The National Register.
London, England, 1820-07-16 00:00:00

C. and J. N. Hayles, Portsmouth, grocers—W. P. M. Croft,
East Sheen, Surrey, builder—A. and J. Manifold, Liverpool,
tanners--J. Matunson, Huddersfield, merchant—J. Goodie'',
Knot/4'ord, victualler—J. Broughton, Linthwaitc, Yorkshire,
cloth merchant—J. Hancock, St. James'. Street, Piccadilly,
coach maker.

Her Majesty the Queen is by birth the nearest
heir to the throne of these realms, next after the
reigning Family,—and though her succession to
the throne is highly improbable, it is not impossible.
I Would it not be a strange event if, after degradation
and divorce, her Majesty should ascend the throne.
The Duke of Rutland, in consequence of the con-•
trition expressed by them, has obtained a pardon for
the four poachers who were sentenced to be trans-
ported for seven years, for poaching at midnight with
lire-arms in the vale of Belvoir; and not only restored
them to their distressed families, but directed that
they should be fully employed on his Grace's estate.
It is said to be in contemplation to take down
London-bridge, and to erect a new bridge in its
place. to con►ist only of three arches.

•
. s
• •
•

tint Jartiament•

-...-
HOUSE OF LORDS.
MONDAY, JULY 10.

