« PoprzedniaDalej »
Vol. XXIII. No. 18.]
LONDON, SATURDAY, MAY 1, 1813.
“ scruple to misrepresent the history, SUMMARY OF POLITICS.
though so recent in the memory of their MR. ALDERMAN Wood and the CELE- " hearers. Thus Mr. Alderman Wood, in BRATED COMMISSION. I dare say that " addressing the Borough Meeting, said Mr. Wood, when he brought forward the " that important documents had been withAddress in the Common Hall, was not " held from the knowledge of His Majesty weak enough to imagine, that he should " in 1806, for he was sure, that if the affiescape the shafts of party malice. He, “ davits of Mr. Edmeades and Mr. Mills who has had some experience in such mat- “ had been submitted to him, he would ters, must have laid his account with re- not have issued the Warrant to the Four ceiving a due portion of the renom of the “ Commissioners for the Inquiry. Now hireling prints on both sides. His con- every reader of a newspaper knows, that duct was well worthy of their resentment, “ when the warrant was issued in May, and, accordingly, they have both attacked" 1806, those affidavits were not in existhim with great fury. The attacks of the “ ence ; — they were produced by the ministerial prints I will not particularly no- “ Princess in her Defence. So much for tice; but, there is one article in the Whig the accuracy of the patriotic Alderman ! organ, the Morning Chronicle, that I can
" But the tribunal,” it seems, not let pass, it being at once so artful and "66 unconstitutional.” Indeed! Does not so malignant. The faction, from whom it " this intelligent Magistrate know that it is proceeds, is become so very low in the " an essential part of the duty of the Privy public estimation; it is fallen so far beneath " Council to institute an. inquiry into every the serious notice of the ministry, that it " charge of high treason that shall come is now become what the Jews and Genoese “ before them, and that in right of their are in Gibraltar, who, by their malice, by office they are qualified Magistrates for the injuries which they slily do to the “ that purpose ? That they are bound to Christians, seek a compensation for the in- " examine on oath, and that, like the Grand sults which they want the spirit openly to“Jury, they may either send the parties to resent.
Such is the state of that tower- trial, or declare that there is no ground ing faction formerly called the Talents, and " for trial?—The tribunal, therefore, was of which faction the Morning Chronicle is “ clearly constitutional, since the main the mouth-piece.- This circumstance" charge amounted to 'high treason. will, alone, account for the following jew-" " Aye, but the Commissioners went belike article, published in that paper on the “ " yond the main charge." They could 26th of April.--I will insert it entire, so not avoid it. For the
purpose of inquirthat the author shall not have to complain “ing into the main charge there was no neof mutilation. The occasion, to which the “ cessity for a Special Warrant; it was writer refers, I shall more fully' have to no- " their official duty to inquire into it as soon tice by-and-by. At present, we will first “ as it came to their knowledge. But the take the article as it lies before us, and then “ public know that all the declarations see, in a short commentary, what stuff it is made by Bidgood, Cole, and Fanny made of." The moderate part of the “ Lloyd, as well as that of Lady Douglas, " public must have read with no little sur- were submitted to His Majesty, and it “prise the language of some of the most was on account of the minor circum"s zealous advocates for the Princess of " stances contained in those declarations " Wales, who, not content with vindicat-" that the King thought fit, as Father of "ing Her Royal Highness from the asper- " the Royal Family, specially to enjoin four
sions thrown out against her since her " of his confidential servants to inquire into
acquittal, go out of their way to abuse " the truth of these allegations, and to re" the first Inquiry itself, by which she was
the whole. The four "justified. In doing this they do not Commissioners had, therefore, a Warrant
port to him
“ to authorize them to go into all the par-has produced no proof of it; and, I cannot
