Star.
London, England, 1810-12-21 00:00:00

did mg lenient the calamity which bid befial led hit
Majesty. He entirely concurred with him in th.b king
it must be the wish and the prayer of every mut that
he might soon recover to exercise the royal pow,
The Right Honourable Gentleman had kid tfeie
proceedings had been marked with proper grasOly
and decorum, and had expressed his satisfaction Arb
the difference between their conduct and the of d.IIP
representatives of the people in 1788. 14e felt no*
gratitude to the Right Hon. Gentleman for the cm). •
pliment in which he conceived himself to be included
With his friends, and he knew not why he (the Clan-
cello!, of the Exchequer) should go out of Ills way to
make such a comparison, and to throw obloquy on the.
national assembly of that day, most of whom wet.
now no more. He could see no reason for his
acting thus to revive that spirit of acrimony, at the
absence of which he professed to rejoice It was by
no means necessary for him in 1810 to make sich
comparison to the disadvantage of those who had dis-
cussed the same question in 1789. The Right Ho-
nourable Gentleman had said he understood, from
what had been thrown out from the
.Opposition side,
that the third resolution would be opposed, as not
being agreeable to the principles of the Constitution,
while he called upon them in 1810, to fnllow the ex-
ample of the House of Commons in 1788. In oppo.
sing such a proceeding he was guilty of no inconsiss
tency of conduct. He had been of opinion that it
was unconstitutional in 1788, and he still continued
to think so, for reasons which he should proceed to
state to the House. The Right Honourable Gentleman
had said there was no comparison between the pre-
sent situation of the country and that in which it was
placed at the time of the Revolution in 1688. He
(Mr. P.) thought with the last Speaker that they
were parallel cases. In the present instance the ra-
cancy arose not from the abdication of the Monarch.
but from the incapacity of him who holds tlant situa-
tion to discharge the functions of Royalty. Though
his person is there, his mind is absent, he is wholly
unable to fulfil the duties of his high office, and it
consequently became their duty to remedy the deka.,
thence arising. It was proposed to lodge the execoeiva
power in the hands of another, during his Majesty's
mental incapacity ; and the mode by which this was
proposed to be done was by Bill; by an Act, which
implied the consent of each ,of the branches of the
Government. It was most preposterously proposed
the royal assent to that Bill, which was only to be
passed because he who alone can give the royal
assent was unable to give it. It went to make inca-
pability capable, to make derangement rational, and
to make incompetent competent. To succeed it
was necessary that all this should be done. But were
they rational if they could embrace such an ex-
travagant proposition ? If they could receive Inch
a proposition as reasonable, as one which ought
to be adopted, never let the man who is the strong-
est Protestant, oho is least friendly to the Catho-
lic religion, laugh again at the doctrine of tran-
substantiation. Never again let them laugh at the
absurdities, of others, if a grave assembly „like that
could say, that an act was complete, because the as-
sent of him is pretended to be obtained whose incom-
petency to give that assent is the cause of the Act
being made. He hoped the Right Honourable Genii
tletnan would find he had not eloquence enough to
persuade the House to came into such a proposition.
The Right Honourable Gentleman, referring to the
precedent of 1789, had told them, that after the re-
covery of his Majesty, he (the King) 'had approved
of what had been done, a,. I ratified the Acts previ-
ously made. Did the Honourable Gentleman re-
collect that his Majesty on his recovery knew who had
acted so without his authority ? and recollecting those
were retained, and that his Majesty continued-undee
the influence of the same advisers, could he think such
a precedent strong enough to overpower the dictates
of common sense, to overturn reason itself, and render
that worthy of imitation which was in itself a palpa-
ble contradiction of what it purported to be ? But,
said the Chancellor of the Exchequer, his Majesty hay.
ing when recovered given his assent to the bill, such is'
proceeding had now the force of the whole Parli anent.
From the time that the billreceived his Majesty's assent., •
he admitted the Act to be legal and constitutional, as
were certain Acts in the cases of the Restoration and the,
Revolution. In those cases the royal assent made valid
the Acts previously passed, which they never could
be while wanting that sanction. The _Right. Hon,
Gentleman bad said that it was their duty to provide
for the emergency of the case, byinacing some per-
sons in a situation to exercise the functions of rop
ally. The public suffer for the iuccmpetency of the.
King, and therefore his place men be supplied bn,
some person equal to the duties of that high office.-
But how were they in their present state to pass an-
Act—how legislate without the three Powers of Par-
liament ? How but by giving some person the au-
thority to do that which the *king should do if able 4
The Right Honourable Gentleman had said that
it was the right of Parliament to command thw
Great sal. Be would maintain that the Grp
Seal belonged to the King, and not to the Lords
or to the Commons. It belonged to the King and
to him only. If the King was incapable of coos.
ing it to be used, who then should direct in what
cases and to what Acts it should be applied f--es
Should the House of Lords or the House of Com-
mons take upon themselves to exercise that 'sower.
or should they supply the defect in the Govern-
ment if they could.? According to the Right Hon.
Gentleman they ought not to supply the defect in the
Constitution, but ought to usurp themselves the au:
thority of the great seal, and order it to be used tat
they should think fit for the purposes of legislature.
He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had said, be
conceived this authority could be used with confer--
mity to the principles of the Constitution. He now
wished to examine this position, to see how the Right
Honourable Gentleman was warranted is malting
tech an assertion. Since the Constitution of 'the
country had assumed a more exact and metheth.
' cal form *1 exercising its powers, since it had been
generally uaderstood. but two cases, the restoration
and the revolution, directly in point, and in neither o(
these did either Ouse think of proceeding as they
were now advised to proceed, and as they had4t
his opinion most unfortunately) acted in 1789.
public business and the courts of justice being wholly
at a stand, wanting the authority of the great seal.—
The Commons formerly applied to the Lords (think.
ing they had a right to do so) to cause the Great
Seal to be made use of. The Lords, however, re-
fused to accede to their wishes and would do nothing