THE QUEEN.—The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, he rose in
pastimes of prmiosui notice, to state to the House what course
of proceeding lie proposed to adopt with reference to the Bill
applicable to an illustrious person. He reminded the House that
bethre the Bill came under discussion, Counsel were desirous of
delay, and there was a disposition to extend that delay to eight
or ten months. In consequence of the Report of the Secret Com-
mittee and the introduction of the Bill, application of a different
nature was made—Counsel in behalf of her Majesty badprayed
their Lordships to proceed forthwith. The noble Earl did not
state this as any inconsistency on the part of her legal advisers, as
no doubt some reason was to be stated Le that advice. He was
ready to admit that a call having been made on the House to
proceed without delay, his blaiesty'e Government were bound so
answer, that all expedition, consistent with the administration of
justice, ought to be used. Looking at the magnitude of the
subject, and the public feeling, all convenience ought to give way
too desire to do substantial justice. It had been a matter of
consideration how far justice could be done in a legislative peo-
ceeding against her Majesty without the assistance of the
learned Judges, and the communication he had had upon
the athje.cl, confirmed his opinion that the House could
not exercise its duty on this occasion in a manner sails-
foamy to the public without the assistanee of the learned
Judges. Instances were to be traced in which some of the lodger
had attended the House without going to the Circuits. The
House might dispense with the attendance of the whole of those
learned Judges, and therefore did not want them all. There
would be no opportunity before November to have all tbe Judges
present, and even then their attendance would be inoonvement.
Hint* enquired what was the shortest period at which the
Housemaid command the attendance of the Judges, he Under-
stood Him en Thursday, the 17th of August, they might have
attendthes of four learned Judges. It was, therefore, his inten •
don to thew, that the Bill be read a second time on the 17th of
Avow. There were other modals which the noble Earl meant
to it. He was aware of the inconvenient season of the year
at which this was to come on; but he trusted their Lordships
would feel the extreme importance of tbs. ease, and that they
would attend, whether the result was hootwebie or unfavourable
to the illustrious person, in a way thaZenh:saliothesery. He
could net Wire, Min a matter so importance. the Peers
would Net swill* their peacoat to their awes it
urgent atheniti. On the wt' en abbe from the prooseding.
the
ete* wad not vote by ry', and as there ht to be a
attendesees dux Lerpa wadi /lei whet they owed to
thwemeivestheillandens pawn, and the Wawa oldie country
et Thlsenwte.iimiNett leielks es require further
ealefentioas bow far the easeganths would be nth.
Mary to the aka He expand a hope, if these was any
Nam Iran the illoadous amen, wail be in a
111 lahle _Eat thou owed. that MIS be seed a
on Mandeb the 17th of Ascots He also gave
notice, that he shaild move that a copy of the Reseindona be
sea to her hfajoity by the Camel the Black Rod, and that the
HOW would allow Counsel to, be hoard at the Bar us the l7th of
AHal OREY did net object to the proceeding suggested by the
noble Earl. It MIS most desirable to have the assistance of the
Judges, 4 the sense time be threw out for the consideration of
the noble Seek whether it would not be consistent with subsuui-
tial Justin mallosi her Majesty's Counsel the inspection of the
CT:wateheing the evidence, in order that they might
thince. A list of the witnesses should also be furP=
He dieted, that every Peer was bound to attend the House
on du day for the discus ion of this important subject, but he
did wet UPI why the Judges could not attend at an earlier period.
Thewebis Earl expressed a hope that no delay would ensue after
the 17th of August.
Lad HOLLAND. before Itesekred any remarks to the House,
moved, that the Standing Order, No. 47, be read,
The Order, bearing date 3d Aprilis, 16M, was accordingly
read. It appeared, that the Home. sitting as the High Court of
Parliament, ordered persons accused to be furnished with all the
means of defence, viz. copies of all proceedings, pro and cox. also
Counsel, &c.
Lord HOLLAND thin said, if the order was earnest, it was
imperative on the Lords to easemusemte the substance of the
evidence to her Majesty. In 103 diet House was in a singular
situation promedusg had been Maituted against Lord
Treasurer Middlesex. A. Secret Onmeoltleo was appointed its
the Catharms, bei=nto the does( certain provisions and
ewes, mod Lend was putt nod a accusation. A Com-
mittee of Leeds drew up uticies of inanchment. Lord Mid-
dimes ther peentod ♦ podelenfer septa of the depositions, and
nn soda lithaniodiale abseil lthre thew, to enable him so
pespee.the be, dehns. Theo thaesidens consisted of the body
of evidence taken: at the bend Outflow& After the publication
of the above order, it would be fa the House to say. whether
copies of the papers before their Lordships ought to be delivered
to her Majesty. According a way principle of justice copies or
:he contents of the Green Sig ought to be communicatld to the
judges of the use, viz.—Every Member in the House, before
they. proceeded. In ordinary. cases of prosecution the
of witnesses were often taken in the presence of persons arc used.
and when the party was on trial, copies of the depositions were
given to the Jullss. He wished to know whether the Attornee•
General was to be furnished with the Green 8.,g. The Secret
Committee had not, as was usual, gone into detail of the evi-
dence; but, on the contrary, their Report was no more than a
seminary of the evidence, and advice to adopt a certain mode of
proceeding. The Queen could have no knowledge front tile
report of the evidence in support of the charges. and his noble
friend's proposition for furnishing a list of the witnesses was right
upon every principle.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL said, the most regular way to
consider precedents would be to appoint a Committee for that
pupate. The Noble Lord had reTerrzd to a standing order; it
was, however. doubtful how tar it applied to this question. lit
another instance on the Journals of the House it would appear.
that the Bishop of Rosliener petitioned for permission to inspect
papers furnished by the House of Commons, and the petition
was rejected. The Lords in this instance were all of opinion.
that the judgment of the House would not be given upon depo-
sitions. It ruust depend on oral evidence. In granting a list of
the witnesses, a thousand obstructions to justice would later-
vene.
Lurd ELLENBOROUG II stated some inconsistency in the
argument of the Noble Lord, who contended that the Green
.Bag ought to be known to the whole House. Those Noble Lords
on a former day argued, that the House, sitting us Judges in
Parliament, and the sworn advisers of the Crown, could not see
the docunients without pre ttdjhng the question.
Lord HOLLAND explat.
Lord ERSKINE said, he had long been an admirer of sub •
Mandel justice, and he was satisfied that the Honour of that
House was a security for the faithful discharge et' their duty in
this important imputy. Whatever the evidence against her 11a•
Testy might be, he should act with justice, and a firm adherence
to truth, without respect of persons. He contended that this
cause was analogous to a case of High Treason, upon which it
was unifarmly the practice to supply to the party accused u list
of the witnesses. !'heir Lordships should, to his opinion, give
every indulgence where analogies existed, and he put it to them.
whether the privileges of Parliament could be at all enthavereit
by an agreement to permit her Majesty to have what was re
quired upon her part. In fact, he thought it the duty of Ling
Lordships to concede the application.

