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. Her 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 SEAFORTII 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-
pe.irs 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,
my 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 111. 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 not there an announcement in conformity with
the precedent of George 111. ? Is there any doubt as to the re-
ligio us 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. -I am 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 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 I do 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. 1 was the party to bring forward the measure with
regard to the Test and Corporation Acts, and the measure to
admit 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
thein o it
address—to—your lordshi
of Lords should on the first oppeoerntucrianityedofl'ipeoxnprto essingan
oconcur
i i
insistP upon
S hsv
the removal of the doubt upon
the
public mind, iu 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 we re prepared and did actually, ad-
mit all those persons to the full enjoyment, benefits, and
your ad-
vantages
t. t
that
otherats taotsfeet.chai srti
tProtestantuiets
youwhich
enst tate 'on the ground of those oaths
and
r ecaot y
then
'untor pror.
lordships to satisfy the
public mind by declaringbelie that the' provisions
of the law of this Protestant
your
requirev i d e d
suc. forh
thecourse
a
ooas
I have ventured to suggest, and that you believe the prince
is a Protestant. On a former occasion—the marriage of
George lll.—it was declared before the privy council that
the princess to whom he was about to be espoused was a,
Protestant princess. In the address proposed to both houses,
it vt
lass, na
no t a smo
aannouncedacaemrtaaidnel,y ;
ihlwmituienhththeeHo
worduse opfr
oCt oe rus t
ant was inserted. That course, however, was not pursued
in the House of Lords, but it was adopted in the address
I have now to propose
amilarourse
that
our
concur in this, I have no objection to the other parts of the
address. i n
lordships H
ouasdeoopft Commons.si c
. If your lordships

!_.\

_‘‘k,

The LORD CHANCELLOR then proceeded to put the ques-
tion on the amendment, which proceeded to insert the
epithet " Protestant" before the word " prince."
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. lie maintained that the amend-
ment was unnecessary.
The Earl of WINCHELSEA 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 Prbtestant 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 had become 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 it, 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 supporlitthe 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 FITZW ILLIAM 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 be could sup-
pose that they would he 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 grpund on which the argument rested.—Refer-
ring to the state of Ireland, he said the remedy was 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 iri
Wales—on the threatened disturbances in the north—on
chartism, in its essence and tendencies—on the hostile feelings
that divide the working classes from the order of proprietors--
-on the enfranchised and unenfranchised 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 handf and in Tie-
land on the other. He depicted O'Connell to the life; es the
foul, brutal slanderer of one day—as the crouching, crawl-
ing, fulsome sycophant of the next. He brought into relief,
by implication, the cowardice, the sordid meanness, the al-
together unutterable baseness, of the loathsome mendicant ;
and then he expressed his astonishment, that treason in Wales
should be rewarded with the gibbet, while treason in Ireland
is rewarded, not indeed with the " crown, but at all events
with the patronage of the crown."
Earl STANHOPE, 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 obviohs. Nay, in his lord-
ship's opinion, a revolution is rapidly approaching—a revo-
lution which nothing can avert, save a repearof 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 for an inquiry into their operation.
Lord MELBOURNE then agreed to adopt the Duke of Wel-
lington's amendment.—Adjournment.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-THURSDAY.

The SPEAKER took the chair at a quarter before four
o'clock. The attendance of members at the commencement
of business was not very numerous, but the house was
crowded before' five o'clock. •