The Sun. — London, England, 1849-06-06 00:00:00

Would now tell the Noble Lord that the people were m ore inclined to have the Right Hon. Baronet in office I by him. With these observations he would conclude, s econding the motion, in the assurance that, although ere, mmight be a m ijority of votee against it in that ° , llBO , there was an overw h e l m i ng ma j o rity in its favour uf , doors, and which he had no doubt would soon be de to tell within. g Si r GEORGE GREY said, the Hon. Gentleman who °m Just sat down h a d no reason to be surprised at the n llr s e Gove rnment h a d t a k en on a l a t e occa s ion, for he irat be aware that t hi s mot i on , or one t o a s i m il a r ef et and which included the reform to which the Hon. ember had alluded, underwent an able and elaborate l ' eh as im in that House for two nights during last ses ,-i and th a t t h e N o bl e L or d a t the head of the Go elllnlent did then fully argue the question, and that the ijajtents he addressed to the House, and the opinions i s - ,, t aen expressed, were sanctioned and adhered to by a 'it majority of that House on a division taking place. ...o e ,Vart hear.) If, therefore, the Noble Lord on this e C, sl ,_on should not address the House, no one could be bef a " as to his opinions regarding the question soo °re it, these so fully expressed on the anion alluded (H e arnto.—ehear.) • There were, how ^-er' it was true, different eircumstances this year rs iall eeted with the question.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. rfmbar f or M ontrose ha d a ll u d e d to some o f th ese , an d l t : iga tated that whil e this year there were no petitions fa voure s of his motion, last year there were large s er tab e rs, although he (Sir G. Grey) could not help ob f e g that the greater proportion o thoe were in l a i _our of the six points of the Charter, f and s not of the Gentleman's plan. They were, however, seme s gat dip's CUM • mstanced, from last year, inasmuch a th P e •Y haad ve ' exerin other es en tries of d so h mething twel of months the system p the ence Hon. i Gentle filsought to introduce, and he could readily afford to " 81 - 1 0 with him on the internal state and condition of e flemantry as contrasted with the state and condition t tex pse countries on the Continent, which he seemed so w ee °1:18 to adopt as his model.—(Loud cheers.) He sue ,. t going to say a word in disparagement of those who were endeavourin to obtain ir ancien Rua, b ens and the establishment of g that liberty which may, iii;u4s, have b een t oo l o ng withheld from them ; but leek the Honourable Gentleman tells this House to th e St them, and to imitate them in the system firip were carrying on, then he answered that his e ek t i and most c h er i s h e d feeling was one of ti times oo Rued thankfulness that he lived under a cons . titti ' the strengththankfulness of which had been tested at differs h ad and under most terrible circumstances, but which . wh; still stood the test of all assailants, and the value of p e Len Was felt and appreciated by the great body of the te °l3l e. -- -(Loud cbeers ) The Hon. Gentleman had said -ate ' th e large military force was kept up in this country for to ia t taintenance of internal peace, and that they ought gni aye no military establishment other than that re iseered for the protection of their colonies and fur ex When defence. God grant that the time might come ,„ - en it might be the case, when they would require no force as alluded to, when no military would be i n s quired f or th e i n t er nal government of the country, or " t the prevention of foreign aggression, and that the Pert e ,ati would Come when they might turn their spears t O pruning -hooks, and their swords into ploughshares , and when they should learn the art of war no more — (A en l °)—but when the Hon. Gentleman said that those 4stitutions on the continent led to those revolutions • 'eh had taken place there, he was ready to join issue rti lth hin lagain, and to ask him , whether he would be will of to accept universal suffrage with the accompaniments W. t iled force whi c h was to be seen in Paris, together b e e n the other agencies, which during the last year had et 4, at work in France.—(Cheers.) Under the existing th e *: of things, the Hon. Gentleman must know, that t te d,waa an overwhelming force of troops in France, A nte ll ', t hough it might not be important to allude to e ene r &ea, yet he found that even there it had been found tre o ' ssar Y at New York to call cut a body of armed se r d ) 7 , for the p ur p ose o f c l ear i ng th e s treets of an as in d I ge of rioto us p ersons , an d w h o had not succeeded kob oue g so until they were obliged to fire upon the ch esl and several persons had been killed.—(Loud s e s Thus, even in America military were re to preserve order. Ade s s l MlE.—They were not armed troops. New ..u.O3BDRxT , --,—There is not an armed soldier in Sir A G re. t he ;,,, GR EY.—There was - an armed force called out, ied Y t e w ,e-- ordered to fire upon the people, and .. . several ia eneenuals had died of gun shot wounds, which aa 01u0Proof that they were an armed force of some kind Wh _ t the r f o p (Hear, hear, and cheers.) With regard to Wh ere Place last year, there were several stations th e aMilitary were placed, in consequence of W b. M all number of police in the districts ere se e eve r b ''`` stations were situated; but no attempt . had for e , , bee n made to overawe the people by a military G fie should, however, like to know, were the W ood ' fi tienean allowed to bring in his 13111, how he sestin a .. act with regard to the framing of the extension of fl u ; °f it. Theme was the motion, Isio. 4. on the paper Nottin is daY ' given notice of b y the Hon. Member for "act 1 " 4131 (Mr. O'Connor), and which was for the th e 14 111 0 nt of two additional points to that proposed by deg Was Member. How would he do with these? It rable to have a definite plan before them before f o u r e e Y t lv i ere called upon to agree to the motion, and there net n ,'e, necessity for explanation on that point. It was . tett ° " reasonable to cause them to give up the consti joforn they were living under, without having some reation .z ohan as to what sort of one they were to get in St en ge, or having some knowledge of whither such a meo,ould lead them.—(Hear, hear.) At most of the re otie i ngss held on the subject of the Hon. Gentleman's t o lie u°, there was invariably a difference of opinion as Wept fart they should go, but in most instancs they re her than the Honourable Gentleman. With tr op in to Lord Ashley's having given prizes at Exeter b ee ' to the working classes of the community for the Mwritten essays, he was glad to find that no Hon. e mber h a d i n d u l ge d i n an y disrespectful remarks against 41 t Nobl e L or d ; and if the Hon. Member for Montrose r • Hume) thought that the right of suffrage was due o those who excelled in those essays which were indi e'llre of sound reason, of intelligence, and of religion, t ' s ! (Sir George Grey) begged to remind him (Mr. Hume) t h at women were the best essayists on that occasion, and ;°:ait Lord Ashley particularly complimented them. — laughter.) And, therefore, if a necessary inference the right be drawn, it was that the women should obtain right of universal suffrage as well as the male adults. ar e Laughter.) He did not mean to say that a finality e o stem ho uld be established, because those principles, or eon asses , of them, then advocated by the two Hon. Members ssrs, F. O'Connor and Hume) might be requisite at e Ac es tede futur e time, He th o ught that it would be wellg to e thos e a l terat i ons w hi c h re ason and judgment sug• t and he edible not at all consent to give up the pri• ere g e a t ssings which the country at present to jq • ed, as the Hon. Member (Mr. Hume) seemed wiih to do.—(dear, hear.) It was difficult to ' r unl the tw o H o e. Members what was to be the kltation o f the suffrage, for t h e Hon. Member for u ntro se Says he is for having as a standard the popu tbor the , ta xation, and education of the country, and also mor e appointment of representatives be rendered s tt , o , _equal to the population. In fact, on that point, he $ q n o difference between the two Hon. Members (Mr. di ffer e ea and Mr. F. O'Connor); but in this point they Opy, o _ '4, because the Hon. Member for Montrose was ]!st e r ni r e ct to equal electoral divisions, while the Hon. equal ° rfor Nottingham acted consistently in supporting ahort electoral divisions; for if he (Mr. Hume) stopped he (Si°rffes'is (Mr. F. O'Connor's) idea on that subject, " e r gtire er ;: e e ur ge Grey) would ask him (Mr. Hume) what divi s ion [Lc had or could adduce against equal electoral 84 01 4 -3 * His (Sir George Grey's) opinion was that t otally s Ystem could not be maintained, because it would re a onset the whole system of representation as it at "t existed ; but should say that he would theseae-evreee two Honourable Gentlemen to settle the lent of f equality pointsquay(H Arrange tee, ot these two p he feared would involve the keeLsiature in inextricable difficulties, and would there *" for •Eti eed the present prefer that that subject were kot•—:(llear There were two more parts of the loturaeis Member for Montrose's motion, to which he li nl to allude—the vote by ballot, and triennial Par ka, el lts• With respect to the vote by ballot, the Hon. zazt_taber (Mr. H. Berkeley) spoke with soreness on the t re f t ,°er in which his motion on that subject had been e s ,,"efl, but he (Sir George Grey) should say that after 4: 41 years, since that measure bad been introduced in f oi l Rouse, he did no t thi n k i t necessary or expedient to ''ew him on the l a t e occas i on , f or at t h e for mer period the motion was d e feated by a g t 3' large majority of the House. Ile (Mr. ~srkele y) t h oug ht that he should give an apology, be•• an 1 4 Se in 1842 he (Sir G. Grey) voted for this measure, C e li,n 1849 he voted against it , or in other words used se--d"un (Mr. Berkeley) he h ad voted w hite one day, I sh„ (34 another day voted black. But to that he opi nion reply, reply, that it was not necessary to retain one's in always on any one point , for at the time he voted th e --7 °ltr of the measure he saw t hat the influe n ce of fay gre at masses of the country was directed in its ade• atnn,r, which was no t the case at present , an d h e sh o ul d - at he had stated at that time that he was ve h ry re en, shoul la giving his vote for the motion. Siticet nth recollected, that a great change . had taken by ti e i With respect to intimidations as elections,. caused di st , e i nfluence of public opinion. He felt it hie bounden t1e 4 4 ,. ° 0 reflecting on the speeches of many o . (kr. Vs , and particularly the Hon. Member for Oldham 011 the°) on that subject, to alter his opinion; and that keteb:Prior occasion, when he voted fur it, it was as a eabl e - , r o f the Government, and not as a member of the Rout e With respect to Triennial Parliaments , t he e th would have an opportunity of giving their opinion sls onie s second reading of that Bill; and he therefore th ou .', not enter into any detail on that matter, as he seemed that the greater number of Members present Membd to have no anxiety on that subject. The Hon. er 4 ,. for Montrose said, in the end of his speech, this House does not represent the interests and feel , t i, s ! of the country; but to that assertion he should reply tn u o tl a t t,ao it d r . ding to ' the present constitution of Parlie present the interests and feelings of the r32ll:_ttory fairly d re and adequately; for he had seen the o k.'