were hostile to public tranquillity. When that infatuation was at its highest pitch, and before the country had spoken out intelligibly in the language of loyalty and duty, he had always relied that the delusion would be dispelled, and depended upon the sober and temperate judgments of Englishmen to defeat eventually the schemes of their enemies (Hear.) Public opinion, when once fairly and coolly collected, must always have its due weight upon the measures of public men. The right honourable gentleman, however, knew too well what was the real feeling of the country; he knew too well, that no minister had ever dared to shew his face in that House, and he (Lord Castlereagh) trusted that no minister would ever dare to shew his face in that House, who had lost the confidence of the country-(Cries of hear, hear.) The minister who had really lost the confidence of the country, could not possess the confidence of that House; for the people of the country,-he meant the rational part of the community--that part which alone ought to possess any influence over the legislature always made its sentiments as distinctly and intelligibly felt in that House as if the wildest plan of reform that was ever proposed had been adopted. He could assure the right honourable gentleman, that if he supposed either himself or his colleagues wished to remain in the service of their Sovereign a moment longer than they possessed the confidence of the House and the country, he had mistaken the men he had to deal with. As long, however, as they possessed the confidence of their Sovereign, of the House, and of the country, no difficulty with which they had to contend, no taunts from the right honourable gentleman or his friends, no apprehension of consequences personal to themselves, should induce them to shrink from the discharge of their public duty. He by no means felt it as a reproach to be told by the right honourable gentleman, that his Majesty's ministers, at a moment when they believed in their conscience that the fate of the constitution was at stake, and the tranquillity of the country endangered by the supineness of the good, and the activity of the bad, entertained a wish that the sentiments of the country at large might be pronounced in support of his Majesty's government, without reference to their share in that government. This he by no means felt to be a reproach. He rather considered it as a compliment. But it was a compliment which he could not return. The right honourable gentleman and his friends would never countenance any expression of affection or loyalty towards the Sovereign, and the constitution, in whatever peril, unless accompanied by a declaration of the expediency of a change in his Majesty's councils. In regard to manufactures and trade, ministers appealed to univer. sal observation, whether there was not a material change from that state of distress in which they had been six months ago; and whether the cheapness of provisions did not materially contribute to the relief of the lower classes. They felt no apathy on the subject of agricultural distress; it had been alluded to in the latter part of the speech; and they were ready to give the fullest consideration to every plan which might be proposed for its remedy, though they were inclined to think, that every thing practicable had already been tried. In regard to foreign affairs, Ministers declined entering at length into the subject, but contented themselves with a few general observations. Lord Castlereagh said, it was not for us to dictate to other powers, or to control their policy. We could not say how other nations were to feel who thought their interests endangered; if we enjoyed peace ourselves, we should endeavour to preserve it, but not presume to dictate to other powers, and thus arrogate the right of intermeddling with the affairs of others, which we condemned in them. Whenever the proper time should arrive, his Majesty's government would be prepared to shew that the language which had been held by this country, and the principles on which that language had been founded, were perfectly consistent with its character. This, however, he begged leave at once to say, that it must not be inferred that Great Britain was of necessity a party to all the deliberations and conclusions consequent on those discussions, at which a British minister might be present. We had our own interests to watch over; and in his opinion it was an additional proof of the confidence happily existing among the great powers of Europe, that they received at their meetings the ministers of powers who were not immediately connected with the measures in progress, in order that their respective governments might, nevertheless, have the satisfaction of knowing the exact nature of those measures. Lord Liverpool observed, if it was necessary to engage in war, the system of war in which we should be most backward to engage, would be that which had for its object to interfere in the internal affairs of other states. While he said thus much, he had never maintained that the principle of non-interference could admit of no exceptions; that there never could occur occasions in which we ought to interpose to prevent the adoption of certain internal arrangements; or that there might not be cases in which it was not only justifi able but necessary to do so for our own security. All that he would state was, the standing policy of this country was peace, and an abstinence from intermeddling with the internal affairs of other nations. The course recommended by Lord Grey would lead to the most serious consequences. Without knowing all the circumstances that connected the revolution of Naples with neighbouring states-without knowing how such an event might affect them-without waiting for explanation or defence-we were to take a side. He was not one of those who, in determining our policy towards revolutionized states, could