Star.
London, England, 1821-07-09 00:00:00

NEW SATIRICAL WORK.

This day vias published, in Three Vols. price £1 Is. boards,
EDINBURGH A SArnticAL NOVEL. gy the
Author of " London; or, A Month at 'Stevens's.
" I shall shew the Vices of Edinburgh, not as a parallel, but
as a contrast to those of London ; nor shall I omit a Portrait, or
a Character, because the Original was my friend or acquaint-
anee."—lNvioneciace.
London: Printed for Sherwood, Neely, and Jones, Pater- ,
nester-row.
Of Whom, and all other Booksellers, may be had,
I. London ; or, A Month at Stevens's ; a.Satirical Novel, in
three volumes. Third F4ition, LI Is. boarch.
S. The Englishman in Paris ; a Satirical Novel, in three
volumes, Li is.
3. Bath; a Satirical Novel, in three volumes. Second Edi-
tion, LI Is, , . .
4. Brighton; or, The Steyne ; a Satirical Novel, in three
volumes. Third P.dition, LI Is.
ie.,- 'These Works serve as vehicles for pourtraying the most
conspicuous Pakkionabks of the present day. They abound in
humour, knowledge of the world,
ahalt pleasantry : the ease and
liveliness of the style also, entitle the Author to a4reat supe-
riority over most hioderu Novelists.
•

