Star. — London, England, 1831-03-23 00:00:00

of expedience alone might it be jussincd. (Hear, hear.) He was de sirous of a reform ; in fact. reform was necessary to allay the discon. tent that existed. The present state of the representation was actually a struggle of .one state in the realm against the other. He respected honourable members who opposed the measure for their abilities, but he suspected their motives. (Hear, hear.) The plan brought forward by Lis Majesty's government should have his most cordial support.— (Cheers.) Lord CASTLEREAGH said that, like his noble friend who spoke last, lie respected the talents of the opponents of this plan of Reform; but he respected much more their motives. (Hear, hear.) The noble Turd said that be gave a pledge on the hustings to his constituents to support Reform. Now he (Lord Castlereagh) never gave any pledge, but he was returned by a triumphant majority. (Hear.) There was a petition from Down, the county that he represented, in favour of ; but it prayed for a Reform that he could not agree to, and con sequently could not support it. The petitioners asked for triennial itarliaments—retrenchment—(which he hoped his Majesty's Ministers would attend to,)—for a reduction of taxation, and for the abolition of tithes. (Hear, hear.) He was convinced of the necessity of sonic plan of reform, and expected it to be introduced, but he was not prepared for one that struck at the very root of the Consti tution. (lie.ir, hear.) The journey of Reform certainly must he begun, and the only question was how far it should go.—(Hear.) Ile could assure the house, although he strongly objected to the bill of his Majesty's ministers, he was not opposed to Reform. They were threatened if the measure was not carried with a dissolution—now that was an eve. t they must expect, sooner or later—he did not believe it would be to-morrow, or the next day—(hear); but whether it was one day. one month, or one year, it was of no consequence, because their :miduct was always before their constituents.—(Hear.) And if this was the last vote he was ever to give it should be against the measure.—(Hear, hear.) In doing so, he was conscious that he was doing his duty. He was not connected with any party in the noose, or out of it. He looked solely to the interests of the coon try.—(Hear, bear.) Mr. SHAW, like the noble lord who spoke last, could not give a silent vote. He was willing to support any measure of gradual reform. lie would support any measure calculated to renovate the constitution. (H e ar.) He was willing to transfer the elective franchise from some rotten boroughs to large towns like Manchester, Leeds, and other populous places.—( Hear.) But this measure of reform lopped off at once C 2 Manbers, and laid the axe to the root of the most sacred insti tutions of the c , itintry.—( Hear.) He was willing, as he before said, to sup; oat a moderate measure of reform, but not such a one as the pro,ent. (Hear.) He was not surprised, however, that the plan should Le r.ecivcd with open arms by all radical reformers.—(Hear.) The measure was most complete; but it must be acceptable to all ultra re formers,—in fact it:opened a high road to universal suffrage, annual parliaments, and vote by ballot. (Hear, hear.) It was a plan that would spare the honourable member for Waterford many a night of agitation. (Hear, hear.) Ministers had completely accomplished that honourable member's darling object, agitation. (Hear, hear.) The honourable gentleman concluded by stating that he could not con •eent to a measure which bad the effect of disfranchising the seven .nousind constituents whom he had the honour of representing in that House. Several Honourable Members here rose ; after some time, they gave way to The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—The honourable and learned member stated that the honourable and gallant admiral (Sotheron), after a seven nights' debate, had declared for the measure; but, in con sequence of the speech of his (the Attorney-General's) honourable and learned friend (Sir E. Sugden), had changed his opinion. The result after all might be, that the gallant admiral would again change his mind. in consequence of the speech lie (the Attorney. General) was then about to make to the house. That gallant admiral had stated that at public meetings, most respectably attended, and held under the auspices of the magistrates of the county, all were unanimously 'or the measure now under discussion, and that feeling was not (nought about by so other bias but the good of the country. If such a unanimity be manifested at every meeting excepting that which lie (the Attorney-General) had now the honour of addressing (cries of No, no,) it appeated to him rather whimsical if that house should prove infallibly right. He should take the liberty of adverting to the speech of his hon. and learned friend (Sir E. Sugden). That hon. arid learned gentleman had built his speech altogether on imputation ; he had said, from first to last, the bill was full of unintelligible matter. 31inisters had been accused of introducing new measures of disfranchise ment ; but the fact was, that the bill was placed in his (the Attorney- General's) hands several weeks ago, for the purpose of his putting it into the shape of an Act of Parliament, and that bill was now eonformable in every shape to the instructions which he received at the time it was placed in his hands ; he was of opinion that that of itself was a sufficient answer to those who stated that the bill was changed in its features. It would be remembered about two years ago, when the most important of all measures, except the present, was carried. it was stated, if the bill were altered, its fate would be endangered. A precisely similar feeling was entertained by the supporters jof the present measure ; it was also said, that the object his 3lajesty's ministers had in view in bringing forward the question of Reform, was to keep themselves in power; that the object of the bill was to keep them in their places.