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

TWF SUN,_ LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING,

similar kind. -I' do not think that we should content our-
selves with improving the legislation, and altering, the Ex-
cise and Cusioms.—(Cheers.) I think while the Reform Bill
was a settlement of a great question that the Reform Bill
itself may admit from time to time of such improvements or
Alterations as experience and knowledge may suggest.—
(Hear hear.) And at the time when I was most attacked
is speaking of the Reform Bill as a final measure, I spoke
in this manner of the retention of the freemen. I said I
thought it was a misfortune that the freemen were kept in
the Reform Bill, and that if they exercised the franchise
corruptly, one of two courses must be adopted, either to dis-
franchise them altogether, or, what I considered the better
course, to treat the rights of the freemen as other rights had
been treated. In a subsequent passage I said that there
were many detects in the Reform Bill which required to be
corrected, but that such changes differed entirely from a pro-
position to found a new reform Bill, based on triennial Par-
liaments, household suffrage, and vote by ballot. This was
said in my letter to the electors of Stroud, written in 1839.
From the year 1839 to the present time, I do not think the
lion. Member for Montrose, or any of t hose who agree with
bins, have thought it necessary to bring forward this ques-
tion of the constitution of the House of Commons. Neither
as a Minister officially, nor when sitting on that side
of the House, have I thought it necessary to intro •
lime any measures of reform on this particular sub-
jec. But as the public mind seems now alive to
subjects of this nature, I believe the time will come - per-
haps is not far distant—when reforms of the description 1
mentioned might be introduced, which will tend to purif
the representative system. I think the inquiry we intend to
make by the Bill introduced this session with regard to cer-
tain boroughs, some of which have been accused and others
proved to be guilty of corrupt practices, may give us
further information than we now possess as to the course we
ought to pursue—whether some of those boroughs ought
to be disfranchised, and whether we ought not to take the
same course with regard to others that were taken with re-
spect to tithe freemen of Great Yarmouth. But I should be
sorry to see one or the other course adopted without other
measures to accompany them. I should be sorry to see this
House much reduced by disfranchising boroughs, or to
disfranchise freemen without at the same time admitting
other kinds of voters to take their place.—( Hear,
hear.) What I have always admitted to be the
defect of the Reform Bill, is not the having of eighty-
live different kinds of votes as stated by the Hon. Gentleman.
What I think the defect of the Reform Bill is, that the great
variety in the right of voting which formerly existed has
been too much reduced to a uniform system.—(Hear, hear.)
I think that by some different varieties of suffrage, by giv-
ing the franchise, for instance, to those who have placed
money in the savings' bank, and thus showed their frugality ;
and to those who have been eleeted by guilds, thus showing
that their fellow-citizens placed confidence in them ; and by
other modes of this kind we might extend the franchise
without injuring the basis of our representation. I am not
disposed to say the Reform Bill is a final measure, and that
you cannot usetully and beneficially -alter and improve it.—
(Hear, hear.) But if the Hon. Gentleman or the House ask
me whether I am prepared at the present moment to intro-
duce any Bills for that purpose, I must at once
say that I do not at the present moment intend to intro-
duce any considerable measures of the kind. I might
find reasons enough for that in the variety of measures be-
fore the House, and to which the attention of the House has
been already in a great degree directed. But, Sir, there are
other reasons—reasons which induced the Hon. Gentleman,
the Member for Montrose, to think that this was a good time
for a large measure of reform, but which indaced me to come
to a totally different conclusion. It is admitted, and it must
be admitted, that sixteen years ago you adopted a very large
measure of reform in the representation—a much larger
measure, I believe, than the most sanguine reformers of the
day expected the Ministers of the King to adopt. It must
be admitted tkat the carrying of the measure of reform—
the removal of Gatton, Old Sarum, and such like places,
from the representation, and the admission to it of such
towns as Leeds, Birmingham, Sheffield, and Manchester—
that all has contributed to give a larger and a
more secure basis to the representation. It cannot be
denied either that the House of Commons thus reformed has
carried large measures of improvement—vast in their
changes—tending to the increase of popular power and
popular advantage, and showing that the House is ready to
act according to the enlightened opinions of the people.
The Hon. Member says our votes this year have been extra-
vagant, and that we have been acting against the opinions
of the people in the 'great establishments we have kept up.
