Star.
London, England, 1818-05-16 00:00:00

\
• 1110\ ib. .

fairness to the House, if he had not intimated its pro-
bability. He thought the 13eneral feeling that had
been manifested was, that the Howe was disposed to
consider, that wken one of the branches of the
Royal Family had entered into a contract of mar-
riage, it was agreeable and proper to make him some
additional allowance, as it could not be expected
that he could support the dignity of his situation on
the same income as before his marriage. He thought
it also appeared that there was no disposition to take
into consideration any of those casual additions to

the income of the Royal Personages as might arise
from military appointments, exercised for the benefit
of the country abroad, or bestowed at home as a
reward for services. On these principles he thought
the House acted, when they voted 6000/. additional
income to his Royal Highness the Duke of Cam-
bridge. On the present occasion he proposed strictly
to follow that precedent, and to move precisely the
same increase and the same sum, as a provision for
a dower. He did not mean to propose any sum for
outfit, as his Royal Highnes's had not thought it ne-
cessary. He had therefore only one or two observa-
tions to make, with respect to this marriage. These
could be but one feeling in the Committee, that it
was highly suitable in all points of view, as the illus-
trious individual was a connexion not new to this.
country, but of whom they had had experience—
(hear, hear.) He thought it but just towards the il-
lustrious Person about to espouse his ftoyal High-
ness, that although when this marriage was in nego-
elation, she made it a point not to be deprived of the
personal guardianship of her children by a former
husband, she by no means wished to extend this to
any pecuniary view. She would sustain a loss in
her income by this marriage of about 30001. a year,
and from that derived from her children, about
20001. more ; so that her loss was nearly as much as
the Grant about to be proposed ; and the House
would see they were doing little more than placing
her in her former situation. As to his Royal Highness
it was not unknown to the House that he had for a
long period of his life been subjected to a limited in-
come, and that unavoidably incurred incumbrances,
he had met them by assigning a very large portion
of his present income to their discharge. It might
perhaps be expected by the House, that by means
of the proposed grant, his Royal llighness.would im-
mediately resume a situation of splendour in society,
consistent with his rank and dignity—but he did
not intend so to act—for he felt that until he had
completely liberated himself from those incumbrances
he could not reconcile it to himself to live to the full
extent of his Parliamentary income. Ile believed it
was not till the age of 32, that his Royal Highness
had succeeded to that income, which the other Male
Branches of the Royal Family came to at the age of
21; and till then he had only about 9000/. a year.
He therefore thought that what he had stated would
liberate his Royal Highness from any insinuation
that might be made for his not living in that style,
immediately on his marriage, which circumstances
might seem to warrant He should now merely
move,—" That the sum of 6000/. per annum he
granted out oldie Consolidated Fund, as a suitable
provision for his Royal Highness the Duke of Kent,
on his marriage."
Mr. CURWEN, however painful it was to his feel-
ings, felt himself bound consistently with his duty,
to oppose the motion oldie Noble Lord. Ile did not
know that he had conceded any principle by any for •
mer vote he had given, which pledged him to vote
for a further allowance to any other branch of the
Royal Family. When he saw that the Duke of Kent
was in possession of £26,000 a year, it was impossible
not to say that this was sufficient, and lie could not
consent that 6000/. a year should be added. There
might be circumstances that more particularly re-
commended his Royal Highness to the notice of the
House, from having incurred incumbrances which
really might have been unavoidable; but were there
not other sources from which he_could be supplied,
without taking money from the people ?—(hear,hear.)
Had not her Majesty been long in possession of the
Privy Purse—(hear, hear, hear)—and about which,
although the House had not made any inquiry, they
ought to have done it ? Why then had not the Royal
Personage made a provision out of that sum, to relieve
him frornhis difficulties ?--(hear, hear.) He washappy
however to find, that Parliament were at last awake
to their duty, and had told the Royal Family that if
they did incur debts they were not to come to the
House to have them paid out of the pockets of the
people—(hear, hear.) He owed it to his constituents
to oppose this Grant, notwithstanding the high opi-
mon he entertained of the noble and benevolent cha-
racter of that illustrious Personage--(hear, hear.)

