In the fecond page, line 54 and the following. An amendment was propofed to leave out "unlefs both Houses of Parliament fhall before the expiration of the faid twelve months exprefsly declare there dilapprobation of the faid intended marriage. The question put, that these words ftand part of the clause. The Committee divided; Ayes 196; Noes 107. An amendment propofed to leave out "or" in the fortieth lineba.odt i I Queftion put, that this word stand part of the claufe; Ayes 195, Noes 110. An amendment propofed in the fortieth line after the fecond "or" infert" to.". Question put, that this amended claufe ftand part of the Bill. The Committee divided, Ayes 179; Noes 112. Mr. Ellis reported, that the Committee had gone thro' the Bill; the report to be received on Monday morning. Adjourned till Monday. Monday, at three o' clock, Welbore Ellis, Efq; reported to the Houfe the amendments of the Committee to the Royal Marriage Bill, which were agreed to. Rofe Fuller. Efq; then made a motion to infert a claufe, that the act fhould continue in force for and during the reign of his prefent Majefty, and for three years after his demife and no longer. But after a fhort debate, which lafted till paft fix o'clock the queftion was put, that this clause be made a part of the bill, when the House dividing there appeared Ayes 132, Noes 150; fo that the claufe was rejected by a majority of only 18. As foon as the above divifion was over, feveral minority came in, being locked out at the time of the divifion, which was the means of lofing the claufe. Col. Lutterel and his father divided with the minority. The Speakers on this occafion were, Mr. Fuller, Mr. Curzon, Sir Henry Houghton, Mr. Mackworth, Mr. Ongly Mr. Burke, Mr. Dowdefwell, Col. Barre, Lord North the Attorney and Solicitor General, Mr. Dyfon, and Mr. Cooper. The House broke up on Monday night at nine o'clock having gone thro' the report And on Tuefday in the House of Commons the bill for better regulating the marriages of the Royal Family was read ead a third time, and it being propofed that the bill fhould pats, many gentlemen oppofed the principle and particular claufes of the bill; Mr. Sawbridge in particular faid it was "a bill to gratify the rancour of a monster, and the malice of a man". No gentleman in administration defended the bill but trutted to the book of Numbers. At fix of clock the Houfe divided, when there appeared to be 168 for its paffing 115 against it. Sir Jofepth Mawbey moved to correct the title of the act, and to make it co-extenfive with its contents by adding these words, "An Act for enlarging and extending the Prerogative of the Crown, and for the Encouragement of Adultery and Fornication, under the Pretence of regulating the Marriages of the Royal Family but this was objected to, and the latter words continue to form the title. The Royal Marriage Bill as now paffed our Most Faithful Commons, in the unlimited extent it was drawn by Lord Mansfield; fo that every defcendant of our now more than ever to be lamented fovereign George the fecond, is int vaffalage and flavery; and the Kings of this limited monarchy are erected into family tyrants to trample upon the laws of nature and religion. One refource of comfort still remains, the reflexion that the arbitary acts of a defpotic Henry were all repealed by his beneficent fon King Edward the Sixth. - The Royal Marriage Bill has been paffed at the expence of two Brittish Baronies, five Irish ditto, one advancement from ditto to an Irish Earldom, one Blue Ribbon, three Red ones, one baronetage, three reverfionry patent places," twenty five thousand pounds in occafional gratituities befides innumerable promifes of lottery tickets. In fo very interesting and conftitutional light in this Bill feen by our worth Reprefentatives. Debate in the House of Commons concerning Dr. Nowell's fermon. MR R. Boyle Wallingham moved, That the thanks of the houfe which had been precipitately voted to Dr. Nowell for his fermon preached on the 30th of January last, might on account of fome offenfive paffages be expunged from their votes. General Irwin feconded the motion. Sir Roger Newdigate faid, it was very extraordinary to make fuch a motion without repeating the paffages which were exceptionable; he defired the gentleman would point them out, that the house might form a judgment. Mr. Boyle Walfingham pulled the printed fermon out of his pocket; and, in his hurry not readily finding the passages he alluded alluded to, turned over feveral leaves: fome of the members, who fat near him, endeavoured to fave time by pointing out to him the paffages: this producing fome converfation and joking. Sir William Dolben rofe to order: and addreffing himself to the fpeaker, faid "Sir, it is very plain to me that the gentle man has neither heard nor read the fermon he has cenfured fince he is not able even with the affiftance of those who fit near him to find out the paffages which he has been told are exceptionable Gentlemen fhould not condemn upon hearfay; much less fhould they venture upon fuch flight authority to make serious motions in the great aflembly of the nation. But, Sir, I will fave the gentleman the trouble of finding out the paffages he is looking for; and as I was the perfon who moved the thanks for this fermon, I will inform the house how that happened. I moved the thanks of this houfe to Dr. Nowell for his fermon, at the defire of your fpeaker, who heard the fermon preached: my motion was feconded by Mr. Popham, who likewife heard it preached: both thefe gentlomen knew what they did, and are equally concerned with myfelf to defend and justify the thanks which have been given. For my own part I think that Dr. Nowell deferves for his fermon the thanks he has received; and I fhall continue to think fo till I hear better reasons urged against it than any which have been hitherto produced. The paffages objected to by an honourble gentleman (Mr. Townsend) when this matter was laft mentioned in the houfe, were the following (here Sir W. D. read the paffages which were objected to)Now, Sir, I infift upon it that thefe words do not bear the construction which has been put upon them they are proper; and well warranted both by the hiftory of the times fpoken of, and by the fervice of the