The Sun.
London, England, 1831-08-03 00:00:00

concluded by again declaring that he should take the sense
of the House on the question of giving Members to

Greenwich.

Lord JOIIN RUSSELL was happy to end, from the
speech of the Right Hon. Baronet, that there was one
part of this Bill at least which was likely to receive his
approbation and support. He could not, however, avoid
thinking that the conduct and principles of the Right
Hon. Baronet were a little inconsistent. Some years ago

the Right Hon. Baronet declared, when a proposal teas
brought forward to give representatives to the great towns,
that he could not agree to it, because it would open a
field for much more extended changes, to which he was
not prepared to assent.—(Hear.) The Right Hon. Ba-
ronet was now, however, of opinion, from what they haul
heard that night, that the large towns might. be en-
franchised with safety, and without too affecting the

rights or interests of the Amalie'. boroughs. Now, -with-
out entering into the question of the manner in which the
Right Hon. Baronet proposed, on the present state of pub-
lic opinion, to render these changes satisfictory without
giving to them other changes, through the dread of which
he resisted Reform at other times, he (Lord J. R.) would

merely oh.!erve that he believed it as impos,ible to c.rry
on the Government of this country ihrough the means of
a House of Commons as at present constituted, as not to

allow Manchester and the other great towns to send
Members to that House.--(Cheers ) He believed
that the people of this country were as much de-
cided on requiring the alteration of the system of no-
ruination and of corrupt influence, as that the great
places remarkable for their wealth, their commerce,
and their intelligence, should be fully and adequately,
represented.--(Hear, bear, hear.) The Right Ho-
nourable Baronet had opened to the House a plan,
new in many respects, but the main object of which
appeared to be, that those large towns might be enfran-
chised without taking away the privileges of the smaller

ones. Oa that subject he (Lord J. Russell) would not
enter at that moment, further than to say, that when the

fitting time came, he hoped to be able to prove that Green-
wich, Deptford, and the other places mentioned in the Bill,
had as good a right to claim the privilege of sending Mem-
bers to that House as any of those to which the Right
Hon. Baronet was disposed to concede it. The Right
Hon. Baronet was, indeed, wrong i❑ one part of his state-

rent, where he said that the people of Greenwich never

dreamed of requiring Members until the Reform Bill was
promised by the Government. Now, it happened that
the people of Greenwich actually petitioned the House to
have the right of returning Members, which they had
once possessed, to be restored to them, and long before the
Reform Bill was promised by the Government.—(Cheers.)
As to the question of allowing these places, Greenwich
and the rest, to return Members, he would not, as he said
before, enter on it at that moment; but he might say that
possessing, as it was acknowledged they did, a large popu-
lation, and paying a rental of millions of pounds a year,

he did not see why their proximity to the' metropolis—
the seat, or the great centre of all the wealth and intelli-
gence of the country—should debar them from the privi-
lege of possessing representatives; nor why that prox-
imity should render their claims less allowable in the
opinion of the Right Hon. Gentleman, than those of
Manchester and the other places which he was willing to
accede to.—(Cheers.)
Sir ROBERT PEEL begged to say a few words in
reply to the Noble Lord. He had stated, he believed very
plainly, that the disfranchisement and the enfranchise-
ment were founded on two very different principles—
(Cheers)—that the one was founded on justice, and the
other on expediency ; and that they might he still justified
in proposing alterations in places originally founded on in-
justice.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord had taunted him with
change of opinions.—( Hear.) But was he the only
Member of that House—or was that the only side of the
House on which Members were not to be allowed to change
their opinions.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Was it to them that
the Noble Lord was to say that nothing could be conceded

