The Sun.
London, England, 1850-03-01 00:00:00

NATIONAL REPRESENTATION.

Mr. HUME, in rising to move for leave to bring in a
Bill to amend the national representation, by extending
the elective franchise, so that every man of full age, and
not subject to any mental or legal disability, who shall
have been the resident occupier of a house, or part of a
house as a lodger, fir twelve months, and shall have

been duly rated to the poor of that parish for that
time, shall be registered as an eleetir, and be

entitled to vote fora representative in Parliament: also,
by enacting that votes shall be taken by ballot; that the
duration of Parliaments shall not exceed three years;
and that the proportion of representatives be made more
consistent with the amount of population and
property—observed that orten as he had had occa-
sion to address the House, he was not aware that
ho had ever addressed it upon a subject of
more importance than this. It regarded, in his humble
opinion, the fiture peace of the country; it was important
as it concerned the justice due to the people of this
country; it was of the utmost importance, in his humble
opinion, as far as it related to the financial state of the
country, and the means by which the expenditure
and the excessive taxation of the country was to be re-
duced. He was quite aware that the vast majority of
the house would listen to him with impatience, because
they thought, and conscientiously felt, that the
House was perfect in itself, and required no
amendment. lie was quite aware that this motion had
been rejected in three successive }ears ; but since the
last session of Parliament the public out of doors had so
unequivocally expressed itself in favour of it, that he
was convinced the House would give the motion the
proper consideration that was due to its tendency and
importance. That motion was for leave ti bring in
a Bill to amend the representation of the people. It
was admitted on all sides that some amendment was
needed, but the difficulty was to deride to what length
the reform should extend.—(Hear, hear.) He wanted
to improve the constitution of that House, so as
to bring it back to its original state. He
wished to make no innovation; but his object was simply
to restore the House and the government of the country
to what it originally was, both in principle and operation.
Ile was one who thought that every man who paid taxes
ought to be represented. Then came the consideration
how to obtain those changes from an unwilling power.
He conceived he was obliged to lay down some rule, and
draw some lino of distinction. Our present Acts of
Parliament drew a line of distinction ; they had been
pointed to what should be the qualification to entitle a
man to the franchise. The constitution of Parliament had
teen, in his experience, what any and every Mininster had
chosen to call it; but, looking at the principle on which
that House was constituted, he asked the House whether
the present rtf.)rmed Parliament was not established and

the reform made a principle altogether at variance with
the great principle on which his present motion was
based, viz., that taxation and representation should be
co-existent. He had a letter in his hand addressed by
Lord Melbourne to Mr. Drummond at the begin-
ning of 1831-32, stating the grounds on which
the then Reform Bill was contemplated. His Lordship
said, "In the former Bill boroughs were regarded in
proportion to their population, but in the present case
the elements upon which the boroughs are to be esti-
mated are by the number of the houses and the amount
of the asses:el taxes." Now, there was the principle
on which the reform of 1832 was effected. He agreed to
that Reform Bill, but at the same time he stated that he
accepted it only with hopes that it would effect that
degree of control on the'part of the people over their re-
presentatives which would insure cheap and good govern-
ment. He had attempted this with the hope that the ques-
tion would have been fully and fairly discussed. In the
results of his proceedings he was bound to state to the
House, that he had been completely, at least he might
say that he had been greatly disappointed. They had
all heard of the mode adopted for legislating in

that House. He must confess that he had been
an advocate for universal suffrage—a word,
he believed, which was often repeated but
seldom understood, but which ho had explained by
stating he had always desired that every man who was a
householder should have a voice in the legislation of the
country. He had always desired that taxation should
go with representation in this country.—(Hear, hear.)
Such, in his opinion, was the original intention of those
who founded our Constitution, and it was only their
opinion which he was desirous of carrying out.—(Hear,
hear.) If he were to bo called to task be would only
say that this and this only was his object; and
if they would allow him, he wouli effectually
make his case out. He was glad to see that the
members of her Majesty's Government had not thought
the subject unworthy of their regard and consideration.
He thought that no measure which was sought to be
introduced into that House should bo introduced with-
out being duly considered and weighed. He had
lived long enough to see that many alterations
had not been amendments, and many reforms lad
not been improvements. The measure which he
was about to introduce was one which would give
contentment and peace to a great number of men,
which would give the franchise to a large number of men
who well deserved it. To meet the feelings of many per-
sous, he had introduced a test into the measure : he pro-
posed that every man who had been rated for the poor's
rate for twelve months should be entitled to the suffrage.
Iler Majesty's Government had epproved of this test,
inasmuch as they had introduces it into their measure
for extending the suffrage to Ireland. The question
might be asked to what extent would this measure
increase the number of those possessing the franchise.
The more they placed dependence in a man the more
trustworthy he would be, but to despise and reject a
man, would be to have no hold upon him. What he
wanted then to do was to raise a man In his own moral
estimation, by placing confidence in him—making him,
in fact, a free man and not a slave; for he
held that he who had no voice in electing those who
passed laws affecting life and property was no freeman,
but was in the situation of a bondsman and a slave. He
wished to do equal justice to Ireland, as well as
to England and to Scotland, for he believed that
many cf the evils which existed in the former country had
arisen from a system of partial legislation. It appeared
that the population of England and Wales in 1841 was
about 16 millions, and taking the number of ratepayers

as his data, excluding the double, treble and quadruple
votes held by one person from his calculation, he found
that he had between 780,000 and 800,000 voters. Now
he proposed that the number of persons en-
titled to vote should be increased to 3,232,762.
Lodgers were equally as fit, and many of them more fit,
to enjoy the franchise than those who now possessed it,
and he would provide in the Bill that every lodger
might be registered to the poor-rates. of the
house in which he lived; and after he had
been so registered for twelve months he should
be equally competent to exercise the franchise as if he
were the possessor of the whole house. Now it was to
this extent that he would carry his plan of registration,
and he put it to the House whether there would he
any danger in thus extending the suffrage. Did
they not all know that whenever the power
of government was confined to a narrow basis,
it invariably led to anarchy and confusion? Had
they net proofs of this in the recent occurrences on
the continent? What, however, had they to fear from
Government if they extend the franchise? Laws were
male not for the benefit of classes, but the good of tLe
community at large, and the Sovereign was no less than
the first magistrate of the land—whose duty it
was to carry out the laws when they had received the
senction of the two Legislative Chambers. Were they
not then in more danger by confining the franchise to a
million when it ought to be enjoyed by three or four
millions? What would any of them say if they were in
the situation of the millions that were now rejected ?
What would any of the Members of that HOMO say or
do, wero they in the situation of millions of artiz ins, on
whose industry some of the finest manufactures de-
pended—(Hear, hear)—receiving 11., 21, or 31. a
week, and who would be called upon to assist
in let erring the Queen's peace should a dis-
turbance break out whilst they were walking the
streets? Were not those artizans entitled to say, " You
call on us to execute the laws, but do you give
us any share or interest in making those law,!?
You treat us as serfs, and drive us like cattle,
and et you call upon us for assistance ?"
Whilst men of large incomes are taxed a thousandth part,
a hundredth part, or a twentieth part, of their earnings,
the artizan was taxed one-fourth of his whole wages
on his consumption of the ordinary articles of
subsist tice. Men not more worthy than they in Bel-
gium, the United States, and in France could not be
taxed without their consent; and why should not the
artz in class of England be placed on a similar footing?
13ut he had, moreover, the deliberate judgment of her Ma-
jesty's Ministers on the paper of the 20th of January
last. He referred to the B:11 of rights for the colonies,
and they must not tell him that they could not place any
confidence in the people of England when they were
placing this confidence in the mixed population of the
Cape of Good Hope, New Zealand, and other
c .doniee.—(ll( ar, hear.) He said then that it
was an insult to the people of this coun-
try that they should be denied a privilege
at home which they would immediately obtain upon set •
ling their foot upon a colonial strand.—(Hear.) Under
these circumstances he would say that he hail not only
a right to ask, but to demand that this right should
be conceded to the people of England.—(Hear, hear.)
Were they less intelligent, less diligent, less moral, hiss
worthy of the right of conferring legislative powers than
the inhabitants of any of the colonies?—(Hear, hear)—
aed if not, why was not the privilege conceded? To
show that they were not he would refer to a
dispatch of Lord Stanley's in 1832. The Ho-
nourable Member then read his Lordship's dispatch.
Here was the principle of extending pow e: and put-
ting into the hands of every man a right to
share in local government, equally applicable to
the national government, of which ho was a part;
and, tl.orefore, he contended that he had Lord
Stanley's decided opinion in favour of his scheme.
Her Majesty's Government was proposing to
introduce universal suffrage into the colonic 4. Thus for
he was supported by parity of reasoning. Evers' man
who was rated to the road-tax at the Cape of Good
Hope was to hire a vote. Her Majesty's Government
were ready to show their confidence in 180,000 persons
at the Cape of Good Hope, and yet they were back-
ward in giving the franchise to Englishmen,
who were no less intelligent and trustworthy.
He wished to carry out a system of equalization by
means of electoral districts, and there were precedents of
a recent date emanating from the Government, in regard
to the colonies, which justified him in asking the House to
adopt the course which he suggested, and he asked Hon.
Members to pause before they gave a vote in favour of
rejecting the measure. Her Majesty's Ministers had
given the colonies three representative es'aees, which
consisted of the governor, a legislative council, and a re-
presentative assembly, and the power and privileges of
each were distinctly defined. Now he did not
object to our estates of the King, Lords, fled
Commons being continued, but what he wished
was that the latter should become a better reflex of the
opinions of the people. In that case it would be more
pure and more efficient. His own coescientious be-
lief was that many in the House held their seats in
consequence of having paid large sums of money to per-
sons to secure their election, and this was equally as bad
in principle as the borough-mongering system of old.
Three years was long enough for any man to hold a seat
in that House. At one time he egreed with his late
lamented friend Cartwright, that one year would be suf-
ficient, but at the present moment he should be satisfied
by triennial Parliaments. Another point be thought it
right to mention was the payment of Members. True,
it was one cf the points of the Charter, but: for the
last 12 or 15 years of his life his principle had been to pay
every officer for the duty he had to perform, and ha still
was of the same opinion. He considered that every
man ought to be paid f m his services, and by the parties
who etnplo3 el him. With regard to the constitution
and privileges extended to the Cape of Good Hope, they
1 a'l, in his humble opinion, a precedent which warranted
them more than any other to press the Government on
this question. They had Ireland and the colonies, and
why not, he would ask, extend the same privileges to the
the people of England and Scotland? He held in his
hind the speech of the Noble Lord, delivered on the Bth
of last mouth—and here he must pay the Noble Lord
the compliment t 3 say that he never heard a speech since
the time of the Ra fwm Bill more really like the Noble
Lord himself—and in that speech the Noble Lord re-
marked, that wherever Englishmen went, they carried
with them the spirit of the free institutions of their
country. Now, he would ask the Noble Lord where
was the spirit of those institutions at home, which they
might carry with them to other countries ? With regard
to the Reform Bill, he (Mr. Hume) must say that it did
not fulfil the objects which it professed. And what were
thole objects? They were the very objects which he
was now contending, and the very objects for which the
Noble Lord himself, he believed, considered to be just.
There was another question in his (Mr. Hume's) motion
—the vote by ballot. Now, the Noble Lord, in in-
troducing the Reform Bill, had sta`el that more ingeni-
ous arguments had never come under his notice then
had been advanced in favour of the ballot; yet the Noble
Lord, on that occasion, said that the ballot was not t
form any part of his Bill. He (Mr. Hume) had voted
for that Bill, but he was for " the Bill, the whole Bill,
and nothing but the Bill." Now us the Noble Lord
boasted of the rights and liberties of Englishmen, and
that they would carry those liberties wherever they
might go, he thought the Noble Lord ought really to
extend their rights and bbn.:ies to them. But it would
be said, "Oh, but you have got the Reform Bill, and is
not that quite enough? He (Mr. Hume) would say,
" No, it is not quite enough." He would refer the
Noble Lord to another passage in his speech, when in-
troducing the Reform Bill. The Noble Lord on that
occasion said, " When I propose a reform in Parliament
I propose that the people should send into this House
their real representatives, that thoso representatives
should consider their wants and attend to their inte-
rests. I propose that they should have this vast power."
Now give them the Noble Lord's system as implied in
those words. Let the Noble Lord come up to his
own mark, and he is fairly entitled to amend
the Reform Bill. Now he asked the Noble
Lord to do so. He (Mr. Hume) held that the
principles which were comprised in his motion,
and the arguments which he had advanced in
support of those principles, were not to be controverted.
His demand was "justice," which was the right of every
Englishman. When the Noble Lord, on the 6th of
February, introduced the Reform Bill, he stated that it
was his intention to give representatives to every part of
the country, and that he did not wish to give a pre-
ponderance to any part over the ether, and that the
Government had taken into consideration the propriety
of giving a certain number of towns and manufacturing
districts a share in the representation. Now, he wished
the Noble Lord would carry out that intention, and give
such representation to the people.—(Hear.) The Noble
Lord would recollect that in his recent motion to extend
the benefit of free trade to the colonies, he made
allusion to the loss of the North American possessions
(United States) to this country, and had attributed that
loss to a " series of blunders." True it was; and the
Noble Lord should not forget that in those " series of
blunders" the main cause of the loss of their North
American possessions was attributable to " taxation
without representation," and Lord Camden, in reference
to the Stamp Act, in connexion with the cause of
dispute in that matter, had expressed himself
in February, 1766, in these words—" My impression
i 5, and I shall retain it to the last hour of my
life, that taxation without representation' is most un-
just, and whoever takes from a man his substance, in
such a case, commits a robbery." He (Mr. Hume) re-
peated the words, it was " a robbery."—(Hear, hear.)
With respect, to the object of the Reform Bill, he might
also refer to the authority of the late Earl Grey. That
Noble Earl had said ho believed it to bo " a measure
of peace and reconciliation," On the 9th of February
the Noble Earl. (Grey) had quoted from Whitelock's
book on Government, and in speaking of the genius c f
the constitution, that authority laid down as an opinion,
that " whenever the question of the right of the electces
was brought before the House of Commons, the good
sense of the House was in favour of the people, and of
the feeling that the more free the elections were, the
more beneficial would it prove to the country.—(dear,
hear.) That was the evidence of the late Earl Grei in
favour of Parliamentary Reform, and in speaking of it,
he pronounced it to be a measure of peace and concilia-
tion, while, on the other hand, its refusal would be at-
tended with disquiet and discontent. Sergeant Grant
ville, too, in a House of Commons in which Seldon and
several other distinguish° 1 Members were, laid down
the same opinions, and contended that all inhabitant-
householders who wore rated should have a vote in the
election of the Commons.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
The same opinion was come to by the House in the case
of the Pontefract election. He next considered the ac-
tual state of the constituent body, showing that there
were no less than eight}-five qualifications for voters in
counties, cities, and boroughs. When such a state of
things existed was it to be wondered at, that they should
require an expensive staff of lawyers to travel about the
county, holding registration and registry revision
sessiets? It was an utter absurdity to assert that the
ign9ruce_of the guilt hulk of the people, could be put

