Star. — London, England, 1826-04-28 00:00:00

a 11 p not believe that by any means a body of men coad brought together who would have the ability to pet : tea the country from occasional commercial revulsioit The tlecsive franchise was a trust placed it certain bodies for the good of the community. He should con tend u on principle that no injury would he sustained by 'Lists bodies it they were for the general good to be dektived of this trust. Yet although he maintained this ptinciple, he did not deny that in f•ct the exercise of the elective franchise, had become a pi ivi!ege, and he should therefore not be disposed to resist a lair and proper compensation. In all cases private rights were held to be subset vient to the public good. The Noble Lord here instanced the numerous instances in which the House legislated upon the principle that private' rights were to be s scrificed for the sake of public ac cowatedation and advantage. Was the proprietor of a borough entitled to greater tenderness, delicacy, or forbearance, than a poor tradesman in the Strand, whose house was to be pulled down with nr without his consent, for the sake of widening a thoroughfare ? If the most sa tted rights of property might be thus dealt with, why, should not the same principle be eilltended to property' in boroughs! His object was to obtain - a Government un ler proper controill, and he trusted he should not be met„ as on former occasions, with the dread of demo cratic violence, and the hosrors of the French revolu tion. This he considered would be bad declamation, and quite as in iprlicahle as if in a question relating to the privilege of the British Peerage, an argument should be drawn limn the conduct of the tyrannical aristocracy of Venice. or as if in 2 question upon the prerogdfives of the British Crown, a tirade should be introduced against arbitrary and despotic sway. Such, arguments', would have as little to do with those questions as the' dangers of democracy, had to do with the present. The Right Hon. Gentleman had often said that after all the Constitution works well. If he could be convinced of that, whatever difficulty he might have in reconciling it to abstract principle, he for one should not be anxious for change. But he was convinced than it did not work well, and that it worked so ill as to threaten the overthrow of she Constitution. He was not going • to advert to the Bullion question, or to any other upon which Parliament had fallen into error. This was cot the test which he was desirous of applying to it. The decisions of any questions of policy, excepting such as were between the people and the Crown, might be as safely entrusted to the Privy Council or any other body as to that Hdhse. But the true test was, the conduct of that House up , n questions between the p •ople and the Crown. He tound the House perpetu illy affirming or denying propositions, not in unison, but in hostility to the opinions of the people; and he inferred from this fact, that t!.e House did not adequately represent the people. This was Ole same argument which had been emp!oyed by Mr. Fox at the end of the American war, and upon this he was content to rest his case in favour of Parliamentary Reform. These were the considera Lions which impressed upon his mind the duty, even at this late period of the'present Parliament, of urging this suhject uptm the House.' They all knew the strong disposition maniloned by the people some time ago' • upon this selsject, and they also knew the strong coer cive me noses adopted to repress that disposition. If the same cause of coercion had continued, it would, he apprehended, have led to violent convulsions and cala mities. His Majesty's Ministers had, however, mate rially changed their course, and had in fact at last adopted many recommendations which had repeatedly been urged in vain from that side of the House. He would read the Resolutions submitted to the House in March 1817, by his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member f t Winchelset. (The Noble Lord here read a suing of Resolutions in favour of unrestricted com merce.) The Order of the Day was moved and the House voted for it, and thus negatived the Resolutions by a very great majority. Yet these very resoluti-ns contain: 1:i the substance of half the measures in which they had been engaged during the last two or three Sessio.is. But although the present Ministers had changed the policy of the Government, he very much doubted whether they would be able to carry that policy • Leo full effect with a House of Commons constituted as the prsseat House WAS. He admitted that many of their measures had been highly useful to the country, but yet . not so useful as to convince him that the existing sys tem of sending Members to that House ought to be preserved; He expected that in the next Parliament, if chosen in the same manner as this had been, they should find those oho were tent there, not by the people, but by interests totally different from those of the people, .. preventing the consummation of the policy which the Ministers had begun to adopt. He.thought the great bo. rough propri , tors would place the Ministers