was first discussed in that House, a right
hon. gentleman opposite to him repro-
bated it in strong language as degrading
to the Queen; but the learned gentleman
(the Queen's attorney-general) denied
that position. He did not consider it as
being of any moment whether the Queen.
was prayed for by name in the Liturgy or
not; in a word, he considered it as a

453] Proceedings against the Queen. After her majesty had arrived in this country, when his noble friend moved for a committee, he distinctly stated, that he had grave charges against the Queen, The House then knew that ministers were in possession of evidence which, in their opinion, was sufficient to support that charge; and it approved of the ministers pausing in their proceedings, and negotiating with her majesty. The House after-" trifle light as air," compared with what wards approved of the motion made by the hon. member for Bramber. It was evident, then, that ministers, so far from being desirous of bringing forward this investigation, took every means in their power to avoid it; and it was equally clear, that the House approved of their conduct in so doing. He did not expect that the gentlemen on the other side would approve of the conduct of ministers, but the House could not, he thought, withdraw the approbation of that conduct which it had so distinctly given.

he called her just rights. What happened afterwards, when a negotiation took place between the noble lord near him, a noble relation of his, and the two learned gentlemen on the other side (the Queen's legal advisers)? Upon that occasion the learned gentleman seemed in doubt whether the omission was legal or not; but he considered it as admitting of an equivalent. Now, if it were an illegal act, it could not admit of an equivalent. In that case, it would have been the duty of the learned gentleman to have broken off As to the proceedings in the House of the treaty at once. But after all that, Lords, he would offer but a word on them, the learned gentleman's opinion underseeing that those proceedings were on the went another change; for in the debate Journals of the House, and that those a few nights ago, he came round to Journals were published at the close of the the opinion of the learned member for session, by which means they became ac- Oxford, and pronounced the omission of cessible as public documents, it was idle her majesty's name from the Liturgy to to pretend that we knew nothing of them. be most decidedly an illegal act. And It was his wish to abstain from entering when afterwards the learned gentleman into any discussion respecting those pro- was charged with some inconsistency upon ceedings; he should be sorry to say one this subject, what was his answer? Why, word that could inflict pain upon the he said, that " he considered it as sound illustrious person who had been the sub-philosophy, when a man received an ject of them; but, with the consciousness that the whole was now before the public, he would declare, that he believed that there was not one man in the kingdom who, before the proceedings in the House of Lords, thought the ministers honest men, that did not, after those proceedings were over, think that what had passed in that House afforded an ample justification of ministers for the step they had taken. Upon the question of the Liturgy, it was equally unnecessary for him to dilate. It was quite impossible for ministers to give his majesty any other advice than that which they had given; it was not considered-it was not recommended as a punishment upon her majesty. The ministers conceived that this was a point completely within the prerogative of the Crown; and, under all the circumstances of the case, they did not feel it to be their duty to advise the king to confer upon her majesty that mark of special grace and favour. When the subject of the Liturgy

injury from a person in authority, and
could not get redress, to disguise his sense
of that injury, and undervalue its ex-
tent.". If this was true, said the learned
gentleman, between two individuals, how
much more was it so when one of them
was an advocate, the advocate of a woman,
and that woman a queen? Such was the
learned gentleman's language as an advo-
cate and as a sound philosopher; and
when ministers heard it, they were silly
enough to think they had a great autho-
rity in their favour; but when the learned
gentleman came to speak as a member
of parliament, he completely undeceived
them; for upon the motion of the noble
lord, a few nights ago, the learned gentle-
men declared, that he considered the omis-
sion of her majesty's name in the Liturgy
as" decidedly illegal", and reprobated it
in the strongest manner; and yet he
voted for the resolution, which merely
" inexpe-
stated, that the omission was
dient and ill-advised”; whereas, if it was

of the nature he had described it in his speech, he ought to have moved, as an amendment, that it was illegal. The learned gentleman had thus ingeniously contrived to display himself in both his characters in one night; for he had spoken as a member of parliament, and voted like an advocate, and a sound philosopher [a laugh].

