Lord Hollandstated, that he had some petitions in his hand, grounded on the distressed situation of the country, to be presented to their lordships house. The first was from the lord mayor, aldermen, and livery of London. Notwithstanding the report which had been just read, he trusted the House would listen to the complaints of the people with indulgence, and the more especially in consequence of that report, would do nothing to discourage the exercise of the right of petitioning the two Houses of Parliament. Whatever might be the allegations and statements in petitions, if they were couched in respectful language, their lordships had always been willing to receive them. If there were, indeed, such practices as were stated in the report, then it was the policy of the House to receive with the utmost indulgence the expression of the opinions of petitioners, whatever those opinions might be, if the petitions were couched in respectful terms. He did not say this, because, in the petitions which he was about to present, there was any prayer to which he could not in any degree assent: but even if the prayer had been for annual parliaments and universal suffrage, it would be a calumny to say, that on that account merely, the petitioners had a design to subvert the laws and constitution of the country. His opinion was decidedly opposed to any such plan of reform as that; but when the people were in a state of such distress, looking to the right and to the left for relief, and formed erroneous opinions of what would best contribute to their relief, that error would be best pointed out by discussions in parliament; and if the one-half or one-fourth of what was stated in the report, was true, the ministers were deeply responsible for not assembling parliament at an earlier period. It was, however, matter of great satisfac- 421 tion, that at all the public meetings that had been lately held, the people had always agreed to petition parliament; and as long as they did thus agree to petition the legislature, it was a strong indication that the constitution was safe. The people, by thus petitioning, acknowledged that it was to parliament they ought to look for relief, and nothing could be so dangerous as an impression among the people that it was in vain to make their complaints to parliament. As to the petition which he now had to present, if there had been no other name to it but that which first appeared, it would be entitled to serious consideration. The name was Wood, the present lord mayor of London; a gentleman who not only held the situation of chief magistrate of the first metropolis in Europe, but had also united the suffrages of his fellow-citizens in his favour to an extent almost unprecedented, who had employed his well-deserved popularity in enforcing the laws, and had exerted himself as a magistrate in the suppression of disorder and tumult, certainly not less strenuously than those more in favour with the government. It was signed also by other aldermen, and by some of the livery, who, as they had shown by their conduct throughout their whole life, that no consideration would induce them to sacrifice the liberties of the people, had lately also proved that they were incapable of yielding up at the summons of clamour the real interests of their country. As to the existence of the evils chiefly complained of, he wished he could disagree with the petitioners. Some mention was made of the causes of these evils, but it was not now that the causes could be completely investigated. When, however, they in parliament talked of delusion spread among the people, they ought not to forget that delusions might be and had been practised on parliament itself on these subjects. The ministers had often said in parliament—"We foresaw all this; it is merely the natural effect of a transition from a state of war to a state of peace£" But had these consequences been foreseen at the time of a former peace, signed by the noble earl opposite; a peace very different in its terms from that which had now been concluded The ministers now said, that they foresaw all this distress. If they did, then they practised a gross delusion on parliament and the public; for in the Speech from the throne, at the opening of the last session, they had stated, that the agricul- 422 ture, manufactures, and commerce of the country, were in a flourishing condition. They did not, therefore, foresee the present distresses as the natural effect of the transition; or if they did, they practised a gross delusion on parliament and the public. That these petitions were a true indication of the state of feeling in the country there could be no doubt. Never in his memory had the country been in such a state of distress, and it was natural that parliament should be called upon to adopt some measures for their removal. The petitioners here spoke to the House in a respectful and temperate tone; they disclaimed the wild and visionary scheme of universal suffrage, and also of annual parliaments, which he also disapproved, though without confounding that with the other. It was curious, that, though the subject had often been discussed in parliament, this scheme of annual parliaments and universal suffrage, as claimed on the ground that it was the right of the people by the constitution, had never been completely confuted, probably because it had always been considered as too absurd and groundless to need confutation; and he had no hesitation in saying, that he thought the grounds and principles on which this claim was made was more dangerous than the claim itself. The people had been told, that universal suffrage and animal parliaments were their right by the law and constitution of their country. Now, if he were called upon to point out one particular above all others, on account of which the people of this country were superior to the people of any other country that he had ever seen, he would mention that rooted respect for the laws for which the people of England were remarkable; and nothing, therefore, was more calculated to make a deep impression on them, than to be told that they were by law entitled to that which they were not permitted to enjoy. It was of the greatest importance, therefore, to convince the people, that the grounds and principles on which, such visionary schemes rested were completely erroneous. As to universal suffrage, that was the wildest fancy that could possibly enter into the conception of any human being; and as to annual parliaments, the people were not entitled to them by any law, and more particularly not entitled to them by, the common law. All the acts of parliament which had been referred to, from the earliest times down to the long parliament, including the act 423 of the 16th of Charles 1st, had for their object, not the limiting of the duration, but the frequent holding of parliaments. This