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

the Reform Bill, speaking to an American of distinguished talents, who then represented his country at our Court, and I said to him, " I cannot but feel very an xious on p ro p osin g to make an alteration in a constitution which has lasted so long." He said, " Yes, so long and so strong." And that, in fact, is the light in which I regard the constitution of this country •it has been very long—it has been very strong ; and we should therefore apply ourselves with the utmost care, . with the utmost deliberation, and I will say with the greatest anxiety, to any plan which proposes to alter the representa tive body in this House. Then, taking it in that point of view, and not with regard to the question of right, let us see whether a body elected by all the householders and all the lodgers would be a better Parliament, a better representation, than the pre sent House of Commons. If you look to really household suffrage, the objection applies to which the Hon. Gentleman alluded, that you get a representation of brick and mortar, and that those who have been the advocates of the Charter will have a fair right to complain when they see the smallest householders admitted to the right of voting, while many persons superior in property and in intelligence to the small householders are excluded.—(Hear, hear.) I do not think that that is an objection which can be fairly entertained against the present system of suffrage, because that mode makes a choice among the householders ; it does give a right to property ; it takes property of a certain amount; it takes the rating combined with that property, and then fixes the franchise. If we admitted the whole of the householders without any other qualification than that of being householders, it would be open to the ob jection that we admitted men of inferior intelligence. If you are to make the suffrage more general—if you are to make it universal, I do not see that having universal suffrage you could well ad upon the plan proposed by the Hon. Gentleman, by keeping up the present cities and all but the smaller boroughs of the country ; I do not see that you could well avoid that division into equal districts and into equal portions, which it is the proposal of the advocates of the Charter to introduce.--( Hear, hear.) If lam asked whether a division into equal districts, and universal suffrage to every male person of full age, would give a better representation of . the people at large than the present system does, would be more conducive to the interests of the people, I must deny that such would be the result. You would thereby have a great number of representatives for the large towns ; some fifty representatives for this metropolis ; some ten or twenty for other large towns; earl representative imbued wi th the spirit and the ex cited feelings of the populations of these towns. You would not have the feelings of the smaller boroughs and middle shied towns represented; you would have representatives of the agricultural classes of totally a different character, firmly attached to existing institutions , but unwillin g to adopt the msures of reform which this House and others formed under the Reform Act, have been willing to adopt. I fear that from a representation so composed, totally differing in their political views—one ton much influenced with views of exten sive amelioration; the other, adverse to progress and im provements—you would have a collision and a contest which would be dangerous in its operation, and, above all, the Par liament so composed would not fairly represent the country which it would affect to represent. As far as his arithmetic went the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose was right but no further; he said that a million of people, in some instances had no greater representation than a few hundreds. His arithmetic was perfectly clear ; but when you examine the operation and the reason of these differences you will find that this representation, on the whole, is better from your having a large variety of that kind than if you had one sole kind of representation, and that the representation of numbers. When we were discussing the Reform Bill, a gentleman, whose loss we had afterwards to deplore, be cause he grave promise of great talents in political life, though his political views totally differed from mine—l mean Mr. Praed, who wished to give two Members to the boroughs in schedule B — men of great science, he thought, and men of great talent and information would be sent by the small boroughs, though not persons of property in the country, such as those who were likely to be sent to Parliament by a division of the country, and not being persons possessed of those stirring habits such as those who were likely to be sent by great towns. The Right. Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, made a similar proposition. The Noble Lord, after quoting a few observations which the Right Hon. Baronet made in support of these views on the occa sion of his preposing a Jury Bill, proceeded by saying—l think that these arguments were founded on sound and just views of policy, but I conceivethat, in giving forty Members to schedule A, and sixty Members to other small boroughs, that we were providing sufficiently for that class of repre sentatives which has in it not only men of commercial and agricultural knowledge, and men of every kind of informa tion, but which has in it men who have studied the consti tution of the country—men in active and men not in ac tive life, whose intelligence fits them to be representatives, but whose habits do not qualify them for county repre sentation, or for the representation of such places as Manchester and Birmingham. If this is the case, and if I am at all right in that view, it disposes very much of the whole of the arguments that have been put forth, that a great inequality exists, that a small place returns as many Members as a large place, that there are a thousand voters in one place, while there are only 300 voters in another place. If I am right in saying that these Members ought not to constitute the main basis of the constitution, that we should rather have the House of Commons like the country itself, composed of various professions and various occupa tions; if I am right in that, then the whole of the arguments against the present system founded on the disparity of the numbers of electors fall at once to the ground. The Hon. Gentleman does not get rid of disparity ; like the rest of his propositions be leaves it'vague and undefined. Then what would be the case if we were to adopt his resolution? He says that be will leave the existing boroughs, with the ex ception of small ones ; he would throw Horsham, with three or four other towns, into the county of Kent; but would he leave such places as Canterbury, Guildford—such towns as Norwich and Ipswich, in their present situation ? If he did he would not have equality of numbers; and I say, how would those who ask for reform be a bit better satisfied than they are at present if they find that still there would be 20,000 electors in one place and only 300 in another? They would then Bay, Let us have a just and effectual reform instead of a mere mockery of reform which you have given us. The Honourable Gentleman, at the end of his speech, wished for a settlement of this question very much in the same lan guage for whichl have been reproached with having used on former occasions. Ido not know how he can have a settlement of the question, for the advocates of the Charter, who are more numerous .than his adherents, would still have their grounds of complaint. They ask for a vote for every male adult, which the Honourable Gentleman does not allow, and for equal districts, which he does not pretend to establish. I will not argue at any length on the question of vote by ballot, for I believe that under that system there would be means of discovering how an elector voted as w ell as now. Among the various meetings lately held, there was one held in the north, at which a gentleman from America stated that he was frequently able in the United States to tell how an elector voted. Ballot in itself was not security, and it would be precisely the same in England. Though the Chamber of Deputies in France were elected by ballot, it was no security against revolution.. With re gard to the other proposition, that the duration of Par liament should noc exceed three years, if I agreed with the Honourable Member for Surrey in thinking that we should appear more often before our constituencies, I should hold that, instead of saying with him that it was a matter of indifference whether we should have annual or trien nial Parliaments, I should say that annual Parliaments were to be preferred. What you want is not the power of dismissing Members when they ill-behave themseves, as he 'apposes; for Burke was rejected at Bristol, not for ill-be baying himself, but for supporting civil and religious Jibe rty. It is not a frequent change in representation that you ought to have in view, but you ought to have in view the mainte nance of full confidence between representatives and their constituents, and some kind of stability in the policy of the country.—(Cheers.) If you had triennial Parlia ments the whole Constitution would be unsettled,you would just give time enough to the people to consider that they should make the change, while an annual election, either in September or October, would be a sort of renewal of the trusts which they would be ready and willing to make. I therefore think, if we are to have any change, that annual Parliaments would be better than triennial Parliaments, and that triennial Parliaments is the worst proposition of all.— (Hear, hear.) I once gave an opinion in favour of five years ; but I am satisfied with the present duration of Par liaments, and certainly I shall not give my vote for an alte ration of the period. I think I see that there is a very close correspondence and communication between Members and their constituents —(Laughter)—and eves' though Mem bers may expect a tenure of their seats for five years, I do ind that the opinion of the constituencies has a great influ ence on the conduct of the representatives.—(Hear, hear.) But I would beg to put this question which the Hon. Gen tleman has raised to another test, which I do not think he ought to refuse. The reform in Parliament took place in 1832. Has the House of Commons since ,that period shown themselves, as is represented by some, to be the mere servants of the aristocracy, or me rel y bi g ots who are afraid to enter upon any reform, indifferent to improvement, or careless of the voice of the people? I think no person who considers the changes made in that time, and how readily those changes have been adopted by the Rouse when the voice of the people was clearly ascer tained, will say that this House has not responded quickly and readily to public opinion of that kind. The new Parliament was not 100 tirely abolished in ttiegNl,in existence when slavery was en favoeusrtedlndies—an immense change petitions, favoured by by the but such a change as was hardladoptedvoice ever of bef t o h re ele, by people, Legislature in the world.—(l hear.) Shortly after that the trade with China was thrown open to the commerce of the world, from which great commer cial advantages resulted. In a year or two after, the commutation of tithes was adopted, a measure in which the clergy.' and the laity were equally interested, but at the same time a subject of such difficulty that it baffled the power and intelligence of Mr. Pitt when he took it into consideration. The Dissenters com plained of grievances with respect to the celebration of marriages and the re g istration of births and deaths. That grievance was completely and effectually remedied. • In another year or two the municipal corporations were en tirely reformed. Many se lf-elected corporations were sub jected to popular election, and an entirely new constitution In the course of late Was given to them.—(Hear, hea r.) Years the House has been occupied with measures from which a great portion of this House dissents, but which were great changes, and in the opinion of the Hon. Member • for Montrose great and beneficial reforms.