The Sun. — London, England, 1848-06-21 00:00:00

for an extension of the suffrage, and in support of Mr. Hume's motion. The Noble Lord also presented peti ;ions from Marylebone and St. Pancras in favour of the T ote by ballot and the establishment of electoral districts. Mr. C. LUSHINGTON presented similar petition s from the Westminster Reform Soci▪ ety, and the inhabi tants of St. Paul's, Covent-garden. Mr. M. WILSON presented sim▪ ilar petitions from Truro. Mr. W. J. FOX presented 287 similar petitions. Mr. MOWATT presented petitions to the same effect from Falmouth, complaining of the outrageous expenditure of the country, and stating, as a proof of the House not representing the sentiments of the country, the evidence recently adduced before Committees appointed to determine returns petitioned against ; also against the interference of Peers in elee- Vons. Colonel THOMPSON presented a number of peti tions from Manchester, Sunderland, Dundee, Wrexham, and other places, in all signed by 3,000 persons, in favour of Mr. Hume's motion. Mr. MUNTZ presented a petition from Birmingham, signed by 10,000 persons, stating, though the Reform Bill was a step in the right direction, and might have satisfied its framers, it did not satisfy the rest of the community ; that class legislation had in a great degree brought about the present state of things on the Conti nent, and praying for Parliamentary reform. Mr. COCKBURN presented a petition to the same effect from Southampton, signed by 300 persons ; also, from the Isle of Wight, to the same effect. Sir E. BUXTON presented petitions from places in Essex. Colonel TYNTE presented petitions from Bridgwater and Glasgow. Mr. OSBORNE from several places in Middlesex, which he stated were not got up by committees; Mr.' RICE from Dover; Mr..AD AIR from Cambridge; Mr. PATTISON from a place the name of which did not reach the gallery; and Mr. CLAY from Hull. Petitions to the same effect were presented by Mr. Hindley, Mr. Westhead, Mr. Fox Maule, Lord Lincoln, Mr. Sharman Crawford, Mr. E. Denison, Sir De Lacy. Evans, Sir George, Strickland, Mr.. Fitsroy, • Sir William Moleswortk, Dr. Bowring, Mr. George ghompson, Lord Duncan, Sir J. Hanmer, Sir G. Clerk, Si,- T. Egerton, Mr. Divett, and Mr. Granger. Petitions to the same effect were then presented by Hon. Members from Monmouth, .Cardif4 York (signed by 5,550 persons), from Stamford, from the brush makers and bellows makers of Bristol, from Stoke-upon-Trent, Kelso, Tunbridge. Wells, Maidstone, Seven Oaks, and other places. Mr. COBDEN presented a petition, signed by 2,000 electors, also in favour of the motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose. The HON. MEMBER also presented similar petitions from Staleybridge, and nearly two hundred other places- Mr. AGLIONBY presented similar petitions from Cockermonth, Whitehaven, and several other places. Mr. C. PEARSON presented similar petit ions from _ . Lambeth. _ Mr. HENLEY presented similar petitions from Read• ing M . of petitions Mr. WAKLEY presented a great n u m ber from different parts of the borouleconstituted of did not Finsbury, com plaining that the House as at presentf the country, and pray jag represent fairly the population o jag the House to adopt the proposition of the Lion. Member for Montrose. Mr. C. P. VILLIERS presented several petitions in favour of Mr. Hume's motion. Mr. J. B. SMITH pre sented aunt.l ar petitions from various parts of Scotland. Lord ASHLEY wished to direct the attention of the House to a petition which he held in his hand Of rather a peculiar character, i n thaprayer of which, however, he did not agree ; but as it came from a respectable body, he felt bound to pre sent it. It was signed by a number of persons who described themselves as the delegates of 200,000 artisans of London an d other towns. They imputed the present state of distress to various causes, and prayed for the adoption of a number of remedies. They prayed for the emancipation of land, for the abolition of the system of gold coinage, for the getting rid of untaxed machinery, and for the putting a stoppage to the workhouse system of labour. They stated that there were several million acres of unoccupied land in this country; they therefore prayed that the Government would adopt a system of home colonies for the destitute portion of the people. They also prayed that, for the protection and maintenance of the just rights of labour, a certain number of Members should be elected solely by the working classes. and that a President, elected •by them, should be a member of the Cabinet as the representative of the work ing classes in the Government, They prayed that imme diate steps should be taken for the relief of the country, and among other things that there should be an equalization of taxes, and of the profits of capital, and that in the place of the present system of currency there should be an unrestricted Government issue of paper; also that a commission should be immediately constituted to examine and establish what is a fair amount of work for each man daily to perform—(A laugh, and hear, hear from some Mem bers on the Ministerial Benches.) The Noble Lord proceeded to say that he knew the meaning of that cheer, coming as it did from a certaid quarter; and he was not surprised at the interruption.—(Cries of "Order.") , The petitioners prayed that it should be determined what was the extent of a fair day's labour, and also legal means should be adopted to secure a fair remuneration for it for each working man. They next prayed the adoption of what were called the six points of the people's charter, and also the repeal iof the legislative union between England and Ireland.—(L aug h ter.) The petition wound up by calling on her Majesty's Govern ment to appoint a commission to investigate the whole sub ject, and the various suggestions which they had made. Mr. HUME asked upon what authority these persons deocribed themselves as the delegates of the great body of artisans ? Lord ASHLEY replied, that he could only state the peti tion was signed by E. Edwards as chairman, and by four other persons as delegates. He had seen these persons, and he could inform the House that they were very respectable and very intelligent men Petitions in favour of Mr. Hume's proposed plan of reform were then presented by Lord John Russell from many parishes of London, and from various places in the country; by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, from Halifax, which, in addition, prayed for the adoption of the People's Charter; by Mr. Macgregor, several petitions from Glasgow and its vicinity; by Sir W. Clay, several from the Tower Hamlets, one of which, signed by 200 workmen employed in one manufactory in that borough, prayed in addition, for the adoption of a system of universal education; by Mr. C. Buller, from Liskeard, East Looe, and other places ; by Mr. Labouchere, Worn Taunton ; by Mr. Wilson, from Westbury ; by Sir John Guest, from Merthyr Tydvil ; by Mr. F. O'Connor, from Nottingham and other places, in favour of the Charter; by Mr. Bright, from Manchester, signed at a public meeting at which 5,000 were present; another from the special con stables of that city, who stated that there would be less occasion for their being called out to preserve the peace if the people were satisfied with the Government—(A laugh) —and several from Derby and other parts of the country; by Mr. Pigott, from Reading; by Mr. Poulett Scrope, from Stroud ; by Mr. M. Gibson, from Yarmouth and places in the neighbourhood of Manchester; and by Mr. Hume, 311 petitions from various parts of the country, including Boston, Sandwich, Carlisle, Northampton, Stourbridge, Leamington, Paisley, Holbeach, Edgeware, Walmer Castle, St. Ives, Sheffield, Lewes, Ayr, and Hammersmith. Alt oget h er the signatures affixed to them exceeded 20,000, and after each name was given the place of residence of the person signing it. not to be a sufficient military establishment kept up to back the civil authority. He thought that such a division of labour was necessary; and he was therefore not one of those who had said in public that there was no occasion or a military force, and that we should depend upon our civil power alone.—(Hear, hear.) But, on the other hand, he should contend that the country had far outdone in that, respect what prudence or necessity pointed out. It had, in fact, become a military nation.—(Hear.) It had lost its civil character, and it seemed to be now verging fast to wards that system which had been lately overthrown throughout the rest of Europe. It had become, therefore, imperative to examine why and wherefore .the pre sent discontent existed ? Whether there were any grounds for that discontent? and to take measures imme diately for its removal and the restoration of public order. It was on those grounds that he considered it his duty to submit to Parliament what he believed would remedy the evil. Whilst the Parliament, as reformed in 1832, had failed to answer all the purposes which he, as an ardent reformer, in common with others, anticipated that it would, he yet should be acting most unfairly were he not to say that the reform effected by the Bill of 1832 had done much to secure the peace of the country.—(Hear, hear.) He believed if we had not had so much reform then, that the country would be at the present time in such a state of discontent that he did not know but that it might be in cluded in the list of those who had risen in arms against their Governments. He, however, wished to have gone further than the Reform Bill of 1832 ; and it was because that Bill had not gone f ur th er —b e c a use it had not effected that for which the reformers then struggled—because it it had not answered thos e p ur poses for which it had passed, that he (Mr. Hume ) thought the time wa d s_no ( w u c e o ar m .) come when that which was wanted should be effecte had Sixteen d years sufficient h ad passed opportunitiesaw ay , and o f ascertaining during t a t how time far they t had answered the purposes for which it was intended. of i order to give to the House the view he entertained that wi according to the Par liament precisely, he should first say that a thethoughtthe Parliament was a mere; engine byh constitutional country was to be governed; and ell Parliament easses s i h n o t u h l d e h uld be attended e p o ri n n t c a i t p n l principles of the e a nd Brit ish fair representation constitution therefore ae wanted to t e a o a n try , in occasions ord e r whether that was the case or no —w ether, e a r s ar a and consider, first, th b a y t the interests . of n a e ll t h instead of its being so, portion of the community , we h ro ad os n t o i t m , p o o n rt t a h n e t c i o n nt n r n a m ry b , in thinking that the sentation. If he was right in interest, excluded from their share in the repre in the country a right to a share that taxation in the representation, he thought and repre sentation should go together ; and that the man who consti tution gave to every man was obliged to pay taxes, not having any right to assist in the choice of his representative in the Legislature, was in a condition little differing from that of slavery —the only difference he could see between a freeman and a slave being, that every free man ought to have a voice under the con stitution in the choice of the'representatives of the people at large in Parliament, a privilege from which the slave was excluded. Now, the question was, were all the classes of j they a w n e d r e t he not, proposition t hen f reemen in this country w h o pa i d taxes represented by the o p l e ass nw ea ns m o n f at th be ei i r n choice?injured dby If exclusion, had to submit to the House was, that the classes who were d exweleurdeedthforosme inthjuerepdalecolfassthese: e w a u s d e i stchoenyt wereent e coianjs. u t i r t e n d . , n be o tion. They were obliged to suffer whatever the laws mi ht direct to be pl ac ed upon them, without having, g g, as freemen ought to have, any voice, in the election of those who had the power to tax th em. Again he had to sub m it th a t if Parliament did not represent all classes in the community, it became an engine of oppression in the hands of the few against the many; and if they had not a good. Parliament, he thought it would be better they should have no Parlia ment at all, but that they should be as the people id other countries were, where the will of the governor or the wilt of a despot decided. But they had seen the result of that con dition of things, and it was because they had seen the ruin' which had taken place abroad within the last few months, that he thought they should not continue to do injustice to men who had a right to a voice in the election of their re presentativ'es., His view of the political power which Par liament should exercise was, that it should, in the first place, be founded upon the broadest possible.basis of popular power, and thence rise up, the Crown being the highest point of the executive. Government was made for the good of the com munity at large, and not for the benefit of the Crown, or for the benefit of the nobility, or of any particular class. But the Government, consisting of King, Lordssand Commons, act ing under and by the authority of Parliament, was for the benefit of all.