124 
pelled to give a very short and 
mperfect account of the subsequent 
proceedings of that assembly. We 
understand, however, that the 
whole of the first day was consum.- 
ed in discussions of order. The 
lord chancellor, in moving that the 
house should go into’ a committee 
on the impeachment, took occasion 
to express, in very strong language, 
his disapprobation of the ancient 
and established practice in such 
cases, of the house coming to a 
previous decision in the chamber of 
parliament, and exacted a sort of 
pledge, that no yoteshould be taken 
on the question, whether the com- 
mons had made good any of their 
charges, until the house went down 
to Westminstcr-hall. He announced 
at the same time, his intention of 
moving in the committee, that some 
of the articles should be divided, 
and discoursed at some length on 
the defective form in which they had 
been prepared by the commons. 
Whereupon some of the lords en- 
tered into a vindication of the an- 
cient practice of the*house in cases 
of impeachment, and argued, that 
the house could not, consistently 
with its forms, discuss the articles 
ef impeachment, unless there was 
a question before it, and_ that, 
whether the house should divide on 
that question, must depend not on 
any gencral resolution of the whole 
house, but on the individua] members 
present, any one of whom might in- 
_Sist on taking the sense of the house 
on the question which it had enter- 
tained. A long and warm conyersa- 
tion followed, in which the ehief 
speakers onthe oneside were the lord 
chancellor, lord Ellenborough, and 
lord Radnor, and on the other side 
_ lord Laudérdale and lord Holland. 
At length the house went into a 
ANNUAL’ REGISTER, 
1806. 
committee to take into consideration 
the first article of impeachment, © 
and being afterwards resumed, ad- 
journed till the 30th. ‘ 
On that day the former subjeet 
of discussion was. revived by lord 
Auckland, who rising before the 
chairman had.taken the chair, made 
a speech of some length . enforcing 
the propriety of a previous discus- 
sion and vote, and ended by moy- 
ing, ** That the proceedings on Mr. 
Hastings’s trial, the report of the 
committee, and questions put to 
the lords in Westminster-hall 
should be printed.” Lord El- 
Jenborough and lord Erskine replied 
to lord Auckland—but after some 
debate his motion was agreed .to. 
The house then resolved itself into 
a committee, in which, after a long 
debate on the most expedient mode 
of framing a question, which would 
bring to a fair issue the pro. 
priety of dividing the first article 
of impeachment, as proposed by 
the lord Chancellor and lord El. 
lenborough—and after a full dis- 
cussion of the question itself, an 
amendment proposing a division of 
the article, was negatived by a ma- 
jority of 72 to 53. The chief | 
speakers for the amendment were 
lord Erskine and lord Ellen- 
borough ; against it, lord Eldon 
and lord Stanhope. It was then 
resolved, that it is the opinion of 
this committee, that the first ques- 
tion put to the lords in Westmin- 
ster-hall shall be, ‘‘ Is Henry vis- 
count Melville guilty of the high 
crimes and misdemeayours charged 
upon him in the first article of the 
impeachment, or not guilty ??"-- 
Then the like motions were made 
on the other nine articles, and se. 
verally agreed to, 
The house being again, on ‘he 
