The Sun.
London, England, 1835-09-08 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1835.

- -
uteasure of Corporate Reform went up to the House of Lords,
the Commission appointed to inquire into Corporations had not
been impugned as unlawful, or the members of it charged with
with gross neglect of duty ; much less was it urged that they
deserved the most condign punishment for what they had done.
When, too, it was stated by Noble Lords, that the Report was
a tissue of fallacies and falsehoods, and drawn up by persons
not determined to inquire into the real state of Corporations,
but by those who have been sent to supply evidence to those
who had determined on their abolition, he thought it became
his duty to state how the Commissioners had been appointed,
and on what principles they had acted. First, with respect
to instruction. The only instructions he ever received were
those conveyed by the Commission itself.—(Hear, hear.)
That Commission was preceded by the Report of a Com-
mittee composed of those who occupied the highest rank in
that House—of you yourself, Sir (the Speaker), the Soli-
citor-General, and the Member for Tamworth (we believe).
And what did that Committee report? Precisely that which
the Commission directed the members of it to perform, and
which they endeavoured to perform.—(Cries of " Hear.")
What did the Commissioners do ? Having met, he (Mr.
Blackburne) gave directions as to the mode in which the
inquiry should be conducted. He gave a paper on the sub-
ject to every Commissioner. Before the Commissioners en-
tered on the inquiry, a copy of that paper was sent to the
chief-magistrate and the town-clerk of every borough that
was to be included in the investigation. Surely that would
have been a very extraordinary step, if the object of the Com-
mission was to destroy the Corporations and to satisfy the
wishes of unprincipled partisans. Every ere of the Commis-
sioners took the course prescribed ; and, except on one occa-
sion, it was not until within the last two months that he
(Mr. Blackburne) had heard a single complaint against any
of them. That one occasion had reference to a Commissioner
who was supposed to have been greatly injured, merely because
he did not concur in the :,erformance of the general duties
of the Commission. Aud even in that instance, the complaint
proved futile; for a criminal information having been moved
for by the Corporation of Colchester against that gentleman,
the Court of King's Bench refused to grant it. And to whom
was the Report of the Commissioners sent ? Not to Lord
Grey's Government ; but to the Noble Earl's successors. The
Commissioners had been censured for not having given the
whole of the evidence on which they formed their opinions.
Had that complaint been made in the first instance, the defi-
ciency could easily have been supplied. The fault, if any, was
his own. He really thought that five or six large volumes
were sufficient ; and that to add five or six and twenty vo-
lumes of particular evidence was quite unnecessary. But
though it had been considered better to give the evidence
in the condensed form of the Report, he could safely-
state that there was not one fact in the Report which
was not borne out by the evidence. If the Corn-
mission were illegal how did it happen that, from No-
vember until March, when that Government was in office,
the legal organ of hich declared that it was illegal, and that
all the proceedings of the Commissioners were null and void,
it was permitted to continue to exist? If it was illegal—if its
objects were fraud, falsehood, and the interests of partisans,
why was it not stopped during that period ? Because the
persons by whom that was deClared knew full well that such
a Commission was not illegal. They knew that such Com-
missions had been issued in every reign since the revolution.
They knew that the Commission in question was the result of
an address to the Crown from the House of Commons, founded
on the report of a Committee. He would not have taken up
so much of the time of the House on this subject, but when he
found some of the highest persons in the realm in another
place attacking the Commission, he felt it incumbent on him
to stand up in his place in its defence. He had hitherto ab-
stained from doing so, because he did not like to interrupt the
regular course of the proceedings of the Bill. Before those
proceedings closed, however, he had thought it right to say
these few words. With respect to himself, at the time when
hereceived the appointment of Chief Commissioner, he was
no willing actor in the scene : but having been asked to take
the office he did so, because he thought he might render the
public some service in it. If he might be permitted to say
anything farther of himself, lie would express his hope
that during above twenty years of professional life, there
Ives not a Learned Friend of his on either side of the
House who had seen anything in his conduct to warrant the
belief that he was a fit subject to be picked out to carry into
- effect any base or corrupt object.—( Hear, hear, hear.) y With
respect to his brother Commissioners, greater care, attention,
vigilance, and correctness, lie never witnessed.—( Hear, hear,
hear.) If the House locked at the evidence taken at the
bar of the House of Lords, they would see that three-fourths
of that evidence was in the Report of the Commissioners ; the
rest was made up of general chrages against the Commission-
ers, and of answers to questions pit to the various town-clerks,
whether or not they would like to be turned out of office ;
the whole of which were cruwncd with this question, put to
the town-clerk of Liverpool, whether. he really thought the
Corporation of Liverpool would be improved by the operation
of the Bill; to which his answer was, " Certainly not."—
(A laugh.) That was a general specimen of the evidence
taken at the tar of the House of Lords on the occasion. In
several instances the witnesses were asked of some statement
in the Report, "Is not that scandalously false ?" In general
they avoided giving a distinctly affirmative reply ; and were
then pressed to do so. He certainly thought he had a right
to complain of the conduct of the counsel by whom the ex-
amination at the bar of the House of Lords had been con-
ducted. He always understood that it was a counsel's duty to
do all he could for his client • but that duty was accompanied
by another, namely, that he should satisfy his conscience that
he was not committing wrong. That became still more
necesaary when the attacks of counsel were made upon
a class of persons, who, like themselves, depended up-
on character, and who could never get on if it were
supposed possible that they could be guilty of dishonourable
conduct. The course which had been pursued on the subject
by the Right lion, Member for Tamworth, showed that that
Right Hon. Baronet did not think there was any colour for
the charges which had been made against the Commissioners.
.So far from showing that they were partisans, the Report
proved that the Commissioners fearlessly and manfully dirt
their duty, whether the consequence was for or against any
party whatever. There might be some mistakes in so volu-
minous a Report ; but they were only mistakes. He submitted
therefore, that the charges made against the Commissioners
were wholly unfounded. Public meetings had been held in
several places, and by them the Commissioners had been
wholly acquitted of the imputations cast upon them. In an-
swer to a complaint from the Recorder of Lancaster, of inac-
curacy in the Report of the Commissioners respecting his at-
tendance, he (Mr. Blackburne) had been at Lancaster him-
self ; and it appeared that there had been a resolution of the
Corporation, to the effect that if the Recorder could not at-
tend to the duties of his office he ought to vacate it ; and he
also found that the Grand Jury had presented him.—( Hear. )
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that he had never felt himself
in so difficult and embarrassing a situation as at that moment ;
conscious, as he was, that a heavier responsibility had never at-
tacked to the decision of the House than on that occasion. But
with the strong feelings, and with the strong opinions which he
entertained as to the course he thought the House ought to pur-
sue, he trusted that he might be allowed briefly to state the con-
clusion to which he had arrived. In the first place, he could not
(concur in the eulogium which had been bestowed on the Bill
in its present state; by the Noble Lord and by the Hon. Mem-
ber for Middlesex ; because he considered it, not as the Bill of
of his Majesty's Ministers, or as the Bill of that House, but as
the Biil of the HOuse of Lords. In what light would a mea-
sure like the Bill as it at present stood—this mangled docu-
ment, this apology for reform—have been viewed by the House
and the public, had it been laid on the table by the Noble
Lord or the Hon. Gentleman. He would venture to say that
it would not only have been scouted out of the House—( No,
mo)—at all events such was his opinion. If in that opinion he
was correct, why not treat the present Bill in the same man-
ner? All that was real, all that was solid, all that was popular
in the original measure was entirely lost and sacrificed—( No,
no)—to pride and old prejudices. Would any one read the
Bill as it at present stood, and the petitions which had been
presented in such numbers from the people, and say that the
former contained the reform which was sought for in the lat-
ter? When the people called for Reform, from the King
down to the parish beadle, to give them such a Bill as the pre.
sent was a perfect mockery. The concessions which had or-

