§ Mr. Wakleyhad a petition to present from the great Radical Association of London. There was a prayer to this petition, as of course there was to all petitions; but as the petitioners had requested him to move that it be read by the clerk, he hoped the House would have no objection to that being done.
The clerk read the petition. The petitioners begged to call the attention of the House to the fact, that the jury laws of Scotland differed from those of every other portion of the vast dominions of her Majesty, inasmuch as the opinion of a ma- 474 jority of a Scotch jury decided the question. The petition went on to state that the verdict was the verdict, not of fifteen jurors, but only of a majority of one out of fifteen. The petitioners prayed the House to assimilate the jury system of Scotland to that of England.
§ Mr. Guestobjected to the reception of the petition, on the ground that it contained the following language disrespectful to the House—"That your petitioners frequently find unworthy imputations cast upon the working classes, who are sometimes designated as a rabble. That your petitioners do not deny that there is a rabble of the trades, as there is a rabble of the Lords, and a rabble of the aristocracy, but they do not say that there is a rabble in your honourable House."
§ The Speakersaid, that the House certainly could not receive a petition which contained language disrespectful to the other House.
§ Mr. Wakleywould not withdraw the petition. He regretted that the expressions objected to had been inserted; but he felt, at the same time, that it was his duty to present it. Petitions had been presented to the other House, charging Members of the House of Commons with violating their oaths in the vote which they gave on the Irish Church question. Under these circumstances, he hoped that the House would show that they were not thin skinned enough to reject a petition because it contained allusions to persons who were not Members of that House. It ought to be borne in mind that the property qualification had excluded from that House those who represented the feelings and opinions of this class of petitioners.
Mr. Jamessaid, that although he agreed with the hon. Member for Finsbury that the class from whom the petition emanated were not properly represented in that House, he thought the wording of the petition incautious and disrespectful.
§ Mr. Wakleythought both hon. Gentlemen by far too captious, for the petition did not speak of a rabble in the House of Lords, but of a rabble of Lords.
An hon. Member said, that was a mere quibble of the hon. Member. The question simply was, whether or not this peti- 475 tion was couched in language fit and becoming for that House to receive. In his opinion it certainly was not; and at the same time he could not avoid expressing his opinion, that the hon. Member would ill serve the cause of the petitioners, if he did not intimate to them that such language was highly unbecoming.
§ The Speakerbegged to draw Mr. Wakley's attention to one of the expressions contained in the petition. The petitioners spoke of a rabble of Lords, but they would not say that there was a rabble in the House of Commons. The exception was an inference that they intended to say that there was a rabble in the other House.
§ Mr. Wakleyasked in what manner petitioners were to express their sentiments if that House chose to attach innuendoes to their expressions—which they disclaimed—as an excuse for rejecting their petitions. In this case the petitioners explicitly stated that they did not say there was a rabble in this House—but that there was a rabble of Lords. And he said the same thing—there was a rabble of every class of society. He had already expressed his regret that these expressions were in the petition, but he did not think they should be made the ground for not receiving it. If, however, the motion for excluding it was persevered in, he should divide the House. The working classes ought to be more effectually represented in that House. At present they were only indirectly represented. Till they were allowed to exercise the Parliamentary franchise, he should look with much calmness upon such expressions.
§ Mr. Williams Wynnwould be sorry to object to the reception of any petition; but there was no grievance which might not be complained of in courteous and decent terms. Whether the language used in the petition was disrespectful to this or to the other House of Parliament, they were equally bound to reject it. He was sorry the hon. Member thought fit to divide the House. He thought it would be better to withdraw the petition.
§ Mr. A. Whiteagreed with the hon. Member (Mr. Wynn) that this petition ought to be withdrawn. He was as much a friend to the working classes as any Member of that House, and he had used as strenuous endeavours to obtain household suffrage; but he thought that every petition to that House ought to be worded in respectful language.
§ The Speaker—Will the hon. Member divide?
§ Mr. Wakleyobserved, that he was placed in a very peculiar situation. He wished to discharge his duty to those persons who had committed their interests to his care. The object of the petition was to obtain a remission of the sentence on the five men, whom the petitioners believed to have been unjustly sentenced at Edinburgh: He took it that they had that one object in view, and that object only—that it was not their intention to insult the House, or to use any expressions offensive to the feelings of its Members. Considering they had that sole and unadulterated object in view, he thought it better to withdraw the petition to-day, and would certainly do so, with the permission of the House He would then write to the chairman of the meeting, at which the petition was agreed to, and if the petitioners were still of opinion that it ought to be presented, he should feel it to be his duty to offer it again to the House, and would certainly press the question to a division. He was happy to say that there was now no obstacle in this House to the presentation of petitions. When he first had the honour of a seat, however, a very great difficulty existed in this respect, and Members had frequently to wait for five or six weeks together, without an opportunity being afforded for laying petitions on the table, in consequence of the discussions which took place on petitions.
§ Petition withdrawn.