The Sun. — London, England, 1832-04-14 00:00:00

led him to alter his sentiments in any re epa et. The principle of the two Bills we re nearly the. same, awl the difference was not suf ficient to make him alter his sentiments on the subject. It was to the pArreiples of this measure that he objected, and not to the form, for he would like to see all abuses cor rected, and it had been his wish to see that. Speaking with reference to the Constitution of our country, he objected upon principle to all great changes, because he considered a Constitution to he an order of things which had risen u p w ith the growth of education, and which had ac , on imodated itself to the wants and characters of the people.—(Hear.) As far as additions to our pre sent system, which the altered state of things in the country might call, for he would very readily and very cordially agree—he meant as regarding repre sentation* to large unrepresented bodies; but with respect to the pr. sent Bill, he considered the question to be, not be tween Reform and no Reform, hut between the present Constitution and this Bill. The principles of the Bill, as it appeared to him, were the principles of per etuel change. He would not detain the House by entering into detail, but he might be allowed to say that if all the speeches that had been delivered in the course of this debate, there had been none which had brought more conviction to his mind than that which had proceeded from the Noble and Learned Lord, the Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench. But his mind was very much influenced in the course he had taken, and was disposed to take by the speeches he had beard six months ago, particularly from a Noble Earl and Baron opposite, who then earnestly counselled the House to reject the Bill, but who had on the pre sent occasion as earnestly counselled there Lordships to go into Committee. Those Noble Lords had grounded their justification for altering from the course they had formerly taken upon the circumstances of the country being altered for the last six months. Ad mitting that their opinions on the principles of the Bill still remained the same, he did not think that they had made out their case. But what was the most extraordinary circumstance attending this pro• eeeding was, that half the Noble Lords who supported the motion for going into Committee, declared in the strongest terms their disapprobation of the measure itself. One Noble Earl had declared it an unhappy measure; yet he supported its going into Committee. Another Noble Lord—one who was so peculiarly earnest in im ploring their Lordships to reject the measure ;n the former instance, but who advised them to vote for the second reading on this occasion, had told them it was a fatal measure—fatal to the British Constitution. Were their Lordships then to be induced, by arguments from those Noble Lords, to vote in favour of a measure which they themselves had declared they considered to be one so full of fatal consequences ? Slimy of the Noble Lords who now advocated the Bill were at one time the determined opponents of every measure of Refoom, great or small.—(Cries of So ! No!) If he ware not correct, he ought to be set right, for it was generally understood that all members of Mr. Canning's Administration were pledged to oppose all motions for Reform. He did not blame Noble Lords for having changed their opinions, for he doubted not that they had done so from a sense of duty, but the circumstance ought to make them more lenient in condemning those who think the present mea evre goes too far, who are ready to support a temperate and constitutional measure of Reform, but not o Bill which was subversive of all our institutions. They had been appealed to as the guardians of public morals to vote for this Bill, as putting an end to the system of bribery subversive to all morality. But oetwithstanding his wish to prevent bribery as far as legislative enactments could prevent it, he eoold not believe from all he had seen and heard that this Bill would have that effect. Indeed some Noble Lords of great Parliamentary experi ence authorised hint in saying that it would increase bribery. There was another point connected with public mora:s he wished to notice. One of the greatest moral evils this country laboured under was the multiplication of oaths, which did not seem to the parties taking them of any great importance.—(Hear, hear.) Tbts evil he thought would be increased, in consequence of the machinery of the Registry and other parts of this 1 ill, which could not fail to increase the crime of perjury. k{e feared also that the poor-rates would be appropriated to election purposes, instead of being applied to the wants of • our fellow-creatures.—(" Question.") He consi tiered the Bill, if it passed, unlikely to please the people of England, for lie was far from satisfied that the whole nation, or even a large majority of it, were in favour of it. The only argument that bad much weight his mind in favour of the Bill was, that it was called for by the voice of the country. He hoped the House would not he cleat' to the voice of the country ; he meant the intelligent part of it, for of course to the vier of the rabble none of them would listen; but be did not ti,ink that this Bill was called for by that cress of the community to which they ought to attend. It was caned for by a class of persons who mourned to them selves the names of radicals and who wished to substitute a republican Goveerrnint for that under which we had ro long flourished. Again, all classes hostile to the Church Establishment were combined in favour of this Bill, Catholics, Dissenters of diflrent denominations, open and and avow; d infidel., were ail loudly clamorous for the Re form Bill.—( hirer, bear.) If he believed the measure likely to be beneficial, he would not be deterred by that feet from voting for it ; but thinking otherwise, it 'mule not be supposed that this combination of persons being in favour of the Bill, would sway the Mem bers of the bench on which he sat to advocate it.—(Ques tion.)—He had-one observation more to make. (A laugh. ) After the mans, appeals that had been made to prelates, he thought it was not too much that they would hear him out. It had given him great and serious pain to rind, that in obeying the dictates of his conscience, he was separated from home of his Right Rev. Brethren, trone whom he had been from his earliest youth united in friendship and attachments, from whom he had never on any former occasion differed on any question; whose motives he certainly knew in every possible way to to be noble and honourable, and whom he was persuaded acted only upon the same feeling as birn.elf, viz. by a desire to promote the happiness of the country, 2nd discharge the duty of their apostolic character. The LORD CHANCELLOR and one or two other Peers, now rose, but the cry being general for his Lordship, he began as follows :—I certainly owe some apology to your Lordships for proceeding to ad dress to you more than a very few words at se late a period of this protracted debate. I am aware that fatigue now weighs down both your Lordships' minds and bodies, and I can assure your Lordships that I am in an extreme state of suffering from the heat of the House; hut I do not feel that I should discharge my duty, as holding the situ ation Ido in his Majesty's Government, the duty I owe to your Lordships, and hardly the duty I owe to myself, were I to rest upon what your Lordships all know of my opinions on this question so often stated in your Lordships' preeence. I assure your Lordships I shad trespass as little as possible on your