The Statesman.
London, England, 1812-05-09 00:00:00

THE STATESMAN.

had
principles of attachment to theCoituthioand wlahistch night
distinguished his family in all tines,
moved for leave to bring in a Bill for the purpose _of
lessening the expense of elections, and he had to con-
gratulate the House and the country on the motion
not having been opposed by his Majesty's Misdates's,
and that they had consented at least to entertain the
measure. The effect of this measure would be, he
trusted, to prevent the long suspension of intercourse
I. which at present took place between the-constituent*
and their representatives. In ancient, and he would
add, the best times of the Constitution, Parliaments
were triennial, and so continued till the year 1784,
iwhen the Members, he did not know whether to
call it Parliament or Convention, of that day, which
had been elected for three, voted that they should
continue for seven years. He could see no radon
why they had not, upon the same principle, voted
themselves a Parliament for twenty years, or for life.
If this principle was good, he could not perceive why
they had not the same right to vote themselves peren-
nial, as that Parliament had to vote itself septen-
nial. There certainly was none, except the expedi-
ency of the thing—but whilst the present suspension
I of intercourse between the representatives and their
constituents continued, it must bare the effect of
cutting off the connexion, of severing the bond of
mutual attachment, and enabling the representatives
to go against the interests of their constituents.—
' This was ast assertion which he was sure would. not
, be contradicted; and he would put it to any Gen-
Itleman who had read the lists of divisions is 'that
House, which had recently appeared in publications,
which it would not be orderly to mention in that
House, whether they were not of opinion that many
of the names would not have appeared on the side
on which they were ranged, if that had been the
first Session of Parliament. This being the case
then, it became the duty of that House to take the
subject into its consideration. He knew and was
prepared for the parliamentary tactics which would
call upon him, to state the remedy he had to pro-
pose; but he was ready to state, that the re-
medy, he had to suggest was this, that, as
there was a number of places, without popu-
lation, which had therefore no just right to return
representatives, they ought to be disfranchised; and
the right of election transferred to other places po-
pulous and wealthy : that the elective franchise,
which was at present withheld, should be given to
copylfolders, who were very numerous in many parts
of England ; and that as the feudal system was now
wholly abolished, the policy of which was to give a
preference to landed over personal property, this lat-
ter description of property ought to be admitted to
the right of election. He should therefore, in the
first place, propose, that the right of returning
Members to Parliament, which should be taken
from the desolate and impoverished boroughs, should
be transferred to the rich and populous towns, such
as Birmingham and Manchester, and to the populous
counties, such as Yorkshire, which at present re-
turns only two Members, notwithstanding its vast
extent and wealth. He would have the right of vot-
ing spread over the whole population : he would
have all partake of its genial influence ; he would
have that right exercised in an unobjectionable and
impartial way ; he would not have ohnogious bo-
roughs; though, if the reform were to oidt,e piale,
which he desired, property would, and always must
have, a most powerful influence. It was not in the
nature of things to derive property of power.; but
its influence would be exerted then in a less objec-
tionable manner. He objected strongly to the pre-
sent state of representation—he objected, in com-
mon with the general feeling of the country, to one
h un d red and eighty-two personscontinuing toinfluence
the nomination to the seats,as well as to the votes of that
House. He objected to the boroughs ; they were bought
and sold like matters of common traffic ; they were
brought iuto the public market, and made matters of
commerce ; they were disposed of like cattle. Were
these things agreeably to the Constitution ; were these
facts in conformity with the boasted " full, fair, and
free representation of the people ?" Were not these
things the sources of Venality, and the inlets to cor-
ruption ? Reverting to the use that might be made
of boroughs "in certain situations, lie would ask,
whether they did not see individuals who had return-
ed to this country " loaded with the wealth of either
, world," influencing the nomination to them When
such individuals, who were powerful because they
were wealthy, might influence the votes of that.
House—individuals who must have imbibed arbitrary
and despotic notions—did not the fact adduce a seri-
ous ground of alarm ? Most unquestionably it did;
2nd he could not reflect on it without a sort of dis-
gust.
He viewed it with forebodings not favourable
to the liberties of the subject, nor to the stability and
prosperity of the Empire. Then what would he do
with those boroughs ? Why; he would get rid of
them by removing the right of nomination to pope-
lous places—to successful, rich, and manufacturing
towns. That is what he would do with them; and 1
such an alteration was agreeable to his idear of a I
"full) fair, and free represattation. of.tke.molost!
Mr.. Pitt, a Statesman whose talents were **know.
