The Sun.
London, England, 1832-03-27 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The proceedings in the House of Lords last night
wll produce a great sensation throughout the coun-
try. The people may see from them with tolerable
distinctness the turn which things will take with r: •
ference to the Reform Bill. The Reform Bill hav-
ing been brought up from the Commons, read a hist
time, and ordered to be printed, Earl Grey pro-
posed Thursday, the sth of April, for the second
reading. earl Harrowlsy then rose, and gave a
succinct outline of the points wherein the present
Bill differed from, and agreed with, the Bill of last
y•
There were, in his opinion, very material distinctions
between the former and the present Bill, and the aitsra-
tions were unquestionably worthy of ec,nsider ation by their
Lordships, and had been wisely introduced by those who
had the framing and management of the measure."
This opening indicated, with sufficient distinc'-
ness, the conclusion at which he would arrive ; but
he soon put an end to all doubt on the sebjeer.
" Upon the whole (he added) those of their Lordships
who might recollect the sentiments which he had ex-
pressed as to the question of Reform when the measure
was under consideration and discussion last year, and
heard what he had now stated, would no doubt be 1-d to
conclude that he intended to vote for the second reading
of the present Bill.—(Hear, heir.) . . . .
There were differences in the present Bill, which, all
things considered, induced him to think th it it was expe-
dient that the present Bill should go into a Committee.
Their Lordships, therefore, would not he surprised, that,
hiving come to the r-solution of voting for the second
reading of the present Bill, after having voted I,r the se-
child reading of the former Bill, that he took this very
early opportunity of adverting to his former opinions. He
would vote for the second reading of the present Bill, in
order to see whether such additional alterations might not
be made in the Committee as would enable him finally to
vote for its passsng into a law. He would endeavour to
propose such amendments, or would support them if pro.
posed by others. But if, after all, lie should find it im-
possible to introduce such amendments as in his opinion
would render the Bill one which ought to pass into a law,
he should still have an opportunity of opposing it."
His Lordship consents to the second reading, irt
the hope that he shall succeed in so motlifiing the
the Bill in the Committee as to free it from the ob-
jections he still entertains to it ; and if he do not
succeed in this object, he will oppose the third read-
ing. His Lordship allowed, that though the
changes in the Bill were by no means immaterial,
lie retracted none of his former opinions on the sub-
ject of Reform ; and he did not hesitate to state,
that if he could with safety oppose Reform a second
time, he would not fail to do so. 0:1 this point he
made the following most important deelarat ion :
" With respect to the general feeling and opinion of the
country, he had opposed the Bill of last p ar, in the hope
that the arguments which had been used against the mea-
sure, and the additional time which would be ed for
consideration, would have had the influence produ a
very important change in the gen,ral servimrtits of the
community ; but he was compelled to c,infess that he had
been disappointed, and that no such change had taken
place.—(Hear, hear, from tip. Op;ersition side.) In the
public feting and sentiments gen-rally, whether right or
wrong, n,) material change had manifested itself, as far as
be could observe."
We may judge from this declaration the sort of
improvement the Bill would receive from Lord
Harroaby, should he have his way. "He and
those who concurred with him objected to the while
Bill ; but still they thought it better to make some
concess-on to public opinion, and to the deela,z=d
sense of a majority of the other House, that' to risk
the consequences that might result from a continued
and derided opposition to Reform. Many infhten-
tial were of that opinion, and to that degree
of compromise, at least, matters had been brought by
the opportunity afforded fur reconstdera,ion.(Hear.)"
The other Nobleman, who has been so often as-
sociated with his Lordship as sharing views regard-
ing this question, Lord Wharncliffe declared " that
he also intended to votefor the second reading of the
Bill He woul,l "not again refuse to
give a second reading to a Bill which had been
sent up by so large a majority of the House of Com-
mons."—(Hear, hear.) His Lerdship declared him-
self also a Reformer upon compulsion; but he stated
more explicitly the degree to which he would carry
his opposition in the Committee.
" The principles," he ob,eived, " on which it was pro-
posed to construct this measure of Reform were sftited in
the preamble of the Bid; and it the details in anything
went beyond the principles stated in the preamble, it
would be their Lordships' duty ro reject those' details.
He thought it the duty of their Lordship to allow the Bill
to go into the Committee, in order to see whether such a
compromise might not be made as might render it, under
all the circumstances, advisable to pass the Bill. It this
should be refused, then their Lordships might reject the
Bill. At the same time, he thought it right to state that