_' ll . tis of the people fully expressed in that House, and a uras interests promoted by the carrying of great urea ea e l:res through the just influence of their honest feelings. i" considered the people were the sole and on l y r means ough which great popular measures were carried only carlitiment, and that tho present motion would t e nd v ery much to emb arrass , and create considerableoar) danger to those beneficial measure:. —(Bear h Mr. F. O'CONNOR said that he did net intend to 'Peak on that motion, but for the allusions mane t° him 1 1 the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir G. Grey). es and And e lth en he had treatel the House with trage t h American gar the circum eet, such as the French tragedy and the s it/ ts re e) he seemed to have forgotton that England f e 'nees that led to the French revolution were the re -4°l of those very rights which the people of re- Were now contending for, and were better able to enjoy, r eeo t Ts? the people of France were so constit u t e d that r „,, Li ti° l l Was to be expected, for if they, the peopl e o f "'es; had the right of suffrage and the other measures which the Honourable Member for M aitrose advocated, they would not he led to physical l :volution. But es France had be n a'luded to by the Right Honourable Gentle man (Sir G. Grey), he would ask him was France ever more tranquil than at present, or was there ever less probability that that people would be led by demagogues for the a c complishment of now pripciples, than at pre sent? lie perfectly coincided with the arguments of the Hon. Member for Montrose, because he believed his mo tion was a step in the right dire ction for the good of the country, yet he would have wished that he included two other important principle—narnely, no property qualifi cation and the payment of Members. Reference had been made to America, but there, as well as in France, the members are paid, and when he saw the Right Hon. and Hon. Gentlemen on the Treasury Benches, who re spectively received their stipend, and who so pertinaci ously adhered to their office because they were paid, he would ask, why should not Members be paid ? He should next say that the arguments advanced by the Right Honourable Gentleman (Sir G. Grey), taken from the speech of the Honourable and Learned Diem ber for Reeding (Mr. Sergeant Talfourd) was rather for a greater extension of the suffrage than for depreciating it, as the Honourable and Learned Gentleman did not stop 'at household suffrage, but extended to the tent of the gipsy. He recollected that the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) had stated at Bristol that the non electors should have a public influence over the electors in the right of their vote, and in that sentiment he per fectly agreed with the Noble Lord. But now that money is exerting its influence as much as then, he thought the Noble Lord should take a retrograde move ment. The Right Hon. Baronet (Sir George Grey) had attacked the Hon. Member for Montrose as not having any petitions to support his motion, but he (Mr. F. O'Connor) had determined that the Ministers should no longer have that as a handle or an obstacle to so impor• tent a measure, for ho would have petitions from every district throughout England for that motion, and show them what he himself believed, that the Emancipation Act, the Reform Bill, and the free trade measures, were mere juggles, and that only for the working classes the Ministry could never carry those measures. Yes, he would appeal to men—the Chartists, who were never guilty of ircendiarism—men who never burned Bristol or Nottingham Castles—men who never took about in derision the portrait of their King, and men who were opposed to revolution; and he believed that they and the rest of the English people would send peti tions to that House from their respective localities—not a monster petition, to be subjected to a Petition Com mittee, but those for which they would severally avouch. He would, therefore, support the motion, as he believed it to be an instalment of the people's rights. Colonel THOMPSON said that he was ready to ad mit that this proposal had not been brought forward in altogether the most happy and fortunate manner. It did not appear to him that the course of proceeding adopted was calculated to bring over to their side any great amount of Ministerial support, and he should be highly gratified if, upon further consideration, some sign could be given that those men who were in truth the representatives of the authors of one of the brightest. because the most successful, revolution that ever took place in the history of the world, were prepared to make some concession to what was manifestly the spirit of the age, and to take that lead which they should take in advancing the interests of this country along with those of Europa in general. There was nut one- fourth part of the population of this country who did not believe that England was seriously interested in the general success of liberal principles throughout Europe.—(Hear.) It was said it was sorrowful to see that those whom Heaven and nature had marked out as the leaders of this great movement, should not be found endeavouring to secure placing themselvei at the bead of the adoption of those liberal principles which were called for throughout the country, and he earnestly hoped that they would not be much longer found standing still in the great onward movement.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. CAMPBELL said that he availed himself of the present opportunity to make a few remarks. He though. it must present itself to any mind of ordinary sagacity, that this subject was intimately connected with that which usually presented itself under the form of Char tiSM . Was the object of this reform to precipitate the adoption of the Charter? The first task incumbent upon them was to identify this proposition with that of the Hon. Member for Nottingham, which was not the less in view, because of late much had not been heard of it. In fact he might say of its supporters, that dum tacent clument. There was no shutting their eyes against the fact, that the government of the majority would be the government of the British empire; but he was willing to make an argumentative concession of the ques• tion. All that lie wished the supporters of the motion to concede was this, that if even this proposi tion was calculated to benefit the country, at least, it was a proposition which could not be translated into law, which could not be adopted by the Legislature with out a long period of agitation and discussion. Remounted, in short, to nothing else than the transfer of power from one class to another, and such a change should be cautious and slow. Whatever energy now belonged to the House of Commons, and whatever wisdom belonged to its lead ing Statesmen, should be devoted undtvidedly to the state of Ireland, which was demanded imperatively at their hands. It was only necessary to refer to the vast amount of literature, which embraced this subject, in order at once to be convinced of this; the opinion alone of the late Mr. O'Connell were sufficient to establish the ground he had taken up. He would submit to Irish Members that it behoved them all most seriously to beware how they became parties to any motion by which the energy of Parliamsnt might be shaken, or its virtue jee•p ardised. The Right lion. Baronet had proposed a scheme for the regeneration of Ireland replete with wisdom and prurience, and in that vast question there was a field tor their labours which might far more profitably be directed to it, than employed in can vassing a subj, ct, and in endeavouring to accomplish it, the very tendency of which was to shake the existing order of things, and to leave questions of great moment in a state of greater uncertainty than attached to them at present. In saying that much he was confident of having the feeling of a large majority of the people of the country with him, and persuaded, as he was, of its truth, he was most anxious that a more able debater than himself should take it up, and lay them before Par liament in the proper light. He had not even heard the shadow of an anticipation of the nature of the objec tions that could be urged against it. In another con jecture than that which at present obtained, he con ceived that it might be proper, and even advantageous, to inquire into the practicability of great constitutional charges. But whilst they had:great questions to settle— whilst they had great practical evils to redress—whilst they had great wants to supply—he would contend, and that, indeed, was the full extent of his argument, that an examination of the operation of the Reform Bill was too wide a question to he prosecuted with any prospect either of success or utility. The Honourable Member for Montrose, however, and his political partisans upon this question, not only challenged this question, but he came forward the avowed champion of democracy, con tending broadly that all men were alike entitled to the pri vilege of exercising the Parliamenrary franchise. For his own part, he thought it would not be difficult to esta blish a complete defence of the Reform Bill in its prin ciple, details, and results; and an inquiry for that pur pose ought, in his opinion, to be a complete answer to the motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose. The principle of the Reform Bill was, that the best form of Government was the representative assembly elected by the middling clastes of the community. That principle was propounded 2,000 years ago by the greatest master of political philosophy. It had on many occasions re ceived the sanction of men of learning and ability, but bad never, as he believed, been applied to the case of actual practice, until the Reform Bill was introduced. It was unreasonable to suppose that the lower classes could ever be sufficiently informed upon public affairs, to act with general wisdom as a body in returning Members of Parliament; and he need only refer to the events of the memorable 10th of April, for an example of the animus which must be taken to inspire the lower classes in a great political movement. But if the Reform Bill had not occasioned a complete