might be on that ground in favour of the Prince of Wales, which he would not enter into at present, it did not affect the question of right; because, neither the whole, nor any part of the royal authority, could belong to him in the present circumstances, unless conferred by the Houses of Parliament.

As to the right honourable gentleman's repeated enforcement of the Prince of Wales's claim, he admitted that it was a claim entitled to most serious consideration; and thence must take the liberty of arguing, that it was the more necessary to learn how the House had acted in cases of similar exigency, and what had been the opinion of parliament on such occasions. would not allow that no precedent analagous to an interruption of the personal exercise of the royal authority could be found, although there might possibly not exist a precedent of an heir apparent in a state of majority, during such an occurrence, and in that case, he contended, that it devolved on the remaining branches of the legislature, on the part of the people of England, to exercise their discretion in providing a substitute.

Mr. Pitt contended, that in the mode in which the right honourable gentleman had treated the subject, a new question presented itself, and that of greater magnitude even than the question which was originally before them, as matter of necessary deliberation. The question now was, the question of their own rights, and it was become a doubt, according to the right honourable gentleman's opinion, whether that House had, on this important occasion, a deliberative power. He wished, for the present, to wave the discussion of that momentous consideration: but he declared that he would, at a fit opportunity, state his reasons for advising what step parliament ought to take in the present critical situation of the country, contenting himself with giving his contradiction to the right honourable gentleman's bold assertion, and pledging himself to maintain the opposite ground against a doctrine so irreconcileable to the spirit and genius of the constitution. If the report of the committee had not proved the necessity of the motion he had made, the right honourable gen

inquiry, that if any doubt had existed, that doubt must vanish. Let it not, then, be imputed to him, that he offered the motion with a view to create delay: indeed, the right honourable gentleman had not made any such imputation. In fact, no imputation of that sort could be supported; since no longer time had been spent, after the first day of their meeting, than was absolutely necessary to insure as full an attendance as the solemnity and seriousness of the occasion required; since that time, every day had been spent in ascertaining the state of His Majesty's health, and now the necessity of the case was proved, it behoved them to meet it on the surest grounds. Let them proceed, then, to learn and ascertain their own rights; let every man in that House, and every man in the nation, who might hear any report of what had passed in the House that day, consider, that on their future proceedings depended their own interests and the interest and honour of a sovereign, deservedly the idol of his people. Let the House not, therefore, rashly annihilate and annul the authority of parliament, in which the existence of the constitution was so intimately involved.

Mr. Burke next rose and sarcastically attacked the doctrine laid down by the chancellor of the exchequer; emphatically calling Mr. Pitt " one of the Prince's competitors," and declaring that, were he to give an elective vote, it should be in favour of that Prince, whose amiable disposition was one of his many recommendations, and not in support of a " Prince," who had threatened the assertors of the Prince of Wales's right with the penalties of constructive treason.

Mr. PITT concluded the conversation with remarking, that if the right honourable gentleman, who had condescended to be the advocate and the specimen of moderation, had found any warmth in his manner of speaking before, which led him to think that he had not considered what he said, he was ready to repeat it with all possible coolness, and knew not one word that he would retract. Upon this ground, therefore, was he still ready to maintain that it was little less than treason to the consti* Mr. Burke.

tution to assert, that the Prince of Wales had a claim to the exercise of the sovereign power during the interruption of the personal authority of His Majesty by infirmity, and in his life-time; and to this asseveration should he adhere, because he considered such a claim as superseding the deliberative power and discretion of the two existing branches of the legislature. And, when he had said the Prince of Wales had no more right to urge such a claim than any other individual subject, he appealed to the House upon the decency with which the right honourable gentleman had charged him with placing himself as the competitor of His Royal Highness. At that period of our history, when the constitution was settled on that foundation on which it now existed, when Mr. Somers and other great men declared, that no person had a right to the crown independent of the consent of the two Houses, would it have been thought either fair or decent for any member of either House to have pronounced Mr. Somers a personal competitor of William the Third?

The question was then put and agreed to, and a committee was accordingly appointed, consisting of the following members:

The Chancellor of the Exchequer,

Welbore Ellis, Esq.

