ber of that House, not to vote, without | fore disposed to envy and obstruct the perfectly understanding what the question credit of those who were to be his sucwent to, as well as the other resolutions. cessors. Whether to him belonged that With regard to the right hon. gentleman's character of mischievous ambition, which motives, he knew not what they were, but would sacrifice the principles of the conif there was an ambitious man in that stitution to a desire of power, he must House, who designed to drive the empire leave to the House and the country to into confusion, his conduct, he conceived, determine. They would decide, whether, would have been exactly that which the in the whole of his conduct, during this right hon. gentleman, had pursued. unfortunate crisis, any consideration which affected his own personal situation, or any management for the sake of preserving power, appeared to have had the chief share in deciding the measures he had proposed. As to his being conscious that he did not deserve the favour of the Prince, he could only say, that he knew but one way, in which he, or any man, could deserve it; by having uniformly endeavoured, in a public situation, to do his duty to the King his father, and to the country at large. If, in thus endeavouring to deserve the confidence of the Prince, it should appear, that he in fact had lost it, however painful and mortifying that circumstance might be to him, and from whatever cause it might proceed, he should indeed regret it, but he could boldly say, that it was impossible he should ever repent of it.

The Resolutions moved, appeared, in his opinion, as insidiously calculated to convey a censure on the sentiments, which he delivered, while they served as an instrument of evasion of an assertion, highly revolting to the public mind, made by the right hon. gentleman himself. This he reprobated as a pitiful shift, totally irreconcilable with the confidence which the right hon. gentleman placed in the expectation of a majority. In majorities, Mr. Fox declared he had no great trust; he had for many years had the mortification to find himself in a minority in that House; and yet, upon a change of situation, he had generally found, that the majority, who had before divided against him, divided with him. For more than eighteen years of his political life, had he been obliged to stem the torrent of power, and sometimes he had enjoyed the satisfaction of finding himself in a majority of he same parliament, of which, in the prosecution of the same principles and the declarations of the same designs, he had before been only supported by a minority. Mr. Pitt observed, it was not without some astonishment that he discovered, that the right hon. gentleman had thought proper, particularly in the latter part of his speech, to digress from the question of right, which was then before the House, in order to enter upon the question of expediency, and that not so much for the purpose even of discussing that expediency as to take an opportunity of introducing an attack of a personal nature on him. The House would recollect, whether the manner in which he had opened the debate, either provoked or justified this animosity. This attack, which the right hon. gentleman had just now made, he declared to be unfounded, arrogant, and presumptuous. The right hon. gentleman had charged him, as acting from a mischievous spirit of ambition, unable to bear the idea of parting with power, which he had so long retained; but not expect ing the favour of the prince, which he was conscious he had not deserved, and there

The right hon. gentleman had thought proper to announce himself and his friends to be the successors of the present administration. He did not know on what authority the right hon. gentleman made this declaration; but, he thought, that with a view to those questions of expediency, which the right hon. gentleman had introduced, both the House and the country were obliged to him for this seasonable warning of what they would have to expect. The nation had already had experience of that right hon. gentleman and his principles. Without meaning to use terms of reproach, or to enter into any imputation concerning his motives, it could not be denied, that they were openly and professedly active, on the ground of procuring an advantage, from the strength of a party, to nominate the ministers of the crown. It could not be denied, that it was maintained as a fundamental principle, that a minister ought at all times so to be nominated. would therefore speak plainly. If persons, who possessed these principles, were in reality likely to be the advisers of the Prince, in the exercise of those powers which were necessary to be given, during the present unfortunate interval, it was the strongest additional reason, if any were

He

it so happened, that he did not retract one single word of that assertion. Gentlemen might quarrel with the phrase, if they thought proper, and misrepresent it, in imitation of the right hon. gentleman, in order to cover the arguments used by a learned lord (Loughborough) in another place. But he was in the recollection of the House, whether when he first used the expression, he had not guarded it, as meaning to speak strictly of a claim of right, not of any reasons of preference, on the ground of discretion or expediency, He was also in their recollection, whether the right he spoke of was any other than the specific right in question, namely, the right to exercise the royal authority, under the present circumstances. He had maintained, that the prince had no such right. If the prince had not the right, he could not be said to have any more right than any other subject in the country. But was it any answer to the assertion, that as Prince of Wales he had no right to the regency, to say that he had other rights, different from the rest of the King's sub

wanting, for being careful to consider, what the extent of those powers ought to be. It was impossible not to suppose that, by such advisers those powers would be perverted to a purpose which it was indeed impossible to imagine that the Prince of Wales could, if he was aware of it, ever endure for a moment; but for which, by artifice and misrepresentation he might unintentionally be made accessary, for the purpose of creating a permanent weight and influence, in the hands of a party, which would be dangerous to the just rights of the Crown, when the moment should arrive, (so much wished, and perhaps, so soon to be expected) of his Majesty's being able to resume the exercise of his own authority. The notice, therefore, which the right hon. gentleman in his triumph had condescended to give to the House, furnished the most irresistible reason for them deliberately to consider, lest in providing for the means of carrying on the administration, during a short and temporary interval, they might sacrifice the permanent interests of the country, in future, by laying the founda-jects, but which had nothing to do with tion of such measures, as might, for ever afterwards during the continuance of his Majesty's reign, obstruct the just and salutary exercise of the constitutional powers of government, in the hands of its rightful possessor, the sovereign, whom they all revered and loved.

