diate knowledge of the perfon poffeffed of, or entitled to, the executive power; for, during the minority of Edward the Sixth, an inftance occurred of the great feal being affixed to an act, fignifying the affent of that Prince, when he was a minor of very tender years. Sir John Aubrey rifing next, faid, Upon the prefent occa- Sir John fien I find it impoffible to do my duty, as a Member of this Aubrey. Houfe, without, in fome degree, differing from thofe with whom I have for fome time acted. I concur with them in rejecting the doctrine of a Regency de jure in the Heir to the Crown; becaufe it is againit precedent, and against the law of the land, and was fo declared in Parliament in the reign of Henry VI. In fact, as 1 fee the fubject, it is no cafe of Regency in day perfon, except as the whole Parliament thall think fit fo to treat it. 'The law of England, as I have been inftructed, acknowledges neither infancy, nor delirium, nor any perfonal infirmity, to belong to the King upon the throne; for, in this refpect, the law looks only to his political character, and fupplies him with councils to enable his acting politically, even when naturally he is moft incapable. But, I do not concur with them in thinking the House, at this moment, competent to exercife any of its parliamentary functions, more especially its legislative one; or to do any thing tending to fuch an exercite. The King has not yet appeared either in his perfon, or by proxy, that is, by a Commiffioner reprefenting him. I take it to be the effence of Parliament, that the three branches of the Legiflature fhould be affembled, before one begins to act. But only two are now met, the firft of the three being abfent. Till this branch fhall appear, I agree with the fentiments contained in a very recent publication, by one, whofe authority, as a well-read and confummate lawyer, is fo juftly and univerfally acknowledged, and with whom I have the honour to be connected by friendship, that without the King we are only a convention. But, in the prefent cafe, there is no neceffity for reforting to a mere convention of the two Houses. The King's perfon may be conftitutionally supplied by a Commiffioner; and that reprefentative, in the prefent extraordinary fituation, will, in point of propriety, be the Heir Apparent to the Crown. Till this chafm in Parliament fhall be filled, I cannot affent to joining in any vote, or any other bufinefs of the House, beyond voting for a previous question, or fome other question tending to prevent our farther acting as a House. When this chafin fhall be properly filled up, when the Parliament fhall be full by a reprefentation of the King, I shall chearfully and heartily concur in the feemingly general fentiments of making the Heir Apparent fole Regent. As As far, alfo, as my confideration of the fubject hitherto can entitle me to fpeak, I confefs I am not in the leaft difpofed to adopt those ristrictions, which have been opened to the Houfe, as probable parts of the intended Regency bill. I dread the effects of a difrufied, curtailed, and confequently enfeebled, executive power. I with fincerely to join in every proper refpect to our moft gracious and afflicted Sovereign, and in providing every fecurity for his returning to the perfonal exercife of his authority, the moment his prefent calamity hall eeafe to operate. But, I cannot think, that the propofed reftrictions would be approved by himself, were he reftored to his former health. From his known love of his country, and from that liberal benignity of mind which foars above the flights of envy, I must prefume, that he would not with to increafe the public diftrefs from his prefent afflicting maLady, by rendering the Heir Apparent to his Crown, and his intended Reprefentative, lefs capable of performing the whole of the Royal functions, than he himself was before the commencement of his illness. The argument for refriction proceeds upon a fuppofition, which might warrant future permanent reftrictions on the executive power. If the Heir Apparent is not fit to be entrusted as a temporary Re. prefentative for his father, it claims from us reftrictions to check the Prince, when he fhall have the executive power as a principal, and in his own perfon. Had he committed any overt act, indicative of a difpofition to abufe the Royal authority, he ought to be equally reftrained in both cafes. But, to reftrain him in either cafe, without provocation, ftrikes me as unjust to him, and dangerous to the State over which he is to prefide for his father. In truth, the argument for reftriction of the Prince as a Regent, feems more to favour of prejudice against a particular party in the State, than to concern the general and public welfare. And though I not only stand unconnected with that party, but have feverely fuffered by their violent oppofition to the choice of me by the county for which I fit in Parliament as one of its reprefentatives; yet this remembrance avails not to influence my opinions upon fo momentous a bufinefs as that which now calls for our decifion. Such are my general fentiments upon the prefent important crifis. They were the fame when we met laft Tuesday, and I then meant to have declared them. But in the early part of the debate, I found no opportunity of addreffing the Houfe; and I was forced, by the remnant of an illness, which has long had poffeffion of me, to leave the House, without waiting, either to declare my opinions by fpeaking, or to ની act upon them by voting. Lord Lord Lord North begged leave to affure the honourable and learned gentleman (the Solicitor General) that he had totally North. mifapprehended the arguments he had on a former occafion urged in fupport of his opinion, which had, no doubt, ded hiin to imagine, that he was confident of his fupport on the prefent queftion. For his own part, he had uniformly alferted, that no act of legislation could poffibly be conftitutionally exercifed without the concurrence of the thres diftinct States of the Crown, Lords, and Commons, not three imaginary powers, fuch as the honourable and learned gentleman had defcribed, founded in fiction, and made up of forms. It was impoffible that he ever, for a moment, could entertain an idea fo contrary to what had been always his idea of the fundamental principles of the conftitution. It was his misfortune that he was but little acquainted with the honourable and learned gentleman, farther than by character, which (he admitted) ftood deservedly high in the estimation of the world, and the maxims which he had that day heard him utter, together with the truth and juftice of his obfervations, had impreffed his mind with a very high opinion of him; but, he confeffed that from fuch maxims and foch truths, he had never before heard conclufions fo impotent, and arguments fo weak. The honourable and learned gentleman had admitted that they were not then fitting in a legiflative capacity, in which opinion he heartily agreed with him-but, how could fuch premifes warrant the conclufion which had been drawn, namely that they'had the power to create a third Eftate, which third Eftate was to give vigour and effect to their proceedings? -But, faid the honourable and learned gentleman, the power which neceffity creates, neceffity muft limit.