Sidebilder
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]
[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 2, 1811. [Price 15

He who contends for Freedom,

"Can ne'er be justly deem'd his Sovereign's foe;

"No, 'tis the wretch that tempts him to subvert it,
"The soothing slave, the Traitor in the bosom,
"Who best deserves that name; he is the wor
"That eats out all the happiness of kingdoms "THOMSON.

SUMMARY OF POLITICS.

THE REGENCY.Look at the motto, English reader! Look at the motto! It contains a truth, important at all times to be borne in mind, but especially at the present time, and as connected with the conduct, and the apparent views, and expectations of public men.-In my last Number, (p. 1313 of Vol. XVIII) I took a view of the language and sentiments of the notoriously venal prints with regard to a prominent feature in the intended limitations to the powers of the Regent; and, I think, I left no ground at all for doubt as to the real object of withholding the Household and Privy Purse (for, I have seen no exception with regard to the latter) from the Prince; nor do I think that I left any doubt as to the impropriety of such a measure. I noticed, and, I think, I refuted, the revived insinuations gainst his Royal Highness with regard to his debts and pecuniary embarrassments, which, as I there observed, ought never to have existed, and which did not arise from extravagant expenditure, but from his having had withheld from him that which was his due as much as the rents of the Duke of Northumberland, or the Duke of Bedford, is the due of either of them; and, I flatter myself that I left no doubt at all with regard to the malignity of the motives, which dictated the revival of those insinuations.I shewed, too, that those who had been, and still were, most strenuous in their endeavours to obtain a reform of abuses; those who were most desirous to see corruption torn from its seat, had uniformly reprobated the means that had been used to keep the Prince of Wales in the back-ground, to misrepresent him, to whisper away his character, and to deprive him of all weight and consequence.Upon this last topic, which is one of the greatest interest to both Prince and people, I think it necessary to say something more, especially after what has

[2

appeared in the venal prints within the last week.The COURIER, which seems to be the chosen channel of attack and insinuation against the Prince of Wales, has represented, of late, that is to say, since it was announced that Mr. Perceval had been refused an interview by the Prince; since that time the COURIER has been extremely industrious to find out reasons for reviving the limitations of 1788; and amongst these reasons, is, the hopes and expectations in the Prince, which appear to be entertained by those, whom this venal gentleman chooses to call the "Burdett gang;" that is to say, all those (four fifths of the people of England) who wish for a reform of abuses, and, as the effectual means of accompli hing this, for a reform of the Commons' House of Parliament.— -The words of the venal man are these:--"When it is considered, that "the gang of Burdett, Cobbett, & Co.

[ocr errors]

seem to expect something in their way "from an unlimited Regent, we agree "that the circumstances have changed, "but the change is in favour of the necessity "of restrictions"---So, then, the neces sity of restrictions, in the view of the venal and corrupt, is increased by the circumstance, that those ho are for a reform of abuses have expressed their expectations, or seem to expect, something in thear "way" from an unfettered Regency. What a compliment to the Prince! What an argument, with the people. constitutionally to oppose the intended limitatiens!Here the views of the corrupt, here the views of those vile men who deal in and fatten upon corruption, here the views of the people's enemies, are completely exposed. For, though they do not, in so many words, say, that they wish the Frince's powers to be limited, lest he should promote a reform of abuses and corruptions; though they do not directly say, that they wish to abridge his power, to shackle and to hamper him, lest he should use that power for the purpose

B

every

is, that he would be likely to grant as far as in him lay, those claims, which have so long been put forward by the Catholics of Ireland. The COURIER of the 29th of last month dwells very emphatically upon this point; and, as a proof of the justness of its suspicions, cites what has recently been said in Ireland with regard to the views of his Royal Highness respecting what is called the Catholic Question.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

