The Sun. — London, England, 1831-10-04 00:00:00

I jority In favour of Reform ; and the only place in whicsli the tango cg s of Anti-Reform principles was heard su i cces s. fully was in a borough where the Government ha , p sessed unrivalled influence ; but where that influeiceh a a u d f been appropriated hy some of the representatives the former Government. He asked, then, could any thing be more clearly proved than that those boroughs ho adhered not to the existing Ministry, but to those could afford them patronage ? It proved, that ift w he t r: was an honest Government, who were not dispose d . avail th emselves of patronage, they would not support them.--(Laughter, and cries of " oh, oh," from the Op- Position benches.) He maintained there could not be a better . r proof of than th ei thei r h ostility to rational Reform,' a Bill which ld have the effs ct of putting th e i r fair share of legislation wou into the hands of the People. The Noble Baron who spoke last objected to the extent of the disfranchisement w and he likewise protest e d against t h e granting o representatives to so many lrge tons ; and, moreover, he took exception to all arrange ments resp ect i ng the West Riding of Yorkshire ;tint all theee obje ctions, he contended, did not affect the principle ofhe the Bill; and h e submitted to the Noble Baron, that t tirne o urge them wou l d be in Committee, when the various clauses came under discussion.—(Hear, hear.) Th e N o bl e , "'di too, had made use of a very strange argument indeed when he contended against giving addi tional Members to the great and populous counties, far he id that if It would h- 50Y additional Members were to be conferred lout coms-vtieal. e advisable to give Or them to the less popu- Lord ehserva:HARNCLIFFE, in explanation, stated his be d on 4 Was, that, considering the injury which . would th e Bil e ' t° the agricultural distric's by certain provisions of be g i v es i t Would be better if additienal Members were to fer el to counties; that the Merrib•rs should be con there,„°Pon the smaller and agricultural counties than upon trh,g,, er and manuf acturingcounties. . at haule 4..4 , - 1 of AIULGRAVE, after expressing his sorrow that ng misunderstood the Noble Lord, proceeded to say Baron , is ,respect to the dissolution, upon which the Noble t 'W m - "a" spoken with such earnestness, there never ye inni6ao,occasion upon which the Sovereign was more fully s th ere e !' in tnaking an appeal to the people. Never wa te.etta period in the history of the country when a much d klideatleharge was made in the views, and feelings, an AN I.oliteets of the Government, and never yet was Idtad:euauge which in the least approached this in mag dist,' .and- i mportance, w hi c h was not followed by a 1, 41... tt h en. I (Rear, hear.) It was necessary that a new th e ttneot should be called to relieve the Ministry from btamiltettilehl difficulties under which they laboured, in 1 44 1:1 „ -- g Power after so long an exclusion and under so li e , ' circumstances of exceeding disadvantage.—(Hear, e h t ') Poe • kQ__ a time, however, the Government . were d to avoid a dissolution, but difficulties were i forcedlengtheusl ultiplied around them, and they were at t!issit,le . into a measure which they would tit . , oechned. And now it was asserted that an alte t, kin had oak in feeling respecting the Wo rn , iten place the public raedietei li ; but the same assertion had been made i d m ? - N ever - Y after the dissoluti on ; and how was it sustaine f eelin g was there a more decided manifestation of popular the t , h ,an upon that occasion. What was the result of d torwea;"°°? Of the twelve county Members who stood th:on „" as the most violent opponents of the Bill, issly .n ~a° returned for his own county as a representative the deliver y e Though all had expressed, in t e hop e rY n. l 4 what Proved to be their last dying words, high to pe a nd u cftihdence only one was successful in the con - should t ier - th n ( t il i e c a .r .. . hear i The Noble Lord (Wharnclifle) should • te pleased the country that the House of Lords to r e hi t It° 'iger exist, they were ready to walk out ; but th e , ) r,!if he declared he had a very different id.ea was that Liity of their station—(Hear, hear)—rd.it that natio th at without envy or reproach maintain_ or one '"at be now supported this measure.—( . Hear.) t o -n e he conceived it . ja i ; a slight sacrifice on their . part i 444..aecrdunre all their just tights and privileges, by simply ize tlen Z . th e un constitutional power of . e i xe t r u e r i e si , (hea r.) .%'Pon the other branch of the L . egia . thei r Li, .i he Noble Baron said, that if this Bill passed, Lo resistin-t"hiPs would not thenceforth have the power the hol t% 1 any Measure which was sent up to them from_ a . Peal e to- Lo ensure ; but this he contested, and le 'th e tw e history in support of his view of the question. and 4 „. t tt 0 L ieu 's's of Parliament had differed before 4fuli t `'at rell a -a t oP to the other House had been succe a ... died y , dthtte4l_,-.Y. !her Lordships. But . it might be . *te e r their L ordehips bad resisted successfully before, 11 th ey likel %at of r, Y to do so hereafter against a a ß n e d fo m rm ai e n d . , L ained et , 1-4olanions ? He contended they were, . . "ow "'e c hang e i h pr sentation could not min begg affect the relnatitvee representation could not inju the relativ e position of the two Houses. u He tr io, ue h a i l remind their Lordships, that the House of C m r - e ' e r alt a 1 °nee consented to the expediency of a measure ht e ring an I • I law, contrary to obeli, i reformlng the 'lamina Yet th ei 11 hel d by the Administration of that day, and the y d,d" Lordship( Lad rejected it. He regretted that Atli. part He believed it las an inexpedient step upon O f ret;-,t.t, stdan he trusted they would take an opportunity 41 ,,,it0ir, 4 , ng hereafter. But here, he contended, was . a 1 h tre . D r ° o f of their Lordships' power and independence. th e ere teas, however, one great distinction between :ti!ale a e hd et . e6 e of their Lordships' .prerogative in thiswas l e PcsleilZ , t he case of the Reform Bill. In the one it it L.eurstislli..th'eu'otlaciere?'"e theta of any direct motive ; o'fvtahseir Considering the influence many , f i t o , _.lan.lll)Pl:_se.eire known to pasese in the other House, was them credit h t enti re ' °"otild they reject the Bill, t" give. 7 ~e 4r. ) ve 41"nterestedness in their decision ..--(f . lear,. Pe th r:so..... il'aittortie., not the country know and right the r i i :ltt I., apeet u f av e He ad a a majority in their . fay . our pbekitiaer.7 the House of Lords in its proper position re. ; pine die 1 4 -4 1 t hat it would be always nicessary to p be t t h h _etiv eee atin,...4of the Constitution, and to act as um -1%4,4 at th e :_ S overeign and the power of the people ; .% tate ly l e , ~7anie ttme, must observe, that lie knew no nal --et, ~N, ,anculated to resist the other branches of the the 8- the wishes (.1 the King and the Ono .; tn . till Hear,.k) The Lord. it was true, might reject tnittlho_t. 4 je - e u t t t vi:h . at would be thei . issue ?—( Would be in a Hear.) They ~, rit, and i n , but if they did so, they a'ited n and in a thei La et ‘‘,4minority of two to one—and he again 1, 51 1 t 4 51 . "ld be the issue? Like all other minorities 5, 1 t o , Ps eaust yield •and they even would be com ad a , yield t • shatto ,e , w e n , 0 opinions so sustained con. hat. "lte d (1 1 : 4a . ended, as those against which it was %Tatin th e n Y ight array themselves. The fact was, sent°e ell; o•-•sio,ustitution there - were r the ob ,ttlee two. lion of any one branch p o r f av t i l s ie iaf Legislature to el ici4 '.f their the Kin g opposed the views acnedssrietaptreed if . ati ße ~ Lords and Cemmons, he was ne . tr!' liou,'," advis ers, and create a new Administra le tio_n o t fe e „Z" and the Commons Pertinaciously opposed d tl S t 'Pp,,2 l Peal e L'irds, there was a dissolution, an .. thus a th - ed th , e the peopl e • and if the Lords, in the:c tutu, e'e Iv e Sov es • ' • d the Pe"Pl''' av ert . 