too much for the agitated monarch, already weakened by many severe trials; and the indisposition, both bodily and mental, which ensued, involved the nation in sorrow, and rendered it necessary that Parliament should turn its attention. to the subject of a regency.

We shall enter, minutely and fully, into the history of this most interesting and important event, whether we regard it in its origin, nature, or consequences, in order that it may be transmitted to posterity with all that regularity and precision which so momentous a circumstance deserves and demands.

At the close of the year 1810, it was generally known that the exercise of the royal functions was suspended, by a recurrence of that malady with which his Majesty had been afflicted in 1788.

Although his Majesty had prorogued the parliament to the 1st day of November, 1810, it was understood and well known that this was not the period intended for the commencement of business, but that a further prorogation was determined on, of which, indeed, notice had been given in the Gazette. This, however, could only be effected by a commission signed by the King; and when the moment arrived, his Majesty was so much indisposed as to be unable to affix his signature; accordingly, exertions were made to obtain as large an attendance as possible in both houses. On the meeting of the House of Lords, the Lord Chancellor stated, with great concern, that the personal indisposition of his Majesty was such at the present time, that he did not think it his duty, under the circumstances, to proffer to his Sovereign a commission to receive the sign manual; and he concluded by moving that the House, at its rising, should adjourn to the 15th day of November.

The House of Commons was, on the same day, placed in the unprecedented situation of proceeding to business, although an official notice of a prorogation had been given; but no commission having been signed for that purpose, the Speaker was obliged to take the chair. A similar motion for adjournment to that made in the House of Lords was made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and, being seconded by Mr. Sheridan, the motion was carried.

On the 15th the two Houses met, pursuant to the adjournment, when a motion was made for a further adjournment to the 29th, which motion, after some slight objections from the Opposition, was ultimately carried. On the question of the second adjournment, Mr. Sheridan, however, to the utter surprise of his own party, turned round and voted with the majority. Mr. Sheridan was known at that time to be the organ of the Prince in the House, and deductions were drawn from the conduct of Sheridan, in regard to the temper and views of the Prince with respect to the regency. As an inte

resting document, which will prepare our readers for the sequel of this important business, we transcribe a letter written at this period by Sheridan to the Prince of Wales; and it having cost us much trouble to obtain, we regret that we have been anticipated in the publication of it by the biographer of Sheridan.

'SIR,

6

I felt infinite satisfaction when I was apprized that your Royal Highness had been far from disapproving the line of conduct I had presumed to pursue on the last question of adjournment in the House of Commons. Indeed, I never had a moment's doubt but that your Royal Highness would give me credit that I was actuated in that, as I shall be on every other occasion through my existence, by no possible motive but the most unmixed and sincere desire to look to your Royal Highness' honour and true interest as the objects of my political life-directed, as I am sure your efforts will ever be, to the essential interests of the country and the constitution. To this line of conduct I am prompted by every motive of personal gratitude, and confirmed by every opportunity which peculiar circumstances and long experience have afforded me, of judging of your heart and understanding, to the superior excellence of which (beyond all, I believe, that ever stood in your rank and high relation to society) I fear not to advance my humble testimony*, because I

* The passage printed in Italics is particularly deserving of notice, as, ere long, it will be seen that the same individual who now boasted of the superior excellence of the royal heart was left to languish out a miserable existence, surrounded by duns and bailiffs, forgotten and neglected by those whom he had served to the destruction of his own character and resources. If ever there was a life which ought to be held forth as a warning voice to those who rely on the smiles and protestations of royalty, that life is the life of Sheridan. A drop of oil, it is true, was sent when the lamp was nearly out; but the lateness of the gift, added to its

scruple not to say for myself that I am no flatterer, and that I never found that to become one was the road to your real regard.

'I state thus much, because it has been under the influence of these feelings that I have not felt myself warranted (without any previous communication with your Royal Highness) to follow implicitly the dictates of others, in whom, however they may be my superiors in many qualities, I subscribe to no superiority as to devoted attachment and duteous affection to your Royal Highness, nor in that practical knowledge of the public mind and character upon which alone must be built that popular and personal estimation of your Royal Highness, so necessary to your future happiness and glory, and to the prosperity of the nation you are destined to govern over.