depended on the will of the Sovereign.' If iesseere a
right, end connected, as it was said to bei'svilli the
rights of the people, it could not be weeiodstleeit
had been on so many different occasions. Scene ellea-
-
FURTHER PARTICULARS, sons Were advanced by his Learned Friends, -ei it
planatory of the causes that prevented four tf.
• mCOUTINUAVON TROY mswinool/ SATURDAX.
s Queens from being cress-nes!, such as the dittserbed
The ATTORNEY-GZNIERAL continued.—He should
state of the Church, and other matters; but if the
now some to the Scottish Act Parliament of James,
coronation of a Queen w er e a rig h t in her, aod hot a
1. which had been quoted by the Qes-en's Attorney-
ceremony, the disturbed state of the Church was no
General. Now, upon reference to that Act, it was
sufficient reerson. He could tit t well apprehend boo the
clear that James I. owing to the troubled state of the
disturbed state of the Church, and attachment to-Ants
times, and being about to leave Scotland, was most
Boleyn, would operate on the mind of the Sovereign
anxious to confer upon his Queen the ceremony of
to prevent the coronation of his favourite wife, Lady
-the coronation. These were the words of the Statute,
and he would assert from the very words themselves Jane Seymour; but it couldeonly have done so,
that they authenticated no general right. The-At-
in consequence of its depending on his free-will to
torney-General then referred to the Act 1428 in the hate
.ed that no motives of expediency or Scats policy
it performed or not. If it were a light, he con-
Scottish Statutes, e. 109, passed in the Bth Parliament
teacti
of James I. and read the following e aith to be made
cou have prevented it. Now, as to Charles f;
ushwo
to the Queen, be the Clergie and the Baroenes :"
though Rnity o nth gave .f
his coronation; he a very precise account of
was totally silent
Qem. die Dominus Res, ex deliberation* et cosisenu toren the solemnity
as to the Queen ; and no writer had since stated that
Stattlit, ClUOd omnes e ninon suceessores ?relater=
Regni quorumcunque, nee non omnes singuti haredes futuri en- she was croweed. There was, it was true, in the liar-
natum, Barunum, omniumque lihere-tenentium Domini Regis: iCian Collection, an account of her coronation ; but it
tHteantur facere consimile juramentum Duminz metre itseines
Nee Wins pi-status de ettero admittatur ad suam temporalita-
teas evidently drawn up prospectively—for a some=
tern, nut hares cujusvis tenentis Domini Regis ad suas tenon-
thing to be done—but not for anything which Was
drias, rthi prius preset Regime illud juramentum." passed and had been done. It said, amongst other
—Did not the words " Dominos nostrez Regina" bear things, that two thrones were to be erected, one fer
, the King ; and one below that, of a smaller size, for
out his interpretation of the meaning of the Statute
and shew that it had reference, not to any general the Queen ; some of the Queens dresses were also de- -
right of the Queen, but to a particular ceremony scribed ; but no man, who looked attentively at the
record, could deny its being written before the event.
which he wished to have performed for his own
Queen ? The whole order emanated from the desire —From some curious manuscript letters preset ved in
of the King himself. It was from him the letters of the British Museum, it would appear that the co-
fidelity were ordered to be "prornetted" to the Queen. ronation was described. as having taken place on a
He again asserted, that according to the construction Thursday ; that the King went to Westminster Church
of the ceremony in Selden, and Pinkerton, no claim by water; but that the Queen was not crowned. On
of right could be made out for the Queen. Among the contrary, the letters went to say, that she stood at
the old law writers, Bracton was, perhaps, the most a window, in the neighbourhood, looking on, while
copious upon the prerogatives of the Queen ; but he her Ladies were frisking and dancing in the room.
did not, in the slightest degree, hint to her having Taking all the accounts together, there could be no
any right to the coronation ; he did not erumei ate doubt that the wife of Charles the First was never
