The Statesman. — London, England, 1812-05-09 00:00:00

1 lir 11, ; • I .1 • • i of knowledge, and the universal Intellectual improvement of the people, would nake it an imperative duty upon Parliament to enquire into the nature and extent of the evil, wits a ♦iew to ascertain what remedy should be appled. It was the more incumbent upon Parliament to enter into this enquiry, inasmuch as a Member, in his place in that House, had made a statement, that a Minister of the Crown had been guilty of corrupt and illegal practices, with a view to procure an undue return of persons to sit in that house, with the view of obtain ing their support to his measures in Parliament. The motion submitted to the House on that occasion had been misted, and certainly the general principle of the feeling upon which it had been opposed met with his concurrence. For s considering the notoriety and generality of the practice, as there stated., nothing could be •more indelicate than to take further pro ceedings on that occasion. After, however, such admission of notoriety was before the Public ; and after it had been declared from the Chair, with all the weight of the constitutional information possessed by the Speaker, that our ancestors would have started at the bate mention of such practices, he would ask, whether it would not be an actual neglect of duty on the part of the House—whether it would not show a criminal apathy in the concerns of the peo ple, to be guilty of an unpardonabte non feasance, amounting to a total disregard of their public duty, if they should not determine to take . the question into consideration ? If they were to reject the enquiry, the people might naturally conclude that they were regardless of their opinions, and negligent of their rights and privileges. It was not his wish, in this instance, to go into any enquiry whether the Ministers had acted corruptly and il legally, as had been charged upon them on the for mer occasion, because, admitting as he did the jus tice of the feeling which stopped further enquiry at the time, he did not consider the present ,a proper opportunity for going into it. Ile was aware how unequal be was himself to the task of bringing for ward the broad question of reform, which required the combined wisdom of the Home, to do it with effect, by investigating the cause of the evil, and ap plying the proper remedy. Feeling, however, as he did upon the subject, he should venture to submit it to the consideration of the House, and in doing so, he should state shortly and distinctly his views with respect to it. lie said shortly, because having two years ago submitted his opinionsat large to the House upon this great constitutional question, it was the less necessary for him on that occasion to take up too much of the time of the House. On that former oc casion, he had most distinctly stated, as he was ready to do in that instance, that the great danger arose from the great number of places in a state of desola tion, without having a population to express its voice, or constituents to be represented, which, how ever, returned Members to that House. He had made an extract of their number, and should com municate the statement to the House. If any Gen tleman should deny its accuracy, let him but move for a Committee to enquire into the fact, and he should be ready to prove its perfect ac curacy by evidence at the Bar of the House.— This, then, being the state of the representation, or of the absence of the representation of the people, he would Owe it to the consideration of Gen tlemen, whether they were not in duty bound to take the subject into their serious consideration ? He had no hesitation to say, that he never should raise his voice against the weight of property, or the fair in fluence arising from the possession of property, hav ing an adequate effect in the return of the Repre sentatives of the People to that House. His great and leading object was to restore to property its due weight in elections ; for, according to its present sys tem, he would contend, that property generally was not fairly represented, and that personal property Ives not represented at all. The extract which he had made, and which he was ready to prove by evi dence at the bar, was, that a few individuals re turned three hundred and twenty-six Members to that House by nomination or otherwise. This was a circumstance which in itself demonstrated that pro.. perty was not fairly represented. He knew that the number he had stated was so enormous that it must astonish even those who were interested in the conti nuance of the system which ,it was his anxious wish to correct. There were besides seventy places pos. sessed by Members of Parliament, and forty Mem bers were returned on eitheir side by compromise, as the practice was usually nominated. All this could not take place if property possessed its national influence in the Constitution of the Representa tive House of Parliament. Mut if any doubt could be entertained on the subject, he had only to state, that one hundred and eighty-two persons returned one hundred and ninety-two Members to that House by simple nomination ; he meant of course throughout the whole of the United Kingdom, England, Ireland, and Scotland. And when he stated that fact, and offered to prove it by evidence, he knew not in what language he could express his surprise if the House should not accedeZp his. motion. Ting had, hp was aware, voted that they were a full, fair, and free representation of the people. But with these facts of one hundred and