The Sun.
London, England, 1802-04-01 00:00:00

TUE PRINCE OF WALES.

Mr. MANNERS SgTTON said, he rose in the
discharge of a duty which he owed, to bring forward
the Claims of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales
intcoot Reion venues
could
temohs fatatcctiloei
is
ui to tei
idoctnl c
fallen hse 1y of l
that
Cornwall.i om substantiall
el
c yet,he
t bc itt
forward a question of such great importance.
appeared to be the sense of the House,- that this
-2-uestruti
he Should now take up as.small a portion of their
time as possible. The Motion, he intended to make
was for the appointment of a Committee, to inquire
what part of the Revenues olthe Dutchy of Corn-
wall had been received, and by whom, -from the
Birth of the Prince- of Wales to his attaiping the
ia
ntnoisl
b o
he
at had
t
age of 2 t, and what Sums had been advanced to His
Royal Highness up to the 27th of June, 1795, to_
wards the payment of his debts. In making this
Motion, he should be warranted by the
.decision of
Parliament, and the Committee would have, to con-
sider in the first place, whether.the Prince of Wales
was entitled to the Revenues of the Dutchy of Corn_
wall from the time of his birth; and if so, by whom
those Revenues had been received, and how applied.
He should state shortly the circumstances on which
he relied, in order to satisfy• Gentlemen, this was
not a Question involving any point of doubt.or dif-
ficulty with respect to the Law of the case ; if it
had,. he would not have brought it before the House
in this form. The Dutchy of Cornwall was first
granted by Edward 111. to his. eldest Son Edward
the Black Prince, who was then only eight years of
-age. The eldest Son of the King had ever since
that period bien born Duke of Cornwall, and the
Dutchy wi:h all its possessions vested in him at his
Birth. It seemed extraordinary therefore, that the
King could receive and .possess the Revenues of.lhe
Dutchy from the Birth of the Prince until he ar-
rived at the age of zt. In saying ,this, he begged
to be understood, that there was no controversy be-
tween the King and the Prince of \\tales upon the
subject. Had the King really himself received.the
'Revenues of the Dutchy, and refused to account for
them, neither he nor any other Member would be
suffered to agitate the Question' in that House.' A
doubt had however been stated on a former -occa-
sion, by an Honourable and Learned Friend in that
House, and by a Noble .and Learned Friend in,the
other House, whether the King could
.not, as
Guardian of the Prince, receive the Revenues of
the Dutchy of Cornwall till the Prince attained the
age of z ,• without account. But this did ,nor
apply to Guardians in- Chivalry, as the whole
remaining remnant of the Feudal System were
entirely abolished by .the. Statute of the .12th
Charles 11. How doubts could be entertained upon
the subject he -was at a loss to imagine, as the pro,
ceedings of Parliament relative to the rights of the
Princes of-Wales to the Revenues of the Dutchy of
Cornwall were entirely inimical. to such a suppo-
sition. He wished- to call - the attention of the
House to Avila: pissed relative to this ,subjea in. the
• year • 1453. He would pass.over what occurred be..
tween the time of Edward 111. and that period, as
not so material. Edward the Black Prince died
before his father, having a son, afterwards Rich. 11.
to whom livery of possession of the Dutchy was
given. . Henry IV. gave livery of possession to
his son, afterwards Henry V. Henry V. was in
France when his son was-born, and died .when the
latter was only nine months old, therefore tag livery

