FOR these six weeks past the two houses have been debating on

the subject of the Regency, and the people at large appear to have fixed their attention on the same subject, that is as far as any object of a public nature can fix that attention; for as to the great majority, apathy seems to have seized them on all national topics however important. Two or three petitions have been presented to the house of Lords and Commons expressive of the opinion of the petitioners that his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales ought to be appointed Regept without any restrictions, and these are almost the only expressions of the public voice on the present occasion; which however, affords us no great surprise, when we reflect on that indifference on subjects of much greater importance, which, to the disgrace of a free people, who enjoy the right of publicly meeting to discuss the measures of government, and to express their opinion of the conduct of their rulers, has characterised the British nation, more particularly for the past twenty years. Such indifference, whenever it becomes general in a nation, may be regarded as too certain a prognostic of national ruin.

Our readers will perceive in our following pages that a most respectable correspondent, who has frequently and ably advocated the genuine rights of Britons against the borough-monger faction, and those pretended Whigs who plead for a government of court influence instead of that which we have a right to,-of FREE REPRESENTATION, has controvered a position we laid down in our last-"That in the present instance of a suspension of the Royal "functions, and for which there is no provision made by the con"stitution, it is the right and the duty of the representatives of "the people to provide the means of supplying the defect." Our correspondent has not, however, we are of opinion, advanced any thing that affects our arguments. It seems to be allowed on all hands, that the constitution has not provided for the case alluded to. We therefore beg leave to repeat, that in this, as well as all other mat

VOL. VIII.

ters in which the laws and constitution are silent, the sovereign power devolves on those who represent the different estates which compose the body of the people. The throne is not now vacant, nor is there a demise in any sense of the word. It might as well be said, that any bodily indisposition which prevents the actual exercise of the royal authority for even a week or a day, causes a demise or a vacancy. All that has been quoted from former periods of the British history has no application to the present case, and it is somewhat surprising that men of sense can affirm, "that we are "now in exactly the same state as the kingdom was in 1688." We on the contrary beg leave to athirm, there is not the least similarity in the two cases. In 1688 the king, or rather the tyrant who had too long been suffered to disgrace the name and the office of king fled from the people he had injured, and oppressed: the throne therefore was in consequence declared vacant, and was filled by another prince to the perpetual exclusion of the fugitive despot. In 1810, mental indisposition suspended the exercise of the royal powers; but so far from a demise having taking place, a short time, as was the case on a former occasion, may re-state the sovereign in all the plenitude of his authority.

་

When we put the question,-" Why, if the Prince of Wales has a right to the crown, during the life of his royal father, does he "not at once enter on the exercise of that right?" so far from imagining that the people would ever summon those to their tribunal," who had declared that the sole right on the present occasion was vested in the representative bodies, we presumed that the Prince of Wales had by his proper and dignified conduct set the question completely at rest. We shall only add on this subject, that the conduct of his royal highness is conclusive on this point. If he had, without any previous declaration or invitation from the great councils of the nation a constitutional right to the sovereignty, we repeat the question, why did he not, the moment his father was declared by his physicians to be incapable of attending to business, at once assume his right! If the laws of the country gave him the RIGHT, it was his DUTY to act agreeably thereto. The conduct of his royal highness evidently proves his own opinion to be that he had no such RIght.

So far from the people at any future period, calling those to their tribunal who have declared it to be, "The RIGHT and the "DUTY of their representatives, lawfully assembled, and fully, and freely, representing all the estates of the people of this realm, to "provide the means for supplying the defect of the royal authority"--we are persuaded that the people if duly sensible of their collective dignity, will ever consider such a resolution as the expression of the proper homage due to the national sovereignty.

A more constitutional or noble resolution, in which the people are explicitly acknowledged to be the fountain of power, never adorned the journals of the two houses. It affords a standing lesson of instruction to the people, and a frank acknowledgment on the part of our rulers, of the popular right to a frequent, free and complete representation, and may justly be considered as a positive sentence of condemnation on the conduct of those persons who, with persevering obstinacy, oppose the grand measure indispensibly necessary to make this resolution accord with the actual state of things, and give it full effect—A REFORM OF PARLIAMENT.

We have thus endeavoured to defend, and to impress upon the minds of our readers, the great importance of the resolution adopted by the PITT administration in 1788, and by the PERCEVAL administration in 1810 as the foundation principle of the proceedings respecting the appointment of a Regent. Our sentiments on this occasion may somewhat differ from those entertained by persons for whose characters and general conduct we entertain the greatest respect: but we must confess, that in political, as well as in theological discussions, we are not overfond of calling any man mas" ter upon earth." The more we reflect on the subject, the more are we persuaded that our opinions are founded, on the genuine constitution of our country, and on the important principle, the grand foundation stone of all legitimate government—THE SOVEREIGNTY

OF THE PEOPLE.

But, although we have joined Mr. Pitt and those of his school in this part of their political career, our readers will not be greatly surprised to find we are so soon compelled to forsake them. The whole course of their proceedings after the very first step, exhibit such a mass of absurdity, inconsistency and effrontery, as evidently prove their grand prevailing motive to be, love of place, and that their most ardent hope is by dilatory proceedings to preserve their respective situations; or should they be compelled to leave them, to be able as much as possible, by re-obtaining the disposal of all the honours and emoluments of government, to preserve all that power and influence of which they have hitherto made but little use, ex◄ cept to accelerate our national ruin.