any one part of that ceremony as appertaining to her crowned. If it were in the breast of the King to say
legal rights. Bracton had stated her being in law whether the coronation should or should not take
" afernme sole;" he had stated her claims to the place, cadet quotio, the question fell at once to the
" aura Regina;" but he was wholly silent about co- ground. It was probable enough that she objected
ronation prerogatives. He had a long chapter, eDe to certain parts of the ceremony ; but if she had the
Coronationaßegis,"but not a word as a matter of right independent right which was now contended for, she
"de Coronationa Regina." The Attorney-General could not have waived it ; and that especially, be-
then followed Mr. Brougham through his series of cause it would be involving the rights of others. The
historical precedents. He would, he said, first advert ground of waiver could not exist as to a public right;
to the case of William I. whose wife was not crowned and if it were so, it was decisive against the claim
at the time :—why not ? Because the King did not now put forward. With respect to the uniformity
hink it right so to order it, though he did subsequently. on which such force was laid, it proved nothing, if
Did slot that clearly shew the right to be in the King ? the being crowned was not a right ; while the devia-
Rufus, not being married, furnishes no case. Then tions did everything to put an end to the question of
Stephen ; why was not his wife crowned with him ? right ; and the coronation of a Queen-consort became
He was married at the time of his coronation; and mere matter of discretion in the Monarch. Charles
yet her's did not take place.for some time afterwards. the Second was not married _till after his own coro-
Why was that delay, if the Queen could claim as of nation.. Some doubt was thrown upon the fact of
right? He then adverted to the circumstance of his }teeing been ever married by a Protestant Bishop;
Prince Henry's coronation, in Henry the Second's but though the historians of the times were silent as
life-time ; a.id that proved nothing, although Louis to the transaction, he found from a Newspaper called
of France remonstrated; for, unless the Princess could e The King's Intelligence," published in 1662, that
have demanded her husband's coronation, during his the King was married at Portsmouth, by Gilbert,
father's life-time, how could she have any claim to Bishop of London. The " Mercurius Politicus,"
demand her own? There was every reason sshy the another Paper published at the same times also cer-
wife of Henry the Second should be crowned. There roborated the fact. If this were the case then, there
was a strong party in the country anxious to put for- was an end to his wife's objections to share in his co-
ward and support the York interest, through which ronation. For, if she had no scruple at being mar-
Henry was considered to derive his best title to the ried by a Protestant, she could Lave no objection to
Throne; and even under such strong circumstances be crowned by a Protestant. There were in her case
in favour of the Queen being crowned, he refused it peculiar circumstances, which rendered it very.neces-
for a'considerable time. Now Bacon's words on that sary she should be crowned, and if it were a matter
subject should be looked to with the closest amen- of right it would most certainly have been performed.
tion, inasmuch as they clearly strewed that that co- The fact, however, was, she never had the ceremony
ronation was nothing more than a mere ceremony. of a coronation performed for her. Talking of the
He referred their Lordships to Bacon's Works, vol. usage in these cases—four of the wives of Henry
3, quarto edition, in which they would find that great VIII. were not crowned ; the wife of Charles I. was
man say, " that Henry's conduct to the Yorkists not crowned, neither was the wife of Charles IL nor
alienated his subjects from him, and that, even after a of George I.—these then were some instances where
son was born to him, he did not vouchsafe his Queen Queens-consort were not crowned since the time of
the honour of a matrimonial crown. It was not until Henry VII. and so far, against the usage, he had a
two years afterwards that the troubles and conten- majority of cases. In seven instances the-ceremony