the
forward as substantial ground for refusing thew
;
.ancrete. There was a common observation,
d !Ot
t! e people first, and give them political rights ae
the
vileges afterwards. The best mode of teacbingthito7
people was, he thought, by giving them " here
worth looking after. In less than three months t
ni hers
were no fewer that 1,045 essays produced by tne—
a puree,'
of the working classes, and three of them,
instrue.t
men Laker, a journeyman printer, and a Paget'
man weaver, received the Parker prizes
and
the working classes could do these things,
when they were capable of writing such elsainl
why should they be debarred from
their voices in the election of representatives? ulvt
the illustration of another, he asked was a man have
a vote as long as his jackass lived, and not to , a
vote when his jackras died? Was a man, ltsv'n'itt,
house worth 101., to be privileged to vote, and •ed
be deP":„
event of his hcuse being burned down, to exers..st,st
next day of that vote? The Hon. Gentleman next Rely,
ceedel to substantiate the basis of his motion—nn,'
the 'Os
the inequality of the is presentation. The nre'eciand
electors to the population was 1 to every IS In ee'e lands
to every 19 in Wales-1 to every 14 in Scotian
and Ito every 58 in Ireland. Half tic borough Pliusislf
tiers of England returned 33 Members and the other I'"
Unshed
290. Members. One-haif of the population of the Unlhat
Kingdom elected the miij ,rity of the Members ileteds
House! Could such a system he defended or ju't";Ane
23 Members were elect'.d by 3,523 electors to
and Ireland, and Newcastle, with. nearly the We? tee
tent of constituency, returned 2. He pressed tors a
extension of the franchise constituted in his mod" ;00
claim of right, maintaining that the people should
they
a hold over the purse-strings of the country, which eel
could not have so long as the present unjust and "eq.&
system of representation was permitted to continue% the
warned the Legislature against continuing to re it, he
people a fair Iperticipation in political rights; 8 I to
cautioned those unwilling to do justice t,.) tbe reetPiee'ee
take a lesson from what had occurred on the 13"""1 as
He deprecated the violence of the Chartists as nine foe
any zeal, though he approved of the PrtheiPleaaising
which they contended, and he was sorry to ha
turned his attention to the subject, that be Lue'lgoe.
there was not a greeter enemy to reform than the hoe,
Gentleman opposite (Mr. F. O'Connor).—(ilear' knee
and laughter.) He was not for using force or vie
in furtherani e of the cause he had at heart.—
par.)
Mr. P. O'CONNOR—Nor ern I. cf
Mr. HUME—He wished to show that the best waY 0
convincing the people of the justice of their claies, :100
by demenstrateig the evil of withholding the conehee lee
for which they contended. The course "'hie" di.
Chartists had taken rendered the name of Chartism
ous, for connected with it were violence, disorder, et\
disregard for the law. While he made this statemet;
he blamed the Government for not having
just demands of the Chartists, instead of swarming es.
country with soldiers and saddling the peoeo
sebere s
pence to keep down the popular cause.
was a time that the quest:on which he then urged
onisteug
consideration of the Legislature deserved more sertros
attention. It behoved those who had property te
those who could make property more valuable w""f"tbis
tice. It did not become them to refuse the people ° ty)
yielded t°
the
prof erto
country those rights which they (the owners of
possessed. They should do unto others as they wallet
htid tob•
wish to be done by, and not to grasp and
which they knew to be unjust. After some furt-er
servations, the Hon. Gentleman concluded by f°rivallf
submitting his motion.—(Hear, hear ) of
Sir J. WALMSLEY said he was quite sensibirenest
the great importance of the question, and felt an ear
desire to see the present defective state of the fran-400
so amended as to secure a full and free ropreseet°! l,ed
of the people. The franchise at present was solife r 5
and so distributed as to render the return of lue'ebe
to that House almost nugatory as an expression of I_,
popular will. It was a strange fact that ef the Pere
her
sons who contributed to the safety of this country' f
the
were less than one million deemed deserving °f tbst
elective franchise. Whatever might be the result, ° 0 be
debate he believed that justice would before 01'7m
done to the great mars e f the people in that Issotter.nieers
Noble Earl at the heal of her Majesty's Govere-s- brig
in advocating the Reform Bill, had pointed to tl'epug
bery and corruption which had prevailed lindere.e, ed
stem. But ho would re "'A
former representative sy
the Noble Lord that since the passing of the Reform of
their blue books contain of accumulated evinenecale led
corruption similar to that which bad formerlYZobt,
forth his reprobation. There could be tlelons
however, on the other hand, but that the else
had been conducted in all the new and poPt'''''' c 6
hi
stituences created by the Reform fa'a'r A- pro'
ma showed the which show the reasenah'eeessought
priory of that measure. be thought that examPe the
to encourage the Noble Lord to extend still furtberrto
representative system in this country. A vast 'nate
of our population were deeply sensible of the tvo,es of
to them when they were denied the right of takload
part in the election of those whose laws they "ere heir'
to obey, and whose taxation they were compelled to
it.'ess•
The present was the most favourable inemept for
Wading to the unrepresented classes a concession - de
they would receive as a boon, and which could bee
rpol:sf
to theta with perfect safety. It was only by ar' °pot('
that House that our system of taxation could be, r-erest
in a manner conformable with the wishes of tueijd be
mass of the people. They might be told that it w°,;-, i'o'
dangerous for theta to extend the basis of the fra—ber'l3"
But, for his parr, it
were at present excluded from the franchise were
aad
he oeted not help thinleinglthat those
most loyal, the most peaceful, the most yalueble,.., be
the most unoffsuding portion c f the communitY• fsel
would ask, could the honest artisan f this con":bieh,
core need while he found that the right of voting' de"
was denied to hiwsel', was about to be eXteniied
to the people of our distant colonies in NC* Z'ature
and the Cape of Good Hope? He would vcri
to tell the NolA Lord wh washe, no doubt, ' sjteOle'
edy
well aware if—that that simplyatiettical ity
—(Hear, hear.) lie bl* n n e
e levee that greater t tore
at present prevailed among the people of this e°,, seer
in favour of an extension of the franchise than ha s 0 felt
been manifested upon any other subject; and be ee`stesrd
persuaded that if the Noble Lord were to bring to',4.ted
an
amid sustained
measure of refhruo, he would be sePl3-thst
ahtiigchspuostsaiittitoeldi
wbtlychtheasgtrheeataultT,dy of the people be
deserve. Under ourr 'efsesnute
would well
neither population nor propertypwras f orly reetelftese
He found that eighty-six Members f that House -roe'
returned:l by a smaller Lumber of voters than 'off to,
tamed in the 'rower Hamlets, who returned On oa
Members. Then again with r'' ad to property, Insr-111es
that one-half of the annual varlguerof England an" while
was represented by nine counties .Members'
and 161 h„ oat),
hek,ntineresalssYsetee:
the other half of that value was represented ".7
one counties and 310 Members; and further it aPre-pre
that one-half of the Members of that House rmobile
rented property of the annual value of 6,200,006,1;510e
the other halt represented property of the annaae e 0134
f 78,000,0001—(Heur, hear.) Liverpool, wh,lcresbi-
tained between three and four hundred thousand tile
tants, and which was assessed to the poor rate ,tea that
extent of 1,500,0001. seat only two Members 's",stsin,
House, while Buckinghamshire- which did net c-ssee
more than half that population and which tvasalt-.eseo
t the poor-rate to not more than half that aenee' yetis°
eleven Members to Parliament. lie hoped that the wee"
would not refuse its assent to the introduction of ° -
sure framed for the purpose ef putting an end t°
melons and unsatisfactory a system.
Sir G. GREY said that, whatever might beb
een ;
opinion of the House as to the merits of them ht
which Lad been submitted to its consideration, he edit
pr
sslit
that his Hon. Friend was at least entitled to crs oder
consistency in having again brought that subject 5 be'
their notice. His Hon. Friend had several tireearey)
fore introduced a similar me ssre, and he (Sir G• she
gave crelit both to his Honourable Friend and t:00. in
Honourable Gentleman who had seconded theh°;jegle
so becoming a spirit, for being animated by until,
desireand
d ,t 0 promote the best interests of theeer.°ffeeieg'
the security of its existing institutions. they
b
however, as ho did, from them in the opinion We bad
bet"
entertained as to the results of the scheme Wage bad
shadowed forth, he felt bound that evening, °S. p.
felt bound on former occasions, to meet the 11101'°d thata
decided negative. His Hon. Friend had statebe bad
his proposal was verbatim the same as that which
and al'
submitted to the House on preceding occasionsjked in
though he (Sir G. Grey) believed that it d. and by
for he feig
some of its terms from the motion brought
his Hon. Friend last year upon the same stkeet.'deetie°l;
that they might be considered as substantially eoy
The question then submitted to their notice via -' sing
r he OXIS 0
whether there should be any extension of teenalitY
franchise in this country—was not as to the m`:i-seoly"
the details of the Reform Bill—was not whether.ltiOll
peer ~
be proper for the House to take into its eon
tbe wv"
the terms and conditions. at present attached to •e If
1 anohis
tive franchise, with a view to enlarge that .r tiro
such an enlargement should be thought desirable.t tnr4s
those points he (Sir George Grey) should
0000
moment express no opinion, because they had, not aril
raised by his Honourable 'Friend that eyeninbe '00t"
ho wished it to be understood that be reserce:";l, re'
a more fitting opportunity his decision wil. 00
sect to them. The question then before the on;
stioe
a wider and more important one. The clue cov.
whether they would entertain a proposal fee fef
sideration of a new Reform Bill, far more awli met s oPei
more comprehensive, and far more extensive se- dapte
ration and its effects than that which bad beer'tl: es fledd
by Parliament after a severe struggle in both 11.
in the country in the year 1832. His Hon. Fr once
rotweee
c'
aske
them to re-model the whole constitution of that tosiont
to re-consider the whole structure of our CO
and the very Lads on which the fabric
system rested. Now ho (Sir G. Grey) vvas o°Leel'oed
to accede to that invitation. He was
maintain that it might not be advantageous
raj _
should consider some of the details of the georoustituti?aa
but he was not prepared to reform the eh oce tnbe
anew, and to abandon the principles "'hied to 0° tic!
origin of that constitution had been adherehd to,o
basis of an electoral system. His Hon. Friesuraedonceit
notef o; rr;:ate
potsbrieto_;
them that whatever might be the terms of bLih, he esisi
was an advocate for universal suffrage, and ttieveritttleaei,
that all persons who paid taxes should ne,. But te
vote for the return of Members to Parliament' biect
Hon. Friend bad qualified that view of thtflodbjige:hieetoe°••
stating
at
shiritartaaxs should
cautions against aamtbittoignseh.tanbNdeorwceoll,nrwesisisettnhetntah:laFlit;elrioficel'atis7Svi°,ll,
bg
whichrced our constitution his n
to the motion of his Hon. Friend was that _ large not
to depart from that principle, and to adoPt," would. u.,a
Fwraisenfcol.undTelcila;tawnad4hborgaskea
indi finite extension of the franchise, whie;oo. VrtePgc,
afford a proper check against abuse. Ins 'ught t°,,, to
had :aid that taxation and representation e
peeessflijef a
together; but he had himself thought it would
_..a'ett
impose a limit to that proposition which his this Ow
1,500,000 pr 2,000,000 of the popttlatiO Q"