—(Hear, hear.) 1 allude to the changes made in the tariff, to the number of duties which have been abolished, the number of ex cise and customs duties which have been reduced, and one great alteration and change has been made which surely cannot be said to show that this House has been peculiarly under the gove rnment of the landed aris tocrac y —the total and entire repeal of the corn-laws. That measure some gentlemen may think an injurious measure; others may think it highly for the benefit of the country ; but, at all events, it shows this, that when the re was considerable popular agitation, and public meetings held In theand when a great cry arose for the change,country, the House of Commons was not slow in listening to the voice of the people, and effecting the alteration asked for be .—(Hear, hear.) Now, if these are changes which have been made, and if various other measures have been carried, such as the reduction of the postage on letters to a penny.— (" Oh oh," from Colonel Sibthorp, followed by much l aughter.) I was mentioning that subject in parenthesis amongst others; but I really think that it was a greatei hange--(Cheers)—that it was a measure of great importance - • nce ; and when you find that the correspondence "Re increased to the enormous extent it has done, consider you may how many persons were pre vented fr om the be nefit of communicating with their friends; and when ou think of the interchange of domestic affect io n which it as occasioned h as you may estimate how gre at a benefi t it conferred on the community.—( Hear, hear.) I think, therefore, that it cannot be said that the Refo r med Parlia ment has either been idle or unwilling to listen to g reat measures of reform; and let it be recollected likewise that (i am sure e ble feeli very! Member of this House must hav e a sensi bleof this benefit, though so many use f u l measures cannot be c • sub ject are carried on account of it,) the debates on every sub th, ~o r now more protracted than formerly, and that there is sarea r et ia e greater difficulty in carrying any number of mea- Gentlem a single session.— Hear, and laughter.) The Hon. nabine has asked us to agree to those great measures ss c „ , c , in the four different points which he has proposed. b e I beg to state that I do not think reforms should waulled to the eubjeets I have mentioned, and others of a THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 21, lB4 B. his questionable testimony. He would call for ant of the Honourable Member for Reading (Mr. Sergeant Tilfourd), who, as it had been said of Akenside, that he had breathed the spirit of Plato into English poetry, night be said to have invoked the spirit of Euripides on thi British stage, and not invoked in vain ; or of him vho had also gained latirels, though in a different field if exer ticn. and of whom it would ever be a subject of grateful recollection that, with the fine perception of taste aid with the generosity of,genius, he saw and recognised tin powers which were revealed in the Purgatory, ,f suicides though written by a self-taught cobbler, and gave the author facili ties for coming before the public which would othersise have been difficult of accomplishment.—(Hear.) When this whole literature was considered, from the time of Ebenezer Elliot, the Sheffield worker in iron, it would be fond per vaded by the spirit of indignation which would arise among men who felt themselves reduced to a slave class, tireaten ing the disruption of that nationality the unity of wlich had hitherto constituted the glory of this country. The stream of mind was separated into two distinct courses; ant if they did not recognise the claims of a class already repreginted in the noblest arena, that of their national literature, thry would exhibit to the world a most deplorable spectacle; the genius of the country would become suicidal by the antagonism of its elements. Future collections of poets and h,storians would not be complete without the authors of those produc tions. They had a niche -in history. They had a place among the laurelled, but they were not admissible into the society of 10/. householders. —(Hear, bear.) In all ranks high talents and great information were the exception ; but they very much misunderstood the working classes who thought that among them were not diffused the mind and the intellectual aspirations whi c h rendered them not un worthy brothers of such as h e h a d named; uay, wlich ren dered them not unworthy countrymen of those Brea: names, such as those of Nikon and Locke, which constituted the brightest glory this country had yet achieved. What was the Legislature to fear ? That those men would render this House a less decorous and less dignified scene? Would it be thought that thoie men would return from their body—still less from the refuse of that body— persons to claim fellowship here, who would turn the House aside by personalities and sarcasm from every great topic of discussion ?—(Hear, hear.) Would they send thither men elated, not with champagne or burgundy, but with beer or brandy, to throw disorder in the midst of their business? Would they send people who would make a taxon property? Why, property—the love of it was instinctive in an English man.—(Hear, hear.) They could not propose to him a" land scheme," or anything of the sort which he could call his own—(" Hear," from Mr. O'Connor)—even with the most forbidding prospects of attaining his object—(A laugh )—but he would make the attempt to acquire property. Nor was there any participation in opinions which strangely had found their way into a document which had found its way to the table of the House. He had consorted with working people—not as master, as landlord, as employer, or as patron—and he had found in them that intelligence and those qualities which kept alive faith in human nature. They had the spirit of freemen. But it must be considered to what they were ex posed. There was a locality which he had known for upwards of fifty years. He first remembered it with a constituency as pure as could be found throughout the length and breadth of the land. Of late it had gained a name for venality ; and how ? Parties were kept up in the town ; partisans were led to bid against one another in corporation as well as Par liamentary contests; and by keeping it before the people that their vote was always to be sold, by this mode of prac tical teaching corruption was instilled into their blood.— (Hear, hear.) It was the tempter who ought to be the ob ject of indignation. The briber was a thousand times worse than the bribed, and when those people did fall there was something which ought to abate the severity of the judg ment on their conduct. One poor man said he had never taken a bribe, but he was in the workhouse, and he took the bribe in order thathe might liberate himself from what he thought a poor-law bastile, and consort again with his fellow-men. Another man, who was invited by a Noble Lord to take his place in a xarriage, and go to the poll, replied, "No, my Lord, I will walk to the poll, and will not disgrace-you by riding in your carriage." The working people would not elect men of their own class as representa tives unless under very strong inducements. In France, with its universal suffrage, they had chosen about 30 or 38 from their own class among the 900 representatives. What would they do here? They would look to persons of local importance, to local benefactors, and to men of national reputation. These were the men who were desirable for that House, rather than those who were unknown to the locality, or who went rambling about with their heavy purses—(Hear, hear) seeking where they could find a constituency to corrupt. Under such a system as had been presented to the notice of the House, the latter class of can didates would be found generally to fail, and there were only two classes of candidates whose claims would prepon derate iu the choice of the constituency. Under such a system there could be no such degrading practice of canvass ing as now existed, and which • only brought the poor and the rich together for their mutual degradation. With large constituencies that would not exist. Men of infor mation and talent, for whom little boroughs were said to provide seats, could more easily find their way into the House through large constituencies without subjecting them selves to any of those degrading practices which polluted him who gave and him who received alike. It was of im mense importance that they should be a united people, that they should not have a class unrepresented, whether on ac count of their industrial undertakings, their relations with other countries, or their internal and external prosperity. One advantage of such a subject as the present being dis cussed at the present moment was', that it brought the middle and the working classes into more harmonious con cert than had existed for many years. It afforded a fair means of amalgamating them together, and it was for the aristocracy to consider whether they would do well in with holding themselves from that union which, with, their assistance, would become the union of a threefoldcord which could not be easily broken. It was not in our armaments —brilliant as were their exploits, and magnificent as were such means of defence—it was not in these that our great glory and influence consisted. It was in the indomitable energy and enterprise of the people, in the course of opera tions which depended on the working classes as our main spring; it was on these that our power and safety must rest ; it was from the progress of mind must come our security. Unite this class on such harmonious terms — disregard theological difficulties—spread education with a bold and free hand over the country—throw wide and open the doors of the constitution—give the people an equali sation of the burdens of taxation, which' surely was their right, whatever elpe was- . .-do this, and they would hot the millions ne,longer an alienated body, but the teal and firm base or the social pyramid. -By these means, we should •achive far nobler conquests in other countries than our armies had ever yet won; for we should bring back voluntary tributes from every clime to which our commerce penetrated —we should raise more hon ourable trophies, trophies not watered by blood— than we could do by the most sanguinary victories; for these measures would be th e source o f union with, and peaceful dominion over, other nations, and as in war, so in peace, we should continue to be powerful and uncon quered. Untax the population, so far as their taxation was unequal—educate the population, enfranchise the population, and then they might arm the population without a shadow of fear for the result—(Laughter from the Opposition benches)—for should the nations of the world be banded against us we should be perfectly able to drive from our shores the world's hostility.---(Cheers.) He would only say, without entering into metaphysical speculations about natural right, but taking suffrage as the rule, and showing the cases for exception, that to accomplish all that the working classes required the Legislature must do them jus tice; in the words of the Great Charter, " neither denying nor delaying justice." He begged of that House, therefore, justice—equal, universal jusiice—justice to the working people of the British empire. (Cheers.) Mr. DISRAELI—The address of the Hon. Gentleman who has just sat down is professedly founded on the motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose. The Hon. Gentleman has avowed himself to-night the advocate of those whom he describes as serfs; but I cannot find in the resolution of the Hon. Member for Montrose that he is prepared to enfranchise those serfs.—(Hear.) No one can suppose for a moment that the project brought before us to-night by the Hon, Member for Montrose is one that at all aims at elevating the condition or the position of those persons in the social or political sys tem. Whatever may be the prejudice of the Hon. Gentle man who has just addressed us against a 101. elector, it is not, as I understand it, the proposition of the Hon: Member for Montrose that a person—who is found starving under a hedge—is to be entitled to the suffrage. Whatever may be the sentiments of the Hon. Member for Oldham, I cannot understand how, entertaining those opinions and animated by those feelings, he should have found it his duty to be so de cidedly the friend of a plan, the object of which is rather to increase the difficulty of the class whose interests, I believe, he most sincerely advocates. I cannot find out how the Hon. Gentleman, consistently with his philosophy, can support the proposition of the Hon. Member for Montrose.