The Sun.
London, England, 1832-04-10 00:00:00

vain that any attempt should he made to resist the
'urther demauds for change which would he made. They
had told the people that their distresses sprung from the
form of their Government ; and it would be to no purpose
that et the breaking out of every fresh distress th, y
Should attempt to resist change, or endeavour to pal,
down the cry for alteration. Tht y had now a
constitution which la id been sanctioned by ages
under which the country had attained a height of unex
anapled greatness, and would they exchange it for one
abounding with as m any absurdities and anomalies as the
old ?—(Hear.) He would now request their attention to
a few of those anomalies. For example, the renters above
101.—indeed, he might say front 10!. to 201.—were to
have a commanding influence iu all the boroughs, where
their influence would be evil ; and renters from 101. to
301. wet:o, if resident out of a borough, to have no county
votes. Then of those towns to which the right of re-
turning Members had been preserved, there were some so
low in population, and in all that was conceived to im
part the right of franchise, that he could find at least seven
unfranchised places better entitled to send Members. The
Noble Lord then referred to tire cases of Newcastle and
Gateshead, and other anomalies in the Bill, and then pro-
ceeded to say generally, that, under the alterations which
the Bill would introduce, it would be impossible to pre-
serve septennial Parliaments. Indeed, if he recolle led
rightly, the Noble Earl had expressed himself favourable to
trienni,l Parliaments. The tact was, that even if they
preserved the Act unrepealed, the electors would practically
repeal it, for they would exact pledges from their delegates to
resign their situations at the end of three years—they would
then no longer have a deliberative assembly—they might have
a primary assembly, and to the popular voice they could op-
pose nothing with success ; and the only termination which
he could anticipate to the measure then before them was a
departmental division of the country, annual Parliaments,
and universal suffrage; these must be the inevitable con-
sequences of the Bill, and therefore should he adhere to the
vote which he originally gave.—(Hear.) There might
be inconvenience in rej-eting the Bill; but there was no
inconvenience which a firm Government might not meet,
and there was none which at all equalled the hazard of
that desolation to the whole country which must be the
consequence of adopting any such measure. The cry from
Gay to day would be for further and greater change, and
therefore he should say to those who were determined not
to pass the Bill, vote not for the second reading.—(Loud
cheers.) There was dancer—he did not mean to deny
that there was; neither did he undervalue that danger ;
hut there was infinitely more danger in encouraging the
popular madness to the extent which the promoters of the
measure, if permitted, would proceed. The Noble Lord
coocladed by moving " That the Bill be read a second
time that day six months."
The LORD CHANCELLOR put the question, and
for some moments no Noble Lord on the Ministerial side
appeared disposed to address the House, and the Opposition
Peers raised a cry of " Question !" but Lord Melbourne
came forward, and then the Lord Chancellor withdrew
for a few minutes.
On the return of the Noble and Learned Lord,
Viscount MELBOURNE, who was inaudible in the
gallery for a considerable time at the beginning and in
many parts of his speech, addressed their Lordships. He
was understood to say, that as the several topics to which
the Noble Baron who prectded him had chiefly addressed
himself had been already discussed so thoroughly in that
House when a Bill of the same nature as that now before
their Lordships was under consideration, be did not think
it necessary to detain the House by observations of any
length. It was the less necessary fur him to trespass
long upon the House after the clear and powerful expo-
sition of the question in all its bearings by his Noble
Friend at the head of his Majesty's Government. The
powers of his Noble Friend had never been more conspi-
cueoslydisplayed than they had been that evening.—( Hear. )
The Noble Baron opposite (Lord Ellenborough) had said
that the question now before the House did not affect the
general question of Reform. To that statement he (Lord
Melbourne) did not assent. The motion before their
Lordships was, " That this Bill for the Reform of the Re-
presentation of the People of Entland and \Vales be read
a second time." The question, therefore, to be determined
by their votes was, whether or not they would agree to en-
tertain the gem ral subject of Reform in the represents-
lion, or would resolve to set that subject aside alto-
gether. The speech of the Noble Baron was di
I"( eted no less against the principle of Reform alto-
gether, than against the datails of the Bill itself. All
the facts which the Noble Baron had stated respecting
the nomination boroughs were, no doubt, true; and he (Lord
Melbourne) had been for years in the habit of concurring
is statements of the same effect as those now made by the
Noble Baron. But all the arguments which the Noble Lord
bad endeavoured to raise upon those facts went to show
the expediency of preserving the whole of the nomination
boroughs.--(Hear, hear.) All those arguments were, in
fact, directly opposite to the general principle of Reform
itself. They who would be prepared to stand up for
" things as they are," would do well to rest their opposi-
tion to every degtee of amelioration upon the arguments
of the Noble Lord (Ellenborough). But with any man
who looked to the signs of the tittles, and who admitted
that changes were necessity in the state of the representa-
tion, those arguments would be of little weight. It was
"nnecessary to go over those arguments, as they were
already completely met by this one unanswerable argument
--that it is impossible-to- maintain the constitution of the
House of Commons in its present state.—(Hear.) He
should net trouble the House with a repetition of the
observations which he made on this subject when the
question was before under the consideration of their Lord-
ships. On that occasion he had been found fault with by
the Noble Lord the Chief Baron of the Exchequer, for
having gone into a discussion of the details of the 8.11,
when the question before the House related to its general
principles ; and he thought that he should now subject
him self to the same reproof if he followed the Noble Baron
(Ellenborough) into the discussion of details which were
suijects to he more fitly considered in the Committee.
Althoughi he (Lord Melbourne) was anxious for the pass•
ing of the Bill, yet he would be far from holding out to
the people exaggerated expectations of the
advantages
which it would confer upon them. Still he thought
that the strong feeling which prevailed amongst the
people on the subject
of Reform ought to have great
weight with the House. In the present state of public feel-
ing, and in the
present posture of the affairs of the coun-
try, it seemed to him to be impossible to proceed without
some alteration in_ the constitution of the House of Cont.