!edged by all ranks, but whose name was indelibly
marked in the history of his country as the promoter
of measures which did not tend to raise the country
in character and power;—Mr. Pitt, in the early pe-1
riod of his public life, had manfully, eloquently, and
justly contended that a reform in that House was
necessary for the preservation of the liberties pf the
People. Mr. Pitt- laid down a plan of the reform
which he wished to-be made ; and it would have been
w ell for that House and for the country had that plan
been adopted. Mr. Pitt entertained the same notions
that he (Mr. B.) did on that subject, particularly
with respect to the boroughs. In the plan proposed,
Mr. Fitt animadverted -on and denounced thirty-five
or thirty-six boroughs, contending that they ought
to be got rid of In the way which he (Mr. 13.) had
suggested on
,the present occasion. Though ani-
madverted on at that period, those Boroughs still
srietnu'aitii onedn. in the
rot oend lyt elistPiil existed,
dl
atedand,
but were Mill
inmewaadrhee,t7heaatltiefbereswetiesof
wealthytT'sa:
the
Hca.i
sipeitnogtfillor!sttlih:l:o6llbrltisl s s
were species
so kf com-
merce,
jweartithstothheelbest
roifgchotuorfstel:etosubjgeectt wasoueroubiljebetha",
ti. lie would
mcearhorthouerebmoroovue thghre
and
did of n
oonimatto!
y
get
two
uninfluenced votes. With respect' to the moral and

constitutional tendency of traffic for Boroughs, he
!would ask, whether the venality and unconstitution-
ality were not greater in him who gave 50001. to'in-
fluence the nomination, than in the poor, uninform-
ed, simple individual who sold his vote for 5t.? To
his mind they were equally great. On the present
occasion he had it in contemplation to move for leave
to bring in two Bills, the object of which would be,
to throw the right of those boroughs—of those unio-
'habited places into the country, add to equalize ulti-
mately the number of Members for each county. If
he were allowed to bring in those Bills, he thought
.
It would do much to win the confidence of the people.
One of his Bills would be for the purpose of giving
to copyholders, as well as freeholders, a right to
vote, a right which had been strenuously contended
for in the last century. He thought the statute of
Henry the VI. and Blackstone supported that right.
Blackstone in his treatise on Copyrights, when
alluding to this disputed point, says, in effect,—" I
must decide against the right, because I have nothing
more to do than to explain the Constitution ; I
am not to create laws, I can only describe what
those laws are. I can only define their limits—l
cannot extend them." Such was Blackstone's opi-
nion, but he plainly hinted that the Copyholder
ought to have the right of voting. He left out Scot-
land purposely, because the subject was in much
better bands. With respect to his own motion, he
would contend that the nominations to the Boroughs
by a few individuals sainmed up the great evil. If
Ile were to argue theoretically, he should say that an
oligarchy of this kind, which formed the House of
Commons by the influence of money, could not at-
, tend to the liberties and independence of the peo-
ple. He would maintain, that such a House of
Commons must be dangerous to both: - Arguing
theoreticidly, he would- say, that• such a House
would cover any act of any Ministers, that it would
on all occasions bring them in an indemnity. Such a
House would rather be independent of the people,
rather than the 'representatives of the people. It I
would render the Sovereign too secure to act in al
way that would otherwise subject him to checks
from Parliament. It was true, that according to
the present state of representation, any Member 4.
might, single-handed, expose the acts of a Minister; •
but it did not prove that the House was a full, fair,l
and free representation - and very possibly the Mi-
nister might be exposed but -to be sheltered. The j
'Present House of Commons, if he were to speak his- I
torically, it had not on the Walcheren and many ;
other great questions sympathized with the feel.
ings of the people. He did not mean to al-
rude to the particular acts of any Ministers,
r of any party, he merely referred to the con-
duct of the House, as now formed, on quest
lions in which the people had felt a strong interest,
which had warmly aroused the whole nation. On,
the whole, his plan still remained what he had for- ,
merly described it to be; it remained unaltered.—'
There might be difference as to any precise plan ; but
all admitted, that the Rouse, as now formed, was I
not a distinct representation of the People. It was
not; it was an oligarchy. It was however said, that
the House contained enough of the feelings of the
country to answer all desired purposes for the peo-
ple. lie would maintain that It did not ; it contain-
ed mote than month of trbteicratic feeling. „ha*
was now to be seen party opposed to party ; entrap;
overbearing aristocratic influence in opposition to a'
rich and powerful borough faction. Would any one
contend, that such a House could be called a re-
presentation of the people? He maintained, that it ;
was an inadequate representation 'of the people.— ,
He wished the Parliament to have the confidence I
of the subject; to destroy the suspicion that the j
Commons had a separate interest from that of the}
Nation. He trusted, that he might be allowed to
bring in the Bills. Such an act would do more to al-
lay the asperities and to cool the violences of the peo-
ple at the present moment, than could any effort of
the Home Secretary of State. In conclusion, he
apologized for the time he had occupied, and la.
