The Sun. — London, England, 1831-04-20 00:00:00

f Reform eNeetlng the objects he 1114 is view. TM, ministerial measure he considered a great and ginrinn measure, worthy of the same source whence it proceeded—i , struck at the root of corruption, and justly satisfied all in terests, and was calculated to pay off the lone outstandin , debtto the people of this country. They had beard mud of revolution; and this and democracy were word bandied about with unsparing liberality ; but as he did no , think the cause of truth aided by allusive epithets, h. would nut reply to them, but content himself with ex pressing his opinion!' tetnperately, and in a few words. Forty-four Members were, according to the Bill, to le sent to the House from the commercial interests, and lo would be much astonished if it did not receive from among them Members as much e nlightened, and as fondly attached to the institutions of the country as any gentleman upon these benches. There would be perhaps one difference-- namely, that they would most likely k now sumeth i n , of those arts and mysteries which they were sent t, represent. And as for the additional representatives fie London, when he looked over this splendid capital— when be saw the magnificent streets—and magazines an , ' store-houses, he could not suppose that those representing such vast wealth could be anxious to throw the kingdom into confusion. And next he found that lest there might be from this too great a quantity of democratic blood, he found that to correct this commercial vice, there was an infu sion of sixty-three country gentlemen. Now to such per sons he had heard many faults attributed, but never was there numbered amongst them disloyalty, or disregard to the institutions of the country or the rights of the Crown. Some distinction, however, had been attempted between these persons and other country gentlemen ; but he could not comprehend in There were classes of country gen tlemen certainly, but they were simply in his opinion two fold—richer and poorer—the man of a thousand, and the man of ten thousand acres ; but the one might be just as independent as the other. Under the Bill, it assuredly would not happen that one family or a single individual could monopolise the representation of a county, but Ile did not think the House would suffer by that arrangement Ile denied that there was proof of anything having a re volutionary tendency in this measure. If there was, then was the disfranchisement of sixty boroughs, in the time of the Edwards, revolutionary. Then was the confer ring the elective franchise on Chester and Durham, in the time of Henry VIII., revolutionary. Then was the ad dition of forty-five Members for Scotland, and one hun dred for Ireland, revolutionary. Then was the disfran chisement of 200,1900 Irish freeholders, revolutionary The object of the 811 was to take the right of election from the oligarchy and the lower classes, who were their tools and engines, and to transfer it to the middle classes. As to the cry respecting revolution, if the great ruses of the people were in favour of a republic, they would have a republic whether the Bill was passed or no ; but he de nied the body of the people were adverse to the existing instizutions. There might he men in the lower classes lavoursble to a republic, and so there were in the middle, and perhaps the higher dose, ; but it was false that the body of the people were desirous of revolution. After declaring that he himself represented a borough in schedule A. he said that if all these boroughs were swept away, the House would be improved by it. The people were not so blind as not to elect persons well tried in their ser vice. The Bill, in a word, sent away 160 drones, and gave 115 working bees in their stead. Hon. Members bad talked of moderate Reform. Ile would be glad to know their plans ; for the persons who now spoke most loudly in favour of moderate Reform were the staunch op ponents of all Reform. The borough he represented was, as he said, one of those to be disfranchised ; but if this were the last vote he was ever to give in the House, he would vote fur establishing the liberties of the country, and reanimating the Constitution of our forefathers . Mr. CHARLES DOUGLAS said, he did not like this measure, as it seemed to him one of injustice, and though Scotland Iv et to have additional Members in consequence ~1 the measure, he tvos sure the people of that country had no wish to he henedtted at the expense of the less of other rights.. He did not agree with the Noble Lord op posite tot to the line the Bill adopted with respect to bouseisoldera of 101. a year value, and to a population of 2,000. He thought that the qualification was too low; and in that. as well aa in several other details, he was op posed to the Bill. Mr. HAWKINS rose and spoke as follows :—As I con sider the present motion of the Gallant General as the first of a s-ries of somewhat similar measures, whose ten dency, whether intentional or not, will be to defeat what may be called the disfranchisement part of the present Bill ; and as to all such attempts, I am prepared to give the most strenuous opposition ia my power, I shall, per baps, be sparing the time of the House if I take this op portunity of stating once for all, my opinions on this part of the subject, and, as briefly as possible, a few of the reasons which have induced me to consider the schedules A. and B. as the most important and most indispensable part of the present measure.—(lleac, hear.) l —I would, most assuredly, Sir, not have troubled the House now, had I succeeded in catching your eye on either of the former debates, and even new, were my own interests alone affected by the vote which I stn about to give, I should have preferred giving that vote in silence, nor would I have obtruded upon the attention of the House any reasons for the correctness of those opinions, :or the sincerity of which such a vote would hare been a sufficient guarantee. But, Sir, the Hattie will probably think with me that the sacrifice, even to a great eonetitu tional necessity, of the privileges of those who have en trusted their interests to my keeping, demands a fewwords in justification of eo painful a duty; and the more espe cially so, as, in the present instance, this sacridee of them is nit rendered less painful to me by any corruption CIS their pert. If I had paid, or was abbot to pay, directlyor indirectly, by myself or by others, a single farthing far the seat I now hold, I might have been expected to reconcile myself without regret to this vote, upon the incontrover tible plea that purchase makes property, and that I had a right to do what I like with my own.—(Hear.) But, Sir, as I have no such excuse to offer to my constituents, the smallness of whose numl ert is their only fault, I am on able to avail myself of such application of a new eon rtistiticnal doctrine either in excusiug myself to them, or in arguing to the House : yet, though I have no such exquisite reason, yet I think I have reasons good enough, and some few of them I shall, with permission of the House, proceed to offer. Of course, Sir, I shall avoid, as strictly as possible, all arguments fur the mere purpose of proving that of which I am glad to see so rimy hsve, be come convinced since the first introduction of this mos sure, of which this House seems, at last, as unanimously convineed as the people—the necessity of some Reform ; but one asgurnent there is which I shall notice, inasmuch as the unfairness of its sophistry is only equalled by the constancy of its repetition. I allude to that class of an tagonists who do not venture into the brunt of the battle with a bold and decided opposition to Reform, brit who always entertain a sincere conviction at uny given moment that the present is not the right moment for discussion of this question—(Hear, hear)—and they arrive at such conviction by this ingenious dilemma--when the people are clamorous for Reform, they tell as that we ought not concede such a measure to the demands of popular turbu lence; and when the people are silent, that silence is a proof of indifference, and, therefore, the measure need not be passed.