The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-21 00:00:00

THE SUN,

not to be a sufficient nnilitary establishment kept up to back
the civil authority. He thought that such a division of
labour was necessary ; and he was therefore not one of
those who had said in public that there was no occasion
for a military force, and that we shoald depend upon our
civil power alone.—(Hear, hear.) But, on the other hand,
he should contend that the country had far outdone in that
respect what prudence or necessity pointed out. It had, in
fact, become a military nation.—(lleac.) It had lost its
civil character, and it seemed to be now verging fast to-
wards that system which had been lately overthrown
throughout the rest of Europe. It had become, therefore,
imperative to examine why and wherefore the pre-
sent discontent existed ? Whether there were any
grounds for that discontent? and to take measures imme-
diately for its removal and the restoration of public order.
It was on those grounds that he considered it his duty to
submit to Parliament what he believed would remedy the
evil. Whilst the Parliament, as reformed in 1832, had
failed to answer all the purposes which he, as an ardent
reformer, in common with others, anticipated that it would,
he yet should be acting most unfairly were he not to say
that the reform effected by the Bill of 1832 had done
much to secure the peace of the country.—(Hear, hear.)
He believed if we had not had so much reform then, that
the country would be at the present time in such •a state of
discontent that he did not know but that it might be in-
cluded in the list of those who had risen in arms against
their Governments. He, however, wished to have gone
fy
further than the Reform Bill of 1832 ; and it was becausee
ted
that Bill had not gone further—because it had not effected
that for which the reformers then struggled—because it
had not answered those purposes for which it how
cbome
passed, that he (Mr. Hume) thought the time was n
when that which was wanted should be effected.—(ll-
-
S hadixt
hadeen yearssufficient h ad passed
opportunitiesaw ay , andof ascertaining during that
howtime
far t they
e it
yt
thaten he thought the
orderhad
tansweredogive ttoh et h
e H o purposesuse the
er
viewwhich h
ei t waster
tianitneendd eodf
Par-
liamentln precisely, he should first say
country Parliament
w a wta a
be mere;
governed; engine
and b y which ardi
n constitutional
to
the
ofo
all classes in the
ah e th
largee r,
cpornintcaiipnlesa of
fullt h the Britishnd
fair
representationconstitution
tParliamentgeee should
He therefore wanted to
to on all occasions by that House.
—rmyb:Yers and
country, in order that the intruesses. of all shoald be attended
tthehat
iconsider,
ffiirtsat
beingwhether
a heaLwda
not,
the caseon r
ttahne t orc not—whether,
in numbers
uat
portion of the community,
• ht in thinking that the consti-
If he was rig.
in interest, excludedmanfromin
ththeeciorunsthrayrea
riinghtthtoe a repre-
sentation.sharel:post important
he thought that taxation and repre-
sentation the representation,
tution gave to every
and that the man who
obliged totaxes, not having any right to •
pay assist
was ° his representative in the Legislature, was in
in the choice of
sentation should go together;
a condition little differing from that of slavery—the only
difference he could see between a freeman and a slave being,
that every free man ought to have a voice under the con-
stitution in the choice of the representatives of the people
at large in Parliament, a privilege from which, the slave was
excluded. Now, the question was, were all the classes of
freemen in this country who paid taxes represented by the
persons of their choice? If they were not, then some
classes must be injured by exclusion, and the proposition he
had to submit to the House was, that the classes who were
now discontented were those injured classes: injured,
because they were excluded from the pale of the constitu-
tion. They were obliged to suffer whatever the laws might
direct to be placed upon them, without having, as freemen
ought to have, any voice in the election of those who had
the power to tax them. Again, he had to submit that if
Parliament did not represent all classes in the community,
it became an engine of oppression in the 'hands of the few
against the many; and if they had not a good Parliament,
he thought it would be better they should have no Parlia-
ment at all, but that they should be as the people in other
countries were, where the will of the governor or the will of
a despot decided. But they had seen the result of that con-
dition of things, and it was because they had seen the ruin
which had taken place abroad within the last few months,
that he thought they should not continue to do injustice to
men who had a right to a voice in the election of their re
presentatives. His view of the political power which Par-
liament should exercise was, that it should, in the first place,
be founded upon the broadest possible basis of popular power,
and thence rise up, the Crown being the highest point of the
executive. Government was made for the good of the com-
munity at large, and not for the benefit of the Crown, or for
the benefit of the nobility, or of any particular class. But the
Government, consisting of King, Lords, and Commons, act-
ing under and by the authority of Parliament, was tor the
benefit of all.—(Hear.) In order, then, to place the House
of Commons in the highest place of power in the country, it
would be necessary to give to the largest possible number of
our fellow-countrymen the right of the elective franchise.
Now he asked Hon. Members, could they in conscience say
that justice was done to the large number of the people,
when five out of every six of the male adults of the country
were without any voice in the election of the representatives
of the country—when they found that, out of 6,000,000 of
male adults above twenty years of age, there were upon the
registry, as possessing the suffrage, less than 1,000,000, and
that of them about 150,000 were doubly registered ? So that
of the 1,000,000 there were 150,000 who had votes in three,
four, and five different places—so that the whole number of
males actually represented under the present system would
be found to be little more than 850,000, forming a class
separate and distinct; and the remainder of the 6,000,000,
who had not the privilege, were placed in an inferior situa-
tion, by being deprived of those rights which by the
Constitution they were entitled to enjoy. He (Mr. Hume)
said " rights ;" he did not say " favour," because every
man born in this country owed allegiance to the Throne, and
allegiance to the laws ; and, in return, he was entitled to
have protection to his person and his property, and a share
in those civil rights which, as an Englishman, the constitu •
tion gave to him. And it was only just that he should have
those rights, for he incurred serious liabilities, At sixteen
years of age he was liable to be drafted into the militia. Any
day, whilst walking along the streets, he was liable to be
called upon, and might be compelled by a magistrate to
assist the civil authorities even at the risk of his life in
keeping the peace. lie was obliged, by the Constable Act,
passed a few years ago, not only to obey, but to assist the
civil power ; and by the Conscription Act, which was not yet
repealed, he was liable to be dragged away from his home,
from his family, from all he held dear and near to him,
when the service of the State required it. And was it,
then, too much to say that such a man ought to be placed
in the situation which the constitution gave him? He ( Mr.
Hume) did not speak of natural rights, which was a phrase
that no one could understand.—(Hear, hear). He spoke of
constitutional rights, which, under the authority of the con-
stitution, had been given, and he then said—What right had
Parliament to shut the door and say that any class of men
—many of whom, too, it should be observed, were of much
superior talents and acquirements to many who sat in that
House, ,should be excluded from the enjoyment of their con-
stitutional rights? He had said that many of the men who
were excluded from: the suffrage were men of talents supe-
rior to those of maay Hon. Gentlemen in the House.—(ilear,
hear, and a laugh.) He repeated it : some of collegiate
education, some of the best informed and most ingenious
classes of workmen, men who were famous throughout the
world for ingenuity, industry, and ability, and many of them
men of superior acquirements, were shut out from the giving
of a vote for a representative in Parliament. They were shut
out from the rights of Englishmen, whilst they were adding
to the glory of the country as soldier or as artizans. Was
not that, he asked, a sound and a legitimate ground
for discontent.—(Hear, hear.) He, therefore, asked
the House for a reason why every man in the
situation he had described should not have a vote?
It was not for him to state the difficulties which had been
alleged. He wanted those who shut the door to give him
their reason. Many of the excluded classes belonged to
colleges, and had not what was called the 101. franchise.
