The Sun.
London, England, 1822-09-02 00:00:00

PRICE SEVENPENCE,

Parliamentary Reform. Gentlemen, on the former of these
I was aware from the beginning, and in the first speech which
I ever addressed to an audience of Liverpool inhabitants, I de-
Oared that I differed in that from those with whofn on most
other subjects I had the honour to agree. I told them that in
accepting of my services they made choice of one who had made
up his mind on the Catholic Question, with respect to which, me
deference for them could induce him to abate one jot of his
ardour in that cause, to which on every occasion, and in and
under every variety of circumstances, I have continued to give
my support. But, Gentlemen, I have dealt fairly with you ; I
have rarelyfailed to deliver rnysentiments on this subject in Par-
liament, without accompanying them with the declaration, that
the sentiments which I avowed as my own were not those of the
great body of my Constituents. I did not compromise you, but
1 continued to dilfer from you in pursuing the straight-forward
line of my duty; and I have had no reason to regret that I
have so acted. If I were to remain here, and to take part in
the proceedings of Parliament, my efforts would be continued
in the same direction : but after the struggle which has been
continued for ten years, as an individual, perhaps I should
advise that now, or perhaps after one more general attempt to
gain the object contended for, it might not be improper to
make a compromise. Stating this, I wish it to be understood
that I now feel as anxious for the complete success of the Ca-
tholic cause as I.have ever felt at any moment of my life. But
political conduct is made up of political axioms and of politi-
cal expediency ; and looking at this subjeetaeitle.a view to the
peace of the country, I should feel disposed to make some
compromise—to accept what I believe I might gain, and ad-
journ over for a period, but never abandoning, the demand for
the rest: In the House of Commons it is frequently better to
persevere in a claim than to talk of compromise. But in the
present instance no evil can result from what I am saying, as
in a late debate I hinted that from regard to the peace of the
Empire, I could be glad if some breathing time were afforded by
the adjournment of the consideration of the claims of the Ca-
tholics, and was anxious to see the general tranquillity se-
cured by an arrangement, removing all the prominent causes
of complaint, and deferring for a season those measures which
woeild complete that emancipation which is claimed, and the
expectation of which I will never forego. Having thus fairly
stated my views with respect to the Catholic Claims, I now turn
to the second question With which my name has been connected,
Reform in Parliament. My purpose has been mistaken, if it is
supposed that I impute to all the advocates for Reform in Par=
liament a perfect knowledge of the extent to which I contend
their doctrines lead. It is with their doctrines I quarrel, and
not with their motives, and I would therefore put, rather argue
mentatively than vituperatively, that which I address to those
who differ in opinion front me on this subject. I wish those per=
sons who think that they have found front recent circumstances
a fitting opportunity for pressing this topic, to state to me—to
me ! —no ; but to state to themselves distinctly the object which
they,. have in view, and the means by which they propose to
obtain it. What is the argument in favour of making a change
in the House of Cornmons ? The
_argument is, that expensive
wars—that a long protracted struggle on the Continent have
placed the nation in.such a situation that heavy taxes have
been imposed, and severe enactments to put down disorder
been demanded and obtained. Granting, for the sake of argu-
tuente that all these things deserve reprehension, let me ask
were the measures in question those of the House of Com-
mons alone ? Does the British Constitution act by a single
organ ? Did no other body concur, sanction, or devise any
of those measures ? Is there no other assembly in exist-.
ence which as far as your judgment goes authorised their
adoption and participated in framing them ? If there be an.
