1 consider what epithets are due to the companions, and " protectors" of women whose characters are so " infamous"; and who is the superior in infamy, the adulterer or the adultress? Comparisons are odious, and, perhaps, would be peculiarly so respecting certain connections. The "infamous" vice of adultery, which involves in it so many other vices, is, to the disgrace of the British nation, perpetually on the increase, and more particularly in the higher circles. No less than six divorce bills have been read in parliament within the last ten days; and another may be shortly expected, as sentence of divorce was confirmed on Wednesday last in Doctor's Commons, at the suit of the Rev. J. F. Tonyn, against Anna Tonyn his wife, for adultery committed with the Rev. Mr. Lynam, his curate, against whom he had before obtained a verdict with damages. The lines of Cowper have been not unjustly applied in reference to such occurrences. "Prostitution elbows us aside "In all our crouded streets, and Senates seem "Than to release the adultress from her bond. The sad effects of adulterous connections, as they have been displayed in the course of the Inquiry before the House of Commons, call loudly on the higher ranks seriously to reflect on their conduct. The Bishop of London, in his well known poem on " Death" (written, however, long before he was made a bishop) remarks, that, with respect to murder, " princes are privileged"; but we hope, if "privi"leged" to break the 6th. commandment, they are not "privileged" to break the 7th. It is earnestly to be wished that some of our bishops, or court preachers, would imitate the faithfulness of Archbishop Cranmer, who presented to that lascivious tyrant, HENRY VIII. a New Testament with this label on the cover-Whoremongers and Adulterers God will judge! The sad consequences of the vices of the old French court are too well known; and afford a striking illustration of the remarks of that bold and energetic court preacher Dr. South, which we wish were engraven on the heart of every prince, and in short, of every man in a public station. With those remarks we conclude this melancholy subject. "The wicked, vicious, and scandalous examples of persons in “place and power, are strong temptations to sin. For amongst "the prime motives of human actions, next to laws, most reckon "examples, and some place examples above them; for although "there may be a greater authority in laws, yet there is a greater "force, because a greater suitableness, in examples; and then "experience shews, that it is not so much what commands, as what "agrees, which gains upon the affections; and the affections, we "all know, are the grand springs and principles of action. So "that if a Prince, for instance, gives himself up to lewdness and "uncleanness, there is no doubt but whoring will soon come into "fashion, and that he will quickly find more by a great many to "follow him in his lusts, than to obey him in his laws! If a Prince "be a breaker of his word, his oath, or his solemn promise, it may prove a shrewd temptation to others to do the like by him. And "then he may thank his own example, if he suffers by the imita"tion. If a clergyman be noted for sensuality, covetousness, or ambition, he may preach his heart out in behalf of the contrary "virtues, and all to no purpose; for still his example will be a "stonger temptation to the sin, than his doctrine can be an enforce"ment of the duty. 66 "The sins of Princes and Priests are of a spreading, and a reigning contagion; and though naturally they are no more "than the acts of particular persons, yet virtually and consequently, they are often the sins of a whole community. And "if so, good God! What huge heaps of foul guilt must lie at such "sinners doors! " "For every person of note, power, and place, living in an open "violation of any one of God's laws, holds up a flag of defiance against heaven, and calls in all about him, to fight under his "lewd banner against God, and bis express commands; and so, "(as it were), by a kind of homage and obedience, to be as "vile and wicked as himself: and when it comes to this, then all "the villanies which were committed by others in the strength and encouragement of his devilish example, will be so personally charged upon his account, and as a just debt exacted of him to "the utmost farthing!"* The important subject of the Orders in Council as they relate to America, was brought forward by Lord GRENVILLE in the House of Lords on the 17th. His lordship, after proving their injustice and impolicy, moved their repeal. The arguments, if such they may be termed on the side of ministers turned on the point" That "when once a principle of action was laid down it ought not lightly "to be renounced." Lord MELVILLE supported his old friends. Lord GRENVILLE'S motion was rejected by a majority of 115 to 70. In the Commons a long debate took place on Tuesday the 21st, on a motion of Lord HENRY PETTY's respecting the Convention of Ciutra. The question, however, was of little national interest, or we should rejoice at the increased numbers of the minority, which were ;-For the motion 153.-Against it 203. Harlow, Feb. 27. • South's Sermons, Vol. VI, p. 313-153 B. F. POLITICAL REVIEW. No. XXVII.] FOR MARCH, 1809. REVIEW OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS. [Vol. V. PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS. Charges brought against the Duke of York.-The important investigations which have so long engrossed the attention of the House of Commons, and the public at large, are at length terminated; that is, so far as they relate to the charges brought forward by Mr. WARDLE; for notice of some farther proceedings, arising out of the evidence recently laid before the house, has been given by Lord FOLKESTONE. The long and minute examinations which arrested the attention of the house, were succeeded by debates of the unparalleled duration of six successive days, before the first division took place; these were followed by debates of two days duration, and farther divisions, when the RESIGNATION OF HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF, suspended all farther proceedings. Almost the whole of our Register for the present mouth has been devoted to the evidence, and the debates on this most interesting subject: the speeches of Mr. WARDLE, Mr. WHITBREAD, and the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, we particularly recommend to the attention of our readers, as displaying an uncommon exertion of talent on different sides of the question. Several excellent