—(Hess, from the Opposi tion.) If honourable gentlemen could persuade themselves to be. Dove such a doctrine, he really could not tell, for surely the cry for Reform was not of so recent a date: was it not the language of Lord Chatham ? Could it be possible that he was playing into the hands of the ministers of 1831 ? Were they not the same principles also that gave fame to his son ? although after the events of the,French revolution he was led to depart from the avowal of such sentiments. Did the noble earl, now at the head of the administration, entertain any idea of putting out the ministers of the day when he brought forward the very same question in 1793, and again in 1797? Surely if honourable gentlemen gave the case the smallest consideration, they would admit that a remedy was wanted, and a proof of the evidence of disease. If the remedy were not com plete in itself, it could not be permanent; if ministers came down with a measure for 1831, leaving something for 1832, and so on for succes sive years, then the public would be kept in a state of perpetual feverish ness ; but it was now admitted generally on the other side of the house, that some degree of reform was exceedingly desirable ; not a word of ' this was said during the seven nights' debate on the first reading of the bill, which was now cast into disrepute by its opponents saying they had WOW other measure to propose. If the opponents of this measure really were for reform, and if they did not at once substitute some other in its stead, they ought to allow it to go into Committee. It was qui:c clear that the operations of the present bill would lessen the expense of elec tions, and prevent bribery ; it also simplified the hither to great variety in the rights of voting, which gave rise to so many contested elections. He would ask, if the measure of representation would not effectually }recent all misunderstanding on that important point. This was a bona fide proof that the bill was intended for the public good. In short, the various clauses of the bill laid the axe to the root of bribery. His Hon. and Learned Friend last night had said that the present measure was a manoeuvre, in order that Ministers might keep their places. This his Hon. and Learned Friend had said without, as he observed, any sordid feeling to the Ministry; surely he (the Attorney-General) had as much ground to suppose that the Hon. and Learned Gentle man had made his speech of last night with a view to get into place. The measure of disfranchising electors for knights of the shire has been characterised as absurd, and the dividing of Yorkshire into three Rid ings, with a member to each, was called similar to the plans of Cromwell - 7 •11 it were so, then it was the plan of a wise man, and a Chancery re. gamer also. This was no novel principle. Every one knew that the • Town formerly did not send writs to places which it thought should no longer send Aleinbeis to Parliament. (Hear, hear.) Suppose the Crown no longer sent a writ to Old Sarum, what then became of the cested rights ? Was it because one person had paid forty thousand pounds, or any other suns to another person for the power of return. ii:g representatives, that he should maintain a vested right? ( Hear.) The amount of rent was, he thought, the hest criterion of value that could be taken ; the poor rate was variable, the assessed taxes it was :apt impossible should be repealed, then the rent was the simplest and fairest criterion that could be proposed. The forty.shilliag freeholders, tie thanked God, were not to be disfranchised, and this bill would give them an excitement to take root in the soil. (Hear, hear.) There hut been one frightful word used throughout the debate—that word tas " revolution." As it appeared to be a word of such frightful im port, it was satisfactory to be let into the secret of its meaning; and an Honourable Gentleman, who had invoked the spirit of Blackstone, had given the explanation. Blackstone says, that some might say that con)holders should have a vote for representatives in parliament, and others might say that leaseholders should have a vote; hut that would be to remove the foundation of the system, or, at least, to endanger the superstructure ; and this was wh at th e hon. gentleman called revolu tion : (hear, hear.) It was well to know the real meaning of that ter rifie word—it meant to give the right of voting to copyholdeta and lease holders: (hear, hear.) He could tell the hon. gentleman that the foun ders of the revolution of 1688 adopted the word revolution as a term ex pressive of their object, which was preservation. They would not admit that they were rebels, as it was not their object to overthrow the monarchy, but to bring round the Constitution to what it was before it was disturbed by arbitrary power : (hear, hear.) He hoped after the explanation they had heard from the hon. gentleman of what was meant by those who called the bill a revolution, that they would not allow their under standings to be imposed on by high-sounding words without meaning. (Loud cries of hear, hear.) He had gone over all the objections made to the bill, that occurred to him. [A member said, the Preston voters.] With respect to the Preston voters he would say, that if Preston was to be the single place whose voters would be affected in any peculiar man ner by the bill, he should be sorry for it ; the principle of the bill was ::01 disfranchisement. (Cries of hear. from the opposition.) He would repeat, the object of the bill was not disfranchisement. The object of the bill was to retain as much as possible of existing tights—(Cries of No, no, from the opposition) —as much of existing rights as was consistent with the real representation of the people in that house. (Hear.) Let any other