The Sun.
London, England, 1848-07-07 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 7, 1848.

turn any Member, and the place having the smallest popula-
tion in the West Riding has a larger number of inhabitants
than the largest of the boroughs returning two members. If
there was a fair apportionment, the West Riding would have
at least 30 members instead of only 18. This isnot a question
between the people of the West Riding and the people of Wilt-
shire. Whatever representat ion Wiltshire and Buckingham-
shire are entitled to should be secured to them ; it should
not be a mock representation, like that of Great
Marlow, where an Hon. Member owning 120 houses comes
in with his cousin, or like that of Aylesbury and other
places. Something has been said about Middlesex. Now
Middlesex is assessed upon an annual rental of 7,584,0001.;
Dorsetshire at an annual rental of 799,000/. They both
have fourteen Members. The amount of money actually
raised for the support of the poor in Middlesex is as large,
within 61., as the whole amount of property assessed to the
poor in Dersetshire, yet they have the same number of
representatives. Cook at the rental of Dfarylebone-
-1,660,000/. a year is there assessed to the poor, being more
than the assessment in two counties returning thirty Mem-
bers? Will any one tell me that the metropolis is not en-
titled to its fair representation in this House, according to
the amount of its property ?—( Hear, bear.) I behave the
Noble Lord the Member for the city of London in his speech
intimated his doubts as to the propriety of giving to the
metropolis so large a number of representatives as they
would be entitled to upon a fair system of representation. I
am surprised to hear such an opinion from the Noble Lord.
I think he might be quoted as an eminent example.
proving that the people of London may be trusted
with the franchise to the full extent.—(hear, hear.,
The Noble Lord has been elected in the city of London uncle-
household snffrage. There is not a house within the walls
of the city which has not a vote attached to it. Where,
then, is the danger of giving to the metropolis its full share
of political power? I believe that large cities, and the me-
tropolis especially, are more qualified than any other part
of the empire to exercise the right of voting, because they
generally comprise the most intelligent and industrious por-
n d. Well,
por-
tion of the people. The inhabitants of the metropolis are, I
conceive, the hardest-working people in England.
now, when Hon. Gentlemen talk of a large community
sending more Members, they have an idea that a great mob
is to elect the Parliament. My idea is that you make a
mob of your London elections, by making the constituency
too large. 'fake, for instance, the Tower Hamlets, with
420,000 inhabitants, and Finsbury with 200,000 or 300,000.
If you wish to give a fair proportion of Members to dif-
ferent parts of the metropolis, and to lay out the whole
of it in wards as you do for the purposes of the civic
elections, the whole would be more easily managed. And
do not be alarmed by the supposition that they would return
only Radicals; you would have some districts sending
Conservatives, and others would be more liberal. The idea
of danger from giving a fairer share of political power
is a chimera. Ido not say that there should, on the whole,
be an increased number of Representatives; 1 think we have
quite as many in this House as we ought to have—(Hear,
hear)—and, therefore, I will assume that if von give a
larger number of Representatives in Some places, you would
diminish the number in others. Wherever the power is, to•
that power the Government will gravitate. The power is'
now in the hands of the large proprietors in this House.
