§ Mr. Western rose to present a Petition in favour of the Ministerial Measure of Parliamentary Reform from the Nobility, Gentry, Freeholders, and other the inhabitants of the county of Essex. The petition was the result of a public meeting, composed, he acknowledged, exclusively of the friends of the Bill, and assembled under peculiar circumstances, the High Sheriff having thought proper to decline calling the meeting, although a requisition had been presented to him, signed by nearly 1,600 persons of respectability. He was not aware how or where the Sheriff's authority was defined, but the practice had usually been, for the Sheriffs to convene their respective counties when requested so to do by a number of influential persons resident within them. He begged it to be understood, that he made no complaint of the conduct of the High Sheriff, who assigned as his reasons for not calling the county together, that there had been already two county meetings during the year, besides a contested election, which had sufficiently manifested the sentiments of the freeholders, and there was, therefore, no occasion for a third meeting, which in times of excitement had better be avoided. This reasoning on the part of the Sheriff was not applicable to existing circumstances, for since the last meeting, important events had taken place. The Reform Bill had been rejected by the House of Lords, which rendered it necessary that the people should universally declare their sentiments with regard to that disastrous event. It was a period of hopes and fears, 217 of conflicting opinions, and much excitement, and the requisitionists, therefore, thought they ought to assemble and declare their sentiments by an Address to the Throne, and petitions to the two Houses of Parliament. When that opportunity was denied them by the refusal of the High Sheriff to convene a county meeting, they had no other resource to prove that no change of opinions had taken place in their minds, as had been asserted, than to call such meeting under the sanction of a certain number of Magistrates. The meeting accordingly took place, and was respectably, although not very numerously attended for the Conservative Reform party, as they called themselves, having given out they did not, mean to attend, many of the supporters of Reform, in the more distant parts of the country, consequently did not come to the meeting, which was therefore composed of part of the Reformers only. Of course the resolutions proposed were unanimously carried, and were embodied in the petition he held in his hands. The petitioners expressed themselves in strong language with regard to the decision of the House of Lords in rejecting the Reform Bill—language in which, however, he completely coincided, for he thought with the petitioners, that the conduct of their Lordships was extraordinary and calamitous. The majority of the Peers were decidedly opposed to public opinion, and such a position in one branch of the Legislature was fraught with dangerous consequences: the events that had occurred since their decision, would be remembered with pain, and their effects for a long time deplored. By their rejection of the Bill they had completely played into the hands of democrats and demagogues who had not failed to profit by the advantage given them. The meeting was decidedly of opinion, that no measure of Reform less efficient and comprehensive than the late Bill would be satisfactory to the people in general, or adequately restore their just and legitimate rights in electing the Members of the Commons House of Parliament. In that opinion he most fully concurred, and should not be satisfied with any measure less comprehensive than the Bill which had been lost. He believed the Bill which had been now introduced was of that character, and therefore he was determined to support it. He wished, however, not to pledge himself to all the details, some of which he did not consider as amendments upon the former Bill, except, they were considered as the 218 means of conciliation, and in that point of view they were highly desirable. The petition he had the honour of requesting might be brought up, was signed by the Chairman only, on behalf of the meeting, in consequence of the length of the discussion by the introduction of a variety of extraneous topics, so that at the conclusion of the meeting there was no time or opportunity to adopt the usual course.
§ The petition read; it was signed by Sir Thomas Barrett Lennard, on behalf of the county of Essex.
§ Mr. Long Wellesleysupported the petition, and felt satisfied, that in giving his vote in favour of the new Reform Bill, he was in no degree departing from the pledge which he had given to his constituents.
§ Mr. Huntsaid, he must call the attention of the House to a remark that had fallen from the hon. Member who had presented the petition, and who had said, that he regretted the conduct of the House of Lords, in throwing out the Reform Bill, because they had played into the hands of democrats and demagogues. The Bill, at least, had given no such handle to radical demagogues or radical democrats, though it would to Whig demagogues and Whig democrats.
