§ MR. HUME, having been called upon by the Speaker to bring on the Motion of which he had given notice, for extending the elective franchise to householders, &c., 1308 said, he was very sorry that at that late hour (past eleven o'clock)— [Mr. O'CONNOR: Go, on, go on.] He hoped his hon. Friend would allow him to speak and judge for himself. He knew the duty he had undertaken, and also knew that, in the time that was before him, he should not be able to state what, on so important a question, ought to be stated. He had been in his place the whole evening, and was most anxious to bring his Motion forward; but the previous discussion had disappointed him, and he now felt obliged to postpone his Motion to the first open day. The only open day which he found on the book was the 20th of June; on that day his Motion would stand first, when he trusted he should be able to bring it forward without meeting with any difficulty.
§ MR. F. O'CONNOR would move the adjournment of the House, for the purpose of having an opportunity to offer a few observations on the course adopted by the hon. Member for Montrose. He quite agreed with that hon. Member, that he ought to be allowed to speak for himself; and he hoped that in future he would only speak for himself, and not venture to speak for the people of this country On a former occasion he came a groat distance, and at much inconvenience, to support the hon. Member on a Motion which he was to have brought forward, but which the hon. Member thought it fit to postpone. He then told the hon. Member, that he had deceived him the first time, but that if he deceived him a second time it should be his (Mr. F. O'Connor's) own fault. There was no question of more importance than the question which the hon. Member was to have brought forward to-night. There had been many questions of importance brought on at as late an hour; and, had the debate been commenced, he would have remained until its close. The hon. Member for Montrose had invited the working classes to fraternise with the middle classes; and he had himself come to the conclusion, that for the sake of gaining the points which the hon. Member sought to establish, it would be advisable to abate a great portion of those principles which he had always earnestly advocated. Having adopted this course, and given this advice to the people, he did not think he had been well treated by the hon. Member for Montrose. If he had not been assured by that hon. Member that he would persevere in his Motion, he (Mr. F. O'Connor) would have proceeded with the measure which he 1309 had himself intended to bring forward. The working classes had been before deluded by the middle classes; and he would now ask them whether they believed that the people would any longer confide in them? He lad told the hon. Member for Montrose, and he had told the party with whom that hon. Member acted, that if they hoped to obtain the confidence of the people, they must make a determined stand upon those principles which they had recently professed; but what was the fact? Why, they had completely juggled the people. It was now proposed by the hon. Member to postpone his Motion for a month; whereas the proper course for the hon. Member to have pursued would have been to have brought forward his Motion, even though the debate should have been adjourned. Had the hon. Member done this, the people would have believed that he was in earnest. He considered he had a right to complain of the contrary course taken by the hon. Member, seeing that it was by his advice that the people had tolerated this movement on the part of the middle classes. The people made a great sacrifice by having even for a moment abandoned their own great principle for the purpose of testing the feelings of the House upon a minor principle. He did not wonder that hon. Gentlemen on the Opposition benches conceived that they had achieved a great triumph, when, in the present state of the country, they saw the false position in which the working classes had been placed; or that they should look with derision upon the position into which the hon. Member had brought his own followers. He (Mr. F. O'Connor) would not be a consenting party to any such "mockery, delusion, and snare." He could no longer place confidence in men who, upon his soul and conscience, he believed only intended to use the people for their own purposes. He never had been a party to any delusion, either in the House or out of it. Had the hon. Member brought the Motion forward, and it had been proposed that he should withdraw it, he (Mr. F. O'Connor) would have opposed the proposition. He would again tell the hon. Member that the country would not be satisfied at his having at eleven o'clock postponed his Motion.