It was a matter of serious consideration whether they were
not blindly going on creating discontent. Whether they
were not placing themselves in the condition of requiring
to keep one portion of the people of the country armed in
order to keep down the other?—(Hear, hear.) It became
a serious matter, and those who were friends of peace and
order ought to consider at once whether the means were
not before them of restoring and securing both by grant-
ing those rights which were now withheld from the
people. He asked the House to consider the state of
the city of Manchester, and what passed there on the
10th of April, after the special constables had assembled to
preserve the peace, which however was not broken. The
question was asked the special constables, " What were they
there that day for ?" and the answer was, "They had met
to prevent the Chartists from breaking the peace, if they
were likely or desirous to do so." To that it was replied
that the Chartists only wanted to have a voice in the elec-
tion of -Members of Parliament ; that they wanted to have
a vote in defending property and life ; that they considered
that Parliament was placing them under heavy contributions
by taxing articles of consumption for useful and necessary
purposes; and that the money was expended for purposes
that were unnecessary and useless; and they were asked
were they themselves contented with the present condition
of affairs? With one consent the special constables said,
" No, we are not contented." They were then asked, why
should they be the oppressors of their fellow-men, who
merely wanted to express their discontent? But there was
no class that ought to feel more anxious than the aristocracy
to remove the existing discontent. The aristocracy had
great property and great wealth to protect. They had,
therefore, a greater stake, and it was of the greatest im-
Portance to them to have peace and order in the country.
They ought to remove every cause that might tend to
produce discontent, for no disturbance could arise, no dis-
affection, could be displayed that would not interfere with
the industry of the country. He, therefore, appealed to the
Government, not as men of property, not as belonging to the
aristocracy, but as having a duty to fulfil which they were
bound by the oath of office they had taken to perform,
to look to this matter whilst there was yet time. It was a
question for them to consider, individually, as Ministers as
well as Members of that Mouse. It would, be of some im-
portance that he should show what were the opinions, as to
the right of voting, which had been expreced by various
persons of authority upon the subject. He knew that
hich down any fixed or intel-
ligible opinions had existed as to the right of voting, and
had
the
e onefailed toon layw it should stand. But
as to the opinions that had been expressed regarding the
ltihgei b 1 Re
e f
principle n c i as
right of voting, Earl Grey, when moving the second
reading of the Reform Bill, on the 3d of October, 1831,
speaking of the great importance of satisfying the
then so disturbed, said—" f
public mind,believe
the present measure to be a measure of justice,
sound
policy, peace, and conciliation. I
believe,
that on its
acceptance er rejection depend, on
the one hand, peace, tran-
quillity,and prosperity ; on the other, that state o f political
dissatisfaction and discontent, the continuance of which
threatens all those disastrous consequences, which must arise
when ill feeling is engendered in the people towards the Go-
vernment of the country. I have said, that I more than any
other man am responsible for bringing forward this measure,
and it is therefore necessary, in the first place, that upon
this point I should set myself right with your Lordships.
My opinion on this question of Parliamentary reform is well
known to such of your Lordships as have done me the
honour of observing the political conduct of so humble an
individual as myself. I have uniformly supported the prin-
ciple of reform. So far back as the year 1786, soon after my
introduction into Parliament, I voted with Mr. Pitt for a
motion which was then brought forward for shortening
the duration of Parliaments. I voted for a measure of re-
form introduced by Mr. Flood, at the commencement of
the French revolution, before the breaking out of that
unhappy war, carried on at such a fearful expen-
diture of blood and treasure. I myself, on two
different occasions, brought forward motions on this subject,
believing then, as I believe new, some change in the repre-
sentation of the people to be absolutely necessary, in order to
give new vigour to the Constitution, and to make the House
of Commons in fact that which it professes to be in theory—
a full, free, and efficient representation of the people." Now
if Lord Grey, ,who had from his earliest days been a re-
former, and who had witnessed the evils of rejecting reform
in 1793, and who had borne testimony against the Govern-
ment for refusing the reform then required, found it necessary
to express himself in such terms in 1831, ought not those
who were now his successors, and some of whom were in
office with him at the time, to let those words sink
deep into their minds whilst viewing the present issue?
Earl Grey quoted the opinion of Mr. Sergeant Glanville,
who stated that all men residing within the borough ought
to have a vote. That was one definition which Earl Grey
cited in the debate on the resolutions in 1792 in the House `.

of Commons. In Fraser's Election Cases, in the case
oof f
thethe borough
right
which
h e Cirencester,peop Ipeople
0 f
England there was
definition
ti iti,s a
upon.
It was that "every male person of full age, and n t
ao
tor any
dwelling,le
legal
theincapacity,a
s ebeing bond fide and shouldwho,frd f
u used
occupyorthepurposes
of any htmse
o
of a residence, &c.," should have the right of voting. He
(Mr. Hume) stated those opinions, becausehi
hthadere were
endea-
many persons who opposed thatveryAnother
obtainPontefract,
thatthe
t appointedhPaat l
the
ahme et nn t at
persontri ae'
should be six months resident in the borough previously to
the election, and the payment of rates and taxes was not
insisted on as necessary. What, then, was the meaning of
the ridicule which they so often heard thrown upon the
working people when they demanded the franchise ?-(Hear.)
Why, it was a decision of the House of Commons itself,
and he (Mr. Hume) was not to blame if he agreed with
such opinions as he had quoted. He would next quote that
of Sir T. Smith, who in the time of Elizabeth said that
" every Englishman was supposed to be present in Parlia-
ment, from the Prince to the lowest person in the country,
and that the consent of Parliament was taken to be every
Englishman's consent." Now, how could they take the Acts
of Parliament to be done with every man's consent, when
five out of every six were precluded from their share in the
representation ?-(Hear, hear.) It was important to keep
that in view, to show that it was not a favour they were ask-
ing, but a right which had been acknowledged in former
times. Lord Brougham had brought in a Bill in 1836 to
extend the suffrage, and he recommended that all persons
rated
asheiloelnesetut
dgeorool
lospdaattfitsofuhnehsoi
authority
etnrehohsstpno:eret
arwenr
instruction
suffrage.
sliel
hditfv
cited
of
andtnt months
the
B allup
too
such
n pd e r allso n
sowners
having
had propertyth
their
thebreefowreertehoetheelrecctlaiosnae, shstoouvrihdiebiei
eelr'thifieyeawtesereessf.haatttewhedraenceaelleudpotnhe
ceedrutacain-
ea
dteshouldhdy bLyot
rchdoen
Nobleuf e rr
Grey,
the
thatright.
fs
t\Thvehhetbrt
best
toweoakns,
constitutional questions; and he said that whenever any
question about elections was brought before the House of
Commons, the decision went always to favour popular
election, thinking that the more free the elections were, the
more free would be the consideration of the interests of the
country. And he added, that in many boroughs the election
still remained popular. He (Mr. Hume) need hardly re-
mind the House of the voting by scot and lot, which they all
knew was an ancient practice, which existed until, he would
admit, it became an encroachment upon the rights of the
people at large. But up to the present hour the great
number of non-represented were deprived of that which the
rules of the constitution fairly gave them. The Societe
of the Friends of the People, on the 30th of May, 179 b.