The authority of the two houses to appoint a Regent during the suspension of the royal functions having been asserted; the next point to be considered is the proper person or persons to be appointed to fill this important trust, and the conditions on which it is to be deputed. It is agreed on all hands that the heir apparent, is indeed not only the most proper, but indeed the only person who should be appointed to fill so high a station. As amidst the differing, and opposite opinions of parties, there existed uo difference of opinion on this point, it was the bounden duty of mi

nisters, not to lose a moment in restoring the exeentive authority of the state; and it is scarcely possible to imagine how any impar. tial, honest man, of plain common sense, can avoid perceiving that the best, easiest and most simple means of accomplishing this ne. cessary object, would have been an address of the two houses to his royal highness the PRINCE OF WALES to take upon himself the important office, subject to such restrictions as might be deemed expedient, by any law or laws passed by both houses, with the assent of the Prince Regent. No one can for a moment indulge the supposition, that his royal highness would have refused his assent to any measure which might have obtained the approbation of the democratic and aristocratic branches of the legislature. It was likewise the bounden duty of ministers, and the two houses not to assume any authority in cases not determined by the laws and the constitution, but as the necessity of the case imperiously demanded. But what was the conduct of Mr. PITT, followed by Mr. PERCEVAL? The phantom of the authority of the great seal has been conjured up, and a resolution of the two houses is to impart to the Lord Chancellor the royal authority, by empowering him to affix this seal to a commission for opening the session of parliament, after they have been debating for these six weeks past, and again to affix it to a bill to be passed for the appointment of a Regent ;-two assumptions of the regal powers equally wanton and unnecessary. The RIGHT and the DUTY of the two houses to appoint a Regent had been solemnly recognised. Why not without any further deviation from the settled course of the constitution, · immediately fill up the important office? To the very phraseology of the ministerial bill appointing a Regent, the language of Mr. Sheridan, on the motion of Mr. Perceval to amend some gross literary blunders in the resolution respecting the great seal to be affixed to the commission to open parliament, which had been committed by the transcriber, may be most justly applied. "Al"though he did not rise to oppose the motion, he confessed he "could see no impropriety in allowing the language to be nonsen

sical, as it bore as near a resemblance as possible to the whole "proceeding."-The act for the appointment of a Regent sets out with declaring his Majesty's incapacity to exercise the royal functions, and then proceeds by declaring the appointment of his royal highness the Prince of Wales to the important office of Regent, by the two houses, "by and with the consent of the King's most ex"cellent Majesty ;" that is "by and with the consent" of a person whom the afflicting hand of Providence has for these three months ¡past deprived of his reason, and on that account pronounced by the very bill to which our Gothamite senators gravely tell us he gives his royal assent, incapable of exercising the royal functions!

This truly, was the precedent handed down to posterity by Mr. PITT, which has been closely followed by Mr. PERCEVAL, and highly panegyrised by their mutual friend and dear christian brother Mr. WILBERFORCE, which is not so surprising however, as that it should have obtained the sanction of the two houses. All precedents must and will assuredly one day be examined at the bar of reason and common sense; and it need not excite any great degree of astonishment should some future statesman use language respecting these famous precedents, similar to that of a late statesman, concerning certain resolutions of an house of Commons, in the early part of the present reign, which he publicly declared"he regarded no more than he should the resolutions of an assembly of drunken porters in an ale-house!"

The manner in which the "restrictions" have been proposed by ministers, and resisted by opposition, reflects no great honour on either party. The restrictions proposed by the bill are as follow. No peers are to be created;-No offices are to be granted in reversion, or for a longer period than during pleasure, except those which are by law granted for life, or during good behaviour, and except pensions to the chancellor, judges, and a few other officers. The principal part of the royal household it is likewise proposed shall be vested in her Majesty. These restrictions are to last for twelve months. Amidst all the warm debates to which the proposals of ministers have given rise, we remark that there is no difference of opinion, respecting the additional expence to the nation of the household of the Prince Regent, in consequence of the household of the royal invalid being preserved entire. An hundred thousand a-year levied in taxes, to support the office of Regent in regal splendour, is deemed of no consequence, and the people we are assured will cheerfully submit to this additional burthen of taxation, splendour being one of the chief supports of monarchical government, and indispensibly necessary to the comfort, and the welfare of his Majesty in his present state, as well as that of the Prince Regent. If our representatives had not been quite so liberal of the money of their constituents on some other occasions,-had a few millious less been squandered in unjust and unnecessary wars, in foolish, extravagant and unsuccessful expeditions, and enormous sinecures on the tribe of nothing-to-do-gentlemen, the people we are persuaded would not with less cheerfulness have submitted to the taxes necessary to support the splendour of the court of the Prince Regent, and of the household of his royal and afflicted father.

The restrictions insisted on by the present ministers, argue on their part no common share of effrontery. Do they imagine it possible for the counsellors of the Prince Regent to abuse the power

VOL. VIII.