The Sun.
London, England, 1839-02-06 00:00:00

Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I aided a qualification:—(Hear.)

Sir ROBERT PEEL—Then ;the Noble Lord admits the ne-
cessity of a qualification ? In the event of a fire taking place and
a mill bring burnt down, instead of rendering assistance to the,
mill-owner, it was said you have duties also to perform..—
(Loud cheering from the Opposition benches, which pre-
vented our hearing the• close of the sentence.) Although
the sentiment may be just, and although no man may call it in
question, although it may be a truism, the unseasonable admission"
of truth in times of great public excitement, may be extremely
dangerous.—(Cries of " Oh.") I regret that the Noble Lord did
add a qualification, it was most unfortunate in the excitable state of
the public mind at that period, that the qualification had not equal
publicity.—(Loud cries of " Hear,_ hear.") Now, as to the amend-
ment of the Honourable Member for Finsbury, the Honourable
Gentleman anticipates that it would be impossible for this side of
the House to assent to it, and I certainly for one will give a cordial
vote against it. But with respect to the first portion of the amend-
ment—that the measure of 1832 had disappointed the expectations
of her Majesty's people—as the Hon. Gentleman and others on that
side of the House are such good judges of the disappointment that
has taken place, I will defer to that authority most readily—(Cheers)
—and as 1 prophesied that disappointment would be the result, I cer-
tainly do not dissent from that part of the amendment. I did dissent
from the measure ; I told—you all the English people in the mass
were not deceived—that they did not place too much confidence on
the legislative power .of a new Parliament to redress their griev.
ances—l told you that you overrated the extent to which
" Many a gem of purest ray serene

The dark unfathomed eaves"
of the reformed Parliament would turn up.—(Great laughter.) I did
not suppoze that " a phalanx of able and eloquent men," who had
been hitherto languishing in obscurity would be brought before the
public.—(Hear, hear.) Supposing I had prophesied in 1830, when
you drove me from power—when you made me responsible for every
fire that took place—when you teed me that public discontent
could not exist without there being evident indications of mist
government—that the people would not complain without good
reason, and that the existence of dissatisfaction, and the prevalence
of crime, were proofs of the bad legislation of those who held the
reins of power.—(Hear, hear.) Suppose I had said at that time,—
" Yes, but you have not two Conventions sitting then as there now
are."—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Suppose I had raid. " You
will have the same fires and the same • outrages in 1838, making
every allowance fur the excitement in France." I do
not consider., as regards the prevalence of excitements, you are
at the present moment in a better condition. If I had said that this
measure you are clamouring for—of the Bill, the whole Bill, and
nothing but the Bill—if I had said, you that arc calling for this, and
who will neither permit abatement nor addition to it—if, whatever
you may think of its finality now, you then hold it to be. the second
charter of public liberty—if I had said, in 183,8 you will be cla.
mourous for a reform of this measure as you now are, and that it
disappoints the public expectation, and that you must be dragged
upon the wheels of 'that which is ever to be stationary—(Laughter)
it would not have been received with the good-humoured laughter
with which you now greet it; hut with a scowl of indignation, at
throwing any doubt upon the introduction of more popular opinions
into the British Constitution.—(Hear.) I should have been de-
nounced as a false prophet. I should be told that there would be
nothing but perfect satisfaction under the new Parliament—under
the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill.—(Cries of
" Hear, hear.") It would have been said, these arc the preju.
diced . views of a Tory, who clings to ancient abuses,
and who will not look on the bright day that is new approaching.—
(Hear, hear.) It may be asked, why then do yolf support this Bill,
which according to you is deserving of reprobation, and has been
productive of disappointment ? Because I take warning from expe-
rience, and because I find it has not produced satisfaction—because
I know that a demand for further Reform in the expectation of
producing satisfaction or finality, would be only. aggravating
the disappointment, and that in five years more, after hav-
ing extended the Suffrage to four millions of people, you
would come again and say you have only given us Household
Suffrage, when you should have given us Universal Suffrage.—
(Tory cheers.) You will argue, it is quite clear that whoever con-
tributes by his labour to taxation, is entitled to a vote. lam so con-
fident, according to the Hon. Geutletnan's own showing, that if all
men are slaves who are not en!itled to exercise the electivo franchise
_-(Hear, hear, from Mr. Duncombe)—that nothing short of
Universal Suffrage in its most unlimited degree will satisfy
you. Why should it be limited to the age of twenty-one ? _ Why
have any limitation as to age, as in the case of the militia ? Thus
you will go infusing popular principles into the Constitution until it
ceases to be a Monarchy, and then, when you were suffering under
the bitter experiences of the change, you will perhaps tell me that
"you were not a false prophet. Would to God that we had continued
under the old standard of our ancient institutions I"—(Loud cheers.)

