The Sun. — London, England, 1821-04-19 00:00:00

question, he must appeal to the . canclOur, and if necessary, to the Compassion of the House.-(Hear, hear!)—The lion. Member next adverted to that part of the Bill which went t) repeal the Septennial Act. The Bill extended only to Eng land and Wales, for as a Noble Lord had already given notice of a motion relating to the state of the representation in Scot land, he-had not thought it necessary to take up that part of the subject. If the House skould accede to his measure; of which he confessed he entertained no hopes. nothing would be easier than to add the name of Ireland or Scotland. It was not his intentien.Lo motelfor leave to .bring in the Bill now. He should in this respect, follow the course which had been adopted by the _Right Honourable Gentlethan who had -brought in the Catholic by inovig,that' the - House. resolve itself into a Committee, to consider the. state oT the representation of the people. If tria.lle*Se should ,accede to this motion, he should then propose ifet.taiq Resolutions 'embodying-the principles upon which the ,';" Mc:v e al:ire ids *founded, and founded upon the declaration of Lord - h•Cnathame that to be tried without being represented, was con - - argil to the Laws and Constittition•of the country. He begged •.err declare, .distinctly, that he should not consider any Member .who voted for the Committee, - as at all pledging himself to sup poht.eitheathe Resolutions` or the Bill.. He felt it necessary, in lirintgl,forward this motion, to be . prepared with a particular hrativith.certain Resolutions, in order to meet the objec . Oa that nothing specific was ever proposed by the advocates for Reform ' -bat the individuals, who voted for the Committee, • woultlatherely sanction the' assertionthat the stath of the rkFe - hsentation was such as to require. some Reform.- - --(Heare hear, ▪ hear l)-hIn advocating the propriety of extending ie. elective :franchise, he was aware that he exposed-himself to the misre • preSeritation - of some, and. the sophistry of others. ''He could • not hope forthe • court:hence of that class of - politicians who -unifotchly supported the system which was first commenced. at •. thh.periol•of the French Revolution--a system which. upheld the of the Crown against • the liherties of the people, and: which7illt. Pitt had himself denounced as one under which - no-MiriiSter could be 'honest. Their minds were to he still atarnied - by idle visions of • anticipated danger, whenever the • tilits of the.people were restored, as if a participation in those ''rights, - which were'unjustly withheld from them, would not be ••• • is pledge of their attachment to the institutions of the country, :and a bond-Of union and tranquillity, • instead of an incentive.. ' 'to-treason and rebellion. It was the deprivation, not the pos- • . sh•ssion of constitutional popular rights which led to disaffection, • and its attendant - train of evils. The Government proved by its own acts. that it was not unconscious of -the wrong which it alid the comununity, knowing that the undoubted rights of the. people were most pertinaciously withheld from them.. Mini. siers.thought it natural that they should resent the oppression— • - they thought it natural that they 'should cherish feelings hostile to an Administration whose system it was to perpetuate all . chuseh - of complaint.. They endeavoured to repress these feel i n gs, net by removing the evil, but by increasing-the coercion. The liberties of the subject were in consequence still further restrained; the last enemy of corruption, public opinion, was attached, and the right of publication abridged—(Hear, hear, fifear.f)The result was a sullen silence. Yet still the people were 'accused in such a manner' as proved that the Ministers could never forgive those whom they had injured; and they could never forget that they had, as the debate on the Army • Estimates of last night sheaved; founded the security of their nahaer on force-4 Hear, hear !)--But if the voice of public , homplaint was met by conciliation, they need not have any re •hicearse to severity. fle (Mr. L.) and his Honourable Friends • -Who t , apported Reform were accused of advocating innovation ; • • but who were the re 4; innovators ? - Were they those who were anxious to restore the purity of the Constitution, or those who, • like the Gentlemen opposite, abrogated the ancient practice of " -public meetings, and suspended the Habeas Corpus Act ?-- - Thils Were the Ministers the real innovators, and. accused the • Refohmerh of the crime of innovation of which they themselves were guilty. Ile denied that there was any innovation in de manding the restitution of those rights of which their ancestors were jealous, and which were equally founded in law and cape . illency. There were•one or two ary,uthents much relied on by those who opposed Reform, respecting -which he wished to say a few words. It was stated that the present system of 'epresentation, though objectionable in theory, worked well in practice; and it was also stated, that rotten boroughs prodneed- much pracfi-,!:11 benefit to the country,- as they were , the means . of bringing men of talent into Parliament who might not otherwise have any opportunity of getting there.— ,With respect to. the 'firit, it was 'certainly very true. that the system,worked:well inpractice ; but for whom did it work well? •. hhhy for. the llonourabte Uentierneu - opposite who used that arp-ornent, and for their relations and friends who enjoyed its hz-'44t, as might be seen by an inspection of-the place and pen . sion . lists.—(Bear !)—B u t the result, however benefical to them, was not equally so tutlie, country ; the preSerit condition to which the ethpire was reduced, in al/ its interests - ' prove,/ that the sys tem did not work well.. for the peOple . England.--(Cheers !) • Kit haal, where were the proofs ? Was the country either rich . and contented at home or powerful Abroad ? How then'could it he Said that the system' welled well for tho country ? The other argument relative to rotten boroughs was equally invalid.. Stich institutions' could not have any peculiar property of fos taiing the rising talent of 'the nation. All history proved that merit and ability were more likely to find their level in a free State than in a corrupt or arbitrary 'Government ; but suppos, ing the.fact to be true, was that House .ilesigned to be a place for the display of talent, of was it an institution formed to' e at c.leck on the. Crown, Where the exertion Of the steady prin ., eiples of honesty and independence was mere to be desired than tth the rhetorical flourishes and harmonious periods which •elo , quence ever nitered,-(Here, hear !)---Ile would take an example fram domestic life, and would. say, that in his own limited es tablishinent he had rathek be served •by a• stupid honest man, than by, the most 'eminently - gifted - rascal that ever wore a li , Very.—(Cheers and laughter !)