in

"aeconclition of what his Hui.. Friend himself had
jeretn, eti that or serfs and bondsmen; and therefore sub
,ia'o t°_, that discontent which he conceived at present
Li." among a large portian of oar tax-laying, P°F-,
till": Ili' Hon. Friend had very truly said that, if
right -ere to preceed upon the principle of givr(lg
theyt should voting to
to ail who were indirectly taxed,.ti,,t
adopt Universal suffrage; for it was evident i.a.
44Y tne ~ - ontributed to its In-
dira., mbar of Lue communiap
,_
e
„,:et taxation. But his Hon. Friend said
he clan-
nishthat the ado, ption of that principle would
iseritBtulld woulProduce results which he ,hould not
witness• and he was therefore desirous of limit:.
g,gtit' aplicatio'n "so that every man of
.fill age, and
lia Plibleet to any mental or legal disability, who shall
g it: 'ten the resident occupier of a house or part of
hau beg 83 a lodger for twelve moeths,. itad,. shall
tik; ,o duly rated to the poor of that parish tyr thatto
rot' 1411 be registered an an elector, and he entitled ”
G. eGfer a be
in Parliament." Now,
the
(Srni...
Ito, litiroenlf aid,h-' that even with that qualification,
hitherto
peen the Is on. Friend gave up what had
Afths ," invariable condition for the elective ft a -,chise—,
tra'lt e,,,13r,a the possession of some props rty or other. The
the
..ecessrily imply
to ice t_meh his Honourable Frion'l would enforce would
the po,session of any. property in
limitusalial Sense of the word. His Hon. Friend,ddtitrll
enxo_t
talitl uts Motion to householders, for he proposed tile francbhe to lodgers occupying a portion of
oktils° in any way whatever, and not merely
'peroons
RitePs/j9g a portion of a house in the mode whicht w,omnlyd
1,40' right to the elective franchise at pres,'.l • 1
144,,,r whi° might get himself rated to the relief of thehe
iegiste'relizd. be entitled to have his name placed on t
so
Vila the without any proof that he had paid his rate;led,ws
ergue'e Owner of a house could by means ofh .
80 rates 4 °Wilber of fictitious voters who mighet
thaasteti,andeiyd
Na.t and who might have given no pro,.
lillYl7td "Y Property. He confessed he did ntesne_e
14040;8,4°o. Friend should oppose an unlimited
.e
hos, art" franchise, and why he should not go with the
kWit 1 utiernber for Nottingham (Mr. F. O'Connor)
itih.e
itleli-ength of universal suffrage.—(lfear.). ls
4,oo(riebd had said that out of a populationof
gat '°°° in the United Kindgom there were only
t-. 800 00
%hers., 0 electors, striking out the double voter..
Nur ‘`' ir GSirey) found from the latest Parliamentary
tildtilas- i1P°1:1 that subject, that out of about -I,aoco,o_ 00s
tt,e 'mates
1p : =England, there were 944,000 elector.. Hi
ight. offend.
aid" that he was , arad to extend the
prep ,
eoht voting to ladies; and he (Sir G. Gres) did not
he 4: his lien. Friend could, upon the principle whichi
'llote.°cated, refuse it to thew. his Hon. Friend.. had
lite till °I the %Term Bill in a very different spirit from
1:0 ;al,ll' Member for Bolton (Sir J. Walmsley), who
;,444,„"e (Sir G. Grey) understood him, appealed to the
'qey,i4CcrY results of that measure as a reason whip
'tilt Minis° Proceed still farther in the policy of progress.
l4it till. Friend, on the other hand, had complainedfr
hieh ie, ill'form Act had not attained the. object for
ll't (4,1 uad been been frame I. Now he (Sir G. Grey)
~,Kport,,,, did not believe that there was a growingrdis-
'4ll4'l betvrCen the increase in population and the
:I)ttageen in the number of electors under
feltthe
:Arig',,-", of the Reform Bill, but
444die-re",thst there was a groaing increasehe in the
Net • °` electors in proportion to the increase of
that kite)
in • e found from the Parliamentary i
ber
of
ael'etor Lth divis;,ns of Lancashire the num
rls • P' Whieti •"- "mtnediate!y after the
t "ae 1 in 1833, 1- • amounted
°l6q °f the 11, farm Bill,had .
t°3S'A.:2' had increased in 1837 to 27,455, and in 1846
444:61 or in other word:, that between 1833 and
wiliklheniitie
e.atiz,b.er. had more tha.n doubled. He found that
huich in 1%"Iclino• of Yorkshire the number of electors,
I-1.47 to -4`°d3 haeamounted to 18,056, had increased_ in
'itYhad`?'°76, and in 1846 to 36,165; showing that
i'At T.it'st doubled, during the some period. He found
,„Iki,tiritt-,,:verAnol the number of electors, which in 1833
1'04( Irtecl to 11,200, had increased in 1837 to 18,81 S,
635116tbm:b4:16 to '7 046. He found that in Manchester
11L., of electors w hieh in 1833 had amounted too
,841.-'t increased in, 1837 to 11,185, and in 1846
the
iii!'leitlb '''''f°tY these fasts showed, at all event=, this:,
(laegrBo°. that class m,hich' his Hon. Friend had spoken
'4/11 d 483
theirated as serfs and bondsmen had been
14 e by
t,tthe , own honest exertions to raise themselves..
I.;°i4li witaearle of society, and to atta'n to certain rights
'/'' b• 4 at once a stimulus to and a reward of inclus-
ti 444 I,
I r honourable Friend had spoken of those who
hcl(1 Posse
it_ h,., ss the elective, franchise in terms
ei,' heti," excited his (Sic G. Grey's) surprise.
ft.:1114 disc
la hise Honourable Friend did not wish to
he working classes, and Le
lii4ittedt:rit'itieirfetdialtethaat7sengt .such discontent at present ex-
rile placed in the position in which
atitleeteltaPariend laYad"s•laeted discontent among them would
$d Oa t -'
8 ;ter of surprise, and would, in fact, d
41 matte d (u hear ) His Hon. Friend
ft litod i _r uty.-- ear, • • •
Oar t 4 all Chese who did not possess the elective
th',4re iti-etwb_ere. serfs arid bondsen—that they had no
tti Were
,7_l. beneEts of the lamsof this country--that
t14.14k1 ut, t cf the pale of the constitution, and that
(R; ti 4 C)4ls' to D v th t' ices voted by a Hou_=e in tbe
-it ° t''•L wh ' a'
d no voice. Now he
,i. Q. u hose Members they ha
Ititiekted ttreY) askel if that were true? For his part he
11
_,t, ki,eat they shared in the benefits.h of our laws;
4 iett the
4,7' no other country the artisan en-
for
liinfe,whiesaproperty,
tWei.4,19_15 i.:44rt
iii!reomteetionatuhd:tlibthoertiare
54 'neBtica.fable pire. He should y
1 at'tht• hi ings conferred by our laws and
tht°10,,,,„-Pon all classes of the
'44
4'lll
" iss
'community, and that
.insi •'-'", Whether electors or non•electors,
.were in
Ple 'iloa d • his Hon. Friend. His Hon.
14, 44 had escribed by
(4,511,r of tla.ted that he derived one great argument in
11444 i Ills motion from the
vnt, tare of the
t togrant
the 9°B which they were a`mii• c
141,Ps
ofi,ithabitunts cf New Z, atand and c. the
4,1) Good Hope. Now lie (Sir George
,:thLtl tked
~the House if there was any analogy be-
tii;li titl4aa'e, of this country and that of the Cape
(+Ali wh" Induce them to adopt here the same con-
kt.blt he r lel' thfy were about to grant to that colony?
110,1 per n'llternbered that in the Cage there. wastibe
1p; he a `Onueil, based on the representative principle.
44.41144i.ti'r:(1., lion Friend whether he was 1 re ared
'a t -"'te thi , . try, au elective chamber foPr the
saeof torci,? S. cowl ,
;ai LitINIL' h. ectiOn.—(A laugh.)
t t G, --I should have no 0 .1 tr.t, QitY•sr
the House
;'h i"er h 4.- eentinced—Well, then, let
.. r4irt. S'
his Hen Friend had no objection to uni-
lh, . sail , , t at he had no o j . .
lII,a -ge• h - Wection to extend the
to adopt
tiettiPoir° wcroen; that he had no objection
\f'4 lb tits
0€ the Chart •r; and tba*, he had no °Noe-
It`qttir ei,eitablisliment of an elective House of Lords.
tilil4rLa",,elr..) He certainly did. not think that his
Ittnthat " '%ould be a safe guide for them to follow
cli,'' by ,I,l3e3asion. He thought that they had better 1
t4,1,P.) 12„i° Principles of their ancient constitution.—raria_
ti;`4, 4,7,4 regard to the ballot, triennial
Hon. i
.41! 1142_11,i40rrn.0 other topics to which his )
'llilt, trouid-1 Incidentally alluded, he (Sihr G. Grey
ill() t.44t0 " het be advisable that he s ould then
kl Tlsst• 48Y discussion of their merits. But there was
itt4telith• to which his Hon. Friend had frequently 41, i ftlth
4111044;a ,"°tlgh he (Sir y) not been able
1,1111',14 to His real tonsintrowith raspect to it—he
(rri'l-g he vt,-; the • question of electoral districts—upon
4440414"e5hed to offer a fetichvn His II?n.
-
thi ti al 'le Part cf his sp had disclaimed any in
t4ll•4lts ofc'tablishine• electoral districts; but all the er-
eq. pr)ia, on. Gentleman.
4 14
' till 4 - who had seconded the
C. Nth `c(l to electoral districts as the only mode of
It% 8 oh' .-
Now he
iiithi %,,,,Jee,tons of the present system.
k(tgeleat." held that the division. of the country into
il,Cthart „(3,,1'al districts, returning equal numbers. of
Vdt r,.,3 r lament, would be
4'
-44
rlt- " 1.
4tl,ttalt°E our constitution. It would deprive, us of
eat :Re which we at present enjoyed of having all
114, tit hoad varied interests of the country representedin
,titlit„lirsa aticse. Ile was not prepared to say
whether,effeced
Nte 'ekgr-
:Years, some change ought not to
be
d from
1)114/it '4 the number of Members returned t4O ovt4rts of the country,' but he believed that the
!11:0141:y . beeetoral districts would either render
IL!'llOki-•4 t-yeat the number of Members in that House
cktiallilZa-elled beyond the limits which would leave. 1
itttl 'tB 1301,1„t thena to discharge the functions of a deli-
ilk' tha-/' or that it would deprive many importantf .
tils -nit -•c°Orttry of their fair share of our system of
ii 4171/. il littnTri' Now, he did not wish to maintain tha-
eth etli,al,,e% of that House was perfect ; but heccr
VI sd-eu.. that the Reform Act had not failed. That.
li4; IN' Illitted into that House representatives
ro_f
1114;,°11 hii°PUlous to
,who had conferred great sFch
-04(ita-;()3lnunitwynast large by the mode in whi
kttki 4 •-•oed in deliberations of the House i but
~)%t t 0t pre the..
it:llll6.°h Pallid to sacrifice to the wishes of those.
interests of this
I.4:4ltilt`l• 4se ;ill. the other important
1,,1t hmor,„ believed that the House, as at present con- i
't-I
- capabledeliberating on questions affect- F
:411411)4ti1t rightso.f
aliberal and enlightened spirit.
-Vt th:%Present in
e them a Bill for largely ex-
Ita4tltit,i -sttinTlehise in Ireland—(Hcar, hear)—and one
p?tiltigltk°,°2 to thelmotionr of his Honourable Friend
thlti Prt,-ir assentingi) that motion that evening
tart /41:a-h",it a great barricr to the progress of 1
Ural-crlll—te nleasur prominent among which was
tltteltka:reiiiebsion measures,
the franchise in Ireland, and
,tl4tli .at Dr ProPosals of a practical and useful cha-
i4tlottilloPerit before Parliament fur improving
.the
:,,tilotlf th‘otisheat cOUntry.—(Hear, hear.) The conside-
-1,11'‘,44nt,.
,measures should be indefinitely. postponed.
1,1),,-a t tl Was to ba plunged into an agitation for a
4441 -11th-ellsive It 4 l3'll. lie did not think that
i:,llitht the c (nlll • 1 time in profitless discus-
'O or " il to vvasts their
t• D tli,Chet to universal suffrage and the six
4 t4et. art, it to sound
t, rte iekt _r, while they could devote
k,t,o4o„t'eti r,,, treasures,of legislation. He had stated
;4%;`,oeQ,,'' othe ti - ho had stated them on
hNibaisttcne• Ilnienh nionedasthe House would refuse to
%-`hill/2,;4.t5t3411.• Friend ton-lay his measure on the table,
‘ ttit7t (41 n°lll`l not give their sanction to a propo-
-4 11-‘a a '44:lei lopposed to that on which our
ItiliSttqtellB all dreenaBteds aPrind adopted, would create
11 'cer ' h necaet, overriding every other power in
th,:%erlsicY irial,believed that the establishintowf
iathpure
the
~Il,kiit°llll wno4rtliousoefwoounlrd inconsistentbeconstit ution; and as ho
b,l44lNe:tl coght to be thankful for living under the.
kilt''hlllip - °f Xing Lords, and Commons, which, in 1
-v4l-atirril;*l:/aellid be endangered by the adoption of the
lit 'Nati.. *4°A. Friend, he hoped that they would
11,,1'. p, 04,te to that motion.
toN; e°I\INOR said it appeared to him that
gigkl'ellpti'llattei-t l.oconsistency in the speech of the Righ
14 8.1 the i', 'No had complained that that motion. went
AO° state length of universal suffrage, while be
l'ql,',lfor)-`ed that it fell far short of such a system
tjklit-t,l4,taetiottllebd the Member for Montrose had not
,I'Lepe. 41,1144 :du a form pleasing to the Right Hon.Ba-
•t
theprinciple and lick the Bill into
N4114'01 the„alpi
4 Itli,, , ta / 'ergot the progress which 44 tile adsiatue 1832? It hail made ore rogress
ki? 41444
etixteg cla,sses of this country thane perh
tphto:,ll. /lae,hii,ses in any other country in the world.
kitigil,et, ti.., for Montrose had animadverted on
igi In mil':
ltn ee defied him to show any part of his
tille h L e had urgei the people to v iolence.
baufacturers of Manchester turned out

