The Sun. — London, England, 1820-08-18 00:00:00

ittsei Light st it• Attie thfl s rilek )the osed s to _ Walt 'ech tile here ariti irse, rnisd IgeSl flea" ti!nti hips• h+•l'C iveg Ted, 2gei• st:'S • thei anCe the , onla ao and, tti l l l°. Oil ; nOt' A 1.11 u? r an care sltctf tiffs u -34 1000 Ord- but, ad!" lieu, and' ?t1 true Sad- p rO - Of nt 6 pre' niat ottle rOr e° ion -the Ti ,;I'~ tat° fore , hey' di%l' r~~ , td re e re' iTy)' ate izie4 kitioth*.)-tlw , 43111)'6f .Ptt Oid , -renalties introduced was the only possible ill °d o , ,Of Inxestigating,l tba;otien4e, and satisfy tagm polio justice~Ms' Noble •Friend asked te Earl' susPeud the proCeedings "unti l the o pi n i o n o f t h e 'Judg e S, Whether ' er e was , any other within their power, should be obtained. 'Until that opinion was 'cib tilled,..their; Lordships were not in :-‘possession of t,Qa•knowledge whether they,ought.toproceed in tin:Le!-way,which had been originated, or whether t here ryas- other, and better' one. He allow ed th a t there - was' some indonvenience irvsnspendo ing the proceediugs,-but how much - greater was t hat likely to-result tcrthe public fromypersever :agin a cou r i e w hi c h on a ll Bands Was admitted ° be objectionable Hear !) , --And which: th e '" Neble Earl (Liverpool') himself admitted c9.1q41.)e justified:only by the necessity of:the Case 11 ,, ° w under onsideration. lle could not give his Zwn opi n i on to t h e i r L or d s hi ps as an aut h or it y , b ut he spoke tnotilightlyl.andi unadvisedly when ;e said, th a t .hi g h, amongs t- the•,highest autho filUe.s, of this, Country, there were slimew ho dif ered fro m th e N o b le Lord thellreolstick,' as• i n s° the, construction; of the state of--Edward,' concluded, str on gly supporting , 'the motion of s Noble Friend: . The Earl. of. LI v ERPQQL and Earl GREY Y explained. ' 4 - 'he Earl of CARNARVON, Baas ready to concur a 4 -aY motion that offered buta chance, of putting e4dto this -strange and anomalous proceeding, kY l lich he could *discover nothing but pure and ,nclualified evil. It had:been said•that this was I,time to review the course which had. beep a d o pted : and it h a d b een said even by iris Noble (Ear} Grey) that the'charae having been preft'iettd en err O) it must now -be -proceeded with : be &use th e c h arge h a d been' distinctly *preferred, e'•illOuse had no alternative but to go on. But its Part, he did not see that the charge was e dliAinetiv preferred now than it had been . l e:it n. , of r i "r * To him 'it appeared, that, :the:, a rgu .o his Noble Friend came to this ; .that p ro s. H ou se must .proceed-theJnotnent 111(iiiSte:is Posed_to them to proceed, and that neither h' w ) nor —at any other time could :the itouse any alternative 'but to persevere in the f or ', ll ` P Y• 14 would, however, remark, that those t w 9Ethe Rouse which interposed delays. he teieeif the several' readings of a 13111,Were p l ed- to afford th em th e o pp or t u nity of .recon talering their proceedings. His Noble Friend had that if by no oth er means -than a Bill of t a7 ns• and P ena l t i es , the offence charged against to tl'leen,-conld be got at, ire should be inclined ne.utertain such a measure, where a distinct and ilrqualitied charge of . direct adultery had.beerr I; fer r N did - e • Now so ha ppen, that no such (1110- charge could- be found in the from 0: 14 inning to the end of it. Before he sat stated it to be , . his , wish to waive the 'Restions which he had urged in the early part Debate: V 'A : 44. GREY, in explanation, said, the charge „,, 14 1liaPsnot so distinctly stated in the Bill as IC ; %gilt be, 'and ought t o have stated.- -: ch a ' " W ever, conceived' adultery ' tq be positively Irti in the Bill. by ti t ,erOotion for referring the question snggested J u d o .Noble Earl' to the consideration of the 7 a4 then agree d to, ou th e "" (1 4es immedihtelyoretired to deliberate e llue.stion had been submitted to \ Vhile they•were absent, • r ea r l. lll . o l.l.'Nxn begged toinquire - of the-Noble ov er t vii Posit e , 'whether it -was intended.' to• 1 e House chi ! - • • . th at . }.