Star. — London, England, 1820-11-08 00:00:00

.41. • • • . power from dissolution. Divorces had, notwithstanding, oc curred, both before add since the Reformation. They were, rotwithstanding, consonant both with the Mosaic and with the Christian dispensation. Our Saysous had said, that "he who pp nth sway his wife for any other cause than adultery, causeth ••• bar o conintit adultery." Did not this obviously infer that divorces were allowable? His Grace concluded by saying, that he considered the charge of adultery established against her Ma jesty, and, under that conviction, he bad no objection of any de scription, least of all of a religious nature, to the Bill proceeding in the form in which it now stood. Lord KING said some few words, which were Inaudible at the bar. The Bishop of WORCESTER admitted that the question of the Divorce was not without some difficulty ; but, consider ing how much the morals of the country were concerned in the issue of this proceeding, he felt bound to give his support to the Bill. (We understood this to be the purport of his Lordship's observations, but lie spoke in a tone so inaudible at the bar, that we cannot vouch for its accuracy.) The Bishop of LLANDAFF thought the Divorce clause should be retained. He did not see any force in the objection made to It on a religions ground ; for he knew of nothing in the Christian religion against a dissolution of marriage for adultery. 'The Bishop of LONDON agreed with his Right Reverend Brother (the Archbishop of Canterbury), that divorces were authorised by the words of our Savioue. As to any objection to the Divorce Clause of the Bill, founded on the supposed con duct of the complaining party, he thought it quite inapplicable. A great constitutional principle was involved in the present case. The King " could do no wrong ;" he could not commit a folly, far less a crime ; and, therefore, recrimination was out of the question ! (Hear, hear.) lard LAUDERDALE, with due submission to the opinions which had fallen from the Reverend Bench of Bishops, thought that the House ought not to agree to the Divorce Clause. He confessed that he approached this part of the question with some difficulty, for he could not forget that it had been said in the House, that were the Degradation to pass without the Di vorce, it would virtually be a degradation of the King.— Were such to be its effect, he would be the last man to vote for it ; but he denied that it involved any such consequence. Why was it that he objected to the Divorce Clause? Was it because be meant to say that his Majesty should be excluded from that relief from the bonds of marriage, on cause shewn, which was open to every subject in the country? No. Or was it because his Majesty could not come before their Lordships in that pure state which would defy recrimination? Certainly not. — In wishing to exclude the Divorce Clause, he contented for no other proposition than simply this, that the parties had not come before them in a situation that admitted of Its application. Her Majesty had acquired, by her marriage contract, rights both public and private. She had been found disqualified for exercising her public rights, and, therefore, she was by this Bill to be deprived of them. But was this any ground fbr the House going farther? Was there to be one law for the King and one for the subject? No. He agreed with what had been so ably urged on the subject by the Learned Doctor who had spoken for the Defence, (Dr. Lushington,) that the law if marriage was the same with regard to the highest as to tbo lowest subject in the realm. If her Majesty should chum to sue for Divorce, the application ought to be tried on the same principle as the suit of any ordinary individual would be tried. A Right Reverend Prelate had said, that the ILing could do no wrong; that he could not, constitutionally spmk ing, commit any crime, and therefore, that there was no xenon for recrimination. A very false idea of the whole of this ems bad, he thought, arisen, from a misunderstanding as to the word " recrimination." Adultery was no crime by the laws, and could therefore form no ground of recrimination. It was an injury from which relief might be sought by Divorce, but the party applying for the relief must shew that be was no con senting party to the injury —( Ilene, hear). He saw no legal dif ficulty in adhering to this principle as well in the case of a Sove reign as of a subject—(Har, hear). The Rev. Prelate who spoke last, seemed to think, that if adultery was proved the Divorce clause might be passed, because no facts had been proved against the husband. The Divorce clause appeared to him inconsistent. The grounds on which he had voted for the measure were, that the Queen was found guilty of crimes which rendered her unfit to be at the head of the females of this country. But the conduct of the King might he such as not to entitle him to a divorce. Earl D ARS LET said, nothing that had fallen from the Reverend Bench of Bishops had any influence on his mind. A Reverend Prelate had said, there was nothing in the whole scripture to prevent Divorce; but Scripture says, "He that runeth away his wife, save for fornication, eauseth her to commit aaidtery."