It is they who govern the country—it is they who
rule the Prime Minister of the day; aid I say that if
the voice of the great mass of the people were heard in
this House, the Prime Minister might rely on the country
with more security and satisfaction.--(Hear, hear.) Now
on the question of the ballot I will say very little,
because the ballot stands at the head of those questions
which are likely to be carried in this House.— (Hear,
hear.) I mean to say that the ballot has the most strength
amongst the farmers and the middle class of people.—
(Cries of " Oh, oh !") It is not the farmers who say
oh, oh, those who do so are landlords; the farmers are in
favour of the ballot, for instance those of Lincolnshire.--
(Hear, hear.) The most ridiculous of all the arguments
urged against the ballot is that it is un-English., I say that,
so far from that being the case, there is more voting by
ballot in England than in all other countries. 'This is a
country of clubs, of literary societies, of charitable institu-
tions, and of popularly governed infirmaries and hospitals ;
and in all such institutions voting by ballot is constantly
practised : and when men who come fresh from the Carlton
Club. with the ballot- box ringing in their ears, and say that
ballcting is un-English—when those who resort to the
ballot-box in order to shield themselves from a passing frown
—oppose the ballot on the ground that it is un-English--
when it is asked as a protection to the former, not merely
against the frown, but the tyranny of his landlord—l say
that such a course is preposterous. Something has been said
by the Prime Minister about preferring one year to three
years for the duration of Parliaments. Now, I think I could
suggest an improvement upon both. It you adopted the
system which prevails in municipal bodies, of letting all
serve for three years, and one-third go out every year, you
would thus have an opportunity of testing the opinion
of the country, and avoid those shocks and con-
vulsions you all so much dread. Now, one word in conclu-
sion, on a subject to which the Hon. and Learned Member
and the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire have both re-
ferred. It has been complained that leagues and associations
are formed out of doors, and would be further encouraged by
this alteration. Remember that whatever has been done to
break down barbarism and abominations of every kind in this
country, has been dons by leagues and associations out of
this House. And why is this so ? Because Manchester can-
not have its fair share of representation in this House, it is
obliged to organize a league which is heard through the
length and breadth of the land. This is the indirect way in
which Manchester makes itself felt, and will do so, by one
means or another, in proportion to the power which it ought
to exercise. De you want to get rid of these league agita-
tions out of Parliament ? Why. then, you must bring
this House into harmony with the opinions of the'
people. The abolition of slavery and other great
triumphs which have seen achieved are your glory
and exultation at this present moment. But is it
not a most cumbrous machine—a House of Com-
mons, representing the people by a fiction ; the people out of
doors obliged to organise themselves into leagues and asso-
ciations to do your work! There is a league or ',association
at Liverpool, at the head of which, I believe, is the father of
the Right Hon. Member for the University of Oxford (Mr.
Gladstone). The object of this association is to eflect
reform in cur national expenditure. This House is, par
excellence, the guardian of the people's purse; its primary
duty is to administer taxation justly, and to take care that
expenditure is properly managed ; yet here is an association
to compel it to effect that object. Now, Sir, it is not with
a view of overturning our associations that I advocate this
reform in our representative system. It is because I believe
we must carry out reforms from time to time by discussions
in this House that I take my part in advocating this mea-
sure in this legitimate manner; it is because I believe it
must be so done, or else must be done as they do it on the
Continent, with bayonets and muskets in the streets.
Now I am not an advocate for any such pro-
ceedings ; and I say that those blembers who, having
a political standing in this House, -advocate an
extension of the suffrage at this moment, are
the real security for the peace of this country.
So long as the great mass of the people see that there are
men here who are earnest in advocating a large reform like
this, they will wait patiently.
They may want more ; but
if they believe that those are honest who are trying to obtain
thus much, in that belief we have a guarantee for the peace
and safety of the country which I value as much as any
Conservative in this llouae.—(,heers.) Sir, my object in
supporting this motion is to br(ing to bear upon the legisla-
tion of this House that talent and those virtues which have
characterised the middle and industrious classes of this
country. For, talk as you will of classes—l do net wish to
go into that question—but if you talk of your aristocracy
and your traditions, I must speak of the middle and indus-
trious classes; and I say it is to them, after all, that your
glory is due.—(llear, hear.) The whole of what has been
done for the last 151) years to elevate this country has been
the work, not of the Government, but of the middle and in-
dustrious classes, whether we look at arts, manufactures, or
commercial enterprise • and it is because I wish to bring the
virtues, the industry, ;he intelligence, and the frugality of
those classes into this House that I support the motion.
