as the right hon. gentleman did; but now, as something more was required to accomplish the object, was the feeling of the house and the right hon. gentleman to be altered? We were told that those things must be endured for which there was no remedy; but if there was a remedy, why should a great and confessed evil be longer endured? His attention to this subject had lately led him to look over what had been done in it in former times. He had found in the former debates a great deal of asperity, which he was sorry to find mingled with such a discussion. He was pleased to find that nothing of that kind had entered into the present discussion, with the exception of one hon. gentleman (Mr. Johnstone), whose accuracy in figures had been complimented by the chancellor of the exchequer, though that accuracy had commenced in miscalculation, and ended in false inference. The hon. gentleman declared himself sorry that a compromise had taken place. He, on the contrary, rejoiced at it, because much disagreeable consequence might result from the prosecution of the suit, and the legal advisers of his royal highness would give no advice inconsistent with his honour. The hon. gentleman conceived it an insult to the public to suppose that there is any balance due to his royal highness on the He was as little inclined to insult the public as the hon. gentleman; but he could not conceive the public so irritable as to fly into a rage at being called on to enter into an account on a matter in which the best informed persons were of opinion there was a large balance against it. He gave the public credit for more justice and less irritability than the hon. gentleman. The indelicacy of entering into such an account had also been mentioned. He knew of no indelicacy in it, except, indeed, in the set-offs which gentlemen made against the revenues of the duchy. Was the prince to be told by his royal father, “It is true I owe you a large arrear, accumulated during your minority, but I have to deduct the expenses of your nursing and education; there is so much for your cradle, and so much for your pap, and so much for your books." The whole of the indelicacy was in this. The Prince of Wales had shared the same education and the same maintenance which had been enjoyed by the Duke of York. They were both maintained out of the queen's privy purse, and it was on the occasion of that maintenance that parliament had made so large and liberal a grant for her Majesty's

arrears.

service. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Johnstone) said, "that the settlement made in 1795 ought not to be changed, and that there was no reason why it should not be continued in 1803." That may be a good argument, but it came rather late. It ought to have been advanced when the original grant on his Majesty's message was proposed. The hon. gentleman held his tongue then; and now, when his Majesty's message had recommended the object to the house, when the chancellor of the exchequer had stated that the object was 'so important and desirable as to admit of no delay, when the house assented to the principle, and seemed to feel no other objection to the measure proposed on it, than that it did not go far enough, the hon. gentleman came out with this argument, which went against the bill brought in on the resolution of the house in every stage. The hon. gentleman adduced a curious reason for not doing more now than was done in 1795. He said it was particularly necessary that the Prince of Wales should keep a greater state than in 1795, and have more trappings and lords of the bed-chamber, &c. because there was then a great number of jacobins in the country. Thus, sir, though we did not know it before, and I am afraid the doctrine will not find many adherents among us even now, the jacobins are the greatest supporters of the splendour of the royal family; and as we are told in the fable of the two owls perched on a ruin, who said to each other when the tyrant who caused the devastation passed by-" Long live King Mahmoud, for while he reigns we shall have plenty of ruined villages!" so our royal family should say, "Heaven send us plenty of jacobins, for they are the best support of our rank, and state, and dignity!" An hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Cartwright), and the worthy baronet near him (Sir Robert Buxton), said that the trappings were of no importance, that virtue was everything, and they deprecated the assumption of state and rank accordingly. He had no objection to this doctrine, if the system so early established, so invariably maintained, and handed down to us by our ancestors, was proved to be foolish. But let the rule be general, let not the splendour of one be curtailed, while that of another is extended. If, as a great man in this country (the late Earl of Chatham) had said, "Every feather of the royal bird aids his flight;" though he should not go to the length that noble lord did, in saying, that "when they drooped, or were

