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

an retul

slightest tendency to subvert the Throne itself.—(Hear,
hear.) The Noble Lord was also afraid of a dissolution
during times of excitement, and wished elections to take
place when the minds of the people were fixed and settled.
Did not that argument come welt from the Noble Lord
and his colleagues in the Ministry ? Had the Noble Lord
so soon forgotten the tenure by which they held their
places, and the measure by which the people obtained the
Reform Bill ?—(Loud cheers.) Did the Noble Lord mean
to say that, on questions of great public interest the in-
tervention of the people ought to be of no avail ?
(Hear, htar.) If such were his meaning now, against
the oratory of the Nolile Lord he would put the conduct
of his administration—against his words he would array
his deeds—(Cheers)—for if he (Mr. Sheil) recollected
rightly, the Noble Lord was the same individual who had
once deliberately declared it to be his opinion that the
whisper of a faction must be unaviling agrint the voice of
a nation.—(Gheerr.) He recollected also that the Noble
Lord, on bringing forward the question of reform, had
declared that he left the duration of Parliaments an open
question—(Hear)—but surely if the Noble Lord could
then consent to leave it as an open question be could not
have considered it, as he now appeared to consider it, as a
question filled with danger to the Constitution.—(Hear,
hear.) The project of reform which the Noble Lord had
introduced into Parliament waQ, in all its leading features,
the same with that which Earl Grey had proposed in the
year 1793, when he presented the petition from the
" Friends of the People." That petition contained a
clause praying that the duration of Parliaments might be
abridged. The prayer of that petition, which was sanc-
tioned by Earl Grey, was upon the duration of Parlia-
ments as vague as the motion of Lis Right Hon. Friend.
It did not ca :l either for triennial or quinquennial Parlia-
ments, and, in alluding to it, E irl Grey said, that he
would not discuss the question of their duration ; for until
the Parliament itself was reformed he cared not a straw
about the length of its existence ; for an unreformed Parlia•
went would only be sent back to the patricians who no-
minated it, and no advantage could be thrived from making
them more frequently appoint their nominees.—(Hear.)
The case was, however, widely different at present, and
this Parliament, this reformed Parliament, would be sent
back to a people who had a right to receive from its repre-
sentatives a large and frequent account of what they had
done doting their stewardship.—(Hear, hear.) The re-
form which the Noble Lord had proposed was founded on
theory, and unsustained by precedent ; the reform which
his Right Hon. Friend new sought was not a mere theory,
but was a system which was founded on the practice of
the proudest period of our history, and was sanctioned by
the best principles of the constitution.—(Cheers.) It
rested upon the Bill of Rights, in which it was declared
" that for redress of all grievances, and for the amending,
strengthening, and preserving of the laws, Parliaments
ought to be holden frequently."—(Cheers.) It rested
also on the preamble of the 6th of William and Mary, in
which it was recited that "
,frequent and new Parliaments
encourage good will between the Sovereign and the
people."—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord appeared to think
that they would encourage the opposite effect ; in that
opinion he contradicted his own illustrious ancestors—in
that opinion he stood a strong antithesis to the great
Lord Somers.—(Cheers.) Now, he would ask the House,
was the declaration of the Bill of Rights, was the pream-
ble to the 6th of William and Mary true ? " No," says

