The Sun.
London, England, 1842-05-04 00:00:00

ud
on

a .s,
e he
1311 t

-Jill

lle

$
1:4

. • r
Hwy.

,of
ro
iy • lit

seated that Government was able to do that which-
no Government was able to do ; who represented Gs-
vernment as bound to attempt that which no
Wise Go+ernment dared attempt—that %%Ilia, if
Government did attempt, instead of doing more
than their duty, they would do a great deal less.
This was what had been represented to the people, in-
stead of telling them the truth, that Government were
themselves supported by the people, and could only be
supported by the people. Instead of this, it was repre-
sented that Government had some extraordinary mine
of wealth, or a means of relieving the distress of the
people, as though they had a Divine permission—as if
they could send them bread from the clouds, water from
the rocks, and multiply the loaves and fishes five thou-
sandfold. And was it possible to believe that the people
in after years—was it possible to believe that, the mo-
ment they gave them this absolute, this supreme
responsible power, would forget those representations ?
Gentlemen talked of class legislation, and they were
going to give one class absolute, unlimited power, which
would lay property absolutely at the feet of labour. How
was it possible for any one to suppose, who heard this
reasoning, that such would not-be the result ? Suppose the
people were to elect such Members as the Hon. Member
for Bath, the Hon. Member for Montrose, and many
others, who would firmly oppose the proposition for a
national bankruptcy, who could suppose that such a
-Parliament as this would lead to any thing but disap-
pointment amongst the people ? Gentlemen talked of
distrppointment attending the Reform Bill. What a dis-
appointment would attend the meeting of the first Par-
llain*nt under the new system, when that Parliament
would refuse to answer a petition not to pay the debt—
When the answer made to the people would be in that
s'ruses that the debts must be paid, even
Leough. they were contracted for wars against
,slLbertYs' and entered into by a Parliament not
-,„`''''ed 'by the people, yet their debts must be paid ?
litd then with respect to land, would they not be driving
Ott of the country by the spoiliation of property all the
funds from which labour would be remunerated ? Was
it, possible to doubt that the petitioners who had been in-
ar,heed to sign that petition to the number of three mil-
"°118, that if they obtained what they sought that they
would not have great reason to complain of the manner
which they had been treated ? What was said after
the passhig of the Reform Bill ? There were murmurs
of disappointment ; the eople said you promised us the
Bill,and the whole Bill, and to be sure we have nothing
-*as, but you have given us the means without the
*,...,_w1----(Hear.) Could any one doubt that the cry
'o
uld be increased twenty times if the people
ee*ved what was demanded in that petition ? When
';•"-1 state of things came—and the consequences must
°ree themselves on every mind—he defied any human
being. to point out in modern or ancient history, a pic-
ture so full of horror. Distress was made the ground
of the application now, and it was extremely bad, but it
would be doubled and trebled then. As the Government
then would be formed on the spoilation of property, how
could it be supposed that under it, property could be
respected, or could receive protection. It seemed to him,
that as far as he could judge, nothing more horrid could
be exhibited than this great country, containing twenty-
seven or twenty-eight millions of human beings—this
vast population, all dependent for their existence on
trade and industry, trade with the furthermost ends of
-the'world—than that country under such a system. Such
scene of famine, misery, and pestilence, could not be
'equalled in modern Europe. If such a state came to
pitst, if such a dreadful revolution took place, he should
shave one wish with respect to it—and a dreadful wish it
`was for an Englishman to express as a means of social
melioration--and that was, that some desperate struggle
'lould arise which would call to life some strong
ilitary despotism, which would give some sort of pro-
te eton and security to that property which remained.
Bt it if they expected to see the old institutions of the
Co! entry revived, they deceived themselves greatly; they
we uld never see them again, they would never deserve
thee rot again. Every nation would look with utter con-
tempt at the ruin of those institutions, and at the glory
oft he country laid prostrate ; and in the history of the
counitry would be told that England had institutions, im-
peril ett indeed, but institutions which contained within
them, telvea the means of conferring happiness, even with
their imperfeetions—institutions better than any great
eonimi Indy, in all the history of the world, she had lived
nudes, 'for 150' years together—institutions which she
threw vantouly away, for no purpose whatever, except
beeaute she was asked to do so, by persons who said
that,. Wfahout these concessions, she would be ruined.—
(Loud ch eers.) Now, these were the feelings which he
entertained respecting this proposition.—(Loud cheers.)
