the moment he took the chair, addressed the House as follows:—I have to acquaint the House that I last night received a letter from lord Cochrane, dated from the King's Bench prison, asserting his innocence upon certain matters of which he had lately been convicted in the court of King's-bench, and desiring that timely notice, and a full opportunity of attending in his place, might be given to him, upon any question which might be brought forward respecting his conduct. I have thought it my duty to return for answer, that according to the usage of parliament, timely notice, and a full opportunity of attending, will be given to any member of this House before any motion will be entertained in which he is immediately interested.

seeing a right hon. and learned friend of his in his place, wished to ask him if he had received any information of the case of a soldier, the servant of the surgeon of a regiment, who, for some personal insult to his master, was sentenced by a court martial to receive 300 lashes, but who, having received a hundred and odd, was in such a state, that (the remainder being suspended) he lay for two hours on the ground, in a state of suffering and insensibility? If his right hon. and learned friend had heard of this circumstance, he wished to know what steps he meant to take with respect to it.

replied, that the circumstance was perfectly new to him, this being the first moment that he had heard of it. Nor would his hon. friend and the House be surprized at this, when they knew that the individual in question must have been tried by a regimental court martial, the returns of which were not sent to his office, unless when any complaint of the proceedings happened to be preferred.

trusted, that his right hon. and learned friend would cause enquiry to be made into the circumstances of the case.

said, that if his hon. friend would furnish him with the name of the party, he certainly would do so.

rose to make his promised motion, and spoke nearly as follows:

Sir; although I deeply regret being under the necessity once more of addressing you on a subject so painful and distressing as the present situation of her royal highness the Princess of Wales, I feel it my duty to persevere in the object which I have in view; intending, however, in deference to the opinion of the House, as pretty distinctly expressed in the recent discussion on this subject, not to retrace the steps which I took on that occasion, but to confine myself to the consideration of her Royal Highness's income, and for that purpose alone shall I call the attention of the House to the Correspondence of her Royal Highness with her Majesty and his royal highness the Prince Regent, as the only parliamentary document on which the proceeding, which I mean to propose, can be founded. Sir, in the same spirit of deference to the opinion of the House, (an opinion which, I trust, I shall never under any circumstances be so presumptuous as to undervalue or disregard,) which induces me to abstain from other matter, I shall endeavour to give a direction to that generous sentiment—the expression of which on the late occasion, was so universal and so loud within these walls—that something ought to be done to ameliorate the condition of her Royal Highness. Sir, I do most deeply regret, and I am indeed astonished, that no step has been taken—that no communication has been made to this House, in consequence of the memorable discussion to which I have alluded. I sincerely lament it; for much rather would I see the hand of government liberally and spontaneously stretched forth on such an occasion, than that an act of bare justice should be wrung from it, by the voice of the parliament and the country. But, since the temperate advice given to his Majesty's ministers by a right hon. gentleman opposite, since the unequivocal expression of the sense of the House, since the delay that has occurred, have been unproductive of any desirable event, if in the agitation of the subject unpleasant feelings should be excited, either in this House or out of it, let the blame rest with those who, having the means in their power of stifling further discussion, by giving his royal highness the Prince Regent temperate and constitutional advice, and by telling him the real sense of the parliament and the people, either neglected to avail themselves of those means, or despised the object for the attainment of which they might have used them. There is no man who deprecates the necessity of such discussions as the present more than myself; but while that necessity exists, I cannot avoid continuing to call the attention of the House to the subject. No man laments more than myself, that any thing in the shape of dissatisfaction should cloud the brilliance of the present moment. But is it to be expected that, because others are basking in the sunshine of happiness, her royal highness the Princess of Wales is to be content in the cold shade of obscurity and neglect? Is the hour of the triumph that she is not permitted to partake that in which she is likely to forget the unjust degradation that she is enduring? What must the illustrious foreigners, so lately among us, have thought of British generosity, when they heard the disgraceful fact, that the allowance to her Royal Highness was so parsimonious that she was unable to give them a welcome, or to appear before them in a way becoming her exalted situation? Is such a circumstance consonant to the character of a feeling, of a liberal, of a high-minded nation? Sir, I assert on the best authority, although I am almost ashamed to assert it, not only that her Royal Highness is unable to maintain the dignity of her station, but that she is even without those comforts with which her habits have hitherto familiarized her. Let us forget, Sir, that this illustrious personage is a princess. Let us consider the subject only as fathers or brothers. Let us contemplate our daughters or our sisters so branded, so degraded. Let us ask our consciences if an innocent woman, thus deserted, has no claim on our defence and support?—Sir, when the Princess of Wales married, she had an allowance of 17,000l. a year from his royal highness the Prince of Wales, besides 5,000l. a year which she received from the Exchequer. In 1800 his Royal Highness sent her a message informing her, that in consequence of his own embarrassments he could allow her only 12,000l. a year. In 1809 his Royal Highness undertook to pay her Royal Highness's debts, amounting to 49,000l.; and to restore her annual allowance to its original sum of 17,000l. For nine years, therefore, her Royal Highness had 5,000l. a year less than when she resided at Carlton House, and had no separate establishment to maintain. The consequence was obvious. Her Royal Highness's income was so inadequate to her expenditure, that in July last she was under the necessity of reducing her establishment to seven domestics, and of almost entirely giving up seeing company. To this and other reductions; and to the generous and disinterested conduct of Mr. St Leger, who had insisted on relinquishing his salary, and who, as well as ladies Carnarvon and Glenbervie, was now without any salary whatever, were owing, the happy circumstance that at the present moment her Royal Highness did not owe a single shilling. But is this a situation in which the future queen of this country ought to be left? Ought she to depend for her freedom from actual pecuniary embarrassment, on the generosity, however magnanimous, of her houshold? The proposition which it is my intention to make on this subject is by no means unprecedented. In the case of the princess Anne, in 1690, a grant was made by this House, not only without a message from the crown, but in direct opposition to the wishes of the crown. It is impossible, Sir, that the House can refuse to interfere. The only income which her Royal Highness possesses, independently of his royal highness the Prince Regent's pleasure, is 5,000l. a year, a sum utterly insufficient to the maintenance of the dignity of her station. I cannot, therefore, but anticipate a favourable result to my motion. It is not a party question. It is a question of common justice to an individual, and that individual a female of the most exalted rank. But whatever may be the issue, I shall have the satisfaction of knowing that this is a duty which I have conscientiously undertaken. Had I heard the slightest hint of any intended arrangement or melioration of her Royal Highness's situation, I would have refrained from any agitation of the subject; but not having received any intimation of the kind, I had no alternative. If in the course of my observations I have alluded in strong terms to her Royal Highness's situation, those terms have been forced from me by the strong conviction which I entertain of the unmerited hardships to which her Royal Highness has for a length of time been subjected. I cannot conclude, Sir, without assuring the noble lord how mortified I am, immediately of his return to this place, and after the warm reception which he has so deservedly experienced from the House and from the country, to require his attention to a question, the consideration of which, I have no doubt, must be as painful to him as it is to the nation at large. Sir, I move, "That this House will, on Tuesday next, take into consideration the Correspondence communicated to the Speaker, on Friday, June 3, by her royal highness the Princess of Wales."

replied to the following effect:

