that after deducting the value of the materials, 15,000l. would be sufficient to cover the expense of the preparations for the fire-works. Mr. Tierney then asked, by whose directions, or by what authority, he had undertaken works to the extent of 15,000l. Sir W. Congreve said, that he thought himself justified by precedent. In the year 1749, the board of works had, by the authority of the King's warrant, gone to considerable expense for the preparation of fire-works. Mr. Tierney then asked, was there a king's warrant for this expenditure of 15,000l. ? Sir W. Congreve said, that he was not prepared to say that a warrant had been yet granted to that amount.-There had been a warrant for a part of it. Mr. Tierney begged to be understood, that he did not mean to impute the slightest mismanagement or inattention to sir William Congreve, in the execution of that part of the duty which he had undertaken. All he wanted was a regular estimate of the expense, and not merely what might have been mentioned in a loose conversation from Mr. Nash to sir William Congreve. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that there was a warrant for the sum of 5000l. Mr. Tierney then moved for an estimate of the expense of the preparations for the fête in Hyde-park, St. James's-park, and the Green-park.-Agreed to. Mr. Bankes wished to know whether the bridge over the canal in the Park, with all its ornamental superstructure, was included in the 15,000l. Sir W. Congreve said, that it was at first included, but as the bridge was intended now to be a permanent one, he did not think it could be fairly classed among the preparations for fire-works. Mr. Bennet asked, whether the large ornaments upon the bridge were to be removed, or whether they were to be per manent. Sir W. Congreve said, that this would be a question of taste, and he could not say which way it would be decided. HOUSE OF LORDS. Thursday, July 14. GERMAN SUFFERERS.] The Earl of Liverpool presented a Message from the Prince Regent, recommending them to concur in such additional provisions to the distressed inhabitants of Germany as should be deemed expedient. The Message was ordered to be taken into consideration to-morrow. SLAVE TRADE.] Earl Stanhope stated, that he had an immense number of petitions to present against the revival of the Slave Trade. Several petitions were accordingly presented and laid on the table. Lord Holland stated, that he also had the satisfaction of being called upon to present several petitions against the Slave Trade; one signed by upwards of 1,700 persons, and the rest numerously signed. The petitions, being from Nottingham, and a variety of other places, were laid on the table. Lord Grenville presented petitions to the same effect, from Queensferry, Kelso, and Maidenhead, which were laid on the table. His lordship then stated, that he had another petition to present, to the same effect, which required rather more particular notice. It was a petition from Bristol, signed by 12,455 persons, agreed to at a numerous meeting, more unanimous, both as to the object and the means by which it was to be attained, than any other meeting in that city within the memory of man. He could not think himself justified in offering to their lordships a petition from that city, on such a subject, so agreed to, and so signed, without calling their lordship's particular attention to it. It must be recollected, that this was a city which had itself once carried on this iniquitous traffic to a considerable extent; but a city which had, to its high honour, given it up even before the abolition. It was extremely flattering to him, personally, to be the instrument of presenting this petition to their lordships, as it formed one of the best proofs of the unprecedented zeal with which the public now came forward to give its voice against this horrid and detestable traffic. The Petition was laid on the table. The Marquis of Lansdowne presented, among other petitions against the Slave Trade, one from Limerick, which was numerously signed by Quakers and others. In answer to a question from the Lord Chancellor, he said it was addressed" to the Lord's spiritual and temporal." The Irish Quakers, as well as the rest of the inhabitants of that country, were so warm in the cause, that they were not to be deterred from petitioning, by being scrupuious about the terms of address. Ordered to be referred to the Committee of Supply. PRINCESS OF WALES'S ANNUITY BILL.] Lord Castlereagh moved the order of the day for the second reading of the Princess of Wales's Annuity Bill. The order of the day being read, HELSTON ELECTION BILL.] The Lord Chancellor said, he did not bring forward the motion which it was his intention to submit to their lordships, because he considered the matter of this Bill was not, in its nature, deserving of the serious attention of parliament, and such as called for examination and remedy. Whether the remedy in the Bill before their lordships was proper or not, there could be little doubt that the mischief was not of a nature which called for the attention of parliament. However, they ought to take care that they proceeded on such evidence as authorised them to legislate upon. It was impossible, without oppression, to obtain all the evidence wanted, before this Bill could be passed, during the present sessions. Were they to receive any part of the evidence this session, that evidence could not be received in another session, on a Bill differing in its contents from the present. He, therefore, thought it inexpedient to proceed farther with the Bill at present; and he should move, That it be read a second time this day two months. Lord Grenville thought the ground assigned by the noble and learned lord very satisfactory. He had no difficulty in expressing himself very friendly to the principle of Bills like the present, when a sufficient ground was laid for the measure. He trusted the House would go into an examination of evidence early in the next session. He would have been anxious to have examined some of the evidence this session, but for the reason stated by the noble and learned lord. The motion was then put, and carried. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Thursday, July 14. PRINCE REGENT'S MESSAGE RESPECTING THE GERMAN SUFFERERS.] The Chancellor of the Exchequer presented the following Message from the Prince Regent: "The Prince Regent, acting in the name and on the behalf of his Majesty, having taken into his serious consideration the accounts which he has received of the severe distresses to which the inhabitants of a part of Germany have been exposed in their persons and property, in consequence of the operations of the war, and of the wanton and atrocious devastations committed by the forces acting under the orders of the late ruler of France, recommends to the House of Commons to enable his Royal Highness, in aid of the volun : Mr. Tierney said, that he felt it necessary to trouble the House with a few observa tions upon this measure; but he begged to premise his remarks by stating, that in offering them he did not act either with the knowledge of the Princess of Wales, or after consulting with any of the gentlemen who had been accustomed to advise her Royal Highness. His observations proceeded entirely from his own view of the subject. He was much surprised at the enactments of the Bill before the House the preamble stated, that it was to enable his Majesty to settle an annuity upon the Princess of Wales: in framing it, the noble lord was authorised to go no further than he was warranted by the terms of the resolution of the House, aug. menting the income of the Princess of Wales; but the whole of this measure, two clauses excepted, related entirely to transactions of the year 1809, regarding the arrangement then made between the Prince and Princess of Wales. What relation they had to the present Bill he could not understand. The Bill, among other things, recited, that the Prince Regent was not in future to be liable to any of the debts of the Princess of Wales. Whether a provision declaring "that his Royal Highness was under no legal obligation to pay those debts," was sound law, he was not competent to decide, but it did seem as if the greater part of the Bill had been devised, in order to prevent any liability on the part of the Prince Regent. The main objection he had to it, was, that the Bill dealt most unfairly by her Royal Highness, and perverted to the most invidious purposes the arrangement of 1809. One of the papers brought down by the noble lord, purported to be an agreement between the Prince and Princess of Wales. It appeared that, in 1809, the creditors of the Princess of Wales represented to Mr. Perceval and the duke of Portland, that seemed to treat this matter with great levity; but the paper, which was before the House, was drawn up only because his Majesty would not consent to bring the Princess before parliament in 1809; while now she was brought before parliament as a person who had violated her word. He had thus stated his opinion on the second reading, with the intention to go further into the subject in the Committee. What he at present wished to ask of the noble lord was, Did he say that the Princess of Wales had departed from the agreement of 1809? Did he bring her before parliament as a person who had exceeded her could give him satisfaction,-if the noble lord could prove that the Princess had ever exceeded her income since the agree ment of 1809, he should give him no further trouble. her Royal Highness was indebted to them in the sum of 49,000l. which circumstance Mr. Perceval stated to the Prince Regent, who took upon himself the payment of that sum. In order, however, to guard himself against future demands, he proposed to obtain the sanction of an act of parliament, or of an order in council to the same effect. Of the last, he was informed, that it was not customary to make such a use; and to the first, it was not then convenient to resort, since it was not deemed expedient to come to parliament at that time. The House would bear this circumstance in mind, because it was the duty of the noble lord to shew why it was now more ex-income? If, on this head, the noble lord pedient and fit to resort to parliament, than at the former period. What he contended, was, that nothing new had occurred to justify such a proceeding. Since the Prince Regent could be provided with neither of these safe-guards, a paper was signed by the parties, which augmented the income of the Princess of Wales 5,000l. and was deemed, under the sanction of his Majesty, adequate to the purpose, which was given in another document, laid upon the table. He then read to the House an extract from this last document, stating that such a guarantee was extremely reasonable, and providing, that if the Princess of Wales should again be found to have incurred debts, application should be immediately made to parliament, praying that an Act might be passed to indemnify the Prince Regent from the payment of those debts. Now, he would ask what had happened since 1809, that could subject the Princess to the provisions of the present Bill? No application, it appeared, was to have been made to parliament for any enactment to secure the Prince of Wales from debts contracted by the Princess, unless she exceeded the income settled on her, or contracted debts which she had refused to discharge. Had this happened? So far from it, the Princess of Wales had discharged, out of her income, a debt of 3,600l. due at the