The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-26 00:00:00

SUN,

LoN DON,

other tests suggested by the Honourable Member, couple,
with residence he thought such a franchise would be
good. He confessed. however, that he could not under-
stand, and he could never admit the prificiple of abstract
right.—( Hear, hear.) The seconder of the motion had ob-
served that he could not comprehend on what principle
such and such things were permitted in our Constitution.
Why, we bad not a cut and dried Constitution— (Hear, hear,)
—but we tried to perfect it as enecla as we could by means
of the existing machinery. Whey could have general prin-
ciples, however, although not abstract rights; and one
general principle should be to trust in toe people.—(Hear,
hear.) It might be contended that, either from a want of
education, or from their shifting their residence from place
to place, or from other causes, portions of the community
were unfit to exercise the franchise; but it would be a mon-
strous thing to say that there ought to be only a million
and a half of voters in the country.—(Hear, hear.)
The people of Belgium strongly resembled our own in two
essential particulars—in their conversance with municipal
government, and in their attachment to religion. In the
deep religious faith of the people of Belgium was found the
best security for order and good government. He rejoiced
that the present oiecussion had taken. place at this par-
ticular moment, although, on the other hand, the idea that
any Bill on this subject could be passed this session was quite
out of the question.—( Hear, hear.) In support of these
annual motions of the Hon. Member fur Montle se he had
always declined committing himself to a p aticul e. plan—
(Hear, hear)—wishing rather to' affirm the general pen-
ciple of reform; but he would vote for this or any other
motion which was likely to lead to an extension of the
franchise. He was now desirous that the Government would
state, not envy what they did not like in the shape of re-
form, but what they. did like, because a Government mea-
sure might be carried, whereas an independent motion
might fall to the ground. He rejoiced at a past declaration
of the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London on the
t ' hat st to of
a
subject of the franchise, but there was also the declaration
in the Speech from the Throne this sesston, the
the representation was not satisfactory (Hear, hear. ) He
did not think, in the teeth of sech declarations, that any
Government could long exist which opposed What appeared
to be so essential a measure as reform in the Parliamentary
representation, and any Government which might succeed
the present would, he thought, whether they liked
it or not, be compelled to bring in such a measure.
If, at the next general election, the people pro-
nounced for such reform, he did not despair getting it
at the hands of lion. Gentlemen opposite. As yet we did
not know how the country would deal with the questions of
Maynooth,Protectioteand Reform. [An Hon. Hember—" Or
with anything else"]—and, theretoi e, he still had hope in
the Hon. Gentlemen opposite. Without expressing any
opinion upon those other measures contemplated, in the
speech of the Hon. Member for Montrose, he claimed to be
allowed a free judgment as to any particular scheme of re-
form ; but he confessed he should be dissatisfied with any
plan unaccompanied by the ballot. , He would vote for the
ballot whenever it might be proposed. Looking, however, to
the impossibility of carrying such a measure through Par-
liament as was contemplated by the Hon. Member for
Montrose, even were the first-reading to be agreed on that
;..ierootion taerecard„hie yote Richer for
or against the present mutton. . -
Mr. NAPIER—Sir, in much that has fallen from the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman who has just sat down I en-
tirely concur; but I am afraid that if some of the prin-
ciples he has advanced are strictly followed out they must,
in the end, lead to universal suffrage.—(Hear, hear.) Since
I have bad the honour of a seat in this House I have had
an opportunity of hearing these questions discussed at great
length and with great ability. I have heard them discussed
by the Noble Lord the Member for the city of London, and
have felt a high delight anu pleasure in hearing from him
those sound constitutional expositions which have, induced
him to vote against those motions of the Hon. Member for I
Montrose, ane others substantially in the same category
with them,—( Hear, hear.) 1 agree with the Hon. and
Learned Gentlemen in his strictures on the despotism which
prevails in some of the countries of the continent. I abhor
-itch despotism, and also the licentiousness and anarchy
which have taken root elsewhere; and I fully acquiesce
in the praise he has bestowed on the British Con-
stitution
for the admirable manner in which it adapts itself
to the imperfections of mankind. But I think, Sir, there are
other modes by which the tranchise might be usefully ex-
tended than by so essential a change iu the principles of
he onstitution as is now asked for.—(llear, hear.) The
question to be considered is whether the particular mode pro-
posed, of lowering the property qualification, iseconsisteut
with the principles of the Constitution, with the mainte-
nance of the Monarchy, and with the maintenance of that
nereditary rank which we find in our House of Peers.—
(lie tr, hear.) I own it is a difficult question to deal with ;
out I do not agree with the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
chat after the 101. qualification of the Reform Bill, the people
were precluded from acquiring a further franchise.—(Hear,
eear.) He says " we ought to have confidence in the people;
we ought to rely upon their talents, industry, and virtue."
