priety of acting with all possible delicacy; but if delicacy and their duty should happen to clash, the latter ought not to be sacrificed to the former.

On Monday the 8th of December Mr. Pitt, either convinced, upon further consideration, of the propriety of Mr. Viner's suggestion, or expecting that the probability of his majesty's recovery would become more apparent upon a fuller enquiry into the case, came forward to propose, that a committee of twentyone members should be appointed to examine all the physicians, who attended the king during his illness. A like committee was appointed the same day in the House of Lords; and the members in both were chosen nearly in equal numbers from each side of the house.

The report of the committee being brought up on the 10th, and ordered to be printed, Mr. Pitt moved" that a committee "be appointed to examine the Journals of the house, and report 66 precedents of such proceedings as may have been had in cases "of the personal exercise of the royal authority being prevented "or interrupted by infancy, sickness, infirmity, or otherwise, "with a view to provide for the same." Mr. Fox objected to the motion as nugatory, and productive of unnecessary and improper delay. The right hon. gentleman knew, that no precedent was to be found of the suspence of the executive government, in which, at the same time, there existed an heir apparent to the crown, of full age and capacity. For his part, he was convinced, upon the maturest consideration of the principles and practice of the constitution, and of the analogy of the common law of the land, that whenever the sovereign, from sickness, infirmity, or other incapacity, was unable to exercise the func tions of his high office, the heir apparent, being of full age and capacity, had as indisputable a claim to the exercise of the exe cutive power, in the name and on behalf of the sovereign, during the continuance of such incapacity, as in the case of his natural demise. And as to the right, which he conceived the Prince of Wales had, he was not himself to judge when he was entitled to exercise it; but the two houses of parliament, as the organs of the nation, were alone qualified to pronounce when the prince ought to take possession of it, and exercise his right. He thought it candid, entertaining this opinion, to come forward fairly, and avow it at that instant; and therefore, under such an idea, he conceived, that as short a time as possible ought to intervene between the Prince of Wales's assuming the sovereignty, and the present moment. He justified the prince's not making this his indubitable claim himself, by imputing his desire of waving the open advancement of it, to his having been bred in those principles, which had placed his illustrious house on the throne, and to his known reverence and regard for those principles,

as the true fundamentals of our glorious constitution, in the maintenance of which, his family had flourished with so much prosperity and happiness, as sovereigns of the British empire. Hence it was, that his Royal Highness chose rather to wait the decision of parliament, with a patient and due deference to the constitution, than to urge a claim, that, he trusted, a majority of that house, and of the people at large, admitted; and which, he was persuaded, could not be reasonably disputed. With regard to the examination of the physicians, three points formed the result, and must be the substratum, on which that house would necessarily raise the superstructure, whatever it might be, that they should deem it expedient to erect.

1. That his majesty was incapable of meeting his parliament, or proceeding to business.

2. That there was a great prospect, and a strong probability, of his recovery.

3. But that with respect to the point of time, when that recovery would take place, they were left in absolute doubt and uncertainty.

Mr. Pitt observed, that if a claim of right were intimated (even though not formally) on the part of the Prince of Wales, to assume the government, it became of the utmost consequence to ascertain, from precedent and history, whether that claim were founded; which, if it were, precluded the house from the possibility of all deliberation on the subject. In the mean time he maintained, that it would appear, from every precedent, and from every page of our history, that to assert such a right in the Prince of Wales, or any one else, independent of the decision of the two houses of parliament, was little less than treason to the constitution of the country. He pledged himself to this assertion, that in the case of the interruption of the personal exercise of the royal authority, without any previous lawful provision having been made for carrying on the government, it belonged to the other branches of the legislature, on the part of the nation at large, the body they represented, to provide, according to their direction, for the temporary exercise of the royal authority, in the name, and on the behalf, of the sovereign, in such manner as they should think requisite; and that, unless by their decision, the Prince of Wales had no right, (speaking of strict right) to assume the government, more than any other individual subject of the country. What parlia ment ought to determine on that subject, was a question of discretion. However strong the arguments might be on that ground, in favour of the Prince of Wales, which he would not enter into at that time, it did not affect the question of right; because, neither the whole, nor any part, of the royal authority

rould belong to him in the present circumstances, unless conferred by the houses of parliament.

The exclusive right of the prince to the regency under the physical inability of his royal father, was strenuously and ingeniously supported in both houses by the gentlemen of the opposition, and warmly and ably opposed by the ministerial members. Although on this great and important occasion the number of the former were considerably encreased: yet the minister was secure on every question of a majority of upwards of threescore in the Commons, and of a larger proportion of the House of Lords. Lord Loughborough, who on this occasion assumed the lead of opposition in the peers, amongst other arguments in support of the prince's inherent right, strongly urged the inconveniency and mischief, which might arise from the contrary doctrine, when it should come to be acted upon by the independent kingdom of Ireland. Was it remembered, said his lordship, that a neighbouring kingdom stood connected with us, and acknowledged allegiance to the British crown. If once the rule of regular succession were departed from by the two houses, how were they sure, that the neighbouring kingdom would acknowledge the regent, whom the two houses would take upon themselves to elect. The probability was, that the neighbouring kingdom would depart, in consequence of our departure, from the rule of hereditary succession, and choose a regent of their own, which must lead to endless confusion and embarrassment.†