their ands, fur the, purpose •F carrying free trade. He
had no part is that movement, though he was cem-
'flitted to gaol, and subsequently tried at Lancaster
by a zpecial jury, ;and after eight days acquitted; and
three of the jury, rife) were magistrates, and who
d,clared thot they had entered the box strongly
prej adived against: him, stated that their pre-
judice was entirely removed by the result, and
invited him to di finer. Ho would support this
motion, though he stifl contended fir the Charter; as for
the Reform Bill, he regarded it as a mockery, a delusion.
and a snare. All he wished was that that Hone should
be elected by the free will of the working classes and all
I classes in the country. They placed their hope on the
transient contents ent which arose from the present
commercial prosperity; but the day would come when
something more thin petitions would be sent to that
House to do justice to the working classes. No people
ware more intelligent than the manufacturing popula-
tion of this country, who were much better pre2ared for
political change than the population of Paris, or any
other city in the world. It was not he who, during the
agitation for the Reform Bill, carriA about pictures of
the King with his head downwards, and a Moody axe
to cut it off with—it was not he who advocated s-tting
fire to Bristol. He advocated the People's Charter,
whole and entire, and never would abandon one point of
it. Ho thanked the Hon. Member for Montrose for
having brought fora and this measure, and however the
Hon. Member might revile him in that House, and
abuse him and his party, he would stand by that party,
and although he supported his motion, his motto wouli
always be " The People's Charter, and nu surrender."
Mr. P. WOOD remarked on the dexterous manner in
which the Right Hon.. Baronet the Secretary for the
Home Department lied answered the speech of his Hon.
Friend the Member for Montrose, for by moans of a
cross-examination, he had endeavoured to show that the
object of the motion ht ;d some similarity to the People's
Charter. He was singularly fortunate in being followed
by the advocate of t'ae People's Charter, who had en_
dearoured to assimilate his measures to that of his Hon.

Friend.
Mr. F. O'CONNOR. —Not at all.

.Mr. P. WOOD—lles was, however, prepar©d for this
by what took place last year. But where was the re-
I nblance? His HO7l. Friend proposed that every man
of full age, and not s abject to any mental or legal dis-
; ability, who should have been the resident occupier of a
house or part of aho use as a lodger for twelve months,
and should have been. 'duly rated to the poor for that
time, should be registered as an elector. He then went
on to shorten the direction of Parliaments to three years,
and made the proportion of representatives more con-
sistent with the awou nt of population and property.
What was the motion of the Honourable Member
for Nottingham ? 'He called upon the House to
recognise the great principle that labour is
the source of all wet ith ; that the people are the
only legitimate source of power ; that the labourer
should be the first to partake of the fruits of his own
industry; and that =station without representation is
tyranny, and should he resisted. He then went on to
assert that these prin sleeks were embodied in the People's
Charter, anneal elec Lions, universal suffrage, vote by
ballet, equal electoral distriete, no property qualification,
and payment of Mem' bers.—(llear, hear.) Now he sup-
ported the motion of leis Hon. Friend the Member for
Montrose, because it et -as diametrically opposed to such
propositions—(Hear) -because, instead of being founded
on abstract rights and principles, it dealt with existing
institutions, which it sought to improve by reform.—
(Hear, hear.) It weal dbe infinitely more satisfactory to
him, and he felt surd to the HOMO in general, if-her
Majesty's Governmen J, instead of so frequently telling
them what they did no t like in the way of reform, would
be kind enough to tell them what they did like. But
how their having a Ile Form Bill for Ireland was a reason
why they should not h ave one for England was a species
of Parliamentary lo;;it • which he could not comprehend.
He supposed, however e that as in the case of Chancery
reform, the experiment must be first made in Ireland. Not
one of the Right ll or t. Baronet's observations had the
slightest reference tc the motion. But they were
told that they must nal :0 into consideration the known
opinions of the move; Now, if the motion were brought
forward by a leader s upported by a large party, entirely
bound together by so me great political principle, he
could understand that in such a case it required great
powers of abstraction to take the motion apart from
those circumstances. But it was very different in the
case of a motion like- this, which was simple in itself,
and although the Horn Member for Montrose had told
them candidly that he himself would go further still, he
at the same time con 'essed that his supporters were not
of the same mind. 3 ale had no party pledged to all the
definite details of the ;People's Charter, or any such pro-
position.—(Hear.) 3 low were the two propositions re-
ceived? The motion of his Hon. Friend was supported
by 82 Members of th at House, while that of the Hon.
Member for Notting! lam found only 13 supporters. Was
it fair then to impute Ito those 82 Members the advocacy
of the People's Chr liter, which they had repudiated?
Was it sufficient for them to go on year by year with a
Government which c antented itself by opposing measures
for reform, and brie; Ong in no measures to remove those
d;fficuities which i -Ivey admitted to exiet ? (hear,
hear.) During the vacation a pleasing rumour was
afloat that the people, were to be no longer disappointed
of their just hopes of having a voice in the Legis-
lature, but it evaporate d when her Majesty's Speech was
laid bef nes them, and turned out to be simply a redress
if the grievances of iv deed. He rejoiced sincerely that
the representation of that country was to be increased
from 40,000 to 250,00 0; but did the Government con-
ceive that they could any longer resist a similar expan-
sion in this country''? Was it wise to wait till they
were driven to it by some formidable convulsion?—
(Hear, hear.) He hi wself had always kept aloof from
taking a part in it in erant agitation. He was anxious
to remain so, but le ea' difficult was it when such a boon
ens held out to agitation at all times. Mr. Fox in the
debate on the Trien vial Bill said be feared no improve-
ment would be ears- iel 1 for the people till they had arms
in their hands; and. Sir J. Mackintosh said the same
thing. One who ki sew fear as little as any man, except
that he feared that which might bring disaster on his
country, the Duke 01c Wellington, declared that it was
the dread of civil war which drove him to grant Catho-
lic emancipation. Who doubted that it was the revo-
lution in Paris in 1830 which produced the Reform
Bill, which was not c arried until we were on the verge
of revolution throu el t the agency of political unions,
which he, though is mpted much more at that time
by youth, refused to join. Then came the corn-
law. That agitatie le was commenced, not by the cotton
interest, to whom a;11 free-trade measures were attri-
buted by some Hon. _Members, but by a member of the
aristocracy, the Ho n. Member fir Wolverhampton. At
first he was not list, sued to; but at length a course of
agitation took place different in its character from that
which preceded the Ratform Bill, and one more marked
by logical argument„ 'which finally brought conviction to
the minds cf the peep le. Still that House could not be '
brought to concur in .a measure of total repeal till they
were driven to it by- a famine.—(Hear.) Looking to
what had passel on the continent such a course was
neither wise nor prudent; and this, in his opinion, fully
justified his Hon. Fri' and in bringing forward his motion
in a time of comparative peace.—(Hear, hear.) It was
said there were no Petitions, and no doubt there were
many more petitions I 'resented the other night in favour
of repealing the atto re.eya' certificate duty than had been
presented in favour• of this measure; but surely the
Government and ti m t House would not take this as a
proof of indifference: on the part of the people. The
great reason. why he, supported the motion was that he
fc ared that the course , which they were pursuing might
have the effect of tb rowing the people into the arms of
the Honourab!e Member for Nottingham. He should
always most deeply r egret to see them placed under such
a leader; for, with out imputing any unworthy motive
to him, he most gror sly deluded the people by the ab-
stract principles which he endeavoured to instil into
their minds with ret pect to taxation, representation,
and the right to resist, leaving to the people
to decide in what mode that resistance should be offered.
—(Hear, hear.) Tim) measure of his Hon. Friend, on
the contrary, was per fectly consistent with our constitu-
tion in every respect.- -(hear, hear.) It was the natural
growth of our constitution, adapted to the habits of the
people, the laws under which they had lived, the system
under which they had been governed, and the direction
which their minds ha d taken. It was the fate of cut-
and-dried constitutions to fail. The wisest legisla'ors of
antiquity were not framers of cut-and-dried constitu-
tions, but ref .rmers. Solon, when he was asked, " Have
[ you given the people of Athens the best constitution
! possible?" replied, 't No, I have given them the best
constitution for them ."—(llear, hear.) All the model
constitutions, from those of Plato to those of Lord
Bacon and Sir T. More, would be most egregious failures
if put to the test. Jeremy Bentham had the same mo-
nomania, and fancied ho could ship off constitutions to
the Brazils just like a cargo of goods. An attempt
had been made of late to frame a cut-and-dried con-
stitution for New Zealand, but like dried flowers it
took no root in the earth. He had been asked if
he was a Republican- He was not one who thought
either a Monarchy or a Republic good in the abstract.
All depended on circumstances. He believed that no-
thing would fit this country hut King, Lords, and Com-
mons. But look at the United States—what could they
be but a Republic? W hat motives had they fcr a Mo-
narchy? But so long as we had rulers who would con-
duct themselves like our present Sovereign—so long as
we had an aristocracy wise enough to know the time for
concessions, even again at that which they themselves
might think right and just....so long as the constitution
was carried on with that! degree of good sense and sound
judgment, which, in spits of manifold defects, still cha-
racterised the general mass of our gentry, so long should
we be safe under a government of King, Lords, and
Commons.—(Hear, hear.) The question then came
whether it would bo unsafe to intrust a much larger
number of the people with the elective franchise ?
(Hear, hear.) The principle of his Hon. Friend's mea-
sure was not universal suffrage, but that every man of
full age, and not under any mental or legal disability,
i with a qualification of residence and rating, paying scot
and hearing lot—

