and forerunner of revolution in other countries. In France, I paid it every respect, I wished it success, and prayed that it might continue to be the guide to constitutional liberty. But when that flag is exhibited in this country, I cannot but bear in mind that formerly 800,000 men rose in arms to arrest the mischief which that flag would have produced had it been allowed to be unfurled on the shores of England. I am old enough to have witnessed the agitation which then prevailed. I trust that this subject will not produce similar alarm, and that it will be debated with that calm and deliberate manner which its importance demands-this will be the best means of preventing agitation and excitement out of doors. It is on considerations such as these that I confess, that I see now no reason to change my opinions on the abstract merits of reform. It gives me great pain to be obliged, by a sense of duty, to take the part which I have espoused in this night's debate. However lavishly the change of imbecility has been bestowed, which is so easy to make against the opponents of the propositions anticipated, as emanating from ministers by their advocates in this House, by the agency of the press, and by the anonymous castigation which I have myself received, for the part which I have taken, I hope I shall at least be exonerated from all charge of disputing the propriety of the measure from any bad or factious motives of my own. Were I to have chosen the advocacy of that side of the question which would have been most convenient, or most to my interest-that which would have redounded to my satisfaction, and have saved me considerable pain-it would have been directly opposite to that which I have espoused. I am not one that would make this declaration as a boast, did I nct think that justice

to others required it as well as to myself. Such is the result of my own deliberation; but what makes my situation so trying and painful is, that my opinions are at variance with the opinions of those whom I am bound to esteem and respect. The House, I am sure, will excuse my going into this almost personal explanation: but I felt myself imperatively called upon to do so. There is only one more topic to which I think it necessary to allude. The noble lord has pressed upon the consideration of the House that this measure emanates from the ministers of the Crown. I admit that if this measure is to be carried in the country, it ought to be brought forward by the government. So far I agree with the noble lord; but I cannot go further, and defer to the authority of ministers. I have not long enough left my place on the other side, not to know that every measure which has been recently brought forward from that quarter, is defective and illusory. I do not mean to say anything offensive or uncivil to his Majesty's government; but I must say, that I do not perceive in their measures that overpowering talent which should induce me to relinquish the opinions which I derived from higher and preceding authorities. This declaration is quite consistent with the most perfect respect for the assiduity, the ability, the research, and the candour of the noble lord who has brought forward the present question. have now done; and cannot sufficiently thank the House for the indulgence which they have shewn me, (hear, hear).

I

Mr. HUME. I beg leave to move that this debate be adjourned till Tuesday, at five o'clock.

Sir R. PEEL.--I wish to be allowed, before the adjournment takes place, to put a question to the noble lord opposite. Is it a part of the noble lord's plan to dis

franchise voters whose qualification is the payment of scot and lot after the lives of the present holders of that qualification?

LORD J. RUSSELL-It is intended to respect existing qualifications, but on death, or expiration, the principle of the measure will come into operation.

The motion of adjournment was then agreed to.

HOUSE OF LORDS,

March 2, 1831. Lord KING presented petitions in favor of reform from Norwich, Croydon, and and the hundred of Wallington.

Earl RADNOR presented similar ones from Bethesden, and from Newtown, Miles Platting, Platting, St. George's Road, Oldham Road, and Islington in the parish of Man

chester.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

March 2, 1831. Mr. O'CONNELL,-I have now to present a petition from the inhabitants of Cork, praying for reform and vote by ballot. These petitioners will hear with pleasure the manly proposals made by ministers. The measure which they have proposed will give an efficient and substantial reform. Whatever may be a man's speculative and theoretical opinions, he cannot, in my opinion, be a sincere reformer who does not aid ministers in endeavouring to carry this measure. I regret, however, that Ireland appears in this as in so many other instances, to be disregarded. I hope that it may turn out that I am labouring under misapprehension on this point. I see no gentleman present who can inform me whether it be intended to restore the forty-shilling freeholders in Ireland. If any portion of the United Kingdom requires the extension of the elective franchise, it is Ireland. I think that with re

spect to chattel interest, Ireland should be placed on the same footing as England.