was the object of all these acts, beginning with the 5th of Edward 2d; and, in one respect, he wished that our modern acts had more resemblance to them, for they were very short, hardly above four lines each. All of them spoke of parliaments to be frequently "holden," not frequently "chosen;" and even at present, the expression "holden" would apply rather to the assembling than to the choosing of parliaments. But when they came down to the time of the long parliament, and looked at the preambles of the acts, they would find, that the reasons applied to the frequent meeting, and not frequent choosing of parliament; and to whatever excesses the long parliament had at last resorted, it ought to be recollected, that several persons, the best acquainted with the principles of our constitution, such as Coke and Selden, were members of that parliament. It was true, that few of these early parliaments sat for more than a year; but even the parliament which passed the act of the 5th of Edward 2d, for; the frequent holding of parliaments, sat for two sessions, and was itself prorogued, and the king was understood even then to have the right to prorogue.—Other opportunities would occur for the discussion of these points; but it appeared to him of importance not to suffer this opportunity to pass without throwing out these few observations. The prayer of the petition was for a reduction of the public expenditure, the abolition of sinecures and useless places, some extension of the elective franchise, and some alteration in the duration of parliaments. On these latter points he gave no opinion at present; but all men of sound judgment agreed, that reduction was necessary, to a much greater extent than had as yet been proposed by ministers. He was not, however, one of those who thought that no alteration for the better could possibly be effected in our system of representation. It was too much to say of any human institution, that it could not be amended: but when he considered the variety of opinions among those who called for parliamentary reform, he was under some apprehension that the object was not attainable at this moment, and that the subject was not in a state to enable even parliament to decide satisfactorily upon it. But, in the mean time, the attention of 424 the people ought not to be diverted from the object of diminishing the means of influence and corruption—a species of reform which might be immediately carried into effect. He was very far from agreeing with those who held out that no good could be done without parliamentary reform, though he admitted that some alteration in the system of representation might be beneficial, especially in the northern part of the British island. But reform would not pay the national debt, feed the hungry, nor prevent improvident wars. He had another petition to the same effect as the first, from the inhabitants of the ward of Aldgate; and a third from the burgh of Rutherglen. This last petition also prayed for reform, but chiefly for retrenchment, and stated our improvident wars as one great cause of the present distress, and to that assertion he requested the particular attention of the House. The present situation of the country was this:—We had a revenue almost beyond the endurance of a loyal people; an expenditure beyond that revenue; and we acted on a system of foreign policy, and also of domestic policy, if Ireland were included, beyond that expenditure; and no real and permanent good would be done, till our revenue should be reduced in a degree commensurate with the depressed situation of the country, and our expenditure should be reduced below our revenue.
§ The petitions were then read.
§ Earl Greystated, that he held in his hand a petition from the lord mayor, aldermen, and commons of the city of London, in common council assembled, alleging the same grievances, and directed to the same objects as the one lately presented by his noble friend. The respectability of the body from whom the petition he was now about to present, would make its due impression, he was aware, on their lordships' consideration. They state, under the strong feeling of unexampled distress, that the country felt, that the grievances of which they complain were not of a temporary character, but arose from causes more deeply rooted, and of progressive strength, which they trusted that House would be inclined to consider, and prompt to alleviate. They complain of an exorbitant expenditure, of a standing army, a burthen on the nation's finances, and dangerous to the people's liberties. Amongst other remedies, they pray for a strict and rigid system of economy and retrenchment, and for a practical reform in 425 the constitution of parliament—disclaiming, at the same time, any participation in those wild and visionary theories, that on the same question have been projected by other persons. With respect to these most deserving measures of economy and reduction, it was now not necessary for him to refer to them. In the course of the last session, when the growing difficulties of the country were submitted to the consideration of parliament, he had discussed those efficacious remedies; and since the assembling of their lordships he had gone rather at some length into a review of these subjects. There remained only the one point to which the petition referred, that of parliamentary reform, upon which he was anxious to offer a few observations, because to that subject, in the early part of his public life, he had given an active and persevering attention, and therefore it was that in expressing his present conviction, he wished not to be misunderstood. In common, therefore, with the petitioners, and with his noble friend who had argued the point with such historical accuracy, he most fully disclaimed the project of annual parliaments and universal suffrage. His noble friend had shown to the conviction of that House, that such doctrines never were acknowledged by the constitution. That they never would become a part of the constitution he most sincerely hoped. Though not disposed to impute to every man who held such doctrines improper or sinister designs; though aware that it has been entertained by some individuals of irreproachable character, and was first broached in the country by the distinguished and highly respected Granville Sharp, yet in his conscience he believed that its realization would not only be unattended with any salutary and beneficial improvement, but would lead to the subversion of all that this nation, over every other part of the world, enjoyed. Such, as he had before stated, never was the principle or the practice of the constitution. But in asserting that fact, he did not, in judging of the proposition, feel it at all necessary to make out that case. Could it even be established that universal suffrage and annual parliaments had been the