The Sun.
London, England, 1832-02-29 00:00:00

was not, under " the most popular description of elec-
tion," permitted to vote, while the Noble Lord proposed
that the same person who could not vote in his parish
should yet be at liberty to vote for a representative to assist
in the government of the State. Then the Noble Lord,
too, gave these persons the means of getting themselves
put upon the rates—an opportunity of which they would
most certainly avail themselves, solely for the purpose of
enjoying the benefit of the franchise. He had only token
those papers furnished by the Government as the data on
which he founded his argument. He had not gone at
length into the question; but he thought he had said
enough to show that, if, in addition to the two great
clauses of disfranchisement, and to the other clauses of
the Bill, they introduced a clause giving Members to
thesewhkh mcoeutriodponloittanfaidlisotfribcetsin,
gtheywotld
infinitelyi
nbieiscdhoiemvgoust.h—at
(Hear, hear, hear.)
Mr. MACAULA Y felt unwilling to occupy the time
of the House upon this subject, after the observations
which lie had thought it his duty to make in the course of
last session. But the extreme solicitude he felt on account
of the importance of the question, and of the peculiar
circumstances under which they were called on to discuss
it, compelled him to make a few observations on the sub-
ject. In that, as in every other place, the first grand
object in the discussion of these questions was to
clear the ground and settle epon whom lay the
burden of proof. It was his opinion that the burden of
proof in in this instance lay upon the Opposition. He
considered that he was speaking to a House of Reformers.
(No!)—there might be one or two exceptions; but the
great body on that and on the other side of the House, had,
he believed, agreed that some change in the representation
must take place.—(No, no.) He did not assert that every
individual in that House entertained that opinion ; but he
could not avoid taking it for granted that the great ma-
jority of the Opposition did ; for he was warranted in
saying that in a great majority of the speeches they had de-
livered they had admitted the necessity of some change.—
(Hear, hear.) If he did not entertain the opinion he
now expressed as to their sentiments, he must put aside
all the addresses seat up from the country by the noble-
men and gentlemen who in their different counties had op-
posed this measure of Reform, but all of whom had said
that some change was necessary—that some Reform must
take place—and that some large bodies of people must
have representatives given to them. If the fact was as he
had stated, they on the side of the House on which he sat
proposed that, as part of the large communities entitled to
representation, the metropolitan districts should be repre-
sented. If enfranchisement ought to be part of the Re-
form that the times required, and that gentlemen opposite
admitted to he necessary, it was for those gentlemen to
show why the places now proposed should not partake of
the advantages of enfranchisement. He was aware that
they had no precise standard by which to determine what
were the towns that should receive representatives. He
should use the word importance to constitute that
standard ; for though it was possible to raise
quibbles upon it, none could possibly deny, that if
they were compelled to bestow representation on
one or two places, they would rather bestow it
upon a town like Manchester than upon a petty
village, and their choice would be guided by the greater
importance of the place selected. If they took the amount
of population as the standard of importance—if they
adopted that of the number of 101. houses—if they took
the amount of the assessed taxes—if they took the wealth
—if they adopted intelligence as their criterion—indeed,
estimate it as they might, let them tike any combination of
arithmetical figures that they pleased—let them multiply
or divide, let them subtract or add, let them adopt the
course pointed out by Lieutenant Drummond, or that of
the Hon. Member who proposed to decide the question by
the square root of population and taxes—in short, let
them take whatever course of arithmetic they pleased,
there was none from which these metropolitan districts
would not come marked with the proofs of a most
undoubted importance.--( Hear, hear, bear.) If
they took population, wealth, and intelligence, as the
standard by which to measure their decision, fifty would be
a more proper number of representatives than eight to
give to these districts.—(Hear, hear.) That was a fact re-
cognised by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman himself.
It was admitted by all Hon. Members that in all these
elements of fitness for the formation of a constituency, the
metropolitan districts stood higher than any other. If
so, it was for those who wished to withhold the enfran-
chisement to give the reason why it should be withheld.
The Not,le Lord had offered some reasons for refusing the
Members to these districts, which reasons the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman, had most elaborately exerted himself
to upset. What, said the Hon. and Learned Gentleman,
will you let loose 150,000 voters—will you give the
rights of franchise to such an immense body ? Yes,
said the Noble Lord, I will add Marylebone to West-
minster—l will give the Tower Hamlets and Finsbury
to the City, and Lambeth to Southonrk.—(Hear, hear.)
