The Sun. — London, England, 1852-03-26 00:00:00

Til E teretion to revise or review the who l e q uestion. If it should o be the province of the Noble Lord t o revise the ques ti,n n, he (Sir J. Walmsley ) would recomme nd him to take !te his serious consideration that part o t Parliamentary re form which he had left out of his Bill —a p art which, in his (Sir J. Walinslee's) opinion, was most im p ortant, as any l o e asure that did not include the protection of the ballot v a tildr as far as he could judge, be lightly esteemed by the rrPle of this country. His first objection to the measire n the Noble Lord was founded on the disp arit y between tihe borough and the county franchise. No gonad reason _ l4 Cl a been alleged, nor did he think that any could he:lleged, why the franchise should be 51. in a borough and to fi in a catanty, and unless Hon. Gentlemen were disposed admit !last he inhabitants of rural districts were less qua il:llos d ie exercise of political rights than t hose of ghs, r it (l trust that they would pres s forward for an equal boroumea d' su of justice for the agricultural as for the manufacturing 2etricts. The proposition to enfranchise by means of the ‘us. direct taxation appeared to him to be a step in the right 'direction s Inasmuch as it recognised taxation to be the basis tf,representation—(Hear, hear)—and he trusted that that frm s ciple would be further carried out. But he could not colt upon another eortion of the Bill with the same favour tole view. He conceived that the retention of the rate tial'ing clause for the q ualification of the voter was an un tigated evil, and he thought that the House would allow lat such a measure as the ratepaying clause had been a fruitful source of litigation, chicanery, and fraud, and that it had been an unnecessary restriction to the right of bottnE—(Hear, hear.) It might not be necessary to increase the number of Members for large towns, e at he could not conceive how the Noble Lord could justify the retention of two Members to a small and insignificant borough, while he refused a Member to lame populous, and important districts. Another feature O, !that Bill to which he ( Sir J. Walmsley) objected was , . ..hat it did not remove nominati ‘n boroughs, which were a eying evil.—( Hear, hear.) In his opinion, the interes sof agriculture, commerce, and manufactures were identical, and 11 Pon this broad view of the question ought the electoral Power to be based. He had referred on a former occasion to the numerous demands which had been made by the people at various periods for enfranchisement. and he had pointed ^ s et the acknowledged loyalty and intelligence of the en franchised classes as evidences of their fitness for the exercise Of political rights. He had also advertel the to eo the patience and forbearance which had been shown by pple under s lrhat he conceived to be very unnecessary and unjust nutmeat, and subsequent thought had convinced him . that reason united with justice in demanding a recon struction- of the electoral system. So far from perceiving any cause for apprehension in extending the basis of the representation, he was persuaded that that was the only course by which they could remove the existing causes of 'discontent, and the enly means by which any Government could ever obtain the full confidence of the eeople.—(Hear, hear.) Twenty years had elapsed since the Reform Bill was introduced, and, with all its defects, there could be no doubt of the satisfactory results of that measure, which removed many flagrant abuses. While, however, he Italy acknowledged the benefits of that Bill, he could no !drat bbrlbyea -to its defects. The o vile of the nominsitien laistsugris were `CF. that fifty-six rotten boroughs were placed in Schedule A, tut nearly an equal number were retained as a sop to the , 'oligarchical party; and, altogether the Reform Bill of 1832 was one of the most aristocratic measures offered to the _nation. The effects of the Chandos clause, in involving the occupiers of the soil in a political serfdom, were fore told. There were 350,000 houses in England and Wales . alone, -whose occupants, although assessed at between 10e and 501. annual value, were totally excluded from • . any share in the representation. Surely, then, they might fairly ask for a revisio n of the system which twenty years' experience had sho wn to be so ineffective for its declare the d object. Within the last twenty years the population of country bad considerably increased, its commerce had ex handed, popular intelligence had been more widely in diffus broead d, and our national litera ture had progressed. But, contrast with all this, there had been no advance and no • improvement in our representative institutions Five-sixths ef the adult male population of these realms continued to be excluded from all voice either in framing the laws they had to obey or in the distribution of the funds of which they had • to contribute so large a proportion. A paper was laid upon . the table of the House two sessions ago, stating the number of electors in the United Kingdom to be 1,050,107 ; being 1 in 30 of the population, or lin of the adult males. That ' e gave an average of 1,60 e votes to each of the 656 Mem bers of that House—he said votes rather than electors, • because many electors had a plurality of votes un der different qualifications, and it was supposed that the total number of electors did uot exceed three-quarters of a million. Thus upwards ot six millions of the adult male Population by the existing system were kept without the pale of of the Constitution ; and there was a grievous and unj monopoly of electoral power in the exclusive hands of a comparatively small minority of the nation. He had said •• that the total number of the electors would give an aver , age of 1,600 to each member of that House; but the real fact was that 329 Members, or a clear majorsty ri, only rep resen ted 430 electors each, whilst heoy re . presented 2,729 electors each. Calne with 159 electors had the same power as Stockport , with 2,400 ; and 18,0 4) Man chester with 12, 000 electors, or Marylebone with , had no more weight in that House he than Ttford with 210 electors, or Knaresborough with 230. These facts suffi ciently demonst r ated the way in which the influence o f the larger boroughs could be neutralise marshalling that the power of the smaller ones against them d by . He our representative system had made no advance, but he believed it bad actually retrograded; 184 of our constituen cies had a less number of electors now than they had at former periods. If he wer e told that the gross number of electors had increased, he wonld reply that the increase had taken place in counties where extraordinary exertions had been made for special objects, and in the boroughs which were included in those counties; and that the register for the English counties showed a decrease of 13,600 electors in the year 1840-50, as compared with the numbers in 1+46-7. It was said that electoral power ought not to be based on • mere numbers; but in truth at present it was neither based on numbers nor on property, nor on numbers and property -• combined ; and indeed he could not tell upon what it was based. The ntatistics given by Mr. Alexander Mackay, in his pamphlet on Parliaments ry Reform, and which he had never heard controverte d, showed that in the year 1811 the total amount of the poor - ra te assessment of the country was ' 85 millions; and of that sum be stated that 7 millions were • represented in that House by 329 Members, and the remain ing 78 millions by 329 Members. What was the practical tendency of such a system? To render that House subser vient to the territorial aristocracy, and, instead of a on of real rep r esentation of the people, to make it a representat the peerage, the army, the navy, the Church, and the Go vernment. The taxation of the country was levied unequally, and tended to restrict the expansion of trade and commerce. 'Wherever a barren rock was to be found among our colonial possessions, a governor, lieutenant-governor, and a costly staff of useless officials were saddled upon the public purse; pensions and sinecures were distributed with an unsparing hand ; and a system of Church patronage was administered, as injurious, he believed, to religion as it was offensive to the consciences of a large portion of the people. To remedy these evils—moral, political, and financial—hie Honourable Friend (Mr. Hume) had brought forward this measure of Parliamentary Reform; and, believing it to be safe, practi cable, and constitutional, he should give the motion his humble but earnest support. There might be those who ap prehended dangers and. difficulties from a measure which sought to add five or six millions of the adult male popula tion to the electoral registry of the 'United Kingdom ; bit for his part he saw no such dangers, nor apprehended any such difficulties. There was indeed a danger; but it arose from a very different source—from the refusal to do justice to men who not only knew their rights, but knew their power to enforce them. The present motion only aimed at correcting abuses which time and a vicious system had pro- I duced ; and the present period of comparative pros• perity and domestic tranquillity appeared to him emiueutly calculatd for the calm consideration and settlement of this e important question. The only sounds that they now heard of the injustice under which the pet pie laboured, or believed they laboured, were those of calm re monstrance and enlightened reason ; but none might venture to predict how long such a favourable state of things might continue. The burdens which the people now bore might soon become insupportable ; the evils that they now endured might ere long assume an erepect which might drive the masses to desperation, and they might approach that House in a temper which alt must deprecate but none would be able to resist. Should such a time ever arise— which he prayed the wisdom of that House to avert—then they would see when too late the political folly of treating with contumely the just demand of millions of their fellow-subjects. By ' timely c oncession to that just demand of hey, content would stren becausethe • the taxes would th en be imposed, the concurrence and consent of all. M . H. DRUMMOND said the excuse urged by the two Hon. Gentlemen who had preceded him for bringing forward the present question was that the country was in A state of comparative tranquillity. Hon. Gentlemen were anxious to send the Members of that House back to their constituents, . . and yet theycOcupied'a whole night in discussing a measure which could not possibly be passed. No less than six gentle men bad brought forward measures for irop-oving the repre sentation, but he trusted, coming in that shape, the Govern . re, it would not fall into the error that had been committe i d • by its predecessor s. but that they wo u ld.at once repudiate t. The present measure differed from — all -otherri that it con - tarried no principl.e. The Noble Lord in his Bill connected - s the right of voting with a beneficial interest of 101. ; but there was no more connexion between the right of voting • . and 107. than there Was between the right of voting and 9/. ho Withlaid this rega rddown to a t s h the e rule,xer- 19s. 6d. The system was altogether absurd, and the mea• _ sure contained no real principle. cise of the elective franchise, and as the only essential rule, that the exercise of the franchise should be co-exte all would include nsive with di. rect service to th e State. He those classes whose pockets the Chancellor of the Exchequer could reach, all those whom the rate-collector called upon— and he would go further and say where a man was too poor to tempt the rate-collector or the Chancellor of the Exche quer. it he had rendered service to the state—as, for instance, a soldier after his discharge, or a militia-man, he should say he was entitled to exercise the right of voting.— (Hear.) One point had had an adventitious i mpor tance conferred upon it, although it had reall y nothing to do with the ques tion—he meant the ballot. What could it possibly signify to them how the electors voted, whether secretly or openly, whether standing upon one leg, or upon both?