lordships no information on subjects the most important, and which, for aught that was said of them, it might as well not have touched. As the speech and of course the address gave no information on the important subject to which he had alluded, he would put a few questions to the noble earl, and he hoped, for the information of their lordships, he would answer them. He would wish to be informed whether our ambassador or agent at Naples was still the accredited agent to the Neapolitan government; and if so, whether he had received instructions to assure that government, that this country would not disturb the state of affairs there, or give any support or sanction whatsoever to any such disturbance by any other power, on the principle of interfering in her internal arrangements. His next question was, whether the secret article of the treaty of 1815, to which he had before alluded, was communicated to his majesty's ministers; and if so, was it followed up by any remonstrance on our part; and, if it was not then communicated, whether ministers when they became acquainted with it, remonstrated (as he thought they were bound to do) against any treaty in which this country was concerned containing principles which we disavowed His next question was, whether within the last year the noble lord had applied for the repayment of the Austrian loan, or any part of it, or of the interest which we ought to receive from Austria-this interest of which Mr. Pitt once talked so confidently. The Earl of Liverpool observed, in reply to the noble baron, that the questions he had put involved subjects of such magnitude that he could not attempt to answer them without going into a detail, which he was not prepared to do at that moment. If, however, the noble lord should think proper to call for specific information on any of the points to which he had referred, and should give notice of a motion to that effect, he would be ready on any such occasion to go into the subject, and to answer the inquiries of the noble lord. At present he hoped their lordships would see that he could not well go into such a detail. Lord Holland said, that the questions which he had put to the noble earl could not excite discussion at present, or require that detail which the noble earl seemed to imagine. He would, however, put them in a shape where they might be answered by a single "Ay" or "No." And, first, he would ask, were our diplomatic relations with Naples changed by the recent political changes in that country? His next question should be, whether the socret articles of the treaty of 1815 were communicated to ministers, and when? And the third was, whether any, and what application, had been made to Austria last year respecting the re-payment of the loan? The Earl of Liverpool again observed, that the present was not the moment to go into such details, but that he would be ready to meet the noble lord on the subject on any future occasion, when he should think proper to submit a motion respecting it. Lord Holland, after this refusal, wished the noble lord joy of belonging to an administration whose affairs were so complicated, as that the head of it could not give an answer, ay or no, to a few plain questions. Lord Ellenborough said, that undoubtedly that man was to be regarded as the greatest benefactor of his country, who could take the most certain means of preventing the calamities which might befal it. If, then, we looked back upon the state of the affairs of Europe for the last twenty-five years, who was to be considered as the man capable of conferring the greatest benefit upon his country? Not the noble general opposite, who had succeeded in putting an end to the war, but the individual who, at its commencement, possessed the means of altogether preventing the war. He congratulated the House and the country, that the noble baron possessed the means of preventing a war, which by many persons was considered likely to take place, not by bringing into action the military power of the country, but by a few words in the speech from the throne, and, what was still more extraordinary, by an application for the payment of a debt! Surely the noble baron must be aware, that the only effectual way of enforcing the payment of a debt must be, an application from a general at the head of an army. It cer tainly appeared to him, that every thing had been done by this government, which, under the circumstances, was proper to be done. The answer which they had given to the Austrian government, was this, "We sincerely hope you will not go to war; and if you do, we will give you no assistance." The noble baron had dwelt much upon the situation to whi we were reduced by the wars in which we had been previously engaged; and there could be no doubt, that, in the present distressed state of the country, war was a thing of all others most to be deprecated, But was this the moment which the noble baron would chuse to press for the payment of a debt? Surely that was a measure but little calculated to prevent a war, which, if it took place, was extremely likely to become general throughout Europe. He was glad to hear from the noble earl, that he was ready to give full information to the House on the sub. ject of the negociations as to the affairs of the south of Europe, when they should be brought regularly before the House. He was the more gratified to hear this, as he had apprehended, from what had first fallen from the noble earl, that there would be