Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

cation. It was called an attempt to force the parties to a reconciliation. It does not appear to have contained even a hint of the sort; and all the speeches in opposition to it seem to have been made, to have been got up ready prepared, upon the presumption it would contain some complaint about there being two beds for one married couple. Upon any other supposition the speeches are incomprehensible; for not one word does the Address appear to have contained upon the subject of reconciliation.

Mr. Wood very judiciously confined himself to applause of the conduct of the Princess and abhorrence of her perjured and suborned traducers, leaving the question of reconciliation, and all other matters between the illustrious parties themselves, totally untouched upon. With what reason, then, was it that Mr. Waithman chose to represent the object to be reconciliation and harmony?However, if this had been the real object, in what way does this gentleman think it could have been more likely to be attained? The Address sealed the innocence of the Princess; it declared the conviction of the Citizens of London, that she was innocent, and that she was worthy of their admiration and loyal affection. Was this likely to "widen

viewed the evidence against the Princess as presumptuous enough to attempt to meddle being, from beginning to end, a tissue of between man and wife; and the anecdote perjury and subornation. How great, then, of Alderman Curtis, though full of characmust her danger have been! And, shall teristic wit, was not at all applicable to the it be thought degrading to the Citizens of point. The Address was not stupid enough London to express their pleasure at her to take off, or to hint at, a restoration to conescape, and also to express their abhorrence jugal felicity. The Address was no humof the perjured and suborned accusers? drum thing from Doctors' Commons, talk-The object of an Address is to expressing about marriage vows and excommunithe sentiments of those who pass it. There is no immediate practical effect contemplated; and to ask what good such an Address can do, is to challenge the propriety of all the Addresses that ever were presented in the world. Plain, sound sense said, that this was an occasion for the people to express their sentiments; a love of truth, a love of justice and fair-play; compassion for a suffering and friendless woman; the sentiments natural to husbands, fathers, sons, and brothers; all the good, all the kind, all the generous feelings of the heart, rose in an unanimous clamour against the objections of Mr. Sturch, who, though Mr. Waithman called him his excellent friend, and spoke of his great exertions in the cause of liberty in Westminster, will, I imagine, not fail to profit from the lesson he that day received. Indeed, I cannot help thinking, that he must have been, in some sort, pressed into the service. He has long been an active man in Westminster, and, being so, he seems to have thought, that there was no necessity for his interference in the City of London, where he did not reside; and, it is, on his own account, greatly to be lamented, that this particular occasion should have been selected for a departure from his usual course. -We now come to the speech of MR. WAITHMAN, who evidently started under the pressure of the discouragement given by the fate of the speech of Mr. STURCH. He confessed, that he was one of those, who had in vain endeavoured to dissuade Mr. Wood from his purpose; and, it will not fail to strike the reader as a little singular, that, in this respect, Mr. Waithman should have earnestly laboured to the same end as Mr. Alderman Alkins; and, if Mr. Waithman profits from his ill-success upon this occasion, he will in the end be a gainer; because, it will teach him to avoid such unnatural co-ope-blishment. rations in future. Mr. WAITHMAN ob- should not this Address tend towards the served, that this was not the way to acce-producing of the desired effect? Supposing lerale redress and promote reconciliation; such an effect to have been its ultimate aim, and, he afterwards said, that the object why should it not tend towards the producwas reconciliation and harmony.Beg-ing of it? The Address appears to conging his pardon, the Address professed to tain not a syllable calculated to offend either have no such object. The Address was not the Prince or his Ministers. It appears to

the breach," Mr. Waithman? Do you think, that the Prince would be less disposed to a reconciliation, because the Citizens of London had shown, that they honoured and admired the Princess? If you do, you must suppose His Royal Highness to have a most singular taste.- -But, Mr. Waithman went further, and said, that this was not the way to accelerate redress.By redress he, of course, meant a removal of the obstructions to the visits between the Princess and her Daughter, together, perhaps, with some steps relative to an estaAnd why, pray, why,