bout laying the representation of the people on
a broader basis. That there were advantages connected
with the present System of representation he would not
deny. But whilst the disadvantages were prominent and
obvious—so plain to the ere of all as to excite the indig-
nation of the people, advantages, on the contrary, were
in their nature such that athveaactoaugleds erducatndmade
evident only by close investigyation and rayroabset
reason-
ing. He might be told, that although the disadvantages
were more easily perceived by the people than the advan-
tages, still the 1 fitter more than compensated for the former,
and that, therefore, in altering the present system of re-
presentation, his Majesty's Ministers were sacrificing to
popular clamour advantages which the people did not un-
derstand. But he denied that lie for one was influenced
in the course which he pursued on the present occasion by
factious clamour or by democratic intimidation. At the
sitne time, however, he looked upon a reasonable deference
to the will of the people distinctly expressed to be one of
the conditions of the government of a free people.—
(Hear, hear.) " Hare est conditio populoruin omnium
liherorum.”—The irresist.ble influence of the opinion of
the people was manifest when the Government of the
Noble Duke opposite fell to the ground, without the pres-
sure of much external opposition. It was perfectly clear
on that occasion that the Administration was falling into
the hands of his Noble Friend (Earl Grey); it was clear
to every man that some measure of the kind now proposed
thust be brought forward : and when his Noble Friend
"and, amongst the principles on which his Government
;vas formed, this principle of Reform, no Noble Lord,
11tit Only the Duke of Wellington, who might be ex-
Accted to take that course after the strong declaration
hich he had made on the subject when in office, stood
,u,j'u."?iris place to avow hitnself to be opposed to the
_%, "Ita-_ Earl's Administration, on the ground that it
fiqnseil on the principles of Reform. But if
Nobleany L
.on.l were wholly opposed to that prin-
elP e, it would not have been at all an unusual course
to stand up on that occasion and express his feelings. In
B,:,:hwonerrPlace it had been objected that his Noble Friend
„hich gin having introduced the measure at the time
he had have It had been said that he ought to
sobsiawedai:eadndonet_ti°lat'llaie. fever of the public mind should have
subject a
calne People should be capable of giving the
man who knew and deliberate consideration. Every
know that if his N any thing of human nature must
the Reform WI as"ble Friend had not brought forward
early
as possible after his appointment
to office, he would b
fessions,
and
of an intsuspected of insincerity in his pro-
his pledges. Ile thoulti" to evade the redeeming of
Ministers would have tgoti therefore, that his Majesty's
defend themselves only as to the
wilt of the measure Which
itsthey had brought forward,
. end that neither as respectedci
the had
time in which they i general principles, or
the must
it, were they
tardy open to reproach from
t'snr. of the Bill. As to the extentrn oosttthdeeteßrinll,inedbe w°PoPu7d.
till; that it was often necessary to
r
and to withhold what this v..

they called for ameliorations, the necessity of which wa,
acknowledged, he thought that it was the wisest course to re-
move to the utmost practicable, xtent all re el subjects acorn-
plaint. In forming a measure of Reform, it was impossible 0
have stopped short of the present Bid. If those who were
friendly to what was called moderate Reform could succeee
in cart ying a measure framed on their principles, it would nut
only increase the discontent, but would produce ultimately
more danger to the institutions of this country than tl e
Bill which they denounced as being too extensive and
sweepine. It was impossible for him to add anything to
the strong appeal which his Noble Friend had addressee
to their Lordships; hut he would most anxiously implore
them not to st:ppone that the silence which pt evaded at
this moment was the silence of content, or that the quiet
was attributable to anything but to the most determine;!
spirit.—(Hear, hear.) He regretted deeply that the
Noble Duke who was lately at the head of his Majesty's
Government was so decidedly opposed to this measure.—
(The Noble Lord then pronounced a lengthened eulogy
upon the Doke of Wellington ; but he spoke in so low a
tono, that it was impossible to collect a sin ale sentence dis-
tiuctly. ) The same inflexibiity, the same unbending spirit
which enabled such greet men to accomplish achievements
which were beyond conception even of ordinary men.
sometimes prevented them from the full end unprejudiced
examination of great questions in t. e altered positions in
which the progress of time might have plate I them. The
Reform Bill was a great change, undoubtedly; but he
would beg leave to tell their Lordships, that if change was
effected upon sound principles, its advantages would not be
confined to the mere removal of the evils which it was in-
tended to remove, but it would give rise to advantages
which were not originally expected from it.
The Bishop of DURHAM was unwilling to trespass on
the time of the House; but considering the station in
which lie was placed, and the nature of the subject non
under the consideration of their Lordships, he felt that it
was incumbent on him to come forward and state the
reasons of the vo'e which he should give. He was
aware of his own inability to grapple with the subject
in all its bearings ; and he was also aware of the obloquy
which might be cast upon persons in his station, in
cons, quence of the course which they might feel be-
coming them to take in that discussion; hut he thought
it, nevertheless, a duty from which he ought nut toshrink
to state to their Lordship his vi ws of the present
question. He would not enter into an analysis of the
measure itself, bat would confine himself to stating merely
the grounds in which he regarde I it as inconsistent with
the moral and political welfare of the country. At the
same time he wished it to be understood, that he did
not consider the rejection of the present Bill to imply a
total rejection of the principle of Reform. He would
not now give up his opinion as to the kind of Reform to
which he would consent, nor would he say whether at
another time lie should not have been opposed to any
change in the system of representation. He would only
sate what he conceived to be the dangers attendant upon
that particular measure. In bringing forward any measure
of that nature, there were three requisites which ought to
be taken into consideration. In the first place, such a
measure ought to be so framed as to avoid exciting alarm in
the minds of those who were attached to existing institutions,
at the same time that it met the views of the greater number
of those who thought that change was necessary. Now so
far was this from being the case with the present Bill, that
their Lordships must be all aware that a great part of the
community looked to the measure with dismay and alarm.
In the second place he thought that in proposing such a
Bill, it ought to be shown that some great pracncal evil
was to be removed by it, or that some great practical
good would be obtained.—(Hear.) For his own part, he
hail heard no proofs of the existence of any great prac-
t:cal evils which the Bill was to remove; nor had any of
the advocates of the measure pointed out any practical
good which it was to confer upon the country. There
were certainly some theoretical evils supposed to belong to
the present system. There were some anomalies which
prevented theoretical perfection in the Constitution;
but it had not been proved that there existed any of so
touch practical evil as to interfere with order and good Go-
vernment on the one hand, or with the tights and liberties
of the people on the other.—( Hear.) The third conside-
ration, which he had thought necessary to be attended to
in the framing of such a measure, was, care should be taken
that it should be of such a nature as not to prevent the
Government afterwards from being carried on without
danger to the best interests of the country. But in that
Bill, prescriptive rights and interests were swept away so
largely that it was impossible not to apprehend that the
example would afterwards be folio ed, to the sacrifice of
all other prescriptive rights. Their Lordships had fre-
quently been warned to look to the signs of the times ;
and he, for one, was not unwilling to take that advice in
good part, to look to the signs of the times. He did look
to them, and be thought it was impossible not to discern
in them much that was calculated to give the greatest
uneasiness to every man who was friendly to the preserva-
tion of the institutions of the country and of the rights of
the people. He saw every where a great desire for inno-
vation. He saw a disposition to make subjects rulers, and
to bring down the rulers to a state of subserviency to the
people ; and he saw that the present Bill was calculated to
foster those dispositions, and to spread them more and
more.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Whenever that Bill should
come into operation, it would cause such an in-
fusion of democracy into the House of Commons, that
that branch of the Legislature would be the chief
power in the State ; and, indeed, would be the only power,
except in so far as it would be itself controlled and go-
verned by the political unions throughout the country.
