The National Register. — London, England, 1811-01-13 00:00:00

TIIE NATIONAL REGISTER 21..... That holding firmly- tlao-opiiiion, that these Prerogatives were vested in the Crown for tie benefit of the people, and keeping hi mind - the - declaration of . a great - personaga on a for mer occasion, they could see no reason why the Prerogatives thus temporarily suspended, might not be finally and entirely resumed'by the people. ts That they agreed in the sentiment expressed by his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales in 1788, that the projected Limi tations and Restrictions would have " the effect of dividing the Royal Family from each other—of separating the Court from the State—and, by disjoining Government from its natural and accustomed support, disconnect the authority to command ser once from the power of animating it by reward; and thereby allot to the Prince all the invidious duties of Government with out theo - neant of softening them to the Public by any one act of grace,_ favour, or benignity." " That it was a project for producing weakness, disorder, and insecurity in every branch of the administration of affair*, and, in short, for reducing his Royal Highness to the sad and disgraceful alternative of submitting to the dictates of men whose implacable hostility to public opinion, exemplified in their open contempt of the right of petitioning, is nut less no torious than their hostility to himself, or resorting to that bane ful inftiience, the eff,cts of which we feel in the enormous ad- . diti,ns to our burthens—in the diminution of our liberties—in the impunity with which the people have been insulted. " That his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales may he in- .! Vested with all the Prerogatives of the Regal Office, whether - they relate to the exercise of substantial power or to the genuine lustre of the King of a free people. " That Addresses and Petitions be presented to both Houses of Parliament, praying that the Regency Bill may provide for his Royal Highness's assuming the full Kingly Preruguive, whether reloi-ing to the efficient discharge of the Kingly duties, or to the necessary splendour of that high office. " That the suspension of any part of the Royal Prerogatives would, at all times, be highly dangerous, but was more particu larly so at the present moment, when the country was involved in war—and the Government was placed in the hands of those who called themselves his Majesty's Ministers—hut whose arrogance and imbecility were pregnant with disaster to the empire. " That the attempt to exert an authority over the Great Seal, and the issuing of Money by a Resolution of the two Houses of Parliament, at all times dangerous'and alarming, was at this moment rendered infinitely more perilous by the flagrant, arro gant, and notorious irubecillity of men, who had the presump :ion to call themselves the Ministers of the Crown ; by the overwhelming weight of taxation, and by a war, the declared object of which was, on tile part of an inveterate enemy, not only the extinction of our commerce and-best interests, but the total subversion of our rights, liberties, and independence as-a nation. " That it was the opinion of that Court that the most Con stitutional manner of proceeding would he to follow the mode sanctioned by their ancestors in 1688. by the two Houses ad dressing his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, that he would take on himself the civil and military administration of affairs, and the disposal of the public revenue, until the means of sup plying the defect in the Royal Authority should be adjusted by 411 Act of Parliament.' • Mr. OL'IN spoke at great length in favour of the Reao:utions. 1l spoke with con,iderable warmth on the conduct of those who pre:c nth; 1, by the " forced smiles," to treat the Resolutions with supercilious contempt. The present alarming situation of the country made the subject, then under consideration, a mat ter of great magnitude, and it demanded the serious thought and deep reflection of every man in the kingdom. The doctrine contained in the Resolutions had his full euncurrence; it was the doctrine of the Constitution ; and he deprecated the idea of re stricting and limiting the Regent. To lop off some of the Royal Prerogative's would have the effect of paralyzing the exertions of the Regent, and Nvou;el be of most injurious tendency to the interests of the people. The proposed line of conduct was neither supieirted by precedent nor by reason. No one of the prerogatives of the Crown could ever be suspended. lie pro posed au alteration in the last Resolution, to move an Address to byth Houses, but more particularly to the House of Corn. mons, beseeching them to place the Prince of Wales in the si tuation of Regent and Protector of the Realm, giving him the fiat power over the firvincial, civil and military, departments of the State, until.the means of supplying the detect in the Royal Functions should be adjusted by Act of Parliament. In doing this there was nothing. to create displeasure, nothing from which blame could arise to ;hem. Mr. CIiItISTOPUER SIviITS could not assent to the Resolu tions. Ile would ask with what propriety they could now • ad dress the House of Cori - limns. after having so grossYy insulted them, as they (the Court) did. last Session (alluding, we pre. *time ) to.the Petition to the. How respecting its.powor to im prison persons during their pleasure.) He would advise slie Court to await and rely upon the conduct of the two Estates of the Realm. Mr. Deputy %ascii objected to the spirit of the Reeolutions4 The " of the Resolutions was this, that his Royal highs ness, as Regent, should be distinctly put in possession of the Royal Powers, without loss of time, on the King's incapacity being. proved. 