The LORD C HANCIILLOII old, tba Noble Lord (Holland)
had cited bat one ease of analogy. and dist was the case of High
Treason, but the Noble Lord had been at last obliged to give up
even that. In the whole course of his (the Lord Chancellor)
official life there had occurred no case but of High Treason in
which a list of the witnesses had been furnished to the accused
party. It never entered the mind of his Majesty's Ministers to
propose any proceedings of a.private nature. neither had it ever
been suggested that any privilege should be withheld for a mo-
ment frum the party accused. Their Lordships were anxious
that her Majesty should have all facilities for procuring the
means of her defence. The case was one which was to be con-
sidered upon general principles, and if their Lordships dissented
from the plan now proposed it would be impossible for them to
proceed as their ancestors had done.
The Resolutions were then agreed to. After which,
Lord LIVERPOOL moved other Rtsolutiorus to the following
effect :
That her hbjesty's Counsel should be informed of the
postponement.
" That Counsel should be heard upon the second reading of
the Bill in support of it.
" That the Attorney-General should be infomed of this
arrangement.
•• That the House should be called otter on the 17th August,
at ten o'clock in the morning.
" That no Lord should leave the House during the proceedings
without leave; and
" That the Lord Chancellor should issue notice to the Lords
to attend on the day of postponement."
The Resolutions weie agreed to. and the House adjourned.
TUESDA Y, JULY 11.

PETITION.—The Marquis of LANSDOWNE
presented a Petition from the Bocoughreeve. Merchants. Manu-
facturers, and inhabitants of Birmingham, praying for relief
is: the Odle China and East India trade. After
some bayou the Noble Marquis. the Earl of Liver.
per, Led lelleebeeeektlL Berl Bathurst. and Lord Lauderdale,
on the policy deposing the Baltic Timber Trade, and relaxing
the duties. the Petition was laid on the table.
THE (al:EEL—Lord AUCKLAND said, he held in hand a
Petition from the Queen, and he should move it be read and laid
on the table. with a view of postponing the consideration of it till
Friday, when a Noble Lord (Erskine) was to bring forward the
same subject for discusSion.
The Petition was then readly the Clerk.
The Petition of her Majesty the Queen to the Lords Spiritual
and Temporal in Parliament assembled. stated. that having
received information that the second reading. of the Bill of Pains
and Penalties, degradiug to het Majesty, had been fixed for the
17th of August, and being advised that a list of the witnesses was
necemary for her defence, her Majesty was desirous that it be
delivered fortnwith to hoe Attorney-Geoeral
The Earl of LAUDERDALE, after die Petition had been
read, suggested that the House should appoint a Committee to
search for precedents, in order to see what had been done on
former proceedings'pf a similar nature. The Noble Earl thought
that mode of proceeding would be satisfactory to the puhlic.
The Earl of LI VEIIPOOI. said, if the Noble Lord made a
media for the appointment of a Committee. it might interfere
with die motion to furnish the Queen with a list of witnesses.
erlith deed Sir 'Friday. He was not aware of any strong prem-
iums is be found.
Lied HOLLAND felt some objection to the appointment of s
Committee to examine precedents. If such a tnotion was made
soad 'greed to, he expres ed a hope that the enquiry would be
gesetaL and that the Committee would not cull precedents suited
to a confined view of the subject.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL had no objection to search for pre •
cedents, such as the Noble Lord referred to, but he did not think
a Committee could distinctly state to the direct object anti appli.
cation of those precedents.
The Petition was then ordered to be taken into consideration
on Friday.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE immediately after moved,
that a Committee be appointed to search for precidents of furnish.
ing lists of witnesses in bills of attainder and all cases analogous.
The Eat/ of LIVERPOOL said. the best practicable course of
proceeding was to confine the enquiry to proceedings as similar as
possible to that before the House.
Lord HOLLAND could not allow that the House was to be
bound by rules and precedents. The principles of justice were
more essential to the proceeding than precedents.
Earl BATHURST expressed an opinion that it would be pro-
per to confine the enquiry to Bills of Attainder, sills of Pains
and Penalties, and Impeachments. The Noble Earl consequently
moved to amend the motion by the insertion of the words pains
and penalties, and impeachments.
The motion amended stood thus-4, That • Committee be
appointed to search for precedents of furnishing Lists of Wit-
nesses in Bills of Attainder, Bills of Pains and Penalties, and
Impeachments."
Lord !lOU. AND again objected to the amended motion, and
contended, that the House ought to be governed only by the
best adminiattation of justice.
Lord AUCKLAND agreed with his Noble Friend, Lord Hol-
land, and said In should vote against the motion of the Noble
Earl. At the same time lie was only influenced by a wish to do
substantial justice. He did not think her Majesty the Queen
could come before the House without a list of the witnesses ;
without it she would not have the whole of the case before her.
The House then divided on the amendment. The nu.obas
Were—