time of the agreement. And was it not hard, that, at the time when the House was professing to do an act of liberality, they should mis lead the country into a belief, that they were obliged to provide some security for the Prince of Wales against the debts of the Princess, because her word or signature was not sufficient? And this while, instead of asking for money, the Princess had been the first of the Royal Family who had refused money! The noble lord Lord Castlereagh said, that he had, on a former night, distinctly disclaimed any belief that the Princess had incurred any debts; and, on that account, he had not thought it necessary to put her Royal Highness's proposed income under the regulations to which the income of some other branches of the royal family had been placed. It was for reasons, perfectly distinct, that he had proposed the Bill as it stood. It was said, that the title covered nothing but a grant of money to the Princess, and that the resolutions of the committee went only to this extent. But he contended, that it was naturally open to parliament, in granting any money, to accompany it with any regulations which they might think fit. As to the title merely, it would be open to the right hon. gentleman in the committee to propose an amendment. It had been said, that the papers, which had been laid before the House, had nothing to do with the grant to the Princess. He apprehended, that they had most materially to do with the grant; for it would have been a reasonable ground of complaint, if the House had not been informed of the incompetency of the Princess's income, before any addition to it was proposed. It was also most proper, on account of the other provisions in the Bill, to know what income the Princess derived from the Prince of Wales. As to the agreement of 1809, the only motive why it had not, at that time, been thought fit to come to parliament (though a parliamentary enactment, even then, was thought the only measure which would be perfectly satisfactory), was, that it was deemed most expedient, if it could be avoided, that the concerns of the royal family should not at all be entered into by parliament. And as the Prince of Wales, at that time, had found means to pay the debts contracted by the Princess, and to increase her income, an application of the kind was unnecessary. The right hon. gentleman had said, that the paper stated, that the Prince of Wales was not liable to the debts of the Princess. As a general principle, the contrary was stated in the papers; but, for the debts to the amount of 49,000l. at that time owing by the Princess, it was true, that he was not liable, because the creditors had not complied with the regulations of the act of parliament respecting the Prince's revenue. But as the Prince was prospectively liable, it was then thought proper that he should be secured against any fresh debts. But, it was said by the right hon. gentleman, why make a provision of that kind at present, but to throw a reflection on the Princess? The obvious answer was, that by the Bill before the House a total change was effected in the Princess of Wales's income. The income of the Princess, or any part of it, was not now at the discretion of the Prince Regent; but it had been thought proper to give the whole income out of the consolidated fund, and to take from the Prince the 22,000l. a year which he was in the habit of paying to the Princess. At present, therefore, the state of the case was very different from that in which it stood under the agreement between the parties. For, at that time, though the creditors of the Princess might have made their claims legal debts of the Prince, by complying with the regulations of the act of parliament, yet, not only might the Prince have secured himself prospectively by an application to parliament, but he had in his power the 22,000l. a year, from whence he could deduct the debts contracted by the Princess, for which he was made liable. As the Bill before the House took from the Prince all dominion over the Princess's revenue, it was but just that the Princess should not be enabled to make any claim on that of his Royal Highness. Such an enactment, which was only that which the natural justice of the case between the parties required, conveyed no imputation on the Princess. For it would be to invert the order of nature, to make his Royal Highness dependent on the Princess while there was no dependence (VOL. XXVIII. ) on her part. The right hon. gentleman might have known, though not admitted to that intimacy with her Royal Highness to which some other members were, that the Princess felt no such apprehensions on this subject as the right hon. gentleman entertained for her. In that letter to him (lord Castlereagh), in which she had not, as he thought, shewn that repugnance to accept the public money which the right hon. gentleman had mentioned-which repugnance did not, in fact exist, until her advisers had created it-in that letter, she stated that there was nothing in the proposed measure inconsistent with her rights, her rank, and her honour. He hoped this would relieve the right hon. gentleman from the fears which he entertained. Mr. Tierney said, that the noble lord had not convinced him; and as he had not convinced the noble lord, he should not make another attempt at that time. As to the letter of the Princess of Wales, it was only an answer to a proposition of an addition of 28,000l. a year to her income. She had then said, that she saw nothing in the proposition derogatory to her rank or character; indeed, it would have been a wonder if she had. He should feel it his duty, in the committee, to propose some clause, to explain, that it was not understood that the Princess had exceeded her income, if he could not, as he should endeavour to do, reduce the Bill to a simple grant of money. Lord Castlereagh explained, that it was in the Answer of the Princess of Wales to his second communication which con tained a draft of the Bill, that she had used the expressions he had mentioned. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed to-morrow. HOUSE OF LORDS. GERMAN SUFFERERS.] The order being read for taking the Prince Regent's Message of yesterday, upon this subject, into consideration, his Royal Highness's Message was read by the clerk; when The Earl of Liverpool rose to call their lordships' attention to the subject. He adverted, in the first instance, to the subscription set on foot towards the close of autumn, last year, for the relief of the suffering Germans, by a number of benevolent individuals. It was hoped, that the sums raised by that mode would be found sufficient, not perhaps absolutely to an(2 Z) posed to do all that could be effected. The noble earl concluded, by moving an Address to the Prince Regent, assuring his Royal Highness of the cheerful concurrence of the House, in such measures as may be necessary to enable him to carry into effect the benevolent object of his most gracious Message. On the question, being put, swer the desired purpose, but to preclude the necessity of any appeal to the generous feeling and liberality of the British parliament. The sum raised on the occasion, to which he referred, was about 100,000l. and reflected the highest credit on the humanity and benevolence of the contributors. The distribution of it had been principally confined to certain districts the vicinity of Dresden. He had Lord Holland said, he felt it to be a seen a calculation, by which, in sixty-three most ungracious duty to resist an appeal villages round that capital, through the to their lordship's generosity; but he was devastating operations in October last, compelled, notwithstanding that circumit appeared that upwards of half a million stance, by his sense of public duty, to sterling of property had been destroyed. enter his protest against this lavish expenHe was certain that it was impossible to diture of the public money. It was true, mention these circumstances without rous- that similar grants had been made on two ing the sympathetic and compasionate occasions in the course of the present war; feelings of their lordships. Taking the one to Portugal, where the people had severe distresses and losses of these unfor- suffered, by a well conducted retreat of ́tunate people into his serious consideration, our army, having driven their property the Prince Regent was induced to propose, before them, to prevent its falling into the that a sum should be furnished, to be dis- hands of the enemy; another to the peotributed on a scale and principle similar ple of Moscow, on occasion of the burning to that which was adopted on two former of that capital. In the case of Portugal, occasions. It would not be necessary to considering all the circumstances, there specify in the address, the sum which it existed strong grounds for such a grant, was proposed to vote; but the intended which was little more than an act of jusamount was 100,000l. Were there no tice. In the case of Moscow, he had other, he was willing to rest the question rather acquiesced in than approved of the upon this consideration alone. That part grant; and he had acquiesced, not from of Europe had been, with very little in- any opinion that the grant could do much terval, engaged in a state of desolating and good, but because, when such grant was destructive warfare for the last twenty once proposed, it was better to agree to it years; and the circumstance, of peculiar than to refuse, in order to shew every disgood fortune to this country was, that, position to make common from its insular situation, it enjoyed ad-Russia, which was then an object of great vantages, which precluded it from suffer-importance. The grant of the Portuguese ing those losses, and inflictions to which was made in the spirit of justice and sound the continental nations were exposed. It policy. The grant to the people of Russia was owing to the blessing and protection might be founded in policy. But here of Providence, that this country had not, they were called upon at the close of the for the shortest interval, been made the war, without any examination, to vote theatre of war; a distinction which ren- away this sum of money at a time when dered the difference between countries, em- the people of this country were suffering barked in one common warfare, as great, severely from the effects of the war, and as that between a country actually en- when there was no appearance of their gaged in war, and one in a state of perfect burthens being, immediately at least, very peace. The proposed grant was meant much diminished. He was well aware of to be confided exclusively to the relief of the calamities which must be endured by the people of those countries who had the people of those countries which had suffered the most directly all the cruelties, been more peculiarly the theatre of war: all the horrors, all the miseries inflicted but these calamities were not of a nature by the immediate and actual operations of to be relieved by money, and therefore war. He was satisfied, that to say thus this was imposing an additional burthen much was sufficient in the way of appeal on this country, without doing much good to the benevolent and generous feelings of to those places where the bounty was to be the House, which he was confident, though distributed. The voluntary subscription, it could not effectuate all the good that he admitted, did high honour to those who might be wished, would shew itself dis-had subscribed; but when they came to cause with |