5-26 L O N 
confequence was, that his royal highnefs the prince-regent 
thought (it to reitrift his daughter the princefs Charlotte 
in the frequency of her vifits to her mother, and alfo to 
refer certain documents which he had received to the in¬ 
vestigation of Some of the privy council. Her roya! high¬ 
nefs now thought fit to appeal to the British parliament 
for the final clearing of her character. She fent a letter 
to the Speaker of each houfe, with a requeft that it might 
be read immediately to the affembltd members. The 
Speaker of the houfe of lords, lord-chancellor Eldon, ne¬ 
ver took tire leaf! notice of it; but, in the houfe of com¬ 
mons, on the 2d of March, 1815, Mr. Abbott faid', that 
in the afternoon of yefterday he had received a paper, 
which purported to be a letter from the princefs of Wales : 
it not having any fignature, and being delivered to one 
of the door-keepers, he had thought ir his duty, previ¬ 
ously to laying it before the houfe, to authenticate it. 
Having fo done, he would, with their permiflion, read the 
letters. 
“Montague Houfe, Blackheath, March 2, 
“The princefs of Wales, by her own defire, as well as 
by the advice of her counfei, did yefterday tranfmit to Mr. 
Speaker a letter, which file was anxious ftiould have been 
read without delay to the houfe of commons; and the 
princefs requefts that the faid letter may be read this very 
day to the houfe of commons. The princefs of Wales in- 
clofes Mr. Speaker a duplicate of the letter alluded to.” 
“ Montague Houfe, Blackheath, March 1. 
“The princefs of Wales informs Mr. Speaker, that fiie 
lias received from the lord vifeount Sidmouth, a copy of 
a report made to his royal highnefs the prince-regent, by 
a certain number of the members of his majefty’s privy 
council, to whom it appears that his royal highnefs had 
been advifed to refer the confideration of documents and 
other evidence refpe&ing her character and conduct. The 
report is of fuch a nature, that her royal highnefs feels 
perfuaded no perfon can read it without considering it as 
conveying afperfions upon her ; and, although their vague- 
nefs. renders it impoi'fible to difcover precifely what is 
meant, or even what file has been charged with, yet, as 
the princefs feels confcious of no offence whatever, fhe 
thinks it due to herfelf, to the illultrious houfes with 
which (lie is connected by blood and by marriage, and 
to the people among whom (lie holds fo diflingnifiied 
a rank, not toacquiefce for a moment under any imputa¬ 
tions affefting her honour. The princefs of Wales has 
aiot been permitted to know upon wha.t evidence the mem¬ 
bers of the privy council proceeded, (till Lefs to be heard 
in her defence. She knew only by common rumour of 
the inquiries which they have been carrying on, until the 
refuit of thofe inquiries was communicated to her ; and 
5 he has no means now of knowing whether the members 
acted as a body to whom fhe can appeal for redrefs, at 
leafl for a hearing, or only in their individual capacities, 
as perfons Selected to make a report upon her conduct. 
The princefs is therefore compelled to throw herfelf upon 
the wifdorn and juftice of parliament, and to defire that 
the failed: investigation- may be militated of her whole 
conduit d uring the period of her refidence in this coun¬ 
try. The princefs fears no ferutiny, however drift, pro¬ 
vided die rnay.be tried by impartial judges known to the 
conftitution, and in the fair and open manner which the 
Jaw of the land preferibes. Her only defire is, that fhe 
may either be treated as innocent, or proved to be guilty. 
The princefs of Wales defires Mr. Speaker to communi¬ 
cate this letter to the houfe of commons.” 
