sty's person or
household, which were to be left entirely to the guardianship of the
queen. Pitt proposed that the queen should be assisted in the discharge
of her duties by a council, which council were to have no power of
control, but only that of giving advice, and satisfying themselves daily
of the state of the king's health. Pitt also proposed that they, the
said council, or some others, should be appointed to manage the real
and personal estate of the king, being bound at the same time not
to alienate or dispose or any part of it, except by lease. These
propositions were warmly advocated by Pitt and others on the same side
of the house, and as warmly opposed by members on the opposite benches.
Mr. Powys, after condemning the whole of Pitt's plan, as tending to
mutilate the constitutional authority, and after asserting that the
heir-apparent ought to be invested with the full powers and prerogatives
of the crown, moved an amendment to the first resolution, by which his
royal highness would be appointed regent, "subject to such limitations
and exceptions as might be provided." This motion was seconded by Lord
North, who endeavoured to show that the bestowing of the whole power and
patronage of the household upon the queen, would be setting up a party
at court in opposition to the administration of the regent. Sheridan
followed on the same side, and was both witty and severe upon the
abstraction of the household patronage from the regency, and endeavoured
to show that Pitt wanted it for himself, when he could no longer hold
his present high office! Colonel Fullarton also argued against the
mutilation of the executive government, and not only attacked Pitt, but
the queen herself. Pitt's resolutions, however, were ably defended by
the new speaker, Grenville, and on a division the amendment moved by
Powys was lost by a majority of two hundred and twenty-seven against one
hundred and fifty-four. All the resolutions were now carried except
the last, and this, which referred to the care of the king's person
and household, was debated on the 19th of January, with, if possible,
increased animosity. Two amendments were moved--one by Lord North and
the other by Mr. Bouverie--but both were negatived by considerable
majorities, and on the 22nd the resolutions were taken into
consideration by the lords. The contest in the lords was even more
obstinate than it had been in the commons, but an amendment, moved by
Lord Sandwich, for l