The Sun.
London, England, 1837-12-13 00:00:00

pounds, whereas, if the county had to pay for it, one-third of
that sum would be found quite sufficient.
Colonel SIBTH ORP had watched the course of proceed-
ing adopted by the Hon. Member for Kilkenny in regard to
the question involved in his Bill during the last Parliament.
He (Colonel Sibthorp) was not one of those who agreed with
the Hon. Gent'eman in the proposition that the candidate
should be wholly absolved from expense in election, and he
should therefore look closely at the Hon. Member's project.
Whoever was opposed to it, he ( Colonel Sibthorp) should only
say that he would always prosecu'e a course of liberal treat-
ment—(La ighter)—to his constituents. The Hon. and Gal-
lant Member then inquired what course the Hon. Member
meant to pursue with regard to his measure, if introduced, and
when he intended to propose a second reading?
Mr. HUME wished the Bill to be brought in and
printed, to give Honourable Members an opportunity of exa-
mining its details during the recess. On the third Wednes-
day in February he should move its second reading. He de-
sired to add, that the clause in the original Bill against " treat-
ing" was expunged from the Bill before the House, because
it had been embodied in a Bill of the Hon. Member for Brad-
ford, who knew so much more of the subject to which it re-
ferred, that he ( Mr. Hume) was glad to have it taken off his
shoulders.

Sir R. PEEL—There is one part of the Bill to which I
think the attention of the House should be specially called. I
mean that which goes to the effect of relieving candidates
from the expense of erecting booths, and transfers that cost to
the counties. Of course the authorities on whom the burthen
would be thrown by the Honourable Gentleman's Bill would
be anxious to economize as much as possible ; and, under
these circumstances, it was not at all unlikely that the accom-
modation provided by them in that point would be insufficient
for the constituency. The poll could not, therefore, be
taken in the time prescribed by the Act of Parliament, and
thus many persons might lose their right of franchise by
having no opportunity to poll. That is one of the evils
to be apprehended from that part of the Honourable Gen-
tleman's measure. But there is another still greater in
question—one which involves, perhaps, the impartial return
of the candidate himself. Suppose, for instance, and it is no
improbable supposition, that the authorities are in the interest
of one of the candidates. There is a most useful provision in
the Reform Bill, which enacts that if there be any fear of in-
timidation or disturbance, the candidate whom it is likely to
affect can erect a booth wherever he pleases, provided he
does it at his own expense, thus giving him the power
of removing the polling place out of the influence of the inti-
midation or disturbance threatened. Now, the Hon. Mem-
ber's Bill obviates that provision by vesting the power of
erecting booths solely in the authorities, and, to bring the
matter to an issue, suppose that the authorities arc favourable
to one candidate, what may be the possible result ? Why, they
can, indirectly, by means of this power, influence the election,
and place the return of the adverse candidate in jeopardy, or,
indeed, altogether out of the question. The Reform Bill, as
it stands, is very well in that respect, and does not need any
alteration.

Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
COUNTY RATES.
Mr. HUME moved forleavo to bring in a Bill "to establish
councili for the better management of county rates in England
and Wales." The Hon. Member said that, like the former mea-
sure, it had been before the House in the past Parliament ; but it
had not, he regretted to say, had fair play shown it—it was turned
out. The principle of the Bill was involved in the solution of
the question whether the ratepayers of counties had a right to be
placed in the same position as regarded the assessment of
taxes, their appropriation and expenditure, as the ratepayers
in boroughs and corporate towns. The objectionable clause
wa: that which interfered with the function of Magistrates in
financial matters, transferring their power in that respect to
the county council, and that clause being the principle of the
13111, was retained in the Bill then before the House to the
same extent as in the original measure. The controul of the
police force, as part of the expenditure, would be also vested
in the county council. The details of the Bill were too nu-
merous to be entered into at greater length ; and he, there-
fore, hoped that the House would permit it to be brought in,
for the purpose of being printed and put into the hands of
Hon. Members during the recess. It was in all respects es-
sentially the same as the measure of the last session.
Mr. A GLIONBY seconded the motion.
Colonel WOOD said that the Bill of last year was rejected
by a large majority of Hon. Members on both sides of the
House, on the strength of a report made by the County-rate
Committee about two Years since, and in the consideration of
the present measure d'uring the recess, he (Colonel Wood)
hoped the same report would be taken in connection with it.
