The Sun.
London, England, 1825-05-31 00:00:00

of her family was a party. They knew and they.declared that
they were only made tools of to get the Resolution paced for
the Duke of Cumberland.
CRIPPS was- friendly to the amendment, but as the.
Right Hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the ExcheqUer) had
no. objection to have a clause inserted in the Bill, declaring
that the Prince should be educated in. England, he should vote
with him. .

....... .
Mr. H. GURNEY thought is the salaries to the Royal Fa-
mily were given to them merely as the King's sons, the Dukes
of ( umberland and Sussex ought to have the same as the Dukes
of Kent and -Cambridge. Nothing could be.more absurd than
to prevent his Royal Highness from educating his own son—the
House of Commons had no right to interferein .educating the
children of the Royal Dukes. He should vote with the Chan-

.cellor of'. the Exchequer as an act of justice.
Sir G. ROSE approved of the intention of. having the edu-
cation of the young Prince conducted in England, although it
was natural that his Royal Highness, who,. while here, was
shy'd at from every hand:, should prefer even passive liberty
abroad. The Hon. Baronet proceeded to eulogize the con-
duct of his Royal Highness during 47 years which he had lived
in the same town with him on the Continent; and deprecated
the expressions which he had heard made use of by some lion.
embers. _

Sir W. CONCtIt.EVE stated, that he had known the Duke
of Cumberland fora long while, duringvhich his conduct watt
unexceptionable; and no one could be more punctual in the
payment of his debts.
Mr. Alderman SMITH said he also was acquainted with his
Royal Highoess,, who had been the victim of malevolence, and
was driven out of his native country by inuendos-and misre-
presentations. Whatever the House might think proper to do
with respect to. the education of the child, he thought that
tirse attacks against the father should not be persis,ed in. •
Mr. Secretary PEEL was sure. it was the universal feeling
of the House that hothing,could be. more unpleasant than these
discussions. He should briefly observe that he did not agree
with the lion. Member for Newton (Mr. H. Gurney) that this
was .to repair an act of injustice. Since the .period alluded to,
circumstances had chanted ;, and therefore, althorgh the for-
mer vote of the House might be correct, it ought not to prevent
Parliament from acceding to, the preseett, one.. The lion.
Member for Montrose had said that every father ought to.
educate his own soh ; but, hOweeeritrue this•in private, life,
it did.hohapply to the case tunler consideration. We all bad
an indirect interest that the education -of the Royal Family
should be as perfect as possible, and we had a right to in-
sist, in providing to that education, (het, it be conducted OR
we wished. The comparison between, the Menthe oilier Royal
flighness the Duchess of Kent eid-his Royal Highness. the
Duke of Cumberlated wel'acit eXactlehjust ' • -.for what might be
adequate for a Princess living in a state of widowhood, would
not be sufficient for a Prince with a with, and upholding the
dignity of his station. It had also been asked why. the Duke of
Cumberland did not come to this country ; but during the debate
of 1818. some reference, had been made to the lastly he "was
then about to espouse by a few individuals who now he (Mr.
Peel) believed regretted extremely .they had done so, and it
was easy to conceive that wider theee circumstances his Royal
Highness would prefer retiring to the'Continent. He avowed,
however, that it would be unreaeonable to take the vote with-
out some better security than the word of a Minister, that the
Prince should be educated in England. He. for one should
have no objection to the introduction' of such a proviso in the
enacting part of the Bill. The form, indeed, in which it was
done appeared immaterial, so tliet it expressed the recorded
sense of Parliament. He .only asked that the House would,
not forcibly. deprive the Duke: of Cumberland of the natural:
contronl which he ought to have over his son, and thus make
the latter, who might be the future Sovereign of the country,
entertain an unworthy opinion of his own father.—(llear I)
Mr. C.- PELHAM said a few words which were inaudible in
the gallery:
.
Mr. BROUGHAM thought the sooner they came to a vote
on the subject the better. lie was quite satisfied if some word.;
were introduced in some way to attain the certainty of the
young Prince being educated in. England. He still, however,
had an objection to the principle of the vote altogether, and
wished at least for some delay that precedents in similar cases
might be brought to light. lie wishedto know whether in future
for every scion of every branch of the royal stock ,ehiCh I
arrived at five or six years of age, Parliament was to be
called on for annual mint of 6,0001. With respect to her
Royal•Higlinese the Duchess of Kent, if his information were
correct, neither she nor Prince Leopold, to their infinite
honour, were privy to the grant for the Princess her daughter.
It seemed, however, that as the active friends of the
Duke of Cumberland wished a provision to be made on the-
ground of educating his Son,. they thought fit to place one
for the Ditches: of Kent its thefront. But the latter asked no
such thing, and it was unfair thus to leave that dietitiguished
Princess anti her brother subject to the odium of the public.
They certainly were beand to support the Members or. the
