66

men, who were duly qualified for the purpose by the well-known laws of the land.

-You attempt it thus:-You say, that, as to the charge of High Treason, there was, indeed, no necessity for the warrant; but, that the warrant was necessary in order to enable the Four Lords to go into the MINOR circumstances contained in the Declarations against the Princess." In

the obvious effect. -The next accusation against Mr. Wood, is, that he called the Commission " an unconstitutional tribu"nal;" and hereupon the Chronicle, in calling him an intelligent magistrate," asks him, if he does not know, that it is "an essential part of the duty of the Privy "Council to institute an inquiry into every "charge of High Treason that shall come "before them; and that, in right of their" deed!" For, I think, we may have our "Office, they are qualified magistrales for "that purpose. The tribunal, therefore, was clearly constitutional, since the main 65 charge amounted to high treason.”. Reader, what is Mr. Perry at here? He is no sot, and, therefore, one wonders that he should, while he was contradicting Mr. Wood, take such pains to show that Mr. Wood was right!It really is surprising to hear any thing so void of sense from such a quarter.- -Why, yes, Mr. Perry, the Alderman does know, that it is an essential part of the duty of the Privy Council to institute an inquiry into every charge of High Treason; he does know this, and, therefore, he naturally can see no reason why the Privy Council did not institute such inquiry, and why the King was advised to issue a warrant to four Privy Councillors, which, as to this case, took from them the capacity of Privy Councillors, and it is for you to tell Mr. Wood why this was done.

-In

exclamations as well as you. Indeed! So, then, according to your ideas upon the subject, it was necessary, when a charge of High Treason was preferred against the Princess, to strip Four of the Privy Council of their official character, to take from them the qualification of magistrates for the time being, in order that they might, along with the charge of High Treason, inquire into certain minor circumstances!deed, Mr. Perry!-Now, it appears to me, that there was not, and could not be, any necessity at all for this. For, the charge of High Treason might have been first inquired into by the Privy Council; by that body, or any portion of that body, whose essential duty it was so to inquire, and who, in virtue of their office, were qualified magistrates for that purpose. And, afterwards, if it had appeared necessary to the King, he might have commissioned 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 magistrates 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 liableries about Mr. Lawrence and Mr. Canning, to prosecution for perjury; whereas, the effect of the warrant was to deprive the Four Lords, as to this particular case, of that very capacity which would have made it perjury to take a false oath before them.

and along with the insinuations relating to Bidgood's basons and towels; it is for you to show why the charge of High Treason and the charge of flirting were messed up 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 perform that" generous candour" of the Four Lords which you say 66 was an essential part of its upon the memorable occasion referred to, "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 aft 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

66

"the destruction of her life and honour."

-As the reason for this proposition, Mr. Jacks is reported to have said, that, "while justice was done to the Princess, "injustice should, he thought, not be "done to the Prince; and, that there was

will venture to contradict you. The objects quire to be taken particular notice of withof 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:"enverned 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 answer, which yel remains due, to the Defence of Her Royal Highness, contained in her Letters of the 2d of Oct. 1806, and 16th Feb. 1807.And here, by way of conclusion to this commentary, I think it perfectly fair to observe, that the Morning" no evidence that could induce any one to Chronicle, which inserted all the matter against the Princess of Wales, HAS NEVER INSERTED HER DEFENCE up to this hour. Call you this fair play, Mr. Perry? Call you this "Generous Can"dour?" The truth is, that that Defence does most powerfully attack the Whig ministry; and to that I ascribe its being omitted. There was a sort of garbled summary of it published in the Morning Chronicle; but none of those parts reflecting on the Whig ministry were inserted. Thus it is that faction prevails over justice, and particularly with those exploded and degraded politicians, the Whigs, who are involved in such a labyrinth of inconsistencies and follies, that they really seem, at last, not to know when to open and when to shut their mouths.- -They are the outcast of the day. Nobody but their own expectants opens a lip for them; and, what deprives them of all pity, is, they show as much empty pride as at any former period.

LONDON COMMON COUNCIL ADDRESS. COMMON HALL REPORT.- In another part of this sheet I have inserted the Report of the proceedings in the Common Council on the 22d of April, and of the Common Hall on the 23d of April. I have also inserted, in the same place, an account of the proceedings in the Borough of Southwark, and in the City of Rochester, and also an Address of a Meeting of the Freemen of the City of Bristol.- -Indeed, I must now limit my publications upon this subject to the mere insertion of the Address, Resolutions, &c. seeing that so many other matters of importance are pressing forward and demanding notice.