There are some questions of the present session on which I
have desired the division lists of the 'House to be examined,
so that comparisons might be made between the constituen-
cies represented by Members dividing in .the majority and
the counties represented by Members dividing in the
minority. Ou the first of these divisions, that limiting
the duration of the income-tax, the Members who
voted in the majority represented 668,038 ; whilst
those who voted in the minority represented only
346,689 electors. In the division of the 20th of March, on a
motion of Mr. Hume's for reducing the number of men in
our navy, there voted in the majority the representatives of
716,278 electors, and in the minority the representatives of
only 171,317. On a similar motion for reducing the num-
ber of men in the army, there voted in the majority 600,753
electors, and in the minority 165,255.—( Hear, hear.) Now,
after these divisions on great public questions, I think it
cannot be said that the small boroughs have overpowered
the votes of the people upon matter relating to finance.
The votes of the House on these occasions have-fairly repre-
sented the opinions of the people. That there has been of
late years a tendency to augment our establishments on
the part of this House, the Government, and the country,
I believe to be true. There are times when it is
thought well that we should render our establishments
as perfect and efficient as possible; and then when in,
accordance with that wish, large sums have been expended,
it often happens that the tide changes, and that a great wish
is expressed that no more money should be spent than is
absolutely necessary. In times of distress, when trade may
happen to be crippled from any cause, such a course may be
desirable to adopt, and I am sure that at such a period the
House and the Government never fail to feel and act upon
that principle. As I said before, there can be no ground for
saying at present, that with regard to expenditure the House
does not represent the opinions of the nation.—(Hear.) My
belief is that it does, and that it represents it fairly. Well,
then, Sir, if you find that a great measure of reform was
carried sixteen years ago, that great measures of reform have
been carried by the Parliament so improved—if you find also
that on questions which do arise or which are likely to arise,
this House represents the opinions of the people, and not any
selfish motive or class interest--then, I say, this is not the
time when a cry and a clamour for more reform ought to
be eXcited. The cry for change at present raised is ac-
companied by so many suggestions and proposals that are
wild and visionary—such, for example, as those contained in
the petition presented to-night by the Noble Lord the Mem-
ber for Bath—(Hear, hear)—views of capital, labour, and
property of the most erroneous kind, are so generally float,
that there is, I think, good reason in that for not making,
at this time, any great or sweeping alterations. And here
let me say that deny the charge—the popular and common
charge—that the government of this country is carried on
for the benefit of its aristocracy. I believe sincerely that
the government is carried on for the benefit of the people at
large, and for the sake of no class interest; but if it be
meant to be said that because people belong to the aristo-
cracy they are to be debarred from taking their part in public
affairs, why I object entirely to such narrow views.—(Hear,
hear.) I, for my part, will never allow that because a man
happens to be called Stanley or Howard he is to be prevented
from enjoying public distinction, as if because he bad not a
name less noble or less illustrious. But, Sir, there are other
reasons—reasons of which the Members of this House can-
not but be sensible—reasons which I find in the records of
events which have been and are every day happening around
us. I say that at such a time the advantages which you have
had in your free constitution have been to you of inestimable
benetit.—( Loud cheers.) The stability of that constitution
which you have shown amidst all storms, and the mode in
which the institutions of this country have braved all hos-
tile attacks, have excited the admiration, not only of those
who are attached to this country, but even of those who
have no connexion with it, but who at the same time de
light to see order and social peace maintained; while it has
brought to you the respect of those even most hostile to
your name and progress.—(Hear, hear.) I hope that this
House will do nothing to lose that admiration or forfeit that
respect. You have stood,
"Like a great seamark, braving every storm,
And saving all who eye it !"
—(Cheers.) I trust you will maintain that position—that
you will not choose at this time to accede to any vague and
indefinite proposal of some measure of reform, which, while
it apparently stops short of adopting the People's Charter,
cannot actually stop short of ultimately enacting that great
change—( Hear, hear)—that you will rather think that it is
due to the institutions which you have the happiness to in-
herit, that it is due to the other advantages you enjoy, that
it is due, above all, to that great people whom it is your
honour to represent, to give a steadfast and most determined
negative tc the present motion.—(Cheers.)