For the

Against it to
The motion, as amended, was accordingly carried, and the
Committee appointed.
The House adjotuiwil.
i.UNSDAY, JULY 12.
Lord KENYO presented a Petition, signed by a numerous
body of Electors I.nd Merchants of Dublin, against a Clause in
a Bill before the House, for the regulation of blasters in Chan-
cery in Ireland. The said clause requires such ,Nl;isters in Clan•
eery to reside in Ireland, in order that tlity mcy he the better
able to discharge the duty, and the Petitinnas oppose the clause
on the ground that it will occasion a new election.
Pelew's Divorce Bill passed through is Committee. The
Smuggling Prevention Bill, and the Slaves Removal Bill, were
also eommit.ed, and reported without anwndments.
Petition read and ordered to lie on the table.

J'atljoUMALL
THURSDAY. JULY IS.
THE 11111 f COURT Or CHANCERY 81it..---The Earl of
CARNAR VON asked whether it was the intention of the Noble
Lords connected with Government to move the sorAmd reading of
a Bill on the table to regulate the Court of Chancery in Ireland.
Loud REDESDALE said, the Bill would be advantageous to
the Court of Chancery in Ireland. Some parts of it were, how-
ever, okortonable. The Bill would require considerable amend-
ment.

The second reading was then fixed for to-morrow.
MARRIAUE ACT AMENDAILIiT BILL.—Lord r.l.LEs-
nintouG it rose, pursuant to notice, to move the seemiti
of this Hill. The Noble Lotd stated tam eases in wlttat Mar-
riages bad been set aside under the existing Act, by the minority
of the husbands. Some of them had been married between so
and 40 years, and their marriages were set aside, on a prom' that
they wanted two or three months of being of age a: die time the
ceremony was performod. lie truant to insert a Aisne, that no
panics should be able to dis aslve their marriages t eb; but
parents and guardians might, within a gt%'en time, annul mar-
riages, if irregular, and without their 4:or:xi-A.
The LORD CHANCLI.I.IIit strongly op?oLcd t'.e 11•11, anti
declared he could not vote t,,r gulp.; into LeGn