. Itoyal Family ; but the-•liouee !sniper before refused to grant
this very sum of 6,0004 to the Mite. of CoMberland, while that-
vote remained unreecinred, lie would consent to indirectly
revoke it. lie entirely agreed with those who said• that it,
would be indecorous to tear the child from the parent. In the
case of the Princess Charlotte of %Vales he urged the objection,
and should do the same now.
Mr. Secretary CA ;;'N I NO assured the House, that this vote
was, not proposed as an atonement for the former decision, but
arose solely from the tact that since the period referred
his Royal Highness theihrke of, Ctimberland had a child, and
that the country had an: indirect interest in the education of
that child, for which education it was necessary that. the Le-
gislature should provide.' Such were simply the circumstances
of the case. If one admitted that the child ought to be educated
for the benefit of the State, then the Crown was booed to in-
terpose, and see that no danger should accrue to the State from
the manner hi which that education was conducted. It there-
fore behoved them to step forward, and while they prevented
the education lions taking place alre'ad, to . adopt the most
efficacious mean, for having it properly bestowed in England.
Undoubtedly, however, after this resolution passed, •it would
be at the option of his Royal Highness whether he accompanied
his son to his country, or allowed the child to come here alone,
and thereby that rude ard harsh interference would -be avoided
which- all so much deprecated. Bitt the sole condition on
which the grant was proposed was, the education should take
place in England--.from that.condition they could not part,
and they lied a right to see that their object was fully secured,
—and that a Triode in-winos the country had a deep interest,
and ihr whom it might hay,: a strong affection, should he pro.
perly brought up. These few words embraced the, whole ques-
tion divested of extraneous topics. •The other votes of the
House ought to he left entirely out of consideration, and also
whether or not the grant Was accompanied by that efOr the
Duchess of Kent. -As to the latter he might say, that certainly
there had been no repugnance to receive it, although upon
thie, as upon all other occasions, that Illustrious Princess lied
acted, as at all times, with the prudence becoming her sex and
station. .'They were called upon to enable his Majesty to pro.
vide for the education of fl• Prince whelMight-be the Kim: of
this country, and they were,resdy to affix to the vote a single
limitatiweanamely, that it should•be attended by educatiozi in
this country.
Sir F. BURDETT saida-nsehe question was put, he should
be relieved from making unpleasant observations, and at the
same time •have the satisfaction ,oftioing his ditty to the country.
'raking this grant in any point• of view in which it could be
presented, and taking it to be different front the view in which
it- was. first presented to the. House, -he objected to it alto-
gether. Ile was told it' wavnot to .put eremuch money into •
pockets ofhis Royal Iligth eehe.Duke- of, Cumberland, • but
to keep up the Interest which the-people of this- country had
in the education of this Prince,-who might be expected to
dame to the them:ie. - He cOhlitenovace hole an infant siz years
old, could require 6,000/. a yettr for-education. If it was de-
sirable to give him a bad education, they could not promote
that object better thanlq-surrounding him with state. If the ,1
young Prince wes to have .the b2SL 'education4 he could have
none so good as-that received ,by the sons of persons,of rank.—
The demand was masked by the claim set up for a noble and
amiable Lady, who made no demand-' • It was extremely unfair
to make it u mask. . .
• The- CIIA NCE 1.1.4f)11 of-the EXCHEQUER said'the Hon.
Baronet heti most erroneously 'considered the proposition for '
the Duchess of Kent a-sort of mask Willa was not surprised.
The'Hon. Baronet might -Certainly take-that view of the suh._.
ject, if so disposed. • After the death of the Duke of Keht;•ln
1820, the Marquis of Londonderry was aSked• a question in
thin House, namely, whether it was his intention to propose
- some addition to the 6000/. settled on the Duchess of Kent ?
eThe answer -was, that he did not think it proper to mike• any
increased settlement, inasmuch as • Prince. Leopold, with great
tenderiless and generosity towards his sister, had contributed
• to the assistance of her Itoyal -Highness and her daughter.---
I: was, however. stated at that time that the establishment of -
the Duchess of Kent couldemebe considered permanent.
-• •Nit. BROUGIIAIIt-suggested to his. lion. Friend, 'with a
Viers of . coming to . s'direct vote,. that it would be better to
withdraw his amendment, and take the_division upon the reso-
lotithis lo that case the Right Hon. Secretary would coerce
:V;eirote by arranging that the. Prince • should be educated in
this. country. . .
Dr. LUSH I NGTON said he understood it wee intended to
take cite in some part of time vote that the education of the
Peinee should be in -England. He thought it was alto -neces-
spiarlykethOeft&ozbyesitonudld. his Majesty,, and not to the
For the ReOlution .
b,-Ipheaidlitoonse then. 'divided— :
Against* '
Majority - —23
While strangers were excluded, Mr. BROUGHAM gave
notice to the House, that, on the constitutional grounds which
he bad stated, at well as because he perceived a disposition in

120