in that di , le-nsua; and no course could therefore be so advantageous - to them, as to meet in the next Parliament the reptesenta. tives of the people only, from whom, if they persevered in meaon es of public benefit, they would receive that over powering support which nothing co ad resist; but which he was not so sure they would receive if they now refused to give to the people their just share in the tepiesen . ation of the con:itry. Having stated the tea. inns why it appeared to him that a Reform in Parlio. me t wis necessary, before he sat down, he should briefly explain his intentions in following• up this reso lution, is it met the support of the House. The mea sure he should pi ogose would not differ from that which ► he had pro, osed on two former occasions. He should propose to take a hundred of the smallest boroughs, and let them send one Member each to Parliament, in stead of two. The number so taken from them to be returned by the counties, and by unrepresented towns . which had grown ap into importance. It would be for • the House to deal with this plan as pleased, or to substitute any other; but that was the course which he should recommend. Two methods of reform had been proposed upon various occasions; the one was, to re model the construction of the House altogether—the other, a partial reform, by which they should be infusing new vigour into the Constitution. He preferred the latter. It was ssuggested by Lo:d Chatham, adopted by Mr. Pitt, and always supported by Mr. Fox.—After quoting a passage from a speech in which Mr. Fox s./, potted the ptincildes of partial reform, the Noble lord concluded by moving, " That the present state of the repre sentation of the people in Parliament requires the most serious caseiditration of this House."—(Hear, hear). Lord ALTHORP seconded the motion. After the admirable speech of his Noble Friend, so full of good sense and argument, and so free from declamation, he should not trouble the House further than to say, th it in the present stag of the representation the people bad not that due preponderance which secured to them the certainty of good go vernment. He did not mean to 'say that the people had not good gementroent under the present Ministers, beams it was in the power of the most absolute, Government to govern well if they chose. (Hear). But be contended that the people bad a right to be se wed by the nature of their representation front the possibility of being governed otherwise. Mr. J. pgrasow clahßed the indulgence at. Hoists in addressing them so eyrly, as he intended ts. cosstrovert the pnnciptes on which the motion was hounded. the popularitysg las Majesty's Ministers VMS in itselri proof of the inutility of the motion; and . ;s that popularity was obtained from the successful in production of measures which trnefitted the people at large, it was a proof that their o f position emanated from pure principles. He denied that the present rep-e -sentati•rn of the people was trot virtual Where was the complaint unattended to by the House? What obsta cles lay in the way of the public voice? What measu•e, demanded out of doors. was neglected within ? Was not the late measure of the Member for Siatfordshite (Mr. Lyttleton's Committee Regulation Bill) instituted at obedience to the s ishes of those out of door., interested in the progress of pirate Bills? The arguments of the N , ble Lord, founded on the representative system of France, wete defective in this— that that cyst- m seas based s .lely in the right pf property, anJ therefore that the benefit to be obtained from applying in ferences from those arguments to this country, would requite for their success the annihilation of the pre sent system of this country. Brsid-s, property was more equally divided in France than in England. To regulate the number of v. tern, a high average of property was neces.ary, and the consequenc- was, tha' the interests of the lower classes, •o beneficially a id usefully represented in that House, were completely 'excluded. In order to reform upon this system, they must proceed to disfranchise a large body of the present electors of the kingdom ; and he believed they kiiiew ton 'well the manner in which it worked in P:ance to wish 'for such a change. The next ptinciple of reform was that which would place the representation upon a more popular basis, approaching it nearer to the uniformity of a representative democracy. An example of this system was presented by the United States of North America. The Hon. Member then described the nature of the American Constitution, and contended that no argument, as refetable to this coun ry, could be deduced from that. The Members assembled at Washington rather as the agents of local Sates than as Councillors directing the complicated aff.tirs of a great nation.