The Sun.
London, England, 1818-05-16 00:00:00

DUKE OF KENT.

The House baying gone into a Committee upon
the Prince Regent's Message,
Lord CASTLEREAGH said, that in calling the
at-
tention of the Committee to the consideration of
a proposed grant on the intended marriage of a
member of the Royal Family, he would abstain
from the introduction of any abstract topics, or
the general grounds upon which such grants were
made. These principles had been already so tho•
roughly examined and defined, that it kvas merely
necessary for him to make a particular applica-
tion of them. Acting on the ground that a grant
of this nature should necessarily accompany a ma-
trimonial alliance of every branch of the Royal
Family, Parliament had already given to the Duke
of Cambridge an addition of 6,0001. a year on his
marriage. He trusted that the House would agree
with him that the Duke of Kent was entitled to a
similar allowance. With respect to the marriage
of his Royal Highness there could be but one
feeling. The individual with whom the alliance
was sought was a branch of an illustrious family
already known to the country. Nor would the
House be disposed to act-withllliberality, when it
was. remembered that the income of the illus-
trious Lady would suffer a considerable diminution
by her marriage. It would be also necessary to
bring to the recollection of the House that his
Royal Highness the Duke of Kent was placed in
a peculiar situation. Until he had attained the
age of 32, he did not come to the enjoyment of
the income usually appropriated to the ,male
branches of the Royal Family at a much earlier
period of life. The offices which. he held had
been quite insufficient to support the necessary
dignity and splendour of his rank. His Royal
Highness was, therefore, compelled to contract
debts, to the discharge of which he had assigned
the greater part of his annuity. His Lordship
concluded by hoping that the Committee would
cordially agree to his proposition, " That an
nual sum not exceeding 6000/. be granted as a
provision for his Royal Highness the Duke of
Kent, on his marriage."
Mr. Cu RWEN differed with the Noble Lord on
several points. He acknowledged no principle
that pledged him to make such allowance on the
marriage of any branch of the Royal Family. He
could not consent that 60001. a year should be
added to the burdens of an oppressed country, for
the purpose of relieving wants that could be so
properly supplied from another quarter. Her
Majesty was not only amply enabled to relieve
the embarrassments of her family, but could also
maintain them with facility in all the splendour
and dignity due to their rank. Her purse had
been overburthened, and that house had not paid
sufficient attention to the subject. Parliament
had done its duty when the grants to the other
Royal Personages came to be considered some
time ago. They could no longer come before
that House, praying that their embarrassments
may be relieved. He fully appreciated the ami-
able qualities of the Duke of Kent, at the same
time his duty lay before him, which he could not
shrink from. He gave his opposition to the mo-
tion.

Sir R. HERON said, that the Royal personage,
whose circumstances were then under considera-
tion, bad been known to the House by his bene-
volence and by the disinterested zeal with which
be attached himself to many objects of benefit
and improvement to the country. But if it were
intended to invest him with such a considerable
annuity, he would wish to see it substituted for
those expenses that were supporting extrava-
gance and useless parade: The Duke of Cam-
bridge was by no means a precedent fur the con-
sideration of the House. The grant to that Royal
personage had been most objectionable. The
income which be enjoyed from Hanover was con-
siderable, and should have been a sufficient reason
for withholding any further addition to his an-
nuity. It was said that his emoluments from,
Hanover were but temporary ; but was it not
time enough to bestow a grant when these'
sources of revenue were lost to him ? He
should vote against the motion:
Mr. BROUGHAM rose, and observed, that if the
personal qualities and the private condition of

