puted interests, and to guard against making a sacrifice disproportionate to the object to be at tained. He could not lose sight of the principle so well expressed by Mr. Burke," as we ought never to go to war for a profitable wrong, so we ought never to go to war for an unprofitable right." Upon the subject of the state of the circulation, his wish was to revert as much as possible to true principles, and keep the circulating medium within due bounds, but it did not follow that he held it to be indispensable that the bank should immediately resume cash payments. He avowed, however, that an impassable line of separation existed between him and the present ministry with respect to the design of making bank-notes a legal tender. With respect to the policy advisable in the affairs of the peninsula, he certainly was not prepared to say that it was expedient immediately to recal our troops, but he did not wish that we should proceed on that expensive scale of warfare without having some military authority as to the probable result. On this subject be dwelt at some length, for the purpose of shewing that the prospects in that quarter did not encourage any sanguine hopes. He concluded with what appeared to him the most momentous of all the objections against the present system of government, which was, the existence of an unseen and separate influence behind the throne. He said it was his rooted and unalterable principle not to accept of office without coming to an understanding with parliament for the abolition of this destructive influence. Lord Mulgrave denied the existence of the secret influence alluded to, and avowed the hose, tility of the ministers to the catho lic claims. Lord Moira, asserting that he came to the House undetermined how to vote, said that he was fixed by what had fallen from the last noble lord; for that, if nothing else but the removal of the present ministers could give the Roman catholics of Ireland any prospect of obtaining a redress of their grievances, such a change ought to be rapturously hailed by the whole country. The House then divided upon the amendment: Contents, present, 90; proxies, 75; total, 165, Non-contents, present, 43; proxies, 29; total, 72. ies, 29; total, 72. Majority for the amendment, 93. The original question was then put, and nega tived without a division. The parliamentary proceedings with respect to subsequent ne gociations for changes in the administration will come under consideration in the order of time. On March 20th, a message was sent to both Houses from the Prince Regent, respecting a provi sion for the Princesses. It stated, that pursuant to powers vested in his Majesty, the king, by letters patent bearing date the 2d of Feb. 1802, had been pleased to grant to their Royal Highnesses the Princesses Augusta-Sophia, Eliza beth, Mary, Sophia, and Amelia,, an annuity of 30,000l. to take effect from the demise of his Majesty; and his Royal Highness being desirous to provide for their establishment by an immediate grant, recommended the subject to the consideration of parliament. On March 23d, the message was taken taken into consideration in the House of Commons, the Chancellor of the Exchequer moving that the House should go into a committee of supply for the purpose. Mr. Creevey rose and objected to the Speaker's leaving the chair, wishing that the discussion should be deferred to some future day; and after some observations respecting the falling off of the consolidated fund, from which the required provision was intended to be paid, and on the late large sum granted to the Regent, from which he thought the additional charge might be defrayed; he concluded by moving the amendment of substituting "this day month," to the word "now." The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in reply, first shewed the groundlessness of the hon. gentle man's apprehensions concerning the consolidated fund; and then entered into some statements to prove that it was a mistake to suppose that there was a large disposable fund in the hands of the Prince, since he had taken upon himself the payment of the debts of the Princess of Wales, to the amount of 49,000l, and so large a part of his income as 70,000l. had been given to a commission under the seal of the duchy of Lancaster, for the liquidation of those debts which had been brought before the House. Mr. Whitbread concurred in the propriety of postponing the committee, on account of the contradictory statements made by gentlemen on both sides of the House from the very same papers, which proved that a further investigation was necessary. He, for one, bad understood that the Princesses were to live with the queen, and that it was on this account that the addition of 10,0001, had been made 10 her income, for it was difficult to imagine on what other account it could have been made. With respect to the payment of the Princess of Wales's debts by the Prince, he thought it one of the most complete juggles that was ever heard of, for a person to undertake to pay the debts of another to save the expense to the people, when he came to get his own debts paid by that same people. The motion for the amendment being put, and negatived without a division, the original question was carried, and the House resolved itself into a committee accordingly. The Chancellor of the Exchequer then made a statement of the proposed grant. By the acts which had enabled his Majes ty to grant an annuity to the princesses in cases of his demise, 30,000l. was to be divided among the Princesses then living; if their number should fall to three, each was to have 10,0001 ;: if to two, 20,001. was to be divided between them; and if only one remained; 12,000l. was to be allotted to her. The melancholy circumstance which had taken place in the Royal Family rendered it necessary that the condition of the Princesses should be considered as if the demise of the crown had actually occurred; and though they might still form a part of the domestic establishment at Windsor, he thought it of importance that they should be enabled to form separate establishments if they chose it. He would therefore propose, that to each of the four Princesses there should be granted the "the sum of goool. per annum, exclusive of 4000l. from the civil list: at the death of one of them, the survivors to have 10,000. each; and the same to continue when there should be two survivors only; the sole survivor of the whole to receive 12,0001. He concluded with moving an annuity of 36,000l. to be granted to the King for the purpose