speeches, and amongst others, those of Lord FOLKESSTONE, Sir FRANCIS BURDETT, and Mr. WILBERFORCE, we are obliged to defer till our next. The evidence and the debates on this occasion, ought by no means to be confined to the perishing journals of the day; the substance ought not to be locked up in large volumes from the mass of the people; its importance renders the wide circulation absolutely necessary; it will form an essential part in the history of Great Britain, and the consequences will prove most interesting to the people, who must by the scenes which have been disclosed, and by the votes of the House of Com mons, be deeply impressed with the consideration of the imperious necessity of a REFORM OF PARLIAMENT, as the grand preliminary, and the only solid security for REFORM in the various departments of government, so long tainted by that deeply rooted and wide spreading corruption, which threatens the very existence of our F VOL. V. MORALS, our RELIGION, our LIBERTIES, and our CONSTITU TION: OUR CONSTITUTION, not in its present violated state, but as it was established at the GLORIOUS REVOLUTION: that Constitution which is the birth, right of Britons, and which it is equally their duty and their privilege to demand from their rulers, with one united voice, firmly, and without delay! The House of Commons appear to have entertained various opinions on this important subject, and to have divided accordingly. To the conduct of the principal parties, we have now to request the attention of our readers. The firm, dignified, and temperate conduct of the original author of the Charges, Mr. WARDLE, has at length not only subdued the prejudices, but excited the admiration of gentlemen of opposite opinions on the main subject of discussion. When he first introduced the charges to the notice of the House, some of the members expressed their marked disapprobation of his conduct; threats were thrown out; "Publicity" was demanded by the ministerial side in particular. Mr. Secretary CANNING confidently declared, that " In"famy must rest on the head of the accuser or the accused;" and by his exultation" that the day of complete exculpation of the Com“mander in Chief was at hand," every one understood on whose head the right hon. secretary intended the " infamy should rest." Mr. SHERIDAN, who, during the various divisions, has either voted with the majority, or absented himself, thought proper to warn the hon. mover from being connected with those whom he (Mr. S.) slandered by styling them" a gang of conspirators against the Com"mander in chief." Mr. YORKE expressed his "firm belief that "there existed a conspiracy of the most atrocious and diabolical "kind against his royal highness, founded on the jacobinical spirit "which appeared at the commencement of the French Revolution, "and whose object was nothing less than to write down all the es"tablishments of the country." Mr. WHITBREAD himself seemed staggered at the boldness of Mr. WARDLE, and suggested to him some cautionary advice. But the honourable accuser of the. Commander in Chief, conscious of the purity of his motives, and feeling the firmness of his ground, calmly persevered. It now turns out, that so far from there having been any "conspiracy" on the part of the witnesses against the royal duke, they were not even volunteers on the occasion; and that they were first applied to by Mr. WARDLE, who had heard from other quarters of the practices complained of. Several gentlemen on different sides of the house, and Mr. WILBERFORCE in particular, have, with that candour which is the characteristic of minds open to conviction, frankly acknowledged their mistaken prejudices, and confessed the conclusiveness of that evidence they thought it impossible to produce. Never was there an instance of a person introducing charges to the House of Commons with a less encouraging prospect of success; never were charges more completely proved; and when we consider their importance, and the effects which we most ardently hope will be the result, we cannot but add, that there never was a man who had a greater right than Mr.Wardle to the thanks of the senate, and the people throughout the empire; and although there may not be senatorial patriotism sufficient to produce the former, we hope there is still remaining a sufficient portion of the old British spirit to produce the latter. The speech of Mr. WARDLE on summing up the evidence is distinguished, not so much for its eloquence, as, for what is still better, its plainness and perspicuity; and notwithstanding the decision of the House of Commons, we believe with Mr. WHITBREAD, that 999 of 1000 persons out of that house, are convinced that Mr. WARDLE has completely proved his charges, and that he was fully justified in moving an address to his Majesty, representing-" That "the abuses could not have prevailed to the extent in which they "had been proved to exist, without the knowledge of the Comman"der in Chief: and that even, if upon any principle of reason, or "probability, it could be presumed, that abuses so various and so "long continued, could, in fact, have prevailed without his know"ledge, such a presumption in his favour would not warrant the conclusion, that the command of the army could, with safety, or ought in prudence, to be continued in his hands. . . . That on "these grounds and principles, his Majesty's faithful Commons, "submit their opinion to his Majesty's gracious consideration"That his royal highness the Duke of York ought to be deprived "of the command of the army." Although the address moved by Mr. WARDLE, was negatived by the great majority of 364 to 123, many of those who voted against the address, agreed in the grand object aimed at by its author,the removal of the Duke of York from office. Mr. BANKES, one of the most independent members on the ministerial side of the house, moved an amendment declaring-" That the house had insti"tuted the most diligent examination into the grounds of the al"ledged charges; and that they felt the deepest concern that the re“sult of that inquiry was such as to convince them that such corrup"tion and abuses had prevailed....That they had at the same time great satisfaction in being enabled to declare, that there appeared "to be no ground for charging the Commander in Chief with per"sonal corruption; but whilst they acknowledged the good conse"quences resulting to the army from the regulations he had intro"duced, they still felt themselves obliged to express their opinion "that such abuses could not have prevailed to the extent they had |