The Sun. — London, England, 1831-04-19 00:00:00

. e felt it e to the ant had a small strange mistake was in- ere was "Ay, tending ew that ere not a Lord quoted netbing Times. tafford itement He lies and .r)--4)y e friend ietze— rniquet 3. He cept in feed by lumber e Rtate table. I seen— Maimed it peti prestnt 6enting er was ly con- a situ- re laud length time of ted his iber.— ne had irtaialy that if further de time to the r.) I feel, er cau ! upon people ere are 3 im stand easure, impos and a umber nt up a the He only ken, that t it. Among these towns were London, Westminster, Southwark, Liverpool, Bristol, Norwich, Nottinsehatn, Leicester, Pres ilton, Exeter, and Colchester. Of 81 Members to whose opinion the Right Hon. Gentleman, with somewhat of a reforming eye, had looked for protection as expressing the sense of the people, 66 had voted in favour of the measure, and only 15 against it. I take up these very places referred to by the Right Honourable Baronet, and from the feelings I have seen displayed in them I cannot but , i consider that these are signal proofs that the voice of the country is decidedly not in favour merely of Reform, not merely in favour of the vague word Reform, which all gentlemen it appears are now in favour of (Hear)—so long as they are not called upon to determine in what sense they understand it, but it is a signal proof that the people are in favour of a thorough Reform, in short, that they are in favour of this Bill ; tisat they think the nomi nation of seats ought to be put an end to, and the franchise extended to large, commercial, and manufacturing towns, which at present are wholly unrepresented. I derive (continued the Nohle Lord) my information not merely from this, but I infer it likewise from the division which now appears among those who represent the various boroughs, which it is the object of this Bill to de prive of their Members. It is no wonder they should say, we will not vote for this Bill ; it deprive; us of the rights which we at present enjoy ; but when we find that persons whose interests are against the question, having no external force applied to them, are exceedingly divided, and that perhaps one-third of them are in favour of relinquishing the power and privilege which they enjoy, from a sense that such power and pri vilege ought not to continue, I say it is a very strong proof of what the opinion of the people is, and the impression that is made on men of cultivated understandings by the arguments and reasons which have been adduced to their minds during the course of the past years on the great question of Reform. I shall now, Sir, refer to the manner in which this Bill has been considered by his Majesty's Ministers during the recess, and in doing so: I find myself obliged, from the misunderstanding that has prevailed, to refer to the way in which the mea sure was originally brought forward. It was difficult properly to estimate a stand ird on which we should proceed with reference to persons who should have the right to vote. There were various means by which this might have been ascertained, pointed out. It was said that those paying the smallest taxes, were those rated at :10/. ; but on looking at the case in that view, it was found that those taxes were extremely irregular, and that in many places they took them at the value of the houses rated. Therefore if we bad taken that test, we should have taken a test liable to error, if we had taken the test of the 10/. householders.— It was also said we might take an examination into the boroughs—their limits, and so on ; but that inquiry would have led to great doubts and difficulties. There would have been probably partialities shown by the persons sent out to make the enquiry, and we should have i l got such a mass of details as would have rendered it impossible for us to bring forward any effective mea sure for a year or more, and yet after all we should not have arrived at a proper criterion of the places which ought to be disfranchised. If we had confined ourselves to the limits of a particular bo rough we should not have done justice, for in Bridge water, for instance, it is stated that the parish is divided into three parts, its jurisdiction extending over the whole, but there is only one part that sends Members to Parliament. It was thought, therefore, better at once to take that well known Parliamentary docu ment, the population register, which certainly was not drawn up with a view to favour any interest, with a view to befriend any party, but was made out for the purpose of ascertaining the population of the country. We obtained, therefore, the returns as they were drawn up in the office of the Secretary of State for the Home Department. Sir, in doing this, we were taking not only what seems to me to be a fair line, but we were tak ing the only practical line that could be adopted, because with regard to many of those boroughs, the only statement to be found in the book of the returns of population is time borough and parish ; and when, by our desire, letters were written by the Secretary of State to the returning officers for their returns, time answer of many of them was, that it was impossible to know what the population was in 1821. Therefore, if we had taken those letters as our guide in framing this measure, we should have taken that line which would not only not have been fair, but a line from which it would have been absolutely impracticable, at least from any known or precise data, to have distinguished the boroughs in all cases from parishes. For instance, with respect to the first borough, Amersham, the return made of it was, that the houses of the inhabitants covered the whole parish. Well then, in speaking of Caine, (which I shall have occasion to advert to shortly) a Right Honourable Gentleman accused us the other night impropete. by saying that this was a corrected return. He ought, himself, undoubtedly, to have taken good care to have been correct before he had made that statement. So far from this being a corrected return, it is, in reality, only a return in part from the letters sent to the Secretary of State's office by the returning officers in the course of last week, and which was laid before the House as col lateral to going into a Committee. Wherever there is a borough to which there is a parish attached, we have endeavoured to do that which I think is most equitable. With respect to the borough of Aldborough, in Yorkshire, it is stated that the borough and township contain 7:35 inha bitants; but on examining the memorials that have been sent to the Secretary of State's office, it appears that it and Boroughbridge, and several other places, make altogether two thousand inhabitants.—(Hear, hear, from Sir C. Wetherell.) In considering the claims of these boroughs, he was not disposed to say that because they now returned four Members—a number exceeding that to which they were properly entitled—he would treat f . th em as separate places, and in that manner prevent them from returning any Member at all ; for that would be ex ercising a severe mode of justice. He would unite the population of all these places as in one, and would give them the right of returning one Member. Ile should therefore propose that they should be placed in schedule B. He next came to the borough of Buckingham, the parish ! of which contained 2,485 inhabitants, and which for that reason he should propose to put also in the list of boroughs in Schedule B. In the same manner Malmnesbury, the population of which was 2,145, and Oakhampton, the Population of which was only 1,807 within the borough, but which by the union of the places immediately adjoining it possessed a population of more than 2,000, were now proposed to be placed in Schedule B. Reigate was one of those places that was in a somewhat doubtful situation. The borough itself contained only 1,928 inhabitants; but the foreigners amounted to 1,633, making together 2,961. That number would entitle it to be placed in Schedule B ; but at the same time that he said this, it was