The Sun. — London, England, 1850-03-01 00:00:00

in "aeconclition of what his Hui.. Friend himself had j e r etn , e ti that or serfs and bondsmen; and therefore sub ,ia'o t °_, that discontent which h e c o n ce i ve d a t p rese nt Li . " among a large portian of oar tax-laying, P°F-, til l" : I li' Hon. Friend had very truly said that, if right - ere to preceed upon the principle of givr(lg theyt sh ould voting to to ail who were indirectly taxed,. ti,,t adopt Universal suffrage; for it was evident i . a. 44 Y tne ~ - ontributed to its In dira., mbar of Lue communiap ,_ e „,:et taxation. But his Hon. Friend said he clan nishthat the ado, ption of that principle woul d iseritBtulld woulProduce results which he ,hould not witness• and he was therefore desirous of limit:. g,gtit' aplicatio'n "so that every man of . fill age, and li a P l i bleet to any mental or legal disability, who shall g i t : 'ten the resident occupier of a house or part of hau beg 83 a lodger for twelve moeths,. itad ,. shall ti k ; ,o duly rated to the poor of that parish tyr that to ro t ' 141 1 be registered an an elector, and he entitled ” G. e G fer a be in Parliament." Now, the (S rn i... Ito, litiroenlf aid,h-' that even with that qualification, hitherto pee n the Is on. Friend gave up what had A fths ," invariable condition for the elective ft a - ,chise— , tra' l t e ,,, 13r ,a the possession of some props rty or other. The the ..ecessrily imply to ice t _ m eh his Honourable Frion'l would enforce would the po,session of any . property in limit us a l i al S ense of the word. His Hon. Friend ,d d t i t r l l e n x o_t talitl u ts Motion to householders, for he proposed tile francbhe to lodgers occupying a portion of o kt il s° in any way whatever, and not merely 'peroons Rite P s /j 9g a portion of a house in the mode which t w , om n l y d 1,4 0 ' right to the elective franchise at pres , '. l • 1 14 4,,, r wh i ° might get himself rated to the relief of the he i egist e ' r eliz d. be entitled to have his name placed on t so Vila th e w ithout any proof that he had paid his rate; led,ws ergue'e Owner of a house could by means of h . 80 rate s 4 °Wilber of fictitious voters who migh e t th a a s t e t i , a n d e i y d N a .t and who might have given no pro,. li llYl7 td "Y Property. He confessed he did nt e s n e_e 140 4 0 ; 8 , 4 °o. Friend should oppose an unlimited . e hos, ar t " franchise, and why he should not go with the k Wi t 1 ut i ernb er for Nottingham (Mr. F. O'Connor) i t i h . e itl e li -e ngth of universal suffrage.—(lfear.) . ls 4 ,oo(r i ebd had said that out of a populationof gat '°°° in the United Kindgom there were only t - . 800 00 %h ers . , 0 electors, striking out the double voter.. Nur ‘`' i r GSirey) found from the latest Parliamentary tildt il as - i1 P° 1 : 1 that subject, that out of about -I,ao c o,o_ 00 s tt, e 'mat es 1p : =England, there were 944,000 elector.. Hi ight. offend. aid" that he was , arad to extend the prep , e oht voting to ladies; and he (Sir G. Gres) did not h e 4: hi s lien. Friend could, upon the principle which i 'llote.°cated, refuse it to thew. his Hon. Friend .. had lite ti ll °I the %Term Bill in a very different spirit from 1 : 0 ; a l , ll ' Member for Bolton (Sir J. Walmsley), who ;, 4 4 4 ,„"e (Sir G. Grey) understood him, appealed to the 'qey,i4CcrY results of that measure as a reason whip 'tilt Mi nis° Proceed still farther in the policy of progress. l 4 it till. Friend, on the other hand, had complained fr hieh i e , i ll 'form Act had not attained the . object for ll 't (4 ,1 uad been been frame I. Now he (Sir G. Grey) ~,Kport , , , , d id not believe that there was a growingrdis '4ll4'l betvrCen the increase in population and the : I)tt age e n in the number of electors under feltthe :Ari g ',, - ", of the Reform Bill, but 444die-re",thst there was a groaing increase he in the Net • °` electors in proportion to the increase of th at kite ) i n • e found from the Parliamentary i ber of ael'etor Lth divis;,ns of Lancashire the num rls • P ' Whiet i •"- "mtnediate!y after the t "a e 1 in 1833, 1- • amounted ° l6q °f the 11, farm Bill,had . t°3 S ' A.: 2 ' had increased in 1837 to 27,455, and in 1846 4 44: 6 1 or in other word:, that between 1833 and w ili k lhe n ii ti e e.atiz,b.er. had more tha . n doubled. He found that h uic h in 1%"Iclino• of Yorkshire the number of electors, I - 1. 47 to - 4` °d3 h aeamounted to 18,056, had increased_ in 'i t Yhad`?' °76 , and in 1846 to 36,165; showing that i'At T.it'st d oubled, during the some period. He found ,„Iki,tiritt-,,:verAnol the number of electors, which in 1833 1'0 4 ( Ir tec l to 11 ,200, had increased in 1837 to 18,81 S, 63 5 11 6 tbm:b 4 : 1 6 to '7 046. He found that in Manchester 11L., of electors w hieh in 1833 had amounted to o ,841.-'t increased in , 1837 to 11,185, and in 1846 the iii!' le itlb ''''' f °tY these fasts showed, at all event=, this:, ( la e g rB o ° . that class m,hich ' his Hon. Friend had spoken ' 4 / 1 1 d 483 the irated as serfs and bondsmen had been 14 e by t,tthe , own honest exertions to raise themselves .. I . ; ° i 4 li w ita e a r l e of society, and to atta'n to certain rights '/'' b• 4 at once a stimulus to and a reward of inclus ti 444 I, I r honourable Friend had spoken of those who hcl (1 Posse it_ h,., ss the elective , franchise in terms e i ,' heti," excited his (Sic G. Grey's) surprise. ft . : 1 1 1 4 dis c la hise Honourable Friend did not wish to he working classes, and Le lii4ittedt:rit'itieirfetdialtethaat7sengt .such discontent at present ex rile placed in the position in which atitleeteltaPariend la Y ad " s • la e ted discontent among them would $d Oa t -' 8 ;ter of surprise, and would, in fact, d 41 ma tte d (u hear ) His Hon. Friend ft l i tod i _r uty.-- ear, • • • Oar t 4 all Chese who did not possess the elective th', 4r e iti -e t w b _ere . serfs arid bondsen—that they had no tti W ere ,7_ l. beneEts of the lamsof this country--that t14. 1 4k1 ut , t cf the pale of the constitution, and that ( R; ti 4 C )4l s' to D v th t' ices voted by a Hou_=e in tbe - it ° t ''•L wh ' a ' d no voice. Now he , i . Q. u hose Members they ha It it i e k ted tt re Y) askel if that were true? For his part he 11 _ , t , k i , e at they shared in the benefits .h of our laws; 4 i ett th e 4 ,7' no other country the artisan en for liinfe,wh ie sa property, t Wei. 4 , 1 9_ 1 5 i.: 4 4 r t ii i!r e o m teetiona t u h d: t lib th o e rt i ar e 54 'neBtica.fable pire. He should y 1 at 'tht• hi ings conferred by our laws and tht °1 0 , ,,,„ - Pon all classes of the '44 4'lll " iss 'community, and that .insi •'-'", Whether electors or non•electors, .were in Ple ' i loa d • his Hon. Friend. His Hon. 1 4 , 4 4 had escribed by (4, 511 ,r of tla.ted that he derived one great argument in 1 1 4 44 i I lls motion from the v nt, tare of the t togrant the 9°B which they were a`mii• c 141,Ps ofi,ithabitunts cf New Z, atand and c. the 4, 1 ) Good Hope. Now lie (Sir George ,:thLtl tked ~the House if there was any analogy be tii;li t itl4 a a 'e, of this country and that of the Cape (+Ali wh " Induce them to adopt here the same con kt.blt h e r l el' thfy were about to grant to that colony? 110,1 per n'llternbered that in the Cage there . wastibe 1p; h e a `Onueil, based on the representative principle. 44. 4 1144 i . ti'r: (1 ., lion Friend whether he was 1 re ared 'a t - "'te thi , . try , au elective chamber fo P r the saeof t orci,? S. cowl , ;ai LitI NIL ' h . ectiOn.—(A laugh.) t t G, --I should have no 0 .1 tr. t , QitY•sr the House ;'h i"er h 4 .- eentinced—Well, then, let .. r 4 ir t . S ' his Hen Friend had no objection to uni lh, . sail , , t at he had no o j . . lII , a -ge• h - Wection to extend the to adopt ti et ti Poi r° wc roen; that he had no objection \ f' 4 lb tits 0€ the Chart •r; and tba*, he had no °Noe- It`qttir ei,eitablisliment of an elective House of Lords. ti lil 4 rL a ",, el r..) He certainly did . not think that his I ttnthat " '%ould be a safe guide for them to follow cli,'' by ,I,l3e3asion. He thought that they had better 1 t4, 1 ,P.) 12„i° Principles of their ancient constitution.— raria_ ti;` 4 , 4,7,4 regard to the ballot, triennial Hon. i . 41 ! 114 2_11,i 4 0r rn . 0 other topics to which his ) 'lli lt , troui d - 1 Incidentally alluded, he (Si h r G. Grey il l() t . 44 t0 " het be advisable that he s ould then kl Tlsst• 48Y discussion of their merits. But there was it t4 tel it h• to which his Hon. Friend had frequently 41, i ftlth 411 1044; a ,"°tlgh he (Sir y) not been able 1,1111',14 to H is real tonsintrowith raspect to it—he (r ri' l-g he vt , - ; t he • question of electoral districts—upon 4 4 4 0 4 14" e 5hed to offer a fetichvn His II?n. - t hi ti al ' le Part cf his sp had disclaimed any in t4ll•4lts ofc'tablishine• electoral districts; but all the er- e q . pr)ia, on. Gentleman. 4 14 ' till 4 - who had seconded the C . Nth ` c(l to electoral districts as the only mode of It % 8 oh' .- Now he iiithi %,,,,Jee,ton s of the present system. k (tgelea t . " held that the division . of the country into i l,Ct h art „(3,,1'al districts, returning equal numbers . of Vdt r,., 3 r lament, would be 4' -44 rlt- " 1. 4tl,tta lt °E our constitution. It would deprive , us of e at :Re which we at present enjoyed of having all 11 4 , tit hoad varied interests of the country represented in ,titli t „ l irsa a ti c se . Ile was not prepared to say whether,effeced Nt e 'ekg r - :Years, some change ought not to be d from 1)114/it ' 4 t he number of Members returned t4 O o v t 4rts of the country, ' but he believed that the ! 11 : 01 4 1:y . beeetoral districts would either render I L !'ll Ok i- • 4 t- y e at t he number of Members in that House cktiallilZa-elled beyond the limits which would leave . 1 i t t tl ' tB 130 1 ,1„ t th ena to discharge the functions of a deli ilk' th a - /' or that it would deprive many important f . ti ls - nit - • c °Orttry of their fair share of our system of i i 41 71 /. i l l i t t nT ri ' Now, he did not wish to maintain tha eth etli, a l ,,e% of that House was perfect ; but heccr VI sd -e u.. that the Reform Act had not failed. That . l i4; IN' Illitted into that House representatives r o_f 1 11 4;,°11 hii°PUlous to ,who had conferred great sF ch -04(it a - ; ( ) 3l nunit w y n a s t large by the mode in whi kt t ki 4 • - •oed in deliberations of the House i but ~) % t t 0 t p re the .. it: lll l6.°h Pallid to sacrifice to the wishes of those . interests of this I .4 :4 ltil t `l• 4 s e ; i ll . the other important 1,,1t hmor,„ believed that the House, as at present con- i ' t-I - ca pabledeliberating on questions affect- F :411411)4ti1t rightso.f aliberal and enlightened spirit. - Vt th:%Present in e them a Bill for largely ex- It a 4 t l tit,i - stt inT lehise in Ireland—(Hcar, hear)—and one p?tiltigltk°,°2 to the l motion r of his Honourable Friend t h lti Prt,-ir a ssentingi) that motion that evening tart /4 1: a - h " , i t a great barricr to the progress of 1 Ural-crlll—te nleasur prominent among which was tltteltka:reiiiebsion measures, the franchise in Ireland, and , tl4 tli .at Dr ProPosals of a practical and useful cha i4tlottilloPerit before Parliament fur improving . the :, , til o tl f th‘otisheat c OUntry.