Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

crown the power of bestowing honours, the constitution is no longer the same as formed and handed down by our ancestors. The King possesses the power because it is necessary-it is an inherent right in the

wish that occasion should arise to create. In the present existing circumstances, the Regent must not be a commissioner of the crown, or a sort of prime minister, as seems to be the opinion of some noble Lords, but he is the eldest son of the Sove-crown-it is a public right, and not a perreign, whom the two Houses of Parliament have had recourse to, as the safest, and the most proper person, to support the weight of his royal father's crown, which is too heavy for him, from a temporary indisposition, we will most fervently hope. He is to maintain untouched all the royal prerogatives, to guard the liberties of the people, and to prevent both Houses of Parliament from going astray, in consequence of the temporary suspension of the magistracy of royalty. How can we expect such an Herculean task from the Regent, when we are coming to a resolution, which would sow the seeds for a combination of the House of Lords against the crown, and consequently would encourage a faction, which the Regent would not be able to counteract. For by such a proceeding, we should be shutting the doors of the House of Lords to the people, and creating ourselves one great, independent, omnipotent branch of the legislature. With such an impression, it is impossible for me to admit that the prerogatives of the crown can be divided, some of them reserved, while others are given to the Regent; and at the same time to contend that the Regent should, nevertheless, be able to carry on a strong and vigorous government, without opening the door to an argument, that if there are prerogatives annexed to the crown, that are not in themselves necessary to the energy and vigour of government, these prerogatives might be spared, and might be abolished, since the crown, no more than the Regent, ought to enjoy prerogatives, which are admitted not to be essential and advantageous to the constitution. If these prerogatives be necessary to the splendour and authority of the crown, they ought not to be suspended, even for a single moment. What is the constitutional authority of the crown? It is an assemblage of all the duties of the kingly office, defined by the common, and statute law. When, and to which of the three estates, was assigned the power of bestowing honours? To the crown. And that power of the crown is derived from the same source, from whence our House derives its power. It is an integral part of the power of the people. The moment, therefore, we take from the

sonal individual right-it belongs to the kingly office, as one of the royal prerogatives, absolutely necessary for the support of government, and the good of the people, and, therefore, if this power be necessary to the King, it must be equally necessary to the Regent. There is no doubt that the royal prerogative of granting the highest dignity a subject can aspire to, ist one of the first privileges of the crown, and is given for wise and beneficial purposes--for the advantage of the people and those who are the objects of government, and for whose benefit all govern ments are erected, and not for any aggrandizement or benefit of the crown itself. The reasons for these prerogatives are two: the one to enable the Sovereign to reward merit, and to bestow grace on the deserving. The other to prevent a combination of our House, which might subvert the very existence of monarchy itself. I have not heard, my Lords, that any single duty is not expected from the Regent. If then he is to be charged with the whole duties of a King, he cannot, he must not be curtailed of the prerogatives -else a time may come when the question may be agitated in respect to the power of the crown. Might it not be afterwards said, what is taken from the crown is gained to the people? Think for a moment, my Lords, how the monarchy would stand if the power of making peers in the one House was taken from the Sove reign, while the other House, after prompting and urging us to such a step, was to solicit our assistance to rob the Sovereign of his other prerogative to dissolve them. Separate thus the idea of the powers of the King from the monarchy, and you will soon feel the deadly blow which has been aimed at this monarchy. My Lords, if it were possible, instead of weakening the powers of the Regent, I would say, they ought to be increased; for every govern ment, which is existing but upon a momentary event, must be unavoidably and naturally weaker than that which is in itself of a permanent nature. Necessity certainly justifies our taking measures to get the third estate faithfully and effici ently represented; but we are not autho rized to make an improper work-we are

