Star.
London, England, 1826-04-14 00:00:00

;.-_

,

from any indifference to the question, still less had it
arisen from any want of sympathy with or respect for
those Gentlemen of great learning and talent who had
distinguished themselves inEdinburgh by the it able sup-
port of this cause; his hesitation had rather been pro-
duced by an apprehension that his feeble aid might be
thought by those Gentlemen more likely to be injurious
thin beneficial to their cause, that they might upon the
principle of now tali easilio be rather disposed to re-
nounce his assistance. The Hon. Gent. had furnished the
people of Scotland with the most cogent reason and
Motive why they should be anxious for the success of
the present motion, by the seal with which he had de-
fended the interests of the thirty-three Corporators of
Edinbiurgh whom he represented. His Hon. and Gal-
lant Friend bad said that every thine was imperfect in
Scotland, although he of course perfectly understood,
his meaning, he would rather say that as a system
nothing could be more perfect. As a system of est{•.
blishing exclusion from the enjoyment of political'
rights, as a system of maintaining the monopoll of
power, as a system of shielding every possible abuse,
a more perfect system could not be devised by the in.
genuity of man. He was the less zealous in his hosti-
lity to that system, because it was now brought before
the House, separate and apart from the great mea-
sure of Parliamentary Reform, and there was nothing
he so much wished as one general struggle for that
constitutional good. Yet the argument of his Hon.
and Learned Friend, as applied to this system, was
entirely irresistible ; it was a pure and perfect
chrysolite, taus tetra etre rotundas it was per-
fectly without flaw. It was, -however, impossible
to convince, so tender and nervous were the' advo-
cates of corruption, it was impossible to convince
them that any change, however minute or remote, could
be effected without endangering the general system to
which they clung. They would listen to no compromise.
--He earnestly called upon the Right Hon. the Secre-
tars, for Foreign Affiirs,who had always expressed himself favourable
to the principles of philosophy, which be truly said were the only
wise regulator of human conduct—he called upon bias. in behaM
of the rights of the enlightened City of Edinburgh. The Hee.
Baronet then proceeded to urge upon Ministers the swanky of
vain in favour of the motion, if they would act in itenferndty
with their repeated professions of liberal said enlightened ;
and suggested the probability. if such moderate and partial
*ere constantly resisted, that the determination of the people to
obtain a more comprehensive and effectual reform would become
impatient and irresistible.
Mr. K. DOUG L S said. be considered there was nothing special
in this case—no corruption had been made out, and if the House
&seeded to this motion, it must be on account of the general ques-
tion of Reform, and not for this special case.
Alt. C. PELHAM opposed is.
Lord A. HAMILTON supported the motion. He
appealed to the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, whe-
ther it was possible for him to maintain ally semblance
of liberattipinions, if he resisted a motion like the pre.
sent. The only argument he had heard against
. motion was, that it violated the articles of Union. Had
not, he would ask the sets of Boroughs been altered is
• 'Many instances and by various modes since the Union?