course for obtaining that great object be pointed out and it would be a fair object of discussion. If he might be permitted to allude to what took place last night, at which a noble lord expressed great sur prise, he felt it his duty to say that the paragraph brought under the notice of the house was not false; and if it went to a jury they would probably find a verdict of not guilty. At the same time he took pains to express his regret that such strong language had been used, and en tered his dissent from every coarse expression. He did not think it was possible for any man to do more justice to the conduct of ministers than he did ; for he did think that by whatever means honourable gentlemen entered that house, they felt they had a duty to perform, and though their opinions might, from their peculiar circumstances, be liable to bias, he did not think that they acted in violation of what they conceived to be right ; and if such mcm. ben would consider the effects of the bill, they would find that they would gain more by it as members of the community than they would lose as members of that house. An hon. gentleman last night had made some allusion to the motives which had induced members of great influence in the county in their support of the measure. The noble lord at the bead of the Government had supported and brought forward the measure in early life, and had ever since adhered to it, not as the means of obtaining o ffi ce, but w h en h e k new i t was t h e cause of keeping him out of office. There were several county members still in the house who supported his motion for reform in 1797, who now support the present bill :—there were the Member for Norfolk, the Member for Middlesex, the Member for Essex, and the Member for Surrey. Of such men he would say, in the words of a living poet— " Happy spirit, he who brought on scenes of real life, Supports the purpose of hie youthful thought." Were such men to be told that they wanted some advantage for them selves, when they staked every thing for that which they believed to be just and right, and beneficial to the country.—(Hear, hear.) The hon. ourable bart. (member for Westminster) too, gave his first vote, and made his first speech In support of that cause he had ever since so nobly sup orted.—(Hear, bear.) An honourable gentleman said, Don't talk to us of intentions—do you think that Essex, and Warwick, and Northumberland, when they opposed Charles 1. Intended or foresaw what followed their opposition ? He would say that could not be used as an argument against the present bill ; they might as well call the honourable ban. member for Cornwall, the Essex, the Warwick, the Northumberland, for he had promised to propose a Reform, to let out those waters of strife that were to overflow the land. But was the pre sent to be compared to the arbitrary times of Charles I. when both King and Ministers were both hated by the people? It was said the present was the worst time in which such a measure could be Introduced, he thought it was the very best. We were at peace with all the world, trade was improving, the currency was at length brought into a whole some state, the country was increasing in prosperity. (Loud cheering from the opposition.) There was one exception, that dreadful corrup tion in returning members to that house, which was demoralizing the people, and disgusting every uncorrupted mind by the exhibition of such scenes as took place at Evesham,East Retford and a hundred other places. Yet it was said no reform was necessary. (No, no, from the opposition.) Why, no reform was the burden of the song of the seven nights.— (Hear, and a laugh.) To say that all reform was to be rejected was such an offspring of prejudice as he thought scarcely any man in his sound sense could be capable of. (Hear, hear.) It was said that old states had fits of restlessness that were the forerunners of dissolution, and that we are in that state. It' that be true the Bill could do no harm ; but were we to lose a beneficial measure for a metaphor of that sort? (Hear, hear.) States were not human beings, but moral structures, and if kept pure might flourish for ages, though they had flourished for ages before. The measure was said to be a robbery of corporations; the corporations say, we wish to be robbed. It was said to be a quo tourranio against the city of London. The next day the city of London petitions for the measure. Never was public opinion more strongly expressed in favour of any measure. if only a half measure were granted it would lead to growing discontent in the country that would be productive of the worst consequences. In his conscience he believed the measure would prevent such consequences; and he hoped in GOD, who had rend this country to its eminence among the nations, that they might, by purifying the election of members to that house, preserve its greatness and its free dom. The right hon. gent sat down amidst the loudest cheering. Sir JAMES SCA RLETT could not be heard at first, on account of the contusion that existed throughout the whole house. Ile had always been a friend to reform, but he considered that this measure did far exceed what any reasonable man could sanction who wished to pre serve the institutions of the country. Any measure of reform that would be useful to the country, must be one that could be effected with due regard to the Constitution. Tbis was a new experiment yet untried, and was an entirely new Constitution. He disapproved of the bill both in principle and detail. 