abovementioned. Mr. Tierney did not think the sum stated too much for separate establishments for the Princesses, but he did not see why it should be taken for granted that they would desire to cease forming one family as at present, in which case, the sum would be greater than necessary. His greatest objection, however, to the present vote, was the piece-meal way in which the additions to the civil list had been made, and which had imperceptibly arrived at an extent, which he stated, including the sum now demanded, to be of the enormous amount of 1,668,000). He thought that the 36,000l. proposed might be saved from the civil list by a fundamental inquiry into its several branches of expenditure, which could not; however, be effectually made while the right hon. gentleman told them that they might examine accounts, but should not examine persons. He had another observation 10 make, which was with respect to the provision for the Princess of Wales, which was comparatively inadequate to her station. She was the wife of the Regent, and as much the representative of the queen, as the Regent was of his Majesty. He then alluded to the separation be- and to the Chancellor of the Ex- This hint from the hon. gentle- Such, however, was probably by no means the wish of the gentlemen in opposition, as it would have been too inconsistent with their professed unwillingness to lay fresh burdens on the people. After more conversation on the subject, the resolution was put, and agreed to without a division. On the question for the third reading of the bill formed upon this resolution, April 17th, Mr. Tierney Tierney rose to state his objections, He could not easily comprehend why the present act was to take place immediately, when the for mer was intended to take place till the king's demise. It was not to be supposed that the amiable Princesses would abandon their Royal parents in their affliction to spend 36,000l. a year under another roof. He would put the que.tion directly to the right hon. gentle man, were the Princesses to have an establishment independent of the Queen? If so, what was to be, done with the saving that must in that case arise out of the civil list as to the general expenditure of the Queen's household? He also objected to the fund upon which these annuities were charged, which was not the hereditary revenue of the crown, but the consolidated fund, thereby giving no chance of a relief from this pressure on the public. The different items of the joint establishment for the Queen and her daughters amount ed to 184,000l. a year, and was not this sufficient in such times? After some other observations on the household establishment, which he denominated an ingenious mode of providing for those who bad the good fortune to be in favour with the minister, he moved the amend ment, instead of dating the bill from Feb. 18th last, to limit its taking effect to the king's demise. The Chancellor of the Exche quer made a reply to only a part of the objections of the last speaker, because many of his arguments were wholly inapplicable to the question before the house. With respect to that of the fund upon which the sum was to be charged, he thought the hon. gentleman could scarcely be serious, since it was notorious that the hereditary revenues of the crown had merged in the consolidated fund. He did not believe that the princesses had any intention of setting up a separate establishment, but it was no reason that they should be compelled to a residence at Windsor during the rest of their lives. Several members spoke in opposition to the bill; and the situation of the Princess of Wales was again brought into the debate. In re turn to some questions on the subject put by Mr. Whitbread, Mr. Secretary Ryder observed, that if he knew any thing of the feelings of the public on this topic, there was no part of the conduct of the hon. gentlemen opposite which had created more disgust and disapprobation than the manner in which. they had introduced this matter to the house. A division took place on Mr. Tierney's amendment, ayes, 35, noes, 101. The original clause was then agreed to, and the bill was passed. It met with no opposition in the House of Lords. CHAPTER CHAPTER VI. Motion on the State of the Nation-Marquis of Lansdown's Motion on the Orders in Council-Mr. Banks's Motion for a Bill for abolishing Sinecure Offices. Ο N February 27, Sir Thomas Turton introduced in the House of Commons one of those motions on the state of the nation which are common at the beginning of a session, but have generally no other effect than to give large scope to the members on each side for attack and defence of the measures adopted by government. The honourable baronet in his speech took a very extended view of the state of public affairs, foreign and domestic, both retrospectory and present, from which he inferred much past impolicy in the plans of ministers, and melancholy prospects from persevering in the same system. It is unnecessary here to repeat what has already constituted the narrative of history, or will be more fully shown in the parliamentary proceedings. He concluded by moving, "That this house will resolve itself into a committee of the whole house, to take into consideration the state of the nation." He was seconded by Mr. Tighe, who enlarged upon some of the topics introduced by the honourable mover, and said in the conclusion, that if at such a crisis ministers refused the committee, it must be said that they bad brought the VOL. LIV. country into such a situation, that they were afraid of looking on the evil, and incapable of supplying a remedy. DOW Mr. Robinson rose to oppose the motion. He said that such an inquiry as the house was called to enter upon, embraced not only questions which had been the subject of past, but many that were to form that of future discussions, of which he gave instances. He proceeded to justify the war policy pursued by the ministers, and recommended perseverance in the contest. Mr. Lamb supported the motion, and alluded to the loss the ministry had sustained by the secession of the Marquis of Wellesley, which he considered as rather aggravated by the accession of Lord Castlereagh. Mr. M. Montague, in a speech which seemed to excite much diversion in the house, levelled many sarcasms against the opposition, and alluded personally to the honourable member for Bedford. This notice called up Mr. Whitbread, who retorted by an animated attack upon the administration, and a defence of Lords Grey and Grenville for refusing to coalesce with [E] them. |