1

learned lord thought his Majesty then in such a state of amendment, that his almost immediate recovery was certain. They must, however, in this measure legislate upon a principle applicable to the case, as far as they could derive any knowledge from experience. The difference between the terms of the duration of the Restrictions, was the question between them. He would be able to shew, that on just and consistent reasoning, the period which he proposed was the fittest for the duration of the Bill. By the experience they had with respect to the first malady and the intervening attacks, it was incontrovertible that the period which he proposed would afford an abundant interval for deciding as to the probable duration of the malady. They had upon that point the fruit of the study and science of men the most eminent in their profession. He alluded to the reports of the physicians who attended his Majesty. From these it appeared, that the royal patient had recovered three times from similar attacks, and that in the longest of these, the duration of the malady was not more than four months. He had given much attention to the subject. What period of time the intervening attacks lasted, they had no opportunity of knowing precisely; but with respect to the first, the records of parliament would shew that its duration did not exceed the period he had stated, and the physicians all spoke of it as the longest interval of the malady. No material variations were stated to have existed as to the nature of the malady at the different periods. But generally he must observe, that, if their lordships agreed in the propriety of Restrictions, and of a Limitation of such Restrictions, the Limitation ought to cease, at that period within which, according to the evidence of the physicians, they might have reason to expect either that his Majesty would recover, or, if the disorder should be protracted beyond the period, when that recovery would be he should not say hopeless for he trusted that would never be the case, but when the expectation of recovery would be materially diminished. Upon a review of all the circumstances of the case, and after the closest attention which he could pay to it, he had framed his Amendment so as to include the interval, in which according to all probability the recovery, if at all, would take place. The attack of the disorder with which his Majesty was afflicted in 1788 and 1789 did

not continue longer than four months. That fact was on the records of parliament. Of the two subsequent attacks he could not speak with the same certainty, but as far as could be collected from the evidence of the physicians, they did not last longer, or at least very little longer than the attack of the same disorder in 1788 and 1789. The noble lord then referred to particular parts of the examination; and laid particular stress on the opinions expressed by one of those gentlemen, not, he said, from any invidious preference as to skill or ability over the rest, but because from his more extensive experience in that particular species of malady, he had had superior means of forming his judgment. His lordship then briefly quoted some particular parts of the testimony of Dr. Reynolds, of Dr. Heberden, of sir Henry Halford, of Dr. Baillie, and of Dr. Willis: in all which they seemed either more or less agreed, he observed, in the conclusion he had referred to, with respect to the interval beyond which the probabilities of recovery were materially diminished, and the confident hopes of ultimate re-establishment wholly shaken. In the uncertainty of all medical science, with respect to this disorder, their only, or, at least, their chief guide in forming a judgment respecting its duration, must be experience. In the case of his Majesty they had happily the experience of his former recoveries from attacks of the same disorder; and in proposing to limit the duration of the restrictions to the 1st of August next, namely, about six months from the passing of the Bill, a period would be thus given of nine months from the 1st of November last, being a period of more than double the term of the duration of each of the former attacks of the same disorder with which his Majesty had been afflicted. He was above any mean and dishonourable attempt which may be made to throw a stigma, or any insinoations against any man for the sentiments he entertained, or the opinions he had formed on this part of the case-the pe riod which should be fixed for the duration of the Bill. These applied as well to the man who fixed twelve months, as to him who proposed six months for its duration. The only question at issue was, which of the two periods was the most likely, with a reference to the facts of the case, to me dical experience, and the principles of sound reasoning, for the probabilities of recovery, to occur in? Besides, the inter

[ocr errors]

val he proposed exceeded double the longest period that hitherto the malady had lasted. What he proposed was to substitute the month of August to the time fixed at present. There was one argument which he would wish to offer, which was, that the limit he proposed would not clash with the opinions of those who founded theirs on the idea that Parliament should be sitting at the period when the Bill expired, in order to afford an opportunity of further consideration and revision. In this view, he would observe, that any man who knew the state of public business, and the measures which it would be necessary to propose, must be sanguine indeed, if he supposed, that, under the administration of a Regency, which was not to commence before February, parliament could separate at least before it should be far advanced in July. This consideration would greatly tend to do away that objection. His lordship then moved, that the word "February" in this clause be omitted, for the purpose of introducing the word "August."

their opinion; but this he must most directly deny. Had they not satisfactory experience of the nature of his Majesty's illness and the probable period of its duration even during the first attack? Was not the evidence of that experience recorded upon the Journals of their lordships' House? Might not noble lords find there the opinions and judgment of Dr. Willis, one of the ablest and most experienced practitioners in that particular species of malady, and one of course upon whose authority they might most confidently rely? Had not that eminent physician on his examination declared, from the result of a most enlarged practice, that the duration of such disorders, as his Majesty was then afflicted with, was generally from three to fifteen or eighteen months; that he had known some cases of recovery still more speedy, even at from two to three months; that he had met with recoveries after two years; but that the average of the duration was, as he had at first stated, from three to fifteen or eighteen months. So far, then, from there being no experience on which to found an opinion, they had that of one of the most en

from three to fifteen or eighteen months was the common period. It was clear, then, that their lordships had upon their Journals, in the evidence of this physician, the grounds of the restrictions which were proposed in the year 1788, and of the duration, which had been fixed to the operation of the Bill imposing the restrictions. The actual clause in the Bill under consideration respecting the duration of the restrictions came so far recommended to him, because it had the sanction of this expe

