The Sun.
London, England, 1831-08-11 00:00:00

REFORM-EDINBURGH POLITICAL

UNION.

(Abridged from the New North Briton of Saturday.)

PUBLIC MEETING.
Last night a meeting of the Edinburgh Political
Union was held in the Calton Convening Room, at
which such of the inhabitants as wished the Bill
speedily to pass, and who feel indignant at the
factious opposition which it has met with in the
House of Commons, were invited to attend. At
half-past six o'clock the Hall was crowded to excess,
when immediately thereafter the Council of the
Union entered, and the chair was taken by the Pre-
sident, George Brodie, Esq. Advocate.
The CHAIRMAN rose and said,
Gentlemen,—When the Wellington administra-
tion carried one grand healing measure, what an
outcry was raised by the high Tories. How did
they depict, in exaggerated colours, the public cala-
mities, which they attributed wholly to the admini-
stration ? how declare that, had the people been
fairly represented, the Bill could never have passed ?
—(Cheers.) Did they not, then, of themselves
proclaim the necessity of Reform ? Well, then, in
no long time, what they affected to desire the people
demand—(Loud cheers)—and what has been the
result ? That like the poor old man who called on
death, but changed tone on his appearance, they
alter their note, and quashing all differences with
their previous adversaries, unite in thwarting the
public will as pregnant with the greatest evils. The
general excitement is, as it suits their purpose, ex-
aggerated or denied, or alleged to be fast subsiding.
When the King appeals to the people they denounce
the act as pregnant with all the horrors of anarchy.
But, to their dismay, it has, with some unfortunate
exceptions in Scotland, proved one of " tranquil
anarchy." had it been otherwise their game was
played. Alarm, which might have united the upper
classes of society to resist Reform, might have re-
stored them (the burghmongers) to power. Dis-
appointed in their expectations of something dif-
ferent from " tranquil anarchy," and defeated on the
general principles of the depending question, our
enemies have resorted to other tactics. Under the
direction of Chancery barristers, accustomed to see
causes hung up till the heart grows sick from hope
deferred, they have proceeded like petty-loggers who
boast that, though they cannot gain the suit, they
can at least protract it. And what did they pro-
mise themselves from delay ? On the one hand
they anticipated some event that might create alarm ;
and much must the " tranquil anarchy" which has
prevailed in France during the anniversary of the
three glorious days have galled them.—(Loud
cheering.) On the other, they flattered themselves
that the people may become indifferent from delay.
Nay, with a folly equalled only by the meatiness of
their policy, they already proclaim that the people
have become lukewarm.—(Cries of" never, never.")
Now, gentlemen, it becomes us all to proclaim our
unalterable desire of Reform.—(Cheers,) Hitherto'.
it would have afforded an advantage against us, as if
we entertained a purpose of keeping up unnecessary
agitation,s—as if we, who had the Ministry with a
majority in the Lower House in our favour, and
therefore ought to rely on their accomplishing the
me sure—had in reality ulterior objects in view. On
this principle has the Council acted, arid, considering
how the yeomanry and high arid special constables
were called out when the working classes held their
excellent meeting—bow the constables were in re-
quisition when we were last assembled—you will
admit that we acted judiciously. But the Council
has not been idle, the Union is not falling to pieces,
as our enemies assert.—(Great cheering.) Repeated
meetings have been held : a deputation had a con-
ference with the Lnrd Advocate, and a memorial
addressed to the Premier has been dispatched as
well as published. With regard to that memorial,
objections, as were anticipated, have been taken to
one passage. It respects the qualifications of Mem-
bers. Now, we were not, could not be ignorant of
the statutory qualifications of Members in England;
but then, unless we are most grievously misinformed,
the law, however literally enforced, is substantially
evaded, and that in a manner calculated to throw
undue power into the hands of individuals. Is the
Scottish provision intended to become a similar
mockery ? At the best it is foolish. Is it meant to
be substantially enforced ? Then the objection to
it remains unimpaired. But the grand objection to
the Scottish Bill relates to the qualifications of lessees
within burgh. A verbal lease, for a year or less, we
all know is perfectly valid, and the terms may, as in
other cases of verbal contracts, be proved by parole
testimony. Now the Bill requires a written title;
and mark the consequences—small tenements can
never bear the expense of stamps, &c. fi r such con-
tracts, and unstamped writings are not receivable in
evider.ce. Three-fourths of the inhabitants, other-
wise qualified, are thus excluded—(Hear, hear)—
while a dexterous political agent, may easily contrive
to engross the power of returning a Member.—
(Loud cheering.) To this subject your attention
must be directed ; and, on a fitter occasion, I shall,
if necessary, show that there is no occasion for
altering, on this head, the established law of Scot-
land. (The Learned Gentleman concluded amidst
loud applause.)
Mr. WILLIAM TAIT, after a few observations,
proposed— •
Resolution 1. Tnat it is the conviction of this meeting
that the feelings in Scotland in favour of the Bill to amend
the representation of the people, has not in any way sub-
sided, as has been falsely represented, but, on the con-
trary, is becoming every day more intense ; and that the
delay which has arisen in the progress of the Bill, a delay
occasioned by the factious opposition of the borough-
mongers in Parliament, has caused throughout the country
great disappointment and alarm.
JOHN GREGORY, Esq. Advocate, said I rise, Sir,
to second the resolution you have last heard. Let
us for an instant consider who are our opponents in
the great struggle, without regarding those who are
swayed by private interest—let us advert to those
honourable and high-minded men who are arrayed
against us—and what, Sir, is their history—they
are the remnant of the high Tory party of a former
age, a party whose gradual dissolution we are des-
tined to witness in a political atmosphere unfitted
for its support.—(Great cheering.) They are the
men who, under the influence of a blind admiration
of the past, have obstinately resisted those great
measures of modern policy, whose object was the
improvement and happiness of mankind.—(liear.)
They are the men who, with stubborn pertinacity,
resisted to the last the repeal of the Test and Cor-
poration Acts, and of the Statutes for the exclusion
of the Catholics—and why? Because they were
venerable specimens of legislation, and their respect
would endanger the established Church of England
—they urge the same objection to Parliamentaty
Reform—it is a bad omen, Sir, for any cause or for
any institution, when the arguments of their cham-
pions contain an admission of their weakness, and of
their inability to maintain their ground in a fair field,
and in the face of a real and national representation.
—(lmmense cheering.) It is an additional argument
against their cause that they have invariably enlisted
the demons of intolerance and bigotry in defence of
a church whose expense arid origin was fesedom of
thought and resistance to the bigotry of 'Rome.—
(Loud cheers.) They tell us, Sir, that the Bill is
republican, and will conveit our happy mixed Con-
stitution into a pure republic. In the first place,
Sir, our system, which in theory is mixed, has be-
come in practice and oppression an intolerable
oligarchy.—(Hear, hear.) hi the second place the
republican character of the Bill appears to me its
greatest recommendation ; it will convert our ano-
malous oligarchy into a representative republic with
a hereditary head.—(Applause.) They tell us, Sir,
that no change of system can remedy the evils of
our condition ; that assertion is premature, and
would be better timed after the failure of the expe-
riment we are about to make. They ask if this
change is to be final to that question. There are
two replies; if this Bill be imperfect, it neither can
nor ought to be final; but in no case can we either
foresee or controul the decisions of future Parlia-
ments.—(Cheers.)
Mr. ALEXANDER BRODIE—Since the union of this
country with England, the practice of withholding