He was convinced that the deteriorated House of Com-
mons; would be ultimately little more than an assembly of
delegates from those other democratic bodies.—( Hear.)
When he saw that those persons were the most determined
advocates of tie measure—who had always distinguished
themselves as tie most constant enemies of good order and
good government—he looked with the deepest apprehen-
sion to the result of a measure which would give to those
persons a paramount influence in the House of Commons.
He was net unwilling that the Legislature should manifest
a due deference to the will of the people. But he thought
that if the public will were not so controled as to give it
a proper direction, it would tend more to the injury of
the people themselves than to the permanent security of
their rights. When their Lordships came to destroy what
were called the nomination boroughs, they would, by that
Bill, substitute in their stead boroughs under the control
of the political unions—(Hear, hear)—boroughs that
would send none but demagogues to Parliament : and by
the same step by which they wet e admitted into the House
of Commons, the representatives of the great commercial
and colonial interests were of necessity excluded. Yet if
lie could conceive that the lower orders of the people would
be benefited by that measure, that would go far to recon-
cile him to the evils which he might suppose to be con-
nected with it in other respects. But he could not see in
what way there was the slightest probability of their being
benefited. He hoped that if the Bill should be adopted,
the Government might still have the means of upholding
those who had conscientiously opposed it. If, indeed,
they would have the power of doing so, that again swill,'
furnish au answer to those who said that the Bill was in-
dispensable; for (as the Right Rev. Prelate was under-
stood) the fact that the Government possessed the means
of protecting the Peers of Parliament in the exercise of
their rights, was a sufficient answer to those who insisted
that the rejection of the Bill would endanger the security
of the State.
Lord STOURTON s mid he trusted it would be received
by the House as some apology for trespassing upon the
time and indulgence of their Lordships upon the present
occasion, that frequently as this great and momentous
question of Pam liamentary Reform had been before their
Lordships, either incidentally in the shape of petitions, or
more directly in the form of a Bill, he had hitherto given
way to Members more able to influence time judgment of
the House, upon this most important, but almost ex-
hausted subject ; he would, therefore, only say,
and lie had the authority of one of our greatest
philosophical statesmen for the assertion, that
of Edmund Burke, in his speech on American
taxation—an authority that would not be without its
weight on the opposite aide of the House. Mr. Burke
states it to be the substance of the British Constitution that
the people should be taxed by their cinvn representatives;
and if this right of Englishmen was valuable at al; times, it
became more so, it was imtore essential to their interests, and
to the security of their property.and,witla that property, to
the very safety of their persons, at a time when the de-
mands of taxation were so heavy, when their national
debt was so enormous, and they were called upon by the
Government of their country to contribute from the annual
earnings of their industry about fifty millions a year for the
exigencies of the State. And, my Lords, is not 016 in
accordance with one of the greatest statutes or charters
of time country ? What says that statute ?—he copied it
from one of our most recent historians,—" 'so tallage or
aid shall henc, forward be laid or levied by us or our
heirs in this our realm, without the good-witl and com-
mon assent of the Archbishops, Bishops, and other
Prelates, the Earls, Barons, Knights, Burgesses, and other
freemen in our realm." And Rymer tells us, that in the
fair and true interpretation of this great statute, which
was in reality but an extension of the great charter ex
torted from John, that Edward 1., upon the knighthood
of his son, summoned a Parliament to grant limn au aid.
The Sheriffs are ordered to send to this Parliament two
.koigl.t• from each county, two citizens train each city,
(.0 La t,vv,n d their Lordships' narticular attention to this)

me or two burgesses from each b rough, as such borough:
.IW' he of gre iter or minor importance, in order that the\
•hould agree to the aid then about to be imposed."
And are a Whig aristocravy to lie blamed it, in consonanc,
with these great fund anent d constitutional principles the;
aiaiin for the reople of England under all their present
ourdens a full, ample, and efficient representation ?
had been often told, and it was one of the leading argu-
ments of the late lamented Mr. Canning, a name he should
aever pronounce without respect and gratitude, that " tla
construction and composition of the Connnens' House of
Pirliament was the same as in the year 1688 at the
revolution, when it acco7nplished such mig things.'
.hut has not every thing else changed around it ?
Have not trade and commerce and manufactures since
aassed into other and now unrepresented channels; has nut
the national debt and tic whole funding system grown up
since that periol? And therefore he had a right to s
that this immutability in the midst of change, was of all
changes the greatest ; as that person who was to stand
absolutely stil on a moving world would become the most
dangerous of proj-stiles. But the very artifi sal condition
of the country was a new and good ground for a more
ample and extended representation ; for the interests, the
property, and with that property the security of per-
sons, was now involved in I..gislative enactments
in a manner that could not have existed under a less arti-
ficial state of things. "Nay, he woul Igo so far as to say,
that there have been times in which a consultation of
Bank Directors had a greater influence over the proper ty
of the country, than could have arisen from the roost
irbitrary acts of the Tudors or the Stuart ." He ap-
pealed to the events of the last five-ancl-twenl years to
ear hint out as to the consequences emanating fann such
an artificial condition. When the French wars hail terrai-
n it ,d, and this country was naturally in the expectation of
happiness and order and prosperity, we found ourselves, on
he contrary, in the midst of confusion and disorder,
Ind dismay and loss of capital that was almost un-
paralleled in the most calamitous periods. An able
pamphlet, namely, an Historical Sketch of the Bank
of England, informs us that 240 banking establisa-
ments were involved in the general ruin, which commenc-
ing with agriculture in 1814, 15, and 16, extended to
trade and manufactures in 1817. This was ascribed to
the transition from a state of war to the state of peace.
