Star. — London, England, 1831-03-04 00:00:00

tae pact of an hon. gentleman near him: but if one word disrespectful that body had escaped from any one whomsoever, he would take leave t 0 say that he did not participate in the sentiment. On the contrary, he s hould ever repudiate it fronahis heart, for he derived his strength from :hat order of society : he was one of themselves, and_ shook alw ays be proud of his connexion with them. (Loud cheers.) Of the u g. met a and sound understanding of the middle classes he entertained a ;c ry high opinion, and well would It be if they evinced more good sense std moderation than their rulers ; if not, then indeed did he despair of the destinies of the country. There were, however, daily indications that his confidence in their clear-sightedness on political subjects gene. v would not be misplaced. It was not long since the noble lord, in all • - theoffice of Chancellor of the Exchequer, had assumea mat, a large doll of the people had borne a tri-coloured flag to n he palace of St. James's, but the assertion was met by their indignant refutation. So far nem intending to flaunt such an unnational symbol in the eyes of their sovereign--so far from preferring a foreign emblem to " The Flag that braved a thousand years a The battle and the breeze," they conceived themselves very much aggrieved by the misrepresenta tion, as if it carried resenta tion, with it an insinuation that they conveyed treason nnder the garb of an ensign of liberty. The truth turned out to be, that instead of thus exhibiting their supposed admiration of the three lays of Paris, ibis tricoloured or rather quadri.coloured flag consisted if three or four remarkably beautiful specimens of silk manufacture, carefully folded and sewed together at the well-known establishment of Lee, Bousfienl, nod Co. If in inquiring whether they should adhere to the constitution as now established, they found that all its benefits only centered in boroughmongers, then argument in its favour would be nu gatory ; but he submitted it would not be difficult to make a calm tem perate appeal to the better judgment of the people on behalf of the old English Constitution, of which he was sure that no such asser tion could be predioaed. (Hear, hear, hear, hear.) It had been said,—by the late illustrious Mr. Canning, that the modelling of a constitution was a matter of extreme delicacy in proportion to the complicated character of so delicate a machine. Who could pretend to judge of the symmetry and proportions of the human frame, of its or gans, and faculties, and endowments, which fell so little short of angelic existence itself, by merely examining an isolated member, or detached feature of the fabric when perfect as created. Let hon. gentlemen re member that all moral theorists and philosophical writers for a thousand years had despaired of realizing in practice a system of such excellence as the British constitution. Must not Cicero himself have contem. plated our form of government when he said " Rxistimo earn ease optimam rempublicam quo constitute est ex tribus genaibus ?" Had not Tacitus described the best and most durable govern. ment to be a combination of king, nobles, and people, par. ticularizing with accuracy the several parts of our constitu tion as it now operated P He had heard frequent allusions to Burke and Canning, and other great authorities, whose opinions had been adduced in the course of this debate, but he would quote a pas sage from a speech of the noble member for Tavistock (Lord J. Rus. sell), in the session of 1819, which he considered much more to the purpose, and was, besides being apposite to the question, one of the most beautiful specimens of eloquence ever uttered in that house.— It had the additional merit of having been spoken by the very noble lord who now sought to lay violent hands on the constitution. (Hear.) The discussion alluded to related to the disfranchisement of a cor rupt borough in Cornwall, when the noble lord was asked what he proposed to do with the unconvicted boroughs ? to which his lordship replied as follows: but in making this quotation, he must premise that he never meant to blame the noble lord for changing his opinion since then, if he saw sufficient grounds for the change ; but the reasons which then assigned appeared eternal and irrefragable, and not of a nature to be less cogent now than when originally uttered. lie on that occasion replied that he would consider a general disfran chisement of the unconvicted boroughs a reconstruction of the House of Commons altogether (hear.) He had therefore the noble lord's own authority for so designating the present plan of reform. The noble lord, however, went on to eulogize the Constitution in the most elo quent terms of praise which it was possible to employ. He observed that " Old Sarum had existed when Montesquieu pronounced the con. stitution of England the nearest to perfection of any which the most enlightened states had ever before experienced. When Lord Somers and other great legislators and philosophers who flourished with him, bore attestation to its merits, it was open to' the same objections which were since urged against it ; and when Hampden lost his life Rut. land returned the same number of representatives as Yorkshire. (Cheers.) He was not inclined, with the pseudo-merchant in the ffible, to cry " New lamps for old," (laughter), and would not con vent to exchange the instrument which had created