Star. — London, England, 1821-07-09 00:00:00

• abutislantl?Veneditn - , that the right of having a cote:Alias btilt• aicTited in the Sovereign. With respect to the Prize Act, which was referred to, it tkrao alkilogYto the present case; besides, it here appeared that the Queen claimed to be crowned on a particular day. He had argued against the exist ence of the right at any time, and hoped, by this time, that he had satisfied their Lordships no such right existed. He was afraid be had not done the case that justice which its importance required. But . the fact was, lie found himself as others who argued cases in the Courts of Law did, namely, that of find ing a greater difficulty in arguing a clear case than one of 'perplexity. And if he failed of throwing any • additional light upon the subject, he hoped it would be attributed to its proper cause. His Learned Friend, • the Queen's Attorney-General, had certainly delivered si : .•to their Lordships a most able and historical detail, with the main facts of which he coincided; but with the conclusions drawn from which he totally differed. Thc.claim now made, was made for the first time ; .rand s if it were of such great importance to her and to the people, it was strange to find no law writer mention a syllable on the subject. It was not at . tempted to be supported by any statutary enactments any dictum of law-6y any passage in any able text writer—but depended entirely for its support on usage, and usage only. Though the Queen was high • .both in dignity and privilege, it should not be forgot ten that she was still no more than a subject. The Queen had no political character which required that she should be known or recognized at the coro nation; and, on all these grounds, he had no hesi tation'in saying her Majesty had no claim of right to be present at that ceremony. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, that coinciding as he did with the opinions just delivered by his Learned Friend, having given their opinions together upon the subject before—having consulted the same docu ments, and pursued the same inquiry—it would be impossible to expect that be should throw any addi tional light upon it. The only argument used in support of this claim was that of uninterrupted use and enjoyment; but when looking to the right claimed, their Lordships should be satisfied of the circum stances under which the use and enjoyment were said to give it. The Learned Counsel for the Queen should have shewn when this right was claimed, and exer cised as such ; and also, that it was not conferred by the grace an favour of the Crown. The case aright of way and common, which was introduced, rather made against than for the claim now asserted, be cause it might have been a hostile right, or an act of usurpation. Even a case might arise out of the very ceremonial, which rested on the same principle as the present claim—he alluded to the case of persons summoned to attend the coronation. 13ut would it be said, because certain persons usually were sum moned, it was absolutely necessary they should now be called? If this claim were admitted, those per-' sons must be called; if it were not necessary they should be so called, his claim must then of neces s ity be refused. Besides this, the language of the Pro clamations, which scarcely varied since the time of , Charles I. all tended to skew that the right of having' a coronation performed, was altogether at the will and discretion of the King. "We have decreed," is the language which they used—and how this could be reconciled with the substantive independent right of the Queen, be was totally at a loss to imagine.— Were the Privy Counsel to take the usage by itself to support the tight, or draw the inference of right from usage, in connection with the circumstances com-1 pounded with it? The latter appeared to him to be the course which their Lordships ought to pursue; and in doing so, then they would have to consider whether it was a right enjoyed by licence and autho rity from the Crown, or an adverse right claimed in dependently of the Crown. In the very outset of the case, these was one circumstance which afforded strong evidence that negatived the right in respect of u ,age: he alluded to the n e cessity of a Royal Proclama tion. The force of this was felt by his Learned Friend, Mr. Brougham, who endeavoured to evade it with great dexterity, and at the same time to misapply it in favOur of his own argument ; for he said, that when once the ight was established, the Proclamation must issue as a matter of course. This was a complete fallacy.