Sir; I am much obliged to the hon. gentleman for the kind manner in which he has expressed himself with respect to me; and I feel very happy at the nature of the proposition which the hon: gentleman has brought forward, however inconsistent it may be with his original line of proceeding. Perhaps, if the course which the hon. gentleman has this evening taken, had been earlier adopted, many discussions on this subject would have been very desirably avoided. But certainly this is the first time that we have been told in parliament, that an extended provision for her royal highness the Princess of Wales, is the object which her Royal Highness's friends have in view, and which they think calculated to set for ever at rest a question, which it had been much better for the honour and happiness of the country had never been agitated. But, Sir, although I am disposed to confine myself as closely as possible to the question to which the hon. member has also limited himself, I will depart from that dry consideration as far as will be necessary to distinguish those topics, which have unfortunately been brought forward in this House—unfortunately, because the only tendency they can have, is to disturb the tranquillity of the public mind, and by no means to effect any advantage for the illustrious individual to whom they immediately relate. Sir, I had almost resolved that I would not be provoked by any question that might be raised, to become a party to a discussion on the affairs of the royal family, to the regulation of which, the functions of parliament are not competent to apply remedy. I should deeply deplore the situation in which parliament would be placed, if we were obliged to listen to questions with respect to the royal family, the discussion of which, if they related to the humblest individuals in the land, would be considered a gross breach of delicacy and propriety, If there be any thing which could deprive the, royal family of all those social enjoyments so dear to human nature in every rank and condition, it would be the dragging forth into public view, under the pretext of the public interest, all the interior circumstances of their lives, the exposition of which would not he tolerated by any private family in the country. Sir, I know that it has been, attempted to justify some recent attempts of this nature, on the ground that his Majesty's ministers have neglected to advise his royal highness the Prince Regent to make a communication to the House on the subject to which I allude. But, Sir, whatever information her royal highness the Princess of Wales—whatever information the world may have obtained through indirect channels on that subject—whatever confidential communications may have been made to foreign powers with respect to it, yet, never could any notice of such a transaction be given to parliament, until in its progress it had assumed such a shape as would allow of its reduction to a formal document. Sir, I am particularly anxious to remove an impression which has been endeavoured to be made by an attempt to confound two transactions which are in fact wholly separate. It has been insinuated, that the difficulties in the way of a marriage deeply interesting, not less to the people at large than to the illustrious individuals more immediately concerned, are connected with supposed difficulties, arising out of the exclusion of her royal highness the Princess of Wales from the court; now this assertion is completely rebutted, by the fact that the negociation for the marriage was in active progress long after that exclusion. It was in active progress so late as the 10th of June, not only after the declaration of exclusion, but after the drawing-room had been held, from which her Royal Highness was excluded, and after the discussions in the House upon the subject. All this is sufficient completely to disprove the supposition, that between the circumstances which I have mentioned, there exists any connection whatever. When the hon. gentleman gave his notice of the present motion, I had no ground for supposing that his object was that which my mind is very much relieved by finding it is. I had no ground for supposing that an increase of her royal highness the Princess of Wales's pecuniary means was the point he had in view. Sir, whatever difficulty I might have felt on any other ground upon which the discussion of this evening might have rested, I have none upon this; for I have no reason to suppose that at the present, more than at any preceding moment, it is the wish of his royal highness the Prince Regent to connect the feelings which arose out of his separation from her royal highness the Princess of Wales, with any disposition to create or to suffer the existence of embarrassments on her part of a pecuniary nature, which can with propriety be removed. It was not, therefore, to this part of the subject that I supposed the hon. gentleman would apply himself. I had apprehended that he would refer to the letter of her Royal Highness, with a view to found upon it some claim of right, as asserted in the letter itself; for really as to any addition to her Royal Highness's income, the consideration of the letter is calculated to lead the attention of the House from, rather than to that circumstance. It is as little mentioned in the letter as it was (as I am given to understand) in the speech of the hon. gentleman on a recent occasion, and in the speeches of the other hon. gentlemen who took a part in that discussion, with the exception of the hon. gentleman near the pillar (Mr. Tierney). I certainly did suppose, therefore, that the debate of the present evening would have taken any range rather than that to which I have had the satisfaction to find it is the hon. gentleman's object exclusively to confine it. I certainly did expect to hear asserted to-night the claim of her Royal Highness, as advanced in her letter, to be received at the drawing-room, as a matter of right. Sir, if his Majesty's ministers do that which it is their duty not to do, or if they omit to do that which it is their duty to do, there is a power in this House to correct them. From the controul of parliament there is no appeal but to the discretion of parliament. Without going into any minute constitutional inquiries, the fact is, that the moment we cease to possess the confidence of parliament, that moment our functions are at an end. But, Sir, it distinctly appears to me, that parliament and his Majesty's ministers will best do their duty to that country which we are all anxious to serve, by keeping within those limits which the constitution prescribes. The legitimate authority of parliament will never be so respected or respectable, as while we abstain from attempting to do that which never can be practically executed without our having first fallen into an utter misconception of our duty. Any endeavour to regulate the sovereign's court—to declare who shall or who shall not be there admitted, is of that description. Any thing so preposterous as to talk of her Royal Highness's "right" to be admitted to her Majesty's drawing-room, I should hardly have expected to find in any letter from her Royal Highness, and still less in a letter of so grave a nature, as that included in the Correspondence to which the motion of the hon. gentleman refers. Her Majesty's drawing-room is certainly the place in which we pay our duty to her Majesty; but nevertheless, it is the court of the Sovereign. It is called by the King's officers, and not by those of the Queen, who merely attend at her Majesty's right hand for the purpose of introducing the visitor. Parliament has nothing to do with the Sovereign's court. They are not the fit judges who ought to be received at that court, and who ought not—who should be treated with kindness, and who with indifference. It is not essential to the Sovereign that he should have a court at all. If the Sovereign were compelled to receive or to deny those whom his ministers or parliament chose that he should so receive or deny, his situation would indeed be most degradingly miserable and abject. He would not enjoy that freedom in his court, to which the meanest individual in the land was entitled in his own habitation. In his court, as in his family, the Sovereign is unquestionably the fit master of his own regulations, and has the undoubted right to receive whom, and when, and how he pleases.

Sir, I know that attempts have been made to connect the motives which have operated on the mind of the illustrious person now exercising the sovereign authority in this country, in the late transaction, with the supposed revulsion of feeling which he experienced at the time that his royal Father directed that her royal highness the Princess of Wales should be received at Court. I deny that there is any proof direct, or by inference, of such a connection. Whatever may have been the feelings of his Royal Highness which occasioned the separation of the royal pair (and I am sure no man more deeply laments that separation than myself), the fact is, that he had met her Royal Highness in the drawing room long after the event to which I have alluded. But, Sir, no one who has observed any thing of the course of public events since that period, can remain unconvinced that, either by design or by misconduct, circumstances have assumed a very different complexion from that which they then bore. Her Royal Highness has been made the vehicle of direct insult on the character and conduct of his royal highness the Prince Regent, exercising the sovereignty of the country. It is impossible to dis- guise the fact, that persons have been permitted to approach her Royal Highness who have been detected in a cabal through the medium of the press, for the purpose of degrading the royal family in general, and more particularly of vilifying the illustrious individual at the head of the state, and of attempting to debase him in the eyes of his family, of his country, and even of his children.

It never could be maintained as a principle, continued the noble lord, that a person ought to be admitted to court who had not sufficient firmness to prevent her. self from being made the vehicle of the most illiberal attacks against the sovereign of the country. It must not, by any means, be supposed that the exclusion of the Princess of Wales from court rests now on the same grounds as it did on a former occasion, when his Majesty was pleased to admit her again to court, after the investigation of a subject of a very different nature. His Majesty's ministers were disposed to rest the case on the ground of the facts which really existed. Every man in the House and in the country must feel undisguised the misfortune which I am compelled to admit, that from causes which cannot now be explained, and which the House are but little likely to understand in their bearings, or to be able to heal—in point of fact the separation is as complete and final, and as hopeless, with respect to remedy, as any transaction in human society can be supposed to be. I cannot, therefore, suppose that the difference will at any future period assume a different result; but I think it will administer some light to the House on the present occasion, without looking minutely into the transaction, and without endeavouring to come to an understanding of it in all its bearings, to learn the fact, that the view which I now take of this unfortunate variance, is that which was taken by his Majesty. His Majesty considered it so hopeless a matter ever to bring the parties together with any thing like satisfaction to their own feelings, that he viewed it in the light of a misfortune which had arrived to such a degree of height, that it was in vain to think, by any discussion, to put an end to it, and the only thing that remained to be done was to see how the matter could be managed in the way least painful to the parties who were the object of it. Without being considered as very forward in laying before the House information with respect to a transaction of so painful a nature, I trust I shall be excused for stating to them, that there is in existence a solemn instrument, signed by the parties, approved of by his Majesty, and to which the signature of his Majesty is adhibited, as well as that of the greatest part of the ministers of that day. This instrument provides for a distinct establishment to the Princess of Wales, and admits the fact of the separation being inevitable—[Here the noble lord was asked across the table the date of this instrument? He answered 1809.]—The King knowing all the circumstances of this disagreement, and as the head of his family, and from his moral character, being the person best qualified to form a judgment respecting it, considered the separation as so complete, that he lent his sanction, as sovereign and father, to the separation. The Princess of Wales accepted the arrangement which was then made satisfactory to herself, and undertook to live on the income which was allowed her without incurring any further debts. Without meaning to contend that what was a satisfactory sum at that period was one which ought not to be unsatisfactory now, or without going so far as to say, that if the House is inclined to think that a more liberal allowance ought now to be made to the Princess of Wales, a new arrangement should not be entered into, I trust, before I conclude, I shall have established this fact, that whatever may be the feelings of the Prince of Wales, as to the circumstance of living with her, he never wished to visit on her the consequences of the disagreement in a pecuniary shape. In 1809, when the feelings of his Royal Highness must be supposed to have been warmest on this subject, he came forward himself to pay her debts, and those debts were paid out of his own income. There never was, I am fully convinced, a feeling in his Royal Highness's mind, that any thing like money ought to be a question between them. At the period of 1809 (for, as was stated by the hon. gentleman in consequence of the reduction of the Prince of Wales's income, that of the Princess of Wales had been reduced to 12,000l.]. which with 5,000l.]. she received out of the Exchequer, made in all 17,000l.) he found her in debt, and that the income which she received had not been sufficient to keep her out of debt. At that time his Royal Highness said, rather than this should be thrown on the public, he was ready to take on himself the payment of her debts, and to add 5,000l. to her income, making it in all 22,000l. provided that he had any reasonable assurance, that no debt contracted by her should in future be brought forward against his Royal Highness. Rather than bring this subject before parliament, he consented to pay her debts, and to grant an addition to her income to secure her from the necessity of contracting debts in future. I trust the House will feel the delicacy with which the Prince of Wales acted in thus withholding from parliament and the public the discussion of this subject. At this time there was a solemn deed prepared, assuming the separation of the parties, which gave his Royal Highness the security of his Majesty and his Majesty's ministers, that he should be freed from future debts on making the proposed addition to the income of the Princess of Wales. This addition was then accepted as sufficient. At the time I allude to, the Prince of Wales had an income of 120,000l. which, after deducting the property tax, amounted to 108,000l. From the high and delicate regard of his Royal Highness to the interests of his creditors, although many of his debts were contracted at a period of life which rendered them extremely questionable, he devoted the sum of 40,000l. annually towards the payment of his debts. After deducting the property tax, and the sum set apart for the payment of his debts, the revenue of the Prince of Wales amounted to 70,000l.; but even before the addition to which 1 have alluded, 12,000l.]. out of that 70,000l. was paid to the Princess of Wales, so that the 5,000l. additional allowed in 1809, with that 12,000l. made in all a deduction of 17,000l. from the income of the Prince of Wales, reducing it to 53,000l. The debts of the Princess of Wales amounted to 49,000l. (they amounted in reality to 80,000l. but they had been reduced to the former sum in consequence of a grant from the droits of Admiralty); and the Prince took that debt on himself, and undertook farther to set apart 10,000l. a year to liquidate that debt, reducing himself to the sum of 43,000l. of income, as Prince of Wales; and this, with 13,000l. which he derived from the duchy of Cornwall, was the whole sum on which he was reduced to live. I have no doubt that the House will agree with me in thinking that he made a very large provision for the Princess of Wales, when his own income was merely 53,000l. in allowing her 27,000l. a year. However the House may feel with respect to the adequacy of this income at the present period, whether she is now liberally provided for or not, I question if ever there was a husband who made greater sacrifices for the comfortable establishment of his wife than the Prince of Wales then did. However the conduct of his Royal Highness may be tortured, and whatever unfavourable constructions may be put on it, I defy any person to say that he ever betrayed any thing of a vindictive nature towards her, or the smallest wish to interfere with her social comforts. On the contrary, he made sacrifices which no other husband in the land, had he been brought before parliament, would have been called on to make. So far from the existence of the colour of mind which has been falsely attributed to his Royal Highness, if he could have possibly increased her income without being supposed to be truckling with the base attacks which were continually made on him, he would not have waited for the suggestion of his ministers, had she disentangled herself from the base cabal by whom she was surrounded. With the greatest satisfaction he would have entered into the feeling of her wants himself—and not have suffered his family to be dragged, as it has been, before the public. His Royal Highness has not made the addition hitherto, and the House will see why he did not. He was not disposed to perform an act of indulgence, till he had performed an act of justice; or to give that to the Princess of Wales which her creditors had a title to enjoy. Till the month of January in this present year, the 10,000l. annually has been applied in extinguishing the 49,000l.; and his Royal Highness considered that her creditors had a claim on him for that sum. I have not seen, till the present day, any moment when his Royal Highness could, with propriety, lend himself to any object of a pecuniary nature, which the Princess of Wales might have had in view—and when that object was masked and covered by attacks against the Prince Regent. And in my opinion his Royal Highness's ministers would have disgraced him, had they advised him to listen to any question of a money nature when his honour was attacked. It was our duty to brave all these attacks; but in a country like Great Britain—a country of truth and justice—we felt that a moment must come when the truth would be apparent—when justice would be done to the sentiments of his Royal Highness— and when we might with propriety call on the parties to say, if money was their object, whether it had ever been refused and when we might assert, that there never was a feeling in his Royal Highness's mind, to make the Crown an instrument for placing the Princess of Wales in an uncomfortable and embarrassed situation.