—(tlear, hear.) I will readily allow, Sir, to these tacticians all the merit that is doe for a very skilful disposition of such force as they possess; but it is scarcely necessary to remind them, by way of lotions answer, that if the turbulence of yesterday was their only teason fur refusing Reform, the tranquillity of to-day is a con clusive reason for granting it.—(Cheers,) if, as they thernaelv , a Fay, we sit lucre to consult the interests rather than ti e wishes of the people, surely, Sir, their patience under misgovernment is no more an excuse for our denial of their right', than would be their impatience under salutary controul a reason for surrendering our own.— (Cheers.) And this allusion to the wishes of tlae people reminds me of one other argument of our adversaries, con cerning the way in which this measure has been received by the people of England, which I will notice on account of its originality : and at this stage of the debate we should be unreasonable indeed, if we were not tiavakful for origi nality of argument in any shape..--(Resat, hear.) If one of Ids Majesty's Ministers had told us, as a proof of the merits of this measure, that its appearance had been l atled by reform ers o f all parties, and all opinions, as the signal for ra ll y i ng Ma jesty's s r egenerationxiagain round that Constitution whose u th r e s y uad ha to d id abandoned in despair ; if his Ma us how this Impure had recon ciled to the Legislativ e Auth or ity o f thi s Houtz the friends whom its corruption h ad disg us t e d, an d t h e enem i es w h om its misconduct had exasperated ,Houtz we 4ilo,llii have found in the petitions laid on this tabl e since the appearance of the Bill the natural and satisfactory grounds on which asser tions were founded. But who e ve rex h pe u c h te p d to hear this fact rerious'y brought forward, mit against this Bill ?—. Your measure must b to as a reason I. it is approved by every bo d y." e bad , b ecause n Your sins arc great, because they are so smalls ' Sir, I have heard much in my childhood of a precept t this effect—that he who be g ins b y attem pting to o,:e everybody, will probably end by pleasing nobody ; 1,,, this is the first time I have heard either a person or a measure *tweed upon the express ground that it actually did please everybody. Surely, Sir, the dearth of argu ment on that side of the House has i nduced Hon. Mem bers, in the desperation of this last struggle for political existence, to snatch up has til y their adversari es' weapons at the risk of cutting their own fingere. Sir, I aclnOw. edge this change of tone in the petitions of the peopl• ; red I hail it as a gratifying proof (to those by whom such roof is needed) that the people are not unreasonable ; hat they will give up as much to the prudence of their tees as they expect to obtain from their generosity; and will prove by the example of the present, to those who will not condescend to read the history of the past, how very limited a measure of confidence on the part of a Go vernment in the fidelity of its subjects is repaid—with !low full a confidence on the part of those subjects in the .visdom and inteerity of their rulers.—(Herr, hear.) And -now, Sir, that I may keep my promise of brevity better -han such vows are usually kept, I will omit what I would have said on those inquiries into the primitive for m of our representative system, of which we have in former years heard so much ; and I will more willingly give up 'hose doctrines of abstract right so much insisted on by our predecessors in this great cause. I should even he content, for the purposes of this dispute, to assume that our right tit our present liberties is a prescriptive right alone ; for, by the very same evidence whereby this is prayed, I claim the same prescriptive right to occasional necessary Reform. If lam referred to the records of hiatery for the title deeds of our representative .stem, that same history tells me of alterationa in that syst e m, compared with which the present measure dwindles into insignificance.—(Hear, hear.)—lf lam told that the transfer of the elective franchise from Gat. ton to Birmingham, without judicial procedure, is a violent innovation, I cannot but recollect that within little more than a century, two independent Legislatures have been blotted out from the page of the Constitution— (Hear, hear)—and with them the greater part of the representation whereof they were composed. If lam told that the vested rights of the present constituency are in violable, I ask (and though so frequently asked before, it has never yet received an attempt at an answer) what has become of the forty-shilling freeholders of Ireland.— (Hear.)—Sir, that very revolution of 1688, which has sometimes been appealed to as the definitive resting place of our Constitutional ark, as the Sian of our political wan dering, that revolution which changed the succession to the throne, is surely sufficient precedent for the disfran chisement of .a nomination borough.—(Hear, hear.) — Sir, if the success of my own argument were the sole in terest I felt in this question, I should willingly risk the event of the controversy on this appeal to historical pre cedent; hut I will not place the cause of the people of England on any such narrow ground of defence. We seek not this Reform, as a matter of abstract right, but of practical expediency; we claim it, not as the fruit of his torical research, bat of historical experience—(Hear)— we ask it, not because it was so in our forefathers' time, but because it would have been so now had our forefathers lived in ours.—(Cheers.)—Sir, it is net enough to tell us that our borough system is now what it was 200 years ago. It is not enough to tell as that a sys tem of tyrannical compulsion and corrupt influence which was in harmony with the violence and fraud of the political war. re of those days, which was in harmony with the re mains of feudal power and the remembrance of feudal fidelity, which was suited alike to the selfishness of their political vices and the sternness of their political virtues; it is not enough to tell us that such a system is not grown worse, or even that it is considerably improved. If the political struggles of those days were, compared with the polite encounters of our own, the warfare of giants, they dis played the selfishness end tyranny of giant natures ; and when the bludgeon was the umpire of popular meetings and the axe of legislative assemblies, it was natural and un avoidable that corruption and intimidation should be reck oned the two main pillars of established Government and social order, and that political honesty should lie identified with blind fidelity to the landlord or the party leader. But now, Sir; that the Sunday pamphlet has superseded the bludgeon of the mob; now, that the daily Journal has been admitted, by mutual consent, as a fitter arbiter be • tween contending factions than the axe ; now, that the prim schoolmaster is found a more effective bugbear to po litical disturbers than the grim headsman, it is too couch to demand of us the continuance of those means of Go vernment whose worst corruption was unnoticed amidst the greater hideousness of the ends to which they were rendered subservient.—(Hear.) Sir, I never contem plate the discussions which have parsed on this question, but I feel myself half a convert to the now unfashionable doctrine of the wisdom of onr ancestors. lam told that they had, of necessity, less experience, and less wisdom than our ourselves. Less experience, I admit they had; but that they had less wisdom I almost doubt, when I see that, unlike their descendants, they made, to the beat of their ability, a practical application of that experience to the necessities and -difficulties which occurred ; and were Sir T. More really to rise from his grave for the purpose of in structing a poet laureate in political econotny,he might well ask us what do we gain by our superior knowledge and accumulated experience, when a fete sounding phrases and a few hard names are sufficient to deter us from put ting to a practical use the results of that experience, and the t:eductions of that knowledge.