some difficulty on this subject. In the present state of ignorance in which they were as to the causes of the late revolution, it was perfectly impossible to form any judgment of the conduct which ministers had pursued. He wished the noble baron, however, to state in what terms, and what precise form of words, he would frame that remonstrance, which was to prevent the possibility of war. vaccillating, knew very little of Austrian councils. Lord Ellenborough congratulated the noble baron and the country, since, notwithstanding the lamentable effects which he had ascribed to the policy pursued in this country for the last twenty-five years, he still thought its moral character stood so high, that a solemn declaration of its opinion must be imperative upon the greatest military power in Europe. Lord Holland said, that the noble baron had totally misapprehended what had fallen from him. He had never dreamt of ascribing any such miraculous effect to the moral character of the country. The Lord Chancellor said, it might not be amiss to observe, that if one noble lord were Austria and the other England, it would be extremely difficult to determine, whether they might or might not be prevented from going to war [a laugh]. The Address was agreed to nem. diss. HOUSE OF COMMONS. THE QUEEN-LITURGY.] Lord A. Hamilton gave notice, that he intended upon Friday next to bring forward a motion relative to the omission of the Queen's name in the Liturgy. Lord Holland said, that he could have no objection to answer the question of the noble lord. The language which this Mr. Wetherell rose for the purpose of country ought to have used to Austria, making a few observation relative to cer shou'd have been plain and unequivocah tain documents, of which he thought the We should have declared explicitly, that House ought to be in possession, before we would take no part in such a war; the motion of the noble lord was taken and we should have expressed, openly, in into consideration. He should, therefore, the face of Europe, not only our disap-give notice of a motion for the production probation of the war, but of the principle of such documents on some day before of the war. The noble baron had said, Friday. He was proceeding to state his that the most effectual way of addressing reasons for so doing, when he was called an emperor was, by a general at the head to order by of an army; but he forgot that this was no longer the case, when that emperor was looking for assistance and support from the party addressing him. Notwithstanding the surprise expressed by the noble baron, he saw nothing so preposterous in supposing, that if, instead of the paragraph which the speech now contained, there had been one, lamenting that any of the allies should think of interfering with the rights of independent nations, the conduct of Austria would have been influenced by such a declaration. For his own part, he believed it would have prevented Austria from marching; at all events, they who thought that it would not have kept her for a long time hesitating and The Speaker, who was satisfied that the learned member would excuse him for interruption, but nothing was so irregular as to offer remarks upon that which was only a notice of motion. Mr. Tierney said, that it appeared to him that the learned gentleman intended, in consequence of the notice just given for Friday, to give notice of a motion for the production of certain papers previously to that day. He wished, in short, to put the House in possession of such information as would enable it to form a proper judgment on the question which would then be submitted to it. Lord Castlereagh admitted that such might be the meaning of the learned gen. tleman; but if it was, it would perhaps be as well to allow him to explain his own meaning. His lordship was proceeding to other remarks upon Mr. Wetherell's declaration, when Lord Folkestone said, it was competent to the learned gentleman, if he thought proper, to move at that instant for the documents he wanted. Mr. Bankes said, it was not usual for gentlemen to give notices of motions before the King's Speech had been taken into consideration. He did not mean to say, that it was not competent to members to do so, but he thought that, unless under very peculiar circumstances, the respect which was due to his majesty ought to induce the House not to engage in any previous discussions. The Speaker observed, that if the learned member would explain his object, he would apologise if he had misunderstood him. He understood the learned member intended to offer some observations upon the notice of the noble lord. That, it appeared to him, would be contrary to the usual forms of the House. It was impossible that any observations could be made leading to a discussion, without going on to a termination of the question. If he mistook the learned member, he begged his pardon; but if he did not, he put it to him and to the House, whether he was not irregular in addressing the House on the notice of the noble lord? Mr. Wetherell said, he had been misunderstood. He intended to move for the production of certain papers, which he conceived absolutely necessary to a proper understanding of the noble lord's motion. Lord Castlereagh thought the learned member could not make any motion of the kind without notice. Mr. Wetherell said, that provided he could attain his object, the mode by which he did so was quite immaterial to him. He was ready to bow to the will of the House. The papers for which he was about to move were, in his opinion, absolutely necessary, in order to come to a proper understanding of the noble lord's motion. However, in deference to the opinion of the House, he was ready to reverse the proceeding, and to give notice for a future day [cries of "no, no, move now,"]. He would then move at once for "Copies. 