The Sun.
London, England, 1831-11-15 00:00:00

practice what it is in theory—the depository of the
wishes, the express image of the feelings, and the
corrector of the grievances of the nation. But the
House of Lords is not only a legislative, but a judi-
cial body. It is assisted by the advice of the sages
of the law—it is purified by the rulers of the church.
It is the duty of such an assembly to guard the
morals, to protect the virtue of the people. Was,
then, the measure, however wise as a political regu-
lation, calculated to promote corruption, to encourage
fraud, and to increase vice and immorality ? On the
contrary, Sir, it is admitted that the measure, so
far from aggravating, would materially lessen, if not
wholly banish from our representation, that corrup-
tion, fraud, and immorality of which it is now too
often the fruitful parent. And yet such a measure
has been opprobriously rejected by the Peers of
England, the last court of judicature in the realm—
by the sages of the law, men who have filled end we
now filling the highest judicial stations—by the rulers
of the church, holding their seats as ministers of arc.
ligion which condemns abominations in high places.
We, Sir, can never forget that when the Commons
of Great Britain appeared at the Bar of the House
of Lords, suing for a redress of grievances by the
only effective mode in which that redress can be
obtained—a full and fair representation of the people
—they were referred to New Sarum and Gatton,
the shameful parts of the Constitution ; thus giving
them weakness for strength, opprobrium for glory,
and the slough of slavery for freedom. And was
that, Sir, the decision of the aristocracy of England
—this the conduct of the descendants of those
B irons who extorted Magna Chants from a feeble
tyrant? With few, and but very few, exceptions,
the ancient aristocracy of England were not wanting
to themselves and their country; and if their order
pass unscathed through the fiery ordeal it will as-
suredly undergo, its safety will be owing to the con-
duct of the best, the olde, t, the proudest of England's
Berons. To what then, or rather to whom, was
the defeat of the measure owing ? To the Scotch
and Irish Peers, to the borough-holders, to the place-
men and pensioners, and last, but not he ist, to those
mitted Prelates who, taught by divine revelation the
danger of wealth and the haz trd of luxury, kindly
take to themselves that portion of this world's goods
which they fear might expose the flock to eternal
destruction. Mr. Phillips then proceeded to give
an analytical statement of the characters of the ma-
jority of 199 Peers who voted against Reform.
is said that unless the Bill be altered the present
House of Peers cannot with any regard to consistency
press it. Of what part of that illustrious body is
consistency deemed to be a necessary appendage ?
Of the Duke of Wellington, who opposed Catholic
emancipation in one year, and introduced the measure
in the next, although a few short weeks b. fore the
Bill for accomplishing that object was submitted to
Parliament he wrote a letter to Dr. Curtis, telling
him the question must he buried for two years? Of
Lord Lyndhurst, who, in 182 S, when Master of the
Rolls, opposed the Catholic claims, and in 1829,
when Chancellor of England, supported them
Of the House as a body, that House which in one
year, by a large majority, refused to consider the
subject of emancipation, and in the next, by a still
larger majority, passed a more extensive measure of
relief than was ever before submitted to Pat liarneut?
No, S:r, it is not the pledged opesimis of the House
that I regard ; it is the bitter hoatility, !he undis-
guised aversion, of their Lordships, that I fear. Thai
majority against the Bill on the last division sea;
forty-env. There were forty Peers absent ; and if
they had all voted the majority would probably have
increased to fifty or moiel besides which, it was
avowed by some of the Press that they only voted
fer the second read,ng in order that the Bill rn:gtut
go into Committee, when they would have an oppor-
, tunny of objecting to those details of which they
disapproved. What are the means by which his
Majesty's Government hope to oyerciune its a few
short weeks this exulting majority ? Are they in-
trigue, corruption, or fear? My not the Bill be
• again thrown out, or may not their Lordships, taught
cunning if not wisdom by experience, disfigure the
; fair features of the measure in Comm,ttee? If new
Peers are not made, and the Bill be again thrown

out, the people will become convinced that the Go-
vernment has not the energy required to reform the
representation, and all further confidence in the public
mind will lie destroyed. Feelin,. that the present is
the most momentous crisis that I ever read of in
the history of our country,—a crisis not merely in-
teresting to our,elves, but to all nations,— and that
on the conduct of our Government depends the fate
of the British Constitution, I would earnestly and
solemnly implore them to adopt, ere yet it be too
late, those decided, those uncompromising measures

which will ensure the security of the Monarchy, the
integrity of the Legislature, and the happiness, the
prosperity, and the well-being of the people.
Mr. W. A. WILLIAMS wished not to excite dis-
content or bad feeling, but it was impossible to blink
the truth that the Bill had been contemptuoully re-
jected.—(Cheers.) One short week had, how-
ever, produced a mighty change. When the re-
solution of the Commons had passed by so large
a majority—when the decision of Ministers not
to resign—when the manner in which the Pre-
mier had been rece.ved by the King, who autho-
rized him to take such steps as he might think
proper for carrying the Bill—when the calm and
peaceful, but firm and unflinching determination of
the people of England—when all these things were
seen—many of the opposing Peers acknowledged
that it was in vain to offer further resistance. Still
there must be no relaxation, no lukewarmness in the

exertions of the people. They must not be de-
ceived by the specious speeches and dangerous doc-
trines of the moderate Reformer. The Duke of
Wellington—of whom he could never speak but
with gratitude, for his great military achievements,
however dearly they might have cost the country—
the Duke of Wellington, that heroic opposer of all
Reform, now professed himself to be a moderate
Reformer. There were many Members of the
house of Commons who had supported the second
reading of the Bit and opposed every clause in
Commit' ee ; and there were in the Lords many who
would do the same. For his part, he always regu-
lated his conduct by one object—the attainment of
a full, free, and entire representation of the people.
—((heers.) The present crisis was one of uncer-
tainty, and some danger. A cry had been
raised, and was now repeated, of there being a re-
action; and the electiens for Dorset, and Pembroke,
and Grimsby, and Dublin, were cited as
evidence of it. These proved only, that it behoved
the people to renew their exertions and be mole than
ever on their guard against the insidious artifices of
their political opponents. He understood that in
Dorsetshire the agricultural freeholders had been
greatly influenced by specious insinuations, that their
interest would be sacrificed in die reformed Housed
Commons to the manufacturers. As all the hopes
and prospects of him ( \lr. Williams) were con-
nected with the landed interest, it could hardly be
supposed that he would support a Bill from which
any such effects were to be apprehended. lie was
aware that the corn laws must undergo full consider-
ation ; but whatever might be decided, it would be
the act of the whole legislative body after a full and
comprehensive view of the subject. If, after mature
deliberation, any sacrifices were to be submitted to
on his part, he should not repine.—(Cheers.) Mr.
Williams sat down amidst the most enthusiastic
cheers, which were continued for several minutes.
The seventh resolution, expressing the thanks of
the meeting to the Bishops of Norwich and Chi-
chester, was moved by J. L. FARR, Esq. and se-
conded by J. H. PRITCHARD, E.g., in appropriate
speeches.
B. Hum, Esq. then rose, and was most ‘varmly
received. The Peers had preserved their usual
consistency in voting—their olsject being to grapple
at all and let nothing escape from their aristocratical
gripe. Look at some of the names of those who op-
posed the Bill. The list commenced with the Dukes
of Cumberland and Gloucester (par nubile fragrant!)
and ended with the little proprietor of the insgffili-
cant borough of Gatton. The first Peer, Earl,
Marquis, and Baron of tho United liingdara, had