—(Hear, hear.)—So much, Sir, for the authority of past generation ; now a few observations addressed to the reflection and the expe rience of the present. Of course, Sir, I shall not be called upon at this day, either in or out of this House, to atistver an opponent who seriously pretends ignorance of the measure in which our nomination system works, whatever may be his opinion of the results which it pro duces. Upon the former of these questions, there is no longer either mystery or disagreement; to the latter I shall briefly address myself. Now, Sir, this question of the results of our borough system is a question of fact; and it is a question of fact to which the limits of debate preclude us from adducing a, satisfactory and direct testi mony ; for such testimony won'd be nothing less than the political history.of England fir such a period as the dis putants should agree in considering a fair criterion. To enter satisfactorily upon such a field of inquiry, is, in this place, minifestly impossible; and to touch upon it by quoting a few isolated examples is only opening a vast magaaine whence disputants on either side may furnish themselves with a species of light weapon of equal bright ness, but equally indecisive. We have been told, for in stance, of the talent habitually introduced into the House through the narrow portal of a close borough ; but we have not been told what proportion this talent bore to the aggregate mediocrity, not to say occasional imbecility of sued; introductions. Hon. Members opposite string up their dozes of choice pippins in a golden row to win our admi ration ; but we have not been called to notice the bushels of crabs which have sprung from the same stock.-,-(Cheers. ) —And surely, Sir, it would not have weakened our oppo cecre case, if they had bestowed some pains in showing that this taient had been generally applied to the service of the country, 404 not of its possessors and their pa trons. Napoleon's serails: ,ornate was a collection of tine talent, - the science, and the experieu of France ; but we shall hardly refer to that as a pattern of a Legislatise As seinbl7.-.--(Hear, hear.)—And these observations, Sir, re- I mind rue of what is, after all, the fatal objection to such I a system of election; that which is, to my mind, the e!e- ' cisive reason against the caistence of even the purest of these boroughs. We have heard much boasting of the independence of our self elected Legislators; and if inde pendence is sl;cays to be measured by irresponsibility, it ' is not to be denied that they are most aristocratically inde pendent of that people whose representatives they are so food of styling themselves. But here, Sir, is the fatal taint in the sogree frum.whence they spriog—here is that illegitimacy of origin which will ever stand in the way of that salutary respect which all rulers, to make their rule effective, should enjoy in the eyes of the people. Legisla tors they may be—wise and honest Legislators if you please—b..:` representatives they are not and cannot be. Hereditary Mstrii.ers of an Elective Assembly—Peers in the House of Commooe- e -by their presence here they intercsipt from tine hereditary branch of the Legislature that popols; popfidrnce which they gannot enjoy themselves. —(Che4rs t )—Sir, there is no one remark which our adversaries are mose aasialtmos in submitting to our attention than the necessity that it legislative assembly should so far enjoy the confidence of the people that it should not be obliged to act as the mere momentary index of popular wiH ; :het it should represent the opinions of the community upon an verage of years, and be respon sible for the ultimate tendency rather than the particular line of its conduct. Sir, in this doctrine I most cordially agree ; and I do, therefore, protest against the continu ance of that system of representation which compels the people to interfere with a jealous expression of their o pi n i ons nn =eh particular action of this House that does not fall in with the momentary humour ; because they feel that whether the ultimate molts cif that action be such as to justify us or not, they at least will have no f:Jture opportunity of controuling the actors, or 01 adopting pr;xautions against .the repetition or continu ance of the actiuu, It is, Sir, for these reasons that the Press admonishes us ,b; , threats instead of advice— (Hear).....that the manufictu6r.z art:zan enrols his name in atiliated societies, instead of -,,:ltxtribing it t, petitions,--(Hear, hitr)—that the agriculturist winks at, if he does not encourage, thc, outrages of the labourers, as th:seled a di c . ir h cuitunas means of lightening those taxes which had with a political affectation of him frots; meeting their demands ; it is, Sir, for that revolution has reasons that khonver our adversaries may persist (ear to transpose the terms antiquated corruption wanted ; 4 irt, tc7i n i la caged for when Reform was that W obstinate continuance of this at e w r ic e b, th si o n se ce pe tb ri e etic s a t l u o v u o t: breaks of popular disconte lutlon, Lave kept that people, and among them the greatest ,ntellect of the ege, in a state of wonder at the continued existence of a Constitution which only throws off its peccant humours by this system of chronic convul sions. —(Hear, hear.) It is, Sir, to use the language of common life—it is because lam obliged to secure, not by force, at least by an understood readiness to apply it, the good conduct of that man towards me to whom I can offer no other motives ; it is because a very little know ledge of human nature would make the most careless di.- position unwilling to trust for a moment out of sight th man who has any power in his possession, but of whose character I do not approve, and over whose acti ons I h ave no controul.—( Hear, hear.) But, Sir, as I said before it is quite impossible to prove general misconduct, or general merit, by any number of particular instance' which the limits of debate will permit us to quote; there is but one indisputable criterion to which we can ap peal in this place : and that criterion must be sought b 1 each individual among the results of his own oh-ervation,and his own experience without these wall.. That criterion of legislative capacity is the general effect produced upon public opinion by the conduct of such a legislation: a slow, silent, continuous effect—visible, indeed, through the whole of its insidetous progress to those whose busi ness it is to watch the signs of the times—the gathering thunder-cloud of a summer's d a y—unheeded by less atten tive ob.ervers, until the first audible muttering s of it. wrath, and unnoticed by the multitude in general, until ; it burst in stortn and desolation on the land. This is that unerring criterion to which rulers have never yet app ea l e d until the eleventh hour ; this is that indisputabl e sign of the times which Governments never deign to notice until ; they can no longer close their eyes to the lightning nor their ears to the thunders—(Cheers.) There is, indeed, Sir, en this question of fact—on this question of the good or bad results of our present system —one argument which I shall suggest to the House—an application of the phi arguments from cause to effect. What, Sir, is the plain state of the case now before this Court? Here are two parties,—one affirming the good effects of our nomi , nation system; the other, at least equally numerous, and , if not more disinterested, at least placed in eirctosstanc e a which throw less suspicion over,their testimony, affirm , ing, with as bold en appeal to experience, the bad effects of the same system ! So far, Sir, the testimony in favour of us is at least of equal value with that in favour of our adversaries; but what will be said when these very adver • saries join most cordially with-us in their ch macter of the system which produces these much-disputed effects ? Why, Sir, these very trumpeters of this House—these champions of our motley franchise—allow that they are astonished when they contemplate the apparently inadequate causes which produce these vaunted results; they allow that they cannot explain by what miracle of our politico moral nature such purity is engendered of such corruption. (Hear, hear.) We infer the existence of bad effects from bad causes. Our adversaries join with us in our character of the causes, but infer therefrom nothing but good effects.