The Sun.
London, England, 1837-12-14 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

Lord, I am a thorough Conservative," are words, the
weight of which is to be estimated rather by their cease-
less recurrence, than by the arch and innocent playful-
ness wherewith they are uttered. The gallant and sen-
sitive Minister has no more been kept in ignorance of
this feeling than he has been able to resist it ; and we
may add, secondly, that this loyal disposition of his
has received from the late elections all that was neces-
sary to bring it into immediate and active operation.
The constituencies of England have unequivocally de-
clared themselves in favour of a Conservative policy ;
and as during the time of William IV., the indica-
tions of such a disposition were not sufficiently deter-
minate to embolden this expediency-Cabinet to break
terms with their Radical allies, so the accession of
Queen Victoria, having been marked by a declaration
of public sentiment which admits of no uncertainty
whatever, has been distinguished by a partial fashion-
ing of Ministerial measures to the loudly-expressed
wishes of the country ; in other words, the Ministers
perceive that a change towards Conservatism affords
a better chance for their retention of office than an
adherence to revolutionary projects. Be this as it
may, it is certain that the double game thus played
by the Whigs has entirely lost them the confidence of
not a few of their Liberal adherents. Not to men-
tion the gathering at the Crown and Anchor, where
Roebuck, Leader, Elphinstone, Evans, Warburton,
and O'Connell vied with each other in the acri-
monious vituperation of the Government, whose
feet, nevertheless, they will still continue to lick, we
observe that Lord John Russell has just been ad-
dressed in a similar strain, in a pamphlet, entitled
A Voice from Stroud," whose author, a Mr.
Ginger Symon, rejoiceth, it seems, in the academical
distinction of B.A. Poor Lord John is really in a sad
plight. Having been justly expelled from Devonshire
on account of his unconstitutional liberalism, he is
now told by this same Mr. Ginger (a hottish condi-
ment to have to do with) that a similar fate awaits him
at Stroud, because he is not sufficiently revolutionary.
According to the numerals of this learned graduate,
who arraigns his representative in no measured terms,
an absolute majority of the Noble Lord's constituents
have signed a petition in favour of the Ballot ; and,
therefore (as among all the arts of which this gentle-
man is bachelor, the art of reasoning is evidently not
included), lie infers, somewhat precipitately we imagine,
that the electors' signatures to a pro-Ballot parchment
is equivalent to the dismissal of their anti-Ballot
Member. It is more than hinted, too, by the spicy
Symon, that between the Home Secretary's speeches
in Parliament, and those which he delivered on the
hustings, there is a very startling discrepancy. I-Tow
this may be, we know not ; but one thing is certain—
that, contemptible in many respects as this angry ba-
chelor is, the flaring up of such a firebrand in oppo-
sition to the noble fagot whom he seems bent upon con-
suming or putting out, is not only an additional evi-
dence of Lord John Russell's doomed condition
among all political parties, but if actively kept in flame
among the Stroud Radicals, must ao far to destroy any,
b
local popularity which his Lordship can still be sup-
posed to retain. To give any analysis of the merle in
which this provincial thresher applies his flail both to
the shoulders of his quondam favourite and to the insti-
tutions of the country, were
_to impose a burden upon
our readeis from which we shall considerately exempt
them. Besides adducing the usual common-places in fa-
vour of the Ballot, it is the humour of Mr. Ginger
Symon to lay claim to great originality for proposing an
extension of the Suffrage according to a qualification
which, repudiating that of property and differing from
the reading one of Bentham, is to consist solely in the
claimant's capacity to write his own name I Surely,
after so redouhted a display of political wisdom and
sobriety, no person aware of Lord Brougham's appe-
tite for novelties will be surprised to learn that the
Learned B iron has condescended to borrow or to pilfer
from such a source. But whether this be matter of
surprise or not, it is even so. In the development of
his Lordship's educational scheme, wherewith the
Ballot and an extension of the Suffrage were incon-
gruously mixed up, it was proposed that without
making the acceptance of a National Education abso-
lutely compulsory, some inducement to take advantage
of it ought to be provided, by entitling the recipients
of its benefits to certain pfivileges or distinctions of a
public kind ; in other words, his Lordship, following
in the wake of Mr. Ginger Symon, obviously means
that the privilege of voting for Parliamentary repre-
sentatives shall constitute the great national prize to
be conferred, irrespective of all other considerations,
on such adults as have learned to write in the Brougham
schools. Other points of resemblance between the
Bachelor and the Baron might be traced without dif-
ficulty. But enough. The changeful relations of
position and opinion subsisting among the faction of
whom Lord J. Russell, Mr. Symon, and Lord
Brougham are specimens respectively, are calculated
to make the country rejoice that the injurious influence
of such a faction is rapidly on the wane. By a
righteous retribution the duplicity of the Whigs in
having mystified and muffled their anti-Radical views,
is repaid with the contempt and distrust of a large
portion of their ultra-Liberal associates. On the
other hand, Lord Brougham, though making a hard
struggle of it to get his head above water,• is only
throwing up the bubbles which precede and indicate
his drowning. As for Mr. Ginger Symon, 8.A., and
such as he, let them rail and bluster to the top of their
bent. Our conviction is, that amidst the existing
quarrels and mutual criminations among the enemies
of the monarchy, the firm union which prevails among
its friends will, under Providence, give additional se-
curity to the Church and the Crown, and the other in-
stitutions of the country.—Times.
