Star. — London, England, 1802-04-01 00:00:00

doubt the Prince's title,' I am not able under the moft unfavourable view of the queftion, to, bring my mind to hefitate with refpea to the claim of right, which I take to be decided ; nor can I anti cipate any arguments which may be ufed again( the motion. The authority of Chief Jullice Dodde ridge, to which Ihave already alluded, is fo ftrongly fupported by faCts, as to operate in a decifive man ner. If an objeCtion be railed on the ground of delay, and the latenefs of the application to Parlia ment, I beg Gentlemen to confider with attention the relations exilling between the Crown and the !'rinse. In tilde relations they will clifcover jutt and fatisfaaory catilcs for the delay. But had the King received the revenues, I can confidently maintain that there would not now be any queftion of this nature before the Houle. It will, how ever, at all events not be denied, that the fob. jea is entitled to our moll ferious confideration, and in aliening that all the profits accruing from the Duchy of Cornwall have been paid into the Treafu ry, with the exception of the funs of r 6,0c01. and iz,oool. o n ly, I merely (late that which can be fuloiantiated to the fatisfaaion of every Gen tleman who hears me. If any doubts (lilt re. main on this point, I troll they will be removed by the authority of my Right for.. Friend who filled the fituation of Chancellor of the Etche quer in the year 1795. If the has which I have !bated be undeniable ;—if the proceedings of the Crown and of Parliament, which I have had oc cation to notice for feveral fucceffive reigns, be right ;—if the inferences drawn from them be corral ;—if I hare truly laid all thefe confeder ations before the Houfe, I cannot bring myfelf to think that the Houle of Commons will deem it confilient with their wifdom, prudence, and li berality, to force the Heir Apparent to have re• coitrfe to other methods for the purpofe of dia. bli(hing a title, to which from the infant of his birth he has enjoyed an Undifputed claim. If I have not erred in the grounds which I have taken, cannot bring myfelito think that the Honfe of Commons will be fo cruel as to reject the Prince's title ; that any candid man will difpute, or that any hood} man will refill his right. This mo tion has been inaituted at the defire of the Houle, and his Royal Highnefs in acceding to it, has been actuated by two motives : The one is, to pre vent all miiiep.-efentation or mifconception with refpeCt to his condo°, and the other to thew his earneß defire to Rand well with the public ; to Thew whatever his expenses have been, whether right or not, that he has not received as much as he was legally entitled to polrefs. In making there remarks, I feel it my duty to fay, that I have been directed by the Prince to abflain from all expreftions of complaint and difappointraent, and that he will acquiefce molt cheerfully in any detilion to which the Houle may come. Of this, Sir, lie has already given the moll fatisfac. tory pia •fs, by contenting to part with that fplen• dour which was called C•or by his rank, by re ftgning a great portion of his income, and by agreeing to live in ohfcurity. If it be Paid that his debts are the effcit of extravagance and dif fipation, and I were difpoled to admit the truth of the obfervation, let me ark, in what fphere of life are we to look for the man who unites the caution and coldnefs of old age with the generofity and „ardour of youth ? If we can readily make allow ances for other men of a left exalted rank, let us do fo for one expofed to more temptations and liable to more dangers. Should the Houle agree ..to the appointment of the Select Committee, m conformity to the motion, their next confideration Will be to form an ellimate of the fums due to the Prince. lam alfo authorited to fay, that it is die 'determination of his Royal Highnefs not to re ceive a fingle fhilling of the debt, but to have it all appropriated to the objects (pacified in the Aft of Parliament, for the immediate fatisfaaion of his creditors. I with to have juaice done to him, that he may be enabled to do juaice to his credi tors. But whatever the refult of the prefent mo tion may be, of this I am well allured, that his Royal Highnefs will cheerfully fubmit to every ineafure which the 1 - loufe may think proper to ,adopt, fully confident that in doing juftice to the Public, they will not be inattentive to his true in. - tereas and the fairnefs of his claims." Mr. Sut ton concluded by reading his motion for the ap pointment of a Seidl Committee. Sir RALPH MILBANK& feconded the motion, and exprefted his firm conviction, that the claims of the Noce were founded in the ftriaeft principles of jullice, and peculiarly called for the interfe tenet of the Houle. Mr.'Finxra faid it flood acknowledged on the Journals of the Houle of Commons that the King had no concern what ever with th e Duchy of Cornwall, Sro when in the yeat 1692, Humphrey Morris, a Member of the Honfe, was appointed Warden of the Stanneries, it became a queftion whether his acceptant; of that office vacated his Feat, 'Venues of Cornwall belonged to the Crown, and to the Prince of Wales, unqueflionably the TI. ife would