The National Register.
London, England, 1811-01-06 00:00:00

THE NATIQNAL

duty to supply the Executive Goverwment.-1 Hear, hear ! ) He
agreed to the cwo adjournments.. •„:11 had taken place ; and in
this he had differed from the opinion of those Hon. Friends with
whom he usually acted; but he did this from principle, and with
a view to giv,. tvery f;:cility to the hope that was then cuter-
tained of Ms Majesty's .I,;cekly recovery. But was that any rca-
son they should now sic quiet and do nothing, that because they
bad the discretion they should nog use it ? But when this tested
peck dent of 1788 came to he considered, he thought all these
arguments in its defence came to the ground. They said this
precedent of 1788 was applicable to the present case. He (Mr.
S.) thought it totally different ; and he would say without affec-
tation, and he was sure, upon conviction, that was that great
It ader of that measure (Mr. Pitt) now alive, he would give his
vote against all these restrictions. But the Learned Gentlemen
and the Alinisters, or the Ministers and the Learned Gentle-
man seemed to forget all law in their character of Mini-
stt • ; and the Learned and Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Secre-
tary Ryder) calls to his aid, a book, written by a Noble Friend
of his at that time. " Ch !" but said the Learned and Right
Hon. Gentleman, " if his Hon. Friend (Mr. Wynne) read Lord
Crenville's book, he would have thought otherwise." He (Mr.
S.) thanked God his Holt. Friend bad not written a book—
( Hear, hccr, hear) and the Right Hon. Gentleman said,
ii he had read that book, he never would have made
that speech. He was pretty sure, when Lord Grenville
was writing that book in 1788, he did not irusgine
he was wridng it to answer his Noble Friend in
1810. But every man's speech, on the other side, relied upon
the precedent of 1788. We will have the precedent of 17et>,
the whole precedent of 1788, and Lathing but the prec: dent of
17SR ; and this was thehurthen of their song, the sommunt Locum
of all their perfections. But he grounded himself upon this
argument; that precedent, he thanked Heaven, bad never
found its way into the Statute-Book ; and although i: was on
the:Journals of that House, it was a disgrace to those .barnols,
and should he b!ottedoutfilr ever. What, he asked, was the pe-
riod at which this measure was adopted ? It was at a time,
when the greatest factions, that ever disgraced Parliament,
existed on both sides of the Hunse.—(Loud cheers, with cries of
Hear, hear ! ) He wished not to recollect that time ;it was not
to be remembered. He could not but remember the words of
Mr. Burke upon that occasion ; he could not recollect them
without the utmost regret ; but was ashamed to repeat them.
He well remembered also the words of Mr. Pi.t, who said,
that in point of right, his Royal Highness the Prince or Wales
had no more right to the Regency than any other man in the
kingdom. eiuch was the party spirit of the time, such was the
spirit itawhicn that measure was brought forward. The Prince
was represented in 1768, as at the head of a faction to pull down
and degrade the Regal dignity and authority. He stated this to
shew that the precedent of 1788, did not apply in any respect to
the present case.. He held in his hand the Bill of 1788; and in
the Bill itself, there was internal evidence that the Regal au-
thority should not be restricted at sal. The very preamble of
• this Bill was a gloring absurdity, and run thus :—" Whereas it
has become expedient and necessary to assist his Majesty in the
Government of these Kingdoms." Was not this an absurdity
in itself, a complete " humLus" upon truth and common sense ?
and after this, would the House believe, that this was. the fa-
mous precedent of 1788, in which so much stress had been laid,
so much reliance had been placed ? He had the dishonour, if he
• might so term it, of being one of the Committee of that day ;
and as much as had been said upon former precedents, he beg.
ged to state to the House, that that Committee was not even
allowed the time or opportunity of looking into the records, in
order to form a true judgment upon it. Some fusty parch-
ments, made up of bad Latin and bad French were handed to
the Committee of that day, of which they could make nothing,
and this it was contended was sufficient authority to graft the
present proceeding upon. The object of the Bill of 17aS, went
yearly to disinherit his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, to
vilify and degrade that Noble Personage ; he trusted, therefore,i
• su;:h a precedent would not be followed upon the present oc-
casion. The single precedent of 1718 then, was the whole of
the case of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite. But he hoped he
might be suffered to trace this measure through all its stages.
That Bill made a permanent provision that the Regent should
not make atny Peers at all, while Mr. Pitt had made upwards
of pile hundred Peers; and here he observed on the dangerous
tendency of .stich an influence; the House of Lords might have
the whole se ontroul of the Government, or could there he a
stronger proof that nothing bUt a party spirit guided the pro-
: reeditigiauf that House uron the occasion. By the same famous
Bill, it was provided that the Queen should have a Council of
four pergonit, and the four persons named in the Bili to be her
Maja-sty's-Coundil were--the Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord:
Chancellor 'fhurlow, the Archbishop of York, and Lord Ken-
yon—if any of these personages should die, it might have been
expetted) that out 'of respect to the Law and the Chter,:h, the

