without discovering errors and misrepresentations; but still the consciousness of rectitude and integrity was sufficient to sustain him against any consequences that might affect him from any quarter. by descending into the grave, to no other person should he acknowledge himself to be a subject. Before he sat down, he must make his solemn protest against the principle upon which the proposed distribution of the patronage of the King's Household was argued. The principle was, that the government of the country could not be carried on, except upon a supposition the most unconstitutional, the most degrading, and he would even say, the most jacobinical that was ever surmised by the most inveterate enemies of the constitution. What! were their Lordships to be told that no Master of the Horse, no Groom of the Stole, no Lord Steward of the Household, had the least consideration for the country; but that his vote in that House would be controuled and directed by those to whom they severally owed their respective appointments? If this be the case, said his lordship, I have got at the end of my life into such company as I was never placed in at the beginning of it. Was he to act upon the supposition, that the noble persons he saw around him paid no attention to the interests of their country? If so, he believed he must abstract himself from all of them, and act for himself. But he could not believe that the noble persons about him, the, descendants of those whose virtues and talents adorned the history of this great country, could be influenced by the vile motives which were ascribed to them. It had been significantly put to him, with reference to the state of his Majesty's health, whether he would supersede a commission of lunacy against the opinion of physicians. He had often done so, and perhaps he might have been wrong in so doing; but he had acted upon his conscience, as he should always do in such cases. With respect to the clause of the Bill now under consideration, he would say, using an expression he had employed in a former debate, and which he took from one well skilled in the science of human nature, he did not know how to disquantity the train of the King. He was asked what he would do in the Court of Chancery, if the present clause, and the Resolution upon which it was founded, came before him? He would answer, that the Resolution was uncertain, and that the court would have nothing to do with it. Now, however, he would ask a question in his turn, and it was this: Were there any two of the noble lords on the other side of the House, who were agreed as to what should be done upon the original Resolution? He had heard of several plans, four or five at least, all of which were at variance. If he were asked for his plan, he would say, that it was his sincere opinion that the whole of the Household ought to be given to her Majesty. He then spoke with the same tender regard to conscience that he would if he were acting in a judicial capacity. He would tell that House, he would tell every man who heard him, he would tell all his Majesty's subjects, that the last thing he would do in the court in which he sat would be to remove from any man labouring under an affliction, such as had unhappily fallen upon his Majesty, those comforts becoming his condition, and to which he had been accustomed. For myself, said the noble lord, with great fervour and feeling, let me but see my Sovereign well, and then let me depart in peace. He could not onjection that the Prince, who was to sucthis afflicting occasion take his heart out ceed him in time, should be limited in his of his breast, and forget that his most gra- powers. The King, whatever his mental eious master was a man. Let those who state might be, must be King until he decould do so, do it. He was not made of scends into the grave. He could never such impenetrable stuff: he had neither discharge it from his recollection, that the the nerve nor the apathy requisite for such Committee had two objects to accomplish an act of stern and unrelenting duty.they had to provide both for the stabiUntil his Majesty should vacate his throne lity and security of the government, and As to the Amendment proposed by the noble baron, he entirely disapproved of it. So much so, indeed, that if every one of their Lordships were to go below the bar to vote for it, he would feel it the proudest day of his life to stand alone, and record his loyalty to his Sovereign by voting against it. He would put it to their Lordships as men, whether they could consent to an arrangement so humiliating to the Sovereign as that which would result from the Amendment proposed? As to restriction it should be recollected, that the King of this country was a limited monarch; and there could be no great ob for the safe and effectual resumption of the | to the perplexity complained of by the royal functions on the part of his Majesty, noble lord, he thought the course to be whenever his recovery should be fully as pursued by the noble lord, in either case, certained. The noble earl (Grey) had to be according to his own shewing suffici enlarged on the importance of the former, ently