The National Register.
London, England, 1811-01-20 00:00:00

38

THE NATIONAL REGISTER.

to propose a motion to the House, which would do.awa. y a great
deal of trouble and confusion. e then moved, that the first
day of February be the last day for receiving Petitions for Pri-
vate Bills ; the 4th day of March for the receiving Private Bills,
and the :.>9;h day of April for the receiving the Reports of Pri-
vate Bills.—Agreed to, and the motion ordered to he printed.
Mr. LUSHINGTON gave notice, that he would, on Monday
ne-tt. move f;)r the revival of the Committee upon Expiring
Laws.

t i.e CSANCILLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave notice, that he
would meve on Thursday, in the Committee, for a Secret
Committee to inquire into the Charge the Privy Purse. He
represented, that as upon several occallias in the last Session,
there appeared to the House to be a necessity for instituting an
inquiry (,f this nature, it was now necessary to guard against any
inconveniences, and remove the possibility of complaint upon
that head.

The Regency Bill was read a second time, andordered to be
comMitted to-morrow.—Adjourned.

TaURSDAY, JAN.I7.
REGENCY BILL.

On the motion of coo k..l;ANci.ei.oit of the EXCHZQVER, a
Secret Committee was appointed to examine into the payments
necessary to be made from the Privy Purse during his Majesty's
Indisposition.
The 14olise having resolved itself into a Committee on the
Rege-cy Bill, a great deal of discussion took place on several
of the cLuses. Mr. WHITBREAD objected to the words of the
cl.r.,se providing for his Majesty's return to power, " That when
his tlajesty shall be restored to such a state of health, &c." It
wit.; now in evidence of the Physicians on oath, that his Majesty,
several I.?mes since 1789, had been in a state of mental ill health,
vy'•if.t the functilos of thef.Executive were nevertheless carried
his name. He thereford moved, that the words be changed
t 3 " snch a state of rnent Al health," &c,
; . Said ' hat had been stated by the Physicians
ron:1-:,: he ata•te.r if blame against the Administrations which
exi trd ..t ne n,>eiod- t.), but could be no grotvid of ob-
ict againstth•c amerriment was negatived.
0 the even claLse b•.•.ng rk.ad,'which states, 46 that the Itc-
gete: be taken :.tri de,mlcd. to be a person executing an
offi:e of taiit."

Sir S. ()MI 1.1.1" rr sr.-me very 1:,:cil)le objections, because
It •vent to maite ./.:•• a a re-po,:..:)111,. officer, and, conic:-
quer Hy. t.) 'he country for eve:), act of his pvern-
r•ent. If the s::::nntrtoe to tic; ti,ey would, iu
e r-,•.n.).1y al:. r r., •,.:•inciph--s of Ow Ce.-11).-1:Utt'ion. The King
s n•.t ani-ndo.e for anv act, however cc4,:urzible, why, then,
$ •1 t'ne Regera be re .ponsible ?
Mr. P L the. ck use way copied verbqtint. from the
Bill of 17:.:!; ought to be :rade the
subject of .1 :inure enactment; but, for the present, he
ty:-.:st LI( nv •:„it 01. r el iuce ILid the tentkricy of taking responsi-
bi.ity ;i. rn ,he of the Regent.
r. rn, v, Mr. Ponsonby, and Sir Arthur
Pio:•qt, co':;cieeel in opinion with Sir Romilly ; a:id the
cl.rase agrcc::! to be imwponed for the present,
On r.,;;tiing ,h ciause, limiting the restrictions to a
CPll3lr

Mr. PeftcEVAL rrOpOqed that they should continue for.twelve
months from th:- lst of February, or until six weeks after the
meeting of P.. , ment.

Mr. PUNso N L:t.l;lo.!Cttod to this period, and moved an amend-
=tint, e,tucimr. i p• of restriction to six niontlir.
Mr. \V!liti,re;ql an.l Mr. Calming spoke in favour of the
amendment, ..:id Mr. Bathurst and M.. Fuller against it; after
which tlit: Ficuse :—for the amendment, 16Q—against it,
134. Majority in favour of Miniqcrs, 24.
The clvisereiirfrting the Princ, from granting Pensions were
opposed h? on ti.e &round that it was an evident
and glaring n.i7 trust of the Prince.
• Mr. QcP:N.,nr., with soma: warmth, denied the imputation.
The hiin:rlf had not a 'power to eraut Pensions Llrond
bis own lif,!; it was tliarefore contrary to every principle 'that
the Regent Should not bc in like manner restricted.--The elatr4
/was Limn agreed to.

On reading the clause respecting the Household,
Mr. Pea cvrAl. proposed, that the office of Chamberlain
shimict "n ;t• oe uh,:u up, but that he Vice-Chamberfain should
perform the duties durit-i the continuance of the Bill; and that
hie whole of his Majesty s Household should 1).! under the cou-
;trout of the'Qiieen, but not liable to be removed by her, ex-
cepting the C??..mtlemen and Grooms pf the Bedchamber, thp
Cuptain of tft Guard, and of the Band of Gentlemen Pensioners.
As to the degree of state necessary for the Regent, he would
have a Lord Ciamherlain; a Mzsstar of the horse, Steward of
ne Houseli6lll, and five O'r fix Lords of the Bedchmlicr, the
*tole of rytbse 'Salaries would not amount to more flap 10,00.
or 12,001. MI. i'excey4 coi:ciluded by reading Lhe

_.~
k..
,~

~..
;!~.~ ..

