Star.
London, England, 1821-02-01 00:00:00

. . .
fo
in other words, till her rotted in the Liturgy ;
the Bill had
cn was. established? , Why,
if
L.socen
7„-,,e1 to degrade her, surely it would be a disgrace
disgrace which, he was persuaded,
.
tbel°rparliament, a
kindly feeling of theilonourable Member would
,cointeetante; Co lewie her, even degraded as she
without some provision, so that in either case a
vs,
r be voted. Had the motion for the Com-
.„ilee'*rr Ms.
keen agreed t himself the wouldHonourale Gentleman
t e, he pledged that he
.not have
einto the
iie question of the Queen's guilt or in-
would have thought the introduction
0046
Of StXh topic most unmanly under the peculiar
col Instances of the case—(Hear, hear, hear).—
T , would say, that he had no intention of drag-
;gei
into discussion judicial proceedings which had
;tabs place in another House, and which were now
:dour the Public. If he had thought it necessary to
;Jo so, it would not certainly be with the view of li-
w-ng the provision of her Majesty, for under an
(ion that reference ought to be made to such
i:Pqnesrestion, any limitation would be an inadequate
voislmient. But was it because lie forbore from
koducing this topic that he we.; to listen in silence
to the taunts of Hon. Gentlemen on the other side.
Was he to allow the Government, after the long and
flftil duty that they had to di 'charge, to be pub-
rev • led 2—(Hear, hear, and a laugh).—Or was
it not rather to shew that they had discharged a
snottanxious duty in a most honourable and con-
scientious manner ?—(Long continued laughter).—
Was he to sit by quietly and permit that House to go
witiran Address to the Throne, the spirit of which
'sight unfortunately be at variance with that which
bad prevailed in the other House, a circumstance than'
which he could contemplate nothing more prejudi-
cial? Was het because it might please his opponents,
to forego recollection of all the circumstances 'via-
tire to the late proceedings which were on the re-
cords of the country, and stared the Honourable Gen-
demo in the face? Was he to suffer the Honour-
able Member for Essex, and the Noble Lord on the
same side (Lord A. Hamilton) to agitate the country?
--(Lord cries of" Order, order.") Ile did not con-
ceive that he was out of order. Why had they not
brought the question as doing justice to the Queen
(*tidy before the House, and let it be tried on its own
merits? Why had the Noble Lord to-night dis-
graced the books with another notice referring to the
question upon which he was defeated on Friday last?
This notice related to some Presbyterian Clergyman
in some part of Scotland—nobody knew where. It
was quite clear that the only object which Honour-
able Gentlemen on the other side had in view, with
arra to the present question, was to contend for
raver!—(Lourl cries of Hear !)
Sr. TIERNEY rose to order, and submitted, that such an
riras that now thrown upon himself and his Honour-
eda was contrary to all order and decorum of debate.
The SPEAKER concurred with the Right Honourable Gen-
lane, and.thought the Noble Lord had made an allusion to the
liinierable Member for Essex, which was not perfectly in order.
Lord CASTLEREAGH, after apologizing for hay-
* been led into any hasty expressions in the warmth
sidebate, proceeded.—He had stated on a recent oc-
casion, that his Majesty's Government did not con-
template any new measures against her Majesty, and
bethought that ought to have the effect of silencing
those who were so clamorous against him and his
Honourable Friends. He, however, considered the
whole of the proceedings that had occurred open to
the judgment of the House and the Country. The
Noble Lord concluded, by insisting that the regular
course was to go into the Committee at once, as the
House would thus best evince that respectful duty,
which the Crown had a right to expect.
Mr.TIERN EY now rose, and addressed the House.
He commenced by adverting to the circumstance
which obliged him to call the Noble Lord to order.
k was quite unparliamentary for the Noble Lord to
ay of him or his Honourable Friends, that all their
as emanated from a love of power—(Hear, hear).
& had not the affectation to say, that he was not
ambitious ; he felt that he was so, but it wits from
quite a different feeling to that attributed to him by
the Noble Lord. It was natural to seek power, as
the only bond of union that could give effect to the
principles they professed. He knew of no other bond
of union than power—.(Chars). But if the Noble
Lord meant to say, that he (Mr. Tierney) or his Ho-
nonrable Friends would hold power upon the same
taros as the Noble Lord and his friends held it—
then he would throw back the imputation in his teeth,
and tell him, that he would rather die on a dunghill,
than go through some of the work which he had seen
performed !--(Loud and long.cheer ing), However, he
was very willing to make every allowance for the
Warmth of the Noble Lord. lie (Mr. Tierney) might
be warm at the idea of getting into power, and the
Noble Lord might be warm at the idea of getting
out of it—(Laughter). But the Noble Lord and his
Colleagues appeared to act upon the principle of men
who, having no substantive merit of their own, sought
to exalt themselves by their attempts to degrade
others—(Chars). This was precisely the system by
which the public conduct of the present Miniiters
was regulated. The Noble Lord found it necessary
to bring the Queen as low as he could in the public
estimation, for he knew that her re-establishment in
all her rights must be incompatible with his contintr,
ante in otfice—(Hear, hear). It was very amusing
to observe with what confidence the Noble Lord
asked—at Would you think me so unmanly as to in-
troduce the question ofthe Queen's guilt or innocence?"
