« ZurückWeiter »
presence of Lord Eldon and Lord Sidmouth, that year, the King's assent was given by and most of the rest of the ministry of 1904, Comunission under his hand, and signed with who mighi, if they had chosen, have con- the Great Seal, to seven Public Acts of Partradicted, or cross-examined, him.---The liament, being the Acts from Chapter 19 public must well remember, that, in 1804, to Chapter 25 of the 4th year of GEORGE Dr. SIMNONS of St. Luke's Hospital, and II.--On the 23rd of March, the King's his men, attended the King; and Lord assent was, by a like Commission, given Grey asserted, and challenged contradiction, to sir Public Acts of Parliament, being the that these persons remained with him until | Acts from Chapter 26 to Chapter 31. the 10ik of June of that year! Nobody ac. This was still very far from the 23d of cepted Lord Grey's challenge. Nobody April. It was more than some days. It attempted tu contrudice him. But, I will, was more than the fortnight which the if the reader chooses, leave this circum- hypocrite of the Courier contends for, stance wholly out of consideration; and li was in fact, a full Calendar month.stick to ihe facts stated upon oath by Dr. The Acts thus assented to were some of HEBERDEN, according to whom the King's them of a nature peculiarly important. malady continued from the 121 of Febru. Some of them contained penalties of death; try to within some days of the 23rd of April. others imposed taxes; others authorised --Now, then, what can have been the raising of soldiers; one was a con meant by the words " some days ?? The tinuation of the Bank Restriction ; Chapter Hypocrite, who writes in the COURIER, 25 granted away from the Crown the fee for says it may mean any time ; any length of ever of certain manors, lands, and houses; time; that it may mean" a fortnight, at and Chapter 30 was a bill of indenmily, re" least.” But, is this the interpretation lative to acts done without law, in pure that sound sense and a love of truth and suance of certain Orders of Council. justice will allow of? ---No: it is clear, All this was done in the King's name, and ibat Doctor Heberden meant a few days; as by his erpress authority, at a time when, some number within a week: but, even in according to the evidence now given upon those days, his words by no means admii, oath by à Physician who attended him, that the King was perfectly recovered; the King was in the same state of incaand, after all, we find, that the Doctor, or pacity that he is now.--Nay, on the another physician, had to remain constant. 26th of March, that is to say, twenty eight ly about him even to the month of October days before the 23d of April, Mr. ADDINGafterwards, on account of the still remain. TON (now Lord Sidmouth) brought down żng appearances of indisposition.--Leaving to the House of Commons A MESSAGE out of the question, therefore, Earl Grey's from the King! It related to a measure uncontradicted assertion as to the attend. of great importance, namely, the bringance of Dr. SYMONDS and his men, until the ing of the Irish militia into England. 1: 16th of June, Dr. HEBERDEN's evidence is had the Royal Signature to it, and began full as to the point, that the malady con- in ihese words : “ His Majesty thinks einued from the 12th of February to the 23rd" proper to acquaint the House of Coinmons, of April.-- What, then, was done during " 8c. &c."- This, even this, was done this time, in the name of the King, and as on the 26th of March, that is, twenty eight by his erpress authority? Whether any days before the 2'3d of April. And Commissions may have been granted, any yet, with these facts before us; with all leases of Crown Lands let or renewed, any ibis before us, we are not to be allowed to titles or honours bestowed, any sentences express our opinion, that great caution of death confirmed, during ibat time, are ought to be used in the resumption of the particulars that I have not, at hand, the royal authority by the King; we are not ineans of ascertaining; but, I have the to be allowed to say, that care ought to means of ascertaining in what cases the be taken to prove that he is quite well first; very highest functions of royalty, the giv- we are not to do this, upon pain of being ing assent to Acts of Parliament, the muk- marked out by the impudent and venal ing of luuus, affecting the property, liberty', editor of the Courier, as men who wish to and lives of fifteen millions of people, were dethrone the King, to throw him into a corexercised, and these I shall accurately ner, to pluck the Crown from his head and state.--Remember, that the space of to bind it with thorns ! But, these are the time mentioned by Dr. Heberden, was, last struggles of knavery and hypocrisy from the 12th of February to the 23rd of combined ; and they will not succeed. April, 1804.--On the 9th of March of Thus -stands the case up to the 23rd of
April, I beg the reader to bear the dates “ that of his Majesty's Physicians. All in his mind. Thus stands the case up to “I can say on this part of the accusation the 23rd of April; but, as the reader may " against me is, that I have stated nothing attach great importance to the assertion of “as matter of speculation, or opinion, of Lord Grey respecting the attendance of my own, but upon authority of the physiDr. Symonds and his men 'till the 10th of " cians. I wish to be distinctly understood June, it is proper to inform him, that, be " here to re-state, that there is not, at this tween the 23rd of April and the 10th of " time,” [27th of February mind) " any June, 24 Public Acts of Parliament received necessary suspension of such royal functions the King's Assent by Commission, as in the “ as it may be necessary for his Majesty to former cases.