Mr. W. Smith in the chair, came to the following resolution :
-" That it is undoubtedly desirable, for many reasons,
that the collective body of qualified electors shall be as
numerous as possible. To reach the numbers, by whom the
power ought to be exercised, it mast be distributed equally
and impartially over the whole surface of the king-
dom. What we want is a free House of Commons and
a real reformation. Any measure of reform which does no!
really give and effectually secure that object, is more than
unprofitable, and the etlorts to obtain it more than thrown
away." The Hampden Club, in 1814, proposed that every
adult male, contributing to the support of the poor, should
have the franchise, and that club improved upon the old
borough decision, by requiring payment of taxes. After all
these opinions, he asked the House whether they were not
really aggressors when they excluded so many from their
rights, and whether they were not the parties who were
driving the people to commit breaches of the peace?-
(Hear, hear.) He wished to hear reasons why they st ould
not render the basis of their constitutional power broader
than it was at present, and why such a course was not
likely to make their institutions more stable. He had
brought with him tables, which he had prepared, as lie bad
upon a former occasion, showing the condition of the repre-
sentation in England, Scotland, and Ireland. The popula-
tion of Great Britain as appeared from the returns laid
upon the table of the House, was, in 1841, 15,000,000 ; of
Wales, 911,000; and Scotland, 2,500,000. Making the
total population of Great Britain, 18,411,000. The males
above 20 years of age were 4,000,000, and of that number
only 944,000 were registered as electors. If they took off
the doubly-registered electors he (Mr. Hume) did not be-
lieve there would be more than 850,000 bona fide elector.
Now, that being the case, he asked whether it was possible
that all the great number excluded without being guilty of
crime from the franchise, could be other than dissatisfied? It
was so great an inequality, so great, so monstrous, that com-
mon sense was shocked at it. He would cite one or two ex-
amples of counties and boroughs to illustrate the working of
the inequality. He would take three English counties first
-Huntingdonahire, Rutlandshire, and Westmoreland. The
male adults amounted to 26,400 in these counties. The elec•
tors registered were 9,000. They returned six Members of
Parliament. Middlesex, Lancashire, and Yorkshire returned
six Members also. Their male adult population above 20
years of age, was 316,000. Their registered electors
were 73,000. Consequently those 73,000 electors and
316,000 adult males were met and equalised is
Parliament by the 9,000 electors and 26,000 adults
in the three former counties. In the borough of the Tower
Hamlets there were 40,000, whilst Ilarwich, with its 190
electors, balanced it. Was that anything like justice?
Instead of that being a House of Commons fully and fairly
representing the people, it was brought together by means
grossly unjust, and the interests of the community were
placed in great danger by such a system. In the six
boroughs of Harwich, Chippenham, Knaresborough, Rich-
mond (Yorkshire), Totnes, and Thetford, the electors were
1,805 out of a population of 28,000 adult males, and they re-
turned twelve Members, the same number that were returned
by Westminster, the Tower Hamlets, Liverpool, Finsbury,
Marylebone, and Manchester, with a population of
1,500,000, and the influence of these six boroughs was pre-
cisely balanced in Parliament by the six former. But a
greater evil was this-that in the large towns something of
public spirit existed, and they were counterbalanced by those
small boroughs that were at the mercy of a few individuals.
Now, with respect to the condition of the constituency of
Scotland, he found that the three counties of Banffshire,
Selkirkshire, and Peebleshire, with only 2,173 electors, re-
turned as many Members as Ayrshire, Aberdeenshire, and
Lanarkshire, with a population of nearly 800,000, and with
more than 10,000 electors. He could mention other similar
instances of a like kind, but he did not wish to trouble the
House by doing so. Turning to Ireland, the anomaly of
the present system was still more apparent. He held in
his hand a publication from the pen of a late distinguished
3htalhoo6lpeageapdm:reot.ao
obireiee,rrdoruo of that House-the late Mr. O'Connell-in which a
contrast was drawn between the state of the elective fran-
chise in Ireland and in this country. The writer took very
naturally what appeared to him to be the most favourable
contrast for Ireland, and he justly complained of the mise-
rable deficiency of the electors in Ireland compared with
the popubelltyteelhoattaiwestcleneteo. Thus, the county of Carlow, with a
population of 86,000 inhabitants, had only 1,700 electors ;
Kildare, with a population of 114,488, bad but 1,200
registered electors ; Leitrim, with a population of
135,000, had but 1,434 electors ; Kerry, with
257,000 inhabitants, had 1,240 electors ; and Mayo, with
heneßmtnat inhabitants,ouptort:sln faroaeoht
otr,dtol ahnh,aoaaeesowd:
ash,
at:
?wrothai
wdnos
wl
ol
hycBae
oessoluo(r1 ;Ito
os3th; Ojireaou.esnsclotinoeiulhoemn:cotbet
20,000 inhabitants,
n.l
tocs
uo.
inhabitants.-(Hear,
utvnseeiatrgt:
ticLe ?ondAohndelerhrey then
proceeded properly,
Westmoreland. The former county, with 297,000 inhabi-
tant; had but 2,172 electors, while Westmoreland, with
only 42,000 inhabitants, had 4,592 electors, so that London-
derry, with an excess of population of 255,000, had less
electors than Westmoreland by 2,420.-(Hear, hear.) Again,
he compared Downshire, ha -sing a population of 337,000 and
2,330 electors, with Weatmoreland, and he found that though
Downshire had an excess:of population in the ratio of 6 to 1,
Westmoreland had an excess of electors to the number of
2,262. In the same manner he went on to Galway, and then
to Cork, where there was a population of 720,000, being 14
times that of Westmoreland, and yet Westmoreland had an
excess of electors over Cork of 550.-(Hear, hear.) All
these were irregularities calling for the attention of the
House, and which ought to compel them to do justice with-
out further delay, seeing, as they must do, that peace, con-
tentment, and public order could only be secured by putting
an end to such inequality and injustice. In the Irish
boroughs the unfairness of the present arrangement was
very strongly apparent. Thus, in the six boroughs of Lis-
burn, Portarlington, Tralee, Ennis, Dungannon, and Kin-
sale, there were only 1,097 electors, while Cork, Dublin, and
Limerick, with over 14,000 electors, returned only the same
number of representatives. In the one case there was one
Member for every 180 electors, and in the other there was
but one Member for every 2,423 electors.-(Hear, hear.)
Thus it appeared that there was nothing like fairness or
equality in the state of the representation either in England,
Scotland, or Ireland. He had received a letter that morning
from a gentleman residing in Rochester, in which he alluded
to the injustice of giving two Members each to such towns
as Rochester and Maidstone, while Woolwich, Gravesend,
and other important towns were left without representatives.
-(The Hon. Member read the passage, and then continued.)
