a part of Italy; but before you
begin to expend your vast sums, recollect
that we have a little account against you-
be just before you are generous, and pay
your debts." He was reminded on this oc-


casiofi of a short passage in the renowned
tragedy of" Tom Thumb the Great," in
which the flatterers of that celebrated per.
sonage advised him to follow up some ex-
travagant project head taken into hishead;
and their advice was exactly what the
servility of many of the smaller powers of
Germany would give to the emperor of
Austria at the present day. His flatterers
thus addressed Tom Thumb.-
" Great sir, the purpose of your soul pursue."
But while such advice was given, he would
have the noble earl opposite say to his
majesty the emperor-
" Great sir, I have an action against you."
This, he thought, would prove a most ef-
fectual remonstrance, and an excellent
hint to the emperor. What could be more
natural than that, before the Austrian
government began to expend such large
sums as must be wasted in a war with Na-
ples, it should pay us part of her large
debt to us-a debt which, he apprehended,
was at the present moment not less than
from sixteen to seventeen millions sterling.
Leaving such a vast sum due and uncalled-
for, he would say, was one cause of the go-
vernment not having before now paid the
dividends (in gold we understood his lord-
ship to say, but at this part of the sen-
tence his voice was suddenly lowered, and
the remainder of it was not heard distinct-
ly below the bar.) We understood him,
in continuation, to observe on the former
system of the currencyand the losses there-
by occasioned to individuals who were
obliged to receive in payment a currency.
of a considerably deteriorated value.
When this, he added, was the situation of
the country, was it too much to say to
Austria, that being now about to engage
in this crusade against Naples, a crusade
which would put it out of her power to
fulfilher formerengagements with us pay
us our debts, before you show yourself
able to do these things." This, he main-
tained, was in the power of ministers, ac-
cording to existing treaties, which it was
their duty to enforce. His belief was, that
ministers did not wish for a war on the part
of Austria against Naples. But it was not
enough that they should confine them-
selves to the mere circumstance of not
wishingit. They should remonstrate, and
say to Austria, on the part of their sove-
reign, I disapprove of this war, as I dis-
approve of any war with any nation found-
ed on the principles of such interference
in its internal concerns. I disapprove of
a war. against a nation with which I am


Debate on thre Addrcss of nanlks







at the Opening of the Session.


connected by treaties, and in which you
cannot engage without destroying the
principles on which we have acted." Such
ought to be the language which the minis-
ters of the Crown shouldhold to Austria, and
he. was satisfied it would not be without
the proper effect. He did not know what
papers the noble lord opposite might be
likely to produce on this subject; but if
it should appear from them that this coun-
try had ceased to be on terms of amity and
perfectly good understanding with Naples,
in consequence of the late change in her
government, he would maintain that the
government of this country had not done
its duty. A word from us against her
present proceedings would, he was satis-
fied, be sufficient for Austria; and if our
sentiments were firmly and decisively ex-
pressed on this occasion, she durst not re-
fuse her concurrence. It was therefore no-
thing but idle mockery to say to the peo-
ple of England that the government wished
for peace, if the necessary steps were not
taken to ensure it. He was sure that the
noble duke opposite (the duke of Welling-
ton) must have felt (though none of his
colleagues )iad dared so to express them-
selves) mortified and disappointed at find-
ing that the Spanish constitution (and here
le begged not to be understood as mean-
ing to say that the Spanish constitution
was without defects-he knew it had de-
fects; but if he were a subject of Spain,
where it originated, or of Naples, where
it was adopted, he would shed the last
.dropof his bloodindefenceof it, with all its
defects, rather than suffer it to be wrested
from him by any of the armed despots of
Troppau)-but he was about to observe,
that the noble duke must have felt morti-
fied and indignant at finding this Spanish
constitution, which had been established
under his auspices, so violently opposed;
and however much he might differ from
the noble duke on many great political
questions, yet he felt it but justice to him
to say, that this country was not more in.
debted to its valour and skill-as a general,
than to the wisdom he evinced on several
occasions in his negotiations with Spain,
and in conciliating the good-will of that
nation towards us; but he acted on those
occasions with the very government, and
under that very constitution, to which, as
he had observed before, the noble duke
must since have felt mortified and indig-
nant at finding the despots of Troppau so
violently opposed. It was said, that these
revolutions were effected by the army.


He was not a friend to the principle, as a
general one, that they were the fittest in-
struments for new modelling a govern-
ment. He was too much attached to the
principles of the Revolution of 1688 to
adopt suchadoctrine; but he confessed he
was glad of the mode of change in the re-
cent instances, as it gave another proof,
that those who leant entirely on. spears
for their support, would sometimes feel
the wound in their own sides. It was
not now a matter of consideration, how
the revolution in Naples had been ef.
fected. One thing was certain-it was
a bloodless one; but if it were as bloody
as it was peaceable-if it were as little
calculated for the peculiar advantage of
that nation, as he was satisfied it was con-
ducive to their better government, still he
would denounce the principle of foreign
interference with the internal affairs of any
nation, and still less could he support
such interference when made by an armed
force.-But it might be said, that we had
no right to offer our advice to Austria.
He maintained we had. Austria was our
ally ; and was he to be told that if he saw
his friend about to plunge into the com-
mission of some atrocious crime, or to
commit some cruel act, that lie was to
withhold alladvice until the deed was done ?
The advice would be then too late, and
he should not act the part of a true friend
if he did not give the advice while its adop-
tion might be of use. He would then
say to ministers, Give your advice to
Austria to desist;" and if your advice
be reasonable she dare not refuse you.
But he had heard it said, that though
Austria could not expect any direct
assistance from this country, she still
would calculate upon the moral assistance
of England. Now this he could not too
strongly condemn ; and it was a great rea-
son with him formaintaining the necessity
of having the most explicit avowal of the
disapprobation of this government. If it
was once known that the British govern-
ment were warmly opposed to any hostile
proceedings towards Naples, it would soon
have the effect of depriving Austria of
that moral assistance which she might
look to in other quarters in the absence of
a positive disavowal. Let England say to
her ally Austria, I say that your inter-
ference is improper, and in no one way
will I give it any support or sanction."-
It was for these reasons that he disap-
proved of the language of the Speech and
of the Address as equivocal. It gave their


JAx. 23),1821.







23] HOUSE OF LORDS,
Lordships no information on subjects the
most important, and which, for aught that
was said of them, it might as well not have
touched. As the speech and of course
the address gave no information on the
important subject to which he had alluded,
he would put a few questions to the
noble earl, and he hoped, for the infor-
mation of their lordships, he would answer
them. He would wish to be informed
whether our ambassador or agent at Na-
ples was still the accredited agent to the
Neapolitan government; and if so, whether
he had received instructions to assure that
government, that this country would not
disturb the state of affairs there, or give
any support or sanction whatsoever to any
such disturbance by any other power, on
the principle of interfering in her internal
arrangements. His next question was,
whether the secret article of the treaty of
1815, to: which he had before alluded,
was communicated to his majesty's minis-
ters; and if so, was it followed up by any
remonstrance on our part; and, if it was
not then communicated, whether minis-
ters when they became acquainted with it,
demonstrated (as he thought they were
bound to do) against any treaty in which
this country was concerned containing
principles which we disavowed His next
question was, whether within the last year
the noble lord had applied for the repay-
ment of the Austrian loan, or any part of
it, or of the interest which we ought to
receive from Austria--this interest of
which Mr. Pitt once talked so confidently.
The Earl ofLiverpool observed, in reply
to the noble baron, that the questions he
ihad put involved subjects of such magni-
tude that he could not attempt to answer
them without going into a detail, which
he was not prepared to do at that moment.
If, however, the noble lord should think
proper to call for specific information on
any of the points to which he had referred,
and should give notice of a motion to
: that effect, he would be ready on any such
occasion to go into the subject, and to
answer the inquiries of the noble lord. At
present he hoped their lordships would see
that he could not well go into such a
Detail.
Lord Holland said, that the questions
which he had put to the noble earl could
inot excite discussion at present, or require
that detail which the noble earl seemed to
imagine. He would, however, put them
:in a shape where they might be answered
by a single Ay" or No." And, first,


Debate on the King's Speech. t24
he would ask, were our diplomatic rela-
tions with Naples changed by the recent
political changes in that country? His
next question should be, whether the se-
cret articles of the treaty of 1815 were
communicated to ministers, and when?
And the third was, whether any, and what
application, had been made to Austria last
year respecting the re-payment of the
loan ?
The Earl of Liverpool again observed,
that the present was not the moment to
go into such details, but that he would
be ready to meet the noblelord on thesub-
ject on any future occasion, when he should
think proper to submit a motion respect-
ing it.
Lord Holland, after this refusal, wished
the noble lord joy of belonging to an ad-
ministration whose affairs were so com-
plicated, as that the head of it could not
give an answer, ay or no, to a few plain
questions.
Lord Ellenborough said, that undoubt-
edly that man was to be regarded as the
greatest benefactor of his country, who
could take the most certain means of pre-
venting the calamities which might befal
it. If, then, we looked back upon the
state of the affairs of Europe for the last
twenty-five years, who was to be consi-
dered as the man capable of conferring the
greatest benefit upon his country ? Not
the noble general opposite, who had suc-
ceeded in putting an end to the war, but
the individual who, at its commencement,
possessed the means of altogether pre--
venting the war. He congratulated the
House and the country, that the noble
baron possessed the means of preventing
a war, which by many persons was con-
sidered likely to take place, not by bring-
ing into action the military power of the
country, but by a few words in the speech
from the throne, and, what was still more
extraordinary, by an application for the
payment of a debt! Surely the noble
baron must be aware, that the only effec-
tual way of enforcing the payment of a
debt must be, an application from a
general at the head of an army. It cer.
tainly appeared to him, that every thing
had been done by this government, which,
under the circumstances, was proper to
be done. The answer which they had
given to the Austrian government, was
this, We sincerely hope you will not go
to war; and if you do, we will give you
no assistance." The noble baron had
dwelt much upon:the situation to which








25] The Queen-Liturgy.
we were reduced by the wars in which we
had been previously engaged; and there
could be no doubt, that, in the present
distressed state of the country, war was
a thing of all others most to be depre-
cated, But was this the moment which
the noble baron would chuse to press for
the payment of a debt? Surely that was
a measure but little calculated to prevent
a war, which, if it took place, was ex-
tremely likely to become general through-
out Europe. He was glad to hear from
the noble earl, that he was ready to give
full information to the House on the sub.
ject of the negotiations as to the affairs
of the south of Europe, when they should
be brought regularly before the House.
He was the more gratified to hear this, as
he had apprehended, from what had first
fallen from the noble earl, that there would
be some difficulty on this subject. In the
present state of ignorance in which they
were as to the causes of the late revolu-
tion, it was perfectly impossible to form
any judgment of the conduct which mi-
nisters had pursued. He wished the noble
baron, however, to state in what terms,
and what precise form of words, he would
frame that remonstrance, which was to
prevent the possibility of war.
Lord Holland said, that he could have
no objection to answer the question of the
noble lord. The language which this
country ought to have used to Austria,
should ha e been plain and unequivocal.
We should have declared explicitly, that
we would take no part in such a war;
and we should have expressed, openly, in
the face of Europe, not only our disap-
probation of the war, but of the principle
of the war. The noble baron had said,
that the most effectual way of addressing
an emperor was, by a general at the head
of an army; but he forgot that this was
no longer the case, when that emperor was
looking for assistance and support from
the party addressing him. Notwithstand-
ing the surprise expressed by the noble
baron, he saw nothing so preposterous in
supposing, that if, instead of the para-
graph which the speech now contained,
there had been one, lamenting that any
of the allies should think of interfering
with: the rights of independent nations,
the conduct of Austria would have been
influenced by such aveclaration. For his
own part, he believed it would have pre.
vented Austriafrom marching; at allevents,
they who thought that it would not have
kept her for a long time hesitating and


JAN. 23, 1821. [26
vaccillating, knew very little of Austrian
councils.
Lord Ellenborough congratulated the
noble baron and the country, since, not-
withstanding the lamentable effects which
he had ascribed to the policy pursued in
this country for the last twenty-five years,
he still thought its moral character stood
so high, that a solemn declaration of its
opinion must be imperative upon the
greatest military power in Europe.
Lord Holland said, that the noble baron
had totally misapprehended what had
fallen from him. He had never dreamt
of ascribing any such miraculous effect to
the moral character of the country.
The Lord Chancellor said, it might not
be amiss to observe, that if one noble lord
were Austria and the other England, it
would be extremely difficult to determine,
whether they might or might not be pre-
vented from going to war [a laugh].
The Address was agreed to nem. diss.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, January 23.
THE QUEEN-LITURGY.] Lord A.
Hamilton gave notice, that he intended
upon Friday next to bring forward a mo-
tion relative to the omission of the Queen's
name in the Liturgy.
Mr. Wetherell rose for the purpose of
making a few observation relative to cer-
tain documents, of which he thought the
House ought to be in possession, before
the motion of the noble lord was taken
into consideration. He should, therefore,
give notice of a motion for the production
of such documents on some day before
Friday. He was proceeding to state his
reasons for so doing, when he was called.
to order by
The Speaker, who was satisfied that the
learned member would excuse him for
interruption, but nothing was so irregular
as to offer remarks upon that which was
only a notice of motion.
Mr. Tierney said,- that it appeared to
him that the learned gentleman intended,
in consequence of the notice just given
for Friday, to give notice of a motion for
the production of certain papers previously
to that day. He wished, in short, to put
the House in possession of such informa-
tion as would enable it to form a proper
judgment on the question' which would
then be submitted to it.
Lord Castlereagh admitted that such
might be the meaning of the learned gen.







27] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
tieman; but if it was, it would perhaps be
as well to allow him to explain his own
meaning. His lordship was proceeding
to other remarks upon Mr. Wetherell's
declaration, when
Lord Folkestone said, it was competent
to the learned gentleman, if he thought
proper, to move at that instant for the
documents he wanted.
Mr. Bankes said, it was not usual for
gentlemen to give notices of motions be-
fore the King's Speech had been taken
into consideration. He did not mean to
say, that it was not competent to members
to do so, but he thought that, unless under
very peculiar circumstances, the respect
which was due to his majesty ought to
induce the House not to engage in any
previous discussions.
The Speaker observed, that if the learned
member would explain his object, he
would apologise if he had misunderstood
him. He understood the learned member
intended to offer some observations upon
the notice of the noble lord. That, it
appeared to him, would be contrary to
the usual forms of the House. It was
impossible that any observations could
be made leading to a discussion, without
going on to a termination of the question.
If he mistook the learned member, he
begged his pardon; but if he did not, he
put it to him and to the House, whether
he was not irregular in addressing the
House on the notice of the noble lord ?
Mr. Wetherell said, he had been misun-
derstood. He intended to move for the
production of certain papers, which he
conceived absolutely necessary to a proper
understanding of the noble lord's motion.
Lord Castlereagh thought the learned
member could not make any motion of
the kind without notice.
Mr. Wetherell said, that provided he
could attain his object, the mode by which
he did so was quite immaterial to him.
He was ready to bow to the will of the
House. The papers for which he was
about to move were, in his opinion, abso-
lutely necessary, in order to come to a
proper understanding of the noble lord's
motion. However, in deference to the
opinion of the House, he was ready to
reverse the proceeding, and to give notice
for a future day [cries of no, no, move
now,"]. He would then move at once
for Copies. 1. Of all Collects or Litanies
in the Public Liturgy of the Church in
each reign, from the reign of James 1
(inclusive) to the present time, in which


The Queen-Liturgy. [28
the name of a Queen Consort has been
inserted from time to time: 2. Of the
Collects or Litaniks contained in the
Liturgy annexed to the Statute of 13th
and 14th, Ch. 2. c. 4, which relates to
the King, Queen, or Royal Family, toge-
ther with the titles of such Collects or
Litanies, noticing therein any blanks in
the titles or bodies of such Collects or
Litanies: 3. Of the Order in Council of
the 12th February 1820, by which Her
Majesty's name has been omitted from
the Liturgy: 4. Of orders made by the
Kings and Queens of England in Council,
relative to the insertion, omission, change,
or alteration of the names or titles of the
King, Queen, or any member of the
Royal Family, in the Liturgy of the
Church of England, from the commence-
ment of the reign of Henry 8, to the pre-
sent time." The object which he had in
view was to place the House in possession
of the facts, before the motion of the
noble lord came under consideration.
The private research of many gentlemen
had doubtless supplied them with all the
information necessary to decide upon it;
but, consistently with parliamentary usage,
no fact, when a motion was made, could
be assumed as certain that was not pro-
perly authenticated. It could be no
secret that many were of opinion that the
Queen of England had a right to have her
name inserted in the Liturgy of the
church by the law of the land and the
constitution of the country. To decide
the question whether she had or not, he
now moved for copies of certain docu-
ments, all of which were among the public
records of the kingdom. No gentleman
could come to a fair and just judgment on
the propriety or impropriety, the legality
or illegality of the erasion of her majes-
ty's name from the Liturgy, until he had
investigated the law and usage of the
country upon that head. As the House
would not be able to perform its duty to
the people, the King, or the Queen, until
the papers were laid upon the table, he
should now move for the immediate pro-
duction of the documents, the titles of
which he had just read to the House.
Lord Castlereagh thought it would be
more convenient to give notice of the
motion. The learned member was trans-
gressing the rules and forms of the House.
He was moving without notice for docu-
ments which nobody understood. If the
learned member thought there was any
reluctance on his part to produce those do.







S29]


The Queen-Liturgy.


cuments, he was much mistaken: so far
from it, that his only objection was as to
the time and manner of making the mo-
tion. He put it to the House whether
the country was likely to improve from
the late reformations which had taken
Place in the form of making motions in
parliament [a laugh]. He was sorry
that the influence of a right hon. gentle-
man on the other side was not exerted,
to prevent motions which only tended to
excite clamour. For his part, he was
not aware in what particular office the
information called for by the learned
Member could be found. He had no
means of judging precisely at that moment
whether he ought or ought not to concur
in the motion. Under those circumstances,
he hoped the motion would be for the
present withdrawn. If it was good for
any thing it would go to postpone the
motion which stood for Friday-it would
operate as an absolute bar to it. If the
motion was not withdrawn he should feel
himself under the necessity of moving the
previous question.
Mr. Tierney said, that as far as he under-
stood the noble lord, he had no objection
to the hon. and learned member's motion,
S hut only to the time of making it. It was
most extraordinary, that any objection as
to time should be made, when the docu-
ments moved for were those upon which
the exclusion of her majesty's name from
the Liturgy had been founded; but the
noble lord had no idea where those docu-
ments could be found If that was the
Case, he should wish to know where the
noble lord had laid his fingers upon them,
when the order in council was made for
excluding her majesty's name from the
Liturgy? Now he would only beg the
House to consider the way in which the
question stood. The learned member
who made the motion, was not an ally of
his (Mr. Tierney's); he was the uni-
form supporter of ministers. A noble
friend of his had given notice of a motion
for Friday. The learned member said,
that there were certain documents which
he wished to have laid before the House,
in order to guide his decision upon that
motion. He thought he could not form
an opinion in the absence of those docu-
ments. The noble lord opposite said he
had no objection to the production of the
documents, but he would not allow them
to be produced now. This was as much
as to say, you must first decide upon
the question, and afterwards you may


JAN. 23, 1821. [30
have the documents." The noble lord
might if he pleased have taken another
ground, and objected to any discussion
until the King's Speech had been received,
and taken into consideration. Instead of
doing so, he said, that the question ought
not to be agitated at present, as he did
not know where to look for the papers.
This was a most curious mode of reason-
ing; it was a most singular objection to
the motion. He would not have added
another word, were it not for an observa-
tion which had been made by the noble
lord. The noble lord expressed a wish
that he would exercise his influence in
preventing certain motions from being
made. What did the noble lord mean by
this ? The noble lord had indeed influ-
ence on his side of the House, but did the
noble lord think, that he (Mr. T.) could
have the impudence, even if he had the
inclination, to say to any honourable
member that such a motion should or
should not be made ? The noble lord in-
deed knew what his influence was on his
own side of the House; he could turn
round to any of his party and say, Sir,
you hold such a place, and you shall lose
it if you do not do so and so." But
did the noble lord imagine that he (Mr.
T.) could do this? It was the tact and
trick of the noble lord to represent the
opposition as an army invariably acting
under the orders of a general. He dis-
avowed the power and command which
the noble lord ascribed to him; if such a
power were offered to him he would de-
cline the responsibility attached to it.
Ministers, indeed, had it in their power to
command-but more of this by and by.
All he could say was, that he felt flattered
by the attention of any honourable member
who consulted him as to whether any par-
ticular motion ought or ought not to be
made. But he should feel ashamed of
himself if he went one step further than
simply giving his opinion upon the ques-
tion. The person so consulting was of
course master of his own actions. An-
other honourable gentleman, who had
taken a share in the discussion, had rather
surprised him, for he appeared discom-
posed by, and complained of, the irrita-
tion which prevailed whilst he was speak-
ing. Now, he would ask whether there
was any thing more likely to promote
irritation than the conduct of the noble
lord upon this question? It appeared to
him that the noble lord had come down
to the House smarting with soreness at






31] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
certain recent events, and had therefore
determined to say something to irritate,
not caring whether it was upon the King's
Speech, or upon any thing else.
Mr. Wetherell wished to explain the
reason why he could not consent to with-
draw his motion. He presumed that the
noble lord had read over, in February last,
the documents which he was now desirous
of obtaining. It was in that month that
her majesty's name was erased from the
Liturgy; and he could not suppose that
the privy council would come to a deter-
mination on so important a measure with-
out looking into the law and usage of the
constitution regarding it. When the
noble lord said, that he did not know where
to find the documents, did he mean to
say, that he had not looked into the lita-
nies of the church to know what were the
rights of a Queen Consort before he struck
her name out of them? He could not
suppose, thatwhen the noble lord hazarded
the desperate venture of striking the
Queen's name out of the Liturgy in which
it had been constantly retained for the
long space of two centuries, he was igno-
rant where to find the records by which
the legality or illegality of it was to be
defended. Had the noble lord never been
at the British Museum? Or was he ig-
norant that the undoubted, the uniform,
and the unbroken usage, from the time of
Henry VIII. downwards, was in favour of
the Queen's right to have her name con-
tinued in the Liturgy ? He could not
strictly and seriously mean to give a nega-
tive to either of these two questions: and
one of the principal reasons which induced
him to make his present motion without
any previous notice was, that he presumed
that ministers had carefully investigated
each of the required documents. Now,
however, they were to be told that they
had come too suddenly with the question
upon ministers, and that they had been
guilty of a paltry parliamentary trick.
But the fact was not so: ministers were
not taken by surprise. Did the noble
lord presume, did the noble lord dare to
assert in the face of the Commons of
England, that his colleagues erased her
majesty's name from the Liturgy, without
considering how far they were justified by
the laws of the country in doing so? If
he meant to say, that they had done it
unadvisedly-and unadvisedly he, for one,
believed that they had done it-what a
censure did he pass upon his coadjutors
in office, in saying that they had struck


The Queen-Liturgy. [32
their pens through the name of their
Queen without thinking of the justice, of
the expediency, or the legality of the act !
Mr. Bathurst complained, that his noble
friend had been entirely misunderstood,
and therefore misrepresented by the
learned gentleman. Was that learned
gentleman so ignorant of parliamentary
forms, as not to know the difference be-
tween consulting public printed docu-
ments, and consulting public documents
properly authenticated? The latter were
dispersed in different public offices; and
therefore, without previous inquiry, it
was impossible to say where a man could
lay his hands upon them. The right hon.
member was proceeding when
Mr. Hume rose to order. The right
hon. gentleman had, since the last meet-
ing of parliament, accepted a place of
emolument under the Crown, by which
his seat was vacated. He wished to know
whether he had been re-elected ? If the
acceptance of a place worth 5,0001. a-year,
under the Crown, did not vacate a seat,
he and those around him were totally ig-
norant of the fact. If the office in ques-
tion was an office exempted from the ope-
ration of the statute, he was also ignorant
of that fact. He suggested the conside-
ration of the objection to the right hon.
member himself, for his own private be-
nefit and convenience.
Mr. Bathurst was obliged to the hon.
member for reminding him that he was
perhaps subjecting himself to a fine of
5001. But before he had given him that
hint, he ought to have examined into the
validity of his objection. Did the hon.
gentleman know how the office which he
had now the honour of filling was appoint-
ed? The act of parliament under which
it existed said not a word about any salary
of 50001. a-year; but it said this, that
those commissioners who had seats in par-
liament should not vacate them provided
they received no salary. He was in that
situation; at present he received no sa-
lary.
Mr. Tierney was aware that under the
act of parliament for managing the affairs
of India, there were some commissioners
who had no salaries; but there were three
who received salaries. Now, he wished
to know of the right hon. gentleman whe-
ther he was one of the supernumeraries,
as they were called, or was the president
of the Board of Control! He did not
know whether what he had read in the
Gazette was correct or not; but there he








was described as the president. If he was clear that they were still ignorant upon
the president, it was for the House to de- what grounds the measure rested which
termine, whether that place was a place they had adopted so inconsiderately eleven
of profit and emolument. months ago.
Mr. Bathurst replied, that the salary The Solicitor-General said, that his
belonging to that office was in the ap- learned friend laboured under a very erro-
pointment of the Crown. Now, the neous impression. He had stated that,
Crown had not, as yet, appointed him because these documents were not in the
any salary, as he was already in possession possession of ministers, ministers had no
of another office under it. justifiable grounds for erasing her majes-
Mr. Tierney had to congratulate the ty's name from the Liturgy; but he had
House at last on a piece of economy on been completely misinformed: for he
the part of ministers. One of them held ought to have known that there could be
the chancellorship of the duchy of Lan- no alteration in the Liturgy without an
caster and the presidency of the Board of order of council. He could assure the
Control-and yet only received the emo- House that ministers had consulted the
luments of one office! documents then moved for,
Lord Milton had always understood, Mr. Scarlett said, that the information
that the late sir James Pulteney, whilst given totheHouse by the solicitor-general,
secretary at war, had received no salary; differed so much from that given to it by
but he had never understood, that on ac- the noble lord opposite, that the House
cepting that office, he had been excused would find some difficulty in reconciling
from vacating his seat in consequence of it. The noble lord said that the Queen's
it. The acceptance of the office vacated name had been erased from the liturgy
the seat quite as much as the acceptance after a full examination of all the neces-
of the salary. sary documents; whilst the solicitor-ge-
Mr. Creevey remarked, that it mattered neral, at the same moment that he con-
not whether a member accepting office fessed that they had consulted these do-
declined receiving any salary, or thought cuments, disdained to rest upon them,
proper to give it away. The question and left the matter to be defended by the
was, was it an office of profit under go- order in council. The motion was not
vernment? If so, the member of course pressed by the learned mover, from any
vacated his seat. He was of opinion, that intention of anticipating the debate, or
the right hon. member had vacated his from any wish to prolong the discussion.
seat, by accepting the office of president The noble lord had therefore taken a
of the Board of Control. wrong course in meeting it by the pre-
Mr. Bathurst referred to the act in vious question. If the principle were ac-
question, which, he contended, did not ceded to, there might be no objection to
include members holding offices without some delay in the production of the neces-
salary. He then proceeded to argue upon sary papers. His noble friend, too, might
the question before the House. His then be induced to postpone the motion
noble friend had no objection to the prin- of which he had given notice, to a more
ciple of the motion, but he conceived distant day, or he might, after considering
some delay necessary, in order to procure the reasons urged in favour of such delay,
the documents called for. They were find them unsatisfactory. He himself
not to be picked up in the streets, nor in entertained not the smallest doubt, that if
the shop of a bookseller, but must be had the motion were now acceded to, there
from the most authentic sources, would be no difficulty in obtaining all the
Sir James Mackintosh remarked, that documents in the course of a single
if ministers had not seen the documents morning.
now moved for-if they had not entered Mr. Serjeant Onslow was desirous of
into that investigation of them into which stating the considerations which would
they ought to have entered, then in rea- induce him to vote for the motion of his
lity they could not know whether the learned friend. Undoubtedly it was the
examination of them might not be deci- usual practice of the House to postpone,
sive of the illegality of the measure in on the first day of the session, the discus-
question. If they had examined them, as sion of every question until after the
they said they had, what need was there Speech from the throne had been taken
of a moment's previous notice ? If they into consideration. This rule, however,
were not now possessed of them, it was was not uniformly observed, nor could it
VOL. IV. D


JAN. 23, 1821. ['3


The Queen-Lilurgy.







35] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
he regarded as imperative. He had
known more than one instance in which
it had been departed from. He had
never known a subject upon which public
attention was so steadfastly fixed, and as
to which a speedy decision was more
desirable. They could not, in the pre-
sent circumstances, pursue a too guarded
course, or defend themselves too efFbctu-
tually against the suspicion of being indif-
ferent to this question. The motion for
the previous question was a manner of
treating it which lie was afraid might be
construed into evidence of a disposition to
refuse the necessary information; but he
must protest most solemnly, that, in giv-
ing his support to the motion of his
learned friend, he meant to pledge him-
self no further. Whenever the question
to which it was introductory should be
agitated, he should regard it as a legal
and not a political question. He should
view it with the eye of a lawyer, and de-
termine his vote by the best lights which
he could derive from constitutional prin-
ciples and historical research. It did not
appear to him to furnish topics for the
display of party spirit, but to require a
decision conformably to the rules and
analogies of law.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer fully
concurred in the observation of the learned
serjeant-an observation on which every
member, lie trusted, would feel it his duty
to act, namely, that the question to which
the present motion referred, should be
discussed as one of constitutional law,
without reference to party or partiality.
But, though he agreed most fully with
him in that feeling, he still must consider
the present a most improper time for
such a motion. An allusion had been
made by the learned serjeant to cases
in which discussions on questions, inde-
pendent of privilege, preceded the consi-
deration of a speech from the throne. It
was true that such cases did occur; but
every member would recollect with what
disapprobation these very extraordinary
motions had been received by the House.
The previous question being put,
That the question be now put," the
House divided: Ayes, 169; Noes, 260:
Majority against Mr. Wetherell's motion,
91. Mr. Wetherell then gave notice of
his intention to renew his motion to-
morrow.
List of the Minority.
AbLrcromby, lion, J. Allen, J. H.


The Queenj-Lithrog.


Astell, Wm.
Belgrave, vise.
Beanumont, T. W.
Barham, Jos. F.
Baring, Henry
Baring, Alex.
Barrett, J. M.
Bennet, hon. II. G.
Bcrnal, Ralph
Birch, Joseph
Brougham, Henry
Browne, Dom.
Bright, Henry
Burdett, sir F.
Bury, vise.
Buxton, T. F.
Butterworth, Jos.
Baillie, John
Bennett, John
Blake, sir F.
Boughton, W. E. B.
Boughey, sir J. F.
Bentinck, lord W.
Balfour, J.
Calcraft, J. II.
Calcraft, John
Calvert, Charles
Calvert, Nic.
Campbell, hon. J.
Carew, R. S.
Carter, John
Cavendish, Henry
Clifford, capt.
Clifton, vise.
Cripps, Joseph
Coke, T. W.jun.
Coffin, sir I.
Colburne, N. R.
Concannon, Lucius
Coussmaker, G.
Cnrwen, J. C.
Creevey, Thos.
Chaloner, Rob.
Dunidas, C.
Davies, T. 11.
Dickinson, W.
Duncannon, vise.
Dundas, lion. T.
Denman, Thos.
Denison, WiVm.
Ebrington, vise.
Ellice, Edw.
Ellis, hon. G. A.
Farquharson, A.
Ferguson, sir t. C.
Fitzgerald, rt. hon. M.
Fitzroy, lord J.
Fitzroy, lord C.
Folkestone, visc.
Farrand, Rob.
Gaskell, Ben.
Gurney, Hudson
Gordon, Robt.
Graham, J. R. G.
Graham, Sandford
Grenfell, Pascoe
Griffiths, J. W.


Haldimand, W.
Hamilton, lord A.
Hamilton, sir II. D.
lHarbord, lion. E.
IHeathcote, sir G.
HIeathcote, J. G.
Heron, sir Rob.
Ilill, lord A.
Iobhouse, J. C.
IIornby, Edmund
Ilonywood, W. P.
liume, Joseph
Hurst, Robt.
Jervoise, G. P.
King, sir J. D.
Kennedy, J. F.
Lambton, John G.
Langstone, J. II.
Lennard, T. B.
Lemon, sir W.
Lloyd, S. M.
Luslhington, Steph.
Mackiitosh, sir J.
Macdonald, J.
Martin, John
Milton, visct.
Monk, J. B.
Moore, Peter
Moore, Abraham
Marjoribanks, S.
Marryat, J.
Maberley, John
Maberley, W. L.
Mahon, hon. S.
Newman, I. W.
Newport, rt. hon. sir J.
Nugent, lord
Onslow, Arthur
O'Grady, Standish
O'Callaghan, J.
Ord, Wnm.
Ossulston, lord
Palmer, colonel
Palmer, C. F.
Parnell, sir Henry
Pierce, Henry
Phillips, G. R.
Phillips, George
Plumer, Wm.
Ponsonby, hon. F. C.
Power, Richd.
Price, Robert
Pryse, Pryse
Prittie, hon. F. A.
Pym, Francis
Rice, T. S.
Ramsay, sir A.
Rickford, Wm.
Ricardo, David
Ridley, sir M. W.
Robarts, Ab.
Robinson, sir Geo.
Rowley, sir W.
Rumbold, Charles
Russell, lord John
Russell, lord Wm.
Russell, R. G.







Address on the King's Speecl, S-c.


Ramsden, J. C.
Snith, lion. Robt.
Smith, Sam.
Smith, Gco.
Smith, Win.
Sebright, sir Johln
Scourfield, W. 11.
a Scott, James
Scarlctt, James
Scudamorc, R. '.
Sefton, carl oif
Stanley, lord
Stuart, lord J.
Sykes, Daniel
Shelly, sir John
Talbot, R. W.
Tynte, C. K.
Townshcnd, lord C.


Tavistock, marq. of
Taylor, M. A.
Ticrney, rt. lion. G.
Tennyson, C.
Warro, J. A.
White, Luke
Western, C. C.
W harton, John
Whilbread, W. II.
Whitbread, Sam. C.
Wilkins, Walter
Williams, Wmn.
Wilson, sir Robt.
\Woo, Matthew
Wyvill, M.
TELLERS.
Grant, J. P.
Wetherell, Charles


ADDRESS ON TIE KING'S SPEECH AT
THE OPENING OF THE SESSION.] Tlhe
Speaker acquainted the House that that
House had been in the House of Peers,
where his Majesty had delivered a most
gracious Speech to both Houses of Par-
liament, and of which, to prevent mistakes,
he had obtained a copy. [See p. 1.]
After the Speaker had read the Speech,
Mr. George Bankes rose, and spoke to
the following effect:-Mr. Speaker; In
proposing an Address to his Majesty, of
9 acknowledgment for the gracious Speech
which we heard some hours ago, and
which you have at last had an opportunity
of reading to us, I shall not trouble you
with any expressions of conscious insuffi-
ciency, because I am aware they are a
very poor excuse for the presumption of
a voluntary undertaking, and because I
do not apprehend any thing very difficult
in returning a suitable acknowledgment
for gracious intimations and assurances,
every way calculated to inspire a dutiful
and affectionate feeling. As one of his
majesty's many, many loyal subjects, I
propose, Sir, that we approach his Throne,
Sto assure him of the fidelity of a nation
which is sound at heart-a nation not so
intoxicated by the splendor of unparal-
eleed triumphs, nor so lulled to apathy by
the security of a profound peace, as to
visit with ingratitude the promoter of
those triumphs and the procurer of this
honourable repose. In a nation in which
Small are free, folly must have her freedom,
and mischief will mark her for its tool;
folly will discharge her debts of gratitude
by denying their amount-by forgetting
the danger from which she has been de-
livered, though ever when in peril herself
the loudest to complain and the foremost
Sto despair. The spirit of mischief can


have no account of gratitude to settle
with the peace maker; it is a spirit ob-
noxious to repose; in war and tumult it
can be content to hope all evil to the
good order which it hates ; but in peace,
it must counsel and contrive it; it is then
that it is seen walking restless through the
dry places of the land, instigating the
owner of each poor and barren plot, not
to cultivate and improve, but to curse the
little portion he is heir to. It was this
same spirit that could heretofore with
mischievous exaggeration deck out the
avowed implacable enemy of its country
with irresistible might, with infallible
sagacity, and inexhaustible resource, and
with prophetic fervor could foretcl the
stability of all that he should set up, and
the ruin of all lie should denounce; the
same spirit that could boldly excuse
and justify all his crimes, or more boldly
could deny them. When baffled in its
every hope, belied by every prophecy,
this bankrupt firm of impudent invention
has still new fictions ready for new cre-
dulity, new idols for folly's worship, and
honourable attributes for every new dis-
turber of the public quiet. If it be true
that each several nation has a peculiar
national character belonging to its inha-
bitants, the king who finds himself at the
head of a frank, a gallant, and a generous
people can wish to exchange the subjects
of his government for no others on the
face of the earth; in their valour lie is
renowned abroad-in their honourable
allegiance he is secure at home; but there
are circumstances that will invariably
work a change in every national character,
and perhaps the strongest changes are
the most generous and the best. Such is
the circumstance of great national success
in war-this will infuse a chivalrous ar-
dour-a zeal for enterprise-a restless
desire of still finding something to oppose,
and something to defend-a chivalry that
will delight in the mimic circumstance of
war, the polished armour and the nodding
plume-a chivalry that will combat ima-
ginary oppressors, that will liberate con-
victed culprits, and commission them to
carry their chains and their innocence to
the inspiring genius of its romantic his-
tory. Such drawback to national suc-
cesses in the wild enthusiasm they inspire,
it may be well for a prince, on his own
personal account, to estimate before he
voluntarily engages in a war; in defensive
warfare, however, he can have no option,
and where upon first assuming the reins


JA'q. 23), IS21.[0


Ir 37]







39] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
of government, he finds the kingdoms of
his rule already engaged up to the very
crisis of a contest, no alternative remain-
ing but between perseverance in much
peril, or submission in lowest degradation,
he has then only to elect whether he will
choose to reign over a broken-hearted
humbled people, who will never infringe
his prerogatives, nor question his rights,
nor obstruct his functions, nor presume
to insult his person, or whether, dismiss-
ing all selfish consideration, at the risk of
the throne he sits on, unappalled by the
fate of his neighbour kings, then captives
or in exile, unintimidated by those at
home whose patriotic prudence would
suggest more cautious counsels-whether
ie will, disdaining all compromise of na-
tional dignity, rouse the ardour of his
empire, and dare to rely upon it. If he
shall have pursued this course, and if in
doing so lie shall have saved for his king-
doms every thing, and their honour, it is
no small drawback that shall cancel the
gratification of his bosom; and could he,
at a moment when popular ardour is
misled, regret the deliverance he has
worked and the laurels he has planted,
he might perhaps deserve that those
whose deliverance he has worked should
withhold from him their gratitude and
affection. The partial abuses of benefits
conferred will not check the further efforts
of beneficent minds; if they did so, all
national improvement must stand still, the
illiterate must remain without instruction,
because those who had hitherto abused
their ignorance are now poisoning the
new springs of their knowledge. Unhap-
pily, this wickedness has not spared us,
it is, Sir, the unkindest cut of all ;" that
benevolent, christian, good-will towards
man, which had spared neither toil nor
cost, by education, to enlighten, and, by
enlightening to improve, is doomed to
suffer, like the wounded bird of the
Poet, who
" Saw his own feather on the fatal dart,
And winged the shaft which quivered in
his heart;
Keen was the pang, but keener still to feel,
lie nursed the pinion which impell'd the
steel."
As one who can share a pride in the in-
tellectual improvement of his fellow sub-
jects; who can admire the zeal which ex-
cites, and the liberality which promotes
it; who can appreciate the laborious re-
search which renovates pious endowments,
lung since sleeping with their founders;-


Address on the King's Speech [40
as one who can pay the humble tribute of
his praise for all that has been done and
is doing in this cause, I cannot but deeply
share their mortification who deplore the
base perversion of such noble purposes.
It is no new thing, indeed, for slander to
arraign all that is high and holy; but the
tongue of slander, however venomous,
can inflict no wound, can effect no punc-
ture, in the character that is sound and
whole; it is the pen of the libeller, against
which innocence is no shield; and at a
time when the evil eye of discontent not
only envies its neighbour's goods, but
covets its neighbour's character, we have,
Sir, to dread and to repel one general
levelling system, both of property and of
good name. The barrier of the constitu-
tion will not fall down at the first giddy
shout of the multitude; the high tribunals
which are its bulwarks will yetstand, though
treason deny their authority, and conscious
guilt their justice; blasphemy may rail
at the holy place, and hypocrisy defile it
with her pageants, long, long before the
dome will totter; but the ruin must come
at last, if the remedy be not fitly inter-
posed. When the league of what is base
and false, profligate and malicious, shall
unite honour and integrity to oppose it,
the evil then works its own cure, and the
remedy is near at hand ; we know its effi-
cacy, we have proved it scarce a twelve-
month since. In the shows and proces-
sions of the year which has just expired,
who but must have called to mind the like
exhibitions of the twelvemonth which
preceded it? The music, the march, and
the banner, the meeting, the resolution,
and address; those first were the very
prototypes of these last arrays; the same
in their real origin, and in their real ob-
ject, differing only in their method of pur-
suing it; the first pursued its object by
denouncing the aristocracy, the second
by denouncing the Crown; the aristo-
cracy was then true to itself; the repre-
sentatives of the people were then faith-
ful; and if the highest duties of fidelity
be now as well fulfilled, the country is yet
safe.-If we turn our eyes from the cares
of domestic solicitude and look abroad,
the whole world is to us a scene of calm,
of tranquillity; our flag flies on every
sea, our busy industry plies in every port;
our merchants are the rulers of kingdoms,
our character every where high, and our
credit every where firm. If this honour.
if this power, if this peace, have been
worth winning, we might, Sir, think them







at the Opening of the Session.


worth enjoying ; but there is a consistency we have new functions to attend to, and a
in the perverseness of those who refuse new degree of vigilance to exercise. The
to enjoy the fruits of measures which they greatness we have so hardly earned we
have so loudly and indiscriminately con- never shall willingly descend from; we
demned. If the ill-humour which has for shall bequeath it to posterity as we won
twenty long years and more, so actively it; it is a greatness which is no empty
despaired of the public weal, would at last name. This greatness is the vigour of
confine the limit of its despondency to its our commerce, and the credit of our mer-
own particular views and its own private cantile good faith. We have no covetous
ends, content might then rest at home, and craving to satisfy, either of riches or of
in its easy seat enjoy the fire-side it has territory-the treasury of Europe was at
defended; but when the shout of clamour our feet when our bayonets mounted
is heard from without, that well-known guard at Paris: we parted the spoil
cry which so loudly informed our enemies amongst the rightful claimants, keeping
of the exhaustion of our resources and the for ourselves nothing but the satisfaction
futility of our resistance; that same cry of having done so. From a nation which
which so urgently demanded a reform, has so acted, no well-constituted govern-
since confessed by its chiefest advocates ment will fear aggression, nor will pro-
to be impracticable or inexpedient; that voke it; and we have the satisfaction of
same cry which so formidably opposed knowing, that his majesty receives from
any protection to our agricultural interest, foreign powers the assurance of a con-
under which protection alone, daily labour tinuance of their friendly dispositions.-
is now eating its daily bread, as often as Whilst we lament that unfortunate cir-
this cry of ill-omen is raised and is reiter- cumstances affecting the commercial
ated, activity must become a duty, and credit of Ireland have impeded the re-
the supineness of loyalty is a cowardice at ceipts of the public revenue in that part
least. It is said that there are some, and of the United Kingdom, we turn with pe-
there are some who have said it them- culiar pleasure to the consolatory balance
selves, that on looking back to the popular of new encouragement to our manufac-
demands which they have sanctioned with tures, by the recent improvement of our
their names, and supported with their trade ; and it is with satisfaction we hear
abilities, they are now convinced, that that his majesty has been enabled to make
youthful ardour had led them to overstep some further reduction in his-military es-
the line of expediency and prudence. It tablishment.-Sir, in adverting to the
might be well if those whose second and proposed provision for the Queen, I ima-
better thoughts lead them to this con- gine it will be sufficient that on the pre-
clusion, would apply their matured judg- sent occasion we express our humble ac-
ment to the consideration of the future as quiescence in his majesty's recommenda-
well as of the past, and would view in tion; and, without presuming to suggest
prospect the expediency of those measures what line of conduct may best become
to which they may now be lending the others, I am satisfied it will best become
weight of their names and of their stations me to avoid the utterance of a single word
and their characters. It might be well if which might provoke premature discus.
they would remember, that the strong as- sion, and unnecessarily disturb the unani-
sertion is received into ready ears which mity of our this night's vote. It is in the
are shut against the subsequent explana- sincere hope and expectation of an unani-
tion, and that there are some evils, easily mous concurrence that I propose an Ad-
inflicted, for which retraction is no redress, dress consistent with the sentiments I have
The breach of that cordial confidence declared, and with the feelings I entertain
which ought to subsist, and which has of loyalty to the throne, and of ardent
subsisted, between the several orders of love for our constitution as it stands, and
society living under this happy constitu- as it has so long stood.-The hon. gen-
tion, must be an evil beyond redress; this tleman then moved,
confidence was our strength in battle, our That an humble Address be presented
union in effort, our hope, and our protec- to his majesty, to return the thanks of
tion. He who dissolves it, breaks our talis- this House for his most gracious Speech
man, the only witchcraft we have used" from the throne:-To express the satisfac-
to make of a little island a great nation. tion which we feel in learning that his
Sir, as a great nation taking a chief place majesty continues to receive from foreign
amongst the chiefest powers of the earth, powers the strongest assurances of their


JAN. 23, 1821.







43] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
friendly disposition towards this country;
and gratefully to acknowledge his ma-
jesty's gracious intimation of the deep re-
gret which he should feel if the occur-
rences which have taken place in Italy
should eventually lead to any interruption
of tranquillity in that quarter, as well as
in the declaration that it would in that
case be his majesty's great object to se-
cure to his people the continuance of
peace:-To thank his majesty for having
directed the estimates for the current
year to be laid before us, and to express
our satisfaction that his majesty has been
enabled to make some reduction in our
military establishments :-To assure his
majesty that we shall have great pleasure
in finding, from the accounts of the public
revenue, that notwithstanding the receipt
in Ireland has proved materially deficient,
in consequence of the unfortunate circum-
stances which have affected the commer-
cial credit of that part of the United King-
dom, and although our foreign trade dur-
ing the early part of this time was in a
state of depression, the total revenue has
nevertheless exceeded that of the pre-
ceding year; and that, though a consi-
derable part of this increase must be as-
cribed to the new taxes, the augmentation
in some of those branches which are the
surest indications of internal wealth will
be found to have fully realized any expec-
tation which could reasonably have been
formed of it:-To assure his majesty,
that we shall not fail to apply ourselves to
consider what new provisions it will, under
present circumstances, be necessary to
make for the Queen, the separate provi-
sion which was made for her majesty as
princess of Wales, in the year 1814, hav-
ing terminated with the demise of his late
majesty; and to thank his majesty for in-
forming us, that he has in the mean time
directed such advances to be made as are
authorized by law :-To express our con-
currence in the satisfaction felt by his ma-
jesty in being able to acquaint us that a
considerable improvement has taken place
in several of the most important branches
of our commerce and manufactures; and
that, in many of the manufacturing dis-
tricts, the distresses which prevailed at the
commencement of the last session of par-
liament have greatly abated:-To thank
his majesty for the assurance of his most
anxious desire to concur in every mea-
sure which may be considered as calcu-
lated to advance our internal prosperity:
-To convey to his majesty our strong


Address on the King's Speeck [44
conviction, that, notwithstanding the agi-
tation produced by temporary circum-
stances, and, amidst the distress which
still presses upon a large portion of his
majesty's subjects, the firmest reliance
may be placed on that affectionate and
loyal attachment to his majesty's person
and government, the testimonies of which
he is graciously pleased to acknowledge
as having recently received from all parts
of his kingdom, and to consider as the
best and surest safeguard of his throne:-
To assure his majesty, that, in the dis-
charge of the important duties imposed
upon us, we are fully sensible of the indis-
pensable necessity of promoting, to the ut-
most of our power, a due obedience to
the laws, and of instilling into all classes
of our fellow subjects a respect for lawful
authority, and for those established insti-
tutions, under which the country has been
enabled to overcome so many difficulties,
and to which, under Providence, may be
ascribed our happiness and renown as a
nation."
Mr. James Browne rose to second the
Address. He said, that eventful times
had been lately witnessed, in which de-
structive principles had assumed new
shapes, and menaced every thing valuable
with ruin. He hoped such scenes would
never be renewed. He could almost wish
them obliterated from our history, if it
were not that their remembrance might
have a salutary influence on two sets of
men-one of whom forgot their duty to
their country, in the heated activity of
party, and the other passively submitted
to the development of principles at vari-
ance with all its interests. As to the Ad-
dress which had just been offered to the
House, he did not know what grounds of
opposition there could be to it. The
present times imposed on parliament a
heavy responsibility. He was sure it was
the wish of every honest man to see par-
liament take such steps as would tend to
tranquillise the country. It was only his
part to show that the Address advised
such a mode of proceeding. It was pecu-
liarly necessary in these times, when prin-
ciples of rational duty and conduct had
been so much laid aside, that parliament
should not so descend from its high sta-
tion, and be so forgetful of its dignity as
to allow the session to terminate without
attending to the wants, the interests and
the business of the nation [hear! from all
parts of the House]. He should not have
indulged in those general observations, if







at the Opening of the Session.


facts had not too strongly impressed on
his mind the necessity of keeping such
points iniview. The honourable member
then adverted to the actual state of Ire-
land. He said, that by a kind of infatua-
tion, from which no national wisdom was
S at times exempt, the affairs of Ireland had
been for a long time made the subject of
short consultations and ill-attended de-
bates. Yet during the progress of the
events which had lately harassed and di-
vided this country, the most furious de-
magogue there had not raised his voice to
applaud the conduct of those who endea-
Svoured to agitate Great Britain, and who
introduced the new and odious doctrine,
that the same licence should be allowed
to female conduct which the established
usages of society had given to nen. It
did not, however, require much research
into history, to show, that national debau-
S chery and national ruin went hand in
hand. As to ministers, he, for one, must
approve of their conduct in the most try-
ing emergencies. He saw in them no de-
ficiency of virtue or wisdom. They had
acted in a manner worthy of themselves,
and worthy of the great glories which
they had achieved for the country-
S glories which he trusted would eventually
bear them triumphant through all the as-
persion and calumny which the spirit of
party had endeavoured to heap upon
them ; but if they failed, it was his sincere
opinion that they would fall in the de-
fence of all those principles and institu-
tions which contributed to the national
safety, honour and happiness. He con-
cluded by seconding the Address.
Mr. Curwen concurred in many of the
general observations expressed by the
honourable mover and seconder of the
Address, and agreed with them, that the
Speech from the throne did not contain
any topic on which there could be any
material difference of opinion; but al-
though what it contained was not likely
to provoke discussion, yet he could not
but remark upon what it had omitted. It
was not the first time he had had to lament
the ignorance which ministers showed of
the real state of the country. When he
looked to the state of agriculture, he
would ask, could the noble lord opposite
be really ignorant that the agricultural in-
terests were in so wretched a condition,
that scarcely any abatement would in-
duce the cultivators of the land to go on
with their labours? Knowing, as he did,
their privations, their disappointments,


their sufferings, he could not but call on
every man of sound and honest feeling
to admire their exemplary patience.
There were men, however, who arrogated
to themselves the monopoly of all the
loyalty in the country; but the conduct
of a community which had borne unex-
ampled hardships with an unparalleled
spirit of endurance, proved that loyalty
was not an exclusive possession, that it
was not confined to this or that set of
men, but was the great characteristic of
the country. This being the case, he
was sorry to find that the Crown, on the
present occasion, had not expressed one
solitary feeling of regret for the fallen
prosperity of agriculture, and the ruin of
the spirited and hardy race, whose la-
bours had previously placed it in so
flourishing a condition. He could not
tell why this topic had been passed over;
he did not speak of it as an irritating sub-
ject, nor did he wish to recall the events of
past times. If he touched upon matters
of so melancholy a character, it was be-
cause he wished that measures should be
taken, while there was yet time, to con-
ciliate the operation of all parties, in at-
tempting the salvation of the country.
He had long ago told ministers that they
were leading the country to ruin; and he
saw that their measures were so partial
and confined, that in avoiding one evil
they necessarily fell into another. Deeply
did he lament, that session after session
should be suffered to pass without any
attempt to discover a real and effectual
remedy for such a state of things; yet he
still hoped that it was not too late for that
remedy to be applied. He rejoiced in the
temper evinced by the Speech from the
throne; by that Speech he would wish to
believe that the olive-branch was held out.
Whatever might be the conduct of minis-
ters, it showed something like a spirit to
conciliate and heal, and he hoped in God,
that such an expectation might be realized.
-The hon. gentleman then adverted to
the subject of reform in parliament: he
stated that a temperate reform, such a re-
form as would make that House be re-
spected by the people (and further he
would not go), was essential to the re-
establishment of internal peace, and gene-
ral confidence and prosperity. As to mi-
nisters, they had fully proved their inabi-
lity to govern; never was the community
so universally impressed with the convic-
tion of the incapacity of their responsible
rulers as at the present moment; so ge-


JAN. 23, 1821.







47] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
neral was that feeling, that all ranks of
men looked to their removal as their only
hope. Even the loyal addressers could
not approve of the conduct of administra-
tion. It was impossible that the country
could go on and pay the enormous taxes
with which it was burthened. How, in-
deed, could it be expected, that with an
income so decreased, such an overgrown
system of taxation could be discharged ?
The whole landed property of the country
at 25 years purchase could not meet the
demand upon us. It was time, then, to
promote conciliation, and to try what
could be done to save the country. It
could no longer be said, sufficient, for
the day is the evil thereof." No man
could look on the state of the industrious
classes, and see their means consumed
and themselves driven into pauperism,
without raising his voice against the
system from which such alarming and pro-
gressive evils flowed. The poor-rates
had increased beyond all precedent; it
was calculated that this tax alone was ade-
quate to the whole rental of the country.
Did ministers think this subject also un-
worthy their attention ? It was in vain to
avoid these subjects; if we passed them
over to-day, to-morrow they would force
themselves upon us. The only way to
escape the ultimate danger with which
they menaced us was, to look them now
fairly in the face. He was convinced,
that if the people found that their exer-
tions were met by a respondent wish on
the part of government, they would bear
cheerfully whatever it was necessary for
them to sustain, until an effectual remedy
could be applied to the grievances which
destroyed their resources, and neutralised
their industry. The hon. member con-
cluded by repeating his earnest wish, that
the agricultural state of the country
should be seriously taken into considera-
tion.
Mr. Tierney said, it was with great sa-
tisfaction that in rising to speak, on the
first day of the session, on the address in
answer to the Speech from the throne, he
felt himself freed from the necessity of
troubling the House with any amendment.
He knew, from long experience, that, as
a mark of respect to the Crown, the
course always adopted in the House was,
never to move an amendment unless the
address contained something which pledged
gentlemen to an opinion contrary to that
which they really entertained. The gen-
tlemen on his side of the House came,


Address on the King's Speech [48
however, to the consideration of the ques-
tion under circumstances of considerable
difficulty and disadvantage. They now,
for the first time, heard the Speech, and
they were immediately called on for a de-
cision. This was a practice only of late
years. Formerly it was customary to
read the Speech at the Cock-pit the night
before the meeting of parliament, which
placed gentlemen on a perfect equality.
Although he did not mean to offer any
amendment, he hoped the House would
forgive him if he did not pass by the
Speech without remark. Taking it as a
whole, there was nothing in it to provoke
discussion. He never heard a Speech
from the throne less likely to call forth the
observations of a friend, or to provoke the
animadversions of an enemy. It was as
moderate and correct as a speech, placed
by ministers in the mouth of his majesty,
could be supposed or expected to be.-
He was extremely glad to hear that the
continuance of peace with foreign powers
was likely to remain uninterrupted; be-
cause, notwithstanding all that was said
about the improvement of the revenue,
he was convinced that the stability of the
finances of this country depended on the
duration of peace; for though they might
uphold their finances, until circumstances
produced a new war, yet, taking every
thing into consideration, he could not
avoid looking to that period with great
dismay. Therefore, it gave him pleasure
to find that the friendly disposition of fo-
reign powers was not likely to be inter-
rupted. The next point in the Speech
was, that his majesty observed with great
concern the recent occurrences that had
taken place in Italy. This was not the
proper opportunity for entering into a dis-
cussion on the events which had taken
place there. But he thought the minis-
ters of this country would not do their
duty if they stood by, in a neutral atti-
tude, and did not prevent the great
powers from exercising acts of aggression
against the small ones. He felt some mor-
tification, after the millions they had ex-
pended to secure the peace of Europe,
when he found that they were to confine
themselves to humble, to very humble
hopes, that that peace would not be dis-
turbed by the recent events which had
been alluded to. There was a time when
a different tone would have been held;
and he hoped ministers would, in a proper
manner make known to those who were
likely to disturb the tranquillity of Eu-







at the Opening of the Session.


rope, when he found that they were to con-
fine themselves to humble, to very humble
hopes, that that peace would not be dis-
turbed by the recent events which had
been alluded to. There was a time when
a different tone would have been held;
and he hoped ministers would, in a proper
manner, make known to those who were
likely to disturb the tranquillity of Eu-
rope, that this country would not allow
any unprovoked aggression. Why had
not England an accredited representative
at the court of Naples ? But it was said
that an agent had been sent, not indeed to
a court, but to a meeting of sovereigns;
whose employment it was, to summon other
sovereigns before them, in order that they
should give an account of their proceed-
ings. These matters would, however, come
under the cognizance of the House here-
after, when they had assumed a more ripen-
ed shape. In the next place his Majesty
expressed his acknowledgment for the
provision which had been made last session
for the support of his civil government. No
person was more ready to provide for the
expenses of the Civil List than he was; but
he could not avoid observing, that these
acknowledgments came rather tardily.
Recollecting that it was the commence-
ment of a new reign-looking to the dis-
tresses of the people, and considering the
liberal manner in which the Civil List was
provided for, it surely was not too much
to expect that at the close of the last ses-
sion of parliament, some expression of
thanks-some manifestation of grateful
feeling, would have been directed to par-
liament. He was sure it would not have
been unpleasant to his Majesty to express
the feeling that existed in his own breast;
but it would have been extremely incon-
venient for ministers to meet parliament;
and, therefore, by anunexampled proceed-
ing, to prevent any discussion (notthrough
any feeling for the honour or dignity of
the throne, but to preserve their own situa-
tions), theyinsultingly dismissed theHouse.
-He found that it was intended to make
some reduction in the military establish-
ment. He was gladto hear it; and, when
they knew what the reduction was, they
would be able to decide whether it was
sufficient, or whether a further reduction
ought not to be made. Until that period,
he must abstain from offering any opinion
on the subject.-The most important part
of the Speech was that which related to the
finances. He did not think, at this time of
the day, any man could suppose that a
VOL. IV.


material improvement could be made in
the revenue of the United Kingdom. The
revenue, on the 5th of January last, ex-
ceeded, it was said, the amount of the
revenue on the 5th of January preceding.
Undoubtedly it did; but every man was
aware of the cause of it, and would attri-
bute it to the 3,000,0001. of new taxes
coming into operation at that period.
Ministers felt this, and wenton to say, that
in those branches which were the surest
indications of internal wealth there was a
great augmentation. He would state the
case thus :-There are 3,000,0001. of new
taxes, the whole of which were in operation
on the 5th of January last; but they were
only in operation for one quarter, on the
5th of January preceding. For three-
fourths of the former year they were not
available. Those new taxes were calculated
to produce 3,200,0001., but they really
produced only 2,200,0001.: therefore he,
as a plain man, would say, that they had
lost a million. With respect to the parti-
cular articles alluded to, the statement of
increase was not correct. On the whole
year there might be an increase; but in
the corresponding quarter there appeared
to be a falling off. Now, why was it ne-
cessary, in the present stateof the country,
to hold out such a delusion ? It was not
because expressions of the prosperity of
the country were put into the royal mouth,
that therefore a person acquainted with
the real situation of things should stultify
himself by believing them against the dic-
tates of his own sense, and when he knew
the reverse to be the fact.-The next sub-
ject alluded to in the Speech was certain-
ly a very delicate one-he meant the in-
tended provision for the Queen. Upon
that delicate subject the King said in his
speech:-" The separate provision which
was made for the Queen, as Princess of
Wales, in the year 1814, terminated with
the demise of his late Majesty. I have,
in the mean time, directed advances, as
authorized by law; and it will, under
present circumstances, be for you to con-
sider what new arrangements should be
made on this subject." He owned that
this mode of communicating that his ma-
jesty had continued to the Queen the
35,0001. a year voted by parliament for
her majesty when princess of Wales ap-
peared to him a little remarkable. le had
always thought that it was for the Crown
to recommend such grants as his majesty
should deem proper for the establishments
of such branches of the royal family as
N E


JAN. 23, 1821.










the King should select and point out. Of his majesty. It was said, indeed, that
course it would be for the Chancellor of his majesty had received with satisfaction
the Exchequer to point out the mode of those assurances of attachment to his per-
carrying the details into execution; but son and government; if by gov-ernment
still the recommendation usually came was meant the Constitution, they would
from the Crown in a more distinct and all agree upon the subject. But if by
sp4 l ape than in the present instance, government was meant the King's minis-
The ma-0 er of doing it appeared to him ters, he would be glad to be shewn the
hele to be unnecessarily cold ; it would single address which declared any attach-
have been, in his opinion, better at once ment to them or expressed any approbation
to have been explicit, and stated, fully of their conduct. Head not seen in any
and unequivocally, what were the whole of news-paper, or any were else, one solitary
the intentions of his majesty's ministers address to that effect, not one which said
towards the Queen, and by so doing put- a word about the matter. Ministers were'
ting an end to a painful and distressing too modest to require any such thing. 4
subject, which had for the last nine months They shrunk, no doubt, from their own
agitated the country from one end to ano- commendation, but certainly their ability
other. Ministers should have avoided any for bearing much eulogy had not of late
thing like ambiguity on such a subject, been put to the test (a laugh.) No, the
and not have gone out of their way to use Addressers confined themselves to general
the term new arrangements ;"-a phrase expressions of loyalty, and observations
which looked as if something more was upon the existence of blasphemy and 4
intended than met the eye. It was his in- sedition, along with the old story of the
tention to have also expressed his surprise licentiousness of the Press. But it was
that nothing had been explicitly said upon very remarkable that there was nothing.in
the subject of agriculture; a subject upon the Speech from. the throne about either
which, however, his observations had been the press, blasphemy, or sedition, yet
anticipated by his hon. friend near him those subjects had been for some time
(Mr. Curwen). Commerce and manufac- agitating the country; and made the pre-
tures were in a very distressing state; and text for convening numerous meetings. *
agriculture was on all sides pressed upon. It was evident, therefore, from the loyal
The next topic in the Speech was where the Addresses themselves, that all men were
King used these words:-" In the dis- heartily tired of ministers, and wished to
charge of the important duties imposed on get rid of them. These Addresses, -how-
you, you will, I am confident, be sensible ever, were easily got up; they arose out
of the indispensable necessity of promoting of nothing but the failure of the measures
and maintaining, to the utmost of your advised by ministers in the last session.
power, a due obedience to the laws, and For their own convenience, and to recruit 0
of instilling intoall classes of my subjects their shattered resources, ministers then
a respect for lawful authority, and for had parliament prorogued, and employed
those established institutions under which two months in prevailing once retain bo-
the country has been enabled to overcome roughs and corporate bodies to vote what
so many difficulties, and to which, under they called Loyal Addresses, while in the
Providence, may be ascribed our happi- mean time, in many instances, where a res-
ness and renown as a nation." Now one pectahle county meeting was demanded,.
would really have thought from events to animadvert upon t1i late meamires
lately recorded in the gazette, that this of the government, the sheriff interposed
duty of inculcating a due respect for the obstacles in the way, and did all in his.
laws was almost unnecessary. There was power to prevent it. He did not forget
another topic which the Speech did not that in the discussion on the bills for
omit to notice; it was that which spoke Regulating Public Meetings during last
of the satisfaction'which his majesty had session, the advocates of ministers had
received from the loyal Addresses which stated, that it would add a dignity to the a
had been voted to the throne from dif- right of petition, to put meetings for that
ferent parts of the kingdom. He was purpose under the control of the sheriff;
glad that those thingshadgiven his majesty but now it appeared to be equivalent to
satisfaction; but it was very remarkable, obstructing the right of petition. He
that the loyal Addressers did not express must say, that, in some instances, the
affection or attachment to any thing in conduct of the sheriff had been quite
the shape of a man in this country, but outrageous. Bat, whenever meetings had


5 1] II'OVSB OF CODWNIONS,


Aldlress on the Kiai'g's Sliech


152 .








V 531


at the Opening ofthe Session.


been allowed to be convened, whether in
whig or tory counties, as they were called,
to vote addresses expressive of loyalty,
they could not refrain from tacking to
them amendments condemnatory df the
conduct of ministers, to whom the coun-
a try was aware that it was indebted for
more evils than to the licentiousness of the
Press. Even so late as yesterday, one of
the strongest tory counties (Oxford,) was
glad to adopt an amendment against them.
His majesty had, however, relieved the
country from any alarm which was at-
tempted to be sounded by the cry of blas-
S phemy and sedition, in not noticing these
topics in the Speech from the throne.
The expressions of loyalty had, however,
given heartfelt satisfaction to his majesty,
and on that account alone he was glad of
them; though he believed they gave no
.satisfaction to any other person in the
0 kingdom.
Lord Castlereagh said, he did not rise
on account of any thing which had fallen
from the right lion. gentleman who had
spoken last; on the contrary, he thought
he had gone through the several topics of
the Speech from the throne, with much
candour, and a great deal of good temper.
He might be allowed to say, however,
that when, in an early part of the even-
ing, he had seen the right hon. gentle-
man driving into the field of the hon. and
learned member, he was led to believe
that the debate would be a long and
stormy one, and he did not know at what
' period of the morning they would be
enabled to separate. Now it appeared
that he had been mistaken, and for all
that had happened, they might as well
have proceeded at once to the ordinary
business, as have consumed the early
part of the evening in a very novel and use-
less kind of debate. But, though it could
not be objected to the Speech from the
throne, that it contained any topic which
could excite a debate, they were, never-
theless, told, that important matters had
been omitted which it should not have
passed over. An hon. gentleman oppo-
site (Mr. Curwen,) had brought before
the notice of the House the agricultural
interests. He could assure the hon. gen-
tleman that government did not look with
indifference on them or on any of the
interests in which the prosperity of the
country was bound up; but he believed
that the distress of which he spoke, arose
more from the internal circumstances'of
S the country, than the state of the laws as


JAN, 23, 1821. [54


they affected agriculture, and the produce
of the.land. Ministers wouldbe always
ready to hear from that hon. gentleman,
or from any other, such plans of relief as
could have a practical result. Such sug-
gestions as could be usefully adopted,
when made upon former odc Ui had
not been un'-trend'.l t-.. The right hon.
gentleman who spoke last, had forciblyani-
madverted upon the necessity of cultivat-
ing that pacific system which was so
agreeably dwelt upon in the opening para-
graph of the Speech. He could assure
him, that he did not overrate the import-
ance and value of a continuation of peace
more than his majesty's ministers did;
nor could he have a more fixed determi-
nation to maintain peace by all themeans
which were consistent with the honour,
dignity, and safety of the country. With
reference to the continental relations of
the country, he should be happy at the
proper time to give the right hon. gentle-
man every explanation for which he might
think proper to call. He would then see
that the fundamental policy of this coun-
try, in its late intercourse with foreign
powers, was uniformly pacific; but were
they therefore to be called upon to inter-
meddle with the internal arrangements of
other powers? Were they to be called upon
on every occasion to direct and control
what other states might think necessary
for their own interests, or for what they
thought or felt to be their own interests?
Was it to be enforced as a part of the
policy of this country, that England
should interfere with whatever arrange-
ments other powers should adopt for their
own security? He was sure that such a
spirit of intermeddling would ill accord
with that pacific spirit which was so well
described as being the best policy for
England to inculcate in her relations with
other states. If this country meant to
remain at peace, she must not show too
great a desire to intermeddle with the
internal affairs of other nations. Eng-
land was a power eminently maritime in
her character, and could only appear on
the Continent under the pressure of im-
perative circumstances. Certainly not,
without a commanding and unavoidable
necessity, for the purpose of controlling
or intermeddling with arrangements which
had no reference to her own interests.
Whenever the proper time should arrive,
his majesty's government would be pre-
pared to shew, that the language which
had been held by this country, and the







55] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
principles on which that language had
been ;founded, were perfectly consist-
ent with its character. This, however,
he begged leave at once to say, that it
must not be inferred that Great Britain
was, of necessity a party to all the deli-
beratifaa/nd conclusions consequenit on
those discussions, at which a British minis-
ter might be present. We had our own
interests to watch over; and in his opinion
it was an additional proof ofthe confidence
happily existing among the great powers
of Europe, that they received at their
meetings the ministers of powers, who were
not immediately connected with the
measures in progress; in order that their
respective governments might, neverthe-
less, have the satisfaction of knowing the
exact nature of those measures. He hoped
he had said enough on this part of the
subject, and he would therefore reserve
any further observations for a future op-
portunity.-With respect to what had
fallen from the right hon. gentleman upon
the state of the revenue, the House would
of course expect the fullest information
from his right hon. friend, the Chancellor
of the Exchequer; but as his right hon.
friend might not feel himself called upon
to rise in the course of the present even-
ing, it would perhaps be as well if he
:shortly stated what was meant in the
Speech upon that head. What the Speech
;intended to convey was this: that the
revenue of the year had not decreased in
comparison with the former year, notwith-
standing the deficiency in the Irish and in
the foreign trade, atthe commencement of
the year, the latter had, however, con-
siderably increased towards the close of
the year; The Speech, it was true, gave
credit for a part of the increase of revenue
to the operation of the new taxes; but,
independent of these, it gave- credit for
an increase in that revenue itself. The
right hon. gentleman had said, that the
estimate of the new taxes was 3,200,0001.
and the receipts 2,200,0001. leaving a
Deficit of1,000,0001. Now, that was not
the fair way ofputting it, for theright hon.
gentleman should have born in mind,
that 700,0001. of the new taxes had been
received during the last year, which, if
added to the 2,200,0001., or as the fact
was, 2,300,0001. made an increase of
3,000,0001. in the revenue. And had it
not been for the falling off of 600,0001. in
Ireland from local causes,' and of between
600,0001. and 700,0001. early in the year
in our foreign trade, the aggregate amount


Address on the King's Speech [5f
of revenue would have been 4,000,0001.;
from which deducting the 3,000,0001. new
taxes, there would have remained a sur-
plus of about 1,000,0001. In the early
part of the last year, there was certainly
a marked falling off in the commerce of
the country, but that depression had
ceased; and looking at the last half-year,
there was great reason to entertain the
hope of a complete return of our come
mercial prosperity. Although every man
must regret that there still existed much
local pressure and distress, he appealed
to the House, whether, in the situation of
those districts which were suffering most
when parliament last inquired into the
subject, there was not a marked improve-
ment. Not only were the wages of the
manufacturers in general increased, but
those wages were rendered more appli-
cable to the wants of the individuals, by
the reduction which had taken place in
the price of the necessaries of life. There
was every reason to hope that this favour-
able state of things would become still
more satisfactory.-Now with respect
to that part of his majesty's Speech
which related to the provision to be
made for the Queen, he did not un-
derstand the right hon. gentleman to
make any complaint, but that it would
have been more becoming if his majesty's
ministers had advised his majesty to sug-
gest some specific sum, as that which he
would recommend for their adoption. If
the right hon. gentleman thought that the
word ," arrangements" in his majesty's
Speech meant any thing more than that
which parliament might consider a suit-
able provision for her majesty, he was
much mistaken. It was more consistent
with the uniform practice, in speeches
from the throne, to call the attention of
parliament generally, and not particu-
larly, to such subjects. In messages,
particular sums had, at various periods,
been recommended, but not in speeches
from the throne. Of course it would be
the duty of his majesty's government to
propose to parliament the sum which, in
their view of the subject, was the most
expedient; and he would therefore now
give notice, that on Wednesday in the
next week he would make a proposition to
the House on the subject, He fixed Wed-
nesday, because Miopday and Tuesday
were days over which parliament were in
the habit of adjourning. On Wednesday,
therefore, he should propose what his ma-
jesty's government considered would be a







at the, Opening of the Session.


proper provision for her majesty; and it
would .be the only proposition which it
was his. intention to make on that anxious
subject ;-there were other parts of the
right hon. gentleman's speech to which he
did not think it necessary at that time to
S advert; although he could not help ac-
knowledging the temperate character of
the whole of the right hon. gentleman's
remarks. On one point however-the
separation of parliament-he wished to
make a few observations. He could as-
sure the right hon. gentleman, that, if he
imagined that his majesty's government
Advised the prorogation of parliament, to
evade the discussion of their conduct in
that or the other House, he was much
deceived. He could assure the right hon.
gentleman, that nothing was more grati-
fying to him, than that the moment had
arrived in which the whole of their con-
* duct might be investigated, and consi-
dered with that gravity and deliberation
which, it was the interest of the country,
should attend all their proceedings. For
himself, he could justly say, that he had
never felt any difficulty, in the situation
of the country, which had not been con-
siderably relieved by the application of
* the wisdom of parliament to the subject.
In recommending to his majesty, there-
fore, to prorogue parliament, in Novem-
ber last, his majesty's ministers had not
been influenced by any wish to elude in-
quiry, They had no disposition to con-
ceal any thing from the House on the
subject. But the fact was, that at various
adjournments of that House which had
taken place prior to the prorogation, it
had been distinctly understood, and on
one occasion, he had endeavoured dis-
tinctly to convey that understanding to
the noble lord on the third bench on the
other side of the House, that the vote of
S adjournment was proposed, in order that,
if the bill then in progress in the House
of Lords should pass, the House of Com-
mons should meet in pursuance of the
call; but that if the Bill of Pains and
Penalties did not come to that House, then
the call would not be enforced, as it was
not intended to bring forward any other
* business. That was his view of the trans-
action; and what he had just stated was
simply laying the ground on which he
should be hereafter prepared to meet the
question.-With respect to what the right
hon. gentleman had said of the loyalty
of the country, he could assure the
right hou. gentleman that he, was as


confident as the. right ho., gentleman
himself could be, that that loyalty would
always manifest itself, whenever cir-
cumstances imperatively called for it.
He had always been persuaded, whatever
might be the occasion, that when the best
interests of the country were involved, the
good sense and good feeling: of the coun-
try would assert themselves, and make
their voices heard in support of the consti.
tution. He had always maintained, that
it was only necessary for the country to
see its danger, to make its voice heard,
and heard most loudly. Undoubtedly he
did not lament, that at the moment when
the infatuation of the country was at its
highest pitch, that language had not been
spoken which the right hon. gentleman
said was now so intelligible. The right
hon. gentleman, however, knew well what
was the real feeling of the country;-he
knew well that no minister had ever dared
to show his face in that House, and he
(Lord C.) trusted that no minister would
ever dare to show his face in that House,
who had lost the confidence of the coun-
try. The minister who had really lost the
confidence of the country, could not pos-
sess the confidence of that House; for
the people of the country, he meant the
rational part of the community-that part
which alone ought to possess any influence
over the legislature-always made its sen-
timents as distinctly and intelligibly felt
in that House, as if the.wildest plan of
reform that was ever proposed had been
adopted. He could assure the right hon.
gentleman, that, if he supposed that either
himself or his colleagues wished to remain
in the service of their sovereign a moment
longer than they possessed the confidence
of the House and the country,, he had mis-
taken the men. he had to deal with. As
long, however, as they possessed the con-
fidence of their sovereign, of the House,
and of the country, no difficulty with
which they had to contend, no taunts
from the right hon. gentleman or his
friends, no apprehension of consequences
personal to themselves, should induce
them to shrink from the discharge of their
public duty. He would say in reply to
the right hon. gentleman, that he felt it
no reproach to have the conduct of minis,
ters not specifically introduced in the late
Addresses, although he thought it a little
too much to say, that the governmenthad
influenced the sheriffs in the mode of dis-
charging the duties of their office; that
was to pay.but a poor compliment to the


JAN, 93, 1821o ,


p 57







59] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
gentry of the country. It would indeed
have 'been a reproach to his'majesty's mi-
nisters, if, at a moment when the most
valuable interests of the constitution were
at'stake, through the supineness of the
;obd--and the activity of the bad, they
had not called upon the rational part of
the country to come forward to vindicate
its character-and maintain its institu-
tions. They were not surely open to re-
'roach that, when the principal classes of
the community were engaged in testifying
their loyalty, they did not press upon
them any particular approbation of the
measures of ministers. Their conduct
ini that respect furnished a striking con-
trast to that of some of their opponents,
who never could afford a declaration of
their loyalty to the throne and attachment
to the constitution, when both were threat-
ened by the schemes of the disaffected,
without covenanting for a change of the
government.-Whether or not parliament
considered such a change desirable, was
not the subject of the present discussion.
An early day would probably set that
question in a clear light. 'The right hon.
gentleman (whom, although he disclaimed
being the head of a party, or that he pos-
sessed any influence beyond that of an in-
'dividual member of parliament he had
certainly heard on more than one occasion
marshalling his forces with the authority
of a leader) might bring that subject un-
der discussion, than which no one could
be more expedient or more constitutional,
whenever it appeared that the servants of
the Crown had lost the confidence of the
House. The short question would then
be,i whether a change of his majesty's
government should take place, with a
view of substituting the right hon. gen-
tleman and his friends for his majesty's
present ministers? That question he
should be most happy to meet at the pro-
per time. He trusted he did not look to
its agitation with unbecoming presump-
tion; but he felt himself perfectly prepar-
ed to state to the House the grounds on
which his majesty's present ministers
hoped they should continue to receive the
sanction and support of parliament. If
that sanction and support were withdrawn,
that step would, of course, determine the
fate of his majesty's present government.
He was sure that the House would decide
in wisdom. If their decision should prove
unfavourable to him, he would bow to
it with that sentiment of respect which
would become him. He confessed, how-


Address on the King's Speech


[60 *


ever, that he entertained no mistrust what-
ever of the issue of the contest: and he
was therefore fully prepared and anxious
to meet the right hon. gentleman, when-
ever he might think proper to make such
a proposition as would allow of the deter-
minationi of the question between them.
Lord Folkestone observed, that how-
ever much provoked to do so by some of
the topics which the noble lord had intro-
duced ini his speech, he would not detain
the House for any length of time. He
certainly did not entertain much hope
that the country would get rid of the noble
lord, if it depended on that House. So
long as the influence of government was
exercised in that House-that was, so
long as the House was constituted as it
was, so long he had no doubt the noble
lord would enjoy the confidence and sup-
port of that House, in spite of the opinion
of the country. He dared to say, the
noble lord, or his right hou. friends,
could shew them in black and white how
well their trust in the confidence of the
House was founded. He dared to say that
the gentlemen of the Treasury, if they ex-
hibited the correspondence which usually
took place before the meeting of parlia-
ment, could afford a very satisfactory
reason for the expectation of ministers on
the subject. But, if the noble lord
relied on the confidence of the country-
if he thought, that because, he possessed
the confidence of the sovereign and of that
House, he therefore possessed the con-
fidence of the country, he would find that
he was very much mistaken. The events
of the last three months ought to convince
the noble lord of his error, if he sup-
posed that he and his friends possessed
the confidence of the country. At no
period of our history had half, or even a
tithe of the number of public meetings
taken place, that had been held within the
period he had mentioned; and at every
one of those meetings, held in such a
manner as to admit of public discussion,
the conduct of the noble lord and his
colleagues had experienced the most
unequivocal reprobation. That a num-
ber of what were called Loyal Addresses
had been sent up to the Crown, he knew
perfectly well; but they had been voted
in secret, among gentlemen who were pro-
fessed supporters of the present adminis-
tration, although not one of them had
ventured to express any opinion of the
measures of the noble lord and his col-
leagues. Expressions of loyalty colmilng







JAxN.23, 1821. [62


in such a way were not of much value.
In his conscience he believed that his
majesty knew nothing of the way in
which these Addresses were got up; and
of this he was persuaded, that some of
them contained expressions, which, if
repeated to his majesty, would incur his
reprehension. And here he must say,
that he could not conceive any thing more
extraordinary than that the Secretary of
State for the Home Department should
take upon himself to make a selection from
the various'Addresses; and to determine
that he would present one, because.it
contained what he considered dutiful,
loyal, and affectionate expressions; and
withhold another, because it charged
ministers with wanting the confidence of
the country. He highly disapproved of
this selection, both because it was uncon-
stitutional, and because it was unfair
towards' his majesty, as it afforded him
only one view of the question.. The noble
Secretary of State for the Home Depart-
ment, in the course of his selections, had
selected one address, which had lately
been published in the gazette, and which,
if it had appeared in any other paper;
would unquestionably have called down
* the punishment, of that House. This
address professed to proceed from a set
of clergymen. It stated that the Ad-
dressers had witnessed with much regret
the spirit of disaffection so 'prevalent in
the country, ard especially the' violent
and unconstitutional speeches of the
Opposition in both Houses of parliament;
S and that they could not refrain from ex-
pressing their indignation at the insolence
of certain members of the Opposition on
the:prorogation of parliament; persuaded
as they were that if such conduct were
to pass unnoticed in the representatives
of the people, that nothing less than ge-
, neral sedition could be expected in the
country." Such were the style and lan-
guage of the Addresses'which the noble
Secretary of State for the Home Depart.
meant took upon himself to select for pub-
lication in the gazette. Such was the
respect which those Addressers exhibited
for the constituted authorities. And then
S the country were told of the licentious-
ness. of the Press! With respect to the
Speech from the throne, there was not
much in it to cavil at. Ministers had pur-
posely made it express as little as possible.
This was the necessary consequence of
what he could not but consider a great
ijxovation; namely, that of returning an


Address, immediately after the delivery of
the Speech. Up to the reign of Queen
Anne, another course was pursued, more
consonant to common sense-and to the
respect due to the Crown. When parlia-
ment was opened with a Speech from the
throne, instead of instantly replying to
all the topics of the Speech, time was
taken for consideration, and the answer
to the Speech was always postponed for
several days. He believed that this prac-
tice was first departed from on the occasion
of one of the duke of Marlborough's great
victories. But even up to a period within
his own memory, it was usual to pro-
mulgate the contents of the Speech the
day before, so that any hon. gentle-
man might come down to the House pre-
pared to speak to theAddress. That was
a practice much more consonant to com-
mon sense, and to the respect due to his,
majesty, than the present one of requiring
an immediate Address, which was of
course an echo of the Speech, and of fram-
ing the Speech, in consequence, in such
a manner as to make it mean little or no-
thing. Adverting to the sudden proroga-
tion of parliament in November, he con-
tended that the mode in which that proro-
gation took place was wholly unprecedent-
ed. After a more liberal supply than had
ever before been granted to the Crown,
that House had been dismissed without
a single word of acknowledgment. He
denied that the understanding on the sub-
ject was such as the noble lord had repre-
sented it to be ; but even if it had been so,
the prorogation ought to have taken place
in a different manner. In his opinion, it
was the duty of ministers to have advised
his majesty on that occasion to make a
Speech by his commissioners, declaratory
of his sentiments on the state of public
affairs. That state was certainly one of
extraordinary danger; for the country
had been in unparalleled agitation for se-
veral months. Some statement might
have been inade on the part of his majes-
ty to quiet that agitation, and to prevent
all 'the turmoil which had since taken
place.- He denied, however, that there
was a general understanding that the pro-
rogation would take place under the cir-
cumstances described by the noble lord;
and" he appealed to all who heard him,
whether the' prorogation did not come
upon them as a kind of surprise ? The
prorogation itself, and the manner of the
prorogation, were both improper.-There
were:a great many omissions in the present


at the 0 'ing 'Pen f te Session.







63] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
Speech. One was, that of any allusion
to the agricultural distress, pervading, as
it did, every part of the country, from
one end of it to the other. To his great
astonishment, the noble lord had declared,
that there had been a great improvement
in our commerce and manufactures dur-
ing the last three or four months, and
that that improvement was going on. As
no other person had heard of that improve-
ment, the fact appeared to him to be incre-
dible. He remembered that at the ope-
ning of the last session similar congratula-
tions had been offered to the House on
the state of our domestic affairs. A few
years ago the flourishing condition of our
commerce was vaunted in a Speech from
the throne, within nine months from the
delivery of which, the country was over-
whelmed with commercial distress, which
the noble lord attributed to the sudden
transition from war to peace. He would
ask the noble lord, or the right hon.
gentleman near him, what were his
grounds for his present expectation of in-
creasing commercial prosperity ? So far
was he from thinking that our trade and
commerce would prosper, that he was
persuaded they would go on from bad to
worse, while the present taxation conti-
nued, Much as he respected the opinions
of his right hon. friend near him, he must
say, that he still adhered to all the princi-
ples which he had laid down two years
ago, on the discussion of the Bill for the
Resumption of Cash Payments. Every
minute of his subsequent experience had
confirmed him in the opinion which he on
that occasion maintained, namely, that
it was impossible the country could bear
a return to cash payments without a pre-
vious alteration in the gold standard. A
great part of our debt having been con-
tracted when the pound was much de-
preciated, it was, clearly impossible, and
would be manifestly unjust, to pay the
interest in pounds at the existing gold
standard. There were many other calami-
ties under which the country was labour-
ing, of which no notice. was taken in the
Speech from the throne. One, which
was, by no means the least, which had
been taken in hand by that House three
or four years ago, and which all persons
agreed, required the. most serious and im-
iediate consideration, was the state of
our Poor Laws. If his majesty's govern-
ment had in contemplation any proposi-
tion to remedy this, or the other evils in-
flicted on the country, it ought to have


Address on the King's Speech [64
been noticed in his majesty's Speech.
Something might also have been said
in it of the agitation into which the country
had been thrown by the conduct of minis-
ters with respect to the Queen. For five
months the country had been kept in a
state of inquietude on this subject un-
paralleled, and pregnant with the great-
est evils. Nothing of the kind was, how-
ever, adverted to; and he firmly believed
that ministers would persevere in their
iniquitous course until they absolutely
drove the people to distraction. That
the noble lord would carry his measures
he had not the slightest doubt. That he
would obtain large majorities there was
not the slightest doubt; and as little,
that the unhappy people would continue
to be harassed and distracted. In every
point of view the prospect before us was
distressing and melancholy.
Mr. Wodehouse protested against the
assumption, that whoever supported the
measures of administration, and especially
with reference to her majesty, must neces-
sarily be a most servile dependent on a
most wicked government. From whom
came the objection to the loyal Addresses,
which some characterized as abetting ty-
ranny, others as fomenting sedition? -
From those who considered it a feather in
their caps, that they were the advocates of
freedom of opinion. If, however, he, or
those who thought with him, expressed
their opinion, they were instantly called
" dogs," dunghill dogs," hole and
corner men."-Hole and corner men!-
Why, there was no hole or corner, how-
ever obscure, into which he would not re-
tire, if he conceived it necessary to the
free and uncontrolled expression of his
sentiments. It was the power of expres-
sing an unbiassed opinion, that made the
privilege valuable.
Lord Folkestone explained, that he had
never objected to the expression of any
opinion, but merely to the manner in which
it was expressed. He wondered how the
King could derive any satisfaction from
addresses got up in the secret manner he
had pointed out.
Mr. Bathurst rose to vindicate his noble
relative, lord Sidmouth, from the impu-
tation which had been cast upon him by
the noble lord. He contended, that the
selections of the Addresses for presentation
to the King were founded in the strictest
policy, and denied that in this selection
any improper preference had been given.
Mr. Warre contended, that the expl~.


_ I~_







i 45]


Petitions relative to the Queen.


nation of the right hon. gentleman was
wholly insufficient. Adverting to'the ad-
dress which had been cited by the noble
lord, he characterized it as foully scanda-
lous; and commented with much severity
on the bad grace with which the selection
of it proceeded from a noble lord who had
issued a celebrated circular to the magis-
trates of the country on the subject of
libel.
The Address was then put and agreed to.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, January 24.
CONDUCT OF MINISTERS.]-The Mar-
quis of Tavistock said, that as his noble
friend, lord A. Hamilton, had fixed his
motion for Friday, he wished to give no-
tice, that he would, on Monday se'nnight,
move a Resolution expressive of the opi-
S nion of the House on the conduct of mi-
nisters in the late proceedings against her
Majesty.

PETITIONS RELATIVE TO THE QUEEN.]
Sir W. Lemon presented a petition from
the inhabitants of Truro, in Cornwall,
complaining of the late proceeding by
S Bill of Pains and Penalties against their
beloved and gracious Queen. They pray-
ed the House to use its influence in res-
toring her majesty's name to the Liturgy,
and in re-instating her in all the constitu-
tional rights and privileges which belong-
ed to her as Queen Consort of these
realms; they also prayed an inquiry into
the conspiracy by which her majesty had
been accused; and expressed a hope that
parliament would exert itself to prevent a
recurrence of those disgraceful proceed-
ings against her, by which the country
had so long been agitated.
Mr. Tynte presented a similar petition
* from the inhabitants of Bridgewater, upon
which he begged to offer a few observa-
tions. The petition would show thesen-
timents entertained by them of her ma-
jesty's innocence of the gross charges
-made against her. For himself, he was
not influenced by any opinion either of
her majesty's guilt or innocence. He
disapproved of the whole proceeding, be-
cause he felt that the charges brought
against her majesty were of a most vague
and indefinite nature, and in opposition
to the established laws of the country.-
He disapproved of those proceedings, be-
cause they did not afford her majesty the
.same means of defence which were grant-
VOL. IV.


JA. 24, 1821.


ed to an accused party in every othercase,
But looking at those proceedings in ano.
their point of view, he disapproved of them
because he conceived them to be a violent
attack upon the Constitution; for if the
Bill of Pains and Penalties had been forced
through both Houses of Parliament, and
had received the royal assent, he knew
not how soon or how often new prejudices
might arise, and new charges be made out
against other parties. He knew not how
soon new modes of trial might be intro-
duced, calculated to insure a conviction
against any individual accused, however
exalted, orhoweverinnocent [Hearhear!],
He opposed the measure, because he felt
convinced that it was derogatory from
the dignity of the Crown, and injurious to
the best interests of the country." The
House of Commons had endeavoured to
put an end to the proceeding, but, unfor-
tunately, in vain. It was not, however,
yet too late to step in and preserve the
confidence of the country; it was not yet
too late to exert themselves for the preser-
vation of what yet remained of the con-
stitution. That constitution had of late
been suspended, and in its room were
substituted laws hastily enacted, and cal-
culated for temporary purposes only.-
These were the sentiments which he enter-
tained upon the late proceedings, as well
as upon the present state of the country.
He did not at first intend to make any
observations on presenting the petition;
but knowing that it expressed the senti-
ments of a great portion of the loyal inha-
bitants of Bridgewater, he conceived him-
self bound to say a few words upon it.
Sir Robert Wilson thought, that as mi-
nisters took care to publish all the loyal
addresses, as they were called, and the
loyal addresses only, in the gazette, the
petitioners to Parliament in favour of her
majesty were entitled to have their peti-
tions printed. He therefore moved, that
the said petitions be printed.
The petitions were accordingly ordered
to be printed.
Mr. Pearse presented a petition from
the inhabitants of Northallerton, com-
plaining of the late, proceeding against
her majesty, which they observed had its
origin in a foul and malignant conspiracy.
They prayed the restoration of her ma-
jesty's name to the Liturgy, that a provi-
sion suitableto herrank as Queen Consort
should be made for her, and that an im-
mediate inquiry should be entered into, as
to the origin of the Milan commission,
F







67] HOUSE.OF COMMONS,
from which all the charges against her
majesty appear to have originated.
Mr. Western said, that a petition had
been presented, praying that House to
institute an inquiry into the conspiracy
against the Queen. He wished to learn
from the noble lord opposite when he
meant to institute that inquiry. The no-
ble lord had said, during the last session,
that if there was any conspiracy, it ought
tobe investigated, it ought to be probed to
the bottom, in order that its nature,extent,
and authors might be known. He (Mr.
W.) would say, that a more foul and abo-
minable conspiracy he had never heard
of. The evidence produced against her
majesty was proved to he all false and
perjured. The accusations brought by
his majesty's ministers had been support-
ed by testimony which was proved to be
perjured, bribed, procured by the most
corrupt means and influence. The whole
of the base and abominable proceeding
was marked by bribery, perjury, and
subornation. It was perfectly clear that
the Milan commission was at the bottom
of this foul and atrocious conspiracy.
Lord Castlereagh said, he would not
be dragged prematurely, by large and
high sounding phrases into a discussion of
such an important question. He meant
no petso.al disrespect to the honourable
member; but, on a question so grave
and so important, he would not make any
statements until it should come under the
judgment of the House fairly. If the
hon. gentleman thought it proper that
parliament should institute an inquiry of
the kind alluded to, it was perfectly
competent for him to move such an in-
quiry. He was in the recollection of the
House, when he said, that in the last
session, when a gallant general(Sir R.
Ferguson) had moved for the production
of documents to show the nature of the
Milan commission, he (Iord C.) had com-
plained of the choice of time for such a
motion, when the conduct of the Queen
herself was under investigation. He must
really express his surprise that gentlemen
who had on every occasion when the house
met moved an address to his majesty for a
prorogation, in order to extinguish all in-
quiry on the subject of the Queen, should
now appear so anxious to move any ques-
tion on the subject.
Sir R. Fergussonsaid, it was true, that
he had, last session made a motion on this
subject, of which the noble lord had got
rid by a mode peculiar to himself; that


Petitions relative to the Queen. [69
of moving the previous question. He
wished, however, to remind the noble
lord of his having then expressed his
readiness to enter on the inquiry, when
the proper period arrived. Now then, the
proper period was arrived, and he put it
to the noble lord whether he was ready to
redeem his pledge?
Lord Castlereagh said, the gallant
general had assumed that this was the
proper time for entering upon such an
inquiry. If he conceived so, let him
make any motion he pleased upon the
subject.
Mr. Bennet said, that, when the in-
famous bill of Pains and Penalties was in
the other House, and when the infamous
evidence in support of it had been circu-
lated through the country, he had taken
upon himself to say, that the evidence was
decisive of the existence of a conspiracy-
he would not say by whom-against the
honour and dignity of the Queen. The
noble lord had then said, that if a con-
spiracy did exist, he wished most anx-
iously to have it brought to light. He
now called upon the noble lord to put
his most anxious wish into execution.
Ministers owed it to themselves, to the
Crown, and to the country, to institute
an inquiry into this odious transaction.
Be they guilty or not guilty, they were
charged by the country with having con-
spired against the honour and character of
her majesty; and they were bound to en-
ter upon the inquiry, if they valued what
remained of their character. The noble
lord accused the Opposition side of the
House, with having last year endeavoured
to put a stop to the proceedings against
her majesty. True, they did so, because
they not only saw the iniquity of the
measure, but the evils which it would
bring upon the country. Therefore it
was, that they called for a prorogation of
parliament. But now they called for in-
quiry, for the purpose of punishing the
guilty, even though they should be found
to be the confidential ministers and ad-
visers of the Crown. There was nothing
more natural than that ministers should
wish to keep themselves safe; but the
hour for such an inquiry would come,
and that he hoped and trusted very
shortly. He was anxious, for the honour
of his majesty, that a full inquiry should
be gone into. That House was bound to
speak strongly, to prove that there existed
a mutual feeling between the House and
the country, and to force and drag for-







Petitions relative to the Queen.


ward not only the Milan commission, but
all the advisers of that proceeding, and
to insist on the restoration of her majesty's
name to the Liturgy.
Lord Castlereagh said, it was for those
honourable members who alleged that a
Conspiracy existed to prove it. It was
rather too much to call upon those who
were not aware of any such conspiracy to
prove its existence.
Sir R. Fergusson asked the noble lord,
whether the conspiracy, or whatever it
was called, by which the evidence was
collected, did not cost money ? and if so,
whether that expense was to be brought
under the notice of parliament ?
Mr. Curwen said, he held in his hand
a petition from the borough of Cocker-
mouth, which was most respectably signed,
by a great proportion of the inhabitants of
that town. The petitioners complained of
S the injustice done to her majesty in strik-
ing her name out of the Liturgy, before
any trial had been instituted against her.
They went on to state, that they had seen
with sorrow and indignation the peijury
and prevarication used in the witnesses
against her majesty. They prayed that
her majesty's name might be restored to
the Liturgy; and also that the House
would exert its influence in advising his
majesty to dismiss from his councils his
present ministers ; men who, for the last
twenty years, had declined practising that
economy which was recommended from
time to time by the Crown. He felt
himself bound to support this petition.
He had for years been listening to the
tales and slanders which had been circu-
lated against her majesty, and what was
the result? They had heard the evidence
brought forward against her majesty-
evidence upon which, as ajuryman, he,
upon his oath, would have acquitted her.
He pledged himself, that he, for one,
would use every effort in his power to
restore to her majesty those rights and
privileges which belonged to her as
Queen Consort. lHe hoped ministers
would retrace their steps, and render to
her majesty that justice to which she was
entitled. This was the only means by
which the peace of the country could be
restored,
Mr. Sykes presented a similar petition
from the inhabitants of Kingston-upon-
Hull. The hon. member said, he would
not, after what had been already said,
offer a single observation upon this peti-
tion, were it not that those persons who


signed such petitions were branded with
the charge of radicalism. If this was
radicalism, then the greatest portion, of
the country were radicals. His majesty's
ministers had, from the moment they
advised the omission of the queen's name
in the Liturgy, systematically attacked
and insulted her majesty. They had
caused an irritation of the public mind,
which would exist until her majesty
was restored to those rights and privi-
leges which belonged to her exalted sta-
tion in the country.
Mr. Lambton said, he held in his hands
a petition from the inhabitants of Stock-
ton, in the county of Durham, most nu-
merously and respectably signed, depre-
cating the late odious and uncalled for
proceedings against her majesty, and
praying the interference of that House to
have her restored to all her just and con-
stitutional rights. In availing himself
of this opportunity for submitting a few
observations on the subject, he must re-
mark, in the first place, that it would be
more to the honour of the House, and
would tend more to sustain its character
and dignity, if they were to pay a greater
degree of attention to the sentiments and
prayers of the people. The present was
a time when the House was labouring
under the just reproach of but ill repre-
senting the sense of the country. He
could not easily understand, therefore,
with what propriety it could be made
matter of charge against any individual
member, that he had given expression
to the feelings and opinions of his con-
stituents. The petitioners in this instance
complained, after professions of their own
loyalty and attachment to the constitu-
tion, of a class of persons calling them-
selves exclusive loyalists. (No, no;
from a member on the ministerial side of
the House.) If the hon. member who
thus interrupted him could show that
he was stating what was not the fact, he
should be ready to confess his error; but
if he was accurately describing the con-
tents of this petition, he was not to be
deterred by such cries from the open
and fearless discharge of his duty. He
should, therefore, now repeat, that the
petitioners complained of a class of per-
sons arrogating to themselves the merit
of exclusive loyalty, and accusing their
fellow-countrymen of hostility to the
throne, on no other ground than their
hostility to his majesty's ministers.
Amongst the many amusing exhibitions


r 69]


JAN. 21, 1821. [70O







71] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
which characterized the discussion of last
night, there was not one more singular
than the effort of the noble lord opposite
to persuade himself and the House that
he and his colleagues possesed the con-
fidence of the people. To the noble
lord's assertion he would, without fear
of contradiction, reply, that not only
nine-tenths, but nineteen-twentieths of
the people of the United Kingdom were
in avowed and open hostility, not to the
sovereign, but to his ministers. The lion
of England, it had been said, was roused ;
but it was rather out of character that the
den of the British lion should be found
in rotten boroughs, in Scottish counties
and close councils. He sincerely trusted
that the House would at length feel the
necessity of attending to the petitions of
the people. The refusal might possibly
lead to consequences which all of them
might rue. The petition which he held
in his hand deprecated the unparalleled
persecution to which her majesty had
been exposed, and prayed for her res-
toration to the Liturgy, from which she
had been so unjustifiably excluded. In
these opinions of the petitioners, he most
cordially concurred. He should have
the honour on a future occasion, to pre-
sent a similar petition from the county
of Durham.
Lord Castlereagh said, he was not
aware of any disposition on the part of
the House to treat the petitions of any
class of his majesty's subjects with in-
difference or neglect; but the hon. mem-
ber had attributed to him a speech which
it might have been desirable that he
should make, but which he nevertheless
had not made. All that he recollected
to have said on the subject was, that
he was not bound to answer any ques-
tion when he considered that it might be
inconvenient to the public service.
Mr. Lambton denied that he had put
into the noble lord's mouth any sentiments
which he had not uttered, or that he had
any intention of placing the noble lord
in a wrong light before the country. His
allusion, in the first instance, was to the
noble lord's answer thai evening to the
observations of his hon. friend the mem-
ber for Essex. The expression relative
to the British lion he did not ascribe to
the noble lord; he had met with it in a
part of the Press which was very zealous
and active in the service of his majesty's
ministers.
Mr. Benett, of Wiltshire, said, hewas


Petitions relative to the Queen. [72
intrusted with a petition from the free.
holders of the county of Wilts, agreed to
at a meeting very numerously and res-
pectably attended. He mentioned this
on account of the circumstance of the
petition being subscribed only by the
high sheriff and 100freeholders-a cir-
cumstance which was owing entirely to
the shortness of the interval between the
time at which the meetingwas held, and
the assembling of parliament. Had this
period been of longer duration, the peti-
tion would have been signed, by many
thousands. It prayed that the House
would use its best endeavours to prevent
the unfortunate, unconstitutional, and
uncalled-for proceedings against the
Queen from being revived ; and, by pro-
curing the re-insertion of her majesty's
name in the Liturgy, to put an end at
once to all further agitation of the ques-
tion. He had been desired to support
the prayer of this petition, and he now
supported it, notin obedience to the order
of his constituents-an obedience to
which he did not think himself bound-
but from inclination, and because his own
opinion fully coincided with theirs. It
had, indeed, his most cordial support.
He did not know what might be the
intentions of his majesty's ministers as to
any ulterior proceedings on this subject;
but after the abrupt and ungracious
manner in which parliament had pro-
rogued at the close of the last session,
leaving the Queen in a predicament such
as no cr minal was ever placed in-that
is, after accusation, and trial, to be left
in a state neither of acquittal or convic-
tion for six weeks, but in a state almost
as anomalous as the trial itself-from
all this, it was not unnatural to infer,
that some renewal of the odious measure
was still in contemplation. Whether the
proceeding was to be brought forward
in a direct shape, or was only to affect
the necessary arrangements for the Queen's
establishment, he was at present ignorant.
Whatever difference of opinion might
prevail with regard to what had been
proved against the Queen, he for one
denied that any offence had been proved,
and maintained that upon every principle
of justice, as well as in the eye of the
law, she was fully acquitted; but, how-
ever men might differ as to that point,
all were agreed, that it was high time
to put a stop to proceedings which had
agitated the public mind in an unheard
of manner, and to take the state of the






JAN. 24, 1821. [74


country into serious consideration, with
a view of relieving the distresses of a
loyal and suffering people. He believed
this was the unanimous opinion of the
county of Wilts; and a more loyal county
there was not in the realm of England.
P He therefore'entreated his majesty's minis-
ters, ifthey had any respect for public
opinion-if they had any feeling for the
distresses of the people-if they had any
regard for themselves and for their own
character, to bring at once this question
to a close, and to heal the differences
which it had so unhappily created.
Mr. Tennyson said, that he had a peti-
tion to present from the borough of Great
Grimsby, in the county of Lincoln.
What had fallen the night before from
the noble lord had led, certainly, to an
inference in his mind, that it was not the
intention of his majesty's government to
S take any further steps against the Queen.
He understood the noble lord to say, that
but one proposition would be submitted
relative to the Queen, and that this would
be on the subject of the income to be pro-
vided for her. All he should say, there-
fore, at present, on this point was, that
his majesty's ministers would have better
consulted their duty, if, instead of ab-
ruptly dismissing parliament, they had,
by proposing an immediate provision,
and candidly disclaiming any intention to
renew the prosecution, rendered the
numerous meetings which had since
taken place, and the petitions which
were now pouring in upon them, unne-
cessary. This remark, however, he made
on the presumption that no further pro-
ceedings were meditated; but it was a
presumption in which he was strongly for-
tified by the expression of the noble
lord. With respect to the restoration of
her majesty's name to the Liturgy, he
must observe, that the principle on which
he always understood it to have been
originally excluded, was the existence
of charges, an inquiry into which might
afterwards render it necessary to remove
it. His majesty's ministers were now re-
duced to the alternative of allowing that
the charges had not been proved, or
maintaining that the defence had failed.
They had not maintained the latter pro-
position; and he could not, therefore,
conceive what fair objection could be now
urged to the insertion of her majesty's
name. He should now present the peti-
tion, which prayed, that a royal residence
might be assigned to the Queen, and


that she should be put in possession of all
the dignities and privileges of her exalt-
ed station.
Mr. Hume presented petitions from
Perth, Aberdeen, Annan, and Banff, pray-
ing for the restoration of her majesty's
name to the Liturgy, and that a suitable
income and residence might be afforded
her. He had no hesitation in stating, that
if Scotland had been adequately and fairly
represented-if it had the benefit of that
reform in the state of the representation,
the necessity of which was felt by the
whole empire, and which he fondly
anticipated, there would not have been a
single petition from that class now called
the exclusive loyalists of the country.
Mr. Estcourt said, he held in his hand
a petition signed by 400 persons, inhabi-
tants of Devizes. It complained of the
exclusion of her majesty's name from the
Liturgy, the corrupt offer which had been
made to her to induce her to remain
abroad, the refusal of every advantage
to enable her to make a full defence, and
the production of a mass of false evidence
against her. It prayed that the House
would adopt measures for restoring her
to the full and and unqualified enjoyment
of all her rights and privileges, as the only
means of averting consequences detri-
mental to the best interests, apd danger-
ous to the tranquillity of the country.
Mr. Robert Gordon observed, that he
had anticipated that which had now taken
place. The hon. member did indeed pre-
sent the petition of 400 of the inhabitants
of Devizes, but he had not thought pro-
per to say one word in support of it.
Although the hon. member and his hon.
colleague (Mr. Pearce) were members for
the town of Devizes, and therefore had
no objection to present this petition; yet,
in point of fact, those who subscribed it
had no right to look for any support
from either of them. In common parl-
ance, the two hon. gentlemen, for whom
he personally entertained great respect,
were called members for Devizes; but in
reality were the representatives only of
some twenty or thirty aldermen in that
borough. This was a very happy illus-
tration of what had, the night before,
fallen from the noble lord (Castlereagh,)
as to his hopes of enjoying the confidence
of the House and of the country. The
confidence of the House, indeed, the noble
lord was pretty sure of possessing, just
as he was sure of possessing the confidence
of the aldermet at Devizes; b. t was he


& 73]


Petidons relative to the Queen.







75] HOUSE OF COMMONS, Petitions relative to the Queen. [76
as secure of the confidence of the people any further hostile proceedings against
of that town, four hundred of whom had the Queen. This would undoubtedly
signed thepetition? They stated, that they prove consolatory to the public; and in-
viewed the proceedings of his majesty's deed it seemed to him that, the bill having
ministers with abhorrence and execration; failed, there was no longer any justifiable
and would the noble lord, therefore, ground for withholding any of the privi-
boast that he enjoyed any portion of their leges which were usually annexed to her
confidence. A more complete illustra- majesty's exalted station. It was but a
tion of the noble lord's popularity, and corollary from that failure, that she
of the general confidence which was should be placed in the same situation as
placed in his measures, could not possi- she would have occupied, had no charges
bly have occurred. For his own part, been preferred, and especially as the bill
in giving his support to this petition, had so utterly failed-as it had never
he might regard himself as much more passed one House, but had been aban-
the representative of Devizes than the doned, as if they were ashamed of it, by
hon. member, as many of its inhabitants its own authors. It was but consonant
were freeholders in that part of Wiltshire with those principles of justice which so
with which he was connected. Heshould happily characterized the people of this
only add, that he concurred most cordially country, that after the prosecution had
in all the sentiments contained in the broken down-after the prosecutors them-
petition. selves had in shame retreated from their
Mr. Pearse said, that, as one of the odious proceeding-no aspersion should
members for the town of Devizes, he be thrown or indignity remain attached
had communicated with some of the peti- to the character of the Queen. Those
tioners; and when they had desired him very persons who arrogated to themselves
to support the prayer of their petition, the designation of exclusively loyal, if
he had told them frankly, that he had they had sense or policy, must feel the
an opinion as well as themselves upon necessity of such a course. It was due
the 'subject of it, and that he could not to the dignity and character of the mo-
give it his support. The 400 persons anarchy. Nothing could be more deroga-
whom the hon. gentleman had described tory to either, than to adopt a line of
as of so much consequence at Devizes as proceeding which, though incompetent
fairly to express the general sense enter- to effect a conviction, uncandidly refused
trained there, were not persons of weight to acquit. The noble lord himself, he
or consequence, but had been selected should imagine, must regret that the
with great pains, and without reference investigation had ever been entered on,
to their qualifications. An address, con- and that he had not adopted the advice
training very different sentiments, had tendered to him by that House. The
been agreed to by those who possessed treatment which the Queen had received
the intelligence and respectability of the had roused the indignation of every honest
town. mind, and 'had excited a feeling of dis-
Sir Francis Burdett observed, that as gust which similar conduct would always
an example of the great variety of opi- produce in this country. She had been
union which existed on this painful subject, treated as one neither convicted nor ac-
they were told, that the view taken by quitted, but on whom it was wished to
the 400 petitioners differed from that of affix a stigma. Nothing now would
the mayor, and a few, he believed twelve, satisfy the public, but that she should
aldermen. This was undoubtedly a very enjoy all the rights of Queen Consort.
fair specimen of the manner in which Lord Castlereagh did not rise to make
the people were represented, and their any general observations on what had
sentiments expressed in that House. He fallen from the hon. baronet; but
trusted, however, that the country was lest it might be supposed, from the tone
to be at length tranquillized; and that, and temper assumed by the hon. baronet,
by a compliance with the prayer of so that his majesty's government had altered
many petitions, parliament would find or abandoned some intention which they
leisure to apply its attention to more im- might have entertained in the period in-
portant subjects. He was gratified to tervening between the commencement
hear from the noble lord an explanation of the proceedings and the giving up of
of what was before somewhat ambiguous, the bill, he could assure the hon. baronet,
and. that ministers no longer contemplated that no such alteration had taken place.







Petitions relative to the Queen.


The bill was withdrawn without any idea
of substituting any other proceeding in
its place, and ministers continued in the
same position of determination.
Mr. Estcourt observed, in answer to
what had fallen from the hon. baronet,
that he was elected, not by 12, but by
36 persons (a laugh.) Undoubtedly, he
was elected to represent the borough of
Devizes, by that number of individuals;
but his apprehension was, that when he
was sent to the House of Commons, he
was one of the representatives of the
whole nation, and was called on to take
care, not merely of the interests of his
constituents but of the empire at large.
A more loyal, independent, or respectable
body of men did not exist, than the cor-
poration of Devizes; and the hon. baronet
was mistaken if he supposed that any
kind of improper inducement was held
out to the members of that corporation
to influence them to pursue a course con-
trary to their honest conviction, when the
election of members to serve them in par-
liament took place. It was not true that
the corporation of Devizes was biassed
by any unworthy feeling; and it was
equally untrue, that the members for
that borough, when they came into the
House of Commons, were influenced by
any feeling but an honest desire to pro-
mote the good of the empire at large.
Sir F. Burdett begged pardon for set-
ting the hon. gentleman right upon one
point. He had not said a syllable that in the
slightest degree reflected either on him
or his constituents. With respect to the
question he had put to the noble lord, he
did not consider the answer that had been
given to it as satisfactory. From what
the noble lord said, it appeared that mi-
nisters now continued in the" position
of determination" which they had formed
previously to the commencement of those
proceedings. But he conceived it to be
very important for the House and the
country to know, and to know distinctly,
whether they were to consider that no fur-
ther criminatory proceedings would be
resorted to against the queen.
Lord Castlereagh said, that when the hon.
baronet had before put this question, he
expressed himself as if the government
were now occupied in considering some
proceeding which they had not contem-
plated previously to the withdrawing of
the bill. In answer, he had distinctly
stated to the House, that the moment the
S bill was withdrawn, government ceased


to entertain the idea of any further hostile
proceeding. It did not, however, follow,
that her majesty's name should be restor-
ed to the Liturgy.
Mr. Brougham said, the noble lord had
informed the House, that all proceed-
ings against her majesty had ceased, and
that it was not the intention of his majes-
ty's government to institute any further
proceedings in the way of trial. Was he
to understand, not only that no further
trial would be instituted, but that nothing
in the nature of punishment would be
continued, as if the trial had proceeded
and terminated in a conviction ?
Lord Castlereagh said, that punishment
was not to be presumed or supposed, be-
cause his majesty was not advised by his
ministers to alter that arrangement which
his majesty, in council, had thought fitting
to have carried into effect before the pro-
ceeding was instituted.
Lord John Russell begged to call to the
recollection of the noble lord the grounds
on which, during the last session, the ex-
clusion of her majesty's name from the
Liturgy was defended by ministers. Would
they, it was asked, place in the Liturgy
the name of a person over whom heavy
charges were pending, and which name, in
the event of guilt being established, they
would be bound to erase ? If then, such
exclusion was continued, he was forced
to conclude that ministers took it for
granted, that those heavy charges had
been substantiated against her majesty.
Dr. Lushinglon rose to present a peti-
tion from the inhabitants of llchester, in
which the petitioners expressed their de-
testation of the measures that had been
adopted towards her majesty, and prayed
that a provision suitable to her rank might
be afforded her, and that she should be res-
tored to her just rights and immunities.
He was in the recollection of the House, and
they would be able to judge of the cor-
rectness of the statement he was about to
make. The noble lord, in answer to a
question put to him by a right hon. friend
of his, relative to the adjournments that
took place during the last session, had
said, that the consideration of the ques-
tion would he postponed to a future day,
in order to see whether the proceedings
would arrive at such a conclusion, in the
House of Lords, as to occasion the mea-
sure then in progress to be brought down
to this House; and that, if it took a dif-
ferent turn, parliament would meet to
make a provision for her majesty. (Lord


JAN. 21, 1821.







79] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
Castlereagh expressed his dissent.) The
noble lord shook his head, but still he
believed that his statement was correct.
He was sorry that they were not at once
called on to make a provision for her
majesty. He lamented, for the sake of
the country, that from the course minis-
ters were pursuing, all those questions
which had already created so much un-
pleasant feeling, were likely to be farther
discussed; and, in consequence, that
disgust which had already been excited,
and that spirit which ought if possible, to
be softened down, would be extended
and encouraged. The petitioners ex-
pressed their wish that her majesty's name
should be immediately restored to the
Liturgy, and that the House would insti-
tute an inquiry into the origin of the
Milan commission, and bring to punish-
ment all those who had been instrumental
in the persecution of her majesty. Would
to God he could entertain any rational
hope that the House would acquiesce in
the prayer of the petition! But he
could not expect that, so long as he saw
the sentiments of the people opposed to
the majority of their representatives, It
would be well if they attended to the pe-
titions of the people before the day came
-and it might come much sooner than
many persons imagined-when a reform
would be hastily resorted to, instead of
being the result of calm deliberation.
Lord Castlereagh observed, that if.the
learned gentleman meant to say, that he
had intimated, that, in the event of the
bill not passing the other House of Par-
liament, the House of Commons should
meet for the purpose of granting a pro.
vision to her majesty, he must declare that
he never said the House should so meet;
and that he could not have said so, be-
cause he never had any such impression on
hismind. He thought thelearned gentle-
man must recollect what passed on that
occasion; and if he did, he would find
that it did not bear him out in his state-
ment. He had said, that if the bill came
down from the other House, he would
then enforce the call; but if it did not,
he considered that step unnecessary. Now
it was evident they could not have pro-
ceeded to consider of a provision for the
Queen, without entering into all the
collateral topics that were connected with
the subject; and that could never have
been done without an enforcement of the
call. The observation of a noble lord on
that occasion was, that there would be,


Petitions relative to the Queen. [80
in the event of the failure of the bill, two
subjects for consideration; one, the pro.
vision to be made for the Queen, and the
other the conduct of his majesty's mi-
nisters. He (Lord C.) however, stated
(and such was the understanding of the
House) that if the bill did not come down,
the House would not meet to consider of
the provision necessary for her majesty, or
to investigate the conduct of ministers;
and he added, that under these circum-
stances, parliament would be called on
at the usual period to decide on a pro-
vision for her majesty.
Lord Folkestone said, he did not see
the force of the reasons which the noble
lord had adduced, with respect to what
his learned friend had stated to have oc-
curred on a former occasion. The noble
lord might assert that he had no intention
of stating the proposition that the House
was to meet in order to provide for her
majesty, and yet he might, unawares,
have thrown out such a statement. When
it was so strongly stated, as matter of recol-
lection, that the words were used, it was
more fair to suppose that something of
the kind was said, than that no expres-
sion of that description occurred. The
noble lord declared his statement to have
been, that if the bill did not come down,
the call of the House was not to be enfor-
ced; but if it did, thatlthen the call would
be enforced; and he argued that it would
be impossible to discuss the subject of
the intended provision, and the other
topics connected with it, unless there was
a call of the House. But it was very sin-
gular that they were now rapidly proceed-
ing towards the consideration of the
necessary provision for her majesty, and
yet no call of the House had taken place.
There was, it was true, a very full attend-
ance of members, and doubtless many
good reasons could be assigned for it.
Notwithstanding what the noble lord had
said, he would state most positively, that
the impression on his mind was precisely
the same as that which his learned friend
appeared to have imbibed. The noble
lord had said, that if the bill went on,
there should be a call of the House; but
if the bill did not proceed, it was consents
ed to, by all parties, that the call should
not take place for the purpose of adopt-
ing measures respecting the provision
for her majesty. Now, he (lord F.) com-
plained, that the call was not enforced
for the purpose of considering those other
matters to which the noble lord had re-







81] Petilions relative to the Queen.
ferred.-He now begged leave to notice an
observation which had fallen from the
noble lord in the early part of the evening,
when, in a manner that appeared most
extraordinary, the noble lord had refused
to answer a question put to him by the
hon. member for Essex, relative to an
inquiry into the origin of the Milan com-
mission. The noble lord had said, Oh,
bring your question forward in the shape
of a motion, and see how I'll treat it."
But, nobody in that House knew better
than the noble lord, the difference between
a question brought forward by gentlemen
on the other side of the House, and one
introduced by those who were seated near
his honourable friend. His honourable
friend urged the necessity of an inquiry,
with reasons which appeared to him to be
extremely forcible; but, at the same time,
he treated the application as a matter of
courtesy. For his own part, he conceived
that an inquiry ought to be instituted, on
the very proposition laid down by the
noble lord, who had said, that, if the bill
failed, and if it were supposed that a con-
spiracy had been formed against the
Queen, he would be the first and the most
zealous in endeavoring to detect its au-
thors. But he now met those who called
for inquiry, with various observations on
their inconsistency; as if it were incon-
sistent in those who attempted, in the
first instance, to stop proceedings of
which they disapproved-to go on with in-
quiries when those proceedings had ceased,
tending to discover their origin. There
was no inconsistency in it. He and his
friends condemned the whole proceeding
as bad. They considered it cruel and un-
just. It was, he might say, an attack on
hereditary monarchy-an attack on those
principles on which hereditary monarchy
was founded; and he was sorry that the
different adjournments prevented such
measures from being taken as would have
put a stop to it much sooner. Every day
that he considered this measure, he saw
more and more the necessity that existed
of putting an end to it at an earlier pe-
riod. But the noble lord would not put
a stop to it; and when he had poured
forth a mass of filth and obscenity from
the green bag, he turned round, and told
those who had all along deprecated the
measure, that they had no right to call
for inquiry. When almost every man in
the country felt that foul practices had
qeen adopted to injure the Queen, was it
* not incumbent on ministers, for,their own
VOL. IV.