Mr. Cochrane Johnltohe gave notice of a motion upon 
the fubjeit of this letter. It came on upon the 51h of 
March; when, indirect oppofition to the wishes of his 
majefty’s miniders, Mr. Lygon moved the exclufion of 
ft rangers.—Mr. Cochrane Johndone, then, after declaring 
ihat he fiioujd not wound the feelings of any branch of 
the royal family, and dating that he had no authority for 
his motion from the princefs of Wales, proceeded to no¬ 
tice the ccmruisfions granted by the king, in 1806, to exa- 
D 0 N. 
mine into certain allegations that had been preferred 
againft the princefs of Wales; and read the whole of the 
Report made by the commifiioners in 1806. He next pro¬ 
ceeded to date, that the paper he ftiould now read was a 
document which, he was ready to prove at the bar of the 
houfe, was dictated by lord Eldon, Mr. Perceval, and fir 
Thomas Plomer, though figned by the princefs of Wales : 
it was a letter to the king, on the 9th of October, 1806, 
as a proteft againft the report of commiftioners. juft de¬ 
tailed. The hon. member observed, that lie fully con¬ 
curred in the fer.timents it exprefied upon tiie fubjeft of 
the commifiion; and he ir.fifted that the charge againft 
the princefs before that tribunal, by fir John and lady 
Douglas, was nothing fiiort of treafon ; that, if the corn- 
miflioners had power to acquit her royal highnefs of the 
crime charged, they had equally the power to convict her. 
What was the ftateof that country in which fuch a thing 
was even poffible ? Befides, he inquired, what became of 
fir John and lady Douglas? If he were rightly informed, 
they ftill perfifted in the fame ltory ; if all they maintained 
were fo notorioufiy falfe, why w'ere they not profecuted ? 
The hon. member went on to remark, that he understood 
no proceedings of the late privy council, except the Re¬ 
port, had been tranfmitted to the princefs of Wales-, Tnis- 
was the cafe in 1806; but lie fubmitted that copies 
of ail thofe examinations Should be given to her. The 
lion, member then concluded by moving, firft, a very long 
refolution, containing nearly the whole of the report of 
the commiftioners in 1806, .with his own reafoning upon 
tire illegality of fuch a commifiion ; and terminating with 
exprefting the expediency of a new and different trial of, 
or inquiry into, the fame Subject : the Second motion was 
for a variety of papers connected with this fubjeft, from 
1806 to the prefent time. 
Lord Caftiereagh defended the commiftioners of 1806, 
and insisted that .their appointment was agreeable to hiito- 
ricai precedent. He did not think the houfe of commons 
a proper place either to try the princefs of Wales for trea¬ 
fon, or to fit in judgment upon the levity of her manners. 
The birth of the child had been traced, and proved ; its 
mother was Anne Auftin. The commiftioners had ac¬ 
quitted tiie princefs, as had his majefty’s then ministers, 
upon oath, not only of actual criminality, but of imputed 
levity ; and likewise a Subsequent administration. A pro- 
fecution had been recommended by the firft cabinet againft 
Sir John and lady Douglas, which had not been instituted $ 
net that there was any doubt of punishment being brought 
down upon their degraded heads, but to avoid bringing 
fuch fnbjecffs before the public. 
Mr. Whitbread conceived that the noble lord had not 
furnished ail the information that was neceffary regarding 
the late letter. He conceived the princefs unhappily and 
unfortunately Situated. He then adverted to her defence 
in 180.6, which had been conducted by Mr. Perceval,, 
lord Eldon, and fir T. Plomer ; the papers they had drawn 
up, arraigning the commiSfion, and the evidence of the 
wkneiies. The nobie lords (Eldon, and Caftiereagh); 
doubted the legality of the commiSfion, as appeared by 
the cabinet-minute of 1807, though that commifiion pro¬ 
nounced a verdift of acquittal; and yet they refer the 
privy council, which lately met, to the evidence taken, 
before it—thus trying the princefs a Second time, not for 
her conduit in 1807, 1808, and 180.9, or any Subsequent 
year, but in 1806. Mr. Perceval, to his dying day, al¬ 
ways publicly proclaimed the innocence of the princefs;. 
but, as for her other Surviving friends, they were mute. 
Mr. Whitbread concluded-- an animated fpeech amidSl 
Shouts of applaufe; and moved an. amendment, for the 
production of the late report of the privy council. 
Lord Caftiereagh Said, that it was not for the houfe to 
judge of the merits of the parties, under the long fepara- 
tion that had existed. No punishment had been inflicted, 
on. the princefs by the restraints-that were placed on the 
intercourfe between her royal- highnefs and the princefs 
Charlotte, When the princefs Charlotte went to Wind- 