--kie appealed to the House, if the Queen was put away by her husband, and not for the crime of fornication, did he not cause her tip commit adultery? And If so, and he came for a Divorce, how, then, could their Lordships grant it ? Ile felt that their Lordships could not pass this Bill, either with or without the divorce clattse. Unless their Lordships divorced the Queen, she must retain her rank and title. The wife of the King must be Queen. He felt that such difficulties surrounded this question, that their Lordships must get rid of it, and the sooner the better. The Bishops of LonsoN and LLANDATT explained. Lord DONOUGHMORE was surprised that the Noble Loud (Lauderdale) had risen to oppose the Divorce Clause. He coild not fail to observe, that a difference of opinion existed among the Rev. Bench of Bishops ; but the greater number of them were unanimous. This Bill was not a suit depending between two parties. The King was only the prosecutor as the Head of the State, and was not personally contented. He had not presented himself at their Lordships' Bar for a pri vate remedy. If it was thought that the facts proved against the Queen were not such as to render het untit to hold her high rank, all these proceedings went for nothing. lie did not wish Royalty to be degraded; there was too much of that out of doors. • The House had declared that the Queen was not fit to be the Queen Consort, and their Lordships owed it to the country and to the women of the country, that she should not continue the wife of the King.--(Soine inattention having been manifested during the speech of the Noble Earl, he said he treated such conduct with sovereign contempt.]—lie then proceeded, and said he thought it extremely hard, after their declared opinion as to the Queen, that they should tie her still to his Majesty, and give him no help. It was as a State measure that he had voted for the Bill, and he thought it ought to be passed altogether; for in what situation would they stand, if, after agreeing. that the Preamble had been proved, they should refuse to pass the Divorce Clause ? The Bishop of CHESTER said, no consideration whatever • would induce him to pass the Bill with the Divorce clause. The Earl of ll A BROW BY thought, that the introduction of the Clause might be supposed as if intended to give relief to particular individual, which was not the case. The Noble Lord declared that he saw no necessity for the Divorce Clause under all the circumstances of the case, as this was a Bill, not for the personal benefit of the Sovereign, but for the public service. Lord FITZW I LLI AM spoke for some time against the Bill. His voice was almost totally inaudible—we caught, however, as oweit as convinced us he was in every respect against the mea sure. He expressed his surprise that the House should enter fain the idea of a divorce, when it had not been applied for by either party—(Hear, hear). Lord LIVERPOOL said, that as he had observed before, h f was ready to give up the Clause relating to the Divorce, if ke House thought it advisable to abandon that part of the measure. lie contended against the argument that a Queen could not be degraded without being divorced, and asked the House whether, if a Queen committed a felony, she ought not to be degraded? It would then be impossible to divorce her, as that punishment was applic:able to adultery alone. It was also• untrue, that the degradation of the Queen would operate in such a case to degrade the King. His Lordship then, in adverting to rat tranation, said, that innumerable calumnies had been circulated against his Majesty, which it was improper in those to allude t o , who knew nut all the circumstances owned with both sides of the question. It was known that twenty-four years ago a separation took place which was sanctioned by the Ki ng , a nd cenfirmed by Act of Parliament. Now, in