contain not a hint calculated to sting the | he reproved the Livery for being wanting pride or to wound any feeling of either. in the same way; and, I cannot help thinkIt simply pronounces an opinion of the ing, that his observation, that " he did not wickedness of the conspirators against the "desire the Livery to submit to his opiPrincess, and of her own innocence and "nions if they thought their own better,” worthiness; and, I should be glad to know would have been full as well omitted; for, from any one holding the opinions of Mr. it appears to me, that the bare idea of a Waithman, what he could imagine more possibility of their submitting to his opilikely to lead to final redress.- -If Mr. nions upon any other ground, or from any Waithman means to say, that to ask for other consideration, than that of a convicredress by means of Addresses is not the tion of the correctness of those opinions, way to obtain it; if he means this as a ge- must appear extremely degrading to the neral proposition, I should be glad to know body whom he was addressing. But, what may have been his views in the nume- as to the opinion itself, of which we have rous addresses which he has brought for- last spoken; namely, that the Address ward in Common Halls? Did he not exwas unnecessary, because the whole nation pect thereby to accelerate redress? Yes, entertained the opinions expressed in the surely, or else we must attribute to him Address. As to this opinion, I say, how motives, which were certainly foreign from will it square with the conduct of Mr. his heart. And, if he, by means of Ad- Waithman upon former occasions, and how dresses, has so often entertained the hope will it square with reason and common of accelerating redress, upon what ground sense? Let Mr. Waithman look back to can he now say, that Addresses are not cal- the Common Halls where he has been the culated to answer that purpose? Mr. proposer of Addresses and Petitions, and WAITHMAN reproved the Livery for not he will find, not only, that the Halls were paying respect to Mr. STURCH'S remarks, assembled because the general feeling of which, he said, flowed from a well-inform- the nation went with the sentiments ined understanding. I will not quarrel with tended to be embodied into the Addresses the grammar of the phrase, which may or Petitions, but that, on almost every ochave suffered under the hands of the Re- casion, those who have supported those porter; but, before Mr. Waithman reprov- Addresses and Petitions have boasted that ed the Livery thus, and applauded Mr. they had the nation with them, an asserSturch's sentiments, he should have consi- tion which has not unfrequently found its dered, whether he himself was prepared to way into the Addresses and Petitions themback those sentiments with his own; or, at selves. But, now, behold, an Address least, he should have made up his mind not to is unnecessary because it only expresses the oppose the Address upon grounds precisely sentiments of the whole nation! Did the contrary of the grounds of Mr. Sturch. Common Sense ever before suggest such an objection to a Common Hall, or to any body else possessed of the faculty of reasoning? When, at the time of the Gintra Convention, and at that of the Walcheren Expedition, Mr. Waithman came forward with Addresses to the King, what would he have said to any one, who should have objected to the addresses as unnecessary, because the whole nation entertained the same sentiments as those contained in the Addresses? In short, adopt this new maxim of Mr. Waithman, and you have left no rational mode of seeking redress but that of open resistance by force of arms; for when the general sentiment of the nation is not for a demand of redress, it is clear, that it will not be granted to the applica tions of a few; and, if it be, then, improper to demand redress when all the nation are of a mind, it follows, of course, that the only way left of obtaining redress is, that of physical force.--Into what

This latter gentleman said, the question was premature, that it was not ripe (which is the same thing); he wanted more evidence; he wished to wait for additional light; and, upon these grounds he opposed the Address. But, Mr. Waithman, who had reproved the Livery for not paying respect to these sentiments of his excellent friend, so far from thinking the question unripe; so far from wanting more evidence and more light, thought the Address unnecessary, because "the whole nation was "united in one sentiment that Her Royal "Highness was as innocent as her accusers "were guilly" so that he opposed the Address because the question was over-ripe, and because there was no more light to be thrown upon the subject.Considering, therefore, how widely he differed from his excellent friend; considering how little respect he himself paid to that friend's sentiments, he should have been cautious how

"Envy, eldest born of hell,

"Cease in human breasts to dwell!"