If the Hon. Gentleman did not amend it, in conformity with
that report, it would meet the same fate as the former Bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL did not intend to oppose the Bill in
that stage ; but, at the same time, he was sorry to find that
the Hon. Member had made it similar to that of last year.
The principle of the measure he (Lord J. Russell) did not
mean to oppose, as far as it gave the ratepayer a control over
the expenditure of the rates ; for if the increase in county
rates since 1790 were looked at, in connection with the
increase of the poor-rates for the last four or five years, it
would seem only fair and just that such right should be given
to those who bore the burden. The Hon. Gentleman, how-
ever, had not acted wisely in introducing so many provisions
unconnected with the principle of control into his Bill. In
the Bill of the Hon. Member introduced last year, though
there was nothing definite, there was still sufficient chalked
out to give the county council the means of making a largo
and expensive establishment. That was to be averted in any
Bill on the subject. With regard to the judicial functions of
the magistrates involved in the Honourable Member's measure,
he (Lord J. Russell) was of opinion that that should be
a distinct and separate question. If, under these circum-
stances, the Honourable Member persisted in introducing
and carrying it through the House in its present form, he
(Lord John Russell) would feel it to be his duty—the
duty of the Government—to act as he had stated—that is, to
take up the matter himself, and introduce another measure on
the subject. The country, however, and the House, were
indebted to the Honourable Gentleman, who had done good
service to the public by bringing the matter before them;
and he ( Lord J. Russell) was only sorry that he could not go
all the length he went in his measare. But if the Honourable
Member did not modify it so as to suit his views he ( Lord J.
Russ-11) should take an early opportunity of bringing in a
simpler measure with the same object.
Colonel SI BTHO RP wished to know the course proposed
to be pursued by the Honourable Member in regard of the
Bill under consideration, and when he would move its second
reading?
Mr. A G LIONB Y fully concurred in the principle of the
Bill, and undertook to prove that the Noble Lord (Lord J.
Russell) doing the same, on his own admission, could not
fairly object to any of its details.
Mr. SANFORD thought that a simpler machinery than
that proposed by the Honourable Member would be sufficient
for the purpose ; and that perhaps the machinery of the Board
of Guardians would be found the most effective. Some system
which would give the rate-payers a controul over their own
funds was much wanting in the country.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose to
call the attention of the House to his motion on the state of the
fund appropriated for the payment of the West India slave
claims, and to propose the substitution of another species of
stock as preferable for that purpose.
Sergeant JACKSON moved for the return of all rewards
offered by proclamation of the Lord-Lieutenant or Lords-
Justices of Ireland, for the discovery of the perpetrators of
murders and other outrages from the Ist of January, 1836, to
the 12th of December, 1837 ; with the dates of the proclama-
tions, and distinguishing which of such rewards (if any) have
been claimed and paid by the Irish Government, in consequence
of information given pursuant to such proclamations ; and for
the return of all crimes and outrages reported by the stipen-
diary magistrates and officers of police in Ireland to the In-
spector-General of Police, or to the Irish Government, as
having been perpetrated in their respective districts from the
Ist of January, 1836, to the 12th of December, 1837, distin-
guishing such crimes and outrages as were contained in the
usual monthly reports, and such as were specially reported.
QUEEN'S MESSAGE.

The SPEAKER then left the chair, and the House went into
a Committee on the Queen's Message respecting the grant to
her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose to
bring the subject before the House, which he did with the
greater pleasure from the conviction he felt that all sides were
disposed to entertain it favourably. He stated that in the last
Parliament a question was put to the Government by the
'Member for Bristol, if it was their intention to make any ad-
ditional provision for her Royal Highness the Duchess of
Kent? He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) said no, but
now he felt that the proper time had arrived, and accordingly
he proceeded to propose such a measure, while the Civil List
was yet under consideration, to which the subject might be said
properly to belong. He hoped that the proposition would not
only receive the approval of both Houses but of the people.
through all classes of whom he was well aware the deepest
feelings of respect and attachment prevailed for her Royal
Highness, both for her own amiable and exemplary qualities,
and for the admirable mode in which she had fulfilled her
high and important trust in the education of the reigning
Queen of England.—( Hear, hear.) Too much could not be
said of the unremitting and zealous attention which she de-
voted to the education of that child, the happy results of
which they all appreciated and gratefully acknowledged
( Hear, hear.) The marriage of the Duke of Kent took
place in 1818, an event which met on all sides with the
warmest approval. It was approved and promoted both by
Lord Liverpool and the Opposition, amongst whom there
seemed to be but one feeling of high esteem for the cha-
racter of the Duke, arid a grant of six thousand pounds a-
year was voted by way of dowry. Lord Castlereagh at that
period made a statement on the subject so able and eloquent,
in illustration of the exemplary character of the Royal pair.