—(A. laugh.) It seemed to him that that was a question that might be fairly left to the constituents. He had himself special rea sons for preferring the vote by ballot, but he would not now enter upon that question. t But they must bear in mind that when they added to the electors, as was pro posed by the present measure, they did not add a similar to a similar thing. It was not the mere addition of electors of the same kind, but electors of a very different kind. He would give an illustration of what he meant. He would take the case of the savings banks. He found by a return which he held in his hand that out of 1,000,00 contributoro in the savings banks there were only 2,000 who possessed 200/. and upwards, while there were no less than 677,000 who possessed less than 201. Let them take that as a guide or an illustration. In point of fact, whet , they had extended the franchise a s far as they proposed they would represent the poverty of the country, and the wealth would not be fairly represented, but actually overborne. He had beard other Hon. Members talk of education as the basis of representation, but be could not see any conthenexio ec bee e , tween reading, writing , and arithmetic, and el ' franchise. The 'argument, however, showed that they had considered the danger of extending the franchise, and try ing, by indirect means, to correct the evil. Much bad been said of the good old times and of the practice ot the Con stitution—the practice of that House formerly was that no one should sit in it unless he possessed a certain amount in land. Land was formerly the only means of possessing Now, property—trade bei n g confined to the Jews, and after wards to the Lombar ds and the Flemings. however, things were totally changed—the essential was property, the accident was land. When the Honour able Gentleman brought forward a measure to do awaents y with the property qualification one of his argum was that that House did not regard the sanctity of their oaths. That was, he thought, a bad system.—(Hear, hear.) They encouraged the violation of oaths—they encouraged uries to break their oaths, and to find men not guilty be .o , . ~1210 iheY dinaPpreyed of their offences being visited with capital punishment. If they did not wish to have Hon. ; Members violate their oaths, let them appoint a Commission such as had been appointed in the case of the St. Alban's election. If they had a standing Commission he thought they Would soon find out what Gentlemen were without the necessary property qualification. Let there be a good Chancery lawyer and a good common-law lawyer on the Commission, and he was bound to say that would make the ' Cominission effective. If they hail not that equality of pro- 1 pery they would have equality of power, and that was as good. Where there were two animals, one of whom had got something which the other had not, they might depend upon it there would be a battle.-(A laugh.) If there were two men, the one rich and the other poor, unless the rich man had something to deteed him which the other had not, there would be free trade between them pretty quickly.--(A laugh.) They must combine priperty and power together, for civi lised society was constituted on the principle of preserving acquired property. - What they were to provide against was not peaceable times. A ; pip was worth nothing that could only sa lin smooth water They must have a consti tution that would stand the storms. There always had been. and there ever would be, times when masses of starving people were to be found, and they might depend on it the severest moral anguish any man could endure was seeing his children starving and himself willing to work and unable to obtain it. They might rest assured that the sufferings of Ugolino would not be less keen if inflicted by a constitutional government term by a Florentine despot. The interests of the landed and the other classes were amal gamating every day. Fur his part he desired to see the great estates and properties subdivided, and the number of small proprietors increased There was inherent in the nature of things something more permanent in land than in manufactures. Take the case of a labourer-no m tter whether he earned five shillings or five guineas a week, he had no regard for anything beyond the ea of the week-he eat and he drank the whole of it, and there was an end of the matter.-(Laughter.) The manufacturers only looked to their temporary profit; but landed proprietors tooked to the permanent value of their property, and were continually laying out something to make that value greater-(Hear, hear, and " Oh," from the Opposition )- though no doubt there were exceptions -( Hear and a laugh, from the Opposition.) There was, at all events, this advantage attached to the se stem of rotten boroughs, that: they facilitated the return of persons to that House when it was advantageous to have them.-(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord lately at the head of the Government had recently been reproached with the basis of his Administra tion, and with some truth. But until Hon. Members had to form a Government they would not know the difficulty of doing so, for it was not enough to find the best man for an office, but whether some "enlightened" constituency did not prefer some empty chatterer.- (Hear, and a laugh) He however did not want them to recur to the " rotten borough" system, but to suggest that if Ministers, as the servants of the public, were expected to come ex officio to that House whenever they were required (whether they had seats in or not), in order to be interrogated, all the advan tages of the rotten borough system would be reaped without the disadyantageS. Governments would be emancipated, and the fop:neaten. of adnalvistratjone con -li,, cv ct, WI towar procession l,l-11 . 0. former, be sh uld like to reform the House of Lords-(Hear, hear, from the Liberals)-which he deemed the weakest part of the constitution, and the one which required the most attention.-(Hear.) The power of this House had increased, was increasing, and ought to be ditninished-(Hear, hear)- and he e anted to strengthen the Lords to withstand i (Hear.) He particularly wished to put an end to voting be proxy.-(Hear.) Then, again, he thought that no nobleman should have hereditary right to the peerage unless they bad the means of supporting its dignity, for there could not be a greater misfortune in a country than a pauper nobility.- (Hear.) At the same time the Crown ought to have the power of creating peers for life, in order to raise to the Upper House man who were likely to be useful there, although they might not have the means of transmitting the income necessary tor the maintenance of the dignity. Sir P. WOOD said if the Chancellor of the Exchequer had adopted the suggestion thrown out by the Noble Lard (Lord J Russell) of availing himself of Thursday nights for the purpose of carrying on the business of the Govern ment - that night would not have been consumed with this discussion , than which, however (if the House were not to be engaged upon the supplies) he could scarcely conceive of any more important. Now, he contended that they were called upon to ewer into the discussion by the declaration which had been delivered by the Noble Earl (Earl Derby) in another place, that the principle of his Government would be to oppose a barrier to the power of demagogues, and upheld the Monarchy against the democracy. Now what did the Noble Lord mean by that? What did be mean by so contrasting the principles of his Government with those of the Government he had succeeded ? Had the late G ov ern_ ment at all adv.nced democraey in a bad sense? In a bad sese it msant insurrection. And there certainly had been two feeble attempts at insurrection in the country during the late Administration- one in Ireland under ell. S. O'Brien, and the other in England under-he would not say whoin.-(A laugh,) And both attempts had been put down, one by the energy of Lord Clarendon, the other by the vigilance of the late Home Secretary, sustained by the good sense and good feeling of large masses of the people. Democracy was a vague word, like " protection." - (Liberal cheers.) It might mean total exclusion of the monar chical-element of the Constitution, or it might mean merely justice to the people. Now on the continent there were two classes of governments -omitting cases of military occupation, which he did not call governments at all-in which these opposing principles were illustrated. In one class -in which was developed the here- high baonarchical an or des potic prirciple-in Austria or Russia, for instance, ditary sovereign, invested with an imaginary perfec.ion, carried on the Government with such small counsel as he chose to call to his assistance, with what was con ceived to be a fostering and p aternal hand, providing for the happiness of his people, who had nothing to do with the Goeernment but to obey, and were not allowed to think for themselves, lest they should discover the imposture and exercise their power-the policy pursued by the Governments of this class being that which war s or ex pressed in a single sentence o nce s p oken by the Emper Francis-" I do not want learned men, but good subjects," and any little unpleasantness that might arise being sup pressed by military force. In the other class of Govern ments, to which our own belonged, there was an her an ed uippertary so vereign, with a represen tative assembly and chamber, composed of persons, from their position, educa tion, and property , be st suited for that dignity and the bulk of the people, instead of being prevented from thinking or acting for themselves, were encouraged and trained to do so by the municipal and parochial systems on which they had to regulate their local affairs; and thus they were edu cated for the more important duty of choosing those who should represent them in the Legislature. Now, the princi ple of the former of these chives of governments he consi dered the principle of fear; that of the latter confidence. - (Cheers trot the Liberals.) And on the principle of confi dence in the people he advocated the enlargement of the franchise. He believed that it would be found soon by all nations that there was no basis on which Governments cou ld rest except that of confidence in the peeple.- (Hear, hear.) Not merely in their affections, which might be influenced by passions and impulses, but in their political education-their power of thinking and acting and judging for themselves. and their appreciation of those h i g h moral an d intellectual qualifications which ought to fit a man for taking a part in the government of he nation. Now, did the Noble Lord (Derby) mean to depart from this pr inciple, or to maintain that it ought not to be extended ? Were we to have that most monstrous form of government an oligarchidel de.: ooracy, under which one uaillien out of five millions of.men alone had votes? Such ase stem would show a total want of confidence in the people ; and no Go vernment. could stand many months which should commit the most fatal error committed by one of the greatest men who ever held power-that of declaring himself against a re form of the representation of the people. Our whole career was one of progress ; and were we to stand etall here, and here alone? The Hon. Member for Surrey said the sup porters of extension of the suffrage were obliged to admit that there was danger in it, and that the only resource was in the good di spo sition of the people. But were h e Constitution people than move d ang erous within the pale of t without it? Now,' the Honourable Gentlemen's illus tration of the starving animals would have been more a pplicable some ye ars ago, before reform or repeal of the corn laws, as j a B g 47, the wh d e i n s as b t r r o e u a s d s u c e ar w ci t t e o . be of 1817, or more recently in had' for sd. was sold for lid. ; and when he was able to tell the people "It is the hand of God, and you muer bear it patiently," which he could not have the ball said had the all cornhe - l a ws not been repeale d. With regard to ot, need Sag was that his constituents wanted it, and that he l h t f w t a h s e s o r m e p e r t e i s m e s . s h a a i d d v t o n te t d hn f e o e r w it h , o an e d up s p h n o r u t l e d d the soe x a t g e a ns n ion tative system, ".Look at France!" He had looked at France, and considered that the lesso n to be derived from the cala mities of that country was to avoid the errors which had oc casioned them. Up to the revolution of 1766 the Govern ment of France had :been of the despotic or paternal chruc ' a racter be had described the people had no political inst tion fitting themfor the functions o' government, or the ex ercise of the franchise; the nobility were exempted from tax ation under which the masses of the community were op pressed; and there arose at last a tremendous insurrection, since which the country had bee Pin a constant state of con fusion. Eyen under Louis Philpe the principle of confie dense in the people had not been acted upon ; the country was ruled from Paris by orders sent down to 'the prefects. Under the last portentous revolution; which had placed the President on-he was going to say his throne - there was to be general voting or universal suffrage; there had not been a single public meeting held. Conceive of such a change in this country with'out a public eeting t o consider it. The fact was, however, the people ot m France had not been taught how to exercise toolitical power, and had never known what it was to bow a majority (Hear, hear) -46 that a minor Hear,ithear,y fou and laughter.) This, nd no better resource than taking up_ arms.