The Sun.
London, England, 1831-10-05 00:00:00

ten sufficiently characterised by the Noble Earl, to
t it unnecessary for me to say one word.—(Cheers.)lse wonder, then, that they are in favour of the Bill,
gh, my Lords, it is obvious that not one in ten
tad of them could have read it, and if one in the
ousand. it is scarcely to be presumed that man could
rehend much of it if he did.—(Hear, hear.) It has
asked, my Lords, what we hope to obtain by rejects the second reading of this Bill? In the first place we
to obtain what every man, what every body of men
a right to obtain when, conceiving themselves to be
it, they folio* thti dictates of their own judgment.
hope to obtain the approbation of our conscience.—
tar, hear.) If on this subject it is the duty of any
a, or
kimbent o any set of men, so to act, it is a duty peculiarly
n this House. Whatever they may please to
i us—wlietber a first or a second Chamber—we are a 55se of Peers. As a House of Peers what is our peeu-
t duty? When any measure is presented to us, the
4ption of-tvl • .1
! "( ' ute apprehend to be pregnant with dan-
t. the community, however strongly that measure
peep ressed upon us by the House of Commons or by
..e, it is our Primary duty to exet•cke the privilege
rlitieh the Constitution has conferred upon us, and to give
liteeoudntry time to reconsider the step which we conceive
thisltr do'aer°' Undoubtedly, my Lords, I would ra-
4ined
the
in the preterit instance, after having tacit-
tlead_ie. Ptacticability of introducing any important
''its into the bill were it not that for the reas
as which I have alre .dy' stated I consider any such ex a-
Ilination ho
Pe have o P'lees• We are told by the Noble Earl that
hlee a
pr° oPtion but to take the Bill as it is ; to adopt at
4 °P"itign which is to con!ign us and our posterity
a new forra of '
red to tell Government, which no one has eve.risleenre-
,racticable,
%ersoulrld be practicable, and which, if it
seeds, host ; . ,in nay opinion, be pernicious. My
'auntey ea its, it possible
If
author: -e
that the Government of this
is
on if this Bill passes into a law ? If
if disftmeh. :fit had begun at the other end—if, instead
hey haci -."`ng boroughs of population and importance,
tther borou
ghsdisfranchised Old Saturn and Gat•on, and the
kn oppottt lowest in the scale of population and rates,
of such a NV would have been
finale Citelit and of proceeding further,
given of seeing the effect
if to proceed
NohletE atli heen found advisable. But, I repeat, will the
Hops tel
ansever me this question. How do he and his
.1".'14 eolfpget to be able to carry on the public affairs in the
Will tills-amnions,
if the present Bill pass into a law?
these, hot, by the introduction of it, have subjected
pon,7'ees and their '
aratat frei. successors to the sudden
..impulses. of_
"-jitlY oh lug ? Itnpul,•es which they must either in 'Ace eY, or Which ' uldenl ' drive them from
°f
grease 'ne
• rna'y
as
s ' )el ' •11
. great asure is akin to that by N. lic thesalaries
s
trot of Offiees of State have been reduced. The pos ei:tlit itri wealth, In y Lords, has not hitherto been, I
is Vier ,ffi"er will he an indi:peneible qualification for the
iirtdiaus
ac4eAs
aorf. the' State. The- measure-. to ayliicbl. i:ltude
e gee4t
~ tstocratteal. By reducing the sal tries, of
44
PO, n'eers of State, you leave the offices open only to
l'eato4e4,„ers of wealth. You narrow the choice of Ythe
'oto ' xou d • the
of
Hugs et,. , eprive country the power of calling
s %lee the most brilliant talent which it pos
eao, rider ,uela will also be the effect of the Bill under our
14'1 telait'ims if it should pass into a law. Let the Noble
'le to 44,1 e 11°W he and his friends will, in that
.case, be
nun '''Y on the affairs of the country ? Again, there
litheileeYauliordin
tide to the Hoa_te officers of the Government, whose
posed almost ",e of Commons is highly u-eful, and
1,,,) and St, , Indispensible. Should the present Bill
CaY, hi, eLe'd all the nomination boroughs be swept
l'o the' what means will it be possible to bring them
'orris, / bane"se of Commons, except by bribery ? My
,alitill to done all I could to endeavour to bring my
but 1 fin,, vote fil.
,tl3.eger ;hit utterly : the secord reading of the Bill ;
doPessible. I have a full sense of the.
'4ll sous 'el' May attend it re'ection, but I have also a not oil e that the respoosibsiiiej f those dangers rests
th tia Who 1 yor
-..., what havenc•
lilt'" Who :.° Our duty by rejecting the Bill,
.but o.tn
,t• done their duty by introducing i
tons'
've-
tr'aY be the result—thinking that the
tian,k aught to have time to reconsider this great ques-
lira' lie Ilawing that, onnienpn occasions, during
theieta,el,444ti"na as great haveY existed, and have, never-
my poli -
tare hourieel o suns
by order and content—l say we
;11:4 Opiniont() giVe the people an opportunity of qualifying
ea o„ on this most important question. N e.at
40144;'11k. give the Noble Earl such an opportul ni yt;
twetilt.'et. /II have little hope that the NoblemfiEtaor I
COQOs4,4I' But lam desirous to have the benefit
oft.‘ifirstwl7,
(-._' Chime e calla " the great ruler of "'na
us in a
titutiout that if this Bill pass, it will place
11,44, . 111 „ Ile 11% different from that which we have hitherto.
-"lako4-e 'tee Constitution cadn lvteendifferent from another.,
klsould t that if i
the proposal that it
‘vkineh 1't441 will throw Tian country into a state from
"ecotoe
an never entire! rereccoover y I cannot consent to
eeatitler ll accomplice in whaty it is impossible for me to
"oodie ""Y other light than as a great political crime.
..4 Viseou:nd continued cries of " bear, hear.")
tail l'ord ti4ILLBOURNE spoke to the following rffrctd:
1 a„1)!, in a'„',,,ail, most willing to concur with your Lot: -
e:, °Ave fruding the ability displayed in the speech which
i'Ll'ot v't;',l heard from m Noble Friend ; although I
p!'"le•Fri . think that much) which has fallen from my
fro
theiti ettua
might have better suited a Committee on the
tr.,,,"1, tny Neat °tion for its second reading. In what fell
tie'Y irgreei.de Friend in an early part, of iris speech I.en-
greibbeta '4. ttaniely, that it is incumbent on the various
eor°etlds one' his Alajest 's Government to explain the
pot,' witho-enieb they support ort the measure ; and there-
forl44ejt that intimatiopap I should have taken an op-
tuthe is‘te.: statin
tot g the reasons' which induced me to vote
1'5:444 oa -- readinz f this Bill. To many of the ar-
-I:4ve: wiiioZY Noble" Friend it aras
I
dual ;14aeli „,, favuhr; for they are arguments which.d.
impossible for me to
ritkirlia the
e-o'ilged elsewhere. If ever there was an in i-
itlg fore Of the
conntrY More anxious than another that theb
must m t-antry
might have gorse on without our e-
ilo HntetUlt frontlncOr the hazard and responsibility which
hhoti-e °le ao great and fundamental a change in the_..
sect toe sat
I was that person. That great
.0'
nliee„ atatesman
Lord Bacon, says that the differ-
! I-4 eiVil - was, that while
, tooe ern
ti, affairs and the sciences
l'ity t'reeat, the",,to should be nothing but change and
tient II repufarrorrner should rest far support on autho-
eetita)uttaspeta
roots
n. s, \serum in rebus civilibusp mutatio
"" (even if the change were for the bet-
tion' eost,-ene! oh perturbationern ;in titant -3"' fama, et o inione, non demonstra-
teltall• el.' In • P corn civilia audio.