leave out of view the circumstances by which they were accompanied he was not one of those who loved revolutions for themselves-he was not one of those who viewed with the same eye a revolution against an oppressive and a mild government. In viewing such constitutional changes, he examined the discriminating character of each particular case; he weighed the possibility of success; he calculated the chances of improvement; and he estimated the effect which the revolu tion would produce on other governments. What two countries in which political changes occurred were placed exactly in the same situation, and how could a common course be chalked out to both? In these circumstances our abstinence from all interference with either party appeared to him to be the best policy, as to interfere would be exercising a judgment without the means of forming a correct one. In regard to the Queen, Lord Castlereagh denied there was any departure from the ordinary course or practice observed in speeches from the throne. The subject was generally touched upon, and it was left to the wisdom of Parliament, according to the corresponding practice, to fix the specific amount. He knew that there approbation of the bill of Pains and were instances in which a contrary Penalties, but at the same time took practice had prevailed, but they had occasion to reprobate, in a very markbeen discontinued, and the course ed manner, the political course which now observed pursued in their place. her Majesty had taken. She had adUpon the subject alluded to, he might dressed a letter to her Sovereign and as well now give notice, that it was husband, which contained sentiments his intention, on Wednesday week, highly disrespectful and improper, to submit a proposition to the House and had followed it by a long series for a suitable provision for her Ma- of attacks on both Houses of Parliajesty. He was anxious to take as ment. Incitements had been held early a day as possible for his motion. out to the military, and the people Monday and Tuesday next were days had been gravely told, that if the on which the House usually adjourn- bill passed, it would be a matter of ed, and therefore Wednesday was the doubt how far they were bound to earliest day he could select for the obey it. These sentiments had been purpose of which he had given no- repeated, not once or twice, but five tice; and he might as well take this hundred times. He could not join opportunity of adding, that the pro- in an address to the throne, praying position which he meant to submit on that respect and honour should be Wednesday next was the only one paid to a person who had so conductwhich his Majesty's ministers intended herself.-Mr Hume lamented the ed to submit to the House upon this anxious and painful subject. The Opposition, as before announced, did not choose to hazard an encounter on the field of the address, but allowed it to pass without a division. The following days (25th and 26th) were employed in the reception of numerous petitions, among which was one from the Common Council of London, deprecating the proceed ings against the Queen, calling for an inquiry into the conduct of ministers, and praying that she might be restored, without reserve, to all the rights and dignities of her high situation. These petitions, being accompanied with frequent comments by those who presented them, which drew forth replies from the opposite side, gave rise to a number of little skirmishes, attended, in several instances, with a good deal of warmth. Notice was particularly drawn by Alderman Heygate, who, in presenting a petition from his borough of Sudbury, stated indeed his uniform dis honourable member should thus have brought forward a general charge of treason, for he could call it no less, against her Majesty. It was most ungenerous, most unmanly, most unfair; and in the face of the House he protested against it. Let the House consider the situation in which the Queen stood when she wrote that letter; the indignities which had been heaped upon her; the refusal of a ship to convey her to England, and of a house to live in. Was she not then entitled to make a last appeal to her natural lord and protector? The terms of the letter appeared to him perfectly justifiable, and he challenged the Alderman to point out a single exceptionable passage.-Mr Heygate had not the letter by him, but thought he recollected the expressions, " Your court is a scene of low debauchery." He quoted others from the answers to the addresses, fully justifying, as he conceived, the censure he had passed on them.-Mr Lockhart and Lord Nugent conceived that any blamable expressions that had escaped the Queen might be well excused, considering the hardship of her situation, and the neglect experienced from those who might have given her sounder advice. In the course of these discussions, Lord Castlereagh stated, that no farther proceedings against the Queen were, or, since the withdrawing of the bill of Pains and Penalties, ever had been contemplated. It was on the 25th, that the first grand trial of strength was made on this important question. Lord Archibald Hamilton brought forward a motion of censure on ministers, for the erasure of the Queen's name from the Liturgy. Lord A. deprecated the idea of acting from any party feeling; he had from the first taken the same view of the subject, and had 'early made a motion similar to the present. If the House had then induced ministers to retrace their steps, would not the House, the Crown, and the country, have stood in a much more favourable situation than they now did? The Queen, he conceived, could not continue to exist as she was now placed, with the mere addition of a pecuniary establishment. It would be impossible in that case to stop those effusions of the press, which he deplored, but which he imputed altogether to the proceedings of ministers. It was impossible to contemplate