Sir G. GREY—Payment is expressly excluded.
Mr. P. WOOD did not mean to say that his Hon.
Friend intended to make his system an eagine for col-
lecting taxes. This, however, was a matter of detail.
The qualification was insisted on. His Hon. Friend's
proposition was the same, in fact, as that laid down by
a very great lawyer, and one much referred to by lion.
Members on the other side—namely, Blackstone, the
only difference between them being as to the amount of
the qualification. Could things remsin long in their
present position? They had 4,500,000 of grown-up
men, of whom about 900,000 had votes, including the
double votes—he would call it 1,000,000. Was it to bo
supposed that the remaining 3,500,000 would long re-
main tranquil under this exclusion?—(Hear, hear.) Was
the development which had taken place in the intelli-
gence of the people during the eighteen years which had
elapsed since the passing of the Reform Bill to bo
thought nothing of ? since that time they had built, it

appeared, 1,500 churches. lie should be very much
ashamed if the result of that hed rwt been to do some-
thing towards the education and improvement in the ha-
bits of the great mass of the people. Our national schools
educated 1,000,000 children, and -the dissenter were not
behindhand in their efforts, acc-yrding t 3 their means.
They had had the 10th of April q aeted almost ad nauseam
by their opponents. Why alto& d they not be allowed to
use it now in support of their v;..ews? Still he knew
that on that day im the neiglconurhood of that very
[-louse there were hundreds of workmen, who, though
they took no part in the meeth .gs, still refused to be
sworn in or act, as they said, agni ust their order. Now,
this eas the feeling which he w ished to see removed.
He wished to see English society no longer broken up
into section3.—(flear, bear.) We ought to be thankful
that we had a gentry, commerce, a race of industrious
mechanics, and hard-working I:Abourers. These he
wished to see assc&ated togeth,xr in each county and
town, and not an excluded class, endeavouring to force
from an excluding class a recog-nition of their rights.
The Braid principle of our cons ',i-mtion had always been

.
locality, and this was engraft 3d in the measure of his
lion. Friend in the provision regiariring a twelve months'
residence. It was owing t t a long habits of local
self-governmcat and obedience, to municipal control
that this country had not do- crated the cause of
liberty by violence. It was t eese old, sturdy Saxon
elements of freedom which were always working
at the bittoin of our system, ass the Saxon language
still lived in the nomenclature all our plitical insti-
tutions. lie believed that the effect of his ll,mourable
Friend's measure would be to •ec nsolidato all interests
and produce a friendly feeling hetavEen the landlord and
tenant, and between tho emplo:,,cr and the employed ;
and this Lcding would be still f rarther developed by the
bekt. Fina'ly, did the House think that this country
was in a safe position with reference t) the basis of pro-

perty in our representation. The common argument on
the other side was—you are going to give all to num-
bers and nothing to property ; and yet, hal it not been
said that 6,000,0001. of property were represented by one
half of the House, and 78,000,0001. by the other half ?
(Hear, hear.) Talk of represen Cation based o❑ property
—why, it was a delusion.—(ll car, hear.) It those in-
telligent and industrious classf ts, for whom education
had done so much, would no longer be content to hold a
subordinate position, what would be the feeling of
those wbo were placed in a more fortunate posi-
tion, and had more time for reflection, at such a die•
parity ?—(Hear, hear.) He Irn.iw constitutions were
not matters which could be 1110130 A to mathemati-
cal formulm, and this was the, reason why he re-
jected the charter. But he was not bigoted
to this particular measure. It was the wish of its ad-
vocates to prevail on the Govurnment to take up the

subject, for it was not themselrtes but their principles
which they desired to bring into power. Neither Sir S.
Romilly nor Sir J. Mackintosh lived to see their im-
provements in the law carried into effect; hut carried
into effect they were, though by other hands. So Cie
principles of the lion. Members for Wolverhampton
and the West Riding came into rower, though they did
not. The Reform Bill, which ;ißgan with minorities of
30 and 40, had become the law of the land. On these
grounds he f:•lt confident that the principles involved
in the measures of his Hon. Friend would ultimately
prevail.—(Loud chQorp.)
Mr. H. I)RUMMOND could :not say that he con-
curred in the sentiment expressed. in the able sreech of
his Hon, and Learned Friend, in which he said that he

had equal admiration of talent, no matter how it was ap-
plied. He (Mr. Drummond) had also great respect for
talent, but lie must except its application in many in-
stances. When his Hon. Friend, reiterating an obser-
vation that had been made the other night, said that ho
was sorry to see one class set against another, he
thought he had made a remark which tended to sepa-
rate those classes more than they were. His answer wa,,
that there were a set of prof,ssional agitator=, who were
going through the country inflaming the passions of the
country by false declarations that the landed interest
of the country were using the power they possessed for
centuries to injure trade and manufactures, and enhance
their own position. He maintained that the charge was
false, and he would maintain it there, where ho would
be met if it were true.—(Hear, hear.) But now, with
referenca to the motion, he was sorry that the Noble
Lord, after what he had said in years past, did not fulfil
the rumour that they had heard respecting the enlarge-
ment of the franchise, and he must say that he regretted
also the Hon. Gentleman who had brought forward the
present motion had mixed up the considerations of the
franchise with other matters, so as to prevent his (Mr.
Drummond) giving his humble support to it; for he was
sorry to say, not only would the present motion be car-
ried, but much worse motions.—(Hear, hear.) Sooner
or later, every word of the present motion would be
carried.—(Hear, hear.) They were ccming to the reap-
ing time of the seed they bad long since sown. The
Hon. Gentleman who brought forward the motion re-
minded tho House that for 150 years the Whigs had
heea teaching them that the people were the only source
of legitimate power. The Whigs had been always the
promoters of agitation until they got into power, and then
they generally turned out good Tories. It might then
be urged that no other political mewurea were possible
in that country, seeing that their enemies denunciated

them. Did Lion, Gentlemen forget that that party had
derended the murder of the King, and the mutiny
at the Nore? And there was not an enemy of the public
peace throughout Europe that they did not dt fsnd now.
—(A. laugh.) When they got into power they wreaked
their vengeance upon the party by whom they had been
kept out, and in order to do that they did not hesitate to
violate the constitution. They turned the throne into a
president's chair, and that was all queen Victoria sat
upon no v.—(II( ar' hear.) After all the concessions
that were suppased to have been msde to them, the
people were as discontented as ever. The Reform Bill
had proved a failure. Why? Simply because the re -
ple expected from the Reform Bill more than any Act of
Parliament could do. If there was another Reform Bill
passed to-morro wile people would be just as discontented
as ever. They were, in his opinion, going she ge tiler wrong.
Last year they were very angry with the Chartists.
They were not now so very much in love with them, ne-
vertheless they sent the head of their Reform League to
go hand in hand throughout the country with the gen-
tlemen upon whom they now turned their backs.—(No,
no.) What, had they not been together at Aberdeen
and other parts of the country? And now they would
not permit that party to come betwixt the wind and
their nobility.—(Hear.) One of their chief supporters
bad told them very frankly that the King, Lords and Com-
mons was the greatest humbug that ever existed. The
Hon. Member for Manchester opened his eyes at that as
it he were astonished, but it had been distinctly stated
that the electoral divisions were incompatible with Lords
and Commons. It was quits clear to him that the ques-
tion before the House was not upon the carrying of the
present measure that day or to-morrow, but the real
question was as to the establishment of a pure demo-
cracy.—(" Hear, hear," from Mr. F, O'Connor.) Why,
it was not desired by one honest man. The object was
the establishment of a pure democracy, and he might re-
mind the House that last year the lion. Member for
Manchester held up the conduct of the people of France
to them as an object worthy of their imitation. And what
was that? Six hundred thousand armed men that were
there alone preserved the public peace, and that would
be maintained no longer than while their soundest prin-
ciples crept in the dark. So long as the unarmed masses
were divided against each other, so long was it impos-
sible that their could bo anything but universal carnage
and confusion. Hon. Members opposite probably did
not wish that; but what signified their wishes? If they
had not sufficient sense to see before their noses, he
could not help it. Did they believe that the Whig party
did not see it, and that their policy was to stave off any
successive step as long as they could? He believed there
was not a man of that party who would not do his best
to prevent the consequences that would result—he be-
lieved there was not one of them that had not as great
a dislike to confusion and bloodshed as himself. Ho
was 'only pointing out what would be the necessary
result of the present policy. They wished to estab-
lish a universal system of equality. Did not all nature
tell them that such a thing did not exist? Did they
not find that all nature and all intelligent beings ranged
themselves in order? and if they would only learn wis-
dom from the ant, they might be instructed by their
system of mutual dependence and their mode of govern-
ment. What they know of the celestial hierarchy
that was not order under order? And were they not
attempting to confound in one great chaos not only all
the institutions of that, but of other countries? Ho re-
gretted that the Government had not taken some initi-
ative step with respect to the present question, because
ho was satisfied that ultimately these measures would be
carried.— (Hear.)
Mr. ROEBUCK said the House and the country were
indebted to the Hon. Member for Montrose for bringing
forward the present question at the present time. The
Hon. and Learned Member for Oxford had reminded the
House that they were now in a state of public calm,
quiet, and comparative comfort. The question was,
therefore, brought before the House simply on its own
merits, unassisted by excitement out of doors, and, he
had hoped, unresisted by prejudice within.—(Hear.)
The question, as stated by the Hon. Member for Mont-
rose, was simply this—that they bad from time to time
made alterations in the representation—they had in-
crease I the number of electors—and he proposed to in-
crease them still further. How bad he been met by the
Right Hon. Gentleman ? Why the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman said, " You are departing from the principles of
the constitution—you aro about to make a chamber of
representatives so entirely representing the democratic
principle that you will overturn the whole constitution
of the country." He thought be had dealt with the pro•
position of the Hon. Member for Montrose very much
like a nisi prius lawyer.--(A laugh.) He had not met it
fairly or in front—he had gone round about it, and
carped at it, and cavilled at it. He had said that it was
opposed to the principles of the British constitution.
Now it had been his (Mr. Roebuck's)
fate to search
after that British constitution, but he had never yet
found it.—(Hear.) But he had met a case in which a
change been made in the representation and in the con-
stitution by the Noble Lord at his right hand—(Lord J.
Russell). The objection taken to the Noble Lord's pro-
position was, that he we, going to make the representa-
tion depend upon money—upon the possession of a 101.
freehold. It was urged that that was a principle wholly
unknown to the Prittsh constitution, but that was not
acceded to by the Noble Lord. He proposed his men-
sure, and it was carried. What did the Hon. Member for
Montrose now propose? Did he controvert the principles
of the British constitution, which he took to be that there
should be a body speaking in the name of the people, and
making laws for them. They bad a King, Lords, and
Commons, who, according Ito the theory of the consti-
tution, were said to represent the whole of the people of
England. He would admit that they represented most
faithfully the passions, the prejudices, the ignorance, and
the good qualities of the people of England, and he did

not support the present motion for a change becaune he
did not believe that the present House so reprasented
them. Why, that House was, in 1850, very much .what
it was in 1830„ He did not understand the propositions
of his Hon. Friend, which he had borrowed from the
Noble Lord, that taxation and representation should go
together. When the Noble Lord propounded that
theory, he was a-, far from the truth as his Hon. Friend.
His ground for demanding an alteration in the franchise
was, that there existed a large body of his fellow-et:un-
trymen who fancied themselves aggrieved because they
were not represented.--(Hear, hear.) In 1830 they
were a larger and a more powerful class than they
were at present. The House was, he thought, bound
in justice to listen to the claims of that unrepresented
class, who then came to the aid of the middle classes
and assisted them in the struggle. There was much said
of the burdens of that country, but as regarded the work-
ing classes they were not of so much importance. He
believed that on investigation they would be found less
than those imposed on the people cf America or most
other countries. But that wes not his ground. What
he desired was, that there should not be in any Large
miss of the population of that country the feeling of
discontent that now existed. If the labouring classes
were not treated fairly they would soon be induced to
listen to bad counsel, and to adopt it. He was of opinion
that there was both peace and security in good govern-
went, and that they enjoyed that security in England.
A man could go from one end of the country to the
other, not armed, but simply deaCnded by the power a
the law. He was protected by the invisible domi-
nion ( f the law, and that without any direct appeal
from himself. When his Right Hon. Friend said the
labouring classes had no protection from the Govern-
ment, he made a great mistake. All classes enjoyed
protection—the people governed themselves by their own
good intelligence. His Hon. Friend had used the word
"serfs" as applied to the labouring classes. Now when
the people felt themselves robbed of what others pos-
sessed they naturally felt themselves injure], teed ac-
cepted a name; and sometimes, too, they acted upon a
feeling of the injustice they experienced. The Right
Hon. Gentleman (Sir G. Grey) had told them that the
House was made up cf a variety of interests, with the
preponderance of a particular power. The Noble Lord
bad told them what it was. lie said he wanted a pre-
ponderance of the landed aristocracy.
Lord J. RUSSELL—No, no; I never said that.
Mr. ROEBUCK spoke only from the published re-
ports, and a as sorry if he had misrepreteeted the Noble
Lord; but ho thought he should be able, if he stepped
into the library, to produce something like these very
word. He would ask him whether such was not the
object of the Reform Bill he had proposed? They had
seen wealth enormously increasing from the spread cf
their commerce and manufactures, and the Noble Lord
found he could not exclude them. The lion. Member
for Surrey, who was in the habit of calling a spade a
spade, had said that the opposite party had wreaked their
vengeance on their political opponents, by whom they
had been so long kept out of power. He meant that
when they came into power, on the shoulders of excite-
ment, as it were, they hal wreaked their vengeance 0..
the Tory party, by so shaping their measures as to
bring in representatives of the landed interest.—(A
Voice-- " The mercantile interest.") Not at all. The
Right Hon. Baronet hal told them that they ought
not, by enlarging the franOses*destroy the combina-
tion of interest that th.Faaliairseileßresented.
Sir G. GREY—I Said Ale House at present repro.
sented all the areat and varied interests of the country.
Mr. ROEBUCK—WeII, then, all be asked of that
House was to have such confidence in the people of this
country as to allow them to vote for their representatives.
—(Hear, hear.) Was it not too much to have the Right
Hon. Gentleman getting up and threatening them with
confusion and destruction if they only bad 2,000,000 or
3,000,000 of enlightened Englishmen saying, " I vote ays
or nay?" Did the Right Honourable Gentleman moan
to say that they were not intelligent ? Why ho was
ale a,ys one of the first to get up and praise the humbler
classes of the people of that country. Praise them, was
the Right Hon. Gentleman's doctrine as long as they
pleased; but give them power, and ho is frightened at
them directly,—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Roebuck) vowed
that he was not frightened at them; he believed them to
be an exceedingly sober, calm, and considerate race.
They were not like the people across the water—they
never seen elsewhere, exceptin Belgium, a regard for the
knew how to govern themselves, and. they had, what was
decisions of the majority; they yielded to them when
duly and properly pronounced, and did not betake them-
selves, as they had seen in every country in Europe, to
fighting when they were in a minority.--(Hear,
hear.) The Right Honourable Gentleman had said
" Whom do yon mean to enfranchise? Lodgers, in-
deed!" But that was a most unfair way to put the
question. His Hon. Friend bad said—first, he wanted
men untainted by crime; next, ho must have them
dwelling in a particular locality for twelve months either
as lodger or occupier. But that was not enough—they
must be able to ascertain who they were, to know them,
and distinguish them, and therefore registration was
introduced. But he went a step further, and said they
must not have a set of vagabonds—a most appropriate
name—they must be actually rated to the relief cf the
poor, but his lion. Friend having some experience of the
vexatious working of the rate-paying clause, did not
require previous payment of the rate. Now mark the
disingenuousness of the Right Hon. Gentleman, who
said it was not desired 'that they should pay rates, and
they were to have twenty persons on the books, not
one of whom would pay the poor-rates. Was that in-
genuous—was that fair to his Honourable Friend? The