Pas given. He now passed to the Reign of Han. VT.
1453, when Edward, his eldest son, was born. In
1455 an All of Parliament passed, enacting that the
Prince of Wales was born Doke of Cornwall, and
ought to have seisin of the Revenues and Possessions
of the Dutchy, in as ample a manner as the Sort of
Edward 111. ;---but enacting that the King should
possess himself of the monies arising therefrom, on
paying to the Prince the sum of toool. a year until
he attained the age of 14, and 2000 marks a year
afterwards. elne 1459 the Prince presented a Peti-
tion of Right, complaining of the dismemberment of
the Dutchy, stating that he was of right Duke of
Cornwall, and entitled to the Revenues and Pos-
sessions thereof, and praying that he might be rein-
stated in the enjoyment of the same, in as ample a
'wanner as his Predecessors had been. The Petition
was debated in: the House of Commons, who as-
sented to the prayer of the Petition, as did the
King, by the advice of his Parliament. He consi-
dered this as a solemn decision of Parliament, that
the Revenues of the Dutchy were vested in the
Prince of `Vales, from the moment of his birth, and
that- the King ha.l no right to receive and dispose of
them- during the minority of the Prince, or why
did Henry VI. accede to the prayer of this Petition
of Right ? It might be said, that Henry VI. was
a weak Prince; hut this would not apply to the Par-
liament who adopted that decision. Edward IV. gave
livery of seisin of the Dutchy to his son Edward
Prince of Wales., then only eight months old, with
the Revenues thereof, as stated in the Charter of
Livery granted by that Monarch, with the advice
and consent of Parliament. At the accession of
Henry the Vllth, in 1485, an Aft was passed,
enacting that his eldest son should enjoy the posses-
sions of the Dutchy of Cornwall in as ample a man-
ner as the eldest son of any former King ; •by which
AEI, a charge of 27061. was made upon the Re_
-venues of the Dutchy in -.lieu of • purveyance.
The -next year Prince Arthur was born, to
whom the King gave, livery of seisin of the
"Dwell), in the same manner as it had been given by
Edward IV; to his Son. It 'was- then considered
-that the Right of.the Prirsce to the Revenues of the
Dutchy took place from the moment of his birth, in
ctinsequence of which the ACI imposing a charge
upon these Revenues was repealed. This was a
• proof-that the moment aeSron was born, the title cf
the king to the Revenues cf the D'atchy immedi-
ately ceased. On the death of Prince Arthur in
15oz, Prince Henry, afterwards Henry VIII. had
livery of seisin, and although then very young, he
at-Wally appointed Commissioners for the manage-
ment of the Revenues of the Dutchy, and received
several Sums of Money for Fines; part of those Re-
venues. Upon the death of Henry VII. Henry
. VIII. succeeded, whose son, Edward Prince of
Wales, was born Duke of Cornwall, and had
livery of seisin of the Dutchy. Edward VI.
Mary and Elizabeth had no issue. He now came
to the Reign of James I. He had thought that this
Reign furnished something very adverse to the
Claims of the Prince of Wales, but upon the most
minute investigation, he could find nothing that did
not tend to strengthen it. That Monarch was de-
sirous of withholding from his Son the Revenues of
the Dutchy of Cornwall, but found he could not do
it. On the death of Henry Prince of Wales, the
L I •••• • ',IL VCU Lt.) ICS, Wit lIIS Charles I.—
When the King insisted that a second son was not
entitled to the Revenues of the Dutchy, in the same
manner as the first born sono the Privy Council,
however, decided in favour of Charles, to whom
livery of seisin was granted. By this it appeared,
that the eldest son became eo instante Duke of
Cornwall, and entitled to all the Rights and Reve-
nues appertaining thereto. James 1. was the only
King who resisted the Claim. lie could nut rind
whether Charles I. granted livery of seisin to his son,
or not. Chatles 11. had no issue. James 11. hav-
ing abdicated the Throne, he would draw no in_
fercnce from the conduit of that Monarch. Wil-
liam 111. had no issue, nor had Queen Anne : he
therefore now came. to the present Family. He
would just state to the House, that all the feudal
tenures•were abolished by the 1 ath of Charles
subsequent to which no livery of seisin had or
, could be granted. When George I. came to the
Throne, his Son, afterwards George 11. who was
thirty years old, was admitted so the possession of
the Dutchy. At the time George 11. came to the
Throne, his Son, Frederick Prince of Wales, was a
minor, but came of age the year afterwards. An
account, however, was rendered to him (and this
was a strong circumstaace in flmvour of the present
claim of the Prince of Wale's) of theeißevenues of the
Dutchy received by the Crown from the period of
the King's-accession, during a part of which rime
the Prince was a minor. His present Majesty suc-
ceeded to the Throne in 1760; 176 z the Prince
of Wales was born ; and he contended, that the
Prince, from the moment of his birth, became entitled
.40 the revenues and possessions of the Dutchy of Corn.
wall, without any Act of Parliament being nec • •• essary
to confer them. If there was any Aft necessary, the
Prince had been cruelly treated ; he was of opinion,
however, that none was necessary. The title of
the Prince of Wales was indeed completely recog-
nized by an Aft of the Sth of Geo. M. chap. z 6,
which enacted, that His Royal Highness then stood
seised of the Dutchy of Cornwall and the Possessions
thereof, and gave power to the Crown to grant
leases during the Prince's minority. He was at a
loss to comprehend how the Prince could be seised
of the Dutchy, without being entitled to the Re-
venues of it. As to a Charter of Livery, it must
now be considered as wholly unnecessary. He was
unable to anticipate a single objection to the claim
of the Prince. If His Majesty had in point of.faa
received these Revenues and refused to account for
them, the Prince of Wales would not have suffered
this question to be brought before the House ; but
• there was no question about that, as, if the subjea
were fully investigated, the House would find that
all the Revenues of the Dutch), received during the
Prince's minority, had, with -the exception of two
s small sums of 16,0001. and tz,oool. been paid into
the Treasury. This was not, therefore, a question
between the Prince of Wales and time King, but be-
tween :His Royal Highneas anti the Public; and a
Right Hon.. Friend of his, who held the oilice of
Chancellor of the Exchequer, had 'then stated to the
House, that if there existed any claim of time Prince
of -Wales !dative to this subject, that claim was

upon the Public. The fat was', that these iterenues
had been applied to the purposes of the Civil List.
If the claim of the Prince of Wales was such as he
had represented it, and he hoped he had not Ina&
vertently misrepresented it, (he spoke with the
utmost deference to the. House) he could not
bring himself to feel that the House would compel
the Prince to resort to a Court of Law to establish
that ClaiM which no candid man could deny, and
no honest man could resist. He would not believe
that the House would entrench itself in legal forms
to resist the Claims of the Heir Apparent to the
Throne. This Claim was not suggested at the de-
sire of the Prince of Wales; but originated in the
Throne itself. The chief motiveof His Royal High-
ness in bringing forward this Claim, was to stand
well with the Public, to prove that he had not been a
burden to the Public, and that whatever might appear
to have been the liberality and generosity of Parlia-
ment, he had not received the whole of what he was
entitled to. He was particularly desired by the
Prince of Wales to abstain from any thing like com-
plaint ; indeed the House could not have a greater
proof of the honourable condutt of the Prince, than
the manner in which he conformed to the At, by
which a part of his income was appropriated to the
payment of his Debts. He hoped he was not now
to be told that the Prince of Wales had entailed
these incumbrances on himself by his imprudence ;
if he was disposed to admit this, which he was not,
but if he was to admit it for a moment, he would
ask where was the man to be found, who united the
prudence and caution of age with the spirit and ge-
nerosity of youth ; or was such a charader, if it
was to be found, likely to he estimable ? Was it
not, on the_ other hand, a charader, from which
was too likely to arise every thing sordid and mean ?
If the House should agree to the appointment of a
Committee, the next business would he to take an
account of the monies 'received : he should say lit-
tle upon that subject at present, but he particular-
ly wished to state, that if a balance should be
found to be due to the Prince of Wales, His Royal
Highness would not receive a shilling of it, but
appropriate the whole to the payment of his debts.
He trusted, that upon all these grounds the House
would do justice to the Prince of Wales. He con-
cluded.by moving; " That a Committee should be
appointed to inquire what Sums of Money had been
received, and by whom, on account of the Reve-
nues of the Dutchy of Cornwall, from the period
of the Birth of the Prince of Wales till his at-
taining the age of 21 years, -and how the same
had been applied ; and also of the Sums advanced to
His Royal Highness to die z7th of June, 1795, in-
clusive."