9

Heir Apparent might have some voice in the nomination of thv
person to such vacancy. But, no! the Prince of Wales 'MINIMA
to be trusted, and her Majesty, was to
.select the persou who
anti to fill this situation; and as he tinist speak out boldly and
tell the truth, the whole of the provisions of that Bill were nut
framed as against Princes generally, but against the Prince
of Wales. They must not look therefore at this mea-
sure, as the Polar Star to lead them safe ho-) harbour, but as a
beacon and warning to steer clear of the rocks which surrounded
it. 'There could not he a more unfair, foul, and fallacious orgu-
Ment than this. What waa meant by the sanction of the Royal
authority ? What did the speech from the throne say ? Nothiu&
that could be construed into an approbation by the Royal mind
of such a measure. Nothing that could at all silty that Ms
Majesty took any nutice of any distinction whatsoever. Lead
Thurlow declared In the House of Peers, that his Majesty ha4l
fdt the highest satisfaction on ;he conduct of both Houses at
Pirliament; and that however some members might differ is
opinion upon general principles, ht was convinced of their
lcyalty and attachment to his Person and Government. As to
hs Majesty's personal opinion on the questioa, ha conceived k
was unpailiamentary to quote that speech as that of his Maa
jisty, but as the speech of his Ministers, and which was no
!yore titan an approbation of their own act;.—As he should have
another opportunity of geing at large into other branches of
this question, he should not trouble the House with many more
olservations. And having thus disabled this celebrate
precedent of 17M8, he had little left to observe upon at prestot.
Ire could not, '..nvever, pass by some points of a Noble Lord's
(eastlereagh) spee,:h on a former Right, without a few °brier-
, \anions :—The Noble Lord would not. give the Regent the
rower of creating a Nine." peer, but he would give hint abniltate
controul over the whole of the Household. Thus the Noble.
Lord drew both ways, to use Amore apprieeble phrase, ad-
hered to his old maxim of tun strings to leis Qul, and b.! woeds
cf. the Noble Lord were worthy of particular notice-- Juppoie."
stys the Noble Lord, " I was to be the Regent," and to lie sur;e
the Noble Lord was highly qualified to MI that exalted station;
4 or suppose I was the Minister of the Regent, I should most
annestl advise the Regent to withhold the grant of Peerage,
because' said the Noble Lord," you would taereby prevent at
great scene of jealousy, discord, and disagreement in your
Councils."—Now ht could not conceive why the Noble Lord
thould form an opinion unless he himself bad knows of the ex-
istence of some of those jealousies and discords in Cabinet upon
the question of creating Petrages, and thus the Noble Lord
would ease the Regent by the extinction of the whole Regal
diaracter of the country. It certainty was a mos: exeellent plan
a) give the Regent case ; to place the Regent on a bed of rosex.—
i Loud cheers, and hear, hair )—He cautioned against exceed-
ing their legislative capacity. It had been doubted, whether
they had tee power to issue writs for the election of Metubt rs.
they ought not to remain an hour longer in sheir perilous situ-
Ilion. What were the arguments adduced by otu. enemy, the
.z:mperor of France, against us ?—they were, that our monarchy
was enfeebled; though King's were madefor the people, aud
lot the people for the Kings. This was the miserable of mist:a
'h+ ; and thus it was that the Devil quoted ficrirture, with a
'vengeance. against us h—( Cries No ! No ! )—The peopl4 of
110nd were not weary of the House of Brunswick. We were
struggling, as we had struggled, for the noblest possible con-
dition of society.—(loud calls
,fur the Orestion ; universal con far
and reiterated clamours for the Question ! )
Mr. G. WI Lso N supported the original Resolutions.
Mr. CAN WING WAlcil not to detain the House, but what
advantage could ensue from raking the ashes of the dead, in
order to rekindle the flames of the living ? He would not for
one, pluck stones from the monument of Mr. Fox, to erect
another to Mr. Pitt; who did 1.o: know this surreptitious
species of commemoration ? We lived, nevertheless, in times
of gigantic stature, since Mr. Pitt was no itaager to be deemed
great.—(Loud cries of hecr ! )
Sir S. RoatiLLY, intrudieg for some moments on their atten-
tion, denied his having introduced the species of argument com-
plained of. The KOK Hun. tacotlernan (Air. Canning) having
first introduced the name of Air. Pitt, connecting it woth the
precedent of i7BB, and dwelling much on the authority of that
Statesman. Preeedenas were, however, necesutry to be cou.i-
dered here, as .they were iii Courts of Justice. Mr. Pitt's
talents and influence were nothing, unless it could he shewn
that tie had improved the cainditioteof soaletys—(Hear, hear ! )
Mr. CANNING here explained.
Sir E. Be koletar asserted ;that he never felt any personal
animosity to Mrs. Pitt, but soh:Iy: to his measures ; mint
maintaio that his qualificationawe-e these for debate only. Ail
arguments drawn ,rain premalentia appeared to him iiteonciii-
sive.—t Oaastion ! Qoeaitoa )-a/Whiletboy hi t. a fair House: %,f
emulous, the people ought also to pousess a strung Executivo
Government. The titres calital for this. If they looked at the
map Of Europe, they would see the necesaity for unanimity and