Mr. URQUHART said, that in
looking at this subject
the country had now the advantage of experience, which
they formerly had nota for on the great occasion when the
Reform Bill was brought before the House, they had hope
of improvement to induce them to proceed with the move-
ment, and could not of necessity have had any experience
as to the operation, and proceedings of a reformed Parlia-
ment. The House had now the advantage of experience,
and taking that as his guide, he (Mr. Urquhart) was bound
to express his opinion that reform bad not mitigated the
evils which it was introduced to alleviate, but had aggra-
vated them. The failure of the Reform Bill in producing
the benefits which bad been expected to result from it, was,
in fact, the greatest which had ever been witnessed in any
civilized nation. It had been stated that, in a financial
point of view, the present House of Commons was useless,
and that was the ground which he urged for a new reforma-
tion of the representation; but that argument went against
the Hon. Member's own view, for it seemed that the re-
formed Parliament had not been efficient in carrying out
economical views. His (Mr. Urquhart's) opinion was, that
as a former reform had not reduced the expenditure or proved
advantageous in a financial sense, so the proposed reforms
would, it carried, also be found ineffectual in producing fi-
nancial advantage. The fact was, that in the conflict of
parties which took place in that House, the advocates of
practical measures fell asleep, and forgot their plans of prac-
tical refo
fo ir reform
rns and improvement,(iNlnHume), ), w
Heh) saw, opposite a great
advocate at
one time was to
be foUnd urging on the Chanceltot of the Exchequer, or at
the elbow of some clerk of some public department, make
reductions; but what has he done of late to effect that re-
trenchment of which he was such an advocate? A great
deal had been said about a reformed Parliament, and
Parliamenthadtbare
tt
:
yet they had increased the expenditure of the country,
while
for
while the Tory and unreformed P
Montrose e nt
said
commended reductions ; and,
Cionmmittee of Finance was
appointed,
1828, a motion in
favour of a reduction of expenditure was carried in an un-
reformed b
e
was not a reduction of 15 or 16 millions merely which was
required, but such a reduction of expenditure as would leave
l loaunsde of
the Colimontn. onms,em a
a surplus calculated seriously to reduce the national debt.
The Hon. Member added, that if the country did not effect
that reduction it did not know what it was about, and added
that a country must be mad which did not pay proper •
regard
to reductions, and which did not in a tinof look
peace to
the expenditure which would be necessary in
a time of war.
That Committee was granted by an unreformed Parliament,
but what had been done of late by the reformed Parliament
to carry out these views ? He (Mr. Urquhart) would ref
mind Hon. Members that the economy which would apply
to individuals would apply equalla..
to nations, and that
the same principles must regulate both. The reformed
Parliament had been spoken of as the friend of retrench-
ment, yet the expenses of the country had in-
creased ; whilst Mr. Canning and Mr. lluskisson, in the
unreformed Parliament, were eminently the friends of re-
trenchment ; and the Right Honourable Baronet the Mem-
ber for Tamworth was in favour of a financial reform before
the passing of the Reform Bill. In 1835 the public expen-
diture was brought to a low point, but it had
continually increased since, until it now reached . the
highest point to which it had ever attained in England,
unless in time of war. The honourable Member who had
introduced this motion, and those who supported it, had
spoken of the will of the public having a proper influence ;
but to show in how far further retOrin would effect this
object he could inform the Honourable Gentleman that he
(Mr. Urquhart) had spent a great portion of his life in
despotic countries, and he saw that what was often
mere declamation here was real there, and that nothing
of public importance was done without the will of tLe
people in fact, that when they said a public Act was
wrong, it would be as impossible to maintain it, as it
would be wrong in this country to persevere in violati"g
the decencies of life against the good-feeling of the com-
munity. What bad the Reform Government done in the
way of reducing the expenditure ? No less then forty-
two millions had been lest up to the present day by
departing from the lessened system of expenditure in 1835,
and including the loss which had occurred from not adher-
ing to the recommendations of the Committee of 1817, the
loss in both ways up to this present day would be 80 mil-
lions. The expenditure had increased under the Whigs—
they had exhibited a deficiency while the Tories had a sur-
plus ; the Tories left a full revenue, and those who were now
in office exhibited a deficiency of nine millions in three
years. He was opposed to the motion as one which was cal-
culated, if carried, to be detrimental to the interests e this

country, and to divert public attention during its discussion
from the real and practical good of the nation ; and in doing
so he firmly believed that he was a greater friend to the inte-
rests of the country in opposing it than those were who sup-
ported the motion. lie looked upon the liberties of the
nation as sacred, and he thought that they could be only
preserved by not giving a preference or predominance of
power to any class in the state. He was opposed to this
inotion, for he looked upon these additional reforms
;is a means of extending the basis upon which some
if the usurped powers of Parliament were established.