—(Hear, hear.) The conside -1,11'‘,44nt,. , m easures should be indefinitely . postponed . 1 , 1 ) , , - a t t l Was to ba plunged into an agitation for a 4441 -11 th -ell sive It 4 l3'll. lie did not think that i:,llith t the c (nlll • 1 time in profitless discus 'O or " il to vvasts their t• D tli,Chet to universal suffrage and the six 4 t4 et . art, it to sound t, rte ie kt _r, while they could devote k , t ,o4 o „t'eti r ,,, tre a sures , of legislation. He had stated ;4%;`,oeQ,,'' othe ti - ho had stated them on hNibaisttcne• Il ni e n h n io n ed as the House would refuse to %-`hill/2,;4.t5t3411.• Friend to n- lay his measure on the table, ‘ tti t7t (41 n°lll`l not give their sanction to a propo -4 11- ‘ a a ' 44:l ei l opposed to that on which our I ti li St t q te llB a ll d r e e na Bt eds a P ri n d adopted, would create 11 ' c er ' h ne caet , overriding every other power in th,:%er l s i c Y irial,believed that the establishinto w f i a th pure the ~Il,kiit°llll w n o 4 r tl ious o e f wo o u n l r d inconsistentbeconstit ution; and as ho b, l4 4 l Ne: t l c oght to be thankful for living under the . ki lt'' h l llip - °f Xing Lords, and Commons, which, in 1 -v4l- a tirri l;* l : /a ell id be endangered by the adoption of the l it 'Na t i.. * 4 °A. Friend, he hoped that they would 11,, 1 '. p, 0 4 ,te to that motion. to N; e°I\INOR said it appeared to him that gigkl'ellpti'llattei-t l.oconsistency in the speech of the Righ 1 4 8.1 the i ', 'No had complained that that motion . went AO° state length of universal suffrage, while be l'q l ,',lf or) - `ed that it fell far short of such a system t jk l it - t, l4 , t aeti ott l l e bd the Member for Montrose had not , I 'Lep e. 4 1 ,1144 : d u a form pleasing to the Right Hon.Ba •t theprinciple and lick the Bill into N4114'01 the„alpi 4 Itl i ,, , ta / 'ergot the progress which 44 tile adsiatue 1832? It hail made ore rogress k i ? 41444 etixteg cla,sses of this country than e perh tp h to:, ll . /la e , h ii ,ses in any other country in the world. kitigil,et, ti.., for Montrose had animadverted on ig i In mil': ltn ee defi e d hi m to show any part of his tille h L e had urgei the people to v iolence. ba ufacturers of Manchester turned out their ands, fur the, purpose •F carrying free trade. He had no part is that movement, though he was cem 'flitted to gaol, and subsequently tried at Lancaster by a zpecial jury, ;and after eight days acquitted; and three of the jury, rife) were magistrates, and who d , clared thot they had entered the box strongly prej adived against: him, stated that their pre judice was entirely removed by the result, and invited him to di finer. Ho would support this motion, though he stifl contended fir the Charter; as for the Reform Bill, he regarded it as a mockery, a delusion. and a snare. All he wished was that that Hone should be elected by the free will of the working classes and all I classes in the country. They placed their hope on the transient contents ent which arose from the present commercial prosperity; but the day would come when something more thin petitions would be sent to that House to do justice to the working classes. No people ware more intelligent than the manufacturing popula tion of this country, who were much better pre2ared for political change than the population of Paris, or any other city in the world. It was not he who, during the agitation for the Reform Bill, carriA about pictures of the King with his head downwards, and a Moody axe to cut it off with—it was not he who advocated s-tting fire to Bristol. He advocated the People's Charter, whole and entire, and never would abandon one point of it. Ho thanked the Hon. Member for Montrose for having brought fora and this measure, and however the Hon. Member might revile him in that House, and abuse him and his party, he would stand by that party, and although he supported his motion, his motto wouli always be " The People's Charter, and nu surrender." Mr. P. WOOD remarked on the dexterous manner in which the Right Hon.. Baronet the Secretary for the Home Department lied answered the speech of his Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose, for by moans of a cross-examination, he had endeavoured to show that the object of the motion ht ;d some similarity to the People's Charter. He was singularly fortunate in being followed by the advocate of t'ae People's Charter, who had en_ dearoured to assimilate his measures to that of his Hon. Friend. Mr. F. O'CONNOR. —Not at all. .Mr. P. WOOD—lles was, however, prepar©d for this by what took place last year. But where was the re- I nblance? His HO7l. Friend proposed that every man of full age, and not s abject to any mental or legal dis ; ability, who should have been the resident occupier of a house or part of aho use as a lodger for twelve months, and should have been. 'duly rated to the poor for that time, should be registered as an elector. He then went on to shorten the direction of Parliaments to three years, and made the proportion of representatives more con sistent with the awou nt of population and property. What was the motion of the Honourable Member for Nottingham ? 'He called upon the House to recognise the great principle that labour is the source of all wet ith ; that the people are the only legitimate source of power ; that the labourer should be the first to partake of the fruits of his own industry; and that =station without representation is tyranny, and should he resisted. He then went on to assert that these prin sleeks were embodied in the People's Charter, anneal elec Lions, universal suffrage, vote by ballet, equal electoral distriete, no property qualification, and payment of Mem' bers.—(llear, hear.) Now he sup ported the motion of leis Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose, because it et - as diametrically opposed to such propositions—(Hear) -because, instead of being founded on abstract rights and principles, it dealt with existing institutions, which it sought to improve by reform.— (Hear, hear.) It weal dbe infinitely more satisfactory to him, and he felt surd to the HOMO in general, if - her Majesty's Governmen J, instead of so frequently telling them what they did no t like in the way of reform, would be kind enough to tell them what they did like. But how their having a Ile Form Bill for Ireland was a reason why they should not h ave one for England was a species of Parliamentary lo;;it • which he could not comprehend. He supposed, however e that as in the case of Chancery reform, the experiment must be first made in Ireland. Not one of the Right ll or t. Baronet's observations had the slightest reference tc the motion. But they were told that they must nal :0 into consideration the known opinions of the move; Now, if the motion were brought forward by a leader s upported by a large party, entirely bound together by so me great political principle, he could understand that in such a case it required great powers of abstraction to take the motion apart from those circumstances. But it was very different in the case of a motion like- this, which was simple in itself, and although the Horn Member for Montrose had told them candidly that he himself would go further still, he at the same time con 'essed that his supporters were not of the same mind. 3 ale had no party pledged to all the definite details of the ;People's Charter, or any such pro position.—(Hear.) 3 low were the two propositions re ceived? The motion of his Hon. Friend was supported by 82 Members of th at House, while that of the Hon. Member for Notting! lam found only 13 supporters. Was it fair then to impute Ito those 82 Members the advocacy of the People's Chr liter, which they had repudiated? Was it sufficient for them to go on year by year with a Government which c antented itself by opposing measures for reform, and brie; Ong in no measures to remove those d;fficuities which i - Ivey admitted to exiet ? (hear, hear.) During the vacation a pleasing rumour was afloat that the people, were to be no longer disappointed of their just hopes of having a voice in the Legis lature, but it evaporate d when her Majesty's Speech was laid bef nes them, and turned out to be simply a redress if the grievances of iv deed. He rejoiced sincerely that the representation of that country was to be increased from 40,000 to 250,00 0; but did the Government con ceive that they could any longer resist a similar expan sion in this country''? Was it wise to wait till they were driven to it by some formidable convulsion?— (Hear, hear.) He hi wself had always kept aloof from taking a part in it in erant agitation. He was anxious to remain so, but le ea' difficult was it when such a boon ens held out to agitation at all times. Mr. Fox in the debate on the Trien vial Bill said be feared no improve ment would be ears - iel 1 for the people till they had arms in their hands; and. Sir J. Mackintosh said the same thing. One who ki sew fear as little as any man, except that he feared that which might bring disaster on his country, the Duke 01c Wellington, declared that it was the dread of civil war which drove him to grant Catho lic emancipation. Who doubted that it was the revo lution in Paris in 1830 which produced the Reform Bill, which was not c arried until we were on the verge of revolution throu el t the agency of political unions, which he, though is mpted much more at that time by youth, refused to join. Then came the corn law. That agitatie le was commenced, not by the cotton interest, to whom a;11 free-trade measures were attri buted by some Hon. _Members, but by a member of the aristocracy, the Ho n. Member fir Wolverhampton. At first he was not list, sued to; but at length a course of agitation took place different in its character from that which preceded the Ratform Bill, and one more marked by logical argument„ 'which finally brought conviction to the minds cf the peep le. Still that House could not be ' brought to concur in .a measure of total repeal till they were driven to it by- a famine.—(Hear.) Looking to what had passel on the continent such a course was neither wise nor prudent; and this, in his opinion, fully justified his Hon. Fri' and in bringing forward his motion in a time of comparative peace.