The Sun.
London, England, 1831-03-31 00:00:00

CAMBRIDGE PETITION.

Lord PALMERSTON ruse to present a petition from
the University of Cambridge, on the subject of the Bill
relative to Reform introduced by his Noble Friend, and
now in progress through the House. The petitioners
stated that they understood the House was engaged in the
consideration of a Bill for the amenthnent of the represen-
tpeople in Parliament, and while they pro-
f:in
stseod tis:f the
eirctniurrenc„
in
anymeasut e calculated to remedy
actual abuses and effect itnprovements rendered necessary
by the lapse of time, in our institutions, they declared they
could not but view with apprehension and alarm some of
the provisions of the measure, by which they were con-
vinced that a great change would be brought about in the
Constitution of the country.—(Hear.) They said that
biAtory and experience showed that every abrupt change
was dangerous to tranquillity, to public confidence, and
credit.—( Hear) And they4tuted their opinion that the
proposed extenion of the elective franchise to great numbers
sideration, because such a privilege, if placed in the hands
small Property called for their careful con-
-00: Ptelrit7c)slasof
class re!erred to, would be liable, in times of
to
excitement, to he exercised less calmly and conside-
ratelywas desirable, and might ultimately lead
us to the honour and pro-
of the country. The petitioners prayed the
:ioiPiemristeY otherh an
changes calatnit
to proceed with the utmost caution and circum-
spection; and, in any extension of the elective franchise,
to take care to confer the privilege only on such persons as
i
had already an interest in preserving good order in the
a and who night he expected to show a due regard
fo
interests of the country. ;having thus briefly stated
thestr thee'
topinions and prayer of the petitioners, it only remained
fcr him to express a hope that whatever opinion Members
on one side or on the other might entertain as to the senti-
ments or object of the petitioners, the moderation with
which those sentiments were expressed would recommend

he petition to the ieliberate and respectful attention of •
the House.
Mr. W. BANKES congratulated the Noble Lord on
having faithfully and happily delivered himself of this pe-
tition, after such an extended period of gestation...--
(Laughter.) It was now nine days, not months—
(Laughter)—since the petition had been voted in the
Senate house. For the delay that had taken place in its
presentation it might at first sight appear difficult to ac-
count. How did it happen that the petition had taken so
long a time to travel to town? Even if it had been seat
from Cambridge by the slowest waggon, it otorbt to have
arrived sooner. With the present improved methods of
communication, a petition need not have been longer in
coming from Padua, Pavia, or Gottingen.—(Laughter.)
He would not undertake to account for the delay, content-
ing himself with observing, that if it were the case of -a
petition with a different prayer, from the neighbouring
university of Gower-strut, no doubt they would have had
it by the swiftest oinnibus.—(A laugh ) The distance
from Cambridge was not great—about 52 miles;
"Nine times the space that measures day and night,"
the period which the great poet allowed as sufficient for
tumbling from one world into another, had the petition
taken to travel to town.—(A laugh•) Why, by the very
longest road, this was only six miles and a small frac-
tion, or, as it would be termed at Cambridge, six miles
and an uncertain quantity, per day—no prodigious rate of
velocity, it must be confessed. However, in his opinion,
it was in the last stage—namely, from Downing-
street, that the principal delay had occurred, although the
way was nicely Macadamized. But probably a Cabinet
Minister carried a drag chain with him when he was the
betrer of a petition signed by his constituents, and directed
against a measure brought forward by the Government of
which he was a member. But omitting the delay that
had taken place in the presesentation of the petition, who
were the constituents of the Noble Lord? A large anti
tespectable body of the clergy of England,—individuals
whose opinions were entitled to the utmost respect. One
part of the Bill which they looked at with the most jea-
lousy consisted in the proportion established in the repre-
sentation of the three countries. It was proposed to add
to the representation of Presbyterian Scotland and Catho-
lic Ireland, while the members of Protestant England were
to be diminished. Although Presbyterian Scotland might
not send Presbyterian Members to Parliament under the
new plan, it would send representatives who bad no ad-
hesion to the Protestant Church, and the same might be
said of Ireland. What would be the effect of this ar-
rangement coupled with the diminution of the English
Members? It could not but be disadvantageous to the
Established Church. In fact, the attempts against the
property and just influence of the Church of England
would become more and more apparent, arid the mainte-
nance or abolition of that church must depend on the exer-
tions of its true supporters.