ticulars, and they could not avoid the help thinking, that his citing so weak a “painful and delicate duty-In the dis- presamption is calculated to do the charac“ charge of that duty, we are persuaded ter of their Lordships no good. It seems " that all those who have taken the pains, as if he was hard pushed, which has always
as we have done, to examine their pro- a sorry look for the client in whose favour “ceedings with accuracy, must acknow- the advocate is arguing. ---Now for the “ ledge that they were governed by the charge against Mr. Wood, who is here “most generous candour, and that they ac- called "the patriotic Alderman," and from
quitted themselves with the clearest con- what sort of feeling the reader will easily “ science—the proof of which was made judge. -The writer of the article says, “ manifest by the result-for it turned out that Mr. Wood, al the Borough Meeting, " that they satisfied no one of the parties said, “ that important documents had been " that were concerned.' -While it is " withheld from His Majesty, in 1806; before me, I cannot help remarking upon 66 for that he was sure, that, if the affidavits this closing position; namely, that it is “ of Messrs. Edmeades and Mills had been manifestly PROVED, that the Four Lords " submitted to him, he would not have isacquitted themselves with the clearest con- os sued the warrant to the Four Lords for science, by this fact: “ that they salisfied “ the Inquiry.". -For baving said this,
no one of the parties that were concern- Mr. Wood is accused of misrepresentation. " ed."--I wonder where Mr. Perry I will not say that the accusation is found the maxim on which this assertion" as false as hell ;" but, I do say, that is founded.--Now, mind, I do not say, substantially it is false. - The fact, the that the Four Lords did not obey the dic. very important fact, to which Mr. Wood tates of their conscience in drawing up the referred, was this: The Warrant was isReport of the 14th of July, 1806; and, I sued upon certain wrillen declarations, laid am aware, that one of them has asserted, before the King. Amongst these written that insinuations to the contrary are "as declarations was that of Funny Lloyd. “ false as Hell;" but, what I say is this : Fauny Lloyd stated, in her declaration, that that Mr. Perry's PROOF is not worth | Dr. Mills had observed to her, that the much; for, that it is possible for a judge or Princess was with child, in 1802. Dr. jury to give satisfaction to none of the par- Mills was called before Lord Moira, and he ties, and yet to act with great and notorious declared that what Fanny Lloyd had said injustice. What does Mr. Perry think, for was an infamous falsehood; for that he instance, of the conduct of the Monkey in never had said so, nor thought so, and the litigated case between the two cats that such an idea had never come into his
The judge, in that memorable case, could mind. Dr. Edmeades, his partner, said certainly give satisfaction to neither of the the same thing.--And, observe, these litigants, and yet it will hardly be contend- Gentlemen were examined before Fanny ed, that, in swallowing the whole of the Lloyd's declaration was laid before the disputed property, he acquitted himself King, and the declarations of these Gentlewith the clearest conscience.- -How often men were NOT laid before the king. If does it happen, that injustice is done to a the declarations of these Doctors had been weak party at the suit of a strong party, laid before the King, would he have been and yet to see the latter dissatisfied? I in haste to issue the warrant? Would be have known a soldier receive a hundred or not have seen enough to make him hesitate ? two of lashes upon the complaint of one who And was not Mr. Wood's assertion was dissatisfied that he did not get double substantially correct? The affidavits, inthe number; and yet, it was evident to me, deed, of Drs. Edmeades and Mills were not that the man ought not to have been pu- made till after the warrant was issued; nished at all, and that what was given was but, their declarations of the falsehood of given to please the complainant. So far Fanny Lloyd's declaration was made before frein Mr. Perry's maxim being generally the warrant was issued ; and it was issued true, it appears to me to be, in cases of ac- without the King being informed of the cusation for serious offences, generally false. counter-declarations of the two Doctors.
