The Sun.
London, England, 1832-04-12 00:00:00

/7 - , •
' -
- ....
41r////
~,,',"'•
-1)
.
:v.ki., - - ja, •
2-Mi t. 2 •••4?-4 9:'
t /41 "
.
•'— • -. i 4.' .. 4 ~.,. .
~,,,,,,
,o, , .ck i 4--
.5
.---7: •'-. - 9 ' --- --, !,,
...
~
1 .. •. , '''.!S&. ..,r 4: ' -tf,,,\, . ~)i,.41,4440. ~ _
~,,_,....
...,
lt .; 4r, --:..-t, „It,. i •:: ___. .‘.., .•÷.--...,..... ;,, .....t., . ‘ oz.. .
~. ~ i r 'Le g, • ;;;, 00.-
~,, a
n c,. L ~ .
.T:7; 1,, ,-- ,• ' ,-- -.' ...le. ,ep,„ --Ls - •cek 6r, ~,,.
./J -
--_-_ •., .. , • w,.. ',iv. .4i v. _ Al;,, :„ 1 ii, - 4+i,
~4C' ••\ ".._ t• 14--.'-'
-.11, ...: - if.----'----4Z;;;), - ft, 41! .'• INI 0 ----!_fi11.,,,2
_ - •
lihaiireiromiu.Sp.
8-

Ihe did not think it necessary, in order to give that represen-
itation to the country, to sweep away the rested franchise
rights of freemen which had been the result of honest
industry, or the price of laudable exertions, and
which were esteemed by those who paseeesed them
as highly "as many of the Peers around him
valued their titles. There were three principles
embodied in this measure, to all of which he had most
decided objections. The first was that of enfranchisement;
the second, that of disfranchisement; anti the third, the
new qualifications, which would establish a new system of
constituency throughout the country.—(He ‘r.) He had
no ofjection, as he said before, to the enfranchisement
of such places as Bit mingham, Manchester, Leeds, Shef-
field, &c., but he could not give his sanction to the
principle of extensive measures of enfranchisement
which thts Bill involved. He had already stated his opinion
as to the disfranchisement clause ; the third principle,
namely, the low qualification, was highly objectionable. He did
maintain that the 101. enfranchising clause would go, in
great towns especially, to establish a constituency, if
not of the lowest description, made up of members of those
political unions which had so much disgraced the country.
Besides, he was convinced that the clause, as it stood, was
more dangerous than it appeared under the former Bill.
There were other parts of the Bill to a hich he had objec •
Lions ; but those to which he had just now adverted
were the principal and the fearful ones. He had stated
that he was fully prepared to give representation
to the great manufacturing interests of the country.
—(Hear, hear.) net declaration he made honestly
for he possessed no political influence whatever over any
human being, and he left every man to take that line of
politics he thought proper to pursue ;.hut lie felt convinced
if the present measure passed, the power of the Crown
must be of short duration. 'The present measure
took away all vested rights, and which he considered
their Lordships ought to hold most sacred. He would
allow the visions of sight to darter in different men, that
one mig t see a spectre., but not another ; hut he thought
it requited no spectre to convince every thinking man
that the pieeent Bill would lead to the must ruinous con-
sequences. lie could see no difference in its principles from
ttoet which had been introduced last Session. Indeed, he
thought that some of the vicious parts of the Bill,
the democraticel ports of it, had been extended. Noble
Lords who addressed their Lordships from the other side of
the House had seated that it was necessat y ti, yield to pubic
opinion. In what situation, he would ask, would the
House be placed if it was to listen to every public
clamour? The legislature 6f one of the greatest
countries in the world would be placed in jeopardy.
He could not be led to believe that leis Sovereign,
having a due regard to the oath he had taken, would
resort to those extraordinary means, or would ex •
erchee his high prerogative, for the purpose of
carrying this Bill, which had been sugeested. He
would be the last man in the world who would consent
to be a slave in the country, but would look forward
to times when the feelings and good sense of the people
would enable him to sustain his rights. No man in
the kingdom was prepared to go to a fuller extent
than he was, in the investigation of questions
of this nature, but he could see no good that
would result from allowing this Bill to go into
Committee. If the present Constitution of the country
had enabled England to weather all the storms that had
beat against her, where was the great necessity of
making any alteration especially an alteration so exten-
sive as the one proposed by the Bill of the Noble Lord?
He would never sanction Any principle that meditated
so great a change in the Constitution of the Country, There
were four parties who were interested in this question ; first
the constitutional party, who seeing the effects of the pre-
sent state of the nation us ished to extend certain privileges,
and give to great commercial towns representation, but
in giving that they did not wish to impair the con-
stitution of the country as it at present existed.
Another party were the Roman Catholics of the count. y,
who saw that it would be the means of giving them con-
siderable advantages and political power. The third party
was the revolutionary party, and the fourth was the Whigs.
In conclusion, the Noble Earl implored their Lordships to
recollect that on their votes depended the interest of the
country at large, and the maintaining unriolated
that sacred Constitution under which it had
so long flourished. He earnestly implored their
Lordships to discharge their duties honestly, faithfully,
and fearlessly; arra he trusted their Lordships, by their
votes that night would establish the aristocracy of
England on that firm foundation on which it had always
stood. He felt proud to be one of that Aristocracy, and
as such, he hoped awl trusted their Lordships would re-
ject the Bill.

