The Statesman.
London, England, 1810-11-30 00:00:00

such a temporary suspension the afairyor-govertt. •
molt might go op without injury for a certain time.
The motion of his Noble Friend was* meant to or.
ford. the most satisfactoryloformation to their leOrd.
ships *nod to'thl country, lid io thi well-founded
hope, that there may be no necessity for-setting
aside the monarchy.—perc ifteie was a loud cry'
of .Order
Lord GRENVILLE gm aptonished al what he
ha' heard frOas the troble Load, which iso.cohli-
dered as highti Uneonstiotiunai.
Lord HARROWLlTexplithesi, and atteidtieniog
on the virtue& displayed ivy his kliksty during his
long reign, and expressed his ardent hopes.that he.
would soon berestored to the wishes of an., attic.
ilea* and intern" people, and concluded with
ituisivvietiot tivO motion of, his Kale FliattiALOrd
14verpn61). • •••• •
Lord lIOLLA,ND expressed. himself with' great
warmth at the unparliamentary .tnanner in• which
the Noble Lord who had spoken had introduced the
King's name. His Lordship adverted to the vote
which he had given at the last meeting of the House
in favour of ibe. Noble Steretary. of State's motion,
bat strenunusiy.Maintained the propriety of having'
a more substantsi ground for their proceedings
than that which was furnished from the Privy
Council; and agreed in the proposition of his Noble
• Friend (Lord Spencer).
Lord HARROW BY explained..
The Marquis of A BEH,CORN defended the cx.
preqionv, made use of by'', .rd Ifirrow by, and es.
pecially the use of the King's name, on the ground
that his Majesty was the direct and immediate sub.
ject of debate.
Lord HOLLAND. again rose to order, and
maintained . that the mode iu which his Majesty's
name had been brought forward was. unparliamca.

tary. ' .": . .. ,
Lord WESTMORELAND defended the 'con:
duet of Ministers,' and challenged the former Ad.
asiAlstration to show, b any of their acts, a greater
;eat and - diligent! lit the eaercitie of their public
functions than. had been used by them. Ile sup-
polled the motion uf. Lord Livetpool.
Laid DARNLEY. opposed the adjotommentood
suppotted the yenpositliiis of Lord Spencer.
Llink %RENY! LLE..--.44 My 1•Ontill it would
his:lo'l44.n much more satistictery to- ma •before I
It
osti to address you, to hate heard the opinions of
your" Lordebnips mote at large, and still More satis-
. factory White bees hcipiaitsted with the.argnalasts
which his Aaiesty's Ministers could 't4*s prodtesiV
' io' order -to itiolobe your Lordships to, accede to the
Asberswdry now- recommend i sod in, so doing to
Stillndunyoar moot sacred duties—to turn your backs
upon pane toiiiitry. But I must own, that 1 am not
snsprised at the tout absence of any thins like argu-
meat, when 1 consider the extraordinary nature of
tke propositign teat the Noble ,Lords opposite submit
1•to•y our adoption—a proposition most derogatory to
ilhe dignity of Parliament, hostile to the bent interests
l'of the Monarchy,. and repugnant to every principle
of the 'Censtitetien. Whim I this dayentered j our
I.l.onedahips* House, I dick entertaiu the kooe, that
as from the 'pressure of the public concerns ~--fronv
" the particular -delay of the immediate quesiiotOtsolf, .
unanimity was most desirable—such' a *conisa.'of
proasaillg would. be proposed. as tended to; pod.
;mete an unanimans acquiescence. It was owlet
Abe influence of similar `feelings and actuated • toy •
arch w,iSlle9, that Ilirotight myself,. on the former dayti
when.we weir Jut assembled, to my stricter
judgment, and for the sake 01 unotiiinityi ro consent
to thepopdsed adjournments bill bethe same nide-
enee that I then attribute the decision of your
Lordships; fur nothing can induce me to believe
it possible that any other motive conic{ have swayed
you to put Such a slain upon youi duties; such a
force upon your consciences as that decision most
unquestionably was. NVlin, then, could have sup-
posed that on •this night, upon much worse grounds,
the, same persons would have called upon your "
Lordships to yield to a similar proposition, and once
muse to rel•inguish the paramount obligations which.
you owe to yourselves, your douutry, and your So- '
vereign ? If Ministers had 'pretfetermined upon this
surreptitious course; if knowingl,.• they had formed
.thedcvice of converting your former acquiescence into
:grounds for a future precedent, then 1 must say that
they have not alone been guilty of great disingenuous- ,
nest, but have been implicated in a very criminal
-and treaoherous'proceediug. ' Eor what have we
heard this night in• support of their. proposition ?
Not iatisfied simply with recommending such a '
.course to our ail Option, they venture to justify it
,upon ouvown proceedings on a former -occasion:
Adjourn now, say they, because you hero ad-
,juittiled this day fortnight. To what esteutlil ask,
'is It determined to carry thistrgionent ? Is there, n 4
LordS, one suiitary ground on which stands the Oro-
priaty of the adjournment proposed. this night, that
. will not beequally conclu,sivefor adjournment to sec-
-emit! adjournment ? Is this [louse prepared to accede
to such doctrine? and upon grounds so ,derogatory
to its character and interests to abdicate its. most sa-
,ered and important functions ?. The Noble. Lords
lippusite'admit that those exists in the estates of
the realm the power to supply any deficiency in the
exercise of the Itlyal functions, yet in the same
tuice they ask you to disregard the right. • They
ask you to convince the country that what libel:
lees on the constitution -have dared to propagate ,
is (true in fact...-to be yourselves the strong
examples, that the wisdoms power*, and influence
of Parliament are but empty, -sounds-..that the
salutary and controuling power of the two de-
liberative branches of the Legislature has degene-
rated into, mere shadow—that all vitality is banish-
ed from &monst us, and that the whole.power of
Gulurcurstut is ,ceutereti lu a duten of Cabinet ..'rii.'

J .