The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-25 00:00:00

lie cored% ed that with respect to counties there must be
F °me difficulty, as, under the exitting law the auicuat of
constituency was diminishing; but with respect to cities
or boroughs, there was no Each excuse. If they admitted
that diminution of the franchise in cities and boroughs in
Ireland, he would ask— he would appeal to the lion.
Member for Kilkenny, on what principle would her Ma-
je•ty's Government resist the extension of that diminution
of the franchise to England and Scotland ? If the Noble
Lord and his colle ;guts should say that in Ireland the cc-
eupation of a b/. house was a sufficient test cf the respec-
tability, the property, the independence, and the station of
its cecepier, he (Sir J. Graham) did not conceive by
what arguments they could prove that a 5/. occupier in
England and Scotland was less trustworthy than the oc-
cup icr of a 5/. house in Irelaad.—( Hear.) But now he
conceived that the object of the Irish Reform Bill with
respect to counties, was an addition to the freeholders pos-
teasing the franchise under the Act of 1829, and to the
leaseholder; possessing a profit equal to the am aunt of a
freehold. The object of that measure was to extend the
basis of the franchise a, it is exited in England and Ire-
land ; but it broke through no principle which the Act of
1829 had established. It did not render the influence of
property subservient to Members, and thus degrade the
station of the' elector. He (Sir J. Graham) confessed
that he was always of opinion that the real principle of the
elective system was stated in the clearest end plainest
manner by the highest constituted authorities—by Mr.
Fox.—( Hear, hear.) That celebreted men laid down
that that was the best system of representation which
admitted the largest number of independent clee-
texts, and which excluded the largest nun.lot r
of those who, from circumstances, were not calculated
to exercise the right of voting. It was upon that prin-
ciple that the Act of 1829, and the Reform Act, conse-
quent upon it, were passed. He (Sir J. Graham) agreed
with the Hon. 'Wernher for lia!ifax (M,. C. Wood) that
words could not be found more clear and distinct than the
words which established the test under- the Act as it now
stood. lie (Sir J. Graham) did net think that any dcfi.
nition of the franchise was necessary. He agreed with the
lion. Gentleman that it was a great misfortune that the
majority of the Judges did not take the definition of the
lay, so as that the minority should agree with them ; but,
at the same time, if the determination of the landlords
should diminish the constituency to any great extent, he
would consider it a very serious evil. But he confessed that
that evil should be made manifest, and though he was of
opinion that no remedy could be entertained which
did not place the right of voting in the profit interest'
that would give a state of security and perfe e independ-
ence to the delegates of respectable voters. Some Hon.
Gentlemen, in the course of the present debate, referred
to the case eif the county Mayo, and said, is it possible
that an Irish county with a population of 350,000 persons,
should only have a constituency of seven or eight hundred
voters? It so happened that when the Irish Reform Act
was under discussion, the county Mayo was brought for-
ward in the debate, and Mr. Dominic Browne, who then
represented Mayo, made a motion for an additional Mem-
ber for that causes:. A numerous constituency was not
always an independent constituency. Mr. Browne stated
that under the 40s. freehold franchise the number of elec.
tors in Msyo amounted to 25,000, and he stated that with
that numerous constituency, all the proprietors of that
county had an absolute power to nominate the Members,
but he ( Mr. Browne) went on to state that when the con-
stiteency, in consequence of the Act of 1829, was re-
duced to 700, that power of nomination had altogether
ceased. The constituency was independent, and there
was no combination of the landlords to put down the elec-
tors. But was that all with respect to Mayo? The
Noble Lord the Member far North Lancashire, stated
another remarkable fact, that the population of Mayo was
350,000, but with respect to their independence he (Lord
Stanley) told them this most striking fact, that in the year
1831, the year before the discussion alluded to took place,
there had been ;treat destitution and distress in Ireland,
and to such an extent that out of 350,000 inhabi-
tants of Mayo, 225,000 had either received relief
or applied for relief from tie Government officers.
( Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) No answer was as
yet made to the remarkable statement of Lord Stanley,
which showed that the number of acres in Great Britain
was about 34 millions, occupied by 350,000 landlords ; and
that in Ireland the number of acres was 40 millions, occu-
pied by 659,000 landlords. By a remarkable coincidence,
in each of the holdi igs ie Ireland there was, on an average,
about five times less the number of employed labourers than
in each of the holdings in England ; and the proportion in
the number of voters in each of the countries was just the
same. lie would then explode the arguments so often
urged on this subject by the Hon. and Learned Member
for Dublin, relative to the small amount of voters in a large
population, unless the test was to be placed in numbers,
and not in property. It has often been put from that (the
Opposition) side of the House, and he would again put it
to the Government, did they entertain the slightest belief
that they had the least chance of carrying the mea-
sure proposed by the Noble Lord ( Lord Morpeth)?
It was neither more nor less than playing over again the
game of the appropriation clause.—( Loud cheers.) The
Noble Lord and his colleagues now felt that they could no
longer defend the perjury and fraud which existed in the
registration in Ireland, and what was the course they
took ? They tacked to the remedy a condition which
they well knew could not be fulfilled, and which
virtually perpetuated these evils. The adoption of
such a measure in Ireland would eventually lead to,
its extension to England and Scotland. Now,
that extension of the suffrage the supporters of her Ma-
jesty's Ministers had urged is the shape of motions—
constantly repeated, and as constantly refused—and now it
was yielded in the most dangerous quarters, not at the sug•
gcstion of the English Radicals, but of the Irish Repeaters.
