moved, that Mr. Lushington have leave to report from the committee of the whole House, upon the Message of his royal highness the Prince respecting the provision for the widow and family of the late right hon. Spencer Perceval.

appeared at the bar with the Report. On the question for bringing it up,

rose, and observed, that after he had quitted the House the preceding evening, he understood an arrangement had been made, upon the subject of the provision for the family of the late Mr. Perceval, to which he could not give his consent. The two first Resolutions (three having been come to by the Committee) had passed without any objection, but the third, which he had the honour to propose, had been postponed for further consideration. Thus giving to that Resolution, which had met with the concurrence of a large majority of the House, a doubtful aspect. The operation of the postponement would have the effect of disparaging that Resolution, and if, in proposing it he had merely stood in the situation of an insulated individual, he should have considered himself bound to protect his motion, but he stood in a very different light; he was protected and supported in it by a majority of from six or seven to one in its favour. If the Report was now brought up, and any objection should be made to the third Resolution, he should feel the necessity for pressing the House to a division on its adoption or rejection.

had no objection to the Resolution, at least, he had been friendly for unanimity on the occasion, and he trusted the hon. gentleman would see how desirable it was. At present, as the House was waiting to go up with the Address, it might be as well if the Report was brought up, and then after the assembly of the House at five o'clock, on the return from Carlton House, should any difference of opinion arise, the Report might be discussed.—The Report was then brought up, and ordered to be taken into further consideration at five o'clock.

The Speaker then acquainted the House that the time was arrived for going up with the Address; accordingly, the House adjourned till five o'clock, and the right hon. gentleman, accompanied by lord Castlereagh and Mr. Ponsonby, (the mover and seconder) and the whole of the House, proceeded in their carriages to Carlton House.

Soon after five the gallery was re-opened, when the Speaker stated, that the House, in pursuance of its resolution, had waited upon the Prince Regent with the Address, to which his Royal Highness had been pleased to return the following most gracious Answer.

"Gentlemen,

"I receive with great satisfaction the assurances of your intention to enable me to make a suitable provision for the widow and family of the right hon. Spencer Perceval.

"The liberality and justice of parliament can never be more beneficially displayed, nor my own inclinations more gratified, than in marking, in the most distinguished manner, the sense which is entertained of eminent public and private virtues, most unfortunately snatched, by an act of peculiar atrocity, from the service of the country."

gave notice that he should to-morrow move an humble Address to his royal highness the Prince Regent, praying that he would be graciously pleased to give directions for erecting a Monument to the memory of the right hon. Spencer Perceval, in the cathedral church of St. Peter, at Westminster.

moved the further consideration of the Resolutions of the committee, for providing for the family of the late Mr. Perceval.

wished to make a few observations upon the subject. He had not had the honour of an intimate acquaintance with the late lamented right hon. gentleman whose family were the objects of the present motion, but for the public and private virtues of that distinguished man he entertained the highest admiration, although they had been so ably pourtrayed by gentlemen more capable than himself, that he could not add any thing to the tes- timony so justly bestowed. But it was impossible to recollect the tragedy of Monday without emotions which could not entirely subside—a tragedy which had awfully snatched away from the scene of life, a man so eminently qualified for his public station, and borne him to the silent grave. With respect to the grant—and for this he principally rose—he thought the House would not act up to the professions which they so unanimously evinced on Tuesday, if they did not make an ample and liberal provision for the eldest son of Mr. Perceval. He lamented that the noble lord, when he originally brought the provision under the consideration of the House, had not proposed to double the grant. If he had proposed 100,000l. instead of 50,000l. he was sure the House would have acceded to the proposition unanimously. Sure he was that the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Ponsonby) who seconded the motion, would have employed his eloquence in recommending the larger grant.

reminded the hon. gentleman, that his observations applied to the third Resolution, and the two first had not been dispoed of.