Colonel WOOD said that the reason he had voted for
the Pecond reading of the Reform Bill was, because he did
not think it right to cut short a measure of importance
in that stage, and wished for the fullest investigation of the
subject. He wits persuaded that if Parliament proceeded
with circumspection, the public, which had manifested a
strong and unanimous feeling on the subject—(" No, no,"
from the Opposition.)—Gentlemen might deny the exist-
ence of such a feeling out of doors, but he repeated that
he was convinced, by his own experience and • all the in-
formation which had reached him, that there was a very
strong and general feeling on the subject in the public
mind.

Mr. WARBURTON believed that the petition correctly
represented the opinions of the tesident members of the
University, to which the Hon. Member for Marlborough
and himself belonged. It would seem from the Hon.
Member's speech, that he thought the members of the
University good ca'culators of space, time, and velocity.
No doubt they were ; as a proof of which he referred to
this simple fact,—that on Saturday evening at six o'clock,
notice was given of a grace to be brought belbre the Se-
nate on 'Monday; with a view to this petition, its promo-
ters knowing full well that the contemplations of the
members of the University would not be disturbed by
the passing-of the ordinary vehicles of communication on
the. Sunday, so that no opportunity was afforded to the
non-resident members to go down and take a part in the
proceeding. Thus, he said again, the attendance of the
non-residents, who had often outvoted the residents on
similar occasions to the present (for instance upon the
Catholic question), was altogether precluded by tie nice
mathematical calculation of the resident members of the
University. The petition bore the signatures of 150 re
sidents. The number of non-residents who attended was
necessarily few, and of those who signed the petition still
fewer.

Mr. PRAED was at Cambridge a few days before the
lintroduction of the Reform Bill, and there then existed a
I pretty general desire to petition on the subject, but it was
thought better to wait till the Members of the University
had ascertained the nature of the measure proposed by Go-
vernment, and accordingly the design was postponed. If
the Members of the University had wished to oppose all
Reform, merely because it involved a change, and to main-
tain every thing that was estahished because it was old,
they would have acted like some of the friends of Reform,
and petitioned before the details of the ministerial plan
could be known. It was not until the Wednesday pre-
ceding the Monday fixed for the second reading, that the
Bill arrived in Cambridge ; and it being thought that the
time was too short to allow of a petition from the Univer-
sity, a petition was prepared as of the undersigned ; but
many persons thinking it would be best to submit a peti-
tion to the Senate, and some declining to sign a private
petition, a grace was prepared. Now it might be sup-
posed, from the statement, of the Hon. Member, that this
occurred at a time when there was no possibility of in-
forming the non-resident Members of the transaction. But
first, be it observed that a petition such as this could
never profess to be more than the petition of the resident
members of the University; and next, it was not usual
for non-residents to go down to vote on such occasions.
Then as to the impossibility of informing the non-residents
of the petition, not to speak of post horses, was there no
mail passing through Cambridge on Saturday night? Be-
sides, some non-resident Members did go down from
London.
Mr. WARBURTON—OnIy four.

Mr. PRAED—There might have been thirty or forty.
What was to prevent that number, or more, from attend-
ing when the information had been conveyed ? The Hon.
Member proceeded to say that a considerable number of
the members of the University would have supported a
petition couched in much stronger terms than the present,
but it was thought better to adopt a modera'e petition,
and unite all suffrages in its favour. He had spoken with
several members of the Senate, who were very far from
telling him that they were opposed to all Reform of Par-
liament, but who, nevertheless, expressed their grave arid
serious apprehensions at the present Bill.

Mr. S. LUMLEY believed that the petition was only
open for signature 48 hours : perhaps if more time had
i:een allowed fur the arrival of the non-resident Members,
it might have been carried the other way.
Mr. W. CAVENDISII said the petition was not
against Reform generally, nor did it oppose the principle
of the measure brought forward by Ministers—it was only
against parts of the Bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL said the Hon. Member fur Marl-
borough had attacked his Noble Friend very unjustly for
the delay that had occurred in the presentation of this pe-
tition. Every one knew the difficulty that Members ex-
perienced in presenting their petitions when there was so
great a multitude to be brought forward. He had at-
tended at the House as early as ten o'clock that day, in
order to be certain of presenting a petition, and he now
feared that he should not have an opportunity. ills Hon.
Friend bad represented the petition before the House as a
petition against the measure of Reform, but he (Lord
John Russell) could not take it in any such sense. The
petition was drawn up in the most respectful terms, and
it did not charge the measure as revolutionary, or use any
of the language which had been applied to it in other cases.
He would beg leave to read a part of the petition to the
House.—(Here the Noble Lard real extracts from the
petition, which set forth that the peti inners humbly
prayed that the House would proceed with caution
in the changes which it was going to introduce, and
take care to preserve the institutions of the country.)—
So far from being, in his opinion, objectionable,
he entirely, agreed with the petition.—(hear.)--It was a
prayer which the petitioners ought to 1 y before the Houso,
intrusted as they were with the interests of the church,
and with the care of many of the institutions of the
country. At the same time he must be allowed to say,
that those men who mixed more in the world, and in its
commerce, trade, and general affairs, were likely to be
quite as good judges of the question as any Members of the
University of Cambridge. The prayer of the petition was,
that the House should hesitate before it made any abrupt
changes. This was a reasonable prayer; but members of
a University, who were more used to study in cloisters
than to consider what was going on in the world, were
perhaps ignorant of what had been going on in that House
for the last six or seven years. They did not appear to
know that when motions had been made for a change of
only two or six Members, an absolute resistance was made,
as absolute as that which had been made against the Re•
form Bill. When he had ventured to propose to add six
Members to that House, the cry was " Good God, what
do you wean to add to the numbers of the House, which is
too full already ?" When it was talked of reducing the

