The Sun.
London, England, 1830-02-25 00:00:00

UNION-HALL.

withu i:poritrhael;
eatlt.eretihlwee
aaftsoietl
oocf:
juvenile,
ti viae, taaces, tthee nr
whichot s i
n st
reio,n its prostitution,country,before t
he Magis_
t
with
ra s
teyeelsitegrsd aoyf
pain,rritr) 11
not nbgei
edr e
witbhy
heovrerroy,. t nTykoncigh
rile]
ic!
(for neither in age nor appearance ought they to be otherwise
termed), pained .:Vary Garnett and Charlotte Greenwood, the
first just turned fourteen, and the other wanting a few weeks of
being twelve years old, were brought up by inspector F. T.
Smith, of the fourth division, for having created a terrible dis-
turbance on the preceding night, in the New-cut, Lambeth.—
The prisoners were dressed as became their years. The youngest,
who was a beautiful and interesting-looking little girl, was re-
markably neatly dressed, and had on a clean white pinafore,
which made her look still more like a child. Inspector Smith
stated to the Magistrates that the prisoners were two well-known
juvenile prostitutes, who were nightly to be seen walking along the
Waterloo-road and the adjoining streets. On Tuesday night,
between twelve and one o'clock, as the inspector was going his
round, he was attracted by seeing a concourse of people as-
sembled in the New-cut, and on going up to them he observed
the two delinquents in the centre, quarrelling most violently,
and using the most opproprious epithets towards eaah other, at
which the blackguards composing the mob seemed to be highly
delighted. The cause of the quarrel was this :—The youngest
prisoner had been with, as she described him, an old gentle-
man, who had given her half-a-crown. Her poor lost com-
panion wished to have her share of the wages of prostitution,
as a partnership had been entered into between them to
honourably divide whatever money they got. This was re-
fused by the other, who said that that was not the way that
she did business, and that she was determined to keep all that
she got for herself, as she earned the money hard enough.—
So violent were the two prisoners that there was no alternative
but taking them to the watch-house, when it was observed, and
horrible to relate, that the youngest one was actually pregnant.
This circumstance was likewise noticed by the Magistrates, who,
as well as every one in the office, were shocked and astounded at
such an occurrence. At first it was thought that some peculia-
rity in the dress might cause this appearance, but this was not
the case, and there is no doubt that this poor little unfortu-
nate victim of headstrong passion—a child not yet twelve years
old—is herself with child. Upon inquiries amongst the officers
of the establishment it appears that this infant mother" has
been on the town for upwards of a year, so that she must have
commenced her career of vice and prostitution at ten years
of age. A few weeks back the father of this child, who
is a very industrious man, residing in the Waterloo-road,
brought her before the Magistrates of Union-hall, praying, with
tears in his eyes, that they would be good enough to send her to
Brixton, as she was incorrigible. Every method had been tried
to make her sensible of her conduct, but without any effect, and
the keeping her at home was ruinous, for she only corrupted
her brothers and sisters. The Magistrates then thought very
naturally that such a mere child might be surely managed by
her parents, and refused to comply with the application.
Both the prisoners seemed to be completely indifferent to
their situations, neither of them shedding a single tear. There
was a hardihood and effronterasycjiriunaotntilio;ronfisntah
in a few years more there was no crime which they would hesi-
tateCedh to their respective parents.
s
to commit.
from nye
ort e:giNaeltsatgi iorcaretecesd.,
n was
fen
qtruenceoeniineveee dov,fsitttiiiiitteaebsaal
and in yeboontshe

We really consider the division upon Lord John
Russell's motion on Tuesday evening to be rather
a triumph for his Lordship's principle than a defeat.
But let it be well understood what that principle
was. It was not favourable to any general theoretic
Parliamentary reform—to any dissolution and fan-
ciful recomposition of the present House of Com-
mons: it simply averred, that three places of im-
mense population should be represented in Parlia-
ment. Nor did it assert the right of popular
representation only. Ilis Lordship made a calcula-
tion of the property in those places, and his motion
required a representation for property as well as
persons, or for masses of persons in proportion to
their property. Against such a motion, then—with
something, certainly, of the fearful odium of
Parliamentary reform (though most unjustly)
hanging about it—there was only a majority
of 48 in a House consisting of 328
Members. This we again state to be a
triumph ; and as surely as the Catholic question has
been carried, so surely will it be carried, that Man-
chester, Leeds, and Birmingham—places so swarm-
ing in population, so large in extent, and abounding
with so much property—shall have a voice in the
councils of the nation. That it is unjust to load the
right of these towns to elect representatives in Par-
liament with the odium of a sweeping Parliamentary
Reform, is obvious. We should indeed think that
due concession (and concession must come) will but
oppose fresh impediments to the revolutionary con-
fusion of annual elections, and universal suffrage.
For is it credible that two Members who have
known the pain and sustained the expense, however
modified, of canvassing such a town as Manchester, for
example, once in seven years, would wish to repeat
the experirr.ent every twelve months ? or that those
who have been exhausted by their applications to
hundreds of the middling ranks of society for their
vote and interest, would choose to be worn out,
both in body and fortune, by purchasing the sups
port of thousands and tens of thousands of the more
needy and rapacious classes ? Sir George Murray
seemed to think that our present borough represen-
tation was coeval with the earliest period of the
Constitution, and of unbroken prescription and
descent, which he therefore would not have med-
dled with or altered; and from this motive he op-
posed the motion. Whereas the fact is, that in
early times, and from the first known origin of the
House of Commons up to a very late date, nothing
was more variable than the right of sending
Members to Parliament, the King usually
calling them by writ from this borough or
that, as each rose in opulence or population,
and omitting to call them from those towns
whose consequence had declined; and Lord John
Russell's motion was strictly in analogy with
the ancient practice of the Constitution, Parliament
only being required to do that which had heretofore
been done by the sole authority of the Crown. It
it impossible, in a motion of the nature of that
which was proposed by h s Lordship on Tuesday
night, but that many minor points of distinction
must spring up, which afforded loop-holes for eva-
sion to those who wished to frustrate the general
proposition. One was hostile to increasing the
number of Members in the House even by six. Had
it been determined to wait for the detection of cor-
ruption before the franchises were transferred from
rotten boroughs to large towns, this might have
been considered as prejudging the question of guilt ;
but it being now clear that Manchester, Leeds, and
Birmingham, must be represented in Parliament, all
trivial and minor objections will, as in the case of I
the Catholic question, vanish.—Times.
The conduct of our Government, with respect to
our relations with Portugal, cannot be defended on
any principle of fair-dealing between nations, or
sound policy, us regards the interests of the British
empire. In all their transactions relative to the
conflicting claims of Don Miguel and the Emperor
Pedro they have shown a lamentable deficiency in
those better qualifications of diplomacy and states-
manship which are evidenced by acts of firmness, con-
sistency, and decision. Leaning at one time to-
wards the support of the rights of Donna Maria, arid
at another giving indirect encouragement to the
usurper of her throne, they have forfeited the con-
fidence of both parties, and sacrificed to a vacillating
policy the interests of England. We have protested,
and we do protest, against the principle of inter-
ference, on the part of our Government, with
the internal arrangements of other independent
nations. That principle has already cost England
dear. Had she allowed France to choose her
own mode of Government at the Revolution,
instead of rushing into a Quixotic crusade to
replace a particular family on a throne, which
they had not the virtue or courage or wisdom to
retain of themselves, the proud spirit of this country
would not be now borne down by an incalculable
weight of debt, nor would her beggared population
have to lament over the mournful glories that strew,
like monumental honours, the grave of her prospe-
rity. Uninstructed in the bitter but salutary wis-
dom of experience by the calamitous triumphs of
that destructive and exhausting war, our Ministers
have interfered in the disputed succession to the
Crown of Portugal—not, indeed, with the energy
that distinguished the fatal councils of those states-
men who lavished the blood and treasures of Eng.
land in support of the Bourbon Dynasty, but in a
spirit of evasive, undecided, and equivocating offi-
ciousness, winch developes no wisdom, supports no
principle, and greatly compromises the interests of
the nation and the dignity of the Throne. If the
Duke of Wellington had resolved to vindicate the
rights of the infant Donna Maria, when he had
her introduced at Court, and received as Queen
of Portugal in this country, why did he not
pursue that course in a manly, vigorous, and
straightforward way ? If he did riot, what a mockery
it was of her cause, and the hopes of her adherents,
to make the Infant go through the ceremonies and
parade of royalty, in the presence of our King arid
before the eyes of Europe, only to send her back to
the nursery to amuse herself with the sceptre and
crown, not as the symbols of empire, but the bau-
bles of childhood ! Let us, however, suppose that
Don Miguel had the sympathies of our Government

