L O N 
army fpoke fo highly in his favour, that, as it was ex¬ 
pected, his royal brother appointed him again to the 
place which he had fpontaneoufly religned. It was natu¬ 
ral however to expeft, that thofe members in the houfe 
of commons who had been molt (trenuous in bringing 
charges againft him fhould feel the aft of his reftoration 
as an exertion of power conveying an imputation on their 
conduCt on that occafion, as well as a ftignia'on the houfe 
itfelf. Under this impreffion, lord Milton, one of the 
members for Yorkfhire, rofe on the 6th of June, to fubmit 
a motion to the houfe upon that fubjeft. He obferved, that, 
although'the duke had been abfolved from the charge of 
perfonal corruption and connivance, his royal highnefs 
certainly appeared to have been guilty of that criminal 
negligence, bordering upon connivance, which rendered 
it impoflible for him to continue in office; and there was 
every reafon to believe that the houfe was then prepared 
to have come to a refolution which.muft have led to the 
refignation of his royal highnefs; but it was avoided by 
Hating, that, as the duke had religned, it was unneceffary 
to proceed any further. This might fairly be underllood 
as an ad ini If on, that, if lie had not religned, the houfe 
would have found it neceflary to adopt fome other courfe 
of proceeding; and it was upon this ground that he founded 
the motion wdiich he was about to fubmit to their confi¬ 
deration. His object was to maintain the dignity of that 
houfe, which appeared to him not llightly queftioned in 
the re-appointment of his royal highnefs. It might be 
objected, that, though the houfe did at that period with 
for his refignation, it did not intend to exclude him from 
all chance of return to office, and that the punifhment he 
had already undergone might be confidered as fully com- 
menfurate to his offence ; but, in the firft place, depriva¬ 
tion ought not of itfelf to be confidered as a punifhment ; 
and, if it were, that did not affesfl the fa<ft, that his royal 
highnefs had been declared by that houfe unfit for the of¬ 
fice in queftion. Now, if he were unfit for the lituation 
of commander-in-chief in the year 1809, it did not ap¬ 
pear how he could be fit for it in 1811. He had voted in. 
the inquiry upon evidence. If nothing had been done to 
fu'overt that evidence, with what face did the prefent mi- 
nifters come to juftify their recommendation of the duke' 
of York to an office the adminiftration of which he had 
difgraced ? Would it be contended that the opinion of 
that houfe had not caufed his royal highnefs’s refignation ? 
If that had not, he fliould be glad,to know what had ; 
and, if it had caufed it, let the minifters Hate upon what 
ground they had advifed his reftoration. He fhould not 
enter into the queftion, whether perfons of his exalted 
rank were the fitted: to be felected for offices of Inch great- 
importance and high refponfibility ; but lie challenged 
the minifters to fay whether they would have recommend¬ 
ed a perfon in all refpeils circumftanced as the duke of 
York was, his rank excepted. After various other obfer- 
vations to the fame purpofa, the noble lord concluded 
with moving the following refolution: “That, upon a 
deliberate confideration of the recent circumfiances under, 
which his royal highnefs the duke of York retired from 
the command of the army in March 1809, appears to 
this houfe, that it has been highly improper and inde¬ 
corous in the advifexs of the prince-regent to have re¬ 
commended to his royal highnefs the re-appointment of 
the duke of York to the office of commander-in-chief. ” 
The Chancellor of the Exchequer began his fpeech by 
acknowledging in the fulled: manner the refponfibility 
of his majefty’s fervants for recommending the meafure 
in queftion. He then ftated the circumltances which led 
to the re-appointment. The gallant officer, he faid, who 
had lately filled the lituation of commander-in-chief, after 
fpending near half a century in the ferviceof his country, 
had contracted an ilinefs which obliged him to apply for li¬ 
berty to retire from the arduous duties of his office; and 
there was not the flighted: hefitation in his mind and that of 
his colleagues whom they fliould recommend for fupplying 
the vacancy. The eminent icryices rendered to the army 
D O N. &5f 
by the duke of York, which were universally acknowledged, 
left them no choice. But the noble lord argued as if his 
niajefty’s minifters could not conltitucionally recommend 
his royal highnefs to that appointment. YVas, however,- 
the refolution of the houfe on which he laid fo much ffrefa 
meant to be eternal in its operation ? The right honour¬ 
able member then went into an examination of the refo- 
lutions; and he contended, that the amendment propofed 
by Mr. Bathurft, which had been alluded to, was not in¬ 
tended to have had the effeCt of removing the duke from 
office. [To this Mr. B. afiented.] He denied that the 
words of the refolution, (fating that the duke’s refignation 
rendered further proceedings unneceffary, implied that it 
was only on that account unneceffary to vote a cenfure 
upon him, but merely that it was unneceffary to go farther 
into the confideration of the minutes of evidence. The 
houfe therefore had pledged itfelf to nothing fubfequentj 
and there was not the mod: diftant idea of le.ffening its 
dignity by the advice given to the prince-regent for the 
nomination of the duke of York as the fitteft perfon to 
fill the vacancy which had occurred. 
