The Sun. — London, England, 1802-04-01 00:00:00

education of the infant during his minority, and ac. ?punt to him, when he came of age : but consider tng the circumstances which attended the creation ° e l the Pri nce of Wales for the first time Duke of which was that of Edward the Black Prince, he doubted very much, or, rather, he though t it hardly possible to conceive, that it was then in ten d e d t h e whole Revenue of the Dutchy of C ornwall should be appropriated by the Duke of it, and yet that the King should have all the charge of the inaintenance of such Prince during his minority. He pas not saying the claim was unfounded ; if it Was a claim fit to he made, it was fit to be adopt ed, and .ought to be so without delay. But a 40 oht was entertained on the subject—in the year 1 .7 8 3, when the Prince of Wales came of age, there Was much difference of opinion on the subject of the title of His Royal Highness, as now insisted 'n ; and it was matter of surprize that the claims, as they were now stated, had so long escaped the vigilance of so many able men as .had from time to time their attention so particularly called hithis subjeft. He was extremely sorry that s Hon. and Learned Friend, in a discussion i'riarked b y ingeniousness in general, should have int roduced such w or d s as these, that this w as a cl,a im On the part of HiS . Royal Highness, which 4" c andid man would deny, nor 'any honest man in. He did not claim the merit of baying : .le: e xtraordinary. candour, but he thought there ns no want of candour in his saying what he -w t e l He did not know whether ; in point of t i w e l• the Prince of - Wales was as much en.. fro t o the Revenues _ of the Dutchy, of C ornwa ll 1 1 " his bir t h, as an y h e ir to a n estate ; b ut t hi s knew, there was great weight of opinitio against at proposition, and where was the want of` can "qr. ie s ay i n g so ? His Learned and Hon. Friend f i d also, t h at no honest man cou ld resist this ader th e c i rcumstan c es o f t hi s case, he owned this s not the•sort of language he exp e Cted t o h ear fr om Learned and Hon. Friend; .but he did not me an the word i n th e most r i g id sense w hi c h m i g h t h e attached to it, nor h a d be an y id ea t h at e fell und er t hi s description, in the' 'mind 'of' his ; ; earned Fri en d. He .did. not think he shouldebe ': s tifled, un d er t h e present circumst an ce s , inert cilintnending to the' House, the adoption of' SUCh . a a °ti "• He was not master of the legal point; tO t e ( le upon it. There was one gene ra l o bjeCti o n, eitt i et its blending, ;two objects, in .themselves na tte4t:lY distinct,. the question of right and the clues : , the ° i f account. But his leading objeetion was th at Wherever there was a wr ong •i n this i t rY there must be some redress. Such a point, .1 1 Li _ S o p inion, ought not to be entertained in that so is e. If it h a d a pp eare d i n goof that no appli ul°ll for redress (supposing the 'wrong to .exist,) he -made elsewhere, or had..been mode else ere in Vain, it would 'then be Mireilne enough to :T., p l t° tii;tt House : but in . the, preseut , posture of " k c 'lse, he was taking . that cohrse, Nvhich the idea ti "at , (This duty prescribed to him, by iippOsing-this n ut , i nn• as one which did not, at present, come under ee l eg i timate fur:a:ons .of that House. He thought a - ,7 l "i'T, ‘ but absolute necessity' could justify its '°eilo ce He was. unwilling' to negative such a etnposirion as because it might be . 4-wide a Question elsewhere ; but for the reasons he had as rSled Jrea:iy, could not support it. He would rneee the previ ous - q uest i on ; hut . ' he beggederve to conclude by moving,. 't That the other ders of he Day .be now read."' la M r. MANNERS SUTTON rose to exp l ain. t: sa id,. he was exceedingly anxious not .to appear l e ,R' v e any uneasiness to any one by what he sa id, t h.of all to his Right Hon. Friend ; rtor aid- he o at he said could have the bearing. his Righ t totrh _''friend seemed to_giv.e it—What he.intended l' ao ' 4 ' was thi s , t h at if _h e h a d corre ctly state d t h e thi tt s e ' a ild the Law of the case Was what he sub eanai-tit' it to be, then the conclusion was, that no no ho ne nl m wan an ould deny it. the justice of the claim, and '• would r esist The question r being.put, . • and • ."