« ZurückWeiter »
3:"* 19610997 yan992 & 28 SW229m 115.1. & i. amounted to 41, and with me taken from the the bill sturing its passage through the other borougly of Vienguib pade thellutab beserta Hyumidit was sjdt recommended by anyone.. bertaken from the Hogse of fun ona dd peopuected withouis Majesty's Covermenty
yet That berine been doneonlle mark ofidisfraa- gewerholeks timerady dioparthat les operation chisement having been total entend punast will nbe beneficiatyphough faditiot without, 3 pleted the best step to be takieu was,ib.bees fearishad ahoandrary result basy enouest those og what means nere. pecessary and practicaklei privilege of bbcluby
speakd is that of the wight23 for the purpose of supplyiug the defisitney in bof voting givenuto persons bolding itards of as 's the numbers of Abe House of Commons which acerlain, yalive withoutalexsesd9*t wrast Beobis,'3 those pripaseu disfranolliseients had ereated uigusikoipoup Lurdshipsgithatpia dhibease there", } The bill with those disfranchisingi clayseazakishia @yosiderablev dopgershav the power was proposed to the House of Coomone, and given to tlandet i proprietary may be used in by a House, adoptech And also glaubes were fa mgaverysiich lasait has been in places that I adopted lor the purpuse of briøging back the mill cotuand; and if sp used, it will probably sambers of the representative portion of the soarletos sangenerals denund for thout regulation: lezislature to pretty near the same amount is formerly untentioned ia beference to this subject, point of numbers, that it bad previously been båt put louerzord bespecting which has found Sixty-five pew Melobers were givena on Biun bits way into the petitions recently presented tiese bebiyolour addisional Membersejustsaltor this orisbeyother House of Parliament the given to the House au representatines kopegulation ballu lei ton is the right of voting by twelve large tumos.995 belure seitling Mosohatst ballotwike is one which has not been taken to the house, and whicho hudher iba; bill now. up by petitioners from the moment the measure before the House, and each w bave Members ; of reform: was takeasby ibie responsible adand iben Here are treatyreight tovusa with a visers of 1stbe: browol, as, va! Government one Membereneb addisionals which, with the hueasure, u and whiobe will probably not Member left to Wey gosh, makeable, whichy uae resorted to agaiu unless the power intaken irum, 154, leave y remainder of 36,ibet partod by the cause I have just mening me nuples which the House of Lormons stioned should be i abused joi thie manner was La luse, Haring
thus removed the rotien se recently and so justly ceasured. At all portion of the constitutiga, pur next duty was eventaj this cause in the billi cannot but reto consider how me should, best impart fresh licom mend it to the adoption of every man ia health and vigogreto sbe whule, budy of she the country wha sincerely desires to increase Consitution-baxing removed the rotten and the petivileges and intueboe of the landed decayed branches, Que objent was to ascerlaiv Aristocracy with them u this clause 'can but how we should bxstjofuse new vigour and form an argument in favour of tlie measure. freshness to the parent stem and the remain But before it was introduced into the bill there ing brauches, so that, faie fruit should be was not even a plangible ground for saying borné, sod permanent health aod energy that the lapded interest was not sufficiently estabu bed.
provided for and protected. Will not the si foutilisque false ramos amputans
sixty-five aidditional county members increase Feldiores lusérit.".