Be knew not whether the Noble Lord was so unmanly
to-day or not, but he was certain of his having been
so unmanly on Friday last—(Laughter). Never yet
had there been heat d a more unmanly attack on a
&fenceless woman, than that contained in the latter
part of the Noble Lord's speech on Friday. The Mes-
sage sent down by the Queen was not palatable to the
Noble Lord. Upon the merits of it, be (Mr. Tierney)
mould pronounce no opinion ; but this he would,
however, say, that had he been the Queen he would
have sent a similar one under tb,e ctiOntstances.—
At was said by the Noble Lord, that the professed
object of it was, to attack and insult the Crown—quite
the contrary. There might per)aps hale been some
colour for the imputation, had Message been sew
the money was voted ; but it wai obvious that
the object of the Queen was to avoid any 'remarks. of
the kind while at the same time she sought to vin-
dicate her honour—(Cheers).—Before accepting any
PeoviUon of a pecuniary nature,. she said, st I owe it
aq*if to declare, that I. will not take your money.
you absolve my character." This he contended
Was language every way worthy of a queen—(Lrear,

4ear)-:Lbut then the Noble I,6rd made a boast of his
lorbearance, by stating that no new proceedings were
-to be instituted against her Majesty. The reason WAS
obiious, he knew he Jared not institute any—( Hear,
.isear).—.lt was also said by the Noble Lord, that the
'House was bound to study the Records of the House
of tords io reference to the late proceedings. This
lie (Mr. Tierney) denied, they were under no such
obligation. Ile had himself perhaps the most reason
lo complain of the Charge brought by the Noble Lord
against him and his Honourable Friends of disturbing
_the public tranquillity. He thought he was the last
man in the House against whom such a charge could
be brought—( Hear, hear ).—lle had always cau-
tiously abstained from offering any opinion on the
inei its of the question till all the proceedings were
concluded, reserving to himself, however, the right
of delivering his sentiments when the several details
were gone through. Indeed, he had even gone so'
far as to incur a complaint from the Noble Lord for
his moderation—(A laugh).—He would now honestly
and sincerely declare, that he regarded with horror
the doctrines advanced by the Noble Lord within the
last half hour--(Cheers).—He had been bred a lawyer,
and he considered these doctrines not only as repug-
nant to every principle of law and justice, but to every,
principle of gentlemanly feeling—( I fear, hers r).—
So help him GOD* he n7ver thought that the most
desperate efforts of a discomfited Administration
would have resorted to them—(Hear).—CTlie Right
lion. Gentleman was here proceeding to read some
extracts from the Lords' Journals, when he was called
to order.) —Well, he was not allcwed to read those
documents, but he might talk of what he heard—(.4
laugh). He had heard it said, that a majority of the
House of Lords had declared the Queen guilty, This
he positively denied. The Right Hon. Gentleman
then urged some arguments, to shew that the second
reading of the Bill did not amount to a moral con-
viction of the Queen's guilt in the minds of many of
the Peers who had voted for it. They might have sup-
ported one stage of the Bill and not another. If the
contrary doctrine was maintained, there would be an
end of all public security, and England would be re-
duced to the state of Turkey. Since the Bill had
been abandoned, the whole policy of Ministers was
to cast a stigma upon the Queen. The Noble Lord
had said, that he knew the motives which had in-
duced his Noble Friend to give up the Bill ; did he
meal! to say that his Noble Friend had not publicly
declared, that if it was not passed her Majesty'would
be entitled to all her rights as Queen Consort ? The
Noble Lord was surprised to think that there should
be any objection to voting away the public money ;
this might be very well for the Noble Lord, who al-
ways paid so little regard to' economy; yet it was the
duty of those who were more careful of the public purse,
to See that the sums voted were for proper purposes.
The Noble. Lord had offered nothing in the shape of
argument, in reply to his Honourable Friend. He
did nothing but endeavour to raise a clamour about
their efforts to pull down the Constitution. For his
own part, he was sure he was not acting unconstitu-
tionally, however unpleasant his style of-acting might
be to the Noble Lord!—(Laughter.) lie was fully
convinced that the only mode of restoring tranquillity
to the country was to re-establish the Queen in all her
constitutional rights and privileges—(Hear, kear)—
after her providential escape from the prosecution
which Elio Ministers of the Crown had instituted
against her. According to the speech of the Noble'
Lord, he had no objection to be tried himself for his
conduct. Perhaps not, if he himself were allowed to
draw up the indictment!—(Laughter.) The Queen
had gone through a most dreadful ordeal; she had
experienced the most cruel treatment--(Hear, /rear)—
she had, however, come off victorious; and why was
she not to enjoy the fruits of victory in the possession
of her just rights? The mode of proceeding against
her was unknown to the Constitution- of the land ;
but, as a grand panacea, the Bill was to pass bcth
Houses, and then receive the Royal assent. That not
being done, he denied in Coto that any verdict against
her had been pronounced. 'f he Lords, a select body,
did not represent the People, but were as a balance,
for a wise purpose, between the Crown and the People.