mented that the House should be so thinly attended
on such an occasion ; for he thought the importance
of the cause would cover the weakness of the indivi-
dual, who had ventured, in discharge of his public
duty, to bring it forward. He repeated hiS hope,
that he might be allowed to bring in his Bills ; for the
people well knew, that " England never can be un-
done but by her Parliament." lie moved for leave
to bring in two Bills, to repeal the 31st Geo. 11. Cud
to give,to copyholders the right of voting, &c.
The Marquis of TAVISTOCK seconded the mo-
tion. He commented. on the present state of repre-
sentation, observing, that if the House were to act ;
in any way that. was not palatable to the Minister;..,
the threat of dissolution was immediately suspended
over their heads, and the meaning of that threat Wag
pretty well underatood. The cause of this evil was
the inadequacy of representation. trusted they
should not be again told *Loom s n could not
cease to exist—that it was inseperike from human
constitutions. He fervently, hoped th,4 a strong stand
etallabe avadeagaiaat proaption, bipeoppietise Ave
proposed Reform. But such an argument would be
injudicious, for though "corrept practices are bad, ,
corrupt precepts' are much worse. Firmly did he'
believe the opinion of the President Montesquieu,
that the destruction of the English Constitution
would be ineVitable, when the Legislative Power be-'
came more corrupt than the Executive. He would
avert that doom by checking, if not by crushing,
corruption ; and if they would not, that the liber-
ties of the people 'should continue to crumble to
dust—to fall to decay—he thought they ought to ap-
prove of every measure to reform the representation of
L the people.
Mr. W. ELLIOTT, in a speech of considerable
length, opposed the motion. It appeared to him to
be nothing less than staking,. on a precarious and
desperate chance, the experienced and acknowledged
benefits of a Constitution, which had hitherto been
the admiration of the world. Those who were ad-
vocates for a reformation in Parliament, were bound
ttoieshepeow,plfieretw,ertehatditmheinhisahpedpirnesasndan,d
seperoonsdpleyr:tythoatf
that dimiuution resulted from the defects in the re-
, presentation. The existing commercial distresses
,were out of the question. They were of a tMporary
nature, and originated in different circumstances, al-
**ugh' be was by no means disposed to conceal their
magnitude; convinced its he was, that to be fully
sensible of our dangers was the surest mode of bring- i

ing to a successful issue the dreadful contest in viliich
we were engaged. It might be said, that those dis-
tresses p
reaser onset
andfrome
the
rwar.
sßutthat,ince
the
Revolution,
i nsupporting
Parliament only expressed the sense of thepettloodpttlieines;
however• mistaken that sense might be, a reference to
history would indubitably establish. The American
illw er
war, so o
adverse ewhic
rsetho:tivureityfealt by Greatndsoundpoßlircityain policy, and
day, was a war in which the people concurred.
Only one petition from the people had been pre-
sented against it. It was the virtue of Parliament,
and not the virtue of the people, that put an end to
that war. So with the present war, the people were
so comiktely with Mr. Pitt in the support of it, that
the enemies of the war in Parliament retired from
their seats for a time, in utter despair, of making Roy
impression on the minds of the people, favourable to
what they conceived to be the true view of things.--
The inference was, that the present war was not attri.
bulable to any defect in the representation, since the
people maintained as strongly as their representativps
the principle on which it proceeded, and vet to the
war the existing distresses of the country were attri.
hatable. In general the House
y particular spoke
imperfections
sense
human
i, notft
pthlaenpeocpolueld; arnedmoaysedecision, no
cnoautursere---ofn ow
ipsdlaoninc:l;toomolrtecesnelppiasr:uoirirtdineittuiteciocsooora:deel4itsdilirmerttuileitptl
oitunirointict:si:nii,;t:h):d!efl.
thetkalo'hitilesirtoerfwwthouenuldßldsr.itatos%
incapable u
. being defined.; it could 6e deducea only froth prat-
itice; it consisted of mutual checks and controuls
among its component parts, the mode of operation
of which it was not very easy to ascertain : it stood
on prescription ; •it:grew out of the feelings and ha.
i bits and necessities of the people. The actual state
of things therefore was the only criterion by which
Ito judge of our institutions. Let this rule be applied
tia representation. It was true that Birmingham was
i not represented—that Leeds was not represented--
I-that Sheffield was not represented: But were these
places less flourishing than York, which was repre.
sentatl-7-then • Hull, which was represented--than
!_Bristol, which was represented ? Were the interests
of any particular place neglected in the House ?--
I The fact was, that the House represented the whole
country. But the reformation proposed would at
one blow exclude from Parliament, many of those
1 who were best calculated to d 6 the country service.