but fair that he should read to the House what the return ing-officer had said, and when he bad done so he thought he should have shown that if they did grant a Member to Reigate, they must be considered to have done complete and ample justice to that borough. The returning-officer said that the borough itself and the adjoining town were in all respects whatever as distinct as two several parishes. These were the boroughs that he proposed to take from Schedule A, and transfer to Schedule B. There was a great number which he proposed to strike out of Schedule B, and to permit them to retain their present number of Members. Time first of these was the borough of Leo- Minster, which possessed a population of 4,646 ; the borough of Morpetb, the population of which was 4 ,291 ; the borough of Northallerton, with a population of 4 ,431 ; and the borough of Tamworth, having a population of nearly 7,000. That borough was like Reigate. The returning officer stated that the parish of Tamworth was very extensive, consisting of towns and hamlets distinct from each other, all maintaining their own poor separately, but all united in the assessment of the church-rates. This separation, in particul a r p o ints, h a d no t b een d eeme d suf ficient ground for legislating upon, an d th ere f ore th e borough was proposed to be permitted to retain its present number of Members. The borough of Truro, according . to the population returns, possessed a large number of I nhabitants. The town was larger than the borough. Looking at all the petitions and memorials that had been !ant into that House, it clearly appeared that in 1821 the borough contained more than 6,000 inhabitants. It ought The borough of 'Westbury' contained a population of 2,846, and Chipping Wycombe had 2,559 inhabitants. These two amounted together to a population sufficiently large to Justify them in transferring those boroughs bare schedule 13 •, and allowing them to return their present number of Member s . In all thes e qtnstions there must be alimit of ankle sort, and whatever might be the line adopted, there Would be perso ns who would discover that there were places just on one side of the limit . to which in literal strictness the ru l e m i ght be applmed, b be more favourably treated.. The liue ut th shil e v yb c a i d ou ad gl , m ,p t te t , o l was one which they had, f 111 1 from that line they would nroon't necessity, ad o pt e d, an d d boroughs, they had determined that where rt. With respect to gh and depended on the t owns hi p was part of the boron form but one place for th e return of itr: both ou g ht t o representatives. tatives. Where, how e ver, the natur e o f these relations two places was in doubt, they cou l d not be ) expected to amend these returns. The cas e of I3eeral s t on was one involved in some degree of doubt. It was not properly s tated in the population returns. It bad b een said that Burr-, 77- '.,50.1!!P0 alston ought to be taken with the parish of Beerfierris, but they did not think that they could make that change, for Beerfierris was a county parish, and did not contain more than one house let at a rent of 101. a year. Then such places now were, in his opinion, more deserving of being swept away from the list of represented boroughs. The Right Hon Gentleman had, the other night, compared that place with the borough of Caine, with which it cer tainly had no one point of resemblance. Caine was com posed of a borough and parish, but the parish comprised the town. The borough was small but the parish was a town parish. If they adopted a different rule it would be most unjust. There were many cases of a similar kind, such as Cirencester and Newport. It was easy to charge partiality against those who produced this measure, taut the fact was, that they took the returns as they came. It was easy to say that Caine, Tavistock, and Knareshorough, ought to have their elective franchise taken away. If such a proceeding was just, nothing would he more satis factory than for him to do so if he could even get five votes by suds proceeding. Th e point to which they ob jected was, the power to nominate. That power would he taken away by this Bill, though the influence of property would remain, and in that way, of course, the influence of the Marquis of Lansdowne and the Dukes of Devonshire and Bedford would still continue. The Marquis of Lans downe had very little influence from direct property in the borough of Caine. Of the houses let at 101. a year in that borough only three belonged to him.--(Hear, hear! and a laugh.) If the right of returning Members should be taken away from the borough and given to the county of Wilts, the Noble Marquis would obtain more influence than he now possessed. The principle of that Bill was, to take away the power of nomination, not the influence of pro perty or that of character—(Hear)--and if they totally disfranchised Caine, Lord Lansdowne would have that in fluence which was properly due to a man enjoy* nobility alike by his origin and talents, his high title, his vast pos sessions, and his great ability— an ability for public affairs united with a moderation of ambition rarely joined to such powers, and an integrity, on which no spot had ever been cast, even in the utmost heat and bitterness of political contention.—(Cheers.)—They might disfranchise Caine, but they could never deprive Lord Lansdowne of the in fluence which his talents and character gave him. That was beyond their power. So long as he enjoyed his ex tensive possessions, his great ability, and his high charac ter, it would be impossible for legislation to reach him, or for party malice to affect his interests—(Cheers)—and this would, and must be so, just as long as aristocracy was held in respect in this country.—(Hear, hear.)—With respect to one point of some importance, he would now make a few observations. It had been s aid that they had not taken all the places in which there was a large population. He confessed that though population in the inferior boroughs had been deemed a qualification, it was not that alone which had guided them in all cases. Thew had also been governed with a view to particular interests. They proposed as a counterbalance to the pure principle of popu lation, to give representatives to all large towns possessed of manufacturing capital and skill. Bury, in Lancashire, Oldham, and Rochdale, he therefore proposed should each send one Member. Salford, which, with Pendleton and Broughton, contained above 50,000 inhabitants, and had commercial interests distinct from Manchester, should send one. For that part of St iffordshire, known by the name of the Potteries, and situated at Stoke-upon-Trent, he proposed there should he one Member. For Wakefield, which, in the original schedule, was omitted by mistake, and for Whitby, there should he also one Member each. Instead of the township of Halifax, which contained much poor and wild land, he proposed that the right of voting should be confined to the township of Halifax, which should return one Member. All these he proposed to be added to schedule D. Having thus added to the number of Members for the manufacturing towns, it was necessary to give some additional Members to the counties. It bad been thought hard that some counties should have four Members, and others, not much inferior in extent and population, should only have two. To remedy this, he proposed that those of them which possessed a population of above 100,000 should have one additional Member.