The Sun. — London, England, 1839-07-13 00:00:00

EVVNING EDITION. 11 Icot ditiowof the labouring classes could be improved was 1 by a general distribution of all the property of the rich lamongst the poor aed labouring classes. Upon that he need not argue. But that etas the way in Ishich some had been induced to sign the petition—it was the manner in which many reckless demagogues had sought to pro duce an effect throughout the country, holding out that all property was to be divided amongst the people in ge neral. He was sure that every Member of the house, and the great majority of the' people were aware that any scheme cf that kind would tend not only to the destruction of our institutions, to the destruction of everything which made this country valuable, but that it would, before any long time, be the source of ruin to the labouring classes themselves.—(Hear, hear.) He knew not how, in any other way that could be proposed the adoption of a plan of this kind would tend to raise their means and increase their riches. His belief was i th t, generally speaking, the ins.itutions of this country :ended to give to give to the people as great a portion of freedom and security as had ever been secured by any in stitutions to the people of any country. He knew no in stance of any people existing on the face of the globe which I did enjoy these advantages to a greater extene—(Heer, . Ihear.) There was great political liberty in some countries; the security of the person, the general supremacy of the law, were less strong and less fortified in those countries than in our own. In other countries, there was a greater tniiitary force to repress any thing like disturbance; in those countries there was far less of that freedom to which he had adverted. So that upon the whole, he knew not that, by any great change of cur institutions such as the Hon. Gent:cman had proposed, lie could at all advance or cremate the welfare of the people of this country. He sup posed that the Hon. Gentleman would hardly contend, after theadeption of Universal Suffrage and Annual Parliaments, that the rest of our institutions would remain in their present state. He could net suppose that the Monarchy, that our hereditary Legislature, and our various institu• tions, would remain as they now were—that they would not be changed for other institutions, if so large and de maeratical a change should be adopted. He did not believe that any such change, even if it could possibly be accomplished three days hence, would tend to the comfort and prosperity of any portion of the people—he did not believe that it would tend to the welfare of the majority of those who had signed the petition.--( Hear, hear. ) He could not conclude without adverting to tee means by which those who professed to be members of the General Convention professed to carry their object into effect. They stated that at the unanimous request of the Con vention they urged the people to agree to the following terms—that they should individually and collectively withdraw their money from the Savings Banks—that that they should convert all their paper money into gold --that they should abstain from the use sf all exciaeabla liquors —that they should commence an exclusive system of dealing—and that they should exercise their ancient and constitutional right of providing themselves with arms. These were the modes which they propose for the purpose of insuring success.—( Hear, hear. ) Some of those who had impelled the Chartists may have acted conscientiously; liut there was no doubt that a great part of them were deluding the credulity of the rest. Ile was certain that the objects.which they avowed ought to be opposed with determination, because if they were achieved they would be fatal to the Constitution of this country, fatal to those rights which were now complained of as a monopoly, and fatal to our system of established Govern went. He (Lord J. Russell) would not say that those consequences he deprecated would take place. On the Contrary, he believed that the deluders of the people would be foil e d jay their own efforts. He believed that the great majority of the working classes now saw as he did, that the adoption of the propositions in the petition would b most injurious to themselves.—( Cheers ) He believed the y now spurned the intended advice they received— (Checrs)—and that they were now beginning thoroughly to see through the motives of throw designing persons who had been attempting to delude them merely for the Purpose of eking out a private income at th,, expense ot their dupes. lie had no doubt that those crafty persons would speedily ford their trade at an end, and that the good sense and virtue of the people of England were fatal to their schemes and objects.—( Cheers.) Mr. D'ISR A EL I concurred in a great deal of what had been said by the Noble Lord. lii all large populous countries there was ever a leaven of discontent. There was such a l eaven i n t hi s country, and that leaven was the basis of the present movement. But the petition was signed by considerably more than a minion of our fellow `objects. Those parties had been talked of on the assump Lion that the basis of their movement was strictly an eco nomical one. He had great doubts upon that head, be. s ca.nee economical movements g enera lly l e d to t umu l ts , bu t e 'dem to an organization. He would admit on the other hand, that this movement did net proceed entirely from a desire of political rights, for political rights were so abstract, and pressed so lightly on the multitude, that they were never the criein -of great popular movements. Tire great impulse f ere was a mixed motive. It was composed of economical and political feelings Those were the causes of that movement which the No, ble Lord was obliged to confess to be a great one. The mixed sentiment o f t h ose classes who spoke in tire petition was, that th e i r c i vil rights bad been invaded—those ' rights which involved personal security, comfort, and happiness ; s and also that they were deprived certain rights which d were of a higher character than merefeconomicalt rations. He ( Mr. D'l. ) did certainly think -1 the n s' civil e rights of the people of England had been invaded.— ( Hear, hear.) Perhapri from no evil intention—perhaps from a fallacious philosophy which desired to impose upon this people a system of Government not suited to their genius arid borrowed from foreign nations. Whatever the cause of the invasion, he (rslr. D'l.) thought that the feel tr.ig of the people c f England note was that their political rights had been invaded—( hear, near ) —and certain ac tive agitators were now stirring up this feeling of discon tent, which he might describe as the via inertice of the masses He would not ascribe the Charter to the New Poor-law, though he believed it had some connection with that measure ; but he believed, also, that the consequences of the present state of feeling amongst those classes would be soon most seriously felt. He found that the feeling which produced the Charter arose about the same time that the Reform Bill was passed, a measure that destroyed a Constitution which he believed was not understood by those who assailed it, and perhaps not even understood by :hose who defended it.—(Laughter and Hear, hear.) Thai Constitution was, however, intelligible; but it appeared that the Constitution which had superseded it was neither defined nor understood. The new Constitution took political power out of the hands of those saho, in the exercise of it, combined the discharge of important social duties, and placed it in the hands of those who performed no such duties; as, for example, the administration of justice, the regulation of the parish affairs, the building of roads and bridges, the employment of labourers, the distri bution of relief to the distressed, the commanding the militia, and the police. The new p ossessors o f p o li t i ca l power de sired to have it freed from such conditions, and from such duties. They desired to enjoy the power at the least pos sible expense and trouble ; and, ! therefore, they called for cheap Government, and for the institution of a central sys tem of administration—that thus both their purses and their persons might be spared. But he would maintain that what was called a cheap system of Central Government, would be found incompatible with the civil rights of the people of England.—( Hear, bear.) In fact, their civil rights were already invaded, and this was the cause of the Charter. The New Poor-law had been passed on the Principle of outraging those civil rights which had so long been the cause of the robustness of our cornmoawealth— (Laughter)—for it told the poor, that instead of applying as hitherto to their neighbours for relief they must depend upon a distant Government. That provi sion was a disruption of the social tics in this country. It also taught them that they should no longer have a right to be relieved by the State, but that in future their relief must be received as charity. He believed that alteration had produced great end just discontent, and be was ready to admit that the Gentlemen on his side of the House were responsible for it, but not in an equal degree, as the New Poor Law originated on the other side. He considered the passing of the Reform Bill MIS a very great blunder.—( Laughter.) He would also admit that a great number of the Tory party, arising from their long stupor, desired to enjoy some of its alleged advan tages, and also sonic of the benefits of cheap Government But referring to the National Petition, he must say it in volved a great fallacy namely, that social evils might be cured by the granting of political rights. But this fal lacy was not confined to them. Every evening he heard Hon. Gentleman at the other side complain that the people were starving, and that Household Suffrage would remedy their starvation. 'Why the National Petition demanded Annual Parliaments—others demanded Triennial Par liararents. He thought, therefore, that the Noble Lord had not acted justly in treating the peti tioners with derision.