—( Hear, hear.) With regard to that and Hou e s e i m are i a i r n p a r opos positioni different from that of the Hon. tion; the gentlemen on this side of the Gen tleman and his supporters, and also from that of the mem bers of her Majesty's Government. It is not for us, Sir, either to defend or attack the Reform Act. We obeyed it. It received from us that allegiance which the law in this country always commands. The practical good sense of the country no doubt prevented much of the evil which we then anticipated from the operation of the measure. Bat when I say that we neither defend nor attack the Reform Bill, I cannot believe that it is consistent with our duty, or with the position which we occupy with regard to our con stituency and the country, as the representatives of a party who were opposed to the change of 1832, that we should evade the difficulty of a debate which some are in clined to think rather fruitful in difficulties, and therefore I jTushtehHeaornd., Gentleman who n is prepared told us tleman wish to take this opportunity to mak e so me observations on a project which has been so s edulousl y prepared, but the II that true character of which has not been sufficie ntly appreciated, and which, I am clear, has no t been underst ood by the elo quentto he w enfranchisea tadvocatehe advocate imaginaryho m feoserfs. have fis c jec ref t o r ay . elt but sligh observed tly on the great propounder, of t his pro I have watched wit h . a e t v t e e r n y t i b o r n o , u occasiona n g d h readfor financialww forward, r t d h , that doctrine. observationdoctrin e. t of no careless character, the proceedings of s mbl ans meetings his friends,t h . a t have an dboetfehnte plea h a roe t e t sf e oo n lra su d pt e .st attended Parliamentary a y mtehd t ea, h nt e at atnhr .a dye .y o i .hhaGavveeen reconstructiont ao l ff e w m e Gentleman to the consideration the been increase in the expendi turetr (H s and taxation of the country.—(Hear, y.— ear, hear.) I have f aaa o nnn u ddd n d titphso t eal h iatt a l ittcrhaeoelfnorreen reform principaloe l r hu y a opportunity—onionbeenhas ostentatiously had occasion this afternoon to listen to the presentation of a great number of petitions. They all talk of the increased and enormous expenditure of the Government, and the enor mously increased am w l amou nt o f taxation of the coun t ry. I want to know what is the rea son that to-night we heard so li ttle of fiscal and financial refo rms?—(Hear, hear. ) I can easily on• aGentleman on em t a h n at who has just ad dressedsubject. He is a m statistics of a different ki n d t o th ose master understand ter ot the statistics, H w h n y e dh did du not 1 I t we are accustomed to hear in this House. Those statistics of e sta a i n o d n fi s a c r a l , n r o e may be very importa nt in their Way, but the amount of penny publications, the great increase in cheap literature, the increase of railway intellect, and of all those productions statistics which you w b y find chat form. I think the Ho use will agree with me, that all Eng land has been told , dur in g the last four months, that there has been in this country an enormous increase in taxation, and in the expenditure of the Government. This has been told to the people of this country in order to im p ress on touthtehequteesrtmionin of financial them that, in consequence of our excessive taxation, and the great expenditure of our Government, there ought to -be changes made in unison with changes that are being made in other countries.—(Hear.) One word, the n , as t o t h e enormo us increase in the taxation of t his country. in round numbers. How is it possible, take the period of twenty years ago. The revenue before them, that Honourable Gentlemen raised in this country in 1828 was 4 9,500,000/. ; in 1848, acts the position . that the taxation of this country has been progressively increased ? But the revenue of 4 w: a i n t s ll oo these maintainl. 1828 was not only 2,000,000/. greater than that of 1848, but the revenue of 1828 was raised from a population, in round numbers, less than 23,000,000, 'while the revenue of 1848 has been raised from a po p ulation of 30,000,000 . The burden of taxa tion p er head in tkose two periods, in 1828 amounted to something like 21. 12s. 2d. a head, and in 180 it only amounted to 1/. 105► and a. fraction.—(llear, :similar kind. I do not think that we should content our selves with improving the legislation, and altering the Ex cise and Customs.—(Cheers.) I think while the Reform Bill was a settlement of a great question that the Reform Bill itself may admit from time to time of such improvements or alterations as experience and knowledge may suggest. — (Hear hear.) And at the time when I was most attacked as speaking of the Reform Bill as a final measure, I spoke in this manner of the retention of the freemen. I said I thought it was a misfortune that the freemen were kept in the Reform Bill, and that if they exercised the franchise corruptly, one of two courses must be adopted, either to dis franchise them altogether, or, what I considered the better course, to treat the rights of the freemen as other rights had been treated. In a subsequent passage I said that there were many defects in the Reform Bill which required to be corrected, but that such changes differed entirely from a pro position to found a new reform Bill, based on triennial Par liaments, household suffrage, and vote by ballot. This was said in my letter to the electors of Stroud, written in 1839. From the year 1839 to the present time, I do not think the lion. Member for Montrose, or any of t hose who agree with him, have thought it necessary to bring forward this ques tion of the constitution of the House of Commons. Neither as a Minister officially, nor when sitting on that side of the House, have I thought it necessary to intro • duce any measures of reform on this particular sub ject. But as the public mind seems now alive to subjects of this nature, I believe the time will come - per haps is not far distant—when reforms of the description I mentioned might be introduced, which will tend to purify the representative system. I think the inquiry we intend to make by the Bill introduced this session with regard to cer tain boroughs, some of which have been accused and others proved to be guilty of corrupt practices, may give us further information than we now possess as to the course we ought to pursue—whether some of those boroughs ought to be disfranchised, and whether we ought not to take the same course with regard to others that were taken with re spect to ithe freemen of Great Yarmouth. But I should be sorry to see one or the other course adopted without other measures to accompany them. I should be sorry to see this House much reduced by disfranchising boroughs, or to disfranchise freemen without at the same time admitting other kinds of voters to take their place.—(Hear, hear.) What I have always admitted to be the defect of the Reform Bill, is not the having of eighty live different kinds of votes as stated by the Hon. Gentleman. What I think the defect of the Reform Bill is, that the great variety in the right of voting which formerly existed has been too much reduced to a uniform-system.—(Hear, hear.) I think that by some different varieties of suffrage, by giv ing the franchise, for instance, to those who have placed money in the savings' bank, and thus showed their frugality; and to those who have been eleeted by guilds, thus showing that their fellow-citizens placed confidence in them ; and by other modes of this kind we might extend the franchise without injuring the basis of our representation. I am not disposed to say the Reform Bill is a final measure, and that you cannot usefully and beneficially alter and improve it. — (Hear, hear.) But if the Hon. Gentleman or the House ask me whether I am prepared at the present moment to intro duce any Bills for that purpose, I must at once say that I do not at the present moment intend to intro duce any considerable measures of the kind. I might find reasons enough for that in the variety of measures be fore the House, and to which the attention of the House has been already in a great degree directed. But, Sir, there are other reasons—reasons which induced the Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Montrose, to think that this was a good time for a large measure of reform, but which induced me to come to a totally different conclusion. It is admitted, and it must be admitted, that sixteen years ago you adopted a very large measure of reform in the representation—a much larger measure, I believe, than the most sanguine reformers of the day expected the Miuisters of the King to adopt. It must be admitted that the carrying of the measure of reform— the removal of Gatton, Old Sarum, and such like places, from the representation, and the admission to it of such towns as Leeds, Birmingham, Sheffield, and Manchester— that all has contributed to give a larger and a more secure basis to the representation. It cannot be denied either that the House of Commons thus reformed has carried large measures of improvement—vast in their ehanges—tending to the increase of popular power and popular advantage, and showing that the House is ready to act according to the enlightened opinions of the people. The Hon. Member says our votes this year have been extra vagant, and that we have been acting against the opinions of the people in the :great establishments we have kept up. There are some questions of the present session on which I have desired the division lists of the House to be examined, so that comparisons might be made between the constituen cies represented by Members dividing in the majority and the counties represented by Members dividing in the minority. On the first of these divisions, that limiting the duration of the income-tax, the Members who voted in the majority represented 668,038 ; whilst those who voted in the minority represented only 346,689 electors. In the division of the 20th of March, on a motion of Mr. Hume's for reducing the number of men in our navy, there voted in the majority the representatives of 716,278 electors, and in the minority the representatives of only 171,317. On a similar motion for reducing the num ber of men in the army, there voted in the majority 600,753 electors, and in the minority 165,255.—(Hear, hear.) Now, after these divisions on great public questions, I think it cannot be said that the small boroughs have overpowered • the votes of the people upon matter relating to finance. The votes of the House on these occasions have fairly repre sented the opinions of the people. That there has been of late years a tendency to augment our establishments on the part of this House, the Government, and the country, I believe to be true. There are times when it is thought well that we should render our establishments as perfect and efficient as possible; and then when in, accordance with that wish, large sums have been expended, it often happens that the tide changes, and that a great wish is expressed that no more money should be spent than is absolutely necessary. In times of distress, when trade may happen to be crippled from any cause, such a course may be desirable to adopt, and I am sure that at such a period the House and the Government never fail to feel and act upon that principle. As I said before, there can be no ground for saying at present, that with regard to expenditure the House does not represent the opinions of the nation,—(Hear.) My belief is that it does, and that it represents it fairly. Well, then, Sir, if you find that a great measure of reform was carried sixteen years ago, that great measures of reform have been carried by the Parliament so improved—if you find also that on questions which do arise or which are likely to arise, this House represents the opinions of the people, and not any selfish motive or class interest—then. I say, this is not the m . time when a cry and a clamour for more reform ought te be excited. The cry for change at present raised is ac companied by so many suggestions and proposals that are wild and visionary —such, for example, as those contained in the petition presented to-eight by the Noble Lord the Mem ber tbr Bath—(Hear, hear)—views of capital, labour, and property of the most erroneous kind, are so generally loat, that there is, I think, good reason in that for not making, at this time, any great or sweeping alterations. And here let me say that I deny the charge—the popular and common charge—that the government of this country is carried on for the benefit of its aristocracy. I believe sincerely that the government is carried on for the benefit of the people at large, and for the sake of no chiss interest; but if it be meant to be said that because people belong to the aristo cracy they are to be debarred from taking their part in public affairs, why I object entirely to such narrow views. —(Hear, hear.) I; for my part, will never allow that because a man happens to be called Stanley or Howard he is to be prevented from enjoying public distinction, as if because he had not a name less noble or less illustrious. But, Sir, there are other reasons—reasons of which the Members of this House can not but be sensible—reasons which I find in the records of events which have been and are every day happening around us. I say that at such a time the advantages which you have had in your free constitution have been to you of inestimable benefit.