- 1 lis Learned Friend, the Attorney-General, and him self reverted to this circumstance merely for the pur pose of shewing in what manner the light was en joyed, namely, by permission, by consent, by authority, and by the "command of the Sovereign ; and for the purpose of spewing that the Proclamation was to be taken in connexion with the usage to establish the right. It really appeared to him that the case, when considered, resolved itself into a dry, technical point of law (though surrounded by circumstances of great splendour and pomp), and must be treated as all Courts of Justice treated such questions. The claim in this case was founded upon uniform usage, and unless it was clearly established that such a usage existed, the claim must fill to the ground. The au thority of Lord B icon, already relerred to—a great and learned Lawyer, a contemporary historian of the times in which he wrote, arid perfectly conversant with the subject of which he treated, was decisive, to spew that the Queen-consort had no right, as matter of usage, to be crowned ; but that when she was crowned, it was a matter of grace and favour con ceded to her by her Royal Husband. Another con current authority to the same point, was Leland's Collectanea, in the Cotton manuscripts of the British Museum. His Learned Friend, after all his industry and research upon the historical part of the case, completely tailed in making out the uniform usage on which he relied. Under the Saxon line, the privi lege of coronation had long existed before it was c nnmunicated to the Queens-consort. According to the authority of Selden, it did not take place at all until after the tenth century, and then proceeded en tirely from the King, as matter of grace and favour. This was perfectly manifest from reference to every instance from the time of the Norman Conquest.— William the Conqueror was married at the time he came to the Throne. The Queen of Stephen was not crowned with him ; but it was said by his Learned Friends, that there was a necessity and convenience sshy Stephen should be crowned alone. Why, this very assertion was an argument in favour of the view he tooklpf the case ; for, if this was an inherent right in Matilda, no necessity or convenience could deprive her of it. Henry 11. was married when he came to t':e Throne, and he was not crowned until a very con siderable period after his accession, because he consi• .. . deted that he held by so strong a title that there was no necessity for hastening Ins coronation. Their Lordships would always keep in view that this Claim was founded upon uniform and immemorial usage.— The fact was, that Henry the Second came to the Throne in December, 1154, and he was not crowned until the year 1158 ; and his Queen was not crowned till 1159. The argument founded upon immemorial usage, in this instance, therefore, completely failed. Then, as to the instance of Prince Hey, the coro nation of his Princess took place in consequence of the remonstrance of Louis, who thought that the ab staining to crown his daughter with her husband was a reflection upon his own royal dignity, and there fore the ceremony took place, but only in the light of favour and grace. So much then as to that his torical fact. As to the case of John, he was married at the time of his coronation ; but his wife, Elizabeth of Gloucester, was not crowned with him. It was said, however, that the reason why she was not! crowned, was, because John was then seeking the hand of Isabella of Angouleme in marriage. That was not the fact ; because the thoughts of his court ship with that Princess were not entertained until a whole year after his coronation. He was crowned in the month of May 1199, and it was not until the month of May, in the following year, that his at-' tachment for Isabella began. It was said that there were some doubts as to the validity of John's mar riage with his first wife, but history proved that he lived with her nine years afterwards. From the pe riod of the Conquest, therefore, there were four Kings who were married al the time of their respective co ronations, and not one of their four Queens was crowned with her consort. These were facts too -stubborn, even for his Learned Friend's ingenuity, great as it was, to grapple with. He should add no thing more to what had been said by the Attorney- General as to the case of Henry VII. It was quite', clear that that Monarch delayed his marriage as long as poliCy and expediency would suggest. That brought him to the reign of Henry VIII. and the Learned Solicitor repeated all the observations made by his Learned Coadjutor. upon the different mar riages of that Monarch, to strew that the argument in support of the right in respect of uninterrupted .usage was not bottomed in fact. It was no sufficient reason Why Henry VIII. did not crown Lady Jane Seymour, his favourite wife, as it had been said, be cause the Church was then in a disturbed and distracted state; for never were the Clergy of this country in so abject a state of tyranny and thraldom as at that time, when the Monarch took upon himself, with his own hand, to alter the Mass-book ; and nothing could have been more easy for him than to command the ceremony. The solution of the difficulty, therefore, resorted to by his Learned Friends, availed nothing.