HL Deb 03 March 1831 vol 2 cc1255-64

On the admission of strangers again into the House,

The Earl of Carnarvon

was speaking about a Petition which he had presented from certain Copyholders, praying for Reform in Parliament, and for the extension to them of a share in the Elective Franchise. He had no objection to the presentation of the petition; and their Lordships were aware, that if the measure on the subject of Reform, which had been brought into the other House, should pass, the petitioners would have their wishes fully gratified. They were to have the privilege which they prayed for, under the new Constitution. The plan went to establish a new Constitution; and, if the old Constitution was worn out, and could not stand any longer, and this new Constitution was to be substituted for it, he need say nothing in support of the prayer of the petition, since the case was amply-provided for by the new Constitution. He was anxious to make a few observations on the measure in question; but understanding that the noble Baron (Wharncliffe) near him, intended to submit a motion on the subject to their Lordships on Monday, he would reserve what he had to say till that motion should be made, when he could enter upon the discussion in a proper and regular manner. Any observations of his on the subject at present, might be objected to as premature, and, therefore, he would abstain from saying anything, till he could regularly discuss the question.

Earl Grey

approved of the course which the noble Earl had taken, in refraining from an irregular and premature discussion of the subject of Reform, and he would follow the noble Earl's example, and refrain from making any observations on the subject except one, which a remark of the noble Earl, on the plan under the consideration of the other House, justified him in making now. The noble Earl had said, that the plan was a measure, not for the reform of the old Constitution, but for the substitution for the old of an entirely new Constitution. That was the way in which the noble Earl had designated and represented the measure, and against that mode of designating and representing it, he most decidedly protested. That was not the true character of the plan, and when the proper time for the discussion came, he would prove that it was not a measure introducing anew Constitution, but a plan, reverting back to the principle of the old Constitution, from which very material deviations had occurred, from lapse of time, and the introduction of abuses. The object was, to establish the elective franchise on the true ancient principles of the Constitution, and thus to restore to Parliament the confidence of the nation in general. He, in this plan, for which, in conjunction with his colleagues he was responsible, had, in all the changes which he had suggested, kept the principles of the old Constitution steadily in view, and had carefully conformed to these principles, avoiding the formation of anything like a new Constitution. His object had been, to found the alterations made in this plan on the basis of the old Constitution, and restore its principles to their original efficacy, which had been lost or rendered ineffective, by those injurious practices and innovations, which had crept in through lapse of time, and the gradual increase of abuses. Such had been his object, and that of his colleagues in office, and such he maintained was the true character of the measure, us he should be prepared to prove when it came properly under discussion. At present he would refrain from any further observations on the subject.

Lord Wharncliffe

was of opinion, that the measure did introduce a new Constitution, and was not calculated to reform the old Constitution, but to establish a. new one. He gave notice, that he would move for Returns relative to the population of certain boroughs, with reference to the measure in question.

Lord Wynford

agreed, that the more proper course was, to abstain from any discussion of the subject at present, nor was it his intention to enter upon it. But he denied that the measure was properly characterised, when it was said, that it was one which reverted to the principles of the ancient Constitution. The principle of the Bill was, to make the right of voting depend on the amount of population. Now, that was not the principle of the old Constitution. By that Constitution, the right of voting was given to the tenants in capite, or those who held immediately from the Crown; and it was given to the boroughs, because they paid more than their due proportion of taxes, without reference to their population; and another reason was, that the Members returned for the boroughs might support the Crown against the great Barons. That was the old principle, although now the effect was often the reverse of what was originally intended.

Lord King

said, that the noble and learned Lord, it appeared, considered the principle of the old Constitution to be, to give the right of voting to the great Lords, who were tenants in capite of the Crown. If so, then, in the estimation of the noble and learned Lord, the perfection of the system was to be found in Scotland, where the superiors or tenants, in capite, had the monopoly of the right of voting, and where there was no representation that deserved the name; and yet this was what the noble and learned Lord considered to be the principle of the old Constitution of England; and such was the principle which he would wish to establish here. He could not hear these attacks on his Majesty's Ministers, without expressing his most cordial approbation of their measure of Reform, and his respect for and gratitude to them,—a feeling which, he was persuaded, he shared, with the immense majority of the most respectable and substantial part of the community. It was a real constitutional and effective Reform, which restored the right of sending Members of the House of Commons to the people; a right of which they had now for a long time been unjustly deprived. It was a measure of the greatest importance that had been recorded in the history of this country, since the expulsion of James 2nd; and its adoption was essential to the preservation of the liberties of the country; for attempting to trample on which, the infatuated race of the Stuarts were driven from the throne, and expelled the country. It was a plan which would insure to the country liberty, peace, and safety, and one for which the Ministers deserved the deepest gratitude of the nation. In the quarter of a year in which they had been in office, they had brought forward this great measure of Parliamentary Reform, and they had also brought forward a great measure of Reform in the Law, which no one could have brought forward, except his noble and learned friend on the Woolsack. Nor did their merits stop here; for they had exposed the malversations with respect to the public money which had for some time prevailed in the Admiralty; and there was reason to believe, that they would expose malversations and abuses in the Colonial Department. If these things were not sufficient to entitle them to the gratitude of the country, he did not know how any Ministers had ever been entitled or could be entitled to it.

