138
considered that they were authorized to prove the truth, by exposure of Mr Norton's inaccuracies. The letters so given up, have been in my possession for a period varying from ten to sixteen years; and I have never made any use of them till these proceedings in the County Court. Will others, reading these pages, be able to say as much? Will they be able to say, they bore for sixteen years every species of misconstruction, vexation, and slander, with such proof in their hands—and never used it? Is there any lawyer, clergyman, officer, political or mercantile man, into whose hands chance may throw these pages, who would bear loss of character as patiently? Why should /bear it only because I am a woman? In what way is it more advantageous to public morality, that the False Accuser should be shielded by perpetual suppression of evidence; and shame be left to rest, not only on my name, but on the name of a distinguished nobleman, a true servant of the Crown, and Prime Minister of a great and free country? Mr Norton comes forward (in his capacity of Magistrate), and he accuses this deceased Minister, not only of private immorality as a man, but of the meanest malversation in his public office. He accuses Lord Melbourne, in so many words—in the Times newspaper—of giving one of the subordinate situations in the Treasury, "as a reward" for the subtraction from Mr Norton's house, of letters written to Mr Norton's wife! Is this to be borne, from any man; least of all. from a man who himself holds an office by Lord Melbourne's appointment?
At the beginning of this Session, idle rumours and unjust aspersions respecting the interference of Prince Albert with public affairs, found their way from conversational gossip into print, and were made a subject of discussion by various organs of the press. When Parliament met, the most direct contradiction, the clearest disproof, the most lofty and resolute defence, shattered the attempt to render unpopular, a Prince for whom England has every reason to feel both respect and gratitude. On that occasion. Lord Melbourne's name was
