a future day to move an augmentation of her allowance. To this letter her Royal Highness returned an answer without any advice from himself, or any person with whom he was in the habit of acting. He would repeat part of the contents of his lordship's first letter. After stating that he had made that evening to the House a communication of the document relating to the separation in 1809, he acquainted her that those papers had been referred to a committee of the whole House, in which it was his intention to move that her allowance should be augmented to 50,000l. per annum. He thought he was correct, then, in his assertion, that the noble lord had not made any communication to her Royal Highness, till after the statement in that House. The noble lord had communicated correctly the substance of her Royal Highness's first letter; the consent and acceptance in that letter were expressed in very general terms. When the noble lord sent the bill, a written answer was then also returned to him, intimating also a general acquiescence in the measure. This letter was also written by her Royal Highness without any adviser. After that he had no hesitation in saying, that when he was consulted on the subject by her Royal Highness, he stated to her that the sum was disapproved of by him, as being larger than circumstances required-larger than what he could consent to vote for, and larger than what he thought the noble Jord ought to have proposed. Her Royal Highness did then say that she approved of the proposition of the noble lord, but the amount of the sum had never entered into her consideration; she then wrote the letter to the chair in her own hand. He thought that the sum of 35,000l. a year was amply sufficient for her situation at this time, till the period should arrive, fixed by act of parliament, at which she would have to receive 50,000l. a year. Her Royal Highness therefore gratefully and thankfully accepted of the 35,000l. a year as fully sufficient for all her purposes. However painful any discussions on the subject of her Royal Highness, or any member of the royal family might be, all he could say, was, that whether the allow. ance should be 50,000l. or 35,000l. a year, things were precisely in the same situation in every respect. There was not entertained by the friends of the Princess of Wales, the slightest idea that she was less in need of the protection of the House, by receiving 50,000l. a year, than by receiv ing only 35,000l. Her Royal Highness had accepted the provision, on the condition that it was not derogatory to her honour; and whether the sum should be 50,000l. or 35,000l. she had not the slightest idea that the difference of the sum made in that respect the slightest difference in her situation. He should have voted against the 50,000l. because he thought that sum improper, and he would now vote for the 35,000 because he considered it what the circumstances of her Royal Highness required. Lord Castlereagh said, that he should not have proposed the grant of 50,000. had he been informed that it was the wish of the Princess of Wales that the sum should not be so considerable, but from the note of her Royal Highness he naturally implied directly the reverse. It was impossible that she could think, at the time he communicated the intended proposal, that the vote had already been passed for a sum, the whole of which, be imagined, was in justice due to her. The hon. member had fairly avowed that he had been the adviser of her Royal Highness, but he (lord Castlereagh) should be sorry to find hereafter that the council given had induced the Princess of Wales to adopt a different line of conduct from that which her real feelings dictated. The design of the House was to give a liberal income, but if the Princess of Wales had now finally receded, on consultation, from what his lordship had first understood to be her spontaneous and uncontrolled desire, he should most cheerfully accommodate the resolution to her wishes by altering the vote to 35,000l. The same amendment must also be made in the Bill. The determination of parliament would, undoubtedly, make a beneficial change in the circumstances of her Royal Highness; instead of being dependent upon the vo luntary provision allowed by the Prince Regent, her income would by right be derived from the consolidated fund, and that sum must, pro tanto, form a part of the income she would receive in case of the death of the illustrious individual now placed at the head of public affairs. Mr. Tierney observed, that an intimation had been given that a clause was to be in troduced into the Bill to prevent her Royal Highness from incurring debts for which the public might be liable. All circum stances considered, he hardly thought it delicate or prudent in the noble lord to make allusions to royal debts. Such a provision as that suggested, might render some enquiry upon this point necessary; and if a discussion were to be forced, regarding the debts of the Princess of Wales, he would not shrink from his duty in calling the attention of the House to the debts of other branches of the royal family. His principal object in rising was to prevent the House from running away with the idea, first introduced by the noble lord, that all the recent discussions arose from a desire on the part of the Princess of Wales to obtain money. The truth was, that these debates arose from circumstances which