the time the farce of baby-sovereignty was played
,ff at Windsor, and continued to have the good
fishes of our Ministers since—as the affair at Ter-
ira and other circumstances make highly pro-
.ble—why, we ask, has the matter been involved
such mystery up to the present time ? Are Mi-
Aers ashamed of their protege while 'hey pro-
iote his interests ? Have they been delaying his
cognition to try the temper of the country, and
•ait the turn of events, in accordance with their
.vourite doctrine of expediency ? The personal
description which Lord Aberdeen gave of Don
Miguel, in the debate of Thursday night, was
not, indeed, a very complimentary one; and,
if that Prince, instead of contesting his claim to
a Crown, was standing upon his deliverance at the
bar of a Criminal Court, and called the Noble -Se-
cretary for Foreign Affairs as a witness to character,'
his testimony would not avail him much in the
opinion of any twelve honest men. Ile said, " the
Prince Don Miguel was false and treacherous and
incorrigible, and that it could not be denied there
was no principle in him. He was, besides, weak
and timid and cruel, inasmuch as cruelty is ever the
offspring of 'cowardice:" This is certainly a more
faithful than flattering portrait of the present occu-
pant of the Throne of Braganza. It has the for-
tunes of inveterate depravity, without the relieving
traits of talent which Tacitns ascribes to the Emperor
Tiberius. We do not give Lord Aberdeen credit for
using the historical pencil with so nice and dis-
criminating an accuracy of touch as the great
annalist of imperial Rome—but he certainly de-
serves the praise of not having too highly
coloured the virtues or concealed the defects of a
Prince suspected of enjoying no small share of his
political sympathies. He shows, however, that
morality has nothing to do with the subject, when he
says that, " after all, he thought it unwise to dwell
so much on the personal character of a Prince, and
to hold it up as a motive to influence public opinion.
The question did not turn on the character of the
Monarch. To him it was comparatively immaterial
whether Don Miguel was a Nero or a Titus—his
object was the interest and reciprocal advantage of
the two countries. He could not deny that he had
usurped the Throne of Portugal ; yet, though he
would not enter into the question of law or right, he
must admit that the people of Portugal, after all,
were the most proper and most competent judges.
It could not be denied that it had been decided by a
vast majority that he was the legitimate heir to the
Throne—and from that decision no valid appeal could
be made." If this, indeed, be Lord Aberdeen's opi-
nion, and also that of the Duke of Wellington,
and if the personal character of Don Miguel
be immaterial, why do our relations with Por-
tugal continue as unsettled as if Ministers
were yet in doubt whether they would assist to
place the sceptre of Braganza in the hand of infant
innocence, or prefer that it should be wielded by
the more vigorous grasp of matured depravity ? It
is true, we cannot well understand how the same
person can be a " usurper" and " legitimate heir"
to the Throne; but, as Lord Aberdeen considers
that no valid appeal can be made from the decision
of the Portuguese, wherefore does he refrain from
advising his Majesty to admit Don Miguel among
the fraternity of Kings ? It is evident, from their
own showing, that Ministers have long since come
to the conclusion that it is their duty to advise the
recognition—for what reason, then, do they hesi-
tate and temporize about the matter, to the great
detriment of the commercial interests of the country?
Why all this shunning and evasion and mystery
about what they tell us is, both in principle and in
fact, so clear a question ? Why the long dalliance
and eternal coquetry of Lord Aberdeen with the
Court of Lisbon, and with the Prince who has been
" declared legitimate heir to the Throne by a deci-
sion from which there is no appeal ? He declares
that he looks only to the reciprocal advantage of
the two countries. Is it not to the reciprocal
mischief, instead of the mutual advantage, of both
countries that this question should remain so
long unsettled ? Are net the interests of commerce
sacrificed to the timid indecision of our Cabinet ? If
the Genius that presides over our Cosnicils concedes
a certain degree of patronage to his successful
ambition, which it would be ashamed to extend to
his virtues only, wherefore proceed so tardily to
consummate the intended union between the two
countries ? If the aspiring youth who swore alle-
giance to " the Charter" only to trample it under
his feet—who has made the most solemn and sacred
engagements " false as dicers' oaths"—who has
risen superior to the claims of humanity, and severed
die ties of nature, that he might encircle his brows
with the " glorious diadem;"--if such a Prince
makes political love to the Genius of Great Britain,
and it is resolved by the guardians of the national
honour that his addresses shall be ultimately admitted
—why does the Noble Secretary for Foreign Af-
fairs so slowly lead him, with his " blushing ho-
nours," to the regal altar, and proceed to ratify
the auspicious alliance " with coy, reluctant,
amorous delay ?" Did Ministers consider the
merchants of both countries worth being con-
sulted on the occasion, we have no doubt their
opinion might be substantially expressed in the words
of the great thematic Bard :—" If 'twere done,
when 'tie done, then 'twere well if it were done
quickly." What advantage, we ask, can either
country derive from that evasive and equivocating
policy which keeps the enemies and adherents of
Don Miguel in alternate hope and fear, leading to
the crimes, the follies, the misery, and the desolation
Of civil war Do not the rights of humanity, as well
as the interests of commerce, require that this state
of things should terminate ? We do not charge the
Duke of Wellington's Government with having, in
the first instance, involved us in this officious inter-
ference with the internal regulations of Portugal;
it was a coup de theatre of the late Mr. Canning,
who, to the brilliant qualities of an orator and a wit,
did not unite the steadiness and wisdom of a judici-
ous Statesman. Mr. Canning himself, after having
taken the rash step, seemed to have been aware of
the error which he had committed, though he did
not know how to repair it. The original sin was
his : but the Statesmen who impeached his motives,
and who succeeded to his power, have not yet
treated this question in a manner more consistent
with the interests, or more advantageous to the ho-
nour of England.—Morning Herald.
We understand that the plan of Ministers, for the
relief of the public from the present monopoly in the
sale of Ale, Beer, &c., is to allow them to be sold
like other commodities in the shops of grocers and
chandlers. This will be a great benefit to the pub-
lic. There is no earthly reasoa why beer should be
received from a public-house. The great public
brewers would still supply the commodity, for the
best of all reasons, because they could furnish it of
better quality at the same price than private indi-
viduals or small brewers. It is in the public-houses,
too, that the adulteration goes on both in beer and
spirits. A great brewer hazards too much by using
deleterious ingredients, and too many persons are
privy to his operations. But the system of licensing
has rendered personal character of no earthly conse-
quence. One fellow is detected poisoning the
people ; die license is not to him, but to the house;
or, at least, the owner of the house is sure to have
it next licensing day, and a fresh occupant makes
his appearance. We anticipate the best conse-
quences from this change. It is to be regretted
that so many brewers have been tempted, under the
monopoly system, to embark their capital in public-