—(Hear, hear.) It was said there were no Petitions, and no doubt there were many more petitions I 'resented the other night in favour of repealing the atto re.eya' certificate duty than had been presented in favour• of this measure; but surely the Government and ti m t House would not take this as a proof of indifference: on the part of the people. The great reason. why he, supported the motion was that he fc ared that the course , which they were pursuing might have the effect of tb rowing the people into the arms of the Honourab!e Member for Nottingham. He should always most deeply r egret to see them placed under such a leader; for, with out imputing any unworthy motive to him, he most gror sly deluded the people by the ab stract principles which he endeavoured to instil into their minds with ret pect to taxation, representation, and the right to resist, leaving to the people to decide in what mode that resistance should be offered. —(Hear, hear.) Tim) measure of his Hon. Friend, on the contrary, was per fectly consistent with our constitu tion in every respect.- -(hear, hear.) It was the natural growth of our constitution, adapted to the habits of the people, the laws under which they had lived, the system under which they had been governed, and the direction which their minds ha d taken. It was the fate of cut and-dried constitutions to fail. The wisest legisla'ors of antiquity were not framers of cut-and-dried constitu tions, but ref .rmers. Solon, when he was asked, " Have [ you given the people of Athens the best constitution ! possible?" replied, 't No, I have given them the best constitution for them ."—(llear, hear.) All the model constitutions, from those of Plato to those of Lord Bacon and Sir T. More, would be most egregious failures if put to the test. Jeremy Bentham had the same mo nomania, and fancied ho could ship off constitutions to the Brazils just like a cargo of goods. An attempt had been made of late to frame a cut-and-dried con stitution for New Zealand, but like dried flowers it took no root in the earth. He had been asked if he was a Republican- He was not one who thought either a Monarchy or a Republic good in the abstract. All depended on circumstances. He believed that no thing would fit this country hut King, Lords, and Com mons. But look at the United States—what could they be but a Republic? W hat motives had they fcr a Mo narchy? But so long as we had rulers who would con duct themselves like our present Sovereign—so long as we had an aristocracy wise enough to know the time for concessions, even again at that which they themselves might think right and just....so long as the constitution was carried on with that! degree of good sense and sound judgment, which, in spits of manifold defects, still cha racterised the general mass of our gentry, so long should we be safe under a government of King, Lords, and Commons.—(Hear, hear.) The question then came whether it would bo unsafe to intrust a much larger number of the people with the elective franchise ? (Hear, hear.) The principle of his Hon. Friend's mea sure was not universal suffrage, but that every man of full age, and not under any mental or legal disability, i with a qualification of residence and rating, paying scot and hearing lot— Sir G. GREY—Payment is expressly excluded. Mr. P. WOOD did not mean to say that his Hon. Friend intended to make his system an eagine for col lecting taxes. This, however, was a matter of detail. The qualification was insisted on. His Hon. Friend's proposition was the same, in fact, as that laid down by a very great lawyer, and one much r e f erre d t o b y lion. Members on the other side—namely, Blackstone, the only difference between them being as to the amount of the qualification. Could things remsin long in their present position? They had 4,500,000 of grown-up men, of whom about 900,000 had votes, including the double votes—he would call it 1,000,000. Was it to bo supposed that the remaining 3,500,000 would long re main tranquil under this exclusion?—(Hear, hear.) W as the development which had taken place in the intelli gence of the people during the eighteen years which had elapsed since the passing of the Reform Bill to bo thought nothing of ? since that time they had built, it appeared, 1,500 churches. lie should be very much ashamed if the result of that hed rwt been to do some thing towards the education and improvement in the ha bits of the great mass of the people. Our national schools educated 1,000,000 children, and - the dissenter were not behindhand in their efforts, acc-yrding t 3 their means. They had had the 10th of April q aeted almost ad nauseam by their opponents. Why alto& d they not be allowed to use it now in support of their v;..ews? Still he knew that on that day im the neiglconurhood of that very [ - louse there were hundreds of workmen, who, though they took no part in the meeth .gs, still refused to be sworn in or act, as they said, agni ust their order. Now, this eas the feeling which he w ished to see removed. He wished to see English society no longer broken up into section3.—(flear, bear.) We ought to be thankful that we had a gentry, commerce, a race of industrious mechanics, and hard-working I :Abourers. These he wished to see assc&ated togeth , xr in each county and town, and not an excluded class, endeavouring to force from an excluding class a recog-nition of their rights. The Braid principle of our cons ',i - mtion had always been . locality, and this was engraft 3d in the measure of his lion. Friend in the provision regiariring a twelve months' residence. It was owing t t a long habits of local self-governmcat and obedience, to municipal control that this country had not do- crated the cause of liberty by violence. It was t eese old, sturdy Saxon elements of freedom which were always working at the bittoin of our system, ass the Saxon language still lived in the nomenclature all our plitical insti tutions. lie believed that the effect of his ll,mourable Friend's measure would be to •ec nsolidato all interests and produce a friendly feeling hetavEen the landlord and tenant, and between tho emplo:, , cr and the employed ; and this Lcding would be still f rarther developed by the bekt. Fina'ly, did the House think that this country was in a safe position with reference t) the basis of pro- perty in our representation. The common argument on the other side was—you are going to give all to num bers and nothing to property ; and yet, hal it not been said that 6,000,0001. of property were represented by one half of the House, and 78,000,0001. by the other half ? (Hear, hear.) Talk of represen Cation based o❑ property —why, it was a delusion.—(ll car, hear.) It those in telligent and industrious classf ts, for whom education had done so much, would no longer be content to hold a subordinate position, what would be the feeling of those wbo were placed in a more fortunate posi tion, and had more time for reflection, at such a die• parity ?—(Hear, hear.) He Irn.iw constitutions were not matters which could be 1110130 A to mathemati cal formulm, and this was the, reason why he re jected the charter. But he was not bigoted to this particular measure. It was the wish of its ad vocates to prevail on the Govurnment to take up the subject, for it was not themselrtes but their principles which they desired to bring into power. Neither Sir S. Romilly nor Sir J. Mackintosh lived to see their im provements in the law carried into effect; hut carried into effect they were, though by other hands. So Cie principles of the lion. Members for Wolverhampton and the West Riding came into rower, though they did not. The Reform Bill, which ;ißgan with minorities of 30 and 40, had become the law of the land. On these grounds he f:•lt confident that the principles involved in the measures of his Hon. Friend would ultimately prevail.—(Loud chQorp.) Mr. H. I)RUMMOND could :not say that he con curred in the sentiment expressed. in the able sreech of his Hon, and Learned Friend, in which he said that he had equal admiration of talent, no matter how it was ap plied. He (Mr. Drummond) had also great respect for talent, but lie must except its application in many in stances. When his Hon. Friend, reiterating an obser vation that had been made the other night, said that ho was sorry to see one class set against another, he thought he had made a remark which tended to sepa rate those classes more than they were. His answer wa , , that there were a set of prof,ssional agitator=, who were going through the country inflaming the passions of the country by false declarations that the landed interest of the country were using the power they possessed for centuries to injure trade and manufactures, and enhance their own position. He maintained that the charge was false, and he would maintain it there, where ho would be met if it were true.—(Hear, hear.) But now, with referenca to the motion, he was sor r y th a t th e Noble Lord, after what he had said in years past, did not fulfil the rumour that they had heard respecting the enlarge ment of the franchise, and he must say that he regretted also the Hon. Gentleman who had brought forward the present motion had mixed up the considerations of the franchise with other matters, so as to prevent his (Mr. Drummond) giving his humble support to it; for he was sorry to say, not only would the present motion be car ried, but much worse motions.—(Hear, hear.) Sooner or later, every word of the present motion would be carried.—(Hear, hear.) They were ccming to the reap ing time of the seed they bad long since sown. The Hon. Gentleman who brought forward the motion re minded tho House that for 150 years the Whigs had heea teaching them that the people were the only source of legitimate power. The Whigs had been always the promoters of agitation until they got into power, and then they generally turned out good Tories. It might then be urged that no other political mewurea were possible in that country, seeing that their enemies denunciated them. Did Lion, Gentlemen forget that that party had derended the murder of the King, and the mutiny at the Nore? And there was not an enemy of the public peace throughout Europe that they did not dt fsnd now. —(A. laugh.) When they got into power they wreaked their vengeance upon the party by whom they had been kept out, and in order to do that they did not hesitate to violate the constitution. They turned the throne into a president's chair, and that was all queen Victoria sat upon no v.—(II( ar ' hear.) After all the concessions that were suppased to have been msde to them, the people were as discontented as ever. The Reform Bill had proved a failure. Why? Simply because the re - ple expected from the Reform Bill more than any Act of Parliament could do. If there was another Reform Bill passed to-morro wile people would be just as discontented as ever. They were, in his opinion, going she ge tiler wrong. Last year they were very angry with the Chartists. They were not now so very much in love with them, ne vertheless they sent the head of their Reform League to go hand in hand throughout the country with the gen tlemen upon whom they now turned their backs.—(No, no.) What, had they not been together at Aberdeen and other parts of the country? And now they would not permit that party to come betwixt the wind and their nobility.