some m i n ds a doubt existed whether, after so long a separa tion, the House could proceed to a total dissolution of the marr i age , lie admitted that such a doubt operated with him, in the future course he was desirous to pursue. Ile was of opinion that a clause should be introduced, ht place of'the clause of Di vlrce, confirming the separation, and calculated to prevent the my/entente: which might arise from the situation of the Queen. The LORD CHANCELLOR; said, that marriage was not, ;is Blackstone said, a mere civil contract. It was the parent, and not the child, of sociOyie mrois et rei publics funciaorentetn." It was altogether a civil contract with re spect to civil rights, and a religion* contract with respect to 141110 61 ClO4. As to r 4 F4444 11 04 0 1 1144 not been 641 f ,to find any authority in the Bible, which stated that a woman who had eomndtted adultery was to be considered fe west, bemuse her husband did the same *4. A woman. might have so conducted heeself as to render it inspeseible for her husband to lei with her ; and would it not be a most mischievous thing to punish the husband by divorce for that to which his wife's conduct had driven him ? As to the objecsion, that his Majesty must be a partrt• the passing of the Bill, what) would have been the case, if the case had been high treason, and that a conviction bad taken place 1 The divorce could not take place in that event without execution, and the act of the King was indhpenably exaary to the performance of that. The No ble Lord then contendoti, that if some clause were not introduced which would most effectually separate the parties, the Queen would be by thi Bill, without the divorce, bound more closely to his Majesty' 'lke was by law a person of independent property, and her claims would be more powerful, if not cut away by this Bill. The Noble Lord, after having repeated his confliction of the Queen's guilt, mid be would reserve his opinion as to the re taining or omitting the DivorceCbuse until he should bear the sen timents of many Noble Lords, and he trusted he should hear the sentiments of the whole House expressed In some other way than by the words Content or Not Content. Lord DUNCAN, in e a very powerful voice, said; he would not let pass the present opportunity of making a few observa tions. The whole proceedings, be observed, were obviously grounded on the evidence of traitors and slanderers, and was a case of the basest conspiracy —(Loud cries of Hear, hair).— " Yes," said the Noble lArrd, “ It is a conspiracy so foul and profligate, that I for one feel no hesitation in putting my hand to my hurt, and pronouncing, conscientiously and before Gus, a verdict of Not Guilty! Not Guilty !" —(Lord Cheers.) After a abort pause, The Earl of LIVERPOOL observed, that the regular motion now; was, that the Chairman of the Committee should report progress, as the Bill could not be gone through to-night. Earl GREY wished to be informed whether the Noble and Learned Lord en the Woolsack did not mean to give his epi nion until all their Lordships had delivered their judgments-upon the question of Divorce, seriatim ?—( Latsghter).—He pressed A division on the clause immediately—(Question, question). Earl GROSVENOR said, that the only question now was, whether the Divorce clause should stand port of the Bin ? The Earl of SHAFTESBURY, amid consilistrahle (=le sion, informed the House, that the question was nut be should 'reveille Chair. The House could not adjourn until it was re sumed. The question that the House be resumed was then put by his lArdthip, and, as he declared it to be carried in the' affirmative, strangers were ordered to withdraw, end they did , so accordingly. Much disorder at this time prevailed, and no division took place. - The House then adjourned at ten minutes before four, until ten o'clock this morning. NATAL INTELLIGENCE. The Hope, Rum, arrived in she River from Honduras, left the following vessels loading in the bay, viz. Zephyr, Cox; Highland Lad, Moos'; Burdon, Aid, Alice, and Onyx, for London ; and Hiriby, for Liverpool. On the 14th of Septem ber, saw the Progress, TALBERT, off the Northern Triangles. She left the bay the day after the Hope. The Rowcliffe was lying at St. George's Quay ; the Ocean had gone to the south ward to load . the Young Dixon, Hamann, sailed eight days before for Landon. The Priscilla, Pnuzirs, from Casmarthen to Pictou, was spoke with on the isth uk. 20 leagues N. W. of Cape Clear, dismasted, and making for the brig port. The Alonzo, ELIMINS, from London, is