Yet it would be observed, that in the late proceed-
ings the Lords shewed infinitely more regard for the
rights of the people than those Representatives in this
House who acted in concert with the Noble Lord—
( Hear, hear).—The Right Hon. Gentleman then
animadverted on the majority on the third reading
of the Bill, observing, that it was composed only of
the Queen's accusers; and that they bad led some
honest Peers through all their dirty work, who, find-
ing that Ministers acted so inconsistently in abandon-
ing the measure, signed a protest, si;nifying their
disapprobation at its being given up. The Noble
Lord said it was his object, as it was his wish, to
preserve tranquillity, &c. He (Mr. Tierney) gave him
entire credit for the feeling, but he differed with the
Noble Lord as to the definition of the word. He
certainly did not admire that sort of tranquillity in
the House which gave a simple " aye" to every de-
mand for a sum of money—(Year).—But he asked
those Gentlemen, who, like the Noble Lord, wished
for tranquillity, did they think the Noble Lord's
course was likely to secure it?—(Hear).—Who, put-
ting his hand to his heart, would say that the refusal
by Ministers to restore her Majesty's name to the
Liturgy was likely to put an end to the general de-
lusion, and restore tranquillity to the country?—
He defied any Member, however warm in the cause,
to deny that such a measure was not, on the contrary,
calculated to increase the irritation, and keep for
ever alive those lamentable divisions, which agitated
the country from one end of it to the other. And
with regard to the hope now thrown out fo the peo-
ple's feelings, did the Noble Lord calculate that a
grant of £50,000 a-year to the Queen would act as a
sedative to all the irritation which his former mea-
sures, ill-advised and unjust as they were, had pro-
duced? If the Noble Lord supppsed so, he deceived
•himself, and if he would deceive the House, by lead-
ing it into the same delu,sion conduct, was crimi-
:n4 in a high degree, He (Mr. Tierney) could assure
:the Noble Lord, if, indeed, he was at this hour of the
day, without knoWing the fact, that the country would
'not be satisfied with half-measures,things could not
• •
remain in stutu giro, with a mere R.5Q,0005 a-year—
,they would not be content until she was put in full
'restitution of all her rights,(Hear). And he (Mr.
Tierney) honoured her Majesty fur her Message toe
night. It showed_ her character in such high light,
It reflected honour on her; because it shewed that she
ihad. a becoming contempt for money, and that ;4

preferred her character above every other minor or
baser consideration—(Ffear). But it was said by
the Noble Lord, that if the money.was once voted,
the Queen would be at liberty to accept or decline it.
This iusertion must have been made by the Noble
Lord in the ignorance of the Queen's character, and
the respect x+hich was due to the dignity of the
House of Commons, for he (Mr..scierney) could as-
sure the Noble Lord that her Majesty would not
treat the House of Commons in such a way as to re-
fuse its grant, without having given it previous no-
tice of her intention to do so. But it was in vain 'to
disguise the real nature of this proposition, for what
was it-after all but a continuation of that low malt._
cious persecution, too unmanly to be called hostility,
and too contemptible to be designated as anything
but a lame and miserable attempt to vilify -the
-Queen by occult and collateral attacks—(Hear). But
he would gravely ask the Noble Lord what founda-
tion in fact the House had for voting this sum to the
Queen ? Look to the King's Speech, not a word was
to be found there like authority for such a measure.
He (Mr. Tierney), therefore, doubted much whether
the House could vote anything, and he confessed he
was totally at a loss to see any recommendation in
the speech to make a " provision for the Queen."
For were not the words " I have from time to

time made such advances as were necessary, !cc.
and it now remains for Parliament, under the
present circumstances, to consider, Stc."—(Hear).--
Who would venture to say, that this was a recom-
mendation to vote anything? mid what was the no-
cessity on her Majesty's part, to which the advances
in the Speech were referred? Was it any voluntary'
or wanton extravagance on her part ? No such thing;
the money was required by her to defend herself—to
shield her from attacks directed against her honour,
which was dearer to her than her life. But why did
not the Message say manfully " make such provision
for the Queen as her rank and station require ; give
her Majesty that which will enable her to sustain,
with becoming eclat, her dignity and her character."