think they would be permitted to do so? No, they
I would have to stand by and see revolution take it-
, course. He would not repeat the thrice-told
story of the French Revolution, but would call on their
Lordships to look to the history of their own country.
he the reign of Charles the First, the House passed
a triennial Bill; the King—then a patriotic King—
a citizen King—agreed to the measure. What tol
lowed ? Very soon afterwards Ministers were removed,
the powers of the Bishops were detroyed, a meeting was
called to shorten Parliaments still further : they were shorten-
ed, and very soon afterwards the Peers lost their influence en-
tirely. so it would he in the present instance, if this
h-mocratic Bill passed into law. If this Bill were passed,
the monarchy would be placed in the hands of the domestic
tyrant—in the hands of the Puritan, or in some individual
or individuals, who may have supposed themselves calcu
Let d to wield power. Did the Noble Earl at the head
of his Majesty's Government think he would be able to
stand the storm, or be competent to guide the whirl-
wind ? Not he. He was much too honourable—too
pene'rating to entertain any such notion. He would
be told that he had been made use of, that his high
wind had been called into service until the ends
of certain individuals had been accomplished, and that
no longer would his services be required. Did
he not feel even now that in the bark, he W 144 touching
ground, that the waters were running front under him?
If this turned out to be the case, and if this Bill passed,
the Noble Earl would find that he would net be the only
person, as he had hoped, on whom the effects of theevil would
fad, but the whole of their Lordships would be swamped.
But the Noble Lord to whom he first addressed himself
thought that this Bill was more fivourable in its principle
than the last; but he satild like to know in what the Bill
now before them differed from that of 1 tst year. If he were
not mistaken, the principle of the Bill of last year was to en-
franchise without necessity, and disfranshise without crime.
That the Bill now before them was more democratical than
the lest, had been allowed by all who were the best judges
upon the suiiject. Would not counties be swamped by
the voters of the large manufacturing towns ?
Earl GREY—No.

The Duke of BUCKINGHAM—No ! It was well
then that the people of England were set right upon
that point; but lie supposed that if they voted for
the county they would cease to vote for the town.