Viscount Sidmouth observed, that he should on that occasion abstain from going generally into a discussion of the pro-lightened practitioners that ever lived, that priety or expediency of restrictions, as these were considerations not connected with the question immediately before their lordships. The restriction as to the peerage proceeded on the ground that his Majesty's indisposition would only be temporary; and the opinion of the physicians warranted the expectation: The question, both of the expediency of restrictions at all, and of the period of their duration, rested on the probability of the King's recovery; either because, on his restoration to health, they would necessarily cease;rience and authority; and it came further or because, if the improbability of his recovery became manifest, it might be unfit to continue them. His noble friend (lord Grenville) had alluded to the precedent of 1789. Would to God they had invariably adhered to that admirable pattern! He had told them that it was not until the third reading of the Bill, at that period, that the expediency of limiting the time to three years had been urged; and he had told them truly, that this was contended against on quite another ground from that urged against the limitation now proposed. But the clause introduced into the present Bill completely obviated the objection made to the corresponding clause in that of 1789. His noble friend had said, that they had then no ground on which to form

recommended to him, because, when its duration was to expire, it would have to come under the judgment of parliament to regulate the proceedings which should then be adopted. But his noble friend would assert, that in fair reasoning, and in just argument, the period of six months should be considered sufficiently long. Such an assertion could rest only on the supposition, either that the King must be recovered by the 1st of August; or, if not, that then his recovery must be so improbable, that the restrictions should then be taken off. These were points, into an examination of which, it could not but be painful to enter; but the view which he had taken of the general evidence of the physicians, enabled him to draw inferences

The Earl of Coventry expressed his determination to support the Amendment, fully impressed as he was with the consolation the country must feel in having a Prince, so distinguished for every great and virtuous quality, to take care of its interests during the continuance of the afflicting indisposition of his royal father.

from it, very different from those which | conscience and judgment, afforded him the seemed to be deduced from it by his noble most confident hopes; and this, in his mind, friend. In his mind, however, and he was the fair interpretation which should would thank God for it, there was never be put on that part of the evidence of the less room for difference of opinion than on physicians, on which his noble friend this point. But with this impression on seemed to lay so much stress. There was his mind, he could not well set forth and consequently in his opinion no ground for establish, with a minute reference to the Amendment moved by his noble friend, the evidence of the different physicians, and he felt therefore bound to give it his a detail which, he much feared, must opposition: but he must add at the same greatly fatigue the attention of their time that he felt much gratified at finding lordships; but it was necessary to go that even his noble friend had proposed into it at some length, in order to six months from the 1st of February rather shew that it did not countenance the than from the 1st of November last. Amendment moved for by his noble friend. The noble viscount then proceeded to read different parts of the examination of the physicians; and when noble lords read it, he hoped they would attend to the questions as well as to the answers respecting the point upon which his noble friend rested the whole of his observations. These observations tended to prove, that if the term of his Majesty's disorder was protracted beyond its limits on former occasions, the probability of his recovery would become fainter, if the symptoms continued to be the same. But his noble friend did not seem to take the symptoms into his consideration, but merely the time. The symptoms, however, the physicians never lost sight of. They repeated again and again, that if the symptoms continued the same, and the disorder was protracted beyond its duration on former occasions, then the probability of the King's recovery would be less favourable. Now, it afforded him the utmost satisfaction to know, that a material change had already taken place, and that an actual amendment was going on. The symptoms, therefore, did not remain the same; and therefore, the opinions of the physicians, if fairly stated, would not make out his noble friend's argument. It was on the favourable change in the symptoms, and not on the greater or less duration of the disease, that the physicians founded their opinions; for they observed, that that particular illness was very different at different times. They could not even conjecture what might be its duration; it was longer in 1788 than in 1804, which they could not account for. But he would repeat that it was upon the change in the symptoms, and not on the duration of the disorder, that they formed their opinions of the probability of recovery. This was a point to which he hoped their lordships would particularly attend. This it was which, in his