— Almost all their different States had different interests, and each man was there as an Ambassador, to grant nothing to one local interest for which he did not gain an equivalent in favour of his own. We, fortunately, had no such distinctions here; the interests of the whole community were bound up together, and it was the, duty of the Members of that House to look only at thel l general welfare of the country. If any argument drawn from the representative system of America could be' carried to this country, it must rather be taken from the C•mstitution of a single State, than from that of the Unien. Whether the of any one of those States would he capable of working those complicated affairs. of a great country like this, he would not stop to ,itfcluire; but cettain he was that such an experiment hail rever been tried. He feared he was fatiguing the House. He had shewn that no reform could be effected, with satisfaction to the great majority of Reformers, but a reform upon principle; and he knew of no representa-, tire principle but the two of which he had been ,speak-* ing. He, then, was not prepared to change perfect if they liked—impure if they liked—but this efficient system by which they were assemble 1 t at day. In the mixed character of our constitution, we had the principle of the French system of property controttled by a sufficient infusi n of the Amei ican principle of democracy. That House partaking of both those systems, and therefore particularly adapted to the wealth and to the freedom nt the country, g ore intro duction to all parties and all principles, and airnitted the expression of every opinion that could. be usetul in the councils of the nation. To this admirably-con 'meted syrein we owed much of our national honour, much of our national safety, and much of the distinc tiou we had so long enjoyed abroad. He apprehended ao change in the conduct of a future Parliament from that which bad characterised the present. He believed that few Parliaments departed much from the spirit of their pre fecessors; and to that we owed the long career of British policy which, with little variation, had been gradually raising the country to its present pitch of greatness— " neque enim plus septima dueitur uxor " At genus ititmortale manet multosque per annos " Stat Fortuna domus et avi numerancur avorum." it was this perpetuity of principle that be wished to preserve. He was not blind to the incongruities of the system; but he feared lest In attempting to remove those parts which appeared defective. be might destroy the whole. He could see the inconsistencies which the Noble Lord had pointed out ; but although the fabric of our Consti tution might not be formed upon the principles of Grecian uni formity, but rather partook the character of Its own proper Gothic, he must yet stand in awe and admiration of its grandeur, for he dared not approach it with the hand of specious reform (Cheering.) Mr. ROSS (of Oxford) objected, not only to the pro position oa its own demerit, but to the manner in which it was supported by its different advocates, and to the inconsistent reasoni kwhich they produced, and which he confessed himself m many cases unable to under stand. The Hon. Gentleman then pr. ceeded to shew, by rtfcrence to several old Parliaments in George the First and Second's time, that the Crown bad more in fluence in the 14 'use of Commons thin at pre-ent, and then c , -ntended, whatever influence the Crown had, k was more than counter b slanted by the influence of the people. The Noble Lord most be aware, that the people bassi a great power over tie House, though in many cases they did not participate in the return of Members to it. Opinion ant of doors must find its, way within, and have its effect there also. And the Noble Lord knew too well that what occurred there was disseminated over the country the succeeding day, to apprt bend that the watchfulness of the people over the House would ever be suspended, or be attempted to be evaded. As to what had been levelled at those who came into the House, representatives of their own pro perty, he would only answer, that he rejoiced to see hereditary rights upheld, and he hoped even to see it form a part of their representation. Bit the influenceof b .roughs in the Howse was greatly misunderstood. It should be recollected. that many Gentlemen at the opposite side were indebted to them, as a passport to their seats. He did not regret that the tact was so, as be was proud that such a medium should be given of introducing talent there. Loud GLENORCHY approached this question with great distrust, and could hardly hope, after the recent decision of the H 'use respecting the representation of Scotland, that the present motion would meet with greater success. Those who opposed reform as a general measure, were in the habit t•f admitting, that if any spe cific case of abuse should be adduced, the /louse would listen to it ; and yet when so flagrant a case as that of Edinburgh was brought forward, they refused in inter fere until some act of criminality on the part of the elec tors. It appeared to him, that all which was necessary had been proved in that ease, but the House thought other w ise,and the grievances of Scotland were left to their fate. They were told, indeed, that Scotland benefitted by the the pppuhr spirit wbich pTev , ikd in Eng ' and the *hole argnmeat of tlPOse who oppose inquiry on th# oceasioti was, Nat the.aotmd par !. made up (mil& lied etewhere. No hope being left of ob•ainineedress in