Mr. W. J. FOX could not but observe that the objections
which the Noble Lord had urged against the motion of the
Hon. Member for Montrose referred rather to the details of
tht6neliatfi-6 which that motion indicated than to the princi-
,.
le-uptiti which it was founded. But those details were not
now fairly before thellouse ; and it was with a view to fix
the attention of the House, if he could, to the great princi-
ple at stake in this matter that he now ventured to offer a
few observations to the House. He thought the Noble Lord
must have been pleased with the fair opportunity that had
been afforded him of correcting, any mistake in reference to
his expressions on a former oc6asion. At the same time he
considered the Noble Lcrd to bah been rather too severe on
those by whom he thought those expressions were per-
verted. His (Mr. Fox's) - own impression was that • the
Noble Lord meant to draw a distinction between fiscal
reform and organic reform ; that he- was willing to
see the former gradually progressing, but that he
would resist the advance of the other in any
way whatever.. It must have been gratifying to the Noble
Lord to have the opportunity of telling the country that he
was not opposed to further reform in the representative sys-
tem ; but it would have been still more gratifying to the
country if the Noble Lord had more distinctly hinted what
the reforms' were to be; what was the principle by which
those reforms were to be guided ; what would be their ex-
tent, and what their results. He confessed that from what
the Noble Lord had said there was very little to guide them
in their anticipations, and that little was of the most indefi-
nite description. It merely amounted to this—that he would
take the opportunity, from time to time, to disfranchise a
man who should be guilty of bribery, or to admit a man to
the franchise who should have acquitted himself well by
making an accumulation in a savings'-bank.—(Hear, hear.)
The broad question, of whether the industrial masses of this
choaudnht reye
nwsecraer
coer
y weretel,
enhoetdfaei
either
er h
y representedthe oihn. ae
Member
hHe
ro ufos er
hS
eurtrheiya
think
tbya
ftahi er
rNe
foebrleen
eo rtdo wt
hheo
mfolloweds
whichNh
aodr
cWouelsdt
taken place to dismiss
ferences of opinion thattheexmistbeyd aatbtrhieefmrembeatrwkeeans ttohotshee
People'swdhife-
the
eppNorethelde
advocated the
To
household suffrage.mC eet eartehre an d
questionthosfea iwr lhyo,
ar t
Lord should have shown, not the differences existing
hey
these two views among theeople, but how ey
were both opposed by a third party whop
that
tethaedrve existed
itsoadny
reform at all.—(Hear, hear.) To show ha
a
limit availed but little. To point to that isFrep y
difference between parties who were for going hdeyondataheat
struck not at all at the matter,
reed
be shown that they were not that some
cs oo uml de
considerable reform was indispensable. Those meetings,
whether in favour of universal suffrage or of household
rueendlessthal
suffrage, proved that the great mass of the people
considered that one or the other was necessary; and they
demonstrated that 'the people at large concurred in their
by their diversity of opinion. The -,real question :was
main purpose much more closely than they were separated
not
whatmean meant not
tl7efonrtmers
uhpaoelti beenany oerenwsuerree; 0.,
the House of Commons, for he thongfic this e.o itl fai
through the Noble Lord's reasoning, not only La'
sion, but on many other occasions, that hi rOreggliNt
government they had only to regard what might tie'&lted
the extrinsic agency, and not the power by which ,it'Vfas
agency
formed and fashioned. The representative - bad hot
the
co
uthnetriaye obpul it hltadwteasdoa it in
government conformity
with only
with toth
the feelings
nga
of
opinion.—(Hear, hear.) If all the Members of that

• Assembly possessed the most absolute wisdom, and if
every one of their measures bore that stamp, there was
still something else to be considered.—(Hear ) They were
to be the representation of the feelings, the condition,
the intellectual, the moral, nay, even the physical,
if you would, of those who were the constituents, or
claimed to be the constituents, of those representatives.
There was another question besides this, and that was,
whether the millions of human beings with whom we were
connected as tellow-countrs men were cherishing in theh
bosoms the ennobling feelings of conscious freedom, or were
smarting under the irritation of evil passions, excited by
being treated as only members of a slave class in what
claimed to be a free country. There was no question of home
or foreign policy, no relations of treaties with foreign nations,
no arrangements which might open or close the doors of
admission to fortunate aspirants, no question whatever of
more importance to the safety and continued prosperity and
glory of Great Britain than the state of feeling among the
great masses of the people of whom that House claimed to
be the representatives. The propositions of the Hon. Member
for Montrose had many And varied bearings on the constitu-
tion, but the one practical question to his (Mr. Fox's) mind,
the question in which he felt the liveliest interest, was this—
were the working people of this country represented as they
ought to be, and if not, could they be so represented with-
out- any peril to any valuable institution? This was the
question which interested him. He maintained that they
.yere not represented as they ought to be. How did the
matter stand in electoral districts? A valuable return had
been moved for in the last Parliament by Mr. Williams,
then Member for Coventry, and delivered in the course of the
present session, from which it appeared that there were only
320,645 10/. householders, and out of these where would the
industrial classes be found but in the poorest rank? The re-
turn was so arranged that it showed the number of house-
holders occupying at a rental of from 10/. to 151. and then
from 151. to 201., and so on. It appeared from the return
that out of this constituency of 320,645 10/. householders,
those who paid a rental ranging from 101. to 15'. were only
99,149 persons, that was to say, that the inhabitants of
houses rated at from 101. to 15/. were only one-third of the
household borough' constituency. They were completely
swamped by the classes above them ; and when the oocu-
piers of 30/., 40/. and 501. houses were taken into the ac-
count, it would be found that they belonged to the higher
portion of the middle classes, who could not be called work.