Sir, it is with the greatest struggle of mind that I have been able to bring myself to trespass so long on the attention of the House. But if there is any regard in the House for the family which brought liberty with it into this country, and preserved it amidst all the struggles which have rent and torn so many other parts of the world, they will not lend themselves to an attempt to degrade that family in the eyes of the nation, and suffer their names to be bandied about, in a way which would not be tolerated in the case of the meanest family in the country. With respect to the hon. member's suggestion, I have no objection to meet any proposal which may be hereafter made on the part of the Princess of Wales; but I must object to the present motion, as being so little calculated to lead to the object which the hon. member professes to have in view, because I am satisfied that nothing advantageous could grow out of it, and that, on the contrary, it would be the means of introducing those circumstances of degradation which we all lament should ever have been brought before the House or the country. It is impossible, therefore, that on the part of the crown I should ever give my consent to a proposition so little expected as that of the hon. gentleman, and so little agreeing with the shape which he now gave to the question. But if it is the feeling of parliament, that the establishment of the Princess of Wales should be placed on a footing more agreeable to her feelings, and suitable to her rank, and if this question shall be separated from those circumstances under which it has hitherto been veiled, I have no hesitation in saying, that I shall, on a future day, be enabled to give that consent which is necessary on the part of the crown to give effect to the wishes of the House. In doing this, the House will, I have no doubt, feel, that they are doing little more than his Royal Highness has already done out of his limited means, when the feelings of reluctance towards the Princess of Wales must have been in full force, and that if the arrangement, which may be hereafter given, has not taken place earlier, it is merely because those who conceived themselves, or pretended to be, the friends of the Princess of Wales, advised her to claim that arrangement on grounds which were not tenable, or because they had other objects in view; and that it is only now, when they were pleased to be more candid, after doing irreparable mischief, by unnecessarily agitating the feelings of his Royal Highness and the country, that such a proposal could with any propriety be listened to. On these grounds, I must resist the present motion, hut, as I have already stated, I shall, on a future day, be authorized to give the consent of the crown, to such reasonable addition to the income of the Princess of Wales, as shall seem to meet the sense of parliament.

said, it had not been his intention, in moving for a grant of money for the separate establishment of the Princess of Wales, in a manner suitable to her dignity, to give up the claim of her Royal Highness to appear in the drawing room. He was glad, however, to hear from the noble lord, that it was his intention to agree to this grant to her Royal Highness; and with a view to the furtherance of that object, he would consent to withdraw his motion.

rose and said:

Before I can give my consent to the motion of the hon. member being withdrawn, I feel it incumbent on me to take sumo notice of several things which have fallen from the noble lord opposite. The noble lord has hardly done justice to the Prince of Wales and Regent; he has hardly done justice to himself and his former colleagues; and he has done the greatest injustice to the nation, whom he has described as acting in a cabal against the Prince Regent. (Cries of No, no! from the opposite side of the House.) The noble lord's words, whatever may have been their meaning, were as general as those I have imputed to him. The noble lord was also pleased to make use of some expressions, which I feel it my duty to animadvert on; he was pleased to call myself, and those who act with me, the friends of the Princess of Wales in this House, and to state that we had objects in view which we durst not avow. He was pleased to state, that the object of all the motions which on former occasions have been made relating to the subject now before the House, were all neither more nor less than a mask for obtaining money. I do, on my own part, most solemnly declare, that I never had any such object in view, as that imputed to me by the noble lord; and I do farther solemnly declare, that the Princess of Wales has never had any such object in view, from the first moment that I had an opportunity of knowing in any manner what her sentiments or wishes were, up to the present day. I do therefore disclaim, on the part of those gentlemen who have been in this manner aspersed along with me, that we ever had any other object in view, than the vindication of her honour from the persecution with which she was assailed, and which the noble lord now contrives to turn into a persecution carried on against the Prince Regent. I do declare, on the part of her Royal Highness, that it is her honour alone which it has been, and is, our endeavour to defend, and that no person on her part was ever empowered to barter for any means in the power of the noble lord to propose, what her right entitled her to. Can I fail being astonished to hear the noble lord say, that the sovereign of this country possesses an undoubted right to receive or refuse those who may appear at court, and to stigmatize those who may appear, by the withholding from them his grace and favour, or otherwise? When the minute was drawn up, to which the names of the noble lord and his colleagues were affixed, advising the King to receive the Princess of Wales at court, was it not because they knew that this was the constitutional mode of proclaiming the innocence of her Royal Highness to the world? Is there any other constitutional way in which the ministers could advise, and the Regent execute, the wishes of his royal father? Is he not at present executing the government in the name and on the behalf of his Majesty?—though the noble lord would now have us forget and lose sight of his Majesty, and consider, in future, only the feelings and wishes of the Prince Regent, and not in any way to look to the King. I confess I am surprized at the conduct of the noble lord, and of those who, along with him, advised the King to proclaim her innocence, by receiving her into the drawing-room.

Another part of the noble lord's speech, in which he talks of the cabals fomented by her royal highness against the Prince Regent, seems to me not a little extraordinary. Has the noble lord then forgotten—sure I am if the noble lord has forgotten, the country has not forgotten—the obligation which it had to him on that occasion?—has he forgotton that, about a twelvemonth ago, he generously interfered to rescue her royal highness from a cabal, by which her honour and her life were threatened? Has he forgotten all the circumstances which took place upon that occasion? I am deceived if the noble lord did not go the length upon that occasion of tendering his resignation to the Prince Regent, if an end should not be put to the unworthy proceedings then set on foot against the princess of Wales. Was not the noble lord then aware of a conspiracy against the princess of Wales? And when the noble lord talks of the press being employed as a vehicle of calumny against the Prince Regent, does he forget how the press was on that occasion employed against a woman who had lost all her friends and protectors? The noble lord had credit with the country at that time for the goodness of his intentions, and for having saved her Royal Highness from that unworthy persecution. The noble lord laid great stress on the circumstance of her Royal Highness being beset by what he called improper advisers. When a person has been so treated as the Princess of Wales has been; when those who once assisted her with their counsels have all fled and gone from her, is it to be wondered at, that a person so destitute and abandoned as she has been, should be approached by persons not worthy of her confidence? When those persons whom she supposed worthy of her confidence had proved themselves not worthy, would the noble lord now wish to persuade the House that they ought to visit the iniquities of those friends on that deserted and defenceless woman? But the House, I trust, will not permit it.