he would go into Committee fairly and Candidly ; for it

would be unfair, and even absurd to go into the Committee
for the purpose of completely mutilating the Bill and de-
stroying its essential principles.—(Hear.) His object
would he to go into the Committee candidly and fsitlt ;
not for the purpose of mutilation and destruction, but
with a sincere desire to have the Bill put in such a s!ate
as to render it safe to pass it into a law."

His Lordship thought it also necessary to a,sign the
opinion of the country as the ground of his yielding,
" He and those who concurred with him certainly
had serious objections to Reform in the Representa-
tion; but he was compelled to admit that in this
they were not supported by any considerable party
in the country."—( Hear.) Lord Wharticliffe was
followed by a Spiritual Peer, the Bishop of Lon-
don, who declared, that if he had been able to at-
tend when the second reading of the last Bill was
moved, "he would most probably have then voted
for the second reading. He certainly felt inclined to
do so; not that he entirely approved of the Bill, but
that he thought it would be attended with less mis-
chief to read the Bill a second time than to refuse it."
The Right Reverend Father in Gov is also a Re-
former on compulsion. " He had certainly," he
added, " strong objections to some parts of the Bill,
and his objections were not altogether removed by
the alterations in the present Bib ; but at the same
time he was willing to admit that the measure had
been liberated from some of the objections which
he had felt to the former Bill, though not from all."
His Lordship made a declaration still more satisfac-
tory than Lord Wharncliffe's, with regard to the
alterations he wished the Bill to receive in the Coni-

mittee. "He thought it (he said) but fair
and candid to declare, that he woad not support
any Amendment which would so alter the Bill us to

mutilate or destroy its essential principles, and by that
menus bring it into such a sate that the Commons

would ieftiZe to agree to it.—(Hear, hear, from the
Ministerial side.)" Earl Grey "hailed with unfeigned
satisfaction the approaching symptoms of a more
general agreement upon this subjec ," and observed,
that " although he was apprehensive that some al•

terations might be proposed to which he could not
accede, he would most assuredly give all due con-
st,deration to the propositions in the true spirit of
conciliation." But he would "agree to no altera-
tions that should be destructive of the essential
principle and efficiency of the Bill." His Lordship
expressed the satisfaction with which he heard the

declarations of Lords Harrowby and Wharncliffe,
and more particularly the Bishop of London, who
said that he would not in the Committee agree to any
amendment that would go to mutilate the Bill,
or to disturb the general principles on which
it was founded. There is cer airily a cleft be-
tween Lords Harrowby and Whaincliffe and Earl
Grey, which must always keep them considerably
:'sunder. This did not escape the notice of the Duke

rf Weilington who declared himself as uncompro-
mising an enemy to Reform as ever.
" The Noble Etul (Harrowby)," sod his Grace, "stated
he reasons which induced him to depart from the cow se
which he had adopted with respect to the former Bill, .r .d
had adverted to various diffeiences which existed between

-hat Bill and the present. Hut then the Nob!e E4rl at
the head of his Majesty's Government insists l that al.
though some alteration!: had been made and change ii it -
troduced, yet the Bill was really and truly, and in pi
eiple, exactly the same measure as t' at whi..t, hail ti n
irought up to this anise I ist year, and to wliii•ii heir
Lordships had refused to give a second reading. Th
was realty the point in the case, and it was the point which
their Lordships had now to consider. The question NI. a.
not whether some minor alterations had been introJactil
into the present 8.11, or whether it differed in some winur

points horn the former the pr,nciple of the Bill
WaS not Reform ; it Wet disfranchisement, enfranchisement,
the placing of ttre right of voting on a different footing,
dianging the %undation of the represetvation, and when
.tcoropanicd, as it would be, with other Bills, producing a
complete revolution."

