The Sun.
London, England, 1866-04-28 00:00:00

and I will ask every man to consider whether what has
been said can be proved ? During the last 30 years 28
bills had been introduced into this house, the only object
of which was to ameliorate the condition of the people, to
reduce the hours of labour, and to secure for them the pay-
ments of their wages in the current coin of the realm ; to
save them from torture and oppression in the mine and the
colliery ; to extend to all engaged in the ingenious arts, in
lace-work and in the bleaching ground the successful ame-
lioration introduced into factories. Sir, those measures
were passed with much difficulty ; never was an opposi-
tion exercised against:a measure stronger, more resolute, or
more pitiless than that which was organised against
those to which I have referred. (Hear, hear). Who pro-
posed them ? There was not one of those measures that
was not proposed by the gentlemen who usually sit
upon these benches. (Cheers). Not one of those mea-
sures but was passed by the united energies of the Tory
party. (Cheers). And who opposed them ? (Hear). The
Liberal Government of the day invariably. (Cheers.) But
they were opposed mainly and chiefly by the influence of
one individual especially, who offered, as he does on all oc-
casions when he opposes anything, an opposition that is
formidable because it is able-who throws all his energy
and eloquence into the opposition to those claims, and who
for a time retarded their advancement ; but notwithstand-
ing his power of organisation- notwithstanding his energy
and eloquence-he was ultimately defeated, and that was
the hon. member for Birmingham. (Loud cheers.) Shall
I be told that these are merely the schemes of dreamy
philanthropists- that they are part of the reaming huma-
nitarianism that has been referred to in this house. I ap-
peal to the last 30 years. The hon. member for Westmin-
ster says we know nothing of the working classes, and the
hon.
a member formonopoly
Lambeth,
of in his freakish speech-(a laugh)
claimed
that knowledge-(cheers)-but
all I know is that years ago when this struggle took place
ed a
my home was full day after day, and year after year of
these men. (Hear.) They raised a large fund in the manu-
facturing districts in order to pay for deputations to be
constantly in the metropolis, and constantly to be commu-
nicating with members of Parliament ; they communicated
with me, and they were always in my house. I made their
acquaintance to this degree, that when a great calamity
occurred a few years ago they wrote to me to recall their
names to my recollection. I think, then, I know them-1
think my noble friend near me, to whom they are more
deeply indebted than myself, knows something of the work-
ing classes. (Cheers.) I remember when we passed through
the lobby of the old house, which many of you will remem-
ber, there they were sometimes with their wives and chil-
dren, and they would cling to you as you entered the House
1 of Commons. (Cheers.) I say they were not measures of a
pseudo-philanthropy-these men were persons in earnest;
they felt their interests, their future happiness, and their
prosperity depended on the success of those measures, they
felt an interest in them with a feeling which, perhaps, we
cannot experience on any subject. They felt their all was
at stake
in these measures, and that we were their only
friends, but they feared the opposition of those who are
now the friends of the working classes. (Loud cheers.) Well,
sir, I hope I was justified in vindicating the great party
on this side of the house from those elaborateattacks made
to the people of England by one who is the representative
of the new opinions, who influences the policy of the Go-
vernment, whose opinions I confess in themselves I do not
believe the people of England would rally round. liis elo-
quence is unrivalled, he possesses great energy and rare
ability, and he places before the people of this country in
commanding language his own views, but they are to my
mind opposed to the interests and character of the English
people. (Loud cheers.) I believe that English and not Ame-
rican principles will predominate in this country (cheers),
but I confess there may be some danger. (Hear, hear.)
There is at least an excellence in the hon.gentleman which
all must acknowledge, and that is his candour. He never
conceals his opinions. He speaks with a frankness which
we do not find in the measures of Government. (Cheers.)
We know what he wants and what he intends to do, and
though we might think it most dangerous, we at least
have the opportunity of guarding against its evil. (Cheers.)
But where I think there is peril is here. The principles of
the hon. member for Birmingham are avowed-they are
dangerous, and consequently they may be evil, but we
may guard against them ; but the great and extreme
danger is this, that the hon. member for Birmingham has,
to use a phrase borrowed from one of our noblest pasttimes,
a confederate, and that confederate sits upon the Treasury
bench. (Loud cries of "No, no.") Now, sir, I venture to
put before the house to-night the principles upon which
Parliamentary Before), if it is to proceed, ought to pro-
ceed, viz., on English and not on American principles.
(Loud cheers.) It ought to proceed on this ground, that
we aro the House of Commons and not the house of the
people-(cheers) - that we represent a great political order
in the State and not an indiscriminate multitude-(hear,
hear)-and that in settling what share the working classes
are to have in the State-which I do not begrudge them
-we ought to act in the spirit of the Constitution, and
form that estimate in its spirit. (Hear, hear.) The
hon. member for Birmingham candidly takes the opposite
view, but the right hon. gentleman tho Chancellor of the
Exchequer goes down to Liverpool-the leader of this
house-the councillor of the Government-and what does
he do ? (Hear, hear.) Why, he professes American prin-
ciples in the widest sense. (Cheers, And cries of " No.")
