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

•

manifested some impatience on account of it, Lord
Wilmington came down and assured them, that the
's4lelay arose solely from the circumstance of some
• inquiries which were made as to the due precedency
of the progeny not having been completed. It, there-
fore, in that case, names which were improperly ex-
cluded from the Liturgy, were restored on an ad-
dress of the House of Lords, he trusted that the
House et Commons would prove itself not less inde-
pendent, nor less unwilling, to exert their right in
addressing the Throne to restore her Majesty to her
rights, and the country to a proper state of tranquil-
fear).—This Petition, as well as another to
the same effect, from the Officers and Members of
the Amicable Society of the town of Nottingham,
was ordered to be printed. The latter prayed that
no supplies should be granted until her Majesty's
name was restored to the Liturgy—(Hear, hear).
Mr. JERVOISE presented a similar Petition from
Breden, Isle of. Wight—Ordered to be printed.
Mr. HUME presented a Petition front Dundee,
praying the restoration of her Majesty's name to the
Liturgy, and requesting the House to give no coun-
tenance to those " Despots of Europe"—(!fear,
hear)—who were preparing to destroy the free go-
vernment which was established in Naples by the na-
tional will.—Ordered to be printed.
The same Honourable Member presented a Peti-
tion from the Incorporated Weavers of Leith, pray-
ing the restoration of her Majesty's name to the Li-
turgy. It was his duty to state, that this Petition
was forwarded to the Right Honourable Member for
Edinburgh, by the desire of the Petitioners, and that
he refused to present the same to this !louse—(Hear,
Ilcar).—No doubt the Right Hon. Gentleman had
strong reasons for his refusal, which, perhaps, as he
was present, he would now explain.
Mr. W. DUNDAS, being thus called upon, said,
that he had no wish whatever to refuse to present
the Petition, but that the Petitioners stated to him
two things, namely, their request that he would pre-
sent the Petition, and also give it his personal sup-
port. Upon this ground he refused, not because the
Petition was in opposition to his opinions, for he had
presented hundreds of Petitions which were quite at
variance with his own sentiments. He returned the
Petition, stating his opinion on the subject of it, and
leaving it to the Petitioners to judge whether he was
a proper person to present it. He could assure the
Hon. Member that he had no desire to shut out the
Petitioners iron► this House; but, as they wished him
to be their advocate, and as with that wish he could
not comply, he felt himself bound, as a man of ho-
nour, to send the Petition back—(Hear, hear).
The Petition was read.

Mr. HUME said, that he had no doubt the expla-
nation.of the Right Honourable Member, as to his
own feelings, was quite correct. But he would take
the liberty of reading to the House the answer which
the Right Honourable Member had sent to the letter
of the Petitioners. That letter contained two distinct
requests—l st, that the Right Honourable Gentleman
would be pleased to present the Petitien on as early
a day as possible, and the Petitioners confidently
hoped, that the Right Hon. Gentleman would favour
them with his support. ,To this the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman sent an answer, which was short enough—
(Hear, hear)—" I cannot present the Petition which
you have forwarded to me; and should any pro-
position be made for the restoration of her Ma-
jesty's name to the Liturgy, I shall oppose it."—
Loud cries of Hear, hear, from the Opposdion).—
rhe litter part of this letter was candid and manly.
But the House would see, that the letter of the Peti-
tioners did not contain two separate propositions, one
most clearly not depending on the other—( Hear,
hear).—He should, therefore' leave it to the House
to judge how far the answer of the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman was to be comidered as an unconstitutional
refusal to present a Petition—(Ncat, hear).
Mr. W. DUNDAS said, he was quite willing to
leave it to the House—(l/ear, hear, and laughter).—
Ile told the Petitioners that he would vote against
the object which they had in view. Still it remained
for them to judge whether they thought him a pro-
per person to fresent it. The Honourable Member
had, therefore, left the question where it was—(lkar,
hear). lie did not think that he would have been
justifiable in depriving the Petitioners of the choice
of the Ilotiourable Member for their advocate, who
could give it peculiar support by his powerful a&
dress, his polished language, and his persuasive man-
n r—(Laughter on the Ministerial Benches).
Lord MILTON was of opinion that the Right
lion. Gentleman's present declaration was totally at
variance with his letter .to the Petitioners. In that
letter he merely stated, that he would not present
their Petition ; and should any motion be made for
the restoration of the Queen's name to the Liturgy,
he should feel it his duty to oppose it ; but not one
syllable did he say with respect to his not being a
proper person to be the organ of their wishes to the
Ilcuse of Commons.

Mr. DUNDAS thought that the declaration in the
letter. was sufficiently explicit, viz. that he would not
present the Petition, but would leave it to some per-
son who coincided with the sentiments of those who
signed it—(Cries of Read!)
Lord MILTON disclaimed any imputation on the
Right Hon. Gentleman, which had the appearance
of questioning the sincerity of his declaration.
The Petition was laid on the table, and ordered
to be printed.
Sir R. FERGUSON presented a Petition of similar
import from, the Inhabitants of the Borough of Kin-
ross. He observed, that to the Loyal Address which
had been recently got up in the Borough, no more
than 1600 signatures could be collected, although all
the Public Offices had been swept for the purpose.—
The present Petition, on the contrary, after having
been agreed to at a Public Meeting, was signed, in
the short interval of three days, by no less than
1700 names. He added, that the Petitioners very
proPerly-oniitted all mention of the Liturgy, as well
is most, of. the Scotch Petitions recently presented.--
}le. thanked POD that the Religion of that country
was subjected to no trammels ; and he believed that
the ittitilbie prayer of a poor simple man was more
accep',C4)le to HstavEN titan all the formace of devo-
tion.wb~li.wisdom of the Noble Lord's Cabinet
could
.prescribe!
'Lae Lora) ADVOCATE of SCOTLAND said,
that he had no wish to treat the assertions of Honour-
able'Cientyineg on the other side of the House lightly;
but, itr opposition to these assertions,. ,lie must. say,