number, it was said, " Good God, don't retrench, Low
can you think of retrenching?" Every attempt at gradual
Reform had been resisted, and the cry of don't injure or
impair, or destroy the Constitution, was constantly raised.
The petitienets did not seem to be aware of the struggle
that had been maintained upou the subject.
Mr. GOULRURN said, the petition proceeded from a
body of men the best informed upon all subjects of discus-
lion in that House, and upon all subjects of learning, of
any society in the world. The question before the House
was one which could be decided only in reference to
its future consequences to the Constitution and institu-
tions of the country. Those who were well instructed
were of all others the best able to decide upon such points,
and to lay aside time prejudices that might obstruct the
judgment. The Bill dealt with every franchise of time
country, except those of the two Universities ; nod there..
fare, if the Universities were prejudiced at all, the proba-
bility was that they would be prejudiced in favour of a
Bill which left theirs the only corporation unchanged,.
Time petition expressed an approbation of some of the pro.
visions of the Bill, and this wa4 a legitimate expression of
the feeling of the resident members of the University ;
and, to ascertain the feelings of the non-residents, the way
was, not to send an express to London, as the non-resi-
dents were seittered all over time country, and it was as
vain to attempt to gain their sentiments, as to attempt any
thing that was impossible.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL complained that the
Right Hon. Gentletnan opposite had defended the Univer-
sity of Cambridge by misrepresenting what had fallen
from the Hon. Member for Nottinghamshire. It had
turned out to be the case, that the petition had not been
sent forth until the Saturday, and on the Monday it was
voted, and thus the same opposition had not gone on as
in the case of the petition upon the Catholic question.—
The petition said nothing more than every respectable so-
ciety was hound to say upon every constitutional question.
It prayed that the Bill might have an impartial hearing,
and a fair and a disinterested consideration. ft was said
that the University of Cambridge was excessively adverse
to the disturbance. of the present proportion of representa-
tives for the respective populations of England, Ireland,
and Scotland. Now the petitioners had professed no
such opinion, and it was only the day before yesterday
that this had been invented. Some allusions had been
made to the University of Gower-street, but he thought
that that University had done itself no small honour in
abstaining from the question. The University of Oxford,
moreover, had not thought proper to put itself forward as
an adversary of his Majesty's Government. This did
them great honour, and it must be recollected that Ox-
ford had shown its consistency of principle by a change of
its representative. The notions respecting the causes of
Reim m were singular, and he could not but allude to the
opinion of one of the Hon. Members for Boroughbridge
(Mr. Attwood), who had thought that the fall of the
House was principally owing to iN having refused to take
into its consideration the question of the currency. He
approved of the tone of the present petition, which did
nothing more than recommend caution, and an attention to
the well-working of the Constitution.

