§ Mr. Whitbread, in consequence of the extraordinary facts which had come out in the course of the discussion last night, thought it his duty to inquire into the cause of the difficulty of obtaining access by petition to his royal highness the Prince Regent? The right hon. the Secretary of State for the Home Department was not in his place, but probably his right hon. friend would be enabled to inform him whether the Secretary of State had represented to the Regent that there were petitions ready to be presented to him, and in that case why his Royal Highness had not been advised to receive them?
The Chancellor of the Exchequerreplied, that in the absence of his right hon. friend all he could state was, that he believed the ordinary course of presenting petitions was on levee days, and that as yet no levee had been appointed. He had no doubt, however, that had any special application been made on the subject, there would have been no difficulty in advising his royal highness the Prince Regent to receive the petitions alluded to. It was rather singular, that the hon. gentleman should ask him what somebody else had done, with whose department he was not connected.
§ Mr. Whitbreadremarked, that the right hon. gentleman was pleased to be facetious; but it was the duty of the Secretary of State, as a member of parliament, to attend in his place; and in his absence, it was the right of any other member of parliament to ask for information from those who it was probable could afford it on any subject upon which the public interest demanded explanation. He repeated, that he wished to know, whether the Secretary of State for the Home Department had communicated to the Prince, Regent the fact that there were petitions in the hands of different noblemen and gentlemen, which they were desirous of presenting to the Regent? For had such a communication been made, he could not conceive it possible that the Regent would not have been advised to receive those petitions. It was rather a fearful circumstance, and one which by no means ought to be treated in the light way in which the Tight hon. gentleman seemed disposed to treat it, after the subject had been so long excluded from the constitu- 1166 tional approach to the throne, that, at the commencement of a new sera, the avenues to that throne should yet remain barred.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerdenied that he had any disposition to be facetious on the subject; nor was he at all aware that be had been so. All that he had said was, that it was really extraordinary to inquire of him what course of proceeding had been adopted by another officer of the State. As far as he was aware of that course, he had communicated it to the hon. gentleman. The hon. gentleman was correct in saying that it was the duty of his right hon. friend, as a member of parliament, to be present in his place in the House, but he conceived that on such a day, when no public business of importance-was expected, and when the inquiries of the hon. gentleman could not by possibility be anticipated; the absence of his right hon. friend could not be imputed to him as a very serious offence.
§ Mr. Whitbreadsaid, that the right hon. gentleman would perhaps communicate the conversation to his right hon. friend, and that to-morrow he would be able to afford additional information on the subject.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerreplied, that to-morrow, his right hon. friend would be present to answer for himself.