— These counties were, Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Cam bridgeshire, Dorsetshire, Hertfordshire, Herefordshire, Ox fordshire, and Glamorganshire. There were eight of these counties which were to send three Members to Parliament, including Glarnorganslaire, which would be allowed two instead of one. What he had now sai,i would correct a mis ipprehension that had prevailed on the provision of the Bill as they related to counties. He had now gone through the intended alterations as they affected the schedule, and the whole effect of them he had brought into one view in a paper which he had intended to read, but which he unluckily had mislaid. H e cou ld, h owever, state from memory, that suppose five new Members given to Ireland, and five to Scotland, the whole number of re presentatives for the United Kingdom would be 627, making a diminution below the present number of 31 Members. There were 24. towns which were to send two representatives, including parts of the metropolis ; 26 towns which were to send one a/ember ; and 26 Members were for counties in England ; and one for a borough and one for a county in Wales. In addition to these were five new Members for Ireland and five for Scotland. The number thus given was to be subtracted from the total diminution, which, he thought, was 154 Members, and it would leave the diminution of the present number of the House 31 Members. This was certainly a less diminution than was originally contemplated.—(Hear, her.) He would now proceed to some other and minor alterations in_the Bill. In the first place, with regard to the right of voting for counties. Some complaints had been made— and, he admitted, naturally—that while leaseholders of a certain annual value and copyholders were allowed the franchise, it was withheld from those who, perhaps, had a much longer term, and greater interest, for 99, or 999 years. It was therefore intended that persons having leases of the value of 10/. a year and upwards for any term exceeding sixty years should be entitled to vote for counties. There was another description of leaseholders whom it was also designed as an act of fairness to include: he meant those who had paid large fines upon leases where the rent was small, but where the interest in truth was greater than that of a tenant for twenty-one years at fifty pounds a year. With regard to the qualification for voting in towns, occupation had in general been taken as a test of residence ; but it was wished to give the fran chise not only to the occupiers of houses, but to the occu piece of warehouses and counting-houses. But the ar rangement, as it before stood, construed strictly, would ex clude all the great merchants of Manchester, Liverpool, and other great commercial towns, who did not reside within the limits, although much of their property was deposited in the town. He was satisfied that this amend ment, instead of hieing disapproved, would be cordially ac cepted.—(Hear, hear.)—Another change carried a little farther the principle of keeping alive existing rights in the persons of those who now held them. It had been very strongly urged by persons connected with cities, where the right of voting was in the freemen, that admitting the principle of saving the rights of those who were now alive, it ought to include the inchoate rights of the sons of freemen, and of apprentices not yet out of their time. This change would not make any difference in the prin ciple of the Bill, and it had, therefore, been agreed to ad mit to the right of voting the children and apprentices of freemen, who would be entitled, on coming of age, or on arriving at the expiration of their articles. With another alteration he apprehended the Hon. and Learned Member for Preston (Mr. J. Wood) would be well contented. It would conserve expressly the rights of all who at present voted by reason of inheritancy. This was merely carrying more completely into effect the ori ginal intentions of the framers of the measure, and he (Lord John Russell) had in fact stated it on the for mer occasion, but the Honourable and Learned Member for Preston had stated his apprehensions that a large body of his constituents would be disfranchised. As to the returning officers, an alteration had likewise been adopted, for it was found that in some instances it would not be possible to insert in the Bill an exact description of the proper individual. It bad been thought, therefore, that the better mode would be to adopt a general clause, giving the Sheriff of the county the power, on the Ist of March of every year, to name the returning officer for places within his jurisdiction. Some improvement had also been made in registration; it was to be provided that the Christian and surname, with the place of abode, should be distinctly stited, so that the register should be a com plete index of the voters enrolled in it ; it was meant that this register should be kept in a book to which reference could be readily made, and as the churchwardens might find it in some cases a burden to make it out, it was pro vided that they might employ such clerks as were neces sary to complete the lists, the expence of which to be paid by the parish to which they related. Some difficulty, i t was thought, might arise out of extra-parochial places, and they were therefore to he joined to the smallest parish by which they were bounded. Another amendment ap ipoliecdititers) p an ol d l inbgor;ooingshtseaido one o th s e it p o o a l t l i i o n o g , a it lw w a a ) s •s htt i h a ou ni cr g ht p t l h ac a e t if power were given to the returning ' the chance of much tumult and confusionifitmeirg to 'be direct bav(4i t i l i r e a ( t l the voters shouldtendertheirt as alsosluvffrag suffrages at different according to his discretion. I provided.r thatpl places, e sons to s v 0 residing teu tr t a h r oi contributory contributory bo boroughs roogh i n n N e V a a r l e e s s t shouldtoll ichv b able they dwelt. To these would be added a clause declaring that any person guilty of false swearing at an election should be liable to the penalties of perjury. [A further clause would be a;mifar to that fbund:iti some of the Acts brought in by the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, providing for cases of misnomer, that the words should be taken and construed in their popular and intelligible sense. " I have now (continued Lord John Russell) gone through all the prin cipal alterations we propose to make; the House will be able to see them more distinctly, and to understand them more completely to-morrow, as I have taken care that the Bill should be accurately reprinted and speedily delivered. By the time we have gone through the two schedules, Hon. Members will be prepared to enter into the discussion of the amended measure.—(Cheers and some laughter.) We may then examine the Bill clause by clause, and those who object to particular provisions, will have a full opportu nity of settling and stating thir objections. If it be thought proper to raise again the question of the principle of this plan, I shall be quite ready to enter into it—to de fend it, and to show that it is entitled to the most favour able consideration of the House. Whatever verbal changes and local improvements may be made in the Committee as to the mode in which this great arrangement is to be car lied into effect, I am prepared to argue that this House will only properly represent the people, and consult the interests of the people, by passing the Bill with as little general alteration as possible.—(Cheers from the oppo sition side.) An Hon. and Gallant Member, whom I see in his place, is about to propose some resolution, by which he means to bind the House to keep up a certain number of Members for particular parts of the empire. I will not now enter into a question which can be more properly debated when the motion is made ; but I cannot help saying that the course seems to me :nest invidious, and likely to promote that jealousy which we ought to endeavour to allay.—(Hear, hear, hear.) It is calculated to raise prejudices which I hoped were ex tinguished, by declaring on this occasion that there is one part, or that there are two parts of the United Kingdom which ought to have a particular number of Members, to the exclusion of the rest.