Sir J. NEWPORT.-I agree with the honourable and learned member, that the question of how far the forty-shilling franchise may not be necessary to countervail the inordinate power of the corporate bodies in Ireland, is one well worthy of consideration. At all events it is essential that the right of voting should be vested in householders possessing certain property, or paying a certain amount of rates, instead of being left entirely in the power, and under the control of corporate bodies. I am not now in the habit of addressing the House at any length; my age and increasing infirmities, indeed, render it impossible that I should do so. I take the liberty, therefore, of stating now, once for all, that I consider the measure of reform, now under the consideration of the House, the most valuable offer ever made by any government to the parliament of this country. Identifying themselves with the popular feeling of the times, the government have brought forward a measure calculated in every way to meet the wishes of the people, and, at the same time, to strengthen the Throne, and improve the power of parliament. When I hear people talk of revolutionary changes, of revolutionary measures-I say that these are the means to prevent revolution. The proposed measure is calculated to consolidate all the great interests of the country; and if, as some contend, it is founded upon revolutionary principles, I assert that those revolutionary principles are the principles of the Revolution of 1688. I repeat, that as identifying the people with the three branches of the legislature, the measure is entitled to the highest praise.

Petitions were presented from Darlaston, Kidderminster, and Hor

ton, in Yorkshire, by Mr. HUNT; from Glastonbury, by Mr. SANDFORD; from Headcorn, by Mr. HODGES; and from the county of Norfolk, by Sir W. FOLK ES, all praying for vote by ballot.

Lord W. POWLETT, in presenting a petition from Sunderlandnear-the-Sea, said,-From the noble lord's statement last night, I learn that Sunderland is one of those places to which the government propose to extend the elective franchise. To that part of the noble lord's plan I have no objection; the population of Sunderland is very great, and its interests very important; it is, therefore, no more than proper that it should have representatives in this House. When the noble lord, however, professes to strike off so many as sixty boroughs at one blow, and to reduce the number of this House by sixty-two, I confess that I am not prepared to go with him to such a length. I think it would be a most dangerous innovation, and therefore cannot give my assent to it. I do not agree with the noble lord, that a reduction of the numbers of this House is at all desirable; and I trust that, on further consideration, that part of the Bill will not be insisted on. With the proposition for extending the elective franchise, I entirely concur; and so far the noble lord may rest assured of my support. Petitions from Frome and Chard, were presented by Mr. SANDFORD: and from Maidstone, by Mr. HODGES.

Lord J. RUSSELL.-I beg leave to move the order of the day for renewing the adjourned debate on the motion that leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the representation of the people of England and Wales,"

Mr. J. CAMPBELL.-I wish to put a question to the noble lord before the debate is resumed; it is, whether it is his intention to include the whole of his plan of reform, as

it respects England and Wales, Scotland and Ireland, in one and the same Bill, or whether he intends to propose several Bills? Lord J. RUSSELL. - If the honourable and learned gentleman had attended to the terms of that motion, he would have seen that it was only for leave to bring in a Bill applicable to England and Wales. If leave be given to bring in that Bill, I shall follow it up by a second Bill to amend the representation of Scotland, and by a third Bill to amend the representation of Ireland. These three Bills will include the whole measure.

Mr. HUME.-It was not my intention to have addressed the House so early in the debate, but having last night moved the adjournment, and being thus in possession of the House," I am anxious to state shortly the opinions which I entertain upon this very important question, I am the more anxious to do so, because I and others, whose opinions upon Parliamentary Reform are well known, have been already alluded to in the debate; and these allusions have been coupled with objections to the plan of the ministers, which, it is said, would be considered by some as only half a reform, and, consequently, as not at all satisfactory. Now I am bound to say,-radical reformer as I undoubtedly am,-that the plan of the government has far exceeded my expectations (hear, hear). Honorable gentlemen had better hear the sentence out before they begin to cheer. I say, then, that notwithstanding my disposition to give my confidence to the government, still I was not prepared to expect that they would have come forward with so efficient and so manly a measure of reform. This is a most important question,-one that involves the interests of every part of the community; and I feel myself bound to say, that the government has com

M

pletely redeemed the pledge which they gave upon the subject. I feel myself the more bound to say this, because, on a former occasion, I thought it my duty to express my regret at the ministers not having ful filled two other pledges which they had made; but when I expressed this regret, I at the same time said, that those pledges were nothing in comparison with their pledge upon the subject of reform; for that, if the government should manfully redeem the latter pledge, and give the people a reformed parliament, there could be no doubt that such a parliament would take care that the other pledges should be made good. Besides the importance of this question, it must be admitted that it is a question of great difficulty (hear). Indeed, it is a change from the worst to the best, and every such change must be attended with difficulties. I confess that when I heard the noble lord say, that it was not intended to shorten the duration of parliaments, nor to introduce the vote by ballot, it struck me that the plan which he was about to develop would turn out not to be an efficient plan; but after hearing that plan, and after considering what are the sentiments of the people upon the necessity of a speedy reform, I must say that I at once came to the conclusion that the government did wisely in not encumbering them selves with these two questions, which are certainly separate and distinct, and which, therefore, may be brought forward at any time, by any one who may think proper to do so. In a word, after considering the nature of the proposed reform, I am of opinion that it will be better to put off these two questions until we have made a trial of the present changes. Some few of the details of the plan may, perhaps, be reasonably objected to; but then, on the whole, the plan is replete with so many advantages to the people,-ay, and to the Crown

