The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-01-21 00:00:00

THE ADDRESS.

The speech from the throne having been read by the Lord
Chancellor, .
The Duke of SOMERSET rose, for the purpose of moving an
address in answer to it. He believed that the speech em-
braced no topics that were likely to create a diversity of opi-
nion. Iler majesty had, in the first instance, announced her
intention of allying herself in marriage with Prince Albert of
Saxe Coburg. This was a matter of very deep interest; and
he trusted, that, by taking this step, the individual happiness
of the illustrious parties would be secured, and that the union
would, at the same time, be beneficial to the country. (Hear,
hear.) The uniformity of religion between the parties, the
previous connexion of their families, and the preceding ac-
quaintance which had been cultivated between themselves,
all tended to produce that desirable effect. (Hear, hear.)
Being well assured that their lordships participated in these
sentiments, he did not entertain the slightest doubt that their
lordships would concur in any measure having for its object
the providing of an establishment suitable to the dignity of
the crown. The noble duke, in turn, glanced at the various
subjects of the speech, and concluded by moving the address,
which was, as usual, an echo of the speech.
Lord SEAFORTH seconded the address. _ -

On the question for the adoption of the address being for-
mally put from the woolsack.
The Duke of WELLINGTON rose—My lords, there is no
noble lord in this house who concurs more sincerely, than I
do in the expression of congratulation to her Majesty upon
her approaching marriage, which she has. been pleased to an-
nounce a second time to the public from the throne this day.
I most sincerely wish that the event which has been thus
promulgated may contribute to the comfort of her Majesty.
(Hear, hear.) I agree with the noble lord who seconded the
address that it is desirable that your lordships should concur
with the other house of parliament in the provision for the
prince whom her Majesty has selected. My lords, it ap-
pears to me that when this•house is called to a question of
this description, the house ought to know, and the public
ought to know, something beyond the mere act of council,
or this announcement from the throne—something more
than the mere name of the prince—(hear)—to whom her
Majesty is about to be united. I had the honour of being
• summoned to the privy council when her Majesty was gra-
ciously pleased to declare in council her intention to espouse
that prince. On that occasion the precedent of the reign of
George 111. was followed in all respects except one—that is,
rily lords, declaring that the prince is a protestant. (Hear.)
My lords, for my own part I entertain no doubt that he is
one. I am sure he is a protestant. I know he is of a pro-
testant family. I have the honour of being known to some
of his family, and lam sure that he is a Protestant. By the
law of this country it is necessary that the prince must be a
Protestant to be espoused to her Majesty. I say, my lords,
that the precedent on the marriage of George HI. ought to-
have been followed throughout, and the public ought to have
had the fact of the prince being a Protestant announced in
the same manner as was then observed. I know the noble
lords opposite too well to think that they are ignorant of the
anxiety of the public mind, and I know well that they have it
in their power to relieve that anxiety—(hear; hear), and gra-
tify the people by the declaration. Nay more, my lords, I
am satisfied that her Majesty is as anxious for the Protestant '
character of the state as I can be, or any of your lordships.
If so, why was riot there an announcement in conformity with
the precedent of George 111. ? Is there any doubt as to the re-
ligious sentiments of the prince ? There is no doubt about it. He
is a Protestant. He cannot be otherwise—(hear.) Why was
it then not stated ?—(hear.) Why, I ask, was it not declared
that the prince is a Protestant? My lords I have seen since
what the reason was for the course adopted. I read what was
asserted with great attention. lam aware what a celebrated
French author has asserted. He says that in France—" En
plein jour, on ne conspire pas." I have been accustomed to
look to those revolutionary discussions. I read the public
speeches and letters—missive and declarations, that I may
see what the danger is, that I may be prepared:accordingly.
I see from what passed there a very sufficient reason why the
word Protestant was not inserted in the communication made
by the Privy Council, and why it has not been inserted in the
speech. My lords, lam convinced that noble lords opposite
are as much dispoSed as I am to preserve the Protestantism
of the state but Ido say that this is the first time that the
House of Lords has been called upon to act in this manner.
The public ought to know—the house ought to know, that
he is a Protestant prince, knowing that we are a Protestant
state. I was the party to bring forward the measure with
regard to the Test and Corporation Acts, and the measure to
adniit the Roman Catholics into all the privileges of the con-
stitution, and to enable them to become part and parcel of
the Protestant state ; but I never intended, nor did noble
lords opposite who supported me in that measure which I
had the honour to propose. intend that the country should
cease to be a Protestant state. I say, then, that the House
of Lords should on the first opportunity of expressing an
opinion—your lordships having been called upon to concur
in the address—to insist upon the removal of the doubt upon
the public mind id reference to this subject. When your
lordships provided for the security of this Protestant state,
you were willing to admit into it—notwithstanding all the
objections that were strongly urged on the ground of former
precedents and ancient laws, orders in council, declarations,
oaths, and what not, you were prepared and did actually ad-
mit all those persons to thefullenoyment, benefits, and ad-
, avnarditoagtheesrosfetchuisriPtireostweshtiactiiit
youstatet,hoeun the ground of those oaths
of that state. But Ido entreat your lobr:dshdi
public mind by declaring you b that the provisions
diet
of the law of this Protestant country course as
I have ventured to suggest, eatsiesfycurtihtye
andry require such a .
pfsortoths
occasion—the
that you believe the prince
is a Protestant. On a former
George lll.—it was declared bg)craesi°tllle—the marriage of
privyes ocuosunpl that
the the princess to whom he was about to be
Protestant princess. In the address proposed to both houses,
it was not so announced certainly ; but in the House of Com-
mons, an amendment was made, in which the word Protest-
ant was inserted. That course, however, was not pursued
't was
in' the House of Lords, but adopted in the address
proposed in the House of Commons.milr course. a I have now
your lordships
, to Propose
that your lordships adopt a si
`concur in this, I have no objection to the other parts of the
address.