—(Hear.) As I have said, it is not my part now to enter into the discussion, as I cannot hope that my authority will prevail upon the Hon. and Gallant Member to relinquish his motion. I may, how ever, take the liberty of reading to him a passage in one of Mr. Pitt's speeches on the Union, which seems to me to have been delivered in the true spirit of a Statesman, anxious to make that Union real and effectual. It was judged proper, looking at the population and taxes of Ire land, to allow her one hundred Members ; and upon the question whether that number should be more or less, Mr. Pitt spoke as fellows :—'' Upon a full consideration of the subject, the Parliament of Ireland are of opinion that the number of representatives for Ireland in the House of Commons ought to be one hundred. Upon this subject, the first question to which I have to call the attention of gentlemen (supposing that they adhere to the resolutions of last Session) is, whether the number so mentioned by the Parliament of Ireland is so reasonable, and founded in such fair proportions, that we ought to agree to it? For my own part, Sir, I will fairly confess, that upon this part of the subject it does appear to me extremely difficult to find any precise ground upon which to form a correct cal culation, or to entertain a positive preference for any one specific number of Members rather than another : but I am the less anxious about it, because I do not consider the consequences as very important. In my view of representation, founded upon the experience of our Constitution, I think we are entitled to say, that, if a nation becomes united with us in interests and in affection, it is a matter of hut small importance whether the number of representatives from one part of the United Empire be greater or less." That was the view taken of the subject by a great practical Statesman, arid I leave it to the consideration of Hon. Members, satisfied that they will not hastily throw by such an authority. It has been my business to explain the alterations it is proposed to make in the Committee in this Bill for amending the re presentation. The House will perceive that the alteration as to the number of Members is considerable : that num ber is increased more than thirty above the amount I stated when first I introduced the proposition ; but, I think, if lion. Gentlemen will consider the reasons for this change—the fitness of taking certain places out of the two first schedules--they will be satisfied of the justice of that course, and that in no instance, and in no manner, is it a departure from the original principle of the Bill.— (Much cheering, and counter-cheering.) It was brought forward, and was received under circumstances which can not but be gratifying to those who were concerned in its original formation. It was the result of great considera tion, and this is the Bill—the very Bill brought forward by the Cabinet, which was allowed by his Majesty to take the whole subject under its view. It is the Bill which the House, after a length of debate unexampled in this country, sanctioned by its deliberate vote upon the second reading. —(Cheers from all sides.) It is the Bill which those who, the Right Hon. Gentleman contends, duly represent the feelings and interests of the inhabitants of the empire, ap proved by a majority.—(H ear , h ear .) I t i s t h e Bill ich the House, notwithstanding the presence in it of 200 Members for boroughs, directly or indirectly affected by it, adopted, although, I admit, by the very smallest ma jority.—(Continued cheering.) Be it remembered, also, that this House was chosen under the auspices of a diffe rent Government—(Hear)—and that in it were marshalled in hostile array all those whom it was thought necessary to retain for the sake of keeping up the influence of the Crown, and who recently occupied official situations. I say, then, that the sanction of such a House is an extraordinary testimony in favour of the justice and equity of the measure. —(Cheers.) I am quite satisfied that this question ought to receive, before long, its final decision. This House would ill discharge its duty to its constituents, if it kept the topic of Reform in debate for the period of another year. Even were it to be continued for three or four months, I should say that the consequent agitation would be highly injurious. For that reason I desire to see the House, in its present shape, and with its present Constitution, sanction the principle of this Bill. I see two great autho rities in opposition to each other upon this vast question._ Earl Grev on the one side, and the Duke of Wellington on the other—(Cheers, and cries of "No, no.") The Noble Earl at the head of the Government is of opinion that it measure of this kind ought to be conceded to the wishes of the people. The Noble Duke, who, on so many accounts, is entitled to the gratitude and reverence of his country, thinks that there should be no alteration whatever in the Constitution of Parliament. If that were a possible course, it might possibly be a wise one; but I think that the Mem bers of this House have made up their minds that even if the coerce were wise, it is no longer possible. I ask Hon. Gentlemen, then, to consider whether, from particular views, and for private reasons, they will endeavour to alter and fritter this great substantial measure? We who pro posed it are bound by its principles, and by its principles we will abide—(Much cheering front all parts of the House)—yes, I repeat it, by its principles we will abide._. (Cheers.) Whatever may be the course which the Noble Lord at the head of the Government and the Cabinet may think it their duty to take—whatever opinions they may deliver in Parliament, and whatever advice they may give their Sovereign, be assured of this, they are united firmly for the purpose of carrying this (Cheers from all sides.) Having been brought forward in Parliament, it was announced to the people ; by Parlia ment it was sanctioned, and by the people it was univer sally approved. If you were to alter, to break in upon, or to fritter it away, you would only be preparing a vexa tious and useless contest, at a time when you might have to deal with the people in their present temper and spirit of moderation ; then, too, you might be called upon to discuss Reform in a state of much less comparative pro sperity than the nation now enjoys. ----(Hear, hear.) I am ready to allow that those who bring forward and press forward this Bill, have some claim to the reputation of boldness.—(Cheers from the Opposition benches.) But I for one confess that I am not so bold, butt that I should look with great apprehension to the consequences of a con tinued resistance by those who have property in boroughs, with the chance that, in the course of that resistance, new distresses or new feelings of agitation may manifest them selves among the people. If the Bill be now passed, it will be passed in perfect tranquillity—without interrupting the union and harmony of all classes ; but if you will not listen to this advice, which I very humbly offer—if you do not think it worthy of being followed—l beg you to remember that those who shall undertake the conduct of a majority of the House of Commons against this measure will have difficulties to encounter with which no Minister in the country has yet been able successfully to contend. If there ever was a Prime Minister, powerful fro,n his authority--from the services he had rendered his country —it was the Duke of Wellington— " Exuvias vetcres populi, sacrataque gestans Duna ducum." He was on every account entitled to power—from the victories he had won both in peace and in war, for— " Peace has her victories as welt as war ;" but he found it impossible to resist the majority of this House : armed with almost unlimited power, granted by one Sovereign and confirmed by another, it was broken and shivered by the storm to which he would not bend. g lf en a e m r,Li, an like the Duke of W e lli ngton , w i t h streng th of cha racter to sustain, and talents to unite all parties, could not opp ose t h e pronounced decision of this House, and the indisputable, and enthusiastic voice of the people, who shall hope to resist it ?—(Much cheering.)