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

for an extension of the suffrage, and in support of Mr.
Hume's motion. The Noble Lord also presented peti-
;ions from Marylebone and St. Pancras in favour of the
Tote by ballot and the establishment of electoral districts.
Mr. C. LUSHINGTON presented similar petitions
from the Westminster Reform Soci▪
ety, and the inhabi-
tants of St. Paul's, Covent-garden.
Mr. M. WILSON presented sim▪
ilar petitions from

Truro.
Mr. W. J. FOX presented 287 similar petitions.
Mr. MOWATT presented petitions to the same
effect from Falmouth, complaining of the outrageous
expenditure of the country, and stating, as a proof
of the House not representing the sentiments of
the country, the evidence recently adduced before
Committees appointed to determine returns petitioned
against ; also against the interference of Peers in elee-
Vons.
Colonel THOMPSON presented a number of peti-
tions from Manchester, Sunderland, Dundee, Wrexham,
and other places, in all signed by 3,000 persons, in
favour of Mr. Hume's motion.
Mr. MUNTZ presented a petition from Birmingham,
signed by 10,000 persons, stating, though the Reform
Bill was a step in the right direction, and might have
satisfied its framers, it did not satisfy the rest of the
community ; that class legislation had in a great degree
brought about the present state of things on the Conti-
nent, and praying for Parliamentary reform.
Mr. COCKBURN presented a petition to the same
effect from Southampton, signed by 300 persons ; also,
from the Isle of Wight, to the same effect.
Sir E. BUXTON presented petitions from places in
Essex.
Colonel TYNTE presented petitions from Bridgwater
and Glasgow.
Mr. OSBORNE from several places in Middlesex,
which he stated were not got up by committees;
Mr.' RICE from Dover;
Mr..AD AIR from Cambridge;
Mr. PATTISON from a place the name of which did
not reach the gallery; and
Mr. CLAY from Hull.
Petitions to the same effect were presented by
Mr. Hindley, Mr. Westhead, Mr. Fox Maule, Lord
Lincoln, Mr. Sharman Crawford, Mr. E. Denison, Sir
De Lacy. Evans, Sir George, Strickland, Mr.. Fitsroy,
• Sir William Moleswortk, Dr. Bowring, Mr. George
ghompson, Lord Duncan, Sir J. Hanmer, Sir G. Clerk,
Si,- T. Egerton, Mr. Divett, and Mr. Granger.
Petitions to the same effect were then presented by
Hon. Members from Monmouth, .Cardif4 York (signed
by 5,550 persons), from Stamford, from the brush makers
and bellows makers of Bristol, from Stoke-upon-Trent,
Kelso, Tunbridge. Wells, Maidstone, Seven Oaks, and
other places.
Mr. COBDEN presented a petition, signed by 2,000
electors, also in favour of the motion of the Hon. Member
for Montrose.
The HON. MEMBER also presented similar petitions
from Staleybridge, and nearly two hundred other places-
Mr. AGLIONBY presented similar petitions from
Cockermonth, Whitehaven, and several other places.
Mr. C. PEARSON presented similar petitions from
_ .

Lambeth.
_ Mr. HENLEY presented similar petitions from Read•

ing M. of petitions
Mr. WAKLEY presented a great number
from different parts of the borouleconstituted of
did not
Finsbury, com-
plaining that the House as at presentf the country, and pray-
jag
represent fairly the population o
jag the House to adopt the proposition of the Lion.
Member for Montrose.
Mr. C. P. VILLIERS presented several petitions in
favour of Mr. Hume's motion.
Mr. J. B. SMITH presented aunt.l ar petitions from
various parts of Scotland.