--( theen e was the example pointe Molt n order to deter us fro to m extending . t hy. f ran chise ! W, t was rather a warning us to do so. It proved how unsafe it was to attempt to ex clude large classes of people from the representation. And such recours'e - was at variance with, and likely to destroy e our. o C hta o d nst i i t ti , e n ti o o t n. do T ne he 'Reform 'Bill had removed gross abuses the Constitution, and had improved its machinery ; and so some of its moat ancient landmarks would have been swept away o s w o n ; and b a hy t a p was said " All is-nowg . m the proper period to dolt et and calm. Why rai se tion of the representati Wy n; becauseoo o p th u e la r r t Convulsion.mthat theowu laariJust steeafely considered. as o s r t o fatal error to withhold Cath olic em ancipation until the had to confess that they did so w hich conceded it from fear of the conse quences of longer refusing it; a been the result of a longer refusal of and such would have reform. Constitu tion ought to be allowed to go on , and expa The it se lf: wherever there was life there n ' and develops must d Some persons had recentl y said the y did not. desirelle progress. constant changes. But chang e was the natural result of the action of a living principle i n a state. What chan g es had aocact ion w itbin the last twenty y ears-in ever y thin g except the re- presen tative systeml The commerce of the country had been inordinately developed-(Hear, hear),-and so had ma nufactures.-(Hear.) Whole towns had risen up; and to one of ,these (Birkenhead), which had not been in existence at the time of the Reform Bill, it was proposed by the late Government to extend the franchise, of which St. Alban's was to be deprived. Railways, again, had everywhere given rise to new towns along their lines. And it was not only in material development that changes had occurred, ut moraL and intellectual education had greatly advanced band the National Society, which some years ago had only 400,000 scholars, now had upwards of 1,000,000. The increase of savings banks and mechanics' institutes led to the same con clusion. Why, then, was everything to progress except the representative system? At the time of the Chartist attempt be knew a body of workmen engaged about that House, although they bad promised to defend it, had declined to be sworn, not choosing, as they said, to act against their " order"-an ominous and remarkable expression. And what made them an "order?" Only exclusion from the franchise.-( Hear, hear.) Give them the franchise, and they would be transfused into the rest of the community. The Hon. Member for Surrey had derided the 10/. or 5/• quali fications for voting, as having no principle in them. The principle, however, was not in the exact sum chosen, but in the choosing of any sum as a test; and he 40s. free hold test was almost as old as parliament itself. At the same time he 'should have no objection to some of the SUN, LoN DON, other tests suggested by the Honourable Member, couple, with residence he thought such a franchise would be good. He confessed. however, that he could not under stand, and he could never admit the prificiple of abstract right.—( Hear, hear.) The seconder of the motion had ob served that he could not comprehend on what principle such and such things were permitted in our Constitution. Why, we bad not a cut and dried Constitution— (Hear, hear,) —but we tried to perfect it as enecla as we could by means of the existing machinery. Whey could have general prin ciples, however, although not abstract rights; and one general principle should be to trust in toe people.—(Hear, hear.) It might be contended that, either from a want of education, or from their shifting their residence from place to place, or from other causes, portions of the community w ere unfit to exercise the franchise; but it would be a mon strous thing to say that there ought to be only a million and a half of voters in the country.—(Hear, hear.) The people of Belgium strongly resembled our own in two essential particulars—in their conversance with municipal government, and in their attachment to religion. In the deep religious faith of the people of Belgium was found the best security for order and good government. He rejoiced that the present oiecussion had taken. place at this par ticular moment, although, on the other hand, the idea that any Bill on this subject could be passed this session was quite out of the question.—( Hear, hear.) In support of these annual motions of the Hon. Member fur Montle se he had always declined committing himself to a p aticul e. plan — (Hear, hear) —wishing rather to' affirm the general pen ciple of reform; but he would vote for this or any other motion which was likely to lead to an extension of the franchise. He was now desirous that the Government would state, not envy what they did not like in the shape of re form, but what they . did like, because a Government mea sure might be carried, whereas an independent motion might fall to the ground. He rejoiced at a past declaration of the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London on the t ' hat st to of a subject of the franchis e, but ther e was also the declaration in the Speech from the T hrone this sesston, the t h e representation was not satisfacto r y (Hear, hear. ) He did not think, in the teeth of sech declarations, that any Government could long exist which opposed What appeared to be so essential a measure as reform in the Parliamentary representation, and any Government which might succeed the present would, he thought, whether they liked it or not, be compelled to bring in such a measure. If, at the next general election, the people pro nounced for such reform, he did not despair getting it at the hands of lion. Gentlemen opposite. As yet we did not know how the country would deal with the questions of Maynooth,Protectioteand Reform. [An Hon. Hember—" Or with anything else"]—and, theretoi e, he still had hope in the Hon. Gentlemen opposite. Without expressing any opinion upon those other measures contemplated, in the speech of the Hon. Member for Montrose, he claimed to be allowed a free judgment as to any particular scheme of re form ; but he confessed he should be dissatisfied with any plan unaccompanied by the ballot. , He would vote for the ballot whenever it might be proposed. Looking, however, to the impossibility of carrying such a measure through Par liament as was contemplated by the Hon. Member for Montrose, even were the first -reading to be agreed on that ;..ierootion taerecard„hie yote Richer for or against the present mutton. . - Mr. NAPIER—Sir, in much that has fallen from the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who has just sat down I en tirely concur; but I am afraid that if some of the prin ciples he has advanced are strictly followed out they must, in the end, lead to universal suffrage.—(Hear, hear.) Since I have bad the honour of a seat in this House I have had an opportunity of hearing these questions discussed at great length and with great ability. I have heard them discussed by the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London, and have felt a high delight anu pleasure in hearing from him those sound constitutional expositions which have, induced him to vote against those motions of the Hon. Member for I Montrose, ane others substantially in the same category with them,—( Hear, hear.) 1 agree with the Hon. and Learned Gentlemen in his strictures on the despotism which prevails in some of the countries of the continent. I abhor -itch despotism, and also the licentiousness and anarchy which have taken root elsewhere; and I fully acquiesce in the praise he has bestowed on the British Con stitution for the admirable manner in which it adapts itself to the imperfections of mankind. But I think, Sir, there are other modes by which the tranchise might be usefully ex tended than by so essential a change iu the principles of he onstitution as is now asked for.—(llear, hear.) The question to be considered is whether the particular mode pro posed, of lowering the property qualification, iseconsisteut with the principles of the Constitution, with the mainte nance of the Monarchy, and with the maintenance of that nereditary rank which we find in our House of Peers.— (lie tr, hear.) I own it is a difficult question to deal with ; out I do not agree with the Hon. and Learned Gentleman chat after the 101. qualification of the Reform Bill, the people were precluded from acquiring a further franchise.—(Hear, eear.) He says " we ought to have confidence in the people; we ought to rely upon their talents, industry, and virtue." Now, a•suredly every man by the exercise of such qualities may not only acquire a franchise, but may assist in hartno uising our free and happy Constitution.—(Haar, hear.) It is asserted that in our constitution as it stands there is mucu corruption, and that it must be got rid of. If it is to tie got rid of; I do not think it will be by these extravagant plans by these mere shifts and contrivances of the ballot box, but through the medium of education.—(Hear.) Secrecy is nut congenial to the English character.—(Cheers.) A man may dive his vote one way and pretend that he gave it another. fo prevent conflict with his landlord, a tenant might avail rumself of the ballot ; hut should we hence have a better state of things? Again, do you think that by lowering the franchise Sou get into purer atmosphere?—(Hear, bear ) Ott the contrary, you multiply the power of those who tam per with the bad passions of the people; and then, where is your appeal to their confidence?—(Hear, hear.) I can understand a professional calling being a test of property, as also (as was thrown out in a previous de bate) an investment in a savings bank; but in that case it would not be an abstract question whether there ought to be an extension of the franchise or not, be cause the franchise would be acquired by all those whose industry brought it within their grasp.—( Hear, hear.) That some limitation is necessary is evident from the question frequently asked, whether ladies are to be excluded from the franchise - (A laugh)—but the main consideration is, should we not derange the constitution by introducing a lower pro perty qualification?-(Hear, hear.) I am not saying I should be averse to an adjustment of the constitution ; but I do say, that by lowering the property qualification you would extend the influence and the power of corruption— (Hear, hear)—and that you could not check that corruption by resorting to secret voting.—( Hear, hear) ) I say, let the exercise of the franchise be open and independent—(Hear, hear)—and I assert, finally, that by lowering the property qualification you do not place the intelligence of the country in a fair position, but swamp it by mere numbers—that you put power into the hands of designing persons, and permit them to wield it to the peril of those institutions and of that monarchy, which I trust will ever be bound up with the peace and prosperity of this country.—(Cheers. ) Mr. ROEBUCK said that whilst be adopted the pre mises and conclusion of the argument of his Hon. and Learned Friend the late Solicitor-General (Sir W. P. Wood), he was altogether at a loss to account for his deter mination not to , rite-- upon this question, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman having admitted. that the subject ought to be entertains I, and that this was the proper time for con sidering it. Twenty yea's had elapsed between the passing of the first Reform Bill and the proposal of the second of the Noble Lord the Member for London. At the former period the country was governed by an oligarchy he used the word as more significant than ar istocracy—but under the reforming hand of the Noble Lord that power had undergone a very great change. The landed interest was no longer the predominant interest in this . country, for by the Reform. Bill of 1832 a large portion of the manufacturing wealth of this country was admitted to the representation , But the Noble Lord evidently found that he • had not done enough by his first Reform 13il1—that it was not sufficient to displace an oli garchy—but that there were thousands in this country whose intelligence and morality—not their lands or the power derived from wealth—demanded consideration at the hands of the State. Supposing that to be the opinion of the Noble Lord, he (Mr. Roebuck) would say that what was wanted was a body of men who represented, first the intelli gence, ant next the good feeling of the country. Did any body pretend to say that the intelligence of the country was wielded by those who possessed land—by those whom the Noble Lord (Russell) had 'represented as the " clay inte rest ?" It certainly was not lend that represented the intel ligence of the people— An Hits. MEMBER—As much as.any other portion of the community.