"N

The Loan CHANCELLOR then proceeded to put the clues.
ton on the amendment, which proceeded to insert the
epithet " Protestant" before the word " priaoe,"
Some delay, however, having taken place in putting the
question,
Viscount MELBOURNE expressed his regret that, out of
respect to her Majesty, their lordships had not, for that night
at least, laid aside all party differences, even that shadow of
a difference, if, indeed, difference it could be called, which
the noble duke had raised, and, came to an unanimous vote
in favour of the address. He maintained that the amend-

went was unnecessary.
The Earl of WINCIIELSEA supported the amendment. He
asked whether, when the bill which relieved the Roman
Catholics from their disabilities passed the legislature it was
_ _

not considered essential to take security that this should
remain a Protestant state, and to show that the sovereign was '
not to be relieved from those principles or disabilities which .
had been imposed on the family when they were first called
to the throne of these realms—viz., that no sovereign could
rule who professed any other than the protestant religion, or
who should marry any other than a Protestant spouse.: But
it did not follow that because a prince had descended from a
Protestant family, and from a long line of Protestant ances-
tors, that he himself should be a member of that religion.
Were not their lordships aware that many of the connexions
of that illustrious prince were at that moment members of
the Roman Catholic faith ? He (Lord Winchelsea) would not
say that those individuals to whom he referred had changed
their religion except upon the conviction of their consciences ;
but still he could not forget the fact that there were members
of the family of which Prince Albert was a member who were
no longer Protestants. Was there not a cousin of that illustri-
ous prince, the husband of the Queen 'of Portugal, an avowed
Roman Catholic, and were there not other members of the
family who hadbecome so ? He (Lord Winchelsea) maintained
that it was not only proper, but absolutely essential, that the
proposed words should be inserted, for the satisfaction and
security of the country. Their lordships knew that there
was a feeling on the part of certain individuals to subvert the
Protestant religion, and to increase the power of the Roman
Catholics, to the prejudice of the Protestants of the country.
That feeling, he would maintain, did exist. But he could