representation of the middle classes, he would put it to the House whether that signal defect in it would not have formed a widely•spread topic of discussion at the general election of 1847, and at the large public meetings held all over the country, by which it was preceded. Oa a question of this sort, however desirable it might be on other occasions, rigid demon stration was not, perhaps, the best mode of attaining the object in view, neither was it, perhaps, altogether attainable. Still ho was quite prepared, were he called upon to do so, to investigate the principles of the two Charters, with as much scrutinising penetration as could be wished for by its warmest advocate. The Charter proposed by the Hon. Member for Montrose was of a nature that would prove dangerous to the best interests of society; it was of too extensive a character, and ought to be listened to with great caution by the House. lie could not but refer the House to the disorders and d tEh i usotrsuoerpbe countriesaa n n c c a t u h n a at t r is heosau,dn sound recentlymiddle taken place in several e wn l g a s st,hat the theygrea great safeguard e n g o u t a r i d n against such disturbances. The House should there fore take care that it did not lightly listen to the propo sition of the H Montrose. Hon. Memb er for meant that the system of government which they enjoyed ought, under no circu ms t ances, to be changed for the Charter of the people, then he should say that he was for the finality of the Reform Bill, which implied a Government of the m ddle classes—the. safest and only secure mode of government they could have. He trusted the House would bear with him for trespassing so long upon its indulgence.—(Hear, hear.) He would not much longer trespass on its patience, but before he re sumed his seat he would implore the House, in the name of their institutions, in the name of the middle classes, in the name of order, and of everything which they valued, not to give its assent to the proposition of the Honourable Member for Montrose. The House of Commons would, he trusted, consult its own dignity, and not he led away from its interests and those of the such propositions. Since the proposition tosub their t presentthe r cwoausn tnothingry by any ,_ House of Commons , sinc e it invited Short of an limpeac o h d m a r em t of the h institutions; and since the character and objects of the he roust oppose , welfare or stability of those institutions, , People's Charter were not of a nature to promote the libert • in the name of freedom, in the na:ne of rational ),. the proposition of the Hon. Member, and in the name of all that was dear to the country, he implored the • House to oppose it. Mr. L. KING doubted very much that the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down represented the opinions of the inhabitants of the borough of Cam ' bridge, for if he did, they must have become very much l changed indeed.—(Hear, hear.) The motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose was now regularly, and he • regretted to say, necessarily, an annual one—one which the safety of the country required, and he believed that I there was no one more calculated to carry out its princi , ples than the Noble Lord at the head of the Government t (Lord John Russell), by %%horn the Reform Bill was in r troduced.—(Hear, herr.) If in the great revolutionary 7 year which they had recently gone through their country was not shaken, it was, he believed, because they were in advance, in the freedom of their institutions, of the peop!o of those countries over which the revolutionary movement swept. But if they wished to secure their in sttutions, and to render them of the value which they ought to be to the country, they would adopt the proposition of the Honourable Member for Montrose, and not suffer themselves to fall into the rear of other countries, now struggling for increased fr,edoin. He warned them, if they neglected their opportunity, that they might regret it. He warned the House that ano. ther Reform Bill was necessary—(Hear, hear)—that there would be danger in delay, and that it would not be wise in them not to listen to the voice of the people. He could state to the House, in proof of the necessity of reform, that while Reigate, with a population of little more than 5,000, returned one Member to Parliament, and while Guildford, with a population of little more than 6,000 returned two, making between them three Members, Croydon, with a population more than double that of both those places, did not send a Member, and was not at all represented in that House. Now, with all respect for the 101. householders of Reigate, and with all respect for the 10/. householders of Guildford, he thought, that the people of Croydon, forming a much larger po pulatiou, and not less intellectual, were quite as worthy of being represented, and that a system which did not admit of their being represented, and which was so glaringly defective, required reconstruction. The people were dissatisfied, and they felt that injustice had been done to them in being denied the right of free I citizens.—(hear, hear.) _ _ Mr. NE, WDEGATE said the Hon. Member for East Surrey (Mr. King) went far enough for the Mem ber for the West Riding, though much too far for the Hon. Member for Cambridge (Mr. Campbell) who had justly complained that the time of the House was lost in discussing the motion, an opinion in which he (Mr. New degate) agreed, for the motion had somewhat the appear ance of a useless formality, for the Hon. Member for Montrose could hardly conceal from himself that, though he proposed to the House to undertake the re-construc tion of the constituency of the country, the Hon. Mem ber had already undertaken it in the association which met at St. James's-square, of which the Hou. Member for Bolton was president. They had, in fact, a Reform Bill going on out of the House, As far as the mere en franchisement of the freeholders went, he (Mr. Newde= gate) had very little to say; but those who worked that point were the members of the lite Anti Corn law League—namely, the Honourable Member for the West Riding, the Honourable Member for Manchester, the Honourable Member for Bolton, and Mr. George Wilson. By calling the attention of the House to the difference of tactics in respect of the two systems, an understanding might be arrived at of the motives of this body. In the year 1845 these gen tlemen objected to the constituency of Warwickshire in the registration courts; 17,000 objections were made to his (Mr. N.'s) portion of the constituency in those days; 23,000 objections were made in all. These objections were supported by legal astuteness, and by an unscrupu leus use of the means at the command of those who made them. Their failure in North Warwickshire, he believed, disheartened them; out of 700 objections made to one parish, 12 alone were sustained, and the re mainder were withdrawn. This induced the adoption of another system, which originated in Manchester; and from 90.0001. to 98,0002 passed through one office, that of Messrs. Sale and Worthington, for the purchase of freeholds in the west riding of Yorkshire and Cheshire. Twenty-seven persons were thus intruded on the representation of the west riding alone, who had nothing what ever t o d o w i t h the county. The result of this system was stated by Mr. George Wilson, who said that the total of the county con stituencies of England was 445,63 u, of which 143,731 had been attacked —namely, one-third of the whole. Mr. Wilson said then the labours of the past year were, he was persuaded, only the beginning of another order of things. It was, therefore, a serious matter to find that these operations, commenced by the Anti-Corn law League, were renewedly avowed by the same gentleman. The Hon. Member for Manchester had stated Oat not only the counties, but the boroughs were to be dealt with in a similar manner. The system of corrupting the constituencies now practised was far worse than the old rotten-borough system. There was a danger in import ing strangers into the constituencies, because the House might interfere; so the system now was to facilitate the purchase of freeholds for the purpose of qualifying to vote. The purchaser, who was in debt to the society for the instalments of his purchase, passed a bond—a personal security, not a mortgage, as that would dis qualify his vote. Until he paid up these instalments he was at the mercy of his securities, who might rccal the money lent at any time in case of a contrary vote. It wus true the purchaser might mortgage the freehold to repay the advances; but that would deprive him of his vote. Therefore his vote was for them, or it was no vote at all.—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable Member for Montrose desired a change in the electoral divisions. This would include certain classes, and create a constituency perfectly corruptible. With respect to 'the vote by ballot, he (Mr. Newdegate) did not consider it any protection, while, on the contrary, he looked upon it as completely open to fraud. He was in Americo when the election of President took place, and for all the check placed on surreptirious voting by the ballot, he might have polled for that high func tionary if he had chosen. He (Mr. Newdegate-) did not think that the country had any conflUence in the motion of the lion. Member for Montrose, and he certainly should give it his decided opposition. Mr. gRIGHT corrected the Hen. Member's mistake, when he attributed the new mode of enfranchising, the peep].) to Manchester. It was devised in 13irminghatn by Mr. James Taylor, and the Anti-Corn law League had nothing to do with it. It was; hovvever, in his opinion, a most fortunate discovery fur the country at large, as by its means numbers of persons would he brought within the pale of the constitution. Of this he (Mr. Bright) was quite satisfied, as a result of that discovery, that the Lion. Member and his colleague would not re present the constituency of Warwick in another Parlia ment unless there was a great change in their opinions. The question before the House was one of the greatest importance. The whole of Europe was abandoning the old system of despotic government for a new one of re sponsibility-. The proposition of the Hon. Member for Montrose was one recognised by the theory of the con stitution. It was, that the common people of England had as sole a right in that House as the other branches of the constitution. By Act of Parliament, however, five out of the six of the full grown men of this kingdom were excluded from all direct exercise of political power, and, as far as the middle classes were concerned, other arrangements rendered the representation, to a large extent, a sham. He (Mr. B.) denit d that the Re form Bill was a middle-class Bill; it it was, would the votes of the Members for Manchester be neutralised by those of the Members for Stamford, who were returned by the Marquis of Exeter. When he asked that they should be admitted, the answer would be that they were too ignorant to exercise the franchise judiciously, or that they were to vicious, many of them, as to be likely to turn their politics.l power to purposes that would be destructive to the interests of the country. Now he (Mr. Bright) was not one of those who believed that it re quired much school learning to choose a Member of Par liament, but if he were, the posi , ion certainly acquired no confirmation from what they had seen in the repre sentatives of the Universities who sat in that /I,.use. The Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) was himself obliged to leave one of those Universities because he de teratined to adopt the course which he deemed to be ne cessary, and which every day of his life since he had found reason to know was absolutely neces sary; and the Right Honourable Gentleman who now represented the University of Cambridge (Mr. Goul burn) was supposed to sit in a most precarious posi tion—(A laugh)—not because he had neglected his duty here, but because he had endeavoureit to banish from his mind those prejudices and antiquitated notions which lingered longest in our scholastic institutions, and had opened his mind to the consideration of those questions which the pressing necessities of the country demanded should be listened to in this House.