The Sun.
London, England, 1846-01-23 00:00:00

Lancashire. By such means as those they avowed they
would be enabled to return one hundred Members to Par-
liament. To obtain that end some send their thousands,
others their five hundreds,and others their fives.—(Hear.)
To those who were the members of the League—those
who had been for some time writing upon Dukes, such as
his Noble Friend the Duke of Richmond, who appeared
to be considered by these writers as ferce naturce, and
liable to be preyed upon, to them he would give the
benefit of his opinion without giving them his
51., and that opinion was, that it was per-
fectly legal for them to act as they
now did. The course they were pursuing violated no
law, common or statute. If his friend Mr. Attwood,
and other rich men like him were to subscribe a million
of money to the purchase of freehold qualifications, they
would have a perfect right, as the law now
stood, to do so. They might purchase those free-
holds for the purpose of returning Members
of Parliament. To such a course the law did
not say nay. The late' Mr. Bentham used to argue
that there was no such thing as unconstitutional—that
it appeared to- him that unconstitutional meant anything
that anybody did not like. " Show me," he said, " any-
thing lawful, and that is constitutional ; show me any-
thing unlawful, and that will be unconstitutional." Now
he (Lord Brougham) would adduce an instance to illustrate
the argument he had referred to. The Sovereign might
create five hundred Peers. He might march these five
hundred Peers into that House, and as the prerogative
was not confined to numbers, neither was it confined to
rank. He might ennoble five hundred soldiers out of a
battalion of Guards, and make every one of
them Peers of the realm. It would be an undeni-
able and unprescriptible right for them to take
seats, and to vote in that House, and the
sovereign might march that battalion of newly-made
peers into that House to overwhelm the Members of that
House, and to carry any measure by a majority of a hun-
dred. It would be perfectly lawful. There would be
nothing illegal—nothing in the slighest degree contrary
to law, in the exercise of this most undeniable preroga-
tive which the Crown possessed of creating peers.
But if the Lord Chancellor should put the great
seal to those patents of peerage, so surely as these
fell on the ears of the Commons House of Parliament,
the announcement of the act which he had done—the
crime which he had committed—perfectly lawful, but
perfectly unconstitutional—a gross breach of the Con-
stitution—a fuul violation of the Constitution—a high
surely would the head of
fact, at least by right and by
crimethat h i
gahn d
officer—if
not misdemeanor—son
desert—fall for the crime he had committed.
Re knew that if be was called on he would say they
were not committing an unconstitutional act. If he
were asked his opinion as a lawyer he would give it,
tnd without requiring five pounds either—(A laugh)—if
in that capacity he were asked which of the two acts
were the most unconstitutional, he would say that act
which raised money by voluntary contribution for
guilty purposes. Ile would say that as a lawyer it was
legal, but as a constitutional lawyer it was illegal—
(Hear, hear)—and a break up of the Constitution.
lie had not for the first time stated this opinion. He
was once asked to aid in the creation of 500 votes, and
his answer was distinctly that he would not subscribe
,ne farthing for such a measure. But be placed his ob-
jection on higher grounds ; he saw it was an unconsti-
tutional act to multiply votes. He would say one word
on voluntary contributings. Those who thus sub-
•cribed and contributed to raise large funds to
,meate votes must be prepared to differ from
.ome of the most constitutional lawyers in this
,:ountry. He did not say that contributions for the pur-
pose of enabling the Crown to defend the country was il-
legal or unconstitutional ; but, on the contrary, was a
praiseworthy subscription, and was not a subscription
rex. the purpose of subverti: g the established regulations
)f the country. He alluded now t:' Ireland.—(Hear.)
He supposed it was just as constitutional as the policy
adopted now—many people might think it a little
,pore justifiable and more constitutional.—(Hear, hear.)
Chose who considered it a legal act, will have against
hem the opinion of the late Sir Philip Crompton, and
will also have to combat a still greater opinion—he meant
tile. Fox. They would also have to combat Lord Grey's
ipinion, as well as Mr. Pitt's. On such grounds the
Parliament had by its votes sanctioned the use of money
raised by voluntary contributions. They may
lave been wrong—that he would not express
to opinion about. He considered that the course
)f this country ought to be, to raise money
iy consent of Parliament, and through the sworn Minis-
rers of the Crown. He did not like to see a trade car-
ied on with impunity, which would alter the founds.
ions of their Constitution, by raising a new trade iii
his country. His love of free trade was not very great—
'ist meant the trade which was driving for money—for base
lucre, for filthy gains—and for that purpose he would
not consent to such a plitical agitation. If that trade
was not checked, there would never be wanted persons
to trade in it, because it is of all trades the easiest car-
ried on, and the meanest. Of all trades it was the easiest

:o drive, and they saw in Ireland what agitation
vas doing, and now in England, in the repeal of
the corn-laws, a good trade was also carried on.
He had an equal dislike with his Noble Friends to what
s called mob government. He would have this country
governed by the Crown and the Parliament. He would
have the measures for the safety of the people of Eng-
land discussed and propounded by wise men. He had been
reproached with inconsistency for advising the Crown
to dissolve Parliament during the agitation of the Reform
Bill. But he cared not for the charge if he felt he was
right. He had sat at the helm of the imperial vessel
For four years, with others more worthy to steer, and he
saw the vessel more than once in sight of breakers;
-le had no desire to see them again.—(Hear, hear.) His
Noble and Learn( d Friend had stated that after what
'lad taken place in former times, and after the opinions
.vhich he had expressed, he held it inconsistent with his
own honour to hold a different opinion,
Lord STANLEY begged to correct the Noble Lord
—his expression was, " holding the same opinions now
as he did then."