Why not say so, and the recommendation would be
honourable to the Crown, and intelligible to that
House. But no, the King was made to say, " Take
the Queen's case into your hands, and give her that
which to you, not me, appears fitting under the pre-
sent circumstances"—(Hear, hear).—Present circum-
stances! What did the words meam? What was
there peculiar in the Queen's case fit for,alie conside-
ration of Parliament? or what other knowledge had
the House and the Country of her Majesty, but that
she had been tried, persecuted, and acquitted, and
that up to this good hour she had not yet received
a shilling of the public money ?—(Cries of Hear).—
The Noble Lord would do well to explain the words,
and he would also give satisfaction, if he accounted
for the omission of the word "provision" in the
Speech ; for the word, though in the Address of the
House, was entirely left out in the Speech ; and he
(Mr. Tierney) well knew that such omission was not
the effect of chance or negligence—for every. word
was studied, and intended to have a certain effect.—
But what reason was there for speaking of that magic
sum of £50,000 a-year? It ought to be less, or it
ought to be a great deal more. The Noble Lord
said, that if the Queen was convicted, the House would
have made some provision for her ma:ntenance.—
True, it would so : an English House of Commons,
considering the high rank which her Majesty once
enjoyed, and her illustrious connexions, would not,
doubtless, leave her entirely unprovided for. But was
it pretended that a sum of L:50,000 would be expected
or granted undEr such circumstances ? Certainly,
such a speculation never could be indulged for a
moment. Well, then, as the Queen was not a con-
vict, and as her allowance was no longer a matter of
charity, he (Mr. Tierney) asserted, that £50,000 was
too little for her to maintain her high station; and
the Noble Lord ought to shew that she had necessa-
rily a Court to keep up, and other expenses to defray,
before he asked so large a sum as £50,000 a-year.—
Unless the Queen was liable to those expenses which
attend upon her high station, £50,000 was too much ;
and if she had all those rights to which she was enti-
tled, perhaps it was too little. The Noble Lord had
talked of the allusion, made on a former night, to
the sending the Orders in Council respecting the
Liturgy into Scotland, The Noble Lord, if he under-
stood him rightly, had defied that side of the House
to make any Motion on the subject ; and he could
assure the Noble Lord, that he would be gratified—
' there would be another Motion made, which would

raise the question as to the propriety of leaving her
Majesty's na-re out of the Liturgy—(Hear, hear).—
The Noble Lord might be assured that there would
be another motion on the subject, and, indeed, he (Mr.
Tierney) and his friends would be deficientin their.
duty if they failed to do So—(Hear, hear). And he
would now take occasion to warn the Noble Lord
against indulging in those feelings of contempt which
he seemed to entertain for what he termed the lower
classes. That class to which he attached the invidi-
ous appellation was very different now from what it
had been some forty or fifty years ago. They were
no longer a rabble, with whom everything was car-
ried by noise and clamour—they were now persons
well educated, capable of thinking fairly, and of
judging correctly of the state of public affairs. But
though their judgment was matured, yet it was ca-
pable of being-warped by the pressure of severe dis-
tress, now near they were now to that state he (Mr.
Tierney) would not hazard an opinion, but he would
say, that it was only upon the most momentous oc-
casions that the possibility of such a crisis ought to
be braved, But what indulgence was to be shewn
men who would beard that feeling upon a question,
of whether an acquitted queen was or was not to be
entitled to all the benefits of her acqUittal?—(Loud
cheers.)—The Noble Lord talked of tranquillity—
was this the conduct likely to secure it?—(Hear.)
Was he likely to restore peace by advancing such a
proposition in the very teeth of the People? The
Noble Lord Might, indeed, boast of his majorities in
that House; but did it chew strength to propose an
adjournment of the Douse, the other morning, at
seven o'clock, instead of meeting the question fairly,
us it ought to he met?—(Hear, hear): And revert-
ing to that debate, he would, say it vas impossible
but that many Members who voted for the adjourn-
ment, would haye given a different vote on the merits
of the question. There was no man who, being
asked his private opinion, could, lie was.sure, lay his
hand to his breast, and. say he did n‘t condemn the
measures of Ministeis: The Noble /kid
as many awl hig.ll-spoding phase,. as he pleased,

but the Queen's name would, notwithstanding, bt re-
stored to the Liturgy. Let the NOble Lord believe
him, and he would Stake his credit upon the evert.
And if it happened that things were so bad, that this
very night he was to make a motion for restoring her
name to the Liturgy, and that only twelve Members
went out with him, the 600 stopping within, yet
would he pledge himself that, one day or other, and
that not a very distant day, her Majesty's name would
be eventually restored ! (Hear, hear). —For what was
it that gave, the impulse to every question debated
there—was it not public opinion? And when he
Fsaw abroad so sincere an attachment to the cause of
the persecuted, and so cordial an abhorrence of per-
secution, he was convinced in his own mind that the
people would never give over until they had obtained
the full restitution of her Majesty to all her rights
—( Hear ).—The omission. Of her name had caused
a ferment which the Noble Lord was bound to allay.
He would advise the Noble Lord to set speedily and
sincerely about it, and he would suggest to !him that
the only means of accomplishing the thing was by
proving to the country, that she. who had been ac-
quitted, ought and would have the full benefit of that
acquittal—(Hear, hear).
Mr. C. BATII(JRST vindicated his Majesty's
Speech, the preliminary part of which he contended
contained a clear recommendation to make provision
for the Queen. The Speech stated, that her Ma-
jesty had not had as yet any provision, and from that
might be gathered the meaning of the word " pre-
sent circumstances." Surely Parliament was the
fittest Tribunal to entertain the question of the
Queen's allowance. The Noble Lord had properly
alluded to the matters in the other House, for they
were now become the property of the public. By
the second reading of the Bill, the principle of it sac
adopted, as he contended. That House and the
Country might judge of the evidence in the other
House, without taking into accoant the judgments of
their .ordships. The Queen now stood in the same
situation as if she had never been accused. She was
not entitled to ask a boon from the Crown. The
motion of the Noble Lord (A. Hamilton) was but a
trick of political expediency. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman concluded, by saying, that he should" say no
more on the principle of the =joie and that the
Committee was the proper place fur going into its
details, and ascertaining what sum ought or ought
not to be granted to the Queen.