so much national prosperity for a burnished and tinselled article of modern manufacture. (Laughter.) Neither would he willingly throw our political system into the wheel on the chance of obtaining a prize in the lottery of con. stitutions." (Cheers.) Such was the Noble Lord's judicious, and at the present moment timely warning against the danger of rash. ly departing from the practical wisdom of mankind, during centuries of historical experience, proffered, too at the critiad junc. aura of 1819, when the six acts had passed ..when the seizure of arms bill, the blasphemous libel bill, and the newspaper stamp bill, were in actual progress through the house. (Cheers.) If such was the line of argument of the noble lord in 1819, he in his language would then call upon the house to prefer the solid ancient lamp of the constitu tion, to the temporary tinsel of modern sophistry. (Hear.) With respect to the great question before the house, he could not but de. dare that be saw in it but the instrument of men endeavouring to retain power. (Hear and " No.") He begged pardon if in error, but tii,y all knew how prone people were to receive disclaimers of anxiety to possess power with suspicion. And this allusion to office led him to another topic not disconnected with his subject. It had been industri ously circulated, that with a view to out-bid, or, rather, under-bid the n s t o o b r l a e n l o o n rd to in measure e°me for reform, t) _ _ this a id e of t a b e e w ho ta use er would ia a have come forward with some plan of moderate reform of our own. (Hear.) he knew not really how to meet this absurd assertion. The fact was, that them is a class of newspaper writers who seem to think that the sum- MUM bonny* of human felicity, the sole object of all our exertions and ambition, is the opportunity of wasting our time and health on the tree. say bench opposite. For his part he was actuated by no such idle am. bition. (Hear, hear.) He might, if such were his object, have proposed a plan of moderate reform, but as he had not done so, he persuaded him. Of that he afforded a proof that he had no ambition of office through •uch a channel. (Hear.) And this he might have done with the less :eseatiou, as he had never taken a decided violent part against the 107111 measures which had been discussed of late years in that so that he was nor barred on the score of consistency, if I_ in. stiinable blessing of sitting on the bench opposite to be t after night badgered, were the object of his ambition. (Hear, t. laughter.) After, indeed, he had lost the confidence of the house, office, if ministers had felt it necessary to propose a safe and ea:l.:orate measure of reform of some branches of our representation, he would most probably have acted on the views taken by the hon. mem ber tot Caine, of the overwhelming danger to be apprehended from all r,sistance to change, and have given it his support as a private indivi dual, though he might not have thought it fit to originate it in an etfi cial capacity. He repeated, he would not have objected to a measure tor extending the elective franchise to some places not at present pos sessing it. the right lionotitable gentleman !inland. He scald assure him with ail truth and sincerity, and upon his honour as a gentleman, that he never had a conference with any individual on the subject.— (Hear, hear.) He spoke then wholly uninfiueneed by personal or party cor.slderacion s , in his individual capacity,—aa a man who had a far deeper stake in maintaining the inte s rity of existing institutions, than he could derive from the possession of any office. (Hear.) Feel. ing thus deeply interested in the well-being of the constitution, he could not consent to a measure which, in the words of the noble lord, went to reconstruct the very forms of that house ; and, be the consequences what they may, so wholly did he despair of being able to modify the noble lord's bill into a kind of tr.ntletate measure less objectionable, that he would oppose the plan of the noble lord altogether. (11C/11, hear.) And why would n. e act thus % Because , havin g attent i ve l y li stene d to t h e f mover statement, and to all that had been subsequently said for and against It, he felt convinced that it the noble lord's argument was good for any thing, the measure which he then proposed could not be a rinzl one, but a mere precedent to still more dangerous innovations. The 01,1., Lad had told them that e found the ancient constitution of this coon. -y in 25 Edw. L and in the refute de titliopio non concedundu—but did these statutes express? simply that '• taxes should not be levied without the COD Stl:t of the commonalty of the realm." And thin, argued the noble lord. if reform be a question of right, which be tt,lt: it to be, here was the right anciently established. If. this, then, .ha right principle or the ease, lei him ask the noble lord how far • s • annu red it wban h e p ropose d to disfranchise so many thou . .nd, of th ose upon whom taxes are levied? (Hear.) Did he assume that the law admitted of such a distinction? It did not; yet 11 . r noble lord at once would disfranchise all tax-payers rated ender 101. ( Hear hear) How could he justify his distinction, i:rtieulatly on hi s own premises ? This objection, which hid en 'ably urged by the hon member for Callington, appeared to hint gime foal to the noble lord's measure. There was another objection also urged by the honourable member fur Callington, which