think that it was on extraneous causes rather than on any measures which might be adopted by Government that the prosperity of the empire depended. He would say, further, though with deep regret, that every day this state of things was becoming worse; but, if this were so, could any thing be more insane than to teach the people that national prosperity depended, not on the measures but on the form of Government? The consequence would be, that Parliament would every day be called upon to reconsider the new Constitution, and to reform it again and again. He would now direct their Lordships' attention to what he conceived to be the most important part of the Bill, namely, the uniformity of the franchise. He did not object to it because it was popular; on the contrary, he was desirous that a more popular franchise should be adopted, but not to be applied every where. As it existed at present, even the poorest persons contributed to send Members to Parliament to express their wishes. It would be idle at the present moment to go into the details of the measure to inquire whether it was possible to establish a rule for fixing the value by which the right to the franchise was to be ascertained; but, he could not avoid observing, that no men were less capable of executing that task satisfactorily than Barristers. He also, objected to the Barristers being appointed by the Judges, and to their sending in their bills to the Treasury. By these means a connexion was maintained by the Government, which might lead to improper conduct on the part of the Barristers, for they had it in their power to enfranchise or disfranchise numbers of voters, contrary to the intention of the Act. The odium arising out of their improper conduct would be thrown, not upon the Government which benefitted by it, but on the Judges. With respect, however, to the 101. franchise, he was of opinion that it would not give power to the middle classes. It went below them, but not to the poorest classes. He had looked to the practical working of the measure more attentively than the noble Earl appeared to have done, and he found that it disfranchised both the middle and the poorer classes. He found that in all England and Wales, there were only thirty-one places in which the renters of between 101. and 201. would not have a decided majority over all the other voters, and the result was, that they would have a majority of fifty on the whole representation of England and Wales. It was evi dent that the Bill would disfranchise the middle classes. He respected those classes, but he thought some misunderstanding existed as to who they were. He understood the middle classes to be composed of persons who possessed the means of education, but not of idleness. It was the class from which almost all distinguished men were drawn-from which many of their Lordships had sprung. The Bill did not give power to them, but to the class immediately above the poorest-those who were the plaintiffs in courts of conscience. They would have the power of legislating for their poor debtors. What effect would this have on the public prosperity? In the first place the power of legislating for persons who had property would be given to those who had little or none. A noble Lord had stated on a former evening that the Church of England was in a minority compared with Dissenters. He did not believe that such was the case, but he knew that the great body of those who were sincerely attached to the Church, and determined to support it, was to be found in the highest and poorest classes. Dissent predominated in the peculiar class to which a preponderance of power was given by this Bill. Let their Lordships consider what would be the effect of the measure with respect to Scotland and Ireland. A great many of the Members now returned for Scotland were Presbyterians; but they were men of large property, and desirous of maintaining the establishments of the country. But, under the Bill the Members for that country would be Presbyterians of a lower class, among whom was to be found whatever yet remained of bigotry and a persecuting spirit. With respect to Ireland, the immediate effect of the passing of the Bill would be, to render half the Representation of that country Roman Catholic. Under such circumstances, how would it be possible to uphold the Church Establishment in Ireland? The Government and Parliament were bound to protect the property of the Church. He recollected hearing a right reverend Prelate declare, the doctrines of that Church would remain even though its property was taken away; but he confessed he was desirous of preserving its property also, and he was afraid that its property, if not its doctrines, would suffer by this Bill. He would next proceed to consider what would be the effect of popular Representation on the acts of the Government. The only thing which could render office desirable to any man who was worthy of having it was, that it gave him itself for the task; and from this it arose the power to carry into effect measures that in this country there was no man, howwhich would benefit his country. Did the ever low his condition but that by abilities noble Earl entertain any hope that, in a and conduct he might raise himself to comParliament such as the Bill would give parative comfort, and thence upwards to him, he could carry any measure which the highest offices of the State; and prinwas opposed to the public feeling of the cipally the State was enabled to avail itmoment? If they changed the Constitu- self of the talents of such men through tion of the country, it would be necessary these very boroughs now so much reviled. to change the persons who were to carry This, they were told, was indeed no longer on the Government. All measures to be an advantage worth considering, for that proposed must in fact be submitted to the every tenth man you met was a man of consideration