Star.
London, England, 1818-04-17 00:00:00

this subittii--4.4or,hrerl—lle WaS
tett te. save • a conscientious one, to
not cletrasiing from the splendour
ily, for he sineerell.thought, that
:raordinary state would be amply
iat solid and stable dignity which
ire, by being venerated more-highly
country—(bear, hear.}—lie should
ion of the proposition.
said, that he would agree with
who supposed that Ministers had
per time for submitting the-present
mice of time hid rested With them:-
lotion had originated in a calamity
prescience could prevent, and-no hu-
wert4 and if, under such tircurti-
the duty of Ministers to provide
of the succession to the Crown, it

be inculpated for the present step.
not, help thinking that if Ministers
Session to .elapse without taking
the kind, they would' afterwards
to a far greater intulpation. Ii
all Royal Marriages to congratu-
,id to make due provision for them,
could is this instance have been at-
ld not have been invidious. It was
ion was preference, but because.
;ma, that no selection was made.—
iriend omitted the Duke of Cunther•
iseral plan, he would have taken on
stigma that hetrusteci,the House
His Royal Highness was placed in
'stances than when his marriage came
louse : it was then a contract with
vhereas it promised now to be con-
ic good—( Laughter )--to the wel-
Would his Noble Friend-net have
ir as a man if hr had shsnk from
Ind supporting the Duke of Cam-

'WPORT shrnvei, by reference to
the decision of the House upon
:rant before, was perfectly delibe-
I, what circumstances had since
Lify the House in departing from
iccmsistency, upon -"is occasion,
grant than urn any o,_her, because
iatton from a principle of economy
insiderately adopted—(hear, hear).
.AST maintained, that the circuit).
,hich the propositicin Was snide helm
at from those under which that now
tirm was offered.
`TE was surprised to hear it asserted
ton was rase upon the present propo-
'w objections made Wore had not
the hearing of the same' Parliament
was said .to be degrading to this
of its Princes received an allow-
ign country ; hut that allnwance was
, but to.a Dowager Princess of Prus-
umstance he saw nothing degrading
(Hear, hear!) The great ground
grant was refused before was, the
111 precedent in the marriage, inas-
without the consent of the Crown—
It was impossible, also, for the mo-
t the decided objection which the+
to this marriage, by her excluding
'timberland from Cot (hear, hear.)
leciston at once satisfactory to the
3eful to the cause of morals in general.
vric of the Duchess of Cumberland
ig was heard about her (hear,.heas!)
'TON conterideds that there had been
listency in the arguments which had
•osition to this grant. It had been
to income of the Royal Dukes should
because it was probable that they
,g this country and spending their
ier, but now this argument was done
21 the Royal Dukes intended to re-
le—(hear, hear). Objections were next
-riage itself, but he had heard from ,
it the sarfle side congratulations upon
He could not avoid stating, that
,hich had been made on the Duchess
tourable to her, and he believed that
'induct of her Royal Highness was in-
more fair and honourable it would
hear). He h.id with regret heard
is thrown out against the conduct of:
)uke, and theie were made as a sort of
iposing the grant. To these he should
-an that no one had the manliness to
he declared upon his honour that he
to be wholly without foundation—

was now loudly called for. The Corn •
and the numbers were—For the rest).
14S—Majority against Mi-
The division was followed with loud
cheers.

was then moved for granting 60001.
Duchess of Cumberland as dowry in
+Aug the Royal Duke.
S rose and opposed it, as he tliougbt
divisions in that illustrious family.—

Brougham of inconsistency Ln the
had just given.
-;HAM begged he woula state to what
induct in the debate the Ihmourable
!tided?

.S-1 understood the !ion. and Learned
say, that if the Committee voted the
Duke of Cambridge, he saw-no reason
tin should be. made against the Duke
-

IGIRM—a Sir, I do not know whether
t wilicieesn it necessary that I ihould
to explain a charge of such a nature
the Honourable Gentleman has made.
7ecoilectipti of the Committee, and am
borne out in the assertion, that I never
fressions thus impiated tp me—(/ttar,
Opposition).-1 am surptized why the
ientleman, whose understanding is so
„occasions-4 Leughter)sh mild have so
what I did say, as to misrepresent it in
las done. I can only account for it by
of his• zeal for the. qiiestion which has
and to•feeiings smarting under recent
r, hear,Jetnn the Opphlitton).--1 am in-
tch an inconsistency as that of whicit he