THE NATIONAL REGISTER

Had the Bill been framed to relieve persons who originally
meant to act honestly, but had mistaken the marriage ceremony,
he should not have opposed it, but the Bill before the House
would do incalculable mischief. No man who had a heart could
avoid feeling fur those cases which had been stated ; but they
were to see what this Bill did. It had a retrospective effect, and
would effect rights acquired since 1751. It would go to establish
marriages in cases where licenses had been obtained by fraud,
and for which persons had stood in the pillory. As to marriage
by banns, he was disposed to say, that all marriage: celebrated by
banns, however irregular, ought to be good marriages. The Act
of the 23d of Gets Sd, made such marriages good, but the Bill
before the House would make them bad, by giving guardians
the power within a few years to act them aside.
The Earl of WESTMORLAND said, it was due to the Noble
Lord who advocated the Bill, to let it go to a second reading.
In a Committee they might make many alterations, and by pos-
sibility afford a remedy foe the melancholy state of society with
reference to marriages.
The Earl of LIMERICK supported the Bill, and the Home
then divided on the second reading--
Contents Ss
Not Content ... 26
Majority —6
The Lord Chancellor was consequently left in the Minority,
and the Bill was committed toe Aiunday.—Adjoumod.
FRIDAY, JULY 14.
Lord HOLLAND presented a Petition from the Pro-
testant Dissentersoigainst the operation of the Test A.,,
and itrayingto be relieved from disabilities intposed by
the same. The Petition was laid on the Table.
THE QUEEN.
Pareenetrea.—The Earl of SHAFTESBURY present-

cd the Report of the Committee appointed to examine
Piecedeuls for furnishing Lists of %Vitnesses to persons
accused in Bills of Attainder, Pains and Penalties, and
Impeachment.
The Report contained lint two eases. The first was that
of Sir JOllll Bennett, in which, upon Petition, copies of
the charges against hint, and a list of witnesses, were
granted'—The second was the case of Lord Strafford, in
which a similar request was complied with.
Tbe Report was read and laid on the table.
Lord ERSKINE rose, on the Order of the Day, to
move the Queen be furnished wills a list of the witnesses,
to be heard in support of the Bill of Pains and Penalties.
Die Noble Lord commenced a most eloquent' speech, by
observing, that the question was one of the greatest im-
portance. ITnless their Lordships consented to deliver
to her Majesty a list of the witnesses against hcr,the pro-
ceedings would be delayed. They would be compelled
to adjourn de die in diem, to afford the Queen a fair op-
portunity of meeting the testimony against her. Where
was the Queen to collect the nature and bearing of the
evidence ? The Bill was in the nature of a criminal in-
dictment, yet it contained no charge that could be clearly
understood. There was no charge of adultery on a given
day, or at a given place, but it was said to be committed
during the course of six years she was absent from this
country. How could her Majesty prepare for her de-
fence upon such charges without more information ? It
was impossible to do justice in this case without the House
enabled the accused to prepare for her defence. What
he recommended was to enable the accused to answer
this Bill. If he did nut make oat the ease that her Ma •
jetty was entitled to all the documents required, he
would withdraw his motion. Lord Eiskine contended
that, if indicted fur high treason, the 'Rusts mous Person
would be entitled to a copy of the indictment. The t. siren
was entitled to a list of witnesses, not only that she might
contradict them, but that they might be made to enters.
diet themselves. He did not know why the list of wit-
nesses should he withheld in all cases except high treason.
He knew that the practice hail been the subject of much
grumbling. The Ministers were the authors of the Bill,
and every thing like the appearance of injustice would
create ahhorienee. The effect of withholding a list of
witnesses would be to compel the Queen to call for delay.
The Noble Lords might say this was nut a proceeding
which inflicted the penalty of death, but what was the
pain of death after they degraded the illustrious person
from all the honours of her Royal House ; from all the
honours she load acquired in this country, life was of no
value after such degradation. They ( ought then to be
careful how in such a case they violated the principles A
justice. The Noble Lord concluded by moving, that a
list of witnesses to be examined in support of the Pains
and Penalties Bill be sent so her Majesty's legal advisers,
to enable the (.Im-en to defend herself.
The LORI) CHANCELLOR opposed the motion. He
was bound by a sense of ditty to object to it. The main
principles of justice must be applied to high and low. In
the administratioe of justice sill were equal. He tell it
necessary to state, that no man email doubt that a list of
witnesses delivered to a person before accusation, gave au
unfair advautege to persons appointed to cross examine
witnesses. The wisdom of ages had not adopted the pro•
ceetlitig recommended. Five vice examination was only
to be relied ou ; mid if so, what would become of jus-
tice if lists of witnesses were to be given. Tue ends of
justice requited they should nut do that o loch was con-
truly to law anti reason. How could they make an ex-
ception its favour of the Illustrious ludiviJaal, which
would impugn all the established rules of evidence ?
Under all the circumstances the question was, e twitter
they could sacrifice the general principle of Parliament-
ary Administration, by saying they could not be governed
by the ordinary principles of justice. The Noble and
Learned Lord gave his negative to the mutton.
The Marquis of LANSDOW N, feeling the importance
of the debate, declared, in justice to her Majesty and
the accusing pert), there could he no joist opposition to
the motion made by his Noble Ft iend. Upou the piece.
dents stated that day to the Hotter, they were under the
necessity of acceding to the motion. He would defy the
House to prove a precedent for the nsanster in which an
Illustrious per-on Omuta lie treated in :his case.
hail departed from precedent, yet they were called on
by those who had recommended the deviation, to be
guided by the land maths tits", had disregarded.—
His Noble and Learned Friend had called upon them to
consider what would most contribute to the ends of jus-
tice. He humid heard nothing to prevent the lions. from
acceding to the course recommit-Jed that day. On the
eutittary, he was convinced that 4 refusal et the claims
w„iisti lead :o au neerraption of the coarsa of jostler.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL opposed the 1/1111101i:
Lord ORES' supported it, and after much debate it was
negaii ned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
MONDAY. JULY 10.
CON rum rr.—Si, K. t;tat Ite 1:,14r,c00.1
thAt W ea 113 A ..irrtiulerid Tv, ut..er