—( Cries of " No, no.") tie supposed the Noble Lord did not oppose the suggestions of a similar character from Hon. Gentlemen opposite, because he had obtained political power through their influence, and he hoped to retain his power through the some influence. }lc, however, believed that, if the Noble Lord expected to establish a Government on what was termed the " Mo narchy of the middle classes ;" he would find himself under a great delusion, which might endanger, not only the ins'itutions, but also the throne of this country. That system was foreign to the genius of the people of this country- If you give political power to the people of this country, you should also give them concomitant public duties to fulfil. Since we departed from this prin ciple discontent bad increased in the English nation, and happiness would only be restored in proportion as we ap proximated towards it. The Noble Lord had answered the Hon. Member for Birmingham, but not the Char tists. , The Hon. Member for Birmingham had de livered himself of a skillful ebullition in favour of the middle classes—but as far as be ( Mr. D's,) could see the Chartists had nothing to do with the Birmingham Union. The Chartists expressed the greatest hostility, not against the middle classes, against the newly enfranchised Consti tuency, not the old, which formed the basis of the Noble Lord's Government. Instead of finding the Hon. Mem ber for Birmingham the champion of the Chartists, ire found him vindicating his late Colleaguev, who were now the Judges of the Chartists. He (Mr. D'l.) was sorry that the Ch art i sts were so strongly opposed by both p art i es i n this H ouse —th e y were a great body—they compl a i ne d of great grievances, and they should not be passed over without some notice. Though they had been sitting already five or six months without, as he thought, any particular results ' yet it seemed that the Cha rtists were now no ticed by the Noble Lord as if by accident. In the early 1 part of the Session they saw Lord-Lieutenants of counties, Noblemen, and Gentlemen, leaving in tire midst of an im . portant debate, and travelling by railroads to retake cap tured towns, and returning just in time to vote.—( Laugh ter.) But the Noble Secretary of State took no I liaise of a ll t hi s . H e thought the Noble Lord now a treate3es the petitioners with unjust contempt. The Noble Lord refused to recognize it as a na tional petition. The Noble Lord, however, thought ha we.; at the head of a Reform Government, which others did not recoenise under that character.—( Laughter.) The Noble Lord ought not to be too severe—he ought to • take the name ::s he found it. Tire Noble Lord seemed to show great confluence in the temper and virtue of the people ot the country, great confidence in himself, and great confidence in his Governtr.e.it.—( Laughter. ) He hoped the Noble Lord had sufficient grounds for,this confi dence. But this did not warrant his contumelious—(" No, no.")--well, his captious tone towards the petitioners. The petitioners amounted to 1,260,000 discontented fellow-subjects. Such a number ought at least to be treated with courtesy. If he (Mr. 1)'I.) were a Minister, he should not despise them whether they had good grounds for discontent or not.--( Laughter.) Perhaps the self satisfied tone arose from a persuasion, that the war in the East was drawing to a close.—(A laugh.) Ho (Mr. D'l.) knew something of that country, and he could say that the Noble Lord was mistaken.—( Hear, hear.) Per haps it was the monetary panacea of the Hon. Member for Birmingham that had insp]rA him with satisfaction It might be said that the Government of the Noble Lord had been hitherto taken up too much with important af fairs, such as the making of Peers, and making promises to make Baronets, to attend to the Chartists. lie hoped, however, that during the recess, when there would be no Cabinet meetings upon subjects of such grave import ance, that the affairs of the Chartists would receive more attention from her Majesty's Ministers. He be lieved if the Government chose to take this move ment as only one of those temporary ebullitions which were rather the result of a plethoric habit in the country, than from any other cause, they would find themselves mistaken. The seeds were so Nn. which would germinate both to the trouble and the dishonour of this land. If Ministers insisted on a system of cheap and centralised Government, they would find in the long run, that they had seriously injured the naiional character, and probably had endangered the National Church. Mr. HUME believed the present movement on the part of the working classes, originated from a deep-rooted discontent, on account of the sufferings they had endured. He believed that, having joined most cordially in promoting the reform of that house in 1832, they had expected better results would follow than they had experienced. The speeches the House had heard that evening had very little to do with the prayer of the petition. The petition did not contain any proposition relative to piper currency, and although they might have suffered under the Poor laws, the Poor-laws were not mentioned in the petition. The Hon. Member who seconded the petition had stated all his own special opinions without looking to the prayer of the petition. The Noble Lord had not dealt fairly with the petitioners, because lie had referred to matters not contained in the petition. What the petitioners prayed was that the House would take the petition into their con. sideration, and use their utmost enaeavours, by all consti tutional means, to have a law passed granting to every male of sound mind and of age. the right of voting for Members, and they prayed for protection to the Voters, Annual Parliaments, and the remuneration of Members. The prayer of the petition, therefore, was for a change in the representation of the people. The peti tioners certainly stated they were heavily taxed—but would the Noble Lord deny that, and would he deny that this discontent, so wile-spread, could long continue without danger to the country ? What had the House to do with ' the cuirency or with the Poor-laws? They might be the affects of bad legislation, but they were to judge of the Chartists by what they saw in their petition. The Noble Lord had asked whether any one supposed that the changes which the Chartists desired would produce that ameliora tion they expected. He would tell the Noble Lord that ae did for one; and when the Noble .Lord said these men did not know what they asked for, he would tell him that no Englishman who loved the Constitution of his country could abject to the principles on which the Charter was founded, and a Nobleman, whose son was then in the House, had taken a distinguished lead in favour of three of those prin. eiples. The House of Commons did not fully and freely ,present the opinions of the people of England. The petitioners demanded their rights—they stated that time Ind corruption had taken from the people their pri vileges, and that the House of Commons was now elected by one-sixth of the people, which was contrary to the original basis of representation. Black. stone, Smith, and Lord Camden, had stated that taxation and representation ought to go together, and that no man could be a freeman who had taxes imposed on him, if lie had no voice in the election of those who imposed them. That was the principle on which the British Constitution rested, as stated by some of the ablest writers. The Chartists said they were slaves, inasmuch as they hod no voice in the passing of laws which affected their rights and liberties; and they attributed their privations and distress to this—that the laws passed were for the benefit of the teN at the expense of the many. He 'would now tell the Noble Lord how Universal Suffrage would procure cheap bread, which the Noble Lord had professed himself unable to understand. Why, they would send into the House men who would repeal the Corn-laws—(i-lear, hear)—they would send into Parliament men who would repeal these - axes that made food dear. At present the House of Commons belonged to the Aristocracy, it represented only the Aristocracy, and it was composed of men who by their nation Were iemoved from the people, and did not know their sufferings, and therefore they refused them their rights. His eculd not agree with the Horn Member op• posits, that the Noble Lord had treated the petition 'ightly.—( Hear, hear. ) He had certainly stated his opi nions fairly, and that he differed with the petitioners both as to their demands and as to the way they sought to ob tain them. He (Mr. Hume) did not approve of the term Universal Suffrage. He thought representation ought to be extended to every man of age, and of sound mind, who paid taxes, and performed the services of the State— men who were in the militia, and so on ; because if an Englishman was bound to give allegiance to the Crown mod the Government, the Crown and the Government were bound to give him protection. Government was a sort of mutual compact, and therefore he wished to see the Suffrage extended to every man. It was thought by some, that this demand on the part of the Chartists was <omething new. He could show that men high in. the ranks of the aristocracy had made similar demands long ,go. In the years 1779 and 1780, there was a Conven 'ion, at which delegates attended from the City of Lon don, Westminster, Gloucester, Newcastle, from the Counties of Surrey, York, Middlesex, Sussex—in short from 35 counties. They called their Assembly, " a aleeting of Delegates," and he thought the Chartists had sdopted a foolish name in styling their Assembly 4. The National Convention." " National Convention" carried with it recollections which every good 'man in the country would wish to forget. Many people thoughtlthere was not much in a name ; but, in the course of his political experience he bad found there was a great deal in a name; and his opinion was, " National Convention" was a bad title.—(l - fear.) In 1779 and 1780, various meetings took place, which were attended by many great men—among them Mr. Pitt, whose memory was so dear to gentlemen opposite. Mr. Pitt was one of the earliest Reformers. He found, on looking at the proceedings of the Assembly •o which he bad alluded, that they had come to a resolu tion to petition for " an alteration in the duration of Par liament by shortening it to the period of one year; for by two Acts that passed in the reign of Edward 111. it was ordered that Parliament should be holden every year and more often if need be."—(Laughter.) He (Mr. Hume) had seen two Parliaments in one year--( Hear, hear)—and he did not see why there should not be again two Parlia ments in one year—it was perfectly consistent.—( Laugh ter.) The resolution went on—" The object then being to prevent the Crown acting without Parliament." 'Writs were annually issued, and in some instances, two or three times a year.—( Laughter. ) If Gentlemen would attend to their business, the House would do more, and sit fewer nights than they now did.—( Hear, hear.) A resolution hed also been passed by that assembly in favour of the Ballot. On the 31 of June 1780 the Duke of Richmond introduced into the House of Lords a Bill for the purpose o! restoring to the people the constitutional right of voting in the elect;on of Members of Parliament. Tne feliowing were the heads of that Bill introduced by a Nobleman, after 26 years' experience :—Parliament to last one year; the number of Members to continue the same ; every male person, or subject of Great B-itain, to be entitled to vote at the age of 21 ; every county to be divided into dis tricts, each district to be called a borough ; each borough to send one Member. That was completely earrying out five of the points of the Charter. Amon. , the Friends of the People, in 1782, were the Duke of Richmond. the Earl of Surrey, Major Cartwright, the Lord Mayor of London, Mr. Duncombe, &e., and they formed an Association, and prelaimed the sane principles as were contained in the Charter. On the 30th of May, 1795, similar resolutions acre agreed to at a meeting, at which Mr. Smith. the Member for Norwich, was in the Chair. The Hon. Mem bers for Middlesex and Hereford also attended that meet ing. He (Mr. Hume) extremely regretted that Sir F. Burdett was not in his place, because be held in his hand an extract from a speech delivered by that Hon. Baronet, on the 15th of June, 1809, when Member for Westminster. Sir Francis Burdett had presented a petition praying that the franchise should be extended to all the citizens paying taxes—that the country should be divided into districts, each returning a Member—and that Parliaments should be restored to the constitutional duration. " The remedy I have proposed," he said, " is safe, constitutional, practicable, and simple ; calculated to give satisfaction to the commu nity—to preserve the rights of the Crown, and restore the balance of the Constitution. To this my aspirations have ever been directed—higher I do not wish to ascend—lower I never can be brought."