arrived off Brut, with considerable damage. The Friendship, Burros, from St. John's (Newfoundland) to Bucktush, was totally wrecked at Cape Broyle, the end of September. Crew and materials saved. The Dominica packet, CLAIM, from Lnndonderry to New York, put into &rangford, leaky, and has proceeded to Porta. ferry to discharge. The Pail, Toutoota, from the Havannah to Havre, was driven on shore near ktochelle, the end of last month, but it was expected would be goi off. The Leander, Honoson, from Odessa to Liverpool, was driven on shore in Odessa Roads, on the 3d ult. but was got off and ready to proceed on the 6th ult. The Matilda, Hmisos, of Lubeck, from Rouen, is lost near the entrance of the Garonne. Wednesday night, the brig Mary and Kitty, of Wexford, Luau:, Master, with corn, pigs, and sheep, on her voyage to Liverpool, was wrecked on the Cited, near ialockbeggar. Of the crew and seven passengers only three were saved. The Cap tain is among the number of those who perished. The Sally, of Arundel, with coals, which was driven upon Margate Sand, on the aitd ult. was got off un Saturday Last. The following is an account of the loss of the brig Helen, of Greenock, 216 tons, Jamas Kass, Master and sole Owner, with timber, for Portsmouth Dock-yard:—On the Bth of Septem ber she sailed from Buccari, in the Gulf of Venice, seven miles from Fiume, and experienced very heavy weather the whole way. On the 17th of September, about four o'clock in the morning, at about 130 miles N.K. of Ushante, as she was scud ding, a sea broke into her over her tafrail, and completely broke all the beams of her quarter-deck, carried away the mizen-mast, land washed two men overboard, who were lost (David Scott a seaman, and Archibald M'Kechnle, the cook ), together with the boats. It was she second mate's watch, and when the acci dent happened, they were in the act of calling out the next watch. The Master and all hands were soon on deck, after being nearly drowned below. The main-mast was directly cut away to wear her, as she had broached too. She soon became full of water, and all hands had to look out for their immediate preservation ; some lashed themselves to the stump of the main-mast, and the others got into the fore rigging; at length she got so settled, that all were obliged to secure themselves in the foretop. The Mu ter was so exhausted from fatigue, that be was obliged to be hauled up under the top, for they could get him no further, where be was lashed, and about four r.st. he expired. About nine a.m. of the 18th a French brig took the survivors up about eight leagues from Cherbourg, viz. William Daw, mate ; Ro bert Weir, second mate ; John Dias, carpenter ; Andrew Acker, George M'Killop, John Peters, Robert Brown, Urquarti, seamen; and Robert Kerr, son of the Master, from the foneasp, l and left the Master dead dere. She carried them to and they arrived at Portsmouth on the 6th November, al ig l good health, by the Alfred packet, but with the kiss of every article belonging to them. They remained on the wreck with nothing but their shirts, except the second mate and boy: laltsrotro, Nov. 6 —Arrived the John Barleycorn, Winn, froth Newport, with the Master and crew of the brig Thaws. Lamaism, of Ilfracombe, on board, which vessel went down about live miles outside this harbour. Mitunisturr, Nov. 6.—A fishing-boat has brought in a boom , gaff, topmast, ;nd several other articles, which she took from a sloop, about eight miles N.W. from ells Eddystone ; the hull of the vessel was from twenty to thirty feet underwater. VaIMOVTN, Nov, S.—Wind &W.—Arrived the following outward-booed vessels: Dditford, 'loom, for St. Vincent's ; Rapid, Hoax, for Demerara; Timo Jonas, for Gibraltar; Dklo Ll Les, for St. John ' s, Newfoundl and ; and Aid, Porn, for Lisboa. PLYstoont Nov. 6.—Arrived the Albatross, Fannasoo, from Prince Edw ard's Island. Arrived off the Sound the Wanderer, Dun, from the South Seas. Put back the Mary, Rear, with damage, having been run foul of by the Chapman transport. POATSMOVlrli Nov. Wind 8.--Arrived the Huddart, Oazza,froan Ciotti= ; and London packet, Taaczir, from Bos ton for Amsterdam, short of provisioase.-Cante into harbour the Grecian schooner. DIAL, Nov. 7.—Wind S.—Passed by the back of the Good win Sands, the Natchez, WAILXOCX, from Havana& for Aistweri. Came down from the River, the Hector, nowise?, Lady Has. nab Ellice, URQUKAILT ; and Sovereign, Name for Jamaica; Rawlins, Dew, for St. Kite ' s; and Rawlins, B artz, for Sierra Leone, Arrived the Palladium, Laws, from Bucktush, and sailed for Hull. Lunt, Nov. 4.