1. Of all Collects or Litanies in the Public Liturgy of the Church in each reign, from the reign of James 1 (inclusive) to the present time, in which the name of a Queen Consort has been inserted from time to time: 2. Of the Collects or Litanics contained in the Liturgy annexed to the Statute of 13th and 14th, Ch. 2. c. 4, which relates to the King, Queen, or Royal Family, together with the titles of such Collects or Litanies, noticing therein any blanks in the titles or bodies of such Collects or Litanies: 3. Of the Order in Council of the 12th February 1820, by which Her Majesty's name has been omitted from the Liturgy: 4. Of orders made by the Kings and Queens of England in Council, relative to the insertion, omission, change, or alteration of the names or titles of the King, Queen, or any member of the Royal Family, in the Liturgy of the Church of England, from the commencement of the reign of Henry 8, to the present time." The object which he had in view was to place the House in possession of the facts, before the motion of the noble lord came under consideration. The private research of many gentlemen had doubtless supplied them with all the information necessary to decide upon it; but, consistently with parliamentary usage, no fact, when a motion was made, could be assumed as certain that was not properly authenticated. It could be no secret that many were of opinion that the Queen of England had a right to have her name inserted in the Liturgy of the church by the law of the land and the constitution of the country. To decide the question whether she had or not, he now moved for copies of certain documents, all of which were among the public records of the kingdom. No gentleman could come to a fair and just judgment on the propriety or impropriety, the legality or illegality of the erasion of her majesty's name from the Liturgy, until he had investigated the law and usage of the country upon that head. As the House would not be able to perform its duty to the people, the King, or the Queen, until the papers were laid upon the table, he should now move for the immediate production of the documents, the titles of which he had just read to the House. Lord Castlereagh thought it would be more convenient to give notice of the motion. The learned member was transgressing the rules and forms of the House. He was moving without notice for documents which nobody understood. If the learned member thought there was any reluctance on his part to produce those do have the documents." The noble lord might if he pleased have taken another ground, and objected to any discussion until the King's Speech had been received, and taken into consideration. Instead of doing so, he said, that the question ought not to be agitated at present, as he did not know where to look for the papers. This was a most curious mode of reasoning; it was a most singular objection to the motion. He would not have added another word, were it not for an observation which had been made by the noble lord. The noble lord expressed a wish that he would exercise his influence in preventing certain motions from being made. What did the noble lord mean by this? The noble lord had indeed influence on his side of the House, but did the noble lord think, that he (Mr. T.) could have the impudence, even if he had the inclination, to say to any honourable member that such a motion should or should not be made? The noble lord indeed knew what his influence was on his own side of the House; he could turn But cuments, he was much mistaken: so far | from it, that his only objection was as to the time and manner of making the motion. He put it to the House whether the country was likely to improve from the late reformations which had taken place in the form of making motions in parliament [a laugh]. He was sorry that the influence of a right hon. gentleman on the other side was not exerted, to prevent motions which only tended to excite clamour. For his part, he was not aware in what particular office the information called for by the learned member could be found. He had no means of judging precisely at that moment whether he ought or ought not to concur in the motion. Under those circumstances, he hoped the motion would be for the present withdrawn. If it was good for any thing it would go to postpone the motion which stood for Friday-it would operate as an absolute bar to it. If the motion was not withdrawn he should feel himself under the necessity of moving the previous question. Mr. Tierney said, that as far as he under-round to any of his party and say, “Sir, stood the noble lord, he had no objection to the hon. and learned member's motion, but only to the time of making it. It was most extraordinary, that any objection as to time should be made, when the documents moved for were those upon which the exclusion of her majesty's name from the Liturgy had been founded; but the noble lord had no idea where those documents could be found! If that was the case, he should wish to know where the noble lord had laid his fingers upon them, when the order in council was made for excluding her