appeared to hint of great weight. It was the inevitable tendency of the bi:l to sever every link of connexion between the poorer :lasses and that class from which their representatives were ,ually chosen. Now this severing of the ties which connected :lee highest and the lowest classes was opposed to the practical %gni:l4s of the present system of representation—a great charac rtstie rtcairraenditory feature of which was, that it enabled very class in the community to, in some way or other, have a to in the election of the members of that house. Now be did cut mean by this to say that the franchise should be extended to all the members of all the classes of the community, but that the cor.stitutioo worked well iron: having here and there an en :nate channel for the broadest principle of popular reprosestatioo. If ' 0 make himself better understood it was proposed to hiii to make a •:acittzt between the franchise in knee in Windsor and titan in fuses in Preston, he would not hesitate toefer the former, but be *null not therefore abolish tine Preston pr franchise, and assimilate it 1 1; . ,it in W' mdsor ; all that he would do was, to take tare not to take .-L - th e niodel for his plan of extending the franchise to other places, but not so the noble lord's bill. It would disfranchise all those open boroughs, the votes of which were not rated at 10L. though no reason had been, or could be, adduced for depriving the freemen of Coventry, or the pot-wallopers of Preston, of their franchise. Would not, he would put it to the noble lord and the house, the effect of this disqualifying principle be the affixing a political stigma upon those not eligible to vote under the 101. qualification ? He could not consent to the measure were it only on this ground, for he could not consent to a stigma upon from 200 to 300 of his constituents, which the bill would disfranchise : to be left, forsooth, to a privy council arrangement, by which they might possibly beenabled to vote in an adjoining parish. Bat, says his noble friend who spoke last, only see how the bill will put an end for ever to the monstrous principle of non-resident freemen, and all the expense and Vexation of bringing men some two hundred or three hundred miles to vote for a member In a place in which they had no local or personal interest. But he asked his noble friend, bow his non. resident constituents of the University of Cambridge would receive this proposition ? Had the hon. baronet who represented the University of Oxford contemplated such an arrangement? [lt was hem intimated to the right hon. baronet that the bill would not apply to the Universities.] No 1 What, is this their general rule, that had no exception ? (Loud ales of " Hear.") The reason, the peculiar beauty of which was, that it applied unflinchingly and without exception to all classes and places. (Hear, hear.) What does it dot—why, it makes an exception of a body clermr—the very men who least need being made an excep tion ; while it deprives the less protected poor man of the privilege of voting where he does not possess a house rated at 101. The right hon. baronet dwelt on this point at some length. He would next apply himself to the arguments which had been adduced against the close borough system. Now it was usually, and as it appeared to hint most convincingly argued, that those boroughs were advantageous by their affording the means of access to that house of men who had no claims beyond their ability. Two objections had been in the course of the de. bate urged against that argument; the one, which he must say came with a very bad grace from the hon. member for Westminster ( Mr. Hobhoese) himself a man of great ability—(hear hear)--was that it was by no means desirable that men of splendid talents should be members of that house—that in a reformed Parliament solid sense and integrity would be more highly valued. (Hear, hear.).._ Now he on the other hand maintained that nothing tended more to foster the public respect for that house than its being the great arena of talent and eloquence, and that nothing would lower it more in public estimation than that It should be below the average ability of educated gentlemen, and that talent and ability would have a welcome reception within its walls. But, says the honourable member for Caine,--" Yes, let us have men of ability by all means," but let us select other means for their obtaining seat than close boroughs. (Hear.) Give us a purer and more extensive franchise, and they will get in at least as much as they can at present. But what, said he, is your test of ability ? Take every 100 men you meet In the street, and one of them will be a man of ability—take 100 names in the Red Book, and one may be a man of ability.