—(Hear.) Thus much, Sir, for those who, aban doning the machinery of our representative system as un tenable ground, take up their position in defence of its re sults. But there is another, and no less numerous class, who, giving up both machinery and results as equally in defensible—who, acknowledging that they Fee here no ex ception to the old rule of " like causes produce like effects," demur, nevertheless, to any proposal for amending the system from an apprehension of danger, whose magnitude, in their eyes, is perhaps to be explained upon the old principle of " omne ighotum pro mit-I:fie° ;" inasmuch as they have never yet be eu able exactly to specify what that danger is. The sole difference between them and us is, Shall the decayed parts of the system be mended or not ? Both are agreed how moth the system wants mending, but one party is unwilling to begin so perilous a job. Both are agreed that it is in rags and tatters ; but whenever we begin to thread the darning-needle, they exclaim, " Leave it alone, in the name of prudence—in the n one of caution —in the name of Robespierre and Danton—it is so rotten, that if you attempt to put a stitch in, the whole will fall to pieces." I will not stop, Sir, to remind such objectors what manner of compliment they Are paying to the old garment which has served their turn so long, and for which they profess such a veneration ; but do they not see the inevitable inference which the political renovators would draw from this admission ? Would not the answer be teady and irreplicable ? If the state of the garment be such as you avow, then it is high time to get a new one. And is not this, Sir, the dilemma in which the obstinate refusal ofall the moderate and timely atnendments has, for some time, placed us ? Have we not been told by a loud, if not a strong party, that the Legislature of Engl cud is incorrigible ? that it is too rotten to be p etched up—and that it is high time to get a new one? And to whom do we owe this, but to those who passed by every opportunity for a timely Reform, with an impudent denial of the existence of any blemish—(Cheers)-_and who now, when such, denial is no longer possible, think to evade the results of their own obstinacy by an affectation of sudden discovery, that such blemishes have gone too far—have spread themselves too universally through the system, to leave any part where a repair may be commenced without danger of pulling the whole to pieces.—(Hear, hear. )—And these, Sir, are the self-elected champions of our Monarchies! Government? And these are the best grounds on which they would risk its defence? Sir, lam not of their opinion. I have better thoughts of that Monarchy of England, which has with stood far more serious renovation than this—l have better thoughts of those institutions which our ancestors feared not to reform and repair whenever they saw need so to do I tremble not at their exposure to the ordeal of public opinion ; through that ordeal they were never yet passed but they came out with equal beauty and with renovated purity—(Hear, bear)—from those struggles which have exuded the superfluous flesh the bone derives its strength, the sinews their elasticity. What these apprehensions of danger are it is in vain for us to ask. Our oppo. nents have on this subject contented themselves with vague generalities, nor have they even condescended to place before us any intelligible picture of those phantoms which exercise so powerful au influence over their own imaginations. We cannot, of course, be expected to combat those forces which will not take the field. We can only ask, what danger there will hence forth exist which does not exist now ? What suppot ts the Monarchy and Peerage now but public opinion ? and how can that support be weakened when we have enlisted public opinion in their favour by granting that Reform which, of all others, public opinion is now most loudly demand ing ?—(Loud cheering.) We have been told, indeed, that the House of Peers could not exist without the support which it derives from its nominees in this Assembly. But, Sir, were we to grant this we should immediately ask, what supports this Assembly ? If the House of Peers is thrown back upon the House of Commons, on what does the House of C •nsions rely ? After all the discussions of the theoretical, and the intrigues of the practical statesman, we come ultimately and in the last resort to public opinion as the tortoise which is to carry the elephant, which carries the ministerial world ; an I, however we may consult our distaste - for unpalatable remedies—however we may think to avoid the bitter necessity of physic by attributing our strength to the disease of which we are dying ; however we may flatter our imagined dignity by a vaunted inde pendence of popular opinion ; it is that popular opinion which is our best staff of support, though we will con tinue to insult it by clinging to a broken reed.—(Cheers.) This topic, Sir, reminds me of Mr. Canning, and which is thus briefly summed up in his own words :—" If you reforinsthe Hotise of Commons on the ground of past misconduct, what will you do with the House of Lords ?" Now, Sir, this objection to Reform in general, is shortly and conclusively answered by a re ference to that part of the Bill which is now the sub ject of discussion. In theschedules A. and B. is written that which we intended to do with the House of Lords : we intended to deprive them of that corrupt and unconstitu tional influence which they exercised in this House; intend to confine them to their own Court ; we wish in future that either House should be what it was intended to be, a Court or perpetual appeal from the decisions of the other, in stead that of monstrous aoomsly which they now offer to the world of two Conrts, designed to controul each other, but ruled in a great tneasore by the rime Judges, and con trouled by a mitts) iufluence.—(Cheers.) One complaint has been made against the particular part of the measure now under discussion, which comes with a peculiarly bad grace from those by whom it is now put forth ; we are told of the anomalies both as regards population and pro perty, which will still defend our representative system, a , if those anomalies could be put for one instant in coropari son with those which now e#ist ; and as if those very per sons would not be the most vociferous in scouting such a Reform as would be necessary to sweep away all anomalies whatever.—(Cl eers.) Another complaint I will notice is one not directed against the measure itself, but against those who have introducer; } t ; and this complaint I ap proach with some diffidence of my own coostito timid know ledge. Sir, I must confess (and I shall be thankful fur correction if wring), I must confess that I was not aware until the late debates on this question, that the appeal of a British King from his Parliament to his people was an unconstitutional measure. I had thought that both the theory and practice of our Constitution had decided, that a Parliament at issue With its constituents on a great constitutional question might, by no unprecedented exer cise of the Royal prerogative, be sent back to those con etituent., if not for further instruction, at least for fur ther proofs of confidence.