Sir RALPH MILBANKE seconded the Mo-
tion. He had no other motive, he said, than to
see justice done, and he-wished a Committee to be
appointed in order that the subjea might be tho-
roughly investigated.
Mr. FULLER said, it appeared by the Journals
that Mr. HUMPHREY MORRIS, a Member of the
House, having been appointed Warden of the Stanna-
ries in 1763, a Motion was made for a new Writ ;
but 'which, after a debate, was reject ; it being
determined that the office was not a place under the
Crown. I • was to be inferred, therefore, that the
Prince of Wales was seised at that time of the
Dutchy of Cornwall.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said, in answer to what had been stated by the
Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, he had
only to observe, there were held under the Dutchy
of Lancaster, which was incontestibly under the
control of the King, several offices, tht appoint-
ment to which did not vacate the seat of a Mem-
ber of that House. But even if that point were
doubtful, he should consider it inconsistent with
his duty, as he understood it, to concur 'in the
Motion made by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman.
He certainly should say it would be matter of great
presumption in himself, as well as a waste of time
to that House, if he were to ask -for its indulgence
for many minutes. in the discussion of the legal
part of the subject now before the House. The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman who introduced it
had discharged his fundions most correctly, ex-
plained the case fully, had given to it all the
advantages of knowledge, of discrimination, and of
eloquence ; but he did not know how he could
give a stronger proof of the confidence he felt in
the motives and principles which actuated his
own conduel, than in rising now and delivering
his sentiments, after so clear a statement of the
case, and so able an address had been made by his
Hon. and Learned Friend, to the House. In many
parts of that speech, though there was much to ad-
mire, he must own that his Hon. and Learned Friend
did not convey conviction to his mind. He had cer-
tainly stared; with great ability and eloquence, the
right of the Prince of Wales to the Revenues of the
Dutchy of Cornwall, and lie had stated it, as at-
taching to the Prince from the moment of his birth,
in like manner as if he were of' full age; but whether
the right was so clear and indisputable, as the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman' had contended, there were
considerations which operated upon his judgment,
and rendered it impossible for him to assent to the
Motion now made. His Hon. and Learned Friend
had assumed the right of' the Prince of Wales to the
Revenues of the Dutchy of Cornwall from his birth,
but he meant to go into the Committee upon very
precise words, as they appeared in his Motion,
which was to inquire " under what authority, and
so forth," together with " a power to search for
Precedents," for the purpose of investigating the
grounds on which he rested the claims of the Prince
of Wales, as they might appear on the Journals of
Parliament :, he believed that to be one of the pur-
poses for which his Hon. and Learned Friend had
introduced the Motion. Then, without meaning
disrespect to any body, but with the freedom of
a Member of that House, he would ask: the
SPEAKER, and the House collectively, whether
such a Motion could be submitted to that House
consistently with any authorised Precedent what-
ever
? What did it amount to ? That the.
Committee should have the power of examining
the journals -of that House, for his Hon. and.
Learned Friend could not indeed expect the House- •
would enter on the ,second part of the subjett pre-
viouS to its disposing of the first, natnely, that
of taking any account of the Revenues of the

Botchy. His Hon. and Learned Friend proposed
that investigation of the Journals, which, he said,
would satisfy the Committee, and whose report on
ohat subject would satisfy the House of the pro-
priety of the claims of His Royal Highness ; and
after that investigation, his Hon. and Learned Friend
proposed that the House, being satisfied of the right,
should proceed to take an account of the Revenues
of the Dutchy; a combination of duties, iatended
to be imposed upon that House, never before in-
cluded in any motion that ever was adopted by that
House, or indeed, he believed, submitted to it.—
His Hon. and Learned Friend had gone through a
very ample field of, Precedents, in which he was
not disposed to follow him; nor, in his view of
the subjed, was it necessary, for, he thought his
Learned Friend had fallen into a fundamental errOr,
not from want of ability, but from riot having ap-
plied his talents to the subject in the way in which,
he conceived, it ought to be considered, and par-
ticularly according to the praCtice of the last two
centuries. His Hon. and Learned Friend contended,
that the effeta of the At of Charles the Second,
which he quoted, was to abolish Tenures, as he had
stated the case to apply to the claim of the Prince of
Wales to the Revenues of the Dutchy of Cornwall.
He did not think it right to assume much know_
ledge on the Subject, as far as it formed a legal ques-
tion, nor had he the least disposition for questioning •
the powers of his Learned Friend, to form a cor-
red opinion-upon that or any other subject worthy
his attention ; he had indeed great respect for the
opinion of his• Learned Friend, but whatever that
opinion was, there were others for whose opinion he
had also great respect, as he was bound to•- have,
fot none had greater talents, nor •any of greater ap:
plication, which opinion was contrary to that which
was expressed by his Learne'! Friend, the technical
expression of which was, that in this case of guar-
dianship in chivalry, the Guardian, while the Ward,
is declared to be seised, until application for release,
being in possession, has a right to the rents and pro-
fits belonging to the Ward. That the Guardirr
was entitled to the profits and revenues after seising,
and until livery is demanded, &c. This was ap_
plicable to the Case of Royal Highness the
Prince of Wales-. - There was no demand of livery
. made on his behalf, as Duke of Cornwall, during
his minority. -This he understoOd to be a point of
Law, on which opinions of the bighest authority
were adverse to this claim on the part of His Royal
Highness. .But he begged. the House. to, 1 unoerstand,
that he was stating these things with great
hii-
dence and reluctance as to part:of-the ol*ft tk
speech of his Learned Friend, natneiy, to settle
legal question. He was not orepared to oOve a de-
sided opinion upon it ;. it w as oot necessarY to
should ; it was enough tor him to know that doubts
were entertained upon this matter, by those who
were, from the course of their education and habits
of lite, much better qualified than lie could pretend
to he to form an opinion on it :oknowing that these
doubts were entertained, he thought it improper to
take the step now recommended to the House, for
until it was found, that fromthe particular 'oartire,,
of this case, or from sonic other cause, legal redress.
out of that House was unattainable, that .this was
demonstrated by attempts being made in vain to
obtain it, he should think the House of Commons.
would be going out °fits proper course, by entering.
on the investigation of the subject. He did not presume
to state what these means for legal redress might be,
but this he knew, some of the best informed men,
and the wisest, were of opinion that a Petition of
Right was the Proceeding proper to be adopted in
this case. His Learned Friend's second head of
observations upon this subjeCt, was one on which
a few words ought to be bestowed, and here the
question was, Whether the Public had received the
Revenues and Profits of the Dutchy of Cornwall ?
This was a part of the case which had about it
considerable delicacy. Here he would ask, Where
was the proof that any part of the Revenue- of the
Dutchy of Cornwall had been direttly applied to
the service of the Public ? He would ask, whether
the proof was to be found in the Journals of Par-
liament ? Or, whether in the Journals of Parliament
any trace was to he found of any such appropria-
tion
? He knew that during the minority of
the Prince of Wales, sums of money arising
from the Revenues of the Dutchy of Cornwall,
had been voted to be applied to the purposes
of the Civil List, but that 94.,0001. of this property
came under the head of Special Services. The House
would recollect what the circumstances were which
attended this transadion, and they would be fully
aware, that it did not always follow that a sum in-
tended to be applied for Special Service, could be
said to be actually for the Public Service. • He was
entitled to call on Gentlemen who contended, that
this claim was a claim upon the Public, io . conse-
Duence of the application of the Revenues of the
utchy of Cornwall to the use of the Public, to
shew from Documents, by which alone that asser-
tion could be proved, how and when that applica-
tion of that Revenue took place ? His Hon. aod
Learned Friend had stated a wish, on the part of His
Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, to give satis-
faCtion to the Public. Whoever had the happiness
to be acquainted with His Royal Highness, must be
well aware of the truth of that assertion. It was
a pleasure to the Public to refled, that such senti-
ments were entertained by that illustrious Prince—
It must give satisfaction to every good man, that. His
Royal Highness had an anxiety to stand well in the
opinion of the Public—Any man who could enter-
tain a contrary feeling or a different wish, must be
void of honour, dead to every generous impression,
and ought to be branded as a monster, and hold up to
the scorn of the Public—But this was not mere
matter of personal anxiety, even in His Royal High-
ness, manly and virtuous as that feeling was ; that
the Prince of Wales should stand well in the opinion
and affection of the Public, was a matter in which the
Public itself was interested. Ir was a deep stake of
the Public, that His Royal Highness Should fill that
place in the public esteem ; and that every branch
of the Royal Family should be in the same situa-
tion in that particular, was also interesting to us
all. - That His Royal Highness had that wish, was
proved to the House by the manner in which the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman had introduced toe
subject for its discussion : but the Hon. and Learn.
ed Gentleman had stated, that if this matter was
fully iavestigated, it would appear, that when the ,

