The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1821-07-06 00:00:00

rtww'r" .. , ,77 71 1, . • • .-.. • , .72:, 1 ' ' - ' 4t. ~ . . ,•. " - -, - -vm,r, ~ 1 31% • • • `4.' ~. 0 • tir '' '. . .. lt, 4 .r.". r ... . A . ' . 0. ... . 01 - , 1 .... • • :=:. , ~~.. •i the kiln in which the coronation of the Queen was to be celebrated. and contained these vary re markable words Hem isi►ies egotist motto is corooalioam Regis. ai sit toromatio regie l neve solo covesato." Henry IV. was clowned 14th October, 1399. He was twice married. Ills first wife, Mary, died • —lame he -come . to-.-the teen., liifeQteeee JohMae was crowned with hint. Newry V. in 1419, the eighth year of his reign, came from France - -is - Asieod • the talmudism if his Qoeen Cat&rime. . 11 . Close Roll of .the Tower proved that she was -crowned alone, and that 'suit end service were .pesformed for her es Queen Consort. in the same oamitter as had been done for the King,. On .the Accession of Henry VI. he was en infant he was „pain crowned; once in England, in .1449, and „ • spin in France, in 1491. He was married after „both coronation., and his Queen, Margaret, was crowned alone in 1445. Here he would, with their Lordships' permission, step aside to con • eider what lied been the role and precedent of • Scotland in these matters, where_ the seine custom with that which he had been describing had uniformly taken place, though the documents for the proof ' of it were by no means so clear or perfect. But ilia he was prepared to maintain, that there was nn instance iii the history of Scotland in which a Queen Consort had not been crowned with or with , • .out her husband. He stated this iu the hrisedest .terms, and he pat it on those who smutted the • '.coutrery, to disprove him. The reason sod • principle on which he grounded this assertion ..tataluty. was a very remarkable circumstance in the ' *salute laws of Scotland, with regard to the right • alf 4 1 1:ieens Consort to coronation. He held in his hand the book which contained the «hole: statute law of the kingdom, as it had remained • for one particular period of two centuries. The statute in question preicribed an oath of elle gisuce to be taken to the Queen Consort ; and it was passed in the nth Parliament o( James I. of Scotland in the year 1429, and was to be found in chap. 109 in the enactments of that year of his reign. In the folio edition of the Statutes., the terms of the oath were to be Resumed as terms of succession, and were held to tipple to heirs and successors throughout all time. Ile. found . f..m Murray's Digs. tof Ike Moieties, with the . ' Conownriaries upon them, that' the oath held to he of the same force and importance. in .all re.pecto es the Oath of Allegiance taken 'ta the King. That he had a right to• refer to • Seoich precedents he was fully prepared to sueintain--since the Act of Scottish. Union made the interests of the kingdoms the same. aesides which, he had only .to refer their .Lardshii.s, many of whom must here been personaly engaged in them, to the debate/A on the first Regency. iu the lust reign, in the report on . which - Scotch precedents were mentioned and,.rea soared upon' the same as English precedents.. 'Edward IV. was mowued in 1461 • and .in 1463, bs'ing then married to .Elisabeth Woodville, wee ; .crowned with her immediately after the marsiage.:, The Cotton manuscripts contain the. orders; issued for 'the coronation of Edward IV. and h 6 consort; , that which referred to the Queen required thist the; .• same order should be taken " younedo oohs yore.. eats." The ceremonial for. the Ring's coronation was there laid down, and, then ,separately that which • was to be observed for ihe Queen.-- . Richard . 111. and his Queen were crowned . loge. titer in lOU. And this brought him down to the period of Henry VII. upon whose reign ond coro natant it would be necessary for him to teedur: snore than one observation. It was well .known, that that Prince held the throne by the threefold claim of marriage, conquest, and descent. Lord • Bocon remarked, that he (Henry VII.) always.cost-: rodered descent as the principal claim, and that he, considered the other two as only casualties compared i with that of descent. He had, as the same writer -observed, always placed descent es his shield, and conquest and marriage as his supporters. All his adherents of the Lancaster party upheld his pro. 'elisions on the claim of descent. The King's claim • ifeferio was conatitnied by Act of Parliament to be de Jere ever after, Not only Henry and. his adluia rents, but that which was the only legitimate organ tb whit-it their Lordships could attend, the Perfumers*, . • held the claim of descent to be the highest. of -the • three. • Henry caused himself to . be . croword,,hosa.: ever, before; ffe made any. application to Parini. , ' in • 1485. Parliament Set • few dela niter. • •The 'Act was ... passed .which entailed the crewel. 