Star.
London, England, 1821-01-27 00:00:00

this was nothing bat a farce—(Loud cheers).--Let
them meet, the people at such open assemblies, and'
not skulk into holes and corners—(Hear, hear)—from
which they might issue libels against the People of
England—(Hear). These petitioners were the friends
of the Constitution, not its enemies. They were the
most loyal people in the world, and the most inca-
pable of betraying the interests of the Crown and
the Nation. If Ministers meant to continue in their
present career, he desired them to pause before they
would drive such a people to despair—(Hear, hear).
Let them be cautious how they stigmatized as disaf-
fected all those who had the audacity to oppose them
(Hear).—Such conduct never could be considered as
resulting from sound policy, either in public or in
private life—(Hear).—The Petition was read, and
ordered to be printed.
Mr. BERNAL presented a similar Petition from
Rochester. Though no party man he joined in every
item of this Petition. He was not disposed to em-
barrass any Government which was well adminis-
tered; but when he saw Ministers institute proceed-
ings which degraded the Nation in the eyes of the
world, he thought it was high time for men to speak
their sentiments, and not smother them under a veil
of affected tenderness (Hear). The meetings of the
People might be considered by a Noble Duke as
farces, or interludes, perhaps—(Hear)—dot if they
were treated with contempt, it might soon appear
that they were tragedies!—The Petition was ordered
to be printed, as was one from Mary-la-bonne, pre-
sented by the same Honourable Member.
Mr. JERVOISE presented a similar Petition from
the County of Southampton, and said he concurred
in its prayer.
Sir W. DE CRESPIGNY supported this Petition,
as he found that a County Meeting was in future to
be called " a farce !"—(Chcers). He thought it ne-
cessary to vindicate the respectability of the Peti-
tioners from the stigma which was cast upon them.
Some persons called such County Meetings mobs !
He supposed that now every Meeting was to be called
a mob, except battalions of soldiers and squadrons of
horse !—(Cheers).
Mr. WELLESLEY POLE contended that the No-
ble Duke (Wellington) whose language had been al-
luded to, had not intended to disparage County
Meetings, though he might not have weighed his
words with the accuracy of a practised speaker.
Mr. BARING felt that it was necessary for him,
in order to vindicate the proceedings of the County
Meeting alluded to, to refer the Right Ilon. Gentle-
man to the County Member behind him (Mr. Fle-
ming), because that Honourable Member had an op•
portunity of trying the patience of that Meeting in a
manner that no Public Meeting ever experienced. He
(Mr. Fleming) had addressed them, and never in his
(Mr. Baring's) opinion was an) speech delivered upon
a similar occasion more provocative of tumult and
disapprobation ; yet not one word was uttered by
that Hon. Gentleman but was listened to with the
greatest good-humour. If Honourable Gentlemen
would only compare the good-humour and order of
that Meeting with the clamour and confusion of the
exclusive Loyalists at the Egyptian flail, they would
see that the former at least would not lose by the
com pad son—( eers).
Mr. FLEMING, in explanaticn, said, that having
understood that the Meeting was convened for the
purpose of discussing certain propositions, be bad ven-
tured to deliver himself with freedom and candour.
The Petition was laid on the table, and ordered to
be printed ; as were four others, to a similar effect,
from different pal is of the County of Southampton.
Sir W. GUISE presented a Petition from the Free-
holders of certain Parishes of Gloucestershire, to a
similar purport with those presented in the course of
the evening, with respect to her Majesty and the con-
' duct of Ministers.—Ordered to be printed.
Lord BELGRAVE presented a similar Petition
from the Town of Chester. Ile said, that it was in
a very few days signed by 1500 persons, and it stated
that their grievances were connected with the present
system of Government—and prayed the I-louse to
use its endeavoers to procure the dismissal of Minis-
ters. With this Petition, he added, was connected an
instance of violence, such as that resorted to by the
Ultra Loyalists, in order to prevent the expression of
public sentiment. While some of the persons whose
names were to this Petition, were signing it, some of
the opposite party came in, and absolutely tote it
from their bands !—Ordered to be printed.
Sir T. ACKLANI) presented a similar Petition
from the Inhabitants of Dartmouth, signed by 1250
persons, consisting of one Magistrate, and between
two and three hundred Yeomen—one hundred Master
Manufacturers—between four and five hundred Ar-
tizans, and the rest of respectable Females and pri-
vate Gentlemen.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in support of the Peti-
tion, thought that Ministers would do well to com-
ply with the universal feeling of the country, and as
to their thundering threats of renouncing office before
they could restore her Majesty's name to the Liturgy,
yet a recollection of their compliant demeanour upon
their defeat upon the repeal of the Property Tax,
led him to believe, that if the House agreed to the
motion of his Noble Friend below him, the Ministers
themselves would come down to the House to-mor-
row, and announce that her name had been restored
—( Hear, heart Ordered to be printed.
Nil-. BARING presented a similar Petition from
the Town of Taunton.