git'ally been made in the House of Commons had been made
in a spirit of conciliation, and he had concurred in them. But

there was a point beyond which concession ought not to go, and
he maintained that to that point the House had arrived. Not a

single step more could in his opinion be taken without dishonour,
and a sacrifice of duty.—(No, no.) He knew he did not speak
the opinion of that House, but he spoke the opinion of nine-
tenths of the people. He could not concur in the eulogium
which had been bestowed on the Bill in its present state—
because almost everything had been struck out of the mea-
sure of the six heads into which it might be divided, viz.,
qualification, aldermen, freemen, town-councils, wards, and
justices. Mto the aldermen, it was a fallacy to say that they
were to be only for six years. That was virtually a perpe-
tuity. Taking the average lives of aldermen, six years was a
perpetuity,—( A laugh.) Then there were the wards. Would

any. . . .., ___
one tell him that the amendment made by the Lords in
that part of the Bill was not for the purpose of facilitating
corruption and undue influence at the election of Members of

Parliament ? As to the changes respecting the magistrates,
which had been made in the Bill by the Lords, they were
most obnoxious. Nothing was felt to be more desirable by
the inhabitants of the metropolis and its neighbourhood--
he was sure that that was the feeling of the inhabitants of
the borough which be had the honour to represent--than to
get rid of many of the blundering and partial magistrates
of the county of Middlesex. In his opinion it would have
been far better if the Lords had, in the first instance, at once
rejected the Bill, instead of paring it down, and destroying
its value. Nor could be help thinking, that when the
Lords made the amendments which they had made in
the Bill, they were persuaded that if there was a spark of
spirit or consistency in the House of Commons or in his Ma-

