Page images
PDF
EPUB

by the learned lord, by a piece of dexterity which his natural candour sometimes allowed to be seen through. The question was, not whether they should blame the issue of an order directing the King to be prayed for by name; it was not in ordering the King to be prayed for by name, but the implied omission which gave to this order its questionable character. The order issued to the Church of Scotland was in the same terms as that to the Church of England, and it was certainly understood by the whole body of the church of England, as an order not to pray for the Queen by name. What then was the natural construction to be put upon this order, but that the Church of Scotland were commanded in the same manner to omit the name of the Queen? But the King was not the head of the Church in Scotland, there was no Act of Uniformity which could apply to Scotland, and the statute of the 10th of Anne gave no authority to order the omission of any name.

Lord Castlereagh conceived that the whole question was unworthy of the notice of parliament. It related merely to two slight cases of individual injury, the proper place to try which was in a court of law. Such questions were brought down; the business of the Session was delayed in discussing them, and it must be obvious, that they could answer no other purpose but that of sending statements abroad calculated to poison the public mind. What, he asked, were the cases introduced? They were cases already settled; one of them referred to the decision of an inferior court, which had been disapproved and set aside by the superior court; and the other was the case of an individual to which his Majesty's government had given no sanction or approval. Why, he again asked, were not such matters left for the decision

of the law courts, or why was the House called upon to waste its time, in discussing such cases?

After some further conversation, the motion was negatived by 110 to 35.

The only remaining step consisted in the passing of the Queen's annuity bill, in the House of Lords. This question, on that great theatre of former conflict, did not produce the warm discussion that was expected. Lord Darnley agreed for once with Lord Liverpool, in approving of the sum which had been proposed. He could not say, with all due respect for the House of Commons, that he agreed with the other vote, by which they had declared that no censure was to be passed on his Majesty's ministers. He was afraid, that whether they acted right or wrong, there was a strong impression, that under any circumstances whatever, the present government were to be supported. And though he had reason to believe, that if he were to move an address to his Majesty, praying that the Queen's name be restored to the Liturgy, there was a number of individuals in that House, with some of whom he was acquainted, and others whose conduct during the late proceedings had shewn they preferred their duty to their country to their duty to ministers, who would favour him with their votes, yet he was disposed for the present to relinquish that intention. At the same time he declined giving any pledge against hereafter proposing a measure, which he considered highly desirable, and one, the voluntary adoption of which would do the greatest honour to his Majesty. He thought her Majesty had been substantially acquitted; but he did not wish it should be supposed that he approved of her conduct in every instance. Had she been better advised, and had she not suffered certain publications to appear under the sanction

of her name, her claim would have been irresistible, and he would not have been under the necessity of relinquishing at present his motion for bringing it forward. There was a point to which he could not forbear drawing the serious attention of their lordships. It would be a great calamity, at least it ought to be so appreciated by all those who were anxious for the security of our establishment, if the members of the Established Church, who ought to find in its bosom the oblivion of all political differences, were driven out of its pale by being daily reminded, by the omission of the Queen's name, of those unfortunate circumstances in which the Sovereign and his Consort were placed, and which had disgraced the country. He was informed that the consequence of that omission, had already been a considerable secession from the Established Church, and he believed it. He even understood that one of those reverend gentlemen who mingled politics with their sacred functions, had been under the necessity of exhorting his congregation, because he had found that a very great secession had taken place in consequence of the religious feelings of pious Christians being shocked by the omission of her Majesty's name in the Liturgy.

The Lord Chancellor conceived there could be no doubt whatever as to the legality of the exclusion. The Archbishop of Canterbury apprehended, if there had been any secession on this ground, of which he had never heard, it must have been from political only, not from religious, motives. Lord Ellenborough said, when he considered her Majesty's conduct, he could not see any ground which entitled her to such a favour as to be allowed so large an income. When he looked at that conduct as it had been proved at the Bar of the House;

when he looked at her replies to addresses, and her letter to his Majes ty, he could not think that the munificent provision now proposed would be employed as it was meant, to support the dignity of the situation and character of Queen. He feared, on the contrary, that whether at home or abroad, so large a provision would only enable her to disgrace still more deeply than she had done, the high situation which she held. He conceived that motives of economy might also be taken into account. At the same time he did not think it expedient to propose a lesser sum, at the risk of occasioning a contest between the two Houses of Parliament, and reviving discussions which the public interest demanded should no longer be agitated. He wished to do nothing which might prevent her Majesty from falling as soon as possible into that oblivion to which she ought to be consigned. When this bill should have passed, he trusted that the House would have got rid of the subject altogether; that it would no longer disturb Parliament. This he thought formed the great benefit of throwing out the bill of Pains and Penalties, which pending, the irritation of the country would never have subsided. He trusted that the Queen would not, for the sake of keeping up that irritation, refuse the magnificent provision made for her by Parliament, and prefer becoming the pensioner of a party.

