Elizabeth-Town gazette. [volume] (Elizabeth-Town, N.J.) 1818-1821, 1821-01-09

but too true that persons in royal stations
might be guilty Of improprieties but 10
his opinion i. was far more consistent with
wisdom 10 keep them concealed than to
submit them to public observation. He
was convinced that much mischief had
already been done by this measure; but
he hoped that this was not quite IRE
parable. Ii was still III the power OF the
House TO do much, by rejecting the bill
altogether.
The Duke Of Bedford said that. in his
opinion the measure was one which, 10
use the emphatic words OF another branch
Of the legislature, was deroga'ory to
the honor Of the Crown, and injurious to
the bes; interests Of the Country" he
did not vote on the divorce clause, because
be could not conscienliousiy vote upon il
without making the Queen guilty. II
had given him great establishment TO see
ministers supporting the omission OF the
clause, conserving to the csstration OF
their own measure, depriviug il OF the
only feature which gave il the sembanee
of nationality He did not mean to go III
detail into the evidence but be could
DOT however, help Offering al few remarks
on some parts Of the proceeding. A
noble Earl opposite Lord Liverpooi) had
commented Oh the evidence 10 manner
which had given him great surprise. lie
had assumed some Of the most important
facts OF the case as proved solely by the
testimony of that pure and immaculate
witness DemoDt. He had ventnretl to say,
that she was in one instance supported by
Doctor Holland; but on the minutes OF
evidence being referred to, no such COR
roboralion appeared. The truth was, eve
ry thing that coild in any way be tnrued
TO the discredit of her majesty was made
use Of to effect The purpose Of this bill,
without any regard either 10 their justice
or probability. He would ask their
iordsbips how the character Of Queen
Elizabeth would have stood ? where would
The glory of her reign have been II she
had been infested as the Princess Of Wales
had been, by spies and informers? His
Grace concluded by declaring, that if
called upon 10 his Judicial character, TO
give verdict on the evidence which had
been produced, he must say, Not Gully,
on his honor and conscience and il
asked for his opinion as a legislator, 6 that
the bill was as impolitic as it was unjust"
The Lord Chancellor still considered
that, If any Noble Lord was not consci-
entiousIy satisfied that there was a clear
legal presumption Of guilt in this case, it
was his duty not to vote for this Bill.
For his own part, whether he viewed the
evidence in favor ofthe bill the evidence
which had been called for the defence !;
or the evidence which ought to have
been called, and had not been called, he
was of opinion that the charge of adultery
had been clearly established. If this were
not his feelings, 10 earthly consideration
should induce him to vote for the third
reading OF the Bill
The Bishop Of Chester said, that think
ing fhe divorce clause ID the bill against
the precepls Of the divine law, and con-
trary 10 the whole spirit ofthe civil law,
it was impossible for him to vote for the
bill with that clause.
The Duke Of Grafton said that upon
looking at The whole of the evidence, he
must pronounce verdict OF " Not Gull
|ty."
The Marquis Of Hnntley was satisfied
of the guilt Of her Majesty, and should
vote for the third reading.
The Marquis Of Donegal said, that his
clear and conscientious vote should be
against the bill.
The Bishop Of Gloucester, from his
objection TO the divorce, should vote a.
gainst the bill.
After some observations from Lord
Peterborough aud the Earl Of Darnley,
amidst loud cries Of Question, the house
divided.
The House then divided on the ques.
ton that the bill be now read third tiuie,
and the numbers we're
Contents, 108
Not Contents -. 81. SO
mdJority
The declaration Of the numbers was
received with the oudest cheers from the
Opposition Benches. Strangers were not
re.admitted into the House, but We under
stand, before the question was put, that
the Bill do pass, or before any Of the a.
mendments which had been promised 90
the third reading were proposed
Lord Dacre and the Earl Of Liverpool,
rose together. Lord Dacre had a paper
in his hand, which was understood to be
Protest from the Queen against the pro-
ceesl;ugs, There were loud cries Of
g Lord Liverpool. !"
The Earl Of Liverpool then said, that
feeling convinced as lie did Of the guilt Of
~ IF ~. ~. nft he