Sir CHARLES WETHERELL thought that bib
Learned Friend had not dealt fairly or kindly with his
Alma Mater. It was highly to the honour of the Uni-
versities that they never had sent forth any petitions upon
party questions, but where the discussions of that House
involved important constitutional questions. On those oc-
casions, the two Universities bad always petitioned as
they had done upon the Catholic Bill, and as the Univer-
sity of Cambridge had done upon the pr..sent occasion.
The fact of Oxford not having petitioned against the Re-
form Bill was sufficient to show that the two Universities
aced independently of each other. The Noble Lord bad
talked of men studying in cloisters, and of their being less
competent to form opinions upon constitutional questions
than Members of that House ; but he (Sir C. Wetherell )
would refer the Noble Lord to many illustrious names of
members of the Cambridge University, whose opinions
upon practical questions of a constitutional nature were of
the highest authority. He would only refer to Dr. Paley,
whom he might style the Blackstone of Cambridge. Paley
had written the most learned and most generally profound
dissertation upon the British Constitution ; and he was
one of those writers of a cloister whom he supposed the
Attorney-General and the Noble Lord would not think
worthy of attention, because he had not mixed extensively
in the world. He could claim distinctions fur many other
gentlemen, and he km.,w that the gentlemen of Cambridge
were as good judges of the Constitution of the country as
any who embarked in the contentious scenes of the House
of Commons. If he wanted a fair opinion, he should say,
" Give that of a man who is removed from all party contests
and from political strife." The Bill was an attack upon
the State—it involved the security of the Church, and the
safety of all the institutions of the country ; and upon
these grounds the petitioners expressed their alarm, and
their petition was fully entitled to the greatest respect.
_ _

Mr. PRAED, in re!erence to an allusion to a Memb.,r
who would wish to have a more intimate connexion with
the University of Cambridge, said, that if he were the per-
son meant, he could only say that he had formed no ex-
pectation of the sort.
Mr. ATTWOOD said, that if his Majesty's Attorney.
General asserted that the Reform Bill had not had the fair
consideration of the house, he grossly libelled the House,
as he had b,fore libelled -.-
Mr. SPRING RICE rose to order.
Mr. DAWSON spoke a sentence, the object of which
we could not ascertain in the gallery.
Sir J. SEI3RIG H T spoke a sentence, which was cheered
by Vie House, but the purport of which could not be
caught by the reporters.

The SPEAKER said, that he had been on the point of
rising, in order to observe, that if the Hon. Member for
Boroughbridge were not interrupted, he hoped that he
would end his speech by something palliative of the
lan-
guage be had used.

- Mr. ATTWOOD said, thathe would certainly drop the
word libel ; but certainly the lion. and Learned Gentle-
man had always been in the habit of using very strong
language, and of applying it against every body of the
highest dignity in the country. It copld not be forgotten
that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, in one memorable
speech, had applied the strongest language against the late
and the present King, and since that time, against an in-
dividual of the highest office, he had made use of expres-
sions which had been reported in the newspapers.—(Cries
of " Order, order.") He would proceed no further upon
this topic, since be found it to be unpleasant to the House.
The argument which he (Mr. A.) had used, was that the
existing system of representation worked well, and that
the alleged ill wor:sing of the system of Government and
the evils suffered by the people, were not connected with
the representation.

1 Mr. G. PRICE, as an old member of the University,
expressed his satisfaction at the course which that
learned body had pursued in reference to the proposed
measure of Reform. The petition against the present
' proposition of Ministers was the more remarkable, as hav-
ing come from those very persons who agree,' with the
Noble Lord opposite on most other subjects. He would
take this opportunity to state, that the feeling of the bar
in favour M. Reform by no means prevailed to the ex-
tent that had been supposed : in proof of which he might
mention, that of the forty-two birtisters on the Home
circuit, to which he belonged, but thirteen had signed the
Reform petition, whereas twenty-nine had objected to do
so, and but four or five of the subscribing parties were
connected with the University of Cambridge. That Uni-
versity, in his opinion, had performed its duty in a most
portentous crisis, and he:the consequences what they might,
it at least would enjoy the proud consciousness that it had
nil been found wanting in the hour of danger to the Con-
stitutkn.—(llear.)
After a feW words from Lord MOOPETW, the petition,
which was ti um the Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars of
the University of Cambridge, was then brought up.
Lord PALMERSTON, on moving that it be printed,
denied that he had wilfully delayed presenting it to the
House. In fact, he hid received i: just that day week,
beenC consistentr with the of the
i
and hal attended it daily for the purpose of fulfil-
ling the wishes of his constituents, but it so happened
that an opportunity of doing so had never been af-
fordedigbt,
whenhitn it
, ex,st:oeittl ahtanailii)r
leiaxvteretieY lue hour
respect due to the petitioners to have presented it. Indeed,
his being enabled to lay it on the table even now, was
entirely owing to the indulgence of the House. He could
scarcely regret the delay, however, as, had it not eccurred,
lion. Members would have been denrivtd of the pleasure
they had received from the elaborate pleasantry of his Hon.
Friend the Member for INlarlborough, who had favoured
them with so many facetious impromptus that he had em-
ployed seven days in concocting.—(Laughter.) With re•
sped to what had been said relative to the discrepancy of
opinion on this subject between the University of Cam-
brif ge and himself, he should merely observe, that he never
that this petition had originated
believed that by honestly performing his duty as a public
,le"..a.iihisntiiiii(ct"aeek,entn't:iiin;lof these whose signatures man on a great national question, i.e should forfeit the
confidence which his constituents had reposed in him.
(H„r ) At the same time the Hon. Gentleman opposite
ahsosmerthiengwas
principally indebted for his
were attached
to it bad formerly opposed him on the policy of Catholic
Emanciptiwn.

