the question, and observed with derision, that ministers, amid their ostentatious professions of attachment to the House of Brunswick, had never made the slightest allusion to that illustrous person who now held the name and dignity of Queen. It was not his intention to find fault with the exercise of any power belonging to his Majesty for regulating the forms of the Church in the performance of divine service, although it was certain that very considerable difference of opinion was entertained upon that point, and that the late order had occasioned much surprise. He understood a proposition was to be submitted in the committee for a vote of credit to the amount of one fourth of the civil list. This, however, he apprehended would not suffice to provide an adequate establishment for the Queen, whose former allowance, as Princess of Wales, had ceased at the moment of his late Majesty's death. Was she then, the Queen of this country, to be left wandering in beggary through foreign lands, or would not Parliament rather make a provision for her support in a manner suitable to her rank and station? He submitted, there fore, to his Majesty's ministers, whether it would not be right to propose a distinct allowance, and must con. tend that they were bound both in justice and honour to disclose to the House all their views upon this sub. ject.

Lord Castlereagh, while he declared his readiness to communicate any information which could be useful, conceived that he would best consult the feelings of the House and of the public, by declining to go into any detail on this topic. He only gave assurance, that the high person in question would experience no additional difficulty or personal

embarrassment in consequence of the event which had occurred.

Mr Tierney regretted that the subject had been introduced, but conceived it necessarily arose from the omission of the Queen's name in the church service. He would not grant to a person labouring under a heavy cloud of suspicion any portion of public money until that suspicion was removed. He could not suppress his conviction that somebody had been scandalously ill used either the King had been betrayed, or the Queen had been insulted. He would not consult any feelings, nor yield to any supposed delicacy, which would impose siience upon him after what had taken place. It was time to speak out openly and honestly. He, as well as many others, had certainly heard rumours extremely injurious to the Queen's character-rumours which, if true, he had no hesitation in saying, proved her unworthy to sit upon the British throne. But it was impossible for him to act upon rumour, upon what might be mere idle calumny; this would be deemed gross injustice in the case of the humblest individual. It was, however, asserted, that a commission had been sent out for the purpose of collecting evidence on this subject. Was that true? and if so, did the noble lord imagine, that, with such evidence in his pocket, he was not bound to produce it to Parliament before he applied for a vote of money to the person whom it affected? If the rumours to which he alluded had any foundation, it was the duty of Parliament to take some steps in order to rescue his Majesty from the degradation of sharing his throne with such a partner. If they were false, there could be as little doubt that it was their duty to maintain her Majesty in all her rights and

dignities. He now called upon them in the name of justice, and in the name of the English monarchy, to give Parliament some information, and to submit the whole case to its inquiry. He pledged himself most solemnly, that, if a case should be made out against the Queen, he would second whatever measure might be requisite to set his Majesty's mind at rest. Should no case, on the contrary, be made out, it might and must be considered as a misfortune, that parties so connected, and in so elevated a station, could not live together; yet this, as unavoidable, must be borne. The Queen of this country, however, she must then be considered; and out of the mouths of the gentlemen opposite must that name proceed before he would consent to vote one shilling of the publie money.

This speech of Mr Tierney involved admissions which were exceedingly inconvenient and disagreeable to the friends of her Majesty. Mr Brougham, whom his situation rendered her natural defender, rose, stating, that he differed entirely from his right honourable friend in the view which he had taken of this unfortunate subject; and it was quite new to him to learn that any Parliamentary recognition, and much less any mode of speaking in Parliament, or that any ceremonial of the church was at all essential to make out the title of a Queen, or to vindicate the rights appertaining to that character. According to his understanding of the constitution, she who was the wedded wife of a King regnant, was eo ipso, Queen-consort; and her claim to that title was as indisputable as that of the King himself. It was not the less so because she was prayed for in no liturgy; or because her name appeared in no order of council; or because no addresses

either of condolence or congratulation were presented to her. As little could she be affected by the noble lord preferring to call her a high personage, rather than to describe her by the title to which she had succeeded. Mr B. therefore conceived there was nothing to prevent the advance of money to her Majesty upon the civil list, even though her name should not be introduced. He must, at the same time, state distinctly, that he was wholly unacquainted with any grounds of suspicion. He refused his ears to all such rumours; as long as she was the King's consort, he knew and should treat her only in the character of Queen-consort. He was wholly ignorant of any inquiries that had been instituted; he listened not to their reported results; nor would he suffer his mind to receive any sinister impressions. But if a charge should ever be brought forward, he would deal with it as became an honest member of Parliament; and he would endeavour to do justice between the parties most concerned; though, God knew, they were not the only parties that were concerned. Until that moment, big with importance, with unspeakable importance to the parties, with an importance of which those who were ignorant of the case could form no conception-until, he repeated, that moment should arrive, his lips were sealed. The House might, however, in justice, recollect

in justice to her whose character had been so freely dealt with on one side, and whose name even had been suppressed on the other, and without forming any premature opinionthat, throughout the whole period of her past tribulation, she had never been slow either to meet or to repel accusation. It was not, therefore, too much to give credit to her now, for having the same alacrity in under

taking, and the same facility in making good, her defence. Never was there a question in which temper and moderation were so indispensable; the voice of party ought to be extinct for no man could calculate the consequences which might follow.