persons had surrendered themselves, but as they were
persons who had no will of their own, be should move Hutt
the Order for their attendance he discharged. Respecting
Sir W. Manners, he should make no root' .
The order with respect to the other tiro o ituesbes was
discharged.

Mr. C. WYNN moved, that Sir W. Manners, having att.
sconded to avoid being examined before the Grantham Elec-
tion Committee, be sent to Newgate for such offence.
Sir J. GRAHAM observed, that Sir W. Mannen had
left town before nny order was issued ; and he therefore
moved, as an prinendment, that the Order be discharged.
Dr. I'D ILLI MOH E remarked, that Jervoise had been
sent to Ne gate under ;precisely sinsiLir circumstances, and
yet nothing was to he done against Sir W. Manners.—
(Hear.)
Aber al remarks front Mr. Tennyson, se.
The SPEAKER noses veil, that if their orders were to be
cisobeled, what would become of their authority.
Amendment negatived.
Mr. %V itorrEsLEl said, there was uo evidence of Sir
W. Manners having absconded.
SirJ. Al' I NTOSIII reminded the House, that it had been
resolved, after evidence, that Sir W. Manners bad
absconded.

Orlithull Motion carried.
Mr. BEN NETT unwed for a return of the number of
wither,' trita acne now receiving peubiunt uu accuuut of
blindness.

Mr. RICARDO moved for returns of the quantities
of Wines imported, dilastigui3hitig thu,e from Erdnee.—•
Ordered.

Mr. CANNING moved, that the Last India Volunteer
Bill Report be iereived.
Report brought up and agreed to, and the Bill ordered to
be read a third time tomorrow.

Mr. WILLY moved, that Nlr. D'Eurrre, the Recorder of
Limerick, who had been milled ill Newgiite for preva-
rication on oath, be brom;ht to the Bar, in order to his beiug
discharged.
Sir J. WI NTOSH thought, after such prevartcatiou on
oath, Mr. D'Esterre might not to be allowed to hold his
judicial office of Records r, ur to continue his profession.—
(Hear l)
Mr. D kWSON, who had becu on the election committee
expressed a similar opinion.
Mr. DALY Raid, the officer was annually elected, and
that the Election loot have the approbation of the Lord
Lieutenant.
Sir J. M'INTOSH said, they ought to have some atm-
ranee that the dismission would take place.
Mr. C. GRANT had no dooht that the wish of the House
would be attended so. f f previous notice could not be taken,
the rc-election would be in September nest f and then doubt.
le-s the wilt which had been expressed would have its due
effect.