Star.
London, England, 1813-03-18 00:00:00

- •
. .
''• •
!' • •
• •:1 tory. fti .• o, ~•41 1.•;.
ta,the dna none ntlew. , MI 01 nag LA*
liost.osider the Duke of Portland was. that it-Was
, at atiasimeitt hither to 'Mtge of the guilt or inno.
OeOfe of any of his Majesty's subjects, "'tech lesi of
cil4 Of his own family ; and they gave it as their opi-
awn, that rp) further.proceeding from the documents
before them should take place, and that, therefore;
the Princess of Wales ought to be received by his
Majesty. The- Hon. Gentleman had said, that we
ought to come to a deciiion in some shape or other ;
and did he think the mock .trial of a newspaper would
contribute to the Princeit's hondbr t . He said, that
some inquiry was necessary, and with this he set out
ai ti Preliniinary one, but what alteration would this
make in the state of case ?He had told the Hon.
Gentleitait on a former day, that he would answer
no question till he should know the object of.his pro-
ceeding. In his plate in the Hchise he would answer
no iluestion more than out of it; .till he saw its pro.,
priety. He had 'hewn the Hcinentlernan that he
would not submit to be catechisi4 at pfeasure; ripe
now that lie saw the Object of the,Hon. Gentlenian's
' mptioni had he ant reason to regret his forbearance.
The Him. Gentleman thought Pikiament ought to
interim to give her Rotel Highness the protection of
the'Lawt but when procs adings shodld be iititituta,
the Princess-would Lave all the benefit of that
tection. Clamour, certainly, Was the most improper
defence that could be made If Parltameht gave
countenance to the present proceeding, the. public
mind must inefritably be agitated; and no proceeding
on the part of Parliament could be productite of
good to any party, in any view of justice. He sittsci
therefore, give his negative to the Motion:
Mr. PONSONBY informed the House; that jig
had sent a note to Sir Samuel Romilly, to inforiin
hint of the netitsitt 'of his presence, and expressed
his intention to itipport the Motion, principally ad
the ground, that if the offensive pliblications cont.
plained of *ire tolerated in the present instance,
°theft or a similar nature would be obtruded on the
Community, to the great detriment of public morals.
Mr; B. BATHURST contended, that there was
itrimg distiuttion between the present publications
and any others which Might be offensive to delicacy,
and therefore that the precedent the Right Hon.
tleman wished to have established was unnecessary.
Ltd MILTON had hit doubts whether he shoUld
have rdled for the prosecution of Lady Douglas, or
Whether he should have given a vote at all. But now'
he had•no doubts as to the vote he should give. The
rank of the parties distinguished this case from any
other ; but even in the case of a private individual,
he should think a prosecution warranted. Let.the
responsibility fall upon the heads of those who had
advised the publication. In the name of injured
morals, he called upon the House to punish; when it
was so justly dtie.
Mr. CARTWRIGHT should vote against the
Motion, as no possible good could arise from it. He,
in common with ethers, laMented that such a publi.

_
cation shotild hive appeared ; but the author of the
first letter had led 'he *ay.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. STEPHEN had seen the publication alluded
to with shame and grief. The Book itself he had never
seen, but he was called up on the present occasion by
his wish to do justice to the memory of his late Right
Honpurable Friend. The Hon. Gentleman had said
he should spiie the memory of Mr. Perceval, because
' the evidence contained certain indecent passages, he
had regarded it as contaminating the name of Mr.
Perceval, a name never connected with any thing im-
pure or ii amoral—(Hear, hear.) He misted the
Hon. Gentleman would explain 'himself—was it an
offence if Mr. Perceval intended an appeal to the pub-
lic upon the subject of the evidence that had ap-
peared I The Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Whitbread) ar-
gued a complete acquittal, from the Princeu having,
been admitted at Court. That admission to Court
certainly did away the charge of criminality, though
he did not go along with the assertion, that the charge
of levity had also been done away. But had the
Princess been minded, she would have been sup-
/ posed guilty of the whole charge, which all must
concur in terming a foul aspersion—(Near, Hear.)—
On that point there could not be two opinions. Had
the exclusion continued, Mr. Perceval thought the
public should be the judge. Was it indecent that Mr.
Perceval did not garble the evidence ? Had the evi-
dence been partial, no fair judgment could have been
formed. Deeply did he lament that the Princess had
now no similar advocate, for her present advocate
was only recommeded by his zeal.
" An open foe might prove a curse,
" But an imprudent friend was weasel"
Would a prosecution for indecency establish either
the guilt or the innocence of the Princess I—(Hear.)
The examination had been conducted with the utmost
impartiality, rather with a leaning to find the Prin-
cess not guilty.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir S. ROMILLY, (who had entered the House
during Mr. Stephen's speech,) observed, that he un-
derstood, that since he left the House in an early
part of the evening, an important statement had been i
made, which called on him for some explanation. He
had•no idea when he left the House, which was for
the purpose of an indispensable attendance in a Court
of Justice, that his Hon. Friend was about to say
any thing which would require from him such an ex-
planation. He felt extremely sorry that it was, after
all, impossible for him to explain the occurrence on
which the House wished for explanation, especially
as it had been supposed that a serious charge lay on
him. It would be in the recollection of that House,
that when on a former night he had stated what bad
passed during the examination by the Commissioners,
he said that he attended all their meetings except
one. That one was the last; it took place on the 3d
of July, and was that at which the examination of
Mrs. Lisle occurred. This, hbwever, he would say,
that unless the examinations on that day were con-
ducted on a different principle from those which had
before taken Flace, the information communicated to
his Hon. Friend must be untrue. The questions were
never taken down, the answers only being written,
just as in ordinarreases of infOrmation before a Ma.
gistrate. The depositions were then read over to the
various witnesses, who corrected any inaccuracies
which they might contain, and afterwards signed them.
Mr. JOHN SMITH had expected that the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman (Mr.-Stephen) would have
expressed a greater horror at the publication so often
alluded to—Out the Honourable Gentleman's mora-
lity generally chimed in •with the disposition of the
Government- Had similar charges been brought
against the wits of any individual, tl,,at indi, id,;,)