tions of the times taught him what he ought to do." was not performed, in six instances it was—and this
Now, he asked, if the Queen had a right to be crowned, was the real current of the usage. Such deviations
would the word "vouchsafe" have been used? Most evidently made against the right which his Learned
decidedly not. If the right existed, he would have Friends contended for; and got rid of the inference
been bound to have her crowned. Bacon continued arising frotre usage, on which alone the right was
to give the reasons why Henry " vouchsafed" a co- founded. The forms used in the coronation also shewed
ronation—namely, " because of the heart-burnings that the crowning of Queens-consort was entirely
and contentions which had arisen, in consequence of at the discretion of their Royal husbands. The case
his depressing the friends of the York party. And, of Edward 11. as related in Rymer, wss referred to;
wishing to give contentment to his people in the cere- but, although the writ of summons required the pre.
stony of a coronation, he resolved that no further sence of those summoned in honour of his wife and
delays should occur." There again their Lordships himself, the ceremony itself took no notice of that fact.
would find the coronation called nothing more than The term ordinabimus would not have been used in
a ceremony ; and they would also see, that its being the mandate of the King, if it were not the will of
granted or not, depended altogether on the will and the King ; and very nearly the same phraseology was
pleasure of the Sovereign. Bacon was not merely to be found in all other modern proclamations.-_
an historian, but an able lawyer ; and if the Queen eWe haveresolved" was always used, from the time
had a tight to be crowned, it is pretty manifest that of Charles I. to the present day, following, as nearly
he would not altogether have omitted to notice it. as possible, the old forms which were adopted. All
Ail the attempts which were made at the other side this shewed that the coronation proceedee from the
to explain this circumstance had totally failed; while King, and did not exist as a matter of right in the
in support of his argument, he required no other au- Queen. The Libcr Regalis was con. idered by his
thority to shew those two leading points—first,that the Learned Friend as a very valuable instrument to
Queen had no right to be crowned; and secondly, shew the ceremonies of the coronation ; but, he asked,
thather coronation was merely a matter of ceremony. did he therefore mean to contend there was any fixed
Henry the Eighth had only two wives crowned, and 'or settled ceremonial for all coronations? The law
four who were not crowned—and as far as that case knew no fixed ceremony—it was subject to the revi-
went=what was to be said of uniform usage? and sion of the Head of the Church, directed by an
the more so when it was considered how often the Order of Council. It was also said by his Learned
practice was interrupted from time to time. His first Friend, that certain offices were holden in Conte-
Queen and Anne Boleyn were the only two of Henry's quence of the coronation of the Queen ; but he re •
consorts who were crowned. Lady Jane Seymour, plied to that, that they were by no means dependent
who was the mother of his son (for which he was so on that event. These tenures were not granted of
anxious)—she who was one of his greatest favourites, the Queen, but of the King, and the se: viers fcr
was no, crowned; and it the ceremony of a corona- Iwhich they were given might be disperved with by
I tion were necessary as a public recognition of the the King. With respect to the offices, the same ob-
Queen, what reason was there in that case, of all i servation might be made. If the ceremony' were net
others, that it should not have been performed ? performed, these persons would not be called on ; if
It was either a right or not a right: if it were a it were performed, as he had just said, the King
right, it could not be abstained from ; if it were not could dispense with their attendance. Looking again
a right, it was nothing more than a ceremony, and to the general language of the proclamations, it

