The Duke of Newcastlewas anxious, before proceeding to the order of the day, to address a few words to their Lordships on a subject which he had hoped would have attracted the attention of some other noble Lord, better qualified than himself to do it justice—he alluded to the late changes in the Administration. He was very desirous their Lordships should be rightly informed as to the precise footing on which the Cabinet about to be completed would stand. He feared he must conclude, judging from circumstances which were too notorious, that it was formed on principles entirely adverse to the Established Church of the country; and if anything were necessary to confirm that belief, it was the secession of certain members from the Cabinet, who had retired in a manner highly honourable to themselves, refusing to participate in those measures of spoliation and injustice which their colleagues in a manner so frightful and reckless had determined to pursue, which would justly draw down on them the malediction of the present generation and of all who should come after them. If he were right in supposing that the present Administration was formed on principles hostile to the Established Church, there was a strange and alarming discrepancy to which he desired to advert. Their Lordships had no doubt read a speech which had been pronounced by his most gracious Majesty to the Bishops on a late interesting occasion—a speech which he rejoiced and exulted in saying, would have been quite worthy of the gracious and venerated sire of his Majesty, which was the highest eulogium he could pronounce. What did that speech prove? It proved, beyond all contradiction, that his Majesty was firmly attached to the religious institutions of his country, and that it was his fixed purpose to maintain them. Here, then, was the discrepancy. On the one side they had an Administration formed on the principles of opposition, insult, injury, and persecution to the Church of England, and on the other, a Sovereign determined to uphold the religion and Established Church of the country, as he was, in fact, bound to do by his most solemn asseveration. In those circumstances, he did not think he 241 should apologise to their Lordships for calling on his Majesty's Government to explain to that House, and to lay before the country at the present critical juncture of affairs, the grounds on which their Administration was formed and was to be conducted, and to ask them whether they were prepared to violate the conscience of their Sovereign, and subject his will to,—
§ Earl Fitzwilliamrose to order. He appealed to noble Lords more conversant than himself with the forms of that House, whether the strain in which the noble Duke was proceeding were consistent with its established and recognized orders? The noble Duke had asked whether the present Cabinet, or that about to be formed, was prepared to call upon his Majesty to violate his conscience, having in a former part of his speech quoted the name of an exalted personage in a manner which certainly appeared to him (Earl Fitzwilliam) to trench very much upon freedom of debate, and the usually recognised forms of the House. It was, therefore, a matter of very grave consideration, whether the course pursued by the noble Duke was likely to conduce either to order of procedure, or to maintain the proper freedom and independence of that House.
Lord Kenyonrose to order. The noble Earl (Earl Fitzwilliam) had not interfered at the proper time. Had the noble Earl interfered when the name of his Majesty was first introduced, he might have been quite consistent in calling the noble Duke to order. But the noble Earl not having then interfered, and having allowed the noble Duke to proceed in his statement, and put a question to his Majesty's Government, it was not competent for the noble Earl to interfere. Nothing could be more proper or constitutional than for any peer of that House to call on his Majesty's Ministers to explain the grounds on which their Administration was formed, and the principles by which they would be guided.
The Duke of Newcastleresumed. He should not have introduced the name of his Majesty, but that it was absolutely necessary, however unwilling he was to do so; and certainly the name of his Majesty had been in that House very improperly used on former occasions. He would therefore press the question, whether it was the intention of Government to attempt to control his Majesty, and induce him to forswear his most 242 solemn engagements? ["Order, Order."]
The Earl of Mulgravefelt great unwillingness to interrupt the noble Duke, but he felt solemnly convinced that the course the noble Duke was pursuing was utterly at variance with the recognised orders of the House. The name of his Majesty should not be introduced on such an occasion; and therefore he put it to the noble Duke himself, without appealing generally to their Lordships, whether he would proceed in a course which the noble Duke himself must acknowledge was at variance with the established rules of the House?
