The National Register. — London, England, 1813-04-11 00:00:00

_VIE NATIONAL REGISTER. which surmises the existence of Kenney to have been a check on the advisers of her Royal Hight'sel. The word devoted presented itself to me from recollection that it was Kenny's phrase; but I certaioly used it in no other sense -than that which it was intended to hear by him. If it he slimes ed capa ble of implying that Jonathan Partridge was in the pay of the Prin cess, or so connected as to he the instrument in any plan, I totally disavow any such meaning--a meaning. iedeed,.not reconcilable to the details. The particulars rotated by Keoney clearly iothcated Ids conception to be only that Partridge was ion into admiration of. the condescension and liberality sit tile Princess, and was thence zealous to testify attachment. To imagioe that a man, under the influence of that se uth:lent. would net !lase n to make a merit of imparting that he haul ir..en examined ruspseting her Royal High. tress, would be to know nothing of 'Juneau nature. This disposition led him into a suppie v .ion Nvltich raw A:111 .111 , 1 a obligua me now to notice, though it was not toTessary that I alionld animadvert upon it in the letwr of mine which was the gr nod of your motion. The omission to which I am pointing will define the second passage ; yet I most say I do not comprehend how any man who reflected thr a moment coull understand that passage as pointing at the Princess. What consequence to her Royal Highness could attend the bringing forward the discussion while Kenney was alive, when the ss hole matter (as related to her) was dismissed in 1103, when Kenney was forth-coming? Partridge in his deposition, states himself to have told me of the Princess having visited Belvidere House with three Ladies and a Gentleman. This representation is correct. Ile did state this to hare taken place on a Sunday. But he sinla the fact of his having mentioned at the some time that the Princess had also been there with only Mrs. Fitzgerald and Captain 3lan!lT on the Thursday preceding that Sunday. This was the visit which had been particularly pointed out to Lord Eardley, and which had oc casioned Ins Lordship's preeedare.—With any refereoce to 0:e Princess, it is absolutely inlitf...rent, and was treated by me as such at the time. Not so, with regard to those at whom my observation was pointed. The assertion, that the long 141es:trance of the Princess's advisers could only be salved by their being too culaioas to touch on (lee poiNls when Kenny was alive, alludes to their knowiedge of the meeting on Thursday —a fact whirl', ripresented as it hall been, made enquiry into the eieentnstaiires, unavoidable. The ex istence of Kenney bailed the unworthy imputation which those Gentlemen were desired to affix ; lweale-e Kenn .y would have ex pose!. such a wilful suppression in Partridge's deposition, as as necessary to give a colour to their purpose. In that purpose the Princess could have no community of mitre: is : it was simply a measure of pel.. - i - esrl intrigue. With regwd to the visit at Belvidere louse on Thursday, though Ke: n iey be dead, Mrs. Fitz:4mila could easily be questioned whether it took place or not. The sub stmutiatiob of it involves no kind of charge against the Princess. It tady rebuts the management of those who. by attempting to make IL be conceived that there was butt one visit ka sisit so circumstanced as to be incapable of any possible misieterpretationl, would lain establish their position, that the enOiry was wanton or desioing. I trust I have been explicit on these points ; and I mast feel my self entitled to hope, that this answer of mine to your call upon me, may have as mulch publicity as the doubts which you thought it ex . 'melon ts. urge. I have the honour, dear Sir, to be, Your very ouctlient servant, (Signed) bisrer street, April& IBIS. SAMUEL WHITBREAD, Eq. Div DEAR Loon—l had the honour to reeeive your Lordships letter in the ark moon of yesterday ; and Ltake the earliest oppor tunity in my power of expressing to your Lordship my perket sa tisfactiou at the explanation you have thus been pleased to ehe uf the passages in your published letter to a Meunier of the Lodi.,e of Freemasons which had Inen so generally misconstrued. your Lordship has most emphatically asked, with respeei to Reitney, " what consequence to her Royal Highness could attend the bringing forward the discussion whilst Kenney was ulive, when the whole matter (as related to her) was dismissed in HAM, when Kenney was forthcoming?' Your Lordship's answer to this. question is implied, awl must meet with immediate and universal euneurreece. "No consequence whatever." Respecting Partridge. the word " devoted" is stated by your Lordship to have been use:l.6y ye tt, from the re::olleetion of its Navin; been the phrase of Kenney, when examined by your Lord ship, and not intended by him to crubey the Aightest imputation flow the ineess of Watts. Your Lordship hail thus disarmed the world of all nuagjnahle offence. At to the allegetl aMitioual visit to Belvidere, not mentioned in defosi Lion of Pat tkdge, it is uouecessary to wake much