other assembly acting such a part, then it follows that a Re-
form of the House of Go' innions must be useless unless a co-
ordinate reform be effected in that other assembly also.—
(Cheering.)—l have, often asked this- question, and I have
never yet met with any man who could answer it—ifyou reform
the Reuse of Commons„ what will you do with the House of
Lords ? If you rill reform the House of Commons, because it
began the war with eknierica, and maintained the war with
France, sinking for a moment the recollection of the prime
ciples in which the American war originated, and forgetting
that the war with France was the war of the Option, if I say
you reform the House of Commons for these wars, for impos,
ing heavy taxes to support them, for enacting laws of severity
to repress -disturbance, will you suffer the- House orlsoule,
who participated in all, to go free ? If You will not do
this, what is your intention with respect to that Assembly,
and how is the reformed House of Commons to operate on the
House of Lords ? Is it to act by compulsion ? Aye, that is *hat
you mean, but it is what you will not say.—(Applause.)—My
quarrel with Parliamentary •Reform is not us to the mode or
the degree—l object to it in limine, because it goes to establish
some other thing than the House of Commons, the tripartite
sharer of the 'British Constitution. They wish to work the
Constitution by it single instrument, and to remove every ding
out of the way of that instrument which might controul or
regulate the exercise of its power.—(Cheering.)—l do not ob-
ject that Old-- Sarum, which has two electors, should have
twenty. Let it have two thousand I If those who exercise the
elective franchise use it corruptly, disfranchise Old Sarum as
you have disfranchised 4irampound. I object to the assertion
that the House of Commons does not represent the people,
because if you mean by people, the nation (and here is the
ern r into which finny fall), I say, having the organs-of the en-
tire nation in the House of Commons, what room is there for
any thing else? The subject of Parliamentary Reform is
pressed on me at this moment, because recently a Gentleman
respectable for his family, respectable for his private character,
respectable for his individual talents, thought proper to rake
up the dying embers of this question, and did me the honour
in the course of the speech which he addressed to the meet-
ing at York, to mention my name, with civility but, with
surprise, at the part which I have taken where Parliamentary
Reform }its been the subject of discussion. Mr. Fawkes, I
name him with honour, for a more respectable man does
not live, is surprised et I, representing the populous town
of Liverpool, should have any respect for close or hod
rough representation. I might turn upon this Gentleman with
surprise also. Ile commenced his career by complaining of
the defective state of Yorkshire representation, and I might
expiees surprise that the moment when the Yorkshire Repre-;
sentatives were doubled, should be the precise moment which
he selects for raising anew the cry of Reform. Having been
long lamenting the situati-an of. Yorkshire, and describing her
in her destitute state to be weeping " like Niobe" over her nu-
merous but helpless children, she at length doubles her repree-
sentation, gets two new liehnitates, and this is the moment
which her champion seizes to come forward and complain of
the defective state of English representation.• This is to me,
surprising. Here, then, is surprise for surprise; but die sure
prise of Mr. Fawkes I shall turn to conviction that my conduct
ought not to excite surprise. So far from its being extaordi-
nary that I, representing as I do the second town in the British'.
Empire, should take the part I do, I have not the slightest he•
sitation in saying that, if I were the Member ter Old Sarum, I
should hold my tongue on the subject of Borough representation ;
and it is because I can have no personal interest in the question
that I feel it my duty to'do what others not similarly circume
stanced cannot do with the Same effect—to expose the fallacy
of their reasoning who hold out particular blots, the exist-
ence of which cannot be denied, as that which should
move us to change our system altogether, and who wish
not to remove the scandal,, but totally to change the na-
ture of our institutions. Will any Reformer tell me that he
proposes to go no further than to effect the removal of the
blots admitted to exist ? If he will, 1' am with him. But
the Reformers wish to go much farther, and it is not to the
mode but to the thing that I object. They are not content that
we should continue to have that combined representation oi'
every species of property—of eve!), description of industry
which we now enjoy, and which is open to every variety-of
worth and talent. It is because they look only to the power
of the country, it is because they would act by force and not
by reason, and because they would erect a power in the
country which if it existed at all must exist alone, that
I oppose their scheme in limine, and lend a more impatient
ear to the cry raised against particular defects than 1 might
otherwise be disposed to incline to their representations.—
(Loud cheering.)--Gentlemen, it is said the influence of
the Crown in the House of Commons is such as to govern
all its decisions. My first answer to this is similar to that
which I give to the propositicin -to change our system alto-
getlicr. 1 would remark, how rarely does the House of Lords
differ from the House of Commons. Is then the influence of
the Crown so much complained of felt in an equal degree in
the House of Lords too ? Take either alternative ; if it be so,
would it be well to alter the system of the House of Commons,
and leave the House of Lords unreformed ? If the influence of
the Crown in the House of Lords is not matter of complaint,
why adopt a measure of Reform which would deprive that
body of all .power, and entrust the whole working of the
British Constitution to a single body, to an untried, un-
known organ? I believe that nothing can be more in-