„ of LtvErtrpor, was net' of optnton ti -wOuld be absautely necessary to call over °bj ee . ,"§•e,:every ddY. It was certainly a great beeir' -t o secure a full attendance, but he had loup e e n nsiderin g w heth e r, after the first - day, , this might not be, adopted that would make th i . e e 'thAtecessary. It would be desirable that t alli t ,,,q t 'artcrs of an• hour should not belost in flu 11.6 over the names every Morning, and .4 tllo,,ight ifmight be expedient that every Nve r s!!.Ould-write name in the: Anti-room ' c ttenaming' - the hour at which he was in' t airt N i La l l e; by which means it could be: a seer- Iv uo had attended, and those Peers whose ab s were s t , t. not down, 4 rr, l nOtt.A NIn was o f o pi n i o n that some such Thge' o ent might b e ma d e . l'e r ,.. e `„Eari of Llvlllipoot, then proposed, that sl - er , on cornin • •g- to the House'. each day, - "ulver in his name in . Writmg. \vas f larr angement-Suggested by the Noble Earl' Artcclaiesced' in' by - the HouSe.: ttt4r,neerda.n absenc e of-twenty minutes the Judges Net j . t o ustice AunoTt • stated' the Judges pre , ;theme It conferred together on the' Question-LL' , le S ov l. a Person, owing no natural allegiance to r 7 ; the s e o -, ei gn.of this country, violating the' wife s C er eign, or th 6 eldest son of the Sot& 1 - act . o ii i c( nisenting to such:Violation, committed : 1 . 4 ' 4 th e Treason within the Statute of Ed, ti tolgti ° Pini o , n ird ?—they, upon deliberation; Were that one who owed no allegiance, by % i t it h e Wife of the K the wife' of the re aso ti .'"t sett,'could: 'not be guilty of High to ` n g's e i i ll° '' could the wife of the King or the th"/Ift a n , Soli, conScltting to such violation, a et of :nigh Treason, coming within s; I P sai d t he Statute. Their opinion,- his Lord- . ac ute ' e m qls founded on , the , langttage of the' cit t o 4ed. th war& the: Third,' Which was. so Ivi an act ",.,t in their judgmmit it could not' apply , tolto-owed adultery committed:with a foreigner 41 Itt y no allegiance to the Sovereign of this li he on Mar ; • • if r u.s of LAN§DowN called the atten , qt. . t . i -tuo ot 0 the - situation of certain -per : e illh e "L c ' aPI-Sear at filch' Lordships' Bar, at, l - °t e - of. t ._ 1 "-ht deserved to be notibed, • By I .oliq,-had,, k 11 other Housei•eertai it- learned per -1,4„11:' r yet':Permitted to' appeal-at their Lord \vas Counsel for 'the Queell• Their sty r Ple a d i L"id . Probably concur i'n sanctioning oces:._,Hg'at their Lordship s ' B a r on the pre , zun In what he had to say on that . . Was Li; &OM - lt3tiag (thy relleCtiOns the , individuals- to whom he had alluded. Trom knowledge 'he had: of theM he had n o doubt that they would acquit themselves with all the fidelity:and plicipriety that could be either ex pected or desired. He must, however; remind thellonse; that it was only possible for them to appear at their Lordships' Bar by virtually With drawingthenaselveSTrom that body of which they formed au hihereiit part, and' in which they re presented bellies who had its good a right td be repregeiated in 'ParliaMent as any other- in . the• nation, and who, by the arran,gement to which. he referred, - were left Unrepresented.- lie . wished to submit to the llouse;the propriety of making it'underatood, that they:only Subinitt6d to sueli departure from the established practice of Par , liam ell trin consideration 'of- the-particular easier= gency of the•case. • At ten, minutes .before two, by order of the llOuse, the counsel were called, in. The large Folding doors Were then thrown open; and Mr. Brinighiim; Mr.' Deninan,' Dr. Lushington, Mr. Williamsi- Mr. yyatt, and , another Learned Counsel entered, and took their` station' at the desk on the right hand side of the inclosed space immediately in• front of the Bar. his Majesty's Attorney .and Solicitor•'General,:: and four other Learned Gentlemen, with' Mr, Motile, the So licitor to the 'Treasury, entered from the side door,andpfaced themselves on the opposite side of the. Bar., The Puke of liisinToN asked permission to put a question to his Majesty's Attorney-Gene ral, and proceeded to ask by whose authority, and for whom, he appeared at their Lordships' Bar ? The ATTN::NaII...GENERAL said, he attended in consequence of Jan order made by their Lord ships. An order of that House had been served, upon him, commanding his attendance on the present occasion. [Here several Peers called,out ‘4 Read, read."] The ATToaNtrz-GENERAY. -proceeded to read the Order oetheir Lordships, with which he had been served