The Sun.
London, England, 1811-01-29 00:00:00

T UE' SD 4 F, JANUARY 29, 1811.

IMP .:IL 171 L PART., LIMENi.

ADVSE OF PEERS.
MONDNY, JANUARY es.

. .
Some judicial and private business tieing trans-
acted, their Goidships aejoUrned for some time
during pleaiure.

REGENCY BILL.

do the teiutning Of the HOuse, Which was about
five O'dOCk, And -previous to the RepOri of the
ComMittee on this Bill being taken into con-
sideratibn,
Earl C; or; s ti rose for the purpose of decided-
ly etpressing his geifecil di:approbatiim of the
Bill, which 'had so far advanced in its* progress 'be-
fore their Lordships.- There was a degree of in-
cciritistency, as well as a violation-of 'Constitutional
prinCiple in the measure; as framed by anisiers;
that he Should f•el it his duty, solemnly and strong-
ly to pretest against it. -He certainly now, 'as 'on.
rho oCcasion.'which was held up by Ministers,. as
furnishing the precedent Which they profeis to
havt• faithfully adhered to, -voted in favour-of pro
ceediog by Bill, as the rno,it constitutional mode cif
proCeeding ; yet he could not consent to adding
irregularity to irreiTulartv, and fiaion to ti;iion,
he contended wait rhe case on- the present occasion.
The measure, is framed and adopted by Ministers,
might be itel as a precedent, and a future' means
of undermining the best interests of thecottntry, it
embraced a stem of and'destruCtite errors,
and so strongly did he feel, thiS impression, that he
wciald thus early bring-forward that protest, as a re-
' cord-of his sentiments, to the iMmediate attention
of `their Lordships.'
• A shorttonVersettion here ensued,' apparently in
ati-oposition of the 'Noble 'EarN'.urging the protest
in the shape- of a motion, in which Earl StatthOpe..
• Lora Grenville, the Earl of Liverpool, end the Lord
Mule- llor- piaticipatect—the result g.,24, that the
Noble Earl (Grosvenor) read the protest as a part of
his speech, am!
The Earl of LIVERPOOL ObSerVed., that the mea-
sures adopted ity' iin sters,'. were similar in all their
patty to those thloptcd, after the fUllest deliberation,
in 1.7t49:
The, Loan CIIANCELLOI.I took occasion to oh-
serVe, 'that if the Noble'Eari felt so strongly as to
protest against -these meaqiiirks.,, which had the Ram-
Parli ment :try found:hit-in as the steps taken in 1.789,
what would he soy to tho,c, various kgiAtrisv. melt.
..bores (Ads of • Nilia:nen:, as they were c:nied),
witch arose out of the pre eedings nt 1759 7: NV,
forthCr, if the Noble - Earl deemed so Untavintrably
as to the present Sesio'n of Parltameot; tie hoped
he would,' consistently with these sentimerita, en-.
deavour to prevent all PeurS who had t.rken ther
seats since the Parliainent was opered, frosts troting
that night !
l'he Doke of, NOrtPot.tt prerented z petition from
the Borough of Lewert';' in Sussex, against a re-
striried Regency, which was ordered to lie on the
table. . .

The Report being brought up,
The Duke of SOsigi took the opportnnity of des
liverieg his sentiments respecting the measure be-
fore their Gerdshipt. He had listened (his Royal
Highness observed) with the utmost attention to the
himititms observations of many Noble 'Lords who
tl;id delivered their opinions upon this most impor
tant measure. The result of this attention was, ad-
ded to the closest cousideretion which he was hits:-`
self able to give the subjeet.,,that, with the exception
of the appointment of a Ittgent, he was convinced,
in his own' mind, that the whole system 'adopted on
the occasion by Ministers.was of the most injurious
tendency to the interests of the country. The framers
p: the Bill bad followed 'up' a iiiolatian of laxV,
a violation 'oldie Constitution. These assertions he
could amply justify, in arguinent and by proof. In
looking manfully at the Ines( important question at
issue, and adverting to thenecessity of the case, he
ksiew he should be accused of want of delicacy ; but
much us he adMired that desirable quality, be should
never be induced by' it to swerve Irvin his duty, or
to violate the didtates of truth.' He must then say,
that from elk he precedents that were to be collected
from the wisdom of their ancestors, and from every
measure latterly sdupted, fturn Which any constito-
tional precedent could be adduced, the manner in
which Parliament 'war opened oz the present occa-
sion, was in his conviction, illegal---:hat it wa4 a
viol Itiow of law. The Commission pm ported to h..
the act of the Sovereign, whereas it was notoriously
not so, but in substance the act of the two Rouses.
The Great' Seal could constitutionally be used only as
the fiat of the Sovereign. To use it in the- rIttl,CM.
instance, was an evident fiction, as he was rendered
incapable of signifying his will, through indisposition.
The Act could not stand the test of a moment's'ex-
amination. The two House') had openly assumed
one of the most important of the Royei prerogatives.
This they ought not to have doee: The proceedieg
was most injurious. The two Houses of ParliaMent
were not responsible—they were totally unwarranted
in such conduct. The history of the country fur-
nished no instance of the two Houses taking the le-
gislative power of the Crown. Repeated Acts' of the
lull and constitutional Legislature prescribed the con-
, trary, such as the Acts of i fit h Edward 111. the At
Henry VIII. the Ist of Philip and Mary, and the
I 51h of Charles 11. The right course for the Houses
to have adopted, would be to address the Prince 01
\Vales to take upon himself the personal exercise of
the Royal aniliority ; then might the Great Seal have
been regularly affixed to a Commission, and the Royal
assent or tlisotit regularly signified, -anti all the other
tonstit utional powers of the Crown legally exercised.
He cordially agre“d with those Noble Lords who
I had so laudably contended, that care should belaken