The Sun.
London, England, 1842-04-22 00:00:00

SOUTHAMPTI'ON ELECTION.

The following. Members were appointed to try the
merits of a petition complaining of an undue return for
the borough of Southampton, viz., Mr. R. Curties, Mr.
Godson, Mr. W. 0. Stanley, Mr. Bucke, Mr. Hutt, Mr.
Wiltshire, mid Mr. Redington.
MEDICAL CHARITIES BILL.

An HON. MEMBER wished to ask the Noble Lord, the
Secretary for Ireland, whether, in the Medical Charities
Bill, which he was about to introduce, he intended to in-
sert a clause to provide for the government and support
of county infirmaries ?
Lord ELIOT said he had no such intention at pre-
sent ; but if, in the discussion, he found the majority of
Irish Members in favour of such a clause, he would be
disposed to accede to their wish.
IPSWICH ELECTION—CASE OF LUCAS.

Mr. RIGBY MASON wished to draw the attention
of the House to the petitions of Obadiah Barwick Lucas,
who had been committed to Newgate for prevari-
cation, before the Ipswich Election Committee. It
was stated in the petition that the wife of
the prisoner was ill, and that the prisoner him-
self had been in a very distressed state since 1837.
He moved that it be referred to the Ipswich Election
Committee, and he hoped the House would assent to the
proposition. If the Committee now wished to examine
this man, they could not do so without applying to the
Speaker for his warrant. Now it was most desirable
that this man should be examined before the Com-
mittee, as he had stated he could and would
give them most important information. He hoped
the House would assent to his motion, and he
would therefore move that the petition of Obadiah Bar-
wick Lucas be referred to the Select Committee appointed
to consider the merits of the petition complaining of an
undue election for Ipswich.
Mr. PAKINGTON, as Chairman of the Ipswich Elec-
tion Committee, felt called upon to state his reasons for
opposing the motion of the Hon. Gentleman opposite,
but before he did so he wished to allude to a circumstance
to which, had he not been called upon to address the
House on the subject of this petition, he should not have
thought it worth his while to have alluded; he meant a
letter signed by the Hon. Member for Ipswich, which
had appeared Lint; the Morning Chronicle, arid he
only alluded to it to express his surprise that the Hon.
Member, after speaking to him (Mr. Pakington)
in the library of the House, to induce him to enter into
a brief conversation, should without consulting him (Mr.
Pakington) on the subject, publish a report of that con-
versation in the morning papers.—(Cheers.) He (Mr.
Pakington) would not allude to that subject further
than to say that he denied the accuracy of that report.
The petitioner applied to be discharged on two grounds,
one of which was the bad health of his wife. He had
thought it his duty to consult the Committee on those
two points, and he had to state it as their unanimous
Opinion, that they could not think of again examining
him. With regard to the two questions, or any other
claim he might have to be discharged from Newgate, he
spoke the opinion of the majority of the Committee,
when he stated that that opinion remained entirely un-
changed. The Committee had been placed in very pain-
ful anddiffictf t circumstance s. The petitioners having to
substantiate their case by evidence taken from among the
political partisans of the opposite party, many of whom
were of the lower classes of society; the consequence was,

Vsses apparent perjury.-
.
scrod hi such conduct, the
d I—of
that there was a great ea . I*-"P. eication and unwilling
iPnervesijs"ted. After repeated biener!s°fulo;) c3f d in several instances t°
givingrcra huet_enoortfree de
witnesses Committee
hade,
how they gave their evi-
dence,Committee would be compe 4cl to resort to the powers
serious
cau-
tions, this witness was g' ailty of repeated prevarica-
tions, and the. ease we s all the worse from the
*Navihidichthaittif
v,t,hasey
respectability of the party. The indignation of the Com-
svit h
Com-
mittee had been very great on finding a person filling
the situation: a...innkeeper, charged with corrupting
others. He had been guilty, in four several -in-
stances, of self-contradiction, confirmed by the testi-
mony of other witnesses, and as far as it was possible to
judge of the motives of another, his intention could have
been nothing but deliberate falsehood, The petition prayed
for his release on distinct and separate grounds, and al-
leged the dangcruns state of his wife, . Retaining its
own opinion, the'
Colitillittee did not interfere with the
judgment, discretion, and compassion of the 'loud°,
With respect to the illriediction of the House of Oons.
mons with regard to contreveated eleetiens, he for one.
;maid be slow
,to part with that privilege. He was
watching with Wilt civ,iety the result a ow experi-
ment. He Ives eiyere that some !Ton. Members had very
recently expressed an amnion that it would be a Wiese.
With great submission, in his hannble opinion, he thought
that was a pl't4hVil:fit Jlittenent, It appeared to him
that a Committee of the louse of Commons was called
upon, in trying election petitions, to look with peculiar
jealousy on the natuse of the evidenee larenght Le-
.are them. Groat part of that evidence ryas given by
persons who wire strong partisans. The witnesses were
liable t.e gyi.at temptations,' not known Courts of
Justice ; aisd lit pushy 141 preyerieatien he L that
the powers given by law t 4 the Ppmnelttee ahoald always
be enfi reed. It was on these ground's that the Commit-
tee bed acted as they had done.
Mr, fliii-DYiir4§oli said, that after what had Leggstated by the Jion, Yen Slier, lie elmald hest penstilt the
feelings of the HMIs? by merely moving that the
petition do lie upon thP table, The Hon. Member also
presented two petitions on the seine enbject one of which
was from the sisters of Lucas.
The original motion was then withdrawn, and the
petitions were ordewed to lie on the table,
On the motion of Lord STANLEY, the Order of the
Day for the House going into Committee on the Aus-
tralasian and New Zealand Bill was read, for the purpose
of its being postponed until Thursday next.
Dr. BOWIIpIG paeser4e4 ppi.itiee from the rrish
of St. Pancras, against the ineoliep-44.
In answer to a C11.11244)11 from captain ;NIANGIsES,
Lord g'PANTIgy Oftt What lie had stated the
other night with repFci tq the colony of New Mealand
was, that ha could not *peak with: the same confidence in
reference to that colony, as ho cenlsl in reference to many
others. He believed, however, that there tyae eensidee-
able demand for labour:
PARMAMENTARY REPRESENTATION.