He thought that he would best consult the feelings of the
House by not dwelling at greater length on these details,
but he could assure them teat these were only instances
selected from, many others of a similar kind which he had
near him.-(Hear, hear.) That being the case, what did
he ask the House to do? He asked them to change
the system, to open the door to those who were excluded,
and to equalize the distribution of the electors whom they
had so arranged. If Hon. Members would take his advice,
he would strongly recommend them to consult a pamphlet
which had lately appeared from the pen of Alexander
Mackay, barrister-at- law, and entitled " Electoral Districts;
or, the apportionment of the Representation of the Country
on the basis of its Population."-(Hear, hear.) It was an
inquiry into the working of the Reform Bill, and though he
had prepared his own analysis to submit to the House, he
felt bound to say that the analysis given by Mr. Mackayi
was so much stronger and so much more accurate, that he
had no hesitation in referring Hon. Members to it in prefer.
ence. They would find in that publication an analysis of
the House and of the country, prepared in the most com-
plete manner possible, but he would only delay the
House by reading a very few extracts from it. In
speaking of the boroughs, Mr. Mackay said -
" Let us now losk more directly into the House of Com-
mons, and see how different interests and populations are
balanced in that assembly. The following '22 boroughs,
AndoYer, Ashburton, Arundel, Bodmin, Bury St. Edmunds,
Chippenham, Devizes, Dorchester, Evesham, Harwich,
Honiton, Huntingdon, Knaresborough, Leominster, Ludlow,
Lyme Regis, Lymington, Maldon, Marlborough, Richmond
( Yorkshire), Totnes, and Thetford, the aggregate population
of which is but a fraction above 100,000, have 42 represen-
tatives in the House of Commons-that is to say, one
Member for every 2,390 persons. The following 20 cities
and boroughs, London, Liverpool, Leeds, Lambeth, Man-
chester, Marylebone. Finsbury, Sheffield, Southwark, Tower
Hamlets, W estminster, Birmingham, Bristol, Glasgow,
Edinburgh, Dublin, Cork, Belfast, Wolverhampton, and
Greenwich, with an aggregate population of 3,780,000, also
return 42 Members, being one Member for about every
90,000 persons. Thus, although the population of the former
group is, as compared to that of the latter, as one is to
thirty-seven, they balance each other in the Legislature."
In the same manner Mr. Mackay went on very properly to
analyse the state of the electoral body in boroughs. In 1831,
the Noble Lord pledged himself that every borough should
have at least 300 electors, and that that number would, he
trusted, be increased gradually to a large amount, but it ap-
peared that there were fifteen boroughs with not more than
150 electors, and that there were 56 Members of that House
returned by 10,000 electors, while ten times that amount of
electors elsewhere only returned one-half that number of re-
hear.) With such facts before them,
Thitiear'
no man who gave an honest opinion on the
a pe rusa 1 of
such an
that analysis
anomalous without
fshpeureebelwjsi
neeoengutt
tad couldht i
as ate theys
arise
time
from
ha d
arrivedwhen
state of things should be put an end to.-(Hear, hear.)
Mr. Mackay remarked that, "There is in England one
county Member 3,290 electors ; Wales, 2,700 ;
s
• England, oaa borough Mem-
berl,633 re
for every 1,045 ; forla
he
Wales,
r 13
78
Scotland, 1,260 ; Ireland,
,e6B could
that
absolute
equality,
aplanal
tty, whichht
they
Hpreodpoidaenot
mean
they might arrive at something like equality ; and it should
h 14."
be recollected that in
,other countries, where the representa-
tion was based upon populatiog, a revision of the electoral
districts was made every ten or twelve years. On this part
of the question there was a very strong comment in the

WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE' '2l, lBlB.

I navnphlet from which be had been quoting, and it was the
last with which he would trouble the House:—" Of the bo-
roughs with the number of electors represented by eacii
Member below the average —are Honiton, which is 822
below it ; Totnes, 875 ; Lymington, 893 ; Harwich, 858 ;
Richmond (Yorkshire), 904, and Thetford, 933. The differ •
once between the two extremes, Westminster and Thetford,
the former having one Member for every 7,286 electors, and
the latter one for every 107, is 7,179. The two boroughs
are equal in Parliament, although the electoral body of
the one is 1.48 per cent., or one sixty-seventh that of
the former. Again, the aggregate electoral body of
London and the metropolitan boroughs is 83,062,
returning amongst them sixteen Members. The
aggregate electoral body of the boroughs of Bridgnorth,
Honiton, Harwich, Thetford, Stafford, Richmond (York-
shire), Totnes, and Lymington is 3,766, also returning
amongst them sixteen Members. In the former, the average
number of electors returning one Member is 5,191, in the
latter it is 235 ; from which it appears that one voter in the
latter is equivalent in the electoral scale to twenty-two in the
former." Thus the whole influence to London was neutra-
lised by the Members of these eight boroughs, who got into
the House, as they all knew, with very little trouble, though
at expense.--(Laughter.) That, he would say, was
not a mfeai x
of thingo—(Hear, hear.) But before stat-
ingsoer state
the course which he would recommend them to pursue,
he might observe that the suffrage was at the present
time on no fixed principle. Honourable Members might
not be aware that though they had a 101. suffrage as the
standard for boroughs, and a 40s. franchise, if they pleased
to call it so, in the counties, yet many would be surprised to
hear that there were altogether no less than eighty-five dif-
ferent suffrages at present in existence. It was impossible to
tell the confusion and delay and expense which this variety
and uncertainty of the franchise gave rise to. What they
ought to do was to render the suffrage as simple, as general,
as easily obtained, and as easily defended as possible. It
was at present narrow, complicated, difficult to be preserved,
and attended with great expense, not only of money but of
time. He would counsel the House to adopt some uniform
system of suffrage for the counties, and one for the
boroughs, but first he would state what were the
various suffrages that now existed. (The Honourable
Member read a list of several denominations of the
franchise, but said that the entire number would
occupy too mcch time in going through.) They were
taken down by a barrister who had made the subject
his study. This much he would say, that many per-
sons who had a right to the franchise under some of these
heads, did not choose to avail themselves of it because they
aid not wish to go to the trouble and expense of registra-
tion.—(Hear, hear.) Now what was the result of this state
of inequality? Why, that the people of this country did
not believe that that House represented the public.—( Hear,
hear.) They found votes and proceedings agreed to that
were altogether at variance with the interests of the people.
They found that class interests and the interests connected
with the aristocracy were always in favour, to the exclusion
of the interests of the people. They found that the agri-
cultural interests were in a great measure freed from taxa-
tion, and it was no wonder that it should be so, seeing that
until a few years ago no English Member could sit in that
House without having 300/. a year in land. In Ireland it
was, he believed, the same thing; but in Scotland they had,
dstill
better order of things. A working
amann cen have, a
dbeelected as a Member of Parliament for
Scotland as well as the wealthiest landholder in the
country, and why should it not be so, if his fellow-electors
had confidence in him ? It appeared to him, there-
fore, that in every point of view the absurdity of the present
state of the representation, and the confusion to which it
gave rise, were all owing to their own neglect in applying
the remedy which they had it in their power to employ. He
' would submit that the time had come when they ought to
effect the changes that were desirable. He would not speak
now of the great increase of taxation which had been allowed
to spring up under the present system, and which the coun-
try believed to be imposed for the benefit of certain classes.
Increased taxes were imposed on account of the army, the
navy, the colonies, but he would only say on this subject at
present, that his own opinion was that one-third of the whole
amount expended for these purposes might be very easily
saved.—(Hear, hear.) After the Reform Bill, and while
lion. Gentlemen were on their good conduct before the coun-
try, the national expenditure had been brought down by seven
or eight millions; but when the public became careless, the
taxes were ag in gradually increased to the present enor-
mous amount. He would wish that Hon. Members
would look over a return that had been moved for
by the Hon. Member for Liverpool (Mr. Cardwell). They
would see how the taxation had gradually risen to
the enormous amount of nearly sixty millions annually
in a time of peace. Was it possible that under such a
, state of things the people of England—writhing under the
injustice of being refused their civil rights, and of being at
the same time taxed to that vast extent—could be con-
tented? They were not content, and they ought not to be
content; and only that those who had the suffrage were re-
gardless of their duty, they would have taken care what
class of men they sent as their representatives to that House.