'the rights of the House of Commons were vested not in one code but in acts of Parliament, usages, and charters, and he could not find In all these any precedent for a specific reform in Parliament such as this. The Learned Gentleman went into the history of Pediment, in reply to some arguments that had been urged in favour of the measure, but did not mean by this mode of reasoning to say that reform was not necessary, but he meant to impress upon the House that Reform must depend upon expediency, and be regulated by experience. He disapproved of •that part of the measure which went to abridge the number of representa tives, and these form the commercial and moneyed interests, which were the most important classes in the community. Ile approved of giving the representation to the large towns, and he said that ought to have taken place long ago; but there was no necessity for bringing in a bill for that purpose, as the Crown had already possession of the power to make any town a borough, by granting a charter. This had been decided, after a long debate, by a vote of the House. He contended the bill had been framed without rule, and that if it was brought into ef fect it would be the means of inflicting hardship in many cases, and would be the cause of increasing discontent. It was as if they had in tended to pull down the old fabric, because that they found fault with one beam in the building. He was assumed that the House of Commons as at present constituted, represented every sentiment, opinion, and in. tercet in the kingdom. The cries of " Question" were then incessant for some time : in the midst of them— Sir T. D. ACLA ND said that he would not detain the house for more than five minutes. He would not have preferred a request to be heard at that late period of the nigh; had he not already endeavoured, but in vain, to obtain the attention of the house at an earlier hour. lie wished to express the opinions he entertained on this subject, and he assured them that he would not take more than five minutes to do so. He knew that he had ro claim to their attention even for five minutes, especially when nearly three hours had been occupied by two speakers who were I well entitled to the most respectful consideration. (Cries of Go on.) — But when hon. members rose up one after another to express their opinions, and the opinions of their constituents, he felt that his right to address the house was the urns as theirs, and he should now claim tine power to exercise it. (Hear, hear, hear.) It was a singular' circumstance in this debate, that not one member had yet taken a part in it, without expressing his readiness to make some reform. (" Hear, hear," from the ministerial benches.) Such was not the characteristic ' of the seven nights' debate (cheers from the ministerial benches): but at present the tone of the house was so changed, that with one or two exceptions he could not refer to any member who had stated that his opinion was still adverse to reform. (Cheers.) He was of opinion that hon. gentlemen did not consider the effect of that admission. They ought to reflect that lie who opened the door a few inches to a strenuous applicant, might as well open it to a larger extent, and they ought to ap. ply that argument to this question, which was not agitated for the first' time, but which had been agitated for the last 50 years, and had been agitated in vain till the present hour, when the admission was at last made that it was a question which ought to be entertained: (hear.) It appeared to him to be trifling and absurd to consider this measure in its minor details: on the contrary, he thought that they ought to make up their minds to some large and substantial measure of reform (cheers from the ministerial benches.) The question on the second reading of ' this bill was a question of reform or no reform: (loud cries of " No, no," from the opposition.) Yes, in plain terms, the second reading of this bill involved the question, whether they would have a large sub. stantial measure of reform, or whether they would be content wi.ll a mere vague expectation of a non-existing phantasy, to be I brought forward hereafter by his honourable friend the member for Cornwall, and to be supported only by those who were either adverse to all consideration of the question, or who brought up the lag ging rear of the reformers, in the hope that their march would be spee- dily and effectually stoppal. Those who professed themselves friendly to reform, and yet stated that they could not support this bill, bemuse there were parts of it which would not admit, in the committee, of any modification that they could approve of, must not be surprised if they were classed in future by the country among the decided opponents and stoppers of reform. He would not trouble the house with the explana tion of the feelings which he had formerly entertained nn this ques. tion, or of that sense of duty which impressed him with the neces sity of supporting the present attempt to remedy such defects in the constitution us no eloquence could now hope to maintain — (hear, hear, hear)—as the common sense of the country would no longer hear ;justified, and would scarcely tolerate--(cheers)—such de fects as gave to etery enemy of the constitution the means of inflicting an additional wound upon it, and to every friend the certainty of feeling an additional pang. (Cheers.) He would not pretend to describe his feelings ; he would only say, that he had never a more painful task im. upon him than the endeavour to find out the course of duty which res d ought to pursue upon a subject which, of all the subjects that had been submitted to Parliament in the 20 years during which he had en joyed the honour of a seat in it, was the most important, both in itself and in its effects, of all the questions which had ever been submitted to any legislature. He could assure ministers it had been his most anxious wish to be able, on principle, to give his unqualified support to the measure. But he was bound to say, that although he saw in it very much to approve, and also observed the fairest intentions to its proposers,—after every effort that he had made to bring himself up to the point of supporting the bill without qualification, he did think it went too far. (Loud and continued cheering from