The Sun.
London, England, 1818-06-02 00:00:00

ItNX;ENCY ACT

Lord CASTLP ItFAGii moved the second reading
of the Regency Act Amendment Bill. The Noble
Lord would confine himself merely to stating the
provisions of the lilll, which went to afford tacili-
ties to the Queen, which were necessary in the
important trust confided to her care, and in case
of her absence frron XVindspr, on. accomit .of ill
health, to appoint the residence of Couusellors at
Windsor, to act for her Majesty during her absence.
The present Bill did not infringe the principles or
operation of the Regency Act ; no attempt at
innovation or regulations were had recourse to.
With respect to the assembling of a new Parlia-
ment, it was provided, in case of the demise of the
Crown, that should a new Parliament not be as-
sembled, the old one should be immediately called ;
and in the event of the Queen's death, the cote of
his Majesty's person should devolve on the Council
until the Meeting of Parliament. 'flue lime al-
lowed for the assemhtios Parlia;:lcnt. was 40
days but that would be at) object for the consi-
deration of the House. _ ,

Mr. TIERNEY said, all that he found fault with
was, that the additional Contmiss'oners should be
all of one side of the question. Ndw if the name
of Earl Spencer had been introduced, no sort of
objection could be made on his part. Ile did not
see why the Royal Family should be excluded from
the Council, for in the event of the death of the
Queen, they would have been the fittest persons-
to have the care of the Royal Person. Bot, how-
ever, the Bill went on the assumption of the ne-
cessity for the Queen residing at a distance from
Windsor. on account of her health. But the
real object of the Bill was to enable her Ma-
jesty's Ministers to dissolve Parliament imme-
diately, for, if the death of her Majesty had
followed the dissolution what was to 'become
of Ministers ? the old Parliament in that event
must be recalled. The new arrangement, .he
thought, in this respect, would lead to much diffi-
culty. There was no provision made in the Bill in
case of the death of the.Priisce Regent during the
dissolution. What objection could there be to
introduce the name of the Doke of York, who
was certainly next in succession ? Again, no
ar-
rant;etssent was made respecting the Windsor Es-
tablishment. Some regulation might tie made to
diminish the expense without intring'ng on the
King's comforts, or the convenience of the Queen.
Mr. CANNING said,- the Bill was only intended
to provide for the emergency which had actually
taken place, and not to revise the Regency Act.
The principle of Om measure had created the dif-
ficulty, and it would not be proper to enter on the
consideration of making some alterations,. as al-
luded to by the Right Hon. Gentlemen, without
mature deliberation. To make provision respect-
ing the demise of the Crown was a grave and
doubtful point ; and 'it was the opinion of Parlia-
ment that nothing should be introduced affecting
that question. With respect to the establishment
at IVindsor, it would be revolting to every man's
mind to enter upon the question of saving at' this
moment., which ❑tight, should the event alluded
to happen, be considered by Parliament when it
met.. The Right- Hon. Gentleman observed, that
the choice of Counsellors had been made with 're-
ference to the respectability of the persons, to
whom he believed really no objection could arise.
Sir S. ROMILLY observed, that the danger At-
tempted to be guarded against by the Regency
Bill, was, in the event of his Majesty's recovery, 1
that he might not find about him persons to
whom he had not .been accustomed. At present
he saw tto•reason for continuing the expense of
the Windsor Establishment, as all hopes of his
Majesty's recovery had ceased.
The Bill was then, after a few words from Mr.
C. WYNNE, read a second time, and committed
for to-morrow.