He did not see the Right Honourable Baronet the Member
for Tamworth in his place; but he held in his hand
a statement made by that Right Honourable Gentle-
men at the time that Parliament disfranchised the 40s.
freeholders of Ireland. The Right Honourable Baronet
stated on that occasion, in speaking of the franchise, " No
doubt it is a vested right; but it is a right which differs in
its character from the rights of property and other private
rights. It is a public trust, given for public purposes, to be
touched, no doubt, with great caution and reluctance;
but still which we are competent to touch if the public
interest manifestly demands the sacrifice." That was the
language held when 340,000 freeholders were struck off the
roll in Ireland. Now he was anxious to see no man's money
taken out of his pocket without his consent. It was contrary
to the constitution and contrary to justice to do so, and what
was contrary to the constitution and to justice could not, and
ought not lung to continue. The people were now, he was
glad to see, alive to the importance of this subject. But let
them bear in mind that every voice in that House was a
voice sent against them to keep up the present extravagant
system, and it was their own fault if they did not come for-
ward and perform their duty. Under the Reform Bill of
1832 they had the undoubted benefit, that whereas the bo-
roughmongers filled the House before the Reform Bill, di-
viding it into Whigs and Tories, who always formed two
factions, influenced only by their individual inter-
ests, the electors had now the power of making
what selection they pleased. He had often heard
it said, by way of regret, that the Reform Bill was likely
to destroy the influence of the Crown. Why, the very
contrary was the fact. The King of England could not do
anything as he pleased before the Reform Bill. He could
not choose even his own Ministers, except as the two fac-
tions of the aristocracy decided.—(Hear, hear.) But now,
if the 101. householders were but honest, if they fulfilled
what the Right Honourable Baronet called the trust given
to them honestly and fearlessly, they might at the next
election take care to place in that House men who would
act up to the demands of the interests and necessities of thu
people, and this could be done in the constitutional mode, in
which only it ought to be accomplished. At the same time he
hoped that the electors would not do anything to impede the
great extension of the suffrage which he believed necessary
for the welfare of the country. They had heard complaints
against the Radical Reformers or Chartists. They had
heard complaints of their disturbances; and he was sorry to
say that for the last ten years they had interfered with the
progress of almost every public meeting, and had thus, in
fact, destroyed one of the most important elements in
the Constitution—freedom of opinion. He had always
objected to them on this ground, because he thought that
whatever might be their owe views they ought not to inter-
fere with the expression of opinion by others. But at the
same time, when he looked back to the causes of discontent
which prevailed, and to the manner in which their petitions I
had been treated in that House, he could not feel astonish-
ment if they were dissatisfied and unsettled. When he remem-
bered the reception of the petitions that had been presented
by his friend Mr. Duncombe again and again, he could not ,
wonder that they should have adopted the mode of family
petitions that had been recently acted upon. Mr. Livesey,
of Preston, was, he believed, the first man who suggested the I
plan of having the name, address, and occupation of the peti-
tioner inserted. Under the Act of Charles the Second it was
said to be illegal to send a petition signed by more than 20
persons. He had himself presented lately a number of
petitions, each signed by less than that number, and he
thought that in the present state of things persons were
wise in sending petitions bearing only a small number of
signatures. But to return : he thought it was unnecessary
for him to say more in order to satisfy the House of the
inequality of the present system, of the great proportion of
the population that it excluded, and of the necessary dissatia-
faction which prevailed throughout the country.—(Hear.
hear.) The remedy which he would now propose was
quite a constitutional-one. He was about submitting to the
House the following propositions :—" That this House, as
at present constituted, does not fairly represent the popula-
tion, the property, or the industry of the country, whence
has arisen great and increasing discontent in the minds of
a large portion of the people; and it is therefore expedient,
with a view to amend the national representation, that the
elective franchise shall be so extended as to include house.
holders ; that votes shall be taken by ballot ; that the dura-
tion of Parliaments shall not exceed three years ; and that the
apportionment of Members to populationshall be made more
equal." Great anxiety existed in the country on the sub-
ject of this motion. He had many applications made to
him to know what he meant by household suffrage, and
here he begged to remark that a word had been acci-
dently omitted in the resolution, as his intention was to in-
clude all householders. Not wishing to create any alarm he
drew a distinction between the vagrant and the man who
ought to have a vote, and adopting the opinion given by
Whitelock and others, and very lately by Lord Brougham,
his definition was as follows. He might remark, in the first
instance, that the Committee who had met and had asked
him to bring forward this motion, had all given different in-
terpretations to the the term household voter. The defini-
tion which he would suggest, if the House allowed him to
bring in a Bill on the subject was this—" that every male
person of full age, and not subject to any mental or legal in-
capacity, who shall have occupied a house or part of a house
for twelve months, and who shall have been rated to the
poor as an elector, shall be entitled to be registered, and
shall be entitled to vote for twelve months from
that period ; and every lodger shall have a right to be rated
to the poor, and after such rating and such residence for
twelve months he shall in like manner be entitled to be
registered as au elector." There would be no difficulty in
carrying out this object. The apparatus all existed. In
every parish there were ratings to the poor, and persons who
s
kept accounts of those rating. All that was wanted was to
have so much of residence as should separate and distinguish
the steady inhabitant, who was entitled to a vote, from the
vagrant, who was not entitled to one. He knew that this
proposition would exclude a certain portion of the population,
but at the same time it would include a great many, and be a
strong inducement to a great many more, who would remain
fixed in their residence for 12 months for the sake of being
registered. He was not aware of any difficulty that existed.
By the present law every house was rated to the poor, and
the Act conferring this suffrage would provide that every man
who so desired might, upon entering upon the occupation of
part of a house, have a right to be rated for a portion, what-
ever it might be, of the poor-rate assessed upon that house.
Thus registration and residence, both of which were impor-
tant, would be secured, and a line would be drawn between
the mere vagrant and the worthy and educated man who was
now excluded from the suffrage merely on account of the
nature of his occupation. It might be argued that this proposal
did not keep up the distinction between personal rights and
property. He did not wish to draw that distinction too
tight, but he must say that by the law as it stood too much
attention had been paid to bricks and mortar, and too little
to brains—(Hear, hear, and a laugh)—and the time had now
come when common sense should prevail. He submitted to
the House that the proper course to pursue would be, to abo-
lish all qualifications now existing in boroughs, and substi-
tute this simple and intelligible principle, by which a large
portion of the people now excluded would be admitted. The
Noble Lord and some others might say that it would admit
toe many—(Hear, hear)—but that was not his opinion.
The more were admitted the better the chance of a free
and a fair expression of opinion, and of doing
away with bribery and other influences which had
been brought to bear. He would tell Hon. Members who
might not have had the experience of the working men
which he had had, that he had held his position in that
House, and been protected for some 12 or 14 years during
the worst of times, by the virtue and honesty of the working
men of Montrose, and the five burghs had kept him in that

House in spite of every effort made by the whole Tcry aris-
'ocracs , who would have given his weight in gold only to
get rid of him.—(Cheering and laughter.) The working
limn now thought and acted for themselves; and mei.
