parties to anything having a tendency to | plain himself. He agreed with the hon. that effect, we should be guilty of the Member that the subject of the Address greatest ingratitude. The House will re- moved by the noble Lord opposite was of collect that, some time ago, I stated in this the utmost importance to the best interplace, that we should not hold office ests of the nation. He agreed with him longer than we saw a reasonable probability that the late Ministers were bound to exof carrying the Reform Bill. We have plain to the House the grounds on which redeemed that pledge. When we found they had taken the important step to that there was not a probability that we which the Address alluded; and he was should be able to carry the Bill in an effi- satisfied that, in what had fallen from the cient manner, we did the only thing which, noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Excheas honest men, we could do, and we re-quer, as full an explanation had been given spectfully tendered our resignations to his as the House could expect; and he was Majesty. As I have already mentioned to satisfied that come when the fullest inthe House, I really should have wished formation might-the country would see that my noble friend had not brought for-that the Ministers had behaved as became ward the present Motion. But, Sir, I deny that the hon. Gentleman opposite has a right to say that the Motion of my noble friend is intended to force the King to take us back into his councils. The Motion is such as might naturally be made by a person eager to secure the success of the Bill. That measure has proceeded now to an advanced stage. It is still in existence; and I am happy to state that the step which has been taken respecting it by a majority of the House of Lords was such, that, although it obliged us to adopt the course which we have taken, still it leaves it in the power of any other Government to carry the measure through in a perfect form. It is desirable for those who are anxious for the success of the measure at least it is not an unnatural course for them to pursue-to call on this House to address his Majesty to pray that he will be pleased to form an Administration so as to secure the ultimate success of the measure in a perfect form. This is not a Motion to force us back into office. For, on the contrary, seeing what took place in the other House, it is possible for his Majesty to form such an Administration as would be able to carry the Bill in the way in which we proposed to carry it. There is nothing in the Motion to justify my hon. friend (Mr. Baring) in saying that it tends to force the King to recal us. This, Sir, is a topic to which I should not have chosen to refer; but, in consequence of the observation which the hon. Gentleman who last sat down made in allusion to us, I thought it necessary to explain myself thus early in the debate.

men of honour, and that the people would look up to them with confidence and esteem. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Baring) had said, that, there were three powers in the State--the King, the Lords, and the House of Commons-but he forgot the people. The hon. Gentleman said, that it was the duty of that House to support the Constitution, of King, Lords, and Commons, which he (Mr Baring) considered to be the most felicitous that ever existed, and the best calculated to protect the liberties and interests of the people. But for his part, he (Mr. Hume) looked to something more than. names. It was too much the fashion to appeal to names, and to divert attention from facts. Look to the results of the felicitous Constitution. Look to the country at this moment. Sunk in the deepest poverty-bowed to the earth under an enormous debt, and groaning under unparalleled evils. Were these the results to which the hon. Gentleman would refer in proof of the unrivalled excellence of the system. There were many things to be seen in the Constitution more than were comprehended in the one view which the hon. member for Thetford took of it. The hon. Member had spoken of the good sense and intelligence and property of the kingdom as being opposed to the Reform Bill. Look throughout the country, and say, was there ever a greater libel cast upon the people of England than that assertion of the hon. Gentleman? Were not all the good sense, and intelligence, and the greatest part of the property of the kingdom unanimously in favour of the Bill? Mr. Hume said, that, having interrupted The hon. Gentleman had talked of the hon. member for Thetford in a manner "throwing dirt," and complained of aswhich he must certainly admit to be some-persions which had been cast upon poble what disorderly, he was anxious to ex-persons in the other House, but was

Who House had already come upon the subject of the Reform Bill, that any Gentleman could find fault with the Motion of the noble Lord. He only regretted that it did not go far enough. The House not only had the right to advise the Crown, and if the Crown did not attend to their advice in a matter which they believed to be of importance to the interest and the liberty of the people-they had not only the right to advise, but the power to give efficiency to their advice; and, he trusted, that that power would be exerted whenever their duty to the people required it. The people were not for the King, but the King was for the people, and it was his duty to use his power for their good only; and, when he used his power otherwise, or refused to do that which the interest of the people seemed to that House to demand, then it was the duty of the House to exert that power which the Constitution gave them to induce the King to pay attention to their advice. He (Mr. Hume) did not wish, in anything which he might say respecting the duty of the King to his people, and of what the people owed to the Sovereign, to speak disrespectfully of his Majesty. He merely said, that if the King did not exercise his prerogative for the good of the people, then it was the duty of the House to lay their advice humbly and respectfully at the foot of the Throne. But he would repel indignantly the assertion of the hon. member for Thetford, that the more humble was the language of an Address from that House to the Crown, the greater in direct proportion was the arrogance of the matter. The construction which that hon. Gentleman had put upon the present Address was most unfair, for he attempted to give it a meaning which the noble Mover never intended to convey. The character of the noble Lord was enough to refute the assertion that anything arrogant could come from him. It was evident that the noble Lord, in proposing the form of the Address, made the language studiously humble and meek, and avoided every expression which could bear the meaning imputed. It was, at first, owing to the delicacy of the noble Lord, much more moderate and humble than at present; and much more so than the circumstances of the case required. It had now become the duty of the House of Commons to go to the Throne, and to say that, having for eighteen months given their attention to