Earl GREY—You tad better read the Bill.
The Duke of BUCKING HAN! said, that he
reinembered a Noble Earl stating on a former occa-
sion, that not one in ten thousand who asked for the
Bill would read it, and that that one would not under-
stand it. Such being the case, it ought net to :he
any matter of surprise that he had nvt been able
to comprehend it. With respect to nomination boroughs,
it appealed that the Noble Lord had now for the first
time found out they ought to be abolished. Now he (the
Duke of Buckingham) maintained that the tight of voting
might be given up or might be bestowed, but could not
be taken away. He had no hesitation in saying
that he possessed influence in what is called a no-
mination borough. He held that influence by law,
and to the law he was ready to restore it. Why
was it that these boroughs were objected to ?
not because of the individuals who held the right of
voting there, but because they were under the in-
fluence of persons against whom the public feel-
ing of the country had been excited. He was ready
to give up that influence, but he contended that as the
voters had committed no offence, they ought not to
be disfranchised.--( Hear, hear.) They had voted, as
their (rends wished them—(Hear)—but ought they on
that account to be visited with &penalty ? The nomination
borough to which he alluded was composed of per-
sons of the poorest class, who had never known
probably what it was to have five guineas to-
gether in their lives. Twice, however, since he had
been connected with that borough have these hard-
working and industrioue men, who gain their liveli-
hood upon the high seas, been attempted to be bribed,
and that by a Reformer. Thousands were offered them.
Did they accept the bribe? No, they rejected it with
scorn, and came to his agent to state what had ti_en
place. He gave them his thanks for their honesty and
kindness to him, but they obtained nothing more,
nothing in the shape of a bribe : was it right that
such men as these should be visited with punishment.
It could not be, and the object of the measure he should
bring in, if the House allowed him an opportunity,
would be to save such men their franchise. What
right had the Crown voters, from Limehouse or
Whitehall, from St. Giles's or Marylebone, to held up
their heads, and " thank God they were not like
unto these publicans?' The Noble Earl had said, that
because he (the Duke of Buckingham) proposed to join
others with those men in their right of voting,
that therefore they were disfranchised. Now he would
ask if Aylesbury, if Cricklade, if Shoreham were
disfranchised ?—(Hear, hear, bear.) Certainly they
were not.—(Hear.) Certain Voters of those places
had committed crimes, but not one even of those had been
disfranchised, and all that was done was to infuse
fresh and pure blood among them, in order to prevent a
recurrence of what was before objected to. His object was,
in the same manner in the Bill he meant to bring for-
ward, to preserve these men their franchise. Some of
their Lordships might think that such a Bill would
more properly originate in the House of Commons.
He thought it a matter of no consequence where
it originated ; but if any of their Lordships
felt any material objection on that ground, he had no hesi-
tation to say he would embody his Bill in a resolution.—
The Noble Duke proceeded to show by a comparative
statement of the population, assessed taxes, and regis-
tered tonnage and ten-pound houses, great injustice
would be done to the boroughs which were seve-
rally enumerated in schedules A and B. Toe Noble
Duke il:ustr rted this particularly by the cases of Dart.
mouth and Helstone. How were these boroughs made out?
They were made out, it appeared, by Commissioners
appointed by the Noble Lord on the Woolsack, and
paid by the Treasury. The Noble Lord en the
Word/lack had done much in order to increase
his patronage. The Bankruptcy Bill, for example,
had considerably extended it. But he trusted an op-
portunity would not be given for another increase
to it, by the appointment of the Commissioners
under this Bill. He complained of the manner
in which these Commissioners had acted with
respect to these boroughs. They went round all these
boroughs, and applied not their principle to the borough,
but the borough to their principle. When the borough
was too small to suit their opinion, they enlarged it. When
too large, they detracted tram it. The franchise was given by
this Bill to 10/. householders ; but how was this value to
be ascertained? The Noble Earl at the bead of Go-
vernment knew very little of the difficulty of assessing
the value of a single house. A cherry tree added to the
value. And the Comonasewners would be obliged to count
all the apple-trees. The atorneys and solicitors would eter-
nally be making Inquiries and increasing the expense, which
was to be p aid by the treasury, and perpetual canvasses would
thus be going on in every part of England. Yet all thin
was recommended by a system as decreasing expense. No
question was to be asked of the voter when he came