ninety-two being returned by one hundred and eighty-two individuals, and seventy placemen having seats in that llouse, and forty others 'being returned by compromise, he could not conceive that these Members could have a full, fair, or free' discretion, an unfettered option, or an unbiassed voice in that House. It would, he knew, be stated, as it had been already urged to himself, that some of these cases lapped over, and that the same persons held places who were returned by nomination. He did not question the fact; but whilst be knew that there were one hundred and ninety-two returned, as 1 he said by nomination, seventy Members possessing places, and thirty at least returned by compromise for either party (he did not mind which, for he was not then speaking as a party man), he could never con- 1 shier them as free in their discretion, or uninfluenced as to their votes. The House thus composed, was returned for seven years. lie had before stated his objection to the repeal of the Septennial Act, unless that repeal should be preceded by some measure to dimintnish the expenses of elections. The repeal of the Septennial Act, he was persuaded, would only, be productive of mischief if the effect were not to bi fortified with some measure. That measure he was happy to state was now likely to be carried into effect. Noble Lord (4 ! ofTethtock), conformably to those THE STATESMAN. had principles of attachment to theCoitut h io a n d wlahistch n ight distinguished his family in al l tines , moved for leave to bring in a Bill for the purpose _of lessening the expense of elections, and he had to con gratulate the House and the country on the motion not having been opposed by his Majesty's Misdates's, and that they had consented at least to entertain the measure. The effect of this measure would be, he trusted, to prevent the long suspension of intercourse I. which at present took place between the - constituent* and their representatives. In ancient, and he would add, the best times of the Constitution, Parliaments were triennial, and so continued till the year 1784, iwhen the Members, he did not know whether to call it Parliament or Convention, of that day, which had been elected for three, voted that they should continue for seven years. He could see no radon why they had not, upon the same principle, voted themselves a Parliament for twenty years, or for life. If this principle was good, he could not perceive why they had not the same right to vote themselves peren nial, as that Parliament had to vote itself septen nial. There certainly was none, except the expedi ency of the thing—but whilst the present suspension I of intercourse between the representatives and their constituents continued, it must bare the effect of cutting off the connexion, of severing the bond of mutual attachment, and enabling the representatives to go against the interests of their constituents.— ' This was ast assertion which he was sure would . not , be contradicted; and he would put it to any Gen- Itleman who had read the lists of divisions is 'that House, which had recently appeared in publications, which it would not be orderly to mention in that House, whether they were not of opinion that many of the names would not have appeared on the side on which they were ranged, if that had been the first Session of Parliament. This being the case then, it became the duty of that House to take the subject into its consideration. He knew and was prepared for the parliamentary tactics which would call upon him , to state the remedy he had to pro pose; but he was ready to state, that the re medy, he had to suggest was this, that, as there was a number of places, without popu lation, which had therefore no just right to return representatives, they ought to be disfranchised; and the right of election transferred to other places po pulous and wealthy : that the elective franchise, which was at present withheld, should be given to copylfolders, who were very numerous in many parts of England ; and that as the feudal system was now wholly abolished, the policy of which was to give a preference to landed over personal property, this lat ter description of property ought to be admitted to the right of election. He should therefore, in the first place, propose, that the right of returning Members to Parliament, which should be taken from the desolate and impoverished boroughs, should be transferred to the rich and populous towns, such as Birmingham and Manchester, and to the populous counties, such as Yorkshire, which at present re turns only two Members, notwithstanding its vast extent and wealth. He would have the right of vot ing spread over the whole population : he would have all partake of its genial influence ; he would have that right exercised in an unobjectionable and impartial way ; he would not have ohnogious bo roughs; though, if the reform were to oidt,e piale, which he desired, property would, and always must have, a most powerful influence. It was not in the nature of things to derive property of power.; but its influence would be exerted then in a less objec tionable manner. He objected strongly to the pre sent state of representation—he objected, in com mon with the general feeling of the country, to one h un d red and eighty-two personscontinuing toinfluence the nomination to the seats,as well as to the votes of that House. He objected to the boroughs ; they were bought and sold like matters of common traffic ; they were brought iuto the public market, and made matters of commerce ; they were