Lord FOLKSTONE rose to support the proposi-
tion for an immediate adjournment on the motion of
the Noble Lord. He implored the House not to go
one step further in this business. From the beginning
—from the birth of the Green Bag, he had never
ceased to deplore the introduction of this most un-
happy proceeding. And if it appeared objectionable
in the beginning, every step which was taken on it
subsequently, only made that disgust which he first
felt increase. Neither was the Noble Lord's speech
to-night calculated to undo the impression. He did
not now talk of the intemperance which that Noble
Lord, otherwise so cool—(Hear, hear)—betrayed ;
but he sincerely deprecated the angry feeling which
appeared to have 1 n called' up in the Noble Lord's
bosom, so early as the fourth day of the Session. For
if the Noble Lord.betrayed his feelings so soon, what
would they be, towards the close of the Session, after
many and protracted discussions—and how would
they spew as towards the Country? And what in
fact was the subject or object of the Noble Lord's
proposition—could it. be said that it was meant for
her Majesty's benefit, when in the very speech in
which he asked a grant-for her, he threw out against
her the most bitter sarcasms? Ifear).--,The Noble
Lord went little short olaccusing her Majesty of High
Treason ; and was this language which, at the present
, moment, ought to go forth to the Public ?—(llea r).—
He talked of the-unconstitutional errors of the Queen
and some of her friends. Unconstitutional errors,
indeed ! Well might the Noble Lord and his col-
leagues use the words. Errors from the men who
suggested and brought in the Bill of Pains.and Pe-
nalties—(Hear)—who talked of that infamous Bill as
a means of reforming the morals of the• country—
(l/ear)—who could now distinguish between a Queen
judicially acquitted and morally convicted!—(l tear.)
Could such men taunt any one with unconstitutional
errors? Now, did not these men argue, that be-
cause one hundred arid twenty-three Peers voted for
the second reading of the Bill, that her Majesty had,
therefore, been convicted of adultery ? And sup-
posing they so found • the defendant guilty, what
was this number but the third part of the House of
Lords ? For it should never be forgotten, that the
Bill in which they voted, was a Bill of Pains and
Penalties, and that there were many other allega-
tions in the Preamble besides the charge of adultery.
For instance, there was one for taking Bergami into
her service, another for taking his family, a third for
conferring honours on him, and a fourth for creating
those honours for the purpose;—in fine, there were
eight distinct charges, and who would say that the
majority who voted for the Bill thought all these, or
how many of them, necessary to constitute the crime
of adultery ?—(I fear, hear). Yet Ministers would
hold out to the country that her Majesty had Lad the
fairest possible trial. The Noble Lord on the oppo-
site side was putting the Queen in the same situation
as if she had been convicted ; and he maintained that
At:was most unfair and unjust to infer guilt to her
Majesty from the circumstance of 123 Peers having
voted for the second reading of the Bill of Pains anal
Penalties. The uniform rile, as in all trial-, was, that
the person who got off in any way, whether by a
verdict hr in 'abandonment of; the prosecution, was
notgoilty ; and that, ever) in such case, it would be
unjust Wider a moral-conviction of guilt. It was a
most unfortunate circumstance that this subject had
ever been brought forwsiA, because every time it had
been discussed, a serious evil accrued to the country;
Lity such discussions the Monarchy wits degraded, and
the Members •of the Royal Family were dragged
through the dirt. He saw no reason why her Majesty
shOuld,not have a provision made for her ma of the
Civil List, which, in. thesetimes, when the value of
money was increased, 'could very well be spared out
of that' fund, fridee4he.shottld hail it as a circum,
stance tending. greatly W promote the respectability
of tie Clown, if this subject were withdrawn from
Parliament altogether.. iForstliese reasons he shou'd
move, as an.-Anientinteist"-Tkaa, instead of the
Speaker's leaving.the.drair,..thie,House should now
adjourn. —Effete there was a loud cry of Questio.: !
,Thq Gallery was ordered to be cleared; and while
strangers were retiring:—~Trnnover.

1

Mr. J.-BROWN declared it had appeared to him
Who the object of the Noble Lord to keep the mat-
ter now in debate perfectly clear of the question of
the gwlt or innocence of the Queen. NVhen others i
were so angry that those opposest to thetreconsidered
the Queen guilty, he thought he had as good a right
to complain of their assuming that she was innocent,
after a Bill of Pains and Penalties had been brought
in against her, and carried to the second reading. It
had been stated by her most eloquent advocate in the
House of Lords, that, as she had virtually been found
guilty, he could not consent to the Divorce Clause
being withdrawn. The Queen had been virtually
convicted on the third reading; and yet it was con-
:ended that she was now to be held up to the world
with all the honours of the virtuous Queen Char-
lotte !—(Hcar, hear). He objected to the proposed
grant, as extravagant and improper, seeing it went to
place on the same footing with one of the best and
most virtuous Queens, one who, to say no mote, was
more than suspected of not being quite so good.—
With• these feelings, he should be happy to vote for
a smaller sum. _ _

---
After the Gallery was again ordered to be cleared,
• Mr. LAMB rose. lie said, his wish always was
that this business should never be brought forward.'
