The enquirer — Richmond, Va., 1810-05-29 00:00:00, page 1

RICHMOND, TUESDAY, MAY 29, 1810.
[No 6.
j
(xj? Published by Thomas Ritchie, nearly op
posite the Globe Tavern, Richmond, Virginia.
CCj* COKD1710NS:—Fixe dollar* a year, to
be paid annr ally in advance- Those echo wish to
be Considered as annual subscribers, must hereafter
designate it at the time of subscribing, otherwise
their papers will be discontinued at the expiration
ef theJirst rear.
RICHMOND PRICES CURRENT.
n.
c.
00
5
TOBACCO,
7
50
nflUH-SUPERFINE,
6
50
VO. FINE,
00
3
CORN, PER BARRET.,
1
17
XVUEAT,
9
0
BACON, PER LB.
67
0
"WUISKE.Y, PER GALLON,
110 00
BAR IRON, PER TON,
260 00
HEMP, PER TON,
Richmond, 8th of May, 1810.
ROBERT GRfcENHQW, now residing in
this place, next door to the west of the bank
of Virginia, anxious to bring his affairs within as
narrow a compass as possible, entreats all those
in arrears to him, to make immediate settlement.
Averse as he has erer been to law, he must re
tort to it, and that speedily, if this, his request, is
not attended to-His individual claims, with
those due to him, »9 executor for Josias Moody,
deceased, will be placed in the hands of a» at
torney for collection, if not settled previous to
August court next. 8t
LANDS FOR SALE—The Subscriber of
fers for sale, his
T R ACT OF LAFTD,
Lying in the county of Amherst, on the waters of
Piney river, adjoining the lands of James Frank
lin, Joel Franklin’s estate, Micajah Camden,
IViUiam S. Crawford and Bartlett Cash ; con
taining near 900 acres. This tract lies extremely
■well; upon it is a considerable quantity of mea
dow ground, it is very fertile, well watered, and
■well adapted to the culture of com, wheat and
tobacco ; upon it is a plantation sufficient to work
eight hands, a considerable part of it is fresh land,
and the w!u»*e of it is in a high state of cultivation
—well enclosed, and divided into four fields ;
each field in its turn has been sowed in small
grain, a part of the grain has been rolled in the
Plaister of Paris, and the whole have been sowed
5n their turn in red clover, which grows luxuri
ant on this plantation ; that, together with the
■white clover, which grows naturally upon it,
produces very fine pasturage, there is also upon
it a very good apple orchard, and there has lately
been built thereon, some useful and valuable hou
pes. A further description is deemed unnecessa
ry, as it is presumed that no person will purchase
■without first viewing the lands. The overseer
living on tiie plantation, will shew the land to any
person wishing to purchase.
ALSO—One other Tract, lying in Goochland
county, on both sidas of Tuckalioe creek,on the
north side ot the Three Chop road, adjoining the
lands of Benjamin Hughes, Benjamin Watkins,
and Elisha Leuk's estate, containing three hun
dred and fifty acres, a considerable part of this
land is cleared, and none of it lias been in cultiva
tion for some years past; it is land of good soil,
and is well adapted to the culture of corn and
■wheat, and is very convenient to market, bemg
Sibout twenty-three miles from the city of Rich
mond.
These Lands will be sold on time, and the pay
ments made accommodating to purchasers. For
further particulars respecting this last tract of
Land, apply to Col. Robert H. Saunders, living
near it in the said county, or to the subscriber in
the city of Richmond. WILLIAM GALT.
April 31._ tf
BY Virtue of a decree oM lie County Court of
Cumberland we shall proceed to seli (on
Saturday the 39th day of June next) the tract of
LAND belonging to the estate ofV/m. Hudson
ylec’d. in this county, on which the said dec’ll
formerly lived, a credit of twelve months will be
given—A final settlement of all accounts pro and
€ion, touching the estate of said Win. Hudson
dec’d. will take place on the above day, and at
the late dwelling house of said dec’d. where the
•hove Bale will take place.
THOMAS BRACKETT,~)
Thomas cordon, * CvmmUiioncrs
NOTON COODMAN >
Cumberland County, May id.