— Nest as to the case of Charles I. it was perfectly cer tain that his wife Henrietta was not crowned with him. If that Queen was entitled to be crowned, as a matter of right, she could not have waived it; but being a matter in the pleasure of the King, it was quite easy to assiln a sufficient reason for her not being crowned. The Learned Solicitor-General, in the remainder of his argument, followed preci s ely the course adopted by his Learned Coadjutor, and contended that the usage relied upon having com pletely failed in proof, and being directly contrary to the opinions of the ablest Lawyers ;Ind Historians who had written upon the privileges of the Queens consort of these Realms, the claim set up by her pre sent Majesty must be disallowed. Mr. illiOUGII:Vtl, after retiring for a few minutes, with the permission of the Council, then replied to the arguments of the Attorney and Solicitor-General. His Learned Friends were mistaken in supposing that he relied upon the necessity of a proclamatiott issuing as evidence of the Queen's right to he crowned. He had merely mentioned it by way of anticipating the argument which might be drawn front it on the other side, and of rebutting the presumption which would probably be raised upon it. He contended that the language of the usual proclamations en such occa sions, was merely the mode of allowing the right, which was to he considered as ex debihrn jushaa, and not es Brat ;v. The like language was used in writs of error and other writs, which tf light be longed to the subject. In this point of view the pro. clamation was to be considered merely as a writ of coronation, conferring no favour on the Queen, but giving her that which she had a right to demand.— Ile coronation proclamation was analogous to the writs issued by the Crown in the event of the decease of a "Peer. His son inherited his rights without the writ, which conferred no new title or privilege upon him ; but still he could not exercise his rights without. His lion. Friends relied much upon the language of the proclamations. They seemed to think " We have resolved," "His Majesty has determined,"&c. proved that the existence of what his Majesty resolved on was contingent on his will. But he did - not see that it was inconsistent with the existence of a right, that' the writ by which it was enjoyed shootd say that the party was resolved upon issuing that writ, in order that it might be enjoyed. An Executive might be willing that justice should be done, without diminish ing the right of those concerned to that justice.—With , respect to the word " Posh/am/is," if it proved any thing, it proved too much ; for, if the word were aay thing more than a matter of course, it shelved that it was optional in the Archbishop to grant the favour asked of him or not. Then his Hun. Friends said, that the coronation of the Queen was nothing but a mere pageant, possessing no political importance.— The very words which had been quoted as proof of this, however, refuted the position ; for it was called', a "Royal ornament," an "outward solemnization." Now, he asked, of what was it a solemnization, if not of the marriage of the Queen with the King, and• therefore, as affecting the descent, of public import ance ? It was an. outward public acknowledgment of the legitimacy of the marriage, to put it beyond question that there was any flaw in the descent.— His Hon. Friends said, he had no right to separate the cases of a King married when he was crowned, and of one married afterwards. There was this dis tinction, that it became more necessary for a King to make this public acknowledgment of a marriage contracted whilst only heir apparent, than when he was in possession of the Crowno and his acts there fore more open to public view, and resting upon responsible advisers. This was, no doubt, the ori ginal intention in crowning Queen-consorts. He ap plied himself to the four exceptions to his general proposition, and concluded that they were all to be, explained by the circumstances under which they oc cuffed. lie then went into a detail of the historical facts connected with the cases of exception adduced by his Learned Friend, and :hewed that in the cases of William the Conqueror, Henry I. Stephen, and Henry IL it was physically impossible that the Queens of those Monarchs should have been crowned with them, they not being present in the country at the occurrence of those solemnities. In all those cases a separate solemnity was, however, fixed and per formed as soon as the first opportunity occurred. With regard to the instance of the Queen of Charles I. the answer of his Learned Friend the Solicitor-Gene ral, did not appear to be so triumphant as he seemed to imagine. The arguments which he (Mr Brougham) had used with regard to the circumstances under which that exception occurred, so far from being in consistent with each other—so far from being incom patible, in his opinion they went to fortify each other. He then alluded to the treaty entered into with regard to the marriage of Prince Charles and Hen rietta Maria, as it was set forth in Rynter's Tedera.— In this treaty the ceremony was appointed, and on account of the differences in religion, great pains were , taken to prevent umbrage being given to the various religions of the parties affected by the contract.— Now, it this was necessary with regard to a marriage ceremony, would not the same views be taken into consideration upon the solemnity of a coronation?