their influence and power Jo fact, there V 1010
was no part of the bill which did not show a Your Lordslips will see that these arrange-teudency raiber to increase than to lessen or menta goustuute the plan upon which we now destroy that influence. Having thus laid propose to take the sense of this branch of the before your Lordships an outline of the princiLegislature, and I hesitate not to say that it ples of this most important measure, I shall will not only be ugattended with danger,, but not trouble, you with those details which will tbat it wil effect the best - purposes of mure properly form the subject of discussion permanent segurity. This plau, I hope, will in the committee . The objectof those details obtain the consent of your Lordslips. Your chiefly. WAS, to guard against expenses at LordáLips will further see that in Counties, all elections taking it as a first prioeiple, that the present rights of voting are reserved that the return of snembers to the Commons all freeholders in counties remain-precisely as House of Parliament should be free and untb y Fere-base every man in possessiou of a shackled. The division of Counties is the freehold retains his right of voting ; but șB0 inext subject to which I shall call the attention franchise can be communicated with a freer of the House, and that only very briefly, observa, hold fur life, unless it be of the value of tea ing, as I pass, that that division ought to form one poveds. Thus, then, will that manufacture of of the strongest recoinendations of the Bill to votes be prevented, which in practice worked that portion of the landed aristocracy who so mischievously. To those rights so already limit their wiews to the narrow objects of priexistens or created by the bill, we propose to l.vate and personal interest. L koow tliat this and the rigbo of poging from copybold and portion of the bill is open to the charge of customary, tegures of the value of tem pounds favouring those combinations and comproto lessees for sixty years and to other lesgees, mises by which particular persons have been as the printed bill will more particularly exhibit enabled to return members to the other House to boble Lords. lo this part of the arrange of Parliament; but my persuasion is, that rement I have now to call your Lordships' at- flection and experience of its operation will tention to a clause which was introduced into convince its warmest opponents that such
will not be the dhenatéresults, and surebam the present practice, it is any thing but full, that it contains nothiu/whiêlpogtatto reador fair, or free and wo man can contead for its it unacceptable to your Lordships Going comtibuance, unless he, be also prepared to further into the details of the measure, you maintains thast system is beneficial to the will find that it contains fresh provisions for country, in accordance with the principles of regulating the polling at elections, and for political expedieucy and unalterable, justice, securing every freedom and facility for the whiclrgives
to luan contractors and speculating electors? It provides that the same properry attorneys the rights and the influence which sliall not yield two votes-that, in a borough, ought to belong to rank and landed possesno man'shall vivte for the town and the couuty; sions, and local connexiou and personal cbaif he he a resident he votes for the town, if aracteru ---} cau little imagine that, in times like non-resident for the county, and noiutermediate the present, a system such as this can fiod tenant shall possess a right of Voting, veither its advocates; that those strange and ubjust shall qualifications be derived froin the pay- avoinalies should be defended in the 19th ment of laod-tas; and to all at present nos century-in an age like this, when, “the sessing the right of votivg" for towns as free schoolmaster is abroad." (Hear, hear, hear.) I holders, it is still continued, provided they should have imagioed, that merely to state the do not live at a greater distance from the place existence of nominatiou boroughs in this cuanrepresented than seven miles. This, I need gou try would be quite sufficient to ensure their point out to your Lordships, will prove a vast being denounced. Let us see how far this advantage in diminisbiog the expense bereto matter affects the aristocratic branch of the fore attendant 'upon bringing pon-resident Legislature. - In-the writings of all the men voters to the poll; and further, it will have who have ever written on the Constitution of the beneficial effect of ridding the representa- this country in the recorded Resolutions of tion of the interference of strangers; and each the House of Commons--in the proceedings place may in future be expected to send to of the House of Commons--I can find no Parliament persons connected and acquainted, trace or vestige of