and their claims on the countr-y, that nothing lie might say
could possibly put the matter more clearly.—[Here the
Honourable C;entleman real an extract from the speech of
Lord Castlereagh on the 15th of May, 1518, on the question
of the marriage of the Duke, dwelling especially on the well-
known estimable character of the family with which he was
about to be allied. It stated that the lady, then the widowed
Prin,cessofLeiningen, would, by her marriage with the Duke
of Kent, be deprived of an income of 3,000/. a-year, appi o-
priated to the maintenance of her children, and of other
Sources of income,
amounting to 5,0001. a-year.] The Duke
at that time was allowed 5,000/. by his father, and had 5,000/.
more from his governments of Gibraltar and Canada,which the
Parliament augmented at his marriage by 6,000/. more. In
1820 the Duke of Kent died, and the Duchess succeeded to
that annuity, but some delay taking place in the payment of
it the Duchess would have been destitute if her brother, the
King of Belgium, had not allowed her a considerable sum. It
was well known that the Duke died embarrassed; his property
on the Continent was not available, and his Duchess, highly to
her credit, abandoned her 6,0001. dowry to the benefit of his

creditors, preferring the reward of a good conscience to all ceived answers from all of thsin, but would fix Friday, def ni-
the enjoyments that the employment of her annuity in other tively, for the appointment of the Committee.
channels could possibly bestow. From 1820 to 1823 the Du- The House, after the d.sposal of one or two Orders, ad-
chess of Kent's income was thus absorbed. Indeed, it never journed at a Quarter-past Twelve.
could have been adequate to the wants of her position, and so
it was felt by all reflecting men, and he doubted whether it
was in any degree creditable to the British public that the de-
ficiency should have been supplied by a foreign King ; but the
fact was that the Duchess of Kent would never have been able
to maintain her positron in society if King Leopold had not
allowed her 3,0031. a-year.—( Hear.) In 1821 this subject
was again brought before Parliament, and 6,0001. additional
was granted to the Duchess, all parties (as Mr. Canning had
stated) agreeing in the grant, in testimony of the exemplary
manner in which she devoted herself to the education of her
children. In 1831 the subject was again brought forward,
under Lord Grey, and Parliament voted an additional annuity
of 10,000/. to the Duchess of Kent, in consideration of the in-
creased care and importance of her charge, arising from the
proximity of the Princess Victoria to the throne. Ail these
sums made 22,0001., the amount of the annuity to the Duchess
of Kent at the present moment—all voted absolutely, and for
her own life, with the exception of the grant of 6,000/. for the
life of her Majesty, which, however, if the law stands unaltered,
must still be paid in annuity to the Duchess of Kent, although
she might apply it to some other object. He would therefore
in the Bill which lie was about to bring in take care to remove
that anomaly. The Duchess of Kent was the first individual
who had stood in the position to the Sovereign which she did
since the time of Henry VII., without having been either Pi in-
cess of Wales or Queen Dowager ; in either of which cases she
would have been, as a matter of course, largely provided for.
In 1814 the Princess Charlotte of Wales was allowed 50,0001.
