Lord Ellen-boroughobserved, that if the Order for proceeding with the Reform Bill in Committee to-morrow were discharged, another day should be fixed for that proceeding.
§ Earl Greysaid, that he meant only to move to discharge the Order for to-morrow; but he saw no necessity for naming any other day.
The Earl of Carnarvon:The noble Earl has moved that the Order of the Day for proceeding to-morrow with the consideration of the Reform Bill in Committee be discharged. My Lords, I do not think that we shall do our duty to our Sovereign, left by the extraordinary conduct of the noble Earl and his colleagues in a most difficult, if not a most perilous situation, if we permit this order to be so contemptuously discharged, and abandon the measure now, because we expressed our wish—a wish which we share with the great majority of intelligent persons of the country—to proceed with it on the most liberal and conciliatory principles. Because the mode of proceeding which your Lordships have thought proper to adopt with respect to the Bill, is not exactly that of which the noble Lords opposite approve—because the alphabetical arrangement which the noble Lords opposite recommend, your Lordships have not thought it proper to follow—because your Lordships decline to consider schedules A and B until you have considered schedules C and D—such are the only grounds on which the noble Lords opposite have proceeded. My Lords, the noble Lords opposite may act as they think fit: we know the grounds, the slight grounds, which their defeat on Monday evening afforded them for one of the most atrocious propositions with which a subject ever dared to insult the ears of the Sovereign. We have heard, and it was what I naturally expected to hear, that his Majesty, who was among the first to recommend Reform upon broad and constitutional principles, finding himself reduced to the alternative to which his Ministers ventured to reduce him, has acted as became a Sovereign of the House of Brunswick; and by so doing he has established an additional title to the respect and affection of his subjects. But, my Lords, it shall not go forth to the public, because the noble Lords opposite, whatever may be the motives which have influenced them, have determined to abandon the measure, it shall not go forth 763 to the public that this House is unwilling to enter into the discussion of its merits. This Bill must be discussed, unless the majorty of your Lordships, which I do not believe, are opposed to that discussion. If, therefore, the Order of the Day for proceeding to-morrow with the consideration of the measure be discharged, I will move, instanter, that it stand for Monday next. Should it be impracticable to bring the subject forward on so early a day, it may easily be postponed; whereas, if it be fixed for too late a day, we cannot advance the period of the discussion. I, therefore, move, that your Lordships proceed with the consideration of the Reform Bill in Committee on Monday next.
§ Earl GreyMy Lords, I have been too much accustomed to the ill-timed, violent, personal, and I must add, unparliamentary language of the noble Earl who has just sat down, as well as to his personal attacks on myself and my colleagues, to be much affected or even surprised by the very disorderly attack which the noble Earl has considered it necessary to make on this occasion. Nor is it for the defence of myself personally against the imputations which the noble Earl has thought proper to cast upon me, that I again rise to address your Lordships. I trust, my Lords, that it is not necessary for me to do so; that in the estimation of your Lordships and of the public, my character is such, that I may without presumption consider myself as sufficiently shielded against the danger of suffering from such imputations. The noble Earl has been pleased to qualify the advice which I thought it my duty respectfully to tender to my Sovereign, as atrocious and insulting; and there are other noble Lords on that side of the House I perceive, who appear to agree with the noble Earl in that opinion. All I can say is, that I deferred giving that advice until the very last moment: that I did not give it until the necessity of the case, and my sense of public duty, imposed upon me an obligation which appeared to me to be imperative. Whether I was right or wrong, is a question which, whenever the noble Lord opposite may think proper to bring it under discussion before your Lordships, I am prepared to argue and satisfactorily, I trust, to vindicate my conduct to your Lordships and my country. But I appeal confidently to your Lordships and to the country, whether, until that period shall 764 arrive, I may not rely upon my character to save me from the imputation of sinister motives with which the noble Earl was pleased most unjustly to charge me. [The Earl of Carnarvon said across the Table that he did not impute sinister motives to the noble Earl]. The feeling which prompts the noble Earl to make his violent addresses to your Lordships, is such as sometimes to render him unconscious of the language he uses. If, however, the noble Earl disclaims the expression which I quoted, of course I cannot wish to tie down the noble Earl to words which he already regrets to have used. I repeat, that the advice which I offered to my Sovereign, when the proper time comes I am prepared to defend; and in the meanwhile I throw myself upon the candour of your Lordships and of the country, and ask if it be possible that I could have been actuated by any other motive than a strict sense of duty? Having as a Minister of the Crown given the advice which I thought it my duty to give, and that advice not having been accepted, I had no alternative but most humbly and respectfully to tender my resignation to his Majesty; which his Majesty with that unwearied goodness he has ever shown me, was graciously pleased to accept. The