there no dirt thrown upon others?
was it that threw dirt upon the people?
Did not the hon. Member call them the
"brawlers without?" and was it fit that
they should be spoken of in that way? Was
it becoming that a Representative of the
people, or one supposed to be sent to that
House to represent them, and to watch
over their interests, should cast dirt upon
them, and asperse them? The hon. Gen-
tleman had said, that there were three
estates King, Lords, and Commons.
Granted. But were not the Commons the
people? Was not that House the people?
[a laugh.] Did they not represent the
people? He could very well understand
the laugh, for he knew, as they all knew,
that the majority of the hon. Gentlemen
around him were not Representatives of
the people; and it was, therefore, that he
wished to see the Reform Bill carried, in
order that all the Members of that House
should be Representatives of the people,
not the nominees of noble persons in the
other House. The hon. Gentleman had
talked of their duty to the Crown. But
he would say, that, if they owed a duty to
the Crown, the duty was reciprocal. The
Crown and the Peers owed a duty to the
people. The people were not to be shared
out of all power in the State, nor were
their rights and interests to be sacrificed
to the other two estates. But he did not
wonder that they were sacrificed when he
saw beside him so many nominees of the
Peers. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Baring)
had said, that there was no want of talent
in the other House. He would not say
that there was, and he should have no
objection if the hon. member for Thet-
ford himself should be taken up there to
increase the store of talent which that
House already possessed. His purpose in
rising before when he interrupted the hon.
Gentleman, was to enlighten the ignorance
of the hon. Gentleman, which was greater
than that of a boy just come from school.
Surely the public newspapers must have
sufficiently informed the hon. Gentleman
as to the cause of the Ministers' retirement
if he was shut out from all other sources
of information. However, the noble Lord
opposite had now enlightened him; and
he (Mr. Hume) must say that he was de-
lighted with the speech of the noble Lord.
He was glad that noble Lord had justified
himself on such excellent grounds. As to
the Address, he (Mr. Hume) was asto-
nished, after the decisions to which the

the provisions of the Reform Bill, and not the support of the King to the utmost being of opinion that it was necessary for extent; and whatever might have occurred the protection of the best interests of the since, he was sure that the Ministers could people-aye, and of the Throne-the not have been in the wrong. But it had Commons respectfully advised his Majesty been objected to the creation of Peers, to reconsider his determination as to the that there existed no necessity for having late Ministers, and to take them back into recourse to any such extreme proceeding. his councils; for it would not be difficult Did any rational man suppose that Lord to prove that there were no other men in Grey was so little acquainted with human that House, or in the House of Lords, nature as that, after the vote to which the who had not by their own conduct proved Lords came on the second reading of the themselves to be incapable of carrying the Bill he could, for one moment, suppose it Bill. It was in the recollection of every possible to carry the Bill without a man in that House, that when, in conse-creation of Peers? Could he have been quence of being left in a minority of ignorant, even at the moment when he twenty-nine on the 15th of November, carried the second reading by a small ma1830, the right hon. Baronet below him jority, that he could eventually advance (Sir Robert Peel) and his colleagues re-the Bill so as that it should become the tired from office, and were succeeded by the Gentlemen opposite, nothing could exceed the delight of the country to see in power the men who had devoted their whole lives to the interest of the people, and who had ever been the advocates of Parliamentary Reform. Those Gentlemen did not take office greedily-the conduct of their whole lives proved that greediness of office could not be charged upon them.

Mr. Baring denied that he had used the word greedy, or imputed sordid motives to the Ministers. He could not sit quietly, and hear language attributed to him which he would be ashamed to use.