-RSKIIVE rose to support .the Mo tion, abl e which he did with great ability and at consider tvhielee"Ph, and maintained, that the length of time th e - e s . " l ull elapsed from the origin of the Grant to ali se „ rre sent period, and the subjet not having been Te, s 'ed, was no answer to the present claim.-- was if the Law was clear, which he, contended it. so e ' i n favour of the Prince, the House would be this ar f rom going out of 'its course in entertaining k ur Motio n , that it would be pursuing its due ,se and he maintained, that the only way to f er t w wheth er t h e m a tter was so or not, was to re. e, te r t o a Committee ; if, upon' the Report of that if ) ,;" nlit tee, there w as a d ou bt upon the,poinr, or retir°doubt, that there was another legal course for s ay s es ' it would b e ti me eno ugh for ' the House to let ut 9 , and t o re f use proceed i ng any further; but this , te ted i°4 only , call e d. f or an I nqu i ry .: H e t h en. . en. tr •historicllly into the , Ads of Parliament,. • o ft .13 l ack t te tim e of the grant of Edward 111. to the th e , Prince, downwards.. He maintained, that by • kinotatute of King HenrylTl: it appeared, that the. 11 4 4 h irneelf, at that time, as well as the Parliament,. kverstood the right of the-Prince of Wales to the ti nt e f .nnes of the Dutchy tole. entire. This was evi the p r.om the King coming to his Parliament, when of e t a n iee was only two years of age, to. take some of kin aY• It was ev id ent aga i n, b y the Petit i on Right, two y ears a f terwards presented to the' . tvs g r in Parli ament, and when the whole Revenue ei t e n es toredlo t h e P r in ce. Thii was a full recog zo'n of the claim, by a Parliament, and by a w arch, Whose interest and disposition had been' nut a n to be h ost i le to the claim—and all . this with periodwhisper to t h e contrary, down to the latest b e ,,_ It was i n d ee d true; that when Charles I. he • -n a e Pri nce of Wales, it was a quest i on whether' ti w w , ,i s a enti t l e d ; but that was resisted purely upon p o ithat h e was not Filius Primogenitus. The e ke ' B ete to h e cons i dered were chiefly two— eether Lee se . ••• Praariloenin:eariltlitiiry Documents were woe. Y of conside ther e w if they were —whether. 4„,ke tt Ilse upo n t h e matter, sufficient doubt to " House he s i tate upon it, and leave it to the .. lou of anothe r tr ib unal ? ' Upon the first part, ti ny contended, th at the matter co ns id er:it ion was abunda nt ly wor - Iv.. of ; and up tten tiy on the se con d, t h at i t , ate c:ear to call upon the House to de ‘T°ll it. He then went through the History Livery of Seisin, and of ?enures, deign to the 'tithe of the t zth of Charles the SeCond, when they •were abolished by purchase from - the Crown', &c. From that day to the present hour, the Prince of Wales had do Livery, that was, Deli Very orthe' Dutchy of Cornwall.--Oeorge the Second, when Prince of Wales, had no Livery of .Seisin.—Prince Frederick had none-His present Majesty had none. The present Prince of Wales had none. In fat, the thing was obsolete. The ground on which he sup ported this claim on the part of His. Royal Highness the Prince of Wales was, not that this was a doubt ; ful question upon a point of Law, but such as had been recognized from age to age, and confirmed by Ads of Parliament ; but the reason why this ap_ . plication was made, was that a Petition of Right • had been prepared, but there was• a difficulty of bringing it to a legal determination. Somewhere it was checked, and did not go on. The best en deavours were made, and yet there never had been , an opportunity of having it determined either by the Chancellor, or the Judges ; upon these grounds he hoped the House Would entertain the Itaquiry. On the' subjea of taking-the accOtint, he Would say nothin g further, than that he was glad - to hear it stated, that in that event. His Royal: Highness had . not been any burthen on the Public. The MASTER of the ROLLS said, it : was very . natural that the Prince of . Wales should .wish to be well in the public opinion ; but still a Proposition, that called upon the House to exercise judicial func_ tions, ought to be loUked upon with a very jealous eve, and no feelings ought to, influence 'their deci- - sion. It was true, that' in the year 1795 he ex pressed considerable doubt upon the subject ; but it was equally true, that he had not then much consi dered it. An Hon. Gentleman said at that time, that the question was as•clear as it was now asserted to be ; but at that period, when a Clause, was pro posed. in the Bill then before the' Hotise, to enable the Prince of Wales to institute certain . suits relit . , true to those Claims which were now, brought for ward, , the I4ouse would not meddle with the subject, and left it to he decided in a Court of jus tice, This was a Claim of a Right of Property, and . 