which had been urged on behalf of the Prince of Wales. He concluded by moving three resolutions; affirming, firstly, that the personal exercise of royal authority was interrupted; secondly, the right of the two Houses to supply this defect of the royal authority, in such manner as the exigency of the case may seem to require; and, thirdly, the necessity of "determining the means by which the royal assent may be given to bills passed by the two Houses respecting the exercise of the powers of the crown, during the continuance of the king's indisposition." Mr. Fox argued, ingeniously, that the principles maintained by Mr. Pitt tended to make the monarchy elective instead of hereditary; and that if Parliament might elect any one to be regent, for whatever time it thought fit, the monarchy would become a republic. Nor did he omit to seek for support, by intimations that he should be Mr. Pitt's successor, under the regency.1 On the report of these resolutions to the House 2, Mr. Pitt explained,-in reference to his third resolution, which had not been clearly understood,—that he intended, when the resolutions had been agreed to by both Houses, to propose that the lord chancellor should be empowered, by a vote of the two Houses, to affix the great seal to commissions for opening the Parliament, and for giving the royal assent to a Regency Bill. The propriety of this singular course of proceeding was much questioned: but, after long debates, the resolutions were agreed to, and communicated to the House of Lords at a conference. In that House the same questions were debated, and Lord Rawdon moved as an amendment, an address to the Prince of Wales, praying him "to take upon himself, as sole regent, the adminis 1 Parl. Hist., xxvii. 731–778. 2 Parl. Hist., xxvii. 782. Twiss's Life of Eldon, i. 191. Death of Mr. Speaker tration of the executive government, in the king's name." Lord Chancellor Thurlow,-though faithless to his colleagues, and intriguing, at the very time, with the queen and the Prince of Wales1,-supported the ministerial position with great force. In answer to Lord Rawdon's amendment, he "begged to know what the term 'regent' meant? where was he to find it defined? in what law-book, or what statute? He had heard of custodes regni, of lieutenants for the king, of guardians and protectors, and of lords justices but he knew not where to look for an explanation of the office and functions of regent. To what end, then, would it be to address the prince to take upon himself an office, the boundaries of which were by no means ascertained? .. What was meant by the executive government? Did it mean the whole royal authority? Did it mean the power of legislation? Did it mean all the sovereign's functions without restriction or limitation of any kind whatsoever? If it did, it amounted to the actual dethroning of his Majesty, and wresting the sceptre out of his hand."2 All the resolutions were agreed to: but were followed by a protest signed by forty-eight peers.3 The perplexities arising out of the incapacity of the sovereign, the constitutional source and origin of Cornwall. authority-were now increased by the death of Mr. 1 Nicholl's Recollections, 71; Tomline's Life of Pitt, iii. c. 14; Wilberforce's Life, i. App.; Moore's Life of Sheridan, ii. 31; Lord Campbell's Lives of Chancellors, v. 583, et seq.; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, 395-403. 2 Parl. Hist., xxvii. 885. The cellor and others. On the accession Bristol, appointed the Earl of Pembroke regent, as "Rector Regis et Regni" (Matthew Paris, Wats' 2nd Ed., p. 245; Carte's History of Eng., ii. 2); and when the Duke of York was appointed protector by the Parliament during the illness of Hen. VI., it is entered in the rolls of Parliament that the title of regent was not given him, because "it emported auctorite of governance of the lande." Rot. Parl., v. 242, a.d. 1454; Rymer's Foedera, v. 55. 3 Parl. Hist., xxvii. 901. Cornwall, the Speaker of the House of Commons. His Majesty's leave could not be signified that the Commons should proceed to the election of another speaker; nor could the new speaker, when elected, be presented for the king's approval. But the necessity of the occasion suggested an easy expedient; and both these customary formalities were simply dispensed with, without any attempt to assume the appearance of the royal sanction.1 sug submits his to the prince. All these preliminaries being settled, Mr. Pitt now Mr. Pitt submitted to the Prince of Wales the plan of regency scheme which he intended to propose. The limitations gested were these:—that the care of the king's person and household, and the appointment of officers and servants, should be reserved to the queen:-that the regent should not be empowered to dispose