It was no argument in favour of the measure that the people
of this country were in favour of it. There could not be a
more loyal population than that of the Channel Islands, and
vet they were not ambitious of sending Members into that
House. To remedy the evils complained of there was but
one course, and that was to go back to their duty as
representatives of the people, to refuse to assent to any
measure which was not strictly, demanded, and not to suffer
a single penny to be expended unnecessarily. These duties
;hey had neglected entirely. Judging from pact experience,
he considered that it would be worse than useless to pass a
new Reform Act, and he therefore begged to move the
following amendment :—" That experience has shown that
change in the constitution of Parliament has failed to obtain
the ends for which it was desirable. and with which it was
eriginelly conjoined, viz., non-interference and retrench-
ment."
Mr. ANSTEY seconded the amendment, which he con-
sidered would have stood better if the word " desired" had
been inserted for " desirable" ; however, he would ac-
cept it as it stood. A more extensive measure than that
now dreamed of had been submitted at the desire of the late
King to the Grey Cabinet, and it WM the Noble Lord at
the head of the Government who had cut it down and
mangled it into the shape of the present Reform Act.—
( Hear, hear.) He had heard with great pleasure the state-
ment of the Honourable Member for the West Riding of his
motives and his views in supporting the present resolution
which, as the Honourable Member had stated, was only to
obtain cheap and good government. He could not help,
however, entertaining suspicion at anything coming from the
school of which the Honourable Gentleman was a member.
lie found him "et Ilona ferentem," especially when he remem-
bered a speech which he delivered, in which he referred to
the example held forth by the United States of economy and
other excellent qualities, which, he said, should be imitated
by the Government of this country. "If," said the Honour-
aide Gentleman, " these changes are said to be incompatible
with the maintenance of monarchy, then I answer, economy
and retrenchment, coat cm/um." For his part he would desire
that they should know the real object sought to be obtained.
They should not be told it was one thing, when in reality it
was another. If the Honourable Member for Montrose
would bring in a Bill for the repeal of the Reform Act, he
would second the motion.
The amendment having been put,
Mr. L. KING asked the indulgence of the House for a
very few moments. He should not occupy them by replying
to the two last speeches, the subjects and results of which
were equally ill. timed. He would rather refer to the speech
of the Learned Member for Reading, who appeared to have
forgotten the old principle of the law of England, that every
man who was taxed ought to be represented. Now since
the passing of the Reform Act the intelligence of those who
were not represented had increased in a most surprising
manner. Commerce, shipping, steam navigation, railways,
had all contributed to this great result. The central dis-
tricts of England were inhabited by a class of intelligent
men earnestly desirous to be admitted to a participation in
the franchise. For his part, he had no fear of admitting such
a class within the pale of the constitution. Such a measure
would do far more for the peace of the country than any
Gagging Bill introduced, even as he hoped the last was, as a
temporary measure. What saved this country in 1832 but the
Reform Bill? Contrast England with France now, and mark
the distincoion between the nations, the one which had passed
a Reform Act, whilst the other had engulfed herself in revo-
lution. He wished to see the principle of our Reform Act
carried out. The small boroughs must form the schedule A
of a new Bill. They were the disgrace and the laughing-
stock of the country. It was said that men of talent found
their way into the House by their agency ; but had not the
people an interest in returning the best men, and was it not
possible that selfishness and corruption found their way into
e throue
gh
boroughs
g hthiss largelym ac hi machinery
d
rri?