--(Cheers.) And now, Sir. before I sit down, one werd ooncereing that people of I rngland, to whose hopes and wishes, as it seems, Majesty's Ministers must not even allude in this House. ' without danger of being taunted from the opposite bench, with an appeal to their physical force ! I, Sir, shall put forth myself no vaunting defiance of that giant power which now sleeps a faithful servant at our feet — power which never yet put forth its strength but in mo defence, and against which, if once it turns in inadnes• an its master, no defiance will avail.—(Cheers.) If, as s Legislator, I am called upon to forget that the people hay , hands, as an Englishman I cannot forget that they have hearts; and, at all times, indeed, but more especially in times like these, I do think those hearts worth the win ning, even at the price of my own power.—(Loud cheer ing.) We have been accused of attempting by a threat of revolution to intimidate those very opponents, whose fa vourite argument aga;nst this Bill—whose staff of reli ance, if I may judge from their cheers, is their own fear of revolution as to ultimate consequence. Why, Sir— threat for threat—upon our joint allowing of the case, the question would only be which way led soonest and straight est to revolution. They do not defend acknowledged ini quities of the present system upon any other grounds than those of general expediency; they acknowledg e the occa , ionil personal, and constant moral corruption inflicted by our present sotnination system ; but it is the only way, forsooth, of keeping things quiet ; the only way of saving the Monarchy, the Peerage, and the Church. Why, Sir, may we not entertain the same fears as our adversaries ? Why are they to be allowed to allege their own prospective cowardice as a reason against that measure, in favour of which we must not state our present apprehensions.— (Hear, hear.) Sir, lam not afraid of a revolution in either case. lam not afraid of that physical violence, against which, if we were not protected by the good sense of the people of England, the bigotry of their self-elected rulers would be but as a broken reed. But Ido think that we shall give no small confirmation of that charge of legi slative incap (city which is now ringing in,our ears, if we neglect to repair our House while it is summer, because the winter hurricane is not yet upon the the horizon.- - ',Hear, hear.) It is because we can retreat with dig nity that I wish to retreat now ; I wish to exchange that suspicious safety which we owe to the good sense rather than to the good wishes of the people, to the remembrance rather than to the continuance of former affection, to the habit rather than to the feelings of past fidelity,—l wish to exchange that suspicious safety for the holiday security of a people's love.—(Loud cheers.) There be some few, I know, in all political p irties, who care neither for a people's love nor have faith in a people's gratitude ; whose best political virtue is a proud consistency in wrong, an I whose highest moral courage is an unreflecting security.—(Hear, hear.)__ Who're, indeed, was ever seen a fabric of time-worn poli tical privilege tottering to its fall, the majority of whoSe pos sessors have not displayed the same idiotic security, amidst the ruin which every one else foresaw.—(Loud cheers. ) I will not detain the House by quoting proofs of that me lancholy truth, of which political history is but one long example ; I will go 119 farther back than to the early days of many whom I now address, and ask was it the firmness of real or the madness of fancied security when th e Court of Versailles drove th e repregtntatives of popular opinion to swear in a tennis court their own inviolability and the regeneration of France ?—(Hear, hear.)—Or was it the firmness of real or the madness of fancied security when, as it were but yesterday, the breathless herald of approach ing insurrection PM ordered to wait on the threshold of St. Cloud " Donee l3orbonico libeat vigilare tyranno." (Hear, hear.)—What price, not the people of France alone, but all civilised Europe, were compelled to pay for ehaining that first madness, is now matter of history ; what price, not France alone, but all civilised Europe, are temut to pay for chaining this second madness, I dare not trust myself to prophecy—(Cheers) —but I appeal to all impartial observers of past and passing events who have witnessed the reluctance with which that mighty people commenced the struggles for which tt•ey have paid so much, to say whether that people would not have repaid, with a rich return of confidence and love, the voluntary sacrifice of antiquated power, worthless and defenceless though it was.—(Hear, hear.)—That such gratitude would have been felt by the people of France for such sacrifice, I do most sincerely believe ; that such gratitude will be felt by the people of Englund fur far less painful sacrifices I do most unhesitatingly affirm—(Cheers)—and the more gratitude, inasmuch as such sacrifices on our part are not yet inculcated by the presence of that other fearful alternative.—(Cheers.)—For the honour of this ancient Monarchy, whose perils and whose triumphs for so many generations are chronicled in the proceedings of this House; for the sake of this faithful people who have stood by ns in the hour of Our trial, and borne with us in the hour of our pride, let us seize the opportunity which now presents itself, to inscribe ourselves on the page of history as the first recorded example of " power correct ing its own usurpation." The Hon. Gentleman resumed his seat amidst loud and general cheering. Sir G. WARRENDER said, that a speech more elo quent than the one just delivered by the Hon. Member for St. Michael he had seldom heard in that House.—(Hear.., But the Hon. Member offered by that speech one of the best defences for the present system ; for, in his own per son, he gave an instance of that eloquence and ability which had been introduced into that House through the representatives of boroughs Awl in the persons of borough proprietors—(Hear)—and he should he happy if, in the event of this measure being carried, it would have the effect for preserving for the serviee the same ability as was now possessed by some of those who were what the Hon. Gentleman had described as a sort of representatives of the hereditary Peerage. In this scheme for disfranchising, the guilt of bribery did not seem always to be followed by the appropriated punishment. There was no proposition to take away the representatives of Liverpool, yet Liver pool was the most corrupt of those boroughs that had been brought under the notice of the House. If that borough was disfranchised, and if Evesham, which was now under consideration, followed the same fate, he should then do what had never before been dace—he should put in a claim il fo l a a • n e I e I i a e r s g te e r townand in Scotlan d . Wakefield, had Tf e been rig s h e t r s of Leeds, t e(l, but Glas gow had never been mentioned. If the boroughs of Liver eploaoi m l a fornd G iEveshamaezow .werelie disfranchised, tvas determined le should i to o put i n a oppose the h e measure of Reform, but he would oppose it directly, and not by a side-wind, like the motion of the Hon. and Gal lant General; least of all would he consent to a proposi tion, the result of which he considered would be injurious to the interests of Scotland. Twenty years since he had represented a Scotch borough, and even if the Reform Bill were to pass, he did not despair 'of representing some pa pulous pace in his own country. To vote for the propo sition of the Hon. and Gallant General would be in effect to say, that, let the population and importance of Glasgow or Aberdeen at any future period be what they might, they should only have the same number of