the Duke of Kent were alone to be considered by
the Committee, the question would he easily de-
cided. In the practice of those virtues, that adorn
private life none was more exemplary. He rea-
dily gave the support of his great influence to
every Institution of charity and benevolence.—
But these were points entirely distinct from the
proper views to be taken on the subject. It bad
been said,. that this matrimonial engagement had
been entered into for the purpose of securing a
succession to the Throne; that the match claimed,
from its own merits, the approbation of Parlia-
ment ; and that the state of the finances of the
Royal personage demanded a liberal allowance
from the Committee. It was right to take measures
fur the succession of the Brunswick. line ; but he
would ask, was parliamentary assistance necessary
to give effect to the marriage of the Duke of Kent
If it was replied in the affirmative, he would give his
support to the motion. Though it was pleasing
to the Committee to indulge on the private merits
of his Royal Highness, yet, in other respects, he
was equally entitled to their consideration. The
delay of the income which every member of the
Royal Family received at •a regular age caused a
multitude of embarrassments to his Royal High-
ness. He served in the West ,Indies, at Gibral-
tar, at Nova Scotia, and Canada. His emolu-
ments, during these services, were quite dispro-
portionate to his rank ; nay, he (Mr. B.) had
understood that the Royal Duke had incurred
losses, far which he received no compensation.
He had already assigned for the payment of debts
forced on him, by the narrowness of his means,
the annual sum of 17,0001. out of his 25,0001.
Mr. B. concluded by voting for the grant.
Mr. METHUEN could not agree to this Grant.
He agreed in all which had been said in praise of
the Duke of Kent, but as much might also be said
for the Duke of Cam bridge.
Lord A LTHORPE opposed the motion.—He could
not discover so much advantage to the Public in
All these Royal Marriages as authorised the com-
ing to Parliament, and calling for additional bur-
thens to be imposed on- the Public,

Lord CASTLEREAGH and Mr. BROUGHAM CX-
plained.
Mr. PROTHEROE, notwithstanding the respect
he felt for the character of the Duke of Kent, was
yet obliged, consistent with his public duty, to
oppose this Grant, which ought not to take place
in the present state of the country..
Mr. J. SMITH *as in favour of the Grant.
That the Duke of 'Kent was embarrassed was not
surprising, when it was considered that till after
he was 32, his income was not equal to that of
the eldest son of many Gentlemen in that Honse.
The Duke of Kent had for years been absent on
foreign service, and that in a quarter of danger,
the West Indies, in the course of which his Royal
Highness loSt considerable property by ship-
wreck, which losses bad never been made up to
him. He would wish to know why, as the Royal
Duke was absent on actual service for his coun-
try., the Parliamentary allowance of 12,0001.
granted to the other branches of the Royal Family,
had been withheld from him ?

Sir C. MONCK understood the marriage of the
Duke of Clarence was still in progress. Whilst
there were any hopes. of an heir to the throne in
this branch of the family he- thought no other
branch of the family ought to apply.—(Much
laughter) _ .

The House then divided—
Ayes 205
Noes 5l
Majority
The Resolution for granting a dowry to the
Princess in case of bet' surviving the Duke was
then put and agreed to.—The Report was ordered
to be received on Monday.
The CHANCELLOR- of the EXCHEQUER moved
that the [louse, at its rising, do adjourn till Mon-
day.—Agreed to.
The Committees of Supply and Ways and Means
were postponed till Monday.
THE ALIEN BILL.
Lord CASTLEREAGH moved the Order of the
Day for the second reading of the Alien Bill.

Mr. LAISIBTON expressed his surprise at the in-
troduction of this Bill by the Noble Lord in a
time of profound peace. By doing 'so, the Noble
Lord had she‘ved full well his opinion of the sub-
serviency of the House--a subserviency which
had, indeed, been well proved. The Noble Lord
had called it a mitigated measure. Ile called it
an outrage on the Constitution and ancient cus-
toms of the land, and was pointed against fo-
reigners, to the influx of whom into this country,
after the tyrannical Edict of Nantz, we owe our
present wealth and greatneis. The lion. Gent.
observed that the Alien Bill was first -introduced
by Mr. Pitt, in 1793 ; but the state of the world
was now different, and there remains no pretence
for continuing this measure. The Noble Lord
must have other motives than those which he pro-
fessed. The object must be to destroy that little
spot of liberty which still remained, and to put an
end to the boast of our-country, " that a Slave,
of whatever country, whenever he set his foot on
English ground, became free." That boast would
exist no longer ; and the object for which it was
to be destroyed was, to point an engine against
the anfortunate individuals who were proscribed
on the second return of the: Bout bons to France.
The Honourable Gentleman then entered into a
review of the proceedings against the proscribed
by the Bourbon Government on the King's second
return, by whom 38 individuals were banished
without trial or sentence, and still remained wan-
derers from place to place ; and against these un-
happy men the present measure was ainied. He
earnestly implored the House to pause before they
armed Government with a power which would be
a stain and disgrace to us. He contended that this
measure was not called for by any line of policy.
If the Government of the Bourbons was esta-
blished with the People of France, the machina-
tions of 38 individuals would not shake it ; if, on
the contrary, the People were against it, the mea-
sure we were now about to adopt would not serve
the Bourbons, whilst it would disgrace us. He
concluded by moving, that, instead of now, the
Bill should be read 'a second time this (lay six
months.