Mr. VI LLI ERS said nothing could be mqie satisfactory to the party
called the Chartists than • the course which the debate had taken
from the mover of the Address down to the close of the Right Hon.
Baronet's speech—nothing could be more disheartening to those who
recommended moderation to the Chartists, and implored them to
wait and sec what the Legislature would do. He regretted to find
that the landed aristocracy had, early in the debate, declared their
intention of maintaining the monopoly, and that the Right Hon:
Baronet, seeing the intensity- of feeling throughont the country
concerning .that 'monstrous monopoly of the Corn-laws, had,
as the leeder of the other side of the House, again re-
newed his opinions on that subject.—(Hear, bear.) He confessed
he , had been much disappointed at the Right Hon. Baronet's
address. He thought there would have been some allusion to the
topics which were now agitating the country. Instead of that they
had had a long disquisition respecting the rights and interests of
Runjeet Singh, and Shah Shooja, and Kam Ram.—(Laughter.) And
then a little further on we have had a lecture, because. the country
has not sympathised with the party who represents the British people
in Upper Canada; and when at last they hail expected to.hear the
Right Hon. Baronet's opinions upon the domestic concerns of the
country, there could be but one feeling of astonishment and dis-
approbatimi. Next, when they found that he had taken up the
miserable and fallaciaus statements of the Hon. Member for Kendal.—
Laughter, and loud cheering from the Opposition benches)—he
could not help thinking that such a course was unworthy the Right
Hon. Bart. The Right Hon. Gentleman must have seen through
the fallacy of thoso statements.—(Much laughter.) Those very
statements had been so frequently refuted that it was not considered
worth the while of any person to argue against them. The allusion
made by the Hon. Member to the state of our experts would lead
kersops to conclude that our trade was flourishing. These arguments
seemed to have been put forward by parties who wished to deny the
fact, that in consequence of the injurious operation of the Corn-laws
our foreign trade was in danger. The statement, as put for-
ward by the Hon. Member, certainly tended to produco that effect
'upon the other side of the House. He heard that cheer, and he
saw by the manner in which it was received, that that was the
effect produced.—(Loud cheering from the Opposition Benches.)
Honourable Gentlemen still appeared confident that such
was the effect of the Honourable Member's statements ;
the fact was, that their trade was injured in the foreign market, in
consequence of the difference of price of provipions in the case of
all articles requiring manual labour; they were gradually losing
their trade in these articles, but in those produced by machinery
they still retained their superiority; and although the export of
such articles might have increased, those produced by manual labour
had I,een gradually decreasing for some years past.—(Hear.) It was
farther well known that their machinery was being exported, and,
in consequence of the advantage held out by the difference in the
cost of living, that artizans were leaving the country, and be-
coming their competitors in a foreign market —(Hear, hear.) He
assured Hon- Members that these statements were well worthy the
consideration of the House, and there was nothing
,inconsistent in
them with the statements, made by the Hon. Member of a trifling
excess of the exports (ascertained from documents not yet before
them) over the average of the last four years. The Hon. Member did
not tell them, however, what increase there was in the goods
which this country had formerly exclusively supplied to the fo.
reign market, nor had he pointed out the increase in the population
of the Colonies and of Europe within the same period. It was a fact
that the markets formerly supplied by England were now sup-
plying themselves—they were making gradual progress in these
manufactures—they were producing these articles cheaper than us, and
they would beat us in the foreign market. He contended that the Hon.
Member for Kendal should have stated those facts fairly instead of
putting them forward in such a way'as to produce the very opposite
effect.—(Hear, hear.) He was glad to see that effect produced,
because it favoured the motion of which he had given notice, that
evidence should be heard at the bar of the House.—(Cheers.) He
owned that seeing the disposition of the House upon that great
and interesting subject, and after having heard he must say
the latter uncalled for declaration of the two. Honour.
able Members for Lincoln, he was disposed to vote
for the amendment of the Honourable Member for Finsbury. Al-
though he had some doubt as to the expediency of bringing forward
the question at the present time, yet seeing the disposition of the
present House, and the speeches and unqualified declarations that
had been made.upon this question, he felt no hesitation in voting
for the amendment of the Hon. Gentleman.—(Cheers.)
Mr. G. W. WOOD after the very pointed" llusion that had bean
made to him by the Hon. Baronet opposite, and after the allusion
that had been made to his statements by the Hon. Member for
Wolverhampten, hoped he would be allowed to explain. There was
nothing inconsistent in his statements with the propriety and ;tem-
sity of a great change in the Corn-laws.—(Cries of " Oh.")