disposed of like cattle. Were these things agreeably to the Constitution ; were these facts in conformity with the boasted " full, fair, and free representation of the people ?" Were not these things the sources of Venality, and the inlets to cor ruption ? Reverting to the use that might be made of boroughs "in certain situations, lie would ask, whether they did not see individuals who had return ed to this country " loaded with the wealth of either , world," influencing the nomination to them When such individuals, who were powerful because they were wealthy, might influence the votes of that . House—individuals who must have imbibed arbitrary and despotic notions—did not the fact adduce a seri ous ground of alarm ? Most unquestionably it did; 2nd he could not reflect on it without a sort of dis gust. He viewed it with forebodings not favourable to the liberties of the subject, nor to the stability and prosperity of the Empire. Then what would he do with those boroughs ? Why; he would get rid of them by removing the right of nomination to pope lous places—to successful, rich, and manufacturing towns. That is what he would do with them; and 1 such an alteration was agreeable to his idear of a I "full ) fair, and free represattation. of.tke.molost! Mr.. Pitt, a Statesman whose talents were **know. !edged by all ranks, but whose name was indelibly marked in the history of his country as the promoter of measures which did not tend to raise the country in character and power;—Mr. Pitt, in the early pe-1 riod of his public life, had manfully, eloquently, and justly contended that a reform in that House was necessary for the preservation of the liberties pf the People. Mr. Pitt - laid down a plan of the reform which he wished to-be made ; and it would have been w ell for that House and for the country had that plan been adopted. Mr. Pitt entertained the same notions that he (Mr. B.) did on that subject, particularly with respect to the boroughs. In the plan proposed, Mr. Fitt animadverted - on and denounced thirty-five or thirty-six boroughs, contending that they ought to be got rid of In the way which he (Mr. 13.) had suggested on ,the present occasion. Though ani madverted on at that period, those Boroughs still s r i e t n u ' a i t i i onedn. in the rot o e n d ly t eli st P i i l existed, d l atedand , b u t were Mill in mew a a d rhe e, t7he a a t l t i e fbe r e s weties of wealthytT'sa: the H c a . i sipe i t n og t fi l l or ! sttl i h :l :o 6 ll br lt is l s s were species s o kf com merce, j w eart ith sto t h h e e l best r o i f g c h o t u o r f s t e l:e to subj ge ect t w as ou erou bi lj e be th a " , ti. lie would m c earhorthoue re b m oro ov u e thghre and d id of n oonimatto! y get two uninfluenced votes. With respect' to the moral and constitutional tendency of traffic for Boroughs, he !would ask, whether the venality and unconstitution ality were not greater in him who gave 50001. to'in fluence the nomination, than in the poor, uninform ed, simple individual who sold his vote for 5t.? To his mind they were equally great. On the present occasion he had it in contemplation to move for leave to bring in two Bills, the object of which would be, to throw the right of those boroughs — of those unio 'habited places into the country, add to equalize ulti mately the number of Members for each county. If he were allowed to bring in those Bills, he thought . It would do much to win the confidence of the people. One of his Bills would be for the purpose of giving to copyholders, as well as freeholders, a right to vote, a right which had been strenuously contended for in the last century. He thought the statute of Henry the VI. and Blackstone supported that right. Blackstone in his treatise on Copyrights, when alluding to this disputed point, says, in effect,—" I must decide against the right, because I have nothing more to do than to explain the Constitution ; I am not to create laws, I can only describe what those laws are. I can only define their limits—l cannot extend them." Such was Blackstone's opi nion, but he plainly hinted that the Copyholder ought to have the right of voting. He left out Scot land purposely, because the subject was in much better bands. With respect to his own motion, he would contend that the nominations to the Boroughs by a few individuals sainmed up the great evil. If Ile were to argue theoretically, he should say that an oligarchy of this kind, which formed the House of Commons by the influence of money, could not at , tend to the liberties and independence of the peo ple. He would maintain, that such a House of Commons must be dangerous to both: - Arguing theoreticidly, he would- say, that• such a House would cover any act of any Ministers, that it would on all occasions bring them in an indemnity. Such a House would rather be independent of the people, rather than the 'representatives of the people. It I would render the Sovereign too secure to act in al way that would otherwise subject him to checks from Parliament. It was true, that according to the present state of representation, any Member 4 . might, single-handed, expose the acts of a Minister ; • but it did not prove that the House was a full, fair,l and free representation - and very possibly the Mi- nister might be exposed but -to be sheltered. The j 'Present House of Commons, if he were to speak his- I torically, it had not on the Walcheren and many ; other great questions sympathized with the feel. ings of the people. He did not mean to al rude to the particular acts of any Ministers, r of any party, he merely referred to the con duct of the House, as now formed, on quest lions in which the people had felt a strong interest, which had warmly aroused the whole nation. On, the whole, his plan still remained what he had for- , merly described it to be; it remained unaltered.