Gentlemen should remember that the schoolinaster had been
abroad, and that there was a great difference between the
lays of 1831 and those of 1848. Public affairs were now far
better understood, although he could wish education had
been still more widely extended.—(Hear, hear.) He thought
that a large suffrage—such as he hoped to see realised be-
fore long—was so consistent with the interests of all classes,
high and low, that he believed no Minister would be able
long to refuse it. It was as clear to him as any proposition
he had ever examined, that, if those were admitted within
the pale of the constitution who were now ranging discon-
tented over the country, a grand cause of such discontent
would be removed, and thereby the number of advocates,''
of order and peace would be increased.—( Hear, hear.) This; I
therefore, was the principal object ; all the others were'
merely subsidiary. The extension of the suffrage was the
one great object—( Hear, hear)—all the others were
matters of detail. Having obtained an extension of the
suffrage, the result would be—for lie would not trouble the
House with figures—according to his estimate, that 2,000,000
of votes would be added to the constituency.—( Hear, hear.)
This increase of the constituency was itself a good. The
more votes that were added the better. He hoped that all
would be included in the franchise who deserved it ; for it
was a heartbreaking circumstance to see men of ability and
talent, though in a low condition of life, excluded by law
from the exercise of their rights in a representative
constitution. If this was not to be a representative con-
' stitution, it must be a military constitution ; it must
be one or the other, and, he hoped, when he looked
round at the state of the continent, that this
truth would be remembered ; it ought to ring in the ears of
those who obstructed the extension of the principle of re-
presentation, and he hoped it would continue to ring in their
ears until the object was obtained. If he found the country
prepared for the change, he was bound to explain why the
resolution,:put forth as the resolution of a committee, was
put in this shape. It was thought better to throw out the
principle, and to let the country say how far they would go.
Having answered what he considered as the calumny of the
Noble Lord, and having stated the definition which he was
anxious to embody in an Act, in order that his plan
should have effect and operation, he would mention
one circumstance, which he had referred to on a
former occasion—namely, why he had put all into one reso-
lution. The extension of the suffrage without protection
would, in his opinion, be an evil, since in many cases voters
would be subject to a coercion and an influence which was
not very delicately exercised by masters; he therefore
thought it perfectly right, and he took it upon himself to
express the opinion on the part of the community at large,
that voters should be protected. It was not the humbler
classes alone who needed this protection; the petitions had
not been confined to those classes: All had joined—Conser-
vatives and Whigs, the man of wealth and the tradesman,
mayors and justices of the peace, had joined in the prayer
that the suffrage should be extended; and the next and
most important question was, in what manner it should be
exercised. hitherto there had been the grossest inequality.
What was to be done? It was not his intention to adopt the
plan proposed by some, of cutting the country into squares.
He was one of those who thought that every change was an
evil.—(Hear.) Every change ought, in his opinion, to be
well considered beforehand; and he never would advocate
any change merely for the sake of change, or unless he was
sure it would effect great good. He did not, therefore, pro-
pose to divide the country anew, and he did not propose to
alter the proportion of Members for England, Scotland, and
Ireland. He would leave the proportions the same as they
now were. He was aware that there were counties with a
population treble the amount of other counties, and it might
be desirable to alter the limits of some counties, as well as
of some boroughs. He had the number of the population in
each county and in each borough. and he could state what
should be the average of each. The next proposition was
the vote by ballot. He knew that this subject had been
very fully discussed in this House upon former occasions,
and he was not now disposed to renew the discussion ; but
he would notice one objection to the ballot, namely, that
it was un-English. If the ballot was un-English, was it
meant that bribery and coercion, against which it was
meant to guard, were English ?—( Hear, hear.) If the
tranchise was a trust, those in possession of it should vote
according to their honest opinion. If a man came into the
possession of an estate giving him the command over a cer-
tain number of votes, why should the men who had them
be called upon to vote at all, when they could not do so
honestly? But was it those men alone who required pro-
tection? Why, men with hundreds and thousands a year
lied not courage to vote as they ought, and required a pro-
tection as well as the poor man. But it was the poor man
he wished chiefly to protect against the rich, in order that he
!night give his vote freely, without suffering the conse-
quences which in many cases a working man endured if he
gave an honest direction to his vote. What was surprising
was, that the higher classes did not object to the Ballot
among themselves. They should do to others as they would
be done by. When they got to their clubs they voted by
ballot, and why not permit the poor man to exercise his
franchise by ballot? He wished any man, when he came to
vote, to be able to go in an erect and independent manner
and exercise his right; he wished him to be as independent
in that act as the Honourable Member for Sunderland oppo-
site, and therefore he thought the ballot was necessary to
the due exercise of the elective franchise. Having dis-
posed of this point, the next was the duration of the Par-
liament. Some proposed that Parliaments should be elected
for five years, some for three years, and some for two years.
He admitted that there was no rule by which a person coull
form an opinion upon this question, which depended upon
practical experience. His own opinion, after all his expe-
rience in that House, led him to say that if the Parliament
were elected for a not longer time than three years, that
term would afford a sufficient opportunity of control over
the representatives. If the elections were annual, it would
occasion trouble delay, and expense, though if his plan
were adopted candidates would be put to little expense. He
thought, however, taking it altogether, that Parliaments
ought not to be elected for more than three years. These
were, therefore, his propositions—household suffrage, under
the conditions he had mentioned ; the more equal apportion-
ment of Members to population ; triennial Parliaments; and
vote by ballot. There was likewise a fifth proposition
which he wished to adopt. He wished to act upon the prin-
ciple be had before referred to, of doing to others as others
did to him. He sat in that House without qualification.
He was an elector, and as an elector he had a title to be
elected. In Scotland there was no qualification required
—no property qualification —but the fact of being an
elector. He was anxious to put the people of England
and, Ireland on the same footing in this respect as those of
Scotland, where there was no property qualification, and
where even working men of talent who had no property
qualification were not therefore excluded from the House.
Upon this ground, he thought that all the rest of the United
Kingdom should be put upon the same footing as Scotland
was, which would open the door for the removal of property
qualification. This was the plan of Reform which he thought
ought to be adopted ; he thought if the House stopped
short of this the plan would be defective ; he thought they
ought to carry it out entire, and they should beware of
making such another mistake as they had done in 1832. In
justification of his views he had no occasion to refer, but he
must refer, to the sentiments expressed by the Noble Lord
when lie introduced the Reform Bill in 1831, which he sup-
ported in this strong manner, and he (Mr. Hume) saw no
reason why the Noble Lord should have since changed his
opinions. The Noble Lord, on the Ist of March, 1831, said—
" But what is the case at this moment? The whole people
call loudly for Reform. That confidence, whatever it was,
which formerly existed in the constitution of this House,
exists no longer—it is completely at an end. Whatever may
he thought of particular acts of this House, I repeat that the
confidence of the country in the construction and constitu-
tion of the House of Commons is gone, and gone for ever.
I will say more. I will say that it would be easier to
transfer the flourishing manufactures of Leeds and Manches-
ter to Gatton and Old Sarum, than to re-establish confidence
and sympathy between this House and those whom it calls
its constituents. I end this argument, therefore, by saying,
that if the question be one of right, right is in favour of
Reform—if it be a question of reason, reason is in favour
of Reform—if it be a question of policy and expediency,
policy and expediency are in favour of Reform." He (Mr.
Hume) could not use stronger language to support his ar-
guments than this, and it was only necessary to read it to
show what the sentiments of the Noble Lord then were.