Lord ASHLEY wished to direct the attention of the House
to a petition which he held in his hand Of rather a peculiar
character, in thaprayer of which, however, he did not agree ;
but as it came from a respectable body, he felt bound to pre-
sent it. It was signed by a number of persons who described
themselves as the delegates of 200,000 artisans of London
and other towns. They imputed the present state of distress
to various causes, and prayed for the adoption of a number
of remedies. They prayed for the emancipation of land, for
the abolition of the system of gold coinage, for the getting
rid of untaxed machinery, and for the putting a stoppage to
the workhouse system of labour. They stated that there
were several million acres of unoccupied land in this country;
they therefore prayed that the Government would adopt a
system of home colonies for the destitute portion of the
people. They also prayed that, for the protection and
maintenance of the just rights of labour, a certain number
of Members should be elected solely by the working
classes. and that a President, elected •by them, should be
a member of the Cabinet as the representative of the work-
ing classes in the Government, They prayed that imme-
diate steps should be taken for the relief of the country,
and among other things that there should be an
equalization of taxes, and of the profits of capital, and that
in the place of the present system of currency there should
be an unrestricted Government issue of paper; also that a
commission should be immediately constituted to examine
and establish what is a fair amount of work for each man
daily to perform—(A laugh, and hear, hear from some Mem-
bers on the Ministerial Benches.) The Noble Lord proceeded
to say that he knew the meaning of that cheer, coming as it
did from a certaid quarter; and he was not surprised at the
interruption.—(Cries of "Order."), The petitioners prayed
that it should be determined what was the extent of a fair
day's labour, and also legal means should be adopted to
secure a fair remuneration for it for each working man.
They next prayed the adoption of what were called the six
points of the people's charter, and also the repeal iof the
legislative union between England and Ireland.—(Laughter.)
The petition wound up by calling on her Majesty's Govern-
ment to appoint a commission to investigate the whole sub-
ject, and the various suggestions which they had made.
Mr. HUME asked upon what authority these persons
deocribed themselves as the delegates of the great body of
artisans ?
Lord ASHLEY replied, that he could only state the peti-
tion was signed by E. Edwards as chairman, and by four
other persons as delegates. He had seen these persons, and
he could inform the House that they were very respectable
and very intelligent men

Petitions in favour of Mr. Hume's proposed plan of reform
were then presented by Lord John Russell from many
parishes of London, and from various places in the country;
by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, from Halifax, which,
in addition, prayed for the adoption of the People's Charter;
by Mr. Macgregor, several petitions from Glasgow and its
vicinity; by Sir W. Clay, several from the Tower Hamlets,
one of which, signed by 200 workmen employed in one
manufactory in that borough, prayed in addition, for
the adoption of a system of universal education;
by Mr. C. Buller, from Liskeard, East Looe, and
other places ; by Mr. Labouchere, Worn Taunton ; by
Mr. Wilson, from Westbury ; by Sir John Guest, from
Merthyr Tydvil ; by Mr. F. O'Connor, from Nottingham
and other places, in favour of the Charter; by Mr.
Bright, from Manchester, signed at a public meeting at
which 5,000 were present; another from the special con-
stables of that city, who stated that there would be less
occasion for their being called out to preserve the peace if
the people were satisfied with the Government—(A laugh)
—and several from Derby and other parts of the country;
by Mr. Pigott, from Reading; by Mr. Poulett Scrope, from
Stroud ; by Mr. M. Gibson, from Yarmouth and places in
the neighbourhood of Manchester; and by Mr. Hume, 311
petitions from various parts of the country, including Boston,
Sandwich, Carlisle, Northampton, Stourbridge, Leamington,
Paisley, Holbeach, Edgeware, Walmer Castle, St. Ives,
Sheffield, Lewes, Ayr, and Hammersmith. Altogether the
signatures affixed to them exceeded 20,000, and after each
name was given the place of residence of the person
signing it.

not to be a sufficient military 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
or a military force, and that we should 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.—(Hear.) 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
further than the Reform Bill of 1832 ; and it was because
that Bill had not gone further—because it had not effected
that for which the reformers then struggled—because it
it
had not answered those purposes for which it had
passed, that he (Mr. Hume) thought the time wads_no(wuceoarm.)
come
when that which was wanted should be effecte
had Sixteen d yearssufficient h ad passed
opportunitiesaw ay , and
o f ascertaining during t a t
howtime
far they t
had answered the purposes for which it was intended.