_..... ... ... ...... ....._
jesty's Ministers, .it was totally impossible that to those
amendments they could . assent. The sum and substance

of all the amendments made by the Lords was to increase the

weans of corruption. Unless the House of Commons pressed
their own view of the subject, they would admit that the
House of Lords was to be thenceforth the engine by which
legislation in this country was to be regulated. The question
- wheth thr Reformed House of Commons was then
&lc to the House of Lords, or to fulfil the
he people. But the Hon. Member for
the House was helpless. Good God !
? His answer was, " Look back at the
'Reform Bill." There was a precedent
for his Majesty's Ministers. It was im-
1, the various perils through which the
, before its eventual triumph ; it was im-
, that it Was only at the last hour that,
protests of some Noble Lords and the
;hers, a well-timed prudence and a kind

of passive resistance caused it to be acceded to by the other
House, without feeling that that formed an excellent pre-
cedent for the steps which ought to be pursued on the pre-
sent occasion. In his opinion, but one course was open to
them and to his Majesty's Government. Let them boldly
declare that they would uphold the Bill in its integrity ;
leaving to those who ventured to destroy it to answer to the
people for their conduct. Seeing what were the wishes of the
majority, he would not take the sense of the House ; but he
must strongly protest against the Noble Lord's motion.
Mr. FRE S EIFIE LD, adverting to Clause 1 of the Bill, ob-
served, that the amendment which had been made by the Lords
in the amendment of the Commons was a great improvement
in the Bill. In the amendment of the Commons it was stated,
that if his Majesty were advised by the Privy Council to ap-
prove of the division made by the revising barrister of a borough
into wards, then, and then only, should the division appear in
the London Gazette ;. and then, and then only, should that di-
vision actually take place. This amendment the Lords agreed
to, but stated that they found it necessary to add the following
provision : " Provided always, that if his Majesty, by advice of
his Privy Council, shall not approve such determination, such
publication as aforesaid shall nevertheless be made, and such di-
vision be in force, for the purpose of any election under the
provisions of this Act, and until such time as his Majesty shall,
by advice of the Privy Council, upon further information and
report from such barristers, definitively approve the division of
such borough into wards in manner hereinbefore mentioned."
The reasons given by the Lords for adding this proviso were :
—" Because without such proviso, by virtue of the amendment
made by the Commons, if his Majesty should be advised by his
Privy Council not to approve the determination of the barrister
as to the division of any borough into wards, no publication
thereof could take place, and no division into wards could have
effect, while nevertheless the election of councillors would be
made by the burgesses of the whole borough so remaining un-
divided—a result contrary to the intention of the two Houses,
as expressed in the preamble to the said clause, where it is de-
clared to be expedient that certain boroughs of large population
should be divided into wards before any election of councillors
for such borough should take place." Now, it was impossible
to deny that this clause of the Bill had been much amended by
their Lordships, whose object evidently was, to carry into
effect a part of the measure which might otherwise have been
inoperative.
Sir S. WHALLE Y thought the Hon. Member for Fins-
bury did the House of Lords too much honour to call the mea-
sure the Lords' Bill. Admitting that much which was good
had been taken out of the Bill, so much which was good had
been left in it, that he had no hesitation in acquiescing in its
adoption. It took away the old Corporations, and replaced
them by new ; it secured elections by household suffrages ; it
provided that the officers of Corporations should be duly
elected ; and in various ways it did much to improve municipal
government. He did not look upon the Bill as a compromise,
so much as a measure that-must inevitably lead to other great
measures of reform. Into the field in which those other mea-
sures must be discussed, he wished to go-with all the arms he
could get. It was a consolation for their having done so little
during the session, that it was wound up on almost the last day
by the completion of a measure, the tendency of which was to
attack corruption in one of its strongest holds.
Mr. Sergeant WILDE fully concurred in the opinions
which had been expressed as to the expediency of the House
of Commons adopting the Bill in its present state ; but at the
same time lie could not too strongly declare the regret he felt
at the alterations which had been made by the Lords. He
felt satisfied that the real and sole object of those alterations
was to retain as much as possible of the old system of cor-
ruption under the new state of things that would be created
by the Bill—(Hear, hear)—and he firmly believed that their
Lordships, in making the alterations, never intended or
expected that the Bill would be received and passed by
the Commons.—(Hear, hear.) He was convinced, indeed,
that the highest gratification that could be afforded to the
Lords would be for the House of Commons to reject the
Bill as it then stood.—( Hear, hear.) That however was,
in his opinion, the last course that the House ought to pur-
sue, because, although the Bill in its mutilated state did not
give all that could be desired, still it must be remembered that
the effect of it, even as it then stood, would be to establish
throughout the kingdom legitimate bodies, through which the
public opinion might be made to bear directly upon both
branches of the Legislature.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman went into a detail of the circumstances
under which the Bill had been introduced into Parliament,
and then drew a comparison between the manner in which it
had been received, discussed, and considered in the two
Houses. Alluding to the speeches of the counsel heard at
the bar of the House of Lords, he observed, that no two
speeches that he had ever heard fall from the lips of men had
occasioned him so much surprise and astonishment. They
exhibited not only a total ignorance or total forgetfulness of
the contents of the voluminous Reports which had been printed
upon the subject, but they abounded in statements relating to
constitutional law so utterly groundless, so completely ill-
grounded, so grossly at variance with all that was known and
understood upon the subject, that he would venture to say
no lawyer's clerk who had been six months in an office would
