The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1825-06-07 00:00:00

Alak.

who might one day 011 roe tle7-net..-eof ;lA* teal:Brought to be
in. A great deal had been said with regard to the income
e Duke Already allowed to him by the country. But after all,
mull ask was 18,000/. a-year a very large sum for a person in
high station? He conceived it was a very inadequate NUM,
iTeeing the numerous cal!s made upon persons of his rank,
were 116/ nude on. private individuate. They necessarily
gave away large sums in c eurity.—( Hear. hear. and a !see.) A,
to the question whether the young Peirce should be educated in
England or ahroad, it was certainly desirable that it shouhl be in
England, but he could not :went to the proposition that the child
should be wilfully separated from his parent. He thought surh
a procedure could not accord either with the feeltngs of the House
of Cominons or of the English nation. He trusted that no such a
Feeling existed in that House. But whether the son should be edit.
catedaeart horn his parents or not, he was sure the II cense wirtld
feel that it was their duty to grant an adequate allowance for his
education.
Sir J. SEBRIGHT said that in his judgment this Bill was
neither more nor less than an attempt to give the Duke of Cumber.
land an additional 6,0001. a year. It would have been creditable
both to the Ministers and to the Duke, had they brought the mea-
sure forward at (MCC as a vote to the Dube of Cumberland himat If.
He was willing to grant a proper allowance to his Royal High.
nese to enable mm to maintain his dignity as a member of the
Royal Family, and to educate his own son, and he thought 18,000!.
a year was quite sufficient for (hone purposes; npreially when, as
he had heard that his Royal Duchess was allowed 3.0001. • year
by the king of Piussis. He had no deities to speak disrespect.
fully of an Member of the House of Commons—la laugh)--of
the Royal Family lie meant. He did not think that the conduct
on the part of any Member of the Royal Family was a sufficient
reason for withholding a competent allowance to him which his
station in the country required; but he had not met with any in-
dividual, however closely coneeeted with the Duke, who did not
consider this measure an entire waste of the public money. and al.
together uncalled, for by the occasion. The idea of granting to
the Duke of Cumberland sum of WOOL a year. to enable him to
educate his own toe, was moat mange. It was like coming to the
Maltietrates in ferrety pe nee r is. for an allowance to maintain his
wife and family. (Hear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was not
for bin to answer for the motives of any one who felt disposed to
support this grant. The Hon. Bart. brh and bins (Sir G. Warren-
der) had stated that his reason for voting for the grant was, that
the Duke of Cumberland bed been ill-used, and ought to have been
allowed the same sum as his other Royal relatives. Bet he must
take the liberty of stating, that that was net the ground on which
lie brought the measure forward. He was. hoerever, perfectly pre-
pared to justify himself in putting it upon the ground which he had
done. He had no hesitation in eaying, that it' the circumstances
were the same now as they were on the former occasion, then it
would have exposed Government to a charge of great inconsistency
in proposing the grant again ; but he would say that circumstances
were entirely altered. The House first began by granting the Duke
of Cumberland less than any of his Royal brothers. To the
Duke of Cambridge and the Duke of Clarence they had
granted an additional 6.0001. on their marriage, but this
they did not think proper to do to the Duke of Cumberland. The
Duke of Cambridge had since hail two children born, but the
House had not been asked to grant him a further sum ; and why ?
Because, having giren hint 24,0001., it was considered sufficient,
not only to meet the additional expenses attending his marriage,
but it was also given in contemplation of the probability of his
having a family. The Hon. Baronet who spoke last said, that in
coming to a decision on such a motion as this, he should not look
into the personal conduct of any member of the Royal Family ;
that was in his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) opinion.
nothing but what was correct and proper. It was the duty of
Government to consider only the relative situation of the Il-
lustrious Individuals belonging to the Royal Family. They
ouelit to see that every member of the Royal Family was placed in
a similar situation one with the other, and as became their rank,
without any reference to the conduct of either. Hie Majesty's
Ministers would have acted very wrong, and very disrespectfully,
towards his Majesty, if they had gone to their Royal Master, and
said, '• we advise you to place one of your Masty's royal brothers
in a different situation from the ran of your Majesty's relatives."
(Hear, hear.) Such a course would be disgraceful, and an insult
to tireir Royal Master. The motion then before the (louse was
nothing more than calling upon the House to place the Duke of
Cumberland in the same situation with his royal brothers.
It was no ,outrage on the country, nor an improper attempt
to induce the House to retract its former decisions. But al.
though the Honourable Member for Hertford did not regu-
late his opinions by the conduct of the Duke of Cumberland,
yet the Member for Surrey had done so, and had used some very
harsh words towards his Royal Highness. But he never could for
the soul of him ascertain or guess what it was that the Gentlemen
Mended their opposition upon. Nothing had been stated by any one
of those who had opposed the grant that could explain the cause of
this personal feeling towards the illustrious Duke. Of course it
was a matter of so much delicacy, that he could not feel juetilied in
entering into it at all; but lie would say, that if it were wrong to give
to the Duke of Cumberland 6,0001. aetear' to educate his son, keep.
ing out of sight any thing belonging to his personal character, as
they were bound to do, then he would say, thut in common justice
and consistency, the House ought not to have given the additional
6.000!. a-year to the Duke of Clarence and the Duke of Cambridge
at the time of their marriages, and that they ought immediately to
take away those grants. If the House of Commons did not do so,
but considered those grants proper, then he thought it was unrea-
sonable. and he must say, unjust, to refuse to make a similar grant
to the Duke of Cumberland, so that he might be placed on an equal
relation with his Royal Brother,.
Sir JOHN SEBR [UHT begged to explain.—The Right Hon.
Gentleman had not Nutted correctly what it was he (Sir J. S.) said
respecting the conduct of the Duke of Cumberland. What he said
was, that the conduct of that Duke should not weigh with hint in
assenting to make Min what wss a reasonable and necessary allow.
once; but beyond that it certainly would, and did weigh with him,
in his judging of the propriety of the present grant. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. T. WILSON said that having great confidence in the watch.
fulness of his Majesty's Government, lie certainly should support
the grant. He must look to one circumstance, which was that •
Prince had been born in whom they had all an interest. (Hear,
hear, and laughter.) Ile thought that, secured as they were by the
clause in the Act, which provided for the education of the young
Prince in 'England. the House ought to make the grant.
The questiou was now loudly tallied tOr, and strangers were
ordered to withdraw.
" Some discussion took place while we were excluded, and a
division on Mr. Brougham's amendment was called or, when there
were—