—lie knew he had omitted many • arguments applicable to the question; buthe hoped the House ai •wottld not allow it., Merits. to suffer by his demerits, but give it the consideration whieli it so well deserVed. This - was not the tithe to trifle with public opinion ; when it,was resisted, •as in ftdy, it led fo consequences which must terminate in some de ploribie convulsion. But in Spain, public opinion, left to its own oeeration - had produced the happiest. results ; it was proceeding to union with knowledge to the correction of venerable abusef, ytheestablishinent of enlightened institutions, and the consolidn tion of'a system equally benefiCial to the Monarch 'and the Pep , pie, as protectihg the prerogative of the one and the freedom of theotlier.. He builedlhat - star of liberty which had risen oil the t. gloomiest hart, of' our political. horizon; as the auspicious omen 4if.the a11-conquering taere Were any well inclined to the reStoration.ef the rights' Of Ertgllimen, but whd .shrunk from stemming tlfe torrent of cor ..ription, thrtnighalreird. of the aspersion • and obloquy which it brckght , ,,on theta, he'. was tot one - of - them ; whatever perils' • enhotr4ass6d.liiin a lioweVer the wind dud the title might he against Aria-he .ws - ;hipported by the goodness of his catise, by. the pu hity tf hit intentions, .:and had,' above till; a . confiding hope "11 - r.: the -spirit of the COnstitra tion.- • The Honourable MeMber theta moved " That the House do resolve itself into a Com • inittee of the whble }louse,- to consider the present state of the Representatican - 'idlYarliament " and sat down amid much eh Mr. S. C. WHITBREAD - 'seconded the Motion. He ob • •aerVed, that Parliathentary Reform, instead !of endangering, would, mare than .any . thing else, • tend to the preservation of liberty and. property. He spoke the opinion of his: Constituents when he said. that-that as the Houhe v; a$ now constituted it was ,• nearly tne raverae of what it was intended to be bY.the theory of the COnstituti- a. It was top notorious to be denied, that a • great iminber obtained their seats in violation of the principle, of eiection-- h (Heir!')—and in Contempt of the Stand Orders of that Honse. But then the•Hottse was too delicately sensitive .:to,')).ll.olit'ifself to be _told of tlioe•thisials, and wap, in 'fact, like ' wqflian`Othad character, with , whom you might take 4::ert" . hcit that of telling her of her frailty.—(Clicers and laugh 'lhrthj-izThe'dortilition to which. the, country was reduced afford - l eii . thl2 . Strerigest hirgtintebt.in favour of. Reform, foralthougli, . - . vhtitibris loured in • frein all harts of the:country, they were ' treated with indifference, am l' neither a correction . of abuses Or tiny subitantl4 inquitY. 'This. cotild not be the case if' the is,, of Commons really renresented the people. The tip, . tion was oppressed with taxet, its representatives were onlythinl 'of enjoying the pleaturet and profits of patronage. lletiOnrahn Member then expressed his appfobation of the • •• plazt of Refliren proposed by his Honourable Friend, particularly that,. art which went to shoiten the duration of Parliaments, aria 'concluded by entreating the htembers to take care .not to be wanting in' 'their duty at trustees - 1)f the people, and guardians of their liberties::.:-(Hear, hear !) • • • . Mr. AV-ILMOT opposed the motion: He could not conceive that, from the reasons now adduced, 'any: member was boUnd -to vote-' for the Cominittee.. Frani the time that the spirit. f "eras had been first 'propagated throughout Europe; he one who 'thought :a - stand:by,. "inn) , • vieh-necessary to our. shafety.: .11e anticipated results - from the diffution ofeducation. • far different from :those looked thir liy the -Anon. Mover; lie' • thoght the p s eoliy, liatt been. fling and artfully : deluded on the subject OfihetrzightS, and particularly the right toAnnual Par liaments and":Uitiversal • Auffrage; that those had -never been the-rights of the *pre might' he proved - almost with matherna .. tiedcertainty:. .He argued artea'ne length against - the supposi • tin that anciently all freeholdeis tht ;COunty Cohrt voted at electioth for.tneMbers, of . P.arliathent. • 'Ahhost overwhelming • •• aegir. uent against the.. rian: Gentleman's Sentiments respecting • • the &ration of each Parlianient Was, that it had. never been -Mentioned in the Bill of Itightk as a matter Of right existing in the representative body... rt, was that; cop" yholders never pos ,sessed-.the right, ofvotittg; . oo it, *Old -be an. extraordinary in. • noiation On the Constiehtibn if theYivere now' admitted tbsote.. Even where the representation altered in the manner which had been recommended, no relief of any very great consequence could be afforded to the pecuniary burthens of the nation, consistently with the assurances given and the faith pledged to the public creditor. The difference between those who were openly hos- tile to every species of Reform and the moderate Reformers was comparatively nothing, compared to the difference between the latter and the sweeping Reformers, who would proceed by their projected reformation to blot out all those venerable institutions which had grown with the nation's growth and strengthened with its strength. Ile for one could anticipate nothing from this general reform but a series of internal disquiets, discontents, and insurrections, in the progress of which our national great ness and national glory would necessarily fall into decay,. and the country would be reduced to deplore its former happiness under a different system of things. There never had been a time when complaints had not been made in this country of the decay of our liberties and the corruption of the Legislature. (The Hon. Member here read an extract from a publication in 1689, which excited considerable laughter.)--It was published only four years after the passing of the Bill for triennial Parlia ments, and accused lioth Tories and Whigs of great corruption, alledging that the Whigs always went restive, except they were in possession of place eir payment .; it strongly enjoined those places which sent members to Parliament not to elect,the sons of the Nobility to represent them, because they were sure to go into the performance of their duty with a proud spirit, and be tray their constituents. After drawing a parallel between this and other countries, he challenged any man to disprove that this country, even as it was now governed and represented, did not . possess t more rational and practical liberty than any other na ' on on the face of the globe.--(Loud and repeated cheers.)— He would read from a publication which he held in his hand, „ The Edinburgh Review," a passage stating what the writer conceived to be the duties of a member of Parliament. They were incompatible with what the Hon. Gent. opposite (Mr. Lambton) required.