the opposition.) He regretted that he could not give an unqualified support to the plan, ' in the details of which ministers had, according to his opinion, moved with too rapid a pace. (Renewed cheers.) He was not unwilling to consent to a very large and ample disfranchisement,--he was not un willing to take for the basis of such disfranchisement the propositions contained in the bill, with some abatement. With respect to the dia. tribution of members obtained by the proposed disfranchisement, he thought that it was on the whole wise and just, with some exceptions, such as the large addition of members to the metropolis. Notwith standing the objections be bad taken, being a reformer on principle, he felt it indispensably secenery to vote for the second reading of the bill, with a view to its modification in the Committee, and hoping that those who had done so much that was wise and good, would consent to arrange re th n e dr d e et t a h ils ep o l f an th ge e nmenemlluyresasf ry. so as t t o. o remove reasonable objections, and (Cheers and loud cries of Ques tion, and Divide.') Lard JOHN RUSSRLI. asked the house to give him some of its attention while be gave such explanations as he could upon certain points that lied been touched on during the course of the debate of yes terday and that night ; and at the same time attempted to answer parts of the arguments used be the opponents of the bill. He wee aware, however, that a great part of those arguments had been so completely anti satisfactorily answered by iris hon. and learned friend the Attorney-General, that it would be ',MC than needless for him to trouble the house with any,regetition of the points touched on in his (the Attor ney-General's) speech. He wished 1 t re to state, that lie differed from his hon. anti learned friend the Atterney-fiereral er the late govern ment entirely, in thinking that his hon. and learned friend, as a re former, could, with propriety, vote against the second reading of :he bill. (Hear.) Mr. Burke had spoken of certain persons as being pro spective patriots, who, when the question came to the present day, were always found wanting. Looking at his past life, his hon. and learned friend might be called a retrospective patriot, and his prospective pa triotism was also undoubted, so long as we dwelt in generalities, and the honourable and learned member bad only to make speeches in that house and to his constituents, expressive of his wishes for some reform ; but now that we came to a distinct and tangible mea sure, his honourable friend used arguments which were not in favour of a more moderate reform than the present, but which mi litated against any reform witatsoevsr. (Hear, hear.) lie begged to observe, that although many concession' had been made in the gene ral language of the opponents of the bill since the seven nights' debate, commencing on the Ist of March, in point of promise or pledge in fa vour of any specific measure of reform there had been no concession— nothing distinct—on the part of those opponents. If the late Solicitor- General could point out parts of this bill which were not quite intel ligible to him, still he (Lord J. Russell) contended that it was a little more plain and intelligible than the imaginary resolution which, in the event of this proposition being defeated, the hon. member for Cornwall was to propose at some future day, no one knew when, to do no one knew what, and which was to afford satisfaction to no one knew whom —except, indeed, it were intended to satisfy those who opposed reform, yet wished to persuade others and themselves into the belief that they were not opposed to it. (Hear, hear) His honourable and learned friend had alluded to the speech which he (Lord John Russell) made at the commencement of the debate, and to the reference to the commonalty ; and his honourable and learned friend had given a strange interpretation to the word " commonalty," for he interpreted it to mean " the barons." (Laughter.) If this were correct, instead of peers heing inn uders in their interference with that house, they were the true representatives of the people, for after all the barons and the barons alone were the real commonalty, (according to his honourable and learned friend), and possessed the right of voting taxes. But he begged his honourable and learned friend to come down a little later when he referred to the constitution of the house. The statement he (Lord John Russell) had made was, that this was a question of right,—that those who asked for reform had the letter of the low in their favour, and, such being the case, possessed a fair claim that the House of Commons should truly repre sent the people. :That was a proposition which required no great degree of ingenuity to establish : it was supported by the very words used in Acts of Parliament, and by the well-known language of the constitu tion. What did our ancestors in 1688 ? First they declared that elec tions ought to be free and uninfluenced ; and, in the next place, two or three years afterwards, they passed an act very contrary to the theory of the right of persons of wealth and property to nominate members of that house; they specifically enacted that all such nominations were contrary to the laws and constitution of the realm, and that they were null and void. Such was the manner in which our ancestors, at the period of the revolution, read and understood the constitution of the realm. If there were time, he could show that great part of the abuses now com plained of in the representation—those which limited the return of mem bers to a small number of persons.