As it was evident from the complection of both houses of parliament, that the majority was against the claim of the Prince of Wales's strict right to the regency, it was thought most advisable, by those who held the affirmative, to avoid, if possible, its being brought to a formal decision. With this view, on the 15th of December, Earl Fitzwilliam, after stating the inexpediency of bringing under the present circumstances, any abstract political questions into discussion, when all parties were agreed in substance, desired to know from the ministers, whether they meant to introduce any proposition of that nature. He was answered by Earl Camden, that as the most essential rights of the two houses of parliament had been questioned

26. Par. Deb. Lords, p. 20.

In answer to this part of Lord Loughborough's speech, Lord Chancellor (Thurlow) lamented, that any remarks should have fallen from the noble and learned lord respecting Ireland, because he considered them as not unlikely. Spargere voces in vulgum ambiguas! Such vague and loose suggestions could answer no useful purpose, but might produce very mischievous consequences. He declared, that he had every reliance on the known loyalty, good sense, and ⚫ affection of that country, and felt no anxiety on the danger of Ireland's acting improperly.

by persons of great and respectable authority, he thought it was become absolutely necessary, that they should not be left doubtful and unsettled. Upon this declaration, his Royal Highness the Duke of York rose to express his sentiments on a subject, in which the dearest interests of the country were involved. He entirely agreed with the noble Earl (Fitzwilliam) and other lords, who had expressed their wishes to avoid any question, which tended to induce a discussion on the rights of the prince. The fact was plain, that no such claim of right had been made on the part of the prince; and he was confident, that his royal highness understood too well the sacred principles, which seated the house of Brunswick on the throne of Great Britain, ever to assume or exercise any power, be his claim what it might, not derived from the will of the people, expressed by their representatives and their lordships in parliament assembled. It was upon that ground that he must be permitted to hope, that the wisdom and moderation of all considerate men, at a moment when temper and unanimity were so peculiarly necessary, on account of the dreadful calamity which every description of persons must, in common, lament, but which he more particu larly felt, would make them wish to avoid pressing a decision, which certainly was not necessary to the great object expected from parliament, and which must be most painful in the discussion to a family already sufficiently agitated and afflicted. Such, his royal highness observed, in conclusion, were the sentiments of an honest heart, equally influenced by duty and affection to his royal father, and by attachment to the constitutional rights of his subjects: and he was confident, that if his royal brother were to address them in his place, as a peer of the realm, these were the sentiments, which he would distinctly avow.

He was followed by his Royal Highness the Duke of Gloucester, who strongly deprecated the discussion of a question, which could only tend to produce the most mischievous consequences. He felt so strongly on the subject, that, if the attempt were persisted in, and the question brought before that house, he could only say, that he believed he should not dare to trust himself to come forward and speak his sentiments on the extraordinary conduct of those, who were unnecessarily inclined to compel a decision on so delicate a question.

Notwithstanding the entreaties of the princes of the royal family, the ministers persevered in their intention; and the lord chancellor closed the conversation by declaring, that though he much lamented the starting of such a question, yet he did not see how they could now avoid coming to some determination upon it.

On the 16th of December, the House of Commons having resolved itself into a committee, Mr. Pitt moved the three

following resolutions, the first of which was voted unanimously.

"1. That it is the opinion of this committee, that his ma"jesty is prevented, by his present indisposition, from coming "L to his parliament, and from attending to public business; and "that the personal exercise of the royal authority is thereby, "for the present, interrupted."

"2. That it is the opinion of this committee, that it is the right and duty of the lords, spiritual and temporal, and com"mons of Great Britain, now assembled, and lawfully and free"ly representing all the estates of the people of this realm, to 66 provide the means of supplying the defect of the personal ex"ercise of the royal authority, arising from his majesty's said "indisposition, in such manner, as the exigency of the case "may appear to require."

Resolved, that for this purpose, and for maintaining entire "the constitutional authority of the king, it is necessary, that "the said lords spiritual and temporal and commons of Great "Britain, should determine on the means, whereby the royal "assent may be given in parliament to such bill, as may be "passed by the two houses of parliament, respecting the exer"cise of the powers and authorities of the crown, in the name, "and on the behalf of the king, during the continuance of his "majesty's present indisposition."

These resolutions passed the commons after several vehement debates, by a majority of 64: and were carried in the lords by 99 against 66. On the 29th of December, 1788, the illness of the speaker (Mr. Cornwall, of which he died on the 2d of January, 1789,) prevented his attendance in the commons, and there was no debate for some days. During this interval from parliamentary business, Mr. Pitt, on the 29th of December, 1788, wrote to his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales the following letter, concerning the plan of restrictions intended to be put upon the regency.

*

"THE proceedings in parliament being now brought "to a point, which will render it necessary to propose to the "House of Commons, the particular measures to be taken for 66 supplying the defect of the personal exercise of the royal au66 thority, during the present interval, and your royal highness 66 having some time since signified your pleasure, that any com"munication on this subject should be in writing, I take the liberty of respectfully entreating your royal highness's per

Some aukward misrepresentations of what had passed at one of the meetings, between his royal highness and the premier, having gone abroad, his royal highness had from that time declined any personal interview with the minister, and had expressed his royal pleasure, that any future communica tions should be in writing.