The efficiency of the Bill is its mrrit in the eyes
of Vett! Grey, while its efficiency constitutes the
objection to it of Lords Harrowby and Whartre.lite.
If the Bill make the Howe: of Commons responsi-
ble to the people, it will be efficient ; Lords liar-
rowley and Whareliffe wish s nominal responsibility
anti a real irresponsibility. The differen..--tre_ There-
foie, between Earl Grey and them its Anything but
immaterial. But there is still a Wider difference be-
tween them and the Duke of Wellington. His
Grace conceives the opinion of the people ef the
country with respeetto their Governments light to go
for nothing. He knows better than they can know
what sort of Government tlsey ought to hove, and
their wish ought to go for nothing, when it does not
receive his approbation. Now, Lords Harrowily and
Wharncliffe dislike Reform, hut they do net see how,
with a population bent on Reform, it can possibly be
withheld. Wishing to preserve Parliament essen-
tially irresponsible, they yet dare not lay down the
principle that civil strife ought to be hazarded for the
sake of opposing a measure sealed by thr national
approbation. They cannot resist the people, and
they will try if they can rescue A few of the frag-
mews ef corruption from the impending destruction.
In short, the difference between the Noble Lords
and the Duke of Wellington is just the difference
between force and stratagem. The Bill will of
course be read a second time, because the out-and-
out Anti-Reformers must now be greatly reduced in
number. But the opponents of Reform in the
House, as at present constituted, outnumbering the
real Reformers, the warfare in the Committee
will be much more rigorously tarried on than in
the Commons. The great problem to be solved by
the trimmers is what is the least possible amount of
Reform which the Commons will be satisfied with.
The people of England must neither slumber nor
sleep. Their enemies are astute, and versed in the
practice of deluding by the means of keeping the
promise to the ear and not to the sense. Their
candour and apparent submission to the unanimity .
of the people must not throw them off their guard.
At a time when there were a few symptoms of
change in the public mind as at present, Lord
Wharncliffe insisted that a change had taken place.
This is no longer the tactics. But we must not
halloo till we are out of the wood. Men are often
farthest from the port when they think they are
nearest to it. We do not mean to say that the
symptoms are not favourable. Still we say, Be-
ware I.—Morning Chronicle.
The reception of the Reform Hill by the Peers,
fast night, was not very different from what many
people had expected. A declaration watt made by
Lord Harrowby, that there were new provisions in
the present Bill which he considered improvements
upon the last; that, however, much of it was still
of such " a democratical tendency," and, if enacted
into a law, would prove, in his opinion, so dange-
rous to our institutions, that he did not conceive
the possibility of his ever being able to support it.
Lord Harrowby added, what must have cost him a
painful struggle, and the confession is, therefore,
honourable to his Lordship's candour, viz., that after
all the time allowed to the people of the United
Kingdom for a sober consideration of the subject,
owing to the rejection of the former Bill, he, Lord
Ilirrowby, felt himself bound to acknowledge that
the public eagerness to see the principles of the
measure brought into active operation had in no
degree subsided, and that a material change
in our representative system was altogether un-
avoidable. His Lordship announced his full inten-
tion to vote for the second reading. Lord Wham-
cliffe spoke pretty much in the same sense. He ad-
mitted, that in their rejection of the former Bill, on
the second reading, the 'House of Lords had not
been supported by any party in the country—that
be therefore would not atfempt to repeat the same
experiment, but would vote for the Bill going into
Committee. It was, however, sufficiently obvious,
from the tone of both these noble Lords, that the
most resolute and uncompromising resistance will
be made by them to tho-e provisions of the Bill
