The Sun.
London, England, 1833-07-24 00:00:00

dices of real reformers against it, and that the majority
of its friends considered the ballot an evil only to be re-
sorted to as the remedy fur a greater evil, but for which it
was not the true remedy. The true remedy for the evil,
which, in his humble opinion, could Got wait for the ballot
and triennial Parliaments to cure it, was a total change in
the system of taxation—by the repeal of all taxes affecting
all articles used or consumed by the productive industry of
the country, and substituting in their place a tax on pro.
perty alone—for in this case property alone would be
entitled to a vote in the elections of Members to
that House, and industry being thus relieved from
the burdens that oppressed l►e , would no longer
seek to interfere in them ; but so long as that House
persisted, and most unwisely, as he thought, in the pre-
sent system of revenue, the voice of industry must be
heard, and heard she would and ought to be, uninfluenced
by favour, and undeterred by fear. For these reasons,
and to compel the Government to a property tax, which,
in relieving the labouring classes from taxation, would be the
only honest means of preventing universal suffrage, he had
voted for the ballot, and must now vote for the present
question; but holding as he did in his hand, and he
keyed it to be in the hands of every Hon. Member, a
recent publication of Mr. Heathfield's, whose previous
works on the subject had fully convinced his mind that it
was not only just, practicable, and easy to relieve the
nation from the burden of the public debt without de-
stroying any of the great interests of the country, but that
property of every description, by the adoption of Mr.
Heathfield's plan, would be greatly benefited, and indus-
try entirely relieved, be most humbly, but earnestly,
appealed to the aristocracy, comprising the great majority
in that House, who, notwithstanding all the fears and
predictions of the consequences of the Reform Bill by its
opponents in the late Parliament, were still the repre-
sentatives of the people, that, in justice to their mutual
interests—which hung upon each other, and must stand
or fall together—they would read Mr. Heathfield's
publication ; which, in his humble judgment, contained
more truth and information as to the real cause and
only remedy fur the evils of the country than all that
bad yet been said upon the subject ; and to which he
entreated the attention of every Hon. Member, in the firm
belief that, under all the circumstances of the country at
the present moment, arising out of the long want of
reform in Parliament and the reform that was come at
last, nothing short of the adoption of Mr. Heathfield's
plan could save the Constitution. Adverting to the cir-
cumstances which had caused the present Government to
decline in popularity, he (General Palmer) observed that
nothing had been so unfortunate as the appointment of a
Right Hon. Baronet to the situation of Secretary at War.
Accustomed to that Right Hon. Baronet's ultra-radical
speeches, the people naturally expected extensive measures
of reform from his Majesty's Government after the Right
Hon. Boronet had joined them. But what was the result?
The Right Hon. Baronet, on taking office, forgot not only
his own principles, but even those of the Whigs ; and in
the case of the Bath election—(Hear, and a laugh). In
justice to himself, he begged shortly to state the circum-
stances of that election.

Mr. Secretary STANLEY spoke to order. When his
Right Hon. Friend the late Secretary at War was in that
House, and when notice was given of a motion respecting
an alleged unconstitutional interference in the election at
Bath, his Right Hon. Friend declared himself ready to
meet any charge which might be brought on that sub-
ject. An Hon. Gentleman opposite, who had presented a
petition complaining of the circumstances, was, he (Mr.
Stanley) believed, satisfied that there was no foundation
for the charge; end after his Right Hob. Friend had de-
clared his readiness to meet the charge, it was withdrawn.
Under these circumstances, he put it to the Gallant Gene-
ral, whether his Right Hun. Friend, not being now in the
House, and the subject of the Bath election being quite
irrelevant to the question under discussion, it would not
be more in conformity with what he was sure would be
the Gallant General's deliberate determination on such a
subject, not to proceed.—(Hear.)
General PALMER, after what had fallen from the
Right Hon. Gentleman, certainly would not proceed,
although, if he were to go on, he thought he could show
that the case in question was one so irrelevant to the
subject under discussion as the Right Hon. Gentleman
supposed. There was another very important question
on which he wished to say a few words; he alluded to
the measure respecting the Irish Church.—(No, No.)
Mr. ROBINSON observed that the Noble Lord objected
to vote, on the ground that he did not feel called upon at
present to give an opinion on the subject, but that he
might do so hereafter. Now, he begged to ask the Noble
Lord, if the motion were rejected that night, whether
the rejection would not have a most baneful effect, with
respect to his Majesty's Government, on the constitution of
another Parliament The Noble Paymaster of the Eaters
opposed the motion on another ground. That Noble Lord
opposed it on the ground that its adoption would be tan-
tamount to a subversion of the constitution. He (Mr.