--and so of 100 men of tawny complexion ; but are these men to get in by the accident of a close borough ? (Hear, hear.) And then the honourable member asked them, was it fair to judge by the accident instead of the gene ral tendency of a system ? Now he (Sir Robert Peel) was con. tent to judge by the tendency and not the accident of the close borough system, and would maintain that that tendency was essentially favour.' able to the entrance of men of ability into that house—he had that morning turned over the names of from 20 to 25 of the most distin. guishal men that had graced that house for the last 30 or 40 years-- men of whom it might be said with the glowing language of Lord Plunkett—were possessed of that " buoyancy of genius which would float them down the stream of posterity • and he found that,with three exceptions, they were all returned for boroughs, which the noble lord's bill would wholly disfranchise. There was Mr. Gunning, Lord North, J. Townsend, Mr. Burke, Mr. Flood, Mr. Pitt, Mr. Fox, Lord Gren ville, the Marquis Wellesley, Mr. Perceval, Lord Plunkett, Mr. Can ning, Mr. Wyndham, Mr. Home, Mr. Huskirson, Mr. Brougham, Sir S. Hominy, Lord Castlereagh, Mr. Tierney, Sir W, Grant, Lord Grey, and the late Lord Liverpool, all first returned for close boroughs (hear), and but :fires of them ever members fur counties. Nor was the mere facility of admission the only benefit. The introduction, by affording them an opportuuity—the essential condition of successful talent—for displaying their legialative ability on a large scale, recommended them to a more extensive franchise at a more mature age ; and again, when they, by caprice or want of money, or otherwise, were deprived of their larger seats, those close boroughs, which the noble lord's bill would destroy altogether, received them, and secured their invaluable la bours to their country. (Hear, hear, hear.) Such was the ease when Mr. Sheridan was defeated at Stafford—he found shelter in 'Winter. Mr. Wyndlisun having failed at Norwich, took refuge at Higham Ferrets; and Lord Castlereagh in like man. ner, having lost his election in the county of Down, was returned for Oxford. Ale. Tierney also, when he lost Southwaik, was returned for Knaresborough ; and Lord Grey for Taviatock, when defeated in Northumberland. All this proved that the tendency and not the mere accident of the close borough system was to facilitate the entrance of men of ability, who otherwise could not obtain a seat in that house. (Hear.) And was this system thus working so advantageously for the general weal,—so fostering of talent and statesmanlike ability,—to be destroyed in obedience to the noble lord's plan? During 160 years the constitution in its present form was In force, and he would ask any man who heard him to declare whether the experience of history had produced any form of government so calculeted to promote the happiness and secure the rights and liberties of a free and enlightened people ? (Cheers.) Many other experiments had been tried to ingraft demo. I cratical upon monarchical institutions, but how had they sue ' corded ? In France, in Spain, in Portugal, in the Netherlands, in 1 every country on the face of the earth, with the exception of the United States, had the experiment of forming a popular representative govern ! went, and of uniting It with a monarchy, been tried ; and how, he would again ask, had it succeded ? In America the house had been told that the most beneficial effects of a representative form of govern went were plainly visible. But he begged to remind the house that there was a wide difference, indeed, between the circumstances of this ! country and America. In the United States the constitution had not been in existence more than 40 years. It was not till the year 1779 that the representative part of the American system of government had been established, and since that time many important changes, as every body knew, had been made respecting the mode of electing;their Pre ' sident. As yet every thing was in uncertainty, for ever since 1 the first establishment of the government of the United States it had been undergoing a change. He would not say that It had been dete riorating, for lie wished to avoid all invidious phrases, but it had been rapidly undergoing a change from a republic to a mere democracy.— The influence of the executive government had been daily becoming less, and more power had consequently been vested in the hands of the people. And yet, with respect to that country, where there was land uncultivated to an extent-almost incalculable—where there was no estab lished church—where there were no privileged orders—where property existed on a very different tenure from that on which it was held in this country, let not the people of k.ngland be deceived—let them not imagine from the example of the United States, that because democracy had succeeded and triumphed there, it would also succeed and triumph here. (Hear, hear, hear.) With the so. litary exception of the United States, there was nut another country on the face of the globe to be found, in which a mixed constitution like! that of England had succeeded. During the last 150 years, in which England had enjoyed that mixed constitution, she had stood the shock of a disputed succession, of long wars and of almost every evil which could befall a state. During that period every country in Europe had suffered the evils of invasion, from which we alone had been freed. I During that period every country in Europe but our own had' submitted to a charge of dynasty, or had been rendered subject to a foreign power. Look - from the nations of Europe to those to South America, which had lately vindicated themselves into in. tlependence. (Hear, hear.) If it were assumed as an undeniable rriaciple that the people in all countries might be safely trusted with the enjoyment of power, what was there to prevent a happy experiment of the powers of the people to form a good government, from succeeding in South America ? '1 experiment bad been made, end had failed signally. (Hear.) What were the causes which, according to the nuaninmus voice of historians, had in all cases led