—(Hrar, hear.) The workingandclasseswashadproofgreatofoneveryprogressof hand, 'ears,there circulation of newspapers ably written and most moral in their tone amongst them, and in the efforts they were making, especially in the north of England, to educate their children, and as adults to educate themselves.— (Cheers.) There could be no doubt whatever but the artizan of this country in the year 1849 was even a different being from the artizan of the year 1832—(Hear) —and even at that time his help was not disdained by the Noble Lord and Right Hon. Gentlemen, who called upon him to assemble and petition Parliament for the passing of the Reform Bill. Ho was quite satisfied that every class of the population was growing in intelligence and in the knowledge of those things which were most useful to enable a man to perform his social and political duties aright. But would it be said that the working classes were so vicious that they ought not to be ad mitted? No, there was not a man in that House who wou!d venture to libel his countrymen by iterating such a statement.—(Cheers.) They had no designs against the monarchy or the constitution ; their only designs were against the system which placed a ban upon them, and in spite of their intelligence, their progress in the arts, their industry, and ingenuity, they still shut them out from a parti c ip a ti on i n those rights and privileges which the citiesns of a free country might be expected o h t rnb oeroee regarded believedcatr,iaed passion,oinetdaalf that,they e x n h e a p d t tihnefran particularchis e ncaosnefiadoefd irritation t t a h t e i m o n , s o u r t dt h h t e n h u y a s m t e w f ou o sl u t mandi fnlototroeo intelligent, representihgaael e ta o t u ,w t i si n r tttutnhhoeeeumi course ,ow o hu w nro son n eme neigh bourhood theygbicheh extended,a l and parishnedl e c a t t i o t n n s e , t w h n e e y ro nos t v he ado fr p a t n ed th i i n se the w i a r s m m un o i a c t ip saute time least within the operation of any undue or improper influence.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord at the head of the Goverment said last year that the present system worked well, and enumerated the various excellent measures which had ben passed since the enactment of the Reform Bill. lie (Mr. Bright) did not deny that the Reform Bill was a great advance. Under these circumstanc es it was a good and valuable measure; but such an argument as that was as good against the Reform Bill of the Noble Lord as it was against the present motion ; for the boroughinon gering Parliament had carried the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, the Catholic Relief Bill ; and, lastly, the Reform Bill itself—and he did not know whether, nceording to the Noble Lord's argument, this was not a conclusive fact that even the Reform Bill was unneces sary. Did not the Noble Lord know that all the pro gress which had been made was a progress in accordance with the democratic element in the constitution, and not at all a progress in the contrary direction ? Sir Robert P e el passed the Catholic Emancipation Act; afterwards the Noble Lord passed the Parliamentary Reform Bill, the Municipal Reform Bill, and the Bill f or th e a b o li t i on of slavery; and then Sir R. Peel passed great changes in the tariff and the repeal of the corn-laws. But how were these measures carrie d? Twice civil war was threatened. An illustrious; member of the Right lion. Baronet's Go vernmentdeclared, in 182 9 , that the alternative was Catho lic ewaacipaticia or chit war. Well, it was not a very wise THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 6, 1349. constitution which allowed things to come to that pass without providing a remedy. The Noble Lord carried the Reform Bill, and to enable him to do so, the con stitution was helped on by brick-bats, and the carriages of Noble Lords and Hen. Gentlemen, who opposed that Bill, were smashed over and over again in the towns and villages of the country. Well, he could not think that constitution to be the best which required such acts as these to give it a fillip.—(Hear, hear.) When slavery was abolished, it was notorious that an insurrection of the .laves in the colonies was deemed to be improbable. And Sir Robert Peel could not make an alteration in the corn-law until a famine occurred in Ireland, and thus removed all pretence for continuing that law. Upon the subject of the public expenditure, this I-louse legislated as if there were no British nation, and tax paying was unknown within the limits of the United Kingdom; but if we had a House of Commons that fairly represented the people, there would-be no one question so carefully anti constantly discussed in this House as that of the di minution of the taxation which now pressed so heavily upon the people. Again, he would take upon himself to say that the Noble Lord and the Right Hon. Baronet had both been aware for years that the laws, with regard to land in Ireland, were in a most defective and mischievous state.—(hear, hear.) lie (Sir. Bright) had not spoken upon any Irish questions during the last three or four years without mentioning that question ; but it was not until 500,000 of the subjects of the Queen bad been laid under ground by famine that the Minister dared to pro pose the measures which he had brought forward this year. Now, he (Mr. Bright) must say, that he had no respect for a constitution, or a system of Parliamentary reuresentation, which required aids like these to keep it in motion. But the system, if it did not work well in this House, worked quite as badly out of doors. From 1836 there had been an incessant movement in all parts of Great Britain in favour of an extension of the suffrage; and out of it had sprung Chartism—which had proved frightful because, during its discussion, passions had been stirred up and false principles often inculcated, and ani mosities engendered. There was no doubt of the fact that a wide-spread discontent prevailed in the country, amongst a large, intelligent, and it might be a powerful class in the country, and a hatred of the law which men sitting in that House ought to be the last to encourage and maintain.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord on a former occasion said that reform was not wanted by those out of doors. The Noble Lord referred to the comparative absence of petitions on the subject. He admitted the fact that the petitions were fewer than usual, but the reason was to be found in the cause that operated to prevent the corn-law abolitionists from petitioning the House of Lords. They felt that the Lords had made up their minds on the subject, and that the only argument they would be likely to listen to was the argument of 1846, which was applied, and for tunately listened to.—(Hear, and cheers.) The Hon. Member for Warwickshire had given an exeellent ad vertisement to the scheme for creating votes. He would tell the House that the plan was progressing rapidly; many towns had come into the plan. The plan was de scribed as a conspiracy by the lion. Member for. War wickshire, who said, according to the true interpretation of the constitution, such votes ought not to be created. Now, in reply to that, he would quote the opening of Lord Chief Justice Tindal, who, though opposed to his party in politics, was too upright a judge to allow that circumstance to bias his decision. Lord Chief Justice Tindal said, "the object of increasing the number of freeholds, so as to confer votes, was not against law, morality, or sound policy. It was one of the essential objects of the Reform Act, to enlarge the number of per sons who enjoyed the elective tranchise."—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Bright) was of opinion that it was to be ap proved of, for a man to put by money to get a vote with. But he would advise Honourable Members and the Go vernment there was one circumstance not altogether co a favourable character connected with this new plan, and which he wished could be avoided. The men who came forward to Furchase these votes did so under a strong and intractable conviction that they were buying a right from which they had been unjustly shut out.—(Hear.) When those men came within the pale of the constitution in sufficient numbers to speak out, it might be they would prove themselves the victors, you the vanquished. —(hear, hear.) It was better, therefore, to give these men their rights before exasperation or irritation had imbued their minds with dislike to the institutions of this country.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped the Noble Lord would not make poverty a reason for excluding persons from the pale of the constitution.—(Hear.) Then were 30,000.000 of people, with 6,000,000 of adults, and only 1,000,000 of electors; 5,000,000 of men, not slaves—not ignorant of the principles of government. and that government affected their material condition— not below that House in information on important sub jects—those 5,000 ; 000 had asked year after year in vain tor their rights. They stood about the hustings longing in their inmost hearts to be admitted to those elective rights which the constitution intended they should have lie had shown the House that the constitution was in capable of governing the country before very great changes were made. The Noble Lord said the peopl' of the country had great influence in that House. He denied it. The titled classes alone had influence.