Star.
London, England, 1820-06-20 00:00:00

Weer% eke necessity of a public inquiry into the information laid
before the two Houses.
• S. 'The arrangement to be made must be of such it nature as
to require from neither party any concession as to the result to
which such inquiry, if ,proceeded on, might lead. The Queen
meat not .be understood to admit, nor the King to retract,
anything. •
5. That, in order the better to accomplish the above import.
ant object, it was proposed that whate ?L'r might pass in the first
conference, should pledgeereither party to any opinion ; that
nothing should be recorded et :thout previous communication,
and, as far as possible, common consent; and that, in order to
facilitate explanation, and, to er.courage unreserved discussion,
the substance only of what passed should be reported..
These preliminary points being agreed to, the questions to be
examined (as contained in Lord Liverpool's memorindtun of
?ern 15, 1620, delivered to hlr. Brougham previous to his pro.
reeding to Sr. Omer's, and in Lord Liverpool's note of thellth
of June, and Mr. Brougham's note of the 12th of June, written
by the Q,ucen's command) were
Ist, The future residence of the Queen abroad.
e
idly, The title which her Majesty might think fit to assume
when travelling on the Continent. -
idly, The non-exercise of certain rights of patronage in Eng-.
laud, which. it might be desirable that her Majesty might desist
from exercising, should she reside abrogrl ; and
ethly, The suitable ineolue to be assigned for life to the Queen,
residing abroad.
Her Majesty's Law Officers, on the part of the Queen, de.
sired, in the first instance, that the fourth point should be alto-
getber laid aside in these conferences; that her Majesty desired
- it might make no part of the conditions, nor be mixed with the
present discussions.
They then proceeded to state, that under all the circumstances
of her Majesty's position, they would not say that her Majesty
had any insuperable objection to living abroad; en the contrary,
If such foreign residence were deemed indispensable to the com-
pletion of an arrangement so much desired by Parliament, her
Majesty might be prevailed upon to acquiesce ; but then that
certain steps must be taken to remove the possibility of any in-
ference being drawn from such compliance, and from the inquiry
not being proceeded in, unfavourable to her Majesty's honour,
and inconsistent with that recognition which is the basis of these
neseciations e and her Majesty's Law Officers suggested, With
this view, the restoration of her name to the Liturgy. ,
To this it was replied, that the King's Government would no
doubt learn wish great surprise, that a question of this important
nature had now been brought forward for the first time, without
having been advetted to he any of the previous discussions, and
without • being included amongst the heads to be now treated
of ; that the Liturgy had been already regulated by his Majesty's
formal Declaration in Council, and bi the exercise of his Majesty's
legal atetrority ; that the King, in yielding his own feelings and
views to the wishes of Parliament, could not be understood (in
the absence of inquiry) to alter any of these impressions under
which his 'Majesty had hitherto deliberately and advisedly
acted ; and that, as it was at the outset stated, the King could
not be expected to retract anything, no hope could be held out
that the King's Government would feel themselves justified is
submitting such a proposition to his Majesty.
li'o this it was AMU trcd, that although.the point of the Li-
turgy was-certainly not included by mane amongst the heads to
he discussed, her Majesty's Law Officers found themselves en-
tided to bring it forward in its mine/ion with the question of
Ilex !thirsty 's ftsideuce abroad. It was further contended, that
the alteration in the Liturgy was contrary to the plain sense and
even letter of the Statute, and that it was highly objectionable
Orr Consdtutlenal grounds, being contrary to the whole policy of
the law respecting the security of tlie succession, and liable tab*
repeated ip ewes where the succession itself might beendale-
geie.3 by i 7; end therefore it was said that e step so taken might
well be retraced, without implying any uewsw.t.by eenceelion.
It was also urged, that the omissive% having her plainly Made-
in contemplation of legal er Perliamentary proceedinp against
tier Majesty, it followed, when those ,proceedings were to be.
abandoned, that the omission should be supplied; and itfollowed ,
for the same reason, that sppplying it would timely no retracts-
tion.--It watereplied, that his Majesty had decided that lite
Majesty's name should not be inserted in the Liturgy, for Crim-
ea' reasons not now necessary to discuss; that his Majesty had
acted under legal advice, and in conformity to the practice of.
his Royal predecessors; and that the decision of hii Majesty had
not been taken solely with a !kr to intended proceedings in
Parliament or at law.
Independent of the biguiry instituted before Parliament, his
Majesty had felt himself long since called upon to adopt certain
measures to which his Majesty, as head of his family, and in' the
exercise of his pkrogative, was clearly competent. These acts,
together with that now under sonsideration,however reluetantlY
adopted, and however painful to his Majesty's feelings, were
taken upon grounds which the discontinuance of the inquiry be-
fore Parliament could not affect, and w,hich his Majesty could
not therefore be expected to rescind. The principle fairly ap-
plied would 'girt, in truth, no further than to replace the parties
in the relative position in which they stood immediately before
Blejesty's arrival, and before the King's Message was sent
down to both Houses of Parliament.
After further discussion upon this polite, It was agreed that
the Duke of Wellington and Lord Castlereagh should report to
the Cabinet what had passed,, and come prepared with their tie.
termination to the neit conference. . •
Her Majesti's Law Officers then asked, whether, in the event
of the bove-prnpositlon not being adopted, any other proceed-
ing could be suggested on the part of his Majesty's Government,
which might render her Majesty's residence abroad consistent
with& recognition of her rights and the vindication of her eharas-
ter '? and they specially pointed at the official introduction of her
Majesty to foreign Courts by the tring's Ministers abroad.—
Upon this it was observed, that this proposition appeared open
to the same difficulty In point of principle it was calling upon
the King to retract the decision formally taken and avowed on
a decision already notified to foreign
the part of his Majesty,
Courts' and to render the position of his Majesty's representa-
tives abroad; in relation to her Majesty, inconsistent With that
of their Sovereign at home; that the purpose foe which this was
sought by the Queen's Law Officers- was inconsistent with the.
principle admitted of the commencement of the conference, and
was one that could not be reasonably required to besccons-
plished by the act of his Majesty—namely, to give to her Ma-
testy's conduct that oOuntenance which the elate of the case, a#
at present before his Majesty, altogether precluded.
the same time it was stated, that while his Majesty, cone
sistently with the steps already adopted, could netantherise the
rime reception of- site Queen, or the introduction of her ma.
piety at foreign Courts by his Ministers abroad, theft was, never.
them, every raispositiete to set that branch of the orders
ready gives faithlail WO4 iibor4lY esere .teds which esi?htell the
British Ministre Ceetieen tte their
se-
mectire missions, itec Ith4lesty)l accommodation, Wm to centre.
byte to her: Act 4 ..t and convenience.
• Majesty e 4.sr. CSficaMzilc the tea..
Ws whatever to think that the Rates cold be induced to &ewe
laps die rop *skims above. red, unit" nor! oth. eta, foundell