Though we have felt and expressed in no measured
terms our reprobation of the attack upon the three
great points of Reform, into which Lord John Russell
was betrayed by the inconsiderate motion of Mr.
Wakley on the Address, we cannot help observing
the magical effects it appears to have had upon the
ranks of the Opposition. Many of the country gen-
tlemen have been elected merely as " COnservatives,"
and this word meaning anything or nothing, enables
Hon. Members to act according to circumstances.
The speech of Lord John Russell took away from
those country gentlemen every pretext for opposing
the Government on merely Conservative principles, and
any opposition they might afterwards offer would be
viewed as " factious" and corrupt—not honest and sin-
cere. Sir R. Peel, who felt his incongruous partisans
dissolving from beneath his feet like snow in a thaw,
has been most anxious to fix them by their votes on
some division. Government, on the contrary, who are
equally well aware of the working of this speech, appear
to have been equally anxious to avoid divisions, and
were enabled to do so until the division on the Pension
List, when it appeared that the Ministerial majority
had already increased from 28 to 62, and we have rea-
son to believe that even the latter number is beneath
the actual majority agsinst the Tories. So far good
has arisen out of evil. No sensible man can doubt
that the Members of the Cabinet, one and all, are so
pledged to the people that each must feel that he would
commit political suicide were he to desert their cause,
and it would be a miracle of apostacy unparalleled in
all history to believe that the whole Cabinet could come
to such a decision in the teeth of their previous con-
duct, and to the ruin of their political consistency.
We trust much, therefore, to the public character of
such old Reformers as Lords Russell, Lansdowne,
Holland, and Howick, Mr. Poulett Thomson, and Sir
John Cam Hobhouse, with others, of whose patriot-
ism we can hare no doubt ; nevertheless we liked not
the speech, though its effects appear to be eminently
beneficial, and we understand will not at all prevent
very good votes being given by the individual Members
of the Government upon one of the most important
points desired by Reformers.—Morning Advertiser.

We have purposely abstained, up to the present
moment, from noticing the late speech of the Hon.
Member for Maidstone, lest it should be supposed
that we regarded it as a mere ephemeral display, when,
on the contrary, we rank it, without hesitation,
amongst the eternal monuments of that particular
school of eloquence to which it properly belongs. Mr.
Benjamin D'lsraeli's oration is not one of those pro-
ductions which we read with rapture at their first ap-
pearance, and then dismiss from our minds for ever.
Oratory is sometimes like philosophy, " a perpetual
feast of nectared sweets :" and certainly, if ever an
orator furnished an uncloying banquet of mirth
and entertainment, the praise may he assigned with
justice to " that young man eloquent," whom Maid-
stone (to that borough's immortal honour) has given
to the State. The difference between the oratory of
such speakers as Fox, Sheridan, or Grattan, and that
of Mr. D'lsraeli, may be said to consist merely in the
difference of the effect produced upon the audience—in
fact upon the difference, such as it is, between bursts
of applause and fits of laughter. Upon " the greatest-
happiness principle" we have no hesitation to give the
preference to the latter school. If to set a table in a
roar has always been considered a fine talent, we do
not see why the power of setting a house in a roar
should not cover its possessor with deathless glory. Mr.
Benjamin D'lsraeli's speech might correctly enough
be ferined a failure, were we to suppose that he aimed
at eliciting the cheers and acclamations of the House ;
bu.t the kinder hypothesis is that the effect which he
actually produced was that at which he aspired ; and,
if this be true, a more successful maiden oration was
never delivered in the British House of Commons, for
the appeal to the risibilities of the assembly was tri-
umphant beyond all precedent. Benjamin had cer-
tainly Benjamin's portion of the laughter of his audi-
ence. At the same time, perusing this remarkable
speech with all the attention due to so masterly a per-
formance, we think we are able to trace in one or two
passages an evident effort on the partof the orator
to draw forth that species of applause commonly
sought after by the speakers of the opposite school.
We would instance the passage in which Mr. D'ls-
raeli described " the hurried Hudson rushing into
the chambers of the Vatican," or that other still
grander burst in which he pourtrayed Lord John
Russell " wielding the keys of St. Peter." We
shrewdly suspect that the peals of loud and long-con-
tinued laughter which greeted ate delivery, and, in-
deed, prevented the completion of these passages,
were not precisely the demonstrations that were anti-
cipated, and we can figure to ourselves the orator's
surprise at so unlooked-for a reception.
" So baviee said, awhile he stood expecting
Their universal shout, ar.(l high applause,
To fill his ea,.; when, contrary, he hears
On all sides, from innumerabl:,
A universal laugh."
The modesty that characterises true genius was
never so beautifully illulrated as in the followiwy, itn-
morlal extract, which we n prig' with the exeressions
of feeling which it drew forth:—."
I i-t-Ind here to-nig•t, Sir, nut fern ally, but in some de-
gree virtually, the representat'ye of a considerable number of
IVlemb,rs of l'arliarnesit.—( Thus's of hnghter.) Now, why
smile ?—( Continued laurht,r.) Why en% yme?—( He, e the
laughter became lone and genrrol.) Why should I not li;ve a
tale to unfold to-night ?"—( .I?6ars of laughter.)
