Alexandria gazette & daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1817-1822, 1821-03-30

the crown, and her majesty would therefore
continue to receive the income allotted TO
her from the crown, 10 the same manner as
any other subject. But from the forms OF
expression which the queen had accustomed
herself TO adopt in her message, and in the
answers to several addresses, wherein she
was to be found speaking of her subjects, &
of her rights as queen of these realms, it
would seem as ifthe queen were desirous Of
erecting herself toto a great and powerful
portion of the state. Lord c. was here call
eG 10 order. and after some observations by
Mr.. Wetherell, Mr.. Hume, and The Speak
err, bis lordsbip proceeded. He said he
was sure the house would never tolerate any
individual, no matter how high, to dictate
to the house the conditions on which they
would regulate ihei proceedings. They
were not now in negotiation with her Tajes-
ty. They had message from the king d.
recting provision to be made; it was their
duty to take that measure into consideration,
and il would afterwards be for the crown TO
sanction that provision, and then would be
the time for her majesty to reject or receive
it. When first she opened this communica-
lion about money, she said she would re-
ceive nothing hut by grant Of parliament
Now she will not receive the grant OF par
liament unless her name is restored to the
Liturgy. May she not tomorrow tell US
she will not receive any money until she is
received into the royal palaces. In fact it
is hard to forsee what the determination of
her majesty can be, unless TO disturb the
tranquility of the country and to bring the
throne and constitution of this country 10 her
feet But he Lord CO. always consulted
the peace and happiness Of the subjects not
Of the queen, but of George Nv. and as
long as be had any influence. he would
never submit. Nothing was more obvious
than that gentlemen who cried out for JUS
tice to the queen, were merely conte ndiDg
for power, and were only agitatiDg tie
country, and increasing the disorder and
confusion Of which they complained. Mr..
Tierney here called the noble lord 10 order,
in the plopriety of which the Speaker con.
cured. Lord Castlereagh resumed, and,
after assuring the House that he had no hos.
tile motive in any thing he said, stated that
be never had il in contemplation, in coming
to regulate the sum her majesty should re-
ceive, to say one word about Der guilt or
innocence When the grant OF Parliament
was made then was the time for her majesty
TO reject it, not now.
Mr.. Terny never felt more DESTROYS of
addressing the house than on that occasion.
He would never stoop to accept or hold Of
fee on the terms upon which the noble lord
had held it, He would never accept it on
terms that were not perfectly honorable 10
this feeings-and (sail Mr.. Tierney in an
emphatic tone) so help me God! would
sooner die on dungbill than receive the
Kings pay for wadiug through some work
that have lately seen. He, Mr.. T. never
recolected in the whole course of bis lite
more unmanly attack on any defenceIess fe-
male, than the latter part of the noble lords
speech. The noble lord had complained Sc
verely of the Queens message, attributing
TO her disposition 10 create disturbance.
OF the propriety or improperly of that mes.
sage, he should only say, that had he been
in the situation OF her majesty, he should
have precisely done the same What did
she do? She takes the first opportunity of
informing the house that she understood
they were taking her affairs into considera.
ton, and magnanimously told them, g | owe
it to myself to say, that ! cannot take your
money after what has occurred" But,
says the noble lord, do not mean to take
any fresh proceedings" No, certainly not;
and why does he not? Because he dare not.
But he does the very next thing TO that; he
rakes up all the odious proceedings in the
House Of Lords, for the purpose of exciting
an unfavourable opinion against the Queen.
Mr.. Terhey then proceeded to read some
extracts from the journals of the House Of
Lords, when he was called to order. Well
then he supposed he might be allowed to
say that be heard the Queen had been con-
victed of adultery by majority of the
House of Peers-that he boldly denied. He
was most unwilling to admit that 1913 peers
did vote for the second reading of the bill,