The Sun.
London, England, 1851-02-21 00:00:00

' t'sat his plan would be no improvement, lam far from
saying that the :lass of voters which he proposes to
create is a class from which we have anything to fear.
But there is another question to which the Hon. Gentle-
man has alluded, and on which I will say a few words
befora I conclude. Though I have stated that it is not
advisable to adopt the present proposition, yet on
other OnViODS I have stated that some extension of
the franchise was desirable.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
But the House will recollect that I did not think it an
evil to have counties, and large cities, and small boroughs
respectively returning Members to Parliamk nt, but that,
on the contrary, if we had merely a representation of
numbers, that then it was my opinion that this wealthy
and intelligent country would not be so well represented
as at present.—(Hear, hear.) With these opinions, I
certainly could not be a party to that which some Mein-
bers of the House seem to wish—the entire abrogation
of our ancient system, and a sweeping away of the Re-
form Bill, together with all other Acts and customs with
which our representation i 3 connected. But Ido think
it desirable to introduce a measure for some further ex-
tension of the suffrage, by which, as I have said, there
would be an opportunity for the working classes to
have votes at elections.—(Cheers.) Still, my answer
to the Hon. Gentleman when he asks whether the
Government are about to introduce any measure for
the extension of the suffrage—my answer to him is,
that we have not that intention. There are reasons
both peculiar to the present time and general reasons
of policy why I think such a course unadvisable in the
course of this year. The peculiar reasons are, that it
is absolutely necessary to commence this year with finan-
cial measures—that the attention of the House of Com-
mons must be immediately taken up with those financial
measures, and that if any question respecting the alter-
ation.of the Reform Bill and the extension of the suf-
frage were introduced it must necessarily be postponed
till a later period; besides there are certain questions re-
lating to the administration of justice in the Court of
Chancery and relating to the general administration in
Ireland, which I propose to bring before the House,
and with which it is very desirable to proceed as speedily
as possible. There are general reasons of policy like-
wise, which I partly stated last year, why it is not ad-
visable to proceed just now with a measure for the ex-
tension of the suffrage. It has always seemed to me,
when great changes were introduced in this country,
that it was desirable that we should, while the minds of

the people were unsettled and unfixed as to the effects o I
these changes, avoid very frequent elections, and the
perpetual agitation of those questions in which the feel-
ings of the country were deeply involved. It is far
'better, after sufficient time has elapsed, and after discus-
sions such as those which take place in this House, that the
country should have an opportunity of calmly and delibe-
rately deciding on the value of these changes. I have like-
wise thoughtovith respect to late years, that we have not
had many changes in the legislation of this country; but
`We have seen great political changes going on in foreign
countries, and I have thought that anything tending to
the stability of our institutions, anything that showed
that we were proceeding quietly with the maintenance
of our institutions, was an advantage to this country, and
preserved us from many evils which another course
might have entailed.—(Hear, hear.) But I can see no
reason why, after this session has passed, there should
not be laid before the House at the commencement of
the next session a proposal on the subject of the ox-
t-nsion of the suffrage—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear")—
and, if I should then be a member of the Government, I
should feel it my duty to present my views on the ques-
tion to the House. I know perfectly well that those
views are not such as will meet with the approbation of
the HOD. Member for Montrose, and those who agree
with him, but I have so often stated that difference of
opinion existing between us, that it will create no sur-
prise in the mind of that Hon. Gentleman that I come
to a conclusion different from that which the principles
which he has from time to time laid before the House
lead him to adopt. However, I think it desirable, seeing
that it is now 20 years since the'passing of the Reform Bill,
that we should after the lapse of that time consider
whether there are not a great number of our fellow.
countrymen not only fully qualified to exercise the
suffrage, but whose exercise of it would tend to an im-
provement of the character of this House.—(Hear, hear.)
For myself, I sun perfectly satisfied with the experience
we have had of the Reform Act; I believe the repre-
tsoentthaotin
people
o since
ot 18321 a rl4.e has_( beenlarge—(Hear,
ea r shuecahr
)a—s two
hgi
ci give
to
tconfidence
not have had in a House of Commons where the Mem-
bers for Old Sarum and Gatton had seats, and where no
Member for Manchester, Leeds, or Birmingham was
present.—(Cheers.) I am, therefore, perfectly satisfied
that the influence of that Reform Act has been salutary,
and I believe that in any changes we make we ought to
consult the spirit of that Reform Act, the temper and
genius of the people of the United Kingdom, and that
we should not attempt to construct on any other basis
but the old foundations, endeavouring at the same time
to add to the symmetry and convenience of the edifice.
Mr. HUME said the Noble Lord seemed te complain
that they were going on proposing changes from year
to. year, but he was sure that no one who looked at the
condition of the country could doubt that much of the
peace which we enjoyed, while other nations were dis-
tracted and disturbed, must be imputed to the state of
our representation having been improved by the measure
of 1832. Now that we were in the enjoyment of peace,
it was the duty of Parliament to see if they could not
give more safety to the State by further concessions to
the people. He saw no reason why one citizen should
enjoy privileges which another did not. It was true he
(Mr. Hume) had given his vote in favour of enfranchis-
ing the 50/. freeholders, but he had also been desirous of
extending to them the protection of the ballot; and if, as
the Noble Lord stated, this class of voters were under
the influence of the landlords, the Noble Lord, who had
refused them the protection of the ballot, must take the
blame, and not himself.—(Hear.) Thera could be no
better time than the present for enlarging the suffrage,
seeing that it was a period of profound tranquillity.
The suffrage was the right of a free citizen; and, if so,
what right had the Noble Lord to deprive these 10/.
householders in counties of the franchise? The Noble
Lord, in opposing this motion, was blind to his own po-
sition and to that of Hon. Members who supported him.
Mr. CO 3DEN had heard with great pleasure, and he
was sure the country would participate in this feeling,
the declaration just made by the Noble Lord, that he
would propose next session a measure for the extension
of the franchise.—(Cheers.) He only hoped that the
country would give that attention to the subject which
would enable them to secure a real measure of reform in
our present most faulty system.—(Hear, hear.) Let the
House remember the scenes that they had witnessed and
read of during the last three or four weeks in the elec-
tions for some of the smaller boroughs—Falkirk, St.
Albans, and one or two other boroughs with 300 or 400
deeoth
these
faueeedrcesi ten bi9ogrmeri
annesaol
asns.
more
general
eHnoi
bnti
heefil
°mere
polled,
insignificant
eotbea
icofrboe:
hadoi douaos
nunne
boroughs
hirh6mmn:a,
onoot
os
rrhpoheewai.i
than occurred
transpired
vh
iolence,
hop:7,oothothe
comparedoo of
n peopleti
nthoseell t
nauelrerc,eo dnivoters. morecombats
an t
Tst
hidrunken-
ness,hoeeoi,n,cheoool
whole
elusion to which he had come was, that in these consti•
tuencies of 200, 300, and 430 electors, with open voting,
so much bribery, corruption, and intimidation took place,
that these small boroughs ought to be utterly extir-
pated from our electoral system.—(Hear.) Ho hoped
the Noble Lord would address himself to the task before
him in the conviction that the country had been for a
long time looking for some measure of reform—(Cheers)
—and he believed that, after the declaration just made,
the Noble Lord would be mistaking the sense of the
country if he, or any one else who might be in his posi-
tion, did not bring in a measure commensurate with the
evils of the present system, and one that should meet the
wants of the people.—(Hear, hear.) He should not hare
risen but for the promise just made by the Noble Lord;
but he begged to offer a few remarks on the immediate
question before the House. The Noble Lord admitted
that the 101. householders in counties, whom the Hon.
Member wished to bring within the pale of the constitu-
tion, were persons wholly unobjectionable in point of
circumstances, character, and integrity. The Noble Lord
also conceded that the 101. householder in counties was
es good a man as the 101. householder in a large town.
If, indeed, property were thy test of character, a man
who rented a 101. house in a village or small market-town
would generally be found to be in superior circumstances
to the 10/. householder in a large town.—(Hear.) But
the Noble Lord said he objected to the motion because it
would be an innovation upon the system of votingby 40s.
freeholders in counties; and the Noble Lord adduced
the innovation upon that system of voting by the en-
franchisement of the 50!. tenants at will under the Re-
form Act as a reason why the House should not
agree to a further innovation upon it by the addition of
a 10/. constituency. But having given the 501. tenants
at will a vote fur the counties, the Noble Lord had not
shown how ho would increase the evil by giving
a vote to the 101. householders. He (Mr. Cobden) con-
tended that it would give the people of counties a fairer
representation than if the House stopped at the 501.
tenants at will, and rejected the present motion. The
Noble Lord said the 501. tenant at will was not so inde-
pendent a man as the 40s. freeholder. But it did not
follow that the 10/. householder would not be a more
independent man than the 501. tenant at will—(Hear.)
A farmer who rented a farm depended for his subsis-
tence upon the employment of his capital in land. The
landlord had great power over that individual, because
by withdrawing the land from him, and the farmer
being frequently unable to gain his living by any
other calling, the landowner was withdrawing the
means of living from him. But if the same
landowner went to a market town and gave notice to
quit to any shopkeeper who refused to vote for him, the
man would say, "I can find another house ; I am a
grocer, or a cheesemonger, and if you deprive me of this
house I can get another, or, if not, another will be
built fur me." Now, if they looked to those counties
where the 404. freeholders had the most influence, as in
the West Riding of Yorkshire and Lancashire, they
would find the representatives of those counties voting in
favour of this motion; while the opposition to it would
come from those counties where the influence of the
tenants at will was preciominant. He was not sure that
the Noble Lord would nut after all find it desirable to
adopt the principle of the present motion in any mea-
sure he might propose. The Noble Lord might try
the plan of grouping together country towns and
small places ; but how would he group together into
ii borough such places as he would find in the West
Riding of Yorkshire, where, in an extensive valley, a
continued series of mills, cottages, and houses might
be found? But the Noble Lord might very easily give
these places a vote fur the county upon the plan of his
Honourable Friend olr. Locke King). Where the
Noble Lord was compelled to leave out a town from
the borough representation he must give the inhabitants
a vote for the county. Take the case of Barnsley, the
seat of the hum manufacture of Yorkshire. That was
an important town, yet it had no representative, while
Pontefract, which was not half the s'ze, sent two Mem-
bers to the House of Commons. If they went to Ro-
therham, Dewsbury, and many other places in the ma-
nufacturing districts, they would find that they must