shed, the bird would fall to the ground;" yet all should be cautiously preserved. In order to bring this contending system home to gentlemen's minds, let it be applied to the house-let it be supposed that the speaker possessed sufficient dignity, and commanded sufficient respect by those virtues which it was acknowledged he possessed; let the chair be removed, let the other badges be stripped off, let that bauble (the mace) be taken away, let the fine house that was building for him, in which he hoped he would soon entertain the members with his accustomed hospitality and splendour, be demolished; let the state coach be laid down, and, instead of proceeding in it to St. James's, attended by a grand procession of members in their private coaches, let him go on foot with the addresses, covered with a warm surtout, and honoured with the privilege of an umbrella in case of rain-(loud bursts of laughter). Let the judges be conducted by no sheriffs, or sheriffs' attendants, to the assize towns; let the chief justice go down in the mail coach, and the puisne judges content themselves with the travelling as outside passengers(a laugh). Let the lord mayor, instead of coming to Westminster-hall in the state-barge, accompanied by the several companies in their state-barges,-let him come in a plain wherry, without any attendants, and instead of going back to feast on turtle at Guildhall, with the great officers of state and foreign ambassadors, let him content himself with stopping on his way back, and taking a beef-steak at Dolly's chop-house-(loud laughing). It was not easy to have done without citing instances in which the abridgement of their happiness, which foreigners admire, but which, according to these gentlemen, are quite simple and unnecessary in the Prince of Wales, may be effected with great saving to the public. The Prince of Wales was not indifferent to the resumption of his rank; he should be sorry he was, as he should not then have the high opinion of him that he had. The house may, therefore, well go a step beyond ministers. It was no consideration that ministers had done what they had, nor even that the prince had abandoned his claims on the revenues of Cornwall in consequence. Let the house make its grant for the attainment of the object desired, without reference to any of these things. The debts contracted since 1795 might, it was true, be brought forward as debts which the Prince of Wales ought to acknowledge, but which he should be sorry to

if

make known. There would be that difference between money voted for these debts, and that voted on former occasions, that no person would claim it-(a laugh). There was the landgrave's debt also, unless it could be supposed that he, like those creditors, contrary to law, would fly from payment, except it was clandestine (a laugh). It would, surely, have been much better for the commissioners, in the first instance, to have come to parliament for an additional grant, when the original sum was found insufficient, rather than strike off ten per cent. indiscriminately. It could hardly be surprising that his royal highness should now wish to make amends for their inconsiderate deduction. He would hardly be suspected of having any interested view in supporting this motion; and certainly he would not be suspected by those who recollect the declaration he made at that time. But he thought it a weak thing, after we had voted away £250,000,000 for the support of the thrones of Europe, an object in which we failed, we should not give £100,000 to maintain the dignity of our own, an object which we could not fail to accomplish.

Sir Robert Buxton moved the previous question, upon which the house divided; for the previous question 184; against it 139.

AUGUST 4.

DEFENCE AMENDMENT BILL.

MR. SHERIDAN ridiculed the hon. gentleman's (Mr. Wyndham) sarcasm on the public prints, observing that, in compliment to his friend (Mr. Cobbett), he probably preferred the weekly to the diurnal publications. He praised the readiness, zeal, and alacrity of the volunteer corps, and remarked, that, "with the exception of the regulars, there was not a corps in the kingdom on which the late secretary at war had not cast some degree of odium." He approved of this bill, because it encouraged volunteer exertions, and pointed out the station in which every man in the country ought to place himself. It had been stated by the right hon. gentleman, with respect to the general defence bill, that its object ought to have been to march companies to the army, and that their first destination was to be that of filling up the regiments of the line. He had spoken to gentlemen upon that subject, who thought that a nobleman, gentleman, trades

man, or farmer, all of whom were liable to the operations of the act, if they did not volunteer, would be very much surprised to find themselves, perhaps in the course of a month, in a private regiment, and liable to be tied up to the halberts. It was impossible for any man to make a comparison between the volunteers and those who were drilled on compulsion. Could the latter be compared with those patriotic volunteers who were sacrificing their time in perfecting themselves in their exercise? Look at the St. George's and the Westminster volunteers, who most likely might at this moment, be seen exercising in the hall. But the hon. gentleman had said, "he disliked that spirit of aristocracy in towns and villages which it was the tendency of the bill to introduce." He denied that it would have any such effect. The only effect of the bill was that of allowing persons to volunteer, instead of being compelled to serve. They were not obliged to wear an uniform. If in villages they voluntarily came forward without uniform, they were exempted from the operation of the general defence bill. In large towns, such as Birmingham, Sheffield, and Nottingham, he should prefer associations of the higher classes, and in the country and villages those of the lower. He was satisfied with the power this bill gave his Majesty, with regard to the acceptance of volunteer services. We ought not to stop while anything was left to be done. We should look forward to the possibility of the most disastrous calamities, and disgraceful events, again occurring. The state of Ireland was such, that although every man must rejoice at its present security, we ought not to calculate on its remaining free from disturbance. It was absolutely necessary that Ireland should not be separated from this country. It might, perhaps, be necessary that the whole of our disposable force should be employed for the purpose of retaining Ireland. Upon the whole, he saw no objections to the alterations proposed by this bill; but, on the contrary, thought it a proper extension of the system of volunteer service. (Mr. Sheridan delivered his speech from the treasury bench.)

Mr. Wyndham answered Mr. Sheridan.

Mr. Sheridan, in reply to the observations that he was a new convert, asked the hon. gentleman whether it was a new situation for him to come forward and state his opinion when the country was in danger? Did he call out, like the hon. gentleman, "re