any crse of detail, •he wa glad to , see the present question brought before the House on general principles. It appeared to him in the highest degree walk and absurd to refuse to provide a remedy against an evil which might be likely to exist because it had not yet been felt. ft was as if a man should persist in keeping company with thieves and villains, only because he had never yet found their hands in his pockets. (A laugh). The Noble Lord concluded with declaring that he would give the motion his cordial support. (near). The Gallery was about to be cleared for a division, when Mr. HOBHOUSE thought 'the Nob e Lot d entitled to great prise for the moderation which he observed in deAling with the subject before the ll•use. He had told them, that when people were in t' e company of thieves and villains, they were net bound to defer their com plaints till they felt strange hands in their pot kets. The expression was rather hard to he sure, but yet as an ii. lustration, it was just, and he (Mr. Hohhonse) would go farther and say that the English people had actually found the hands in their pockets. He had frequently spoken on this subject, and th•ugh his exertions had not *trailed to effect the object for which they were designed, he was yet hound in the language of the old Scotch Reformeis, to is testify." The Ho I. Member for New castle-under-Lv me saw the phencrmeni of the times quite differently froiii him, and used languAge much like to that which O: id put into .he month of a P.igan Deity : Nitor in adveraun ; tom me, catera, vincit Impetus • et rapido contrarlus evekor stbi. The Honourable Gentleman went against the current of opinion, which swayed most of the Members of the House, and which he doubted not would eventually bear 114 n down. To the talents and high attainments of the Honourable Gentleman he bore unequivocal tes timony. a Minas, noster essd," said he—Would that he were on our side, and that we had the advantage of his powerful assistance. The Honourable Gentleman seemed to think there was something new in the Insti tutions of America, and this was the conclusion with which he (Mr. H , blrouse) quarrelled. It should n•-t be forgotten, that the Americans had learned to be what they were from the free spirit of our Constitue don which they inherited. It was not in America that they learned democratic principles of Government; they only fought over again the battles whioh our ancestors fought at the perio.l of the Revolution, as well as at many former periods. Our Penns, our Hampt'ens, and our Seldens, were those nut of whose book the Ame ricans took a leaf to inform them, that there was no se- curity for good government but in a fair repre. rotative systeM. The Hon. Member for Newcastle-undet-Lyme had said there were only two modes of Reform to pursue; the first of which - was the French system of property, arid the second, the American plan of democratic repre sent ition. Now as to the first, it was not the fact that in France property was the basis of representation. It was indeed its apparent basis, as it was here also; but in France the returning officers, if he might so name them, were really under the controul of Government.— The elections there were the point to which Government dirtcted its particular attention, and fix the purpose of crushing the aspi•ations of the people after liberty—to use a metaphor, which he had employed before—he took a leaf from E gland's bo••k. The system of op pressi n in France did not arise from the Aristocracy, it succeeded only because there was no Aristocracy to oppose its progress. To cut the At i,tocracy of a country into shreds was never advantageous to the cause of freedom, as was evident in the ca•e of France.— • There the grossest bribery prevailed, not indeed in so complete a Way as here, because we had net lived so long for nothing, but had availed ourselves of the doe:tit:es of our Walpoles and Pelham: of forn:er days. We did n:it, it was true, break d•ts n bridges or stop fences to prevent electors from passing, for we knew how to manage matters better and .more speciously without having recourse to those overt acts. The H .n. Gentleman had appealed to the authority of his (Mr. Hobhouse's) Hon. Colleague for the purity of the House as now constituted. It was not, however, about the House, but about the opposition which sat in it, that his Hon. Colleague spoke, when he v , uched for its purity of character. The Hon. Gentleman also asked whether the House was less pure or more corrupt now than at any former time. He really did hot know how it could be more corrupt: the Ministers were always sure of hiving a majority, and what more did they want 1 It was adduced by the Hon. Gentleman in proof of the purity of the House that the salary I 4 tely proposed for the President of the Board of Trade had been withheld. In this he sheaved that he agreed in the public opinion which prevailed on that subject; but he gave a pretty character us the majority, who voted upon that goes :ion. That very vote he would challenge as a complete instance of corruption. Of eighty-seven Members whe voted with Ministers, thirty-eight had salaries under Government, ten more were connected with the former by ties of blood, and there was only one County Mem ber in the whole majority. It might be a reason why the County Members had not lent their aid that this was the last Session of the present Parlian ent ; but if another Session remained, the case might have been very different. A Parliament during its last Session, fn quently resembled a repentant sinner on a death bed, who, as Swift said, after a life spent in iniqui:y, was willing to sacrifice to GOD the leavings of the devil.