Yes, they who had talked so much of swamping consti-
tuencies—who exclaimed so loudly against such a course
—who affected so much dread of a large constituency—
actually proposed to swamp Westminster with Alarylebone
--(Cheers)—to swamp the City with Finsbury and the
Tower Hamlets—(Cheers)—and to swamp Southwark
with Lambeth—(Cheers)—and that too, although at the
same time they described the present constituencies of each
of these places as sufficiently numerous.—(Hear, hear.)
What, were they not afraid of the unhealthful state of the
metropolis—of the agitation excited by elections among
such very large constituencies ? No, they seemed to be
afraid of none of this things when they made the pro-
posal. Of what then were they afraid ? Of eight Mem-
bers. Simply of eight Members, that must be the cause
of their tear. But the fear was still more remarkable, for
the Noble Lord proposed to add two Members to Middle-
sex; so that it might be said that the Noble Lord feared
six Members—a number not so great as was returned by
some individual Peers to that House.—(Hear, hear.) The
only argument against giving representatives to the metro-
politan districts was, that the Members would be called to
a very strict account by their constituents ; that they
would not speak their own sense, but merely the fluctu-
ating sense of those who sent them as their representatives.
But that argument applied as strongly to the instances of
Members returned by individuals. He did not understand
the grounds on which those who represented the submis-
sion of Members to be called to account by a numerous
constituency as a disgrace, while they thought it a point
of honour to submit to the same strictness of account to an
individual. He did not understand that spirit of honour
that could lick the heels of an oligarchy, while it spurned
at the wishes of the people.—(Hear, hear.) He did not
understand that point of honour which made a man boast
that he had gone out of his seat because he had voted in a
particular manner against the wish of one man, his patron,
while he taunted another for quitting his seat solely because
he had offended 12,000 persons. But supposing this strict-
ness of calling to account to be an evil, was that evil
confined to the metropolitan districts ? During the dis-
cussion on the Catholic claims there were many gentlemen
who disguised their opinion—who compromised their opi-
nion for tear of offending their constituents. He did not
understand on what ground they were more afraid on the
subject of the influence to be exercised by the constituency
in the metropolitan districts than in other large towns.
tie knew an instance of an individual who declared there
were many gentlemen who said on that occasion they
could not vote for the Catholic question if they wished to
retain their seats. That, however, was not the evil of
popular representation alone. It was the faut of all re-
presentations—individual and numerous. To suppose
otherwise would be to manifest an ignorance of human
nature. But the great argument really was, in plain
words, a dread of the preponderance of the people. There
might be some evil in that; but if It was an evil, it was
one which this Bill would not increase. It had always
been found that a great city exercised an influence over
the empire of which it formed a part. That influence,
however, was not connected with the number of represen-
tatives it possessed. It might, indeed, exist without the
city having any representative at all. It often existed
under a despotic Government. At Rome, the despotic
Emperors, while they exercised the most unbounded and
the most brutal tyranny, yet thought it necessary to conci-
e the populace with expensive shows. At Madrid,
under their tyrannical Government, the mob often com-
pelled their despot King to promise the dismissal of an ob-
noxious 'Minister ; they had done so in the reign of Charles
II , and again in that of Charles III.; but that had nothing
to do with the share the people of Madrid had in the
Cortes ; and if in any country in which the people ex-
ercised a morbid influence over the Government, it was
in Turkey, in despotic Tut key ; even there, where reigned
the most absolute, the most unmitigated despotism, the
tyrant of Constantinople was often forced to obey the will
of the people living in the neighbourhood of the Seraglio.
That was an influence which nothing could take away but
an earthquake like that of Lisbon, or even greater than
that which had visited the world in 1606. But did the
p
Noble Lord propose to take away that influence? He
knew it was Fromalltiie
the
city
off Lon-
dona
rty
or of the people hidbeeele ; and
npinipms
ofgl.eiabtle.
iimportance in theilstrugglest
had generally, by the force of its
tpomtvie,irn'kd decided
(iine ad kthose
a law to straggleB;but it would be o
ab,urd
regulate a power which was
only to be dreaded when all law was at end. As long as
the rule of law continued, the power of London would
only consist of the number of votes it had in that Hou.a.
When law was at an end, the power of Loiadtlieroccowulatsi
consist of 1,500,000 men, and of that power