Having, therefore, this opinion in his mind, he would
oppose the proposition, as long as he sat in that House,
for Unf versa' Suffrage, and he had only to decide whether
he aho uld vote for hearing the petitioners at their bar.
-Now, he must say that any person who was disposed not
to grant UrOversal Suffrage, he thought that Gentleman
could act a consistent part in voting for hearing the
petitioners. But he must confess that it was with some
Surprise he had beard the Hon. Gentleman, the Member
for Leicester, declare that, agreeing with him (Mr.
Macaulay) in all his principles, he now was disposed to
vote simply for allowing the persons presenting that pe-
tition to come to the bar to explain its principles.
(Sir John Easthope made some observation, which was
inaudible in the gallery.) He (Mr. Macaulay) though
he would treat the petition with respect, and thcite who
sent it, he should give a conscientious vote against ;lur-
ing the petitioners.—(Cheers from the Ministei.''al
benches.) It appeared to him from conviction, that by*
so doing he was not only acting on the whole for the
best for the State, but that he was really doing to the
petitioners themselves a great service, and that they
Would ultimately have no reason for complaining that
they (the House) had refused to hear them in support of
their demands __(Cheers from the Ministerial benches.)
Mr. ROEBUCK, who spoke in so low a tone of voice
as to be scarcely audible at first, said, that after the de-
scription given by the Right Hon. Gentleman of the
iabebocuor.lnsequences which would follow from granting the
souk:: tg Population of this country the power they
&at the "ses; he was very much inclined to believe
friend to Right Hon. Gentleman was no very great
f working classes. He told them that he had
ndo.e seriseetishh_ g towards the petitioners, but entered into a
givingrthu_nseof the consequendes which would result from
sufi,pring,' laborious frugal, industrious, honest, long-
desari
t, Patient people their rights, and entered into a
them
Roebuck
Pplwil of the horrors that would result from giving
) etr, which plainly indicated to him (Mr.
hat he (Mr. Macaulay) entertained no
.rdY good feeling towards g them. The proposition
down
b‘nolc) had the Right Hon. Gentleman, he (Mr. Roe-
soquen seen before put forth with all the gorgeous
Geluietnce with which he had heard the Right Hon.
it .an on the subject before, which left no doubt of
otesin. Tre .
He had seen it on the discussion upon the Re-
zus".l By the proposition of the Right Hon. Gentle-
landhe was not to give to the working public of Eng-
nY Would Povrer, until it was beyond a doubt that they
no t use that power improperly. That was the
position laid down that night; and then the Right
Gentllematt said, could he believe that the labour-
At?
population could obtain this power without misusing
si
sso rie (Mr. Roebuck) would ask him what they (the
use) were at all for ? For what purpose was it that
4!" e House of Commons was formed ? He was prepared
of 1? Maintain that by every principle of the Constitution
<tywere brought together to represent the whole body
tho people. What was it that brought them there ?
was that desire in all to proceed upon their
wn merits. They were there to prevent the conse-
Ittendes of that desire. If he were a strong man, with
14.1koiorie to check him, he carried out that desire.
the strong
this but men joining together to prevent
ci
s'rong oppressing the weak? It was upon this prin-
fPie that Parliament was elected for the purpose of per-
.:l:ling in that arena the business of Government, that
Which was once performed in the times before us in the 1
the
Market-place. But then if the Government were
o',e watchers, he wanted to know who were to watch
7rn--sWito were to watch the watchers? There was
.13Ty one mode, and that was by making them respon-
vTto the people. But they were only responsible to a
ion of the people. They oppressed the remainder ;
age
would touch their power. They were delegated
,x a *all section; that section were joined to oppress the
aternaincler. The Right Hon. Gentleman stood forward
Ptinst the petitioners, and said they demanded a mini-
of wages. He (Mr. Roebuck) looked around him
pointed to the other side of the House, and he
slistd if there, in that House, they did not demand a
laitainiura of wages ? They said they had landed power,
Itild therefore they demanded a minimum price in corn.