The Duke of BUCKINGHAM said, that he had heard
with great regret, and with no small feeling of surprise,
language in defence of the votes they meant to give on
the present debates, by the three Noble Lords, whose example
he was so proud to follow in the discussions on the former
Bill. These Noble Lords led him, and those who acted
with him upon that occasion, to victory; but he re-
gretted to ind them now on the opposite side
in the contest. Those Noble Lords had each made
unanswered and unanswerable speeches ; but they had
been now put to the unpleasant necessity of answer-
ing those speeches themselves. He and several other
Noble Lords were consequently left to fight the battle
themselves, but he hoped that they should again
pursue the battle to victory. Those Noble Lords
had, it seemed, retired hick, " scared at the sound
themselves had made." They said that they were not
deserters, forsooth, because they bad not enlisted, but
they had left that side of the House to fight on
the other side. He hoped they would not shortly find
themselves in the same situation in which other leaders had
been placed, vie. shot down by their own soldiers. One
Noble Lord, who was inclined to be facetious, said he had
no objection to fight on his (the Duke of Buckingham's,
side, provided that the right wing of the army was
not commanded by the High Bailiff of Old Slrum,
and the left by the Mayor of Gatton. The Noble Lord
talked of flags, but he should recollect that there was a
flag already in the field—he alluded to the white flag of
Birmingham—and of all the flags that could be made, it they
were as numerous as those that Major Dalgetty had fought
under, the flag of Mr. Attwood was the one he would se-
lect. A Noble Earl bad stated that his objections were to
the principle of the last Bill ; but there was not an argu-
ment which he bad used which should not have induced him
also to vote against the present Bill. If they voted against
the last Bill, what reason had they for not doing
the same now? They had voted against the Bill
of last year because it was too much of a democratic ten-
dency, and consequently it was thrown out. Upon that
occasion, the Noble Earl opposite (Grey) then
said that he would produce a Bill of similar
efficacy, or he would not remain in the King's Councils.
lie had produced a similar Bill, and the question now was,
whether the consistency of their Lordships' House should
he maintained or not. What was the difference between
the principles of the former Bill and of the present one ?
Was it less democratical ? The po ideal unions had declared
that it was more democratical, and therefore they were
satisfied with it. The Noble Earl had told them last year
that the Bill was called for by the people ; but who called
for it now? Were they seeking to yield to the cla-
mour of the people ? The Noble Earl had called on their
Lordships not to submit to intimidation. He (the Duke
of Buckingham) asked the Noble Earl to abide him-
self by that call ; but if he was so blind to the interests
of the country, so lull of personal ambition, he implored
their Lordships not to consent to give the Bill a second read-
ing. He suppos-d there had been no compromise with the
Noble Earl at the head of his Majesty's Government,
—( Hear, hear.)—and Noble Lords, to bring forward
this Bill in its present shape. Their characters exempted
them from that supposition—but had there been
no softening down of the people ?—and had they succeeded
in doing away the democratic principles of the mea-
sure? If they had not, with what face could they
venture to come forward with the measure again? It seemed
that some Noble Lords had been admitted behind the
,cones in this transaction, and saw the incanta-
tion of Macbeth who broke in on the witches. They
had seen the spell formed—they siw the incantation
formed—and what then ? Why then, they told their
Lordships to take the venom out of the Bill, and
• asked them to go into Committee for the purpose
of doing that. Why, did Noble Lords think they would
be allowed to extract the venom out of this Bill in
Committee ? could they think they would be able, or
be permitted to remove the poison from a Bill which
contained nothing but venom ?—(Loud cheering.)
Did they think they would ever be allowed to make
any thing eatables healthy meal—a good dish of
soup—out of that which was altogether unclean ?
['heir Lordships were asked then to go into Com-
nutty, to so the Bin right, sat suit *WY

to the poll, as to his being the individual described,
and an appeal was only to be made to a Committee
of the House of Commons, and this ostensibly was to di-
minish expense ! The next point was in relition to the
Metropolitan Members. They had the segments of
London, and the Members to be supplied to these
segments were to represent the interests of England! What,
London representing England? They were to to k for
purity of representation to the purlieus of Saffron-hill, to
tne shads of Tower-hill, to the classic language ot Bil-
lingsgate, and the salubrity of Maryleboue Tkey
had heard much of England's glory and Westmins-
ter's pride, but every beggar they met with in
the metropolis was to form a part of the future

constituency. He would refer fur a few moments to
the speech made by a Noble Lord (Shrewsbury) last
night in favour of the Bill, which was so unfortunate,
fick e, and dreadful. He hardly knew how to take
notice of that Noble Lord's speech. He certainly had
spoken in the terms which were not fit to be used to any
Gentleman in the House of Commons, or any Peer of
Parliament.—(Hear.) In the name of God, what
bigoted casuist could have induced him to support the
measure in the -maoner he did ? He called on their
Lordships to vote for the Bill, because their Constitution
wasgood for nothing, and commerce had been ruined. He
declared that the House of Commons ought to be reformed,
and that this was a ground upon which the Bill should
go to d second reading. He said that the country
Right Reverend
been governed by a foul oligarchy, and that it ought
to be destroyed. He they appealed to the
80124, led be teW awe tint they bed ben the formes

.;~;..