Why this had beew done- is More than half of the
whole -number of Boroughs in Scotland. Had not
also the Union with Ireland, made since that period, a'
.great change in the constitution of that House. He
. deprecated the principle that, so long as a body of SS
self-elected Corporator: could perpetuate itself, there
should be no free representation of Edinburgh. The
Right Hon. Gentleman professed to be the friend of
education ; and when education was more generally
diffused, was this the beautiful system they intended to
peseta to the enlightened people? If such was their
Intention, it would be more prudent, as well as more consistent
in than to desire that the people should retrograde, than that the;
should advaice in intelligence. The Noble Lord sat down after
thanking the House for the attention which they had paid to the,
observations which he had felt it Ma duty to make on an occasime
which. more than any other in his mind, called on the Haase forks
serious onsideratiom
The LORD ADVOCATE of SCOTLAND comas
menced by :icing that, he should not treat this as a
ScotylrQuestion, but as a Question affecting British in-
terist, and therefore altogether a British Question. The
Committee, he would observe, who sat upon this Bill, I
had supported the proposition on which it was founded,
and which he felt himself now conscientiously bound'
to support. The Noble Lord had moved last year for
a return, which he expected would prove there had
been malversatiqn in the public business of Scotland.—
Now, in his opiniin, it was always wrong in principle
to begin, in cases of mooted national rights, with the
weaker vessel, more particularly when he reflected on
the means by which the national Union between the
two countries had been effected. The consequence
of the legal measure which had taken place lately was,
that Edinburgh had been improving in resources and
population for the last few years beyond all former pre-
cedent. It was contended that the consequence of the
present system was that those tenting 5/. a year in
Edinburgh were that out from the representation. If
this was good for any thing, it was a good substantive
gi ouid for impeaching the representation altogether in
England, IreLtnd, and-Scotland. The better waywould
then have been for the Noble Lord to have levelled
his attack generally against the skate of the representa-'
lion of the United Kingdom. If such were the tendency
of the Noble Lord's motion, he should have no objec-
tion to meet him on the subject, provided he brought it in upon, the
broader principle applicable to a variety of other representations,
but certainly he would not now sanction a motion which overlooked
Avowal principles. and merely for the sake of introducing a specu.
lathe system of reran* in a particular city, applied itself to the
remedy oft specific alleged abuse, which ought on principle to form
merely an item In the elms of alleged abases. For these reasons he
should oppose the mentions.
Mr. Becretar7 CANNlNG—Although it is neither
my desire, nor within my competence, to speak to the
latter parts of the historical statements made by the
Noble Lord (Lord A. Hamilton), I feel myself bound,
as a mane spectator of the contest, and it is in this cha-
racter alone that I have viewed the whole discussion-
upon this subject, to assure the Noble Lord that the al-
teration which has taken place in the preceding Bill, to
which allusion has been made, and which, as be says,
has left the question as nearly as possible where it was,
without either improvement or contradiction,. has not
been effected in the manner, or by the means which he
supposed. The gravamen of the Noble Lord's attack
upon my Hoe. Friends is not the division of the Bill,
but the mode, the object of that division, and the col-
lusion which was practised upon the =Cask& As to
the' fact of collusion, my two Hon. Friends.oor and
isibiad me, have most distincuy disclaimed asCrep;
bated the imputation • and when a charge Of this.
lure" advanced, item of no triblirlat
which an appeal can be made, except to the Aet.

most beneficial and the least objectionable. .The asser-
tions of the Noble Lori, though they were in opposi-
tion to this statentent,-were not contradictory, as both
may be perfectly true; but by the way of taking the
sting out of his objection, he refers to those motives by
the intience of which the division of the measure was
effected. This being the state of the discussion, I do
net know of any other tribunal, when a charge of per-
sonal or'parliamentary unfairness is alleged, to which
reference can be made, tban the honour of the parti 's
in question. To this tribunal the appeal has been
made, and the charge has been most strenuously denied.
I have been required, both by the Hon. Baronet (the,
Member for Westminster) and the Noble Lord, to an-
swer certain questions .which have been proposed to,
me, connected with the general question of Reform,
and to declare upon what ground I can, in. any consis-
tency with some former declarations of mine on another
occasion, oppose that degree of improvement which is,
supposed to be contained in the present proposal of the
Honourable Member for Cane. These calls have been,
undoubtedly made with great politeness, and in terms
of more than ordinary, and, I fear, undesc ved com-
pliment; but, I confess, I am very much at a loss to
understand the grounds upon which it is said I shoal&
give my concurrence-to the present measure; or how
suck a character can be attached to my expressions, as
to give reason for supposing that I am pledged either to
this or any other more comprehensive measure of Reforms.
It is perfectly true, that on the occasion alluded to by
the Hon. Baronet, I did make use of those expressions
which he has taken as the foundation of his argument is
and that I did state, in the language used by all men,
when they have occasion to address a deliberative body,
upon any great question connected with policy or the
public weal, that I would not resist change, merely be.