`-(Cheers.) ••Where was the difference in the landed
Ill'eprietor in coming into the market, and saying his
,:liges were corn, and they should not reduce corn below
j' certain price ? The Right Hon. Gentleman, the
Member for Edinburgh, said it was bad political
It:°eotny to demand a minimum of wages. Was there
kr! difference between bad political economy in a man
)40.1.1ng that he had his labour to depend upon, and must
lirie„ minimum of wages, and the landed pro-
e° ?r who said he must have a minimum price in
lass, ,i_lie perfectly agreed with the Right Hon. Gentle-
s that aesea many of the miseries of the people had been
41)1114 1-12' bad government.—(Hear, hear.) Few could
4%114, Vls• There was the Poor-law Bill ; this, no
°llllars 141,,,..Ca05ed much of the misery existing in the
r,,ttrty He would point to the organ of the other
repssi,s` The Times, They every day brought out
traet•-"1°11s, just as wild, quite as fearful—quite as de-
bre
afterk
ISEltsae security of property as that which was
villiustiel in the petition. But was he, therefore,
1)t eu in saying, that in every town—in every
tsOlest,,,lf they acceded to the proposition, they laid
Ntesejitihuder the foot of labour. Why were a part of
sesa,'? s4lpity represented, and not the other classes as
Or tiplliiiitiere was a still larger, and equally intelligent
Perty e„s,it he meant the labouring majority
classe, I':ltrY, and who were not connected with pro-
ih the riSS,ltia the Right Hon. Gentleman said that these
the'f.st be so blinded that they would little respect
The --„,-,L.Property, that they would produce a scene
did "uukt7l4.3r of bloodshed, confusion, and rapine.
llot •
m Jud
cosvalintit„ ge them as they ought to be judged. He
Plae at‘'dthetri by the words written by a malignant,
th,tez his lira foolish demagogue, upon whom he could
h' 4t was:, ""'", and whose name he could mention, but
th that -114401.1 y beneath contempt. It was not from
the"selyes e would judge them. He would look to
alr p he
Ettiwould ask all who had. borne witness. to
had'rut ice, who had borne witness to Their long
4 bee h, heaped
forbearance of the oppresion which
- d •
t oeta pe upon them. It was from these that
b ashy vy's judge his countrymen, and not from the
aY the chafing of an idle document, rendered ridiculous
tie partieswho had
4„
1;1 virtu7e uon when they drawntheir fellow-men, no better 4tean ha:, and but a little better in wealth, made different
Odesee'llgs from themselves
de raded and servbiYle a?
Nor
they lvh cgh.
fc!i he- had known Stl.Pess. ells own inanY of them to be men of
ea the. ,ey had wealth and security in property
SsPeet it if I;,e•eat. electoral body; h
wey then should they
w ee otherwise, when persons equally intelli-
si sus Wiled to that body, and what reason they
t'P Vse that then they would have England inn sta.te

of anarchy most terrific, as described by the Right Hon.
Gentleman? He said there was no argument to sup-
port such a proposition. At the present moment
they had no physical force men to keep down. They
had many millions of suffering people in the country, and
if they were to rise up as one man, all their armed force
would be as a rush against them. They could do nothing.
But, instead of this they found them peaceable and acting
in strict obedience to the law. This was the feeling deeply
impregnated into the people of England, and, if he were
asked to distinguish his fellow countrymen from ali
others, he should do so by saying that there was but one
feelingin the country with respect, to obedience to the laws.
It was that feeling amongst us which made him feel
sensible, that if the whole body of his fellow-countrymen
were invested with power, he should walk home as he
should do to-night, in peace and security, having the
greatest faith in his fellow-countrymen.—(Hear, hear.)
And he would say to the Right Hon. Gentleman, with-
out wishing to be severe upon him, that if ever there
were a libel thrown upon his good, patient, forbearing,
laborious countrymen, it was that kind of declamation
which said that they were unfit to govern themselves.
