Chapter VI: Part 6

The fact of _two juries being summoned_ has been _acknowledged by the coroner_, in his affidavit before the Court of King's Bench in April last. The affidavit of this gentleman, however, contains so many _errors_, that we here introduce an exposition of it, as given by the talented D. Wakefield, esq., in shewing cause against the rule being made absolute in the case of "Cumberland _v._ Phillips."

"Mr. Wakefield said it would be in the recollection of the
court, that this was a rule obtained by Sir Charles Wetherell,
for a libel contained in a publication relating to his royal
highness the Duke of Cumberland. He would not read the alleged
libel in detail now, but confine himself first to the
affidavit of Samuel Thomas Adams, the coroner who had held the
inquest on Sellis. It was necessary that he should read the
affidavit, as he had to offer several remarks upon it."

The learned counsel then read the affidavit, as follows:

=In the King's Bench.=

"Samuel Thomas Adams of No 9 Davis street Berkeley square in
the County of Middlesex solicitor maketh oath and saith that
he hath seen a certain book or publication entitled "The
Authentic Records of the Court of England for the last
Seventy Years" purporting to be published in London by J.
Phillips 334 Strand 1832 and that in the said book or
publication are contained the following statements or passages
which this deponent has read that is to say--"

[Here the deponent, _lawyer-like_, set out the whole of the pretended libel, as published in the "Authentic Records," for the purpose of putting us to all the expense and trouble possible.]

"And this deponent further saith that he was coroner for the
verge of the King's Palace at St. James's in the month of June
one thousand eight hundred and ten before whom the inquest on
the body of Joseph Sellis referred to in the aforesaid
passages extracted from the said book or publication was held
and that it is not true as stated in the aforesaid passages
that Lord Ellenborough undertook to manage the affair by
arranging the proceedings upon the said inquest or that every
witness or as this deponent believes any witness was
previously examined by the said Lord Ellenborough or that the
first jury for the reasons in the aforesaid passages alleged
or for any other reasons refused to return a verdict in
consequence of which they were dismissed and a second jury
summoned and empannelled to whom _severally a special
messenger had been sent_ requesting their attendance and each
of whom was directly or indirectly connected with the court or
the government. And this deponent further saith that it is not
true that any person was omitted as a witness whose evidence
was known or could be suspected to be material but on the
contrary this deponent saith that when the death of the said
Joseph Sellis was notified to him he as such coroner as
aforesaid was required to hold an inquest on the body of the
said Joseph Sellis and that it being required by a statute
passed in the twenty-third year of Henry the Eighth chapter
twelve that in case of death happening in any of the king's
palaces or houses where his majesty should then happen to be
and in respect of which death an inquest should be necessary
that the jury on such inquest should be composed of twelve or
more of the yeoman officers of the king's household to be
returned in the manner therein particularly mentioned he this
deponent in the first instance issued as such coroner as
aforesaid an order that a jury should be summoned composed of
the said yeoman officers of the king's household pursuant to
the directions of the said statute. But this deponent saith
that believing it to be important that the cause and
circumstances of the death of the said Joseph Sellis should be
investigated in the most public and impartial manner _he took
upon himself the responsibility of not complying with the
strict letter of such statute as aforesaid and countermanded
the first order as aforesaid for summoning such jury in
conformity to the said statute and instead thereof directed a
jury to be summoned consisting of persons not being yeomen
officers of the king's household_ but living at a distance
from and totally unconnected with the palace of St. James's
And this deponent further saith that thereupon his agent as
this deponent has been informed and believes took the
summoning officer to Francis Place of Charing Cross man's
mercer and that the said Francis Place then mentioned to the
agent of this deponent the names of many persons fit and
eligible to compose such jury and out of such persons so
summoned by the officer as aforesaid an impartial jury was
formed of which jury the said Francis Place was foreman And
this deponent saith that before such jury so summoned and duly
sworn he as coroner proceeded on the first day of June one
thousand eight hundred and ten to hold an inquest on the body
of the said Joseph Sellis And this deponent further saith that
the court which under other circumstances would have been a
close one he this deponent directed to be thrown open to the
public and all persons without distinction And this deponent
believes the same was done and that all persons without
distinction were admitted into such court amongst whom were
many reporters for the newspapers who attended for the purpose
of taking and did take notes of the proceedings and of the
depositions of the witnesses examined upon such inquest And
this deponent further saith that at the commencement of the
said inquest the several informations on oath of the principal
witnesses taken on that and the preceding day by John Reid
Esquire the then chief magistrate of the police were read over
and handed to the said jury to enable them the better to
examine such witnesses respectively and such witnesses were
respectively resworn before this deponent as coroner and
permitted to make any addition to their evidence so given
before the magistrate as aforesaid and that each and every of
such witnesses had full opportunities of making any addition
to such testimony which they thought proper And this deponent
further saith that all the circumstances of the case as far as
they could be collected were carefully and impartially
scrutinized by the said jury and that all the evidence which
could be collected and brought forward and that every person
was called before the said jury and examined as a witness and
no person was omitted to be called and examined who would
have been or who it could be supposed would have been a
material witness And this deponent further saith that in the
course of the inquiry the said jury proceeded to the apartment
where the body of the said Joseph Sellis had been first
discovered and was then lying and did then carefully view
examine and inspect the body of the said Joseph Sellis and all
the other circumstances deemed by them necessary to be
examined into and ascertained in any way touching the death of
the said Joseph Sellis And this deponent further saith that he
locked the doors of the apartment in which the body of the
said Joseph Sellis was found and did not permit the same to be
inspected nor the state and position of the said body to be
disturbed, from the first discovery of such body in the
aforesaid apartment until the same was inspected by the said
jury And this deponent further saith that on the conclusion of
the investigation the said jury immediately and unanimously
returned a verdict that the said Joseph Sellis voluntarily and
feloniously as a _felo de se_ murdered himself And this
deponent further saith that the proceedings upon the said
inquest were in all respects regular _except_ as to the jury
not consisting of the yeoman officers of the king's household
and that such proceedings were themselves conducted in the
most fair open and impartial manner and that the verdict so
found by the jury as aforesaid was a just true and honest
verdict and that there is not the smallest ground for
supposing or alleging any thing to the contrary
thereof[192:A]