--:-(Here the Hon. Member read the pas sage. Thegeneral import of it was, that members of Parliament should not, to execute their duties properly, consider themselves as the representatives of any particular district, but as bound to legislate for the general interests of the nation.)—ln these sen tmients be fully concurred. He felt convinced that if the sym pathy desired by the Hon. Gentleman opposite (Blr.Lambton), between the representatives and his constituents existed, it would be productive of much more injury than good. When it was stated that the members of that House were completely depend ent on the Minister, he could not admit it to be the case. What ever might be the results expected from the plan , now proposed by those who were the advocates of Reform, it could not be de nied by those who attended to the events of past time, or of, the present day, that liberty was not the birth of a moment. That it was not to be arrived at instantaneously. He would not tres pass.longer on the time of the House, but conclude with the words of a Right Honoutable.Gentleman who formerly filled the chair, that it should be their daily prayer to uphold the con stitution, and preserve to the latest • posterity the dignity and authority of that House. Mr. HOBHOUSE said, that if it were• necessary for the Hon. Member who spoke last to entreat the patience of the House, it was much more necessary for him to do so, feeling as he did his incompetency to the task he had undertaken. He would, however, state those opinions he conscientiously enter tained. The Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Wilmot) said, that na tions, when they tried to do so, could not, by one step, arrive at freedom from a state of oppression and slavery. The obser vation could not apply to them, however applicable it might be to other nations. They were not emerging from slavery, but he did not know how soon they might fall into it; and it was with the view of preventing so fatal an event that his Hon. Friend (Mr. Lambton) brought forward the -present motion. Enough had been said by his Hon. Friend to prove that Par liament was quite different now to what it had been in former times, with respect to its numbers, its duration, its constitution, and the system of election. It was justly remarked by Mr. Hume, that the history of this country was a history of per petual change ; and Mr. Fox had well observed, that no inno vation could be greater in the constitution of that House, than to decide that no innovation was to be attempted. For himself he could see no argument, no good reason, against the neces sity, the propriety, and utility of Reform. Just as with re spect to numbers there was no fixed principle. In the time of Henry VI. the number of Members in that House amounted to no more than • 300. In the time of Henry VIII. 31 more were added, and 13 in the reign of Elizabeth. Westminster first sent Members in the time of Edward VI. and James I. added the Universities. At the Restoration 72 places were dis qualified that - formerly sent Members to Parliament ; 36 were subsequently restored to their franchise. A mistake, however, had been made in the number of places disqualified, for they amounted, he believed, to 79. The number of places entitled to send Members having thus varied, they Must now surely have a right to legislate on the frame of Parliament. The fran chise was also changed. It was not known exactly what places formerly had a franchise. This was the case with respect even to Westminster itself, for a Committee sat on the subject during two whole years, and they then reported that they might sit during the remaining part of the Session of Parliament, without coming to a decision. As to the duration of Parliament it was first sessional, then held twice a year, subsequently annual, and afterwards biennial, triennial, and septennial. With respect therefore to the numbers, the duration, and the franchise, there was a variability in the constitution of Parlia ment. There was a variability also in its character. It differed materially in the time of the Plantagenets, the Tudors, and the Stuarts. The.characterof Parliament, in better times, might be fairly taken from the Statutes against corruption in different periods, as compared with the revenue. At the Revolution the revenue was 1;200;0001., and:the Statutes against corruption 14. In 1792, the Statutes against . , corruption were 95, and the in. crease in the revenue was proportionate. In 1818, the revenue amounted to 64,500,0001. Adding to this source of influence, the East Indies, the Board of Control, the Lee Ward Island, duties, and 196,0001. paid in pensions, by a parity of reason ing, a proportionate change must have. been effected through means of corruption in the constitution of, the House. Look ing to these circumstances he had a right to say that the House of. Commons, as it now existed, was a mere mushroom sudden ly sprung up' from the unfortunate circumstances Of the times. It was not therefore proposing any innovation to make some effort at bringing it back to the principles on which it formerly stood. He had of late frequently heard it asserted that the in- fluence of the Crown had not increased. In the beginning of the last century Mr. Hutchinson asserted, that the influence of the Crown sent between thirty and forty members to that House. It had not decreased thirty years after; for when Mr. Henry Cox was called to account for his disbursement of the public money, allowance was made, as a thing of course, for the sums necessary to influence thirty or -- forty Members of .that House. • It was impossible to say that the House had not changed its- character; and the end of the system pursued was that which had been foretold by Mr. Hutchinson, that the House of Commons would become a third estate independent of the people of England. This was now actually the case. He defied any man, however great his talent Or eloquence might be, to dis prove it. They hail a house of Comirions not representing the opinions of the people ; in place of being so constituted; that when a majority spoke their sentiments it would be decisive im mediately of what was public opinion. - He defied any person to show that it was the intention of the constitution to have the country governed bT suckers Oligarehy. When the question of Parliamentary Reform was introduced, the bbjeation Was--that all who supported it differed 'in their Opinions, that they pro ceeded upon contradictory viewi, and that it was impossible to ascertain precisely what their object was, or how far they intend= ed to go. It was very remarkable that,.in the . beginning, same objection was made - against introducing the R.eformation into this country. There were then in Germany twelve differcn sects of Reformers. 