—( Loud cheers, and laughter from the Ministerial Benches.) It was not uninteresting to observe the opposite definitions given of Universal Suf frage by Tory and Radical writers. In Blackwood it was described as meaning " the destruction of property, order, and civilization ; impracticable in an old and highly peopled state; and necessarily ruinous to the security of life and liberty." On the other hand, the Chartists asserted that " to deprive any member of the community of his right to vote, in making the laws, or electing those who are to make them, was neither more nor less than an outlawry of such individual—putting him out of the pale of the Constitution—that it is, in fact, a robbery, if the leas► particle of his property is touched for the purposes of the community which thus excludes him— that a man deprived of his vote is to all intents and pur poses a slave, for be is wholly dependent on others for life, and liberty, and comfort, which he is obliged to commit to the care and keeping of persons whom he despises, perhaps detests." He (Mr. Hume) held by this opinion ; and in its support he would quote two high authorities—the Noble Lord (J. Russell) and Earl Grey. The Noble Lord, in introducing the Reform Bill, said, I n t h e ancient Constitution of the country no man could be taxed for the support of the State who had not con sented by himself or his representatives to such tax." How could the Noble Lord, after making that declaration to induce the Heine to pass the Reform Bill, now laugh at the demand for Universal Suffrage ? Either the Noble Lord must have a short memory, or he must have marvel lously altered his opinions.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Earl Grey said, specking of the Reform Bill, and he (Mr. Hume) would apply it to the Chartist petition, " I be. lieve the measure to be one of peace and conciliation. Li 1786 (the Noble Earl continued) I supported Mr. Pitt in his measure for shortening Parliaments— and making the House of Commons more fully, fairly, and freely representing the people." [f he (Mr. Hume) ewe asked, would Household Suffrage give cheap bread ? lie vould reply that it would send into that House me❑ who would better attend to the wants and interests of the corn• munity ; aed he would say openly that he supported it and had proposed it, as a step to a more extensive Reform. The condition of the country rendered absolutely essential, ' in his opinion, some immediate progress towards further Reform, and if Household:Suffra ge had been conceded, he believed it would have stopped much of the discontent that prevailed.—( Hear, hear.) He begged pardon of the House for having so long trespassed upon them, but he felt that it was most important to the best interests of the country, that when a petition came up, signed by 1,200,000 of the industrious classes, they should be treated with con sideration and respect. They deplored the want of edu cation, and complained that the House had neglected its duty in spreading that enlightenment of the popular mind which would be the best basis of a strong and good Go vernment. They wished not to affect the interests of the Aristocracy or the stability of the Throne, but they wished to keep the Aristocracy in their proper sphere, and to give the CoMmons of England their duo weight and influence. He entreated the House to dev.se means of giving satis faction to the now discontented masses. And he did im .plore the Noble Lord well to consider if the Constitution would not be more endangered by resisting these demands than by basing the Government on the suffrages of four or five millions of electors. If the Noble Lord rejected these demands, he (Mr. Flume) belieeed that the best in stitutions of the country would be perilled—but if every man in the country had a vote, he believed men would be sent to this !louse anxious to correct abuses, and especially to eontroul unnecessary expenses, and to give to industry its due reward. On these considerations, therefore, he should give his support to the motion. Mr. SLANEY said he could not agree to going into Committee on a petition which asked so large an altera tion ie the Constitution, and one which appeared to him not at all calculated to lead to the end which the petitioners professed to have in view. He would have been willing to give to their prayer every consideration, if he believed that it was in any degree likely to forward their own ob ject. They complained that they were suffering under deep distress. Nobody could doubt, who had read their petition, that they greatly exaggerated in their statements, and that these statements were not derived from the peti tioners themselves, but were suggested t ) them by evil councillors.—(Hear, hear.) Still, he lamented that he was obliged to confess the existence of great distress among the lower orders, and to relieve this distress he hoped and trusted that something might be done. He wished to turn from the political part ef the subject, and to avoid entering into the interminable discussions connected with the Cern-laws, and the Currency, and the Poor-laws. The petitioners required a remedy, of which he doubted the propriety ; nay, be believed that the very fact of going into Committee en such a proposition would tend to un settle the public miad, and shake the confidence of capi talists in the stability of thin g s. The population had in creased six times more in the large towns than in the country; but no corresponding alteration hal taken place in the provision for the comforts and improvement of the people. In Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, and other large towns, one :in seven or one io ten of the population lived in great distress—in cellars. There bad been no provision made for public walks.—( Roars of laughter.) Gentlemen might laugh, but this was a very important point. So agein with respect to education, something must be done for the lower orders. And he trusted that next Session some steps would be taken towards securing to the people these practical benefits. Mr. O'CONNELL wished to say a few words, as he felt it his duty to take a decided part against the Chartists out of the house, and felt it equally his duty to express his opinions in the House favourable to their principles, though not to their mode of operations.--( Hear, hear.) He was not for-Annual Parliaments, for he believed the result would be, as in America, that little intereA would be taken in the elections occurring so often. He candidly confessed that he was a thorough Radical Reformer—he was for extend ing the Suffrage to the greatest possible extent ; but as to Universal Suffrage, the Chartists did not mean that, for they excluded women. It was impossible, indeed, in the existing state ofsociety that there should be universality of Suffrage. He utterly denied the right of the wealthier classes to call themselves the master classes, and he could not see why, within the limits to which he had adverted, any Englishman should be deprived of his vote. The prin ciples extracted by his Friend from text writers, were femiliar to the mind of every lawyer, so much to, indeed, that the Han. Member for Ripon, in speaking of Canada, talked of them in the freest possible manner. The prin ciples there laid down, were to give to every man the same right, and he was robbed of his property if he was deprived of the right to vote. Now. what was the effect of the franchise in England? Why, 19 per cent. was the utmost of the population in England that had a right to vote, and in Ireland it was only four per cent. Was it therefore to be wondered at that with such a source of grievance as the people of Eng land hid, they were not in a state of contentment and quietude. The people of Ireland had still greater eause.of complaint, for there 96 out of every 100 were deprived of the right of voting. He would not now enter into the topic of the Ballot, though he must confess himself to be in its favour, nor would he enter into the new qualification ques tion, though there existed that absurd anomaly that the Members for England and Ireland were obliged to qualify, while the Members for Scotland did not. He would suppert the payment of Members for their services if that was required —( Hear, hear.) He was thoroughly convinced the present system of exclusive voting which had been established by the aristocracy in that House, and by which they were returned, would have yielded to the force of public opinion, had it not been for the course pur sued by the Chartists—( Hear, hear)—who had advocated the ridiculous notion of going to the Savings Banks, and promulgated the evil doctrine of resorting to arms.— ( Hear, hear.) If they had bad any desire to effect good for the people, they would have advised them to save all the money they could. The truth was, the Chartists were the protectors of the aristocracy and their exclusive ness, while they attacked the middle classes who were the sinews of society. The Chartists suggested violent mea sures, and they spoke treason continually.—( Hear, hear.) Nothing now was so common r‘s treasonable recommenda tions —( Hear, hear.) They used the most traitorous lan guage, by which they terrified the best members of society and weakened the public safety. He was sorry to have heard the Noble Lord speak as he did with respect to some of the observations that had been made by the Hon. Mem ber for Birmingham relative to the fluctuations that would take place if his plan of the currency were to be adopted. He said that it would increase the democratic power, and he in stanced in favour of that argument that whiCh had taken place in America. The example of America was no discourage ment to those who encouraged the democratic principle. Had they not paid off the National Debt ?—( Hear, hear.) Were they not free from taxation, and their flag floated as safely on the seas as the flag of Britain? Lo-ik to demo. cratic Athens—look at the first 400 years of the Roman Re. public—was it not democratic ? and it only ceased its au thority when it became aristocratic.