With regard to the rights of her Royal Highness, the noble lord comes forward and tells us, that she has no rights, and that she is entirely dependant on her husband. Then her Royal Highness is the only person in the country to whom no protection can be extended! She is to be exposed to the mercy of whatever vindictive feelings may be entertained against her, and that without the least hope of redress! Among the blessings which the country, through this House, enjoys, it is as much owing to the publicity of discussion, as to its acts, that we are indebted for our security and freedom. I say, that it is to this publicity that the safety of the Princess of Wales is to be attributed; that it was owing to the discussion in this House, that there was brought to the knowledge of the noble lord, and of the country, the proceedings of the cabal which he then checked. And I, who then interfered accidentally in the debate, shall always look back with a degree of satisfaction to that interference, when I consider that I was one of the instruments of her salvation. But is it fair in the noble lord, after all these proceedings, in which he bore so conspicuous a part, to come forward to the House and say, that the only object of the Princess of Wales has been to obtain money, and that she and her friends were now taking off the mask? I do declare, that I never had in the least degree a compensation in money in view; and if I were asked if any sum could be a compensation to the princess of Wales, for the feelings of mortification which she has experienced, I would without hesitation say, that all the wealth in the world was in my estimation insufficient. And when the noble lord repeats, that there is nothing vindictive in the treatment of the Princess of Wales—I will ask the noble lord, interdicted as she has been from all communication between her and her nearest relations at present in this country, what name he would give to this treatment? I will ask him, if he considers it nothing to be excluded from all the joy, from all the scenes of festivity which are the consequence of the establishment of peace throughout Europe? If now, when she is bereft of her father, who bore a part in the great battles of his time, and who fell in the service of Europe, her nearest relations have gone from the country without seeing her, and the whole to her has been a scene of solitude and mortification, is this not to be considered as a punishment inflicted on her Royal Highness? Does the noble lord think the Princess of Wales has no claim to any thing but money?—that she ought to forego her other rights?—does he contend that she has no right to be present at the nuptials of her daughter?—that she has not the right to be crowned as consort of England, when the event happens which may call for such a coronation? If the Princess of Wales possesses a spark of dignified feeling, no sum on earth will ever purchase from her the dereliction of those rights. Neither would the country be contented that for any income whatever she should consent to forego those rights.

The noble lord has talked a great deal of the debts of the Princess of Wales, and of the liberality of the Prince of Wales; and I do not mean to reproach him with any want of generosity before he came to be Regent. But twice before the Prince of Wales applied to parliament for money; and, during these late years, we have been from year to year providing for the deficiencies of the Civil List, and we are now conniving at a great excess of the Civil List in the demonstration of joy which we have been witnessing. In talking of the debts of the Princess of Wales, therefore, it surely never could be the intention of the noble lord to induce us to consider it as a matter of blame or accusation against her. She became once, it is true, involved in debt; but after the experience which she had, she profited by it; and when she found that from the increase of the price of the necessaries of life, retrenchment became necessary, she met the necessities of the times by that retrenchment; and she was enabled to do this by the affectionate conduct of her servants to her. This conduct, on the part of her royal highness, enables me now to say to the public what the hon. mover has already stated, without any communication with her on the subject, but from the enquiries which he has made, that she does not at present owe one farthing in the world. Is not that circumstance creditable to her Royal Highness? Is there any person to whom the country equally looks up, who can say the same thing? Notwithstanding what has been stated by the noble lord, that the House should not feel itself treated with disrespect in regard to the intended marriage, when the sovereign of the Netherlands communicated to his people that a marriage was concluded between his son and the heiress of the British throne, and when a communication had even been made to the Princess of Wales by the person who was to be her future son-in-law, is it too much to say, that we also had a right to a similar communication?

The noble lord tells us, that though it has been asserted, that the marriage was broken off in consequence of the refusal to admit the Princess of Wales to the drawing room, the marriage was not in reality broken off till after the affair of the drawing room was passed by, and that it had no connection whatever with the rupture. I do not myself believe that it had. Having heard this rumoured, as the cause why the marriage was at an end, I was at some pains to make enquiries into the subject, and, in consequence of the information I so acquired, I am led to believe that the marriage was broken off on account of the present situation of the Princess of Wales. If so, the situation of her Royal Highness becomes of the greatest political importance to the nation; and it is impossible to separate that situation front the political relations of the country. When the noble lord tells us that the affairs of her Royal Highness ought no more to be dragged before the House than those of any other individual in the country, I answer, that it would be impertinent in any individual to intrude his affairs, or the affairs of any other person, on the attention of this House, and that therefore they cannot, and ought not to be discussed in it, but when the affairs of the royal family are brought forward, it is because that family is the property of the nation.

When the noble lord asserts that the House of Brunswick gave us our liberties, he forgets that we possessed liberties before they were called to the throne: he forgets that we selected that House, not to bestow, but to maintain our liberties. With such notions the noble lord seems ill calculated for one of the advisers of a British sovereign; and if he should on this or any other occasion recommend his prince not to satisfy the loyal and reasonable wishes of his people, let him beware of the responsibility that he takes upon himself, by pursuing a line of conduct so unconstitutional. Of all others the noble lord appears most calculated to do justice to the feelings of the people of England; it is not long since, on his arrival in this country, and on his entrance into this House, after the completion of events of great political importance, he was greeted by all parties with the warmest applauses. Did the noble lord feel within his heart the proud reflection of meriting those applauses; did not his breast swell with conscious pride? Surely he could not have felt it, or if he did it is but an ill compliment to call the same universal ebullition of popular sentiment, when directed in disapprobation of any proceeding, by the opprobrious epithets of cabal and conspiracy, Under these circumstances, when it is known that the Princess of Wales cannot subsist upon the income already allowed, I should be glad to see the House of Commons adopt her by voting an augmentation, but never let it be given— rather let her Royal Highness suffer all that penury can inflict, than bestow it—as the purchase of any of the undoubted rights she possesess. 'Never let us hear of such base commutation.' Her Royal Highness never entertained such degraded notions, and before God I protest, that for one moment they never influenced me. Let the noble lord recollect a former occasion when the Princess of Wales was dragged before the public and the House; let him recollect that at that moment a change of administration took place, and that he continued a colleague of the individual who was at the head of the government until the day of his death; and then I ask him how he can arraign us, with common justice and decency, for doing that now which he and his colleagues were then about to effect?

But it should seem from the statement of the noble lord, that an opportunity has never been afforded to the Prince Regent, or to his advisers, to perform that which now the noble lord expresses his willingness to recommend. Was no opportunity afforded of increasing the income of the Princess of Wales at the time the Regency was established, before any of these discussions had taken place? Aye, but replies the noble lord, the Prince Regent ought not to do an act of justice under such circumstances. Why? Because it would seem as if he truckled to the debates that have taken place in parliament—as if he yielded to the cabals and conspiracies that were formed throughout the country. I remember that a right hon. gentleman, whom I lament that I do not now see in his place, and whose advice we should have all been glad to receive (Mr. Canning), on a former occasion, when it was said that the time might hereafter come, when it would be necessary to make some parliamentary provision, reproached the noble lord with not having made an adequate provision for the Princess of Wales on the establishment of the Regency. Why, I ask again, did not the noble lord then advise it? Was not that an opportunity? Why did he not avail himself of it, especially if he knew that the separation between the Prince and Princess of Wales was final, conclusive and irremediable? The noble lord has said a great deal to prove the impossibility of these royal personages ever reuniting; that an insuperable barrier is raised: we cannot but lament the fact, but it is not what the country desires or demands: it is not for that purpose that the House of Commons interferes—no questions of this nature would ever have been brought forward, if common justice had been done, or if common decorum had been observed, and all parties would this year have been spared the repetition, if the Prince Regent, or his advisers, from whom it is impossible to separate him, had not designedly put upon the Princess of Wales an indignity, which an almost broken spirit could never brook, and the effect of which we are endeavouring to prevent. There are achings of the heart for which there is no remedy; there are wounded feelings for which there is no balm, for which all interference, all aid is vain; but as long as in this House we retain a power of expressing our sentiments, in spite of all the taunts that may be thrown out, and all the odium that may be incurred, I shall continue to give a vent to my feelings; as long as there remains to parliament, that power of succouring all, from the highest to the lowest, I shall, I hope, without fear, plead the cause of the injured: the Princess of Wales is an injured woman; she is not so high as to be above the reach of parliament, nor is she, nor can she be so low, as to he beyond its power to do her justice. These are the considerations that have influenced me throughout my conduct. I have no motive but that of protecting the unjustly oppressed. I have uttered no word, and have been parent to no sentiment upon this occasion, which I shall ever disavow, or from the maintenance of which I shall ever shrink. I shall be glad to see the House of Commons adopt the Princess of Wales, by giving her that protection which her innocence and her desertion claim: let it augment her income, but I protest in the name of justice, against depriving her of any of the few rights, that may remain to her in her present forlorn and pitiable condition; if the House does not make any provision for her, she must be considered in future as an unhappy female, deserted by her natural protectors,—deserted by parliament and the country. What I require for her Royal Highness is, that as long as she maintains that character which she has been pronounced from the highest authority to merit—being innocent—I demand that she should be allowed the privileges of innocence. If the House of Commons assents to a grant of money, I shall be rejoiced at this testi- mony of its approbation; but it shall not silence me if, on any future occasion, I shall think the Princess of Wales aggrieved: I will not allow, as far as I am concerned, that it shall bury all these transactions in oblivion, and I will not consent to any augmentation of the income of her Royal Highness, on any other grounds than on those which I have now stated.