Mr. 8, CTIAWFORP then rose to propose she follow-
ing resolution ;--se" Whereas vefiOlis petitions hare been
presented to this House, stating, to the effect, that,
under the present system of eleetion laws, the people are
not duly represented ; and that they are thus deprived
of the acknowledged right of freemen to have a voice in
the making of the Jaws by which they are governed, and
in imposing the taxes weigh they are recpired to pay;
and therefore praying, that the right of VPtillg may he
extended to the adult male population of the realm,
subject to no limitations or restrictions but such as may
be necessary for the safe and tioureet practical exer-
cise of the right itself ; that votes should be take*
by ballot ; that election districts should be equa-
lised to accord with the number of electors ; that'
no qualification shoehl be demanded from Mem-
bers but that of being duly elected by g majority
of votes ; that representatives should he paid for
their services at the public expense ; and that elections
should be annual :—And whereas, complaint having
been made, as above stated, that, under the present limi-
tation of the franchise and laws of election, there is not a
full and free representation of the people; it is therefore the
duty of this Rohe() to take Op immediate consideration the
amendment of these laws, wins a view of giving to et pr)-
portion of the community a full, fair, and free representa-
tion in the Commons' House of Parliament; and this House
will, on an early day, resolve itself into a Committee of
the whole House, for the purpose of considering the same."
The Hoe, ivierilber, y, i q IYal3 heard very indistinctly in
the gallery, commenced hi fPfPrline; to a 11441ber of
petitions, including a petition from Bradforst ant Gates-
head, which had recently been presented to the House,
praying for an extension of the suffrage, There was
also a petition signed by the chairman of a meeting
of delegates which was held at Birmingham. It was
signed by eighty-seven delegates from fifty-one towns,
who were appointed Jointly by the ll:addle classes to
represent their views with respect to the representation.
How stood the representation of the country—could it be
said it was fair ? Was it not the case that 133 Members
of that House, belonging to the counties of England,
Scotland, and Wales, were returned by means of the
influence which the aristocracy possessed through
the Chandos clause? They were the representatives
not of the people, but of an aristocratical oligarchy.
Thus, in consequence of the division of the counties, and
of the influence of the oligarchy, the abolition of the
nomination boroughs had not produced the °trot which
had been anticipated in giving effect to the popular voice,
besides every method of bribery had been had recourse to
in order to defeat the objects of the Reform Bill, and the
people justly complained that their voice was not heard in
t hat House. If the voice of the people had been heard in that
House, the expensive wars in China and Hindostan would
not have been undertaken; and those measures which had
driven the Canadians to revolt would not have been
adopted. It was impossible to enforce economy with such
a state of things. 'The shortening of Parliaments had not
been effected, and the very reasonable proposition for
extending to Ireland equal political rights with
England, had been rejected. The Corn-law
had been kept up, and a most oppressive Poor-
law enacted. To what was all this owing ? Un-
doubtedly to class legislation. He would do the Right
Honourable Baronet at the head of the Govern-
ment the justice. to say, that he (Mr. Sharman
Crawford) believed that he would have advanced
further to benefit the people if he could, but he was re-
strained by the aristocracy. The first thing he pro-
posed as a remedy for these evils was an exten-
sion of the suffrage to all males above twenty-one
years of age, and unstained by crime. The prin-
cenil which this proposition was founded had been
ple ,ntly and powerfully:enforced by the Noble
most clogn. est, for London on introducin the Re-
Lord, the Mel- -Toole Lord • g
on that occasion said that
Re-
form Bill. The es.
could pretend that the House of
no man of common sense 9,
Commons represented the Peopi,;,
of England, and he (Mr.
S. C.) said the same of the present ;louse of Common.
These were the general principles whichthe peti-
tioners desired—and he also desired-eta maintain.
But .110 did not deny that limitations were
requisite--- limitations to protect the exercise of
this right itself, Minors should be excluded, to
gether with lunatics, paupers,
an
felons. His
d
object, and the object of the petitioners, was
to vest the franchise in the industrious classes
of the costritry, and he would support all such
regulations which were necessary to,
effect diet object, He
thought lodgers admittedto e the franchise as well
as householders. He thought also that there should be
a particular law with respect to registration in Ireland.
It was necessary that he should new refer to some
of those objections which he was aware might be
made to the proposition he laid before the House,
He maintained that most of these objections were
applicable to the sufferings at present exist-
ing. The first of the ohjeetiens to which .
he hadalluded, was the want of education, He would
ask, were the majority of voters now existing educated ?
Was not a great number of the- county 10/. voters
inferior in education to the industrious classes? Wavoter
hat was
the amount of knowledge held to be necessary for
to acquire before he was qualified ? Wits it necessary
that he should be competent to understand all
the questions brought before Parliament ? If
they demanded such a qualification, a great
proportion of those who now held the franchise
would be excluded. It was not necessary that the
voters should understand all the questions brought be-
fore the House of Commons. He considered it sufficient
that they could judge of the character and conduct
of the representatives who - required theis votes,
The next objection was the greater corruption that
would prevail. Was there not as much corruption at pre-
sent prevailing from the highest to the lowest'?
The third objection was, that if they admitted a
larger class to the franchise, it would endanger the rights
of property. He contended that the working claws,
from their endeavour to obtain property, were interested
in protecting it as much as those who possessed it.
He did not deny that the people might, by, unjust legis-
lation. be tempted to array themselves agunst property,
but if that array took place, it was not from ,;ny dis-
position for such on the part of the people, but because
property arrayed itself against them. He now came to I
the second point to which he wished to call the atten-
tion of the House—he meant the necessity of equalising
and apportioning the franchise to the population. The
Hon. Gentleman here went into a detail of the number of
inhabitants and voters in the principal towns and
boroughs, for the purpose of showing how small the
proportion was the latter bore to the former, and then
went on to say it was impossible for any one lAD studied
the subject, not to see that there was the greatest irre-
gularity in the representation. That question had been
ably argued by an lion. Gentleman who was not then a
Member of that House ; but as the Hon. Member for
Sheffield had given a notice of his intention to bring
forward the is'
su jeet, he would not, at present, wear
the House by going over the arguments. Now, rat
respect to the ballot, he claimed it as a protection for the
holiest voter, who could not be expected to sacrifice all
his worldly interest to the exercise of the franchise. It
was essential to freedom of election, and , the franchise
was of little value 'without some such protection. The
next point to which he wished to draw the 'attention of
the House, was the property qualification. His argu-
ment was, that Members could not fairly be expected to
perfinan their duties, and could not fairly be held re-
sponsible for them, without some remuneration. Many
sincere Reformers, were of opinion that it was not ex-
pedient to shorten Parliaments to a period less than
three years' duration. He admitted that there were
strong arguments both for triennial Parliaments as well
as for annual Parliaments ; but this was:a fair subject
for discussion in a Committee of Inquiry. He (Mr. S.