-SIR

I would fain have forborne to express these
sentiments; but they are extorted from me
by the love of that truth, which was never
yet, under any circumstances, sacrificed or
disguised to ultimate advantage.-
WM. CURTIS and SIR JAMES SHAW and MR.
ATKINS all allowed, and indeed, most ex-
plicitly declared, that the Princess was in-
nocent; and had been most cruelly and
foully treated; but, they said, that this
being notorious to the whole nation, any

inconsistencies, into what absurdities, men | since I was about 12 years old, but the two plunge themselves, when once they are, first lines of which have frequently occurfrom whatever cause, induced to quit the red to me through life: straight path!Mr. Waithman, as if not content to differ completely with Mr. Sturch as to the grounds of opposing the Address, and as if resolved to deprive his friends of all possible means of defending his consistency upon this memorable occasion, seems to have gone out of his way as it were for the deliberate purpose of differing from himself.What the Devil (for I must ascribe it to some supernatural agency); what the Devil, I say, had he to do with the proposing of "a Resolution declaratory of the complete acquittal of "the Princess of Wales," after he himself proceeding on the part of the Citizens of had objected to the Address; after he him- London was unnecessary; and they, thereself had declared the Address unnecessary, fore, moved to dissolve the Hall. Their because "the whole nation was united in conduct, though I disagree with them in "one sentiment that Her Royal Highness opinion, was perfectly consistent. They "was as innocent as her accusers were thought, that it was a matter with which "guilty!" Could such a proposition the Citizens of London ought not to medhave originated in any thing short of the dle. Therefore, said, let us separate. suggestion of some malicious demon, bent But, Mr. Waithman, while he thought upon the destruction of this gentleman's the Address unnecessary, because the whole well-earned fame ?—The Address was, nation were agreed as to the innocence of it appears, much too delicate as well as too the Princess, yet proposed a resolution of dignified to entertain even the idea that his own as being necessary to declare that doubt of her Royal Highness's innocence very innocence!This was so palpably had ever existed in the minds of those who inconsistent, that it was impossible it were addressing her. It sets out (if the should escape the observation of any one above substance of it be correct), with as-present; there was such a manifest desire suring Her Royal Highness that the senti- to take the thing out of the hands of Mr. ments of the City of London towards her Wood; there was, in short, so evident an have never undergone any change; it then unfairness, to say nothing of the folly, in reprobates those who have conspired against the attempt, that the Livery appear to her; it next expresses admiration of her have resented it in a very decided manner; forbearance and magnanimity; and it con- whereupon, as if to make bad worse, Mr. cludes with expressing a hope that the na- Waithman is reported to have said, that tion will be happy under the young Prin-" he was sorry, that his well-weighed opicess, who will have had the advantage of such a mother's example.--This Mr. Waithman would, it seems, have turned into a verdict of acquittal; or, rather, into a sort of vulgar congratulation upon an escape out of a court of justice. Acquittal! The word itself, as applied to the Princess, is an insult. When and where and by whom and for what was sheal Highness the Princess of Wales; and, ever TRIED? And, if never tried, how as to the simple point, whether his resolu can she be said to have been acquitted? tion was to oust Mr. Wood's Address, there -It is not, however, with the words required little more time to decide upon that I am displeased so much as with the that than is required to decide upon choice tendency and manifest spirit of the propo- between ugliness and beauty. Besides, sition, the object of which clearly was to mind the convenient doctrine that this reget rid of the Address proposed by Mr. proof implies. The proposer must, of Wood; or, in other words, and to speak course, generally have weighed his propoplainly, to defeat Mr. Wood. I remem-sition before-hand; so that, if his propober a little poem, which I have not read sition does not go down, he can always,