"SAM{L}. THO{S}. ADAMS."

"_Sworn in Court the eighteenth
day of April 1832--By the Court._"

[192:A] Whatever our readers may think of this jumble of
words, we assure them it is _verbatim_ from the ORIGINAL
affidavit, which is WITHOUT POINTS, as lawyers consider such
matters unnecessary.]

"The first remark he had to submit to the court in this case
was, that a person who applied for an extraordinary remedy by
criminal information, must deny all the charges contained in
the libel. The rank of the illustrious individual in this case
made no difference with respect to that point. Now the court
would find, by the affidavit of Mr. Adams, the coroner, that
one of the main parts of this alleged libel, so far from being
contradicted, was SUBSTANTIATED,--he alluded to the fact of
there having been TWO JURIES summoned to inquire into the
circumstances relating to the death of Sellis. He did not mean
to say that that fact formed any justification for the
publication of the libel; but the fact itself was certainly
extremely important, and Mr. Adams' affidavit contained the
reasons why the mode pointed out by the act of parliament for
summoning juries in such cases had been departed from. The
fact of there having been two juries summoned was no doubt
sufficient to induce any person to believe that there was some
reason for that proceeding, which was not apparent on the face
of it. Mr. Adams had described the manner in which the jury
were summoned. He said he sent the summoning officer to Mr.
Place, man's mercer, of Charing-cross; but Mr. Place was not
the coroner for the verge of the King's Palace, and had no
authority to act. He would leave it to the court to form their
own opinion, whether or not this departure from the usual
course was or was not for the purpose of obtaining an
IMPARTIAL TRIAL. The affidavit showed that Mr. Adams had flown
in the face of the act of parliament, and the statement in the
Authentic Records, that there had been a second inquest, was
CORROBORATED by that affidavit. Mr. Adams had referred to the
act of parliament, as being that of the 23rd of Henry VIII.,
whereas it was that of the 33rd of Henry VIII.: that was no
doubt a trifling circumstance, but it tended to show the
manner in which Mr. Adams performed the duties of his office.
Mr. Adams had stated that summonses had been drawn up for
summoning TWO JURIES, but those for summoning the FIRST were
not used; but the reason he gave was most unsatisfactory. He
had no right to send to Mr. Place, and Mr. Place had no right
to act as coroner; and he (Mr. Wakefield) submitted that the
court ought to require an affidavit from Mr. Place to
corroborate what Mr. Adams had stated. He believed it would
not be difficult to show that the inquest might be quashed, as
being illegal; and it certainly might have been quashed if
Sellis had had any goods, which would have been subject to an
extent at the suit of the crown. At all events, Mr. Adams
might have been prosecuted for a breach of duty. There was
another point which, though of a trifling nature, he would
take the liberty of adverting to, in order to show that the
inquest was illegal. By the 28 Henry VIII. c. 12, the jury in
cases of this description were to be summoned from the verge
of the court. Now this applied to the court sitting at
Whitehall; but at the time in question the court was sitting
at St. James'. The summoning, therefore, was clearly not good,
and the jury, consisting of Mr. Place's junta, could not
legally hold an inquest on the body of Sellis."

Four other mistakes, also, in the coroner's affidavit were pointed out by _Mr. Place_ himself in a letter to the public.

1. Mr. Adams says, "he issued an order to summon a jury of
persons of the king's household, but that he rescinded the
order, and summoned a jury of persons who lived at a distance,
and were wholly unconnected with St. James' Palace." Mr. Adams
must by these words mean that he summoned a jury from the only
place to which his power extended; namely, "the verge of the
court,"--a small space, and from amongst the few tradesmen who
resided within its limits. _I never before heard that he had
issued any order to summon a jury of persons of the king's
household._

2. Mr. Adams says, that his "summoning officer applied to
Francis Place, of Charing Cross, for the names of persons who
were eligible to compose a jury, and that out of such persons
an impartial jury, of which Francis Place was the foreman,
assembled on the 1st of June, 1810." Mr. Adams probably speaks
from memory, and is, therefore, incorrect. He might, to be
sure, have instructed his officer to apply to me; but, if he
did, it was a STRANGE PROCEEDING. The officer was in the habit
of summoning juries within the verge, and must have known much
better than I did who were eligible. The jurors could not have
been indicated by me, since, of seventeen who formed the
inquest, five were wholly unknown to me, either by name or
person; and amongst the seven who did not attend, there were
probably others who were also unknown to me. The number of
persons liable to be summoned is so small, that it has been
sometimes difficult to constitute an inquest, and there is no
room either for choice or selection.