patience and time, and but for some thing that has been s id, and but for some charges that have been mane against this Government for their production and prosecution of this measure, my task would have been simple indeed, But in justice to them, in justice to yeur Lordships, and in justice to what I know, these charges I cannot allow to be altogether unnoticed. And when I talk of repelling charge , i, before going into those levelled at Government is general, for their mnduct in this measure, let me put aside at once those minoe matters, one of which has been alluded to et an earlier period of this night, as it was ,cri former occasions—which has been partly retracted, pertly 'explained away, and partly triumphantly repelled. Let ine only linger to add my unqualified, unhesitating, and com plete concurrence in the indignant daraial of it which has hitherto been given by my Noble Friend at the head of Government. I know, and a far as a non case -answer for matters not within the scope of his own immediate knowledge, I may also say of my colleagues, for any belief amountsto an absolute conviction that there is not the shadow of 3 shade of a foundation for thoeicalumnies which have been whispered in public, and which have been urged here, but have received an indignant denial. I refer not merely to the blacker charges which were never meant to be urged, but of a charge hardly of a less dark description, that of violating the sacredness of our trust, in respect to a corre spondence whichjhas been alluded to. Now it was referred to by a Right Rev. Prelate who spoke last with a degree of ignorance—(Herr)—but I will say, of the most inno• cent ignorance—(A laugh)—innocent ignorance, not only of what had passed four or five years ago in the formation of the Canning Administration, but innocent also in reference to what bad passed thin evening before them, when be mistook the cheer of proud and instant denial of the Noble Marquis for a cheer of assent; and when that Right Rev. Prelate proceeded to give him and his colleagues who he thought had changed their opinions on Parliamentary Reform, credit for their candour. Ivly e Lords, there is not the shadow of truth in the imputation ' or belief of the Right Rev. Prelate. Those who constituted the Administration of Mr. Cannning retained their opinions upon that, as uppttall other questions of foreign or domestic eei epoliey, precisely the same after the junction was formed as \ , ..31.f0re that ever:o,44)ok place. And if any instance were ' - Wanting particularly on the subject of Parliamentary Pe fOrm, it does so happen that I, in my own proper iterson, although not connected with that Go v,* rnment, yet a very great favorer and promoter of it, brut for the purpose of facilitating that junction,—it is well known that I formerly and previously to the formation of drat Government, declined taking any office in it; but I was a supporter of the main principles of that Administration, and supported it with the exception of one or two occa • sions, one of which, indeed the most renearkable,when the question of Reform was moved in the House of Commons, when he opposed Government, and success fully opposed them, and the Noble Marquess, whose cheer was misunderstood, as if any alteration whatever had taken place in kis opinions, acted along with me. I ought to apologize to your Lordships for thus detaining you with the refutation of these charges ; but I am aware if w e do not come forward and read a line of perpetual contradiction to these charges, they are taken as admitted for truth. Following the example of the Noble Mai guess's admirable and luminous speech, combining so much deliberate and conciliatory truth, it is my intention to lay aside every thing that can he construed as proceeding from personal motive. Now first, my Lords, I am surprised to hear it said that Government with haste and precipitancy have plunged into the ques tion of Re'orm. As often as I have heard this charge made I have given it a denial; but as my Noble Friend (Carnarvon) forgets all these denials, I trust I may, perhaps, at length succeed in preventing him from reiterat ing this 101 times repeated charge, if I give him an authority which I am disposed to respect on such an occasion, and which lam sure my Noble Friend will believe—l mean the authority of my Noble Friend himself. It will be found that on the question of Reform the ♦ery first day that the Noble Earl at the head of the Govern ment took his seat on that bench, my Noble Friend said, " I do not wish the Noble Lord opposite to delay, for one moment, to bring forward the great subject of Reform ; if, indeed, he is anxious for his own safety, if he is anxious for the safety of his country, he will take the earliest and most convenient opportunity of submitting his measure to the attention of the country. Now, my Lords, we did not take the earliest op portunity, and so follow up the advice of my Noble Friend, but we took a period of three months to consider and mature the plan which we then introduced, and having carried it through the other House, and one stage in this one, it was finally rejected by your Lordships.—(Hear, hear, hear.) We again brought it forward and having brought it to the present stage in this House, he thought it was rather too bad that his Learned Friend should so taunt them as having brought forward the question precipitately. Most of his Noble Friends, and Right Rev. Peelste who spoke last, are of opinion the question of Reform had been brought forward precipitately, hastily, and before the country was ripe for it. I am sure, my Lords, that no one could have thought that they had been for three days listening to the debates in this subject. Any one coming in, and having heard the speeches would have wondered where they bad been to for the last few years. The Rev. Prelate said with singular consistency, that the popular voice is folly, and within a few sentence, after the public mind was wise. Then my Noble Friend says that the property of the country is all against the Bill, meaning, as I think, the landed interest, that there might he no doubt what the property was, and in case the Noble Duke had wished to qualify his statement to his Noble Friend near me (Lord Carnarvon), arida to that, so as to carry the case further, that the whole of the trade of the country is against us. Why, we add that to the property of the country, and we find that not only the landed interest, but the commercial, in fact the whole interest of the country are leagued against this particular measure. Now, to my mind it is most extraordinary that those who are in possession of that property—of the whole property of the country take no steps to have their opinions upon the subject made known. When I see the Right Rev. Bench opposite rne, who have only a fractional part of the property to the country, but a large fraction, yet they were not at all against the measure.