and fury, which would ultimately involve | Bill: as he was not anxious to follow the in destruction all the institutions of the example of the hon. and learned Member country. In conclusion, he hoped that in any other respect, he would not follow it Ministers would soon have an opportu- in this. He would allude to that majority, nity of again submitting the Reform Bill for the purpose of expressing his venerato Parliament. tion for the Assembly to which it belonged, and his gratitude, as well as his admiration, for the honest and manly part which they had taken, in battling with the threats and intimidations with which they were assailed, and faithfully and conscientiously discharging the sacred duty with which they were intrusted. The hon. member for Staffordshire had said, that the measure must shortly be carried; but he appealed to the House to say whether the language, either of that hon. Member or of those who had spoken on the same side with him, shewed that the measure would be carried legitimately? He denied that it would be so; and he made that denial solely to contradict the language which he had heard from the supporters of the Ministers. On the present occasion, the House was called upon by the noble Lord deeply to lament the defeat of the Ministerial measure of Reform, and then to come to a vote of confidence in those who brought it forward. He frankly and fearlessly declared that he rejoiced in the destruction of the Bill; and, as to the idea of placing confidence in his Majesty's advisers, he would only observe, that ever since they had come into office as the Ministers of the Crown, no one single act of public utility had been carried-not one measure which had done any good to the people. It was true that fifty-four bills were on the Records of Parliament; but how had they been proposed? how carried? Colonel Sibthorp was surprised to hear the hon. member for Staffordshire declare, at that hour, and when the Bill had passed both Houses of Parliament, at least been carried through the one House, and settled by the constitutional efforts of the other, that he had only within a few days made up his mind to the expediency or necessity of the measure which he had been for weeks and months supporting. This indecision on the part of the hon. Member gave him reason to hope, that on some future occasion he would join with that side of the House, in supporting such a measure of Reform as they might think proper to adopt-a measure less hostile to the Constitution, and more in accordance with the real wishes of the people. The hon. member for Yorkshire, who had given them a very brief statement of his opinions upon this occasion, said, he would not advert to the question of Belgium, or enlarge upon the advantages derived to the country from the repeal of the duties upon coals and candles. He knew that the first was a very unpalatable subject on the other side of the House; and, therefore, his policy, and, in this instance, his prudence in remaining silent upon it deserved admiration. They had been favoured with a speech from the hon. and learned member for Calue. If he (Colonel Sibthorp) had ever doubted as to the course which he ought to take respecting the present motion, and all those motions brought forward by the present Government, that speech would have removed his doubts; for of all the speeches he ever heard, having a tendency to the subversion of good order, and the overthrow of the religion of his country, the speech of the hon. and learned member for Calne was the most so. He alluded to Scripture; but the tenour of the observations which he made was in direct contradiction of the precept which the Scriptures inculcated namely, obedience to superiors, and a proper respect for all orders of society. The hon. and learned Member said, that he would not in any way allude to the majority in the other House, who, he thought, had shewn their true amor patria in throwing out the revolutionary Why, at unseasonable hours of the night--generally between two and three o'clock, when it was impossible that they could be properly discussed. He had a great respect, personally, for the noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but he could never think of placing confidence in a man who could bring himself to propose to Parliament such a Budget as the noble Lord submitted to the consideration of this House in the last Session. He disclaimed every thing in the shape of an unkind or a disrespectful feeling towards the noble Lord; but the Budget stuck in his throat. He could not swallow it, nor could any, even of his most voracious admirers on either side of the House. It was detestably unsavory, and so compounded, that, if swallowed, it could never have been digested. As to retrenchment, much was undoubtedly promised by Ministers; but how had they kept those promises? Was it an instance of retrenchment to incur an expense for a bodyof Commissioners appointed to divide counties -limit boroughs-and make out districts? While upon that topic, he would ask the noble Lord in what part of the country those Commissioners now were ? He had heard that they were in Yorkshire. He had also heard of some disturbances on the race-course at Lincoln, and that those disturbances were attributed to the presence of the Commissioners in that city. He desired also to know how these Commissioners were to be paid, for as yet that had not been decided? Perhaps they were volunteers. He trusted that they were so, and that the country would not be called upon to pay them for their journies. He should most decidedly oppose the motion of the noble Lord, because it was his firm conviction, that that motion was nothing more than a resource -a trick of his Majesty's disappointed Ministers-in order that they might ascertain the sense of the House of Commons. He trusted that those Ministers would soon be out of office. He did not speak this as a man connected