3. Mr. Adams says, "the depositions of the witnesses were
taken by John Read, the then chief police magistrate, and were
read to the witnesses, who were severally asked if they had
any thing to add to them." This, if left as Mr. Adams has put
it, would imply negligence on the part of an inquest which was
more than usually diligent and precise. The depositions were
read, but not one of them was taken as the evidence of a
witness. Every person who appeared as a witness was carefully
and particularly examined, and the order in which the evidence
was taken, and the words used, differ from the depositions;
the evidence is also much longer than the depositions. Both
are before me. The inquest examined seven material witnesses,
who had not made depositions before Mr. Read.

4. Mr. Adams says "the jury _immediately_ and _unanimously_
returned a verdict that the deceased, Joseph Sellis,
voluntarily and feloniously murdered himself." The jury of
seventeen persons were every one convinced that Sellis had
destroyed himself, yet two of them did not concur in the
verdict,--one, because he could not believe that a sane man
ever put an end to his own existence; and another, because he
could not satisfy himself whether or no Sellis was sane or
insane.

FRANCIS PLACE.

_Charing Cross, April 19, 1832._

The very morning this letter was published, we called on Mr. Place, who repeated the substance of it to us, adding that Sir Charles Wetherell had sent a person to him for his affidavit, which he REFUSED in a letter to the learned knight, condemning the whole proceeding of criminal information. Mr. Place read a copy of this letter to us, and promised he would publish it if ever a _sufficient reason_ presented itself. It was an admirable composition, and did credit to the liberality of the writer's opinions.

As to the affidavits of the Duke of Cumberland and Neale, they contain nothing but what other people in similar situations would say,--_they deny all knowledge of Sellis' murder, and of unnatural conduct_. Whoever thought of requiring them to _criminate themselves_? But affidavits, from interested persons are not worth much. The notorious Bishop of Clogher, for instance, exculpated himself in a criminal information by an affidavit, and the result was, the man who published the _truth_ of that _wretch_ groaned in a jail!!! Sir Charles, therefore, had no occasion to boast of the Duke of Cumberland's _charitable_ mode of proceeding against us by _criminal information_, instead of commencing an _ex-officio_ action; for in neither of these modes of procedure does the _truth_ or _falsehood_ of the charge form an object of consideration. We are, therefore, _prevented_ by the Duke of Cumberland and his adherents from proving the _truth_ of the statements we made in "The Authentic Records" _in a court of law_; but where resides the _power_ that shall rob us of the glorious LIBERTY OF THE PRESS? We are the strenuous advocates of the _right to promulgate_ TRUTH,--of the right to scrutinize public actions and public men,--of the right to expose vice, and castigate mischievous follies, even though they may be found in a _palace_! The free exercise of this invaluable privilege should always be conceded to the HISTORIAN, or where will posterity look for _impartial information_? In this character only did we publish what we believed, and _still believe_, to be the _truth_ in our former work of "The Authentic Records," and which we have considerably enlarged upon in our present undertaking, merely for the purpose of fulfilling our sacred duty, and not with the idea of slandering any man! If the Duke of Cumberland had proved our statement _false_, we would have freely acknowledged our error, as every man ought to do who seeks fairly and honorably to sustain a noble function in the purity of its existence. We know there are writers who seek, not to enlighten, but to debase; not to find amusement, but to administer poison; not to impart information, either political, moral, or literary, but to indulge in obscenity,--to rake up forgotten falsehoods, and disseminate imputed calumnies! To such, the sanctuary of private life is no longer inviolable; the feelings of the domestic circle are no longer sacred; retirement affords no protection, and virtue interposes no defence, to their sordid inroads. Upon offences like these, _we_ would invoke the fiercest penalties of the law. The interests of society demand it, and the rights of individuals claim it! But our strictures and exposures are of a widely-different character,--not if they were _false_,--but because their TRUTH must be apparent to every unbiassed individual in this mighty empire! With this conviction alone we stated them, and even Sir Charles Wetherell himself said we "seemed to have no other motive in stating them only for the purpose of stating them!" We are not disposed to comment upon this part of the learned counsel's speech, as it proves all we want to prove regarding our motives.

* * * * *

This year was not less remarkable for the king's family sorrows than for public grievances. His majesty was nearly childish and blind. The queen dreaded the ascendency of the popular voice in favour of the Princess of Wales, and the Princess Charlotte exhibited a resolute spirit, which it was feared would end to the unhappiness of the puissant queen. The Princess Amelia suffered under indescribable sorrows, both bodily and mental, which ultimately terminated her earthly career on the 2nd of November.

Many representations were made to the public of the numerous visits made to the Princess Amelia by the king, and their affecting final interview. We believe we may, with truth, say those representations were erroneous; for the king's malady was of too serious a nature to admit of any new excitement, and the peculiar regard he entertained for this daughter would not allow his hearing of her sufferings in any shape, without feeling the most acute pain.