The first and second Resolutions were then read, and agreed to nem. con. On the third Resolution being read,

rose, and said, that unanimity was certainly a most desirable object on the present occasion: but if that benefit was to be departed from, it should be for the sake of a more effectual assistance than that proposed in the 3rd Resolution. It was there resolved that on the demise of Mrs. Perceval, the annuity should descend to the next male heir. It was impossible to conjecture when the event of Mrs. Perceval's demise might take place: it might not be till the eldest son was considerably advanced in life, and when perhaps he might not be in much need of assistance either from the circumstances of fortune, or from wealth derived from the exertions of his own talents and industry. This was not the situation in which the House would wish to place the eldest son of Mr. Perceval. Those who knew that youth, could bear witness that he succeeded not merely to his father's name, but also to his splendid talents. He was now prosecuting his studies at one of the universities; and when he left that seat of learning he might choose either to follow his father's profession, or, induced by an honourable ambition, wish to devote himself to public life. But he would ask, was the provision of 200l. sufficient to maintain him, with due attention to his rank in life, even in the pursuit of his studies? Would it enable him to preserve such a rank as would afford him a fair chance of success in the profession which he might choose? If he was properly and consistently maintained, it must be at the expence of Mrs. Perceval, or out of the funds appropriated for the rest of the family. But was it to be supposed that Mrs. Perceval could, without great inconvenience, afford such means of support to her son? If, then, unanimity was to be departed from, something effectual should be done. He understood that the son was now nearly of age, and he thought it would be proper to furnish him immediately with the means of pursuing his studies with effect, and subsequently his profession. He felt a difficulty in proposing any specific sum; perhaps the House would please to confer 1,000l. a year, but it ought to begin to accrue immediately, or at least from the time of the young man's coming of age. This provision he thought far more efficient and useful than that proposed by his hon. friend in the third Resolution. He wished however, that some other member would undertake to direct the feelings of the House into their proper course.

thought it necessary to call the attention of the House to the wording of the Resolution. It appeared to him to be the intention of the hon. gentleman who moved it, and of the House in agreeing to it, that this annuity should go to a son of Mr. Perceval. The Resolution, however, proposed to provide for "the male descendant of Mr. Perceval, being the heir at law." Now it might happen, that the legal heir to Mr. Perceval might be his grandson, and the son of a daughter; and he would therefore move that the following words be inserted, viz. "Such heir at law being the descendant of a son."

expressed himself warmly in praise of the private and public virtues of Mr. Perceval. Notwithstanding he had constantly opposed his political measures, yet he deplored his untimely loss as much es any man, and he would cordially give his vote for 2,000l. a year, to descend to his son.

proposed that the Resolution be recommitted, and therein to grant 1,000l. a year to the eldest son on his coming to the age of 21: without any prejudice to his reversionary right in the sum already voted by the House.

thought the arguments which the hon. gentleman (Mr. Huskisson) had used, might with equal propriety apply to the other sons. When he recollected this, and further, that the sums originally proposed had been proposed by ministers, and had received the approbation of the friends of Mr. Perceval's family, he was bound to support the original proposition.

declared that in his opinion the young man who was the representative of Mr. Perceval, ought to have every advantage which the country could give him. Yesterday evening he had voted for the Amendment of the noble lord, because he was desirous of preserving unanimity; but as the House had decided by a large majority, against that Amendment, he felt himself at liberty to give way to his feelings for the memory of his much lamented friend, and in testimony of the high regard in which he held his virtues and talents, he was ready to vote for any additional grant that might be proposed.

came down, determined not to oppose what so large a majority of the House had last night declared to be their opinion. He was nevertheless convinced of the danger of opening the door to any extended vote. He regretted that the personal character of Mr. Perceval's son had been introduced into the discussion, as it was wholly irrelevant to it, and those early praises of his talents might prove prejudicial to him in his future life. Two appeals had been made to the House—the one to their feelings, the other to their judgment. They had answered the first by expressing in words, as strong as the British language would afford, their detestation and abhorrence of the crime that had been committed, and their sense of the public and private virtues of the individual on whom it had been committed. When they came to the provision that was to be made for the family of that individual, their judgment was necessarily to be consulted. For his part, he thought it would be wise to postpone the consideration of the subject for a week, when the House would be more cool upon it. The necessity had been urged of making a handsome provision for Mrs. Perceval, and all the family; there were many differences of opinion as to what was a handsome provision. Under all the circumstances of the case, he did not see the necessity.—All that he thought the House bound to do, on the spar of the occasion, was, to vote something, to shew their sense of abhorrence of the late horrid transaction, without entering into any nice disquisition into what might be the cost of the education of Mr. Perceval's children. For the reason, however, which he had assigned at the commencement of his speech, he should refrain from voting on the present question.