any-thing to warrant such anid, as it were, identified with their local in a practice as that of nomination. On the conterests. In the qualification of those who trary, the most careful steps have at various vote from houses, it will be required that they times been taken for the purpose of avoiding show a previous possession of themi twelve any practice of that pature, or even having a months preceding--that they give direct proof tendency thereto. Were there in the theory of the house being of the valae of JO1., or rated or the practice of the Constitution any-thing in the parish books for Poors' Rates as for a of the sort, is it reasonable to suppose that it house of that value,or paying an apoual rent of would have escaped the acuteness of Locke that amount. If he qualities on rent he must and of Blackstone? It has not only not been have paid up all arrears; if on taxes, all arrears acknowledged by them, but it has been de to a specified period; and no householder shall nounced by Chatham and Saville, by Pitt, by be entitled to vote as such if his landlord pays fox, and by Grattan. It has been denounced his Poors' Rates. (Here the noble Lord went by them as that gross abuse, that rank ganinto a statement of the number of boroughs grene, which was eating into the vitals of the disfranchised and of those enfranchised, but in Constitution, destructive alike of the liberties terms at variance with the printed bill. His of the people, the security of this House, and Lordship almost immediately corrected bim- the maintenance of the Throne. (Cheers.) I self, but in a toue of voice not heard below the refer to the records of Parliament, iu evidence Bar.) Upon this general outline, your Lord of the impropriety of the interference of Peers. ships are now called up to decide. I call upou in the election of the Members of the other any man to say if it be exposed to objection. House. At the commencement of every Sesa Will it be considered that the right of pomina sion, is it not made a standing Order that tion to boroughs forms a part of the British Peers shall not interfere with the election Constitution ; but, ou the contrary, will not of Members of the House of Commons ? all men say that such a right is wholly at va- And will any man in the face of that maintain riance, and inconsisteot with the spirit and in- that peers ought to buy and sell seats in Pardependence of that Constitution I say, my liament? Will any man, upon a point like Lords, that its acknowledged principles de- that, have the hardihood to set himself against mand 'the discontinuance of this modero-1 the recorded resolutions of the House of Comshould call it this incorrigible-abuse, as the mons? Another principle of our Coustitution only means of recovering that popular confi- is, that no man shall be taxed unless through dence without which the represcotatives of the bis representatives in the House of Commons; people in the Commons' House of Parliament and so jealous is that House of its privileges could not adequately discharge the high trusts in respect to bills for the imposition of taxes, reposed in them. I will go much farther that it will not allow this House to correct will contend that, peither in theory nor in the most trifling mistake, without instantly practice, is such a system consistent with the throwing out the bill. Will it then be conprinciples of the British Constitution. In tended that the practice of nomination is in theory, all men agree that the representation any respect consistent with principles such as of the people in the Commons House of Parlia- these? The arguments, when, which rest ment should be full, fair and free; while, in upon the theory of the Constitution, are ar
giments which I hold cannot be refuted, let proceeding as it did with the boroughis-conus then come to the practice of the Constitu- iained in Schedule A. Much has been said of tion. I hold it to be equally inconsisteut spoliation and robbery; but is there nothing with all that I have ever been able to discover in modern times that equally well deserves to of that practice where is the proof of its ever go by hat uame? Look to the Union with having beca recognised? Can any man, by Scotland; on that occasion sixty-five boroughs any reference to the practice of our ancestors, I were reduced to ifteen, and ope bundred show that such a pracrice was ever legally iv. I boroughs in Ireland, returning two hundred treduced? It it not the known prerogative of Members, were, wuder similar circumstances, the Crows to issue sommelises to towns and disfranchised; was that an act of robbery and other places to retard members to Parliament spoliation ? Oh, but there was, on that occaAnd it is equally indisputable that for the sion, compensation. (Loud cries of " Hear, bok part those writs were issued with a view hear," from the Opposition