have disgraced himself by uttering them. The lion. and
Learned Gentleman was proceeding upon this point, when,
Lord SAND ON rose to order. He appealed to the House
whether it was desirable that what had taken place elsewhere,
previous to the consideration of the details of the measure,
should now be made a matter of discussion in the House of
Commons.—( Cries of " Order !") He appealed to the
Speaker whether it was not desirable that some limit should
be put to a species of discussion which had no reference to the
points really under the consideration of the House.
Mr. Sergeant WILDS begged to assure the Noble Lord
and the House that it was not his intention in any degree to
offer any disrespect to the other House of Parliament. In the
observations he was making when the Noble Lord interrupted
him, lie was merely discussing the difference of the mode in
which the Bill had been treated in the two Houses. The
Hon. and Learned Gentleman then adverted to the character
of the evidence heard at the bar of the House of Lords—evi-
dence, he said, which the lowest tribunal in the empire would
be degraded by listening to for a moment, yet in the House of
Lords it was not only received, but cheeted to the very echo,
and by way of completing the solemn mockery, was gravely
declared by their Lordships to be convincing.—( Laughter.)
He had already stated the regret he felt at the alterations
which the Lords persisted in making in the Bill—they were
important, but they were not fatal ; they left in full and
unimpaired vigour the great principle upon which the Bill
proceeded, and from which, as time and popular intelli-
gence advanced, many benefits and many blessings must ne-
cessarily spring. Still lie believed that the reason why a
stronger and more general expression of feeling had not
• taken place with respect to the Lords' amendments, was
because that the full effect of them was not yet sufficiently
understood. The effect of the rating qualification in the town
of Newark would be to exclude every alderman except one—
even the mayor would not escape.,( Hear, hear.) In conclu-
sion, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman observed that the
country, looking at the course which had been taken in the
two Houses of Parliament, the manlier in which the Bill had
been considered in that House, the principle upon which it
had been introduced, and the manner in which the Lords'
amendments had been received, would have good cause to per-
ceive that the Reformed House of Commons was a safe House
of Commons, and that if it had not achieved all that could be
desired, it was only because the people had not given them a
stronger force.—( Cheers. )
Viscount EBRING TON congratulated the House on the
disposition which it showed to let the Bill pass, however much
they might be disposed to quarrel with it on certain points.
He was also glad that there was to be no division on the last
amendments sent up from the Lords, because if a division were
to take place, it would only tend to increase the hopes of the
Tories, who, probably trusting to divisions among Reformers
in that House, had been emboldened to suggest some amend-
ments, on which they so pertinaciously insisted. When he
agreed with the amendments, or rather consented to them,
he did not, in any remarks he might make, intend to im-
pugn the right of the other House to exercise its fair and
constitutional privilege of making such amendments ; and
though he was disappointed that such amendments had been
made, still he was not very sorry at the position in which
they were placed, because, from the admirable spirit dis-
played by his Noble Friend that night, and from the intel-
ligence and judgment and spirit with which the amendments
sent up by the Lords had been framed, and enforced by the
reasons urged, he was cenfident that it could not be a final, at
all events not a satisfactory measure. The Bill had many de-
fects, but still it gave a power to the Liberal party which
would enable them to carry Reform much farther. On these
grounds, therefore, he accepted the Bill, in the cordial hope
that before the close of another Session of Parliament they
would see the Bill materially amended. 'His Hon. Friend the
Member for Middlesex, and the Hon. and Learned Member
who spoke last had described the position in which the House
of Lords stood, and spoke of the necessity of Reform in that
House. He would not allude further to the observations of
these Hon. Members, but he must say that he had no wish to
speak with vituperation or reproach of the other branch of
the Legislature. From the beginning of his political life he
had ever been most anxious that the three branches of the
Legislature should be allowed to employ their distinct and
proper functions for the advancement of the public weal
and good Government.--( Hear, hear.) He had always been
anxious to see a concurrence of feeling and harmony among
the three branches, because he was convinced that it was
only by the harmony of all the three that any of the branches
could be beneficial to the country.—( Hear, hear.) He re-
gretted to see any discordance between the two Houses, be-
cause he was convinced that it tended to lessen the respect
and regard which the public were disposed to show towards
the Legislature. Though he disapproved of some remarks
that had been made with regard to the Lords, still he could not
shut his ears to the words that had been used by a large por-
tion of persons, not of extreme opinions, but, on the contrary,
removed from the turmoil of party politics, and who were ac-
customed to judge, not from party feelings, but from facts. He
could not shut his ears to the opinions expressed by the people
of the impossibility of the two branches of the Legislature
continuing as they were.—( Hear, hear.) 'He was always
anxious that each of the three branches of the Legislature-
should enjoy its full integrity, and the full exercise of its rights ;
but at the same time he could not fail to be influenced by the
prevalence of the opinion to which he had alluded. He was
persuaded that the veneration which belonged to the House of
Lords in the eyes of the people of England would not conti-
nue, unless the people found that the principles of the House
of Lords worked practically better for good government.
In what he had said be had expressed his sincere and con-
scientious opinion—an opinion founded not only upon the
grounds he had himself stated, but from what he had heard
from many persons who were far from being the advocates of
extreme measures. He earnestly hoped that the Ilouse of
Lords would consider seriously of this crisis in a spirit which
the importance of the case demanded, and that in the course
of the next session of Parliament that assembly would ex-