The Prince of Wales also still pursued the most dissipated rounds of pleasure, making his very name hateful to every virtuous ear. The house of royalty, indeed, seemed divided against itself.

General historians say that the year

1811

was not marked by any very particular events of much interest, either to kings or kingdoms; yet we must differ from them in this opinion, inasmuch as, at its commencement, the Prince of Wales was appointed _Regent_, and the king's person confided to the care of the queen, conjointly with archbishops, lords, and other adherents of her majesty.

The session was opened on the 12th of February; and the speech, delivered by commission, in the name of the regent, expressed _unfeigned sorrow_ at the king's malady, by which the exercise of the royal authority had devolved upon his royal highness. It also _congratulated_ parliament and the country on the success of his majesty's arms, by land and sea, and did not forget to beg for further SUPPLIES,--_so much required_.

Let us here inquire the cause that prevented the _amiable_ regent from opening the session in person. Had his mistresses detained him too late in the morning? or had they played a _designed part_ with him, to prove their superior domination? or had he been in his most privately-retired apartments, _conversing with a few of the male favourites of his household in_ ITALIAN? If either of these do not give the true reason of his absence, we may be sure to ascertain it upon inquiry of the vintner or faro-table keeper. Here the different _degrees_ of morality, contrived by custom and keeping the people in ignorance, are well illustrated!

The queen was much at Windsor at this period, she being obliged, by etiquette, to hear the bulletins issued by the physicians concerning his majesty's health, or her _affection_ for the afflicted king would not have produced so great a _sacrifice_ on her part.

In this year, the disgraced Duke of York was restored to his former post of commander-in-chief; although, but a short period before, he was found guilty of being privy to, if not actually and personally, disposing of situations in the army, by which traffic, very large amounts had been realized by one of his royal highness' mistresses.

The money required for this year's supply amounted to _fifty-six millions_! The distress in all the manufacturing districts, notwithstanding, was of the heaviest nature; while, instead of ministers devising means to relieve the starving poor, oppressive enactments were substituted.

Let it not here be supposed that we are condemning any constitutional enactment of government. We only wish to see the interests of the poor a little more regarded, instead of laws being made solely with a view of aggrandizing the wealthy, whose eyes already stand out with fatness. Is it not evident that the men at this period in power were resolved to continue their system of corrupt administration, in despite of all remonstrance and opposition? A long course of oppression had apparently hardened them, and so far steeled their hearts against the petitions of the suffering nation, that they actually seemed to delight in increasing the heavy burdens which already preyed upon the vitals of the community.

Our readers may probably be aware that the visits of the Princess Charlotte to her mother were always "few and far between;" but at this period, the interviews became so uncertain and restricted, that they could not be satisfactory either to the mother or the daughter. Some of the attendants always remained in the apartment with them, _by the regent's command_, to witness the conversation. For some time, the princess contrived to write _privately_ to her mother, and obtained a confidential messenger to deliver her communications. This was ultimately suspected, and, after a close scrutiny, unfortunately discovered, and immediately forbidden. Her royal highness was now in her fifteenth year, in good health, and possessing much natural and mental activity. It was not very probable, therefore, that the society of FORMAL LADIES, every way disproportionate to herself in years and taste, could be very agreeable to her, more especially when she knew that these very ladies were bitter enemies to her adored mother. If the Princess Charlotte had been allowed to associate with natural and suitable companions, the very decisive feature of her character would have rendered her the brightest ornament of society; but this was not permitted, and England has great cause to mourn that she was not more valued by her father and grandmother.

The elegant and accomplished Dr. Nott was now selected for the Princess Charlotte's preceptor, and he ardently exerted himself to improve the mind of his royal pupil. The very superior _personal_, as well as mental, qualifications of the reverend gentleman, however, soon rendered him an object of _peculiar interest_ to the youthful princess. The ardency of her affections and the determinate character of her mind were well known to her royal relatives. They, therefore, viewed this new connexion with considerable uneasiness, and soon had occasion to suspect that her royal highness had manifested too much solicitude for the interest of her friend and tutor!

The Duke of York first communicated his suspicions on this subject to the regent, and the prince immediately went to Windsor (where the queen then was) to inform her majesty of his fears, and to consult what would be the most proper and effectual measures to take. Her majesty was highly incensed at the information, and very indignantly answered, "My family connexions will prove my entire ruin." Her majesty, accompanied by the prince, drove off directly for London, and the Princess Charlotte was commanded to meet her grandmother in her chamber. With her usual independent readiness, the princess obeyed the summons, and was ushered into the presence of the haughty queen.