of the real or personal property of the king, or to grant any office in reversion, or any pension or office, otherwise than during pleasure, except those which were required to be granted for life, or during good behaviour; or to bestow any peerage except upon his Majesty's issue, having attained the age of twenty-one." These limitations were suggested, he said, on the supposition that the king's illness would not be of long duration, and might afterwards be revised by Parliament. prince's The prince's reply to this communication was a most The skilful composition, written by Burke and revised by reply. Sheridan. He regarded the restrictions as "a project for producing weakness, disorder, and insecurity in every branch of the administration of affairs,-a project for dividing the royal family from each other, for separating the court from the state, a scheme discon 1 Parl. Hist., xxvii. 903, 1160. Parl. Hist., xxvii. 909. 3 Moore's Life of Sheridan, ii. 50. Lord Stanhope assigns the authorship to Mr. Burke alone.— Life of Pitt, ii. 18. Further inquiries health. necting the authority to command service, from the power of animating it by reward, and for allotting to the prince all the invidious duties of government, without the means of softening them to the public, by any act of grace, favour, or benignity." And he repudiated as unnecessary, the restriction upon his granting away the king's property,-a power which he had shown no inclination to possess. But before Mr. Pitt was able to bring his proposals before Parliament, fresh discussions were raised by the the king's opposition on the state of the king's health, which resulted in another examination of his physicians by a select committee. The inquiry lasted for several days: but, while it disclosed much party spirit, intrigue, and jealousy, it established no new facts concerning the probable recovery of the royal patient.2 The least. hopeful physicians were popular with the opposition: the more sanguine found favour with the court and ministers. At length, on the 19th January, Mr. Pitt moved, in committee on the state of the nation, five resolutions on which the Regency Bill was to be founded. After animated debates they were all agreed to, and communicated at a conference to the Lords, by whom they were also adopted: but not without a protest signed by fifty-seven peers, headed by the Dukes of York and Cumberland. Further resolutions on the regency, Laid before The next step was to lay these resolutions before the prince. the prince; and to ascertain whether he would accept the regency, with the conditions attached to it by Parliament. The resolutions were accordingly presented by both Houses; and the prince, out of respect for his father, the interests of the people, and the united desires of the two Houses, consented to undertake the trust, 1 Tomline's Life of Pitt, ii. 425; 2 Commons' Journ., xliv. 47. Parl. Hist., xxvii. 910. though he felt the difficulties which must attend its execution. The resolutions were also presented to the queen, and received a gracious answer.1 sion for ment. Another technical difficulty was still to be overcome Commisbefore the Regency Bill could, at last, be introduced. opening Parliament had not yet been opened, nor the causes of Parlia summons declared, in a speech from the throne,-formalities always held to be essential to enable Parliament to proceed with its legislative business. It was now proposed, by a vote of both Houses, to authorise the Jan. 31, passing of letters patent under the great seal, for the 1789. opening of Parliament by commission. The necessity of adopting this expedient had been already intimated, and had been described as a "phantom" of royalty, a "fiction," and a "forgery." It was now formally proposed, by ministers, on the ground that the opening of Parliament, by royal authority, was essential to the validity of its proceedings: that during the king's incapacity such authority could only be signified by a commission under the great seal: that without the direction of both Houses, the Lord Chancellor could not venture to affix the seal; but that the commission being once issued, with the great seal annexed to it,—the instrument by which the will of the king is declaredno one could question its legality. It was also stated that the royal assent would hereafter be signified to the Regency Bill by commission, executed in the same way. A precedent in 1754 was further relied on, in which Lord Hardwicke had affixed the great seal to two commissions, the one for opening Parliament, and the other for passing a bill, during a dangerous illness of George II.3 1 Parl. Hist., xxvii. 1122. 2 Lord Camden's Speech. Parl. Hist., xxvii. 1124. 3 Speeches of Mr. Pitt and Lord Camden. In the latter this pre- |