— (Cheers.) Look at the Cabinets. It' there was anything invariably be chosen from one class. The constitutiot popular in the constitution of Cabinets they would nom of that House was aristocratic, not popular. Of the fourteen members of the Cabinet seven were peers Lords Russell and Palmerston were not peers, but en the seine class. There were four baronets, and one no a baronet. These baronets were all connected wish peers by blood or marriage.—(blear.) Some day the House would find out that the people considered this was wrong As the present system existed it was impossible t' have a Cabinet so composed as that the interests of five sixths of the unrepresented should be regarded of attended to. A change, however, would riot take place until the danger became so great that it eculd no longee be refused. He would ask whether the fi•P-sixths of the people who were excluded from the franchise were body of men for whom they telt neither respect nor con fidenee? Why, where would the greatness, the his tory of the past and future, and the security of thi country, but for those who were denied the franchise? All e irtne, ibda3try, integrity, morality, and religion, die not reside in the sixth, who are represented in that House. Was the constitution worth preserving? Were the institutions worth encouraging which stood in fear o this class? He was not the friend of order—(Laughter) —he meant disorder. He believed the party he was con• nected with was the true Conservative party in that House. He was not unmindful of the liberties and pri vileges which the country enjoyed, but he was satisfied that all the advantages that we en j oye d wou ld b e conso lidated by passing the present meameasure.—(Hear.)Mr. .N EWDEGATE said a f ew words i n exp l ana tion. Lord JOHN RUSSELL—Whatever I may think of the motion before the House, yet I cannot enter upon the discussion of it without paying a tribute to the mo deration and fairness, to the total absence of bitterness of language, which marked the speech of the Hon. Member for Montrose in introducing it.—(Hear, hear.) Fur my part, I ern happy he see him again amongst u in renovated health—(Cheers) —a n d, although I differ in opinion from him, I can have no doubt that nothing but the most patriotic motives has induced him to bring the motion under the consideration of the House with a view to improve the representation and correct time defects of our institutions.—(Hear, hear.) But with respect to that motion I must say that if there was much doubt and obscurity both in the past year and in the present year in the views of the Hon. Member for Montrose—if he came before the House telling us that he meant to give the franchise to all householders, but that who he meant by householders he was unable to tell us—(Hear, hear)—and that the old understand ing of t.,e word " householder" as a man who held a house was not his definition of the word—if, I say, there was some obscurity about the proposal of the Honourable Member for Mon trose, the speech of the Hon. Member for Manchester has cleared it of all ambiguity—(Hear, hear) —and I think must have shown the H ouse that , whatever might be the wishes of the Hon. M em b er f or Montrose himself, whatever might be his resp ect f or t h e ancient constitu tion of this House, and howeve r he might reverence those forms which have enabled hi m to act no undistin guishad part, and to confer no small benefit upon his country, those who aid him, and in aiding overpower him —(Cheers)—have no limitation in their designs—that, to use the words of the lion. Member for Manchester, they have no respect for the Constitution—(Hear, hear) —that they do not propose to atop short of admitting every adult male to the enjoyment of the franchise; and that, although this would not be obtained by the motion of to-night—although it would not be effectual in carry ing the six points of the Charter—yet that is the end to which the Honourable Member for Manchester is directing his efforts.—(Hear, hear.) In considering this proposition I must refer to what fell from the Hon. Members for Bradford and East Surrey. Those Hon. Members having said they wished they had seen me, a s the author of the Reform Bill, taking a lead in this movement, I must refer a little to the considerations which actuated those who framed that Reform Bill. I should rather say, to some of the considerations; because I do not intend to weary the House by referring to them all. It so happened that in the 1821 I brought forward an enlarged plan of reform in this House, and that in 1831, as the organ of the Government, I proposed a Bill which was carried, and the main provisions of which became the law of the land. In framing that measure our view was to found it upon the ancient constitution of the country, to consider what were the defects in the representation of the people in this House, and to amend these defects in the spirit in which the constitu tion was originally framed. Our object, likewise , was to amend it so as that our amendments should agree with the various parts of our ancient, free, and glorious constitution.—(Hear, hear.) We were not among those who professed no respect for that con stitution.—(Cheers.) We held that it was essential that those who had the franchise should be possessed of wasnot inde pendenceob- an d int e lligenue. If ther e w as no independ ence in the persons w h o exercised the franchise, you happy t could hav e no expression of th e p ublic will.—.(Hear, hexer ar, hear.) It' th e y h a d no independence you could tain th a t w hi c h i s t h e o bject of representation—th e good gove rnmen t o f t h e c ountry. lion. Member for Montrose assert to-night that which I asserted last year — t h a t the object of representation should b e to obtain, nu t mere conformity t o a b s t ract rights, b u t th e we l f a re o f the community at large, and that therefore that system of repre sentat ion which con tributes most to t h e good government of the country is super:or t o any t h eoret i ca l plan of perfection which may be devised for the purpoie by persons who are mere speculators. Such, then, being the object of obtaining independence and intelligence in time electoral body, let us consider for a moment in what condition we found he representation of the country, in both these re spects. We found in the counties a 40s. franchise, which as we thought it secured as much independ ence as it was possible to secure we retained. With respect to the towns, we fouud the ancient household franchise in existence, but, as in modern days it had become Any thing but an improvement upon the class of ancient burgesses,—fte men of property and intelligence who formerly composed this class,—we thought that this kind of franchise required to be modified in order to enable us to obtain the object we had in view, And let me here observe, that much of the corruption which pre vailed in the constituent body in the time of the unre formed Parliament arose from the want of the intelli gence which is necessary in a constituent body. For instance, take the question of the corn laws. If a man were eager for the maintenance of the corn laws, or if he were eag.sr for their abolition, be would, of course, vote for the candidate who was most favourable to his particular views, whatever they avt.re ; but, if a man had never even heard the question stated, and was entirely ignorant of its merits, and if one of the candidates before him was ready to bribe him, that man, being totally indifferent to higher political con siderations, would necessarily be easily affected by the bribe, and would give his vote, not because he was convinced of the merits of the candidate, but simply because he had been bribed by him.--(llear, hear.) .1 say, therefore, that I think intelligence is es sentially necessary in a body of electors. Then next with respect to the arrangement of the representation. We found that in this respect there were very great de fects—those defects being chiefly of two kinds. A large number of the toroughs of the country were in the pos session of individual proprietors, and the persons sent here were directly nominated by those proprietors, and represented only those individuals. This was of course inconsistent with any nations of popular representation. Wo found also that some of the great seats of manufac ture and commerce had no representatives at all; that Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, and other large towns, were entirely without representatives in this House. We proposed to correct those defects by cutting off more than 100 members from the smaller boroughs, and supplying their places by conferring the representation upon the larger counties, the seats of manufacture, and the po hdeefeceotaunrtreyq.nireßduttowhbilee w a e me c n o d n e s d i- , part of the constitution which lion. Member for Montrose stated it to bo the time— d<ptihitiederl roeeud n s o wt t htaoaswt s e na e tsn m h(o'otsher t e o tr us to be so defective as the I mean that part of which comprised the sending of re presentatives to this House by constituent bodies of various kinds—by large counties and populous cities, and at the same time by smaller boroughs which are not affected by the passions and excitement which usually take place in large boroughs.—(Hear, hear.) Mow, for my part, considering the varied character of the people of this country—considering their varied oc cnpations—considering how many men there are of great intelligence who take little part ordinarily in poli tical conflicts—considering how many men there are who give their labours to the world in the shape of works on political science, it may be, or who are conver sant with commerce, but do not enter into the agitations relating to the immediate political questions of the day, I certainly am of opinion that the country, taken as a whole, is far better represented by the varied kind of representation I have just mentioned than it would be if we had nothing but two large divisions—the counties sending agricultural Members and the large cities con3nesrcial Members, or representatives of the manufacturing interest. (Hear, hear.) My be lief was, and I still retain that belief, that, if instead of the present scheme of representation you were to divide the whole country into equal electoral districts, and to give fifty Members to the metropolis, and twenty-five Members to Manchester; and if in order to balance these you were to give a similar number of representa tives to the counties of Devon, and Sussex, and Norfolk, so far from your having a more complete representation of the country, you would have a much less complete and less perfect representation.—(Hear, hear.) You would, indeed, have a greater number of' persons repre senting the interests of Manchester, but you would have, on the other hand, a greater number of persons repre senting the agricultural interest; and you would have few men not closely connected either with the one or the other, but who, from their great attainments, are well qualified to sit in this House, whose opinions would have great weight in it, whose talents would add a lustre to the representation, and at the same time be most useful to the country.