‘• Now, why smile ?" Mr. Bcnjainin D'lsraeli, with
maiden diffidence, calls all these bursts and roars of
laughter " smiles !" In his exces,,ive modesty he de-
scribes his triumphs as ovations. " Now, why smile ?"
asks Mr. Benjamin D'lsraeli. " Why envy me ?"
af.,ain exclaims the orator of Maidstone. " Why enve"
Mr. D'lsraeli ? What a question Who envies not, or
can help envying, the representative of representatives.
and the laughed at of all laughers—the successful
rival of Mr. Peter llorthw.ick in eloquence—the und:s-
pitted peer of Mr. Horace 'fwiss in statesmanship ?
Mark how philosophy extinguishes the vulgar feeling
of wonder in the peroration of this incomparable speech,
which needs a Quintilian to do it justice ! I am not at
all surprised, sir, at the reception which I have re-
ceived ! !"
" Let peals of laughter, Codrus, round thee break,
Thou-unconcerned canst hear the mighty crack ;
Whigs, Tories, Iladieals, in convulsions hurled,
Thou standst unslim,k amidst a bursting world."
The whole of this rare speech would make a valuable
addition to the " Curiosities of Literature," a new
eclitien of which we see announced by the booksellers.
That remarkable prophecy which terms the conclud-
ing sentence—" Ay, S;r, although I sit down, the time
will come NT lien you will hear me"—would furnish a
new and most interesting illustration of the chapter on
" Political Prediction." Mr. D'lsraeli's divination,
however, of his own future success in the House is
certainly not drawn from the source from which, ac-
cording to Thucydides, Themistocles, was wont to de-
rive his insight into futurity. Themistocles," says the
historian, "far surpassed all in his deductions of the
future from the past." We would humbly suggest to
Reform Association to publish the speech in question
in a cheap form : it cannot be circulated too widely.—
Morning Chronicle.
Why the Whigs should have selected this particular
juncture for making a demonstration against the three
favourite objects of Radicalism, is not a matter of cu-
rious speculation merely, bat, as thowing additional
light on their Ministerial character and position, is a
question of rule!) practical importance, These objects,
comprising the Ballot, Short Parliaments, and an ex-
tension of the electoral franchise, have been pressed
upon their aieention for some years ; and although they
have repeatedly declared their reasons for believing
that such measures were neither desired nor needed by
the country, yet lid ving in the same breath invariably
spoken of them ag " open to be brought forward in
Parliament, either by Government or by any individual
Member," they have thereby fostered a very general
impression that, far from being finally resolved upon
the'reoints in question, their minds were by no means
I()%seelosed against giving them a favourable conside-
ration. " I thought," said Lord John Russell,
" that it might hereafter appear that those principles
might be safely introduced, and I resolved to keep my
mind ready to watch the progress and course of events."
Nay, apart from this intimation, in which his Lord-
ship must be considered as only confirming what were
previously uuderstood to be the sentiments of his col-
leagues, the extreme surprise wherewith their recent
and determined denunciation of those " principles"
has been received by a large portion of the country, is
a sufficient proof that the contingent adoption of them
by the Whigs was very extensively, though in most
quarters very indignantly, reckoned on. Accordingly,
when the Noble Lord declared, a fortnight ago,
that if Parliament were disposed to support Mr.
Wakley's proposals, he at all events " must not be
expected to take a part in favour of any such mea-
sures," we could not but feel that to whatever
extent the said expectation existed, it had been
at least passively encouraged by these very Ministers
themselves, who, instead of having manfully announced
at an earlier period, their fl and final stand in
opposition to the Indica' ovulertures, had maintained
such a coy flirtation with them, distinguished alter-
nately by occasional caresses and tame resistance,
as induced a universal belief that sooner or later they
would abandon their equivocal hostility. Now, with-
out meaning to insinuate that the Whigs will adhere
to their recent anti-Radical protestations one moment
longer than their selfish interests may seem to require,
it is pretty clear, we think, that up to the opening of
this present Parliament they have been encouraging
a most unworthy and reprehensible delusion among
a large proportion of their supporters. That even
now, they arc only practising a different kind of
delusion by making a show of Conservatism, is pro-
bable in the highest degree. But in the mean time,
as it has been their cue to assume all of a sudden a
high constitutional tone on certain points, the question
still recurs, what are the circumstances which at this
particular crisis have elicited from them such a strong
and novel intimation ? These circumstances appear to
us to be chiefly two ; which, operating concurrently,
are in err, judgment eiifilcient to explain the plienorne-
nou. First of all, there is reason to believe that, with-
out any personal disfavour towards Lord Melbourne,
a certain exalted personage, whose hospitality, we
think. muss almost be superseding his Lordship's cu-
linary establs shment, has given such an unequivocal
express:on to Conservative predilections as might well
work upon a much more phlegmatic temperament than
the Noble Vi'scount has credit for. " You know, my

HORSE STEALING.—On Thursday, Nov. 30, a
valuable young horse, the property of Mr. Frieker, surgeon,
of this town, was stolen from its pasture in Prestbut7.
Although persons were dispatched in different directions in
pursuit, and hard-bills issued, no clue to the detection of the
thief was obtAined until Fi iday last, when Mr. Pricker re-
ceived a letter from a friend, in!orming him that his horse was
detained at Birmingham, and that his presence was requested
to identify the animal. A man, who gave his name '1 homes
Johnson Jones, had been'takea up by the police there, at three
o'clock. of the same day that the horse disappeared. The cul-
put, who on Friday morning swallowed laudanum with the in-
tention of committing suicide, but without effect, will be sent
to this town ft .r examination before our Bench of Magis-
! trates.—Cheltenham Journal.