1 he disposition of the House of Commons for Fi-
nancial Reform, is by this time pretty correctly appre-
ciated. The higher ranks of this country have been
for too great a length of time in the practice of quarter-
ing their children on the public, to renounce it as
long as a penny can be wrung from the people. We
must keep up establishments, says a Right Hon.
Gentleman on one side of the House; we must not
let our establishments down, says a Noble Lord, or
a Gallant General, on the opposite side; and thus
while all are eulogizing economy and retrenchment,
any Member who goes honestly to work, and
descends from generals to particulars, is deserted
by all but a small band of incorruptibles.—Tuesday
night the Honourable House were engaged on Con-
stitutional Reform, on the motion of Lord John
Russell, for leave to bring in a Bill to enable the
towns of Manchester, Birmingham, and Leeds to
send Representatives to the, House of Commons, in
which Bill should be a Clause suspending the preroga-
tive of the Crown—if any boroughs be disfranchised
for corrupt practices till three boroughs have been dis-
franchised. One of these towns, Manchester, has a
population little short of 200,000, and is rated to the
County Rates at 750,0001. a year. The property of
the town is estimated at thirty millions. It does
certainly seem that that must be a singular state of
the representation which excludes such a town from
all participation in the elective franchise, while a
knot of individuals, hardly possessing more property,
returns more than a majority of the Representa-
tives ! Sir George Murray thought that this was
all as it ought to be—" it was a Gothic structure ;
he rejoiced that it was in the style of architecture
which was the favourite of our ancestors. He was
no great admirer of modern edifices; and he rather
believed that the Noble Lord himself (Lord John
Russell) had been as disgusted as himself at the
efforts of a neighbouring nation to erect a Grecian
Temple, which, however, when completed, was
found to be far inferior in beauty and durability
to the old English Constitution.—(Hear,
Rotten Boroughs for ever ! All these modern
edifices are so defective that they cannot pre-
vent the people from influencing the elections,
and as the Representatives yield obedience to the
popular will, they come into collision with the will
of the Monarchy and the Aristocracy. Now the
beauty of the Gothic system is, that the Monarchy
and Aristocracy name a majority of the Represt,nta-
dyes of the people; and having, therefore, nothing
to dread from the people, the Government can
hardly fail to work well. The King and the Ari-
stocracy have both the strongest interest in dipping
deeply into the pockets of the people; and as long as
there is money for both, it is not likely they should,
by their differences, allow the people to put a stop
to this—to them so beneficial art operation. No
wonder the Gothic system should be such a favourite.
No modern Constitutional Edifice will ever be able
to boast of an Old Sarum, a Gatton, or a West-
bury. Mr. Peel took the bull by the horns. " The
people of England (he said) must live wider a li-
mited Monarchy. They had a House of Lords, and
am King,oe
rat and a
principle House
were of jompttme
don sb;y andte
ai firinainisoerd.i
majority
Commons, its functions would become totally in-
consistent with the principles of the House of Lords
and a limited Monarchy." The English of this is,
that a limited Monarchy and a House of Lords can
onl
House
of )er.
That'hpeexe Csptloebinynmi tuhosetn continuo reedeigo° stsh el namingligr all
Hereditary Po.
persons7namcly, that popular Constitutions afforded
Lords and Masters. One argument of Ml.
no security against war, and that all the warslast century were popular in their commencement,
mands some notice, as it may tuislaad
though they m+kht be unpopular towards eclusion. He instanced the American war,
r e
thitheirsobtain
wan• of 1 r 03, when Mr. Fox could only
Mr. Peel forgets that the public opinion
the House of Commons 4G Members against
e.l
country is not free—that under the existing Con-
stitution—the King and the Aristocracy have
the produce of the industry of the nation at
their mercy, that they are thereby enabled to
corrupt public opinion at its swim, by the enor-
mous interests they can create itt favour of the side
they espouse. When wa!,. was declared in 1793,
the Members of the stock Exchange, with the ex-

seption of the late Mr. Ricardo, threw up their
hats—seeing a long succession of gambling specula-
tions before them. Contractors of all sorts, and
would-be contractors, were in ecstacy. The whole
Aristocracy were alarmed, and Mr. Pitt was obliged,
contrary to his inclinations, to gratify the King's
love of war, by the dread of being laid aside after
the Whigs had seceded from Mr. Fox. The King
and the Aristocracy command the Church, and the
pulpit drum ecclesiastic was beat in every parish
throughout the kingdom. If a number of furious
dogs were let loose on a crowd, it would be as fair
to infer from the excitement which this would
occasion that they were an ungovernable set of b-
ings, as to infer that a people, heated and stimu-
lated by all the means at the command of the most
powerful Government in the world, were of them-
selves enthusiastic for war. The people of every
country of the Continent are uniformly hostile to
war, because their Governments are under no ne-
cessity of corrupting them, having direct means to
compel obedience. In the United States, the Fe-
deralists, that is, the admirers of English Aristc-
eracy and English jobbing, were always anxious to
embroil their nation. The Democratic party, that
is, nine-tenths of the nation, have always been fcr
peace, and economy, and the absence of state and
expence. To talk of the inclinations of a country,
with such detestable laws as those which gave
estates of four hundred thousand pounds a-year
in perpetuity to an eldest son, and thus di-
vide a nation into an overgrown ascendancy,
and overburdened miserable commonalty, one
half paupers, in a state to be unfairly acted
on by the Aristocracy, is like talking of
the dispositions of a man in a fever. The pec-
ple become reasonable towards the conclusion of a
war, because the means for carrying it longer on are
not forthcoming ; they feel the privations, and the
intoxicating cup is no longer presented to the lips
of the corrupters of opinion. As to the sort of Re-
form proposed on Tuesday night, it can do little to-
wards stemming the torrent of evils that press on the
country. On the other hand, it can do no harm.
It was objected to it, that the number of represen-
tatives is too great already. No doubt three times
too many. A House of above one hundred and
fifty Members is a mob. But six able Members,
acquainted with the affairs of three great commercial
towns would not add so much to the evil of excessive
numbers, as they would add to the talent of the
House.—Morning Chronicle.
One good turn deserves another ! Sir James
Scarlett is, no doubt, preparing a defence for his
trial. In the history of England there are prece-
dents enough for his justification ; but it must be
remembered that, until he enlisted with the Duke
of Wellirgton's own, he was a noisy friend to the
liberty of the Press. He will not dare, therefore,
to appeal to the Star Chamber, or, indeed, to any
ex-officio information filed before he became Attor-
ney-General. He will have to stand unsupported
and alone, poor man, on the narrow ground of his
own peculiar merits. From so dismal a fate we
would, if possible, save our worst enemy; and we,
therefore hasten to inform Sir James that another
Attorney-General, no less a personage than his
Majesty's Attorney-General at Botany Bay, has
instituted two prosecutions for libel since Sir
James became Censor-General to the Duke of
Wellington. In the Colony of New South
Wales there are but three newspapers. One
of them is the Official Gazette. -The edi-
tors of the other two are now languishing
in prison ! We pass over the wisdom of the Colo-
nial Officer in thus filling the hearts of the colonists
with attachment to their Government, as well as the
admirable skill displayed by Sir James Scarlett in
his efforts to render the present Administration po-
pular. For these the gentlemen will have their re-
ward. But we claim the thanks of Sir James for
having provided him with two "cases", to which
he may safely refer in justification of his own pro-
ceedings. By the bye, we trust that some straight-
forward Member of the House of Commons will ask
Sir James the following questions :—" If you had
been Attorney-General when Lord Eldon appointed
Sir John Copley Solicitor-General, and if the libel
on the Chancellor, for which Mr. Alexander
has been sent to Newgate, had appeared verbatim
in every London newspaper, would you have
thought it worth while to prosecute the author ? If
not, why not ? Do you think that Lord Holland,
under these circumstance, would have sworn that
he believed the squib injurious, or even applicable,
to Sir John Copley and Lord Eldon ? If not, why
not ?"---11forning Journal.
The division on Lord John Russell's motion
must, we think, convince the most obdurate that
some sort of parliamentary reform, whether for bet-
ter or worse, whether the result of conviction or of
weakness in the Ministers, must speedily take place.
When in an assembly of upwards of three hundred
and twenty Members, the Ministers could only mus-
ter a majority of forty-eight, it is pretty plain that
there is something wrong, and that public opinion is
decidedly against them. And to think, too, that
this majority had for its rank and file all the depend-
ents of the Treasury, and that Ministers had for
their champion no less a personage than Mr. Horace
Twiss, who, to speak in his jargon, showed cause
so admirably against the motion, and adduced so
many convincing reasons for keeping things as
they are—to think of this, we say, is enough to
;make a melancholy man merry for a month. Not
that we would have him laugh solely at the ex-
pense of Mr. Twiss, for, beyond all doubt, the
employers of the Learned and Honourable Gentle-
man cut a much more ludicrous figure than their
champion, and we dare say now heartily wish him
and their cause at the bottom of the sea. The
arguments—God forgive us for calling them argu-
ments—with which Mr. Twiss resisted the motion,
and convinced his brother clerks that reform would
be attended with danger, are really the most con-
temptible absurdities that have been tittered since
the commencement of the Session. " Reform,"
says Mr. Horace Twiss, " would be innovation—
innovation is a change—all changes are experiments
—and experiments are dangerous." " Moreover,"
says be, " the constitution is Gothic; and, if we
were to add a *leg, or a turret, or anything else to
it, we would destroy its inimitable symmetry just
as the beauty of Westminster-abbey would be
destroyed if Mr. Nash's new palace were stuck upon
its roof." Shade of the good and great King
William ? whoever beard any thing half so Gothic
as this ? Now, who is the gentleman who ex-
presses so much abhorrence of innovation, and who
even threatens us with a rebellion in the north if
we commit any act in violation of the settlement of
the Scottish union ? Why, one of the men who
broke in upon the Constitution last year, and who
assisted Parliament in kicking the articles of union
and the Constitution itself all the way from Palace-
yard to the back settlements of Conemara in Ire-
lend. He assisted to break in upon the Constitue
tion last year in order to get or keep his place, and
for the same worthy reasons lie this year thrusts his
Gothic monuments in our faces, in order to prevent
that which, to a moral certainty, would send him to
his old Chancery distaff again before the lapse of
another twelve months. But it is smiting ink upon
such a statesman. Reform must take place, and
we have no doubt Mr. Twiss would vote for it to-
morrow if he were desired. Besides, if Ministers
do not change their tone, it is very likely to happen
this very summer. The country is dissatisfied with
the present men and measures to an extent never be-
fore heard of, and if they do not instantly dissolve
Parliament the cry of reform will be raised louder,
and a more sweeping alteration demanded than
that which the people at present seek arid with
which they would be satisfied. We cannot see
what possible objections Ministers can urge against
giving representatives to the large manufacturing
towns. Mr. Goulburn certainly can have no ob-
jection. A rabble election would be quite a God.
send to that able financier just now. gin that
would be drank and the beer that would be spilt
would be enormous. No cotton-spinner would give
his vote for less than a fortnight's wages, and the
is hole of the sum would soon find its way (0 tile

