wished their conduct had been equally free from party motives; but he believed every unprejudiced man would allow, that administration had acted a more pure and disinterested part on this occasion than their opponents had done. The members opposite, instead of coming forward in a bold way, had selected one single point, with the view of picking the votes of a few individuals whose opinions were doubtful. They had had recourse to a system of management, which could only be met by management; and when a proposition was made that could lead to no practical good, it was fair to meet it by moving other orders of the day, or by calling for an adjournment. It was extraordinary that twelve months had been suffered to elapse, during which ministers were allowed to perpetrate a great injustice against the Queen, and at the expiration of that time nothing but an abstract proposition was brought forward. As to the law of the question, he thought that there was nothing so decisive in the clause so much relied on by the noble lord, as to render it imperative to insert the Queen's name in the Liturgy, The Act of Uniformity was not passed out of any jealousy of the Crown, but to prevent encroachments and alterations from being made in the prayers of the church, and to put down heresies and schisms injurious to the establishment. That clause, therefore, was inserted in the statute to shew, that though no alteration could be made in the general prayers of the church, those collects and litanies which affected the royal family were open to alteration. The opposite party had done the very thing of which they accused ministers, when they struck the name of Lord Melville, before trial, out of the list of privy councillors; also, with regard to the Queen herself, when they

placed her conduct under the investigation of four commissioners, without informing her of the existence of such a tribunal. If the King, in the exercise of his royal prerogative, should be forced to insert the name of her Majesty in the Liturgy, that would be found to be only the first step to greater encroachments; for he should wish to know on what principle, after such an advantage were gained for the Queen, she could be excluded from the coronation, and all those privileges of grace and favour which, in happier times, it would have been the pride of the King to have afforded her. He allowed, that now that the bill was withdrawn, the Queen was in the situation of a person technically innocent, and she was in as full possession of her rights as Queen Consort, as if no stain had ever been cast upon her character. It was one thing, however, for her to enjoy the rights to which she was legally entitled, and another to enjoy those honours which had been granted to her predecessors as matters of grace, favour, and consideration. She had no strict right to have her name inserted in the Liturgy; and when the matter had come to such a pass as it had done in the Lords, where 123 peers had declared her guilty upon their honours, he could not, as a minister of the Crown, allow it to be granted to her as a boon. The conduct of her friends in parliament was very extraordinary; whilst her trial was proceeding, they were making motion after motion for a prorogation, in order to put a stop to it, but now that it was over, they wished again to meet the question, and to drag the House again through all the mass of evidence which they had declared to be so disgusting. If they succeeded in their efforts, on their heads rested the responsibility. His lordship then proceeded to state, that

he felt compassion for the state to which the Queen had reduced her self; but there were so many circumstances that rendered her dangerous, that it became necessary to tear away the veil from her guilt. She had lent herself to a party who, he believed, entertained views dangerous to the established institutions of both church and state; and he therefore could honour her as little in a political as he could in a moral point of view. He would caution honourable gentlemen not to be deceived by her advocates, nor to be entrapped into the support of the present milk and water resolution, by any rash declaration that might have been made in the country. The country was now, thank God, coming to its senses, (Hear, hear, from the Opposition benches,) and the efforts of that party which had hitherto distracted the country, would soon expire if Parliament maintained its present firm tone of determination. It ought to support the existing government in undiminished honour and character, or at once to extinguish the present cabinet as ministers.

Mr Brougham would have taken no part in the debate, but for the insinuations by which the noble lord had revived all the late agitating and painful discussions. Little weight could be attached to the majority in the House of Lords, when its nature was examined. If the House would allow him, he could shew in what way the majority for the Queen had been composed; he could shew how many of that majority owed their places, their patronage, their honours, and their revenues, to the patrons of the bill; he could prove, that while the minority could not in the slightest degree be influenced by the party who was to be the victim, the Illustrious Personage who was the una

vowed prosecutor, was represented by his household, and state officers, and dependents of all ranks, and his power extended as well over those who waited for the highest rewards a monarch could bestow, as those who accepted even the lowest boons they could confer upon their adherents. Nothing was talked of on the other side, but the Queen's increasing and inconvenient popularity. Why was she popular? And why were the hearts of all classes interested in her behalf? Because she was oppressed and persecuted; and if ministers wished to sink her into comparative oblivion, they had nothing to do but to abstain from that persecution. The people had witnessed a woman and a Queen maltreated, insulted, trampled upon; they had seen injuries inflicted where injuries were possible; and insults where injuries were powerless. They felt for her, because they loved the monarchy and the persons of their rulers, with what an historian had called, with somewhat of a sneer, “a childish admiration of royalty." For this the people of England had covered their Queen with the shield of their protection, and had covered themselves-he would boldly say itwith immortal renown, as lovers of justice and detesters of tyranny.

After an explanation from Alderman Heygate, and a reply from Lord A. Hamilton, the House divided, when there appeared for the original motion, 209; for Mr Robinson's amendment, 310. The motion was therefore negatived by a majority of 101.

On the 31st January, Lord Castlereagh brought forward his announced proposition of going into a committee to consider of a provision for the Queen. Mr Brougham hereupon immediately rose and made the following communication :—

"CAROLINE R.