The noble lord in the blue ribbon, like most of the gentlemen who had spoken on that side of the house, had argued, not against the truth of the resolutions, but the propriety of coming to them, and had waved any dispute on the question of right. The right hon. gentleman, though he affected also to object to the propriety of coming to this resolution, had directed his whole argument, as far as it went, to an invalidation of the truth, of the proposition, and the maintenance of his former assertion, in favour of the existing right of the Prince of Wales. This line of argument, supported by such authority, was itself an answer to those who doubted the propriety of any resolution.

The right hon. gentleman had ventured to represent him, as having declined maintaining his former assertion, "That the Prince of Wales had no more right to the regency, than any other subject in the country," and he had also intimated, that he had thus retracted, in consequence of believing that not twenty persons would join in supporting that proposition. But

the regency? Yet all the rights of the Prince of Wales, which had been mentioned by the noble lord alluded to, were of this description. It would be just as reasonable if the question were, whether any person had a right to a particular estate in Kent or Surrey? to argue, yes he has, for he has such and such an estate in Yorkshire, and in Cornwall. With regard to the question, whether twenty persons did or did not agree in his denial of the right of the Prince of Wales, he would put the whole on that issue, that if the Prince of Wales had any such right, the resolution he had moved could not be true; and he considered every person who differed from his assertion on that subject, as bound to vote against the present motion. The right hon. gentleman in discussing the question of right, chose also to remark, that the right of the two Houses, and the right of the Prince of Wales, were to be considered as two rival rights, and that the only question was in favour of which the arguments preponderated. He should be perfectly ready to meet the question on this issue, if it were the true one, for the right of the two Houses was clearly supported by precedent and usage, in every similar case, by express declarations of parliament, and by positive authority of law; yet the right of the Prince of Wales was not even attempted to be supported

on any of those grounds, but on pre- tion seemed to be made between the tended reasons of expediency, founded on situation of a private guardian, and that imaginary and extravagant cases. In of the person who acted for the king in fact, this was not the fair issue of the ar- his nonage, insomuch that some law gument. The right of the Prince of authorities of great respectability had Wales was not to be considered as a rival laid it down, that the powers of a regent right, to be argued on the same grounds were merely tutorial, and it had been deas the other. It was a right which could termined by the Parliament of Scotland not exist, unless it was capable of being in the reign of James 1, that the duke expressly and positively proved; whereas, of Albany, when regent, could neither the right of parliament was that which restore a person forfeited for treason, nor existed of course, unless some other right grant lands which had fallen to the Crown could be proved to exclude it. It was that by bastardy. It was well known, that which, on the principles of our free consti- the powers of a private guardian were of tution, must always exist in every case the most confined nature, and could not where no positive provision had been made proceed to greater lengths than the by law, and where the necessity of the exigency of the case required, nor encase, and the safety of the country, called croach upon the purposes of ordinary for their interposition. The absence of management. But he thought it wrong any other right, was in itself enough to to compare that case with the government constitute the right of the two Houses, of a kingdom, where powers of a very and the bare admission that the right of different nature were necessary to be given. the Prince of Wales was not clearly and As to the appointment of a regent whatexpressly proved, virtually operated as an ever his powers might be, the same had admission of every point under discussion. always been made in Scotland, as in The Lord Advocate (of Scotland) was England; under the sanction and authoat a loss to discover how the general rity of the states of the kingdom, either question of right could be waved, unless previously given, or afterwards interposed; both Houses were ready to resolve that sometimes the next heir of the crown the Prince of Wales should not only be had been chosen, sometimes not; someregent, but invested with all the royal times one regent; and, at other times, powers without limitation or distinction; more than one. Many of the kings of for if a limitation of any kind was to be Scotland having fallen in battle, and some the subject of debate, it did not seem by the hands of their subjects, when the possible to avoid a previous discussion of power of the aristocracy was too great, the right. As to the question itself, he there had been more infant succession, hoped it would be considered, that they and more regencies in Scotland, than in were not met to deliberate upon a settle- most other countries; and the states of ment of the kingdom of England alone. the kingdom had repeatedly shown, that He thought it necessary to inquire into they did not consider any individual the constitution of England and of Scot- whatever as having a fixed legal right to 1and separately before the Union, and of that office. When the Maid of Norway Great Britain since. He had heard it succeeded her grandfather, Alexander 3, very confidently affirmed, that, were the six regents were appointed. In the insupposed inherent right of the heir ap-fancy of James 2 of Scotland, there was parent to exercise the royal powers upon such occasions as the present to be disallowed, the consequence would be a virtual dissolution of the Union, the rule being fixed in Scotland, in favour of such hereditary and legal claim of right; but he would take the liberty of asserting, with equal confidence, that the proposition had no real foundation. It was true, that by the law of that country, the right of private guardianship did, in certain circumstances, attach upon the nearest male kinsman by the father's side, at the age of twenty-five, and in the earlier periods of the Scottish monarchy, little distinc

:

a regency of three. In that of James 3, there was a regency of seven. In that of James 3, the duke of Chatelheraut, the next presumptive heir of the crown, claimed the office upon that ground; but his claim was disallowed, and first the earl of Murray was appointed, and afterwards, probably others, none of whom were in succession to the crown. It was of more consequence, however, to con sider how that matter had been understood by the Legislature of Great Britain since the Union; and surely it was impossible to read the Provisional Acts of 24 Geo, 2, and 5 Geo. 3, without seeing clearly