ing people at all. But out of the entire constituency of
85e,000 persons, upon a rough calculation, only 1 in 17 be-
longed to the working classes, and no more. He did
not, call that a representation of the working people—of
those who made our clothing, who built our houses and pa-
laces, who cultivated our fields, and who made, in fact, all
our wealth; nor could he understand the feeling with which
Hon. Gentlemen could turn round and say, " You have done
all this, you have created it with your strong arms, but now
we tell you that you are the villeins of the soil, and that
you have nothing to ao with the laws but to obey them."
The Noble Lord said that a great many things should be
done for their benefit, though the condition of a benefit was,
that it should be desired and prized by the party
on whom it w.B bestowed, and though it was
most desirable to take away from the working-
man that incessant occasion for discontent which arose
from his having no hand in the matter of legislation, and
which led him to fancy that he would have done much more
wisely if he had been consulted. Let the working people of
this country be substantially represented, and in so doing
he would not very minutely inquire into their information
and acquirements or into the amount of their deposits in
the savings" banks.—( Near.) They were already taxed;
they contributed towards the exigencies of the state; they
had at least a property in their own limbs and nervous arms,
and was not that enough to mark them out for constituents,
for it must be borne in mind that is was not proposed to
make Members of them? It was not necessary that they
should be able to unravel the mystery of the Spanish mar-
riages, that they should be versed in the Treaty of Utrecht,
or that they should philosophize on the Norman conquest.
It was only necessary that they should nominate a neighbour
whom they had known all their lives, or some one who had
a national reputation, as the person to whose guardianship
they were willing to confide their interests. That was
all the knowledge which the labouring man wanted. This
knowledge and information which had been talked about
was not required by the House in other matters. By one of
the clauses of the Public Health Bill, a plurality of votes
was given to wealthy efec4piers upon the ground that the Bill
affected property. He had no doubt, however, that those
persons would be found to be quite as uninformed on sani-
tary questions as a man in a factory would be on any diffi-
cult question of foreign politics.—(Hear, hear.) One of the
most interesting debates on reform in his recollection was
that which took place in 1822, when the Noble Lord now at
the head of her Majesty's Government brought forward a
motion on the subject in a most remarkable and impressive
speech. On that occasion the Noble Lord quoted a passage
from Blackstone, which perhaps the House, for the sake of
the comment which followed it, would allow him to read.
'rhe passage was taken from book i, chap. 2, of the "Com-
mentaries ."—" 1. As to the qualifications of the electors.
The true reason of requiring any qualification with regard
to property in voters, is to exclude such persons as are in so
mean a situation that they are esteemed to have no will of
their own. If these persons had votes, they would be
tempted to dispose of them under some undue influence or
other. This would give a great, an artful, or a wealthy
,man a larger share in elections than is consistent with gene-
ral liberty. If it were probable that every man would give
his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon
the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every
member of the community, however poor, should have a
vote in electing those delegates to whose charge is commit-
ted the disposal of his property, his liberty, and his life."
In reference to this passage, which the Noble Lord quoted in
1822, he continued thus :—" We have not only one free
agent, but there are in this country at least 1,000,000 of free
agents—men perfectly free and independent, men who have
no vote for a Member of Parliament, though they are anxious
to acquire the right, and are in every way qualified to ex-
ercise the functions of electors." On another occasion, so
late as 1835, the Noble Lord also said, "Although
it is a much disputed question, yet I believe that,
in ancient times, every inhabitant householder resident
in a borough was competent to vote for Members of
Parliament."—(Hear, hear.) He would now revert to the
argument used by the Noble Lord in 1822, as it was the
argument which he meant to adopt and apply on the present
occasion. The Noble Lord at that time pointed to the intel-
ligence of the country, and to the growth of that intelli-
gence, as a demonstration that the franchise must be largely
expended. He argued, that in London there were 100 cir-
culating libraries, and 900 in the country ; and that
'23,600,000 newspapers had been issued in the year preceding.