BY virtue of a trust deed executed by Ed
round Lacy to the Subscriber to secure the
payment of a debt duo William Mann, will be
sold for cash, on the 1st day of June, S negroes
at the Globe Tavern
ROBERT S. NIXON;
Richmond, IVTnv 13. ids
C"'* UN-HOW1;Kk !—The pruprieitn . of the
J RICHMOND 1‘OWDXR MILLS, offer
fl>r sale, by the keg or larger quantity, F and FF
Gun Powder, glazed and ungiared ; Warranted
•cpialto any imported, and on reasonable term*
Retailers at liberty to return the powder, if
not approved. Apply to
JAMKS BROWN, Jr. Or,
DAV21) y. BURR.
May 23._ 2aw2w8iJswtf
RAN-AWAT—Five dollars reward will be
given to any one who will bring home tny
negro boy WILSON, or inform me where lie is
«o that 1 may get him, lie has been away since the
latter end of Feb las*, he is a bright mulatto
about 15 years old, about A feet -i incites high._
1 am of opinion he is baroored in this ciiy, or
Mancheste., as he lias hcen repeatedly seen in
both places. I expect he has Idred himself to
some tobacco factory, and probably attempts to
pass as a free hoy,or s iys it is with my approta
lion. My reason lor supposing x»; is, that about
* years ago lie run aw ay, and hired himself to
3t Tobacco SiemiTiery.
D. DOR RING TON.
May 95. tf
FOURTEEN HUNDRED Sacks Liverpool
Ground Salt, Sugars, Coffee, Teas, Rai
*ins in boxes anti Kegs, Copperas, 8 by 10 and J2
by 10 Window Glass, White Lead, & Spanish
brown, Havanna Segars, Playing Cards, Dimi
ties, Ornaburg*—nod
DUTCH BOLTING CLOTHS.
Ton bale nv—
M & B. MTKPS.
May 25.
2 w6t w4 w
A RACK on the New Castle turf, on next Sa*
t.urday fortnight, (the 2d of June,) mile ft
repent, a catch upon each horse. Mr. John M
Syrne’s hay h<- ae Tom Tough ; Dr. Claiborne's
Golden Eagic ; and Mr 11. ilsll'n bay mare Fan
n\ Bird piay or pay—each gentlemap subscri
bing 9> 100.
yOTIN M. SVMF,
V' n RRi.Sl.RY CJ.AlBOPNIt,
.'! ‘R. LI SON BALL.
May 2 *t
ALUABLE LAND—FOR SALK*-The
subscriber will sell, and give immediate
possession of his plantation, in King William
county, near the Piping Tree, containing by a
late survey, four hundred and eighty two acres.
There is half of this Land sufficiently fertile for
tobacco, that which has been in cultivation, pro
duces good corn and whea*. . On the premises,
is a two story Dwelling House, elegantly situa
ted, which, with little expence, may be made
comfortable and convenient ; there is also a thri
ving apple orchard of choice fruit, and a variety
of other advantages, which makes this plantation
a desirable residence for a genteel family ; it is
about nine miles (b Hanover Town, and twenty
five to Richmond-Further particulars made
known by the subscriber, residing in th** city of
Richmond.
COLE D1GGES.
May 25.
1m
''■"''HE Equalizers of the taxes for the city of
X Richmond will hold their meetings at the
Clerk’s Office, of the Common Hall, in the up
per «tory of the. Market House, on every
Tuesday and Thursday from the hours of eleven
to one o’clock, commencing on Tuesday the 59th
inst. and continuing three weeks from said day—
Applications by persons considering themselves
aggrieved by the valuation of property made by
the assessor of the city taxes and his associates
will apply for relief, on the said days bv a note
in writing addressed to the Equalizers'and left
at the said Clerk's Office—No applications wil
be received in any oilier form
N SHEPPARD.
Clerk Common Hall.
May 25. . 3w
Europe.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
London, April 5.
SIR FRANCIS BURDETT.
Mr. Lethbridge moved the order of the
day fo- resuming the adjourned debate on
the resolutions of the honorable gentleman,
respecting the letter of Sir Francis Burdett,
to his constituents; which letter is charged
as being a breach of the privileges of this
House.