-There have, however, some things passed in the City of London, which re

suppose, that he was at the bottom of "the conspiracy, whatever persons might "choose to surmise.". Now, really, this does appear to me to have been as awkward an attempt as I ever witnessed in my life.- -Pray, Mr. JACKS, who had said, or who had insinuated, that the Prince was at the bottom of the conspiracy? I have seen no such expression or insinuation in any Address, Resolution, or Paragraph. Nothing, at any rate, has appeared in print of this sort; and, it was for your exuberant loyalty to tell the world, that there were persons who might surmise such a thing!Never (and I have said it a thousand times) was there a man so cursed with friends as the Prince of Wales has been, and as he appears yet to be.—— To suppose the Prince to be capable of hatching, or abetting, so foul and detestable a conspiracy against the life and honour of any woman, and especially against his own wife, the mother of his only child, a defenceless foreigner; to suppose this is to suppose him to be all that is treacherous, cruel, and cowardly; it is to suppose him to be a disgrace to the human form; it is, of course, to degrade the royal authority in his hands, and to prepare beforehand an apology for any act, however disloyal or treasonable, that might be committed or meditated against him.--Do I go too far here? I am sure I do not; and, therefore, I must reprobate the motion, and more especially the speech of Mr. JACKS, who, whatever he might have heard from disloyal men in private; whatever malignant surmises he might have heard round his fire-side, might, surely, have stopped till he heard them in public, before he gave mischievous exposure to them by the means of such a motion and such a speech.

tion; and, if one could suppose her (which I do not) to entertain any vindictive sentiment towards her august spouse, even that feeling might be gratified by the result of this proceeding of the meddling Mr. JACKS. Once more, I say, no man ever had such friends as the Prince of Wales.

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 Prin"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 66 never would submit quietly to have mo❝tives attributed to me which I did not "avow; that my opinion on the utility of "addressing the Princess of Wales was 66 unchanged, but for the sake of unanimi"ty I should not oppose the motion; that "I should persevere in my amendment if "I stood alone, from having overheard "during its being read to the Court, many "Members loudly clamouring against its "adoption, because it went to excuse the "Prince; that from having read The "Book' with much attention, I was not "able to see any evidence whatever to "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, 66 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 dirt.'- -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 "of Her Royal Highness's life and honour.'

66

66

-I am, Sir, your most humble ser"vant, J. JACKS.-White Lion-court, "Cornhill, April 23, 1813."--Now, supposing him to have heard the expressions here imputed to some members of the Court; supposing him to have overheard some of them say that they would oppose it, "be"cause it went to excuse the Prince;" I do not, however, believe the fact, I disbelieve, wholly disbelieve this statement of Mr. JACKS; but, if, for argument's sake, we suppose it to be true, whose is the blame? Why, his, to be sure, who was the first to start the idea. From such friends the Prince ought most earnestly to pray for preservation.Mr. JACKS is the first man, the very first man, who has dared to refer to the Prince in the nefarious transaction. What could the worst enemy of the Prince have done worse than this? Who has given publicity to such an idea against him? His old friends, the Whigs, have, indeed, since he turned his

-Praise of the conduct of the Princess; expressions of abhorrence of her perjured and suborned traducers; vows of attachment to her: such were the topics of the Addresses of the City of London; and, yet, in these addresses, Mr. JACKS, as he tells us under his hand, could discover nothing but à desire" to drag the Chief Ma

It is, I think, high time for His Royal Highness to reflect upon the consequences of such conduct on the part of those who call themselves his friends; those who call themselves loyal men, to the exclusion of all others.Here are the world told by Mr. JACKS, that he found that the Addresses of the people to the Princess were, in reality, meant as so many attacks upon the Prince; and that, even in the Common Council of London, in the Corporation of the first City in the kingdom, having proposed certain words, with a view of clearing the Prince from all share in the conspiracy against his own wife's life and honour, the said words were rejected! What a thing is this to proclaim to the world! And this proclamation is made, not by us Jacobins, but by a man, who is everlastingly boasting of his attachment to the throne and to the Royal Family.- -So, then (for I cannot help coming back to the charge), the processions to Kensington Palace and Montague House, accompanied by hundreds of thousands of

old crazy Peg Nicholson were inserted in the Gazette; the Addresses to the Prince upon his becoming Regent were inserted in the Gazette; and, " to come to close quar

the loyal effusions of His Majesty's sub-
[jects, as the sure and certain channel to
posterity.. -Well, then, now let us hear
what passed at the Common Hall of the
City of London on the 23d of April, upon
the report of the fate of the loyal and af-
fectionate Address to the Princess of
Wales; the long-calumniated, the injured,
the outraged Princess of Wales.