The Parliament
iusinstances
e eesqoufay rr
u with
for an exension of the franchise. He thought it would
auel lo
have been better if the motion had been confined to that
object. As he was called upon, however to say "Aye," or
"No," to a mere general proposition, he:had no difficulty in
ittiho n talentin t h
giving his assent to it.—(Cheering.)
Mr. FEARGUS O'CONNOR said it was an admitted
fact that every new political party and every new political
question went through a certain ordeal. First, the leaders
were laughed at, then scoffed at, then reviled, then persecuted,
then their proposals were heard, then discussed, and after-
wards legislated on. This motion and its treatment by the
Prime Minister of the Crown gave him a guarantee that he
and his brother Chartists bad not laboured in vain. The
speech of the Hon. Member for Reading had been much be-
praised. It bad been called able, poetical, astounding, and
astonishing—(A laugh)—but it seemed to him to be a
speech based upon ignorance of the question. The Hon.
Member wanted education, but political rights must pre-
cede it. Enfranchise the people and ignorance would be-
come a crime; but do not keep the people in ignorance and
punish them because they were so. The Honourable Mem-
ber for Montrose said that this motion was the motion now
adopted by the majority of the working classes of this coun-
try. Ile (Mr. O'Connor) should be unworthy his place in
Parliament if he did not give the flattest denial to the state-
ment. The majority of the people were for the people's
Charter in all its integrity. He cautioned the Member for
Montrose and the Government how they ventured to post-
pone the larger concession which the people required. Al
that bad occurred in other countries had occurred in coned
quence of withholding the people's rights. Nevertheless-
though it did not go far enough, it was his intention to vote,
for the motion before them. lie should do so, if on no
other ground, at least upon the ground that it proposed to
shorten the duration of Parliaments. He declared that, after
seeing how the time of the House was frittered away, he
should prefer annual Parliaments without further change, to
universal suffrage with a septennial Parliament. Annual
Parliaments, universal suffrage, electoral districts, payment
of Members, no property qualitication—all these, five out of
the six points of the People's Charter, had been in former
times fsatures in the constitution of these reslins. Why
were they not again to be recognised ? As to the agitation
by which the people ought to gain their legitimate aims, the
gentlemen on the Ministerial benches certainly had no right
to complain of it, since it was precisely themselves who, in
former years, to gain their ends, had taught the people agita-
tation, and set the example of the very class of language
which they now denounced as seditious. Those gentlemen
stood by the Reform Bill of 1832, that measure which had
wholly failed to fulfil the objects which it was announced to
effect, whose motto was " Peace, Retrenchment, and Reform,"
And the delusive expectation from which was, high wages'
cheap food, and plenty to do, almost as great a bubble as the
Liberty, Equality, Fraternity" jargon of our neighbours
across the Channel. He himself belonged to neither party,
to neither faction in that House ; neither to the aristocracy
faction on that side of the House, nor to the middle-class
faction on the ether, the only difference between whom
was, that the former had deceived the people once, while
the latter had deceived the people twice ; he belonged to the
party of the people, and lie would tell the House and the
Government, that unless the just demands of the people, of
the working classes, were conceded before long, Government
would find themselves all at once in the position of the
late Frenoh Government.—(fear, hear.) Not tLat this
should be done by a violent revolution—God forbid ! He
would heartily say, for lie knew that the first shot fired in
suchwtrusthh oat
would
could
of
c o
elections. contest e .teh t
have
then
u ob
been
le
el
Jed
unl
isg eegma
juggled
dert
regarded
exemplary
xrddeeoe
doma m s
p they
conductaor y f thehtah had been
asnbehaeaumost
iworkingno
been
Franco.
el ate
hs
w
It was said that the working classes were not fitted for the
repudiated
Ideeh
o ofatl the
e voteq
essen-
tial teat of qualification, and he should like to know
e
conduct of the working classes of England amid all the
grievous miseries which they had suffered for the last six
years.—(lf
it as r,h
aa settlement the lion.
lisoo longn.