said, in explanation—I hope that the hon. member will not attribute to me any want of gratitude, for the distinguished favours I have received From the House and the country; I trust I feel them as I ought. It is not my disposition to impute to any member unworthy feelings and motives, still less to the hon. gentleman opposite. I am convinced that he never has had any sinister purposes to answer, but I believe most conscientiously, that he and others have been made the instruments of a wicked cabal, and the channels for conveying insults to the sovereign. With regard to the seclusion of her Royal Highness, I must say, that if visits were not paid to her by the august personages at present in this country, those visits had not been prevented by any want of facilities afforded by the Prince Regent. As to what has been said of the conduct of a young and illustrious female, I am sure the House will feel, that it cannot be consistent with its duties or its feelings, to enquire now into her sentiments; I may safely leave the hon. member himself to judge whether it be fit that she should be made a judge and arbiter between the parties in these unfortunate transactions. With great personal respect I hope the hon. member will allow me to say, that subjects like the present, in any view, he is not likely to bring forward again to any useful purpose. I was misunderstood, if it be supposed that I said I was authorised to give the consent of the Prince Regent to any arrangement that might be made: but I did venture to say, from the knowledge I have of the principles which govern his Royal Highness, that money has never been any difficulty, and that if it be the sense of parliament that the income of the Princess of Wales should be increased, consent on the part of the crown will not be withheld. As to any former conspiracy, with a knowledge of which I am charged, I declare my perfect ignorance. Enquiries may be instituted, independent of any conspiracy; and one of the happy consequences of the form of our constitution is, that not even a con- spiracy for the purpose of enquiry can cast an imputation of guilt, unless there exist reasonable grounds of suspicion. I certainly was never acquainted with the existence of any thing that may be properly termed a conspiracy. After the statement I have had the honour of laying before the House, and after the result of previous discussions has been seen, I really would entreat the hon. gentleman to inform me, whether further discussion in parliament is likely to promote a beneficial conclusion?

—After what has fallen from the noble lord, I hope I shall be allowed to say a few words. I am much obliged for the personal civility shewn me by the noble lord, but I can assure him that I shall endeavour to discharge my duty, without being deterred, although I feel great respect for him, by any fear of incurring the noble lord's displeasure, or by any alarm of clamours that may be excited. No one can be more averse to discussions like the present than myself, and I lament that they have been forced upon the House by a deficiency of good advice, in a quarter that might have rendered them unnecessary. In what I have done, I have acted upon the principle of absolute necessity. I concur in what the noble lord has observed regarding the heiress presumptive to the throne. I have no intention, and never had, of obtaining or promoting the interference of her Royal Highness; I have stated what I have the best reason to believe is the fact, and what I should assert that I knew to be the fact, were it not for the significant shake which I observe of the noble lord's head. The unhappy differences which have been carried to such an extremity as to be irremediable may, I fear, be attended with political consequences, not in contemplation when the formal instrument to which the noble lord has referred, was prepared and executed. To what the noble lord has asserted, that every facility was afforded to the illustrious strangers to pay their visits of ceremony to the Princess of Wales, their royal relation, I can only reply, that the universal impression abroad is directly in opposition to that statement. With regard to a conspiracy for enquiry, on which some explanation has been offered, I admit that where there is a suspicion of guilt, there enquiry may deserve applause, but the enquiries that were instituted last year, were understood to be wholly unauthorised, and had no legal or constitutional shape: they were carried on in a dark, mysterious, and unjust manner, and when the noble lord heard of them by means of the discussions in this House, he interfered to protect her Royal Highness, and by his interference they were defeated; he knew that there were no fresh suspicions of guilt not canvassed in 1806 and 1807, and upon those charges the noble lord had given the Princess of Wales his verdict of acquittal. I did not mean to employ the word conspiracy in a legal and technical way, but merely to convey that there were persons in the dark undermining her Royal Highness and planning her ruin and destruction, whose efforts failed in consequence of enquiries in this House. I hope that the noble lord will not now call that completely constitutional and legal, which he before so severely and positively condemned.

—In justice to the Princess of Wales, I feel myself called upon to state, that I have not had any communication with her Royal Highness. I should, I trust, be the last man in the House to propose an increase of income, if the consequence were to be the resignation of any rights on the part of that illustrious personage.

Wortley.—After the address we have this night heard from the noble lord, which does him as much credit, as a man and as a member, as any speech that was ever delivered in parliament, I should not have risen, but that the line of conduct I have pursued on a former occasion seems to render it necessary. I never for a moment imagined that the effect of discussions of this kind would be to reconcile the parties, and I thought that this was not the fit place for attempting an adjustment of differences, to which the public ought not to be made parties. The noble lord has said that this subject has been introduced for the purpose of calumniating the Prince Regent, and for dragging into public notice the characters of the most illustrious individuals. I put it to the conscience of the noble lord to say how it was first introduced. Was it not occasioned by rumours, or rather by certainties (for every man was evinced of the truth) that enquiries were going on which affected the feelings and hearts of every individual in the country? These enquiries compelled the discussion of this painful subject. I put it likewise to the conscience of the noble lord, whether tranquillity had not been restored in the public mind upon this question, until the feelings before existing were awakened by the publication of documents, galling to all, but most galling to the illustrious personage immediately concerned. I say, then, that ministers must not be surprised if a strong sensation is produced on the public mind, on an occasion like the present, nor must they be astonished, if in the House of Commons some means are found of expressing the public opinion.

.—The noble lord having alluded to what fell from me on a late occasion, I shall trouble the House very shortly with some reasons that induce me to beg the hon. member not to withdraw his motion. The noble lord observed, that on what I said on a former night, I alluded to the possibility of parliament being called upon to come to a vote for an increased establishment for the Princess of Wales. It is perfectly true, but I should be extremely sorry if, from that circumstance, it could be imputed to me that I thought any sum would be sufficient to compensate her Royal Highness for the cruel injuries that have been inflicted upon her feelings. All I meant was, that parliament being bound to do something, the most moderate, mild, and efficient course would be to provide for her establishment; not because the sum given would add to the domestic comforts of her Royal Highness, but because in the Commons of England she would then find a protector, recognizing her as Princess of Wales, and performing those offices that others ought to discharge. I hope also that the hon. gentleman will not consent to withdraw his motion, because if he did so, I should think parliament would separate with very little honour to itself.

Let us see how the case stands: the Princess of Wales sends to us information, that, by a message from her Majesty, she has been forbidden to appear at court, and that intelligence is accompanied by a correspondence, which the House might or might not have received, but having been received, it now lies upon the table, and the House of Commons is bound in some way to notice it. I may safely defy the noble lord to produce any precedent where the House has refused to attend to an application made by any branch of the royal family. We are bound to take it into consideration, even though the result should be only to provide a befitting establishment for the Princess of Wales. Much I think is done to satisfy the feelings of all classes of society in the country, by merely considering the subject. When the noble lord says, that this House has no right to interfere in transactions of this kind, I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that the assertion must have been extremely painful to your ears; it is the first time that such a doctrine has been broached, for I have often heard it maintained, on the contrary, that there was nothing so high that the eye of parliament could not reach, or so low that it could not fathom. Then comes the question, is this an occasion where discretion authorizes an interference? If it be not, I should be glad to know what is? A step has been taken to outrage the feelings of an exalted individual; she complains, it is entered on the Journals, and if no further notice be taken of it, there can be but one opinion out of doors, as to the motives for this silence. Gentlemen were, however, to go away with the notion that something would be done by the Regent; but the noble lord has taken care to be most guarded in his language upon this point. I admit, very readily, the general kind disposition of the Prince of Wales, but of his particular kindness to his wife, the Princess of Wales, I must beg leave, with all respect, to entertain some doubt. I beg the House to recollect, that but for the conduct of the Prince Regent, the House would never have been engaged in this painful discussion, nor would the public mind now have been agitated. The noble lord has referred to a document, formally establishing a separation, signed by the King, the Prince and Princess of Wales, and others. Let me ask him, if there be one word in that agreement which declares that the Princess of Wales shall not appear at court (expressions of surprize by lord C.)? The noble lord may cry oh! but I maintain that that is the whole pith of the question. (Hear, hear, from the opposition benches!) Any woman may agree to articles of separation; but does the noble lord mean to say, that in that paper there was a syllable which could savour of an admission that the conduct of the Princess of Wales had subjected her to the slightest censure? If not, then I insist that something new must have since occurred to justify the provocation which her Royal Highness has lately received. We say that an indignity is put upon the Princess of Wales. The defence of the noble lord is, that a formal separation has taken place that justifies the proceeding. My answer is, that subsequent to the date ‡ of that instrument she was formally received at court, and that if the King had imagined that the effect would have been to exclude her, his Majesty, I am certain, would never have signed it. Then I demand to know what has happened since to justify this exclusion? Let the noble lord tell us if he can. There has been a most cruel and unprovoked insult offered to the consort of the sovereign authority, at a time most galling to the feelings of all the royal family; to accomplish which the queen, who must be supposed to be best acquainted with the sentiments of the king, has been made the instrument. If her royal husband had been in possession of his faculties, would they have dared to add this fresh contempt? The noble lord must know that advantage has been taken of particular and unfortunate circumstances to get rid of the Princess of Wales, and to degrade her in public estimation. I really believe that the august personages, lately in the metropolis, were desired not to visit her Royal Highness, or if not, what does it prove but that the general reputation which artifice has raised her, is such that her near relations had been deterred from discharging even the common duties of civility?