observed, it would not be denied that the merits of Mr. Perceval were greater than those of any man who ever yet filled the same office. He had the singular merit of leaving his family, after five years of administration, poorer than they would have been had it been his fate to have been carried off before becoming minister of the country. Had he advised his sovereign to confer on his son the office of Teller of the Exchequer, which was lately conferred on another, it would have been an act perfectly justifiable, and which few persons in his situation would not have done. He would have done this, had he followed the conduct of lord Sidmouth on a similar occasion, which he did not mention for the purpose of censuring. Mr. Perceval was, in fact, the only minister of the country whose fortune had been ruined by his public services; and the question properly before the House was, whether a public functionary was to be ruined by having dedicated himself to the service of his country and his sovereign. Much had been said about unanimity. He considered that unanimity was not abandoned as to the principle of the vote. All were of opinion that the family of Mr. Perceval had a claim on the country, and the only difference which existed was as to the amount of what ought to be bestowed upon them. It would be very singular indeed, if the understanding of a minority of the House were to be binding on so great a majority as appeared from the vote of last night. He implored the House to do something to repair what was reparable in the unfortunate situation in which the family of Mr. Perceval were now placed. They could not give back a father to his children, but it was at least in their power to place those children in a situation above the reach of want.

lamented that an occasion for a discussion should have been introduced which made it necessary for him to take a part extremely painful to his feelings. The present was, he must say, a very unusual mode of proceeding. It was certainly very unusual to give an annual grant to one child during the life of a parent in possession of a similar grant, when a provision had been already given to the whole of the children. He thought the present was altogether an improper time for the discussion of this question. He thought that some time ought to have been allowed, previous to entering upon the consideration even of the first proposition; but what took that case out of the general rule, was the universal acquiescence of the House in its propriety. In his opinion no business whatever ought to be proceeded in for a week at least. In the course of a week he might satisfy himself, by conversation or otherwise, as to the propriety of acceding to or voting against this new proposition. He wished to have this time for the satisfaction of his own feelings. [A murmur of disapprobation from the opposite part of the House.] Surely he had as good a right to gratify his feelings as the hon. gentlemen had to gratify theirs. Could any gentleman state an instance when a proposition for a grant of public money was submitted to the House, at a time when there was no First Lord of the Treasury, or Chancellor of the Exchequer, consequently when the country was without an administration?—Was it proper in this House, to avail themselves of such an interval, to vote a large sum of the public money merely under the influence of feeling? What harm, he would ask, could possibly result from this delay? Could the hon. gentleman who made the proposition entertain a doubt that the merits of Mr. Perceval would survive one week in their recollections? There did appear to him something wrong in voting away the public money in the present situation of the House. He was aware, when he said this, that the finance minister's opinion was not an infallible rule to guide the opinion of the House: but it would be allowed that it always had been considered decorous to entertain no general business, much less to vote away the public money, in his absence. He should therefore move that the further consideration of this Resolution be postponed to that day se'nnight, and if, after the recess, he should find himself compelled to vote against it, it would be a satisfaction to his own mind that he had not done so without the maturest consideration.

opposed the postponement, saying, he could only consider the Resolution of to-night an extension of the original grant of the House; and the principle of the right hon. gentleman, therefore, in his opinion, applied equally to the original measure. Mr. Perceval had left his family in a worse situation than if he had never been the minister of the country. He thought the situation of the eldest son was more to be pitied than that of any other person of the family. Possessing, as the House were told he possessed, the most promising talents, was he to be precluded from entering that House, if he was so inclined, as an independent man? He had always in that House voted against Mr. Perceval, but he would not be doing justice to his own feelings, if he did not express his approbation of the Resolution now under discussion. This was the expression of his own feelings, and he was sure he was only expressing the universal feeling of the country, when he wished to see the son of Mr. Perceval placed in such a comparative state of independence as would enable him to tread in the steps of his father.