a year; in 1820 the Queen had an allowance of 50,000/. a
year. In 1761 Queen Charlotte had a dowry assigned of
60,000/. a year. In 170 the Princess Caroline of Wales had
an annuity settled on her of 50,0001. In 1831 the present
Queen Dowager was allowed 100,000/, a year. Had the
Duchess of Kent been in any parallel position she would al-
ready have been in possession of a large dowry by anticipation ;
but respecting her real income, while superintending the early
education of the Queen, she received fifty per cent. of it from
her brother instead of the people of England. There was, he
thought, great inconsistency in continuing to grant a foreign
King 35,0001., and permitting him to pay it back for the sup-
port of the mother of their future Queen. Knowing their feel-
ings of respeet and regard for her, he did not anticipate any
opposition to the proposition he should now make to the House,
that 8,0001. additional annuity should now be allowed to the
Duchess of Kent, in consideration of her increased proximity
to the Throne, and the additional claims which she had ac-
quired by her conduct in the capacity of a mother and a guar-
dian on the gratitude of the people of En,gland.—(Hear.) It
might, however, be suggested that she might still reside with
the Sovereign, and thereby incur less expense ; but he con-
tended that such a choice should he left es a matter of free
will, of choice, and good feeling, and not laid down as a matter
of necessity. Such compulsion would be degrading in every
respect to the Sovereign and her mother. The income of the
Duchess of Kent had been infinitely less than that enjoyed by
the Dukes of York and Clarence. The utmost increase to the
public which the proposed augmentation would occasion would
be about two thousand pounds a year. He had to apologise
to the House for the inadequacy of the manner in which he
had represented the claims of her Royal Highness, but he felt
that those claims required only a simple statement, as he was
sure no difficulties would be urged in opposition. He would,
therefore, move that a sum not exceeding 8,000/. be granted
from the Consolidated Fund to make an adequate provision for
her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent.
The Chairman having read the resolution,
Mr. HUME said that no one could value more highly than
he did the services of her Royal Highness the Duchess of
Kent in the education of her daughter, and no one could feel
greater pleasure at the satisfaction and delight which her
Royal Highness must derive from the result of those services.
It was with pain he rose upon the present occasion, but the
consequences of preceding extravagance showed that they
ought to consider well before they set an example. 100,000/.
had been granted to the Queen Dowager, and he was sure the
country considered this sum profuse and extravagant. He ex-
pected that the Government would have come down to the
House with a proposition to settle upon the Duchess of Kent
the income which she was at present in the receipt of ; but he
was not prepared to hear a proposition for any additional sum.
He was anxious that her Royal Highness, who had so well
earned the popularity she possessed, should not be the recipient
of one shilling which the country would grudge. He did not
think that the iecreased proximity of her Royal Highness to
the throne at all required any increase of income. While her
Royal Highness had to defray the expense of her daughter
22,0001. a year he considered a limited income ; but now that
her Royal Highness was become one of the Royal family he
regretted that due consideration was not had to that part of
the question.
Sir R. INGLIS was happy that the Hun. Member for
Kilkenny had not opposed the resolution, for he had not
pointed out any specific objection to the grant. He had only
stated that it might teed to alienate the affections of the
people. Let him not, however, suppose that this point would
be misconceived by the country, although it might be by him-
self. The country owed a debt of gratitude to the Duchess of
Kent which no money could. repay. He trusted that, after what
had passed, the motion would be adopted unanimously.
Colonel SI BT HORP said that he s'lould say a few words
upon the present grant, which he felt it his duty to do as a
guardian of the money of the people. When he heard of the
King of Belgium, he could not think that there was much
liberality in granting 3,0001. out of 50,000/. a-year. The
Chancellor of the" Exchequer should have brought forward this
proposition in a more full House than the present, or he ought
to postpone it.
Sir F. TRENCH considered that the country owed a
debt of gratitude to the Duchess of Kent which no money
could pay. This grant ought to be given to her, if only to
enable her to continue the benevolent course which she had
through life pursued. He wished to ask if her Royal High-
ness had not incurred debts ?—( Hear, hear.) lie should
wish an amendment to be proposed for a sum that would cover
those debts in addition to her income. lie knew not if this
were the case. He was sure if debts had been incurred they
were debts of necessity, and he would vote to have her set
perfectly free.
An Hen. MEMBER, who said that this was his first essay,
observed that if the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman who spoke
last was a well-wisher of her Royal Highness the Duchess of
Kent, he had shown it in a strange way, by alluding to debts
of her's, which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had never
named in bringing forward the resolution. Her Royal High-
ness might well exclaim, " Protect me from my friends."
Sir R. PEEL said that be thought it would have been more
satisfactory and respectful to her Royal Highness if her Ma-
jesty's Government had introduced the present proposition to
the House when they brought forward the Civil List, or if at
least they had then stated their intention to propose an in-
creased income to her Royal Highness. Many Members
had left London who would doubtless be anxious to join in
the general concurrence on this point. It would have been
more satisfactory if an intimation of the increase had been
given when the Civil List was brought forward. For himself,
he fully assented to the proposition.—( Cheers.) On every
occasion on which the name of the Duchess of Kent had
come before Parliament, the House had felt that the grati-
tude of the country was due to her Royal Highness for
the manner in which she had devoted herself to the
care and education of her daughter.—( Loud cheers.)