After some considerable period of silence, her majesty began to ask what particular services Dr. Nott had rendered, or what very superior attractions he possessed, to engage the attentions of her royal highness in such an unusual degree, as was now well known to be the case. Her royal highness rose up, and in a tone of voice, not very agreeable to the queen, said, "If your majesty supposes you can subdue me as you have done my mother, the Princess of Wales, you will find yourself deceived. The Reverend Mr. Nott has shown me more attentions, and contributed more to my happiness in my gloomy seclusion, than any person ever did, except my mother, and I ought to be grateful to him, and I WILL, whether it pleases your majesty or not!" The queen saw her purpose was defeated in the attempt to intimidate her grand-daughter, and therefore, in a milder manner, said, "You must, my dear, recollect, I am anxious for your honour and happiness; you are born to occupy the highest station in the world, and I wish you to do so becoming the proud character of your royal father, who is the most distinguished prince in Europe." The queen had scarcely concluded her sentence, when her royal highness burst forth, in the most violent manner, and with an undismayed gesture, said, "Does your majesty think I am always to be under your subjection? Can I believe my royal father _so great and good_, when I have so long witnessed his unremitted unkindness to my neglected mother? Neither do I receive much attention from the prince; and my uncle of York is always preaching to me about virtue and submission, and your majesty well knows _he does not practise either_! Mr. Nott practises every amiability which he enjoins, and I esteem him exceedingly _more than I do any other gentleman_!" The queen was quite vexed at the unbending disposition manifested by the princess, and desired her to retire, and reflect upon the improper conduct of which she had been guilty, and, by humility and contrition, to make a suitable atonement.

While walking out of the room, the princess appeared in deep thought, and more tranquil; her majesty, imagining it to be the result of her own advice, said, "The Princess Charlotte will never want a friend if she abide by her grandmother's instructions, and properly maintain her dignity of birth." Her royal highness returned to her former situation before the queen, and exclaimed, "What does your majesty mean?" "I mean," replied the queen, "that you must not condescend to favour persons in _low life_ with your confidence or particular respect; they will take advantage of it, and finally make you the tool to accomplish their vile purposes." "Does your majesty apply these remarks to the Rev. Mr. Nott?" hastily replied the princess. "I do," said the queen. "Then hear me, your majesty; I glory in my regard for Mr. Nott. His virtues are above all praise, and he merits infinitely more than I have to give; but I resolve, from this moment, to give him all the worldly goods I can; and your majesty knows that, by _law_, I can make a will, though I am but little more than fifteen; and my library, jewels, and other valuables, are at my own disposal! I will now, without delay, make my will in his favour, and no earthly power shall prevent me. I am sorry your majesty prefers _vicious and wicked characters, with splendid titles_, to virtuous and amiable persons, destitute of such empty sounds!" The princess left the room, and the queen was more disturbed than before the interview.

The regent was soon made acquainted with the result, and recommended that no further notice should be taken of the matter, hoping that the princess would change her intention upon a more deliberate survey of the subject. But in this opinion, or hope, his royal highness was disappointed; for the princess that day signed a _deed_, whereby she gave _positively_ to her friend and preceptor, Dr. Nott, her library, jewels, and all private property belonging to her, and delivered this instrument into his hand, saying, "I hope you will receive this small token as a pledge of my sincere regard for your character, and high estimation of your many virtues. When I am able to give you greater testimonies of my friendship, they shall not be withheld." We need hardly say that the divine was _delighted_ at the great attention and unexpected generosity of her royal highness. He was more; for his heart was subdued and affected.

A considerable period elapsed after this circumstance, when the queen was resolved to recover the _deed_ at all hazards, as she feared, if the validity of such an instrument were ever acknowledged, royalty would suffer much in the estimation of the public. All the queen's deceptive plans, therefore, were tried; but failed. The prince, at length, offered a large amount as a remuneration, and finally persuaded the doctor to give up the deed! Of course a good living was also presented to him, on his retiring from the situation in which he had so long enjoyed the smile and favour of his royal pupil.

The Princess Charlotte was mortified, beyond expression, at this unexpected conduct on the part of her father and grandmother, and was not very sparing in her expressions of dislike towards them. Mr. Perceval (who was then premier) was requested by the prince to see her royal highness, and to suggest _any_ terms of reconciliation between the princess and the queen; but he could not succeed. "What, Sir!" said her royal highness, "would you desire me to _appear what I am not_, and to meet her majesty as if I believed her to be my sincere friend, when I know I am hated for my dear mother's sake? No, Sir! I cannot do as you desire; but I will endeavour to meet her majesty at all needful opportunities with as much gentleness of manners as I can assume. What indignities has not the queen offered to my persecuted mother? You well know, Sir, they have been unmerited, and if her majesty insults the Princess of Wales again in my presence, I shall say, 'your majesty should regulate your family affairs better, and teach lessons of virtue to your _daughters_, before you traduce the characters of other ladies!' You, Sir, are the regent's minister, and in his confidence, so I may venture to give you my candid opinion, and I do not consider that, by doing so, I exceed the bounds of propriety. Will you, therefore, oblige me by announcing to the prince, my father, that I am unalterably devoted in heart to my mother, and while I wish to be a dutiful child to my father, I must not even be that at the expense of principle and honourable sentiments. My grandfather always had my respect and pity."

It is scarcely necessary to say, that Mr. Perceval retired with evident symptoms of disappointment and chagrin. He immediately communicated the result of his interview to the regent and the queen, who declined making any further remonstrance, lest the princess should imagine they feared her, or were at all intimidated by her bold decisions.