—(Hear, hear.) Why they had done everything
for them (the House of Commons). On them rested
the fabric of English greatness ; and now the
very fact of their quiet organisation, when making a
demand of this sort, afforded such an example of forbear-
ance and self-government as had never been seen before
in the history of nations. He should like the Right
Hon. Gentleman to put his finger on one portion of
history which would show such a spectacle as the floor
of that House yesterday.—(Hear, hear.) There were
three millions of people who had come from the many
towns and hamlets of this country, in its highways and
byeways ; in the security of the law had they signed a
document for the indulgence of that right which they
believed in their hearts to be for their general good ;
they had not banded themselves together against the
law to obtain it, but faithfully, prudently, and respect-
fully they came and asked for it there.—(Hear, hear.)
And from this the Right Hon. Gentleman concluded,
notwithstanding the startling instance which :he
(Mr. Roebuck) had mentioned, that this petition was to
be thrown by as nothing ; that he was to fix his critical
opinion and his critical eye, and his grammatical sa-
gacity, on this document ; and he was to forget the
startling fact that there were:three millions of his fellow-
subjects, who were not now within the pale of the Con-
stitution, and had come in a peaceable manner to de-
mand a right which they believed their own.—(Hear,
hear.) Let it not be supposed, for one instant, that he
agreed in the one-hundredth part of what was contained
in that petition ; what he asked for was, not that
they should be simply heard ; the Honourable
Member for Rochdale only asked for an inquiry, and he
was met by the Hon. Baronet the Member for Leicester
—(Laughter)—the Hon. Member for Finsbury asked for
an inquiry also, and then came a strange alteration in
the Right Hon. Baronet.—(Hear, hear.) He saw some-
thing now which he did not see before.—(Hear, hear.)
But now the demand was precisely the same—an inquiry
in which they might state their opinions, and why they
thought the evils which at present existed in the country
arose from bad legislation—the inquiry was precisely
the same as that for which the Hon. Member for Roch-
dale moved the other night, and now a special light had
fallen on the Right Hon. Gentleman.—(Hear, hear.) He
(Mr. Roebuck) voted for the motion of the Hon. Mem-
ber for Rochdale, and he meant to vote for the petition
now before the House, he meant to vote for the Charter.
—(Hear.) He asked for the people to be admitted
within the Constitution, because he believed that the best
Government which could be got for any people, at any
time, must be chosen from the whole of the people—
(Hear, hear)—and it struck him that if to-morrow they
were to transform by legal means, and no violent legis-
lation, that House of Commons into a complete repre-
sentation of the people of England, there would be not
one iota of difference as to the relations of property in
this country—(Hear, hear)—with this single and ad-
vantageous exception, that every man would have the
profits of his own labour, only so much being taken from
it as was his fair share towards the expenses of the State.