JAN. 24, 1821. [82
honour-was it not incumbent on the
noble lord, out of regard for his own cha-
racter as a promoter and supporter of those
offensive measures-measures which had
broken down under him and utterly failed
-to institute an immediate inquiry?
He should have thought, that the noble
lord would have found it perfectly con-
sistent with his honour and character to
inquire into the origin of those measures;
but certain he was, that there was no incon-
sistency in the conduct of those who had,
from the beginning, opposed those pro-
ceedings, in now demanding that they
should be probed to the bottom.
Dr. Lushington felt a strong conviction
of his own correctness. He might be mis-
taken; but he hoped when the noble
lord next made any statement on a subject
of so important a nature, both to his
majesty's government and the country, he
would express himself in plain and intel-
ligible language. This would be ex-
tremely convenient to honourable mem-
bers, many of whom had come out of
the country, entertaining precisely the
same opinion that he did.
Sir T. Acland presented two petitions,
condemning the conduct of ministers in
the proceedings against the Queen, and
praying, that her name might forthwith
be restored to the Liturgy. One of them
was from the inhabitants of Axminster;
the other from the inhabitants of Colyton.
Mr. Alderman Heygate rose, to present
a similar petition from the inhabitants of
the borough of Sudbury. He observed,
that it prayed, that her majesty might be
restored to the enjoyment of all her law-
ful rights and privileges; and, what was
not common in these days, the language
in which it was couched was not only
respectful to both Houses of parliament,
but also to the sovereign. He wished to
take that opportunity of expressing his
opinion on the subject of the petition,
which his constituents had called upon
him to support. This was a time when
every man who valued the constitution
should speak out. No man could deplore
more than he did, the introduction of the
bill of Pains and Penalties; and he de-
plored it because he firmly believed that
it was not justified by any state necessity,
nor could tend to any good purpose. He
could not but congratulate the House and
the country on the declaration of the-noble
lord opposite, that there would be no fur-
ther proceedings instituted against her
majesty. He was one of those who de-







83] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
p'ored the original omission of the Queen's
name in the Liturgy, because he foresaw
that it would be productive of many evils;
and because it gave the best oppor-
tunity to those who cared nothing for
the Liturgy, to revile the sovereign, and
to abuse and embarrass the govern-
ment of the country [hear, hear from
the ministerial benches]. But it was
one thing to regret the original omission,
and another to vote for an address to the
sovereign, to request the insertion of her
majesty's name in the Liturgy. This sub-
ject was not to be decided by the Queen's
guilt or innocence alone as to the charges
preferred against her. There was another
very important consideration; the line of
political conduct which her majesty had
chosen to pursue since her return to this
country, and which vwas not more unbe-
coming her dignity, than it was at variance
with the counsels of her sound and legiti-
mate advisers. This line of conduct she
had persevered in during the last four
months; yet, on her first coming to this
country, and when the proceedings against
her had just commenced, shle declared,
that she would not mix her cause-the
vindication of her character and honour;
yes, she saidshe would not nmix up that
cause with the views of any political
party whatever. Unfortunately, her ma-
jesty did not persist in that determina-
tion many days; she soon put her name
to a letter addressed to her sovereign arnd
husband; yes, to her husband; and he
spoke as he was sure every man would
speak, who felt for the character of his
country ; this letter contained sentiments,
which, addressed to a private gentleman,
would have been considered disrespectful
in the extreme; but, when applied to
the sovereign, became little less than
what, in any other person, must have
been visited with the punishment of the
law. This letter was followed by a long
series of attacks on the authority of both
Houses of parliament; and they were
gravely told, if the bill passed both
Houses, and became a law, it would be a
matter of doubt how far the people would
be bound to obey it. Incitements were
also held out to the military, who were
paid by that House, to interfere with the
administration of justice. If the indivi-
duals who signed these petitions forgot
these things, he, for one, was not pre-
pared to forget them. He could not sit
in silence, at such a moment, when the
constitution was in danger; and it became


Petitions relative to the Queen. [84
the House of Commons to reflect seriously
before they paid honour and respectto an
individual, however illustrious, and how-
ever unfortunate, who had been a party
to those proceedings. He was willing to
make great allowance for her majesty.
It might have been supposed, that, the
foreign education of the Queen, and her
imperfect knowledge of the language
might have led her to have allowed senti-
ments to go abroad of a dangerous nature,
without knowing the full extent of them ;
or that her feelings might on some occa-
sions have made her intention appear
worse than it really was. For those things
he would be willing to make all due
allowance, and if the mischief of which
he complained had happened only once
or twice, he should not have taken notice
of it. But when it was not once or twice,
but repeatedly, that those insults were
offered to the state and to the sovereign,
when they were renewed at every oppor-
tunity, and were to be met perpetually
in every newspaper which contained ler
answers to addresses; and that after re-
peated remonstrances from her best ad-
visers, he could not but Ihink that some-
thing serious % as intended by the persons
by whom she was surrounded. But, if
nothing furtheewas intended, and nothing,
he knew, was more contrary to the advice
which she received from her legal advisers,
whose good sense, judgment, and real
patriotism, made them aware of the evil
that her cause must sustain from such
proceedings, while the triumphant exer-
tions of their talent bore it up even
against those disadvantages, yet he must
repeat, if nothing further was intended,
parliament ought still to consider, that
should they carry up an address to the
throne in favour of a person who had so
conducted herself, it would appear as if
they acted upon a recognition of the pro-
priety of such conduct. These were his
unbiassed sentiments. He had never
courted ministers on the one side, nor
popular opinion on the other; and how-
ever they might be received, he never
would be afraid to speak his sentiments.
He hoped the moment would soon arrive
when the memory of all those unhappy
proceedings would be buried in complete
oblivion. He trusted that the time would
soon come when this question would alto-
gether disappear, and the permanent and
great interests of the country would oc-
cupy the attention of parliament, that
we might be no longer the ridicule of







S 8] Petitions relative to the Queen.
foreign nations. We had already suffered
from this question in many respects, and
he trusted it would not long continue to
interrupt the proper business of the legis-
lature and distract the community.
SMr. Hume said, he was extremely
sorry the hon. member had made a sort
of general charge of treason-for he
thoughtit was no less-against the Queen,
for having uttered the sentiments con-
tained in the letter to his majesty. lie
wished the hon. member had confined
himself to a statement of specific facts,
and particular circumstances. He held
that letter in his hand, and he called on
the hon. member to point out any one
passage that could justify the assertion
he had advanced, much less that could
warrant him in directing such an attack
on an individual who was not, and who
could not, be present to defend herself.
The hon. member's conduct, in this in-
stance, was like that of ministers on all
occasions. The proceeding he had adopt-
ed was most ungenerous, most unmanly,
most unfair ; and in the face of the House,
he protested against it. Why should the
hon. member pursue the plan of the
noble lord opposite, and endeavour, by a
side-wind, to do that which he could not
effect in a direct manner ? If he wished
to censure her majesty, or any of her
advisers, he would have an opportunity
of doing it plainly and openly ; but the
mode which he had been pleased to adopt
was most unfair. He was as much dis-
posed to support the authority of that
House and the dignity of the throne as
any man, but yet he would say, that rno
sentiment contained in the letter of the
7th of August, to which the Queen had
put her name, appeared to his feeling to
be at all improper [Hear, hear! from
the ministerial benches]. Those who
could lay their hands upon their hearts
and applaud themselves for.the conduct
they had observed towards a deserted
and defenceless woman, were of course
extremely glad to receive any little assist-
ance which gentlemen at either side of
the House might be inclined to bestow on
them. Therefore it was, that they so
loudly cheered the hon. member who had
just sat down; and the present cheers,
though conveying a different meaning,
formed a part of the same system. But
let those who condemned the Queen place
themselves in the situation in which she
stood when that letter was written. Was
there a man in that House so mean,


J'AN. 24, 1821. [86
so dastardly, as to trample on an un-
protected, a defenceless woman ? Sorry
he was to say, the ministers had done so.
They had endeavoured to trample her to
the dust by the basest and most infamous
means. He used the word infamous"
in its strongest meaning-he used it in
the broadest sense the English language
could possibly affix to it. The people
could now judge of the means to which
her majesty's persecutors had had re-
course. The proceedings in the House
of Lords were in their hands; and all the
country must perceive, what hIe, in his
conscience believed, that, from the begin-
ningi to the end, the whole of the mea-
sures adopted against her majesty were
most base and infamous. What was the
situation of this illustrious but unfor-
tuna:te woman ? To what situation was she
to come ? The worthy alderman admitted,
that it was highly improper and highly
wrong to strike the Queen's name out of
the Liturgy ; and -yet, though lie made
this admission, he said he could not call
for its restoration to the place from which
it had been so unjustifiably withdrawn-
thus adding injury to wrong and per-
petuating injustice. The avowal of such
a doctrine was most disgraceful. Let the
noble lord opposite, who had cheered the
worthy alderman, in the course of his
observations, reflect, if ever reflection
met him, when he laid down his head upon
his pillow. [A laugh from the ministerial
benches, and cries of Hear from the
opposite side.] He could expect nothing
else than that laugh from the gentlemen
opposite-he could expect nothing else
from those whose public and private senti-
ments were devoted to the cause ofminis-
ters, and who sacrificed every thing at
the shrine of power.-But he would call
upon the House to recollect the situation
in which the Queen was placed on the eve
of her return to this country: to under-
stand and fairly appreciate her majesty's
conduct, it was necessary to refer back
to the situation in which she had been
placed by his majesty's ministers. As
Queen Consort upon the demise of the late
king, she was entitled as such to the same
respect on account of her rank as the:king
was by virtue of his. If royalty were to
be supported, there could be no distinc-
tion between the two. The law conferred
particular rank on each, and by the
same right, both the one and the other
were entitled to it. If his majesty weoe
de fact King, why was not her majesty







871 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
to be considered de facto Queen Consort ?
Wasit not the duty of the king's ministers
to pay her the respect to which, from her
situation, she was entitled; and to take
care that she should suffer no improper
indignity? But what did they do? When
her majesty was about to return to this
country, she applied to lord Liverpool to
provide a suitable residence for her; she
also applied to lord Melville for a proper
vessel to convey her across the Channel.
The former returned no answer, and the
latter transmitted a refusal-that is, a
refusal to pay the Queen of England that
respect in the mode of conveyance which
was allotted to every petty German prince
who visited this country. Was that jus-
tifiable treatment ? Was it becoming,
or decent, or proper? England had
been disgraced in the eyes of Europe by
such a transaction. He repeated, that by
it, England had been disgraced, through
the misconduct of his majesty's ministers.
[Hear, hear.] The whole proceeding
adopted towards her majesty carried with
it ignominy, and unfortunately the coun-
try must share a portion of it with its
government. Was it not enough, that her
majesty should have been refused a house ?
Was it not enough, that she should have
been refused a ship to carrry her to the
British shore? Was not all this neglect
monstrous enough, without the omission
of her name from the Liturgy ? Ministers
ought to have felt the shame of compell-
ing the queen to accept the assistance of
an honest and humble individual of the
city of London. What was the Queen to
do upon finding herself in this destitute
and insulted situation, and with such
charges preparing against her ? She
knew that the green bags were planned
against her. She saw that she was about
to be brought before a tribunal upon the
construction of which he would call upon
the hon. alderman to avow his opinion.
Was it, he would ask him, a tribunal
which met the sanction of the country ?
Was it not, under all the circumstances
of the case, contrary to the best principles
of law ? Under such circumstances, was
it not natural for her majesty to feel indig-
nant ? Was she then to be blamed by
the hon. alderman for writing a letter to
her lord and protector, whom she thought
she had reason to apprehend, at the time,
was countenancing the machinations of
her enemies? But, what did she say
in that letter of the 7th of August ? She
protested against her persecutors being


Petitions relative to the Queen. [8W
among her jurors. Was that an unfair
protest ? When, therefore, the complaint
was just and the indignation natural, it
was unmanly for the hon. alderman to
complain of her majesty's protest against
a court so composed, and which he ad-
mitted to have been improper. The hon.
alderman admitted this, and yet blamed
and deprecated the letter, without point-
ing out a single passage which was not
called for upon the occasion. The Queen
wrote that letter when she made the last
effort to induce her sovereign to protect
her. If that protection to which she was
entitled had been then afforded, that let-
ter would have never met the public eye,
See the situation in which the Queen
would have been placed, had she not
made a last effort to spare the country
the pain of these calamitous proceedings.
She had already used every means in
her power to prevent the sort of trial
which she saw approaching, and the con-
sequent mischiefs which that trial must
entail upon the country. So far from
incurring any blame for having made the
attempt, he thought the act was credita-
ble to her majesty; and that opinion he
entertained with the great bulk of the
community; for there was not one in a
hundred who was not of the same opi-
nion. He held the Queen's letter in his
hand; and he again called upon the hon.
alderman to point out any passage it con-
tained which justified his observation.
Was it where the Queen said, I have
always demanded a fair trial, that he
thought her incorrect? Was she not enti-
tled to a fair trial ? Was she not entitled
to have that claim for justice granted by
her sovereign and husband ? He saw not
one word in that letter which was not
called for by the occasion; and he chal-
lenged the hon. alderman to refute his
assertion, by pointing out an objection-
able passage.
Mr. Alderman Heygate claimed the
indulgence of the House while he vindi-
cated himself from the attack of the hon.
gentleman. He was perfectly surprised
at the manner in which his observations
had been met. Any body who had heard
them and had not heard his own obser-
vations, would naturally have thought
that he had defended the bill of Pains
and Penalties, and justified the original
rejection of the Queen's name from the
Liturgy. Equally surprised was he to
hear a charge of having made an unmanly
attack upon an unfortunate and illus-







69] Petitions relative to the Queen.
trious woman. Whatever else he might
have done, the term unmanly" could
have no reference to him. He had not
slunk into any hole or corner to deliver
his sentiments-he had not shrunk from
the public eye to utter them; but had
openly, before the country, and in his
place in parliament, endeavoured to state
his own opinions and justify them to
that House and to his constituents.
The hon. gentleman had asked, whe-
ther he approved of the mode of trial
appointed for the Queen. To this he
answered-No; and if the bill of Pains
and Penalties had unfortunately come
down to that House, there was no human
being in or out of it who would have
shown a more decided opposition to it
through all its stages. But, objecting to
it, as he did most decidedly to that bill,
he was obliged to condemn also the lan-
guage into which the Queen had been
betrayed by her advisers. The hon. gen-
tleman had called upon him to produce
the objectionable passages. Not having
that letter about him, he could not pro-
duce it; but he would appeal to the
recollection of the House, whether such
an expression as this ought to be tole-
rated in an appeal to the sovereign :
Your court (and this speaking to the
king) is a scene of low debauchery.'
Was that fit language ? But he did no
complain alone of the language used ii
that letter. It had been said by one of he
majesty's friends, when speaking of th
bill:-" This bill darkens the perspec
tive in the future, lowering the prospect
into civil war." There were similar ex
pressions, equally censurable, in many o
the answers which her majesty had unfor
tunately been advised to transmit. H
particularly alluded to the answers to th
artisans, to Nottingham, to Cripplegate
&c.' The following were paragraphs fror
some among them; and it was for th
hon. gentleman to say if he thought there
proper or not:-" These are times whe
the well-understood interest of armies ca
never be separated from the interests o
the people."-" The slave of his apple
tite only cankers for his fatuity."-Th
answer to the Cripplegate address calle
the government of the country an insc
lent domination."-In her majesty's letter
of the 7th of August (although, n(
having the letter near him at the moment
he could only quote from recollection
there was a declaration that the Quee
would not submit, except compelled b


JAN. 24, 1821. [90
actual force, to any sentence, except one
pronounced by a legal court of justice.
The answer to the Cripplegate address
contained the following paragraph:-
If such a bill should pass, it may
perhaps hereafter be proposed to the
people of England how far it may be
obeyed." In the answer to the artisans
there was this expression-" Owing to
the hard-hearted conduct of your oppres-
sors, you cannot earn by the sweat of your
brow what will prevent your watering
your pillow with your tears." And then
that "hereafter their sufferings would only
appear like a troubled dream." Were
such phrases, so applied, proper or be-
coming ? But he need not dwell upon
them for his justification, for he should
rest that upon the concurring opinion of a
noble earl (Grey,) distinguished for his
eloquence and talents, whose speech he
did not know whether it would be compe-
tent for him, in point of order, to refer
to. [Order.] Finding that it would be
irregular to quote it, he should throw
Himself on the candour of the House for
Sa fair and just interpretation of the sen-
i timents which had brought down upon
- him the attack of the hon. member. If
Sthe extracts which he had quoted could
be considered fair or proper, then he
Should confess he was in error in alluding
t to the improper advice under which he
n feared her majesty had acted. He meant
r merely to state his own opinions openly
e and fairly ; and certainly the last thing he
- contemplated was, to take any advantage
t of the situation of an unfortunate and
- illustrious lady, which he lamented as
,f much as any man, though he could not
- see how parliament could remedy the
e evil in the manner pointed out.
e Mr. Lockhart said, he felt extreme re-
e, luctance in coming forward on this occa-
m sion. He cordially agreed in the wish
e expressed by an hon. member early in the
m evening, that something might be done
n which would bury in oblivion this unfor-
n tunate question. The hon. alderman ap-
)f peared to concur in this wish ; but he was
!- sorry to find that the expression of his
ie sentiments was rather at variance with the
d promotion of that salutary conclusion
o- which was on so many accounts desirable.
-r The hon. alderman had read to the House
ot several objectionable passages which her
t, majesty had been so ill advised as to in-
,) sert in her answers to addresses. It was,
n he feared, but too true that much objec-
y tionable matter would be found on both








,91] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
sides. This was remarkable throughout
the whole of the late unfortunate proceed-
ing. Evidence had been published, and
comments made upon it, from day to day,
which were calculated to impair the dig-
aity of any court of justice, and to violate
that respect which was due to the highest
tribunal in the land. This objectionable
conduct was not, however, confined to
one side of the question; it pervaded both,
and was alike censurable. He had seen sen-
timents put into her majesty's mouth, by
her irresponsible, not her legal advisers,
which he deplored as much as any man,
and which he attributed to improper ad-
vice acting upon highly irritated feelings.
If the House of Lords witnessed these
proceedings from day to day, and could
apply no remedy to them; if the highest
court of judicature in the kingdom, with
the Attorney-General, were doomed to
witness these libels, without exercising
any power to restrain their circulation,
how could that House in future prevent
them? If a system of irritation were un-
happily continued-if the Queen were to
be suffered to continue in her present si-
tuation, where was the force or the energy
to suppress that which hitherto had been
openly promulgated ? It was for the pur-
pose of stopping the continuance of an
agitation which he deplored, that he ex-
pressed an ardent hope that all proceed-
ings against the Queen, whether in the na-
ture of acts, or in the nature of omission,
should be finally set at rest. The noble
lord opposite seemed disposed to take no
step for restoring the Queen's name to the
Liturgy, and the hon. alderman appeared
to concur in the opinion. The noble lord,
however, deprecated the assumption, that
the omission of the Queen's name in the
Liturgy should be considered as a punish.
ment. On the contrary, he denied it was
a punishment, but that it had been done
in the ordinary course of an arrangement
in council. Now the error, he thought,
was in the assumption, that the omission
was not a punishment. It could be con-
sidered in no other light than as a punish-
ment, inflicted for a crime which was not
proved, and for a prosecution which was
abandoned. It was either that or a gra-
tuitous personal degradation ;-one or
the other it must be. Was it thought
that ministers could satisfy the public
mind by such a course? Pecuniary ar-
.rangements the Queen was to have; but
were they calculated to promote a tran-
quil end ? Ministers had already tried pe-


Petitions relative to the Queen. [92
cuniary measures; but, instead of being
an anodyne, they rather acted as a stimu-
lus. They had had no tendency to tran-
quillize the minds either of her majesty or
the public. The attempt having failed, a
different effort should be made to set the
matter at rest forever. The Queen's name
had unfortunately been omitted in the
Liturgy. She was placed, then, in the
situation of a person deemed guilty, rot-
withstanding the accusation had been
abandoned. Her majesty's name was
thus placed in a situation of painful suspi-
cion to every religious person in the com-
munity, on that day when all party feel-
ing should be laid aside, in the common
supplication of the God they all adored.
So that it was impossible hut the omission
of the Queen's name in the Liturgy must
operate as a degradation. Those who
thought her majesty guilty, had, in this
manner, an opportunity of gratifyingtheir
feelings; although the result of the trial
did notj ustify that Sentiment; while those
who thought the Queen innocent, and
those who thought her not proved guilty,
had a right to complain of the degrada-
tion inflicted. This being the consequence
arising out of her majesty's present posi-
tion, in what situation was she placed ?
Her circumstances were to be enriched,
but her character was to remain dispara-
ged ; and with a disparaged character she
might hold a court! Ministers were to
give her wealth, which to a certain ex-
tent was power and command, but with a
depreciated character it was to be used
indifferently. How could her majesty,
placed in this situation, suinion about her
those constitutional advisers of rank and
character who would dignify the establish-
ment of a Queen ? Was not this course
calculated to consign her majesty into the
hands of evil advisers, who would care lit-
tle for hep rank and character, and only
care about producing all that mischief
which ministers themselves seemed to re-
probate. If the Queen were put into a
situation of innocence-and she was en-
titled to be called innocent since no charge
had been proved against her-she would
then be entitled to hold her proper station
in society; to summon about her person
those who, having high station and charac-
ter themselves, would only advise her for
her good, and assist in rendering lier the
ornament of her rank. That was the fair
and just course which ministers ought to
pursue, instead of throwing the Queen
into thehands of irresponsible advisers, who







93] Petitions relative to the Queen. JAN. 24, 1821. [94
would rake together, as was done in the upon him either to produce them or to
answers to the addresses, all the nonsense remember them.
of the French Revolution, calculated to Mr. Alderman Heygateexplained, that
inflame rather than heal popular discon- what he had said was this-that not having
tent. He earnestly hoped ministers would the letter by him at the moment, he could
not takethiscourse, butthat by placing her not quote the passages he alluded to with
majesty in the possession of an untouched accuracy from recollection.
character, they would give her the advan- Lord Nugent, in continuation, contend-
tage of the counsels of her legal advisers, ed that the hon. alderman could not be
and prevent those irritable consequences surprised at being charged with unmanli-
which a different policy must necessarily ness, when he came forward with charges
engender. The country would never be against the Queen, founded on a docu-
satisfied until this healing policy was ment, which, when he was called upon
adopted. It would not endure, that the to produce, he said he had not in his pos-
attention of parliament should be for session, and the contents of which he had
months drawn away from the considera- forgotten. Instead of producing the pas-
tion of the pressing difficulties of the dif- sages in the letter on which he had found.
ferent classes of the community; they ed his charge, the hon. alderman had
would not endure, that parliament should, quoted certain passages from answers
week after week, be wholly occupied in which had been given by her majesty to
debating points of trifling punctilio with the addresses presented to her. He would
ministers, when the mighty interests pf the be the last man to say, that many of those
country ought to have their undivided answers were not highly improper, or that
consideration. The agricultural interests they did not reflect great disgrace on those
of the country were left untouched; al- by whom her majesty had been advised
though lie knew part of the evil might be to present them. At the same time, the
remedied, for it was produced by the laws. unfortunate and anomalous situation of
He had hitherto in general supported mi- her majesty-the persecution she had suf-
nisters-he had supported them through- fered-the obloquy that had been heaped
out the war, which by their wisdom, forti- upon her by a venal press, all these
tude, and perseverance, they had brought were circumstances which ought to be
to so triumphant a conclusion. For their taken into account, in estimating the
political conduct, at the period to which he course which she had pursued. It was,
alluded, their names would stand high in in his opinion, not very manly, harshly
history; but he doubted whether they to condemn her majesty under such cir-
understood the arts of peace as well as cumstances. Itwastoomuchlikethecon-
thoseofwar. He concluded by earnestly duct of those Spanish Inquisitors, who,
calling upon them to restore her majesty's having stretched their victim on the rack,
name to the Liturgy, in fact to recede in converted the ravings of pain into addi,
toto from the course they had hitherto tional matterofaccusation. Thismodeof
pursued towards the Queen; and, by so conduct he could not think manly orEng-
doing, put an end to a controversy so lish. Undoubtedly, he thought with the
useless in itself, and so fatal to the best hon. alderman, that many passages in the
interests of the country. answers of her majesty to the addresses
Lord Nugent begged to say a word on that had been presented to her were
what had fallen from the honourable al- extremely reprehensible, and that they
derman, in the elaborate vindication reflected great disgrace on the good sense
which he had entered into of himself, as and education of those who had advised
to what he had been charged with having her majesty to make them. But this he
said in his original speech. In the hon. would say, that ill as he thought of those
alderman's first speech, he had thought who had advised her majesty to make those
fit to charge her majesty with having answers, he thought the blame which those
been guilty of a crime in her letter persons had justly incurred, vanished into
to the king, for which any other subject air, compared with the blame to which
would have been amenable to the law. those persons were liable who had advised
When, however, the hon. alderman was his majesty to give the answers which he
called upon to point out the passages in had given, to addresses from certain bodies
which that charge was founded, he failed of the people. The hon. alderman must
to produce them, and professed, that he recollect some of these; and especially one
had forgotten them, He now again called to an. address which the.hon. alderman







95] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
among others, was charged to present-
an address from the metropolis of his
majesty's empire. His majesty's answer
to that address was calculated to produce
mischief; in comparison to which, all that
could be dreaded from any of her ma-
jesty's answers sunk into insignificance.
The several petitions were laid on the
table and ordered to be printed.

ADDRESS ON THE KING'S SPEECH AT
THE OPENING OF THE SESSION.]-Mr.
G. Bankes appeared at the bar, with the
report of theAddress on the king's Speech.
On the motion that it be brought up,
The Hon. William Lamb observed, that
with respect to most of the topics to which
the address referred, there would be va-
rious opportunities of discussing them.
There was one, however, of so urgent a
nature, and on which a step might sud-
denl) be taken, so irremediable as to place
it entirely out of the power of that House,
that he felt it to be impossible, consistently
with his sense of duty, to allow it to
pass without a few observations. That
topic was the present state of the affairs
of Naples, and of the conferences with
reference to that state, which were sup-
posed to be going on among the greatsove-
reigns of Europe. He knew, that in
touching on this subject, he was touching
on a delicate matter, because it was one
which might be considered in a course of
negotiation, and he should therefore treat
it accordingly. He certainly was not one
of those who were of opinion, that no cir-
cumstances could occur in any country
affecting its internal condition and the
principles on which its government was
to be carried on, which would justify the
interference of any foreign power. At the
same time he must say, that from all
he had heard of the transactions in Naples,
and of the principles on which those trans-
actions had been founded, there was not
a shadow of ground or reason justifying
the interference of foreign powers on that
occasion. There had been no violent acts
committed; there had been no doctrines
avowed dangerous to the peace of the
neighboring nations, or subversive of the
first principles of civilized society. But,
what he particularly rose for was, to make
a remark or two on the statement in the
Speech from the throne, and in the speech
of the noble lord opposite on this interest-
ing subject. As far as he could under-
stand those statements, they professed the
observance of a strict neutrality by the


Address o, the King's Speech [96
British government, as well as an anxious
wish for the general preservation of tran-
quillity in Europe; and, if that should
prove impossible, for at least securing the
continuance of peace as far as this coun-
try was concerned. It was to the princi-
pie of non-interference on the part of this
country, thus distinctly asserted, that he
objected. What had been the conse-
quences of a similar principle when the
partition of Poland took place? Were
they peace and tranquillity? No. The
consequence, on that occasion, of that
principle of non-interference, on the part
of this country, with the designs of foreign
potentates, had been the long and inve-
terate wars in which Europe had since
been involved, and which had left this
country and the continent in the state of
distress in which they now found them-
selves. Such had beenthedisastrous result
of our declining, on that occasion, to co-
operate with France in interfering to pre-
vent the iniquitous project then contem-
plated from being carried into effect.
What he wished particularly to impress
on the minds of the noble lord and his
colleagues was, that if hostilities were once
to commence in any part of Europe, no
man could tell how far they might extend;
and to urge them to such an interference
with respect to Naples as might prevent
any such calamity. By such a wise and
timely interference, the peace and tran-
quillity of this country would stand a
much better chance of being effectually
secured, than by the indulgence of any
fallacious hope, that if hostilities were
once commenced in any quarter whatever,
we might be able to keep this country
from being compelled to enter into the
contest.
Lord Castlereagh observed, that as it
was impossible to dispatch a subject so
interesting and important in a few sen-
tences, it would, in his opinion, be more
expedient to postpone its consideration
until an opportunity should be afforded for
discussing it in parliament in the ample
manner which it deserved, The general
reasoning of the hon. gentleman was un-
doubtedly fair, but it did not appear to
him to be strictly applicable to the line of
policy which this country was, in the pre-
sent instance, called upon to adopt. He
begged not to be understood as giving any
opinion upon the present subject; but it
must be evident to the hon. gentleman,
and to the House, that other powers might
entertain apprehensions with respect to







'97] at the Opening of the Session.
their own security, on which subject they
might have opportunities ofjudging,which
this country could not possess, and on
which it would have no right to interpose.
He repeated, that he begged not to be
understood as giving any opinion on that
question in the present instance; but he
was quite sure, from what had fallen from
an hon. gentleman of so enlarged a mind,
and whose candid mode of discharging
his parliamentary duty did him so much
honour, that he could not be at all ac-
quainted with the data on which alone any
observations on the present state of affairs
in Naples could justly be founded. The
circumstances of the recent transaction in
that kingdom were certainly most interest-
ing and important. The hon. gentleman,
however, seemed to have run away with an
assumption of facts relative to the internal
condition of Naples, wholly different from
those which had been represented to him
(lord C.) or those which had attended the
transactions in question.
Mr. Warre remarked, that the noble
lord had now repeated those observations
which he had made in his speech yester-
day, and which were strongly calculated
to arrest attention and to excite alarm. He
would take the opportunity, before he sat
down, of asking the noble lord a question
on the subject of Naples, to which the
noble lord would of course give or with-
hold an answer, as he should think proper.
A great deal of what had fallen from the
hon. gentleman near him, appeared to him
to be extremely worthy of the noble lord's
consideration. It was with great regret he
heard the noble lord hold it out as a pro-
bability, that any consideration of safety
to the Austrian dominions, as that subject
might be viewed by the Austrian govern-
ment, might justly operate to render the
gallant, noble, and justifiable effort of the
Neapolitan people to assert their indepen-
dence, the means of exposing them to the
aggressions of foreign powers. With res-
pect to the question that he wished to ask
the noble lord, he felt himself especially
justified in putting it; because some ot
his majesty's ships of war had been enm.
played on a service connected and inter-
woven with the recent transactions in the
kingdom of Naples: he meant in trans.
porting the king of Naples to Leghorn
He therefore begged to ask the noble
lord if he could foresee the probable tim(
when he would be able to furnish thf
House with information, either in thi
shape of documents or otherwise, on thii
VOL. IV.


JAN. 24, 1821. [98
most interesting and important subject;
on the result of which, perhaps, depended
the peace and tranquillity of Europe; and
of no country more than England ?
Lord Castlereagh professed himselfun-
able to give any precise answer to the
question of thehon. gentleman. It could
not be expected of any member of his ma-
jesty's government, in the discharge of
his public duty, to communicate any of
the circumstances that might have reached
him on such an occasion ; while the trans-
action to which those circumstances relat-
ed was still pending. If the hon. member
would, at a subsequent period, move for
any information which he might wish for
as to the course pursued by this country
in the transaction, there could be no diffi-
culty in producing it; but he would him,
self see, that any communication respect-
ing the larger European question would
be attended with more difficulty. This,
however, he had no hesitation in distinctly
declaring, that the course which had
been pursued by this country on the sub-
ject, in no way rendered it a. party to the
proceedings, whatever they might be of
the three great powers assembled at Lay-
bach. Although there had certainly been
no difficulty on the part of the English
admiral on the station, to afford the king
of Naples every possible facility for his
voyage from Naples to Leghorn-yet it
ought not to be inferred from that inter-
ference, that England had any participa-
tion either in the invitation of his majesty,
the king of Naples, to Laybach, or in any
other part of the policy of the three great
powers on the subject. It was unques-
tionably a matter of great delicacy, and one
on which he could not be called on prema-
turely, to disclose the policy by which the
powers in question were actuated.
Sir Robert Wilson said, he had been
given to understand that a Neapolitan of
high rank and character had been sent to
the English court by the constitutional go-
vernment recently established in Naples;
but that having tendered his credentials,
f he was, though received with the noble
lord's usual urbanity, not recognized in
his character of envoy; on the ground that
it was impossible for the British govern-
Sment to recognize any act of the new go-
. vernment at Naples, until the allied pow-
Sers had come to some decision on the ne-
e gociation then carrying on at Troppau,
Sand since at Laybach. On that ground,
After remaining three weeks here, he un-
s derstood that the individual in question
IH







99] HOUSE OF COMMONS, Address on the King's Speech [100
had returned to the continent. If that not Itil instantly to resent. It was the
was really the fact, it mattered little what more ignoble on the part of the British
hope of the preservation of peace might be government, that the act was directed
expressed in his majesty's or in the mi- against a nation too feeble to express its
nisters' speech; for here was a direct overt sense of the injury. He knew the noble
act of hostility against the Neapolitan lord would say, that a Neapolitan minister
government. What must be the conse- was at present resident in London ; but
quence, when intelligence reached Naples, he resided here only because the existing
that the Neapolitan ambassador had not government of Naples were desirous, that
been received ? Would it not introduce if the minister whom they had accredited
distrust, and weaken the councils of the to the court of London should not be re-
constitutional government happily estab- ceived, all intercourse with that court
lished at Naples ? Would it not encourage should not be therefore suspended. In
the anti-constitutional faction ? Would it this he confessed he thought they acted
not operate disadvantageously towards unwisely ; because he thought that they
liberty, and would it not operate to aid would have done much better boldly to
and abet the tyrannous conduct of those assert all their rights as an independent
sovereigns, who seemed determined to be nation ; and if they must perish, at least
as oppressive and insolent in prosperity, to perish without the slightest compromise
as they had been servile and abject in ad- of their dignity and their honour.
versity; whose present measures tended Lord Custlereagh declared his impos-
not merely to the destruction of Neapolitan sibility of entering into all the details of
liberty, but to the general demoralization this subject, even were he prepared him-
and debasement of mankind; and who self to feel all the animati 41 with which
seemed to have commenced a violent cru- the gallant general appeared invariably to
sade against all the duties of humanity contemplate every possible species of re-
and all theprinciples of civilization? The evolution. He denied, however, that a
noble lord, and a colleague of the noble reluctance to acknowledge a revolution
lord, in the other House of parliament, suddenly effected in any country was a
when questioned on the subject of any just ground of hostility. Without enter-
pledge of this country to interfere with the ing into particulars, he would merely
establishmentofthe constitutional govern- observe, that the English government
ment in Spain, had expressly declared were required to recognize new forms and
that the British government had entered changes, suddenly brought about under
into no treaty or engagement for that very mysterious circumstances, and prin-
purpose. It was a constitution similar cipally by one sect. It seemed tolerably
to that of Spain which the Neapolitans evident, that the object of that sect was not
had adopted. They had only asked their confined to Naples, but extended itself to
Sovereign to give them that constitution the subversion of all the existing govern-
which he promised them on the 1st of ments in Italy, and the union of the
May, 1815. Their object was, to convert whole into one state. He by no means
arbitrary power into constitutional autho- wished to declare, that such a plan de-
rity; to get rid of a government supported manded, or would justify, the interfer-
alone by corruption; to relievethemselves ence of neighboring powers. That must
from intolerable and unaccounted tax- be a subject of much deliberation and in-
ation; and to destroy superstition, and that vestigation on the part of those powers,
general ignorance which he had heard and it was a problem which, he trusted, we
advocated in that House as the best se- should not undertake to solve. He posi-
curity for the allegiance and fidelity of a tivelydenied,however, thatwehaddoneany
people! Such were the requests of the thing which the Neapolitan government
Neapolitans; and finding that it was their were justified in considering as an act of
general wish, the king had acted as the hostility; and he could assure the gallant
father of his people, and acceded to them. general that we had not done any thing
In doing so, ought he not to be considered which the Neapolitan government so con-
as acting as an independent sovereign? sidered. The intercourse between thetwo
In sending back, however, the minister countries continued on the same footing
whom he had deputed to us, we had con- as before the late changes. The ministers
mitted an act of hostility towards the Nea- at both courts communicated as usual,
politan people, which, if they were as and carried on the ordinary routine of
powerful as they were brave, they would diplomatic intercourse. But he protested







101] at the Opening of the Session.
against the principle, that the British go-
vernment were bound to rush forward and
acknowledge every change that might be
made in a foreign government without the
least deliberation as to its nature. On the
contrary, the British governmenthad dis-
tinctly declared, that itcould notinstantly
consent to a technical and formal recog-
nition of a state of things which required
much deliberation to estimate. What the
gallant general had said of his (Lord C.'s)
former explanation respecting the principle
of the conduct of the British government
towards that of Spain, was perfectly cor-
rect, although at the time alluded to, the
gallant general was inclined to push the
assumption that the British government
was a party to the declaration of the allied
sovereigns, which it was not. All that he
now wished to press on the House was,
that while they held the government of
this country, strictly to account for the en-
gagements which they made with other
powers, they would not interfere too fre-
quently in the policy of other powers.
Those powers were as much entitled to act
independently with reference to any point
in which they considered their own in-
terests involved as this country would be
under similar circumstances.
Sir R. Wilson wished to ask the noble
lord, whether the non-recognition of the
new Neapolitan minister was accompanied
by any circumstances hostile to the new
constitutional government of Naples ?
Lord Castlereagh-Certainly not.
Mr. James adverted to the Austrian
loan, and requested to know if there was
any prospect of its being repaid.
Lord Castlereagh replied, that in the
early period after the contraction of that
loan, there had been some payments upon
it; but for a long course of years no pay-
ment had taken place; and although some
communications had recently been in-
terchanged on the subject, they were not
of a nature to hold out any great prospect
of a speedy repayment.
Mr. James then gave notice, that he
would shortly submit to the House a
motion for papers explanatory of the sub-
ject.
Sir Robert Heron was sure the ques-
tion of Naples would not be treated as one
of delicacy by Austria. If that House
exhibited so much delicacy upon it, Naples
might be over-run and annihilated before
any beneficialinterference could be inter-
posed. Our ancestors would not have
shewn much delicacy under such circum-


JAN. 24, 1821. [l 1
stances. They would have instantly sent
a fleet and an army to assist their ancient
allies in the establishmentof their liberties.
It was well known by every English gentle-
manwho had travelled on thecontinent,that
the conduct of the government of Austria
was so execrable in Italy, that any thing
like freedom or independence was utterly
incompatible with the continuance of its
power. What was the fact ? Ministers had
by their measures brought this country
into such a state, thatit was impossible we
could enter upon a new war without
immediate destruction to our finances.
Were it not for that, there was no English
heart that would not anxiously wish that
this country should vigorously interfere
to put down this new system of diplomacy,
and counteract the designs of the three
holy and royal inquisitors; who took
upon themselves to sit in judgment on
what they were pleased to consider the
crimes of independent nations. Happy
result of that most happy piece of royal
blasphemy-the holy alliance !
Mr. Hume, although lie rather differed
from his hon. friend on the question of the
propriety of interference on the part of this
country, thought that we ought to take
every opportunity of showing our good
will towards the Neapolitans. It had been
stated to him, that an application had been
made to our government,to know if permis-
sion would be granted to export to Naples
a supply of arms, for the manufacture of
which a commission had been received in
this country. If such an application had
been madeand refused, it would show, that
our government favoured the objects of
Austria, Russia, and Prussia, rather than
the struggle of the Neapolitans for inde-
pendence. He should be very sorry if
such a disposition had manifested itself
and he requested to know how the fact
stood.
Mr. F. Robinson replied, that as the
law at present stood, there was no obstacle
to the export of arms to any part of Eu-
rope-except Spain. Power was given by
law to prohibit the export of arms by an
order in council; but that power had
been exercised only with reference to
Spain. The export of arms to Naples
was therefore perfectly free.
Mr. HuNme observed, that that was no
answer to his question. Had any such
application as that which he had described
been made?
Lord Castlereagh said, that he had not
heard of any such application.