4ihta, i fodi . attibus autem et scientiis
ttanquain
ulteri-
ttily
the .revs ,°") °lmola novis operibus,
atop `"e ... ' Qua eircumstrepere debent.' eUndoubt-
Le med. , etivtrt 0, ,
bto Q tis—atinu arising from change is to be
he 4,4 `t:ted. Leh the other terms of the proposition must
ttl.tai.PPorteci Lyhal.t,,tvh.ich it is proposed to change must
I 9ped es we c_stnority, consent, reputation. and opi.
i IltY, Lb and 17c.'g that the columns of that support are
0 itnite. ete i d ling--if we find that, instead of autho-
ill 4(1 of '4 disrespect for. all authority--if. weefifinnddtthhaat:
i 4'1)4" °I e"8"814s there pi
•)
_udi4l,_ repotati_ is clissensus— f w
II 'et the '°O, it iti 'En and opinion, there arel aversion and
0 , to et, altuatia t.oen time to look about us, and to consi-
-1 We nhert to the4 'n Which we are laced ;it is then time
4, -1.4 first principles of placed
Constitution. that
14 nett NI. th .
I told h Its., e edifice which is tottering and crumbling
, 1N„ y on_ (Hear hear.)
,i 7 steno e ot• My Lords, we have been
• steno " orkerf. Your, Lordships that we
d• to the% the duty Popularis aurce • and that it frequently
ought not to be
i., tl -''t th of legislative an'i re resentative bodies
h will P
''',l del:,:r-Y have of the eeople. I perfectly
I, $4, rst
tin
" representative body at all? The wildest
admit it.
1) wiiCY ...ordemhitenee would hardly deny the proposition.
tee, .;". Old p
0: ,alth°Ugh it
men"y be our duty to resist the
eh Hate, 'Le fOr atii 't ' ossible to resist it f
to ut.,/, e
~. s i imp . .•. long
eas,,r---.0./e ' Out in this case resisted it
ie., ih I 1)... 'et bear ) I this the more freely, be-
-0,,1 tea. .•••c on f • say
Iti ha, stin thu . Willer occasions been in the foreground
0, , 1 . e /
erg rhasoee, 0 so
otsied it : "'my Reform. Ni ht after nieht 'efl 41e00 ' tln,„
wh 'll another place, going' far beyond
bet l'aii sore 1 alts u are now adverse to the present s7,
lAlaterl_:.lit the
:xl'earropposed in the other House of aiwac terat,d 111. . sion of the elective franchise to
od' Whiell Ytittt. look I,4,.krnwintghharn. With reference to that period,
efler °l' Alp Ptived tl great regret to the circumstances
, for 1 • /tusk. le Administration of that day of the services
'dill° ad i'owall aiwiaTsx'so!,
think all never cease to regret them
in ti, Iltiiht .11 ink' that he was not fairly treated
ildt , e Ilobl ' e occurrence first shook my confidence
I tese e Utike opposite. On that. occasion, hor.v-
-1 i lbghe ."Nnaed the tran 1
Ptopo,i,lN because . btr of the elective franchise to Bir-
Ihea„o_ "(in was
adopt '° toy
.own heart I knew that if that
ir te, kit re, por ed, it must necessarily lead to a large
I Lkesoale'oing„aarnwaln..avilt iny Lords, give the elective franchise
irti weilth treat empori to Manchester . Because. they. have
e, ovule_ kid in.,,,01.., urns of commerce, daily increasing in
j tiy,dnee, Kpi,rt
andt` l'lc.e. Because they are full of men of
of, ilifi__ 41100, ,', l.ntelligenee. Because they have ar-
;t: o,o‘!Nee. at imperial grandur, and metropolitan mag-
waol hoe 't they . U would give the' tl l •t've franchise he-
4i! au • have hits • nme
e ec
1
al, for, 'fler,a.,,, increased. But the whole country
oil th , t,) b . 7"•-•-(Hear, hear,) It semi to me, there-
rise.
,_ e ire (Hear,
len
"4 °, cea,itr Insa,ure.
„,tie ger to resist the adoption of
I oil', bee," when
the
obte Earl says that on former
0,4
te_, wishes ot the people on this subject
if4' 1: 4,1. :isted, every thing has returned to a peaceful
014' hey( .. "r a certain time that 'nay be so, but not
ise,o ',are r ''• Two of the
re and
that
e that ifef,._ m
.3 great that
against the urea-
,o ; ela, Nit the
r,•""Pu"rlar di
eminaberedlyfourseidt aiss a tvealpon of par. ty,,
'1 i moor that sprin . mere.y a tempo' all
Vlb
gs up Whenever any general calamity

occurs, and subsides when that calamity is at an end. Ad.
mining- both these arguments to be well founded, is it not
desirable to deprive party of so formidable a weapon ? And
when your Lordships see that, on every occasion of public
calamity and distress, from whatever cause arising, the
people c mil for an alteration in the representation, and that
the call is accompanied with a deep. rankling sense of
injustice suffered, and of rights withheld, can you be in-
sensible of the danger of pi olongirig such a state of things?
What constituted the great danger which attended the
continuance of the system formerly pursued towards the
Roman Catholics in Ireland? That it gave opportuniths
to those who, as has been well observed, " were always
lying in wait to take advantage of time distresses of the
country." My Lords, the popular feeling on the subject
of Reform extends, your Lordships do not know how far;
it penetrates, your Lordship-, do not know how deeply; it
will break forth with irresistible violence when your Lord-
ships are flattering yourselves that the country is enjoying
general repose • and perfect tranquillity. I have already
observed, that my Noble Friend who has just spoken stated
many things which would have been better stated in a
Committee. Why will be not allow the Bill to go into
that Committee? lam sure my Noble Friend did him-
self great injustice when he said that his right hand had
so far forgot its cunning, that he should be unable to adapt
any amendments to the Bill. Undoubtedly the measure
is an exteneiee one. It does away with the nomination
boroughs ; it takes away one Member fm oat the represen-
tation of a number of other boroughs ; it alters the consti-
tuency of boroughs ; it generally augments qualifications,
I allow that these are great changes. I cannot concur in
the popular censure on the Hense of Commons for delay in
considering them. They are of great importance, and they
mlemend consideration But :deer so much deliberate con-
sideration, when your Lordships find that the House of
Commons has persevered in bringing down this Bill, will
you at once, and without any consideration at all, reject
it? Will you get rid of the whole proposition, on a
promise of 1 know nut what,—on a something to be in-
troduced liere:lter ? I implore the House to pause be-
fire they come to such a decision. I implore your Lord-
ships to consider the question as it now sands before you.