-How ought it to limit that power? Not, furely, by entering into the difcuffion of diftinct queftions, but by proceeding immediately to supply the temporary defect in the executive Government, and no farther. The fame neceffity pointed out the Prince of Wales, as the perfon pre-eminent above all others, for fupplying that defect. It was impoffible that they could overlook his claim, and yet they were now debating about the form of that which they could not fet afide. From the words of the Refolution, it was clear that the act which must follow it, was not to receive the Royal affent from the Regent, but by a perfon, a thing created by the Houfe for the fpecial purpofe of giving affent, without any difcretionary power whatever. Such were the three Eftates' which were to give validity to their proceedings.--But, would any man ferioufly maintain that thofe three Eftates were really and truly any more than two, "Qui facit per alium, facit per fe."-The fubftantial truth was, and he defied it to be controverted, that the the whole power fo exercised was the fole and uncontrouled act of the Lords and Commons, without the participation of any other Eftate known to the conftitution of this country. Lord North illuftrated this argument, by quoting the wellknown law report of an eminent author, under the title of "Stradling verfus tiles," (which (he faid) he would take the liberty of inentioning among the other great law authorities which they had heard. The difpute was occafioned by the interpretation of a will, wherein the teftator had bequeathed to Mr. Stradling all his black and white horfes. He had fix black horses, fix white horses, and fix pyed horfes. The learned Council, Mr. Stradling, very ingeniously contended that his client was fully entitled to all the horfes-to the black horses, because they were black; to the white horfes, because they were white; and to the pyed horfes, because they were black and white. In like manner (added Lord North) do the advocates for the present queftion argue, when they maintain that the three Estates of Parliament will be perfected by adopting the third Refolution. First, they act as a Houte of Commons; fecondly, as a Houfe of Lords; then, like the black and white horses, they act both as Lords and Commons; and from this ftrange combination the the third Eftate is created, which was to give life and vigour to all their operations. The honourable and learned gentleman (the Solicitor Geheral) had alfo thought proper to affert that the forms of the conftitution, and the precedents of our anceflors, compelled the Houfe to adopt the mode which had been followed in bringing forward the Refolutions. He, for one, denied that the conftitution could poffibly fanction any conftitutional measure that was founded on a fiction in law-and with regard to the precedents which the honourable and learned gentleman had mentioned as furnishing examples of other pageants and other puppets, he contended that they were not in point. The Duke of York, furely, was in a very different fituation, and the Duke of Gloucester was invelled with full powers to open the Parliament in the usual form. With regard to the doctrine which had been maintained, that the fame arguments would apply to a commiffion granted by His Majefty for giving the Royal affent to any bills which had paffed both Houfes of Parliainent--the abfurdity was obvious. The King in granting that comminiffion actually gives his affent to fuch bills, and the Commiffioners, of courfe, have no difcretionary power. If therefore, we, as a Houfe of Commons, in conjunction with the other Houfe of Parliament, grant a fimilar com miffion, do we not, in fact, ourfelves give the Royal Affent to our own act ?-In other words we argue, that we think it' wrong wrong to give it ourselves directly, but we will appoint Com miffioners to act for us. Such was the monftrous and unconstitutional proceeding which we were about to adopt, and of the danger of fuch a precedent they ought to be aware. The precedents which had been brought before them, on that occafion, ought to put them on their guard, left they theinfelves fhould furnish pofterity with a leffon, which might one day prove fatal to the Conftitution.-What was the Man of Straw, which they were now going to create but a creature, a thing, formed with their own breath, to give a colour to a meafure, to which he would be bold to fay, the hiftory of this country did not afford a parallel?—As to the precedent of the Revolution, which had been dwelt upon fo much, he faw nothing in the declaration of William and Mary, that was not founded on the true principles of the Conftitution as by law established-That declaration, which was afterwards incorporated in the Bill of Rights, always fuppofes, and proceeds upon that fuppofition, that the three Estates are perfect and entire. If, therefore, he said any thing in the former debate which could for a moment imprefs any gentleman with the idea that he had maintained fuch a doctrine as that fupported by the honourable and learned gentleman (the Solicitor General) he begged to take that opportunity of declaring, that he must have been misunderstood. To the amendment, he fhould moft readily give his vote, regarding it as the only mode by which, on the present emer→ gency, they could act legally. They were now affembled to fupply the defect which the unfortunate diforder, under which His Majefty laboured, had occafioned in the executive power-and the question was, what was the form they were to adopt? At the time of the Revolution, Parliament had addreffed King William to affume the reins of Government; and was that measure (he would ask) ever confidered as hoftile to any one principle of the Conftitution?-Why then, do we not follow that precedent, and by addreffing the Prince of Wales to take upon him the Regency during the indifpofition of his Royal Father, fave ourtelves and our pofterity from the horrid principle of virtually declaring, that an act of legiflation may be exercifed by the Lords and Commons at a time when the third Eftate is incompleat? With regard to what he had heard of limiting the preroga tives of the Regent, whatever his opinion might be on that fubject, the pretent was not the proper time for such an inveftigation. It had been faid, if a queftion of this nature were to be brought forward, it would be done more conftitutionally, and with equal effet, when the Regent could diffolve the Parliament, and defeat the intention. But the idea was abfurd. Was it poffible to imagine at a VOL. XXV, T time 1 |