"there was another passage of the same speech of the Noble
Lord which it was very important that the House should
bear in mind. The Noble Lord showed the necessity of a I
change in the state of the representation at that time, and he
(Mr. Hume) wanted to show what the Noble Lord's opinions
before been gone over, for arguments in favour
thenthat
Iwere
should;
gI
ot
owviel lr n ot be
the
ground
which
hh
et
eh i
frequentlys
of a change in the state of the representation ;
but it is due to the House that I should
state shortly the points on which the reformers rest their
case. In the first place, then, the ancient constitution of our
country declares that no man shall be taxed for the support
of the state who has not consented by himself, or his repre-
sentative, to the imposition of these taxes; the well known
statute De Tallagio non concedendo repeats the same lan-
evdeorubhtesehhadvisepubteeedi.i
gt
huraogwe
h; aund
it,on a tiht
so ul
eggha s omme ea
og historicalha s o
It includes all the freemen of the land,' and provides that
each county should send to the Commons of the realm two
I knights, each city two citizens, and each borough two bur-
gesses." He read the next passage to introduce the two
branches of his plan, namely, the ballot and the duration of
Parliaments;—" I ought to notice certain points which are
looked to with great interest by the most zealous advocates
for reform, but which are not included in the proposed
measure. In the first place, then, I have to state that
there is no provision in this Bill for shortening the dura-
tion of Parliament. That is a subject which has been
much considered, but, upon the whole, without stating the
opinion of his Majesty's Ministers on it, I may observe that
it was thought better to leave that matter to be brought for-
ward as a separate question than to bring it at the end of
a Bill affecting franchises and matters of local reference,
separate and essentially different from any question concern-
ing the duration of Parliament. Withoat saying to what
opinion his Majesty's Ministers incline on this point, I may
say that they consider it of the utmost importance not to
burden this measure :with any other, but to reserve it by
itself, leaving it to any other Member, at any time that may
be considered fitting, to introduce the question, and to make
it the subject of future consideration." " There is another
question, likewise, which has excited a vast deal of interest
in the country, and of which no mention is made in this
Bill, I mean the vote by ballot. I have no doubt the ballot
has much to recommend it as a mode of election. More in-
genious arguments never fell under my eye on any subject
than I have seen in favour of the ballot." He (Mr. Hume)
believed that the Noble Lord and his colleagues were at that
time in favour of the ballot. " But, at the same time, I am
bound to say that I hope this House will pause before it
sanctions the motion which the Hen. Member for Bridport
is to make, and adopts the mode of voting by ballot."
N-ow, he (Mr. Hume) said that these arguments of the
Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) were very good, and ought
to weigh with the House on the present occasion ; but he
wanted to clear away, as the Noble Lord did, the objections
to a great measure of reform, and in the same speech the
Noble Lord referred to the doubts entertained by some as to
the expediency of bringing forward a great and effectual
measure of reform, when the Noble Lord said,—" I think,
therefore, that they have a right to be believed when they
come forward with a measure of effectual reform, and say
that they do not so for any sinister purpose of their own.
Interested as they are—all must be—in the future welfare
and prosperity of the country, they do think that this mea-
sure will tend to promote that future welfare, and secure
that future prosperity; and above all do they think that it
is the only way caldulated to insure permanency to that con-
stitution which has so long been the admiration of foreign
nations on account of Its-popular spirit, but that admiration
cannot be made to,exist much longer unless, by an infusion
of new popular spirit, you show that you are determined
not to be the representatives of small classes or parti-
cular interests, but that you will form a body which,
representing the people,—which, springing from the
people—which, sympathising with the people, can fairly
call upon the people to support any future burdens, and to
struggle with any future difficulties you may have to en-
counter, confident that those who ask them so to do are
united heart and hand with them, and look only, like them-
selves, to the glory and welfare of England." Were not all
these observations applicable to the present time ? Hs could

not show in stronger language the necessity of bringing
forward and adopting the plan he proposed than by citing
this passage of the Noble Lord's speech. Upon these
grounds he thought that the Government were bound to
give their support to his plan. which the Government, as
tar as the Noble Lord was concerned, had approved; tbr no
stronger reasons, no stronger arguments couhi be adduced in
its favour than these he had read from the Noble Lord's
speech. He would repeat once more, that he thought the time
had arrived when art important onward step must be taken.
If they only did justice to the mass of the people, they might
rely upon this, that the mass of the people would give them
cordial and unqualified support; but of this they might
equally rest assured, that, if they continued to exclude a
large portion of the people from the enjoyment of civil rights,
it would be impossible for the Government of this country
any longer to repress universal discontent. To his mind no-
thing could be clearer than this, that they must freely grant
civil rights to their fellow subjects, or else they must be pre-
pared to coerce them. They had already—most prematurely
in his opinion—begun the plan of coercion, and it certainly
had beet productive of no good fruits. He meant, not merely
recent coercion, but that also of a more distant date. Let
him be allowed to refer to the year 1793. That was a period
when the first French Revolution raised in this country a
wide spread and eager demand for more popular institutions.
The cry of reform was then raised with great loudness and
strength ; and he entreated them to look at the measures that
were the❑ taken for the purpose of repressing that cry. Let
them look at the measures that were taken for the purpose of
putting clown reform, and let them look at the penalty which
this country paid for the pleasure of carrying those measures
into practical operation. All possible means of coercion were
then resorted to, and what did we pay for it ? —no less a sum
than 600,000,0001. Enggind added 600,000,0001. to her debt
—it might be son,ooo,oooL—the debt was 1,000,000,0141.,
and certainly at the lowest computation 600,000,0001. of that
must be set down to the account of the war, which war
arose altogether out of attempts to coerce the people. Look.
ing back, then, as no one at present could help doing, to the
state of things in 1793, could any rational or dispassionate
man deny that all we had since then suffered in the way of
war and its consequences, in the weight of public taxation,
and in the misery and distress which followed in its train,
might all have been avoided if Parliamentary reform had
been conceded in good time? But the aristocracy were
against it, the Sovereign was against it, and that arch-traitor
to reform, Mr. Pitt, was against it. That Minister; who in
1785, took his great stand upon reform principles, kept this
country under the severest coerceive rule throughout the
many years that his administration lasted. Such had been the
consequence of formerly refusing to make any concessions to
the just demands of the people, and such again would be the
inevitable consequence of any resistance to the popular will ;
that which the people of England had done before they
would do again. It was the duty of the Legislature to con-
cede that which they believed to be just and right, and to
trust the people; if they trusted the people they would be
perfectly safe, but if they deceived the people they might
expect severely to suffer for that crime. Trust the people,
and there need be no ground for alarm ; the people were as
much and more interested than the wealthier classes were in
the maintenance of law and order, for there were none in the
community more interested than the working men in the
public tranquillity, for they would be the first to suffer by
anything like disturbance. Persons of property,,though they
might to seine extent sutler, could get thr,,ugh such diffi-
culties infinitely better than the poor working man ; he w/o,
therefore, much more interested than those who belonged to
any other class in preserving the institutions of the country
from any species of harm. If the Legislature denied the
fair demands of the people, let them not suppose that the
working man could be insensible to so great a wrong—let
them grant the boon in time, and they would meet with
nothing but gratitude in return. On that ground, then,
and on the other grounds which he had stated, he
should say it was the duty of the Ministers of the
Crown to counsel her Majesty, and assure her that the pro-
posed change was for the benefit of the monarchy. They
should tell her that they did not make this demand for the
especial benefit or advantage of a class ; that, on the con-
trary, it was for the good of the whole body politic that
every one should participate in the privileges of the British
Constitution. The people whose cause he then pleaded re-
quired no more, and they would be content with no less.
