The Sun.
London, England, 1832-03-22 00:00:00

REFORM BILL.

Mr. C. PELHAM said he had listened with the deepest
attention to the arguments that had been urged on both
sides during the important discussions on the question now
before the Horse. These discussions he considered of the
most serious and grave description, and were well worthy
the notice of the House, especially from the important
conseqcences involved in them. The only substantial
reason he had heard from the mouths of gen-

lemen on t}e other side of the House was, that those

out of doors would have the Bill, and therefore it must
pave. This was no fanciful notion of his ; for an
Honourable Member on the other side had used
these very words—" That there was now a de.
mocratical change in the people." He had no wish to
speak against the revered person of the present Monarch,
but if he wished to substitute another form of Government
for pure and limited Monarchy, he could not adopt
more convenient language. He had paid the greatest
attentic,n to the speech of his Majesty's Attor-
ney-General, but there was one principle in it to
which, as an independent Member of Parliament, looking,
as he had a right to do, to every thing that concerned ge.
nerally the legislature, lie could not assert. That principle
was, that that House had no right to interfere with the
concerns of the other House. [lt was almost utterly impos-
sible to hear one sentence in the gallery from the beginning
to the end of the Hon. Gentleman's speech. We under-
stood him to say that what he understood the real dis-
tresses of the country to he, they would not, in his opinion,
he removed by this Bill ; and th it the act of purifying the
House of Commons would be better accomplished by paus-
ing than by adopting the course the House appeared to be
about to pursue.]
Mr. J. STANLEY contended that Reform of some
sort or another was called for, by not only the bulk of
the pnhlic, but yearly every Member of the House of
Commons, every Member without almost an exception.
Lord Bolingbroke had recommended, as the only
remedy for the evils of the country, a Reform in Par-
liament, and to give the people a more equal representation
in that House. That illustrious philosopher had said
that so long as a few individuals could controul the Go-
vernment of the country, so long must that Government
he carried on by undue influence. An Administration, said
Lord Bollingbroke, must concede to an Oligarchy places
and profits in return for the power they gave them. Lord
Bolingbroke complained, a hundred years ago, shat
the corruptions of Parliament would spread to every
department of the State, and would make the Aristocracy
a most degraded body. He had contended th et the
power of Old Sarum or Gatton was as great as that
of the Members for Yoe kshsre or London ; and
the remedy was that all such boroughs should be abolished.
He (Mr. Stanley) should be reluctant to change any of the
old institutions under which England had enjoyed more of
liberty than any other part of the world ; but he
found that tinder the same system practical evils existed
and for which practical evils practical remedies must be
provided. The present system of representation had enabled
Ministers to carry on disgraceful wars against the sense
of the country at large. The American War was carried
or. in opposition to the opinions of the people at large, re •
peatedly expressed, and likewise in opposision to the
decided sentiments of the real representatives of
the people ; and all this was done because the Ministry were
hacked by the Members for close boroughs. It was the asto-
nishment of the people of this country which possessed a free
Parliament should have been more profli 'ate and corrupt
than the most despotic Governments in Europe. Every
body must be aware of the astonishment which foreigners
epxressed between the different feelings of individuals
and those which, up to a late period, had been
acted upon by Government. It was to make the
Government act in unison with the feelings of the people
that this Bill was introduced. What could remedy the
evils of the country but to restore the power of the people
over the House bygiving the country a real representation ?
One portion of the Bill was designed to give Members to
towns in England which, although now unrepresented, pos-
sessed greater wealth and population than half the capi-
tals of Europe. He was astonished when he heard
Gentlemen object to the Bill upon such pityful grounds
of detail as were frequently urged. Because some persons
thought that Appleby was not fairly dealt with, they
gave vehement opposition to the whole measure. He
would tell all such Members that the country cared little
for those minor details—details which were important only
to individuls, and certainly of no consequence whatever
to the great principles and the objects of the Bill.—
It bail been thrown in the teeth of that side of the
House, that a much smaller measure of Reform would
have been sufficient. If it were an Anti-Reformer
who used this argument—an Anti-Reformer whose only
object was to satisfy the immediate outcry of the people
—he would reply to such a person, that he agreed that • he
Bill had done more than was necessary ; but if it were
a sincere Reformer that urged this objection, he should
say that he could not conceive how he could be dis-
contented with the extent of the measure, unless he
could show that a lass extensive Reform would be
sufficient for the extent of the evils to be remedied. He
would always maintain that a Bill less comprehen-
sive would never have been sufficient to satisfy the
people, or to attain the objects which they had
in view. The Honourable Member for Oakhampton had
spoken of the re-action in hi.county ; and that the wealth
and respectability of that County was against the Bill. He
denied the fact ; and would state in spite of the exertions of
the clergy, the people were unanimous for Reform, and had
gone counter to all who usually had influence over them.
The supporters of the Bill had been attacked by an
article in the Quarterly Review which, attributed
a dootrine to overthrow the monarchy and establish
republican principles. That party claimed for themselves
an exclusive loyalty, but they knew that it was only so
long as the Croon was subservient to their own
views and that they bad the controul of the public
purse—so long was the Crown worth upholding.
Those were the parties who claimed to have exclusive loy-
alty, and who accused the supporters of the Bill of being
republicans. It had been said that the proposed measure
would not be final. He knew of no human measure
that could be final—every measure must be adapted to the
circumstances of the times, and it was snfficient if they
could legislate for their present wants without being bound'
by past times or the chance of future wants. It was no reason
or proof of the purity or perfection of an institutuion to ad •
duce its age. There was no Reformer who was not sen-
sible of the immense• advantages which had been derived
from the Constitution, but there was a feeling in the
country, that if the present *neurone be not carried
the people would not be satisfied even to the extent of
that measure. It was by Reform alone that they could secure
a cheap government, and a controul over the people purse.
To the present measure he gave his most cordial support,
and to the Ministers who had so wisely, so ably, and so
powerfully brought if for ward, he offered his tribute of
gratitude for having altered the institutions of the country
in time, and for doing that which in one short year might
be too late to do.—(Cheers.)
An Ilox. MEMBER. whose name we did not know, rose
to oppose the Bill, as too great and too sudden an encroach-
ment upon the established institutions of the country.
(LEFT SPEAKING.)

EXETER. ASSIZES, MARCH 20.