with any party. He recognised no government which had not for its object the prosperity and happiness of the people; and on that ground he had opposed the present Government, as well as the last. It might be remembered that he voted to eject the late Administration from office, and, should an opportunity present itself, he should certainly do the same kind office for the present. Mr. Hume said: Sir, I shall stand but a very short time in the way of other Gentlemen who are desirous of addressing the House before the decision of this question. I am too much fatigued with the exertions which I have been already called upon to make this day, to occupy the attention of the House at this hour for any considerable time. But I am anxious to state, that I entirely concur in one sentence which fell from the hon. Member near me (Colonel Sibthorp), that these Resolutions have been proposed for the purpose of pacifying a disappointed people. But the same hon. Member says, that the people do not want Reform. Now, Sir, observe the inconsistency. He says, that the people do not want Reform, and yet that they are disappointed, and that their irritated feelings required to be pacified, because Reform has been refused. The hon. Member must have forgotten himself. He could not mean to make the two assertions. When the measure to which the whole of the people looked up with hope, and which they would have received with gratitude, has been frustrated for a time, it is just and necessary that something should be done to satisfy their disappointed feelings, and to encourage them to hope. An hon. and learned Gentleman below me says, that the Ministers called upon the people, and excited them to clamour for Reform. But, Sir, the fact is, that the people called upon the Ministry, and in a manner which it was impossible not to attend to. The people did not want excitement. They were and they are too much alive to their own interests-they understand too well the measures which are from time to time in progress in this House, to have any occasion to be roused or excited on the question of Reform. So far from there having been any necessity that his Majesty's Ministers or others should excite the people, if I may state honestly my own opinions and my own experience, I will declare, that even my efforts have been much more exerted to control than to excite them. The Gentlemen who opposed the Bill in its passage through this House are ignorant of the real state of the feelings of the people, and they are, therefore, neither prepared to do the people justice, nor competent to devise a measure which would fully meet their wishes. In all societies there are some unreasonable men; and I know that there are many persons who think me an unreasonable man, as all epithets are given by comparison. But 1 should be glad to be told who are the unreasonable men in this case? They who wish to maintain the influence of Peers in this House, or we who wish to turn that influence out of the House, and restore in it the just influence of the people, and to open the way for their Representatives who would know and support their interests? The people are kept out of their own House of Parliament to make room for the minions of a few Lords. In another place there has been much talk of this House becoming a House of Delegates. But let me ask, what are the hon. Gentlemen around me who sit for the close boroughs but delegates? All the Gentlemen who are sent here from the boroughs in schedule A are nothing more than delegates; and yet the persons whose delegates they are, talk about what the House of Commons would be if the people were allowed to send their delegates into it. I think, Sir, that a more indefensible measure than the rejection of the Reform Bill, on such grounds, never was adopted by a House of Lords. [order] The hon. Gentleman near me, who cries order, has said, that he took pleasure in the rejection of the Bill; and in alluding to the conduct of the House of Lords, he spoke in raptures of the manner in which the Bill had been received there. Now, does he think that he ought to have been allowed to express his approbation of that conduct, and that I shall not be at liberty to say that I greatly disapprove and regret it. But, Sir, my regret is not occasioned by any apprehension that the recent proceeding of that House will stop Reform, but because it will force this House to pass a measure of more extensive Reform, and more objectionable to the opposers of Reform than the Bill which has been rejected. It is not because I suppose that the cause of Reform will suffer ultimately any injury from not being supported by the Peers that I regret the ignorance which they have shown of the feelings of the people. It is altogether for their own sakes; and I hope that the universal manifestation of the opinions of the people will open their eyes, nor can I hesitate to say, that before long many of them will be made sensible of the real state of those opinions. I trust that this House and the country may be assured that the zeal of his Majesty's Ministers is not to be damped, and that their exertions for the good of the people will not be checked; and I am quite certain, Sir, that if this Motion be carried and I hope it will be carried triumphantly it will have the effect alluded to by the hon. member for Lincoln, and give satisfaction to a disappointed and indignant people, who will have confidence in the Ministers, and will not be satisfied till their efforts for the good of the country, being supported by a patriotic king, shall be crowned with success. For it cannot be supposed, Sir, that a paltry division of the country can stand up successfully against the millions. It seems to me the most unreasonable thing that ever was contended for, that three or four hundred men should stand up against the just claims and the rights of 20,000,000, and that so small a majority should refuse