Crawford) was for annual Parliaments, because, in the
first place, the constituencies would be greatly extended,
and thus the probability of bribery would he lessened.
He had now taken a review of the several points which
the petitioners had entrusted to him to bring forward.
He felt that there were other Members more able to dis-
cuss the subject than he was. He thought that he had
shown to the House that the present House of Com-
mons was not a fair representation of the country, and
he therefore called upon them that agreed with him, to
vote for the inquiry he had proposed. He was aware
that the subject ought to be fully discussed before the
enquiry was granted—(Hear, hear)—and he therefore

I thought he had done his duty in bringing the subject
forward. It was not his intention to ask Members to
pledge themselves to all parts of the plan. He, merely
wished them to go into the consideration of the present
state of the representation, and to endeavour to devise
means by which a full, a fair, and a free representation
of the people, might be attained.—(Cheers.) The points
which he had brought forward for the consideration of
the House had recently, he was aware, fallen into some
discredit, as being contained in what was commonly
called the Charter. That such was the case he would
not deny ; but, at the same time, he did not wish to
identify himself with any proceedings which had taken
place in relation to the Charter. He was aware that
many of those proceedings had done great injury to the
cause of Reform. He alluded to attempts to attain the
objects sought by means of physical force and tumult.
He utterly repudiated all such attempts, and the first
resolution of the delegates to whom he had al-
luded was, that the -Object for their consideration should
he the best measures for securing, by peaceable means,
a full, a fair, and a free representation of the people. It was
only by those means that he desired to carry his object. He
wished to create a moral power, which by a temperate, yet
forcible expression of opinion throughout the country, should
accomplish such changes. He was bound to
.repeat that if
there were any disposition to attack property, it was only be-
cause the property of the country arrayed itself against the
people The moment they did justice to the people, the mo-
ment they showed a disposition to inquire how justice might be
done, they might depend upon it that the same security for
property that always had existed in England would return.
file sufferings of the people are gnat, and those sufferings
they ascribe to unjust legislation. Their presem., demand for
a reform of that House arose in consequence of their refusal
to make reasonable amendments in the Reform Act. Neither
the working class nor the middle class could effect this Reform
by itself ; but if a complete union took place between these two
classes, it would produce a power which it would be impossible
to resist. It appeared that that union was now in progress. Both
classes ceneurred In the propositions that he laid before
the House. (Hear, hear.) Theae propositions were
most temperate, and free from all harshness. They had the
power to answer this petition by taking into consideration the
grievances it expressed. He asked no more of the House.
It had twee said that the power of the aristocracy would be
epdaegered by a free admission of the people to political
power. On this paint he should refer to the declaration of
the Noble Lord the Member for London, who assumed that
objection in a more forcible manner than he could do. He said
that while the aristocracy performed the important duties and
dispensed extensive charity, both public and private, in their
respective districts, it was not in human nature but that their
influence shou'd be very great, He would now call on the
ggeeeeFent tit sbew itcdisposition to consider the present
applicetiop ; it they did not feel justified in acceding to the
resolotions, let them at least treat them with kindness, If the
Noble Loss! the Member for London had been present, he
should have called on him, as a leader of the cause of the people,
to advocate the extension of their rights. He regretted that he
was not there, hut Ite Melted that he should have his assistance
litt ttltliee Oceasioe, He believed he had completed all he
bad to say in reference to the present motion ; in bringing it
forward he trusted that he had not offered any disrespect to
any party.—(Hear, hear.) He wished tq bring it forward
without any aggravation of party spirit. He wished to do it
ip a manner ettwietellt With the prayer of the petition, which
eepressed the complaints of the people, and he thought they
had a right to have those complaints heard.
Mr. O'CONNELL seconded the motion.
The SPEAKER having put the question,
Mr, WALLACE was quite satisfied, from being one of the
oldest Reformers in the House, that the time had come when
those sentiments, which had been so ably worked out by the
Hon. Member before him ( Mr.S. Crawford), should receive the
serious consideration of the House and the country generally.
Unless the middling and the working classes were brought to
art in mere perfect unison, ho roust say that the Reform
Bill was a delusion, practised upon the country by those who
had been parties to the passing of the Bill ; and among those
he included Hon. Members on that (the Ministerial) side of
the House, as well as those Members who ought to Le, but now
were not, sitting upon that bench.— (The Hon. Member
here pointed to the bench generally occupied by the leading
Members of the Opposition.) He felt that he ought himself
to have gone down into that place which, those whom he re-
gretted to say were absent, ought to fill on the present occasion.
—(Laughter, and cries of" Go down.") He (Mr. W. )appeared
on the present occasion to advocate the rights of the people
respecting those points alluded to in the keels-tent whioh had
been se ably brought ferwassl, end in so mild and gentle-
rpaply e; tong, by tiie Han. Member for Rochdale. He (Nir.
Wallace) knew that he was not speaking at that time of the
night, at 11 or 12 o'clock, when those who could command
the attention of the House generally rose—he was speaking
as one of the minor poets —(Laughter.) Could it ha
said that the Reform Bill had effaeted any of the
things which had liege espeeted of it ? Certainly not.
Some measure in reference to the franchise was absolutely ne-
cessary for the public interest ' his conviction of that was con-
tinually increasing. He had originally been an advocate
merely for vote by ballot ; he then became an advocate for tri-
ennial Parliaments; and recently he had taken into his consi-
deration the question of anneal Parliaments. He had from the
first opposed the Charter, and some or his constituents.had on
that ground refused to support him. But he believed that
they would have come to his rescue if there had been the
slightest risk of the Carlton Club money finding any favour in
the town which he represented. He was satisfied that if they
had triennial Parliaments in the place of septennial, they
would have had proposed totally different measures of general
finance from what the Right Hon. Baronet had proposed.