'Lutherans Calvinists, and .various others, and it was asked 'which system of Reform they would introduce into England ? The unity Of -the Catholic Church was opposed . to this diversity of opinion. If this objection were listened to, they 'would in all probability have never enjoyed the benefits of 'the Reformation. He - hoped, notwithstanding similar objec tions, that all Reformers would now - unite for• the purpose of making such a change as would cause-that House. to sympathise • in the most perfTct Manner possible with the wishes of the peo ple. He differed in some points froth his Hon.Friend(Mr.Lamb- Ion) ; but agreeing with him' in the main object of his motion, he would support it. He objected to Boroughs, • inasmuch as they were made an article of traffic. An Oligarchy governing in this manner, however tolerable' it might be otherwise, was ruinous to the country for those who bought a borougla•must a-course expect and - look for a return in some other way.. to annual Parliaments; the peoplehad a right to them by usage. From the time of the Conquest to Edward IL they were held two or three times a year ; and it had) been satisfactorily proved that those were not merely sessions of the satne Parliament, but that an eleCtion .took place' for each. Lord Raymohd was of opinion that annual Parliaments could never be departed from without injury to the Constitution. (Here the Hon; Member took a cursory view of , those Who supporte&P.arliamentary Re forth froni the thine of Lord - Shaftesbury to Mr. Pitt.) It was an error to suppote that time House of Commons voted away the Lords in the time of -the Rebellion. The 'Parliament of that day was not the Parliament of - England ' for it mas, by being purged various times, reduced to 87, 67 of whom sat for boroughs. The Family now on. the throne: need not fear ex tending theprivileges of the people. In the Rebellion 011745, when" the Aristocracy_ favoured the Pretender, he was not joined on his march towards England by More than-300 of the 'people. The Hon. MeMber concluded a speech fidl-of learned referenee and-quotation by ari attempt to refute the arguments of Mr. Canning in. his Letter to the Electors of Liverpool. From an observation of that Right Honourable - Gentleman (upon a for- . tiler occasion, that demagogues soon fell' to their - proper level in that House, he took occasion to attack. him with much ela .borate lievority." • - • . • ..• Mr. HORACE, .TWISS was inaudible for Some time in the gallery, owing to the noise'in the House. It - had. been argued that public opinion was slow at arriving at correctness. This slowness was his great objection to the extension of suffrages as proposed by . the Honourable Gentleman. The opinion of the people was right' in the great current from age to age. It was not to be regarded as the reflectWtof -a.mairror, but at Me per manence of a picture, and th6refoire titre was required for the features to settle. PubliC opinion ought to follow, not to pre - - cede, the deliberatiOns of Parliansent, - . If that was at all times proper, how much more so no*,-,loleis the public mind was so exposed to novelties in cipiniona and events ? It had been stat ed that 150 Members were returned .by BOrough -influence.— Ile would here mention, npt as important iii itself, but asshow ing the accuracy of Hon. Gentlemen on the other side, that this number was quoted from L or d Gr e y' s petition of 1793, without adverting to the addition of 100 Irish Members since that time. Every government must be more or less oligarchi cal, except the government of the unit of despotism,; the more democratical a government was, the more oligarchical it became. But there was •no greater fallacy than to represent the MO Mem bers as if they were returned by one united corporation. They never did, and never would pull together. It was a greater misapprehension to suppose, that if triennial Parliaments were restored, one Parliament only would be held every three years. Reasons of precaution, as beneficial, to the people as to the Go vern:tient, had required a dissolution one year before - the period limited by law. Those reasons of precaution would not be less likely to operate in triennial Parliaments. Miscellaneous cases of deaths of monarchs, changes of administration, and other circumstances, would occasion still more frequent dissolutions. Triennial Parliaments would therefore be very little more than annual Parliaments. Besides we were to regard not only our in ternal liberty, but our foreign glory. If we were surrounded, as Bishop Berkeley supposed, by a brazen wall, frequent elec tions might, with less hazard, be ventured upon ; but we had to protect and maintain our glory in other countries, and there fore the executive must not be too unsteady and precarious.— The inconveniences of elections, as they nosy occurred, was a price we paid wisely and willingly for our liberty. He would not detain the House longer at. this late hour ; but he' hoped the House would not agree to the motion of the Honourable Gentleman. . Sir ROBERT WILSON said he rose to support tlle.motion of his Hon. Friend from his own conviction of its necessity and propriety, and in compliance with the wishes of 2,000 of his constituents. Before he proceeded to state his reasons for vot ing for the motion, he begged, in the name of the friends of reform, to offer his acknowledgments to his Hon. Friend - (Mr. Lambton), not for the talent he had displayed in support of the motion, for that,was the natural fruit of his genius and appli cation, but for eitie industry he had bestowed on the subject.- - The opinions and views of the great body of the reformers were now embodied. It could now be seen whether the reformers could show, not balm; but poison e for a sickening state. Even the enemies of reform admitted that the reformers were theore tically right in demanding a free, full, and fair representation. He could say from his intercourse with the people of this coun try, that if Reform were a . mere theory, it would not have in terested the people. Many might contend for the . victory of truth over fallacy, because fallacy must prove remotely perni cious. But the people would not take a deep interest in abstract theory. In other countries tumults, violence, and massacres had been seen in consece.ence of the attachment of the people to abstract principles. It was not so in England. But the question of Reform had taken such deep root, because the peo ple were persuaded that it was necessary for the real interests, for the general happiness and prosperity of the country . ; because. they were persuaded that it was the regulating principle of power and-life ; of liberty, person, and property. He agreed with the Hon. Member for Newcastle (Mr. Wilmot) that it derived great energy from taxation. There were two causes why it did so : first, the people felt themselves oppressed by in tolerable taxes upon their industry, to such an extent as he had formerly sholn, that 240 days in the year were occupied in earning what they paid in taxes. In the next place, they felt this burden more galling, because the greatest part of it • was for paying the interest of public debt. The Member for New castle had argued, that the people had considered the war just, necessary, and proper. But a great many