As the proceedings against her Majesty had been
brought to a conclusion, he must consider her as vir-
tually acquitted; and, therefore, he thought her name
ought to be restored to the Liturgy. Ori these grounds
he also thought she was entitled to a provision. At
the same time, he also thought it would have been'
altogether as favourable for her if she had in the first
instance accepted the E 50,000 a-year which had been
offered to her, before any trial came on—(Loud cries;
of Hear, hear).—And even at the conclusion of the
it. would have been as well if she had given upl
this point of the Liturgy—(Hear, hear).—And al-
though he would not presume to condemn, he could
not help lamenting the Message which her ;Majesty
had sent down to the House that day. It would be
unwise for the House to alter its course in consequence
of that Message. In pursuance, then, of tile duty which
he owed to his country, and with a view of calming
the agitated state of the public mind, he should vote
far the House goinr, into a Committee—(Hear).
Mr. BIIOUGHLI said, he should not long oc-
cupy the attention of the Ilousc after the question had been so
faly discussed. In justice to her 3lajesty, and as a party in that
triad in which she had been acquitted, he 'hould claim the in-
d:.l:.,, trice of the House for a short time. Ile should put it to
lion. Friend, whether he was justified in making the obser-
vation he had done respecting her Majesty? Tha position of
his lion. Friend must mean, if it meant anything, that every
body who had made charges aZaiust the Queen was right; that
her Majesty was wrong in everything; and that, after the pro-
ceedings against her had been concluded, she ought to have ac-
knowledged herself wrong; although the King himself bad,
with a voice that was echoed through all parts of the country,
proclaimed the whole of the proceedings against her . Majesty
to be concluded. For his own part, the fullest conviction rested
on his mind that the Queen was entirely guiltless—(Hear, hear)
and that the Court which tried her, constituted as that Cant
WAS, had pronounced her guiltless; and that the proceeding of
the Court was not even so strong in her favour as the confes-
sion of the prosecutor himself. In the opinion of his Honour-
able Friend, her Majesty ought now to give up all claims to ker
privileges, and crouch to the proceedings that had taken place.
Ile went as far as to say, that after an actual, and not a virtual
acquittal, she ought to come forward and acknowledge what
oven the prosecutor did not dare to advance; and that she ought
now to do an act which would endanger the tranquillity of the
country, and might even be fatal to her own repose and security.
If he Cllr. ISlougham) had conceived that thL Liturgy was a thing
of no importanceno more than as dust in the balance of this
question, the Noble Lind opposite would have relieved him
from all doubt, by the manner in which he treated the question.
At one time the Noble Lord looked on the exclusion of her Ma-
jesty's name as a stigma : now he called the abandonment of the
Bill of Pains and Penalties a technical acquittal, and would
assume that the Bill ought to band the consciences of that Houle,
although it had never come down there. He never heard any
thing more moderate in its tone than the Nlessage sent down to
the House by her Majesty that day. There was nothing in it
like a tone of dictation, and he merely said, that the intended'
vote of the House would be needless, because she would not ac-
ccde to it, while she continued in a state of degradation. How
could such a Message as this be coostreed into disrespect to the
House lie could lay his Land on his heart, and conscientiously
declare., that he saw no means of terminating these discussions,
except by doing justice to her Majesty, on the principle that she
who had been acquitted, ought not to be treated as if she were
guilty—(Hear, hoar).
Mr. BRIGHT conceived it was the duty of the House to
proceed immediately to the proposed grant ; and he thought the
Message of her Majesty this day, was an additional reason why
the House should do its duty in voting the proposed sum to the
Queen.' as the only means of tranquillizing the country—(!Wear).
Mr. MARTIN (of Galway) supported the motion for the
Speaker leaving the Chair.—(Here there were loud cries of
" Withdraw, and clear the Gallery !")
Mr. WESTERN rose to speak in reply, but finding the dis-
position of the (louse to be against any further discussion, he
would not occur-y any of its time.
The nintion for the fireman. leaving the Chair was then car-
ried without a division. The House having accordingly resolved
itself into a Committee,

Lord CASTLEREAGH rose and said, the only quer ion on
which the Committee had then to deli.rerate was, what should
he the proper quantum of allowance to he granted to bur )la-
jesty ? lie should propose such a provisiou as he considered
suitable to her present situation. In looking at the condition of
her Majesty, it appeared to be that of a Queen Consort sepa-
rated from the IZ:ng. It was a separation recognized by hia
late Majesty. and our which had been felt by him as inevitable.
The provision, ther:fore, could not be that of the Queen living
in the Court of her husb-mi, and keepinr, up all the forms of
State along with him. If the Queen survived his Ith.jesty, she
would be entitled to a dower of fifty thousand pounds a year;
therefore he thought the same income should be given to her
senile living separate from her husband, and which was the
Sallie as that proposed tote given to her in 1514.—The grounds
on which the House then made that provision existed at this
time. It was on the same ?rinciple that a similar offer had been
made to her at St. Omer s. The Noble Lord concluded by
moving :—" That it is the opinion of this Committee, that his
Majesty be enabled to grant annually the sum of £50,000 out
of the Consolidated Fund, for the sole and separate use of her
Majesty, during her Majesty's life."
