they were no longer meetings of any legal | Earl Grey did not expect, after what had passed in that House, last session, on the subject of public meetings, to have heard any reflection cast on county meetings, especially as, when the measures for abridging the liberties of the people were under discussion, the noble lord contended, that county meetings called under the authority of the sheriff, would henceforth have greater weight. But, notwithstanding all that the noble earl had then said in support of county meetings, and the advantage of holding them under the authority of the sheriffs, some of those sheriffs refused to call meetings, and others conducted themselves with the grossest partiality when they were called. The noble earl had explained the manner in which sheriffs were appointed; but he was surprised to find, that he had not attempted to say any thing satisfactory on the discretion they assumed of refusing to call meetings. He should be sorry to attribute to a person of the noble duke's character a wish to depreciate any part of the constitution, though his words certainly had that tendency. The noble duke did not object to meetings which both parties called, and where there were opportunities for discussion. But was not the meeting in question legally called? Was not the requisition respectably signed and was not the object legal? His noble friend had described the meeting as most respectable. The objection of the noble duke applied to a circumstance which was unavoidable. County meetings often did wrong in not patiently hearing VOL. IV. persons who addressed them; but this was the case in every assembly in which conflicting opinions were stated. Did not something similar often occur in parliament? If the doctrine of the noble duke was to be adopted, county meetings would never be called, except on occasions when there could be no difference of opinion-such as those which occurred last year, when the object was, to express to the throne, sentiments of compliment and congratulation. His noble friend (lord Grosvenor) had described some very extraordinary conduct on the part of the sheriff at the Cheshire meeting. Did the noble duke and the noble lord mean to call that meeting a farce? But their lordships had had an instance of the same kind at their own doors. Yesterday a meeting of merchants and bankers was called in the city of London. Who were the persons who endeavoured to prevent fair discussion, and to provoke a dissolution of the meeting? Precisely those who had before got up a secret declaration. The private declaration alluded to by the noble duke did not express the opinion of the county of Hants. It was said it had 9,000 signatures; but, whatever the number was, they were procured, not by any fair discussion at a public meeting, but by influence and the active canvass of clergymen. How could it, then, be asserted, that in this way the sense of the county had been sufficiently expressed? He hoped that the noble duke did not mean to reflect on county meetings generally ; but his language had been such as to give great reason to suspect that the feeling with which ministers regarded popular rights was very unfavourable. Those rights, however, were not less a part of the constitution than the prerogatives and privileges of the Crown. The Duke of Leinster said, he believed his majesty's ministers were extremely fond of coups de théatre; but the farce at Dublin, to use the noble duke's phrase, where the military were called in from the county gaol, and the meeting dispersed, vi et armis, had nearly terminated in a tragedy. He should shortly have occasion to call the attention of the House to this subject. The Earl of Blesinton said, that the noble earl opposite had no objection to county meetings, where an opportunity was afforded, of hearing the arguments which might be urged on both sides, and entering into a calm, fair and impartial I discussion of public questions. But, what was the conduct of the sheriff in the county of Dublin? Did he allow gentlemen to address the meeting on both sides of the question, or did he permit any person to offer his sentiments who was opposed to the requisition? No; he chose rather to dissolve the meeting than to hear any opinions opposed to his own; he proceeded to call in the military, without applying to the civil power, and actually handed lord Cloncurry out of the chair, whose good humour and discretion on that occasion, prevented this farce from terminating in a tragedy. The Earl of Carnarvon strongly reprobated the attempt which had been made to cast a reproach upon one of the most respectable meetings he had ever attended. He hoped the noble duke would learn to appreciate better the character of English meetings in general; and that he would not, without better information, attempt to degrade a respectable public meeting of an English county by designating it as a clamorous mob. to the Liturgy, and the restitution of all her rights and dignities; and also for a complete change in the system of government. In presenting this petition to the House, he wished to say a few words in explanation of what was meant by a complete change in the system of government. They wished for a system of rigid economy and retrenchment, instead of a system of prodigality and corruption, for a reform of the various abuses which had crept into the government, and for a system of justice, kindness, and conciliation towards all classes of his majesty's subjects. The meeting was one of the most numerous which had ever been held in the county, and the