Where, then, is the Princess of Wales to seek for redress but in this House? What friend has she in the world to console her under her sufferings? Her condition is the most forlorn that imagination can picture. A foreigner, deserted by all her natural friends and protectors, she claims the aid and support of the Commons of Great Britain. I say that when she was married in this country she was adopted by parliament: parliament is her guardian, and I hope it will faithfully execute the trust reposed in it. Now, let any man contradict me if he can—thus stands the law upon the subject. This royal female is brought to England, is recognised as Princess of Wales by act of parliament, and a jointure of 50,000l. a year is given in the event of her surviving her husband before he ascends the throne. Will any man say, circumstanced as she is, that she can be looked upon in any other light than a widow? She has been discarded by her husband. Why she has been so treated, with the question of guilt or innocence, I have now nothing to do. I allude to nothing I have heard, I am bound only to act upon this plain principle, that a person who has not been proved to be guilty is to be treated as innocent. Will, then, any man say when an appeal of this kind has been made, when the Princess of Wales, abandoned by all the world, throws herself upon the protection of parliament, that the House shall pass the subject by and not take any step upon the occasion? I wish nothing to be done but that which is strictly just: I wish for a thorough acquittal of the Princess of Wales from base insinuations, since no direct charge can be substantiated; I wish her to be restored to her character, and to be allowed the means of supporting her rank and station. Instead of withdrawing the motion, what I would suggest is this, that the question should be postponed, with a view to give time to the noble lord to be the bearer of a message upon the subject from the Regent.—(No, no, from lord Castlereagh.)—I see that the noble lord will not consent. I suppose it is, because he will advise his royal master to do nothing that shall seem like truckling to the wishes of parliament. That I take to be a new doctrine, so that if the innocence of the Princess of Wales be proved, it is not to be admitted where it is of most importance, because it will be called yielding to hasty motions in parliament, or truckling and submitting to public calumny! We might as well live in the reign of Henry S, if such are to be the principles on which the crown is to act.

Is it meant to be said that parliament has nothing to do with questions that agitate the public mind? Is not parliament the guardian of all the best interests of society, of the public manners, morals and decorum? Has this question no connection with the public manners, morals, and decorum? The very essence of our privileges is that they are undefined, and may assume what shape they please. I defy any man to shew me any question in which parliament may not advise the crown, if it be necessary for securing the public interest. I say that in this instance the public interest imperiously calls for our interference. If the letter of the Prince Regent had said that he would never meet his wife in private, we should have had nothing to do with it, but he adds, that he never will meet her in public. What, then, is to become of the Princess of Wales? If her Majesty dies, who is to hold the drawing-room, and who is to be our future queen? The noble lord smiles: he may have settled all this, but without meaning to put it in a factious way, I insist that it is of the last importance that par- liament should entertain the subject. The noble lord seems to have a great deal of information in store—let him give it—my whole object is, that if she deserves it, the Princess of Wales should be put in such a situation as to be able to discharge in future the public duties that fall upon her, by being enabled to appear with credit at any drawing-room that may be held. I never said she ought to force her way into the Queen's drawing-rooms, but this I will maintain, that if she does not go, her absence is not to be attributed to any want of merit on her part, to any positive demerit, and still less to any imputation of guilt.

Upon the subject of the princess Charlotte of Wales, I am little disposed to say any thing; I have no means of access to her person: I never spoke to the princess in my life; but I must be forgiven if I say, that if the feelings of affection of the young princess, by what has passed, have been strongly roused, it gives an earnest of conduct in future to her subjects, that will confer upon her the highest honour, and upon her people the greatest blessings. I lament that parliament did not, last year, take some step. This fresh insult, offered through the queen, at the instigation of a secret adviser, might then have been spared. It therefore becomes us now to interpose; we owe it to the royal family; and I contend that, if we do not, we shall most deliberately betray the trust that has been reposed in us by the country, in which there is but one feeling from one end to the other.

The noble lord made a great parade; but I must say, that in a pecuniary point of view I do not think the Princess of Wales has been kindly treated. When she lived in Carlton house she had 17,000l. a year, besides her 5,000l. and yet, when she had to maintain a separate establishment, with all its increased expences, her income was reduced to 12,000l. a year. The noble lord says, what could the Prince do more? I answer, that he could have referred it to parliament, and what motive was there for not doing it? Parliament never knew of these debts of the Regent, now so much talked of, for Mr. Perceval so wrapped them up, and made such an involved statement of them, that they were never discovered. Those debts amounted, we understand, to between 4 and 500,000l. and at the time of the Regency 60,000l. per annum was given, besides the proceeds from the Duchy of Cornwall, to provide for their liquidation, and what the Prince paid for the sums due from his wife was not deducted out of his income, but only out of the sum that would otherwise have been applied to pay his own creditors. So that the expences of the Princess of Wales were not paid by her husband, were not paid by the public, but by the creditors of the Prince Regent; and 1 appeal to the House, whether this is a situation in which it is fit that the future queen of this country should be placed?

Although I would not advise her Royal Highness to demand the payment of 50,000l. a year, provided as her jointure, yet I think that she has an unanswerable claim to it, and she has the more need of it to maintain that splendour and state which will protect her in some degree from the efforts of the promoters of cabals. The noble lord said, that a suitable provision may possibly be made. Will that satisfy the House? They virtually acknowledge that the treatment of her Royal Highness has been proper, and then at the end of this session, or perhaps not until the next, the noble lord may come down with what he calls a suitable allowance; Nothing in my opinion can produce in this case a better effect, than for the House to shew that it takes an interest in the question; and if this motion be withdrawn, it will be obvious that in its result it takes no interest whatever. Considering the time that has elapsed since this question was first introduced, recollecting the willingness the noble lord now professes to add to the provision of the Princess of Wales, and observing the heated state of the public feeling upon this question, it must be admitted that ministers have been grossly culpable in not endeavouring to put a stop to further discussions by conciliatory proposals. The public feeling has been now raised to a great height, and what will induce it to subside I do not know;—assuredly the country would not be satisfied, if an injury like that sustained by her Royal Highness should go unresented. I say that her claims are rested upon grounds not to be shaken; and I ant confident the House will not tamely submit to insults offered to its future queen, the cause of which has hitherto been unexplained. I flatter myself that we shall not separate without doing something to restore the Princess of Wales to that comfort which she has every right to enjoy, if not to that splendour she has every right to maintain. Let us shew that we participate in the general feeling of the nation; that her Royal Highness is not without a protector, and that that protector is the House of Commons.

said, that he approved of the object of the motion of the hon. gentleman, because that object was, by an exertion of the ordinary power of the House, practically to repel the calumnies thrown on her royal highness the Princess of Wales. This object was to be effected, not by restoring her to her dignities, but by increasing the means of maintaining her establishment. But the object of the noble lord was the same, provided it could be done in a manner respectful to the Prince of Wales. It was proper that the Princess of Wales should be supported by parliament, provided for by parliament, but not in such a manner as to give her a victory over her husband. As the noble lord had in view the same object, not perhaps as the Princess of Wales had, but as the parliament ought to have, he was glad to accede to his suggestion, and to suffer the motion of the hon. gentleman to be withdrawn; because if the hon. gentleman persisted in his motion, and failed, he would injure the cause he espoused; and if he succeeded, he would do no more than the ministers consented to do. The dispute was about the manner, and the manner of the hon. gentleman would fail, while that of the noble lord would succeed: he could not, therefore, but prefer the manner of the noble lord. The case was this: papers had been communicated to the Speaker, and by him to the House, containing a correspondence, which stated that the Prince of Wales would not enter any company where his wife should be. What did this prove?—An entire separation in mind; as what had been said by the noble lord, proved a complete separation by instrument between the Prince of Wales and his wife.—By parliament, what course was to be taken, if they were to enter into the quarrel? (which certainly should never be done but in the last instance). To attempt to oblige his Royal Highness to take back his wife would be unjustifiable—to interfere to procure her admission to the queen's drawing rooms, was a power which it might be doubted whether or no it was within the province of the House to exert, it being a matter not strictly political, but comparatively trivial. How, then, could the House act, but by providing for the lady—by de- claring, that as she was not admitted to share in the establishment of her husband, parliament would give her one of her own? This he thought the best possible way of proceeding, for the interest of the wife, the feelings of the husband, and the dignity of the House.

wished to know the intention of the noble lord, before he consented to withdraw his motion.

said that, as he found the sense of the House to be in favour of an addition to the revenue of the Princess of Wales, though he had no positive instruction upon the subject, yet from his general knowledge of the sentiments of the Prince Regent, he felt himself justified in giving his consent to any measure that had in view to effectuate that object.