Mr. PROTHERO9 was in favour of this Bill. He
thought we should be careful to prevent the dis-
turbance of our present tranquillity by the ma-
chinations of the disaffected.

Mr. LYTTELTON OppOlea the Bill. The power

it conferred on Ministers was often exercised tin,
manner highly prejudicial and oppressive to, to
dividuals. As an instance of this, he allale(ige.
the case of Mr. Befort, the vender of the c`li
dicinal, who formerly resided in the 1-13Ynt:rwo
for a period of ten years ; and who, in 10, ice,
18
sent out of the country at a few hours'
e' hi'tste,
without any reason being assigned. In th the
however, with which he was ordered to quit A
country, he was under the necessity of 'Wiles
musical instrument behind him ; and in his, nee
afterwards discovered copies of a corresP°l7oa
between the Pope, the Catholics of Ireki"
',ree.
a father of the order of La Trappe• cEarY
spondence was sufficient to alarm the Seere'of
for the Home. Department, in whose opinion
to name the Pope was little short of tre'n.se,
Now in the return made by order of the the
it was stated that no person was sent uot ° that
country in 1814 ; but Mr. Befort affirtned,sof
it was in 1814 that he was thus sent away; cedin
if the fact was so, that would throw thee' be•
over the whole return ; and instead of no "Chao
ing sent out in that year, numbers of
suffered equally with this unfortunate ven„alg
gout water. At present Gentlemen
on without concern, being at present tree 0' 4
selves ; but this was shoving but little "Ifii,g,ae
and very little concern for the character '''
country, at a time when there was scarce loot
country in Europe in which Englishmen were to
to be found. He concluded by -supporting
amendment. fie
Mr. H. Ctivis shortly supported the 131"' tyro
could not account for the omission in ti)e
mentioned by the Honourable Gentleman
Lyttelton). lei
A division was again called for, and the 'al
was about to be cleared, when ere
Lord FOLKESTONE said, that lie should e oo
worthy of the hospitality with which his tincettilis
ha:l been received, if he were not to C"t dosed
most solemn protest againit the door beim., (-Ile
on the exercise of such hospitality in tutu" 0,43
strongly condemned the policy of the inekonre,,oo
contended at some length that omen of tt,rP
itf
perit y of England had been owing—tot I„at itl
geographical situation—not to the numbe er
rs -1
inhabitants, but to the opinion ceetc d;IY M
tained of its liberal policy lowa' ds strangers'
present, he considered a Bill like the ple'en
be injurious and useless. 4 co°
Mr. C. GRANT Could not regard the me*
an infringement on the Constitution, nv t r :of
called for at this moment. He did not th'il-osr'
ancient system of policy was marked by 'IINIera
titular predilection for foreigners, except as
lte
chants. The Statutes alluded to afforded' -the
protection as Merchants. With respect 10 not
prerogative of the Sovereign, it certainly 4",51,iel
the policy of the Constitution to preclude Weyer
front prohibiting the intercourse of der'ferei
should the safety of the State require ththe
cisc of such prohibition. The principle of
00
Act of 1793 had been applied in all casecit,:ali
that period, when danger was apprehended'
it be said that danger was not now afloat, wi)e-toit
tempts had been made at assassination ? and
not proper to arm the Executive with ',owe° t -;:ele
petent to avert that danger ?He was of opitii° set
never was a period in which a more dangeroll.ss of
of conspirators existed against the liberile,,iti
mankind, and therefore he thought the ne,ril'hat
for the Bill was apparent. It had he-n