Sir Samuel Romilly said, that after all
the consideration he had been able to give
to the subject now under the consideration
of the House, and if it could be true, as an
honorable member had • asserted on a for
mer .light, that he was then the only per
son who entertained a -loubt,on the subject,
he was glad to find that was not the case
now ; for he believed many honorable mem.
bees who had taken time to consider it, were
of the same opinion with himself. He con
gratulated the House on now coming to the
question in a more cool, sober, and credita
ble manner, than they could have done had
they before entered into it.; and that they
would now be more likely to j£ive their judg
ment and decision in a manner thore con
I sonant with the strict rules of justice, than
when they were seemingly hurried on by the
warmth of their feelings. The proposition,,
he said, involved two questions ; first, whe
ther the paper was a gross libel, reflecting
on the privileges of the House i Secondly,
whether it was expedient to come to the re
solutions? On the former, he did express
| doubts, whether the paper were a libel at
all ; and next, whether it were a libel re
flecting on the just privileges of the House.
He would state le the House the doubts lie
entertained as to the libel; and in doing
this, it would be necessary to see for what
Mr. Gale Jones had been committed. The
honorable member then referred to the
Speaker’s warrant, from which, he said, it
appeared, that Mr. Jones was committed for
two offences ; one, a libel against the cha
racter and conduct of the House ; the other,
against the past conduct of individual mem
i bers. The libel for which Mr. Jones had
been committed, was stated to be a paper
published by him as manager of a Debating
Society. It announced, that the question to
be debated was, “ Which was the mast de
serving the censure of the public——Mr.
Vorke’s enforcement of the standjng order of
the House, to exclude strangers from the in
quiry info the Walclieren Expedition, or
Mr. Windham’s late attack, on the freedom
ot the Press ?” Then followed a statement
of the manner in which the question on the
preceding it ght had been determined. This
paper, in his mind, did not contain anything
libellous against the characier or conduct of
the House £ but only against the conduct of
individual members, on matters that were
past. He begged the House would believe,
that he did nqt intend to justify Mr. Jones
for issuing this paper. He thought it ex
tremely wrong,-that any person or persons
calling themselves a Debating Society, who
ndvertised questions for discussion, to which
any one might ho, and there deliver his opi
nion tor a shilling, should take upon them
to criticise, or censure the conduct of any
manor set of men, in any other assembly,
on points to which the latter could notvive
any answer, not hemp; present. Hut as tliis
paper had been made the foundation of cal.
ling Mr. Jones before that Hwuse, and of hb
being sent to prison in consequence, he could
only argue on it as a matter of serious doubt
and consideration in his mind, whether the
House, in their committal, had acted with
all that discernment and propriety, that
might he expected from it. The paper al
nded to the enforcing of the Standing Or
der. That was the act of the individual
member; the House was not concerned in
•t-(Murmurs from the o/i/:osite side of
the Mouse. J->11 he was mistaken, he err
ed under tile highest authority of the House,
that nf the chair, who had informed them
that no member had a right to enter into the
slightest discussion of it. Jt was only a few
evenings ago, when a right honorable gentle
man attempted to speak, before he moved
the Standing Order, the Speaker told him
he could not he allowed to do So.-.The only
pat t the House to«k in it, was making the
Standing Order on thefirsr day of the Sen.
sion-and after.it became the entire and
sole act cl the individual member who chose
to | nt it in torce. Here the honorable and
learned member again referred to Mr.
Jon-s’s advertisement, and observed how
guardedly it was worded—(Hrar ! Hear J
from the Treasury lirurh !)—The learn,
eti member said, if anyone could so far mis.
understand him* as to suppose, that he in
tended to justify the paper, by saying it was
guarded—he was at a loss to imagine on
what ground he could do so. He thought
the expressions libellous against the indi
viduals to whom they were applied, and he
had said so ; and he mentioned the word
“ guarded,” merely in allusion to that part
charged as a libel against the character and
conduct of the House. .*
An honorable member had, on a former
night, said, '‘Did we not come to an imme
diate decision in the case of Gale Jones?
and should we hot do the same- in the case
of Sir Francis Burdett ?”—He (Sir S R.)
would in return ask, did the House do right
to come to such an immediate decision ? If
the House came to a decision in the case of
Crosoy, as had been contended, it was upon
different principles from the present. Mr.