—( Hear, hear.) Again, many of your Lordships who have pledged yourselves to this measure are not altogether void of property; but putting all that aside, how does the state of things out of doors stand—how does the trade and property out of doors stand ? There was the meeting of the bankers, merchants, and traders of London. held in the Egyptian Hall which was numerously attended, and, which comprise d more of the• property of the countrythan had ever before met, yet they petitioned for the passing of this Bill, and are they to go for nothing? I would like to know what would have been said had the 30th part of those who attended that meet ing met for the purpose of opposing the Bill. Even though they had not liked this meeting in an open hall, in a pub lie manner,but had met with closed doors, and admitted with tickets, my Lords, if a petition had been agreed to at a meeting of the description which I am de,cribing, I am sure that for the next Session of Parliament we would never have heard the last of it. Surely after this we would hear no more of the trade of the coun try, and of the property of the country be. ing against this measure. As to whit fell from his Noble and Learned Friend, that a Bill being passed by the Commune ought to be passed by that House, he agreed with him in that; but when it was said that the trade of the country, the whole wealth of the country, was against this measure, how had the majority by which it had been been passed, been made up ? ')9-1, Members had voted for the Bill, and 191 against it. They were not merely Mem hers for stela . ' places, but of the county Members the largest majority was for the Bill, ninety three Members for counties, having voted for• it, and only ten against it. Those ten who alone voted against the measure, your Lordships must be aware, numbered among them some representatives of the smallest counties, and net one of the largest ones. If any one of your Lordships has the curiosity to know how the rest of the ma jority is made, now I will take a pleasure in t.lling you. Of 137 representatives for large towns, 111 voted for the measure, and 26 against it. When I come to the boroughs I find the case altogether in the oppo site way. I also find that most of them that are included in schedules A and B, had voted against the measure. It may administer comfort to the Right Reverend Prelate to know that of the Members whose boroughs are in shedule A, there were to be found those who supported the Bill, and seventy-seven against in— ( Hear.) As to schedule B, there were only twenty one, against which the numbers were nearly balanced. This Parliament, be it known also, was chosen under the present system, and notwithstanding the advantage that circumstance gave against Reform, which advantage had been already taken against the Bill—notwithstanding the tendency of persons elected by the present system to op pose it, and though the use of the franchise is not yet extended to those who are to be benefited by the Bill, nevertheless, in a House of Coinnione so chosen, there was a majority in favour of it of county Members, in the proportion of no less tha❑ eight or nine to one, and, in point of importance, incalculably greater even in the numbers of the majority. This is one reason why I ask your Lordships if there is even a shadow of foundation for the assertion— not that the public voice was against it, for that would be joking with the question; but whether any reasonable portion of the public had expressed themselves strongly opposed to it? It might be said that the Members who voted i❑ the majority, looked to the new constituency to sand them back to Parliament. We have been told that those Members were deputies and not representatives, of the people—if that be so, they had become deputies under the present system. If I had found that immediately after the general election, those Members gave their vote's, more strongly in favour of the measure, than after having had eight or nine months time for reflection, then indeed I might have supposed that their eagerness for Reform had abated. But what was the fact ? The majority instead of being diminished hail con siderably increased—(Cheers) —and that could only have arisen from one or two suppositions, either that they did nut act as mere deputies to those who elected them, but gave their votes from their free and unprejudiced judg ment, or they must have known that their constituents con tinued to entertain the same opinions upon the subject of Reform, If they had had any reason to believee that their constituents hasi enang ei their minds, or that they had relaxed in their iu quite evident that their change of opinion would have been very manifest by the. votes the Members had given. lusteed, however, of which, the majority had increased instead of diminished. A Noble Duke has stated, that in 1829 and 1830, there was little or no call for Parliamentary Reform, and that it was not until the latter end of July 1330, there was any agitation, or any great feeling in the public mind on this great question. I beg to assure the Noble Duke that he is very greatly misteken, If that Noble and Gallant Duke had lived as much in this eountrya—l do not allude to late years, during which he certainly haw resided here, but during the preceding years—he would have formed the Fame conclusion as his N o ble Friend. Lord Grey, had formed—that the question of Parliamentary ir:F.eform has been making a sternly and constant progress ever since it had fixed tlig attention of the public mind, since 1798. It was greatly impedid by the events which occurred about the period of the French revolution, but towards the latter end of that war it resumed its activity, and when the short peace of 1802 arrived, it increased more steadily, more uniformly, till at last it Wendt.' all over the country.—(Cheers.) It is impossible for a n y person to deny that th e re were incidents—l allud, more particularly to the determination taken by some of the Noble Duke's colleagues, and to their conduct in th other House of Parliament in 1828, when a change we, taking place in the administration, which tended very much to hasten the question—when it was found an oppor tunity was offered, of giving the franchise to one 0: two great towns—when the East Retford question gave them that opportunity, and when such crimi nality was proved sufficient to disfranchise that borough_. when it was the most politic course for Ministers to take, and when that opportunity was repudiated—ill these things had the effect of giving such a stimulus to Reform as it has not received for many years. There is now no way of stopping its progress, and it is our duty to take that course which the country calls on us to take, and which we feel to be necessary, with the view of giving pe ace and tranquillity to the countay.—(Hear, hsar.) I t is a great delusion to suppose that at the genera; election of 1930, Parliamentary Reform was not made a primary object. It was the first ob ject. And I can speak of my own knowledge to one instance, that of the Yorkshire election in which I was engaged, that it was the first and greatest object. It has been stated that the excitement at that period arose from the French revolu tion. —(Hear.) But I can state to your Lordships that I had gone through my canvass in Yorkshire before the news of that revolution reached York. The com mencement of the proceedings in France might certainly have been known, but the result was not. I assure your Lordships there was not one subject, and I can be con firmed by those Noble and Honourable Friends who accompanied me on my cans ass, that there was no one sub. ject to which more importance was attached, than that of Reform. I can state also, that there was no place to which a candidate went but he met Reform. Negro slavery was certainly one question about which I was asked, but as regarded Reform the people were most zealous and eager. Your Lordships are not to suppose that I am making those observations wtthout any other view than to set right what I take to have been a mistake respecting the elections ; for it is very important in this respect that it has been charged that his Majesty's Ministers have excited persons on the subject of Reform—that it is said to had been their doing entirely, and not the people's. My Lords, we bring forward the question in redemption of our pledges.