national disgrace, than to have the first prince of the blood, the sovereign's next brother, a fugitive, or a kind of pensionary at Rome, not from any extravagance of his own, but merely from the extreme scantiness of his income, which was known to be inferior to that of several private gentlemen in both kingdoms; nay, he believed inferior to the regular receipts and

might be issued officially, as an arrear due | to the subjects of the landgrave, or rather the landgrave himself; yet out of a kind of deference, or condescension, ormodesty, or whatever his and the noble lord's friends may interpret it to be, his lordship, I presume, by the advice, or at least with the approbation of his hon. friend, comes to parliament. As he first doubted, was afterwards satisfied, and was finally con-profits of many persons concerned in trade vinced, does the hon. gentleman begin to doubt again? He certainly does, or he must confess himself guilty of great imprudence and possibly injustice; for suppose the resolution should not be agreed to, though the hon. gentleman is convinced that the claim is just, and the money safely issued by the board at which he sits, the claim would be, nevertheless, for ever reprobated, and the claimant unjustly deprived of his demand.

The House divided; Ayes 50; Noes 42.

and commerce. The peculiar hardships and sufferings of the royal brothers became still more exaggerated, and were rendered more irksome and mortifying, when they were contrasted with the enormous sums granted for the support of the dignity and splendour of the crown, while both were tarnished and disgraced, and the money thus generously given employed in purposes of corruption, and squandered away on the most worthless, to a degree of profusion, unknown to any civilized state in Europe. The royal duke, now at Rome Debate in the Commons on Sir James for the reason now assigned, is in the line Lowther's Motion for an Address relative of succession to the crown, and has had a to the Income of the Royal Brothers.] child born in that capital, and living, who May 9. Sir James Lowther moved, "That may possibly sit on the throne of these an humble Address be presented to his realms. I will allow that such an event is Majesty, to express the just sense this not very probable; but it is sufficient for House entertains of his Majesty's regard my purpose to contend, that it may hapfor the lasting welfare and happiness of his pen. What, then, would be the consepeople; and, as this House cannot omit any quence? But that you must of course be opportunity of shewing their zeal and regard governed by a prince not only born, but for his Majesty's honour, and the prospe- educated at Rome. He flattered himself rity of his family, humbly to beseech his that he had been uniform in the whole Majesty, that, in consideration of the high course of his parliamentary conduct; that rank and dignity of their royal highnesses he liked to speak his sentiments freely and the dukes of Gloucester and Cumberland, openly; for that truth being his object, he he would be 'graciously pleased to make always pursued it to the best of his knowsome addition to their annual income, outledge. He was liable to error and mistake, of the revenues cheerfully granted his Majesty for the expences of the civil government, and better supporting the honour and dignity of the crown; and to assure his Majesty, that this House will enable his Majesty effectually to perform the same, as nothing will more conduce to the strengthening of his Majesty's government, than honourably supporting the dignity of the different branches of the royal family." He began with warm encomiums on the many public and private virtues of the two princes; and observed, what a disgrace and reproach it was to the nation, to permit their royal highnesses to live in a state much below that maintained by several private gentlemen; a circumstance extremely unbecoming the dignity of personages of their rank; that nothing could convey a stronger appearance of ‡

but he liked candour and steadiness of conduct so well in others, that he should endeavour to practise it himself. He admired it even in a warm opponent, a person whose political sentiments were known to be so directly opposite to his; the person he meant was the right hon. gentleman on the floor, (Mr. Rigby) who, he observed, since he first knew him, always spoke without reserve, and seldom changed his party or his opinions. He said, he was furnished with a strong argument in support of the present motion, by the very persons who constituted the constant majorities of that House. They must agree with him, because they maintained it in debate, on a former occasion, that the necessaries of life were greatly enhanced in their value; that the prevailing fashion of the times, was to live in an increased state

of luxury, elegance, and splendour; that such an inevitable increase of expenditure called for a suitable increase of income; that at no time within his memory, nor that of any member then present, was the inco me of the royal dukes sufficient to maintain their rank, nor at all adequate to the most moderate and measured economy; and that the parallel held throughout, for if the increase of the Civil List revenue was necessary for the splendour and dignity of the crown, a suitable support for those who were so nearly related to it, formed a part of that very dignity and splendour. None could say that either were maintained, if the King's brothers were doomed to suffer a kind of banishment, in a state of poverty and obscurity, because they were not enabled by the crown or the nation to live according to their rank in their native country. He finally observed, that the application now made to the throne was by no means unprecedented; that such addresses had been frequent, and succeeded in more instances than one; particularly in respect of the late prince of Wales, father of his present Majesty, and the two royal brothers, who are the objects of the motion.

Sir Edward Astley seconded the motion, observing, that the argument of similarity and relation, so judiciously urged by his hon. friend, were unanswerable. The gentlemen on the other side must agree fully to it in all its parts. The expences of living are increased; the means of support must keep pace with it, say those gentlemen. The dignity and splendour of the crown, from these circumstances, call for such an augmentation. Is not this every thing that the warmest friends of the motion would wish to urge in its support; unless at the same time they will have the hardiness to contend, that the royal dukes stand in a different predicament from every other person in the kingdom; and hazard still a greater paradox, by saying, that the necessities and the humble, unprincely situations of the royal brothers, bear no affinity to the splendour of the crown, or the dignity of the nation? Sir J. G. Griffin, after objecting to the propriety of the motion, and urging the difficulty of discussing a subject of so delicate a complexion, involving in it the King and his royal brothers, proposed the previous question.