to the decline of empires? The danger of a successful military chieftain attaching to himself the affections of his legions. aid being misled by vanity to turn the arms which he had first employed for the defence tit his country, to his own ambition and aggrandisement. Had not the present constitution of England saved it for more than a century and a half of military glory from that unfortunate ants denteThe staff of NI aribOrough,the greatest chieftain of his age,had bow broken in ibis country with impunity ; and had the baton of his illostri tius it tell. the: most illustrious commander of the present age, before winoiu culudeating star even the fortunes of Napoleon had 'mailed — had not that baton crumbled into atoms before a vote of that House which he (Sir It. Peel) was then addressing ? Again, he had been told 1 of the danger which was likely to accrue to the liuerties of England front the cuiploymeet of a standing army. Had he not been told very recently by the hon. and learned member for Clare, that the army of ' Enblanu was eminently obedient and submissive to the laws Had he not said, " mild is your army in its demeanour, so popular is it in all parts of your euipiire, b 0 confidant are the people in its justice and moderatioa, thet 1 inq lore j ou, whenever you have occasion to call in a thick to qutli internal disorders, acid lei your regular envy, and not our e contour , fur they alone wit' act with temper anal ll:bere t:on Title declaration et the lion. .t..d learned member for Clare was a 3ufficielit answer to that ,argument. With regard to the Mau ence of the oligarchy, be would ask hon. gentlemen to point cut to him any instance in which there had been an attempt to subject the people of England to the sway of an oligarchy, or to establish any laws of exclusion or distinction among them? Up to this time no one practical advantage had been held out to the house as the natural consequence of the change now proposed. All the rzasons which had been urged to them for making that change were that it was necessary to conciliate public opinion. No better way of conciliating the public will had been devised than that of adding half a minion electors to the counituency of the country • but if that were s good way of conciliating public opinion, then if an other Government, wishing to participate in the popular favour, should add an other million to the constituent body, that argument must be entitled to the same success. (Hear, hear.) We used to be promised, that whenever the constitution of the House of Commons should un dergo &change, securities should be taken for preventing it from maga& ing us in ruinous wars. All persons who knew any thing of history, were well aware that there was no security against war in any popular government. Mr. Fox hail left it upon record, that upon its commee ce ment, the American war was highly popular. At a later period it had been predicated by other statesmen, only inferior to Mr. Fox, that at their commencement all the wars in which we had been subsegaently engaged had been highly popular at their outset, but that, on the ap. pearance of failure, they had become tiresome and out of latour with the people. We used to be told that retrenchment of the Public expenditure would be the first measure of a reformed parliament: But a reforming government had declared already, that all further re. trenchment was impossible. We used also to be told that the Laflamme of the crown in that house was so enormous, that teform was mess sary, as a check upon it. The influence of the crown in that house! (Loud cheering.) Would a ny man rise up in his place, and state that any influence could contend successfully in that house with the influence of public opinion ? (Hear, lieu, hear ) Honourable gentlemen were in the habit of saying, that the crown could now influence more members than at any former period of our history, and that the aristocracy could, by their support, establish or overthrow any government. Yes, honourable gentlemen were in the habit of saying this, although, since the death of Lord Liter pool, in 1827, the country hail had five different Prime "int - Asters, and five different Administraiions. (Loud cheers.) Such was the influence of the Crown,—such was the influence of the aristocracy ? (Hear, hear.) He contended that neither of these influences bad any existence. ( Hear, hear.) He then proceeded to show that no practical advantage could arise to the country from this change in the constitution of the House of Commons, and to deprecate the period at which it had been proposed. That period was a period of great excitement, and if hon. gentlemen would but give themselves the trouble of looking at the history of reform, they would find that it was always most flourishing when there was either a pres sure of great difficulty on the country, nr some revolution on the con. tinent, which misled the people of England, (Cheers from the oppo. .ration,) by the delusive hopes which it held out to them of the attain. went of rester liberty than that which they then enjoyed. ( Hear, hear.) Look at the question of reform—look at the Parliamentary Debates, and they would see that whenever the question of reform was frequently agitated. some dire misfortune lurked behind. It was brought forward with great pomp of circumstance, in the year of the rebellion, 1745 ; it was brought prominently forward during the American war ; it was brought forward at the commencement of the French war ; and, to coins to our own times, it was brought prominently forward in the years 1817, 1819, and 1822—in a word, at every period, when there was either great commercial or great agricultural distress in the country. Then was reform brought conspicuously forward—then was it certain to find favour in the eyes of the people. (Hear.) It was brought for ward, too, at periods when the excitement of foreign revolutions misled the judgment of the British public, and deluding them with a false love of liberty, rendered them discontented with the moderate freedom which they enjoyed. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Pitt was its advocate and champion in 1780, when the establishment of American independence, after a successful struggle with this country, had deluded the enthu siastic lovers of freedom in this country with notions of liberty which it was difficult to comprehend. From the year 1785 to the year 1790, the question of reform slept in lethargy like that of the grave ; but in the latter year the appalling events of the French revolution again recalled it into life, and inspired it with new powers of existence. Nor was it surprising that the cause of reform acquired energy from that re volution, which Mr. Fox had designated in his place in that house as the most stupendous fabric of liberty which the ingenuity of man had ever raised. In the year 1790 Mr. Flood brought forward a motion on the subject of reform, and in the course of his speech upon it referred to the state of France. One of his arguments were thus expressed :—" If France improves her government, you must restore yours. Again, what is your situation as to external danger ? France, the great object of external danger to England, can no longer give ala rm ; during her disturbances she cannot have the power ; and after her liberty is establisbsd, she will not have the inclination to make ambitious war. The better her Government is, the more rational will be her counsels • the more ra tional her counsels, the more pacific they will be. Kings may hope for glory, and their ministers and minions may hope for plunder front warfare; but what can the people expect from an ambitious war ? Nothing but an accumulation of tales and an effusion of blood." Again, in the year 1821, when the question of reform was brought forward by the bon. member for the county of Durham, sew lard Durham, he also appealed to the events which bad just before taken pl ace upon the continent, and hailed them as the auspi cious dawn of liberty upon this country. His language wan as follows : " Where its power and justice are acknowledged, as in Spain, the prospect is most cheering. We see disa ff ection instantancoulY quelled—venerable and rotten abuses reformed--su perstition eradicated—and the monarch and the people united ender a constitution, which alike secures the privileges of the one, and the liberties of the other. May I not then consistently hail the rising of this star, in what was once the most gloomy portion of the Europese horizon, as a light to show us the way through all our dangers and difficulties—as a splendid memorial of the 41-conquering power d public opinion ?" Wu that star of liberty, be would ask, which the. I appeared in Spain, a steady light to show the people of England she way to an improved state of freedom, or was it the periodical return of an eccentric comet, which sheds disastrous lightand perplexes nations with fear of change ? Again, with th e events of the French revolution fresh in the recollection of the country, he had no hesitation in saying that the same experiment was again in agitation. and the country was again expecting that it could improve its own liberty front the example of what had recently passed in France. "Oh ! let us wait ( continued the right hon. gentleman) until we see more of the results of thai es periment, for it is proper that we should pause before we make it in our own happy country. Before we venture upon it, let us feel assured, that the liberty, which now exists in France, if it be the offspring of a just revolution, is that liberty which has virtue and justice as its com panions, and peace and prosperity as its attendants. (Hear, hear.) I see at present no reasons for expecting to see such consequences emana ting from the late revolution in France, and I deprecate above all things making the revolution in France a precedent for a revolutila in this country. (Hear, hear, hear.) Let us therefore remain can. tent with the well-tempered freedom which we now enjoy, and which we have the means of securing, if we act with ordinary discretion. I lament exceedingly that government should have determined to agitate such a question as that of reform at this particular crisis : it would have been wiser in my opinion to have evoked these new causes of excite. ment, for depend upon it that by this process throughout this land the first seeds of discontent and disunion are sown. (Loud cheers front the opposition.) In every town there will be a conflict—a moral aisle I mean—between the possessors of existing authority, sod q. is:ing privileges, and those to whom the existing authority and the existing privileges are to be transferred. Oh ! Slr, I lament beyond measure, that government had not the pis. dente to adhere to that temperate course of policy which they have pursued elsewhere. I lament that, if they did think it necessary to propose a plan of reform in this excited state