in explanation declared, that he would have objected to the original vote, if he had not found the House unanimously disposed in favour of it.

said, although he might on a division vote in favour of the postponement, he had not the smallest hope that any additional time would alter the adverse opinion which he now entertained of the Resolution under discussion. He could not help adverting to the allusion which had been made to what had been called an understanding among some members of the House, and made in such a way as to insinuate that something like an improper interference had been used by those members. He owned a communication had been made to him by a noble lord opposite, of what was intended to propose to the House, for the family of Mr. Perceval, but this could not be considered in the light of any arrangement on the subject. He believed he would have credit with his political adversaries, when he said, that it was with great pain he entered into the present discussion. He felt, what he believed was strongly felt by all, an abhorrence of the late atrocious and disgraceful deed, and he thought it was the duty of the House to manifest their sentiments on such an occasion, by making such a provision for the family of Mr. Perceval, as had been originally submitted to the House.—But when it was proposed to go beyond this, he could consider it in no other light than as a reward for political services; and he should be a traitor to his country, and be declaring loudly that the opposition which he had always maintained to the measures of the present administration, was nothing more than mere empty profession, if he did not loudly protest against such a reward. Without wishing to say any thing unpleasant, he would ask, if it was not reward, what was it? What was the career of Mr. Perceval? His career was altogether of his own selection. He obtained a seat in that House by honourable means; but if he took a seat in the House and afterwards accepted of the situation of prime minister, it was altogether his own selection. He might have accepted it, or have refused it he could not be compelled to quit the bar. They had heard a great deal said respecting the lucrative situation which Mr. Perceval quitted. His information on that subject was somewhat different. He had been told that lucrative judicial situations had been offered to Mr. Perceval, and that he chose rather to retain the situations which he held at his death. He thought the mention which had been made that night of the abilities of the eldest son of Mr. Perceval, of which the House could know nothing but from report; and the intention of making him independent at the age of 21, were only calculated to injure the young man. If this was not a reward for political services, he was entitled to enquire into the situation of the family. He was told that Mrs. Perceval possessed an income of 2,000l. per annum independent of the grant of parliament; so that the interest of the provision of 50,000l. with this private fortune, and the annual grant of 2,000l. would constitute an income of 6,500l. for the purpose of maintaining and educating this family. Would any country gentleman, with such an income, consider it inadequate to educate his family to any profession or situation in life whatever? He understood the House was to be called upon to-morrow to vote a monument for Mr. Perceval. These things grew upon them very fast. He would conclude with solemnly protesting against the additional grant.

said, that it was impossible for any one not to be convinced, that the hon. gentleman who spoke last wed on this occasion entirely from his sense of public duty, and with great pain to his private feelings. It was too late, now to set about regretting the cause which yesterday prevented the House from being unanimous. The fact was that the unanimity which had been so much wished for, was broken, and new propositions made on which unanimity was not to be expected. He was surprised, however, that the hon. gentleman should have conceived, that the agreeing to the Resolution would imply an approbation of the political conduct of Mr. Perceval. Every one was agreed that he possessed eminent public virtues, and that his private virtues and amiable qualities endeared him to the hearts of all who knew him. It was universally known that from a sense of duty he had left a lucrative profession, in which there could be no doubt of his being able to provide for his family, and that by devoting himself to the public service he died, leaving his family unprovided for. Good God! was it possible that the House should not take into its consideration the manner of his death? A right hon. gentleman (Mr. Tierney) had reproached the proceedings which had been already taken, as singular and unprecedented: but surely this was no common occasion, and need not be governed by common rules. It was impossible for the House to repair the loss that the family of Mr. Perceval had sustained, but he thought that it was their duty to take care that the loss should be as little heavy as it could possibly be made to every individual of the family.