§ Earl Greysaid: Nobody, my Lords, is more ready than I am to admit the privilege which every noble Lord possesses, of asking, upon any occasion, questions of any member of his Majesty's Government, nor shall I be found unwilling to answer those questions when properly put. I must, however, say, on the present occasion, that the question itself is a very strange and extraordinary one, and that the grounds on which it is founded are altogether inconsistent with the orders of your Lordships' House. The noble Duke first of all says, that there is, what he calls a discrepancy between certain declarations said to have been made by his Majesty and the formation of the present Administration. My Lords, with respect to the speech supposed to have been delivered by his Majesty, I can say nothing, not having advised his Majesty—being in no way responsible for it—not knowing by whom it was reported, or on what authority it rests; I can say nothing but this—if that speech expressed his Majesty's determination to uphold the Church, I am certain it expressed truly the feelings and determination of his Majesty on that important point. My Lords, give me leave further to say, with respect to the inference which the noble Duke appears to draw, from what premises I know not, that there is, in the constitution of the present Administration, something inconsistent with that declaration of the Sovereign to support the Church, that the noble Duke's inference is unwarranted, and I beg leave to give his assertion the most positive contradiction. But the noble Duke has referred to the secession of some individuals lately members of his Majesty's Administration. Nobody, my Lords, regrets that secession, nobody has, both upon personal and public grounds, 243 more reason to regret it than I have. But I am sure, that, in leaving his Majesty's councils upon grounds which, in conscience, in honour, and in duty, they found themselves compelled to act, they will give me credit for an equally sincere conviction, though, on certain points of opinion, I may differ from them, as well as an equally sincere desire with themselves, to uphold and secure the interest of the Protestant Establishment in these realms. More than this, my Lords, I will not say on the present occasion, as we may soon, possibly on this very night, have an opportunity of going more into the circumstances connected with this subject; but I must protest, distinctly and decidedly, against any interpretation which the noble Duke, or any other Peer, may put upon the changes that have unfortunately lately taken place in his Majesty's advisers, leading to the conclusion that there is in those who remain in his Majesty's confidence any other than a sincere and conscientious desire to maintain, by all the means in their power, inviolate in efficiency, in dignity, and in usefulness, the Established Church of these kingdoms. So much, my Lords, in reply to the general assertion of the noble Duke; but I must be allowed to add, that the manner in which the question was put was most extraordinary. For, what was the question? The noble Duke called upon me, unworthily placed as I am at the head of his Majesty's Councils, to answer a question which, I believe, never before entered into the mind of any man but that of the noble Duke himself—namely, whether the Administration had been formed on the principle of forcing his Majesty's conscience? Is it possible, my Lords, that the noble Duke could have thought of seriously proposing such a question, or that there could have been any but one answer to it? The noble Duke may think the measures of his Majesty's Government inconsistent with the duties which they owe to their Sovereign, their country, and the Established Church. He may condemn those measures as loudly and vehemently as he pleases; but, can he believe, that any man could deliberately entertain the intention which he ascribes to his Majesty's Government, or give any answer to the question but one—that they never had attempted, and never could attempt, to control or force his Majesty's conscience? 244 My Lords, I can answer for it, if an attempt were made by any member of the present Administration, or of any other Administration, to propose to his Majesty anything which he thought inconsistent with the duties which he owes to the people as their protector and father, the Sovereign would at once reject such a proposition with indignation, and would not suffer such an individual to continue for one instant longer in his royal confidence. My Lords, I have thought it necessary to say thus much in answer to the noble Duke's question—a question which I think altogether improper—a question far from consistent with the orders and rules of this House; and, having answered it, I may now say, that I am ready to meet any charge which the noble Duke or any other Peer is prepared to bring against me; and, if the noble Duke thinks his Majesty's present Ministers are unworthy the confidence of this House, the proper course which he is bound in honour, and I think in duty, to take, is to move an address to his Majesty, praying that he would be graciously pleased to remove them from his Councils—a Motion, my Lords, which I shall be prepared to meet, and, on the result of which, I shall be prepared to act, as my duty and conscience shall dictate.