have determined othcrwife. As Parliament was a Court of Record, it was hound to abide by its' on precedents, and render the :Cone jbaice to the Prince of Wales as to any other itraividual, when his claim was jlttlified and jandioned by its forma precedeins. • The CHANCE I.Loa of the Ext. lIEV R, in anfwer to what was dated by the lion. Gi:ntleman who Lit fpokc, obferved, that pc: tons accepting offices under the Duchy of Lai:calker ' the right to which was undoubtedly in the king, did nut vacate their feats in Parliament. With regard to the motion, be fare., that if he could continently with his duty concur in it, he Ihould certainly thi:.k it a wane of time to occupy the attention of the Houfe, af * ter it had been dila:lced fo ably by the Hon. Gen tleman who had introduced it, and who hatl ap- . plied to the fubjea all dune advantages which he derived from deep knowledge, profound erudition, ` and accurate judgment. Ht could not give a fironger prcof of the principle by which he was '.aauated on 'the p_refent occalion, than by riling . ..furnon.aftu that Hon. Gentleman. Powerfill as . lOsl,bten the effea of the ilatement he had made 'in the had not pro duced a conviEtion in his mind that the Prince of .'~.. Wales was entitled to the revenues of the bitchy of Cornwall from the period of his irrth. Ac cord:lig to the view he had taken, if he was dif. poled to acqniefce in the argument that di.: Prince of Wales was clearly and nf right entitled to them, (till there were contiderasions which operated for cibly to induce him to refit the motion which had jull been made. The Honourable Gentleman had :lamed the title of the Prince of Wales from the hour of birth, and had enforced it by reference to the Journals of the Houfe ; but if he rightly underltood his motion, he meant to give the Committee a power of inveftigating the right of the Prince, as far as the Journals would enable them fet to do, and in the event of thole Journals affirming his right, they were to enquire into the accounts of the revenues. He would alit whether filch a motion as this, having two diftina objects, had ever been fubmitted to a Committee ? The Committee were &It to fearch the Journals to prove the right which was contended for, and, having found - it, were then to apply their atten tion to the appropriation of the Revenues. This was a combination of duties which he never knew referred to any Committee. The Hon. Gentleman had gone through an ample field of precedent, but he had proceeded upon a fundamental error, by not applying his talents to the period of the fall two centuries, within which the Legiflative part of the Government had Aimed the chara&cr by which it was charaaerized at the prefent moment. Adverting to the practice of former Parliaments antecedent to that period, it would be found that many queftions had been decided between private perfons upon principles contrary to thole which were now recognized ; the Journals were full of fuch intlances. The Learned Gentleman had con tended that the effect of the ftatute la Charles If. was that of abolithing tenures by chivalry. He entertained a high refpeet for his opinion, as well as for the opinions of other eminent Lawyers, who infifted that the Ratute of Charles the Second aboliffied Military Tenure, and he admitted that till Livery was granted, the Prince of Wales held by that Tenure. But there were authors who maintained that feifin did not of courfe imply pof feflion, nor livery the receipt of revenues. It was well known that the relation of guardian in Chi- valry exifted when the ward had livery and was feized and the guardian, thongli livery had been granted to the ward, was entitled to the revenues, till recourfe had been had' by the ward to certain legal forms. He thould Date his argument with more accuracy by obferving, that the guardian was entiled to the revenues after feifin, and till livery was demanded. He begged the Houle to underhand that he urged what he did with extreme diffidence. He was not prepared to (peak dc cidedly—knowing thatdoubts exifted in the minds of perfons much more competent than hinifelf, it was not for him that the Houfe thould ftir a Rep upon a queftion which involved a difficult point of law. He would not prefnme to fay what legal meafures ought to be adopted, but fome of thofe who were belt informed thought that a Petition of Right was the one which it would be molt proper to refort to. With refpea to the queftion, whe ther the public had received the rents of the Duchy? it certainly was one of extreme importance. He would afk, what proof was there that any pax of the revenues had been fo applied ? Where were the Journals of Parliament in which fuch an ap propriation could be found ? True it was, that in 1771, an account had been prefented of feveral films paid during the minority of the Prince of Wales out of the revenues of the Duchy of Corn wall, by warrant of the Lords of the Treafury, and applied in aid of the Civil Lift. This turn fo applied was 94,0001. under the head of Special Services. It did not always follow that rums paid for Special Services were applied for the ufe of the public. He was entitled to call upon Gentlemen who contended the claim was againft the