GENERAL HISTORY. 
as their rank and station might 
appear to require. __ 
This message being taken into 
consideration on the following day 
by the House of Lords, the Earl 
of Liverpool stated, that the pro- 
vision intended to be made was 
an addition of 6000I. a year to the 
Duke’s income, and a jointure to 
the same amount to the Duchess, 
if she should be the survivor. A 
corresponding address to the Re- 
gent was agreed upon without 
opposition. 
In the House of Commons the 
subject was introduced by Lord 
‘Castlereagh, who, in the introduc- 
tory speech to his motion, said 
that he could not conceive any 
grounds on which it was likely to 
be opposed. Having then stated 
the fact of the marriage, he mov- 
ed for the grant of a provision to 
the royal pair to the amount 
above-mentioned. 
The motion was opposed by 
Mr. Whitshed Keene and Sir M. 
W. Ridley on the ground of its 
being unnecessary to lay an addi- 
tional burthen on the public for 
augmenting the income of a 
branch of the royal family already 
adequately provided for. Mr. 
Bennet took a different view of 
the subject. He said, and ap- 
pealed to the public voice for the 
truth of his assertion, that of all 
the branches of the royal family, 
the duke of Cumberland was the 
one to whom the public feeling 
would be the Jeast inclined to 
grant any pecuniary boon. He 
asked whether a marriage be- 
tween the princess of Salms and 
another member of the royal 
family had not been projected, 
and broken off in consequence of 
certain circumstances’; and whe- 
(51 
ther the Queen had not strongly 
expressed herself on the impro- 
priety of the duke of Cumber- 
land’s marriage with this prin- 
cess, after her professed union 
with the duke of Cambridge had 
been obviated. 
This attack on the persons of 
the royal pair was followed up in 
the speeches of other members, 
notwithstanding the regret, ex- 
pressed by Lord Castlereagh at the 
turn which the debate had taken. 
To the observation respecting the 
secrecy with which the marriage 
had been conducted, he affirmed 
that it had, onthe contrary, been 
attended with all possible publi- 
city, the duke and duchess having 
been married at Berlin in the pre- 
sence of the king of Prussia and 
several members of the house of 
Mecklenburg. The question being 
at length called for, the House 
divided, when there appeared for 
the motion 87, against it 70. 
The report of the} committee 
with respect to the grant to the 
duke of Cumberland being brought 
up on the 29th, and a motion 
made for reading a second time 
the resolution in its favour, Mr. 
R. Gordon rose to oppose it, and 
maintained, contrary to the asser- 
tion of the above noble lord, that 
it was the duty of the House to 
consider the question as a per- 
sonal one, and to inquire whe- 
ther the duke of Cumberland had 
rendered any services to his coun- 
try which could entitle him to the 
grant. In conclusion he moved 
to defer. the second reading to 
that day three months. A fur- 
ther debate was then entered into, 
which the ministerial party in 
vain attempted, to terminate by 
the cry of question, repeated as 
[E 2] 
