Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 5.djvu/332

318 debate, like the former one, did not close till half-past four in the morning, and then it was with a triumphant majority of two hundred and seventeen against one hundred and three. The bill, thus carried by such majorities through the commons, was carried up to the lords, on the 9th of December, by Fox, accompanied by a numerous body of the commoners, and it was considered as certain of passing there; but the king and his party, exasperated at this resolute conduct of the house of commons, had gone lengths to quash the bill in the lords that are rarely resorted to by the crown.

As in the lower house, so here, it was allowed to be read the first time without dividing; but it was attacked with an ominous solemnity by Thurlow, the duke of Richmond, and lord Temple, who, since his recall from the lord-lieutenancy of Ireland, had thrown himself into the opposition with peculiar vivacity. It was known that he had been frequently closeted with the king of late, and he bluntly declared the bill infamous. Thurlow went further; and, fixing one of his most solemn glances on the prince of Wales, who was sitting in the house to vote for the bill, declared that if this measure passed the crown of England would not be worth wearing; and that, if the king allowed it to become law, he would, in fact, have taken it from his head and put it on that of Mr. Fox. On the 15th, when the bill was proposed for the second reading, then the royal proceedings against it were brought at once to the day-light. The duke of Portland rose, and said, before going into the question, he was bound to notice a report which was confidently in circulation, and which, if true, vitally affected the constitution of the country. This was no less than that the king had written a note to lord Temple, stating that "his majesty would deem those who voted for the bill not only not his friends, but his enemies; and that if lord Temple could put this into still stronger language, he had full authority to do so."

The duke of Richmond read a paragraph from a newspaper in which the report was stated, naming lord Temple without any disguise. On this Temple rose, and admitted that he had given certain advice to the king, but would neither admit nor deny that it was of the kind intimated in the report. That the rumour was founded on truth, however, was immediately shown by the division. Numbers of lords who had promised ministers to vote for the bill withdrew their support; the prince of Wales declined voting; and the opposition moved and carried a resolution for adjournment till the next day, in order to hear evidence in defence of the East India Company. It was clear that the bill had received its death-blow, and would never pass the lords after this determined expression of the royal will. But it did not at all intimidate ministers. That evening, in the house of commons, Mr. Baker moved, that to report any opinion, or pretended opinion, of his majesty on any bill or other proceeding, &c., pending in either house of parliament, with a view to influence the members, was a high crime and misdemeanor, derogatory to the honour of the crown, a breach of the fundamental privileges of parliament, and subversive of the constitution; and, secondly, that the house would, on Monday next, resolve itself into a committee to consider the state of the nation.

Fox was very indignant, and made no scruple of