exhausted Treasury. But to be more serious—
why should Caine return two Members and Leeds
return none ? " Oh," says Mr. Horace Twiss,
" Caine is Gothic, Leeds is a modern place."
True, but Caine did not exist from all eternity. It
was once as modern as Manchester itself, and
the right of returning Members was conferred
upon it for the very reasons now urged in favour
of Birmingham, Manchester, and Leeds. The elec-
tive franchise was given to those places which were
deemed the centre of trade at the time and were
comparatively populous. Changes have taken place
—towns have dwindled away—boroughs have sunk
into farms—and respectable villages once the empo-
rium of the wool, isee, and tin trade have nothing
left to tell of their existence but a single house or
landmark and the Honourable Members who repre-
sent them. On the other hand, new towns have
started up as if by magic. Villages hare been built
by steam. The wool trade has left the west of Eng.
land. and settled in Yorkshire. The wealth of the
west has rolled eastward and northward, and we see
no good reason why the honours should not follow.
Not that we would deprive any community, con-
sisting of one or more per,oes, of their rights.
We have no desire to rob Sir Massy, or Sir Moses,
or any ether lic.e..st dealers in rotten boroughs, of
their prop,ity. But we would compel them to sell
it. We would strip Cornwall of ten of its nests in a
night; not by pillage, but simply by giving to the
worthy burgesses a fair solatiuni in the shape of the
King's coin, or so many barrels of beer and kegs of
brandy. This might be done easily and peaceably,
and with great advantage to the Country at large.
New men would thus be bought into the House—
weavers they might be—braziers they might be—
clothiers they might be—Glasgow bailies they
might be—but still they would be men of sense
and intelligence, and not your Mr. Thomati
Macauley species, who creep into holes God
knows how, and render the House of Commons
a mere debating-room for small lawyers and
upstart philosophers. In this sense we avow our•selves parliamentary reformers. And why ? This
question, we know, will be asked ur, and therefore
we answer it here. We advocate this kind of re-
form to prevent one of a more sweeping nature.
The signs of the times tell us that if the House of
Commons do not reform itself it will be reformed
by the people out of doors. We see this as clearly
as we see the pen with which we write. The
country has no confidence in Parliament as it is at
present constituted. A new Parliament might work
better and give more satisfaction, but the country
will always be in a precarious state till we place
safety. valves in Birmingham, Manchester, Shef-
field, Glasgow, Paisley, and other places. If this
were done the greater evil might be averted. If
this were done the great mass of the people would
be satisfied. We should give to every man who
pays taxes and poor rates in these places a vote,
and with this they would be contented. But if this
be not done, and that speedily, let the Ministers and
the Aristocracy look to the consequences. It is
better to give that as a boon, and appear liberal,
though it should make their hearts ache, than
allow what they withhold to be extorted. We
give them this warning in time, under a serious
conviction that the period is come when some
such compromise must be made. If they resist
the measure they may live to repent it. If
they reject a proposition of so wholesome a na-
ture, and which would not in the least inter-
fere with their real interests, perhaps they will
have to submit to one of a more galling character.
The reform for which some men contend is revo-
lution. The innovation they wish would be an
inundation which would sweep before it all the
institutions of the land, and overturn the altar and
the throne itself. And this is just what the ultra
reformers desire. They tell its so distinctly, and
we know they are at this moment stirring heaven
and earth to accomplish their purpose. We would
defeat the machinations of these persons by the
measure we propose. We would deprive them of
their lever by giving to the manufacturing classes an
interest in, and an influence over, the representation.
And this is of all the remedies the one which the
wild reformers most dread. Mr. Hobliouse voted
with Ministers against Birmingham, and we have
no doubt all his radical friends approve of his con-
duct.
The reformers should be treated like Lord
Ellenborough's elephants—the wild ones should be
led between.the tame.—Morning Journal.
We alluded yesterday to the question of the re-
presentation of Manchester, Leeds, and Birming-
ham. Sheffied was not mentioned upon the occa-
sion, although the petition from it, in favour of an
extension of the elective franchise, formed the
groundwork of Lord John Russell's motion. The.
Ministry, as our readers are aware, mustered their
" troop" against the proposed innovation ; and never
assuredly did they muster their forces with less
credit to themselves, or benefit to the country. The
motion was popular with every man of right
feeling; but the opposition to it ten times more
unpopular. If Westbury, Wotton Basset, and such
like rat-holes, ought to be represented, is it not
agreeable to common sense, that towns of such
immmense commercial importance as Manchester,
Birmingham, and Leeds, should be represented ?
The question is not worth an argument, nor will we
insult our readers by endeavouring to prove that
such towns ought to be represented; but we will
just take leave to hint to his Majesty's Ministers,
that they could not possibly have committed a
greater blunder, than that of refusing the elective
franchise on the grounds on which it was demanded.
It will now be said, and most justly, that they are
opposed to all salutary innovation ; but the time, if
not come, is coming, when innovation will be the
peace of England—when the aristocracy will tremble
for its privileges, and the Government, as in the case
of the Catholic question, will be glad to concede
even more than it now refuses. We have no wish
to rouse the country to an undue sense of its wrongs
—though nothing would be more easy—against the
existing Government. We wish it well, arid to
many of its members we give credit for good inten-
tions; but its sagacity has been sadly at fault of
late, and we should not do justice to our readers—
whom we prize still more—were we to withhold our
opinion of its acts.—Morning Advertiser.