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Look at Venice—she arose out of the sea by the force of democracy, and it took 700 years of the strides of the aristocracy to put down that power. Look at Switzer land, at Holland, and at Norway, charged as it had been by the Holy Alliance with a heavy debt, by tile de mocratic power they had paid it off. Look also at Bel gium—there they had General Suffrage, the Vote by Ballot, and frequent Parliaments, and in spite of all the inconveniences of a new Government, which Europe had hung upon them, and their being compelled to keep up a large army, there was no country that was advancing to greater prosperity.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Although all these things had arisen from the democratic principle, it could not be of use if it was not kept within the pale of the law.—( Hear, hear.) In conclusion, he would readily vote for going into Committee, and if there was any chance of obtaining it, which he knew there was not, he should vote for a considerable Extension of the Suffrage, the Ballot, Shortening the Duration of Parlia ment, doing away with the property qualification, and allowing constituencies to pay the expenses of their Member:3.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. WALLACE, agreeing in much of what had been slid by others who had preceded him, would state briefly the course he intended to take. He would vote for going into Commit , ee in order to see what could be done there ii this important meter. Although he did not agree to all the demands of the Chartists, he retained firmly his &ten declared opinions. He agreed to four out of the six demands of the Chartists. He disagreed from Universal Suffrage, but agreed to Household Suffrage. He disa greed from Annual Parliaments, but he was decidedly fa vourable to Triennial. He agreed to Vote by Ballot, and paid Representatives..—( Hea-, hear.) He agreed also to no qualifications for Members, and he sat in that House without being required to produce one. He agreed to equal representation as being sound in principle, and was prepared to admit that where 1,200,000 of thinking men had signed E petition to obtain these thino:s, it would be gross presumption in him to say that this House should net go into Committee on the question. Though he did not think it at all likely, yet if these men, and those who advo cated their cause, should show him, inCommittee, good re,t -so:1 for ge lag against his opinions with respect to Universal Suffrage and Annual Parliaments, he would change those opinions ; at the same time, it was right to say, he saw very little chance of this.—(Hear, hear.) He, however, t4incereiv believed that with Triennial Parliaments and Household Suffrage all the benefits desired could b 3 ob tained.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. A. WHITE would vote for the Committee. He thought the people ought not to be satisfied till they were fully and fairly represented in that House.—( Hear.) Gen, JOHNSTONE would support the prayer of the petition, because he had not heard a single argument against the claims it put fcrth. They must either re lieve the petitioners from taxation, or they must give them the right of choosing their Representatives. That was the true state of the case, and how far it was expedient, it was for the gentlemen on the other side of the House to determine. What was the cause of all the evils that had been complained of? Why, the National Debt and nothing else, and until the people obtained a House of Commons, so constituted as to be able t•, grapple with it, they would not be relieved.—( Hear, hear, and cries of " Oh, eh.") Without they could relieve the people from taxation, they could give them no substantial redress, and the only way to do that was to give Universal Suffrage ; by that he meant that every male person, twenty-one years of age, should have a vote in the representation of the country, that vote being taken by Ballot. He thought the House could not do justice to the petitioners, unless they granted the Committee. Mr. VILLIERS said that it was his intention to vote for the Committee, and the Hon. Member who had just sat down would not deter him from doing so, although he had alluded to the only circumstances that were likely to pre vent Hon. Members from doing so. lie could not allow the lion. and Gallant Member to bring discredit on this question by the arguments he had advanced. the understood the Hon. Member to say that the National Debt should be grappled with, and that he implied to mean an attempt to shake the public credit. Gen. JOHNSTONE—If the prayer of the petition was not granted, the people ought to send Members who would grapple with it.---.( Hear, hear.) Mr. VILLIERS said his alarm was founded upon the meaning which the Hon. Member attached to the word grappling. If he thought by voting for the motion he was in any way identifying himself with the erroneous views of the petitioners or their recommendations to a disobedience of the laws, no persons would be further from advocating the measure. He could not see, however, that voting for the measure committed any one to the adoption of these sentiments. He saw nothing in the prayer of the petition inconsis- THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY 13, 1839. tent with the rights of propriety in obedience to the laws. There was some inconsistency in opposing the prayer of the petition, when it was recollected whet laneusge they occasionally held t o eac h ot h er i n th a t H ou s e . 'They were in the constant practice of bandying reproaches one with another about their neglect of the interests of the people, and yet when the people stepped in es a third party, with intelligence dawning upon them as to the manner in which their proceedings were conducted, it could not be considered extraordinary that they should ask, that the Commons of England should be differently coeetituted.— ( Hear, hear.) If he had never heard or read any 'thing of the proceedings of that House save what had occurred during the present Session, he could not help saying that the prayer of the petition was a most reasonable one. If any Hon. Member brought forward a question of national interest, he was actually obliged to apologize for it.—( Hear, hear.) He confessed he was astonished at the speech of the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury. He could not have made out a stronger case if he had been a warm advocate of the Charter.—( Hear, hear.) He had never heard greater abuse of the House for its neglect of duty. He told them that the people were ignorant, and they had not educated them —that they were overhurthened with taxes and that House had given them no relief. .The Hon. Member had certainly given a true picture of the - House, for nothing was so common as to hear it asserted there that they did not possess the confidence of the coun try.---( Hear, beer ) On these grounds he should support the motion of the Hon. Member for Birmingham. Mr. SL ANE Y explained. Mr. OSWALD could not consent to going into Com mittee on the petition, because lie thought its deliberations would end in throwing out the first and leading principle of the petition, which was Universal Suffrage. They would, therefore, be only raising hopes and expectations which must end in disappointment. He did not pretend to say now the elective franchise might not be extended in time, but this he would say, that an overwhelming ma jority of the country were opposed to Universal Suffrage, and he thought he should be acting exceedingly wrong if he voted for going into Committee when that question was to be discussed, as he believed it would only lead to deception. _( Hear, and cheers ) Mr. WARBURTON thought it would not be pm tising any deception to vote for going into the Committee, because going into Committee did not pledge them to the principles of the petition. lie was not a Universal Suf frage or an Annual Parliament man, but he might agree to a proposition now . for Triennial Parliaments. Why then refuse to go into Committee because the principle could not be carried out to the fullest extent. If he thought that giving a more extensive representation to th e people would be the means of grappling with the national debt, as it had been`termed, he certainly would not vote for it, but be did not believe that such would be the result. —( Hear, hear.) Mr. WA KLEY wished to know whether the Hon. Member for Glasgow was opposed to the whole of the six propositions of the National Petition ? He admired his candour, but did the Hon. Member mean to say that because he could not get the whole of the six propositions, be should objeet to going into Committee in order to get one ? Was that the line of conduct which the Hon. Member thought was most - likely to obtain the confidence and approval of his constituents?( Hear, bear.) The Hon. Member, however, had made the declaration, and must abide by it. The Noble Lord (J. Russell) had not certainly treated the question with any degree cf levity or unkindness, but there was one remark which he regretted to have heard from the Noble Lord, and that was with reference to the wages of the labouring classes. The Noble Lord had said • he did not believe they were in such distress as had been represented, teed had referred to the SaVings Wank re turr,s of an agricultural and commercial county, one of which was Devonshire. He thought the Noble Lord was one of the last persons who ought to make any allusions to that county.—( Hear, hear.) He thought the Noble Lord had got enough of it.—( Laughter.) He had alluded to the increase of deposits in the Savings Banks of Exeter, but it appeared to him (Mr. W.) impossible that these deposits could have been paid by the labouring classes. He was inclined to think that there were other parties who were lending themselves to a fraud,—( Hear, hear.) Did the Noble Lord know what the sages of the labour ing classes in Devonshire Were at that moment, or want they had been during the last five or six years? From six to seven shillings a week in a neighbourhood with which he was well acquainted (Axminster), and was it possible to suppose that men with wives and families could, out of 7s. a week, make deposits in the Savings Banks?_( Hear, hear.) The thing was utterly absurd and preposterous. In the neighbourhood of the metro polis the condition of the agi icultural labourers was equally wretched. He had a short time since been speak hig to a farmer who had been in business 30 years, and he told him that during the whole of that time he had never known them to be in such a state of destitution and com plete misery and poverty as at the present moment. He (Mr. Wakley) had seen these labourers lying about in barns, and sheds, and outhouses.__( An Hon. Member— "'l hey were harvest men.")—He admitted that, but why should not these poor men have the';rneaus of paying frr a bed ?—( Hear, hear.) Was that the condition to which they wished to see their labourers reduced ? Was it to that their legislation tended ?