41141,,, Peoples and th e Commons, an , tvew'rlg thi s " an ultimate resource. There were means o t f i hi e , pro, °PPoeition, which might ceastitutionally, an „io_d tl,tt,',"ahlV, be resoited to..—f Hear, hear.) He de kr; tcou kilo: vote of their Lordships on the presentocca c -_ 04 tn de°TBillered as fsirly settling e t ili th e . enied even it could be so regarded, t , , i eeei ved .. e''''tinv, state of excited feeling, the question h.a f r rd ship e " a 6041 decision of the uestiera. it wh w er a i al th l their , ° , ti iu ' tn a . a ooe of 'the branches g of the Legislature, Nor'' of 5 P.4 ' )r itY, and opposed, moreover, the views rd the thi.factntZtitetc°Ple: 'Let no man conceal from him.- (14 a ", he v ote d lie voted against the second reading of Reform.— O n t ' heti hear against the prineiple of 4410,itiohri,Jen_,1, re echoed by some Noble Lords on the Reform.— the fact in in th e 1, ) Ile now clearly saw that . what he (11„4" there tvuegiuning of his speech he suspected was_ ' th '.) I a ''' a division in the camp. N il , o conclesion t he v 'FY( lie look he declared, that from the state of it ~,° t" of t h at ed with great anxiety and agitation . to . tria o ° ,, L l d pro ve i g h t. If they rejected the Bill, he feaied esten-eu.---me,:_e,the Noble Lords opposite a melancholy_ h im , tt ione d t:id ' `_.) When such a body as the House o , f m e ri ght e , 1 , " r ed that the 1111 only conceded tlis pe'll'k s (lier:rhpt,es.:ct,ou_nld not conceive a course more reckless .t or meet , h ear.) ",;(1 that. of offering apposition to i it. Period Lordshie , ff . e e t of Vas decision was likely . to e nd as e nv of 9i influence in the State for as . 10145 a Lop?rivilege% ... !heir Lordships had derived their titles aj,d at ei. ,``, l . l_ rights from their ancestors. 4 :7 4 )1 rot In said that the embarrassment he Ne e d in in addressing their Lordships was not dinii- Jjelle.t of tle P h reeentitig himself to their attention upon a sub ,%, knowinn.,',llortientous interest. He rejoiced, however, 4 14 a urlisiO2nt arnong a majority of their Lordships there 0 th e i r ~ ' 4 In wishes, in h opes, and in determination to cotdi . dut y and for 1 i e lf he feltgreat pleasure in hauY au PPorti e i j a", „ e _ % l op e , g t ie amenunient ef his Noble Friend Bar oes, (4 In his O pinion Reform was not neces , o e f e.Y. U _ a lUr e e ar t ?, -- aii, .d e.l if it d uere, the .Reform proposed was tij.eull Pnali hl ' Y grel,lel ttheilrie II not believe . their L dshi I assent. He. considered, too, ()r that a P i eitnpvieete for the re'eeti allow *---(Cheers 3 r of. the Bill should be . pure l a ( For .himself he was not dispos . et . to _then). etio'autpthaessevii complained of did exist ; but it it did, P i r ititio!ed w ' as uorcetdly take care to Fee that the remedy worse than the ,vil.—(llear, hear.) a if il l a tnatter o such extreme importance there was heito prleeduuaeledoeufrbetettshat the remedy proposed would be likely p.r:judicial than any which had Me: -7141'0 underintQlsre snoUld decidedly PeatiseiseLs e they Proposed to remedy, and de l iberately consider be fore they ventured upon the adoption of this remedy.— (Hear, hear.) He certainly was of opinion that the measure proposed went upon the principle of trampling upon the rights of property, and of destroying many of our ancient and familiar institutions, which, however odious they might be in the eyes of Reformers, be confessed he regarded with the partial affection that a man might the imperfections of his mistress. " Veluti Balbinum polypus Agnw." He believed that the very defects of the Constitution were attended with advantage—(Hear)—and, therefore, speak ing generally of the principle of Reform, he must speak of it as an evil. But alluding to it more in detail, he would ask had the House of Commons neglected their duty to wards the people ? It had been asserted that for the last , forty years there had been a necessity for Reform; but , where were they to find the proof of this assertion? They had embarked in a war which he would ever maintain was a necessary war ; this was attended with great expense, and with a consequent increase of taxes. But still the main end of the war was answered, and all men were satisfied because the great object of France, which was to make herself, whoever might be the ruler, mistress of the destinies of Europe, had been frustrated. A deht—an enormous debt had been incurred to enable us to carry our great object into effect ; and now it was well known that one of the first acts of a Reformed Parliament would be to propose a violation of faith with the public creditor, who had come forward to assist the nation in the time of need. The war, he had already declared, he considered to be just and expedient, and he had now to add, that lie believed it to be inevitable. Peace arrived, and be admitted it gave us no great compensation for our losses during the war ; hut still we bad secured ourselves from the domina tion of the French in Europe, and even had the inestimable advantage of establishing peace upon a solid foundation ; and to the firmness of the Ministry, and to the firmness of the Parliament, was the successful termination of that mighty war to be mainly attributed. Now, if the na ture of the House of Commons were altered, if that House were simply to be an assembly of delegates representing the feelings, and passions, and prejudices of the people, he asked could such calmness, such coolness, and such firmness ever be expected from them ? If there had merely been in Eng land at the time a House of Delega'tea, would the States of Germany, would Prussia, would Spain have ever been urged to, and maintained in their resistance to the power of France? Would a House of Delegates, swayed and guided, and imperatively influenced by popular passions, ever have had the firmness or the ability to allow the Noble Duke to display the Fabian policy which he had so suc cessfully and gloriously exercised in lying behind his lines at Cintra, when, in this country, all the popular orators were predicting that not a British soldier would ever leave Portugal, and when these opinions found a voice in the camp itself—(Load cheers)—when there was in all probability only one breast which did not quail with ap prehension !—(Great cheering.) When peace came, 1 e admitted that it did not bring all the benefits which might have been fondly anticipated from it ; but in what was the House of Commons to blame ? Was there any com plaint of the people which had been brought before them which did not meet with due attention ? They had been accused of servility, but he remarked that they had not been guilty of servility in the time of Mr. Pitt, nor in 1827, nor yet upon a recent occasion, when they thought proper to withdraw their confidence from the Noble Duke (of Wellington), and thus compelled him to resign his situation. Since the peace too, he contended that the House of Commons had done all that they possibly could for the benefit of the people—there had been, in the first instance, a reduction of upwards of twenty-five mil lions of taxation—the interest on the National Debt had been reduced—great improvements bad been made in the criminal law (for which credit was due to the Right Hon. Gentleman who proposed them)—economy had been car ried into all the public offices, and the amount of pensions had been reduced ; yet the very first object of the Reformed Parliament would be, to wipe away the National Debt, regardless of good faith and the gratitude' due to those who assisted the Government in need, and to do away with pensions which had been won by the blood, and labour, and glorious exertions of our soldiers and sailors, which had procured for us a safe and honourable peace.