He would go back, not to 1822, but to 1832, when the Noble
Lord realized his own views by carrying the Reform Bill ;
and he would assume that he then proportioned the fran-
chise to what lie held to be the advanced intelligence of the
country. He could not say, however, that the facts would
altogether bear him out in relinquishing the vantage ground
he might have gained by the Noble Lord's previous conces-
sions. The Noble Lord said there were in 1822 1,000,000
persons prepared for the franchise; but the Reform Bill did
not provide for half of that million, and they had been left
unproyided for since, with a quarter a century of wrong
pressing upon their minds, and depressing their spirits.
While in 1832 the number of newspapers circulated was
32,000,000, the circulation had been for some time nearer
70,000,000 than 60,000,000 ; and as regarded societies and
institutions established for the people's improvement, he
would only refer to one of which he had read an account in
the papers of that morning. It was an account of a meeting
of the Yorkshire Mechanics Institution, held at Ripon,
where not fewer than eighty-one societies were included and
renresented in that institution alone. Since 1832 500,0001.
had been expended by the Government on education ; a
much smaller sum than ought, as be thought, to have been
expended on a matter of such inconceivable importance ; but
30 that sum had been laid out, in addition to the building
of schools from sources of private subscription and private
benevolence. Since 1832 there had, besides, sprung up a
popular literature altogether unparalleled in extent—(He
—a literature of which our numerous magazines, the publi-
cations of the Messrs. Chambers, and the works of Charles
Knight, formed a distinguished part, and which were circu-
lated through the country to an amount previously unex-
ampled.—(Hear, hear.) One of their alone, Chambers's
Miscellany of Entertaining Knowledge, being only one of
the many publications of that house, had been issued to the
extent of 18,000,000 of printed sheets; and he understood
that their sales fluctuated with the state of the manufac-
turing districts—(Hear)—one-sixth of the issue being in the
counties of York and Lancaster. Then, if they looked to
other facts indicative of the advance of intelligence among
the people at large, they found proofs multiplying all around
them. It might be said that these were cheap publications
to which he had referred, and that the public mind would
rather be vitiated than improved by them, that their powers
would be frittered away, such light reading not being adap-
ted to mature the intellectual character; but they must re-
member, that all the standard works of the most celebrated
authors had at the same time been cheapened; that the
works of Bacon could be bought for fourpence, and those of
Shakspeare for two shillings, and that the writings of all the
philosophers who had adorned the country were circulated
at the merest trifle above the cost of type and paper.—
(Hear, hear.) It was a remarkable fact that the production
of new literature had not diminished either. He found in
the history of printing, in " M'Culloch's .Commercial Dic-
tionary,' a statement of the number of new works pub-
lished, and the average price per volume, in four years end-
ing 1832 and 1842. In the four years then ending the new
books published were 6,149, and in the four years
ending 1842 they ' were 18,59; ; while the average
price per volume was, in the first period Ifs. 5d.,
and in the second period Ss. 9Ved.—(Hear.) The book-
sellers' circular had recently fallen into his hands, and
he found from it that the number of new works last year was
3,414, and of new editions 570, while the average price per
volume was 6s. 3%d.—(Hear, hear.) He might refer, also,
to the establishment, since 1832, of parks and places of re-
creation, which, though not to be used as an argument,
might be taken as an indication of growing intelligence.
Take, for, example, the visitors of the British Museum. In
1832 the number of visiters was 147,896 ; last year they
were 820,965. The visitors to the reading-room of the Mu-
seum, in 1832, were 31,200 ; last year, 67,525.—(Hear, hear.)
Then, as regarded the economics of the working classes,
they found a vast improvement.—[Here the Honourable
Gentleman pointed out the great increase which had taken
place since 1832 in the deposits in the savings-banks, to
show the improved system of economy now prevalent ; and
also the great increase that had taken place in the
number of public petitions to Parliament, in order to point
out the growing discontent among the unenfranchised
classes.] There was one peculiar fact that could not but
strike every reflecting person at the present day, and that
was the number of writers that were springing up among the
working classes—writers who did not, like the authors of
former days, rest on patrons and private patronage—writers
who courted no class above them, but yet who retained
strong within them the feelings of the working class in
which they bad been born and bred.--(Hear, hear.)