that the inference which he was enabled by his ob-
servations to draw from the proceedings of the Peotile,
of Scotland, was decidedly the reverse of that which
the Honourable Gentleman opposite stated to the
House, .and that the opinion of thesreat majority
was in favour of the measures of Ministers. With,
the exception of four County Meetings, the Addresses
to the King were carried by great majorities—and
not only did these majorities consist of Freeholders,
but also of Justices of the Peace !—(Cheers from the
Opposition). With respect to the Counter Petition of
Edinburgh, he had reason to believe that it was signed
several times by the same persons, giving different
places of residence.
Mr. KENNEDY said, he could not be silent and
hear his country calumniated in that house. - The
Learned Lord had said, that the majority of the peo-
ple and the property of Scotland was in favour of
Ministers. He (Mr. Kennedy) utterly denied the
statement. It was possible, indeed, that the greater
part of the property of Scotland which was repre-
sented in that House might be in favour of the pre-
sent system ; but it was well known how little of the
real sense of the people and wealthy classes of that
kingdom was represented in the House of Commons.
—This unfair representation of Scotland was en-
dured with the utmost impatience by that country ;
and never would the discontents, not only of the
lower orders, but of that class of persons which
should never be spoken of without respect (the mid-
dling classes), cease, until the property and opinions
of that parr of the Empire were fully and fairly re-
presented in that House--(Hear, hear).
Lord BINNING would maintain that these County
Meetings represented the great landed interest in
Scotland, and they spoke the opinion of that interest.
The Petition from the inhabitants of Edinburgh was
got up in a Theatre, and was signed by all sorts of
persons over and over again. He denied that the
generalitY of the people t:f Scotland had any wish
for Parliamentary Reform.

Mr. J. P. GRANT said, it was true the Meeting
alluded to was held in a Play-house, because no other
place could be found large enough to hold the Meet-
ing. The Petition then adopted was signed by 17,000
of the male adult population of Edinburgh, praying
for the removal of the King's Ministers ; and only
1,600 signed the Loyal Address. He contended that
in all parts of Scotland—in parts where political dis-
cussion never was heard, the people were almost una-
nimous in their desire for Parliamentary Reform.
Mr. ABERCROM BY said, all the information he
had received from Scotland respecting the opinion
of the people as to the proceedings against the Queen,
and the -conduct of Ministers, shewed that it was
hostile to both.

Sir G. WARR7.NDER admitted that there had
been considerable agitation among the lower orders
in Scotland respecting the proceedings against the
Queen ; but the landed proprietors approved, no doubt,
of the conduct of Ministers. He had no doubt that
Scotland would be the first part of the empire that
would return to its senses on these subjects—Wear).
Mr. BROUGHAM said, nine-tenths of the People
of England and Scotland had loudly expressed their
opinions against the conduct of Ministers ; and the
remaining tenth had expressed no opinion at all. It
was not to be endured by the People that they should
be told by all the Ministers that they were mad !
That was not a ready way to bring them to their senses.
Mr. FORBES said, ali the landholders in Scotland
were Commissioners of Supply ; in that quality they
might attend County Meetings. The people of Aber-
deen were actually canvassed in the streets to sign
the Petition in favour of the Queen.
Mr. HUME said, the information he had received
was directly opposite to the assertion of his Hon.
Friend—(Hear).
Sir It. FERGUSON said, that in all the Loyal
Meetings the Gentlemen Freeholders loudly declared
that they had no connection with the present Minis-
ters. He was perfectly ready to concur in the opi-
nion that the landed Gentry in Scotland, who had
been alluded to, adhered to the present Administra-
tion ; but in candour he must add, that they generally
tendered the same adherence to 1:11 Administrations,
whatever were their politics— ( I Aar, and a laugh.
The Petition was ordered to lie on the table.

Sir R. WILSON presented a similar Pe:ition from
the Churchwardens, Overseers, and Inhabitants of
the Parish of St. Saviour's, Southwark. That Meeting
fairly represented the opinions of that large parish,
and v.,as attended by many wealthy and respectable
individuals, who had never before mingled in public
politics. If Ministers would recommend the inser-
tion of her Majesty's name into the Liturgy, it would
not be long before the House would adopt it. If they
had given any indiscreet pledge, they had better break
it, and retain their places by doing right.
Mr. C. cALvERT supported the Petition. He was
afraid Ministers could not open their eyes; for if they
did, they would lose their places.
The Petition was ordeted to lie on the table.
DISFRANCHISEMENT OF GRAMPOUND.

Lord JOHN MUSSEL obtained leave to bring in
a Bill to exclude the Borough of Grampound horn
the elective fr,inchise, and to give it to Leeds.

CONTESTED ELECTIONS.

Petitions were then presented, complaining of undue returns
for Tregony, Boson, and Warwick; which were ordered to be
taken into consideration on the 15th and 20th of February, and
on the Bth of Nay.