noble Earl says, that there was no adequate cause for our resignation, that the grounds on which we proceeded were only trifling; that they were only mere matters of form; that the proceeding proposed by the other side-was conciliatory; that, in point of fact, it was only if the discussion of the schedules C and D should or should not precede the discussion of the schedules A and B. If that was really the case, if the question was as unimportant as the noble Earl represents it, then the noble Earl is right, and he is justified in censuring the Ministers; but that was not the case, and in the debate on Monday evening, I distinctly stated to your Lordships the reasons which rendered it evident to me that the question which we were then discussing was of the utmost importance, and that to postpone the consideration of the schedules, taking them out of the order assigned to them, materially affected the principle of the Bill. The main principle of the Bill, that on which my colleagues and I place the greatest stress, is, to relieve the Constitution from the numerous evils which result from the existence of the nomination boroughs. The proposition made to your Lordships on Monday was, 765 to postpone the consideration of that subject and make the extent of the disfranchisement depend on the number of towns to be enfranchised, thus making the disfranchisement which we regard as the essential part of the Bill, contingent upon another circumstance. That was a very material change in the character of the measure, and such a change, that it was quite impossible for us, without allowing the nomination boroughs to be part of the Constitution, to accede to it. But, my Lords, that is not all. In what situation was the author of the Bill placed after the question of Monday evening was carried? A noble Lord (Wharncliffe) declared that he was ready to go the whole length of schedule A, and the noble Earl (Harrowby) said in that discussion, that he was disposed to grant a considerable Reform; but I did not hear any other noble Lord on that side of the House, express his willingness to go along with those noble Lords, to agree to the whole of the disfranchisement comprehended in schedule A. But by whom was the proposition of Monday evening made? By a noble and learned Lord, who, in the course of his speech, stated, that he still considered the Bill to be inconsistent with the safety of the Government and subversive of the Constitution. What right had we to suppose that the noble and learned Lord would support the disfranchising portions of the Bill when they came to be considered, if we gave our consent to the postponement? And by whom was the noble and learned Lord's proposition supported? In the first place, by a noble Duke, who has declared that the present state of the Representation is incapable of being amended by human ingenuity or wisdom. By whom else was that proposition supported? By another noble Duke (Newcastle) who has declared himself hostile to any disfranchisement by a noble Baron (Bexley) who expressed his hope that, by adopting the proposition of the noble and learned Lord, their Lordships might entirely avoid the necessity of any disfranchisement. My Lords, under these circumstances, is it not childish to say that the question decided by your Lordships on Monday was merely one of form or precedence? It involves the principle of the Bill, and it was quite impossible that we could, with any consistency, accept that as a boon which would have been at once destructive of our measure and our character. In the 766 circumstances in which that decision placed me, I had first to see whether I could obtain the means of insuring the success of the measure; and having failed in that attempt, I had to consider whether it would be consistent with my duty to my Sovereign and to the public, and with the maintenance of my own character and honour, to continue the mere shadow of a Minister, and to have the Reform Bill taken out of my hands, for the purpose of being cut, carved, mutilated, and destroyed, just as its opponents might think proper. My Lords, I am convinced, that in the opinion of all your Lordships, even of those noble Lords who do not approve of the Reform Bill, the course which I have taken will be attributed only to a sense of the duty which I owe to my Sovereign and my country, and a sense of what was due to that personal honour which, I trust, I have never yet forfeited. I stand before the public responsible for my actions. I am ready to meet any charge which may be brought against me, and to vindicate my conduct and my motives whenever the proper occasion may arrive. One word, my Lords, as to what the noble Earl has chosen to call the contemptuous manner in which I have moved to discharge the Order for to-morrow. It is the usual motion on such occasions. It is not for me to appoint any other day. Even the noble Earl finds a difficulty in doing so. For myself, I certainly cannot proceed with the Bill under the circumstances which have occurred. I trust that out of all these unhappy differences, a measure of Reform may eventually arise, extensive, efficient, and beneficial (if not extensive and efficient, it will not be beneficial)—a measure which may be satisfactory to the country, and which may restore the attachment of the people to the institutions of the State. But it is impossible for me to proceed with the measure, subject to the daily alterations which might be forced upon me by a majority, four-fifths of which consist of persons who object to all Reform whatever. To the unjust, the ill-timed, and I will add, the unprovoked attack of the noble Earl, I should, perhaps, not have considered it necessary to make any answer, had I not been desirous to set myself right with your Lordships and with the public, with reference to the motives which have influenced me, and the sense of duty under which I have acted.