And, by the 30th of July, discharge at the present moment.' 36 more Public'Acts; thus making the He was pressed further by Mr. Grey, and number 91 Acts, receiving the King's As he then said: “I meant distinctly to state, sent, by Commission, after the 12th of “ that there is not at this time, any necesFebruary in that year; and, July, the "sary suspension of the royal authority reader will bear in mind, was still long any act which may be
necessary to be before the month of October. There « done.' - This was what Lord Grey al. are still some circumstances to notice, in luded to the other night; and, if it had order to make the history of these trans- any meaning at all
, it meant one of these actions complete. A change of ministry three things: that it was not necessary that took place between the 23rd of April and the King should be deranged in mind ; or, the 10th of June. Mr. Addington, Ld.
-Mr. Addington, Ld. that it was not, at that time, necessary for St. Vincent, Mr. Yorke, and Ld. Hobart, him to have the use of his senses; or, went out of the cabinet ; and Mr. Pitt, that his faculties were not so much imLd. Melville, Ld. Harrowby, Ld. Camden, paired as to render him unfit for business. and Ld. Mulgrave, came into it. The The two formerit cannot be supposed others remained; and the Law-Officers that any man could mean ; and, iherealso remained. This change was com fore, we must take the latter; and, then, pleted on the 18th of May: So that Lords all we have to do, is, to compare it with the Eldon, Castlereagh, Hawkesbury, West- Evidence of Dr. Heberden.--I should now morland, and Chatham were in both ca enter upon the subject of individual or binets.- Nothing more need be said. collective responsibility ; but as my space The thing is so plain; the chain of facts so is so narrow, and as I see, that the subject complete; the statement so incontro will demand room, I must defer it till vertible, that it sets all pettifogging at my next. defiance. There are, however, two points, upon which I shall just say a word or Mr. Finnerty.---This gentleman was, two; namely, the declaration of Mr. Ad- on Thursday, the 31st of January, brought DINGTON (now Ld. Sidmoutb), during the up to receive judgment, in the Court King's malady in 1904; and the individual of King's Bench, for a libel against responsibility of Lord Eldon. --As to CASTLEREAGH. He produced affidavits, the former, it was called forth by a ques- respecting the conduct of his prosecutor, tion, and afterwards a motion, of Sir some of which he was, it appears,
allowed ROBERT LAWLEY, in the House of to read, and some not. He was sent to Commons, on the 27th of February, 1804. the King's Bench Prison till next ThursSir Robert Lawley asked the minister for an day, when he is to be brought up again. explicit statement as to the state of the I have inserted the proceedings in King. To this Mr. Addington answered, another part of this Number, from the Times that no such statement was necessary in newspaper, to which I beg to refer the the opinion of his Majesty's confidential reader. --- The subject is one of the servants. Whereupon Sir Robert Lawley greatest consequence; it is worthy of all moved an adjournment of the House. the attention that the public can bestow This produced a long debate, which was upon it; and, I am convinced, that in this very interesting at that time, and certainly way it will be viewed by every man in not less so now. In this debate Mr. Add the kingdom, who has left in him one dington spoke no less than five times. He single spark of a love of justice or humamade explanation upon explanation ; and, nity. at last, it came to these words :
WM, COBBETT. "hon. Gentleman has stated, that I have State Prison, Newgate, Friday,
set up my own opinion in opposition to February 1, 1811.