Mr. STUART WORTI.EY objected to the granting a sum
to this amount; for he safe great danger in placing so large a
sum in her hands—in the hands of one who had used such un-
warrantable language in her Answers to various Addresses, and
particularly in her Letter to the King. He defied any man to
say that such fentiments as they contained were not directly
calculated to overturn the Constitution of the Country—(Loud
cries of Hear, tear). Gentlemen most recollect, that that House
had often refused to grant much smaller sums to other branches
of the Royal Family; and the Queen ought to consider it as a
great favour if the House voted her a less sum than .€50,000.
He wished that matters should return so peace and quietness,
and that all proceedings might drop; and it was for that reason
he would not propose an Amendment to the Motion. But he
should nut feel he had done his duty, if he dlcrnot hold in re-
probation, the language used by her Majesty.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought it highly improper to throw
out such a charge against her Majesty, after her severe and bit-
ter trial. Ile quoted a passage from the Histoey of Henry VIII.
in which it appeared that Cardinal Wolsey had made a similar
charge against Queen Catherine, of having gone much abroad,
and endeavoured to gain the favour of the people, to the great
danger of the King's person. Abe very same Spirit seemed now
to actuate certain persona in the country, and he did not think
that any man of common generosity would have Imputed it as a
crime to her AlJjesty, that she bad throw. knelt on the people
tor supper..

Mra HUME rose amidst some expressions of impatient', and
defended the Answers of her Majesty to the Addresses.. They
were constitutional truths, and be did not espect some Honour-
able Members to admire them. They expressed sound morality, ,
and were consistent with the Christian Religion.
Mr. STUART WORTLEY observed, that ea far from being
constitutional truths, he considered them seditious libels, and he
should give notice, when the House resumed, of his intention to
address the King, to lay the Queen's letter before the House.
Mr. HOLM NE SUMNER thought it impossible to concern- !
plate the provision intended for her Majesty previous to her
marriage, as that by which the House should be regulated, after
what had passed in another place. The Honourable Gentleman
on the other side had said, that it was unmanly, on the present
occasion, to advert to the put conduct of the Queen. Strange !
the House was to bear from those Gentlemen of conspiracies
and of bribes, and of subornation of witnesses; but the facts
elucidated, not by the evidence of those witnesses, but by that ,
of the witnesses of the Queen herself—those facts the House
was, in humanity, to pus over.—(Hear, hear! from the lards- ,
feria' Benches.)—lf the Queen had shewn any contrition (groans
front the Opposition), be would have been the last man to say a •
word about bee past conduct; but he would not suffer himself •
to be put down by clamour. To his mind there never had been
a clearer case of adulterous intercourse, or of degrading conduct
in any class of life, than that which had been proved against the
Queen—(Grunts.):—Gentkmen on the other side said that her
Majesty stood acquitted. He (Mr. 11. Sumner) thought that
she stood as convicted, and not brought up for judgment !
(Lough from the Ministerial Benchea)—The conduct of the
Queen was, and had been, one continued effort to bring into
contempt every institution in the country. She had vilified the
House of Lords; she had defied diem, and she had said., " You
may decide what you please ; but I will appeal to the feelings
of the people." It had been said that her Answers to the Ad-
dresses presented were answers written in a moment of irrita-
tion. That might have been the case with respect to the first,
second, or third; but their language became every day stronger
and more seditious. The very Message which had but then been
received by the House skewed a spirit of determined hostility
and a determination to keep alive the disturbed feeling of the
country; that Message evinced a disposition which ought to put
every Member of the House upon his guard; which should in-
duce him to pause before he committed such ample means to the
guidance of her Majesty. The Honourable Member was sur-
prised that no one had yet moved for an account of the sums
advanced to the Queen since she had been in this country ; and
indeed her Majesty ought.properly to have given the House
some information as to the manner in which those sums had been
disposed of. He heard, not only from public rumour, but from
authority to which some respect was due, that the Queen bad
sot paid a single private bill since she had been in England!—
Rear, *hear, hear!)—There was not a tradesman paid.—
Groans.)—The house ought to know bow the money had been
isposed of. If it had not been paid to those who were enti-
tled to it, perhaps it hadiseen paid to prompt all the fine pro-
cessions to Brandenburgh-house ; or to the Press, which in-
stilled its daily poison into the ears of the whole-community.—e
Giving to the Queen all the benefit of an acquittal, he thought
£30,000 a-year an ample income for a woman who had been CM
years separated from her husband ; but he would go no further.
The Honourable Member then moved, as an amendment to the
original modoo, that an income of afao,ooo per year should be
granted to her Majesty.