— (Cheers.) It was said that the people were inadequately represented ; was this the case—did it appear to be the case? In 1819, when there was a question of the re sumption of cash-payments, there was a great diversity of opinion, and the great interests of the country were very nicely balanced, yet the House pursued, without reference to one side or the other, that course which they deemed the best. Again, there was no reason to presume that the House of Commons, in any question of moment and difficulty, would suffer themselves to be overborne by the popular voice, and the display of feeling created under an immediate and exciting influence. There was the Catholic question ; this was carried by the vote of the House of Commons, contrary to the expressed wishes of the great majority of Englishmen. They passed the measure be cause they thought it would be eventually advantageous to the country, without in the least regarding the outcry which was raised against it by the people ; and thus they clearly proved that they were not to be influenced—arbi trio popularis aurce. This Reform Bill had been for a time supported by the mass of the people, who were under the influence of a delusion, from which he was happy to find they had since awakened. It had been supported, too, by some persons of property, under the idea that only by Reform could that property be preserved and revolution avoided. They, too, had been taught to regard the matter in another light. It was supported, too, by the Noble Earl and his Administration, who came in pledged to ad vocate Reform ; and amply had they redeemed that pledge, for they had introduced a Bill much more extensive than ever had been expected from them. By what he had heard from some of his friends who in another place bad been in the minority, he understood that his Majesty's Ministers said they wished to place themselves on the stedlist ground between the abuses which they were desir ous to amend, and the convulsions which they hoped to avoid ; that they declared that no man in his senses could say that the House of Commons, as at present constituted, represented the people; that nevertheless there was a time when the House of Commons represented the people; and therefore that if it came to a question of right, the right was in favour of Reform. He had been told that they proposed to come down for proof of their assertion to the times of Edward the First. When be heard that, lie con fessed it reminded him of the lady in Prior's Alma : And lest I should be wearied, Madam, To cut things short, came down to Adam." - - (A laugh.) To carry their principles into effect, they ought to repeal the Act of Henry VI., for limiting quali fications. He understood that it was maintained by them, that in ancient periods of our history there was the utmost purity of representation and purity of election; and that nomination boroughs and close corporations were in those times utterly unknown among the institutions of the country. Now that he distinctly denied. At all times Members bad been returned to the other House of Parlia ment by the influence of the Crown, through the medium of close corporations. In the time of Edward the Fourth, two Members were returned to the House of Commons by the Royal influence, especially as a reward for their services to the King. (The Noble Eel' here briefly adverted to some other . ..historical Theta, in the reign of Richard the Second, &c., in support of his argument : but spoke in so law a tone of voice that we are unable accurately to repeat his statement). Coraiug down to a later period, he ob served that a, Noble Author on the Constitution, speaking of the anomalies in question, said, " These unhealthy excrescences could not prevent the Petition of Right, or save the Crown horn the Roundheads." The horrid tragedy alluded to in the last passage, however, was the result of imprudent and unwise concession. It was not imputable to the Constitution of Parliament ; but to the determination of the House of - Commons to engross the whole authority of the State. They succeeded in destroying the Monarchy and the Peerage, but they did not so succeed until the whole of the privileges of Parliament itself had been subverted. By Charles 11. the Royal influence had been resumed. But had it been resumed injuriously ? To a Parliament constituted as the present, we owed the revolu tion. To a Parliament constituted as the present we owed the succession of the House of Hanover. He would, therefore, say, with an eloquent writer, " The Constitu tion is arraigned at the Bar ; if it cannot be saved f rom condemnation, at least let its merits go in mitigation of punishment." He denied that at any former period it was supposed that a remedy would be found for esistitig evils in a complete change of the Constitution. Still less could such a remedy be found at the present day, when the in fluence and patronage of the Crown and of Ministers had been so greatly circumscribed. The Reformers could not cite any time in the history of this country in which the plan of Reform, which they so warmly advocated, was in operation, attended by the advantages which they said must flow from it. The Noble Author of the measure had spoken of it with great ability; and he (Lord Mansfield) felt the greatest respect for that Noble Lord. It w as , therefor•, with no uncourteous disposition that he selectee as the observation made by the Noble Lord, which had pro duced the greatest impression on his mind, the remark to the effect, " that if a man were to argue that as Govern ment was a matter of experience and not of speculation. therefore things should rest as they were, his objection t Reform would be sound." He would proceed to make few observations on the Bill. • It proceeded upon entirely fresh principles to reconstruct the State. If it were adopted, he could not help thinking that those who rocked the cradle of the infant Constitution; would ere long ac company its coffin to the grave. But to its adoption there appeared to him to be the most insuperable objec tions. The Bill consisted of two parts; the one the disfranchisement of the old boroughs, the other the crea tion of a new constituency and a new arrangement of bo roughs. He did not deny the abstract power of Parlia ment to disfranchise all the boroughs in the kingdom. But such a proposition must be understood under this re striction, that Parliament could not do what was unjust. Now, he considered the proposed disfranchisement of bo roughs as unjust and impolitic. Whether they were pro perty or trust the destruction of them was equally unjust. I , they were a trust, the trustees could not be divested of them unless mismanagement were proved ; ifproperty. the owners could not be deprived of them unheard in their defence. In the case of the abolition of heritable jurisdic tions, and in the taking of lands, Parliament had always provided compensation. He considered the proposed dis franchisement of boroughs as impolitic; because be con sidered it to be impolitic to say that there was no security in a charter from the Crown. Did their Lordships sup. pose that those would be the only charters from the Crown declared invalid? The abolition of the charters of Henry VIII. granting confiscated land would not be approved in that House ; but their Lordships might depend upon it the proposition would find great favour in a Reformed Parlia ment. Against the principle of the Bill therefore he pro tested. Ile protested equally against its details. But that subject had been so ably and unanswerably treated by his NAle Friend, that he would not weaken by repeating his Noble Friend's arguments ; and would merely point out a few of the inconsistencies in the measure which particu• lady struck him. In the first place, the Bill professed to proceed upon the principle of population ; providing that towns not having two thousand householders should be disfranchised. But in taking this population, the authors of the Bill referred to the census of 1821, although that census was notoriously incorrect. Nothing could exceed the unfairness of this. Since 1821 various towns bad in creased in population, so as to have a right to the elective franchise. But they were told that the Bill was to effect a final settlement of the representation. §o that those towns were to be for ever excluded from that which was nevertheless, according to the principle of the Bill, their right. And this was the more strange, as the argument of the friends of the Bill was, that because certain towns had increased in population, they ought to increase in re putation. He supposed that it was for the purpose of neutralising this