Mr. Hume did not impute to the hon. Gentleman the words which he disclaimed. But, he would ask, did Earl Grey enter upon office without a condition? Did he not, in fact, take office upon the express condition that the King would enable him to carry through a Reform of the House of Commons, such as he should deem to be efficient? Was there no agreement then? He would tell hon. Gentlemen, that whenever the explanation came which they so loudly called for, it must be shown that there was from the first an understanding between the Ministers and the King. All that the House had heard from them showed that they did not enter into office without a pledge to carry a Reform Bill, such as they should think to be the best for the interests of the country. Earl Grey had been all his life the advocate of Reform, and in 1793 he pledged himself to such a Reform as he had now endeavoured to carry into effect. It was not to be supposed then, that after a lapse of forty years, he came into office pledged to the same measure of Reform, if he had

law of the land? No-it was impossible for any man in his senses to imagine that such an object could be accomplished otherwise than by the means he had mentioned. Could any man who once gave his support to the Bill suppose that there was any other way of carrying it? Or could he lay claim to the slightest shadow of consistency if having once given it his support, he should suddenly turn round and deny the means requisite for carrying it to a successful conclusion? If he anticipated correctly the fit answers to these interrogatories, then he would say, with the greatest confidence in the soundness of the opinion, that it peculiarly behoved the House of Commons to take a decided measure at the present important crisis. He could but recollect, and he was sure the fact must be full too in the recollection of all who heard him, that there never was a plan of Parliámentary Reform propounded in this country which united so many persons in its support, as did the plan brought forward under the auspices of Lord Grey. It could not be forgotten, either, that when that plan was brought forward in that House on the 1st of March, 1831, it found but little favour in that House; and that when carried to a second reading, it was by such a small majority that it became as obvious then that the House of Commons would never agree to it, as it was now plain that the present House of Lords would never give it their consent. What was the consistent and noble course of conduct which his Majesty thought it fitting to pursue? He came down to Parliament, and by instantly dissolving them, gave that sanction to the Bill and to the counsels of his Ministers which until within

a day or two he had never once withdrawn. I with his own lips to the assembled ParliaWell, then, the measure came to Parliament of this great country, and now they ment recommended by the sanction of the King, in a manner that obtained for him the universal gratitude of his people. Never did Monarch receive such a meed of affectionate applause. Let the House only look to the language used by the King on the memorable 22nd of April, 1831; the words were these: "I have been induced to resort to this measure for the purpose of ascertaining the sense of my people, in the only way in which it can be most constitutionally and authentically expressed, on the expediency of making such changes in the Representation as circumstances may appear to require, and which, founded upon the acknowledged principles of the Constitution, may tend at once to uphold the just rights and prerogatives of the Crown, and to give security to the liberties of the people."* In consequence of that dissolution a general election took place; and how did the people respond to that call? Did not the country, from one end to the other, declare in favour of the Bill? Did not many who had been habitually opposed to the late Government waive many of the objections which they might have had to any measure proceeding from them? The timid were induced to extend the amount of Reform-the more earnest Reformers limited their wishes-and never did there arise an instance in which a Government made so near an approximation to pleasing every body. He knew it would be impossible to please every body; but this he did know, that the plan which had just been rejected went further to satisfy the greatest number of Reformers than any former plan that ever had been laid before Parliament. At the opening of the present Session his Majesty used this language:-"I feel it my duty, in the first place, to recommend to your most careful consideration the measures which will be proposed to you for a Reform in the Commons House of Parliament. A speedy and satisfactory settlement of this question becomes daily of more pressing importance to the security of the State, and to the contentment and welfare of my people." Those were the sentiments of the King; at least they were sentiments to which he gave his most solemn sanction, and in so many words did he deliver them

* See Hansard, vol. iii, pp. 1810-11. † Ibid. vol. ix, p. 1, 2.