of giving the people a Reform of Parliament, and effect the great purpose of putting an end to seat-selling, and all its train of jobs and wickedness and national degradation and ruin; though they do not, in so many distinct words say, that this is one of their strong reasons in favour of limitations, they bere clearly discover that such, in fact, is one of those reasons, and, I should not be at all surprised, if The Prince of Wales's name is made this was the very strongest of the reasons, for which they wish for limita- "use of at these Meetings in a way which tions.If, then, it be true, that you "should be known to the whole empire. ought to avoid that which your enemy "His word is asserted to be solemnly pledged wishes you to do, the people must "to accede to the Catholic claims. We see, that they ought, by all the con- "quote the Speech of Mr. O'Connell, stitutional means in their power, to shew," "His Royal Highness's sentiments on that they are opposed to such limitations; "this subject were neither concealed nor and, to give his Royal Highness a proof" doubtful. He had communicated them, of their confidence in him. If he, for a" as became him, unequivocally and withyear, or for whatever length of time, be "out disguise, amongst others, to Cathorestrained, either directly or indirectly," lics of rank and respectability. We from adopting such measures as he would," therefore do not proceed on precarious if possessing full powers, be disposed to "grounds, when we announce emancipaadopt, the people can, in reason, expect" tion as at hand. The word of the Prince nothing in the way of that change of system," is pledged; we require not, neither could which disinterested man, that I have "we have, any more certain guarantee. ever heard of, has long been wishing for. "We know that his understanding, clear, To act freely, the Regent, like other men, "nanly, and unimpaired, cannot be immust be free. He may be, and I hope and posed on, nor his conscience surprised believe, he would be, disposed to gratify" by any idle or unfounded scruple."-fully all the just wishes of the people, in "Meaning, we suppose, by this last senthe whole of the kingdom; but if he "tence, to set the Prince's intellects in opbe hampered with restrictions, how is "position to and above that of his venerable he to do any thing which would be Father. If the sentiments of his Royal likely to give any satisfaction at all? For, " Highness be misunderstood by the Cathough he would not, in direct terms, be "tholics, he will, no doubt, feel it necessary prohibited from giving his assent to a mea- "to state the fact without loss of time." sure for the reform of Parliament; for in- Here, again, it is not openly avowed, that one stance, yet, if by means of limitations, object of the limitations would be to prevent such a weight of influence was opposed to his Royal Highness from assenting to any him as to render it impossible for him to measure for the relief of the Irish Catho carry such a measure, the effect would be lics; this is not openly avowed, but that the same; and he would be compelled to these venal men would wish that object to act upon the system, though, at the same be accomplished by the limitations, there time, he might protest against it. What can, after the reading of this paragraph, the effects of such a state of things would be no doubt at all.What, then, this be, the mind of man cannot conjecture. impudent son of venality, calls upon The people, therefore, at a time like this, Prince to deny that he wishes to see the when they have more at stake than they Catholics relieved! He presumes, or has, ever had before, should let their voice be at least, the impudence to affect to presume, heard, in a legal and constitutional way; that it is an offence in the Prince to wish aud, should prove to his Royal Highness, for such a measure, and especially to bave that they are willing to confide in his wis- pledged his word for it, if it came within dom and justice, in spite of all the insinua- his power; and, this, too, observe, whils tions that the venal and corrupt are, in it is well known that Mr. Pitt and his col their divers sorts of publications, pouring leagues gave the same pledge, in words as forth against him. Another of the explicit as men could give any pledge. reasons of these venal men against putting Let us hope, that the difference between fall powers into the hands of the Prince, them and the Prince would be, that his

the

render the army unnecessary by doing away the discontents of the people of Ireland; and yet, would these venal men fain persuade us, that the Prince's known disposition to adopt measures calculated to remove those discontents is one reason why he should not be entrusted with the powers belonging to a King of the United Kingdom! He ought not, according to them, to be entrusted with kingly powers, because he would, in this instance, at least, adopt measures likely to restore harmony to the people, and to place the country in a state of secure defence; because (for there is the rub) he would adopt measures likely to make the people of one part of the kingdom an united people, than which there is nothing that venal and corrupt men more sincerely dread.It is, as applied to this point, asked, how would the King feel, if, upon his recovery, he were to find, that the measure concerning which he had such scruples, had been adopted during his incapacity? The argument is a monstrous one, to be sure. It outrages common sense. Yet, it is no wonder to hear it urged, considering the quarter whence it comes. What a pretty state must the country be in, however, if such an argu-` ment were to have any weight? Admit this argument, and there is, at once, an end of all notion of the Kingly Office being established and upheld for the good of the people. It becomes a personal property, and the exercise of it dependent upon mere whim and caprice. What lessons of republicanism are these "loyal" writers now inculcating! They have long told us of the scruples of the King; these scruples have long been urged as an obstacle to a measure so anxiously desired by a considerable part of his subjects, a measure promised by one set of ministers and actually brought, in part, into parliament by another set of his ministers, where it was received without any opposition, and was proceeding towards its accomplishment, till those scruples were expressed; the King, who had those scruples, is now declared in a state of incapacity, in a state between delirium and insanity, in a state of mental derangement; and, we are now to look upon it as a bar to giving his son full powers to act in his stead, lest he, when he recovers, if he should recover, should feel displeased at this measure having been adopted during his incapacity! Any thing

