The Sun.
London, England, 1831-12-26 00:00:00

vere endtntvour'nj to promote.—(Cheers.) But
in de:p.te of these uniuwaid events, they had alle-
viated some taxation, which pressed heavily upon
the poor. Besides, they had added no new bur-
dens—they had created no new sinecures and no
new pensions, and had kept us out of a war, into
which the Tories were so anxious to plunge us.—

(Cheers.) Ministers were right in not attempting
any, Fink of importance in a House of Commons
where there was such a large uneempulous minority
aeainst them—they might be defeated, and Reform
might thereby be delayed, if not lost. Let us give
thorn undivided supp •rt till they carry this measure,
etiii if, with a reformed Parliament, they did not re-
deem their pledges of retrenchment and ameliora-
tion, it would then be time for the people to with-
draw their confidence.—(Cheers.) The country
halt bewailed the protracted discussion on the late
B 'l, aid regretted that Peers had not been created
ctrty the measure. But perhaps it was as fortu-
nate. for it prevented the enemy from saying, they
had hen condemned unheard, and it gave the House
of Peers a chance to vote in conformity with the
writ .s of the people. It was not necessary at this
time of day to remind the meeting, that the British
Constitution was an invention for the good of the
pe ele, and that the House of Lords was only one
of its elements. That if the House of Commons
were hostile to the interests of the country, the King
could dissolve them, and appeal to his people, as he
did with his late Parliament. That if the Monarch
were tyrannical, the Commons could withhold the
suppliea, and that if the House of Lords opposed
the welfare of the people, the crown could infuse a
relit spirit into them by new creations.--(Cheers.)
This was the undoubted prerogative of the King,
and if it were not for this, the Upper House might
endanger the i-afety of the State, by successfully
setting public opinion at defiance. A despotic House
of Lords would be as great an evil as a despotic
Prince, or a despotic House of Commons. But the
Ministers now knew their friends, and he trusted
that they would advise his Majesty to exercise his
prerogative, and regenerate the House of Lords, if
they continued obstinate, and thus prevent a second
defeat, by neutralizing their opposition to the people,
which was only the result of Tory creations for the
last fifty years.—(Cheers.) The Ministers were
worthy of confidence, for they were the friends of
liberty. The Anti-Reformers had strained every
nerve to drive them into harsh acts against Political
Unions, by which they dreamed that they would
alienate the affections of the people, and thus blast
Reform. Gloriously had they been disappointed—
Minister 3 had declared that they would pass no new
I iws to put Political Associations down—that they
would not infringe upon the birth-right of Britons
to meet, and discuss, and make known their
grievances,—a right confirmed by the Revolution of
1688, though frittered down by the iniquitous acts
of Pitt and Castlereagh, till British liberty had almost
dwindled into a shadow and a name.—(Cheers.) In
the spirit of charity he would interpret the late
proclamation as a kindly warning to the people,
that there were still on the statute book some rem-
nants of Tory machination against freedom. How-
ever unjust these might be, they were unrepealed,
and therefore the law of the land. The Edinburgh
and all similar Unions were legal—they had not, and
they would not, trench upon the laws even though
they were unjust. The Unions must always be a
rock of offence to the Tories, for the former were the
foes, and the latter the abettors of corruption and
abuse. He trusted there was not a man in the
Edinburgh Political Union, so abject, so utterly un-
worthy of the blessings to be achieved by Reform,
who would for a moment sanction the unhallowed
views of the Anti-Reformers.—(Cheers.) In con-
clusion, Ministers were worthy of support, for they
were the friends of the people, and their continuance
in office was the best security for carrying Reform.
They were struggling to restore the people to their
just rights, and to their due weight in the adminis-
tration of the Government :—And why ? For '6 the
.security of the State—for the 6 contentment' and
she welfare' of the people." Rarely had Tory
Ministers brought forward measures for the content-
ment of the people. With them the word people
had almost grown obsolete. As long as we sub-
mitted tamely to misrule, they might deign to call us
the people, but now, because from the progress of
knowledge, and the enormity of their abuses, we have
murmured and demanded Reform, we have become
the rabble and the mob.—(Great cheers.) The in-
dependent electors of all the counties of Great Bri-
ndle the majority of the House of Commons, and
the large minority of the House of Lords—almost
the whole of the middling and working classes—in
a word, the Reformers, comprising the majority of
the wealth, the talent, the moral, and the physical
:strength of the country, constitute in the enligh-
:ivied eyes of the Tories, the rabble—(Cheers)—
but with us they are the feople.—(Cheers.) The
annals of Great Britain furnished few Tory measures
for the contentment of the people. The sword, and
the suepensions of the Habeas Corpus Act, were more
congenial with their policy. How short-sighted had
it been ? How vain their imaginations, that such
stern remedies could calm the mighty Leavings of
poolar discontent, created by wrongs accumulated,
and justice delayed ? No—they have only nourished
them the more, till in the fulness of time, they bad
now burst forth with tremendous power, and crushed
cur former rulers into the nothingness of private
men, tied I trust they will remain exiled for ever.—
Cheers.) (Mr. Hay then moved the second reso-
lurierewhich will be found in oar advertising columns.)
Mr. JANIF.3 SMITH, S. S. C.—Another campaign
between the King, the Government, and the people
on the one side, and the boroughrnongers on the
other, has now commenced. Once more the standard
of Reform has been raised in the Commons House
of Parliament, and :Ministers, faithful to their word,
have nobly redeemed their pledge to the people, that
their new measure of Reform would be fully as
efficient as that which a venal oligarchy strangled in
the House of Lords.—(Cheers,) Whatever doubts
might have been entertained as to the issue of the
contest some months ago, and I confess that I felt
no great disappointment at the rejection of the former
Bill by the Upper House, having anticipated such
an event from the beginning ; I think That we may
now calculate upon a speedy and satisfa.ctory settle-
ment of the important question which has agitated,
and which will continue to agitate the country till
that desirable event be accomplished; for it is im-
pos,ible to disguise the fact that no measure short of
a full and efficient Reform in the representation will,
or ought, to satisfy the people who have a clear and
undoubted right, admitted even by the Tories them-
selves, to be fairly represented in Parliament.'—
(Cheers.) If it be fortunate, as it certainly is, to
have a truly patriotic Ministry in whom the nation
can place the most unbounded confidence, it is still
more fortunate that we are blessed with a pateenel
;Monarch who reigns in the hearts and affections of
his people, and who verifies so conspicuously in his
person the truth of the constitutional axiom that
the King of this free country holds his ceown only
in trust for the benefit of the people.—(Gre.at cheer-
ing.) We may therefore rest assured, that should
an emergency arise to render a creation of Peers ne-
cessary that his itlajesty WO) Unhesitatingly exercise
his prerogative, which consists, ;46 Mr. Locke has
well defined it " in the discretionary power of acting
for the public good where the positive laws
are
silent." Indeed, we may reasonably presume thee
his :Majesty has already notified his intention to
efect to his Ministers, for I cannot conceive that
they would have risked the peace of the country,
for risk I am afraid there will be if the Bill be again
rejected, upon the mere hope of making a few death-
bed conversions among the Tory Lords and Bishops.
I am no stickler for the frequent and extraordinary
exercise of the Royal prerogative, for the history of
our country unfortunately sheave that it has cot
always been exercised for the public good; but when
I see one of the most beneficial measures ever sub-
mitted to the consideration of Parliament attempted
to be thwarted by a malignant and selfish influesece,
equally regardless of the wishes of the King and of
the people, I earnestly trust that his Majesty will,
if necessary, send up to the House of Lords a sulii-
eieril number of the tried friends of the people, and