Lords Sitting of 30 April 1838

MINUTES.
Bill. Read a third time:—Haileybury College.
Petitions presented. By the Earl of ABERDEEN, from the Synod of Ayr, for a grant to the Church of Scotland.—By Lord SKELMERSDALE, from two places in Lancashire, for the better Observance of the Sabbath; and from Ormskirk, against the alienation of Church Property.—By the Marquess of SLIGO, from Stoneyhurst, and several other places, for the Abolition of Negro Apprentices.

SPAIN—FOREIGN ENLISTMENT ACT.
Lord Lyndhurstwished to know from the noble Viscount, whether any intention existed to renew the Order in Council for suspending the Foreign Enlistment Act?
Viscount Melbournesaid, that in the course of a discussion which had recently taken place elsewhere on the subject of Spain, it had been announced, that it was not intended to renew the Order in Council alluded to, and he could only repeat that statement.
Lord Lyndhurstwished to ask of the noble Viscount, in what situation certain individuals would be placed should they continue to serve a foreign Sovereign after their licence had expired? No persons were entitled to serve without that licence. The first licence was for three years, which was afterwards continued for another year. The first period had expired, and he presumed that the second was near its close. Now, he would call the attention of the noble Viscount to this point—namely, what would be the situation of those persons after the expiration of the month of June next?
Viscount Melbournesaid, it by no means followed, that though the Order in Council would not be renewed, that licences might not be granted to protect those individuals. Ministers, if it were necessary, might advise her Majesty to grant licences to ex-

667
empt persons from the operation of the Act in peculiar cases, and under particular circumstances.
Subject dropped.

THE CORONATION.
The Marquess of Londonderrysaid, that, anxious as he was on all occasions to act with courtesy towards her Majesty's Ministers, he was compelled a few evenings since, in the absence of the noble Viscount opposite, to ask for some information on the subject of the approaching coronation. On that occasion, he understood from the noble Marquess (Lansdowne), that the arrangements connected with that ceremony were still open to consideration. He could not avoid stating, that he felt extreme disappointment and extreme dissatisfaction at the course which had already been pointed out as that which was intended to be adopted with reference to this solemn ceremony. He knew, that the question of expense was one which, it might be said, ought rather to be noticed in the other House than there. Still he conceived that he might allude to it, and he fairly owned, that in his opinion this question of expense might have been better urged on almost any other occasion than the present. He should like to know on what ground this ceremony was fixed for the particular day which had been announced? How was it—under what unfortunate circumstances did it happen—that the coronation (which he might almost call the commencement of this auspicious reign,) should fall on the anniversary of the decease of a Monarch who was universally beloved? Surely all those who looked back to the proud period when he reigned, and who recollected the glory which the country had then achieved, must be anxious that his memory should be reverenced. He was one of those who viewed that reign with these sentiments, and, therefore, he could not but look with deep regret on the selection of that particular day for the celebration of this ceremony. He could not conceive why the coronation should be hurried forward at such an unusual period. That ceremony used to take place at a much later, and, he would say, a more convenient period of the year. Was it to be performed now because the noble Viscount felt it necessary to get rid of the business of Parliament, that he might the sooner enjoy his leisure? Why should the public business be thus stopped in what he might call the middle of the Session? Why should the ceremony be
668
fixed for such an unusual time? He understood that the banquet and many other splendid appurtenances of that august ceremony were to be dispensed with. He greatly disapproved of any such proceeding; and whatsoever views others might take of the subject, he conceived, that, if it were intended to make an inroad on the monarchy, the shortest way to effect that object was by abandoning, in the first instance, time-honoured and time-consecrated forms and ceremonies. He should say little as to the rights of different families in this country which depended on certain services rendered at the coronation. How were they to preserve those rights hereafter when the ceremonies connected with them were dispensed with? He wished to ask, ought they not to proceed with great caution, when a series of dispensations of this nature might possibly put in jeopardy the rights and privileges, the manors and hereditaments, which many persons held and enjoyed by observing certain forms at the coronation. Let them look at the situation of the great city of London. Was the noble Viscount ready to satisfy those who were interested that their rights should not be affected, when ceremonies in which they ought to take a part were abrogated? The banquet ought not to be omitted; all the ceremonies ought to be gone through; the more especially, when many illustrious individuals from foreign nations were likely to be present. When it was recollected, that the city of London gave a most splendid banquet on the occasion of the foreign potentates having visited this country, ought not those great personages who came over to do honour to the coronation, as the representatives of their respective sovereigns, to be received with equal distinction? It was very well to talk of economy, at the same time that 2,000,000 l. or 3,000,000 l. were thrown away and squandered on worthless objects, on the equipment of men who were incompetent to the proper discharge of great public duties, or in the erection or proposed erection of splendid Houses of Parliament. But he would say, that in this instance economy was very much displaced. He would ask, whether the large sum of money that would be expended in this great metropolis, if the coronation were celebrated on a grand scale, and which would circulate throughout every part of the country—he would ask, whether that would not be attended with immense general benefit?

