mmended, which he could urge constitutional grounds; but the uence of this objection was greattrengthened on his mind by a relection of the mode in which set committees had lately been apnted, the manner in which they I conducted themselves, the meaes they recommended, and the untunate associations connected with m. He would not examine the vs which had been enacted on the ggestion of such committees, but could not forget that their acts ad been of such a nature that a green g and a secret committee were condered by the public as the prelude the most monstrous displays of instice, harshness, and tyranny. It uld not be denied that there exist1 great sensitiveness and irritability the public mind on the question ow before the House, and it would e unfortunate if these feelings should e increased by seeing a mode of proeeding adopted, so odious and oboxious, as that by a secret commitee. He therefore conjured their lord ships, as they valued their own character and estimation with the country, not to adopt such a mode of proceeding.

The Lord Chancellor, after stating that he never had so painful a duty to discharge as now, defended the appointment of a committee of inquiry, which appeared to him the step best calculated to prevent injustice. The objection of his noble friend (Lord Holland) to the appointment of a committee, did not appear to him well founded. There might be judicial proceedings at the instance of the Commons, after the committee had reported on the papers before the House, as the secret committee could, in that case, be regarded only in the light of a grand jury, deciding that matter of accusation existed. The committee, on examining the papers,

would declare, either that there were grounds of accusation, or not. If the former, the House would know how to deal with it; and if the latter, no injustice could be done. What, therefore, could accrue from the appointment of the committee? Good God! could their lordships be said to be deciding against individuals, because they stood forward to protect them from the result of disclosures, where there had not been found grounds of trial? He entirely agreed with Lord Liverpool as to the legal character of the supposed crime, which, from being committed abroad, could not be amenable to the ordinary course of justice. In a case like the present, Parliament must interfere, or there would be no interference whatever.

The Earl of Donoughmore, who had usually opposed the measures of ministry, gave them his entire support in the present question. The noble lords who had argued the question upon his side of the house, appeared to have forgotten the nature of the proceeding, the merits of which they were discussing. Those noble lords seemed to regard the proceeding as one which was to criminate, and even finally condemn, the illustrious person to whose conduct it was applied: but was it not most clear that the proceeding amounted simply to this-to an inquiry on the part of that House, conducted by a secret committee, conducted in the manner most decorous, most delicate, and most respectful, both towards the parties concerned, and towards the public, and conducted in the manner most peculiarly calculated to allay that irritation of which such frequent mention had been made?

Lords Lansdowne and Holland severally explained, after which the reference to a committee was carried without a division.

The same day was marked in the

House of Commons by a more animated and interesting debate. It was opened by a communication from the Queen herself, which was read by Mr Brougham, and was conceived in the following terms:

"The Queen thinks it necessary to inform the House of Commons, "that she has been induced to return to England in consequence of the measures pursued against her honour and her peace for some time by secret agents abroad, and lately sanctioned by the conduct of the Government at home. In adopting this course, her Majesty has had no other purpose whatsoever but the defence of her character, and the maintenance of those just rights which have devolved upon her by the death of that revered Monarch, in whose high honour and unshaken affection she had always found her surest support.

"Upon her arrival, the Queen is surprised to find that a message has been sent down to Parliament, requiring its attention to written documents; and she learns with still greater astonishment, that there is an intention of proposing that these should be referred to a select committee. It is this day fourteen years since the first charges were brought forward against her Majesty. Then, and upon every occasion during that long period, she has shewn the utmost readiness to meet her accusers, and to court the fullest inquiry into her conduct. She now also desires an open investigation, in which she may see both the charges and the witnesses against her -a privilege not denied to the meanest subject of the realm. In the face of the Sovereign, the Parliament, and the country, she solemnly protests against the formation of a select tribunal to examine documents, privately prepared by her adversaries, as a proceeding unknown to the law of the land, and a flagrant violation of all the

principles of justice. She relies wit full confidence upon the integrity o the House of Commons for defeating the only attempt she has any reason to fear.