"nions were in opposition to the general "sentiment so hastily adopted." And how did Mr. Waithman happen to learn, that this general sentiment had been hastily adopted? The persons present had all had the same time and opportunity that he had had of forming their opinions upon every thing relative to the case of her Roy

interpolation of the Courier's reporter; for it does hold forth such an aristocratic idea; it is so hostile to the well-known rights of the Livery of London; it has its birth in a sentiment so congenial with the practices of corporation encroachments, borough corruptions, and all the means by which popular representation and the people's rights have been undermined and destroyed; it implies so much contempt for the judgment and virtue of the people, and so much arrogance in one who owes all the little poli

besides, in such direct contradiction to the whole course of the political life of Mr. Waithman, who has called, I believe, more Common Halls than any other man now alive, and who has repeatedly been the cause of putting upon record declara tions of Common Halls, that the Livery ought to be received by the King upon the Throne as well as the Common Council, that I really am filled with astonishment that he should have said any thing liable to such an interpretation; and I must say, that I shall not be able to bring myself to believe it, until I have better authority than that which any news-paper can give.

with as much propriety and modesty as Mr. Waithman, accuse the assembly of hastily rejecting what he has well weighed. -But, in sober sadness, did Mr. Waithman imagine, that the Livery were to wait in the Hall all day in order to show respect to his well-weighed opinions? Or, did he presume that they were to go home and come again after having, out of respect to him, taken time to consider and to weigh his weighty proposition? There is something so absurd in all this, that, really, one is almost tempted to believe, that thetical power he has to their voice; and it is, speaker's head was gone at the time when he uttered it. I am happy to perceive that I am drawing fast to a close of Mr. Waithian's speech; for it gives me sincere pain to be compelled to notice in it these unaccountable inconsistencies. He hoped, he said, that the Livery would preserve its character for purity and wisdom. -These qualities are of a nature widely different, and should not have been thus joined by what grammarians call the copulative conjunction. The Livery may be pure and wise; but, they might be wise and not pure. Purity may exist without wisdom; and wisdom may exist without purity; at least, this may be the case in the usual sense of the words, and the sense in which they are here employed; because, if wisdom is to embrace the quality of righteousness, then Mr. Waithman has made use of it superfluously.Taking it for granted, then, that he meant purity as the contrary of corruption, and wisdom as the contrary of folly, I would, if I had been present, certainly have taken the liberty to ask him how he had been able to discover any thing of the nature of corruption to be practised or accomplished through the means of the Address proposed by Mr. Wood; and how it was likely that the Livery should lose its character for purity by agreeing to that Address. And, I

-I have now gone through all the material parts of this debate. To be obliged to make remarks such as I have made upon the speeches of Messrs. STURCH and WAITH MAN is by no means pleasant; but, what I have said the case imperiously called for, and I am satisfied that I have done no more than what strict duty demanded at my hands.

WM. COBBETT.

Bolley, 7th April, 1813.

LETTERS of Lord MOIRA AND MR. WHIT
BREAD, RELATIVE TO THE PRINCESS OF
WALES.

mason.

CORRESPONDENCE OF LORD MOIRA AND
MR. WHITBREAD.

would also have taken the liberty to ask Letter of Lord Moira to the head Freehim, whether folly appeared more conspicuous in that Address than in a proposition to declare, in the shape of a resolution, the innocence of the Princess, when, by the rejection of the Address, such a declaration had been previously declared to be wholly unnecessary.I am truly grieved to observe by the report, in the Courier, that Mr. Waithman said, that he thought the Address, if proposed at all, ought to have been proposed in the Common Council and not to the Livery at large. say, I am truly grieved to observe this, and I would now fain hope, that it is an