—(Loud cheers.) The stability of that constitution which you have shown amidst all storms, and the mode in which the institutions of this country have brayed all hos tile attacks, have excited the admiration, not only of those who are attached to this country, but even of those who have no connexion with it, but who at the same time de• light to see order and social peace maintained; while it has brought to you the respect of those even most.hostile to your name and progress.—(Hear, hear.) I hope that this House will do nothing to lose that admiration or forfeit that respect. You have stood, " Like a great seamark, braving every storm, And saving all who eye it !" —(Cheers.) I trust you will maintain that position—that you will not choose at this time to accede to any vague and indefinite proposal of some measure of reform, which, while it apparently stops short of adopting the People's Charter, cannot actually stop short of ultimately enacting that great change—( Hear, hear) —that you will rather think that it is due to the institutions which you have the happiness to in herit, that it is due to the other advantages you enjoy, that it is due, above all, to that great people whom it is your honour to represent, to give a steadfast and most determined negative to the present motion.—(Cheers.) Mr. W. J. FOX could not but observe that the objections which the Noble Lord urged against the motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose referred rather to the details of the measure which that motion indicated than to the princi ple upon which it was founded. But those details were not now fairly before the House; and it was with a view to fix the attention of the House, if he could, to the great princi ple at stake in this matter that he now ventured to offer a few observations to the House. He thought the Noble Lord must have been pleased with the fair opportunity that had been afforded him of correcting any mistake in reference to his expressions on a former occasion. At the same time he considered the Noble Lcrd to have been rather too severe on seer e those formt h b ey and whom former org a organic he e gradually thou tasrrhtted uefvorhn g lit iran evye t feeo; or reform those erottoeifehrlngprogressing, al itentts hgshhieente expressions were per verted. His (Mr. Fox's) own impression was that the Noble Lord meant to draw a distinction between fiscal representativehg gratifyinge, w other t a o b h s u u eta t rot w r ty i h t i l n h l e:ahtga Nobleta nh h t y o e e wasLww Lord a o ryudl not ot whatever.bor ap e v s p i eos opposed the t tl h oto epfmup further sys tem; but it would have been still more gratifying to •the country if the Noble Lord had more distinctly hinted what the reforms were to be; what was the principle by which those reforms were to be guided ; what would be their ex tent, and what their results. He confessed that from what the Noble Lord had said there was very little to guide them in their anticipations, and that little was of the most indefi nite description. It merely amounted to this—that he would take the opportunity, from time to time, to disfranchise a man who should be guilty of bribery, or to admit a man to the franchise who should have acquitted himself well by making an accumulation in a savings'-bank.—(Hear, hear.) '[lie broad question, of whether the industrial masses of this country were or were not fairly represented in that House had been scarcely touched either by the Hon. Member for West Surrey or by the Noble Lord who followed him. Nor could he think it a fair reference to the meetings which had taken place to dismiss them by a brief remark as to the dif ferences of opinion that existed at them between those who I advocated the People's Charter and those who supported household suffrage. To meet the question fairly, the Noble Lord should have shown, not the differences existing be tween these two views among the people, but how far they reforml4 - ere both t eab);,ahtehairr.d) pa T r o ty sh w o h w o t w h e a r t e th a e d r v e er e s x e i t s o te a d ny a all difference availedb et w bute en parties httle. whoTo pointwere for to g o t i h n a g bey t di se o r n e d p a t n h e a y t li shterucskhownnot thatat all he at "tore nnioattter,agreuendlessthaitt could be shown that they were not agreed that some considerable whether in favour orn n s s: ff bl r e a . ge o Those f h meetings, suffrage, proved that the great mass necessary; and e and pe t o h p e l y e considered that one oowrfatsuhneiinvodetrihrearel was demonstrated that the people at large concurred in their main purpose m uc h more closely than the y were separatec, by their diversity of opinion. The real question was not whatmean meant not to fiscal reforms p uhaodnany en been or were to be proposed. 'He of the proceedings of the House of Commons, for he thought this fallacy ran through the Noble Lord's reasoning, no t only on this occa sion, but on m an y ot h er occasions, that in a representative g th o e ve e r x np ri e n n si t e theyonly t regard had to what might be called only to govern the agency,and pno o bpu the power by which it was e t s hl e formed and fashioned. The country, representative agency had not a government of opiaipn.—(Hear, hear.) If 41 the Dietuber3 of that t n ad w to as with the feelings ofdo it in conformity the. assembly possessed the most absolute wisdom, and if every one of their measures bore that stamp, there was still something else to be considered.—(Hear.) They were to be the representation of the feelings, the condition, the intellectual, the moral, nay, even the physical, if you would, of those who were the constituents, or claimed to be the constituents, of those representatives: There was another question besides this, and that was, whether the millions of human beings with whom we were connected as fellow-countrymen were cherishing in their bosoms the ennobling feelings of conscious freedom, or were smarting under the irritation of evil passions, excited by being treated as only members of a slave class in what claimed to be a free country. There was no question of home or foreign policy, no relations of treaties with foreign nations, no arrangements which might open or close the doors of admission to fortunate aspirants, no question whatever of more importance to the safety and continued prosperity and glory of Great Britain than the state of feeling among the great masses of the people of whom that House claimed to be the representatives. The propositions of the Hon. Member for Montrose had many and varied bearings on the constitu tion, but the one practical question to his (Mr. Fox's) mind, the question in which he felt the liveliest interest, was this— were the working people of this country represented as they ought to be, and if nut, could they be so represented with out any peril to any valuable institution? This was the question which interested him. He maintained that they were not represented as they ought to be. How did the matter stand in electoral districts? A valuable return had been moved for in the last Parliament by Mr. Williams, then Member for Coventry, and delivered in the course of the present session, from which it appeared that there were only 320,645 101. householders, and out of these where would the industrial classes be found but in the poorest rank ? The re turn was so arranged that it showed the number of house holders occupying at a rental of from 101. to 151. and then from 15/. to 201., and so on. It appeared from the return that out of this constituency of 320,645 101. householders, those who paid a rental ranging from 101. to 15'. were only 99,149 persons, that was to say, that the inhabitants of houses rated at from 101. to 151. were only one-third of the household borough: constituency. They were completely swamped by the classes above them ; and when the oocu piers of 30i., 401. and 501. houses were taken into the ac count, it would be found that they belonged to the higher portion of the middle classes, who could not be called work ing people at all. But out of the entire constituency of -850,000 persons, upOn a rough calculation, only 1 in 17 be longed to the working classes, and no more. He did not call that a representation of the working people—of those who made our clothing, who built our houses and pa laces, who cultivated our fields, and who made, in fact, all our wealth; nor could he understand the feeling with which Hon. Gentlemen could turn round and say, " You have done all this, you have created it with your strong arms, but now we tell you that you are the villeins of the soil, and that you have nothing to do with the laws but to obey them." The Noble Lord said that a great many things should ho done for their benefit, though the condition of a benefit was, that it should be desired and prized by the party on whom it w.s bestowed, and though it was most desirable to take away from the working man that incessant occasion. for discontent which arose from his having no hand in the matter of legislation, and which led him to fancy that he would have done much more wisely if he had been consulted. Let the working people of this country be substantially represented, and in so doing he would not very minutely inquire into their information and acquirements or into the amount of their deposits in the savings'' banks.—(Hear.) They were already taxed; they contributed towards the exigencies of the state; they had at least a property in their own limbs and nervous arms, and was not that enough to mark them out for constituents, for it must be borne in mind that is was not proposed to make Members of them? It was not necessary that they , should be able to unravel the mystery of the Spanish mar riages, that they should be versed in the Treaty of Utrecht, or that they should philosophize on the Norman conquest. It was only necessary that they should nominate a neighbour whom they had known all their lives, or some one who had a national reputation, as the person to whose guardianship they were willing to confide their interests. That was all the knowledge which the labouring man wanted. This knowledge and information which had been talked about was not required by the House in other matters. By one of the clauses of the Public Health Bill, a plurality of votes was given to wealthy occupiers upon the ground that the Bill affected property. He had no doubt, however, that those persons would be found to be quite as uninformed on sani tary questions as a man in a factory would be on any diffi cult question of foreign politics.—(Hear, hear.) One of the most interesting debates on reform in his recollection was that which took place in 1822, when the Noble Lord now at the head of her Majesty's Government brought forward a motion on the subject in a most remarkable and impressive speech. On that occasion the Noble Lord quoted a passage from Blackstone, which perhaps the House, for the sake of the comment which followed it, would allow him to read. The passage was taken from book i, chap. 2, of the " Com mentaries:"—" 1. As to the qualifications of the electors. The true reason of requiring any qualification with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such parsons as are in so mean a situation that they are esteemed to have no will of their ewn. If these persons had votes, they would be tempted to dispose of them under some undue influence or other. This: would give a great, an artful, or a wealthy man a larger share in elections than is consistent with gene ral liberty. If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then,upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote in electing those delegates to whose charge is commit ted the disposal of his property, his liberty, and his life." In reference to this passage, which the Noble Lord quoted in 1822, he continued thus :—" We have not only one free agent, but there are in this country at least 1,000,000 of free agents—men perfectly free and independent, men who have no vote for a Member of Parliament, though they are anxious to acquire the right, and are in every way qualified to ex ercise the functions of electors." On another occasion, so late as 1835, the Noble Lord also said, "Although it is a much disputed question, yet I believe that, in ancient times, every inhabitant householder resident in a borough was competent to vote for Members of Parliament."