he would venture to say, that no officer who served in Germany last war would deny him a claim to uncommon abilities: indeed he had never heard of more than one commander (lord G. Germain) in that army, who did not always speak of him in terms of praise, in terms of admiration. He concluded with declaring, that no good could be expected from the present men in office, who stood not on their own legs, and dared not maintain a single opinion, unless it was backed and supported by their colleagues, who received their final instructions from an authority they dare not acknowledge. Could any one therefore be surprised at the errors of such men? Their blunders hitherto had obviously reduced Great Britain to a very calamitous situation, and their scandalous inactivity on the present occasion, added to the encouragement they gave to the national despondency, by not speaking. out, seemed to threaten the ruin of the empire-a predicament in which he saw clearly they would rather see Great Britain involved, than part with their beloved places. fensive paper, they should have given immediate orders for the striking of some decisive blow at France; some sudden shock, that would serve effectually to draw her attention from making an offensive war, either in Europe or elsewhere, to the protection and security of her own coasts and distant dependencies. Ministers, ignorant as they were, must know, that France was vulnerable in the West Indies. There the troops and fleet under general and lord Howe must have proved successful. He had seen an officer of rank and experience, lately returned from Philadelphia, who assured him that the army there was composed of veteran troops, ably commanded, and in the most perfect discipline and good order. This army and fleet might be ready to proceed on any service against our natural enemies early in the next month, if they should receive their orders in time; and having no equal force to oppose them, whatever service they were sent on must be crowned with success. The noble duke had wished that he would shew in what manner America was to be regained without our agreeing to her claim of independency. He would give their lordships his opinion; and he thanked the noble duke for calling for it. Leave the Americans to themselves, and he had no manner of doubt but they would soon send commissioners to offer terms to Great Britain. There was a natural necessity which would force America to come back to an alliance with this country. She could not, however artful men might gloss over the matter, be so lost to all sense of her own interest as to continue dependent on France. She would soon see the false bias she had taken. Her own interest, her own ease, her own happiness, would point it out; and the consequence would be, that all cause of animosity and contention ceasing, she would, on motives of sound policy, at length, of her own accord offer terms to England. The noble duke had alluded to earl Waldegrave, as having materially assisted prince Ferdinand in his success last war. He was exceedingly willing to do the noble earl ample credit for his bravery and skill, as a military man; but neither took away from the merit of prince Ferdinand, who was one of those men rarely to be met with; he had scarcely ever read of a general so truly expert, both in the cabinet and in the field, so wonderfully able both as a general and a negociator, except the famous John duke of Marlborough; and [VOL. XIX.] Lord Ravensworth said he was astonished how the noble lords in administration could hear their conduct so severely arraigned, and not offer the least justification, even to blunt the force of any of the heavy charges made against them. This silence, he hoped, portended some good to the nation; for by refusing to answer, they tacitly confessed the truth of the several accusations; and the next step he hoped they would ̧ take, would be to wait on their sovereign, fairly confess they had deceived both his Majesty and the nation, and resign their places, as no longer fit to conduct the public affairs. The House divided: Contents 33; NonContents 50. As soon as the division was over, The Earl of Abingdon got up, and said, These dead majorities will be the ruin of this nation. Let the question be what it will, though the salvation of the country depend upon it, if it be moved by the minority it is sure of a negative: and, my lords, we are told, too, by the ministry, that this is the only way in which his Majesty will receive our counsel. It may, indeed, my lords, be the only way in which his Majesty will receive our counsel; but, it is not the only way in which we have a right to give our counsel to his Majesty.. My lords, we are the hereditary counsellors of the crown, and have a right to [3 Y] 1 an audience of his Majesty at all times, to lay our humble services before him. I therefore move, my lords, that we of the minority do, in a body, wait upon his Majesty with the Address that has been made by the noble dake: it contains information worthy the royal ear; what effect it may produce is not for me to forejudge. The Duke of Richmond assented to the proposal, and said, that, if it was agreeable to the other lords, he himself had no objection; but that that was a matter which would be best settled out of the House. The measure was not carried into execution. Protest against the Rejection of the Address to the King on the State of the Nation.] The following Protest was entered on the Journals: "Dissentient' prince William Henry, prince Edward, prince Ernest Augustus, prince Augustus Frederick, prince Adolphus Frederick, and of his dearly beloved daughters, princess Charlotte Augusta Matilda, princess Augusta Sophia, princess Elizabeth, princess Mary, and princess Sophia; and for the honourable maintenance and support of prince William Frederick, and princess Sophia Matilda, the son and daughter of his