Lord BROUGHAM apologised. That was quite a
different thing. lie was beguiled by the word incon-
sistency. It was not ineonsittency to act one way and
hink another—(Great laughter)—it Was downright
lishonesty. He had often heard the charge of ineofi-
istency ; but he . had no respect for, nor did he
vish to court or belting to, the sect of that
lass of persont who know years tO pass
war them without any increase of knowledge,
old who are toe proud tO gather *Weill frati
length of years, or profit by the lessens of eN-
:ierience. To do this was not inconsistency.
In conclusion, he wished to oipress his most
•ordial approbation of that part df her Majesty's
Speech Which recommended their Lordships taking the
listurbed state of Ireland into their early consideration;
The Earl of MALME§BtRY begged to prtiteSt against
that part of the Lord's speeeh its which he reeoili-
uended an appeal to the people. He perfectly agreed that
uchan appeal should be made on no trifling or trivial occa-
lon. If it was necessary to take the opittion of the peoplei
let it be the cne Which thq aot,std it, 1841, Which ex-
dressed its a protectionist Parliament; He would
sot suppOse that because the Prime Minister had changed
pis views, that the, people
.had changed theirs.—(Hear.)
The Eaft of RADNR observed that it was a
!natter of necessi:y to yield to public pressure from
vithout, when they had not a Government who would
lead the public mind. This bad been the Fractide of
late years. lie would wish to ask the Noble Lord, be-
core he left his place, whether all the great
,neasures which he had seen carried had not been
so carried by pressure filen without 7 .11111*otild ask,
vas not the abolition of the slave trade carried by pres-
sure from without ? Had not Catholic Emancipation
'peen carried by pressfire froth Withbut 1 Had
;sot the repeal •of the Orders of Council
4een carried by pressure from without ? Had not
the repeal of the Test Acts been carried by pressure from
without ? He lamented to say that this was always
the case wheti tile people ofitttriti itt ktto*-
edge and enlightenment the Govertiiiitht of the ceintry.
they should reflect that to carry out any great measure
pressure from without..was required. Some reference
lad been made as to raising mopey for such purposes, as
being an unconstitutional act: In that base it would be
in unconstitutional act .to subscribe 100,000/. for the
purpose of a railway: There was also a subject
.vhich at present Was otctlpying dohaidefahle attention
—it was a scheme for improving the dwellings of
the poor in the metropolis. To raise money for
that purposed according to the Noble Lord, would also
se unconstitutional. Bo Would it be with raising sub-
.criptions for churches; in fact, it would place an em-
`,argo on many charitable purposes. The Noble and
Learned Lord had also chosen to cast violent aspersions
in the Anti-Corn-law- League. lie (Lord Radnor),
however, had no objection to the name, however much
it might displease the Noble Lord; but. he denied that
hey raised money for unconstitutional purposes. He was
t subscriber to that fund—(Hear, hear)--and he believed
-hat in doing so he was subscribing for a charitable
purpose ; for he believed nothing could be more chari-
table than effecting a repeal of the corn-laws, and car-
rying out this principle of free trades—(Hear, hear.)
The Noble Lord had said that-the League bought votes
with the funds they were raising. He (Lord Radnor)
denied this. They bought no votes with the funds, but
it was raised only to Barry on the agitation. They per-
suaded people to buy votes7—to lay out their money to
give effect to their opinions, but they did not buy
votes. The League, therefore, merely facilitated the
getting of votes, but they did not make them. "(Hear,
hear.) They opened an office to enable persons who
wanted
tvcatets*tohh get them from pteharsotnsprwivhioiewgeer:_(Hear;
willingear
to sell h
;
hear.) They did not make votes, as other parties had
lone, by the 501. clause, by which they had divided
their farms into four or five parcels for effecting
,uch a purpose: The League slid nothing in
secret, but their object was to carry cut a great poli-
tical object. The Noble and Learned Lord had objected
to their agitating for a political purpose as unconstitu-
tional ; but had not the Noble and Learned Lord him-
self done so in his agitation on behalf of the abolition of
the slave trade? If the one agitation was unconstitu-
tional, the other was also of that character.—(Hear,
te
hear.) The Noble and Learned Lord bad charge
League with being actuated by selfish considerations
at
alone. To that he (Lord Radnor) would answer,
there was no such evidence in their conduct, whichhad
pense of time and money, not to realise any p
rgenerally.
or advantage, but for the good of the public
wfoasunbdectahuesier
shown on the part of the leading members airagtreeeath.eexe-t
oroigrineigohf
eight merchants
eArenhtani-Ctsoroni
nie when trade fell
trade in a very bad state. At that ti ,
ed projects for the
so much in 1838 or 1839, they form
TseiVlL
others in the same
purpose The became
trade ey ecame
trade from the ruin hanging over them'h
t which was ood
free traders,. and they found that t a _ g
--of rescuing themselves and
large, and they in -
• duced others to become free-
every way, and also
traders.- He would support in
I Ma Anti-Corn-law
nc h Leaguee
s ter
League. He was
for themselves was good for others, and for. the public at
defend, the • • Anti-Corn-law
lea- in that ways.
listen to reason they
sorry
thatthe GaonYver-n°llmeent.Bhw°ouukild—bneot