'limiting the succeisiou to Henry VII.. and..elip direct. heirs of 'hi! body:, He was declared to. 'a full end perfect right to, the crown, and-no eats. • tiorr was Made of the Princess Elizabeth; and it was kept as f matter of doubt. whether she was to •be Queen or not, his policy being to avoid-that marriage . , if it . were possible.. Jt was even said that be was in peaty for soother Princess, . slid still he cdtkinued to defer celebrating the marriage as long as he could: He was not married till 1486. A very remarkable delay then took place in the at the Queen, who was, it was to be Princess. and the daughter of Ed ;relit doubts were entertained, and eat was excited by this delay. belie and treated in all respects. as Quetta Aim the more jealous Henry had .beep . pretensions being mingled with his own, the . - he was to ovoid meeting- Parharnenri confirmed his own claim, the more' had been to defer the marriage, the he was to avoid doing any thing after . seem to imply even a notice of the ights• with respect to the crown. She —treated as the Queen Consort, and had remarked that Henry's marriage occasioned mach .more triumph and hie own entry or commotion, which, further remarked, the Rang rather liked:: The delay of hercoronation give great umbrage. And here he what were the feelioge of the country, .Iv of ilie.Oueente party, on the occa referting to., a theft- firing authority. f York, aunt to Elisabeth, afterwards the Duke of Burgundy, had these re , the reflections which she made upon those blues. •' She could not," she without trouble that Henry refused to th be crowne4 (so honour which no _ England had . been debarred of since ' ellelleell 1 ), and 4,at the birth of a eon - `-miniand bin ite all more indulgest er knit *•4l. I. • trim "!!!INF! 0 M!"--; in his conduct towards her." He could not appeal to a better authority thau that den aged end Royal women, the aunt of the reigning Queen, the last fortress'and prop of the Lancasters, jealous of the rights which belonged to her family, and fearful of any tbing.-:which appeared to slight their claims. She had passed the less active moments of her fife only,. conscious of all which had transpired in the course of that history. and especially of the facts which connected her family with the crown. There could. be no better witness to *hew what had been the sense of former times—what understanding had existed respecting the rights and usages of these times in reference to Queens of England. She maintained that Elizabeth ought to be crowned, as every other Queen Consort had been before her. Henry VII. at length yielded to public feeling, and the Queen was crowned 26th Nov. 1487. Lord Hu. con said that it was an old christening which had stood long for godfathers, and his Lordship gave his readers to understand that it went much against the King's stomach. The coronation was ordered in the very tense form and words in which two years and eight months before the King's own coro nation had been. Up to this period from the Con quest there hint been nineteen King. crowned.* Of these eighteen were Harried before or after coronation, and of these inertia*, 'the eighteen Queens were all crowned. , Asseunilligthat Margo ret, second wife of Edward #lllS'ereeirteed (of which, fir reasons before givetraffitikeetuld be no ' doubt) --independent of that theiOsulif Itl Queens • crowned. or these coronations Id 'bad been 101em nixed for Queens alone. About the same number had been solemnized altogether for Kings alone. "The state of the Church during the whole , of the eabeeqeent period of that reign was such as made it hardly possible to say whether it was Reformed or Catholic, or to know how any ritual could have .lieugoes' through without occasioning jars either sm the one side or the other. Besides which the , Quern's pregnancy shortly after the marriage, •labouring as he always did under the most anxious . desire of the birth of a son, would naturally tuna Aside the King's thoughts-from any other subject. arid she died the day after the delivery, within a year and a few months after the death of Queen • Anna Boleyn. Then with regard to Ann of Cleves, her case was no exception to hie arguments, be cause it was well known that from the very day of his marriage with her he began his -iattemptai to effect her divorce, which he cositiuwed till he ac complished his purpose with .her colleens, •which consent of hers was a most material feature in-the case. She consented to the divorce, and waived all claim to the crown. The state of the Crunch during his union with Catharine Howard was again a material objection to her being crowned ; besides . which, very soon after their marriage she was disco. tweed to be incontinent, end a divorce took place. Again, in the tione.uf Catherine Parr, the state of eccleaiastictil affairs would. eery well account fur there being no constant:Po—if it Omelet be found, , on full 'torch being madeohet• no such coronation did take place. That, however, he bud no right to admit ; man had any right to assume that it did .not take place; although he believed it was highly probable abet it did not; as there were no remains of...the solemnity. There wan an necessity for pursuing the inquiry in the reigns of Edward VI. Mary. cud Elizabeth, as Edward was never mar sied,,autl Mary and Elizabeth •were Queens reg. nett. With regard to the reign of Jemes 1. he was crowned shortly after his arrived from Scotland. Upon the reign of Charles I. it would be•necessary, undoubtedly, for hien to make several observations. • On the id February. 