In this year, Lord Sidmouth moved to bring in a bill to alter the "Toleration Act." His lordship stated, that this bill was calculated to serve the interests of religion, and promote the prosperity of the Church of England! But Lord Sidmouth, for once, was disappointed. The sensation excited throughout the country was of an unprecedented description; for, within forty-eight hours, no less than three hundred and thirty-six petitions against it were poured into the House of Lords! and the House was presented, on the second reading, with five hundred more! It was consequently abandoned.

The supplies voted for the public and _private_ services were FIFTY-SIX MILLIONS!

At the close of this year, the poor were perishing for want; yet the court became more splendid than ever! The ill-fated sovereign was as imbecile and as weak as an infant, and his representative a profligate ruler. What a condition for England!

War still raged at the commencement of

1812.

We will not, however, record the scenes of devastation and horror consequent from it; neither will we eulogize Lord Wellington for the _victories_ he obtained. Much rather would we shed a tear at the remembrance of the slaughtered victims to kingly or ministerial ambition. Who that believes in the immortality of the soul can think of these horrid engagements without shuddering at the immense and inexpressible accountability of the destroyer? It would be utterly impossible to give an idea of the number of WIDOWS and ORPHANS who have had to mourn the consequences of _splendid_ victories, as a _wholesale murdering of soldiers_ are denominated. How many _ducal coronets_ have been purchased at the expense of human existence! Rather should our brows never be encircled than at such an unnatural price!

On the 13th of February, the restrictions formerly in force against the prince regent terminated; and, properly speaking, it may be declared, _he then assumed the kingly power_. One hundred thousand pounds were voted for him, _professedly_ to meet the expenses attendant upon his assumption of the regal authority.

This was a moment of triumph to the queen, and the sequel will prove that her majesty took especial care to turn it to her own account. The Duke of York was fully reinstated as "Commander-in-Chief," and, therefore, ready ways and means presented themselves to her majesty. The regent engaged that the queen should have the continued sanction of his name and interest, in all the various ways she might require. Accordingly, it was soon arranged, that _her majesty should receive an additional sum of ten thousand pounds per annum_ FOR THE CARE OF HER ROYAL HUSBAND'S PERSON!

We cannot pass by this shameful insult to the nation without making an observation upon so _unnatural_ an act. If the queen were the kind and affectionate wife she had so very frequently been represented to be, could she have allowed herself to receive an immense payment for merely doing her _duty_? But a more selfish woman, and a more unfeeling wife, never disgraced humanity, as this wicked acceptance of the public money fully testifies.

An additional nine thousand pounds annually were also granted to each of the princesses, whilst places and pensions were proportionally multiplied. In the case of Colonel M'Mahon, upon whom a private secretaryship had been conferred, much very unpleasant altercation took place in the House of Commons; but _bribery_ effected that which argument proved to be _wrong_. It was a well-known fact, indeed, that this individual was nothing more than a pander to the regent's lust, to which infamous engagements and practices we shall hereafter refer.

On the 11th of May, as Mr. Perceval was entering the lobby of the House of Commons, he received a shot in his left breast, and, after staggering a few paces, fell down and expired. The assassin was tried on the 15th and executed on the 18th of the same month. He defended his conduct on the ground of having received much injury from the government, who had denied redress of his grievances, and, therefore, thought he had only done an act of justice in taking away the life of a member of so callous an administration.

Agreeably to the regent's message, fifty thousand pounds were voted for the use of Mr. Perceval's family, and two thousand annually to be paid to his widow. In case of her demise, however, the same amount was to be continued annually to such male descendant as might at that time be the heir, for the term of his life.

Let us here inquire into the services which Mr. Perceval had rendered his country to warrant ministers in this lavish expenditure upon his family, one of whom now frequently intrudes his crude notions in the House of Commons. Mr. Perceval had been for a long period the _pretended friend_ of the ill-fated Princess of Wales. "The Book" which he arranged, and which had been printed, but not published, in 1807, giving the particulars of the "Delicate Investigation," improperly so called, _was bought up_ in 1809, and as much as fifteen hundred pounds GIVEN _for a single copy_. The rancour and malice of the unprincipled enemies and calumniators of the open-hearted Princess of Wales had been much exposed by Mr. Perceval, and by his apparent generous and manly defence in her royal highness' favour, the storm materially abated. After a long period, she was again received at court, and acknowledged _innocent_ of the charges preferred by her assailants. Apartments were given to her at Kensington Palace, and it appeared very probable that her wishes would finally be completed, in the restoration of her beloved daughter to her society. But mark the ensuing change. Mr. Perceval was chosen by the regent to assist in his councils; and as no man can serve two causes at the same time, Mr. Perceval deserted the princess, and became the servile minister of the prince! Surely there must be something supernatural in the smile of royalty, when, in some instances, principle and conscience have fallen subdued before it! We know for an _incontrovertible_ fact, that but a few months before Mr. Perceval's acceptance of office, he delivered his sentiments concerning the Princess of Wales to a particular friend, in these words: "I am decidedly friendly to the Princess of Wales, because I am well satisfied and assured her royal highness is a much-injured lady. I am also convinced her mother-in-law had conceived an inveterate dislike to her before she arrived in this country, on account of the objections preferred by the prince against any connexion, except that which his royal highness had already formed. From these unhappy circumstances, I am obliged to believe, that the sufferings of her highness are unmerited on her part, and very much increased by the dictatorial behaviour of her majesty." At another interview with the same person, the following question was put, unreservedly, to Mr. Perceval: "Do you, Sir, think her royal highness has been deserving of the persecutions she has endured, by any deviation from virtue and propriety?" "I do not think the princess guilty," earnestly rejoined Mr. Perceval, "and I am fully satisfied, in my own mind, that if there had not existed ungenerous intentions on the part of the royal family, the affair would long since have sunk into silence. There is a gaiety and levity about her royal highness which is not usual with the _English_ ladies generally; but, with all the exterior frivolity of the princess, when she chooses to be lively, _I would prefer her infinitely to the professedly-modest and apparently-reserved of the sex in high life_. I believe the princess to be playful, and incautiously witty, in her deportment; but _I prefer that to secret intrigue and infamous practices_."

