My Lords, I rise under a considerable degree of embarrassment, and certainly with a degree of anxiety, which I am not able to describe; I shall not, therefore, upon the present occasion, do more than express my hope, that the noble earl opposite (Liverpool) will feel himself called upon by his duty to answer some questions which I feel it my duty to put to him. He will, doubtless, conceive that, in proposing them, I act perfectly separate and distinct from any party-feeling whatever; that I am instigated solely by my own feelings, by the situation in which I stand; and that the questions which I shall ask upon this occasion, are unauthorized by the sanction of any individual. I suggest them to the noble lord, under a strong sense of duty belonging to my situation. They relate to the events which have recently occurred, which are well known to the public; and with which the persons, consulted on that delicate occasion, must likewise be well acquainted. Of the conduct of other persons I must speak with that dutiful respect which I can most conscientiously pay. With this preface, I shall proceed to put my questions to the noble earl, and if any noble lord have difficulties regarding the questions, I will repeat them. I shall now proceed to put them in the order which appears to me most convenient. The first question I would ask is

"Whether, since the removal of her Royal Highness the Princess Charlotte of Wales to Carlton

House, her Royal Highness has been allowed that communication and intercourse with her friends and connexions, which she enjoyed previously, when she resided in Warwick-House? I am anxious to receive an answer to that question." The Duke of Sussex here paused, waiting a reply. His Royal Highness proceeded :

"If the noble lord thinks fit to decline giving any reply to that question, I will go on to the next-" (Some noble lord signified a wish that the question should be repeated). The Duke of Sussex complied, and put it again to the Earl of Liverpool; who, not rising to reply, his Royal Highness continued"The noble earl may wish, perhaps, to answer my questions together. I ask him, secondly

"Whether her Royal Highness the Princess Charlotte of Wales, since her removal to Carlton-House, has been allowed the liberty of communicating in writing with her friends, and of receiving letters from them; or has been permitted to have the use of pen, ink, and paper in the same manner as when she resided in Warwick-House?

"The third question to which I beg an answer is as follows-Whether her Royal Highness the Princess Charlotte of Wales, in Carlton House, is allowed that liberty, which persons not in confinement enjoy?

"My fourth question is-Whether, in the course of the last year, the same recommendation as to sea-bathing and sea-air, was given to her Royal Highness the Princess Charlotte of Wales, which

is understood to have been given in the present year?

"Fifthly, I beg leave to ask-Whether her Royal Highness the Princess Charlotte of Wales, having arrived at the age of eighteen years and a half, (which is past the period at which Parliament has recognized the capability of members of the royal family to assume the reins of the government of the country without assistance) there is any intention to provide for her Royal Highness an establishment suitable to her situation; and enabling her to hold communication with, and to mix in, that high society over which, I hope, her Royal Highness will hereafter preside? To these five questions I await the answer of the noble lord."

Lord Liverpool left it to their lordships to consider, whether such questions as these ought to be put, and whether, when put, they ought to be answered? The Prince Regent was the father of his family, and it belonged to his prerogative to regulate the education of her Royal Highness the Princess Charlotte of Wales as he might think proper. The Prince Regent had done nothing, with respect to her Royal Highness, except what was for her benefit: that he felt towards her as a father ought to feel, with the strongest and warmest affection; and was only anxious to perform those duties which God, nature, and the laws of the land, imposed upon him. He trusted that, under such circumstances as the present, their lordships would give his Royal

Highness credit, for not having conducted himself but on grounds the best calculated to promote her comfort, benefit, and honor.

The Duke of Sussex replied, that he had listened with the greatest attention to what had fallen from the lips of the noble earl. If it be thought that, in any thing that was uttered by him, he meant to express an opinion disrespectful of the high personage to whom the noble earl alluded, he begged to disclaim any such intention; in so doing, he conceived he should have transgressed the orders of the House, and it would have been the duty of any noble lord to have interposed to prevent it. He assured the House, he felt no such disposition. He confessed himself not at all satisfied with what had been said by the noble earl upon the occasion; and, therefore, gave notice that, on Friday the 22d, he should bring forward a motion on the subject.

The Lord Chancellor could not be altogether silent. The illustrious Duke had said, that he meant no disrespect with reference to a certain quarter, and he was persuaded that he did not mean it; but he would take the liberty of saying, that, if the noble earl had answered those questions which had been put to him, he would have betrayed every duty which he owed as to the quarter to which he alluded; and he now told him, that, if he had answered those questions,-he meant the first four of them, the noble earl and he would never have conversed together again.

What was the meaning of the questions? When it was asked, whether the Princess had the liberty of communication with her friends, (with her enemies, might have been added); whether she had the free use of pen, ink, and paper; whether she enjoyed the same liberty as one not in confinement ?-was not all this imputation? It was an imputation on the ministers of the Prince Regent. But his Royal Highness had the right, under the advice of responsible servants, to educate the children of his family as he may think fit; and no interference by Parliament could be justifiable, unless strong grounds were laid for it. If the advice which had been given, and followed, in the most laudable manner by his Royal Highness, was wrong, his ministers were responsible; and if his Royal Highness had been misled, he, at least, would have the satisfaction of having acted as one who deserved applause, and not censure.

The motion was, however, not brought forward on the day appointed by the illustrious Duke, and the business was dropped.

On the 18th July, the Princess Charlotte was removed from Carlton-House to Cranbourne-Lodge, attended by the Dowager Lady Rosslyn, Lady Ilchester, and other personages of her new establishment, which had been selected for her by the Prince Regent. The situation of her Royal Highness, at her new abode, is represented not to have been of the most pleasant or agreeable