this Bill would interfere with hospitality-41° b"l„se
thing. It would not operate in that %e?; tece
foreigners who really flew from religious Perloot
don would still find an asylum in England; „ilea
if we were to look to history ford peti°(' Cite
the persecuted found refuge in this conntr'q the
last 25 years furnished most ample proof °,,eat
hospitalities of this country; and at the Pr" ea'
.moment not less than 20,000 foreigners werei.
joying the protection which England afforde's
Mr. F. DOUGLAS thought the Bill dangel'i,,,,
connected with the policy avowed by the, „-ptre"'
Lord on its intioduct ioll. Olt looking at tin'
amble, he did not find any reason stated 1.(); ore
(hieing the House to pass the Bill. The peja'so it
was calculated to meet an external danger, dit to
had a domestic effect. Was there reasl;-
It
apprehend the danger as in the former case oc•
must be recollected, that the war wasv"e °Wail
cessity—to protect and secure our liberties., oger
there any reason to apprehend external "°)
now ?—Was danger to be apprehended troteu too
followers of Buonapsrte ? The Hon. Ge°l7intri
condemned the impolicy of dragging this c°-,40113
into the vortex of Continental iotrigues•l such
respect to the prerogative of the Crowo, I there
power really did exist, what necessity w°s such
for passing the Bill? He deprecated piaci";
strong powers in the hands of any Ministers'
The House divided—
For the mation..... ......................... • •',ss
Fur the amendment
Majority in favour of the second reading.. • • Lori
After a short conversation-, in which Mr. Per,:,,rt'S
Castlereagh, and Mr. Bathurst took a part, the P"-
dered to be committed on Tuesday next is
The Hon. Mr. LYTTLETON put a question with rc''aiieof
a Mr. Befort, who was sent out of this country o,ooolollre
because, as it was understood, he had come here to
nicate between the Irish Catholics and the Pape. tb.
Mr. BATHURST said that he was unable to. arnry.
Hon. Member's question, but promised to make ii4,Pro fut.
The Report of the Savings Banks Bill was taken 'Ole "-;
titer consideration, and the Bill was recommitted. gods;
next was brought up, and tire third reading fised form el
n.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER br°,6-toet 141
Irish Assessed Taxes Bill, which' was read a firs" -itla
ordered to be read a second time on Monday next. .0
Mr. PEEL declined proceeding further this Sess:tat '-
the Irish Prisons Fees Bill. He moved, therefore, "
ty pf
committed thatNEWPORT a day three months.
Sir JOHN cquiesced in the proPrie;eri4ll
ferring any further proceeding, as he knew frau)
that the persons receiving fees of this description, inyisiouran,
though welt paid at present, would stretch arty Pro -f
their own interests, which Parliament in the wan"„ -
'nation, might adopt.—The motion was' then carrie _
The other Orders of the Day wire then dispose,' '
which the House adjourned to Monday next.
r

---------------------
BIRTH. Lady
On the 21st ult. at Castletown, Isle of Man, the
General Cowing, of a daughter.

DIED. Jobo 1"7
On Tuesday last, at his house in Gloucester-place,
Camon, Esq. ,
......0
- - - 0 GreA,
,
LONDON: Printed by J. B. CARSTAIRS, of N"'hY , iir'
it/
Ormond-street, Queen-square; and published , T t(/'
05 i
SCRIPPS, of No. 7, South Molten-street, a' 01'
Office, No. 112, Strand ; where Advertisements.,
Letters, &c. (post-paid) must be addressed.

If d

toN2,

p • C

Tit°PP/

oi p -17
tit 9,!°?,6„
6.e „.
14t
~ ?
7,4 e a
e0n,12

;
0:
t44:f.pkhiz,
P hrE
-
"4.4,trAleer
ht
, • ,
44,„ 611,
.4o p ,teo4
,„cz
4:), P'"
n

.70,4
14e ;'44pee,
bk. eihd
114 e OA,
&
Q . 4-" Ct,
"i 4
4,
;
4 ~.
eq,r
'
44 itcn,
Zei
e