He would not have ventured to propose such. Such
things would never have been heard of. He (Mr: Wallace)
for one would say, although he had not consulted his consti-
tuents, that he was nearly prepared to vote for annual Par-
liaments and for the proposition submitted to them that eight ;
and if he did so, his course would he to say to his constituents,
that if they were not pleased with his conduct with respect to
annual Parliaments, that he would re-place the trust they had
reposed in his hands, and they might give the representation
to any one they pleased.—(Laughter.) He would not vote
for the motion, and then sit for seven years. Would the Flight
[lon. Baronet follow such a course? He fancied not. He
gave the Hon. Gentleman who had brought forward this mo-
tion his hearty concurrence with respect to part of the mo-
tion, and he could assure him that he almost wholly agreed in
the proposition he had brought forward. He was quite sure
there was no property qualification necessary. The i%lembers
for Scotland proved this. He defied England or Ireland to
show that they (the Scotchmen) were not fit for the repre-
sentation. He would like any man to get up and say that.—
(Laughter.) He said they were as good men as any in that
House, either Tory or Ra:licat. There were very few Whigs
amongst them—(Laughter)—only one here and there. Scot-
land knew better. They always had out-and-out men, and no
half-and-half Members.—(Loud laughter. )
Dr. BOWRING said he was unwilling to give a question
of such extreme interest and gravity a tacit concurrence.
There could be no safety for any Government that did not rest
upon the affections and opinions of the people. The great
principle of representation was freedon of admission, and ex-
clusion was the exception. He was aware that until some
change should take place in the constitution of Parliament,
there was little chance of obtaining a hearing for the advocates
of sound principles in the House of Commons, and
he was also aware that that change could only be
brought about by a hearty co-operation between
the multitude and those who were somewhat above
them in society. Hon. Gentlemen opposite paid great atten-
tion to the petitions of the people when it suited them to do
so. Hon. Gentlemen opposite attached great importance to
the petition which had been presented in favour of the Income-
tax from Manchester, signed by 24.000 persons. He would ask
them,was not a petition signed by millions of quite as great im-
portance ? The petitions of the unrepresented were in lass
opinion entitled to more attention than were the petitions of
the represented. The represented spoke through their repre-
sentatives ; the unrepresented many, the suffering masses, suf-
fering through the effects of evil legislation, had no means of
making their sufferings known, except by petititin. There were
elements of danger in the present state of society—on the one
hand, they had the privileged few; on the other, the suffering
Many, On the one side, the agglomeration of property in the
hands of a few ; on the other, millions possessing
nothing, yet suffering mush.—(Hear.) This was a
fearful state of things. If the multitude were entitled to those
expressions of sympathy which had been made use of by Hon.
Gentlemen opposite—if they bad borne their sufferings with such
patience and fortitude—surely the House was bound to pay at-
tention to their prayers. What his Hon. Friend asked, then,
was, not to pledge themselves to the principle at once, but to
consider it. He (Dr. Bowrtng) was satisfied that those princi-
ples must ultimately be acknowledged. All that was wanting
for their success was, that they should be detached from those
nroteets of violence, and from those projects of ignOrance with
which they had been mixed up. They had only to be exhibited
in their naked strength, and their naked truth to prevail. The
extension of the suffrage had never been attended with any
danger to property. Were the men of England less
worthy to be trusted with the suffrage than the inhabitants of
Switzerland or Spain ; or were the fathers of the people of
4a:dories, less worthy than their descendants on the other side
of the sastlentio? -No danger had ever arisen from an extension
of the suffrage. He could not look at an excluded man with•
out feeling as if he had done the man a wrong. He could ask,
because one man was a little less opulent than his neighbour,
was he therefore to possess fewer rights? He had heard the
late Mr. Roscoe say that he could not understand how the
principle of universal suffrage could be repudiated by any man
who reesignised the great Christian principle of doing to
others th'it which he would have done to himself. Yet so
strongly anorpelees was the principle at present acted
on, that in acme instances they did confer those pri-
vileges upon the poor. If they found a poor man in a
situation so degraded se to be influenced by their bribes or ter-
rified by their threats, they let that man have a vote in return •
ing representatives to that House. His Hon. Friend had at-
tached to his motion a proposition for securing to the voter
the protection of saereey. The Radical Reformers were de-
sirous of securing the protection of the ballot, in order that
every man might have an opportunity of recording his free
and unbiassed opinion. The present state of the represents-
tMe was indefensible. They saw small bodies electing the
same numbar pf representatives as large ones. Small cities
returned an equal number of representatives as large cities,and
small agricultural districts the same as large ones. His
.Hon.
Friend had likewise represented the necessity of shortening
lie (Dr. Bowring) had always
Leen in favour of annual Parliaments. It seemed an arrange-
ment in eenrermity with the general course of nature, and
of our social habits, We settled our accounts from year to
We elected our muiiieipal officers annually.—( Hear.)
spear.
The Hon. Member for Greenock had been in the habit of re-
turning to his constituents at the end of every year, and he
though the less of this part of the question, as every Member
who approminf the principle of annual Parliaments, had it in
his own power to eceneint the community of it. With respect
of equality to the number of votes could anything be more de-
sirable? Could anything be less defensible than that a thou-
sisisd persons in one part of the country should exercise in that
House ses much political power as ten times that numb er in ante
then district? This
seemed to him exceedingly indefensible. If
they said that th,ir constitution should be made up of"
incon-
gruity and absurdity, so he it. Pet if they wished it to be eoh-
sistent with public opinion, gathered ciit of the sources of public
opiniene-the entire community—let them make it consistent
with that peislic opinion. No man would say that Scotland was
worse represented hottanse the money qualification was not re-
quired. This qualification: 57,0p1d exclude some of the best men •
in Parliament. The man most 4t of all to be a legislator might
to-day possess a fortune; a calamity might overtake him to-
morrow, and the next day they would decsde that he ought not
to have a seat in this House. What was the ttedactleo ? that it
was not his intellect, nor his mind, nor his knew!edg,. 0, whiph
they desired to come to their assistance as legisieters, ;set his
wealth. There was nothing like common Ramp in this pro-
ceeding. He concurred with the principles of the propesittoee,
and he hoped the House would consent to consider them in
detail.