benches, reto the competency, wealth, and population of echoed from the Mioisterial.) No, it was not those places, aod their general fitness to recompensation, it was gross and scandalous tro pembers of Parliament when so sum bribery---corrupt and wotorious bribery-it moded. Is it not notorious tbat the issue of was a bribe for agreeing to the Union. i was those writs has been discontinged, either on in the House of Commons at the time. I application to be relieved from the burden of voted against the measure of the Union at the returning members- for in those days it was time, but now that it has been carried, that it a burder or from the knows decay of those has subsisted for so many years, I must say, places? These are facts notorious in the his- that any attempt to dissolve it would
be io the tory of Parliament. I do not mean to say that last degree injurious to both countries. Once this prerogative bas at all times been wisely again I repeat, that wbat was given to the exercised. I do not mean to say that it might risb horough-owners was not compensation, pas bare heen abused-that writs might have but a bribe. (Here Lord Pluokett addressed a been denied where they ought to have been few words to the noble Earl.) I am reminded issued, and continaed where they ought to by my noble and learned friend, that 28 of have been withdrawa; but ebat tells notbing the Irish boroughs lost one-half of their repreagainst the priociple for which we are coo- sentation without any compensation whatever. tending that principle is, that the repre-. If to take the whole be a robbery, surely to sentation of the people ought to be a real re- take half is in principle the same ; but the presentation; the only ground on which writs object is too notorious to be disputed, or to could be rensed, was that the boroughs had need any discussion. No; if the Irish Parliafallen into decay. These considerations, then, ment had not completely forfeited all claim lead me to the other branch of the subject. to the confidence of the people it professed to k is said that the measure is one of spoliation represent, that Act would never bave been and robbery. (A cheer from a noble Jord on heard of which is now attempted to be reme of the Opposition benches.) I think pealed, and which I thiok 'never can be rehear some noble lord assenting to this posi- voked without ruin to both countries. At the tion. Let us look at the foundation upon period when that Union took place, I was, I which this rests. I deny that the right of re- have said, in the House of Commons, and turning members to Parliament is other than shortly afterwards heard Mr. Foster, who a trust; and surely ao man will have the bar. bad been Speaker of the Irish House of Comdihood to afbrm that the obligations of a trust wons, say in bis place in the United Parliaspe sot perfectly distinct from the rights of men, that money had been directly given, property. Property may be enjoyed-may be and Peerages bartered in lieu of votes. (Cheers used-may be abused, provided the abuse in- and counter cheers.) I have no hesitation in jutes no maa but the owner; but a trust is saying, on the subject of peerages, that on a confided for certain ends and purposes; and recent occasion-1 allude to the Coronation, a is a trust be violated, it may be resumed witb time when the Royal grace and prerogative are perfect justice. In the private transactions of usually exercised in reference to the peerage life, that prisciple has ever been acted on; and 1-that I should not bave done my duty if I I see nothing that should deprive us of its had advised the exercise of that prerogative benefits in transactions of a public and politi. in favour of those who were adverse to cal character ; and I say that tiine, however the present bill; but I believe there do not long, can consecrate no abuse so glaring and exist men more independent than those who indisputable. Nothing can convert a trust bave been added to the peerage. But to into a right of property. This, then, is no act return to what Mr. Foster said. He made the of robbery or spoliation. I will afirm that, statement which I have described. The late over and over again, the old practice of the Lord Londonderry got up, and objected to constitution was, that the King should refuse such insinuations being thrown ut. Mr. kais writ; it is a matter of the most perfect Foster replied, “I make no insinuationsrotoriety that forty-four horoughs and one corruption and bribery have been practised city were thus, in effect, disfranchised, in con- money has been paid-seats have been barSequence of the discontinuance of the writs ; tered-is that an insiouation ?-1 am ready to thus, then, the bill only proceeded according prove the statement.”. So did that right hon. to the usual praetice of the constitution, in Gentleman speak, and bo answer was given.
