his loss comparatively trifling. The capture of the islands of Bourbon, and Amboyna, which transpired soon after, was of a description to raise the spirits of the nation.

But in November, 1810, the malady which had fixed upon his Majesty early in October, could no longer be concealed. After the unwelcome intelligence had been announced, preparations were made for issuing daily bulletins at St. James's and the Mansion House. From these, though nothing satisfactory, or explicit, could possibly be obtained, it was impossible the public could long remain ignorant of the nature of the King's complaint, for time produced the developement of the whole mystery.

With this state of his Majesty's mind the ministers must be presumed to have been acquainted long before it was laid before the public; and it might have justified them in proceeding to remedy the defect in the regal authority without any delay. The question naturally recurs, in what manner, and by whom it is to be remedied? A regency was obviously necessary; in whom is this to be confided? The public would naturally look up to the Prince of Wales upon such an oc

⚫casion; and it seemed to be the general opinion, both in and out of doors, that an application should be made to him to take upon himself this office. An interview, it was said, had been requested by the Minister, but this was declined by the Prince; and the purport of it was conveyed in a letter, of which the papers gave with confidence the substance, and added, that the princes of the blood had united in a remonstrance against his Royal Highness being fettered by any conditions on coming into the office. To this the ministers made a respectful reply, urging their duty to the crown, which caused them to see things in a different light; and in fact, if the occurrences took place as represented, there seems nothing preposterous in the proceeding. The interference of the princes was not called for, nor could they claim any peculiar privilege on this occasion above that of any other subject. The Prince declined with great dignity to make any reply as to the main question, till the proposition came fairly before him from the two Houses.

A difference of opinion prevailed in the Houses on the mode of filling up the va

cancy, whether by bill or by address, but it was determined to be by bill, and to follow as much as possible the precedent of 1788. The whole of this proceeding depends on a fiction. It supposes, that an act of the two Houses, sanctioned by the king's seal, affixed by a person acting under their authority, shall have the weight of an act of parliament.

The Minister, in one of his vaunting speeches, suggested that no inconvenience would follow from the adjournments, or the delay in filling up the vacancy, as in the case of issues of money or execution of orders, what inferior officer would dare to disobey the orders of the cabinet? But this high language in the end did not prove so decisive as was expected; for in a very important point the cabinet found itself mistaken, and England was seen to contain an inferior officer, who knew his duty, and would be guided by his oath, and not by the opinions of others, on what it might be their interest to exact. A large sum of money was wanted for the public service, and this is drawn by proper checks, countersigned by different officers, and whose duty it is to fol

low the rules prescribed in a matter of so great importance. The King's seal was naturally wanting; and when the order came, its informality was evident; and Mr. Lar pent, with true honour and the old English spirit, refused to let it pass in this improper manner through his department, nor could Lord Grenville, as aucitor, suffer the issue without decisive authority upon the subject. In consequence of this resistance, the Minister was obliged to come to the two Houses for their assistance, and a vote was passed by them to take off the scruples in the officers.

On the meeting of the Houses on the 30th November, a report of the physicians on the state of the King's health was brought up in both Houses, and in the lower House the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in hopes of the King's amendment, moved for the further adjournment of a fortnight, and if none appeared, that then the Houses should proceed to fill up the chasm in the royal authority. This was opposed by Mr. Whitbread on the ground of the impropriety of delay, but justified by Mr. Yorke. Mr. Ponsonby went more at large into the grounds of opposition,

2

declaring his intention of dividing the House upon it, and moving for a committee to examine the physicians. Sir F. Burdett reprobated in very apt terms the pretended delicacy of many gentlemen, who forget that delicacy must give way in great affairs of moment. Mr. Wilberforce declared, that after balancing the matter in his mind for a considerable time, he could see no harm in the adjournment, and should therefore vote for it. Some other members spoke, and on a division, there appeared for it two hundred and thirty-three, and against it one hundred and twenty-nine. In the House of Lords a similar adjournment was moved and carried. Lord Grenville winded up a speech against it with a school-boy quotation, but the Duke of Sussex made a deep impression on the House by the reasons which he gave for resisting the adjournment, namely, that it was more consistent with the constitution to adjourn only from day to day; and secondly, because he wished to ascertain in whose care the King was to be placed, and that in case of recovery the royal authority might be restored to him pure and unimpaired.

On the 13th of December the Houses met

R