—(Hear.) My Noble Friend at the head of the Government is pledged by the opinions of all his life to bring forward Reform. But at the same time, we only bring forward a question at a time when the people were not only ripe for it—(hear, hear)—hut were bes,eching the Parliament and the Government to take it up and bring it forward—(Cheers)—when the people were in a state to receive it, in which they never were before, whether you regard the intensity of their feelings or the universality with which the subject of Reform had been taken hold of throughout the country.—(Hear, hear, hear.) And if I were asked to name an event which more than all the others, and which ten thousand times more than the revolution of the three days in Paris had tended to render that feeling intense, and more intense than all the others, and to spread it more widely than even the event I should bring forward, would be that ill-fated declaration of the Noble Duke's, that no Reform was necessary—(lmmense cheering)—that all was so perfect—that the representation of the country was so complete, whether of those parts which are to be found in schedule A or schedule B—whether of boroughs which are corrupt from jobbing, from giving their venal votes, or of close boroughs which may be brought to market and sold for a price by the owner, or made a traffic of fur himself or his family, or the means of pocketing of money, as in spite of all the law was referred to by my Noble Friend opposite, may be done without the possibility of preventing it—that that altogether composed a system so perfect that the Noble Duke considered could not be amended—not only that he could not make a more perfect one, but that it was one so complete and so perfect as to render it impossible for the Noble Duke to approach with anything like an amendment.—(Loud cheers.) Now there could not be a more manly, a more gallant, and, fol lowed up, as it was, by a strict adherence to that opinion, a more straightforward and consistent expression uttered by that Noble Duke. —(Hear, hear.) — No man can blame him for it, but I think every man must deplore it —(Hear, hear.) I deplore it not on account of its spreading wider and wider the zeal for Parliamentary Reform—in making the zealburn more fiercely than before, because I think that was no disadvantage, for it was only giving vent to feelings, then in the people, and by accelerat ing, by a little space of time, those feeling, which, in all probability, would have shown themselves 'ere now— but that was the proximating cause—the predis posing cause I have already adverted to—the proximating cause of the strong, and universal feeling which existed, and which showed itself on every side, almost as soon as Ministers accepted office. Now there were one or two statements made in the course of this debate, with respect to the effects of this measure which I think it necessary I should advert to. I am by no means, my Lords, at this late hour, about to go into a detail of the Bill, nor even to enter into an examination of the difference between this measure and the las-, muck less into a detail of the provisions of the different clauses ; but there were one or two statements made respecting certain particulars which it is necessaray I should claim your Lordships indulgence while I advert to. It I could think as some of your Lordships have thought that such consequences would follow the pastine of this measure, I should have that a statement of consequences made only for the purpose of alarming persons within or without —or, if I could believe the im mediate or direct tendency of the provisions of this mea sure would be such as some have predicted, I un doubtedly would do more before I by acclamation supported the measure. But to curie at once to one of the great points made against the provisions of this Bill, is this —does the Bill give sufficient weight or not to Parliamentary Representation ? The Noble Duke thinks it goes to the entire destruction of all Parliamen tary institutions, and so does the No'eie and Learned Chief justice of the Court of King's Bench. Now, I confess, I can see nothing of the kind in the Bill. It at all events leaves the county representation as it was before. Nay, I go further to say, that the Bill leaves the county representation, according to conservative doctrine, better than it was before. Is it proper in the first place to say that all Parliamentary Representation is destroyed when the Members of Counties are to be chosen precisely in the same way in which they were before? Further, leaseholders are allowed to vote, and even tenants at will, by a change made in the original measure, by a near relative of the Noble Duke on my left. Does this, I say, give no influence to landholders ? It clearly does—copyholders also are to have a right of vot ing, and the greater part of those also must be considered as in the interest of the landed interest. But besides all this, twenty-five counties are to have double re presentation, making fifty additional county Members, which, with seven others added separately to counties of lesser size, makes fifty-seven new Members for counties. I cannot help thinking besides that a great number of persons who have hitherto had votes in counties which may lose by gaining votes in towns, will leave the county votes, pure agricultural votes, uninfluenced by the towns. The opponents of the Bill thought this an improvement, and at any rate it is an alteration in the sense to which they are favourable—(Hear, hear)—as it goes to increase the influence of property and particularly of landed property. But then it is said that it is not so much with respect to the counties that pro perty is under-rated, as in the 101. qualification of towns. Now great and manifold are errors which prevail upon this subject.—( Hear, hear.) It is said that we shall find the number of ten-pound householders greater than that of those who inhabit houses of 201, and up• wards. Now I admit that, generally and indeed almost universally, we shall find the number of houses worth 20/. and upwards smaller than those worth 101. But the number of purely 10/. houses does not show that the number of voters of the lowest description will overwhelm those of the highest. You must not take the mininum of 101. and erect it into a maximum, and that the 10/. voters are, therefore, completely to over power those of 201. and upwards. You must consider, therefore, an infinite number o f h ouses b etween the value of 10/. and 201., many of them h ouses o f a hi ghly respect able character, particularly between 15/. and 20/. Analyse the returns of any town, and you will find that to be the case. Take Warwick for exampl.. I find by the returns that Warwick contains :AO voters of 10!. and upwards; hut of these, 200 are of 201. and upwards, and out of the remaining 300 below 20/., 100 or 150 approach inure nearly to 20/. than they do to 10/. These and the p anise line dra wn wh i ch the argument 0/. and 201. h ouseholders, as it 10/. householders inevitably bend t oget h er, so that you s eta aria as if th e representat i on eternally ther have e n w not slat tuhnpaoptnoe4 between cz. ne them, l were to he thrown entirely into the hands of people with ) I believe another great towns; b u t if th e y little omoruisntoaio m mistake e pr t o o p w e b r he t a y tth . —(Hear, nLhoerads take th e i r id eas o f a . will go into those small towns which are to retain the right of voting, they will find few even of mere 101. houses which have not tenants of a respectable situation in life.... A day-labourer cannot afford 10/. a-year for his house. a man who is earning ten, twelve, or at the outside four- teen shillings a-week cannot, out of such a pittance, sp ire :31. 