• abutislantl?Veneditn- , that the right of having
a cote:Alias btilt• aicTited in the Sovereign. With
respect to the Prize Act, which was referred to, it
tkrao alkilogYto the present case; besides, it here
appeared that the Queen claimed to be crowned on
a particular day. He had argued against the exist-
ence of the right at any time, and hoped, by this
time, that he had satisfied their Lordships no such
right existed. He was afraid be had not done the
case that justice which its importance required. But
. the fact was, lie found himself as others who argued
cases in the Courts of Law did, namely, that of find-
ing a greater difficulty in arguing a clear case than
one of 'perplexity. And if he failed of throwing any
• additional light upon the subject, he hoped it would
be attributed to its proper cause. His Learned Friend,
• the Queen's Attorney-General, had certainly delivered
si:.•to their Lordships a most able and historical detail,
with the main facts of which he coincided; but with
the conclusions drawn from which he totally differed.
Thc.claim now made, was made for the first time ;
.rands if it were of such great importance to her and
to the people, it was strange to find no law writer
mention a syllable on the subject. It was not at-
. tempted to be supported by any statutary enactments
any dictum of law-6y any passage in any able
text writer—but depended entirely for its support on
usage, and usage only. Though the Queen was high
• .both in dignity and privilege, it should not be forgot-
ten that she was still no more than a subject. The
Queen had no political character which required that
she should be known or recognized at the coro-
nation; and, on all these grounds, he had no hesi-
tation'in saying her Majesty had no claim of right
to be present at that ceremony.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, that coinciding as
he did with the opinions just delivered by his Learned
Friend, having given their opinions together upon
the subject before—having consulted the same docu-
ments, and pursued the same inquiry—it would be
impossible to expect that be should throw any addi-
tional light upon it. The only argument used in
support of this claim was that of uninterrupted use
and enjoyment; but when looking to the right claimed,
their Lordships should be satisfied of the circum-
stances under which the use and enjoyment were said
to give it. The Learned Counsel for the Queen should
have shewn when this right was claimed, and exer-
cised as such ; and also, that it was not conferred by
the grace an favour of the Crown. The case aright
of way and common, which was introduced, rather
made against than for the claim now asserted, be-
cause it might have been a hostile right, or an act of
usurpation. Even a case might arise out of the very
ceremonial, which rested on the same principle as
the present claim—he alluded to the case of persons
summoned to attend the coronation. 13ut would it
be said, because certain persons usually were sum-
moned, it was absolutely necessary they should now
be called? If this claim were admitted, those per-'
sons must be called; if it were not necessary they
should be so called, his claim must then of necessity
be refused. Besides this, the language of the Pro-
clamations, which scarcely varied since the time of,
Charles I. all tended to skew that the right of having'
a coronation performed, was altogether at the will
and discretion of the King. "We have decreed," is
the language which they used—and how this could
be reconciled with the substantive independent right
of the Queen, be was totally at a loss to imagine.—
Were the Privy Counsel to take the usage by itself to
support the tight, or draw the inference of right from
usage, in connection with the circumstances com-1
pounded with it? The latter appeared to him to be
the course which their Lordships ought to pursue;
and in doing so, then they would have to consider
whether it was a right enjoyed by licence and autho-
rity from the Crown, or an adverse right claimed in-
dependently of the Crown. In the very outset of the
case, these was one circumstance which afforded
strong evidence that negatived the right in respect of
u ,age: he alluded to the necessity of a Royal Proclama-
tion. The force of this was felt by his Learned Friend,
Mr. Brougham, who endeavoured to evade it with great
dexterity, and at the same time to misapply it in favOur
of his own argument ; for he said, that when once the
ight was established, the Proclamation must issue as
a matter of course. This was a complete fallacy.-
1 lis Learned Friend, the Attorney-General, and him-
self reverted to this circumstance merely for the pur-
pose of shewing in what manner the light was en-
joyed, namely, by permission, by consent, by authority,
and by the "command of the Sovereign ; and for the
purpose of spewing that the Proclamation was to be
taken in connexion with the usage to establish the
right. It really appeared to him that the case, when
considered, resolved itself into a dry, technical point
of law (though surrounded by circumstances of great
splendour and pomp), and must be treated as all
Courts of Justice treated such questions. The claim
in this case was founded upon uniform usage, and
unless it was clearly established that such a usage
existed, the claim must fill to the ground. The au-
thority of Lord B icon, already relerred to—a great
and learned Lawyer, a contemporary historian of the
times in which he wrote, arid perfectly conversant
with the subject of which he treated, was decisive, to
spew that the Queen-consort had no right, as matter
of usage, to be crowned ; but that when she was
crowned, it was a matter of grace and favour con-
ceded to her by her Royal Husband. Another con-
current authority to the same point, was Leland's
Collectanea, in the Cotton manuscripts of the British
Museum. His Learned Friend, after all his industry
and research upon the historical part of the case,
completely tailed in making out the uniform usage
on which he relied. Under the Saxon line, the privi-
lege of coronation had long existed before it was
c nnmunicated to the Queens-consort. According to
the authority of Selden, it did not take place at all
until after the tenth century, and then proceeded en-
tirely from the King, as matter of grace and favour.
This was perfectly manifest from reference to every
instance from the time of the Norman Conquest.—
William the Conqueror was married at the time he
came to the Throne. The Queen of Stephen was not
crowned with him ; but it was said by his Learned
Friends, that there was a necessity and convenience
sshy Stephen should be crowned alone. Why, this
very assertion was an argument in favour of the view
he tooklpf the case ; for, if this was an inherent right
in Matilda, no necessity or convenience could deprive
her of it. Henry 11. was married when he came to
t':e Throne, and he was not crowned until a very con-
siderable period after his accession, because he consi•