'was .that House the place where legal claims were to be asserted anddiscussed ? His Hon. and Learned• Friend had thought it sufficient to state the right, and call for a Committee to decide upon it, asserting it to_be a very clear case ; but the House was todecide whether it was a clear case or not; in the first instancei and sniely that 'House was not to be called uptin to trench so far - uptin the province of a Court of justice; for though it Was admitted that in a doUbtf . ul case they ought not to interfere, yet it must be pretty eVideni, that having once taken cognizance of a case, whether cleat or doubtfUl, they would not. afterwards decide against them selves. Those who had supported the Question had taken great pains to prove, that the Dutchy of Cornwall' vested in : the 'Prince of-Wales from the moment of hi's birth - --no one ever ddubted it. They had stated that the Dutchrfrequently became vested in Pririces of \Vales at a very early age, and here arose one, of 'his doubts upon the subject. A Prince or Wales at - twc;Nears -of age, it was evident was incapable of administering his revenues, the - King. Must administer them and appoint Officers for that porposelpf necessity. The question :was, whether-the King administering these ReVenues was subject to controul I it was agreed by those who contended that the King was not accountable, that there was po person competent to, take the account and judge of the expenditure. He should give no opinion upon the subjet% he merely contended that the House had no authority to decide. The question . was exactly the same, if it was made a question between the PrinceS of Wales and the Public ; as,. if n the King had no right,- the Public "could have o right to dispose of . them. They were not assured that a Court of Justice would not grant a remedy in this case, and even if a Court of Justice could afford no remedy, it was no ground for that'House , taking upon itself the decision, it was merely a ground - for its removing the obstruction which pre vented a proper remedy from being‘ administered. Fe wished to give no Opinion relative to : the rights of the Prince of Wales, but merely to urge that it did not belong to-that House to decide-the Question. FOX said, he did not conceive that this was a question, of Law, but a mere question of Fart ; he was however sorry that the Motion was so worded, that it could in any degree , he a matter of doubt ,What was its objet. This was not, in his opinion, a mere question of Law, nor did the Motion call upon the House to assume a judicial power, because the Prince appeared in the situation of a Public Credi tor, calling upon . the House to decide upon a question of faCt, and the result of that determination would not be a judicial decision,_but a Legislative provision. The present case was not a common .case between a Guardian and his Ward, because in such a case, the Guardian was responsible' to his Ward, and could be called upon to account for the profits of his •Ward's income; hut that could not be done in the • case of the King and the Prince of Wales, because the Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said, that in the case of the King no such account could be called for. •It had been said, that the Prince had other modes of 4edress, in the Courts of Law ; but 'the Learned Gentleman who had stated that His Royal Highness had such a remedy, had not pointed out what that remedy was, or how it was to be prosecuted. Of all the different cases which .had been quoted upon this occasion, that of Frederick Prince of Wales appeared to be the most decisive , upon the question, because when he attained the age of maturity, he was paid the revenues of the .Dutchy of Cornwall, which had been received in his minority. Of the right of the Prince, there did not appear to be any sarious. doubt, .but no Gentleman had distinctly stated that His Royal Highness had any legal means' of 'enforcing that right ; he did not mean to say, that in every,pri vane case, where an individual had' a right which the law did not afford him the means of substantiating, that