Nothing like this was known in former times; but in the
literature of which he spoke the fact he had stated was
before them in every page. Their works were elevated by a
peculiar spirit, a spirit the result of the circumstances in
which they had been born and bred, and the political con-
dition of the class to which they belonged. Perhaps he
should be naming authors whose names would sound strang
to the great majority of those he addressed were he to run
over the list, and yet they were a class of writers whose
works every legislator would do well to consult.—(Hear,
hear.) He could not understand the spirit of his country
unless he did consult them. They had in them the rich
aad racy spirit of our old English writers ; and when they
had the sense to avoid the conventionalities of mo-
dern authors, and follow out the dictates of their
own aspirations, they indeed brought forth "thoughts
that breathe, and words that burn."—(Hear, hear.) He
might refer to Bamford, the Radical author of Lancashire,
whose graphic description of the stirring times of 1819 the
future historian would transfer to his pages as the best record
of the events of that extraordinary time. He might also
speak of " one who whistled at the plough," whose narra-
tions of the flogging of the soldier were enough to make the
the br race.one Theres,anddr wasawte hartsferopoet Thom,mtheeyes of
of
tilheesilmcorsetep pcaulloouns of our
I d ev e
there,r u r y
awnhdo
wt ohook
csohuel ldt e
gr
vunder
ehis a
countryhedg , asnodn
gs as wwhoirst
hchild
die there, andwho could give his country songs worthy of
Burns;, that man never knew what it was to live in
a 101.'
Thomas Co oe
house.. There were such men as William Lovett and
terawryounildeiniottanadskinttehueec Itluosulsepotwo
etrakferoamn
jinai o
ftherir
literary

his questionable testimony. He would call for that of the
Honourable Member for Reading (Mr. Sergeant Talfourd),
who, as it had been said of Akenside, that he had
breathed the spirit of Plato into English poetry, might be
said to have invoked the spirit of Euripides on the British
stage, and not invoked in vain ; or of him who had
also gained laurels, though in a different' field of exer-
ticn, and of wham it would ever be a subject of grateful
recollection that, with the fine perception of taste and with
the generosity of genius, he saw and recognised the powers
which were revealed in the Purgatory of Suicides, though
written bya self-taught cobbler, and gave the author facili-
ties for coming before the public which would otherwise have
been difficult of accomplishment.—(Hear.) When this
whole literature was considered, from the time of Ebenezer
Elliot, the Sheffield worker in iron, it would be found per-
vaded by the spirit of indignation which would arise among
:nen who felt themselves reduced to a slave class, threaten-
ing the disruption of that nationality the unity of which had
hitherto constituted the glory of this country. The stream
of mind was separated into two distinct courses; and if they
did not recognise the claims of a class already represented in
the noblest arena, that of their national literature, they would
,-xhibit to the world a most deplorable spectacle ; the genius
of the country would become suicidal by the antagonism of
its elements. Future collections of poets and historians
would not he complete without the authors of those produc-
tions. They had a niche in history. They had a place
among the laurelled, but they were not admissible into the
society of 10/. householders. —( Hear, hear.) In all ranks
high talents and great information were the exception ;
but they very much misunderstood the working classes who
thought that among them were not diffused the mind and
the intellectual aspirations which rendered them not un-
worthy brothers of such as he had named ; nay, which ren-
dered them not unworthy countrymen of those great names,
such as those of Milton and Locke, which constitute:
the brightest glory this country had yet achieved.
What was the Legislature to fear ? That those men
would render this House a less decorous and less dignified
scene? Would it be thought that those men would return
from their body—still less from the refuse of that body—
persons to claim fellowship here, who would turn the House
aside by personalities and sarcasm from every great topic of
discussion?—(Hear, hear.) Would they send thither men
elated. not with champagne or burgundy, but with beer or
brandy, to throw disorder in the midst of their business?
Would they send people who would make a tax on property?