..

.

deted that he held by so strong a title that there was
no necessity for hastening Ins coronation. Their
Lordships would always keep in view that this Claim
was founded upon uniform and immemorial usage.—
The fact was, that Henry the Second came to the
Throne in December, 1154, and he was not crowned
until the year 1158 ; and his Queen was not crowned
till 1159. The argument founded upon immemorial
usage, in this instance, therefore, completely failed.
Then, as to the instance of Prince Hey, the coro-
nation of his Princess took place in consequence of
the remonstrance of Louis, who thought that the ab-
staining to crown his daughter with her husband was
a reflection upon his own royal dignity, and there-
fore the ceremony took place, but only in the light
of favour and grace. So much then as to that his-
torical fact. As to the case of John, he was married
at the time of his coronation ; but his wife, Elizabeth
of Gloucester, was not crowned with him. It was
said, however, that the reason why she was not!
crowned, was, because John was then seeking the
hand of Isabella of Angouleme in marriage. That
was not the fact ; because the thoughts of his court-
ship with that Princess were not entertained until a
whole year after his coronation. He was crowned in
the month of May 1199, and it was not until the
month of May, in the following year, that his at-'
tachment for Isabella began. It was said that there
were some doubts as to the validity of John's mar-
riage with his first wife, but history proved that he
lived with her nine years afterwards. From the pe-
riod of the Conquest, therefore, there were four Kings
who were married al the time of their respective co-
ronations, and not one of their four Queens was
crowned with her consort. These were facts too
-stubborn, even for his Learned Friend's ingenuity,
great as it was, to grapple with. He should add no-
thing more to what had been said by the Attorney-
General as to the case of Henry VII. It was quite',
clear that that Monarch delayed his marriage as long
as poliCy and expediency would suggest. That
brought him to the reign of Henry VIII. and the
Learned Solicitor repeated all the observations made
by his Learned Coadjutor. upon the different mar-
riages of that Monarch, to strew that the argument
in support of the right in respect of uninterrupted
.usage was not bottomed in fact. It was no sufficient
reason Why Henry VIII. did not crown Lady Jane
Seymour, his favourite wife, as it had been said, be-
cause the Church was then in a disturbed and distracted
state; for never were the Clergy of this country in
so abject a state of tyranny and thraldom as at that
time, when the Monarch took upon himself, with his
own hand, to alter the Mass-book ; and nothing could
have been more easy for him than to command the
ceremony. The solution of the difficulty, therefore,
resorted to by his Learned Friends, availed nothing.—
Nest as to the case of Charles I. it was perfectly cer-
tain that his wife Henrietta was not crowned with
him. If that Queen was entitled to be crowned, as
a matter of right, she could not have waived it; but
being a matter in the pleasure of the King, it was
quite easy to assiln a sufficient reason for her not
being crowned. The Learned Solicitor-General, in
the remainder of his argument, followed precisely
the course adopted by his Learned Coadjutor, and
contended that the usage relied upon having com-
pletely failed in proof, and being directly contrary
to the opinions of the ablest Lawyers ;Ind Historians
who had written upon the privileges of the Queens-
consort of these Realms, the claim set up by her pre-
sent Majesty must be disallowed.
Mr. illiOUGII:Vtl, after retiring for a few minutes,
with the permission of the Council, then replied to
the arguments of the Attorney and Solicitor-General.
His Learned Friends were mistaken in supposing that
he relied upon the necessity of a proclamatiott issuing
as evidence of the Queen's right to he crowned. He
had merely mentioned it by way of anticipating the
argument which might be drawn front it on the other
side, and of rebutting the presumption which would
probably be raised upon it. He contended that the
language of the usual proclamations en such occa-
sions, was merely the mode of allowing the right,
which was to he considered as ex debihrn jushaa,
and not es Brat ;v. The like language was used in
writs of error and other writs, which tf light be-
longed to the subject. In this point of view the pro.
clamation was to be considered merely as a writ of
coronation, conferring no favour on the Queen, but
giving her that which she had a right to demand.—
Ile coronation proclamation was analogous to the
writs issued by the Crown in the event of the decease
of a "Peer. His son inherited his rights without the
writ, which conferred no new title or privilege upon
him ; but still he could not exercise his rights without.
His lion. Friends relied much upon the language of
the proclamations. They seemed to think " We have
resolved," "His Majesty has determined,"&c. proved
that the existence of what his Majesty resolved on
was contingent on his will. But he did-not see that
it was inconsistent with the existence of a right, that'
the writ by which it was enjoyed shootd say that the
party was resolved upon issuing that writ, in order
that it might be enjoyed. An Executive might be
willing that justice should be done, without diminish-
ing the right of those concerned to that justice.—With,
respect to the word " Posh/am/is," if it proved any
thing, it proved too much ; for, if the word were aay
thing more than a matter of course, it shelved that
it was optional in the Archbishop to grant the favour
asked of him or not. Then his Hun. Friends said,
that the coronation of the Queen was nothing but a
mere pageant, possessing no political importance.—
The very words which had been quoted as proof of
this, however, refuted the position ; for it was called',
a "Royal ornament," an "outward solemnization."
Now, he asked, of what was it a solemnization, if
not of the marriage of the Queen with the King, and•
therefore, as affecting the descent, of public import-
ance ? It was an. outward public acknowledgment
of the legitimacy of the marriage, to put it beyond
question that there was any flaw in the descent.—
His Hon. Friends said, he had no right to separate
the cases of a King married when he was crowned,
and of one married afterwards. There was this dis-
tinction, that it became more necessary for a King
to make this public acknowledgment of a marriage
contracted whilst only heir apparent, than when he
was in possession of the Crowno and his acts there-
fore more open to public view, and resting upon
responsible advisers. This was, no doubt, the ori-
ginal intention in crowning Queen-consorts. He ap-
plied himself to the four exceptions to his general
proposition, and concluded that they were all to be,
explained by the circumstances under which they oc-