Members, and that the whole representative body of Scotland should un dergo no change, although at present it had only one more Member than Cornwall. Without supposing that this he might fancy that at some corruption, period ur s e v p o ti u o l n d pass English bor law oughs would be disfranchised for and he ighnlsob a e would not destroy the chance Scotland at present possessed of obtaining the frapchise which would thus become vacant. He begged it, however, to be dis tinctly understood, that he did not vote against the propo sition of the Hon. awl Gallant General because be was fa fourable to the Bill to whiCTi it applied. Mr. WYNN congratulated the House upon the extra ordinary ability displayed by an Hon. Memeer for a c'ose borough (Mr. Hawkins, of St. Michael's), who, but far such modes of gaining admission into Parliament might never have etiFiyed an opportunity. When such were the consequences of the present system, who would not wish that it should be perpetual? It was not possible for any constituency at all times to return representatives equally excellent ; but, looking back to the history of the House of Commons, he saw that men of the most splendid abili ties had first fostered their talents iu close boroughs, and had afterwards been deservedly chosen for populous places. Some individuals seemed possessed of hereditary ability, but the great mass of the House was unquestionably of a con tented mediocrity of t dent. Nearly all the great charac ters whom he had sten, or of whom he had read, had commenced their career, and had originally entered the House through the channel of a close borough. With out going into particulars, he would look to general re sults, and he would appeal to the Government of the country for the last cer.tury as a proof of the excellence of the present system of representation. If, on the other band, a century of misgovernment could be shown, lit would admit it as an irrefragable argument in favour of aitiacpi t ,pu h i a no t teery Le h r a i l o ,ni d what country had enjoyed e b o e f r r e t r yn Refocus. During generaln what h pi a d n p d rog in re d s i e vi i ( ie lu e a i i , happiness—morn. r!r u e bl r ic a made in arts and manufactures and literature? Had any nation met the same dangers, endured the same struggles, Ind triumphed with the same glory? The Government had been constantly supported by the confidence of Par liament and the suffrages of the people. He did tio• lent' that upon this subject the feelings of the people had been excited, but their good sense was now awakened, and they had returned to their reliance upon the House of Commons as at present constituted. He agreed with those who said that 'inlets of peril and pressure were not the fittest for discussing a question of this sort ; but he saw no reason to anticipate any such evils in a time of itrofound peace anti growing prosperity. With regard to 'the Bill itself, he regretted that so much had been at tempted in it, since the effect was that the details had iiet been sufficiently examined ; and he condemned the test o' Population, which had been resorted to, as the criterim for conferring the elective franchise. Besides, it wait littb less than absurd to pretend to ascertain that population by a census taken ten years ago, when the lapse of only a few weeks would have furnished returns far more recent and accurate. Another anomaly in the plan was this ;—that although those who voted for boroughs could not also von for counties in respect of the same property, yet the po pulation of those boroughs was taken into the cal culation in deciding the point, whether the counties where they were situated should or should not be allowed additional representatives. The Right Honour able Gentleman illustrated this point, by reference to the cases of Glamorganshire and Cumberland. Care ought to be taken not to give a double effect to some part of the constituency of the kingdom, by communicating t o them a double right of voting. During the thit ty years he had sat in Parliament, he had paid great attention to the different cases of corruption brought before the House; and when it was proper to do so upon strong proof, I e had supported the extreme of disfranchisement. It was observable, however, that corruption hail, in various cases, been established not against the lowest class of voters. At Cricklade, Aylesbury, and Retford, it had been proved against the householders. Those who Lad resided in houses of 101. a year rent and upwards, had been shown, in many instances, to be the most corrupt ; and what security was there that 200 out of the 300 voters in each place contemplated by the Bill under consideration, woulsl not be very willing to accept 201 apiece for their suffrages? The measure was so complicated that it ought to have been divided into separate Bills; and sure he was that the question of Registration alone would require consideration for nearly a Session, as it would be extremely difficult to guard against eternal disputes and jealousies as to the value of houses. Many questious of difficulty would also arise on the subject of leases and the length of terms. It had been said that the general effect of the Reform would be to get rid of 114 drones, and to replace , hem by as many active and intelligent Members ; but his experience rather showed that the best men of business and d e most efficient Members of Parliament were not usually those who represented counties or populous towns. Splendid talents would unquestionably make their way, but he begged to call the attention of the House to the case of the late Mr. Hoskisson—a man not remarkable for the brilliancy of his abilities, but who invariably secured attention by his habits of business, and by the depth and accuracy of his knowledge. Instances of the same kind were frequent, and showed the necessity of some mode of introducing such useful and able men to public life. He was certainly of opinion that the present number of close boroughs was larger than necessary, but the proposed remedy was infinitely too sweeping. He was disposed to approve of the plan of throwing the small boroughs, where it could be done, into districts—not depriving them of their share in the representation, but calling upon them to exercise it conjointly. Such a system prevailed in Wales, and it had worked well, and a Bill was before the House for extending it to Scotland. Let that ex periment be made in one or two places first, and if it succeeded, next year it might be carried further. With respect to population, lie thought that another Session ought to elapse before it was definitively fixed ; a new census would be soon made, and was it to he said that it was fit to establish a principle in 1831, which might be altered in 1882? Claims to the franchise which could not justly be resisted, might next year be advanced, and the only answer must be, that the Bill hail been passed, and that the application was ton late. This brought him to the motion-immediately be fore the House. Ile saw no reason why the representation of Ireland should be altered. It was true, that since 1800, and chiefly in consequence of the Union, Ireland had in creased in population, alth, and happine s.