SUMS which His Royal Highness had received:iieri:
put in opposition to what he was entitled to
Royal Highness had not been the occasion of "'llt
burthen to the Public. However that point 11.4
stand in reality, he was confident, in all the sum'
which had been voted for Royal Highnesis7;
and for every branch of tho Royal Family, the
House of Commons had tided with the sense the/
felt of the respect which was due .on the one 110°2
and the care and frugality -on the other—respea
most unfeigned for every branch of the Royal Fa-
mily, and care and frugality as the guardians of
615
public purse. Now, as to the state of Accounts in
particUlar, as they applied to Sums voted, he had oe-
cnoonn,in to
statingi the circumstances beforelaytleoarcumtlsietal;ilc7s of
ne
set:acv
foirmil eLri°ste;
c
but he could nor consent to the course of proceeding:
proposed by the motion-now before the House; an°
1;e called on the House to do him the justice to be-
lieve, that he had but one object in view
buPci°n
this occasion, and he hoped he should never a'
don it on any, and that was, to arrive at truth.''
The motion was of two parts : that of deciding
upon the cplestion of right, and of taking the ae;
count. Upon the subjed of the right, he bad state°
to
c
what occurred to him; by. way of answer
the application to the House. He believed le
to be by means of. a Petition of Right• Ile musoa
however not be understood to recommend "'at' lee
any other proceeding. As to the Statement His
Account, it appeared that the sums issued f°
~r
Royal Highness the Prince of Wales out of the Irv-
, List, were monies which arose out of a fixed a,"°
ante, and which it was unnecessary to trouble the.ef
House with the detail of; there was an aggreglevae
123,4811. there was besides an extraordinary "11-'
ance of so,esole a further sum between the Frj;ia,
of Wales and his Royal Brother Prince Frederic,/
Duke of York, a sum of 32,00'01. the
which that fell to the share of the Prince of Wad;
was, he believed more than a moiety,' h'l-r
amount of the advances in the year 17813:, the
• 211,3901. Now deduding 16,c001. of the
gregate, more than a moiety, alth°°B43
rlcal
Duke of Yotk most probably bad .a goo'
less, there would • then have been receive" .by
ite-Ptince• of Wales-atthe d • 1 I°' ;,ertot. be af-iu
was 011-
proprtile:
year 1783, Upwards of 195,0001. Titis a' fill
cable only to twelve years of the nonage '°`..ettes
Royal Highness the Prince of Wales. The ftev) have
of the Dutchy, from - Q aid t°
~,lien
/2 'to I 7 o3,,are 4- • vat,
been 233,0001. ; so that -if 38,0061. were 3i ltvr-
durir!g the nine first years of-,th s e Prince'. 0:11'61i
vnen
the whole stun would be accounted for.
atelni
thee Prince of Wales came of- age, there was 3 foi
made to- hitn out of: the Civil List, of there_
h:s. Revenue,and• which was received by -11's
Highness until the yea'r'..t7K7 that peri°e`eesa
augmentation Of the Revenue;-of
took place oat of the'civil List, which was tog
raised to oceoool. per acnum.. The Whoias
from that period to the eth of. lantiaiya 18Oz'a the
86 ;,0001. The whole' 'sum advanced Oil esaf
•
Liv 11 List to the. Prinea of Wales, since
Pilo
age,• kt
Nvit, -,725.0001. Out of 'which the_r.-I.lee' he.
be particular items dededed, the detail of w°,/ sten
should-not enter upon at present—such
R 1 • :-
laid dy aruilnuEdtilogrni,:Cillleastr3ll.:teocnierc house,ums
t .arid s(t)ifriti eh
co
,tilifiletrua I.;:iahe •
talents that were made, the particulars °I" w
Butwere laid minutely before Parlianient 1795i1is
made on the on es uilipaonsdi,ngal nt e ilces
'high wteirle
revenues 011
00
Dutchy of Cornwall taken on the other, wit,laty
• touching the question of right, he doubre,d,:e it
much the accuracy of the calculation by w",""d be
was found that a considerable balance, wut'a not
in favour of the Prince of Wales. . cO, to
but be matter of joy to the House of Coann°oeilia
hear from authority so unquestionable as thaftrward
Hon. and Learned Friend who brought °tended
this Motion, that His Royal Highoesa into the
to appropriate any thing he might receive' wore
payment of his Debts. It was a selitintlej; it
thy of the virtue from which it orign're, 003
must give every man in England pleaVod
to none more than the person wh° std"
the honour-of making the observation. Great
tion of Heir Apparent of the Crown .00,045
Britain was so high and so onerous, that itoil,eo Ile
required more than was allowed to hir for the
i
came of age. It was much to be .vvis.ne": Royal
sake of the feeling and comfort of His,,d tir°l3
Highness the Prince of Wales, and ioue'eeeld be
public grounds it was desirable, that he s"-- eans
put in possession, as soon as possible, °I -tbecanelonee.
which were granted by Parliament for his t.eto the
that he should be as soon as oossbie Putt:be de-
tail possession of those means. It was, ti
sired by the Public, that every branch °I. °e 'ta 'he,
Family should be supported with splendourcte..; aou
Public was interested in that very aOPeara'i t Clete
however the oddity of the expression Wig ense
a smile, he was of Opinion, there wus'fnucl'osfli;rds
what was said once at the Bar of the Ho°' baancii-
by Sir F. Norton, when' e said; that all tile witit
es of the Royal Family should be suPP`irtee",olal
a degree of splendour peculiar totiicleurnou s.self. ...--.
%-e'_ r
Orot to
their aelitience ought to be a consp
be
the cap of State ; was a feeling r°Pe lo ur
ea
cherished, by a Statesman, for respett to 010
ei l
"
was founded in the nature of 53 f
it l
from a feeling and conviction the truthiveerion
and here, he could not refrain from an °llse. '11'55
• e
that occurred to him, and which arose f
•and scandalous misrepresentation on the subi
c of 111E5.
-Debts of His Royal Hightiese, eonsequec'ivii Li t
having brought forward the ,Abject of the oioly "00
A misrepresentation that wok place, ce,').,it past °e
in that House, but out of it. 'Nothing t'
that occasion could justify the expressio"i ;,I'e
of on that subjed, by way of refiettion.°,', taarl'el
would say again, it was. 'his earnes,rit 51-111:a
payment of the Debts of His Roe3l w
isteo ,be
be accelerated as much as possible, cons _id:
the measures adopted by Parliament f°rllsitae,,tl;lo,
House would 'therefore perceive, w` °P) j
d any ?Ire
siderabie reludanee that he offe, re and .1
tion to a measure that was io tench:,.,f
,edesl'•
to have for its oleied, the attaincnt9t of
vi°eJt
—an end--„ to lie could not assent to • t situe t
dit healze
before the House. He koe‘.y it mG to
a Guardian,- or a Father, is not at . bis
use of what tray be Taft. to his COn datrlengio.ture "1'
rity, but that he is to elTly it to I'l