Lord J. RUSSELL.—With reference to the many important
topics in the Speech of her Majesty, and the important question
brought forward tonight, which do not form part of that Speech, I
feel that I shall have so many occasions of addressing myself to these
subjects when they are brought under the consideration of the House,
that I do not deem it necessary to do more than give that explanation,
which may be fairly called for in respect of some points.
touched on by the Right Honourable Gentleman opposite
and the other Hon. Members who have spoken upon the Speech from
the Throne. The Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, in allud-
ing to the affairs of Belgium, seems to suppose that a great oppression
and injustice was about to be committdd by the great Powers of
Europe, because something which had been held for a few years by
the King of the Belgians, was proposed to form part of the territory
of the Netherlands ; but, according to the laws of Europe, these territo-
ries did form a portion of the Netherlands, and when it was proposed to
constitute the kingdom of Belgium, the King of the Belgians and the
King of the Netherlands consented to an arrangement by which one
portion should form part of the Netherlands and the other a part of
the German Confederation. He could not therefore think
that there was any injustice to the inhabitants of those
territories, whom he did not believe to be in a state of
hostility to the Government of the King of the Netherlands.
I'must say, however, on the other hand, that if by the intervention
of the great Powers of Europe the revolution in Belgium, which at
first threatened the dissolution of the alliances of Europe, and the
abrupt termination of the Treaty of Vienna, was put. a stop to,
there/ is much upon which this country has to congratulate
itself. The Right Honourable Gentleman at the commence-
ment alluded to the affairs of India—a subject which is pecu-
liarly difficult to treat on the subject of an Address; but with
respect to that I must say that the Right Honourable Gentle-
man did not give a correct view of the case when ho stated
that extension of empire was the object the Indian Government had
in view. The differences that had arisen had taken place, in conse.
quence of the acts of the Sovereign of Persia, and the course that
has been proposed was not with any wish to extend the territories
of this country, but to protect those from aggressions who were en-
titled to that protection. The passage in the Speech is completely in
accordance with the proclamation of the Governor-General of India,
and if our decision in that respect is wrong, Fhave only to say that
it was not come to without great discussion and deliberation.—
(Hear, hear.) The Right Honourable Gentleman has alluded to the
affairs of Canada, and I am very glad that be has laid great stress
upon that part, in which her Majesty declares that she would main-
tain the authority of her Crown.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon.
Baronet stated that the Address in answer to the Speech was to be
looked to as amounting to nothing. It is true that upon certain
topics it was not expected that the House would express any
opinion, but upon a question like the present, whether the House
was prepared to maintain the authority of her Majesty in7Canada,
I think we have a right to expect a declaration of the opinion of the

House, in accordance with the Address we propoie. ft is a subject
with respect to which the House cannot be taken by surPrise. It if
a question upon which the mind of every one must have been extt
cised for the last two years. It is a question whether it is prudent or
wise, or honourable and right, to stand by those subjects in Canada
who have hitherto, at their own cost, defended the authority of
her Majesty, or whether we should abanion them. I think upon,
this question we are entitled to ask the opinion of the House,
and upon this we say, the honour, no less than the interests of the
Crown, require that we should defend those possessions, against all
encroachment and aggression. The expense of that defence, great
or small, we, the Ministers of the Crown, are ready to incur, rather
than do that which we think would be injurious to this country as
an empire, sink her character in the scale_ of nations, and be a posi.
tive dishonour to the Crosse of England. - The Right Honourable
Gentleman has commented upon that part of the Speech
which alludes to the conduct of the President of the
United States. I should have been glad if we could have advised her
Majesty that the exertions of that Officer had been attended with
success, and that his call upon the people of that country to prevent
aggression had been responded to; but 1 think it is impossible, re-
ferring to the account with respect to Canada, and referring to the
accounts given by the officers of the United States themselves, it is
impossible to say that the efforts of the President have been attended
with the effects which they have deserved. I believe that every-
thing has been done by the President of the United States
that could be, but the people of that country are so jealous of put.
ting authority in the hands of the Executive, that they will run any
risk sooner than do so. I certainly think it would be desirable that
the authority of the President should be increased in that respect. The
Right Hon. Gentleman has alluded to the latter part of the Address,
and also to certain speeches purporting to have been delivered in dif-
ferent parts of the country, and deprecated the latitude we
have given to discussions of that mature.— (Cries of " hear.")