absurdity that a double standard was re sorted to by the introduction of property as a principle. It sometimes happened, however, that neither principle re conciled the matter to justice ; and that of two towns, pre cisely in the same circumstances, one was disfranchised, while the other retained its two Members. The great object of the Bill seemed to be to obtain a new consti tuency. Now, he had no objection to an addition to the constituency ; but be confessed that he did not think the class out of which the Bill proposed to increase the con stituency exactly the best that could be chosen. The Bill then professed to give additional influence in counties to the Aristocracy of land, as against the Aristocracy of houses. In sotne counties, however, the house interest would greatly preponderate. The division of counties, also, would in several cases give to counties having a smaller number of inhabitants, and paying smaller rates, a greater number of representatives. He did not mean to impute mo tives of partiality or injustice to the authors of the Bill ; but he must say that, as far as he could judge from what had passed in the House of Commons, the arrangement on that point had never been satisfactorily explained. It wag the avowed intention of the Bill to get rid of bribery and corruption; but in many cases freemen little exposed to bribery were deprived of their just and natural rights, and the elective franchise was bestowed on potwallopers, the most expused to bribery. The Bill objected to the in fluence of the Peers, and yet in the division of counties it occasionally gave great influence to Peers, tending to what the petition from Durham termed " an overbearing oli garchy." In some towns the Bill confined the 'elective franchise to the residents ; in others it admitted the non residents. All this appeared to he for the sake of pure anomaly.—(A laugh.) An owner of an estate bad, in many cases. no vote, while the tenant had one. And then this was always described as a final settlement of the representation. Was it possible that it could be so ? As long as any individual in the country remained without a vote, so long would that individual say that he was de prived of his rights. As long as any town exceeded in population the limit placed by the Bill to the elective franchise, so long would that town protest against its ex clusion. As long as there were any poor to be bribed, and as long as there was any money to bribe them with, so long would there be corruption. Against the last evil there could be no adequate security but l+igh qualification. So much for the details of the 11111, but no alteration of the details could reconcile him to its principle. He thought it very possible that some thing might be advantageously proposed to diminish the expence of elections, to correct the abuses resulting from bribery and corruption, and to provide for the issuing of the King's writ to large towns at present unrepresented. On those points, however, be would pronounce no opinion. But he must say, that the large towns had never been able to prove that they experienced any real injury from not having any representative , . Some proposition might be made with respect to the representation of Scotland. On that point he would pronounce no opinion. If any dissa tisfaction existed on that subject, it was some consolation to redeet that it must be of recent date. For it was „ply lately that the Reformers complained of the apathy of the people on the subject of Reform, sad especially of the people of Scotland. Objecting to the Bill under their Lordships' consideration as he did, it was very natural that be should oppose it. But he was told that he roust not oppose it. He was told that the interference of the House of Lords with the Bib, although it was legal, was objectionable, and that the people would have the Reform Bill. With respect to the first position, it ought to be remembered, that in 1725, when a Bill to prevent bribery at elections was sent to that House from the House of Commons, that House made two important amendments in it; the one limiting the penalty for the offence, the other rendering such votes legal as were determined to be legal by the last adjudication. Both these amendments were accepted by the House of Com mons. It appeared that the House of Loris then interfered with a Bill of this character from the House of Commons with success; and it might chance to be the same now. And were not the House of Lords as much the guardians of freedom of election as the House of Commons? The se cond point was, that the people must and would have Re form. He did not deny that a very large portion of the people were in favour of Reform ; but he did not believe that the feeling was unanimous. And although there might be a great numerical superiority in favour of Re form, he believed that if the line were fairly drawn, the great balance of property would be found to be against it But let it be proposed, for the sake of argument, that the people were unanimous in favour of Minn. The House of Lords were not to obey the dictum of the House of Commons, or of the people, but were to exercise their own judgment upon any question brought before them. It was impossible that, in exercising that judgment, they could have any other objects in view that the interests of the people. The interests of the House of Lords was, that the people should have the fullest possible enjoyment of those rights and liberties on which the happiness. of stations depended. The happiness of the people could not increase without their participation in it ; it could not be Idiminished without their suffering deprivation. If, therefore, selfish motives were ascribed to the Peers, he would even on that foundation assert the impossibility of their withholding their assent from any Bill which they really thoupht would conduce to the happiness of the people. It had been well observed by a Noble Friend of his, in presenting a petition to their Lordships on the subject, "that it was not right to say that the Peers had no interest in the Bill, but that it was right to soy that they had no interest in it separate from the people." He came now to consider the appre hensions which were enter tained of the consequences that might result s from the rejection of the Bill. Their Lordships had heard it asserted by the Press, and that in no mea sured language, that their persons awl property would be endangered by tile rejection of the Bill. Such threats, was convinced, would have no effect on their Lordships. Should any disturbances follow the rejection of the Bill, he had perfect confi!enee in the firmness of his Majesty's Government to put them down. He should be verysorry, however, were any such events to take place, as the inno cent might suffer with the guilty. But it • was insisted, that the people would be riotous if disappointed of this their favourite measure. Why, what did the people ex pect from it ? Delusions. They expected to sell at great price', and to buy at small prices. They expected to have ;he taxes reduced, the National Debt wiped off, the tithes Abolished'. They knew not that all these things, if they were to happen, would recoil on themselves. But how was it possible that such consequences could flow from the Reform Bill ? Nut flowing, would not the people fee), would not they express, disappointment? Such being the case, why should not their Lordships put their opinion and that of the minority of the House of Commons in contrast with the opinion of the people, but for their benefit? They 'lad done so on other occasions. In conclusion he would ay that he would fain see the present effervescence subside. If he knew the best means of restoring caltn and con idence to the public mind, it was to ask the authors and friends of the Bill to renew for two years the charter ,f our Constitution, with all its anomalies and defects. At the expiration of that period they might enter on ,a vise and temperate consideration of the subject. But OAS would not suit big Majesty's Afinisters..(Near, hear.) They were fond of the continued agitation.