education of the infant during his minority, and ac.
?punt to him, when he came of age : but consider-
tng the circumstances which attended the creation
°el the Prince of Wales for the first time Duke of
which was that of Edward the Black
Prince, he doubted very much, or, rather, he
thought it hardly possible to conceive, that it was
then intended the whole Revenue of the Dutchy of
Cornwall should be appropriated by the Duke of it,
and yet that the King should have all the charge of the
inaintenance of such Prince during his minority. He
pas not saying the claim was unfounded ; if it
Was a claim fit to he made, it was fit to be adopt-
ed, and .ought to be so without delay. But a
40oht was entertained on the subject—in the year
1.783, when the Prince of Wales came of age, there
Was much difference of opinion on the subject of
the title of His Royal Highness, as now insisted
'n ; and it was matter of surprize that the claims,
as they were now stated, had so long escaped
the vigilance of so many able men as .had from
time to time their attention so particularly called
hithis subjeft. He was extremely sorry that
s Hon. and Learned Friend, in a discussion
i'riarked by ingeniousness in general, should have
introduced such words as these, that this was a
cl,aim On the part of HiS.Royal Highness, which
4" candid man would deny, nor 'any honest man
in. He did not claim the merit of baying:
.le: extraordinary. candour, but he thought there
ns no want of candour in his saying what he
-w
tel He did not know whether; in point of
tiwel• the Prince of - Wales was as much en..
fro to the Revenues _of the Dutchy, of Cornwall
11" his birth, as any heir to an estate ; but this
knew, there was great weight of opinitio against
at proposition, and where was the want of` can-
"qr. ie saying so ? His Learned and Hon. Friend
fid also, that no honest man could resist this
ader the circumstances of this case, he owned this
s not the•sort of language he expeCted to hear
from Learned and Hon. Friend;
.but he did not
mean the word in the most rigid sense which might
he attached to it, nor had be any idea that
e fell under this description, in the' 'mind 'of' his
; ;earned Friend. He .did. not think he shouldebe
':stifled, under the present circumstances, inert-
cilintnending to the' House, the adoption of' SUCh.a
a°ti"• He was not master of the legal point; tO
te(le upon it. There was one general objeCtion,
eitt
iet its blending, ;two objects, in .themselves na-
tte4t:lY distinct,. the question of right and the clues:,
the °if account. But his leading objeetion was
that Wherever there was a wrong •in this
i trY there must be some redress. Such a point,
.11 Li _
S opinion, ought not to be entertained in that
soise. If it had appeared in goof that no appli-
ul°ll for redress (supposing the 'wrong to .exist,)
he -made elsewhere, or had..been mode else-
ere in Vain, it would 'then be Mireilne enough to :T.,
pl
t° tii;tt House : but in
.the, preseut, posture of
"kc'lse, he was taking. that cohrse, Nvhich the idea
ti "at, (This duty prescribed to him, by iippOsing-this
nut,inn• as one which did not, at present, come under
ee legitimate fur:a:ons .of that House. He thought
a-,7l"i'T,‘ but absolute necessity' could justify its
'°eiloce He was. unwilling' to negative such a
etnposirion as because it might be
.4-wide a
Question elsewhere ; but for the reasons he had as-
rSled Jrea:iy, could not support it. He would
rneee the previous- question ; hut.' he beggederve to conclude by moving,. 'tThat the other
ders of he Day .be now read."'
la Mr. MANNERS SUTTON rose to explain.
t: said,. he was exceedingly anxious not
.to appear
le,R've any uneasiness to any one by what he said,
th.of all to his Right Hon. Friend ; rtor aid- he
o at he said could have the bearing. his Right
totrh _''friend seemed to_giv.e it—What he.intended
l'ao'4' was this, that if
_he had correctly stated the
thittse'aild the Law of the case Was what he sub-
eanai-tit' it to be, then the conclusion was, that no
no hone nl
m wan an ould deny
it. the justice of the claim, and
'• would resist
The
question r
being.put,
. •
and • ."-RSKIIVE rose to support .the Motion,
able which he did with great ability and at consider-
tvhielee"Ph, and maintained, that the length of time
the
-es." lull elapsed from the origin of the Grant to
alise„rresent period, and the subjet not having been
Te,s'ed, was no answer to the present claim.--
was if the Law was clear, which he, contended it.
so e' in favour of the Prince, the House would be
thisar from
going out of 'its course in entertaining
kur Motion, that it would be pursuing its due
,se and he maintained, that the only way to
fer tw whether the matter was so or not, was to re.
e, ter to a Committee ; if, upon' the Report of that
if ),;"nlittee, there was a doubt upon the,poinr, or
retir°doubt, that there was another legal course for
say
ses' it would be time enough for'
the House to
letut9, and to refuse proceeding any further; but this ,
tetedi°4 only,called. for an Inquiry.: He then.. en.
tr •historicllly into the, Ads of Parliament,.
• oft
.13 lackt te time of the grant of Edward 111. to the
the, Prince, downwards.. He maintained, that by •
kinotatute of King HenrylTl: it appeared, that the.
1144 hirneelf, at that time, as well as the Parliament,.
kverstood the right of the-Prince of Wales to the
tintef.nnes of the Dutchy tole. entire. This was evi-
the p r.om the King coming to his Parliament, when
of et
an iee was only two years of age, to. take some
of
kin aY• It was evident again, by the Petition
Right, two years afterwards presented to the'
.tvsgr in Parliament, and when the
whole Revenue
eitenestoredlo the Prince. Thii was a full recog-
zo'n of the claim, by a Parliament, and by a
warch, Whose interest and disposition had been'
nut
an to be hostile to the claim—and all. this with-
periodwhisper to the contrary, down to the latest
be,,_ It was indeed true; that when Charles I.
he•
-nae Prince of Wales, it was a question whether'
tiww,,isaentitled; but that was resisted purely upon
poithat he was not Filius Primogenitus. The
eke' Bete to he considered were
chiefly two—
eether
Leese . •••
Praariloenin:eariltlitiiry Documents were woe.
Y of conside
there w if they were—whether.
4„,ke
tt Ilse upon the matter, sufficient doubt to
" House hesitate upon it, and leave it to the
..lou of another tribunal ? 'Upon the first part,
tiny contended, that the matter
consider:it ion was abundantly wor-
Iv.. of ;
and up
ttentiy on the second, that it
,
ate
c:ear to call upon the House to de-
‘T°ll it. He then went through the History

