Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1831-05-06

public mind was deceived If Mr. Cam ng had
lived and had changed his opinions on his
question. he would have had the man.Iness to
nvow the change But expression of Mr. Can
nrng no passage in his brilliant speeches, carried
the sigh'cst Indication that such change had taken
place as hs noble friend had supposed Where had
his noble friend found he proof thar Mr. Canning a,,
changed his opinions the subject of reiorm9 WHY
IN speech which he delivered on the silk trade n
| 1927 lt1car.) In 1897 year after The al eraiion
OF the silk trade, Mr. Canning when sttinr or the
bench opposite, backed by the support of largo
party IN The House, upon the question: as to what
was TO be done with the franchise of Prrryn-Mr
Canning, against the dictates of his own iudpmen
submitted 10 be left In minority of his friend
around hiin, q question whether the franchise Of
Penryn should b. thrown into the hundreds or trans
ferrcd To Manchester. Hear Thus, when his
Noble Friend threw out lmputa''ons against public
men. tenderness for the fame Of Nj Canning ha6
induced him vindiCatc has memory H. now came
to the tremendous question then before the House.
bui before he approached the consideration of it, he
must confess that he atiiicted wuh great PAIN
and hum!lia ion beyond any thing he had expe-
renced IN considering question Of THIS descriptions
He was asked. hG W ud not say to make q .evoiu
ton In the country. Su to Ubsttute for the present
system fferent constitution CCheersl land he wac
not invited to do tins alter calm and diepassionate
inquiry. but take this step by sppeal motives
which If he acted upon, should not be subjec,nr
his fears to his Judgment, hui his Judgment TO HE
lie RS Hear. hear Before he proceeded further he
would ask why the Kings name was introduced in
this discussion? Why mad it been stated in another
place that his plan had received the particular sane
ton oithp King: As to the reference that had been
made to the discussion the Catholic question, the
cases had no similarity. On that occasion it had
been publicly stated that the measure had not the
sanction Of the king, and the Ministers had then nc
a!terna but to deClFre that the brot
forward with the sanction of the King. But when
a measure like this was brought forward by the adj
minIstraou, was it necessary, day after day in both
Houses of Parliament, and IN the public press, to
state that this measure, which must have received
the of is Va ,or1
with the express sanction of the King? lie (Sir r
Peel) held 1t To be no lmputatInn upon his respect
ard loyalty TO the crown, Ii he disr Garded the in-
nation that the king had sanctioned this measure.
and If, as member Of Parliament. he exercise his
Judgment the merits Of tins question as unreser
vedlY as fno such ntmaton had been given rIiea,-.
But he regretted or other grounds, that tho 81
the King should he thus Ubrudcd dav ai'Cr day
L1Iear.l he could not dismiss from his mind donl,a
TO the justice and eXprdency of this ex rene aeG
Of disf-anchsemen'; but granting i!ia thy o,3
exist, snll 1t was harsh measure towards tn 10y
bodies who We're called upon II sacrifice privileges
which they had long eXccised and If was Justly
introduced, why should the KING be held ou' as be-
special author of the plan? H [Slr Z. Peel had
thought the King had been IN" tounl e ace and
favor; but il seemed a. il this plan Of ext dIsran
chIsepent tn be received By b Icuse. and not
to b. dissented from under th~ error OF ITS beng
introduced with the Ii;& express sanction, If not
at .thc KInE's suggestion Then the House was
mnraccd wit h dissolution Cbeers.i The chances
of dissolution strong If the measure were
carried as If it alcd Iie ISL r. PEEL cared not if
the House were dissolved not nor should he be
III for the performance of single Legislative duty if
he permitted any such measure to Influence him. H
cared not whether he was returned again not: bur
if he felt any anxiety on this head he would GO to
his constituents with the bill in his hand ffiear -
and he would place his special ground TO their re-
ncwed confidence upon his determined opposition c
it fcheers lie would ~ 20 a con!fGucity whose
numbers, by the returns of 1921 were not more than
four thousand inhabitants, and he would tell them
that this bull had been brough: in without any acga-
ton of neccssty, without any beng mad out
against them, and that he had opposed 1t. He knew
they had abused their rights; that til" humbnst
man amongst them never received nor asked brlhe
for The vote they gave [Hcar.] They had received
him when he had been subjected to the ndignry Of
expulsion for what he conceived to be- special act
Of duty, even to that church of which he was sr
humble member They had then returned him az
their representative; and TIL the necessity of the
measure established by cogent arguments
than III had yet heard, he u!d not consent TO de-
prve them of their right But he told tggt he
must adopt this os The alternat was cvi
connections h. was to b. cared from the CT rci-e a
his delib"ratige judgment on a PECULIARLY compi -
and important question. by The apprehension az =
massacre for such the picture give bv he sa.
member for Calne. But why should he SIR r .....
PEEL not have the privilege Of exercising tie sarge
Judgment this bill as The hoaouroble gent ea- CT
the other side had done when they voted agan-, -n.
bill of the noble Lord last year? They did o.. ...z
that when they rejected hat BILL implied a- aver.
SION TO all measures Of reform Upon Ii sane al.r
ciplc, those gentlemen rejected the vote by -.
and why he not at hbe;ty discuss his bi2 -
would say to Ministers Don't shift from Your ov-
shoulders the weight ofrcsponsbiiuy " hch n ache
to the proposal OF such measure; dou't say SAB
prove our capacity to govern, but boast saineg O..
your ability to destroy LChcers.l lie lea ha1
not been one who lndustuonsly C%CH"l The 81 rrav
wave Of the muiude-who employed al his tacuI-
ties to crcnte dissatisfaction and discomfort. IIear
hear hoar.7 lie at least bad vr Uttered tn lon
ruagc of noble Lord in 1927, who found the rso-.
PIE peaceful, quiet and coDentci, and complained
shat DC could not rouse their indignation against ne
constitution -of the House of Corasuous-v.hr
grievcd hot they were opa'hcuc rs ~ prove
q" deaf to The voice Of the charms7, charm n never
sa wisely (HcGT) iie at least never called for -'
Of the names Of 10 prily councillors u nYfer '-
direct them he full torrent OF popular G.-glca ,~-
and resentment, on account oftho 5anurcr. ion a.
forded &c their services. clear Neither had hac.a.
instituted any Jnvidous comparisons between ra-
/ rrea' naval commanders q the Civilians VINO prc
! sided over he Admiralty Neither had he iu-,l @.
and encouraged any body Of mcn 20 display, iIn5e
the very windows ofhc seat Of government "A fcrl-rl
emblem Of revolution (lIear) He had never been th
person to excite the people 10 pitch Of ph-rDzy q