The Sun.
London, England, 1821-04-19 00:00:00

question, he must appeal to the .canclOur, and if necessary, to
the Compassion of the House.-(Hear, hear!)—The lion.
Member next adverted to that part of the Bill which went
t) repeal the Septennial Act. The Bill extended only to Eng-
land and Wales, for as a Noble Lord had already given notice
of a motion relating to the state of the representation in Scot-
land, he-had not thought it necessary to take up that part of the
subject. If the House skould accede to his measure; of which
he confessed he entertained no hopes. nothing would be easier
than to add the name of Ireland or Scotland. It was not his-
intentien.Lo motelfor leave to .bring in the Bill now. He should
in this respect, follow the course which had been adopted by the
_Right Honourable Gentlethan who had-brought in the Catholic
by inovig,that' the-House. resolve itself into a Committee,
to consider the. state oT the representation of the people. If
tria.lle*Se should ,accede to this motion, he should then propose
ifet.taiq Resolutions 'embodying-the principles upon which the
,';" Mc:veal:ire ids *founded, and founded upon the declaration of Lord
-h•Cnathame that to be tried without being represented, was con-
- -argil to the Laws and Constittition•of the country. He begged
•.err declare,
.distinctly, that he should not consider any Member
.who voted for the Committee,-as at all pledging himself to sup-
poht.eitheathe Resolutions` or the Bill.. He felt it necessary, in
lirintgl,forward this motion, to be
.prepared with a particular
hrativith.certain Resolutions, in order to meet the objec-
. Oa that nothing specific was ever proposed by the advocates
for Reform' -bat the individuals, who voted for the Committee,
• woultlatherely sanction the' assertionthat the stath of the rkFe-
- hsentation was such as to require. some Reform.----(Heare hear,
▪ hear l)-hIn advocating the propriety of extending ie. elective
:franchise, he was aware that he exposed-himself to the misre-
• preSeritation-of some, and. the sophistry of others. ''He could
• not hope forthe • court:hence of that class of- politicians who
-unifotchly supported the system which was first commenced. at
•. thh.periol•of the French Revolution--a system which. upheld
the of the Crown against • the liherties of the people,
and: which7illt. Pitt had himself denounced as one under which
- no-MiriiSter could be 'honest. Their minds were to he still
atarnied -by idle visions of • anticipated danger, whenever the
• tilits of the.people were restored, as if a participation in those
''rights, -which were'unjustly withheld from them, would not be
••••is pledge of their attachment to the institutions of the country,
:and a bond-Of union and tranquillity, • instead of an incentive..
' 'to-treason and rebellion. It was the deprivation, not the pos-
• . sh•ssion of constitutional popular rights which led to disaffection,
• and its attendant- train of evils. The Government proved by
its own acts. that it was not unconscious of -the wrong which it
alid the comununity, knowing that the undoubted rights of the.
people were most pertinaciously withheld from them.. Mini.
siers.thought it natural that they should resent the oppression— •
-they thought it natural that they 'should cherish feelings hostile
to an Administration whose system it was to perpetuate all
.chuseh -of complaint.. They endeavoured to repress these feel-
i n gs, net by removing the evil, but by increasing-the coercion.
The liberties of the subject were in consequence still further
restrained; the last enemy of corruption, public opinion, was
attached, and the right of publication abridged—(Hear, hear,
fifear.f)The result was a sullen silence. Yet still the people
were 'accused in such a manner' as proved that the Ministers
could never forgive those whom they had injured; and they
could never forget that they had, as the debate on the Army
• Estimates of last night sheaved; founded the security of their
nahaer on force-4 Hear, hear !)--But if the voice of public
,
homplaint was met by conciliation, they need not have any re-
•hicearse to severity. fle (Mr. L.) and his Honourable Friends
• -Who t,apported Reform were accused of advocating innovation ;
• • but who were the re 4; innovators ? - Were they those who were
anxious to restore the purity of the Constitution, or those who,
• like the Gentlemen opposite, abrogated the ancient practice of
" -public meetings, and suspended the Habeas Corpus Act ?--
- Thils Were the Ministers the real innovators, and. accused the
• Refohmerh of the crime of innovation of which they themselves
were guilty. Ile denied that there was any innovation in de-
manding the restitution of those rights of which their ancestors
were jealous, and which were equally founded in law and cape-
. illency. There were•one or two ary,uthents much relied on by
those who opposed Reform, respecting -which he wished
to say a few words. It was stated that the present system of
'epresentation, though objectionable in theory, worked well
in practice; and it was also stated, that rotten boroughs
prodneed- much pracfi-,!:11 benefit to the country,- as they were
, the means . of bringing men of talent into Parliament who
might not otherwise have any opportunity of getting there.—
,With respect to. the 'firit, it was 'certainly very true. that the
system,worked:well inpractice ; but for whom did it work well?
•. hhhy for. the llonourabte Uentierneu - opposite who used that
arp-ornent, and for their relations and friends who enjoyed its
hz-'44t, as might be seen by an inspection of-the place and pen-
. sion .lists.—(Bear !)—B u t the result, however benefical to them,
was not equally so tutlie, country ; the preSerit condition to which
the ethpire was reduced, in al/ its interests-' prove,/ that the sys-
tem did not work well.. for the peOple . England.--(Cheers !)
• Kit haal, where were the proofs ? Was the country either rich
.and contented at home or powerful Abroad ? How then'could
it he Said that the system' welled well for tho country ? The
other argument relative to rotten boroughs was equally invalid..