The Marquis of Lansdowne was prepared to accede to the grant, and was happy that his noble friend, Earl Darnley, had followed his recommendation, of not pressing any motion on the subject, Disapproving of the Queen's letter to the King, and of her answers to addresses, he still thought much allowance was to be made for the situation in which she had been placed. If, in the pro

ceedings instituted against her, she had found in the Peers of England, persons not confining themselves to the duties of peers, but exercising the functions of prosecutors-if she had been led to think that a process new to the constitution, had been set on foot by ministers against her, and sanctioned by that House, he was bound to say that improprieties in her conduct since her arrival in this country there might have been, but no member of that House, after the

abandonment in which she had been left in point of dignity and comfort, ought to wish her to be made responsible for them. He, therefore, did not object to the present grant; and he thought that her Majesty, not being called upon to wave her claim

to the insertion of her name in the Liturgy, was not bound to refuse the money. She had been ill-advised to refuse it, and he still trusted she would be well-advised to accept it.

The bill passed without any farther observation or discussion.

-The bill having thus been carried through all its stages, received the royal assent, and waited only the Queen's acceptance of the sum thus voted. This acceptance, after some delay, and notwithstanding the contrary recommendation of injudicious advisers, she was wise enough to grant. Thus this long series of proceedings, which, during more than six months, had agitated the House and the nation, was brought to a final termination.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

CHAPTER II.

FINANCE.

Introduction of the Subject.-Motions by Mr Maberly, Mr Creevey, and Mr Hume.-Navy Estimates.-Army Estimates; numerous Divisions.-Ordnance Estimates.-The Budget.-Address to the Crown on the subject of Economy and Retrenchment.

THE agitation of the House and the country on this painful question being brought to a period, the chief subject of contest during the remainder of the session, was the standing subject of finance. On this field a new combatant had recently appear ed, who, by activity and determination, soon thrust himself forward into a conspicuous place. We took once occasion to complain of the popular chiefs as advancing charges which were too vague, too sweeping, and never laying their finger upon any real or practical grievance. This charge is certainly redeemed by Mr Hume, who can be accused of nothing but the excess of minuteness. If the others attacked no detail, he attacks indiscriminately every detail. He somewhere, we think, lays it down as a maxim, to advance all the charges which he has heard, or can think of, taking the chance of being able to make good some one or other of them. He has thus brought forward many rash assertions, and inaccurate calculations; yet, presenting an immovable front to all the buffets with which he was overwhelmed, he con

tinued to press towards his point. As money is the subject on which the House shews itself always the most sensitive, and on which it divides stronger against ministers than on any other, he was sure of support whenever he had got any good ground to stand upon. His disputations, hence, though too much multiplied, and often trifling, had the effect of introducing a more systematic plan of keeping accounts, and a more rigid determination to practise economy than heretofore. Our readers, therefore, will not, we suppose, be unwilling to follow this determined investigator through the narrative of his multifarious career during the present session.

The financial campaign was opened on the 1st February by Mr Maberly, who moved for a variety of accounts relative to the sinking fund. Its nominal amount of 17,000,000l., he observed, was rendered nugatory by a loan of 12,000,000l., which reduced its real amount to 5,000,000/. He urged that this fictitious system should be done away with, and the sinking fund stated in the public ac

counts at what it really was, being only the excess of national income above expenditure. This view was seconded by Mr Grenfell. The Chancellor of the Exchequer observed, that the country, he was glad to say, had now arrived at that period when they might bid adieu to new loans and new taxes. The expenditure of the year would be met by the revenue; and he had to congratulate the country on a great increase of the export trade.

In the course of a desultory debate, Sir J. Newport complained of the great rise which had taken place in the expense of collecting the Irish revenue. Since 1808, it had risen from 111. to 25%. per cent. Mr Vansittart explained this to arise, in a great measure, from a large part of the expense being no longer charged on the merchants as formerly, but now defrayed by the revenue. Mr Baring and Mr Philips complained of the unintelligible manner in which the public accounts were made up; but the old mode, according to Mr Vansittart, served many useful purposes, though it was not comprehended by the honourable gentlemen opposite.

A pretty warm conversation also took place on the 9th, when the minister moved the appointment of a committee of ways and means. Mr Creevey referred to the petitions from the agricultural and commercial interests, which fully proved the monstrous distress under which the country laboured-distress so great, as to prepare one part of the community to go to war with the other for the possession of its property; and yet in this deplorable state, nothing in the way of relief was even hinted at by government-they heard no plan for the amelioration of distress-night after night they had before them the old story of committees of supply and

ways and means; but they heard not one word about reform-not one word upon the necessity of retrenchment. Under such circumstances, he would not consent to grant one farthing of the public money-he would divide the House upon every vote, until he had some distinct pledge from those who took upon them to manage the affairs of the country, that some plan of practical reform should be submitted to that House. He would call upon the landholder and the fundholder to unite to unite against monsters-the monsters were not the fundholders; the monsters were those who held places under the crown, and appeared in that house. They appeared in that house under various characters, as lay lords of the Admiralty, as puisne commissioners of the India Board, but they shewed that they were real pensioners-dependents on the bounty of the crown; their presence in that house was useless it was worse than useless, for there they were to vote on all occasions with the minister, never with the people. Let it not be supposed that he objected to the responsible ministers of the crown sitting in that house, their presence was necessary; but it was a monstrous thing to see persons holding places at pleasure under the crown, sitting and voting in that house; these formed a part of the pack which stood firm and united, it was found impossible to break in upon them. There were 72 persons in that house who held places to the amount of 120,000l. a-year, and 40 members were sufficient to make a house, to vote away the public mo ney, or to invade the public liberties! Was such an abuse to be endured? Was it possible from such men to expect the introduction of any plan of economical reform? There was another body of men in that house who were called independent members;

« EelmineJätka »