—(blear, hear.) Mr. ROEBUCK continuing—l am sure this interruption must come from a person representing land, but I still deny that toe representatives of land interpret the intelligence of the country. The men'Whom he (Mr. Roebuck) would en franchise were those who combined what was called manual and intellectual labour—instructed artisans, who, although possessed neither wealth nor power; fulfilled all the condi t brie of good citizens. It was these very men who were ex eluded fom al voice in the government of the country. He confessed he did not understand the 'doctrine of abstract right.—( Hear, hear.) He did not know what it meant to say 'hat a man had a right to be represented, but of this he was certain, that, unless the intellectual • classes were represented, there could be no good government. For the object is good government Those persons ought to ne adopted into the' constitueticye He .would • show the House they were instructed, they were moral; and he would then ask who would refusetc ,recognise their claims? He- was 4alkinguoftirtstruat sr& artisatw_ A.i..man of that class did not live in a 10/. house ; he lived in lodgings. This would be found to be the case in London and the' great Manufacturing cities. He wanted such a man- to be a con stituent. He did not want him to•be a constituent because the man would agree with him—it was ten to one he would not - , -but he wanted him to be a constituent, first, because he was a man who, by his honest industry, had gained his.own position ; next, because he was an instructed man ; rand, third, because he was a moral man. On account of these three qualities, he placed him on a line with any other clisss in the,country ; an i ,i be said such a man as he had described was as worthy to be a constituent as any Hon. Member in that'House was to he* a Member. Where was the man to tell him be was •not ?--(Hear, -bear. ) • Mae he to be told by the possessor of thousands of _acres that they who made all that distinguishes England from every, other country ib the world, that they were not to be deemed worthy of sending a representativie :to that House? Representatives of land were demanded —but was not land to be found in other 'coun tries? Representatives of wealth were admitted, but was not wealth found in other .countries? But that which was not to be found in any oiler country in the world except —that body of men framed to endure labour, obe dient all the power •of mischief in their hands re they to be excluded ? and yet obey he now placed. before that. House; he It was those persons they oughtnot Members whether sented s e ? Yet this class, who distinguished this countries, by the present law—by no inten tionitcoaint htehlsaitnw, House.? u country from all law —but by accident—this class was who composed the and em he wa hwithin on the part of the Legislature, or on the part of those not going too tar in asking Representatives to that • the roll , of those who returned un rin tr g y i excluded from the representattineonnoefuteheetecob House. He had heard a .great talk of democracy, and 'the dangers Of democracy. lie had heard the Noble Lord's (Lord John Russell) answer the other night to the statement made by the Noble Lord at the'head of the Go vernment: that answer bad not, quite satisfied' him. Democracy, as be ( Mr. Roebuck) understood the term, was equivalent; if he might use the Latin phrase, to populus, as opposed to plebs. He did not want plebs to govern, as he did not want aristocracy ; he did not want any section of the people to govern ; he warted the populusi which answered more to our word " nation"--he wanted the nation to govern itself.—( Hear, hear.) As for the Noble Lord at the head of opr( ear. hear) —he the Government coming forward and sa yi ng. h e was opposed to Democracy, what did be mean? Did he mean that in this country the artisans had what were called C ommu nist prin ciples?. Not at all.—( Hear, hear.) The moment a man upn t o d gained o an !fet i d ) g the b sacredness yhis own labour, erty op _H he might be depended would be the man to come forward and say, "This is mine— it is the result of my own honest labour and of my own intel lect "—(Hear, hear.) You will find no Communist princi ples received among the artisans of this country.—(Hear, hear.) As for the ignorant and benighted labourers of the agricultural classes, he (Mr. Roebuck) did not know what ti VI 91:S /3/.4 FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 26, I'-‘s‘) which have been brought before our notice on the other side of the question—to bear in mind, for example, if they please, the case of Manchester and Thetford. In , North Cheshire we have only two towns ,of great manufacturing importance—Macclesfield and Stockport. The total popu- lation of the county is 249,000 ; the total population of the two towns I have just named is 92,000. There remains, therefore, as the difference between the two, 156;000. But while the two towns, with a pePulation of 92,090, return four Members to Parliament, the rural constituency, with 156,000, return only two' Members. . Take the case of South Cheshire, in which there is only one town, that of Chester. T:e nopulation of the county is 206.000, and the population of the town of Chester 28,000, leaving 178,000 of the popu lation of that - rounty who are put represented except by the county Members. The town a, Chester, with its population of 28,'00, returns :two Members to this House, while 'the rural constituency of 178,000 returns the same number.—(Cheere.) I will take the case of South Derbyshire, Where there is. only one considerable town, The population of South Derbjshire is 166.000, and that of the town of Derby - 40,000, leeving 115, 0 00 of the rural population. That population of 40 000 return' two Members, and the rural populatiOn of 125,090 returns the teme number. I will now take North Durham. It contains the important towns of Durham, G tteshead, &Judi Shields, and Sunderland The entire pepuletion of North Durham is 2;2,0 4 10, including both the town population and the coun try population; and this is nil in:eresti; g fact, that while ibe l ioptilation of the towns is exactly the same as the county population, yet the population ef the great commer cial towns I have named are represented by six Members, while- the purely agricultural population ot •136,000—the other moiety of Noah urban-are only represented by two Members.- (Cheers.) I might still pursue this. I will take the important county of Kent. West Kent has a population of 460,000. It contains four great towus— Chathem. Greenwich, Maidstone, and Rochester, one of these towns having a population of 100,000. The popula tion of the towns is 169,000, and the remaining rural popu lation is 228,0 0 0, yet. the urban population of 169,0110 re turns seven Members to Parliament, while the 228,000 only return the two Members for West Kent.—( Loud cheers.) Yes, but year after year we have been told that it is most unjust to the towns - that our representative sys tem is favourable to territorial influences, and that it •is an artificial means of giving preponderance to the landed in terest. We never heard a single word of these extraordi nary circumstances. We have heard a great many contrasts made between the number of representatives returned by the great towns in'" South Lancashire and the smaller boroughs in the south of England. But no Parliamentary Reformer has yet condescended to favour the House with the more extended views to which I have now alluded, views which I should hope will now be accepted as the result of a msre extensive and temperate experience.—(Cheers.) I will now appeal to that favoured region any mention of which is so favourably received in this House and whose f ort unes, commercial, Parliamentary , and political, are not only the subject of so many discussions in the House of Commons, but which is itself the theatre of so many leagues, confederations —(Cheers)—and associations. The people of this , part of the country are celebrated for their powers of statistical analysis.—(A laugh.) They favour us with the publication of tracts on, gaw ujr en.nuuma o, sou , / visOy 010 ee among o ther things, the profits that the colonels quainted with the most minute details. But they have never called the attention of the people to these facts. - (Cheers.) Here is the case of North Lancashire. There are four consi derable towns in North Lancashire—Blackburn, Clitheroe, Lancaster, and Preston. The population of North Lanca shire is upwards of 460,000. These four towns out of that only take 143,000, leaving for the rural constituencies a population of 316,000. The four towns return seven Mem bers, and the rural constituencies return only two Members Hear, hear.) I will take the ease of South Lancashire. It has a population of 1.600,000, under the new census. I will take all the towns, the noblest seats of modern industry —Aston, Bolton, Bury; Liverpool, Manchester, Oldham. Rochdale, Salford, Warrington Wigan. The population of these boroughs is 1,000,000, being two-thirds of the whole population of the county, and the remaining third consists ot the rural population. Yet the million of manufac turing population in this proud county of South Lanca shire are represented by . fifteen Members, while the rural population, which is half as great, is represented by only two Members. lam sure the H. have heard such long, frequent, and repeated complaints of the injustice done to towns, and the preference given to the agricultural interest, that they will not feel that I am abusing their pa tience by these details.—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) I will therefore take the county of East Nor folk, in which their are two great towns. East Norfolk has a population of 250,000. Norwich and Yarmouth has a population of less than i 00,000. Yet the 99,000 persons in the manufacturing towns and the seaport are represented by four Members, while the agricultural population of East Norfolk, nearly double its amount, are only represented by two Members.—(Cheers.) I now approach Yorkshire, and that is the last county I will quote. I will first begin with East Yorkshire. The East Riding has a population of ' .21,0 0, and contains two towns, one, Hull, a port of great importance. The town population of the East Ridin g ' is 94,000, represented by four Members. The rural; population, 1 26 , 000 , are rep r es ented b y onl y halt that amount.—(Hear, hear.) The West Rid in g re:.' mains, and if I were to seek an ;instance to show that the distribution of representation is not ma de with an y eesire to promote or retain the preponderance of the landed interest, I should seek it in the West Riding, that is so frequently the subject of our discussions, There are nine considerable towns in the West Riding—Leeds, Sheffield, Bradford, Halifax, Huddersfield, Wakefield, and others. The entire population of the West Riding is 1,300,000. The town population is 500,i 00, and the rural population -(00,000. The town population are represented by sixteen Members, although they are only 500,000 in number, while the rural population of 80C,000 are represented, not by sixteen Members, but by two.—(Loud cheers from the Ministerial benches.) This is a summary of what I have just stated. In South Lancashire among the borough population every 70,000 persona have a representative, and every 257,000 of the rural population have a representative. In the West Riding of Yorkshire every 32,000 of the population of the towns have a Member, and every 400,000 of the agricultural population have a similar advantage.