At any rate, that which he cites as Change, then, the words " documents and PROOF of the clear conscience of the Four “ affidavits," in Mr. Wood's speech, into Lords, is no proof at all. Their consci- the word “ declaralions," and he is correct ences might, for aught I know to the con- to the very leller : as his speech now stands, trary, have been very clear indeed; but he it is perfectly correct as to the spirit and to the obvious effect. - The next accusation men, who were duly qualified for the puragainst Mr. Wood, is, that he called the pose by the well-known laws of the land, Commission « an unconstitutional tribu- -You attempt it thus :-You say, that, “ nal;" and hereupon the Chronicle, in as to the charge of High Treason, there calling him an “intelligent magistrate," was, indeed, no necessity for the warrant; asks him, if he does not know, that it is but, that the warrant was necessary in order “ an essential part of the duty of the Privy to enable the Four Lords to go into the “ Council to institute an inquiry into every MINOR circumslances contained in the “ charge of High Treason that shall come Declarations against the Princess."In“ before them; and that, in right of their " deed!" For, I think, we inay have our “ Office, they are qualified magistrales for exclamations as well as you.- Indeed! “ that purpose. The tribunal, therefore, So, then, according to your ideas upon the
was clearly constitutional, since the main subject, it was necessary, when a charge of o charge amounted to high treason." High Treason was preferred against the Reader, what is Mr. Perry at here? He is Princess, to strip Four of the Privy Counno sot, and, therefore, one wonders that he cil of their official character, to take from should, while he was contradicting Mr. them the qualification of magistrates for the Wood, take such pains to show that Mr. time being, in order that they might, along Wood was right! It really is surprising with the charge of High Treason, inquire to hear any thing so void of sense from such into certain minor circumstances! -Ina quarter. -Why, yes, Mr. Perry, the deed, Mr. Perry!-Now, it appears to Alderman does know, that it is an essential me, that there was not, and could not be, part of the duty of the Privy Council to in-' | any necessity at all for this. For, the stitute an inquiry into every charge of High charge of High Treason might have been Treason; he does know this, and, there first inquired into by the Privy Council; fore, he naturally can see no reason why the by that body, or any portion of that body, Privy Council did not institute such in- whose essential duty it was so to inquire, quiry, and why the King was advised to and who, in virtue of their office, were issue a warrant to four Privy Councillors, qualified magistrates for that purpose, which, as to this case, took from them the And, afterwards, if it had appeared necescapacity of Privy Councillors, and it is for sary to the King, he might have commisyou to tell Mr. Wood why this was done. sioned any of his servants to inquire into
-Yes, yes, Mr. Perry; Mr. Wood does the minor circumstances. -If this had know, " indeed” he does, that Privy Coun- been the advice given to the King, we cillors are, in right of their office, qualified should have never heard of the petition of magistrales for that purpose: he does know Sir John and Lady Douglas. They would this, and, therefore, it is that he wonders have had no need to pray to be put into a why a warrant, making the four Lords situation to answer to a charge of perjury. something other than Privy Councillors, And, it is for you, Mr. Perry, to show, why was thought necessary upon this particular your friends, the Whigs, did not give the occasion, and he regrets it, because, as it King such advice; it is for you, Mr. Perry, appears, if it had not been for this warrant, to show why the charge of High Treason the parties, who might swear falsely be was mixed up together along with the stofore the four Lords, would have been liable ries about Mr. Lawrence and Mr. Canning, to prosecution for perjury; whereas, the and along with the insinuations relating to effect of the warrant was to deprive the Four Bidgood's basons and towels : it is for you Lords, as to this particular case, of that to show why the charge of High Treason very capacily which would have made it per- and the charge of flirting were messed
up jury to take a false oath before them. in one dish; it is for you to show the neAnd now, Mr. Perry, it remains for you, cessity of this ; and this you must show bethe advocate of the Whig ministry, to show fore you will have proved yourself an useful why the warrant was issued; to show why advocate.- As to what you say about the the Privy Council did not perforin that's generous candour" of the Four Lords
an essential part of its upon the memorable occasion referred.co, duty;" to show why (as Privy Council. you may, for aught I can assert, be very lors are, in right of their office, qualified sincere; nor is it a point which I feel at all magistrates for such a purpose) the Privy disposed to dispute with you; but, Mr. Council did not act in right of office upon Perry, for there to be much of manliness this particular occasion ; to show why, in in your praises, they must be bestowed short, any special warrant was issued to where you are not well assured that no one