Why, property—the love of it was instinctive in an English-
man.---(Hear, hear.) They could not propose to him a " land
scheme,' or anything of the sort which he could call his
own—(" Hear," from Mr. O'Connor)—even with the most
forbidding prospects of attaining his object—(A laugh )—but
he would make the attempt to acquire property. Nor was
there any participation in opinions which strangely had found
their way into a document which had found its way to the table
of the House. He had consorted with working people—not as
master, as landlord, as employer, or as patron—and he had
found in them that intelligence and those qualities which
kept alive faith in human nature. They had the spirit of
freemen. But it must be considered to what they were ex-
posed. There was a locality which he had known for upwards
of fifty years. He first remembered it with a constituency as
pure as could be found throughout the length and breadth of
the land. Of late it had gained a name for venality; and
how? Parties were kept up in the town; partisans were
led to bid against one another in corporation as well as Par-
liamentary contests; and by keeping it before the people
that their vote was always to be sold, by this mode of prac-
tical teaching corruption was instilled into their blood.—
(Hear, hear.) It was the tempter who ought to be the ob-
ject of indignation. The briber was a thousand times worse
than the bribed, and when those people did fall there was
something which ought to abate the severity of the judg-
ment on their conduct. One poor man said he had never
taken a bribe, but he was in the workhouse, and he took
the bribe in order that he might liberate himself from what
he thought a poor-law bastile, and consort again with his
fellow-men. Another man, who was invited by a Noble
Lord to take his place in a carriage, and go to the poll,
replied, "No, my Lord, I will walk to the poll, and will not
disgrace you by riding in your carriage." The working
people would not elect men of their own class as representa-
tives unless under very strong inducements. In France,
with its universal suffrage, they had chosen about 30 or 38
from their own class among the 900 representatives. What
would they do here? They would look to persons of local
importance, to local benefactors, and to men of national
reputation. These were the men who were desirable for
that House, rather than those who were unknown to the
locality, or who went rambling about with their heavy
purses—(Hear, hear) seeking where they could find a
constituency to corrupt. Under such a system as had been
presented to the notice of the House, the latter class of can-
didates would be found generally to fail, and there were
only two classes of candidates whose claims would prepon-
derate in the choice of the constituency. Under such a
system there could be no such degrading practice of canvass-
ing as now existed, and which only brought the poor and
the rich together for their mutual degradation. With
large constituencies that would not,exist. Men of infor-
mation and talent, for whom little boroughs were said to
provide seats, could more easily find their way into the
House through large constituencies without subjecting them-
selves to any of those degrading practices which polluted
trim who gave and him who received alike. It was of im-
mense importance that they should be a united people, that
they should not have a class unrepresented, whether on ac-
count of their industrial undertakings, their relations with
other countries, or their internal and external prosperity.
One advantage of such a subject as the present being dis-
cussed at the present moment was, that it brought the
middle and the working classes into more harmonious con-
cert than had existed for many years. It afforded a fair
means of amalgamating them together, and it was for the
aristocracy to consider whether they would do well in with-
holding themselves from that union which, with their
assistance, would become the union of a threefold cord which
conld not be easily broken. It was not in our armaments
—brilliant as were their exploits, and magnificent as were
such means of defence—it was not in these that our great
glory and influence consisted. It was in the indomitable
energy and enterprise of the people, in the course of opera-
tions which depended on the working classes as our main-
spring; it was on these that our power and safety must
rest; it was from the progress of mind must come our
security. Unite this class on such harmonious terms—
disregard theological difficulties—spread education with a
bold and free hand over the country—throw wide and open
the doors of the constitution—give the people an equali-
sation of the burdens of taxation, which surely was their
right, whatever else was—do this, and they would have the
millions no longer an alienated body, but the real and firm
base of the social pyramid. By these means, we should
achive far nobler conquests in other countries than our
armies had ever yet won; for we should bring back
voluntary tributes from every clime to which our
commerce penetrated —we should raise more hon-
ourable trophies, trophies not watered by blood—
than we could do by the most sanguinary victories; for
these measures would be the source of union with, and
peaceful dominion over, other nations, and as in war, so
in peace, we should continue to be powerful and uncon-
quered. Untax the population, so far as their taxation was
unequal—educate the population, enfranchise the population,
and then they might arm the population without a shadow
of fear for the result—(Laughter from the Opposition
benches)—for should the nations of the world be banded
against us we should be perfectly able to drive from our
shores the world's hostility.—(Cheers.) He would only say,
without entering into metaphysical speculations about
as the rule, and showing
the cases for exception, that to accomplish all that the
working classes required the Legislature must do them jus-
tice ; in the words of the Great Charter, " neither denying
nor delaying justice." He begged of that House, therefore,
people of the British empire.—(Cheers.)