Sir George Howard said, it was much more decent to let the King exercise his own discretion, than to dictate to him

concerning the disposal of what was his own property, as much as that possessed by any member of that House. In another light too, it was more proper to let the King, after he had been for some time in the possession of his newly augmented revenue, judge whether he could with propriety, by accidental savings, increase the incomes of his royal brothers. On the whole, if the present motion was to have any effect, in his opinion it would be that of increasing parliamentary grants, and the public burdens already become enormous.

Governor Johnstone contended, that there was nothing improper or unseasonable in the motion; that the average expenditure of the crown, for the last eight years, was full 20,000l. per annum under the Civil List revenue; that the minister promised very considerable savings in all the departments; and that, consequently, it was fair to contend, that the motion was both reasonable and seasonable; and as to the propriety of the terms in which it was conceived, they were the same as those made use of by the late celebrated Mr. Pulteney, on a similar occasion.

Mr. Rigby opposed the motion in the most strenuous terms. He said, he had as high a respect for the royal dukes as any individual in that House, but, in his opinion, the motion would, if carried, have a most ludicrous, or rather ridiculous effect; it would be granting a sum of money to his Majesty for his own particular purposes, and in the same breath almost desiring him to apply it to different purposes. It was mere child's play, giving a thing in one instant, and demanding it the next, in order to bestow it on another. He then turned with vehemence towards the chair, and arraigned the conduct of the Speaker with great acrimony. He said, that though our burdens were heavy, and our expences immense, our situation had been grossly misrepresented in a place, and in the presence of those, where nothing but truth should be heard. That the sentiments declared at the bar of the other House to be those of this, were never so much as thought of here; that the Commons of this kingdom knew better; that for one, he totally disclaimed them; and he was certain that a very great majority of that House did so too. He trusted, that before the House rose, it would be proved whether the House thought with the Chair, or with him, whose sentiments, he said, were directly contrary to those delivered in the name of that House at the bar of the

said he, "You are therefore requested not taking any particular notice of the censure to go home."

that right hon. gentleman had passed on his conduct as Speaker of that House, he begged that his Speech to his Majesty at the bar of the House of Lords, on Wednesday last, might be first read by the clerk: and the same being read accord

DEBATE IN THE COMMONS ON MR. SPEAKER NORTON'S SPEECH TO THE KING ON PRESENTING THE BILL FOR THE BETTER SUPPORT OF HIS MAJESTY'S HOUSEHOLD.*] As soon as the preced-ingly (see p. 213.) he then appealed to ing question was determined,

The Speaker rose in his place, and begged leave to draw the attention and recollection of the House, to what had fallen in the course of the debate from the right hon. gentleman on the floor, (Mr. Rigby). Previous, however, to his

the Journals for the Vote of Thanks, which followed on his return, to shew, that the sentiments which he expressed to his Majesty, when he presented the Bill for the better support of his Majesty's household, were the sentiments of the House, and not his own particular sentiments, as had been asserted by the last-mentioned right hon. gentleman. While the Speaker was yet on his legs, up rose

Mr. Rigby, who adhering to what had fallen from him in the former debate, spoke of the Chair in terms very nearly bordering on disrespect. He insisted that he had a right to animadvert on the Speaker's Speech, or on his conduct, within or without that House, if he thought it improper. He was certain the Speech now read did no convey his sentiments, whatever it might those of the 281 who voted for the augmentation of the King's Civil List. He said he had a right to appeal to the Chair, and from the Chair, and would never be intimidated, or led by any inducement, to forfeit the privileges of a British senator. The Speaker was no more than another member, and he was as free to differ from the Chair as from any other individual in that House. He proceeded to great heat, which seemed to make the Treasury bench uneasy.

"When the Speaker presents a Bill in the course of the session, in the delivering of which he thinks proper to make a Speech to the throne, the House of Commons, on their return, have sometimes come to a resolution to desire the Speaker to print his Speech; as they did on the 2nd of December 1761, when sir John Cust presented the Bill for settling a jointure on the Queen; and on the 7th of May, 1777, when sir Fletcher Norton presented the Bill for the additional sum to his Majesty's Civil List; and on the 26th of May 1786, when Mr. Cornwall presented the Bill for establishing a fund for the discharge of the National Debt; and these Speeches are then entered on the Journals. As the Speaker receives no instructions upon what particular topics, or in what manner, he shall express himself upon these occasions, it may happen that he may, in the name of the House of Commons, whose mouth he is, declare sentiments, which, though they coincide with the opinions of one part of the House, are entirely contrary to those of another part. This was the case in the Speech of sir Fletcher Norton, on the 7th of May 1777: for, in a debate on the 9th of May, some allusions being made to this Speech, as if the Speaker had used expressions to the throne which he was not authorized to use as the sense of the House of Commous, the Speaker immediately called the attention of the House to the subject, and desired a copy of his printed Speech might be read; and then demanded the judgment of the House, whether what he had said was liable to this objection. The House, by a question put, declared, That Mr. Speaker did, upon that occasion, express, with just and proper energy, the zeal of this House for the support of the ⚫ honour and dignity of the crown, in circum-sent: it was coming to the point at once, stances of great public charge.' Under these difficulties, therefore, the Speaker can only, upon such occasions, endeavour to express what he conceives to have been the intention of the majority of the House, and the principles upon which they appear to him to have passed she Bill." Hatsell's Precedents, vol. 3, p. 146.