'On these grounds I saw no policy, no consistency, in unnecessarily giving a general sanction to the examination of the physicians before the council, and then attempting, on the question of adjournment, to hold that examination as nought. On these grounds I have ventured to doubt the wisdom or propriety of any endeavour (if any such endeavour has been made) to induce your Royal Highness, during so critical a moment, to stir an inch from the strong reserved post you had chosen, or give the slightest public demonstration of any future intended political preferences; convinced as I was, that the rule of conduct you had prescribed to yourself was precisely that which was gaining you the general heart, and rendering it impracticable for any quarter to succeed in annexing unworthy conditions to that most difficult situation which you are probably so soon to be called on to accept.

I may, Sir, have been guilty of error of judgment in both these respects, differing, as I fear I have done, from those whom I am bound so highly to respect; but, at the same time, I deem it no presumption to say, that, until better instructed, I feel a strong confidence in the justness of my own view on this subject; and simply because of this-I am sure that the decisions of that judgment, be they sound or mistaken, have not, at least, been rashly taken but were founded on deliberate zeal for your service and glory, unmixed, I will confidently say, with any one selfish object or political purpose of my own.'

up,

On the meeting of parliament, on the 29th, Lord Camden

scantiness, only tended to wound still deeper the feelings of the dying man, and to lacerate the heartstrings, which a more bountiful donation would have kept from breaking.

stated, that examinations had taken place before his Majesty's Privy Council, of the physicians who attended the royal person, and the result of these examinations was, that it was the unanimous opinion of all his Majesty's physicians, that though his Majesty was incapable of coming to parliament, or of attending to public business, yet they entertained the most confident hopes of his recovery, but were unable to state at what period he might become convalescent.

This statement was followed by a motion for the adjournment of the House to the 13th of December, which met with considerable opposition, but was ultimately carried. On this occasion the Lord Chancellor made the following most extraordinary remarks, which although, strictly speaking, they may be considered as truly constitutional, yet they tended, in a great degree, to open the eyes of the Prince's party to the ulterior views of ministers as connected with the establishment of a regency, and to the conditions which were to be annexed to it. The Prince of Wales, according to the showing of the Lord Chancellor, was not to be invested with any powers arising from the incompetency of the sovereign, but merely as an individual, acting under the controul and responsibility of the ministers.

It was in reply to some strong remarks made by Lord Grenville, on the unconstitutional power of ministers, acting independently of the crown, that the Lord Chancellor said that, according to the spirit of our laws, the Sovereign is King in infancy, in age, in decrepitude. If you take away what the law gives him, you change the name and authority of the King, by the sanction and authority of which name you can alone rightly act. The King's political capacity, he would again repeat, continues the same in infancy, in sickness, in age, and in decrepitude. No subject can be considered in the same light. God forbid that the two Houses should declare the King incompetent. Much might be said on a question of this nature, but it never was to be allowed that such a power rested in the Privy Council.

By this memorable exposition of the powers of the Sovereign the Privy Council, at whose head the King is supposed to sit person, and from whose decisions issue some of the most

in

important enactments by which the jurisprudence of the country is supported; this same august body, second to none in the empire, were told that they had no power to declare the incompetency of the individual who presided at their head; and that they could act with the same legality and authority, in the event of such incompetency, as if no such calamity had befallen the individual, and that no suspension whatever` existed to the exercise of the royal functions. It was a startling doctrine, and made that lively sensation (as our neighbours the French would call it) at Carlton House, which, in the end, threw many obstacles in the adjustment of those points which the extraordinary case required.

The question of a regency in an hereditary monarchical government, is at at all times a dangerous subject for the statesman to handle. It carries with it the pre-supposition, that a King, in the abstract sense, can be represented as well by the log as by the stork which Jupiter sent to the frogs; or that it is only setting up one person in the place of another, and calling him a King—and a King he is. Some strong insinuations of this kind were broached in the House of Commons in the various debates on the regency question, particularly by Mr. Whitbread, who, being in opposition to the measures of ministers, unequivocally declared, that the acts of ministers went to show, that the affairs of the country could be equally well managed, although the monarch was in a state of positive incompetency.

Before, however, we enter upon the immediate question of the regency, as connected with the proceedings in parliament, it may not be improper, nor without its use, for the better recollection and understanding of the subject in-all its parts and relations, to state shortly the principles on which those who brought forward and carried the restrictions on the Regent, and those who opposed them, severally founded and supported their doctrines and opinions.

The minister and his adherents set out with this short and simple maxim, that a regent is not a king; that in every respect and point of view, whether considered relatively to common sense, to justice, or to the fundamental and essential doctrines of the British constitution, each condition is, and