Cause it was change ; neither would I resist innovation,
as innovation, provided it were accompanied by that
degree of improvement and advantage which would
sanction a departure from established order, and war.
rant the propriety of adopting it. I have often been
accused of being incorrigibly and pertinaciously averse
to a reform of any kind which I did not consider abso-
lutely necessary and expedient ; but I would even take
a higher and more formal ground, and 'say, that I de-
sire to be accused of resting my opposition to reform, not
upon any times—not upon any circumstances—not upon
its application to any particular places—not upon any
events of a nature transitory and evanescent—but upon
a decided, matured, and I may 'say, unalterable convic-
tion, that there are no grievances in the representation
to be redressed ; but tharif there are any grievances, that
they could not be remedied without leaving us exposed
to the chance of greater misfortunes and greater cala-
mities than could possibly arise from any of those evils
to which we may be subjected by an endurance of our
present grievance (hear! front the Opposition Benches);
The Noble Lord has ssid that he hopes I do notlintend
to rest my opposition to a reform in Scottish Bo ghs, on
the articles ofUnion between this kingdom and &Attend
—to a certain degree I will admit to the Noble Lord
chat I do not. Itt, on other grounds, I could-bring
myself to think that .a great and sweeping plan of Re-
form, which would go •to the Reform not only of the
Scottish Burghs, but of the whole system of representa-
tion in the empire, mold be made practicable and Irene.
ficial ; and if these Articles of Union stood in the wee
of that general improvement, I would go with dor
Noble Lord in his view of the case, and say that ncthing
in that Act, with respect to a particular portion of the
empire, could be conclusive against the power and
opinions of the Legislature, when considering the ad-
vantages trhich would result to the whole community.
But I think that no such good would result from any
such sweeping or general Reform ; that the present
motion would not do good ; and I cannot but be of
opinion with the Learned Lord who spoke before me,
that we are bound to oppose any experimental plan of
Reform when about to be applied to that party who is
the weakest in the compact, and that She has a right
to say, if there are any hazards attendant upon these
measures, which we contend there are, try the measures
first upon yourselves, before you subject us to its con-
sequences, and do not' select the weaker vessel to make
upon it a trial of your experiments. Since the comment,-
ment of this debate, I have bad the Articles of Union
put into my hand; -and- in them I find that the article
upon the subject-runs thus: " And be it provided; that
from and after this date no one shall be capable to elect
or be elected a Member of the Parliament for the United
Kingdoms of England and Scotland, except such as
may have been capable to elect or be elected' for the
Parliament of Scotland." Now I say that as long as
England preserves that state of representation which
she possessed at the period of this Union, so long has
Scotland a right to plead that she should not be cons;
pelted to adopt any plans of reform which England
may not think it expedient to try upon herself ; but if,'
I repeat.• the whole Empire was to be affected by any
such alterations, thea Uwould contend that Scotland
could not plead this act-.of Union in bar of the claims
of that Empire, for the purposes of universal be-
nefit. I adroit, that, speaking of Scotland only, and
the Parliament of Scotland, there may not be that po-
pular election which would in other eases be desirable ;
but we are not arguing the question with regard to
Scotland alone, and I am prepared to contend that,
'taking Scotland, with its representation. to-be, as it
virtually is, a part and parcel of an empire, in which
ft many classes of things and sentiments find,-and
Mg have, an organ of their opinions; that it is fully
laid truly in possession of a representation of its opinions
Is the Parliament of the kingdom. I do not mean to
law, that if I was allotting the portion of representation,
L would not give to Scotland a larger share of that
popular infusion, which .1 consider desirable • but I do
Isay, that the h:fusioa of other parts of the empire,
where the representation is of a character more popular,
produces such a ;immixture ip the General Parliament
of the Empire, as I think sufficient to ensure all, even
the highest, objectifor which such.a body may be de•