Dr. LUSILINGTON thought it matter of regret, that the
Bill of teens arid•panalties had not passed from the Douse of
Lords to an assembly where it might have been discussed with
all that temper, niciekration, humanity, and justice, which had
so conspicuously telotned the speech of the Honourable Mem-
ber for Surrey--(a lang!.; —that iloneurable Member was the
first man in that House who had presumed to utter, who had
dared to declare—(heareind order)—who had dared to declare,
that the Queen had been approved and found guilty of adultery
--(hear). The Hon. Member for Surrey had not followed the
wise example of the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Castlereagh),
who hail prudantly ab-tainted from comment on the subject;
but, not having been called upon to judge the cause—having
heard, in all probability; the evidence but imperfectly—having,
perhaps, merely read the evidence without seeing the witnesses
—the lion. Member came forward, uncalled, unasked, to de-
clare her Majesty, in his firm conviction, guilty. Really, when
he looked at the whole train of proceeding, and thought of the
opinion which the Hun. Member (ialr. Holing Sumnet) had
pronounced, he did not think that the Queen might have met a
fairer trial from a jury of convicted felons—(hear and crdcr)—
with a Judge not appointed for political tergiversation, than
could be anticipated Irons persons who condemned her even un-
heard. And upon what description of proceeding was she so
condemned ? Upon a dill of Pains and Penalties—upon a pro-
ceeding which was not only repugnant to every constitution:.)
principle—but which, even wnea given up half way, produced
almost all the bad consequences to the party attacked which
could have resulted from its beieg prosecuted to conclusion. The
Honourable Member for Surrey had taken :Iron himself to de-
cide rather harshly and rather hastily. Was that Honourable
Member acquainted with all the motives by which legal advisers
were likely to be influenced? 'Was he so clearly aware of the
plan and principle upon which her Majesty's defence had been
conducted ? Was it not possible that the legal advisers of her
Majesty might have had, during the whole proceeding, an eye,
is prospect, to the. How eof et:amens? Who could say that
the fact was not so? And when it was known that witness after
witness continued to arrive after the defence was over, common
humanity, Dr. Lushington should have thought, would have
dictated the more favourable conclusion. The lion. and Learned
Member then adverted to what bad been said by Mr. H. Sum-
ner as to the expenees of the Queen. Since he- Majesty had been
in this country she had received at the rate of 35,0001. a year,
and not a shilling more. Large advances had been spoken of:
but the Hon. and Learned Member would tell the house, that
he, at the time of her Majesty's first arrival in England, had had
occasion to apply for an advance to her of 5,0001. and that that
advance of aamol. bad been refused. It had been refused,
though wanted for matters of absolute necessity ; and her Ma-
jesty had, for a time, been obliged to receive credit. Because,
forsooth, some one had told him that her Majesty had not paid
a certain bill, all the rest of the money which she had received,
bad been disbursed in paying the Press, in bribery, and in dis-
seminating seditious and treasonable publications—(cheers)--
another demonstration that, with this lloneurabk Gentleman,
accusation was tantamount to proof, and iinpeachmer.t to con-
viction—(ehec,s).—lle begged that he might not be misunder-
stood; but he dad enaintain that her Majesty was treated harshly
and cruelly when a casual expression in an answer to an address
was brought u? in array against her, and every ambiguous word
was imputed to her as a mortal sin. Nobody could know so well
as those who had been in habits of intercourse with her Majesty,
what had been the nature and amount of her disbursements.—
Nobody, during the continuance of the proceedings against her
Majesty, could so well as her legal advisers the sufferings
under which she laboured. They had been compelled to break
in upon her rest at all hours of the night (a titter arwrej :.ate $t
the Minerterin/ Members), because there was no memory except
her's towhich they could apply for information which was indis-
pensably necessary for them to have before they could proceed
to the cross-examination of the witnesses produced against her.
Wu her mind, too, he would ask, freed from all subjects likely to
inflame it? or was it not Inflamed by a persecution which bad
been carried on against her with unrelenting malice for four-and-
twenty years, which bad already subjected her to trials, and which
was to end at last in that most odioui and unconstitutional of all
measures a Bill of Pains and Penalties? He knew no person whose
passions were so much under command as not to have felt sonic
degree of irritation at such treatment ; and be would say that it
was much better that such irritation should be expressed as her
Majesty had expressed it at the moment, than pent up in silence In
the breast, and brought forward at a future time for worse var.
poses. When Gentlemen viewed her situation in this light, be
trusted that not one of them would be found who could view
it with any other feeling than that of sincere commiseration for
her sufferings. He trusted that, instead of turning her answers
to the Addresses into a matter of accusation against her, they
would say—" Here is an Illustrious Lady, who, on appro:sdaing
our shores, was flattered with a prospect of joy and ha
but who, on reaching them, met with unmerited enmity
persecution." All the hopes which she once bad to support her
are now faded, fallen, and gone. Separated originally from her
husband, without any person imputing the blame of that sepa-
ration to her; subjected to a persecution for twenty-five years,
as unjust as it was cruet and unrelenting; brought by it to a
trial of forty-five days' continuance, which ended in a result
which, on every principle of the British Constitution, was tan-
tamount to au acquittal ;—surely, under such circumstances, her
sufferings were not to be aggravated by petty personal insults, or
rendered more acute by the deprivation of necessary pecuniary
i resources?—(Hear, /rear).
Mr. HOLM' SUM= and Mr. Alderman Woon rose at the
IMO time to address the Committee ; but the cries for the latter
Oestiesson readdress the House being predominant,