—(Hear, hear.) They seemed to forget that it was like a fever, which gave the patient artificial strength for the moment, but left him in a state of wretched debility. He trusted, however, that the arguments which had been so ably urged against the measure by his Noble Friend would have their due weight with the House. lie trusted thatthey e w le o m u e ld at n a, ot no d t es e t o r n oy . those venerable institutions which bad been so long ou r fl hez i t— ng, in h s o t w itu ev ti e o r n , but sco acting in opposite in beautiful harmony, which neither time nor chance could destroy, unless the aid of that great power by which it had hitherto been upheld were withdrawn. He trusted that their Lordships would not countenance those rash theories and speculations, that, if pursued to the extent to which their authors were dis posed to carry them, would make of society one vast chaos, in which "Nell/ sea forma manebit."—(Hear.) The Bill extended to all the institutions of the country. It prepared the way for the abolition of the Law of Pri mogeniture as in France, for the abolition of the Peerage, and for an interference in the succession to the Crown.-- ( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) There might be persons who thought otherwise; but he believed that the theories which the Bill enforced would do* all that. Heretofore the supporters of such measures had con fined themselves to theory; but he believed that men of talent and of character—active and enterprising men-- who held these opinions would now be introduced into Parliament to enforce them, by the suffragee of the new constituency.—(Hear.) Their Lordships should recol leet that it was not the fate of England alone that re'ted on their decision. The fate of Europe was involved in the vote they came to on that Bill. All the institutions of the country were at stake, and on them was placed the repose of Europe. If England became convulsed, or even if she suffered a bloodless revolution, the only barrier to the progress of anarchy would be removed. War would ensue —war, which all parties in and out of the House joined in deprecating, would infallibly ensue; and its attendant calamities would not be lessened, if, following the councils of the present Government, the people of this country found themselves arrayed on the side of their former irreconcilable enemies, and opposed to all their most ancient allies and friends.---(Hear, hear, hear.) — This allusion to the policy of the Government reminded him of an assertion of the Noble Earl, when he declared he would stand or fall by the Bill—(Hear)—and that he saw w s snyr determinedreasona b le na b ineot hopesto oafbanndarron; carrying it l w ff l ear, h il e le hear.) i There were two ways of carrying the Bill,—one by a fair majority of the Members of that House, and the other by counselling the Crown to an undue exercise of the Royal prerogative.--(Hear, hear, hear.) When the Govern ment, on a recent occasion, brought up twelve new Peers, it was asked somewhat whimsically if the twelve would sup port the Bill? If the Noble Earl (Grey) should be in duced to advise the adoption of a further addition to the number, he hoped his proposal would not be counte nanced; but if it was, these Peers might be asked if they intended to vote by their Centurion.—(Hear, and a laugh.) He (Lord Mansfield) bad now done. He would not troub'e their Lordships further on this most important subject. He would merely add, that the resolution he bad come to of voting ag iinst the Bill was not the result of passion or prejudice, but of long and most painful meditation. Lord KING could not venture to place before his eyes the picture of what the state of the country would be when it was known that a proposal had been made to their Lordships to give a positive rejection to the Bill—a Bill sent up to their Lordships by a great majority of the House cf Commons.—(Hear.) The Bill might be rejected, and that rejection would probably be considered " Ira leenum vincla recusantum." lie trusted, however, that although these lions might gra tify their resentment, they would be at least chained and rendered harmless. He trust( d that they would not long he ;Bowed to exercise their undue power to the prejudice of the interests of their country. The Noble Lord (Wharn eliffe) said in the course of his speech, that he would advise the Government to leave the measure alone for two years. --(Hear, and a laugh.) The Noble Lord said he wished he could suggest some method of pacifying the country and of stopping the progress of the present excitement. And how did the Noble Lord, who was so anxious to put an end to the excitement, propose to accomplish his object ? Why, be would pacify the country by rejecting the Bill, and leaving the people to indulge in all those feelings of exasperation which the disappointment of their hopes must excite. The Noble Lord and his friends had met the question with a pure and simple rejection. The Bill was in their opinion, too dangerous ever to be entertained. They Would not even allow it to go to a Committee— (No, no)—but if they met the question with a decided negative, how were they to go to a Committee ?—(Hear.) No, their Lordships weela eensider the merits of the measure sent to them by the House oi and they rejected it in such a manner as to say that the country was not to hope from them that any measure of Reform would be entertained.—(Strong expressions of dissent from the Opposition side.) That was the gist of the motion, and of all the speeches he bad heard. —(No.) if it was not, he knew not what they meant. He now came to another question. What were the evils the country complained of?—war, taxes, and debt. He did not deny that the people were too fond of war ; but he contended that the people changed their opi nion of its necessity much sooner than the Parliament. Would the first war with America have continued so C m: many o y o e s a ; s under ti t l he at a w n a t s hor no i t ty of a th in only Reformed evil — t h e Hus o pro prietors of t o. priet o r s Parliament were also the proprietors of taxes. He called them proprietors of Parliament, in the langu ige of Grattan, because he did not wish to use the offensive phrase of boroughmongers. He would tell the Noble Lord bow this proprietorship worked. From a list of pla ces a nd pensions, above 1,0001. a-year, hid before the House of Commons, and printed by its order, it appeared that the Members of their Lordships' House receive above 300,000/. a-year out of the taxes and otherwise, under the • places, and salaries. This w a s th e re name of pen,'"'' suit of the proprietorship system, and the nomination of Members of Parliament. The Noble Lord and his friends laid great s tress on the worst part of the system, and seemed to think the worst possessed the greatest merit. lie(Lcrd King) remembered the time when no one would dar e t o mention such things , and when the Speaker of the ether House would ha v e called any man to order who vent ure d to talk of nomination boroughs. Now, how ever, th e system was recognised and acknowledged, and Members seemed to glory in what Burke called the rotten part of the Constitution. Corruption and all its at tendant a buses losnegereer arty str dispositionippednakedt o n to tchoe:air it. t. . There was no They were told that the Bill proposed a new Constitution. Whose fault was it that such a Bill was now before them ? And he would say more, that if they did not note concede this timely Reform, they would perhaps be compelled to grant another Reform, which they would consider still more untimtly than even a very moderate Reform was tut ught to be some years ago.