church appointed for the occafion. Sir, I muft think that the complaint against this fermon proceeded from the honourable gentleman's fpleen: for, Sir, the temper with which he threw the fermon three times on the table, declaring it ought to be burned by the common hangman, convinced me, that at that moment at least his bitterness and zeal made him as defirous to burn the preacher as his fermon. : : ex Mr. Popham. "I acknowledge that I heard the fermon preached; and I expreffed to Sir W. Dolben my difapprobation of it but Sir William infifted that I muft have been miftaken, and that the fermon contained none of those offenfive preffions I had mentioned. As Sir W. was pofitive to thee very letter in the fermon, I fuppofed I had been mistaken; and yielding to his interpretation, and better memory, I confented to fecond his motion for thanks. But I have read the fermon fince it has been printed, and find I have been misled by Si William 4 (257) 1/0 beniz) 1,03 babulls.. William Dolben; for I declare, I think it the most exceptionTM able fermon. I have ever feen."nisabong zijit populag sit mid Mr. Speaker (Sir Fletcher Norton) As I have been called upon, I hope the houfe will indulge me with a few words. Ie is true I heard the fermon, but I did not approve of its highly difapproved it, and I did not conceal myofentiments I took care to mention the difguft it gave me, to a gentleman who I was fure would tell the preacher of it again. Having done fo, concluding that the offenfive paffages would be expunged and not printed, I called upon Sir W. Dolben to know if he intended to move the thanks for the fermon as a cuftom. ary compliment of courfe." 1 Mr. Townfend. "The honourable gentleman who made the motion of thanks, and has endeavoured to justify them by commending the offenfive paffages of the fermon in question, has very improperly attributed my complaint to fpleen and want of temper. It proceeded from a very different motive. From the moft mature and cool confideration and enquiry in the caules of the civil wars and the hiftory of Charles's time, I am of opi nion that the perfons who first took up arms against that prince were not only blameless, but praife worthy. Had it been my misfortune to have lived when a neceffity like that called for it, I fhould not have hefitated to have taken arms likewife But because I do not with to fee fuch days, I am for cenfuring the arbitrary doctrines contained in this fermon, being thoroughly perfuaded that the encouragement of Mainwaring, Sibthorp and Montague, who preached then the fame doctrines which Dr. Nowell has now revived, was more pernicious to Charles the first, than the efforts of all his perfonal enemies if he had any. Mr. Frederick Montague. "Sir, the reproach which has juft been caft upon the name of Montague, is not the occafion of of my rifing at this time, I feel it impoffibl that I should have the leaft relation to fuch a man; and if I had I fhould not attempt to defend his writings which I abhor. A different confideration has inclined me to fpeak on this occafion: the Clergy of this Country are in a very difagreeable fituation when they are obliged to preach on the 30th of January I remember when a Clergyman was refufed the thanks of this Houle becaufe he preached in the oppofite extreme to Dr. Nowell. And now we are going to expunge the thanks to this Gentleman for a reafon directly contrary to that which caufed the refufal, to the other. What can the Clergy do? If they follow the fervice of the Church for that day, they must be condemned by reafon, truth and juftice if they contradict the terms and fpirit of the fervice they they will not find themfelves without reproach and cenfare.. on that account. The confciences of the Clergy and the understanding of their congregations, and the rights of humanity ought to be releived from this infult. I therefore give notice, that with the leave of this Houfe, I intend to bring in a bill to abolish that ftature by which our Church fervice is apointed for the 30th of January." Sir Roger Newdigate with extreme violence and heat juftified both the Preacher and Charles the Firft. He read fome extracts from a Sermon by Fleetwood; in which he preached the fome doctrine as Dr Nowell; and yet Sir Roger obferved that Fleetwood was not a Tory, but was perfecuted afterwards by Queen Anne's Tory Adminiftration. Sir Roger however acknowledged that he could not defend every act or particular part of the conduct of Charles; he faid he muft own he had one fault, which was complying too eafily with the wishes of his people: and he inftanced the execution of Strafford whofe warrant Charles figned altho' he knew him innocent, Sir Roger faid that no hiftorian of any credit or abilities had ever attempted to defend the men who oppofed Charles; one hiftorian indeed had endeavoured to do it but no regard was paid to that Hiftory by any perfon, as the author was known to entertain notions and profefs prinples diametrically oppofite to our Religion and Goverment. Sir Roger dwelt much on the princely virtues of the blefled Martys. he exalted his learning, piety &c. &c. and concluded by declaring that in his opinion Charles the First as a King and a Gentleman poffeffed virtues which were worthy of the imitation of any perfon in any age or Country. Sir. Roger moved then for the order of the day. Lord Folkftone faid, hehad a perfonal knowledge of Dr. Nowell, and a great regard for him; that he could not fuppofe the doctor had any bad intention, nor indeed did it appear that his expreffions went beyond thofe of the fervice which is appointed by law to be read on that day. His Lordship owned that the fervice of the day ought not to be the guide of any Englithman's doctrine; because the service was drawn up by Father Peters, the confeffor of James the fecond. Captain Phipps moved for the journals of the houfe to be read where Lenthall wes reprehended for faying in the house of commons, that they who firft drew the fword in the late rebellion were as guilty as thofe who cut off the king's head. This debate ended with reading the journal. The queftion being put for the order of the day, the fpeaker impartialty declared that the Ayes had it; but upon a divifion it appeared that the No's had it by 151 to 41. Mr |