ertergy.--(Question ! )—The calamities of Europe were written
in its blood.
Mr. Powsoxiv expressed n- u-h reluctance to protract the
discussion, his primary object being to do away certain mire-
presentations. What, was it now necessary to review the dm-
racters of politicians who had been dead four years ago. lie
l that there would be no repetition of undue warmth on
either side.
Mr. CA N NING here said, that his chief object was to obtain a
disavowal, as to Mr. Pitt, which had been made by Mr. Pcn-
sonby.
Mr. WurruiTAD asked what was the nature of the disavows!,
alluded to; when he was interrupted by repeated and incessant
cries of Question.
Strangers', were then ordered to withdraw, after which Lod
Porchester's amendment was put and negatived without a
division.
We understand that Mr. Perceval then proposed anew the
Resolution respecting the Household which had been lost in tie
Committee.
The Opposition however resolutely maintained their ground,
and once more supported the amendment of Lord Gower's
which had before been carried by a majority of thirteen, resolv-
ing that her Nlajesty should have the 64 sole direction of szch
portion of his _Majesty's Household as should be deemed x-
quisite",y,(e.
A division then took place on this amendment, and Ministers
were a second time ddeated,by a majority of three !
The four first Resolutions were carried without a division.

THURSDAY, JAN. 3.

REFUSAL OF THE EXCHEQUER TO GRANT
MONEY FOR THE ARMY AND NAVY.

Lord CLIVE went up to the House of Lords with a message,
requesting a conference, which having been granted, the sane
Committee which had attended the former conference attended
the Lords in the Painted Chamber, and laid before them a cory
of the Resolutions respecting the Regency, desiring their Loi
ships concurrence thereto,
The CHANCELLOR of the Ere nrQur te rose to inform tie
Ilouse, that a difficulty having occurred in consequence of tle
existing unhappy circumstances of the nation, with respect ;o
the issuing money for the service of the army, he would in
leave to request the interference of the House in order to co
away the possibility of an inconvenience which would he mat
serious if not immediately prevented. He conceived that It
would be inconvenient to entt r into a discussion of the propoi-
tion lie intended to make, until the House were in possession of
all the facts of the case. He would to-morrow call their attet-
tion to the consideration of it, and begged to be understood as
not haying had it in his intention to obtain a previous intim-
pity, but merely to shew to the House whether Ministers hail
acted with propriety or otherwise, in attempting to act as they
did. He then moved that there he laid before the House _ _

" A copy of a warrant from the Lords Commissioners of tie
Treasury to the Auditor of the Exchequer, dated 31st Deccta-
ber last, together wi,h a copy of the correspondence which had
taken pla:!e upon the subject of that warrant, between the Lords
of the TreaA.ry and the Office of the Exchequer."
Mr. Pox I' regretted that the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer had not tAte:i :tees, but would certainly not do any
thing in counteraction of what would be of benefit to the pub-
lic service.

The CHANCELLOR of the FxcnEQutß felt thankful to the
Honourable Gentlemen on the other side for their forbearance
on this occasion. He thought he should be able to shew suffi-
ciently to the House, that no public inconvenience had resulted
from this cifficulty not having been earlier brought under their
consideration. The case was shortly this :—The Act, called the
Exchequer Act, required that issues of money from the Exche-
quer shall only be made !;), the authority of the Great Seal, the
Privy Seal, or the directions of an Act of Parliament. It ap-
peared to the Lords of the Treasury, that, as certain sums of
money had been expressly appropriated by an Act of Parlia-
ment for those particular serviccs,the Exchequer in issuing those
monies on the warrant of the First Lord of the Treasury, would
have been strictly justifiable, as issuing it under the directions
of an Act of Parliament. This had been the common practice
of the Exchequer ; hut, nevertheless, upon consulting the At-
‘d "elicitor-General
,uppn the legality of issues un-
nt, they were, zn of opinion that under the
In of the wordS of the Act, such payments could
payments by the direction of an Act of Parlia•
then, to give legality to the warrant, lie next
:eat Seal; but, although the officer to whom the
'trusted was most perfectly ready to take the full
himself of any act which the duties of his office
•-d, it was tout.d that there ‘r ere no in.ttances

