from any desire that the committee should report in the affirmative. Perhaps the House would rather be inclined to think that he and those around him, from the responsible situation in which they were placed, were interested in wishing that no proceeding should take place. They had certainly shown no anxiety, either individually, or in their character of ministers, to rush into an inquiry such as this; but their duty now compelled them to sacrifice to the ends of justice those feelings of reluctance which they, as individuals, must entertain. From the number of cheers which proceeded from the gents. opposite, he doubted not that there was one in reserve for the declaration of the opinion, that he did not consider this committee to have any other effect or power than that of determining the mode in which the illustrious individual might best vindicate her character consistently with the ends of justice. If it should be reported that there were no grounds for farther proceedings, how much would that report be prejudiced by the mixed character of judges and parties concerned, which might be imputed to those learned gentlemen? Looking to the interests of public justice, and to the protection of their illustrious client, he might confidently appeal to the honorable and learned gents. (Mr. Brougham and Mr. Denman); whether their hands were not more unfettered, by having no concern with that committee, than would be the case if they were appointed members of it. If,

as in the case of Sir Thomas Rumbold, the committee should recommend a farther proceeding, either by impeachment or by any other mode; the House would first take the precaution of referring the report of the other committee to á committee of the whole House, so that the reports of all the committees on the subjeet might be in the view of the House in judging of the question. He had described the course which he thought best for bringing the question without prejudice, before the House at large. He now thought it necessary to notice some of the arguments which had been used by the hon. and learned gentleman, one of her Majesty's legal advisers, (Mr. Brougham.) And first he could assure the hon. and learned gent. and the hon. member near him, (Mr. Creevey, we under stood,) whose tone on this subject was, he might say, in a spirit of contradiction, that they could not place his Majesty's ministers in a situation more responsible than they themselves conceived their present situation to be. They felt the delicacy and the importance of the proposition before the House, and they asked nothing of indulgence in the examination of their conduct. Ministers were frequently at issue on particular questions with hon. members at the other side, who were themselves in extremes upon the same subject. He (Mr. Brougham) thought then that it was by no means a duty of ministers to urge an inquiry into the subject; but that it was an imperative duty upon them to refrain from intro

ducing the subject to the House, unless it was forced upon them by the strong hand of necessity. This was an opinion of the hon. and learned gent. which he (Lord Castlereagh) had not found to be in any degree relaxed; for last night, even under feelings which actuated him, he made it rather a matter of charge that the forbearance of his Majesty's government was not carried far enough. He had urged that some ground should be left still open for negotiation, in order to see whether something further might not be done. He (Lord Castlereagh) conceived-the hon. and learned gentleman would bear him out in the assertion-that, after the transactions which had occurred within the last 48 hours, little could be expected from any farther negotiation with the illustrious personage. He himself could bear testimony, and had in fact, borne testimony, how little her Majesty was under the advice of those who should be considered as her legal advisers. The publication of the papers, which the hon. and learned gent. complained of as having been sent before the public partly untrue, and garbled, incorrect, and imperfect, was a proof that her Majesty had not been swayed by the advice of those who were her constitutional advisers, but had taken other, and he would add criminal advice, and appealed to the lowest order of the people. (hear, hear, from the ministerial benches.) He regretted that, on such an occasion, her Majesty had not resorted to the advice of those who were her professional

P

advisers, and that she should have suffered by a base and pernicious interference. That her Majesty should act with a consciousness of innocence, every man of feeling would rejoice; but it would have been matter of satisfaction to have found her guided by the counsel of those who were constitutionally, he would say, appointed to be her advisers. With respect to the plan adopted by his Majesty's ministers, he would state to the House, that full a month ago their intention was known to the hon. and learned gent. They had, without reservation, communicated to him what would be the result of the step ber Majesty had just taken. They had most unequivocally made known what must be the inevitable result of her Majesty's arrival in this country. He protested against the observation of a right hon. gentleman (Mr. Tierney) on a former occasion, that it was incumbent on ministers to bring the affairs of the Queen before parliament, previously to any grant being made. They conceived that no such necessity existed at one time; they imagined that, after a separation which had existed so long--which had been effected with the knowledge of his late Majesty, and which he might say had been sanctioned by parliament, which had passed a bill providing for her Majesty (then Princess of Wales) under the arrangement-after that separation, which there was no hope of seeing any immediate termination of, it was not intended that any measure connected with her Majesty should be proposed

to parliament; and he had no hesitation in stating, that if her Majesty had allowed that practical separation to continue which had so long subsisted, and had remained abroad, so far from bringing on any measure of this kind, his Majesty's ministers would have felt it their duty to avert this painful examination. (hear, hear, hear.) Did the hon. member then conceive that this, like other money matters, might not be arranged without previous communication to the House? The crown, it should be recollected; originated all money questions in that House, and no provision could be made for any branch of the royal family, unless previously recom+ mended by the crown. In contracting with a foreign power for a subsidy, no previous mention was made to parliament of the sum so to be given. No doubt the treaty would be afterwards to be submitted to parliament, and such would be the understanding with all the contracting parties; but still it was the practice to arrange the amount of the sum, without any previons application to parliament. It was said that the offer had been made to her Majesty on condition of her resigning her titles and rank as Queen. No such proposition could be made, nor could it be said that proceedings should be commenced as against her Majesty, in consequence of her not resigning her honours and titles as Queen. Her Majesty could not resign those titles: they belonged to her, and they could not. be removed, unless (as he understood his lord