I implore your Lordships to ask your selves why the mea-
sure was introduced by his Majesty's Ministers,:-..why it
has been adopted by the other House of Parliam.nt? I
implore your Lordships to ask yourselves if the present
state of things can long continue? When the Noble Earl
said that it had been declared that the Bill must not be
touched or modified ; that it must either be taken and
registered by their Lordships, or thrown out intact, he
misunderstood my Noble Friend. My Noble Frieed's
language by no means admits of such an interpretation.
There was nothing in the statement of my Noble Friend to
warrant the supposition that he was adverse to delibe-
ration. But even if there were, would that justify the
Noble Earl in rejecting the measure without deliberation?
The Noble Earl had talked of population as the basis of
the measure, and has contended That that basis is erroneous.
population I admit is made the tale of the disfranch se-
ment ; but that it is the basis of our plan of represent:-
tion, or that it is our intention ever to make it the
leisis of the representation of the country, I deny. The
Bill comes in to effect an extension of the present system
of representation, and adapts it more completely to the
circumstances and situation of the country. The question
is undoubtedly an exceedingly large one, and the Noble
Earl has argued it at great length with an ability and ca•
pacity such as he always displays ; but he has argued it
incompletely. It is impossible, on a debate on the second
reading, when the general principle of Reform is the ques-
tion.—(`` No, no," from the Opposition side of the House,
cheers from the Ministerial side, and repeated " No, no,"
from the other side.) Everybody who had spoken had •
been anxious to make a declaration on that subject—
(Cheers)—and it was hardly possible to mike any state
went in favour of the principle of Reform, which slid not
call forth an indignant denial from these who, a few
mouths before, adniii.ted the necessity of Reform. When
that is the case, 1 put it to your Lordships whether Reform
is not the general principle of the Bill, and whether that
is not now the question for discussion ?—(" No, no," from
the Opposition.) is it agreeable to the course of youm
Lordships' proceedings to discuss the principle of a Bill
before going into a Committee ; and if you epprove of
that principle to go into a Committee ? Or are pito
Lord-hips prepared to say that you approve of the Re-
form and will nut go into a Committee l'—.(Cheers.) I ap-
peal to the Nob e Earl who spoke early in the debate, and
who introduced a Bill in the beginning of the Session, ie
which he took a considerable interest, but which I ultimo
say was of very trifling importance as compared to this
Bill, and was as inconsistent as a Bill could well be, and
the Noble Lord pressed your Lordships to allow him to go
into a Committee, merely on account of the excellency of
the object he had in view. If your Lordships object to
the principle of Reform, you will not allow the Bill
to go to a Committee, but if you do not, you will ;
and there, as the Bill is made to your hand, you will
amend and change it according to the reason and sense
and justice of the House.—(l-lear.) If not, what elterna
tive is there? What course will your Lordships pursue ?
What do you propose? If you will not allow the Bill to
go into a Committee, and there is no other Bill, wham
have you to give ? If it is necessary, us is stated, to ap-
pease the spirit of the people—if it is necessary to propi-
tiate them, your Lordships will allow the Bill to go the
Committee, as you will spare yourselves the mortification
of retracting or of presenting some other Bill. The
arguments which had been directed against the details of
the Bill are fit for the Committee, and I should wish to
spare your Lordships' time by not now discussing them.
I will not go, therefore, into all the questions mooted by
the Noble Earl. Ido not deny that this is a measure of
great importance—that it causms a great change—that it
• will he followed by other great changes—(Hear)—that
other measures will be necessary to carry it into complete
effect. There must be a change in the Constitution in re-
spect to Ministers having seats in another place. There are
some defects which may lead to other changes. I would
not exclude Alinisters from that House, nor allow them
to obtain seats by any other means than the voice of the
people.—(llear.) I should be exceedingly sorry to see
such a change, but the Bill will make changes necessary
to adopt it to the working of the Constitution, and to the
circumstances of the country ; but to effect these changes,
I rely on the elasticity of the Constitution, on its adapting
power, which has preserved and improved it in times past,
and will not fail, 1 hope, on future occasions.—(Cheers.) I
am depaiting, however, from the rule I laid down ros to
go into the details, which demand more discussion than
I can now give them. 1 must abstain, though that is doing
the measure injustice, because it is not possible for me to
go the length I wish. I implore your Lordships to con-
sider it well, and not now to touch those topics which will
best be considered in the Committee, but to recollect the
scenes into which you are about to enter. It is a great
que-tion you are about to decide—a question involving
the peace and happiness of the empire. I beg leave to
observe to your Lordships, that there is a great difference
between this Bill and that for the relief of the Roman Ca-
tholics, to which it has been compared. You have it now
in your power to grant what will be considered a boon, on
which the repose of the country depends, and which is
looked for with impatience. But in this Bill you are not
bound in any manner. You have never rejected this, or
any similar Bill. Some of your Lordships tray in the
other House of Parliament have expressed an opinion on
Reform ; but as a body—as a House of Peers—you ate
unbound and uncompiomised. Your Lordships have free
liberty and power to decide as you think fit, and you will
come to the decision free from the influence of fear, free
from all apprehension, free from all menace, free even
from that fear which a noble and generous mind sometimes
leads to rash and untimely acts—free, my Lords, horn the
imputation of fear. The Noble Duke stated at the begin-
ning of the debates on the subject of Catholic emancipation,
that he did not consider that he was addressing himself to
vour Lordships' fears. lam not of a different opinion.
• It is said that the great measure of Catholic emancipation
has not accomplished all that it promised. I admit that
--hut I would beg leave to ask, what would have been
now the state of Ireland had it cot been passed into a law?
If the want of complete success is to be ascribed to the
conduct of one man, if lie has had the power to app(ee
the beneficial workings of the measure. and delay its ad-
vantages, I must -say that man no the creature of your
Lordships' 'hands; your obstinacy gave hint influence, and
created the power which he possesses to impede the heal-
ing effect of a beneficial law. That he should have had
the power to raise obstacles to the peace and tranquillity
of the country, is a circuinstance I deeply aid
seriously
lament. Whatever other motives may actuate your Lord.
ships, I implore you not to be guilty of the rashness of
fear ; I implore you not tobuegnuirletymionfd y
theeugr Lordshipsreate
rrasli-
ness of del ay.—(Hear. ) I will
of the address of the Roman Consul to his Council on
going to war, when he planned that masterly march which
overthrew the Carthaginian General before he could unite
himself to his other forces—a march which, perhaps,
changed the destinies of the world. • The Roman army
used then not to procrastinate ; and assured thin that
their safety depended on the adopting his
.plan immedi-
ately, an-1 that there would be danger 1n delay—eye
"71'i/inn' sue quod tutus celeritas feciss.t, temera-
rium moranda facerent.—(Cheers.)