of iorder to give to the House the view he entertained
thatwi according to the
Par-
liament precisely, he should first say that
athethoughtthe
Parliament was a mere; engine byh
constitutional
country was to be governed; and
ell Parliamenteasses sihnotuhl de
h uld be attended
eporinntcaitpnl principles of the ea
nd Britishfair
representation constitution
thereforeae wanted to
te aoantry,
in
occasionsord e r
whether that was the case or no —w ether,
e ar
s ara
and
consider, first,
thbayt the interests
.ofnaell t h
instead of its being so,
portion of the community,
we hroadosntoitm,
poonrttahnetcionntnrnamryb,
in thinking that the sentation. If he was right
in interest, excluded from their share in the repre-
in the country a right to a share
that taxation in the representation, he thought and repre-
sentation should go together ; and that the man who
consti-
tution gave to every man
was obliged to pay taxes, not having any right to assist
in the choice of his representative in the Legislature, was in
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 j
they
awnedr e t
he not,
proposition t hen
freemen in this country who paid taxes represented by the
opleassnweansmonfatthbeeiirn choice?injured
dby
If
exclusion,
had to submit to the House was, that the classes who were
d exweleurdeedthforosme inthjuerepdalecolfassthese:
ewa u
sdei stchoenyt
wereent e
coianjs. ut
irtend.,
nbeo
tion. They were obliged to suffer
whatever the laws mi ht
direct to be placed upon them, without having,
g
g, 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 id other
countries were, where the will of the governor or the wilt 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-
presentativ'es., 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, Lordssand Commons, act-
ing under and by the authority of Parliament, was for 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
oar 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
min 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. He 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 nu one could understand.—(Bear, 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 many Hon. Gentlemen in the House.—(Hear,
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 th'em
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 artisans. 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 net 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 wants 1 to have a voice in the elec-
tion of asembers 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
b th , Y e oath of office they had taken to perform
to
.00k te e• ' t Is matter whilst there was yet time. It was a
question for them • •
well e to consider, individually, as Ministers as
perta7cieu.thabt of that House. It would be of some im-
the right of yet? should show what were the opinions, as fo
persons of anther
nif, which had been expresed by various
various opinions htY un the subject. He knew that
the Reform Billeexited as to the right of voting, and
ligible principle as
thela one iled to lay down any fixed or intel-
as to the opinions that ou which it should stand. Bat
right of voting, Earl a
naa bees expressed regarding the
reading of the Reform Bill, ea the moving the second
speaking of the great , 3d of October, 1831,
public mind, then so disturbed,
rs"`4lles of satisfying the
the present measure to be a measure stid---" I believe
policy, peace, and conciliation• t"
beliesv ins ice, sound
acceptance or rejection depend, on the ofie hand,et that on its
quillity, and prosperity ; on the other, that state of
tran-
dissatisfaction and discontent, the continuance oritical
threatens all those disastrous consequences, whith intialvbrieh
when ill feeling is engendered in the people towasaetiease
vernment of the country. I have said, that I more than any
other man am responsible for bringing forward this Insese-rZ
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 bad 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 cc the refiolutiela 1702 in the How
- _ •

;77 777

of Commons. In Fraser's Election Cases, in the else
of the borough of Cirencester, there was another definiton
of the right which the people of England could stand upm.
It was that "every male person of full age, and not subject
to any legal incapacity, and who should occupy any home
or dwelling, the same being bond fide used for the purposes
of a residence, &c.," should have the right of voting. 3e
(Mr. Hume) stated those opinions, because there were
many persons who opposed that very ground had endea-
voured to obtain that very right. Another Parliamentcry
authority was that given by the Committee appointed in the
case of Pontefract, where it was laid down that the person
should be six months resident in the borough previouslyto
'the election, and the payment of rates and taxes was rot
insisted on as necessary. What, then, was the meaning of
the ridicule which they so often heard thrown upon tie
working people when they demanded the franchise?-(Hear.)
Why, it was a decision of the House of Commons itself,
and he (Mr. Hue) was not to blame if he agreed, will
opinionssuchm
as he had quoted. He would next quote teat
of Sir T. Smith, who in the time of Elizabeth said that
e every Englishman was supposed to he present in Parla-
ment, from the Prince to the lowest person in the counter,
glishman's consent." Now, how could they take the Ads
and that the consent of Parliament was taken to be every
En
of Parliament to be done with every man's consent, whm
five out of every six were precluded from their share in tie
representation ?-(Hear, hear.) It was important to keep
that in view, to show that it was not a favour they were list-
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 to the relief of the poor and all owners of properly
rated to the parish, and all such persons having had their
holdings for twelve months before the election, should be
entitled to the suffrage. But there were other classes to which
he would extend it. They were what were called the educa-
tional classes, and certificates of attendance upon certaei
classes of instruction should confer the right. There was
another authority cited by Lord Grey, that of Whiteloci,
whose opinion was stated by the Noble Lord as the best en
constitutional questions; and he said that whenever any
question about elections was brought before the House of
Commens, 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 Society
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 not
really give and effectually secure that object, is more than
unprofitable, and the efforts 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 should
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 be had
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
Wake, 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 4,000,009, 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 corn-
neon 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
-Huntingdonshire, Rutlandshire, and Westmoreland. The
male adults amounted to 26,400' in these counties. The elec.