by the , Deputy Usher of the Black Rod. This commanded his attendance on the second reading of the Bill, when Counsel were to be heard _and witnesses examined on either side. He ithe Attorney-General) had the re f ore thought it his duty to appear before their Lord hips personally, or to depute some one to act for him on the second rtading of the Bill, and pro duce:eyideAce in support of the charge. The. Duke of lamtvroN begged to repeat the question. By whose command he appearett'at the Bar, and from whom had- he recei*ect-iiit structions to do so ? The ATTORKEY-GENERAL repliedy that in con sequence of the order whi c h h e h a d rei . eitM i ihe had considered 'himself bound persottalirtfo at tend l dr to depute some other- Counsel , to 4altp . eiet' in his stead. ne had taken the only coutselie . could take to obtain information on the subjett, by applying at the Secretary of State's Office, and by making other inquiries. .The ~Duke of lIANuLT - oN,asked,- if he was. to understand that helad,received his instructions front the Secretary of State.? 'Lord'' HOL D' LAN understood the Noble Duke wished -t3 be informed if it were from-the Secre tary of State that the Learned Gentleman had received those instructions,. in , consequence of which he bad. attended at their Lordships' Bar:. Ire' (Lord Holland) understood him to attend in consequence-'of an order of that House. The Eail 'of LIVERPOOL said, an order had been served . On the Attorney-General, In .conse qnenCe Of Whiate was bonnd to appear at their Bar.. The , Learned Gentleman had, hOwever, taken other means of - seeking information, and in consequence' of inquiry'madeUt the office of the Secretary 'of State and elsewhere,. he now:ap peared before theni. Lord HoLtmcn - thought it was proper that this . matter should be exactly understoed. Mr. 13nouonANt said he attended in behalf of her Majesty the. Queen. [llere Mr. Brougham was interrupted by one of their Lordships, who made some remark upon the prOceeding, which was quite inaudible.] Mr.• BaovonAst then proceeded to address their Lordships. He said, that his Learned .Vriend . (the Attorney-GeneralY appeared there ; but for whom was not so clear,: for himself ) he was be fore their Lordships .for an individual, - for her Majesty the ()Neon,. of whose Counsel he 4p peal•ed. It might be in the recollection of their Lordships, that the last time he had appeared at their bar they had thought proper to delay,to subsequent stage the arguments which lie bad considered it his duty to tender to their Lord:. ships, against the principle of the Bill now before their Lordships: It was also the pleasure of the House that Counsel be informed that ~c r iey were to 'Confine 'themselves in their' ; arguments to the mode of proceeding before Al ie Their Lordships might' probably retiater, that r,v he at that - time regretted thattUen. c ordships would not allowhim 4 . 00,4ter lattaititor Obser vatien; but their LerdShips haeifWe j d that that latitude of ol*r*ion would lie l tiistored to him, and that on , the4‘pcond reading of the Bill he would' be enabled :to make his objections to the principle of it. He. conceived that the period had now arrived, 'When ,laying the truth or false hood of the allegatiaii4' out of view, and ad- Miffing the faas to '6e true as stated in the preamble of the Bill, all of whi c h he h a d denied, and did now' deny to possess. any co lour Or foundation whatever in truth, and he 'was sure their Lordships' sagacity and justice would not allow theM to mistake the admision which he now made merely for the sake of raising the argument to demur and object to the principle of, the Bill.. The objection' which he meant to urge could not be 'interfered with by. any proof to be offered to the facts. The first case which shotild - reerand'theii.. tOrdship4 of was that — of the Duke and Duchess Of Norfolk, in the years d 69 'and 1670 . : Itithat case the Duches had presented a petition to their Lordships' House, in , which . sho stated not that any, Bill . v a s intend hd to 'be btOught against 'her, but merely: that the Duke of Norfolk was offering to their Lord ships a Dili of stieba nattire and She prayed that she might be heard against it before—the Bill' shotild be• received. The:order df the llioase,Of the Bth Januarys 167'2, directed that- the chess shOUld have notiee of the. Bill (Offered :but not recei'ved);andinight be heard by-Zdunselwhat she had to objectagainstit. Redid not now ask to be heard against , thelirst reading :of the - Bill . —he well remeMbered the scorn with which, on a former occasion,le , was ptit-dowwwhen he had. suggested , that he should be.solmrtnitted.