— Upon these grounds, it was perfectly coaslstent for the Queen not to wish to be crowned, for the fear of bringing odium upon herself, and for the King to consent, for the sake of preventing discontent among his subjects. It had been contended by his Learned Friends, that a. public right could not have been waived by the Queen ; but he never contended that it had. She only waived her priv-ite right, and there by an injury was done to the realm. But that waiver could not destroy—it only suspended the right, which suspension could not weigh against the general usage and the original existence of the right. He had yes terday illustrated this by the practice of the Courts of Law, with regard to rights of common, where ex ceptions or suspensions of right had occurred. lie then argued upon the distinction to be taken between services to be performed at a coronation of a Queen consort, and the onorous or honorary offices about the person of the King, such as following him to the wars, or carrying a banner before him. To follow him in time of war, was originally onorous upon those who held certain manors or lands; and in consequence of their services in the wars, they were elevated to the honorary office of carrying a banner before him. Of exactly such a nature was the office of Sword Bearer to the King; the reward of some onorous duty which had been performed with zeal and distinction. Undoubtedly the appoinfments to do similar services to the Queen, must have been made under similar cir cumstances, as in the case of the which he mentioned yesterday. The SOLICITOR•GENESIAL observed, that there was no mention of that claim or right upon the Records. Mr. BROUGHAM said, that it Was contained in the Red Book of the Exchequer, and he read - the passage to their Lordships the day before. • The SOLICITOR-GENERAL replied, that the claim had been disallowed at the coronation of James 11. and two others; and he did not believe that it was granted at that of Richard H. Mr. BROUGHAM had found it in the Testa de Ne ville, and in the Roll of the Knights' Fees, and there was no doubt but the claim had been allowed. The right of the Queen to be c rowne d must be substan tial and independent, or how could such rights as he had shewn to exist ever have derived their origin? They must have grown out of her right, and were as much connected with it as others were with the co ronation of the King. He contended that the nature of Grand Seijeantry did not confine it to mere per sonal services done about the body of the King, but to any offices done in his parks or elsewhere. It must, then, likewise extend to all his family connections, and unquestionably all services rendered to his con soi t at the time of her coronation must be Grand Serjear.try, as well as any other duty performed whatsoever. As to the allusion to the Scottish Act of Parliament, there was no weight whatever to be attached to that. His Learned Priends said that the words, " Dcmine nostra• Regime were peculiar to the particular Act in which they were contained, and they rested upon the pronoun as referring to that Queen alone. Whereas it was evident that "nostrre" was only used as an expression of form. If his Learned Friends would turn to the head of the very chapter in which this passage occurred, they would find, as in all other places, that the King was mentioned in the same manner. The words used were "Domine nostro Rege." With respect to Lord Bacon's remarks upon the omis sion of crowning Elizabeth, the consort of Henry VII. for some considerable time, he only spoke as an his torian, not as a lawyer. lie merely stated what the facts were, without giving any opinion upon the ques tion of right or legal power in the Monarch to delay the ceremony. It was clear that the York faction held it to be the Queen's right ; as the head of that faction, Margaret of Burgundy, expressed herself, be cause it had been the practice with all Queens from the Conquest downwards. ‘Vith regard to the Queens of henry VIII. his Learned Friend, the Attorney- General, only stated that four of them were not crowned, without bringing forward one scintilla of evidence in proof of his assertion. He then proceeded to explain the probable causes why the consorts of Henry VIII. were not crowned. But let his Learned Friends shew one case where the claim was made and thezight refused. This, he contended, they were utterly unable to do. Ile had now concluded his arguments, and his observations upon that which had been ad aced against them by his Learned Friends. He be seeched their Lordships to bear in mind the propOsitions which, he was confident, he h a d sat i s f actor il y ma d e out. If so, it was contrary to all analogy in the constitu tional law, or in the imperial law of these realms, to say that the rights of the Queen to partake of the solemnity of coronation, only existed at the will or pleasure of any individual. Howsoever their Lord ships should decide upon the strict legal right, when all the circumstances of the Queen's claim to be crowned, and all the high and ancient rights con nected, and so inseparably interwoven with it, were taken into view, even upon the ground of expediency and propriety, it would be almost a criminal act in any Council to advise the Sovereign to set the first example of the omission of that high solemnity. Shbrtly before four o'clock Mr. BROUGHAM con eluded, and strangers were ordered to withdraw.