( PRICE 7D )

rapine and plunder. That was the ground on which e
Catholic Nobleman called on Protestant Peers to support
this Bill. If he had been treated in the same manner,
what would he have said ? Would be have been where
he now sat, if they had told him "you are a Catholic,'
Ind we don't believe you ; profess yourself ready to make
oaths, but we know you mean to break them ; you profess
yourself ready to support the revenues of the Pro-
eestant Church, but we know you mean to destroy them ?"
Where would have been the end of the thunders
fulminating against him ? Such language might
do very well to provoke an auto da fe at Lisbon,
or to re-kindle the flames of Smithfield, but those
who had given him such advice, had given what
was unworthy of a Christisa man or an English states-
man. Yet these were the grounds on which the Right Rev,
Bench were called on to support this Bill. But he would leave
the Noble Earl to his own conscience, and to the feel-
ings which the couutry would entertain of a cause
that was defended by such arguments.—(Hear, hear.)
They were proud of those who had earned their coronets
by carrying the banner of England to victory.
They were prond of those who had raised them-
selves from the honourable situation of English mer-
chants, and of those who had raised themselves to twee
in that House by their proficency in the fine arts. Could
the Noble Earl wish for a more democratic aristocracy ?
Then why should the House be Reformed ? Where was
the nee-ssity of it? It was not the constitution
that required to be remedied ; bet it was the
revolutionary character of the sentiments of the
people. He would conclude by hoping this Bill
would meet with a Red Sea in that House, and he buried
for ever, so that it might no longer fright the isle from its
propriety.—(Much cheering from the Oppsition.)
The Earl of SHREWSBURY exp'ained.
The Earl of RADNOR :LA Lord TETNHAM rose together.
The cries for Lord Raduor beiug more prominent, Lord
Teynhaua gave wry.
The Earl of RADNOR said that he was anxicus to say
a few words upon the observations that fell from the Noble
Deice in relation to the speech of the Noble Earl near him
(Shrewsbury). His duty had been much lessened by the
explanation made by the Noble Earl. Al. he would say,
therefore, was, that he certainly understood the Noble
Earl to say in his former speech that which he het
said to-night in his explanation._(Cries of Hear, hear.)
He did not understand him to charge the Bishops with
tyranny and spoliation, but that they bad uniformly sup-
ported Governments who had deserved that character.
Much of the debate which had already taken place
bed given him great pleasure, for all the Noble
Lords who were against the second reading of t' e
Bill seemed to have Intel a hankering after the
Committee that they could not refrain from making
speeches which had nothing at all to do with the second
tending of the Bill, but were only fit for the Com-
mittee. The speech of the Noble Duke went entirely
into the det.ils of the Bill, and this certainly was not a
proper time for their consideration, hut in Committee.
The Noble Earl opposite, who had preceded him, found
great fault with some Noble Lords who had stated
their intention of • voting for the second reading, on
the ground of inconsistency. Consistency was a very
good thing in itself, but on some occasions it was ale
necessary to look at the changes of times, when consistency
might well be called obstinacy. Besides inconsistency
was not altogether confined to that (the Ministerial) side
of the House. Some of the Noble Lords who bad made
that charge seemed to have forgotten the Catholic question.
The Duke of Wellington, when he was Freinier, made a
speech strongly against those claims which was very much
applauded, and in a very short time after that great heal-
ing measure was brought in and carried by the Noble
Duke, assisted by many of their Lordship., who
were loudest in their applause of his former speech,
and who were now such advocates for consistency. The
Noble Duke who had spoken lest bad gone very full into
the 'details of the Bill—he had dwelt much upon the
number of houses in certain boroughs, and on
the amount of the taxes in others ; but this was
not taking the subject in a spirit of fairnese—
it was what be would call trickery—for the Noble
Duke was perfectly aware that the principle of the
Bill went upon houses and taxes taken together.
With respect to the imputations which had been
cast out, that all the alterations intended by this
Bill arose from interested motives, it appeared to him
that it was utterly impossible for Noble Peers on the other
side of the House or even the Noble Duke who