for a change of opinions founded on the altered state of the
country and of opinion—(1-tear)—altered because one
Gentleman had been compelled to leave office for being op-
posed to Reform, and another had been supported purely
on the ground of embracing it—(Hear, hear)—altered
because that which was partial and limited had be-
come general—( Hear, hear)—altered because his
Majesty had been induced to give it his countenance—
(Hear)—altered, above all, because, under the express
sanction of the Government, the King's name, and all the
weight and influence of the Royal authority had been taken
away from the Constitution, as it existed for ages, and
brought to the support of a proposition for a mast exten-
sive system of Reform.—(Cheers.) And was it from the
Noble Lord and the Right Hon. and Noble Persons
opposite that these taunts came ? and had no change
taken place in their opinions ?—(Cheers.) Had he
(Sir R. Peel) ever taunted the Noble Lord opposite (Lord
Palmerston) in the course of the discussions for the change
of his opinions on Reform ? Had he ever taunted that
Noble Lord, or the Right lion. Gentleman beside bins
(Mr. C. Grant), although for full sixteen years of their
lives they had been chiefly distinguished for their resistance
to all Reform whatever—(Cheers)—distinguished too, for
their adherence to Mr. Canning, the main feature of whose
domestic policy was resistance to all Reform, in whatever
shape it might clothe itself.—(Cheers.) Did he deny to
them the privilege of taking whatever course the altered
circumstances of the time might point out to them to he
expedient, and why was the same privilege to be refused to
him ?—(Hear.) In the year 1826, when the question of
giving the franchise of Grampound to one of the large
towns was brought under the notice of the House, did the
Noble Lord or the Right Hon. Gentleman rise in their
places then, and say that the time was come when they
must yield to their deep sense of the propriety of trans•
(erring the privileges of decayed, corrupt, or small boroughs
to large unrepresented towns? No. So far were they
from being convinced of this imperious necessity, that they
voted for the transfer of the franchise to the hundred.—
(Hear, hear.) Had he insisted on those Right Honour-
able Persons preserving their opiuions or their consistency,
and why was he then to be debarred from proposing that
which he now considered most expedient ? What, too, was
the situation of the Noble Lord (Russell) ? After the able
speeches they once heard in that House—after the able and
erudite treatises they had read out of it—(Cheers)—the
Noble Lord, the author of the Bill—the proposer of the
plan of Reform, flanked as he was, right and left, by his
Noble and Right Hon. Friends, ought to be the very last
men in that House to taunt him with a change of opinion.
—(Cheers.) Ile knew not what advantage the Noble
Lord proposed to draw front his former declarations, but
this he would repeat, that having seen one Government
driven from office for opposing Reform—having felt that
from whatever cause, whether from the conduct of the
Government or any other, the demand for Retlirm was
become more general—and having seen no less than five
Governments within a very short period of time, he had
declared his intention, rather than risk the chance of
another change of Government, to support a measure of
Reform, if it could he made consistent with reason and
with justice.—(Heir, hear.) In compliance with that
pledge, and in obedience to that principle, he was now
supporting the Reform Bill (the House having already de-
cided on the principle of the measure) as far as he could
support it consistently with his sense of justice and fair
dealing, without any compromise of his priuciples or with-
out the perpetration of injustice ; and he would continue
to do so in spite of all the taunts of the Noble Lord or his
adherents.—(Cheers.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in explanation, denied that he
intended to taunt the Right Hon. Gentleman for the course
he had pursued in former years. What he had said was
this, that the Right Hon. Gentleman, having last year de-
clared that he could not consent to give representatives to
the large towns of Birmingham, Manchester, and Leeds,
because if they did they must go further, was a little in-
consistent in proposing to give them representatives now,
hoping or expressing an opinion that they might do so
without going further, the meaning, as he clearly admitted,
to resist all further changes.—(Hear, hear.) In his opi-
nion, and he now repeated it, the Right Hon. Baronet
would not find himself secure from those further changes
if lie made the concession to the large towns, and he would
find himself unable to maintain power unless he went to
that extent to which lie was at present so much opposed.
He repeated, that the Right Hon. Baronet would find it
impossible to coutinue to govern England with the mere
execution of that plan which lie proposed.—(Cheers.)
Sir R. PEEL said, the Noble Lord had threatened him
with the difficulty he would find as a Member of the Go-
vernment if the Reform Bill was not carried. Now he
(Sir R. Peel) was content to take the penalty of his con-
duct. He was content to resign all hopes of office, and
'cave England to be governed by the Noble Lord—
(Cheers)—provided he was not made a party to the
hazard which he believed would be incurred by the
(Cheers.) If the consequences of the course he now took
were to be perpetual exclusion from office, he was content
CO incur them rather than share in the dangerous responsi-
bility of the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) He had but one
word to say in reply to the observations of the Noble
Lord, and that was, that the plan he now proposed was
the same the Noble Lord had recommended a few years
age, except that the
the Noble Lord
lavdiviiieshedwtehree
toH obuosediaos.
give compensatk,ri
franchised.—(Hear.)
Mr. HUNT reminded the Right Hon. Baronet that ten
years ago, at Manchester, sixteen persons were killed, and
6113 badly wounded, for demanding that very Reform