—( Hear, and cheers.) Were these men, who were sweating and toiling under a burning sun all day, to be compelled to take refuge in barns and sheds at night ? He wished it to go from the House to the labouring classes, that they were deceiving themselves if they expected any redress from that House. He was not one of those who would recommend the people to try and obtain the victory by the shedding of human blood, but he would tell them not to waste time by pre senting petitions to that House in future, because they would never lend a wilting ear to them. They would not be aliewed even to discuss the prayer upon presenting them. Why, if he (Mr. W.) had twenty petitions to present, lie dare not utter a word in support of them. He • and every other Hon. Member who advocated the cause of the people, and who were anxious to put forward their grievances, were gagged by the forms of the House. He would tell the people then to form associations—to discuss their grievances—to make known their wants—to make friends and not enemies of their neighbours—to win the confidence and good will of the middle classes—and join with them in such a demand as would produce an effect upon that Assembly—but at present they might as well petition the rock of Gibraltar as that House.— ( Hear, and a laugh.) It was a tnockery—a delusion, which he for one never would encourage. He wished to show the House what the state of the working classes was, and cordially supported the motion.—(Heara hear.) Mr. F. MAULE had not intended to address the House, but after what bad fallen from the Hon. Member for Finsbury, he felt it necessary to say a fe..v words. He had said that the lion. Member for Glasgow must take the consequences of his speech, but he thought the Hon. Member ter Glasgow was perfectly justified in his state ment. His (Mr. P. Mettle's) opinion was that a vast ma jority of the people of Scotland were entirely opposed to what was called the Charter.—(Hear, hear.) When he referred to the county of Perth, he found that the delegate who was elected to represent that county in the National Convention had withdrawn himself from that Association, the moment he perceived the precipice to whiich they were hurrying their followers, and was no longer connected with it. That individual had some respect for The rights of property, and the comforts and happiness or the people. The Hon. Member for Finsbury said the prayer of the petition ought to be granted, because the wages of the people were unable to maintain them. He regretted to find that such was the case, but in the country to which h e (Mr. F. Maule) belonged the wages of the agricultural labourers were such as to enable them to maintain their fa milies in comfort ; and he only wished they had Savings Banks established there as in England. Wide respect to the statement of the Hon. Member, that these deposits were nut made by the labouring classes, theec must be some mistake, for they were advised by their leaders to withdraw their deposits, which it was stated would amount to a considerable surn.—( Hear, hear.) He woo:id oppose the motion, because he believed the great bulk of the peo ple of that country were opposed to these principles. Sir T. D. ACL AND regretted to say that the wages of the agricultural labourers were extremely low, but it was necessary to explain one or two points. Now in many districts it was the custom to give the men beer with their wages, and the seven shillings a week were thus _increased to eight shillings. Again there was generally a small cottage provided at a low rent, or no rent at all, an d some times fuel ; and when all these matters were tal:en into account, although the wages were nominally but seven or eight shillings a week (which was nearer the rate in his neighbourlmod) the real amount paid was not moth more. Sir JOHN YARDE BULLER confirmed title state ments of the last speaker. He did not know what course was pursued in that part of the county of Devonshire to which the Honourable Member for Finsbury heed re ferred, but in his (Sir John Buller's) peel, la bourers received 10s. a week, gardeners 12 5., and those who worked under masons and carpenters -15.. a week. There was also a strong desire on the part: of the gent ry and yeomanry, a strong desire to place the labourer in the best situation they could. He could also bear his tes timony to what had been asserted by the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Home Department relative to the in creased deposits in the Savings Bank at Exeter.—( Hear.) Mr. S CHO L E FIE LD rose amid cries of " Question, question," " Divide ' divide." He thought there ought to be a property tax. The Noble Lord the Secretary for the Home Department had charged. the Reformers with hav ing m,ede up their minds fo r a division of property. That lie denied. They wished for no man's property; and if the House would only act honestly, they would lime of no fur ther Chartist meetings. What they protested against was the aristocracy petting their hands into pockets that did not belong to them. They complained that taxation was not equal ; they said that that l aw w hi c h compelled a poor man to pay as much for his pipe of tobacco paid for his segar ; which compelled a as poor a rich ma n m topa a y n • as much f or t h e p ostage of his letter as the rich man ; and which in fact compelled him who earned only e i g ht shillings a week to pay as much for every article he required for his use as the man who had le,ooo/. cr 20,000/. a year was unjust. The Chwtists wished for nothing but justice—they only des ired that they should not pay more than a f a i r s h are of taxa than. Unless the House acceded to the inquiry now asked for they would not do justice to the petition. —( Hear, h ear .) Mr. ATTWOOD replied amid much confusion and cries of Divide !" It was Perfectly ridi,;ulons to tell him that the amount of deposits in the Saeinge Banks was any proof of the improved condition of the w orking classess. It was known that the greater portion of foe money in the Saving Banks wee placed there by rich mum because they got more interest for it by that means than they could in any other way. Of the 22, 4 00,000/. that were in the Saving Banks, he would venture to say not ‘2,000,000/. be longed to the working classes. He called upon the Con. servatives to go into . Committee with him on this subject, for the purrs° of tryth ,he how fa r t h ey could reil i eve t h e dis tresses compiain2 , Icif by the petiti oners. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared__ For going into Committee Against it ....... : ....... .... ............. 235 Majority against going into Committee-189 PENNY POSTAGE. Mr. MARK PHIL LIPS presented petiti o ns from Manchester, nun -, ercusly signed, in falmur of a uniform rate of penny postago. Lord SANDON presented a petition from Liverpool to the same effect, and praying the House to pledge itself to meke good any deficiency in the revenue which might be the consequenco of adopting the plan.--( Cheers.) Mr. AGLIO N B Y presented several petitions in favour of a uniform penny postage. Oa the Order of the D being read for the bringing up the Report from the Committee of the whole House on the Post-office Acts, Mr. GOULBURN rose, but was for some time inaudible, in consequence of the confusion which pre vailed in the House. He said that he could assure the House it was not his intention to trespass long on their patience at that late hour. In propssing the Re solutions of which he had given notice, he had no wish to be considered as expressing an opinion hostile to the in troduction of a uniform rate of postage whenever the revenue should be in a state fit for the adoption of such a measure. But it was necessary before expressing an opinion on this subject that the H ouse s h ou ld h ave b e f ore it all the consequences that were likely to ensue in conse quence of the adoption of this measure. At this late pe riod of the Sessioe the House bad no opportunity of exer cising its discretion on a measure like the present, or of discussing those great financial questions which were in volved in it. He had never entertained any expectation, urea a very short time since, when some vague and obscure intimation was given respecting this subject, that any men. sure for a uniform penny postage would be submitted to Parliament. He had heard her Majesty's Postmaster- General in the other House of Parliament designate this scheme as wild and visionary. Ile had heard every Ment he: of the Government who ha - i been on the Committee appointed to investigate the subject,protest against this plan —not on one occasion only but whenever the reduction was proposed, her Majesty's Government objected to it; there fore he could have had no expeetation that the House would have been called on this Session to give cff:ct to the recommendations of the Committee, still less that they would have been called on to give effect to a measure for beyond that recommen d e d b y t h e Committee; and lie thought that he should satisfy the House that such were the opinions entertained by many Members of that Com mittee, which had reported that it would be desirable to in troduce a ua;ferin 10 v rats of postage, when the state of the revenue would permit it. But if the Government intended to propose this plan of uniform penny postage, they should have laid bef o r e th e H ouse t h e details' of the measure, but instead of doing this the Chancellor of the Exchequer intended to Mtroduce a Bill proposing to con fide to the Treasury the power of m)kieg, such arrange ments as they may think fit to carry this measure into effect. He would say that this was most unstatesmanlike. —( Cheers.) If there was one duty more incumbent on the House than another, it was not to give the Treasury the power of relaxing any duties, but to fix the amount of the imposts to be levied on the people, and to define and circumscribe accurately the manner in which those duties were to be levied. But that was not the course proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Did the House know the extent of the various interests involved in this question? He had been engaged the whole morn ing in receiving deputations of persons who would be ag grieved by the adoption uf this plan ; he had seen paper makers, who were afraid that a monopoly would be created on behalf of cne individual—stationers, who objected to the sale of stamped covers being sold, instead of the sale of covers being open to the puulic. He would not take up the time of :he House by entering into these questions, but he was satisfied that if this measure were adopted it would inflict great pecuniary loss on individuals, and in some instances absolute ruin. He had asked them why they had not applied to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, they had answered that they were not satisfied as to the conduct or discretion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer —that they wore disgusted—that they had represented their situa!ioa to Parliament, and that they had a right to call upon Parliament for protection for their interest. He trusted they would not adopt the resolution of the Right lion. Gentleman, which would preclude them from exercising their duty on this subject ; but that they would refuse to give the Government that discretion on thi; subject, which was most unsafe to be entrusted to them The system proposed by the Right Hsu Gentleman was, besides being in itself a great evil, abominable as a prece dent. Ii adopted it would have a tendency to make the Relic anxious to avoid the trouble of watching the business of Government, and to evade the trouble of discussion If they were thus to agree to leave everything to the Trea sury, that course would affect not only the postage and the revenue generally, but also all other great questions which it was now the business of this House to consider and discuss. Ha ( Mr. Goulburn) asked the Right Hon. Gentleman to postpone his resolution, and to agree to his (Mr. Gaul burn's) motion. The Right Hon. Gentleman admitted that he could not have the new Post-office arrangements ready until next year. Why not keep his motion over, then, until the next Session, when he would be much better able to go through the plan in a business-like manner?