tots registered were 9,000. They returned six Members of
Parliament. Miadlesex, 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 in
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 Harwich, 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 HarwicLie Chippenham, Knaresborough, Rich-
mond (Yorkshire), Totnes, and Thettord, the electors were
1,805 out of a population of 28,000 adult mules, and they re-
turned twelve Members, the same number thatwere 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 ot
the present system was still more apparent. He held in
his hand a publication from the pen of a late distinguished
Member 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 moot favourable
contrast for Ireland, and lie justly complained of the mise-
rable deficiency of the electors in Ireland compared with
the population. Thus, the county of Carlow, with a
population of 86,000 inhabitants, had only 1,700 electors ;
Kildare, with a population of 114,488, had but 1,200
registered electors ; Leitrim, with a population of
155,000, had but 1,434 electors ; Kerry, with
257,000 inhabitants, had 1,240 electors ; and Mayo, with
306,000 inhabitants, had only 1,300 electors. Thus it
appeared that Rutland, with less than 20,000 inhabitants,
had more electors than two Irish counties, containing
together between 700,000 mid 800,000 inhabitants.-()ear,
hear.) He went on to ask, as he (Mr. Hume) thought very
properly, was that fairness ? was it justice? And he then
proceeded to compare the two counties of Londonderry and
Westmoreland. The former county, with 297,000 inhabi-
tants, 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, having a population of 337,000 and
2,330 electors, with Westmoreland, 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-
toutineut, can 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 Kip-
sale, there were only 1,097 electors, while Cork, Dublin, and
Limerick, with over 14,009 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 that 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. Mackay
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 look more directly into the House of Com-
mons, and see how different interests and populations are
balanced in that assembly. The following 22 boroughs,
Andover, 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, Westminster, 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
In the same they
9%000 persons. Thus, although the population of the former
thirty-seven,
g,r9uP is, as compared to that of the latter, as one is to
tin ebralmanrc.emeaacckhaoythweerntinonthveerLye Legislature."
oi spl ae tr ul
yr e .t
0"
analyse the state of the electoral body in beroughs. la 1831,
the Koble 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-
presentatives.-(Hear, hear.) With such facts before them,
he would say that no man who gave an honest opinion on the
subject could arise from a perusal of that analysis without
feeling that the time had arrived when such an anomalous
state of things should ,be put an end to.-(Hear, hear.)
Mr. Mackay remarked that, " There is in England one
county Member for every 3,290 electors ; Wales, 2,700 ;
-
Scotland, 1,633; rean d, „ 1 078 • England, one borough Mem-
ber for every
1,. 684 " He did not mean to suppose that by any plan which
he could propose they would ensure absolute equality, but
they might arrive at something like equality; and it should
be recollected that in :other countries, where the representa-
tion was based upon populating, a revision of the electoral
districts was made every ten or twelve years. On this part
of the question there was a very strong =mint ih the

se tights
boat the There was in these days a great deal ef talk a vofeerlA
and the duties of property. Ile said it was the
man to maintain! himself in the position in ite ss era
placed. The man of preperty ought to defend
sot 00,s
tion.—( Laughter.) Hon. Members were perhanttet;
that the most popular works issued in Englase% of h),e
last twelve months—he did not mean the spits
Blanc, but English works—works promuleatl'„astol '
which were widely entertained by the mostsintellysespsyt
a
working men —laid down the preposition that %oll'
was
remember the
ichroebxbaecrty.w—or(dOs,h,noor
h,didanhie N"exo'peell°tl,,br be
have been called upon to prove his -positionhs ioschete 'brit
refer them to a work in French.--(imnie,seed
laughter.) He understood the cheers, but he:iotlisioe
the same principle was contained in English rceler, to
here also it was held that property