could not agree with the argument of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Tierney,) who thought it was wrong, because it was unprecedented, to grant a sum of money without the presence of a Chancellor of the Exchequer in that House. The case was certainly unprecedented altogether, and he thanked God that there was no precedent of such a case. He could not, however, see any difference in the principle, between voting a sum of public money in the absence of a Chancellor of the Exchequer, and voting a sum in the presence of that minister directly contrary to his advice and opinion, as the right hon. gentleman himself had done in the case of Mr. Palmer. He did not agree with the gentlemen on the other side, either, that more time was required for the consideration of the subject, or that it was a question which should be entirely divested of every consideration of feeling. He thought that the unanimous feeling of the House was contained in their first Resolution, "that they would make a hand- some and liberal provision for the family of Mr. Perceval;" but he did not think that they would be carrying that Resolution into effect, if they did not make some provision for Mr. Perceval's eldest son. He allowed that he had worded his Resolution in rather an incorrect manner, for which he must apologize by assuring the House, that he had not intended to have spoken yesterday, but had thought that the proposition would have been brought forward by some person of more weight than himself. As he now found that some gentlemen went farther than his proposition for the benefit of Mr. Perceval's eldest son, he would willingly agree to any amendment for carrying it farther; but could not recede from that proposition which had been yesterday carried by so large a majority. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Whitbread) had said, that Mr. Perceval had left his profession voluntarily. Certainly it was so, for no man could be absolutely compelled to embark in public life; but from a sense of public duty, Mr. Perceval had sacrificed a profession in which his talents and Virtues would necessarily have raised him to the highest offices.

thought, that he should be doing great injustice to the hon. gentleman (Mr. Whitbread) not to say, that no man had displayed a more warm or generous feeling than he had on the present occasion. He however thought, that, in resisting the vote proposed, the honourable gentleman had given the House an incorrect picture of the actual circumstances under which Mr. Perceval gave up his profession for the public service. As he happened to be perfectly well acquainted with those circumstances, he felt it his duty to declare to the House, that Mr. Perceval made the sacrifice with great regret, and that he did so with a strong impression that he was hardly justified, from what he owed to his family, in making the sacrifice. He acted upon the particular call of his sovereign, which, under the peculiar circumstances of the case, appeared mandatory to a loyal mind. It was well known, however, that the sovereign would not have required any man to sacrifice his profession, or the means of providing for his family, if he had not conceived that it was in his power to give a compensation for the sacrifice required. His Majesty had, therefore, at the time of calling Mr. Perceval to his service, intended to grant him an office (the duchy of Lancaster) for life, as some compensation for the sacrifice to be made in the surrender of his profession. On the House chewing some disapprobation of this grant for life, Mr. Perceval immediately waved that grant, out of which he might have looked for the provision of his family. He must allow that the calamity which had taken place would have made a place for life of no more value to him than one for a shorter time, but still the credit must be given to him of resigning a valuable grant which had been the principal inducement to make him consent to abandon his profession. It must also be recollected that he had many opportunities of providing for his family, by recommending them to places, which he had not availed himself of. He could not agree either with the honourable gentleman, (Mr. Whitbread) in the view he had taken of the value of the sacrifice Mr. Perceval had made in quitting his profession. He was sure that his right honourable friend left it with a very high professional character, which, with the talents he undoubtedly possessed, could not have failed of raising him to such an eminence in his profession, as would have given him abundant means of providing for his family. He believed, that at that time he was not only rising rapidly in his profession, but that he actually enjoyed a very liberal income from it. Now, as to the Resolutions which had been already agreed to, he was authorized on the part of Mr. Perceval's family to say, that they entertained a very grateful sense of the liberality of parliament towards them, and that they were quite satisfied with what was done. It would not be right in them, however, to set up their own judgment against the sense of parliament, if the House thought that a larger provision was more proper; but they wished to express their grateful sense of the liberality of the House in what was already done for them. He still continued of opinion, that what was originally proposed was a fit proposition, considering both the circumstances of the family and of the public. He, therefore, did not feel justified in voting to extend the grant; and yet, as he did not know how to oppose any proposition for the relief of this family, he should not vote upon the present occasion. If, however, it should be the deliberate opinion of the House as well as the committee, that the grant ought to be extended, he should support the Bill that would be brought in pursuant to those resolutions. He could see, however, no advantage in the postponement which had been moved by a right hon. gentleman.