— (Cheers, and cries of " Hear, hear.") There were other objects in connexion with this measure which de served consideration. He alluded to the financial character which was involved in his ( Mr. G.'s) resolution. During three years the financial expenses of the country had ex ceeded its means. For three years the House had aban doned the great paramount duty of keeping its expenditure within its means, or of endeavouring to raise the receipts to an amount adequate to the demands upon them. If this resolution, proposed by the Right Hon. Gentleman, were carried, that deficiency which had hitherto been re garded as temporary would be made permanent, at least for a period of ten years. If they were to take off the revenue 1,500,0001., while we were deficient to the amount of 2,000,000/o at the close of the next year the defi ciency would become 3,000,0001, or 4,000,009/. ; and at the end of the follovving year it would have increased to 7,000,000/. or 8,000,0001. Was this state of things to be ventured upon, at a time when the country was labouring under a weight of debt that it could not support ? ( Cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman had talked about pledging the House to make up for any deficiency that might occur. But he ought to have much doubt in the validity of a pledge. now that the project was disclaimed by great numbers of Hon. Gentlemen opposite; some on the grounds that it was unnecessary, others that it would be uecessary to retain the revenue within the expenditure.— ( Bear, hear.) The present intention was altogether new in the annals of the finance of this country. No man had more earnestly deprecated such a system than Lord Althorp, when he, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, was called upon to repeal the malt tax and the house and window tax. The Noble Lord used every effort to dissuade the [louse from agreeing to such a proposition, when he was called on in 1833 to agree to a reduction of taxation, and that at a time when he had nothing like the present financial de ficiency—in fact, there was then a surplus of 700,0001. Ile cautioned the House against adopting a precedent which would lead to the most embarrassing results. He cau tioned them against the danger of taking off a million and a half from the revenue, when we were already deficient 600,0001. There was nothing more easy than for a Minister to repeal taxes. There was nothing which a Minister was more strongly tempted to do, especially when his Government was in a difficult position, than to gratify a popular call, by throwing away 1,500,000/. of the revenue. It mattered not whether a tux pressed on the commerce of the country like the postage tax—(Cheers) — or on the national beverage of the poor, like the malt tax, cr on the comforts and employment of the industrious classes, like the cotton tax.—( Cheers.) It would be most dangerous for the Government to accede to any popular demand for a remission of any such tax, and to abandon its own functions, unless it saw that the circumstances of the country fully justified it. Instead of yielding to such a cry, the Government should resist it, and he ( Mr. G.) really believed that the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite cried out for the proposed reduction against his own conviction— against the sincere conviction of the Government. He was sure the Right lion. Gentleman not really desire Right to adopt such a dangerous course as that which he had been jutt warned against.—( Hear, hear, hear.) What would be the cry to-morrow ?—( Cheers from both sides of the House.) If the precedent was now set up of a Government yielding, to popular clamour, a million and a half of revenue against their better judgment—what would be the situation of succeeding Governments ?—( Opposi. tion cheers.) To give the Government time to coniider _ _ if the probable deficiency could be supplied, he (Mr. Goulburn) brought forward his proposition. The Com mittee had merely recommended that so soon as the state of the public revenue would permit the risking of a large branch of the revenue, the measure should be adopted, commencing with a reduction to twopence. The loss would be greater on the twopence than on the penny postage— ( Hear, hear)—therefore it was clear they did not mean that the twopenny postage should be immediately intro duced. lie was determined to record his own opinion, that the revenue could not at present bear the proposed change, and he trusted that the country would soon recover its sense of prudence, and discover the inexpediency of so hasty and perilous an experiment; at all events, he should ease his own conscience and discharge his own duty.— (Opposition cheers.) The Right lion. Gentleman then moved his Resolutions as follow: That it appears from the Finance Accounts of the United Kingdom laid upon the Table of this House, that the execs.; of Expenditure over Income for the year 1837 was 655,760/., aLd for the scar 1838, 345,2271. That fr:lm a statement submitted to this House by th- Chancellor of the Exchequer, the excess of expendi ture over income, fur the year ending the sth of April, 1840, i 3 estimated at not less than 860.0001., making a total excesi of expenditure over income in the three years en lint* the sth day of April, 1840, of not less than 1,860,987/. That the Select Committee appointed, " to inquire into the present rates and mode of charging postage, with a vie w to such a reduction thereof as may be made without injury to the revenue," reported to this House on the 13th day of August, 1838, as follows: " That your Committee are of opinion that, so soon as the state of the public revenue will admit of the risking a larger temporary reduction, it will be expedient to subject all inland letters to an uniform rate of one penny per half ounce, increasing at the rate of one penny for each addi tional half ounce." That the net revenue of the Post-office, for the year ending the sth day of January, 1839, amounted to 1,655,993/. 15s. 3d. That it is The opinion of this House, that with a defi ciency of revenue during the three years ending on the sth day of April, 1840, of not less than 1,860,9871. it is not expedient to adept any measure for reducing the rates of postage on inland letters to au uniform rate of one penny (:hereby incurring the risk of great present loss to the revenue), at a period of the Session so advanced, that it is scarcely possible to give to the details of such a mea sure, and to the important fin:x.cial considerations connec ted with it, that deliberate attention which they ought to receive from Parliament. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he was surprised to find that the Right Hon. Gentleman rested his opp:;sition to the measure on the single ground of postponement, doubtless feeling that the measure, was likely to give content to the great mass of the people out of doors, and to win the support of many Meminrs in that House.—( Cheers. ) The Right Hon. Baronet ( Sir R. Peel), in his declaration of hostility, had not spoken of the lateness of the Session, but bad declared that there were two contingencies only in which he would consent to the measure—the existence of a surplus revenue equal to the revenue risked—or the contemporaneous imposition of ' a tax to the same amount. Now it certainly could not be ex r pected that there would be a surplus revenue equal to : a million and a half. And as to the second course, would not Members opposite be the first to resist the im position of a tax before the deficiency was aseertained?--- ( A cry of " No, no," from the Opposition.) Well, would they propose a tax of a million and a half ?—(Loud ironi cal cheers from the same quarter, and hear, bear, from the Ministerial side.) If they told him that no Ministers were at liberty to propose this reduction, without imposing a tax; then he would ask them, one and all, whether they would support a tax as a guarantee? That, be was sure they, as men of sense, would riot do. The question of poStponing the subject was a convenient way of saying to the public, we do not choose to hazard our popularity by opposing this measur e .—( H ear , h ear .) His Right Han. Friend had complained of the manner in which he had brought the subject forward. Now, what was the course he had pursued ? Why, he had determined not to bring the matter before the House until he had put it in possession of what the real financial state of the country was. In reply to the Right Hon. Gentleman, he was sub ject to great disadvantage, because lie must either answer by anticipation objects urged from ether quarters, or he must allude to a former discipline. If the question was one of mere reduction of duty on letters there could be no doubt, looking at the petitions that had been presented, and the feeling that existed on the sub ject, that it would be fully justified. Who could doubt the benefit of the reduction—who could doubt that it would confer a great bson upon the whole population ?