Hon. Gentleman, after adverting to several ()Owe ois
was a puhltsc.actisoe
opposed the extension of reform on the ground t poi
cause a number of Members to 'be sent into the tieVa
instead of taking a rational and comprehenrer's, old ;74
affairs, would be absorbed by petty local inssit,a,aste°
down the taxation at the expense f the " els v."tis
greatness of the country. He repeated that ts of
object of the movement was to divide the proyeorr;cten
country. The ideas of advantage from the/4)100r
these political theories were mere delusions. Po
Commons—no Legislature—do what it might' teen
vent distress among the people; and to tell a groO,
Legislation had any power to relieve them wssat sines
lusion. It was a delusion to tell the peal° thkind.„,.(
but money was the lot of the great mass of manhe eibnilts
oh.) There was .at present running through tcsoot!Ss
Europe a strong desire for a total "regeneratteP_sseisS",
He would say in conclusion, you shall have that Tea'ssot;
but you must first ass through a baptism
hilYaaterS
are now doing in France—and you never shall hays
on°
tion until He comes who is alone able to give it• the s of
Lord J. RUSSELL—I rise thus early to addressntme
because I think it is entitled to an explanation loetio
bat
the views I entertain, not only regarding this Mos WO
other propositions to which it is nearly akin, 0,1"
after the speech of the Hon. Member for biontreivoloV
jecture are like to follow it (as we understood)•
roseau edit;
me to allude to the petitions which have bees,n_Pstroted,„l
this House, and to what the Hon. Member for luu.ects trot
the expression of a general opinion on the suh.p.l ept
ssfor At
that I have to say that it does not appear that, r7o;y. intro
provisions called the People's Charter, there Weettasseistg,
numerously signed petition presented to this "s's presesor
early part of the session. Regarding those sirlchsidl° se
and regarding those meetings which have been themes
theses
port the motion of the Hon. Member for Mont'000.1(100
two remarkable circumstances—one is. that c oleo
pains were taken to misrepresent a speech which 1 nios
weeks ago—( Hear)—when notice of that ino.stisil, dessil
poned by the Hon. Member, to the effect totsatenrif
therein that the people wished for no reform.
ss.l;-‘thicsljetf
done with such care that in placards all the sco'''s-recsill,, •
plied my belief that there ought to be retest/11'1,-0e
sed
expunged, and in some cases directly the ref",aisdle
The words I used were—" My belief is that thesr-sclesUtn
working classes desire that there should be l!
greys of reform ; that this House should give taoteiilit'fid°
the question before it, and that on peace and Off scensfosie
pond their interests.—(Cries of "Read on.") 's over"ile
not deny that which has been stated over anuraoselPsel
that I expressed my belief that the countrY'fteefeNol
middle and working classes, were not in favour strosti,o
Charter, or the plan of the 'Hon. Member for lifeuciesiers;its
that declaration has been used as if it 'Were so J' 4*
against all reform ; whereas I went on to OP io desi es'
excluded these specific measures, that the Peettetalool,
gradual progress in reform, and in using tliate Der fa l°
eluded no species of reform, neither parliamentabs astf et
nor any other kind of reform which it might otae°lloo
adopt. But so great has been the misunde
boryieooo,
misconstruction of what I said, that at thla rese„slating
meeting the Hon. Member for Montrose Inn`sister,l".oe,
which began thus :—" That the Prime 0"....."-teosivsite
stated his opinion that the people require no • res'esi4
sures of political and fiscal reform, it is hereVwhat
and so on. The Hon. Gentleman having hearclsboaki et°
and accurately knowing what I said, realli.:o GOIr
taken more pains. When that resolution Lciotis:gli pss
his hand, he should have said, " This
syis....ss
trary to the fact; I know it to be so--(.1"'" the
sible for me to move it as it stands." th
Mr. HUME.—I can only say, it is consistent toes
fact, to my knowledge.—(Order, order.) sireetor°
Lord J. RUSSELL.—Now there is another for nit s
which has attended many of these inee_stiflganieled
They have been meetings convened,and ."°`-ints esaoP-A
view of proposing and supporting the four Pe- on 0"
in this resolution which the Hon. Gentleman s SflilS in
to-day, and to which he has now added rs 0010-con
with the view of sending petition to thlotter abet
support of this resolution. But where
..s.theA eitber
st
to a discussion it has repeatedly halloo —seSo3- segs
some Chartist has risen and moved an Aln"-crooB.ed,P