to which the country generally has attached the
highest value and importance; and that if, in any
Ministerial quarter, a credulous hope of a majoriry
for reform in the Lords' Committee should be founded
on "ghat fell from either of the above Noblemen, res-
pectiug their desire to mollify the national irritation
on the second reading, such a delusion can led to no
other than the most disastrous consequences. The
Bishop of London, so far as could be inferred from
general expressions, will go a step further than Lords
Harrowby and Wharncliffe towards satisfying the
public wishes. The Learned Prelate stated not
merely his belief, had not domestic circumstances
compelled him to be absent from the second reading
of the former Bill, that he would have voted for ir,
but his determination to admit the present measure
into Committee, and there to abstain front promo-
ting any such changes as may endanger their rejec-
tion when sent back for acceptance by the House
of Commons. This at least is something gained,
though but an individual vote. As for Lord Csr-
tiarvon, his anger at what he considered the incon-
sistency of Lcrd Harrowby, appeared to blind the
Noble Earl to every difference between the framing
of the present 8.11 and of its predecessor. The Duke
of Wellington evinced an unimpaired appe-
tite for the destruction of the Bill, which accord-
ingly his Grace, if not interrupted, will devour
on the second reading. Indeed, we regretted to
hear the Duke of Wellington repeat his original de-
scription of Lord Grey's Reform principle, as one
under which it would be " impossible to govern the
country ;" because it looks as if this great Com-
mander did nut contemplate the people of England
as a free people, or our Government as one wherein
the nation ought to exercise any power at all. Un-
doubtedly, if a Government approaches to perfection
directly as it recoils from any intermixture of popular
right, then the Reform Bill is a most inconvenient
and pernicious measure; but tastes are various in
matters of civil policy, arid the bulk of Englishmen
arc of opinion that the most difficult of all Govern-
ments to conduct in this country at the present mo-
ment, would be one which excluded the people from
all controul over its functionaries. The Duke of Wel-
lington ended his short address by stating that if the
Bill should pass the second reading, he would assist,
by his most diligent efforts, in endeavouring so to
modify amid correct it as to render it more practically
useful. We doubt not his Grace's good intentions ;
but really, with his declared views upon Reform, we
are more disposed to look upon his language as a
. warning, than an encouragement to Lord Grey.
The Prime Minister wai.ed with becoming patience
until other Noble Lords should deliver their senti-
ments upon this preliminary stage of the proceeding.
He then, with mingled courtesy arid firmness, as-
sured the Opposition Peers of his readiness to listen
to all their suggestions, and to give full weight to
all such proposals as should not, by their adoption,
involve him in the necessity of abandoning the great
principles of the Bill as now understood, accepted,
and cherished by the country. But from these Earl
Grey once more pledged himself that nothing should
induce hint to depart. Well, then, we are well sa-
ti•fied with this assurance from a gentleman to
whom no broken promise has ever in the course of
a long public life been imputed; and we fix our
eyes on such a constitutional modification of the
Peerage as shall calm the anxiety of the English na-
tion, respecting any wt.-constitutional encroachment
on the forthcoming charter of 1832.—Tim's.
The Reform Bill has at length landed—we wish
we could say safely landed—in the House of Lords.
But though we cannot go so far as to pronounce
it secure, we may affirm that its reception was at-
tended with circumstances which augur favourably
of its result. The circumstances. to which we al-
lude are the declarations of Lords Harrowhy and
Wharncliffe and the Bishop of London, that they
would vote for the second reading, with the in-
tention of proposing such modifications in the Com-
mittee as they considered necessary to the improve-