16;6, he was crowiretk, that being a considerable period after his accessio n , which occurred on the 27th March preceding, or about a year before. A• proclamation issued in the usual term., .and almost in the same terms as the .praclametion of bit present Majesty, on the 17th January,-16;6, for .the "icorortation or the Kiug, .and his dearly-beloved Consort, the Queen." On the 24th pf the same month end year another proclamation issued, appending a Court of Claims, sad is the recital of that pet:whim:lton the corona tion was mentioned rte being to take place on February the second, "of ourselves and our dearly beloved Consort." So • that on the 24th January, only nine days before the ceremony, as well us on the 17th, it was clearly intended that the Queen should he crowned on tbe second of theensuing month. It was true that ou the 30th January another pro clamation, was issued, ,the third in" the slime month, and only three days before the errecnony took 'place, for the purpose of creating Kinglos of the Bath, to assist at the solemnity of the coronation, in which, for the first time, the words, " our dearly beloved Consort," were dropped. -The Intention, however, as regarded her, 'night not have been. dropped ; our was there any positive evidence io 'thew that her coronation did not take place, which had been announced in the proclamation of the 17th, and solemnly recognised iu that of the 24th. There was extant an account of the ceremonial, among the manuscripts in the Hai Irian collection iu the British Museum, in which the ceremonial for the Queeis was laid down as well us for - the king. That account ,was loon in the past tense, as if the coronation had actually taken place. Admitting, however, that et was only a prospective account of. what was to take place, still there was tio evidence on the face of that manutcript, to skew that it did not afterwards actually take place. ,For his own part, he was ready fairly to avow his owe opiuiou to be, that she was not crowned. There certainly was not sufficient legal evidence to chew that she was, and. with regard to historical evidence, he thought the smile preponderated against it. Be it so, therefore. Ile could, however, give such an explanation as must satisfy, as could leave no doubt on the amid of any caridid or reason able man. that the, omission imagist be imply ac counted for. The projected marriage of Charles I. to a French Princess gave great umbrage to the people ; in so much so, that iu the treaty for the, marriage a provisiou was made to quiet the cla- • moms of the people,.contaming au express stipule turns that none of the King's subjects who were Papists should be allowed to serve the Queen.— No sitotser had Henrietta Maria entered the king dom than dame alarms increased ; and in the very first Parliament, and in his very first speech room the throne, the King expressly referred to " malt- Nosy • persons who had spread filbert* that he was not s good a keeper and maintainer of the religion of the evuutry,eit bo ought tabs; sad be coo -1.4 ..•• •I 1 . ~ :~:- 1 i ~,, , plained of those ramonn ss malignant misrepresen tations, assuring the. Parliament, that "as he was brought spat the feet of Gamaliel".—meaning there by James au would lie zealously preserve the religion of the country." PerliaMeat immediately took the subject into its eisuirderation, and a grand cour•rence wisa held bottom) the two Houses on the subject of religious; thinestitt of which was • pen.' tion to the King from both Houses of Parliament, prayinehim to enforce the laws against Popery, and urging him to advance the religion of the country; in the fifth article of which mention was made of the Queen's being a Papist, and reference also was made to the article in the treaty of mar riage, preventing Papists, the natural horn sub. jeets of the King, from being introduced into the Queen's service. Immediately' after the Queen's arrival, the discontents running very high on the very delicate question of the Queen's religion and her proximity to the King, sod the country bring unquiet oil the subject, the Parliament went to ,every length short of remonstrance, and adjured the kiug to preserve the established religion, which they undoubtedly conceived to, be in