It always has been the policy of the present Government
not to check free discussion, because we believe in doing so,
no violation of the law would be committed. Free discussion, in
my opinion, ought to be enjoyed by every one, and I thought with
respect to the Poor-laws, as they were incapable of being misrepre-
sented, that the utmost latitude ought to be given with respect to
their discussion. But, Sir, when attempts were made to
abuse that liberty, by -exciting the people to use physical vio.
knee, and to employ arms in order to injure those who
were obeying the laws, I no sooner found that was the case
than I consulted the Law Officers of the Crown with respect to
the proceedings, and I certainly should have considered myself very
imprudent if I had acted contrary to the opinion of the Law Officers
of the Crown. In all the steps I have taken, whether in forbearing to
prosecute, or in instituting prosecutions, I have acted after consulting
them, and in compliance with their advice. Sir, thereare topics not con-
nected with the Speech from the Throne, which have been the subject
of discussion to-night, I will allude very shortly indeed to one of
them. I mean the subject of the Corn-laws. I certainly was of
opinion in 1828, that a moderate fixed duty would be better than
' the fluctuating scale then adopted, but I did see. that the law then
adopted was a great improvement on the one that before existed,
and, therefore, I very readily gave it-my assent.—(Hear, hear.)
I do certainly think it is time to consider whether that law
has answered :ts object, and whether any change wi❑ be generally
beneficial to the country ?-- (Cheers.) I stn not prepared now to
enter into the discussion, but I think that much is due 'to those re-
spectable parties who have been advocates for a change in the law
(I will nut say by taking evidence at the bar of the House), that
this House should give the most patient attention to all the
facts they can bring forward, and not let it be said that
this House Iris . decided against an alteration in the law
regarding interests that concern the people at large.—(Hear,
hear, hear.) Sir, there is another subject which has
been made the topic of amendment—a subject which was introduced
in the same manlier last year by the colleague of the Hon. Member
who now proposes it. The Hon. Gentleman proposes a great
change in our constitution, similar to that proposed last year
although I must say his colleague did not introduce that acrimony
into his speech which he has thought fit to introduce this night.
But, Sir, I do not think it necessary either to follow him through the
different arguments he urged, nor do I think it necessary to urge at
large the proposals he makos. I did cheer the Honourable
Gentleman when he said he did not think it right to bring
forward details, because I thought that word details
was a singular word to use with regard to the course lie
was adopting. It was not that I wished to ask the Hon. Gentleman
to go into a lengthened detail of the different provisions Of the mea-
sures he proposed, but that he should give some notion of the nature
of it—whether we are to have Household Suffrage, or something be-
yond Household Suffrage, or the Charter and Universal Suffrage—
that he should give us some hint of what his proposal was, would
be no more, I think, than a reasonable request.—(Loud cries of
" Hear, hear," and cheers) But as he has not done that, I
can only say, that if he or any other Hon. Member will propose the
repealing of the Reform Bill, with a view to substitute a different
kind of representation of his own, I will then enter • into the whole
subject of the Reform Act. I will then state the grounds and the
principles on which it rested, and the grounds on which I think it
should rest now, not merely from a dislike of change, (although
a dislike of perpetual change is a natural ground of objec-
tion), but because I am ready to maintain the principles
of that Act—(lleer, hear.) Why, Sir, it seems a surprise to many
Gentlemen, and it gives. some triumph to Honourable Gentlemen op-
posite, that Honourable Members should dislike the Reform Act;
but to me it is not either surprise or disappointment, because, in
fact, that was the opinion they entertained at the time the Reform
Bill was brought forward. There were those who proposed the
Reform Bill, as my Lord Grey and my Lord Spencer did, as
a permanent settlement of the question—they repeated over
and over again in the other House and in this House of
Parliament, that they wished to have a permanent settlement
of that great question. There were those ivho opposed it as a
dangerous innovation; but there was a third class who said, " We
accept this, but we accept it only as an instalment.—(Cheers.) s
" Others m consider it as is great measure, we do not consider it
goes far enough, and thererore we will support it, bet with the view
of afterwards introducing further changes in the representation."—
(Hear, hear.) Why, Sir, is it any matter of surprise, or any matter
of disappointment to any one, that those persons should now come
forward and say they wish for further alteration. I admit it is
quite consistent for them to do so-1 admit that I should be blameable
myself if I were to take that course; but they did not conceal at
the time their wish for a greater change, and I do not find fault with
them for now proposing it, for I do say the friends and movers of
the Reform Bill can feel neither surprise nor disappointment, and
they can by no means say that they themselves are now disappointed
when eight years ago they were determined they would be
disappointed.—(Hear, hear, hear) Even .nay Hon. Friend the
Member for Thetford introduced a motion relating to Universal
Suffrage, and the llon. Member for Dublin supported the
motion. Can I be surprised that those who then
entertained such opinions, should now entertain opinions of the same
kind. But the Hon. Gentleman gets rid of many of the difficulties
of the question by only asking for a change, and not telling us what
change he wishes. Does he propose to divide the country into dis-
tricts, and that each district shall return one Member ? I think
Met is the plan the Chartists have put forward. The Ho-
nourable Member speaks of nomination now, but I think he
would have more cause to speak of 'domination then. It
might be sold that a Member was returned solely by
the influence of some great proprietor in the neighbourhood; and
does not every one know that that might be the case ? And do we
not see, theretbre, that those who propose these vast changes look to
changes in the property of the country also?—(Loud cheers.)