'the principles of that Revolution (168$) were as different from those inculcated by the Resolutions then pros posed as was light and dark!" There a King was to be pro. vided, the "Ihrone being empty ; but here the two Houses. were only called upon to provide for the temporary incepecity of this King. Here was a King upon the throne—the King was ineae pable of exercising the Royal . Functions, and that incapacity was to be provided fur. If the two Houses were to appoint a Regent to the full exercise of the Regal Functions without any restriction or limitation whatever, it would be " virtually de throning," the King. Two Kings could not sit upon one throne. To appoint a Regent with unrestricted and unlimited _ powers would be snatching the sceptre from the reigning Knits% hand. —(loud cries of No, no !) He concluded with moving, as an amendment, that all the words after " that" in the original mo tion, be omitted, and the following words substituted—' thie Court relies, with the fullest confidence, on the wisdom and constitutional principles of both Houses of Parliament, and that they will, under the present afflicting circumstances of our bee loved Sovereign, take such measures for the temporary discharge of the necessary duties of the Royal office, as well at the same time to secure the Crown on the bead of its rightful possessor, till such time as it may please Providence to answer the united prayers of the people,. by removing the present calamity with ' which his Majesty is afflicted ; and thereby enable him to ree assume the exercise of his Royal Authority, without mbar ras men to himself or his people." Mr. •CHRISTOPHER SMITH seconded this Motion. The original Resolutions were then read, as well as the Amendment, and on their being put, Mr. SLADIi. rose to express his dieapprobatioo of the Amend ment. If the Executive had only such prs. ugstives a. it Ough4 to have, the two Houses were bound to provide for the lull vas ercise of them in the appointment of a Regent; and if they abridged any of the Royal Prerogatives, that act would he tell ing the country that the King had more authority that wee ne cessary for the good of the people and the security of the Crown. He approved of the Resoiutions, because they Lid down the Constitutional - course that ought to be pursued in the present case of necessity. Mr. NIA \e St A N observed, that many Regencies were noticed in English history, but every Regency had had the full and un limited exercise of the Royal Authority. With respect to any obstruction being opposed to prevent the King's re-Assumption of power in the event of his .recovery, there was a sufficient se curity in the Perliement and the people ; but he could not for a moment believe that any one would be so base and so mean as to even advise, the Prince to obstruct his Father's return to power so sow' as he should' lie doclered competent to exercise. Mr. Dixosi thought the Resolutions ill-timed. They should have relied on the two Houses of Parliament, who were almost daily taking into the fullest consideration the most adviseabie conduct that could be pursued in the present emergency. lie did not know the Prince might be advi .ed ; but of this he wits , certain—the Princes old tried friends would he careful bow they trusted the new cunecrie I—( Considerable la ui 4 hing,.) Mr. Fever- contended, theta was most important and highly necessary, that they should express their opinion upon the pre sent state of affairs. The City of London should take the lead in public opinion, Where there Wa3 responsibility there ought ' to be unrestricted and unlimited power. He detended the con stitutional doctrine of the resolutions, therefore he disapproved of the line of Conduct marked out by the Ministers, and express ed by the Amendment. Mr. SVENCLtit contended, that to limit and restrict the Re gent in the exercise of regal authority was unconstitutional and irrational ; it was like saying to the master of a vessel, " you shell have the. power of punedurie the crew ; but you shan't have the pleasure of giving them :drup of grog Considerable I laughter.) Mr. W Lent and Mr. Maitero - r made some observations, but owing to there being much coughing and noise in the Court, we could not hear what they said, but we understood they ape proved of the Resolutions. Mr. WAITHMAY observed n the question haft been brought within a very narrow compass by calling the attention of the Court to the fixed principles of the Constitui ion. A deficiency in the kingly crfhce hod been made out, and 'it ought to be im mediately supplied: King, Lords, and Commons were re quired by our Constitution. Each had different powers—each was a check upon the other; and while each continued perfect, the Govecfnetent would le! enabled to go on, but when any one 4 became incapacitated,. it was dos duty a the two. remaining le .1••••• 'lO