103) HOUSE OF COMMONS,
Mr. Bankes then brought up the report.
After it had been read a second time,
and on the question for agreeing to it,
Mr. Hume, adverting to the paragraph
which related to the reductions said to
have been made in the military establish-
ment of thecountry, said, he presumed
that his majesty's ministers were prepared
to say in what branches, and to what ex-
tent, those reductions had taken place.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer re-
plied, that it was impossible for him to
answer at present. The nature of these
reductions would appear when the Army
Estimates should be laid on the table.
Mr. Hume said, he should have supposed
that ministers, before they put the passage
in question into his majesty's mouth,
would have the estimates before them,
otherwise they had made his majesty
state that, of the truth of which they
could not be assured.
The address was then agreed to.
THE QUEEN-LITURGY.]-Mr. We-
therell, in rising to submit the motion
of which he had given notice yester-
day, observed, that as a noble lord had
given notice of a motion which was un-
questionably the most important that had
been brought under the consideration of
parliament since the year 1789, it was
impossible for any gentleman to go into
the examination of that question until
the necessary preliminary information had
been given to the House. Were he
to state, as an historical fact, that for
three centuries the name of a queen con-
sort had in no instance but one, that of
the consort of George 1. been omitted in
the Liturgy, he had no doubt that he
should get credit for having stated fhe
fact correctly; but he apprehended that,
in parliamentary practice, such an im-
portant question ought not to be decided
without a regular authentication of the
facts by which the decision of the House
was to be regulated. When he first pro-
posed to move for certain papers on this
subject, it had been supposed by the
right hon. the chancellor for the duchy
of Lancaster, that he intended to move
fof a whole magazine of prayer-books.
This however, was not the case. From the
reign of James 1. down to the present
time, there were only seven instances in
which he wished to know what the prac-
tice had been; and therefore the first
branch of his motion would only require
that seven short collects should be ex-
tracted. The two otherdocuments which


he wished to be produced were, an extract
from the form of prayer annexed to the
act of Conformity, and a copy of the
order in council for the omission of her
present majesty's name. To the produc-
tin of those papers he did not anticipate
any opposition. He might state at the
same time, thathe did not want them for
his own information, as he had long ago
been supplied with them by a gentleman
in the University of Oxford, whose atteu-
tion had at an early period been directed
to this order in council. The learned
member concluded by moving for the do-
cuments he had mentioned.
Lord Castlereagh had no objection to
the production of the documents now
moved for, although at the same time he
saw no necessity for the motion, as facts
of a similar kind were often stated in de-
bate, and assumed as true, without any
official authentication. His opposition to
the motion of the learned gentleman, on
a former occasion, had proceeded from
the unusual, and, as he conceived, not
very prudent moment at which it was
brought forward.
The motion was agreed to.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, January 25.
PETITIONS RELATIVE TO THE QUEEN.)
Lord Erskine said, he held in his hand
a petition from the burgh of Banff, in
Scotland, praying that parliament would
oppose the institution of any further pro-
ceedings against the queen, and endea-
vour to procure the restoration of her ma-
jesty to all her rights. He observed, that
he could pledge himself for the petition
being properly and respectfully worded.
The noble and learned lord also presented
petitions to the same effect from the incor-
porated trades of Dumfries, the incor-
porated trades of Arbroath, the town of
Montrose, the burgh of Selkirk, the city
of Aberdeen, New Deer, in the county
of Aberdeen, and from some other places
in Scotland; and, finally, the petition of
the Lord Mayor and Common Council of
the city of London in Common Council
assembled.
The Earl of Darnley rose, to present
the petition of the county of Kent. His
lordship made some observations on the
manner in which sheriffs of counties were
selected, and on the way in which they
took upon themselves to refuse their assent
to public meetings. In the present in-


The Qae~en--iturgy..


[104







105] Petitions relative to the.Queen.
stance, the sheriff had refused, not only
to attend the meeting, but to call it.
How far it was legally competent for the
Sheriff of a county thus to obstruct the
inhabitants in the exercise of one of their
most important rights, he should not then
discuss. He thought, however, that it
was a fit subject for the consideration of
parliament.
The Earl of Liverpool observed, that
the sheriffs were appointed, if he might
use the expression, in so judicial a way,
that the influence of the Crown had
nothing to do with it. In the first place,
three gentlemen for each county were re-
turned by the judges, upon their oaths,
to the privy council sitting in the court
of Exchequer, and afterwards, on the ap-
pointment, the first name of the three
was invariably taken, unless sufficient
reasons were alleged on behalf of the party
to alter that course of nomination. There
was, therefore, no ground for imputing
that the sheriffs of counties were in any
respect influenced by the Crown in the
exercise of that discretion, with regard
to calling county meetings, which un-
doubtedly belonged to them.
The Earl of Darnley, in explanation,
said, that he did not mean to impute that
the influence of the Crown was exercised
in the appointment of sheriffs, but merely
to observe, that, under other circum-
stances, they might be made the instru-
ments of the Crown to obstruct, very
materially, the right of petitioning.
Earl Grosvenor said, that, as the late
conduct of sheriffs was before the House,
he wished to say a few words on a most
trifling instance of their partiality. He
alluded to the conduct of that officer at
the late meeting of the county of Chester,
at which the sheriff took upon himself to
determine in what terms an address from
the county should be framed. An address
called a loyal address was moved. He
(lord G.)who attended as an humble indi-
vidual, moved an amendment to that
address, containing similar expressions
of loyalty and attachment to the throne,
but accompanied with expressions of dis-
approbation of ministers. The sheriff re-
fused to receive the amendment. He de-
cided that it was not relevant to the object
of the meeting, and declared that he
would not put it. The sheriff did not
stop here; but afterwards took upon him-
self to assert, that the original address
was carried; and refused, though repeat-
edly pressed, to grant the only means of


JAN. 25, 1821. [106
determining the point, namely, a division.
In consequence of this refusal, the meet-
ing broke up without coming to any regu-
lar decision. By this conduct of the she-
riff, the great majority of the freeholders
were deprived of the right of petitioning.
The sheriff was purely a ministerial officer,
and ought not to assume to himself the
right of determining whether the parti-
cular words in which an amendment was
framed were relevant or not. In this in-
stance, he contended, that the sheriff of
Chester had been guilty of a gross trans-
gression of duty, and of a violation of the
rights of the subject. But he was deter-
mined that such conduct should not pass
without the strictest inquiry in a court of
law or in parliament, if possible. The
proceedings of the sheriffs in several coun-
ties had been very extraordinary, but the
case of Chester was the most monstrous
of all.
The Earl of Darnley wished to call their
lordships' attention to that part of the
petition which prayed for the restoration
of her majesty to all her rights. The
House of Commons had already declared,
that the proceedings against her majesty
were derogatory from the dignity of the
crown, and injurious to the best interests
of the country. He hoped they would
follow up this resolution in the only way
in which it could be effectually followed
up; by taking such measures as would
tend to restore her majesty to all her rights,
and, in the first place, would take steps
to reverse that measure by which it was
attempted to deprive her of them, namely,
the erasure of her name from the Liturgy.
The House might remember that, on a
former occasion, he had declared his
opinion that the erasure of her majesty's
name from the Liturgy was the foundation
of all the ulterior proceedings against the
queen. He had witnessed with much
satisfaction that men of all parties, for-
getting private partialities in their love for
their country, had condemned those pro-
ceedings. He would make one effort more
to restore tranquillity to the country.
The Marquis of Lansdown said, he had
a petition to present from the county of
Wilts. The meeting was convened by
the sheriff on a requisition most respect-
ably signed by persons of every class in
the county. The petition strongly stated
the loyalty of the petitioners, and their
attachment to the constitution. These
sentiments were also accompanied with a
strong opinion on what had taken place









with respect to her majesty. The petition, had been called, after attempts of a very
however, did not complain of any of those extraordinary kind bad been made to pre-
blasphemous and seditious publications ventthe county from assembling. Among
which had made so prominent a part in those who had endeavoured to obstruct
addresses of a different stamp, and which this constitutional expression of the opi-
would have been most readily condemned nionl of the county, were persons holding
by the petitioners had the state of things official situations under government and
in the county been such as to require any members of that House. They had put
censure of that kind. He had taken forth a counter-requisition, and stated
some pains to know the state of the that they had already sent an address to
county in which he resided, and he could the king which rendered any further
confidently say, that at no time had the expression of the sentiments of the county
conduct of the inhabitants been more unnecessary. Notwithstanding this at-
orderly and religious, tempt to prevent it, the meeting was held,
Lord Ellenborough observed, that some and a more numerous and respectable
of the petitioners appeared to petition assemblage of freeholders never was seen
in ignorance of the real nature of the in the county. The petition-which he
question respecting which they prayed held in his hand-was adopted at that
the House. There was no question now meeting, and the signatures amounted to
about restoration of rights. The object several thousands. No names more res-
of the bill of Pains and Penalties was pectable, either for property or character,
to deprive her majesty of all those pri- could be found in the county then those
vileges immunities and exemptions which which were appended to this petition. The
appertained to her as queen consort; and number was not less than from seven to
that bill being thrown out, of course eight thousand; and, the petition might
her majesty's rights remained as they were therefore be held to represent the general
before, untouched and undiminished. sentiments of the inhabitants of Hamp-
Lord Holland said, that the noble lord shire. The petitioners prayed, that their
might have made up his mind upon the lordships would not, under any shape
question as to the right of the queen to or form, re-enter on proceedings against
have her name inserted in the Liturgy, her majesty, and that they would take
that no such right existed, but undoubt- measures to procure the insertion of her
edlv there were men high in the law and majesty's name in the Liturgy. He
eminent in station, who were of opinion, trusted, his majesty's ministers would not
that the queen had a legal right to have act so madly as to oppose the wishes of
her name inserted in the Liturgy. It was, the petitioners, and the general opinion of
therefore, quite natural that the people, the country, on the question.
seeing that her majesty's name was ex- The Duke of Wellington supposed, that
eluded from the Liturgy, and witnessing the noble earl had alluded to him, as one
besides, that her majesty was refused of those who had signed the counter-re-
a palace, and that no establishment had quisition. Now, he did not sign that
hitherto been given to her, should peti- counter-requisition, and the reason of his
tion for the interference of that House, refusal to sign it was, that being lord-
to have her majesty restored to those rights lieutenant of the county, and besides, a
which appertained to her as queen con- member of the government, he thought
sort, and which had been enjoyed by all his signature, under these circumstances,
preceding queen consorts, would have been improper. He must
Lord Ellenborough admitted, that the say, however, that he entirely concurred
question respecting the insertion of the with those who signed the counter-requi-
queen's name in the Liturgy was liable sition, as to the impropriety of assembling
to very considerable doubt and difficulty, the county. As an address had already
and though he might have formed an been presented to his majesty, signed by
opinion upon it, he was well aware that 9,000 names, he considered the opinion
it was a question of great delicacy and of the county already expressed, and
difficulty. All he meant to say was, that that it was not necessary to go through
the queen's rights as queen consort were the farce of a county meeting. At the
not all affected, meeting which took place, only one side
The Earl of Carnarvon rose to present was allowed to be heard. The member
the petition of the county of Hants. The for the county, whose view was different
meeting at which this petition was voted from the requisitionists, attended, and


r Petitions relative to th~e Queen.


.1071 HotIJS OF LORDS,


(108







109] Petitions relative to the Queen.
wished to state his sentiments, but could
not procure a hearing.
'Ihe Earl of Carnarvon admitted the
propriety of the noble duke's reasons for
not signing the counter requisition, but
he confessed, that he heard, with some
dismay, a declaration by a member of
the government, that a county meeting
called for the purpose of addressing the
king and petitioning parliament, was
considered as a farce. He was afraid that
it was a part of that system which minis-
ters had long pursued, and which would
tend to persuade the people, that it was in
vain to expect from them a substitution
of conciliation for threats and restraints.
The noble duke might think that the
loyalty of the county was sufficiently ex-
pressed by the first address ; but was it
not strange to say, because a loyal address
had been secretly circulated and signed,
that therefore there was to be no public
county meeting ? The declaration ex-
pressed the attachment of those who
signed it to the constitution. The noble
duke approved of that declaration; but
he would be glad to know how far he
conceived himself pledged to support
that constitution: because if any thing
was more essential than another to the
preservation of the constitution, it was,
that county meetings should be free and
open. But it seemed that it was not this
popular part of the constitution which it
was the object of ministers and their
friends to support. What sort of loyalty
was that which was displayed in the de-
claration ? and how was it got up ? A
sort of pastoral letter had been sent to
every clergyman in the county, request-
ing that body to use their utmost exertions
to obtain signatures. This was not the
first time (but he hoped it would be the
last) that men who ought to keep aloof
from political contests had been thus
employed. The deputy sheriff of the
county signed the letters as secretary to
the Pitt club; so that when the Pitt club
had made their collection of signatures,
their lordships were to be told, that to
hold a county meeting was a farce. The
noble duke had also stated, that the
member for the county could not obtain
a hearing. This assertion was not correct.
There was nothing extraordinary in cer-
tain tokens of disapprobation being ex-
pressed,on the address of a speaker in
any assembly. It was what occurred in
the other House of parliament, and even
in this; and such expressions of feeling


JAN. 25, 1821. [110
the noble duke himself must often have
observed. The member of a county, as
well as any other person, would meet with
that sort of disapprobation, when, what he
said did not accord with the feelings of
those whom lie addressed, or when they
thought their time unnecessarily occupied.
The Marquis of Lansdown said, he sub-
scribed most cordially to every wordwhich
had fallen from his noble friend. The noble
duke had stated, that the counter-requi-
sitionists conceived there was no necessity
for calling the county together again. The
complaint on the part of the inhabitants
of the county, however, was, that they had
not been called together at all. Who was
it that set up the opinion, that the loyal
declaration expressed entirely the senti-
ments of the county ? It might be the
counter-requisitionists, but he trusted not
the noble duke. A certain declaration
was privately circulated, of which no per-
son who signed it had power to alter or
modify a single syllable, any more than
the clergyman who circulated it had power
to alter any of the thirty-nine articles
which they subscribed. Yet, according
to the explanation of the counter-requisi-
tionists, the sense of the county had been
sufficiently taken in this private manner.
For this reason, and because one of the
members for the county had been prevent-
ed from being heard, the constitutional
meeting of the county had been stigma-
tized as a farce. It was with astonish-
ment that he heard this term of reproach
applied to the exercise of one of the most
valuable rights of the subject-the more
valuable because it was exercised in the
face of day, and gave every individual in
the county the opportunity of canvassing
freely and independently the state of pub-
lic affairs. This right had not only been
long exercised in this country, but, was
a right, the exercise of which was encou-
raged when the sentiments expected to be
expressed were agreeable to those in power.
That kind of assembly, which was now
called a farce was, a year ago, the only re-
gular and constitutional mode through
which the throne had been approached
with addresses of congratulation. Did
any of his majesty's ministers, then, call
these meetings a farce ? Such meetings
would never be so stigmatized, when their
proceedings accorded with their opinions
and wishes.
The Duke of Wellington said, he had
not stated that the county had been
called before, but had given it as his







111] HOUSE OF LORDS,
opinion that its sentiments had been suf-
ficiently expressed in an address which
had been publicly circulated and signed.
With respect to the word farce," he did
not use it out of disrespect to county meet-
ings generally. He certainly did not view
them with any disapprobation, when so
conducted, that all sides could be heard;
but when they were called by one party
only, and when every man who wished to
say any thing in opposition to the opinions
of that party, had to ask the protection of
some noble lord or some other person, in
order to obtain a hearing, he did not con-
ceive that such a meeting expressed the
sentiments of the county. He was willing
to allow that county meetings, if properly
regulated, were a fair constitutional mode
of taking the sense of the county; but
this could not happen when they were at-
tended by a mob for the express purpose
of supporting one side. The fact was,
that the county member had not been
heard at this meeting.
Lord Holland observed, that the noble
duke had expressed, in the address, his
attachment to the constitution ; but what
he had said in that House explained what
he meant by his attachment to it. There
was a distinction in the mode in which he
wished the constitutional opinion of the
people to be expressed. An address se-
cretly got up and privately circulated, was
a grave and commendable mode; but at-
tachment to the constitution expressed at
a public meeting was a farce. What dis-
pleased the noble duke was, that persons
on one side could not obtain a hearing.
But his noble friend had explained this.
The meeting was public, and all parties
might have come to it. It seemed, how-
ever, that every thing was fair when the
parties were secured by lock and key,
and when no one who disapproved of their
proceedings could get near them; but
when public discussion was invited, and
the doors thrown open to all persons both
friendly and adverse, then the meeting
was a farce. The declaration mentioned
by the noble duke purported to ex-
.press the opinion of the county ; but as it
was only the opinion of individuals, he
could not admit it to be what the noble
duke described it, but considered it a
fraudulent attempt to misrepresent the
opinion ofthe county. He did not say that
county meetings were entirely without
defects. There was nothing in the con-
stitution of this or of any other country
that might not be liable to objection.


Petitions relative to the Queen.


[tIs


But this he would say, that that arrange-
ment by which an opportunity was given
to both sides to come forward and express
their sentiments was not one of its defects.
The noble duke had said, that it was ne-
cessary for persons who opposed the object
of the meeting to apl eal to some nodle
lord for protection. If by this he alluded
to meetings at which he (lord Holland)
had been present, it was certainly true
that he had always endeavouied to obtain
a patient hearing to every person ; but if
lie meant, that there was a decided unwil-
lingness to hear persons state sentiments
of the kind alluded to, such was not the
fact. He declared that both at the meet-
ing of the county of Oxford and of Bed-
ford, a fair hearing was given to persons
who spoke in a way calculated to excite
irritation. The noble duke had used the
word '" farce," in application to that
which was a part of the constitution.
He sincerely believed that this expression
was used in haste, and candour required
that the same excuse should be extended
to all who wrote or spoke on constitutional
subjects. Let not their lordships, when
they had heard the popular part of the
constitution called a farce, be too severe
on the language of others respecting its
other branches. With regard to the ex-
planation given by the noble duke, he did
not see that it amounted to any thing, ex-
cept that all county meetings must be
a farce, unless they were favourable to
ministers, It never occurred, that oppo-
site parties joined in calling meetings.
It was sufficient that they were open to all.
As far as his information went, a more
shameful attempt to put forth a false opi-
nion as the sentiments of the county was
never made than that which proceeded
from the counter-requisitionists.
The Earl of Liverpool said,that his noble
friend had been misunderstood. He never
meant to treat with contempt county
meetings, which he knew were a part of
the ancient constitution of the country.
What he objected to was, that when they
were so assembled and so controlled by a
mob, their proceedings must necessarily
be a farce; such meetings were not
meetings of freeholders. Undoubtedly,
county meetings, if they could be conduct-
ed in practice according to their theoretic
object, must be most useful. In that
sense, he admitted, that no part of the
constitution was more valuable; but they
were liable to great abuse, and when not
held in county hall, but in the open air,







1 13] Petitions relative to the Quee
they were no longer meetings of any lega
description of persons known to the con
stitution. He did not know that thi
Hampshire meeting was to be considered
an exception. When the noble lords talked
of sending round the declaration to b4
signed, he should like to know how tho
petition of the Hampshire meeting hac
been signed ? Were the 7,000 or 8,00(
signatures all collected at the meeting
The declaration had 9,000 signatures ; anc
it was, after all, to the signatures that the3
must look forthe expression of the opinion
of the county-he meant to the number
and respectability of the signatures con-
sidered together. It certainly was not his
intention, or that of his noble friend, tc
stigmatize county meetings; all that was
meant was,that those meetingsin which cla-
mour and confusion prevailed, to the ex-
clusion of fair discussion, did not convey
a correct expression of public opinion.
Earl Grey did notexpect, after what had
passed in that House, last session, on the
subject of public meetings, to have heard
any reflection cast on county meetings,
especially as, when the measures for
abridging the liberties of the people were
under discussion, the noble lord con-
tended, that county meetings called
under the authority of the sheriff, would
henceforth have greater weight. But,
notwithstanding all that the noble earl
had then said in support of county
meetings, and the advantage of holding
them under the authority of the sheriffs,
some of those sheriffs refused to call meet-
ings, and others conducted themselves
with the grossest partiality when they were
called. The noble earl had explained the
manner in which sheriffs were appointed ;
but he was surprised to find, that he had
not attempted to say any thing satis-
factory on the discretion they assumed of
refusing to call meetings. He should be
sorry to attribute to a person of the noble
duke's character a wish to depreciate any
part of the constitution, though his words
certainly had that tendency. The noble
duke did not object to meetings which
both parties called, and where there were
opportunities for discussion. But was
not the meetingin question legally called ?
Was not the requisition respectably
signed ? and was not the object legal ?
His noble friend had described the meeting
as most respectable. The objection of the
noble duke applied to a circumstance
which was unavoidable. County meetings
often did wrong in not patiently hearing
VOL. IV.


n. JAN. 25, 1821. [il'l
1 persons who addressed them ; but this
- was the case in every assembly in which
Conflicting opinions were stated. Did not
I something similar often occur in par-
1 liament? If the doctrine of the noble
e duke was to be adopted, county meet-
Sings would never be called, except on
Occasions when there could be no differ-
0 ence of opinion-such as those which
? occurred last year, when the object was,
Sto express to the throne, sentiments of
Compliment and congratulation. His
I noble friend (lord Gios\enor) had de.
r scribed some very extraordinary conduct
. on the part of the sheriff at the Cheshire
meeting. Did the noble duke and the
noble lord mean to call that meeting a
Sfarce ? But their lordships had had an
instance of the same kind at their own
Doors. Yesterday a meeting of merchants
and bankers was called in the city of
London. Who were the persons who en-
deavoured to prevent fair discussion, and
to provoke a dissolution of the meeting?
Precisely those who had before got up a
secret declaration. The private declaration
alluded to by the noble duke did not ex-
press the opinion of the county of Hants.
It was said it had 9,000 signatures; but,
whatever the number was, they were pro-
cured, not by any fair discussion at a
public meeting, but by influence and the
activecanvass of clergymen. How could
it, then, be asserted, that in this way the
sense of the county had been sufficiently
expressed ? He hoped thatthenoble duke
did not mean to reflect on county meet-
ings generally ; but his language had been
such as to give great reason to suspect
that the feeling with which ministers re-
garded popular rights was very unfavour-
able. Those rights, however, were not
less a part of the constitution than the
prerogatives and privileges of the Crown.
The Duke of Leinster said, he believed
his majesty's ministers were extremely
fond of coups de theatre; but the farce at
Dublin, to use the noble duke's phrase,
where the military were called in from the
county gaol, and the meeting dispersed,
vi et armis, had nearly terminated in a
tragedy. He should shortly have occa-
sion to call the attention of the House to
this subject.
The Earl of Blesinton said, that the
noble earl opposite had no objection to
county meetings, where an opportunity
was afforded, of hearing the arguments
which might be urged on both sides, and
entering into a calm, fair and impartial
I







115] HOUSE OF LORDS,
discussion of public questions. But,what
was the conduct of the sheriff in the
county of Dublin ? Did he allow gentle-
men to address the meeting on both sides
of the question, or did he permit any per-
son to offer his sentiments who was op-
posed to the requisition ? No ; he chose
rather to dissolve the meetingthan to hear
any opinions opposed to his own; he pro-
ceeded to call in the military, without
applying to the civil power, and actually
handed lord Cloncurry out of the chair,
whose good humour and discretion on
that occasion, prevented this farce from
terminating in a tragedy.
The Earl of Carnarvon strongly repro-
bated the attempt which had been made to
cast a reproach upon one ofthe must respect-
able meetings he had ever attended. IHe
hoped the noble duke would learn to
appreciate better the character of English
meetings in general; and that he would
not, without better information, attempt
to degrade a respectable public meeting
of an English county by designating it as
a clamorous mob.
Lord Ellenborough said, he had heard
with regret the expression which the noble
duke had made use of, because he was
sure it would be taken advantage of out of
doors. tle, however, did not understand
that expression in the sense in which it
had been taken by other noble lords, or
he would have agreed with them in the
censure they had bestowed on it. In his
opinion, the expression was not meant to
apply to all county meetings, but only to
those at which it was impossible any
rational discussion could take place. It
was with deep regret he felt himself com-
pelled to say, that the county meetings
which had lately been held deserved all
that the noble duke had said of them.
This was occasioned, not by the persons
who attended those meetings, but by those
who absented themselves fiomn them. If
the 9,000 persons who had signed the
counter-declaration had attended themeet-
ing, they would have had a majority, or
at least they would have given a different
complexion to the meeting. If the ancient
practice were restored, county meetings
would be very different from what they
were at present. Addresses would then
have greater weight than they have now,
when they are agreed to after-and not
at the meetings.
The Duke of Bedford presented a peti-
tion from the county of Bedford, praying
for the restoration of her majesty's name


Naples-Declaration of the


[1116


to the Liturgy, and the restitution of all
her rights and dignities; and also for a
complete change in the system of govern-
ment. In presenting this petition to the
House, he wished to say a few words in
explanation of what was meant by a com-
plete change in the system of government.
They wished for a system of rigid economy
and retrenchment, instead of a system of
prodigality and corruption, for a reform of
the various abuses which had crept into
the government, and for a system of jus-
tice, kindness, and conciliation towards
all classes of his majesty's subjects. The
meeting was one of the most numerous
which had ever been held in the county,
and the petition was carried with only'two
dissentient voices. Two most respectable
individuals had entered their protest against
it, and they were heard with that respect
and attention which their manly conduct
deserved.
Viscount Anson presented a similar
petition from the city of Litchfield. He
had received a protest against it, which
had been framed at a secret meeting: and
he could not but express his regret at ob.
serving the names of nine clergymen, at
the head of whom was the dean of Litch-
field, subscribed to a protest, of which,
the object was, to excludeher majesty from
the prayers of the people. He was sorry
to be compelled to say, that the conduct
of the clergy throughout the country had
exposed that body to merited reprobation.
He had no hesitation in declaring, that
the petition contained the real sentiments,
and almost unanimous opinions of thein-
habitants of the city of Litchfield.
The said petitions were ordered to lie
on the table.

NAPLES-DECLARATION OF THE AL-
LIED SOVEREIGNS AT TROPPAU.]-Earl
Grey rose, to call the attention of the noble
lord opposite, to a subject connected with
our foreign policy. He had been unsuc-
cessful inhis attempt to obtain answers to
the questions which he had put to the
noble lord on a former night, which led
him to fear that he should obtain no in-
formation on the present occasion. The
noble lord must be aware that a circular
letter had lately been addressed to dif-
feient continental states, and among others,
to the senate of Hamburgh. Itwasinthe
following terms:-
The overthrow of the order of things
in Spain, Portugal, and Naples, has neces-
sarily caused the cares and the uneasiness








of the powers who combated the revolu- by the allied powers was founded upon
tion, and convinced them of the necessity treaties. In this circular it was inferred,
of putting a check to the new calamities that the allied powers would have the con-
with which Europe is threatened. The sent of the courts of London and Paris to
principles which united the great powers their proceedings. He wished to know
of the continent to deliver the world from whether this paper had been communi-
the military despotism of an individual cated to the government of this country,
issuing from the revolution, ought to act and whether the inference of support from
against the revolutionary power which has England had been authorized by the
just developed itself. government ?
The sovereigns assembled at Troppau, The Earl of Liverpool said, he had
with this intention, venture to hope that not the least difficulty in answering the
they shall attain this object. They will question of the noble earl. The paper to
take for their guides in this great enter- which he referred was, he believed, an
prise, the treaties which restored peace incorrect copy of a real paper which did
to Europe, and have united its nations exist. However, he had no difficulty
together. in stating, in the first place, that there
Without doubt the powers have the were no treaties of the nature alluded
right to take, in common, general mea- to in that paper. In the next place, he
sures of precaution against those states was able to assure the noble earl, that
whose reforms, engendered by rebellion, the court of London was no party to any
are openly opposed to legitimate govern- proceedings now in progress with refer-
ments, as examples have already demon- ence to Naples. In consequence of a
strated, especially when this spirit of re- paper, similar to that referred to by the
billion is propagated in the neighboring noble earl, a paper had been addressed
states by secret agents. by this government to thedifferent powers
In consequence, the monarchs assem- of Europe, which he should have no objec-
bled at Troppau, have concerted together tion to lay before the House. That paper
the measures required by circumstances, would explain the whole policy pursued
and have communicated to the courts of by this government with reference to the
London and Paris their intention of attain- affairs of Naples. He repeated, that he
ing the end desired, either by mediation had not the slightest objection to the
or by force. With this view, they have production of that document, though he
invited the king of the Two Sicilies to could wish, as a matter of convenience,
repair to Laybach, to appear there as con- that the noble earl would not move for it
ciliator between his misguided people and that evening.
the states whose tranquillity is endangered. Earl Grey expressed himself perfectly
By this state of things, and as they have satisfied with the answer of the noble earl.
resolved not to recognize any authority He certainly should not move for the
established by the seditious, it is only production of the paper to-night, after
with the king they can confer, what had fallen from the noble earl; but
As the system to be followed has no he hoped that it would be speedily laid
other foundation than treaties already before the House, and he confidently ex-
existing, they have no doubt of the assent pected, from the answer of the noble earl,
of the courts of Paris and London. The that that paper would contradict the in-
only object of this system is, to consolidate ferences drawn by the courts of Peters-
the alliance between the sovereigns: it burgh, Berlin, and Vienna; and show,
has no view to conquests, or to violations that they had no right whatever to count
of the independence of other powers. upon the co-operation or assistance of this
Voluntary ameliorations in the government government.
will not be intruded. They desire only The Earl of Liverpool had no difficulty
to maintain tranquillity, and protect in assuring the noble earl, that the paper
Europe from the scourge of new revolu- he had referred to would give a complete
tions, and to prevent them as far as pos- contradiction to any inferences, calculat-
sible." ing upon the assistance of this govern-
He would not stay to inquire how far ment. There were some arrangements
theconclusion of thiscircular wasin unison which prevented its immediate produc-
with the sentiments stated at its com- tion; but he should be ready to lay it
mencement: all he wished to know, was, before the House in the course of the next
whether the determination here expressed week.


JAN. 25, 1821. (118


117) Allied Sovereigvns at Troppalu.








119] HOUSE OF COMMONS,

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, January 26.
THE KING'S ANSWER TO THE AD-
DRESS.1-Mr. Speaker reported the king's
answer to the address as follows:
Gentlemen,
I receive with the highest satisfaction
this dutiful and loyal address. The
assurances which you give me of your
affectionate attachment to my person and
government, and of your cordial support
in the discharge of those sacred duties
which are imposed upon me for the pro-
tection and happiness of my people, afford
me the surest pledge that I shall be ena-
bled, under the favour of Divine Pro-
vidence, effectually to preserve to my
subjects those inestimable blessings which
they have hitherto enjoyed under our
invaluable constitution."

PETITIONS RELATIVETO THEQUEEN.]
-Mr. Wyvill presented a petition signed
by 1,700 inhabitants of the city of York,
complaining of the conduct of ministers
towards her majesty, and praying for the
restoration of all her rights, and espe-
cially for the restoration of her name
to the Liturgy. He took that oppor-
tunity of stating, that it was with con-
siderable pain he learnt that the noble
lord opposite, did not, of himself, intend
to advise the restoration of her majesty's
name to the Liturgy. He inferred from
this conduct, that neither ministers nor
his majesty were aware of the irritation
which prevailed throughout the country
on this subject. He must also say, that he
was greatly surprised that ministers had
no intention of instituting an investiga-
tion into the Milan commission. The
country would assume from this conduct,
and confidently assume as a fact, that there
had been a conspiracy, and that ministers
were parties to that conspiracy.
Mr. James presented a petition from
Carlisle, praying for the restoration of her
majesty's name to the Liturgy, and en-
treating that the House would no longer
continue to support ministers, who had
introduced and supported such uncon-
stitutional measures. The petition was
signed by more than 1,000 names, and it
reprobated the bill of Pains and Penalties
asa violation of the constitution and of
the fundamental laws of the realm, and as


Pelitions relative to the Queen.


a measure unknown, except in cases of
most urgent state necessity.
Mr. Denison rose to present a petition
from the parishes of St. Mary Magdalen,
Bermondsey, and others, praying for the
restoration of her majesty's name to the
Liturgy. Itlamented that the late mea-
sures against her majesty should ever have
been instituted. In the sentiments and
prayers of the petitioners he concurred,
being convinced, that a more impolitic,
unwise, and unjust measure, than that of
striking her majesty's name out of the
Liturgy, could not have been devised;
and being also convinced, that nothing
could restore tranquillity to the country
but the replacing of her majesty's name
where it ought to be. On the motion, that
the petition be printed,
Sir E. Knatchbull expressed a hope
that, on the score of economy, hon. gen-
tlemen would not press the printingofevery
petition of this sort that might be pre-
sented. He therefore hoped the hon. mem-
ber would not persevere in the motion he
had made.
Mr. Denison agreed with the hon. gen-
tleman, that economy was desirable, but
could not agree that the petition ought not
to be printed. Those from whom it came,
though in a humble situation, were as
much entitled to have their sentiments
made known to their fellow subjects as any
other body of men could be.
Lord Milton was glad to find the hon.
member for Kent so alive to the necessity
of observing the most rigid economy,
and trusted the House and the country
would regard it only as an earnest of
the zeal with which, for the future,
the hon. member would labour for the
reduction of every useless expense and
unnecessary office. Perhaps he would
find, that the office of receiver-general of
the land-tax was one which might be
dispensed with, under the present cir-
cumstances of the country, and the busi-
ness connected with it, performed through
some other channel. Should a motion
to this effect be made, he hoped the coun-
try would be favoured with the support
of the hon. gentleman, who might per-
haps be an important witness on this
subject.
Mr. C. Dundas presented a petition
from the county of Berks. It complained
that no inquiry had been made into the
distresses of the country, but that parlia-
ment had been occupied for many months
solely, with a needless prosecution against


[I20







121] Petitions relative to the Queen.
the Queen-a prosecution which was dis-
tressing to the moral feelings of the coun-
try and derogatory from the dignity-and
honour of the Crown. In presenting this
petition, he begged leave to join in the
wish that the undivided attention of mi-
nisters and of parliament should be de-
voted to the relief of the unprecedented
distresses of the country. The petitioners
most justly stated, that for months their
attention had been devoted to a prosecu-
tion that was at once unnecessary and un-
just. The failure of that prosecution
placed her majesty in the same situation
in which a party accused was placed by
the throwing out of a bill by the grand
jury, and at this result every friend of the
royal family, every well-wisher to our
constitution, every lover of his country
must have sincerely rejoiced. That most
unjust proceeding had alarmed every
friend of justice and truth and humanity;
it had disgusted every manof sound under-
standing and good feeling. He had enter-
tained some hope, from the experience of
his majesty's mind and disposition, that
the irritation and dismay excited through-
out the country would have been removed;
and that the country would have been re-
lieved from a feeling of dissatisfaction
which had perhaps never been equalled.
He could answer for the petitioners being
as decided in their loyalty to the king,
and their attachment to the constitution,
as any body of men in England.
Mr. Denison presented a petition from
the inhabitants of Godalming. It was
most respectably signed. Its prayer was,
for the restoration of her majesty's name
to the Liturgy; and for such reform in
that House as would give the people a
free, fair, and full representation. He
fully agreed in this prayer, though he was
no advocate for the wild schemes of an-
nual parliaments and universal suffrage.
Mr. W. Williams presented a petition
from the inhabitants of Lambeth. It was
signed by more than 2,000 respectable
inhabitants. It was the firm belief of the
petitioners, that nothing could allay the
irritation of the country but the restora-
tion of her majesty's name to the Liturgy
and to all the rights belonging to a
Queen consort. He cordially coincided
with the petitioners, and he had placed
that reliance on the candour and huma-
nity of ministers, that as soon as they had
been compelled to give up the prosecu-
tion they would have restored her ma-
jesty's name to the Liturgy. He still hoped


JAN. 20, 1821. [122
they would retrace their error, and restore
her majesty's name to the prayers of a
religious and loyal people, as the only
means of giving tranquillity tothecountry.
The petitioners prayed also for inquiry
into the Milan commission.
Sir Ronald Fergusson presented three
petitions-one from the magistrates and
town council of Culross, the second from
Burntisland, and the third from Kinghorn.
One of the petitions stated, that all
the evils of the country-our agricultural
and commercial distresses, were owing to
his majesty's ministers; and, therefore,
prayed the House to withdraw its confi-
dence and support from them. He hear-
tily hoped, that the House might comply
with this petition. All the petitions de-
clared their abhorrence of the prosecutions
against the Queen, and prayed for the
restoration of her name to the Liturgy,
and to all her rights as Queen consort.
Mr. Sykes said, he had a petition to
present on a subject somewhat different
from the preceding petitions. It was from
Cottingham ; and complained of the great
distress which afflicted all classes. The
speech from the throne had been made to
represent a state of things which existed
not. Never yet had he seen one person
outside of those doors who believed one
word of it. Whatever ministers might
believe themselves, or attempt to make
others believe, sure he was, that so far as
his experience extended, nine-tenths of
the people joined in the belief, that with-
out a change of ministers and measures,
no satisfaction could be obtained for the
people. Without an entire change of
the system acted upon, the unhappy agi-
tation which prevailed, and from which,
the royal name, the royal family, and the
best interests of the country had suffered,
could not be allayed. For this reason,
too, the petitioners prayed for the dis-
missal of ministers. On the first day of
the session he had heard much of the folly
and mischief of certain persons; but he
would ask, whether there could be fully
and mischief equal to the folly and mis-
chief of those who had instituted the pro-
ceedings against the Queen ? He should
have thought that wisdom would have
dictated very different conduct in point
of prudence; he should have thought that
wisdom would have dictated very differ-
ent conduct on the ground of justice.
The measures against the Queen had been
conceived in mischief, nursed up in folly,
and supported by perjury.







123] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
Mr. Hobhouse said, he held in his hand
some additional commentaries on the as-
sertion of the noble lord opposite, that
he was in possession of the confidence of
the country. The first was a petition from
the parish of St. George, Hanover-square.
The mock loyalists had endeavoured to
get up a mock-loyal petition in the same
parish, and in ten days they had got 415
names. The petition which he held in his
hand had not been ready for signature more
than ten hours, and it had got as many
names. If the subject did not require
that it should be presented that night, it
would have been signed by nearly as many
thousands. It prayed for attention to the
distresses of the country, for the restora-
tion of her majesty's name to the Liturgy,
and also for a reform in the representation.
The second petition was from the book-
binders of London and Westminster. It
prayed for the same objects. The third
was from Langport, praying for the dis-
missal of ministers, and for the restora-
tion of her majesty's name to the Litur-
it was signed by 1,000 names. The
fourth was from Sidmouth, and signed
by 450 individuals. No one could object
to the loyalty of the people of Sidmouth,
who, from unaccountable attachment to
ministers, had refused to petition against
them in the case of the Manchester busi-
ness. A mock loyal address from this
place had not so many names, although
applications had been made for ten miles
round. He had been entreated by the
petitioners to urge the necessity of taking
the prayers of the petitions into serious
consideration. It would be a failure of
courtesy to the noble lord, whose motion
was fixed for that night, if he were to
offer any observations now, upon the sub-
jectof the Liturgy. He must say, how-
ever, that the member for Guilford had
taken a very erroneous view of the ques-
tion, when he had said that he viewed it
only as a legal question. If the exclu-
sion of her majesty's name could be es-
tablished as legally right, still the ques-
tion would recur as a question of state
necessity. Would it be endured that her
majesty's name should be struck out of
the Liturgy, upon evidence which had not
made good the charge against her majesty,
tothe minds of those who had been trying
the question? There wasno inconsistency
in connecting the two subjects, of the
restoration of her majesty's rights and the
reform of that House. If there had been
an actual responsibility of ministers, they


Petitions relative to the Queen. [124
would not have dared to attempt measures
so hostile to the interests and to the feel-
ings of the country. The proceedings
against the Queen had taken away the
film from-the eyes of all who had, in de-
fiance of reason, supposed that that House
represented the people. But the illusion
had been removed by the first lord of the
Treasury, who had disregarded the House
of Commons when it declared the prose-
cution derogatory and injurious, but who,
when he afterwards gave it up, said, it was
because the people of England had felt
so strongly against it. What could be a
more clear declaration than that of his
considering that House as not represent-
ing the people of England ? The House
would act wisely, therefore, by acceding
to such a reform as would convince minis-
ters that they did represent the people. It
would be better to do it with a good grace
than to be forced to do it. As to the
dismissal of his majesty's ministers, it
was impossible to say how that very desir-
able object could be effected. Ministers
would not yield to the people, or to the
parliament. In former times, if ministers
could not carry a great measure attempted
by them, they resigned their places; but
the present ministers could endure every
defeat and censure, and still keep their
places. They failed in the attempt to
carry the Property-tax, and kept their
places. They lost the bill of Pains and
Penalties; still they kept their places.
If there should be a majority that night
against them, of which he had no idea,
to-morrow we should still see them in
their places: and there seemed no reason
to doubt, that they would leave their
places as inheritances to their heirs,execu-
tors, administrators, and assigns. He,
therefore, could not see how this prayer
could be carried into effect; but he was
willing to contribute all in his power to-
wards the accomplishment of this object,
as one of the only means of saving the
country from impending ruin.
Mr. Sergeant Onslow said, the hon.
member.had imputed to him, expressions
too absurd for any but an idiot to have
used. If the right of excluding her ma-
jesty's name was legal, still there was
the question of expediency to be consider-
ed. If the hon. gentleman chose to cite
his words, he ought to have done it cor-
rectly.
Mr. Holhouse said, he had never sup-
posed the learned gentleman to be an
idiot. He was the last man in the world







125] Petitions relative to the Queen.
to say any thing to disparage the learned
gentleman, or to speak with personal dis-
respect of any one. Many, however, had
thought, as well as himself, that the
learned gentleman considered the question
about to come on to be merely a legal
question.
Mr. Fyshe Palmer presented two peti-
tions, of a similar nature: the first, from
the inhabitants of Reading, signed by
1,300 persons : the second, from the inha-
bitants of Tilehurst, tithing of Theale,
and its vicinity. The hon. member beg-
ged leave to say, that the petitioners were
devotedly attached to the constitution,
and were most anxious to support the
honour and dignity of the Crown. They
had seen, with regret, the late proceedings
against the Queen, carried on against the
advice and recommendation of parliament
-they had seen the charges against her
majesty supported by the foulest and most
corrupt peijury,-they had seen that
the witnesses brought forward against her
majesty were discharged servants, who had
been bribed to give testimony against her.
This was nothing less than corrupting the
source of justice. The petitioners most
solemnly prayed the House of Commons to
withdraw their support from those minis-
ters, who had, for such a length of time,
abused the power entrusted to them,-
that a stop should be put to any attempt
to renew the proceedings against the
Queen,-that the House of Commons
would husband with strict economy the
resources of the nation; and that every
exertion should be made to inquire into,
and alleviate, the distresses under which
the country at present laboured. They
prayed also, that every effort should be
made to correct the abuses which existed
in the representation of the people in par-
liament. He begged to remind the House
of an observation which had been long
since made, that unless a reform took place
in parliament, no ministers could possi-
'bly manage the affairs of the country
with honour to themselves, or advantage
to the people, however well inclined they
might be to do so.
Mr. Denman presented a petition from
the inhabitants of Nottingham, in which,
they described the late proceedings against
her majesty as having originated in a foul
conspiracy, and expressed a hope, that the
'feelings so generally entertained amongst
the people on this subject would be like-
wise found to animate that House. They
deprecated any renewal of proceedings so


JAN. 26, 1821. [126
disgraceful, as dangerous to the public
peace and trusted that her majesty's name
would be re-inserted in the Liturgy. The
petition further prayed, that the House
would take steps for bringing to punish-
ment those who had conspired against the
Queen, and that it would refuse to grant
any supplies until those objects were
attained.
Mr. Birch presented a petition from the
corporation of Nottingham, praying, that
no further proceedings should be insti-
tuted against the Queen-a prayer which,
after what had been declared by the noble
lord opposite, the hon. member was will-
ing to consider as already complied with.
He trusted that the worthy alderman
(Heygate) who disapproved of the original
exclusion of her majesty's name from the
Liturgy, and yet professed himself to be
against its restoration, would attend in
his place that night, and find reason, in
the course of the debate, to change his
view of the question.
Mr. R. Martin observed, that he ap-
proved much more of this petition than
of that which had been presented by the
Queen's Solicitor General. As counsel
for the Queen the learned gentleman
might naturally entertain a strong and
honest prejudice in her favour; butbefore
others allowed themselves to bring for-
ward charges of conspiracy and perjury,
they ought to be able to prove their alle-
gations. He wished, therefore, to give
notice, that if he should hear parties ac-
cused of having committed bribery and
false swearing in order to calumniate and
degrade the Queen, he would challenge
them to put something in a course of
proof, so as to give to the accused a legi-
timate mode of defending themselves.
This might be easily done by moving, that
all the papers relative to the late inquiry
should be taken into consideration.
[Cries of Move, move."] Move what?
what was he to move? It was for those
who made the charges to substantiate
them.
Mr. Denman said, he was obliged to
the hon. gentleman for the terms in which
he had thought proper to allude to him,
but he scarcely thought he stood in need
of a defence or apology for presenting
the petition which had called forth the
hon. member's animadversions. He was
not bound to justify, to its full extent, the
language of the petition, of which not one
word was his own; neither was he aware,
that any charge was preferred against









the gentlemen opposite of having been would allay the irritation excited so gene-
engaged in a conspiracy. The petitioners rally by the treatment of her Majesty.
expressed, in general terms, their belief Mr. Monck presented a petition from
that a conspiracy had been formed and the town of Wantage. The petitioners
defeated; and they hoped, that its authors called the attention of parliament to the
and abettors might be brought to punish- existing state of the agricultural classes;
ment. This part of the subject evidently they also complained of the treatment ex-
referred to a question, upon the consider- perienced by the Queen, and stated, that
ation of which it was not then a proper nothing but the reinstatement of her ma-
time to enter. jesty's name in the Liturgy, and her in-
Mr. Heathcote said, he held in his hand vestiture in all the honours of her rank as
a petition from the inhabitants of the town Queen Consort, could allay the agitation
of Boston, similar in its general prayer which prevailed throughout the country.
to those which had been already received. He heartily concurred in the prayer of the
In presenting it, he could not avoid ex- petition, and earnestly hoped, or rather
pressing a hope that all those proceedings wished-for hopes he had none-tlhat
which had now so long, to the exclusion sentiments like these, which were so
of every other subject, engaged the atten- honourable to the sense and feelings of
tion of parliament, might be brought the people, would not be lost upon his ma-
speedily to an end. In their progress jesty's ministers. He earnestly wished
they had not been less detrimental to the that the voice of the people might not, as
dignity of the throne, than repugnant to heretofore, be thwarted, and that parlia-
the feelings of the people; and where so ment would not exhibit a determined
much must now be granted-and so little spirit of opposition to the sentiments of
could be denied, a full restitution of the the people at large.
rights and privileges of Queen Consort Sir Robert Wilson said, he held in his
appeared to him to be the most just and hand a petition, signed by 2,097 persons
the most politic course, of that respectable class of artisans de-
Mr. Honywood presented a petition nominated the Spanish Morocco Leather-
from Margate, praying for the dismissal dressers [a laugh]. He did not know
of ministers, and the restoration of the what there was in that to excite a laugh;
Queen to all her rights and dignities. it was true the petitioners were poor but
Those who signed it were freeholders, and, they were honest, industrious, and loyal ;
in publicly meeting to express their sen- theyalso paid heavy taxes, and had as much
timents on public events, were not con- right to be heard in that House as the con-
scious that they were acting" a farce," stituents of the representative of any bo-
but imagined rather that they were en- rough in England. They were as well enti-
gaged in the exercise of one of their tied to attention, when they approached
most valuable liberties. He feared much, that House with the expression oftheir sen-
that if these petitions should be treated timents upon a great national question, as
with neglect, the people would be con- any body of men whatever, and they were
firmed in an opinion which they had long then more especially deserving of being
entertained, namely, that the House did heard when they held one uniform lan-
not speak the sense, or represent the guage with all their countrymen upon the
wishes of the country. important subject which occupied, at that
Lord Stanley rose to present a petition moment, the attention of parliament. That
from the inhabitants of Chorley, in Lanca- language was strong, but it was just.
shire, complaining of the unprecedented They expressed their detestation of the
treatment of her majesty, and praying, odious proceedings against the Queen,
not merely, that the Queen's name should and more particularly the act of omitting
be restored to the Liturgy, but also that her name in the Liturgy while she was yet
her majesty should be invested, without untried. This they called an outrage to
further delay, in all the honours and dig- decency and law, and insisted that it was
nities due to her exalted station. Such evidently intended to brand her majesty
was the prayer of the petitioners, in with infamy in the first instance, that she
the whole of which he cordially concurred; might be compelled to remain in exile, or
and he thought ministers would abandon if she returned home, that the disgrace
their duty if they did not immediately attached to her name might facilitate her
accede to the wishes of the country, and condemnation at the bar of public opinion
give that advice to their sovereign which i and of both Houses of parliament as one


127) HOUSE OF COMMONS,


Petitions relative to the Queen.I [128








129] Petitions relative to the Queen.
already degraded. The petitioners also
expressed their regret, that political
malevolence should ever have found its
way into the temples which ought only to
be occupied by religion and her kindred
charities. The petitioners therefore p rayed
the restoration of her majesty's name to
the Liturgy. The hon. member then pro-
ceeded to comment on the conduct of mi-
nisters relative to this question. He said,
that the Chancellor of the Exchequer on
a former occasion, had expressed himself,
as if the question would be decided by its
legal merits, but the noble lord opposite
had let the cat out of the bag ; for he said
what was equivalent to stating, that what-
ever the legal merits of the case might
be, his majesty's ministers would never
sanction the insertion of the Queen's name
in the Liturgy. .He had, in fact, made it
not a questionof law, but one of party,
and he called on party knights and their
squires to defend him in his station. But
the petitioners prayed that her majesty's
name might be restored to the Liturgy,
not only as a matter of right and of law,
but as a means of tranquillizing the
country; or as it was expressed in their
own language, that the sword of public
dissention might be returned into the
scabbard, and the torch of domestic
discord extinguished for ever." They
said, that without this was done, tranquil-
lity could not be restored, and he would
add-ought not. [Hear, hear !] He re-
peated that the agitation so jnstly excited
ought not to cease, unless justice were
done the Queen; for if it could cease
without that justice beingdone, the coun-
try would present the melancholy spec-
tacle of acquiescing in an act of monstrous
injustice. If, therefore, peace were to be
restored, he hoped it would be the peace
of freemen and not of slaves. There could
be no free government unless the voice of
the people were heard and attended to.
If this were not so, he should as soon live
under the Sophi of Persia or the Dey of
Algiers, as in England, if her spirit of
freedom were gone. He was most anxious
for peace, but he detested the maxim-
1" Iniquissimam pacem, justissimo hello
autefero." That doctrine was at variance
with the genius of a free people, and he
therefore was no advocate for peace,
unless it could be justly and honourably
maintained. Anarchy might be the dis-
ease of a state, but tyranny was its death.
-The petition was laid on the table, as
well as another from Bolton-le-Moor, in
VOL. IV.


JAN. 26, 1821. f130
Lancashire.-The gallant officer, in pre-
senting the last petition, said that it was
very numerously signed. The people
in that part of the country naturally
shrunk from holding a public meeting
after the horrible scene at Manchester,
where so much blood had been shed, and
had still remained unatoned for. There
were 600 maimed persons there, still cry-
ing for redress or inquiry. They wereyet
asking in vain forjustice. Their petition
at present was, that the Queen should be
reinstated in all the honours of her station.
Mr. Rouse Boughton presented a petition
to the same effect from several clergymen
of the established church, and several
dissenting ministers of Evesham, deploring
the measures which had been hitherto
pursued against her majesty, and entreat-
ing, that her name might be forthwitli
restored tot heLitu rgy, and, thatshe should
be invested with all the honours, dignities,
and prerogatives, due to her station. lie
concurred with the petitioners in thinking
that the act of striking the Queen's name
out of the Liturgy was unwise, inexpedient,
and unfair. The ministers ought, without
delay, to retrace their steps. By no other
mode of conduct could they allay the agi-
tated state of public feeling.
The Marquis of Tavistock rose to pre-
sent the petition of the freeholders of the
county of Bedford. It was, he said,agreed
to at the first meeting held of that county
for the last twenty-live years; and one
more numerous, more respectable, more
temperate, more loyal, and in every res-
pect better conducted, had never been
held in any county. It was conducted
throughout in the true spirit of the con-
stitution, and did honour to the county.
The petition was signed by upwards
of 2,400 f eeholders and other respect-
able individuals. They complained, in
very warm terms, of the treatment of the
Queen; they reprobated the proceedings
carried on against her majesty, from the
beginning to the end ; they werejealous of
them, because they saw, that they shook
the country and interrupted the public
peace. Perhaps it might suit ministers to
consider the Bedfordshire and other coun-
ty meetings as a farce. It might suit
men to apply that term to county meet-
ings, who durst not themselves meet before
the public, but who were obliged toskulk
into holes and corners, from which they
issued libels against the people of England.
This was not the treatment which En-
glishmen deserved. Instead of.having
K







3,t1 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
their feelings outraged in this manner,
they ought to be treated generously and
kindly -as friends, not as foes. The
people of England were libelled when they
werecalled disloyal. They werethe most
loyal people in the world. He hoped
ministers would pause, before they drove
the people to the last extremity of despair.
It was not by sending forth imputations
of sedition and blasphemy against all who
had the hardihood to oppose their schemes,
that they could tranquillize the country.
This tirade of unjustifiable imputations
could never answer a good purpose; such
a course would always be found bad
policy, either in public or private life.
Mr. Bernal presented a petition from
Rochester, signed by2,500 persons. The
petitioners, he observed, weresincerely at-
tached to the kingand tothegenuine prin-
ciples of the constitution; and had, in the
exercise of an undoubted right, felt it to
be their duty to express their disapproba-
tion of the measures pursued by his ma-
jesty's ministers. They called on the
House to use its influencein procuring the
restoration of her majesty's name to the
Liturgy ; they prayed, that it would insti-
tute a rigid inquiry into the recent pro-
ceedings against the Queen; and they
besought the House no longer to place
confidence in those ministers who had
insulted their king and degraded their
country. They also called on the House
to inquire into the distressed state of the
empire; occasioned as it was, by the con-
duct adopted by ministers-by their
boundless profusion and extravagance,
their opposition tothecorrection of abuses,
and their abridgment of the rights of the
people. While such men were in power,
the petitionersconceived, thatthe preroga-
tives of the King, the rights of the Queen,
and the liberties of the People were in
danger. He entirely and sincerely-not
at all as a party man, but from honest
conviction -concurred inthosesentiments.
He did not wish to embarrass this or any
government, when it was properly con-
ducted; but when he saw proceedings
instituted which were calculated to de-
grade the country in the eyes of the
world, and therebytolessen itsconsequence
in the estimation of foreign states, it
was, he conceived, high time that a change
should be effected. At such a time as
this, it was right that gentlemen should
speak their sentiments freely, and not
smother them under the veil of delicacy.
-He had also to present a second peti-


Petitions relative to the Queen. [15I
tion on the same subject from the parish
of Mary-le-bone. It was signed by 6 or
7,000 inhabitant householders; and he
understood, that every endeavour had been
used to prevent any hut inhabitant house-
holders from affixing their signatures to
it. Had it not been for the shortness
of the time, it would have received the
signatures of 20,000 persons. The peti-
tions, which were now pouring in from
every part of the country, came from per-
sons, many of whom never before dreamt
of interfering in political matters. They
did not merely originate in towns, cities,
and counties, but they also emanated
from wards, parishes, and villages. These
petitions proved the real state of the coun-
try; they showed clearly what the senti-
ments of the people were; and they
contradicted, decidedly, the assertion
made by the noble lord opposite, that
ministers enjoyed the confidence of the
country. These appeals to the House
would not, he hoped, be looked upon
as political farces or interludes; if they
were despised and slighted, instead of
farces, they would, perhaps, be the pre-
cursors of deep political tragedies.
Mr. Jervoise presented a similar peti-
tion from the county of Hants. He stated,
that it was agreed to at a county meet-
ing, which was most respectably at-
tended, and that it was signed by 8,000
freeholders; who, while they opposed the
unwise and dangerous acts of the present
administration, were as much attached to
the soundest principles of religion and
loyalty as any men in the kingdom.
Sir W. De Crespigny said, that having
been one of the principal actors in this
county farce he begged leave to say a
few words respecting it. He used the
term "farce" because he found, that
county meetings were in future to be
deemed farces, comedies, or perhaps,
tragedies. He heard that county meet-
ings had, in a most indecent, unconstitu-
tional, and improper manner, been com-
pared to mobs. In a short time, he sup-
posed, all bodies would be looked upon
as mobs, except battalions of infantry
and squadrons of horse. He would ven-
ture to say, that he felt as much respect
for military talents as any man in the
country; but let such sentiments come
from the most mighty mouths that could
be, he would, in his place, protest against
them, not only as disrespectful to par-
liament, but to the country at large.
They were not now on the plains of Water-








133] Petitons relative to the Queen. JAN. 26, 1821. [~ I4
loo, or the Peninsula, or in the German Mr. Wellesky Pole said, he hardly
dominions. [A laugh.] As to those gen- knew in what way he ought to treat the
tlemen who dared to laugh on such an observations which had fallen from the
occ vision, there was not one of them, who, hon. baronet on the other side. He had
if he had the spirit of an Englishman, some doubts as to whether the hon.
ought not to stand up for the honour of his baronet's allusions fell within the orders
country against the impropriety of such of that House; but as he was not stop-
language. They were not in a country ped by the Chair, it onlyremained for him
where they could be cowed by the mili- to make a few observations on them. The
tary, and, in his opinion, every member hon. gentleman had used very hard words
of that House should stand up for the -[Cries of 'No,' and 'Yes']-were not
honour of the country. The Hants meet- sentiments such as he had expressed with
ing was most respectable, and he supposed respect to a noble person-
that 7,000 or 8,000 persons were suffi- The Speaker here interrupted the right
cient to speak the sense of the county, hon. gentleman and reminded him, that
It had been stated, by aset of gentlemen, he was out of order. The reason he had
that a counter-requisition was signed after not interrupted the hon. baronet was,
the high sheriff had appointed the county that he had notbeen able to collect, from
meeting. This was a most unfair and what had fallen from him, the person to
improper proceeding, and was intended to whom he alluded.
prevent the expression of the public feel- Mr. Wellesley Pole hoped the hon.
ing. And on what account? Because baronet, would do him the justice to-
an address had been got up, not at a allow, that he had not misconceived whom
county meeting, as it ought to be, but by he had alluded to. He had made several
the influence of the secretary of a club, severe observations, and had entirely mis-
called the Pitt Club. That secretary represented what he supposed to have
took it on himself to send all over the been said on the occasion alluded to. If
county, to the ministers of the church he knew the noble person to whom he
in their different parishes, desiring them had alluded, he would find, that there
to sign the load of parchments he trans- was not a man in that House, in the coun-
mitted to them, and to call on their pa- try, or in the world, who held in higher
rishioners to sign them also. Good God estimation than that noble person did,
Could this be called a county address the liberties of the people of England.
which was procured without a county [a laugh, and cries of hear, hear!] This
meeting ? It happened that this secretary might extract a smile and a laugh from
of the Pitt Club was also under-sheriff lawyers; it might excite cries of hear,
of the county; and he knew, that in con- hear," from civilians; but it would not
sequence of this circumstance, many of elicit a smile and a laugh from those
those whosigned theaddress thought, that who knew that noble lord-who acknow-
the under-sheriff had the sanction of the pledged the advantages the country had
high sheriff for what he was doing; and derived from his talents, and were ac-
if certainly was a little too bad that such quainted with his constitutional princi-
delusive conduct should be allowed. He pies, which were not only duly appreciated
was much displeased at the allusion which in this island, but were perfectly under-
had been made to the meeting; and he stood all over the world. He admitted,
should be ashamed of himself, having been that he ought not to have suffered the
present at it, if he did not fairly and observations made on the other side of the
candidly state what he knew, and what the House to have occasioned any warmth of
House would excuse him for detailing, feeling in expressing the few words with
with a degree of warmth which, under which he meant to trouble them. As
other circumstances, would not, perhaps, to what the hon. baronet asserted, namely,
have been justifiable. that the noble lord had treated county
Mr. Fleming said, he could not sup- meetings disrespectfully, he felt perfectly
port the sentiments contained in the peti- convinced, that that noble person neverhad
tion presented by his hon. colleague, it in his contemplation to state, and never
and' felt himself called on, in justice to did state, any thing that was disrespect-
the rank and property of the county of ful of county meetings. He was con-
Hants, todeclare, that many of the most fident, that that noble lord never uttered'
wealthy and respectable freeholders were a'word that could he considered disrespect-
not present at that meeting' furt to the freeholders. Whit his inoble








135] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
relation had said, was, that a meeting
had taken place, so irregular and tumultu-
ous, that no impartial discussion could
be obtained-that only one side was heard,
and that it could not, therefore, be deemed
a fair and regular county meeting. His
noble relation, not being in the habit of
weighing words-not being a regular
practised public speaker had used the
term "farce," which was afterwards taken
up with so much warmth. But he was
quite sure, that he never had said any
thingunconstitutional,ortendingtotrench
on the liberty of the subject-taking
that phrase even in its broadest sense.
He was quite satisfied, that when the hon.
baronet was better acquainted with the
character of that noble person than he
now appeared to be, he would lament the
way in whichhe had taken this business up.
He was never more mistaken in the cha-
racter of any individual than he was
in that of the noble lord, if he sup-
posed, that he could have said or done any
thing hostile to the liberty of the subject.
Sir W. De Crespigny said, that until
he came into that House, he knew not a
syllable of the proceeding in question,
and therefore the right hon. gentleman
could not correctly state that he had al-
luded to any thing which occurred in the
House ofLords. In fact, he only heard
that the words were made use of by the
noble person referred to, unaccompanied
with any statement of the place in which
they were uttered.
Mr. Baring said, that the right hon.
gentleman had undoubtedly misrepre-
sented the Hampshire meeting.
Mr. W. Pole said, he had not uttered
a word about that meeting. He had stated,
that the noble lord spoke of a tumultous
meeting; but he had not mentioned where
it was held.
Mr. Baring said,it appeared to him, that
the right hon. gentleman must have meant
that meeting or none, and lie felt himself
called on to vindicate the character of the
meetingfrom the injurious assertion which,
it seemed, had been cast on it by other
persons. He would not say one word about
the expression made use of by a noble lord,
in another place. He respected that noble
person, and was perfectly sensible of the
great obligations which the country owed to
him. He never hedrd his name mentioned,
or reflected on his character, without ex-
periencing feelings of pride and satisfac-
tion. He would not, therefore, censure
him for any unguarded expression, utter-


Petitions relative to the Queen. [ 16
ed in the heat of the moment. He pos-
sessed great talents in one line, and had,
by their exercise,done his country most
important services ; but he was not at all
in the habit of public speaking, and,
therefore, an unadvised expression might
fairly be excused. It was said, that this
was an extremely tumultuous meeting,and
that it was impossible for a gentleman,
speaking in opposition to the sentiments
contained in the petition, to obtain a hear-
ing. Now, in contradiction to that, he
would appeal to the hon. member for the
county (Mr. Fleming), who had a fair
opportunity of trying the patience of the
meeting, and who did try it in such a man-
ner as, he believed, was never attempted
before; for, on a subject which agitated
the country from one end to the other,
no address was ever delivered at a public
meeting more likely to provoke angry dis-
cussion than tht of the hon. member; and
yet, there was not a syllable of that speech
which was not heard and patiently attend-
ed to. He thought, therefore, that the
same testimony would be borne to the
regularity nd good conduct of the meet-
ing by the hon. member, as he was pre-
pared to give. If he contrasted the pro-
ceedings of that peaceable meeting with
the riot and uproar occasioned by the
exclusive loyalists in the city of London a
few days since, the hon. member would
certainly see nothing to complain of. The
hon. member had said, that the great pro-
prietors, the men of rank and consequence
in the county, were absent from that
meeting, and therefore, that it did not
speak the sense of the county. He re-
gretted that the system should prevail, of
men of rank and property absenting them-
selves from county meetings and meet-
ings of the people at large. Hewas quite
sure, that it was not the best mode of con-
ciliating the affections of the people, to
make those nice distinctions between the
higher, the middle, and the lower ranks
of society; and he thought the hon. mem-
ber was not pursuing a course calculated
to produce peace, good order, and kindly
feeling in the country, by making such
observations.
Mr. Fleming was sorry that any thing
he should have said on the occasion in
question was provoking. He thought the
meeting was convened for public discus-
sion, and what he had said he believed to
have been perfectly fair.
Lord Belgrave presented a petition from
the city of Chester, which the noble lord









stated, had, in the course of a very few comply with its advice, and would come
days, been signed by 1,500 persons. It down to the House to-morrow eveningwith
complained of the various existing griev- a gazette in their pockets, containing an
ances connected with the present system order in council to that effect.
of government; and expressed the asto- Mr. W. Smith presented a petition from
nishirent of the petitioners, that as the certain inhabitants of the city of Norwich,
accusation against her majesty was with- which he declared to be perfectly respect-
drawn, her majesty's name had not been ful and constitutional in all its language.
re-introduced into the Liturgy ; and their The petition prayed for the restoration of
hope that the House would interfere for the Queen's name to the Liturgy, for the
that purpose. He observed, that a strong dismissal of ministers, and for a reform of
instance of the violence of those who were the Commons House of parliament. It
opposed to the wishes of the petitioners contained the uninfluenced sentiments of
was afforded by the fact, that as some of many inhabitants of Norwich, who were
the petitioners were about to sign the peti- no less distinguished for their talent than
tion, it was forcibly torn from their hands, for their integrity. It was signed by 4,500
Sir T. Acland presented a petition, nu- individuals in a few days, over whose mind
merously and respectably signed, to the no interest or influence had been exercised
number of1,250 persons, from Dartmouth by any person whatsoever.
and its vicinity, deploring the omission
of her majesty's name in the Liturgy, as COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.]-On the
tending to occasion endless differences, order of the day for going into a Com-
and heart-burnings in society, regretting mittee of Supply, the Chancellor of the
that the people, who weretaught to pray Exchequer moved, that the Speaker do
for all Jews, Turks, Infidels, and Here- leave the Chair.
tics, were prevented from joiningin prayer Mr. Creevey said, he would not detain
for her majesty; and hoping, that the the House, at any length, from the im-
House would deliberate for the purpose of portant question about to be brought for-
procuring the restoration of her majesty's ward, but begged to call their-attention,
name to the Liturgy, and of securing her for a few moments to the motion now made.
from further oppression. This was the first stage of an annual par-
Lord John Russell observed, that as he liamentary process, called a Committee of
and his colleague had been requested to Supply; a process by which, onceortwice
support the prayer of the petition when- every week, hundreds of thousands on
ever it was presented, he now rose for the hundreds of thousands, and millions on
purpose of doing so; and he would say, millions, of the public money, were voted
that for his own part, he was prepared i in that House, in the presence ofnot more
to vote for any measure which might be than a dozen persons, exclusively -of the
proposed, for the re-insertion of her ma- ministers of the Crown. He hoped, how-
jesty's name in the Liturgy. He could ever, that things would now go on bet-
conceive, that many persons might be ter. The public seemed to havetakena
alarmed by the appearance of men armed noble attitude ; by their efforts, they had
with clubs and carrying stones, or by prevented her majesty from being-over-
large and turbulent meetings, or by the borne by superior power-they had pre-
circulation of seditious and blasphemous vented the laws and the constitution from
libels; but he could not conceive how any being subverted by the ministers of the
man could be alarmed by the restoration Crown. He trusted they would now turn
of her majesty's nameto the Liturgy, espe- their attention to the protection of their
cially as the peace of the country seemed own property in that House. He did not
to require it. The House would no doubt know whether it was true, that an illus-
recollect what had been the conduct of itrious individual had declared that pub-
ministers with regard to the property tax: lic meeting in this country was a farce.
they had retained it in their grasp as If it was true that such an expression had
long as they could; but, after the been used, he would say, of it, that it was
House had expressed its opinion upon not a British sentiment, but must have
the impolicy of it, they had made a merit been imported from Troppau ; the royal
of giving it up to its wishes. He had politicians assembled at which place, no
therefore, no doubt, that if the House doubt, thought every thing a farce but
were to advise the insertion of her majesty's their own plans of conquest and tyranny.
same in the Liturgy, ministers would A farce! If he wished for a farce, re-


0. 137-1 i'litions relatrive to the Queen.


JAN. 26, 1821.







1391 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
commend him to a Committee of Supply.
Some years ago a dissection was made of
the component parts of the House of Com-
mons, by which it appeared that 72 mem-
bers of that House had the good fortune to
enjoy among them, about 170,0001. a year,
out of the taxes. Now these72 gentlemen,
or some of them, were the gentlemen
who generally formed a committee of
supply: they, and very few else, voted
away all the money of the country. He
should, in the course of the session, move
for certain documents by which another
and a new dissection of the House of Com-
mons would be laid open to the country.
He trusted, that the public would support
him in an alteration which he aimed at
effecting in committees of supply. As
affairs were managed at present, he was
not surprised at independent men not
attending on these committees; neither
did he blame them for their absence from
them, as the estimates were so compli-
cated, and so overloaded with items, as
to be perfectly unintelligible. He hoped
that the public would attend closely to
this matter; for, if they did, they would
either make their representatives mend
their manners, or would be compelled to
speak to them in a language which could
not be misunderstood.
The House resolved itself in the said
committee, in which, the Chancellor of
the Exchequer moved, that a supply
be granted to his Majesty." The motion
was agreed to, and the House resumed.

MOTION RESPECTING THE OMISSION
OF THE QUEEN'S NAME IN THE LITURGY.]
-Lord Archibald Hamilton rose to make
his promised motion. He said, he was
sure he had never risen in that House on
any occasion when it was more necessary
for him, than it was at present, to expe-
rience their candour and indulgence, both
with reference to himself individually,
and to the subject which he was about to
bring under their consideration. It would
certainly be superfluous on his part, after
the numerous petitions which had that
day been laid on the table, to insist either
on the inherent importance of the question
which the House were now called upon to
discuss, or on the intense interest which
the people at large took in that question.
He hoped, that any deficiency on his part
would be considered as made up by the
number of petitions laid upon their table,
of which there was not one, at all con-
nected with the Queen's case, that did not


Motion respecting the Omission of [140
either beseech the House to restore her
name to the Liturgy, or express some dis-
approbation of its removal from it. These
petitions, which were a sure murk of the
direction in which public opinion was
running, would, he trusted, be considered
as adding some weight to his arguments,
and would inducethe House to listen, if
not to him, at least to public opinion, of
which, in this instance, he should be
the organ. One of the first impressions
created by the subject which he was in-
troducing to their notice, was, the gene-
ral ferment and irritation excited through-
out the country since the commencement
of the late melancholy proceedings-a
ferment which had not only reached that
House, and prevented it from transacting
the ordinary business of the nation, but
had extended itself from one corner of
the kingdom to the other, and had inter-
fered with all the usual occupations of its
inhabitants. With regard to himself he
had only one observation to make. He
had no doubt, standing in the place in
which he stood, and speaking on the
subject on which he spoke, that the noble
lord and the right hon. gentleman oppo-
site (and perhaps it was an imputation
in which some other members might be
induced to join) would assert, that he
addressed himself to this subject as a
party question, and that he had no object
in agitating it but a party object. Once
for all, he protested against any such
inference. He felt himself to be upon
firm ground when he repelled it. He
begged the House would recollect his
former conduct on this subject. He did
not wait to know what the public opinion
would be; but when her majesty was first
insulted by ministers, when her very name
was not introduced by them into their
speeches, but when they spoke of her by
circumlocution, he stood up in his place
in that House, and asserted her Majesty's
inalienableand incontestible rights, uncon-
nected with any regard to the feelings or
opinions of his party. He now declared,
that, whatever the result should be, no
man would regret more than himself if
the question should not undergo a grave,
calm, and dispassionate consideration.
When however, the noble lord and the
right hon. gentleman opposite called the
present a cold, legal, and unconstitutional
question, he could not, refrain from asking
whether, in the mode in which the' name
of this injured and' illustrious wommn was
first struck from the Liturgy-whether,








141] the Queen's Name in the Liturgy.
in the motive in which that act had ori-
ginated-and whether, in the conduct that
had followed, there was any thing which
shewed that they considered the question
to be a cold, legal, and constitutional one ?
On the contrary, did not the whole of
the proceedings exhibit a disposition to
inflict every description of insult, injury,
and injustice on the individual, and to
excite and irritate the country at large ?
It was on these grounds, and on these
grounds alone, that he was induced to
make his present motion, and not from
any motives of a party nature.
He begged to be allowed to advert to
one other point with respect to himself.
It must be in the recollection of the
House, that when the hon. member for
Bramber (Mr. Wilberforce) made that
motion which had occupied so large a
portion of the interests and time of the
House in the last session, he (lord A.
Hamilton) had stood up in his place, and
made a speech, which he concluded by
an amendment alluding to the very omis-
sion of which he now complained.* And
he now asked the House if they did not
think, if the amendment which he had
proposed on that occasion had been
adopted, and if his majesty's ministers
had then retraced their steps-if they
had replaced her majesty's name in the
Liturgy-much, if not all of the ferment
and irritation which had been excited,
would have been avoided, and this
House, the Crown, and the country,
would have found themselves in a much
more favourable situation than that in
which they were pow placed ? In saying
this, he must again beg, that party motives
might not be imputed to him, although
he by no means wished to disclaim fair
and open political hostility towards the
noble lord and the right hon. gentleman
opposite.
There was one other preliminary obser-
vation which he wished to make, although,
perhaps, it was unnecessary. It w.,s this
-that in bringing forward his present
motion, and in the ample discussion
which such a proposition as the restoration
of her majesty's name to the Liturgy was
calculated to occasion, he should con-
sider the subject as one with reference to
which ministers were as fairly responsible,
and which was as unconnected with any
thing personal to the Crown itself, as
any subject whatever that could possibly

See Vol. 1, p. 1259.


be submitted to the deliberations of parlia-
ment. He considered thesound constitu-
tional doctrine to be, that whatever sub-
ject was fit to be discussed in that House,
was a subject on which ministers, and
ministers only, were responsible; and
that no one had a right to introduce any
subject into that House which was not
bottomed on their responsibility. He felt
himself, therefore, to be in no way liable
to the imputation of introducing topics
personal to the Crown; because the sub-
ject was one on which ministers solely
were responsible.
He now came to the case itself. The
first observation which he should make
was, that he was not in possession of
the course which his majesty's minis-
ters meant to pursue with respect to
her majesty. He should be glad to
learn what that course was. It must
be evident to every one, that matters
could not rest where they were. It was
not possible, that her majesty, the Queen,
could exist in this country in the situation
in which she was now placed, merely with
(and the noble lord had intimated, that
it was the only proposition which he had
it in contemplation to make) an addition
of some nature to her pecuniary means.
If nothing were done to allay the feel-
ings so powerfully excited throughout the
empire; if nothing were done of sub-
stantial justice towards her majesty; if
nothing were done to prevent those effu-
sions from the press on both sides, so
generally and extensively mischievous, it
was difficult to say what the consequences
might be. With reference to the last sub-
ject which he had mentioned, he begged
not to be understood as suggesting any
restraint on the press. What he recom-
mended was, that the cause of the present
intemperance of the press should be re-
moved-a cause which his majesty's mi-
nisters had as much reason to be ashamed
of, as the country, at large, had to deplore.
What had been the foundation of all these
calamitous events ? If there was one thing
more than another in that concatenation
of causes-for it was not a single cause
which had operated to plunge us into
our present condition-but if there was
one cause more than another, which had
wrought upon the public mind, and
brought it to its present state of excite-
ment, it was that unjust, that impolitic,
that oppressive, that unconstitutional mea-
sure which was the subject of his motion.
Now, he wished to ask, if the House should


[142


JAN. 26, 1821.








143] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
not think fit to express their opinion that
his majesty's ministers had done wrong
in omitting her majesty's name in the
Liturgy-he wished to ask, either the
right hon. gentlemen opposite, or the
House itself, what measure could be sug-
gested so likely to calm that irritation
which the injustice done to her majesty
had produced in the country ?
After the notice of a motion which had,
the other night, been given by his noble
friend behind him (the marquis of Tavis-
tock), he wished to confine himself as
much as possible to the question of the
omission of her majesty's name in the Li-
turgy; because he understood, that that
motion would afford a more ample oppor-
tunity for entering at large into the con-
sideration of all the extraordinary pro-
ceedings connected with the subject.
But it was impossible for him, or any
other man in the House, to contemplate
those proceedings, and the consequences
with which the country had been visited,
without feeling the utmost disgust and
indignation at ministers, who, by their
conduct, had put, and for six months had
kept, the whole population of the empire
in a state of continual ferment and agi-
tation. The proceedings of his majesty's
ministers had been not only most unwise,
unjust, oppressive, and impolitic towards
her majesty, but they had been-to use
the only word which could sufficiently
express and was appropriate to their most
mischievous character-absolutely revo-
lutionary in their nature [hear, hear !].
Since he had had the honour of a seat in
that House, in all the efforts of reformers
or radicals, in all the exhibitions of vio-
lence which he had witnessed within or
without those walls, he was not aware of
a single proceeding so truly revolutionary
iu its tendency as were the proceedings of
his majesty's ministers with reference to
the important subject under discussion.
In order to state the grounds on which
he called upon the House to come to the
resolution with which he should conclude,
on the injustice and inexpediency of the
step which ministers had taken, it would
be necessary >r him to call upon honour-
able gentlemen to consider well the situa-
tion of her majesty at the time her name
was excluded from the Liturgy ; because
he unfortunately perceived, during the
discussion of a former night, that some
members allowed subsequent irritation to
have a retrospective effect-as if the sup-
posed misconduct of her majetsty, after


Motion respecting the Omission of' [14I
the act was done by the exclusion of her
name, ought to operate against her, and
that ministers ought to be allowed to pu-
nish the Queen beforehand for imaginary
crimes recently committed. When lie
heard a worthy alderman (Heygate) the
other night, deprecate the omission of her
majesty's name from the Liturgy, but
at the same time appeal to her Letter to
the King, and to her answers to addresses,
as a reason for approving of the continu-
ance of that original act of injustice, he
could not but ask the House what such
a proceeding was, but trying the Queen
for one offence, and punishing her for
another [Cheers.] Her majesty's name
was excluded from the Liturgy at a
time when she had a right to expect very
different treatment; and he now called
upon the House to do justice on the
other hand, by applying to her majesty's
case, the subsequent injustice she had
endured, and the irritation to which she
had been exposed. The principle on
which a contrary practice proceeded,
had been admirably well illustrated on a
former night, when it was said, that it
could be resembled only to the proceed-
ings of the Inquisition, where words ex-
torted from an unhappy and innocent
sufferer, under the infliction of the rack,
were taken as undubitable confessions and
depositions of guilt. Hoping that this
House, even as at present constituted,
would be too just to imitate such a
course, he would proceed to state
what he conceived to be the situation of
her majesty, at the time her name was
struck out of the Liturgy; because he
wished the House to understand, that he
thought such a proceeding, on the part of
ministers, not only impolitic and oppres-
sive, not only illegal and unconstitutional,
but an act of the grossest injustice to-
wards a person already grievously wronged
and injured, and whose wrongs and inju-
ries need not have come before the House,
or been exposed to discussion in the forum
of the public. At the time when the
prayers of the people were first refused
to her, her majesty was without any home,
without any state in the country. The
law had deceived her; for by the laws of
the land she stood the undisputed Queen
of England. As Queen, and as a woman
in domestic life, she was left equally des-
titute. She was a wife, but she had no
husband. She had no station. She left
this country after having received many
insults, with a letter of licence to author-







1 45] the Queen's Name in the Liturgy.


rise and to justify whatever line of con- Liturgy ?-if they had been proved, why
duct she might think fit to pursue. She did not her accusers proceed to somejudg-
was followed by spies; her very servants ment against her? The fact was, that mi-
were corrupted-she was persecuted in nisters had neither thought proper to con-
every way, and by all the acts of diplo- sider her guilty or innocent; and as they
macy-she could go to no place where had been influenced by a vague mixture
there was a British minister, that she of hope and fear, she had been treated
was not sure to meet with insult and con- with a vague mixture of justice and in-
tumely. She met with no protection. justice.-li reference to the point of lega-
Under such circumstances, considering lity, it was necessary to refer to the origit
the treatment which her majesty had nal order in council, under which, the
received, considering the insults that change in the Liturgy had been made.
were heaped upon her; above all, bearing It set out with stating, that Whereas in
in mind the letter of licence, would the the Act of Uniformity which establishes
House place itself in the moral chair ?- the Liturgy of the Church of Eagnlud,
Would it affect to be shocked and out- provision is made for such alterations in
raged, even if guilt were brought home the prayers for the royal family, as from
to the door of the Queen-to the door of time to time shall become necessary.''
a woman who had a letter of licence from Before he proceeded further, he denied
her husband [Hear, hear!] ? If all that that to be a fair statement. No such pro-
her accusers imputed to her were true, vision was made: no power was given to
which he believed to be false, for he alter the prayers, but merely to change
believed her majesty to be innocent; still, the names. Alteration in the prayers
if all that had been imputed to her were would consist of a substitution of words,
true, the manner in which she had been and a change perhaps of substance and
authorized in the first instance, and after- meaning; but alteration of names could
wards pursued and watched and perse- extend to nothing else but the names
cuted, while her servants were instigated, mentioned in the Liturgy. He knew not,
seduced, and corrupted, absolutely pre- whether the law officers of the Crown meant
eluded any fair or reasonable man from to found any thing upon it; but he assert*
bringing forward an accusation. This ed, that the order in council was not con-
was not all: had she not undergone a formable to the statute, which applied
severe trial, on a grave charge, in this merely to the alteration of names, and
country, and upon which she had been not of prayers. Upon what authority
fully acquitted ? Had she then, he would then, but their own, did ministers found
ask, received any thing like fair play? the violent change they had directed ? If
On the contrary, he should say, that any thing more were wanted to confirm,
whatever might have been the result of the opinion he had hazarded, it would be
the trial she had undergone, the Queen supplied by the concluding words of the
had been first grievously wronged, and sentence, and be directed by lawful
provoked into the commission ofthecrime authority." If the act meant to give a
recently imputed. [No, no, hear!] He licence to change sentences and expres-
would repeat, that her majesty had been sions, would it not have been differently
provoked, deliberately provoked, into the expressed ? If such a prerogative were to
commission of offence; if any offence she be conferred on the Crown, why was not
had committed, the statute express in the terms it em-
With respect to the legal part of the sub- played ? it was framed by men of learn-
ject he would offer but a very few words; ing and acuteness in that day, who would
he would ask the noble lord and the right not have been guilty of an omission so
hon. gentleman opposite, to state dis- important. The sole authority cited in
tinctly, if they could, the reason, why the order in council was the Act of Uni-
her majesty's name had been originally formity. Another observation here oc-
excluded froth the Liturgy, He asked curred: by that order no more authority
that simple question, and he expected a was given to pray for George the Fourth
plain and satisfactory answer. It was said, than to pray for the Queen. It might
that there were at the time very heavy indeed, be said, on the other side, that
charges against the Queen; but he would the king never dies, and therefore it was
a* if these charges had been proved ? If needless; but the reply was at least as
they had not been proved, why was not obvious, that the accession of George the
the name of her majesty reinstated in the Fourth made the Queen Consort; and if
VOL. IV. L


JAN. 26, 1821. [146








OMotion respecling tIle Oinission of 1,18


the order had said nothing but about
omitting the names of the prince and
princess of Wales, he would ask, whether,
as a matter of course, the Queen would
not have been prayed for ? In the next
place, he should wish the other side to
state, to what extent they contended, that
the Act of Uniformity gave them autho-
rity. He should be glad to know, whe-
ther they meant to go so far as to insist,
that the king might alter the prayers of
the church from mere caprice? If any
such doctrine were advanced, he was
sure that it would not want instant
refutation.
One other suggestion he would offer.
Was it ever contended-could it ever be
,contended, not only that this statute gave
the king authority to alter the prayers as
his caprice might dictate, but actually to
enderr the Liturgy a sort of penal power,
amounting to the actual degradation of
his Queen ? [Hear.] He was not now to
ibe told, that this was merely a legal or
constitutional question. Suchanattempt
had been made and had failed: because
the omission was used for the express
purpose of degrading and insulting the
Queen. Would ministers, with the ad-
vice of their high law authorities, go the
length of asserting, that the framers of
the act meant to give the power of degra-
dation as a punishment? It was impos-
sible: so that whether the question were
looked at as a matter of law orjustice, the
House could arrive at but one conclusion
*-that ministers had done an illegal act,
.and inflicted a severe wrong in excluding
her majesty. One more observation on
this part of the subject, and he would
conclude it. He did not mean in any
way to question the legal authority of the
King; but lie was certainly much sur-
prised to find, not only the head of the
church, but the head of the law, presiding
at the council where this illegal order was
made. It might be presumptuous in him
to question the proceedings of such high
authorities; but they had done one thing
that was either illegal or wholly nugatory.
This self-same order had been sent to
Scotland, where, in matters of this kind,
ministers had no jurisdiction. He spoke
in the presence of the Lord Advocate;
but still he would assert, either that the
order there was a dead letter, or a nuga-
tory piece of nonsense, or it was a direct
violation of the law. What had been the
consequence ? The order had b en in
cotland rwhat it otght to have' been in


England, mere waste paper. It might
not then be too presumptuous for him to
add, that as the conduct of government
had been clearly illegal with regard to
one part of the kingdom, it might be
suspected, that it was not completely legal
with regard to another.
Now, though it was not very material
to notice all the names which wereattached
to that order in council, yet there was one
name, which from the extraordinary cir-
cumstances with which it was connected,
he felt in some measure obliged to revert
to. He alluded to the name of Mr. Can-
ning. Nothing could be more disagree-
able to him than to speak harshly of any
individual in his absence ; but he must
say, that it was of that absence that he now
had to complain. Common report gave
out, that that right hon. gentleman had
differed with hislatecolleagues. If this were
the fact (but of the truth of which he was
ignorant), he would :ask,whether it was too
much to expect, that he should have been
in his place, to have stated the grounds of
that difference ? If Mr. Canning could
profess in his place, as lie had done last
session, an undiminished regard and affec-
tion for her majesty ; if he could tell the
country, that he for one would not be her
accuser ; surely, if his resignation pro-
ceeded upon principle, as he wished it to
be understood, it was not too much to ex-
pect, when the interests of the Queen
whom he so loved and so revered were at
stake, that he should have remained in
England only a few days longer, when his
presence might have been of such essential
service. That right hon. gentleman had
subjected himself to animadversion by the
line of conduct lie had pursued, and on
this account, lie (lord A. Hamilton) felt
himself called upon to say, that he was at
a loss to discover on what principle, if any,
he had vacated his office and differed with
ministers. His name was appended to the
order in council ; he had kept his station in
the cabinet during the whole of the pro-
ceedings ; and at the close, when his opi-
nion and support might have been of so
much benefit, he abandoned Iris former
coadjutors and retiredd from the kingdom.
He did not pretend to say what might be
other men's notions of duty ; but if he
(lord A. Hamilton) had retired from office,
because he thought ministers had acted
improperly towards the Queen, he hoped
he should have had the justice and resolu-
tion to have stood his ground. As it was,
Sthe right: hon. gentleman had left it in


147] H HOUSE OF: COXPIMUSS,








1491 tIe Queen's Name in the Litu rgy.


doubt, whether he differed from his late which was effective, why recede from it
friends, in what particulars, and to what why abandon it the instant it was pro-
extent. If he agreed with ministers, he nounced ? And if they did not consider
owed it to his friends not to desert them in it so, why did they persevere in the per-
their utmost need; and if he differed from section of her majesty [Hear, hear !] ?
them, he owed it to his Queen to state Why not restore her to her rights ? Why
fairly, openly, and manfully, the grounds not replace her name in the Liturgy ? He
of that discordance, could not be aware of what their views or
Having thus far gone through the sub- intentions were, but he hoped they would
ject, perhaps it might be fair now, to state explain themselves ; he hoped they would
the nature of the resolution with which say, whether they considered it as a ver-
he should conclude; it would le to this diet, vote, or judgment, on which they in-
effect, that the order by which her majes- tended to act. He hoped ministers would
ty's name was excluded from the Liturgy, relieve the House and the country front
was ill-advised and inexpedient. It was further discussion on this painful subject,
not however, to be supposed, that he He regretted, that he trespassed so long
limited his object and intention to that upon the patience of the House, but when
only : no; justice required, the interests he took upon him the duty of bringing:
of the country required, not merely that forward so important a question, he was
ministers should receive censure fiom the not to consider himself, nor indeed the
* House for having done wrong, but that length of time which lie consumed. Tor
they should be supplied with a stimulus him it appeared evident, that the striking
to do right; and right could not be done the name of her majesty out oftheLiturgy
without replacing the name of the Queen wasaproceedingmostinjurious-injutious
in the situation from which it had been alike to the Crown and to the country.
improperly removed. In order to induce Why, he asked, were the people ordered to
the House to proceed thus far with the pray for the members of the royal family ?
subject though he did not mean to con- Was it because of their extraordinary
clude with a vote to that extent-[Hear, merits-for any peculiar virtues which
hear, from lord Castlereagh]. He was distinguished them in private lile ? No
somewhat surprised by the cheers of the they were not prayed fur in consequence
noble lord ; the noble lord and his friends of any personal qualifications, but simply
would find employment enough to get rid because of their station. He would beg
of the motion now pending, without in- of the Houseto reflect on the consequences
voting others ; and the whole subject, at of excluding her majesty's name from the
no very distant day, would be before the Liturgy-lie would beg of them to con-
House. Wasit not, however, more natu- sider how far that principle might be car-
ral and parliamentary, in the firstinstance, ried. If the House on< e established an
to notice what had been done? If he had example of that kind, he would beg of
now attempted more-if he had proposed them to reflect how far it mightbe follow-
an address to the King to restore the ed, not by that House, but by the public.
Queen's name to the Liturgy, he was con- Were ministers disposed to stigmatise the
vinced, that he should have been taunted royal family, they might injure the Queen
with having proposed, what was personally in the tirst instance, they might wound her
offensive to the sovereign, and more than feelings; but the measure would prove
the necessity of the case required. But them to be short-sighted as well as unjust,
at all events, be that as it might, he cer- The Queen would be exposed to the first,
tainly did not conceive that he was bound shock ; but the whole of the royal family
to receive his tactics from the enemy would be exposed. Ministers talked of
[a laugh]. They all knew, that the pro- the public danger-they affected to la-
ceee:ingagainst hermajesty was sanctioned ment the public discontent-they talked
by a vote of the House of Lords ; but they loudly of blasphemy, sedition, and irreli-
also knew, that no sooner did the measure gion ; but, was there any mode that could
receive that sanction than it was aban- be adopted more likely to injure religion
doned. Now, the question he would ask and to degrade royalty, tlan the one
was, whether ministers intended to inforce which ministers seemed to pursue ? To-
that vote? What effect, he would ask, wards the interests of religion and the
did ministers intend to give to that judg- throne, of the country, and of the royalty
* ment, if judgment it might be called? If family, he considered their proceeding
they considered it a vote or a verdict, equally injurious. He would again ask,


JAN. 26, 18-21.








151] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
did ministers mean to rely upon thejudg-
ment of the House of Lords ? If they did,
he would just beg of the House to apply
the principle to a sentence pronounced
in a court of law ; and then they could
see how ridiculous it would appear. If it
were the decision of judges, and if, the
moment that such decision was declared
by the majority, it was abandoned, the
cause would have been given up, and the
whole proceeding would necessarily fall
to the ground. When the noble lord de-
elared, that ministers did not intend to
take any new measures against her ma-
jesty-when he said, that they did not in-
tend to do more against her, they took
credit for what they were not entitled to
receive. The fact was, they could do no
more against her. He gave them-the
country gave them-no credit for kindness
or forbearance; they carried their per-
secution as far as they could. If they
should determine to exclude her ma-
jesty's name from the Liturgy without
granting any kind of equivalent (indeed,
he knew of no equivalent they could grant),
he would call on the House, to consider
what a situation the Queen of England
would be placed in. The hon. and learn-
ed gentleman opposite (the Attorney
General) might, perhaps, have learned
something of the foul, odious, disgusting,
and abominabie attacks which were daily
made upon her majesty, by that part of
the press which was supposed to be under
the patronage of ministers-would they
encourage those attacks ? If they allowed
every person who wished to curry favour
with men in power to libel the Queen Con-
sort, they might depend upon it, that they
would take the very best means'to degrade
the throne, and to expose every member
of the royal family to the foulest impu-
tations. If they were determined to leave
the Queen in the situation in which she
stood, they would leave the country in a
state of excitation-they would leave the
royal family exposed to a deluge of asper-
eions, and the country exposed to danger.
He would ask, had ministers any re-
medy to propose ? The noble lord opposite
said, he had none but an allowance. Hf
he had no proposal tonmake, but to continue
her majesty's allowance, to use the words
of a gallant general (Sir R. Wilson) they
would see disunion and discord and the
most implacable enmities pervade the land.
Perhaps, indeed, he did not go so far as
the gallant general, but this he would say,
that the people would look upon the treat-


Motion respecting the Omission of [152
ment of the Queen as unjust and cruel.
The people had early discovered, that
her majesty was a persecuted woman-
they supported her cause, and would
continue to do so, whilst she had wrongs
to complain of. He would ask ministers
how long they intended to keep the coun-
try in a state of inflammation ? The in-
terests of the nation were neglected, com-
merce and agriculture were suffered to go
to decay-six months of the public time
had been already consumed on this pain-
ful subject, to the utter exclusion of all
other considerations-the functions of the
legislature were suspended-the House
of Commons seemed as if it did not par-
ticipate in the common feelings of the
nation-as if it felt no wish to attend to
the general interests, although they knew,
that the greatest distress and embarrass-
ment prevailed ; surely they would not
overlook the sufferings of the people in
the present session, as they had done at
the end of the last, merely because his
majesty's ministers, unfortunately for
themselves, and still more unfortunately
for the country, had got into a scrape from
which they could not extricate themselves.
How they had got into the scrape he knew
not; but he believed the noble lord and
his colleagues to be men too wise and too
honourable to have instituted these pro-
ceedings willingly, and at their own in-
stance. The current opinion was (whether
well founded or not he could not say),
that they hadunfortunately given a pledge,
in an evil hour, that if the Queen should
set her foot in this country, some pro-
ceedings should be commenced against
her; they being persuaded at the time,
that her Majesty never would return.
They had thus become responsible for a
proceeding, which he believed, they had
not advised, but which had been involun-
tarily forced upon them. This was a line
of conduct, on the part of the adminis-
tration, which it was the duty of that
House to deprecate; for there was, at once,
an end of all the good which the country
ought to derive from the government, if
it was not to have the benefit of the talents
of ministers, however small-and certainly
the present administration possessed no
great portion of talent--and if ministess
were to come forward as the advocate of a
measure which they had not advised, but
which they had an interest in supporting.
-Unless ministers meant to contend, that
the vote of the House of Lords was a real
and effective judgment, he maintained,







133] the Queen's Name in the Liturgy.


that they had done wrong, not only in
the first instance by omitting her majesty's
name in the Liturgy; but by their sub-
sequently persevering in thatexclusion.-
But the principal point on which he in-
sisted was, that until ministers took mea-
sures to tranquillize the country, or ra-
ther, until the House took that care into
their own hands, discord and confusion
would continue to pervade the kingdom,
from one end of it to the other. The noble
lord concluded by moving,
That the Order of Council of the
12th February 1820, under which, the
name of Her Majesty, Caroline, Queen
Consort, has been omitted in the Liturgy,
and theaccustomed Prayers of the Church,
appears to this House to have been a mea-
sure ill advised and inexpedient."
Mr. Charles Ellis said, it was nothis in-
tention, when he came down to the House,
to take any part in the debate of this
night; but he was sure, the House would
think with him, that the observations of
his noble friend-if he might be per-
mitted so to call him-with respect to the
resignation of a right hon. friend of
his (Mr. Canning) called for some re-
marks in reply. That he should have
taken upon himself the task of vindicat-
ing the conduct of his right hon. friend
required, he owned, some apology both to
the House and to some of his own friends,
who were far more able to execute the task.
But he rose, rather to deprecate any such
course, and to enti eatthe friends of his right
hoe. friend to exercise their forbearance,
whatever charges or insinuation of charges
might be made against him, by the
noble lord, or by any other member.
His right hon. friend, on the first agita-
tion of this question, had taken the ear-
liest opportunity of avowing to the House,
his determination to take no part what-
ever in any proceedings against her ma-
jesty. From the moment that the hope of an
amicable adjustment failed, his right hon.
friend had abstained from all interference.
He was absent from the country during
the whole of the proceedings in the other
House of parliament, and did not return
till after the bill of Pains and Penalties
had been withdrawn. On viewing the
state of those proceedings on his return,
he felt convinced, that the course which
he had pursued before, was no longer
compatible with the station he held, and
there appeared to him no other alternative
than to surrender his office. Having
thus -puchased the right of acting con-


formably to the resolution which he had
at first announced, he again absented
himself till the conclusion of this calami-
tous affair. Such was the course which
his right hon. friend had thought it his
duty to pursue; and it was not his inten-
tion to offer any remarks on the propriety
of his conduct, or to mix up his right
hon. friend with proceedings, from all
participation in which it was his desire to
abstain. He should therefore, confine
himself, to what had been .said by the
noble lord, as to his right hon. friend's
concurrence in the omission of her man-
jesty's name in the Liturgy. His right
hon. friend, in a speech which could
hardly yet be erased from the recollection
of the House, had stated the reasons
which appeared to him to justify that
measure. He should not, therefore, do
his right hon. friend the injustice of weak-
ening, by any remarks of his own, the
arguments which he had then urged with
such force and effect; and he would there-
fore, only state, that his right hon. friend,
in retiring from office, did not wish, in
the slightest degree, to withdraw himself
from any share of the responsibility that
might attach to his colleagues on account
of that measure. With respect to the
curiosity which the noble lord had men-
tioned, as to the degree in which he and
his colleagues might have difered, he
begged, that the noble lord would satisfy
himself with waiting for the return of hik
right hou. friend. Thus far he trusted
he might say, withoutany breach of con-
fidenee, that on all the great questions
of external and internal policy, his right
hbe. friend cordially concurred with his
late colleagues. He hoped he should not be
so far misapprehended as to be supposed
to disapprove of what the noble lord had
said. It was not the intention of his right
hoe. friend to shrink from a justification
of any part of his conduct. If any hon-
ourable gentlemen had charges to prefer,
his right hon. friend would be found, not
only to be ready, but he might be bold
to say, able to answer them. Itwasneces.
sarily in their sense of propriety, what
was the fit time of bringing them forward
-whether they should make the attack
in his right hon. friend's absence, or delay
it till his return. He did not deprecate
any such attacks, or claim for his right
hon. friend any courtesy; but he begged
the House to call to mind, the manner ul
which his right hon. friend had repelled
other accusations, when they had beep


JAN'. 26, 1821. 1 [154:








Motion respecting the Omission of [ 15G


brought forward as substantive charges.
He begged them also, not to lose sight of
the consideration, that the line of con-
duct which his right hon. friend had felt
it to be his duty to pursue, could not
have been dictated by an attachment to
office on the one hand, or by the ambi-
tion of conciliating popular feeling on
the other. It was dictated alone by a
strong and conscientious sense of the con-
flicting duties which he owed to the illus-
trious persons whose unfortunate variance
had distracted the country.
Mr. Robinson, in rising to reply to the
speech with which the noble lord had in-
troduced his motion, begged to say, in
the first place, that it contained one senti-
ment with which he entirely concurred.
That sentiment, the noble lord had ex-
pressed in plain terms, in the beginning of
his speech, although he had thought pro-
per to qualify it towards the conclusion :
it was, that his Majesty's ministers, and
they alone, ought in this case to be the
responsible persons. The noble lord had
intimated to the House, that ministers, in
the advice which they gave to the Crown,
had been actuated by motives which did
not leave them the exercise of their own
judgment. Whatever might have induced
the noble lord to make the supposition,
he (Mr. Robinson) could not consent to
take any advantage from such an admis-
sion; for the advice was given by his ma-
jesty's ministers, and by the legality and
expediency of that advice they were ready
to stand or fall. When he considered the
language in which the noble lord had
characterized this act-when he heard it
called an illegal proceeding-an insult to
the sovereign-an injury and a disgrace
to the country, and a measure for which
the noble lord had no milder epithet than
revolutionary-it would be base in minis-
ters-it would be the height of meanness,
not to avow their responsibility. Before
he proceeded to make any observations
on the motion of the noble lord, and on
the arguments that had been used in sup-
port of it, lie would advert to the cir-
cumstance which had led to the alleged
offence. The noble lord had not argued
at great length in support of the opinion
which he had expressed as to the illegality
ofthemeasure; and heapprehended, that
such an argument, if he himself were to
enter into it, would not be very satisfactory
to the House, or very likely to lead to a
just conclusion. He said, however, that
his majesty's ministers, neither at the time


they gave that advice, nor at present,
entertained the slightest doubt of its
legality; nor could he now conceive on
what grounds it was contended, that that
advice was not consistent with law. If
the act were imperative on the Crown, in
all circumstances, with respect to the in-
sertion of the Queen Consort's name
in the Liturgy, it was equally imperative
with regard to the names of all the royal
progeny. [Cries of No, no, from the
Opposition]. In the terms of this clause
he could not find one word that separated
the name of the Queen from that of the
royal progeny. In. many cases, however,
the names of the royal progeny had not
been inserted; and therefore, with respect:
to them, the act had never been imperative
on the Crown; and since he could find no
distinction made in the act between them
and the Queen, he could not see why it
should beimperative in the one case more
than the other. He felt that he could
not argue this point in a satisfactory man-
ner; but he would repeat, that ministers
did not believe then, nor did they now
believe, that there was any illegality in the
omission.-Letthe House look at the situa-
tion in which the question stood when
ministerstooktheir determination. Her ma-
jesty was living, and had long been living
in a state of eparation from her royal con-
sort; during theti neshe had been princess
of Wales, her separation had been author-
ised by his late nimjesty, and had been
recognized, and in some degreesanctioned,
by acts of parliament. Hermajesty was
residing abroad, and it was at that mo-
ment that propositions were made, which
it was hoped, would terminate by arrange-
ments, former majesty continuing abroad,
and ceasing to assume the style and title
of Queen [Hear, hear from the Opposi-
tion Benches]. At the time of making
that proposition, ministers had abundant.
reason to believe it would be acceded
to. If, therefore, with the prospect of
such an arrangement, they had inserted
her majesty's name in the Liturgy, they
would have been guilty of an absurdity;
since they would have invested her with
that style and title, whichit was proposed,
that she should not assume. Under these
circumstances, it would have been a most
extraordinary proceeding indeed, to have
advised the King to begin by conferring on
the Queen that mark of honour and re-
spect, which the insertion of her name in
the Liturgy would convey. He thought
the course which. ministers had taken was


135) HOUSE OF COMMONS,








157] the Queeit's Name in the Liturgy.
the strongest proof that they were sin-
cerely convinced of its legality. With
the prospect of being compelled to make
that charge which they had brought against
her majesty, and having in their power
the means of making that charge-[cries
of Hear, hear," from the Opposition.]
He was unavoidably obliged to allude to
that proceeding, though he was not called
on at pre-ent tojustify it. What he wished
to observe was, that with the prospect of
bringing this charge against her majesty,
ministers would not have been warranted
in advising the insertion of her name in
the Liturgy. If they had done that, they
must have gone a great deal farther, and
advised the king to place her majesty, in
all respects, in the same situation as if
there had been no imputation against her.
Many persons, he believed, were of opi-
union that her majesty should have been so
placed; but there were others, lie also
believed, who were not disposed to recom-
mend that course. There was a third
class, who, like the first, recommended
that her majesty should be treated with
all external marks of respect; that she
should have a palace and every other royal
Accommodation ; but that she should be
treated with cold ness, and discountenanced
by the court. Now, he had no hesitation
in saying, that to have placed her in such
a situation, and at the same time to have
said, Oh, do'nt go near her-pay her no
respect," would have been the greatest
violation of the principles of honour on
which ministers had acted.-But it had
been said, thatministershad insulted their
Queen, betrayed their King, and brought
their country to the verge of revolution.
And what was the motion of the noble lord
for the remedy of those evil measures ?
[Hear, hear.] If ministers had been guilty,
They merited severer punishment than the
mild and mitigated castigation of the
noble lord's motion. If they were really
guilty, and escaped without punishment,
that escape would be the most fatal omen
to the constitution and to the country.
He asserted, that with the opinions the
noble lord professed, it was his duty to
Stake another course, and not to have
brought down his milk and water reso-
lution; telling the House, at the same
time, that there was another motion in
reserve, which they did not know when to
expect. If it was the intention of the
noble lord merely to do justice to the
* Queen, why take this isolated point-why
advert in anticipation to another motion,


JAN. 26, 1821. [158
as if the present were intended to as-
certain the feeling of the House? He
could not account for the noble lord's
conduct, unless by supposing that he
wished to have the benefit of all the shades
of opinion existing in the House, by miti-
gating, asfar as possible, the terms of his
present motion.-Great stress had been
laid, by the noble lord, on the petitions
which had been brought forward. Many
petitions had been presented that night,
and he believed, that all of them prayed the
House to take the promptest measures,
not for turning out ministers, or for al-
laying the agitation of the country, but
for effecting the restoration of the Queen's
name to the Liturgy. Now, was that the
object of the noble lord's resolution ?
It was no doubt, involved in it, and might
be expected to follow, if the present pro-
position were carried ; but, on so great a
question as this was represented to be, was
parliament to take particular points of the
subject, or to act on any but clear and ex-
plicit grounds ? The noble lord said, that
he had recourse to this mode of proceed-
ing with a view to conciliate the Queen
and the people; but lie (Mr. Robinson)
contended, that the present course was
calculated to produce an opposite effect,
and that the House ought either to speak
plainly or not at all. Such was the view
he took of the present motion; it was not
of a clear, direct, and simple character,
as it ought to be, and as he understood
the promised motion of another noble lord
was, he was not disposed to meet the
resolution with a direct negative. The
noble lord had stated, that he would not
take his tactics from his opponents, and
in this respect he would imitate the noble
lord's example; and, since the noble lord
had brought a proposition for an abstract
resolution instead of a direct and specific
motion, he should take the liberty of
moving that the House do now ad-
journ."
Lord Archibald Hamilton rose to ex-
plain. In answer to the right hon. gen-
tleman, he begged to say, that he had
used the word revolutionary" without
doubt, and he had used it advisedly.
He also begged to be understood as ap-
plying it, not solely to this particular
act of the erasure of her majesty's name
from the Liturgy, but to the whole of the
proceedings which had been had against
the Queen.
Mr. Hobhouse, being in possession of
the House, began by observing, that if








159] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
the right hon. gentleman who had so re.
gently sat down, and whom, as one of his
majesty's ministers, he must look upon
as one of the advisers of those unfortunate
measures, for which, upon the part ol
his colleagues, he had been endeavour-
ing to offer an apology, bud felt such a
proceeding necessary, how much more
was he (Mr. Hobhouse) bound to apolo-
gize to honourable members for any tres-
pass he might make upon their time and
patience. With respect to the observa-
tions of the hon. gentleman who spoke
first, after the noble mover, upon another
right hon. gentleman, he begged to say,
that as that right hon. gentleman was not
present, he should refrain from all re-
marks on his conduct. He thought it
was due to the character and situation of
that individual to wait until he should be
in his place, so that he might have an
opportunity of refuting any charges of
whatever nature they might he, that
might be brought against him. On such
an occasion as this, honourable mem-
bers had something else to do than to
enter into particular justifications of
their colleagues. It was calculated to
take out of the view of the House that
which ought to be the main subject of
their consideration. For his own part,
he could not help suspecting, that some-
thing like a parliamentary manoeuvre
in the hon. gentleman's rising so early,
as it were, to give the cue to those
friends of the late President of the Board
of Control, whose scruples, had not oper-
ated, like his, to make them relinquish
office. If that was the intention of the
hon. gentleman he hoped he would not
be followed, but that the friends of the
right hon. gentleman (Mr. Canning)
would consider what had passed that
night, and that the unanimous petitions
of the people of England would operate
on them to give an independent vote.
With respect to the right hon. President
of the Board of Trade, he had heard the
speech of that right hon. gentleman with
surprise. The right hon. gentleman had
not given them a single excuse for the
conduct of ministers. He had told them,
that he would not enter into the legal
question, and yet he had concluded by
moving, that the House do now adjourn :
leaving the conduct of the ministers with-
out excuse. Upon what piineipleof law,
of argument, or of fairness, ea~ld he
attempt to excuse the conduct of his
colleagues in offSie, if he could not frst


Motion respecting the Omission of [ 160
prove, that what had been done by them
i was not an infringement of the constitu-
tion, and a violation of the statute law of
the land ? Without affecting to be more
a lawyer than the right hoi. gentleman,
he meant to say, that the onusprobandi
l lay entirely upon ministers; it was for
them to prove, that when they ventured
to erase her majesty's name from the
Liturgy they were not violating the law.
It was not for the opposition to prove,
that ministers had done any thing of the
kind. [Hear, and a laugh from the mi-
nisterial benches.] He should be able, he
hoped, to show the noble secretary for
foreign affairs, that this was not a foolish
opinion. Since the time of the reforma-
tion-before which it was known there
were no statutes regulating the religious
formularies of the country ;-from the
time of the reformation to the present,
there was no single instance in which the
name of a queen consort had been omit-
ted, under circumstances similar to those
in which her majesty stood. The fact
was, that there was one exception; and
he would mention it, as he observed the
learned attorney-general was taking notes,
as if he had made some slip-the case of
the queen of George 1. But he asserted,
that that was no instance in point. That
queen had been unknown to this country
as princess of Wales, or in any other
character; she had been divorced before
she became queen; she had never kept a
court in England as princess of Wales,
and was in no way known to or recognized

by the people of England. The 13th and
14th of Chas. II. commonly called the
Act of Uniformity, contained words so
clear and explicit, that it was impossible
to get overthem. The names were direct.
ed to be changed and altered from
time to time, and fitted for the occasion."
It was impossible, that those grave autho-
rities by whom that statute was framed-
he meant sir Matthew Hale and lord Cla-
rendon-could ever have been guilty of
that slip-slop (as it was sometimes termed)
in language, as to have supposed for a
moment, that the words change and
alter," could embrace a power to "omit"
also. They evidently and expressly meant
that the names should be varied with the
occasion, and fitted thereto. What was,
perhaps, a strong confirmation of this fact
was, that at the time when the statute of
Uniformity was framed, the reigning king,
Charles 1I. had no queen; but these was
a vacant space left, in the provisions of







161] the Queen's Name in the Liturgy. JAN. 26<, 1821. [169
the act, for the insertion of her name; dinary state of agitation. The right hon.
and accordingly the moment that the king gentleman in moving for an immediate
did marry, the queen's name was inserted adjournment, had at least proved, that
in that space, and ill the Liturgy, con- what he had called parliamentary tactics,
formally to the act. The right hon. gen- were not confined to the Opposition side
tleman was moreover called upon to show of the House. No doubt, lie expected,
on what documents his colleagues pro- by such a mode of getting rid of the
ceeded, when they struck her majesty's question, the votes of a few gentlemen,
name out of the Liturgy ? In truth, how- who would otherwise support the pro-
ever, that right hon. member had only position of the noble mover. But he
excused one fault by another; for he said, trusted, that those honourable gentlemen
that had ministers inserted the Queen's would well consider what they were about
name in the Liturgy, then she would im- to do, and that by so adjourning they
mediately have come over, and claimed would reject the prayers and petitions of
all her rights as Queen Consort. And the whole people of England, of which
why should the Queen not claim all her they had received such striking manifes-
rights ? But it was quite certain, that stations. He would entreat them to re-
when her name was so struck out she member, that even if on other occasions,
would instantly come over. When thus they considered themselves pledged to
insulted and condemned, she had nothing vote with the right hon. gentleman, by a
to do but to come where she might have point of honour it now behoved them to
something like a trial; and where she give up; and finally he would refer them
might shew her accusers, that they had to the vote wh;ch they had concurred in
no grounds for their charges. Those during the last session ; a vote which had
loose, unsifted charges formed no ground characterized the whole of the proceedings
for the proceedings of ministers. His against her majesty as being derogatory
late majesty, in his Letter to the Prin- from the dignity of the Crown, and inju-
cess of Wales in 1807, had declared, that rious to the best interests of the country.
charges brought against persons, and exa- Mr. Wetherell and several other mem-
mined in their absence, were not to be hers having risen at the same time, the
considered as legal charges. But it ap- cry for that gentleman became general.
peared, that his majesty's ministers acted He said, that he had been in hopes of hear-
upon them as upon legal proofs. They ing some grounds alleged by his majesty's
did not go to those persons who were best ministers as those upon which the order
able to inform them as to the truth; they in council had proceeded, by which the
did not question the honourable persons omission of her majesty's name in the
who had been about her majesty, her do- Liturgy of the church had been directed.
mestic physician, or the noble ladies who The right hon. gentleman who had spoken
had resided with her, but on loose papers, after the noble lord opposite, had gone
drawn up by they knew not whom, they into a variety of observations, the tendency
proceeded at once to the act which he de- of which was, the justification of that act
cleared to be absolutely illegal. The testi- upon the part of the ministers of the
mony which they had brought forward Crown. Without wishing to follow the
was quite extraordinary. As he himself right hon. gentleman through all the state-
had long resided at Venice, he knew per- ments contained in his speech, he was
fectly well, the infamous character of one quite prepared to state the reasons upon
of the persons whom they had brought as which he differed from him on this most
an important witness from that city, a important subject. The right hon. gen-
person named Bianchi, the porter at an tleman had critically argued, not so much
hotel in that city; a man who bore a cha- the matter, as the form of the motion sub-
racter so infamous as ought to have de- mitted by the noble lord. For his part,
terred any man, or set of men, from ever he thought that form was an extremely
adducing his evidence in a court ofjustice. correct one. He thought the right hon.
Ministers ought to have inquired, before gentleman however, had stated, in a very
they instituted those proceedings, whether candid manner, what was his own view of
they had grounds which would satisfy the the question, and his own opinion upon
country; nor should they then have com- its merits: and having himself possessed
menced them without a state necessity. the means of frequently considering it,
What state necessity was there ? They he would now state what was the result of
knew that the country was in an extraor- that attention and inquiry which he had
VOL. IV. M







Motion respecting the Omission of [ 164


bestowed upon it. And firstly, he
thought, this act was to be considered as
the act entirely of his majesty's ministers,
and not as that of his majesty. Such was
his judgment; and if in making it, he
had come to an erroneous conclusion, he
could only say, that it was an error of some
maturity. When, the day before yester-
day, he had the honour of moving for the
production of certain documents and
papers, it was not for the purpose of in-
forming his own mind upon any parti-
cular knowledge to be derived from them,
because he had already taken pains to
make himself acquainted with their con-
tents; but he had done so with a view of
possessing the House of the same neces-
sary information. It was singular to ob-
serve the conduct of the right hon. gen-
tleman and his colleagues upon two occa-
sions, immediately connected with the pre-
sent discussion. When he (Mr. W.) first
made a motion with reference to the papers
which had been laid upon the table, the
noble lord (Castlereagh) moved the pre-
vious question; and now, when the noble
lord (A. Hamilton) submitted some other
proposition relative to the object contem-
plated by his own motion, the right hon.
gentleman moved an adjournment. Minis-
ters, however, must not suppose, upon a
great constitutional question like this,
that the attempt to defeat him by a mere
point of tactics would be successful. It
was truly a great question, involving, not
the rights of the present Queen Consort
alone, but the public rights and privi-
leges of all queens consort in these or fu-
ture times-a question not upon this sin-
gle violation alone, not on this individual
case, but upon the general tenure of those
rights and privileges recognized by the
statutes and constitutions of the realm.
It was, in truth, a question involving this
important consideration-whether the sta-
tute and constitutional law of the land,
has vested in the privy council of the
king, a power to leave out or to insert as
it chooses, the name of the Queen Consort.
That was the plain question; and though
he admitted, that as upon this point, they
could not argue the abstract question,
yet it was a perfect fallacy to suppose, that
they could .authorize such a principle in
any particular case, without authenti-
cating its general operation. It was ma-
nifest, that if the act of omitting her ma-
jesty's name was to be attacked or to be
defended, the future principle would be
affected generally, according to the deci-


sion to which they should come. The
particular question was, whether, accord-
ing to act of parliament and the con-
suetudines regni, such act was or was not
illegal. This mere form of putting the
question might suffice to show that it was
not confined, and could not be'confined,
to the present case alone. Out of this a
further consideration naturally arose, and
that was, whether any queen consort of
the realm was to hold the privilege of hav-
ing her name inserted in the Liturgy of
the church, at the mere pleasure of the
king's council.
Referring, therefore, to what the right
hon. gentleman had suggested as an insu-
perable difficulty, it resulted, that it
would be a mere fallacy to argue this case
on those individual circumstances which
might seem to constitute it an isolated
and particular question ; if they did not,
in truth, embrace the whole point under
consideration, and become, as such, ne-
cessary to be taken into the discussion.
It was, therefore, that he took the liberty
of calling the attention of the House to
those peculiar facts (and God knew they
had been sufficiently calamitous ones!),
from which it appeared, that an omission
had been directed to be made of this de-
scription; they were to decide upon a
right which had existed for three cen-
turies, ever since the first use of a reform-
ed Liturgy; they were to decide the ques-
tion, whether the legal and constitutional
usage should be violated by doing in this
case what must endanger all other laws
and usages of the realm. He had already
stated, that, since the time of the Re-
gency, he had met with no one question
whatever, so considerable and so important
as this. They should remember, that
they were called on to decide a question
of a civil nature-no less an one, than
whether that privilege, which for three
centuries had been supposed to attach,
not to the natural person of the Queen,
but to her exalted public station and cha-
racter, was, after the lapse of so many
years, to be laid at the feet of the privy
council? or, in other words, whether the
Queen Consort of these kingdoms was to
be exalted or degraded at their mere will
and pleasure ? Presuming, not that his
humble labours could benefit the House
-presuming, not that his information
could enlighten honourable gentlemen,
but presuming to offer his own mature
and unbiassed opinion, he now took the
liberty of accusing his majesty's ministers


1631 HOUSE OF COMMONS,








165] the Queen's Name in the Liturgy,
of having made an order, upon the 12th
of February last, which was grossly illegal.
If the right hon. gentleman, who had
manfully come forward that night, and
for whose personal character no man en-
tertained a more sincere respect and con-
sideration than himself, had thought pro-
per to apply the epithets of milk and
water" to the motion of the noble lord
opposite, he could promise the right hon.
gentleman, that he should not have to
complain of him for making use of lan-
guage of that description. Therighthon.
gentleman, in an argument, which, to be
sure, appeared rather absurd, had stated,
that that noble lord might have been a
little more severe on his majesty's govern-
ment. For his own part, he must say,
that he was not disposed to use language
quite so subservient. He was sure, that
the right hon. gentleman knew the per-
sonal respect which he entertained for
him; and, without meaning any offence
to him, he begged to repeat, that he
would take especial care to avoid the
charge of not stating his opinion with as
much strength and plainness as the forms
of the House would allow.
In that view of the case, he did assert,
that so far as his humble opinion was
concerned, he did not put the question
upon the ground of expediency or inex-
pediency; but he was disposed to put it
upon the plain and broad ground of ille-
gality. His argument was, that the act
was an undoubted contradiction to the
ancient and unquestionable privilege in
dispute, as it was confirmed by the Act
of Uniformity. He was little disposed to
trouble the House with a detail of facts
which must be known to all honourable
gentlemen too well to need repetition;
but some short data there were which it
was material to notice. He did not mean
to dispute, what no man acquainted with
the history of his country would dispute,
that after the Reformation, the supremacy,
in all ecclesiastical regulations, was vested
in the king as head of the church. Nei-
ther did he dispute, that in the reign of
Henry VIII, the Crown had the power of
regulating the service of the church as it
pleased. He would not weary the House
with a train of historical references: it
was sufficient to know, that prior to that
period, the direction and management of
ecclesiastical affairs had been entirely
under the see of Rome. Subsequently
to this period, this whole system had been
altered and reversed, and ecclesiastical


JAN. 26, 1821.