PROTEST.-Againsi the Rejection of Lord business at any period of any day, he still King's Motion for omitting the name of him as made it expedient that some one of
retained such marks of indisposition about * Jokn Lord Eldon," us one of her Ma- his Physicians should be about his person jesty's Council.
for some months afterwards; and that Dr. DISSENTIENT,First, Because it is of Heberden was in attendance on bis Ma. the highest importance, that in the ap- jesty so late as the end of October;” and pointment of her Majesty's Council, the it was stated in debate, and not denied, public should have every security, which that, during this latter period, and parti. previous conduct can afford, that the per- cularly on the 101h of June, 1904, when sons composing the same will not act under it was understood and believed both by any undue bias, but that whilst they fol- this House and the public, that his Majesty low the course prescribed to them by their was perfectly recovered, his Majesty duty for restoring his Majesty to the public not only continued in a state which reexercise of his Royal Functions, whenever quired medical guidance, but that both he shall be in a capacity to resume them, Dr. Simmons and his assistants still were in they will neither expose his Majesty to attendance on, and possessed a controul the danger of a too early pressure of bu- over his Majesty ; yet, that nevertheless, siness, nor concur in representing his Ma- while his Majesty was still subject to such jesty as qualified to act in his high office, personal controul, the said John Lord Elbefore his recovery shall be complete. don, as Lord High Chancellor of Great Secondly, Because it appears by the evi. Britain, did receive his Majesty's pleasure dence of Dr. Heberden, taken on oath be on divers important matters of his Mafare a Committee of this House," that he jesty's Regal Government, and did, in vir. was first called upon to attend his Majesty tue of his said office, perform various pub. on the 12th of February 1804 ; that he lic acts requiring the sanction of the believed his Majesty presided at Council King's authority. 4thly, Because John on the 23d of April following; and that Lord Eldon, having so conducted himself, he should consider the interval between is not, in our own judgment, a person to those periods as constituting the duration whom the sacred trust of acting as one of of his Majesty's disease at that time.” her Majesty's Council in the care of his Yet, nevertheless it appears from the Jour- Majesty's person, and in the discharge of nals of this House that between the two the other most important duties, by this days above-mentioned, John Lord Eldon, Act committed to the said Council, can being then Lord High Chancellor of with propriety or safety be committed.Great Britain, did, on the 5th of March, GREY, LAUDERDALE, Vassal Holland, 1804, receive, and in his Majesty's name ERSKINE, RossLYN, DERBY, ASHBURTON, signify his Majesty's consent to a Bill, PonsonBY, PONSONBY, (of Imokilly.). intituled, “ An Act to enable his Majesty to grant the inheritance in fee-simple of certain manors, messuages, lands, and he
KING'S ILLNESS. reditaments, in the parishes of Byfleet, Evidence of Drs. Willis and HEBERDEN, Weybridge, Wallin, Wallinleigh, and Chertsey, in the county of Surrey, to his
as given in the Lords' Commutee, - apRoyal Highness Frederick Duke of York pointed to examine the Physicians, who and Albany, for a valuable consideration;"
have attended his Majesty during his illand that he did also put the Great Seal to a
ncss, touching the state of his Majesty's Commission dated 9th March, by virtue of
health. December 18th, 1810. wbich 15 Bills received the Royal Assent;
Die Martis, 18 Decembris 1810. as well as to a Commission dated March 23d, under which 17 other Bills received the Dr. ROBERT DARLING WILLIS Royal Assent; although his Majesty was,
called in and examined. at that time, as appears by the evidence YOU are desired to acquaint this Comabove recited, aftlicted by a malady of mittee, whether the state of his Majesty's the same na:ure and character with that health is such as to render him incapable which has now occasioned a suspension of of coming in person to his Parliament, or the Regal functions. Thirdly, Because it of attending to any kind of public busifurther appears from the same evidence, ness: --His Majesty is incapable of com" that after the period when his Majesty ing to parliament, or of attending to any wasso far recovered as to be able to transact public business.