They seek to divide the property of the country into smaller divi.
sions, that there may be ncrpretext for saying certain persons have the
predominating influence, but they do look forward for other changes.
Sir, I have been blamed I know both in this house and out of this
House for the declaration I made last year, I must beg to call to the
recollection of the Ifeuse the circumstances under whirls that decla-
ration was made. I beg pardon for troubling the House on this sub-
ject, but really that speech and my conduct has been the subject of
attack during the whole of the recess, and I have had no means of
giving an answer to it. Perhaps I may now be permitted to advert
to that subject. The Hon. Member for Kilkenny called for some
declaration of the 'Government. He said—See what was done by the
Right Hon. Member for Tatnworth when he was in office. He
told you how far he would go. He said he would adopt certain
reforms, he told us how far he would go, and, said the Hon. Member
for Kilkenny, can't you tell us how far you mean to go, and where
you mean to stop. In order to answer that call, I made the deslara.
hots that has so often been alluded to; and was it an uncalled-for
declaration, when such were the opinions expressed by the sup-
porters of Ministers. Should I not have done wrong if I had given
any one reason to suppose we were about to propose or support mea.
sures to which we were adverse, and to which we meant to give our
opposition ? and let me ask if I had then said, even as the Hon.
Member for Kilkenny proposed, that we meant to support the Ballot,
does any one believe that the support of the Ballot alone, without
the support of those farther measures of what are called a transition
state, and progressive reform, and alterations of franchise, would
have been satisfactory to those who are the friends of reform ? and
if that was not satisfactory do you think I should have given satis-
faction if I hail sa'd the Ballot was to be an open question ?—(Hear,
and cheers.) I)oes anybody think that would have been a wise and
just course for the Government to pursue ? For my own part I
believe it would not have given content to those who wish for further
change. I think, Sir, whatever dissatisfaction may have been caused
by that declaration of mine, that it was for the better to make that
declaration—(Hear, hear)—.and to let it be understood what the
policy of the Government was, than to let it be supposed that weshould
give half support to the Ballot, sotne encouragement to the Extension
of the Franchise, and some hope of a change in the duration of Par-
liaments, and thus In some degree tend to unsettle all that had been
settled, without proposing any new and rational plan on the subject.
Therefore, Sir, whatever dissatisfaction may have been caused by
that declaration, I do not, I confess, regret having made that
declaration., There are some expressions in that speech which
have been misrepresented in a way not only iejurious
to myself, but in some respects injurious to the House.
For instance, I am represented to have said it was the intention of
the Reform Bill to give the landed interest a preponderance in this
House. Now, what I refer to is a few words uttered 'at the end of
the discussion on the Reform Bile After the continual attacks made
on that Bill, I said that, so far from its being my opinion that it
would be the destruction of the landed interest, on the con-
trary it would give the preponderance to that interest.—
(Hear, hear) But was the Bill in that state when it
was going up on the third reading to the House of Lords, or the
second time it had been introduced into that House? \Vas it the
same Bill we had originally introduced ?—(Hear.) Had not some
great alterations beets made in it, particularly one by which all the
501. tenants at will were introduced into the constituency of the
counties ?-a(llear.) Lord Althorp, at that time, warned the House
of the consequences. He said they were persons whose votes would
generally be at the disposition of the landlord; and that the measure
would give immense power to the proprietors of the land. In spite '
of that objection of Lord Althorp, the House adopted that
proposition by a very large majority—(Hear)—and amongst
those who supported it were many Reformers, and if I am'not mis.
taken the Hon. Member for Kilkenny himself voted for it.—(Hear,
hear.) Because I, seeing the effect of that proposition, amongst
others, declared my opinion that the Reform Bill would give the
landed interest the preponderance, the Honourable Gentleman wrote
a public letter to his constituents, to accuse me of declaring it was
originally the intention of the Reform Bill to give this prepon-
derance.

Mr. HUME—If I said so, it was from the declaration of the
Noble Lord last year.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—It is very difficult to explain anything
to the Honourable Gentleman.—(Loud laughter.) He is con-
tinually making misrepresentations, bat it is very observable that
they are not intentional.—(Cheers and laughter.) I wish the Hon.