---=-he was then consideredas desiring what had neVet be fore been asked or granted—atliing, in:shciFt3 - -gub‘ ktersive of all the forms of pitceediag by which their Lordships had governed themselves. He did not,:therefore, th 6 ask Obe-hea:rd against the first readings IleCanse, by their LordShips' &eel, sion on the fortner occasion, he was precluded from it ;' but he 'stood now on the authority of the case which he'had-cited, that he was entitled to be heard agaiat The - principle of the he stood On the grOund that the DuchesS'Of Nor folk, if not on the secondreading of the Bill, had been heard in two previous stages againstreceiV-' lug 'it, and if that were nota: case in point,he could nottell how a case in point could be found on any Subjec't - whatever. There was also, in May 1698, the case of Knight hnd'Burton, which was, it was true, a Bill of Pains 'and Penalties . , arising out of proceedings in the Exchequer Chamber; but there was also the case' of Lord and Lady Angle Sea, Which was a proceeding for a Bill of • Divdrce: lie 'would not impute 'any thin; to' theNdble Persons who had sought 'for precedents on this occasion - ; hewas satisfied the cases he had cited had been by them . overlooked : there was no Other way . of 'accounting- for the omission of what"WaS i'SO'germane to the but tith• facts Were, that in otie of the cases he had'cited, a list of witnesses had' been allowed, and thege two cases were not in the Report Made by those Noble Lerds—while, in the case which was put into that Report, a list of the witfiesSes were `riot allowed: Would now proceed . 'to state in tilt stage at which they were arrived his' objection to the l princtPles of the Bill. -. The' LORD CdascELLoa--"The Counsel must withdraw." Mr. Brougham hereupon retired one step from the bar. The' Earl of LivrarooL saidi that undoubted ly when the case should be cloSed it would 'be competent for the Counsel to answer and over:- throw the testimony given, and 'over and ,aboVe they Might certainly object to the Bill itself if it were thought ob t jectionable. That he con - - ceived would be the regular Course of Proceed ing ;. but if he righify' understood the Learned Counsel, he wished 'to be now heard against the principle of the Bill. The LORD CHANCELtOR said, there was one argument in . favOurOf the regular course as poiot, ed out by the' Noble Earl (Liverpool) which was; that if the facts were not proved there would be no 'occasion for occupying their Lordships' time by going at' all into the arguments on the prin ciple Of the Bill. : Lord KENYON said, their Lordships moist be aware of the' extreme regret of the COuntry at large that any Opinion' should be . entertained by their 'Lordships of the necessity of going at all into the eviderick llV'therefore, with' a view to" avert that necessity, moved that Counsel be now allowed to proceed. • The Earl of LtvErtrooL thought that .after the question \\ hid' had been put to the. Judges, .the answer to winch their. Lordships had beard, and after the decision which their Lordships had come, to, that Counsel should be bear& upon the 13114' the only question remaining was,- what was the usual course of proceeding.. That course, in his opinion, was that the Attorney-. General should proceed, and after closing Itis,,case, it :would- be then competent , for her Majesty's Counsel to reply. . The Marquis of LANsn9wN said,.it' would be proper to see if the argument used' for saving fiv e time of the House, did not in reality pitesc, the other way. He thought it was quite clear that the Learned Counsel must be allowed .• to speak against the principle. of the. Bill, eitlt er new or at a future stage of the proceedit4, but that he could not ,be alowed to speak twice upon it. His Lordship, therefore, tho!...ght that the •Counse/ ought to elect whether They would now, or, at- a subsequent period,bling forward their arguments against, the prin6ple of th e Bill. lie ,th oug ht that th e consifAeration of saying du.