sirable is this rich and populous , country ; and that
although it may, not possess all the advantages
which may .be thought attainable in theory, yet that
it do not wish to, touch that which
.I find to be of
'soffiCient practical otility, for the sake of the theory,
which nsay. aftei.all; prove delusive. Ate
WWI that I di not sail, upon Honourable Meru-
betv,towagroo widtsau upon this view of the aities-
lon—l only' state candidly and fairly what are say
inlet* that I • mar -not • be- *subjected to doubt
misrepresentation (kettri heartfrew the Oppolitsoa

that althongial.sisstthe.pblie kin
maw* the aftdom of Scotland.; yet
try tho otherpor clogs of thsticirtg dem
thOnfosaion and coramixtote of the
fertile swanked it them, and Job serve
of pracCc .1 utility for which it is de-
. Let us for a moment consider
the case, as to Scotland, in the view of public
benefit. Have we any reason to believe that counto y
to have been exposed to any difficulties, to have suf-
fered any distresses, because the Representatives of
that kingdom have nut been chosen with the same
regard to the popular voice as in the elections of this
more wealthy and more populous nation? If we
look to Scotland, caw say that in these times, when
the whole empire has been flourishing, she has not
advauced in power and importance? So far from
that, I would say the very reverse is nearer the truth.
She has even outstripped us in the race of prosperity,
made advances to wealth and greatness, in a ratio
much beyond those who enjoyed in its fullest ex-
tent the benefits of free and uncontrouled election.
The Honourable Member, in the commencement of the
detail, urged arguments founded on the disfranchise-
ment of the system of representation adopted in Scot-
land; he contended that ,the Scotch Members-are sub-
ject to misgivings on this topic; that they are aware.
that they are so considered in this House; that they
possess here awkward fedings. I see no such symp-
toms--(loud cheers and laughter).—Scotland, such as
she is, mis-represented or non-represented, as the Hon.
Member maintains, has still continued to make good
her hold—(continued cheers and laughter) the Soohrons
have made no impression among her maidens. I can
find no instance of her relinquishing her own gallants
for any of England's sons ; her shires and burghs con-
tinue intact,.from the embraces of the men from the
South, except once, and -once only, as I remember,
when Mr. Fox, discarded and banished from Westmins-
ter, took refuge in the arms of Kirkwall. Scotland,
rich in her resources of representation, and feeling the
advantages of her fertility, has found means to
spare to England many to represent the boroughs
of this part of the kingdom--(Cheers and laughter).—
,The very motion of this night-proceeds from a Gentle-
man who comes from that country; who settled and
nestled himself in an English Borough: and who having
so settled and so nestled himself, undertakes with filial
piety to reform the abuses in the representation of his
•mother country.—(Cheers and much laughter.) For my
,part, were I an Advocate for the measure of Parlia-
mentary Reform, which I am not, I would move an
amendment to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman, and
instead of a motion for " leave be given to bring in a
Bill to amend the law relative to choosing a Represen-
tative for Edinburgh," I would propose that Edin-
burgh" be omitted, and that Caine" be substituted
for it.—(Loud cries from the Opposition of" Move, move,"
and
_iron Mr. ABERCROMBIE in particular.)—lt is not
necessary, Sir, for me to move as the Honourable
and Learned Gentleman requires. lam arguing solely
on, the grounds of the Honourable and Learned
Gentleman, and of the supporters of Reform. The ob-
jection to the elective rights of the Corporation of Edin-
burgh was, that there were but SS electors. Why the
number of electors in the Borough which the Hon.
Gentleman represents is still smaller nor smaller, per-
haps, in comparison to the whole population of the place
—thear, from the Opposition), but still there was a great
disproportion between the body of the electors and the
body of inhabitants of the Borough. of Caine. Ido not
complain of this smallness, but I would say to those
who complain of smallness as an objection to the
exercise of elective rights, 4, Look at home before you
go abroad."—(Hear.) If this objection is to be an avail-
able one, why select Edinburgh, when the Hon. nem-
. ber, by looking at home, would find a fitting subject for
the experiment he proposes. If the paucity of numbers
is to be taken as a test of insufficiency, why stop here ?