Gentlemen to understand there is a great difference between seeing
that the Reform Bill at the third reading in the House would give a
preponderance to the landed interest, from saying that it was origi-
nally the intention of the Reform Bill to give that preponderance.
—(Hear, hear) I know not if the Hon. Gentleman understands
me now.--(Laughter.) With respect to the orginal intention of the
Reform Bill, I am speaking now in the presence of the men who in.
troduced that Bill, and who were present at its formation, and I
think I should be corrected by them if it were not so, when I say
that the intention was to give a fair representation to all classes of
the community. There was no wish to give any undue
preponderance to one party rather than another. I more
than once stated to the House that we had taken a cer-
tain number of counties and an equal number of commercial
and manufacturing towns. I have thought. it necessary to state
this, because, although it was explained by my Hon. Friend the
Under Secretary of State shortly afterwards, this has been the stock
in trade of a great many who have attacked me on the declaration
made at the commencement of the last Session. I really do think it
is a proof that the declaration which I then made was not, after all,
at variance with the general sentiments of the country; it was my
opinion at the time I made that declaration that the opinion of the
majority of the people of this country would be against what is
called this progressive Reform of the Representationby leaving it un-
certain. It is my opinion that the general sense of the
country went with me when I made that declaration— that
they would rather (I do not say they would agree with me in my
conviction of the benefit of the Reform Bill generally, or that
greater 'may not be obtained by some other sort of representation)
but I do believe,oy
7ht ha
tai
dn
wog
,onobtained
lwould
mn oet fresh
ee
sbhe thatchangen efofirc mi
a totoof
mrepresentation
of
of
uhthna
et.
dictoautlisnotnrnotcountry
cg
eawnueiosrteahtleil
r alteration, and all to end, as appears in a plan 'for
Universal Sufftage. My Hon. Friend, the Member for Sheffield,
when speaking to his constituents, said that he would go three.
fourths of the way for Universal Su &age. This was a great concession
and one of his constituents said, if you wiil go three.fixarths of the
way, why not have a settlement, and admit the other fourth ? I

ant of the opinion of that interrogator—if I could lead my inind t
go three-foufths of the way, I would say, Let us have the Charter
dt onec—let us give Universal Suffrage at once; for what ever Its
petlb or dangers, it would be better than uncertainty and change
and fluctuation. In these opinions lam convinced the ttountrs,
coincides with me. The Government of this day thick it r ight to
stand by the declaration of Nord Grey and Lord Althorp. We are
not ashamed of being the followers of such men, and by they jr prin-
ciples we are contented to abide.—(Cheers.)
Mr. C. BULLER rose amidst loud cries of " Divide, ." and
" Question." He could _not
u l w
et the present opportunity • pan
without making a remark et
hat he deemed a si itlect
of peculiar interest. The most cautious abstinence that they
exhibited to.night respecting the affairs of Canada.—(Cries of" ( th.r,l
He thanked the House, not only on public but on private grei, ads:
be laid upea th
because nothing was more becoming gentlemen of honour and kir_
nem than to wait until the information should
table which would vindicate those Whose conduct must come um lee
r
the examination of the House. He di3
not shrink
teaatt te
he
could inquiry-
he had done no act which he was not pre:
,ared to defend—he courts
inquiry, and wished the moment for it to coke as
—(Cries of " Oh" from the Tories.) All he wiblicd to call th
1.
Lion of the House to, was this fact, that his arle Friend and Go-
vernor. General and High Commissioner--(Laui;.ter, and cries of
" Oh, oh," from the Tory side of the House)—he mtls.' say that
could not understand the courtesy or propriety of Gentlemen
interrupting him in that way. 'What he mettft ,t° bay
was, that his Noble Friend had discharged his duty ify ;nro:
posing what he believed a beneficial and satisfactory settlettea.•
of the affairs 'of Canada. That had been proposed in the Report
presented to her Majesty's Ministers, and all he wished to call
the attention of the House to was, that there had been no
negligence on the part of his Noble Friend, and to ex_
press his hope that the . Government would not long delay
giving the public an opportunity of judging %mons:the smatter.
He begged leave to say that the Government of the United St.."‘tca
had done as much as a Government could possibly do. That Go-
vernment had passed a neutral' law, and they had done more to
enforce it than we had done to enforce our neutral law. New
he thought we should not say that a State that had done
this had stone notbing but issue unmeaning words. The
Government of the United States was a free Government—it
had the virtnes and the vices of a free Government. Now he
supposed the Right Hon. Baronet did not wish to upset that Govern..
