Star.
London, England, 1810-12-21 00:00:00

on that occasion, and the Seal was 'ever used till
liter the Restoration of Charles the Second, se im-
pressed were they with the idea that they had no
right to east case the authority of the Great Seal. He
knew it might be said that that was not the proper
Great Seal of Charles the Second ; it might be the ,
• Sea) of the Republic, or it might be the Great Seal of '
be Protector Olivet Cromwell ; but still it was that
by the authority of which that convention held itself
eapable of assemblingto discuss the affairsofthe nation.
Such, however as it was, the Lords would not sane.
'ion the use of it in the absence of the executive power,
and the Commons, in the end, were obliged to
give up the point. At the period of the Revolution,
the Right Honourable Gentleman had said, the state
of things was not at all analagous to the circum-
'seances of the preSent day, became then the throne
was vacant, and a King was to be made, instead of a
person to be supplied durifog the indisposition of the
reigning Monarch, It was not the convention of
which the Right Hon. Baronet had spoken, who at
the Revolution tendered. the. Crown to the Prince of
Orange. That Assembly; after discussing the sub-
ject, dissolved itself, desiring the Pfince of Orange to
call a Parliament in the regular way, and it was that
Parliament as they thought themselves, and as they
were thought by the people, who made a tender of the
Crown to the Prince and Princeis of Orange. The na-
tion had at that period more at stake than it had per-
haps ever had before. The established religion had
been attacked, and the laws subverted by a bigotted
Prince, who looked upon Parliaments as nuisances
which he was ambitious of doing away, or at least of
excluding them from any share of the Government.
Thc people had then everything at stake, and they took
the best way of securing their liberties. He believ-
ed there were men alive at that day, who as tho-
toughly understood the Constitution, both theoreti-
cally and practically, as ever it had been understood
since, and they certainly would have recommended a
.better mode of proceeding had they been able. They
intended to g.ec the Royal power to the Pzince and
Princess of Orange, but were determined first to gain
those rights to which they so nobly laid claim. Before
they tendered .the Crown, a declaration to that effect
was made by tile Speaker in the House of Lords to
William and Mary, and the compact once made, they
were proclaimed King and Queen. Those who lived
et that day thought such a compact a 'efficient sects.
rity. They did not think it necessary to have recourse
to fictickk or to fraul ; to gain to their act an assent
from him who could not give one. They thought.their
every purpose answered by an address ; and in estab-
lishing the Throne of 3Villiam and Mary, they estab-
lished their own lan s, their rights, and liberties. The
Right Hon. Gentleman said, that could "not be regard-
ed as a precedent, because at that period a Ring was
to be made. Why, if so, the Act they had to do was so
much the greater. But the Right Honourable Gen-
tleman thought the Legislative Act, which could not
legally be gained, must be illegally procured,to stamp
the legality of their proceedings, and give effect to
their decisions. The more lie thought on it, the more
be (Mr. Ponsonby ) was astonished, how• so extrava-
Laant an ids rcouid be entertained. The law of the
nd said, the assent of the King should be given in
Rill Parliament, or under the Great Seal by Commis-
sion. The law on this subject was so very short that
be would read it to chem.—[Here the Right Ho-
nourable Gentleman read a passage from an Act of
the 33d of Henry VIII. setting forth that the royel
essent should he given, teal ever had been given by
Lis Majesty's letters intent, and tinder his own hand,
and that such assent so given was the same as if
given in person, and as such was tO remain.]—
POI being the law, he would now ask if the King
eras capable of giving his assent in either way there laid