hibit a tone and temper better adapted to the present state
of public opinion than it had done in this.—( Loud cheering.)
He could not sit down without paying his humble tribute
of approbation to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who
was at the head of the Commission of Corporation Inquiry, for
the clear and conclusive defence of himself and of those who
were associated with him in that inquiry against the aspersions
which had been so unjustly cast upon him and his associates.
Every one who had heard that defence must, he was sure, have
felt great satisfaction at the opportunity that had been afforded
to that Hon. and Learned Gentleman to do himself and his
Co. Commissioners?'. justice ; and he was also sure, that after
hearing that defence, the fullest credit would be given to all of
those Commissioners for having conducted their labours with
the strictest honour, impartiality, and justice.—( Loud cheers.)
Viscount SANDON adverted to the observations of the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Blackburne) respecting
the very strollg language made use of in the House of Lords
against the Commissioners, and perfectly agreed with that
Hon. and Learned Gentlemen that it would have been more
discreet if their Lordships had refrained from the use of such
language ; but, at the same time, the House of Commons was
much more reprehensible for allowing some of its Members to
use language respecting the House of Lords of a much
stronger nature, which, so far from being checked by the
House, was cheered even by some of h's Majesty's Ministers.
Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE—By whom ?
Viscount SANDON—.I certainly heard a cheer from the
Ministerial bench, but as I am short sighted, I cannot fix it
upon any Hon. Member.—( Hear, and laughter.) When I
complained of the language so used towards the other House,
there were cheers from the opposite bench, but they were
not cheers of encouragement to me, but of encouragement to
those who used that language. Indeed, it seemed to him that
while they were attempting by their measures to avoid a col-
lision between the two Houses of Parliament, they were in
their speeches expressing the greatest regret at doing so.—
( Hear, hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Member for
Dublin had said, that a collision had already begun. Now it
was not in the nature of things that two co-existent bodies,
having co-equal powers, could always agree ; but still that
occasional difference of opinion might very well exist with a
perfect harmony in the general proceedings of those two
bodies. The conduct of the House of Lords had not been
such as to alter this Bill so as to make it impossible for the
House of Commons to agree with it. On the contrary, it
was the opinion of many in this House, that the Bill was a
very great improvement of the Municipal Corporations ; and
not only so, but that it would be the means, by-and-by, of
obtaining other improvements.—( Loud cheers.) What right,
then, had Hon. Members to find fault with. the Lords, be-
cause, in the first instance, their Lordships had not gone
the full length that the House of Commons had gone ? He
thought that the Bill, as it now stood, was as near an agree-
ment between two bodies of co-equaj powers, on such an im-
portant measure, as it was possible to obtain. He was per-
fectly satisfied with the Bill as it now stood. Indeed he
should have been satisfied with it, even without some of the
changes which the Lords had made in it.—(Cheers and
laugiTter.)) But had he a right to quarrel with the other
House of Parliament because they had made those altera-
tions ? What would be the value of the other branch of the
Legislature, if they were merely to be allowed to record the
edicts of this House ? Besides, what was the amount of the
majority even in the House of Commons for the fullest mea-
sure of reform on the subject of Corporations? Let the
House consider whether it was not too much to say that .a
majority of thirty-five should not only govern the House of
Commons, but should govern also a co-equal branch of the
Legislature ? He had not intended to trouble the House with
any observations on this occasion, nor did he wish to be con-
sidered as making any charge against his Majesty's Ministers.
On the contrary, he thought the course they had pursued did
them the highest credit.—( Cheers.) He was speaking only
of this particular occasion.—( Laughter.) He thought they
did themselves the highest credit in acceding to the amend-
ments of the Lords in a measure which he hoped would tend
to maintain the limited monarchy of this country by mitigating
the transition from one state of things to another, and combin-
ing in stricter bonds of amity the mixed and balanced consti-
tution of the three component powers of the State.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
concluding observations of the Noble Lord rendered it unne-
cessary for him to advert to the charge that Ministers had
cheered the language that had been used in this House, to-
wards the House of Lords. He agreed with the Noble Lord
that it was wise and proper not only for this House, but for
the House of Lords, to uphold a co-equal branch of the Le-
gislature ; but while lie said this lie, as a Member of Parlia-
ment, would tnaintain that when any amendment came down
from the Lords to this House he had a right to analyze it, to
discuss it with freedom, to point out where he conceived the
Lords to be in error, and to suggest that course which it
seemed to him most fitting to take. Although his Noble
Viend (Lor 1 Sandon) had complained of improper language