—(llear, hear.) I know it may be said, and it will be said, unless I answer it by anticipation, "You have made out a very good co lourable case in favour of your views; hut you have selected live or six important but pa , tial instances." Sir, I have an ticipated that objection, and I have tested the matter in ano ther manner, which it must be admitted is a fair mode. Here I have a catalogue of the population of every town in England which has a population of not less than 20,000. There are 77 towns in this list, beginning with Ashton and ending with York, with a population, many of them, much exceeding 20,000. They include almost all the seats of c ,m -rnerce and manufacturing industry, and they include a popu -4,000, who are r e p resented by 138 Members. ITahtie9rn of 6,2 There are towns which do not possess popu lations of 20,000, but which are considerable places, the seats of commerce, and which ou g ht to be in serted in any list of the kind, although they do not posand - sess populations of quite 20,000, such as Lowestoft Lynn Regis, I have added about 30 of these boroughs to the 77 boroughs, all of which have a population of 20,000, rnd some of them a vast and immensely increased popula tion: The population of these 107 large towns, and stresrictly boroug h constituencies, is more than 6,500,000, repented by 187 Members. The result of this analysis about is the follow th ing :If these Membe rs re p resent 6,500,000, half e population, taking the population of the country at 17,000,00 0 , that remaining portion of. the community are represented by, Members - barely exceeding in number the M e mbers representing this c atalo g ue of to wns.—( Hear.) I find that the popu lation of these boroughs have 35,000 per gine to every ember of this House, and that the popu lation of the rest of England, the rural populalion, have 36,000 for every Member.—(Cheers.) So that, taking this complete and comprehensive view, when you come to a fair distribution of the representation between the land and the town population, yon have only between each a differ ence of 1,000 in the proportion of the population.—(Hear . ) In both cases, in the case of the urban and the rural and landed population, you have a less difference in the number of persons represented by each Member than has been quoted by Mr. Mackay. Whether you look to the town s or country population, they are, there fore, more amply repreented in this allude than is laid down in the pamphlet that has b e en alluded to as the proper exemplar and type of represen tation in this House. Having examined this subject so far, I have arrived at a different conclusion from that of my Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose: I think that his sta tistics, and the statistics of his school, are f combiounded up nations on partial instances , and supported by fantastic which convey erroneous impressions that do not just if y the policy that 'he advocates.—(Cheers.) completely i a llusory, and, as the- facts to which I have appealed are o pen to • all, and may be found in the in his library,. I .shall be surprised to find him main taining his poiition that in the distribution of the re. presentation the town population is not justly treated in respect to a comparison with the country population. — (Cheers ) It appears to me, Sir, that this is a position that can no longer be supported.—(Cheers.) Going to the next proposition, my , Hon. Friend asks us to' sanction'a resolution that the duration 'of Parliament ought not to exceed three years. Sir, I. have no inveterate prejudice to shorter Par liaments. I have often said in this House that triennial Parliaments, were a l wa ys supported by the Tory party.. Chat statement has been received with scoffing by Pion. Gen tlemen opposite, who do not condescend to pay much regard to any other history than that in which they form such dis tinguished characters.—(Cheers and laughter.) But tre is no doubt that the cluing° in our manners, which hash n creased the business of the House of Commons, is an els meat that must be taken into consideration when you wish to ascertain the proper duration of Parliaments. B ut, re membering what lase happened here during the last fwtnight, I am filled with 'astonishment to hear the Re formers and Liberals cOrne 'forward in faVour of triennial Parliaments. What have they told us this year ? One member of the Government is very anxious to bring forward a measure which he considers of the 'utmost importance kr the security and good government of the realm. But what are we told? " Why, you are' -bringing forward a measure 'lir the last yeti ot a Parliament !_(Cheers and laughter.) You would legislate in a condemned ht Parliamen countsel the laugh.) It can't be heard of. Yon oug to Sovereign to prorogue and dissolve the Parliament as soon as possible." But if in the last year of a Parliament so nench time is lost, we shou ld have, If my Hon. Friend's proposition we re adopted, duennial Parliaments—(A laugh)--and, if the old and favourite scheme of annual Parliaments were again a h m a e v n e ts_ an ( n k u a l l a u P g a h rl ) i a unedtufttos that e ar o d m i s m a n t o o ns d s say, p condemnedEtnedgianYcowuP: a r d n never presume to legis a late, because they would be dissolved, and would cease to exist in the very year they . met. The third; proposition of my Honourable Friend is the recommendation of the vote by ballot. Now, it is always the case that the man. ner of taking the votes can never be considered as an abstract question. You must necessarily look at the votes you have to take. If you have to take a very large number of votes; or if you have, on the contrary, a very small number, the method by which you w th il e l prerceosemntat con stituency.—(A them to be taken necessarily assumes a different character. With a limited constituency the ballot may be a very I have heardsof con stitutional measure; but are Hon. Gentlem n en ot p ?_ rep (c ar r e i d eo t n o_ accept the ballot on this condition? Well, 1 will assume that they are not prepared se to accept it, an h cl an th t a o t they would , n e yof from recommendn(At hecry Opposition f v o , t e N b o y; b )b a e lnl Youcoht withbenches.) are e,oslauingffdarraccgohne'ytraonl and to hlewr ig:44l l to night of an oligarchy, but I never heard of a t.more cunning and successful m numberins p d e e e v to i i device to ,e t orf from o oestablish ni na criticism, tt ihe an tsoih aothflietmmheitfeurednenfranchised millions about whom we mucla.—(Loud cheers from the Ministerial is have hei4 do not believe from the speeches ofm my H e o li n c . he F s ' ri kni i ( 41 Member for Montrose and other parties on that side of the House, that they sincerely desire t concomitant say that anextension of see the:present consti tuency vote by ballot. They alw a y s vote by ballot —( Hear, hear). But where=taut of thethe line?—(Hear.) Where is the do they 1, Lee line to be drawn , of the franchise is a necessary admit that the franchise is a r i g ht? If you say that you do not want to draw the line, and tell us I have submitted to these restri c tio n s in , d e ference to the prejudices of other persona;"—if you wish to have uoi- they might receive, for they were not educated — the ir edu cation hitherto had not been much taken care of ; but of this j he was sure, that if you went into any of our large manu facturing towns, you would find the artisan, who was the manufacturer and artisan of his own fortune, would be the first to oppose himself to anything l ike Communist doc trines—(Rear)—and if a man could be depended upon he could, for the maintenance of what was called the sacred ness of property.— , Hear, hear.) Then, where was the objection to this man ? What were the opposers of the mo tion afraid of?—(Hear, hear.) There might be a sort of personal antipathy to coming in near contact with men who had not hitherto bad power; but when we came fairly to discuss what was wanted in a constituent body, what was there in the proposal that should excite alarm ? 'I he real proposition was—as for the ballot and the other points, they were as dust in the balance as compared to this— that " every man of full age and not subject to any mental or legal disability" (but it did not rest there, or it would be universal suffrage), "who shall have been the resident occupier of a house or part of a house for twelve months, and rated to the poor of that parish for that time," should be registered as an elector. If it could be made out that the constituency proposed could lead to mischief, jj there would be en end of the case; but what was there in this to excite alarm? True, there was a vagabond popu lation in every great community, and labourers who were living by their labour from day to day, and continually moving about; but they were not included in this proposi tion. Where was the danger of giving a vote to a resident ratepayer?—(Hear. hear.) It would be said, "Oh, but he must have alt 1. house." The Noble Lord's (Lord J. Rus sell's) Reform Bill brought it down to Si. there were very few houses under 51. His (11r. Roebuck's) farm labourers, at 9s. a week, paid Si. a year. Wby should not Si. house holders vote? Then, in London and various towns there were lodgers, and among them there were the most eLlucan d and intelligent men; why shou'd not they be admitted? What was wanted was not only to give an ample represen tation to this country, but at the same time n a, to excite any jealousy or to do any injustice. Now among the intel ligent artisans you would find a strong feeling against the peculiar mark which the Legislature thought fit to consti tute a title to vote. There were thousands—he was going, to say millions—of persons, who, being lodgers, were ex cluded from the franchise ; but there was not a parish in which you would not find persons living as lodgers with men who were entitled to vote, and who were of a higher degree of mind and morality and everything else than their landlords.— (Hear.) He would not go now into the question of the ballot. He was surprised to hear the Attorney-Ge neral for Ireland (Mr. Napier) propound the exploded fal lacy that the ballot was un-English. Un-English Why, did the Right Hon. Gentleman ever iota by ballot at his club 1 If a Member were proposed for admission who from some social peculiarity was a bore, and whom the Right Hon. Gentleman wished to exclude from is club, he would vote in such a case by ballot ; and yet he h would not allow the same privilege to a man who was called upon to vote for a Member of Parliament, and who, while under the coercion of a landlord, of a person who dealt with him, or of a powerful neighbour, might wish to have an inde pendent opinion. —(Hear, bear.) Then the Right Hon. Gentleman foisted upon us the wretched argument that the &;;;;,,,Tarearuyeastipg He (Mr. Roebuck) thought we had en— he Ri ht Hon. Gentleman bad voted by ballot Vila. l 6lK d a t nu,. l ioo he begged him to reflect a little , and ask, himself why he had done so, and why he did not say to hitnself, " I won't vote in this un-English way; I don't like it; it is not bold and open enough for me. I must tell Mr. A, whom I think a bore, that I shan't vote for him, that I shall exclude him from my club; and I won't submit to the degradation of secret voting any longer."- (A laugh.) But the Right lion. Gentleman wanted the influence over the electors which open voting gave. If not, let bun say so, and then he (Mr. Roebuck) would acknowledge the argument and grapple with it; but don't let him deal with the question by a sham or tell the House about the ballot being un-English. 'rake a case. He (Mr. Roebuck) was a landlord, and he had an influence over his tenant Now, what was that in ? Was it one proceeding from respect? Was it the influence of a highly instructed over a less instructed mind ? No; it was the mere influence of a dominant will over the will of another man. The landlord did not in such a case come to the tenant, and say, " I think you will find that Mr. So- and-So is not a good representative, because of his opinions," but he sent his agent. who had this message— " Telt the tenant that this is my will -if he does not vote as I please he must take the consequence." The Right Hon. Gentleman must believe one of two things—either he most wish to retain, by means of open voting, the sort of influence just described, or he must suppose that the elector nould become demoralised by voting in a manner contrary to bin expressed intention. Now this, he supposed, was what was meant by un-English ; the tenant, it was feared, would promise his landlord one thing, and do another. But why did the landlord ask him at all?