Again, in 1821, 22, we were involved, as far as agricul-
ture extended, in almost similar misfortunes; that was
ascribed to over production—not to an over production
of wrought articles, and a glut of manufactured goods,
but to superabundant harvest. Our seasons were too
favourable—our waggons groaned under too heavy a
load. As peace had destroyed its millions of capital,
so plenty was to destroy other millions. But this was not
all—prosperity was also to have its victims. And such
was the general dismay, want of mercantile confidence,
and tinivers-il confusion in 1825 and 1826, that an emi-
nent Statesman, now no more, best acquainted with the
commercial interests of the country, and himself connected
with the Administraron of the day, informed the country
th t London was within forty-eight hours of a state of
barter. Now, what are the people of England to think
of such consequences traced to such causes? Peace,
plenty, prosperity, producing each in their turn confu-
sion, foss of capital, want of confidence, stagnation of
trade. He did nut say he had not the presumption
to do so, that there was any thing wrong in their legis-
lative enactments. But can it surprise their Lordships
that the people, under such circumstances, should trace
their misfortunes to a want of adequate representation—
that their purses had been too much under the control of
proxies from this House, who, instead of being guardims
of their property, hail been profuse and lavish in its ex-
peraditure, and the causes of those heavy charges that now
bear on the industry of the productive classes ? That,
under similar circumstances, Noble Lords are disap•
point td in their expectations of a re-action, and
that the people of England seek with as much anxiety
and determination as ever for a more extended repre-
sentation in their own Commons House of Parliament
—nor does the Noble Baron who attributas the evils

that have befallen the country to extraneous circum-
stances, and even states his own conviction, that such ex-
traneous circumstances are to go on, rather ineseasing
than diminiebing, does he afford them much hopes /
A non-Reformer too ! A most intelligent and able per-
son tells the people in another place, and that
very recently on the question of the Dutch Russian
Loan, that there were spendthrift times, in which not
only thonsands, and tens of thousands, but tens and
twenties of millions, were thrown away.—(Hear.)
But one word before he sat down about a half-measure with
which we were threatened this night by a Noble Duke.—
What did Mr. Canning say of half-measures of Reform ?
Why, he said that they of all kinds of Reform were the
most disadvantageous—against other kinds of Reform he
could produce argument ; but against half-measures there
was demonstration, for this plain reason, because they
would satisfy no one.
The Marquess of SALISBURY would not go into a
discussion of all the principles of the Constitution with
which that Bill interfered. The only question to which
he should apply himself was this—whether or not the Go-
vernment of the country could go on under the system
which his Majest:'s Ministers proposed to substitute for
the existing Constitution? The Noble Earl at the bead of
the Government had stated what he conceived to be the
causes of the prevailing discontent, but he had not ex-
plained to the House in what way that measure would go
to remove those causes. The Noble Earl seemed to have
carefully avoided any such explanation. But when he
came to the House with a measure of such importance, be
ough to be prepared to show to their Lordships both that
it was necessary to make an alteration, and that the pro.
posed alteration was of the nature which the case de-
manded.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble E irl had certainly
painted very strongly some results which, he said, seemed
to him likely to follow upon the rejection of that Bil .
Those consequences he (Lord Salisbury) wou'd not deny
were very serious, if they were real. But the Noble Earl's
speeech had reminded him of the phrase, " Omne igno-
tam pro mugntfico." He did not apprehend any such
consequences, but he was ready to admit that there did
exist a strong feeling in favour of Reform ; and, Anti-
Reformer as he was, and Anti Reformer as he believed
he should always be, he would make a sacrifice of
his own feeling so far as to concede some mea-
sure of Reform, if he could be satisfied that that
might be done without danger to the country. He was
most anxious to concede, were he once persuad. d that he
could do it wit safety. The question had been already so
much better argued, that he was aware it might be said
that be was wasting time by dwelling upon it; but he
wished to hear in what way Ministers intended to provide
fur the introduction of official men into the other House
of Parliament? Only two days ago he bad seen an ad-
dress to the electors of a certain populous place, by a
Gentl,man atrached to the present Government, and who
called upon them to give a practical refutation of the
argument that official persons would not be likely to get
into Parliament after the abolition of nomination
boroughs. At all events this address was an excellent
practical illustration of the difficulty that would be ex-
perienced. The truth was, that if this Bill passed, Mem-
bers must be subject to the will and pleasure of their con-
stituents. The Noble Lord who bad just sat down
had said that the country was menaced with a half
measure, and true it was that a Noble Duke had said that
he was ready to propose a Bill of Reform if the present
were rejected. The question, therefore was at end,
whether the House would be entirely deprived of the op-
portunity of entertaining the subject of Reform if the Bill
now offered were thrown out. The point now to be con-
sidered was, whether it was most fit to preserve the con-
sistency of the House or the consistency of the Ministry.--
(Hear.) Any Noble Lord who felt disposed to vote for a
moderate measure of Reform might embrace the opportu •
pity which the Noble Duke would afford him. If, on the
other hand, the Bill on the table were read a second time,
and consequently the principle of it saectioned. Noble
Lords would find themse:ves in a position from which they
could not retreat : they could not afterwards support a
more moderate and therefore a less objectionable plan.
Under no circumstances could he give support to the
principle of the measure before the House, especially as he
meant to alter materially every single clause it contained ;
and he was convinced that the best, as well as the fairest
mode of proceeding, would be to reject it, and to call upon
the Noble Duke to redeem the pledge he had given.