obvious. If the noble lord was of and in this respect he coincided with him, opinion that these words ought to stand but he must contend, that in securing his part of the clause, he in that case would Majesty's restoration to his government, vote against the amendment: and on the they were providing in the most effectual question that these words remain, he manner for the true interests and the ulti-would of course say Content; but if he mate security of the government. Their Lordships, therefore, instead of diminishing the splendour that surrounds his Majesty, should preserve it in all its plenitude. He remembered, and with a satisfaction which would only terminate with his life, the part he had taken in the discussions of 1789. He would now act upon the same principles. His conduct upon that occasion had obtained him the approbation of his gracious Master, as he trusted his conduct at the present crisis also would. He had no reason to change the opinion which he had given in a former debate respecting his Sovereign's recovery. Far from it: for, in addition to what he then said, he had now the satisfaction of stating to the House, that the prospect of his Majesty's recovery was greatly increased by the view which was taken of his case, and the actual state in which he was. The noble and learned lord declared, that he was not ambitious of continuing in place, but that he was incapable of entertaining any interested views at such a period as the present; and concluded a speech, which was delivered throughout with peculiar solemnity of manner, by repeating his regard and veneration for his Majesty, and his intention to oppose the Amendment. The Earl of Clancarty said, that if the House came to a division on the noble marquis's proposition, he would give his vote for the omission of the clause; but he should also feel it his duty to vote against the Amendment which the noble marquis had notified his intention of moving, if his first proposition were acceded to; and should also think it necessary to propose an Amendment himself in lieu thereof. Lord Grenville said, that he should consider the question then before their lordships not so much in reference to the proposed Amendment, as to the immediate consideration whether the words now in the clause shall or shall not stand part of that clause. With respect to that part of the question he felt no difficulty, and as thought as he understood the noble lord to think, that those words ought not to remain, he, on the question being put that these words stand part of the clause, will say, Not-content. With respect to the allusion made by the noble and learned lord on the Woolsack, to the part taken by him (Lord Grenville) at the period of 1788, he could assure that noble lord, that that moment had not yet arrived, and he believed never would arrive, in which he should, in the slightest degree, regret the part taken by him on that memorable occasion. The sentiments he then had entertained on the subject of the household governed him still. He then said what he now repeated, that they should surround the sick bed of Majesty with dignity; every possible provision should be made to secure to the royal person every comfort and convenience. The feelings which had in this respect operated upon his judgment at that period, he should be sorry that twenty-two years could have blunted; but when he formerly voted for vesting the Household in the Queen, he did it on the principle that her Majesty should be amply provided with the means of enforcing and upholding the authority to be vested in her-but there was one essential point of difference between the Bill then brought into parliament, and that now before their lordships-that in the former, such means were provided for the Queen; but in the present, all such means were withheld from her. If a lord of the bed-chamber failed in the due discharge of his duty-should he even be guilty of negligence or indignity towards his Majesty, the Queen would have no power either of removing him, or supplying his place. He found the same restrictions extended to the exercise of her power, whether applied to the first lord of the Household, or to the lowest menial attendant on his Majesty-so much then for the pathetic appeals with which their lordships had been so vehemently assailed upon the plausible ground of consulting the personal convenience of his Majesty There were, however, other considerations, and amongst them, that was not least important which respected the Addresses sent by both Houses to the Prince of Wales, and to the Queen. Those noble lords who thought that the subsequent arrangements provided for by the Bill, with respect to the Household, did amount to a breach of faith with either the Prince or the Queen, could not be expected to vote in support of those arrangements, and as for those who had supported the measure of 1788, they could not therefore be called upon to support the Bill now before the House, especially in those points in which it was not only dissimilar to the former, but repugnant and contradictory to it; the regulations provided in each, respecting the civil list, were