[166


government had been intermingled and
identified with the civil ordinances of the
state. In the reign of Edward VI, a
Liturgy founded upon these principles of
alteration was established. In succeeding
reigns, various acts of parliament were pas-
sed; which, from time to time, made the
Liturgy of thechurch, and all matters con-
nected with it, matters of civil regulation.
In other words-and this was important to
observe-the church was made a part of
the state, and the state a part of the church.
He would not trouble the House with
particularly adverting to these different
statutes; all this was undoubtedly origi-
nally the effect of the Reformation: the
Liturgy might thus be said to have been
established by the Reformation. In sub-
sequent reigns it was, indeed, altered;
thus it was altered by queen Mary.
After that .period, and in the reign of
James I, it was reduced into pretty nearly
the same form in which it existed at pre-
sent. Thus it continued until the reign
of Charles I. In that reign it was well
known, that the political dissension which
existed, arose from religious as well as a
civil feeling, The Liturgy of the church,
which was thus originated under Edward
VI, came to be reviewed in the reign of
Charles I; and by the civil and religious
authorities of his day some partial changes
were effected in it, of that slight nature to
which he had already alluded.
Thus far it had been necessary to make
mention of historical facts; and these
brought us down to the reign of Charles
II. And here it was proper to remind
them, that the church and state were now
to all intents and purposes to be consi-
dered as mingled and connected; the
church, and all parts of the church go-
vernment, being part and parcel of the
state itself; the king, recognized as the
head of the church, was the head of the
state also. The union of these two cir-
cumstances led to the fact, that after the
Reformation, very different regulations in
matters ecclesiastical were adopted; be-
cause they were not ordered as theretofore
by the authority of the pope, but subjected
to civil authority by the power of parlia-
ment. In other words, the Liturgy was
established by act of parliament; and the
regulations and enactments ordained and
provided by that statute, and by all others
made in furtherance of the same object,
became of equal effect, validity, legality,
and strength, and were as much binding,
and exacted equal obedience, as any other








167] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
acts of parliament whatever. He took
upon himself to say, with great deference
and humility, that he had now proved his
position; namely, that these regulations
of a civil nature were those which made
the church part of the state. He had
already said, the king was head of the
church. Referring, indeed, to the reign
of Henry VIII, it might perhaps, be said,
that by virtue of his prerogative, he might
havegoverned and regulated its ordinances
of his own authority alone, even supposing
no acts of parliament had intervened;
but that was not the case now. Leaving
the question of prerogative alone, suffi-
cient was shown to prove, that it was at
least controlled by the power of parlia-
ment in this case; and enough was also
shown to prove, that the regulations of the
church were part of the civil law of the
country, and were to be governed by that
law as well as by any other matter.
Allowing the king, therefore, to be
the head of the church (and God knew
he had no wish to impair one tittle of his
prerogatives in that character ), the next
question was, whether acts of parliament
passed subsequently to the Reformation
had not curtailed them. Let no man sup-
pose here, that he was fora moment deny-
ing the plenary powers of the Crown-
powers which it undoubtedly possessed;
but it would be a waste of time to show
in what instances those plenary powers,
which might formerly have been exercised
by the Crown, had been since lost and
confused, by theCrown itself having dele-
gated them to parliament, though origi-
nally they were its own. He had already
shown in what way the Liturgy was framed
and subsequently modulated; the exigen-
cies of the times afterwards gave rise to
certain restraining statutes. It was well
known, to all who heard him, that the
Covenanters, and others of the puritanical
party, undertook to revise particular parts,
not only of the civil, but alo of the re-
ligious institutions of the state. At that
time, divisions pervaded the whole king-
dom ofthe same nature; and, consequently,
in the year 1661, it was resolved, to esta-
blish a Liturgy, that should unite as close-
ly as possible, all religious parties in the
state, and make them submit as much as
possible to the state's authority. The
purpose was, not so much to make out a
form of Liturgy which should unite all
men in any universal form of belief, but
to settle, and ensure to all the component
parts of the state, in facie ecclesie, a


Motion respecting the Omission of [168
legal recognition of all the civil parts of
the ecclesiastical institutions of the coun-
try. There was no man who maturely
considered the subject, but would concede
to him this proposition-that the great
purpose of the Act of Uniformity was,
that church and state should be in all res-
pects mixed ; so that you might mix up,
as it were, allegiance to the church and
state, and secure the same obedience to
the latter as was already required to the
former. Such was the principle of the
Act of Uniformity, by which it was in-
tended, that a civil and a religious rebel-
lion, which had so long raged, should not
operate to the prejudice of the establish-
ment. It was to the evils of dissension
that the Actof Uniformity addressed itself.
There were subsequent acts, the due per-
formance of which were also provided for
by that statute. Accordingly, there was
to be found in the Liturgy, a recognition
of the authority of the king, of the pre-
lates, of the privy council, of the magis-
tracy, and every other component part of
the civil constitution of the country. He
would now call the attention of the House
to the effect of that act. The Liturgy of
the church being thus settled and esta-
blished, was annexed to the act, and
authenticated under the great seal, was,
to all intents and purposes, part and par-
cel of the Act of Uniformity. It was as
much a part of the act, as if it had been
written in the parliament roll, and tran-
scribed from that roll into the statute
book. This was a point, which he appre-
hended, neither the Attorney General, nor
any gentleman conversant, with the law of
the question, could dispute. The Liturgy,
then, was to be considered as virtually
and substantially part of the act of parlia-
ment; and it was, indeed, only in conse-
quence of its length, that the whole of
the church service was not enrolled, and
printed among the statutes. The act di-
rected, that the Liturgy thus identified
with it should be printed, and carried into
effect; and that 21 copies of it should be
deposited in the Tower of London, and
various other repositories of public docu-
ments. The Liturgy thus established,
could undergo no change unless there
were some change in the Act of Uni-
formity, reserving a power to make such
alteration. It was clear, that the Crown
had no power to alter or add to any part
of the Liturgy, as it related to faith and
doctrine; not a comma or a word could
be altered in any prayer or collect. How







169] the Queen's Name in the Liturgy.
far then, did the power of alteration ex-
tend ? He would read to the House, the
very short clause of the Act of Uniformity
itself; which was, he thought, so express
in terms, as that it could leave no doubt
on the mind of any hon. gentleman upon
the question before them:
Provided always, and be it further
enacted by the authority aforesaid, that
in all those prayers, litanies, and collects,
which do in any way relate to the king,
queen, or royal progeny, the names be
altered and changed from time to time,
and fitted to the present occasion, accord-
ing to the direction of lawful authority."
These were the wordsoftheact. Now,
it was singular, that if more was intended
than to change the name to George or
Frederick, to Anne or Caroline, that the
framers of that act should not have thought
of inserting the word omit," or some-
thing to that effect. The vocabulary of
the English language was nearly as full
and perfect at that time as it was at the
present day; and yet, how happened it,
that sir Matthew Hale, lord Clarendon,
and the other learned men who had drawn
up the act, with all the copia verborum
which the language presented, should not
have hit upon a word which would bear
the construction of expunge, or omit, or
leave out ? But they had done no such
thing. They merely left it "to be altered
and changed," as he had just read. How
came it to pass, that it was not stated, if
such was ever intended, that it should be
left to the power of the Crown to omit the
name of her majesty or the royal family ?
How came it to pass, that after all the
revisions which this subject had undergone
by parliament, by the convocation, and
by the twelve learned lawyers-how came
it, he asked, to pass, that if such a power
as that now assumed was ever intended to
be conveyed, all these high authorities
should have concurred-not in putting in
the word expunge," or omit," but in
merely inserting these words-" To be
altered and changed from time to time,
and fitted to the present occasion accord-
ing to the direction of lawful authority ?"
Was any honourable gentleman prepared
to contend, that at the period of the resto-
ration, when the throne was to be re-
stored to all its dignity and splendor, it
could bein the contemplation of the legis-
lature to pass an act in which a power
was to be granted to degrade the queen ?
From the Reformation down to the period
of passing the Act of Uniformity, the


JAN. 26, 1821.


[170


names of queens consort had been uni-
formly inserted in the Liturgy. Cathe-
rine, the queen consort of Henry the
Eighth, was in the Liturgy; the queen
consort of Charles the First was in the
Liturgy; and the principal of reinstatement
and redintegration had been constantly
acted upon, through the whole period of
time which intervened between the Refor-
mation and the reign of Charles II. There
was another argument, which operated
very forcibly upon his mind, though he
did not know how it might strike other
gentlemen. At the time of the passing
of this act, Charles II, was not married,
and a blank was left in one collect for
the name of the queen ; leaving it per-
fectly to be understood that it was to
stand pro re nata for the insertion of the
queen consort's name when the king should
marry; and not only was the blank left
for the name, but also for the titles ; and,
in fact, after the marriage of the king,
some copies of the book of Common-prayer
had the blank filled up and the name of
her majesty the queen consort inserted.
He did not know how this might
strike others; but it struck him beyond
all doubt, that the intention was, that
according, to the act, the name of the
Queen must be necessarily inserted. This
just brought the case of the Liturgy as it
stood in the preceding reigns. They had
one uninterrupted course from this time
down to the reign of George I; and
in this period, would any one attempt to
say, that it was not the consuetudo regni?
They had the proof of the constant prac-
tice of three centuries ; and he thought,
that a constant custom for three centuries
was fully sufficient to establish a prescrip-
tive right. And who were they who dis-
puted this usage; who were they who de-
nied this presumptive right ? They were
those from whom he should never have
thought, that the infraction of a long-esta-
blished usage would have come. Who
could have expected from the present
anti-radicaladministration, from this mo-
narchical administration-they who in and
out of doors were so loud in combating
every thing like reform or change, who
trembled at the bare idea of the least de-
viation from any and every long-esta-
blished custom ;-who, he asked, could
have expected that such a violation of the
constant practice of three centuries would
have come from them ? What was it, that
was in the present day more ardently sup-
ported by this anti-radical, anti-reform,








171] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
monarchical administration, than avenera-
tion for what was termed the ancient
usage of the country? And yet it was
from this same quarter that they now
found an attack upon the undisturbed
practice of three centuries What was it
that was more anxiously looked to by all
ranks than ancient customs ? Upon what
did the privileges of that House rest ?
Upon the consuetudo parliament. Upon
what did the prerogatives of the Crown
depend? The jus coroner. Upon what
the privileges of the Lords? Usage. Upon
what,,in a word, did some of the best and
dearest rights which men enjoyed in this
country depend? Usage. And now we
were to take from the present monarchical
administration the doctrine, that usage
the most ancient, was to be abolished at
their discretion In obedience to the dic-
tates of this anti-radical, monarchical ad-
ministration, those men, who, as he had
said, were shocked at the least word that
whispered change or reform, the House
was now called upon, without any argu-
ment or any precedent, to give up the
practice of three centuries. [Hear,
hear]. He, in his humble situation in
life, had always been opposed to the
principles of the radicals ; he had ever
deprecated their wild and visionary schemes
of reform; he had looked on public af-
fairs with an eye as active, as ardent, and
persevering as many men; and he had
held the same opinion with respect to the
principles of all violent reformers; and
his sentiments with respect to them were
still unchanged. He begged to ask them,
as an humble individual, for he liked to
be consistent-[cheers from the ministe-
rial benches]. He did not feel annoyed,
nor would he be put down by the cheers
of the noble lord and his friends. He
knew well from what cause they pro-
ceeded: he would repeat, that he liked to
be consistent; and he begged to ask the
noble lord who was so strongly opposed
to every thing like change or innovation,
upon what principle or precedent it was,
that he would attempt to justify the abo-
lition of the constant practice of three
centuries? It was not from the noble
lord that he expected such an example :
but when he did set it, hethought, at least,
that some argument, founded upon reason
and practice, should be urged to justify it.
It was this violent, and he would say, ille-
gal conduct, on the part of his majesty's
ministers, that had placed him (Mr.
Wetherell, in the situation in which he


Motion respecting the Omission of [172
then stood in opposition to all the measures
adopted against the Queen. He main-
tained, that the whole course of the
proceedings pursued by his majesty's
ministers, from the first introduction of
the bill of Pains and Penalties, had been
a series of monstrous and unjustifiable
innovations on the constitution. If the
noble lord had not been guilty of these
aggressions on the constitution ; if he
had not endangered the peace of the
country and the security of the monarchy,
he should still have givenhim his support,
and not have stood there his determined
enemy in every thing which respected the
measures against the Queen. From the
moment that the Queen's name was ille-
gally and unjustifiably left out of the
Liturgy, from the moment that the illegal
and fatal order of the 12th of February
took away all chance of a fair trial, he
had placed himself, and would continue
to place himself, in opposition to every
measure of ministers founded upon it.
After the date to which he had already
referred, he would now beg leave to call
the attention of the House to whatever
there wereof precedents for this unjust
proceeding. He could not, of course, pre-
sume to guess what new field of research
might be opened, or what unexpected
powers of eloquence might be displayed
by the distinguished persons who formed
the present administration ; but there
was one topic which he might venture to
anticipate as likely to be urged on this
occasion; he alluded to the omission of
the name of the Consort of George I.
That monarch ascended the throne in
1714; and for eighteen years previous
to that period, the princess of Zell had
been a prisoner in Hanover; she breathed
her last in the same dungeon in which she
had been confined foreighteen years. She
was never mentioned in any public docu-
ment, or upon any public occasion, as the
queen of George 1 ; and even her name
was not to be found in the index to Tin-
dal'sHistory. Shewas never, in any way,
recognized as queen, nor did her name
ever appear in any state paper or address
to the king, or in any document, public
or private. But this was not all; George
I. was actually divorced from his queen,
and this was sufficiently established in
Coxe's Memoirs of Sir R. Walpole, who
was minister at the time. It was idle and
contemptible, therefore, to adduce as a pre-
cedent, the case of an absentee and a pri-
soner, who was not only never recognized







173] the Queen's Name in the Liturgy.


as queen, but between whom, and the
king, the conjugal relation was dissolved
by the decree of a court of judicature. If
any person had a right to be considered as
the queen consort of George the First, it
was the duchess of Kendal, and not the
princess of Zell; for a left-handed mar-
riage, as it was termed by the German
jurisconsults, had been solemnized be-
tween the duchess and that monarch. He
was not sufficiently skilled in the German
law to know what was the exact nature of
such marriages; but he believed, a left-
handed marriage was that which was con-
tracted between a person of rank and one
below his own dignity; and the difference
between it and an ordinary marriage was,
that it left the woman the control and pos-
session of her own personal property If,
then, at his accession, any individual was
entitled to the privileges of the consort of
George I, it was the duchess of Kendal,
to whom he was so married, and not the
princess of Zell. Looking, then, at this
most wretched rag of a precedent, who
was it, he asked, that understood the
history of his country, or that had any
pretensions to common sense, could at-
tempt to support by it, the measure which
his majesty's monarchical ministers had
adopted ? He would maintain, that no
man in his senses could attempt to rely
upon such a case. The House had now
before them the invariable consuetudo
regni down to the present time; for the
case which he had just disposed of could
not for an instant be looked upon as an
exception. They had that constant cus-
tom before and since the period of
George I; and if there was any doubt as
to the custom, it would be fully removed
by the act of parliament. He would
now remind the House of another point
which bore on the subject. The rights
of the Queen were hers, not as attached
to her person, but to her political charac-
ter. By the common law, she had in this
character, rights and privileges, equipo-
lent with those of the king. She had
besides, all the legal privileges of afemme
seule, not from the jus mariti, but be-
longing to her character as Queen Consort.
She had also considerable patronage, and
a right to exact from all subjects the same
homage that was paid to the king himself.
These privileges were hers immutably and
indelibly. They were not in the power
of the king to give or to take away. But
if the king had by law, the power of de-
priving her of any of these-if he could of


his authority say, that his subjects should
not pay any marks of respect to her per-
son-if he could prevent them from kiss-
ing her hand or order them not to respect
her person-if any of these things could
be legally done by his majesty, then he
should think, that his majesty might also
be in some manner justified in the exclu-
sion of her name from the Liturgy. But,
when he found that the converse of all
these was true, he thought, that the con-
verse of the argument must be also true.
He again asked, how ministers, how any
men in their senses, could admit (and
they must admit it in order to support
the ground they had taken), that the king
could not legally do any of the things
which he had just mentioned, and at the
same time contend, that he could strike
her majesty's name out of the Liturgy ?
How, then, did it come to pass, that his
majesty had the power in the one case,
and not in the other; the one privilege
(that of the Liturgy), as he had shown,
belonging to her majesty as much in right
of her character as Queen, as any of the
others ? How did it happen, that by com-
mon law he could not take away the name
of Queen, and yet, that he could abolish
the rights of that character ? Looking
at the question in a legal point of view-
and in that view he had given it his most
serious consideration-the thing appeared
to him so plain as not to admit of the
slightest doubt. But his own opinion was
not the only one upon which he rested.
He had put the question to men of un-
questioned legal knowledge-men not
less eminent for information than sound
judgment-men connected with no party,
and of course not biassed by partial views;
and every one of them had concurred in
stating, that the text of the statute left
no ambiguity, but that combined with
the general usage of three centuries, the
case did not admit of a doubt. They
concluded, that the law and the custom
were decisive; and that therefore, the ex-
punging of her majesty's name from the
Liturgy by the privy council, was in
every sense, illegal. But, notwithstanding
the cheers which he had heard from gen-
tlemen on the ministerial side of the
House-cheers which he set to the account
of the vote which he intended to give on
this occasion-he would again ask this
anti-radical, monarchical administration,
what it was, that they had urged in de-
fence of this violation of the law, and the
custom of the country ? Let them look


JAN. 26, 1821. 1174







175] HOUSE OF COMMONS,


Once more at the clause in the Act of Uni-
formity. Now, as an humble individual,
he begged to ask his majesty's anti-radi-
cal, monarchical ministers, amidst the
cheers of their friends, whether, if the
name of the Queen might be left out by
the order of the privy council, under
the authority of this act, the name of the
king might not also be omitted by the
same authority ? Might it be permitted
to a plain man to ask this monarchical
administration, whether, by this same au-
thority, they might not leave out the head
of the church-he who would lose the
throne if he married a Papist? As a
plain man he begged to ask them, whether
they would contend (and they must con-
tend it, in order to support their argu-
ment), that by the authority of this
act, they would be justified in leaving
out of the Liturgy, the bishops, the privy
council, and the other public authorities
who were there mentioned, as directed
by the act? He presumed, that no one
would contend, that the king, the privy
council, the bishops and others, could
be kept out by this act. Why then, he
demanded, was the name of the Queen
alone to be omitted ? Did the act give
the power of omitting that name and no
other? The argument was absurd. The
Liturgy, in effect, as far as the name of
the Queen was concerned, was in the reign
of Charles I, what it was in that of Charles
II; and though Henrietta, the queen of
Charles I, was highly unpopular, no
power was attempted to be given of ex-
cluding her name from the Liturgy. It
was not left in the power of a faction of
a court to put her in, or a faction out of
court to put her out. The House of Com-
mons impeached the queen of Charles the
First, and yet they did not afterwards
think of such an expedient as the expung-
ing of her name from the Liturgy any
more than that of the king. But he
thought, it was unnecessary to press this
part of his subject farther upon the
House.
He could not but observe, how different
was the conduct of the noble lord (Castle-
reagh) upon this occasion, from that pur-
sued by Mr. Pitt in the case of the re-
gency: instead of proceeding to act at
once, he went into the question of pre-
cedents, and all those which bore upon
the subject were produced and examined.
Instead of consulting the privy council
only, instead of meeting a demand for
inquiry by the previous question, he


did what was his duty-a committee to
search for precedents was appointed, he
produced all the documents which were
necessary, and laid them before the House.
This was fair and open. But what a
contrast to this was the conduct of the
noble lord Now, looking to the act of
parliament, unless it was supposed, that
a court of censure was intended to be
placed over the Queen-unless it was
wished to renew the odious court of com-
mission-unless such an iniquitous tri-
bunal was to be established-what did
they do by consenting to the present mea-
sure ? They allowed the privy council
the power of excluding her majesty's
name, without charge, without examina-
tion, without trial! No ; actum est ;"
it was done; and because it was done, it
was meant to be supported as irretrievable.
The establishment of such a precedent
was most dangerous; and might be most
fatal to the peace of the country. They
might, according to this principle, at any
time expunge the name of a Queen with-
out any reason assigned; and though it
was possible that such a case as this might
never again occur, yet, by assenting to it,
now that it had occurred, a general prin-
ciple was laid down, by which, at any
future time, the Queen might be the vic-
tim of a faction at court, and deprived of
all the privileges of royalty. The prin-
ciple, he contended, was absurd, as it
was now supported; but it was worse-
it was highly illegal and unconstitutional.
Were the House, he asked, prepared to
sanction a precedent teeming with such
frightful consequences? Were they pre-
pared to set an example by which, at any
time, a queen who might have the mis-
fortune to be unpopular at court, was to
be left unprotected to the fury of her
enemies, and deprived without trial ? It
might be said, that the present was a case
in which moral conduct was concerned;
but who was to be the judge of such a
question ? If once they gave a discretion
to ministers, they would, in allowing
them a particular example, establish a
most dangerous general principle-a prin-
ciple by which every attribute of royalty
would become precarious. He felt, that
he had too long occupied the attention of
the House. [Hear, hear.] He was will-
ing to have this tried by any test; and by
whatsoever test it was tried, it would be
found equally injurious, and opposed to
the due administration of law and the
strict principles of justice. It might, on


X7-otion Tespectingo ther Omission of







177] the Queen's Name in the Liturgy,
the present occasion, serve the purposes
of a faction at court; but history furnish-
ed them with examples of the purposes to
which faction might convert such prece-
dents. She who was the object of court
favour to day might be sacrificed as its
victim to-morrow; and it should be re-
collected, that her majesty was once the
object of the favour and respect of those
by a great portion of whom she was now
most vehemently opposed.
He had viewed this question generally;
he had looked at it as a question of law-
as a question of the discretion which might
be vested in a government; and in every
view which he took of it, he was con-
vinced, that its sanction, on the present
occasion, would be unjust and unconsti-
tutional. He was equally indisposed to
regard the popular favour, or the caprice
of a court; the favour of the latter was as
precarious as the arbitrio popularis aurce,
described by the poet as belonging to the
people. If discretion, unlimited and un-
restrained, were to be admitted in decid-
ing the rights of individuals, there could
be no calculation of the consequences-
there could be no security against injus-
tice, nor any protection against the most
frightful misgovernment. If they degrad-
ed a Queen without law, or contrary to
the statutes that secured her rights and
privileges, there was no reason why they
might not apply the same arbitrary prin-
ciple to the degradation of a king. In
reason and good sense, the same rule
might be applied to both. He said again,
that the proceeding of the privy council,
in striking her majesty's name out of the
Liturgy, and thus punishing her without
trial, and degrading her against law, fixed
his mind in a firm determination to oppose
all the measures which should be built
upon this act of injustice, or emanate
from so impure a source. The sub-
sequent proceedings confirmed him in
this resolution; and the trial, if trial
it might be called, beforejudical accusers
and senatorial judges, but increased his
feeling of aversion to the whole conduct
of her enemies. The whole course of pro-
ceeding was illegal and unjust. On a
proper occasion, he would prove, that the
Milan commission, was illegal-that the
mode in which the evidence was collected,
was illegal-that the conduct of the privy
council could only be compared to that
of the star chamber-and that, as the
trial began in rottenness and injustice, so
* the end had been highly oppressive and
VOL. IV.


revolting. Entertaining this opinion, he
was bound to oppose the conduct of mi-
nisters, and to denounce to the House the
proceedings of the noble lord. His vote,
thank God, was his own-his sentiments
were his own-and he would neither dis-
guise their nature or withhold their ex-
pression [Loud cheering,] Long before
the trial commenced-long before the
threatening offer at St. Omer, he began to
feel, that ministers were misconducting
themselves towards her majesty; and,
feeling so, he would have despised him-
self if he had concealed his feelings. The
result could not but be anticipated.
Those subsequent acts could not but be
objectionable which were founded at first
in gross illegality and monstrous injustice.
Without any cause publicly assigned -
without any trial-without any authority
but the discretion of ministers-her ma-
jesty had been dethroned and insulted
before foreign nations, and cashiered in
the face of the country. Nay, more : she
was told, that she could not set her foot in
the country of which she was Queen,
without exposing herself to a still more
dreadful fate. The threatening letter of
the ministers, handed to her at St. Omer,
contained at once an infamous bribe and
a bill of impeachment, to induce her to
stay away, and to deter her from demand-
ing her rights. The principle of action
disclosed in this conduct was fit for the
reign of terror ; it was becoming the most
oppressive power in the most troubled
times; it was worthy of a Pagan state;
it had no parallel in Christian history.
[Loud cheers.] By an illegal proceed-
ing-by an act of caprice-the ministers
of the Crown dethroned and cashiered the
Queen, and then held out to her a threat
of more dreadful punishment, if she ven-
tured to visit the country in which she
held so high a rank, or dared to claim the
privileges to which she was entitled. In
their threatening letter they, in effect,told
her-" We have dethroned you already,
we have degraded you in the face of Eu-
rope; but if you venture to set your foot
upon British ground, we shall still farther
degrade and punish you."
When he saw proceedings thus com-
menced in rottenness andinjustice, marked
at every stage by new acts of cruelty and
oppression, his mind was made up, and
he was determined to take his stand against
them. If the bill of Pains and Penalties,
of which he was supposed to know nothing
-to which he could scarcely allude, as
N


JAN. 26, 1821.


[178








179] HOUSE OF COMMONS,
being presented to another House and
withdrawn-had been brought down to
this House, he (Mr. Wetherell) must have
moved an amendment. This bill (he
would have said) is entitled, a bill to de-
prive her majesty of her rights and privi-
leges as Queen Consort of these realms-
why, she is already deprived of them by
the privy council. It is entitled, a bill
to dethrone her majesty-she has been
already dethroned. It is entitled, an act
to degrade the Queen-but she has been
already degraded; and why dethrone her
who has already been dethroned, and de-
grade her who has already been degraded ?"
The privy council had exercised a dis-
cretionary authority and passed a judicial
sentence, and then they appealed to par-
liament to sanction their authority and to
confirm their decision.
He conjured the House to look upon
this not as an insulated case-not as an
individual or personal example. The
question was, whether a Queen Consort,
without being legally charged with any
crime, without a hearing in her own de-
fence, and without the formality of a trial,
could be deprived of her rights and pri-
vileges-could be degraded from her rank
by a secret tribunal-by a kind of star
chamber, which gave no reason for its de-
cision, and did not summon the party to
explain her conduct ? Being of opinion
that a precedent thus set might not
stop where it began, but might lead to
the most mischievous consequences, he
would vote for the motion of the noble
lord. Theopinion which he had expressed
was, that the omission was totally illegal;
but he could have no objection to say,
likewise, that it was unadvised and inex-
pedient. The whole of the proceedings
against the Queen were of a dangerous
and irregular character, contrary at once
to the interests of public order and the
rules of righteousjudgment. A tribunal
to try the Queen for offences unknown to
the law might likewise extend its authority
to try a king ; and thus the measure was
revolutionary and mischievous.-Thehon.
and learned gentleman had concluded by
thanking the House for the patience with
which he was listened to, and declaring,
that long before the offer at St. Omer,
be was convinced of the illegality and the
inexpediency of the measure which he had
now exposed.-The hon. and learned
member sat down, amidst loud and con-
tinued cheers.
Dr. Dodson said, that the real question


Motion respecting the Omission of [180
before the House was, whether the Crown
had the power to omit the Queen's name
in the Liturgy. Upon this question, he
for one, had no hesitation in deciding in
the affirmative, and therefore he protested
against the inferences of his hon. and
learned friend the member for Oxford;
into the extraneous matter of whose speech
he by no means intended, or thought it
necessary, to enter upon this occasion.
His hon. and learned friend did not con-
fine himself to the immediate question be-
fore the House, as to the omission of the
Queen's name in the Liturgy; but had
endeavoured to show, that it was illegal and
unusual, nay, that the Crown was not
entitled to make any alteration in the
Liturgy. He however, should confine
himself to the question before the House,
and had no doubt he should be able to
convince the House, that the proceeding
so strongly deprecated by his hon. and
learned friend was neither unconstitu-
tional, nor illegal. His hon. and learned
friend was constrained to admit, that the
power of altering the form of prayer was
in the Crown, because it was enacted in
the 26th of Henry the eighth, that the
king should have all the power and autho-
rity in the church which had been asslu-
med by the church of Rome. His hon.
and learned friend did not know, that that
power had been taken away. Was it to
be supposed, that seeing, that Henry 8th,
was vested with that power, he never ex-
ercised it ? The fact was, he did exercise
it. He declared, by an order in council,
that the bible should be translated and
read in English. During his reign there
was a constant exercise of that right.
During the reign of Mary, the power of
the pope was restored; but in the reign
of Elizabeth, the statute of Henry the
eighth was revived and acted upon. But
his hon. and learned friend said, there had
been an Act of Uniformity which took
away the power of the Crown. There was
no act in existence which took away the
authority of the Crown; on the contrary,
the power of the Crown was confirmed by
the 13th and 14th of Charles the second,
called the Act of Uniformity. The House
would see nothing in that act which took
away the power of the Crown. It went to
promote the power of the Crown, inas-
much as it imposed additional penal-
ties on those who impugned the book of
Common Prayer. The book of Com-
mon Prayer emanated from royal autho-
rity; consequently it increased and sup-







181] the Queen's Name in the Liturgy. JAN. 26, 1821. [18
,prted the power of the Crown. His hon. tongues which now vociferate with such
and learned friend, and the noble lord emphasis, that right which it seemed they
who brought the measure before the had then abandoned.-In proof of an
House, had relied upon some clause which almost unanimous opinion on that subject
made it legal to alter the names of royal (said Mr. Martin), we voted an address
persons in the Liturgy. In the acts of to her majesty, calling by implication on
Uniformity, which passed in the reigns her majesty to acquiesce in the step taken
of Edward and Elizabeth, there was no by the kingin council ; and by which step,
such clause, and yet alterations were her majesty's name was not, on the death
made. But then it was said, it was the of the late king, ordered for insertion in
change of the names of the royal family, the Liturgy; and praying her inajcsty to
and not the queen. He found in those be assured, that by such conduct she
changes the names of a king and queen, would be exalted in our opinion. I do
as well as the names of persons related to not affect to refute the eloquent expres-
the royal family. Some names had been sions used by the member for Bramber
inserted, and others taken away. What in that address. I state the import only.
passed in the reign of George 3rd ? Did To this address, unfortunately, after in-
not his late majesty take out the duke of effectual negotiation, the Queen was re-
Cumberland's name from the Liturgy ? commended by some very mischievous
His hon. and learned friend however, counsellors to express a firm but respect-
said, that if they left out the name of the ful dissent. Thus stands the fact. It is
Queen they might leave out the name of very clear then, that in June last, we
the king. His hon. and learned friend thought it not right to call on the king
need not be under any alarm on that ac- to retrace his steps, or to retract his opi-
count, because the king himself only had union ; and in accordance with this our
the power of altering thenames. Itthere- opinion we voted the address. Let me
fore was not to be supposed, that the king ask, is it because the Queen was then in-
would leave his own name out. Taking fluenced by counsellors alike the betray-
the argument of his hon. and learned ers of her majesty and the people-is it
friend to be correct, and that the king for this reason, that we are to compliment
and council had not the power to leave her who rejected our interposition, at the
out names in the Liturgy, he might ask expense of the administration who assent-
him, how he accounted for the alteration ed to the proposal of a gentleman gene-
in the form of prayer which had so often rally opposed to the noble lord and his
taken place ? Were not those alterations colleagues ?-Mr. M. said, that when
made on account of his late Majesty's ill- he heard that address read, he hardly ex-
ness, and upon the delivery of the Queen ? pected, that without some modification,
If he had no power to make alterations in his majesty's ministers would have assent-
the form of the Liturgy, how came those ed to it. That they did so, is to their
things to be done, and to be considered immortal honour. It was on their parts
legal? The learned doctor concluded, by a peace-offering; and is it a just return
begging the pardon of the House for for such conduct to come to the resolu-
having trespassed on its attention. He tion proposed by the noble lord. Some
had promised, at the outset, not to detain there be, who may think, almost in the
them long, and he had endeavoured to words of the resolution, that her majesty's
express what had occurred to him in as exclusion from the Liturgy, was not call-
short a compass as possible, ed for at the time by any strong state ne-
Mr. Martin, of Galway, begged leave, cessity. Notwithstanding this, Mr. M.
in the first instance to address himself to asserted, that even those who are of that
the consistency of the House, and to re- opinion, might vote for the adjournment,
mind them of what occurred late in the which was the previous question; and for
last session. He appealed to the recol- this reason, that by so doing, they in no
election of every gentleman, whether the way give up their private opinion, though
question of the Liturgy was not repeat- they decline to come to a solemn vote
edly under consideration; and whether directly expressive of that opinion, inas-
it was not, for the last time in that session, much as such vote would, in substance,
discussed in conjunction with a motion convey a recorded censure which is in the
for an address to her majesty. The legal contemplation of but very few. Gentle-
right of the Queen to be named in the men opposite to me, say, insert the name
Liturgy, was then hardly lisped by those of her majesty in the collects and Litur-








Motion respecting the Omission of [184


gy of our church, because her majesty
has vanquished a foul conspiracy, insinuat-
ing, that the conspirators were the go-
vernment, and, to speak out, his majesty.
Such language being held, it is utterly
impossible to call on the king to insert
the Queen's name in the Liturgy. If
gentlemen can be content to compliment
the Queen without degrading the Crown,
let them propose a law, enacting, that in
time to come it should be the law of this
land, that no queen's name should be
otnitted from our Liturgy. This would
certainly attain every object her majesty
should have in view, for the Queen would
then be prayed for. But this law they
will not propose, because it would put
this question to rest which they, in the
phrase of Mr.Cobbett, consider nothing less
than a perfect God-send to their party.
Sir John Newport deprecated the man-
ner in which the king's name had been
made use of in the course of the present
discussion, for the purpose of influenc-
ing the minds of members ofthat House.
To answer a legal argument by appeals
to the personal feelings of any body of
men in that House, gave the strongest
reason to suppose, that the legal argument
could not be met.-[Hear, from the At-
torney General.] As it seemed to be the
intention of the learned gentleman oppo-
site to meet the argument, he would fur-
nish him with one more subject for the
exercise of his ingenuity in answering it.
In the Act of Uniformity passed by the
Irish I parliament, two years after the act
passed in this country, there was a clause
which ian thus :-"In all prayers, lita-
nies, and collects in the Common-prayer,
wherein mention is made of the king,
queen, royal family, lord lieutenant,
or any other of the lawful authorities of
the kingdom, the names and titles shall
be altered and changed from time to time,
as circumstances may require." These
words were a plain comment, which served
to explain the intent and meaning of that
part of the act; and being so, it appeared
to him, to be impossible to contend, that
any authority was thereby given to leave
out any of the parties so mentioned, or
to make any alteration but that of the
names. With respect to the proposal of
bringing in a new act on the subject, it
was for those to do so v.ho thought, that
the law as it now stood was inconclusive
on the subject.
The Attorney General confessed, that
he rose to address the House under feel-


ings of considerable surprise. If the law
of the question were so clear, so very
clear, as the hon. gentlemen on the other
side supposed, how did it happen, that,
eleven months after the act had been done,
those hon. gentlemen came forward with a
motion-to do what ? To declare that act
to be illegal ? No ; but to declare, that
it had been unwise and inexpedient tacitly
to admit the existence of the right, by
alleging, that the right had been ex ercised
improperly. If the act was illegal, why
had the hon. gentlemen opposite solong
slumbered ? Why had the noble lord
begun by announcing a motion, the very
same which he had formerly contemplated
as an amendment to the proposition of the
hon. member for Bramber, and concluded,
by making a motion of a tendency altoge-
ther different. Why had not that noble
lord followed up his original intention ?
Why had he permitted the speech of the
worthy alderman under the gallery (alder-
man Heygate) on a former evening to
affect the line of his proceeding ? Why
had he not, as in June last, movedat once,
to restore her majesty's name tothe Liturgy
instead of trifling about the expediency
of having removed it ? To come, in the
first place, to the question of legality-
why, the very motion of the noble lord
was an admission of the legality. [Cheers
from the Opposition.] Let not the gen-
tlemen on the opposite benches, however,
imagine that he meant to rest the case upon
such admission. Not so. Feeling, not-
withstanding what had fallen from his
hon. and learned friend, the member for
Oxford, that the law of the question was
most clear and indisputable, he should
endeavour to impress the same con-
viction upon the House. Still he could
not help again adverting to the nature of
the motion before the House. If the act
was illegal, why discuss its wisdom or
propriety ? Once show the act to be illegal,
and no matter what might be the conduct
of the Queen; whether it was such as the
whole nation might be proud to approve,
or such as it must be compelled to
condemn, nothing could justify mi-
nisters in having advised that act;
there was litera scripta upon the sub-
ject; there was a course laid down for
them to pursue; and to recommend any
other course, would be, to recommend the
exercise of such a dispensing power on
the part of the Crown, as no minister, in
his senses could venture to advise.
The whole argument of the hon. and


1,831 HOUSEE O4F COMMONS,




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs