Star.
London, England, 1820-06-07 00:00:00

% •

• Ns b
; • Nklr

little delibt.ratiohltii- state. t fact. The question,
vrp pe*ctly fair and reasonable. From'
the of the Nsbie Lord, he had no hesitation
in conciuditithitt the letter was perfectly genuine..
Mr. CRE VEY said, that whatever might be the
opiniohof the Noble Lord, 'it certainly was not the
opinion of all that the question of his Honourable
Friend. was
,inexpedient ; for so persuaded was he
(Mr: Creevey) that it was entirely competent to him
to introduce this question to the House, that he held
in his hand a motion which he had proposed to make,
the object of which was, the production of the ac-
count of the negotiation that passed between the
Agents of the English Government and het Majesty
the Queen. It seemed that the House was now
tallectupon to institute proceedings against her Ma-
jesty.; for the crime of setting her foot in England.
This was the sum of the charge. The King, it ap-
peared,' had the same objections to be in the same
kingdom with her Majesty, as he formerly had to
sit with herin the same drawing-rcom—(Hear, hear).
In pursuanceof this feeling of enmity, a threat was
held out against her Majesty at one time, and then
a bribe. was proffered of £50,000 to induce her to
renounce her character. of Queen of these Realms !
(rear, hear).—The House ought to recollect, that
when the King sent them a Message, desiring them
to interfere in his behalf, it was their bounden duty
to consider, before they went into the evidence (into
which he maintained that they had no right to go,
as nob Ody could doubt of the present being a private
prosecution), not oaly the situation in which they
might themselves be placed, but also the situation
in which the King absolutely was placed. In the
first instance, he was the procurer of the evidence
and the prosecutor of the crime of which in the last
he might be called upon to become the judge—
(Hear, hear) ;--for if a Bill of Attainder should be
passed against her Majesty, it could not be passed
without the King's giving his consent to it as a' part
of the Legislature—(Hear, hear).—The House ought
to beware how it made itself a party to such a trans-
action, especially as, from the reign of Henry VIII.
downwards, it had not been the custom of Parlia-
ment to interfere with the Queens of England--
(Loud cheers).—The arrival of her present Majesty
appeared to have created indescribable alarm amongst
Gentlemen on the other side of the House; for,
strange as it might appear, fifteen Ministers failed
last night to attend in their places, being too busily.
employed in arming against one poor, weak, de-
fenceless woman ! ( Loud cheers).—And who was
that woman ? The daughter of the Duke of Bruns-
wick, the niece of the lute King, the wife of the pre-
sent King, the mother of the Princess Charlotte
(Hear, hear). —lf that Pi incess had been alive, would
this business have ever been brought before the
house ?—( Hear, hear).—lle thought not. He had
written in pencil the motion of which he had intended
to give notice, relative to the late negociation at St.
Omer's ; whether he should move to-mom row evening
that an account of it be laid before the House, he
would not say ; but, feeling as he did upon the sub-
ct, he should have felt himself a disgraced man, if
he had not made the remarks which he had just
offered to their notice upon it--( Hear, hear)..
Sir ROBERT WILSON assured the House, that
no motion had ever occasioned him more acute regret
than that which had just been submitted to the con-
sideration of the House. He trusted, however, that,
in the appeal which he was going to make to their
generosity, he should meet with the support of a
majority of the House. He called upon them to
protect her Majesty during the continuance of this
inquiry from every species of indignity—(Hear, hear).
Ile did not now allude to the indignities which she
had received from our Ministers at foreign Courts,
or from those foreign Courts themselves, at the in-
stigation of those Minister s, nor to the paltry indig-
nityof strikin::, her name out of the Liturgy of the
Church ; but he.' did allude to the treatment which
she had received in her journey to this country, and
to the obstacles which had Leen raised up to retard
it. It was a disgraceful fact, that the Queen of Eng-
land, in crossing from the Continent, should have
had no other vessel on which to erect rhe Royal
standard than a common passage-boat ! (Hear, hear).
—lt was a disgraceful fact that she should have no
place to which she could fly to as an asylum !
(Heru, hear)—that she should have no other roof
to shelter her head, than that of an honest, but pri-,
Tate individual ! —(Loud laughter.)—Gentlemen
might laugh at the term, but he maintained that the
Gentleman to whom he alluded was an honest man,
and had performed his duty to her Majesty in the
same exemplary manner as he had performed all the
other duties cf his station—(Hear, .hear).—'That in-
dividual had given her an asylum which she had not
been able to procure in any of the Palaces of the
Crown—(l/cur, hear).—He was sloe that his Majesty
would never wish to see any of his subjects treat; c 1
with indignities which they did not deserve, much
less one who had once been the wife of his affection,
and still was the partner of his throne—(Hear, hear).
Lord A. HAMILTON thought the present a fa-
vourable opportunity for the few observations which
he had to make. The House would recollect that he
bad formed and expressed a strong opinion upon this
subject before. His Honourable Friend (Sir Robert
Wilson) seemed to attach but little importance to the
exclusion of her Majesty's name from the Liturgy.—
Ile (Lord A. Hamilton), on the contrary, was per-
suaded that this act of the Ministers tended in no
small degree to exhibit a disposition on their part to
condemn her Majesty unheard. He was of opinion
that this act of theirs' was wholly illegal, and con-
trary to the terms of an Act of Parliament. Was it
not one of the first and the most boasted principles
of Britiih justice, that every individual, from the
highest to the lowest, was regarded by the law as in-
nocentotntil he or she was proved to be guilty ? He
would appeal to the sentiments of justice, of Minis-
• ters themselv.es, if• their conduct to the Queen was
fair,. even upon the supposition that they were ena-
bled to make.out a case, against her? He begged to
observe, that he spoke not from any instruction or
authority upon this occasion. He contended that her
Majestys.name ought to:be replaced in the Liturgy,
before any measureof hostility was instituted against
her. . That it had been the intention of Ministers to
strip her of her character of Queen, was manifested
by their present conduct. Their acts against her had
raised a prejudic,e, under the operation of which the
House was new called upon to enter upon the dis-
cussion of charges to be brought forward against her.

I.; •