—I am glad at last to hear a pledge given by the noble lord, that the establishment of her royal highness the Princess of Wales shall be made a subject for the consideration of the House, though difficulties have arisen as to the mode of proceeding. I am glad, too, that I was preceded by my right hon. friend, because he has shewn himself as averse as I can be to a stretch of the jurisdiction of the House, for which now there can be no necessity, as by the declaration of this night, the purposes of the most sanguine friends of her Royal Highness must have been answered. In my opinion, it would have been most improper for the House to have interfered to procure the admission of her Royal Highness to the drawing room; but that we can interfere in a way most proper, no one now can doubt. The Commons of England, voting under the present circumstances an increase of allowance to her royal highness the Princess of Wales, in effect determine that she does not deserve to be visited by fresh insults and indignities, but that she is worthy of her high station, and that they therefore afford her the means of supporting that rank. Such a vote will be not only a virtual acquittal of her Royal Highness, but a condemnation of those who advised that most indiscreet letter, by which she was insulted. I am glad that the noble lord has found an opportunity for giving this pledge—and I will tell him why he has found an opportunity, because he perceives that parliament and the country loudly demand it.

then withdrew his motion.

said, that in rising to submit to the House the motion of which he had given notice, he felt it incumbent upon him to explain his reasons for not having, at an earlier period, called the attention of parliament to this most important subject. The state of Ireland had unfortunately for some time been such, as to call for the adoption of some additional measures in order to preserve public tranquillity, and he certainly was prepared, at a much earlier period of the session, to have submitted them to the consideration of parliament. The evil which it was now proposed to remedy, had not, he was sorry to say, risen on a sudden; it had existed for a considerable time, indeed, he might say, for the whole period that he had had the honour of forming a part of the Irish government. Many parts of Ireland had been in a disturbed state, excesses had been committed, and disaffection prevailed, which it was known that the ordinary powers of the law were insufficient to repress. He therefore was prepared early in the session, to have submitted the present measure to the House, but the great and glorious events which occurred at that time, the overthrow of the monstrous tyranny established by Buonaparté in France, the restoration of the ligitimate sovereign, and the general pacification of Europe, induced him to suspend his proposition until he saw what effect was produced in Ireland by these important events, and he hoped he should stand justified in the opinion of the House, for having, under such circumstances, and for such an object, delayed the production of this measure: he did not wish that at a season of general happiness and rejoicing for the restoration of tranquillity, Ireland alone should form an exemption.

He was not, he confessed, very sanguine in his expectations of the effect that would be produced upon the tranquillity of Ireland, by the events to which he had alluded; but he thought the government of Ireland were bound to make the experiment, and to defer the measure as long as the necessity of the case would permit. With that view, the measure had been deferred, and he wished he could now state to the House, that these events which had restored tranquillity to the rest of Europe, bad restored tranquillity to Ireland; unfortunately, the effect they had produced upon Ireland was not very great; he could not congratulate the House and the country upon the state of that part of the United Kingdom, nor could he, consistently with his duty, postpone the production of this measure till another session.

Before he submitted to the House the details of the measure which he now proposed to bring forward, he should beg leave very shortly, to state the nature of those disturbances, for which he now wished to propose a remedy. Those disturbances originated in different causes—the first that he should mention, were those which were the result of political combinations. In stating this part of the subject, it was far from his intention to exaggerate the objects which the persons so combining had in view, or the danger that was to be apprehended from them. He could not suppose that these combinations, which had for their object the overthrow of the government and the separation of Ireland from Great Britain, could find any supporters among men of any talents or weight in the country. These combinations consisted of idle infatuated people, with little education, and who were the dupes of men who possessed certainly more means of acquiring information than themselves, but still, he trusted, had none of those qualifications which could render them formidable, as the leaders of popular insurrection. But that these were combinations, whose object was to overthrow the existing government, to transfer the allegiance of the people to foreign powers, and for other objects of a similar kind, and that the individuals composing those societies, were bound together by oaths, there could not, unfortunately, be a doubt. In stating the grounds upon which he made assertions of this kind, he should rely only upon documents, the authority of which could not be questioned; he would not quote the verbal or written communications which had been made to government, which though in many instances were well founded, yet in others might be liable to a suspicion that they were exaggerated, from the fears naturally entertained by individuals from the appearance of immediate danger, and the recollection of past events. But to prove the existence of these combinations, he should only rest upon documents of unquestionable authenticity—he should refer to the oath, which was proved in evidence, at the last assizes in Ireland, against several persons charged with these combinations, and upon which they were convicted. Mr. Peel then read the oath, by which the person taking it, bound himself to suffer death rather than give any information against his companions before judge or jury; to join the French upon their landing in Ireland, &c. This oath proved that combinations certainly had been formed, the object of which was, to call in the assistance of a foreign power. So much for the first head of combinations, viz. those which were of a political nature. Another class of combinations, which existed in Ireland, were those which were formed under the pretence of redressing what was represented as local grievances. The objects of these combinations were various, though the mode of carrying them into effect was in most cases the same, to inflict punishment upon persons who disobeyed their orders, who gave more than the price which they chose to fix upon land, to prevent new tenants taking land, which any person belonging to the combination had given up; and for many other purposes which it was unnecessary for him to detail, as they were perfectly well known to every person at all acquainted with the state of the interior of Ireland.

He would, in order to prove the accuracy of his statement, and the existence and objects of the combinations to which he alluded, refer to the proceedings at the last assizes of Roscommon: at those assizes no less than nine persons were tried and convicted for having taken and administered oaths, binding them not to inform against threshers, and not to deal with Protestants, and to conform to the rules and regulations of the committees, under whose directions they acted. Upon this part of the subject, he was desirous to read to the House a letter from a most intelligent and active magistrate, who was sent down into the county of Westmeath, to make enquiries into the causes of the disturbances in that county, and to assist the resident magistrate of it by his advice and experience. The letter gives a very clear statement of the nature, objects, and proceedings of the deluded miscreants by whom the public had been disturbed. It was dated 23d March, 1814. "The disturbances in this county (Westmeath) appear to have commenced about the beginning of the year 1813, and have been rapidly increasing ever since, notwithstanding great exertions have been used on the part of the magistracy, to check and subdue them; the persons engaged in those disturbances, styling themselves carders, commenced their outrages by attacking houses, robbery of fire arms, and swearing the lower order to obey such rules and orders as should be dictated and pronounced by them. Their first objects appeared to me to be that of regulating the price of ground set in con-acre, to prevent old tenants from being turned out of their farms and to regulate the fees and dues payable to their own (Roman Catholic) clergy. To effect these purposes, they posted notices through different parts of the country, declaring vengeance against any person who should not comply with such their lawless dictates; if a tract of land was to be set in a con-acre, these lawless miscreants would fix a price per acre upon it, and any person giving more would certainly receive personal torture or suffer some injury in his property. I have examined into the cases of many individuals where personal torture had been inflicted, and I uniformly found it to proceed from some dispute relative to ground either by giving a price exceeding that fixed on by those miscreants, or by taking a farm of which the late occupying tenant had been dispossessed by his landlord."

He begged again that he might not be suspected of any disposition to exaggerate the extent of the danger to be apprehended from these combinations; he did not mean to say, that the details which he had laid before the House, were of such a nature as to prove any threatening danger to the connection happily subsisting between the two countries, but they were of a nature to call imperatively upon government to adopt measure, for the protection of the loyal, tranquil, and industrious part of the community; and this duty was the more necessary, and more strongly imposed on government, because, if protection was not afforded for the well disposed, they were reduced to the painful alternative, either of joining the insurgents, or of exposing their persons to torture, and their houses and property to destruction. But these combinations were formidable in another point of view—the persons combining, were now obliged, for the attainment of their objects, to observe a great degree of caution, and to maintain a strict discipline, and therefore, qualified themselves to become dangerous engines in the hands of able and designing men, to be applied to other purposes. So much for the causes which originated out of those combinations to which he had already alluded.—There was another species of disturbance of the public peace to which he alluded with unfeigned regret; he meant that which arose from religious animosity. Interruptions of the public tranquillity arising from such a cause, were the most to be lamented, and he feared the most difficult to be remedied. He would not now enter into the history of those unfortunate disputes, but he had the satisfaction to say, that notwithstanding the pains which had been taken in Ireland by means of the press and of inflammatory speeches, to induce the Roman Catholics of Ireland to believe that the Irish government was not disposed to administer impartial justice to them as well as to their Protestant fellow-subjects, that these efforts had in a great degree failed of success, and there was indisputable evidence to shew the lower orders of Catholics were satisfied, that government were determined to treat all offenders against the public peace, whatever religious creed they might profess, most impartially.

In order to give the House an idea of the extent to which this irritation prevailed, it was only necessary for him to allude to a melancholy and fatal affray which had recently taken place at a village in the county of Cavan; though the accounts which had been given of this transaction were greatly exaggerated, still the House would learn with deep regret, that it was not terminated until seven persons had lost their lives, and many were wounded. On hearing of this unfortunate occurrence, the Irish government not entertaining any doubt of, and still less wishing to throw any imputation of the competency of the local authorities to conduct an enquiry into the causes of it, with fairness and impartiality, but desirous of obtaining information from a source that would be free even from the possibility of suspicion or imputation, sent down a gentleman of the Irish bar, of the highest professional eminence, and qualified by his commission, by his talents, acuteness and judgment, Mr. Jobb, to examine into the subject. The report of that gentleman stated, that the unfortunate dispute which had occurred was not a premeditated one, that there had existed animosity between the parties, but that the outrage in question did not proceed from a previously concerted conflict. Mr. Peel then read an extract from the report which Mr. Jobb had made, to the following effect: "I should not consider that I had done my duty if I omitted to state, that both parties, and per- sons of every description, expressed great satisfaction at the interposition of government, and appeared to rely confidently on the impartial administration of justice as well on the enquiry as on the future trials." He read this with satisfaction, because it shewed that the wicked attempts which had been made to convince the people that justice would not be fairly administered to them, had not succeeded.

He had now enumerated the principal features of those disturbances which had so long agitated Ireland. There subsisted in Ireland many obstacles in the way of the ordinary administration of the law, and one of the greatest was the difficulty of procuring persons to give information to government, and evidence against the violation of the peace. There was in Ireland, if he might be allowed the expression, a sort of romantic feeling, independent of any consideration of personal danger, which rendered the name and character of an informer odious, and was almost sufficient of itself to close the ordinary sources from whence information could be derived.