The Earl of Carnarvonsaid, that he 767 had made no attack upon the noble Earl, but as the noble Earl had made an attack upon him, he was sure that their Lordships would allow him to say a few words in explanation. It still appeared to him, that the other House of Parliament having sent the measure up to them, and their Lordships having determined to take it into consideration, if their Lordships should now determine not to go further, they would appear to dismiss it with contempt. Now he was sure that every Member of that House desired to afford to that measure the most earnest and the most complete attention. With regard to the complaint of the noble Earl, that he (the Earl of Carnarvon) had imputed motives to him, and sinister motives too, he would appeal to their Lordships, whether a single word that had fallen from him could be construed into the meaning of imputing any such motives to the noble Earl. Indeed, after what he had heard to-night, and a few nights ago, he, for one, could not form a conclusion as to what the motives were which had guided the noble Earl in the course which he had pursued. He thought that the noble Earl, when he spoke of the advice which he had tendered to the Sovereign, alluded to that which had been formerly alluded to in that House and elsewhere, namely, the making of such a number of Peers as would destroy the deliberative character and independence of the House of Lords. But though he condemned the giving of such advice, he had never imputed to the noble Earl that in giving it he was actuated by the personal motive of preserving himself and his colleagues in office; and he had never meant to insinuate that in tendering such a tremendous counsel to their Sovereign, they had done so for the purpose of making their way in a House in which they had been already outvoted. If the noble Earl supposed that he imputed any such motive to him in giving that counsel, he had quite misunderstood what had fallen from him, and if any person had imputed such a motive to the noble Earl, the imputation had not come from that side of the House. When he said that it was the most atrocious advice that any Minister had ever given to his Sovereign, the words were spoken in perfect good temper, though, undoubtedly, they were characterised by a warmth which became a friend of the Constitution, and a Member of that House—they emanated from a feeling which he 768 should deeply and warmly entertain till the last moment of his existence. If, however, such an atrocious counsel had not been given to the Sovereign, and if it were other considerations that had induced the noble Earl to take the step which he had taken, he humbly begged the noble Earl's pardon for attributing to him such an unconstitutional line of conduct. Perhaps he had already exceeded the limits of an explanation, but he supposed, after the attack which had been made upon him, that he should be allowed to offer a few more observations to their Lordships in his vindication.
§ Lord Doverrose to order. The noble Earl should confine his observations to that which was immediately before the House, and he had no right to diverge from the strict line of explanation into other and irrelevant topics.
The Earl of Carnarvonwas satisfied that he was perfectly in order, for he meant strictly to confine himself to the subject before the House. He had a Motion before the House, and to that Motion he attached no trivial importance. When he said he had been attacked by the noble Earl, he did conceive that the statement of the noble Earl as to the temper which he (the Earl of Carnarvon) manifested in making that Motion, and the warmth of feeling which he then displayed—a warmth of feeling which, when the Constitution was assailed, any man who loved that Constitution would not fail to evince—constituted an attack upon him. The statement of the noble Earl was, that he (the Earl of Carnarvon) was possibly in such a state of irritation as precluded him from knowing the import of his words. He had spoken not in anger, but in dismay, when he heard such a declaration as that made under such circumstances by the noble Earl to that assembly. If be was not wrong in supposing that such an advice as that he bad already alluded to, had been given to the Sovereign, he would ask their Lordships whether the history of this country supplied an instance in which on such slight and trivial grounds a proceeding so involving the political independence and constitution of that House had been resorted to by any Administration? If such an advice had been given to the Sovereign, it was given in a spirit consistent with the mode of dealing which had been hitherto adopted by his Majesty's Ministers towards their Lordships,—it was 769 given by Ministers who meant to deal with their Lordships as abject tools and instruments, precisely as they themselves were dealt with by those whom they could not deny to be their lords and masters. The Motion which he (the Earl of Carnarvon) had made, was made in order to enable every noble Peer in that House to make up his mind as to the course which he should pursue; and though amongst them there might be shades and differences of opinion as to the extent to which Reform was required, there was no difference of opinion on this point,—that, owing to circumstances to which he should not more particularly allude, but which he, for one, must ever deplore, a necessity existed for their conceding some considerable but the safest possible measure of Reform. It was for the purpose of affording to their Lordships an opportunity of proceeding with the consideration of this measure in Committee, and of introducing into it such amendments as they should think fit,—an opportunity that he regretted to find his Majesty's Government refused to give them,—that he had brought forward the Motion now before the House. Under such circumstances, he conceived it his duty to call on their Lordships not to adjourn the consideration of this measure for a long period, but for the shortest possible time. He proposed no unnecessary delay, when he proposed to fix the Committee for Monday next, and there would be no difficulty, should the House not then be in a situation to resume the subject (and there was no reason to think that it would not be so), to postpone the question until the House should be in a situation to resume the consideration of it. His Lordship concluded by moving, that the House do resolve into Committee on Monday—carried.
§ Their Lordships on the Motion of Earl Grey, adjourned till the 11th.