therefore he had a right to apply to Parliament for redress ;. hut in such a .case as the present, in which the Public was one of the Parties, it was• a -- fit case for the inter- Terence of Parliament., This case appeared to him to be one of 'peculiar hardship upon the Prince, for he I had two . Parties against - him on this occa sion, viz. the King and the Public.. With respect to ihe tottier, it had been stated frOrn high Legal Authority, that the King could not be called upon to render any account of the Revenues of the Dutchy of Cornwall ; and as to the latter, it was now Proposed That the claim of the Prince should not he even taken -into consideration, so • that the Prince would be left entirely without remedy: The Chancellor of the Exchequer had said, that part of the Revenues of the Dutchy of Cornwall had been ap. plied, not to the pub')c service, but -to especial service, the nature of which could not be explain ed. Now it certainly must be matter. of great.con solation to the Prince, to be told that his Revenue had been applied, not to the service of the Pub lic, hut that it had been applied to purposes of which no account could be given. As to the asser tion, that the House would not interfere to decide upon a legal question, he was sure the Chancellor of the EXchequev, who was so well acquainted with the prodeednigS of that House, would nor _ Assert that the House had never taken upon itself to give an opinion upon legal questions ; they had 'done it in many instances ; -it was not necessary to 'cite them all.; he need only mention the opinions given by the House upon the question of ,General Warrants and the' seizure of-papers. Perhaps when that assertion was nude, it was only meant, t.hat the House would not give a legal decision upon private : cases; but it was rather singular to call this a private case, in which the parties were the King, the Prince of Wales, and the Public. It had been tai.!, that HiS Majesty had a right to appropriate the revenues of the Dutchy of Cornwall to the education andfmaintenance of the Prince during his minority, but Ile could. riot entirely agree in that proposition ; His Majesty's second son, the Duke of York, had succeeded to the Bishopric of Osnaburgh . when he was very young, but the-Revenues of that Bishopric had nor been applied CO his maintenance during his minority, but were laid out in purchasing 'con ' siderable estates for him in this Country. Upon the whole, he was decidedly of opinion that -the House ought not to ,concur in the Motion for going into the Orders of the Day, because: they ought to decide the'questiOn one way or the other, either by admitting, or negativing the' Prince's claim, or by making some Legislative provision upon the subject. With regard to_the 'sct_off which had been stated, of the right of applying this money 'for the Prince's support and education during-his minority, - that could not come into dis. cussion, in the present stage of • the question, though he was prepared to give his opinion that nu such set-off could be made. . • .The CHANCELLOR — of the EXCHEQUER explained with regard to the application of the Revenues of the Dutchy of Cornwall, to what was called especial service ; from the ohscure man. net in which these Accounts were kept before Mr. Burke's-Bill, it was• impossible to state distindly all the purposes for which the money was applied. The ATTORNEY GENERAL said, that if the Question was, whether the Prince was, or was not, enabled to keep up the proper splendour of his rank, it would be a proper subject for Parliamentary con sideta. tion , ; but the subject now before. the House, Was a Mere question of right, and in that point of view, he opposed. the. Motion. If that right which was now contended for, existed in the Prince of Whies . , he was sure that right would have been Stated before, particularly when the Prince came of age, and his Establishment was made. He was glad; that the 'question was now brought to a fair issue, - . viz. Whether the King had a right to apply the Revenues of the .Dutchy- of Cornwall to the maintenance of the Prince during his minori -ty ? It appeared by the original Charter of Ed ward 111, that the Dutchy was granted to the Prince for that very express purpose ; arid now it was contended, that instead of being applied to • the maintenance of the Prince during his mi nority, it was to form an accumulating fund, to be paid'to him on his.coming of age. He