— Before they departed this Parliamentary life, they generally desired to show souse signs of g-ace, and after voting against the people throughout the early part of their career, they thought it advisable to vote for them towards the close, previous to their dissolution. It was, urged by the Hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Line,' that if they did not adopt either the American or the French plan of Reform, there was no other plan for them to adopt. But he could assure the Hon. Gentle man that such was not the case: they had a plan of their own, independently of either of those named. Nay, there were many plans : the Hon. Member for Durham could propose one; he could himself propose another; and many Hon. Members had each his particular plan to suggest. The Hon. Gent. introduced - a flourishing quota tion respecting the "mei avorton." But then those who went before us had a different sort of representation front that which exists at present. It was ne .ssary that the couatry should not be deceived on a subject of such importance. No one should be allowed to believe that England never had a proper representation. According to the statement of the Hon. Member for 0. ford, the nomelectors of this king&im in the mass were possessed of no property whatsoever, and were quite undeserving of consideration. This was a proposition so exceedingly odd and absurd, that it was a pity they (the Opposition) could not see the smile which must have played on the countenances of the Right Honourable bentlemen opposite, while they were thus instructed. In fact, it was the great objection, that while the orulent ma nufacturing interests of the country—while Such towns V as Manchester and Birmingham we-e left unrepre;eme t, such places as Orford, which had the honour of re turning the Hon. Member. should have such an *citron. tage over the former. Those in general who had the right to vote were the most ragged portion of society, who would most properly be consigned to * poor house. They were inevitably led to commit rerjttry, AS giving their vote under the illnence of others, and not with regard to the interests of their country. Of the electors themselves he spoke—not of those who sold them. It was notorious that they had but two courses to pursue—either to introduce Reform, or to do away with the hypocrisy of pretending to the people that there was a legitimate representation. In his views of the people's right to a fair representation, he was borne out by the presumption of the Act of Parliament, which made it n-ce.sary !or a placeman to go back to his constituents to know whether they appoved of hitn is their reprerentatiee under the change of his cir cumstances. The Right Hon. Gentleman, who had on:e represented Liverpool, did rot go back there to seek the consent of his consiituents, hut to one ot those convenient places that would send in King Log if they were ordered. Was it not a p werful fact in support if his case, that the Right lion. Gentlemair deemed it it,. consisteot with his duty to reptesent Liverp of ? po ther pri•of of the nocetsity of reform would he found its the multi•tde o' Statutes against bt ihery at elections. D:d not those Statutes imply the necessity of represen tation, and were they not roloriously broken ? This was no near complaint. In the yeat 1754, Sir J hn Barnard, a statesman of vett integrity, moved for a repeal of the Statutes against bribery, inasmuch as they were a prolific cause of pe•jory, and a clo tk for the delusive system. It was high time then to do away with the farce. Mr. Burke, who said everything ahrmt everything, declared, that for all proper purposes the House of Cam moos was not a House of Commons. S i said he (Mr. Hobhouse). Let them say if Ory woold, that the system was a Rood one, and worked o e I, but let them not hold out that it was a fair representa.i .n. Tt:e Hon. Member for Montrose said the other uight, that if the Opposition would but do their duty, GOD knows what wonders might be achieved. Now this was delasive laognage, for if the Opposition tried their strength, and mustered every night, sit would Ministers. The only result would be, that while one party had a great minority, the other party would have a great major ti. Such was the case in ttre time of Mr. Fox and Mr. Pitt; such was the case when the Hon. Member for Montrose brought on his motions ill 1821 and 1822. Influence was invariably decisive; many Gentlemen came down on purpose to vote with Ministers, and must do so from motives of honour and the esprit de corps, until the King would please to turn his layouts into another ch 4nnel. It was the hest way