he did not wish to revive, and the object of the pecuniary allowance was only to recognise the Princess of Wales, who had been abandoned by all, as under the protection of the House of Commons. In her letter her Royal Highness expressly called it "an extraordinary and unsolicited mark of munificence," and it was not candid in the noble lord to endeavour to create the impression that the uniform design of the Princess of Wales was to extort money; such an intention had been denied by her Royal Highness and by all her friends. He did not see much reason to complain of the conduct of the noble lord in other respects, excepting that he had gone a little too far in leading the House to believe that he had consulted the Princess of Wales. Mr. Tierney said, that one of his principal objections was, that the Princess of Wales had not been treated as a person fit to be consulted. The noble lord had brought down a parcel of papers, and had given notice of a motion, but the wish of her Royal Highness was never asked, whether the sum should be larger or smaller than what was proposed. This might be thought the more extraordinary as the noble lord had never before shewn any reluctance to pay sufficient respect and reverence to the members of the royal family. It was, no doubt, a new principle of action which the noble lord did not understand, to see an individual consulting the public interest instead of her own, in refusing 15,000l. a year, and he hoped this case would not be drawn into a precedent hereafter, to lead the noble lord to make smaller offers than the actual merits of persons interested required. Lord Castlereagh was of opinion that it would have been highly indecorous to have negociated with her Royal Highness upon the extent of the sum she required; he had, however, gone so far as to mention (VOL. XXVIII.) the amount, and if the Princess of Wales had felt any personal repugnance she would have informed him of it in her note, instead of stating that she considered it as an act of justice. He was not to presume that what her Royal Highness termed an act of justice to herself was, at the same time, an act of injustice towards the public. Since that period, however, it seemed that she had been better advised, and that she had determined to do injustice to herself rather than do injustice to the public. As to his having given a wrong colour to the recent discussions, by asserting that money was the object, all that he had argued was, that such must be the result since parliament could only interpose by pecuniary relief. Such, in common sense, ought originally to have been the motion, and then the House would never have been troubled with subjects distressing to itself, but doubly painful to the various branches of the royal family. Mr. Tierney observed, that he had distinctly stated, on a former debate, that he had had no private communication with the Princess of Wales; he had, however, advised, that her Royal Highness should not accept 50,000l.: it was very likely to appear to the noble lord an extraordinary proceeding, and, no doubt, he would not have advised it. When, however, the noble lord talked of the indelicacy of making a bargain with the Princess of Wales, he seemed entirely to forget one of the documents he had laid upon the table, in which the income of her Royal Highness was reduced to 17,000. The augmentation made by the liberality and justice of parliament was, no doubt, very acceptable to the Princess of Wales, but it was no less creditable to her Royal Highness to have had so much consideration for the situation of the public. Lord Castlereagh remarked, that at the time the document, just referred to, was signed, it was absolutely necessary that there should be some understanding: the parties also were the Prince and Princess of Wales. It did, however, not become the minister of the crown, in submitting a proposal to the liberality of parliament, to make the amount of the vote a subject of negociation with the Princess of Wales. Mr. Whitbread begged to be allowed to say a few words upon what had fallen from the noble lord. The Princess of Wales had not been treated even fairly by him he had said a great deal on the supposed change in her determination re(2 T) reflected upon any sums; she had accepted the principle which, on the part of parliament, was an act of grace, and on the part of the crown an act of justice. It was but fair to state, that the instant the reduction was suggested, it received the hearty concurrence of her Royal Highness, and she felt grateful for this assistance, waving no right, and clogged with no condition. There was, at least, something invidious and unhandsome in what the noble lord had thrown out on a former night, that in proportion to the smallness of the sum received was the necessity of introducing into the Bill a provision against the debts incurred by the Princess of Wales. Surely such a threat was unnecessary, when it was known that her Royal Highness, even limited as was her present income, did not owe a shilling: the insinuation, that it was possible, nay, probable, might have been spared, unless, indeed, the noble lord's experience in other quarters had shewn him, that however enormous the revenue allowed to an individual, the incurring of immense debts was still inevitable. Much had been said to exonerate the House in future from hearing of the case of the Princess of Wales. All