—(Hear.) He would not say what might be the consequence. They were implored to grant this Reform to preserve the peace of the country, and they should take heed lest they forced the people to that general understanding respecting the non-payment of the taxes which they had ahreatened. The people, it was well known, had for some time thought that the taxes voted by a condemned House of Commons might, under certain contingencies, be refused. lie would not trouble their Lordships further than to implore them to consider well the consequences of what they were about to do. The Marquis of BUTE commenced by contending that his Noble Relation (Lord Wharncliffe), although he had moved a direct negative to the Bill, was not, therefore, to be considered wholly opposed to Reform. His Noble Relation was to be judged by his arguments, and not by the motion, for, as far as he understood the opinions of the Noble Lord, they were favourable to a very consider able degree of concessio n to popular wishes. No man had ventured to assert in that House or elsewhere, that the present system was perfectly correct ; but what they ob jected to, was the Bill. They said that, if they were to have Referm, it must be a Reform rather more in confor mity with the existing institutions of the country. He (Bute) was decidedly of opinion that the people would reap no great degree of benefit from any scheme of Reform which could be proposed ; but at the same time he was prepared, in common with others, to make just and proper concessions to the feelings and opinions of those whose in telligence and high moral character entitleol them to de mand attention. What he complained of was, that the Noble Earl (Grey) had in the Bill united the most oppo site principles; and th e on ly h es it a tion he felt in opposi ng it arose from the respect which he was accustomed to pay to all the Noble Earl's opinion?, and to the respect he had far his character. He contended, however, that the ne w system would give as many nomination boroughs as the old, and that the Bill merely transferred the nomina tion from one hand to another. It was said that these nomination boroughs were dangerous to the liberties of the country. He cou!d not understand that. It might do as an assertion for the hustings of a tavern dinner, but it was too puer il eud to than a s Under those n a dinconsistent ert t whicha a w a b e used tre the elsewhere. Did any one mean to any that there was not greater secu rity prop er ty dy of timesaction the h est an d brightest of the Constitu tion ? The borough s were created under the T u d o rs, and they were sel e ct e d, not f or their riches or t h e num ber of their population, b ut b ecause the Crown w i s h e d t o oft pese e r nr n e t tl re d momen t of make ttse of them to promote its own arbitrary views. The necessities of the Crown having, at a subsequent period, compelled it to part with its property and, the estates on which the boroughs were situated, they became the property of the Aristocracy; and they, in their turn, had also been compelled to part with them ; the conse quence of which wa., that the power of the Aristocracy was now infinitely less than it was at the accession of the House of Hanover—the period so often triumphantly re 'erred to as the most glorious of the Constitution. But how did the Noble Lord propose to get rid of the nomina tion boroughs? Why, by sweeping away a great part of these boroughs. by destroying the Corporations, and ash stituting for them a uniform system of ten-pound and three-and-sixpenny voters. Every one knew the influence exercised in country towns by attorneys and a certain class of moneyed men, and the consequence would be to place all the constituency under the dictation of one or two in dividuals. The Noble Lords wished, he had no doubt, to promote the liberty, and happiness, and morality, of the people ; hut this Bill was not calculated to promote their views. Nothing was more carefully attended to by our ancestors than to preserve the hereditary principle of our C institution in all its parts. That principle was the soul of the Monarchy. But by destroying the Corporations—by taking away those privileges which the presen t race of freemen enjoyed, and which they expected to transmit to their children, this Bill destroyed that, and by destroying that would injure the hereditary principle, and would certainly injure the Monarchy. He was not a friend to abuses, and it such as existed could be corrected, he should not object; but he could not consent to the great changes proposed by this Bill. It would not get rid of nomination and cor ruption, and for these reasons he meant to vote against the Bill; though he repeated that he should not object to any measure which would get rid of abuse. The Bill, how ever, went se far—the changes it introduced were so nu merous and so violent—the principle was so new, that he could not by any possibility go the length of the Biil. He knew that many Noble Lords who went further than he did would not consent to this Bill. With reference to that country with which he was connected (Scotland), he would offer one observation. He admitted that the system of represention there established was incorrect in principle ; but he denied that it had been injurious in practice. He wished to say for himself distinctly, and with respect to the county which bore his name, that what had appeared in the papers was not correct. He admitted that there was an influence exercised there; but it was nothing but the influence of property fairly exercised. As far as he was concerned, that property would not be injured, nor the influence lessened by the Bill. Individually he was satisfied that his interest would be the same as before. The Noble Lord concluded by reiterating his determination to vote against the Bill. Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that he understood that the motion he had made to reject the Bill would be con sidered as an affront to the House of Commons, which he had no intention of offering. When he moved that the Bill be rejected, he was not aware that such was not the usual course, or that the House of Commons would con sider it as an affront. With their Lordships' permission he would beg leave to withdraw that motion, and substi tute for it, " That the Bill be read a second time this day six months." Lord HOLLAND could assure the House that he was disposed to adopt the usual courtesy of the House, and grant the request of the Noble Lord ; but when be con sidered the motion for the rejection of the Bill was in tended to show to the people of England that it was to be wholly rejected, not merely put off, he must object to the motion being withdrawn.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl opposite (Earl Mansfield) had assigned as his reason for supporting the motion, and for rejecting the Bill, that it would take away from the people all hope of Reform.— (Hear, hear.) He hoped he should not be considered pertinacious, therefore, if he objected to the withdrawal of the motion.—(Cheers.) Lord WHARNCLIFFE—If his request were objected to he would not divide the House on the mot*, and some other Noble Lord could move that the Bill be dead a second time that day six months. Lord HOLLAND repeated that from the manner in which the question had been put, and the manner in which it had been supported, the question being then possession of the House, he could not consent to the Noble Lord's withdrawing it.—(Hear.) Lord PLUNKETT said that the argument of the Noble Earl who supported the motion turned upon its farm, and by withdrawing the motion the Noble Lord would deprive himself of that Noble Earl's support. After the question had been put there could be no discus sion or withdrawal of it, and he for one should not consent to that. The Eorl of MANSFIELD begged I eave to explain his own meaning. Whatever form the Noble Lord might have put his motion in, his arguments would have been jection of the Bill; he wished it to be rejected, and he should have used the same language bad the motion been to read the Bill that day six months.—(Hear, hear.) Calls for the Lord Chancellor, and several other Peers, who rose to address the House. The LORI) CHANCELLOR said the motion had been put into his bands, and he was bound to put it. The Noble Lord, however, wished to withdraw the motion, and that he was bound to allow if no Noble Lord objected. But there was an objection, and he had no power to allow the withdrawal. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY explained that the mo tien the Noble Lord had to put was, that the words pro posed to ba left out stand part of the question. Earl GREY admitted that the interpretation given by the last Noble Earl was correct, but the motion was put, that the words stand part of the question, in order to sub stitute other words for them, and those other words in this case were, that the Bill be rejected. Considering the manner in which the debate had been conducted, and that the House was in possession of the question—and con sidering that the Noble Earl had expressly stated that he supported the motion in that form, bnause he would not have the public deluded by entertaining any hopes of Re form—considering th:sl things, he could not consent to the motion being withdrawn. It should be put in the form it had been proposed on the records of the House, and on that motion the sense of the House ought to be taken, that it might he seen that their Lordships moved to reject a Bill brought up from the Commons. Consider ing the circumstances under which the motion bad been made, and the opinions expressed, he must object to the Noble Lord's being allowed to withdraw his motion. The Earl of CA - RNARVON said his Noble Friend had made his motion inadvertently, and bad disavowed all in tention of affronting the House of Commons ; but the Ministers fastened him to his words, and would not con sent to receive his Noble Friend's explanation. He did not envy them their dignified position in availing them selves of such an inadvertence, end force his Noble Friend to adhere to a form of words be wished to abandon. He must say that he did not think that a single vote would be entrapped by such a shallow, and, if he did not enter tain a great respect for the Noble Lords opposite, he should fay, such a ',paltry objection.—(Cheers.) It was only fair to allow his Noble Friend to correct his verbal error.—(Hear, hear.) Lord HOLLAND rose to order. Lord KENYON rose to order, in the gallery; but Lord WHARNCLIFFE obtained possession of the House, and avowed that his object was to have the Bill rejected; and whether be carried that into effect by making a motion for rejecting, it or for reading it a second time that day &x month., the effect was the same. It was of no use to try to puzzle the people out of doors with such distinctions. On the other side, there was an attempt to force him into a course which would be considered as an affront to the House of Commons and the country. Was it so, or was it not? The LORD CHANCELLOR spoke to order. There was no question before the House. In order to give the Noble Lord an opportunity of speaking, he would move that the further consideration of the question be adjourned. Lord WHARNCLIFFE repeated, that the Noble Lords imputed to him a desire to affront the House of Commorts. --(No, no.) He had not the smallest intention of doing any such thing, and he gave the Noble Lords joy of their triumph obtained by such means. But between him and them the country would judge. Lord HOLLAND repeated, that Ile would not consent to the Noble Lord's wish, and assigned as a reason, because putting the motion in that form would be Lighly advanta geous to the cause of the Bill. The Earl of MULGRAVE said many of the arguments of the Noble Baron turned upon the inadvertence of the Ministers in drawing up the Bill, and the same species of isioo gave io ortlino7 form that he he would had i n not r intro. t inadvertence which he attributed to them i n th e d eta il s o f the Bill be had himself been guilty of. Lord ;andes gut somei°n to a WHARNCLIFFEdivother Noble L or d wou ld move that dpre.sucedtheit the Bill be read a second time that day six months. Earl GREY did not know what the Noble Lord meant when he spoke of the triumph of the Ministers, and when he wished them joy of their triumph referred also again to the expressions Mansfield, as his reason for not inset being withdrawn. The motion' ought the records of Parliament in the i troduced.—(Hear hear . The Duke of4t1.61411 1 1*„ oaent of his Noble Frieocriffitll44r Tirll4e 0 COM atone, it cer'ainly WAS a little extraor.lir ary that the Ministers of the Crown were the persons who opposed the withdrawing of this disrespectful arnerd went.—(Cheers.) He did not call upon Noble Lords to decide immediately ; but as they were going to adjourn, he would request them to take the subject into their COM_ sideration during the night. The Duke of RICHMOND said, that the only palatable thi ng which that House could do towards the House of Commons was to let the Bill be read a second time; and, therefore, if Noble Lords wanted to pay respect to the House of Commons, they knew how to effect it. Lord KENYON said, that the Noble Lord having state', that the words of his motion were inadvertent, he thought that he ought to he all need to withdraw it. The Earl of RADNOR said, that as it appeared that the Noble Lord had committed an inadvertence, he thought, on the contrary, that the Ministers were fully justified in taking advantage of that inadvertence ; as be understood it, however, the Noble Lord had worded his amendment in this manner to express his entire reprobation of Reform. Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that the only object of his amendment was to get rid of the Bill ; he meant nothing disrespectful by it. The Duke of BUCKINGHAM was about to adarots their Lordships, when The Earl of RADNOR remarked, that he had been about to make a speech when the Noble Duke had inter rupted him.—(A laugh.) If the Noble Lord had not in tended more by his amendment than to get rid of the Bill, he did not see any objection to his being allowed to withdraw it ; but, otherwise, any advantage that cooed be reaped from his inadvertence would be for the good of the country, and his Noble Friends (the Ministry) would do perfectly right to keep it now that they had got it. The Duke of BUCKINGHAM said that he understood that his Noble Friend had only moved for the purpose of negativinz the Bill ; and his impression had been; that he would have concluded by moving that the Bill be read that day six months. If, however, his Noble Friend was not a'lowed to withdraw his amendment, be (the Duke of Buckingham) begged leave to give notice that he should tike an opportunity of moving that the Bill be read that day six months.—(Hear.) The Earl of HADDINGTON said a few words, which were inaudible below the bar. Lord HOLLAND said, that after the Noble Lord bad stated that he could assure the House that be had not meant anything disrespectful to the House of Commons by the wording of his amendment, he (Lord Holland) would no longer oppose the withdrawal of the amendment. Lord WHARNCLIFFE then withdrew his motion, and as we understood, amid the confusion of their Lordships quitting the House, substituted, " That the Bill be read a second time that day six months," in its stead. The House then adjourned at a Quarter past One, t.) this day. HOUSE OF COMMONS, OCTOBER 3. Colonel EVANS presented petitions from a district in Nlanchester, and from Newton, in Aylesbury, praying for f.trther inquiry into the case of Mr. and Mrs. Deacle. Mr. TIDD presented a petition from the landowners of i3ridgewater against the Bill for the registry of deeds. Mr. LAMBERT presented twelve petitions from diff , - rent parts of Ireland, praying for the disbanding of the yeomanry corps. The Hon. Member went into the case of the Newtownharry affair. Mr. WALKER had been requested to support the prayer of the petitions, and had also a number to present himself on the same subject. Mr. O'CONNELL hoped that the Honourable Mem ber would make a motion on the subject, and let the question be brought fully befote the House, and not !lave it in this way, day by day, in detached pieces. Sir R. BATESON defended the conduct of the yeo manry in general, and hoped the whole body would not he !darned for the misconduct of a few. Mr. SHEIL said that he agreed with the Honouraide Nlember for Kerry, that an inquiry should take place by a motion, in order that the whole quell rion might be brought forward at once. It might be said that it would take up too much time, but he must remind Hon. Gentlemen that there was a ca , e in point, that was the case of the Deacles, and surely the 14 dead bodies lying at Newtownbarry demanded that a little time should. he spared fur an investigation. Mr. HENRY GRATTAN was decidedly opposed to the yeomanry force, and hoped the Government wou'a take the prayer of these petitions into their serious eon tideration. . The petitions were then ordered to lie on the table. Lon! ALTHORP moved the Order of the Day for the bringing up of the report of the Committee of Supply, which, after a few words from Mr. Hunt and Lord Al thorp, was agreed to. Lord ALTHORP then moved that the H.use resolve Jupply.