—(Hear.) One of their chief supporters bad told them very frankly that the King, Lords and Com mons was the greatest humbug that ever existed. The Hon. Member for Manchester opened his eyes at that as it he were astonished, but it had been distinctly stated that the electoral divisions were incompatible with Lords and Commons. It was quits clear to him that the ques tion before the House was not upon the carrying of the present measure that day or to-morrow, but the real question was as to the establishment of a pure demo cracy.—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. F, O'Connor.) Why, it was not desired by one honest man. The object was the establishment of a pure democracy, and he might re mind the House that last year the lion. Member for Manchester held up the conduct of the people of France to them as an object worthy of their imitation. And what was that? Six hundred thousand armed men that were there alone preserved the public peace, and that would be maintained no longer than while their soundest prin ciples crept in the dark. So long as the unarmed masses were divided against each other, so long was it impos sible that their could bo anything but universal carnage and confusion. Hon. Members opposite probably did not wish that; but what signified their wishes? If they had not sufficient sense to see before their noses, he could not help it. Did they believe that the Whig party did not see it, and that their policy was to stave off any successive step as long as they could? He believed there was not a man of that party who would not do his best to prevent the consequences that would result—he be lieved there was not one of them that had not as great a dislike to confusion and bloodshed as himself. Ho was 'only pointing out what would be the necessary result of the present policy. They wished to estab lish a universal system of equality. Did not all nature tell them that such a thing did not exist? Did they not find that all nature and all intelligent beings ranged themselves in order? and if they would only learn wis dom from the ant, they might be instructed by their system of mutual dependence and their mode of govern ment. What they know of the celestial hierarchy that was not order under order? And were they not attempting to confound in one great chaos not only all the institutions of that, but of other countries? Ho re gretted that the Government had not taken some initi ative step with respect to the present question, because ho was satisfied that ultimately these measures would be carried.— (Hear.) Mr. ROEBUCK said the House and the country were indebted to the Hon. Member for Montrose for bringing forward the present question at the present time. The Hon. and Learned Member for Oxford had reminded the House that they were now in a state of public calm, quiet, and comparative comfort. The question was, therefore, brought before the House simply on its own merits, unassisted by excitement out of doors, and, he had hoped, unresisted by prejudice within.—(Hear.) The question, as stated by the Hon. Member for Mont rose, was simply this—that they bad from time to time made alterations in the representation—they had in crease I the number of electors—and he proposed to in crease them still further. How bad he been met by the Right Hon. Gentleman ? Why the Right Hon. Gen tleman said, " You are departing from the principles of the constitution—you aro about to make a chamber of representatives so entirely representing the democratic principle that you will overturn the whole constitution of the country." He thought be had dealt with the pro• position of the Hon. Member for Montrose very much like a nisi prius lawyer.--(A laugh.) He had not met it fairly or in front—he had gone round about it, and carped at it, and cavilled at it. He had said that it was opposed to the principl es o f t h e Br i tish constitut i on. Now it had been his (M r . R oe b uck ' s) fate to search after that British constitution, but he had never yet found it.—(Hear.) But he had met a case in which a change been made in the representation and in the con stitution by the Noble Lord at his right hand—(Lord J. Russell). The objection taken to the Noble Lord's pro position was, that he we , going to make the representa tion depend upon money—upon the possession of a 101. freehold. It was urged that that was a principle w h o ll y unknown to the Prittsh constitution, but that was not acceded to by the Noble Lord. He proposed his men sure, and it was carried. What did the Hon. Member for Montrose now propose? Did he controvert the principles of the British constitution, which he took to be that there should be a body speaking in the name of the people, and making laws for them. They bad a King, Lords, and Commons, who, according I to the theory of the consti tution, were said to represent the whole of the people of England. He would admit that they represented most faithfully the passions, the prejudices, the ignorance, and the good qualities of the people of England, and he did not support the present motion for a change becaune he did not believe that the present House so reprasented them. Why, that House was, in 1850, very much . what it was in 1830„ He did not understand the propositions of his Hon. Friend, which he had borrowed from the Noble Lord, that taxation and representation should go together. When the Noble Lord propounded that theory, he was a-, far from the truth as his Hon. Friend. His ground for demanding an alteration in the franchise was, that there existed a large body of his fellow-et:un trymen who fancied themselves aggrieved because they were not represented.--(Hear, hear.) In 1830 they were a larger and a more powerful class than they were at present. The House was, he thought, bound in justice to listen to the claims of that unrepresented class, who then came to the aid of the middle classes and assisted them in the struggle. There was much said of the burdens of that country, but as regarded the work ing classes they were not of so much importance. He believed that on investigation they would be found less than those imposed on the people cf America or most other countries. But that wes not his ground. What he desired was, that there should not be in any Large miss of the population of that country the feeling of discontent that now existed. If the labouring classes were not treated fairly they would soon be induced to listen to bad counsel, and to adopt it. He was of opinion that there was both peace and security in good govern went, and that they enjoyed that security in England. A man could go from one end of the country to the other, not armed, but simply deaCnded by the power a the law. He was protected by the invisible domi nion ( f the law, and that without any direct appeal from himself. When his Right Hon. Friend said the labouring classes had no protection from the Govern ment, he made a great mistake. All classes enjoyed protection—the people governed themselves by their own good intelligence. His Hon. Friend had used the word "serfs" as applied to the labouring classes. Now when the people felt themselves robbed of what others pos sessed they naturally felt themselves injure], teed ac cepted a name; and sometimes, too, they acted upon a feeling of the injustice they experienced. The Right Hon. Gentleman (Sir G. Grey) had told them that the House was made up cf a variety of interests, with the preponderance of a particular power. The Noble Lord bad told them what it was. lie said he wanted a pre ponderance of the landed aristocracy. Lord J. RUSSELL—No, no; I never said that. Mr. ROEBUCK spoke only from the published re ports, and a as sorry if he had misrepreteeted the Noble Lord; but ho thought he should be able, if he stepped into the library, to produce something like these very word. He would ask him whether such was not the object of the Reform Bill he had proposed? They had seen wealth enormously increasing from the spread cf their commerce and manufactures, and the Noble Lord found he could not exclude them. The lion. Member for Surrey, who was in the habit of calling a spade a spade, had said that the opposite party had wreaked their vengeance on their political opponents, by whom they had been so long kept out of power. He meant that when they came into power, on the shoulders of excite ment, as it were, they hal wreaked their vengeance 0.. the Tory party, by so shaping their measures as to bring in r e p rese nt a ti ves of the landed i n t erest . —(A Voice-- " The mercantile interest . ") Not at a ll. Th e Right Hon. Baronet hal told them that they ought not, by enlarging the franOses*destroy the combina tion of interest that th . Faaliairseileßresented. Sir G. GREY—I Said Ale House at present repro. sented all the areat and varied interests of the country. Mr. ROEBUCK—WeII, then, all be asked o f t h at House was to have such confidence in the people of this country as to allow them to vote for their representatives. —(Hear, hear.) Was it not too much to have the Right Hon. Gentleman getting up and threatening them with confusion and destruction if they only bad 2,000,000 or 3,000,000 of enlightened Englishmen saying, " I vote ays or nay?" Did the Right Honourable Gentleman moan to say that they were not intelligent ? Why ho was ale a,ys one of the first to get up and praise the humbler classes of the people of that country. Praise them, was the Right Hon. Gentleman's doctrine as long as they pleased; but give them power, and ho is frightened at them directly,—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Roebuck) vowed that he was not frightened at them; he believed them to be an exceedingly sober, calm, and considerate race. They were not like the people across the water—they never seen elsewhere, exceptin Belgium, a regard for the knew how to govern themselves, and . they had, what was decisions of the majority; they yielded to them when duly and properly pronounced, and did not betake them selves, as they had seen in every country in Europe, to fighting when they were in a minority.