—(Hear.) In order, then, to place the House of Commons in the highest place of power in the country, it would be necessary to give to the largest possible number of oar fellow-countrymen the right of the. elective franchise. Now he asked Hon. Members, could they in conscience say , that justice was done to the l arge num b er o f th e people, ' when five out of every six of the male adults of the country were without any voice in the election of the representatives of the country—when they found that, out of 6,000,000 of male adults above twenty years of age, there were upon the registry, as possessing the suffrage, less than 1,000,000, and that of them about 150,000 were doubly registered? So that of the 1,000,000 there were 150,000 who had votes in three. four, and five different places—so that the whole number of males actually represented under the present system would be found to be little more than 850,000, forming a .class separate and distinct; and the remainder of the 6,000,000, who had not the privilege, were placed in an inferior situa tion, by being deprived of those rights which by the Constitution they were entitled to enjoy. He (Mr. Hume) said " rights ;" he did not say " favour," because every min born in this country owed allegiance to the Throne, and allegiance to the laws; and, in return, he was entitled to have protection to his person and his property, and a share in those civil rights which, as an Englishman, the constitu • tion gave to him. And it was only just that he should have those rights, for he incurred serious liabilities, At sixteen years of age he was liable to be drafted into the militia. Any day, whilst walking along the streets, he was liable to be called upon, and might be compelled by a magistrate to assist the civil authorities even at the risk of his life i n keeping the peace. He was obliged, by the Constable Act, passed a few years ago, not only to obey, but to assist the civil power ; and by the Conscription Act, which was not yet repealed, he was liable to be dragged away from his home, from his family, from all he held dear and near to him, when the service of the State required it. And was it, then, too much to say that such a man ought to be placed in the situation which the constitution gave him? He (Mr. Hume) did not speak of natural rights, which was a phrase that nu one could understand.—(Bear, hear). He spoke of constitutional rights, which, under the authority of the con stitution, had been given, and he then said—What ri g ht h a d Parliament to shut th e door and say that any class of men —many of whom, too, it should be observed, were of much superior talents and acquirements to many who sat in that House, ,should be excluded from the enjoyment of their con stitutional rights? He had said that many of the men who were excluded from: the suffrage were men of talents supe rior to those of many Hon. Gentlemen in the House.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) He repeated it: some of collegiate education, some of the best informed and most ingenious classes of workmen, men who were famous throughout the world for ingenuity, industry, and ability, and many of th'em men of superior acquirements, were shut out from the giving of a vote for a representative in Parliament. They were shut out from the rights of Englishmen, whilst they were adding to the glory of the country as soldier or as artisans. Was not that, he asked, a sound and a legitimate ground for discontent.—(Hear, hear.) He, therefore, asked the House for a reason why every man in the situation he had described should not have a vote? It was not for him to state the difficulties which had • been alleged. He wanted those who shut the door to give him their reason. Many of the excluded classes belonged to colleges, and had not what was called the 101. franchise. It was a matter of serious consideration whether they were not blindly going on creating discontent. Whether they were net placing themselves in the condition of requiring to keep one portion of the people of the country armed in order to keep down the other?—(Hear, hear.) It became a serious matter, and those who were friends of peace and 'order ought to consider at once whether the means were not before them of restoring and securing both by grant ing those rights which were now withheld from the people. He asked the House to consider the state of the city of Manchester, and • what passed there on the 10th of April, after the special constables had assembled to preserve the peace, which, however was not broken. The question was asked the special constables, " What were they there that day for ?" and the answer was, "They had met to prevent the Chartists from breaking the peace, if they were likely or desirous to do so." To that it was replied that the Chartists only wants 1 to have a voice in the elec tion of asembers of Parliament ; that they wanted to have a vote in defending property and life; that they considered that Parliament was placing them under heavy contributions by taxing articles of consumption for useful and necessary purposes; and that the money was expended for purposes that were unnecessary and useless; and they were asked were they themselves contented with the present condition of affairs? With one consent the special constables said, "No, we are not contented." They were then asked, why should they be the oppressors of their fellow-men, who merely wanted to express their discontent? But there was no class that ought to feel more anxious than the aristocracy to remove the existing discontent. The aristocracy had great property and great wealth to protect. They had, therefore, a greater stake, and it was of the greatest im portance to them to have peace and order in the country. They 'ought to remove every cause that might 'tend to produce discontent, for no disturbance could arise, no dis affection, could be displayed that would not interfere with the industry of the country. He, therefore, appealed to the Government, not as men of property, not as belonging to the aristocracy, but as having a duty to fulfil which they were b th , Y e oath of office they had taken to perform to . 0 0k t e e• ' t Is matter whilst there was yet time. It was a question for them • • well e to consider, individually, as Ministers as perta 7 c i e u. tha b t of that House. It would be of some im the right of yet? should show what were the opinions, as fo persons of anth er nif, which had been expresed by various various opinion s h t Y un the subject. He knew that the Reform Bill ee xi ted as to the right of voting, and ligible principle as thela one iled to lay down any fixed or intel as to the opinions that ou which it should stand. Bat right of voting, Earl a naa bees expressed regarding the reading of the Reform Bill, ea the moving the second speaking of the great , 3 d of October, 1831, public mind, then so disturbed, rs"` 4ll es of satisfying the the present measure to be a me asu r e stid---" I believe policy, peace, and conciliation• t" beli e sv ins ice, sound acceptance or rejection depend, on the ofie hand,et that on its quillity, and prosperity ; on the other, that state of tran dissatisfaction and discontent, the continuance oritical threatens all those disastrous consequences, whi th intia lvb r ieh when ill feeling is engendered in the people towa s a etie a se vernment of the country. I have said , that I more than any other man am responsible for bringing forward this Ins ese - r Z and it is therefore necessary, in the first place, that upon this point I.should set myself right with your Lordships.' My opinion on this question of Parliamentary reform is w e ll known to such of your Lordships as have done me the honour of observing the political conduct of so humble an individual as myself. I have uniformly supported the prin ciple of reform. So far back as the year 1786, soon after my introduction into Parliament, I voted with Mr. Pitt for a motion which was then brought forward for shortening the duration of Parliaments. I voted for a measure of re form introduced by Mr. Flood, at the commencement of the French revolution, before the breaking out of that unhappy war, carried on at such a fearful expen diture of blood and treasure. I myself, on two different occasions, brought forward motions on this subject, believing then, as I believe new, some change in the repre sentation of the people to be absolutely necessary, in order to give new vigour to the Constitution, and to make the House of Commons in fact that which it professes to be in theory— a full, free, and efficient representation of the people." Now if Lord Grey, who had froM his earliest days been a re former, and who had witnessed the evils of rejecting reform in 1793, and who bad borne testimony against the Govern ment for refusing the reform then required, found it necessary to express himself in such terms in 1831, ought - not those who were now his successors, and some of whom were in office with him at the time, to let those words sink deep into their minds whilst viewing the present issue? Earl Grey quoted the opinion of Mr. Sergeant Glanville, who stated that all men residing within the borough ought to have a vote. That. was one definition which Earl Grey cited in the debate cc the refiolutiela 1702 in the Ho w - _ • ;77 777 of Commons. In Fraser's Election Cases, in the else of the borough of Cirencester, there was another definiton of the right which the people of England could stand upm. It was that "every male person of full age, and not subject to any legal incapacity, and who should occupy any home or dwelling, the same being bond fide used for the purposes of a residence, &c.," should have the right of voting. 3e (Mr. Hume) stated those opinions, because there were many persons who opposed that very ground had endea voured to obtain that very right. Another Parliamentcry authority was that given by the Committee appointed in the case of Pontefract, where it was laid down that the person should be six months resident in the borough previouslyto 'the election, and the payment of rates and taxes was rot insisted on as necessary. What, then, was the meaning of the ridicule which they so often heard thrown upon tie working people when they demanded the franchise? -(Hear.) Why, it was a decision of the House of Commons itself, and he (Mr. Hue) was not to bl ame if he agreed, will opinionssuch m as he had quoted. He would next quote teat of Sir T. Smith, who in the time of Elizabeth said that e every Englishman was supposed to he present in Parla ment, from the Prince to the lowest person in the counter, glishman's consent." N ow , h ow could they take the Ads and that the consent of Parliam en t was taken to be every En of Parliament to be done with every man's consent, whm five out of every six were precluded from their share in tie representation ?