--(" No, no," from Mr. O'Connell.) The Hon. Member, no doubt, had more personal experience; but even he would not deny that Ireland had increased in intelligence. Of late years the Members she had sent over were men of wider views and greater talents than those who arrived in this country immediately after the Union. But it was to be recollected that if the population of Ireland had been augmented, that of England had been augmented also, and in an equal proportion ; and if the number of Mem bers were to depend upon the number of constituents, it would be necessary to review the subject every ten or twenty years. For the reasons he had stated, unless stronger arguments than he had yet heard were brought forward, he was willing to adhere to what was established, if only because it was established ; the onus of proving the propriety of a change rested upon those who ad vocated it. Sir G. CLERK wished to state a f ew o f th e reasons . . . which induced him to support the motion of the Hon. and and Gallant General. The only reason why the measure of Reform had acquired a certain degree of popularity in Scotland was, that it proposed to give five additional Mem bers to that part of the United Kingdom, and if he could approve of any part of the plan it would be that. He did not - think with the Hon. Baronet (Sir. G. Warreuder) that the effect of the motion of the Hon. and Gallant General would be to limit the number of representatives for Scot land ; if that had been his opinion, he (Sir G. C.) would not have supported it. He wished the ease of Scotland to stand upon its own :writs, so that if necessary additional Mein berg should be given to Glasgow or Edinburgh, without reference to the numbers for England or Ireland. He would not object to the transfer of the franchise from boroughs which should have been fully crnvicted of cor ruption, to other parts of England. But he would sup port the amendment, of which the object was to prevent the rutting off forty.ene Members from the representation of this country. He had voted last year against the pro position of the Noble Lord opposite to increase the numbers of the House by adding representatives fur some of the large towns ; but he would have had much less oh- jection to such an increase, than to the sweeping measure of disfranchisement which the Noble Lord now pro posed.--(Hear, hear.) He could not see any reason fur the diminution of the number of the representatives, when the population, wealth, and intelligence of the country had increased, and when that very increase was alleged as the principal ground on which the measure of Reform was dert.nded.—( Hear.) Sir JOHN MALCOLNI would not occupy the House by discussing the details of the Bill. He was opposed to the whole measure by which an example would be given for taking away the charters of Englishmen. If that Bill were passed, and those boroughs, of which he him self represented one, were cut off from the representa tion, how should risen who had passed a greater part of their lives abroad in the service of the country, and therefore possessed ❑o local influence, obtain access to that House? How were merchants and professional men, however qualified by their peculiar experience to enlighten the deliberations of the legislature, to obtain places in Parliament having no family or local influence ? Never had he felt so much pain, as when sitting in that place, he heard himself described as a piece of dirt by gentlemen in their charges of rottenness and corruption against those boroughs and their representatives.—(Hear, hear.) Although, as a Scotchman, he would be desirous to obtain (as we understood him) all proper advantages for Scotland, he yet was of opinion that the representation of England ought not to be diminished.—(Hear, hear.) If the new experiment-ups:l the constituency were to be made at all, it ought, at least, to be confined to those places which have ut present the right of representation. W:th respect to the proposed increase of the representatives of Scotland—alhough he was by no means deficient of that attachment to his country by which Scotchmen were dis- tinguished—yet, rising a military phrase, he must say that the Scotchmen had taken the liberty very often of billetting themselves upon England since the . Union —(Much laughter.)—On the contrary, he had never heard of an. Irishman or Englishman hiving sat for a Scotch borough. He knew that in voting against the Bill, and also in sup porting the amendment of the lion. and Gallant Member opposite, he differed trom his constituents, and he felt that in doing so he was acting with the boldness and indepen dence in which he had prided himself throughout his life. Sir R. WILSON thought that the Noble Lord who had introduced the Reform Bill had dome honour to himself and the Administration with which he was connected by the redeeming of their pledges to the nation, however objectionable in some of its details that Bill must be considered. For his part, his objections to a reduction of the English representation were insuperable.—(Hear.) He had never heard the Noble Lord allege a single reason for that reduction ; and certainly he (Sir It, Wilson) could not understand why a diminution of the number of Members was to be considered advisable at a time when the business of the country was confessedly increasing.— (Hear, hear ) He knew that the time was not distant when England would require the aid of the full amount of her representatives to maintain her interests—(Cheers.)— and he could not tut be startled at the proposition which, instead of increasing, or at least preserving the amount, was, in effect, a decimation of the English representation. —(Cheers.) Whether, in those vie.vs he was right of wrong, the moment he heard the proposition of his Noble Friend, he determined rather to relinquish his seat in that House, than give his support to that part of the Reform Bill..—(Cheers.) —For he had been sent into that HOLM as a Reformer, and he would not appear to his constituents an enemy to Reform, by withholding his support from the Reform proposed by the Government, with which be as assoziated on the general pi inciples of their administra tion; and On' the general question of Reform. He had a confidential communication with a gentleman connected with the Government, and from him he received an assur ance which satisfied him, that the part of the Bill to which lie so strongly objected was not considered essential t o its princip'e, but would merely be submitted to the House as a suggestion for their consideration. During the recess, h e had had conversations with several others, who confirm ed him in that opinion; and he had also been assured by the Gallant General who moved the amendment now before the House, that his proceeding was not of a hostile character. Accordingly, agreeing with the Gallant G. neral in that view, and in his disapproval of the proposed reduction of the Members, he had promised to support the present motion.—(Cheers, and loud cries of, " Oh, oh.") In promising that support, he conceived that he was act ing in opposition to the views of his Majesty's Govern ment —(Oh, oh, and cheers.) If it seemed necessary t o give representatives to places in Scotland and Ireland, hi_ •therto unrepresented, it would be much beter, he thought, to enlarge also the number of English Members than to diminish it.—(Cheers.) On the 12th of April, the Noble Loud (Lord John Russell) said, that as it was thought de sirable by many persons who were favourable to the prin ciples of the Bill that the Members of the House should not he reduced, the Government had been induced to relax its determination on this point, not thinking it of vital irnportance.—(Hear.) On the 13th of April the Noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, said, that in order to remove erroneous impressions which scenic I to have been taken from the expression of the Noble Lord (J„ Russell) on the preceding evening, he wished to state that Government had no intention to restore the whole numbe r of the Members which it was originally proposed to take from the House; but that if the House, upon considera tion, should come to a decision not to diminish its Mem bers, the Government would not think that such an inroad upon the principle of the Bill as to induce them to resist it, as they had never considered the reduction an essential part of the Bill.—(Hear.)— But, last night, that proposition was declared to be ' essential to the Bill; and the motion of his Gallant Friend opposite was described to be as invidious inea- • sure, and they who supported it were set down as enemies to Reform.—(Great cheering from both sides.) He was greatly surprised at that change of language.