> time of their Lord s hi oz was as nothin ,, to being saved the dis clos ure of facts, which, 71 . the Learned Counsel's P.:eguments prevailed, would be the desirable re sult. . The Counsel were then ordered to be called in, and Mr. Brougham advanced again close to the liar. The -Jo ttn CHANCELT,Oa, addressing the Conn sea,l, inf orme d t h em th a t h e was-commanded by the House t o ask if they chose,,now to in 'their arg umen t s aga inst ,the principle of the Bill ; at the sa me time, they must clearly.uuderstanil that they could, not' then so proceed, and at any future stag e lik ew ise. . [Here there was a. cry of Counsel to withdrauV which was, loudly reiterated, as.,Mr. Brougham bad not retreated at all from the.-liar; ou which, as before, he stept back a pace or, two.] The Earl of LA ILDERDALE said, that he must object to the course of: proceeding. proposed';• for the Counsel:might find it expedient tw o bj ect . to the principle founded on facts •arising from the evidence to be given on the, Bill ; when. ; by the mode adopted,. they,twould, be, precl u d e d f rom Ile to h eobjections,.tis,ct hluowseeveil well,Sohnded. objected t.. appeared like the Court making a bargain with the Counsel to pursue a certain course in defending his client's cause: The Counsel were then ordered to be called in, On which Mr. BRouGuAlt stept forwar&te the -Bar. and apologized for his delay in withdrawing when.the call took place. for that purpose. , lie said, •he. Tiad, understood from .those who wire .the habit : ?fAitteedigg'4lte *7l oLittleir.L-Drdshipss,:that34<:. withdrawing was a mere act of form ; he bekgs:(l, therefdre to' c'ear liintself ' from tr imputatiOn - of (liro t he their. Lordships . as he was well aWare there-itere those present who were quite . . , ieacly'th' rinStonstrue any . thing he might do or PIY.---(Loga, criei of. " Order I. order t")-1Ie now undeestood ;that ht setii to make his:ekction as to the time When le wthild argue against the principle of the Bill, and lie the-more readily'cliose that mom-ent frinn being satis fied their. Lordship? sense of justice .Would induce them to re vise their decision against hereafter hearing him, should any thiegessential to th e en d s o f substantial justice arise after the 'evideece had be en gon e t h roug h t t e ren d er i t nrces - Wy. His first .objection was t that the 13111 was a private law made furs particular case, and t o p un i s h a p ar ti cu l ar indi vidual, a proceedine never resorted to in anytountry, or it) the iithsett earliestttei• ieli t p t g e n r i a o n d c c o f t ( t ) l every n p i r a i c c i worst Of buses } without a de e p sens e o f it s h a t e f u l na t ure , an d 1 ( ) ) 1 ( e i e t: f the uv i g s p re r , u tt d e e s a t i c j e u . ri ls s 'Lo o n t .. Salts-had described such laws as of a cheadful description, and only tole justified by absolute.necessity. Such laws were ex war given, and then lay post facto ; -they first p erm it the deed to be done, and after wards define wh et h es i t b e gu il ts ' or innocent, or rather before any. notice or and indict pu n i s h ment. as if t h e g u ilt •ls' bold of the perso n ad been previously nine - defined. He disclaimed the childish pedantry of quoting to their Lordships examples from the Rowel history, but it would be-:in their Lordships' recollection .that not only the wisest and best. of the legislators of that !people, but even those of moderate sagacity, have• startled at passing lasts like these. , And in the'history of our own country, the story of the enactment wayspeedily followed by the ac count 'ot• the repeals It might be 'objected that he was referring to a period when civil wa rs h a d d e l s i ge d t h e country w ith bl m "l s hut' be did not refer to those times for exampleS, hut because the cases lot wag about to quote were against. the examples of Bills of Pains•and penalties. In 'tile reign of Edward Hl_ the Bill against MI - timer was passed and 'quickly rescinded ; so also similar Bills in the reign of Richard 111., and indeed almost all laWs nf a similar nature adopted under the pres sure of temporary 'expediency were afterwardi - repealed, The case of Lord Strafford would be in the recollection of their Lordships. All the Bills against , the wires of Harry V 111.,. any reference to which would involve him' in' the history of the violence and'cruelty of that hateful tyrant, be