Upon no ground, then, I repeat, can nomina- abuses, should be perpetuated, because the
will mild and amiable disposition, his subjects reyder it more secure. Nor, my Lords, has should incur the bazard of submitting to his it been by this House that the power of nonin tyranuical successor, rather than depose him, nation to seats in the Commons: House of Surely that is not doctrine that can ever be Parliamenti fori these boroughs was enjoyed, adopted in a British Parliament. Freedom is byt by a few individuals, who exercised that the first of blessings, when possessed it should power for their
own advantage and to promote be most scrupulously cherished, and where their private ambițion, whilst the odium is wanting it should be obtained almost any thrown upon the whole body (Heari) i That cost. Has the constitution, in its present form powerqis not exercised for the adyantage of worked well? Has it conciliated or preserved the Peers as a branch of the Legislature, nor the confidence of the people? If it be neces. is it exclusively possessed by Peers; but shared sary that the representative portion of our with them by loan, contractors, and attorneyss legislature sliould aspire to the confidence of who speculate in the purchase and sale of the people, I will say of the present system, these boroughs for their own profit. The that instead of working well, nothing could effect was to diminish the respect of the people. have worked worse, I did not happen to be for the Peers, and to place entirely at the disa in this House a night or two ago, when a most posal of a few individuals those offices of valuable admission was made, but I read the honour and emolument which ought to be the statement in the newspapers of the present reward alone of merit. By removing sueh representation of Scotland I can say the doom abuses, you will relieve at the same time the is sealed—it is really so absurd and ridiculous Peers from odium, and do justice to the peothat I only wonder how any one could for a ples But, let me ask, do the Peers themselves moment imagine the possibility of its con- gain nothing by the bill 3d I am not one of the tinued existence. Its thirty three counties those who think that it could be for the adhad but 3,255 freeholders.. If we remove from vantage of the nation that each branch of the these the numbers who vote merely in right State, standing upon its own rightshould of superiority, it reduces the whole number to cling to the letter of the Copstitution for itsj 1,259—scarcely enough for a small borough. bwú advantage against the interests of the Argyll, with a population of 97,000, had only other two. It constitutes the happiness, of the 130 electors; there were only 131 in Caithness, State in which we live that all the three of whom but 11 were real proprietors. Ren- prders are so blended together, that each, frew, with 15,000 souls, had only 142 electors. when acting as a separate body, is of necesai Inverness, with 95,000, possessed no more than sity led to view its own interests as wound up 90 electors, and of that number but 28 were with those of all the others. (Heap.) My real proprietors. Bute had but 21 electors,
of Lords, I would by no means deprive the Peerste whom one only was a proprietor. But, my 1 of that natural and useful inflgence which Lords, we are not now going into the subject they ought to possess; at the same time that of the Scotch representation ; and I only make I thank God they do not possess such immuz these statements in answer to the argument of pities and privileges as were possessed by the those who assert that the present system bld French nobility. I greatly prefer that just works well, notwithstanding its abuses. It influence which they possess, as
prod good habits, industry, respect for property, I prietors, and as magistrates by good offices, and increased prosperity, are the criteria by benevolence and justice to the people, with of improvement, in what country are they whose interests theirs are identified as memmore remarkable than in Scotland ? Surely bers of the same commonwealth. That istu that improvement is not to be attributed to Aluence they will continue to possess, and that, the system of Scotch representation,
which, hot diminished but increased, after the passt as has been acknowledged by a noble Lording of this bill (hear ) - for the pdium exopposite, is so bad, that it can do longer be cited by the nomination boroughs will then be maintained. I know not, then, by what rea- 1 removed, whereas, should the unfortunate soning it is attempted to attribute the pros - decision of this night be to reject the bill, I perity which this country has enjoyed to the verily believe that the just, and natural, and defective representation, or to prove that the useful influeuce of the Peers of this country
that his own"
will add considerahly to their- just influence, sentiments and principles by which his former other measure apon reéord ;'avd this reinark, Iancesib Did he not rather found the
will be seriously redweed-reforming