"The Queen having learned that the House of Commons has appointed this day for taking into consideration the part of the King's most gracious speech which relates to her, deems it necessary to declare, that she is duly sensible of his Majesty's condescension in recommending an arrangement respecting her to the attention of Parliament. She is aware that this recommendation must be understood as referring to a provision for the support of her estate and dignity; and from what has lately passed, she is apprehensive that such a provision may be unaccompanied by the possession of her rights and privileges, in the ample measure wherein former Queens Consort, her royal predecessors, have been wont in times past to enjoy them.

"It is far from the Queen's inclination needlessly to throw obstacles in the way of a settlement which she desires in common with the whole country, and which she feels persuaded the best interests of all parties equally require; and being most anxious to avoid every thing that might create irritation, she cautiously abstains from any observation upon the unexampled predicament in which she is placed, but she feels it due to the House and to herself respectfully to declare, that she perseveres in the resolution of declining any arrangement, while her name continues to be excluded from the Liturgy. "Brandenburgh-house, Jan. 31. 1821."

Mr Western bitterly reproached ministers with at once declaring their belief of the Queen's guilt, and proposing such a provision for her. They should first turn their attention to the state of the country, and inquire into the expenditure, with a view to its reduction. What would the people of

the country say, when they learnt that a minister had dared to call the Queen of England an adulteress, and at the same moment had proposed to make a provision for her? After withdrawing the indictment, and abandoning the bill of Pains and Penalties, was it time to consider, whether the Queen was guilty or innocent? Under these impressions, he moved the previous question.

Lord Castlereagh conceived, there was not much notice due to the argument of the honourable gentleman, that the House should pay attention to nothing except the state of the country, and should make it preliminary to any provision for the Queen. He passed, therefore, to consider the intimation now given by her Majesty. He apprehended that her Majesty would have an opportunity of exercising her right to abstain from benefiting by the resolution of the House. No act of oppression was intended to be exercised by the Crown; her Majesty would be free to act, and would exercise her own discretion as to the acceptance of a grant, if the House should be disposed to vote one. Her Majesty had been travelling in unconstitutional paths, and the whole system of her conduct had been to erect a great power to dispute with the Crown the allegiance of its subjects. They had lately heard of her Majesty's subjects, and of the allegiance owing to herself.

Here violent cries of order were raised, and a discussion of some length ensued, in the course of which Mr Hume cried out, "It is necessary that the noble lord should state, whether he thinks what he says, or knows what he means."

Lord Castlereagh maintained, that he had been strictly in order, and undertook to prove it, by several quotations from the Queen's speeches and answers, particularly where she says,

"I shall be happy to do any thing for the good town of Canterbury, and to make MY PEOPLE happy." He then added, we shall see by what means it is contemplated by her Majesty to render her people happy. We shall see whether it is decided to be effected by a subversion of the Constitution of the country-whether it is by controlling the legislature, or by assailing the prerogatives of the Crown, or perhaps by effecting a reform in Parliament a reform in the largest sense. He came, as one of the ministers of the Crown, to call the attention of the House to his Majesty's most gracious message, and in particular to that part of it in which the establishment of a provision for the Queen was recommended. The question, therefore, was, whether the House would grant to the Crown the means of forming that provision? Prior to that grant from this House, her Majesty could not form any stipulations with it. When that grant was agreed to by this House, it would rest with her Majesty to refuse it. If the House stopped their proceedings to-day on this account, they might do it to-morrow for want of the introduction of the Queen's name into the Liturgy, and next day for want of her receiving a palace. He attributed not the manifold attempts now made to disturb the peace of the country to her Majesty in particular; but there was a desperate factionthere were wickedly inclined and desperate men, who would plunge this kingdom into anarchy; but their at tempts would be foiled. It was not the people who were to be feared as the disturbers of the state, but those desperate politicians who sought their own petty gains in the ruin of the existing state of things. While he lived -while he had means of repelling that attack upon the Constitution of the country-while he was party to the King's councils, never would he

suffer the constitutional authorities of the kingdom to be controlled in the exercise of their privileges-to be dictated to by any persons whatever. The present introduction of the state of the country, joined with the paltry motion made on a former evening, clearly shewed that the object of the gentlemen opposite was, by aggravating the distresses of the country, to make their way to power, (Calls to order.) Lord Castlereagh concluded by saying, that the present question was not respecting the guilt or innocence of the Queen, but the provision to be made for her.

Mr Tierney, in rising, applied himself particularly to repel the charge made by Lord Castlereagh against the motives of his party. He would not stoop to the meanness and little deception of saying that he was not ambitious. He had always held those persons cheap who affected to despise proper and honourable rewards, which the possession of office conferred on him whose talents were dedicated to the performance of its duties; and not less so, those who thought that the acceptance of office necessarily implied a violation of political integrity and connexions. For himself, he knew of no bond by which power could be gained-no connexion by which success could be ensured, but the union of the views and principles of those who were united to attain it. In this sense, perhaps, the opinion of the noble Lord might apply to him, and the other gentlemen on that side of the House. But if that noble lord meant to insinuate that power, and power only, was the object of himself (Mr Tierney) and his honourable friends around him, and that they would consent to accept power on the same terms as those on which his lordship held it, he threw back that imputation in the teeth of the noble lord, and could tell him that he would