Mr. KEITH DOUGLAS another from the Seven
Incorporated Trades of Dumfries, and another from
the Journeymen of the same town.----They were all
read, and ordered to be printed.
_ . _

Mr. W. SMITH presented a Petition, signed by
4500 persons, who, he said, were remarkable for their
talents, integrity, understanding, and education, pray-
ing for the restoration of the Queen to all her rights,
and a Parliamentary Reform.—Read, and ordered
to be printed.
Mr. LITTLETON presented a Petition from the Master
Manufacturers of Staffordshire, praying for a removal of all
Commercial restrictions, which was laid on the table. The
Honourable Member said, he was instructed to ask the Member
for Taunton, if it was his intention to move for the revival of
the Committee appointed last Session, for the consideration of
Commercial Regulation?
Mr. BARING replied in the affirmative.
ADJOURNMXNT OV THI 110 MG

On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHE-
QUER, the House resolved to adjourn, at its rising, to Wednes-
day next. COMMITTIZ OP SUPPLY.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the
Order of the day for the House going into a Committee of Supply.
Mr. CREEVEY observed, that the present was the first
stage of the process by which million: were about to be voted

apwarevleLledatehbee
being subverted, he (Mr. C.) hoped. that, in like in:inner,
.y
hopedianeen nfroowmfobcr binegtte:actriLeLd, Aa
n.sdtht
the
Publiclalvsfrhoandt
would come forward in defence of their property. If a Public
Meeting in this country had been deemed a farce, such language
must have come from Troppau. But the real farce
among was the Com-
mittee of Supply, where lit individuals, sharing
£170,000 out of the revenue of the country,votedawaythtehme
public money.
The House then went into the Committee, where,
. on the mo-
tion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQULR, a Supply
was granted to his Majesty.—Report on Wednesday.
THE LITURGY.
Lord ARCHIBALD HAMILTON, in rising to
make his motion relative to the omission of the
Queen's name in the Liturgy, begged leave to ex-
pressart
s of h
hist hopes that
countryth at
uthoealidi
makeup umbo
er of Petitionsfry
aade
ffirocmi
deficiency
pon his part in doing justice to the subject. The num-
ber and the nature of these Petitions well entitled
them to the consideration of the House, as contain
ing a clear and unequivocal expression of public
opinion. The general ferment of the country, from
one end to the other, must also have its due weight
with the House ; as it had not only extended to
that House, but Interfered with the daily avoca-
tions of People at large. Ministers might be of
opinion, that he had taken up the question as one
of the party, but it would be in the recollection of
the house that he had, before the clear manifesta-
tion of public opinion, asserted, in his place in
that House, the constitutional right of her Ma-
jesty to have her name in the Liturgy. That he
had done at the time when her name had teen
only mentioned by a degrading circumlocution.—
When the Member for 13ramber (Mr. NVilberforce)
made his motion, he (Lord A. Hamilton) had, in the
shape of an Amendment, made substantively the
same motion that he then submitted to the House,
and had that Amendment been carried, a great part
of the subsequent evil would have been prevented.--
In his motion, he meant nothing personal to the
Crown, as the whole was to be traced to the respon.
sibiiity of Nlinistei s...(Hear, hear, from the 11 intstetial
Benches).—lt was impossible that matters could re-
main in their present state, nor could the Queen be
satisfied with a mere pecuniary establishment. Some-
thing must be done to restrain the ebullitions of the
Press, and the restraint he would propose, would be
to do away the cause. If any one thing had a greater
effect on tile Public than another, it was the unjust
and unconstitutional exclusion of the name of the
Queen from the Liturgy of the Church—( Hear ).
Should that not be done away, no effectual means
could be proposed to allay the irritation in the public
mind ; he must call the whole of the proceedings