--(Hear, hear.) The Right Honourable Gentleman had said " Whom do yon mean to enfranchise? Lodgers, in deed!" But that was a most unfair way to put the question. His Hon. Friend bad said—first, he wanted men untainted by crime; next, ho must have them dwelling in a particular locality for twelve months either as lodger or occupier. But that was not enough—they must be able to ascertain who they were, to know them, and distinguish them, and therefore registration was introduced. But he went a step further, and said they must not have a set of vagabonds —a most appropriate name—they must be actually rated to the relief cf the poor, but his lion. Friend having some experience of the vexatious working of the rate-paying clause, did not require previous payment of th e rate . N ow mar k t h e disingenuousness of the Right Hon. Gentleman, who said it was not desired 'that they should pay rates, and they were to have twenty persons on the books, not one of whom would pay the poor-rates. Was that in genuous—was that fair to his Honourable Friend? The Right Hon. Gentleman shook his head, but he (Mr. Roebuck) maintained that he was dealing with his ar -gument more fairly than the Right Hon. Gentleman had dealt with the llonourable Member's. The Right Hon. Gentleman had said that all wealth arose from labour, but he confessed he had seldom heard so much error in so few words. The motion of his Hon. Friend had hem termei universal suffrage, and those who op po. el it fancied that what was called the labouring classes would preponderate in point of numbers. They said, give them a vote. and their representatives would preponderate in that House; that they would have an undue influence in the state, and ultimately do away with the House of Lords and the Queen. But who were the labouring classes? Was the little shopkeeper, toil ing from six in the morning till nine at night, constantly moving about, and charging 100 per cent . b ecause hi s business occupied so much of his time—was he a labour- ing man? Was the man who lived in a9 - i house one of the labouring class, while he who lived in a 101. house was not? He wanted to know if the Hon. and Learned Member for Oxford was a labouring man?—(A !aogh.) 113 laboured all day and the greater part of ' the night? Was he then a labouring man? Why the distinctions of class in that country were like the shade across a sheet of paper, beginning with one colour and passing into another by such nice tints that no one could ti 11 where one colour ended or the other began. Could any man point out the precise distinction between the poorest labourer who pave his h srd work for the smallest pittance, to the highest intellectual labourer in the Legislature of the country? Could any man draw the line clearl) ? He thought they were frightening themselves with a name.—(Hear, hear.) They called men by the same name whose interests were as different as possible; in fact it was an idle bugbear, which the sooner they got rid of the better. Never did the Hon. Member for Surrey speak a truer word than when he said all that would c ome to pass. Ho sa i d w i t h him, that the time must come, and ho was anxious that it should not come in whirlwind, storm, and confusion, and that it should be accepted as a growing, living ma nifestation ti the power and vitality of the British con stitution.—(Hear, hear.) It was an object with them to take care that the popul at i on around t h em s h ou ld not be stirred up into an a rme d ma d ness , i ns t ea d o f becoming an improved and intelligent people. He wished to see the hand of good-fellowship held out to them—that they should not keep them down, but help them up—that they .should aid them by education, and show them that tney were r ea lly th e ir friends. In that spirit he accepted the proposition of his Hon. Friend. He had that faith in th e ex p a nsive power of the conatitutiod , and in :the mighty effect of the great discoveries of modern times —of printing and the steam engine, and the increased means of communication, that the time would come when there should not be a human being in the land who would not feel himself quite equal—that terrible word—with every other, but not in the sense of the Right Hon. Gentleman. But were all men now equal in the eye of the law? Not at all. Out of four and a half milli ons there was on ly ono m illion who had the power o f vot i ng for representa ti ves in that House; they considered it a degradation not to have the right to vote; but he (Mr. Roebuck) had never voted in all his life for any human being. In fact, although these men considered it a degradation to be deprived of the vote, if the right was given them to-morrow, the first thing they would find was that they would neglect to , make use of it. B ut that was no answer to hi m. Dis content was in th a t class and they should get rid of it Was there e ver so conservative an assem bly as th at ar i s i ng out of univ ersa l suffrage at the t i me o f t h e l ast F rench revolution— a un i versal suffrage t h a t was propounded by the democrats of Franco, e xpecting that they would have things all th e i r own' way? The Right Honour able the President of the Board of Trade shook his head; but he (Mr. Roebuck) knew what he meant.— (A laugh.) H e meant to i nt i ma te that th e p eop l e o f France w ere diff erent f rom the people of England. There appeared to be a general impression that the peopl e o f that count r y wore not to b e trus ted with power. He thought it was a mistake to say that the middle classes of the count r y s h are d i n t h at o pinion. By bringing for ward this qu es ti on year a f ter year, they ought not to be taunted by the failure of their efforts in that House out cf the attempt to press the question still on the attention of Parliament, and to make the middle classes thoroughly understand that there was no danger whatever in en dowing the large sec ti on o f the labouring populati on with that p ower w hi c h t h ey th e mselves posse sse d. Re collecting all the, antecedents, th ey ought to be very care ful and anxious to confer upon them that franchise which they asked, because they had enabled that House to force f orn the aristocracy of the country the Refor m Bill.— (Hear, hear.) Th e N o bl e Lord himself must know that they forced that Bill on the House of Commons as we ll as the House of Lards.—(Hear, hear.) It was idl e not to call that measure a revolution. It was a revolution, and a very beneficial revolution.—(Hear, hear.) Th e Lion. Member for West Surrey shook his head. Th a t Hon. Gentleman, however, contradicted everything and everybody.—(Laughter.) That was a revolution that was brought about by a strong feeling out of doors—a feeling that was kept up, maintained, and cherished by the Noble Lord and his colleagues.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord need not attempt now to hide the fact, as the time had long passed by. If ever there was a revolution, that, he repeated, was one. He certainly never wished to see rep ea t e d i n t h at country such an attempt to drive the vessel so near the rocks. In a few hours more they might have found themselves in a violent revolution, instead of a peaceful one. He therefore entreated the Noble Lord and the Howe to be careful how they resisted so long again the desires of the people—of those whose demands were honest,. just, and reannable.—(Hear, hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL.—Sir, before I address myself to the motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose, I feel it will be necessary for me to say some words respe . cting the motives and the conduct of those who had brought forward the Reform Bill. The Hon. Member for West Surrey has chosen to say—not an original observation on his part, although he is not wanting in originality— t"at the Whigs in power immediately became Tories, and acted upon that principle, which he thinks the right one, upon which every Government ought to act. But it is somewhat difficult for him, after making the remark, to show that the bringing forward of the Reform Bill tallied with the principles of a Tory Government. The Hon. Gentleman, therefore, hits on the ingenious device of inventing the motives that actuated us, and says that the Reform Bill was brought forward by the Whigs to wreak vengeance upon their fees. Now a more unjust remark never fell from any Hon. Gentleman. But the Hon. aed,Learned Member for Sheffiel I, in giving us a warning of the danger of resisting this measure, charges us with a resistance for a series of years to every proposition for a reform in the representation of this House. Why, Sir, the plain truth is this—that, f a series of years, I myself had brought forward and had voted for motions having for their ohject a ref au in the representat . on.—(llear.) But if I fsel it some what necessary to vindicate myself from this charge, I cannot at the same time refrain from saving a few words in defence e f that chief under whom I had the honour for so many years to serve. and under whose au-pices the liefirm Bill was brought forward and ultimately carried. Lord Grey throughout his political life had brought for ward many propositions for :reform.—(Hear.) In ISIO being then a member of the House of Lords, wbero re form was not likely to be a very palatable or favourite topic, Lord Grey declared that, although his original plans bad been modified—although his ardour had some what() abated by age and experience —yet, even it. those days, when Reformers were few, an d th ose gene rally much calumniated and run down, he was still convinced of the justice of those opinions which he held in respect to reform. And after all this we are now to be told that we brought fora and that great measure for the mere purpose of wreaking vengeance upon our foes. That may be a very ingenious device of the Hen. Mem t-er, but anything further from the real history of the fact could not be stated or imagined. Well, Sir, I will now come to the immediate question before the House. And I must say I think that my Right Hon. Friend has been somewhat ill-treated by those lion. Members who followed him, in accusing him of misrepresentation or misconstruing of the motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose. The Hon. Member for Montrose had himself stated that he was in favour of tao principle of that which is called the People's Charter; that every man should have a vote; and ho further said, he conceived that those who bad not votes were absolutely slaves. He therefore proposed that not only occupiers of houses, but lodgers should have votes on being rate]. Well, my Right lion. Frierd says that that is evidently a franchise disjoined from property—that the constitution of England has hitherto united, though not in every case, property with the right of voting, and that this proposition of the Hon. Gentleman would, if carried, cause a great change and iunovation on the constitution. If the Hon. Member for Montrose proposes only to admit every man that is an occupier of a house, and a lodger who is rated, what be comes of his assertion that every man who has not a vote is a slave? Either he is making a motion so exten sive in its nature that but a very small class can be re garded in the light of what he calls slaves. or else he is making a motion that proposes to give but a restrictive suffrage. In that case he leaves a large number of the people in the so-called state of slavery. I understood the Hon. Gentleman to say that if his proposition b carried, out of the 4,000,000 of adults in Great Britain 3,000,000 would have votes. If that be the case, this cannot lbe the restrictive franchise referred to by the Hon. Member for Oxford. If, on the other hand, it is the restrictive franchise, like scot and lot voters under the ancient laws, the lion. Member for Montrose will lone the benefit arising from the delivery from slavery of the great body of the people.