Mr. WILLIAMS was not at all surprised at the indiffeh
settee rneraes..ed on the other side of the House towards this
important question, when he saw how much the present system
e
of representation marked of the great object which those
people had in view, namely, to prise-este the interestiv
of the
aristocratic few at the expense of the inclastriolas eof
duringthe country. Having had a seat in that House duringttse
whole period the Reform Bill had been in operation, he had
had opportunities enough of witnessing how incomple single
Incomplete that
measure had been—that it had pot worked out on
principle which it had been professed it had been .
should, according to the statements of Lord Grey tne nous
.nten,cledi,to

• of Lords, and of Lord John Russell in the House of Comn- on:,
on the introduction of that measure. Seeing the failure of
• that measure se complete, he (Mr. W.) had no hesitation is
supporting the proposition of the Hon. Member for Rochdale
(Mr. S. Crawford.) But he felt the deepest conviction that
no justice would be obtained for the people of this country
until anther Reform Bill was carried out to the
full extent of the • principle which had been ex-
pressed by his Honourable Friend (Mr. S.• Crawford),
What had Lord Grey said upon the introduction of the Reform
Bill in the House of Lords? He stated that the object of it
was to procure for the people of this country a cheap and a
good government. Had it obtained either one or the other
of these two great objects? Good government meant good
and just laws. Had those laws which were passece since the
Reform Bill came into existence been founded uptei the prin
ciple of equal justice to the rich and to the poor ? He believed
that if they examined almost every statute they, would find
some part of each formed for the advantage of the rich and the
disadvantage of the poorer classes. Had the Reform Bill pro-
duced them cheap Government? nby the expenses of the
present Government, and the Government for some years past,
had been some millions more than they were the yesr preceding
the passing of the Reform Bill. Lord John Russell, upon the
introduction of that Bils in the House of Commons, said, in
June, 1831, that when he proposed to have a Reformed Par-
liament he proposed to have sent to that House real representa-
tives of the people, to deliberate upon their wants, and consult
for their interests ; to consider of their grievances, and to at •
tend to their desires. He proposed that they should possess, in
fact, what they had hitherto not within their grasp, the
power of holding the purse-strings of their monarch.
Laws would no longer be classed for particular classes ; they
would no longerebe passed by men who voted at twelve o'clock
for what they had not heard a syllable about, merely because
the leader of their party told them so to vote. Not one of
those prophecies had been fulfilled. There was not a Hefei-tree
in the country who would tot be perfectly satisfied with eneh a
result. All that was required was, that the Members of that
House should really represent the people, providing for their
wants, and consulting their interests—no one asked for a more
extensive Reform Bill than that. He extremely regretted
that the authors and promoters of the Reform Bill were absent
from their seats in that House.—(Hear.) If there had been
any party question under consideration they would have been
in their places ready to carry out their purposes ; but when
the interest of vast masses of the people were cocserned, they
did not think it necessary to appear in their seats. He held in
his hand a retu nof the registration for the year 1840. From
that return it appeared that there were five towns returning
Members to that House, of which the aggregate constituency
was 1,1,88; five was returning ten Members. with a constitu-
ency of 1,496 ; and. twenty towns returning forty Members, in
which the constituency was 6,288. Thirty towns were return-
ing sixty Members, with a constituency of 12,180. Manchester
returned two Members, and possessed a constituency of 12,150.
—( Hear, hear.) There were forty towns which returned sixty-
seven Members, with a constituency of 14,180; there were
seventy-four towns returning 121 Members, with constitu-
encies of 29,99 e. The West Riding of Yorkshire returned two
Members, and possessed a constituency of 30,120. Now this
was a perfect exhibition of the representation of the country.
There were 61 Members returned by the same constituency as
two Members. In another case, there were sixty-seven Mem-
bers returned by a less constituency than two Members. In
another case, there were 121 Members returned to that House
by a less constituency than two other Members. It was proved
by this exhibition that the Reform Bill had been a failure.
'1 hey saw small constituencies, with vast interest and wealth,
brought to bear upon them, in order to obtain seats in
that House—in order to advance the interest of a
particular class at the expense of the rest of the community.
They had seen a vast system of corruption since the passing of
the Reform Bill, but more perhaps during the last elect ion
than any preceding one. He would venture to assert that in
the old time of the boroughmongering system, when seats in
that House were sold,, as was admitted by Lord Castlereagh,
as open as the noon-slay sun, the system was not more noto-
rious than it was at present. In the time of the borough-
mongering system individuals purchased their seats for a certain
sum of money. Now the same individual could go to a small
set of sordid electors and make a purchase precisely the same
as under the old boroughmongering system. He believed, in
fact, that under the old system they might have made a better
bargain than with the present electors, who sold their votes to
persons ready to sell their country. Was it to be wondered at
when such a system was in operation—when it was so sorely
felt by the great body of the people, that a feverish anxiety
should exist throughout the whole mass of the industrious and
productive classes of the country for a great and important
change in the condition of that House. There was no diffe-
rence in the country as to that change. The only difference
of opinion was as to the means to be employed to-obtain it.
The good sense of the country would point out the necessity of
agreeing in the common principle, and acting together to ob-
tain the great end desired. He called on those who had the
least ibterest in the possession of property to look to this sub-
ject, and make those concessions which, if delayed, would ul-
timately be forced from them.
Mr. WARD said, there was nothing so disagreeable in that
House as a one-sided debate. He could not impute the silence
of Hon. Gentlemen oppceite to an intentional slight. He was
rwher inulined to accept it as a sort of tribute on their part
to the importance of the principle which had been advanced
that evening; and as a sort of petiof of their consciousness,
that however impracticable it might be in the pie seut• state
of parties in that House to entertain such a principle, yet
that principle was one of great importance, and they, there-
fore, left the Right Hon. Baronet to wind up the debate
by some very courteous reasons, why he could not entertain
the proposition. He (Mr. Ward) was willing, thus, to con.
:true their silence. He certainly should not offer the House
any very lengthened remarks in support of the motion. The
motion was brought forward in a moderate form, and in that
speech, the temperate tone of which was acknowledged by all
who had spoken, the Hone Member asked them to take into
consideration the means of securing a full and fair representation
to the people of England, which was its ultimate object.
They had all discussed this question, ht fore many of them
had had an opportunity of voting on the ballot, which he had
himself supported ; and he had also voted for triennial Par-
liaments, which he, on general grounds, preferred to annual.
As to the question of qualification of Members, he had voted
on the motion of Sir William Molesworill, for equalising
the system in Scotland and England ; and if the interests of the
working classes could be represented more intelligibly, and more
satisfactorily by a working man, he should he delighted to see
him admitted into that House, if he could he so by not requir
ing a properly qualification; which in the case of men of
good family there was a thousand rr.cans of evadinv, and which
he considered to be no better than a fraud. Ile did not know
that they could entirely dissever the suffrae from the posses-
sion of eome property, but he wished to widen the basis of the
present system, as a security against the dangers consequent
on its present unsettled slate. Virtual representation etill pre-
vailed, though it was exploded as a system by the Right Hon.