Livery of Seisin, and of ?enures, deign to the
'tithe of the t zth of Charles the SeCond, when they
•were abolished by purchase from -the Crown', &c.
From that day to the present hour, the Prince of
Wales had do Livery, that was, Deli Very orthe'
Dutchy of Cornwall.--Oeorge the Second, when
Prince of Wales, had no Livery of
.Seisin.—Prince
Frederick had none-His present Majesty had none.
The present Prince of Wales had none. In fat, the
thing was obsolete. The ground on which he sup-
ported this claim on the part of His. Royal Highness
the Prince of Wales was, not that this was a doubt-
; ful question upon a point of Law, but such as had
been recognized from age to age, and confirmed by
Ads of Parliament ; but the reason why this ap_
. plication was made, was that a Petition of Right
• had been prepared, but there was• a difficulty of
bringing it to a legal determination. Somewhere
it was checked, and did not go on. The best en-
deavours were made, and yet there never had been
, an opportunity of having it determined either by
the Chancellor, or the Judges ; upon these grounds
he hoped the House Would entertain the Itaquiry.
On the' subjea of taking-the accOtint, he Would say
nothing further, than that he was glad- to hear it
stated, that in that event. His Royal: Highness had
. not been any burthen on the Public.
The MASTER of the ROLLS said, it:was very
. natural that the Prince of
.Wales should
.wish to be
well in the public opinion ; but still a Proposition,
that called upon the House to exercise judicial func_
tions, ought to be loUked upon with a very jealous
eve, and no feelings ought to, influence 'their deci--
sion. It was true, that' in the year 1795 he ex-
pressed considerable doubt upon the subject ; but it
was equally true, that he had not then much consi-
dered it. An Hon. Gentleman said at that time, that
the question was as•clear as it was now asserted to
be ; but at that period, when a Clause, was pro-
posed. in the Bill then before the' Hotise, to enable
the Prince of Wales to institute certain. suits relit.,
true to those Claims which were now, brought for-
ward, , the I4ouse would not meddle with the
subject, and left it to he decided in a Court of jus-
tice, This was a Claim of a Right of Property,
and. 'was
.that House the place where legal claims
were to be asserted anddiscussed ? His Hon. and
Learned• Friend had thought it sufficient to state the
right, and call for a Committee to decide upon it,
asserting it to_be a very clear case ; but the House
was todecide whether it was a clear case or not; in
the first instancei and sniely that 'House was not to
be called uptin to trench so far -uptin the province of
a Court of justice; for though it Was admitted that
in a doUbtf.ul case they ought not to interfere, yet
it must be pretty eVideni, that having once taken
cognizance of a case, whether cleat or doubtfUl,
they would not. afterwards decide against them-
selves. Those who had supported the Question had
taken great pains to prove, that the Dutchy of
Cornwall' vested in: the 'Prince of-Wales from the
moment of hi's birth---no one ever ddubted it. They
had stated that the Dutchrfrequently became vested
in Pririces of \Vales at a very early age, and here
arose one, of 'his doubts upon the subject. A Prince
or Wales at -twc;Nears -of age, it was evident was
incapable of administering his revenues, the-King.
Must administer them and appoint Officers for that
porposelpf necessity. The question :was, whether-the
King administering these ReVenues was subject to
controul I it was agreed by those who contended
that the King was not accountable, that there was
po person competent to, take the account and judge
of the expenditure. He should give no opinion
upon the subjet% he merely contended that the
House had no authority to decide. The question .
was exactly the same, if it was made a question
between the PrinceS of Wales and the Public ; as,. if n
the King had no right,- the Public "could have o
right to dispose of. them. They were not assured
that a Court of Justice would not grant a remedy in
this case, and even if a Court of Justice could
afford no remedy, it was no ground for that'House ,
taking upon itself the decision, it was merely a
ground-for its removing the obstruction which pre-
vented a proper remedy from being‘ administered.
Fe wished to give no Opinion relative to:the rights
of the Prince of Wales, but merely to urge that it
did not belong to-that House to decide-the Question.
FOX said, he did not conceive that this was
a question, of Law, but a mere question of Fart ; he
was however sorry that the Motion was so worded,
that it could in any degree, he a matter of doubt
,What was its objet. This was not, in his opinion,
a mere question of Law, nor did the Motion call
upon the House to assume a judicial power, because
the Prince appeared in the situation of a Public Credi-
tor, calling upon. the House to decide upon a question
of faCt, and the result of that determination would not
be a judicial decision,_but a Legislative provision.
The present case was not a common .case between
a Guardian and his Ward, because in such a case,
the Guardian was responsible' to his Ward, and
could be called upon to account for the profits of his
•Ward's income; hut that could not be done in the
• case of the King and the Prince of Wales, because
the Right Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said,
that in the case of the King no such account could
be called for. •It had been said, that the Prince
had other modes of 4edress, in the Courts of Law ;
but 'the Learned Gentleman who had stated that His
Royal Highness had such a remedy, had not pointed
out what that remedy was, or how it was to be
prosecuted. Of all the different cases which .had
been quoted upon this occasion, that of Frederick
Prince of Wales appeared to be the most decisive
,upon the question, because when he attained the
age of maturity, he was paid the revenues of the
.Dutchy of Cornwall, which had been received in
his minority. Of the right of the Prince, there
did not appear to be any sarious. doubt, .but no
Gentleman had distinctly stated that His Royal
Highness had any legal means' of 'enforcing that
right ; he did not mean to say, that in every,pri-
vane case, where an individual had' a right
which the law did not afford him the means
of substantiating, that therefore he had a right to
apply to Parliament for redress ;. hut in such a
.case as the present, in which the Public was one
of the Parties, it was• a --fit case for the inter-
Terence of Parliament., This case appeared to him
to be one of 'peculiar hardship upon the Prince,
for he I had two. Parties against- him on this occa-
sion, viz. the King and the Public.. With respect