31r. GOULBURN remarked, tira the petition Certainly
appeared to Lint to have rea•eived much lees respectful treat,

. 1./ --
r"

I

meat thian it would probably have expelieoced had it been
in ',lppon of Reform-instead of being against it.
'I he ATTORNEY-GENERAL would yield to no
Gentlemen present in respect fur the Onivcrsity of
Cambridge, and it was therefore must unfair to interpret
any of his observations as in the least degree disrespectful
to that learned and venerab:e body. He had, moreover, a
right to complain of certain allusions which had been
made to his conduct at a former period of his public life;
but he owed no apology to any one for the course that he
had pursued upon the trying and melancholy occasion so
needlessly referred to.—(Hear, hear.)—Personalities, it
Was true, had been uttered ; but his most painful duty to
his unfortunate and much-injured client rendered such
personalities unavoidable. But since this unhappy subject
had now been invidiously obtruded on the notice of the
House, he would not shrink from declaring, that an illus-
trious individual whom it would be unparliamentary more
partictilarly to allude to, bad in his person given more
&gnat example of generous magnanimity than history had
ever recorded of any sovereign since the time of Henry V.,
when that high-minded and chivalrous monarch presented
the sword and balance to the Chief Justice who had per-
sonally offended him.—(Cheers.)
Mr. ATTWOOD, in explanation, had only stated that
the Attorney-General had employed inflammatory language
which might be productive of the most injurious conse-
quences in the present excited state of the public mind.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL could by no means
admit that the public mind was in a state of excitement
which the Hon. Member described, although, certainly,
attempts had been tnade to inflame it.—(Hear.)
Mr. H. TWISS supported the petition.
Sir J. SEI3RIGHT took occasion to allude to the sup-
posed probability of a dissolution of Parliament, but the
Hon. Baronet was very imperfectly heard in the gallery.
Mr. G. PRICE should have no desire to sit in that
House after the passing of a Bill which would destroy the
Constitution.

Sir R. Vl' VYAN referred to the recent rumours of
an approaching dissolution, and animadt;erted on the decla-
ration of an Hon. Member, that it was the undoubted pre-
rogative of the King, in such an event, to issue ❑o writs
for certain boroughs which at present enjoyed the right of
returning Members. He could not, however, for a moment
believe it possible that Ministers would presume to advise
his Majesty to adopt such a monstrous alternative, after
their recent experience of the result of an unconstitutional
interference with the right of election in the neighbouring
kingdom. The Hon. Baronet concluded by charging the
Noble Lord who was now Chancellor of the Exchequer
with inconsistency, iu having last session voted that the
distress of the people was general and not partial, whereas
he had subs, queue!), opposed a motion for a select Com-
mittee to inquire into the causes of that general distress.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had op.
Posed the Committee alluded to from a conviction that it
would not promote an aHeviation of the distress which he
acknowledged to have existed. It was intended to inquire
into a variety of subjects, and amongst others to investigate
the currency question, any agitation of which he had no
doubt would increase the an:ount of public suffering, in-
stead of mitigating or removing it.—(Hear).
Mr. G. R. DAWSON said that the menace of a disco.
lotion was a most offensive attempt to intimidate Members,
for the purpose of deterring them from the discharge of
their duty. Ministers might as well say to Parliament
" We despise your opinions, fur we shall soon have an op-
portunity of kicking you out of the House."---(Laughter.)
Sir J. SEBRIGHT explained.
Sir G. MURRAY said the Hon. Baronet and the other
advocates of the measure seemed to overlook the great ar-
gument which those who called out fur still further changes
in existing institutions than those which that measure
would effect, extensive as they were, would derive from the
fact that such a measure had been passed by a Parliament
professing to act in obadience to the wishes of the people.
If, in this instance, a House of Commons not chosen fur
the purpose should effect such important changes in our
representative system, a fortiori a House of Commons
chosen under those changes shoulego much farther in yield-
ing
to the most extensive demands of their constituents.
Mr. TWISS—I wish to know from the Hon. Baronet
how he would vote, should it be proposed to disfranchise
the county Which he represented, or raaluce its Members
to One, the principle of disfranchisement (wing the same as
in those boroughs which the Bill he supported went to de-
prive of their Members ?

