JET. 36.] AND THE PRINCESS CHARLOTTE. 199 



disposing of the persons of the family under age, for 

 the case of the grandchildren of George I. (so pro- 

 fligately answered by ten or twelve judges) only goes 

 to infants apparently. It is worth remarking, how- 

 ever, that these judges, who argue most strongly for 

 the prerogative, give as on$ reason the danger of the 

 royal family scattered abroad in foreign countries. 

 But as to positive law there is none, I take it, one way 

 or another. The case is one for Parliamentary inter- 

 ference, upon the broad constitutional grounds. In- 

 deed I am inclined to think a fair argument against 

 the marriage might be raised (certainly not upon pre- 

 cedent or authority, but upon analogy); for jealous 

 as our law is of the interference of aliens, is it not 

 anomalous that we should have no jealousy of a foreign 

 sovereign prince obtaining such insight as the King- 

 Consort must always possess ? However, this is a mere 

 speculation. But, at all events, the principle of it 

 should so far operate as to prevent anything more 

 than is necessary from being permitted. There will 

 be time enough when we meet to discuss this further. 

 " You will before this time have perceived by my 

 last letter that the same view of the advantage of the 

 Princess retiring for a little time has forcibly struck 

 me, which you appear to feel so strongly. On the 

 other hand, her own strong inclination to have some 

 Parliamentary discussion, by way of security for her, 

 should not be overlooked ; and quite independent of 

 her, the question should be viewed on its own merits. 

 -Yours ever, H. BROUGHAM." 



In answer to what I had written to Lord Grey re- 

 lating to the difficult situation in which the Princess 