—' There might be difference as to any precise plan ; but all admitted, that the Rouse, as now formed, was I not a distinct representation of the People. It was not; it was an oligarchy. It was however said, that the House contained enough of the feelings of the country to answer all desired purposes for the peo ple. lie would maintain that It did not ; it contain ed mote than month of trbteicratic feeling. „ha* was now to be seen party opposed to party ; entrap; overbearing aristocratic influence in opposition to a' rich and powerful borough faction. Would any one contend, that such a House could be called a re presentation of the people? He maintained, that it ; was an inadequate representation 'of the people.— , He wished the Parliament to have the confidence I of the subject; to destroy the suspicion that the j Commons had a separate interest from that of the} Nation. He trusted, that he might be allowed to bring in the Bills. Such an act would do more to al lay the asperities and to cool the violences of the peo ple at the present moment, than could any effort of the Home Secretary of State. In conclusion, he apologized for the time he had occupied, and la. mented that the House should be so thinly attended on such an occasion ; for he thought the importance of the cause would cover the weakness of the indivi dual, who had ventured, in discharge of his public duty, to bring it forward. He repeated hiS hope, that he might be allowed to bring in his Bills ; for the people well knew, that " England never can be un done but by her Parliament." lie moved for leave to bring in two Bills, to repeal the 31st Geo. 11. Cud to give,to copyholders the right of voting, &c. The Marquis of TAVISTOCK seconded the mo tion. He commented. on the present state of repre sentation, observing, that if the House were to act ; in any way that. was not palatable to the Minister;.., the threat of dissolution was immediately suspended over their heads, and the meaning of that threat Wag pretty well underatood. The cause of this evil was the inadequacy of representation. trusted they should not be again told *Loom s n could not cease to exist—that it was inseperike from human constitutions. He fervently, hoped th ,4 a strong stand etallabe avadeagaiaat proaption, bipeoppietise Ave proposed Reform. But such an argument would be injudicious, for though "corrept practices are bad, , corrupt precepts' are much worse. Firmly did he' believe the opinion of the President Montesquieu, that the destruction of the English Constitution would be ineVitable, when the Legislative Power be-' came more corrupt than the Executive. He would avert that doom by checking, if not by crushing, corruption ; and if they would not, that the liber ties of the people 'should continue to crumble to dust—to fall to decay—he thought they ought to ap prove of every measure to reform the representation of L the people. Mr. W. ELLIOTT, in a speech of considerable length, opposed the motion. It appeared to him to be nothing less than staking,. on a precarious and desperate chance, the experienced and acknowledged benefits of a Constitution, which had hitherto been the admiration of the world. Those who were ad vocates for a reformation in Parliament, were bound ttoieshepeow,plfieretw,ertehatditmheinhisahpedpirnesasndan,d seperoonsdpleyr:tythoatf that dimiuution resulted from the defects in the re , presentation. The existing commercial distresses ,were out of the question. They were of a tMporary nature, and originated in different circumst ances, al **ugh' be was by no means disposed to conceal their magnitude; convinced its he was, that to be fully sensible of our dangers was the surest mode of bring- i ing to a successful issue the dreadful contest in viliich we were engaged. It might be said, that those dis tresses p re a se r onset and from e the r war. s ßutthat, ince the Revolution, i nsupporting Parliament only expressed the sense of thepe ttlo o d p tt l i e ines ; however• mistaken that s ense m i g ht b e , a reference to history would indubit a bly es t a bli s h. Th e A merican ill w er war, so o adverse ewhic rsetho:tivureityfealt by Greatndsoundpo ß li r c it y ain policy, and day, was a war in which the people concurred. Only one petition from the people had been pre sented against it. It was the virtue of Parliament, and not the virtue of the people, that put an end to that war. So with the present war, the people were so comiktely with Mr. Pitt in the support of it, that the enemies of the war in Parliament retired from their seats for a time, in utter despair, of making Roy impression on the minds of the people, favourable to what they conceived to be the true view of things.