Lord Wynford

explained, that he had not said what the noble Baron imputed to him. He had said nothing as to what ought to be done. All that he had said was, that this measure—be it good or bad —was not founded on reverting to the ancient principles of the Constitution.

The Duke of Wellington

did not mean at present to enter on the discussion of the plan of Reform which had been introduced in another place, but would reserve himself until the subject came regularly before their Lordships, on the motion of the noble Lord near him for the production of papers relative to the population of the boroughs. At present he wished only to say a few words on the charges made against his noble friend, who had been at the head of the Admiralty, in his absence, and when he had no opportunity of justifying himself. There was no man more unlikely to have been guilty of malversation than his noble friend, and it would have been but fair and candid in the noble Baron to have given notice of a motion for the production of documents to support the charge before he made it. If the noble Lord had done that, then there would have been an opportunity of ascertaining precisely how the matter stood, and of explaining that which might appear at first view to be wrong. Unless the noble Baron chose to take that course, these charges, made in the absence of his noble friend, would better have been avoided. Then the noble Baron said, that there would be an exposure of malversation in the Colonies; but he had better have waited till the present noble Secretary for the Colonies should bring-forward that exposure. The fact was, that attempts had been continually made to fasten charges of malversation on the Colonial Department for the last ton years, and they had all utterly failed. The noble Baron ought to bring before the House documentary or other evidence to prove that the charges were well founded, or he ought to abstain from making them at all. As to the measure of Reform now under consideration in another place, he would postpone the observations which he had to make on it till it came regularly under discussion. But. he might now call on the Ministers, who had brought forward such a measure on their own responsibility, to explain in what manner they proposed to carry on the monarchical government of this country under the state of things which must be the result of the adoption by Parliament of such a measure as this.

The Duke of Buckingham

wished to know, whether it was the intention of the noble Secretary for the Colonies to bring forward anything in the shape of charges of malversation against his predecessor in office?

Lord King

denied, that he had made any charge of malversation against the late Secretary for the Colonial Department. What he had said, or meant to say, was, that abuses existed in the administration of the colonies which would now, as he hoped, be exposed and remedied.

The Duke of Buckingham

said, that the noble Baron had made use of the word malversation in the affairs of the colonies.

The Duke of Richmond

said, the noble Boron had explained what he meant, and it was always the rule to take a noble Lord's explanation of his meaning as his real meaning; and the noble Duke's persisting in imputing to the noble Baron an accusation which he said he never meant to make, was unparliamentary.

The Duke of Buckingham

had only meant to say, that the noble Baron had used the word "malversation;" but it often happened, that in the hurry of debate, expressions were used which conveyed a meaning other than what was intended, and of course the noble Baron's explanation of his meaning was to be taken as the true one. But then the noble Baron had certainly brought a charge of malversation against the Admiralty, which had better been avoided, in the absence of the late First Lord of the Admiralty, unless the noble Baron was prepared to support it by documentary or oilier evidence.

Lord King

What he meant by malversation was this—that the Admiralty had applied money which had been appropriated by Parliament to one branch of the naval service, to another branch of that service; and that, without giving notice, or rendering an account to Parliament; money which had been put in the estimates for naval stores, and voted by Parliament for that branch of the service, had been applied by the Admiralty to the payment of a greater number of seamen than had been voted by Parliament, and of this no notice was given, nor was any account rendered to Parliament. This he called a misapplication, and malversation in the management of the public money, and the fact had already been sufficiently proved. The noble Duke (Wellington) had said, that he ought to have called for documents, and proved his charge by evidence before he made it. But from that he had refrained, since the subject might, perhaps, come before their Lordships in a much more grave and serious manner, by an impeachment. Had it not been for this, he would have had the highest satisfaction in calling for accounts and documents in support of his charge.

The Duke of Wellington, thought, that if the noble Baron was so scrupulous about calling for accounts and documents, he might as well have refrained from making the charge.

Lord Goderich, in answer to the noble Duke's (Buckingham) question, stated, that he had no intention to bring forward, any charge for malversation in the colonies, otherwise he would have given notice of a motion, and brought forward the charge in the regular way.

The Duke of Buckingham

said, that was such an answer as might have been expected from the noble Secretary for the Colonies.

Earl Grey

regretted these topics had been alluded to, and though he had no wish to prolong the discussion, he must say a few words. He could assure their Lordships that there was no intention what- ever to make any charge against the noble Lord who had been lately at the head of the Admiralty, on account of any malversation in the office. There was no imputation on the character of that noble Lord, who was well known to be a person of the highest integrity and respectability. Nor was there any intention whatever to impute anything improper to the late Secretary for the Colonies. But with regard to the Admiralty, he regretted that there had existed, for a considerable time, a great, irregularity in the application of the money voted for the naval service. Occasions might no doubt arise, in which it might be highly expedient to take money from one branch to be applied to another branch, and in which a Minister would be justified in doing so on his own responsibility. But the first opportunity ought to be taken to give notice to Parliament, and to render the accounts to Parliament. For the noble Lord who had been lately at the head of the Admiralty he had the highest respect, and there was no intention whatever to impute to him that he had done anything contrary to what he thought to be his duty. But it was necessary that the irregularity should be put an end to, and for that purpose it was necessary that it should be brought under the notice of Parliament. As to the question put by the noble Duke, about the manner in which the government of this country could be carried on under a state of things which would follow from the adoption of the measure of Reform, he should be prepared to show, when that measure should come regularly under discussion, that the Government could be carried on with a reformed Parliament much more safely and more perfectly than at present; and in order to show this, he should have little more to do than to prove that it was not necessary to the safety, nor to the prosperity, of the monarchy that the Government should be conducted on a system of corruption and patronage.