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1837

he felt bound again to renew the measure, not shutting
his eyes to the difficulties that surrounded it. Last
session, in consequence of understanding from the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer that some measure was to be
brought forward with respect to the establishment of
Local Courts, he had withdrawn his motion on this sub-
ject. That measure, however, not having been brought
forward, he felt compelled again to introduce this subject.
During the last session, the House had been counted out
no less than thirteen times when his notice to bring in
this Bill was upon the paper. He had, however, after
great difficulties, succeeded in persuading the House
to read the Bill a second time ; before he could get the
measure through a Committee the House was dissolved.
On these grounds it was that he had withdrawn the former
Bill. Having stated this much, he would shortly revert
to the evils of the law as it at present existed, which
arose from the delay in actions of ejectment. In a
very early edition of " Burns' Justice," he found it
stated, that " a more short and easy method of ousting the
tenant seemed eligible." In the course he (Mr A.) was
pursuing, he was supported by the opinion of eminent
lawyers, and by the opinions of Gentlemen appointed
under a Commission sanctioned by the House.—(Hear.)
The Commissioners of Common Law, in their fifth
report spoke to the same effect, and stated that it appeared
desirable the jurisdiction of the proposed local courts
should extend to cases of ejectment between landlord and
tenant, when the value of the tenements did not exceed 201.
The evil continued at the present moment to the greatest
extent, and he had volumes of correspondence, from every
part of the country, complaining of those evils. He called
on every Hon. Member who opposed the Bill to deny, if
he could, that the evils were not such as to be ruinous
'to the industrious classes.—(Hear, hear.) He found
that in general the owners of small tenements were those
who had retired from a life of industry, or those who after
several years of servitude laid out their savings in the pur-
chase of small property. He knew of many cases in
which vexatious possession of tenements was kept, when
there was no other property on the premises belonging to
the nominal holder than a chair or a table, or some piece
of worthless furniture.—{We understood the Hon. Member
to say a dog in some cases.] He had known cases in which
the occupying tenant had been paid .5/. on condition
of giving up possession, and the tenant under whom such
occupier held, afterwards retained possession, until 301.
were paid to buy him out.—( A laugh.) He intended to
divide his Bill into two clauses. The Bill provided that
parties should go before a magistrate and make certain
declarations in the Bill provided, and which were intended
to satisfy the Magistrate, first that notices had been
given in a manner described in the Bill, which notices were
to give the Magistrates jurisdiction ; and secondly, to
satisfy the Magistrates of two facts, that the relation
of landlord and tenant, did at one time subsist between the
parties, and that it no longer existed. If any question of
title was included in the case, the Magistrate might dismiss
it to a higher jurisdiction. The Bill provided further—
that if a landlord used this process to gain possession
of a tenement to which he had no right, the tenant
so ousted might bring an indictment against the person
who made the false representation, and also an action
against the landlord. The Bill gave a remedy against
the landlord, for he (Mr. Aglionby) thought the Ma-
gistrate ought to be protected from any action whatsoever.
kVith respect to the 501. clause in his Bill, which gave the
landlord, after bringing his action of ejectment power to
cal an the tenant to enter into security for costs, he was
prepared, notwithstanding the objections that might be
urged against it, to justify it on these grounds :—he
might be told that it gave the landlord power to
dispossess tenants of large holdings for political
purposes, but he contended that it would have
no such effect. Let them look to the expenses
to which a landlord was put by an action of ejectment
against the tenant, who, if he happened to be a man of
straw, would leave him in beside for the costs. The object
of the clause was to meet cases of this sort ; and it was
grounded on no less an authority than the Report of the
Commissioners of Common Law, from which the clause
was copied almost word for word. If therefore he erred
in introducing such a clause into his Bill, he erred
on great authority. He would call the attention of
the House more particularly to the effects of the clause.
After the landlord had brought his action of ejectment, he
could go before the Judge, and call on him to give a sum-
mons to the tenant to come before him, prepared to give
security for the costs of the suit.--( Hear, hear.) The
Judge was to determine whether the bail which he
offered was considered to be sufficient or not. In
what way, he would ask, would a tenant be injured by
this' No one but a dishonest tenant would put a landlord
to the ruinous process of ejectment, and it was but fair that
in such a case he should be made answerable for the costs.
He begged to apologize for detaining the House so long.
He had introduced sonic matters which might have been
better introduced in Committee, but he preferred alluding
to them now, as he might not have another opportunity
of answering objections. He threw himself upon the House,
and he would be glad tofind he was mistaken in thepositions
he bad laid down ; but if the House found that his princi-
ples were fair, and required the intervention of the Legis-
lature to carry them into effect, then he trusted he should
receive their support. He had no feeling of paternity for
his own clauses, but would readily consent to the introduc-
tion of any clauses that might throw a greater shield of pro-
tection over the landlord. His great object was to protect
the honest landlord, but not to injure the honest tenant ;
and he would add, he never would throw the protection
of the law over a fraudulent tenant whatever might be his
party or politics, or upon any other pretext whatever.—
( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member concluded by moving
that the Bill now be read a second time.
Mr. JERVIS did not complain of the course taken by
the Hon. Member, although it was his (Mr. Jervis's) pain-
ful duty more than once to oppose the Bill. He avowed
that he belonged to that party which had given a factious
opposition to the measure, for he had divided with the Hon.