"The Queen cannot forbear to add, that even before any proceed ings were resolved upon, she had beer treated in a manner too well calcula ted to prejudge her case. The omis sion of her name in the liturgy; the withholding the means of conveyance usually afforded to all the branches of the Royal Family; the refusal even of an answer to her application for place of residence in the royal man sions; and the studied slight, both of English ministers abroad, and of the agents of all foreign powers over whom the English Government had any influence-must be viewed as measures designed to prejudice the world against her, and could only have been justified by trial and conviction."

The message being read, Lord Castlereagh entered into an elaborate exposé of all the views and principles upon which Government had acted in this critical proceeding. The House would readily perceive the great pain of that duty which devolved on him in introducing to their notice one of the most delicate, anxious, and momentous public questions that ever was agitated. Generally speaking, Parliament, in replying to a royal mes sage, had a direct and simple course to follow; but he was sure that enough of temper had been disclosed within these walls-and he might appeal to the declaration of the learned gentleman himself, (Mr Brougham) whether there had not been enough of exaggeration and partial representation without doors to call on him so far to travel beyond the real necessity of the case, as to offer such explanations as would make the circumstances of which the House were to judge ge

lly understood. His Majesty's isters came down to the House her as persecutors nor prosecu-no part of their conduct, he sure, warranted such a charge. Majesty threw himself on the at council of the land, in a case ch nearly interested the nation as I as himself-called on them to to the case, and to tender him h advice as they would think best ted to the situation in which the intry now stood. There appeared him no doubt as to the proper urse to be pursued; and he could ure the House, that no vote which y one might give, would fetter his cision as to ulterior proceedings, even as to whether there should any proceedings at all. But at the ne time, he should mislead the buse-and on that point he depreted the idea of the learned gentlean (Mr Brougham) deceiving himIf if he disguised that in these mmunications there was matter that avely and deeply implicated the ilstrious personage to whose conduct e documents referred. He was stonished that the Queen's advisers hould have impressed her with the elief that any guilt could attach to er, or even to the lowest individual the land, without a public hearing f the whole merits of the case, withut a full examination of evidence, uch as was in all cases admitted in a court of justice, and without a full power of cross-examining that evidence, so as to afford every opportunity of proving or disproving the charge imputed.

The first question before the House, related to the course of proceeding best calculated for securing justice to all parties concerned. He proposed a committee, appointed not by ballot, but by nomination. He would wish an impartial committee, yet he would not propose Mr

Brougham and Mr Denman, the Queen's confidential advisers, as members of it. He conceived, that by so doing, he would place these gentlemen in a very awkward and unpleasant situation. Lord Castlereagh could not help remarking on the opposite line which prevailed among some members on the opposite side. Mr Tierney had, on a former occasion, urged, that no step should be taken with regard to the Queen, till the charges against her had been fully investigated, and till either her guilt or her innocence were fully established. Mr Brougham, on the contrary, denounced ministers as having precipitated such an investigation; and declared, that they could not be justified in the eyes of the country, till they had shewn themselves to have made every possible sacrifice in order to avert it. He conceivedthe honourable and learned gentleman would bear him out in the assertion that, after the transactions which had occurred within the last forty-eight hours, little could be expected from any further negociation 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 honourable and learned gentleman 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 would ask for what purpose had those communications been made, and what was the use made of them? He regretted

that, on such an occasion, her Majesty had not resorted to the advice of those who were her professional advisers, and that she should have suffered by a base and pernicious interference. It was a full month ago since ministers had communicated to Mr Brougham the principle on which they intended to act. 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. He deprecated the assertion, that it was a flagrant breach of duty to have held out what was termed a bribe to her Majesty that it was a forgetfulness of constitutional duty to have offered any sum of money, without previously consulting the House, who were ultimately to vote it. 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 previous 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 the legislature concurred in an act for that purpose. Therefore such a proposition could not be made to, or effectively complied with by her

