The Sun.
London, England, 1820-08-18 00:00:00

ety less firm, when onlooking Into the -history
that' Bill, he found that in the Commons, where
t .originated, it was Carried only by a maiority
of 33 : aLid.so litti,e general was the conviction
of its expediency, that when it came up to this
House it was adopted only by a majority of '7.
After referring in 3 cursory manner to, the case of
the Bishop of Rochester, the Noble tall prop
ceeded to say, that he looked upon all such Bills
as unjust and odious. Theyruight, perhaps, be
supported. with. some appearance of • reason, if
times were tumultuous-4 they were
tknes when great dangers. were apprehended.
Jut. he would ask, was .danger to any one
individual apprehended in the present cast
Me belieVed not one instance would be shewn

, .
where' the. present case,
:if not inquired into,
,c(fuld produce, bad consequences. Their. Lord
4,ips. were 4ware, 'from the votes of the House
of .Commons, of the conduct of 'that Douse, and
of, his Majesty's; Ministers in that II ouse.upon
the present -proceedings. Those Ministers, so
far from considering these proceedings Audis-
penceb le to.the public safety, on the contrary,
znimit,:ed that if there was anv mode by which
they could get out of the scrape, they were eager
to adopt it. If, he looked into the particular cir-
cumstances of the would find, that, under
'41;1 the itnpressions• which the public have on this
occasion,. they feel strongly that they have no.
interest in this Bill proceeding.—( hear, hear !)--7--
,t.he Noble • .Ear.l-; ;opposite would rise in his
place, and state some matte; of danger, which-
imposed a paramount necessity ttpon the.' Crown
of proceedi4g. then indeed there might he some
reason in the ,thing. But, neither the Noble: Earl
not. any, Noble Peer,: lyopld place the support of
the, Bill on. any such ground., What then were
the real circumstances of the case ?--Their Lord-
ships:hould .not forget the situation in which het',
Majesty. was placed at the time when this Bill
wus thought. necessary Many years preceding
that time, from circurnstances.in which blame,
pe.rhaps, was.pot imputable 'to any person, ditfer-
ences .hnd, arisen,..the result of 'Which W-as, that
for: 26 , years and ,niore her:Majesty had ,been
placed in a:. state of, exclusion not only from the
society of her husband, but from the Court, and
fronaevcry communication•with the,Royal
Ininint 9f fact, she was plaCed in such a situa-
tion„ tit4t.if Ale had, been a private individual. no
Bill of Divorce against her could receive :the
co,untenance: of this.,flouse. SUCh' was her situar
tion,thut-even if :she haderre,d, which, however,
he by no means udmitted—hut even if ,she had,
erred, she would.have erred under circlunstances
tht, no individual, from: the:highest to the lowest
person in the:landscould come to their Lordships
and demand a ,Bill for separation from the tie of
marriage. • :It .was.. afair question of: public po-
litiy,,whethec, 4atuitting. all the charges made-
aoinst
.her,,,M,ajtsty to
,be true, which, however,
he. admitted only: for•:the !sake of the argu-
lialrtt, whether,. even. if they were. true to
the ,greatest esitent,.. they had not been. in-
curved Ands peculiar circumstances,' and he-
ther it would not ,'bane. been more conducive
toithe public interests, if• the Ocean; the Alps,
autt,the A ppenines,,had been. allowed to stand as
a veil het.kmen.those-defects and the public dis--
.Cl4Surt of them, which could have no other con-
sequetk(e,, than .tbat of, disturbing 'the national
p Co,c.e,-iCiteerS.,)l,-S ch disclosures could only
excite feelings which never ought to be excited
LL-Wltichnever can be,,exCited..withOut danger to
the. tate.„, ~When personslo the, ghost charac.:
ter in.the country. were concerned!in those dis-;
Os. the duty of the HoUse .to avoid
anir,C.tittrse_that might lead to them.-- It was a
cony e Calculated to ;divide interests that never
otight.tobe .separated. It was a,course.which it
wis..,e,ijually the duty of the 'House, and the in-
tereSt. of..the. ptplie . to .avert.---(Cries :of :hear,.
hear !)--But even if this investigation were :to be
proe& ed:in, it ought-not. to be pursued fin such
a *tie as ,that_of n Hill of Pains and ,Penalties..
Thilt Biii,--insbead: of doing.,vdiat Ought.to.have
beeddone,' instead-of setting out with stating the
offence, as _it.ough( typhave_been stated begins
witic,stating -the; :promotion of a person -of.low
ra to K. high.,Aue.: If 'this were an offence,
he-/would ask„ was the line of distinction
to.bo.drawn ?, Was. this the :-country, above all
others, where 54cli distinctions were to, be. made,
and where honours and titles were top be the ex-clu-
simpcivileges of the higher.orders ? 'Were there
Petsong ;in.. This country. so promoted ? Ifud
no: persons this •country----meritorious: persons
he did not, dispitte-7-but had no 'persons in this,
countrv..been.,raised frontun humble:situation to
one .Of conti4e3lce with the Sovereign
beaz•Dr7Af that were the. case, Then he might be
alla:wed.tousk,,whether the charge. upon the sub-
ject of .promotion retained in this BilVwas one
of any, ConseqUenco',!,.- Another charge was
introduced as.„ a ,linct of a make-weight---he
meant_ that of . Orders and Sicilian , Baronies,
and;Alecorations,
..and then the Bill „ came
to -the . main charge—that of adultery.- ; But
as .ifi. the, _framers of the. Bill upon cow,
ing "toi.thiS. partopf it. had shrunk. from this,
they did-every thing in ,Their power to render- it
difficalt_to he understood. If by that term they
meant any thing.else than what it was generally-
uuderstood,to theani.he, Ivould usk the Ministers
of Religion,he would ask any Peoin the House,
whether such .a charge, if proved, ~could be fol-
lowed by divorce, according to„ ,the laws of this
country ? For his part, he 'protested against the
useof expressions which did not convey the real
meaning. The charge, whatever it was, „should
have been digtinctly, and directly made,; thus her
MajeStY would .know .what the charges against
her were, and she would, be prepared to meet
them . • But even if the charges were directly
made, and even if they could be proved, still it
was to be recollected that the public interest was
no way concerned in going into them. If her
Majesty erred,. they were notaltngether free from
responsibility, whose Councils drove her. into
such 'error. As. to the question of innocence or,
guilt,' he had not delivered,,nor had he the means
of -delivering any.opinion.;..but this he knew,,that
there was a strong feeling in the public. mind.
that this proceeding could lead to no public good