-(Hear, hear.) It was important to keep that in view, to show that it was not a favour they were list ing, but a right which had been acknowledged in former times. Lord Brougham had brought in a Bill in 1836 to extend the suffrage, and he recommended that all persons rated to the relief of the poor and all owners of properly rated to the parish, and all such persons having had their holdings for twelve months before the election, should be entitled to the suffrage. But there were other classes to which he would extend it. They were what were called the educa tional classes, and certificates of attendance upon certaei classes of instruction should confer the right. There was another authority cited by Lord Grey, that of Whiteloci, whose opinion was stated by the Noble Lord as the best en constitutional questions; and he said that whenever any question about elections was brought before the House of Commens, the decision went always to favour popular election, thinking that the more free the elections were, the more free would be the consideration of the interests of the country. And he added, that in many boroughs the election still remained popular. He (Mr. Hume) need hardly re mind the House of the voting by scot and lot, which they all knew was an ancient practice, which existed until, he would admit, it became an encroachment upon the rights of the people at large. But up to the present hour the great number of non-represented were deprived of that which the rules of the constitution fairly gave them. The Society of the Friends of the People, on the 30th of May, 179 b, Mr. W. Smith in the chair, came to the following resolution : -" That it is undoubtedly desirable, for many reasons, that the collective body of qualified electors shall be as numerous as possible. To reach the numbers, by whom the power ought to be exercised, it mast be distributed equally and impartially over the whole surface of the king dom. What we want is a free House of Commons and a real reformation. Any measure of reform which does not really give and effectually secure that object, is more than unprofitable, and the efforts to obtain it more than thrown away." The Hampden Club, in 1814, proposed that every adult male, contributing to the support , of the poor, should have the franchise, and that club improved upon the old borough decision, by requiring payment of taxes. After all these opinions, he asked the House whether they were not really aggressors when they excluded so many from their rights, and whether they were not the parties who were driving the people to commit breaches of the peace?- (Hear, hear.) He wished to hear reasons why they should not render the basis of their constitutional power broader than It was at present, and why such a course was not likely to make their institutions more stable. He had brought with him tables, which he had prepared, as be had upon a former occasion, showing the condition of the repre sentation in England, Scotland, and Ireland. The popula tion of Great Britain, as appeared from the returns laid upon the table of the House, was, in 1841, 15,000,000 ; of Wake, 911,000; and Scotland, 2,500,000. Making the total population of Great Britain, 18,411,000. The males above 20 years of age were 4,000,009, and of that number only 944,000 were registered as electors. If they took off the doubly-registered electors he (Mr. Hume) did not be lieve there would be more than 850,000 bona fide elector.. Now, that being the case, he asked whether it was possible that all the great number excluded without being guilty of crime from the franchise, could be other than dissatisfied ? It was so great an inequality, so great, so monstrous, that corn neon sense was shocked at it. He would cite one or two ex amples of counties and boroughs to illustrate the working of the inequality. He would take three English counties first -Huntingdonshire, Rutlandshire, and Westmoreland. The male adults amounted to 26,400' in these counties. The elec. tots registered were 9,000. They returned six Members of Parliament. Miadlesex, Lancashire, and Yorkshire returned six Members also. Their male adult population above 20 years of age, was 316,000. Their registered electors were 73,000. Consequently those 73,000 electors and 316,000 adult males were met and equalised in Parliament by the 9,000 e l ectors and 26,000 adults in the three former counties. In the borough of the Tower Hamlets. there were 40,000, whilst Harwich, with its 190 electors, balanced it. Was that anything like justice? Instead of that being a House of Commons fully and fairly representing the people, it was brought together by means grossly unjust, and the interests of the community were placed in great danger by such a system. In the six boroughs of HarwicLie Chippenham, Knaresborough, Rich mond (Yorkshire), Totnes, and Thettord, the electors were 1,805 out of a population of 28,000 adult mules, and they re turned twelve Members, the same number thatwere returned by Westminster, the Tower Hamlets, Liverpool, Finsbury, Marylebone, and Manchester, with a population of 1,500,000, and the influence of these six boroughs was pre cisely balanced in Parliament by the six former. But a greater evil was . this-that in the large towns something of public spirit existed, and they were counterbalanced by those small boroughs that were at the mercy of a few individuals. Now, with respect to' the condition of the constituency of Scotland, he found that the three counties of Banffshire, Selkirkshire, and Peebleshire, with only 2,173 electors, re turned as many Members as Ayrshire, Aberdeenshire, and Lanarkshire, with a population of nearly 800,000, and with more than 10,000 electors. He could mention other similar instances of a like kind, but he did not wish to trouble the House by doing so. Turning to Ireland, the anomaly ot the present system was still more apparent. He held in his hand a publication from the pen of a late distinguished Member of that House-the late Mr. O'Connell-in which a contrast was drawn between the state of the elective fran chise in Ireland and in this country. The writer took very naturally what appeared to him to be the moot favourable contrast for Ireland, and lie justly complained of the mise rable deficiency of the electors in Ireland compared with the population. Thus, the county of Carlow, with a population of 86,000 inhabitants, had only 1,700 electors ; Kildare, with a population of 114,488, had but 1,200 registered electors ; Leitrim, with a population of 155,000, had but 1,434 electors ; Kerry, with 257,000 inhabitants, had 1,240 electors ; and Mayo, with 306,000 inhabitants, had only 1,300 electors. Thus it appeared that Rutland, with less than 20,000 inhabitants, had more electors than two Irish counties, containing together between 700,000 mid 800,000 inhabitants.-()ear, hear.) He went on to ask, as he (Mr. Hume) thought very properly, was that fairness ? was it justice? And he then proceeded to compare the two counties of Londonderry and Westmoreland. The former county, with 297,000 inhabi tants, had but 2,172 electors, while Westmoreland, with only 42,000 inhabitants, had 4,592 electors, so that London derry, with an excess of population of 255,000, had less electors than Westmoreland by 2 ,420.-(Hear, hear.) Again, he compared Downshire, having a population of 337,000 and 2,330 electors, with Westmoreland, and he found that though Downshire had an excess of population in the ratio of 6 to 1, Westmoreland had an excess of electors to the number of 2,262. In the same manner he went on to Galway, and then to Cork, where there was a population of 720,000, being 14 times that of Westmoreland, and yet Westmoreland had an excess of electors over Cork of 550.(Hear, hear.) All these were irregularities calling for the attention of the House. and which ought to compel them to do justice with out further delay, seeing, as they must do, that peace, con toutineut, can public order could only be secured by putting an end to such inequality and injustice. In the Irish boroughs the unfairness of the present arrangement was very strongly apparent. Thus, in the six boroughs of Lis burn, Portarlington, Tralee, Ennis, Dungannon, and Kip sale, there were only 1,097 electors, while Cork, Dublin, and Limerick, with over 14,009 electors, returned only the same number of representatives. In the one case there was one Member for every 180 electors, and in the other there was but one Member for every 2,423 electors.-(Hear, hear.) Thus it appeared that there was nothing like fairness or equality in the state of the representation either in England, Scotland, or Ireland. He had received a letter that morning from a gentleman residing in Rochester, in which he alluded to the injustice of giving two Members each to such towns as Rochester and Maidstone, while Woolwich, Gravesend, and other important towns were left without representatives. -(The Hon. Member read the passage, and then continued.) He thought that he would best consult the feelings of the House by not dwelling at greater length on these details, but he could assure them that these were only instances selected . from many others of a, similar kind which he had near him.-(Hear, hear.) That being the case, what did he ask the House to do? He asked them to change the system, to open the door to those who were excluded, and to equalize the distribution of the electors whom they had so arranged. If Hon. Members would take his advice, he would strongly recommend them to consult a pamphlet which had lately appeared from the pen of Alexander Mackay, barrister-at-law, and entitled " Electoral Districts; or, the apportionment of the Representation of the Country on the basis of its Population."-(Hear, hear.) It was an inquiry into the working of the Reform Bill, and though he had prepared his own analysis to submit to the House, he felt bound to say that the analysis given by Mr. Mackay was so much stronger and so much more accurate, that he had no hesitation in referring Hon. Members to it in prefer ence. They would find in that publication an analysis of the House and of the country, prepared in the most com plete manner possible, but he would only delay the House by reading a very few extracts from it. In speaking of the boroughs, Mr. Mackay said - " Let us now look more directly into the House of Com mons, and see how different interests and populations are balanced in that assembly. The following 22 boroughs, Andover, Ashburton, Arundel, Bodmin, Bury St. Edmunds, Chippenham, Devizes, Dorchester, Evesham, Harwich, Honiton, Huntingdon, Knaresborough, Leominster, Ludlow, Lyme Regis, Lymington, Maldon, Marlborough, Ri c h mon d (Yorkshire), Totnes, and Thetford, the aggregate population of which is but a fraction above 100,000, have 42 represen tatives in the House of Commons-that is to say, one Member for every 2,390 persons. The following 20 cities and boroughs, London, Liverpool, Leeds, Lambeth, Man chester, Marylebone. Finsbury, Sheffield, Southwark, Tower Hamlets, Westminster, Birmingham, Bristol, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Dublin, Cork, Belfast, Wolverhampton, and Greenwich, with an aggregate population of 3,780,000, also return 42 Members, being one Member for about ;every In the same they 9 % 0 00 persons. Thus, although the population of the former thirty-sev en , g,r9uP is, as compared to that of the latter, as one is to tin e b r al m an r c . e m e a a c c k h a o y th w e e r nt in on th v e er L y e Legislature." o i s p l a e t r u l y r e . t 0 " analyse the state of the electoral body in beroughs. la 1831, the Koble Lord pledged himself that every borough should have at least 300 electors, and that that number would, he trusted, be increased gradually to a large amount, but it ap peared that there were fifteen boroughs with not more than 150 electors, and that there were 56 Members of that House returned by 10,000 electors, while ten times that amount of electors elsewhere only returned one-half that number of re presentatives.-(Hear, hear.) With such facts before them, he would say that no man who gave an honest opinion on the subject could arise from a perusal of that analysis without feeling that the time had arrived when such an anomalous state of things should ,be put an end to.-(Hear, hear.) Mr. Mackay remarked that, " There is in England one county Member for every 3,290 electo rs ; W ales, 2,700 ; - Scotland, 1,633; rean d, „ 1 078 • England, one bo roug h Mem ber for every 1,. 684 " He did not mean to suppose that by any plan which he could propose they would ensure absolute equality, but they mig ht arrive at something like equality; and it should be recollected that in :other countries, where the representa tion was based upon populating, a revision of the elect ora l districts was made every ten or twelve years. On this part of the question there was a very strong =mint ih the se t i g hts boat the There was in these days a great deal ef talk a vo feerl A and the duties of property. Ile said it was the man to maintain! himself in the position in it e ss er a placed. The man of preperty ought to defend sot 00, s tion.—( Laughter.) Hon. Members were perhanttet; that the most popular works issued in Engla s e% of h ) , e last twelve months—he did not mean the spit s Blanc, but English wor k s — wo rks promuleat l '„astol ' which were w id e l y en t er t a i ne d b y the mostsintellysespsyt a working men —laid down the preposition that %oll' was remember the ic h ro e b x b a e c r t y. w — or ( d O s, h, no o r h, did an h i e N"exo'peell°tl,,br be have been ca ll e d upon to prove hi s - po sition hs i o s chet e ' b r it refer them to a work in French.