had just spoken, to conceive it possible that Noble
Lords sitting in that House could lend themselves to such
low and paltry proceedings.—(hear.) Such imputations
put him in mind of a speculative book which he was
reading the other day, in which the writer stated
that it was difficult for men to conceive how others could
act upon any other principle than these which they felt
themselves capable of grappling with. He thought the
Noble Lords who had imputed such unworthy motives
to others, must, indeed, be perfectly acquainted with
the principles from which those unworthy motives pro-
ceeded themselves ; for how persons in the high situa-
tion those were filling, who had been adverted to, could
condescend to act upon such motives, appeared to him im-
possible to be explained. Ile repelled such insinuations
altogether.—(Hear, hear.) There had been some state-
ments made by the Noble Duke last night which alto-
gether with respect to the present Bill were erroneous.
In speaking about the 101. voters, that Noble Duke
had stated positively that every lodger who paid
6d., 7d., Sd, or 9d., a night for his lodging would have a
vote. Such an observation was totally without founda-
tion. You might change your residence as often as
you pleased previous to the registration ; but you
must he rated, and how by possibility could a lodger,
who changed his lodging every night, paying 7d.
or SI for that lodging, be so rated. The thing was
impossible. It was well known that for those who were
lodgers even for a twelvemonth the owners of the house al-
ways paid the rates and not them. So much for such argu-
ments. A Noble Earl had quoted last night a speech of
the Earl of Chatham's, delivered in 1770.—(flear.)—
" But we must consider these boroughs ; the infirmities
of our Constitution would be like the infirmities of
the body—we must bear therm with patience, and submit
to cure them if we can, as amputation of the limb might
be death. Now he, (Earl Radnor) could quote a speech
of that Noble Earl's, delivered, he admitted, at an earlier
period, and therefore, it might be stated he had changed
his opinions, in which that Noble Earl had said,
speaking of the representation of the colonies through
decayed horoughe—(Hear, hear)—these boroughs are
what is called the rotten part of the Constitution. They
cannot continue for three centuries, and, if they do not
drop, they must be amputated. Now, it had been said
that the colonies could not be represented in the
House of Commons, but through the medium •of
those boroughs. Why, a Noble Marquess, the
son of the Noble Duke opposite (Buckingham) advocated
strongly the interests of the colonies, and did he sit in the
House of Commons for a rotten borough ? No, he
sit in that House as the representative of the county of
Buckingham. A Noole Earl who presided at a meeting
that was held a few days ago in the City of London on the
subject of the colonies, and for a lung time before lie came
to that title, which he filled in so distinguished a manner,
sat in the House of Commons as the repreeentive of the
county of Cork. There were other Hun. Members also
who warmly advocated the interests of time colonies, who
sat in that House, but not as the representatives of rotten
boroughs. He had quoted these instances for the purpose
of ,hewing how fallacious it was to suppose that those
who were possessed of colonial property could not find any
means of having their interests supported in the
House of Commons without having recourse so that
rotten and disgraceful part of the Constitution.
By what law—by what legal enactments—did the Noble
Duke possess the power he stated he had of sending Mem-
bers to Parliament? It was impossible to find out. He
po d houses, and might in that way have an in-
fluence, and might, indeed, exercise a right in the election
of members of Parliament. In the result, the Noble Duke
seemed to do no more than to draw a fair inference
which was, that he possessed power from his possession of
the houses, but the question was whether certain Peers had
a tight to send two Members to Parliament, and whether
the Members were not likely to be influenced by the parties
sending them to Parliament—and that that power and
influence should be sacred and hereditary, for the Noble
Duke's father possessed it before bitn.—(Loud cries of
Hear, hear.) There was no law which he (Lord Radnor)
was aware of that entitled the Noble Duke to any such
right. This Bill would net deprive their Lordships of
their tenants,—it would not deprive them of their right to
a ly of their rents, bat it might deprive them of that to which
tv law they had no title whatever. A strange argument
644 We snit eed repealed over and over wits