Barotiet, the Home Secretary, and tre Noble Lord, the Se-
cretary fur the Colonies, so long ago as 1831. They said that
representation and taxation should be co-existent, while they
taxed twenty where one was represented in that House. This
was a great anomaly, if the ouestion were pressed out of that
House. He considered the question to be one principally of
time., Hove was the franchise used now? Had the people,
who were interested with it, proved themselves before the
Election Committees to be so free from sordid motives of ac-
tion as that the people of the country ought to be setisied to see
the representation in their hands. A more disgraceful stn e
of things than that which those Comniittess brought to light
it was impossible for the page of history to unfold. He cared
not to winch side it was attributed. It was only a question of
finding out, for both were guilty of it. When the question of
the disfranchisement of Sudbury came before the House, he
would certainly vote in favour of it. But he thought it very
hard that the charge -of corruption should be confined to that
(the Oppositions) side of the House. He thought that there
was as much corruption in that 1-louse as in any constituency.
There.was as much corruption in a blue ribalid as in a couple
of sovereigns.—(Hear, hear.) With one party the corn-laws,
with another the sugar duties, constituted a sort of corruption.
With respect to the suffrage, there was a strong organization
among the people on the question, but that was owing to the
want of kindness of feeling shown towards theth atter the Re-
form Bill. The only remedy for such a state of things was
contained in the motion now under the consideration
of the House. He remembered, when the question of
Catholic Emancipation was sought to be obtained, the
opponents of that measure resisted it on the ground of the'
Catholics lesing under improper guidance, and that they would
therefore make a bad use of the power they woted acquire.
Mr. Canning, he remembered, in reply to those peisons, said
that whatever they complained of was a sort of idol worship
which they would put an end to ; they would throw open the
temple of the Coestitution, and let them see the real divinity
enshrined within. -He would conclu le by stating his inten-
tion of giving his cordial support to the motion of his Hon.
Friend.

Sir J. GRAHAM said that what had fallen from the Hon.
Member who had just sat down, required that he should say a
few words. From the great silence on the question which was
observed on that (the alinis-erial) side of the House, he feared
that it would be supposed disrespect was thereby meant
to the large classes of the community ; but he was
sere he need not say no such thing was intended.
That night they had heard universal disparagement of the Re-
form Bill on the other side of the House, and it had been
treated with contempt and derision, and they were told that it
was, in fact, useless. The tin. Member for Coventry had
entered into an analysis of the constituencies for the purpose of
showing that the representation was unequal. Now, he slid
not come there to discuss abstract propositions. The real
question, as he conceived, was, what was the form of Govern-
ment under which they should live? and he believed the
peerage and the monarchy would not survive if weight were
given to Members, to the exclusion of pr,,perty;—( Hear,
hear.) This subject was considered very • carefully
by the eminent men who had taken part in the
Reform Bill, and admitting the dangerous extent.te_which aris-
tocratic influence prevailed over popular influences, they thought
that in applying the correction they went to the utmost ext nt
which was consistent with the maintenance of the ancient con-
stitution of the country. That was his own opinion, and he had
seen no reason to change it. He honestly entertained that
opinion then. He sincerely entertained it now, and, enter-
taining it, he could not recede from it. He was bound to
listen to motions of this description with respect, but, he be-
lieved them to be fraught with danger to the existing form
of Government.
Mr. O'CONNELL said he had heard with some sur-
prise the Honourable baronet's statement that, if the
motion were carried, it would be followed by the
destruction of the peerage, and the acuihilation of the mo-
narchy. He was sorry to hear the Hon. Member use those
words, because he remembered that he was taunted, as one of
the Reform Ministers, with that very prophecy, though he then
very properly repudiated the prophecy and derided the prophet..
The Reform Bill had been hailed by the people, because they
believed that it would secure to them real representation. That
was the foundation of the speech of the Noble Lord, the Mem-
ber for the city of London. The people thought that although
the franchise would not be universal, yet that it would give to
the Members of that House the character of real representatives
of the people. The Noble Lord began his speech by referring
to the 25th Edward V., for the principle that no
,British sub-
ject should be taxed without his own consent, and
he cited- also the statute, " De.tallagio non concedendo,"
declining that without the consent of the earls, barons,
bishops, baronets, knights, burgesses, and other freemen of
England, no money should be levied for the support of the
State. He said it must be conceded that the taxation at pre-
sent was not placed upon that footing, and the object of
the Bill was to remedy the evil. He (Mr. O'C. ) contended
that the people had been disappointed, that the HOuse repre-
sented apartieular class, and a particular dais only, and that the
object now stated by the Noble Lord had not been attained.
Could there be any doubt but the people of England were di..
vided into two classes ? A master-class having votes in the
choice of the representatives, and the slave class who had no
yoms yliert returning members to the House, who had no
share to the IlliOlahrcif t.k,' 14M, who were bunt to ..bey laws
made by othcrs; arid wlignevPr there Were a Piasi bqtind tq obey
laws made by others, no matter by what name that cla• s might
be called, it was. in reality a slave-class. No one could deny
that such was the situation of the people of England. The
master-clans was a small one, the slave-class was a nume out
one. There were not above 20 per cent. of the male popula •
tion who had a right to vote for representatives in Parlia•
ment. There were 80 per cent. unrepresented, SO per cent. of
the slave-class. In Ireland the difference was still more
pirtiopeteT is tins ertettli
The stlhav°eTils4S nritrul amounted Tinneraey there Were four boo-
, t rand • 'only t thousand vo• erg
to 400,000, Thoe master-class 1. co.
2,000. Was that, he asked, to be the constitution of England?