--(imni e , s eed laughter.) He understood the cheers, but he:i ot lisi oe the same principle was contained in English rc eler , t o here also it was held that property Hon. Gentleman, after adverting to several ( ) O w e oi s was a puhlt s c . act isoe opposed the extension of reform on the groun d t poi cause a number of Members to ' be sent into the tieV a instead of taking a rational and c omprehenr er ' s, old ;74 affairs, would be absorbed by petty local ins si t , a , a ste° down the taxation at the expense f the " els v . " t is greatness of the country. He repeated that ts of object of the movement was to divide the proy e o r r ; c ten country. The ideas of advantage from th e / 4)10 0 r these political theories were mere delusions. Po Commons—no Legislature—do what it mig ht ' t een vent distress among th e p eop l e; and to te ll a groO, Legislation had any pow er t o re li e ve them ws s at sin e s lusion. It was a delusi on t o te ll th e peal° thkind.„,.( but money was the lot of the great mass of ma n he eibni l ts oh.) There was .at present running through t c soot!S s Europe a strong desire for a total "regeneratteP_sseisS", He would say in conclusion, you shall have that Tea's so t; but you must first ass through a baptism h ilYa a terS are now doing in France—and you never shall hays on° tion until He comes who is al one a ble to give it• the s o f Lord J. RUSSELL—I r i se th us ea rly to addressntme because I think it is entitled to an explanation loetio ba t the views I entertain, not on ly re garding th is M o s WO other propositions to which it is nearly akin , 0 ,1" after the speech of the H on . M em b e r for biontreivoloV jecture are like to follow it ( as we u nderstood)• roseau edit; me to allude to the petitions which have bee s ,n_P stro ted,„ l this House, and to what the Hon. Member for luu. ects tro t the expression of a general opinion on the suh. p .l e pt ss for A t that I have to say that it does not appear that , r 7 o ; y . intro provisions called the People's Charter, there Wee ttas seis t g, numerously signed petition presented to this "s' s pr ese sor early part of the session. Regarding those si rlc hs idl° s e and regarding those meetings which have been themes the s es port the motion of the Hon. Member for Mont' 0 00 . 1 ( 100 two remarkable circumstances—one is. that c oleo pains were taken to misrepresent a speech which 1 ni o s weeks ago—( Hear)—when notice of that ino .s ti sil , de ss il poned by the Hon. Member, to the effect tot sa tenr i f therein that the people wished for no reform. ss .l ; - ‘ thic sl je tf done with such care that in placards all the sco''' s - r ecsill,, • plied my belief that there ought to be retest/ 11 ' 1 , - 0 e s ed expunged, and in some cases directly the re f ", a isdle The words I used were—" My belief is that th e sr - sclesUtn working classes desire that there should be l! greys of reform ; that this House should give t a o teii lit ' f id° the question before it, and that on p ea ce and Off scensfosie pond their interests.—(Cries of "Read on.") ' s o ver"ile not deny that which has been stated over anu rao selP s el that I expressed my belief that the countrY' ft eef e Nol middle and working classes, were not in favour stro sti,o Charter, or the plan of the ' Hon. Member for life u cies iers; it s that declaration has been used as if it 'Were s o J' 4 * against all reform ; whereas I wen t on to OP i o desi e s' excluded these specific measures, that the Pe e t te tal o ol, gradual progress in reform, and in using tlia t e De r fa l° eluded no species of reform, n e ith er parliament a bs a stf e t nor any other kind of ref orm w hi c h it might o tae° l l o o adopt. But so great has been the misunde boryieooo, misconstruction of what I said, that at th l a res e „ s la ting meeting the Hon. Member for Montrose Inn` s i s ter, l ". o e , which began thus :—" That the Prime 0 " ... .." - te osiv sit e stated his opinion that the people require no • res' e si 4 sures of political and fiscal reform, it i s hereV wha t and so on. The Hon. Gentleman having hear cl sbo aki et° and accurately knowing w h a t I sa id, realli.:o G OIr taken more pains. When th a t res olution L c iotis :g l i p ss his hand, he should h ave sa id , " This syis....ss trary to the fact ; I k now it t o be so -- (. 1 "'" th e sible for me to move it as it stands." t h Mr. HUME.—I can only say, it is c onsiste nt t oes fact, to my knowledge.—(Orde r , order.) sireetor° Lord J. RUSSELL.—Now there is another for n it s which has attended many of these inee_ s t iflga ni eled They have been meetings convened , and . " ° ` - i n ts e s aoP - A view of proposing and supporting the four P e- on 0" in this resolution which the Hon. Gentlema n s SflilS in to-day, and to w hi c h h e h as now a dded r s 0010 - c on with the view of sending petition to thlotter abet support of this resolution. But where ..s. th e A eitbe r st to a discussion it has repeatedly halloo — se So3- seg s some Chartist has risen and moved an Al n " - c ro oB . e d,P 0Y _srts every person of full age and unconvicted 0f be en sey s tisi°, l , / to have a vote, and that that resolution has ""..,h " - Oil else that, such a resolution being proposed , st`l o AO in the meeting took place that the repo rters, W ste eis VIA 0 attend accurately to these matters, have been Itc h ter t eo the result of the meeting. I say, therefore, n a 01 1 0 0 this movement, that, in the first place, it has 7 1 said sol° degree founded upon misrepresentation of Wu: h olt place in Parliament ; and, in the next place,.., o f the/so' be considered at all as a movement in sunPe r ' sse til ( i s s tb st Getletnan the Member for Montrose—wheth er " c try cIIS or Birmingham, or Me r yl e b one , as I think, or $ 0 1 ° f obw seer o of the great cities. It is to be regarded rather a g o tbs tis sO s in which there w as a di v i s i on of opinion`, thei"bls ta fists very often had th e ma j or i ty ; an d Where f oclr a se s lii majority the meeti ngs cannot b e cons ideredls e 100 6 1 1 11 the plan of the Hon oura bl e G ent l ema n. I R h is sP e boot t Gentleman, to my great satisfaction, be Ital i sa s the m . it, declaring that the plan of reform which 1 7 offen t ' d eff st to propose in 1831, and which was carried , lu l .ll PT i se s Helmut in 1832, had been mainly instrument' „ a t. L o s the peace of the country during the present i reO ti iilit;,' that testimony as a testimony that the Pite trend .1 the been useful in averting discontent, preser v :"'(lles r ,' UP," and in bringing about other useful measnrins, that 017; pTehoeplHe.ona.ccGorednitnlgemteant,heiinrdperedes,enatfterriVcceshekhe:oool, '26 Atten those who would fitly represent them, he them o fd their own interests as they ought, 04 he interests 0 0 carrying into effect measures conducive t e e t s - lious e community. If that be so, it must make t .. . - nt e of . I. 'foll' s to the necessity for any Government rne" - . 0 this • ow enable the people to find a fair representation st , it 15 00 Bcause, by the Hon. Gentleman's own staterne'the prec l be from their mistake of their true interests that tt hee h s es ted* House does not fairly represent them, an d tha re pren tea l opportunity at a general election of eing fai r " ) : en t ' s . til t The electors, indeed, might reply to the g ° t ll o u n ge it !if that they had the power, but did nee.choose b tte .s r sO d manner he recommended, for that thef - i sts a sis e be'" , olt 4 their true interests tha he self till sell nhimself that they had chosen their present representatives" thei t .4. that their views were the sound views accordingT. the notions of public policy, and not, the views Whie s u ao tot s et Gentleman entertained. For, although he 1 1,1‘, 01 ' 110 r a i n g y ht p h a e rti m cu e l y ar e r e i t g e h b t lie o h f , su t ff h r e a t g t e h , • ion . s notions, and that they are not fairly representedpeople are to ' 1 .7 the sentatives do not coincide with his views an' s oof (Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman began hi. ls. s ed that every man who was a contributor to the ter t ests be d he people cannot cont toot areere way should have a share in the representation , th et as died man of full age who contributed in any way positively a right to vote. Why, Sir, if this P o o is were true there would be an end of all disput e it seen' sa el matter—an end of the Hon. Gentleman's proPe c s i limitations, his restrictions, his qualifications—au 501-0 500g50, have nothing to do but pass an Act of Parliante' s the 1; lodging that right, and admitting all to vote. fitieos Gentleman in his plan does not carry his proP e ';eist is e' effect.—( Hear.) His remedy is to extend the fra, l3 ;seg s 'lo to _ropl the to include " all householders," the word " all" ut p i peno left out by ewn n ec i mistake; a a, k n, ed;wahi householders"iod m from ay b his t leo e x di ng p ee l l a rse n d a e t i p, o e n rs h son et - e 0 0 0: 0 ;0 0 ; fi ll. x it e e d nd re t s l icl e as I understand, who must claim to be rat i e li a, the b° re D ' algs sl ol, the actually pe er . rated, rrhe a r e m i t s pelacr restriction, r o i n e ti t . o h n e , a(la an., l; rate-book a ce diu r 0 pO l , which, if the Hon. Gentleman is • ° f rraer tion right . of , you have not the smallest title to impo e ons hear.) Here is a man of full g belonging to th r u to' t ; Westminster ; he claims his right to vote. Itre ltbe 1, 5 6 that be is not registered, and g his name is not ° „ - eSl39: t 0 for the book, and therefore he cannot be admitted? a i I'4' l ' l o says, " I have an indedeasible, a constitution „y 0 0 being a man 21 years of age ; and it is imP ssiv isini I °.sOt h , IN • y 0 deny that right, or set aside or evade ml C ' — r ste'' by any pretence of your qualifications about so 00 4 60 and registration, and conditions of lodging , anci usi i6- o° ll. (Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman by tha t , a q , sbe, n destroys his own proposition. I will confess r s i a gieg p "o/ Gentleman quoted some sentences of mine in "- sa l ," 0 8 Reform Bill in 1831, which, I must admit , w ere lied ' t oll loosely quoted. They could not have been aPP, 0 0 , foundation of the measure I proposed; but at lasi' e tia t l .: to state exactly what the measure was. 1 didl ; pros- Sue doubt about it, and every one can judge Whe t Th e it .l / 4 4 was which I wished to see Parliament adoP t ' fla tere h l es s,/ Gentleman's proposition is of a very different s u e ar, seo of a very vague and indefinite character. --L `f o lder' o ot When the Hon. Gentleman says that all heteallf do hill lodgers who claim to be rated are to vote, I_J asso thi r l s eig understand how large a part of the working or f° c'o ° include. Many sons living with their fathert2,ot t he lo s part of a family, might or might not form in t b e re ate di ai stituent body under this proposition. He sa) ote, se nd r e millions of persons of full age who ought to v _ se at rote only one million or less are included in the Pt` s i t ioa sho on sentation. But I should imagine, if hi s prop s Z ei of carried out, and every man had a right o we t ioP - yo ,id being registered and rated, you would find ht o f t oo three millions at least excluded from the r i g e woo t oo who would not come nnder the definition as se Gentleman has made. What, then, becomes of h i t of V c ° oels that you have disqualified those who have the rig to es,iffor and that it is beyond the power of ParlianWla .) those who have that constitutional right? — ( ;teat Ole entirely from the Hon. Gentleman as to the foun t w hich h ot proposed representation. In toy opinion, th i f i tu n se er ib~ e people have the right to, not only every ran hest Intl° the whole population of this kingdom, is the 11 0100 government and the best ki n d o f r epresentatio n ..., s se,, L st possible for the Legislature t o g i v e.—(Hear, hea' b e st not should be that universal suffrage would g i v e tb / d o :0 , lature, the best law s , an d t h e b est go vernmen t too CiS l d ie e see that this House would be justified in refusi n g ot 0 Ss a h° But if this would not g i ve so good a governnie aw l a' 1 5 f ferent form of voting, then it was mere pedantrla or dievotsiollf philosophy to say th a t every man oug ht to have,. et e the main object o f representat i on, as t h e main ]fare it° institutions, bein g goo d government an d the We ' ct °et people, yo u oug h t not, for the sake of some abstra va about the means, to lose sight of the very objec t : l e d e t z l at, to keep in view. —(Hear, hear.) We have a tn." - r t of tution—the Crown and the House of Lords are a P s t constitution • they are not evils to be endured, Ig o eg, the benefit of the institutions which we enjoY. 