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

4144 of the character of a Whig Ministry, it was perhaps
toad as that which the Hon. Gentleman himself pos-
id in this House.—(llear.) The Right Hon. 111,.ver
tk ealled npon him (Lord J. Russell) to state his opinions
to this
question, but he owned that he was put to conside-
;otie difficulty on account of the vagueness of the proposi-
• If it had been for any fixed perioch—if it had de-
ned that new Parliaments should be called every year,
try three years, or every five yeare, he should have
6 iW
how to meet, and how to deal with it ; but when
Lt,_tteas required to give a decision upon the motion in
and
when no period of duration was named, it
eit*, med hardly fair to expect that any man should arrive
k conclusive judgment. It was like sending Parliament
as expedition with sealed orders, not to be opened until
eached a certain latitude and longitude.—(Hear.) The
ligmhet Hon. Member for Lambeth bad not stated his pre-
10e for any particular period—but at least in this the
tit:,
fit:ember for Oldham (Mr. Cobbett) had excelled
,r be avowed plainly that he was for annual Par-
ts na•-•-(llear, bear.) He (Lord J. Russell) avowed
genes plainly that he was as much opposed to annual Parlia-
aein tue Honourable Member for Oldham could be
favour of them.—(Hear, hear.) He was convinced
k et
hti:e3' could not co-exist with the monarchy,
►ti-;°"litlg that annual Parliaments could only pre-•
stteta°,4 tePublic, he should resist to the u•most any
do 13' to Introduce them. What had been the sugges-
lel:: of other speakers? The Hon. Member for Mary-
asserted that originally Parliaments were
-el annual. This was an historical mistake, for it was
O°W admitted that although they usually existed only for
lobfrne Year, they had been sometimes proroeued and lasted
Z* The authors of the Triennial Bill had not so
Wfor they declared only that frequent Parliaments
thollbe for the advantage of the commonwealth. Next,
the 01. Member had heaped abuse upon the authors of
lid'Ptennial Bill, as the worst Ministers this country
Cever known. That was to him (Lord J. Russell) a
aleilith for the first Ministry of George I. consisted of
%Nit roost distinguished Whigs of the glorious reign of
pot,t,..er° Anne, and the King, on coming to the throne,
to* selected them, because they would most conci-
the' the people whom he was called upon to govern. If,
Litt„Prfater what the Hon. Gentleman had advanced was an
k ,Teka truth, it was to him (Lord J. R.) an historical
1(4'7. But the Hon. Member had added that he had
Arai:44y for his opinion, and his first authority was
tithed Bacon Coxe, a learned man, who had certainly pub-
up many works, but who was not generally looked
Asi,l7 as an authority on such matters; neither was
% ;hit°, a great authority ; and Doctor Smollett, upon
A e;
lie had also relied, found fault with the Septennial
Viett,'," What many would think its merit, viz., that it
oa 'l,7e Very Act which maintained the House of Hanover
all itll throne. In fact, his Jacobite stanzas were worth
the. nhistory put together ; but the present Ministers and
Nil: friends were no Jacobites, and they did not regret
atat.the Rouse of Hanover had been continued in pos-
th of the Crown of these realms. His authorities,
tie "ore, were of little weight or value. Next he had
°3Ple
tic toed that the Parliament which pasted the Se.ptet?-
osou'et bail been guilty of a gross abuse of authority in
tilll'4,ing its own existence for three years. No doubt
3.1441 ht be a question, but a question which he (Lord
eatt,,,ltell) should have decided in their favour : it was an
the „'"tdinary act of authority, but it was resorted to for
the rtZPose of maintaining the Protestant succession and
ttota'"arties of the country. But whether the Parlia-
g,testp.e°,4l4 or could not strictly lengthen its own ex-
do 1718 to 1721, there was not
.the slightestd
Ittht that it had full power to fix the period ofR. uh-t
Roo „for future Parliaments. Although the. Right
Opini plover had not favoured the House with. his
Patt•°° as to the precise number of years for which a
so Ikansent ought to last, lie (Lord John Russell) bad
essitation in stating the grounds on which he
14,8,4 that rather a long duration ought to be pre-
% `". By the constitution of this country, the House of
43Wons held the public `purse in its bands, and, con-
eleotly, the power of giving supplies from it ; it had,
loa,refore, for a time, the whole power of the kingdom.
o,‘"oat power had
. the Crown, opposed to that? The
nr"Wer of dissolution. If the Crown dissolved a House of
Zonanions, one of precisely the same opinions as that dis-
,'Zikktd might be returned by the people. When such was
Of ease, there remained no further check, and the House
Commons remained supreme. The people, therefore,
Y r
e-electing the same or similar Members, enjoyed, in
oiTfit, the supreme direction of the State. This enormous
0014lr ought to be met by some counterbalance on the part
4eriot:am p,
the Crown. if Parliament were made of three years'
it would in fact be only of two years' dura-
and the Crown would thus be deprived of the power
Pillateelt
th.°°'ing the time whewetsa dissolution should take
and The dissolution must occur within short periods,
Of the result was not the consistent deliberate opinion
°tiler e People, which in this country, as in every
aPpro'h,„°°Aht to be supreme, but the chance of mis-
t2l -138100, of error, of delusi, n, and the constitu-
fr'aps ' Iv" Placed in a state of jeopardy which, per-
tuilibw.°lll,l leave it without any poise to preserve its
rnlin. That was the constitutional reason why the
pow ern ought to be able to counterbalance the immense
°f the democracy, by choosing the time most con-
Itere-1/ f" a dissolution. If the duration of Parliament
Nt,im*ed at seven or even at four years, the Crown
tote; still have that power of choosing ; but, reduce it
Ile w Years, and it was deprived of the power altogether.