of influential individuals out talent. All he could say was, that doors, and framed so as to flatter their he was not so fortunate as to meet opinions; and they would then be brought with them in his walks. But granting forward not on the responsibility of the Go- that, in the ordinary sense of the words, vernment, but on the recommendation of men of talent were more frequently to be Committees. Thus would be removed the found now than formerly, still not one in a great practical advantage which the country hundred of them would be found available now enjoyed of having Ministers selected for the public service. If the change profor their ability, who weighed all measures posed in this Bill was agreed to of necessity maturely before they brought them forward, further alterations must be made whenever and waited for the most favourable oppor- it was demanded. There could be no suctunity to propose them. It was necessary cessful resistance to whatever demand was to look, not only to the revolution which made. Let this Bill be passed, and there the new system would occasion in the con- would be such a House of Commons as duct of men in office, but also to the effect would render it impossible for any Governwhich it would produce upon the opposi- ment to be conducted on any regular printion. During the last thirty years a body ciple of action. No series of measures of independent men, not necessarily con- could be carried by any Government with nected with the great mass of the people, such a House of Commons as this Bill had combined together for the purpose of must lead to. Changes of policy would advocating certain measures, and had ex- continually be forced upon the Ministry. ercised a powerful influence on the delibera- How could a House of Commons elected tions of Parliament by these means they under this Bill deal with questions of comacquired an aptitude for public business mercial policy? The modified principles of which enabled them to execute the duties free trade, to which noble Lords who adof office, whenever his Majesty's wish or vocated the Bill were attached, had made public opinion rendered a change of Mi- no converts among the peculiar class which nistry necessary. Under the new system, it was now proposed to endow with prehowever, there would be no opportunity ponderating power. That class still believed for forming a regular opposition, because the exclusion of all foreign competition to the representative body would be constantly be the true rule. Go back to that policy; undergoing changes. There would, indeed, teach foreigners that we had tried the new be an opposition in the country, backed by liberal system, and had failed; teach them to mobs, which would dictate to the Govern- adopt the principles in their intercourse ment. It was proved by the history not with us which this class thought best, and only of this country but of others, that the consequence would be, ruin to our trade, whatever might be the form of the Govern- and famine for the people. The noble ment-whether the most absurd and mon- Lords opposite were teaching the people strous democracy or the most absolute mo- a dangerous lesson. They told the people narchy or despotism-that was practically that the form of Government was the the best which afforded able men an oppor- great cause of distress. Would the Bill tunity of coming forward in the public now proposed remedy that distress? service. The present Constitution of Eng- was not even pretended that it would, and land did that beyond any which had ever if the people had the Bill and still found been known. By the present system this distress, they would of course, pursuing admirable end was attained-that while the instructions they had received, again one Government existed, another was al-demand fresh changes, and fresh changes ways in a course of preparation to qualify could not be denied them. This Bill was to remove anomalies, and to correct contradictions, but it contained greater contradictions and greater absurdities than were to be found in the system it was to supersede. Their Lordships would excuse him if he mentioned a few of those absurdities. In the first place, every man who rented a house of from 10l. to 50l., unless he resided in a borough was to be excluded altogether from the franchise, notwithstanding, he belonged to a class of persons of the most intelligent and respectable character. No householders of that class, however, were to have a vote for a county, but all such renters were to have a vote for the borough they resided in. Upon what principle, in consonance with the construction of the Bill, was that distinction made? Then there were seven towns left without Representatives which were larger in population and in extent, and were more wealthy than enfranchised Walsall and Whitby. Again there were five boroughs in schedule B which had twice as many voters and twice as large a population, but were only to have half as many Members as five other boroughs which were to be left untouched. But there was something more extraordinary and more monstrous still. There were Newcastle and Gateshead, which latter place had been discovered in a wonderful manner to be a place of importance, for who but the framers of this Bill would have found in it the qualifications which would entitle it under the circumstances, to return Members to Parliament? Newcastle and Gateshead, with their 57,000 inhabitants, were to have three Members, while Liverpool and Toxteth Park, with their 187,000 inhabitants, were by the Bill to have but two Members. Such an arrangement was monstrous. Then, with respect to the counties, Middlesex, with its 1,358,000 inhabitants, was to be confined to two Members; while Northamptonshire, with its 179,000 inhabitants, was to be divided, and was to have four Members. Again each division of Lancashire had a population of 670,000 inhabitants, while each division of Cumberland would have a population of only 84,000 inhabitants. Was it not monstrous to suppose that such absurdities, if passed could be suffered to continue? If such constructions as these were found in any ancient system of government, they could only be endured on account of their antiquity, but their introduction into a system which professed to cure anomalies, was out of all character. But there was another consideration, which made it impossible to suppose the measure, if passed, would be lasting. Could any one imagine that the new constituency, thus suddenly and unexpectedly gifted with the power of electing the House of Commons, would be content to exercise the franchise at so distant a period as once in seven years?