b. in; used towards the House of Lords, yet he had carefully
abstained from noticing the general course of our debate on
the Lord's original amendments. Let him bear in mind that
that debate was conducted in a spirit which induced them to
hope that they would be spared any further discussion by the
acceptance of the Bill in they House of Lords.—(Cheers.)
The whole course of that debate was marked with temper,
moderation, and respect for the House of Lords. If the sole
object of the House of Commons on that occasion had been to
show respect and deference to the most delicate sensibility of
the House of Lords, spiritual or temporal, no other course than
that which was actually adopted could have been taken.
Viscount SANDON.—Strong language was used by the
Hon. and Learned Members for Bath and Dublin.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER —lf that
were so, how, let him ask, was that language met by the
House ? But was not the most mild and most respectful
temper shewn not merely in the tone and character of the de-
bate, but what was more, in the character of the amendments
made upon the amendments of the other House ? He rejoiced
in the spirit manifested in that debate and in those amendments,
because it displayed on the part of this House a desire to afford
to the Lords an opportunity of conciliation. He knew that if
the House of Lords had grasped that opportunity of setting
themselves right with the country by a frank and cordial ex-
pression of an union of opinion with the House of Commons
in the amendments this House then sent up to the Lords,
they would have done more to defend the House of Lords
against evil than could ten thousand angry speeches made at
the bar of that House, or ten thousand cheers from those who
heard those speeches, or ten thousand defences of the Lords on
the part of his Noble Friend (Lord Sandon.) All would have
been forgotten except their acquiescence in the amendments;
therefore one of his reasons for his regretting that another
course was taken was not merely that the Bill had not been
improved to the extent that it might have been, but that the
House of Lords had missed one of the greatest opportunities
for setting themselves well with the country that ever was
offered thm. At the same time, neither now nor at any
other time had he spoken with the slightest disrespect of the
House of Lords. But looking back to the course pursued by
the House of Lords for the last fifteen years, he saw that if
that course were persevered in it must impair their usefulness
to the public. It was true their Lordships had agreed to many
salutary measures. Indeed, he never despaired of their Lord-
ships' acquiescence in the measures of improvement that might
be proposed to them—sooner or later. IJe did not despair
that they would acquiesce sooner or later in the amendments
which they had now rejected. But when he had said
" sooner," they had al ways said " later."—(Laughter.) They
had acquiesced in a manner which rendered their acquiescence
valueless frequently to those upon whom the boon was con-
ferred. Look back to the Catholic question ! Look back to
the question affecting Dissenters ! In like manner- look back
to the question of Reform ! Reform, like the other two mea-
sures, was at first resisted by the Lords boldly, and apparently
upon principle it was afterwards conceded, but in a manner
that at least did not increase the value of the concession.
This Bill again ; why, every amendment that was made by the
Lords had the effect, so admirably stated by a Right Hon.
Gentleman not now in his place, of implying distrust without
conferring security.--( Cheers.) " The House of Lords feel-
ing reluctant to adopt the principle of popular reform, must
necessarily feel more reluctance than we, as Members of the
Reformed House of Commons, to such measures as the pre-
sent. But, surely, surely we shall see the day when the two
Houses of Parliament, either from conviction or necessity,
shall place themselves upon a more harmonious prin-
ciple for combined action. The time is coming—the
very admissions in this Bill prove it. May it come
speedily, and avert the dangers that must otherwise threaten
us. I believe this Bill is a great point gained. I differ alto-
gether from the statement of the character given of this Bill
by the Hon. Member for Finsbury. I say that, even with the
amendments of the Lords, it contains more practical good for
the promotion of popular feeling in a right direction, than any
measure that has ever been propounded in Parliament since the
Reform Bill : for it has a more active operation than the Re-
form Bill itself; it touches classes of men and topics which
the Reform Bill does not touch. It concerns the administra-
tion of justice : it regards the application of public funds - it
gives to the people public duties to perform ; it opens to them
a new career of public usefulness; it entrusts to them the'
superintendence of their local affairs ; so that when this Bill
shall be in complete operation, we shall find a new and im-
proved public spirit developed. This Bill, therefore, is not to
be undervalued, as the Hon. Member for Finsbury would fain
undervalue it. On the contrary, it is the greatest boon the
Legislature can give to a free people." But for all this (con-
tinued the Right Hon. Gentleman) he regretted that the Bill
was rendered less efficient by the introduction of the Lords'
amendments. His Noble Friend ( Sandon) had spoken of the
mitigating power of the Bill. If the mitigation be one from
evil to good, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not'
like a slowness of transition.