The Earl of Haddington

observed, that no man could be more incapable of malversation than the noble Lord who had been lately at the head of the Admiralty. Of this, every one who knew that noble Lord must feel well assured.

Lord Bexley

had, from the official situations which he had long held, the means of knowing, that when money was voted by Parliament for the naval service, the officer at the head of the department had been allowed a considerable latitude as to its application to the different branches of that service: whether or not it would be adviseable to alter that plan, he was not prepared to say, but he knew that what had been recently complained of in the other House of Parliament was a very old and well-known practice.

Lord King

wished the sense to be distinctly understood in which he used the word malversation. Certain sums were stated in estimates as required for each branch of the service, and for each branch these sums were voted and appropriated. It had been the practice of the Admiralty to take money from, one branch and to apply it to another, in the teeth of the parliamentary appropriation; and that, too, without any notice given or account rendered to Parliament. This was clearly a malversation, and the assumption of a power which it was never the intention of Parliament to intrust to any Minister. It was to express that fact, and no other, that he had used the word.

Earl Grey

could not concur with the noble Baron (Dexley) in the latitude which he seemed inclined to give to the Lords of the Admiralty in the application of the public money. He was aware, as he before stated, that occasions might occur in which it would be necessary or expedient for the Ministers to have recourse to this mode of applying public money. But then they certainly ought to give notice to Parliament, and show that it was proper, under the circumstances, to adopt that course.

Petition laid on the Table.

The Marquis of Cleveland

had a Petition to present on the subject of Parliamentary Reform, and hoped that their Lordships would indulge him with the liberty of making a few observations on the subject, as they had done to others. He had heard the declaration made by the Ministers, a few days previous to the recess, respecting the course which they meant to pursue on the subject of Reform. The noble Earl at the head of the Ministry had, very soon after his appointment to the situation, explicitly declared his intention to introduce a measure of Reform, and that declaration had been most gratifying to him. The Ministers had made other declarations with which he had been highly gratified, but for the present he confined himself to the declaration as to Reform, which was the subject of this Petition, Whatever might have been said in another place as to his opinions on the subject, he had all his life been a friend to Reform, and, as his years increased, his sense of the necessity for Reform had increased also. It would be improper and irregular at present to enter upon the discussion of a measure which was under consideration in the other Mouse of Parliament: it was sufficient at present to know that there was such a measure in progress; and he spoke of the question in general, and, so speaking, he gave it as his opinion, that Reform was absolutely necessary, and he would support it with all his power. He was aware, from what had been said in another place, that he might be liable to the suspicion of saying one thing when he meant another. But that was not his way. He had never changed his opinion on this subject. He had always been a friend to Reform, and was so still; and his opinion of the necessity of Reform had only been strengthened by time. He did not mean to say, that he would go the length of approving of the whole of any measure of Reform that might be introduced into Parliament. But the principle of the measure was good, and he would support it as far as the principle was concerned, although he might not approve of it in toto. He felt himself in rather a delicate situation from what had passed in the other House; but he repeated, that his opinion in favour of Reform had never changed; and he was anxious to support a measure of Reform brought forward as a Government measure by a responsible Ministry, and the present Ministry had brought forward their measure in the most proper manner, and at the most proper time. The petition which he had to present in favour of Reform was from a very important place, with a population of from 16,000 to 17,000 souls, which ought to have a Representative. It was from the inhabitants of South Shields, in the county of Durham; and while they prayed for Reform, they left it to the Legislature to settle the most proper plan for effecting the object. As for himself, in his notions of Reform, he was neither a Radical Reformer nor an ultra Tory.—The Petition was laid on the Table.

Earl Stanhope

presented a Petition from certain Holders of Land at Marden, Kent, praying for a Repeal of the Malt. Duties. Alluding to the measure of Reform under consideration in the other House, he ob- served, that there were some objectionable things in it, but there was also much that deserved approbation, and so far he would support it. He was satisfied that Reform was essentially necessary for the safety of the country and for good Government. He did not agree that it was irregular to allude to what was passing in the other House. On the contrary, he thought that it was regular and proper, and sometimes even necessary. However, as the subject was to be brought regularly before their Lordships on Thursday, he would reserve any observations that he had to make on the measure till that opportunity. The principle, he thought, was incontrovertible; and, in the measure itself, there was much that deserved admiration and applause; but he was of opinion, that it ought in some respects to be altered.

Petition to lie on the Table.