to ihe tottier, it had been stated frOrn high Legal
Authority, that the King could not be called upon
to render any account of the Revenues of the Dutchy
of Cornwall ; and as to the latter, it was now
Proposed That the claim of the Prince should not
he even taken -into consideration, so • that the
Prince would be left entirely without remedy: The
Chancellor of the Exchequer had said, that part of the
Revenues of the Dutchy of Cornwall had been ap.
plied, not to the pub')c service, but -to especial
service, the nature of which could not be explain-
ed. Now it certainly must be matter. of great.con-
solation to the Prince, to be told that his Revenue
had been applied, not to the service of the Pub-
lic, hut that it had been applied to purposes of
which no account could be given. As to the asser-
tion, that the House would not interfere to decide
upon a legal question, he was sure the Chancellor

of the EXchequev, who was so well acquainted
with the prodeednigS of that House, would nor
_

Assert that the House had never taken upon itself
to give an opinion upon legal questions ; they had
'done it in many instances ; -it was not necessary to
'cite them all.; he need only mention the opinions
given by the House upon the question of ,General
Warrants and the' seizure of-papers. Perhaps when
that assertion was nude, it was only meant, t.hat the
House would not give a legal decision upon private
:cases; but it was rather singular to call this a
private case, in which the parties were the King,
the Prince of Wales, and the Public. It had been
tai.!, that HiS Majesty had a right to appropriate the
revenues of the Dutchy of Cornwall to the education
andfmaintenance of the Prince during his minority,
but Ile could. riot entirely agree in that proposition ;
His Majesty's second son, the Duke of York, had
succeeded to the Bishopric of Osnaburgh. when he
was very young, but the-Revenues of that Bishopric
had nor been applied CO his maintenance during his
minority, but were laid out in purchasing 'con-
' siderable estates for him in this Country. Upon
the whole, he was decidedly of opinion that -the
House ought not to ,concur in the Motion for
going into the Orders of the Day, because: they
ought to decide the'questiOn one way or the other,
either by admitting, or negativing the' Prince's-
claim, or by making some Legislative provision
upon the subject. With regard to_the 'sct_off
which had been stated, of the right of applying
this money 'for the Prince's support and education
during-his minority, - that could not come into dis.
cussion, in the present stage of • the question,
though he was prepared to give his opinion that
nu such set-off could be made. . •

.The CHANCELLOR—of the EXCHEQUER
explained with regard to the application of the
Revenues of the Dutchy of Cornwall, to what
was called especial service ; from the ohscure man.
net in which these Accounts were kept before Mr.
Burke's-Bill, it was• impossible to state distindly
all the purposes for which the money was applied.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL said, that if the
Question was, whether the Prince was, or was not,
enabled to keep up the proper splendour of his rank,
it would be a proper subject for Parliamentary con-
sideta. tion,; but the subject now before. the House,
Was a Mere question of right, and in that point of
view, he opposed. the. Motion. If that right which
was now contended for, existed in the Prince of
Whies., he was sure that right would have been
Stated before, particularly when the Prince came of
age, and his Establishment was made. He was
glad; that the 'question was now brought to a fair
issue,-. viz. Whether the King had a right to apply
the Revenues of the .Dutchy- of Cornwall to the
maintenance of the Prince during his minori-
-ty ? It appeared by the original Charter of Ed-
ward 111, that the Dutchy was granted to the
Prince for that very express purpose ; arid now
it was contended, that instead of being applied
to • the maintenance of the Prince during his mi-
nority, it was to form an accumulating fund, to be
paid'to him on his.coming of age. He defied any
man of common sense, whether Lawyer or not, to
look at the Charier by -which this Dutchy was
granted to the Prince of Wales, and say that that
was the fair construction of .that Charter. The
Dutchy was vested in the Crown in. the reign of
Edward I. ; -from him it came to Edward:lll. who
gave it to the. Black Prince as an appanage to His
Royal Highness for his support, instead of main-
taining him out of his other revenues. That this
was the real intention of this grant, appeared from
the construdion which was very soon after put
upon it by the Parliament of the Country. By the
33d of Henry VIII. the revenue of the Dutchy was
given to the Crown, with certain reservations, for •
the maintenance of the Prince of Wales, and when
the Prince was of age to support himself, the
revenues were to revert to him.—[Mr. ERSKINE
said across the House, that that Aut was soon
after repealed.]—lt mattered not whether it was
repealed or not, becauSe the passing of that Ad
had shewn the sense in which Parliament had con-
sidered it. The Ad was undoubtedly repealed,
but Gentlemen must recoiled (and particularly the
Gentleman opposite to hiai, who seemed particular-
ly versed in the history of the troublesome 'periods
of our History) that the repeal was at the time
when the Duke of York had thrown off his alle
giance, and was endeavouring to•subvert the Royal
AUthority. The :ATTORNEY GENERAL then •en-
tered into a most able investigation of the Law
Upon the subjea, and concluded with contending,
.that even admitting the Prince had a claim, which
he denied, still, that the money which had been
advanced to the Prince during his minority, more
than equalled the Revenues of the Dutchy during
that period. •
Mr. Fox explained. . - •