majesty's name from the Liturgy? Now he would only beg the House to consider the way in which the question stood. The learned member who made the motion, was not an ally of his (Mr. Tierney's); he was the uniform supporter of ministers. A noble friend of his had given notice of a motion for Friday. The learned member said, that there were certain documents which he wished to have laid before the House, in order to guide his decision upon that motion. He thought he could not form an opinion in the absence of those documents. The noble lord opposite said he had no objection to the production of the documents, but he would not allow them to be produced now. This was as much as to say, "you must first decide upon the question, and afterwards you may you hold such a place, and you shall lose certain recent events, and had therefore determined to say something to irritate, not caring whether it was upon the King's Speech, or upon any thing else. their pens through the name of their Queen without thinking of the justice, of the expediency, or the legality of the act! Mr. Bathurst complained, that his noble friend had been entirely misunderstood, and therefore misrepresented by the learned gentleman. Was that learned gentleman so ignorant of parliamentary forms, as not to know the difference between consulting public printed documents, and consulting public documents properly authenticated? The latter were therefore, without previous inquiry, it was impossible to say where a man could lay his hands upon them. The right hon. member was proceeding when Mr. Hume rose to order. The right hon. gentleman had, since the last meeting of parliament, accepted a place of emolument under the Crown, by which his seat was vacated. He wished to know whether he had been re-elected? If the acceptance of a place worth 5,000l. a-year, under the Crown, did not vacate a seat, he and those around him were totally ig tion was an office exempted from the operation of the statute, he was also ignorant of that fact. He suggested the consideration of the objection to the right hon. member himself, for his own private benefit and convenience. Mr. Wetherell wished to explain the reason why he could not consent to withdraw his motion. He presumed that the noble lord had read over, in February last, the documents which he was now desirous of obtaining. It was in that month that her majesty's name was erased from the Liturgy; and he could not suppose that the privy council would come to a deter-dispersed in different public offices; and mination on so important a measure without looking into the law and usage of the constitution regarding it. When the noble lord said, that he did not know where to find the documents, did he mean to say, that he had not looked into the litanies of the church to know what were the rights of a Queen Consort before he struck her name out of them? He could not suppose, that when the noble lord hazarded the desperate venture of striking the Queen's name out of the Liturgy in which it had been constantly retained for the long space of two centuries, he was igno-norant of the fact. If the office in quesrant where to find the records by which the legality or illegality of it was to be defended. Had the noble lord never been at the British Museum? Or was he ignorant that the undoubted, the uniform, and the unbroken usage, from the time of Henry VIII. downwards, was in favour of the Queen's right to have her name continued in the Liturgy? He could not strictly and seriously mean to give a negative to either of these two questions: and one of the principal reasons which induced him to make his present motion without any previous notice was, that he presumed that ministers had carefully investigated each of the required documents. Now, however, they were to be told that they had come too suddenly with the question upon ministers, and that they had been guilty of a paltry parliamentary trick. But the fact was not so: ministers were not taken by surprise. Did the noble lord presume, did the noble lord dare to assert in the face of the Commons of England, that his colleagues erased her majesty's name from the Liturgy, without considering how far they were justified by the laws of the country in doing so? If he meant to say, that they had done it unadvisedly and unadvisedly he, for one, believed that they had done it-what a censure did he pass upon his coadjutors in office, in saying that they had struck Mr. Bathurst was obliged to the hon. member for reminding him that he was perhaps subjecting himself to a fine of 500l. But before he had given him that hint, he ought to have examined into the validity of his objection. Did the hon. gentleman know how the office which he had now the honour of filling was appointed? The act of parliament under which it existed said not a word about any salary of 5000l. a-year; but it said this, that those commissioners who had seats in parliament should not vacate them provided they received no salary. He was in that situation; at present he received no salary. Mr. Tierney was aware that under the act of parliament for managing the affairs of India, there were some commissioners who had no salaries; but there were three who received salaries. Now, he wished to know of the right hon. gentleman whether he was one of the supernumeraries, as they were called, or was the president of the Board of Control! He did not know whether what he had read in the Gazette was correct or not; but there he |