ma- APRII: 1 11. men% as your Lordship has said, 4 6 that with any reference to the Princess.of Wales, it is absolutely indifferent, and was treated as such by you at the time." Besides, the parties arc Alive ; and if a sittipiCioll of impropriety could exist, they might and would have bran examined. Your Lordship's judgment on this matter, after investigation, Is most satisfactorily decisive, %Alien you further say s " the substantiation of it " (the additional visit to Belvidere)" :li volves no kind of charge against the Princess of Wales." I am concerned that any report of my Speech in the House of Commons, should have led your Lordship to think, for a moment, I had proeeeded hostilely towards yourself ; and 1 was sorry .to see how very in ,ccurately what I bad said in the House of Commecs 00. Wednesday, was reported in some of the Papers of tla•succeeding day. The report to which yoar Lordship adverts, as containing the true version of my speech, had been seen by me I ate on Wednesday night, and was intended for insertion in the Papvr on Thursday morning; 1 was afterwards informed it had arrived too late to fiod a place in the Paper•on Thursday. I was glad to perceive it in in the Maraing t'lzeonie./e of yesterday. Having seen it before it was sent to the press, I can have no hesitation in saying, that, to the best of my recollection, it contains the substance of what I si.ia hi my place. Some verbal inaccuracies are quite immaterial. I am hound to fulfil your fjord .hiip's hope, by making your letter to ine public. in entleavourite% to obtain the explanation of pas sages so generally understood, I knew not how to proceed effectually, but by a motion in the House of Commons, if successful, your Lordship would have had the opportunity of giving the explanations in the very place where they were asked for ; anti 1 never had any doubt of their honourable and satisfactory nature. But the discus sions in the House of Commons bovine now been dipped (as I sincerely hope never to be revived), P- I will send your Letter, and my Answer, directly to the Public Journals. It will give me pleasure to acknowledge, by the same 'neat's, much personal civility received at various times from your Lord ship ; and particularly - in the manner in which I was requested, and the urbanity with which I was received, to peruse tae documents with which your Lordship has referred in the early part of the pre sent year. In the discussions which afterwards a: use, I did not use the knowledge I had so acqeired of any one of them, until- it had appeared in print. I regret, that in the course of these discussions I have given mo mentary pain to their Lordships, or cause of dissatisfaction to any persons, of whwe friendship and esteem I was pleased in thinking I possessed a share.. Time loss, if lost, is entirely my own—it is pain ful to me. But justice has been the object of my pursuit—that. Vursuit has been conscientiously conducted by use, and must there fore, t T f necessity, have been free f:orn selfish consideratio.os. %Vitt, the addition of these explanations from your Lordship, se honourable to the Princess of Wales, and so jut to yourself, the public will be satisfied, that justice has been obtained. I have the honour to be, my dear Lord, Your Lordship's obliged and obedient Servant, SAMUEL ‘V HITUREA D. To the Right lion. the Earl of AloinA, K. G. 6;:c. &. The cloudy qualifying rountl- about style of Lord Moira's letter, sufficiently proves it to b e genuine, but that Mr. WHITBREAD his alswer could pretend to think the explanation of Lord Motu A satin- f;ii-fory, might justity sonic doubt being 'brown on th o document. We WWI till we almost weep, to see ouch things sent forth to the work' by men who are called Statesmen. We turn with pleasurf from these to something more rational. LETTER FROM BILLY AUSTIN TO MR. WHITBREAD. [From the Satirist td the present Month.] Blackheath, March c2sth, 1813. DEAR SIR, —Although I hear you are a vet y speaking man in Par, lament : Always .1111tiiillis to tAke the lead, and carry your train* ever iliffirnltiex and dAngers, j wit like myself when I get our boys to play at " hillow my leader,'' and gallop them over hedges, and through ditches, and such ton, till they are so torn and dirty you can't think, —ye., Sir, though you .ire so t real a man, yet, as your origin, like . mine,Nras also a little (peer and obscure, I hope you will not be an gry w ith me for writing you this letter, mereiy to beg that you will not plead the c,itise of the good Princess, who has brought me up. For lam told ynn do her mue i harm by it; fur that though you are the best and readiest accuser in the world, you arc the very worst :tde fender that any person can have . lam sure the good • Princess never did you any harm ; and Iwi .11 you would la her alone. But they I say you are never easy unless ou are charging and abusing great peo l'ple, whom you can't abide on account of their belug born noblemen , ' and sueli like ; • whereas, if thtilfadhccu borli iu low life, t '.• t3B. I. i ► r r L 1' ti I is le le te ) 4. its L. l►e illy to tgh nk, ike an- will ttp. are de- nrer they peo- -1101.