He asked the House to agree to his motion more as a pledge
than anything else that they would carry out the principle
of reform. If the House agreed to his motion, such assent
would not have the effect of pledging them to any of the
details of any measure that he might seek to found upon a
motion so agreed to. Further, it they permitted him to
bring in a Bill, Hon. Members who supported his motion
might nevertheless propose any alterations that they thought
proper in the Bill when it came before the House. If he ex-
ceeded the just limit of reform, they might correct and cur-
tail what he proposed. If he fell short of what the neces-
sity of the case demanded, they might extend his plan ;
but he hoped that ihe House would at least come to such a
decision as would restore confidence and impart peace to the
agitated feelings of the country, for they much needed a con-
fidence and peace which every one felt they did not at pre-
sent enjoy. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by making his
motion as above stated, correcting an omission by inserting
the words " all householders."
Dr. BOWRING seconded the motion.

The SPEAKER having read the resolution,
Mr. H. DRUMMOND said he could not understand how
the alteration in the suffrage proposed by the Hun. Gentle-
man could have the effect of alleviating that distress which
at present, unfortunately, so much prevailed; neither could
he understand how the adoption of his proposition would
have had more effect in stopping the ,proceedings of the
10th of April, than had the means adopted by the Govern-
ment for that purpose. He well knew that the enumerat-
ing of such principles as the Hon. Gentleman had given
utterance to, tended considerably to produce dissatisfaction,
and he was glad that to him was not entrusted the keeping
of the public peace on that occasion. That was fortu-
nately entrusted to her Majesty's Ministers, who were
in possession of information regarding the matters which
the Honourable Gentleman could not possibly be, and he
thought that the manner in which they preserved the
peace on the occasion alluded to, entitled them
to the gratitude of the community. He confessed he
had felt a difficulty in following the Honourable
Gentleman through his details ; but he would mention, in
order to show that the subject was not new, that in 1829 an
extension of the suffrage aid the shortening of Parliaments
was recommended. Several circumstances which had, how-
ever, of late taken place on the continent, had given it this
year an impetus it had never before received, and there was
not a doubt but that it was a subject which they would all
have to discuss on the hustings at the next election, when
they would find, as was said by Extlipus Judaicus, "That he
who will not argue is a bigot, and he who cannot is a fool."
—(Cheers and laughter.) There was no doubt but great dis-
tress prevailed at the present time, and those parties who
were suffering distress the most were those whoadhered most
closely to the opinions expressed by the Hon. Gentleman. The
distress which prevailed had been the means of causing scenes
of the most heartrending description, and men, stung almost
to madness by being subjected to such misery, could not be
brought to a calm consideration of the question. There
was another class of what might be termed intellectual
labourers, such as mechanics, persons connected with the
various trades, having charge of steam-engines, and so fort,.
These people earned very high wages, but it was notorious
that they were for ever in poverty notwithstanding, and a
gentleman with whom he was ooeversing the other day re-
garding them, told him that one man in his employment
had five guineas a week, but yet he was never possessed of a
farthing.—(Laughter.) All these joined the cry for the
franchise extension, while it was notorious that a reform in
their physical condition would be of much more benefit to
them.—(Hear.) There was a higher class above these,whom
he might call intellectual speculators. These were composed
of doctors without patients, and lawyers without briefs.—
(Laughter)—and a host of such like characters, who wanted
to turn the world into one great chaos, and see if they could
not fetch up a constitution out of it to suit themselves. The
system pursued by them was ca.ried on in France at present
to great perfection, road on a small scale it was carried on in
this country; all of these parties being strong advocates for
the Charter. He was aware that the word charter was of
bot little repute, but he remembered the time when the fact
of a man being a reformer was sufficient to have him set
down as a black sheep. The word reformer soon, however,
turned into Radical, and that had now shifted into Chartist.
And while the Chartists included all those evil persons he
had mentioned, still it did not fallow that they were all of
such an evil stamp. They all, however, seemed to have
strange notions as to the first principles of law ; and, to
prove this, the Hon. Gentleman read an extract from the
report of a meeting held at Leeds some time ago, at which,
he said, the Hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Muntz)
attended. The extract he read was from a speech of one of
the aldermen of that town, wherein it was stated that,
while they were all loyal subjects, and willingly submitted
to the Government of King, Lords, and Commons, the two
former of which were evils which they could afford to en-
dure, yet they conceived that they were entitled to those
rights they demanded. They were advocates of peace, law,
and order, but if their demands were refused by the Go-
vernment, and if the Ministry hesitated too long in grant-
ing them, let it not be said that they were the first to
trample on the institutions of the country, and to raise the
standard of anarchy. The Honourable Gentleman then
went on to state that, whatever they did with the present
motion, they ought to make up their minds to stand by the
institutions of the country—(Cheers)—and they must not
allow themselves to think that the King, Lords, and Com-
mons were mere evils which could be endured.—( Hear,
hear.) Having thus shown who the parties were who asked
for these changes, the next point was what did they ask
for? He would not say ask " us" for, because he was no
party to their Reform Bill. He hated it then, and he hated
it now.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) It gave away all their
old suffrages, and established one in the stead which had no
principle to rest upon. Nobody could give a reason why
101. was more entitled to a vote than 91. 19s. 6d. When the
authors of that measure talked of its being a final one, they
certainly displayed very little foresight for it must have been
evident to all that it was only the first step to a great num-
ber of similar raeasures.—(Hear.) At the same time he
would say, that though it was said everybody was now dis-
satisfied with the Reform Bill, there never was a time when
the people were so fairly represented as now.—(Hear, and
" Oh.") Why, there was a little book, Mr. Dodd's " Par-
liamentary Companion," in which that fact was duly chro-
nicled. But reverting to the point of the real nature of the
changes asked for, he objected to all of them which were new.
He contended that the vote should only be given to property,
those who had no property should be entirely excluded.—
(Oh, oh.) It was of no use talking of intelligence. They
could not define wisdom by an Act of Parliament.—(Hear,
hear.) The object of every civilised society was to make
men live in peace, and the first duty of Government was
to put down mob force. Property was the aim of all parties,
and it was, therefore, the right and the duty of property to
rule. There was no such thing in nature as equality—they
did not find it either in the animal, vegetable, or the mineral
kingdom. Inequality was the law of nature, and they might
agitate to all eternity, but they never could alter it. Then
he had no objection to triennial Parliaments, because
naetcautsietit
wouldw was
reverting
if s
reverting to the old Constitution. He felt besides
be of great advantage to the Members they met their
constituents more frequently, and not only to Members but
to their constituents also.--(Hear, hear.) How many of
them before they were acquainted with facts and details
made flaming professions and fine promises at the hustings
which they afterwards discovered were totally
ticable ?—(Hear, hear.) If they met more frequently a
better practical political education would result. At present
that House was too much separatedfor from
electoralt h e
divisions,people.—
(Hear, hear.) To the
demandto ballot'
and similar claims,
universal suffrage , no property qualifications, the
be was prepared give a direct
negative.
If asked for his reason, he replied they.
were new.
That was sufficient.—(A laugh.) He dis-
liked all these things because they were
merely the
means of getting at certain other things, and he would
rather the House should take its stand where it now was,
than make concessions. It was to the interest of the great
mass of the people that there should be a division of property,
every twelve months.—(No.) He knew it. Political eco-
nomists might explain how the poor man was as much
interested in the security of capital as its owners, but poli-
ticalmuch falsified, and political
economy had been very
economists very much astonished by what had taken place
in France. If they' attempted to put all men upon an equal
footing as to the right of electing representatives, and of
being representatives, they would begin a system which
would be totally subversive of the rights of property, and
therefore totally destructive of property itself.—(No, no.)