10d. for house rent. The man occupying a 10/. house is of some little substance, but a man who occupies a House of 14/. 1 . /. or 161. a-year, long and lung before you get to 201, a-year is in the situation of a reputable shop-keeper, to overseer in some large manufactory ; in short, a person in every point of view respectable. But, my Lords, do you think, and do those who hold this argu ment think, that there will be a perfect reverence in point of communication and connexion and in fluence, between the tenants of these different houses ? Do your Lordships imagine that the occupier of a 201. house will strut by his poorer neighbour who occupies a 141. house ; will have no communi cation with him, have no habits of ordinary intercourse with him, no connexion with biro, no interchange of the social civilities of lite with him, and use none of those means of making his opinions known, and exerting that influence which superior wealth gives to a man in urging any of hi s v i ews ? Th e y will have, and will use al those means of intersourse. The richer will in all cases have the opportunity of making his sen timents known, and insuring them a favourable hearing, and the particular effect will be, that that an influence will be exerted by these better householders, better only in circumstances, for they are all persons of the higest respectability, whether as regards character, habits, or education, down even to the humblest, but these better, I say in point of circumstances will natu rally exercise influence over their less wealthy brethren. The reguiar, the wholesome, and I sly, my Lords, in the long run, the most effectual influence is that which is to be exercised in the course of daily habits in the inter course between man and man, such persons being most likely to exercise the legitimate influence. But I confess, my Lords, that I feel no alarm, whatever, even contem • plating a state of things which should leave all and every one person to exercise his own judgment without any interest of a loftier neighbour. I am morally certain, my Lords, that it is the interest of the poor as well of the higher clasees, that there should be good govern ment in this country; that such representatives should be chosen and sent by them to Parliament to watch over their interests in general ; and, as I said before in the long run, it is for the interest of the coun try, its prosperity and stability of all its institutions, that they should be carefully kept up. I will not, my Lords, enter into the inquiry whether the rich man or the poor is most interested in a convulsion of the state. It is sufficient for me that the poor man loses his all—the rich can do no more. But, my Lords, the poor man is the first that suffers. He is the first who feels the grinding effects of such a convulsion. The humbler classes would suffer most se verely by such a state of things, not even excepting the day labourer ; the artisan, the labourer in towns as well as the agriculturist. The middle classes would also suffer materially—those very classes, my Lords, to which you propose to give the franchise by this Bill.—(Hear, hear.) Why, then, my Lords, should you be afraid of halting them. They have every interest at stake; and if they foolishly take a false step, it will lead to their own ruin. If even one Parliament should be returned under the present Bill, that should be wild enough to deter mine on evading the constitutions of the country, why should you not trust those men who would first fall, and who, according to human nature, would be the very first to avoid taking a false step? Suppose there was even men in the country—designing men—over whom you have no hold ; who have no stake in the country ; who are destitute of every thing, and are the prey of agitators, if there be such a body of men, what argument is that in favour of the objectors of this measure ? Why, by the present Bill you give an interest in the representation to those who are probably con. nected with them, and whose efforts after reclaiming them, would have more than persons of a higher descrip tion. What, therefore, was better fitted for such an object, that of reclaiming them to a sense of their duty, than a measure like the present, which made it their own interest to return to that duty ? I have no more doubts, my Lords, tha❑ I have that I am at present in existence, that the moment this Bill comes into operation, the effects I Lave before pointed out will ensue. The question, then, is, my Lords, what are you putting this Bill in the place of? Why, my Lords, you are giving the 101. fran chise in the place of that franchise which was before unconnected with property.—(Cheers.) By the present Bill, my Lords, the rights of freemen are kept to all intents and purposes. It has been said by the Noble Duke and Baron before me, that among the very persons most anxious for this measure were those who expected to get votes, Was that any argument against the present measure when it was known that in some instances 160,000 citizens were left without the right of voting, while the Members were returned by some 20 or 30 Members of a corporation ? It was not only those who expected to get votes who were advocates for this measure, but it was the in habitants of great towns who were for the first time to obtain members. They say true, it is with respect to these great towns in many instances we shall net obtain this franchise ourselves ; but still we know . _ _ 1113 LI that Members will be returned for this place, the representatives of which we had before to seek elsewhere ; and we had nobody then to take care of our interest.— We are not 10/. householders, therefore we shall not have the franchise ourselves ; but we shall know our Members, and we shall be certain they will not be returned by close boroughs. Can any man, my Lords, wonder at the anxiety of such persons to have representatives of theirowu? In one instance I can mention, my Lords, there is a town with upwards of 50,000 inhabitants (Bath), where the Members are returned by only a few individuals ; and in the great city of Edinburgh, with upwards of 150,000 in habitants, the Members are returned by only 33 corpora tors. By meaus of the present' Bill, however, pro bably the whole of those 150,000 inhabitants would rote in the representation. Their Members can only be returned by a large constituency, and they would therefore have a greater chance of being properly repre sented in Parliament than if they were returned by one or two individual Common Councilmen.—(Cheers.) At this late hour, my Lords, although there are many topics to which I might allude, and should wish to pass them by, but I must say one word upon the picture that has been drawn of the supposed circumstances of a Reformed Parliarnent.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The Noble Duke (Wellington) had stated that it would be attended with a ereat expense, and have a revolutionary tendency. If I thought by the present Bill anything of a revo lutionary tendency would take place, or that it would be like the Long Parliament, I should be inclined to believe something of the supposed increase of expense. The Noble Duke, in support of his statement that th e Parliament would be an expensive one, had cited the ca-e of the Government of France. Why, my Lords, how was all that expense incurred in France It was not because the budget was so much greater, but because the army was greater ; and the Noble Duke had stated that that arose from disturbances at Lyons. •The reason of the expense was not to be attributed to the Parliament of France, because it had been reformed ; but the cause was, that the dynasty had been changed, that there was a disputed succession, and that these were the germs of civil war in the country, but that there were lowering apprehensions as to the dynasty of the country, and that by that means a large army was necessary. That a Reformed Parliament in England should he an expensive one, was one of the wildest things that was ever heard of. He thought, let whatever might be attributable to a reformed Parliament, it would not be the excess of extravagance.