8 041 1 04 greatest and one of the most profound writers or nos pe s t to in writing on the subject of government, said , 1 , 3 „, ati, ll elf exactly in words, but in sentiment, what I 5,..--.„ 0 ,0- 4 0 quote—" Every government is formed, either ot,": si ed it of aristocracy, or of democracy. A government T ed, hoj t o combined out of the three may be easily iinagT ro agh s f cannot be easily brought to pass ; °Of it shall he Y rost i ed t pass it cannot be durable." Such was the Bella! thou great and profound historian—a sentiment a tl e u ra floe to Justified by all the experience of the world in mot„ fot ten sf s with the exception of one, and I should say ' a l ir country. It has so happened that in this coup: , r iidlo7l had these elements combined which Tacitus said !' ..sso r: t.lO , be combined—of monarchy, aristocracy, and den l T sera to be s ef eor dieg .so it has happened that that constitution has Sir, I confess that, seeing how difficult it is, near] c v a trip that judgment, and which I believe to be very S s s.Sseet_s, judgment, with the exception which we have seen 0 00 0 : 10 how difficult it is to maintain that species of m o ne e el i r to tution which has provided for the happiness r oc risi , in this country—l have always felt, haying u s o f ref? ;c al do since the year 1819 with proposing measure, ss ,. any and with assisting other measures of reform, nv .v " wa y and nice a matter it was to alter ill a n t ta tiotl'A adjustment of the different powers of thet apristig remember, on the night before I was SbOtt REFORM IN PARLIAMENT. Ilr. HUME said, that after the exhibition which had taken place on that day, as well as yesterday, he hoped lie should be allowed to state that the public did take some in terest in this question.—(Hear, hear.) As far as his know ledge went, no arrangement or organisation whatever had been entered into with the view of procuring signatures to petitions, but he considered the language used by the Noble Lord, in the short speech he made on a former occa sion, h a d g i ven r i se to the adoption of the various petitions which had been presented. He could assure the House and ,the Noble Lord that it was with the greatest reluctance that be had been induced to bring' forward this question, as h e was aware of his inabilit at ter much pressing. His been induced to do so y, but he had Honourable Friend near him k n ew that it was at their sugg est i on that § he had b een i n . ulled to en deavour d u ced to do so at a meeting which h ad been country by to avert evils which threatened(aear the' a disturbance of t he p ublic peace.- _(gea r , thought it also necessary to state , that although he had bees sequested by a considerable body of Iti bring the subject forward before the 10th of April, - th at lie had refrained from doing so; b ut afte r that time he consented to do, so with the view of showing that the can t of reform might be advanced in connexion with the proser. vation of the public peace, in contradistinction to those wh o by their conduct led to the commission of acts of violence. It was not, then, until after the 10th of April he had resolved to bring forward this subject. He believed there was much greater precaution used npon that occasion than there was any necessity for. But there was, at all events, exhibited a readiness on the part of every class in the community, from 'the highest to the lowest, to come forward for the protec• tion of law, peace, and order.—(Hear, hear.) And he (Mr. Hume) knew nothing that was of greater importance than the rendering of the civil law and power paramount, and the military force unnecessary for the repression of civil disorder. (Hear, hear.) On the occasion to which he was alluding he believed it would hove been quite unnecessary, had any die turbance really arisen, to have employed a single soldier in the metropolis. The display in support of law and order by the citizens was highly creditable to the country at large; and it should make the House listen the more at tentively to him (Mr. Hume) whilst he unfolded the propo sition, he was about to make, the object of which would be to ensure still more safely the preservation of domestic tranquillity. And whilst he stated what it was that led to the affair of the 10th April, and what led.to all the breaches of the peace on the part of those Radical Reformers called Chartists, during the last ten years, it should be for the House to consider—when they saw matters brought to such a crisis as that of the 10th April—whether there was any - just ground of complaint existing on the part of those who sought to obtain an extension of the suffrage, and to pro cure a voice in the election of those who ruled the destinies of their country; and further, if those grounds of com plaint were found to exist, whether it was not the duty of the House of Commons to correct those abuses as soon as possible. He thought that all would agree with hi that the country was not in the condition this year that it had been in during the last three or four years, with regard eith er to trade or the revenue. The circumstances which recently occurre d h ad alto gether alter e d the condition of the working classes. This country, which had been forward as an example, as having a better form of cadoniFtntion than any other country in the world —we, who h whole as o t f ed that our Houses of Par liament represented the the eole—bywet,hewhaoidhaodt been accustomed to boast thmatemwe could, Parliament only, carry all necessary for the amelioration of the condition of their" that we could, by the civil power alone, tvithoutphrPeasevivPn ige—any recourse to the military, repress tumult and e order— had stood distinguished from thega•ette of wEe'urwopheo, of lihia s h aid to have almost all the countries of which mi had military governments, and many tary despotisms, many of which depended for ,nifietwoe.mfoilreil the large armies they maintained, had recentlayu'ro,;:nd-P" condition materially altered. We had, thought, our that our military forces were required for our foreign ps sions and the defences of our colonies mucl. more tha n for service in this country. He (Mr. Name) w as not one of those, he begged to say, who thought there ought , „ _ THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE" '2l l 1818. pamphlet from which he had been quoting, and it was the last with which he would trouble the House:—" Of the bo ronghs with the number of electors represented by each Member below the average--are Honiton, which is 822 below it ; Totnes, 875 ; Lymington, 893 ; Harwich, 858 ; Richmond (Yorkshire), 904, and Thetford, 933. The differ ence between the two extremes, Westminster and Thetford, the former having one Member for every 7,286 electors, and the latter one for every 107, is 7,179. The two boroughs are equal in Parliament, although the electoral body of the one is 1.48 per cent., or one sixty-seventh that of the former. Again, the aggregate electoral body of London and the metropolitan boroughs is 83,062, returning amongst them sixteen Members. The aggregate electoral body of the boroughs of Bridgnorth, Honiton, Harwich, Thetford, Stafford, Richmond (York shire), Totnes, and Lymington is' 3,766, also returning amongst them sixteen Members. In the former, the average number of electors returning one Member is 5,191, in the latter it is 235; from which it appears that one voter in the latter is equivalent in the electoral scale to twenty-two in the former." Thus the whole influence to London was neutra lised by the Members of these eight boroughs, who got into the House, as they all knew, with very little trouble, though at some expense. — (Laughter.) That, he would say, was not a fair state of things.—(Hear, hear.) But before stat ing the course which he would recommend them to pursue, he might observe that the suffrage was at the present time on no fixed principle. Honourable Members might I not be aware that though they bad a 10/. suffrage as the standard for boroughs, and a 40s. franchise, if they pleased to call it so, in the counties, yet many would be surprised to hear that there were altogether no less than eighty-five tiff ferent suffrages at present in existence. It was impossible to tell the confusion and delay and expense which this variety and uncertainty of the franchise gave rise to. What they ought to do was to render the suffrage as simple, as general, as easily obtained, and as easily defended as possible. It was at present narrow, complicated, difficult to be preserved, and attended with great expense, not only of money but of time. He would counsel the House to adopt some uniform system of suffrage for the counties, and one for the boroughs, but first he would state what were the various suffrages that now existed. (The Honourable Member read a list of several denominations of the franchise, but said that the entire number would occupy too much time in going through.) They were taken down by a barrister who had made the subject his study. This much he would say, that many per sons who had a right to the franchise under some of these h ea ds, did not choose to avail themselves of it because they did not wish to go to the trouble and expense of registra tion.—(Hear, hear.) Now what was the result of this state of inequality? Why, that the people of this country did not believe that that House represented the public.--(Hear, hear.) They found votes and proceedings agreed to that were altogether at variance with the interests of the people. They found that class interests and the interests connected with the aristocracy were always in favour, to the exclusion of the interests of the people. They found that the agri cultural interests were in a great measure freed from taxa tion, and it was no wonder that it should be so, seeing that until a few years ago no English Member could sit in that House without having 3001. a year in land. In Ireland it was, he believed, the same thing; but in Scotland they had, and still have, a better order of things. A. working man could be elected as a Member of Parliament for Scotland as well as the wealthiest landholder in the country, and why should it not be so, if his fellow -electors had confidence in him ? It appeared to him, there fore, that in every point of view the absurdity of the present state of the representation, and the confusion to which it t w h o e a r l d e m s e a d h y m w it gave rise, were all t o h w ey i n h g a t d o i t t h i e n i r th o s w i r a p o neglect e i m n p loy. applying n o h t i h c a h t the time had come when they ought to effect the changes that were desirable. He would not speak now of the great increase of taxation which had been allowed to spring up under the present system, and which the coun try believed to be imposed for the benefit of certain classes. Increased taxes were imposed on account of the army, the navy, the colonies, but he would only say on this subject at present, that his own opinion was that one-third of the whole amount expended for these purposes might be very easily saved.