public, to Thew upon what it was they founded their af fertion. Every one who had the happinefs of knowing the Prince of Wales, muff give him cre dit for the honourable manner in which it was the with of his Royal Highnefs the pirefent queltion lhould be brought forward. Undoubtedly it was the defire of his Royal Highnefs to Rand well with the public. It was of deep importance to the country that the condua of the Prince of Wales fhould be, as it certainly was, above the eishtell imputation. His Royal Highnefs had Ftvin a decided proof of the difinteretted principle on which he had brought forward his claim, by the fentiments he had exprelfed through the medium of the Hon. Gentleman who had introduced the rubjeet, and by the affurance that if it lhould ap pear there were large rums due to him from the revenues of his Duchy, they thould be oppored to thofe he had received from the public.— It was material that the real Date of the advances to his Royal Highnefs out of the Civil Lilt thould be known. It was with reluctance he brought them forward, but having only • one great object in view, that of truth, he was compelled by his deity not to keep them back. He was of opinion, ' if a proceeding founded upon his claim took place in a Court bf 'Judicature, it would not alfume the chara&er of a litigious proceeding. He proceeded to Rate the rums paid to his Royal Highnefs, as a fixed allowance during his minority, out of the ' Civil Lift. The aggregate of the (urns in the courfe Of t s years was 128,4201. betides extraordinaries *to the amount of 50,5521. Having contrafted the 'payments made out of the Civil Lilt with the furs received by his Majefty from the revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall, agreeable to an account upon the table of the Houle, he Rated the balance in favour of his Royal Highnefs to amount to a 7cry confiderable rum. He obferved that it mull be extremely gratifying to the Houle to find that the Prince of Wales had declared his intention of ap plying what should appear to be due to him in payment of his, debts. There was no man who would feel more fatisfaaion in accelerating the payment Oftliore debts titan himfdf. He was one of thofe who did not think a fufficient allowance had been made to his Royal Highnefs in the brit inftance, when he came of age. It fhould be re ' colleted that he entered upon that elevated Ration -which Isis birth entitled him to without any ado- quate means of anfweting that kale of expenditure a .• which became his rank—it was to thh 'circum- Rance his early difficult4s were to be attributed, and therefore it could not but be the with of the Houle, and of the public, the' the liquidation of his debts Ihould be ::eelerated by every potlibte means, not only with a view to the advantages of thofe perfons who were the creditors of his Royal Highnefs, but hecanfe it was defirable that the Heir .Apparent filmic' be put in poffeftian of that full revenue, without tleduaien, which the fphere he moved in entitled him to enjoy. .It had been truly laid by Sir Fletcher Norton, at the Bar of the Houle of Lords, that it was not merely to the perfon who exercifed the Sovereignty, an etlablilh ment Ilion'd be granted to enable him to fopport the fplendour of his Clown, but that every branch of the Royal Family thould polfets the means of race - ling the dignity of the throne. It was a truth founded - on the nature of man, and the hillory of nations. As to the nature of the debts contra led by his Royal Highnefc, he was entitled to fay, from his own perfonal knowledge, that more grufs and fcandalous mifreprefentations had never been made on any folsjed, titan with regard to them.— They were not of a nature which jollities' the ob fervations that had been made upon them—he would not fay in the Houle, hut nut of it. The Houfc, he trolled, would be fenlible of the reluc tance with which he appeared to interfere with the with of his Royal Highnefs, to refer the accounts of the revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall to a Corn. mince of the Houtz of Cemmoas. He was onlyre lieved from the regret he flood,' other wife have x rerienced, by the confederation that trout the Crate ment he had made, a compliance with the remelt of his Royal Highnefs, would not attain the objea he defired. To return to the queflion of t ight, he admitted that a guardian was not at liberty to make Life of the income of the minor, without duly accounting for it; but in the reeve cafe it was necetlary to confider the circumieances that attended the creation of the Duchy of Cornwell. When his Majelly, King Edward the Third, ex preffed his intention of detaching from the Crown the moll valuable part of his potrellion as an Edit blithment to fupport the dignity of his fon the Prince of Wales, he never could have intended to put him into the poffeffion and receipt of fuch im menfe revenues, and at the fame time fupport him during his minority. If it was otherwife, if the claim was a jolt one, he was lorry it had not been made fooner, and certainly it ought to be acted upon without delay. He could not avoid think ing at the period when the allowance to be made to the Prince of Wales was the futile& of dilcut lion