and the aristocracy also (hear, hear), though the gentlemen below me do not think so, that I will say at once that I will not be one of those who would stand in the way of its details. If, indeed, suggestions founded on reason and good sense should be made, and if it should appear that any modification of the details may be advantageously made, I hope that the ministers will see the propriety of adopting them, in order to render the plan more efficient. However, as I said before, I shall not cavil with the details when I think the plan in general so good. After this expression of my sentiments, which is candid, and, I assure the House, honest too, I beg to state, that among all the persons I have seen to-day, I have found general satisfaction of the plan. Many of the greatest reformers are satisfied with it, and wisely too, for it is the business and the duty of a government to proceed by degress, and not to hazard a just defeat by proposing too much at once, I have no doubt that numbers may think the qualification too high, but I am quite sure that there is too much good sense in the mass of the British community not to see that a great point is gained; and that although some may be denied an immediate participation in the benefits conferred, yet that ultimately the plan will be found advantageous to every man in the community. And who will benefit most by it? Why, the higher and lower classes,-although the higher classes may not be sensible of the fact. In my opinion the government has acted upon a good and a wise principle, and I should be glad to know what better plan could be proposed to meet the wishes of the public feeling than that of the noble lord. Population and property are adopted as qualifications. It is true that some may contend for two other qualifications, and say that taxation ought to have

been made a third, and civil services a fourth qualification. These are certainly the only four qualifications I know of. It is, however, extremely difficult to combine these four, and the ministers, therefore, have wisely selected two of them. I do not say that this selection is not open to objection, but I do contend that the combination of these two is more advantageous than the combination of any other two; and therefore it is that I say that the principle on which the government has acted is an extremely proper one. The two speeches that have been delivered on this side of the House I must candidly acknowledge, appear to me to be speeches against any kind of reform (hear)-not only against the plan now proposed, but against any plan that can be devised. Now, I put it to any honourable gentleman to say whether, in the present state of public feeling on this subject, it is possible for us to go on long without a reform in parliament? If any person supposes we can, that person deceives himself most wofully. A noble lord below me (Lord Gower) last night painted in glowing colours the prosperity of Scotland, and said, that if one of the old Scotch reformers could rise from his grave, and witness the properity of his country, he would be more than satisfied. Thus the noble lord left the house to suppose that the prosperity of Scotland had arisen from a limited and corrupt state of representation. I admit, that since the period to which the noble lord alluded, Scotland has arisen to a greater pitch of prosperity than any other country in Europe, but then no one can mistake to what this is owing; it is owing to the union of Scotland with England, --to her participation in the commerce of England, to her intercourse with a rich, a powerful, and a prosperous country. I hold it as a maxim not to be contradicted, that

all the intercourse which a poor country may have with a rich one must improve the former as well as benefit the latter. I therefore attribute the prosperity of Scotland not to her restricted representation, but to her intercourse with England; and I contend that had the elective franchise been enlarged and extended a century ago, as it is now proposed, she would have been even more prosperous than at the present moment. The noble lord did not remind the House that the people of Scotland have been up in arms, as it were, for reform-that they have raised their voice from one end of the kingdom to the other in its favour, and have crowded your table with petitions upon the subject. Shall I be told that the elective franchise of Scotland, being now limited to some 2500, or at the utmost 3000 persons, is not to be extended? Or when it is proposed to extend that privilege from 3000 to 60,000 persons, can I conceal from myself the great advantages which must be received from the change? I cannot; a general sympathy, a cordial sympathy, a consonance of feeling will be excited between the governed and the governing-between the people and their rulers; and it will lead to the happiest and best results. Upon that ground, then, I think that the speech of the noble lord last evening was in no respect applicable to the subject before the House. I have heard many opinions advanced upon the subject of reforming the mode by which the Scotch members are returned to parliament; but I never before heard any man contend that the present system of representation should continue in Scotland. to return to the plan of the ministers generally I will not detain the House by going into the details of that plan, but content myself with one or two observations. In the first place, I perfectly concur in what has fallen from the noble lord

But,