—(Hear, hear.) After the Reform Bill, and while Hon. Gentlemen were on their good conduct before the coun try, the national expenditure had been brought down by seven or eight millions; but whcn the public became careless, the taxes were again gradually increased to the present enor mous amount. He would wish that Hon. Members would look over a return that had been moved for by the Hon. Member for Liverpool (Mr. Cardwell). They would see how the taxation had gradually risen to the enormous amount of nearly sixty millions annually in a time of peace. Was it possible that under such a state of things the people of England—writhing under the injustice of being refused their civil rights, and of being at the same time taxed to that vast extent—could be con tented? They were not content, and they ought not to be content; and only that those who had the suffrage were re gardless of their duty, they would have taken care what class of men they sent as their representatives to that House. He did not see the Right Honourable Baronet the Member for Tamworth in his place; but he held in his hand a statement made by that Right Honourable Gentle men at the lime that Parliament disfranchised the 40s. freeholders of Ireland. The Right Honourable Baronet stated on that occasion, in speaking of the franchise, " No doubt it is a vested right; but it is a right which differs in its character from the rights of property and other private rights. It is a pubic trust, given for public purposes, to be touched, no doubt, with great caution and reluctance; but still which we are competent; to touch if the public interest manifestly demands the sacrifice." That wa's the language held when 340,000 freeholders were struck off the roll in Ireland. Now he was anxious to see no man's money taken out of his pocket without his consent. It was contrary to the constitution and contrary to justice to do so, and what was contrary to the constitution and to justice could not, and ought not long to continue. The people were now, he was glad to see, alive to the importance of this subject. But let them bear in mind that every voice in that House was a voice sent against them to keep up the present extravagant system, and it was their own fault if they did not come for ward and perform their duty. Under the Reform Bill of 1832 they had the undoubted benefit, that whereas the bo roughmongers filled the House before the Reform Bill, di viding it into Whigs and Tories, who always formed two factions, influenced only by their individual inter ests, the electors had now the power of making what selection they pleased. He had often heard it said, by way of regret, that the Reform Bill was likely to destroy the influence of the Crown. Why, the very contrary was the tact. The King of England could not do anything as he pleased before the Reform Bill. He could not choose even his own Ministers, except as the two fac tions of the aristocracy decided.—(Hear, hear.) But now, if the 10/. householders were but honest, if they fulfilled what the Right Honourable Baronet called the trust given to them honestly and fearlessly, they might at the next election take care to place in that House men who would act up to the demands of the interests and necessities of the people, and this could be done in the constitutional mode, in which only it ought to be accomplished. At the same time he hoped that the electors would not do anything to impede the great extension of the suffrage which he believed necessary for the welfare of the country. They had heard complaints against the Radical Reformers or Chartists. They had heard complaints of their disturbances; sad he was sorry to say that for the last ten years they had interfered with the progress of almost every public meeting, and had thus, in fact, destroyed one of the most important elements in the Constitution—freedom of opinion. He had always objected to them on this ground, because he thought that whatever might be their owa views they ought not to inter fere with the expression of opinion by others. But at the same time, when he looked back to the causes of discontent which prevailed, and to the manner in which their petitions had been treated in that House, he could not feel astonish ment if they were dissatisfied and unsettled. When he remem bered the reception of the petitions that had been presented by his friend Mr. Duncombe again and again, he could not wonder that they should have adopted the mode of family petitions that had been recently acted upon. Mr. Livesey, of Preston, was, he believed, the first man who suggested the plan of having the name, address, and occupation of the peti tioner inserted. Under the Act of Charles the Second it was said to be illegal to send a petition signed by more than 20 persons. He had himself presented lately a number of petitions, each signed by less than that number, and he thought that in the present state of things persons were wise in sending petitions bearing only a small number of signatures. But to return : he thought it was unnecessary for him to say more in order to satisfy the House of the inequality of the present system, of the great proportion of the population that it excluded, and of the necessary dissatis faction which prevailed throughout the country.--(Hear. hear.) The remedy which he would now propose was quite a constitutional one. He was about submitting to the House the following,propositions :—" That this House, as at present constituted, does not fairly represent the popula tion, the property, or the industry of the country, whence has arisen great and increasing discontent in the minds of a large portion of the people; and it is therefore expedient, with a view to amend the national representation, that the elective franchise shall be so extended as to include house holders; that votes shall be taken by ballot; that the dura tion of Parliaments shall not exceed three years; and that the apportionment of Members to population shall be made more equal." Great anxiety existed in the country on the sub ject of this motion. He had many applications made to hi m to know what he meant by household suffrage, and here he begged to remark that a word had been acci dently omitted in the resolution, as his intention was to in clude all householders. Not wishing to create any alarm he drew a distinction between the vagrant and the man who ought to have a vote, and adopting the opinion given by Whitelock and others, and very lately by Lord Brougham, his definition was as follows. He might remark, in the first instance, that the Committee who had met and had asked him to bring forward this motion, had all given different in terpretations to the the term household voter. The defini tion which he would suggest, if the House allowed him to bring in a Bill on the subject was this—" that every male who a havelo u s e beenor par rated t house to othe poor as as elector, person of full age, and not subject to any me n t a l or legal in capacity, a t c w i teTv, twelve who months, shall be entitled to be regi s t ere d , and shall be entitled to vote for twelve months from and every lodger shall have a right to b e rate d to the poor, and after such rating and such res id ence for that period; s h it !l in like manner b e entitled to be There would be no difficulty object. The apparatus all existed. In carrying out this n registered twelve as a elector. every parish there we ths shall havean and occupied shall were ratings to the poor, and persons who ratings. All that was wanted was to separate and distinguish have so much o kept accounts o f f those t who was entitled to a vote, from the the steady inhabitant, entitled to one. He knew that this vagrant, who was not herdence as should ould inolude a great many, and be a excludes certain portion of the pop u l a ti on, to a great many more, who would remai n be r o o t p a o t si t t h i o e n sa w m o would time it w strong inducement He w as not aware of anydifficulty that existed. registered. By the present law eve ry house was rated to th e poor, and would provide th a t the Act conferring this suffrage every manfixed in their residence for 12 months for the sake of being who so desired might, upon entering upon the occupation of f the poor - rate assessed upon that ho use. what ever it might be, o and residence, both of which wer e impor tant,Thus registration be drawn between part of a house, have a right to be r a ted f ora portion, would be secured, and a line would on account from the suffrage merely of the now excluded tion It might be argued that this proposal nature of his occnpa • Con between personal rights and the mere vagrant and the worthy and educated man who was did not keep up the distinction too the law as it stood too tight, but he must say that by and too much mortar, and too little attention had been paid to bricks laugh)—and the time had now to brains—(Hear, hear, and a . v property. He did not wish to draw that distinction be, t the House that the proper course to pursue would abos lish all qualifications now existing . in . boroughs, substi tute this simple and intelligible principle, beby which a large that it Noble Lord and some others might say would. admit but that was not his opinion. toe many—(Hear, hear) — portion of the people now excluded would admitted. The and a fai r expression o f opinion, and of d oing away with bribery and other influences which had The more were admitted the better the chance of a f ree been brought to bear. He would tell Hon. Member s w h o Wight not h ave bad the experience of the working men which he h a d h a d. that he had held his positionin that House, and b een protected for some 12 or 14 y ears during i the worst of times, by the virtue and honesty of the working men of Monttuee, and the five burghs bad kept him in that House in spite of every effort made by the whole Tory aris tocracy, who would have given his weight in gold only to get rid of him.—(Cheering and laughter.) The working men now thought and acted for themselves; -and lion. Gentlemen should rem em b er t h at the schoolmaster had been abroad, and that there was a great difference between the days of 1831 and those of 1848. Public affairs were now far better understood, although he could wish education had been still more widely extended.—(Hear, hear.) He thought that a large suffrage—such as he hoped to see realised be fore long—was so consistent with the interests of all classes, high and low, that he believed no Minister would be able long to refuse it. It was as clear to him as any proposition he had ever' examined, that, if those were admitted within the pale of the constitution who were now ranging discon tented over the country, a grand cause of such' discontent would be removed, and thereby the number of advocates of order and peace would be increased.—( Hear, hear.) This, therefore,; was the principal object ; all the others were merely subsidiary. The extension of the suffrage was the one great object—(Hear, hear)—all the others were matters of detail. Having obtained an extension of the suffrage, the result would be—for he would not trouble the House with figures—according to his estimate, that 2,000,000 of votes would be added to the constituency..—(Hear, hear.) This increase of the constituency was itself a good. The more votes that were added the better. He hoped that all would be included in the franchise who deserved it; for it was a heartbreaking circumstance to see men of ability and talent, though M a low condition or life, excluded by law from the exercise of their rights in a representative constitution. If this was not to be a representative con stitution, it must be a military constitution ; it must be one or the other, and, he hoped, when he looked round at the state of the continent, that this truth would be remembered ; it ought to ring in the ears of those who obstructed the extension of the principle of re presentation, and he hoped it would continue to ring in their ears until the object was obtained. If he found the country prepared for the change, he was bound to explain why the resolution,:"put forth as the resolution of a committee, was put in this shape. It was thought better to throw out the principle, and to let the country say how far they would go. Buying answered what he considered as the calumny of the Noble Lord, and having stated the definition which he was anxious to embody in an Act, in order that his plan should have effect and operation, he would mention one circumstance, which he had referred to on a , former occasion—namely, why he had put all into one reso lution. The extension of the suffrage without protection would, in his opinion, be an evil, since in many cases voters would be subject to a coercion and an influence which was not very delicately exercised by masters; he therefore thought it perfectly right, and he took it upon himself to express the opinion on the part of the community at large, that voters should be protected. It was not the humbler classes alone who needed this protection ; the petitions had not been confined to those classes: All had joined—Conser vatives and Whigs, the man of wealth and the tradesman, mayors and justices of the peace, had joined in the prayer that the suffrage should be extended; and the next and most important question was, in what manner it should be exercised. Hitherto there had been the grossest inequality. What was to be done? It was not his intention to adopt the plan proposed by some, of cutting the country into squares. He was one of those who thought that every change was an evil.