§ Mr. George Dawsonsaid, he had been requested by several gentlemen of the county of Essex, to state to the House, that this petition was not the petition of the county, but only that of the 600 or 700 individuals who had attended the meeting. He did not wish to depreciate the petition more than it deserved, for he was ready to acknowledge, that amongst the number who did attend, were many very respectable persons, and he was glad to observe the tone of moderation with which the petition had been introduced, arising, no doubt, from the consciousness of the hon. Members, that it was not a declaration of the sentiments of the county at large, and that the inhabitants had not responded to the call which had been made upon them. There had been great skill and industry employed in getting up the meeting, and even a public breakfast provided, but only 300 or at most 400 persons attended, to the mortification of those who had planned a trap baited with all the delicacies of the season, for the advocates of the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill. Taking these circumstances into consideration, he did not think the petition entitled to the weight that was generally attached to county 219 petitions. Moreover, as it had been declared to be the petition of the friends of the Bill, if the county of Essex, which contained 300,000 inhabitants, could muster only 600 friends of the Bill, it was not a very clear manifestation of the feelings of the county at large in favour of Reform. As to the High Sheriff, he thought that gentleman had exercised a very sound discretion in declining to convene the county, after a former meeting on the same question, and the thinness of the meeting showed, that his refusal had not disappointed the county. He thought, also, that the High Sheriff had much reason to congratulate himself on not being present at a meeting where the Established Church was held up to execration and obloquy. He alluded particularly to the language made use of by the hon. member for Colchester (Mr. Daniel W. Harvey); that hon. Gentleman was a Dissenter, and might not be greatly attached to the Church of England, but he understood the attack he had made upon it, was so gross as even to excite a feeling of abhorrence in the auditors. He trusted, that the detestation then manifested would be re-echoed throughout the kingdom. It was time, that Gentlemen should see, that under the colour of Reform, an attack was to be made upon all our established institutions, and more particularly on the Church. He trusted that those hon. Members who were attached to that venerable establishment, would be prepared to act as the advocates of its rights, and if no check was put to the propagation of similar sentiments to those uttered by the hon. Member, who, he believed spoke with sincerity, then an occasion would arrive for seriously defending the Church sooner than many hon. Members expected.
§ Mr. Daniel W. Harveywas convinced, that in making these statements, the right hon. member for Harwich (Mr. Dawson), was merely reporting facts that had been conveyed to him. But if the right hon. Gentleman meant to assert that his observations had been received with execration, by the persons present at the Essex Meeting, he would say, in return, that this statement was as erroneous as that which referred to the numbers present. The right hon. Member only did him justice in asserting, that he sincerely believed the opinions he uttered. It was the opinion of the best friends of the Established Church, in that House, and out of that House, and he would second it by voice and 220 vote, that the religious and political institutions of the country ought to be disconnected. The prevailing sentiment at the Essex meeting was one of deep regret, that the conduct of the Bishops, in the decision of the House of Lords on the Reform Bill, had strengthened a feeling of hostility to the Church. The right hon. Gentleman had rated those who attended the meeting at between 600 and 700 persons; whereas there were at least 1,000 or 1,200; and one reason why the attendance was so limited was, that the county felt satisfied in the declaration of Ministers, that the Bill which they intended to bring forward, should be as efficient as the Bill of last session. Was it to be concluded, that all who did not attend the meeting were Anti-reformers? The truth was, that the county was unanimous for Reform, and he doubted whether an opponent of the measure could be found, beyond the Corporation of Harwich, which had such solid reasons for opposition. Those who were called Anti-reformers showed no want of tact upon this occasion, for they issued a counter address on the morning of the meeting, in which they set forth the necessity of Reform, arising out of the state of the public mind, in terms to which no reformer at that meeting would have refused to subscribe. His principal object in rising was, not to repel an attack, for he believed the right hon. Gentleman did not mean to make one, but simply to assure the House, he had not been heard with execration, but the same feeling was manifested there as was general throughout the country, and that was, a feeling of deep regret, that certain Members of the other House should have given the real enemies of the Church such a prodigious advantage.