should foe . the present purposcly'pass over, aid take his stand arbet ter periods, and only jest glance at the time of the twt, I bar ' lesis; when Strafford suffered under a pro( eedng which was the greatest disgrace that ever sullied the p trite of either flonse of Parliament. Had that beets a•ense vi impeachment, tt would have been comparatively a case of justice; there • would have been at least the forms of justice half observed, and the spirit totally neglected ; bet'it was a case of attainder, and to shew their Lordships' what 'was the sense enter tained by their ancestors of that Aet a te would beg leave to read to them a passage front a histoil written' by 'one of the most eloquent mete that ,erer existed, anda hear relative to ne Of :their, Lordships who -then heard , him. — Here the 1 , earned Counserread.a passage front " Mr. Fox's History of ;sines the Secinul," which, after stating the Tate of the Earl of Strafford, precieds to . eive an account of the conduct of the Houk of Lords, at a subsequent period, when they revelled the iniquiteusact, and in the preamble of the Bill stated, that to the end that rigot be done•to the memory of thedcceased' Earl. it Should be enacted, that all t=cerils of the attainder should be • wholly canceller ,to the end that it might not be visibleto after ages, to he drawn . into example to the prejudice of any person whatever. Of a similar nature was thatßill Which at present laid On their Lordship? tabi.e, by means of which, rank the,' , most exalted, station the' Most respectable; and above all, every thing dear tp character and fettling Were to be blasted. The obliteration of the attainder wets not done to:bring to life the odious precedent ; it was sione in hatred to it,' that it Might be held on as a beacon to warn, as a landmark tti guide, ' when future Princes and Parliaments should' be called upon ' been done to to decide in, similar cases, that they might avoid what 'bad Lord Stratford ; bedause in his own time it • was abhorred by all good men, avid in the immediately succeedieg age was, reseinditlhy the sons of the actors its it. Having thus stated the general objections to Bills of Pains and Penal ties, he would venture to say of the present case, that the worst of former Bills, not excepting those -f Hen rythe Fig bra's Wives. were regular judicial acts, compared to the orle before their Lordships. • He should assume that nothing illegalizonld be laid to her :Majesty's charge; and that be was bound to as sume from the face of the proceeding astir- , because, itany - act had been committed in violation of any law, their Lord- • ships Would never haveentertained the Measure. And .here . be must he allowed to make one observation respec,ting another mode of proceeding ; - he r t'Asidered;• that . if no iltegal at had been done, inipeachpsent Was the mode for trying what c4nid not beindicied by law. He did not 'mean to contend that ;I verson might not be impeached for what svat also indict Al" ; what he meant was, than - eritaies'lnay be committed. not cognizable- lsy, the Coutte. below, but et-0i *strictly tAgaiz -10111,b,y their Lordships. .He . therefore thought that some tlatig of a reason'shontd be given tsishew•why iti;peachineni ' had not been resorted to. • In Strafford's ease 'impeachment Was resorted.to. and .the W l / 4 11 .of Attainder - was ,hrotight•ln: pending the proceedipgsou the.impeachme at, and it way ()ply ‘•be.n they apprehended that the impeachment would fail that • they adomed,the attninder. The pre'•ent 'was, he conceived, in the spit it of those proceedings. : f'be actors in Him injos lice were then on the l populae side., and their enceessors in the present day now have recourse to 'a sintitar measure; WIIt.::, - they ((ogee that impeachiner,( wou ld. IA If th e arise were , such as to -make I he : prow.oters of it tie Bill doubt self their Lordships entertaining "... Cbargt.of impeathment, they might Mare laid their paper ~ and proofs before the other House of Parliament; a ror: e of impeachment might have been-then brought up, ant', their Lordships would doubtless have sutlem ird it to g? o ".t. Indeed, ;s it was the privilege of the cow n3ons . to '-rtipeach, it might be doubted whether their Lord #biPs child, avoid entering on it. Had that stepleen adopt ed. 1 ..,er Majesty's Advisers would have had a specific