their consequences on the country, and not feel disgust and indignation at the conduct of those men who had placed the country for so many months in such a state of jeopardy and danger. The conduct they adopted was not only unwise and unconstitutional, but required the strongest expression he could use to designate it properly it was of the most revolutionary description he had ever witnessed. He did not make use of this term unadvisedly, it was the only one suited to the occasion. He was not afraid of either radicals or reformers-he was aware of no danger equal to that risked by the ministers of the Crown, in advising the prosecution of the Queen. A worthy Alderman had lately said, that he that he, forsooth-regretted the omission of her Majesty's name in the Liturgy; but then he talked of her letter to the King. What was that but trying her then for one thing, and punishing her for another? Before any trial, ministers proceeded to take her Majesty's name out of the Liturgy— an act not only unwise, but unjust, an act of gross injustice. For all that followed from this, they were indebted to his Majesty's Ministers. What was the situation of her Majesty then? She was without any court or retinue. The laws had deceived her. By law she was a Queen. In domestic enjoyments she was equally deceived-she had no husband-no state, and left this country with a letter of licence for her conduct. Abroad she was followed by spies-persecuted by every thing in the shape of diplomatic function-she was forced to go about with no sort of protection from any one quarter. Placed then as her Majesty was, in this condition, would the House affect to be shocked at her doing what her letter of licence allowed her (if anything guilty were done by her?) If even all was true with which she was charged-he still thought she never should have been prosecuted in the manner she was. Why, when the charges against her were not proved, was not her name restored to the Liturgy? The fact was, ministers wished to consider her as neither innocent nor guilty; they grounded their measures on a vague idea of her being both. He conceived it impossible to produce any legal ground which gave them authority to commit an act of legal degradation against her Majesty. If there was, let the King's law officers come for he wished to carry a measure personally offensive to the King. After all, let it be as it might, he was not bound to receive his tactics from the opposite side. He wished to know what effect the giving up of the measures against the Queen was to have, if all due honours were not restored to her. On what principle would it be contended, that the dignity of the Crown could remain safe and uninjured, whilst the Queen was exposed to ca lumny and insult. Would it be urged, that it was in consideration of any per ward and state it. Whether it was considered as a matter of law or justice, ministers appeared to him to have acted wrong. He could name one point in which the order was certainly illegal. The self same order which had been issued in England, had also been sent to Scotland, over which it had manifestly no power, and he would therefore say, in the presence of the Lord Advocate opposite, that the order, as it regarded Scotland, was either a dead letter, or a direct violation of the law. What had been the consequence? In Scot-sonal quality, or on account of any land, as it ought to have been in England, the order had proved mere waste paper. Lord A. then adverted to the absence of Mr Canning, which that gentleman wished to be understood as arising from a conscientious difference with the other ministers on this point. Why then had he spoken at first in favour of the prosecution? Why had he continued in office while it was going on? And why did he not now attend to speak in her Majesty's support? Although he merely moved now for a censure on what had been done, the House would be call ed soon to consider the means of restoring her Majesty's name to the Liturgy. (A cry of censure at the course now announced, being raised from the ministerial benches.) Lord A. felt surprised to see what he had just said re. ceived in so unexpected a manner by the noble Lord. The subject would engage the full attention of the House at no very distant day; but was it not more natural, was it not more conformable to the rules of parliamentary practice, to notice that which had already been done, before they proceeded to amend it? He felt convin. ced, that had he ventured to move an address to the King, praying him to restore the name of her Majesty to the Liturgy, he should immediately have been taunted by the insinuation, that merit in private life, that the King was entitled to be prayed for in the Liturgy? No; he held his place in the Liturgy as a member of the Royal Family, independently of any merit or desert of his own. Could any thing be imagined more unjust and unfair, or more likely to excite an invidious comparison, than to say that the name of one of the parties was fit to be inserted in the Liturgy, and the other unfit; if the House began to set the example, how far would not the evil spread itself, or at what limit would it stop? He was decidedly of opinion, that the measure would prove injurious, not to the Queen alone, but the whole of the Royal Family. When the noble Lord said, that he would do no more against her Majesty, the House understood his reason for desisting. The fact was, he could do no more→→→→ the public feeling would not allow him. He therefore begged the noble lord not to take any credit to himself for his forbearance; he had done his utmost, and being at length reduced to abandon his designs, he now came forward to argue their legality. He begged the House to consider how the country, which took so decided a part in the Queen's favour, would endure that nothing should be done to redress her wrongs, or to stop the torrent of calumny poured upon her by |