Member for Finsbury against it, and successfully too, for
the Bill did not pass. It was essentially a landlord's
Bill. It was calculated to draw a most invidious distinction
between the rich and the poor. He did not dispute some
part of the arguments of the Hon. Member, and enough
had been said to shew him that some measure was neces-
sary to enable the landlord to recover possession. It was
most unfair to say that a Magistrate was sufficient for
the poor man, while the rich man might go into
a Court of Law, and it showed him (Mr. Jervis) the neces-
sity of a reform, which would be best effected by the
establishment of Local Courts. His Learned Friend was
obliged to pray in aid the fact of his Bill having been read
a second time on former occasions ; but was the Bill then
as it had stood before ? As the law at present stood, if a
tenant was in possession of a house, and paid rent, which was
the proof of a tenantcy, a notice to quit was all that was
required in order to entitle the landlord to obtain possession
of his premises. Surely that was sufficient protection.
By the Bill of his Hon. and Learned Friend, if a person
was in possession of premises—no proof being required of
any payment of rent—an alleged landlord comet
in, and by giving a four days' notice to quit,
ho immediately threw the proof of the title upon
the tenant or person in possession, which was a means of
setting aside the whole law of ejectment, as well as the com-
mon law of the country. His Learned Friend had stated
many cases of oppression which had been reported to him
by landlords—they were a wealthy class, and were able
to make their grievances known; but would the House for
a moment suppose that tenants had no grievances to
complain of ? It was only at the last Assizes for
Chester, that he held briefs in two cases which he
would characteriie as most oppressive. Enclosures had been
made from a Common, each had paid rent, the landlord had
given notice to quit ; but upon the case corning before
a jury, they confirmed the parties in their freehold.
Though it might be convenient in towns that a summary re-
medy should be given, he would contend that one case of
injustice was worth a hundred cases of delay. His
Honourable and Learned Friend had stated that this
Bill was not calculated to injure the tenants. He apprehended
that it was so, in no ordinary degree, and he was extremely
surprised that such a measure should proceed from his Hon.
Friend. What, he would ask, would be the result of it ?
Why, in all towns where there were 101. householders, if
parties had given notice to quit, they would have the
voter entirely in their possession. The measure would not be
confined to that alone ; for it would apply equally to the
county voters in all cases beyond 501.—(Cheers.) His Hon.
and Learned Friend assumed that all tenants were rascals—
(Cheers and laughter)—and being so, he asked protection
for the landlords. If he was right in his view with respect to
this Bill, it was intended to give an advantage to the rich over
the poor. If he might be allowed to give a recommenda-
tion to his Hon. and Learned Friend, he should say that
the best way would be to wait till the Government had re-
deemed the pledge which they had undoubtedly given to
the country to bring forward the subject of Local
Courts.—( Hear, hear, hear.) In Ireland an appeal was
given to the Judge. He was afraid, if the present
measure met with the sanction of the House, it would be
attended with the worst results, and he should, therefore,
move an amendment to the motion of his Hon. Friend,
that the Bill should be read a second time that day six
months.
Sir S. WH ALLEY seconded the amendment.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL could not but think
that. the Ilouse had great reason to lament his Hon. and
Learned Friend the Membor for Chester should have thought
it necessary to state his opposition to this Bill in language
such as he had used ; and to surround his opposition to
it with topics which he must say were very unne-
cessarily of an inflammatory nature. He was not at all
disposed to deny that the question which his Honour-
able and Learned Friend the Member for Cockermouth
had put, with so much credit to himself and benefit
to the country, was surrounded with many difficulties.

They had to deal in this, as in all other cases, with a choice Select Committee where the matter would tderngeoceesestearryy
of evils, and the question for the House to decide was— consideration, and where, if it were thought be
whether it was so clear that the balance of difficulty witnesses from both classes affected by the
was against this proposition, that they would refuse to called and examined as to the working of the pdres.tenvyt
Osytishitethno.
entertain the Bill now, for a third time, brought It would be the better plan, and he hope
before the House ? Now he must say, if it was admitted, agreed to.
as it must be admitted, that there was a necessity Mr. C. FERGUSON hoped the Bill would nroitnebiepileosat
for some remedy, he was not able to discover by upon its second reading. He considered ihp
so modi-
what mode it was possible to obtain better sera- a most valuable one, and he believed it might
e benefi-
rity against the evils which at present existed than Pied in a Committee up stairs, as to make it a
Tulho t
tst m igh t,
that which was proposed by his Hon. and Learned vial one for all parties.—(Hear, hear.)
Select
Friend, the Member for Cockermouth. What was the however be remedied in Committee, or
evil? It was this, which every Gentleman must own, Committee up stairs. He thought it was well ac
the impossibility of ejecting tenants, after the expiration of of the House to consider whether they would not give
g'
The enor-
a tenantry. It was said by his Hon. and Learned Friend, t rates power in the cases to which he adverted.
stood,
the Member for Chester, that this was essentially what mous expense attendant upon the law, as it at present
to 013-
was called a Landlord's Bill. Undoubtedly, in one sense, rendered it totally out of the power of the poor man
•it was a Landlord's Bill, because it was a Bill to provide tain justice.
deserved the at-
proper remedy for an injured landlord.--{Hear.) He agreed Lord SANDON thought the Bill well
with the Hon. and Learned Member for Cockermouth, tention of the House, as the evils of which it compllu%
worthy_
that they must divest themselves, in considering this Bill, were admitted to be great ; he should, therefore, vote fur its
of everything like the apprehension of clamour.—( Hear.) second reading,in order that it might not be thrown out, until
Was the landlord the only person who would be benefited the whole of its merits had been considered in detail. d
by the Bill? Had it never occurred to the Honourable Sir HARRY VERNEY would vote for the
sec la
and Learned Member for Chester, that individuals pos- reading of the Bill.