Crosby was a member of the House, and ha
vjng been committed by the authority of the
House, the Court of King’s Bench could
not interfere in discharging him, because
:t appeared, he was duly committed by the
authority of the Speaker’s warrant, for a
breach of the privileges of that House, to
which he, as a member,, was always a.,
menable. But, if that had been stated in
the Speaker’s warrant, as a breach of pri
vilege, which appeared to the court net to
be a breach of privilege, then the court
would, on the habeas coi pus, have dischaig.
ed him: He did entertain a great doubt,
whether the House had a right to commit
for a breach of privilege in the case of a li
bel on the conduct of one of their members.
He thought the House had a right to com
mit,-in a great many cases—such as where
their proceedings were interrupted; where
the people, by hissing, or otherwise, insult
ed members coming to the House; vyh'ere
they threatened members, if they voted on
a particular side, and many others of the
same nature ; but when he spoke of libels
published on the past conduct of members,
and not on any proceedings at the moment
going on before the House, he had great
doubts as to the right of committing, because
lie conceived it to be against the first prin
ciples of justice; because the House acted
as their own Counsel, Jury and Judge; be
cause they were the accusers and the pu
nishers:-They began by reading the pa
per, and they concluded by ordering the par
ty away without hearing him. Would any
court of law act in that way ? • The house
were the judges of the law and of the fact ;
and the party was committed during their
plea*s«re, without any appeal. ..But all this
was only from necessity ; and when the ne
cessity ceased, the power ought to cease
with it. I lus was the doctrine held and
started by Lord Chief Justice De Grey,
in the case of Mr. Crosby, who was com
mittcd, as a member of that House, for a
breach of its privileges. The court of corn,
mon pleas could not give any relief, because
it did not know what were the privileges
of the House of Commons- The Chief Jus
tice said, the commitment was legal, be
cause it was necessary; aild that showed,
that if it had not been necessary, it would
not have been legal. The House had been
told of a great number of precedents and
decisions of the courts of law ; but what were
they?—He should be glad to know vrfiere
they were?—of those tnat had been mention
ed, the fir3t was in the reign of the Tudors;
and that was not a time, he thought, to
which the House should refer in defence
and support of its own privileges-a time
when the House were told, at the beginning
of each session, that they were not to med_
die with matters of State ; and when Queen
Elizabeth repeatedly ordered the House not
to proceed any further in such and such ca
ses. The case of Arthur Hall had been re
ferred to in 1580. What was the sentence of
the House? W'as it any thing like the
commitments of the present House of Com
mons ? No■ ■■ The sentence was for six
months imprisonment-to pay a fine of
500 marks, and at the end of that Six mouths,
to a still farther imprisonment, ’till he
should make a retraction. That retraction
might be given during the rcc*-ss of Parli
ament. If the individual war, obstinate, his
imprisonment might “last for years,” or
even life, as Parliament did not then meet
so frequently as it does now. When the re
traction was offered, it was to be in the pre
sence of the Lord Steward of his majesty’s
house-hold, the Chancellor of the Exche
quer and several other principal officers of
State.
This was the mode of proceeding cited to
the house, as authority to justify what had
been done in this case. Was there any
thing similar between .them ? Could the
house now commit for an indefinite time, or
for six months ? Can it impose a fine, as. was
done in those days? He could himself cite
many cases in which the House had in those
times made commitments of the most extra
ordinary nature, and sentenced men to as
extraordinary punishments. There was one,
Of putting two men back to back upon a
horse, and leading them through the streets
with a particular mavk upon them.—There
was another, in which anew and extraordi
nary punishment had been invented by the
House tor the particular offence—But were
these such cases as were at all to lie cited as
precedents on the present occasion ?—He.
was astonished to see it attempted. With
respect to the case of Arthur Hall, Mr. Hat
sell takes notice in his book of Parliainenta
ry Cases, an'] says, that it was afterwards
declared derogatory to the proceedings of
the house. These were in fact not deserving
the names of precedents, but were mere ex
ercises of authority ; for precedents are on
ly the decisions of a legal judge., The I louse
had also in former 'lines carried their au
thority very high, in the resolutions which
they from time to time passed. There was
a resolution of the House, March 8, 1701,
“ that no man who had been committed by
the House »f Commons, should dare* to sue
out a Habeas Corpus but the re volutions
of the House were not the laws of tKeHonse*
In the case of the King against Flower, that
was a committal by the House of Lords for
a definitive period of time, and a fine was
imposed.-i'hi* was not for a libel on the
House of Lords, but cnly one of their mem.