0Y _srts
every person of full age and unconvicted 0f been seystisi°,l,/
to have a vote, and that that resolution has ""..,h "-Oil
else that, such a resolution being proposed, st`lo AO
in the meeting took place that the reporters, Wsteeis VIA 0
attend accurately to these matters, have been Itch terteo
the result of the meeting. I say, therefore, na 01100
this movement, that, in the first place, it has 71 said sol°
degree founded upon misrepresentation of Wu:holt
place in Parliament ; and, in the next place,.., of the/so'
be considered at all as a movement in sunPer'sse til(is stbst
Getletnan the Member for Montrose—whether " c try cIIS
or Birmingham, or Merylebone, as I think, or $ 01°f obw
seero
of the great cities. It is to be regarded rather ago tbstissOs
in which there was a division of opinion`, thei"blsta
fists very often had the majority ; and Where foclraseslii
majority the meetings cannot be consideredlse 10061111
the plan of the Honourable Gentleman. IRhis sPeboott
Gentleman, to my great satisfaction, be Italisas them. it,
declaring that the plan of reform which 17 offent'deffst
to propose in 1831, and which was carried, lul.ll PTises
Helmut in 1832, had been mainly instrument' „at. Los
the peace of the country during the presenti reOtiiilit;,'
that testimony as a testimony that the Pite trend
.1 the
been useful in averting discontent, preserv:"'(llesr,' UP,"
and in bringing about other useful measnrins, that 017;
pTehoeplHe.ona.ccGorednitnlgemteant,heiinrdperedes,enatfterriVcceshekhe:oool, '26
Atten
those who would fitly represent them, he
them ofd
their own interests as they ought, 04 he interests 00
carrying into effect measures conducive teets-liouse
community. If that be so, it must make t...-nte of .I.'foll's
to the necessity for any Government rne"-.0 this • ow
enable the people to find a fair representation st, it 1500
Bcause, by the Hon. Gentleman's own staterne'the prec
lbe
from their mistake of their true interests thattthee hsested*
House does not fairly represent them, and tha reprenteal
opportunity at a general election of eing fair"): ent's. tilt
The electors, indeed, might reply to the g°tllo unge it !if
that they had the power, but did nee.choose
b tte.sr
sOd
manner he recommended, for that thef-istsasise be'",olt4
their true interests tha he self till sell
nhimself
that they had chosen their present representatives" theit.4.
that their views were the sound views accordingT. the
notions of public policy, and not, the views Whiesuaototset
Gentleman entertained. For, although he 11,1‘, 01'110
raingyhtphaertimcuelyarereitgehbtlieohf,sutffhreatgteh,
• ion . s
notions, and that they are not fairly representedpeople are to '1.7 the
sentatives do not coincide with his views an's oof
(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman began hi. ls.sed
that every man who was a contributor to the tertests bed
he people
cannot cont toot areere
way should have a share in the representation, thetas died
man of full age who contributed in any way
positively a right to vote. Why, Sir, if this Poo is
were true there would be an end of all dispute itseen'sael
matter—an end of the Hon. Gentleman's proPecsi
limitations, his restrictions, his qualifications—au 501-0 500g50,
have nothing to do but pass an Act of Parliante's the 1;
lodging that right, and admitting all to vote. fitieos
Gentleman in his plan does not carry his proPe';eistise'
effect.—( Hear.) His remedy is to extend the fra,l3;seg s'lo
to
_ropl
the
to include " all householders," the word " all" utpipeno
left out by
ewnneci mistake; aa,kn, ed;wahi
householders"iod m fromay bhis t
leoe xdi
ngpeellarsendaet ip,oenrshsonet-e0
00:0;00;
fill.xiteedndretslicle
as I understand, who must claim to be ratielia,the b°
reD'algsslol,
the actuallype er . rated,rrhear
emits pelacr
restriction,
roine
tit.
ohne,
a(la
an.,l;
rate-booka ce diu
r 0 pOl,
which, if the Hon. Gentleman is • °
f rraer
tion right . of
, you have not the smallest title to impo
eons
hear.) Here is a man of full g belonging to th ru to't;
Westminster ; he claims his right to vote. Itreltbe 1,56
that be is not registered, and ghis name is not °„-eSl39:t 0
for the
book, and therefore he cannot be admitted? ai I'4'l'lo
says, " I have an indedeasible, a constitution „y 0 0
being a man 21 years of age ; and it is imPssivisini I°.sOth
, IN • y 0
deny that right, or set aside or evade ml C'—rste''
by any pretence of your qualifications about
so 00460
and registration, and conditions of lodging, anci usii6-o°ll.