danger, on account of the religion of the Queen. Alter the King had given satisfactory answers to all the arti. cies of thus petition on the subject of religion, his :Ministers took occasion to mention the next day, 'that the King took it very well their putting him in mind to take care of the religtosi of the country ; but that nevertheless he would have done and granted precisely the same things if the two Houses had never petitioned; and that the King hail sea that his father, when he recommended the.person of his wife, had not recommended her , religion. He cited stria as another instance of the religion of the Queen being a subject of very great jealousy and suspicion with .the Parliament and the country. In consequence of that petition, a proclamation. was almost immediately issued against Popish Re cusants. The result of these heats in the country operated not so reuch on the mind of Charles I. as of his Queen, Henrietta Maria. On the 11th of August, the House of Commons resolved itself into • Committee of Grievances; the grievance which occupied their.attention bring the subject of the Catholic religion. 'the usual course was. taken of refuting to grant the supplies unless the griev ances were remedied; the two parties came to an open rupture, and the King di.ialveil the Parlia ment. After that dissolution, and before another Parliament" was holden, the coronation of the King took place. Such was the frame of mind of the country and the two Houses of Parliament when the practical question arose, whether she, being a Popish Queen, should be crowned or not The first determination of the King clearly was,. that she should ; though possibly he might after wards have found that it would not be safe to re vive the animosities of the month of August pre ceding. That was the least favourable supposition for the purpose of . his (Mr. Brougham's) explana tion; but he rOuld give another account of it, namely > . that the objection moved not from the King, but from the Queen herself. The Queen _mast have been aware of the peculiar circumstances and difficulties under which she was placed, and those circumstances must have operated.on the mind of the Qu.:eti, as well as on that of the King. Indeed he (Mr. Brougham) did not well see how it was possible that she should •be - crowned by the ceremonial used in this country ; by a ceremonial performed in • Protestant cathedral,itt a Protestaut altar, and by, as she must' have supposed, an here tical Archbishop; by those very phrases which were used by the Catholic., which applied to a Catholic King and a Catholic Queen equally and on the same sense, but when applied to a Protestant King and a Catholic Queen, must either mean one thing in the one case and something else iu the other, or something heretical and abominable iu the eyed , of that Catholic Queen. Out of that dilemnE4 there was no way for human ingenuity to escapa.s That Fart of the ceremony which related tote' receiving of the Sacrament at u Protestant altar, in a Protestant Church, and from the hands of a Protestant Prelate, no Catholic could view without abhorrence; but even putting that part of the ceremonial aside, there was another winch could not have been got over. She would have to receive a ring from the hands oft Protestant Archbishop with these words : " Accipe ormolus?: fidei, signaculusst &Meter Trimitatis"—" Receive the ring of fAtl4.,the • sign of the Holy Trinity." The word fidei, " faiths," here, as applied to a Protestant ceremonial, meant the Protestant faith ; and being so understood by the Archbishop, being himself a Protestant, she roust have taken the ring as the symbol of the Protestant faith, and not of her own. she being a Catholic. No good Catholic, therefore, could receive the ring without abhorrence, and iu consequence that Queen must have felt a similar sentiment on that occasion. The form proceeded further, in these words: " Quo possis ontaes keereficas---evieare ;" she was to receive it as achami by which she would be enabled to avoid all heretical sins; words which, noel by a Pro lesion{ Archbishop, iu u Protestant t . bunch, must be understood as • charm to event all the abomina tions of the Cetholic religion, that religion being her ow,n—." inter harboras goats aquiSioweue seri talis convert infidels and barbarous people to the knowledge of the true faith," mean ing again, of course, the Protestant faith. This, therefore, was a species of gift which might • have appeared so abominable, so abhorrent to her princi ples, and so disiL noble to her, that she might well be supposed to be ready to forego her part in that cere mony to which she had the some right as all preceding Queens Consort, and the same right as the King Regnant. under all the peculiar circumstances of the case. He thought it was barely possible to grant that the change might have been made by the King himself—that he allowed was barely possible; but he thought their Lordships,olb weighing the case, would find that it was next ho impossible that it should not have proceeded from theQueeti. 