—(Hear.) He had been a Reformer.—(Cheers, and repeated cries of oh, oh !) He had been prepared to support the Govern ment even on that point to which nothing could ever have reconciled him but the fear that opposition to it might cause the Bill to be lost—he meant the disfranchisement of the potwallopping boroughs, which he had always con sidered a most useful and efficacious part of the consti tuency.—(Loud cheers.) At the same time he hail never advocated (we understood him to sty) universal suffrage; or the ballot, because he believed, that if those measures were once conceded, they would lead to others by which the overthrow of the Constitution would speedily be effected.—(Cheers.) He was not the Reformer who could change his opinions on the subject of Reform every week. (Prodigious cheering, and cries of " oh, oh.") He was not the Reformer who put on and cast off his principles with as much readiness as his garments.—(Repeated cheer ing.) He was not the Reformer, who, by his indecision, . disparaged his own character, and threw doubt upon his own opinions.—(oh, oh ! and repeated cheering.) Neither was he the Reformer, who, having passed his word to his Gallant Ft iend opposite, that he should support his mo. tion, could afterwards appear to barter his political inde pendence, in assisting the opposition of the Government to that motion. He thought it' the duty of every man em barking in public life to sacrifice all private interests—to sacrifice not only his own hopes and fortunes, but those of his relatives, which he must hold far dearer than his own —rather than to compromise his character for political in tegrity.—(Cheering of very varied expression.) But the fluctuation of Councils on this question had been such, as if the Government had set its fortunes upon a die, which, in prudence, ought never to have been cast.—(Cheers.) — He regretted that uncertainty of C iuncils, as it endangered. the measure upon which the peace arid tranquillity of the country depended.—(Cheers.) He felt himself in a posi tion of extreme difficulty ; he could not retract his pro mise to his Gallant Friend, nor could he (after the decla ration of the Noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exche quer, last night) consistently with his duty to his consti tuents, vote for the amendment.—(Cheers.) He could understand what was signified in those cheers. Who, then were the men who dared by such cheers to impugn • the integrity of his conduct?--(Cheers.) Let them stand up boldly in their places.—(Cheers.) He did not shrink from the difficulty into which he had been involved ; though he felt that he had been inveigled into his present dubious position by his mistaken confidence. He was pre pared to surrender to his constituents the trust which they had committed to bin), if they d;sapproved of hit;:conduct, and withdrew their confidence. If it should be the con sequinee of the course which he pursued on that occasion, that he should retire from public life, he would carry with him into his ret rement a grateul recollection of the cour tesy which he had ever experienced in that House, and a perfect confidence that he bore with him into private life an unblemished character for political integrity.—(Cheers.) Mr. STANLEY had beard from the Gallant General who had just sat down an imputation of change of lan guage and uncertainty of councils, which, however easily detected by the quick eyes of a watchful enemy, could scarcely have been perceived by a confiding friend. If the Hon. General was so much astonished at that change of language, what did lie suppose must be the astonish tnent of his own constituents at his change of language.— (Hear, hear.) To him it was astonishing that the G lant Member, who had been a Reformer—(Hear, hear)— well, who still was a Reformer—could 'reconcile his oppo sition to the present measure of Reform with his own pro. • • . _ fessions.—(Hear, hear.) He did not know what the Hon. Baronet would say to his constituents, who would, he thought, be somewhat startled at the course followed by their representative, notwithstanding his readiness to re-. linguist' his seat after he should have defeated the mea sure to which they were anxiously attached—( - Iw, hear)—unless, indeed, the Hon. and Gallant Baronet hal prepared them for the lamentable departure by one of those confidential communications—(Cheers and laughter) —respecting which he (Mr. Stanley) wished to say a word. The Gallant Member seemed to complain that his Majesty's Ministers had deceived him on a question of which no man heard a word until two or three evenings ago.—(Yes, yes, from the Opposition.) In whatever communications the Gallant Member might have bad with persons connected with the Administration, he (Mr. Stan ley) believed that he had been spoken to in confidence ; fur he was sure their confidence in the Gallant Member aas only qualified by the supposition that he was t(; Radical.—(Hear, nni a laugh.) But it appeared now that the Gallant General had been also in confidential rom- munication with the Gallant Member who moved the amendment, and that he had pledged himself to support a proposition avowedly brought forward to defeat the mea sure of his Majesty's Government.—(Hear, hear.) Al though, no doubt, the Gallant Officer (Sir R. Wilson) thought that it was not of a hostile tendency.—(Hear, hear.) But had the Gallant Officer heard the No:,le Lord opposite last night, who made so much of his little light—(.' Yes ;" and a laugh)—did he hear the Noble Lord say that the motion bad been brought forward with no friendly feeling—althOugh the Noble Lord thought that no doubt many who were friendly to the 13i11 would sup port that unfriendly measure ?—( Hear, hear.) The object of the social compact entered into tt the confidential meeting at which the measure was resolved upon, was to embarrass, and, if possible, to defeat the measure of the Government.—(Cheers.) He 41 not know what gen tlemen were present at that meeting.—(A laugh.) Par ties at the other side of the House were strangely mixed. —(Cheers.) Their motives and principles were strangely mixed. Their ineasurts seemed carefully calculated not only to reconcile them to each other, but to catch as in:•n! stray voters as possible from that (the . Ministerial) s de. He would ask those gentlemen who were so unwilling that Ministers should drive the House into a hasty division —he would ask the Gallant General who introduced the present amendment, whether, from the time when his mo- tion was first placed in the notices, it had not undergone four distinct modification.' ?—(Cries of" Yes, yes.") Well, thee, yea—(Much noise, and cries of " Hear, and order.") Would the Gallant General go still farthe r i n hi s not-con- fidential communications—(Hear, hear—Yes, yes, apl cries of " Order") —and tell him whether it had not been the object of each of those changes to take more certain means of defeating the Bill than were afforded by this originally intended measure ?—(Loud cries of -" Hear, hear, hear.")—Was it not one of the intentions to move V that the number of the representatives of Great Britain should not be diminished ; and was there not then a little idea that it would bring the Bill still more into disfavour, if the English representation were placed in contrast to that of Scotland as well as of Ireland ? Was it not thee resolved to bring the amendment in its present shap e , a s he most likely to embarrass and endanger the whole Bill —( Hear, hear, hear. )—He would also ask the Gallant -- General, hail there been one word said in the dice ,si~o upon the amendment to prove the inconveniences whi were apprehended from the altered proper ions of the Ens' lisp. to the Irish and Scotch re pre,entation ? Had th not, on the contrary, gone over and ovcr the diseu,sion the principles of the Bill, whereas that pri nc i p l e bp been already decided by the House, and still mote eidedly approved of by the whole country ?_(year, hea r ) P Q • -I t