defied any man of common sense, whether Lawyer or not, to look at the Charier by -which this Dutchy was granted to the Prince of Wales, and say that that was the fair construction of .that Charter. The Dutchy was vested in the Crown in. the reign of Edward I. ; -from him it came to Edward : lll. who gave it to the. Black Prince as an appanage to His Royal Highness for his support, instead of main taining him out of his other revenues. That this was the real intention of this grant, appeared from the construdion which was very soon after put upon it by the Parliament of the Country. By the 33d of Henry VIII. the revenue of the Dutchy was given to the Crown, with certain reservations, for • the maintenance of the Prince of Wales, and when the Prince was of age to support himself, the revenues were to revert to him.—[Mr. ERSKINE said across the House, that that Aut was soon after repealed.]—lt mattered not whether it was repealed or not, becauSe the passing of that Ad had shewn the sense in which Parliament had con sidered it. The Ad was undoubtedly repealed, but Gentlemen must recoiled (and particularly the Gentleman opposite to hiai, who seemed particular ly versed in the history of the troublesome 'periods of our History) that the repeal was at the time when the Duke of York had thrown off his alle giance, and was endeavouring to•subvert the Royal AUthority. The :ATTORNEY GENERAL then •en tered into a most able investigation of the Law Upon the subjea, and concluded with contending, .that even admitting the Prince had a claim, which he denied, still, that the money which had been advanced to the Prince during his minority, more than equalled the Revenues of the Dutchy during that period. • Mr. Fox explained. . - • Mr. TIERNEY considered this not as a question of Law, but merely as a creditor asking his debtor whether he would pay him the debt which he owed him. It would be disgracefUl in an individual to say to a person who made a claim upon him, and who only asked permission to state the nature of his de nand, to say, " No, I wild not hear you—seek your remedy at. Law: ".—and therefore he thought it would not be right in the House , of Commons to refuse to hear the proofs in support of this claim. - Lard HAWKESBURY said, that if this . was a proper question for the consideration of the House, the only proper way would be, to move.for a Com mittee to examine Precedents. It had been saki, that this was a mere question of Fatl, and not of but he coritendea that the Fitleition of ir„a Could not arise until the • point Of Law had .beentlO: tertnined; He did not mean, it, enter into ah amination of the legal question;" but ,it appeared him, upoo considering the original Charter, a - nd the Ads of Parliament , which had been allude d to; that •the Dutchy had been granted f o r t he triainteriance the Prince of Wales, and that consegtiently , the, money so applied had been properly applied: . Upon the whole, thelnore he considered the question the more he was satisfied it was one that the Hotte. could not interfere in, in the manner now propooe& Mt; SHERIDAN supported the Motion; in, A . speech of .some length, in which he principally re plied to the ATTORNEY GENERAL, and contendedi . that the Hon. Gentleman . was inaccurate in his ob servations upon the . two Actil that passed in the Reign of Henry Vi., He alluded to the itiode iii which the Prince's Delfts had been paid, and said i that a, deduCtion of io per tent. had been made froai the demands of the Creditors. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in eNplanation, said, that an option was left to the Creditors, whether they would take a debenture for tool. bearing 3 per cent. or for 90!. bearing S per. cent. therefore the Hon. Gentleman was not corral in saving" that to per cent. had been taken off. --- Mr. JEFFRRY S (of Coventry) said, the senti.: merit expressed by the Hon. Mover on the part of the Prince of Wales, that His Royal Highness wished for justice to himself, merely to enable hint to do justice to others, was perfettly consistent with every part of His Royal Highness's conduct wards his Creditors. He said, he was, he be_ lieved, the principal Credit6r of His Royal High.. tress ; but he spoke, he was confident he spoke the sentiments of the Creditors at large.' In answer to rlie assertion of the Chancellor .of the Exchequer, that to per Cent, was not taken off by compulsion, 'he said, that when it was proposed to hint, he, was told, he might have redress ,by appealing to the verdid of a jury—he had obtained a verdia for a sum within a trifle of his claim' , and the to per Cent.tvits•thep taken off, and the remaining balance paid in Debentures, ,bearing a farther discount of zoi. per cent. He said he certainly had a choice to avoid the deduaion ,of zol. ,per cent. but it was by taking Debentures bearing an interest of only .instead of 51. per cent. payable in eight years.i He said, he was forced to comply, the Commissioners refusing to give him any part in relief, and had he, not complied, he ,should cer tainly have been immediately arrested by his own Creditors.