down and described ? That theXing coktici not come
to his Parliamert they kttew, that he Criuld not sign
the necessary paper They also knew. On what prin-
ciple t'len could they pretend to gain the royal assent
where it was impossible that• it could he given by the
King ? Why have recourse to artificial means for
that which could be obtained by'referring tO the best
principles of the Constitution At the period at which
the law to which he had just, called their attention,
bad been made (in the time of Henry the Eighth),
there were several laws in being making.varioua of-
fences treason. Those laws were repealed a few years
after the death of that Nlonarch by the first Parlia-
ment iu the reign of Queen Mary, but in that same
year another act w.‘s passed making it treason to imi-
tate the King's Sign Manual, as the royal.assent could
ably be dethuteby the Sign Manual and under the
Great-Seal. ,t," Such was the I..vr 411 f n, such is the law
at this day." It was remarkable too, that so convinced
were the legislattire'of those times of ale necessity of
that law, than an act of attiinslif which had, been
passed against the then Duke of Norfolk -"*.s re.
'Versed, because the assent of Henry had not been for-
mally given to that Act: It the Act to which he I
*en alluded, it was stilted tti have been reversed, be-
t ause it was not signed " with .his frAhness's own
hand," and because it was not duly sealed. The royal
assent is to be given in hit terson, or by letters pa.
tent tinder the Great Seal, and signed by the king's
own hand: According to the 'Sad of Henry the
Eighth, any Act which shall not so have received the
royal assent, shall be " void and non-effective, and
shall be adj iadged to be no Act of Parliament."—Could
there be wend any authorities mote complete than
those, of the two ways of gaining the royal assent to
an Act of Parliszneot I He contended, no Act of
Parliament 'could be complete, carried in the way
proposedi containing in itself .fraud, fAsehood, im-
positiotv phrportiag in have what it has not, the
rtiyal assent, it could in no way be recognized or al-
Sowed by the laws of the land: It was monstrous,
that such fraucl, that such abominable imposition ,
should be resorted to, when the Constitution sup-
plied•an easy'rernedy which had been -made use of
*A the best'days Or-Parliament. The Right Tlonou-
rable Gentleman had wished to know if by ad-
dress. the Parliament would not virtually give the
Regent the authority as mach from themselves as it
sould be given 'by Bill. It certainly would do' so.
regarded the.ll;inse as competent to give that
ikuthorit it - the mode of &int+. fr

WWI

tended set
. Did they
ire custody of
priety of doing
every one. But
state to the

wire. Every s.
to his Majesty
be supposed that t. limitations,
vary, would be disregarded by the Prince, it stated to
him in a declaration ? As well might Lnrd Somers,
and those who carried the heads of the Bill of Rights
to King William, have expected to be treated with
neglect. It was necessary that the Prince should hare
11. he power of legislation. He ought to have the
power of assenting to Bills that might pass the two
Houses, and was it to be supposed that he would
neglect the suggestions of those from whom he deriv-
ed his authority ? Could it be thought the Prince,
or any of his family whom they might so invest
with power, would treat them with neglect, or re-
fuse to assent to any Bills that might be essential
to the welfare of the King, or the safety of the
People. He could not think they would ever give
the power to any one capable of acting such a part.
.He would insist that the Prince deserved to be en-
trusted with the power by the' two Houses, and the
sole question on • which they had to decide was by
what mode, and what manner, that power should be
given ? The Right Honourable Gentleman thought
the precedent of 1789 would justify them in adopting
his proposition. It was a fraud and a violation of the
principles of the Constitution. Was such a prece-
dent to justify them in committing a new fraud and
in violating the Constitution anew. It was the first
time he bad ever heard a grave assembly told, " your
predecessors acted wrong two and 'twenty years ago,
and you would therefore bejusti fied in doing the same."
Yet on such grounds had the Right Hon. Gentleman
expected them to come info his views; on no other had
lie endeavoured togain the sifpportofthe House. He had
not advanced onesingle new argument in support of the
proprietyaof such a proceeding. He had disdained to
justify it by any argument of his own. He wished
to carry it not by argument but by precedent. Au-
thority against argument and reason is always ab-
surd and frequently mischievous. Yet the measure
recommended by the precedent of 1788, preposterous
as it was, he had preferred to the simple means af-
forded by the Constitution itself for supplying the
defect. The only proper mode of proceeding was by
address. To proceed by Bill was to adopt a measure
the truth of which no man could assert. It was ab-
surd to su that done which every one knew
was .imposnreto be done. Such a proposition was
wholly unworthy the good sense and wisdom of the
House. How far. the Right Hon. Gentleman might
be right as to the restrictions necessary to be imposed,
was a question into which he would not enter, but
any idea of imposing any considerable restrictions,
be thought inexpedient. The Prince had now gained
a period more advanced in life than that at which the
greater number of our Kings has reached before they
ascended the Throne, and, if at 48 years of age, the
Prince was not fit to take upon himself the cares of
Government; he never would be fit to be entrusted
with them, and ought in that case to be excluded from
the regal authority for ever. He would ask what was
the period, and what the state of the country when
these restrictions were intended to be imposed. Was
the country at peace ?—was it in prosperity ?—was it
in security ?—No, it was far from being in such flou-
rishing state;—crippled and almost ruined by a weak
Ind contemptible administration. The Right lios
-eourable Gentleman had spoken much of the bles-
sings enjoyed by the people of England under his Ma.
jesty's long extended reign. He was as sensible as any
man how much the nation owed to the mild virtues
'Of the King, but much as he revered the King's
private character, lie could not but ask if his dorni-'
nions were is that prosperous state in which they once
were ? He could not but ask if we were now in that
state of peace, of security, of tranquillity, and of glory;
with which we were blessed when lie ascended the
throne ? Are the Ministers of the present day such as
then directed the Councils of the nation, or such as
ought now to be entrusted with the guidance of pub.
lie affairs ? The Right Honourable Gentleman
thought himself perhaps one of the blessings of his Ma -
hest y's reign. He had no doubt but he considered
imself as one of the great blessings, in the possession
lof which the people of this happy country ought to
rejoice. His Colleagues, no doubt, he also looked
aipon as blessings, and the measure he now proposed
;;was, doubtless, with a view to secure to the people of
England a continuance of these inestimable blessings.
`But he, for his, part, felt no gratitude for them at all, and no gra-
titude, he believed, was felt for them by thecountry at
-1-le,for one, viewed the Right Honourable Gentlensan opposite in
such a light, that with all his veneration for the Sovereign who
had appointedtim his Minister, he would hail the day of his de-
ture u one of the happiest days England ever saw. The Right
114inoureik• Gentleman then moved as an Amendment, that all
the words of int original motion shbuld be taken away after the
word " that," for theE4ose.of Inserting the following words :
' " Thar ail humble Marisa be presented to his Royal High-
ness the Prince of 'Wales, rcttnesting him to take upon himself,
during his Majesty's present •inasposition, the Government of
these Realms, to administei the same under the tide of Sole Re-
gent of the United Kirigdomi of •Lireat kritain anti Ireland."
Mr. CANNING said, in the two propositions now
before the House; the whole object of the one had
been explained, and the other had been stated only in'
part, the House being left to conjecture what the re-
mainder might amount to. It was not necessary far,
him to go to 4 remote period for an authority in point,
when he saw one exactly analogous, not above twenty
years ago. The cases of the Restoration and of the
Revolution, he admitted had points in' which they'
might bear upon the present case, but still they were
Materially different, and in some respects contradic-
tory. Here there was no usurpation to check--no
rights of which a party had been unjustly deprived..
to which care was to be taken that he should be re-
stored. Here there were no bulwarks to be opposed
against the return to the throne of a despotic monarch,
who had endeavoured to overtarn our religion ; but
facilities were rather to be provided for facilitating the
return of a beloved Monarch to his Throne, and to
the anxious wishes of his people, the moment he should
have recovered from a temporary malady. There
between