Earl BATHURST began, in a very low voice, by no-
ticing what he had said on presenting the Oxford petition,
and what Lord Brougham bad delivered regarding the ten•
pound franchise during the debate on the second reading
of the Reform Bill. He defied that Noble Lord to show
that the right to vote by every ten-pound householder was
constitutional ; and he referred to the case of Grampound
at the first time when that right had been attempted to
be established. On that occasion Lord Milton stood up in
his place and objected to it, on the ground that the pro-
position was unknown to the Constitution, and it was
setting a fanciful experiment against the wisdom of our
ancestors. For this reason his Lordship proposed that the
right of voting at Grampound should be in the inbabi
tauts paying scot and lot ; and who was found to support
the proposition? Lord Althorp—(Cheers)—now Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, and the individual principally
ictive in the passing of this Bill through the House of
Commons. The sense of the House was taken, and they
.vere left in a minority ; but on chat occasion a Noble
`Prirrirl of his (for although they' differed he hoped to be
honed still to call him so). then Member for Yorkshire,

had opposed the ten-pound franchise on the ground th m•
he had received a communme mtion from Leeds, stating it h
ha the general opinion of the inhabitants that the qoalifica
thin was too low.—(Hear.) The next occasion n whist
the subject was discussed was on the disfranchisement of
Penryn, when it was proposed to convey the forfeited wr.t
to Manch, star. The moment Moichester was mentioned
up rose Mr. George Phillips, a residerrt in the town, wile
deprec ited the proposal of fixing the qualification for a li
vote at only 101., and argued that it ought to be 201., me
at the very lowest 151. Lord John Russell himself pro •
posed teat it should be fixed at 20/ , as he was convinced
hy what ha I been said by the Member who was resident
in Manchester. At Birmingham, again, it was sug-
gested that it ought to be fixed at 101. ; and about Oa
same time Political Unions there had their origin. 1
insight be worth while to enter a little into their history
and to remark, that, in the outset, they were merely corn
•dnations of the operative classes, whose object was to in-
duce their masters to raise their wages. They were too
confin,,d to any one branch of trade, hut the concert ant:
co operation extended to all. Afterwards they began to
assume a political aspect, and their views, which at firs:
were limited, were extended, and they endeavoured to die
rate not only to their masters but to the Government. It,
a place like Birmingham it was hardly to be disputed that
the 101. franchise would nearly be equivalent to universal
suffrage, for it was not at ail stated in what way the value
of the house was to be ascertained. Thus would the power
of. the Unions be augmented: they would be formed in
every part of the kingdom, and they would have active
agents always on the alert, to take care that every marl
belonging to the Unions should vote in favour of the popu-
lar candidate. All the really industrious, who did not
join in these associations and did not partake of the ex-
citement, would thus be entirely neglected. Hence it was
obvious that the Government itself would, in fact, be
placed in the hands of the Political Unions, and the tyranny
they had at first exercised over their masters would be
extended to the members of the Cabinet. He (Lord
Bathurst) objected much more to this Bill than to the
former, and contended that in most of its provisions it was
infinitely worse. After stating the absurdity of the
mole in which the boundaries of boroughs were to he
fixed, his Lordship remarked that his objection was not
to the principle of abolishing nomination boroughs, be-
cause they could be rendered free by enlarging them, hut
to the principle of disfranchising them in order that other
places might be enfranchised. Not only was time principle
of spoliation adopted, in order to give representatives to
particular towns in England, but to give additional Mem-
bers to Ireland and Scot'and. On what possible principle,
he asked, were six new Members to be given to the former
arid five to the latter? or how could it be said that in the
present state of those countries, with their vastly aug-
mented population, that that was all that was re-
quired ? On the whole, he opposed the Bill, nut because
it was a measure of Reform, but because, instead of reform-
ing, it destroyed the constituency of time country ; and
although in early life he had given a vote in favour of some
change iii the representation, he did so on time principles—
first, that the number of Members of the House of Com-
mons should continue unchanged—and secondly, that no
borough should be disfranchised without proof of corrup-
tion. The Noble Lord concluded by drawing a distinc-
tion between political consistency and personal obstinacy,
applauding the one and censuring the other.
The Earl of HADDINGTON, having been all his life
an opponent of Reform, naturally felt anxious to vindicate
the course he intended now to take in voting for the
second reading of the Bill before the House. Up to
within a few days of the last discussion the leaning of
his mind was, that the Reform Bill should be read a
second time, not because he thought Reform a good ; '
on the contrary, be considered it a tremendous evil;
but because, on the principle of expediency, he saw that
some Reform was absolutely inevitable ; and he felt that
the sooner the question was settled by calm consideration,
and the sooner the obnoxious parts of the measure
were removed in a Committee, the better fur the country.
If, shortly before the ale ate on the former Bill, he had
abandoned the intention of supporting the second re ding,
the change arose from witnessing the spirit prevailing in
the nation and in Parliament, which c mvinesd hint that
anything like an amendment of the Bill was quite imprac-
ticable. Other considerations had wrought with him in
the sama direction. In common with all well-thinking
men, he had felt the greatest possible indignation at the
manner in which the House of Lords had been treated
both by the public Press and at public meetings : intimi-
dation had been attempted ; and he knew that it was the
custom to say that threats of the kind ought to be entirely
disregarded. He was not precisely of this opinion, al-
though he felt that when it was said that the continuance
of the Union with Ireland depended upon the result of
the Reform Bill, it was not an argument that ought to
have weight in a deliberative assembly. All the vulgar
motives of personal fear were assigned on the former
occasion, but of late be had heard nothing of the kiud : it
had been found that such intimidations produced no effect,
and therefore they had been abandoned. It had appeared
to hint, also, that-the House, in the exercise of the con-
servative duty it owed the country, was called upon in the
first instance, and at a period of unparalleled excitement,
not to sanction without hope, or at least with very slen-
der hope, the principle of a Bill involving such tre-
e tuendous consequences. It was the duty of the House of
Lords to appeal fronaaMinisters to the good sense of the
country. The appeal had been made, and what was the re-
suit? A great deal had been said of reaction. He was hint-
self quite certain, at the time that the last Bill was pre.
sented that the country was divided. That a large portion
the people favoured that measure, he had no doubt ; but
he was also certain, that a large portion was opposed to it.
He believed that the rejection of the Bill on that occ msion
had given courage to those persons to speak their minds,
and they had done it in a manner most distinctly and most
• respectfully ; but he could not help thinking, that it their
petitions had been looked into, however they might be op.
posed to the extent of the principle, they would not find in
these petitions any such abnegation of the principle of Re-
form itself as would form a safe and reasonable ground for
them to refuse the reading of this Bill the second time.—
(Hear.) His firm belief was, that the reasonable and re-
spectahle part of the country were tired of the discussion—
' ( Hear)—and they desired the settlement of the question.
• He believed that they wished Parliament to amend the re-
presentation, though they did not approve of the measure
now before the House ; but he did riot think that they
wished their Lordships to reject this measure without exa-
mination. Indeed, if their Lordships did so reject the mea-
sure, lie believed they would not have the support of those re-
spectsble persons in the country to whose opinions they had
before listened and were still anxious to listen with attention.
It would have been, he could assure them, much more
agreeable to his wishes to come down to that House and
to take the same course which the Noble Baron behind
him had taken, and to oppose on reasons similar to those
adopted by the Noble Baron, the further progress of that
which he must call a most ex!ensive measure of change.