669
And he would ask further, whether, if that sum were not circulated, the Ministers who counselled this curtailment of the coronation would not be responsible for the detriment which the country in general, but the metropolis in particular, must sustain? He should be very glad if there were any change, or any likelihood of a change, in the system which they were told was meant to be adopted. But he feared that no alteration would be effected. He hoped, however, that the noble Viscount would still do whatsoever lay in his power to alter the period when the coronation should take place, and also for re-establishing the system which had prevailed for centuries. He hoped that the coronation would not be
"Sent before its time into this breathing world
But half made up—and that so lamely and
unfashionably,"
as to be utterly unworthy of her gracious Majesty and disgraceful to this great nation.
Viscount Melbournesaid, he ought to offer an apology to the noble Marquess for not having been present when the adjournment took place before the recess, in order to answer such questions as the noble Marquess might have thought proper to ask. Had he been aware of the intention of the noble Marquess, he certainly would not have been absent on that occasion. The questions of the noble Marquess had reference to two points—first, whether the arrangements for the coronation would be subject to further consideration, and would undergo any alteration; and next, as to the time when the ceremony would take place. With respect to the latter point, as to the time, he had to state, that a change of the day, probably to the 28th of June, had been determined on. That change had been agreed to in order to avoid doing any violence to those feelings to which the noble Marquess had adverted. He thought it right, however, to observe, that the day originally intended was named entirely through inadvertence. Still, he might say, that there was scarcely a day in the year that could have been selected that had not some melancholy reflections connected with it. It should also be observed, that the accession of a Sovereign was constantly kept as a festival in all countries, and at all times; and yet that accession must, of necessity, be the anniversary of the death of the preceding Sovereign, Therefore, he did not thin,
670
that any very great fault had been committed in naming the day originally intended. It was however, he admitted, very proper and very wise to pay respect to such feelings as the noble Marquess had described; and, therefore, a fresh proclamation should be issued, to defer the solemnisation of the ceremony to the day which he had pointed out. He now came to the other question—whether those pomps and ceremonies which were dispensed with at the coronation of his late Majesty were now to be discontinued or not? And, in answer to that question, he begged leave to say, that it was not the intention of her Majesty's Government to make any further change, any material change, in the ceremonial from what had already been set forth. He was ready to defend the course taken by her Majesty's advisers. He could not, on the part of himself and his colleagues, plead guilty to the charge of want of reverence for the practice of their ancestors; and, from what had occurred before, he did not think that they were fairly liable to such a charge. When those ceremonies had anything like substance in them—when they were agreeable to the present time—when they were in accordance with the usages and customs of the present day—it might be well to adhere to them. But when they appeared to be mere shades and mere shadows—when they appeared to be mere vain pageants, useless, and idle, and, in some instances, tending to create ridicule—when this was the case, he conceived that they were prudently and properly given up and abandoned, especially when they had been given up on a former occasion. There was another reason, which ought to have some weight, and that was, that the dispensing with those ceremonies would effect a very considerable diminution of expense. Again, there was another point that ought to be taken into consideration. He alluded to the great fatigue which the duties of the day would necessarily impose on her Majesty, and which, perhaps, her Majesty would scarcely be able to undergo. He did not deem it necessary to state anything further. It certainly did not appear to him that any good reasons had been advanced to induce them to return to the old system. As to the motive which the noble Marquess thought proper to attribute to Ministers, there was no foundation whatever for the charge. They proposed, on good grounds as he conceived, to follow what was done

671
on the coronation of his late Majesty. The course then taken he always thought had given great satisfaction, not only to the metropolis, but to the country in general. The noble Marquess had adverted to a sort of discontent which he asserted existed in this town, because certain parts of the ceremony were to be dispensed with. He did not know that there was any such discontent; but, if it did exist, he did not think it formed a sufficient ground for altering what had already been determined on. In his opinion, the course which was intended to be pursued, manifested due honour and respect to the Crown, and a proper consideration for the wishes and feelings of the country.