meet of th erreasurc. We used not inform our
readers that a general impression has for some time
prevailed, the recollection of which must nave so
far prepared the public for what hae, now hfppened
as to prevent any thing like surprise being felt on
.he oceaeiene tt is but justice, hoWever, to these
Note!e.:men to admit that they e'e.preesed themselves
with a manly franknees both as to the change
which had taken ;,pace in their opinions, and as to
thecoeret which it is theirintention to porsoe: Those
w7io give them credit for sincerity-e--as we not only
do, but shall continee t-5 do, until we see good
reason for the orreeery—may look forward to the
passing of the Bill unimpaired in its principles, and
consequently uninjured in any of its leading provi-
sions. Those who refuse them such credit may
tremble for the fate of the Pit!, hot they must first
suspect their Lordehlt,:t not only of the duplicity
which hat bee`e. prematurely charged against them
seeeee of our contemporaries, but of more undis-
guised falsehood than is either necessary or jud'cious
in the management of plots, which are always better
done by being conducted with some regard to repu-
tation. Though Lord Harrowby alluded to the pos-
sibility of rejecting on the third reading what they
agreed to on the second, his Lordship was sufficiently
explicit in his description of the favourable changes
in the present Pil!, and, above all, in his admission
of the impertance of consulting public opinion with
respect to it, to warrant any inference to the dis-
advantage of his Lordship's sincerity. " When
he supported the rejection, or rather the post-
ponement of the Bill for six months, he hoped
that the arguments, which appeared to him and to
their Lordships so convincing against the Bill, would
have a considerable influence on the feelings of the
country. They had not prevailed to the extent
which he desired, lie was compelled to admit."
How different in this language from the tone of
those prattlers in the other House who either de-
nied that a change in public opinion had taken place,
or that it ought to have any influence with the Le-
gislature if it had ? The speech of Lord Warn•
cliffe was equally satisfactory. After declaring that
he would not again refuse to give a consideration to
the Bill sent up from the Commons, his Lordship
added " that the principles of this Bill, if they looked
into them, were the only ones, in some degree, in
which any change in the representation of the
people in the other House of Parliament could be
founded." The Bishop of London went still
farther. He declared that he would have voted for
the second reading, even of the former Bill, which
he considered much more objectionable than the
present, had he not been prevented by particular
circumstances from attending. In conclusion, the
Right Rev. Prelate declared that " it was not his
wish to alter the Bill in such a degree as to render
probable its rejection in another place." These,
we r peat, were circumstances so favourable in an
impartial view of the case as to justify strong hopes
of ultimate success : for although Eall Grey, in the
jealousy natural to a man who is deeply pledged to
the integrity of a particular measure, may have his
doubts as to the agreement of the Noble Lords in his
views, it is scarcely possible to suppose that they
will endeavour to defeat the principles of the 8.11
after such statements as they have made, and any
concessions shcrr of that his Lordship ought gladly
to recognise. It is true there are other and great
dangers still hanging over the measure in the oppo-
sition of such men as the Duke of Wellington and
Lord Eldon, the venerable patron of all old griev-
ances. Still, however, the hold which the country
has taken of the measure cannot be easily relaxed ;
and though Lord Caernar von, once a Reformer, and
Lord Eldon, never a Reformer, and never likely to
be one, tinder any circumstances, fold themselves
voting on the same side of a Reform question, the
public have shown more consistency—and eventually
their consistency will ensure their succets.—Morn-
ing Herald.
It is almost unnecessary to point the attention of
our readers to t) e rec ption which the Reform Bill
met last night in the House of Lords; for to that
matter the attention of every friend of Reform will
be directed—hut it is only justice to the cause which
we have invariably advocated to note that it is now
apparent, beyond ail possibility of doubt, that a great
number of new Peers must he created, and that the
Reform Bill will never pass into a law, unless such
a creation be made. The utmost extent of the con-
cess'one of the Wharncliffe and Harrowby parry is
ro allow the Bill to be read a second time—in the
Committee it is their determination to mutilate ir,
or as they are pleased to say, to modify it—and if
riot altered in the Committee—that is to say, if not