to the people their just Representation. It has been the great boast of the Constitution, that it secured to the people a full and fair Representation. But the fact is, that they are scarcely represented at all, and that, consequently, a small number of persons who have the nomination of Members to this House enjoy all that can be gathered from the people in the shape of taxes. Sir, I should consider it no longer an honour to be a Briton, if my countrymen did not manifest their indignation at such a system, and resolve that it should be put an end to. I trust, therefore, that his Majesty's Ministers and the House will show, by the decision of this night, that they are determined to stand by the Reform Bill until it is carried. I implore every man who hears me to support the resolutions of the noble Lord; for many weeks cannot pass away until this question must be finally settled to the satisfaction of the country. It has not been taken up by a small number, or by a party, but it has taken root in the minds of the people, whom you never can satisfy until you shall have restored to them the rights of which they have been so long deprived. The question must, before long, be settled, by surrendering the unhallowed usurpation of that power which is the right of the people, and which has been so long withheld from them. I have heard some persons talk of being afraid of the influence of the people. But who are afraid of that influence, except those who keep from the people what is theirs? Who ever knew a man who withheld unjustly what belonged to another, that was not afraid to meet that person face to face? No wonder, then, that they who have done so by the people are unwilling to meet their Representatives in the same assembly; and, at the same time, I have no doubt that the people will act as becomes the dignity of an enlightened and high-minded nation; that they will hail the Resolutions of the House this night with pleasure. As to the Amendment, I wish it had been proposed by any other Gentleman than a member for one of the Universities; for I do not wish the respect of the country for these learned and venerable institutions to be too much lowered, although I know that on many occasions their Representatives in this House have stood in the way of measures calculated to promote the welfare of the people. I did not expect that the right hon. Gentleman, or any of his party, would would not do-but he would at least tell repose confidence in the present Ministry, them what they ought not to do. They for they have always shown that they did ought not to allow the sense of the country, not wish the House or the country to be they ought not to allow the voice of their satisfied with any part of their conduct. constituents, to pass unnoticed and unBut I can tell the right hon. Gentleman, heeded. They ought not to let the meathat if the Ministers have not his confi- sure of Reform now fall to the grounddence, they have the confidence of the coun- they ought not to suffer it to be treated as try. I saw this day a meeting of many if it were a mere Turnpike bill; without thousands of people, and I never saw so expressing any wish for its reconsideration, much unanimity at any meeting as prevailed or any desire for its ultimate adoption. It there on this subject. I shall not longer appeared to him that this was the question occupy the House, nor would I have tres- which they now had to decide. But he passed so much upon its attention this did not think that they could or that they evening, but that I was anxious to implore ought to stop there. Not only ought they any hon. Member who may be in doubt to to agree to this Resolution, but they ought support the Resolutions, and thereby (to to adopt some measures-first, to tranuse the language of the hon. Member for quillize the public mind, and next, to asLincoln), to satisfy a disappointed people. sure the people that a measure, having for Mr. Thomas Duncombe expressed his its basis a full, efficient, and effectual surprise at the manner in which the Gen- Reform, must be ultimately successful. tlemen opposite endeavoured to escape The hon. and learned member for Boroughfrom this Question. It was not a Question bridge naturally expressed his disapprobaabout a Game-bill, nor about a Bank- tion, and that of his friends, at any adruptcy-Court bill, nor about one of Mr. ditional creation of Peers, and particularly Brougham's Letters, written in 1810. No, by a Whig Minister, and he declared his it was a Question which involved this great feeling most strongly against any measure consideration-whether the people were to being carried by such means as these. expect a real Reform, or any Reform at So did he (Mr. Thomas Duncombe.) He all, and if ever a declaratory Resolution agreed in the propriety of the sentiment, was necessary, the Resolution now before that no measure ought to be carried by the House appeared to him to be emphati- means such as these [hear, hear.] Gencally so. It was necessary, in consequence tlemen cried "hear, hear," but if they apof the situation in which the country and proved of that principle, they must meet the House were placed by the abrupt and him half-way, and shew him some other hasty rejection of their Bill. Did not his means by which the just desires of the Majesty in the judicious exercise of his people might be fairly granted. If they prerogative, dissolve the last and call the could not meet him half-way--if they present Parliament, in order that he might could not show him some different means correctly ascertain the sense of the people of effecting this object, then it was clear on the vital Question of Reform? Had no other mode-no other alternative renot that sense been made clear and mani-mained, but that to which the hon. and fest, both within those walls and without those walls? And what had been the result? Why, the rejection by the House of Lords of a measure