charge, ~, tli such peculiarity of detail' as would have enabled Liens to see on, what points they were called upon for defence; and if not allowed a list of witnesses, they would have- had whatmould at least make the measure bear some resern blance to a je.dieial proceeding, which at present it did not;.. but I:.e Amsted that it. would at least resemble, a,' judicial- r,roceeding ,in its regard for substantial jestice..: Another, 'thing from which a conclusion Might be drawn, that the resent was not a charge of guilt, or the proCeeding a judleial one, was ibis, that if the charge had heel-v.4a some thing done•for which the piirty might be indicted, or even impeached, he would be precluded froth urging any thing on the-exPedieneyerf the measure, because in. Conrts!of - Jnstice arch questions, were wholly foreign to a judicial investigatiere; ,but when it, was a.qucstion of legislation,' of a new law to be passed, be was' immediately- let in to addnce every' argineent ' tending to expose the impolicy or injustice of the proceeding. • The Il i teyned cottoski,.io.cootiouotion;ob'serced that he could sheW front theirLordships'proceedings,or rather from thepio testsaf thevirtimus minorities,thatsueh theasurr'sslnoildnever . be resorted to except front failure of justice, or the most ailtso'e lute an d pressing state necessity. Without these exceptions nothing could justify sucli a proceeding-. The Learned Cerin:sel' prOceeded to read a protest; which 'among betide diaingnished ' "names had ,that of the Lord Chancellor Cots-per signed to it, in which the arguments he had just urged on their Lord- • ships were corroborated and supported. Whe:re then; be would ask, was the impelling necessity, which alone•could•jus tify the proceeding ? Was the succession in jeopardy? Sup ptsing tlsat her Majesty hurl been brought Under the operatiott o!' the statute'of Edward Ill..froto the pcculitircirc'utiostancev, from time separation or age of • the parties, it would be a rea sonable inference *bat, no danger could arise to the succes sion ; yet as that would have been a case of impeaclithent,'he ' would' have been •bonnd- to treat it simply as a qUestion of fact,:atoi could not have argued from inferences or prohabili-, ties; but here „he was entitled to argue it ,as a law to he made, and ;not a trial under any existing statute. If a . ,....1in"-' ~dow. or danger- -to the ' succession ' could be sheven; - then . orse t ,only of li k is objeetions would be removed. There-was another , (langey, td : the succe, , ,.4ion, which w,is, where it Ns:as . likely to fail for want of a successor, ion to i fiat 'he Would not. call, their .Lordships' attention. What then was the genunti, of .neeessity, here stated ? Why, it was said, that the a-o•.ductof her Majesty, from the station which she occupied, i - eig, ht . degrade the. Crown and the Nation,' and thin art in ference.4s ,drawn that the connectienletween her Majesty, ri'e...cr9wllt a,nd the Nation, must be broken, because of such conduct., On thiS he would observe, first of all, that the charge ... , ..;is . frit- the &Induct of her Majesty before-she was Queen, when only the wife of a subject, ass:oo filling the highest stationiti the realm. yet but a subject. Now observe how that acted. If the Queen had been hrtiught there for an act :done - whilst Princess;• :would any nian'hare denied that . it MO : . 4,.8i1i, of Divorce, aunt must , then have heen had on m . the, ordinary terms ; all the fors must have been drily coMplitd . with. The party - *est coins. by Petition to their ' Lordship? liouseond must have come into ask it with. clean., lands, But it was delayed till her Majesty became .. Qtieen, wife, _ e nd although he did il:/) and then proceeded in when her M'ajesty had rust, as ante centur,tained it. The question now. wa s , of the, King anti the oin sad,i d, i t p li tt l a i t g e h p t i s n i o o f n a , itpsrviaysastueflicientMrlis erg um entth at soitte , cb leer i, and not of th an and wife, and lie . did say; that it would' m U i-njust•if they 'did no t give to- , her Majesty every benefit its clueen which she ' would have enjoyed as Priqess, 14, 1 , jug, ratted, the, ;question tit Kftriminakion, 'he . wotild : int it out ' of' view; hot' he •shtlulct 'violate-Ike' - instruction of -. hisillustrious Client if he uttered the word again without ab-