The Sun.
London, England, 1849-07-04 00:00:00

apprehensions of more extensive democratic changes.
These parties put the question to Lird Grey, who was
the hea I of the Guvernmerr, winch was also put to L‘prd

Althorp, the representative of the Governineut in the

House elf Comin.ons, " whether this was to be the etim-

mencenaent of other measures, calculated to destroy the
entire system of representation, or whether the Bill then
introduced was that upon which they meant to stand ?"
Lord Grey, speaking in the name of the Government,
gave an assurance upon these interrogatories that Go•
vernment had no ulterior objects beyond the Bill then

brought forward. Upon this assurance many persons,
who would otherwise have been opposed to the Bill, give
their adherence to the Government and enabled them to

carry that measure into effect. Some five years atter-
wards he (Lord John Russell) was asked to give his con-
sent to an entirely new scheme of representation, when
he stated that though there might be defects in the Re.
form Bill, he was lapt prepared so soon after the passing
of that measure to propose a new scheme; but that a
time might come when public opinion might demand an
alteration, based upon the principles of that Bill, which
should receive his best consideration, and to which
he could give his consent. The Honourable Member

said, that by that declaration he had precluded him-
self from supporting any measure of reform. He after•
wards wrote a letter to his constituents, in which he
stated that he was not opposed to giving greater extension
to the political privileges of the working classes, and
that any measure of teat kind, duly matured, would
meet his consideration.—(Hear, hear.) He had been
now for 30 years connected with the cause of reform in
Parliament, and he would now state his opinions on the

motion when the Hon. Member for Montrose brought
forward his motion, which he considered rather obscure.
He then thought it was a step which would tend to the
six points of the Charter. He was not, therefore, sur-
prised that the Hon. Member should support this motion.
The Hon. Member for Nottingham lays it down that the

people are the legitimate source of power, and that the
labourer was entitled to the first fruits of his labour.
The labourer receives his wages for which he contracts,
and there the matter ends. There was an opinion which
prevailed in France, and which might still prevail there,
that no capitalists should enjoy undivided property, but
that every man who was engaged in the undertaking
should participate in the profits. If the Honourable
Member meant that, he would at once declare be
would not consent to it. The Honourable Mem-
ber said that taxation without representation was
tyranny; if he said that because a man had not a vote,
he would not agree to it. That system of representation
which was most for the benefit of the
.people was the
best, and should not be rejected upon abstract principles.
The Member for Montrose said that every man who had
not a vote was a slave. Ho did not agree with that opi-
nion. He often heard the boast made, and that by the
people of this country, that he was a free-born English-
man, but he never understood that to mean that he had a
right to vote for a Member of Parliament. What be-
came of women, if every one who had not a vote was a
slave? It could not be said that they were unfit. Miss
Martineau would surely be competent to vote. The
same objection might be made with regard to serving on
juries, which was limited to a certain amount of pro-
perty, and being deprived of the qualification, it might
be said that a man ❑ot entitled to serve on juries was a
slave, and it might be further extended to the disquali-
fication of being judges, for which certain qualifications
were necessary to be called to the bar, and to have a
legal coucation. The object of the motion was to
give every man of lull age a vote, but if that was
the case they would enjoy as much liberty as they
did at present, as if universal suffrage was the rule. A
House of Commons so elected would not harmonise
with the other parts of the Constitution. The whole