ings at Liverpool, at Bedford, in Hamp-
shire, in London, &c. ; but, that the pub-
lic opinion was not so hostile to ministers
as gentlemen asserted, appeared from the
number of loyal addresses that were pour-
ing in from every part of the country. It
had been said by a noble lord, that these
addresses were got up, to bolster what was
called, a discomfited administration. Did
the noble lord then think so lightly of go-
vernment, that, if they wished to get up
some forty or fifty, one hundred, or one
thousand, loyal addresses, they would find
any difficulty in the thing? The truth
was, that government did not in any de-
gree interfere with these meetings, or with
the way in which the addresses were got
up. Neither he, nor any of his colleagues,
would wish to remain in office one hour
after they had lost the confidence of the
people; but ministers were not to be con-
vinced, by the assertions of the gentlemen
on the other side, that they had lost that
confidence; nor would they be induced
by clamour or by taunts, to desert their
duty to their sovereign and their country.
[Loud cheers.]-It was common, at the
beginning of every session, to hear that
ministers were about to resign; lists of
their successors were even handed about,
and it was confidently affirmed, that they
could not remain a week in office. This
reminded him of what used to be the case
in the Peninsula: the intercepted corre-
spondence of Joseph Buonaparté was full
of observations upon the blunders of the
English general, and of prophecies, that
the allied army was about to be destroyed;
but it always happened, that this blunder-

It had been repeatedly said, on this and former nights, that the whole country was against ministers upon this question; yet it was worthy of remark, that after this most illegal act, as it was called, of omitting the Queen's name in the Liturgy, had been committed, the parliament was dissolved, and a general election took place. But then, when the people were left to their own judgment-when their minds were not misled, or their passions inflamed, not one word was said upon this subject-not one of the gentlenen opposite considered it as a topic which he could urge from any hustings in any part of the kingdom with success.-Upon the assertion, that ministers had lost the confidence of the country, he wished to say a few words. The present administration was opposed by the whigs, a party possessed of great wealth, talent, and respectability, professing a warm attachment to the constitution, and honourably united together for the purpose of getting into office, in order that they might thereby serve the country more effectually, according to their own system and principles. They were opposed by another party, inimical to all the existing establishments in church and state-they were called the Radicals, a party nume-ing general, as soon as he got sight of the rous, active, assiduous, and persevering; and, he was willing to admit, that they were as different from the Whigs in character, and in their objects, as "light from darkness." These two parties, however, so essentially different in every thing else, agreed in one point. The Whigs had found out, that they could do nothing that was good; and the Radicals had discovered, that they could do nothing that was bad, while the present ministers remained in office; and therefore, these two discordant parties heartily joined together to turn them out. This junction had given them the appearance of strength; but still that strength was only formed by the union of those who always opposed ministers. The opponents of ministers at all the public meetings were composed of Whigs and Radicals. Witness the meet

enemy's army, annihilated it. So it was with respect to the rumours to which he alluded; if they were to be believed, the ministers could not exist a week; but, when the battle took place, the truth appeared-the Whigs were defeated, and the ministers confirmed in their places.

There remained only one point on which he wished to say a very few words. His majesty's ministers had been accused of a disposition to persecute the Queen; and the gentlemen, on the other side, had by no means been sparing in their censures upon this point. But, before the House, or the country, condemned his colleagues and himself, it would not be amiss to inquire, what sort of treatment-what degree of mercy, her majesty would have experienced from the Whigs, if they had been in power? To these inquiries, the

457]

FEB. 6, 1821.

[458

two months, but for ever, without the
power of justification! Such was the
mercy the Whigs would have shown to the
Queen; and such was the consistency
which they had displayed in their cen
sures upon ministers! He was rather sur-
prised last night at the asperity with which
an honourable and learned member (Sir J.
Mackintosh), animadverted upon the rea-
sons given by the hon. member for Corfe
Castle, for preferring the present ministers
to the gentlemen on the other side of the
House in office. Those reasons, however,
appeared to him to be perfectly fair and
constitutional; they were founded upon
the uniform language and conduct of the
gentlemen themselves; and the preference
was given to his colleagues upon an expe-
rience of their public conduct. He could
not conceive any thing more constitu-
tional than for a member of parliament
to express himself so;-but, perhaps,
it was not to be wondered at, that gen-
tlemen should feel sore at a sentence
of condemnation coming from a person
who had so long been the ornament of
that House, and who stood so deservedly
high in its estimation. Mr. Pole con-
cluded, amidst loud cheering, by declar
ing his intention of giving a decided nega➡
tive to the motion.