Robinson) had never heard a speech in . that House, so
contrary to all the previously expressed opinions of the
speaker, as the speech that night delivered by the Noble
Paymaster of the Forces. Did the Noble Lord recollect,
that when it was urged by the enemies of the reform
measure that it was an innovation on the constitution, he
and his colleagues had maintained that it was a restora-
tion of the constitution, and not an innovation upon
it? So it was with respect to triennial Parliaments.
Their adoption would be a restoration of the constitu-
tion, and not an innovation upon it. All that the Hon.
Mover of the proposition contended for was, that the
House should pronounce an opinion that septennial Par-
liaments were too long ; leaving the question of the pre-
ferable duration to be afterwards determined. In the
present state of the country, when he believed that there
was no set of men prepared to take the reins of Govern-
ment if his Majesty's present Ministers were to quit office,
he was sorry to see them pursue a course of conduct
which, coupled with the declaration made by the Noble
Paymaster of the Forces, he was sure would greatly depre-
ciate them in the eyes of the country. He had not heard
a single sound objection to shortening the duration of Par-
liament.. As to the term to which they ought to be
limited, he was for making it three years, because that
was a restoration of the Constitution, and, therefore, less
liable perhaps to objection than any other term. But let
not the House, let not his Majesty's Ministers deceive
themselves. The opinion of the country on the proceed-
ing.; of that night would be, not that the question was
whether Parliaments should be triennial or of any other
diminished length, but that the course pursued by the
Noble Lord, coupled with the speech of the Noble Pay-
master of the Forces, was a declaration by his Majesty's
Government in favour of Septennial Parliaments.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL explained. Ile did not be-
lieve that he had ever used the words " tantamount to the
subversion of the constitution." What he had said was,
that if triennial Parliaments were established by law, they
would, in his opinion, be found incompatible with the
maintenance of our mixed constitution. He had made n 9
declaration is favour of septennial Parliienents. His
opinion upon the abstract question was, that five would
be a better term than seven ; but as by the present law the
duration of Parliament was seven years, and as there did
not appear to be any great wish to diminish the term to
five, or any great benefit to be expected from such a step,
lie saw no reason for making the change.
Mr. GASKELL contended that it was a matter of in-
difference at the present moment, whether, at the time the
Septennial Act was passed, it, was a justifiable measure.
No doubt they were better judges of the question at that
time than the people of the present day could be. The
question was, whether the Septennial Act worked well
now ? The Hon. Mover and his friends had made out no
case that it did not do so. As to some of the evils com-
plained of in the present constitution of Parliament, he
feared they were out of the reach of legislative enactment ;
but whatever those evils might be, he believed they would
be increa-ed, to a tenfold degree, in triennial Parliaments.
The House would do well, therefore, to pause before they
touched a system which combided what could be WM-
bined of good, and excluded what could be excluded of
evil. It was especially expedient to pause at a moment
like the present, when there were so many omens of the
consequences to be apprehended from great and precipitate
change*. If such measures as that now proposed were to
he pressed upon them, be trusted to God they would be
met by firmness and wisdom. They had surely hail
enough of encroachment on the constitution ; and if they
surrendered the Septennial Act, they would abandon the
only remaining barrier against the uncontrolled fists of
democracy.
Col. EVANS entered into a compari-on of the measures
pursued by triennial, and the meatuses put sued by septen-
nial Parliaments, and maintained that the former had b,en
much more advantageous to the country. The arguments
of the Noble Paymaster of the Forces were as much in fa
your of Parliaments for ten or twenty years as for septen-
nial Parliaments. And yet that Noble Lord had staol
he should feel less difficulty in acceding to the proposition
of the Hon. Member for Oldhatn, for annual Par.iarnents,
than in according to the proposition of his Hun. Friend.
Mr. lIAWKINS expressed his surprise at the declara-
tion.of.the Noble Lord, that it would be better to postpone
the decision of the question until the next session ; and
maintained that the present was the moment at which
it ought to be determined. He entirely dissented from
the opinions of the Noble Paymaster of the Forces;
for he thought that the carrying of the Reform But
had rendered the present proposition more than ever
necessary. Hon. Members complained of the practice of