cuffed. lie then went into a detail of the historical
facts connected with the cases of exception adduced
by his Learned Friend, and :hewed that in the cases
of William the Conqueror, Henry I. Stephen, and
Henry IL it was physically impossible that the Queens
of those Monarchs should have been crowned with
them, they not being present in the country at the
occurrence of those solemnities. In all those cases a
separate solemnity was, however, fixed and per-
formed as soon as the first opportunity occurred.
With regard to the instance of the Queen of Charles I.
the answer of his Learned Friend the Solicitor-Gene-
ral, did not appear to be so triumphant as he seemed
to imagine. The arguments which he (Mr Brougham)
had used with regard to the circumstances under
which that exception occurred, so far from being in-
consistent with each other—so far from being incom-
patible, in his opinion they went to fortify each other.
He then alluded to the treaty entered into with
regard to the marriage of Prince Charles and Hen-
rietta Maria, as it was set forth in Rynter's Tedera.—
In this treaty the ceremony was appointed, and on
account of the differences in religion, great pains were,
taken to prevent umbrage being given to the various
religions of the parties affected by the contract.—
Now, it this was necessary with regard to a marriage
ceremony, would not the same views be taken into
consideration upon the solemnity of a coronation?—
Upon these grounds, it was perfectly coaslstent for
the Queen not to wish to be crowned, for the fear of
bringing odium upon herself, and for the King to
consent, for the sake of preventing discontent among
his subjects. It had been contended by his Learned
Friends, that a. public right could not have been
waived by the Queen ; but he never contended that
it had. She only waived her priv-ite right, and there-
by an injury was done to the realm. But that waiver
could not destroy—it only suspended the right, which
suspension could not weigh against the general usage
and the original existence of the right. He had yes-
terday illustrated this by the practice of the Courts
of Law, with regard to rights of common, where ex-
ceptions or suspensions of right had occurred. lie
then argued upon the distinction to be taken between
services to be performed at a coronation of a Queen-
consort, and the onorous or honorary offices about
the person of the King, such as following him to the
wars, or carrying a banner before him. To follow
him in time of war, was originally onorous upon those
who held certain manors or lands; and in consequence
of their services in the wars, they were elevated to
the honorary office of carrying a banner before him.
Of exactly such a nature was the office of Sword
Bearer to the King; the reward of some onorous duty
which had been performed with zeal and distinction.
Undoubtedly the appoinfments to do similar services
to the Queen, must have been made under similar cir-
cumstances, as in the case of the which
he mentioned yesterday.
The SOLICITOR•GENESIAL observed, that there was
no mention of that claim or right upon the Records.
Mr. BROUGHAM said, that it Was contained in the
Red Book of the Exchequer, and he read-the passage
to their Lordships the day before. •
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL replied, that the claim
had been disallowed at the coronation of James 11.
and two others; and he did not believe that it was
granted at that of Richard H.
Mr. BROUGHAM had found it in the Testa de Ne-
ville, and in the Roll of the Knights' Fees, and there
was no doubt but the claim had been allowed. The
right of the Queen to be crowned must be substan-
tial and independent, or how could such rights as he
had shewn to exist ever have derived their origin?
They must have grown out of her right, and were as
much connected with it as others were with the co-
ronation of the King. He contended that the nature
of Grand Seijeantry did not confine it to mere per-
sonal services done about the body of the King, but
to any offices done in his parks or elsewhere. It must,
then, likewise extend to all his family connections,
and unquestionably all services rendered to his con-
soi t at the time of her coronation must be Grand
Serjear.try, as well as any other duty performed
whatsoever. As to the allusion to the Scottish Act
of Parliament, there was no weight whatever to be
attached to that. His Learned Priends said that the
words, " Dcmine nostra• Regime were peculiar to
the particular Act in which they were contained, and
they rested upon the pronoun as referring to that
Queen alone. Whereas it was evident that "nostrre"
was only used as an expression of form. If his Learned
Friends would turn to the head of the very chapter in
which this passage occurred, they would find, as in all
other places, that the King was mentioned in the same
manner. The words used were "Domine nostro Rege."
With respect to Lord Bacon's remarks upon the omis-
sion of crowning Elizabeth, the consort of Henry VII.
for some considerable time, he only spoke as an his-
torian, not as a lawyer. lie merely stated what the
facts were, without giving any opinion upon the ques-
tion of right or legal power in the Monarch to delay
the ceremony. It was clear that the York faction
held it to be the Queen's right ; as the head of that
faction, Margaret of Burgundy, expressed herself, be-
cause it had been the practice with all Queens from
the Conquest downwards. ‘Vith regard to the Queens
of henry VIII. his Learned Friend, the Attorney-
General, only stated that four of them were not
crowned, without bringing forward one scintilla of
evidence in proof of his assertion. He then proceeded
to explain the probable causes why the consorts of
Henry VIII. were not crowned. But let his Learned
Friends shew one case where the claim was made and
thezight refused. This, he contended, they were utterly
unable to do. Ile had now concluded his arguments,
and his observations upon that which had been ad-
aced against them by his Learned Friends. He be-
seeched their Lordships to bear in mind the propOsitions
which, he was confident, he had satisfactorily made out.
If so, it was contrary to all analogy in the constitu-
tional law, or in the imperial law of these realms, to
say that the rights of the Queen to partake of the
solemnity of coronation, only existed at the will or
pleasure of any individual. Howsoever their Lord-
ships should decide upon the strict legal right, when
all the circumstances of the Queen's claim to be
crowned, and all the high and ancient rights con-
nected, and so inseparably interwoven with it, were
taken into view, even upon the ground of expediency
and propriety, it would be almost a criminal act in
any Council to advise the Sovereign to set the first
example of the omission of that high solemnity.
Shbrtly before four o'clock Mr. BROUGHAM con-
eluded, and strangers were ordered to withdraw.—
The Privy Council afterwards adjourned till Tuesday,