He should state shortly to the. House what had bees the
progress of the concessions made by the present Gov rn-
merit. Her Majesty's Government, in the summer of 1839,
having c 'me to the conclusion that they no longer possessed
the confidence of the House sufficiently to carry on the
business of the country with advantage, resigned office.
They returned to place under circumstances which he
would not dwell upon, but within a week of their return,
a supporter of her Majesty's Government, the Hon. Mem-
ber
fcr Preston, made a motion that the 10,. franchise
sit )uld be extended to the counties of England, being
one half of the sum now proposed for Ireland. The Hon. I
Member for Bridport made on that occasion a pathetic ap-
ical to the Noble Lord opposite. He represented that the
distress of the English Radicals was extreme, and that if
the measure was resisted, it would be the mutt unfortunate
day that had ever come. He said the Noble Lard
must give these some popular topic at the bust-
intsbs—sorne ground on which to rest their support
of the Government, and if not, the Government could no !
longer reckon upon the support of the English Radicals. I
The Hon. Member for Sheffield was still more explicit— 1
he told the Noble Lord, who at the time resisted the
measure in rather a timid and doubtful mariner, that he
should give scone distinct promise that et a future day he
would be induced to give way—that two-thirds of the
party whom he atte -opted to lead went beyond the narrow
line which he had defined—that it was impossible to keep ;
them together, and it was, therefore, incumbent on the
Noble Lord to give way. So the Session ended. He
(Sir J. Graham) thought it probable that something in the
way of concession would be proposed, but his suspicions
resolved themselves into certainty when he read the speech
made at the hustings at Edinburgh by the Hoe.
Gentleman the Sccretary at War. On that occasion
the Honourable Gentleman announced distinctly to
his consti:uents twat he was a decided advocate
for the extension of the 101. franchise to England and
Scotland. He was admitted into the Cabinet, frankly and
freely avowing those ; rinciples, and immediately after the
floe. Gentleman had taken his scat there, the Ballot was
made an open question. And now, the Ballot being an
open question, they had arrived, in the course of eighteen
months, at this rapid progress of tendering a 5/. franchise
for the counties in Ireland. He would ask, to whom was
that Irish concession made ? Why, distinctly to the Hon.
and Learned Member for Dublin, and to him alone.—
(Cheers.) The merit of the measure was with him. He
originally proposed it in 1832, when the Irish Reform
Act was introduced. He had pressed it from time to
time, and it was occasionally resisted with more or less
firmness, but it was his measure and his suggestion, and he
( Sir J. Graham) bad most evil forebodings if it were adopted.
What was the present concession but the first step to other de-
mands which had been frankly avowed and acknowledged?
He would give a short summary of them, and he would ask
the House to pause and deliberate before it would accede
'to them. The first object of the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber was to secure the tame franchise In England and Ire-
land ; his second was an alteration of the proportion of
, the representatives of the three kingdoms, and according
to the proportion of the population he required that the
representatives of Ireland in that House should be 175 in
number. The third demand of the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman—and without which there could be no peace
in Ireland, and, so far as he was concerned, there should
be none—was the confiscation of the property of the Pro-
testant Church, already reduced 25 per cent.—the confis-
cation of that property to public uses, in which the Catho-
lic might participate in common with the Protestant.
These were the avowed objects of the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman, and there we e others distinctly shadowed.
Had he not talked of separation in a manner not to be
misunderstood ? and bad he not spoken of Hanover,
Belgium, and Switzerland, all independent countries,
with populations infinitely less than !rebind ?—( Hear.)
But it was in vain for him to define the secret purposes of
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman ; but ho would read to
the House a much shorter and clearer exposition of his in-
tentions than any he (Sir James Graham) could offer.
The words were uttered by the Noble Lord, and he de-
scribed the intentions of the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man in words which he should now read to the House.
The Right Hon. Baronet here read to the House from
ea
speech of the Noble Lord (J. Russell), in which_
• Ireland
stated that all that was taking place
showed that the Hon. and Learned
objects and views were neither more neor
attempt, under the name of a repeal of th
the two
Union,es. and un-
derl ns
M than e m
an
and to
co countries—to n tthreiestnto orovae separatert andin Commons of
es-
tablish, in the place of King,
uriithe Parliament,
united
padrs
Parliament,
detsnutn, ite
the United Empire,
and Learned Gentleman should be leader and King, and
most conspicuous part,
Bonne ParliamentLor in which the Hon.
in which no doubt he would play a f
bnl
viuitthionutwhiitichvolivt
but at ell events in the
ss
the extinction of one or the other,inwgagthiemPt:Oicboleurrttorigeso nn a osry ear, sel gd ien
g) e ain
r
loss of that power of phad hitherto been governed.d
übli
c opinion
Such by
wasw
thhi echexposition
t royf
the lion. and Learned Genr)taehtlinatdionna:innGsoeeuennrtcalteedmoeennsi
3gs
dne
„les
umat
inegdd.
tTh7 .diaotnes
wwahsiclhBt3loi_e. Noble(iie
aLr
to think the date made some difference; but he thought it
was the principle and the conduct that made the difference ;
and iled there been since then any change which would
give greater confidence in the intentions of that party ?
The Government now had net the control of the mcverncnts
of the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin-_(Cheers)
—and he was astonished that her Majesty's !Ministers so
tamely and recklessly subuft'cd to the course imposed
upon them.—(Cheers.) If he was surpri ed at their
concetstons, his surprise was gieetee at the accusation
brought by the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Morpeth)
against his Noble Friend ( Lord Starlet' ), that the
present state of agitation in Ireland was to be