'they saw that its the proclamation on the 17th, and itgaiti on the 44th of January, the intention was cleanly en• tertained of crowning the Queen, the latter being only nine days before the ceremony; and he would vat it to. their Lordships, whether it was probable that within to short a period as that which elapsed between the date of the 24th and the day on which the ceremony took place, any should have occurred to induce the King to alter that intention which he bad solemnly and publicly declared. The Paths went was not then sitting, mud no popular meetings were likely to take place at that time, so that i t was not likely that the p' tiblic opinion could have • - . . • 1 been made more clearly known to him on 2d of February then it was on the 24th of January. gtill, if he allowed that it might arise out of the hosti lity of the country to the religiose priisciples of the Queen, that was sufficient to account for the ease as an exception ; but when they reflected that the opinion of the country could not be unknown to the Queen, and wbenlhey considered' the light in which it was natural for her to view the ceremony itself, their Lordships would, uo doubt. find grounds to suppose that it was the Queen herself who first started the objection. Having then done with the case of Charles the First's Queen, and shewn, as he hoped, that no argument was to be drawn from her absence, as that was not occasioned by • want of right, but a waiver of the exercise of that right, he was now come to the neat case, which was that of Charles 11. And if in that caw it ap peared that the Queen had not been crowned with the King, the oiniiision could be accounted for on reasons which left that case no analogy with the present. When the coronation of Charles took place he was unmarried, and it was true that his wife was never crowned after marriage. But the wifeof Charles was the daughter of Portugal, and therefore being a Papist the same objections arose to her as prevailed against Henrietta Maris. ludeed these objections were much more aggravated from the circumstance of religious animosities be ing carried at that time to a greeter height. In the case of the first Charles the suspicion was not to strong that the King was inclined to the Roman Catholic religion, and though religious jealousy ran high in that reign against the Popish Queen, yet it then wanted that determined characterof animosity which it had since assumed. The reigning Monarch was now more than suspected of bei n g favourable to the Papists, and the period was fast approaching when party spirit wrist so far as to bring a Bill of . Exclusion into Parliament. The people hud not yet forgotten the grand rebellion, or the sufferings which the uncompromising attachment of Henrietta Maria to her religion had brought upon herself and others. These recollections celled all their reli gious jealousies into action, and a determined dis like to a Popish consort to the King prevailed in and out of Parliament. Was it, therefore, un likely that the King should so far give way to these feelings as not to call for the coronation of the Queen? And that such • measure would be extremely disagreeable was evident, even from what was plowing in Parlianient ; for in the 14th of Charles the Second, the very year of his restora tion, a motion was made in the House of Commons, and a warm debate took place upon the propriety of addressing the King, recommending hint to marry a Protestant wife. At the same time the House could not be ignorant that the King was about to marry a Portuguese Princess ; but this consideration perhaps it was that induced the House to take the steps which they took. Charles, however, was not influenced by this conduct of the Parliament ; he married the Princess, but he was obliged, in his subtequeat conduct, to be very guarded, that he Should not increase tie misunderstanding between hint and his people. He would not, therefore, pro pose so bold a measure as the coronation of his Roman Catholic Queen. a measure in which his father encountered great difficulties, and which were exaggerated in his case by a suspicion thin lie himself was, under the rose. o professor, or at least a warm 'favourer of thin religion. But it would appear that the second Charles was extri cated from his difficulties by the same means as his father. Ca thasine feeling the seine scruples as Henrietta Maria, declined initiating at the ever nanny of the coronation, and this refusal, without taking into account any interkrence on the port of. the King, was sulAcient .to prevent that •erre mony from taking place. It was, beyond a doubt, that the absence•of Catharine from the eorotsatisn of Charles the Second was tuiribatable to the same cause Oast excluded Henrietta Maria from that of his