No ! I would make no statement in this house that 1 am
not prepared to substantiate. (Cheers.) I have expressed
pretty clearly my views of the English constitution, and I
confidently assert that they are correct. (Cheers.) I say
the right hon. gentleman, following the example, as ho
always does, of the member for Birmingham-(cheers, and
cries of "No, no")-went on a tour of agitation, and, I say,
he expounded his policy founded on American and not on
English principles, and I am here prepared to prove it.
(Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman went to a well
organised meeting, and of course he well considered what
he had to say. He made some observations on the general
policy of the Government, and he then referred to the real
business of the session. He said the Government had
brought forward a Reform Bill which was a very moderate
measure, as it would only introduce 400,000 additional
voters to the constituencies. (Hear.) Well there might be
very good reasons for it, only we have not argued the
point-(hear)--but we shall do it in committee, if the bill
getsthere. (Laughter and cheers.) If, however, your views
of the English constitution are the same as inine, that num-
ber is a great addition to the Estate of the Commons, and
the right hon. gentleman said, "We brought in a very
moderate measure of reform-(Ministerial cheers and coun-
ter cheers)-and we propose only by this bill to add4oo,ooo
to the franchise ; and be treats with great obloquy and
contempt all who oppose the bill and support the amend-
ment. (Hear, hear.) Notwithstanding, says the right
honourable gentleman, the moderation of our measure,
there were still, he reminded his audience, four and a half
millions who are still excluded-" living, breathing men,
citizens like ourselves, who pay taxes, and who, like
ourselves, are bound by every civil duty, and interested
in the peace and prosperity of the country." (Hear,
hear, and cheers.) That is all very well. But the
object of discussion is to elicit truth. I do not object to his
entertaining American principles, but let us clearly under-
stand-(oh, oh, laughter, and cheers)-what is the inter-
pretation that is to be put upon his speech. I say that
every man of candour must say there is but one interpre-
tation that can be put upon it, viz., that the 4,500,000 have
a right to become constituents and exercise the franchise,
although it is prudent and practical in the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, as a man in office, to propose drat 400,000
only shall now be brought within the pale of the con-
stitution. (Hear, and cheers.) By that line of policy you
show that you are not in favour of the English constitu-
tion, but that you are introducing American principles.
There can be no other interpretation put upon the lan-
guage of the hon. gentleman. If there was any doubt it
can remain no longer when we rememt er the speech which
he made a year and a half ago, when he startled all parties
and agitated the whole country by placing the foundation
of the suffrage on the rights of man. (Cheers.) The right
hon. gentleman published that speech, with an explana-
tory preface, which nobody understood. (Laughter.) But
there was no mistake on the part of the right hon. gentle-
man when he made that speech. He published his preface
to
please his colleagues, but he never • • •
changed his opinions.
And in Liverpool, on a recent occasion-not speaking in
heat, but well considering what he Said--in order to catch
votes, he expressed an opinion that the suffrage
moral right, and ought to be so considered - and he
was a
he said,
speaking of the improved condition of the minds of the
community, "It is that changed and that improved,
constantly increasing capacity, which constitjroved, and
fitness, but, in a moral :ense, constitutes a right e's not
only
' In what
sense can it exist but as a moral right ? That mpl etely
vindicates the statement that I have made. (Locuudche cheers.)
I have here the words'of one of the wisestmen that
ever
in this house. Though not politically connected with him
I remember spontaneously offering my tribute to his cha-
racter and services. These are the words of Sir George
Lewis-" You may talk of the rudeness of monarchical' go-
vernment, but I defy you to point out anything in mo-
narchy so anomalous as counting votes, instead of weighing
them, as the making decisions depend not upon knowledge,
ability, experience, or fitness of the judge, but upon num-
bers." (Hear, hear.) I think Sir G. Lewis was a great
loss to the country-(hear, hear)-a great loss to the House
of Commons-(hear, hear)-but the greatest loss to gentle-
men opposite. (Cheers.) Sir G. Lewisf
man. would
Ho wouldnothave
built up the constituency on the rights of
not have entrusted the destinies of the country to the
judgment of a numerical majority --(cheers)-he would not
have counselled the Whig party to reconstruct our insti-
tutions on an American model, or to profit in time from
the wisdom of the children of their loins. (Cheers.) It is
because I wish to avert from this country such calamities
and disasters that I shall vote for the amendment. (The
right Iton, gentleman
lasted for s
The
and was
°me minutes,)
CHANCELLOR
party. lie said Mr. S amid loud cheers, which
sat down
of the EXCHEQUER then rose,
received with enthusiastic
cheers by the Liberal
a clear declaration .fr Speaker, at last, sir, we have obtained
hear) -and
we
know
now
an authoritative source-(hear,
5;000,000 adult males. wunthtat, by a bill in a country with
benches and cheers from the
eeruption from the Opposition
Imitted to proceed ? Liberals.)(Ministeriach
now that the bill, which, in a count
males, proposes to add to a limited
of the middle clue and 200,00.0 of the Workang, class ' • is, In .