Upon these propositions a long det:•te succeedeu,
Mr. Adam, Mr. Ponsonby, Carving, Mr. 13,:t.hurst, Mr.
Wilberforce, Mr. H. Addington trsok a part, when the Cr,ni..
mittee divided on an amendment of Mr. Canning's for putting
the Lord Steward of the Household, Mayer of t,,e Horse, and
Vice Chamberlain under the controul of the Prince ; and toe
subordinate persons in these departments under tht: direction of
the Queen. For the Amendment 160—against it 184. Majority
in favour of Ministers 24.

A second division then took place upon the main quslst:on as
propaked by Mr. Perceval, when the numbers were :--tor the
e!ause 2C9—agilinst it 182. Majority in favour of Ministers 27.
Mr. PONSUNtY afterwards proposed as an amendment, that
the office of,Gprd Steward should be taken from under the con.
troul of her Majesty. Upon this amendment the Ccimr;ttee
divided, when there appeared to be—Ayes 177—Noes 204.
Majority against the Amendment, 27.
Mr. PONSONEY then moved, that the' office of Master of the
Buck-hounds should be excepted, upon which the Committee
came to another division. Ayes 180—Noes 202. Majority iu
favour of Ministers 22.—Adjourned.

FRIDAY, JAN. 18.
Upon the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the Excuzgu ER, the
Cull of the House was postponed to Monday next.
The House then vi.ent into a Committee on the
REGENCY BILL.

Mr. LUSHINOTON in the Chair.

The CLIANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER, previous to the read-
ing of the 17th clause of the Bill, made a few observations
explanatory of the manner in which it was his opinion that the
blank should be tilled up. That clause respected the appoint-
ment of a Council to assist her Majesty in the discharge of the
trusts committed by this Act to her Majesty. In the year 1789
there were appointed, as Members of the Council, the two Arch-
bishops, Lord Thurlow, Lord Kenyon, the Groom of • he Stole,
the Master of the Horse, and the Lord Chamberlain. He
shoi'td therefore propose to the House characters similar to those
appointed at that, period. The two Archbishops, Lord Eldon,
Lord Ellenborough, the Groom of the Stole, and the Master of
the Horse.

Mr. ADAM wished to know whether any of the Royal Family
had been applied to to accept of a place in the Council of ;lot
Mtsty.
'I he CHANCELLOR of the T....7xcnEQuER conceived that an ap-
plication to any of the Rrri:.:l Family would not at all be conso-
nant to the respect due to their dignity.
Lon; Geo kGE CA Vr N DISH moved as an amendment, " That
the ! )t.lte of York be appointed one of the Council, and' that
his Royal Highness should be placed at the head of that

The CHANCELLOR of the EICREQU ER agreed with the
Nolle Mowr of the amendment, that if his Royal Highness the
Duke of York was considered by the Committee as a fit person
to be mppointed of the Council, he should of course appear before
an v of the others.

Mr. Secretary Itvpta also agreed in the propriety of placing
the name of his Royal Highness in the first place, if he should
be considered eligible to such a situation; but he wotfid prove
the impropriety of making such an -appointment. It was cut-
tainly natural that her Majesty should have the benefit of the
advice of those conn.'ctod to her by blood, but it would be corn-
pietely unnecessary that those should be appoiiited of her Coun-
cil, who were bound by no forna to abstain from giving their
advice, but who on the contrary, would in the performance of
such an act, be 6111 y doing that to which they were obliged by the
laws of duty. His Royal Highness the Duke of York had imme-
diate recourse at all times to her Majesty, -and certainly would
not withhold from his Royal Parent any suggestion ‘,flitch
might tend to.her advantage in the discharge of the trust con-
fiflt d to her. There appeared to him to be several strong ground,
of objection to the amendment, grounds, which if seriously Con-
si&red, would' be soon individually sufficient to do away the
probability of the advantage of such an• election. lie had first
to oiler to the CfMrflittetl a strong 'constitutional objection. It
vas evident that the appointment of any of the Royal Family to,
any ofrcial situation, if it was pot a measure indispensably neces-
sary, 'as extremely reprehensible(hear, hear.) Was it not
possible that such a thing might happen as an obligation upon
that Council to appear in their capacity of Council before 'that
House ? and was it not necessary that that Council should be 4.s
disinserested as possible, in order to their aving unbiassed acr-
viz:e and uninfluenced and impartial intelligence. He (Mr. S.
Ryder) well knew that the Duke of York highly regarded his
Royal Father, but the very circumstance of his regard was an
indisputable disqualification. There was another geound, which
w4s, that as the Regent iiimaelf would be a most improper per-
son to haste any kind of concern with his 'Majesty's person
during his indisposition, in an equally strong degree would that
objection of .ct the Duke of I ork, or any other of the Royal

~~