had, from the first, been persuaded that the war had been founded in injustice. It had not been waged for the liberty, but against the inde pendence of the people. Great part of the money had been spent to induce persons to become 'supporters of the war, and to engage the . independence of others on the same side. Cer tainly a great proportion had been expended to animate industry in order to dispose the people to approve'of the-war. The very interest had been paid by loans during the war ; and the people werecontent to enjoy the temporary prosperity, in the hope of not seeing the evil day, as Louis XI V., who had said th a t h e care d not ifthedeluge should flow afterhe was gone. Anypeople could have ' been so corrupted : but it was the duty of their Representatives to have been more prudent, to have foreseen the calamities, and to have prevented them. The people now saw, that no remedy could be applied by the House without Reform. If the House had the will to apply a remedy, they had not ' the -power, be cause they were without the confidence of the people. The people asked not spoliation, but a remedy that would give them their due and necessary proportion of the fruits of their own labour.—(Hear, hear was true that they had the li berty of expressing their opinions, and that there was still— , thanks, to the exertions of Hon. Gentlemen, in and out of Parliament—some practical liberty left to the country. The Right Hon. Member for Liverpool had indeed compared the liberty enjoyed in England with that enjoyed in America ; and after saying that nine -tenths of tho inhabitant* of the United States were in a state of actual slavery, had inferred that the degree of practical liberty existing in America was less. than that which existed in England. lie (Sir R. Wilson) had never stood forward as the eulogist of the forni of government adopt ed in the United States. He allowed that a large proportion of the population of those states consisted, of slaves ; but .those who urged that circumstance, as a matter of charge against America, ought not to forget that slavery was made a part of its Cdnstitution, whilst it was under English domination, and that it had- recently refused to admit into the union a - state which had refused, to abolish slavery. But was slavery un known in every part of the British Empire ? Or were not slaves a kind of property acknowledged' by the law in Jamaica, Guadaloupe,, and other of the West India Islands ? Before the Right Hon. Member for Liverpool took credit to' England upon that score, upon another occasion lie ought to bring in a dill for the abolition of slavery in the West India Colonies-- The question of Reform did not depend upon mere precedents. The people of England had, a right to 'every improvement in their government which the increased intelligence of the age, the growing knowledge of society, the change in the position of property, and the altered .temper of the population rendered desirable, if that improvement was compatible with the safety of the country. ' Reform was'a question which, whether it was or was not connected with the principles and precedents• recog nised ii;, the reigns , of the Edwards and the Henries, must at no distant period be fujly recognised by the House of Com mons. He should indeed despair of its success were it to de-. pend upon nothing else than its justice : it depended, however, upon other causes—upon the knowledge, the temper, and the courage of the community ; and he was convinced, hat if the 'reformers persevered with the same quiet and determined spirit which. they had: recently exhibited; many of the gentlemen whom he saw-around . him would not, sink into their graves without beholding the House of Commons a full, fair; and equal representation of the people. • , Mr. ABERCROMBY could not give his vote on this occa sion without stating to the House the qualifications which' he, wished to accompany-it. It would' be unnecessary for him to advert to the ancient usages of Parliament as appointed by the 'COnstitation, because he considered they were accurately de fined. The duration of Parliament was fixed and ascertained, as also were the places Which returned Members and the right of voting ; in all of which, however, ChangeS had taken place, which changes were not unknown to 'the Constitution. The plan which had been introduced this night by the Member for Durham, he had a fundamental objection to ; and which, if car ried into effect, he could view in no other light than as tending to a complete revolution. It was very easy to adopt that system of Reform.which would leave the fabric of the. Constitution safe and secure. That would not be the case if the present plan were adopted. - It would certainly _make the House of Com .mors'a very' popular asseeriblage ; but that popularity.wodld eventually entail disgrace on the. House itself, and consequently Misery On thenation atlarge. When he voted in 1810 for a ParliamentarY Retbrni, thejelan introduced was of that mode rate nature•that none could find a reasonable objection to it. It had been in part acted upon this Session in the case of the Gram pound Disfranchisethent Bill ; but here Reform was not car ried to its necessary extent. In all cases of this nature it was ;proper that the - Crown should-balance its- strength between the people and their representatives; and lie could not conceal him self from the fact, that the influence of the Crown had Of late years very Muth increased in that House. It wag impossible to look at the expence of colleCting the revenpe,. and the increase ofinfluence in the Army and Navy, and not be satisfied that:the CroWn possessed' an equal increase of influence in that House, 'which if not checked in time; might become so overwhelming as toproduce very disastrous consequences. With respect to triennial Parliaments, he conceived that period was the shortest possible duration to 'width they could be reclined. For some reasons that reduction' might be thought advisable but 'he could never be brought to agree to it, unless the expences attending elections were in eome 'way or other reduced also. Without this the remedy would be inconceivably worse than the evil. Upon this debate a great deal had. been said against Parliament, and nothing infavour of it.. -He thought the conduct of Parliament had been unfairly dealt with. Since he had the honour of a seat int bat - House,'he had seen wisdom displayed on both sides. Although on several occasions the people had instructed their Representatives, yet on others the Parliament had instructed the people, and that profitably and successfully too. Without care' rying the. House far back, lie would•remind them of the concili atory measure which. -bad passed. that Reuse, and . was under • consideration elsewhere. If that measure were carried, the cre dit of it would fairly belong to the Parliament, which had in this case instructed the people. In giving his vote on thii oc casion, he wished to be distinctly understood as giving