dearly beloved brother William Henry duke of Gloucester; his Majesty hopes, that he shall be enabled, by act of parliament, to grant an annuity of 60,000l. to the six princes, and an annuity of 30,000l. to the five princesses; and to grant an annuity of 8,000l. to prince William Frederick, and an annuity of 4,000l. to princess Sophia Matilda, the son and daughter of the duke of Gloucester; the annuities to his Majesty's sons and daughters to take effect after his Majesty's demise; and the annuities to the son and daughter of the duke of Gloucester to take effect after the death of the duke of Gloucester; and his Majesty recommends the consideration thereof to this House." "Because, we think the rejection of the proposed Address at this time, may appear to indicate in this House a desire of continuing that plan of ignorance, concealment, deceit and delusion, by which the sovereign and his people have been already brought into so many and so Ordered, nem. con. "That leave be grievous calamities. We hold it abso- given to bring in a Bill, for enabling his lutely necessary that both sovereign and Majesty to settle on their royal highnesses people should be undeceived; that they the princes Frederick bishop of Osnashould be distinctly and authentically made burgh, William Henry, Edward, Ernest acquainted with that state of their affairs, Augustus, Augustus Frederick, and Adolwhich is faithfully represented in the pro- phus Frederick, an annuity of 60,000/. posed Address, at a time when our exist- per annum; and also to settle on their ence as a nation may depend upon our con- royal highnesses the princesses Charlotte ceiving a just idea of our real situation, Augusta Matilda, Augusta Sophia, Elizaand upon our wisdom in making a proper beth, Mary, and Sophia, one other anuse of it.(Signed)-Richmond, Aber- nuity of 30,000l. per annum; and also to gavenny, Thanet, Abingdon, Har-settle on his highness prince William Fre court, De Ferrars, Fitzwilliam, J. derick one other annuity of 8,000l. per St. Asaph, Devonshire, Bolton, annum, and on her highness the princess Portland, Effingham, Radnor, Sophia Matilda one other annuity of Rockingham, Stamford, Manches- 4,000l. per annum." ter, Ponsonby, Craven, Spencer, Hereford, E. Carlisle." The King's Message relating to a Provision for his Younger Children, &c.] April 8. Lord North presented the following Message from the King: "GEORGE R. "His Majesty, being restrained, by the laws now in being, from making provision for his younger children, out of the hereditary revenues of the crown; and being desirous, that competent provisions may be made for the honourable support and maintenance of his dearly beloved sons, prince Frederick bishop of Osnaburgh, Debate in the Commons on the Royal Family Annuity Bill.] April 10. The said Bill was brought in and read the first time. Lord North proposed that it should be read a second time immediately. Lord Irnham objected to the second reading of the Bill on the same day it was first read. He thought that hurrying it through the House, was neither a mark of respect towards the duke of Gloucester, nor towards the princes in the succession to the crown. That it would be bad policy as well as unjust, at such a time as this, to disinherit the issue of the princes of Brunswick and Orange, without going peculiarly favoured nation. The kingdom at large contemplate with rapture his Majesty's numerous, and still, I hope, increasing progeny, as insuring even beyond our children's children, to the "nati notorum, et qui nascentur ab illis," the blessings and glories of his reign. It is the duty of his faithful Commons here to do more, to provide for them in a manner adequate to their exalted birth and royal dignity. through the decent and legal forms of acknowledging and authenticating the marriage of his royal highness the duke of Gloucester, in order to legitimate his children. And it became the more necessary, because the present ministers had occasioned so many reports of their doubts; which, though they only meant as a cloak for persecution, and to prevent foreign courts from paying the duchess of Gloucester proper respect, might be construed by the princes in the succession, to have arisen from the circumstances of the inquiry made by the privy council: and as they were going to recognize one marriage, he thought it would be proper to lay before the House the certificate and proofs by witness, of the marriage of their royal highnesses the duke and duchess of Cumberland. Mr. Rigby rose to ask if any man in the House or in the nation had any doubt of the legality of those marriages? He said, that he sat in the privy council at the time they were investigated; that he had no doubts, and did not wish to have a motion which could imply that there were any. He thought it a proper mark of respect towards the duke of Gloucester, to read the Bill a second time the same day. Lord North again moved the second reading of the Bill, and said it was usual to hurry such Bills as related to the royal family, in order to shew unanimity upon the question. The message, Sir, from the crown, points out to us the provision, and the mode of it, which is desired. I give my hearty consent to the grant. It will be a grant worthy of the English nation, worthy of the great personages, in whom we have now so important an interest. Hereafter, I trust, we may claim a share of their future fame and glory. Yet Sir, I regret, that it is not made a certain provision for them during his Majesty's life, and the duke of Gloucester's, as well as during the life of the prince of Wales, or the successors of the reigning monarch. It is only to take effect after the demise of the crown, and on the death of the duke of Gloucester. Sir, if I understand the Bill in your hand, it compels the prince of Wales to grant out of the hereditary revenues of the crown the annual sum of 60,000l. to