in Parliament, that among the many eminent men who took part in it, if loch a refource as the revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall had really ex act', it mutt have (truck tome of them—it could not have efcaped their knowledge, as their atten tion was efpecially called to the fubjea. Ht was lorry his Learned ar.d Hon. Friend in the courfe of his obfervations fhould have Paid that.the claim for which he was contending was one which no candid or bonett man could deny. I-fe would airtime no merit for his candour, but he tank credit to him fell for the charader of an honeft man, and yet he felt himfelf juftified in refuting his content to fuch a motion. But, on the other hand, it was enough to induce the Houfe not to decide upon his opinion, that ttiefe doubts were entertained by thofe who were better enabled than himfelf to form a judgment upon the fubjed. Ulm thought the claim unwarrantable, he fhould molt affuredly rent it altogether in the firft inftance. He did not think himfelf juftified, under all the circum fiances of the cafe, in recommending fuels a mo tion, even if it was not liable to the technical ob jeCtion of combining two diftina fubjeas. He confidered that if a wrong culled in this country there was by the law a• means of redrefs. It ought therefore to be afcertaincd whether the wrong of which his Royal Highnefs complained, was a wrong for which there was a legal remedy or not. If redrefs could not be had elfewhere, then an application to Parliament might be pro per. Till an appeal for redrefs had been made before a legal Tribunal, competent to grant it, he felt lie could not, confidently with his duty, fanc tion a motion, the objed of which was to dare the Houle to interfere in a way not confonant with its legiflative functions. Nothing but need fity, he conceived, could jußify the interference of Parliament. He was nnwilliug to negative fuch a prppofition, by moving the previous gelation, but lhould conclude by moving the Order of the Day. Mr. MANNERS SUTTON, in explaining, laid, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had fuppofed him to have laid, that no honelt man would refill the Motion ; what 'he had laid was, that it he had correctly Rated the law upon the fubjed, no can did or bona man would be found to refill the claim of his Royal Highnefs. Mr. Eits IC IN If began by profefling his attachment to his Royal Highnefs, obferving, that highly as he was influenced by filch a consideration, it' had no concern in the opinion which, as a Member of Parliament, he thought it his duty to adopt. He had, a number of years ago, given an opinion on the rubles.% and he Rill retained the tenements he had then expreffed. His Learned Friend had gone fo fully and ably into the epieftion, that he did not think it neceffary to do more than shortly Rate his reafons for recommending to the Houle to ac cede to the Motion for referring the Prince of Wales's claims to a Committee. If the Charter of Edward 111. had never received any conftruc don, or if it was capable of two conftruaions, un doubtedly he fhould think that the petition of right was the proper form for his Royal Highnefs to retort to, and that it was a fit matter for a judi cial &cation. He was ready to admit the Parlia ment had not, at the period which had been allud ed to, attained the cherailer it had polfelfed within the fall two centuries, but at the I . :ime time it WAS to be obferved, there was a material difference be tween a queltion referred to the decition of Par liament, in which private perfons were the parties, and one between the Prince of Wales and the King. If a private man Paid another man had taken his • ettate, he agreed with the Chancellor of tiae Ex chequer, that it was a fuhjea for a judicial cicci lion ; but the title of the Prince of iVales to that which was part of the inheritance of the Crown vas diflitut It was, he eoi coliarly fit to be referred t, HOUIC of Commons. If a l ' fi)llS AVIIO alolliti be called Committees, had perukd the various f Par. liament and Documents which related in the fub je.R, and tended to elucidate th. timid tinj ie neceffary to fignify to the Hoyle, :hat it was a queflion of doubt and difficulty, he thowd i., iiicb cafe deem it proper to he confidAed in am e hee place. It appeared to him, that ,he runs wire, would be (*elated to compote the Cemmittee, ilf the prefent motion fhould he a 7: would he: of all others the mot lithely to determine with aria Jo (lice as to the right of the PI ince of W a lc e -... rhe legitimacy of . the title of of W.:!ei, he dated, mull have been well known to our en. cedors, for in the reign of Henry the 'sixth, the King, conleious of the manner in which he held the Duchy during the minority of his fon, applied to the I.cgifl m ore to autlioriie him to retain them. Parliament invefted him with the power, and only two years after, when the Prince of Wales was but four years of age, a petition of right was pre fented to the King in Parliament, to repeal what had been done. Though the Houle had been fo obfequious only two years before, as toallow the Prince toool. a year till he was eieht years of age , and tcoo marks for his wardrobe, yet, aauated by a fenfe of what