Mr. Lennardwas surprised at the statement made by the right hon. member for Harwich. He had hoped that the lesson the right hon. Gentleman had received at the Sussex meeting, would have prevented his future interference with counties with which he had no connexion. He regretted, however, as the right hon. Member would persist in interfering, that he had not been present at the Essex meeting, for he was sure the hon. member for Colchester had much underrated the Members present. In his opinion at least 2,000 persons attended the meeting in question. The weight to be attached to it was not, however, to be derived from the numbers present, but from the circumstances that called it together. The requisition had been signed by between 1,500 221 and 1,600 of the most respectable persons in Essex, and there would have been an overwhelming display of numerical force, had it not been expected that the Resolutions would pass without opposition. The right hon. Gentleman had alluded to remarks which had been uttered at that meeting, relating to the Established Church. The allusion could not apply to him, but he suspected that the right hon. Gentleman had received his information as to what had been said respecting the Established Church, from an incorrect source. Perhaps he had derived it from the reports in the London papers, which, on this occasion, were not distinguished by their usual accuracy. He said this, because he knew it to be the case with what he had said himself at that meeting, as well as the reports given of what other Gentlemen had said on the occasion. With respect to the Church, he must say, as a friend to that establishment, that there would be no safety for it, unless some of its own friends undertook a revision of its laws and condition. He would ask the right hon. Gentleman, what was the moral to be drawn from the feeling which had been exhibited towards the Church at the different Reform meetings which had lately taken place throughout the country? Was it not evident, that the Legislature must shortly turn its attention towards such methods as would allay the angry feelings which now prevailed towards the Church, and endeavour to conciliate the people? This was a measure which must be undertaken by Ministers, and he did hope, that so soon as they had leisure for so important a task, the opportunity would not be lost. With respect to the petition now before the House, he trusted he might be permitted to bear his testimony to the strong feeling in favour of Reform which pervaded the whole county of Essex. This petition was adopted in the full confidence that the measure of Reform to be brought forward would be found as efficient as the last. He was happy to say, the petitioners would not be disappointed. He was of the same opinion as his hon. friend, with regard to the new Bill, and while it was calculated to conciliate many opponents, it was, in all material points, quite as efficient as the last measure.
§ Mr. Westerntrusted the House would permit him to make a few observations, in reference to the remarks which had been made by the right hon. member for Harwich (Mr. Dawson), who, although not 222 present, had confounded the sentiments of the meeting with those expressed by the hon. member for Colchester (Mr. D. W. Harvey). Such a mode of inference was unfair, and the meeting at large ought not to be considered responsible for individual opinions. The House, he trusted, would look to the petition as the index of the opinions of the meeting. Certainly many observations were made at the meeting not relevant to the question of Reform. The hon. member for Colchester had delivered opinions upon several most important questions, in none of which he agreed, and he was conscious the feelings of the meeting were not with the hon. Member. If he thought otherwise, if he believed the opinions of the freeholders of Essex were so different from his own on these subjects, he should no longer desire to represent that county.
§ Mr. Wellesleycould assure the right hon. Gentleman, the member for Harwich, that the members for the county of Essex had no need of profuse expense to keep the reforming interest together. As a proof of the spirit that prevailed on the subject of Reform, he must adduce the fact, that his colleague and himself had been returned free of all expense at the last election; and a balance of the subscription still remained in hand. With respect to the public breakfast which the hon. Member had been so severe upon, it had been given chiefly to his tenants, as a mark of his attention. No exertions were made by Reformers to get up the meeting, but great exertions were made by their opponents to prevent it. It was no less singular than true, that though a variety of influential places in the county were held by persons who did all in their power to traverse the views of Ministers and their supporters, the feeling in favour of Reform was still general and strong.
§ Petition to be printed.