Sir J. SEBRIGHT—Most decidedly I would oppose
the proposition.—(" Hear," front the Opposition.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, begged leave to say,
that what he had said touching the King's prerogative
extending tis the power of omitting to send writs to places
returning Members to Parliament, had been misunder-
stood. At present all writs were sent in the King's name;
and though he had his doubts whether his Majesty con-
stitutionally possessed the power of omitting to send writs
to every place which may have returned 'Members, he had
no doubt of the improbability, amounting to an impossibi-
lity, that such a coup d'etat would even be bad resort to.
He was inclined to think the King did possess that power,
it certainly was exercises in ancient periods of our history,
and had not been formally curtailed ; but, as he had said,
need not be apprehended. By the Bill the power thus
formerly exercised would be defined and exercised by an
act of the legislature.
Mr. 11. GURNEY was one of those who saw no
reason why the two Universities should not have the power
of returning clergymen to represent their interests in that
}louse, if they felt that members of th it body would be
their most fitting representatives. The Act by which
clergymen were excluded, it was well known, was aimed
individually at the celebrated Horne Tooke, and might he
repealed now that the circumstances of the times were so
much changed. The Hon. and Learned Attorney-General
was in error as to the constitutional law with reference to
the King's power to omit sending writs to places returning
!Members to Parliament ; fur in the times of James I. the
House passed a resolution declaratory of the fact that he pos-
sessed no such power ; and since that time no attempt had
been made on the part of the Crown to asset t tli,:t right.
Sir H. HARDINGE said, that the borough which be
represented possessed more voters under burgage tenure
at present than at the Revolution ; and, therefore, would
contend, that to deprive it now of its two Members
would be to violate the corporate rights established and
guaranteed in 16S8.
Mr. HUME was not surprised that the Bight Hon.
!t.epresentatives of the twenty-seven burgage tenures cf
Newport should he opposed to measures which went to
put an end to such a mockery of representation ; but he
teat
put it to the common sense of the House whether
!lac system was defensible under which twenty-seven bur_
gage tenures should have the power of returning two
Aletubers to that House, while the large and pipulous
towns of Birmingham and Manchester hail no represen-
ttahtives?—(llear.)—Hon. Members rang the changes on
e danger of innovating upon the Constitution, as if the
paramount excellence of the English Constitution were
not its facility of accommodating itself to the changes
'vh4,h time and circumstances effect in all human insti-
tutions, and as if, in fact, every new Act of Parliament
IV" not pro tanto a change in the Constitution.--(Hear.)
Air. HOY felt himself called upon to offer a few obser-
vations against , the Ministerial plan of Reform. He had
listened to the several speeches which had been delivered
°o both sides of the question in silence, but now should
'74 mere listener no longer. " Server ego auditor tan-
;‘,44, nunipianine reponanr ?" His first objection to the
di was founded on its great disfranchisement principle,
by which not only the pourer classes but the very highest
`of:l4'4l he deprived of the power of voting for Metnbers of
4riiatuent. Of the borough honour
representing, which he had the
',Presenting, his present Majesty was a freeman, and
),:fect could not tender his vote, as the present Bill lapped
ii all non-resident voters, of which his Majesty was one.
e also übjected to the Bill on account of the glaring in-
conais,,wy
e„ ' of its provisions. Its advocates assert that it
AvvY-"‘ hilt to restore to the people their just rights ; but that
pe4:l,l,,flLeY, for that House hail akn no rights front the
the :dm' therefore hail none to restore to them. Besids.,
by
tr Bill. did not grant tile people asked for, judging
I
what the}
'asked
f,, le'r petitions, 280 (out of 600 altogether, presented
bye-rethe introduction of the Bill) of which were for vote
and
shallo,,c reduction of taxes, :aid the abolition of tithes
oqe'',
ou!es. Did Minist.ers
Franceshut tali,e)i,iii
le3yeelgsiz, aloe,
via, ,it, t the democracy in . .
cout4i.i2"'Pared to fake- the latetafiroonce,editniges
ferrairet,lii oasts!
mad, ''w, a nuidel
the :sli,itilnen he recollfeoeit.eirtrhet emphatic'the early period
of the ° Chancellor of the Exchequer in
. declaration of
of d'el,,,,Pitlre,ent session, in favour of the triN-toieutiLeoiritiibtlieiant)
the't Prt.„:1()11. but they were told by the .1
int,;4tuet measure would be conervativ.elns
we, .'t• C.". Conservative, indeed, which
o
Bq: It Iv knock off sixty-three Members
der-
fatmou.nee:sii:l:llolisliegl.)
of that House.
ita ;4 ti. 4 evident that Ministers did not themselves un
:,,,l's;tt,Q, ;I:Pidrineiple and 'tendency of their own Ine:su!.ye: s°
0' 4 to their guidance would Le only to
ot (4,1, the blind le,- •blind,and both falling Into
ve lai,,_, ti ling the
,o' tile' k ,"e for one would not be so led : he saw b.e.-
'ern
.the
,' 01,1„t'leilt,"a''n ; and, like the heroic Roman a old.:
frcoNe into it to save the Constitution of his country
ma• tO telt' n•
' er,,,13i1i -Ni„ rHORPE was a reformer, a real conseien-
trit w,,11,11.) but had voted against the second reading, 0
, o,fraak tn.‘vould continue his opposition to it, so long.
that hylii,:uePrive a large portion of his constituents of
IV -cto4.4,rights the at resent enoyed. It was true
isgturnts hay d expressed their approbation of the