!tent ; if he slid not go that length, was it not their duty to get
the good opinion of the American people with us.—(Cries of
" Hear.") it had been exhibited in a most satisfactory manner
that the sympathy manifested last year had entirely ceased, that
those people who had invaded the Canadas had been a set of maurau-
ders, over whom no Government could have possibly a control. The
Right Hon. Baronet's Government had a good.feeling for Don Miguel,
but did they with all their good intentions prevent two vessels being
sent from England laden with arms and men to invade Portugal;
nor did they reach them until they had nearly gained their
destination. Now be must say that they ought not rashly to
blame America for the affairs of Canada. He would ray that the
conduct of the United States under the circumstances ought to be
generously acknowledged, and that those who disapproved of
it should not provoke their prejudice.—(Cries of " Question.")
He would say a few words on the motion of his Hon. Friend. He
was averse to supporting the amendment on an Address of a Govern-
ment to which he was not hostile. It was impossible for him. He
could not be supposed of taking an opportunity of opposing the
Government The principle is of great importance, whether the
Reform Bill shall go no farther. That the proposition of the
amendment, was not as stated by Lord John Russell, for the
purpose of cutting up the country into squares that would give a
preponderance in the elections as bad as the system followed before
the passing of the Reform Act. This was not at all shown by the
amendment of his Hon. Friend. His Hon. Friend only said that
the Reform Bill remained yet to be carried out, an opinion with
which he agreed.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw.
when there appeared—
For the Motion 1 '2 6'
For the Amendment Sd
Majority —34a
The House then adjourned.

The House divided,

CHARLES EDWARD STUART.

_ .
The following graphic description regarding the per..
sonal appearance, education, attachment, and bigotted.
obstinacy of this unfortunate Prince, is from Lord
Mahon's " History of England, from the Place of
Utrecht to the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle." The vita-
racter altogether is drawn with much impartiality, awl
exhibits in a strong light the faults and virtues of the
man who by his winning conversation, generosity, and
bravery, "so deeply stamped his image on the hearts of
the Scottish nation, that even thirty or forty years after
his departure his name always awakened the most ardent
praises from all who had known him—the most rugged
hearts were seen to melt at his remembran6e, and tears
to steal down the furrowed checks of the veteran."
With the exception of the attachment of the French
army to Bonaparte, there is, perhaps, no instance of such
devotion to a leader as that exemplified by the Scots to
the descendant of James VI., and even the case of Bo-
naparte can hardly be called an exception. The Prince
landed in the wilds of Moidart with only seven men, and
in a few months was all but master of the kingdom.
" The person of Charles (says Lord Mahon) was tall and
well formcd, his limbs athletic and active ; he excelled in
all manly exercises, and was inured to every kind of toil,
especially long marches on foot, having applied himself to
field sports in Italy, and became an excellent walker. His
face was strikingly handsome, of a perfect oval, and a fair
complexion ; his eyes light and blue, his features high and
noble."

With respect to his education, his Lordship says
that his tutor, Sir Thomas Sheridan, had certainly left
him uninstructed in the most common elements of knoiv-
ledge. His letters, found among the Stuart Papers,
are—

" Written in a large, rude, rambling hand, like a school..
boy's. In spelling they arc still more deficient; with him,
humour,' for example, becomes LINER ; the weapon be
knew so well how to wield is a SORE. ; and even his father's
name appears under the alias of Gasis. Nor are these errors
confined to a single language: who, to give another misno-
mcr of his French, would recognize a hunting knife in cool.°
Da CHAS. I can, therefore, readily believe, as Dr. King
assures ns, he knew very very little of the history or Con-
stitution of England."
ghat a contrast the following description affords to
the conduct of the blaod-thirsty Pretender to the
Spanish throne, in this civilized age 1.
" He could never be persuaded or provoked into adopting
any harsh measures of retaliation ; his extreme lenity to Ins
prisoners, even to such as had attempted his life, was, it
seems, a common matter of complaint among his troops;
and, even when encouragement had been given to his ass
sination, and a price put upon his head, he continued most
earnestly to urge that in no possible case should the Elec-
tor,' as he called his rival, suffer any personal injury or insult.
This anxiety was always present in his mind. Mr. Forsyth,
a gentleman whose description of Italy is far the best that has
appeared, and whose scrupulous accuracy and superior means
of information will be acknowledged by all travellers, relates
how, only a few years after the Scottish expedition, Charles,
relying on the faith of a single adherent, set out for London
in a humble disguise, and under the name of Smith. On
arriving there, he was introduced at midnight into a room
full of conspirators, whom he had never previously seen.