Mr. TIERNEY considered this not as a question
of Law, but merely as a creditor asking his debtor
whether he would pay him the debt which he owed
him. It would be disgracefUl in an individual to
say to a person who made a claim upon him, and
who only asked permission to state the nature of his
de nand, to say, " No, I wild not hear you—seek
your remedy at. Law: ".—and therefore he thought
it would not be right in the House, of Commons to
refuse to hear the proofs in support of this claim.
- Lard HAWKESBURY said, that if this . was a
proper question for the consideration of the House,
the only proper way would be, to move.for a Com-
mittee to examine Precedents. It had been saki,
that this was a mere question of Fatl, and not of

but he coritendea that the Fitleition of ir„a
Could not arise until the • point Of Law had .beentlO:
tertnined; He did not mean, it, enter into ah
amination of the legal question;" but
,it appeared
him, upoo considering the original Charter, a-nd the
Ads of Parliament, which had been alluded to; that
•the Dutchy had been granted for the triainteriance
the Prince of Wales, and that consegtiently , the,
money so applied had been properly applied:. Upon
the whole, thelnore he considered the question the
more he was satisfied it was one that the Hotte.
could not interfere in, in the manner now propooe&
Mt; SHERIDAN supported the Motion; in, A.
speech of
.some length, in which he principally re-
plied to the ATTORNEY GENERAL, and contendedi.
that the Hon. Gentleman .was inaccurate in his ob-
servations upon the . two Actil that passed in the
Reign of Henry Vi., He alluded to the itiode iii
which the Prince's Delfts had been paid, and saidi
that a, deduCtion of io per tent. had been made froai
the demands of the Creditors.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
in eNplanation, said, that an option was left to the
Creditors, whether they would take a debenture for
tool. bearing 3 per cent. or for 90!. bearing S per.
cent. therefore the Hon. Gentleman was not corral
in saving" that to per cent. had been taken off.

---
Mr. JEFFRRY S (of Coventry) said, the senti.:
merit expressed by the Hon. Mover on the part of
the Prince of Wales, that His Royal Highness
wished for justice to himself, merely to enable hint
to do justice to others, was perfettly consistent with
every part of His Royal Highness's conduct
wards his Creditors. He said, he was, he be_
lieved, the principal Credit6r of His Royal High..
tress ; but he spoke, he was confident he spoke the
sentiments of the Creditors at large.' In answer to
rlie assertion of the Chancellor .of the Exchequer,
that to per Cent, was not taken off by compulsion,
'he said, that when it was proposed to hint, he,
was told, he might have redress
,by appealing to
the verdid of a jury—he had obtained a verdia for
a sum within a trifle of his claim' , and the to per
Cent.tvits•thep taken off, and the remaining balance
paid in Debentures,
,bearing a farther discount of
zoi. per cent. He said he certainly had a choice
to avoid the deduaion
,of zol.
,per cent. but it
was by taking Debentures bearing an interest of
only .instead of 51. per cent. payable in eight
years.i He said, he was forced to comply, the
Commissioners refusing to give him any part in
relief, and had he, not complied, he
,should cer-
tainly have been immediately arrested by his
own Creditors.—[Here the Hon: .Gentleman was
called•to. Order, for going into a_ discussion upon.
private affiirs.]—H6 should not have mentioned
his oWn situation had the deduOidos not been re-
ferred to by the CHANCELLOR of the Exc.' EQUF ttf.
his only wish being to do justice to the honourable
feelings of the Prince towards his Creditors.

T 11; SOLICITOR GENERAL opposed the original
Motion.

Mr. TY RIVIIITT said, that nothing was farther
from the intention of the Prince of W,des, than to.
enter into any thing like a contest with the King
upon this point.- His Royal Highness had, by the
advice of several Learned Gentlemen whom he con-
sulted, sent a Petition of Right in 1796 to the
Lord Chancellor, to be presented to the King, but
the Lord Chancellor said, lie did not conceive it to
be his duty to present that Petition, and in fa& it
had never yet been presented,
Colonel GROSVENOR and Mr. JonrtsroN said a
few words against the original Motion.
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT delivered his senti,
ments upon the subjea with a considerable degree of
warmth the course of his observations he as.
serted, the Prince's claims were treated in a dis-
graceful manner—(Agreat cry of" Order! Order!
Chair! Chair !")—upon which
The SPE/IIi:ER interfered, and observed, that
it was not permitted to any Member td consider
that House as treating any branch 'of the .12.6yal
Family in a degraded manner.
Sir FRANCIS .BURDETT explained, that he
did not expressly mean that, but alluded to the
effet produced by the eloquence, perhaps, of the
Right Hon. Gentleman : his opinion still was, that
the application of the Prince was treated in an un.
worthy manner. He then adverted to what he
called, the misapplication of the Public Money by
Ministers, such as their making Loan, from it
without the consent, or even the knowledge of Par-
liament. The other branches of the Royal Family
were the ()Weds of this bounty; and he knew ,not
how much farther. this bounty might have extend-
ed. In his opinion, the Prince should be made
fierfeEtly independent of any Administration. When
Pensions were granted so liberally, and the French
Noblesse, Clergy, and others splendidly supported,
surely the Prince's claims ought to be allowed. He
knew not of what stuff chat man's conscience was
made who, under such circumstances, refused.rhe
Prince's claims. The Heir Apparent, if splendour
was constitutionally held to be necessary for the
Crown, ought surely to be invested with a degree
of it. On the contrary, he thought him the' worst
used man in the Country.—[About this part of the
lion. Member's Speech; the cry for-the Question ,was
loud and generalj—on which, he said, he was.sorry
.to observe the impatience of the House. on the occa-
sion ; but as the case stood, he had"felt it necessary
to make these observations.

Mr. ELLIS begged to trouble the House with a
few words, to which he was induced by what fell
from the Hon. Baronet, of whose lan4uage he spoke
in strong terms of disapprobation. }or his part, he
deprecated whateVer brought burthens on the Peo-
ple as much as any man could do; and as to the
present Question, he conceived it to be one of that
kind of right, which that souse had nothing to do
with—Such was his sincere opinion. He did not
often trouble the House. The Questiou had been
brought on four times : he hoped the present would
be the last, and under these impressions he would
give his vote.
Lord TEMPLE said, he shotild have given a si.
lent vote, were it not for what had fallen from the
Hon. Baronet, which he thought made 'it necessary
for every independent man in that House to state his
reasons for the vote be should give—LA long and
general laugh.l—His Lordship then proceeded wa
assert the purity and 'independence of his pariia,
limitary condua, which, he said, was not in the