The Marquis of Stafford declared him self anxious to view the subject without any reference to the personal characters of the two illustrious personages affected by the proposed proceedings of parlia ment. Neither could he agree with one side of the House in the position, that no other parts of the royal prerogative should be transferred to the Regent than were actually necessary-nor with the other, when it was maintained that all the pre rogatives of royalty of right appertained to the appointment. In his opinion par liament possessed a discretionary power, to be regulated by the peculiar circum stances of the case and time, to which its attention was called. Viewing the subject thus, he saw very serious distinctions between the present period and the year 1789.-There was the difference of peace and war, together with that most import ant point, that the Sovereign not then arrived at his present advanced age. With respect to the objection agains giving the power of granting peerages founded on the ground of an improper exercise of it by the Regent, he must be allowed to say that such an apprehension, though a justifiable motive for caution in the case of a Regent either not allied, of remotely allied to the throne, could not apply to the son and heir of the Sovereign, upon whom the evils of such an unjusti fiable course, would, in the ordinary course of nature, react.

was not

The Lord Chancellor begged leave to state to their lordships, that with respect to the motion, then under their consider

But what, he would ask, was the nature of the crime imputed to him? Why nothing but this, that he had on these occasions acted in obedience to his Majesty's commands. What would the noble earl have thought of his conduct, if he had refused compliance; what kind of crime would that noble earl consider him guilty of, if he had dared to disobey the positive commands of the Sovereign ?

With respect to the accusation which had been made over and over again, as to his having held out a certain prospect of his Majesty's speedy recovery, he would now repeat, what he had stated as often as the charge was preferred, that he never held out any such hopes to the House. He had certainly stated from himself, as from a person ignorant of the medical profession, his confident expectations of his Majesty's recovery within a reasonable time. This he must observe was a species of disorder as to which he had little confidence in the opinions of physicians. If all the physicians on earth were to tell him that his Majesty's recovery would be speedy, he would not believe them. Upon the same grounds, were they to declare that his Majesty's recovery would not be speedy, he would be equally incredulous. The restoration of the Sovereign to the full exercise of his mental powers depended upon other causes than mere medical aid. In the language of the Scriptures, if it was the pleasure of God that "there should be light" in the royal mind," there will be light." He would, however, undertake to assert, that there was a most material amendment in his Majesty; and having said this, he would say no more at present, but that, upon his hopes of salvation, he believed what he had asserted to be true and right.

[ocr errors]

ation the question had not been fairly or acccurately stated. This he should endeavour to prove to the Committee in a subsequent part of his speech, the more immediate object, which he had in rising, being to set the noble baron (lord Gren ville) right upon a point, respecting which he had been himself (the Lord Chancellor) as well on that as on a former occasion greatly misrepresented. The noble baron, as well as the noble earl near him (Grey) had thought proper to put a construction upon his words, which he never meant them to bear. They concluded, that, because he stated it to be of no consequence personally to himself, whether the commencement of the Restrictions should be dated from the first of November last or from the present time, he was therefore impressed with a sanguine hope of his Majesty's speeedy recovery. Such an opinion, he must explicitly declare he never had given, though for some reason not clear to himself, his language had been much misrepresented on this point both in and out of that House. He would explain to their lordships what he really did say. There were many noble lords who now heard him, who knew how well he could justify himself against all the calumnies and accusations urged against him. There were many of them who knew that at the time when he was charged with criminality, he was only one of an administration which acted never against the opinion of the physicians; nay some of these noble lords who formed part of that administration, and acted with him then, sat now on the bench with the noble baron and noble earl, who accused him, and were, and must be convinced, that all he said in his own vindication was strictly true. So satisfied was he of the integrity of his motives and the correctness of his conduct, that he would not shrink from the As to the Amendment proposed by the most minute inquiry into every part of noble baron, the object of which was to those transactions. What he did on those limit the duration of the Restrictions to occasions he did in concurrence with, and the 1st of August, it arose out of the with the approbation of all his colleagues, principle that there were to be Restricand he would have acted as he did, though tions. Now as the noble baron admitted he had even differed from every man the principle, he could not comprehend among them. He would even go farther, why he contended with such unrelenting and say, that acting conscientiously, so positiveness for the limited duration 3 help him God, he could not have acted though he had declared a month ago, otherwise than he had done in the instance that nothing should induce him to vote particularly alluded to. Whilst he had for their continuance beyond six months the approbation of his own conscience he from that time. There appeared to him was ready to incur every risk and submit an irresistible argument against the ceasto all the responsibility which the faithfuling of the Restrictions at that period; and discharge of his duty might expose him to. it was this, that parliament would not be

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »