Star.
London, England, 1831-07-13 00:00:00

Sir R. INGLIS thought the Government ought to have
grommet an outfit for lice Majesty, according to all former
pet cialent.
Lord ALTHOR P said he had before stated to the
House, that Government was perfectly willing to make the
pmpoe;tl to the House, and perfectly confident that the
House would agree to it; but his Majesty, in consideration
of the hurthen• of the country, had refused to allow it; and
he was confident the country must be grateful for his con-
sideration —(ileac, hear.)
The resolution was agreed to.
The House resumed. Report to-morrow.
TIEFOIM.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved, that the House resolve
itself into a Committee on the Bill fur amending the repre-
sentation (0 E,lg4t.ld and Wales.
Lord !11 A 1 T I.A Ni) said he was anxious that the borough
of Appleby should trot suffer any great injustice under the
Bill. Appleby contained two parishes, only one of which
was put down in the population return, by which means it
was made under two thousand. and put in schedule A,
whereas it ought to be placed in the schedule B. The
gaol and town-house of Appleby were situate in the parish
of Saint Michael. s Well was ommitted in the population
return. The noble lord was but indistinctly heard.
General C tNN F.I.LY seconded the motion.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that it was not • bill of pains
and penalties that they (the Government) were pressing for.
and he did not see that it was necessary to call in counsel to
have their case argued. AVhatever mistake had arisen in
the census might he corrected in the Committee; for if they
on. e opened the door of the house, and admitted counsel for
Appleby, it would admit a principle that would afford a
claim to every other borough, and it might procrastinate the
progress of a bill, the importance of which was so pressing.
On these grounds he would oppose the application. The
theta required could with equal effect be stated by the repre-
sentatives of the borough In the committee.
Sir R. PEEL warmly supported the application, and con.
tended that the petitioners should be heard at the bar of the
house by counsel, to show that the principle of the bill was
not applicable to their borough.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL rose to oppose the ap.
plication. He reprobated the object of the petition to he
beard by Counsel at the bar of the Muse. He considered
that they bad come forward under that mask ; but that the
real purpose was very different.—(Cheers.) It was absurd
to suppose that the progress of the Bill would be stopped
until Appleby had determined whether the principle of the
Bill could be applied to them. If such were to he the case,
every other borough night be ten pled to try a similar
manwevre.—(Cheers). He considered that the presenting
of the petition was an attempt to defeat or retard the mea-
sure—(Cheers). The repretentstivcs of boroughs were
competent to give all the statements in the Committee, and
if the petition was persisted in he was determined to i ut it
to the test, and ask a majority of de House whether or not
they would thus he trifled with on this momentous question.
Mr. C. WY NN supported the prayer of the petition, and
said, that it was strange to be told that the bill was not one
of pains and penalties, and still that the petitioners would
rut be allowed to be heard by counsel,—a privilege which
would have been granted had the petitioners been really
charged with alleged crime.--(Loud cheers from the Oppo.
sition ) They only sought to state their grievances. What
would be the case if it had to go before a jury; and that the
jury should be told there was no necessity for hearing evi.
ttence in favour of one prisoner more than another, but to
bring in a general verdict on all. That there was no neces-
sity of ask ng, why sentence of death should not be passed
upon them.—(Cheers from Opposition) But that this jury
should be directed for this time to condemn them aIL And
this, he concluded, would be precisely similar to the! con.
chtct of the government, if they were to proceed with the
bill, and refuse to hear the evidence.
Mr. A TTWOOD said, that the learned Attomey-Gene-
ral was not warranted in asserting that the petitioners had
come forward under a mask. The Honourable Member
supported the application, and expressed his decided;op-
position to the Bill lie was loudly cheered by the Op.
position.
Mr. C. WOOD opposed the application to be heard by
Counsel. Ile said, that the question could he put regard-
ing every borough separately in the Committee; there
tright be several cases of the same nature. There was one
he believed in the borough of Wareham.—(Cheers and
laughter from the Opposition.) He was prepared to be
cheered in this manner by the Hon. Gentlemen opposite;
but when he rose he would appeal to the justice of the
House, and not to its passions.---(Cheers from the Minis.
terial benches.) His Majesty's Ministers had declared that
if it could be proved that the principle of the Bill could not
be applied to any particular place, that it would be taken
into oonsideration ; but the question then before the House
did not appear to him to be whether or not the principle
would apply, but it was relating entirely to the manner in
which the pnertf should be taken.
S:r G. WA lIRENDER supported the petition. He
could not be taxed with having come forward under a molt,
f.,r he had no connection whatever with the borough of Ap.
pleby ; he disavowed all party feeling on the subject, or any
desire to oppose the present Ministry, whom he would have
been happy to support. He was opposed to the principle of
the Bill, and had voted against the second reading ; but
there were points in it he approved of, and for these he would
vo e. Such of them as were connected with that part of the
country which he represented. He considered that if they
refused to hear the evidence, the House was departing from
all principle of its precedents, and that if it refused it ought
to change the opinion of every moderate man who was
favourable to the Bill. The House ought to comply with
the prayer of the petition to preserve its character with the
eountty.
Lord MILTON and Lord J. RUSSELL explained.
Sir. PRAED said he was opposed to the bill ; and he
contended that every borough had a right to be heard by
Counsel when they were about to be deprived of their rights.
lie thought that the allegation of coming forward under a
mask was most applicable to those allotted brought forward
the measure. Ile had opposed the bill because he thought
the principle cf the bill was bad and dishonest.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY thought that the presenting of
the petition showed the greatest instance of hostility to the
measure that had yet been offered by the gentlemen on the
opposition benches. It had not been done for bringing for-
ward Appleby to be heard by Counsel ; but it had been to
plead the cau.e of all the enoearments of .he boroughmon.
goring system. (Cheers.) There would be ISO boroughs
who might wake application. and, on a moderate compu-
tation, to be heard by Counsel would occupy as many days,
so that it would he at least 130 days before the bill could be
got into a Comnrit.ee. (Cheers.) The question of the po-
pulation eas a stir pie question of aye or no, and not one
requiting the pia...tree of silk gowns and flaxen wigs, nor
that the House should be deluded by the sophistry of
Lounsel. . .

Sir E. SG GDEN supported the petition. The bill, he
said, had been changed in almost every clause since its first
presentment, in consequence of his Majesty's ministers
not having been in possession of proper information, and yet
they now refused to admit legitimate proof. It was the
beunden duty of ministers to have possessed themselves of
all the read and important facts before they had brought for.
ward their bill. (Cries of Question from the ministerial
lunches, and cheers from the opposition.) The learned ba
ronet explained. Let us know, in Gon's name, how we are
to be used, if time is so pressing that arguments cannot be
listened to; but if the measure is to be forud unceremo-
niously on the house by the strength of the majority, and all
o..posstion beet down, let it be done in the face of all Eng-
bend. and he *odd not attempt to speak against the mea-
sure, but content himself with giving a silent vote. He
repioba.ed the sentiments that had been uttered by the At.
tortley•Denentl. He cared not, though it would be as
inconvenient to hint as any one, whether it would be 100 or
rall days. He 'multi wish justice done, if it should occupy
years, rather than to hear that the measure had been accom-
plished merely by strong parliamentary influence.
Sir R. GRANT opposed the petition. He said that it
was contrary to the precedent of the house, and instanced the
roe of the Catholic Association, that had been refused to be
heard by counsel at the bar of the House.
Si, C. WETHERELL rose amidst cries of " Question,
guts:ion !") lie had heard it admitted by the hon. mem-
her (Mr. t . Wood) that there was a case in Wareham, and
why ought rot this of Appleby be treated as another case?
lit should like to know who it was that had a licence to
make mistakes, and setting them right? Did ministers
mean to preset ve it exclusively to themselves, and to make
and alter just as they chose The depriving of &borough of
its ancient right to send members to Parliament, was a
bill of pains and penalties. In the case of such bill wit.
resses were always admitted. (Hear.) The noble lord had
said the house were agreed even on the details of the mea-
sure. Had he read the notices of motions ? There were seven
notices of amendments to the details. The two members for
Northamptonshire, who should be but one, (a laugh) were,
according to one of these notices (unless, indeed, a late
meeting at a certain office had re-united them) as much
two as two could be. To return to Appleby, how could

. - .

its population be ascertained from the schedules, which
were perpetually making some new mutual exchange ?
(Hear.) But the house had made up its mind. In the ,w•
formed Parliament that might be a good argument. These,
he had no doubt, numbers would be every thing. But the
time (or such an insult to justice and to Great Britain, as to
decide without discussion on the rights of Englishmen, was
not yet arrived. Up to the present time no cue had occurred
in which the rights, not of a borough merely, but of any in-
dividual member had been decided on without testimony being
adduced. They had heard much about that house having
lost the confidence of the people. Was a conduct such as
ministers would now have them take, likely to secure that
confidence ? (Hear.) Let them preserve that character of
fairness and candour, which the Commons bad for centuries
merited, and let them leave to the reformed parliament to aim
at other attributes. (Cheers.)
Lord A LTHOIIP said the hon. and learned member bad
been betrayed by the flow of his eloquence into many ex-
agger.itions. Ile denial that government wished to decide
without discussion. They said, in GOD'S name let the bill
go into a Committee, and there let the case of each borough
be sepsrately examined (hear.) He denied that the bill
was a bill of pains and penalties (cheers.) Far from that
it was beneficial to the whole of the community (cheers.)
Ile contended that the way to judge of the population
of Appleby was by the population return. How
could you learn any thing of it by witnesses ? If not
engaged in the population return, they knew nothing on
the subject ; if engaged in it, you have their answer
already (hear, hear). The honourable and learned member
was surprised that his noble colleague in the representation
of Northamptonshire should differ from him (Lord A.) in
certain details. He (Sir C. W.) could not have observed
their political career, for they had in many other cases dif-
feriAl. They agreed, however, in the prineples of the bill,
aid as to their private friendship, that, he trusted, was un-
alterable.—(Hear.) %Vas this the way, asked the Learned
Member, to secure the confidence of the people ? He (Lord
A.) asked the same qui scion—Was it the way to secure that
confidence to retard by pretexts and impediments the march
of the reform bill ?—( t beers.)
Mr. CROK lilt said, every one was agreed as to the
correctneiis of the population returns. What the petitioners
stated was, that by mistake two parishes bad been separa-
ted from each otber.--(Hear). He found that in the re-
turn of 1811, the places being classed by towns, these two
parishes were united, and Appleby was made to contain
2,200 inhabitants, but in the next return they were
classed by parishes, and the name of Appleby was sub-
stituted for the name of one of the parishes.—(Hear).
He had expected that Ministers would have treated the
case as they had done that of Buckingham. The peti-
tioners did not object to, or endeavour to defeat the
principle of the Bill ; they merely asked to be admitted
into that schedule, in which they should, according to that
principle, be placed.—(Hear, bear). But let us discuss the
question in committee, it was said but the Speaker would tell
them that a Committee could not call witnesses, unless the
precious sanction of the House had been given to that effect.
He denied that this was a surprise or any mask. The Se-
aviary of State had been weeks ago put in possession of the
circumstances of the present case, precisely as he had been
put in possession of those relating to Buckingham, Truro
and one or two others. He had read over the whole of the
representations made to government, and, with the exception
of Wareham, be found no case parallel to the present. It
was these who refused to adhere to their own principle, and
to apply their own rule in their own line, who deceived the
people.
Mr. J. WOOD explained.
Colonel TOR RENS said the Right Hon. Gentleman had
not read over the representations accurately. The case of
Ashburton was similar to the present. He was surprised
that so much zeal should be shown in the one cause, and so
little in the other.

Mr. CROKRR explained.
Alderman THOMPSON felt the House was called upon
in justice to accede to the prayer of the petitioners.—(Hear,
hear.) He begged to state that the petitioners were a most
respectable body of men. He was desirous to see the prin.
ciple of the Bill maintained, but equally so to confine it
within the bounds of impartiality and justioe.—(The woe.
thy Alderman sat down amidst cheers and loud cries of
question.)
Mr. C. FERGUSON could have no objection to bearing
Counsel at the bar. What he wished to know was, whether
St. Michael's and Bungay were one and the same place. The
returns of 1811 and 1821 differed on this point. He therefore
wished to hear witnesses. Being a friend to the principle of
the bill, he wished to have it violated in no instance.—
(Hear, bear.)
Col. I.OW THER would tell him in two words that they
were one and the same place.
After a few words from Lord J. RUSSELL, the division
took place, when there appeared—
Against hearing Counsel at the Bar .. 284
For hearing Counsel lB7
Majority in favour of Ministers 97
On re-entering the gallery, we found Col. CONOLLY
speaking in support of an amendment to the motion that
the house go into a committee on the English reform bill.
The hon. member had moved, as an amendment, that the
Speaker leave the chair that day six months. He con.
sidered the present representation a perfect one. The dbl.
franchisement proposed was incompatible with justice, sod
with the British constitution. It was incompatible with the
security of property. The British nation would not sanction
such spoliauco, if acquainted with the facts. The elective
franchise was identified with property—it emanated entirely
from property—he could not consider them distinct. The'
tenure by which the franchise was held, was the same as'
that by which many members held their estates. (Hear.)
At the Union with Ireland, compensation was given to the
proprietors of boroughs. He then alluded to the press. The
proprietors of the property under discussion were abused by
it in the same manner as were the clergy of France at the be.
ginning of the first revolution, by the press in that country.
The axiom was, vilify those whom you intend to rob.—(Na,
no, and cheers.) He had no connection with the borough-
mongers—(a laugh )—but he could clearly see that the abuse
of the press was the effort of a weak party to uphold a cause
it could not justify. The bill would democratize the repre•
sentation—(Question)—it would demoralize the people.
After a few words from Colonel SIBTHORPE,

Mr. FAN E condemned the bill as a delusive measure.
The ministers had been placed in a difficult position by the
votes of the last parliament, and they had dissolved that par-
liament in order to maintain themselves in the government.
(Hear.) The bill was decidedly democratic, and destructive
to the best institutions of the country.— (He sat down amidst
loud cries of question.)
Mr. C. PELHA3I spoke of the bill as a most confused
and incomptehensible piece of legislation, and defied members
to ray that they really comprehended it. The bill went to
remedy wrongs for the prevention of which there were already
upwards of 100 statutes on their books.

Mr. ATTWOOD condemned the bill as a most violent
measure—as running at the destruction of one-third of the
rights of representation. It was a sweeping measure of in.
noeation—and it was to be decided by those who had been
somewhat suddenly and violently called together. The Mi-
nisters seemed to lie decidedly ignorant of the value result-
ing from the incongruities constituting that house ; and of
the value of identifying in interests both houses of the legit'.
Lowe. It was said that the proposed house would not be a
democratic assembly ; he would ask the noble proposer of
the bill if he could point out any period in all history here
such a house and an hereditary peerage had co-existed ?
The authority of Lord Clarendon had been quoted on a for.
mer night. He doubted whether the words were ever uttered
by Lord Clarendon—but as they were uttered (if uttered)
two centuries ago, he would put the undisputed possession
in opposition to such opinion. There were the rights
practised for centuries on one hand, and a doubtful autho-
rity quoted on the other. An old Act had been discovered,
in which it was asserted, that elections " ought to be
free." Who disputed that fact ? Had they not numerous
laws to secure their freedom ? But did that Act justify
the taking away of rights and franchises?—(Hear, bear)
He would not impute private interests to any man,
because the question was of such vast importance ;
so extremely affecting present times as well as futurity,
that all must desire to promote the interests of the country.
But he called on them to rely on what experience had
proved, rather than resort to systems the efficacy of which
lied not been established. (Hear, hear.) From his ex.
perience he could declare that the condemned boroughs me.'
rited not their condemnation, but their support. (Cheers.)
Their conduct bad been honest; they had returned the
most valuable representatives. He had represented a bo.
rough for ten or twelve years, and be defied any one to
say that any other considerations than those of the public
interests had guided his votes. Why then was his bo.
rough to be disfranchised ? He would look to other
boroughs ; see bow and by whom they were represented;
Led Lidon and the elder Pitt had sat for boroughs, and
then he would ask how could they justify it to them.
selves to destroy such rights ? The borough system had

ever supplied the house with its ablest and most effective
members, yet that system was to be destroyed, and by revo-
lutionary violence. (hear, and a laugh.) It was said that the
boroughs were opposed to the interests of the people; no,
they were favourable to the maintenance et existing institu-
tions. In no country had talent been so encouraged and
brought forward, and all had been encouraged through the
medium of this condemned borough system. Ought they
not to draw wisdom from what was passing around them in
Europe and in America ? There were struggles proceeding,
and for what ? For , the representative principle—for
the " Sovereignty of the People"—, sovereignty that was
inconsistent with the sovereignty of the Monarch. (Loud
cheers.) If it triumphed, the Thrones must be in-
secure. Femme proved it. Would the principles stop ?
Would Kings be allowed to remain ? On the contrary,
must not the severest conflict arise, and must not blood flow
in such conflicts? When such contests were proceeding,
ought they to allow their Institutions to be cast into the
general furnace of European revolutions? Ought they not
to hold flutt by fixed institutions ? They ought, and be
hesitated not to say, that the house had no right thus to
place in jeopardy the rights, institutions, and liberties of
the people. (Loud cheers.) They rested on the same
foundation nigh the prerogatives of the Crown; and had
the P..rliament the right to abrogate those prerogatives?
(Cheers.) No; nor had they the right to abolish the fran-
chises proposed to be destroyed by this bill. (Cheers.) But
it was to be carried ; and it it were endangered in the other
house, there were to be new peers created. That was threat-
em.d ; but he did not believe that any ministers would have
the audacity and profligacy to recommend such a proceeding
(loud eneers) Ai hat would that be but the ministers elect-
ing of themselves to the other house, to carry their own
measure (cheers). If that principle were to be adopted.
where was it to stop ? He concluded, amidst immense and
long-continued cheering, with repeating his decided condem-
nation of the principles and provisions of this destructive
and revolutionary hill.
Captain GORDON rose amidst tremendous calls of
" Adjourn," "Go on, " Divide," &e He was enabled
to say, that be did not desire to trespass on the House ; he
only rose for the purpose of moving, that the further debate
on the question be adjourned till to-morrow. (Cheers, and
er es of " Yes. sdjourn," " No, don't adjourn," Be.")
Mr HUNT seconded the motion for adjournment.
The SPEAKER rose to put this question amidst loud
cries for and against adjournment.
A MEN! Bt. R in the side gallery excited no small
merri-
ment amidst all the tumult, by exclaiming. " Olt, adjourn
the debate, to be sure ; adjourn till ten o'clock to-morrow
morning !"
The SPEAKER was afterwards enabled to put this ma
Con, when—

The CH.INCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose.
amidst loud cries of " Adjourn !" and said he should feel it
to be his duty to oppose any adjournment of the question;
if it were found impossible for the House to do more at that
late hour (twelve o'clock). then resolve itself into a Com-
mittee on the Bill, he certainly could not think it was ask-
ing too much that the question before the House should be
discussed at present.
After a few words from Colonel Wood, Mr. Wynn, Sir
R. Peel, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sia E. Sugden,
and 111. C. Pelham, on the question of adjournment,
Captain GORDON moved as an amendment, that the
debate on the Speaker's leaving the chair be adjourned.
The house then divided, when there appeared,
For the adjournment - - 102
Against it . 328

3lajority for Ministers • 220
After some further discussion, from which strangers were
excluded, a second division on the question that the Speaker
do leave the chair, took place, when there appeared,
Ayes - - - .280
Noes' . . . • PO

Majority - - 196
Sir C. WETHERELL moved that the Louse be ad.
journed till Thursday.
The SPEAKER informed him that the motion could
could not be sustained in that shape, as a division had al-
ready taken place on adjournment ; but the hon. ban. might
put his motion, that the house, at its rising, be adjourned till
Thursday.
Sir C. WETHERELL then put the motion accordingly,
and made a long speech.
Mr. C. PELH A:11 seconded the motion.

An Honourable MEMBER complained that the hon.
baronet, Sir C. Wetherell, had been much interrupted in his
speech.
Colonel DAVIES and others opposed the motion.
Lord W. LENNOX said he did not think that the hon.
baronet (Sir C. Wetherell) could have been much interrupted
in his speech, for he saw at least eighteen members fast asleep
(Laughter.)
Alderman WAITHMAN hoped that ministers would be
firm, fur he had heard a great many soporific speeches de-
livered that night.
The House then divided on the motion, that at its rising
the House adjourn till Thursday.
Against
Fur .. 63

Majority for Ministers .. 172
From twelve o'clock till half-past three the gallery was
kept shut, and strangers were eieluded, during which, we
understand, the members were engaged in a long and de.
sultory debate on the course of their proceedings, which
ended in the two parties endeavouring to persuade each
other that the faults were all on the side of their oppo-
nents. At that time we were again admitted into the
gallery, and found the Speaker then putting the question,
" that I now leave the chair ;" on which
. . .

Lord STOR3IONT moved that the debate be adjourned
till this day, at five o'clock. He did that to show the other
side that they were not to be browbeaten. If he were de-
feated, he would sit there till fire o'clock the next day.
The motion being seconded, the question wu put.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the object of the noble lord having been gained, to make the
house hear the debate, he hoped the noble lord would then
allow the Speaker to leave the chair.
A abort conversation ensued.

Colonel WOOD teminded the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer that the government had always, after such a struggle,
given way, and suggested the propriety of its then giving ;
way, though he declared that he would vote with the noble
lord, should he resist the motion for an adjournment.
slr. STANLEY recommended the minority to consider
whether thew might not strain their opposition and their va-
luable privilege of moving the adjournment too far. The
only difference between them was as to a point of form, and i
not any substantial advantage on either bide. He thought the
minority of 63 should give way to the majority of 235. The
minority would lose nothing, and the majority would pin
nothing but the advantage of not yielding. If the minority
would consent to the house going into a committee, pro
forma, the house would be as ready to hear the opponents of
thelmeasure when it came next before the house, as if they
were not to go into a Committee at that time.
Sir C. WETHERELL said a few words in favour of the
adjournment. He thought the motion might stand adjourned
till five o'clock. Such motions were frequently made by the
ministers when they were in opposition.
Lord A LTHORP had never moved an adjournment when
In opposition, and had seldom supported such a motion. He
had seldom seen a case important enough to warrant a mi-
nority in insisting on an adjournment. He could not, con-
sistently with his duty to those gentlemen who supported
him, give way.
Alr. S. PERCEVAL would support the noble lord op.
posite (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), with the under-
standing that the Opposition should have a right to eddies'
the House again on the Bill in Committee.
Mr. PR AED said a few words against agreeing to the
motion of the noble lord. It appeared that at that time they
were only required to consent to the motion for going into
a Committee, to satisfy the dignity of the opposite party,
which he, for one, could not agree to.
There were loud calls for Question ! before the Honour-
able Member concluded, and on his sitting down strangers
were again ordered to withdraw.
Oa a division there appeared—
For the adjournment .
Against it 214
Majority .
On our return to the gallery, the debate upon the question
of adjournment was again resumed with much vigour on both
sides, upon the motion of Lord STORMONT, seconded
by Mr. PRAM:), after which the House again divided,
when the numbers for and against the adjournment appeared
to be—

Noes
Ayes
bf ajority •• --111111
The adjournment was again moved, and after another die-
cussics equally animated, and carried on with equal perse-
verance as any of the preceding ones,

... • ~ .• • '
• .
.... .11 . . . • •
ill
a
•
Sir R. !HOU.; titouglit th,. Government ought to lave its population be ascertained from the schedules, which ever supplied the house w
4 t proposed an outfit for her Majesty, according to all former were perpetually making some new mutual exchange ? members, yet that system
Pe ecolent. (Hear.) But the house had made up its mind. In the re• lutlonary violence. (hear, so
Lord ALTHOR P said he had before stated to the formed Parliament that might be a good argument. These, boroughs were opposed to 1
I House that Government was perfectly
time (or such an insult to willing to make the he had no doubt, numbers would be every thing. But the they were favourable to the
pmpos;el to the House, and perfectly confident that thejustice and to Great Britain, as to Hons. In no country had
All House would agree to it ; but his Majesty, in consideration decide without discussion on the rights of Englishmen, was brought forward, and all h
1. of tit: fmrthen of the country, had refused to allow it; and not yet arrived. Up to the present time no cue had occurred medium of this condemner
he was confident the country must be grateful for his con. in which the rights, not of a borough merely, but of any in- not to draw wisdom from
suleration —( Hear, hear.) dividual member had been decided on without testimonybeing Europe and in America ?
•.
The resolution was agreed to. adduced. They had heard much about that house baring and for what ? For . I
The House resumed. Report to-morrow, lost the confidence of the people. Was a conduct such as the " Sovereignty of the
.:
Pi' ' a ETON M. ministers would now have them take, likely to secure that inconsistent with the sort
P Lord 3011 N RUSSELL moved, that the House resolve confidence? (Hear.) Let them preserve that character of cheers.) If it tripmphi
• - fairness and candour, which the Commons bad for centuries secure. France proved i
k• itself into a Committee on the Rill fur amending the repro. fairness
end let them leave to the reformed parliament to aim Would Kings be allowed

•
•
;
h I
1.1.
4
,
1 .
1
0