—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable and Learned Member for Sheffield says he does not find fault with the present re presentation; but, consiCering that a great number of the population are excluded from the franchise, in order to content them he thought they should be allowed to vote. Now if that is the ground upon which you are proceeding, unless you give the franchise fully and com pletely to adult males, you will altogether fail in your object.—(Hear, hear.) If the franchise was to be ex tended as far as the Hon. Member for Montrose calcu lated, when he said 3,000,000 out of 4,000,000 would possess it, then I think it would be much more painful to individuals to see that out of four adult males, three of them had the right of voting, and one of them was ex cluded. This would be considered a still more unfair exclusion than any that at present existed. In respect to the question of taxation and representation, upon which the Hon. and Learned Member for Sheffield says that the Hon. Member for Montrose has followed me in error, I must observe that I do not think either of us are in error upon the general principle of the constitution, although I may be of another opinion as to the practice. I apprehend, Sir, that many of the declarations so often made were to this effect e that the King did not from ancient times, since the commencement of the representative con stitu ion, levy taxes by his own authority as Sovereign, bat called the representatives of counties and boroughs together to take their assent, which assent was considered to be that of the people at large, and therefore, from the .beginning of our representative history, with one small exception, the principle was, that all taxes should be levied with the consent of the people. It is quite another question whether the ge neral maxim was true—namely, that every person sub ject to taxation had a direct voice in the representation. It is quite evident at all times of our constitution that great numbers, though not subject to taxes and affected by the taxation of the country, had, notwithstanding, no direct vote in the representation. And when Lord Camden declared that taxation without representation was a tyranny, he did not deny the right of the House of Commons to tax the people of England and Scotland, although a gre at number of the population to be affected by such taxation had no votes at all for Members of Parliament. But what he meant was—that in proposing a tax upon America, when America bad no represents, Lives in Parliament, was plainly and obviously a tyranny, and a violation of the great principle of the constitution, which was taxation and representation.— (Hear, hear.) I, therefore, deny that there is no truth in the validity of the principle of taxation and representation. I deny also that it is meant to be carried literally into effect as regards all persons that are subject to taxation. It is only meant that the House of Commons, hei'ng really and veritably the representa tives of the people, shall grant in their name the taxes and subsidies to the country. If I am right in this general maxim I think I shall not be wrong in asserting that we did not dt. viate from the p r i nc ipl e ef the constitution in the proposition wo made in the Reform Bill.—(Hear.) We were of opinion that the thee was come when a re form in the representation was necessary, and that the people could not consider themselves fairly represented while a green mound and a town destroyed by the sea some ceetaries ago ,sent representatives to the House at a time when the great seats of manufacture—Manchester, Leeds, and Sheffield—had no members in Parliament. Believing that the time was come when this unreal re presentation would no longer be tolerated, we proposed that there should be such a change as would oblige the representatives of the people more directly to reflect their opinions in this House. But we did not propose to destroy all that then existed, for we gave to certain boroughs the right of sending members to Parliament, where a body of electors, though small, would still be found to return them here. We believed, as it was well stated by Lord Hol land, ;in a letter having reference to the constitution in Naples, that the atte m pt t o ma k e a cons tit u ti on for a natior, and to believe that it would be all at once fitted fir it, was as absurd as thinking of building a tree or manufacturing an animal. The Hon. and learned Gen tleman says that in framing this Reform Bill we endea voured to create a preponderance in favour of the landed aristocracy, and that I had avowed such to be our ob ject. Now I must say it certainly was our object not to make any unfair distribution of the new representation. And while we proposed that many towns not hitherto represented should send members to this House, we like wise proposed that many counties possessed of large po pulations should send additional representatives here. In doing so, we distributed fairly the representation. I was asked towards the end of that Bill whether it was true that I utterly discarded the landed interest, or some such phrase, or as Lord Ashburton styled itl, whether I had not taken from the barley field and given to the coal field? So far from that I said that the effect of the measure would be rather to give the landed interest t a i o preponderance. I eli d not say that preponderance but that that interest was so strong in he country that thtahteitl was ancied on i rntienrtees, inten tion this fair representation of the people would end in giving that preponderance. I should have it most unjust if I proposed a number of manufacturing towns for representation with out considerable eh e o r u s g h h le t nsid taking into consideration the growth in the wealth a l d t u p r e a n l. l3 i people of counties, o.Gentl a e l ni th a o n u ss h p t r h op ey os ere i not pay any rates or taxes, yet if ho be a lodger n the c house he should have a right to vote. Now it appears ti me, in the first instance, that if my Hon. Friend at tligonhttbon-naiggrhi- t begins by stating that every person, althoug h he may at tempts to carry out that object byßill, a and if such Bill frauds. I become law, it would bo open to in n u me r able cannot conceive how any means could be adopted to prevent any number of persons b ein g p laced on the re gistryalthough, according to the present law, they could have claim placed there. Supposingof to be • the owner or occupier ahouse which there are six or seven lodgers — the o w ner is rated , and as rated householders, rate—the other lodgers are not rated, and have nothing to do with the payment of them. Well , accord ing to the Bill of the Hon. Member , they may be all pays the rated and placed on the rate - books upon their own de mand. They would be under no obligation to pay the rates—the obligation would still devolve on the occupier. I own it does appear to me that this is as near universal suffrage as a plan that does not profess to be one of universal suffrage can well be.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman himself has avowed that he is in favour of the People's Charter; and in all the public meetings of which we have seen an account, the lion. Gentleman and the Hon. Member for Nottingham have avowed the same objects and the same views. —(Hear.) If that, thou, be the case, how am I to distinguish the lion. Gentleman's proposition from that which the Chartists hitherto have made?—(Hear, hear.) But then the Hor d . and Learned Member for Sheffield says, should you Why you distrust the pe o pl e ? Wh y no t h av e confidence in the whole body o f th e p eo pl e ? A n d w hy not admit them Now, to vote for Memb ers o f P ar li a ment?"— (licar i do not it may seem very ungener ou s in me to say that feel confidence i n th e grea t body of the people; and this, too, when it is declared by the Hon. and Learnedare Mem ber for Sheffield, that when the working classes raised by on e s id e o f the House we aro always_ h sure to ear that praise echoed on the other. Now, Su, I admit that the conduct of the working classes is de serving of our praise, and that, too, upon every oc casion that we have had an opportunity of judging of their general conduct; but going from that conduct, should it follow thst a suffrage almost universal should give to them tae power of electing Members of Par liament, and that if they hal that power their choice would always be a wise one?—(Hear, hear.) Am I to say that because they are deserving that the consequence should be that they should elect the Mem bers of this House, by whom are to be determined all questions in relation to this great empire?—(Hear, hear) —that to them should be intrusted the preservation of our constitution and of this empire, in the direction of which this House has so great a part?—(Hear, hear.) Candidly, I must say that I think they should not; I be lieve that they would be misled, and I have seen inst acces that induce me to think so. There would be fund one man telling them that 30,000,000/. of taxes were paid for a debt that was not a national debt —that they would be right in not paying it; and that they might get rid of those t IXO3 by refusing to pay that debt. I think that a man telling them this would get followers and sup porters, and thus have a seat in this House. I believe, too, tha' persons might obtain favour amongst them by pro posing the tepee! of the new poor-law, and restoring the old poor-law—that law which was fast leading to a social revolution in this country. I believe that doe eines such as these, and others, would, with the classes ! o whom you propose to give the sufflase, have great weight and influence.—(Hear, hear.) If such, then, are :ny opinions, I cannot support the proposition of the Honourable Gentleman.—(Hear.) But, then, we are repre a:lied with the measures on this subject that we nave preposed. The Honourable Member for Oxford , ass, " You have brought in a Bill respecting the Irish ranchise, and the constitution for the Cape laid down Principles which do not d Fier much from that which the Honourable Gentleman proposes." With respect to Ire and we have brought forward a Bill which, if it passes en its present shape,"will give 250,009 votes to 2,000,000 of an adult population—that is,which gives to the people a less number of voters in proportion to the population than that which the people of England and Wales now have.—(Hear, hear.) If that, then, be so, that Bill is no precedent for the measure of the Hon. Gentleman.