§ Mr. Henry Lascellesgave notice, that he should, on Monday, bring forward a motion which related to a subject that had caused the greatest grief and melancholy throughout the country: he meant the death of that illustrious personage the late chancellor of the exchequer. It was his intention, he said, to move, that some signal mark of public respect should be shewn to the memory of that great man.
Lord Castlereagh ,alluding to a motion of which a noble lord (H. Petty) had given notice for Monday, rose to enquire whether it was the intention of that noble lord to bring it forward? At the time the notice was given, he observed that the noble lord did not seem disposed to press the question upon that precise day. As a matter of personal convenience to himself and other friends who certainly would be ill able to enter into the discussion of such a subject on Monday, he hoped the noble lord would agree to a farther postponement.
§ Mr. Foxassented to the propriety of the postponement required, for the reasons alluded to by the noble lord. It was no doubt highly desirable that the consideration of the question to which the noble lord referred, should take place on an early day. He knew that it was his noble friend's intention to bring it forward as early as possible, but certainly not on Monday. Adverting to the notice of an hon. gent. (Mr. Lascelles) for that day, he submitted whether it would not be more proper to postpone that notice until after the discussion of the motion proposed by his noble friend, which naturally claimed the precedency. He felt, however, that it was not for him to dictate to the hon. gent. But it was for that hon. gent. and those who thought with him, to consider whether the motion they had it in contemplation to bring forward, might not involve points, the discussion of which would more properly belong to the question announced by his noble friend; whether, in fact, it might not be of such a nature as many gentlemen could not assent to, without a gross violation of their public duty.