Here,' said his conductor, is the perscn you want,' and left
him locked up in the mysterious assembly. These were
men who imagined themselves equal, at the time, to treat.
with him for the throne of England. Dispose of me, Gen_
tlemen, as you please,' said Charles;' my life is in your power,.
and I. therefore, can stipulate for nothing. Yet give me, L
entreat, one solemn promise, that if the design should sue.
ceed, the present family shall be sent safely at &honourably-
home.'"
Notwithstanding all that the female sex had done anti
suffered for him, he appears to have had no favour..
able opinion of them, and in that resembles his ances-
tor, the Royal schoolmaster :
" Nevertheless, in 1772, at the age of fifty-two,- Charles
espoused a Roman Catholic, and a girl of twenty, Princess
Louisa of Stolberg. This union proved as unhappy asi
was ill assorted. Charles treated his young wife with very
little kindness. He appears, in fact, to have contracted a dis..
paraging opinion of her sex in general; and I have found,
in a paper of his writing about this period, As for men,l
have studied them closely ; and were I to live till
:fourscore,ffflpoerurgitnotti
I could scarcely know them better than now ; but as for
women, I have thought it useless, they being so much more
wicked and impenetrable.' Ungenerous and ungrateful.
words ! Surely, as he wrote them, the image of Flora Mac-
donald shouaoel
nd(ling affecting haver
debauchery,
ecrbei
as
eeuacncft
after
ennergr
yt
, histhe
et
othearthrbythe
battle
t restrainedtdalieinisodpourfsoav cndeushe i
siiotodfen suffering
s pen
int ion t'Twilieinactibtlhlw
friends he had left in Scotland :

" As a very young man, he determined that he would .
sooner submit to personal privation than embarrass his friends
by contracting debts. On returning from Scotland be told
the French Minister, d'Argenson, thathewould never ask
any thing for himself, but was ready to go down on his knees
to obtain favours for his brother exiles. Once, after 1
meriting some divisions and misconduct amongst his servant;,,
he declared that, nevertheless, an honest man is so highly
--7 cc;
be prized that, unless your Majesty orders me; iir
part with them with a sore heart.' Nay, more, as it appears
to me, this warm feeling of Charles for his unfortunate
friends survived almost alone, when, in his decline of
nearly every other noble quality bad been dimmed and de-
faced from his mind. In 1783, Mr. Greatbed, athpeenr,sotnhael.
friend of Mr. Fox, succeeded in obtaining an interview
with him at Rome. Being alone with him for sometime, the
English traveller studiously led the conversation to his en..
terprise in Scotland. The Prince showed some reluctance
to enter upon the subject, and seemed to suffer much pain at
the remembrance ; but Mr. Greathed, with more of curiosity
than of discretion, still persevered.
A
him his
ialipspecayreedbrtiogbetheinked, e whichohffistlifeacleoadatsslmngetd, h
oppressed
animation ; and be began the narrative of his Scottish cam...
paigns with a vehement energy of manner, recounting his
marches, his battles, his victories, and his defeat, his hair.
breadth escapes, and the inviolable and devoted attachment
of his Highland followers, and at length proceeding to the
dreadful penalties which so many of them had subsequently
undergone. But the recital of their sufferings appeared to
wound him far more deeply than his own : then, and not till
then, his fortitude forsook him, his voice faltered, his eye
became fixed, and he fell to the floor in convulsions. At
the noise, in rushed the Duchess of Albany, his illegitimate
daughter, who happened to be in the next apartment, „,
Sir,' she exclaimed to Mr. Greathed, ' What is this ? -
you most have been speaking to my father about Scotland
and the Highlanders ? No one dares to mention these Bub.
j:cts in his presence." '
If this singular personage had received a proper edu,
cation, cast off the trammels of Jesuits and Priests, and
consulted the general feelings of the British nation more
than his own high sense of prerogative, where might
have been the House of Brunswick now ?

BELL'S LIFE IN LONDON.—The pugilistic con,.
cat between Burke and Bendigo is fixed for Tuesday
Feb. 12. The full particulars will appear in Bell's Life
in London of the following Sunday. The publication3t
Beli's Life in London commences at 12 o'clock on Saturday
noon, at the Office, No. 170, Strand, by which early
,pub.
lication the Papers can be sent off by the Two o'clock
Saturday Afternoon Birmingham Railway train. The
price of Bell's Life in London is Fivepence only. To
avoid disappointment, Papers should be previously orderej,
through the newspaper agents.
NATIONAL RENT.--At a meeting of the
Committee appointed to collect tho above fund in this town_
held yesterday, they resolved to transmit the sum of /went
pounds to Messrs. Grote, the Bankers, as the first instals
moot of the amount contributed by the working roerw
Brighton. —Brighton Patriot.