those your Lordships to regard popular clamour, of the people; and which amidst the improves impartially and attentively the general expresments of time and the itcreasing knowledge sibh of public opinion, and, if expedient, to of the people, caonot be retained for any cous yteld to it. (Hear:) What was it thatiuduced siderable length of time by any existing power the noble Duke opppsite to concede to the in-this couniry. The bivi, besides relievii claims of the Catholics? Did the doble Duke the Peers from the odiani cast upoo then by ever state that his opinious respecting those their supposed på rtieipation in those abuses, Alain's had been altered ? Did he retract the by the addition of tixty-five Members to the conduct had been governed? (Hear, hear.) county representation. Hear:) The bill has Did the right hon. Neinber of the other House beto buled by the country with a '
more of Parlianient,
second only to the unanimous expression of approbation than any doble Buke himself in inAlence and importmy Lurds, Iras brought me to the last tople on any which it is my intention to occupy you'at change in his policy upon the exigcary of the fretent. I have said that the country was times and the altered 'state of public opinion? unanimous in approbatiot vf the bill of which was not the noble Dirke bimself charged io this I have risen to propose tbe second reading. Pur House with inconsistency, and with departing although it has been safd'tKat Che' engerness from his principles ? - and was not the defence of the people had passeit away, su strong way of the noble Dúke that he had not changed this epision is the minds of many persuts at his opinions, but that he could no longer the time of the assolution of the Fast Parlia. act on them consistently with the opinions
of tett; "that they conBilently predicted that the country ? (Hear. With respect to the te result of the elections would be' uti favour present measure, I have not to excdše myself able to the Gurethuvent which had resorted to to your Lordships for any change of former that treasure. But I need not remind your opinions, or for any depafture froin principles Lestships of the result of those elections, "nur forinerly professed. But, had it been otherTeed to remind you of the petitions which
have wise, I'sliould have felt myself borne out by hrely been presetited to this House,' bearing the example of the noble Dike, io yielding to gratuites hore numerous than ever before the unequivocally declared opinions of the were attached to petitions upoti atly subject: people, and giving them that fult, free, and tay be to?d that those petitions must fiót be fair representation to which they are entitled referred to, for that the Peers of Eugland in tisk hy those principles of that constitution which calni deliberate this great question on its have rendered it the admiration of the world, own merits, and without regard to the desires and the envy of surrounding nations. I do ang portion of the people and that the not, therefore, my Lords, address you in the Pers will do their duty. Again, I may be language of intimidation, when I entreat you teld, that those petitions do not express the to attend to the opinions of the people. But if they do; (be Peerstare too nöble, too high- tions express the opinions of the people, I will
ded, too courageous a body to yield ady. ask, cau they dispute that those opinioos were thing to intimidativa.' I believe, my Lords, expressed in the results of the dissolution of soald be one of the last men in this House last Parliament? When
Sir Robert Peel into recommend it to your Lordships to yield to troduced into the other House of Parliament intimidatiou. Far from addressing your Lord: the Bill for thie emancipation of the Roman skips in the language of intimidation, I would Catholics, he stated that such chariges had say. Do not give way to popular clamour." takey place io the opinions of the people, it But I do not use menace when I say, “ Do would have been impossible for the Govern. Dirt resist the jnstand liberal wishes of the ment to persevere in opposition to those opipeople unequivocally expressed.” (Hear.) I do nions, Now, my Lords, how did the right not use the Japguage of the people when I hun. Gentleman make out his prools that the pray your Lordships to attend to the voice of people had so changed their opinions? He Dite-teuths of the people-too loud not to be stated that the best criterion, the most pracbeard, and too plain and reasonable to be tical and constitutional way to ascertain the saistakes or denied. But, my Lords, do not opinions of the people, was to take a consider. Matter yourselves into the belief that there is able number of the principal counties and ay abalemeat of the feeling
of the people towns, and to observe in what way the votes spon the subject of Reform. Do not believe of their representatives had varied upou a that if this bill be rejected, a more limited particular question. On that principle the measure can be substituted with safety or ad- right hon. Gentleman compared the rotes of vantage. You must either take this' bill, or the representatives of eighteen counties, which you will be called on, not fur this, but for he thought the most important, and fioding something which you will think iofinitely that of those representatives nineteen voted more Jaugerous than the present ineasure, for, and only seventeen against the emansithough perhaps not more dangerous thau a cipation of the Catholics, when the question istcoad refasal. I would not recommend it to had been last before the House, he considered