_ •
Mr. BROUGHAM rose, and observed, that if the
personal qualities and the private condition of the
I)uke of Kent were alone to be considered by the
Committee, the question would be easily decided.
In the practice of those virtues that adorn private
life, none was more exemplary. He readily gave the
support of his great influence to every institution of
charity and benevolence. But these were points en-
tirely distinct from the proper views to be taken on
the subject. It had been said that this matrimonial
engagement had been entered into for the purpose of,
securing a succession to the throne ; that the match
claimed from its own merits the approbation of Par-
liament ; and that the state of the finances of the royal
personage demanded a liberal allowance from the
Committee. It was right to take measures for the
succession of the Brunswick line; but, he would ask,.
was Parliamentary assistance necessary to give effect
to the marriage of the Duke of Kent ? If it was re-
plied in the affirmative, he would give his support to
the motion. Though it was pleasing to the Commit-
tee to indulge on the private merits of his Royal
Highness, yet, in other respects, he was equally en-
titled to their connderation. The delay of the in-
come which every member of the Royal Family re-
ceived at a regular age, caused a multitude of em-
barrassments to his Royal Highness. He served in
the West Indies, at Gibraltar, at Nova Scotia, and
Canada. His emoluments, during these services, were
quite disproportionate to his ranki nay, he (Mr. B.)
had understood that the Royal Duke had suffered
losses, for which he received no compensation. He
had already assigned, for the payment of debts forced
on him by the narrowness of his means, the annual
sum of 17,0001. out of his 25,000/. Mr. Brougham
concluded by voting for the grant.
Mr. METHUEN said, that having given his vote
most conscientiously against the .proposed grant for

the Duke of Clarence, he could not conscientiously
vote for this.

Lord ALTHORPE observed, that in proposing
the former matrimonial grants, Ministers declared
that if Parliament refused them, the marriages of the
Royal Personages could not take place. Parliament,
however, had seen that the Duke of Clarence was de.
termined to persevere in his engagement, without the
allowance which, it was said, he could not dispense
with. Supposing even that the security of the suc-
cession to the present family was offered as a reason
to demand a provision from Parliament, how far, he
would ack, was that object likely to be attained in
the person of one of the oldest of the Royal branches?
(Hear, !war, hear!) He agreed with his honourable
and Learned Friend (Mr. Brougham) in commending
the prudence of the Noble Mover, who abstained
from then telling the Committee that the interference
of Parliament was necessary to give effect to the mar-
riage, as he had done in the instance of the Duke of
Clarence; whereas that Royal Personage had contra-
dicted by his acts the statement of the Noble Lord.
Mr. BROUGHAM rose to explain his meaning
on the point to which the Noble Lord, who just sat
down, had alluded. The Noble Lord opposite bad
declared, that unless 10,000/. were to be bestowed as
a matrimonial provision to the Duke of Clarence, the
marriage could not take place. If, after the Noble
Lord's assertion of its utter impossibility, his Royal
Highness did persevere in his engagement with the
illustrious Lady, independent of such pecuniary al-
lowance, how imprudent must it have been to ven-
ture upon such a declaration!
Lord CASTLEREAGH replied, that in the asser-
tion alluded to, he spoke the sense of his Majesty's
Government. He was not answerable for the acts
to which the private feelings of honour might induce
his Royal Highness. The conditims upon which
10,0001. was to have been bestowed upon the Duke
of Clarence, were such as the interests and honour ut
the country demanded.
Mr. PROTIIEROE said, he should support this
motion, although he had deemed it his duty to op-
pose that in behalf of the Duke of Clarence.

Mr. J. SMITH bore ample testimony to the ami-
able virtues of his Royal Highness, in private life,
snd to his great merits in foreign service. In addi-
tion to the 17,0001. a year, assigned by his Royal
Highness for his debts, Mr. Brougham should have
mentioned the sum of 10001. a year for the support
of officers widows and other deserving objects. He
supported the motion. _ _

.fir C. MONCK rose to make a few observations in
support of the grant, but the cries of .4 Question"
rendered him almost inaudible.

The gallery was then cleared, during which a
division took place :—For the Motion WS—Against
it 51..—Majority for the Motion 1544
On our return to the gallery, Lord CASTLEILAGII
was moving the resolution for granting a dowry of
6000/. to the Duchess, which was agreed to.