Proceedings against the Queen. gentlemen on the other side, had already furnished an answer. If they had been in possession of evidence, affecting the character of her majesty, to which they gave credit, they would have had no negotiation, no treaty; they would have commenced their proceedings immediately, Some gentleand brought in their bill. men might, perhaps, think that such was the course which ought to have been pursued; but, surely, no man would contend, that it would have shown a greater degree of consideration and of mercy towards her majesty; or, that endeavouring to prevent the proceedings against her, by a previous negotiation, evinced any very strong desire of persecution. It was to be recollected also, that it had been stated, from very high Whig authority, in another place, that instead of the bill of Pains and Penalties, her majesty ought to have been proceeded against for high treason, by which, of course, her life would have been put in danger. So much for the mercy of the Whigs; so much for the lenity of those gentlemen who accused his majesty's ministers of persecution. But this was not all. Some gentlemen had complained, that by proroguing parliament, the ministers had deprived her majesty for two months of all means of explanation or redress in parliament.Now, he begged the House to consider, how the Whigs would have treated her A noble lord majesty upon this point. (lord John Russell), in the month of August last, after the lords had made their report upon the evidence referred to them, after the bill against the Queen had been brought in and read a first time, proposed, in a letter addressed to the member for Bramber, to address his majesty to prorogue parliament, and put an end to all the proceedings. In what situation would that advice have placed her majesty, if it had been adopted? How would she have stood, if this Whig manifesto had been successful? Charges of a most grave nature would have been preferred against her majesty-a report of a committee of the House of Lords, recommending proceedings against her, would have been made and printed-a bill to degrade her would have been brought in, and read a first time-and then, without giving the Queen any opportunity of making any defence, without hearing her counsel, or examining her witnesses, the Whigs, in their great mercy, would have prorogued parliament, and left her, not for

Sir Francis Burdett said, he meant to address his observations to the general question now before the House, although he might find it necessary to advert occasionally to what he would not call the argument, but the sort of rhapsody which they had just heard from the right hon. gentleman. That, indeed, had little or no reference to the question before the House; and whether it were true or not, that the Whigs had, according to the right hon. gentleman, acted in this or that manner, upon this or that occasion, must now be a matter almost indifferent even to the Whigs themselves. But the right hon. gentleman was singularly unfortunate in his allusions to former periods, and in rendering his inferences from them applicable to present circumstances. He had thought proper to go back to a time beyond the memory of them all-to the early stage of Mr. Fox's political career; and had quoted an opinion then pronounced by that eminent statesman. It was very possible that Mr. Fox, with little or no experience of the conduct of that House, should have, nearly half a century ago, expressed his belief that it did represent the feelings of the country

that it did sympathise with those feelings traordinary to hear the right hon. gentleand that there was a possibility of man, a professed enemy to reform, pointfinding them closely united in sentiment ing out the imperfections in the theory of together. But who, at this time of day, our representative system; and, if he would contend that such was now the gave up the theory, he was not to be surcase, or relieve the right hon. gentleman prised that the people out of doors refrom the singularity which characterized minded them of what had been the prachim, when he ventured to assert, that the tice. He should not, however, now wanHouse of Commons faithfully and accu- der into the question of reform. That rately reflected the opinions and feelings would present itself in due time; but of the people? The right hon. gentle- its importance was such, and it so naturalman was peculiarly unfortunate in his ly entwined itself with every other subject reference to those very times. If he was of great interest, that he could not sincere in his confidence of the authority, severely condemn the right hon. gentlelet him evince it by the same test as that man for introducing it on this occasion. to which Mr. Pitt appealed; let the ad- As to what had been said of the “radiministration, of which he is a member, cals," or "the many," of whom he was dissolve the parliament. Mr. Pitt did so, one-if it were meant that this "many," though then a reformer, and though he or the people at large, were desirous of had declared, that without a reform, it mischief, he would answer, that no man was impossible to effect any practical had a right so to calumniate the people good within those walls. The right hon. of England, and particularly no minister, gentleman had introduced a variety of at a time when the right hon. gentleman desultory topics, admitting, at the same and his colleagues were doing all that lay time, that the Whigs, whom he so often in their power to degrade the royal family condemned possessed amongst them in the eyes of the people, and to destroy men of great talent, rank, property, and that respect and reverence with which the consideration; but lamenting that they royal family was wont to be regarded: should have suffered themselves to be still less were they entitled to calumniate joined by the radicals, or the great bulk the people at a moment when the latter and body of the people. [Cries of "No, were stepping forward to support the no," from the Treasury bench.] The dignity of the Crown against its immeright hon. gentleman's expression was, diate advisers. Did they conceive it "The radicals or the many," and he now possible to degrade so important a memdescribed "the many" as following and ber of that family as the Queen-consort, looking up to persons of high character, without doing material injury to the infortune, and abilities. For his own part, terests of every other, so far as those inhe hailed the prospect, and trusted that terests were connected with the public the connexion would continue, as he welfare ?—This observation brought him believed it to be the only practicable a little to the question now before the means by which redress could be obtained House; and he approached it with all for these grievous wrongs resulting from the circumspection due to the exalted SO many years of mal-administration. rank of the parties concerned as well as The mode of remark, the coarseness of due from a sense of justice to ministers terms in which the right hon. gentleman, themselves. Adverting, however, to the had indulged, when he talked of the situation of the Queen, unjustifiably Whigs being scouted, was rather extra-treated as she had been, and adverting ordinary. Had such language been re- also to the feelings of the people, he ported of an American assembly, it would should deem it necessary, in the first place, have been quoted as a proof of the want to discard from his mind all techuical of refinement in a democratic govern- objections-all legal subtilty-and to ment. Whatever might be the defects disperse, if he could, that worse than of that House, as arising from the state Cimmerian darkness which had been cast of its representation-defects which he over the subject. In that light he could never had, nor should disguise-he not but recognise the truth of the only part should always uphold it as an assembly of the speech of the hon. member for Corfewhere the courtesies of life were respected castle, in which all must agree; namely, as a practical assembly, consisting of that the beginning, progress, and terminathe best-conducted audience the world tion of these proceedings were equally lahad ever produced. It was rather ex-mentable; and in his (Sir F.'s) mind, esta

