always been made in Scotland as in England, under the fanction and authority of the ftates of the kingdom, either previously given, or afterwards interpofed, and fometimes the next heir of the crown had been appointed, fometimes not, fometimes one regent, and at other times more than one. Mr. Hardinge laid great ftrefs upon the precedents of Henry the fixth, and upon the regency bills which paffed in the reign of George the fecond, and of the prefent king. In the former, in cafe of a minority, the princess of Wales was made regent, and the duke of Cumberland, the next prefumptive heir, paffed by; in the latter, the king was enabled to nominate a regent by his will, though the duke of York was the next major in fucceffion. These indeed were acts of complete legiflatures; but in the debates which they occafioned, no complaint was made, no idea started that they were doing an injury to the right of the prefumptive heir, or that of any other. He likewife contended, that the convention at the revolution did, in their declaration refpecting the appointment of William and Mary to be king and queen, and the definition of the feparate powers of each, decide upon an abftract queftion of right, and did legiflate, to all intents and purposes, as far as was now propofed to be done. Mr. Fox combated thefe arguments with great force and acutenels. He began by declaring, that in his opinion the labours of the committee appointed to fearch for precedents had been entirely fruitlefs, all of thofe reported being either irrelevant and inapplicable, inconfiftent with each other, or drawn from pe riods of civil violence, anarchy, and confufion. Of this latter fort he fhewed the precedents fo much infifted upon, of the reign of Henry the fixth eminently to be; and at the fame time proved, that fo far as their inconfiftency with each other afforded any ground of argument, they were, on the whole, more favourable to his opinions than those of his opponents. He next endeavoured to prove, from the fpirit and practice of the conftitution, and the abfurdities and dangers to which a contrary doctrine would lead, his main pofition, viz. that the prince had, fubject to the adjudication of the two houfes of parliament, an exclufive right, under the exifting circumftances, to the full exercife of the royal authority. The affumption, of a power to nominate a regent, he confidered, fo far as it went, as a converfion of the fucceffion of the monarchy from hereditary to elective, infifting, that the poffeffion of the crown, and of the executive authority, muft, in the nature of things, be governed by the lame principles. In order to illuftrate this, he put the cafe of a foreigner afking an Englishman, whether the monarchy of Great Britain was hereditary or elective? Any man familiar with the theory of the conftitution would naturally anfwer that it was hereditary; but, if the doctrine of that day prevail ed, if the houfe fet afide the hereditary right to the exercife of the king's authority, during its perfonal fufpenfion, the answer must be, “I "cannot tell, afk his majefty's phy"ficians: when the king of Eng"land is in good health the mo"narchy is hereditary; but when "he is ill, and incapable of exer "clfing cifing the fovereign authority, it " is elective." Let the committee confider the danger of making any other perfon regent befides the prince of Wales. If the two houfes could chufe a regent, they might chufe whom they pleafed: they might chufe a foreigner, a Catholic (for the law defines not the regent) who, while he held the power of the third eftate, might prevail on the other two branches of the legifiature to concur with him in altering or fetting afide the fuc teffion of the houfe of Brunfwick. He faw this fuppofition was deemed extravagant; but he meant to put an extravagent cafe. He had not, however, put an impoffible one; let them turn to the favourite period of our hiftory (lavourite at leaf with the other fide of the houfe that day) the reign of Henry the fixth, and they would find, that Richard, duke of York, took advantage of his power as protector of the kingdom, and actually difinherited the prince of Wales, and the whole line of Lancafter, though they were more nearly allied, and had much better pretenfions to the crown than the houfe of York. The fame difmal fcene which had difgraced our annals at that period, might be acted over again. He contended, that the appointment of a regent, in the manner now propofed, implied a right in the two houses to legiflate and enact laws, in the teeth of the ftatute of the 13th of Charles the fecond, which not only declared, that the two houfes of parliament could not make laws without the confent and concurrence of the king, but also declared, that whoever thould prefume to affirm the contrary, fhould be guilty of high treafon. The VOL. XXXI. right to make laws refted only in the legiflature complete, and not in the concurrence of any two branches of it. Upon that very principle was our conftitution built, and on the prefervation of it did its existence depend. Were the cafe otherwife, the conftitution might be eafily deftroyed: becaufe, if the two branches could affume the power to make law, they might, in that law, modify or entirely change the nature of the third eftate. The prefent fituation of affairs had been compared to the revolution; but their proceedings were diametrically oppofite. At the period of the revolution the convention which was then assembled, confcious that they could not make any change in the genius of the monarchy, until they had a head, firft reftored the third eftate, and then defined its power; whereas the committee were called on to proceed in a different way; first, to new-caft the office, and then to declare the officer. And what must be the fituation of a regent elected by that houfe? He must be a pageant and puppet, a mere creature of their own. They might appoint him for a year, a month, a day, and to change the monarchy into a republic. The fafety of the whole depended on the jealoufy which each retained against the others; not on the patriotifm of any one branch of the legislature, but rather on the feparate interefts of the three concurring, through different views, to one general good. All these painciples would be deftroyed by the prefent project, which would radically alter the government, and of confequence overturn the conflitution. Another mifchief and that of the moft ferious nature, might arife from an elective regency. What, if the two houfes fhould difagree in the person to be appointed? What, if one regent fhould be appointed in England and another in Ireland? With refpect to Ireland, if the two houfes of the British parliament fimply declared the prince of Wales regent, moft probably the parliament in Ireland would do the fame; if they fpeculated, the Irish parliament would fpeculate. Were the queftion of right but once fet afloat, it would become impoffible to fay to what extent it might be carried. capacity, has no more right to "exercife the royal authority, dur ing his majefty's incapacity, "than any other individual fub"ject?" The right honourable gentlemen well