If such a motion were entertained, the House would
be called upon night after night, to alter the law
relative to this Borough, and that Borough, and
they would be required thus to proceed, is a series
of partial legislative measures, without end. I have
now argued this question on the grounds as it was
connected with the place to which the motion has
reference, and I shall briefly proceed to nonce it as it
is connected with the more general question of Par-
liamentary Reform; and first, I would say, that this is
the single instance in which the paucity of the numbers
of the electors has made a ground of disfranchisement ;
on every other occasion, it has been deemed necessary
to allege and prove an abuse in the representation;
and I contend, that without the proof of such abuse,
there is no conclusive ground established for an altera-
tion in it. The present question is one quite different
in principle from the more comprehensive one, of
which a Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) has given
notice, and which will come on for discussion in a few
nights—here the principle relates solely to the smallness
of numbers, and is quite distinct from the measure of
a more comprehensive reform, which should be adopted
in spite of all existing rights, for some great national
good—(Hear)., That every partial interest should yield
to so great an object, I admit—but though I admit the
,principle, I deny the advantage of its application to
the measure of Reform. As to the present measure
of partial Reform, although I will not say that
cases may set occur to deprive a City or' Borough
of its franchises, or to alter them, yet I do object
to such a deprivation or alteration, without proof
being given of abuses in the use of them. I do,
besides, object to this motion, because it is the first
time that suck a change would be made ; because the
electing portion of the inhabitants of a place was dis-
proportionate to the bulk of its population ; and because,
by entertaining it now, a series of discussions leading to
endless contentions and individual squabbles would be
let into that great question of Parliamentary Reform
(for great I admit it to be) of which the Noble Lord
(Lord .1. Russell) has given notice foi an early day. Sir,
I prefer to discuss that great question ou its own merits.
The topics relating to it should be kept for the motion
of the Noble Lord, and I hope they will be kept for
discussion long after his time. To the entertainment
of this partial measure, I prefer that the more compre-
bansive one be submitted to this House for the purposes
of declamation and of annual display. I shall be as
well satisfied if the display be a triennial one. But as
this is a Incest/re which does not purpose even (if castled)
.to accomplish a national good ; as it cannot operate even
as.so eons& in any useful vray, but as one of individual injustice
(individual not only as to the persons to whom it is proposed to
'/IPKY•fievi also as AO the instance itself); and as I look upon it, in
Wary point Of view.-co be fraught.wlds many evils and no advan-
tages, I am determined to give it the meet decided opposition.
Mr. HOBHOUSE was surprised to find the Right
Hon. Gentleman mad instituted a comparison between
the case of Vie Beton& of Caine and the representation
of Edinburgh. Was it to be endured that the City of

. .. , -;r::
• note of the issclividOs t._4a so, who, d.6l.tiits , ' -,4* say, the
StLadct is icaliii. :1144 iiithe reams of their% Of I occasion/ most psi that upon thspd, sj al-hr as r4so
simillillimemillilliniPlihv *Mkt ea 1713414 eimPlainiar. theta,- teedengsa AO dipino gsMII **ever toot ' sigt am glad to.fial
sent mode of Election, been "Mt" from every ear° is My HatuFriodedt...... ebi1..... Lord Athos** ibe mover of the kr:lng.eneugh of the,
brotbuti eaceptiog a few close boroughs.
S rF. BURDETT confessed that he had hesitated Bill, stens, as a team for kit being "hied, that many, principle to atone for
Of his friends,approved of the measure in part,-Inid ,alll the purposes of i
whether he should address the House upon this quell of
h 1 hl, of others, which he deemed the sirable (hear, hear).
two or not, but his hesitation had not certainly arisen
irn in uni indifference to the nuestinn. still less had it most beneficial and the least objectionable. .The suer- the case, as applied i
_ _ _ __