-Oh no, they would require an election oftener; and, unless he was very much mistaken, they would have a right to claim proceeding upon precedent, the vote, of the noble Earl (Earl Grey) in favour of Triennial Parliaments. But what if that further concession was refused? Would this new constituency rest content? Assuredly not. If they could not exactly and at once rule the Parliament within doors, they could exact pledges from their delegates, and they would do so, as they had already done; so that the Parliament itself would be controlled by primary meetings of the people, and be no longer entitled to the character of a deliberative assembly. This their Lordships surely never could assent to. It was too monstrous, too wild, too impolitic, too unreasonable to disfranchise for the benefit of one class the rest of the community. But if it were done, how were the claims of the very poorest afterwards to be resisted? A uniform franchise was to be adopted, and if that uniform franchise was to be maintained, and the rights of the poor were to be conceded and respected as they must be, the franchise now proposed must be lowered. Nor was there any resting place to stop at until it reached Universal Suffrage. The uniform franchise proposed must lead, not only to Universal Suffrage, but to a division of the country into particular parcels, measured by extent, and regulated upon theory. Indeed that principle had once been advocated by a noble Baron (Lord Durham) who usually sat on the other side of the House, but had not of late been often present in his place. Such being his opinion of the measure, and he knew not how any reasonable man who examined the question could come to other conclusions; he must adhere to the view he had before taken, and vote against the second reading of the Bill. He did not act thus without having considered the question as thoroughly as he was able. He knew that there might be inconveniences attending the rejection of the Bill, but he did not believe that any consequences would arise which could not readily be overcome if the Government met them with firmness and decision. But even though the inconveniences, the dan If danger would be infinitely greater. lieve that the Bill would pass, and should afterwards reject it? If, after their Lordships had associated themselves with the Bill and had signified according to the rule and precedent, their concurrence in its principles, they should ultimately reject it, merely because they could not make it what they wished, would not the evil be tenfold greater than if they were not to mention its principle? There could be no compa dangers. The question was, not as put by gers arising from the rejection of the Bill, should prove much greater than he apprehended they would, still he felt himself in duty bound to resist it to the utmost of his power, rather than, by giving his assent to it, render himself, in any degree, a party to a measure which must lead to the over-cond reading, should lead the people to bethrow of all the ancient institutions of the country, to the misery of those it was professedly intended to benefit, and to general desolation. The present Bill was even more democratic, and more objectionable and unjust, than the last. In the former Bill some security was given, by it being made necessary that the rent should be paid before the franchise could be exercised, but in the present Bill that did not exist. Again in the present Bill a 10l. household-rison in his opinion, between the probable er might live in fifty different residences in the course of a year, and still enjoy the exercise of the franchise; in the former Bill that was not the case. But if the enfranchising clause of the present Bill was more objectionable than that of the last, the same might be said of the disfranchising clause. The only principles he could discover in it were those of injustice and unreasonableness. It was arbitrary, and without the show of necessity. The numbers of fifty-six and thirty were taken and declared to be positive and unalterable, without the slightest argument or statement to support the assumption. Their Lordships, in fact, were not to be allowed to investigate the subject. The Minister proposed to cut off, to annihilate, fifty-six boroughs, and to partially disfranchise thirty more; and the concurrence of their Lordships was demanded, not upon inquiry, not upon proof, but simply because the Minister had proposed it. They were not told they might consider the measure, and when they deemed advisable, alter it; they were not told they might exercise deliberation and judgment; but, on the contrary, the noble Lords opposite were unbending; they would permit of no alteration, would allow of no amendment. And if that were the case, what was the good of going into Committee? If their Lordships were determined to resist many of the provisions of the Bill, and the noble Lords the Members of the Government, were determined to allow of no alteration, but were pledged, as they avowed, to do every thing in their power to pass the Bill in its present shape, whatever might be the inconveniences and the dangers of rejecting the measure now, the