What are the hopes you entertain of his that it would, provided the recoyery, is Majesty's recovery :-I entertain confi- complete. - Relapses have not been pro dent hopes of his Majesty's recovery, the duced after former illnesses in his Ma: protraction that has bitherto taken place, jesty's complaints. though it le sens considerably the expect When Dr. Willis agrees with the other ation that the recovery will take place in physicians, who have been examined, in a very short time, is not sufficient to dimi- assigning the immediate occasion of his nislr niy confidence that his Majesty will Majesty's present illness, does he mean ultimalely recover.
to assign it as the primitive cause of the Do you found the opinion given in your complaint, or only as having brought into answer to the former question, upon the action a disease to which his Majesty bad particular symptoms of his Majesty's dis. been before subject ? --Certainly as bring. order, or upon general experience in other ing into action a disease to which his Mas cases of the same nature, or upon both ? - jesty has been before subject. I form my opinion upon both, upon my When Dr. Willis expresses this confi. general experience in cases of mental dis- dent expectation of his Majesty's recoease, and upon the particular symptoms of very, does he mean his final recovery, his Majesty's complaint.
without the probability of a recurrence of Whether in that particular species of the same indisposition ?-Certainly not. the disorder his Majesty has been afflicted Should his Majesty recover, so as to with, it has been found from experience fulfil all the expecration, which Dr. Willis that the greater number of persons so af. means to express, is it in his opinion more fected have been cured ?-Confining my. or less probable that his Majesty would self strictly in my answer to that particu- be subject to similar indispositions ?-His lar class of the disease under which his Majesty having already laboured under Majesty now labours, I should say that a four attacks, it is more probable he will very large proportion recover.
continue liable to repeated attacks. Can you form any judgment or proba His Majesty's illness having been imble conjecture of the duration of his Ma- mediately preceded by and constantly acjesty's illness ?--No, I cannot.;
companied with fever, arising from extraWhether so far as experience enables ordinary susceptibility and nervous irritayou to judge of his Majesty's disorder, you tion, is not such a complaint more likely think it more probable his Majesty will or to be re-produced from external circumwill nor recover, so as to render him capa- stances and causes, than any other iudisble of attending to public business ? --I position of the same class ? - It is, perpresume that my answer to a former ques. haps, a medical question of very little tion is an answer to that. I consider re. moment, whether his Majesty's complaint covery as including a full capability of is attended with fever or not; in my opie transacting all business.
nion there is no fever present, the whole Whether you can state to this Commit- depending upon an extreme nervoos irrita tee any particular cause to which you as bility; but I am not aware that his Macribe his Majesty's present indisposition ? jesty will be more subject to relapse on
I presume the exireme distress for the that account, than he would be if it arose illness of the Princess Amelia.
from any cause in the constitution itself; Whether any change has taken place it appears always to require some external in his Majesty's indisposition since your cause to excite it. Jast examination before the Privy Coun Whether, when the complaint is accomcil? -] can hardly state that any mate- panied with that extreme nervous irritabirial alteration has taken place. It is ex-lity described by Dr. Willis, it is not more tremely difficult in cases of this descrip-subject to be acted upon and increased tion to measure accurately the degrees of by external circumstances and causes, amendinent.
