The Sun.
London, England, 1820-11-21 00:00:00

PROVINCIAL JOURNALS.

(From tke Bristol Observer.)

The QuEeN of ENGLAND IS accused of adultery with a me-
nial,---umler circumstances .of the most disgraceful aggrava-
tion. Upon 'this charge, nearly Orie•third of the Peers have
declined to vote at. all—a circumstance not of favourable im-
port for` her -Majesty, since no one who believed her innocent
would fail to declare that opinion in the hour of need, espe-
cially as if it had been a Ministerial question (which it noto-
riously was not), absence and opposition -to the Bill would
give only equal offence:—whereas many who believed her
Majesty to be guilty, but who could not think oilier faults
but in connexion with her misfortunes, might very naturally
wish to spare themselves the- pain of actively concurring in
proceedings a:;ainst her. But let that pass, whilst We exa-
mine what• was the opinion of those Peers who did vote. The
following classification of the Noble Lords will be found cor-
rect, although the reader must supply, from his own observa-
tions, the number,to each class except the first
lst.—Peers who entertained no doubt whatever of the

guilt of the Queen, or of the justice and expediency
of passing the Bill (the Majtnity) - 123
2d.---Peers who entertain a conviction as strong as that
of the above class of ii:e guilt of the Queen, but who
opposed the Bill on various grounds of expediency, and
some of whom Suggested the propriety of au Address
• to the Throne, or other mode of declaring their abhor-
rence of, and disgust at, her Majesty's conduct, viz.:-
- The Archbishop of York, Bishops of Chester and Glom.
cester, - Lords Harewood,.. Ellenboruugh, Gosford,
Grantham, Falmouth, Calthorpe, tir.c.; considering
that he number of speakers was nearly one-half of all
who took part in the debate, this class (part of the Mi-
nority) cannot consist of less than 4O
3d.—Peers whi) admit that there exist strong grounds for
suspicion, but who consider the allegations not to be
legally proved, amongst whom are, the Duke of So-
merset, Lords Grey, Lansdowne, De Clifford, &c.-(see,
' ilartiertlarly, the able'speeches of-Lords Grey and Lans-

aowne)—probably .at least •
4th.—Peers who argue upon•the utter legal inadmissibi-
lity of the evidence before the House, and whose belief
that the charges against the Queen are unfounded is to
be inferred front their speeches and conduct, but who
avoid any personal pledge that such is their belief—
among whom are, Lords itosslyn, Grosvenorolud Car-
narvon, who, however, declared that they would vote
against the Lill, whether the charges were proved or

not
sth:--Peers who have exprkssrd their beief that the
Queen is innocent—Duke of Bedford, Lords Erskine,
Thank, Ste..' . in which class, also, Lord Fitzwilliarn
must be included, since his'Countess bat'. waited upon