—(Hear, hear.) Nobody asked the Right lion. Gentleman how he was going to vote at his club, because, in the first place, it was considered that no one had a right to put such a question, and because, in the next place, the Right Honourable Gentleman would riot answer the question it it were put. Take the case of a voter in a county. A Member was put up. Suppose he were the tenant, and the Right Honourable Gentleman the Landlord, than whom nobody could be more opposed in poli tics. Give him the ballot, and he voted as he liked .he voted against the Member proposed by his Right Hon. Friend ; but take away the ballot, and let him stand exposed to all the influences which the landlord could bring to bear, and what was be expected to do? Why, to sacrifice any independent feeling ot his own mind. This it was which 'vas un -English— (bear) —that he should be coerced against his will, and compelled to vote against his conscience. As to the Bill of his Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose (Mr. el me), when he recollected that there were small bo roughs, of which he could find a dozen—he might say sn— that should hardly have the population of one borough, which were yet net better, represented than they, he en tirely agreed with the greater part of his Hon. Friend's proposition. The mind, however, could not help recurring to the last proposal for reform made by the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London (Lord J. Russell), and cer tainty, of all the mischievous proposals that were ever pro pounded to this House, that which proposed to combine various small boroughs into one in order that they should have a voice in this House, thus conducing in every way to immorality and to the improper representation of this country, as the Noble Lord's measure did, was the most mis chievous---(Hear, hear.) What would be the immediate consequences of it? Why, that every so-called boroueh would be made proportionate to a small county. You would have in it an electioneering attorney, a committee, awl a canvassing body; and, if the combined boroughs were five in number, you would have five attorneys, five committees, five canvassing bodies, and five separate establishments alto gether. That would be five centres of corruption, of ex pense, and of un-English coercion. —(Hear hear.) Any attempt to unite into one section the small boroughs of this country, resuscitating that system by destroying which the Noble Lord attaine d his great ren own, was the most mis chievous attempt he had ever heard of. Without going quite so far as his Hon. Friend did in his last proposition, in the proposed proportioning of the representation to property, he would be quite satisfied with a large extension of the constituency of this country, with the ballot as a protection. At present he wanted to know from the Government whe ther they would bring upon the poli•ical stage that portion of the population for whom he found in their individual ca pacities they were always expressing the most extraordi nary concern.—(Hear.) He did not see how those persons were to be excluded from the representation for any length of time, and he ventured to prophecy that many months, certainly not many years, would not elapse before some Mi nister of the Crown, more prescient than the rest of his col. leagues, would perceive that the peace of this country would be best secured by giving to the intelligent artisans a voice in this House; and that we should find those artisans re presented here by some new Reform Bill, brought in either ' by the Noble Lord the Member for the city ot Londou, or by the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, with, no doubt, the view not only fairly to secure his own position, but also to give to the constitution that security which could only be given if the intelligence and morality of this country were equitably represented.— (Hear, Divide.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—AIthough the subject does not appear to be so interesting to the House as one might have imagined—(Ministerial cheers)—l can not allow the present opportunity to pass without trespass ing for a few moments upon its attention. And, Sir. I shall eneeavour to do that which, so far as I have been enabled to observe, has not yet been pursued by any gentleman who has preceded me—not even by the Hon. Member who brought forward this resolution—for 1 will keep to the motion betere the House.—(Hear, hear.) We have had from the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who has just addressed you one to those dissertations which no one can make more interesting than he can on subjects of a very abstract character ; and we have had several speeches from other gentlemen, certainly, on the subject of Parliamentary reform. But, it appeared to me that those speeches were mainly addressed, not to the motion upon the paper, but rather to that still more elaborate though evanescent proposition, which for a moment excited so much interest, but which, with a due regard for the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London (Lord J. Russell), I think Hon. Members opposite should have had the delicacy not to allude to. - (Hear, hear, and laughter.) Among those who have addressed the House is the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Member for the city of Oxford (Sir W. 'Page Wood), who delivered himself of a very elaborate speech, which was evidently prepared to sup • port a Ministerial proposition—(Q hears and laughter) 7 . and one consequence of the train of his argument, and one con clusion at which he seemed inevitably to arrive, was,• with singular inconsistency, the determination not to vote at all in favour ot a proposition which - for three' successive year. he had supported.—(" Hear,"-and a laugh.) , Now,' Sir. when I look at the motion before the House, I see four propositions contained in it. With a view to place them succinctly before the House, I will just recapitulate them. We have a proposition to bring in a Bill which is to extend the franchise, which is to insure that that franchise, when it is exercised, should be taken by-means of the ballot, which is to secure a triennial election of Parliaments, and which is to change materially the Proportion of representatives , so that they shall be made more co ns i s t e nt with the amount of population and propetty. This was the fourth proposi tion laid down for - our adoption. I understand from the speech of the Hon. Gentleman who seconded the motion (Sir J. Walmsley) that the proportion of representatives Which would be deemed more consistent with the amount of population and of property is, to use the language of that Hon. Gentleman, a redistribution which will diminish what he calls the territorial influence.—(Hear.) I am glad 1 am stating fairly the question before our consideration; and I will now. venture to make a few observations upon this fourth proposition, because it is a More novel topic , and one exciting perhaps the mos t interest. Well, I deny the position which is assumed by Hon. Gentle men opposite upon that point.—(Hear, hear.) I deny that the proportion of representatives is unfairly arranged in favour of that territorial interest.—.(Hear, hear.) 1 deny all the positions assumed in that pamphlet which has been lately circulated and submitted to Parliamentary criticism. The Hon. Gentleman who seconded the motion referred to some observations I made on a preceding night, when we were frequently told that it was a monstrous ano maly that a large town should return only two Members, and that a small and almost depopulated borough should be represented by the same number of Members. I reminded the House on that occasion of the fact that there were agricultural, or, if the Hon. Gentleman prefers the word, territorial constituences, which experienced the same injus tice, if it be an injustice, in regard to that distribution of the representation which Hen. Gentlemen impugn, and which they impugn because of their peculiar interest in towns. --(Hear, hear.) I put the case fairly. The case instanced by me on a previous night was one which, as it is a brief one, I will refer to again, though I have others to which I am very desirous of calling the attention of the House. Mind, I am giving no opinion now upon the particular .circumstances before us ; I am confining myself entirely to. the endeavour of laying the case fairly before the House. Yon say that the proportion of representatives is so arranged by the present system that the town population are nut -.fairly represented in our con stitution and in this House. I deny the accuracy of the sta t e ment. I give no opinion upon the expediency of the prepon d era nce being given to country or to town in the L - gislature, but confine myself now to mere statements of fact. Let me call the attention of the House to the case of North rteo—be(arin laatnd Ithienveolitioand.yalogeernbeoruss, wa y htailnecels - - versal suffrage-without which, as far as political justice t - from that unfriendly course.-(Hear.) Why theyehnterdei Our is concerned, I do not see how you can establish the ballot,- ' three or four hours have so severely criticised the with drawn because, if you have the ballot with a limited conetitueneYe ' - I will not s a y the abandoned- p ro p osition of the latoe you commit a greater injustice upon the unenfranchieten t Minister, Ido not pretend to understand. Sitting on Ake classes; but if you have universal suffrage you come tot same side of the House, meeting under the same roof-- a new constitution-(Heer) - you have, in fact, the stove- ' e Vheers)-combining and coanci ling together for the same• reignty of the people, which is the principle of the Ameri- object-(lean hear) -I should have thought that all these can constitution, so often refe r red t° and panegyrized in considerations would have prevented the slightest allusion to this House. But the sovereignty of the people is not the the suejec, and that they would have brought forward their con stitution of England That constitution is mitigated and own pro position without obtruding their rejections o n the modified, but it is still the sovereigntyo of Queen Victoria. - me asure of ehe Noble Lord, with regard to which we, on r (Cheers.) "But," says my Hon. nen'' , m we must have the this side, have Always shown the moat respectful silence.- ballot ; we will no longer have fine spun erguments•against (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) I should have .thought that it. We must terminate bribery BP I corruption:" - Nov,,, I gent l e men opposite wo.eld have considered the privilege th ey beg his attention to a paragraph which comes from anew- enjoy in having a high' constitutional statesman On the one thorny that' he will respect, becauee it is ' a Traneatlantic hand, and the privilege te ° ley have on the other of bringing authority, and proceeds from a country where the people en- forward revolutionary recOmmendatioos anti plans, and that joy universal suffrage and vote by ballot. Now, this is the th ey would no t have deanled it their duty to enter. during way in which the governor of New York on the last occa- : th e w h o l e even ing, into a crticisne of the late Government sion addteesed the Legislature o f that intelli g ent state. measure. - (Hea r and laughter.) We had some . line- This was a document which, doulatlegs, they would treat with erions ma d e to a d e. o a retiou on the subject ot reform from the the greatest consideration. for it ems attended with all the Present head of . the Ceovernment ; .but I protest against con circumstances w hich ex cited thtii' r espect and admiration.. elusions drawn 'from mere anor.ymous paregroples in newo- America; New York, tbe bolot-exactly what the am. papers. I roust say-for myself and my colleagues that •we eL meer for Sheffield wanted-self-government; and here is do not consider au eats-bee' of toe franchise to be synony. the mintier in which the chief of the Self-governed addressed moue with the exteesioa of deinocret ic power.- ( Hear, the Legislature of no l m a state than New York , when (hear.) That much vaunted Ref orm Bill, which no One it Is,t asassembled,-" The alarming increase of bribery at., Ii has so much basis with praise a , the Hon. Member popular elections demands your serious attentip."-(Cheers leir Montrnbe,-.,h a t would that Bill have been, I eaelt, and Laughter.) This is at New Yerk, recollect, where the but for tbe spirit and energy of a Stanley - r-(Cheers.) ballot is in On ce. -( . ;beers ) The head of the S tate declares W heu I amtold that he (Lard Derby) is opposed to all re that bribery is increasing to an alarrni , g extent, And de- bourn, I cannot but remember-end e•- -end the Nobl e Lor d w ho mends the 6 Ltlous at teL.t ien of t he In e islat ure.- (Hear.) ' hes ,uccredea nie iii the PaerliaLntary seat I once held knows I will quote some further ext - acts from the same letter it that it was that individual w,ito proposed a motion f ono. which I have read this pasaige. I will not men; i,,n w hi c h added one-riiiilb to the con..