proper carrying on of affairs, why was it not entirely
taken away ? He did not wish to bee the hands of
Government weakened. There was no party in this
country in the year 1788, which would have availed
itself of the circumstance of any restriction in this re-
spect on the Executive Government in the hands of.a
Regency ; and he did not now think any such restric-
tion expedient.
Lord TEMPLE entered at some length into the
precedent of the Revolution, and that of 1788. He
concluded by voting in favour of the Resolutions.
Lord JOCELYN spoke on the Ministeri d side of
the question.
Mr. ADAM strenuously opposed the motion, and
supported the address. He contended that the just
and legal course for the House to pursue ivas by re-
solution, and not by bill. An address could be coup-
led with certain restrictive resnlutions, so that there
could be no objection to that mode of proceeding on
that account. The procedure by bill was founded on
the precedent of 1788, by whom was it found neces-
sary to adduce that precedent only ? '1 he fact was,
that no other similar instance in English history was
to be found—it was an unprecedented proceduries--
He contended that it was not fair of the Gentlemen
opposite to say, that because the House had agreed
to the Address to his Majesty in 1789, that there-
fore the whole House approved of the previous
proceeding in 1788, respecting a Regency. Much
had been said about the s, Political capacity of
the King" on former occasions, but the measure
proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer went
to subvert that capacity. If any thing were done
by way of Bill, it ought to be done in conjunction
with the King, and if they proceeded by Bill, with-
out his Majesty being in the full ezeecise of his power,
it would be a death-Wow to his political capacity.--
It had been said, that the proceeding by address was
not so safe as the proceeding by Bill ; but the
contrary was the fact, and the Address could be
accompanied by restrictive Resolutions. Almost
all the restrictions which would be proposed by
the Right Honourable the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, would meet with his opposition, the
restriction respecting the peerage in particular. It
was in effect, putting the Executive branch of the
Constitution into the hands of the Parliament, and
they would be discussing the Kingly prerogatives, a
thing not adviseable. Such discussions were of a
dangerous tendency, and were calculated to cut up
the prerogative by the tones. He objected to the
proceeding by Bill, and there was no effort that he
could make in opposition to it that he would not make
in the course of its progress. He disapproved in toto of
the proposition for restrictions of the prerogative.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL supported the
motion for proceeding by Bill.
Sir S. ROMILLY disapproved of the third Rep.
lution, for the same reason that induced him to ap-
prove of the second Resolution. The House could not
proceed by Bill, for the very mention of such a mode
of proceeding, must• convince every one, that it was
necessary to have his Majesty's assent to a Bill, befote
it could pass into a law ; and how could his Majesty's
assent be obtained during his present melancholy Si-
tuation? The assent of his Majesty meant his will; aid
in his present lamentable state, how could that will
be known ? He disapproved of the Bill, became
thereby the House would legislate without the con-
troul of the third-branch, without • acknowledging
such Act. The Ronse ought to proceed in an open
and manly manner, 'and the proceeding by Bill had
nothing candid and 'open in its while on the contrary,
the proceeding by ail -Address would be frank, ho-
eouratile, and Manly. To the Bill the assent of the
Crown would be given on the auVerity of the House;
but if that House in conjunction with the other House
were of sufficient authority for a mode of proceeding,
then where was the necessity' of the Bill if the two were
competent to provide for the deficiency. If even it
were not an improper proceeding it ,certainly would
be a superfluous one, but it was not a proper mode of
proceeding, the address was what ought to be adopted.
Of the course of proceeding by Address he approved,
and should oppose the motion for a Bill. The Reso-
lution which the House was called upon to adopt was
most unconstitutional and dangerous in its tendency,
therefore he should not approve of it, and should sup-
port the amendment for an Address.
The SOLICITOR CLINERAL supported the Motion for
a bill.