Now, a•suredly every man by the exercise of such qualities
may not only acquire a franchise, but may assist in hartno-
uising our free and happy Constitution.—(Haar, hear.) It
is asserted that in our constitution as it stands there is mucu
corruption, and that it must be got rid of. If it is to tie got
rid of; I do not think it will be by these extravagant plans
by these mere shifts and contrivances of the ballot box, but
through the medium of education.—(Hear.) Secrecy is nut
congenial to the English character.—(Cheers.) A man may
dive his vote one way and pretend that he gave it another.
fo prevent conflict with his landlord, a tenant might avail
rumself of the ballot ; hut should we hence have a better
state of things? Again, do you think that by lowering the
franchise Sou get into purer atmosphere?—(Hear, bear )
Ott the contrary, you multiply the power of those who tam-
per with the bad passions of the people; and then, where
is your appeal to their confidence?—(Hear, hear.) I
can understand a professional calling being a test of
property, as also (as was thrown out in a previous de-
bate) an investment in a savings bank; but in that
case it would not be an abstract question whether there
ought to be an extension of the franchise or not, be-
cause the franchise would be acquired by all those whose
industry brought it within their grasp.—( Hear, hear.) That
some limitation is necessary is evident from the question
frequently asked, whether ladies are to be excluded from the
franchise - (A laugh)—but the main consideration is, should
we not derange the constitution by introducing a lower pro-
perty qualification?-(Hear, hear.) I am not saying I
should be averse to an adjustment of the constitution ; but
I do say, that by lowering the property qualification you
would extend the influence and the power of corruption—
(Hear, hear)—and that you could not check that corruption
by resorting to secret voting.—( Hear, hear) ) I say, let the
exercise of the franchise be open and independent—(Hear,
hear)—and I assert, finally, that by lowering the property
qualification you do not place the intelligence of the country
in a fair position, but swamp it by mere numbers—that you
put power into the hands of designing persons, and permit
them to wield it to the peril of those institutions and of that
monarchy, which I trust will ever be bound up with the
peace and prosperity of this country.—(Cheers. )
Mr. ROEBUCK said that whilst be adopted the pre-
mises and conclusion of the argument of his Hon. and
Learned Friend the late Solicitor-General (Sir W. P.
Wood), he was altogether at a loss to account for his deter-
mination not to, rite-- upon this question, the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman having admitted. that the subject ought
to be entertains I, and that this was the proper time for con-
sidering it. Twenty yea's had elapsed between the passing
of the first Reform Bill and the proposal of the second of
the Noble Lord the Member for London. At the former
period the country was governed by an oligarchy
he used the word as more significant than ar-
istocracy—but under the reforming hand of the Noble
Lord that power had undergone a very great change. The
landed interest was no longer the predominant interest
in this . country, for by the Reform. Bill of 1832 a
large portion of the manufacturing wealth of this country
was admitted to the representation, But the Noble Lord
evidently found that he • had not done enough by his first
Reform 13il1—that it was not sufficient to displace an oli-
garchy—but that there were thousands in this country
whose intelligence and morality—not their lands or the
power derived from wealth—demanded consideration at the
hands of the State. Supposing that to be the opinion of
the Noble Lord, he (Mr. Roebuck) would say that what was
wanted was a body of men who represented, first the intelli-
gence, ant next the good feeling of the country. Did any-
body pretend to say that the intelligence of the country was
wielded by those who possessed land—by those whom the
Noble Lord (Russell) had 'represented as the " clay inte-
rest ?" It certainly was not lend that represented the intel-
ligence of the people—
An Hits. MEMBER—As much as.any other portion of the
community.—(blear, hear.)