4,-4lpao
.**4.4*

of any money issued upon warrants under the Great Seal for
public services of th:s description, or for any other purposes but
what were connected with the Great Seal or the office of Lord
Chancellor. He then found it necessrry to see whether the Privy
Seal could not be obtained, for if it was, there was no doubt of
the legality of the warrant, and it would have been the duty of
the Exchequer to have issued the money, although the persons
were to be hanged who made use of the Privy Seal. He at first
thought that the keeper of the Privy Seal was the only person
responsible• and that officer was, as well as the rest of His Ma-
jesty's Ministers,perfectly disposed to encounter the responsi-
bility of every act which the public service might require to be
done in his department. It appeared, however, that he was not
the only responsible person ; for by the Act, the Clerk of the
Privy seal is also an efficient officer ; and every act under the
Privy Seal must be attested by his signature. His Majesty's
Ministers Would have wished, as far as it could he possibly done,
to take the whole of the responsibility upon themselves ; but
this could not be done, and the Clerk of the Privy Seal appeared
not only indisposed to give his signature, but said that he was
hound by virtue of his oath to refuse his signature. This was a
difficulty which it was not easy to surmount, nor could it be
expected that even the Resolutions of the House of Commons
would overcome the religious scruples of a conscientious man.
It appeared necessary, then, to pass an Act of Parliament to sus-
pend pro Canto, either the oath, or the necessity of his signature.
After a short conversation between the Chancellor cf the Ex-
chequer, Mr. Bernard, and Lord Temple, the motion was
agreed to.
Mr. HOBART then brought up the Papers, which were or-
dered to lie on the table, and be printed, and referred to a Com-
mittee of the whole House to-morrow.

FRIDAY, JAN. 4.
ISSUE OF PUBLIC MONEY.

On the motion of Mr. PERCEVAL, a Copy of a Letter of the
Privy Seal, staling their reasons for refusing to affix the Privy
Seal to Warrants for the issue of money for the Army and Navy.
was ordered to be laid before the House, and was afterwards
read. It was signed John Larpent, and John James Larpent,
dated Privy Seal Office, 4th of January. The grounds upon
which they did not think themselves justifiable in affixing the
Privy Seal to the Warrants were, that by the usual course of
business in the Privy Seal Office, they could not prepare a docu-
ment to affix the Privy Seal, but under a docket under the
King's Sign Manual, and countersigned by three Lords of the
Treasury, and that they conceived themselves bound by their
oath of office, which they quoted, not to affix the Privy Seal till
such formalities should have been fulfilled.
After a long desultory conversation on the manner in which
the papers were to be taken into consideration, the various do-
cuments contained under the head " State Papers," in another
part of our paper, were referred to a Committee of the whole
House. _ _

The CnANcEt.t.oa of the EXCHFQUER, in bringing his pro-
mised subject before a Committee, observed, that although the
Noble Lord (Grenville) was certainly liable to some legal res-
ponsibility of form, still the actual, the effective responsibility
was for Ministers, who had voluntarily assumed it, in order to
urge that course of proceeding which they thought most condu-
cive to the public weifate. '1 he Right Hun. Gentleman con-
chided by moving two Resolutions, the substance of which was
as follows
46 That it was necessary that the sums voted and appropriated
by Parliament should be issued.
" That it wasexpedient that the Lords of the Treasury should
be empowered to direct such an issue by their Warrant, and
that the Auditor of the Exchequer should be authorised and
commanded to obey their Warrant of the 31st of December,
and such other Warrants as they should in future issue in like
manner."

On the Question being put,
Sir JOHN SEA BRIGHT approved, in the warmest terms, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer's conduct; he thought it the best
and manliest that could be adopted.
Lcrd TEm YLE defended the conduct of his Noble Relation
(Lord Grenville) and contended that Ministers alone had acted
contrary to the Constitution, by their attempt to issue money
on their own responsibility, when Parliament was sitting. ••
Mr. RosE justified the conduct of Ministers.
Mr. Po NSON BY observed, that all this difficulty
prim%
from ill-timed procrastination in supplying the suspended P°`".
ers of Royalty. All the logic and eloquence in the lionSe could;
not have told them bei ter than this Resolution now befollt
them, cf the neci.ssity of filling the vacancy sooner. tsit-could
not have proclaimed more loudly their artificial proceedings,
which had been done in open defiance of the Constitution, and
of mullion sense. He affirmed that Ministers, in the Resolu-
tions noW proposed, were presuming to take up the (Attu fuuc-

4............

torney and Solici
tier such warrant
strict construction
be considered as y
nient. In order,
aOptlid to the Ore
Great Seal is entrt
respontlblity on hi
igh t-re quire ; y