The Master of the Rolls,

Rt. Hon. F. Montagu,
Attorney General,
Robert Vyner, Esq.
Rt. Hon. Henry Dundas,
Thomas Powys, Esq.
Solicitor General,
R. B. Sheridan, Esq.
Wm. Hussey, Esq.

Ld. Advocate of Scotland,

Marquis of Graham,
Lord Belgrave,

Sir Grey Cooper,

Wm. Wilberforce, Esq.
Rt. Hon. Wm. Windham,
Philip Yorke, Esq.
Earl Gower,

Rt. Hon. W. W. Grenville,
Rt. Hon. Edmund Burke.

December 12. 1788.

THE report being brought up from the committee, who had been appointed to examine precedents in cases of the personal exercise of the royal authority being interrupted by sickness, infirmity, or otherwise,

Mr. Pitt moved, "That the House should on Tuesday next resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House to take into consideration the state of the Nation."

After Mr. Fox had spoken,

MR. PITT rose, and begged leave to remind the House, that they had just received a voluminous report from the committee, appointed to search for precedents, in order that gentlemen might have every information before them, to guide their proceedings under the present arduous and singular situation of the country, that the wisdom of their ancestors, the statutes of the realm, and the records of parliament, could afford; and he had moved to refer that report, together with the examination of His Majesty's physicians, to the committee of the whole House, who were to take the state of the nation into their consideration upon the ensuing Tuesday. In that committee the topice touched on by the right honourable gentleman✶ would necessarily undergo an ample discussion. In their last debate on the subject, there appeared to be a point at issue between the right honourable gentleman and himself: and, from all that the right honourable gentleman had then said, it still appeared to be no less at issue than before. The right honourable gentleman explained, as he thought proper, the meaning of a very essential part of his speech, on the preceding Wednesday. Mr. Pitt said, that he should be sorry to fix on any gentleman a meaning, which he afterwards declared not to have been his meaning. In whatever way, therefore, he had before understood the right honourable gentleman's words relative to the Prince's forbearing to assert his claim, he was willing to take the matter from the right honourable gentleman's present explanation, and to meet it upon those grounds where he had then, after maturer deliberation, thought fit to place it. The right honourable gentleman now asserted, that the Prince of Wales had a right to exercise the royal authority, under the present circumstances of the country, but that it was as a right not in possession, until the prince could ex

* Mr. Fox,

ercise it on, what the right honourable gentleman called, the adjudication of parliament. He, on his part, denied that the Prince of Wales had any right whatever, and upon that point the right honourable gentleman and he were still at issue-an issue, that, in his opinion, must be decided, before they proceeded one step farther in the great and important considerations to be discussed and determined.

Concerning one part of the right honourable gentleman's speech, it was impossible for him to remain silent, as the right honourable gentleman's ideas in that point had not appeared to him to be quite accurate and distinct. He seemed to have intended to have renounced all idea of the Prince of Wales's right to assume the exercise of the royal authority, under the present or similar circumstances, without the previous adjudication of parliament, or of the two houses; but, if he understood the right honourable gentleman correctly, he had used the words, "during the sitting of parliament;" the plain inference from which expression was, that if parliament were not sitting, the Prince of Wales could assume the exercise of the regal authority. Mr. Pitt declared, that he thought the Prince of Wales could, in no one case, have power to assume the right. If there were no parliament in existence, he granted that the heir apparent, acting in concert with other persons in great situations, might, under such circumstances as the present, have issued writs, and convened the two houses, for the purpose of providing for the exigency. Such a proceeding would be justified by the necessity of the case, and with a view to the safety of the nation, which superseded all forms; but, that it would be a legal and formal summons of the parliament, or that a parliament could be called together, without legal authority, he must absolutely deny. Such a meeting would be a convention, like to that assembled at the time of the abdication of James the Second, and in other periods of difficulty; but it could not be a legal and formal calling together of a parliament. With regard to the question of the Prince of Wales's right of assuming the power, during the intermission of parlia ment, and his right not in possession, as it was called, during the