Right Hon. Gentleman shook his head, but he (Mr.
Roebuck) maintained that he was dealing with his ar-
-gument more fairly than the Right Hon. Gentleman had
dealt with the llonourable Member's. The Right
Hon. Gentleman had said that all wealth arose from
labour, but he confessed he had seldom heard so much
error in so few words. The motion of his Hon. Friend
had hem termei universal suffrage, and those who op-
po. el it fancied that what was called the labouring
classes would preponderate in point of numbers. They
said, give them a vote. and their representatives would
preponderate in that House; that they would have an
undue influence in the state, and ultimately do away
with the House of Lords and the Queen. But who were
the labouring classes? Was the little shopkeeper, toil-
ing from six in the morning till nine at night, constantly
moving about, and charging 100 per cent. because his
business occupied so much of his time—was he a labour-

ing man? Was the man who lived in a9-i house one
of the labouring class, while he who lived in a 101.
house was not? He wanted to know if the Hon. and
Learned Member for Oxford was a labouring man?—(A
!aogh.) 113 laboured all day and the greater part of '
the night? Was he then a labouring man? Why the
distinctions of class in that country were like the shade
across a sheet of paper, beginning with one colour
and passing into another by such nice tints that
no one could ti 11 where one colour ended or
the other began. Could any man point out the precise
distinction between the poorest labourer who pave his
h srd work for the smallest pittance, to the highest
intellectual labourer in the Legislature of the country?
Could any man draw the line clearl) ? He thought they
were frightening themselves with a name.—(Hear, hear.)
They called men by
the same name whose interests were
as different as possible; in fact it was an idle bugbear,
which the sooner they got rid of the better. Never did
the Hon. Member for Surrey
speak a truer word than
when he said all that would come to pass. Ho said with
him, that the time must come, and ho was anxious that
it should not come in whirlwind, storm, and confusion,
and that it should be accepted as a growing, living ma-
nifestation ti the power and vitality of the British con-
stitution.—(Hear, hear.) It was an object with them
to take care that the population around them should
not be stirred up into an armed madness, instead of
becoming an improved and intelligent people. He
wished to see the hand of good-fellowship held out to
them—that they should not keep them down, but help
them up—that they
.should aid them by education,
and show them that tney were really their friends. In
that spirit he accepted the proposition of his Hon.
Friend. He
had that faith in the expansive power of
the conatitutiod, and in :the mighty effect of the great
discoveries of modern times—of printing and the steam-
engine, and the increased means of communication, that
the time would come when there should not be a human
being in the land who would not feel himself quite
equal—that terrible word—with every other, but not in
the sense of the Right Hon. Gentleman. But were all
men now equal in the eye of the law? Not at all. Out
of four and a half millions there was only ono million
who had the power of voting for representatives in that
House; they considered it a degradation not to have the
right to vote; but he (Mr. Roebuck) had never voted in
all his life for any human being. In fact, although these
men considered it a degradation to be deprived of the
vote, if the right was given them to-morrow, the first
thing they would find was that they would neglect to
,
make use of it. But that was no answer to him. Dis-
content was in that class and they should get rid of it
Was there ever so conservative an assembly as that arising
out of universal suffrage at the time of the last French
revolution—a universal suffrage that was
propounded by
the democrats of Franco, expecting that they would
have things all their own' way? The Right Honour-
able the President of the Board of Trade shook his
head; but he (Mr. Roebuck) knew what he meant.—
(A laugh.) He meant to intimate that the people of
France were different from the
people of England. There
appeared to be a general impression that the people of
that country wore not to be trusted with power. He
thought it was a mistake to say that the middle classes
of the country shared in that opinion. By bringing for-
ward this question year after
year, they ought not to be
taunted by the failure of their efforts in that House out
cf the attempt to press the question still on the attention
of Parliament, and to make the middle classes thoroughly
understand that there was no danger whatever in en-
dowing the large section of the labouring population
with that power which they themselves possessed. Re-
collecting all the, antecedents, they ought to be very care-
ful and anxious to confer upon them that franchise which
they asked, because they had enabled that House to force
f orn the aristocracy of the country the Reform Bill.—
(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord himself must know that
they forced that Bill on the House of Commons as well
as the House of Lards.—(Hear, hear.) It was idle not
to call that measure a revolution. It was a revolution,
and a very beneficial revolution.—(Hear, hear.) The
Lion. Member for West Surrey shook his head. That
Hon. Gentleman, however, contradicted everything and
everybody.—(Laughter.) That was a revolution that
was brought about by a strong feeling out of doors—a
feeling that was kept up, maintained, and cherished by
the Noble Lord and his colleagues.—(Hear, hear.)
The Noble Lord need not attempt now to hide the
fact, as the time had long passed by. If ever
there was a revolution, that, he repeated, was
one. He certainly never wished to see repeated in that
country such an attempt to drive the vessel so near the
rocks. In a few hours more they might have found
themselves in a violent revolution, instead of a peaceful
one. He therefore entreated the Noble Lord and the
Howe to be careful how they resisted so long again the
desires of the people—of those whose demands were
honest,. just, and reannable.—(Hear, hear.)

Lord J. RUSSELL.—Sir, before I address myself to
the motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose, I feel it
will be necessary for me to say some words respe.cting
the motives and the conduct of those who had brought
forward the Reform Bill. The Hon. Member for West
Surrey has chosen to say—not an original observation
on his part, although he is not wanting in originality—
t"at the Whigs in power immediately became Tories,
and acted upon that principle, which he thinks the right
one, upon which every Government ought to act. But it is
somewhat difficult for him, after making the remark, to
show that the bringing forward of the Reform Bill tallied
with the principles of a Tory Government. The Hon.
Gentleman, therefore, hits on the ingenious device of
inventing the motives that actuated us, and says that
the Reform Bill was brought forward by the Whigs
to wreak vengeance upon their fees. Now a more
unjust remark never fell from any Hon. Gentleman.
But the Hon. aed,Learned Member for Sheffiel I, in giving
us a warning of the danger of resisting this measure,
charges us with a resistance for a series of years to
every proposition for a reform in the representation of
this House. Why, Sir, the plain truth is this—that, f
a series of years, I myself had brought forward and
had voted for motions having for their ohject a ref au
in the representat.on.—(llear.) But if I fsel it some-
what necessary to vindicate myself from this charge, I
cannot at the same time refrain from saving a few words
in defence e f that chief under whom I had the honour
for so many years to serve. and under whose au-pices the
liefirm Bill was brought forward and ultimately carried.
Lord Grey throughout his political life had brought for
ward many propositions for :reform.—(Hear.) In ISIO
being then a member of the House of Lords, wbero re
form was not likely to be a very palatable or favourite
topic, Lord Grey declared that, although his original
plans bad been modified—although his ardour had some-
what() abated by age and experience—yet, even it.
those days, when Reformers were few, and those gene-
rally much calumniated and run down, he was still
convinced of the justice of those opinions which he held
in respect to reform. And after all this we are now to
be told that we brought fora and that great measure for
the mere purpose of wreaking vengeance upon our foes.
That may be a very ingenious device of the Hen. Mem-
t-er, but anything further from the real history of the
fact could not be stated or imagined. Well, Sir, I will
now come to the immediate question before the House.
And I must say I think that my Right Hon. Friend has
been somewhat ill-treated by those lion. Members who
followed him, in accusing him of misrepresentation or
misconstruing of the motion of the Hon. Member for
Montrose. The Hon. Member for Montrose had himself
stated that he was in favour of tao principle of that
which is called the People's Charter; that every man
should have a vote; and ho further said, he conceived
that those who bad not votes were absolutely slaves. He
therefore proposed that not only occupiers of houses,
but lodgers should have votes on being rate]. Well, my
Right lion. Frierd says that that is evidently a franchise
disjoined from property—that the constitution of England
has hitherto united, though not in every case, property
with the right of voting, and that this proposition of the
Hon. Gentleman would, if carried, cause a great change
and iunovation on the constitution. If the Hon. Member for
Montrose proposes only to admit every man that is an
occupier of a house, and a lodger who is rated, what be-
comes of his assertion that every man who has not a
vote is a slave? Either he is making a motion so exten
sive in its nature that but a very small class can be re-
garded in the light of what he calls slaves. or else he is
making a motion that proposes to give but a restrictive
suffrage. In that case he leaves a large number of the
people in the so-called state of slavery. I understood
the Hon. Gentleman to say that if his proposition b
carried, out of the 4,000,000 of adults in Great Britain
3,000,000 would have votes. If that be the case,
this cannot lbe the restrictive franchise referred to by
the Hon. Member for Oxford. If, on the other hand,
it is the restrictive franchise, like scot and lot voters
under the ancient laws, the lion. Member for Montrose
will lone the benefit arising from the delivery from
slavery of the great body of the people.—(Hear, hear.)
The Honourable and Learned Member for Sheffield
says he does not find fault with the present re-
presentation; but, consiCering that a great number of
the population are excluded from the franchise, in order
to content them he thought they should be allowed to
vote. Now if that is the ground upon which you are
proceeding, unless you give the franchise fully and com-
pletely to adult males, you will altogether fail in your
object.—(Hear, hear.) If the franchise was to be ex-
tended as far as the Hon. Member for Montrose calcu-
lated, when he said 3,000,000 out of 4,000,000 would
possess it, then I think it would be much more painful to
individuals to see that out of four adult males, three of
them had the right of voting, and one of them was ex-
cluded. This would be considered a still more unfair
exclusion than any that at present existed. In respect
to the question of taxation and representation, upon
which the Hon. and Learned Member for Sheffield says
that the Hon. Member for Montrose has followed me in
error, I must observe that I do not think either of us are
in error upon the general principle of the constitution,
although I may be of another opinion as to the practice.
I apprehend, Sir, that many of the declarations so often
made were to this effectethat the King did not from ancient
times, since the commencement of the representative con-
stitu ion, levy taxes by his own authority as Sovereign,
bat called the representatives of counties and boroughs
together to take their assent, which assent
was considered to be that of the people at large, and
therefore, from the .beginning of our representative
history, with one small exception, the principle was,
that all taxes should be levied with the consent of the
people. It is quite another question whether the ge-
neral maxim was true—namely, that every person sub-
ject to taxation had a direct voice in the representation.
It is quite evident at all times of our constitution that
great numbers, though not subject to taxes and affected
by the taxation of the country, had, notwithstanding, no
direct vote in the representation. And when Lord
Camden declared that taxation without representation
was a tyranny, he did not deny the right of the House
of Commons to tax the people of England and Scotland,
although a gre at number of the population to be affected
by such taxation had no votes at all for Members of
Parliament. But what he meant was—that in proposing
a tax upon America, when America bad no represents,
Lives in Parliament, was plainly and obviously a
tyranny, and a violation of the great principle of the
constitution, which was taxation and representation.—
(Hear, hear.) I, therefore, deny that there is
no truth in the validity of the principle of taxation and
representation. I deny also that it is meant to be
carried literally into effect as regards all persons that
are subject to taxation. It is only meant that the House
of Commons, hei'ng really and veritably the representa-
tives of the people, shall grant in their name the taxes
and subsidies to the country. If I am right in this general
maxim I think I shall not be wrong in asserting that we
did not dt. viate from the principle ef the constitution in
the proposition wo made in the Reform Bill.—(Hear.)
We were of opinion that the thee was come when a re-
form in the representation was necessary, and that the
people could not consider themselves fairly represented
while a green mound and a town destroyed by the sea
some ceetaries ago
,sent representatives to the House at
a time when the great seats of manufacture—Manchester,
Leeds, and Sheffield—had no members in Parliament.
Believing that the time was come when this unreal re-
presentation would no longer be tolerated, we proposed
that there should be such a change as would oblige the
representatives of the people more directly to reflect their
opinions in this House. But we did not propose to destroy
all that then existed, for we gave to certain boroughs the
right of sending members to Parliament, where a body of
electors, though small, would still be found to return them
here. We believed, as it was well stated by Lord Hol-
land, ;in a letter having reference to the constitution
in Naples, that the attempt to make a constitution for a
natior, and to believe that it would be all at once fitted
fir it, was as absurd as thinking of building a tree or
manufacturing an animal. The Hon. and learned Gen-
tleman says that in framing this Reform Bill we endea-
voured to create a preponderance in favour of the landed
aristocracy, and that I had avowed such to be our ob-
ject. Now I must say it certainly was our object not to
make any unfair distribution of the new representation.
And while we proposed that many towns not hitherto
represented should send members to this House, we like-
wise proposed that many counties possessed of large po-
pulations should send additional representatives here.
In doing so, we distributed fairly the representation. I
was asked towards the end of that Bill whether it was
true that I utterly discarded the landed interest, or some
such phrase, or as Lord Ashburton styled itl, whether I
had not taken from the barley field and given to the
coal field? So far from that I said that the effect of
the measure would be rather to give the landed interest
tai
opreponderance. I eli d not say that
preponderance
but that that interest was so strong in he country that
thtahteitl was
anciedoni rntienrtees, inten-
tion
this fair representation of the people would end in
giving that preponderance. I should have
it most unjust if I proposed a
number of manufacturing towns for representation with-
out
considerable
eheorusghhlet
nsid
taking into consideration the growth in the wealth
a ld t
upreanl.l3i
people of counties,o.Gentlaelnithaonusshptrhopeyoserei
not pay any rates or taxes, yet if ho be a lodger n the
c
house he should have a right to vote. Now it appears
ti me, in the first instance, that if my Hon. Friend at-
tligonhttbon-naiggrhi-
t
begins by stating that every person, although he may
at-
tempts to carry out that object byßill, a
and if such Bill
frauds. I
become law, it would bo open to innumerable
cannot conceive how any means could be adopted to
prevent any number of persons being placed on the re-
gistryalthough, according to the
present law, they could have claim placed there.
Supposingof to be
• the owner or occupier ahouse which
there are six or seven lodgers—the owner is rated, and
as rated householders,
rate—the other lodgers are not rated, and have
nothing to do with the payment of them. Well, accord-
ing to the Bill of the Hon. Member, they may be all
pays the
rated and placed on the rate-books upon their own de-
mand. They would be under no obligation to pay the
rates—the obligation would still devolve on the occupier.
I own it does appear to me that this is as near universal
suffrage as a plan that does not profess to be one of
universal suffrage can well be.—(Hear, hear.) The
Hon. Gentleman himself has avowed that he is in favour
of the People's Charter; and in all the public meetings
of which we have seen an account, the lion. Gentleman
and the Hon. Member for Nottingham have avowed the
same objects and the same views.—(Hear.) If that,
thou, be the case, how am I to distinguish the lion.
Gentleman's proposition from that which the Chartists
hitherto have made?—(Hear, hear.) But then the Hord.
and Learned Member for Sheffield says, should
you Why
you distrust the people? Why not have confidence in
the whole body of the people? And why not admit them
Now,
to vote for Members of Parliament?"—
(licari do not
it may seem very ungenerous in me to say that
feel confidence in the great body of the people; and this,
too, when it is declared by the Hon. and Learnedare
Mem-
ber for Sheffield, that when the working classes
raised by one side of the House we aro always_h sure to
ear that praise echoed on the other. Now, Su, I