—The Larkins and Rattler, from Davies Straits, have arrived in Leith Roads, and passed up to Beness; the former with 17, and the latter with 14 full—both full ships. Tuesday, the Elizabeth, Viaticums, from Davies Straits, ar rived at Aberdeen, with 14 bh, 160 tuna of oil. Doves, Nov. 7.—Arrived the Recovery, bawra, from aff Dungeness Ruch, to repair damages. Cowes, Nov. 7.—Arrived the American ship iEolus, Soma sou, from Hamburgh for Philadelphia, with her fore-mast sprung, sails split, atc. Cnssost-House, Nov. 6.A—Ships Entered Inwards :—The For titude, from Revel lOlive Branch, from Waterford; Edward, from Bremen; Pomona, and Friends, from Liebau ; Eliza. Fer dinand, Naiad, an 4 Neptunus, from Dantzic ; Nassau, and Li berty, from Malaga; L oi re, from Dunkirk ; Burton, Martha, VRiovsal.l4 Isabella , from twerr Atlantic,!Ml; 44**11114i Vow, Patience, and Brodrick, from Petersirorgt ; Nerve, from Riga; Watson, from Memel; Elba. from Amount= ; Star% ling, from Havre: and Galnsborough, from Pleanimantsred Outwards :••-Tise George, Ilan Cobenrg, and Prince for Rotterdam ; Charles, and Piggot, foe Tobago; and of WINO" for Ostend.. --Cleared Outwardet--IVlre, Apr Marseilles; Oscar, for Jamaica ; Ocean, fttr Palermo; Ow% for Dominica • AnsPhitrise, for Grand Caner ; Astons, for Antigua; Ma rshal Blurbs:, for Rottartbun ; Herman, foe Mi lan; and Elizabeth, for Seville. AILISVIDAt St. Maloca, the Mna, Askew, from Ntweastle. At Barcelona, Aspadb M‘Kenzie, Iraqi Stornoway. At Tea& rifle, Meredith, Blundell, from Bristol. At Miransichi, marnock, Cumag ; Nereus, Wilson; 11110iners, Callender; George Cann*, Potter; Retreat, Kinnear; sad the Mary, Pitlady, from the Clyde; Martha, Martin, from Leltla4 Oxford, Callender. from Liverpool , and Nelson, Fatkin, front Bridge water. At St. John's (New Brunswick), Hanover, Adatoon, from London ; Ann, Mason, from Coil ; Hamlet, ---, fresh Londonderry ; and Angerona, Barclay, from Aberdeen. At Ancosti, Brothers, from Cork. THE EVENING STAR. LONDON• WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1890. THE FUND& PRICK OF STOCKS THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK : Sper Cent. Reduced 171-5 per Cent. Cies. 171 61 Si per Cent. 76-4 per Cent. 1151-5 per Cont. Navy 11411 Long Anne. 17 7-161—Imperials per Cent. 654 . Iridi 5 per Cents. 104—India &ode Ms. =Ys. pe. South Sea Stock 751—New Anne. ei Exchequer Bills 44. se. pre.—Gees. for Aers MI 671 U. gifted individual may come to the Throne, it is ee r . tainly possible that he may be led to infer, froin the Bishop's application of our English political atiom, (that " the Korn can do no wrong,") that he has a riSbe to debauch all the Ladies of the Court; and that, by a fictitious construction, not he, but the * Mi. nisters Fat she time being, coistmit the act of adultery! The observation of the Loan CHANCELLOR that, " as to recriseirmlionohe had not been able to find any authority in the Bible, which stated that a wo man who had committed adultery was to be consi dered hum:eat, because her husband did the same thing," deserves some notice, from the singular sub stitution of innocence, in the conclusion of the sen tence, for recrimination in the commencement. Th e question—and his Lordship knows it—is not whether a woman who has committed such an act shall be held innocent, hut whether, if her husband has com mitted the same act—and, especially, if in any way he has contributed to her crime—be shall obtain a verdict in a court of law against his wife? The LORD CMANCRLLOR knows, as well as Any man in England, that if any Riau come into Court, to seek for a remedy in such a case. " he must come with clean hands r But as the Loan CHANCELLOR has been examining his Bible, with respect to the crime of adultery, we beg to refer him to a passage which applies to the case of those who sit as Accusers and Judges, and which we would recommend his Lordship to read to the Haase the next time he talks about Scripture, when be ought to talk of the law of England. The passage to which we allude is in the eighth chapter of John's Gospel ; and as this book is rather ancient, -and not to be found in every Nobleman's library, we shall quote the words: " The Scribes and Pharisees brought unto Jasc•s a THE QUEEN. We cannot refrain from beginning our remarks this day by calling on our Readers, before attending to anything else, to read with the deepest attention the lettv from Naples of the 10th ult. inserted in our fourth page, from which they will learn a little more of