—( Hear, hear ) In ordinary questions of taxation, to the philoso pher the benefit might be apparent, but it would not be generally felt; but in repealing the tax upon letters, there was scarcely an individual in the whole of the community that would not feel the benefit of it. It was not a ques tion of reasoning, but it was a question of demonstration. The party who could not write a letter previously, had the inducement to do so now. In bringing the question forward, he had not disguised from Hon. Members that it was not a question of the reduction of a tax, but that the ques tion was making provision for an income they were about to lose. But he had been charged with having been a guest of popularity ; if he had been, he might have told the public that the reduction of the postage would add not only to their pleasure, but to the revenue, although he knew that it would do no such thing. He had never said any thing to discourage the promoters of the measure, but he had always maintained that it would cause a great sacrifice of the public revenue ; and that unless the House of Commons were prepared to guarantee that sacrifice, Government would not be warranted in proposing its adoption. It was therefore too bad for the Right Hon. Genii: man now to tax him with seeking popularity by bring ing forward a poptklar measure. He had no doubt that the proposed measure would entail a considerable loss of in. come ; and there could be no doubt it was the duty of the House to guarantee the amount ; but if that guarantee was a guarantee that would be forborne, then the arguments of the Right Hon. Gentleman were good for nothing, because public faith would not then be endangered. At the same time he must say that the Right Hon. Gen tleman's argument made the danger greater than it was. Taking the Post-office revenue from 1836 to 1838, he found it was an invariably increasing revenue. The gross revenue in 1834 was 2,079,0(0/., while in 1838 it was 2,212,0001. How had it been increased? Precisely in these branches in which the largest diminution in the postage had been made.—(Hear, hear.) That he thought was an argument in favour of the guarantee which he re. quired, as it showed that instead of sustaining a loss there was such an elasticity in the revenue that it would make up the deficiency. He would take the foreign and ship let ters, in which a large reduction of postage had been made. The amount received for ship letters had increased from 88,000!. to 103,0001., being the largest increase that had taken place in any department of the Post-office, and if he took the number of le*ters, he found that from 1833 to 1837 the particular class of letters bad increased from 42,0001. to 167,000/., being an augmentation of four times the number consequent upon a reduction infinitely less than was comprehended in the present proposition. The Right Hon. Gentleman said he had conferred with various persons in the paper trade, who had said that they would be severely injured by the proposition ; that they locked with apprehension at the course Parliament was likely to take if it was intended to use stamped covers, and use paper of a particular description. He did not think these apprehen• sions well founded, but he would ask where had these great interests lived that they bad never heard of the matter before? What papers had they read—with whom had they talked ? Had they not heard of the Postage Committee, and of the proposition that was to be made to the House? They bad slept almost to the twelfai hour, and had now roused themselves, and when the Right Hon. Gentleman proposed to them to wait upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer, it was said to have been received with a shout of disdain.—(Mr. Goulburn —" It was the plan I alluded to.") What were the powers he asked for ? Not irresponsible and irretrievable powers— ( Hear, hear, hear)—but merely power to deal with the question between that and the next Session, and leaving to Parliament the full power of then re. coasidering it. He had been asked why he had not manfully resisted the pro position at once, in the present state of the revenue, as the Noble Lord ( Spencer), and the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, had done the proposition for the repeal of the malt tax ? The questions were entirely different —( Hear, hear.) The repeal of the malt tax was an absolute loss of revenue, which was not accompa nied by any proposition to make good the deficiency. It was much more sweeping, because certainly much more prejudicial to the public interests. He did not believe that the Hhuso of Commons would disregard its resolu tion, if it were once acceded to—he did not place so little reliance upon its honour, as the Right lion. Gentleman would seem to do, and he was quite confident it would, when called upon redeem its pled s ‘e. The very same pledge had been given by the honest petitioners who had addressed the House, and he would merely add, that if they threw over the pledge, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would throw over the resolution, and he would take upon himself all the unpopularity, and he knew it would be very great, of the rejection of the measure. lie should rather do than allow any misconception to remain as to the in tentions of the Government or the Minister. Sir R. PEEL said it was extremely inconvenient to be called on to discuss the question at that late hour of the night. He denied that the arguments he had used on a former occasion were in any way ineonsivent with the amendment of his Right Hon. Friend. His great and in. superable objection to the proposition was, that there was a deficiency of nearly one million in the revenue ; that at that period of the Session its details could not be properly considered, and that the probable deficiency was not pro vided for. He had no objection to the principle of the measure. He denied that the paper-makers had been in attentive to the progress of the Right Hon. Gent.'s plan. They had found a deficiency in the public revenue, and her Majesty's Government had voted against the proposition. Ile found that when the Committee divided on the pro position, the numbers were, Ayes 4, Noes 4 ; but among ti e Noes were two Lords of the Treasury, and the Presi dent of the Board of Trade. And why should they there fore charge the paper-makers with indifference or igno rance, if they took it for granted that the Government would not propose what they had before rejected. The Right Hon. Gentleman had said ant he had merely asked for discretionary power to the next Session of Parliament, and not beyond, but the words of the resolution were, that it is expedient to reduce the rate of the postage to a uniform rate of one penny. This was not a resolution conferring temporary authority on the Treasury, but it was decisive of the whole plan.—(Loud cheering.) If the Right Hon. Gentleman only intended to try the experiment, and to make a temporary arrangement until next Ses sion, why not dfer the whole matter until that period, when be would be enabled to mature a plan to bring it for ward on his own responsibility, and then he could ask the House of Commons not to consent to a temporary expe dient, but to come to a permanent decision ?—( Hear, hear. ) It was perfectly true that he felt the course proposed was so fatal and objectionable cs a precedent that he felt bound to protest Against it. His great objection to it was as a precedent to future Governments. For the first time, with an admitted deficiency in the public revenue of one million, they were about to place to hazard a revenue of 1 500,0001. They bad had a deficiency in the revenue in 1837 and 1838, and expected an increased" deficiency in 1839, a .d yet they were going to hazard a revenue of 1,500,0001. l'he Right Hon. Gentleman said that this was a measure of grave and extraordinary importance ; might not the re peal of any other tax be proposed on the same ground—the Government to propose the reduction of the tax, and Par liament to pledge itself to make good any deficiency that might occur ? This was the course pursued by the first Legislative Assemblies of France; they repealed any unpo pular tax and placed the public revenue under the safeguard of the national honour. The same argument might be ap plied next year to the window tax or to the soap tax. It might be argued next year that the soap tax affected the morality or the cleanliness of the lower orders, and there fore the soap tax ti.ust be repealed, and Parliament called upon to pledge itself to make good the deficiency. This reasoning would apply as a precedent in every future case. Hitherto men of all parties had cancurred in the necessity of maintaining inviolate the obligation of the public faith, and wLen in 1832 Lord Althorp had been beaten on the malt tax, he had applied to him:( Sir R. Peel) to ask if he would support him in moving the rescinding of that resolution ; he answered he would cordially support him, as it was not fitting that this first example should be set while there was a deficiency in the revenue. Why should not the same principle apply to the Post-office duty as to the malt tax. He was sorry to see that principle about to bo departed from. Lord Althorp had stated he would resign if he could not rescind that resolution, and he had succeeded in resciading it, and the same success would have attended the present Government if they had followed his example. He had heard some sneers as to what a succeeding Government might do—what had a preceding one done ? lie had,:altbough the e d i e enee of his own Government was at stake, opoose repeal of the malt tax, and by the d es assistance f Hon. Gentlemen opposite he lead maintained t h e p u blic faith inviolate by a triumphant majority. T would apply to a repeal of the post . intercourse, and horsy, h e same arguments or of stage coach duties, which facilitate commercial of labour and be of great advantage in the interchangeav in this instance, Rah commoiti ; and if they gave w_ should not next Session a re peal of those duties be pro posed, trusting to Parliament to makehit the good e the Noble deficiency? The volume before him st ated t Lord had said, that the proposition of the Hon. Mendel. f or Lin colnshire, to commenc e the year with a deficit of one million, was one which no Minister . of a great nat i on oug h t to act upon—no House of tommons to receive. The propcxW • • on, adopted, would deprive the count r y o f re • seeet at home, o f re p utation abro ad , and would soon have the effect of removing her from that noble situation she bad hitherto hell amongst the nations of the world.— ( Cheers.) Again, the Noble Lord asked, was "it a tim e, when we had a deficiency of one million, to propose to increase that deficiency by another?" Again, the Chancellor of the Exchequer said, " that according to the view of the Hon. Member for Middlesex, they had saved all they could they had saved throe millions, and they de sired to save more. However, before he remitted more taxa tion the substitute should be provided. "—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman seemed to remember that doctrine to-night. He sai I, " If you propose a tax of 1,500,000/. I'll support yeti." But why not propose it himself?— EVENING EDITION. (Cheers.) Why reserve for himself the pleasing duty of remitting taxes, and leave his opponents the labour of Im posing them ?—( Cheers and laughter.) The Right Hon. Gentleman referred to a pledge. He (Sir Robert Peel) was against such an experiment upon the interest of the public creditor. If the deficiency which had so lament ably existed for three years should extend into a fourth, no doubt Parliament must devise some measure to avert fur ther disgrace from the nation ; but it would be unwise to pledge the House to provide a substitute merely for one particular tax, for then they might object to -übstitute on any other grounds. He was reedy to give M. Rowland 11111 credit fur the greatest ability and candour. That gentle man stated that any loss the revenue might sustain from a penny postage would be made good from the increase of ether branches of commerce. But who was to determine the benefit ariing from other sources?