• her Majesty... l5
From the Majority, The MurningCironicle would deduct
the Bishops, doubtless on the charitable supposition that all
Churchmen are knaves, for imam other rule can their votes
he considered but as of the greatest weight, and (the Whig
Oracle, too!) making an aristocratic distinction which the
Constitution. acknowledges not, between created and in-
heriting Peers, as if in this country the :need of talent and of
-virtue, like the patents of Nobility in ancient France, must be
• valueless for a certain number of 'generations, would argue
ffoigetting Vow din Minority was constituted) that _the Bill
was sent to the Committee by a small Ministerial majority
6Ay ! The' fact, however, cannot be disguised, that two-
thirdi of all the Peers who attended, and range than one-half
of all the Peers of England, have declared her Majesty to be
guilty. Wherein, then, consists the triumph? Arks! Now,
comes nreiancholy view of the case. Upon such asocca-
sion, it might have: been expected that party feelings would
have been laid aside, and the contention fir office suspended,
from a sense of common danger. The Ministers had set the
exaniPle ; it might have been hoped their opponents would
have followed it; instead of which we see, that when the
country was awaiting its breathless anxiety the issue of the
proceedings against the Queen, and whets the noble bearing
of many of England's Peers had created the' strongest reliance
on their. wisdoin, honour, and firmness, the Opposition in a
body, many of whom had objected to the• Bill because it car-
ried with it a divorce, voted for that very' clause, and thus
sent it back to the House, encumbered with a provision for
thc.personal,relief of the King, which many of the most con-
scientious approvers of the Bill had declared(in erroneous
judgment, we have fortnerly shewn) that they could not sup
port. This paltry. 'lmmure, which was intended merely to
•• embarrass the Ministers, has contributed
,much.to veil from
general observation the real decision of the ;louse upon the
guilt of the Queen. It is sufficiently distressing to see party
spirit thus active at such a time, but such things have always
been, and from those who resorted to the trick, when the most
distant glimpse of office presented itself to their longing eyes,
nothing better could have beets anticipated; but Use coy
si-
deration which is most. awfully alarming to every admirer of
the British Constitution, as,.it exists in King, Lords, and
Commons; is, that no inconsiderable number .of the Peers
should be found, and amongst them some of the greatest per-
simal weight, to avow, that they dared not follow the dictates
of their consciences—that they firmly believed the Queen to
beguilty,;that popularupiniun was upon this subject entirely
weong, and that-the basest means-had.been resorted to, to
%inflame and mislead the public mind ; but that, to opinion so
formed, and to feelings so'-excited, it was nevertheless " ex-
pedieut" to defer. True it is, that
". Fear adusitted into public councils
Betrays like t reason :"
but we little expected to see this exemplified in the British
House of Peers. If we mistake not, Lord Halewood,* and the
Noblemen who • adopted the saute sentinient, have created a
• danger ten times greater than that which they would avoid.
They; who, as we arc told by our most liberal writers,.are
specially appointed "ad dflesidenduni Ilegeim," and are plac,
ed by the -Constitution as a barrier against the tyrannical en-
croachment of." erronious•popular feeliog"—upon whom the
thinking and loyal part of the. Nation calculated that it might
least in. safety, until .reason and justice had. resumed their in-
fluence on the artificially-inflamed mind of a portion of the
public,—have, in the hour of need, shrunk; ore the pitiful
pretence of 't. expediency," front the performance of. a pain-
ful duty. We honour those, who, believing the Queen to be
innocent, or objecting to the mode of trial; manfully and con-
stitutionally opposed the Bill ; yet of those, who, entertaining
no doubt or scruple upon either ground, thought it " inex-
pedient" to proceed, we can only say, they have much to an-
swer for.—,Do.they. imagine that the House of Peers has
risen in public estimation, by the abandonment of the Bill ?
e must just ask these Lords of expediency if they re-
commend a Coronation ? if the Queen's naine is to be
restored •to the Liturgy, " ad defivalenthim Itegem ?"
fs to be tosturalised and made a Peer?—and if the
Queen be innocent why not ? These, and various other po-
litical considerations, loess upon us ; but we must reserve
them, and the moral effect of the termination, such as it is,
of the ioquiry.into the Queen's conduct, for another number;
observing, only, that, as we should have considered the ac-
Inittal of her Majesty upisit proofs of innocence, one of the
most happy events which could have occurred, so we fear the
present terminatiim, which leaves upon most minds a moral
conviction 'of her guilt, yet seems to require that she shall be
treated as of unsullied virtue, may prove to he ft-aught with
peril ;—.it has besides a direct; tendency to revive the explod-
ed charge of Conspiracy against the hest men among us, and
is even on that account most seriously to he lamented. For
the happiness of the Queen-herself, with all her imperfec-
tions on her head, we have never ceased to wish sincerely, so
'far as it could be reconciled to the general interests of mora-
rality and virtue.
Sir Archy M'Sarcasm would say, this never could have
happened but atoned. the " Noheelity is' the South, wha a'
spring frae runs-puncheons and suggar hogheds."
(Front the Sheffield Iris.)

What has the Queen obtained ? Something which may be
called a tictory, and which probably will be celebrated by a
triumph, unparallelled in the annals-of the country. Had
her Majesty been condemned by both Houses of, Parliament,
and the fill for diVercing and deiiaoing her been signed,
and made as unchangeable as the laws of the Medea and
Persians, by the hand which she received, and in which
she placed her own, at the altar, we trust that we
should have been the last to say a hard word of
her unnecessarily ; but having escaped the toils,—
having been acquitted, it may be said, we will not so far com-
promise what we fear to be t'be troth, as to deny our convic-
t►on—a conviction of which we cannot divest ourselves—
that it has been-more from the rigid equity of her judges, i❑
pronouncing upon what they considered defective evidence
of her guilt, on the part of her prosecutors, than the
clear establishment of her innocence by her advocates.—
And here we are content to leave a question, which
now will probably not be solved during her Majesty's life.
During that life it will be in her power to do much towards
confirming the confidence of those who belieVed in her purity
before it was subinitted to the test, and who believe in it
still; towards conciliatiog the good opinion of those Who were
doubtful of her discretion before the trial, and whose doubts
have-not been removed by the evidence. on either side ; and
lastly, towards deserving the good will, and glad esteem, the
fervent prayersbf, all who fear God, and delight %o honour
. those on whom Ile bath .put honour, by leading henceforth,
whether at home or abroad, a sober, virtuous, and quiet life.