—(Hear.) The Hon. Gen tleman who spoke last alluded to the representatives for Stamford, and the influence which Lord Exeter is sup posed to have in that borough. I confess myself that, seeing the borough of Stamford has sent here a Right Hon. Gentleman whose long experience of public life end whose knowledge of financial and commercial sub jects are generally acknowledged, I do not think such a man out of place in this House.—(Cries of " Oh, oh," and " Hear, hear.") It does not follow that I agree with that Right Hon. Gentleman.--(An interruption.) I was not saying that the Members for Stamford were the the representatives of Lord Exeter. My belief is, that ,f the Hon. Member for Manchester wishes to destroy Al aristocratic influence he must go further than he has yet proposed.—(Hear, hear.) It may be quite true that the Marquis of Exeter possess influence in Stamford, out show me a county where there is a man of great landed property, and tell me if that man does not possess influence in that county also? Do Hon. Gentlemen mean .0 destroy all such influence in counties?—(hear)--for anti! I hear some such declaration, I shall maintain that it is far better that we should have a varied representation hat small boroughs as well as large cities should be ^epresented—than that we should have only two sets if men representing two antagonistic classes of opinions. —(llear, hear.) Ira saying this, I have stated the rounds upon which I think the general alterations of the Reform Bill was founded; and it I have stated .hem correctly, it will be seen that they differ so en- Lir, ly from the proposition of to.night, that it is quite mpossible fir toe, or for any of those who took a kart in framing the Reform Bill, and who still retain heir opinions, to adopt any such measure as that which the lion. Member fur Montrose has to-night proposed for our consideration. There is another very lifficult question with which we are not called upon to teal to-night, but in which I may in passing allude. [ mean the question whet:ler, in conformity with the 4eneral principle of the Reform Act, which I believe o be a just principle, there might not be a greater lumber of persons possessing the suffrage than at pre. sent; whether, in feet, the working classes should not he admitted more generally to held the. suffrage; and vhether, in the great towns, in the counties, and in the boroughs, there should not be another kind of franchise ntroduced, to enable them to vote for the representatives of such places.—(llear, hear.) I stated last year my spinion in favour of such an extension. I stated various nodes in which it might be done; but the Hon. Gentle. ,nan who makes the present proposition and his friends -save always protested against any extension of that kind. Ever mice I starated the proposition I have seen it treated with ridicule by those who hold the opinions if the Hon. Gentleman as a change which would not be it all satisfactory—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. Bright)— and which ought to be derided, and not adopted. But , he [lon. Member for Manchester, who says that the working classes are entirely excluded from the elective ranchise, showed, in answer to the Hon. Member for Warwickshire, that this is not precisely the case, because, seeing that the possession of a forty-shilling freehold gives persons a right to vote, he stated that many of that class were now accumulating their industrial savings to ouy freeholds, and he read an opinion by the late Lord Chief Justice Tindal, showing that such a project was in strict conformity with the policy of the Parliament of this country. If that is the Case, then no class is ex ' eluded. When a working man has saved a sufficient sum to enable him to buy a freehold in his native county, there is no person in this House who will not say he is glad to see him enjoying the benefits of his industry and frugality.—(Cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman, indeed, in arguing on this subject said, that he thought this a per fectly fair means of acquiring the suffrage; but he did not answer the Hon. Member for Warwickshire, who complained not of the practice of working men buying freeholds, but of other parties lending them the money; and thus, while putting them nominally in possession of a vote, depriving them of all free will to exercise it.— (Cheers.) Therefore, I can only say again upon this subject., not considering this as the topic of to-night, and therefore not wishing to dwell further upon it, that there is nothing in the Reform Act, and nothing in any opinion I have ever held, or in any opinion I hold now, which would debar me from seeing with satisfaction any plan by which the admission of the working classes could be still further extended, and the basis widened upon which the representation rests.—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable Member for Montrose, in replying to my speech of last year, said that there had not been any great reform carried except at the risk of civil war and the danger of convulsions among the people. Now, whatever truth there may be in this state ment with respect to Parliament as it stood before the Reform Act, I do not think the Hon. Gentleman quoted a single instance since the Reform Act, in which there was any such danger before a reform was carried. — (Hear.) He referred to the danger of a rising among the blacks of Jamaica, but that is a question entirely un connected with the representation in this House—this [louse having never represented, or was supposed to represent, the negroes of the West India islands.— (Hear, hear.) Therefore the only instance he quoted since the Reform Act was singularly inapplicable to the purpose.—(Hear.) But I cannot concur with him in the opinion that' he gave, that this House had been slow to adopt reforms and changes which have been sanctioned by public opinion. Whether the changes we adopted were salutary or injurious, no restriction hase h holding ecbaene deny n questions aoasnfe d tthattlllieivimm with d nie tg u na r stt i i n bo o g yni re spect t he seventeen years we have acted under the Reform Act there have been great changes made in a variety of subjects.—(Hear, theu b je tithect to thet s p . — u ( q l au l ne e saterino, Church.ndh— etaoar: ) Thereg andr e T a a tt l h t placed upon pluralities—the translati on o f bi s h ops almost bishops in commenda»ze c t e it p i t rel i entirely accordance a blished—w(itHheatrh.e) Next, with regard to the Dissente rs . They complained they could not marry ex rites of the Established Church —that they could not procure registration for their children except by going to a clergyman of the s sme establishment. That grie vance had been remedied. Then take the question of trade. How many changes have ben made with re spect to it? In the first instance, the China trade, which was a monopoly of the East India CompanY, has been thrown open to merchants in general. Then take the changes in the Customs when the Right Hon. Gentle man (Sir R. Peel) was in office. The corn -laws, which had subsisted for so long a time, entirely abolished ; the law rel a ti ng to t h e p ro hibiti o n of foreign sugar entirely altered; ot h er measures as to trade adop ted ; and , b but the other d boasted of from the time of C r omwell to the p resent da ys repealed by t h e vote of the pres ent House of Co mmons. I say, then, that w h e th er t h es e changes wer e wise or not, they do show that th e House has not been sloeulroadolft alterations in our policy whic h Iwleenreourreaqb led e y public opinion. But then the ys een Gen tleman says, public opinion has gone before the election of 1841, and to those in he would look to Let him look to several of the Lancashire particularly.. dm Members to vote against any ' 4 townsin Lancashire sen g alteration in the corn-laws, That thia ahQuid haYe been ti 9 the House with respect to those measures. Now, I wish shows that up to this time public opinion was not . pre • pared for the change which the House in 1846 adopted. My belief is. though I do not assent to the wisdom of the course the House took in so lung delaying this change, that it was not behind public opinion in the course it took on that subject.—(Bear, hear.) With respect to many subjects in relation to religious liberty, as to the Roman Catholics particularly, does any one believe that universal suffrage would produce less feeling of reli gious bitterness and animosity that now exists among- - Members of the House?—(Cheers.) My belief is that Members of this House are far more liberal than the community in general are disposed to be.—(Cheers ) The lion. Gentleman says the liberal and democratic ele ments of the country do not exist in the House, more especially in the Cabinet, and that the feeling of the aristocracy entirely governs the formation of the Mi nistry. With respect to this subject—though I am afraid the Hon. Gentleman will think I am labouring under some strange delusion—my belief is that the people— that the humblest people, that the poorest people of this country, have no indisposition to the aristocracy.—(Loud and general cheering.) My belief is that the aristocracy is not and could not be forced upon them, but that the aristocracy having, from the time it became a free country, most happily for its liberty and most fortu nately for themselves, felt a sympathy with popular liberty having even entertained popular prejudices when the people were prejudiced, and having stood up for popular rights when those rights were attacked-- my belief is, I say, that the aristocracy of this country has a strong bold on the opinions and affections of the people.—(Leud cheers.) And, Sir, when we talk of the aristocracy, and of the members of different Admi nistrations, let it be recollected that many of the aristocracy of this day were the democracy of 50 years ago.—(Cheers.) It was said by a very clever person, whose opinions I have heard quoted in the House, Ma dame do Steel, when she carne to this country and studied our manners and constitution a little, " I see now what is the difference between your aristocracy and the ancient noblesse of France. In that country the aristo cracy was the despair of talent, in this country it is the hope of talent."—(Much cheering.) These very words very well express in my mind the difference between one of those constitutional aristocracies which never admitted new persons into its ranks, and never gained new mem bers, and the aristocracy of England, which contains in many instances persons the sons and grandsons of those who were themselves the democracy of the country, whose fortune was of the very smallest and most insig nificant, but whose talents, we find by the credit which they obtained for the exercise of them, raised those per sons to a place among the aristocracy.