— The Privy Council afterwards adjourned till Tuesday, • THE EVENING STA R. LONDO N. MONDAY, JULY 9, 1821. THE FUNDS. 'PRICES OP STOCKS THIS DAT AT ONE O'Clork: 3 per Cent. Reduced 77 1 / 2 3 / 4 3 per Cent. Cons. 76 3 / 4 77 ex. div. 4 per Cent. 95 1 / 2 1 / 2 —Navy 106% 109% taw ; Long Anns. 19 7-16 1 / 2 —lndia Bonds .57 L 591. Exch. Bills. 4s. 6s. pr.—Cons. for Acct 78 % 4 r: The argument on the Queates claim to be cro rno along with the KING terminated on Saturday T , Privy Council are to give their decision to. rt i ono ., : It is looked forward to with little, or, we s:loul.1 rag : , say, no anxiety whatever. No person doubts what will be, although there may be some diire the grounds on which each rests his b e li t i daim will be rejected. That such will be ;!:e sion, we anticipate not from entertaining the sn::Il!ct distrust in the uprightness of. the Privy Council, b7z from the form which the case of her ;ii shaped by her own legal advisers, has t a L m. Memorial of her MAJESTY consisted of two first, her right to be crowned ; and 'second, l)! T prayer to be crowned on Me swie (iv with Now it is extremely clear, that though the right sv , : , ! established beyond all que:tion, it does not means follow that the prayer to have it czo- c i l ; on the same day with the Coronation of JESTY, must, or ought to be granted. The is a matter of favour entirely, which vicars discretion alone must regulate. We think it pn. bible, therefore, that the Council will pass no jr, is ment on the right, but content themselves wiz!l.,:. Glaring, that no ieacon 'ooe,lsLesvn to induze::% ;s to recommend that her M .a.ms - ry should be mate! on the same day with the litxo ; reservi7l7, to lc MAJESTY whatever right she may have to be c10g,.( at any future pet iod. The foreign arrivals yesterday consistel of tlt . Paris Papers of Thursday, Madrid to the 25th a% and Dutch to the 6th inst. The debate on the Censorship of the Press in fr.mr commenced in the Chamber of Deputies on Wedm, day. It was opened by M. SIMEON, Minister of tie Interior, and the author of the propehed law forte continuation of the restrictions. He concluded long speech by recommending its simple adnp:;o•. —He was followed by M. BUSSON, who maintaind that a Censorship was incompatible with the ciples of a Representative Government. The stzt speaker, M. JESSE BEAUVOIR, made a vielert!i• rangue in support of the Ministerial project; the course of which he was frequently inte;rtiptel by such expressions as the following r—t , It is t:.s speech of a disturber !"—" No (says another), but ci a madman." A third subjoins, .‘ It is the speech a fool 1" General Fox called him twice a calumniate*, and at last quitted the Chamber, notwithstanding the efforts of his friends to detain him, exclaiming, thu he could not longer listen to such a speech. At i:; conclusion, the debate was adjourned to the follow. ing day; and it is likely to last for a week or ten days, and to excite all the passions of the codicting parties in the Chamber. There is some probability that the Ministers will be defeated, as they are opposed by the two extreme parties. The Ultras are as anxious for the Liberty of the Press as their opponents—a proof that they hare no small confidence in their talents as writers, or dui they think public opinion more favourable to them. The Spanish Cortes have, it appears, given the ne• cessary authority to the Spanish Government to raise a loan of 200,000,000 reals. Numerous arrests have taken place at Seville, where a vast plan of conspi racy against the Constitutional system has been dis covered. A former Guerilla Chief, D. Mnt, is amongst the number of persons arrested. The KING had pre- mised a Deputation of the Cortes to proceed to the Assembly on the 30th, to close the Session. The Piedmont Gazette of the 26th ult. contains an additional list .f 25 individuals, whose property is sequestrated, and who are to be prosecuted. Letters received in Vienna, from the frontiers of Turkey, speak of a sanguinary battle having taken place near Galacz, between the Greek Army and the Turks, in which the latter were completely defeated, with the loss of thirty pieces of cannon, and four Pachas made prisoners. The QUEEN Of the NETHERLANDS arrived on the 30th ult. at Spa. The KING of PRUSSIA was expected there on the sth inst. French Five per Cents.—Wednesday, 85fr. 80c. The visitors to see Westminster Hall and Abbey this morning, were very numerous, many of them of the first rank. Upwards of 100 additional hods have been put on this morning, in order to forward the different works, which are all to be finished this week. The applications for tickets for admission to the galleries to witness the passing ceremony, exceed all expectation. There are no fewer than eight hundred table' deckers and waiters already set down as Candidates for service at the Coronation Banquet. In the round of visits which her MAJESTY is paying to the different Theatres, it is understoo that her nest ,% I;.e 'Lc Theatre Royal Enzlisb Operayousc.