The Sun.
London, England, 1831-03-18 00:00:00

GUARDS.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY took that opportu-
nity of calling the attention of their Lordships to an occur-
rence which, in his mind, deserved as much of their no-
tice as the business which had just occupied them did.
They had just reprimanded a military person for having
disregarded their privileges : and standing, as he did, in
the situation of one attached to the same profession, he felt
himself called upon to maintain the military authority,
which had been, as he understood, infringed upon on a
late occasion by a Noble Personage then present. He
would, therefore, call upon his Noble and Gallant Friend,
the Commander-in-Chief, to state whether there was any
foundation for a statement which had appeared in the •
newspapers, and by which it would seem that tire autho-
rity of his Gallant Friend had been treated with very little
ceremony. His Lordship would see how necessary it was
that military orders should be upheld, and that no indivi-
dual, however high his station, should he permitted to
contravene them; and he was sure that, when it was al-
leged that the first law officer of the country had broken
through that authority, some explanation was clue, and
he had no doubt but that some explanation would he given,
It was not too much for him to say that the first law
officer of the State had no more power to break through
the regulations imposed by military discipline than any
other person. He would not trouble the House with
further detail, but state that the Lord Chancellor had been
charged with forcing through the King's guard
on the day of the last drawing-room, From the
statement that had appeared in public, it would seem
that all regard to military form was broken through; but
he had no doubt the statement was overcharged, fur it was,
in his opinion, impossible for the Noble and Learned Lord
to have acted in so violent a manner. It so happened,
however, that he had been informed of the circumstance
by a Noble Friend of his, who was in part a witne,a to
the transaction, and in consequence he had had further in-
quiries ; from all which he collected, though there might
he exaggeration in the accounts that appeared in the
papers, there was no doubt of the main fact, that the
King's guard had been forced by the Lord Chancellor. In .
order, therefore, that their Lordships should be in posses-
sion of the facts, he would ask his Noble and Gallant
Friend three questions—lst, Whether the King's guard
had been forced by the Lord Chancellor on the day of the
last drawing-room ? 2d, Whether that arose from mistake
or from a misconception of the orders given to the guard ?
3d, Whether the officer whose guard was forced had been
put under arrest, or had satisfactorily excused himself ?
He hoped his Noble Friend Would give the House and the
country an explanation of the circumstances, as he hoped
their Lordships were as impressed with the necessity of
maintaining the military discipline of the force of the
country as they were of upholding the privileges of their
House. —(Hear.)
Lord HILL said that he had no difficulty in giving the
explanation required by his Noble Friend. In the first
place he must state that in the year 1815 an order proceeded.
from the late King, relative to the arrangements to be ob-
served in the Parks on the occasions of his birth-day, which
order was still in existence ; and it was in particular com-
manded that no carriage should be allowed to pass through
the Horse-guards on those days. On the day of the late
drawing-room the officer in command gave the proper or-
ders to the non-commissioned officer of his guard, and a
corporal was stationed outside the gate to prevent any car-
riage driving in. Several carriages had been stopped in the
course of the morning, and when the Lord Chancellor's car-
riage came to the passage, the corporal held up his hand to
the coachman to keep back ; but the horses' heads having
got inside the gate, the sentinel laid hold of the reins,
and prevented further ingress. The Lord Chancellor
then, as he understood, inquired why he was detained,
and, being informed that the soldier acted by orders, lie .
desired to see the officeroof the guard ; and when the officer
appeared, he first inquired did be know him. The officer
replied, that he believed be had the honour of speaking
to the Lord Chancellor. The Lord Chancellor then in-
quired why was he detained? and the officer informed him
that no one but the Speaker of the House of Commons
had the privilege of going through, with the exception of
the Earl of Shaftesbury, who had obtained the privilege
for that particular day. The Lord Chancellor having
asked was he to understand that he could not go through,
and being answered that it was not possible, sail, " then
we must go hack," on which the officer waived his hand
to the sentinel to let go the reins, and the coachman, who
it was supposed had not heard the last observation of the
Lord Chancellor, whipped his horses, and passed through
the gate before he could be stopped. He (Lord Hill) had
taken care to see the officer who had been then on duty,
and the corporal and soldier, and to make inquiries into
the subject, and he was bound to say that, after the fullest
investigation, he came to the conclusion that the officer
was not to blame, and that the corporal and soldier had
both fulfilled their duty, and he was quite satisfied, from
his communication with the Noble and Learned Lord him-
self, that the Lord Chancellor had no idea whatever o
forcing the guard.—(Hear, hear.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that he must feel
grateful to the Noble Marquis for having call« 1 on his
Noble Friend for the explanation which he had just made
to their Lordship'; but in the first place he should
say that he had not been aware of the comments that had
been made on his conduct with regard to this transaction
until his particular attention had been lately called to it.