—(Hear, hear.) — A Reformed Parliament would not allow a patronage, even to the most moderate amount, to exist merely a■ pa tronage, and for the purpose of patronage, and in order to enable a Government to carry on which without that patronage could not steadily pursue its course. It will grant supplies enough for the public service, it will support a Government which does its duties to the country, and which wisely and honestly conducts that service; but the Government under a Reformed Parliament must stand upon its own merits, and must not trust to the influence arising from pa tronage any more than it can trust to the influence conferred by nomination boroughs. My Lords, many of those things may be looked forward to as changes, and attributed to the form, which, as a friend to it, I must in justice say, cannot altogether be ascribed to it. I very be lieve that as Parliament is at present constituted, for years to come, difficulty will be found all but insurmountable. Government must be carried on according to honest, fair, liberal policy ; and, above all, not by such a policy as is dictated by the caprice, or even by the feelings of t h e people, but such a policy as carries along with it the opinion of the intelligent, whom I believe, in toy con• science, to be the great and overwhelming majority of all ranks and classes of the King's subjects, down even to the humblest class of the people, education has made such progress among them, that with powerful, with daily in" and, I believe, the exulting confidence and satisfaction, I may say the good sense, the p l a i n , sound, rational, consistent, clear, and piaceful opinions and wishes of the majority of the country. A successful policy, I say, roust carry all this slung with it. That there should be a restriction on the right of franchise I may ad mit, but it is not from any distrust I have even of those classes to whom this Bill does not give the elective franchise that I say it ; fur I am perfectly convinced, that ;bat as soo❑ as you remove the grivance you will restore • yourselves to a place 41 their affections. That grievance i► the present state of the representation—the capital grievance of all their complaints—that grievance once removed, arid the slightest suspicion need not be entertained even of those who are held in the humblest classes, to whom the Bill will give the franchise. On this occasion, much has been said on the consequences of rejecting this Bill. I will not take that view of the case, because I wish above every thing to avoid what by the leanings of the ingennity of perversion might misconstrue into apparent threat. But I wish only before I conclude to beg of you not to lose this opportunity, I won't say of regaining, but of improving your place in the affections of your fellow-countrymen.—(Cheers.) If their confi dence in you, if their love and respect should unfor tunately have been shaken, I think that wisdom and good feeling, and a due regard to the peace and security of the country which every one in bound to manifest, will incline you to lean towards that course of conduct which is certain, not only to restore to you that which you have lest—if you have lost it, but to raise you higher still in the affections, esteem, and respect of your fellow-countrymen. My tears for an adverse event—my fears of what may by possibility happen, I shall not say any thing about. I mean nothing further than this, that no one event would be more to be dreaded for the security of our establishments, or the continuance of all our in stitutions in the State and in the Church, than are growing alienation of the public mind from the legislative body of this country ; and, above all, a grow ing separation, a widening of any breach, an increase of any distance from the body and bulk of the people. My Lords, we have heard of other Bills of Reform which are to be brought forward. I confess I look upon these plans with all but suspicion. The time and the occasion, the interval that elapsed between October last and tha present Bli!, all tend very greatly to excite a distrust of any effect these plans are likely to produce, and I think they who trust to these Bills would go secreta dona ferentes, not even the smallest acceptance or gratitude for the offer would be met with, nor could they tend to soothe the irritation or calm the previous solicitude in which the public mind was placed. Do not let it be said that the anxiety for this measure of Reform has nearly gone by. Don't let any one be so deceived. It exists as strongly and as universally as ever it did, with only this difference, that it has stood the severe test of repeated disappointment and delay. It is as intense as ever, and you may rely upon it, from one end of this country to the other, not merely in the capital, but in all the provinces and towns in England, Scotland and Ireland. They are waiting in breathless suspense, and in the most painful solicitude for the event of this night's discussion. I hope and trust—l confidently believe--I may say I fully expect that decision will be such as to diffuse universal joy through the coun, try.—terminate that painful suspense, and greatly increase the affections which the people bear towards you. Lord LYNDHURST—My Lords, I will trouble the House with a few observations, and from the courtesy you have shown me on former occasions, and from the import ance of the subject now under consideration; I am in duced now to address your Lordships. A statement has been put forth, during this debate, for the twen tieth time, and has been as often denied, and it now becomes my duty again to give a denial to that statement in the most positive terms. The statement is, that the late Government, of which I formed a part, was upset on account of the question of Reform. My Lords, that statement I now again most positively deny. But since it has again been brought before your Lordships it becomes my duty to enter into a short detail of the circumstances attending the breaking up of that Go vernment. On the Monday preceding, the day which was appointed for the discussion of the Reform Question, an important division took place on the Civil List, in which Government were left in a minority. It was too late that night for the Cabinet to meet, but early the next morning they did so, when it was decided that they should resign their offices, as they did not retain the confidence of the House of Commons. That was the day on which the Reform discussion ought to have come on. But his Noble and Learned Friend having been requested to postponehis motion, the reason given him was, that it would be inconvenient for that ques tion to he discussed while there was actually no Government, as Ministers then only held office till their successors were appointed. My Noble and Learned Friend consented to postpone his motion, when he made that celebrated declaration that no circumstance could affect him, so as to detain him from bringing for ward his motion on the 25th. The suc cessors to that Government were then appointed and they retired. But, certainly, my Lords, I