constitution depended upon a moderate exercise of the
privileges of every part. If the Crown exercised its
prerogative capriciously ; if the Lords rejected con-
tinuously Bills sent up from that House; or if the
House of Commons refused the supplies whenever the
will of the House was obstructed, the Constitution would
not last a month. He would not say there might not
exist another form of Government on its ruins, but they
could not enjoy the temperate liberty which they had
so long possessed.—(Hear.) For these reasons he (Lord
John Russell) could not agree to universal suffrage.
With respect to the equalization of electoral districts,
the proposition of the Hon. Member for Nottingham was
certainly more intelligible than that of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Montroee. He could understand the division of
the country into districts, each district to have one or
more Members; but that it would put an end to the in-
fluence of the aristocracy, who were a bugbear with some
Hon. Members, he did not believe. If considerable pro-
perty possessed by one man or by several, was to have
an influence in a neighbourhood or district, most as-
suredly it would carry elections with universal suffrage
as well as with the present mode of election. He did
not, therefore, think it so good a system as that which
they at present enjoyed.—(Hear, hear.) The Honour-
able Gentleman who spoke last, spoke for the hundredth
time of the discrepancy which existed between the num-
ber of electors in one place and that in others, but there
never was a doubt of that fact. He (Lord John Russell)
never denied it, but what he did say was that the sys-
tem of representation, though not of numbers, was more a
representation of the whole community than if they had
districts. If they had the country divided into districts
they would have the Members of many town and country
districts discussing nuestions_._wbich. no doubt, would
come before them, touching their particular interests.
Very possibly those who at first expected a great de-
mocratic change, would be disappointed, for a Conserva•
tive may be returned. But if they made that great
change in the Constitution, would those who did
so be satisfied?—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Why,
they had seen in a neighbouring nation within the last
year that a large majority was returned of Conservative
opinions; but did that give satisfaction, or did the mino-
rity sit down contented ?—(Hear, hear.) They brought
their question before the Assembly, and afterwards laid
plots to carry destruction through the streets of Paris,
and to obtain by force what they could not otherwise
get.—(Hear, hear.) These were the results of the doc-
trine of universal suffrage, and also that which held that
the working classes should be always in a state of pros-
perity; that the order of society ought to be so managed
that manufacturing industry should be so restricted to
the exact necessities of the world, so that the supply
could never exceed the demand. They were disap-
pointed, and then some 30,000 men went into the streets
of Paris prepared to sacrifice their lives. For his own
part he did not think that the people of this country, who
were called slaves by some Hon. Gentlemen, that what
they possessed was so trifling as to induce them to run a
risk. Feeling this, he was prepared to resist the pre-
sent motion, but at the same time he believed that it
would be for the advantage of the country if a greater
number of the working classes were possessed of the
suffrage, if that could be done without a sacrifice of
their Constitution. He should, therefore, oppose the
proposition of the Hon. Gentleman, feeling that it
would tend to the greatest evils, and deprive them of the
enjoyment of benefits which, if parted with, would place
them among the most foolish and unwise nations of the
earth.
Mr. MUNTZ reminded the Noble Lord of the declara-
tion he had m-ade with respect to finality when he was
called " Finality John "—(Laughter)—and asked how
he'd explain that.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he never used the word
finality. The nick-name given him was no doubt a
good one, but he should repeat again that he never used
the word.
Mr. MUNTZ continued—He (Mr. Muntz) had heard
with great pleasure the last declaration made by the
Noble Lord, that he was prepared to extend the suffrage
to a large portion of the working classes. He, however,
thought the resolution of the Hon. Member for Notting-
ham was exceedingly ambiguous, and as for making elec-
tions annual, he certainly should give that proposition
his opposition. He was quite ready to extend the suf-
frage, and when that was done he should support the
vote by ballot. As to the electoral districts, it required
very careful consideration; but, as regarded no property
qualification, it was absolute nonsense.—(A laugh.) He
should, however, he regretted to say, be compelled to
vote against the motion, though it contained much of
what he approved, and which, if not given to the people,
they would take themselves.
Mr. F. O'CONNOR replied, and denied that his reso-
lution was either a Socialist or Communist one, for he
was opposed to both.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion... ... 13
Against it ... ... 222
Majority —.209
FRAUDS IN THE SALE OF BREAD.

Mr. BANKS then rose to move " that the House do
resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House for
the purpose of considering the means of more effectually
preventing frauds in the sale of bread, and also of pro-
viding in the manufacture of bread against the use of
deleterious ingredients in that article." It had been er-
roneously supposed that when ho introduced his Bill of
last year he meant to cast some imputation on the trade
of bakers. Any such intention he disclaimed; but it
would happen in that, as in other trades, that the honest
trader would be placed at a disadvantage in the compe-
tition with those who were of an opposite disposition.
At present the poorer classes had not that degree of pro-
tection in the purchase of bread to which they were en-
titled. The Lion. and Gallant Member for Brighton had
introduced a Bill on the subject, which, though it might
have been a very good Bill for the genteel inhabitants
of Brighton, took away the protection required by the
poorer classes. The Act of 19 Geo. 111., which formerly
protected the poor man, and the effect of the law now was,
that all bread was Bold by weight, though the bak, r was
not limited as to the size or weight at which he should
make up his loaves. Undoubtedly there was the power
to call on the baker to weigh his bread, and
if it was not of the proper weight, be might be
discharged by the rich man; but how frequently was
the poor man indebted to his baker, and, therefore, did
not dare to exercise this right.—(Hear, hear.) The
Hon. Member proceeded to read from statements that
had been forwarded to him from various counties, show-
ing the fraudulent practices which prevailed, and the
manner in which the poorer classes were deprived of the
proper weight. The remedy he proposed was, that in-
stead of bakers being allowed to manufacture bread of
any weight and size they pleased, they should be required
to make all loaves of a given weight and stamp them
with the weight they professed to contain. He had in-
troduced a Bill containing such a provision last year, but
was opposed by the metropolitan Members, and ulti-
mately found that it was doubtful whether such a subject
should not have been intrteluced in a Committee o• the
whole House. That sae the ceurse he now proposed to
teke, and to move that the House resolve itself into a
Committee to consider the sale and manufacture of bread.
If the Government or the law officers of the Crown or
magi-trates of experience would tell him that there
was no necessity for such a measure, he would ge.e
up the question. But, however, he might be told th,t
trans ,lirt.hirw: awl bread eh-sp, he thought ihat,
[A,)r.t-etion wee required by the t;loor rol'or.,
he felt coutaa,t,eu to urge the question upon tee
lion of the House. He found by a case which had taken
plaice its Edinburgh last autgoan, that he was askiLig for