He must at the same time be allowed to mention that he
wished the Noble Marquis had chosen any other day but
this for the discussion of such a subject, and that be, at
least, entered upon it without connecting it with that re-
primand which he, as Speaker of their Lordships' House,
had just delivered, in obedience to their commands. He
saw no reason why this case should be put in converse to
the other, and why it should be set forth that, inasmuch ,
as a military attack (by the way, which the other was not)
had been made on the privileges of the House, an attack
should be made by a civil functionary of the House opal.'
the military. It was thus he had been put on his trial by
the Noble Marquis—not at the bar, certainly, but on the
Woolsack; but he must tell the Noble Marquis that there
was no more comparison between the two cases than
existed between any of the two most opposite things in the
world. Still he could not be otherwise than obliged by -
the Noble Marquis having drawn forth the clear and
explicit statement of the Noble and Gallant Lord, and
he had little more to do thin to confirm the statement
of his Noble Friend.—(Hear, hear.) He could assure
their Lordships that no one in the world thought
less of the state and primp of the office which he held
than he did. Tire observances of that state and pomp
were to him certainly the most irksome and the most op-
pressive parts of his public duty ; arid it was not from any
foolish wish of passing through the Horse-guards, instead
of going round by Piccadilly and down Constitution-bill,
and, indeed, the latter was the course lie should have pre-
ferred if time permitted, in as much as he would have at-
tained a little more air and exercise, that he had ordered_
his carriage to the Horse-guards. But the fact was, he
had been sitting in the House the greater part of the day,
having made a great effort to bring to a conterlaucsitoe:, t! be
z.
bearing of a cause which had been long Pr", , 1i
which one of the parties was in distress, which

it was, therefore, material to save expense ; and he had
'Vended his sittings for an hour longer than expected, in
order to kesp down an expense to that party of SOL or
901. ilut as the time approached when he should be at
the drawing-room, he thought he should greatly shorten
tltv road if he ordered his carriage to go through the Horse-
guards. He should mention that he had been through the
Horse-guards on the occasion of the Queen's drawing-
room, and when he was stopped on the occasion in ques-
tion, he supposed it was done by mistake ; and on being
told by the officer of the guard that the Speaker of the
House of Commons had only• permission to pass, he
observed that it was very extraordinary that the same
privilege should be denied to the Speaker of the
House of Lords. The officer then said that Lord
Shaftesbury also had the privilege for that day, and
when he heard that he was confirmed in his opinion that
the whole arose from tnistake—for as their Lordships had
been occupied on the subject of privileges, it was
to be observed that his Noble Friend was only Chairman
of the Committees, and he concluded that he was
not the person to whom the accommodation, as he thought,
meant for the Speakers of both Houses of Parliament,
WAS intended. The officer, however, satisfied him that
there was no mistake, and he (the Lord Chancellor) said
then that he must turn back. He would row mention a
circumstance which he had been compelled to withhold
from the Noble Marquis when he had the kindness to in-
form him of his intention to bring this matter before the
House—namely, that he had given orders to turn back,
but he supposed the footman had not communicated them
on the instant to the coachman—and certainly he was
never more surprised in his life than when he found his
coachman had taken him throueh.—( Hear, and laughing.)
He, however, thought it would have been ridiculous to
have turned back—(Hear, and !aughing)—and the
coachman had acted upon hi, former peremptory orders
to go on.—(Hear.) had, in his conversation with
the Noble Marquis, taken the whole blame upon himself,
heine desirous to save the man ; and he could only assure
their Lordships that he was the last person, either in or
out of the House, to set an example of placing military
discipline at defiance, and that he was far from enter-
taining the ides of forcing the Horse Guards, either by the
mace or purse. English guards were not to be forced by
the one, or to he bribed by the ether—and far be it from
him to make the attempt. Nothing could be more foreign
from him, than to sanction the breaches of any of the
orders of his late or his present Majesty ; and he enter-
tained too high a regard for, and was too well aware of the
necessity of military discipline, to attempt to violate it.
He had only to add, that nothing could have been more
correct than the conduct of the officer who commanded the
guard—and he must also say, that the corporal and the
soldier behaved with strict propriety.
After a few words from the Marquis of LosnoNnteistr,
which were not heard at the bar, the matter dropped.
The Earl of FIFE presented a petition from the Rsyal
burgh of Banff in favour of Peritamentary Reform, and
he took that opportunity of correcting a misrepresentation
of what had gone forth respecting what he had said on a
late occasion. The observations he had then made re-
ferred, not to the Lord Chancellor's Reform of the Court
of Chancery, hut to the Bill introduced by another Noble
and Learned Lord (Lord Wynford). He disapproved of
the latter, but he entertained the highest opinion of the
nature of the former—and he considered that the Lord
Chancellor conferred a lasting benefit to the country by
the course he was pursuing.—Adjourned at Half-past Six.