Star.
London, England, 1820-07-11 00:00:00

come. lie: laid& not be betrayed by the retrospec-.
tive vie* which-hie Honourable and Learned Friend
had taken of the "proceedings-respecting her MajeA.
into any detailed remark on, the subject. He h.O
hoped that the period having arrived, when the pain*-
ftil subject whiCii had so long agitated the public
mind' ,r.,s in a course of being settled judicially, that
that Iloirm would not, on any occasion; be dragged
into any farther noice of it, until it should come
regularly betbre them. It was not calculated to
further. the ends of public justice, to ealM the exist
lug effervescence of feeling, or to qualify that House
to petform..the duty which might eventually cte-
velie upon them, to debate, by snatches, the most
d4cult and delicate points of -the question, and
thus to keep alive a constant and injurious irritation.
lie would therefore confine himself to one single re-
n. irk in his-Honourable and Learned Friend's speed'.
Ilk Honourable and Learned Friend's great accusa-
tion ag-..iinst the Ministers of the Crown was, that
having thoughtit imperative upon themselves, in the
performance of their duty, to bring for card the
charges which they had brought forward, they ne-
vertheles,tin defiance (according to his Honourable
and Learned Friend) of the principles of justice, and
at the rick (according-to'his Honourable and Learned
Friend) of incurring a'greater blot than ever had been
thrown on the House in the 'annals of the country,
did yield to the oiinion or that. House, expressed, of
not unanimously, bra Sno4 commanding and enpre-
ccdepted majelity.- His Honourable and Learned
Friend thought it matter of blame, that his Majesty's
Ministers, having found it necessary (although with
yt sit reluctance) to bring the-matter in•queluon oa-
th:. the consideration of Parliament, had nevertheless
what he was pleased to call the weakness and the in-
consistency to persevere to the last in endeavouring
to avert what they themselves, what Parliament,
and what the country considered to be a great na-
tional calamity. To Irimself, he could assure his
Honourable and Learned Friend, that. be took no
blame for his Share of the transaction—(Hear, hear).
-Undoubtedly, had the Resolution to which the House
acceded, been drawn and worded by his colleagues
and himself, there were some expressions, some awk-
wardness which they would probably have omitted.
. But from that fact let this fair inference. be deduced'
-...that the Resolution in question had not been sub-
mitted to the approbation of Ministers ; but that, con-
sidering it tb embody the sentiments of the House,
although the words were not theit's, they thought-,
that, to have considered them with critical severity,
would have shewn fastidious delicacy at the expense
of that whiCh they were convinced was sincerity of
intention. Whatever might have been the effect. of
that attempt at conciliation, no man could say that it
had not been made with earnestness ; no n.an could say
that in the mode adopted for its attainment, a cold nig-
gardly parsimony of language had been fallen into.
If the proceeding could be charged with any error
•in that respect, it was error of excess. Would to
GOD that excess had been tenfold, so that the result
had been more fortunate! But as that was 4," past
praying for," he had the satisfaction to know, that,
so far from shrinking from the accusation of his Ho-
no,urable and Learned Friend, that they had deviated
from the straight-forward path, his colleagues and
himself, and more particularly himself, to the latest
period of their live-, and whatever might be the re-
sult of the melancholy transaction, would feel a
consolation which they would not exchange for any
earthly advantage—that the last hope and chance of
avoiding the nienaced evil had been most sincerely
tried—t Hear, hear!) •
Sir J. 1%1 ACK INTOSH then moved the first and second Re-
solutions, which were put and negatived without a division.
Sir 3. MACKINTOSH, in moving the third Reso-
lution, begged to make one or two observations in
answer to what had fallen from the Right lion.
• Member opposite (Mr. Canning). First, it was re-
markable how strictly the Right Hon. Member
applied the proposed Resolutions as personal to him-
self and his colleagues. He seemed to consider him-
self and his friends as the permanent, immovable
Administration of the country, and that everything
proposed was directed against them. The possible
abuse of power generally seemed to be-totally
,lost
sight of. 'lire Right Hon. Member .regretted that
the subject respecting the Queen should have been
'introduced into this question. He (Sir James-Mack-
into-It) should carefully abstain from entering
into the merits of that question until it was really
forced upon them, and then he should endeavour to
aiischarge his duty to the best of his ability—(Hear).
The Right nom. Member, in an orderly digression,
bad attempted to rebut the charges of vacillation and
inconsistency made against his Majesty's Ministers;
he, however, at the same time admitted that they did
deviate a little from the line of conduct originally,
proposed on the question of the Address to her Ma-
- ,jesty. Now what was this deviation but inconsist-
ency ? Her Majesty was threatened with the severest
proceedings on her arrival, and in three days after
the House of Commons was prostrate at her feet. He
ci.d not mean to cavil with the words of the Address
to the Queen. His objection to it was made on con-
;tutional grounds, and he would venture to say,
f at at no former period of Parliament had there
been an Address of Advice or Opinion to a Subject.
Oa this ground it was that his objections were
founded. If • the Crown disregarded the advice of
Parliament, they had in their own hands the means
of rresetving their dignity-. But, in -the case of
t.Jae Queen, she had no responsible adviser, and the
House might expose itself to every species of con:
tutuely without havins, the means of redress.—
There tad been various Actresses of Condolence and Congn.
ts.latinit to Princes at different periods, but never until June,
WA, was Parliament known to have presented an Address of
Asivice to a subject. These were the grounds by which his vote
v. as actuated, and'upon these grounds he founded his censure of
the conduct of Ministers, whuee duty it was to protect the dig-
- nity eat Parliament. The Hon. Member tMr. Canning) said,
• • ,bat the kin-solution was not the Resolution of Ministers. It was
w their Resolution rit was the Resolution of all who voted for it.
4la disdained an, minute investigation into the construction of
Its sentences, lie looked only to the principle upon which it was
briught forward. The Right lie... Member opposite argued that
the Con-kith:ion provided against all ordinal y abuses sof power,.
Ctat there were some crimes of so atrocious a nature eh:a t'te law
slut not provide against, yet it never contemplated their omission.
" 'N:fli.tt was more atrocious than the stairs:l:r. of an innocent
S:dual, according to the forms of law? Yet what crime was
tire more securely provided against by the Cors.itutioil ? IThat
• 1014 f •.ronger.than the regulation of our laws of I ligh Treason?
It was thought that a tinte mLlmt come, when Innocent intittri-
da•J , would be in danger of dying by the sword, and against
. s:•••h a period provision was made by the law. But the 'light
• ISon:suraltsc Meatier seemed to be of opinion, that the securie