The motion of Lord J. Russell to communicate
to Manchester, Birmingham, and Leeds, the right of
returning each two Members to Parliament, would
so evidently, had it succeeded, have been only the
commencement of a radical change in the constitu-
tution of Parliament, that we owe some apology to
our readers for considering it even for a moment in
the light of a distinct and isolated proposition.—
The wedge, when properly employed, is a mecha-
nical power of irresistible efficacy, even although
its thinner side be pared down to the tenuity of a
razor, and such was precisely the kind of imtru-
mem which Lord John Russell proposed to apply
to the solid fabric of the Constitution. Of
thie important truth some of the supporters of
the Noble Lord's motion were probably ignorant ,
or unmindful; but many of them, we are persuaded,
were supporters of that motion only because they
knew the truth and the importance of the political
principle of which the wedge is the proper physical
emblem. For why should any anxiety be mani-
fested by any man who is not prepared and deter-
mined, if possible, to go further—to extend the
right of representation to these particular towns ?
We search in vain throughout the speeches of all
the advocates of the measure for any thing like a
cto;o7i that applies peculiarly to those places. All
that is zei!l with an appearance of supporting
the measure may resolved into the hackneyed
topics in favour of a general change of the
;hole representative system of the country; while
every syllable that is advanced having any special
application to the towns in question, is strongly
and unequivocally in favour of leaving them
as they are. Have Manchester, Birmingham and
Leeds, in consequence of the unfavourable position
in which the present system of national representa-
tion places them, been outstripped by other more
favoured towns in the acquisition of wealth, in the
IlierC4so of population, in the progress of import-

ance and respectability.? The fact is notoriously the
reverse. They have vastly outrun all their compe-
titors. This, so far from being denied, is, strange
and perverse as it may seem, insisted on by the ad-
vocates of change, and serves indeed as the founda-
tion of their solitary argument, with the excep-
tion of such as are pressed into the service of
this particular proposition while they properly
belong to the general question of reform. Is there
again any reason to believe that the benefit likely to
be derived from having Members in Parliament
whom they could call peculiarly their own, would
compensate to Manchester, Birmingham, and Leeds,
the injury they must experience from the interrup-
tion to their industry incident to the periodical ex-
citement of a popular election ? This question, of
obvious and paramount importance, if the subject
be considered as one of local circumstances and
considerations, the advocates of change have en-
tirely overlooked or eluded, and by doing so,
have proved in the clearest possible manner that
they regarded the motion as part and pareti
of some mcre extensive and general scheme
of reform. But it is said the object of this sort of
reform is to preserve and strengthen the present
structure of the House of Commons, and to make
its anomalies and defects less obvious to public
view. We answer, that the present structure of
the House of Commons is sufficiently strong and
secure, whatever may be its apparent anomalies or
defects, so long as the latter do not disqualify that
Assembly from contributing its proper constitutional
share towards the good government of the country ;
and that if the anomalies and defects did in fact
amount to such a disqualification, this sort of
reform would be worse than useless. This ap-
peal to the imagination, for such in fact it is,
fails of its intended effect, inasmuch as the
want of symmetry in structure, when once be-
come familiar, ceases to offend. To anomaly
in action, however, the minds of men can-
not
so easily be reconciled. And is it possible
to imagine a greater anomaly of the latter kind than
Parliament would display if it decreed the right of
representation to Manchester, Birmingham, and
Leeds, and denied it to Sheffield and fifty other
places having similar claims ? Our objection to the
present and to every other scheme of reform, open or
disguised, gradual or sudden, may be briefly stated.
It is that they all, without exception, tend, and
are indeed designed, to render the Constitution and
character of the Legislature more democratical than
it is; while we are firmly persuaded that democra-
tical influence is already quite as strong as is at all
consistent either with the principles of the British
Constitution, or the real, substantial, and permanent
welfare of the community.—Morning Post.

NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY MEETING

(From the Newcastle Chronicle.)

Pursuant to the Requisition published in our last
week's paper, a meeting of the county of Northum-
berland was held at Morpeth on Monday last, for
the purpose of petitioning Parliament on the present
distressed state of the country. A few minutes
after twelve o'clock, Sanderson Ilderton, Esq., the
High Sheriff, entered the Town Hall, and we were
sorry to observe that he was suffering so severely
from an attack of the gout, as to be obliged to have
the support of crutches. On the bench we also ob-
served the Hon. H. T. Liddell, M.P., W. Clark,
Esq. of Benton, G. T. L. Blenkinsopp, Esq. W.
Orde, Esq. of Nunny Kirk, H. J. W. Collingwood,
Esq. of Lilburn Tower, A. Atkinson, jun. Esq. of
Lorbottle, W. L. Smart, Esq. of Trewhitt, Sir C.
M. Monck, Bart., Sir E. Blackest, Bart., J. S.
Donalson, of Cheswick, &c. &c. The Hall was
soon filled, but not so crowded as on some former
occasions; as soon as silence was obtained,

The HIGH SHERIFF sad, that in consequence of
the Requisition which they would shortly hear read,
he-had thought it his duty to call them together;
an as perhaps some difference of opinion might arise
on the occasion, he trusted the same honourable feeling
which bad always distinguished the county on for-
mer instances would be observed to-day, and that
they would give every gentleman who might be de-
sisous of addressing the meeting, a patient and at-
tentive hearing.—(Applause.)
Mr. M. CLAYTON, the Under Sheriff, read the
requisition.
H. J. W. COLLINGwooD, Esq. of Lilburn Tower,
then rose—He said he had the honour to propose to
the consideration of the Meeting a petition, which
he hoped would meet the approbation of all parties,
as it merely stated the distress of the country, and
prayed for relief, without at all entering into the
causes by which that distress had been produced.
Ministers considered that distress only existed in a
partial degree; but was it at all likely that the people
of England would complain without a cause ? Were
not they the best judges of their own sufferings ?
(Cheers.)—He should like to know what branch
of trade was at this time in a flourishing condition ?
(A cry of " none.")—Was not trade at a stand-
still in all parts of the country ? Ministers had ad-
duced the increase in exports by way of disproving
the general cry of distress; but had the manufacs
turers derived any profit from their shipments ? He
}relieved the very reverse would be found to be the
fact. The agricultural distress was also unparal-
leled. That interest was every where on the de-
cline ; and it was impossible that it could go on
much longer, under the present low state of prices,
and existing weight of taxation. It was impossible
the farmers could pay their rents ; the profits of
the soil would not allow them to do so. They
could not live without drawing largely upon their
capital, and there was surely no person present who
could support such a system. The landlords must
reduce their rents.—(A cry of " Aye, that's the
cure," and considerable applause.)—" No," said the
speaker, vehemently, " that is not the cure—it is the
cry." Why should the landlords be required to
reduce their rents ? If they touched the landholder,
why not touch the fundholder also ? If the land-
holder was called upon to reduce his income, should
not that of every other person be reduced in pro-
portion? Look, too, at the shipping interest.
Could it be said to he in a flourishing condition ?
The shipping of Great Britain seemed to be
gradually declining, and in proportion to that decline
foreign shipping was rising. Nothing could be
more injurious to a maritime nation than this.
England depended mainly upon its shipping.
Without its wooden walls, in what situation would
it stand ? What, he would beg to ask, had caused
the decline of our maritime greatness ? Had not
free trade injured the shipping interest ?—(Cries of
" yes" and " no.")—There were many shipping
gentlemen present who could treat that question
more ably than he could do; but be would say that
free trade bad injured the shipping of this country.
The alteration in the currency had increased the
value of money from 25 to 50 per cent; and every
article of the produce of the soil had fallen in the
same ratio. It was impossible, without some remedy,
to go on. If the present Session was allowed to
pass over, without such measures being taken, it
was impossible we could exist as a nation—we can-
not remain as we are.—( Cheers.)—Mr. Coiling-
wood concluded by moving the petition, which was
general in its nature.
W. °RUE, Esq., of Nunnykirk, said, he had great
pleasure in seconding the petition, because it was
couched in language that was at once mild and mo-
derate, manly and decisive.—That there was great
distress in our commerce, agriculture, and finances—
that, in short, general distress prevailed in the coun-
try, was beyond doubt; and it was curious that
Ministers could assert in his Majesty's speech that
the distress was only partial, when the very two
Members appointed by the Administration to move
and second the Address in the House of Commons,
said that it was general and not partial.—(Hear,
and applause.)—He believed it to be, and he was
sorry to say it was, deep, general, and extensive. In
corn farms there was a great depression ; and in
stock farms it was still greater, the depreciation
amounted to full 40 per cent. How, then, rents
could be expected to be paid, he knew not.—(A
gentleman near him mentioned wool.)—As to wool,