—[Here the Hon: .Gentleman was called•to . Order, for going into a_ discussion upon. private affiirs.]—H6 should not have mentioned his oWn situation had the deduOidos not been re ferred to by the CHANCELLOR of the Exc.' E Q UF tt f. his only wish being to do justice to the honourable feelings of the Prince towards his Creditors. T 11; SOLICITOR GENERAL opposed the original Motion. Mr. TY RIVIIITT said, that nothing was farther from the intention of the Prince of W,des, than to . enter into any thing lik e a co nt e s t w i t h t h e Ki ng upon this point.- His Royal Highness had, by the advice of several Learned Gentlemen whom he con sulted, sent a Petition of Right in 1796 to the Lord Chancellor, to be presented to the King, but the Lord Chancellor said, lie did not conceive it to be his duty to present that Petition, and in fa& it had never yet been presented, Colonel GROSVENOR and Mr. JonrtsroN said a few words against the original Motion. Sir FRANCIS BURDETT delivered his senti, ments upon the subjea with a considerable degree of warmth the course of his observations he as. serted, the Prince's claims were treated in a dis graceful manner—(Agreat cry of" Order! Order! Chair! Chair !")—upon which The SPE/IIi:ER interfered, and observed, that it was not permitted to any Member td consider that House as treating any branch 'of the . 12.6yal Family in a degraded manner. Sir FRANCIS .BURDETT explained, that he did not expressly mean that, but alluded to the effet produced by the eloquence, perhaps, of the Right Hon. Gentleman : his opinion still was, that the application of the Prince was treated in an un. worthy manner. He then adverted to what he called, the misapplication of the Public Money by Ministers, such as their making Loan, from it without the consent, or even the knowledge of Par liament. The other branches of the Royal Family were the ()Weds of this bounty ; and he knew ,not how much farther . this bounty might have extend ed. In his opinion, the Prince should be made fierfeEtly independent of any Administration. When Pensions were granted so liberally, and the French Noblesse, Clergy, and others splendidly supported, surely the Prince's claims ought to be allowed. He knew not of what stuff chat man's conscience was made who, under such circumstances, refused.rhe Prince's claims. The Heir Apparent, if splendour was constitutionally held to be necessary for the Crown, ought surely to be invested with a degree of it. On the contrary, he thought him the' worst used man in the Country.—[About this part of the lion. Member's Speech; the cry for-the Question , was loud and generalj—on which, he said, he was.sorry .to observe the impatience of the House. on the occa sion ; but as the case stood, he had"felt it necessary to make these observations. Mr. ELLIS begged to trouble the House with a few words, to which he was induced by what fell from the Hon. Baronet, of whose lan4uage he spoke in strong terms of disapprobation. }or his part, he deprecated whateVer brought burthens on the Peo ple as much as any man could do; and as to the present Question, he conceived it to be one of that kind of right, which that souse had nothing to do with—Such was his sincere opinion. He did not often trouble the House. The Questiou had been brought on four times : he hoped the present would be the last, and under these impressions he would g ive his vote. Lord TEMPLE said, he shotild have given a si. lent vote, were it not for what had fallen from the Hon. Baronet, which he thought made 'it necessary for every independent man in that House to state his reasons for the vote be should give—LA long and general laugh.l—His Lordship then proceeded wa assert the purity and 'independence of his pariia, limitary condua, which, he said, was not in the r