I hers, the Bishopof Lanriaff. From the time
of I'rynno to that period, this question had
| often be» n agitated, hut never fairly deter
i pained noil it happened, that same shor^tinie.
before this present commitment, Mr Har
grave, allowed to be one of the most l*>arn
ed, constitutional lawyers in this country,
• had written and published a very learned
argument on this point in which he strongly
doubts the right. Mr. Flower was brought
before the Court on a writot habeas cor/ius,
and his ca.se was argued before two judges
j of the court only', and not by the whole court;
| Mr. Justice La wrence being absent from in
disposition, and Mr. Justice L-e Blanc, sit
ting, at Nisi Prius. The const, in giving
their judgment, began by saying, that in
times tike those, factious persons always bj.
gan their mischievous course by endeavor
ing to bring into disgrace the courts of LatV
aud the Houses of Parliament.—The House
would observe that this was not a libel a
gainst the House of Lords, but otrly against
one of its individual members. Alter coin
mentingat length on the matter of the.libel,
the learned Judge concluded by saying, that
the court would make themselves accompli,
ces in the encouragement of sedition and tu
mult, if they did not remand the prisoner on
that occasion. t"Now (said Sir Samuel Romil
ly) can any man say that this judgment was
pronounced in a grave, sober amt temperate
manner ?” He was iar from wishing to
say auy thing which might appear a censure
on the learned Judge, for whom he had a
high respect; but he certainly could not
have supposed that a grave Court could have
entered into a question of that nature in the
manner it had done—If there was any case
in which, more than any other, it was to be
wished that the question was tohe determin
ed-by the most impartial Judges, this was
the case—Strongly feeling, therefore, and
entertaining this-opinion, he felt much in
clined, when this question was disposed of,
to move for the discharge of Air CJalc Jones,
without demanding from him a petition of that
nature which was stated to be customary.
He could not say, whether what was alleiig
ed to be the custom had over been dispensed
with or not ; but he could not help thinking
of such a custom, that it was one “ more hon
ored in the breach than in the observance,”
He believed there was no civil tribunal in the
land (be knew the spiritual opes sometimes
decided differently) which required a man
to retract the opinions which he had deliv
ered, perhaps on the firmest and most sin
cere conviction. The opinion itself might he
utterly false and erroneous ;-but if the man
who delivered it, firmly believed it to be
true, it was not to be supposed that a man
could be found to change his opinion by the
authority of that house ; and if his opinion
was unchanged, he thought it too hard to
require him to recant it. In the spiritual
courts, he knew that a different course had
been often taken ; and that, in cases where
men had been prosecuted for heresr, they
had been often obliged publicly to recant
those doctrines which they had promulgat
ed from the sincerest conviction ; but it was j
not the custom of civil tribunals to force a
mr.n to take a part in his own humiliation
and punishmt nt. He must confess that in the
course of last session he thought it was ra- I
1 ther hard to expect an individual called to
I their Bar (Gen. Clavering) to confess him
[ self guilty of prevarication. . That individu
al had, however, as he thought properly,
preferred staying some time longer in pri
son, to make that abject submission which
was required, by what was said to be the
custom of the house. As to the paper in
question, although he conceived that in ma,
ny parts it was intemperate aiul improper,
yet he did not conceive it particularly deser.