Mr. ROEBUCK continuing—l am sure this interruption
must come from a person representing land, but I still deny
that toe representatives of land interpret the intelligence of
the country. The men'Whom he (Mr. Roebuck) would en-
franchise were those who combined what was called manual
and intellectual labour—instructed artisans, who, although
possessed neither wealth nor power; fulfilled all the condi-
t brie of good citizens. It was these very men who were ex-
eluded fom al voice in the government of the country. He
confessed he did not understand the 'doctrine of abstract
right.—( Hear, hear.) He did not know what it meant to
say 'hat a man had a right to be represented, but of this
he was certain, that, unless the intellectual • classes were
represented, there could be no good government. For
the object is good government Those persons ought to
ne adopted into the' constitueticye He .would • show the
House they were instructed, they were moral; and he
would then ask who would refusetc ,recognise their claims?
He- was 4alkinguoftirtstruat sr& artisatw_ A.i..man of that
class did not live in a 10/. house ; he lived in lodgings.
This would be found to be the case in London and the' great
Manufacturing cities. He wanted such a man- to be a con-
stituent. He did not want him to•be a constituent because
the man would agree with him—it was ten to one he would
not -,-but he wanted him to be a constituent, first, because he
was a man who, by his honest industry, had gained his.own
position ; next, because he was an instructed man ; rand,
third, because he was a moral man. On account of these
three qualities, he placed him on a line with any other clisss
in the,country ; ani,i be said such a man as he had described
was as worthy to be a constituent as any Hon. Member in
that'House was to he* a Member. Where was the man to tell
him be was •not ?--(Hear, -bear. ) • Mae he to be told by the
possessor of thousands of _acres that they who made all that
distinguishes England from every, other country ib the
world, that they were not to be deemed worthy of sending a
representativie :to that House? Representatives of land were
demanded—but was not land to be found in other 'coun-
tries? Representatives of wealth were admitted, but was
not wealth found in other .countries? But that which was
not to be found in any oiler country in the world except
—that body of men framed to endure labour, obe-
dient all the power •of mischief in their hands
re they to be excluded ?
and yet obey
he now placed. before that. House; he
It was those persons
they oughtnot
Members whether
sented
se ? Yet this class, who distinguished this
countries, by the present law—by no inten-
tionitcoaint htehlsaitnw,
House.?
u
country from all
law—but by accident—this class was
who composed the andem he
wahwithin
on the part of the Legislature, or on the part of those
not going too tar in asking Representatives to that
• the roll, of those who returned unrintrgyi excluded from the representattineonnoefuteheetecob
House. He had heard a .great talk of democracy, and
'the dangers Of democracy. lie had heard the Noble
Lord's (Lord John Russell) answer the other night to the
statement made by the Noble Lord at the'head of the Go-
vernment: that answer bad not, quite satisfied' him.
Democracy, as be ( Mr. Roebuck) understood the term, was
equivalent; if he might use the Latin phrase, to populus, as
opposed to plebs. He did not want plebs to govern, as he
did not want aristocracy ; he did not want any section of the
people to govern ; he warted the populusi which answered
more to our word " nation"--he wanted the nation to govern
itself.—( Hear, hear.) As for the Noble Lord at the head of
opr(
ear. hear)—he
the Government coming forward and saying.he was opposed
to Democracy, what did be mean? Did he mean that in this
country the artisans had what were called Communist prin-
ciples?. Not at all.—( Hear, hear.) The moment a man
upn t o d
gained
o an
!fetid) g
the b
sacredness yhis
own labour,
erty
op _H he might be depended
would be the man to come forward and say, "This is mine—
it is the result of my own honest labour and of my own intel-
lect "—(Hear, hear.) You will find no Communist princi-
ples received among the artisans of this country.—(Hear,
hear.) As for the ignorant and benighted labourers of the
agricultural classes, he (Mr. Roebuck) did not know what

ti VI 91:S /3/.4