While the youth and health of the Queen required it, her
Royal Highness had devoted herself to retirement and seclu-
sion—(Cheers)—and when, at a more advanced age, it be-
came necessary to introduce her Royal charge into society,
the Duchess of Kent made no distinction of party, but intro-
duced her daughter to the leading men of all parties.—
( Cheers.) This was done with the most decorous hospitality;
but it might have led to an expenditure beyond the bounds
of her Royal Highness's income. Upon this subject, however,
he would make no inquiry, nor would he express an opinion.
He took it for granted that the. Government had made all ne-
cessary and proper inquiries, and he did not think that fur-
ther or minute inquiry ought to be made. There was nothing
in the present proposition to startle the House or the country,
and he thought it ought to meet the cheerful acquiescence
of the House, as it certainly did with his. His respect for
her Royal Highness, and the high value he placed upon her
services in the education of her Royal daughter, made him
heartily rejoice in the hope that the present resolution for an
increased grant to her Royal Highness would meet with the
marked concurrence and the general and unanimous feeling
of the House.—(Cheers.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said, that as no objection had been
made to the grant, he had but little to say. With respect to
not having introduced the proposition with the Civil List, her
Majesty's Government did not think it right that this grant
should be postponed until after the recess, as the Civil List
necessarily must be. He thought there was quite a sufficient
number of Members present, and he did not think a more
proper time could be selected for the proposition being
brought forward. lie thought the mode in which her Royal
Highness had attended to the education of her daughter en-
titled her to the gratitude of the country. It was the wish of
her Royal Highness that no grant should be proposed to the
House for her use that did not meet with concurrence, and give
satisfaction to the House and the country.—( Cheers. )
Sir R. PEEL, in explanation, said that it was not to the
time of bringing it forward he had made any objection, but
that no intimation of the grant was given on bringing forward
the Civil List, which he thought ought to have been done.
Mr. C. W. W YNN said that he could not understand how
the new position in which her Royal 'Highness was placed as
regarded her proximity to the throne demanded any increase of
income. Her Royal Highness had at present a larger income
than either the Duke of Sussex or the Duchess of Gloucester.
He regretted that more opportunity had not been afforded for
considering the subject.
Sir E. SUGDEN fully concurred in all that had been said
in praise of the Duchess of Kent. lie did not rise to oppose
the resolution, but they ought to he satisfied as to the terms in
which it was drawn up. Was it intended that this annuity
should continue in the event of her Majesty's death? That
would be the effect of the resolution as it now stood.—(" No,"
from the Chancellor of the Exchequer.) He ( Sir E. Sugden)
was of a different opinion. It appeared to him that a difficulty
would arise if a vote wire to be taken only for the 8,000/.
This mieht be avoided by voting the 30 000/. in one sum.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER. said ;he
difficulty alluded to by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
could not arise.
The Resolution was agreed to, and the Retort received.
The Report of the Civil List Acts was brought up, and
agreed to, and a Bill ordered accordingly.
THE PENSION LIST.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said there
was an Order of the Day for the appointment of a Committee
on the Pension List. He had written to some Members now
absent from town, to ascertain whether it would be convenient
for them to serve on that Committee. fie had not yet re

HOUSE OF LORDS.—Dze. 12.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Val ooleack at
five o'clock.
The Marquis of LANS DOWN E moved the second reading
of the Quaker; and Al( ray:ans Relief Bill.
Lord BROUGHAM wi;'ied to know whether it was th.s
Noble Marquis's intention to propose any extension of the re-
lief proposed by this Bill?
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE could only say that be
was not prepared to move for any extension of its clauses.
Lord BROUGHAM said the only question was whether
the Bill should extend merely to Quakers and Moravians, or
whether it should be an Act of toleration going further.
The Bill was then read a second time.
THE DUCHIES OF CORNWALL AND LAN-
CASTER.
Lord BROUGHAM said that he had now to rise to move
for a Return to which—as he understood by a note
he had received from the Noble Lord at the head of the
Woods and Forests there would be no objections—.
namely, fa. a Return of the net Revenues and Receipts
of the Duch♦ of Cornwall, fir the years 1832
1833, 1834, 1835, and 1836, distinguishing each year, and the
amount of the fines for each o: those years, also distinguishing
each year's amount ; and a similar Return for the Duchy of
Lancaster. It was evident that the Civil List would have to
be regarded as a mere form if the House were to be called
upon merely to assent or dissent from it, without having before
their Lordships a knowledge of the amount of those revenues.