—The Noble Lord moved the Order of the Day for the Commit tee on the Bill for the Reform of Parliament. General GASCOYNE rose and spoke amid great con fusion, but we understood hint to deny distinctly that, the Bill opened by the Noble Lord to-night was the one, or anything like it, *hick time Hottse laudread a second tine. before the recess hear.)—lf greater concession , were required from the present Cabinet, no doubt they would he granted, notwithstanding their vapouring decla rations that they would s'and or fill by the original mea sure. Nothing that had fallen from the Noble Lord could induce him to r elinquish or alter his motion, and whetbei the Bill were or were not to be re , -printed, he should. therefore, persevere. [The lion. and Gallant Member here became inaudible from the confusion in different part , of the Howe.] Ile wished that Hon. Members who were not inclined to listen would go at once to dinner. He saw no reason for reducing the numbers of the House, and he seriously recommended the Noble Lord and his friends to withdraw the present Bill, and, if they thoeght proper, to tiring forward another better considered and more matured. He-sinly required the House, as regarded its numbers, not to spoliate England for the sake of giving additional weight to Scotland and Ireland, and contended that population had never been the basis of calculation at the Union, when in 1800 it had been decided to give 100 Members to Ire land. Of late years the population of Ireland had been grossly exaggerated for political purposes; but Mr. Pitt had stated it at 1,400,000, while the population of Eng land was then admitted to be 10,700,000. Hence it was clear that population had been no ingredient in fixing the number of Irish Members ; and as to taxes, while Ireland only paid 4,600,000/., England contributed 27,700,000/. to the exigencies of the State. At this moment Ireland did not pay more than one- tenth part of the taxes of the empire, yet sbe had more than one-sixth of the represen tation. The Hon. Member then proceeded to argue upon th e inconvenience resulting from the present large propor tion of Irish Members, and contended that it was an odd remedy for this evil to propose to increase them. He also insisted that positive injustice would be done to England, by giving five new Members to Ireland and Scotland, and appealed on this point to the lion. Member for Wateebral (Mr. O'Connell). Suppose the matter were reversed, and it was suggested that England should have more Members, and Ireland fewer, what an argument would it afford to the Hon. Member for the repeal of the Union. In the discussion of all questions relating to the imposition of new burdens, the representatives of that part of the United Kingdom called Ireland combined, one and all, to obtain for that country an exemption from a fair share of those burdens to which England was subjected. By such com bination they had thrown the whole weight of the Pro perty Tax upon this country, and a great part of the Assessed Taxes also. The Irish Members and the Scotch united to resist the abolition of the paper currency in Ire land and Scotland. When that question was under dis cussion in the House, a meeting took place, attended by eighty-three of the Irish and Scotch Members, who fre quently voted with the Ministry of that time ; and the unanimous resolution of that meeting was, that they would to a man withdraw their support from the Government if the continuance of the paper currency were not permitted in Ireland and Scotland.—(Hear.) He had no hostility to the interests of Ireland, but as he had always seen the re presentatives of that country combining with those of Scot land for the purpose of relieving those countries at the expence of England and Wales, he could not consent to a measure which would so much increase the strength of combination in future, as the proposition of the Noble Lord opposite would do. He would not so much object to the disfranchisement of some of the boroughs, if the same number of representatives were given to other places, so as not to diminish the number of the whole House. He would therefore conclude by moving an amendment to the following effect :—" That it is the opinion of this House that the total number of knights, citizens, and burgesses, returned to Parliament for that part of the United King dom called England and Wales, ought not to be diminished." Mr. SADLER considered the proposition respecting the diminution of the number of English representatives in the United Parliament monstrous and unjustifiable in every point of view ; and he thought that the Gallant General who had just addressed the House, had shown goad reasons wherefore it should not be endured. He had understood the Noble Lord opposite to say, that it was a matter of no moment, whatever might be the precise pro portion of the Members in that House representing the several parts of the United Kingdom, and had referred to the authority of Mr. Pitt in support of that assertion. But in adopting the argument of Mr. Pitt on that ques tion, the Noble Lord compromised the principle of his own Bill, which was professed to be direct representation, whereas Mr. Pitt's words were in defence of virtual repre sentation, which the Noble Lord repudiated.—(Hear, hear.) It was a dangerous anti fearful enterprise to di minish the preponderance of the English representation : it was desirable to preserve the integrity of the United Kingdom.—(,Heitr.) The question of the separation of Ireland from this country bad been so much agitated, that he thought it might yet be necessary to decide it either calmly in that House, or by the sword. As to the prin ciple or th e d e t a il s of the Bill itself', Tie must say,• that ft was a matter of some difficulty to deal with measures so fluctuating.—(Hear.) It seemed as if the Bill was to be altered, from one stage to another, in order to render it palateable to all s orts of tastes in succession—(llear.)-- and to leave of th e m e asure, as at first proposed to Parlia ment, little but the name ; like the Budget of the present Government, which had been almost annihilated in the process of alter a tion, and of which nothing now remained but the smoke and the steam. Looking to the former de clarations of the Noble and Learned Lord now presiding in the other House of Parliament, and also to those of the Noble Earl at the head of his Majesty's Government, one must lie persuaded that Ministers had changed their opi nions and i n t en tions very much since they commenc e d the present plan of Reform.—(Hear, hear.) The astute and Learned Lord, who, at the time to which he was re ferring, held a seat in that House, then denied that he was a friend to radical Reform, " because," sail he, " the Re form which is so called, would lead to revolution." Not withstanding that declaration, the Noble and Learned Lord had sanctioned the introduction of that revolutionary Bill. The same Noble Lord bad also said that the mea sure which lie should propose would conciliate all classes of Reformers. But had that Reform Bill effected such a conciliation ? The Noble Earl at the head of time Ad ministration likewise had said that he would never con sent to any Reform inconsistent with the principles and practice of the Constitution. But here was a Bill utterly at variance with both. It was by slow and irregular movements that the Constitution had attained its present consistency and strength, which it would for ever lose, if any of its elements were removed. The principle of virtual representation, rejected by the Bill, had been recognised by the Constitution from t he earliest period , and was con statitly kept in view by our S axon ancestors. The prin wi hiborough, a rto subject of our constitution a l hi s t ory , t h e e t was ciple of the Noble Lord's B ill, takin g population as the basis of representation, was ce rtainl y not recognised in the time of Henry the Third. The count y of York, which at that time as greatly excee ded the other counties in population and extent, as it - no w exceed e d them, had then only two right was, from o of ff each u their the representatives. Ac cordin g to Hume , who was no mean authority for the representatives o f th e b oroug h s first institution, vested i n th e govern i ng bo a d the Mayor and th e select Alder men. T o a supported al so b y t h e hi g h authority of the Noble Lord at present sitting on the woolsack.