1..N0 one wished more than he that there should he an
' identity of interest between Parliament and the
people ; but he confessed that he did not wish to see
Parliament whirled about by every blast of popular
Opinion. There was no part of the proposition for
reform, to which he so strongly' objected, as the re=
atoration of triennial Parliaments. It was said that
.they would be more pure. On what was this as-
sertion founded ? If experience were consulted it
'would be found that triennial Parliaments had beets
more personally corrupt than septennial. . Their
lonly effect on the people was to corrupt their morals
, by taking them more frequently from their occupa-
tions. An analogy in favour of Reform had been
attempted to be shown, from the reduction of the
Representatives of Ireland. That reduction was
necessary; the proposed Reform was unnecessary;
.an 4 therefore .he would not hazard it. So with :e-
-1 spect to the proposed Reform in the representation
iof Scotland, his argument was, that the present state
of the representation of that country had existed for
I above a century, and that no part of his Majesty's
1 dominions enjoyed greater prosperity. Why risk all
! this good? Besides, how vague, how undefined, how
I opposite, were the opinions of those who professed
thethselres to be the friends of reform! They
scarcely got together at the Crown and Anchor
Tavern, or at the Freemason's Tavern, before
they began to dispute upon their respective
plans. How would his Honourable Friend
propose to reconcile these discbrdant opinions? how
could he conciliate those who in 1793 presented a
petition founded on the abstract rights of man ? how
could he conciliate that great patriarch, as he was
called,' of reform, Major.
.Cartwright ? how would
he conciliate those who maintained the opinions of
Mr. Flood? A Society had lately been established
under the name of " The Hampden Club." One of
the resolution advertised as pVoceeding from this
club was, "That according to the principles of the
f.:amden ,
stoavviiitfi on
anedn representation ni
tws ehraev
iinng
thein.
separable."
geat
Westminster,adiee and s
hezpcptioosinedsinioldieaft redtnhitdpe Hon.
(ressomeatMo
seraoliuMw-hhiosP.!ifloan.taFx rwielinsdecnotinteikliliatteo a
thesesuffrage, et
hml
al
Member
eies. p dvh efoorewyr-
/Mans? Whose minds did his Hon. Friend think ho
**bald 'settle? •He (Mr. E.) could tell him what
Winds he would unsettle. He would unsettle the
minds of a large portion of the population of the
Empire. He would unsettle the minds of many of
those who were attached to the Constitution as it
stood. lie Would tear up that stable anchor of the
Slate--a4l`ejudice for antiquity, a reverence for an-
.cien t wage and acknowledged berafits ; and he' would
turn the country adtiftupowthe rocks of vain specu-
lation and fantastic imaginary improvement. [Bear,
haul] He confessed that he entertained some
doubt with respect to the petitions for a reform in
Parliament, which had been laid on the table of that
House. The advocates of reform knew very well
how to mimic the public voice. He did not, how.
ever, believe that there was any thing like a general
feeling on their side. In this opinion he was con-
firmed by their qwn complaints of the languishing
state of the public mind on the subject, and of the
necessity of stirring it up to exertion. To commence
a Parliamentary reform at the present moment
veu were it necessary, or advisable at any period,
would be to commence the repair of a house in the
hurricane season. At this critical period, was it
prudent to call on the people to search the very
foundations of the Commonwealth ? Such an at-
tempt would be only to make breaches, and to let in
al the fury of the elements upon that venerable edi-
fice, which had stood so many storms and assaults.
—On these grounds he should give his decided vote
la prayed
rg against
e u
ta the;ot
hr
that
ttmy otoftt i owtnhoe; a n
ihdind ou se receive
House. [Loud
earnestly
ortruesdt
negativelcyr iehop hoped a
s of /tear,
fetl
ti:.l,
hear, hear I]
nrEtolTef
moh,aNi
sn,
reasoning,
ahh
soooungi
hadhn
i) djiyuffseettr i nsaaggtr
demeoltdwhn,,, tilt:
hiet
;litiheMgghert.nnelraoiYnl:rteGernijo