Bill whet first promulgated in that House, but he was
sure they would not continue to favour it when better ac-
quainted with its provisions. At present there were
1,233 voters in Lincoln, but by this great franchise-
extending Bill that numher would be reduced to 434
voters—(Hear, bear)—lnd by the freehold provision the
county electors would also be diminished, In the same
way Grimsby, which at present possessed 324 voters,
would by the Bill he deprived of one Member, and would
have but 94 electors.—(Hear.) In opposing the Bill,
therefore, he felt he was consulting the interests of the
people at large as a real reformer.
Mr. R. GRANT considered the present petition as one
of great importance, as expressing the decided opinion of a
mutt important and enlightened body, proverbially slow to
propose any change in existing institutions in favour of the
principle of Reform.—(Hear.) The petitioners, it was
true, did not ger the length of the Bill, but neither did
they go the length of its opponents, and between both
extremes chose the middle ground of moderate Reform.—
This declaration of the petitioners, joined with the una-
nimous sentiment of the veriest opponent of the Govern-
ment measure in favour of some Reform, was a highly im-
portant feature of the times, and augured well for the
speedy success of that measure.—(Hear.) He would ask
the moderate reformers, who grounded their hostility to the
Bill on the assumption that to grant it would he only
opening the door to mote extensive popular demands,
whether their r,r,,itment did not apply with increased force
to their own less yielding proposition?—(Hear.) If, after
granting much, they would still be asked far more, surely
to grant little would not be the way to check the demand
of the public.—(Hear.) The Hen. and Learned Gentle-
man proceeded then to say, with reference to a declara-
tion of the noble Chancellor of the Exchequer a few nights
since, that but one or two petitions, the result of public
meetings, had been presented against the Bill, while
numberless petitions bad been presented in favour of
it; that be had himself presented a petition from the
city of Norwich, signed by upwards of seven thousand
of the adult male population, highly approving of the
Government measure, which would have been still
more numerously signed had time been allowed ; and
that no petition against the measure had been pre-
sented fram Norwich as the result of a public meeting, as
had been stated. Since be had heard the lust assertion,
he had inquired into the matter, and had learned that so
far from a public meeting having agreed to a petition
against the Bill, the opposite was the fact. The gay be-
fore yesterday a meeting was convened, by a public printed
notice, of the Mayor and corpora'ion of Norwich, at the
Guildhall, to, among other matters, petition against the
Bill ; but the respectable Tory gentleman who was to
mave the petition, so far from going on with his motion,
moved its adjournment, and his proposition was seconded
and supported by the leaders—most respectable gentlemen
—of the Tory party, without any comment or opposition
on the part of their opponents, thereby yielding to what
they felt to be the unananimous sense of the meeting.
The petition was then ordered to be printed.
Lord I'ALMERSTON next presented a petition from
the bachelor graduates of the University of Cambridge,
highly approving of the Ministerial plan of Reform.
On the question that it be pt -
Sir R. VI( VYAN rose to say, that he wished it to be
distinetly understood that the Attorney-General had in his
place stated it to be law that the King could omit sending
writs to any boroughs be thought fit to deprive of the right
of returning 111embers.—(u Hear," and " No.")
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL had only to repeat, that
the Bill went to effect by an Act of Porliatuent whit the
Crown formerly accompilshe.l by the exercise of its pre
rogative.