--(He ar. ) That Noble Lo r d, w h o now says that Parliament is about to return to th e or i g i na l pat h of f rt . t h the ii a n C ons titution, gave s ome t i me ago, i n a certa i n peri odical,rthe same account of th e representat i ves o f the bo roughs that which he (M r . S . ) h a d j ust quoted from A e--namely, th a t t h e r i g h t of voting was origin confined, in the borou g h s , to t h e governing part of te u ally the burgesses. lie referred to the antiquarian Grose, to s h ow that no:Mil mtion b oroug h s and virtual representa tion had always been recognised. It was the intention of wasit t,,0 tn supportedr more alri Legislatureey consistentt h c a t authority rloivtuiylt should of br ee athesonNaont composedeg Lord ()ao fd that Constitution that the House of Commons should re presentd at large masses of property—a n opinion in which he site, the Member for Tavistock. And he would ask, was govern mentppersonso country chosen by a rich constituency, than th a t i ts di v i s i ons s h ou ld he g overned by num e ri ca l strength ? When the Aristo cracy of a neighbouringwere deprived of their political influence, th ey were very soon afterwards de prived of their property. The influence of large masses o f wealth over that House was necessary, if it were de sired to preserve the prosperity of the country.—(Hear.) If the present system were close and corrupt, and there fore, requiring Reform, by what was it to be decided what parts of that system should remain, if not by the test of have e t them, e xperience ? But to what parts of the system did expe rience refer the most glorious events in the constitutional history of England ? Was it not well known, that if the close and rotten boroughs, as they were now called, had t ea o r f , s h e e t :: e . not existed at time tim e of the revolution, that great mea mariailaisidhedth.:A( ) Would the restoration have been effected, but for time same s b u a r r e au w g o h u a l: ne ß v a er t Latent have been passed ? The county Members were more than two to one against that measure, which was brought about entirely by the close and rotten boroughs.—(Hear.) It was then by those boroughs that the House of Bruns wick Was given to England, and the rights and liberties of Englishmen were preserved. Sixty-five Members for the boroughs supported the Bill, and only forty-three voted in favour of t y r anny. —(Hear.) At periods when the whole body of the people were unanimously opposed to time cause of liberty, and were vehement in favour of passive obedi ence, of the divine right of Kings, and of religious intolo ranee, the representatives of those cl.,se and rotten boroughs never dim:Traced tbetnselves by yielding to the popular feeling in favour of orpresiort. At the time of the revo lution, the House of Commons tYas besitlled with petitions that the Crown shotild be restored to its original right, and that the principle of religious toleratism should not he recognised : The cause of civil and religious liberty found but thitte,n supporter: among the county Members.— 'Hear. ) Through ou t t h e w h o l e o f the constitutional his tory of England the aristocracy of taloit found its way into that House by the influence of the aristocracy of vealth, as the long lizt: of illustrious names which adorned the annals of that House fully demonstrated.—(Hear.) If the excision of the boroughs from the, :epresentation now oroposed by the Noble Lord had taken place stt an earlier period, the House of Brunswick would never have rctned here. Bat it 7 , 5 - as said that the present constituency was too limited ; that House. represented but a small mino• city of the peeople ; but sul'el-y ?t could not be said that the new system would hot he liable t;; :17:at objection. The Noble Lord supposed; that by confining the ft:snehise to persons rated at and above 101. a year he would exclude dl corruption from the constituency ; but to hint (Mr. 'ztfller) that seemed to imply a groundless charge against the p e ople of Great Britain. Ile denied that all purity was confined to the classes favoured by the Noble Lord's proposition, and that all below those classes were unworthy of political privileges. The Noble Lord was adverse to the principle of virtual representation, and hoW did he propose 'o do away with it? There were scores of millions of British subjects whom the Bill left still unrepresented, and they had certainly as mt..ch right as any of their fellosti subjects to direct representaiZon. Did the Noble Lord supoce that the subjects of Great Brltain, in her foreign possessions, were not as much entitled to representation as those within her shores ? But his Bill left them totally unrepresented in that House, directly or indirectly. If the scheme of uniformity which was contemplated by the Bill should ever be carried into effect, the House would represent only one class. But it could easily Ire proved, that in every age of our constitutional history the representation had been virtual. He might not be prepared to deny that there were anomalies in our system. Those anomalies could as well be seen at the time of the revolution as at present, and they were seen at that period ; hot by what persons ? By those only who had private interests to advance by the exposure of those anomalies—by men who, like Boling broke, had their views of political ambition to promote by alterations of the Constitution ; but the fallacy of that Nobleman's assertions was exposed by Mr. Addison. The opinions of Addison respecting the boroughs was confirmed by that of one of the most earnest friends of civil and re ligious liberty that hail ever done honour to English litera ture. He alluded to John Locke, who, putting the ques tion in the strongest and most unfavourable light for the boroughs, said that " It was thought by many that the representation of the people became, in course of time, disproportioned to the population, , when a town, having no inhabitants but a single shepherd, should send a Mem ber to Parliament, at the same time that a large and flou• rishing town in its neighbourhood was unrepresented. He confessed that this was an evil for which some remedy %I'd.; required, if it were possible to find it. But it was consi dered that, as the constitution of the Parliament was the original and fundamental act of the society at its first for mation, no inferior authority could make any alteration. He (Mr. Locke) thought, therefore, that the people had ' no legitimate power to alter the constituency, and that the inconvenience was incapable of remedy.—(Much laugh ter.) Such was the opinion of Mr. Locke—(Renewed laughter)—which excited the risibility of certain gentle men—(Laughter)—who wished not only to disfranchise the boroughs, which Mr. Locke considered inconvenient and incapable of remedy, but those which, instead of be ing decayed, as they were described, had been long in a state of progressive improvement. But still the supporters of the Bill were resolved to cut away from the Constitu tion, with unsparing hands, the representation of those towns, and to interfere without compunction with vested rights.—(Much laughing.) But it was one of the cha racteristics of fools that they rush where angels fer to tread."—(Repeated laughter.) He could not see occasion for the improvements which the Bill proposed to make. The Constitution had in itself a principle of regeneration. An authority which had been more than once referred to in that debate, says, indeed, that " Time is the greatest innovator." But the gentle men who repeatedly quoted that line, always omitted what followed.