have shewn that the Reform question had nothing to do with the breaking up of that argu mdnt. Having, my Lords, disposed of that question, 1 will now go to the consideration of the immediate ques tion now before the House. The Noble Earl has stated with fairness and candour that the principles of this Bill are the same as the last, and, to do justice to the Noble Earl, I must say, that he has fully redeemed the pledge given by him at the close of the last Session. He has introduced this Bill, which is as effi cient as that which was then rejected. I consider it quite as mischievous as that to which I have alluded, and, there fore, I feel ti.at I am bound to give the same vote upon it as on the last occ tsion. Every thing I have heard, and the result of all my meditations, and inquiries, upon the subject, have perfectly satisfied my mind that the vote I then gave was perfectly cor rect. It has further been stated by my Noble and Learned Friend that the question of Reform has always been kept alive in this country. That proposition, my Lords, I deny. Allusion has been made to the opinion of the late Mr. Canning. My Lords, I know from personal communications with that late lamented Gentleman, that it was his opinion that the question of Parliamentary Reform was forgotten in the cenntry. He had still stronger grounds for his opinion. The Noble Lord who now led the House of Commons on the part of the Govern ment, bad also stated that the question had been for gotten in the country. When told of this statement did he deny it ? No ; he triumphantly adopted the state ment, and explained it by saying, " Very true, it slum bered, but he awoke it." My Lords, from the year 1824 to 1829, not one single petition upon the subject of Reform was presented to either House of Par liament, and it was not till the people were called upon, that they came forward with petitions. I will ask then My Lords if the statement of my Noble and Learned Friends, was quite correct, that this question had been always kept alive. My Lords, at the elections of July 1830, before the insurrection at Paris, had reached this country, was there a single cry of Re form ? It was necessary, at general elections, that there should be a popular cry—tile election had proceeded a considerable length, while the cry was—" the slave trade, and a free trade to China." The news then arrived from Paris, and the cry for Parliamentary Reform was then raised. A charge then took place in his Majesty's Counsels, and the Noble Earl was placed at the head of the Government. In three months came this miserable Reform, and I appeal to every Noble Lord in the House, if he had not astonished every person, even those who were in expectation of a change. The Bill was read in the Commons and read a second by a majority of one, when the Ministers brought down the King suddenly to this House in order to dissolve Parliament, and then it was the cry for Reform was effectually raised. After these facts, which I defy any one to contradict, am I not justified in saying that the cry for Reform has not always been kept alive in this country, but has been raised by his Majesty's Ministers. The Noble Earl near me, who has on this occasion changed his ♦iews, has made a splendid speech and though they have lost his vote, still they have that speech remaining which I consider as one of the best that has yet been made in favour of the Bill. It is not to he supposed, nor indeed is it even pretended by the Noble Earl (Harrowby), or by those Noble Lords who act with him, that they have altered their views with re spect to this measure. One of them bad described it as a tremendous evil ; and another of those Noble Lords said it was impossible for him to consent to its passing in its present shape, nor would he give his support to the third reading, unless very extensive alterations were made in it in Committee. In that respect, therefore, those Noble Lords entertain the same opinions as before, and differing only with me by tit , it expression of anxiety to get rid of the evils with which the measure was pregnant. The Noble Earl says that the Bill as regarded the right of voting, differs materially with the former 8,11. But whether it does or not, it makes no difference with me for I unhesi tatingly assert that there will be no difference in the prac tical operations of the Bill.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) Whether schedules A or B are to remain in the Bill is to me wholly immaterial. The Noble Earl, however, said that the ground of his altering his course was, that he did not find that the course pursued last session by their Lordships, had received the countenance of any considerable portion of the country. On this point 1 !oust beg to join issue with the Noble Earl. The re sult of the observations I have been able to make is, that it has received the countenance and support of a great proportion of the wealth, intelligence, station, and character of the country.—(Loud and continued cheering.) If the Noble Earl supposes that his vote will abate the virulence of the public Press, or that it will pacify the Political Unions, he is mistaken. Allow me , o appeal to the addresses that were presented to the Crown, in groat numbers, subsequently to the vote passed in this House, and which have been kept carefully and as completely as possible from public observation. I will appeal also to the former vote in the House of Commons to show that a great portion of that body was averse to the measure. Is it possible for any man to say that that House of Commons supported the measure when his Majesty's Ministers found it necessary to get rid of that House ? I will refer, also, to that House of Commons which has sent the presentbill up to this House, constituted as that House is, and with all the ar tifies which have been used, it is sent up here by a majo• rite of only 106 out of between 600 and 700 Members, I am, therefore, justified in saying that the opinions of Noble Lords opposite have not been supported by any very strong majority of that House. It has been said that sent up as the Bill has been, we ought to consider it most attentively. 111) Lords, it is our duty to give it our most careful consideration hut the form and manner of so considering it must depend upon the character of the Bill, and upon the objections that might be made to it. If I merely objected to the details of the Bill, I would not vote aiotinst the second reading of the Bill, but would allow it to go into Corn tnittee, and then if possible to correct its detail.. But what are the principles of the Bill as stated to us by the Noble Lord (Grey) himself? He tells us that the principles are the same as those of the last Bill; that there are three main and leading con ditions which must be considered as the principles of the Bill, viz., disfranchisement to the extent of 56 boroughs, enfrancbisements to the extent of 64 Members, and the 101. qualification clause. It is in these three provisions that the principles of the Bill consist. The Noble Earl has told us more than once, on former occasions, that if the Bill went into Committee, be had no objections to considerable alterations; but he accompanied that by stating, that if any alteration went to impair the efficiency of that measure, and consequently of the principle of the Bill, he should consider it as fatal to the Bill itself. There I join issue with the Noble Lord ; for these are the grounds of my objections, and it is because I object to those principles that I make my stand against the measure. If three provisions be carried into effect, I care nothing about the other details of the Bill. Those details might be rectified in Commit. tee, but if we agree to these principles, we commit an error which we cannot rectify.