The Duke of WELLINGTON observed that this was a
motion for a Return of the amount of revenues which had
never been inquired into, by that House before ; therefore,
he put it to the Noble and Learned lucid whether such a
motion ought to be made without notice.
Lord BROUGHAM thought it a pity, a very great pity,
that those revenues had not heretofore been enquired into by
both Houses of Parliament, and quite as a matter of course when
their Lordships were called upon to vest in the Crown certain
revenues for the support of its dignity, could anything be
more of course than for Parliament to inquire into what the
amount of these revenues were, and what application the
Crown had for them ? But, if the Noble Duke had any ob-
jection to the motion being taken in this way, he (Lord B. )
should have no objection to giving notice.
The Duke of WELLINGTON submitted that it was
usual when amotion of this sort was brought forward, of a
novel nature, to give the House notice of it.
Lord BRO U G HAM said no doubt the Noble Duke was
quite aware of the nature of his motion. It was merely for a
return of the net produce of those Duchies. He had strictly
confined it to a Return of what monies came to the Crown from
those quarters ; and he now gave notice, that he should move
ler the Returns on Thursday next.
WEST INDIES.
Lord BROUG H AM moved for the Return, of the real value of
Exports to the West Indies and Mauritius for the last 10 years,
up to Janu try 1837, distinguishing the amount of each year.
ADDRESS TO HER MAJESTY—THE DUCHESS

_ _ _
OF KENT.
Upon the Order of the 11.,..y being read, for taking into con-
sideration her Majesty's Message to the House, and after the
Message was read by the Clerk at the table,
Lord MELBOURNE rose and said, he had the honour
yesterday to bring down from her Majesty the Queen the
Message that had just been read by the Clerk at the table;
and he bad now to move that their Lordships take that mea-
sure into consideration, and that they return a general Ad-
dress in answer to it, stating their readiness to concur
in it, by agreeing to any measure necessary and fitting
for carryi❑g the object of it into effect. With re-
spect to the general objects of that measure he was
sanguine enough to suppose there would be but little
difficulty in their Lordships agreeing ; he was sanguine
enough to hope that the loyalty and affection which
their Lordships felt for her Majesty, and the gratitude which
they must be anxious to evince to her Royal Highness the
Duchess of Kent, for the fidelity and success with which she
had discharged the important duty which had been imposed
upon her—he was sanguine enough to hope that from all those
motives combined, upon the present occasion, in order to mark
those feelings, some accession would be made by their Lord-
ships to the income of her Royal Highness, such as became
the different station in which she was now placed—an
income which, whilst it gave to her Royal Highness
the means of supporting her station, would not be in,
consistent with the feelings of Parliament. With respect to
the subject coming before their Lordships before the measure
was brought up to that House originating in another place,
it would be unnecessary for him to give any reasons or to
enter into any details, either as to the amount or anything con-
nected with that measure, which would have to be fully en-
tered into when the measure came to be carried into effect.
He trusted that the matter would be so arranged and so pre-
sented for their Lordships' consideration, that they would all
concur in an Address to her Majesty expressive of their readi-
ness to carry into effect her Majesty's wishes. The Noble Vie-
count concluded by moving, that an humble A ddress be presented

to her Majesty, returning Thanks for her most gracious .Message,
and to assure ht r Majesty that that House, always desirous of
manifesting its du' y and attachment to her Majesty's person and
family, would cheerfully concur in all such measures as would
give effect to her Majesty's most gracious Message.
The motion having been put from the Woolsack,
Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought the Noble Viscount
was incorrect in supposing that it was usual to answer a Message
like the present without having put the House in possession of tho
measures which were to be founded on it. In the ease of the
Message which had been sent down to that House relative to
the Royal Dukes, Lord Liverpool had stated that be thought.
it improper to move an Address:in answer until their Lordships
were in possession of the measures to be brought in.
Viscount MELBOURNE—In the case of the Message re-
lative toiler present Majesty when Princess Victoria, which he
believed was on the 3d of August, 1831, the course adopted
was similar to that which he now proposed.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH understood the rule to be
that the Message having come down on one day it was to be
taken into consideration the next. The question for their
Lordships to consider was whether it was not usual to state
first what were the measures to be brought in.