—(Cheers.) The Reform Bill had not effected the object—
(Cheers)—fQr Thigh it was passed. Would they tell the

people of England that they would not hold out a hope to tiltlsl -
• that these evils should be remedied ?—(Cheers.) He wanted
to know on what ground they gave a preference to the master
Class over the slave. class. At the time that the statute " v
ta
distinctionlia gio nonof
coneedendo"teeem.
en wasAt
thpassed,at timeit wasthe ssiee tits() make, ackeiss ocji
the
slaves, actual slaves, slaves who were property. They sal
there were now ne slaves, no men who were the property:
others. If they boasted of having abolished slavery, The
did they continue a slave-class ?—(Loud cheers.) s
Right Honourable Baronet had said that at the to„
't
Lt-,
of the Reform Bill it had been determined tTo
the representation should be based, not Upon UP,;;;'
lotion alone, but upon property. Was that so?
property had the freemen?—( Cheers.) What property had the
freemen by birth—what property had the freemen by servitude'
—(Cheers.) Was that representation based upon propert)2r4,
(Cheers.) But, then, there was the 10/. householders. 12,r,
the possession of such a house as that evidence of properiV,
A man might be liable to 30/. a-year rent, or 5001. a-Ye ii
rent, and because he inhabited a house of that value they ga!tj
him a vote, when, at the same time, by the very possession tv:.7
that house he might be pauperised. There was the 50/. fellatio; '1";
at-will in counties who had a vote. He was liable to betur".'"
out of his farm at any time ; he had no tentleore:'
whatever. Was that a proof of his property?
it was a proof his distress, and his servitude. It was le
surd to say that they adopted property as the basis of the:l' ;
d
representation—they had done no such thing. They h
adopted -a fantastical and uncertain test, which was not a test
di"
of property.—(Cheers.) They taxed every man, either
rectly or indirectly. There was no man so poor that they (11',1
not deprive him of some part of his property by taxation ; a 74
as they took property from him, he had a right under the o'
Constitution—he hail a right under the principle of represe";
tation—to a vote in the choice of representatives. Neitbee
Nature, nor Nature's God, made this distinction of property
between man and man. Under the feudal system, the aristoerad
claimed to be of a superior nature. The present aristocrael,
did not dare to do so in words, and ought not to do so
tically by legislation.—( Loud cheering.) The results PP"
duced by the present system were almost ludicrous. The coati
of Tipperary had 482,908 inhabitants. 2,468 voters, and it re;
turned two Members. 'The borough of Thetford had 15-`
voters, and returned two Members also. If they were to bac.e
property as the basis of representation, let them have IS
reckoned according to the rules of vulgar arithmetic. 11e)
West Riding of Yorkshire had 1,154,000 inhabitants, 50,1
voters, and it returned two Members to Parliaineot•
The borough of Harwich had 181 voters, and like;
wise returned two Members to Parliament. Was tbs
representation based upon property ? Parliaments
lasted seven years. Why was that ?—( Cheers. ) ;yid
w'
they remember that the same transaction that transferred
Crown of England to t'ae present Royal Family, at the saise,
time gave the people a right to triennial Parliaments ? HoN
had they lost that right? By the grossest violation of trust o
which men could be guilty—(Cheers)—by the most tine:
ralleled enormity that could be committed.—( Cheers.) 1-" e
men who had been elected to serve for three years, of their
own power prolonged the term of their existence to seven.•
;
He approved of triennial Parliaments from the conviction th"
annual elections became elections of course, and that it cry
more difficult to remove a man elected annually than 1r
was to remove a person chosen for three years. There „
another point which required investigation—that was bribery 4
Had it not been acknowledged to exist, by both sides of the
House and by the organs of both parties ? If the llforiti%
Chronicle admitted its existence to-day, it was only heel, r
the Times acknowledged it yesterday. He had heard tbto
Right Honourable Baronet attribute its existence 40
large constituencies even more than small ones ; m_.
however that might be, there was no doubt that the
ssi
never had been such bribery in England as h,
taken place during the last election. 'They were ascertairope
it even through the dark medium of the Election -Committeel,,.;
And what was bribery? It was the worst social crime tif"?
could be committed, enhanced by all the horrors of perjury
It demoralized and corrupted the people from one end ofe
country to the other. They were a religious people. Dat-Lj
1
the last election there had been much spoken of the differe"''
of persuasion between Christian and Christian. Great I";
fessions were made of • Christianity-owhere was it
reality? Where was it when they called upon tnyt--e
to stop this enormous bribery ? It had been said that -after t
ballot had been instituted there would be more bribery th
Boto
ever—that constituencies would be bribed by wholesale. o,
it should be remembered that that would be more diffieste
and, in the next place, it would be a criminal conspiracY .
which very few gentlemen would care to expose themselsev_'_.
while, at the same time, it would be almost impossible to er,
cape conviction. But it was well known it was most pre'fa„,
lent in small constituencies; and all he asked was, that th
should do this to stop the practice, and in favour of morality tit
give the ballot in great constituenc es. Let them sot
where they admitted that the ballot would stop it. Lett
e.
give this one proof of the reality of their 00701
tessions, and not continue to talk of their religion with to.
making out the morality it prescribed. He did rot mener
detain the House by speaking at any length on the qual°o
tions of Members ; there was no qualification in Ireland hV,otoi,
the Union ; there was none in Setland ; members of •
versifies required none; the sons of Peers need nothaveoo
qualification. He touched upon these points because be 110.
there to advocate as far as possible tranquil reform, and `6,
quiet co, cession of principles that tended to the public advs.o
tage. He knew what was called the Charter had given lithe
to a great deal of doubt and some apprehensions, but o h
violence of the Chartists was not one that could last ; it op
passed away already, and men were now taking a lead leo
..,1
movement, who were incapable of involving themselves i
species of violence. His only object was to show that t11;1
was cause for inquiry ; they put the case as distinctly ar_ tol,
could, and he could not think that they would make sT.;:es,
preference, as it would exclude so large a number of the c_
fish people from their right of being represented in that 11°7CI,
He had t of mixed up other questions with it, but he might
fat
sent that they could not trust to the well-working of the ti,,g
sent system. Before the Reform Dill they were told.
though though the principle was faulty yet the system worked' tio'
The reply to that was the enormous accumulation of debt, ,
lung wars, and the burdens they had brought upon the cou?,;(0
The Reform Bill was tried, and it mitigated but little ot, to
evils complained of ; and at the present moment the refuset!,,
allow the people of England a fair share in the representalr4
was said by themselves to be the cause of the overwhelt
distress which had reached them, and which was admitted :to
deplored by Members on all sides of the House. There 3el
distress and misery in the land, and the people were deprive/ r
their inherent right to representation. All they asked 00b,,,
a Committee to inquire and to bring every fact distine•gue
fore them; then they app'ied to the House either to eva"ttot
the present system, it they found it preferable, or to give
remedy which they might find most desirable.
