Star.
London, England, 1820-09-08 00:00:00

he hoped he would not be understood as prejudging
on the one side or the other. A more unseasonable
proposition than that suggested by the Noble Lordt,
who first spoke on the other side, he had never heard.
No answer that the Noble Earl (Liverpool) could
have given could have had the effect of warranting
such a proposition—( Hear, hear ! ).--It seemed to
him to be a proposition to restrain the Counsel at the
Bar within certain limits in their'defence. The clause
alluded to in the Bill could be considered only when
the whole case was closed, and the Bill came under
consideration in a Committee. Now, it was impos-
sible that any alteration whatever could be produced
or made. The defence was, therefore, to be directed
against the whole of the Bill, as it stood at present.
It was not only a Bill of Pains and Penalties, but a
Bill of Divorce. That was the state of the Bill now
before their Lordships ; and to that extent it was the
.dutf of the Counsel to direct the evidence for the de-
fence. He agreed with the explanation of the Noble
Lord (Liverpool); for it was only the same state-
ment, somewhat more at length, as on the former
occasion referred to ; and he (Earl Grey) had at the
same time acquitted him of any such object as that
alluded to. Ile was very glad to hear from the No-
ble Earl now what he had been persuaded of at first,
that personal relief was not the object of the high and
Illustrious Individual. This was a statement which
he received with perfect confidence and satisfaction.
Ultimately, without giving any opinion of the result
of this proceeding, if the proceeding concluded so
ai that her Majesty should incur pains and penalties,
degradation from her high and illustri.ms situation,
he thought, must
,be the necessary consequence. It
she should be degraded from the rank, character,
and situation of Queen Consort, she ought not to re-
main the wife of the Sovereign. Not because it would
be a personal relief to divorce, but because it was ab- ,
turd in terms, that one degraded from the rank of
Queen should be the consort of the King. A Bill
degrading the Queen, who was to remain the wife of
the King, must be considered a Bill degrading the'
King also—(Hear, hear ! ).—This was not the time
for discussin this subject ; but if such a proposition
should hereafter be made, he should state his objec-
tions to it. At present such a question could not be
introduced for any useful purpose; it could lead to
no practical conclusion ; it could have no effect what-
ever on the character of the Bill, but on the course
to be pursued by Counsel Lor the defence. He, there-
fore, must regret that the subject had been intro-
-timed on the present occasion. Any statements by
the Noble Lord (Liverpool) could be viewed but as
the declarations of an individual only. The Bill bore
its own character on the face of it. Upon that Bill,
'as it now stood, their opinions and observations were
to be given on the second reading. The clause al-
luded to could be considered only in the Committee.
They were not to decide on the fate of the Bill as it
now stood, without hearing the whole case, and
without discussion, examination, and inquiry (Hear).
Lord LONSDA LE in explanation stated, that he
certainly had no intention of limiting the defence of
the Queer, and he concne red with the Noble Earl in
thinking that any declaration of the Noble 'Earl's
could not effect that object, but he had required no
such .deciaration.
Earl GREY explained. He had understood his
Lordship's object to have been, that Counsel should
be instructed not to make any defence against the
clause of Divorce.
The. Earl of LIVERPOOL said, he had put no
such construction on the Noble Lord's meaning. He
had only conceived the Noble Lord to have put a
question to him before the Counsel shoad be called
on to state the course they proposed to pursue.
Earl GREY begged the Noble Lord's pardon, for
he had misunderstood his object.
The Earl of DONOUGHMORE always differed
with great regret from his Noble Ft lend, whosoheart
and abilities were equally eminent. His Noble Friend's
wish always was to do his duty, and he was compe-
tent to discharge it from the integrity of his heart
and the wisdom of his understanding. On this oc-
casion he had great satisfaction in agreeing with his
Noble Friend. He had not risen, however, merely
to express his own satisfaction, but his astonishment,
at the opposition he could not call it, but the sugges-
tion of the Noble Lord on the other side. He meant
no disrespect; he believed the Noble Lord had con-
sulted with none upon the subject; but this was a
most momentous consideration, and he would ex-
press freely what he thought in every stage of it.
The question now was the proof of the preamble to
the Bill : that was, had the Illustrious Person done
what was deserving of a Bill of Pains and Penalties,
be their amount great or small? Whether the whole
or a part of die Bill should be passed was not the
question at present. They had only one half of the
evidence before them. If the Illustrious Person should
not remain Queen—(they had been told a great deal
of the public feeling)—what would be the public
feeling, if one degraded from the rank of Queen
should remain the King's wife. He desired, as a
Juror, to be enabled to form his opinion on the whole
of the issue.

The LORD CHANCELLOR (to Mr. Brougham).
—I understand it to be the wish of the House to ask
you how you propose to proceed whether you pro-
pose to proceed to state the defence now, or to take
the delay agreed to be allowed ?
Mr. Baovottast.—Amid the new and accumu-
lating difficalties which, every step we proceed, are
arising around us—even now we are met witlys a new
Bill—(Order, order).
The LORD CHANCELLOR.—When Counsel
ate ordered to withdraw, they are understood to be
precluded from making any observations on what
takes place in the House. If the Counsel act other-
wise, the order for withdraw ing must be enforced,
and you will understand now that it is the pleasure
of the House that you make no observation Qll what
has been said by any of the Lords. You are asked

a question, and you are to confine yourself to the an-
swering of that question.
Mr. Uttetrotimt.—l cannot say " Yea" or " Nay"
to that question. I tell what I ask. I speak not of
justice, but what I trust your Lordships will in corn-

passion concede—
The LORD CHANCELLOR.—Mr. Brougham,
this House does nothing in compassion. That is a
mode of address whicli you ought not to use,
Mr. BROUGIIAM.—Then I make no appeal to the
compassion of your Lordships. I thought that an
appeal to your mercy wads the wore respectful mode,