I

March 23, 1813. My dear Sir,-The difficulty of taking down, with accuracy, in the House of Lords, what is said by any individual, as the reporters are not allowed to make notes, has occasioned the account of what passed there yesterday to be incorrect in many of the papers. I am thence anxious to detail to you the substance of the explanation given by me, that you may communicate

it to our Brethren of the Lodge, whom I had requested to suspend their opinions on the subject till I might feel at liberty to enter upon it. I thought it expedient to separate the matter into distinct heads, that each of the misrepresentations I had to combat may be answered the more precisely.. I never happened to be at Belvidere, or in its vicinity, in the whole course of my life. It follows that I could not have sought there any information respecting the Princess's conduct. But the negative does not only apply to that place. In no one instance have I ever spontaneously endeavoured to obtain particulars respecting Her Royal Highness's behaviour; and I should certainly have declined such a function had the Prince requested it of me, which I am persuaded never entered the most distantly into his contemplation. It is not in his nature to prompt so vile a practice. When any matter has been referred to me, or any communication has been made to me in an authentic and formal manner, my oath, as one of the Prince's Council, bound me to such examination of the point as I might think the honour and interest of His Royal Highness required.

all in the neighbourhood, and that it was entirely unnecessary for his Royal Highness to notice it in any shape. The servants had been desired by me never to talk upon the subject; Lord Eardley was informed that his conception of what had been stated by the servants was found to be inaccurate; no mention was ever made by any one, not even to the Lords who conducted the inqui ry, three years afterwards, of the particulars related by the servants, and the circumstance never would have been known at all had not the legal advisers of the Princess, for the sake of putting a false colour on that Investigation, indiscreetly brought it forward.. The death of Kenny, in the interval, tempted them to risk this procedure. Jonathan Partridge having been known at the time when he was questioned to be devoted to the Princess, from his own declaration to the steward, no one can doubt but that Her Royal Highness would the next day be informed by him of his having been examined. The measure was most offensive, if not justified, by some uncommon peculiarity of circumstance. Yet absolute silence is preserved upon it for so long a period by Her Royal Highness's advisers; a 2. Two of Lord Eardley's servants forbearance only to be solved by their being were examined by me in London, in a spi- too cautious to touch upon the point while rit very different from what was slander- Kenney was alive.-3. The interviews with ously imputed by the Princess's legal ad- Dr. Mills and Mr. Edmeades did not take visers. Lord Eardley had given to the place till between three and four years after Prince an account, absolutely uninvited, the examination of Lord Eardley's servants, and no less unwelcome, of meetings be- and had no reference to it.-Fanny Lloyd, tween the Princess and Captain Manby at a maid servant in the Princess's family, Belvidere, which his Lordship had repre- had, in an examination to which I was not sented (from the report of his servants) as privy, asserted Dr. Mills to have menhaving caused great scandal in the neigh- tioned to her that the Princess was pregbourhood; his Lordship had asked an au- nant; a deposition which obviously made it dience of the Prince, who had no suspicion necessary that Dr. Mills should be subjectof his object, for the purpose of stating the ed to examination. This happened to be fact, and exonerating himself from any sup- discussed before me; and it was my suggesposition of connivance. When the Prince tion that it would be more delicate to let me did me the honour of relating to me this re-request the attendance of Dr. Mills at my presentation of Lord Eardley's, expressing great uneasiness that the asserted notoriety of the interviews at Belvidere, and the comments of the neighbours, should force him to take any public steps, I suggested the possibility that there might be misap-mediately discovered that it was his partprehension of the circumstances; and I eùtreated that, before any other procedure should be determined upon, I might send for the steward (Kenny) and the porter (Jonathan Partridge) to examine them. This was permitted. I sent for the servants and questioned them. My report to the -Prince was, that the matter had occasioned very little observation in the house, none at

house, and to have him meet the magistrate there, than that publicity and observation should be entailed by his being summoned to the Office in Marlborough-street. Dr. Mills came early, and then it was im

ner, Mr. Edmeades, who had bled Fanny Lloyd, though the latter (knowing the Prin cess's apothecary to be Dr. Mills, and imagining it was that apothecary who had bled her) had confounded the names. Dr. Mills was therefore dismissed, without being examined by the Magistrate; and he was begged to send Mr. Edmeades on another moru ing. Mr. Edmeades came accordingly, and

« AnteriorContinuar »