admit that the conduct of the working classes is de-
serving of our praise, and that, too, upon every oc-
casion that we have had an opportunity of judging
of their general conduct; but going from that conduct,
should it follow thst a suffrage almost universal should
give to them tae power of electing Members of Par-
liament, and that if they hal that power their choice
would always be a wise one?—(Hear, hear.) Am
I to say that because they are deserving that the
consequence should be that they should elect the Mem-
bers of this House, by whom are to be determined all
questions in relation to this great empire?—(Hear, hear)
—that to them should be intrusted the preservation of
our constitution and of this empire, in the direction of
which this House has so great a part?—(Hear, hear.)
Candidly, I must say that I think they should not; I be-
lieve that they would be misled, and I have seen inst acces
that induce me to think so. There would be fund one
man telling them that 30,000,000/. of taxes were paid for
a debt that was not a national debt —that they would be
right in not paying it; and that they might get rid of
those t IXO3 by refusing to pay that debt. I think that a
man telling them this would get followers and sup-
porters, and thus have a seat in this House. I believe, too,
tha' persons might obtain favour amongst them by pro-
posing the tepee! of the new poor-law, and restoring the
old poor-law—that law which was fast leading to a
social revolution in this country. I believe that doe-
eines such as these, and others, would, with the classes
!o whom you propose to give the sufflase, have great
weight and influence.—(Hear, hear.) If such, then, are
:ny opinions, I cannot support the proposition of the
Honourable Gentleman.—(Hear.) But, then, we are
repre a:lied with the measures on this subject that we
nave preposed. The Honourable Member for Oxford
,ass, " You have brought in a Bill respecting the Irish
ranchise, and the constitution for the Cape laid down
Principles which do not d Fier much from that which the
Honourable Gentleman proposes." With respect to Ire-
and we have brought forward a Bill which, if it passes
en its present shape,"will give 250,009 votes to 2,000,000
of an adult population—that is,which gives to the people
a less number of voters in proportion to the population
than that which the people of England and Wales now
have.—(Hear, hear.) If that, then, be so, that Bill is
no precedent for the measure of the Hon. Gentleman.—
(Hear, hear.) With regard to the Cape, the state of its
population and the franchise to be given cae form no
ground for such a motion as this. Any representation
given to a colony such as the Cape will be a representa-
tion for the colony only—it will have nothing but the
concerns of the colony to manage. It is not like the great
Imperial questions which come before the House of Com-
mons here. The representation here is totally diffe ent
from that which would suit such a colony as the Cape.
Ile next part, then, of the Honourable Gentleman's
proposition—having given a vote, or the right of voting
nearly to all persons; having made it that which Sergeant
relfourd had well said, when he said " that this was a
household suffrage, not for everybody who held a hoes-,
but for everybody that a house would hold."—(Laugh-
ter.) The Hon. Gentleman next states what is the alte-
ration he would propose as to the cities and boroughs
that should send Members to this House. Now, lam
bound to say Oat the Hon. Gentleman's explanation on
this, as on other occasions, has been very un'atisfact
—(Hear, hear.) I can very well under, tand the plan of
the Hon. Member for Nottingham, and as laid down in
the Charter, which the Hon. Member, I believe, has
signed and assisted in drawing.—(" Hear," from Mr.
Hume.) By that it was proposed that the country
should be divided into a certain number of districts,
each having 40,000 or 50,000 persons, who should have
a representative. Now, I think that would be very in-
jurious, and less like a national representation than that
which now exists. When we were making the Reform
Bill we endeavoured, in preserving the ancient boun-
daries and ancient cities and boroughs, to give a fa'r
representation to the whole. Now, I say that a hen
you come to apportion the representation you would
be obliged to consider tho case of the counties.
Here you have 100,000 people collected in a manu-
facturing town, and you say they must have two
Members to represent them, but here, where there are
200,000 people in a county, you say they are not de-
serving of a representation of four Members. Now,
what is the state at present of the representation?
There is Nottingham, with 53,000 persons, sending two
Members to Parliament; and North Devonshire, with
170,000 persons, has only two Members.—(Hear.)
Mere is Leicester, with 50,000 persons, having to o
Members cf Parliament, and South Devon, with 200,000
persons, sending no more Members to Parliament.
There is Oldham, with 42,000 persons, and two Mem-
bers, and Dorsetshire, exclusive of the boroughs, with
170,000 persons, sending no more Members to Parlia-
ment than Oldham.—(Hear, hear.) If then we come
to inequalities in the representation, and you say there
are gre at numbers of persons in the manufaeturirg
towns who are not represented in proportion to the
population, yet I say that before the small boroughs are
destroyed, I do not think that your object will be
attained by destroying the boroughs connected
with the agricultural counties. Wolverhamptor,
Bradford, Stamford, and Kidderminster, with a
population of 198,000, send twelve Members to Par-
liament; and South Devon, with a population that is
12,000 more than all these towns together, sends only
.wo Members to Parliament. If then we are to
light the question of inequality, let us fight it upon true
grounds. Adopt the plan cf the Hon. Member for Not-
tingham, aid divide tt e country into districts—give an
equal number to boroughs and counties.—(ll, ar.) But
he Hon. Gentleman does not propose that; he takes up
the question of the great Wallas and small boroughs, but
yet I never heard of a remedy f et. the inequality pro-
posed by the Hon. Gentleman which would deal
(pally with the counties and the towns.—(Hear.) I
have upon otter occasions stated my reasons for think-
ing why a representative from the large towns and divi-
sions of counties would less represent the people than
the divisions which at present exist. I do not believe
that any other result would follow from the proposed
change than to increase the division amongst classes.
between the agricultural an i manufacturing interests. I
think that the representation of the smaller towns with
agricultural districts around them tends to smoothen
those differences by the Members they send to the
House of Commons. If we are to change this—then
let there be a fair and equal p'an of representation pro-
posed; let that plan be explained to this House, and let
not the Hon. Gentleman, now for the third time point to
the small boroughs and the large towns. Sir, when I
brought forward the Reform Bill, I stated what boroughs
I thought, and I named them, should be disfranchised,
as well as what counties and what towns I proposed to
give the representation to. I laid the whole case fairly
efore the House and the country to judge of it.—
(Hear.) But the Hon Gentleman's plan always gives
me the suspicion that he desires to give not a prepon-
derate, but an almost exclusive weight to the great towns
of this country.—(Hear, hear.) He would not treat
fairly the whole population by dividing them into manu-
facturing and agriculurista—(Hear.) The Hon. Gen-
tleman talks of tae labouring classes as if he wished to
make a distinct class of them—as if we distrusted them,
and would keep them at a distance.—(Hear.) I differ
altogether from that view. So far from the working
classes being a slave class, they have, in my mind, in-
estimable privileges—they are secure in their persons
and their property; and if the poor man be injured I e
is as sure of having a fair trial before his country as the
highest man in the land—he has the security of the law
and of our free constitution.—(Cheers.) Such, too, I
am sure is the feeling of that class. We have never

seen any other sentiment declared by them than that
"we are a free people and have the full enjoyment cf
our liberty."—(Cbeers.) I appeal to any one who has
ever heard the popular feeling expressed, if it is not so?
and nothing, I am sure, can be more different from
the feeling that they are living in a state of slavery.
—(Hear, hear.) There is not a republic in the
world which opens such a field to every honour and
every distinction as this monarchy.—(Loud cheers.)
Here a man may rise to the highest honours in the
state; he may rise to the greatest power in the state; he
may become a Minister in this country, however humble
may be his origin, and in that situation he may advise
his Sovereign as t 3 the policy he should pursue, and the
measures he ought to adopt; he may rise to the highest
position in the Church or the law, he may become Arch-
bishop of Canterbury or Lord Chancellor, and as such ho
may take rank before the Duke of Norfolk and the highest
noble in the land.—(Cheers.) They possess every pri-
vilege, their properties and their lives are protected, and
they have a fair field open to their ambition—they are