—( Hear, hear.) He would now revert to the argument used by the Noble Lord in 1822, as it was the argument which he meant to adopt and apply on the present occasion. The Noble Lord at that time pointed to the intel ligence of the country, and to the growth of that intelli gence, as a demonstration that the franchise must be largely extended. He argued, that in London there were 100 cir cujating libraries, and 900 in the country ; and, , that 42t600,000 newspapers had been issued in the year preceding. He would go back, not to 1822, btit to 1832, when the Noble Lord realized his own views by carrying the Reform Bill; and he would assume that he then proportioned the fran chise to what he held to be the advanced intelligence of the country. He could not say, however, that the facts would altogether bear him out in relinquishing the vantage ground he might have gained by the Noble Lord's previous eonces elsns. The Noble Lord said there were in 1822 1,000,000 persons prepared for the franchise; but the Reform Bill did not provide for half of that million, and they had been lent unprovided for since, with a quarter a century of wrong pressing upon their minds, and depressing their spirits. While in 1832 the number of newspapers circulated was 32,000,000, the circulation had been for some time nearer 70,000,000 than 60,000,000; and as regarded societies and institutions established for the people's improvement, he would only refer to one of which he had read an account in the papers of that morning. It was an account of a meeting of the Yorkshire Mechanics Institution, held at Ripon, where not fewer than eighty-one societies were included and represented in that institution alone. Since 1832 500,0001. had been expended by the Government on education; a much smaller sum than ought, as ho thought, to have been expended on a matter of such inconceivable importance; but still that sum had been laid out, in addition to the building of schools from sources of private subscription and private benevolence. Since 1832 there had, besides, sprung up a popular literature altogether unparalleled in extent—( Heir) —a literature of which our numerous magazines, the publi cations of the Messrs: Chambers, and the works of Charle,s Knight, formed a distinguished part, and which were circu lated through the country to an amount previously unex ampled.—(Hear, hear.) One of them alone, Chambers's Miscellany of Entertaining Knowledge, being only one of the many publications of that house, had been issued to the extent of 18,000,000 of printed sheets; and he understood that their sales fluctuated with the state of the manufac turing districts—(Hear)— one-sixth of the issue being in the counties of York and Lancaster. Then, if they looked to other facts indicative of the advance of intelligence among the people at large, they found proofs multiplying all around them. It might be said that these were cheap publications to which he had referred, and that the public mind would rather be vitiated than improved by them, that their powers would be frittered away, such light reading not being adap ted to mature the intellectual character; but they must re member, that all the standard works of the most celebrated authors had at the same time been cheapened; that the works of Bacon could be bought for fourpence, and those of Shakspeare for two shillings, and that the writings of all the apthitlhoesopmrs est whotrifl h h e a d a b adorned e the t c o o f u n t t y r y p e w e a r n e d circulated (Hear, hear.) It was a remarkable fa c t that the p roduction e e r of new literature had not diminished either. He found in the history of printing, in " M'Culloch's _Commercial Dic tionary," a statement of the number of new works pub lished, and the average price per volume, in four years end ing 1832 and 1842. In the four years then ending the new books published were 6,149, and in the four years ending 1842 they were 18,597; while the average price per volume was, in the first period 1 ls. 5d., and in the second period, Ss. 9 1 ,0.—(Hear.) The book sellers' circular had recently fallen into his hands, and he found from it that the number of new works last year was 3,414, and of new editions 570, while the average price per volume was 6s. 3 1 Ad.—(Hear, hear.) He might refer, also, to the establishment, since 1832, of parks and places of re creation, which, though not to be used as an argument, might be taken as an indication of growing intelligence. Take, for, example,.the visitors of the British Museum. In 1832 the number of visitors was 147,896 ; last year they were 820,965. The visitors to the reading-room of the Mu seum, in 1832, were 31,200; last year, 67,525.—(11ear, hear.S Then, as regarded the economics of the working classes, they found a vast improvement.—[Here the Honourable Gentleman pointed out the great increase which had taken place since 1832 in the deposits in the savings -banks, to show the improved system of economy now prevalent ; and also the great increase that had taken place in the number of public petitions to Parliament, in order to point out the growing discontent among the unenfranchised classes.] There was one peculiar fact that could not but strike every reflecting person at the present day, and that was the number of writers that were springing up among the working classes—writers who did not, like the authors of former days, rest on patrons and private patronage—writers who courted Ito class above them, but yet who retained strong within them the feelings of the working class in which they had been born and bred.—(Hear, hear. ) -Nothing like this was known in former times; but in the page. a t gh bornee orneTheirresult l bred, r oo works at and de w e te r bi e re e e po l om e l v i t an e an d ie by ey con dition literature of which he spoke the fact he. had stated was wp el before leiocibi a them trb se pyi t n o, da e v be e ep r el y nr h of the class to which they belonged. Perhaps he should be naming authors whose names would sound strong to the great majority of those he addressed were he to run over the list, and yet they were a class of writers whose works every legislator would do well to consult.—(Hear, hear.) He could not understand the spirit of his country unless he did consult them. They had in them the rich and racy spirit of our old English writers; and when they had the sense to avoid the conventionalities of mo dern authors, and follow out the dictates of their own aspirations, they indeed brought forth "thoughts that breathe, and words that burn."—(Hear, hear.) He might refer to Bamford, the Radical author of Lancashire, whose graphic description of the stirring times of 1819 the future historian would transfer to his pages as the best record of the events of that extraordinary time. He might also speak of " one who whistled at the plough," whose narra tions of the flogging of the soldier were enough to make the flesh creep upon the bones, and draw tears from the eyes of the most callous of our race. There was the poet Thom, of Inverury, who took shelter under a hedge, and saw his child die there, and who could give his country songs worthy of Burns; that man never knew what it was to live in a 101. house. There were such men as William Lovett and Thomas Cooper. He would not ask the House to take an estimate of their literary merit and intellectual power from years he plea —( ao fgncwincreased what • e • foundedn nbae much ofe greater increaset h e ir, al validity ttityoa taxation itaahnne ?t Hear, pfo° pr uPlahlteii hear. )i hear.) But we all know that the wealth of the country has, The taxation per head in this country, in 1848, as compared with twenty years ago, is greatly reduced in amount, bht there is another circumstance of importance to be taken into account, namely, that there has been a great re-distribution of taxation, and in every instance that re-distribution has been in favour of the working classes of this country. Compare 1827 and 1847 with the two financial years of 1828 and 1848. The Customs of 1827 were under 18,000,0001; they scarcely exceeded that sikm in 1848. The Excise duties in 1827 were 12,000,000/., they were not so much in 1848. The stamps and taxes were nearly the same in both years. There was an immense reduction in the revenue derivable fromw iwasth lt reductionhse2BP, H s t d -o ao ffi fp e rna e o poi more er proportionate a 7e, s b c o oo increasem, o p o a o compared innwtihthe 1848 populationla s 8 2 c 7 0 . m Tpahre compared this country. The rate of our Government expenditure increase e t the last population, public the wealth, has been almost stationary; the amount of our taxation has been stationary. The popular pleas for reform are, therefore, not true..—(Hear, hear.) The pleas that have been, to-night, ad nauseam, repeated in every petition are utterly fallacious, and it becomes those who offer those petitions to the House to vindicate the accuracy of their allegations. We are asked, in the first place, to increase the franchise. I lis whimacbatinesi eear tt n ddyh e tea: d txi btlnaodhettll with eehern. uee t adtsrdoei igtdogri founded.hhia. r sht a oeA dt t uexonvt r fpwly e rnnmhy p oopt e e fseatea c odrn t rins de oato t meonb o n nnutfothwone hear Hon. from I the e m b il e o r forn GentlemanMontrose, some principle laid down upon which the franchise was to u s a s t a b the subject difference af th,a right of o f Qap binrunie. eunhhteeEnwneno confounding gelo p naenl me r gli a o dofn p ndtc o tcdihho s towih e nedan s ahists dsHtit a iniattathonuhu c novt h r jet that a oooghGr n tnnhai e g egaatti n e lilhottetol wh o rer, oivim u aeggfln g o ,hahtg ane h nttere t ss. Englishman to have a vote, why is it necessary . for thweaesxtehre cise of that vote that the person should live in a house?— (Hear, hear.) But then he must be of age, says the Hon. : 0 1 e s m e r b ve r . his Again, country, h and sai d notthat b e a moreper s otnhttvamnoeia atbw aeaenlcldathl to cheers,) know e u nr s p o on w. eighteen years of aonfda,gtehsehreofuolrde, hhaeva:gauevdotteh....sat(Levaeuryhtemran twenty-one r t tiwgehnttyto noteot a to principle g h h e t t h o as v (Hear.) The whole of the male population, saysg theee1,1120.... Gentleman, are liable to serve in the militia when th e y Hon., - arrive at legal age, and they must join the posse condtatui, even when they are at school ; and, therefore, he p m . poses this great change. But in doing so he has laid down no principle whatever. I cannot understand where the line should be drawn. I observe in a debate not only in "another place," but in another country, that some ridicule was excited by a gentleman who advocated the rights of the other sex to the franchise—(A laugh)--but as far as the mere abstract reason is concerned, I should like to see anybody in this Home, who is the follower of the Honourable Gentle man opposite, get up and oppose that plan. I say that, in a country governed by a woman, in a country where you al low a woman to form a part of the other estate of the realm, English peeresses for example, where you allow a woman not only to hold land, but be a lady of a manor, and to hold courts, where a woman, by law, may be a churchwarden— (Laughter) I really do not see when she has so much to do with Church and State, any one reason for your withholding from her the right to vote. (Hear, hear.) But the plan of the Hon. Gentleman oppo site at once disfranchises millions. Hon. Gentlemen oppo site have spoken of the suffrage as " a trust." But Ido not look upon it as " a trust" any more than " a right." It is what everything in England is—it is a privilege.—(Hear, hear.) It is created by law, as everything in England is created ; the characteristic of our history has been, that it is held out not as an odious exception, bat as a general re ward.