—had grown up since the accession of George 11. When ministers determined on reforming the system, the first question which they had to ask themselves was this—and he put it to all who affecting to approve of reform opposed the bill—" Is it fit that the direct nomination of members by individuals, and that the sale of seats for money, should continue to be part of the constitu tion of the house?" If the bon. member for Cornwall said such nomi nation and purchase of seats ought to continue in a reformed House of Commons, he told the hon. member that such a reform as he could propose would not be a final reform. (Hear.) He would never deny the advantages that in particular cases might have arisen from nomina tion and purchase of seats for money, as in the case of 3f r. Ricardo, who, by the disbursement of 1,0001. a year, was enabled to com municate to the house the results of his very valuable labours arid ex traordinary intelligence on various subjects. But if you were to form a plan of refbrm on this ground,--if you permitted nomination and sale of seats to continue,--in the very first year of a reformed Parlia ment, if we did not do it others would rise and Kay such franchises were contrary to the laws and constitution, and they would have an argument w helm it would be impossible to resist. Having come to the conclusion that they (main not to permit the practices in question to cottanue any longer, this question of disfranchisement followed as a natural and recta,. eery consequence of that conclusion. Gentlemen might talk of the hard. ship of disfranchising voters such as those of Ewa and West Looe, but he denied the hardship, and contended that the privilege which they at present enjoyed was not one which they were quatified to exercise. r he real question was briefly this- was it for the public good that the owners of boroughs should continue to nominate members of that house, and, having once decided that it was not. it would he only a mockery to say to 200 or 300 voters of inconsiderable boroughs, " you shall have the right of sending members to Parliament." As to the rule of selec tion with respect to boroughs to he disfranchised, no doubt, as the hon. and learned member observed, there was no positive law why places with 2,000 inhabitants should send one representative to the house, and places of 1,900 inhabitants should not. But a similar objection would exist wherever ministers had drawn the line. (Hear, hear.) It was a matter of prudence and expediency where to draw the distinction ; and ministers thought it would be reasonable to say, that boroughs. pos. seising fewer than two thousand inhabitants, should nut be represented. His hon. and learned friend said, that in consequence of die preponderance of the landed interests in the new plan, the due in. fluence of the commercial and monied interests would be lost in the house. He did not agree in this—he thought there would be no diffi culty in persons of wealth making known their pretensions and obtain ing seats in Parliament. His lion. and learned friend also intimated, that the national credit might be destroyed by the bill,—but in arguing against it Itched himself given reasons. which proved that this could not be the case: his learned friend said " if p.it destroy the national credit, you not only ruin the upper classes but a number of persona of small property"—true, but the bill gave persons of small property an interest in elections, and thus tended to bring forward a class interested in maintaining the national credit (hear, hear.) Then he was told by his lion. and learned friend that it was unjust to take the census of 1821 as a etandurd a census made 10 years ago : but in the line place, he admitted this was trot the natural line of proceeding but the line of convenience ; and secondly, if ministers had attempted to obtain a new census with a view to this measure they would have given room fur every kind of fraud- In such a case all sorts of trickery and de ception 'would be resented to in order to swell the returns of population, it being known that the fate of boroughs was to depend en the amount of their inhabitants. An honourable and leumed gentle man said last night that the petitions presented to the house were not merely petitions for reform, bite fur the ballot and a confi.ea. lion of tithes. Now it happened that a paper which had been just placed on the table of the house, in coasequt nee of a motion of the honourable member for Preston, entirely contradicted this asser tion. It appeared that the number of petitions fur reform were 645 ; for the ballot 200 ; respecting tithes, comprehending pet'aons for co neat . tation, a different arrangement of tithes, &c. 70. (Hear.) 11 hh what sort of justice could it be said, then, that the petitions for reform were in favour of the ballot, and of !I destruction of tithes and troperty It was said that the effect of the bill would be to give a preponderancy to the landed over the other interests, and in the next sentence it was added that the measure would produce the triumph of democracy. These were conflicting statements. When arguments were resorted to in this vague way, in the hope of catching up a vote or two from opposite sides,—( Hear, hear, bear.)—when commercial men were threat ened with a preponderance of die landed interest, and the aristo cracy were alarmed with apprehensions of' the mob, it must be apparent that such opposite objections, proceeding from the same lips, were either not well considered or insincere. (Hear, hear.) Look at the conduct of members of small boroughs; they were generally found voting against economy and retrenchment in the teeth of the popular wish. He found by a reference to certain curious tables, that of the representatives of boroughs, with a population under 2,000, 30 bad voted for economy and reduction, and 96 against it. On the other hand, in the case of bo roughs having 5,000 inhabitants and upwards, although the election was generally close, 69 members had voted for, and 47 against, retrenchment. When the people saw the representatives. who were, In facts soot to that House by popular influence, voting in direct contradiction to the Members for the small lot. roughs