—( Hear, hear.) But in order to do so, and to act with
any consistency on the same view of the subject as that
adopted by the Noble Baron, be must be of opinion that it
was possible to contest the granting of Reform of any
sincl.—( Hear, hear.) If any one Noble Lord would con.
vince him th at lie could do that, he would give his vote in
defence of time system as it now stood, and against any
change whatever. With the defence which had been
made for the nomination boroughs, he most fully sym-
pathised ; he regretted their loss, but did is Noble Friend
who had made that defence, think that at this time of day
these nomination boroughs could be continued? It the
Noble Baron did think so, he disagreed front many of those
mpaurcthootysmoesepdiatno(t)firethpereNseonbtlempea,sikuerehilehlef
whow,as. weirtewasasas
to destroy the nomination boroughs—that was his very
object yet he opposed this Bill as decidedly as the Noble
lbajerocnt, because he thought it put an end to all check what-
ever on the popular power. In determnining to retain
the nomination boroughs, the Noble Baron was, there-
fore, as much opposed to the plan of the Noble Duke as
he was to the measure of the Noble Earl opposite.—
( Hear.) The Noble Baron and the Noble Earl who had
last spoken had both of them treated this Bill as if the
101. clauses were part of the principle of it. Now
he objected to the 101. clauses as much as they did,
though not, indeed, with respect to the smaller boroughs ;
and there it was that he thought the Noble Baron did not
draw a proper distinction. In the smaller boroughs, he
thought that the 10/. householders would form a respec-
table &ass of voters; but with respect to the "ten
as they were called, that would now be put
roti
mton;-',iel'isa,:tivity in large boroughs, he thought that the
description of them given by the Noble Baron was quite
unanswera; le. The Noble Baron seemed to suppose that
those who voted for the second reading of this Bill, must
be prepared to support it throughout. He denied that
inference altogether. He thought that in voting for its
second reading, he did not pledge himself to anything of
hat sort. Unless he hoped to msdify some of the clauses
in the Bill, lie should not consent to the second reading of
it, although the principle of the Bill, as stated in ite pre-
amble, was precisely that which any Bill of the kind must
contain. Any Bill whatever that only gave repreeenta-
tives to the great towns—that cut off a few of the most
objectionable boroughs, and increased the constituency of
of some of the rest, must contain, as this Bill did, clauses
of enfranchisement, of disfranchisement, and of enlarge-
ment. Under these circumstances, he felt that, in such
a stage of the measure as this, they could not refuse
Ow people of England to read the Bill a ie.

eand time. It became right, therefore, for eve,
man to state his particular views of this question. 1.
eeneideued that the vote for the 'second reading of ti
Bill pledged him no more than what those words in tb
preamble necessarily pledged every one to—namely, the(
some Reform was necsesary. Ile Sholi'd, in the Committe
support everything that he thought would be an improve
anent of the Bill, and that would diminish the danger o
its consequences. In the course he shouted adopt with re
spect to this Bill, he should consider what. were the dan-
gers that might be the consequence of the p.rt he as
,utned ; for he was sorry to say that we lived in times in
which the choice was, not between good and evil, but lee
eween two evils—two practical and undoubted evils. The
Noble Baron himself admitted, that the course he recone
mended was not without its dangers; and be could not
conceal from himself tin mt there were evils in reading this
Bill a second tiffie. He had brought himself to consent
no it, not without difficulty, but on a consideration of the
balance of difficulties; and on that ground, he thought i
would become him, as a Member of the conservative par.
of the L gislature, to consent to to into Committee on the
Bill. He confessed that he had no very sanguine views
of what could be done in that Committee. He did not
feel that it would he possible for them to replace those
much defamed nomination boroughs, nor that balance
which they created as against the excess of the popular
principle ; but he did nut see the impossibility of at least
giving such a weight to property that much plight he done
to redress the balance of the constitution, at least that, as
a Noble Friend of his had said on the first reading of this
Bill, some planks of the vessel might be saved, and she
might float into tranquillity. The thing was possible,
theugh he confessed be was not very sanguine with
respect to it. But, on the other hind, he saw that
the consequences of rejecting this Bill would he the means
of riveting on them the whole Bill—( Hear, hear), or
even worse than this Bill—( Hear, hear, hear)—a
measure at least as strong as this, and carried with a
revolutionary spirit through the country, anti it would be
for them to consider in what state they would then he,
and in what state the monarchy might then be.—(Hear.)
He had brought his mind to see no other issue, and he
could not see how they were to preserve the principles of
the Constitution but by altering the Bill in Coinmittee.
He proposed, therefore, that they should go into Commit-
tee on the Bill, that they should do their best with it
there, and having done that, they might then throw it
out upon the third reading with a much better grace than
they could do at present. He thought, if they did this,
they would do better for the interests of the country than
if they adopted any other course, and the country would
then see a practical refutation of that assertion that their
Lordships did not sympathize with the feelings of the
country, and were determined to refuse all Reform what-
ever. They would show that they were willing to con-
cede touch, and that if they did not concede all, that at
least they did not throw out the Bill till they had tried all
their power to pass it. The people had had their minds
filled with delusion. The commerce of the country was
in a state of stagnation, the revenue was suffering, and
enterprise was checked, and the good humour and cheer-
fulness of the people of England was mucli injured. He
(lid not say that these were reasons for passing the Bill,
but for their going into a consideration of its details with
a view to show that they were willing, as far as the safety
of the Constitution would allow them, to admit of a
practical Reforin. He thought that this question must be
settled by a compromise.—(Hear.) The people of this
country were now in a temper of mind to render that pos-
sible. How lung that would continue he could not say.
That House was actuated by much the same temper. Par-
liament was of that temper, and he saw no reason why any
one of their Lordships (except those, if any such there
were, who though they could take their stand upon ex-
isting institutions, and could refuse all change whatever)
should hesitate to adopt a compromise. He did not pre-
cisely understand en what ground the Noble Duke resisted
a compromise. If he understood the Noble Duke rightly
with respect to this measure, the King's name had been
abused, so that the measure appeared to come before them
as if with tine Royal authority to recommend it ; that it
was brought in by a Government who had pledged them,
selves to Reform, and with the public mind strongly ex-
cited in its favour. The Noble Duke admitted that there
must be some Reform ; if so, it was impossible to see the
reason why he would not avoid multiplying the diffieul
ties of the country by yielding to a compromise. As little
was it possible to see why the Noble Ell opposite ehould
not consent to the same. Even if the name of the King
could be properly used in favour of a measure, it could not
be used with respect to the extent of the measure; and
the duty which the Noble Earl owed his Sovereign could
not prevent him from p tying due and respectful attention
to what were the suggestions of that House ; and as little
could his pledge to the people be affected by his doing so
For himself, he should adhere to what had in the year
1830 been stated by the present bead of the Government.