no sane tion to tile plan which had been introduced. Ha was desirous that the House should not suffer an impression to go abroad, that , no conces'sCort would.be granted to the people ; if it did, it would not only. embmger the security of the House, but the peace of the country also. Mr. F. PALMER, in supporting the motion, conjured the House to pay sonic attention to the petitions on this subject, under which the table now groaned. Mr. 6. WORTLEY admitted that there were many Mem , hers who were returned to that House by the influence of others; he admitted that there wasa very strong and general feeling in favour of Reform ; still he contended, that the House of Com mons, as at present composed, was the only assemblage by which the Government of the country could be successfully carried on. -• In tracing the arguments which had been adduced upon the present representation of Boroughs, he could not go back to the reigns of Henry IV. and James 1. but he must look to later periods, when all dissensions between the Government and the people were healed. From that- time he could not find that any alteration " had taken place in those Boroughs. He should like to be informed when either Corfe Castle or Old sa:. rum were otherwise represented than they were now ? The right of representation had been given, and wisely given, in or der to create a desire to procure influence in that House. He was clearly of opinion that, when the Acts of the Houk of Com mons were to receive a check from the House of Lords and the Crown, it was decidedly necessary that that in fluence should exist. He was glad that the right to ex ercise that influence; and the general question, had been brought before - that House; that, was the proper place to discuss it, and he felt convinced the more it was debated the more speedy termination it would meet with, as the coun try would soon be Satisfied of the emptiness of the present plans of Reform. One of the pretexts in favour of that Reform had been the complaint that the present House of Commons was not an index to public opinion. Of a certain portion it certainly was not; nor ought it to be ; it was the duty of Parliament to look coolly to the. consideration of every question ; it had done so, and its decisions always produced great satisfaction to the country. If any proof were wanting of this, he would refer the House to the memorable proceeding of a few months past, and that would aiibrd them abundant conviction. He fully agreed with the Member for Caine, that no alteration could possibly take place in the duration of Parliaments, unless some arrangement were entered into by which the expences of the election could be curtailed. Indeed, if the Parliament meant to maintain its other principles, and ensure a fair exercise of its prerogatives, - it would not suffer any encroachments to be made on them by the visionary schemes of speculative Refor mists.—(ilear: hear !) . Lord BURY justified the reformers from the charges of disaffection and disloyalty which had been urged against them. If reform were not speedily granted, 30 years of misrule and misgovernment would meet with a dreadful retribution. Reform would come, and come to teach Parliament the uses for which it had been instituted. Mr. R. MARTIN. was against the motion. He was con vinced that if he and the friends with whom he generally acted were to make their obeisance to the chair and quit the House, leaving the question to be decided on by the Gentlemen opposite, the motion , would be.negatived, even amongst them, by a most triumphant majority. , Lord MILTON said, that he had always thought the ques tion was important, and had always approached it with caution. He had early in life been an advocate for the continuance of that Constitution, which he had been taught to believe worked well. —(Hear !)—But times had altered. Consistency bound him to change his opinions, when he beheld that Parliament had changed theirs. He wished that the House of Commons should express the feelings of the people. Although the HOuse was as wise as the Senate of Rome, or the Areopagus of Athens,, if it did not express the feelings of the people it was not the House of Commons understood, by the people of England at all ages. The House ought to b e the real representation of the people of England. He appealed to the authority of Mr. Burke to prove that assertion, and to -chew that the people were correct judges of the conduct of their representatives in the House. He de dared that lie had witnessed in that House as much unwilling.. ness to attend-to-any opinions contrary-to the feelings of some Members as be had ever seen in a popular assembly. He was convinced frbro obserVation that the great mass of the house holders of England and Scotland were desirous of Reform. He had seen„ at a respectable. county meeting, the Yeomanry declare their-desire of a Reform. He could not, however, agree to the motion, which,, however beautiftil in theory, would be productive of as many - difficulties as it -Would tend to rem edy. The House ought to be the representation and mot the delegation of the people. The majority of the people would, he was assured, have voted against the votes of the House on late occasions. That was a fearful situation, in which thecountry could not continue long Without producing destruction. — (Loud coughing.)—He had said that the county meetings were sometimes more regular than the House of Commons. Per haps hiS 'observations were- not pleasant to some Members, al though they were true. He did not wish to cause pain to any Members. He was fearful that the - small boroughs gave to the Ministers their great majorities.' The County Members usually were 84 on one side, and 86 on the other. The Borough-Members were 172 on the Treasury side, and 73 on the Opposition. Unless a more popular spirit was infused into the House, there was. every danger that it would soon be in dis putes with the, people; and unable to perform the duties which the Constitution expected from it.' , - • Mr.-W. WILLIAMS said that if the arguments of the Hon. Mei - ober for Yorkshire were correct, the people were now as much Repablicans as they would be on any future occasions. He was attached, aei he was sure the people were attached, to the Constitution of King, Lords, and Commons. The Borough Members were independent of constituents • that was a danger : they might be well informed men; and therefore the system could work well; but was-that the mariner in which a Legisla ture ought to be composed ? No. ',Vile Malt Tax would have been repealed if the county-Members - had alone possessed votes on the late divisions. The majority of the county MeMbers on a late division on the Army Estimates,: were 32 to 22 against that Wasteful expenditure of the public money. The House Of Com mons ought to have a control over his Majesty's Ministers. With the same sincerity as the Right Hon. Member for Liver pool had declared, that he would always oppose Reform'; be de clared, that he had supported, and would - always support Re form, for he thought that it alone could save the country. Mr. HONYWOOD was for going into a Committee upon the state of the representation. (Loud cries of " Question, question !") The. CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose for the .purpose of moving an Adjournment of the debate until to-mor row (WedneSday). The Adjournment was agreed to.