This feeling, he admitted, was most powerfully assisted in its operation, by the dreadful system of intimidation, which was established in the disturbed districts with the view of preventing evidence from being given. As he had proved every assertion that he had hitherto made, by a reference to some authentic document, he should follow the example on this occasion, and shew the extent to which this system of intimidation was carried, by a reference to the most melancholy record which any court of justice could exhibit. He would allude to the case of a person of the name of James Connell. He saw an hon. gentleman, the member for Westmeath, in the House, and he was sure he would confirm his statement upon this subject; this unfortunate man (Connell) had given information against some persons for administering unlawful oaths—it was found necessary, after he had given information, to keep him in gaol for his personal security, until he was brought up to Dublin to give evidence. He (Mr. Peel) afterwards saw this man, and cautioned him against going back to his own country; he was, however, so desirous of returning, that no advice could restrain him, and he went home; he, however, had the prudence to remain some days in the house of lord Castlemaine, but upon the departure of that noble lord, Connell went to his own house. It would hardly be believed, but as soon as his return was known, from three adjoining parishes delegates were actually appointed to murder him. It was proved upon the evidence of one of the delegates, that in each of the three parishes, six delegates were chosen to commit the murder; that these delegates met at the appointed time, and selected nine of their number to perpetrate the act. They attacked the house of the poor man, and murdered both him and his wife. It was not necessary for him to make any comment upon this dreadful transaction, but it shewed to what a degree the feelings of the people must be blunted, and in what odium an informer was held, when it was considered little less than a praiseworthy act, to visit with deliberate and atrocious murder, the delivery of evidence in a court of justice.

Ater having entered into this detail, it only remained for him to shew, that the country was now in a disturbed state, and that the hopes which were entertained by some, that these combinations would be destroyed by the overthrow of Buonaparté's government, had proved unfounded. To prove this, it would perhaps be only necessary for him to state, that no less than seven persons had been taken up at no remoter a period than the 5th of the present month, in the county of Kildare, when actually engaged in one of these conspiracies to which he had at first alluded, as assuming a political complexion; and that that county was in a considerable state of alarm; that a large military force had been marched into it; and that it now presented an appearance which a country in a state of peace with the whole of Europe ought not to exhibit. In the Queen's county disturbances to a very serious extent existed, long after the occurrence of these events which procured the restoration of permanent tranquillity had prevailed; and here he begged leave to read a lettter which had been given to him by one of the members of that county, from a magistrate of it, which represented the disturbances in a very serious point of view. Mr. Peel then read the letter, and also an extract from one from General Merrick, stating the necessity of calling the military in aid of the civil power, in the county of Kildare.

He trusted that he had now shewn to the House, from documents that could not be disputed, that the ordinary powers of the civil magistrates were not sufficient to maintain public tranquiliity, or to give confidence and security to the well disposed. It would, in his opinion, be infinitely better to invest the civil powers with sufficient authority to repress those disturbances, than to call in the aid of the military, the frequent use of soldiers in that manner made the people look upon them as their adversaries, rather than their protectors. With regard to the measure itself, which he had now to propose, he did not wish to go beyond the necessity of the cases, as he was anxious that it should have permanent operation, and that the Bill he should propose should form a part of the permanent law of the land. He by no means, however, meant to state it as his conviction that it was calculated effectually to meet the exigency of the case; he reserved to himself the full power of proposing, even in the present session, the revival of any of those provisions which had been enacted at former periods to meet temporary emergencies. He wished to keep the consideration of them distinct from the discussion of a permanent law, in discussing the principle of that law. He hoped that gentlemen would not suppose, that because such measures as these which he was now about to propose, were not necessary to England, that, therefore, they were not necessary in Ireland, for the state of the two countries, were essentially different.

He proposed in the Bill which he was now about to move for, to give to the Lord Lieutenant a power, when disturbances existed in any county or part of a county, to proclaim that district to be in a disturbed state, to appoint a superintending magistrate, with a salary, and special constables, with salaries. He proposed that the magistrate should have a house and office, but that he should not he invested with any extraordinary powers; that he should be responsible immediately to the government, and removeable at their discretion, and that he should be called upon for those exertions which could not be required from ordinary magistrates, who could not be expected to devote the whole of their time to the public service. The special constables, to whom he proposed to give a better salary than to ordinary constables, he should propose to select from among the farmers' sons, and persons of that class, and to make them keep a kind of watch and ward in the disturbed district; these constables to be placed under the controul of the superintending magistrates. The extraordinary expence that must be incurred by the establishment of this magistrate, and the special constables, ought in his opinion to be paid by the disturbed district. He thought himself bound in candour to state to the House, that in proposing the appointment of a supernumerary magistrate, he was rather calling upon the House to sanction a measure that had been adopted, than introducing a new system. In the counties of Kildare and Westmeath, and in every disturbed district, where the government had the means of doing it. Magistrates of this description had been appointed, not in conformity with any express provision of law, but from the necessity of the case, and the appointment had been attended with great benefits; their minds being wholly turned to one employment, they became of course more skilled in the mode of detecting and apprehending offenders. Another material advantage that would result from their appointment, was, that they would have no local allurements or interests to sway their judgment. He begged, however, that it might not be supposed that he meant to throw any imputation upon the regular magistracy of the country, the magistrates themselves he was sure would not think so, because nothing was more common than applications from them, that appointments of this kind should be made, and these applications were made, not by gentlemen who wished to avoid their duty, but those who were the most anxious to discharge it.

He was aware that many magistrates, in Ireland, were willing to devote their time to the public service; but when it was necessary that parties should be sent out every night, perhaps for a month together, it was not to be expected gentlemen could neglect their own concerns entirely, and give up all their time to the public. He trusted he was swayed by no consideration of personal friendship, when he mentioned one signal proof of those exertions in the case of a noble friend of his, lord Desart. The services that he had performed were not of a nature to attract much public attention, but on that very account they deserved more richly the public acknowledgements and gratitude; every sacrifice of what others would consider their ease and comfort, had been made by his noble friend, every risk of personal safety had been encountered, his days and nights had been devoted to the fulfilment or the most active duties; as a magistrate he was repaid by the consciousness of having performed these duties, and by the knowing, that his exertions had been attended with success; but it was with deep regret he stated, that his health had been injured by his zeal and incessant activity, and that he was now deprived of the assistance of his noble friend in the House, by the necessity which he was under, of absenting himself from his parliamentary duties, on account of indisposition. In this country the appointment of stipendiary magistrates was not necessary, and therefore would be improper; but in Ireland the state of the country was so different, that the measure appeared to him indispensable for the public safety: that uncommon exertions had been made by many magistrates in Ireland, he was perfectly ready to admit, acting gratuitously, and from the best and purest motives.

There would be in the Bill several regulations for the conduct of these magistrates, which it would be unnecessary now to detail: he should only repeat, that by bringing forward this Bill, he did not preclude himself from proposing other and stronger measures even in the present session, if the case should require it. Having thanked the House for its indulgence, the right hon. gentleman concluded with moving, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide for the better execution of the laws in Ireland, by appointing superintending magistrates and additional constables in counties in certain cases."

said, that although it was too soon for him to pronounce upon the nature of the measure, he was ready to give his cheerful approval of its mildness, and to accord with its general principles. He agreed with that part which invested government with the selection of magistrates connected with the local interests of the countries; because all magistrates so connected must carry with them weight and respectability. He also approved of the clause which levied the expences on the disturbed districts. On the whole, he could see no objection to the measure, as no man was inclined to go farther than himself to punish offenders who outraged the laws.

was of opinion, that government deserved all possible credit for their forbearance; for in his mind, the cases that had been stated would warrant a law of a very different description. It would have been better to enact a law of a permanent than a temporary nature. When laws in cases of this kind were too mild, it was a false humanity that dictated them.

explained, that the special constables were intended to be formed of respectable farmers' sons. The law would go forth to the country, not as a dubious measure proposed by administration, but as one sanctioned by the unanimous approbation of parliament; a circumstance which would contribute much to its efficiency. If government should in future be compelled to come to parliament for some stronger measure, they could come with a good grace, seeing that they had not asked for more than they believed in their conscience to be absolutely necessary. The Bill contained nothing that was irreconcileable to law, or the constitution; but, on the contrary, was consistent with its best principles.

said, he must confess that he had heard, at first, with much anxiety, the proposition for such a Bill; but that anxiety had been entirely removed by the statement he had heard.

Flood gave the fullest confidence to the right hon. gentleman's statement, as far as it went; but he was happy to find, that he had made no allusion to the part of the country which he had the honour to represent. It appeared that out of the 34 counties of Ireland, only four were disturbed. If all the counties were like that which sent him to parlia- ment, the Bill would be unnecessary. He thought the unhappy jealousy which prevailed amongst the lower orders, might be ended by a law which would do away Orange-men and all other party distinctions. He highly approved of the provision for rewarding the civil officers; as few men could be found in any situation, high or low, who would exert themselves without being well paid.

said, that as the right hon. gentleman's statement appeared to be extremely candid, and as the measure itself seemed as mild as it was judicious, he should certainly make no opposition to it in its present stage.

supported the Bill.

entered into explanations of some length, in answer to the objections of different gentlemen. He defended the county magistrates against the suspicion of supineness. The proposed law might be assumed to be strong enough. All that was wanted were responsible persons to carry it into execution. In answer to a remark of sir F. Flood, the right hon. gentleman observed, that instead of there being only four counties in a state of disturbance, it was probable that twenty might be deemed in a state the reverse of tranquillity. Even Wexford, which sent the hon. baronet to parliament, was lately represented by the grand jury, to be rather in an alarming state.

Leave was given to bring in the Bill.