MR. TURTON.
The Earl of Winchilseasaid, that, in answer to a question which he had put to the noble Viscount on Friday evening, he had been informed that an individual to whom he had then alluded had not been appointed to the situation of legal adviser to the noble Earl who was going out as Governor of Canada. He now, however, understood that that individual had not only left this country for Canada, but that he had gone out in her Majesty's ship which also carried the noble Earl. He, therefore, called on the noble Viscount at the head of her Majesty's Government to give an explicit answer to a statement, which affected not only the character of the country, but the character of their Sovereign. When he mentioned this subject on Friday last, he objected not to the appointment of such a functionary by the Crown, with any reference to its usefulness, or with any reference to its expense—his objection rested solely on the ground of character, and of character only. Differing, as he did, from the noble Viscount on many important opinions and principles, and believing, as he did, that many of the measures introduced by him were dangerous to the safety of the country, still he had hitherto given him credit for honesty and openness in the manner in which he brought them forward; and deeply should he regret if he found anything in the course which the noble Viscount had pursued in this instance that should have the effect of weakening or shaking that opinion. But he must freely state, that if he found the individual to whom he had alluded going out to Canada in a responsible situation, going out in a public character now, or with a promise that, when he got out there, he should be
672
placed in a situation of public trust and confidence—if he found that to be the case, then he would only state, and he would state it boldly and openly to the noble Viscount, that he had not acted with that candour which became him. With the answer which he had received on Friday evening he had sat down perfectly satisfied. But now he was informed that this individual, if he had not gone out to Canada in an official capacity, had, at all events, gone thither at the public expense. It could scarcely be supposed, looking to the situation which he held in the legal profession, that he would go there for nothing; it could not be imagined that he had gone out to serve the country at his own private expense; and he would not do so much injustice to the noble Earl who was selected to fill so dignified a situation—he would not think so lightly of his character—as to suppose that this individual, who had appeared as a criminal at their Lordships' Bar, had gone out in the character of that noble Earl's private friend. No; it was impossible that that noble Earl should admit to his friendship and confidence an individual whose conduct had banished him from all female, from all moral, society. What he asked of the noble Viscount then was—first, whether a public situation of any description or character was ever offered to this individual? Second, whether any promise had been given to him that when he arrived in British Canada he should be appointed to any public situation? And third, whether, if he were not going out in a public character, or in any character at all, his expenses were to be defrayed in whole or in part by the public? If this individual had in any way been recommended to a public situation, or if any portion of his expenses were to be defrayed by the public, he should boldly contend that such a proceeding was highly objectionable, and he should give their Lordships an opportunity of expressing their opinion on what he would contend was, if the fact were so, a gross dereliction of duty on the part of Ministers. They ought to be most cautious in the selection of those who were to fill important stations, and more particularly so when they considered the tender years, the inexperience, and the confiding nature of their royal Mistress. If there were one duty more imperative upon Ministers than another, it was to guard the public and private character of the Queen—to encourage around her worth and

673
virtue. Those formed the best defence and security of the Throne. They commanded the affections of the people, and while they added dignity to the Throne, they encouraged the growth of virtue and morality throughout the whole community. He again asked, was this individual offered a public situation at any time, or did he go out with a promise that he should have that situation when he arrived in Canada? Further, he should ask of the noble Viscount, if such a situation had been injudiciously given to this person by the noble Earl who was proceeding to Canada, whether he was to be allowed any remuneration from the public purse?
Viscount Melbourne.—I have no difficulty whatever in answering the observations of the noble Earl, which have exceeded a great deal the limits which are usually permitted to noble Lords in putting those questions which are expected to be answered by the courtesy of the House. The questions which the noble Earl has put to me relate to matters with which I am not acquainted, and which certainly affect most deeply the character of the Gentleman to whom he has alluded. But I do not intend to enter into any details of which I am not in possession, and I shall confine myself most strictly to answering the questions which the noble Earl has put to me. I say, then, first of all, that no situation whatever was offered by her Majesty's Government to the Gentleman whose name he has alluded to; and next, that that Gentleman has gone out to Canada, if he has gone out at all—which I do not mean to deny—without any appointment, without any prospect of an appointment, and without any intention on the part of Government, or on the part of my noble Friend, the Earl of Durham, to appoint him to any public situation whatever.