of the public mind, they did not confine it within those narrow limits which are consistent with the safety of the country and the dignity of their own characters (hear). They have thought proper, however, to adopt another course; they have sent through the land the firebrand of agitation (cheers from the opposition) ; and it is case so far to imitate the giant enemy of the Philistines, as to send 300 firebrands through die country, carrying danger and dismay in all quarters,; but it is not easy, whet' the mischief is done, to find a remedy for it. In the pre sent difficulties of your situation, you should have the powers of sum moning all the energies of life, and should take care that you do not signalize yoor own destruction by bowing down the'pillars of the edifice of yoi.r liberty, which, witlt all its imperfection, still contains the noblest society of freemen known to the habitable world. (Great cheering, and cries of " Adjourn.") Sir J. SEBRIGHT (we believe) moved the adjournment of the debate till five o'clock to-morrow night. It was carried without dis cussion. The House adjourned at Hslf.past Two o'Clock. SPIRIT OF THE JOURNALS. TIMES.—Now is the time, certainly, for the people of England to show themselves. Every man calls for reform. Are the mere boroughmongers to be buffered to stifle the cry ? Impossible ! The idea is ridiculous. IVe really cannot conceive what is now meant or aimed at by the corrupt old set : they must know that the present Parliament, or a Parliament constituted like the present, cannot " go on." The defeat of the present bill would be immediately attended with such meetings throughout the realm as would be fearful. It would nut he necessaiy to call or to speak of a national convention—we should deprecate any such formality ; but, in Truth, thc•:•e would be a national conven tion, fur 10,000 requisition, to call meetings would be in stantly signed, and though divided into counties, districts, and clot' parishes, all England would congregate to insist upon a reform. Ten men cannot be got together on the! other side of the question. It is it.ipussible that the rotten boroughs should " go on." It is madness—it is wicked-', ners—to an inconceivable degree—to attempt to uphold' them. Sixty, at least, must drop ; and if the enemies of reform choose, through spite, to mention others which stand in their predicament, no one, we presume, will have any ob jection to extend the sentence of forfeiture to criminals of equal guilt. We fervently conjure Parliament,—we fer vently conjure the enemies of Reform, after a decent and measured struggle, for the sake of apparent consis umey,—to pass the Bill : for we assert, beyond the pos sibility of contradiction from the event, that it is impos sible for any member from the 60 rotten boroughs ever to show his bead in Parliament again. Some talk is now made about the rights of the patrons, and of compensa tion for loss. Well, certainly, though we urge it not, we have no objection to compensation. Let a aunt of money, equal to that which the patrons of these boroughs have pocketted for selling the rights of the people, be repaid by them to the Treasury, if they will haze it so. 'mi., i, the only compensation that has any reason or common sei.io in it. Detestable wretches! to talk of compensation for the loss of that which they know in their consciences deserves punishment, and which ou tl.at very account they practisA, not openly and in broad daylight, but with more secrecy than housebreakers. It is singular, that in one respect Lord John Russell's bill should appear to be only restorative. He takes the members of 60 rotten boroughs out of the hands of their patrons, and gives them back to the constitution. PysT.—lt will, we suppose, be conceded by even th • most violent admirers of revolution. that there is at itya.:t much inconvenience attendant upon all great national changes ; that change is not merely for itself a good thing ; and that, in order to justify it, we must be preoired to prove that it will retued:v settle pre-existing evil, or produce some good that we have uot enjoyed before. By this test we have tried the arguments of those wit° support the sweeping treasure of legislative revolu tion now proposed by the Government ; but we have s9;:jht in vain for any exposition of the evil to be avoided, or tie! good to be gained, by the changes which they recotil• mend. They have not dwelt upon any instances of tyranny or oppression, or gross error in Government, arising out of the state of the representation ; nor have they strewn that the wishes of any considerable body of the people were not made known and enforced in the House of Commons.-- When we are told that the proprietor of three ale houses in one pace sends two members to Parliament, and the while population of a tar_ e town in another, sends none, we cannot deny that, so far, thesystem seems to require reform; but if w“ inquire a little further, and discover that the two Member., for these thrce houses are the active vigilant guardians of the West or East India interest in the, House of Commons, which otherwise could not have protection or representation in that house, and that two of the wealthiest and most in fluential manufacturers in the unrepresented town are mem bers for three other old houses similarly privileged, without the violence, and tumult, and popular commotion which an election in such a town would occasion, we begin to think that this system works very well after adj, and that any great or violent change in such a sys tem would throw the whole country into confusion.