—The other Orders of the Day 'Were then disposed of, and the House rose at -Half-past One o'Clock. • • • • HOUSE` OF COMMONS (LAST.NIGHT). Mr. Ricuaitnsoic presented the Report of the Commis sioners appointed to superintend the buildmg.Of NeW Churches.: On the motion of Mr. Hotifirs, a' new writ was ordered to be issued for the return of a Knight to serve in the present Parliament, in the room of the Marquis of Londonderry, late Lord Castlereagh, Member for the. County of Down, Ireland. Mr. CURNEN presented Petitions from certain Clearers of the Soil, Inhabitants of Alback and Levengen, complaining of agricultural distress.—Ordered to be printed. METROPOLITAN ROADS. Mr: D. GILBERT brought up the Report of the Commit tee on the 'Metropolitan Road Bill. Mr. CUWWEN hoped the printing of this Bill would not be postponed to so late a period of the Session as was intended. He thought it would be in compliance with the wish of the House riot to fress this Bill through any , more of its stages this Session. It might be printed and brought forward early in the ensuing Session. Mr. D. GILBERT was not inclined to delay the Bill be yond the present Session.' It had been amended in the,CAmi mittee so as to meet with general approbation. Sir H. PARNELL said, he should always oppose the Bill. After some further observations from Mr. lloNYwoon and Mr. CURWEST, the Bill was ordered to be re-committed on the 9th of May next. Mr. HONY WOOD presented a Petition from certain Inha bitants of-Blackheath, praying that the Queen might be re-in stated in all her rights and privileges. Laid on the table. . • SMOKE OF STEAM ENGINES. Mr. M. A. TAYLOR said ; he should have occasion to trouble the House for a very few minutes, as-there was not a Gentleman in the House but must be aware of the mischief and inconveniences occasioned by the smoke issuing from the chimnies of furnaces of steam-engines. It was not only prejudicial to health, but was also extremely detrimental to• property; it was a nuisance in law, but the legal process for abating it was attended with considerable expence, the fear of which often induced parties to remove from the neighbourhood, even at a considerableloss. He had been induced by the con sideration 'of these circumstances to apply himself to the endeavour to provide some effectual remedy. Two Committees had been appointed to inquire into the subject, and the result of their labours had been to establish the possibility of removing this nuisance in a great measure, if not altogether, by the use of furnaces on a particular construction, which almost entirely con_ stimed their own smoke. The Hon. Member then proceeded to describe several instances in which the use of s4ch furnaces had been successful in . removing the nuisance. Those furnaces emitted' but -a very trifling qtiantity of smoke, and that was of a character wholly different from" that of other. furnaces ; he, therefore, proposed to afibrd to those persons .who might be damaged by such nuisances, a greater facility .than.the law now gave to effect their removal. • The provision. which he should make for that purpose would operate chiefly by empowering the Court, in cases of conviction on indictments for nuisances of this description, wherein it should appear that the parties per- , . sisted in refusing to abate them, to z. , -.varuthe payme n t o f cos t s to the prosecutors.' Ii e concluded by moving tor leave to bring in " A Bill for affording greater facility in the prosecution and abatement of Nuisances, arising from Furnaces used in working Steam Engines." Mr. TR EMAYNE was favourable to the general principle of the Bill ; but doubted the expediency of applying 1:3 pro visions to the case of engines worked in tile mining districts. Mr. I). GILBER'I' said he understood that Mr. Parkes had contrilled a very ingenious method of Making steam engines consume their own smoke. At die same time the lion. Gen tleman's Bill must be considered as almost tantamount to a new law; and it would certainly be necessary to guard against the interruption of (important works On account of a trifling, ineon. venience or proceedings from groundless. complaints. Sir M. RIDLEY supported the motion. There . were so . . many ingenious inventions for the suppression of the evil that no excuse, he thought, existed fo r the . proprietors of steam eat. pines in not putting it into practice. Mr. WIENFELL concurred in the utility of the proposed' measure, but at the same time be hoped due consideration would begiven to the hint thrown out relative to the applica.' tion of this . Bill to large steam engines for particular purposes, in particular spots. :Mr. S. WOR'I'LEY did not see why the remedy should not be applied to steam engines in the country, distant from town, as well as in other places. Bon. Members who did not live in the country did not know the inconvenience resulting from the establishment of steam engines near their residences. • Mr, CURWEN thought - great bandit might accrue from the Bill, but care ought to be taken in fixing the extent of its ope ration. • Mr. Alderman WOOD said, that as-there were no complaints of steam engines in Cornwall, he thought it .would be better to exempt that, and perhaps some other counties, from the ore.. ration of this Bill. If some such limitation were not adopted, the Bill would probably have to encounter great opposit io n._ Cornwall itsslf, they all knew, might send a pretty consider able force in hostility to - it. - Mr. M. A. TAYLOR shortly replied, and expressed his de.: termination not to exclude any particular county. If the House should agree to introduce such a provision, he shonld himself abandon the Bill altogether._Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. Mr. LENNARD presented a petition from the inhabitants of Aylesbury against the importation of such foreign commo dities as interfered with the sale of our own..--Ordered tolie on the table. Mr. CHICHESTER presented a Petition from the import ers of pottery in Belfast, .pr a yio g th a t t h e impending act for imposing certain duties on pOttery and hardware may not pass into a law. Mr. WESTERN presented a Petition from the. Merchants, Traders, and Manufacturers, of Colchester. The House would be surprised to hear the specific nature of this Petition: They had found out that their prosperity depended on that. of 'title agriculturiSts, and they prayed the House .to grant additional protection to the Agriculturist, stating that it that class was not upheld•in their present state of distress, they must all be in, volved in one common ruin. —Read, and ordered to be printed. The Hon. MEMBEI t then presented a similar Petition from Ingpert, in Essex.