the -artifices yet practised to procure witnesses against the Qtramr. woman taken in adultery : and when they had set her in the midst, they say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Mow in Me law cannnanded us, Mat such should be stoned : but what sagest thou? So when they continued asking him,' he raised himself up and said unto them, HE that is WITHOUT SIN among YOU, let HIM FIRST CAST A STONE AT HER r HOUSE OF LORDS, NOVEMBER S. PROCEEDINGS OF THIS DAY. TRIAL OF HER MAJESTY. The House resumed proceedings this morning at tee o'clock. Lord 13masroao (recently returned from Portugal) took Our Readers could hardly fail to observe, yester day, that our preliminary observations, written while waiting for our accounts from the House, embraced much of what formed the line of arguments through the day. But still there is much matter left for re flection. The Protest of her MAJESTY against the Proceedings of the House of Peers occasioned no little soreness to some of their Lordships ; and no wonder ; for a conduct similar to that with which they are charged, if fixed upon any men -in the middle ranks of life, would cover them with in famy, and banish them from every kind of society above that of thieves, picklocks,% suborners of false witnesses, conspirators against the innocent for the the oaths. sake of lucre, and plotters to pollute the pure stream Among the absentees from illness were bird Roos, the Earl of English jurisprudence. of Dssusurros, and the Marquis of Hearroati. Lord LIVERPOOL requested leave of absence for the The conduct of the Duke of NEWCASTLE, and „„, o f sr lab ,„„ —s w.... was tinder the necessity of Lords SoMERS and SHEFFIELD, in voting for the se- attending to the duties of the College over which he presides. cond reading, without hearing the evidence for the Lord KENYON thought the reason Oren Defence, was deservedly the subject of severe ani- Lord LIVERPOOL said, that the Bishop of Bristol bad pot madversion in the House. Ministers, remembering c anaille a Member of : h i s in t r i al l se ettb d er li dis ksa l usseas _ iyen, P racawahl g w as meant to the emphatical declaration of Lord LIVERPOOL in the give, any wee tspea it. we absence awaid, w e r. mew, be a mat. outset, that he trusted no Noble Lord would presume ter o f so i mp ortao „ as regarded this peoceeding. to give a vote on the case, who did not hear the Lord REDESDALE said a few words is favour of the ap. whole of the evidence, durst not throw their protect- idiestion--Leave of absence hewed- Lord HOLLAND said, that he had been prevented by W ing shield over them. The Duke of NEwcssrtz disposition from attending yesterday to six his name, within seemed to feel deeply indignant, that an attempt was tbe dose iincited by. the Standing orders of the Home, to made to deprive him of theinvaluabk privilege of de- the Dom f rom t h e s econ d R ea di ng o f t h e Rey He now ciding a cause without hearing it! , wished nis have their Lordships' permission to do so. He But of all the nets-light cast upon the country by had from the fiat looked on this BM as a very foolish, a very the discussion upon the Divorce Clause, nothing has reg a l dts heard tall* and very unnecessary measure ich ' "Lifter hay suced a pread such a gleam as the doctrine promulgated by :gdi, Lor dsh i ps 'Bar, he could now on his erweelesee been T a u d biome the BISHOP of LONDON. We had always understood declare, that be thought she r u nes i m prove d io May points, —and we believe that all the people of England doubtful in all, sod the Bin both unjust in plocipie and baud. were equally stupid—that the protecting axiom +'the ous in its consequences. King can do no wrong" had reference only to polid- Lord DARNLEY wished to put in a similar plea, on the cal acts ; because, for all measures of this kind Mi- V isual sd fsegetishass—(the V I*, no I"). Lord MINTO moved, " .That the Standing Order on the nisters are held responsible: but this Learned Chris- albite mould be dispensed w i t h." tian Bishop —or, more correctly—this Bishop of Lord LAUDERDALE thought such a motion contrary to the Church of England, applied the axiom to the au form. He desired that the Clerk should read the Standing Divorce Clause, to thew that recrimination could Order, as also the Order of the Mule respecting Mocha& ant be heard as applying to the KING. This The Clerk read the Orders referred to, from which it sqre peered, that no motion for the suspension of a Standing Order was the more amazing to many of the hearers, could be made without