—(Hear, hear.) Well now, Sir, that brings us really to the character of this House and the political order of which we are.the representatives. We represent the Com mons, and the Commons are an estate of the realm. The material of that estate is of course a question of policy, of expediency, and it is perfectly open to anybody at any time to discuss the question of what that order should con sist; but it is an order, whether you make it a thousand or a hundred thousand, or two or three millions, it becomes an order, and a privileged order. The Reform Bill was a re• construction of this order or estate of the realm. That was a settlement most unsatisfactory to the House. And no one can pretend that that settlement was_ carried with the fall support and sanction of the people of England.—(Hear.) There is not the slightest doubt that if you had had universal suffrage at that moment the measure would .have been re jected. But you decided not only to have the Bill, and the whole Bill, but nothing but the Bill.--(Laughter.) And you got it. But when there has been a great settlement of the question under such circumstances,is it unreasonable that we, who agreed to it with reluctance, should insist that be fore any new scheme is sanctioned for the new settlement of that great question, the newly-proposed construction should offer a fair prospect of giving satisfaction to the people and se curity to the State ?—(Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, I for one am no advocate for finality; far from it. I cannot conceive that there may not be circumstances or periods when we ought to do that which which we have done for 500 years in this country—reconstruct the state of the Commons. I acknow ledge that the last reconstruction, however unsatisfactory to the Hon. Gentleman and his friends, is, I believe, more satis factory to the nation than the plan which is brought forward by the Hon. Gentleman. Certainly, I cannot, in considering this plan of the Hon. Gentleman, discover anything that has a tendency to satisty the public heart. This is not at all a project which is to enfranchise " the serfs of England" that goes to the labouring classes, and says, "you shall take your place in the political constitution of your country." 'fhe Hon, Member for Montrose has brought forward a pro ject of which property, and property alone, is the basis. — (Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, I think that property is already sufficiently represented in this House. I am prepared to support the system of 1832 until I see the character and constitution of the country occasion a new change.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, in opposing the motion of the Honourable Member for Montrose, I protest against being placed in the category of those who advocate " finality." This proposed change does not appear to me to be in any way adapted to satisfy the wants of the age, nor to be conceived in the spirit of the times. On this occasion I shall touch but very briefly upon a second point, not because I have any wish to evade that important part of the discussion—l mean ballot. We shall have an opportunity of discussing that question when the Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. H. Berke ley) brings forward his motion. There is not the slightest .ioubt that the adoption of the ballot in this country would at once effect a very great alteration in the character and habits of the people. And that I think would be a very great evil.—(Cheers.) But before we argue the question of suffrage and ballot, I am surprised that Hon. Gentlemen op posite a fo r4 r o g t e e t r, t the ought immense o ev never element e b n e t which, in omitted; that is the influence of opinion organized by a free press. That is the best safeguard against corruption and intimida tion.—(Cheers.) You may have what laws you like, but dis cussions and that is the means by which you can put an end to the intimi dation and corruption, as it elevates the tone of public feel ing, and brings the influence of public opinion upon the conduct of the great body of the nation.—(Hear, hear.) Nobody can pretend that this is an age distinguished by its corrupt practices; on the contrary, every Parliament that has ever existed for the last fifty years has been less and less corrupted.—(Hear, hear.) We have not, as was the case seventy or eighty years ago, the Secretary of the Trea sury depositing a 500/ note in the hands of a Member in the lobby for voting for a Ministerial measure, and then a charge regularly made for such corruption under the title of "head money,"—(Hear, hear.) All that was now asked from the Right Hon. Gentleman whe had filled that office was " a pair."—(A laugh.) Sir, I shall not touch for a mo ment on the third point, short Parliaments. No one can sup pose that short Parliaments would occasion less expendi ture of the public revenue than long Parliaments. Moreover, I shall net say a word against' the practice of triennial Par liaments, because it is a part of that old Tory creed which I have consistently supported.—(oh, oh, and cheers.) Did not: Sir William Wyndham support triennial Parliaments against a corrupt Whig Minister ?—(Hear, hear)--and I:am happy to see indications amongst the movements of the people of this country which show that they are prepared to rally round that part of the Tory creed. The only reason why I object to it now is, that no Honourable Gentleman has shown us the paramount necessity for a change. But no one can for a moment suppose that the substitution of a system of triennial Parliaments can have the least effect on our policy or legislation.—(Hear, hear) And, there fore, I now come to the fourth point, which I admit is one of very great importance. I allude to the proposition for elec toral districts. The Hon. Member for Montrose entered into some details on the subject. I owe to the kindness of a gen tleman, who is unfortunately no longer a Member of this House, my possession of the manifesto of the new party upon that subject. Sir Joshua Walmsley was so kind as to place in my hands this publication, which he told me was the manifesto of the new party.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) I promised to give it as candid a consideration and attention as possible. From this publication it would seem that the county of Buckingham, which is said to produce an annual rental of 674,0001., sends eleven Members to Par liament ; whilst Lancashire, with an annual produce of 5,000,000/., sent only twenty Members to Parliament. Now I admit that Buckingham has none of those great advan tages that attend the towns of the Manchester school ; but Buckingham refused to pay the ship money, and car ried the grand remonstrance, and since the settlement of our Parliamentary Constitution, in 1640, I believe Buck inghamshire has furnished this House with a series of statesmen (Laughter) with a series of statesmen— (Cheers)—such as have contributed more than the Members sent from any other county to create the empire, sustain the renown, and cherish the high spirit of the English people.—(Cheers.) Buckinghamshire, however humbly it asay now be represented, has sent to the House of Commons Hampden, Grenville, the elder Pitt, and Burke.—(Loud cheers.) Now I ask the House, is it to be tolerated that a population which, for centuries, have sustained the credit, honour, and prosperity of England in such an eminent degree, shall be destroyed for the purpose of adding to the legislative importance of some great manufacturing towns, born in a day, and perhaps vanishing in a day ?—(Cheers.) I see a great deal in these days about realised capital; but, Sir, one of the most important elements in constructing the suffrage of an ancient people is the realised experience of the th t i li s r i o s u th h e nation—(Hear, hear)—and to su pp ose th a t you can sud let) denly deprive a great section of the n a ti on o f th ose pol i tical torem ern be r l th b e e v g agrar theepa ouse, in con sidering men s h i a d ms eri h n rights which they have exercised w ith h onour and prospe rity to themselves and t o th e na ti on a t l arge f or centuries, may probably lead to a civil w ar . Unworthily as Bucking hamshire e t h r a i s a y q u n e o s w t i ohne represented, , a Manchester, for n e p x m am n p m le. ack Here (said the H onourable a e whom it has heretofore had a v o i ce i n Parliament. Now, g I will show you who are th e grea t men we are to anticipate, from um eanntilf eemsnto, of the new party. d S , R i A n EfaLclt--, t T ha h t at th e is x i a l e a t ra ly ph co le n t fi w rm as s th w e ba o t riv w i :is af t t o i l i d e Mr. HUME—That p u bli ca ti on was printed before ever any party was formed. me by Sir Joshua Wahnsl e y, t h at i t was .accepted and accre dited;gr D an i new party.—(Loud cheers from the Opposition. ) '1 lie great question which the n ew party h ad to deatwith was, where were they to get a leader?—(Laughter.) The doctrines of the party had been laid down. Here is the pamphlet, by Alexander Mackay, of the Middle Temple. The ideas broached in it are, to be sure, strange and novel, but then there is all the more reason that they should have an expe rienced leader. They must have a secretary—a rnanagiug man—a whip for the new movement.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) We have the electoral districts all carved out, at least upon paper. Manchester is to have seven instead of two Members of Parliament. Now, only think of that— ( Great laughter.) Why, Sir, since we have been in our dreary opposition, there Is been, no doubt, from many pecu liar circumstances, only one Member for Manchester.—(Loud laughter.) My Right Hon. Friend has not said much either as 'a Member of the Administration, or .divested of that position, although he has appeared in both characters during t h he present been ssilent, eanets, o s o r n session.—(A virtually for Manchester. There is difficulty enough at present. It (lan t g h has been but one Member laugh.) My My Right Hon. Friend is hard enough to keep one Member in order. But, Sir, if we are to have seven—if there are to be seven Richards in the field--(Roars of laughter)—we must retire from the - contest. Only think of having to reply night after night, and one after another, to these seven Manchestea Members.—(Renewed laughter.) Why, the bare idea over powers one. It would require one of the Parliamentary giants of a bygone period to cope with so Herculean a task. nut then Liverpool and Glasgow are to have the same number. Conceive Liverpool and Glasgow each with seven Members —( Laughter)—all statistical Members. (Roars of laughter.) And then Dublin is - to have six. Now, as there is always a petition against the Members for Dublin, there will be constantly as a matter of course, six petitions to be tried.—(Renewed laughter.) Well, then, Birmingham and Leeds are to have five Members, and Bristol and Sheffield four, and the metropolis is to return upwards of forty Members.—(Hear, and laughter.) Such is a part of the new system which we are called upon to carry out. This new constitution is to confer as many Members for London as all Scotland has at present, and the pamphlet asserts that London is entitled to them in consequence of its population and wealth. The only objection to the new scheme is, that when we get the men together, we may, indeed, have some thing called the House of Commons, but then, unfortunately, this House of Comm ons w ill, probably, be neither able to govern themselves nor the country, and the country would not probably obey them.--(Hear, hear.) It is very easy to form these plans, but their working out is quite another matter. Why not go the whole length of the Honourable Member for Oldham (Mr. Fox), and have universal suffrage at once, for his speech led to that? We have sufficient experience to know—recent experience—that in a country, however civilised, however educated, when you elect all the Members by universal suffrage. the people may, after all that, laugh in their face.—(Hear, hear.) What has happened in a National Assembly in a neighbour ing country? And Parliament is to be elected by this con stitution? Sir, I say at once, as it is the fashion to lay down principles, that there is no such thing as governing any European country, except by ancient and traditionary influence, and great properties round which men may rally. —(Loud cheers. ) These gentlemen may succeed—they are doubtless sincere. I predict no results from their theory which I do not think inevitably flow from it, but I will again warn them that without traditionary influences and large properties, it would be impossible to govern England or any European country; and feeling in this manner, and having experience to guide me, they cannot blame me if I prefer the liberty which we enjoy to the liberalism which is promised—(Hear, hear) —and think there is something better than the rights of man, and that is the rights of Eng lishmen.