which the House of Commons, in accordance with the sense of the people, had agreed to. The sense of the whole country was anxiously sought, and was correctly ascertained in April last, and now it appeared that the struggle was between that strongly expressed sense and the opinion of a small number of Peers. The question for that House now was and the question in every man's mouth throughout the country was-" What will the Commons do?" He would not attempt to tell them what they would do-he would not endeavour to describe what they learned member for Boroughbridge objected, and to which, perhaps, Gentlemen would become more reconciled when they looked to the majority by which the Bill was rejected. If that majority were analysed-he did not mean to say, that he would analyse it--but if it were analysed, he was sure it would be found that most of those Peers who voted against the Bill received their honours in consequence of their known influence in, and connexion with, borough property [order]. It appeared that he could not, or that he ought not, to express his opinion with reference to the minority or majority of the other House; and yet he heard the majority of the House of Commons alluded to, spoken of, and questioned in the House of Lords in the debate on this very Bill. If, however, he were not permitted to allude to the manner in which Peers were now made, he would refer to the subject as matter of history. Old Daniel De Foe, that entertaining, liberal, and enlightened writer, speaking of the Peerage of his time, about a century and a half ago, said, to go into the country; some had partridges and pheasants to shoot; while others were occupied in looking after their tenants, especially in discharging those who happened to have attended Reform meetings, or who had perhaps, unwittingly, expressed themselves in favour of Reform measures. All these things you know must be attended to." By such considerations it appeared that these "Most potent, grave, and reverend Seignors, Now These very noble and approved good masters" were induced, with very little ceremony, to reject the Bill. But then several of them declared that they had anxiously done their duty, and that they had ascertained the exact feelings of the people. One of their Lordships said, "I have visited two or three shops, I have been in Bondstreet and St. James's-street, and from my inquiries I am convinced that the measure is against the wishes of the country. Besides, the feeling is all artificial. It has been raised by a set of demagogues; revolutionary language has been used, disloyal expressions have been uttered, appeals have been made to the passions, and not to the reason of the people." [hear, hear.] Hon. Members opposite cheered. he wished to know where these things had occurred;―he wanted to learn where they had taken place. Let the House look at the language made use of at the last elections: was there anything revolutionary there? No; the people understood their rights too well to wish, or desire to express anything illegal. They were anxious to see the wisdom of that House and of the House of Lords uniting with the wisdom of the King in the formation of a measure that would secure to them their rights and liberties-that would, in fact, give back to them the Constitution; for they might be assured of this, that the people would never admit the present borough legislation and taxation to be a part of the Constitution. Restore to them but their rights-let them really appear in that House by their true Representatives-and they would show that they were grateful as well as loyal. Let him tell the House that they were loyal because they were still brave-that they were wealthy, because they were still in "Wealth, however got in England, makes Lords of mechanics, gentlemen of rakes, Antiquity and birth are needless here, 'Tis impudence and money make a Peer." Well, he could prove that such were pretty nearly the qualifications of that majority which rejected a measure on which the hearts of the people were unalterably and inviolably fixed. And therefore he most strenuously contended, that the people, the country, the House, had a right to advise, had a right to petition for, the creation of new Peers. Not a creation of Peers boasting no other claims but those to which De Foe alluded, but a body of Peers, created on constitutional grounds, and who were likely to infuse a feeling of liberality and public spirit into the whole mass. He admitted that such a remedy would be desperate. Ay, ay, but not half so desperate as the disease-not half so desperate as the danger which threatened the country, and which it would be the means of averting. He, therefore, for his own part, was willing of two evils to select the least. But he wished to know what that House had done, or what the people had done, that they should have been treated with such contumely by their Lordships? He had asked several noble Lords the question. He had asked them, "Why did you not allow our Bill to be read a second time, and to go into Committee for alteration and improvement? If you had done this you might afterwards have been justified in rejecting the measure." The answer of one and all was, "What you have said is most true; but we were told, that if we took such a deliberative course, we could not have kept our majority together." "What, not keep their majority together, to defeat a Bill so revolutionary as this-a Bill so utterly democratic-a Bill which threatened to over-dustrious. But neither that bravery, that throw all the venerable institutions of the country?" "Oh!" answered they, "what we say is very true. The majority would not attend. They had more important duties to perform. Many of them had wealth, nor that industry, would be devoted to the service of the Legislature, if that Legislature remained deaf to the just claims of the people. What, then, was their situation? Might they not find |