upon such a point, what coeclusinn could be Conte to exc^pt that the borough members were neither relay r virtually the repre aentrives of the people. There was one other eceent to which he wished briefly to refer. He alluded to the appeal to the Privy Cetincil. H - felt, as well as the learned gentleman, the difficuldee which were con.. meted with this part of the measure. need if :icy thing could iee SUA. gated to restrain the power pieced ie the hands of the Privy Ceuteed, without affecting the main objects of the bill, Etc should be most le eppy in adopting it. (Hear, hear.) He had now done with the provisions of the bill ; and he had only a few words to say with respect to the real question before the house. Hi, Majestt Ministers were anxious to frame such a plan of reform as would hind firmly aed kindly the different clas es of society together, (bear, hear.) and which would secure a representation on which that house and the country might safely test. (Hear, hear.) He did not mean to say that tie plan proposed by them might not be altered, but he fele that if, in the cont. mince, it were materially altered, an as to deprive i: of the character which he had just described, he should feel that neither himself r any other friend of realm, would think themselem precluded, at any fauna time, from bringing forward those parts of the measure a Lich had been thrown aside, and whicn they considered to be cssenth'l. (Hear hear.) If any alteration were proposed, which would no: intert, re with tile great objects that ministers had in view, he felt no liesitatioa in saying, that to such alteration no opposition would be given. (Hear, hear.) But if alterations were called for, that would not sari ft the country, such a course would only lead to a prolonged struegle. O land of conciliating the feelings and affections of the people. (Ilea .) They lived certainly in extraordinary times : (cheers front the opposi. tion.) The hon. baronet, the member for Cornwall (Sir U. Ve vyan), who had strenuously opposed this motion, and who thought met he could in some way or other direct th e mig hty mass of public epiniee which was mat in action—that hone baronet had given them warning, both from circumstances which had occurred at home, and frotn creme which had happened in foreign countries, with respect to the drove that was to be apprehended front making peepular concessions. But. be would ask, had the honourable bcrunet never looked to the danger of resisting well-founded popular claims : (hear, hear, hear.) Had he never contemplated the danger which a government encountered, when it placed itself in a situation, end lc:meted itself upon a plinciple, that was not sustainable by reason-- that was not tenable against the representations of contemn acne;? Day after day complaints were made of the sta'e oldie represenbriote— day after day the people declared that the nominees of boroughs did tot represent them, and were they to pay no attention to the const int, !lie fervent, the glowing appeals of this large, liberal, and enlightened tea. tion ? (Hear.) Had the hon. but. never thought of the consequences which had resulted to kings and princes, in consequence of their resist ance to the just demands of the people—in consequence of the roe!, having found that their representations were fruitless and unavailing The honourable baronet had referred to revolutions. He had spoke : of the French revolution of 17110, and he had referred to the r. non in this country, in the time of Charles the First. But the host revolution that had happened was that which occurred in France, in the month of July last. (Hear.) How was that !evolution caused e Was it occasioned because Clarks X. and his ministers were too ready to come forward with plans of reform? ( Hear.) 'des it because they offered to make greater concessions to the people than ought to he granted? Certainly not. But was it not, on the eootrary, because that Monarch and his ministers opposed themselves to popular rights to the uttermost ? (Hear.) Il'as it not because they were determined to transgress the laws, and to violate charters? (Cheers from the opposition.) Not, be it observed, to violate charters by prevent. ing persons from sending members to Pailiament who were unfit to do so; but because they violated charters connected with the constitution e f the realm, and necessary to its safety—charters which they had sworn to defend. (Hear.) Did they not attempt all this ? Did they not make the effort, supported by the most pocerful machinery, assisted by a gallant army, and sustained by a finely-appeinted guard? Yet, with all them preparations, the cl.itermination of the people rendered the project abortive. (Hear.) Would the hon. baronet call this a lesson that ought to induce then: to stem the tide of improvement, and to close the door of concession ? Would he say that when they might con ciliate the affections of the people by listening to their claims, they ought to reject those claims and rather govern by force ? There wee a time in France (he then was acquainted with the ministers theft), whet. moderate concession would have prevented the catastrophe which had since occurred ; when the allowance by law of BONO persons instead of .10,000, to elect to the municipal ceuncil, would have given the mince t satisfaction to France. He deeply regretted that the Government of the country had taken an opposite course; for sure he was, that if they had acted differently, the dynasty of the Bourbons would have been pr - served, and the power of an ancient monarchy would have been consoli. dated. But now the hon. baronet came forward and said, that the whole danger lay in conceding to popular feelings and wishes. The entire danger, according to hint, was to be apprehended from conceding to the good sense, and good feelings. and good understanding of the people, that which they felt to be essential to their welfare; for