Mem-
ber's motion as better than nothing at all ; but he frankly
aught of influence and energy remained to him, that in-
fluence and that energy should be enthusiastically applied to
es t i f
oonr ;
the attainment of the great object of his life—the People's
Charter. One class was set against another class, in order to
promote the objects of a third party. That species of tactics
was always resorted to in political struggles. The free-traders
had done so, by setting the middle classes against the work-
' ing classes. He would take that opportunity of saying to the
Hon. Member for Montrose, that when, on a former evening,
he had taunted the lion. Member with having withdrawn his
motion for reform, and the Hon. Member for the West
Riding had charged him with ferocity in so doing, he did not
intend to make any harsh observations, and he begged to ex-
press his regret if he had done so, for he never intended to
allow any ferocity towards the Hon. Member. But, in say-
ing what he did on that occasion, the Hon. Member for the
West Riding had only pursued the course to which he (Mr.
F. O'Connor) had already referred, and had tried to set the
middle classes against the working classes, who were in fa-
vour of the Charter. He would now conclude, only observ-
ing that if it had not been the intention of the Hon. Member
to divide on his motion that evening, he should have reserved
what he had to say until he had heard the sentiments of all
those who were disposed to speak on the question before the
House. But as it was for the advantage of the cause that the
House should come to a division that evening he should con •
tent himself with stating that, as the Protection party had
adopted the cry of " No surrender," so he would take his stand
upon the Charter, and say " The Charter, and no surrender."
Mr. M. MILK ES should detain the House only a few
minutes whilst he stated his reason for not supporting the
new Reform Bill, at the same time that he was by no means
opposed to reform. His objection to the motion of the lion.
Member for Montrose was the fundamental one that there had
been no grounds yet shown for the new reform league, or for
the agitation which it professed to create in the country. In
all organic reforms two things were necessary to inquire into
—the first, what are the evils which it was sought to re-
medy ? The second, whether there was any great or general
popular demand for that organic reform? Now
he did not think that a sufficient case had been
made out of great practical evils sufficient to show
that such a reform as the one proposed was neces-
sary. A referm might be required, and he had no right to
say, looking at the Corn-law League, and the successful in-
fluences which it brought to bear on the most distinguished
minds in that House, together with its signal
success, that agitation on behalf of reform was
not necessary or right. But there was a very
wide difference between the resolutions which
were before the House and the one specific grievance which
the Corn-law League sought to remedy. The motion of the
Hon. Member was to elicit the declaration whether the
people demanded organic change in the institutions of the
country, and whether there were such evils in the present
constitution of the kingdom as to require those organic
changes. lie would not enter into the question of the suf-
frage. The most satisfactory view that he could take of that
matter was to regard it not as a right or a privilege, but as
a trust. The House, therefore, was bound to inquire whe•
.ther it was demanded by the people, and if so, how was that
demand demonstrated? Why should forty gentlemen con-
stitute themselves a committee in order to stimulate this
demand? The question of the suffrage was not one on
which the lion. Member or his fellow-committeemen could
give any additional instruction to the people. They knew
all that they ever could know on the subject of the franchise,
and they knew, moreover, that if they went systemati-
cally to work in demanding it, the Parliament must at last
grant it to them. On the ballot he had already expressed
his sentiments in that House. He bad rather do
if the
without the ballot. But at the same time,
in
the
people in any numbers complained of being
coerced
the case
exercise of their franchise, if the complaints madee
h 'n
would not
of the Stamford election were well establis:d,
tect the voters.
deny that the ballot must be granted to
pun-English in the
It had been said that there was something u
as a degree of openness
ballot, and he must say that there w
which t ded to enable
en
in the social institutions of England
and if the practice of
the people to dispense with the baltlowt,;,
s a higher mode of re-
open voting could be maintained,
1
the concealment of the ballot.
cording their sentiments that
political experience he had never
In the course of his humble eas would render it necessary
• witnessed any such intiinidatio
et the voters. But as the Hon.
to resort to the ballot topro.te
bad truly said, the real
Member for the West Riding
Question under consideration was that of electoral divisions.
•
Neither the ballot nor tile buffrage constituted the import.