wake. from the circumstance of the Bishop interlarding the Lord MINT() gave up his motion. same discourse with references to the Scriptures. Let Lord HOLLAND said, that be did not retolka a single its for a moment compare his doctrine, in its practi- case of an application such as he had made being refused. cal application, - ow ith the conduct of a Churchman in Lord DARNLEY said, that though it might be incompe, the Court of Ling David. Did Nathan apply such sen t to move the immediate nonunion of a Stanfill Order, h e knew of nothing to prevent his moving, that certain Peers, nu unction to the soul of David when he had commit by name, should be permitted to sign the dissent. He cheat ted ad.l'.tgry ? That honest Prophet was, on the con- f ore move d, that Lord Holland, th e H o l m o f p eaceti m e , L or d nary, so oncourtly as to say to the King, " Thou art Bolingbroke, and three or four other Peers, whose names we did not catch, should now be allowed to add their names. l as NEU r But, says our Bishop, " The KING can Lord LAUDERDALE observed, that to move that certain no wrong ; be cannot commit a folly, far less a crime ; Peers who had neglected to conform to a Standing Order should and therefore recrimination is out of the question r new be enabled to repair that tinier*, was in his opinion, That is, should our good KING debauch the Bishop's moving no thing less than a di rect v i o l at i on o f the forms of wife, and afterwards murder the Bishop himself, his that House. lord HOLLAND said, that to remove all objection, the Winisters, and not himself, must be answerable : the best way would be to give notice, which he now did, of a me. Wrong must be held to have been done by them—not don for to-morrow to take the Standing Order of the House, by the KING ; for to apply the law otherwise would respecting Protests, under consideration. " involve a great constitutional principle." Lord LIVERPOOL said, that he thought no man could have In examining the bearing of this wise Bishop's hesitated a moment as to the reasonableness of doh application nor Dea n new doctrine, - we would not be understood to insinu- made b y his b t the Noble Dam ° M as (Lard Holland). It ad ate that our good and gracious KING has been, or wiiii nT t o fi + om maces, althea by r e Tales of dissent , the as he üb. House,period and can ever be, guiky of such iniquity as the Prophet Rabb* could be fairer than to grant the indulgence which be laid to the charge of the King of ISRAEL—who now craved. But he thought the ease was quite different, of would ever think of such a thing ? bat we mean to those whose only piss was mere forgetfulness. The very object af the Sanding Order was to goad against that sort of locos say, that his doctrine — if we rightly understand it, and if not torn up by the roots—may ultimately "sienee The LORD I CHANCELLOR said, that there was a greet be productive of incalculable evils to unborn gene- di m ionee h etwean m is la y e ar ... and meow dieesee_(.f laug h). rations ; for it is far from being impossible that forgetfulness was to be admitted as a goo d p l ea f or ge tting all of his MAJESTY'S successors may not possess the a Sanding Order of the House, there would be no end to same high . and exalted virtues,' the same self-corn- each aPPlleeeken• At v events, the question could never be in, what the Scotch call, " the shear way," proposed by the mend, the samb regard for the laws, the same correct post in, (Lord Darnley). Each Lord must speak for him. views.of what is due, in--the way of example, from a edf, and state the sd grata en which lie sowed die is _ Monarch to his subjects, that characterize our pre- &i tem of t h e H otta ; an d w h oever did so, ought „moduli scut 41•19 and whin P 7 suf4 wake t 644 leSh"seo state !bother it really had been his Vitiation to sign the this rhen At sent it ws to bi 'ghoul , tttucl hal t Lu being Pmed from suit o Fria Tit Lo speee the the pi of the bead could Thi 'gamut ships, vary c were • last ye of the Dly r Clause ous L had b Holy such ; induce release liberty wife d the hi The d hapte wife, nd he ith ti blished hem I I,ath sa most our I hich ompel een bi .octant erforc queni ere, 1 he evil et, any iews t er oted I easuu ear, • t of can n a of y fun 'teen her The d it I esterd g the 's life .ore a • ld • ed 'yore lean, resent ifFered t nal e ot, ho een ife of sot rt, b 'Tort at it, ould c e wet ut fry übstit nee ; 1 nd Le of sul lune he Tr The nwha imse duke ate f• •bliga ile ta ase, • ouh chi ight era sac 'yen c na At aest When Lad Casi