Time Doke or WELLINGTON---I concur, my Lords,
entirely with the Noble Lord who spoke last, in the opi-
nion that this measure is a most extensive one•
.It goes
to overturn the whole system of our representation ; .

affects the counties, town:,, and boroughs ; it affects every
thing ; and, as the Noble Lord said, it will require fur-
ther changes. It alters all the relation, of representation,
and even the proportions of representatives of the different
parts of the Monarchy. It i the most considerable alte-
ration and change ever proposed. The Noble Lord says
it would not lie sufficient unless it went to a great extent;
and he tells your Lordships it ought to go to a Committee,
and that we should not reject the measure now, but pro-
ceed to consider its details in a Committee. • Notwith-
standing all the changes it is to effect, it will be followed
by other changes---(Hear, hear)-,-in order to render it fit
for working, and adapt it practically to our Constitution.
Before I go any further, I wish to observe on a statement
made by the Noble Earl when he introdticed the measure.
He did me the honour to notice my conduct. The Noble
Earl, when lie opened tl e measure to your Lordships,
made some observations on me ; and the Noble Earl
generally manages, when be makes a speech, to attack
those who he supposes are his adversaries. He seems
to prefer that to explaining or defending his own mea-
sures. The Noble Earl seemed to forget that there
was any necessity to defend his own measure or ex-
p'ain it to the House, and chose rather to criticise me
and my language, and the langu tge of my Right Hon. Friend,
and our conduct and language in Parliament during
the last Session. The Noble Earl thought proper to find
fault with my language relating to the constitution of Par-
liament. The Noble Earl found fault with my opinion of
Parliament; but what had the Parliament done up to the
moment when I was speaking to make it undeserving of
our .iprobation ? My Noble Friend who has spoken with
great ability, regretted that I should have made the state-
ment I did make to your Lordships of the character and
conduct of Parliament. My Lords, I beg my Noble
Friend and the Nobl, Earl to recollect that when I spoke of
the Parliament I spoke as the King's Minister, and it is
the duty of a King's Minister to support the institutions
of the country.—( Hear.) It had never, when I was in
office, been the practice for the King's Ministers to give up
the institutions of the country and abandon them the
moment they wine attacked. But, my Lords, if I wanted
an example of the opinions of the value of the House of
Commons, I should find it in the opinion of the Noble
Earl the last time, I believe, that he spoke of the House
of Commons. In the month of February, 1817, the
Noble Lord said, " Constituted as it now was, he in
his conscience believed that the House of Commons was
of all other institutions in all the other countries of the
world, the institution hest calculated for the general pro-
tection of the subject. Supported by the people in temperute
and firm claims for redress, it was not only able but
certain to remedy every wrong. It was capable to act as
the most efficient controul upon the executive, by diminish-
ing the means of corruption and reducing the pressure of
a severe and grinding taxation." That was the opinion
of the Noble Earl himself in 1817; and what, I would
ask, had the Parliament done subsequently to deserve th,
disapprobation of the Noble Earl—what had it done be-
tween 1817 and the moment when I pronounced it, of

which my Noble Friend arid the Noble E irl have expressed
so much disapprobation? When tire Noble Earl quotes
what I said not quite a twelvemonth ago, he might, I
think, quote it correctly. What I said was, that I ap-
proved of the constitution of Parliament. I said that if
I had to create a constitution of Parliament, I would not
say that I should be disposed to make our Constitution
over again, because I did not believe the wit of man
could invent it, but I said that I would do my endeavour
to establish one like it, in which property should be pre-
ponderant. That was what I said, and I afterwards bad
the satisfaction to hear the Noble Marquis (Lansdowne)
deliver a similar opinion. He had stated that in any
,ystsin of representation which he could supprt property
must be preponderant. I said that also as a Minister of
the Crown ; and as a Minister of the Crown that I should
resist Reform. I spoke as a Minister of the Crown, and as
a Minister of the Crown I meant to resist Reform.
The Noble Lords say that this statement of mine
created a great dislike to roe, and created that spirit
of Reform which has since pervaded the whole
country. I beg the Nolle Earl s pardon; but the
spirit of Reform in this country was the consequence of
the French Revolution. It is partly true, that ever since
the American war, from time to time, there has prevailed
in this country a demand for Parliamentary Reform.
When there has been distress or difficulty the people have
demanded Parliamentary Reform. At the sante time, I
believe that, from year to year, the manifestations of such
a desire have been less frequent. I have, indeed, the au-
thority of those most friendly to Reform for saying, that
the manifestations of the desire for Reform were less fre-
quent till the period of the Revolution of July, 1830,
than they bad formerly been for a number of years. It
nappened, unfortunately, that a few days before the Ordi-
nances were issued at Paris, his Majesty had dissolved the
Parliament here. At the elections, my Lords, no doubt,
a strong spirit of Parliamentary Reform was exhibited,
ind many candidates for seats in Parliament were obliged
to pledge themselves in favour of Reform. At several
contests the question was decided by the candidate declar-
ing himself a Refortner. The Noble Earl also referred to
what had occurred in relation to the city of London. In
the month of November there also occurred the resignation
of Ministers, and it was attributed, like other things, to
my opinions on Parliamentary Reform. With respect to
the city of London, I was acquainted with these circum-
stances, as I stated myself on November 2. My Lords,
the Lord Mayor further explained to us the situation of the
city of London, as regarded myself on Nov. 5. We repre-
sented the state of the city to his Majesty, and we received
his Majesty's commands on Sunday, Nov. 7. He had
made the same statement in the House. To state that the de-
sire for Reform arose out of what I said, or out of the King's
not going to the city of London, was inconsistent with the
fact. My Lords, the state of London was then very bad,
and the state of England in every part in the South and
the North, was bad, and it was all owing to the French
revolution and the revolution in Belgium, and not to the
King's visit to the city of London, and not to what I said
in Parliament. The Noble Earl has cast the blame on
those of us of his Majesty not attending in the city. My
Lords, I beg to know if his Majesty has yet visited the
city of London ? The question was, whether we were
right or wrong; and if we were wrong, I beg to ask
why his Majesty has not yet visited the city of London ?
As to what has been said about Parliamentary lit form
having caused the fall of the Government, on that I will
say a few words. I have stated before, in reply to the
Noble Earl, and I now repeat, that the question of Re-
form had nothing to do with the breaking up of the Go-
vet nment. The Government retired because it had lost
the confidence of the House of Commons. I know that
many of those who decided against our Civil List also de..
tided against the second reading of the Noble Lord's Bill,
which they brought into Parliament. lam right, then,
in saying the question of Parliamentary Reform was not
the cause of the House of Commons withdrawing its con-
fidence from us. If it had been only the question of Par-
liamentary Reform, we might have stood. We were
beaten on the Civil List—we found we no longer enjoyed
the confidence of the House of Commons—and we re-
signed the next day.—(Hear, hear.) I preferred the
following day above all others, because on that day a
question of Parliamentary Reform was to come on, and
I did not wish that a question of that kind should be
defended by a Government which had lost the confi-
dence of the House of Commons.—(Hear.) That is the
real state of the case, and not as it has been stated by the
Noble Earl. The Noble Earl stated at the time of his as-
suming the Government that it was the general spirit of
Reform which had deprived the Government of support.