tour speaking in the sense in which every lover of the
14e1;41tion ought to speak—every man who wished to
ladohe ,he Constitution in King, Lords, and Commons,
and 4° did not desire that one should completely dtstroy
the peetwbehn the others. The King was a trustee for
Pe°PleLPie,"-sthe House of Lords was a trustee for the
'etititti7toe House of Commons was the immediate repre-
Raver ° of the people, and they ought to conduct the
the to,e4letlt of the country in harmony together. It was
unit •
oe Olt of many
years' consideration of the subject, and
alterott "Pinion, from which he had never varied, that the
lion or° to triennial Perliaments would be the total destruc-
tion fue°lll" mixed Constitution. With regard to a proposi-
leveo making the duration of Parliament five instead of
ttot Weal's, he admitted that there might be some, though
atit—eat, advantages in the change. He spoke of it as an
enotil tract question—as if he were about to frame a new
advtot.lit'"; but he doubted much whether any expected
Pentritle to be derived from the change would corn-
alterael! f°, the positive disadvantage of making the
Ron. iwen* He could not omit to mention, that the
railtep,:ernuer for Oldham, who quoted him, had entirely
nussen7:4ted what he really said. He (Lord John
Purnai,,Zirehenied he took his report from the. daily
P„,„l,licak• h he begged, whether in his speeches or in 11,s
434eruberieh-4' that whenever he quoted him or any other
Words
reap Would take the pains first to ascertain the
Personaritraq employed. Having the means of attending
ttateroe„Y'. the Honourable Member need not adopt the
ter4,B 'tBlll the daily journals, as if they were the exact
droo °tett on the occasion. (The Noble Lord here
pher_Ped his voice, and in rather a conversational tone ex-
flaued the nature of the misrepresentation : the difference,
est. as we could collect it, was, that instead of saying
et lain measures were " essential," he had qualified it by
tit PTYing also the word "useful." He apprehended that
i„ distinction had escaped those who had given his speech
- the d'l • nals ) He had never been an advocate
to y Jour .
tir,triennial Parliaments, and had always contended that
.„I°,° an alteration would make the Members dependant
11,-; !Pon the settled opinion of the people: that settled
Ooi°!°n he believed to be an en'ightened and a wise
0; 14,:°, but otherwise, the votes and acts of the House
ptel;onbe subject to the evils of misrepresentation, mis.ap •
Wariti noon, and false colouring, and there were at no time
Soehag those who were interested in misrepresentation.
10,,0ua House of Commons could not co-exist with the
that 11°4. In the United States, indeed, it was provided
Year; 70Prublio man should hold office for more than four
uteri in a republic it was a principle to distrust public
That
turn; told Was not the principle of the British Constitu-
he vim bo,, a' be was bound to maintain that constitution,
In,„ ao say.,,to resist the change to triennial Parliaments.
Noble be begged to add, in accordance with his
'Would ne_7) that as to any proposition next year, he
jAxt year discuss it.
bad AIES KENNEDY explained. The Noble Lord
All
ii
l haec:ouuseidd him of having adopted certain opinions lately.
"Y in answer was, that ever since the Hon.
ariletui2ned Member for Dublin brought forward his
nedy) had tLot:t.edtbeinatdhdereisnsitnoortikt)e..T.hro.ne, he (Mr. J.Ken-
so ikons_ SHELL could not help thinking that the com-
et 1,41,76 t of the speech of the Noble Lord was strangely
elating al/te With ' nig thatits conclusion ; for he commenced by
Was to the motion of the Right Hon. Gentleman
by. beio°.'tiaelue for him to. grapple with, and he concluded
tilra. 6ut itself as definre as man could be, by avowing
I:;blthe stanch supporter of the Septennial Act. The
413 e Lord had told them that in his opinion short Par-
, stink were incompatible with the monarchy. Now he
overthrown—
colieoei__Bl,.artsthe Noble Lord, with all his historical re-
it .woe;
al h uon him, could not have forgotten that
long Parliament that the monarchy was once
(Loud cries
tio arliaments being the de's‘triluicetairo? —of
11,ort p anthdethcaot,matistun.)
d pasted, we had triennial Parliaments from the year 1694.
-Gain to the year 1716, when the Septennial Act was
---(Cheers.) Dur
/Tiede to es'abhah a demoncg racy all that time no attempt was
nationT hri
loos which
Throne, and
country. The
:reanadbohnatdthenofatmtiblye
Whi Was to agitatedsucceed to thee