pledge would be faithfully redeemed.fuis venal gentleman affects to take it amiss, that the Prince's intellects are, by Mr. O'CONNELL, supposed to be less liable to expose him to be imposed upon than thase of his venerable Father are so to expose the latter. This is very fine, to be sure, and especially after the publication of the evidence of the Physicians, who have given proofs of the melancholy state of his Majesty's mind.--It is, besides, notorious, that the objection to the measure of what has been called Catholic Emancipation, was, the scruples of the King. How far it was constitutional, or decent, to urge such an objection to a measure proposed to parliament, I shall not now inquire; but, as to the fact, nobody will attempt to deny it; and, if the Prince has no such scruples, the measure would by him, if he were unshackled, be, of course, assented to, and, indeed, brought forward by his ministers.So far from the Prince's disposition towards the Catholics being an argument in favour of any limitations that might tend to thwart his views and clog his measures, it is a strong argument against all such limitations, with all those, at least, who desire to see Ireland tranquillized, and rendered invulnerable to the attempts of the enemy. The state of Ireland is not better known to us, than it is to that enemy. He regards Ireland almost as an ally. He may be mistaken in his opinion; but, while our venal prints themselves declare, that a regular army is necessary to keep Ireland safe, can we blame the enemy for his opinion? These venal men tell you, that Ireland is harrassed with French machinations and factions. How did they come there? How comes it that Ireland engenders these factions and machinations? Why, because the people are discontented; and, therefore, the way to put an end to the French factions and machinations, is, to put an end to the discontents of the people.That the Prince, if left unshackled, would do this, there can be no doubt; and would not this be a very great blessing to the country? I mean, not merely to Ireland, but to the kingdom at large; for, those are very narrowsighted people who suppose, that England is not affected by this discontented state of Ireland. We help to maintain the army, which we are told is so necessary to the guarding of Ireland. We pay fifteen parts out of seventeen of the expence of main-so taining that army. From this expence we should be relieved by measures that would

monstrous as this has seldom been broached in private conversation, and to put it in print requires, one would think,

ples and traitorous views and intentions; that the venal and corrupt crew; that tribe of hypocrites, who have assumed the appellations of " the loyal," and "the King's 'friends;" the public have often been told by me, that this crew have a regard for the kingly government only in so much as it may be useful to them in their venal and corrupt practices; and, that, if they were once to perceive, that they could no longer profit from it in this way, they would not scruple to become its most deadly enemies.This I have always thought. It was reasonable that it should

be so.

But, though I am not, when I reflect, at all surprised at what I now see, I did not, I must confess, expect to see such undisguised hostility as these corrupt men now discover towards the Prince of Wales and his Brothers, who have come in for their share, from the moment it was known, that they also were opposed to a limited Regency; that is to say, that they were opposed to the measure intended to keep part of the kingly power in the hands, in all probability, of those men who are now in place; the moment the venal and corrupt writers discovered this, they fell, tooth and nail, upon the Prince's Brothers as well as upon himself.The history of the Protest of the Royal Dukes has been given in the preceding Volume, at page 1297, but, as the Copies of the papers which passed between them and Mr. PERCEVAL have not been before inserted by me, I here subjoin them in a note *.

more impudence and more perfect con- | tempt of public opinion, than has ever been known to be possessed by mortal man. If such an argument can have any weight, what a state, I again ask, must this nation be in? To what a degree of degradation must we be fallen if such an argument can have weight with any considerable number of people? Nay, the bare commission of it to print is but too strong a proof of the tameness, not to call it cowardice, which the writer, at least, believes to exist in the nation; for, were not such his opinion of the public, he never would have ventured to use such an argument. Another argument against vesting the Prince with full powers, is, that, if unchecked, he might put an end to the wars in Spain and Portugal; and, then, if the King should recover his senses, what would be his feelings to see his measures, as to this important point, totally changed. This was the argument made use of by corrupt men at the outset of the disputes upon the Regency question; and, indeed, it was saying nothing anore than that, if the Regent changed the ministers, he would do all that was wrong; and the plain truth is, that the limitations upon him are nothing more, and can be nothing more, than so many means in the hands of those who would be in opposition to his new ministers, to thwart his views and his measures. It does not suit the venal writers to say, in plain terms, that measures ought to be taken to render it impossible for the Prince to go on without keeping the same ministers that now are * Letter to Mr. PERCEVAL, dated, Wedin place; that, if he will not agree to keep nesday night, 12 o'clock, 12th Dec. 1810— them, he ought to be so hampered as to be SIR; The Prince of Wales having assemnearly disabled from carrying on the govern- bled the whole of the male branches of the ment; it does not suit them to say this in Royal Family, and having communicated plain terms, but that this is what they to us the plan intended to be proposed by mean there can be no doubt at all, and to his Majesty's Confidential Servants, to the this object have all their efforts tended. Lords and Commons, for the establishment And, indeed, why not this as well as any of a restricted Regency, should the contiof the other reasons? For, what would be nuance of his Majesty's ever-to-be-demore likely to injure the King's feelings,plored illness render it necessary; we feel than finding, upon his recovery, that his servants had been dismissed? It would, therefore, be much fairer dealing, if the venal and corrupt authors of the divers publications in question were, at once, to tell us, that they wish for such limitations as shall compel the Regent to keep the present men in their places, during ins and their natural lives.The public have often heard me say, that the wenal and corrupt, who have been incessantly accusing us of Jacobinical princiDihants. B

it a duty we owe to his Majesty, to our Country, and to Ourselves, to enter our solemn Protest against measures we consider as perfectly unconstitutional, as they are contrary to, and subversive of the principles which seated our Family upon the Throne of this Realm.-(Signed)Frederick; William; Edward; Ernest; Augustus Frederick; Adolphus Frederick; William Frederick.

Mr. Perceval's Answer, dated, Downing Street, 20th Dec. 1810, shall be inserted in the next Number.

« ForrigeFortsett »