We leave our readers to judge whether this simple declaration was not honourable to the princess, and whether it does not correspond with every speech delivered by this gentleman in his public and private defence of her royal highness. Humanity, however, is weak, and the ingratiating attentions of the prince were too powerful to be resisted by Mr. Perceval. At his royal command, Virtue, Goodness, and Truth, assumed the garb of Vice, Infamy, and Falsehood. "Oh, blasting privilege of sovereignty! The bare scent of thy perfume spreads desolation to society; changes man, the noblest of God's works, into a monster; and the consequences of thy _unnatural existence_ will most probably produce the engine to be used for _thine own destruction_!"

Shortly after the untimely death of Mr. Perceval, Lord Liverpool was appointed first lord of the Treasury; Mr. Nicholas Vansittart, chancellor of the Exchequer; and Lord Sidmouth, secretary of state for the home department.

On the 17th of June, Mr. Vansittart brought forward his budget,--the amount of the supplies required being more than sixty-two millions. Certainly this was not a very exhilirating or agreeable prospect to the nation of the retrenchments intended by the new ministry; but notwithstanding the divisions on the subject, it finally received the sanction of parliament. Had it not been for the corrupt state of the representation, can we suppose it possible that such a sum would have been permitted to be drawn from the starving multitudes, when there existed such pecuniary distress in the manufacturing and commercial districts, unequalled in former years?

The new parliament met for business on the 30th of November, and one of its first acts was, to grant the sum of one hundred thousand pounds to Lord Wellington for the part he had taken in legal slaughter!

It may, with propriety, be submitted here, how large a grant would have been made to any man who should have presented a _plan for the comfortable and honourable maintenance of the perishing millions_? We fear any patriot, who had dared to press such a scheme would have soon been consigned to a damp and dreary dungeon, charged with disaffection to the monarch, or commanded, under _certain protection_, to set sail for another country; and, if permitted to reach the destined shore, there to be received and treated as one of the most infamous of the human race! But in these days, the _will_ of the regent, supported by the queen, was supreme law. There was not one who ventured to _insult his dignity_ by speaking to him TRUTH!--not one _dared_ to stem the torrent of his royal displeasure! It is true that, when Lord Liverpool first entered office, he once _hinted_ to his royal master the general voice of dissatisfaction which the people expressed; but the imperious regent commanded silence upon all such subjects, and desired Lord Liverpool never again to meet his highness, unless under a positive resolve not even to give the most distant hint at matters so very disagreeable to the royal ear, and which were of _no considerable importance_! His lordship proved himself wanting in fortitude to set an example to courtiers, and the principle of his mind was, consequently, bartered for the _pleasure_ of being the _slave_ of a haughty prince, who had "relinquished Justice, and abandoned Mercy!"

We must here refer to a most interesting circumstance with respect to the Princess of Wales. Her royal highness was well aware of the bonds, _still in existence_, given by the Princes George, Frederick, and William, to the firm of Perigoux and Co., of Paris, which were to the amount of several hundred thousand pounds, as we have before named; and, in an open and friendly conversation with Messrs. Whitbread and Perceval, the princess said, "The regent and the royal dukes engaged in those bonds are perfectly aware they deserve severe exposure. Their action was not only wicked, but their intention also; as every person in any way acquainted with their concerns must be sure they undertook to pay more than their means would ever permit, seeing how deeply the country was in debt, and that the revenue did not then meet the annual amount required. And," emphatically added the princess, "if the world did but _know of the_ LIVES SACRIFICED _in this affair, to preserve the good reputation of these princely brothers, I suppose royalty would not gain much in the estimation of good people by the exposure_!"

The substance of this conversation soon afterwards transpired to the Prince of Wales. There cannot be a doubt that his royal highness was _afraid_, but he resolved not to _appear so_; and from that period, he and the queen were the unalterable and bitterest enemies of the princess, both publicly and privately. So, then, for the simple expression of _truth_, to those who were already in possession of the whole affair, was an injured princess to be pursued by the hounds of destruction until her capture should be accomplished. The prince sought an immediate divorce; but as the former attempts on this ground, in the year 1806, had failed, there appeared great difficulty in the attainment of his object. The former charges and gross calumnies were declared false, and Lady Douglas had been shunned by all good and strictly-honourable society; for, except where she was received in compliment to the queen, her invitations were, indeed, but very few. The old story was again resorted to, and as Mr. Perceval was now no more, a bold attempt was resolved on, as the last resource, to obtain the desired end.