materially and essentially different. In the Bill of 1788, a clause was inserted, expressly providing that the quarterly expenditure during the King's illness, should not exceed the amount of the expence of the former quarters previous to the illness of his Majesty, but in the present Bill he was not aware of any adequate provision for due responsibility in the expenditure of this part of the public money. He should say no more at present upon the Bill itself, but content himself with stating it as his opinion, that the clause now before their Lordships, was so inconsistent with their former Resolutions upon which they had grounded their Address to the Queen, and to the Prince, that he should feel it to be his duty to vote that the clause shall not stand part of the Bill. The Lord Chancellor begged leave to be distinctly understood as not absolutely approving of the present clause. He did not approve of taking any part of the Household from the Queen. He would have left the whole of the Household with her Majesty. The Marquis of Lansdowne here rose, and expressed a hope, from what had just fallen from the noble and learned lord, that he would vote for the Amendment. The Lord Chancellor replied, that though he did not altogether approve of the original clause, it did not follow that he might not more strongly disapprove of what was proposed by the noble marquis to be substituted in its place. The Marquis of Lansdowne said, that he understood the learned lord to disapprove of the clause, and therefore concluded that he would vote that said clause should not stand part of that Bill. The Lord Chancellor said that the noble lord had again misunderstood him. He had thought in the first instance that the Household should be left with the Queen, parliament had told him he was wrong in that opinion; and he now was for leav ing with her Majesty as much of the Household as the House would agree to leave her, since they would not leave the whole of it to her Majesty's controul. The Earl of Clancarty said, that as there were noble lords who disapproved both of the Clause and the Amendment, they might vote against the Clause, provided the pos session of the House was not pre-occupied by an Amendment. Lord Redesdale suggested, that that object might be in some measure answered, if the words proposed to stand part of the clause should be put in the following form, that those words be here inserted. This motion, if rejected, would afterwards leave the clause open to be corrected by the House. Earl Stanhope said, that from the high opinion which he entertained of a noble lord (Grenville) who opposed the Amendment, and his wish, that he should always think in the same manner as his lordship, and that his lordship should think in the same manner with himself, he was very sorry that he should be deprived of his vote this evening; but he hoped that when the numbers came to be reckoned they would be able to do without him. Lord Sidmouth said, that all the arguments which he had heard that night in favour of the Amendment, resolved into the deviation of the Bill from the Resolutions. He wanted to know what was intended to be conveyed to the understanding of the House, when that Resolution was adopted. The noble lords who persisted in maintaining this deviation could not agree in the sense to be given to the Resolution. The meaning which the noble earl (Grey) attached to it, was different from that entertained by the noble marquis (Lansdowne). It was said that there had been a breach of faith with this and with the other House. There had been no such breach of faith. It was impossible to say that a Resolution had not been adhered to, which was not specific, and which admitted of the utmost latitude of interpretation. He wished that the proceedings of 1788 had been closely followed. Indeed all the inconveniencies which had arisen in the progress of the present measure, had their origin in the departure had the merit of it. He should therefore give his vote for the rejection of the noble marquis's Amendment. The question being then loudly called for, the Committee divided on the moThat the words of the original Clause should stand part of the Bill; when the numbers wereContents Not-Contents Majerity against the Clause 96 108 12 The Committee, after some discussion as to the manner of putting the motion, proceeded to divide on the Amendment moved by the marquis of Lansdowne, when the numbers wereContents Not-Contents 107 98 9 from the precedent of 1788. He thought that any division of the Household was improper. He was willing that all necessary and becoming splendour should be given to the Regent; but when he wished this, he could not give his consent to stription, the King of his dignity. He wished that the Regent should be armed with all the ordinary power of the government; but he did not wish that all power should be taken from that illustrious person to whom the care of the sovereign was entrusted. He agreed, however in the propriety of depriving the Queen of the power of removal, that every objection of a constitutional nature might be obviated. It had been stated by a noble baron, that if you