be could say was, that he hoped no cause would be given for bringing it again under the notice of parliament. For his own part, he did not feel himself precluded from asserting, in his place, the cause of the Princess of Wales, or of any other individual, who had to complain of indignity or injustice, whenever he should think it expedient. He felt happy in the conviction that the House of Commons did not give, and the Princess of Wales did not accept, the sum now voted as a compromise, barter, sale, or purchase of any right of person, dignity of station, or purity of garding the 50,000l. upon advice with her | Lord Castlereagh did not think that any thing he had said, called for the warm expressions employed by the hon. gentleman: he still maintained, that if the Princess of Wales had any objection to the 50,000l. mentioned in his note of the 5th instant, it was natural that it should be noticed in the reply. He did not wish to refer to any circumstances that could excite controversy or irritation; but whatever might be remarked of the advice given by his late friend, Mr. Perceval, it could not be denied, that he had given some strong proofs, that he did not think it fit that the family differences of the royal personages in question, should motion of lord Castlereagh, the amendment of 35,000l. instead of 50,000l. per annum was introduced. A Bill was ordered to be brought in, to carry the Resolution into effect. be agitated in parliament: he hoped that the hon. member would in future be of the same sentiment. With regard to the sum, if the hon. member had originally thought that an augmented income was necessary, it was a great pity that parliament had not arrived at that conclusion, before, any of the painful deliberations had taken place. IRISH PRESERVATION OF THE PEACE BILL.] Mr. Peel rose, he said, with considerable regret, to propose an additional measure for the preservation of the public tranquillity in Ireland. The House were already aware, that he had introduced a measure during the present session, on the same subject, which was then in progress, and which was to have a permanent operation. When he brought this Bill forward, he had reserved to himself the right, should circumstances require it, of bring Mr. Whitbread felt it impossible to refrain from adding a few words. He put it to the noble lord, whether, with his knowledge of all the transactions of the parties, he did not think it would have been impossible to have avoided discussions like those which had recently occured, if the Book had been published, which such great pains had been taken to conceal? If the noble lord meant to arraign himing in another, of a more effective and defor not having proposed the reduction of the vote in the committee, he must know that he had concurred wholly in what fell from his right hon. friend (Mr. Tierney) upon the subject. As to the former debts of the Princess of Wales, lord Thurlow, who then advised her, had used the strongest expressions to induce her not to accept 12,000l. per annum: he had, in fact, told her, that if she did take it, she would be a begger, and the result proved the truth of his assertion. He concluded, by repeating his assertion, that pecuniary considerations had never operated upon him, and his conviction that it had never influenced the Princess of Wales. Mr. Ponsonby wished to say a few words in justification of the vote he had given: it was not governed by a consideration of the pecuniary situation of the Princess of Wales, and consequently he had never conjectured whether the sum was likely to be too great or too small. He lament ed now, as he had done before, that the subject had ever come before parliament, and he hoped that some steps would be taken to prevent a recurrence of the evil. The House was incompetent to enter into such questions, as whether the Princess of Wales should, or should not, be received at the drawing-room. The only constitutional mode of entertaining her case was by a grant of money. It was true, that he felt considerable resentment at an act of wanton oppression and unjust indignity offered to her Royal Highness, and he was desirous of shewing, for one, his disapprobation of that injustice and indignity. These considerations, and these only, had governed his vote. The question was then put, and on the cisive description. The apprehensions which had induced him to make this reservation, had since been confirmed; and, however painful the task, he found it absolutely necessary to adopt a system which, although perfectly consistent with the established principles of constitutional government, was at variance with those maxims of moderation and mildness, by which he was desirous the people of Ireland should be governed. There was something peculiar in the present disturbed situation of that country, and in the character of the combinations which existed among its inhabitants, that rendered it necessary to have recourse to some extraordinary measure, of greater vigour, and of more limited duration, than the Bill which was then before the House. Since he had last addressed the House on this subject, he had endeavoured to collect information from every quarter, as to the state of Ireland; and it was, with particular pain, that he had now to state, that the disturbances, which existed, were of a most alarming description. He regretted to state, that in those parts of Ireland