—(Hear.) Every change ought, in his opinion, to be well considered beforehand ; and he never would advocate any change merely for the sake of change, or unless he was sure it would effect great good. He did not, therefore, pro pose to divide the country anew, and he did not propose to alter the proportion of Members for England, Scotland, and Ireland. He would leave the proportions the same as they now were. He was aware that there were counties with a population treble the amount of other counties, and it might be desirable to alter the limits of some counties, as well as of some boroughs. He had the number of the population in each county and in each borough, and he could state what should be the average of each. The next proposition was the vote by ballot. He knew that this subject had been very fully discussed in this House upon former occasions, and he was not now disposed to renew the discussion ; but he would notice one objection to the ballot, namely, that it was un-English. If the ballot was un-English, was it meant that bribery and coercion, against which it was meant to guard, were English ?—(Hear, hear.) If the franchise was a trust, those in possession of it should vote according to their honest opinion. If a man came into the possession of an estate giving him the command over a cer tain number of votes, why should the men who had them be called upon to vote at all, when they could not do so honestly? But was it those men alone who required pro tection? Why, men with hundreds and thousands a year had not courage to vote as they ought, and required a pro tection as well as the poor man. But it was the poor man he wished chiefly to protect against the rich, in order that he might give his vote freely, without suffering the conse quences which in many cases a working man endured if he gave an honest direction to his vote. What was surprising was, that the higher classes did not object to the Ballot among themselves. They should do to others as they would be done by. When they got to their clubs they voted by ballot, and why not permit the poor man to exercise his franchise by ballot? He wished any man, when he came to vote, to be able to go in an erect and independent manner and exercise his right; he wished him to be as independent in that act as the Honourable Member for Sunderland oppo site, and them efore he thought the ballot was necessary to the due exercise of the elective franchise. Having dis posed of this point, the next was the duration of the Par liament. Some proposed that Parliaments should be elected for five years, some for three years, and some for two years. He admitted that there was no rule by which a person could form an opinion upon this question, which depended upon practical expelience. His own opinion, after all his expe rience in that House, led him to say that if the Parliament were elected for a not longer time than three years, that term would afford a sufficient opportunity of control over the representatives. If the elections were annual, it would occasion trouble delay, and expense, though if his plan were adopted candidates would be put to little expense. He thought, however, taking it altogether, • that Parliament s ought not to be elected f or more than iree years. These were, therefore, his propositions—household suffrage, under the conditions he had mentioned; the more equal apportion ment of Members to population; triennial Parliaments; and vote by ballot. There was likewise a fifth proposition which he wished to adopt. He wished to act upon the prin ciple he had before referred to, of doing to others as others d.d to him. He sat in that House without qualification. He was an elector, and as an elector he had a title to be elected. In Scotland there was no qualification required —no property qualification —but the fact of being an elector. He was anxious to put the people of England and Ireland on the same footing in this respect as thon of Scotland, where there was no property qualification, and where even working men of talent who had no property qualification were not therefore excluded from the House. Upon this ground, he thought that all the rest of the United Kingdom should be put upon the same footing as Scotland was, which would open the door for the removal of property qualification. This was the plan of Reform which he thought ought to be adopted ; he thought if the House stopped short of this the plan would be defective ; he thought they ought to carry it out entire, and they should beware of making such another mistake as they had done in 1832, In justification of his views he had no occasion to refer, but he must refer, to the sentiments expressed by the Noble Lord when he introduced the Reform Bill in 1831, which he sup ported in this strong manner, and he (Mr. Hume) saw no reason why the Noble Lord should have since changed his opinions. The Noble Lord, on the Ist of March, 1831, said— " But what is the case at this moment, The whole people call loudly for Reform. That confidence, whatever it was, which formerly existed in the constitution of this House, exists no longer—it is completely at an end. Whatever may he thought of particular acts of this House, I repeat that the confidence of the country in the construction and constitu tion of the House of Commons is gone, and gone for ever. I will say more. I will say that it would be easier to transfer the flourishing manufactures of Leeds and Manches ter to Gatton and Old Sarum, than to re-establish confidence and sympathy between this House and those whom it calls its constituents. I end this argument, therefore, by saying, that if the question be one of right, right is in favour of Reform—if it be a question of reason, reason is in favour of Reform—if it. be a question of policy and expediency, policy and expediency are in favour of Reform." He (Mr. Hume) could not use stronger language to support his ar guments than this, and it was only necessary to read it to show what the sentiments of the Noble Lord then were. There was another passage of the same speech of the Noble Lord which it was very important that the House should bear in mind. The Noble Lord showed the necessity of a change in the state of the representation at that time, and he (Mr. Hume) wanted to show what the Noble Lord's opinions then were :—" It will not be necessary on this occasion that I should go over the ground which has frequently before been gone over, for arguments in favour of a change in the state of the representation ; but it is due to the House that I should state shortly the points on which the reformers rest their case. In the first place, then, the ancient constitution of our for rthe his country o f the s t atdeclares who has that not no consentedman shall byhimself, be ta ed or repre sentative, to the imposition of these tax es; th e we ll k nown supt r statute De Tallagio non concedendo repeats the same lan guage; and although some historical doubts have been thrown upon it, its legal meaning has never been disputed. It includes all the freemen of the land,' and provides that each county should send to the Commons of the realm two knights, each city two citizens, and each borough two bur gesses." He read the next passage to introduce the two branches of his plan, namely, the ballot and the duration of Parliaments:—" I ought to notice certain points which are looked to with great interest by the most zealous advocates for reform, but which are not included in the proposed measure. In the first place, then, I have to state that there is no provision in this Bill for shortening the dura tion of Parliament. That is a subject which has been much considered, but, upon the whole, without stating the opinion of his Majesty's Ministers on it, I may ob.erve that it was thought better to leave that matter to be brought for ward as a separate question than to bring it at the end of a Bill affecting franchises and matters of local reference, separate and essentially different from any question concern.. ing the duration of Parliament. Without saying to what opinion his Majesty's Ministers incline on this point, I may say that they consider it of the utmost importance not to burden this measure :with any other, but to reserve it by itself, leaving it to any other Member, at any time that may be considered fitting, to introduce the question, and to make it the subject of future consideration." " There is another question, likewise, which has excited a vast deal of interest in the country, and of which no mention ia made in this Bill, I mean the vote by ballot. I have no doubt the ballot has much to recommend it as a mode of election. More in genious arguments never fell under my eye on any subject than I have seen in favour of the ballot." He (Mr. Hume) believed that the Noble Lord and his colleagues were at that time in favour of the ballot. " But, at the same time, I am bound to say that I hope this House will pause before it sanctions the motion which the Hon. Member for Bridport is to make, and adopts the mode of voting by ballot." Now, he (Mr. Hume) said that these arguments of the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) were very good, and ought to weigh with the House on the present occasion; but he wanted to clear away, as the Noble Lord did, the objections to a great measure of reform, and in the same speech the Noble Lord referred to the doubts entertained by some as to the expediency of bringing forward a great and effectual measure of reform, when the Noble Lord said,—." I think, • therefore, that they have a right to be believed when they come forward with a measure of effectual reform, and say that they do not so for any sinister purpose of their own. I Interested as they are—all must be—in the future welfare and prosperity of the country, they do think that this mea sure will tend to promote that future welfare, and secure that future prosperity; and above all do they think that it is the only way calculated to insure permanency to that con stitution which has so long been the admiration of foreign nations on account of its popular spirit, but that admiration cannot be made to exist much longer unless, by an infusion of new popular spirit, you show that you are determined not to be the representatives of small classes or parti cular interests, but that you will form a body which, representing the people,—which, springing from the people—which, sympathising with the people, can fairly call upon the people to support any future burdens, and to struggle with any future difficulties you may have to en counter, confident that those who ask them so to do are united heart and hand ;viiii - them and look only, like them selves, to the glory and welfare Of England." Were not all these observations applicable to the present time? Ho could not show in stronger language the necessity of bringing forward and adopting the plan he proposed than by citing this passage of the Noble Lord's speech. Upon these grounds he thought that the Government were bound to give their support to his plan, which the G overnment s as tar as the Noble Lord was concerned, had approved; for no stronger reasons, no stronger arguments coulu be adduced in its favour than those he had read from the Noble Lord's speech. He would repeat once more, that he thought the time had arrived when an important onward step must be taken. If they only did justice to the mass of the people, they might rely upon this, that the mass of the people would give them cordial and unqualified support . ; but of this they might equally rest assured, that, if they continued to exclude a large portion of the people from the enjoyment of civil rights, it would be impossible for the Government of this country any longer to repress universal discontent. To his mind no thing could be clearer than this, that they must freely grant civil rights to their fellow subjects, or else they must be pre pared to coerce them. They had already—most prematurely in his opinion —begun the plan of coercion, and it certainly had bee& productive of no good fruits. He meant, not merely recent coercion, but that also of a more distant date. Let him be allowed to refer to the year 1793. That was a period when the first French Revolution raised in this country a wide spread and eager demand for more popular institutions. The cry of reform was then raised with great loudness and strength; and he entreated them to look at the measures that were then taken for the purpose of repressing that cry. Let them look at the measures that were taken for the purpose of putting down reform, and let them look at the penalty which this country paid for the pleasure of carrying those measures into practical operation. All possible means of coercion were then resorted to, and what did we pay for it ? no less a sum than 600,000,0001. England added 608,000,000/. to her debt —it might be 800,000,0001.