Viscount SANDON—I said that the amendments of the
Lords were a mitigation of the original provisions of the Bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—The
Bill was an infusion of good into the old system of evil ; but
the amendments of the Lords were an infusion of evil into the
new system of good. They were an infusion of the ancient
freemen_ (for instance) into the new constituency of house-
holders, in order to mitigate the transition from evil to good.
Such a mitigation was like introducing all the mischiefs of
a cholera hospital into a town► hitherto free from the infec-
tion. They knew what the mitigating system had been in the
case of Great Yarmouth. He had hoped that this debate
would have been saved the House, but, as it was, he did not
think the observations that had been made were more than
his Noble Friend himself would have felt justified in making
if he himself had been, a sincere friend of the Bill.
Mr. D'E YNCO URT said, that in assenting to these
amendments he must be understood as making the strongest
protest a Member could make against being required to give
up one of the most ancient and sacred rights of the people—
that of appointing their own magistrates to administer jus-
tice in their local districts. He thought his Hon. Friend the
Member for Finsbury had under-rated the merits of this Bill ;
for though some of the amendments were objectionable_

such as the qualification clause, the alteration as to the words,
and especially as to justices—all of which were peduliarly the
Lords' portion of .the Bill—yet this was the price paid by the
House of Commons for the material improvements which
other, parts of the Bill introduced, in which the Lords had no
share, except that of consenting to them. The Hon. Mem-
ber then went on to contend, that if the House of Lords con-
tinued its opposition to all the liberal measures which were
brought forward, it would be impossible to go on without
making a change either in that House or the constitution of
the country. He was sure that that was the general feeling
of the country.—(Loud cries of " Question !")
Sir WILLIAM MOLE SWORTH said that in yielding
to the House of Lords, by agreeing to so many of their
amendments, the House of Commons had made an useless
attempt to conciliate a set of men who had shown that they
did not know either their own interests or the feelings of
the country.—( Hear, hear.) He contended that the inte-
rests of the aristocracy—of that exclusive set composing the
House of Lords—were different, and at variance with the
general interests of the people, and that it was hopeless to
expect a change in their conduct without a reform. A few
years ago an open expression of opinions such as these re-
garding the House of Lords would have created the greatest
astonishment; but now the general question asked was, " What
is the use of the House of Lords ?"—( Hear, hear.) What
had brought about this state of things but the conduct of
the Lords themselves? It was their conduct in regard to
the Reform Bill, to the Municipal Reform Bill, and to the
Irish Church Bill, by their opposition to which last they showed
themselves indifferent to the welfare of Ireland, that the change
came in regard to them in the opinions of the people ; and he
would say, that if they should show the same feeling in regard
to a few more measures brought forward for the good of the
country, the people would begin to see that they could not be
reformed in any manner, save by being dissolved.--( Cheers. )
Mr. LENNARD said it was with regret that he allowed
the amendments of the Lords to pass without opposition--
especially that amendment which deprived the town-councils
of 'the nomination of the justices. He considered that pro-
vision to be one of the most valuable parts of the Bill which
had been sent from the House of Commons. It was valuable,
as'tending to secure proper magistrates for the boroughs, and
still more valuable as recognizing the right of the people to
choose their own magistrates; a right which, as had been
stated by the Member for Newark, was in former times one of
the rights of the people. The prerogative of the Crown in
this respect, of which so much had been said, was an encroach-
ment on the rights of the people—an encroachment which,
from what he had observed, he thought had often worked very
ill. It was with great regret that he found it necessary to
allow the amendments of the Lords in this respect to be passed
without opposition ; but it was a satisfaction to him to have
heard a distinct declaration from his Majesty's Government
that the present measure was not in any way to be looked
upon as a final one. For his own part he protested against
being in any way bound by what was now done; and he said
this in order that next session, if a proposal should be made
for giving the people that election of their magistrates which
had been refused to them by the Lords, it should not be ob-
jected that the question had been settled by Act of Parlia-
ment. With reference to the House of Lords, he believed,
from all he had seen, that the conduct which had been long
pursued by that House had impressed the people with a very
strong feeling, and one which was exceedingly difficult to be
restrained; and he could not help expressing his opinion that
the, time was come when it was absolutely necessary for that
House to put itself in harmony with the people.
Mr. HUGHES HUGHES said that it had been admitted
on all hands that this Bill was the greatest boon which had
been given to the country since the period of the Reform Bill.
Now he would say, that the country was as much indebted to
the House of Lords for it as to this House.—( Laughter.)
Was it not even called the Lords' Bill ? He would still main-
tain that they oWed to the House of Lords its being so good
a measure.
Colonel SHIT HOR P tendered to the other House his best
thanks for the part it had taken in regard to this measure.
Mr. WALL ACE thought the Bill, notwithstanding the
alterations made by the other House, an excellent measure—
( Hear)—and hailed it with pleasure, as being better calcu-
lated to root out Toryism than any other that had been passed
since the Reform Bill.
Sir EDWARD CODRINGTON protested against the
mutilations made in the original Bill, and hoped that the Bill,
as it now stood, would only be taken as an instalment. lie
was sure the country would not be satisfied if the Bill were
not restored to its original state.
Major BEA UCL ER K protested against the principle of
qualification, and the division of the smaller towns into wards
and hoped that sooner or later a sounder principle of legisla-
tion would be introduced.—(" Question.")
Mr. WARD was convinced that the Bill, mutilated as it
was, would be a good working Bill, and he thought that it
would be an absurdity to reject such advantages as it con-
tained. He agreed, however, with Hon. Members, that it
was quite improper to allow matters to continue as they at pre-
sent were, when Bills were sent to the other House, and
treated as if they were so much waste paper.
Mr. P. HOWARD regretted the loss of the clause re-
specting the justices, yet thought that the Bill as it stood was
worthy of being accepted.
The motion was then agreed to.
ORANGE LODGES.