Mr. HORNE Rapproved of the proceeding by Ad-
dress.

Mr. CROKER supportei the Resolution.
Mr. WHITBREAD.—It was not his intention at
that late hour to trespass long upon the attention of
the House. • The Learned Gentleman who has jus-
sat down, has dealt with his precedents in whatever
way he thought proper. , He has converted Bills into
Addresses, and Addresses into Bills. He has spoken
of writings which no man ever wrote, and of signa-
tures which no man ever signed. He (Mr.
bread) would not attempt to follow him through all
the mazes of his learned confusion. The subject upon,
which they were now deliberating was certainly of the
most momentous importance. His Majesty has been
labouring for seven long weeks under the most afflict-
ing disease ; tile exercise of the Royal Authority has
been interrupted ; and the Ministers have dared—
(Hear, Hcar)—to exercise the Royal Functions with-
out making any communication to the Nation. The
Right Hon. Gentleman had 'stated to that House, that
the symptoms of his Majesty's disorder were become
more favoitrable,And that a speedy recovery was to be
anticipated. It appears that from the Ist to the 14th
of November the symptoms were very violent. Could
the Right Hon. Gentleman say, upon the evidence of
the Physicians whom we have examined, that the re-
covery is likely to be speedy ? AU of- them say they
supposing that
be re - '

.:.pefioci of
subject to a
Have the
lartd this
this
301.

' • ***,, ,?( • • • •
• i .
:t ortegislattal which had (Mr. Ponsonti) theilibluivihoultiereise
intend giving the person .d 6 :veto ; trairStendant pop As tniftrdtatioestoii-the Prince
dy of the Queen ? He concitst pia' -1, of Wa4lll, at hiast tis the disposal of places and
doing so, and so he conceived'Would 'alsistist ipennons, he was not prep/meal° saythathe%pproved
But were not the House competent to •of any such, as things were now situated. Could he
fe Prince that such was their intention and tie• I have hesitated on this point, his mind must have been
ry security for the restoration of the powers .made up by an observation of the Honourable Baro.
rajesty could also be obtained. Was it to ; net (Burdett) who had observed, that if such an ap-
ed that the limitations conceived to be neces- pendage was not necessary to the Executive for the

m...tuy. I nere covery is likely to be speedy ? AU of- them say
authOrity ;it was the mode of (king, it for which being these striking dissimilarities between the cases cannot give any such information. But supposing
he contended. There was a proper way as well as an dwelt on by the Right Honourable Gentleman who he did recover, supposing that he should again bi
tasprOper way. The only proper way was by address. had spoken last and the preseut case, he must support stored to the use of his reason—in the future petic
ollowing that mode of giving the author ty had every the proposition of l:is Right -Honottrable Friend (Per- his life, he will again in all probability, be subject
advantage the other mode could pretend to, without ceval) seeing, as he did, an authority altogether in frequent recurrence Of the same calamity. Have
WM ableto the tame objections. It was'qui,te as point in favour of that mode' of proceeding i and not Parliaments which have existedibetween 1288 and
* li
Wiffilmiethe authority of the Regent after giving being satisfied that in addreEsin_g the Prince, as re- period done their duty in makiniepoprovisiensior
dositabority by address, as to do it by-the pre- '.emended by the other Right 11,urtable oiccurreleta ? Zaire vtas su a resupsoce in L