knew, that he dared not venturd to fubject fuch a que!tion to debate. Confcious of his error, and confcious that fo monftrous a doctrine as he had fu fered himself, in an evil hour, to deliver, had revolted the public mind, he now fought to divert the public attention by a paltry triumph over him, though that triumph could not be obtained without a marked infult upon the prince of Wales. For, whatever opinion of the prince's right he (Mr. Fox) might entertain, why should that right be difcuffed which had been neither claimed, nor was intended to be claimed? That this was the precife state of the fact, was not to be doubted, after the declaration which had been fo gracioufly communicated, from the higheft authority, in another place. The claim being thus difavowed, how muft the preamble of a bill run, truly to defcribe the cafe as it flood at prefent: "Whereas his Having fully argued the right of royal highnefs the prince of "Wales has never claimed a right to the regency, it becomes nc " ceffary Toward the conclufion of his fpeech, Mr. Fox adverted to an argument advanced against him, including a charge, that he had deferted the caufe which he had heretofore been fuppofed to claim the peculiar merit of ftanding forth on all occafions to defend, and had thus manifefted an inattention to the privileges of the house of commons, as opposed to the encroachments of the prerogatives of the crown. Upon this occafion, Mr. Fox remarked, that his refiftance of the latter, when it had been thought increafing unconftitutionally, was well known. The influence of the crown had been more than once checked in that house, and (he really believed) to the advantage of the people. Whenever the executive authority was urged beyond its reafonable extent, it ought to be refifted; but he defired to afk if this was an occafion for exercifing the conftitutional power of refifting the prerogative or the influence of the crown in that houfe? He had ever made it his pride to combat with the crown in the plentitude of its power and the fulness of its authotity: he wifhed not to trample on its rights while it lay extended at their feet, deprived of its functions, and incapable of refiftance. Let the right honourable gentleman pride himself on a victory obtained against a defencelefs foe; let him boaft of a triumph where no battle had been fought, and, confequently, where no glory could be ob tained! Let him take advantage of the calamities of human nature; let him, like an unfeeling lord of the manor, riot in the riches to be acquired by plundering fhipwrecks, by rigorously feizing on waifs, and ftrays, and deodands, and all the accumulated producé of the various accidents which misfortune could throw into his power. Let it not be my boaft, he faid, to have gained fuch victories, obtained fuch triumphs, or availed myself of wealth fo acquired. The right honourable gentleman, he added, appeared to have been fo long in the poffeffion of power, that he could not endure to part with it, and was at leaft refolved to deftroy what he might no longer be permitted to enjoy. He had experienced the full favour of the crown, and enjoyed the advantage of exerting all its prerogatives; and, finding the operation of the whole not too much for the fuccefsful carrying on of the government, he had determined to cripple his fucceffors, and deprive them of the fame advantages which he had poffeffed; and thus circumfcribe their power to ferve their country, as if he dreaded that they would fhade his fame. Mr. Pitt made a fhort reply, in which he faid, that the personal attack just made upon him was neither provoked nor juftified by the manner in which he had oppened the debate, and was unfounded, arrogant, and prefumptuons. The right honourable gentleman had thought proper to announce himself and his friends to be the fucceffors of the prefent adminiftration. He did not [F] 2 know know on what authority the right honourable gentleman made this declaration; but he thought, that with a view to those questions of expediency which the right honourable gentleman had introduced, both the house and the country were obliged to him for this feafonable warning of what they were to expect. The nation had already had experience of that right honourable gentleman, and his principles. It was the profelled object of the party with which he acted to endeavour, by the weight and extent of their political influence, to nominate the minifters of the crown. It could not be denied, that they maintained it as a fundamental principle, that a minifter ought at all times fo to be nominated. He would therefore fpeak plainly. If perfons who poffeffed thefe principles were in reality likely to be the advisers of the prince in the exercife of thofe powers which were neceflary to be given during the prefent unfortunate interval, it was the ftrongest additional reafon, if any were wanting, for being careful to confider, what the extent of those powers ought to be. It was impoffible not to fuppofe, that by fuch advifers thofe powers would be preverted to a purpofe which it was indeed impoffible to imagine that the prince of Wales could, if he was aware of it, ever endure for a moment: but to which, by artifice and mifreprefentation, he might unintentionally be made acceffary; for the purpofe of creating a permanent weight and influence in the hands of a party, which would be dangerous to the just rights of the crown when the moment thould arrive (fo much wifhed, and, perhaps, fo foon to be expected) of 3 his majefty being able to refime the exercife of his own authority. With refpect to the fubject of the debate, he observed, that it had been argued upon grounds of expediency, as if the conteft was between two rival rights, and the only queftion, in favour of which the arguments preponderated. He fhould be perfectly ready to meet the queftion upon this iffue; but, in fact, this was not a fair ftate of the cafe. The right of the prince of Wales was not to be confidered as a rival right, to be argued on the fame grounds as the other. It was a right which could not exist unlels it was capable of being exprefsly and pofitively proved; whereas the right of parliament was that which exifted of courfe, unlets fome other right could be proved to exclude it. It was that which, on the principles of this free conftitution, muft always exift in every cafe where no pofitive provifion had been made by law, and where the neceffity of the cafe, and the safety of the country, called for their interpofition. The abfence of any other right was in itfelf enough to conftitute the right of the two houfes; and the bare admiffion that the right of the prince of Wales was not clearly and exprefsly proved, virtually operated as an admiffion of every point under difcuffion. In the courfe of the debate, Mr. Rushworth (member for Newport, Hants) ftanding upon the floor, the whole of which was crowded up to the table, defired that gentlemen of more experience and age than himfelf would refer to the glorious reign of George II. Let them recall, he faid, to their memory the year 1745: fuppofe that great and good king had lain under a fimilar affliction |