the Noble Lord, " the great men who effected the revolu-
tion of 1668 were all mistaken ; the Bill of Rights must
be set aside, and the Triennial Bill must be considered as
an error in legislation."—(Hear, hear.) They had heard,
too, of the preamble to the Septennial Act—it recited,
first, that elections were conducted with great expense ;
next, that they were conducted with great heats and
animosities ; and, last of all, it assigned the rebellion
which had recently taken place ; and as a remedy
for these inconveniences, the enactment of the Sep-
tennial Act followed. Now, would the Noble Lord deny
that the last of these causes was the chief inducement for
passing the Septennial Act ? It was alleged to be the
case, as he had before stated in the preamble to the Act ;
and in the debates upon it that point was fully admitted
by the Duke of Devonshire, who introduced it in the
House of Lords. Now, he would ask the Noble Lord
whether there was now any rebellion in the country to
justify the continuance of the Septennial Act ?—(Hear.)
He thought that if the inquiries which had been institu-
ted during the present session were properly followed up,
the great expense of elections would in future be dimi-
nished ; and as to the heats which elections generated, he
thought that they were likely to operate more prejudi•
cially upon the Members of a long Parliament than upon
the Members of a short one; for if it were true that
elections produced excitement among the people, then
Parliament must also partake of that excitement, being
the representative of the people. The feelings of the
people, might, however, soon pass away; but the Mem-
ber of Parliament was likely to continue still a partisan.
Hence a great evil might arise from the Parliament think-
ing one way whilst the people were thinking another ;
and out of that another evil might arise greater than
a contest between the people and the King—he meant a
contest between the people and the Parliament.—(Cheers.)
He therefore contended that if new and frequent Parlia-
ments were necessary to control the Ministers, new elec-
tions were necessary for the people to control the Parlia-
ments. He agreed with the ',Wale Lord that the power of
the House of Commons was now great, and that it had
been doubled by the passing of the Reform Bill ; but did it
follow that because it was great it was to be of long du-
ration? The Noble Lord said—"lts power is great, it must
therefore last seven years." He (Mr. Slieil) said—" Its
power is great, therefore let it be short-lived."—(Great
cheering.) The Noble Lord said, " The trust is vast,"
and he (Mr. Shell) "Let the trustee, then, go the more
frequently to the cestui que trust, and let him the more
speedily pass his accounts."—(Cheers.) It had been said,
" Let us give this Reformed Parliament a trial before we
venture to prefer a charge on its constitution." He main-
tained that it had bad a trial, and that it had done enough
to warrant a judgment. They were not to judge merely
by the number of days it was in duration, but by the
number and magnitude of its proceedings. If was a com-
mon observation, that men sere now better able to form
an opinion on the merits of men and measures than they
could have been formerly in a much longer space of time,
so rapid and crowded was the course of events—so multi-
plied the number of experiences which enabled them to
arrive at a sound conclusion. Let them judge that House
by this test—what had they done this session ? Had they
not run through the whole cyclopmdia of legislation, be-
ginning with their Coercion Bill, and their East and West
India Bills, and their Bank Charter, and their Church
Bill, and their Local Courts Bill, not to say anything of
their other important measures, each of which would have
hitherto occupied the attention of Parliament one session?
Were not these legislative achievements in themselves
enough to warrant their going before their constituents to
obtain their verdict on their usefulness? In fact, their
whole career was one of portentous velocity—a kind of
30-statute speed on a rail-road of legislation ; and was it
not right that the people who enabled them to thus out-
strip their predecessors in haste, if not in usefulness, should
be also permitted to avail themselves of the improved ma-
chinery of time and economy ? He called, therefore, upon
the House to do its duty to the country by adopting the
present motion. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman sat
down amid loud cheery.
Lord HOWICK expected nothing but embarrassment
in discussing so intricate a subject. The question was
one of fearful importance—(A laugh)—but he thought
the objections were not of consequence.
Mr. EWING observed that there was a sort of restless
and irritable feeling in the public mind which prevented the
deliberate consideration of the subject at the present moment.
General PALMER said that no Member of the House
could feel more strongly, or acknowledge with more sin
cerity, than himself, the obligation of the country to his
Majesty's Ministers, for their great measure of reform.
But it was obvious, at the time the struggle fur that mea-
sure was going on, that the true essence and real value of
it was the recognition that reform was not revolution;
that it was within the Constitution; that time could not
sanctify wrong ; and that it was consistent with the
powers of the Legislature to rectify abuse, and restore the
right, although the right had been long lost sight of.
It was this healing and saving principle in the Constitution
that made the Reform Bill valuable; that °trained for it
many of its supporters in that House, and the general
voice of the people without. It was, nevertheless, seen
that the details of the Bill were far from being perfect, acd
putting its opponents out of the question, it had not sa-
tisfied its friends ; being considered by some too demo-
cratic, and by others too aristocratic, and there was still
the same honest diffetence of opinion. It was, there-
fore, clear, that the measure was defective, and, to
speak the truth, it was a mass of expedients, uncon
fleeted in themselves and unsupported by any gener-1
principle. The true principle on which representation
ought to be founded, and which, as he had stated on the
Reform Bill, must eventually be adopted, was contribu-
tion ; for without repeating his arguments, he must repeat
his assertion, that every contributor to the taxes, how•
ever humble his station, ought to have a vote in the elec-
tion of the person intrusted with the serious and impor-
tant duty of imposing burdens on his fellow-subjects;
and not only should he have a vote, but be enabled to give
that vote according to the dictates of his own understand-
ing, uninfluenced by favour, and unassailed by corruption.
To effect that object he had voted for the ballot, although
in justice to its opponents he admitted the honest preju.