found that the Monarch rejected such advice as was necessary for carrying the Bill into a law-nay, even if such explicit declarations had not at any time been personally made, the mere fact that the Monarch retained the authors of the Bill in his service was enough to justify all mankind in taking it for granted, that the Bill had his entire sanction and support, and so also should they assume that he had given his consent, and pledged himself to all means requisite for carrying forward that measure to its full completion. He asked the House to tell him what were men, so placed, to do? They owed it to their Sovereign not to remain in office a single day after they found themselves unable to carry the Bill upon which they had staked their existence as public men. They began with the Bill under the circumstances which he had stated-they went forward with it, confronting one of the most formidable Oppositions that ever was orga nized to defeat a single measure. Not a moment's delay took place, that they could, by possibility, have avoided—it was at length sent to the Upper House, and its fate there was but too well known; but what followed upon it? A protest was entered upon the Journals, and signed by seventy-six of the most influential Members of the Upper House, declaring that it was a measure of the most revolutionary character, and tending to destroy the balance of the Constitution. He would inquire how they were to judge of men's conduct otherwise than he had proposed they should judge, namely, not by the language, but by the actions, of those noble persons. Surely, men of the world would judge of them, not only by what they said but by what they did. He could not help being actually amused by the artlessness with which the hon. Member below him spoke of the confidence that might be placed in the declarations of those noble Lords, when they assured the world that they wonld give not only as good a Reform as the Ministers who had just left office, but that they would go a little further, and throw Weymouth into the bargain. The hon. Member who had thus so artlessly told them to place unlimited coufidence in the declarations of those noble Lords had spoken most contemptuously of some of the publie meetings which had been held in various parts of

hope of there improving its details? If
any man thought he could lead people
into the belief that the Bill could come out
of such hands otherwise than ruined, they
would find few but old women for their
disciples. He doubted if there was any sane
man in the United Kingdom who thought
that the party whom he had been alluding
to entertained an honest wish to go into
the Committee with the desire of improv-
ing the Bill, and rendering it better, upon
the same principles and basis upon which
it had been originally proposed; and yet
he supposed it was to men of that stamp
that the country was to look for a new
Administration. What were they to think
of an Administration, in the present posture
of public affairs, who would not give one
rotten borough for the sake of obtaining
Reform? And be it remembered, that a
Judge of the land formed a portion of that
remarkable party. Let them only look to
the conduct and public principles of that
noble Lord. Did the hon. Member for
Thetford forget all the various changes
which the opinions of that noble Lord had
undergone? Was there any old woman
in the country who would put faith in de-
clarations coming from one who had
changed so often? It was almost in vain
to combat any further the reasonings of
the hon. Member below him, who had all
at once taken it into his head to contrast
the Aristocracy with the people, so much
to the disadvantage of the latter.
would undertake to draw by lot fifteen
weavers, shoemakers, or other artizans,
and he would undertake to say, that there
would be not one of them who would not
prove that the whole speech of the hon.
Member was, upon his own showing, fal-

the country as well as in the metropolis. [ of the Bill as a whole, they were yet willHe would inform the hon. Member-heing to go with it into Committee, in the need not inform many other Members in that House, for most of them knew it perfectly well-that those meetings were any thing but deserving of the contempt which the hon. Member had thought proper to lavish upon them. He would recommend the hon. Member to attend one of those meetings; and if he could form anything like a judgment of himself, he must return with the full conviction that the humblest speaker in the habit of attending there was fully equal to the task of exposing the fallacy of his reasonings-speeches of that stamp would not be endured at a Political Union-not even a millionnaire could render such logic as that acceptable, if addressed to any auditory, unless it were the Holy Alliance; but it was reasoning that would never do for any political club, nor for any Reform Association, from one end of the kingdom to the other. Reference had been made to all that the Anti-Reformers had promised to do; but then let it be remembered how late they were in coming forward with that promise of theirs. Over and over again they were asked to state what extent of reform they were ready to concede, but they sedulously concealed their intentions, and took care to say nothing. But setting aside all considerations connected with them personally, and with their conduct as individuals, and as a party, he would come to this pointon what foundation did the Bill rest? The first principle of the Bill was schedule A. It was an inversion of everything like common sense and reason, to give any other part of the Bill precedence of that schedule and it was unparalleled to address any advocacy of such a mode of proceeding to an assembly of grown up persons. There were no intelligent child-lacious. But he would no longer occupy ren who would allow their minds to be influenced by such a mode of treating an important subject. It was idle to think that the conduct of the late advisers of the Crown could be assailed upon such a ground as that, forsooth, they had put the wrong part of the Bill first. He had himself heard the noble Lord who had propounded the plan of the Anti-Reformers, for so he would persist in calling them -he had heard that noble Lord say, that the Bill was revolutionary. Was it men such as that who were in future to fill the councils of the King? Was it men who told the country that though disapproving

He

the time of the House with any subject so unimportant. The moment had at length arrived, when a House faithful to their trust could no longer refrain from approaching the Monarch, and humbly representing to him that they could not place confidence in any Administration except that of those men who had, under his own gracious sanction and support, introduced the important measure for amending the Representation of England and Wales. That measure now had been before the country for eighteen tedious months, and no man who mixed with the people out of doors could for a moment