---( Hear! and a laugh.) They never quoted the next sentence, in which that philosopher recommends that they who would effect useful changes must imitate the manner in which time innovates, that is, slowly and gra dually—(hear.) If they who professed to act upon the advice of Bacon, in bringing forward the present plan of Reform, incurred themselves all the danger with which the Bid was pregnant, he (Mr. Sadkr) might he willing to allow them to make the experiment. But when he knew that the fate of millions depended on it, he could not withhold his most earnest opposition. When be looked to history, and saw that no attempts at violent changes, professing to have improvement for their object, had ever succeeded, but had invariably led to the destruction of that liberty which they were intended to extend, he could not but be apprehensive, that by measures to which that Bill would open the way, if successful, this country might be added to the catalogue of nations whose rash efforts to obtain improvement by revolution, led only to anarchy and desolation. He denied that the measure of ministe rial Reform proceeded on the principle which had govern ed, and ought to govern, alterations made in British in stitutions. It proceeded upon a principle rather of recon struction than of repair and improvement. Did they propose under that Bill to amend the Constitution in the manner in which that building had been restored, which gave its name to the edifice in which they were then assembled—a building which had been reared by illus trious hands, and consecrated by the blood of heroes. What course did they pursue with respect to those parts of that building which had suffered under the hand of time? Did "they destroy its carved work with axes and with hammers?" Were they not, on the other hand primarily governed by the original idea of the architect? Was it restored stone by stone in the genuine spirit of the first design ? and so ought they to deal with the Consti tution.—(Cheers.)—So had the leaders of the great revo lution in 1688 grappled with, the difficulties they had to contend against, and they might truly be said to have altered in the spirit of the original. In fact he knew no writer of any authority who ever maintained an opposite opinion. But how did the Noble Lord, the Member for Tavistock. treat the-great body' of the reformers ? He spoke or them as more consistent in proposing to dispense with the Monarchy than in repairing the rotten parts of the Constitution, after the manner they proposed at the time he referred to, and yet the Bill fell into the same error, and was obnoxious to all the reproach which the Noble Lord cast upon the labours of other reformers—that which he would then have defended from them was now to be attacked with sacrilegious hands, and that Consti tution destroyed which had been handed down from gene ration to generation. The House had heard, in every imaginable form, the objections stated to the ex isting system, and the inconveniences pointed out, dwelt upon, and exaggerated, with which it was said to be fraught ; but he would maintain that the new system would be found full of the same inconveniences, and des titute of many of the excellencies of that which it was in tenet] to supersede. Hon. Members might say what they thought proper with respect to the readiness with which the persons proposed to be disfranchised would agree to part with their rights; they might dwell to any extent they thought proper upon the supposed unanimity upon the subject of their own disfranchisement of those per sons who were to be disfranchised. No doubt letters might aee ( ta n : t o ) f e e p n a r ties c written on c here d a ; n d b u t l t i c e ( r m e intimating ldi t be beii e v the that people generally would be parties to the annihilation of their own privileges? It was not in human nature that such feelings should be general. Though he was perfectly willing to attribute to most men high political virtue; but he confessed he should be slow to attribute to any class of men that extreme devotedness of virtue as was implied in the assertion, that the persons in question were willing to part with their privileges for the good of the couutry. One of the most remarkable, and to him one of the most alarming features in the present aspect of public affairs was, the course adopted by those who were out of doors called Reformers. The Reformers, as they 'were called, well knew the certain operation of the present Bill—they' well knew that if it were once agreed to, they might make it a stepping stone for the attainment of their ultimate oh jects, and eventutlly render it the means of accomplishing all that they sought. To him the unanimity that pre vailed was awful--it was the calm that portended the storm.—( Hear, hear.) He set out withwying that he would shortly examine the principal features of the Bill in its altered state; and he must be permitted. in the first instance, to begin with observing that the present Bill was equally objectionable with the former one; and though some of the grounds on which he should object to it were of that general nature which did not strike so forcibly as those applying to individual cases, yet when fairly and im partially considered, they ought not on that account to he at all looked upon as the less strong. Amongst the chief objections to that piebald measure was really its piebald character, which professed to make it rest upon the bases of property and population. Let the House, and let the independent and enlightened part . of the nation judge how they had acted upon those pnncip!c:s 7 bow_ they had proceeded, unfettered xi they were by auLieu p r j•idiceg Ot the slighted regard t Vested rights. Supposing he were to tags; d view of the probable conduct of legittlia t"rs, unshackled by anything but equitable principles, how would men so circumstsueled propose to not ? They could not fail to regard society VT divided into two of its el uses—the inhabitants of towns and the country popula tion. In mentioning those two classes, he begged it, how , ver, to be distinctly understood, that nothing could be further from his mind than to place them adversely with respect to each other, or that anything should be said or done calculated to disunite them. For very obvious rea sons, the town population must always be considered in a m:r . e advanced state than that of the country, being less scattered, possessing more ready opportunity of communi cation with each other, of un'.on, and of continued action. lie was not one of those who could readily subscribe to the doctrine that the worst _lass for constituency were to be foond in the large town? and cities ; but laying aside that argument for the present, he would ask how the pre sent Bill paid that respect to property upon which it professed to proceed Y Perhaps the House would permit him very briefly to compare the property of the town and rountry. From the returns for the purposes of the Pre pei ty Tan made in 1810, it appeared that the rental of houses and warehouses in towns amounted to 13,135,4401. whereas the rental of land amounted to 32,588,3031. No doubt it might be observed, in reference to the sum al dived to the latter, that it included the rent of many valu able houses and warehouses, which might he deducted • from that class and added to the former. In 15.1.1 the towns and cities had a population of 2,920,095, while the country parts possessed a population of 8,341,342. Now, to tura op in a few words the way in which the Bill would operate, he ehonld say that they had a population of 30,000,000, that they had a rental of 30,000,0001. that the former Bill gave 141 Members to the to ens, and the altered • Bill gave 149. [Here a dig• TurbariCe in the strangers' gallery rendered several of the detalla which followed these remarks wholly inaudible.] The lion, Member next proceeded to argue upon the prnhabilities of the neighbour ing Aristocracy. He hesitated Pet to tell them, when they attempted to establish their la eozastituency, they would secure nothing for the advantage of the neighbour ing Aristocracy, for it would be in vain that they did en deavour to conceal from themselves the fact, that a turn of 70/. or 80/. would purchase a vote; that being tlaa fact, then, he would ask, what became of the virtual re-' presentation which gave the highest rank an influence in that House? When they gave the 10/. franchise to the towns, what did they do for the county parts? Did they give a vote to a tenant holding from year to year, even though he paid five times ten pounds per annum ; nay, even though he paid one hundred times ten pounds?