The people did not say that all the evils of life were to be
attributed to the present condition of that house, but they
said that being unrepresented, they paid more largely to
the expenses of the State than they ought to do in
reference to their condition in numbers ; and, judging
from the acts—not the words—of the majority of that
House, they concluded that they were unfairly dealt
with, and that they had been, for a long time, a long-
suffering and a patient people, and they asked to he re-
presented. Let him look at one or two circumstances
which had lately taken place, and he would ask, what
would they think if they could be traced to the evils of
an aristocratic Government? He did not like such aris-
tocratic Governments as that of England. He thought that
the whole of the people, more particularly the labouring
population of it, who had hitherto been the main
stay of the Government, but who were now in a state
of extreme distress, and, with food scantily supplied,
ought to be represented; and he thought that the govern-
ing body was called upon to do something to relieve their
distresses by allowing them to work for food. But the
aristocratic body would do no such thing ; he therefore
should conclude that it was a spirit of rapine in this aris-
tocratic body.—(A voice No.") He took his language
from their repeated acts. He said it was a spirit of
rapine which caused that body to act as it did. The
present aristocratic Government was a fierce, tyrannical ,
Government, fond of rapine and plunder ; but let them
look around, and go a little farther, and they should see I
that these people, having power in their hands, and being
dt a distance from misery, were not alive to the evils I
wh.;ch their legislation created •, and that, therefore,
not o.'llY. would they be doing a benefit to the poor, but
to the Cch also, by sending amongst them persons who
would te2l them the evils which bad legislation pro-
duced.—(h,„ 9ar, hear.) Nor did he believe that he was
going to give .to one small body, as he called the labouring
class, the electi:ln of that House—(Hear, hear)—it would
be borne by the whole people of England, the wealth,
the intelligence, ilnd the integrity t,f the country.—
(Hear, hear.) people • on earth were ever
governed by the poor, but always by the wealthy,
the thinking, and4the le isUre classes. The only diffe-
rence would be that they would have wealth exercising
its legitimate influence, with intellect assisting it, in-
stead of, as now, wealth exercising none but a malign
influence in that House. This constituted the difference
between the Right Hon. Gentleman and himself. He
had great faith in the patience and virtue of his fellow-
countrymen The Right Hon. Gentleman doubted it,
and said they were not to be trusted, and he grounded
his belief on the paper which was now on the table, and
he &Nut his eyes to the experience which he ought
to have had, and who, in passing through this
country, must have become intimately acquainted
with tire many sufferings of the thousands around
us ; but forgetting all this, shutting his eyes to
all the experience which he ought to have had, he judged
of his fallen countrymen from that paper on the table,
and he said that they were unworthy of trust, that they
delighted in rapine, and would glory in bloodshed—that
where they fund peace they would make war, where
cultivated land they would make a desert—and that
great country, which they had contributed almost
entirely to raise to its great prosperity—(Hear,
hear) his poor labouring countrymen would, if
they had the means,., reduce to a wide scene of
bloodshed, anarchy, an.l confusion—(Hear)—and in this
sense he would for ever, said the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, oppose to the utaaost of his ability, the demand
made shy the people of that. country. He (Mr. Roebuck)
did not envy
.the feelings of? the Right Hon. Gentleman
who th us estimated his fellow' people ; and, for himself,
whether he were in that House or out of it, he would
say, that the little ability which he possessed should
be devoted to their service ; and he believed that
he should be best doing them service when he
spoke of them vith kindness, consideration, and affec-
tion ; and that h, it should do for them that which they
ought to expect ; .I.t his hands when he made them all
equal in the eye of , the law, and would not allow a ser-
vile class to remain ; and he did believe that property
would be more SQCIn, .e when his fellow-countrymen had
more power.—(The I. ton. Gentleman resumed his seat
amidst loud cheers.)
Sir F. EGERTON ss id, he did not think it necessary
to speculate as to the p. revise effect which would follow
the granting of the prayer of this petition. The Hon.
Gentleman seemed to think that out of a general strife
a perfect Utopia would arise, • under which everything
would be condueted in the eat and most delightful
manner. With such an opinion he certainly could not
concur. He perfectly coinc;.ded in a •hat had had fallen from
the Right Hon. Member for Edinburgh ; he believed it
would be the height of f 311 y to had out to these three
millions, of men, who had signed that trashy, and con-
temptible document, that the prayer of their petition
would ever be granted, as d that would almost be inferred
if they were now allowed to appear at the bar. Entirely
concurring with the 'MO t Hon. Gentleman, he should
give a vote, which, tb ouglh perhaps an unpopular one,
would still, he believe. i, lye the correct one.
Mr. HAWES said he was so thoroughly convinced
that this was a fitting time for all who were anxious for
the good of the county; r to speak, that he should take the
opportunity of making a few observations on the subject
before the House. W ith respect to the speech of the
Hon. Member for Bath, he would say that it had removed
all doubt from his mind as to which way he should vote
on this occasion, for wi th‘ all tAat fervid eloquence and
great talent and boldness, which always marked his con-
duct and speeches in that House, he had told the House
and the country that they were not going to vote for an
inquiry into these grievant !es, but they were, in fact, to
vote for or against the Charter. On that sole point he
was at issue with his 14 onoura ble Friend. He did
not concur with him th at an universal extension
of electoral rights would be either wise Dr prudent ; but,
on the other hand, he distinctly disclaimed wing any
want of confidence in the peoille. If the questa:l;were,
whether or not the Charter sh ould become the of
the land, he (Mr. Hawes) w'onLd -feel bound to N'S't
against so wild and indefini to a: change. He would ask
the Hon. arid Learned Meg iber !or Bath whether, in the
public meetings which had, from time to time, been held
throughout the country is support of the Charter, they
found that enlightened el ass of mechanics to whom it
was desirable that the franchise should be ex-
tended ? Was it their views which were advocated ,
in those meetings as stated in the petition ?