which you say was
will venture to contradict you. The objects quire to be taken particular notice of with of your praise, in this case, may or may not out delay.- - In the Common Council the merit it, in the opinions of different per Address was brought forward by Mr. sons; but you can have no merit in utter- WAITHMAN, and seconded by Mr. FAing that praise; because you know, that, vell. Nothing very particular passed, as in print, it will bring you no antagonist. the reader will see, except what arose from
Assertions, in such cases, have no an amendment, proposed by a Mr. Jacks. weight with people of sense. You should After the word “ conspiracy," this genhave proved, that the Four Lords were go- tleman proposed to add these words : 66 verned by the most “generous candour" "tered into by persons admitted to her towards the Princess, a very fair opportu. " society and confidence, and abusing it to nity for doing which is offered you in an " the destruction of her life and honour." answer, which yél remains due, to the De- -As the reason for this proposition, fence of Her Royal Highness, contained in Mr. Jacks is reported to have said, that, her Letters of the 2d of Oct. 1806, and “ while justice was done to the Princess, 16th Feb. 1807.And here, by way of injustice should, he thought, not conclusion to this commentary, I think it “ done to the Prince ; and, that there was perfectly fair to observe, that the Morning no evidence that could induce any one to Chronicle, which inserted all the matter suppose, that he was at the bottom of against the Princess of Wales, HAS NE- " the conspiracy, whatever persons might VER INSERTED HER DEFENCE up “ choose to surmise.". -- Now, really, to this hour. Call you this fair play, Mr. this does appear to me to have been as Perry? Call you this “Generous Can- awkward an attempt as I ever witnessed in “ dour?” The truth is, that that Defence my life.Pray, Mr. Jacks, who had does most powerfully attack the Whig mi- said, or who had insinuated, that the nistry; and to that I'ascribe its being omit- Prince was at the bottom of the conspited. There was a sort of garbled summary racy? I have seen no such expression or of it published in the Morning Chronicle; insinuation in any Address, Resolution, or but none of those parts reflecting on the Paragraph. Nothing, at any rate, has Whig ministry were inserted. Thus it is appeared in print of this sort ; and, it was that faction prevails over justice, and parti. for your exuberant loyalty to cell the world, cularly with those exploded and degraded that there were persons who might surmise politicians, the Whigs, who are involved such a thing !-- Never (and I have said in such a labyrinth of inconsistencies and it a thousand times) was there a man so follies, that they really seem, at last, not to cursed with friends as the Prince of Wales know when to open and when to shut their has been, and as he appears yet to be.mouths. - They are the outcast of the To suppose the Prince to be capable of day. Nobody but their own expectants hatching, or abetting, so foul and detestopens a lip for them; and, what deprives able a conspiracy against ihe life and hothem of all pity, is, they show as much nour of any woman, and especially against empty pride as at any former period. his own wife, the mother of his only child,
a defenceless foreigner ; to suppose this is LONDON Common Council ADDRESS. to suppose him to be all that is treacherous,
-COMMON HALL REPORT. - In an- cruel, and cowardly; it is to suppose him other part of this sheet I have inserted the to be a disgrace to the human form ; it is, Report of the proceedings in the Common of course, to degrade the royal authority in Council on the 22d of April, and of the his hands, and to prepare beforehand an Common Hall on the 23d of April.-I apology for any act, however disloyal or have also inserted, in the same place, an treasonable, that might be coinmitted or account of the proceedings in the Borough meditated against him.--Do I go too far of Southwark, and in the City of Roches- here? I ain sure I do not; and, thereter, and also an Address of a Meeting of fore, I must reprobate the motion, and the Freemen of the City of Bristol.-In- more especially the speech of Mr. JACKS, deed, I must now limit my publications who, whatever he might have heard from upon this subject to the mere insertion of disloyal men in private ; whatever maligo the Address, Resolutions, &c. seeing that uant surmises he might have heard round so many other matters of importance are his fire-side, might, surely, have stopped pressing forward and demanding notice. till he heard them in public, before he gave
-There have, however, some things mischievous exposure to them by the means passed in the City of London, which re- of such a motion and such a speech.