sessing property might be loth to invest it in the Mr. AGLIONBY said that if the House wished it, he
building of cottages or small tenements, from the circum- was willing to accede to the proposition of the Honour:08l!
stance of the difficulty that existed in the way of enforcing Member for Finsbury for a Select Committee ; but E_l
their rights, and therefore, altlioughby a sort of reflected light, present advised he thought nothing would be gained
it was a Bill that operated for the benefit of the tenant, it Mr. BROTHERTON supported the second reecho
0°
was as decidedly, though not so obviously, for the benefit the Bill, at the same time observing be thought the prh.p.,_
of the landlord? What was proposed was this :—that on sition of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, for the conselu-10_
the expiration of a tenantry, an individual, who was tion of the two Bills was well worthy the consideration
now driven to the expensive process of ejectment, of the House.
might come and give security to the Justices, and then Tile gallery was then cleared for a division, but none
when the tenancy had expired, what. objection could there took plane, and the Bill was read a second time.
be to give possession to the landlord, leaving to the other Mr. AG LION BY then stated that he should to-morroW
party the remedy of an action at law ? It was said that move the Bill be referred to a Select Committee.
R
this might give rise to injustice. But was not the present PARLIAMENTARY ELECTORS AND
state and practice of the law unjust to the landlord without MEN'S BILL.
being beneficial to the tenant? Indeed the difficuty of the Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that thisA BpillFberEeE3';
lion. Member for Chester was to find instances in which a second time.
the proposed measure might operate unjustly towards the Mr. Sergeant JACKSON rose to put a question oldie
occupying tenant. It was quite otherwise with the Hon. subject of Irish education, when he was interrupted by
Member for Cockerrnouth, who was furnished with enough The SPEAKER, whose observations were not heard.
of cases to make out good grounds for the present measure. Mr. F. FRENCH then rose to put a question, which he
There could be no doubt that the balance of evidence was said related to the subject of the Bill.
in favour of the Hon. Member for Cockermouth. He The SPEAKER called the Honourable Member to
thought also that it was very much in favour of the Hon. order. He had already said, that it having been trie'e,
Member for Cockermouth, that this measure was very that a Bill be read a second time, no question could be nu;
much like what had been recommended by the Common by any Hon. Member, until that first question was Pu
Law Commissioners. That Commission had not emanated from the Chair.
from one or other side of the House ; but consisted of The question having then been put that the
the most distinguished men of the bar without regard to meutary Electors and Freemen's Bill be read a second lir'
party.—( Hear, hear.) He should support the second read- Mr. F. FRENCH begged to ask the Noble Lord Yoe:
ing of the Bill. His Hon. Friend (Mr. Aglionby) had ex- tiler it was his intention to introduce into the Bill a elan"'
pressed a wish that the subject should tee taken up by the for the remission or reduction of the stamp duty on free'
Law Officers of the Crown ; but he (the Solicitor-General) men's admission ?
in declining to take upon himself the management of the Lord JOHN RUSSELL spoke across the table a feet
Bill, was disposed to give his best assistance to the corn i- words in reply, which were not heard.
deration of the Bill, but he did not think it could be in Mr. THORNELY was in favor of an alteration of tl:e
better hands than in those of his Honourable Friend.. law respecting the admission and registry of Freemen.
Sir EDWARD SUGDEN said that the House, when An HON. MEMBER, whose name we could not learu'
legislating generally on the subject of landlord and tenant, said that the rights of the freemen having been
should be careful to satisfy that vast body of persons who sacrificed, and they having been deprived of their exclus
filled the relation of tenant, that they were not anxious sive privilege to vote for Members of Parliament, and al-0
merely to secure their own rights as landlords, but were for the Members of the Municipal Government, ouch
equally anxious to make security for the rights of not to be required to pay a tax for the exercise of their
Parlia-
tenants.—(Hear, hear, bear.) Now he thought the remaining rights. It was complained that the rate-paYieacr
Bill was in direct violation of all principles of legislation, clause was a hardship upon the Constituency create
as regards mutual remedies.—(Hear, hear.) He did not under the Reform Act, but the tax upon the
deny that there ought to be such a modification of the admission of freemen was considerably more unjust'
law as would, by lessening the expense, give a more speedy He would not oppose the Bill now, but at a future stage'
remedy.—(Hear.) It was a mistake to suppose that by Colonel SIBTHORP said he could not hear the free-
making the remedy more speedy, if it were a just remedy, the men of England abused as they had been by the Hl'
landlord only was benefitted. It tended to prevent litigation Member for Wolverhampton (Mr. Thornily)
between landlord and tenant, and therefore conferred out standing up in their defence. If the freemen
equal benefit on the one as on the other.—(Hear, hear.) of Wolverhampton were so bad, those who had don°
But. his objection to this Bill was, that it did not admit of him the honour to return him as their representative
any modification. No alteration in Committee could make were a different race of people.—(Laughter.) He would
it such a Bill as its supporter thought it ought to le. It not now oppose the Bill, but he beggedto state that this wag
went upon this ground—to take away all security whatever one of those Bills which had been brought in by the Noble
from the tenant, and to place him entirely in the power of Lord who represented the Reform Bill as a final measure,:
the landlord.—( Hear, hear.) It ought to be a matter of The Noble Lord repeatedly refused to furnish him Wit'
grave consideration whether the power of deciding upon are turn of the printing of that Bill, although day aftelci
questions between landlord and tenant should not, up to a day he had applied for it. In his conscience he believes
certain amount, be given to the Magietrates, though cer- that a better man did not exist in private life, but a
tainly this would be placing them in a very delicate posi- worse man never showed himself in public life.—(Laughter.)