He contended that, the views so advocated,
were the views of those 71sea,iers whom the Hon. Gentle-
man had so powerfully condi ‘mned, and whose doctrines
and opinions he had treated with such merited scorn ;
and when this was the case, he had a right to conclude
that if the prayer of the p etition were granted, it would
be used for the benefit .of those bodies, and not for
that of the working clam sea. There were some points
in the Charter in which h e ( Mr. Hawes) fully concurred.
He was in favour of abolit ,ping the property qualification,
and also in favour of Vote by Ballot. He was also prepared
for a steady extension of the Suffrage ; but in the
present state of educati on in this country, taking the
petition itself as an indit :ation, he thought a gradual ex-
tension would be far safer than an immediate assent
to the principles of the ~Charter. Having steadily advo-
cated every measure tai 'culated to ameliorate the condi-
tion of the people, ho nevi :rthelcss could not vote for the

Charter. He was not yet prepared to admit that the
Reform Bill had been a failure, considering the many
wise measures which had resulted from it during the last
ten years ; and he believed that a safer remedy
for the grievances of the people would be found
in that Bill than could possibly be found
in the Charter. He must, therefore, enter his
humble protest against being supposed to vote by any
accident for the Charter, but, at the same time, to state
that in the general advocacy of progressive reform, he
would still be found the firm friend of the people.
Mr. HUME said he was sorry to hear the speech of
the Honourable Gentleman who had just sat down,
who, though he made excellent promises, and
accused others of being wild and indefinite in their
demands, did not state one single object which he
had to propose for the relief of the people. The Hon.
Member was for progressive reform. He (Mr. Hume)
would be glad to know by what steps. The Hon. Mem-
ber sail the people were to be judged by the language
used at public. meetings. He (Mr. Hume) regretted that
violent language had often been used; but were the great
body of the people to be blamed ?—(Hear, hear.) As
well might they attack Hon. Members opposite on ac-
count of the language held by the Right Hon. Baronet,
who had stated that England would be as rich as she is
if all the manufacturers were engulfed in one common ruin.
Sir R. PEEL—I never said that.—(Hear.)
Mr. HUME—It appeared in the Standard, and was
copied into other papers. —(Hear.) It was stated that
the people were to be judged by their petitions. Now,
he would ask, if in that petition they had manifested any
intention to defraud the public creditor ?—(Hear, hear,
and "Read.") The Hon. Member then read a part of
the petition relating to the national debt, and contended
that there was no disposition evinced to avoid its pay-
ment. The petitioners stated that bribery existed in that
House to an extent which was best known to its Mem-
bers. Was that true or not ?—(Laughter.) He wished
that every man who was 21 years of age, and who was
liable to serve in the militia, should have a vote. That
was the only remedy for bribery and class legislation.
When the Reform Bill was before the House every evil
that could overtake the country was pourtrayed as the
certain result of passing that measure. The Right
Honourable Gentleman, the Member for Edinburgh,
had taken a leaf out of the book of those who
opposed that measure, and had depicted the
same results as the consequence of universal suffrage.