He stated that on the 22d Nov. last year, when he took
possession of the Government, and then the Diable Earl
came before your Lordships with several propositions. His
first proposition was, that it was his intention to propose a
plan of Parliamentary Reform, he having obtained the
consent of his Majesty for that purpose, and that he meant
to bring it forward as a measure of Government. The
Noble Earl then made a remarkable declaration. The
Noble Earl said, " I wish to place such a Reform on the
basis of the settled institutions of the country."—(Hear.)
The Noble Earl said that he wished to place his Reform
upon the settled institutions of the country, and now he
acknowledged that he had brought in a measure which
would effect a great change in them. The Noble Earl said,
"Sortie Reform is necessary; but the principle on which
I wish to see it regulated is to give the people an influence
in the great Council of the Nation, because it is necessary
to give them a resting place on which they may repose
with satisfaction and confidence. The principles the
Noble Earl had then laid down he had departed from,
and be has introduced a Bill with other principles, and
which led to other changes. In consequence of his de
claratien, the Noble Earl introduced a Bill into the
other House, and which, after some discussion, passed a
second reading in the House of Commons. The Bill was
proceeded with, but when it was to go into a Committee
in the House of Commons, the Committee wished to resist
some parts of so extensive a change. It was proposed that
the proportion of Members for England should not be di-
minished; there was a great collision of opinion, and the
niajarity of the Committee of the House of Commons was
against making such an extensive change. Did the Noble
Lords persevere and carry the measure through the House
of Commons, as the principle of the Bill had been cm,
ceded ? Did they attempt to adapt it to the practice of
the Constitution and the opinions of ti.e House, of Con -
r"ns ? No such thing ; they dissolved Parliament.
From that dissolution I date all our misfortunes. That

Parliament was dissolved, and the Noble Lord, perhaps,
thought according to the precedents of 1784 and 1807
He, however, appealed to the people not to decide concern-
ing a by-gone transaction—not to decide concerning the
character of Ministers ; but he appealed to the people to
know whether or not the Parliament should be reformed,
and be reformed by the actual which he had brought
in ? I will beg leave to read to your Lordship's the King's
Speeeh on the occasion:—
"My Lords, and Gentlemen,—ln resolving to recur to the
sense of my people in the present circumstances of the country,
I have been influenced only by a paternal anxiety for the con-
tentment and happiness of my subjects; to promote which I
rely With confidence on your continued and jealous assistance."
flie people then were called upon to consider the details
of a measure which had been under the consideration of
the Parliament, and Which Ministers intended to refer to
it again, and the country was+ also called on to elect Mem-
bers to carry that Bill into effect. Before 1 proceed fur-
ther I shall beg leave to refer to the conduct of the Govern-
ment in dissolving Parliament in 1781 and 1807. In
1781 the King had diff -red with his Ministers, and put an
end to the session by the following speech :--
"My Lords and Gentlemen,—On a full consideration of the
present situation of affiirs, and of the extraordinary circum.
stances which have produced it, I am induced to put an end to
this Session of Parliament, I feel it a duty which I owe to the
Constitution and to the topritry, in such a situation, to recur as
speedily as possible to the sense of my p67lsle, by calling a new
Parliament. I trust that this means will tend to obtiate the il-
chiefs arising from the unhappy division and distractions witch
have lately subsisted, and that the various important objects
which will require consideration may be afterwards proceeded
upon with less interuption, and with happier &tett. I can have
no other object but to preserve the true principles of our free
and happy Constitution, and to employ the powers entru.ttecl to
me by law, for the only end for which they were given—to the
good-of my people."
I will not read his hlajesty's speerh in 1807, but it
was to the same purpose. Now the diff tenet between the
rises of 1781 and 1807 and the present case is this':—ln
those two cases his M ijesty differed from his Ministera.
They proposed measures to Parliament to which Parlia-
ment agreed : but his Majesty thought proper to change
his Ministers, and the Parliament would not give its con-
fidence to the Ministers whom he appointed. It was in
favour of his new Ministers that his Majesty on those
c ises appealed to the people. In this ease it was not an
appeal about Ministers, nor about a measure which they
had introduced into Parliament and was disliked, which
made Ministers dissolve the last Parliament. On the
contrary, the Parliament had approved of the principle of
the Bill, and it had the King's support. It was brought
forward by the Ministers, though now one of them says it
will change every thing, and require further cle,nges. Yet
this is the measure about which the people were invited
to deliberate. This, then, my Lords, sheds you
that there is a great difference between these cases ;
and on this ground I charge the Noble Earl with
heving created the cry which pervades the country.--
(Hear, hear, hear.) Yes, my Lords, I say created
the cry which pervades the country ; and we shall not
so soon get rid of those delegates to Parliament who
are governed by their constituents— who hold their
seats on the principle of accounting to those con-
stituents fer every vote—whb are watched over by
other delegates—who have power placed in their hands
only to do as they are bid—and who are called upon
to resign whenever they do not obey their constituents.
My Lords, this measure, thus debated by the people—
( Heat)—and thus brought forward by the Government
which had ex ited the people on this very measure—
(Hear)—goes to establish a totally new system of election
throughout the country. There is not a single interest
of any description—whether in county, town, or borough
whether in England, Ireland, or in Scotland—that escapes
unaltered, with the exception of the two Universities. I
will not enter into the detail of this measure, which has
already been gone into by my Noble Friend, because
I am unwilling to take up nwe of your Lordships' time at
this late hour than is absolutely necessary. But I have
one or two objections to this measure which have not
been stated by my Noble Friends who have preceded me.