Nor has Mr. Jacks at all mended the mat- | back upon them, libelled him at a pretty ter by a letter, published the following day round rate; but, even the malice of a disin the Gourier news-paper, in the follow- appointed faction, thrusted back from the ing words : --"Sir,--Observing that very threshold of the Treasury, falls " few of the Morning Papers have given short of the ingenuity of the loyal Mr. " any of the reasons which I assigned yes. Jacks, whose motion the Common Council “terday, in the Court of Common Coun- rejected by a vast majority. - The Prins cil, for addressing it a second time (fol- cess's natural desire to hear her innocence "lowing Mr. Waithman), and none have proclaimed by the people has been amply “ inserted the principal one, I beg leave gratified ; she has also heard her well" to send you shortly, as nearly as I re- known accusers loaded with just reproba" collect, what I said I stated, that I tion; and, if one could suppose her (which
would submit quietly to have ino- I do not) to entertain any vindictive sen" tives attributed to me which I did not liment towards her august spouse, even "avow; that my opinion on the utility of that feeling might be gratified by the result
addressing the Princess of Wales was of this proceeding of the meddling Mr.
unchanged, but for the sake of unanimi. Jacks. Once more, I say, no man ever "ty I should not oppose the motion; that had such friends as the Prince of Wales. " I should persevere in my amendment if -Praise of the conduct of the Princess; " I stood alone, from having overheard expressions of abhorrence of her perjured
during its being read to the Court, many. and suborned traducers; vows of attach" Members loudly clamouring against its ment to her : such were the topics of the
adoption, because it went lo excuse the Addresses of the City of London ; and, “ Prince; that from having read' “The yet, in these addresses, Mr. Jacks, as he “ Book' with much attention, I was not tells us under his hand, could discover no" able to see any evidence whatever to thing but a desire to drag the Chief Ma“ implicate' him in the conspiracy; and I “ gistrale into the dirt,” though that “Chief
was, therefore, the more strongly im- “ Magistrate's" name was not once men“pressed with the conviction, that the tioned either in the Addresses themselves,
great object of the addresses was to drag or in any of the speeches of those who " the first Magistrate of the country into brought them forward or supported them. " the dirl.' The words of my amend - Why, then, I do and must say, that, un
ment were as follow :--After the word der the guise of loyalty, Mr. Jacks has " conspiracy, entered into by persons made a most daring attempt to vilify the " admitted to her society and confidence, character of His Royal Highness the Prince, “by basely abusing it, to the destruction -It is, I think, high time for His " of Her Royal Highness's life and honour.' Royal Highness to reflect upon the conse
I am, Sir, your most humble ser- querces of such conduct on the part of vant, J. Jacks.-White Lion-court, those who call themselves his friends ; * Cornhill, April 23, 1813."--Now, those who call themselves loyal men, to supposing him to have heard the expressions the exclusion of all others.
Here are here imputed to some members of the Court; the world told by Mr. Jacks, that he supposing him to have overheard some of found that the Addresses of the people to them say that they would oppose it, “ be- the Princess were, in reality, meant as so " cause il went to excuse the Prince ;" I do many allacks upon the Prince ; and that, not, however, believe the fact, I disbelieve, even in the Common Council of London, wholly disbelieve this statement of Mr. in the Corporation of the first City in the JACKS; but, if, for argument's sake, we kingdom, having proposed certain words, suppose it to be true, whose is the blame? with a view of clearing the Prince from all Why, his, to be sure, who was the first share in the conspiracy against his own to start the idea. From such friends the wife's life and honour, ihe said words were Prince ought most earnestly to pray for rejected! What a thing is this to propreservation.--Mr. Jacks is the first claim to the world! And this proclamaman, the very first man, who has dared tion is made, not by us Jacobins, but by to refer to the Prince in the nefarious a man, who is everlastingly boasting of his transaction. What could the worst enemy attachment to the throne and to the Royal of the Prince have done worse than Family.- -So, then (for I cannot help this? Who has given publicity to such coming back to the charge), the processions an idea against him? His old friends, the to Kensington Palace and Montague House, Whigs, have, indeed, since he turned his accompanied by hundreds of thousands of