* See vol. 15, p. 1153.

Mr. Fox replied to the right hon. gen tleman, and observed, that he had brought the matter to a direct decision; that was, he had rendered it necessary for the Speaker to seek the sense of the House, as the charge was open and direct. The Speaker had either misrepresented the sense of the House, or he had not; as an individual, he had disclaimed the sentiments of the Speaker, as far as the same respected himself; and had plainly hinted that it was the opinion of a majority pre

and bringing the matter to a fair issue. For his part, he suspected the Speaker did not deliver the sentiments of the majority, though it was plain he did the sense of the because he was immediately thanked on his return, nem. con. as ap peared by the Journals. The question, then, which remained to be decided, was,

House;

on the Speaker's Speech to the King. Whether the Speaker had done his duty? dropped a word or expression without any The truth, he believed, was, that the court intention, he wished that the motion might thought he had exceeded it, by their so be withdrawn, and the affair be thus termihighly disapproving of the speech. He nated; for it was pretty evident, that was resolved, however, to take the sense though the Speaker might imagine he was of the House by motion, which, if nega- delivering the sentiments of the House, tived, in his opinion, the Speaker could from hurry and inadvertency, it was possit no longer in that chair with reputationsible, he might not even have delivered to himself, or be further serviceable in his station, after having been publicly deserted, bullied, and disgraced. He then made the following motion :

"That the Speaker of this House, in his Speech to his Majesty, at the bar of the House of Peers, on Wednesday last, and which was desired nemine contradi cente, by this House, to be printed, did express, with just and proper energy, the zeal of this House, for the support of the honour and dignity of the crown, in circumstances of great public charge."

The Speaker assured the House, that he meant to deliver nothing but their sentiments. He thought he was justified in what he said, considering the time, the occasion, and the various current circumstances which combined to stamp what he offered with peculiar propriety. Conceiving, therefore, that he had discharged his duty, and that the same had been afterwards publicly approved of, he could not think of remaining in a situation where he could be no longer serviceable; which must be certainly the case, if the present motion should be rejected.

Mr. De Grey did not approve of the word wants, in the speech. He said, such an expression was disrespectful to the sovereign; and, in his opinion, the whole speech conveyed a very improper idea to foreign powers in particular, who, presuming on its contents, might be tempted to disturb the public tranquillity.

The Speaker replied, that he thought he did not make use of the word wants, as it could mean nothing. As to what effect his speech might have in foreign courts, or any other political consequence which might arise from it, he never considered. He wished to express the sense of the House; he imagined he had done so; and he could never think of sitting longer in that chair, than while he was in the exercise of his duty.

Mr. Welbore Ellis said, he presumed the Speaker delivered his own sentiments with great candour and sincerity; and in so doing, in his opinion, he acted a very commendable part. But as probably he spoke without notes, and might have

his own. He recommended warmly to the Speaker, and the friends of the motion, that the matter might be ended without bringing it to a question.

The Speaker said, he understood that great pains had been taken without doors to represent his Speech as not conveying the sense of the House. For his part, if he erred, he did not err intentionally; he meant to convey the opinion of the House, and looked upon himself fully justified both in point of fact and precedent. If he misrepresented what he meant faithfully to convey, he trusted the House would excuse him. He knew such addresses to the throne had been frequent; he was He said, he sure they were proper. thought it incumbent on him to let his Majesty know what was the sense of the House; and, in so doing, imagined he was acting in the faithful discharge of the trust committed to him: if the House thought otherwise, he could not, nor would not, remain in that chair.

Mr. Dunning said, the dignity of the House was gone, if the Chair was permitted It was plain the blow to be degraded. was ultimately aimed at the House through the Chair; and that the present was an experiment, made purely with a view to see to what a pitch of humiliation and disgrace the House would bear to be It was, in fact, humbled and let down.

an attempt of a court faction, to render the representatives of the people despicable, as well as detestable, in the eyes of their constituents.

Mr. Attorney General Thurlow entered into a kind of dissection of the Speech. He insisted, that it neither contained the sentiments of the House, nor was it strictly supported by fact; for, "the large present supply, &c. great beyond his Majesty's highest wants, &c." did not exceed 14,000l. which was represented in the speech to be "a very great additional reThe great stress laid on the venue." overplus might have been better spared, as it would have been extremely mean, when they were voting the augmentation, to withhold the difference between the expenditure and the grant. He contended,