One of these objections is the uniformity (though, by the
by, this objection was stated by one of my Noble Friends)
of the constituent body throughout all the towns of this
kingdom ; and I say that you make room by that unifor-
mity for combinations among the electors, such as will
afford ground for the activity of such a Committee as was
found in this town last winter, and which, as soon as it
was noticed by the Parliament, was discontinued, but
which can be renewed, and will he renewed as soon as
ever this Bill shall have passed.—(Cheers.) But I object
to this system on other grounds. I ebject to the repre-
sentation that is adopted with respect to the counties. I
agree with my Noble Friend, that the landed interest is
very imperfectly represented even now by the Members
for the counties.—(Bear, bear.) It is a great mistake to
suppose that these Members for the counties are elected
solely fi tun the agricultural freeholders, for there exist
manY of those freeholders in great towns, and who have
considerable influence over the county elections—(Hear,
hear)—and I beg to observe, that this evil will be much
increased by the addition to the elective body in the
counties, of copyholders, of leaseholders, and even of simple
holders of land to the amount of 501. a ye.sr. By this
Bill, my Lords, leaseholders and. copyholders in towns
are to be deprived of their corporate rights, and to be
allowed to vote for the Members of the counties; so that,
so fir as that goes, the election of the Members of counties
will be still more under the influence of the freeholders of
towns than at present. It is a great mistake, then, to
suppose that the additional Members given to the counties
to the amount of 62, will be any compensation for what
the landed interest will lose by the Bill.—(Hear.) But
there is yet another view of the subject to be taken by
your Lordships. What we have to consider is, the for-
mation of a Government. We must take care that a
Government is formed in this country—(Hear)—and
for that purpose we must not only know what the repre-
sentation of England is to be, but what also is to be that
of Scotland anti of Ireland. Ido not pretend to know
enough of Scotland and its representation to pronounce
whether it ought or whether it ought not to be reformed ;
but I must repeat, in the words of a Noble Friend of mine,
whom I must ever lament—l mean the late Earl of Liver-
pool—that Scotland is the best conditioned country in the
world.—(Hear, hear.) I believe I may also say,
that it is the best governed country in the world ; and at
least, I am sure, that it has been one of the most prosperous
for the last 60 or 70 years.—(Hear, hear,) We are, then,
bound to look et what is going to be done with the
representation of Scotland. In Scotland the county repre-
sentation is going to be treated in the same mintier as
the county representation in England ; freeholders, lease•
holders, and copyholders (allowing for the difference of the
holdings in the two counties), are all to have votes ; and
the county electors are chiefly to be elected by those re-
siding in towns. Now let us look how it is to be in Ire-
land. In Ireland we thought, very foolishly, that two
years ago we had settled the question between the Protes-
tants and the Roman Catholics : it was at that time hoped
that the question of representation as between those two
classes was entirely settled. But now what is it that is
going to be done? Leaseholders of 19 years, and those
who hold land to the amount of 501. a year, are to have
votes for county Members. Now I believe that there are
very few holding land to the amount of 501. a year who
have not leases also; but whether this is so or not, the
fact will be, that nearly every tenant on every estate will
have a vote, and that almost all these will be Roman
Catholics. All the close corporations in Ireland (of
which, I think, there now remain twelve), which were
established in the reign of James the First, pur-
posely for the support of the Protestant religion and the
Church of England, are by this Bill to be inundated
with 10/. househo:ders.—(Cheers.) Nor, is this all ?
there is another arrangemt nt in this measure with which
we refused to interfere at the time of the Catholic Bill,
because we would not give advantage to one party over the
other. The voters in what are called the counties of
cities, are corporaiors admitted without any limit as to
number, by the Corporation, and are generally Protestants,
and are living at a distance from the place. Besides these,
a right of voting is constituted in favour of freeholders re-
siding within a certain distance ; and these, again, were
generally Roman Catholics. At the time of the Catholic
Bill, we refused to raise the franchise of those freeholders
because we would not give to the Curporators an advan-
tage over the forty-shilling freeholders. What we tie n
said was, " You have the power of admitting as many
freemen as you please, and we therefore will not limit the
number of the forty-shilling
freeholders." But what did
the present Bill do? It gave to every 10/. householder
the right of voting, and at the same time it took
away the right of voting from the absent freemen ; so
that, in fact, all these Corporations would be turned
into so man Roman Catholic Corporations—(Hear)—
iiistead of being balanced as we left them. In addition
to this, my Lords, the consequence cf introducing this
et; rs
description a t inns, ;
new class of voters will be, that thioughout the country
persons in a very low station of life will have a large quan-
tity of electoral power entrusted in their hands—such as
waiters
suchare likely
postillions,anlet
m ostlers,e
ask y
andour menial
Lordships servants
whether o
any persons
but
men
of the
e
returntomost viol
violent
principles
oni
poluesse
and
Com-
monsdoon -
duct ? Some persons now and then talk of Radical Re-
form, by which has generally been meant universal suf-
frage and vote by ballot ; but I declare, that if I was called
on to say what was Radical Reform, I should say that it
was this measure, neither more nor less, as adopted and
proposed by the Government..—(Cheers.) Anti, let me
ask your Lordships, is there no clanger that this measure
may go farther than its proposers anticipate?--(Hear,

hear.) rit Noble Friend of mine has already stated
the dangers which will result from this measure in con-
sequence of the principle on which it stands. It
stands, with respect to large towns, on the principle
of population. Is it then possible that Noble Lords,
having adopted the principle of population with re-
spec: to certain of these towns, by giving those that con-
tain nine, ten, or twelve thousand souls each a right
of representation—is it, or will it be possible in future to
resist any town which shall demand to send,Members on
the ground of having thirty or thirty-five thousand inha-
bitants? Such a thing would be absolutely impossible...—
We cannot stop here. We must go on. The system has
no limit ; and we shall very soon find that the whole
number of the vacancies now existing Must be filled up.
—(hear, hear.) I beg to give your Lordships another
proof on this subject. If numbers are to form the prin-
ciple of this Bill, why are thete four or five county towns
which pay a considerable taxation, attd which have a con-
aiderahle population, not only having a respectable inha-
bitancy, but Jae a respectable neighbourhood near them,
aid yet have their name's omitted? Why is this, but
because they do not happen to have within the limits, not
of their boundaries, but of the ancient chartered borough
from which they have Arleen, a population of four thousand.
—(Hear, hear.) And yet, after such an instance as this,
we shall be toll that this is not a question which turns
upon numbers. Taking the whole view cf this system of
representation, including the representation of Scotland and
of Ireland, I say filet the House of Gimmons can be nothing
aut a democracy under it, at el moat lead to all those conse-
quences which those most cage r for fleform have never ex-
pewee/ weed f tiluw, cen‘equences that entail with there
Radical Reform, -tete by ballot, and other innovations, the
effect of which we have fell reason to dread.—(Hear.)
But it is said that this will go nn further, because the
people are attached to the King, the Lortie, zed the Com-
mons. If that is so, I want to know why we are not to
go to Radical Reform at once? If we can trust the people.
why are we not to give them all they ask fur?—(Hear )
But, my Lords, in considering thle measure, it is necessary
that we .liould look at what is the meaning of King, Lord
and Commons. I have always considered that the King
of this country is the head of this country—that he is the
bead of the Church—the bead of the law—the head of the
armed force—othe protector of the peace of the country—
the head of the political negociations of the country—not
one shilling or money car be expeteled by the public trea-
sury without his order and signature—and nothing can be
dune without his sanction. But though all this is true.
the King eaa do nothing that is contrary to law; and foe
this purpose he is aided by his Ministers, who are not only
responsible for the legality, but even for the prudence and
the fitness of his acts. And to whit authority is it thee
the Ministers are responsible? To this and to the other
House of Parliament ; and teore especially to the other
(louse, because it has an exclusive rule over the pure.
