HC Deb 01 March 1844 vol 73 cc462-7
Mr. S. Crawford

rose to move the amendment of which he had given notice:— That the several Petitions which had been received and laid on the Table of this House since the commencement of the Session, complaining that this House is not a true representation of the people, be referred to a Select Committee to inquire into the said allegation; and that the further consideration of the Estimates be postponed till such Committee shall report thereon. The House was aware, the hon. Member said, that many such petitions had been presented, and that up to that moment no notice had been taken of the allegations which they contained. He would beg particularly to draw the attention of hon. Gentlemen to one petition which had been presented from Birmingham, agreed to at a public meeting, and signed by the Mayor, the allegations of which were most remarkable and striking, and yet the Committee on public petitions had not thought proper to print it. The petition to which he referred alleged, in the first place, that the House of Commons as at present constituted, did not represent the people: secondly, that it did not possess the confidence of the country; thirdly, that a large number of the Members of which it was composed had obtained their seats by the most disgraceful bribery and corruption; fourthly, that its proceedings were for the most part influenced by selfish and party motives, rather than by considerations of justice and a due regard to the wants and interests of the people; and further, that the House systematically disregarded the wishes of the people, and legislated in utter recklessness of their welfare. Now, his proposition was, that a Select Committee should be appointed to inquire into the allegations contained in this and the other petitions of the same nature, before they proceeded further in voting the Estimates. He thought, under the circumstances, the House could not claim to represent the feelings and opinions of the country, or if they thought they did, why did they not at once declare that the allegations contained in the petitions were unfounded? He was not now contending for the extension of the Franchise, which he thought ought to be conceded, but he would put it to the House whether some improvement in the representation of the people ought not to take place? If the people had no respect for the Legislature by whom the laws were made, how could they be expected to respect the laws? Thus it was that the country could only be kept under by the maintenance of a large military force. They must maintain the Government either by the respect of the people for the laws, or by a large military force. When he brought forward his proposition on a former evening for postponing the Supplies until the grievances of the people should be considered, it was objected by his hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham (Mr. Gisborne), that his Motion was not sufficiently specific. He hoped the Motion he was now submitting would be considered sufficiently distinct in its object to satisfy his hon. Friend, and that it would have the advantage of his support. He had, however, some ground, he thought, for being surprised at the objection which had been expressed by the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. T. Duncombe) to the course he had taken, because that hon. Member had himself proposed that the grievances of the people should be considered before voting the Supplies. That was the constitutional principle for which he was now contending. He was not seeking to delay the business of the House by adjournments, and it was far from his intention vexatiously to persevere in a course which had not some reasonable ground of success. There was no man from whom he had expected more cordial support than the hon. Member for Finsbury, and yet in the very outset the hon. Member for Finsbury had disclaimed all sympathy with the Motion. It was his intention to take the sense of the House upon his Amendment, which the hon. Member concluded by moving.

