210

became incapable of governing, was convened; and, had theprecedent of Henry VI . been followed, by order of the Council,or by order of the two Houses of Parliament, the Prince ofWales should have had a commission given him under the GreatSeal, to preside in the parliament in the name of, and with theauthority of the King.

“ What was the nex-t step which was taken in the reign ofHenry VI. ? A Regent was appointed by the authority of thelegislature; that Regent was the Duke of Gloucester, theperson next in blood to the King, except the Duke of Bedford,who was not then in the kingdom ; and he was controlled in theexercise of his power by a permanent Council. Has this beendone now ? No such thing. The Prince of Wales, the personnext in blood to the King, is to be appointed Regent, but he isnot to be appointed by the legislature, and he is not to becontrolled by a Council.

“ Could I have been of opinion, My Lords, that the proceedingsduring the infancy of Henry VI . ought to have been followed bythe nation in the reign of George III. , I would have placed myfoot on the precedent I have been considering, as on a firm basis ;I would have looked my country in the face, and boldly said, —The Prince of Wales is now restrained by a Council, because ourancestors restrained by such a Council, the Regent, in the reignof Henry VI . This would have been a manly proceeding; anda strict conformity to the precedent might have been a degree ofjustification for having followed it. But to follow precedents,without a reference to the times and circumstances under whichthey were made, is to follow blind guides, which will frequentlylead us into error; and I have no difficulty in saying, that we