-tittiellnyof Great Britain. the name of the writer , bec ause I amabout to quote only -(1-1e:,r, hear.) I copulate the assertion a the Hon. teas, nut opinions. Ile was once a Member of this House, Geadernan and rue friends, that we are o. party opposed to and has filled important situations in the service of his Seve- all reform unless we linen to reign, and it I were ..o state his name, it wou ld, lam sure, bee ro us. I uropesitions of the kind now will tell the Hen. Gentleman what we are be received by gentlemen on both Odes with universal re- opposed to-we are adverse to all new and unnec, !pert. You now knew that bribery is not prevented by the proposals teended on such erroneous calculations as the f.teso tillet, and you will find that i - does r ot p revent something sent.- (Cheers.) I tell him th a t if env project oh this OT else. "Individuals Were not merely beate n from the polls, any other subject is brought forward; I trope it will be us e -. but were knocked down, beaten, and stabbed when proceeding founded on more accurate data than the before about their ordinary occupations in op.n day in distant parts (Rear.) What we are opposed to is tamperinge with the de of the city.- (Hear, hear.) ' The police appeared to have positary of political power-to constant shifting been utterly inefficient. and the hundred thousand citizen sol- ing of the depositary of political power as the t g r he 4n reer t ; ii c : r h e a t n fe : is calculated to 1?e -there, of whom the New York papers boasted so much, were thing to a country that can be conceived.-(e n i: t T rio" content to remain at home (Laughter)-while a few gangs may talk of tampering with a policy, and You of ruffians commanded all the approaches to the polling- things worse; but that which is worse is, t booths, and in one instance destroyed the ballot - box." - the constituency of England.-(Cheers.) If there Tegtowibthe (Laughter.) I find no fault with my Hon. Friend and others a change, let it be a change always called for by e l for recommending the adoption of a new mode of voting in this cessity- (Hear, hear)-and one which futenteee s This is the land of free discussion, and every one general-I will not say final-but general and give permanent 44,11berq to recommend what he thinks best, but it is satisfaction.-(Cheers.) I ask, is the proposition of the remarkable that in the instance of the 'ballot, as in that of Hon. Member for Montrose, the whole facts on the statement die ' proposed new distribution of electoral power, the of which it. is founded I have shown to be utterly fallaciwas facts on one side only a re stated-onl y a one-sided view is is that a proposition calculated to give such general an, d kou .;lit before us, and only one class of considerations it permanent satisfaction ?-(Hear, hear.) The proposition urged upon our attention.-(Hear. hear.) I resume the of the Noble Lord at the head of the late Government, is that narrative from the destruction of the. ballot-box. This last one calculated to give general and permanent satisfaction? outrage upon the freedom c ol election has very naturally The Noble Lord will confess that, whatever bee its merita, it caused extreme irritation, and the Courier and Enquirer says was not calculated to give that general and rmanent ea that brutes must be met by brute force, while the Tribune tistaction. The sense of the country and the House alike is still more plainspoken. Re says " that the scoundrels called upon him to withdraw it, and lam sure there is not who thus trampled upon the highest privilege that a free man one who will say that if that proposition had been brought eee vei n " e u v etu nave uceu e uue nee eon e u deo teenteer , fairly under discussion, it would have received the concur whom their hireling souls thus villanously insulted."- rence of the House.-(Hear, hear.) Wecannot sanction the (Great laughter and cheering.) Now; I beg -my lion. proposition of the Hon. Gentleman or his friends. And may Friend to observe that while, by the confession of no less we not flatter ourselves that he will consider these things a personage than the Governor of the great state of New that he will investigate them, and calmly consider the ins- York, the ballot does not prevent bribery, it is likewise portant information from the other of the Atlantic whh perfectly inefficient for the prevention of scenes of I have given him, and that next year-with a health, horrible intimidation, such as we cannot even conceive in spirit, and energy which I hope he will long enjoy this country, men being beaten and stabbed at the polling- (Cheers) -we shall find him coming forward more temperate booth. - ( Hear, hear ) My correspondent, for whom I know in h is views and more careful in his arguments ?-( Hear). my Hon. Friend entertains personally the highest conside- Till we have propositions of r a sped made claaracte 1831-(r brougC he ht;fo ers rt ra tion, gives some further infermation respecting the ward I sh all stand by the sein influence of the ballot, and I mast confess that what lam and counter cheers)-not because it was a settlement made about to quote is really humiliating- "We understand by this party for our intereats - fore on the contrar y , it was that the Whig committee of the B th Ward" - I ought , against our interests; but this lam bound to say, that however, in justice to remind the House that the Whig the country has been w ell g overned-(Hear, hear)-and party in America is not identified with the party in this those who find fault with the arrangement, which I do not, country of which the Noble Lord opposite is the distinguished are bound to show that under that arrangement the country chief and hereditary ornament-" We understand that the has been mi s governed .-(Hear, hear.) 1 • • , n my opinion, Whig committee of the Bth Ward and other wards have though many of '- - ear the laws passed are laws I could not have offered 100 dollars to every man who can secure twenty approved. the arran ge ment has proved satistactory and the democratic votes for the Whig tickets on elect ion da y ."- p re p onderance of sentiment in the country is , thatunder . (Cheers and laughter.) " This money has been partially the country has been well governed .-( Cheers .) There is raised by the most shameful extortions from the office- holders scarcely one of the great est questions agitated in the country of the party. It is said that every policeman in the Whig which, in this reformed Parli l amen districts has been taxed fifteen dollars towards defraying therefore when gentlemen come forwardt not i been met, and the expenses of the election.-(Continued laughter.) By time, if they cannot show that the present wth new Prt•Pnai construction of this means the Whigs seek to crush every inoependent this House is calculated to favour misgovernment, feeling in the voter, and to make him the m ere tool of p art y the same time are unable to place before us any clear ea and at With the money procured in this manner politica l hacks are eoherent scheme that promises a more ameliorative system, nra sent to buy up the votes of the poorer , and y e t more de p en- must u p hold the system that exists, though I believe it one dent classes in those:wards."-(Cheers and laughter.) This that was conceived in no friendl y s p irit to the Tor y part y .-. payment of 100 dollars to every man who can procure 20 (Hear, bear.) But it is one by which remedial influences democratic votes for the Whig ticket is certainly intolerable, have been experienced under the good sense and support of and I have been particular in bringing it under the notice of the people of England, and under which our institutions have . ot : Friend, in order - that he may employ the g reat in- flourished-institutions which, I believe, are absolutely ne i : is O possesses not only in England , b ut on tne other cessary, not only ro the greatness of this country, but to the /a . • ``,l,s d'af the Atlantic, in preventing democratic electors being freedom of the people.-(Great cheering.) Ohnbed to vote for anything so bad as the " Whig ticket."- Mr. H. BERKELEY, who was almost wholly inaudible -Laughter.) All this iniquity is practised under the opera- from the buzz of conversation in the House, gave an expla 'tion of that very system which my Honourable Friend nation relative to the ballot. He stated that he would re says is the only means of preventing bribery, and which serve the more particular expression of his views till a future the Honourable Member for Bristol would persuade us to day, when he brought on his motion on the subject, as he ob adopt as an infallible mode of preventing intimidation.- jetted to the ballot being mixed up with any other question (Cheers.) I must quote one paragraph more, because it re- whatever. The Right Hon. Gentleman had alluded to a ters to legislative authority. In the experience of New disturbance in New York, and to the ballot-box being York, at least, the ballot has been proved inefficient for the broken, but he would give the House another piece of infor purpose of preventing bribery at elections; and the follow- Illation from America, and that was, that in the southern, or tug preamble and resolution have been presented to the As- aristocratic States of the Union, they were seeking to get sembly :-" Whereas the use of money at elections, for the rid of the ballot, Lecause the friends of the abolition of purpose of influencing and corrupting electors, is an in- slavery took protectiat under the ballot, and the enemies of creasing and dangerous evil, and the bestowment or offer, abolition bad no means of detecting their votes.-(Hear.) promise or reception of money, or compensation in any form, Mr. OSBORNE congratulated the House and through should be made good and sufficient grounds for the challenge them the country on this, that whatever evasions or mys and rejection of a vote ; but, whereas doubts exist as to the tifications might have gone forth during the last week, upon constitutionality of a law itisfranchieing an elector, there- one point the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been suffi fore, resolved, 'That the Committee on the judiciary be and calmly explicit.-(hear, hear.) Treading in the footsteps are hereby requested to examine and report whether, in of most, illustrious warrior of the age, the Righ Hon. their opinion, a law conformable to the foregoing preamble Gentleman, atter much circumlocution, had formally de would be a violation of any provision of the Constitution clared the intention of the Government to abide by the of this State.'" Let not our countrymen run away with Reform Act of 1831.-(Cheers.) He had announced that the idea that corruption is the necessary consequence of Her Majesty's Government did not intend to move on witq the old mode by which we give our votes in this coup- the spirit ofthe(No, no -that the old )-that they looked lity upon tdodge he try.-( Hear, hear.) I believe it to he a g rowing senti ment in the conviction of Englishmen that corruption is ,%- is to be renewed, and that come what might the Govern the consequence of men not being properly brought ufe meat would give no reform in Parliament.- (Hear, hear.) -(Hear, heir.) You may pass laws ostensibly to pre- The Right Hon. Gentleman said he would certainly give the vent corruption in countries where nothing is secret, co untry 1,0 reform in this Parliament ner in the Parliament or in countries where nothing is open; but corruption cannot to come.-(Cries of e No, no," from the back Ministerial be stopped by law; it can only be stopped by elevating the benches.) He knew it was the intention of those ardent tone of the community, and making men ashamed of the Reformers who cried "no" to give the country a further thing itself.-(Cheers.) You must seek for an antidote to Cab of reform, but unfortunately they were not in the corruption in that direction and not in new-fangled systems net. Let there be no mistake on this point, that the of election. I say, furthe r, that the tone of the community present Caandbinet th was satisfiedwould with th no e party settlement to giv in 1831- in which we live is becoming elevated. Every successive (No, no) -at they be e reform a quarter of a century shows a decrease of corruption. No further trial. The Right Hon. Gentleman bad commenced man who knows anything of the tone of public life a hundred hi s speech by attacking the speech of the Hon. Member for years ago can hesitate to admit that corruption then ascended the University of Oxford-(No, no, and a laugh)-he much higher in society than it does at present. You have begged the Hun. Gentleman's pardon-he (Sir P. Wood) had driven corruption from the higher classes. In proportion as not descended to that yet- he was the Member of a popular education extends, men become more pure, and when the coruitittiency-the Member for the city of Oxford, and the same influences come into operation among the inferior Right Hon. Gentleman said it was a speech to be made classes you may hope to obtain a result which it is for the upon the resolution to be moved by the Noble Lord interest of all classes should be accomplished.