— (Hear, hear.) With regard to the Cape, the state of its population and the franchise to be given cae form no ground for such a motion as this. Any representation given to a colony such as the Cape will be a representa tion for the colony only—it will have nothing but the concerns of the colony to manage. It is not like the great Imperial questions which come before the House of Com mons here. The representation here is totally diffe ent from that which would suit such a colony as the Cape. Ile next part, then, of the Honourable Gentleman's proposition—having given a vote, or the right of voting nearly to all persons; having made it that which Sergeant relfourd had well said, when he said " that this was a household suffrage, not for everybody who held a hoes-, but for everybody that a house would hold."—(Laugh ter.) The Hon. Gentleman next states what is the alte ration he would propose as to the cities and boroughs that should send Members to this House. Now, lam bound to say Oat the Hon. Gentleman's explanation on this, as on other occasions, has been very un'atisfact —(Hear, hear.) I can very well under, tand the plan of the Hon. Member for Nottingham, and as laid down in the Charter, which the Hon. Member, I believe, has signed and assisted in drawing.—(" Hear," from Mr. Hume.) By that it was proposed that the country should be divided into a certain number of districts, each having 40,000 or 50,000 persons, who should have a representative. Now, I think that would be very in jurious, and less like a national representation than that which now exists. When we were making the Reform Bill we endeavoured, in preserving the ancient boun daries and ancient cities and boroughs, to give a fa'r representation to the whole. Now, I say that a hen you come to apportion the representation you would be obliged to consider tho case of the counties. Here you have 100,000 people collected in a manu facturing town, and you say they must have two Members to represent them, but here, where there are 200,000 people in a county, you say they are not de serving of a representation of four Members. Now, what is the state at present of the representation? There is Nottingham, with 53,000 persons, sending two Members to Parliament; and North Devonshire, with 170,000 persons, has only two Members.—(Hear.) Mere is Leicester, with 50,000 persons, having to o Members cf Parliament, and South Devon, with 200,000 persons, sending no more Members to Parliament. There is Oldham, with 42,000 persons, and two Mem bers, and Dorsetshire, exclusive of the boroughs, with 170,000 persons, sending no more Members to Parlia ment than Oldham.—(Hear, hear.) If then we come to inequalities in the representation, and you say there are gre at numbers of persons in the manufaeturirg towns who are not represented in proportion to the population, yet I say that before the small boroughs are destroyed, I do not think that your object will be attained by destroying the boroughs connected with the agricultural counties. Wolverhamptor, Bradford, Stamford, and Kidderminster, with a population of 198,000, send twelve Members to Par liament; and South Devon, with a population that is 12,000 more than all these towns together, sends only . wo Members to Parliament. If then we are to light the question of inequality, let us fight it upon true grounds. Adopt the plan cf the Hon. Member for Not tingham, aid divide tt e country into districts—give an equal number to boroughs and counties.—(ll, ar.) But he Hon. Gentleman does not propose that; he takes up the question of the great Wallas and small boroughs, but yet I never heard of a remedy f et. the inequality pro posed by the Hon. Gentleman which would deal (pally with the counties and the towns.—(Hear.) I have upon otter occasions stated my reasons for think ing why a representative from the large towns and divi sions of counties would less represent the people than the divisions which at present exist. I do not believe that any other result would follow from the proposed change than to increase the division amongst classes. between the agricultural an i manufacturing interests. I think that the representation of the smaller towns with agricultural districts around them tends to smoothen those differences by the Members they send to the House of Commons. If we are to change this—then let there be a fair and equal p'an of representation pro posed; let that plan be explained to this House, and let not the Hon. Gentleman, now for the third time point to the small boroughs and the large towns. Sir, when I brought forward the Reform Bill, I stated what boroughs I thought, and I named them, should be disfranchised, as well as what counties and what towns I proposed to give the representation to. I laid the whole case fairly efore the House and the country to judge of it. — (Hear.) But the Hon Gentleman's plan always gives me the suspicion that he desires to give not a prepon derate, but an almost exclusive weight to the great towns of this country.—(Hear, hear.) He would not treat fairly the whole population by dividing them into manu facturing and agriculurista—(Hear.) The Hon. Gen tleman talks of tae labouring classes as if he wished to make a distinct class of them—as if we distrusted them, and would keep them at a distance.—(Hear.) I differ altogether from that view. So far from the working classes being a slave class, they have, in my mind, in estimable privileges—they are secure in their persons and their property; and if the poor man be injured I e is as sure of having a fair trial before his country as the highest man in the land—he has the security of the law and of our free constitution.—(Cheers.) Such, too, I am sure is the feeling of that class. We have never seen any other sentiment declared by them than that "we are a free people and have the full enjoyment cf our liberty."—(Cbeers.) I appeal to any one who has ever heard the popular feeling expressed, if it is not so? and nothing, I am sure, can be more different from the feeling that they are living in a state of slavery. —(Hear, hear.) There is not a republic in the world which opens such a field to every honour and every distinction as this monarchy.—(Loud cheers.) Here a man may rise to the highest honours in the state; he may rise to the greatest power in the state; he may become a Minister in this country, however humble may be his origin, and in that situation he may advise his Sovereign as t 3 the policy he should pursue, and the measures he ought to adopt; he may rise to the highest position in the Church or the law, he may become Arch bishop of Canterbury or Lord Chancellor, and as such ho may take rank before the Duke of Norfolk and the highest noble in the land.—(Cheers.) They possess every pri vilege, their properties and their lives are protected, and they have a fair field open to their ambition—they are a fiee people, and they - are not the less free because they have not votes given to them to enable them to elect persons who may have the direction of public affairs in Parliament.—(Hear.) Though I entirely differ from the motion of the Hon. Gentleman, and though I must give it tonight, as I would at any time give it, a dis tinct negative, yet I do not hold that a 101. valuation is absolutely necessary, or must be always permanently re tained ; and having stated that opinion I may be asked why I have not come forwardi tithe present session and proposed such an amended measure for reform as I may consider advisable. It is my opinion, and that of my colleagues to whom I submitted this question, that it would not be advisable in the present session to put aside all other questions in order to raise the queston of the franchise, which must lead to long and protracted debates, excluding every other subject, and leading, I fear, to many angry contests.—(Hear, hear.) I considerd that, of late years, we have made very great changes with respect to our commercial policy, and these changes are matters of discussion in this House, and, still more matters of discussion in the country.—(Hear, hear.) My opinion is that the sentiments of the country should be allowed to bo matured and settled upon these questions, before we place before the country that which must cause great excitement, and could hardly be settled without great divisions of parties. I believe that if we in addition to that which has caused angry debates through. out the country—the question with regard to our com mercial law—that if we added to that another question, we we might do a seri ous i n j ur y t o the interes ts country.—(Hear, Lear.) I believe that _t h is Parliament is equal to th e d e t erm i na tion of subjects ofgre atbe nefit of the which might be passed as law, for elapse fer once a measure the bne interest, country; but no long time wo ul d had been passed for the exte o nsion of the suffrage, until a complaint would Le d that the present House of Commons had not been elected by all who might be entitled to vote for representatives. I believe it is more for the interest of this cou ntry that the Parliament should continue to give its attention to the subject brought before it , t han if we rushed into a contest on Parliamentary reform. (Hear, hear.) There are, too, other considerations which I think may well induce us to collect further in formation, and that open to us further reflection, before we bring the question of extension of the suffrage before the House. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman has alluded to great changes on the continent of Europe in the last few years. These changes are not without their lessons. The first lesson—and we are told of it by Honourable Gentlemen in favour of the motion—is, that we have seen governments which might have altered their institutions—which might have granted popular representation—which might have allowed the people au enlightened press, and might have introduced melt - Aires which would have prevented ahso lu►e power from interfering with the liberty of the people unjustly, and that, having lost the time which they should have devoted to such objects, were overwhelmed with the tide of popular• fury which they had incurred. But another lescon has been taught since governments have been overthrown, or disturbed in their course. We have seen in three countries in Europe, the cause of liberty endangered, and the cause of good governments injured, by those who came forward in the name of liberty and of democratic government. We have seen in Italy a venerable Pontiff, whose good intentions and benevo l•nce no one can doubt, obliged to fly from his capital. We have seen that cap;tal stained with the blood of his Minister, who had been assassinated; and we have seen the wild establishment of a republic followed by a foreign bombardment and a foreign occupation.—(Hear, hear.) We have seen in Germany various changes, from the extr. me of despotism to the extreme of democracy; we have seen universal suffrage given and withdrawn, and a suhAitute adopted, which was borrowed from ancient Ronan, by which the vot_s of 100 of the richest men are I cued t) the votes given by 1,000 of the poorest. We have seen this substitute for the evil of universal suf frage. We have seen in France, when a demand was wade fir the extension of the suffrage beyond the rarrow limits of a few hundred thousands —w e have seen nat followed by a republic, which appeared to the twonishment of ninetv-nine out of every hundred inhabitants of France—(Hear, heir)—we have seen univerEal suffrage proclaimed and acred upon, and yet the new republic and universal suffrage openly reviled at once by the wisest and the ablest men, and at the same time by the poorest of the people.