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

of knowledge, and the universal Intellectual
improvement of the people, would nake it an
imperative duty upon Parliament to enquire into
the nature and extent of the evil, wits a ♦iew to
ascertain what remedy should be appled. It was
the more incumbent upon Parliament to enter into
this enquiry, inasmuch as a Member, in his place in
that House, had made a statement, that a Minister of
the Crown had been guilty of corrupt and illegal
practices, with a view to procure an undue return of
persons to sit in that house, with the view of obtain-
ing their support to his measures in Parliament. The
motion submitted to the House on that occasion had
been misted, and certainly the general principle of
the feeling upon which it had been opposed met with
his concurrence. Fors considering the notoriety and

generality of the practice, as there stated., nothing
could be •more indelicate than to take further pro-
ceedings on that occasion. After, however, such
admission of notoriety was before the Public ; and
after it had been declared from the Chair, with all
the weight of the constitutional information possessed
by the Speaker, that our ancestors would have started
at the bate mention of such practices, he would ask,
whether it would not be an actual neglect of duty
on the part of the House—whether it would not
show a criminal apathy in the concerns of the peo-
ple, to be guilty of an unpardonabte non feasance,
amounting to a total disregard of their public
duty, if they should not determine to take. the
question into consideration? If they were to
reject the enquiry, the people might naturally
conclude that they were regardless of their opinions,
and negligent of their rights and privileges. It was
not his wish, in this instance, to go into any enquiry
whether the Ministers had acted corruptly and il-
legally, as had been charged upon them on the for-
mer occasion, because, admitting as he did the jus-
tice of the feeling which stopped further enquiry at
the time, he did not consider the present
,a proper
opportunity for going into it. Ile was aware how
unequal be was himself to the task of bringing for-
ward the broad question of reform, which required
the combined wisdom of the Home, to do it with
effect, by investigating the cause of the evil, and ap-
plying the proper remedy. Feeling, however, as he
did upon the subject, he should venture to submit it
to the consideration of the House, and in doing so,
he should state shortly and distinctly his views with
respect to it. lie said shortly, because having two
years ago submitted his opinionsat large to the House
upon this great constitutional question, it was the
less necessary for him on that occasion to take up too
much of the time of the House. On that former oc-
casion, he had most distinctly stated, as he was ready
to do in that instance, that the great danger arose
from the great number of places in a state of desola-
tion, without having a population to express its
voice, or constituents to be represented, which, how-
ever, returned Members to that House. He had
made an extract of their number, and should com-
municate the statement to the House. If any Gen-
tleman should deny its accuracy, let him but
move for a Committee to enquire into the fact,
and he should be ready to prove its perfect ac-
curacy by evidence at the Bar of the House.—
This, then, being the state of the representation,
or of the absence of the representation of the
people, he would Owe it to the consideration of Gen-
tlemen, whether they were not in duty bound to take
the subject into their serious consideration ? He had
no hesitation to say, that he never should raise his
voice against the weight of property, or the fair in-
fluence arising from the possession of property, hav-
ing an adequate effect in the return of the Repre-
sentatives of the People to that House. His great
and leading object was to restore to property its due
weight in elections ; for, according to its present sys-
tem, he would contend, that property generally was
not fairly represented, and that personal property
Ives not represented at all. The extract which he
had made, and which he was ready to prove by evi-
dence at the bar, was, that a few individuals re-
turned three hundred and twenty-six Members to
that House by nomination or otherwise. This was a
circumstance which in itself demonstrated that pro..
perty was not fairly represented. He knew that the
number he had stated was so enormous that it must
astonish even those who were interested in the conti-
nuance of the system which ,it was his anxious wish
to correct. There were besides seventy places pos.
sessed by Members of Parliament, and forty Mem-
bers were returned on eitheir side by compromise, as
the practice was usually nominated. All this could
not take place if property possessed its national
influence in the Constitution of the Representa-
tive House of Parliament. Mut if any doubt could be
entertained on the subject, he had only to state, that
one hundred and eighty-two persons returned one
hundred and ninety-two Members to that House by
simple nomination ; he meant of course throughout the
whole of the United Kingdom, England, Ireland,
and Scotland. And when he stated that fact, and
offered to prove it by evidence, he knew not in what
language he could express his surprise if the House
should not accedeZp his. motion. Ting had, hp was
aware, voted that they were a full, fair, and free
representation of the people. But with these facts of
one hundred and ninety-two being returned by one
hundred and eighty-two individuals, and seventy
placemen having seats in that llouse, and forty others
'being returned by compromise, he could not conceive
that these Members could have a full, fair, or free'
discretion, an unfettered option, or an unbiassed
voice in that House. It would, he knew, be stated,
as it had been already urged to himself, that some
of these cases lapped over, and that the same persons
held places who were returned by nomination. He
did not question the fact; but whilst be knew that
there were one hundred and ninety-two returned, as 1
he said by nomination, seventy Members possessing
places, and thirty at least returned by compromise for
either party (he did not mind which, for he was not
then speaking as a party man), he could never con-1
shier them as free in their discretion, or uninfluenced
as to their votes. The House thus composed, was
returned for seven years. lie had before stated his
objection to the repeal of the Septennial Act, unless
that repeal should be preceded by some measure to
dimintnish the expenses of elections. The repeal of
the Septennial Act, he was persuaded, would only,
be productive of mischief if the effect were not to bi
fortified with some measure. That measure he was
happy to state was now likely to be carried into effect.
Noble Lord (4! ofTethtock), conformably to those