pretieNsor —namely her religious scruples as to the :.ropriety of assisting et a ceremony perform ed with the rites of • teligiou different front her own:' • But Catherine seetnesl to have been more big,:„jed to her religion than even Henrietta Maria, for efie even refused to recognize smother ceremony of tits most serious kind, to which, it appeared, her predeeessor made no Objection. /ii the first article of impeachment ii;;einst Lord Clarendon, it was charged, :hat he had ,connected the King with a Princess. who carried her hos ‘ ility to the Church of England so far, that she refused to be married by flue of its ministers. I► was cerlaiidy a fact that the Princess of Portugal did make such an objection, mud indeed she persevered ih it so far, that she took the chance oit not being married at all, rather thee have the cere mony performed by a clergyman whom she could not respect. She was tinned to Charles according to the forms of her own communion, but it was at this day doubtful whether the marriage was ce'e brated afterwards by • elergyman of the Church of Eriglaotl, or, in other words, whether they were legally married at all or not. Thus it appeared that in this respect Catharine was more bigotted to her faith than Henrietta Maria—the latter had recognised a ceremony which the former denied, and it was consequently more likely that Cathariee's objection. to a coronstion which was to be perform. ed by a Protestant Prelate, were equally strong in that care as they were in that of her marriage. It was the opinion of some antiquaries that Henrietta Maria would convent to be crowned if Popish Priests were suffered to assist at the ceremony, but Cadre , rine flatly and unqualifiedly refused to take any part iii a ceremony at which a Minister of the Ns bread Church officiated. The case of the Queen of Charles 11. was therefore in all respects like that of Charley 1. Both were Peplos— both were either for bid any participation in the ceremony by their hus bands from fear of disobliging the people, or they themselves feeling the weight of odium which was ex cited against them, declined from religious scruples or delicacy to avail themselves of their right. In neither cases had the right of being crowned been brought to issue, and in neither case, therefore, was it compromised. Thus, it appeared, no ar gument could be drawn from this Queen's case, as applying to the claim of her present Majesty. The next case was that of James If. Here it appeared that the King being married at the time of his accession s his Queen was crowned with him.— They were both Papists—profesisedly an, and it was said that on that occasion the sacrament was omitted. Here the other ceremonies were got over. He (Mr. B.) could out now say, but it was evident ....•••••••••••••• from history, that the Queen of James the Sec,..), though • Papiit, did assist at a Protestant niers.. bon. Now, it might be said, that this fret enough to overturn the reasoning which he (Mr. %;) had been using in accounting for the absenceif the former Queens on account at their religio, since here was • Queen who, Ihnngb profesal ic the same religion as the, former Queens, yet f 6 no scruple at bring present at the ceremony. But it should be observed that there was this difference in the caws in that of James sod his Queen both were Roman Catholics--in the others, one was a Protestant, the other • Papist. When both were of the same religion both could interpret the words io the same way—they could apply the word " faith," fur instance, to that re ligion of which they were followers, and there was not that inconsistency in two persons —mini and wife taking the same words in two different reuse,. The 'con, of James's Queen, therefore, did not overturit the argumeirts which he used as to the religion. of the Queens of the two Charles?' for it should be remembered that the wife of James. though the ceremony was performed accordirig to the forms of the English Church, was yet crowned with a Room) Catholic King. He w s s happy that he had terminated linehistorical deduction, and arrived at a period where alt mos clear before him. He carne rsow to the time of the Revolution, since whirl), their Lordships were aware, that all Queens Consort had been regularly crowned as a mutter of course. There was at f eas t bet one exception, which could not bear .at all o. the general argimsent—he meant that of George 1. The wife of George I. never came to this country ; she was also said to hare been divorced previous; to his accession to the sovereignty of this country by the sentence of the Ecclesiastical Court of the country where she was married. Her coronation, therefore, was wholly impossible. It was legally impossible, iu the first place, if she was divorced ; and it WIN in the next place, physi cally impossible, because she never came to this • country, and, consequently, could not be crowned. Having teferred to the