for the Opposition to own the power of Ministers, and bow before it. He supported them from a grateful sense of their frequently doing right when it was in their power to do wrong if they pleased. When a Bill was introduced to exclude Mr. Tooke from Parliament, he expressed himse.f obliged to Mi nisters for not ordering him to be hanged on the lobby of the House, being fully assured that they had it quite within their power to do so. It was, therefore, that he (Mr. Hobhouse) was grateful for the smallest donations they were pleased to bestow—(A forr i gh)— The present was a good time for the discussion of the question. For iii 1824, the Chancellor of the Exche quer attributed the prosperity of the country to the much calumniated Parliament, and if distress now prevailed, he thought that some blame might to attach Parliament. Now was the time to enqoire whether the system worked quite so well. To the financial part of it he chiefly objected. Till the year 1819, when Mr. Vansittart said, " Now let us have a real sinking fund," Parliament was never aware that the old sink. ing fund was a sham. He next objected to the dead weight, for which a Bill was introduced, and on the 29th of April, 1822, the second reading had passed without a division. A little while afterwards, indeed, some persona had begun to see that there was some. thing in the scheme that was wrong ; and accordingly the Hon. Member for Winchelsea, the Member for Taunton, the Member for Wareham, and the Member for Montrose, had come down and divided against it. But what bad their success been ? They had di vided twice; once in a minority of thirty-fives and again with a minority of fifty-four. Only fifty four persons in the whale House had been able to .see the absurdity of that scheme.—and it had been carried by triumphant majorities—which was so wild, that even the Right Hon. Secretary lot Foreign Affairs was re duced to confess " that he did not understand it."— (Hear, hear.) And this was the financial wisdom of Parliament 1 the truth was the " wisdom of Parliament," was ever the folly of the minister of the day—(Hear.) It signified nothing who was the minister—not a point; except, indeed, that out of the peculiar, impartial, and generous f• cling of the House, it did appear that they rather preferred a minister who was pre-eminently stupid and absurd—(Laughler.) Of the majorities of that House, he might say as the poet said of tr,e inhabit• ants of Jerusalem— " Of vehatotteer descent their god-bead he, Stock, stone, or other homely pedigree, " In his defence his servants are as bold " As if be had `:en born of beaten gold."—(Laughter.) Ministers are of beaten gold, as an Honourable Friend whispers to me ; but the gold is so attenuated and beaten out to such superfices, that nobody was sensible of its benefit. He knew well that naval and military officers often felt it a most inconvenient thing to give a vete against Ministers. The Duke of York might, as Commander in-Chief, be impartial to a certain extent ; but officers, knowing the fact that commissions were at the disposal of Government, did not like to vote against Ministers on certain occasions. He bad taken the trouble to analyse the votes that had been given in that House, upon the principal divisions which bed taken place in the years 1621 and 1822. 'Phis analysis 'hewed, that, in 14 greet question% the majorities for Government were either whelly, or in a great part, made up of these S 9 persons who bad returned themselves to Parliament without any connection with Constituents, but who had a very intimate and a very profitabk connection with the Government. 1a 31 questions, the result of the analysis was as follows :—Of the Members who voted for Ministers en these occasion, only 2$ County Members were for Government, and 37 were against it. Ten County Mem bers voted sometimes one way{ and sometimes another. 'rho accounted for 7S out of the SO Members for English Cow'- ties. Of the it counties of Wales, 13 Members, whose Ow dons were net popular, were for Ministers, and nine agair.t them. One was sometimes one way and sometimes the other — Of 89 cities and boroughs, 37 Representatives were for Mini,teci. and 107 against them. Now came the places were the elections resolved themselves Inte individed elections—where the Ber t ' sentativo was self-elected, and bad no connection whatever with the sentiments of the country Of these, 150 itrere for Minster, and only 17 against them.—(Hear, hear! and loud ebeers.)- 194 of this description voted sometimes one way end sometimes. the other, and 26 never voted at all.—(Hear, hear !)—Of the Unmet. :sties, the four Members uniformly voted counties and 66 Royal burghs of Scotland, t tot Government, and only 11 against them. land, 24 Members were invariably for against them. Of the cities & boroughs hi were the adherents of the Al inlet ry , and only in vain did the Bight lion. Gentleman g ha• be would atom a venal majority. -~. • * id for Govertunent. the IS Members always voted em. Of the counties of Ire• Government, and only II n Ireland,24 Rept esenta two Ply setters for the Oppositier an on the opp , •site side Pf lie would be stript of