~ .

t-444.

. AP.
' continued 11 p., stets almAt inoonsliikv.—Tho
state of that trade had been brought before Parlia-
ment by the Duke of Thchmond, by whom the case
of the growers was advocated in a very able manner,
and he hoped he would bring it forward again. The
state of the manufacturing interest was also lament-
able. There, too, the depreciation was forty per
cent.; and yet they had been told by Ministers that
exports were greater than in any former year ! But
custom-house entries were very fallacious—they told,
indeed, the amount of exports, but they did not state
the balance of trade, nor the profit to the manufac-
turer, who was forced to dispose of his goods even
at a loss, rather than keep them to rot in his ware-
house; and he was sorry to understand that manu-
facturers were in some places paying their workmen
partly with paper and partly with goods. As to the
shipping interest, he contended that there was no
remunerating principle. If he were asked the one
great cause of this, he would, without hesitation,
answer " the pestilent heresy: of free trade."—
(Cheers and laughter.) He deeply deprecated that
free trade, and would say that it was laying the axe
to the root of the maritime superiority and prosperity
of Great Britain, by giving the preference to the
foreign ship-owner, who can build and sail his ship
at one-half the cost the British ship-owner can. If
other nations were in a similar situation in regard
to debt and taxation, he would have no objection to
trade being as free as the winds of heaven. But how
could we, with a debt of eight hundred millions,
compete with France, which had one of only two
hundred millions, or with America, which in a few
years would have none ?—(Cheers.) He was far
from saying that the country was without hope ;
but he was satisfied that it was only by deep
retrenchment, and by maintaining not a single
soldier, or continuing a single office that was
not absolutely necessary for carrying on the machine
of Government, that it could be saved.—(Cheers.)
He would support the just splendour of the
Crown, because we had a Monarch who was
worthy of a free people. He was glad when the
ancient castle and keep of Windsor were restored to
even more than their former grandeur; but he did not
like to see the money of the people expended on the
mummeries of Brighton, the miserable mass of build-
ings at Carlton-house, or the petty palaces of Pim-
lico—those miserable monuments of a Monarch's
taste, and a people's folly.—(Cheers.)—These were
misapplications of the public money, which, in times
like these, ought not to be suffered. We were suf-
fering under the Act called Mr. Peel's; but he must
say that that measure, severe as it unquestionably had
proved, was in principle right ; and though it had
added 40 per cent. to our debt, if it had not been
passed, we should soon have had two prices—a
paper price and a gold price. It was like admini-
stering too strong a dose of medicine to a person in
a delicate state of health. But the die was cast;
and he trusted the worst effects of the measure were
over—that we had " weathered the storm"—and
that Ministers would not again tamper with the
currency. We must be content to remain as we
are, and, coute qui coute, must take Mr. Peel's Bill
as we took still dearer things, " for richer for poorer,
for better for worse."—(A laugh.)—But there was
one tampering with the currency, however, and only
one, which he should be glad to see Ministers adopt
—he meant the restoration of a small note circula-
tion, which, he must say, as far as concerned the
smaller tradesmen and the lower classes of the com-
munity, would be a very great accommodation.—
Ministers had recognized the principle by continuing
one-pound notes in Scotland ; and if we now had
these in England, it would be attended with great
public benefit, and materially relieve the pressure of
the prevailing distress.
The Hon. H. T. LIDDELL next rose, and was re-
ceived with great enthusiasm. He said,—the peti-
tion which you have heard read having been now
regularly moved and seconded, 1 hope I may be per-
mitted, considering that I have had some share in
assembling this meeting, to address you,---and I am
afraid it may be necessary to do so at some length,
—first in explanation of my own conduct, and next
in favour of the petition which you have heard so
well moved and so ably and eloquently seconded.
First, I will say a few words in vindication of my
own conduct, because I know that no man in a public
situation can bring himself forward in favour of any
public measure without exposing himself to some
risk of disappointment, or if he escape that, he may
still incur censure from some quarters, whether de-
served or not, as it is impossible that, on a question
like this, absolute unanimity of opinion can prevail.
But placed as I am in the high situation of your
representati7e in Parliament, I have no hesitation in
declaring before you, and the public at large, that I
have been actuated by only one motive. Ever
since I have been placed in that situation, I
have thought solely and entirely as to what was
best for the public interest; and when I could make
up my mind, I have not stopped to look for prrce-
dents whether other people have done the same
thing—though I doubt not such might be found ;
but I have asked myself whether 1 was right or
wrong, and if I could justify the proceeding to my
own conscience, I am comparatively little solicitous
of praise or blame from others.—(Applause.)—
There is only one tribunal before which I will con-
descend to plead—and that is the bar of public opi-
nion. I shall never be ashamed to plead before that
bar, and never shall shrink from its scrutiny ; but I
do not. consider myself responsible to any individual
for the performance of an act ari,ing from a con-
scientious sense of my public duty.—(Applause.)—
Having said thus much in my own justification—
and I could scarcely say less,—l will proceed to
state why I think it advisable, and conducive
to the public interests, that a meeting of this
kind should be convened. I think I can show that
this meeting is both right and expedient—consti-
tutionally right, and politically expedient. That
you are here in the exercise of a great
constitutional right, no man can deny—that you
are here in the hope of beneficial results, I will en-
deavour to show. What is the end of all good
government ? Undoubtedly to promote, in the
greatest possible degree, and to secure on the
most permanent foundation the happiness of the
people. For many years this nation has enjoyed a
state of uninterrupted tranquility. During that
period we have seen a regular system of govern-
ment, extensive in its effect, and comprehensive in
its nature, acted upon by those who are the rulers
of our destinies. The great scheme first displayed
itself in the Act of 1819, for restoring our mone-
tary system to the state in which it existed before
the war; and all subsequent measures connected
with trade, both in the changes made in the navi-
gation laws, and the repeal of the protections to
several branches of our manufactures, have conduced
to one and the same end; the practical effect has
been to press prices to so low a level as to enable
our manufacturers to supply the demand of the
foreign markets. That has been the object of all
these measures, it is still kept in view, and possibly
it may be the policy most calculated, in the end, to
promote the permanent advantage of the country.—
(A voice in the hall, " No, no.")—That, I say,
nlay be the c use, though I presume to offer no opi-
nion upon the subject. But I think I can prove to
demonstration as clearly as a mathematical proposi-
tion, that in consequence of those measures, the suf-
fering of the country has attained its present height.
And feeling that, and believing it to be as true as
that I stand here, I think it entitles us to look with
some degree of doubt and suspicion on the prudence
of those measures which his Majesty's Ministers
are so determined on carrying through. In the
year 1797, the well-known Act for restricting the
Bank of England from making cash payments was
passed, the consequence of which was that the
country was enabled to make those stupendous
efforts which carried us through the war. But the
check which hitherto existed upon an unlimited
issue of paper being removed, no long time elapsed
before a considerable depreciation took place in the
national currency; though, from the nature of such
matters it was not for some time that it was ob-
vious, except to a few intelligent and sagacious ob-
servers. But in 1811 that depreciation became so
certain that the House of Commons appointed the

~~. ~~.