Mr. HUME presented the Report of the Committee ap-
pointed to inquire into Orange Lodges. On moving that it be
printed, he took the opportunity of saying, that as there was not
time for the printing of the Report, and putting it in the hands
of Members before they separated, he felt bound to state that
the Committee in the Report recommended to the attention of
the House the order issued by Lord Hill, of the date of the
31st of last month, in which it was stated that any officer
or soldier attending an Orange Lodge should be subject
to he tried by a court-martial for disobedience of orders,
and might be dismissed the service or otherwise punished.
The Committee also stated that they were bound to ob-
serve that in nearly every corps in the service, whether
the militia or regular forces, at one time or other an Orange
Lodge had existed. The system extended to the regiments
at Malta, the lonian Islands, Gibraltar, Van Diemen's Land,
and to a very great extent in the Canadas ; and that now effi-
cient measures had been taken to put an end to the Orange
Lodges in military bodies. The Committee also suggested to
the House the propriety of dismissing from every office, civil
or military, every person who continued to hold any office in
connection with the Orange Lodges. He would, however, lay
on the table the address he intended to propose at the begin-
ning of next session, if his Majesty's Government did not pre-
viously come forward and recommend the Crown to dismiss
any person from his office who was connected with any society
in which there were secret oaths, and secret signs and tests.
Colonel PE RCE VAL was anxious to offer a few observa-
tions before the Report was ordered to be printed. He agreed
with the Hon. Member in hoping that the order of the Com-
mander-in-Chief would have the effect of preventing the con-
tinuance of Orange Lodges in the army. It was the opinion
of the Noble Lord at the head of the army that the existence
of su.th lodges was prejudicial to the service. He (Colonel
Perceval) bowed to this opinion. But he did not agree with
the Hon. Member in thinking that merely being an Orange-
man disqualified a person from holding office under the Crown.
He had the honour of being a member of the Orange institu-
tion, and he denied that that society was bound together by
secret oaths or signs ; for all the signs and tokens had been made
known to the country through the Committee of that House.
The Orangemen truly denied that there were any secrets in
these societies ; they were merely a body of loyal subjects,
bound together for their mutual protection, and for supporting
the Crown of the country, and maintaining the connection be-
tween England and Ireland. Therefore he did not see how
the Hon. Gentleman could be justified in recommending to
the House a motion to the effect which he had stated. The
order of the Commander-in-Chief not merely regarded the
Orange institutions, but all other societies. The Hon.
Member, therefore, should make his motion applicable to
other societies as well as to Orange lodges. It was notorious
that secret societies, properly so called, existed both in the
army and out of it to a very considerable extent.—( Cry of
" Name, name".) It was known that many Riband societies
existed in the army. He had been told that none of those
societies existed in Ireland, but he knew that there were
many. They also were of such a character, that the House
would be able to get at their secret organs. He was told that
the Orange society was a political body, but was not this the
case with the Anti-Tory Society ? Was it not the case
with the, Franchise Society? The name proved it. The
members of the Riband societies had not the manliness to come
forward as the Orange societies had done, and lay open all
matters connected with them. The Orange Society was a
most loyal institution, and they had ever exerted themselves
to prevent the separation of England and Ireland. He de-
precated the course pursued by the Minister at the close of
the session. As an officer of the army, he was not anxious
that military Orange lodges should be continued ; but at the
same time he wished that all other societies should bit sup-
pressed in the army. Fifty years ago there was hardly a re-
giment in the service in which there was not an Orange so-
ciety. The Hon. Member alluded to the existence of such
societies in regiments in distant colonies; but they had all
ceased to exist in regiments at home as soon as it became
known that they were objectionable. It was said that an
Orange lodge existed in the 35th regiment; but they had the
best evidence to prove that the statement was erroneous. If
the Hon. Member for Middlesex had laid the Report on the
table without making any observations, he (Colonel Perceval)
should not have troubled the House.

Mr. AGL lONB Y admitted that the discussion was prema-
ture ; but rose to observe, that every Member of the Com-
mittee was prepared to sanction the language used by the Hon.
Member for Middlesex. He thought the House and the
country were deeply indebted to his Hon. Friend for the
manner in which he had conducted the inquiry before the
Committee.

The motion was then agreed to.
PAPISTS BILL.
M. TOOKE moved " That the House do not insist on the
amendment made in this Bill by the House, and which had
been objected to by the other House."

Mr. WA RBLTRTON opposed the motion.
After a few words from Sir G. Strickland, Mr. Sergeant
Wilde, Dr. Bowring, Mr. Callaghan, the Attorney-General,
and Mr. Ewart, the House divided. The numbers were—
Ayes
Noes

............... 2l
Majority —2
On the motion of Sir F. BARING, the Lords' amend-
ments to the Stamp-duties Bill were agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS FEES, &e.
Mr. HU-ME gave notice that early next 'session he should
move to release the Members of this House from paying for
the delivery of the sessional papers, from all fees to the porters

was, whether the H
taL to truck
wr-7; of tl
t ftlfileitdgtOlgthat
`•-' ttjeton,e7rliittlat
;I'l tr Antallood
Cco 013ect
-,abvtaLißillop,itagsed,
• tte./*Act
crt t e
xw
of ot]