the King's sons, 30,000l. to his daughters, and 12,000l. to the children of the duke of Gloucester, during their respective lives; but no permanent provision is made for. them during the present reign, or the life Mr. Wilkes. Sir; the very title of the of the duke of Gloucester. The Bill Bill, which the noble lord has just pre-effectually ties up the hands of the sucsented to the House, will give the truest pleasure to the friends of the Protestant succession. A royal family, already so numerous, is an invaluable addition to the national strength and importance. Every Englishman, who is at heart anxious not only for the permanent, but the perpetual, preservation of our liberties in the august line of Brunswick, must now enjoy the highest satisfaction. The alarming fears, which our ancestors at various periods experienced, from a suspicion of the failure of succession to the imperial crown of these realms, are not likely to disturb their posterity. We live in happier times. The gratitude of this House to Heaven increases every year, with the fortunately prolific, annual increase of the royal offspring. We triumph in those indearing pledges of our monarch's love, and the public felicity, which an all-bounteous Providence continues to bestow on this cessor, but leaves the prince on the throne the option of any provision for the children and other very near relations of the crown during the life of his present Majesty, and his next brother. I desire to be set right, if I have mis-stated the Bill, which has just been read to the House. [Lord North said, "The hon. gentleman is certainly right. The King will not be obliged to make any provision by this Bill for any part of the royal family, during his own life and that of the duke of Gloucester." Mr. Wilkes then added,] I submit, Sir, to the House, that in this respect the Bill is imperfect. The provision for the younger branches of the royal family is not an immediate certain provision, but to take effect at a distant period. They are left at the present moment without the smallest fixed revenue, or support, independent of the crown. The sovereign makes no grant, but we are taking away, without his consent, during his minority, | two branches of the legislature, have by a part of the hereditary revenue of the an express act of parliament the power to prince of Wales, for the future mainte- "make laws and statutes of sufficient force nance of his brothers, sisters, and the more and validity to limit and bind the crown, remote branches. and the descent, limitation, inheritance, and government thereof." The maintaining the contrary doctrine by writing or printing is declared a species of high treason, and whatever slavish positions of hereditary, divine, indefeisable right may be adopted in despotic countries, and by modern courtiers here, the people of England in general consider their crown as the free gift of the nation, settled on their own terms and conditions. We know that the British crown is not in the gift of the reigning prince. He is only tenant for life, while he observes the original compact. The example of this generosity is not given by the father and the sovereign to his first subject, although it comes in the mode of a paternal precept. We leave them now in a state of the most absolute dependance on the crown, on the caprice of the sovereign, or perhaps the mercy of the minister. The Bill therefore, in my opinion, ought to be extended to a settlement of the same revenues to take place immediately, and to be secured by the fullest parliamentary grants irrevocably. The strong ties of blood in the first degree would in this case coincide entirely with the wishes of the people. I may surely, Sir, leave in all safety to the servants of the crown so acceptable a service to the best of princes and of parents. A circumstance, Sir, of the utmost importance seems on this occasion to have been intirely neglected by ministers. It is remarkable that the children of his Majesty's next brother, the duke of Gloucester, are recognized and provided for by this Bill, before there has been a notification in any way to parliament, or to the public, of his Royal Highness's marriage. I have not, Sir, the least doubt of the legality of that marriage, but I know that strong doubts have formerly been entertained, even by some of the present ministers. The noble lord is as ill informed on this subject as he has been all along respecting America, when he ventures to assert, that no man now has the least doubt remaining. In consequence of the general uncertainty in the minds of the nation a very few years ago, the privy council entered upon the enquiry of the legality of the duke of Gloucester's marriage. They received evidence, which, as it is reported, satisfied them; but as that évidence has never been communicated to the public, a degree of scepticism I know has continued. I wish it removed. It will be undoubtedly, when parliament shall be treated by ministers with respect, when the great council of the nation shall be furnished with the proofs, which flashed conviction on the minds of the privy council. The representatives of the people, Sir, have surely a right to examine every thing respecting the succession to the imperial crown of these realms, because they, in conjunction with the other The people, Sir, in consequence, possess the right to be informed of whatever respects the succession. All we know as to the marriages of the King's brothers amounts to this, that they were private and clandestine, and that no proof of their legality has hitherto been given to the nation. The proofs of those marriages ought to be communicated to the two Houses of Parliament, while the parties are still alive, and the witnesses with us may be examined. The facts may now be ascertained with precision. If any doubts have been suggested in this age, they may be removed by those