tion, and they would probably be the first to object to it. His policy had been dark and crooked, and he.had been
The lion. Member (Mr. A.) had stated that the Magistrate working like a mole underground. The freemen
was to see that the relation of landlord and tenant had in his opinion, been treated shamefully, di,gracefnaY'
once subsisted between the parties, and that it no longer and faithlessly—(Hear, hear)—they had been told that
subsisted ; but the Bill provided no such thing—it only their rights would be preserved, but such was not the ease'
provided that the Justice was to see that a certain notice had He would say nothing of the Chancellor of the Exchequer's
been delivered and a certain declaration made. The tenant conduct, but without meaning anything disrespectful, it ap'
wrongly ejected, indeed, might bring his indictment or his peered to him that the Noble Lord and his Friend we°
action ; but how seldom would lie have the power to do so ? like the Siamese twins.—(A laugh.) He hoped the free-
A man in full possession, with his family and furniture in men of Stroud would some day remind the Noble Lord et,
the house, receives a notice to quit which he does not his ingi atitude towards the entire body of' freemen, some I
believe to be legal, or, perhaps, he does think that whom, when he was kicked out of another place, had ser•
his term has not expired. He says to the landlord him to that House.—(Much laughter.)
that he will resist him; and had he not a perfect right to do Sir AUGUSTUS DALRYMPLE said that he or
so ? What, however, said the Hon. Member—he would proved of the first clause of the Bill, which relieved those
not stay to enquire whether the landland was right persons who were bona fide rate-payers, and for this
or wrong, but would go a neighbouring magistrate, reason, that great and serious inconvenience had bee'
and having filed his declaration, the magistrate was occasioned in some of the districts which he had the 11''
bound to issue his warrant, and within four days to turn nourtorepresent,bytheenforeement of thelaw in this respect
the tenant out of doors. What, however, was to be done He must, however, protest against the sweeping charge°
with his furniture ? Suppose that he was not able and insinuations which had been thrown out against th°
to find security for the costs, it was to be sold within 14 days. freemen.
Was this fair, was this consistent with the laws of England ? Mr. WILLIAMS said that he, too, would not be 11
The Hon. Member would give a hearing to one side, but party to what the Honourable Baronet had se justly de'
would deny it to the other. If he said that he would sum- signated ,the unwarrantable insinuations which had bee'
mon the tenant, and that he would hear his statement before thrown out against the freemen. He had the bon°.
resorting to any extreme measure of this sort, he could then to number a good many of them amongst his cons"'
understand the proposition ; but he never could believe tuents, and not one of those persons had ever re;
that the House of Commons would give its sanction to a ceived a single farthing for their votes. He did not se
measure so unjust in principle and so oppressive in why a body of electors should be attacked in this waYi
practice as this.—(Hear, hear.) He for one, as belong- The borough of Liverpool had been frequently mention e'_.
ing to the class to which these powers were given, would when such a subject was under discussion ; and it had be
le;
feel great alarm lest a feeling of suspicion should be proved before the Committee of Inquiry, that not onli,t
engendered in the minds of the people of England, that poor, and working men, had received money for t,ts.,'
in sanctioning such a measure, they were thinking more of support, but one in especial, who belonged to a
their own interests,than of the justice of the case.—(Hear.) ral profession, and who was believed to be vvealthYi
The Hon. Member said what harm will this Billdo the tenant? refused to tender his vote until he was paid 601. It ba
I give, to be sure, extraordinary powers to the landlord, been said by some Hon. Members who had preceded lit',
but give tenants something in return. What did he that the effect of this resolution would' be to increase tij,
give ? He gave him an action for damages, and an indict- number of freemen in towns. He denied that it would bull
ment for perjury. Was it possible the Hon. Member was any such effect. The fact, he believed, would be, that it vve
aware of the state of the law, and make such an diminish them. At present when it was known that a o°o'l2
provision as this? Did he consider the relation in which was out of his time, and was too poor to pay the fees 0130,0
the class of persons stood who were likely to be affected by his admission, there was a strong contest between the tr,
this Bill, and believe that such a remedy as this would parties for the purpose of securing his vote. " fle,rhe
not be inoperative ? Suppose the landlord was wrong, dially supported the Bill of the Noble Lord, au"io
what was the remedy which the Hon. Member gave the would in the mean time withdraw his notice of 1112,:-J,
tenant—an indictment for perjury. This was a remedy which stood for to-morrow. He would give the .o°oo
which would scarcely ever be resorted to, and Lord four months to carry his Bill into a law—if it sh°,ol
the tenant was thus wholly left without protee- be a failure, he trusted that the House would then for
tion. He would never be a party to a factious the leave they had so kindly given to bring in a P -
opposition to any measure ; but he would never give his abolishing the stamp duty on the admission of froth°. net•
sanction to a Bill which he believed to be so objectionable Lord SANDON could not sit still and listen to the!tj,e
in all its details. He thought that in any measure of the putations that had been made by the Hon. Member,v/1v ot