—(Cheers.) And are we to be told the very next day, as it were, that those persons are to be put under ban and excluded from all share in the government of the country, — that they are not to enjoy any of the social distinctions of life ?—(Cheers.) What I have to find fault for with the Hon. Member for Manchester (Mr. Bright) and those who agree with him is, that they are so exceed ingly narrow-minded.—(Tremendous cheering from the Opposition benches.) Get them upon the subjects with which they are particularly conversant, and I listen with great admiration to their extensive knowledge and acute ability, but when we come to discuss large questions such as concern the fortune of our empire, then I see that they have intellect and understanding bound up in such a narrow round—(The Noble Lord was in terrupted by a tremendous burst of cheering from the same quarter)—that it is quite impossible to get them to understand those great principles on which our ances tors founded the constitution of this country, and which we, their successors, humbly admire and endeavour to follow. The Hon. Member (Mr. Bright) spoke too of economy, and told us that nothing could be done in this House to obtain it—that motions for economy were refused 'and rejected, and that even the smallest reduction was not sanctioned by a majority. But, Sir, I think in this re spect the House and the country have very much come to the opinion if there is a strong disposition for re trenchment in the public mind that the Government is likely to listen to that opinion, and that having listened to it they are more likely to carry such retrenchment into effect in the manner which is conducive to the effi ciency of the public service, than by votes and discus sions debated in the course of some half-hour upon the estimates. The fact is, that since the estimates of last year were introduced, the navy estimates have been re duced nearly 400,0001., and there have been various other reductions. Therefore, though there have been no direct votes of the House cutting down the esti mates, yet the influence of public opinion has been brought to hear upon them, and they are now made more in conformity with public opinion than, as I must confess, they were when we presented them at the beginning of last year. But if this be the case, the Hon. Gentleman has no reason to complain of the want of economy which exists. The Honourable Gentleman, indeed, speaks always as if we were adding to the taxation of this country, and as if the people were borne down by an additional weight of taxation which it was impossible for them to bear. He (Mr. Hume) always argues in this way—we paid 50.000,0001. 10 years ago ; we pay 52,000,000/. now. There is, therefore, an additional taxation of 2,000,000/. But when he does so he really uses a computation which is unworthy of the knowledge we know the Honourable Member must possess on the subject. The real matter to be inquired into is, whether the same taxation is kept up, if there has been any addition to it, or if the taxes have been reduced. In looking to this subject I beg to refer the Honourable Gentleman to a paper of the tuxes imposed and of the taxes reduced within the !ast 20 years, viz., from 1829 to 1847. I find the sum all is, that while 6,000,000/. of taxation has been lin pesed upwards of 17,000,0001. has been reduced, making balance of excess of taxes repealed over taxes imposed of 11,266,0001. (Cheers.) And, be it observed, in the course of these 20 years the population has been increas nig, the means aid property of the country have been increasing, and, therefore, with 11,000,0001.1, ss of tax ration, that which remains is imposed on a greater amount of population and property.—(Hear, hear.) There have been of late great complaints that taxes imposed on er iieles of consumption of the people were maintained, and it was sai 1 the-re should he direct taxation instead. Now, let us examine this question, I find that of the. sum total of taxes taken off, 7,500,000/. was taken off the Excise, and 9,500,0001. off the Customs, while 800,0001. had been imposed on the Excise and 2,000,0001. on the Customs, leaving a balance of 7,000,0001. in excess of duties repealed in the latter, and of 6,000,0001. in the former in the last 20 years.—(Hear, hear.) So far a is it from being true, therefore, that the country is burdened and weighed down by an additional amount of taxation. that this Houie for the last twenty years, having beer, employed in the same way for twelve years before, has been employ ed in taking off the load of taxation, and in diminishing the burdens of the people. But let me con sider the state of those taxes which are on the neces saries of life at the present period, and compare them with what they were formerly. I will take a speech de livered in this House 112 years ago.—(A laugh.) We have had since that time many wars, and more especially the last great revolutionary war, which caused this country to incur debt to an enormous extent, and there fore it may be supposed that taxes on the necessaries of life would be greatly increased. Here is an extract from a speech delivered at the period I mention:— " For my part, I do not know any one necessary of life upon which we have not some tax -or another, except water; and we can put no ingredient I know of into water in order to make it palatable and cheerful wit'sout paying a tax. We pay a tax for air, and for the light and heat of the sun in the daytime, by means of our tax upon windows; and for light and heat in the nighttime by means of our duties Nem coals and candles; we pay a tax upon bread, meat, roots. and herbs of all kinds by means of our salt duty; we pay a tax upon small beer by means of the malt-tax, and u heavy additional tax upon strong beer by way of ex cise. Nay, we cannot have any clean thing to put upon our backs, either of woollen or of linen, without paying a tax by means of the duty on soap, &c." Now, with respect to all those taxes, it is to be observed, that the duties on coals, candles, and most of the taxes here mentioned no longer exist. Adam Smith, writing , some twenty years after, said there were four articles, necessaries of life, taxed in this country,—leather, salt, candles, and soap. Of all these there is now only one which bears any tax. I think these things are worth mentioning, because we hear it continually repeated that there are great taxes on the necessaries of li!e, which our ancestors had not to bear, and that the people are now suffering under an additional weight of taxation. That two such great wars—the American and revolu tionary war—both of which I must confess appear to me to have been unnecessary—(Hear, hear)—should have rendered necessary a great load of taxation, is what I am compelled to admit, but it is what I am sure the Hon. Gentleman would not wish to alter, if the alteration re quired any breach of faith or any attack on public cre dit.—(Hear, hear.) And yet let him not be sure the plan he proposes would not have a great effect on that credit. I cannot forget when one of those great peti tions, signed I believe by some 3,000,000 or 4,000,000, was presented by the Hon. Member (Mr. Duncombe), the petitioners especially declaimed against the national debt, and asked the House to abolish it, on the ground that we were directly forced to incur and pay the interest upon it. Therefore, Sir, I don't think it so exceedingly safe, if this motion should be carried, that many of those admitted to the suffrage would not in their ignorance think they would be benefited by the reduction of those taxes required to pay the national debt.—(hear, hear.) With respect to the gist of this motion, and as to its main purpose of admitting every male of full age to vote, I must say, frankly, that I do object to giving every person a vote for Members of the House of Commons—(Cheers)—in the belief that they would, many of them, be easily affected by misrepr_!: sentations and delusions, and that they have not !ufili cient political information to enable them to on make a right choice of Members.—(Cheers.) The Member asks me if I do not believe in their virtue and Honourable integrity. I entirely give credit to the great body of the working classes of this country for their virtue and integrity. I believe, from time to time you may enlarge and wore the suffrage, that they will more worthy of the franchise; but, b come as ' al.ras I can see and ob serve, I say that if you were at the present time to divide the whole country into districts, and give every man a vote, as the Eon. Gentleman proposes, the people would be liable to be misled by artful and designing d e magogues—(Cheers) — and that the representation of this House, so formed, would not conduce to the welfare and good government of the people.—(Loud cheers.) The Hon. Member asked us to imitate that which is now going on in countries abroad, and on this subject I must speak in the same spirit as that in which it was adverted to by my Right Hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department (Sir G. Grey). I by no means wish, as the Honourable Member (Mr. Hume) seems to suppose, to defend or to eulogise those Kings who have so long withheld from their subjects constitutional liberty; on the contrary, I have said in this House that my belief was, if they began after 1815 to admit their people to the enjoyment of constitutional liberty—if they had framed those laws with respect to the press which would have enabled thei t subjects to understand and dieettea political Dietteee jeisteed of being driveu to ape! culative works and wild theories as their models of government, that they would have taken the wise course, and that we should not have seen the con vulsions acd tumults of the last and of the present year. —(Hear, hear.) But it is quite different to hold that opinion, and to say I am anxious to imitate the present course of things on the continent. Nor do I think those nations mean to proceed in that advance which they were once so ready to profess.—(Hear, hear.) I see that with .reepect to the Prussian Constitution of last year, for in stance, universal suffrage was to be the established rule. We were left behind. Prussia had got to the top of the tree, and we Here at the bottom, in darkness and igno rance. The Hon. Member said we should have followed. " Don't let us be behind Prussia," said he; " there they have got universal suffrage. Don't let England follow at such a distance in her wake." But what have we seen in the present year? By the Constitution which is now adopt( d the electors arc divided into three classes —the richest and smallest class, who pay most; another more numerous plying smaller taxi's, and a third very numb sous class paying the smallest amount of taxes of all. Are they all to have an equal right of suffrage? By no means.— (Hear, tear.) The 500 of the first class are to choose as many representatives to the Chamber at Berlin as the third class of 5,000 persons. Whet is that but another way of escaping from the evils of universal suf frage?