vingthe attention of that house. As to that
passage, of *• the Commons lording it over
the king, as well as the people,” it was a
passage which he thought unintelligible at
the first reading, and which he did not yet
understand. But he could notallow that the
j warmth which ran through the paper was
I proof of its being written in contempt of that
! house ; for he conceived, on the contrary,
that a certain vehemence in the expression
| of any opinion, was often rather a proof of
the sincerity of that opinion, and of the im_
portance that the person delivering it at
tached to it. A noble Lord (Lord Binning)
sefcmed to take great credit to himself when
he said, that if Sir Francis Burdett had ar
gued the matter with perfect calmness, he
should not then have thought it necessary to
view the production as a breach of the privi
leges of that house.—The Noble Lord was
entitled to no great credit for that declara
tion ; for if such had been the case, nobody
could have complained of it as a breach of
pr’vilege, and the question would not have
been brought forward. In considering how
ever, the degree of warmth in which such
questions might be fairly agitated, he would
bring forward to the house, wha ,if brought
forward against an individual, would be caL
led art argument uni ad homintyi He
would recall to the recollection of tile house
| language which had been used by the House
of Commons itself, in conference witn the
| House of Lords, upon a question of pri/ile“
ges. i he House of Commons then said
*• they did not wonder, after the many suc_
cessful attempts their Lordships had made
upon the fundamental principles of the con
st itntion, that they had ventured to proceed
still farther ; but that if the Commons did
not resist their claims, .the liberties of the
country would he snnk in the bottomless
land insatiable abyss of their Lordshifis' au
thority.”
i Im wan a sort of language which the
house of commons had formenv supposed was
not unbecoming them to use i and ne siiould
confidently ask, whether there was any thing
in the paper ut Sir Francis Burdett's, whicu
at ail approached this language, which the
house of common* thcmseives thought pro.
per, in the controversy with the. Lords?——
It wan* however, completely agreed, that in
this controversy, the house of commons had
been in. the wrong, and yet they thought it
not unbecoming them to tue 3uch language.
They used it -ilso not in the heat of the mo.
inent, but it was deliberately drawn up b)
their committee. He therefore did not think
the language ot this paper was dererving 0.
their censi-it-, and he thought that the if .use
should ve-y seriously consider whether it
was H',v»sa.ile to censure the paper or not.
He thought that in the Curse of the argu
meiu an unlatr course ha<l been taken to
wauls the Hon. Baronet (air F. Burden) arid
| such a course as would almost have been
' " 1 ... »■ m>«IT
{Considered a contempt of court by thejudg„
I es al*y «>tlirr tribunal. A specific cuarge
i had been brought against tiie Honorable Ua
, ronet, and tnc past tran*«acti >ns of ihe liie
| ot the honorable huronp* were brought to
■ streng’hen or to aggravate this charge. A*
to toe life ot the honorable B*i*unet, he was
I not propat ed to say much. lie hart not tha
good tortune to be acquainted with him, and
; had never met Inin except In that house ;
, but he would, say, that no judge in r.rtv of the
| courts ot law would receive>any anecdotes of
< h«s forintre life* when the question v/as on a
: specific charge. The Right Honorable
(Gentleman cm the other side-(the Master
i die Rolls) liad appeared-to consider the
! question as forced upon the H use. and that
j on that account they were not at liberty to
get rid of it.
| In this opinion he entirely dlTere'd front
i him, and would not agree that the H use of
Commons was bound, like an ordinary court
Jot justice, to come to a (Incision up<>u every
! question which was proposed to their Cunsi.
deration. A court ot justice was bound to
determine every case which was brought
before them, without being at liberty to con
sider whether it was prudent or imprudent!
for the parties to bring such cases before
them. T. he House of Commons was, howe„
ver, not bound in the. same manner ; they
were not obliged, when any individual Mem
ber read a thing in a newspaper, which,
on a hasty consideration he thougnt proper*
to bring forward as a breach of privilege, to
come to any discussion upon a matter so pro
posed, There were many consitlet atioos
which it was their duty to attend to. It of
ten happened in policy, as Well as in religion*
that punishment produced a contrary effect.
