§ Lord Castlereagh moved for the appointment of a committee to examine the Journals of the House of Lords, in order to ascertain whether any and what proceedings had taken place in that House with respect to her majesty, and to report their opinion thereupon to the House.—The motion was agreed to.—The noble lord then said, that he had submitted this motion with the view which it implied; and if from the report of the committee, it should appear that the other House had instituted any proceeding, he should then consider whether, pending that proceeding, the notice of a motion which he had given for to-morrow should not be dropped; and also whether he should not to-morrow move the reading of the order for taking his majesty's message into consideration on Friday, with a view of moving the postponement of that order until some future day. This postponement he should feel to be proper, in order that the House might wait the result of the proceedings in the House of lords, still reserving to itself the right of taking his majesty's message into consideration.230
§ Sir J. Newport
asked, whether it was the intention of the noble lord to keep the order which was fixed for Friday in abeyance, until the lords should pronounce their decision upon the subject? If such were the noble lord's intention, it would be a very uncommon course of proceeding.
observed, that the proceeding instituted by the lords might never be brought in any legislative way before that House, and, therefore, he proposed only that the order for considering his majesty's message should be delayed, but that the House should by no means abandon its right of inquiry upon the subject.
§ Sir M. W. Ridley
hoped the House would not agree to the course proposed by the noble lord. If no other member would take the sense of the House upon the subject, he should feel it his duty to do so.