— ne chair. FINANCE. The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, Lord ALTHORP said that it was then his intention to state to the House his view of the present expenditure and revenue for the present year. He proposed to do so -srst, by stating what the revenues of the last year would ;)e ; then the expenditure ; and lastly, what would be the balance of the account. The mode in which he would arrive at this result, would be by saying what the produce of last year was; what was the difference between last year and the present one, up to the present time ; and what would be probably received for the last quarter of this year. The produce of the Customs for 1830 amounted to upwards of 17,000,00.1. A de crease had taken place up to the 24th of September, from the first of January, 1831, to the amount of 1,000,0001. This reduced it to 16,890,0001. I estimate, continued the Noble Lord, a fur ther loss of 210,0001. upon coals, duties on which having been reduced to the amount of 16,000,0001. I expect the duties on wine, and the exporting of coals will be a decrease of 10%0004, making the whole estimate of the present year for the Customs 16,750,000/, The produce of the Excise for 1814 was about 18,000,0001. The decrease up to to the 24th of September, is upwards of 1,000,000/. The reduction of duties is about 100,0001., which only extends from the 24th of Septemberto the end of the year. This reduction made tk e excise duty upwards of 16,000,00t.14 There had been received on - the stock of wine in hand 127,000/. Altogether, the clear produce of the excise was 16,800,0001. With respect to the statement of the Customs, it will be neces sary to state what is the amount of taxes that have been reducer'„ and what effect they have had on the revenues. The amount of taxes reduced is altogether 3,357,0004, and the reduction on the Customs made the whole amount to four millions. But the re venue accruing from the Customs and Excise, which amcamted in 1830 to 36,000,0004 will now amount to 33,000,000/. Thus the decrease, by a fair computation, instead of being 4,000,0004, has only been 2,611,0001. It will now be understood that the Cus toms amount to 16,750,0901. The Excise amounts to 16,800,0004 The Noble Lord then proceeded to state that the Taxes, Stamps, and Crown Lands were 15,000,0001. and upwards, which made the amount of the whole revenues received 47,250,000/. He now came to the expenditure. At this period Government knew better what was more likely to be the expenditure than at any other period of the year. In the curly part of the year Government were obliged to make up the amount tromp estimates, but at the present time a very small proportion was made up from them. He could, in consequence, make a state ment of the expenditure which might be perfectly relied ca. It amounted, up to the 24th of September, to 35,222,641/. The ex penditure from that time to the end of the year would amount to 11,533,8804, thus snaking the whole expenditure for 1831, 46,756,5214 The surplus which would remain, after deducting; the expenditure from the produce, would be just 41)3,479/.. The expenditure, lie found, for 1630, was 47,812,0001. I have (con tinued Lord Afthorp,) examined the statements in'cvery way that - I can. lam sure I make no exaggeration. I have consulted those in the Treasury whom I believed to have had the most ex. perience, and they tell me that I can with cookience rely upon the general accuracy of the statements made. • The whole effect of these will cause me to make a few remarks, because it does appear, that comparing these with the statements of last Fe bruary, the amount is rather larger than I stated at that time, notwithstanding the number of taxes I have been enabled to suc ceed in carrying. I will only state, that in February I made ara allowance for the general revenues of the country, and the con sequences of those revenues. Having nsade this statement with respect to the balance of the accounts, I will only hope that I have made myself clear. There are, however, two other fasts relative to the mode in which 1 have disposed of the balance to which I would wish to advert In consequence of a question that was asked me a few nights since by the Hon. Member for 02-k -hampton, respecting the circulating medium, I wish most particularly, and it is desired by others as well as by tnysalc to state the course which has been pursued by the Bank durtng the last year, in order to do away the suspicions and imputations thrown out that they have been tampering with thecurreacy. It is perfectly well known to the House that the, exchange has fora long time been against this country. In consequence of this there must be a considerable draft upon the Bank, which is the pivot on which the circulating medium turns. The effkt of this draft on the Bank produces a pressure on commerce, and persons engaged in commerce require bills to be discounted. If the Bank refuse to discomft them the effect would be to produce a great and unnecessary pressure upon commerce. The course which the Bank has pursued has been not to withhold the prac tice ofdiscounting. It was essentially necessary that the Bank should not allow its securities to increase, because, if then did, while the draft remained upon them, they would be' obliged to contract the exchange of the country, which • he need hardly add, would prove of the greatest injury, The Bank, properly, have taken care that the securities haze not increased when in their hands ; but a s private securities have increased, thay have brought, is proper_ tion, to the market a certain proportion of the Bank securities. The of bet of this caused the [trait to act on the circulating me. ilium of this country grad and fairly. 'he country has i n _ IllY deed felt the effects of the raft, but they hail not been of that sudden change which in former times had produced such disas trous conseqoences. I now wish to state my own course, with respect to the employment of the surplus funds. It was, no. doubt, well known that the Government were accustomcal to take an average of the surplus fbnds which had accrued from about three of the preceding quarters, and these seem to be N. plied to the payment of the debts for the ensuing quarter. king as these remain stationery, this is the proper course of s'pro ceeding, and you do not average a larger redemptive than you had funds to meet. But when the revenues euctuatsai, might happen, you would be placed in a sce a,onvhat awkward predicament. It is well known to the Hoene that an Act tad been passed, by which the Commissicasers to the pun. of the pub lic debt th. were bound to apply the surplus of e revel'!" ) appiv Luc surplus tu 71,;;•„; found that, 'the ....- ----- -, -- - ••"-" ~e ' I "'"'' " h ' Bills, Since instead f appl3lug . the . The Noble Earl chasing c:s"fh::s7: Exchequer been dinlitlishilY' o ,;;i Exc ( - ) heqUer Bills, used by the Earl of . quarter's revenue to the Pe._rf.,',; a iif deficiency bin:. in the lenting to the motion have applied applyingit to the plirf;". p . , -, . 4 t 4.1., It to be placed upon I t ; h a , n in k iln i% , L the sin's . " , in, which is was. in /be cat - t - c ....- - 4 * . 40c014.6 Is e ' , -,•-• ..f."1,3t,- a dr a l . At -4 ,-. lii . 0 - -- A. i .... y,:.4 I, (0th0tim0tit.0444.,,,, ,4,,,,..a.i ,;-., _-. ... ~, duo : se . ~ I . Alieeeo oi tt f ool l:;Tatincl', ~, ---,..., , k,„ ' . i '•'- ,*. ' ,2-, ''. " • *' 4, l' ,l• 4ll.l.': s g,:ii. , - :I',..'' ; •%. • -. - 7 t - - . • - • • --: . '... '' ',I, r.• '--,'"%.• ."W'll, -• . - , '. - .f •rl. .. . •• ' . '' .•• ' '' . i; . • A '..- ' ' ---r j, -::: `';r 4 A . ' . Wist, , .',47, .;, : 4 .- • ~ t:',:.' s'.. , -..` • . ---', , • `!', s -: - ~„,,-;it'•• •'• • V s..m•-*• !'''''',' ;. . v,,,,,,... 1 ). t z . ' k%F.A't 4 . .-.' i A, 'l , i •'-' ' ' '. •