—the debt was 1,000,000,0t,0/., and certainly at the lowest computation 600,000,0001. of that must be set down to the account of the war, which war arose altogether out of attempts to coerce the people. Look ing back, then, as no one at present could help doing, to the state of things in 1793, could any rational or dispassionate man deny that all we had since then suffered in the way of war and its consequences, in the weight of public taxation, and in the misery and distress which followed in its train, might all have been avoided if Parliamentary reform had been conceded in good time? But the aristocracy were against it,the Sovereign was against it, and that arch-traitor to reform, Mr. Pitt, was against it. That Minister, who in 1785, took his great stand upon reform principles, kept this country under the severest coerceive rule throughout the many years that his administration lasted. Such had been the consequence of formerly refusing to make any concessions to the just demands of the people, and such again would be the inevitable consequence of any resistance to the popular will; that which the people of England had done before they would do again. It was the duty of the Legislature to con cede that which they believed to be just and right, and to trust the people; if they trusted the people they would be perfectly safe, but if they deceived the people they might expect severely to suffer for that crime. Trust the people, and there need be no ground for alarm ; the people were as much and more interested than the wealthier classes were in the maintenance of law and order, for there were none in the community more interested than the working men in the public tranquillity, for they would be the first to suffer by anything like disturbance. Persons of property„though they , might to some extent suffer, could get through such diffi culties infinitely better than the poor working man; he was, therefore, much more interested than those who belonged to any other class in preserving the institutions of the country from any species of harm. If the Legislature denied the fair demands of the people, let them not suppose that the working man could be insensible to so great a wrong—let them grant the boon in time, and they would meet with nothing but gratitude in return. On that ground, then, and on the other grounds which he had stated, he should say It was the duty of the Ministers of the Crown to counsel her Majesty, and assure her that the pro posed change was for the benefit of the monarchy. They should tell her that they did not make this demand for the especial benefit or advantage of a class; that, on the con trary-, it was for the good of the whole body politic that every one should participate in the privileges of the British Constitution. The people whose cause he then pleaded re quired no more, and they would b e con t en t wi t h no l ess. He asked the ouse to agree to his motion more as a pledge than anything else that they would carry out the principle of reform. If the House agreed to his motion, such assent would not have the effect of pledging them to any of the details of any measure that he might seek to found upon a motion so agreed to. Further, it they permitted him to bring in a Bill, Hon. Members who supported his motion might nevertheless propose any alterations that they thought proper in the Bill when it came before the House. If he ex ceeded the just limit of reform, they might correct and cur tail what he proposed. If he fell short of what the neces sity of the case demanded, they might extend his plan ; but he hoped that the House would at least come to such a decision as would restore confidence and impart peace to the agitated feelings of the country, for they much needed a con fidence and peace which every one felt they did not at pre sent enjoy. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by making his motion as above stated, correcting an omission by inserting the words " all householders." Dr. BO WRING seconded the motion. The SPEAKER having read the resolution, Mr. H. DRUMMOND said he could not understand how the alteration in the suffrage proposed by the Hun. Gentle man could have the effect of alleviating that distress which at present, unfortunately, so much prevailed; neither could he understand how the adoption of his proposition would have had more effect in stopping the :proceedings of the 10th of April, than had the means adopted by the Govern ment for that purpose. He well knew that the enumerat ing of such principles as the Hon. Gentleman had given utterance to, tended considerably to produce dissatisfaction, and he was glad that to him was not entrusted the keeping of the public peace on that occasion. That was fortu nately entrusted to her Majesty's Ministers, who were in possession of information regarding the matters which the Honourable Gentleman could not possibly be, and he thought that the manner in which they preserved the peace on the occasion alluded to, entitled them to the gratitude of , the community. He confessed he had felt a difficulty in following the Honourable Gentleman through his details ; but he would mention, in order to show that the subject was not new, that in 1829 an extension of the suffrage and the shortening of Parliaments was recommended. Several circumstances which had, how ever, of late taken place on the continent, had given it this year an impetus it had never before received, and there was not a doubt but that it was a subject which they would all have to discuss on the hustings at the next election, when they would find, as was said by Ewdipus Judaicus, "That he who will not argue is a bigot, and he who cannot is a fool." —(Cheers and laughter.) There was no doubt but great dis tress prevailed at the present time, and those parties who were suffering distress the most were those who adhered most closely to the opinions expressed by the Hon. Gentleman. The distress which prevailed had been the means of causing scenes of the most heartrending description, and men, stung almost to madness by being subjected to such misery, could not be brought to a calm consideration of the question. There was another class of what might be termed intellectual labourers, such as mechanics, persons connected with the various trades, having charge of steam-engines, and so forth. These people earned very high wages, but it was notorious that they were for ever in poverty notwithstanding and a gentleman with whom he was conversing the other day re garding them, told him that one man in his employment had five guineas a week, but yet he was never possessed of a farthing. — (Laughter.) All these joined the cry for the franchise extension, while it was notorious that a reform in their physical condition would be of much more benefit to them.—(Hear.) There was a higher class above these,whom he might call intellectual speculators. These were composed of doctors without patients, and lawyers without briefs.— (Laughter) —and a host of such like characters, who wanted to turn the world into one great chaos, and see if they could not fetch up a constitution out of it to suit themselves. The system pursued by them was carried on in France at present to great perfection, seed on a small scale it was carried on in this country; all of these parties being strong advocates for the Charter. He was aware that the word charter was of but little repute, but he remembered the time when the fact of a man being a reformer was sufficient to have him set down as a black sheep. The word reformer soon, however, turned into'Radical, and that had now shifted into Chartist. And while the Chartists included all those evil persons he had mentioned, still it did not fellow that they were all of such an evil stamp. They all, however, seemed to have strange notions as to the first principles of law ; and, to prove this, the Hon. Gentleman read an extract from the report of a meeting held at Leeds some time ago, at which, he said, the Hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Muntz) attended. The extract he read was from a speech of one of the aldermen of that town, wherein it was stated that, while they were all loyal subjects, and willingly submitted to the Government of King, Lords, and Commons, the two former of which were evils which they could afford to en dure, yet they conceived that they were entitled to those rights they demanded. They were advocates of peace, law, and order, but if their demands were refused by the Go vernment, and if the Ministry hesitated too long in grant ing them, let it not be said that they were the first to trample on the institutions of the country, and to raise the stanaard of anarchy. The Honourable Gentleman then went on to state that, whatever they did with the present motion, they ought to make up their minds to stand by the institutions of the country—(Cheers) —and they must not allow themselves to think that the King, Lords, and Com mons were mere evils which could be endured.—(Hear, hear.) Having thus shown who the parties were who asked for these changes, the next point was what did they ask for? He would not say ask " us" for, because he was no party to their Reform Bill. He hated it then, and he hated it now.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) It gave away all their old suffrages, and established one in the stead which had no principle to rest upon. Nobody could give a reason why 10/. was more entitled to a vote than 91. 19s. 6d. When the authors of that measure talked of its being a final one, they certainly displayed very little foresight for it must have been evident to all that it was only the first step to a great num ber of similar treasures.—(Bear.) At the same time he would say, that though it was said everybody was now dis satisfied with the Reform Bill, there never was a time when the people were so fairly represented as now.—(Hear, and " Oh.") Why, there was a little book, Mr. Dodd's " Par liamentary Companion," in which that fact was duly chro nicled. But reverting to the point of the real nature of the changes asked for, he objected to all of them which were new. He contended that the vote should only be given to property, those who had no property should be entirely excluded.— (Oh, oh.) It was of no use talking of intelligence. They could not define wisdom by an Act of Parliament.—(Hear, hear.) The object of every civilized society was to make men live in peace, and the first duty of Government was to put down mob force. Property was the aim of all parties, and it was, therefore, the right and the duty of property to rule. There was no such thing in nature as equality—they did not find it either in the animal, vegetable, or the mineral kingdom. Inequality was the law of nature, and they might agitate to all eternity, but they never could alter it. Then he had no objection to triennial Parliaments, because it was reverting to the old Constitution. He felt besides that it would their A be of great adva n t age t o th e M em bers if they m constituents more frequently, and not only to Members but to their constituents also.—(Hear, hear.) How many of them before they were acquainted with facts and details made flaming professions and fine promises at the hustings which they afterwards discovered were totally imprac ticable?—(Hear, hear.) If they met more frequently a better practical political education would result. At present that House was too much separated from the people.— (Hear, hear.) To the demand for electoral di v i s i ons, universal suffrage , no property qualifications, the ballot, and similar claims, he was prepared to give a direct negative. If asked for his reason, be replied they were new. That was sufficient.—(A laugh.) He dis liked all these things because they were merely the means of getting at certain other things, and he would rather the House should take its stand where it now was, than make concessions. It was to the interest of the great mass of twelve the people that there should be a di v i s i on of property y ( ) He kne w i t. Political eco nomists might explain how the poor man was as much interested in the security of capital as its owners, but poli ticalm economy had been very much falsified, an d po li t i ca l economists very much astonished by what had taken place in France. If they attempted to put all men upon an equal footing as to the right of electing representatives, and of being representatives, they would begin a system which would be totally subversive of the rights of property, and therefore totally destructive of property itself.—(No,