a fiee people, and they-are not the less free because
they have not votes given to them to enable them to elect
persons who may have the direction of public affairs in
Parliament.—(Hear.) Though I entirely differ from
the motion of the Hon. Gentleman, and though I must
give it tonight, as I would at any time give it, a dis-
tinct negative, yet I do not hold that a 101. valuation is
absolutely necessary, or must be always permanently re-
tained ; and having stated that opinion I may be asked
why I have not come forwardi tithe present session and
proposed such an amended measure for reform as I may
consider advisable. It is my opinion, and that of my
colleagues to whom I submitted this question,
that it would not be advisable in the present session to
put aside all other questions in order to raise the queston
of the franchise, which must lead to long and protracted
debates, excluding every other subject, and leading, I
fear, to many angry contests.—(Hear, hear.) I considerd
that, of late years, we have made very great changes
with respect to our commercial policy, and these changes
are matters of discussion in this House, and, still more
matters of discussion in the country.—(Hear, hear.) My
opinion is that the sentiments of the country should be
allowed to bo matured and settled upon these questions,
before we place before the country that which must
cause great excitement, and could hardly be settled
without great divisions of parties. I believe that if we in
addition to that which has caused angry debates through.
out the country—the question with regard to our com-
mercial law—that if we added to that another question,
we we might do a serious injury to the interests
country.—(Hear, Lear.) I believe that _this Parliament
is equal to the determination of subjects ofgreatbenefit of the
which might be passed as law, for
elapse
fer
once a measure
the bne interest,
country; but no long time would
had been passed for the exteonsion of the suffrage, until a
complaint would Le d
that the present House of
Commons had not been elected by all who
might be entitled to vote for representatives.
I believe
it is more for the interest of this
country that the Parliament should continue
to give its attention to the subject brought before it,
than if we rushed into a contest on Parliamentary reform.
(Hear, hear.) There are, too, other considerations
which I think may well induce us to collect further in-
formation, and that open to us further reflection, before
we bring the question of extension of the suffrage before
the House. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman has
alluded to great changes on the continent of Europe in
the last few years. These changes are not without
their lessons. The first lesson—and we are told
of it by Honourable Gentlemen in favour of
the motion—is, that we have seen governments which
might have altered their institutions—which might have
granted popular representation—which might have
allowed the people au enlightened press, and might have

introduced melt-Aires which would have prevented ahso-
lu►e power from interfering with the liberty of the
people unjustly, and that, having lost the time which they
should have devoted to such objects, were overwhelmed
with the tide of popular• fury which they had incurred.
But another lescon has been taught since governments
have been overthrown, or disturbed in their course.
We have seen in three countries in Europe, the cause of
liberty endangered, and the cause of good governments
injured, by those who came forward in the name of liberty
and of democratic government. We have seen in Italy
a venerable Pontiff, whose good intentions and benevo-
l•nce no one can doubt, obliged to fly from his capital.
We have seen that cap;tal stained with the blood of his
Minister, who had been assassinated; and we have seen
the wild establishment of a republic followed by a foreign
bombardment and a foreign occupation.—(Hear, hear.)
We have seen in Germany various changes, from the
extr. me of despotism to the extreme of democracy; we
have seen universal suffrage given and withdrawn, and
a suhAitute adopted, which was borrowed from ancient
Ronan, by which the vot_s of 100 of the richest men are
I cued t) the votes given by 1,000 of the poorest. We
have seen this substitute for the evil of universal suf-
frage. We have seen in France, when a demand was
wade fir the extension of the suffrage beyond the
rarrow limits of a few hundred thousands—we have
seen nat followed by a republic, which appeared to
the twonishment of ninetv-nine out of every hundred
inhabitants of France—(Hear, heir)—we have seen
univerEal suffrage proclaimed and acred upon, and yet
the new republic and universal suffrage openly reviled
at once by the wisest and the ablest men, and at the
same time by the poorest of the people.—(Cheers.) We
have st en men endeavouring to remedy the evil that
has be >n brought upon them by surprise. I have been
told, and many others have been told the same, that it is
the opinion of the great mass of the people of France,
that the present constitution is not suited to their
habits and character, and that that constitution rust
be replaced by institutions of a different kind.—(Hear.)
Now it was no bu iness of ours, as I stated when I was
first asked by the Hon. Member for Montrose—it is no
business of ours to interfere with any kind of govern•
ment that the French nation may give to themselves....
(Hear.) But it is our privilege, and we should be idiots
indeed if we did not avail ourselves of it, to observe what
is going on in Europe—(Hear, hear)—and to take coun-
sel from these events.—(Hear, hear.) I say then, that
if the result cf the first lesson of 1848 was "It is too
late," the result of this second lesson is "Do not do

too much, and do not go too far, without full delibera.
tior." I say that we are in the happy position that we
have not a constitution to seek.—(Cheers.) The Hon.
and Learned Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) says
that he has always been looking for this constitution,
and has not been able to find it.—(Laughter.) Why,
that, in fact, is our happiness and our advantage—that
we have no written constitution, but that every English-
man " knows his rights, and knowing dares maintain;"
and that no person would venture to deprive an English-
man of that liberty which, notwithstanding the Hon.
Member for Montrose, he knows that he has, arid he
values it.—(Loud cheers.) Well, then, if that be
the case; if we are in the enjoyment of so much
liberty; if the people of this country, during the years
1848 and 1849, have shown so much good temper, and,
as the Hon. Member says, are now in a state of quiet,
and contentment—l say that Ido not think it will be un-
wise in us to pause and consider, and not to take the
next step without further consideration as to what that
step shall be.—(llcar.) That there is no very prevailing
wish among the people at this time for these changes,
and that the midd!e classes are, as the Hon. Member for
Sheffield says, opposed to them, are certainly not con-
clusive reasons against those changes.—(Hear, hear.) It
is very unadvisable to wait for a storm before we go to
sea; but at the same time, if you lift your anchor and
unfurl your sails in a perfect calm, you may be drifted
against the rocks.—(Loud cheers.) I do net think,
therefore, that in the pre,ont temper of the people of this
country, it would be advisable for the Government of

this country to propose a great plan for the extension of
the suffrage.—(Hear, hear.) Whenever we do pro-
pose a plan, t think it should not be a substitute for
the Reform Bill, but a supplement to that Act.—
(Rciterat-d cheers.) My opinion is certainly that the
Reform Act was adapted to a e institutions of
this country—wa; adapted to the wishes of the
people of this country. I believe with Hon. Gentlemen,
that the people of this country have, since the Reform
Bill was introduced, made great advances in knowledge
and in information of every kind.— (Hear.) I rejoice to
know and to acknowledge those advences. I think that
it is partly in consequence of those advances that they
do not, as far as I can perceive, show any impatience at
the present moment for a great political change; that
they know the conflicts and even the dangers that must
accompany any such change, that they are contented t 3
wait till the wisdom of this House—(oh, oh, and laugh.
ter)—shall decide that it is necessary to make a farther
extension of the suffrage; and that the 101. value shall
be no longer the 1 mit for the right of voting in this
country.—(Hear, hear.) I think, therefore, if you decide
against the motion of the Honourable Gentleman that
you will be deciding against a motion which is in-
consistent with any right of suffrage that has hitherto
existed in this country, and which would introduce into
your representation a body of &lectors with whom you
might find it was impo,sible to make the other institu-
tions of the state accord. I am supported in this view
by the language th, t I see is held at the public meetings
which are professedly in support of the Hon. Member
far Montrose. I observe that at ono of them the Honour-
able Member for Nottingham rejoiccd in the union
that had taken place—(Laughter, and hear, hear)—and
la marked, amidst the great applause and laughter of the
audience, that it was not enough to destroy protectior,
but that they must destroy the Eitablished Church and
get rid of the " black dugs," which was the name with
which he thought right to denominate the clergy of the
United Kingdom.—(Laughter, and hear.) The Hon.
Gentleman cheers that sentment —(Hear.) The Hon.
Gentleman has united with those who are proposing this
plan to- fight.—(Hear, bear.) The lion. Member for
Oxford (Mr. Wood) means nothing of the kit.d. Ile has
e•kquently expressed his adherence to the constitution of
this realm, and his wish to preserve the monarchy and
the institutions of the country. I have no doubt that
such is his intention; but when the Members come to be
elected under the plan of the Hon. Member for Mon-
trose, if sanctioned by Parliament, I rather believe, arid
I am inclined to think, that the lion. Member for Not-

tjugham would be more likely to carry themajoritY;ith
him on his plan, than the Hon. Member for Oxford on
his.—(Cheers.) Be that as it may, this is a question of
conjecture and uncertainty. My advice to the House is
to fr to that conjecture and uncertainty the institu-
tions that we now have, being prepared to amend them
with rezdrd to any of their detects, refusing to ally our-
selves with any obstinate rejection of wl.at may be for
tho public benefit, but not adopting a course full of
danger, full of doubt, and full of peril to our best inte-
rests.—(Loud cheers )

Mr. B. OSBORNE—The Noble Lord had described
the speech and motion of the Ihn. Member for Montrose
as unsatisfactory, but the declarations just made by the
Noble Lord were completely unsatisfactory to the sup-
porters of the Government. It was worthy of notice
that all the opposition to the motion, with the exception
of one amphibious politician, the Member for West
Surrey, had come from the Treasury bench. lie was
one of those who had indulged in the pleas* dream that
the Noble Lord would have deprived his Hon. Friend
of the necessity of making his motion by bringing for
ward a treasure to amend the reps esentative system. In
July, 1848, the Noble Lord not only disclaimed the
doctrine cf fieality, but expressed himself as totally
dissatisfied with the state of the franchise.—(lleac,
hear.) The Noble Lord would not put to sea in a storm,
and he would not lift his anchor in a calm Were they
to gather from this that the Noble Lord was Baiting
for a breeze—(A . laugh)—and that it would not be
until the excitement of a general election occurred
that he would lay on the table of the House a Bill
for extending the franchise?—(Hear, hear.) He did
not think that such a course was calculated to
place the Noble Lord in a very high position with the
constituency of this country. He was afraid that until
the broad arrow of the Government were stamped upon
the measure, it was in vain to bring forward a motion
like the present. There were always people who said
the proper time had not arrived for measures of this
kind. At one time it Bas said that you should never
yield to popular clamour, and at another that you should
not grant such a measure when there was popular apa-
thy. But if ever there was a time when a Minister could
add to his fame, and secure the best interests of his coun-
try, it was by bringing forward such a measure at the
present moment. If he were not much mistaken, a cry
was arising out of doors that would swell after the
speech of the Noble Lord so that he would not have to
wait long for the storm he had spoken of. Who were
the parties that were really promoting this agitation?
A supine House of Commons and a procrastinating
Cabinet.—(Loud cheers.) The Noble Lord bad given
the House few reasons for the dilatory course he
proposed to pursue—a course very different from that
taken by his great predecessor, Mr. Fox, who laid
it down that a Government should initiate reform.
Such were also the sentiments of Lord Grey and Mr.
Pitt. He regretted he did not see in his place to-night
the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire (Mr. Disraeli),
(A laugh.)Refor
Reform
the successor of Mr. Pitt in his position as leader of the
great
WhatadridisttoheartaHticonp.ahirtyernobferthsaisy
that?copientsrayi.d—
Associations and Anti Corn-law Leagues, and other com-
binations of the kind, were the consequence of the people
having to take the government of the country into their
own hands; that if the Government would not lead the
peoplepeople would drive the Government.—(Elear,
hear.)the o it was now; and hence we had a set of agi.
tators getting up—(lronical eheers)—of whom the Noble
Lord (Lord John Russell) was the godfather.—(llear,
hear.) The Noble Lord himself, a few years after the
Reform Bill passed, expressed his dissatisfaction with
the franchise. In 1837, when the Government was not
things
ss otos trkoern andthe ity
awratys necessarytogether oas
t throwwa
sout a
uthese
things to keep the party together (as it was called),
ho said in his letter to the electors of Stroud that
it would have been difficult, but net impossible, by
means of the " freemen" franchise, to obtain the re-
presentation of the industrious, intelligent, and
able mechanics, and ttat such a change in the
character of freemen would do much to purify
our elections and to strengthen the House of Commons.
--(Hear.) But to come to a more recent period ; what
came out before " Mr. Roebuck's Committee " on the
Election Compromises? Why, that at Harwich 94
Tory votes cost 6,0004 and 84 Whig votes 2,0001.—.
(Hear.)--at Nottingham, 529 Whig votes cost 12,0001.,
and 144 Tory, 5,0001; at Lewes, 411 Tory votes cost
5,0001., and 407 Whig, 2,000/.; at Reading, 572 Tory
votes cost 6,0001., and 410 Whig votes 16,000/.—(Hear,
hear)—no, that last was amisutahlz)eitt as
hewWhif,s6oaoli.waylna
did the thing cheapest—(A jag
six boroughs 3,796 votes cost upwards of 53,366/.
(Hear.) Last year the Hon, Member for Droitwich
(Sit J. Pakington) had a Committee, and it was pro-
' posed that Members Amid take as oath against bribery;