of the country. But the Houses of Lords and Commons
however powerful in themselves, are still called togethei
by the power of the King ; though when called to
gether, lam prepared to say that it is the House of Corn•
mons that really has the controul over every act, whether i
be civil, military, or religious. This being the case, me
Lords, it is highly important for us to know of what the
House of Commons is to be composed, in order that we
may feel assured that they will exercise their high dude-
, with discriminative prudence and discretion.—(Hear,
hear.) It was for these reasons that I softie time ago
called on the Noble Lords opposite to state on what foot-
ing the King's Government was to be carried on untie'
this new Reform Bill. The first answer that I received
was, that it was not to be carried on by corrupt means;
but as I never imputed to the Noble Earl that intention,
and as I do not think that he meant to say that the Go-
vernment, when I was at the head of it, was so cat rite
on, it was evident that this was no answer to my ques
tion. On try again repeating it, the Noble Earl state.
that the Government had nothing to do with that ques
tion--that Parliament was now called open to decide foe
itself, and that the Government was no longer responsible
fir proper provision teeing made. I believe there is n.
man in the country who will for a moment affirm that it
is one of the first duties of the three estat,w of Parliament,
conshLred in their collective capacity, to watch over the
rights of the people, and to protect the rights and th.
property of the subject. Does any one in his senses sup-
pose that the veto of the King could, from that throne,
afford the required protection. No, my Lords, it is only
by the influence which the Crown exercises in the Haus
of Commons that the liberty and rights of the people can
be protected. There is another most important point o
view in which we are called upon to consider this ques-
tion. I mean with reference to the existence of the Church
of England in Ireland, which the Legislature of the United
Kingdom is bound to maintain by the articles of the
Union. Does the Noble Lord suppose that when the new I
political system prevails in Ireland, the Church can long
survive its introduction ? When so many Members are
returned to Parliament by the influence of the Roman Ca-
tholic hierarchy, who can imagine that the English Church
can be maintained concurrently with that influence. This
is a subject which comes home to every man ; and 1 would
beg Noble Lords, in considering this question, to ask
themselves who are the Roman Catholic hierarchy in Ire-
land? and who are the parties who make these attacks
upon the Church established by law in Ireland ? I would
also entreat Noble Lords to ask themselves what class of
Members of Parliament occasion the most trouble and in-
convenience to the Executive Government ? Assuredly
those who come from large towns ; and the greater the num-
ber of that class of representatives the greater will be the
embarrassment attendant on the Councils of the State ;
and, I repeat, the more they are increased the greater will
be the necessity for such increase of the influence of
the Crown, and of this House, as will prove sufficient to
counter-balance that sinister tendency. I put it to the
Noble Earl opposite, has he not already felt the inconve-
nience of that sort of interference which the numerous
representation of great towns had created ?—nay, has not
the Irish Minister, at the present moment, and under the
old system, affected merely by the excitement of this occa-
sion—l say, under the old system, has not the Irish Mi-
nister been compelled to abandon, in the other House, one
of the most important Irish measures of the present Go-
vernment? Members representing large places have now
the power to compel the Government to give up any thing
they may demand from them. There is no man who looks
at this question but must feel that, under the alterations
which this Bill would effect, the 'conduct of the Govern-
ment would be impracticable. As has been justly remarked
by a Noble Earl below me, if we take one step too far,
we cannot retrace it—if we go one step too far forward
we must proceed—we must advance through all the hor-
rors of revolution to the military despotism that of course
ensues thereen, and to all that follows upon that system
of Government.--(Cheers.) At this late hour of the
night I shall not trespass much further upon your Lord.
ships' attention. I do not think it necessary to trouble your
Lordship* at any length respecting the advantages enjoyed
by this country under the system of government which
existed up to the present day. No man denies that we
have enjoyed great advantages—no man denies that in no
country upon earth has there existed so much of happiness,
so much of prosperity, so much of wealth, as have been
enjoyed, and universally enjoyed -by all classes in this
country—.the safety of property and of 'person, and the
largest commerce bare be4-n possessed by this community
—for military strength, for the convenience of navigation,
for the purpose of commerce, no country could be more
favourably circumstanced, and of commerce she enjoys a
larger share than all the nations of Europe united ; but it
you once establish the democratic assembly which was in
the contemplation of the flamers of the Bill, do you be-
lieve for a moment that you can preserve all these vast ad-
vantages ? In no place whete such systems have been
established have they failed to declare sear against enlarge
property, against the payment of public debt, and against
every principle that has ever been recognised in the Briti li
Constitution. The moment a demvet acy of that kind is
established, property is declared to be the common enemy.
Do I mean to say, my Lords, that you alone are interested
in the preservation of property. I say the whole people
are interested in its preservation. Look at the anxiety
which prevails in every part of London on the subject of
this great innovation. A Noble Lord near tne has been
ridiculed for referring to what might he the opinions of the
inhateitants of Bond-street or St. Janies's-streetr on the
question of Reform ; but I would repeat that they are
much interested in the result, and I Would repeat further,
th et the amount of property possessed by that class of his
Majesty's subjects, has been much under-rated. I know
one who employs from 3000 to 4000 workmen in his
establishment, and I will ask the /louse is be not interested
faithth e
andpresent
pr?o
promoting
nh
ge
tnoth
interestedthe
s result o
upholdingsuch a measure
the publicpublic wealth? Suppose the Bill agreed to, I would ask
the Noble Earl how does he propose to deal with the popular
representatives? Can the Government go on in such a
a s
-state of things--can a system of that kind continue tee
cadet without destroying the authority of the Crown, both
in our settlements abroad and in our foreign relations ; in
truth, there was nothing which the measure did not go to
change. Again, in all those acts of the Executive Govern-
ment which the House of Commons was in the habit
of controuling, see how great will be the change.
We have already had experience of a Parliament so con-
stituted, acting without the controul and against the
interest of the Crown. A Parliament which a cele-
brated person has described as acting with a vigour which
engrossed all authority; all questions relating to the tights

of property were decided by a Committee of that Rootless;
accountable to no law, and governed by no principle ;
which perpetrated injustice, and seized property, without
permitting appeal from its decisions ; a Parliament whir s
declared against its own dissolution, and continued its owis
existence until the army interfered—who at last began t
feel that it was necessary to resist the cruel despotism thus
created ; for the people felt that they bad exchanged only
one kind of tyranny for another. This, then, was the
state in which England found herself after the murder of her
King; and this was the consequence of there being no
effectual influence to act upon the Commons. I have
st ited to you that this is a question of pruperty, and I
have given my reasons for thinking so. I think, too, that
under this Bill it will be impossible for the Government of
the country to be carried on upon any recognized
prin-
iple of the British Constitution--any, at least, that has
been acted upon up to the present day. My opinion
tlso is, that no good can arise from going into a Com-
mitte upon this Bill, for I think it cannot be altered so
as make it a useful or salutary measure ; and therefore I
think the House ought to vote against the second reading.