—(Cheers.) If they confined themselves to a pledge upon one ground, many parties might reasonably object to an imposition of a new tax, on the ground that the redeemed postage would do them no good.._ (Cheers.) But if they had the revenue at large to make up, there could be no such par tial objections made. The Right Hon. Gentleman had sail there was a difference between political and financial arrangements, but be ( sir R. Peel) could see none. His firm belief was, that if the House redeemed the pledge they were celled upon to give, they would be pledging themselves to a property tax.—( Hear, hear.) That might be the wisest course to adopt, but it would be a great question with him whether it would be wise to impose such a tax. He objected to the pledge altogether, thinking that it would be far bet ter, and more becoming on the part of the Ministers of the Crown, to leave it to Parliament to take such steps as the case might require. He should therefore object to giving the pledge required. For doing so, the Right Hon. Gentleman might, if he pleased, cast upon him the odium of opposing the measure, for that he cared nothing for; he would, however leave that public arena in which he had been engaged for upwards of thirty years ; than concur with the proposition that was now brought forward, of pledging that House to make good any deficiency that might tyke place.—( Hear, hear.) Hon. Members might fancy that the popular will was in favour of the measure, and that the people would not be satisfied without it ; but his firm conviction was that if a month was allowed to pass, and the subject was brought forward early in the next Session, the public would be perfectly sati fied.—( Hear. hear.) lie objected to Parliament divesting itself of its proper functions, and he should therefere oppose the propo sition. Mr. P. THOMSON concurred with the Right Hon. Gentleman in the observations he had made relative to the necessity of maintaining the public credit of th country ; but with respect to the pledge that was esked for the House they were in this 'situation ; they could not give the plan a trial unless they came to Parliament, and asked for powers to carry it into effect for a time, coupled with the pledge. The Right Hon. Gentleman wished to have the vote for the proposed tax submitted to e the House at the same time. That was impossible. How' could they ask for a tee to supply deficiency, the eaten of which was not kncwn. One person said there would be no deficiency, another said it would be considerable, while Lord Ashburn ham said the revenue would be entirely annihilated. Until the experiment was tried, therefore it was impossible to tell the amount that was required ; and unless the pre sent pledge was adopted by the House, they must defer the plan until they had a surplus of 1,600,0001. L should be recollected that Mr. Hill bad said that the revenue would be increased in other branches. The Bill merely gave the Treasury power to make engagements for the reduction of postage—to charge postage by weight, and to enable the Stamp-office to contribute to the Post-office department. Alt these regulations would come next year before Parliament in the shape of a Bill, to which its assent must be given. He trusted, under all the circumstances, that the House would not refuse to the country the pre sent beneficial experiment of a reduction of tax ttion (Hear, hear.) Mr. WARBURTON was rejoiced to find that they were to fight for a measure which they conceived to be of the grestest importance to the country. He preferred having it contended for inch by inch, rather than to have it passed sub sitentio. One of the objections urged was that the period of the Sess'on was too late to bring for ward such a propositiou ; but Hon. Members must have seen arid watched the progress of the measure before the Committee, and they must have read the evidence and re port of that Committee. The same ergurnent would apply to their Lordships not being in possession of its de tails. The evidence taken before the Committee had been printed, and must have been long since in the hands of the Alembers of their Lordships' House. There was no extraordinary power or re-action deman3.ecl by the Chancellor of the Exchequer; for, under the existing laws, be had the power of reducing the rate of post age to any sum he pleased—even to an infinitesimal.— ( Hear.) fie had also the power to charge postage in advance, but there was no power to charge by weight, or to compel the Stamp-office to collect a portion of the postage. The statienere before the Committee had given evidence in favour of the scheme; and that because an in dividual now proposed a measure of safeguard, they should imagine that they were to be injured was most prepos terous. This question should not be argued as a mere question of taxation. The primary object of the Post-office was not taxation but public conveni ence. The Post-office was net originally instituted for the purpose of texetion, and therefore this ought not to be treated as a mere question of revenue. The original object cf the institution of the Post-office, was to ensure the safe and speedy conveyance of letters. Was it therefore right to impose a tax upon letters of 1,500 per cent.'? and were they not forced to take the subject into consideration by the facility of evasion, and by the institution of railroads and every one who had been ex amined, bed stated that if they reduced the tax, they should so reduce it, as to bring a new class within reach of the Post-effice. He would rctronstrate against the impo sition of any new tax, until the plan had been tried, as lie considered a new tax would he a great evil, more especially if imposed to cover a temporary deficiency.—( Cheers.) He had told the Cbanceilcr of the Exchequer that he would give co pledge, but would wait until he saw his clause, end then judge for himself. He acknowledged that Parliament was bound, when an' . deficiency appeared, to make that deficiency good, and he should feel bound to do so, whether be gave a pledge or not. It was well for the opponents of the measure to en deavour to alarm the country, by talking of the imposition of a new tax. He would say, let them revise the large branches of the imports—the coffee, the sugar, and the timber—(Cheers)—and they would by that means secure a surplus revenue of upwards of five millions, and at the same time reduce the price of articles to the public ; therefore, let not the public be alarmed by the threat of the impo sition of new taxes. The Chancellor of the Exchequer would be enabled to make good the deficiency without the imposition of new taxes.—(Hear, hear.) There was also tobacco and tea, all these articles of import were on such a footing as no reasonable men could approve of, and if these were placed upon a proper footing, that would be all that was necessary to make good the deficiency. Ile would quote the authority, of Lord. Ashburton for stating that any deficiency of revenue would be made good from other sources, in consequence of the increased comtnunication which would take place. He was of opinion that the experiment could not be fairly tried under three years, and then he would be prepared to con sider the means for making good the deficiency. He con sidered this a question cf the utmost importance to all . classes of the community, and he should support the re duction. Lord S AND ON rose amidst general impatience and cries of" Divide." He had the greatest esteem for his Right Hon. Friend on account of the patriotic nature of his op. position, but seeing that he ( Lord Sad don) had always advocated the system of a cheap postage, he must support the motion of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, and throw the whole responsibility on her Majesty's Govern. ment. —( Hear, hear, and Divide, divide.) The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion for bringing up the Report... 213 Against it .. 113 Majority 'On our re-admission into the gallery, we found Sir R. PEEL on his legs, moving the omission of those words which pledged the House to make good any defi ciency that might take place. After a few words from the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, Mr. WALLACE said that as he had taken a promi nent part in bringing about this great measure, and had agreed to the pledge required, he would be prepared at any period to vindicate honestly the pledge he had given, and to vote immed'ately for any tax which Parliament should think most Edvisable to impose for the purpose of making * good any deficiency which should take place in the Revenue from the adoption of this measure.—( Hear, hear, bear.) Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the Mize divided, when there appeared— For Sir R. Peel's amendment Against it 1 b 4 Majority The Report was then agreed to. Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that the Hocse, at its rising, do adjourn to Monday next.—Agreed to. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUE R ob tained leave to br in g in a Bill to carry int o e ff ect certa i n Improvements in the Metropolis, under the direction of the Commissioners of W, ods, Forests, and Works. Sir C. KNIGHTLEY moved that the evidence and proceedings taken before the Carlow Election Committee be laid on the table of the House, and that it be printed. —Ordered._ _ - Mr. BARING brought in a Bill to explain and amend I and 2 Vie. c. 99, so far as relates to flues and penalties levied under the Rf•venue Laws. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at a QUARTER PAST Two O'CLOCK. A WIFE'S PERILS.—The work of fiction which has just appeared under the title of " Temptation, or a Wife's Perils," is one of those sterling productions of which the literature of the day offers us so few specimens. It has the singular quality of combining the intellectual excitement of such works as " Delphine," and " Clair D'Albe," with the excellent moral tendency, and much of the truth and skill in details which characterize the novels of Miss Austen. Some of -its characters, too, (particularly that of Lord Montgomery), are perfectly original, while the exciting and passion-fraught nature of the plot, and the skill with which it is worked out, will render this novel one of the chief favourites, not of the i season merely, but of this popular c lass of our literature. FIRE AT A LUCIFER MANUFACTORY.—. Thursday forenoon an explosio n took p lace on the p remi ses of Mr. Jones, manufactureroof nt l eh u se c w a m e a l s - at matches,engaged iala used for the n th e m a. situated in Queen-street, Finsbury , w hich was attended wit h serious n eo u n fis s c e t q u u r e e n , matches s report, and set fire to the building. Mr. Jones effected his escape, but was dread fully burnt, and was obliged to be taken to the hospital. Before the engines reached the spot very great damage was do ..e to the premises by fire. Mr. Jones is not insured, and it is only about three weeks since his premises were destroyed by fire.