, having had no opportunity of addressing the House on this interesting subject hitherto, hoped for their indulgence for a few moments. He could not coincide in the objection made by a right hon. gentleman, (Mr. Tierney) to the grant on the ground of want of form, for he was not aware that there was any rule of the House requiring that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should make the proposition. It had been regularly introduced to the House by a message from the throne brought by a minister of the crown. He could not help thinking also, that the arguments used against the Resolution from an extreme desire of unanimity might be dispensed with, when it was recollected that five-sixths of the House concurred in it, to whom it was more decorous that the remainder should concede, if they wished for unanimity as much as they professed.— He would mention a circumstance deeply calculated to impress the feelings of the House. He was present at that moment of agony and sorrow when lord Arden came into the room where the remains of his beloved brother lay; and laying his hand upon his body, exclaimed, in accents too affecting to be forgotten, "He is gone to that happiness which he merited, but his children his dear children, what will become of them!" An hon. gentleman who was present, with great feeling and readiness said, "My lord, be comforted, they are the children of his country." He trusted that that declaration would be verified, and that the liberality of parliament would protect them in a manner adequate to the occasion.

declared, that he did not wish to appeal to the passions or the feelings of members, but to their deliberate judgment. He could not but think that some distinction ought to be made between the eldest son bearing the name of Spencer Perceval, and the younger children. There was this distinction in point of fact, that the eldest son was just of an age to be sent to the University, in order to receive that liberal education which his father always intended for him. Now, if no other provision were to be made for him, he would ask, how would it be possible for him upon 200l. a year to associate in the University with persons of his own rank in life, or to enter a liberal profession? The younger sons might learn to accommodate their views and prospects to their situations; but if the eldest son, who was just on the point of entering the University, was now reduced to a provision of 200l. per annum, it would be he, in fact, that, of all Mr. Perceval's family, would suffer much the greatest loss. It must be recollected, with what prospects he would have entered the University, had his father lived. It was supposed that he had gone out of his way to praise the promising talents of this youth. He only stated a hope that he might one day shew himself the heir to the talents and virtues of his father; and he would also add to this wish, that he might display those talents and virtues in that House. It would be a natural ambition for the son of such a father, to sit in parliament, and embark in public life. If that should be his wish, he hoped the House would give him the means of coming forward as an independent man.

, rose amidst loud cries of question, and said that he supplicated some decent regard to order, if not for his sake, at least for the gravity due to the subject. He then adverted to the arguments against the proposed grant, on the ground of justice, divested of every feeling connected with the peculiar nature of the case. For his part, he thought they were doing nothing but a cold blooded act of justice, and he would give his vote for this grant as if he were a juror sworn to assess the damages due to this respected family. If they looked at the matter with a view to analogy, they would find that a right hon. gentleman (Mr. Ponsonby) who held the seals in Ireland for four or five months, was remunerated with 4,000l. a year he did not mention this with disapprobation, quite the contrary; but on this principle, he thought it just that the children of a man who lost his life in the service of his country should be taken care of. For himself, he declared that if this vote implied a general approbation of the political conduct of Mr. Perceval, he should protest against it. From that right hon. gentleman, during his life time, he had often differed, and indeed, he did not believe he ever had the honour of pulling his hat off twice to him in his life; but, the present question he conceived to be one which implied the performance of merely an act of duty.

proceeded to put the question on Mr. Huskisson's amendment for the recommittal of the Resolution, when

observed, that if the House concurred in the amendment, his Resolution would be lost.

agreed in the correctness of the hon. gentleman's observation, and said, that the only way to settle it would be to put the question as it now stood, and then the question of postponement, after which the question on the recommittal would come to be decided.

observed, that he would not fatigue the House by dividing on the recommittal of the Resolution, but reserve his opposition to the last stage.

The first question was then put, "That this House agree with the committee in the Resolution;" which was negatived without a division.

Mr. Tierney's amendment for the postponement of the consideration of the Resolution for a week, was then negatived; after which Mr. Huskisson's motion, for the recommittal of the Resolution to a committee of the whole House, was carried, and it was finally determined that it should be re-committed to-morrow.