sort which might be introduced, the tenant had a right out giving his positive denial to them. He di' tad
to demand the same security which the landlord had. for one moment deny that great malpractices the
He was quite satisfied that whatever difference of' opinion existed in Liverpool ; but he did not believe that to
there might be as to the details of the measure before the freemen of that place deserved the imputations
0f4,10y0
House, there could be but one opinion- as to its principle. had been cast upon them.—(Hear.) He would oroo
He should therefore, although reluctantly, vote against the stand up as the friend of the poor man, wh lte
proposition.—(Hear, hear.) generally depressed by those who professed t°„p:,./
Mr. PR YME—The Hon. and Learned Member who his friend. He had been accused of deluding, the their
had last spoken, in arguing against the principle of the ratives of Liverpool, under the pretence of being rigl)t
Bill, seems to have argued against objections that might be friend. He thought that the Hon. Member had e°,
jt
remedied in Committee. There was no one unacquainted to make the assertions he had done.—(Hear, heaT•tilitalf
with the difficulties to which landords were exposed in get- was quite natural that freemen should not be Paleedeer4
ting a tenant out of possession, and the inducements were favourable to the opposite side of the House, as rile or
often strong to the occupier to remain obstinately in pos- on the opposite side had taken every posso;,reetli
session, or to demand a considerable sum of money for portunity to deprive them, by every means ou,la not
giving it up. It was for that acknowledged grievance that and indirectly—of that franchise which they c heal°
his Hon. Friend had introduced his Bill. It was for the withhold from them by the Reform Bill.-041seno (Pies'
House to decide whether they should give to magistrates He hoped they would be enabled to separate the __.,erits.
the power of adjudicating or not, but the Bill did not give it. tions, so that they might each stand on their ovsni_we Noble
It was further suggested, that giving Magistrates the power Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in reply, said, Toarablf
to adjudicate did not give the tenant as effectual a remedy Lord had thought it proper to put a most tins ha;
as he would otherwise have. It appeared to him, how- construction on his motives. A great many Melntoreh
ever, that the course proposed by his Honourable Friend thought that it would not be fair or equitablhstity, scho4,
would do away with a great deal of the evils complained freemen from the payment of the Stamp
ii-u__lvantagei
of, and that the arguments urged on the other side were householders were subject to so many d:sie'•_,,,,tiirctr_
more against the details than the principle of the measure. By doing to the freemen the benefit which th_eoyti7eilnide
Mr. WAKLEY was glad that the Bill had been opposed the House would leave it, of course, for the h
to Pat
last Session, and he also rejoiced at the discussion that had also to demand relief. He should be very sorry ti
taken place this evening. No person who had listened barrier to the improvement of the Reform Bill
to the speeches of the Hon. and Learned Member oppo- After a few words from Mr. HODGSOI%-tiel_misted
site (Sir E. Sugden), and the lion. and Learned Member Bill was read a second time and ordered to ~0
for Chester, could feel other than satisfied that the Bill was IRISH NATIONAL EDUCATI"" to le
calculated to inflict great injustice upon a large class of the Mr. Sergeant JACKSON asked if annyt
community. Since the discussion that took place last session taken to make any change in the steps
y ste
triw ear f .ina,
on the subject, lie had received a great number of coma u- National Education, so as to satispfyretshee scruples of
teal'e
nications, and there was no doubt that every Member who scientious Protestants. intended to. b
represented a large constituency had also received letters Lord MORPETH said it was
irticularly wit stwit
on the subject. He (Mr. W.) would vote unhesitatingly some alterations in the system rote
on oft
for the rejection of the Bill, because it was a most improper gard to the reading of the ScrtinpstLs.
he, alliorT2iiiiietuearr,ere,af-21
remedy for what lie admitted to be a great grievance. children (we understood) vver
the answer was
He should be sorry, therefore, to see the Bill rejected upon Scriptures in a separate part of the scnoor. e pater;
the second reading. He trusted that his Hon. and Learned Mr. Sergeant JACKSON said
of the
was too beeu'ra?
Friend would agree to send it before a Committee up stairs. satisfactory. pENSION%ann.
A NOV}:":'-' 13:011t 1.-
A matter of that kind could not be satisfactorily arranged THE KING OF H
v from the !e, lee 4,i,
in a Committee of the whole House. It had been Mr. HUME wished to
tried twice, and had most signally failed. His Honourable Gentleman, y-ear to prine
of th,e
and Learned Friend appeared to entertain a different opi- last night stated that the 6,
glen of his Bill to what he had done on former occasions. of Hanovern'to the Duke C,r
Exchequer, a: Geoner
• ti
In his former Bills be proposed that the Magistrate should '21,000/. granted asap
entsilie throne of Ilanover_?_e, „en%
only act ministerially ; but now he proposed that they should who had now acceded to
of
the ExcHEgt.Jib,eiel-e 01-f
.1
wase Chancellornnow
w to
e eekoo
act judicially. As the Bill stood lie much doubted whether The CHANCELLOR
Prince George had with rogeri,
the Magistrate would have such power. He had been as- that the pension
the resent l't•ing c-noiberlaod
sured that morning by a Barrister of high standing, that different description° to other Oc",,,sirs. of Ilan°Yer'for
Duke °I.
the words in the Bill would not give such a power. to the 21,0001. to
h.na
whPerl
The Hon. and Learned Member should not object to a had been grained to