such was the l intention and scope of the measure. (Hear, hear, hear.) When lie was told of the baleful effects of democracy—of the destruction of property—and of other evils which it was said this measure would produce, he would say to those who thus viewed the question, that he felt the utmost confidence in the good sense, discretion, and too. deration of the people of England, and therefore he could not par. ticipate in such fears. (Hear, heat.) He believed sincerely that the people had the ability, and he hoped that they would have the power, to send individuals to that house—not to destroy the monarchy, not to pull down the House of Lords, but—persons who would respect the in terests of the monarchy, the interests of the House of Commons, and the interests of the public at large. (Hear, hear.) If this were not the case—if, as had been said, republicanism heel gone through the lend, then he contended, that it would be quite beyond their power to keep this house constituted as it was. (Hear, hear.) If the people were so infected with those principles, it was utterly impossible that an govern could go on with a Parliament thus framed ? No government could go on for five years if they proceeded hi a course directly contrary to the interests, and habits, and feelings of the great body of the people over whom they presided. (Hear, hear.) Theta:or, be said what they had to do was, to make their institutions harmo nise with the feelings of the people—to conjoin the two together, and to render them, in future, susceptible of that mutual agreement, which he admitted was most difficelt to be attained in a system composed of King, Lord., and Commons, but which it was impossible to arrive at in the present constitution of the House of Commons, though that de lete might be remedied by the principles c:ntained in this bill. (dear, hear.) It had been advanced as a reproach to ministers, in the course of this debate, that they had gone beyond all expectation, and had given power to the people at the eapense of the stability of our rode:met institu ions. it should, however, be observed that th e present i. nistration stood in a different sitteeth ri from any Cot had preceded ie. It was said of other administrations, that when they gut fora their predecessors' shuations they would just do tes thou whom they succeeded had done. 'i'he imletteetion grown on the present Ministers was of a different kind. aced he for one was content to accept of it. When he sat on the other side of the House, he was se tae. what chary in proposing any very ex•ensive system of refonn, beeatteie he fele that what might seem wise and good to those who had no puhlei power or responsibility, !night present a very different aspect to tole rs who had not the same official meats of forming a judgment ; bet siow. when he and his friends were called on to give advice and counsel to their sovereign, they had acted up to the full bent of their opinion— ; (hear.) They had not hesitated to avow —they had not attempted to conceal any part of their opinions. They had risked every thing 'Oat Ministers could wish : they had tieked pl.:ce, power, and distinction.— in short, every thing,—in an endeavour (he hoped that it would be a triumphant endeavour) to improve lareely, liberally, and generously, the constitution of Great Britain (loud cheet Mg, and cries of " gut- time") Mr. HUNT presented himself to the lemee amidst much tumult. lie declared that he would not detain them two minutes. He understooc the hon. and learned noneber for Weymouth (Sir E. Sugden) to is eve said that it' this bill were passed imo a law, the electors of Preston would hereafter be prevented from voting. How then, could i c vote. without explanation, for a 11:CIFUle which, it was asserted, would dis qualify his constituenis ? (Hear.) Seppoeitig he voted for it, in the absence of explanation, it would go forth to tile solid that he had sup. ported a bill which disqualified ttioee who sent him into Parliament.— (Near.) He had, in consequecce of his feelings on this Subject, made application to the need,: meree, who iieformed him that t 0 life.interset would be irjeireel 11 the hell, hut that if it appeared dot it interfacd with his Ctliob:!:Util!s. that point eleiould be altered. H ts hem. colleague had waited on :he head of the governerert. and had receietd a similar assurance. Under these cacti o owlets, having explained a hat had occurred, he felt himself justified in the eyes of 116 country atom he came forward to give his vote for this ineareire. . . galley was then, with some ditikul,c. cleared. The Itt.use then divided, there nrp.areti— Fm the amendment ... Fer the tiecoad reading 301 302 Majority for the second reading .. 1 During the division the utmost anxiety for the fate of the bill was evinced by the strangers in the upper loi,he and the passages v . •h e house. Ibrers were now and then hard firm within the heetac, a Lich were interpreted according to the hopes or feats of those who heard them. When at last tremendous cheerio,: from within announced that die fate of the second reading was decided. and that it was carried, —though only by a majority of One, the joy expressed by the strangers was unbounded. 11'ithin the house loud and continued cheer.. accompanied by clapping of hands. were heard, and, as far as we could judge, they came chiefly from the opposition side, who (judgir g from what we saw when the gallery was opened) looked upon the bill as vir. tually defe►ted, at least for the present. On our return to the gallery, we found the SIMAIEII putting the question—that the Bill be committed for Thursday. the 14th of April. This was agreed to. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, sod the house ad. punted at four o'clock this morning. When the majority was announced outside the house, it was received with cheers by a considerable number of persons who had waited to heel the result.