—(Cheers.) W e have st en men endeavouring to remedy the evil that has be >n brought upon them by surprise. I have been told, and many others have been told the same, that it is the opinion of the great mass of the people of France, that the present constitution is not suited to their habits and character, and that that constitution rust be replaced by institutions of a different kind.—(Hear.) Now it was no bu iness of ours, as I stated when I was first asked by the Hon. Member for Montrose—it is no business of ours to interfere with any kind of govern• ment that the French nation may give to themselves.... (Hear.) But it is our privilege, and we should be idiots indeed if we did not avail ourselves of it, to observe what is going on in Europe—(Hear, hear)—and to take coun sel from these events.—(Hear, hear.) I say then, that if the result cf the first lesson of 1848 was "It is too late," the result of this second lesson is "Do not do too much, and do not go too far, without full delibera. tior." I say that we are in the happy position that we have not a constitution to seek.—(Cheers.) The Hon. and Learned Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) says that he has always been looking for this constitution, and has not been able to find it.—(Laughter.) Why, that, in fact, is our happiness and our advantage—that we have no written constitution, but that every English man " knows his rights, and knowing dares maintain;" and that no person would venture to deprive an English man of that liberty which, notwithstanding the Hon. Member for Montrose, he knows that he has, arid he values it.—(Loud cheers.) Well, then, if that be the case; if we are in the enjoyment of so much liberty; if the people of this country, during the years 1848 and 1849, have shown so much good temper, and, as the Hon. Member says, are now in a state of quiet, and contentment—l say that Ido not think it will be un wise in us to pause and consider, and not to take the next step without further consideration as to what that step shall be.—(llcar.) That there is no very prevailing wish among the people at this time for these changes, and that the midd!e classes are, as the Hon. Member for Sheffield says, opposed to them, are certainly not con clusive reasons against those changes.—(Hear, hear.) It is very unadvisable to wait for a storm before we go to sea; but at the same time, if you lift your anchor and unfurl your sails in a perfect calm, you may be drifted against the rocks.—(Loud cheers.) I do net think, therefore, that in the pre,ont temper of the people of this country, it would be advisable for the Government of this country to propose a great plan for the extension of the suffrage.—(Hear, hear.) Whenever we do pro pose a plan, t think it should not be a substitute for the Reform Bill, but a supplement to that Act.— (Rciterat-d cheers.) My opinion is certainly that the Reform Act was adapted to a e institutions of this country—wa; adapted to the wishes of the people of this country. I believe with Hon. Gentlemen, that the people of this country have, since the Reform Bill was introduced, made great advances in knowledge and in information of every kind.— (Hear.) I rejoice to know and to acknowledge those advences. I think that it is partly in consequence of those advances that they do not, as far as I can perceive, show any impatience at the present moment for a great political change; that they know the conflicts and even the dangers that must accompany any such change, that they are contented t 3 wait till the wisdom of this House—(oh, oh, and laugh. ter)—shall decide that it is necessary to make a farther extension of the suffrage; and that the 101. value shall be no longer the 1 mit for the right of voting in this country.—(Hear, hear.) I think, therefore, if you decide against the motion of the Honourable Gentleman that you will be deciding against a motion which is in consistent with any right of suffrage that has hitherto existed in this country, and which would introduce into your representation a body of &lectors with whom you might find it was impo,sible to make the other institu tions of the state accord. I am supported in this view by the language th, t I see is held at the public meetings which are professedly in support of the Hon. Member far Montrose. I observe that at ono of them the Honour able Member for Nottingham rejoiccd in the union that had taken place—(Laughter, and hear, hear)—and la marked, amidst the great applause and laughter of the audience, that it was not enough to destroy protectior, but that they must destroy the Eitablished Church and get rid of the " black dugs," which was the name with which he thought right to denominate the clergy of the United Kingdom.—(Laughter, and hear.) The Hon. Gentleman cheers that sentment —(Hear.) The Hon. Gentleman has united with those who are proposing this plan to- fight.—(Hear, bear.) The lion. Member for Oxford (Mr. Wood) means nothing of the kit.d. Ile has e•kquently expressed his adherence to the constitution of this realm, and his wish to preserve the monarchy and the institutions of the country. I have no doubt that such is his intention; but when the Members come to be elected under the plan of the Hon. Member for Mon trose, if sanctioned by Parliament, I rather believe, arid I am inclined to think, that the lion. Member for Not- tjugham would be more likely to carry themajoritY;ith him on his plan, than the Hon. Member for Oxford on his.—(Cheers.) Be that as it may, this is a question of conjecture and uncertainty. My advice to the House is to fr to that conjecture and uncertainty the institu tions that we now have, being prepared to amend them with rezdrd to any of their detects, refusing to ally our selves with any obstinate rejection of wl.at may be for tho public benefit, but not adopting a course full of danger, full of doubt, and full of peril to our best inte rests.—(Loud cheers ) Mr. B. OSBORNE—The Noble Lord had described the speech and motion of the Ihn. Member for Montrose as unsatisfactory, but the declarations just made by the Noble Lord were completely unsatisfactory to the sup porters of the Government. It was worthy of notice that all the opposition to the motion, with the exception of one amphibious politician, the Member for West Surrey, had come from the Treasury bench. lie was one of those who had indulged in the pleas* dream that the Noble Lord would have deprived his Hon. Friend of the necessity of making his motion by bringing for ward a treasure to amend the reps esentative system. In July, 1848, the Noble Lord not only disclaimed the doctrine cf fieality, but expressed himself as totally dissatisfied with the state of the franchise.—(lleac, hear.) The Noble Lord would not put to sea in a storm, and he would not lift his anchor in a calm Were they to gather from this that the Noble Lord was Baiting for a breeze—(A . laugh)—and that it would not be until the excitement of a general election occurred that he would lay on the table of the House a Bill for extending the franchise?—(Hear, hear.) He did not think that such a course was calculated to place the Noble Lord in a very high position with the constituency of this country. He was afraid that until the broad arrow of the Government were stamped upon the measure, it was in vain to bring forward a motion like the present. There were always people who said the proper time had not arrived for measures of this kind. At one time it Bas said that you should never yield to popular clamour, and at another that you should not grant such a measure when there was popular apa thy. But if ever there was a time when a Minister could add to his fame, and secure the best interests of his coun try, it was by bringing forward such a measure at the present moment. If he were not much mistaken, a cry was arising out of doors that would swell after the speech of the Noble Lord so that he would not have to wait long for the storm he had spoken of. Who were the parties that were really promoting this agitation? A supine House of Commons and a procrastinating Cabinet.—(Loud cheers.) The Noble Lord bad given the House few reasons for the dilatory course he proposed to pursue—a course very different from that taken by his great predecessor, Mr. Fox, who laid it down that a Government should initiate reform. Such were also the sentiments of Lord Grey and Mr. Pitt. He regretted he did not see in his place to-night the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire (Mr. Disraeli), (A laugh.) Refor Reform the successor of Mr. Pitt in his po sition as lead er of the great WhatadridisttoheartaHticonp.ahirtyernobferthsaisy that?copientsrayi.d— Associations and Anti Corn-law Leagues, and other com binations of the kind, were the consequence of the people having to take the government of the country into their own hands; that if the Government would not lead the peoplepeople would drive the Government.—(Elear, hear.) the o it was now; and hence we had a set of agi. tators getting up—(lronical eheers)—of whom the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) was the godfather.—(llear, hear.) The Noble Lord himself, a few years after the Reform Bill passed, expressed his dissatisfaction with the franchise. In 1837, when the Government was not things s s o to s tr k o e r n and the it y a w r a ty s necessary together o as t throw wa s out a u these things to keep the party together (as it was called), ho said in his letter to the electors of Stroud that it would have been difficult, but net impossible, by means of the " freemen" franchise, to obtain the re presentation of the industrious, intelligent, and able mechanics, and ttat such a change in the character of freemen would do much to purify our elections and to strengthen the House of Commons. --(Hear.) But to come to a more recent period ; what came out before " Mr. Roebuck's Committee " on the Election Compromises? Why, that at Harwich 94 Tory votes cost 6,0004 and 84 Whig votes 2,0001.—. (Hear.)--at Nottingham, 529 Whig votes cost 12 ,0001., and 144 Tory, 5,0001; at Lewes, 411 Tory votes cost 5,0001., and 407 Whig, 2,000/.; at Reading, 572 T ory votes cost 6,0001., and 410 Whig votes 16,000/.—(Hear, hear)—no, that last was amisutahlz)eitt as he w Whif , s 6o a o l i. way ln a did the thing cheapest—(A jag six boroughs 3,796 votes cost upwards of 53,366/. (Hear.) Last year the Hon, Member for Droitwich (Sit J. Pakington) had a Committee, and it was pro ' po s ed th a t Members Amid take as oath against bribery; THE SUN, .LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH .1, 1850