~,,, ..

taTtion Committee to take into its consideration
the financial state of the country. That Committee,
presided over by a very able man, passed a number
of resolution, which put the question upon a true
footing, and accurately and precisely defined the real
standard of value, as it had previously existed for
near 200 years. But the recommendation of that
Committee was not then attended to. It is believed
that the depreciation at certain periods amounted
to 30, 40, and even 50 per cent., compared with
the price of wheat and commodities, and com-
pared with gold to about 30 per cent, at
one particular time. But, in spite of the ac-
knowledged depreciation, and the resolutions of the
Bullion Committee, another set of resolutions were
moved by the Government, and passed through the
House of Commons, falsifying those of the Bullion
Committee, and virtually almost denying that any
depreciation in the value of paper had taken place.
That resolution I leave to its fate; but the tendency
of it was to create a belief that the currency was
still in a sound state, that the pound note really re-
presented its sterling
-value, and that, therefore, the
country had not to prepare for those dangers;diffi-
culties, and pressure which succeeded the termina-
tion of the war. Many of you will recollect that
during that period, we had the advantage of what
were called war prices; and by means of these
prices the country was enabled to make those im-
mense efforts for the prosecution of the war, though
it was taxed to an extent never before known in a
civilized state. Yet by these means the high rate
of taxation was kept tip without half the pressure
that is now felt.—Now, when we consider how taxes
are levied, this fact is not extraordinary ; because
taxation ultimately falls upon the productive indus-
try of a country ; and if we were then highly taxed
we were at least also highly paid—if we had to pay
the taxes out of labour, that labour was highly re-
quited, and the residue of its wages afforded those
comforts to the lower orders of which they are now
deprived.—(Applause.)—Hence it is that the two
circumstances of high taxation and low prices are
incompatible with each other. That is the gist of
the question, as is asserted in the fourth clause of
this petition, and I believe it is precisely on this
point that the pressure of the times is now so se-
verely felt ; and, therefore, I consider that we are
justified in calling upon the Government, if it be
possible, by the revision of former Acts, by chang-
ing existing laws, or by the most severe and un-
sparing economy and retrenchment, to adopt one of
two alternatives—either to reduce the taxes to the
level of our means, or to expand our means to some-
thing like proportion to the enormous bulk of our
present taxation.—(Cheers.)—But to recur to
the period at which I left off, it will be recol-
lected that the war in Europe ceased in 1815, and
that we have since, through the mercy of God,
enjoyed the blessings of peace with foreign na-
tions. At that time Government were anxious to
redeem the pledge that had been given to the public
creditor, by resuming cash payments. For that crisis
the country had to prepare, and did prepare for it.
And what was the consequence ? One-half of the
ps ivate bankers of England were unable to with-
stand the pressure, and such a scene of distress,
confusion, and dismay, was never before witnessed
in this then unhappy country.—(Hear.)—But the
Government saw that the time was not yet arrived,
they relented at the sight and protracted the day of
settlement for two or three years. When 1819
came, it was carried into full effect. That year,
which must ever be memorable in the history of the
country, was, it cannot be doubted, the period of
the commencement of our misfortunes, and, I fear,
that from it we may have to date the commence-
ment of our decline. But, I contend, that the mea-
sure of 1819, was undertaken without due reference
to the depreciation that had existed during the
paper currency, when we undertook to pay the
national creditor to the full extent of his demands,
according to the original standard of value, by
which act the burthens of the country were increased
from 25 to 30 per cent. upon the principal of the
debt, and the interest thereof in the same propor-
tion, which interest can alone be paid by the taxes.
might stop to refer to authorities ; but I speak
before a large and intelligent audience, who must
recollect the circumstance of those times; and if I
err, I only ask to be contradicted, and, I believe, I
shall be able to prove the strict correctness of every
statement I make.—(Hear.)—Such being the case,
only consider what was then done. One per cent.
upon a debt of 800 millions, amounts to eight mil-
lions, and by taking it at 25 times that amount or a
full quarter, it follows 200 millions were at one stroke
of the pen, added to our national burthens I It may
be asked how that could be done by the Legisla-
ture ? 1 believe it was done through inadvertence of
the truth. The House was misled by the reasoning
of a most ingenious man, Mr. Ricardo, who, mea-
suring the depreciation of the currency by the value
of gold alone, spread upon an average of years, com-
mitted that error—an error which he lived to repent
and acknowledge ; for with the candour which is ever
the accompaniment of superior talent, he afterwards
confessed he had been wrong in his facts, that the
depreciation might have amounted to 10 per cent.,
and perhaps to more, and that he could not himself
place reliance upon the calculation which led him to
believe that the difference created by the resump-
tion of cash payments would not be more than 3 or
4 per cent. After the Act in 1819, let us look to
the history of the country, when the measure began
to be felt. Three years afterwards, in 1822, the
price of corn fell down to an average of 435. per
quarter; and the distress caused by the unmitigated
pressure of the Bill of 1819, was then so general,
so intense, and so dreadful, that Ministers were
again forced to concede to the demands and necessi-
ties of the people, and the late Marquis of London-
derry came down to the House of Commons with
the Small Note Act, by which the means of the
country were expanded, and it recovered by the
spring of a moment. I wish it had made a wiser
use of the prosperity which succeeded. From that
period until 1825, tinder the stimulus given by the
Small Note Act, to the affairs of the country, a
transient gleam of prosperity enlivened the annals of
the nation.—(Applause.)—But the country, unfor-
tunately, made bad use of it. It seemed as if a
periodical mania had come over us.—(Hear.)—
Schemes of the wildest and most chimerical nature
were proposed by designing and crafty men to gull the
community, who swallowed the bait, and awoke with
the hook in their mouths. In the unrivalled lan-
guage of Mr. Canning, " Projects the most absurd
and visionary had only to be stated, to glitter like
ephemerae in the beams of the rising sun, and sink
with the dews of the evening. A puff of vapour
sent them waving to the skies, the puncture of a
pin brought them down again to the earth."—
(Cheers.)—The consequence was, that a consider-
able overtrading occurred ; fraudulent and unsound
transactions took place between this country and
other nations of the world, and the fabric which had
been reared by the measures of 1822 was destroyed in
a few weeks by the panic of 182.5. That panic has
been doubly disadvantageous, for it caused greater
dangers to be attributed to a small paper currency,
convertible on demand, than I think that currency
deserves ; for if we appeal to history 100 years
back a period long before the idea of 11, notes had
ever entered into the imagination of the most in-
genious financier—l mean the reign of George
the Second, the epoch of the South Sea scheme,
we perceive that by the bursting of that famous
bubble private ruin was equally extensive, public
credit as much impaired, and individual dishonesty of
persons in high station was much more scandalous
and discreditable to the country. I only mention
this to shew that frauds of this kind, and panics of
this nature, can take place without a small paper
currency. However, in 1825, the Administration
got a fright, and in consequence determined, cost
what it might, to prevent the possibility of a panic
being again effected by the holders of 11. notes. A
cry, and a most unjust one, was raised against the
country bankers, because, when, we came to settle
accounts, it was shewu that nothing but the most
extraordinary want of contideuce ever known could
have caused the confusion in private banking houses
which prevailed at that period for I believe that