supposed divorce of George 1. as en impediment to the coronation of his wife, he also recollected that certain proceeding had been instituted against her present Majestrfor the same purpose, hot those proceedings having terminated without a decision against her Majesty, could lint be taken us gruuud for depriving her of . stiy legit right which could be established as appertsiiung to her in her quality of Queen Consort. A Learned Judge, in a recent case, that of the King tr., Woolf, had dechrred, on so allusion being made •to the effect of a ciiininal proceeding on the legit rights of is party accused, that if proceeding's of X eriatioal nature were commenced and alterwardo stayed in any subsequent siege; the party was to be held as. completely innocent, as far as his legal rights were concerned. se, if be had never been put upon trial. This was a doctrine so clear, w d the principle on which it was founded so well known, that he should be ashamed to offer a single further observance) upon it. The Learn-. ed Gentletnati then stated to their Lordship. that he had applied to the - Demi and Chapter of Westminster for permission to consult the Li her Regalia, and he had received answer that leave could not be grouted without the sometime of the highest authority. The Dean then ,appeared in Cone, and having produced the book, permission was granted to Mr. Brougham, . who, -with his Learned Corfesgues, Mr. Denman 'sod Dr. Lushington' withdrew to consult it. After en absence of shoot half an hour, Mr. BROUGHAM returned, arid stated to their Lord ships, that lie was extremely sorry to inform theta lie was afraid he should require an hour longer to consult the Liber keg-alas, and even then he could not answer with certai n ty at to his being prepared. Lord LIVERPOOL then said, that, this being the ease, the Court had no aneroid - ire, but either to adjourn for an hour or until to-morrow Morning. The LORD CHANCELLOR asked tc a . Brougham. whether he could not proceed with , t part of his orpiment which did not rents rsiths assistance of the Liter Argolis? Mr. BRocansm said be hld, eta ht tithe had gone, bees liroublieg their Lordsl/100114 the his torical part of his argument, and itAel necessary this should he concluded before he same to the general Part of U. The LORD CHANCELLOR then stated, that his duties in the Hou'e of Lords prevented his attend suee on the Council longer than half-pan three or four o'clock ; 'but that he had no objection to intend from tau o'clock until four to-morrow, and. if it was necessary, the Council could again meet in two horns after. Mr. BROUGHAM said, he should have concluded his argument by four o'clock. The Council then adjourued at two o'clock tw tea o'clock to-morrow. IMPERIAL PARLIAautiT. • HOUSE OF. LORDS, Tnuosuaw, JULY S. fn a Committee of Privileged the claims of the Marquis of Donegal. lied soother Peer were admitted to vote at the election of en Irish Representative Peer. Mr. Mao* from the East India House, brought up an Account of Pensions, Gratuities, dm Lord CA LTHORPE presented • Petition In favour of the Bill fu► Preventing Cruelty in Animals. The Irish Silk Hill, the Hop Exportation Drawhork the Isle of Man Trade Bill, and the hick Custom Cu 0. • Bill, were read a third time. The Assessed Taxes Conspositios Bill, the Audit of Ac couple Bill, mad the Husbandry Hone Tax BA went through a Cotomiitee.—Ordered to be read a third time on Monday next. DUKE OF CLARENCE. The Order of the Day having been read for going *tato a Committee on the Duke of Compeer Annuity Bill— The Earl of LAUDERDALE me, not, lie said, for the 'impose of apposing the Bill, nor to criticise the principle upon which the arrears had been granted ; on the contrary, he thought the Parka meat had done themselves immortal honour in granting the arrests, it chewed that they procteued upon suun i S c riciples. His chief ob ject in rising Iglu call thci Lordships' attention to the sitantion af anothilbranch of the Royal Family—he meant the Dube of Cumberland. Et was nothing to him whether a Prince were a fa vourite or not, in considering such I subject, but whether the mile, were required for the mints. . . as he could: He wai very remarkable del ciesostios of the Qui observed; a 'Princess, 11 . ward IV A "qiesit do mucb..cliscontent wss was ati e ndrd asIA tri Consort. Now the n .of her.pretensions he'll more suitors§ he was until be bad confrrrno solicitous he bsid heel mine likely - 44 was I • winch might seem to Queries rights' with Well always - treated Lord Baron had rei to her had occasion fliVlCinw than hie Owl his Lordship funher . suffered than Irked: was found to give gr would sbew what wei and especially of the glen, by referring IMpreurt of York, al .Warned to the Duki samkt %song the ref thee vents of those tri wig ", gee without I ietAissbeth be crol (jogger ; of. England the Cestueo), and had Ostierisilirmi buil . • •• vio 4 .. , -~- -