—(Loud cheers.) I have now attempted to demon strate that the measure proposed is crude, unsatisfactory, and inefficient, and does not, in fact, satisfy the real popular longings in this country.—(Hear, hear.) Now, I want to show the House what is the real character and object of these measures—what they will lead to, and what are its dangers. Now, Sir—everything I have heard, and every thing I have read—all go to prove this fact—that although the y may call it a popular movement —although they make concessions in some points—though they may throw dust in the eyes of the people—yet that, after all, this is nothing more or less than a middle-clas s movement.—(Hear.) I b e g the House to observe what this class has already done in the way of legislative enterprise. But do not let me be sup posed for a moment, in anything I say of the middle classes, as meaning anything disrespectful to them—no one i n the H thoroughly House more achievements am well acqu i reciates the urban population and their great what they ha ve done for human nature and for civilization , abated wth and I am opposed t(oaenyr class that, from success, desires to be predominant.—(gear, hear.) And we are under some obligations to Honourable frank avowal—their am bi t i o n entl emen opposite for their hear.) They say the middle nut concealed.--(Hear, supe rior intelligence and wealth, class possesses superior power. They t e ll us tel7a- t the great towns in it ought to have the north of England ou g ht to govern the country. Hav ing given us such fair warning of their intentions, let me re mind them and the count r y o f the trprisea. consequences o f thei r former attempts in great legislative enterprises, ;The first was the abolition of the slav e trade, a we carried in total ignorance of the subject. measure that was first experiment at colonial reform. A n d the abolitionatwas your of the slave trade ended in great disasters, and involved us peril and difficulty, entirely from th e cru d e manner ' in which in great the afl'air was consummated. Well, next comes the Refen n Bill. I need not prove how they failed in Parliamentary reform. The speeches on the other side o f t h e to-night, and, indeed, the motion itself, clearly House esta blishes that failure.—(Hear, hear.) Well, then, Sir, t tried their hands at commercial reform, and carried it. IN's plain to any one that in that measure the interests of the capitalists were completely studied, and the interests of the labouring population whoolly overlooked.—(Hear, hear.) Well, then the reform of the colonies was a failure--the re form of Parliament was a failure—the commercial reform was a failure. Colonial reform has ended in colonial ruin. Parliamentary reform has been, by your confession, a de cided failure, and as for the effects of commercial reform, I have only to appeal to the pictures which you yourselves are continually drawing of the present state of England.— (Hear, hear.) And what is the remedy for all this disap pointment ? A new scheme, which is to give seven Members to Manchester and finance reform. The Noble Lord at the head of the Government expressed his opinion that this is not a popular movement. In that I agree with him. The Hon. Member for Montrose says there was no agitation until the Noble Lord said the people did not want reform,showing the recent and unsubstantial character of the agitation—hav ing its rise in the captious expression of a Minister. But I will tell the House how this affair has ban arranged. In consequence of the organization and agitation of England by the middle classes a new profession has sprung up in this country. The profession to which I allude was the result of the organization necessary to carry out a great question. Sir, a new profession has arisen, and that is the profession of agitation.—(Cheers and laughter.) Well, Sir, when Hon. Gentlemen cheer, do they deny my assertion? Do they recollect the observation— " Quemves hominum secum attulit ad nos. Grammaticus, Rhetor, Geometres, Pictor, Aliptes Augur, Schcenobates, Medici Magi. omina novit Grreculus esuriens in ccelum jusseris ibit." —(Roars of laughter.) Perhaps 1 am wrong in saying that profession is new to us. It is new to us. It existed in a country, as this passage shows, as powerful, and, perhaps, much more corrupt than England is at this moment. It is this new profession, Sir, which produces what are called "great questions," but when a great question is carried, it is the ruin of the profession. —(Great laughter.) The Chairman has no ehair to fill—the deputy-chairman cannot represent his Hon. Friend—the committeeman has no business—the pamphleteer has no pamphlet to write—the lecturer is idle, and the orator is silent.—(Renewed laughter.) Therefore the instant a great question is passed, the "profession" is all anxiety to firirl' - qu„t another great question.—(Grest, laughter.) I believe tlrte of the most cruel' things which the Right Hon. Baronet the Membetlfoe tTanpworth ever did was to have curtailed the labours of the profession too soon. Before the ship comes into the harbour another should always be looming in the distance.—(Cheers.) After the last great exploit of the middle classes—free imports, ludicrously called free trade—the " profession" felt restless and hungry. The Hon. Member for the West Riding having accomplished his purpose, like a great man, went abroad.—(A laugh.) The profession should look about for a new question—a great one of course—the one they turned up was "perpetual peace," which they were fortunate enough to bring forward just on the eve of universal war.—(Great laughter.) It was a fatal mistake, and therefore, after one or two foolish speeches, the question was coolly shelved. And, Sir, the profession would have been at an utter loss but for this fortunate pamphlet.—(Laughter.) We have now the great question of electoral districts, for the old ones of extension of the suffrage were quite " used up," and it was this plan of carving the country into districts that gave a dash of novelty and zest to the whole thing. The originators felt their way like the most delic ate artists, and used the utmost finesse and dexterity, well knowing that there was no kind of enthusiasm amongst the people for the project. It is headed the "New Reform Movement." I may state that I take this report from a newspaper that is the re cognised organ of the new party, and avows itself to be so. " New League Movement in Manchester.—lt is well known that the members of the Anti-Corn-law League have, ever since the dissolution of that ',body, held occasional meetings in Manchester." Did we not hear it constantly repeated that the Anti-Corn-law Association was entirely . confined to that sole purpose? But now we see that, ever since their last great success, they have been holding occasional meet ings, not knowing what to do.—(Laughter.) This is their own account of the matter :—" Newhall-buildings, the locus quo of which has already become famous, and the site of which will hereafter be sedulously traced by the local historian and the antiquary, is likely to have its celebrity still farther enhanced by a new movement, of which a pre liminary meeting was recently held. It was attended by Mr. R. Cobden, Mr. Bright, Mr. Kershaw, Mr. J. B. Smith. George Wilson, Esq., the Chairman of th e A n ti-Co rn -law League, presided." The meeting which, we are told, was private, and was merely preliminary, was intended to collect the opinions of its members as to household suffrage, trien nial Parliaments, and equal electoral districts.—(Laughter and applause.) It was ultimately agreed that a circular, signed by the chairman, should be forwarded to all who had supported the free -trade movement ; that in this way the public opinion might be obtained with regard to the points under discussion. Public opinion, therefore, did not give them the points—(Cheers) —with a view that decided mea sures might afterwards be taken by the public at large. The following is the circular referred to : " Dear Sir,—A. number of gentlemen have met here to-day to consider what steps should be taken to promote a more cordial union of all classes of reformers in favour of an im provement in our system of Parliamentary representation. They feel that increasing public expenditure and increasing taxation are causes of the deepest anxiety, and they doubt the possibility of any permanent remedy being applied whilst the taxpayers are for the most part excluded from direct influence in Parliament. I have been requested to ad dress this circular to you to ascertain how far you think the extension of the franchise to all householders, with the pro tection of the ballet, the more equal distribution of the elec toral power by means of electoral districts, aadthe shortening of the duration of Parliaments to a pefiod not exceeding three years, would afford a system of representation such as the middle classes, now partially enfranchised, would generally acquiesce in—(Laughter)—and which the nnenfranchised classes would accept as a substantial admission to their legi timate place in the Constitution. I shall be glad also to know whether you think that at the present time a move ment is desirable—(Great cheering and laughter)—in favour of the changes I have indicated, and if you are disposed to co-operate with an association founded for the purpose of promoting them. I shall be glad, also, to know what, so far as you have ascertained, is the prevailing feeling of the inhabitants of your town or district on the subject to which I have referred.—(Shouts of Hear, hear.') The replies to_ this circular will not be published—(Laughter) — and I will thank you to favour me with an answer at your earliest con venience." . To this document there is appended the signature of a gen tleman whom I will not call distinguished, for that would be 'a prostitution of the word so notorious, for that would be offensive; but 1 will say the well-known George IVilson.—(Hear, hear.) Now I have shown to the . House, without the slightest exaggeration, quoting from their own documents, the way in which these things are got up.— (Cheers.) But the remarkable circumstance in the present movement is this, that it has not in the slightest degree originated with any class of the people, even it the people had been misled; for it is possible that there may be a po pular movement, and that movement an erroneous one. But this movement is an erroneous one, and it is not popular.—(Cheers.) The moral I draw—observing this system of organized agitation—this system of playing and faltering with the popular passions for the aggrandise ment of one too ambitious class—the moral I draw is this, Why should the people of England be forced to find their leaders in these persons? The proper leaders of the peoPle of England are the gentry of England.—(Cheers.) Milers they are leaders I see no reason why they should be gentry. —(Renewed cheering.) It i s because Hon. Gentlemen are negligent of their duties—it is because they are unmindful of the duties of their high station—that this system of pro fessional agitation, so ruinous to the best interests of the country, has arisen in England. It was not always so. Honourable Gentlemen call themselves the country party. That was the name once of an English party who were the foremost to vindicate the popular rights. They were the natural leaders of the people—the champions of everything that was natural and popular. Yon may blame yourselves, and yourselves alone, if you have allowed the power which was entrusted to you by the constitution to slip out of your hands, and to be exercised for interests and purposes other than the general god and .the national pewre. When Sir William Wyndham was the leader of the country party, do you think that he would have allowed any chairman, or deputy-chairman, or hired lecturers, or pa m . phleteers, to deprive him of the hold he had upon the heart and feelings of the people of England? Do you think that he would have suffered a measure to be brought forward in this House as a class movement, and upon the avowed basis of establishing for one class a predominance i n these lands ?