---Ordered to be printed. Mr. J. SMITH gave notice of his intention to move, soon after'the recess, for leave to bring in a Bill similar to that he had moved for last year, to amend the Bankrupt Laws, but not cora. prising so many objects. • NEW STREET. Sir G. NOEL moved for an account of the expenditure of the money voted by Parliament thr the building of the New-Street, with the names of the Commissioners, and of thc wao had received any of it. • Mr. LUSHINGTON hoped the Hon. Baronet would post pone his motion for the present, as the information could be of fered with much greater facility at a more advanced period. Sir G. NOEL assented, and the notice was withdratvn. Mr. HARBORD obtained leave to bring in a Bill to regu late the making and sale of bread. ARMY AND ORDNANCE ESTIMATES. Lord PALMERSTON moved, that the House resolve itself into a Committee of Supply. Mr. HUME stated, before the House went into a Commit tee, that as it was understood to be - necessary that.the supplies of every service in the army should be voted before the hecesii, it was not the wish of Gentlemen on his side of the House to make the opposition to them in detail.—(Hear !)—lt was, how ever, upon an understanding that the Report - would not be-. brought up :till-after the Recess, when . the discussion would be taken upon it. Col. DAVIES wished to know whether the Right Hon.Gen tlernan opposite (Mr. Ward) meant to take a vote on credit for the supply of the Ordnance services. Mr.. WARD - replied in the affirmative, and moved that the Ordnance Estimates be referred to the said Committee. The House then went into a Committee of Supply. The following Grants were then voted Fin the British Half Pay - - X 737,20,0 0 0 Military Allowances - - • - - 47,894 0 0 = Allowances to Reduced Officers of the Irish . Establishment - 2,493' 4 ti Widows' Pensions - - - - 161,980. 0 Sir M. W. RIDLEY wished to know how this .rooneY fo r the 'Widows' Pensions was distributed, and by what rules the . extent of the individual Grant was fixed.' Lord PALMERSTON 'said, that the gr, o.rtt for this service' was at:present defrayed entirely by a v ot e o f the house; and if the Hon. Baronet would turn to Paper 41 of. the Estimates, he would sCe the rates established foi. tfie'relaives of officers or every rank, which it was not in his (Lord Palmerston's) power to alter. Sir It. WILSON said, th a t h e h a d se en a • report in the CA L . EDONIAN MtncußY' of certain . in Edinburgh, on the subject of the. iolice in that city, in which the Lora. • President of Scotland e was stated to have declared, that the pra.ce tice of' signing false - payments prevailed generally in - the Army and Navy: He wished to know froth the Noble Lord opposite, whether there was any - foundation for such a statement i' There was.another practice in the Army, of which he . could not but lament the inevalence,.withregard to the purchase Of Cointhis sions. ' Officers were obliged - ,o . declare upon their honour as officers and gentlemen, that they did not give more than a certain sum for, their commissions, though it was as notorious as the sun at noon day that this declaration was . in ' almost every case i false: He hopedsonietheasures would be taken either to abol ish or amend the existing regulations. • Lord PALMERSTON said, that with rpect to the extract "which the Gallant Member had read from a NewSpaper, he was at a losi•to know to what practice it all u d e d ; f or so far q° ol there being in the army any practice of signing false pay hg ts ' any officer convicted of so doing, Would he brought to .a Court" Martial; and be ignominiously dismissed•the army for such an act. • 'With respect to the other pr ac tice, l ie did not knot', wh at stronger means of prevention they " could tithe, than what was quoted by the . Gallant Member. • Sir It. WILSON said; it was that certificate be wished. w. 130 •discontinued. Mr. HUME repeated the case instanced by the Hon. Merl; her for Southwark. The case 'was,. that a complaint was ir 3- t against a Captain Brown, Supennte n d an t o f th e Police a _ . - Edinburgh, the establishment ~to receive pay, which, not being presen'/ they were not entitled to receive. The indiVidnal quoted fro 1.1 the newspaper stated, that the circumstance, of Captain Itr ii 7; l having, signed false musters was, in hi s Opi n i on , suiNcl e p te ... entitle him to be removed froth his Satiation. The Ldr" b it.., 'sident, who chose to oppose his removal, leamuSe the ii ) ,.. nt i t ants of the place had long wished it, in, his defence Said , ' tiw r a y was a practice which existed in the army to . s i g n falsL h a d Lists. He (Mt. I.lunie) 'must sliy, thh e at fOr thirty years " ha d known any thing of the Army and 'Navy, no su ch practice existed. , He hoped the Noble Lord (Palmerston) , c ould stl port him in this denial. ~ . or . Sir J. 'YORKE said, he knew nothing of Captain Brown , the circumstance of his having forged Pay Lists: Mr. HUME begged pardon for interruptisig the Honou r l e . ,Baronet, but he wished to put him right as to what he (. 1 7 ., • Hume) said. He did not charge Capt.. Brown with forging/ He received 5001. a year for his •situation, and had continue many years' to sign lists a persons as efficient, whom 1, , ,i , of b , ~ not to be' there. Ile onl wished' to have a disavowal Lor d charge against the Army and Navy, brought by t " President. .. . . Lord PALMERSTON begged to state in the rnn_s_t distinct f"' and unequivoeal . Manner, that officers signing 0 ' would he :guilty'Of one Of the highest offences kno in re it Army, and the regulations Of the. Army afforded checks, ~ .A a it dering it scarcely possible for such a thing to be cloll e / - certain 'b ly' was of the rareSt occurrence: Sir . HARVEY didnot conceive such a thing passib le , I the, Navy. , s " the observations Sir G. CLERK was sure that the report o f . , Of the Lord President was incorrect. He , clid not know btlt. e be.. , about' the merits of the case against Capt. Brown.n; , 0 lieved the principal charge against hint was for hay! his horse. some of the men charged in the lists to take care of not answered Sir M. 'W.' RIDLEY said the Noble Lord had , employed his question, as to whose discretion the fixing of the rates of Widows' Pensions was left in. , tinus took th e Lord PALMERSTON, said, that he . soin liberty of advisingarlb r.. the Crown to make grounds, titherivise the pensions were g ranted acco tv i'' grants e o 1 . p,artic,uleard rates, from which there was no deviation. Mr. HUME . begged to say, relative to Captain 13,rof_v.nb;:thisi,t, it was not he Who broughtthe matterbefore the house; .would take upon himself to say that ,Cap for individuals Who were not in existence. The LORD ADVOCATE delineate the ex p ta.:"nalirown.-- of the charge preferred in that House against t•• Brown hadcha 401 That individual was answerable to the Sheriff' ' Ecli rte n: rtu g ir: ' :