practice of the constitution in remoter periods, that acknowledgment could form no ground for the adoption of such a course in the present time. To what monarch, to what assembly, were mankind of ascribe that infallible wisdom 426 that indefeasible power, by which posterity were to be bound down implicitly? But of all classes of society, this denial of the right of dissent was least to be expected from the very men who, in furtherance of their views of reformation, would limit and restrict the legislative power of a country to what was supposed to be once the practice of the constitution. When men spoke of the rights of the people, in what did they mean those rights to consist? Those rights were the liberty and security of the subject. Laws and institutions were only the modes by which these two human blessings were best guaranteed. The character, therefore, of those means would depend—they were only admirable and salutary, as far as they tended to uphold the existence and secure the permanence of those invaluable rights. The true question under the present circumstances was, whether it was desirable to adopt such a change in the system of representation, as was best calculated to provide for the public liberty and security? It was natural, he felt, that the people should look, under the pressure of unparalleled distress, to every measure likely to procurd redress; but in making that admission he could not conceal from himself, that in the very anxiety for that redress, they were ready to subscribe to plans and systems of reform, without particularly weighing the specific merits or applicability of such propositions. But though they had not fully deliberated on such questions, they could not be insensible to those admitted abuses and flagrant anomalies which, from the time of Mr. Locke down to the present period, had excited public odium, and the existence of which he felt persuaded had no more baleful tendency than to weaken the authority and undervalue the character of parliament. To that plan of parliamentary reform proceeding on the principles of the British constitution, and limited by a sound and provident discretion, he was a sincere friend, because he believed that in addition to the correction of such abuses as described, it would also tend to dissipate the discontent that now from many causes so generally prevailed. And here he was willing to admit, that he was not disposed to carry his views of parliamentary reform to the same extent as when in early life he had applied his mind to the consideration of that important subject. He trusted he should ever possess the manliness fully to avow any change of 427 opinion that a more mature judgment had effected. No fear of misrepresentation, no apprehension of unpopularity, should ever induce him to equivocate with his settled conviction. It was not on the spur of the occasion that he now ventured to express his opinions. It was in the recollection of their lordships, if the observations of so humble an individual left any impression, that in the year 1810, on a motion introduced by himself to take into consideration the state of the nation—a motion, in discussing which, he then endeavoured to explain the causes of the distresses at that time, and which now in progressive increase have produced the dreadful evils of this day; he had expressed, that there was then a considerable modification in his opinions on the subject of parliamentary reform. He dwelt on this subject the more strongly, because he found that the petition which he had the honour to present, took for its basis of reform, the very same basis that he had himself adopted at a period of life, when hope was more sanguine, and the necessity of change was less tempered by caution. The extension of the right of voting to householders paying direct taxes, was that basis. His impression now was, that so sudden a change in the frame of the constitution was more liable to produce dangers than had entered into his contemplation under more sanguine anticipations. He therefore wished to be understood as the friend to that plan of reform that would remove and correct all those abuses, which had been reprobated successively by Locke, Blackstone, lord Chatham, Mr. Pitt, Mr. Fox, and even by Mr. Burke, who in his speech on the American war, had so justly described them as the shameful parts of the constitution. Admitted, as they were, it was not surprising that the people should look with abhorrence at so marked a deviation from the original principles of the constitution. Whenever the other House shall deem it expedient, in the shape of a proposed law, to forward for the consideration of their lordships such a measure, to the extent he had stated, he was willing to accede. He felt it both salutary and desirable, that when the House was most probably about to be called upon to pass new laws, arising out of discontent and conspiracy, that parliament ought to evince a willingness to meet the fair prayer of the people, and remedy those abuses in our system which have sprung from the decays of time, and 428 the consequences of corruption. He could not, however, acknowledge this reform in the system as a sine qua non, or that without it, as the petitioners alleged, nothing could be done for the people. Constituted as it now was, he in his conscience believed, that the House of Commons was of all other institutions in all the other countries of the world, the institution best calculated for the general protection of the subject. Supported by the people in temperate and firm claims for redress, it was not only able but certain to remedy every wrong. It was capable to act as the most efficient control upon the executive, by diminishing the means of corruption, and reducing the pressure of a severe and grinding taxation.
Earl Grosvenorstated, that after the able speeches of his two noble friends, he was not inclined to trespass on the attention of their lordships. He was urged to one observation, because it struck him that his noble friend who spoke last, seemed to misconceive the meaning of the petitioners. When they expressed the opinion, that without parliamentary reform nothing in the shape of redress could be expected, it was not, in his judgment, that they disapproved of the other remedies, but that from the conduct of his majesty's government they had no hope of receiving them. From every thing that had passed, they entertained no hope that the distress under which the country suffered, would make any impression in that quarter. Had any real reduction taken place, were there even a disposition evinced to reduce the burthens, and to correct the flagrant abuses, they would not probably have deemed it indispensable to press parliamentary reform to the extent that under the unchecked continuance of abuse, they now felt necessary.
§ The petition was ordered to lie on the table.