66

The

people; the shouts that rended the air, and that almost stunned the population for miles around; these, according to the loyal Mr. JACKS, are not to be looked upon as testimonials of the Princess's innocence," ters," as Lord Milton would call it, so much as testimonials of the guill of the the Addresses to the Prince, as well as Prince! And this is what Mr. JACKS those to the Princess, upon their marriage, calls loyalty, is it! This is the way in and upon the birth of their child, were all which he shows his friendship to the re-inserted in this same official receptacle of presentative of the King? Mine is a very different way. I say not a word about the Prince; my loyalty forbids me to mix the name of His Royal Highness with that of the parties concerned in the transaction; my loyalty tells me that I ought to confine myself to a defence of the injured wife; but, indeed (and that is quite enough to say of it), my loyalty is just the opposite of that of Mr. Jacks.Now for the Report" Report of the proceedings was then read, at the Common Hall.-When a Com-"when, in addition to what has appeared mon Hall has been held and has agreed" in the public papers, it was stated that upon an Address, after that Address has Mr. Tyrrel, the City Remembrancer, been carried up, it is usual for the Hall" had sent the Address and the Answer of to meet again, in order to receive the re- "the Princess to the Gazette writer, to port of those who have carried it up.- "be inserted, as was the custom, in such The Common Hall met for this purpose on 66 cases, and not observing them in the the 23d of April. What passed there as next Gazette, had written to Mr. Rawto the conduct of the Lord Mayor I shall" linson, the writer to the Gazette, to innot particularly notice. An account of it "quire the reason of their not appearing. will be found in the Report of the day's" Mr. Rawlinson returned an answer, that proceedings, which I insert below, and "it was not the custom to insert any Adwhich I must beg the reader to peruse with" dress in the Gazette which was not transattention, as being of considerable import-"mitted to him by the Principal Secretary ance. -But, I think myself called upon "of State for the Home Department. In to notice, in a very particular manner, a consequence of this, the Remembrancer fact which was brought to light respect- "communicated by letter the circumstance ing the non-insertion of the Address of the" to Lord Sidmouth, and enclosed a copy Common Hall and the Princess's Answer," of the documents in question for inserin the London Gazelle. This is one of the "tion. Lord Sidmouth, in his reply, acmost interesting and most important facts" quainted the Remembrancer, that he had appertaining to the history of this affair; "not thought proper, in the discretional and, therefore, I shall endeavour to make " exercise of the duty of his office, to init very clearly understood to the whole "sert the Address and Answer in question circle of my readers, abroad as well as at "in the London Gazette.' -The followhome.The LONDON GAZETTE ing has been published in all the London is an official publication of the Govern-news-papers, as a copy of Lord SIDMOUTH'S ment; it is published under the immediate letter to the City Remembrancer upon this authority of the Government; the WRITER memorable occasion. of the Gazette is an Officer of the GovernWhitehall, April 7, 1813. ment. This publication contains all Pro- "Sir, I have just received your letter clamations; Orders of Council; Orders of " of this day's date, enclosing a copy of an the Lord Chamberlain; and, generally," Address from the Lord Mayor, Alderall documents, issued by the Government. "men, and Livery of London, to Her Amongst other things it contains Addresses "Royal Highness the Princess of Wales, to the Throne and to the Royal Family" with a copy of Her Royal Highness's from Corporate Bodies, Counties, &c.

"Answer thereto, and desiring that I will "order the same to be inserted in the "London Gazette: in reply, I have to

The Addresses to the Prince upon the kill-
ing of Perceval, for instance, were inserted
in the Gazette; the Addresses to the King"
upon his escape from the pen-knife of poor

acquaint you, that in the exercise of the "discretion which belongs to my official