-- The inference was, that the present war was not attri. bulable to any defect in the representation, since the people maintained as strongly as their representati v p s the principle on which it proceeded, and vet to the war the existing distresses of the country were attri. hatable. In general the H ouse y particular spoke imperfections sense human i, n o t f t p th la e n peo c p o l u e ld ; a r n e d mo a y s e dec ision, no c n o a u tu rse re--- of n o w i p sd la o n in c: l ; t oom o l r t e c e sne l p pias r :u o irirt d ineitt u ite c iocso o ora: d eel4itsdi l irmert t u i lei t pt l o i tu n iroin t i c t : si : n i i, ; t : h) : d ! ef l . the tka l o ' hit ile si r t o er f w w th ou e n u ld ß ld s r . i t at os % incapable u . being defined.; it could 6e deducea only froth prat itice; it consisted of mutual checks and controuls among its component parts, the mode of operation of which it was not very easy to ascertain : it stood on prescription ; • it:grew out of the feelings and ha. i bits and necessities of the people. The actual stat e of things therefore was the only criterion by which Ito judge of our institutions. Let this rule be applied tia representation. It was true that Birmingham was i not represented—that Leeds was not represented-- I-that Sheffield was not represented: But were these places less flourishing than York, which was repre. sentatl- 7 -then • Hull, which was represented--than ! _Bristol, which was represented ? Were the interests of any particular place neglected in the House ?-- I The fact was, that the House represented the whole country. But the reformation proposed would at one blow exclude from Parliament, many of those 1 who were best calculated to d 6 the country service. 1..N0 one wished more than he that there should he an ' identity of interest between Parliament and the people ; but he confessed that he did not wish to see Parliament whirled about by every blast of popular Opinion. There was no part of the proposition for reform, to which he so strongly' objected, as the re= atoration of triennial Parliaments. It was said that .they would be more pure. On what was this as sertion founded ? If experience were consulted it 'would be found that triennial Parliaments had beets more personally corrupt than septennial. . Their lonly effect on the people was to corrupt their morals , by taking them more frequently from their occupa tions. An analogy in favour of Reform had been attempted to be shown, from the reduction of the Representatives of Ireland. That reduction was necessary; the proposed Reform was unnecessary; . an 4 therefore .he would not hazard it. So with :e -1 spect to the proposed Reform in the representation iof Scotland, his argument was, that the present state of the representation of that country had existed for I above a century, and that no part of his Majesty's 1 dominions enjoyed greater prosperity. Why risk all ! this good? Besides, how vague, how undefined, how I opposite, were the opinions of those who professed thethselres to be the friends of reform! They scarcely got together at the Crown and Anchor Tavern, or at the Freemason's Tavern, before they began to dispute upon their respective plans. How would his Honourable Friend propose to reconcile these discbrdant opinions? how could he conciliate those who in 1793 presented a petition founded on the abstract rights of man ? how could he conciliate that great patriarch, as he was called,' of reform, Major . . Cartwright ? how would he conciliate those who maintained the opinions of Mr. Flood? A Society had lately been established under the name of " The Hampden Club." One of the resolution advertised as pVoceeding from this club was, "That according to the principles of the f.:amden , s t o a vv ii i t f i on an e d n repr esentation n i t w s e h r a e v i i n n g the in. separable." geat Westminster,adiee and s he z p c p ti o o s i n ed sini o ld i ea f t re d t n h i t d p e Hon. (res someatMo se ra o li uM w-h hi o s P . !i flo a n. ta F x r w ie li n s d e c n o ti n t ei kli lia t te o a these suffrage, et hm l al Member eie s . p d vh efoorewyr /Mans? Whose minds did his Hon. Friend think ho **bald 'settle? •He (Mr. E.) could tell him what Winds he would unsettle. He would unsettle the minds of a large portion of the population of the Empire. He would unsettle the minds of many of those who were attached to the Constitution as it stood. lie Would tear up that stable anchor of the Slate--a4l`ejudice for antiquity, a reverence for an .cien t wage and acknowledged berafits ; and he' would turn the country adtiftupowthe rocks of vain specu lation and fantastic imaginary improvement. [Bear, haul] He confessed that he entertained some doubt with respect to the petitions for a reform in Parliament, which had been laid on the table of that House. The advocates of reform knew very well how to mimic the public voice. He did not, how. ever, believe that there was any thing like a general feeling on their side. In this opinion he was con firmed by their qwn complaints of the languishing state of the public mind on the subject, and of the necessity of stirring it up to exertion. To commence a Parliamentary reform at the present moment veu were it necessary, or advisable at any period, would be to commence the repair of a house in the hurricane season. At this critical period, was it prudent to call on the people to search the very foundations of the Commonwealth ? Such an at tempt would be only to make breaches, and to let in al the fury of the elements upon that venerable edi fice, which had stood so many storms and assaults. —On these grounds he should give his decided vote la p raye d rg agains t e u ta the ;ot hr that tt m y o toft t i o wt n hoe ; a n ihdi nd ou se rec e ive House. [L ou d earnestly ortruesdt negativelcyr ie hop h oped a s of /tear, fe tl t i: .l, hear, hear I] nr E tol T ef m o h , a N i sn, reasoning, ah h soooungi hadhn i) d j i yu ff se e tt r i n saa g gtr de m eo lt dw h n,,, t i l t : hi e t ;litiheMgghert.nnelraoiYnl:rteGernijo i 7 4 ~i ~G., E F , pli I N t 1E