living witnesses, to whom no recourse can be had in succeeding times. I regret that there are so many "historic doubts" in our history. Posterity has this just claim on the present generation, that our fields may not be again deluged with the blood of a brave people in a fatal civil contest. Should the smallest degree of scepticism now exist, the progress of it, if not timely checked, is known to be rapid, and it would acquire strength even from the general destroyer, Time. The fullest light ought now to be thrown on a transaction hitherto covered with clouds and dark ness. This enquiry, Sir, I likewise consider as a point of national honour and justice to several foreign princes, who are allied by marriage to the crown of Great Britain. The House of Nassau, to whom we owe the restorer of our violated constitution, the king of Denmark, the princes of Brunswick and Hesse, and others of the Protestant line, are actually in the parliamentary entail of the crown. They will think that we are proceeding in a very irregular manner, when we make settlements on the children of the King's next brother, as legal heirs of the crown after the children of the King, before the marriage of his Royal Highness has been publicly recognized. Majesty would be graciously pleased to order the proofs of the marriages of their Royal Highnesses the Dukes of Glouces ter and Cumberland to be laid before this House." Lord Irnham seconded the motion. His lordship said, though on some personal considerations it must be disagreeable to me to speak on this Bill, yet as it is not of a private nature, but concerns the honour and justice of the nation at large, I return thanks to the hon. member for his motion, and wish the marriages of their royal highnesses the dukes of Gloucester and Cumberland to be fully investigated, established, and circumstantially proved to the parliament and the nation. The right hon. member (Mr. Rigby) says, "Who doubts the legality of the duke of Glou Sir, in this Bill I should have been happy if there had been a clause respecting her royal highness the duchess of Gloucester, for whom no establishment is mentioned, although the Bill contains a provision for her two children. The honour of the nation, and the splendor of the British crown, call upon us to proceed to ascertain an adequate provision during life for the wives of the royal brothers. It would have naturally taken place in a Bill of this nature, consecrated to the Brunswick line, the elected of Heaven and the people, as the protectors of our liberties, if ministers had adopted the same liberality of sentiment, which pervades the nation. Is this par-cester's marriage?" Sir, I should have been liament, Sir, doomed to counteract the wishes of a whole kingdom? or is it meant to attempt the subjecting every branch of the royal family to the same servility, which has characterised the present majority in this House? There is not, Sir, a private gentleman among us, who has not painful ideas from the precarious situation of the two royal duchesses, almost unparalleled in any family of distinction. They have still to expect, from the merited esteem of the nation, an establishment adequate to their high rank, and the additional lustre it has received from their unexceptionable, I might say exemplary, conduct. I hope such a provision will be made, and I am very happy that the worthy baronet (sir James Lowther) near me has given the House assurances of his moving it in parliament, if it continues to be neglected by administration. The motion will come from him with weight and dignity, nor can there be a doubt of his generous endeavours being crowned with success. To facilitate, Sir, so important a business, the previous step I have mentioned seems necessary. Every communication ought to be made to parliament, which can elucidate a matter at present obscure, that we may know the sure grounds on which we proceed. We shall then be in possession of those clear proofs alluded to, without which I do not think we can with propriety enter upon that clause of the Bill in your hand, Sir, which respects the descendants of the duke of Gloucester. I therefore hope, Sir, for the concurrence of the House in a motion for "an humble and dutiful Address to the King, that his less surprised at hearing that spoken by any other member than one of the privy council, who must either fail in his memory, or agree with me, that reports prevailed that there were doubts of sufficient proof being established, before the Lord Chancellor, the archbishop of Canterbury, and the bishop of London, sent to Gloucester house to examine into the marriage of his royal highness the duke of Gloucester, by order of the privy council. It was said, and it is now avowed in parliament, that they neither found certificate nor any living evidence to prove the marriage. That upon the report to the privy council, the entry was made in the book "legally married;" but the privy council determined to leave the word "legally" out. Several occurrences followed, which tended to create doubts in men's minds, such as sending a message to Gloucester house, upon the duchess proving with child, to propose to them to be married again, and afterwards refusing to bury a child of the duke of Gloucester's in Westminsterabbey. These reports were propagated by the ministers. Is it, therefore, decent or parliamentary, that the same ministers, without first quieting the minds of his Majesty's subjects, and laying the evil spirit which themselves had raised, should in a moment make parliament decisively cut off the legal succession of the House of Hanover. I was not the person to doubt the marriage, and therefore I call for proofs to be laid before parliament. I believe ministers acted in this insolent manner, in order to have a better pretence for insulting the duchess of Gloucester, and to refuse her a maintenance. It like |