where the laws had been administered with the greatest severity, and where the greatest number of convictions had taken place, the terror arising from those convictions had scarcely survived the cause, when new combinations of a more extensive and dangerous character had obtained birth; and these combinations were carried on with a degree of secresy which defied the operations of the law, as it at present existed. Under these circumstances, it became necessary to intrust the Irish government with a power to be exercised in case of emergency, of a nature more decisive than that of which they were already possessed. The proposition which he should make to meet this end, was the revival of the measure which had received the sanction of parliament in 1807. He was sorry that considerable odium had attended the former introduction of this measure, because many of its provisions were copied from the act of the Irish parliament of 1796, although, in point of extent, it did not go so far. The amount of its operation was to permit two magistrates to transport idle and disorderly persons. The preamble was copied from the Act of 1807, and merely referred to certain disturbances which existed in various parts of Ireland, excited by seditious persons; and he should propose it to be limited to the period of two years. The object of the Insurrection Act, or rather of the clause to which he should now propose to revert, was to provide, in case any part of the country should be disturbed, or in danger of being disturbed, that two justices of the peace should be empowered to summon an extraordinary sessions of the magistrates of the county, which should consist of seven magistrates, who should make a report to the government, or the lord lieutenant, that part of their district was in a state of disturbance, and that the ordinary law of the land was inadequate to the preservation of the public peace. In this case, it was provided that the lord lieutenant, by the advice of his privy council, should be empowered to issue a proclamation, commanding all persons residing within the said disturbed district, from sun-set to sun-rise, to keep within their houses, and that no person should be suffered to be dricking in a public-house after the hour of nine o'clock; and further, if they should be detected out of their houses, without being able to shew good cause, they should be considered as idle and disorderly, and be liable to transportation for the period of seven years. The law also required that the lord lieutenant should order a special sessions of the peace to be held, at which these persons should be tried, and, if necessary, that trial by jury should be dispensed with. There were other provisions, which sanctioned the employment of the military to quell disturbances, and, in order to facilitate the detection of of fenders, enable the magistrates to pay domiciliary visits; and upon refusal being given to open the doors of such houses as they visited, enabling them to enter them by force. In the present state of Ireland, he thought it would be no great restric tion, where disturbances did exist, to require the inhabitants to remain within their houses from sun-set to sun-rise. It was impossible to deny that this description of measure was an evil; but the House had to decide upon comparative evils; and when the dreadful alternative to which they would be reduced, if some such measure was not adopted, was considered, he apprehended no doubt could exist as to the expediency of adopting it, until the occasion for its existence had ceased. That the measure would prevent the evils of which he complained, he was satisfied; and this opinion was founded upon a variety of documents which he held in his hand. These documents gave the most convincing testimony of the disturbed and alarming state in which Ireland now was. Among others was one from a respectable magistrate of the county of Roscommon, which described the state of that county to be most alarming, and lamented that the law of the land was inadequate to the preservation of the public peace, in consequence of the magistrates having no power over suspected persons. There was another letter from a magistrate of equal authority, Mr. Maycock, of the county of Westmeath; who, after adverting to the atrocities which were every where committing within that county, observed, that if the legislature would allow domiciliary visits, and require the inhabitants to be at home at a particular hour, tranquillity would soon be restored. It was by no means the intention of government to have recourse to this Act, even if it should be passed, on ordinary occasions; on the contrary, as with the Act which had been passed in 1807, and remained in full force till 1810, without being acted upon, it was intended only to be resorted to, when every other effort had failed to quell disturbance. He would wish the House to consider the dreadful evils which were meant to be corrected. In many parts of Ireland, the inhabitants were obliged to sit up whole nights to guard themselves from assassination; and a letter had been put into his hand that day, by an hon: baronet, the member for the Queen's county (sir H. Parnell), which stated that the Caravats were levying contributions of 30s. and 40s. each, from the little farmers every night, and seizing arms and ammunition, wherever they could be found. He had also letters in his posses. |