•
the tititiKert naving learnt a lesson from the events
which followed the termination of the war, had so
guarded their issues, that though great difficulties
did exist, and fuel was added to the flame by the
failure of some, yet that few, or none of them,
should, in accordance with the principles usually
acted upon in trade, have stopped payment, since
out of 60 that failed, 50 have paid 20s. in the pound,
and the remainder are clearing off, in the best way
they can, the demands upon them. Now, this provee
that the most of those bankers had sufficient assets,
and that it was only from the suddenness of the call
made upon them that their failure was occasioned.
After saying thus much in favour of the country
bankers, I have only one circumstance to add—that
it is by no means clear, that a regulated paper cur-
rency may not exist under a better system of bank-
ing than that which now exists in this country.
And I may say that no county in England has more
reason to be proud of the stability and beneficial in-
fluence of its banks than this ; and no county has suf-
fered more inconvenience by the results of the mea-
sure of 1828, which withdrew from us the assistance
we received from a small paper currency. But
when Ministers brought forward the Bill of 1828,
what a singular anomaly was there in their proceed-
ings 1 If I go forty miles north, and pass a river, or, in
some places, an imaginary boundary which I can
step over, there I find small notes circulating freely,
upon a footing of perfect security, and of such ac-
knowledged benefit, that the Government declined
to interfere; and now, strange to say, at this very time,
when they attempt to represent the public distress
as only partial in its existence, that very Chancellor
of the Exchequer who brought forward the measure
for the suppression of the small paper currency,
which alone acted in mitigation of the measure of
1819, states that Scotland and Ireland form grati-
fying exceptions to the general prevalence of diffi-
culty and privation, and the statement is confirmed
by the Scottish and Irish Members—and Ireland
and Scotland still possess that small paper currency
of which England is deprived.—(Cheers.)—l do
contend, that these circumstances justify me in
thinking that this county ought to state the truth
to the Government and the Legislature, in respect-
ful, moderate, and temperate language ; because I
think that if inquiry into the causes of the distress,
or relaxation in the rigorous system which Ministers
are determined to carry into effect are to be obtained
by the concurrent demands of such meetings as this,
in opposition to the influence of the Annuitants, the
Fund-holders, and the Tax-eaters, those blood-suck-
ers of the state, as the great Lord Chatham called
them.—(Cheers.)---In order that:every one here may
be able to follow me with clearness through this dif-
ficult subject, I will with the view of making it
more intelligible address you in a figure which no
man, who can count ten on his fingers, can well
misunderstand. I know there is a difficulty, to those
who have not had the means of studying the ques-
tion, in ascertaining clearly what is meant by the
depreciation of paper. But suppose, that there
was no such thing as paper, and that we were living
under all the blessings of a pure metallic currency—
that we had nothing but coin; and suppose it should
please the Government, for some reason or other,
to debase that coin, (and such expedients have been
resorted to by the worst of Governments at differ-
ent periods of the world,) to convert every two
sovereigns into three, by a mixture of alloy. Well,
for every one hundred sovereigns, one hundred and
fifty would be brought into circulation by the change.
What would be the effect ? The effect, for a time,
would be very satisfactory—we should have a vast
quantity of money amongst us, and the country
would be in the situation described by Hume, when
speculation would display new activity, profits and
wages of all kinds would be high, and every one
would appear to be a vast deal richer; and last of
all the public creditor, who now received forty-eight
millions of pure gold would be defrauded of pre-
cisely one-third, taxes would be diminished accord-
ing to the same rate, and we should go on all very
well for some time. We may suppose too that
Parliament should pass a formal resolution (inscribed
upon the parliamentary records), that in public esti-
mation such debased coin was equal to what it was
before, which would be calculated to convey an im-
pression that it really was so. Suppose then, that
under these circumstances, and fortified by that re- •
solution, an individual, suppose a farmer, shall bor-
row a 1000!. to lay out upon his land, giving his
bond for the sum at five per cent. interest. He ex-
pends the money, and thinks he has made a very
good speculation. He gets 10 per cent. for the
10001., and makes 100/. a-year. He pays the
holder of his bond .50/. per annum, and the remain-
ing 501. goes to supply his own wants; and to main-
tain him "in that situation unto which it has pleased .
God to place him." Well, some years afterwards,
the Government thinks it right to rescind its former
resolution, to recall the debased currency, coin it
back again, and restore the original standard. What
would then be the consequence ? Why, the coin
would fall to the same level as before the debase-
ment ; and the country, instead of being rich, would
be instantly transformed to a state which Hume has,
per contra, described,—manufactures would be im-
peded or destroyed—the operations of agriculture
would be checked, and wages and profits of all sorts
would be diminished to the lowest limits. And
what would happen to our friend with the 1,0001. ?
He had agreed to pay principal and interest accord-
ing to the terms of his bond. The principal.is im-
mediately raised by that re-coinage to 1,500!. in-
stead of 1,0001., and the interest to be paid upon
it is in like manner, raised to 751. instead of 501.,
while, from the full of yrofits, and the impossibility
of finding a market for his produce, his means are
decreased in the same proportion, so that instead of
making 100/. as lie did before, be could not make
75/. That man would be felled to the earth by the
blow—the creditor would foreclose upon him, and
it must be quite evident to you that no man who
had borrowed money under such circumstances,
would be able to repay it. Now, open your eyes.
The nation is in the situation of that individual,
though perhaps not to the same extent. The nation
has borrowed 800 millions, in a depreciated currency, •
and taxes had to be raised to pay the interest of the
debt increased, according to this calculation to the
value of 1200 millions. In consequence of this, as
I stated in my original address to this county, the
county is now suffering under unexampled distress,
and I have no hesitation in ascribing it in a great
degree to the operation of Mr. Peel's Bill, unmiti-
gated by any small-note circulation in any, part of
the kingdom. But though I can explain to you the
causes of our present distress, it is much more diffi•
cult to apply satisfactory remedies. I know the ,t.
country is in this state—and I know that, as we
have heard to-day, the Act of 1819 must be adhered
to, " for richer for poorek," to a certain extent. But
I do not conceive that because we are bound to
abide by it to that extent that we are to be precluded .
from endeavouring to obtain those palliatives which
are calculated to relieve us froth our distress. And
believing that it is only by the application of those pal-
liatives,and by the nation enjoying that wonderful per-
fection in mechanical arts which confer upon it advan-
tages such as no other country under heaven ever pos.
sessed, that she can be enabled to struggle through her
difficulties, and maintain her position amongst the
nations of the.world, I conceive I was perfectly jus-
tified in presuming to call the attention of this county
to the present critical situation of the country. In
the year 1819, a petition was presented to the
House of Lords, the terms of which are so precisely
adapted to the state.of our affairs at this moment,
that it is surprising to think how that which was
then a prophecy should assimilate so exactly with
our present condition. And whom do you think that
petition was presented from 2—(A laugh, and cry of
" Cobbett.”) No, from the merchants, bankers,
and traders of the city of London. But it was ne-
glected by the Legislature. It cautioned them, that
the bill would augment the burthen of the national
debt, that it would increase the pressure of taxation, ,
lower the value of all landed and commercial pro-
perty, seriously affect public and private credit, em-
barrass the operations of commerce, agriculture, and
manufactures, and throw out of employment st great
pdrtion of the labouring population of the country.

11littil,
ill the

such t
tags t
Never
long
gold
the ea
agricu
who i

uoluti(
elated
to be
The n

over-r
but c

too ml
stilt)]
termir

Vere ii

blues

diture,
be dot
ttt bot
mere',
our ni
these

monst

ever e

never

went
tary f
the pr
I al wa
bected
and w
of the
Cotnn

conser
those

recejy
and r,
mestsu
mice.
the pr
igencit
(Appi,
author.
the 41,

mos
this et]
raised
and ti
BpeaKi

the teat,
and
the ne,
smarted
whom
like aut
fore tak