against the Queen revolutionary, with which the con-
duct of no Radicals could be compared. It would
seem, front what had on a former night been stated
in the House, that Ministers intended certain pro-
ceedings of a retrospective nature. An Honourable
Alderman (lleygate) had blamed the omission of her
name in the Liturgy in the first instance, but for-
sooth would defend the exclusion, on account of the
Queen's letter to the King. But that would, in effect,
be to try the Queen for one offence, and to punish her
for another. But the situation of the Queen, at the
time, was to be looked to, when her name bad been
omitted in the Liturgy; and he must contend, that the
act was not only illegal but unjust, to an oppressed
and an injured woman. The Queen, at that time,
had no home nor establishment in this country,
though she was by law a Queen; and, with rela-
tion to domestic life, was to be regarded as without
at husband. She had also left the country with a
letter of licence—(Hear, hear, hear, and No, no!)--
had been watched by spies while abroad, and had
met with no protection from any qualiter. Amidst
such circumstances, would the House place itself in
the moral chair ? Even if all had been done that
had been alleged, no fair and candid man would
bring any accusation against her. It ought also to
be remembered, that she had formerly been tried
and acquitted ; and if she had been guilty of any
crime, she had been provoked to it. It was said, that
heavy charges bad beets made against her; if those
were proved, then let her be punished; if false, her
name ought to be restored. There was no alterna-
tive; but Ministers would neither assert she was
guilty, nor admit of her innocence. The Noble Lord
then went on to comment on the Order of Council
fcr the exclusion of the name ; and mentioned, that
by the Act of Uniformity, no alteration could be
made in the Prayers ; but one name could only be
substituted for another. Had the Act meant to con-
vey any such power, it would have described it in
clear and precise terms. Even the Order in Council
was only negative, and did not warrant the altera-
tions. The Act of Uniformity no more authorized
the praying for George IV. than for the Queen. The
accession of George IV. made his wife a Queen, and
entitled her equally, to the Prayers of the Church.
The Act was never meant to have a penal effect,
which it must have, if the construction attempted
to be put upon it was right. He was doubtless
surprised that the Head of the Law, as well as the
Church, should sit in Council when such an Order
was made. The same Order had been sent to
Scotland, for which there was no authority, and
where it had been regarded as mere waste paper.
The manifest illegality in the one case made him
strongly doubt the legality in the other. Among the
other names, that of Mr. Canning was subscribed to
the Order in Council. It might appear illiberal to
censure a man in his absence ; but it was his absence
of which he complained. It was also said, that he
had differed with his colleagues on the subject of the
Queen; and, in that case, he ought to have waited
for a few days, and explained the reasons for his
conduct. At one time he spoke in favour of the
prosecution—then his name appeared to the Order
in Council—and, lastly, the Public had been in-
formed that he had differed from his colleagues.
But, in that case, he ought to have stated the cause
to the House. The Noble Lord said, his motion
would be, that the omission was ill-advised and in-
expedient. But he should not limit himself to that,
as the injury could only be repaired by the insertion
of the name. At the same time he should not call
fora specific vote to that effect—(Hear, from Lord
Castlereagh).—The Noble Lord would probably have
enough to do in dealing with the motion as it was
made; and he bad no doubt, had he called for a di-
rect vote to replace the name of the Queen in the
Liturgy, he would have been told that he offered an
insult to the Throne. Prayers were not offered up
for the Royal Family, merely on account of their
personal qualifications ; but merely because they were