Majesty. What was understood was that by her Majesty remaining abroad, the whole of those conflicts would be avoided which must arise from her re sidence in this country; for it could not be denied, that, if her Majesty remained here, with the rights and pri vileges of her rank as Queen, it would occasion daily conflicts in a particular quarter, which there would be no lack of disposition to turn to another pur pose. The understanding with respect to her Majesty's title as Queen was, that (assuming her residence abroad) she should travel under such a title as might prevent the recurrence of those circumstances which must be painful to her Majesty, and which arose from conflicts with public officers abroad while travelling under her title as Queen. But this was never meant to be understood as requiring her Ma jesty to surrender any legal right or title which she possessed; and the honourable and learned gentleman possessed a document which would put this matter beyond all doubt, and shew that no such thing was ever in contemplation as to take away any of her Majesty's legal rights or titles.

As to the reports of his Majesty's ministers acting as men and as ministers in opposition to her Majesty, and wishing to deprive her of those rights and privileges which she ought to enjoy, he would say, that there was no foundation for the charge. There existed no such disposition amongst his Majesty's ministers. But in looking at the privileges of her Majesty, the House should distinguish between those which she held as matters of right, and those which she enjoyed as matters of grace and favour on the part of his Majesty. If not debarred from those which belonged to her as matters of right, she ought not to complain that she did not enjoy those which are only given as matters of faAs an instance of a privilege

vour.

of the latter description, he would mention reception at court;-of this the King himself must be the best and sole judge, for no one would assert that he had not a right to regulate his own court and his own family; and no one could justly complain of his doing so. When this subject was before the House on a former occasion, it was held that the King was the regulator of his own court, and the Queen of her drawing-room; and that the King had the undoubted right to arrange his court and family as he pleased. He apprehended that any honours paid to the Royal Family were derived from the favour of the Crown; and any want of respect to the Crown might be a ground for depriving any member of that family of those privileges. He apprehended that the coronation was also a privilege which must be considered as derived from the grace and favour of the Crown; but he would admit, that in this the Crown should not act irrationally, but upon intelligible principles. In the same manner must be viewed the reception by authorities at home or abroad; they all proceeded from the grace and favour of the Sovereign. Was it meant to be said, that the Crown, for exercising its undoubted prerogative in withholding these distinctions, was to be accused of injustice towards that individual whom its determination affected? He should be prepared, at another time, to contend, that it was entirely in the discretion of the Crown, whether the members of the Royal Family should be prayed for in the liturgy, by name, or generally as the Royal Family; but, above all, he should contend that it was for the Crown to grant or withhold such a favour. As to the treatment of the Queen by the foreign ministers of the Crown, this point had been settled since 1817, when instructions had been issued in consequence

of application made by the minister at Stutgard. These instructions distinctly said, that they were not in their official character to give to her Majesty any public or official reception; that they were not themselves to be the instrument of introducing her Majesty at foreign courts; and that if any foreign court should think fit to give a public reception to her, they were not to assist on the occasion as the ministers of this country. But it would be found that it was laid down in those instructions, quite as broadly, that they were equally enjoined to obtain for, and give to her Majesty, every possible facility and comfort in the prosecution of her travels through the kingdoms where they might be stationed; and that she was not to receive any interruption. He hoped the House, at least, were satisfied with the explanations which he had given; but he had no hesitation in saying, that the miseries which had attended her Majesty's travels arose from the situation of her Majesty herself. He had already explained, that her Majesty, since the accession of his Majesty, had travelled under no other character than that of Queen of England; and the fact was, that her Majesty was in the habit of pressing the question of her public situation upon the public authorities of countries; and, first, upon our own ministers, because they were the channels of the highest respectability for introduction to foreign courts. As to guards of honour, which were matters of favour, and by no means matters of right, they were not usually granted to those travelling under an incognito; and from this, and other circumstances, it was to be inferred, that her Majesty's own acts were the only reason why every facility, of every kind, was not experienced by her. There had been no unbecoming severity exercised towards her Ma