Star.
London, England, 1818-04-14 00:00:00

question was brought forward, he should strenuously
support Lim io the utmost of his power. But he was
apprehensive that it might wear an appearance very
foreign to his Honourable Friend's intentions, if the
House departed from the precedents of former Ad-
dresses, by referring to the topic of economy, not to
be found in the Messige, and thereby seeming to in-
sinuate that the Crown had improperly omitted that
important consideration. On the merits of the ques-,
tion he heartil a d with his Hon. Friend.
Sir J. NE RT expressed his regret at being
obliged to differ so widely from his Right Honour-
' able Friend (Mr. Plunkett) in his view of the Amend-
ment, which he regarded as absolutely necessary,
after what had passed on both sides. It was a great
mistake in his Right Hon. Friend to suppose, that
the Amendment could refer to any thing but the-
conduct of Ministers. The Message was their act,
and if the omission was censured by the Amendment,
the censure fell upon the constitutional advisers of

the Crown alone.
Lord LASCELLES was one of those present at
the Meeting at Lord Liverpool's, and he there felt
that he could not agree to the proposition of Minis-
ters. He was prepared to oppose it by his vote when
it came forward ; • but he declined 'supporting the
Amendment, Or voting in the present stage.
Sir C. MONCK strongly supported the Amend-
ment, as did Mr. CALCRAFI' and Mr. TIERNEY,
upon the ground of Lbrd Castlereagh's refusal to in-
form the House what was intended, and the fact
which had come out of so many Members that morn-
ing having karat what the measure was, and immeb.
&Lately declared that they could not agree to it,
Mr. LITTLETON (Staffordshire) said, he should
not easily be suspected of opposing Government,
with whom he so generally acted. Ent he had been
one of the Meeting at Lord Liverpool's, and had
found a great many others, like himself, friends to
the measures of Administration, but who could not
agree to the proposition made by Lord Liverpool.—
However he should reserve himself for the after stage
of the question.
Mr. ASERCROMBY considered that they who
opposed the Amendment quite mistook the question.
The duty of the House was to act as an interme-
diate body between the People and the Crown, at-
tending to the interests of both. His Right Hon.
Friend (Mr. Plunkett) could not surely so far forget
its functions, and indeed its whole forms of pro•
ceeding, as to regard any thing which it did relative
to a Message or Address, as applicable to the execu-
tive branch of the Government, or to any persons
other than the Ministers of the Crown. After the
avowals of °pillion on all sides respecting the ex-
pected proposition, it would be a deception not to
add the declaration contained in the Amendment.
Mr. C. W. VYNN wished the Amendment to be'
withdrawn, for fear of impeding the future opposi-
tion to the proposed vote—in which opposition he
would certainly concur—but the Amendment, he,
thought, contrary to the usual forms of proceedings.
Mr. W. COURTENAY deemed it necesssary to
declare at once, in the earliest stage, his opposition
Ito the measure. He should vote for he Amendment
with this view—he approved of it because it went to
declare the opinion of the House, and to prevent the
measure, deprecated on almost all hands, front being
proposed. It had his unqualified assent.
Sir T. ACLAND vtas against the Amendment,
though he strongly supported the principle of it, and
should shew this by his vote when the measure was

•
proposed.
Mr. GOOCH had been at Lord Liverpool's, and
disapproved of the proposition.
Mr. m1;11113EN warmly supported the Amend-
ment ; as did also General WALPOLE, who asked,
whether if such an expression of regard to the bur-
diens of the country had been in the original Address,
Gentlemen would have voted for leaving them oat ?
Sir W. CURTIS said he had not been at Lord Li-
verpool's, though he had on former occasions of a
similar kind, and had expressed his mind freely. If
he had been there, he should to-day have opposed the
proposition decidedly, and so he should when it came
on—but he would not vote now for the Amendment.
Sir S. ROMILLY begged the House before voting,
to recollect that the whole of the Members to whom
the private and unconstitutional disclosure had been
made in the morning, and who alone knew its nature,
had, from all that now appeared, disapproved of it ;
and had one after another informed the House of its
being of a kind impossible to be supported by them
who usually voted with Ministers. Was it too much
in these circumstances to record the warning of the'
House to Ministers in the Address, and to let it he
known that there existed here such an opiniod ? The
original Address would only tend to mislead any one
who read it as to the sentiments of the House, and
the reception which the proposition was, likely to
meet with.—The House then divided, when there ap-
peared—For the Amendment 93—Against it 144.-
1 lajority for the original Address 51.
Mr. P. METHUEN moved for a Return of the
Incomes of the Dukes of Clarence, Kent, Cumber-
land, Sussex, and Cambridge, from military,
or civil appointments ; also of all pensions or other.
allowances, as well as grants horn the droits of ad-'t
miralty since 1800.
Mr. TIERNEY proposed that their incomes from
any foreign States should be included.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER 'was
understood to say in reply, that it was impossible to
make such a Return, as the means of making it were
beyond the province of Ministers.
Mr. J. P. GRANT said, that at least the person-
ages who received those incomes had the power to
make the return.

Mr. BROUGHAM thought that the House ought
at least to be informed of the emoluments of the
Duke of Cambridge in Hanover, and he could name
one person who could make a return to' that effect :
it was the person who was making the application to
the House for more money—(hear, hear.) Their
grant must be influenced by the amount of the pre-
' sent income ; because they would grant only what
was necessary for supporting the splendour belong-
ing to the situation of the Royal Dukes. What was
necessary for that purpose they were bound to give ;
but if any other means existed for contributing to
that object, it was surely indispensable to know the
amount of those means, in order to enter upon the
question, how much ought to be granted in addition?'
(Hear, hear.) Hanover had formerly bt.ert a bur-
den, and the source of incalculable expcas.: to this