inconveniences and the dangers of rejecting it in a future stage Viscount Melbourne said, he felt extreme unwillingness to address their Lordships at that period of the debate, being perfectly aware of his incapacity to offer any new arguments on the question, particularly as the several topics to which the noble Baron who preceded him had chiefly addressed himself had been already discussed so thoroughly in that House when a Bill of the same nature as that now before their Lordships was formerly under consideration. It was the less necessary, indeed, for him to trespass long upon the House after the clear and powerful exposition of the question in all its bearings by his noble friend at the head of his Majesty's Government. The powers of his noble friend had never been more conspicuously displayed than they had been that evening. The noble Baron opposite (Lord Ellenborough) had said, that the question now before the House did not affect the general question of Reform. To that statement he (Lord Melbourne) did not assent. The Motion before their Lordships was, "That this Bill for the Reform of the Representation of the people of England and Wales be read a second time." The question, therefore, to be determined by their votes was, whether or not they would agree to entertain the general subject of Reform in the Representation, or would resolve to set that subject aside altogether. The speech of the noble Baron was directed no less against the principle of Reform altogether, than against the details of the Bill itself. All the facts which the noble Baron had stated respecting the nomination boroughs were, no doubt true; and he himself had been for years in the habit of concurring in statements of the same effect as those now made by the noble Baron; but all the arguments which the noble Lord had endeavoured to raise upon those facts went to show the expediency of preserving the whole of the nomination boroughs. All those arguments were, in fact, directly opposed to the general principle of Reform itself. They who would be prepared to stand up for "things as they are," would do well to rest their opposition to every degree of amelioration upon the arguments of the noble Lord (Lord Ellenborough). But with any man who looked to the signs of the times, and who admitted that changes were necessary in the state of the Representation, those arguments would be of little weight. It was unnecessary to go over those arguments, as they were already completely met by this one unanswerable argument that it is impossible to maintain the constitution of the House of Commons in its present state. He should not trouble the House with a repetition of the observations which he had made on the subject when the question was before under the consideration of their Lordships. On that occasion he had been found fault with by the noble Lord, the Chief Baron of the Exchequer, for having gone into a discussion of the details of the Bill, when the question before the House related to its general principles; and he thought that he should now subject himself to the same reproof if he followed the noble Baron into the discussion of details which were properly subjects to be considered in the Committee. Although he was anxious for the passing of the Bill, yet he would be far from holding out to the people exaggerated expectations of any advantages which it would confer upon them. Still he thought that the strong feeling which prevailed amongst the people on the subject of Reform ought to have great weight with the House. In the present state of public feeling, and in the present posture of the affairs of the country, it seemed to him to be impossible to carry on the Government without some alteration in the Constitution of the House of Commons-laying the Representation of the people on a broader basis. That there were advantages connected with the present system of Representation he would not deny. But whilst the disadvantages were prominent and obvious-so plain to the eyes of all as to excite the indignation of the people--the advantages, on the contrary, were in their nature such that they could be produced and made evident only by close investigation and by abstract reasoning. He might be told that although the disadvantages were more easily perceived by the people than the advantages, still the latter more than compensated for the former, and that, therefore, in altering the present system of Representation, his Majesty's Ministers were sacrificing to popular clamour advantages which the people did not understand. But he denied that he for one was influenced in the course which he pursued on the present occasion by factious clamour or by democratic intimidation. At the same time, however, he looked upon a reasonable deference to the will of the people distinctly expressed to be one of the conditions of the government of a free people. "Hæc est conditio populorum omnium liberorum." The irresistible influence of the opinion of the people was manifest when the government of the noble Duke opposite fell to the ground, without the pressure of much external opposition. It was perfectly clear to every man on that occasion, when the Administration fell into the hands of his noble friend, that some measure of the kind now proposed must be brought forward; and when his noble friend stated, amongst the principles on which his government was formed, this principle of reform, no noble Lord, except the noble Duke (Wellington), who might be expected to take that course after the strong declaration which he had made on the subject when in office, stood up in his place to avow himself opposed to the noble Earl's administration, on the ground that it was formed on the principles of Reform. But if any noble Lord were wholly opposed to that principle, it would not have been at all an unusual course for him to stand up on that occasion and express his opinion. In another |