petition was carried with only two dissentient voices. Two most respectable individuals had entered their protest against it, and they were heard with that respect and attention which their manly conduct deserved. Viscount Anson presented a similar petition from the city of Litchfield. He had received a protest against it, which had been framed at a secret meeting: and he could not but express his regret at observing the names of nine clergymen, at the head of whom was the dean of Litchfield, subscribed to a protest, of which, the object was, to exclude her majesty from the prayers of the people. He was sorry to be compelled to say, that the conduct of the clergy throughout the country had exposed that body to merited reprobation. He had no hesitation in declaring, that the petition contained the real sentiments, and almost unanimous opinions of the inhabitants of the city of Litchfield. The said petitions were ordered to lie on the table. Lord Ellenborough said, he had heard with regret the expression which the noble duke had made use of, because he was sure it would be taken advantage of out of doors. He, however, did not understand that expression in the sense in which it had been taken by other noble lords, or he would have agreed with them in the censure they had bestowed on it. In his opinion, the expression was not meant to apply to all county meetings, but only to those at which it was impossible any rational discussion could take place. It was with deep regret he felt himself compelled to say, that the county meetings which had lately been held deserved all that the noble duke had said of them. NAPLES-DECLARATION OF THE ALThis was occasioned, not by the persons LIED SOVEREIGNS AT TROPPAU.]—Earl who attended those meetings, but by those Grey rose, to call the attention of the noble who absented themselves from them. If lord opposite, to a subject connected with the 9,000 persons who had signed the our foreign policy. He had been unsuccounter-declaration had attended the meet- cessful in his attempt to obtain answers to ing, they would have had a majority, or the questions which he had put to the at least they would have given a different noble lord on a former night, which led complexion to the meeting. If the ancient him to fear that he should obtain no inpractice were restored, county meetings formation on the present occasion. The would be very different from what they noble lord must be aware that a circular were at present. Addresses would then letter had lately been addressed to difhave greater weight than they have now, ferent continental states, and among others, when they are agreed to after-and not to the senate of Hamburgh. It was in the at the meetings. following terms: The Duke of Bedford presented a petition from the county of Bedford, praying for the restoration of her majesty's name "The overthrow of the order of things in Spain, Portugal, and Naples, has necessarily caused the cares and the uneasiness of the powers who combated the revolution, and convinced them of the necessity of putting a check to the new calamities with which Europe is threatened. The principles which united the great powers of the continent to deliver the world from the military despotism of an individual issuing from the revolution, ought to act against the revolutionary power which has just developed itself. "The sovereigns assembled at Troppau, with this intention, venture to hope that they shall attain this object. They will take for their guides in this great enterprise, the treaties which restored peace to Europe, and have united its nations together. Without doubt the powers have the right to take, in common, general measures of precaution against those states whose reforms, engendered by rebellion, are openly opposed to legitimate governments, as examples have already demonstrated, especially when this spirit of rebellion is propagated in the neighbouring states by secret agents. "In consequence, the monarchs assembled at Troppau, have concerted together the measures required by circumstances, and have communicated to the courts of London and Paris their intention of attaining the end desired, either by mediation or by force. With this view, they have invited the king of the Two Sicilies to repair to Laybach, to appear there as conciliator between his misguided people and the states whose tranquillity is endangered. By this state of things, and as they have resolved not to recognize any authority established by the seditious, it is only with the king they can confer. "As the system to be followed has no other foundation than treaties already existing, they have no doubt of the assent of the courts of Paris and London. The only object of this system is, to consolidate the alliance between the sovereigns: it has no view to conquests, or to violations of the independence of other powers. Voluntary ameliorations in the government will not be intruded. They desire only to maintain tranquillity, and protect Europe from the scourge of new revolutions, and to prevent them as far as pos sible.” He would not stay to inquire how far the conclusion of this circular was in unison with the sentiments stated at its commencement: all he wished to know, was, whether the determination here expressed by the allied powers was founded upon treaties. In this circular it was inferred, that the allied powers would have the consent of the courts of London and Paris to their proceedings. He wished to know whether this paper had been communicated to the government of this country, and whether the inference