tell the persons who entertained if. that there was that spirit
among the Protestant population of this country, that would
make them rue the day on which such an object should be
declared. He believed that the country was on the eve of
one of the most awful convulsions that had ever taken place
in a civilised state. He believed that there were certain
parties, who, to forward their own political views, had raised
up a storm which they felt themselves unable to meet or
quell-:--a storm, which at this time was threatening to burst
upon them with the greatest violence, and with the most la-
mentable results. He would support the amendment ; and
he for one could not conceive that the adoption of it could
possibly give offence either to her Majesty or the illustrious
individual to whom she was about to be united, while, on the
other hand, he was quite convinced that it was essential, and
would, tend in a most material degree to satisfy the public
mind on the subject. He conceived that if there was one
thing more than another which was imperative upon the So,
vereign of these kingdoms, it was to maintain inviolate the
Protestant faith. Alluding to the reported presentation to
her Majesty of a person who was the propounder of senti-
ments and principles which strike at the root of those reli-
gious and moral principles on which the government of this
country ought to be conducted, his lordship said he should
inquire into the rumour, and, if he found it correct, he would
take an early opportunity of moving in that house a vote of
censure upon the party by whom that individual had been
presented to her Majesty.
Earl FITZWILLIAM believed that if they carried their views
beyond the walls of that house their lordships would find
many persons who would be of opinion that whether the word
Protestant should be inserted in, or omitted from the address,
was a matter of very little moment. He bore testimony, to
the severity of the present address, which he considered not
to be beyond the power of legislation to remedy.
Lord BROUGHAM said, the noble duke supposed that the
omission of the word Protestant was made with the view of
paying court to certain parties to whom he had alluded ; but
he (Lord Brougham) must say, that his opinion of those
parties must be considerably changed, before he could sup-
pose that they would be content with so small a concession,
or that they would be diverted from their views, or rest satis-
fied with the insertion or omission of any mere word in that
address. But the case had not, he thought, been correctly
stated by his noble friend. The law did not prohibit the
marriage of the sovereign with a Roman Catholic ; it only in-
flicted a penalty, should such a marriage' take place. That
penalty was the forfeiture of the crown. (Hear, and laugh-
ter.) Was it supposed by noble lords opposite that her ma-
jesty would run the risk of. forfeiting the crown ? for that
must be the ground on which the argument rested:7Refer-
ring to the state of Ireland, hersaid the remedywas a just and
moderate provision, founded upon a well-considered princi-
ple and a well-contrived machinery, a due and proper provi-
sion for the clergy, who administer to the spiritual wants of
the great majority of the Irish people. He should wait for
the results of the recent contests in India, before he con-
gratulated the ministers upon their policy. The noble and
learned lord then dilated on the distress which pervades nearly
all ranks of the community—on the deeply-seated discontent
that possesses the labourers—on the recent rebellion in
Wales—oh the threatened disturbances in the north—on
chartism, in its essence and tendencies—on the hostile feelings
that diVide the working clasies frotn the order of proprietors--
-on the enfranchised and uneufranchised sections of
the community—and finally, on the remedial measures
which his learned lordship would suggest as suitable
to the emergency.. The noble and learned lord was
exceedingly happy in the contrast which he drew between
the reward of sedition in Wales on the one hand. and in Ire.
land on the other. He dePicted O'Connell to the life, as the
foul, brutal slanderer of one day—as the crotichifig,. crawl-
ing, fulsome sycophant of the next. lie brought into relief,
by implication, the co.,vardice,, the sordid meanness, the al-
together uninterable baseness, of the loathsome mendicant ;
and then he expressed his astoniihment, that treason in Wales
should be rewarded with the gibbet, while treason inlreland
is rewarded, not indeed with the " crown, but at all events
with the patronage of the crown."
Earl STAN HOPE, agreeing with the noble lord's descrip-
tion of the country, begged to remind him that the members
of the " reforming administration" of 1831 had pledged:
themselves to pacify England by means of the reform bill
and that, afterwards, the same men had pledged themselves
to elevate the moral character of the labouring classes, by'
means of the new poor law. The results of those measures
and of the free trade system are now before' the. world—for
the chartists are now only. practising, for;their own ends, the
lessons which the reforming ministers .of 1831 taught them..
He denied the accuracy of Lord Brougham's statement, that
the labouring classes desired a repeal of the corn-laws. That
the labouring classes are deeply discontented, the noble earl
declared to be unfortunately too obvious. Nay, in his lord-
ship's opinion, a revolution is rapidly approaching—a revo-
lution which nothing can avert, save a repeal of the new poor
law, and the abrogation of the currency act of 1819.
The Duke of RICHMOND could not admit that the condi-
tion of the country was so deplorable, as the Earl of Winchel-
sea and Earl Stanhope had described it to be. As for the
corn-laws—his Grace expressed a strong hope that parlia-
ment would, after the debates of last session refuse to enter-
tain any proposition tbr aii inquiry into their operation.
Lord MELBOURNE then agreed to adopt the Duke of Wel-
ngton's amendment.—Adjournment.