Notwithstanding the frequent and severe
punishment tor heresy in former tittres, these
punish inentst instead of abating heresy, ap
peared to incieaye it, and even to *ake the
most recent instance, about a breach of pri
vilege, the committal of IV’r. Gale Jones,
was so far from putting a st<HP to attacks up
on the H iuse, that it was the very cause 8c
occasion or tile (juesti »n now under discos.,
sion on another breach of privilege. It was
therefore word* consideration whether this
mode of punishing tor cnrtempt was likely
to he productive of good or harm ; for as the
late instance of one committal for a breach,
of privilege produced that which was the
subject o* the present discussion, it <ught se
riously to be considered, whether the decisi
on on the present case might not produce a
number of other writings, which would be
as great or greater violations of the privi
leges of that House; and whether the House
could by any exercise of its power of com.,
mittal, stop such publications ? He thought
'hat the present lime was not a proper one
for agitating questions of this nature, at a
time wlitn the nation felt most acutely the
losses and disgrace of the Expedition to Wal
cheren. 1 hey had. been told by the House
of Commons, that this expedition had been
wisely planned, and ably executed—(Loud
cries of hear, hear !) It must be allowed
that the opinion of the House and of the coun
try upon that subject was diametrically op
posite— ( Hear, /.ear !) He thought that
at such a time, when the opinions of the
Nation and its Representatives were so op.
posite on an important subject, it was not
prudent or advisable to resolve upon com
ing to a decision which would necessarily
be discussed and canvassed in every corner
ot the kingdom ;and in the consideration of
which, public opinion might probably again
run contrary tw the declared opinion of-that
House. (Cries of No, no,from the Minis
terial side of the House ) What! said the
lion, and learned member, are they not sa
tisfied that the opinion of the house and the
nation are opposite to each other on that
questiontowhic.il have alaided i (No, no.
from the Ministerial side, and loud cheer
ing from the Opposition benches. ) It then
they will not allow that the sense of the na
tion is against them on that point, let them,
suppose if . they can, that the country is
ready to support them in similar expediti-,
ons f Let them suppose if they can, that the
country is ready to approve ot their commit
tals, and of the construction they think pro
per to draw from those papers which tiiey
shall consider to ha,ve been written in via.
lation of their privileges. If they do so lac
shut their eyes as to believe that the coun •
try approves of such measures, I fear that
they will soon find themselves wretchedly
mistaken, and that they will regret those
measures which they now so warmlv de
fend.” 1
GERMANY. VfEHMMarch 15, 1810.
IMPERIAL NUPTIALS.
WHEN the Prince of Ncufchutrl demanded of
liis Imperial Majesty the hand of his illustrious,
daughter, for his Master Napoleon, lie rJded,
The policy of my sovereign is in unison will,
;lhe wishes oflii* h*art>—This union of two
| powerful families will give ri.se In two gene
rous nations new assurances of tranquility a id
happiness.” In his speech to the Archduchess
■M * ai a i.ouisa. lie said, " Politioalkconsidera
tion* may have influenced the delentiination of
both.Sovereigns ; hut it is above all, your con
sent, Madam, that the Emperor, trty master,
wishes to obtain. It will lie delightful to tee on
a great throne the Grniusof powIrr united
witli DtAOTtsi and Grac -.b winch .are dearly
loved.” 1’he following is the answer of the
Archduchess
“ T ie will of my father has constantly bee*
mine , rny happiness will always oe involved in
his. It is in there principles that thq Emperor
Napoleon cannot fail to find a pledge oj the senti
ments which will actuate my conduct towards
my husband ; happy if I can contribute to his
happiness, &,n .hut of a great na i ni J give, with
the permission of my father, my consent, to my
union with the Emperor Nap >le >n ”
The answer of the Archduke CharLp.S, to
the request of the Emperor N ipoleon that he
would accept his procuration for the marriage
ceremony, was peculiarly animated: Itwas'as
follows ,
“ 1 accept with pleasure, Prince, the proco
sition which his Majesty the Emperor of the
Ereoch has through you transmitted tome.
quatly flattered by his choice, as penetrated w»t*x
llir delightful pre sentime it that mis n'liunr,*
will ellace every trace of political riisa'ention, re
pair the evus ot war, and produce a future hap.
pines* to two nations, wl»o are formed to esteem
each other, and will render each other a rrcip.
meal justice—1 shall reckon amongst the m ,.t
interesting moments of my life, that, wind in ,¥