— That inequality, then, was perfectly obvious ; and, if they went through the Bill, they would find it abounding with similar inequalities ; they would find it iniquitous from beginning to end—unequal in every part of the system Might he he permitted to call the attention of the House to the distinctions drawn between electors in one part of the country ? For example—why should a farmer of Norfolk be worse treated than an elector of Devizes ? Hon. Members opposite would find it rather hard work to reconcile that with their new principles. He regretted that the Honourable and Learned Gentleman (the At toriiey-General) wart not then in his place, that he might defend those transfers of the franchise that formed so much an object of his admiration—that he might be enabled to contrast the Constitution of Cromwell with that then proposed by his Majesty's Government. Oliver Crom well gave to the counties 237 voices in the repreeeotative presentbody of il the l nation. ga,,e to t h f e l e towns gave the towns n a l4l, d to then t 143. Precisely inverting the amount j from that compa rison, the House would he enabled to judge how far our co while u the modern legislators adopted the principle of Cromwell— namely, that of giving representation to property. If he proceeded to examine more minutely the less important de tails of the present measure, they would find that the pro posed distinctions and divisions would lead to the parcel ling out of counties into arrondissements. It seemed to have been laid down as a general rule, that for every 60,000 persons there should be one representative ; but let him look as he might, he could not regard it otherwise than as a heap of contradictions. There was only one principle intelligible throughout, anti he could not refrain from call ing that a principle of gross partiality ; for he could not impute to any one who undertook the business of consti tution-making anything like such gross ignorance as must be presumed to exist, were the framers of the Bill to be acquitted of partiality. For example, there was the county of Durham, with not more than one-sixth of the popula tion of York, yet Durham was to have five additional Members, and Yorkshire only one; but that was said to have been done for the purpose of rectifying discrepancies —to rectify those discrepancies Durham was to have four Members, and the West Riding of Yorkshire only two. In. Durham there was one. Member to 34,000 ; in the West Riding of Yorkshire one to 303,000. Perhaps a certain Noble Individual not then in the House could explain to them, how it happened that such special care should be taken of the county ? Then possibly the Right Hon. Baronet, the First Lord of the Admiralty, could explain to them how it occurred that two additional Members were to be given to the county of Northumberland, and why the North Riding of Yorkshire, the population of which exceeded it by thirty thousand, should have only two Members ? Why, also, should they have only two additional Members for Lancashire, with a population six times as great ? Lancaster, with twenty times the wealth of the county to which he referred. Yet with such inequalities and such injustice, the Government said they would have the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing hut the Bill. Northumber land was to have one Member to a population of twenty six thousand, while Buckingham had but one to sixty-one thousand ; no doubt that was all the result of a chapter of accidents, in which certain talismanic numbers were to determine the rights and privileges of British subjects. Let the House contrast that with the principle adopted by Cromwell in his assessment of 120,0001. He fixed three representatives in counties as'essed in 1,000/. ; fourteen to those upon whom 4,000/. was levied ; and twenty-one who yielded 5,000/. The scheme, therefore, of Crom well, was popular in principle, and founded upon a regard to property. It bad been said that the privileges of electors were a trust more than a privilege ; but he was yet to learn how rights held in trust were less sacred than any other rights, at least until they were forfeited by some improper Act. They were told that the franchise was a trust ; the Noble Member for Tavistock had said " that the Crown was a trust, anti that they ought to have as good a reason for disfranchising Old Sarum as for expel ling King James." He had held these opinions respecting the advantages of the Constitution when he was a humble individual, and before he entertained the slightest hope of being able to give his vote for its preservation in that House. He had been as warm a defender of the ancient Constitution of this country at that time as he was now ; and when he looked at the provisions of the plan by which his Majesty's Ministers proposed to correct the defects of that Constitution, and when he turned to a consideration of that Constitution itself, he was justified in his objec tions to the one, and more than justified in all his affec tion and veneration for the other.—(Hear.)—He repeated his determination, therefore, as far as his humble efforts went, to maintain that Constitution pure anti untouched, for by it he was resolved to stand or fall.—(Hear, hear.) It might be said this was mere declamation, but the tree was best known by its fruits. Let those who doubted the advantages we derived from the Constitution look to the condition of the country. Let them look to the difference between England and her neighbours. Let them contrast their conditions, and when they saw the very foundations of society broken up in the one, and peace and prosperity visible in the remotest corner of the other, they must ac knowledge that the Constitution of England was the ark which saved her in the general destruction.—(hear.)--- The Judge Advocate had observed, in his late account of the earlier history of England, that as the powers of the King and the House of Lords could never become formi dable but through the dissensions of the two Houses of Parliament, that were the Lords to attempt to oppose themselves to those who were the representatives of the voice of the people, they would be but as dust in the balance. What, then, would be the consequence of the measure now before the House ? The next step in Reform would sweep away this dust from the balance— overthrow all th it the wisdom of ages had erected and con secrated—and they would at length, and at no distant pe.- riod, inscribe on the tablets of an ancient Monarchy, " Mene, thy kingdom is departed from thee."—(Cheers.) They talked of vested rights. If it was determinel to de stroy one kind of vested rights, what others would be safe ? If they inquired into the pedigree of the boroughs, they !oust inquire into the pedigree of the other rights of the State. If they touched one bit, they must inquire into all. The rights of the boroughs once questioned, then would come the inquiry into the rights of Corporations. Then the inquiry into the rights of the Church, and so they must go on to those other modifications, which were pot only hinted at, but plainly explained by those who were now the advocates of the measure of Reform. When those who 13111 ; when they could lay aside the • ir mutual the Bill, the House join in clamours for the pa then rice -13mg of the hopes which were have f so ß l e o r n o g i.n a , time l (t advocated tinite i ,etch the t ei rn , rours:tipeozlttr.trai of ei3t could form some conception fliun f i expectations which it satiction e: l, ( he had occasionally wandered from tli question immediately before the House, he hid th oug ht t h at _ , fe e a d r. o ) a if ir and of the