Mr. Whitbread communicated to the Princess of Wales the scheme then forming against her honour, and that the ministry were favourable to the wishes of the regent. Her royal highness stood amazed at this unexpected information. "What!" said the princess, "is not the Prince of Wales satisfied with the former abuses he has poured upon me? Is he so abandoned, being heir-apparent, as to risk his life, or engage the vengeful disposition of the nation, in the punishment due to the crimes he has committed against me? _If the generous English people were informed of half the sufferings I have endured since my arrival in this country, they would never be induced to yield obedience to the commands of a prince whose virtues are not the least balance to his_ VICES! But," continued her royal highness, "I will go down to Windsor, and request an interview with the queen." Mr. Whitbread remonstrated, and at last the princess consented to write, and ask an audience. A courier was despatched with it, and the _verbal_ reply of her majesty was, "She would see the Princess of Wales, provided her royal highness was at Windsor Castle by _eight o'clock in the evening_."

Not a moment was to be lost; the carriage was announced in a few minutes, and the princess, attended by only one lady, entered it. "Drive quickly," said her royal highness. It was only half-past seven when the princess was announced. Her royal highness was received in courtly style and unbending manner by her majesty, who, in her usual way, inquired "the cause which gives me the pleasure of a visit, so very unexpectedly, from the Princess of Wales?"

"Madam," answered her royal highness, "I am quite sensible of your surprise at my hasty request and appearance; but as I am tired of hearing the false reports in such general circulation in the court, I am resolved to ask your majesty in person, if I am likely to experience any renewal of those bitter persecutions which, in former years, were agitated to my horror and surprise. I am well aware the regent would not enter upon such a business, unless he had your majesty's sanction and countenance, as well as assistance. Is it because Mr. Perceval is dead, that your majesty thinks me so unprotected as to fall immediately a prey to my base enemies?--if so, your majesty will be in the wrong; for although Mr. Perceval forsook my interest when he engaged himself in confidence to the regent, my husband, I never shall forget the gratitude I owe him for former benefits, and his letters speak volumes of truths, which it was entirely impossible for him to name or attest, unless his mind had been duly influenced by the solid foundation upon which his opinion was fixed."

Her majesty appeared vexed and astonished; then, assuming that hauteur for which she was so remarkable, said, "I do not know, princess, that I am under any necessity to answer your question, as it seems to me improper to do so. The prince regent has an unquestionable right to choose his ministers and counsellors, and also to engage their attentions and services _for any purpose his royal highness may please_,(?) and therefore I decline to answer any interrogatory upon the subject. Your royal highness must be aware this interview and conversation is very unpleasant to me, and I hope, in future, you will not put me to the very disagreeable task of refusing you an audience, or of permitting one, under similar circumstances. I must, therefore, desire your royal highness will take some refreshment in the adjoining room, and I wish you a very good evening."

It hardly need be told that the insulted Caroline did not stay to partake of the proffered _hospitality_ of this German princess. To be injured by the son, and insulted by the mother, was as much as human feeling could endure, and the princess reached her home in a state of mind little short of distraction. On the following morning, one of the royal dukes called upon the princess, and told her, he was informed of her journey to Windsor by an express from his mother, and also stated his opinion that no measures of an unpleasant nature were in agitation. The princess hastily answered, "Do you think I was not fully satisfied of the regent's intention upon the subject before I resolved to visit the queen? You forget, prince, that I am an injured lady. You know I was brought into this country to afford money to pay my intended husband's enormous debts, and to give him means to live in the greatest splendour with his numerous mistresses! I am deprived of the society of my only child! Injurious reports are circulated and received against my honour, and I am not even permitted to exonerate myself from these vile and slanderous imputations, because I am injured by the reigning authority."

The royal duke said, "I beg, my dear cousin, you will not permit the harsh and unfeeling conduct of the queen to operate on your mind. _We all know she is revengeful in the extreme_, but she always _favours George_ in every thing; and, from her very bitter conduct to you, we are well assured George is meditating some new scheme against you. One thing I promise you: I will abide by you, even presuming any thing _disreputable is proved_; and I only beg you will give me your _private_ confidence, that I may be prepared for the worst."

Her royal highness, hastily rising, said, "Sir, if you intended to insult me, I feel it such; but if, from unguarded or not well-considered language, you have so very improperly expressed yourself, then I am not captious to place any ungenerous meaning upon your words! If my rectitude did not rise higher in the scale of truth and uprightness than that of your family, including _both sexes_, I should not have ventured the close and determinate inspection into my conduct at the will or command of my avowed foes! If it were not for my child's sake, I would _satisfy you all_ that I am privy to TRANSACTIONS which one day or another will be punished with the vengeance of heaven, and which I solemnly believe to be my duty to explain, though it may even cause 'the cloud-capp'd towers and gorgeous palaces' to fall into one general heap of ruins!"

The duke was almost petrified with the language and manner of the princess, and strongly urged the necessity of _silence_ upon any and all of the unfortunate or dishonourable transactions in which the family had been engaged, observing, "Your own welfare depends upon their's, and that is a consideration of positive importance, which I hope your royal highness will justly appreciate!"