§ MR. COBDEN: My conviction is, that there can be but one opinion on the part of every sincere, honest, and intelligent man in the country, that the hon. Member for Montrose is entirely blameless for the de- 1310 lay which has taken place in the discussion of his Motion. I think that no reasonable man would suppose that any one having to conduct so important a question would bring it before the House at a quarter-past eleven o'clock. The object of my hon. Friend is, that this question may be fully discussed; and, if it had begun at five o'clock, I doubt whether one evening would have sufficed for a full discussion of it. The hon. Gentleman who has just spoken has undertaken to give advice, in no very courteous or complimentary terms, to my hon. Friend; but, if I were to venture to give my hon. Friend advice, it would be this—that in conducting this important question, he should not follow the advice, still less the example, of the hon. Member, who calls himself the leader of the working classes of this country, but who, after undertaking for nine years to lead them in the advocacy of what is called "the People's Charter"—[Mr. F. O'CONNOR: Fifteen years]—who, as the hon. Gentleman stated the other day at a meeting of his Convention, had after, as he now says, fifteen years of leadership and advocacy of the People's Charter, met with but one man in the House of Commons upon whom in his absence he could depend for the advocacy of his principles. ["Name!"] I cannot name the hon. Member; but I think that is sufficient to warn the hon. Member for Montrose to beware how he conforms himself to the tactics and advice coming from the hon. Member for Nottingham. I think, if anything could open the eyes of the working classes of the country to a just sense of the value of the hon. Member for Nottingham's services, it is the position in which he has been placed by every hon. Member, except one, in this House, after fifteen years of leadership. I have had long experience of that hon. Member, and perhaps he will not accuse me of being actuated by any feelings of hostility towards him—for certainly no hon. Member has lavished so many compliments upon me as he has done—but I say, that my experience of the conduct of the hon. Member out of this House, and of the spirit and manner in which he has tried to array the working classes against every man who could effectually assist them in carrying forward the objects in which the hon. Member himself professed to wish them success, convinces me that he has done more to retard the political progress of the working classes of England than any other public man that ever lived 1311 in this country. I speak from long experience of that hon. Member; and no man has more right than I have to speak of him upon that subject. For seven years I had the direct and relentless hostility of that hon. Member, upon what, I believe, was strictly a question affecting the interests of the working classes of this country—I mean the abolition of the tax upon their food. That hon. Gentleman did all he could to array the working classes against me, and against those who acted with me. I had more hostility to encounter from that hon. Member than from the Duke of Buckingham and all his party, And what is the resu1lt? I never fraternised with the hon. Gentleman or his myrmidons. No one can for a moment charge me with ever having done so. I always treated the hon. Member as the leader of a small, insignificant, and powerless party. I never identified him or his party with the working class of this country. I ever treated him, as I do now, not as the leader of the working classes, but as the leader of a small and organised faction. I have set the hon. Gentleman publicly at defiance, and all his followers; and I never failed to beat them by votes whenever I met them at public meetings in the open air in any county in England. In any advocacy I may enter upon for the working classes, as I never have, so I never will offer to fraternise with the hon. Member and his organised followers; and if he says, as he has said, that he is preparing his followers to go along with us, I say to him again, that with him and his Chartists, as an organised body, I never will fraternise. I have set them at defiance before, and I set them at defiance now. I would advise my hon. Friend the Member for Montrose not to be deluded by anything which may fall from the hon. Member as to the power he has over the working classes of this country. He was weak before, he is harmless now; and whatever he may threaten or promise will be equally powerless and uninfluential. Ferocious as was his attack upon my hon. Friend the Member for Montrose, there is no one who will not be as well disposed as ever to continue to my hon. Friend that confidence which he has always enjoyed from the great mass of the people of this country.
§ LORD J. RUSSELL: I suppose that the hon. Member for Nottingham proposed his Motion for adjournment merely for the purpose of making his observations upon the postponement of the Motion of the 1312 hon. Member for Montrose; and as the hon. Gentleman has effected that object, I presume he has no inducement to retard the business of the evening by pressing, and will withdraw, his proposition. I cannot myself see that there is anything objectionable or unusual in the hon. Member for Montrose, finding he had not been able to bring forward his Motion at a earlier hour, taking the course of postponing it. But with respect to the other questions that have been alluded to—making no comment upon the personal observations that have passed—the hon. Member for Nottingham saying that no confidence ought to be placed in the hon. Member for Montrose, and the lion. Member for the West Riding saying that no confidence ought to be placed in the hon. Member for Nottingham—avoiding remarks upon these questions of personal confidence—I must say my belief is that the middle and working classes of this county, speaking generally, wish for neither the one great reform nor the other—that they are anxious for neither the People's Charter, as proposed by the hon. Member for Nottingham, nor the great plan of reform, which comes somewhat near the People's Charter, as proposed by the hon. Member for Montrose. I do not think that they at present desire either the one or the other. My belief is that the middle and working classes desire that there should be a gradual progress in reform; that this House should give its attention to the questions that are before it; and that in securing the peace and quiet of the country rest their true interest and prosperity.
§ Motion for adjournment withdrawn.