-(Cheers.) I (Lord J. Russell); but he (Mr. Osborne) would leave it have n o ti ce d w hat I conceive to be my Hon. Friend's total to the House, it the speech of the Chancellor of the Exche failure to prove, that the proportion of representatives is not quer was not also directed to that very motion.e-(No, no.) consistent with the different classes of population. I think I lie would not weary the House by wading through the have shown that nothing can be more erroneous than dreary mass of confused statistics which the Right Hon. the opinion ao prevalent in a portion of this House Gehtleman had thought it his duty as Chancellor of the Em end the country that the landed interest possesses an undue chequer to bring before them in order to show that the preponderance in this House. I think I have also shown, e griculoaral constituencies were not fairly represented,while by reference to figures bearing official sanction which are boroughs and towns had a greater proportion of thatrepresents open to everybody , that it is almost imp ossible to distribute fives. But he told the Ri g ht Hon. Gentleman ,on his the electoral power more justly than is done at present own showing, he was bound to bring in a Reform Bill to re between the two great classes which represent the town and move the injustice done to what he called the territorial in country. I also venture to think that I hav e offered my terest. But he had no such design ; be had omitted, too, all Hon. Friend some reasons for doubting whether as much mention of Ireland ; and het (Mr. Osborne) feared that he corruption and intimidation may not prevail under a system was going to legislate o hat country . on very different of secret voting as we have ever experienced under the principles .-( Oh, oh !) Without being enamoured of the system which exists in this country.-(Hear, hear.) I have motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose, to map this f u rther given some reasons for supposing that my Hon. c ountry into districts, he was en far dissatisfied with the Bi ll Friend and those about him should hesitate, with their Pre- of 1831, which her Majesty's Government had pronounced seat constitational doctrines, to recommend short Parlia- to be final-No Ino !)-that he would vote for i -1,--par ments.- (Hear, hear.) I next come to the proposi - titularly for the latter part of the proposition, "that the fion, that the franchise ought to be very much ex- proportion of representatives be made more consistent with tended ; and on this I have one observation to make. the amount of population and property." The Right Hon. Viewing this quest ion with perfect impartiality, I trust, Gentleman said he would make a colourablecase &cm - i I have been much s truck b y the great exaggeration which the ballot, and had referred to the riot New pervades in pervades the statements made by my Hon. Friend and York. He did not object to the Right la un. Gentle his associates. I remember last session to have heard a die- man, taking the case of America, but he • h wis ed he would tingaished Member of this House-one who is in the habit not select the American twig, but take what was good in She of addressing it wit h g reat ability, and with sufficient coufi- constitution of that country.-(lroni I h ea C eera.) Was the deuce in his cause and himself-1 mean the Hon. Member Chancellor of the Exchequer content with the way elections for Manchester - ask this cieestion:-" Is the system to be were carried on in this country ? Did he endured in which only one in seven of the adult population of Harwich, the borough for which remember • the ca 2 enjoys the franchise?' -(Tumultuous cheering immediately (Sir F. Kelly) was a candidate, when the SolicitoreGener foLowed this appeal ; and " Hear, hear," from the Oppose- vitiated because the electors ea the proceedings were time.) Ay ; I say so. You cheered the sentiment then and their perquisites; and was it tried away the busting.. you cheer it now. Is it true that only one adult male in pened in all parts of England not notorious that riote e naSr seven enjoys the franchise? Here are the figures, let us ex- eack as 1842, a Curorni-t during an election? ember 0° M ber for amine them. This paper was prepared , before the publica - Sheffield had reported eeobtained by the Linn. era population timesf the census of 1851, and it apples to : he and corruption; strongly on the existence of bribery and noth• had been remedy census dove to census or 1841, which .1 have.. compared with the electoral the evil. But he could ing yet Hon. Gentleman that lists of Great Britain for 1e42-3. The proportiOns must evi- ;he people were determinedtell the Right ballot. Both sides dently be !falai about the drips as they would have been if 1 were to ha blamed to have th e nfessed that .he be had availed myself of the census of 1851 for, the purpose of lieved, if this amed for this, and he CO- - - ere to be traced back ison The electors for Great Britain in 1812-3 were to its system of briber,' ^ • with the Whig compar • 1 source , it would found to begun 941,782, and the adult . males were, in 1841, 4,961,045, be 1 Party in the ' e w ho were obliged to re which gives, instead of 1 voter in 7, 1 voter In 5, omitting sort to -time of W al P ° "' f -posing the influences fractions. - ( Hear.) • But .from the .4,961,00 adult melee b ea • it as the only is oOF a lean _go Bear, hear.") The fact some deductions must be made. .For the army and navy ring against them.-(Cries m in the desire of putting down abroad and in Ireland, and for the navy and merchant sea- was, neither party was sincere they would have adopted men afloat I deduct 169,650, which leaves the adult male brib • for • ere, if they bad beentosi owe protect the people, not only population at 4,791,39-5. Then I deduct 35,000 for the arm vote by ballot-(0b, oh) on ei but from intimidation , , which at home, 111,099.f0r the navy and merchant seamen ashore, from bribery and poem? O. The Member for the University 74,149 for almspeople, pensioners, paupers, lunatics and was more rite than IF ,„ wade the old stereotyped objection 1,7 er) prisoners, and 164,384 for domestic servants, who are al. of Dublin (Mr - , Ile w ould endanger the Monarchy. What ways excepted from any scheme of reform.- (Hear, h to this motion to t i i i le stank _ 1 itch in France? Was it not that a Thee I deduct the residue of the population , - 276,526 hear.) had endangetea 4.0,00,000 bad only 230,000 electors? And here reduce the adult population to• little more than , and nation' m e ; res s ~ his surprise to hear the Chancellor of the Thus, instead of lin7, it is, by the fi 4,129.566. .he most rfi . gures on our uer de ne the Sovereignty of the country be ' to in official returns, only lin 4.-(Hear, hear.) table in Ex le c oe‘ctoris • and bad the Right Hon. Gentleman been fait:lief.' Those bold statements of-I will But I must go ~,,, 2e!negeon that ( the Opposition) side of the House, he.would. demagogues, - after what we have heard trove not call tb --tnoubt have defined the Sovereignty as consisting in her foe Montrose-but the bold state the lion. Mem- no-. Quee n,. Lords, and Commons.- (Oh, oh.) The Right ments of having dwindled down to this, th Ron. Gentl m aeduelnt. lionottrable Gentleman had objected to the secrecy of the t I population of 4,129,566, which, as a have got tan e o , y ballot. He ought to have been the last man in the givds 1 in 4-I ask what am I to regards the electoral h i e s d r rai House to have done so, considering be was a member of and urban labourers ?-(Hear, 11° • with the- agric al v et heard a Government which was -shrouded in secrecy , Th e that the Hon. Gentleman and hear , ? . I have 41°L t ijey eons- Maynooth cry was to be used as a claptrap •to go Govern plain that' only 1 in 7 his fiends, while franchise to the hustings-(Hear, bear) -and her Majesty's have any wish, under have the exereoe e• of the ' , vo te to the meat would not speak their minds upon it, but he, could 1,435,412 peasantry any System, to give (Hear, hear. ) tell them it would become a very serious question for them. spread over this country.-- kind. Well, then, -(Question, question.) The Hone Member for Dublin I never heard one bold assertion of thitt 6, I have remaining University knew nothing of the efficacy of the ballot-he if I deduct these labourers only 2,694,154, from 4,12 e, he wards the electoral body, is had no poor men to deal with who might be swayed,by some lin 2 and a fraction which as regal . "' / in.B.—(llear, bear.) attorney, or by some one who could put the screw en him, action of 86, or nearly ts we have always but the representatives of popular constituences knew what But what a difference from the statemen difference __ b ea r ) What a those influences were.-(Divide, divide!) Why, had they heard on this subject 1- 1 " fie ' pjanchester and at Leeds! not seen it stated in all the papers that at a late election the from the statements made e ons at Liverpool or any- agents wrote to say that if the tenants did not vote for Mr. From those of reform ssm" fom the statements made Frewen they must not expect the landlords to dedn where else! Whet a difference from ) What a difference from their rents? He could have wished that the motion hadct from in pamphlets 1-(ll"2:,rbretriC orators who, during the ) long put in a better form, bat he would vote for it hhw be: the st atements of 4 ,,,th— nd a - a ll the world 1-(Hear, hear.) In- had voted for similar motions before. If the Noble , a Lord s Vaca tion , havO e sswu- , - it is absolutely little more than half and his party, who said they took office as barriers demo stead of one IL I: l I V el i 3 i clud i n g 1,500,000 of labourers, who cracy, instead of talking of themselves as barriers-which tee what you say, ha ve unequivocally proposed to enfranchise. were sometimes swept away by the waves ofelem ocracy-- not one of Tot., appears to me, then, that the propositions be- would join Hon. Gentlemen on his side of the House -(Cheer,rs.) fore the eeeeee • crude, that they do not bring with them (Ironical cheers and laughter)-inmaking are of invesugation, are not in accordance with facts, and democratic wave, very sure was h weaken proof - ' dicate that degree of research which the House has ing Queen, Lords. and Commons, ile not in a right to expe It aPPears ct in all matters of this kind. - (Hear, hoer .) perly treated and properly a channel for the e that , so far from the oble Lord, if he pro trusted the p e ople , would be to me that they are based on statistical errors strengthening both this and the other House of Parliament.. e flagrant than their political blunders, and that we Lord J. ItUS:AELL - Sir. I have so often addressed you more rnoO whatever may be Our opinion of the policy recom- on the subject of the motion now before the House.; that I mended, approve of it, founded as it is on such erroneous shall not think it necessary, neither would it be agreeable to and imperfect data.- (Hear, hear.) I am not one of those the House, to go at any length into the several propositions who think, that because I disapprove of a proposition which my Honourable Friend has introducd. It Appears brought forward in this immature manner, I am bound te to me, Sir, the simple question is, whether the adoption of a oppose every proposition brought forward to remedy griev- Bill founded on the principles contained in my Honourable vances connected with the representatien of the people- - Friend's propositions would conduce to the good government (Hear, hear.) There has been very free criticism on the of the country, and on that proposition I have come most other side by the new supporters of the Noble Lord of the clearly to the opinion that it would not conduce to the good measure 'which he proposed wh en he was a Minister of the government of the country- (Loud cheers.) I believe that Crown.-(Hear, bear.) I think a sense of decency, if it you had a different distribation-which, however, has nothing the, should have led those gentlemen to abstain I not been chalked out by my geglOefebis "flend—but sub, .. .