The Sun.
London, England, 1820-07-06 00:00:00

THURSDAY, JULY 6, 1820.

LONDON JOURNALS,

(DAILY Ea TItiCTS.]

FROM THE MORNING PAPERS OF THIS DAY.
[Morning Post.]
DIVORCE :OF •THE QUEEN.

The Bill founded otv the Report of the Lords' Committee
was last night brought in by the Earl of Liverpool. It is of
that stature which the Report demanded, and, it will rejoice
every well regulated mind to observe, just, without being
vindictive. Founded on a preamble, which must be proved
(or there is no foundation fur any deprivation of rights and
honours), the measure goes not ono step farther than abso-
lute necessity requires, as the result and consequence of its.
truth. For no one will deny that if adultery has been com-
mitted, the trait penally,that could attach to the crime must
be degradation from the rank of Queen, and the forfeiture of
all the rights and immunities of that exal:cd condition.
There is no threat of punishment, no angry passion sought
to be gratified. The Bill simply says, you are accused of
having brought shame and disgrace upon the British Crown
—the facts being established, your sentence is divorce
from that ftegal State which you have abused, and depriva-
tion of those privileges of which you have shown yourself to
be umworthy. it will be seen from our Report, that this Bill
was read a first time, and appointed formally fur a second
reading on Monday; but this is merely to say that the second
reading will be fixed on Monday. In the meantime, copies
will be sent to the Accused and to her Counsel, and the latter
will this (lay be heard at the Bar upon the Petition prevented
yesterday from the Queen. It asserts that her Majesty has
some important facts to.state, even in this early, stage of the
proceeding : we shall be glad to find that they are really what
they are described to be. lhe future course will, we have
reason to beliee, be what we mentioned yesterday. It does
not however seem clear when the proof in support of the
Preamble to the Bill will be taken, whether before or after
the adjournment.

tended probably to counteract any prtljudice which the crinii-
natury report of the Secret Committee might prucluee.

[British Press.]

A Petition was presented by Lord Holland yesterday even-
ing to the Huuse of Lords, which, alluding to the judicial
proceedings 'against her Majesty, and the'probablc necessity
of her causing foreigners to come into England as wit-
nesses for her exculpation, prayed the House not to pass
the Alien Bill, as the Ministeis of the Crown would there-
by have the power of preventing the Queen's witnesses
from coming into this country, and of exposing them
while here to many personal inconveniences. This point
is certainly well deserving of the attention of Parliament,
and even should it be thought expedient to pass the Alien
Bill as a general measure, a clause might be introduced en-
abling-the Queen to afford personal protection •to all fo-'
reighers during the continuance of her trial, who might come
to England as witnesses on her Nl'ajeity's' 'behalf. There are
indeed certain rumours afloat which enjoy very general cre-
dence, that hut very few witnesses will be required by her
Majesty to sheer the laughable absurdity of the principal
charge against her, namely, the adulterous intercourse with j
Bergami.