members of the Royal Family and
and unwise to lead the Public to di
between the different members of th
conduct of Ministers on the present
to make Religion a mere erg:ne of
felt that they were not warranted in L.
against the Queen, and had theref(
them, but could lay no claim to a
bearance, as the Country N:oul d
to proceed farther in their career
The most abominable charges had bt
the Queen, and as such action woul,
tion, the tranquillity of the country
stored while things remained in th
If the country was still to be delugi
abomination, they would be led to
House and they had nn common
believed that the Noble Lord and hit
too sensible men to have instituted
ing of themselves, and was of opinii
vertently given a pledge that such pi
be commenced, on the event Of thi
over. He believed that lini,ters xre
conduct that they had not advised,
servility he complained—(/fear, her
the House took the matter into thei
would say, in the language of the
behind him, discord would continue to
out the country. lie conclude,l by

That it is the .ense of this House, eta
oil of l'eb. 12, 1820, authorizing the otniy.i
name from the Liturgy, was in.),t ill-. tivis,
Mr. ELLIS defended the con&
ning, who (he stated) had declared
ning, that lie would take no part in
against the Queen. Oa that accot
absent during all the proceedings in
fineing he could continue no lunge:
chosen to resign. When charges h,
brought against his Right lion. 1
serice, the House should recollect hi
fence. From the responsibility att,
der in Council, he (Mr. Canning)
shrink. He trusted Honourable G
postpone their attacks on his Right
his leturn, as he could assure them,
actuated either by attachment to of
of popular a pplatt,.e.
Mr. F. ROBINSON entirely cons
nion of the Noble Lord, that Mini
responsible for the proceedings ag
though that opinion the Noble
quently seemed, in some measure, ti
ther the advice to exclude the nat
from the Liturgy was right or w
were alone responsible, and by th,
must stand or fall. When the N(
charged Ministers with revolutior
would have been cowardly, indeef
avowed their responsibility. But
now did Ministers entertain any dour
gality of the proceeding. If the A(
tive as to the insertion of the name of
the names of all the Royal Progeny •
but as the latter had often been
might the Queen's. The Queen hat
rated from the King ; that separati
cognized by the late King, and a se).
ment had been sanctioned by Act of
They would recollect it was also at
gined that the Queen had consented
and the insertion of her name in the
have been incongruous with such a
as grave charges might be brought ag
it was not fitting she should have the
ing her name inserted in the Litut
Ministers) had found it their bounder
the King to refuse that mark of rest
jesty ; because, if they had not don(
have been treating her in a way as i
been even accused of anything—(Hi
there were some who thought that
been so treated ; but there were oth,
differently, and that they ought not
her according to her high dignity, gi
and so forth. They had been accuse,
of having brought the country to
lion—(Hear).—lf so, what should
fate ? not the milk-and-water moti
Lord—(llear)—who talked of an
of which they knew nothing. Why
Lord, if he desired to drive them ft
not make his motion fully at onct
tempting, by a mitigated proposition,
votes of all who might have the sli'
difference of opinion from Ministers
the Petitions had for their object tin
nizters, while they only prayed for
her Majesty's name to the Liturgy
of Commons would not take that .
speak openly and plainly, as they were
ther more definite object brought lot
Noble Lord. He would not meet
motion by a direct negative, but w'
this House do now adjourn.
Mr. HOBHOUSE thought the
thing better to do than to enter int
the Right Honourable Gentleman
whose eloquence was capable of defeno
whenever he might be openly and
He hoped that the Parliamentary
Right Honourable Gentleman woulo
away, by a Parliamentary manoeuvre, from vom:
against that Administration which he had qu
As to the speech of the President of the Board'
Trade, he was surprised that he had heard no rvcc
in defence of the conduct of Ministers as respect!
the Queen, though upon them lay the onus probalii
and of defending their conduct. Since 1544, t/4
was no instance of a Queen Consort's name beA
excluded from the Liturgy. He saw the Attar!!
General taking his pen, as if he (Mr. Hobhouse)k+r
made a slip: but there was no instance, unless it.,
of the Queen of George I. could be called one; D.,
ire contended that she was never recognized as C10e,!.!
or known as Princess of Wales in this country,..
was divorced before her husband became long
this country ; and there was no instance of the oto
sion of a Queen Consort's name from the LoturgTe,
The Right Honourable Gentleman should have to.
them under what law her Majesty's name had, Ite!
so omitted. All that the Right Honourable 609'
man had said in defence of Ministers was, that,
they had advised the insertion of her name In t:
Liturgy, she would have come to the countryoi3-.
have claimed all her tights. That very -.tcpr

lnw iittt.cOsmin;asit. :„,tt
..I,,!:troiiilcceo(nc:tum..tit,pesderiu.iffni;tris,,ecttroitietf.:l jest)
hat family. t have
rodsce
r present `p<
State.
their proeeetti,. uP .
•efore aban tefrifi
ihgr)isiedeeye,i
.211
.1 believe that t
'
mpathies i.
ti s colleagues et, -the
ion they had ine
~ro:eedin~s'T `Lust
ib•lk)iuent
-gat
le Queen connr. Cattesponsible
, and of such be al
e.ir own hands, no,
e gallant Gene, the
it the o:iier in Ce:!, Get
arc
ct of
it-dandi3;;r. ekP,
3(.011,1‘j
Jlton; the bea4 In
fl the ,
im.""e•li4 ma)unt he had
pa'
o the Lords,
not
ar neutral, he
tux
:ad fut merly be by
Friend in his ces,
ti tr urn pliant
Cache.[ to theO: rive
had no will s tho
Gentlemen uni! Acl
it 110 n. friend, asl
1, he had not bet Lit
otLe, or theke con
.
scurred in the, ww
a!
s alone ret the
ain't the Qum' liar
Lord had Th:
to retract. Wee, the
ame of the Qu..., cot
wrong, Mini, wh
that advice nat
Noble Lord Itl wa
miry conduct, t a
ed, had they to tha
neither then wa
loubt as to the wa
Act were im, gre
of the Queen,
must be in as
excluded, so , Co
td been long In
ttion had been of
separate estab'
of Parlarnen pn
t the titne L
ed to live abm an
to Liturgy we
proceeding;• ag
against the ' on
he honour of ,tlu
urgy. They rct
len duty to ad • na
espect to her • to
ne so, they wne bli
sif she had • • in:
ycar).—llel to
she aught tall de
hers who &light• to
)t to haves re
riven her a palate, as
ed of high cri,, an
the eve of dr
i have been
tion of the )1,- ye
ulterior motif! tr.
ty did the N la
from their s' or
re, instead of r th
ion, to catch • th
sli
i to
he
higrb'eheumtr
e.itelsos
tttetio.
0?1. tlt
•
fr,
'hint, but sro, of
were to have " L
Orward by an. to
the Noble Lori
he
iy,tnwnoHtoofuouri(till:hdsileierdn.lubsodcatdoanodvenceibeeScrenowila: tc
dpeufebnlicicilnygchh!rge.in!