—(Hear ) why might not (continued the Noble and Learned Lord) their Lordships canvass the provisos con tained in the Bill, and come to a decision upon the debate on the second reading as well as in Committee? Something, indeed, had been said obscurely at the beginning of this debate, of a measure for the purpose of carrying this Bill through their Lord. ships' House. He did the Noble Earl at the head of the Go vernment but justice to say, he considered him incapa ble of yielding to that proposition. He knew the man ner in which the Noble Earl had been assailed on this subject. Not a day had passed on which he had not been attacked in the most virulent way for not giving way; but the Noble Earl had too good a sense of the constitution of the country to give way to so rash, so wicked, and so improper an act. He was sure no Minister in this country would ever have had recourse to such a measure, still less the Noble E irl. The Noble Earl had, not intentially, but in point of fact backed the House of Commons with respect to this question, and he could not believe that the Noble Earl would have followed up that packing of the House of Commons by the creation of Peers. The effect of such a measure would certainly have been to have weakened and destroyed their Lordships' House, which ought to be a check and a barrier against the House or Commons, destroying by any measure the Constitution of the country. If the Noble Earl could have sanctioned such a measure, was it possible the Sovereign could have been placed in the situation of thraldom cv.hich such a measure would have brought him into—a situation of thraldom from which he could only have been relieved by the repetition of a wanton, unconstitutional a c t ?—(Hear, hear.) He knew what the Noble Earl bad gone through both from friends of his, from those around him, and from that scourge and hard task-master, the Public Press, which had been let loose at him in the most severe and unjustifiable manner. He believed it never was the intention of the No ble Earl to resort to so rash, so desperate, and so wicked anexpedient. He was confident no Whig Government of any former day would ever have thought of resorting to such a course. But if any Noble Lord had been influenced by any apprehensions of this nature (which he hoped was impossible) to consent to the Bill passing into Committee, what greater difficulty was there in pursuing that course in the Committee, or to any subsequent stage than with reference to the second reading? It never could be resorted to with respect to details; but he had read something like an argument which was on this subject, which was this, and that if their Lordships allowed the Bill to pass through this stage they would be considered as adopting the provisions and the principles of the Bill, and then that would be something like an argument in favour of resorting to such a measure for the purpose of giving effect to a previous vote passed on subject. The Noble Earl had stated his opinion on the subject of the feeling on this measure throughout the country.—(Hear, hear.) He bad stated that a great majority of the wealthy, thinking and popular classes of society were in favour of the measure. He did not mean to say that many persons of intelligence, high station and influ ence, did support this measure. But undoubtedly the great ma jority of those persons were decidedly hostile to the measure. How then it might be asked were their Lordships to ac count for,the number by which the measure was supported. It was supported by the whole of the Whig party throughout the country. It was supported by the whole party of the moveable revolution in this country which had become a most extensive party. They cordially approved of the measure, but they ap proved of it not as the Noble and Learned Lord on the woolsack had stated as a final measure but as a first step. It had been said that the whole of the Di►sen ters supported it, but this was contrary to the fact. There was, however, another numerous set of persons who supported it—those persons who were dissatisfied with their actual condition—persons who did not prosper in the world. There was also a formidable ally in support of this measure, namely, the periodical Press. The great majority of the periodical Press supported the mea sure, they supported it fur reasons which were sufficiently apparent. They prospered in agitation and excitement, The carying of this Reform Bill they thought would per petuate agitation and excitement and in this way benfit them There was another object they had in view—looking at France and Belgium, the conductors of the press saw a new road ope❑ to thier individual and personal ambition— that they would rise in their grade of society, and that they would extend their /power far beyond any thing which five or six years ago even entered into their contemplation, —(Hear, hear.) Those were the parties by whom this Bill was supported—they who gave the appearance of great numerical power in support of this measure. —(Hear, hear, hear.) While he admited this combined ask, that their L or d s hi ps ' wou ld b ar t h e i r j udgment and 'yield their vot e s o n a quest i on o f so great power, was it to thi s com bi na ti on o f power, h e wou ld importance.—(Hear, hear.) There was this further consideration to which he begged to call their Lord ships' attention, that he was perfectly satisfied that the mime combination of persons could be brought together actuated by the same excitement, agitated by the same feeling, and pursuing the same activity if led on by his Ma:' jetty's Alinisters, any set of Ministers after the passing of this Bill to an attack on any L : P. toe Institutions of the country. He would ask whether it might not be made against the peoperty of the Chur ch —against the Hierarchy —against the standing army, --against the Legislative— h o and observing what had ta k en place, he would ask whether exception might not b e directed to save such object. a ti u 6 t ss r a i y n e o f c t o h m e b c i o n u a n t i t o country,persons, with some s li g h t y,of and watching the course of e v en t s The extent to which th e d e l usion on this subject had gone was surprising and no greater instance of it would be cited than was apparent from the conduct of the Right Reverend Prelate (the Bishop of Chichester) in what he had written in the public Papers, though he had no doubt that in f hture he would be more cautiops, for he made charges, and what sort of pharges he made against so many Hon. and Noble Members of that House. From the fi at time at which this measure. had been first brought into Parliament Ministers have been challenged to state, the necessity for bringing forward so extensive a measure of Reform. The whole question turned on the extent of it and the Noble and Learned Lord had never heard any reason given for so extensive a measure. Not only had there been no e %idence offered in support of this ext, nsion, bus all the evilence was directly the other way. He call%d upon their Lordahipts to recollect t e mode in which the proposal had been merle by the Noble and Learned Lord or, the wpolsaCir, if Reform at is election was received. It satisfied ail Reformers, and tat was ate unanswerable argument against tie necessity of so extensive a measure.—(Hear.) l'h. it Lordships were told that they ought to provide for ir independent representation of the country in the House Concluded in the First Page. PRINTED AND PUBLISHED MY MURDO YOUNG, AT 111 IS SUN OIFFICS, 112, STRAND, LONDON.