For the Amendment,
Against it, -
Majority against the Amendment, 30
On our entering the gallery, Mr. BROU(111 AM was addressing
the House. The lion. and Learned Member was fur a short time
inaudible, owing to the noise occasioned by persons entering the
House. When we heard him he was observing, that it appeared
to him that the grant was really intended for the Duke of Cumber.
land ; for, although it professed to be for the education of the
young Prince, yet it was proposed to be for the life of the Duke.
If the honest intention of Ministers had been to give an annuity
for the education of the son of the Duke, nothing could have been
more easily done; for it might have been said in the Bill, that the
annuity was to be granted " for the life of the Prince ;" but in-
stead of such being the limitation, the words of the Act were " for
the life of the Duke of Cumberland." It was not quite a provision
for the arrears of the annuity, the payment of which an Hon. Ba.
row (Sir Charles Forbes) had expressed his inclination to make up
to the !Stoke for the last eight years; and nothing he was sure
would be more gratefully acceptable to the Duke. But his Ma-
jesty's Ministers did not go so far as the llonourable Ba-
ronet ; they only meant to give the Duke an annuity of
6,000. for his life, for the education of his son. Bet
then caine a proviso which was rather curiously worded ; for al-
though
the former claust: gave the annuity to the Duke for his life,
is thiseli youngatinc ip, t rioinvciscositLeclladrebdu tihiavtingit
inshocuulgdianuodt, bore payableshlid
be abroad with the consent .of his Alajesty. But it the country
should be so unfortunate as tolose tise young Prince, then the Duke
and his friends would be in great strait, for the g.ant was not to
be paid unless the Prince should be thing in Eucland. (Hear,
and laughter.) Now If it was the intention to make t; Is grant far
the benefit of the child alone, he would give the Committa an op.
portunity of doing what they really meant to do. If ..: there were ^r
lion. Members who thought that the Duke of Cumberland could
not afford to educate his son out of an income of or lo,ooof.
a-year, he would tell them how they might effect their put.
pose. If they gave the King the sum of three thousand pounds
to do that himself which they were now about empower
the Duke of Cumberland to do, it would be the true and consti-
tutional mode. He would give 3,0001. a year to his Majesty for
the benefit of the boy, taking care to provide that the King, who
was the legal and constitutional authority for superintending the
education of the young Prince, should appropriate it to that ex.
press use. As his Majesty acted by his Ministers, over whoa. the
/louse had a control, he considered this to be the only proper
mode of accomplishing their object. Do not give money to the
Duke of Cumberland, who is irresponsible, but give it to the King,
who acts by his Ministers, and who would be responsible for the
education of the son of the Duke in England. If thiamin not a fair
and liberal provision, then he knew not what would be. flelhought
the amendment he should propose would meet the wishes and feel.
ings of all parties. lie should therefore move, that instead of the
words " his Royal Highness Ernest Augustus Duke of Cumber.
land," there should be inserted " His Majesty," and that the sum
of 3,0001. a year for the life of the young Prince should be inserted
instead of 6,0001. for the life of the Duke.
Sir Cll.lliliES FORBES said that as the lion. and Learned
fieutleman had been pleased to allude to what lie had said when
the doors were closed, he could not refrain remarking that it wan
his wish to address the House rather titan the newspapers but if
any one thought that he said anything with closed dams which he
would not say with the doors open, he would tell Inc be Mal
no more capable of such conduct than the Has. mid Iwsnad (len.
tleman himself. But the Hon. and Lemma lisublimum bed not
stated hie warda correctly. He certainly did gegabig lendwue,
the arrears ought to be pall to the Duke of eindidinikaid that
it was his intention to make.a motion to that effect, kit be boll sub-
sequendy said that he would not do so.
The Hon. Baronet was convinced that those very indivldasla vb.
iteought forward these charges, and attempted to affix these stilitiMl
wpm tie Duke of Cumberland would be among Me fits to
paws themselves the devoted humble servants of his Rowel
ans, iheuld he come to the throne. He was satisfied the
woes equally unfounded in themselves, sad unworthy of the
maim
.I'bo CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, when be

. . 113
. . 143