most trifling cause-evidence on which he would not consent to the hanging of a dog. A right hon. gentleman Mr. Peel) had contended, that a bill of Pains and Penalties was necessary, that this form of proceeding became expedient in consequence of the high ground on which the House had placed her majesty by their address. Now it appeared to him that a bill of Pains and Penalties was by no means likely to produce its intended effect, whilst it was extremely well calculated to lead to those consequences which it must have been most desirable to avert. The right hon. gentleman indeed had spoken as if he did not think the Queen innocent; but what, then, became of his argument in justification of the proceedings, that they were absolutely necessary in order to prevent adultery and high treason from being seated on the throne? As far as this was the object, the measure had failed, even according to the right hon. gentleman; and what he had contended was necessary, turned out to be ineffectual. On the present question he thought he had some reason to expect the vote of the attorney-general. The proceedings against the Queen began by the exclusion of her name from the Liturgy, and were follow

blished the strongest grounds for the condemnation of the conduct of ministers. Was it possible, in the whole progress of human events, to recognise any thing more preposterous and contrary to common sense, than the course they pursued? There were three modes in which he should consider their conduct. Had it been their wish that the Queen should remain abroad, why did they comport themselves towards her in such manner, as to make it impossible that she could continue abroad, as, indeed, to make it necessary for her quiet that she should return to this country? If it was wrong that she should return, why did ministers leave nothing undone which made it unavoidable? But when she had returned, and when the preservation of the public tranquillity was their duty, why were injury and insult repeated, in order to increase all those other difficulties which were of their own creation? Had those insults never been inflicted-had the Queen been received in a manner correspondent with her station and dignity-she must soon have ceased to be considered as an object of political importance. Had she been allowed a court, it would have been visited by persons wholly unconnected with any of the parties of the country. Castra, ubi nulla potentia.. Had she beened up by permitting the evidence against thus received by the government, she her to be published. Not only was this would probably, in a short time, have been evidence published, but the speech which happy to go again abroad. So much, the attorney-general permitted him-elf then, for the wisdom of the treatment to make in opening the charges, had been which she had experienced when her other given to the world, and sent forth apunprovoked wrongs had caused her to parently with the view of sinking deep revisit this country. He might also into the public mind. That speech had, observe, in the third instance, that as her he must confess, filled him with astonishalleged offence did not amount to high ment. On no occasion, and least of all treason, and as the sole object was, to on this, could he have expected that a show that she was unfit for her high public officer would act the disgraceful station, this purpose might have been part of collecting the rhetoric of the fully answered by a proceeding in the lowest brothels, and afterwards pour it ecclesiastical courts. A single fact would forth with unbounded licence in the ears then have been sufficient, and all that of a disgusted audience. Unrestrained exposition of evidence which, if it had by auy consideration of the Queen's exnot produced immorality, had excited alted rank, or by any recollection of her universal disgust, might have been avoid- misfortunes, he had endeavoured, by a ed. The charges were of that nature statement of seeming facts and specious that they ought never to have been pro-and highly-coloured descriptions, to exduced, unless there was a certainty of supporting them by the most unexceptionable testimony. He could not conceive how any administration could be guilty of a greater offence to the Crown or to the public, than to produce such charges against the first subject in the realm on evidence insufficient to determine the

cite prejudice and odium against her, and then, proh pudor! called no evidence to support the most infamous parts of his accusation [Loud cheering]. The hon. and learned gentleman spoke as if the Spirit of Evil dwelt in his bosom, and possessed his tongue; for who but the Author of all malice-who, with the feel