Stich institutions' could not have any peculiar property of fos-
taiing the rising talent of 'the nation. All history proved that
merit and ability were more likely to find their level in a free
State than in a corrupt or arbitrary 'Government ; but suppos,
ing the.fact to be true, was that House .ilesigned to be a place
for the display of talent, of was it an institution formed to' e
at c.leck on the. Crown, Where the exertion Of the steady prin-
., eiples of honesty and independence was mere to be desired than
tth the rhetorical flourishes and harmonious periods which •elo-
, quence ever nitered,-(Here, hear !)---Ile would take an example
fram domestic life, and would. say, that in his own limited es-
tablishinent he had rathek be served •by a• stupid honest man,
than by, the most 'eminently -gifted-rascal that ever wore a li-
, Very.—(Cheers and laughter !)—lie knew he had omitted many
• arguments applicable to the question; buthe hoped the House ai
•wottld not allow it., Merits. to suffer by his demerits, but give it
the consideration whieli it so well deserVed. This - was not the
tithe to trifle with public opinion ; when it,was resisted, •as in
ftdy, it led fo consequences which must terminate in some de-
ploribie convulsion. But in Spain, public opinion, left to its own
oeeration - had produced the happiest. results ; it was proceeding
to union with knowledge to the correction of venerable abusef,
ytheestablishinent of enlightened institutions, and the consolidn-
tion of'a system equally benefiCial to the Monarch 'and the Pep-
, pie, as protectihg the prerogative of the one and the freedom of
theotlier.. He builedlhat-star of liberty which had risen oil the
t. gloomiest hart, of' our political. horizon; as the auspicious omen
4if.the
a11-conquering
taere Were any well inclined to the reStoration.ef the rights' Of
Ertgllimen, but whd .shrunk from stemming tlfe torrent of cor-
..ription, thrtnighalreird. of the aspersion • and obloquy which it
brckght,,,on theta, he'. was tot one-of-them ; whatever perils'
• enhotr4ass6d.liiinalioweVer the wind dud the title might he against
Aria-he .ws-;hipported by the goodness of his catise, by. the pu-
hity tf hit intentions, .:and had,' above till; a. confiding hope
"11-r.: the -spirit of the COnstitra tion.- • The Honourable MeMber
theta moved " That the House do resolve itself into a Com-
• inittee of the whble }louse,- to consider the present state of the
Representatican-'idlYarliament " and sat down amid much
eh
Mr. S. C. WHITBREAD- 'seconded the Motion. He ob-
• •aerVed, that Parliathentary Reform, instead !of endangering,
would, mare than .any . thing else, • tend to the preservation of
liberty and. property. He spoke the opinion of his: Constituents
when he said. that-that as the Houhe v; a$ now constituted it was
,•
nearly tne raverae of what it was intended to be bY.the theory
of the COnstituti- a. It was top notorious to be denied, that a
• great iminber obtained their seats in violation of the principle, of
eiection--h(Heir!')—and in Contempt of the Stand Orders of
that Honse. But then the•Hottse was too delicately sensitive
.:to,')).ll.olit'ifself to be _told of tlioe•thisials, and wap, in 'fact, like
' wqflian`Othad character, with, whom you might take
4::ert".hcit that of telling her of her frailty.—(Clicers and laugh-
'lhrthj-izThe'dortilition to which. the, country was reduced afford-
- leii.thl2.Strerigest hirgtintebt.in favour of. Reform, foralthougli,
. - .
vhtitibris loured in • frein all harts of the:country, they were
' treated with indifference, am l' neither a correction .of
abuses Or tiny subitantl4 inquitY. 'This. cotild not be the case if'
the is,, of Commons really renresented the people. The tip,
. tion was oppressed with taxet, its representatives were
onlythinl 'of enjoying the pleaturet and profits of patronage.
lletiOnrahn Member then expressed his appfobation of the
• •• plazt of Refliren proposed by his Honourable Friend, particularly
that,. art which went to shoiten the duration of Parliaments,
aria 'concluded by entreating the htembers to take care .not to be
wanting in' 'their duty at trustees-1)f the people, and guardians
of their liberties::.:-(Hear, hear !) • • • .
Mr. AV-ILMOT opposed the motion: He could not conceive
that, from the reasons now adduced, 'any: member was boUnd
-to vote-' for the Cominittee.. Frani the time that the spirit. f
"eras
had been first 'propagated throughout Europe; he
one who 'thought :a- stand:by,. "inn), • vieh-necessary to our.
shafety.: .11e anticipated results- from the diffution ofeducation.
• far different from :those looked thir liy the -Anon. Mover; lie'
• thoght the pseoliy, liatt been. fling and artfully :deluded on the
subject OfihetrzightS, and particularly the right toAnnual Par-
liaments and":Uitiversal • Auffrage; that those had -never been
the-rights of the *pre might' he proved-almost with matherna-
.. tiedcertainty:. .He argued artea'ne length against-the supposi-
• tin that anciently all freeholdeis tht ;COunty Cohrt voted at
electioth for.tneMbers, of .P.arliathent. • 'Ahhost overwhelming
• •• aegir. uent against the.. rian: Gentleman's Sentiments respecting
• • the &ration of each Parlianient Was, that it had. never been
-Mentioned in the Bill of Itightk as a matter Of right existing in the
representative body... rt, was that; cop" yholders never pos-
,sessed-.the right, ofvotittg;.oo it, *Old -be an. extraordinary in.
• noiation On the Constiehtibn if theYivere now' admitted tbsote..
Even where the representation altered in the manner which had
been recommended, no relief of any very great consequence could
be afforded to the pecuniary burthens of the nation, consistently
with the assurances given and the faith pledged to the public
creditor. The difference between those who were openly hos-