The Right Hon. Member for Edinburgh had misinter-
preted the intentions of the petitioners, and, if for
no other reason they had a right to be, heard against
his allegations. If they now refused the request of the
petitioners they had only themselves to blame for the
consequences. By refusing they were provoking re-
volution. The petitioners attributed to the present
constitution of that House, and the consequent
state of the law, the miseries which they suf.-
fered. What could be more unjust than the
maintenance of monopoly. The law of entail and
primogeniture produced a monopoly of the land,
which was attended with great misery to the people.—
(Hear, hear, and cries of " Oh.") He assured those
Hon. Gentlemen who jeered, that they NA ere laughing at
the misfortunes of their fellow-men.—(" Oh, oh," and
cries of " No.") They were laughing at the sufferings
of their fellow-creatures. If the complaints of the
people were worth attending to, they ought to be lis-
tened to with patience, and not laughed at. It
might be that he was a very imperfect expounder
of the people's intentions and wishes.—(Hear, hear,
and laughter.) The Honourable Gentleman here
read a document relative to the distress at present suf-
fered by the poor, but in so indistinct a tone, that we
were unable to catch any of it. The Hon. Gentleman then
went on to say, in reference to the document, that it
was distress such as was described there that they were
laughing at. Yet, after the example which they had
had at that (the Opposition) side, he must expect that
the demand of the petitioners would be refused. He
must again repeat, that there was nothing in the para-
graph of the petition to which he had alluded that could
warrant the conclusions of the Right Hon. Gentleman. ! :
The petitioners concluded by praying to be heard at the ,
bar of the House, where they would be entitled " to un- ! '
fold a tale of wrong and suffering." Would they refuse i
that prayer ? Because there might be unreasonable 1
demands in the petition, would they refuse to
grant the reasonable demands it contained ?—(Hear.) • i
. . _

The people only asked to be allowed to be within the pale
of the Constitution, and if they were he believed they
would only have their due.—(Cheers.)
Mr. WAKLEY said, he heard with great surprise
and regret the speech of the Hon. Member for Lambeth.
—(Hear, hear.) He was sorry to find that a single
Member of the newly-enfranchised boroughs of the
metropolis was found to oppose so just and reasonable
a proposition as that before the House.—(Hear, hear.)
When those boroughs were to be enfranchised it was
thought that some very troublesome Members would ob-
tain admission here(lronical cheers from the Ministe-
rial benches)—whose principles would be as objection-
able as those which which were to be fonnd in the peti-
tion on the table. He thought they had not been much
troubled by those Members, and they never would be if ,
they were to take a lesson from the book of reform which
had been read by the Hon. Member for Lambeth.
That book was a large one, but it did not contain any
specific plan to extend the rights of the people of this ,
country. If he expressed surprise and regret at the
speech of the Hon. Member for Lambeth, he may ex- '
press the same regret and astonishment at the silence
which had prevailed on the benches opposite—(Hear,
hear)—for he did expect on a question of that
kind, affecting the working classes, that the causes which
called forth the Kentish fire at Conservative societies,
and the denunciations of the Whigs, heard at those
assemblies, would have induced Hon. Members opposite
to hold out the hope to the people that their interests
were not gergotten by their former advocates.—(Hear.)
He hoped he should hear something satisfactory from
some of those Members, as they represented themselves
to be advocates of the working classes ; and there never
was a time when their voices could be heard with
greater effect, or a better, opportunity afforded them of
rendering service to the people than at that moment.—
(Hear, hear.) The discussion had taken too wide a
range. The proposition before them was simply this,
whether 3,300,000 of their fellow-countrymen, who asked
to be heard at the bar of the House, were to
be answered with " Yes," or " No." And the answer
would convey happiness or disappointment to them.
The manuer in which their request was made showed
that they were justified in making it.—(Cheers.) They
merely asked to be heard at the bar, and the House
hesitated to see if their demands were just or not. In
the very outset they alleged that they had no represen-
tatives in that House, and was it not then fair to permit
them to give a faithful and honest relation of those
grievances.—(Hear.) What said a great leader of the
Whigs that very night,? What representation did the
Right Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Edinburgh,
give of the people of the country ?—(Hear.) Was it
not right to see if the people were the sanguinary mon-
sters they were represented to be.—(Hear, hear.) Ho
(Mr. Wakley) never beard such a representation
of the people of England as that made by the Member
for Edinburgh, in a speech of great imagination,
and exhibiting a comprehensive and powerful mind.
It was absolutely frightful and terrific.—(Hear, hear.)