destroyed—to oppose it in every other stage! We
thank the Noble Lords for their honest confessions
—it is now for Lord Grey to exhibit an equally
honest and efficient practice.—ellerning Advertiser.
The Reform Bill was yesterday carried up to the
House of Lords, on which occasion Lords Harrowby
and Wharncliffe fulfilled the hopes of their enemies
and the fears of their friends, by declaring respec-
tively their intention to vote for the second reading
of that revolutionary and destructive measure, for
such they acknowledged that they still considered it
to be. Till we had the avowal from their own
mouths we could never have believed that these
Noble Lords would finally determine on a course so
utterly irreconcileahle with their former professions
and conduct. Till this moment, had we been de-
sired to point out two Members of the House who,
judging from their former declarations on the
subject, might be most firmly relied on as
opponents to the principle and essence of the Minis-
terial Bill, those two would have been Lords Har-
rowby and Wharncliffe; for their strongest argu-
ment on the occasion of the former discussion was
directly pointed against the very line of policy they
have now adopted. The 'Twits adduced by these
Noble Lords for their change" of conduct will in no
degree lessen the surprise or regret with which that
change will be contemplated. They assert, firstly,
that the present measure is less objectionable than
its predecessor; and secondly that the desire of the
people to see it carried into a law remains undimi-
nished. It is not easy to accommodate these two as-
sumptions, fur if the measure has undergone such al-
terations as are accordant with the views of its former
opponents, we should imagine that, from the same
cause, it would be less favourably viewed by its for-
mer supporters. One or other of these parties is
therefore liable to the charge of inconsistency, and
we think there can be little doubt to which of the
two such a charge applies. The authors of the
measure declare that it is " as efficient" as the
last ; they pledged themselves that it should be so,
and they have more than redeemed their promise.
Lord Harrowby, in dwelling on the changes in
schedules B and D, the combining taxation with
population, and the preservation of the rights of
freemen, variations which in no degree palliate the
general injustice and ruinous tendency of the pro-
ject—wholly omitted to notice in his list of im-
provements that it is now no longer required of an
elector that he should inhabit the same house during
so much as a fortnight together, that lie should be
assessed to the poor-rates, or that he should be
capable of paying his landlord's rent. The real
change effected in the present Bill is one by which
property of every description will be more com-
pletely prostrated before numbers, and the legis-
lative power of the State more firmly secured in
the hands of the lowest and vilest of the com-
munity. With regard to the second point, we
fully concede to Lord Harrowby that, among the
classes we have just alluded to, as ardent a desire as
ever exists for " Reform." If he refer to them we
leave him the full benefit of his position. If, on
the other hand, he refer to the respectability, the
wealth, the literary and professional talent of the
country, we think no man of discrimination, who
has given attention to the subject, will say that the
statement is borne out by fact. Every day's ex-
perience strengthens our conviction that the
great majority of these classes, are decidedly
hostile to the Ministerial Reform scheme, and
view it with distrust and alarm. Indeed Lord
Harrowby and Lord Wharncliffe are themselves of
this number. They both declare that the measure
in its present shape will not have their concurrence,
and this they say though its authors and supporters

(4 all grades, ab they are well aware, have proclaimed 1
hat any clipping of the schedules or abridgment of
the proposed right of voting will be considered equi-
valent Co a rejection. Would it not therefore be
more honourable, more manly, and more safe, at
once to put a veto upon the Bill, than to support it
on one particular stage, fer the express and avowed
purpose of snbsequewly adopting a course which, in
either case, whether the attempted amendments be
successful or unsuccessful, must lead to its ultimate
destruction ? But Lords Harrowby and Wham-
cliffe having committed themselves by their declara-
tions of last night, let us hope that their Noble Col-
leagues will sill save them from the odium which
would inevitably attach to so devious and incon-
sistent a line of conduct as they have proposed for
themselves. The Bishop of London also announced
his intention to vote for the Bill. The speeches of
the Duke of Wellington and Lord Carnarvon emi
nently deserve attention.—Moriting Post.