—(Loud cheers.) Read Sir John Hinde Cotton's speech on the motion for extending the suffrage in the time of Sir Robert Walpole. He was one of the foremost of the country party, and he never thought of pairing off at half•past eleven o'clock at night, and allowing his country to be ruined.—(Cheers.) This I, must impress upcn the minds of Hon. Gentlemen, that if we are, as we may be, on the eve of troublous times—if it is necessary that great changes should be made in the consti tution of the .country, let these changes be effected by the natural leaders of all popular movements—(Loud cheers)_ and then we shall find that these changes are not carried into effect to accomplish the purposes of a middlceclass:Govera ment, but the purposes of an English Government —a national Government—a Government of which we may be justly proud and in which we may place full confidence. If we are called upon to effect large changes, the power to effect them will then still remain within the scope and objects of the constitution. Because, notwithstanding the sneers of Hon. Gentlemen opposite, I am not ashamed to say that I am ready to maintain the English constitution. I do not mean by that merely the English House of Com mons, and still less any particular party in the House of Commons, which some Honourable Gentlemen seem to con sider as comprising the whole of the English constitution.— (Cheers.) But I would carry into effect the changes that may be necessary in the spirit of the English constitution— that large and liberal spirit which would allow of all the changes that are necessary, and yet would maintain the in stitutions of the country. I would not maintain the con stitution merely because it is swayed by an ancient mo narchy, mitigated by the power of a co-ordinate popular eitate, not because that constitution has planted the tree of English liberty broad and deep in the land, or because it is not dependent upon the will of an individual or the caprice and passion of a great city, nor would I maintain the constitution merely because it secures due administration of justice, safety for person, and respect for propetty—though these are all great and im portant considerations—but I would maintain it, because of all existing politics, it is the constitution which most tends to promote the happiness and elevate the condition of the great body of the people.—(Loud and prolonged cheering.) Mr. OSBORNE moved that the debate be adjourned.-- (" Oh, oh," and cries of " Go on.") Mr. F. MACKENZIE asked if any arrangement had been come to for another night to continue the debate, as he found there was not another open night for it until the 19th. of July ?--(Hear, hear.) If, therefore, Hon. Gentlemen op posite adjourned now, it looked as if they were running away from a division on their own motion.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. HUME said he did not wish to run away from the motion, and appealed to the Government to give him an other night. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said in the present state of the public business he could not comply with the request, but he had no objection that the House should go on with the eehate.—( Cheers. ) Mr. COBDEN thought the Government must see that this question excited one hundred times more interest than the West India debate.—(" Oh, oh," and cheers.) He ad mitted there was a difficulty in having so many adjourned questions, and the only remedy he thought would be, either by a tacit understanding or by a resolution of the House, to limit the length of Hon. Member's speeches. The gallery was then cleared for a division on the motion for adjournment, but none took place, and the debate was adjourned nominally till Friday next. VAN DIEMEN'S LAND. Mr. C. ANSTEY renewed his motion from yesterday, for the papers connected with the dismission of the Judges in Van Diemen's Land. An Ho's. MEMBER moved that the House be counted, and only 34 Members being present, the House adjourned at a Quarter before Two. INDIA AND CHINA. Dispatches have been received from Marseilles in antici. pation of the overland Bombay mail of the 12th ult. The intelligence, although partly anticipated by our last advices, published on the 12th instant, is of great interest. It gives th e d etails of the murder of the two British officers at Moultan 2 the capital of the western district of the dominions of Lahore. sevllelroeusltatillggwlase, t i a t k n en as b lo y ng ß m of me rc h and i se, and is now the third city of the b un e j en eet rem Si ar ng k h ab i l n e l aa BlB a , n a e f m te p r o a . rig kingdom. The Governor of Moultan had been for some time consi dered to be disaffected towards the Seikh rule. He was desired to settle his accounts and pay up his arrears. This order he, having paid a visit to Lahore, contrived by intrigues to baffle. A successor was named to take his place, and two young offi cers — v i z., Mr. Vans Agnew of the Bengal Civil Service, and Lieutenant Anderson, of the Bombay Fusileers, accompa lied the newly-appointed Gover nor, Khan Singh, to Moulton. They left Lahore on the sth of April, and reached their destination on the 18th of that month. They were well received by the old Gover nor, Dewan Moolraj, who showed them the fort. A quarrel, however, was picked with some of their followers, and both of the Englishmen were wounded. Seeing themselves about to be massacred by treachery, they retreated with !shall Singh and their escort to a small fort outside the walled town of Moultan, where for twenty-four hours they considered themselves protected, but the troops from Moulton hastened to attack the fort. Lieut. Anderson being severely wounded, was unable to rise from his bed ; Sir. Vans Agnew shook hands w ith hi m , an d b a d e hm an eternal adieu. He then prepared to defend himself, but his pistols had been tampered with, and as the crowd of sol diers with which his escort had " fraternized " entered the room,he drew his sword and cut down the first assailant, but he was instantly shot, and his body, like that of his com panion Lieutenant Anderson, and that of their apothecary, Mr. Wilkinson, hacked to pieces, and treated with every in dignity. The new Governor, Khan Singh, was wounded, and made prisoner by the troops of Moulton. This insurrection is calculated to produce dangerous conse quences, for the Dewan Moolraj will be joined by all the dis affected and turbulent men of the late Seikh army, who were dismissed at the time of the conquest. The season was adverse to campaigning, for the heats in that part of the Puidaub are intolerable in the months of May June, July, August and §e,pternber. Orders were instantly issued at Lahore to send a corps of the army down to Moultan (a dis tance of 200 miles); but they were countermauded, when the death of the two officers was proved. It was said on the day of the departure of the mail that a force of four regiments would be dispatched from Bom bay to Kurrachee; but it was feared that they would not be able to reach that place, in consequence of the south-west monsoon, which was then approaching. The Indus was then in a fit state for being navigated by the steamers and flat-bottomed boats, which could come within one mile and a half of Moultan by going up the Chenaub (Acesines). Captain Christopher, who commands the flotilla on the Indus, and who is well acquainted with the river, and who had gone up the Chenaub near to Moulton, was to proceed to Kurrachee from Bombay on the 13th of May. There was a number of boats ready at different stations on the Indus, and a heavy battering train was ready at Sukkur, which could be con veyed with speed to attack Moulton. The only want was of time to prepare the expeditions before the monsoon shall have set in. There is no doubt that proper arrangements will be adopted for having two strong corps sent to subdue the rebels, the one from Ferozepore and the other from Kur rachee, as soon as the season will allow the troops to move. Various absurd rumours were current respecting a combi nation amongst the Seikh troops, and other disaffected mountain tribes, to embarrass the British authorities, but there was no foundation for these reports. The feelings of the people of even the Moulton districts are favourable to the British, and no apprehension is entertained of the disaffection gaining ground. in other parts of India peace prevails. Oude is, however, disturbed, and may require to be managed by the British authorities. In the Nizam's territory there are hopes enter tained of amelioration, as the Sovereign and Resident are at last on terms and are willing to introduce good measures. Mr. Clerk, the ex-Governor of Bombay, took his departure from that place on the 6th of May, sincerely regretted. Lord Falkland, who was sworn into office on the Ist, had reco vered from his indisposition, and was to hold a levee on the 13th of May. The management of the Indian navy engrossed much at tention at Bombay, especially subsequent to the suicide of Mr. Purser Harrison, who attributed all his misfortunes to his superiors. He had been dismissed for neglect of duty as Deputy-Superintendent of the Stores. The affairs of the Union Bank continued to be discussed at Calcutta, but with little prospect of a satisfactory termi nation. The late disturbances at Surat were still the subject of much animadversion at Bombay. The Government had sent a high civil servant to examine into the facts and to present a report thereon. A strict inquiry is necessary. Advices from Hong Kong are to the 26th of April. The Peninsular and Oriental Company's steamer Pottinger had arrived late at night of the 22d, bringing dates ,from London of the 26th of February, and the first intelligence of th • revo lution in Paris, and the abdication of Louis Philippe. In Canton general quiet prevailed ; au unprovoked attack by some Chinese on two foreigners, as they were proceeding in a Hong boat to visit the warehouses of their principals, met (with summary redress on the representation of her Majesty's Consul, and the Chinese were taken and punished .by exposure in the " cangue," &c. Trade continued inactive, but there appeared no want of money. Her Majesty's steamer Fury returned from Shanghai to Hong-Kong on the 21st, bringing dates thence to April 13th. The demands made by the consul for the delivery of the ring leaders in the attack on the three English missionaries, had been complied with, and the parties were identified and punished; the Toutai of Shanghai had been dismissed for his supineness in the business ; and a Mandarin, Samqua, formerly a merchant at Canton, had been appointed to suc ceed him. This affair has thus been satisfactorily brought to a termination, to which, no doubt, the dispatch of h er Majesty's ship Espiegle to Nankin, with h er M aj esty's Vice-Consul, largely contributed. Some slight de monstration was made by some idlers - as the officers and Man darins were passing through the streets ; but the parties we re immediately apprehended and punished by exposure in the " cangue." The Espiegle returned safely to Shang. hai, and proceeded to Ningpo, leaving her Majesty's ship Childers, Captain Pitman, at Shanghai. Her Ma jesty's ship Scout remains at Foochowfoo, and her Ma jesty's ship Columbine at Amoy. Her Majesty's steamer Medea is stationed at WhainPos, and the Plut o a t Canton. Her Majesty's ship Melampus, Captain Campbell, senior officer, and her Majesty's steamer Fury, remain in Hong-Kong harbour. It is reported his Excellency Gover nor Bonham intends having an interview with the Viceroy at the Bogue in a few days. The latest dates received at Hong-Kong are—from Cal cutta, March 8 ; Madras, March 14 ; Bombay, March 11; . Singapore, April 13; Manilla, April 9. \ ot COURT CIRCULAR. The Queen and Prince Albert took an airing yester day in an open carriage and four . The Equerries in Waiting, Colonel Buckley and Colonel Bouverie, were in a ttendance on horseback. His Royal Highness Prince Albert visited his Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge yesterday, at Cam bridge House. Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent visited the Queen yesterday, at Buckingham Palace. The Prince of Wales, the Princess Royal, and the Princess Alice, took an airing yesterday in a carriage and four. Prince Alfred, the Princess Helena, and the Princess Louisa, took airings in the gardens of the Palace. His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge honoured the performance at her Majesty's Theatre yesterday evening with his presence,