Mr. 11. GURNEY would still contend that the King
possessed no such power, imd that since the reign of
Richard 11. thsr'e was but one instance of intermission of a
writ to u place returning Menikrs.
Mr. WY NN entirely agreed with the Hen. Member for
Norwich ; for, as he had correctly stated, a resolution was
passed in Parliament of James 1., drawn up and sup-
ported by some of the highest names in our constitutional
history, declaratory of the const,tutional principle that the
Crown did not possess the power of omitting to send writs
to places enjoying the right of representation—(Hear)—
and since that declaration of the constitutional law, the
King had never' attempted to assert the possession of such
a power—(Hear)—and writs had been accordingly issued
to, among other places, the borough which returned
Hampden.—(Hear.)
An HON. MEmnnit, whose name we could not learn,
said that the statement of the Attorney-General had been
misunderstood. All the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
said was, that the Crown had exercised the pow,r of omit-
ting to send writs to places returning Members in an early
period of our Parliamentary history, and that the powei•
should only be exercised wider a statute of the Legislature
in future.

Mr M. FITZGERALD conSidered the question 'then
mooted as one of too Serious importance to the independ-
ence and privileges of that House, to be merely glanced at
on presenting a petition.—(Hear.) If, as the law-officer
of the Crown had stated, the King possessed the power of
withholding writs at his pleasure, it was evident that such
an unconstitutional influence might be exercised to the de-
struction of the rights and independence of the House of
Commons, and, through it, of the people at large, of
which they were the representatives.—(Hear, bear.) It
was highly expedient, then, that a question of such corr-
al importance should not be lightly passed over,
but should be placed beyond doubt by the law autliori-
tiea.—( Hoar.)
Mr. CAPEL considered the petition then before the
House was one founded on a delusion of the public mind
respecting the measure of Mmisters. That measure was
generally hailed as a get at franchise extending one, while
it in fact was one of wholesale disfranchisement, as many
of its present supporters would soon find to their cost.
Sir C. WETIIERELL wished to know in distinct
terms what the doctrine of his Hon. and Learned Friend
(the Attorney-General) was on the great constitutional
point,—whether the Crown had or had not the power of
omitting to send writs to places returning Members to that
House ? That was not the proper time for discussing so
important a constitutional question, so be would not then
condescend to state his views on it. But it was important
that it should nut go forth to the public, and that, too, as
a strange postscript to two petitions from die Doctors and
Bachelors of the University of Cambridge, that in the
opinion of the King's law-officer, as he understood his Iron.
and Learned Friend, the Crown did possess the power,
and therefore might exercise it, according to the advice of
its adyi•era, of withdrawing writs from places at present
returning Members to that House.-7-(Hear.) He main-
tained that such a power was a usurpation of the privileges
of Parliament, and therefore called upon his lion. and
Learned Friend to state, in express and direct termln his
doctrine on the subject.—(Hear.)
Mr. SAILER also considered it right that there should
be a clear understanding as to whether the King hail or
bad not constitutionally, the power of omitting to send
writs to all places returning Members to that House. If
such were the doctrine of the law advisers, it was evident
that the rights, and independence, and utility of that House
were in fearful jeopardy.—(Hear.)
Sir 11. VYVYAN could not refrain from expressing
also
his sense of the dangerous consequences of the doc-
trine of the Hon. arid Learned Attorney-General. lie did
not expect an immediate dissolution, because he thought
that Ministers knew too well that a new Parliament
would be still more hostile to them than the present, that
ithe boroughs which they proposed to disfranchise would
trmlnunsed to them to a man, and as the late election for
not be safe to increase the exci
nry of Clare showed that Ireland was in such a fer-
ment on the repeal of the Union question, that would
In a new Parliament Al, iisterstetEnvoeuultdonfiait Imivasts‘e. etolee'itiir°',;.7se
they would doubtless lie"
their measure, to fight for their places, whence
irs\eit in the event of a dissolu-
tion.—( Hear, and a laueij,ei
actuated by any factions opposition to the present Adtni-
In saying this he was not
nistrn, but by a sense of
thei- liai.!,(!"tY, which he would
ever assert, be who may
dir:ter ; and he hoped
he should never again see the
Ministry
must have recourse to an excitement Jtl."r•l'''" a
their only means of retaining office. mte,. Pulblic mind ns
The petition was ordered to be printed,'"./
Li•ni G. L. GOWER presented a petit'
Abraham Bradley King, praying that his ern "11
Sir
had bi en agreed to by the late Administration, anenroftjuilt:t.
ich
taken iroo con-ideration.
Iht
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
ed,
printed.
on the part of Goveintoent, to the petition being
After a few ohservations from Mr. RUTIIVEN and 111(r.
DAwsori, the petition was read, and ordered to be