take away the power of removal, you subject your sovereign to the chance of indecent treatment from persons whom you have no power over. He could not see the force of this objection. If any persons were so far to forget themselves as to behave irreverently or indecently in the presence of his Majesty, their attendance might be dispensed with, although a removal should not take place. It was impossible to conceive that any such persons would have the assurance to force their attendance on his Majesty contrary to the wishes of the person who had the direction of him. They were to recollect that the sovereign still existed in his political capacity; and if it was not right, therefore, to take away from him any power but such as was necessary for carrying on the government, so, in like manner, it was not right to take away any of the dignity due to the sovereign. The additional sum which might be found necessary for the splendour of the Regent, was so inconsiderable, that it could be no object to the nation; its amount would not equal the fourth part of the expence which had been laid out in improving their lordships' House-and would they hesitate to bestow this sum, and thus avoid Earl Grey observed, that as it was a fund the shame and disgrace of bereaving their intended for the purpose of protecting the sovereign of his proper splendour and arts, and giving encouragement to all dignity? He wished to follow the prece- those improvements which had conferred dent of 1788 closely, and to avoid making such honour and advantage on the coun→ the contrast between 1788 and 1811 dis- try, it should be wholly under the illus graceful to the latter. What had twenty-trious person placed at the head of the two years done, to lower the sovereign in executive government. the eyes of the country? He entreated their lordships to spare their sovereign the possibility of feeling a disappointment at their proceedings on his recovery; and to avoid departure from a precedent which did immortal honour to the person who VOL. XVIIL Majority for the Amendment When strangers were re-admitted, we found earl Grey animadverting on the Clause which provides for the appointment of a Council to assist the Queen. The noble earl considered it a most extravagant supposition to presume, as that Clause did presume, that persons would be appointed by the Regent, to fill the most dignified situations in the country, who could feel other interests, than those prescribed by their duties. The Clause itself contained a most insidious reflection. It seemed to assume, indeed it was admitted by the noble lords opposite, that the House should place every impediment in the way of those to whom the Regent might extend his confidence. If that was the principle, it was better at once to introduce a Clause disqualifying such persons from holding any place of trust under the government. Lord Stanhope gave notice of his intention to move an Amendment on this Clauses when the Report should be brought up. On the Clause being read, relative to the disposition of the Privy Purse, The Earl of Liverpool stated, that as it was a fund, as well for private beneficence as for public bounty, it should be strictly applied to those purposes to which it was presumed the Sovereign would himself apply it. 3 U any Hawke Ashburton Thurlow Ossory The Earl of Moira strongly reprobated | Stawell the improper exposure of this fund: a fund Sundridge applied to the purposes of beneficence, the great merit of which so frequently consisted in the secrecy with which such favours were dispensed. It was impossible that any thing more painful to the feelings of a revered Sovereign, could occur, than to know that his application of such a fund had undergone a parliamentary investigation. He could not conceive thing more painful to the feelings of his illustrious heir, than to have its disposal offered to him. In that view he differed from his noble friend (earl Grey.) The Queen, from every consideration, was the person to whom its disposition should be transferred; of all others she was best fitted to be trusted with those amiable secrets, which such an examination must disclose. Satisfied he was that bis royal highness the prince of Wales would never have consented to accept it. Auckland Dundas De Dunstanville Carysfort Berwick Hutchinson Charlemont Kingston Conyngham BISHOPS. Exeter Rochester List of the Minority. DUKE. MARQUISSES. The other Clauses were then read pro Beaufort List of the Majority on the Amendment of the Salisbury Abercorn EARLS. BARONS Tynedale Ashburnham Haye Brownlow Montague Bridgewater Northampton Westmoreland Winchelsea Chesterfield Cambridge Radnor Kenyon Sandwich Gloucester Grosvenor Grimstone Rochefort Abingdon Douglas Mulgrave Dartmouth Bedford Aylesford Selsey Devonshire Macclesfield Pomfret Winchester Graham Harcourt MARQUISSES. Rosslyn Nelson Grey VISCOUNTS. Hampden BARONS. Audley Effingham Buckinghamshire Bathurst Stewart, (Moray) Stewart, (Galloway) St. Helens Arden Beauchamp De Clifford Liverpool Wilton Hastings Powis St. John Spencer (of Worm Manvers Lonsdale leighton) Clifton Bristol Dutton VISCOUNTS. Caithness Hume Glasgow |