In that year the Noble Earl stated that he urged an abstract
right, that some asserted that every tax-payer had a right
to vote, but that he denied there was any such right, so
that " in his opinion the rights of the people were, to
have. a good government (Cheers from the Ministerial
Benches), and one calculated to secure their rights and
privileges." • If it was so, then he denied that the limita-
tion of the suffrage was as incompatible with the right-
of the people; or that their rights could be affected by
the mere question of extent. He did nut think that the
Noble Ea: I would deny this doctrine; and therefore be urged
that tine people h Id no more right to become 101. voters
that every man among them of full age aid sound mind bad
to puss: as a vote. The people had a right to good Govern-
ment ; and if Reform was necessary for the peace, tran
quidity, and happiness of the country, it ought to he
granted ; but the people had no right to it till it received
the sanction of the law. Such was not merely his indi
victual opinion, but the opinion of a great and liberal
lawyers recently expressed in a most interesting and valu-
able work. M. Dumont, in course of his residence at Pins,
was in the convention with Mirabeau, and was pre-
sent VI lien the " Declaration of the Rights of Man" was
made. He saw the absurdity of all that galimatius, and
he said, " I felt, in short, the falsehood and the folly of
the whole affair—it was at best a puerile fiction. A
Declaration of Rights, I said to myself, ought to be fol-
lowed, not preceded the final settlement of the new Con-
stitution for rights have no exietence except as the result of
laws.''—(hear, hear.) That observation, in his opinion
applied to this Bill ; the people had not any right to the
specific measures. If they entered into the Committee
with the desire of making the measure as good as they
could, with reference to the circumstances of the country,
they would receive from the country a tribute of gratitude
such as no House of Peers had ever before received. He
haul stated the grounds on which, with much reluctance,
he should give his vote on this question ; and, in doing :et
he thought he gave an answer to the Noble Baron who
objected to it going into the Committee, and that be was
justified in saying, that in the existing state of this country,
when no man could deny that some reform was necessary,
this was not the time for them to refuse to read the Bid
a second time.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of WICKLOW was opposed to the Bill. He
voted against the measure of tine last session because he
abhorred its principle.—(Hear ) He should vote against
the present, because he abhorred its principle;—(Hear,
hear,) and he would add, that he so far agreed with time
Noble Earl behind him, that if he were obliged to choose
between them, lie should choose the Bill of the last session
in preference to this. Had they heard a single thing to
show that its working was likely to be beneficial to the
country, or that such a change in any country would be
productive of the well-being of the country ? There had
been no arguments to show that this measure would be
good, but that evil would result from the rejections of it,
and they had been threatened with civil war, confusion,
Intl loss of property. If such threats were at all well
founded, he thought it more became their duty to adhere
strictly to what their consciences approved. They were
told that the people would have this measure and no other;
at least so the Ministers told them, and so the Minister"
were told by their masters--the Press; but if such was
the statement, who hell command over the Government
they affected to support, it was more than ever time duty of
that House to stem the torrent that was bearing them
away. If there was one objection to the Bill stronger than
another, it was the effect it would wemk in Ireland. He
had not spoken to any individual who looked at the mea-
sure in that point of view, without a strong apprehension.
He called on their Lordships to take a retiospective glance
,t time history of that country. In the civil wars, in the
time of Charles 1., the Protestant patty in Ireland felt the
utmost alarm, and applied to England fur assistance. Kind
words and promises of support were given them; but the au-
thorities here were too much engaged in carrying forward
their own schemes to be able to attend to that country, and
the consequence was, the peace of that country was shaken
toits formations, and was not restored but by the blood-
stained sword of Cromweli and the resettlement of the
kingdom. The second period of danger occurred in the
reign of Charles H., and peace was then only recovered
v the reconquest and resettlement of the kingdom by
I,ilitatn 111. At the time of time Union, the Protestant
interests were told that the only means of maintaining
them was by supporting that Union, and that the two
Churches should be incorporated. The Union was passed;
his measure would go tar towards dissolving it. The
Raman Catholic was in the abstract as good a subject as
'he Protestant; but his religion was a symbol of party
lAA-epee, and the feelings of that difference were flow as
'unmated as in any part of their history. The Catholic,

xould acquire by this measure a preponderance and f rev
that the Protestants could not counteract, and the harrmehs
which were now represented by Protestants would in fu_
lure be thrown open to the Catholic intetest end to popol re
demagogues, who would acquire such force, that it would
he impossible for any Government to k•-ep the two coun-
tries together. Did those in that House w o weir in fa-
vour of Reform feel willing to purchase it at the price oi.
the repeal of the Union ? If such Noble Lords theie
ivere, lie recommeneed them to study that part of the
Irish h•story when, in tt:e year 1782, a weak Govern-
ment broke the chains which had hitherto tiounit the Ca•
tholics to the State, by declaring the hish Parliament a
tree body. The words that on that ()evasion were used in
another pl ice he should now quote. and they were not the less
true for the tinsel garb of oratory in which they were ut-
iered Infituated men, look bemre you leap—you are
rushing blindfold upon a gulf—you are arraying a nation
against you—a general election will take place in Novem-
ber—Reform will throw your close boroughs over—you
put the poison- d chalice to your dips---it is your turn
t .is Session, it will be ours next " There was no Go-
vernment better acquainted with the feelings and disposi-
tion of his party than he who uttered these words. if
this Bill shou'd pass, it required no prople tic spirit to
foretel that the fall of this country in the scale of nations
must be the consequence. And in that spirit he was de-
termined to vote again•t this Bill, as he had done against
that other measure which led to it.—(Cheers.)
Lord GkGE said, that in October their Lordships
might have rejected the Bill, but that they could not safely
da so at present; and, had they the temerity to do so, the
(oily result would be, the loss of those amendments which
they might now hope to introduce in the Committee. re
maintained that such a course wouk b! ridiculous. It it
were a question of mere violence to themselves, they would
despise it as they had done before. But to rush into the
midst of an exasperated people, would be something bor-
dering on insanity. While posts yet ex steel, he would
have said, " defend them to the last ;" but to resist when
there was no linger means of defence, was to court one's
own destruction.

The Marquess of LONDONDERRY next spctice, but
was not for some time distinctly audible in the ga!lery,
This Bill was founded upon the same vieieus princiitAe
with the former. On the preceding cceasion, the Noble
Premier had declared that he would stand or fail by the
great principle of the Ell ; these he untierstood to be
three—enfranchising, disfranchising, and qualification.