• THE EVENING STA R.

LONDO N.

MONDAY, JULY 9, 1821.

THE FUNDS.
'PRICES OP STOCKS THIS DAT AT ONE O'Clork:
3 per Cent. Reduced 771/2 3/4
3 per Cent. Cons. 763/4 77 ex. div.
4 per Cent. 95 1/2 1/2—Navy 106% 109% taw;
Long Anns. 19 7-16 1/2—lndia Bonds .57L 591.
Exch. Bills. 4s. 6s. pr.—Cons. for Acct 78% 4 r:

The argument on the Queates claim to be crorno
along with the KING terminated on Saturday T,
Privy Council are to give their decision to.rtiono.,:
It is looked forward to with little, or, we s:loul.1 rag:,
say, no anxiety whatever. No person doubts what
will be, although there may be some diire
the grounds on which each rests his beliti
daim will be rejected. That such will be ;!:e
sion, we anticipate not from entertaining the sn::Il!ct
distrust in the uprightness of. the Privy Council, b7z
from the form which the case of her
;ii
shaped by her own legal advisers, has taLm.
Memorial of her MAJESTY consisted of two
first, her right to be crowned ; and 'second, l)!T
prayer to be crowned on Me swie (iv with
Now it is extremely clear, that though the right sv,:,!
established beyond all que:tion, it does not
means follow that the prayer to have it czo-cil;
on the same day with the Coronation of
JESTY, must, or ought to be granted. The
is a matter of favour entirely, which vicars
discretion alone must regulate. We think it pn.
bible, therefore, that the Council will pass no jr, is
ment on the right, but content themselves wiz!l.,:.
Glaring, that no ieacon 'ooe,lsLesvn to induze::%;s
to recommend that her M .a.ms-ry should be mate!
on the same day with the litxo ; reservi7l7, to lc
MAJESTY whatever right she may have to be c10g,.(
at any future pet iod.

The foreign arrivals yesterday consistel of tlt.
Paris Papers of Thursday, Madrid to the 25th a%
and Dutch to the 6th inst.

The debate on the Censorship of the Press in fr.mr
commenced in the Chamber of Deputies on Wedm,
day. It was opened by M. SIMEON, Minister of tie
Interior, and the author of the propehed law forte
continuation of the restrictions. He concluded
long speech by recommending its simple adnp:;o•.
—He was followed by M. BUSSON, who maintaind
that a Censorship was incompatible with the
ciples of a Representative Government. The stzt
speaker, M. JESSE BEAUVOIR, made a vielert!i•
rangue in support of the Ministerial project;
the course of which he was frequently inte;rtiptel
by such expressions as the following r—t, It is t:.s
speech of a disturber !"—" No (says another), but ci
a madman." A third subjoins, .‘ It is the speech
a fool 1" General Fox called him twice a calumniate*,
and at last quitted the Chamber, notwithstanding the
efforts of his friends to detain him, exclaiming, thu
he could not longer listen to such a speech. At i:;
conclusion, the debate was adjourned to the follow.
ing day; and it is likely to last for a week or ten
days, and to excite all the passions of the codicting
parties in the Chamber.

There is some probability that the Ministers will
be defeated, as they are opposed by the two extreme
parties. The Ultras are as anxious for the Liberty of
the Press as their opponents—a proof that they hare
no small confidence in their talents as writers, or dui
they think public opinion more favourable to them.

The Spanish Cortes have, it appears, given the ne•
cessary authority to the Spanish Government to raise
a loan of 200,000,000 reals. Numerous arrests have
taken place at Seville, where a vast plan of conspi-
racy against the Constitutional system has been dis-
covered. A former Guerilla Chief, D. Mnt, is amongst
the number of persons arrested. The KING had pre-
mised a Deputation of the Cortes to proceed to the
Assembly on the 30th, to close the Session.
The Piedmont Gazette of the 26th ult. contains an
additional list .f 25 individuals, whose property is
sequestrated, and who are to be prosecuted.
Letters received in Vienna, from the frontiers of
Turkey, speak of a sanguinary battle having taken
place near Galacz, between the Greek Army and the
Turks, in which the latter were completely defeated,
with the loss of thirty pieces of cannon, and four
Pachas made prisoners.

The QUEEN Of the NETHERLANDS arrived on the
30th ult. at Spa. The KING of PRUSSIA was expected
there on the sth inst.

French Five per Cents.—Wednesday, 85fr. 80c.

The visitors to see Westminster Hall and Abbey
this morning, were very numerous, many of them of
the first rank. Upwards of 100 additional hods
have been put on this morning, in order to forward
the different works, which are all to be finished this
week. The applications for tickets for admission to
the galleries to witness the passing ceremony, exceed
all expectation.

There are no fewer than eight hundred table'
deckers and waiters already set down as Candidates
for service at the Coronation Banquet.
In the round of visits which her MAJESTY is paying
to the different Theatres, it is understoo that her nest
,% I;.e 'Lc Theatre Royal Enzlisb Operayousc.