Mr. DISRAELI—The address of the Hon. Gentleman
justice—equal, universal justice—justice to the working
who has just sat down is professedly founded on the motion
of the Hon. Member for Montrose. The Hon. Gentleman
has avowed himself to-night the advocate of those whom he
describes as serfs; but I cannot tied in the resolution of the
Hon. Member for Montrose that he is prepared to enfranchise
those serfs.—(Hear.) No one can suppose for a moment that
the project brought before us to-
night by the Hon. Member
for Montrose is one that at all aims at elevating the condition
or the position of those persons in the social or political sys-
tem. Whatever may be the prejudice of the lion. Gentle-
man who has just addressed us against a 10/. elector, it is
not, as I understand it, the proposition of the Hon. Member
for Montrose that a person—who is found starving under a
hedge—is to be entitled to the suffrage. Whatever may be
the sentiments of the Hon.- Member for Oldham, I
cannot
understand how, entertaining those opinions and animated by
those feelings, he should have found it his duty to be so de-
cidedly the friend of a plan, the object of which is
rather to increase the difficulty of the class
whose interests, I believe, he most sincerely advocates.
I cannot find out how the Hon. Gentleman, consistently with
his philosophy, can support the proposition of the Hon.
Member for Montrose.—(Hear, hear.) With regard to that
and similar propositions, the gentlemen on this side of the
House are in a position different from that of the Hon. Gen-
tleman and his supporters, and also from that of the mem-
bers of her Majesty's Government. It is not for us, Sir,
either to defend or attack the Reform Act. We obeyed it.
It received from us that allegiance which the law in this
country always commands. The practical good sense of the
country no doubt prevented much of the evil which we then
anticipated from the operation of the measure. Bat when I
say that we neither defend nor attack the Reform
Bill, I cannot believe that it is consistent with our duty, or
with the position which we occupy with regard to our con-
stituency and the country, as the representatives of a
party who were opposed to the change of 1832, that we
should evade the difficulty of a debate which some are in-
clined to think rather fruitful in difficulties, and therefore I
wish to take this opportunity to make some observations on
a project which has been so sedulously prepared, but the
true character of which has not been sufficiently appreciated,
and which, I am clear, has not been understood by the elo-
quent advocate whom we have just heard, who is prepared
to enfranchise imaginary serfs. The Hon- Gentleman told
the great propounder of this project dwelt but slightly on
us he was the advocate of fiscal reform. I observed that
that doctrine. I have watched with attention, and read with
an observation of no careless character, the proceedings of
meetings that have been attended by the Hon. Gentleman
and his friends, and the resolutions that they have offered
to the consideration of those assembled, and have always
found that on every opportunity—on every occasion financial
I
and fiscal reform has been ostentatiously brought forward,
and that the principal plea for Parliamentary. reconstruction
yal all
Government, talk of
atnhde ituhcareased
—(Hear, hear.) I have
ture and taxation of the country.
had occasion this afternoon to listen to the presentation of a
and political revolution has been the increase in the expendi-
hear. ) I can easily
agnredaetnnorummobuser
eoxf
ppe
ne tdi
ti
uo nr
es .
of
Thet
he
enor-
mously increased amount of taxation of the country. I want
to know what is the reason that to-night we heard so little
of fiscal and financial reforms?—(Hear,
understand why the Hon. Gentleman who has just ad-
dressed the House did not dwell on that subject. He is a
master of statistics, but statistics of a different kind to those
we are accustomed to hear in this House. Those statistics
may be very important in their way, but the amount of
penny publications, the great increase in cheap literature,
the increase of railway intellect, and of all those productions
which you may find at the terminus of a station, are not
statistics which touch the question of financial and fiscal re-
form. I think the House will agree with me, that all Eng-
land has been told, during the last four months, that there
has been in this country an enormous increase in taxation,
and in the expenditure of the Government. This has been
told to the people of this country in order to impress on
them that, in consequence of our excessive taxation, and the
great expenditure of our Government, there ought to be
changes made in unison with changes that are being made
in other countries.—(Haar.) One word, then, as to the
enormous increase in the taxation of this country, I
take the period of twenty years .ago. The revenue
.raised in this country in, . 1828 WAS 49,500,0001. ; in 1848,
47,500,000/., in round _numbers. , How is it possible,
with these facts before them, r that, Honourable Gentlemen
can maintain the position that the taxation of this country
has been progressively increased ? But • the revenue of
1828 was not only 2,000,000L greater than that of 1848, but
the revenue of 1828 was raised from a population, in
round numbers, less than 23,000,009, while the revenue of
1848 has been raised from a population of 80,000,000.
The burden of taxation per head in those,.tWo, periods, in
1828 amounted to something like 2/. 12k 2d.z.na-bead, and, in
1848 it only amounted to 11. 10i. awl it ifltiqttio4,,,,....(Rear,