FORE:Clinton, having now united his forces at New York, directed his attention to the approach of the fleet of D'Estaing. This had sailed for the Delaware, expecting to find Lord Howe there; but, finding that he had sailed for New York, it followed him, and arrived there six days after him. The fleet of D'Estaing consisted of twelve sail-of-the-line and six frigates. Howe had only ten sail-of-the-line, and some of them of only forty or fifty guns, and a few frigates. Besides, D'Estaing had heavier metal, and ships in much better condition, for those of Howe were old and out of repair, and their crews were considerably deficient. Altogether, D'Estaing had eight hundred and fifty-four guns; Howe, only six hundred and fourteen. From D'Estaing's superiority of force it was quite expected that he would attack Howe; but he was dissuaded by the pilots from entering the harbour, and lay outside eleven days, during which time he landed the Ambassador. Lord Howe showed much spirit in preparing for an encounter, though he was daily in expectation of Admiral Byron with some additional ships, the Admiral coming to supersede him. He put his ships in the best order he could, and the English seamen hurried in from all quarters to man his vessels. A thousand volunteers came from the transports, and masters and mates of merchantmen offered their services. Just, however, when it was expected that D'Estaing would avail himself of the tide, on the 22nd of July, to enter the harbour, he sailed away for Rhode Island, and up the Newport river. In a few days Howe sailed in quest of D'Estaing. They found D'Estaing joined by Lafayette with two thousand American troops, and by General Sullivan with ten thousand more, and D'Estaing proposed to land four thousand from his fleet. The English garrison in Newport amounted to only five thousand men. But here a contest arose between D'Estaing and Sullivan for the supreme command, and this was not abated till Howe with his fleet hove in sight. Then D'Estaing stood out to sea, in spite of the remonstrances of Sullivan, Greene, and the other American officers. Lord Howe endeavoured to bring him to action, at the same time man?uvring to obtain the weather-gauge of him. In these mutual endeavours to obtain the advantage of the wind, the two fleets stood away quite out of sight of Rhode Island, and Sullivan commenced in their absence the siege of Newport. Howe, at length, seeing that he could not obtain the weather-gauge, determined to attack the French to leeward, but at this moment a terrible storm arose, and completely parted the hostile fleets, doing both of them great damage. D'Estaing returned into the harbour of Newport, but only to inform the Americans that he was too much damaged to remain, but must make for Boston to refit. Sullivan and the other officers remonstrated vehemently against his departure; but in vain. Scarcely had D'Estaing disappeared, when Sir Henry Clinton himself, leading four thousand men, arrived in Rhode Island, and Sullivan crossed to the mainland in haste. He blamed the French for the failure of the enterprise.On the 20th of January a Bill was introduced to the House of Lords for the naturalisation of the Prince. By this Act, which passed the next day through the House of Commons, the Prince was declared already exempt, by an Act passed in the sixth year of George IV., from the obligations that had previously bound all persons to receive the Lord's Supper within one month before exhibition of a Bill for their naturalisation. And the Bill was permitted to be read the second time without his having taken the oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, as required by an Act passed in the first year of George I. But on the second reading in the House of Lords the Duke of Wellington objected that it was not merely a Bill[468] for naturalising the Prince, but that it also contained a clause which would enable him, "during the term of his natural life, to take precedence in rank after her Majesty in Parliament, and elsewhere as her Majesty might think fit and proper," any law, statute, or custom to the contrary notwithstanding. The Duke of Wellington stated that as the title of the Bill said nothing about precedence, the House had not received due notice of its contents; he therefore moved the adjournment of the debate. Lord Melbourne remarked that the omission was purely accidental and, in his opinion, of no importance; at the same time he admitted that this Bill did differ in form from other similar Bills, as it gave the Queen power to bestow on Prince Albert a higher rank than was assigned to Prince George of Denmark, or to Prince Leopold. But the reason for the difference was to be found in the relative situation of the parties. Lord Brougham, however, pointed out a practical difficulty that might possibly arise. According to the proposed arrangement, if the Queen should die before there was any issue from the marriage, the King of Hanover would reign in this country, and his son would be Prince of Wales. Prince Albert would thus be placed in the anomalous position of a foreign naturalised Prince, the husband of a deceased Queen, with a higher rank than the Prince of Wales. Lord Londonderry decidedly objected to giving a foreign Prince precedence over the Blood Royal. In consequence of this difference of opinion the debate was adjourned till the following week, when the Lord Chancellor stated that he would propose that power should be given to the Crown to allow the Prince to take precedence next after any Heir Apparent to the Throne. Subsequently, however, Lord Melbourne expressed himself so anxious that it should pass with all possible expedition, that he would leave out everything about precedence, and make it a simple Naturalisation Bill, in which shape it immediately passed.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Vivamus sagittis egestas mauris ut vehicula. Cras viverra ac orci ac aliquam. Nulla eget condimentum mauris, eget tincidunt est.
FORE:The purport of these Cabinet Councils was generally understood by the country; but as yet only the most sanguine anticipated the proposal of Sir Robert Peel, when the Times newspaper on the 4th of December announced, apparently from secret information, that it was the intention of the Government to repeal the Corn Laws, and to call Parliament together in January for that purpose. The assertion was received with incredulity, not only by the Opposition, but by the Ministerial journals. One organ of the Tory party placarded its office with a bill, headed "Atrocious fabrication of the Times!" But the latter journal, on the following day, declared that it "adhered to its original announcement." Day by day the controversy raged in the newspapers; but the news was too probable not to gain credence. The result was a conviction throughout the country that the Times had really obtained information of the Government's intentions; but as a matter of fact its information was incorrect, as the Cabinet, far from intending to repeal the Corn Laws, had made up its mind to retire.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Vivamus sagittis egestas mauris ut vehicula. Cras viverra ac orci ac aliquam. Nulla eget condimentum mauris, eget tincidunt est.