Viscount MELBOURNE—Certainly not, certainly not.
lie might be mistaken, but if they referred to the journals of
the House their Lordships would find that such was the ewe.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH—The Journals could not be
referred to for statements made by any of their Lordships. If
the Noble Viscount would take the trouble to look at the book
which he held in his hand, he would perceive that Lord
Liverpool considered it improper to take such a course.
Viscount MELBOURNE would only repeat that the
course pursued in 1631 was precisely that which he now sug-

Bested.
The Duke of WELLING TON thought that there could
be no difference of opinion on the subject of the address. His
Noble Friend near him had merely referred to what had oscurred
on a former occasion, by way of precedent, and to ascertain
what was the usual practice. It was quite certain that there
was no intention in the mind of any Noble Lord to throw any
obstacle in the way of the Address ; and when their Lord-
ships would recollect the care which her Royal Highness
the Duchess of Kent had taken of her Royal Daughter,
and the advantage which the country had derived from the
number of years for which she was left without any provision
whatever for the expences attending upon that care, he was con-
vinced that there was not one Noble Lord in that House who
could for a moment doubt of the expediency of at once moving
the Address in answer to her Majesty's most gracious Message.
With these views, he should certainly support the Address,
which seemed to be opposed by no Noble Lords, whether it
was according to precedent or not.
. Lord ME LBO URNE said that the House was not called
on by the motion to vote for any specific grant, nor to say that
they would assent to aoy measure which the House of Com-
mons might think proper to send up to them. They (the Lords)
had before them what was done in 1831, on the 3d of August.
On that occasion it was stated that there was an inaccuracy
in the Message, inasmuch as it was there mentioned what the
specific measure was to which their Lordships would afterwards
be called upon to assent. On that occasion Lord Grey stated
in the strongest terms, that the amount of the grant which
might he made in accordance with the Message must be set-
tled by the other House, and when it came up to their Lord-
ships, it would he for them to say whether the allowance
would be *sufficient, and that was all their Lordships could say
as to the details. On that occasion no objection was taken to
the course proposed by Lord Grey, and he (Lord Melbourne)
had thought th,t it was the ordinary and general course
pursued on similar eccasi tns. The House therefore was only
called upon to acknowledge the Address, to express its loyalty
to the throne and its affection to the Royal House of which
her Majesty was the head, together with its readiness to give
all consideration to such measures as should come from the
other House in compliance with the Message.
Lord BROUGHAM begged leave to read the Address
again, and see whether the House was about to do anything
or nothing. The Noble Lord then read the Address. Ha
understood the meaning of the Address to be that it was de-
sirable to make a provision for her Royal Highness tha
Duchess of Kent, to make up for the deficieney of the present
income of her Royal Highness, owing to her altered position
by the elevation of her Royal Daughter to the throne,
whereby her Royal Highness is placed in the rank of Queen-
Mother. If the Address went no further than to express
the attachment of their Lordships to the family of her
Majesty, and their desire in any way possible to contribute to
the dignity of the Crown which her Majesty wears, and the
comfort of the family to which she belongs, and of which
she is the head, nobody could object to an Address
meaning no more than this ; for it pledged
this House to nothing. But if the Address were taken with
the Message to ple(ige this House to concur in whatever mea-
sure might be sent before it from the other House for an in-
creased provision for the Duchess of Kent, it was his (Lord B.'s)
opinion that their Lordships should pause until they knew the
effect of their acquiescence, and what the other House should
grant. Lord Grey, in 1831, said that if the grant from the other
House was too small their Lordships should not concur in it, And
they should also refuge their assent to it. There might be a
rivalry in titt, House between parties desirous to outbid each
other in the disposal of the income of the public to shew their
loyalty, and in that case a proposition ni:ght come up, which
probably one or two, and he would not say more than one or
two or their Lordships, might think excessive.—( A laugh.)
The Address, if carried, pledged the House to whatever was
sent up from the other House. Now in his opinion it was
necessary that that should be modified. He spoke with great
diffidence upon the question—he agreed with the Noble Duke
(Wellington). 50(1 he believed that every Member of that
House, as well as of the House of Commons, and nearly the
whole of the na.ion, joi.ied in every respect and good eishes
for the illustrious mother of our respected Queen. Her conduct