I have now stated the course which I think your Lori-
ships ought to take, and I have referred to that which was
the state of the country at the moment when the King de-
clared from the throne his intention to dissolve the Parlia-
ment. I must say. that since that time the question has
materially
effected chiefly by the course which his Majesty's Minis-
changed its aspect, and that change has been
,ere thought proper to adopt. It is quite obvious also to
edr
tyr
your
ncrooLs,i,drderlipo,n
to;
voteand tahgoauign
me, that whatever may come of this measure, not much
.
we
time will elapse before the subject will be brought azain
let tlheearsencoes
of this Bill, yet I would entreat that your decision be au
gwen. as not to pledge you to any other question or propo-
s tion connected with Reform which may hereafter be
proposed by any Noble Lord, wheTher in public or pri-
ntldy
readingr e c o
pri-
vate; your Lordships will, by thus refraining from pledg-
.ng yourselves, be enaVed, when the question is regularly
wrought before you, to form a correct judgment, and to
render great service to the country.--(Cbeers.)
Lord MELBOURNE rose to explain. What he had
.aid had been overstated. He had not said that the BR
.vould effect a great change in the state of the country. but
great change in the representation of the House of

Commons.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE then roue to +peat, but
the wish for adjournment appearing to he uuiver•al,
Earl GREY moved that the debate be adjourn-d to the
following day.— Adjourned at a Quarter past Ooe o'clock.

ROUSE OF COMMONS, OCTOBER 4.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY presented a p tition from the
'iankers and others of Brighton, prayin: for the inatitution
if a Cnurt of Requests in that town ; also one frim Yar-
liouth, praying that the law might be altered by which
Per*Ong with conscientious scruples might be relieved from

aking oaths.
The petition was supported by Mr. WILES and Mr.
O'Comixtr,, and ordered to he printed.
Mr. LAMBF.RT presented a petition from Wexford
.tgainst the Kildare-street Society. The Hon. Member
was very sorry to appear to throw water on a drowned
'noose, but the petition having been sent to him he was

hound to pre,ent it.
Mr. CAMPBELL brought in a Bill to amend the liws
felative to fines and recoveries, which was read a first
name. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman moved that it

ue read a second time on the 11th inst.
Sir C. WETHERELL complained of the Hon. Gentle-
,nan using the terms, " feudal and barbarous" to the fines
Lnd recoveries. He stated that, after snaking this objee-
ion, he would be ready to co-operate with the Hon. and
Lturned Member in his attempts to simplify the law and
ielsen the expense of suitors.
After a few words from Mr. O'CONNELL and Mr.
&star, the second reading was ordered for the 11th of
October.
Mr. SANDFORD presented a petition from Somerset-
'hire against the Registry Bill.
Mr. STRICKLAND and Lord Monmrts contended that
Yorkshire should be exempted from the operation of the
Bill, as it had had a registry from the time of Queen Anne.
Mr. CAMPBELL said that if when the Bill was con-
.idered in Committee the Noble Lord pressed for the
omission of Yorkshire as the wish of his constituents, he
of course could not object to it, but he had had letters
from that county saying that the including of it in the
would be considered es a great blessing.
The petition was ordered to be printed.
Colonel SIBTHORPE presented a petition to the same
offect from Lincoln. In doing so the Gallant Colonel ob-
served that he considered it a most dangerous measure,
and one that he should give his most strenuous opposition to.
Mr. WILKS thought it due to his Gallant Friend
to observe that he had received instructions from
several very large towns to oppose the Bill, but he
thought it would be better to let the subject drop for the
present Session.
Mr. BARING brought up the report of the Com-
mittee on the Malt Drawback Duties Bill, which was as

follows :
" That the present system of allowing a drawback on malt spi-
rits, aflbrds great opportunity for fraud.
" That in any manner of reducing or repealing the malt draw-
back, dile precaution be taken to prevent the revival of illicit
distillation."
Mr. GRATTAN moved for certain returns relative to
the constabulary police of Ireland ; also the expences in-
curred thereon.
Colonel EVANS seconded the motion, observing that
he thought double the number of the police of Ireland
might be kept up at the same expense, if they were pro-
perly selected.—Accounts ordered.
NEWTOWNBARRY AFFAIR.
Mr. H. GRATTAN rose, pursuant to notice, to move
that there he laid before the House a copy of the memo-
rial of Jas. Nowlan and others, of the 16th August, to the
Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, regarding the conduct of
Capt. Graham and the Rev. W. Morgan, two Mogistra!ts
af the county of Wexford, for declining to receive
hail, and grant the required information on the charge
of firing the house of one of the Newtonbarry yeo-
tnanry, together with the Marquis of Anglesea's
reply; and also for copies of any other communications re-
ceived by the Irish Government relating thereto. After
what had taken place, the Hon. Member did not see how
the motion could he refused.
Mr. CRAMPTON had no objection to concur
with the motion. He, however, bad made inquiries
with respect to the conduct of the two Magistrates re-
ferred to in the notice of motion, and he let bound to
state that there was nothing whatever to impute to them.
Mr. LEFROY defended the conduct of Captain Gra-
ham, reminding the House he was not the person who had
issued the warrant.
Sir R. VYVYAN protested against the time of the
House being consumed unnecessarily on this subject.
After a few words from Mr. H. OrtarrAts in reply to
Sir 13. Barisozr, the motion was agreed to.
LORD MAYOR'S DAY.
Colonel EVANS rose to make the motion of which he
had given notice, concerning certain military prepara-
tions said to have been made in the city and in
the Tower of London, on or about the 9th of
November last. The Gallant G.l,,tiel et ited that
I is object in making the present motion was for the better
maintenance of the public peace at the present important
crisis, ,nd to awaken in the mods of the public the
necessity of having a force constituted for the preserva-
tion of the public peace. He considered that
between the question of Re!orm rind insurrection, or civil
war, there was no alternative. It would be in the
recollection of the House, that on the 2tl of November last
the first Parliament under the present reign assetnbled for
business, and on that thy his 111,6esty's late Ministers bad
made a memorable declaration that no Reform in the repre-
sentation of the country was necessary. It was no part of
his (the Gallant Colonel's) duty to question the wisdom of
that declaration, but he strongly objected to the policy
that led to it. It appeared that when his Majesty's late
Ministers resolved on making that declaration,
they deemed it necessary to make preparations
for a contest with the people, military preparation, having
been made for weeks previously. A few days after that decla-
ration the annual festival of the Lord Mayor's Day took plac.,
and such were the fears of his Majesty's 31inisters, who
had been invited to dine with the Lord Mayor that day,
that all the cavalry within reach of the capital
were marched into London, in order to act in collision
with the people. Arms were prepared to be distritatted
to the police, and reports were abroad that by some
secret instructions the Police were to select friends on
whom they could rely, to he ready to render assist-
ance to each other in the event of a struggle, thus
increasing the police force, by most unconstitutional
means, to nearly double its number. Happily,
however, events took place, which put an end
to such alarming preparations for the protection of an
Anti-Reform Administration. The Gallant Colonel then
repeated the object he had in view in the present motion,
trusting that the House ',mild see the necessity of acced-
ing to it.
Sir H. PARNELL thought the Moose would see that
the Gallant Officer had no ground whatever to support
his motion. With reference to the prt.parations nit
the 9th of November,
Choy es ere nothing more than what