of support from England had been authorized by the government? The Earl of Liverpool said, he had not the least difficulty in answering the question of the noble earl. The paper to which he referred was, he believed, an incorrect copy of a real paper which did exist. However, he had no difficulty in stating, in the first place, that there were no treaties of the nature alluded to in that paper. In the next place, he was able to assure the noble earl, that the court of London was no party to any proceedings now in progress with reference to Naples. In consequence of a paper, similar to that referred to by the noble earl, a paper had been addressed by this government to the different powers of Europe, which he should have no objection to lay before the House. That paper would explain the whole policy pursued by this government with reference to the affairs of Naples. He repeated, that he had not the slightest objection to the production of that document, though he could wish, as a matter of convenience, that the noble earl would not move for it that evening. Earl Grey expressed himself perfectly satisfied with the answer of the noble earl. He certainly should not move for the production of the paper to-night, after what had fallen from the noble earl; but he hoped that it would be speedily laid before the House, and he confidently expected, from the answer of the noble earl, that that paper would contradict the inferences drawn by the courts of Petersburgh, Berlin, and Vienna; and show, that they had no right whatever to count upon the co-operation or assistance of this government. The Earl of Liverpool had no difficulty in assuring the noble earl, that the paper he had referred to would give a complete contradiction to any inferences, calculating upon the assistance of this goverument. There were some arrangements which prevented its immediate produc tion; but he should be ready to lay it before the House in the course of the next week. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Friday, January 26. THE KING'S ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS.]-Mr. Speaker reported the king's answer to the address as follows: "Gentlemen, a measure unknown, except in cases of most urgent state necessity. Mr. Denison rose to present a petition from the parishes of St. Mary Magdalen, Bermondsey, and others, praying for the restoration of her majesty's name to the Liturgy. It lamented that the late measures against her majesty should ever have "I receive with the highest satisfaction been instituted. In the sentiments and this dutiful and loyal address. The prayers of the petitioners he concurred, assurances which you give me of your being convinced, that a more impolitic, affectionate attachment to my person and unwise, and unjust measure, than that of striking her majesty's name out of the government, and of your cordial support Liturgy, could not have been devised; in the discharge of those sacred duties and being also convinced, that nothing which are imposed upon me for the pro- could restore tranquillity to the country tection and happiness of my people, afford but the replacing of her majesty's name me the surest pledge that I shall be ena-where it ought to be. On the motion, that bled, under the favour of Divine Pro- the petition be printed, vidence, effectually to preserve to my subjects those inestimable blessings which they have hitherto enjoyed under our invaluable constitution." Sir E. Knatchbull expressed a hope that, on the score of economy, hon. gentlemen would not press the printingofevery petition of this sort that might be presented. He therefore hoped the hon. member would not persevere in the motion he had made. Mr. Denison agreed with the hon. gentleman, that economy was desirable, but could not agree that the petition ought not to be printed. Those from whom it came, though in a humble situation, were as much entitled to have their sentiments made known to their fellow subjects as any other body of men could be. PETITIONS RELATIVE TO THE QUEEN.] -Mr. Wyvill presented a petition signed by 1,700 inhabitants of the city of York, complaining of the conduct of ministers towards her majesty, and praying for the restoration of all her rights, and especially for the restoration of her name to the Liturgy. He took that opportunity of stating, that it was with considerable pain he learnt that the noble Lord Milton was glad to find the hon. lord opposite, did not, of himself, intend member for Kent so alive to the necessity to advise the restoration of her majesty's of observing the most rigid economy, name to the Liturgy. He inferred from and trusted the House and the country this conduct, that neither ministers nor would regard it only as an earnest of his majesty were aware of the irritation the zeal with which, for the future,' which prevailed throughout the country the hon. member would labour for the on this subject. He must also say, that he reduction of every useless expense and was greatly surprised that ministers had unnecessary office. Perhaps he would' no intention of instituting an investiga- find, that the office of receiver-general of tion into the Milan commission. The the land-tax was one which might be country would assume from this conduct, dispensed with, under the present cirand confidently assume as a fact, that there cumstances of the country, and the busihad been a conspiracy, and that ministers ness connected with it, performed through were parties to that conspiracy. some other channel. Should a motion to this effect be made, he