Mr. WA KLEY regrettA that he had not heard the speeebof
for
the Right :lon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the floeto'i
parlment, and he was also sorry that the Right Hon. Gonth'iofer
late colleagues were not present also. What were they t"
ht ors
from their absence—from the absence of those who brougotati
the Reform Bill? 'They were placed in considerablepf
in consequence of their absence, as they were not alit, or
their own strength. Were they favourable to the chaneest.
not? He inferred from their absence that they life 50'
Well, we must fight that battle ourselves. Instead 01 is oso
sional motion on this subject, there ought to be a monthly rob'
Was it not curious to see the state of the House on such that
jeet? Millions were reflecting on what was passing of
House, and were looking forward with anxiety to the "Spiel
the question; yet here they saw almost empty benches• oegor
would infer Irons this that the House did not reP":O to
the feelings of the people, or they would not etaiti uof
neglect their business on such an occasion. They w°,l4 they
yield ield till thi y were driven to it by fear. The people ,‘",45;
were regaid'ess of their feelings. They asked for redri-citier
it was refused, the people would take it. It was onlY fired tat,
tion of time. The very moment the people were res° ooer
have redress, they (the House) must yield, because theYosl
not have the power to resist. They thought that this.,"
question gut up by agitators ; he could assure them they 1111
grossly deceived, and they were sleeping on a volcano' tha
people attributed the r distress to class legislation t"piee;
House • Within the space of twenty-four boors a fax; h
curred in that house to exemplify this, au" f--
of that kind was worth a whole volume ° 00.5 e
ttiry. lie said that man that was not rcpt.; 1.0,
was a slave. He had all the authorities since
s'lo
Revolution of RISS in support of the assertion that t,°o' froto
slaves, and nothing but slaves, because money was tai'eeed
their pockets without their consent. What had haVd Dert,
that House on Wednesday evening ? A question ,'"s ri
-
brought forward, which involved the' right
man, and dealt ruin to 500 poor people. The quetl;o,stito
with reference to a certain enclosure. The rich
~g 0 les 'oje
" This is my property"-500 poor people said 1c „at,
property." The rich man said to the Government 500 Poo'
an office under your authority to dispossess thescite pfO
people, and to raze their buildings to the earth. -I_,
sition was, that the House would see the evidence "iviotted
given between the parties before it come to a clef'. iveurot
That determination was by a vote of 11 l to 30 would
tie:-
the rich man, and they actually decided that they a 01,1,4.
see the evidence upon which they were going to make en $ roe
cision. Would any man tell him, that if there had 'Ouid bdif.
per representation of the people, such conduct weree
been allowed? Did they believe that the peoPl;at
ferent to such conduct? Did they believe 'd aope6st
ss 11
500 people, who had been rendered housele" ?
oftbst
would have any respect for the laws of their cotlf".l,-.7 the
answer could be made to such a statement as this
occasion it was not requisite to go into all the of P4ents
resolutions. He was for shortening the duratlnarliael,o,
minas, but he was very doubtful whether annusat_i`onaial 'The
would be as productive of as much benefit atere,sioll'oreet,
lit:merits ; but that was a question far future 017 „wart., ea.
Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary for the 1-1004a'e wo?10"0,0-
had told the House that an extension of the suunZed tnitoys
danger the monarchy. Why, then, they endawrity, he
0104
narchy by giving contentment to the people- sof the c,O tatty'
thought that the best security to the institution:,
.0t noi.tef, re,
was contentment its the people. Ho warned
ultte.
31en'I'tbat the
per with the feelings of the people. Let , cools, olds son-
frain from laying that flattering unction to tilt' v°otiou for
people would remain passive under opPreas!,S, on aPfy e'
elude with the words of Lord Camden, in ;aid, e test
a repeal of the Stamp Act. Lord Canyleflooylif r toed s
tion is this, I will maintain to the last heti' ° Whoe," h, raY
ation and representation are inseparable'ietery sc,'",.,'lctia this b 4
man without representation committed a"
it ,-;t1.50t0 be lett;
opinion, almost amounts to a direct robber3-d
disputed ?If its truth were admitted--"! 1 the motisentedro
mitted—how could they refuse to accede "e
ction
Hon. Friend? Millions in this country we_re in the Woe And
that assembly. They asked to have a "i" made an efore, la
those who made the laws. The Government..) ther `near
f Mr. nu
tared
said, they should have no voice. lie 'f they t 1 tal
that „co /
the language of Lord Camdem, said,
voice they became slaves, (the Go"' n
them, they were committing a
anti if they robber} he pre"(
Mr. It. YORKE said, to
(slicle first thinos t"efle were t°
system of representation, one of the
or sixty el Te°,lne Ode;
effect of the v heard
be disputed. In the last week el,
election. Th teetion svg:
after the last election, was thasdi.rec2ll,lnet,, e
aorottte,
their notice relative to the Sudbury
only that the e ugh we'
nfamous, that t"
an bad and infamous, but so bad and i
had therefore.., that"r'
unworthy of representation, and theyte,
std. Again,
toot,
had unanimously advised the House not on her°. 91'
ittee sitting
the Comm for Y row
day they had learned that
that
• had committed an
lled befor _035.
Ipswich election
vaganu e,
and —e '"
suggested that it should be &siva ni
:tem. ( Cheers. ) filer (for,
This was under the present sy
for hanself that
.hitiee(vVit
Yorke) had no hesitation in saying
tnehiattteteh rteoe
a individualsek%ci
edg
eh had
themselves
comp tn pr
rogues
; Con t° which frA°
He entire y 0.2 c
ft,
4.
Yorke) could nut g
ive
ohiAiembers, but he ag,eed it
I the
the principle of payiii„
II should, boWeVes;,, 0
some details in the
.tion. e
of toe
motion. qua .
,
motion. that one
Mr. PROTHEROE t,!,,az.the
sAlcornnsieenrt! ni°
1 dissentC'' f gel
pre,ic•nt
h encouragement to mow,
the Reform Bill, gave so muc
t ri; ohtsl"p4 h/ !td
under that sys e
vote
old system. as a no n a
vitude. lie considered that the • were .10
themselves lie did not
nouseholders
than any no— of those veil
corrupt
.r class. He was not one
Prr4P69ll i"
tha"ausetAnk that ethlrilPti''g'rnea'4
ded to e
thou,4o. •:.
right of voting should be exten
scat the
t to the no qualification peri3O
ont 110 gave his as,en
hers he thought no 111embhc"_'re,
With rtsreet to posing Mern
he returned to that House without possessing
odid
ever
Should give his support t sn° he dto
sLott qualification. He
t them otion, so
Mr. BERNAL said, that in suppor mkt
but at the! wag
not do so with a view of seeking popularifysthis
country oil
time he declared that the representation of this
did 11"1.°
anything but a perfect system.—(Cheers.) tshteeuie,letielltdcir