It would be of little life to give even a fketch of the 
arguments ufe.d in the remainder of this debate; which, 
in general, were only recapitulations of thofe above llated. 
The fupporters of the motion chiefly infilled upon the 
fenfe of.the houfe refpefting his royal highnefs’s conduCt, 
as implied by the refolution entered on its journals, con- 
ftequent upon his refignation. They alfo laboured to (how,, 
that there was a mafs of undeniable evidence fufficient 
to eftablifh fuch inftances of mifeonduft as ought to have 
precluded his reftoration to office. The oppolers, on the 
other hand, dwelt upon the fervices he had rendered by im¬ 
proving the military difeipline, upon the general wiih of 
the army for his re-appointment, upon the feverity of the 
punifiiment.be had undergone, and upon the methods 
that had been employed to inflame the public mind to his 
prejudice. Among the latter fpeakers were fome who 
liad originally taken part again ft him ; and who did not he- 
fitate to avow, either that they had formerly been carried 
away with the current of public opinion, or that they con¬ 
fidered the cafe as it now flood in a different point of 
view. It is unneceffary here to inquire into the various 
procefies of conviction that might have operated on dif¬ 
ferent minds. That a great change had been wrought in 
the fentiments of this afl'embly was apparent on the divio- 
fion; when the votes for the motion were 47, againff it 
296; majority 249. 
On the 24th of June, a converfation (for there was no 
debate) took place in the houfe of lords on a topic rather 
general than political. It related to the dodtrine of pri¬ 
vate affallination, and was introduced in the following 
manner: Earl Grey rofe to call the attention of their 
lordftiips to an article which had appeared in a French 
newfpaper, publifhed in London, in which the horrible 
doctrine of aflaffination was preached up and recommend¬ 
ed in the rnoft difeCt terms. The article he ailuded to 
purported to be ail extradl from fome Englifh publica¬ 
tion ; and forry was he to fuppofe that there was any Eng- 
lifliman who had a heart to conceive, or a hand to write, 
fuch a fentence as that which he referred to. As this pa¬ 
per might have fome circulation upon, the continent, and 
might perhaps excite the idea that ruch infamous doflrmes 
might receive countenance in this country, he felt it ne« 
ceflary that his majefty’s government fhould have an op¬ 
portunity of exprefling their abhorrence of fuch lenti- 
nients ; for, were they to circulate in fuch a fhape on tne 
continent without being exprei’sly declaimed by their 
lordfliips and by the government, they might produce ef¬ 
fects molt injurious to the character, and difaitrous to the 
interefts, of the country. The article in queftion pu ■- 
ported to be an extract from a work which recommended 
an Anti-Corfican Affociaticm. Here the noble earl read 
an extraft from it, the fubffance of which was, “ that, 
however reprehenftble might be the general principle,of 
cutting off your enemy by pvi’/ats means, yet it was pof- 
fful©. 