was the undoubted light of the Prince, it undid 'what •it had done tofir e , (bring the Duchy lice from that difmember ment which the fotmer AA had produced. Thefe twu proceedings in the Sixths reign of lltory the !hewed what was :he opinion of the .King himfelf, and of the Parliament, with regard to the right-of ,the Prince of Wales to Livery of the Dully of Cornwall, from the moment of his birth In the reign of Edward the Fourth, Or. precedent was equally (hiking : Livery of pcfr ‘ tii ;; was granted to the Prince, who was' then eight moutio. old. The Charter of Livery recited that the Onke of Corn well w as cnti:led to Lively the cirtti as if he hal been. twenty-me years of age, and both the Char. tersto which he had referred were fanaioned by the Lords Spititnal and Temporal. Had they been Chattels granted by the King merely from fienifni aed ;trod' will towards the Prince if Wales, they would not have jaaified the inference he had drawn fi orn them ; bat recited what was the law of the land, it therneore did appear extraordinary that in the yeai tBo2, Pat iiantent fhould have been in donhowith refpea to the mean ing of fuch a grant.. Flawing dated the cafes of Henry the Sixth, and Edward the Fourth, he fhould advert to that of Healy the Seventh. That King made the fame fort of butter in favour of the Prince of Wales with the affmt of his Parlia ment. Upon the birth of the Prince, iie.ry was granted him—afterwards zyool. was t iken front his revenues to anfwer the prelfure ( , f the times, and the Aa of Parliament authorizing it was af terwards repealed, and the money redored. Thus, from the reign of the Mack Prince thele had been three confirmations of the Tigit, and no contro. verfy. In the reign of James the 17ird, a memo'. table circtundance occurred. Upon the death of Prince Henry, when Charles - the Filet, his fon. was Prince of Wales, a doubt arofe whether he was entitled to the Duchy of Cornwall. In the courfe of the arguments upon that queilion, there was not an obrervation made that did not admit the Prince of Wales was entitled. The only que& tion rya s, that offline primogenitne. No man doubt. ed of Henry, had he lived, but only whether his fon was entitled. What.was dooht,:d to Jay' was whet oar anceders had no diaculteisling: Could there pollioly be •any doubt what Pattie meot meant by raying. that a Prince of Wales was entitled to his livery from his birth, the fame . as if he was of fall age ? Was not the enjoyment of the right for fo many ages a proof of its cxiitcnce? The title of the Prince of Wales to the Dui hy of Cornwall was a public acknowledged title—it was l a matter of hiflory, and never at any pet iod the • fubjea of doubt. The next reign to which it was necelfary to refer, was that of Ch.irk- the Second. when the Itatnte paired alrolifhing te;e!al to-lures ' It was to be oblerved, that livery of land :wore out of feudal obligations, and when Oates were heredii. tary, the Lord entered into polTeiTion, and retained it till the heir fued out his livery, for which he paid a confideration, which was called Prmier Sri/its; thi s practice fell into dilute, for by the liatute of Marl borough it was enaCted, that if the heir was kept: out of his land, he might have an Agee .of Mors d'4uncyler, without filing out Chiler-lern,lin with Premier &gm. So the law continued till the t eat of Charles the Second, which related only to te.. nures by military fervice, grand and ptit jerjeantry,. and certain others. He wilhed the Houle to feel whether livery was necelfary of land hell by tenures comprehended within that datute ; with that view the Learned and Honourable Member read the (haute, and commented upon it. He obferved that tenure by Knight's fervice, by which alone•ward fhip ever exiled, was done away by that flatute which bound the Crown, becaitte it was feecially named in it. If Knights . feivice was taken away, and all other Cervices that required livery, he was at a lots to know why livery was neceflary. George the Second, as Prince of Wales, had no livery,. Frederick, Prince of Wales, had no livery. Ao account was rendered to them of the revenues dare hog their minority. Why then fhould the Heufe make a difiinaion with regard to th e p ee f to t nine; of %%Tales ? If the I.)rm of livery was neceilary, is was an exception from the (haute c‘ Charles watt refpe.b to this particular elate. Ile knew of no. thing that diftinguilhed the cafe of the King and the Prince, but the one reported by !!lie Judiee Fortefcue, where there was the opinion cf ten Judges againft two upon the queflion referred to them refpeaing the right of the King to the Go vernment of his child, and the approhatiun of his nein iage. Upon the whole, the otte;Lion appeareC to him not of deebtful interpretation, but that it had been fettled and acknowledged item age te. age. He thought it would be placing the Prim of Wales in a very unfavoltrable point of view t. involve hint in a private litigation with his Majett; . He obfcrved that h,e had conlidercd the fulajed wit the•allidance of feverai learned - Lawyers, and pail - ticularly with Mr. MansGe/d i wi o op:11:ca 7 1111.111111111111111111 Tnccivta. pe. t o a cw.ra :. : tlic ifier th. 2 i • c . e IL A