than a similar complaint not so accompa. Has Dr. Willis attended his Majesty in nied !-I was not aware of any similar the former attacks of this disorder :-Í at complaint that can take place without tended his Majesty in the year 1801. being accompanied with a similar nervous
In case of a cessation of the disorder, irritability. would great interruptions, or such as would How many relapses have taken place in probably arise in the exercise of his high his Majesty's present disorder since his station, be likely to produce a return of Majesty was taken ill in October last Import the disorder ?-) have no reason to think | There have been two relapses,
State the periods of those relapses ! The 15th Nov. and the 5th Dec. were the his Majesty's present disorder with those
On a comparison of the symptoms of
the his periods at which a considerable degree of of his disorder in the year isoi, is Dr. increase of the symptoms took place, which Willis of opinion that the paroxysms of have been denominated relapses.
the present case are more or less severe : Dr. Willis has stated that his Majesty's either in degree or duration than those of disorder arose from extreme distress for the former --The paroxysms in this disthe illness of the princess Amelia, the order have been more frequent but not Committee wish to know if Dr. Willis con. more severe than in 1801, nor of longer siders these relapses to have arisen in the duration. ordinary course of the disorder, or whe Have the remissions in the present disther any estraneous causes have contri- order been of longer or shorter duration buted to occasion those relapses? - In that than those of the disorder of 1801 -Hiextreme state of nervous irritability very therto they have been shorter. infling causes are sufficient to produce an Whether the remissions have been more occasional increase of symptoms till the or less complete in his Majesty's present recovery has advanced beyond a certain disorder than in 1801 -I think less comperiod; it may be difficult to say, there- plete. fore, whether this increase of symptoms Whether the disorder, under which his may have arisen in the ordinary course of | Majesty now labours, is of the same class the disorder, or from trilling circumstances as that in 1801 -It is of the same class. #bich may have produced them.
Whether from the facts which Dr. .. Did not the first relapse occur about the Willis has collected from the physicians, period of the princess Amelia’s funeral? - and other medical attendants on his MaOn the following day, or the day after that jesty, he deems this disorder to be of the
When Dr. Willis speaks of relapses, same class as his Majesty's other attacks, does he mean relapses after a cessation of in which Dr. Willis did not attend his Mac the disorder, or after a remission of the jesty ? - I believe all bis Majesty's attacks disorder? --Certainly after a remission, have ben similar. bis Majesty's disorder has never ceased. How far in these disorders the experie
Were there not exacerbations of his ence of former attacks in the case of the Majesty's disorder on the 15th November same patient affords an indication of the and the 5th December 1-Certainly, on probable time of the cure, supposing that the evening of both those days.
a cure shall be ultimately effected? It Does Dr. Willis consider the exacerba- becomes probable where the symptoms of tions which took place on each of those one attack resemble the symptoms of a days to have been relapses properly so preceding one, that the progress to amend. called, or such paroxysms as commonly ment, will be similar also. occur in a diorder of this description ? Whether the progress toward recovery I consider them merely as paroxysms has hitherto been the same in this, as in which belong to the disorder itself. former attacks? It has rather been more · Are, or are not the remissions of his Ma- prolonged than in 1801, but it is further jesty's disorder impeded, and the pa- advanced than in the first attack in 1788: foxysms renewed or increased, by his con- I cannot speak as to the attack in 1804. sideration of, and reflection upon his own Whether the difference is such as to case, under all its circumstances ?-I am afford Dr. Willis any ground for judging not aware of any particular effect that has that this recovery will or will not be detaken place from such considerations. layed longer than in the former attacks?
Whether in the course of Dr. Willis's The difference is not sufficient to enable experience in disorders of this kind, he has me to form any judgment on the subject. had occasion to observe that the age of Whether referring to his answer given the patient is a consideration of weight to a former question, Dr. Willis can state in forming expectations of recovery - what degree of protraction in recovery Where the traces of age can be discovered would be sufficient to diminish his expecin the symptoms of the disorder, it is cer- tation of ultimate recovery?--My opis tainly a matter of great consideration ; nion would be rather guided by the sympbut in his Majesty's situation I have not toms which should attend that protraction discovered any traces of age in the symp- than the protraction itself. toms; I therefore infer that his Majesty's When the approaches towards recovery age is not a matter of moment.
are more likely to manifest themselves by