(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman by that ,aq, sbe,n
destroys his own proposition. I will confess rsiagiegp"o/
Gentleman quoted some sentences of mine in "- sal," 08
Reform Bill in 1831, which, I must admit, werelied 'toll
loosely quoted. They could not have been aPP, 00,
foundation of the measure I proposed; but at lasi'
etiatl.:
to state exactly what the measure was. 1 didl; pros- Sue
doubt about it, and every one can judge Whet The it.l/44
was which I wished to see Parliament adoPt'flaterehless,/
Gentleman's proposition is of a very differentsuear, seo
of a very vague and indefinite character.--L `folder' oot
When the Hon. Gentleman says that all heteallf do hill
lodgers who claim to be rated are to vote, I_Jasso thirlseig
understand how large a part of the working or f° c'o°
include. Many sons living with their fathert2,ot the los
part of a family, might or might not form intbere atediai
stituent body under this proposition. He sa) ote, send re
millions of persons of full age who ought to v _seat rote
only one million or less are included in the Pt`sitioashoon
sentation. But I should imagine, if his propsZei of
carried out, and every man had a right owe tioP
- yo ,id
being registered and rated, you would find ht of too
three millions at least excluded from the rig e woo
too
who would not come nnder the definition asse
Gentleman has made. What, then, becomes of hit of Vc°oels
that you have disqualified those who have the rigto es,iffor
and that it is beyond the power of ParlianWla
.)
those who have that constitutional right?—( ;teat Ole
entirely from the Hon. Gentleman as to the fount which hot
proposed representation. In toy opinion, thifitun seer ib~e
people have the right to, not only every ran hest Intl°
the whole population of this kingdom, is the 11 0100
government and the best kind of representation..., sse,,Lst
possible for the Legislature to give.—(Hear, hea' best not
should be that universal suffrage would
give tb / do :0,
lature, the best laws, and the best governmenttoo CiSldie
e
see that this House would be justified in refusing ot 0 Ssah°
But if this would not give so good a governnie
awl a' 15f
ferent form of voting, then it was mere pedantrla
or dievotsiollf
philosophy to say that every man ought to have,. et e
the main object of representation, as the main ]fare it°
institutions, being good government and the We ' ct °et
people, you ought not, for the sake of some abstrava
about the means, to lose sight of the very object:led etzlat,
to keep in view.—(Hear, hear.) We have a tn."- rt of
tution—the
Crown and the House of Lords are a Pst
constitution • they are not evils to be endured, Igo eg,
the benefit of the institutions which we enjoY. 8041104
greatest and one of the most profound writers or
nos
pest to
in writing on the subject of government, said, 1,3„, ati,ll elf
exactly in words, but in sentiment, what I 5,..--.„0,0-40
quote—" Every government is formed, either ot,":sied it
of aristocracy, or of democracy. A government Ted, hojto
combined out of the three may be easily iinagTroaghsf
cannot be easily brought to pass ; °Of it shall he Yrostiedt
pass it cannot be durable." Such was the Bella!
thou
great and profound historian—a sentiment a tleura floe to
Justified by all the experience of the world in mot„ fottensfs
with the exception of one, and I should say '
a lir
country. It has so happened that in this coup:
,riidlo7l
had these elements combined which Tacitus said !'..ssor: t.lO,
be combined—of monarchy, aristocracy, and denlT sera to
besefeordieg.so
it has happened that that constitution has
Sir, I confess that, seeing how difficult it is,
near] cv a trip
that judgment, and which I believe to be very Sss.Sseet_s,
judgment, with the exception which we have seen 0000:10
how difficult it is to maintain that species of monee elirto
tution which has provided for the happiness roc
risi,
in this country—l have always felt, haying us of ref?;cal
do since the year 1819 with proposing measure,
ss,. any
and with assisting other measures of reform, nv.v"way
and nice a matter it was to alter ill anttatiotl'A
adjustment of the different powers of thet apristig
remember, on the night before I was SbOtt