— The Borough System may be in form inconsistent, but in fact it is most useful ; and though it does occasionally open a door to traffic in Legislative power, we insist that even such traffic is quite as innocent, and much less dangerous, than the bribery and corruption and wholesale depravity which frequently attend upon popular elections. HERALD.—The minds of many, on the scheme of reform being first propounded, were so surprised by the extent of the change, that they overlooked its nature. We contend that the principle of the proposed alterations is conservative of the balance of Parliamentary power among the different dames of society. Let alarmists look at the 24'2 Members who, in the 596—the total number of the House of Commons, as proposed by Lord John Russell —wig belong to the landed interest. Is not this ballast enough to satisfy the vivacious Achilles ?—ls not raising (and thus following the example of Sir Robert Peel) the qualification another source of consolation! A word to Sir Robert PCel; he stands in a proud position ; he is the great commoner of his day; his Parliamentary talents, and not his wealth make him so—he has shown himself superior to the vulgar taunt of want of consistency - he yielded to the Dissenters when expediency required it—he conceded the Catholic claims when the alternative was civil war, to be undertaken in a doubtful cause—he did not hesitate to be wisely incon sistent when a Minister of the Crown—let him not hope to maintain his character as a great Statesman by re serving consistency for his present place, " the Leader of Opposition." Lord Stormont has bestowed the title of the Achilles of anti-Reformers upon Sir Charles We therell. We recommend Sir Robert Peel to itilOW the Learned Gentleman to retain the dignity, and exercise the duties, of the title. Sir Robert Peel is at the crisis of his fate ; he may, indeed, rally round him the salesmen of bo roughs, the town-clerks of corrupt Corporations, and the electioneering nominees of churchmen; but if he throw the weight of his name, and the dexterity of his pleading, in the scale of anti-reform—in short, if he array himself against the King and the people of England, he will irretrievably lose his reputation for political moderation and sagacity ; nor will he escape the imputation of having preferred the re turning faVour of a party, that once drove him from them with execration, to the tranquiliity of his country. Cit RON IC LE.—The spectacle which this country presents at the present moment is singularly instructive. The whole nation (with the exception of certain boroughmongers, and their creatures) are calling out loudly for Reform ; and, on the other hand, the peccant part of the Constitution, the Representatives of corrupt interests, with the in stinctive love of life which all creatures possess, are stirring heaven and earth to defeat the Ministerial mea sure. Wherever Meetings have been held, and they have been held in every town, almost in every village of the island, a word has not been uttered, a hand has not been held up, against Reform. It is in the House, of the constitution of which the people complain, that the voice of opposition to Reform dares to make itself heard. But Ithere is nothing in this to surprise us. It is not unusual in our Courts of Law to hear guilt utter the language of in nocence. The speakers, though the nation have no sym pathy with them, sympathise with each other. The arraigned ate their own witnesses, and they swear hard ; they are their own judges, and they are indignant at being accused. —We never expected that the power against which the present measure is levelled would expire without a struggle. The plunder of this powerful nation is too tempting a prize not to be stoutly contended for. But the contest cannot be doubtful. We, the reformers, are the nation. We have the Monarch on our side, and an Admi nistration, supported by a large division of the Aristocracy, who are contented with the enjoyment of their " own" pro perty, and ready to hold their authority by the tenure of the will of a people, ever disposed to honour and respect those to whom honour and respect are due ; we have the people to a man. Stupid and besotted must the wretch be, who despairs of an issue with such odds on our side. It is not the part of a good citizen to agitate the country on every light occasion with attempts at organic reforms. Many worthy men entertaining this opinion have remained patient under the glaring ab. sea which deface the political system of this country, till a proper opportunity should occur for effectually remedying them, that opportunity has arrived; for when can we have a fitting opportunity, if we neglect that, when the government of the country invites ? Patience is no longer a virtue, but a crime. Let him who hesitates to act now, reflect that his patience and his silence may give eucouragement to the men who would, to preserve their corrupt interests, stick at no means, h.,wever unjustifiable, to attain their ends; and thus may contribute to consequences which a prudent firmness and determination is the outset might have prevented. In kindness to the very men, who, blinded by their base interests, .would rush on any extremes, it is the duty of every good citizen to make his stand in time. This is not a ccW,n icture for trifling. He 1 1~~ e