Where did the Right Hon. Gentleman reside ? Where
had he passed his days ? With whom did he associate?
What books had he read ?—(Hear, hear.) Where had
he the foundation to justify the opinion he had given of
his fellow-countrymen ?—(Hear, hear.) From whom
did they select their navy ? Was their navy mutinous,
cowardly, and treacherous? Where did they select their
valiant soldiers from ? Were they mutinous, or trea-
(herous ? What was the character of their merchants,
their professional men, and their tradesmen ?—(Hear,)
It was too much to treat the people, en masse, as the
Right Hon. Member did. Who wero the particular
persens he pointed at—what class of the tradesmen,
the carpenters, the masons, or the smiths ? But,
after all, he (Mr. W,) was not so much disposed
to find fault with many parts of the Right Hon. Gentle-
man's speech ; but yet, if there was any Member of that
House who ought, more than another, to support the mo-
tion of his Hon. Colleague, that person was the Right
Hon, Member for Edinburgh.—(Cheers.) Only ten or
eleven years ago, the Right Hon. Gentleman was an ad-
vocate for Extension of the Suffrage, and perhaps it
would not be long before he supported the five points of
the Charter , and if he heard the statements of the people,
perhaps he would be convinced of the sixth.--(Laughtbr.)
If the Right Hon. Gentleman was opposed to Universal
Suffrage, he might come very near it.—(Cheers.) He was
aware of what might be said by persons who opposed this
motion. They might say that it was a vote, aye or no,
for the Charter—(Hear, hear)—but he (Mr. W.) denied
it in tote. The question . was,. whether 9,300,000 per-
sons were to be heard by counsel, at the bar of the
House—whether they were to have the opportunity of
relating their grievances in their own language, and in
their own way ?—(Hear, hear.) Let them look to the
present system of representation. Were the 101. voters
incorruptible?—(Hear, hear.) Look to the disgraceful
proceedings which had taken place in the Committee
rooms, and the bribery and corruption which were
exposed before those Committees. (Hear, hear.)
Look to the horrible and disgusting corruption exhibited
at the last elections.—(Hear.) Was it to the working
classes that corruption was to be ascribed ? No ; but
to the 101. householders, whom the House had preferred.
Nothing could be more dangerous to the character of the
nation than that such practices should go unpunished,
and that the House should be determined to sustain a con-
stituency so polluted. The working. people told the
House that this was a dishonest legislation, and that
they were bound by laws which wore made, not by their
representatives, but by the representatives of those dis-
honest and corrupt constituencies. They said, and he
believed it was true, that they would purify the constitu-
ency by admitting the working. people into it.— (Hear.)
He believed that was true, for he had been much amongst
the working classes of this country, and he had travelled
much in other countries, and he had never seen more

llise
.°
,
F honesty and real worth than was to be found amongst
h
working people of England,—(Great deers from
Loeth
bjdes of the House.) He was glad to hear those
clieer
franchise
a ofn e
Members agreed with him as to the cha-
racter But
illrf countrymen, Why did they refuse them
the .Why did they-keep thorn distinct, as a
servile class, hzviogs no voice in the making of the laws
? ;01f1 the honesty which they admired
10L houses, in the bricks and
atoniflodGr ctoahvree, err:
ei
or inerlt s thet I f tab
uri i t 1 Z.re of the 101. houses ? No,
but in the hearts of the
peo;)le.—(Hear, hea?,) For-
merly the people throughout the country slept without
fear or danger, without lock or bar upon their doors.
But how was it now ? It was nect,lssal
nr 7
have a rural police for the protection ot now to
operty,
The Hon. Member for Edinburgh. said that the discosl-
tiems of the people were sanguinary, and that the laws
which legislators, elected by them, would make would
also be sanguinary and destructive of property. But he
asked_ could they pass any law more sanguinary than the
New Poor-law ?—(Hear, hear.) How did that law deal
with the widow ? How did it deal with the victim 'of
se auction ? How did it deal with the octogenarian ?
H e would say that, whatever might be the opinion of the
H ouse as to the ultimate object of the petitioners, after