—(Hear, hear.) Such a system would be totally new in this country. For my own part, I would rather obtain this full representation by the old and prescrip tive mode of the constitution. We have to see yet whether this scheme will succeed. While we see such a course of changes and transmutati ons i n o th er coun tries, don't let u s have the weakness, and childishness, and folly, to imitate them till they have at least fixed on something really good and legitimate. The lion. Gen tleman wishes us to imitate the nations of the continent. I see, in the course of these changes, almost every great capital has been, for a certain time, in a state of siege.— (Cheers.) Paris,Vienna, Berlin, and Milan, have all been in that condition. And what is the case in a state of siege? No security for liberty, the press entirely crushed, ac cording to the will of some general commanding in the town. If any newspaper appears, hostile to the ruling power, or displeasing to the general in command, he goe' off with some thousand or two of men able to enforce his orders, and says, " The town is in a state of siege, this newspaper shall not appear." Now, is that a state of things we should envy or ought to imitate?—(Cheers.) Well, we enjoy some freedom of the press; we, who have each man every morning, according to his desire, the opinions he chooses duly set before him. Ono newspaper tells him the whole country is ruined by free trade—another tells the reader the country is ruined because we have not adopted universal suffrage. So long as each man has this luxury—(A. laugh)—to read what paper he chooses, all of them agreeing that the country is ruined, in the first instance, and then having different opinions from which he may please himself as to the cause of that ruin, and to have his news paper presented to him at his breakfast table, don't let us have this state of siege, of which we have heard so much; and don't let us have seme general at the Horse Guards depriving ever y man of his newspaper.—(Cheers and laughter.) I would not have any imitation of those nations on the continent which are at present undergoing those transformations. I trust that a rational and temperate liberty may be the result of all their struggles. I am sorry to see their efforts beset by so many difficulties, and accompanied by so much bloodshed. But, so far as I see, there are but three great countries which appear to stand, each ac cording to its constitution, in a firm and unmoved posi tion—the one where there is a complete democracy, namely, the United States, where none of the people wish to change their constitution—where it is evidently suited to them; another in the opposite pole, the empire of Russia, where the Jaw is fixed by the sole will of the monarch, but where order is preserved and general se curity for life and property afforded under the strict means adopted by the supreme authority; the third is the constitutional monarchy of Great Britain; and, so far as I can see, the people of this country are as much attached to the constitutional monarchy as the people of any country have ever been attached to the constitu tion of their own state. My belief is that it is the form of government suited to this people. My belief is that not a balance of forces, but a combination of powers brought about by monarchy, aristocracy, and demo cracy acing together, produces as much of liberty and happiness, as great a development of talent, as great en couragement in the practice of religious and moral duties as any constitution the world ever exhibited has pro duced. My belief is, that if you adopted the scheme of the Hon. Member for Montrose, as it is explained by t h e Hon. Member for Manchester (Mr. Bright), you would risk all these blessings.—(Cheers.) Ido not Oink that you, the House of Commons, chosen by uni versal suffrage in equal or nearly equal districts, would lung have peace in this House; and, if you had peace in this House by an overwhelming majority carrying measures of a democratic nature, you could not keep harmony with the other two powers of the state.— (Hear,_ hear.) In framing and p ro p os i ng t h e Re form Bill, as I stated at the commencement, what we wished was to adapt the representation of this House to the other powers of the state and keep it in harmony widi the constitution. That object, I think, after seven teen years' trial, we have attained. We have obtained a gradual progress of measures of reform without convul sion, without fear, or risk of bloodshed. If you go on in the same course other measures will be adopted by Parliament, other measures which, being in harmony with the opinions of the people, will pass into a law in a constitutional manner, and without interruption to that constitution. I pray you, therefore, in the reline of that constitution, net to adopt the mereure now before the House, but to give it a decided negative. I believe y, a ill be consulting the interests, aid I am firmly con vinced you will ago be consulting the wishes and opinioi of the people.—(Great cheering.).. Mr. OSBOR thought it could not have escaped the observation ut the House and would not of the people, that the opposition to the motion had ceme, with (no -xeep ion, not from the hereditary en( mica of reform vn the other side, 1 ut from the Gcnelemcn who now occu pied the Treasury bench. Theyl.a !client) , d into power on the credit of what had been done by the Hon. Membi r "or Montrose, and those who Lad been stigmatised us men of narrow and confined minds. It was time that these who expressed so narrow and c_nfined ideas eboutd be thrown over by those whom they stigmatised. The most remarkable speech of the evening was that made from the vicinity of the red box by the Hon. Member for Cambridge. His whole argument was drawn, like a al from the 10th of Ai ril. The Hon. and c!assical Member when he referred to Aristotle for got that Aristotle had been persecuted by the Conserve tires of his day fur his new doctrines. The Hon. Member's speech would have been more appropriate on :he Miscellaneous Estimates. With respect to the speech of Ihe Secretary for the Home Department there had, -.ince the days of Julian the Apostate—(Laughter)—been no such conversion recorded in history. It was true, he staid, that in 1842 he had voted for the ballot, but he had been c,enverted the other da3, by the argu ment of me Hon. Member for Oldham! Julian the Apostate had assumes the garb of a m,enk at first, but when he reached the Imperial throne, when he took his place on the Treasury bench of his day, he voted against Christianity. The speech of the Noble Lord was a me lancholy failure. He appealed to the Conservative fears of the old womrre Not content with referring to the state of foreign countries, he brought in the subject of ,he national debt. In the book on the English consti tution—that curious book wherein he said the constitu tion to which he now appealed had never been fixed—ho sta'ed that the national debt had been the great cause of the taxation of the country; and, therefore, that it des• potism were to be established in England it must begin by destroying the national debt, the people, possibly, being willing to part with their liberties in exchange for a diminished pressure of taxation. How did such views tally with those now expressed by the Noble Lord? The attempt to terrify those sensitive persons the fund holders was a weak invention of the enemy. The Whig party were notoriously more aristocratic at all times, more anti-liberal in reality than those who avowedly opposed liberal principles. Ia the words of Swift, they "Forget the dunghill where they grew, And think themselves the Lord knows who" —(A laugh.) The Noble Lord said—and the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth cheered him at the time— that half the capitals of Europe were in a state of siege. Was the Noble Lord so satisfied with respect to his own Government, was he so confident that he could point to Ireland and say that at present it was not in a state of siege? The Habeas Corpus Act was suspended; the Alien Act had been renewed; and at this moment there were actually more soldiers in Ireland than voters. Was it not notorious that four prosecutions had been instituted against one newspaper, and that the Attor ney-General could not possibly get a conviction against Mr. Duffy? The more any plan was pressed, the more did the Noble Lord, recede. He would propose none of his own, and therefore Hop. Members were obliged to vote for the plan of the Hon. Member for Montrose. If he (Mr. Osborne) might offer any advice to those men of narrow and contracted minds, the fres-traders, it would be that they should make a stand, separate themselves from that party which had proved itself an incubus on the country, and take the position which their talents would command. The Noble Lord would be left to de claim to empty benches, while they were carried into powe r on the shoulders of the people.—(Divide, divide.) Mr. P. W. WOOD rose amidst loud cries of " Divide," and observed, that Hon. Gentlemen who evinced so much impatience might be satisfied in not having had much of their time consumed on previous occasions upon ques tions of reform. He was happy to see that her Majesty's Government had considered the present subject worthy of discussion. It was said that there were no petitions in favour of the proposed measure; but that circumstance could not ignore the existence of 5,000,000 or 6,000,000 of uv.enfranchisrd Englishmen, whose feelings were too sensitive to be indifferent to contemptuous con duct, and whose minds were far too acute to take sneers for arguments.—(Cheers.) Nobody had gr,p pled with the motion; but the artifice which bad ben resorted to both by the Noble Lord and by the Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir G. Grey) was to assume that motion to be identical with the one brought forward on a termer occasion by the Hon. Member fur N*ltingliam (Mr. F. O'Connor). But the two measures were dia metrically opposed to each other. It was curious enoug h that in the debate on the Triennial Bill iu 1792—which was supported both by Mr. Fox and Mr. Pitt—elr. Fox (who was then in power) said, " that it was the fatality of this country that the Government would never move towards reformation till it was on the brink of destruction, nor until they feared that every man was about to take up a musket." That, also, had been uniformly the case with all the Governments on the continent, and had beer. one main cause of those convulsions which were now taking place in almo s t every country in Europe.—(Hear.) It was said that there were no petitions calling for the measure; at other times when numerous petitions were presented, the cry was, " Oh, this is agitation." He (Mr. Wood) was no agitator. lie did not approve of itinerant agitation. ' . —(Opposition cheers.) He refused, in 183 2, to pin till • raitical Union ; and yet , after 0 1 4 4 " 6 the rolitioot _ ;i._. .