Mr. Blewitt

seconded the Amendment, feeling convinced that it was fully justified under the present circumstances of the country. He had himself presented petitions to this House, denying that the people had any confidence in their present Representatives, and every day's experience tended to confirm him in the opinion that they legislated in that House for themselves. It was but the other day that they had passed a law to exempt certain hon. Members and noble Lords from penalties which they had incurred, and this was done upon the ground of ignorance of the law. He should like to know how far the plea of ignorance of the law would avail any wretched individual who might be charged with—he would not say a crime—but with an infringement of the law? Would his ignorance of the law diminish his punishment one atom? The people saw that the legislation of that House was carried on for the purpose of depriving the people of their bread, and putting money into the pockets of the landlords. He would ask the House to permit him to refer to the opinion of an American writer, which was extremely apposite to the occasion. To a man (the hon. Member read) who looks with sympathy and brotherly regard on the mass of the people—who is deeply interested in the 'lower classes,' England presents much which is repulsive. Though a Monarchy in name, she is an aristocracy in fact; and an aristocratical caste, however adorned by private virtue, can hardly help sinking an infinite chasm between itself and the multitude of men. A privileged order possessing the chief power of the State, cannot but rule in the spirit of an order, cannot respect the mass of the people; cannot but feel that for them government chiefly exists and ought to be administered; and that for them the nobleman holds is rank as a trust. The condition of the lower orders at the present moment is a mournful commentary on English institutions and civilization. The multitude are depressed in that country to a degree of ignorance, want, and misery, which must touch every heart not made of stone. In the civilized world there are few sadder spectacles than the contrast now presented in Great Britain, of unbounded wealth and luxury with the starvation of thousands and tens of thousands, crowded into cellars and dens without ventilation or light, compared with which the wigwam of the Indian is a palace. Misery, famine, brutal degradation, in the neighbourhood and presence of stately mansions which ring with gaiety and dazzle with pomp and unbounded profusion, shock us as no other wretchedness does. It is a striking fact, that the private charity of England, though almost incredible, makes little impression on this mass of misery—thus teaching the rich and titled to be just before being generous, and not to look to private munificence as a remedy for the evils of selfish institutions. The hon. Member concluded by saying that he was much obliged to the House for its attention.

The House divided on the question that the words proposed to be left out stand part of the question:—Ayes 91; Noes 15: Majority 76.

List of the AYES.
Acland, T. D. Hope hon. C.
A'Court, Capt. Hornby, J.
Arkwright, G. Hussey, T.
Baillie, Col. Irton, S.
Baillie, H. J. Kemble, H.
Barnard, E. G. Knatchbull, rt. hn. Sir E
Barrington, Visct. Lincoln, Earl of
Beckett, W. Lockhart, W.
Bentinck, Lord G. Lowther, J. H.
Boldero, H. G. Lygon, hon. Gen.
Borthwick, P. Mc Geachy, F. A.
Botfield, B. Maclean, D.
Brotherton, J. Mc Neill, D.
Browne, hon. W. Mitchell, T. A.
Bruce, Lord E. Morris, D.
Cave hon. R. O. Mundy, E. M.
Chetwode, Sir J. Nicholl, rt. hn. J.
Clerk, Sir G. O'Brien, A. S.
Cockburn, rt. hn. Sir G. Packe, C. W.
Collett, W. R. Patten, J. W.
Corry, right hon. H. Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.
Cripps, W. Peel, J.
Damer, hon. Col. Plumptre, J. P.
Denison, E. B. Polhill, F.
Dickinson, F. Pollock, Sir F.
Douglas, Sir H. Pringle, A.
Douglas, Sir C. E. Richards, R.
Duncombe, hon. A. Sanderson, R.
Egerton, W. T. Sandon, Visct.
Eliot, Lord Sibthorp, Col.
Escott, B. Smith, rt. hn. T. B. C.
Estcourt, T. G. B. Smollett, A.
Fitzmaurice, hon. W. Somerset, Lord G.
Flower, Sir J. Stanley, Lord
Fuller, A. E. Stewart, J.
Gaskell, J. Milnes Sutton, hon. H. M.
Gordon, hon. Capt. Tennent, J. E.
Goring, C. Trelawny, J. S.
Goulburn, rt. hn. H. Trotter, J.
Graham, rt. hn. Sir J. Wellesley, Lord C.
Greenall, P. Wortley, hon. J. S.
Greene, T. Yorke, hon. E. T.
Hamilton, G. A. Yorke, H. R.
Hay, Sir A. L. Young, J.
Herbert, hon. S. TELLERS.
Hinde, J. H. Freemantle, Sir T.
Hodgson, R. Baring, H.
List of the NOES.
Aglionby, H. A. Plumridge, Capt.
Blewitt, R. J. Scholefield, J.
Bodkin, J. J. Villiers, hon. C.
Bowring, Dr. Wakley, T.
Bright, J. Wawn, J. T.
Cobden, R. Williams, W.
Duncan, G. TELLERS.
Duncombe, T. Crawford, S.
O'Connell, M. Fielden, J.

House in Committee of