hoped the country would be favoured with the support of the hon. gentleman, who might perhaps be an important witness on this subject. Mr. James presented a petition from Carlisle, praying for the restoration of her majesty's name to the Liturgy, and entreating that the House would no longer continue to support ministers, who had introduced and supported such unconstitutional measures. The petition was signed by more than 1,000 names, and it reprobated the bill of Pains and Penalties as a violation of the constitution and of the fundamental laws of the realm, and as Mr. C. Dundas presented a petition from the county of Berks. It complained that no inquiry had been made into the distresses of the country, but that parliament had been occupied for many months solely, with a needless prosecution against the Queen-a prosecution which was distressing to the moral feelings of the country and derogatory from the dignity and honour of the Crown. In presenting this petition, he begged leave to join in the wish that the undivided attention of ministers and of parliament should be devoted to the relief of the unprecedented distresses of the country. The petitioners most justly stated, that for months their attention had been devoted to a prosecution that was at once unnecessary and unjust. The failure of that prosecution placed her majesty in the same situation in which a party accused was placed by the throwing out of a bill by the grand jury, and at this result every friend of the royal family, every well-wisher to our constitution, every lover of his country must have sincerely rejoiced. That most unjust proceeding had alarmed every friend of justice and truth and humanity; it had disgusted every man of sound understanding and good feeling. He had entertained some hope, from the experience of his majesty's mind and disposition, that the irritation and dismay excited throughout the country would have been removed; and that the country would have been relieved from a feeling of dissatisfaction which had perhaps never been equalled. He could answer for the petitioners being as decided in their loyalty to the king, and their attachment to the constitution, as any body of men in England. Mr. Denison presented a petition from the inhabitants of Godalming. It was most respectably signed. Its prayer was, for the restoration of her majesty's name to the Liturgy; and for such reform in that House as would give the people a free, fair, and full representation. He fully agreed in this prayer, though he was no advocate for the wild schemes of annual parliaments and universal suffrage. Mr. W. Williams presented a petition from the inhabitants of Lambeth. It was signed by more than 2,000 respectable inhabitants. It was the firm belief of the petitioners, that nothing could allay the irritation of the country but the restoration of her majesty's name to the Liturgy and to all the rights belonging to a Queen consort. He cordially coincided with the petitioners, and he had placed that reliance on the candour and humanity of ministers, that as soon as they had been compelled to give up the prosecution they would have restored her majesty's name to the Liturgy. He still hoped they would retrace their error, and restore her majesty's name to the prayers of a religious and loyal people, as the only means of giving tranquillity to the country. The petitioners prayed also for inquiry into the Milan commission. Sir Ronald Fergusson presented three petitions-one from the magistrates and town council of Culross, the second from Burntisland, and the third from Kinghorn. One of the petitions stated, that all the evils of the country-our agricultural and commercial distresses, were owing to his majesty's ministers; and, therefore, prayed the House to withdraw its confidence and support from them. He heartily hoped, that the House might comply with this petition. All the petitions declared their abhorrence of the prosecutions against the Queen, and prayed for the restoration of her name to the Liturgy, and to all her rights as Queen consort. Mr. Sykes said, he had a petition to present on a subject somewhat different from the preceding petitions. It was from Cottingham; and complained of the great distress which afflicted all classes. The speech from the throne had been made to represent a state of things which existed not. Never yet had he seen one person outside of those doors who believed one word of it. Whatever ministers might believe themselves, or attempt to make others believe, sure he was, that so far as his experience extended, nine-tenths of the people joined in the belief, that without a change of ministers and measures, no satisfaction could be obtained for the people. Without an entire change of the system acted upon, the unhappy agitation which prevailed, and from which, the royal name, the royal family, and the best interests of the country had suffered, could not be allayed. For this reason, too, the petitioners prayed for the dismissal of ministers. On the first day of the session he had heard much of the folly and mischief of certain persons; but he would ask, whether there could be folly and mischief equal to the folly and mischief of those who had instituted the proceedings against the Queen? He should have thought that wisdom would have dictated very different conduct in point of prudence; he should have thought that wisdom would have dictated very different conduct on the ground of justice. The measures against the Queen had been conceived in mischief, nursed up in folly, and supported by perjury. |