Was it not then absurd, after that declaration trenching
these principles, to suppose that any good could be effected
in Committee? Nothing could be snore flimsy than titer
arguments advanced to induce Noble Lords to agree to
the second reading, with the hope of being able to amend
it in Committee. The Noble Earl (of Haddington we
believe) had stated that he came forward e.ost reluctantly
upon this occasion to act in opposition to the opinions he
had previously expressed. The Noble Earl, t. o, denied
that there had been any re-action in public opinien ; he
would furnish him with a criterion whereby the truth of
that re-action might be ascertained. There had been se-
veral elections lately—at Cambridgeshire, Dorsetsbire,
Forlarshire, Dublin, Leominster, Carmartbenshire, and
other places, and only three Reformers had been returned
in conjunction with ten Anti-Reformers. He regretted
exceedingly that, with these facts before them, any Noble
Lords should be led to desert their former opinions. He
could not bring his mind to think how the Noble Earl
could get rid of the declarations which be had formerly
made. [Here the Noble Marquess read a great number of
extracts from the speech made by a Noble Earl in the course
of the debate upon the second reading of the for mer Reform
Bill. We are inclined to believe the speech alluded to was
that of Lord Harrowby.l He continued to say : What were
the results of the introduction of this Bill? Ireland was in a
state bordering on open rebellion—Jamaica was in actual
rebellion—and all our foreign relations were in a state of
positive distraction. Ali these evils he hesitated not to
d tclare had resulted from the conduct of the Noble Ear'.
He would now beg to trouble their Lordships with an o-
tract from the speech of Charles James Fox, which he
was delighted to discover, and felt happy in bringing for-
ward in support of opinions which be had himself always
upheld. Mr. Fox said—" Sir—it will possibly appear
strange that a representative of the people should not deem
it more meritorious to comply with the wishes of his con-
stituents, than to counteract them ; and it may possibly he
urged, that it is his duty, upon all oec tsion-, to act in
conformity to those wishes, however repugnant they may
be to the sense of his own conviction. Sir, I will not
differ with the Honourable Gentleman shout the idea he
annexes to his term of c the people; ' I will, for argument
s ake, allow that nine-tenths of the people are at this mo-
ment in opposition to Government. But I shall at the
seine time insist that we have higher obligations to justice
than to our constituents ; we are chosen the delegates of
the British electors for salutary, not for pernicious pur-
poses ; to guard, not to invade the Constitution ; to keep
the privileges of the very freemen we represent as much
within their proper limits as to control any unwarrantable
exertion of the Royal authority. We are bound to pro-
mote their true interests in preference to the dearest de-
sires of their hearts, and the Constitution makes us the stile
arbiters of those interests, notwitteatandug the imaginary
infallibility of the people. To show, Sir, the propriety
of this reasoning, let us suppose that the people, instead
of this mixed monarchy, which we celebrate as equally
the pride and envy of the universe, should instruct us,
their representatives, to introduce a dernoet aticel corm of
Government ; should we act as good subjects to our King,
or as faithful guardians to our couutry, if we complied
with so dangerous an advice? We have sworn to main-
tain this Constitution in its present :orin—to maintain the
privileges of Parliament as a necessary part of that Con-
stitution, and neither to encroach uprn the legit, jurisdic-
tion of the Peers, nor the just prerogatives of the Sove-
reign. Shall we, then, do what. we are sensible is wrong,
itecause the people desire it? Shall we sacrifice our t ea-
sen, our honour, and our conscience, for fear of incurring
the popular resentment, and whit • we are appointed to
watch time Ilespertan fruit of liberty wirti a dragon's eye,
tre ourselves the only slaves of the iv:Pile community ?
Perhaps the Hon. Gentleman wid 'ell me, that nothing
tut the soul of absurdity' could suspect the people of
a design against their own hapriness. Sir, I do not
soap, ct the people of any such design, hut I suspect their
opacity to judge of their true happiness. I know
ey are generally credulous, and eenerel y unto-
formed ; captivated by appearances, while they neglect
time most important essentials, and always ridicu-
tously ready to believe that those men who have
the greatest reason, from their ext. naive property, to
be anxious for the public safety, are always cell-
caving mea•urea fur the oppression of their t,wn pos-
terity. Sir, if I misrepeesent the people, whence
spring those eternal terrors of being ruined, in the
tuidst of the most unbounded prosperity ? Have nut we
tottered, if popular clamour must be cr diced, upon the
verge of ruin, since time first moment of our existence as
a nation ? Indeed, at the Revolution, patriotism itself
ecknowledees we were saved ; ye' from that period let us
only read the works of our greatest politicians, anti we
shall Sod ourselves utterly undone. Even our glorious
Deliverer was scarcely seated upon the Throne, when the
grateful people, whose liberties he had testored, began to
consider him as an enemy to the Constitution. In every
succeeding reign we were destroyed, an at this moment,
while exulting in all the pride of a felicity never known to
our ancestors, we are planted in the deepest abyss of de-

struction."
Lord HOLLAND—In 71 ?

The Marquess of LONDONDERRY replied—Yes, in
71. He then proceeded to remark that the Noble Baron
(Wharncliffe) had stated that the day on which he had
nioved the rejection of the Reform Bill was the proudest
day of his life; he hoped and trusted thet he could not
now depart from his consis'ency. It had been said
abroad that Noble Lords were induced to support the se-
cond reading of the Bill in consequence of their knowing
that the Noble Earl at the head of the Government was
intrusted with authority to take measures to secure the
carrying of the Bill through their Lordships' House. No-
thing could be more unconstitutional, even at this time,
than the assertion on the part of the Noble Earl that he
nod the authority in his hands to carry the measure. Tire
reasons advanced for going into Committee on this Bill were
ridiculously flimsy. They were not the true reasons. There
':vas something lurking behind. Their Lordships Ind
a right to know what they were; if, in their conferences
with the Noble Earl, the Noble Lords had heard good
;rounds stated in private to induce them to depart from
their former views, their Lordships ought to know them.
He was not to he deterred from openly declaring this—
every Peer had a right to speak out. They were now,
then, struggling for God and their country—stiuggdng
about a matter of no less consequence than a change in the
Constitution. When the thing was so openly stated abroad,
re felt himself justified in stating it as openly there. If
the Noble Earl had used this influence in his private con-
fei ences with Noble Lords, it ought to produce his im peach-
irn:nt. They might talk of using the King's name at
rlections—that was bad enough—but when ti:e Prime
Minister used the paramount influence of the Roy al name
in his Cabinet, be was deeply responsible and deeply guilt).
—(Cheers.) These were his sentiments, and he would
.;ive his most decided and uncompromisiog dissent from
drat unfortunate tneasure.—(Cheer s.)
A NOBLE LORD from the cross-benches moved,
" That the Debate be Adjourned to to •morrow."

Ttir tuution Irt,te agreed to, cud their Lordship,
)urnod at a Quarter-past Twelve,