Notwithstanding this, when the vote came under discussion, Mr Tierney demanded how, under this vote, provision could be made for the Queen. The Chancellor of the Exchequer observed:-If the demise of his late Majesty had not taken place, an annuity, under the act of Parliament, would have been payable as to the Princess of Wales; and the resolution now before the House will undoubtedly empower the Treasury still to continue that payment to the individual.

Mr Tierney. In the first place, I totally deny the power to grant this annuity; because the grant depended on the life of the King. It stood on a particular footing; it had reference to the continuance of the King's life, and was not attached to the particular person whose rank would be affected by that event. Besides, who is to receive this annuity? There is now no. such person as the Princess of Wales. If they intended to grant to her Majesty that which had previously been conferred on the Princess of Wales, words to that effect ought to be introduced; and if the right honourable gentleman advances one penny, under the authority of that resolution, for the service adverted to, he will be guilty of a great offence against the House of Commons. The Chancellor, however, insisted in reply: An alteration of station cannot divest the individual of a local and personal interest in the grant; and therefore the annuity will be payable to the individual, under the authority

of the House, although her political situation may be changed. But Mr Tierney retorted: She has ceased to be Princess of Wales; there is no such person. How, then, I ask, can this resolution grant an annuity to an individual not originally in the contemplation of Parliament? I know the right honourable gentleman must not mention the word Queen. I am quite aware of that. I should be very glad to hear the right honourable gentleman use the word, and I should be still better pleased if I could get him to record it on the journals.

The two honourable members thus continued to reassert their respective positions, while Mr Hume urged: What reason is there, I wish to know, for not stating specifically, that the annuity formerly granted to the Princess of Wales shall in future be paid to her Majesty the Queen? By such a statement the objection of the right honourable gentleman will at once be obviated. Mr Lushington endeavoured to shew, that this, in point of form, would render necessary the insertion of the names of all the other persons concerned; and after all this skirmishing, no opposition was finally made to the vote.

On another ground, these votes were the subject of a pretty serious discussion in the Upper House. Lord Lauderdale contended, (February 24) that the granting of sums by the Commons, which could not be appropriated, nor consequently come before their Lordships during the present Parliament, was a manifest breach of their privileges; and, unless noticed in some shape or other, would form a most pernicious precedent. He perfectly well knew, that when sums were voted in a committee of supply, it was the practice to apply certain portions of the money so voted to particular purposes; but then, this was

always done under the supposition that the application would appear in the act of appropriation; and thus, before the close of the session, be brought under the consideration of both Houses of Parliament. A resolution for supply, voted by the House of Commons, if not followed up by an act of appropriation, was, in fact, only so much waste paper. But the present was a very peculiar case; for this and the other House of Parliament had been informed that a dissolution was about to take place. The resolution was adopted in one House of Commons, and the appropriation was to stand over to another Parliament. The vote was not for services that might be expected to come under the cognizance of Parliament in the regular course of business, but for payments which were to cease on the demise of the King. Among these payments were several pensions and annuities, one of which was 35,000l. a-year to the Princess of Wales; but the resolutions bore that these sums should be paid to the Prince Regent himself, although they were granted for other persons. He complained that the other House of Parliament, knowing that those annuities were to expire on the demise of the Crown, thought fit to say, on its own authority, that they should be continued. The message requested them to adopt the necessary measures for expediting the public services. The House of Commons certainly took the quickest mode of doing this; but in accomplishing their purpose they had broken through every rule in proceeding to do that by a resolution which could only legally be done by Act of Parliament. The noble lord finally read three resolutions, arising out of his views on this subject. The first merely enumerated the money votes which had been passed by the Lower House.

"Resolved-That the Commons House of Parliament, informed by his Majesty's message of the intended dissolution of Parliament, have, in these resolutions, attempted to appropriate money to be paid for services subsequent to the dissolution, which can only legally be effected by an Act of Parliament appropriating the supplies voted; and that they have further, in a most unprecedented manner, assumed the power of providing for, and authorising the payment of, certain pensions and annuities, subsequent to the dissolution of Parliament, which by law are declared to be at an end.

"Resolved-That under these circumstances, we feel it our duty to declare, that though we regard these proceedings as derogatory to the privileges of this House and of Parliament, yet we are induced, by a sense of the state in which public business is now placed, to forbear from any immediate proceedings, and to declare that we will concur in indemnifying those who may pay money, or otherwise act under these resolu tions, which we must nevertheless deprecate, as threatening the subversion of the best and wisest principles of the constitution of our country."

Their Lordships would see, that in proposing these resolutions it was by no means his wish to embarrass in any degree the measures of Government, but merely to enter a protest against the proceeding which had taken place being hereafter drawn into precedent. He concluded by moving the resolutions.

The Earl of Liverpool was certainly ready to admit, that the resolutions moved by the noble earl were consistent with the description he had given of them in the conclusion of his speech. They were well drawn up, as to his view of offering no ob