§ The Duke of Sussexrose to present the Petition of the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council of the City of London, in favour of the Reform Bill, and he was glad that the conversation which had just passed had taken place, as he was in some measure in the same predicament as the noble Lord who had presented the Perth petition. The petition had been put into his hands as the petition of the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council of the City of London, but was signed only by Mr. Woodthorpe, their Clerk. The prayer of it was, that their Lordships might speedily pass the present Bill of Reform, which they had now before them, as it was of very great importance, both in respect of the tranquillity and advantage of the metropolis, and the whole 670 country, that it should speedily pass. He himself concurred in substance in the statements in the petition, and also in the prayer of it; and, as he had not obtruded on their Lordships' attention with any observations of his when the Bill was read a second time, he would now, with their Lordships' permission, make a few remarks on the subject. He had not troubled their Lordships on the occasion of the second reading of the Bill, because he was satisfied that the cause of Reform would be much more strongly and ably advocated on that occasion by others than by him. But in the course of the debate—he alluded only to some particular observations in that debate, and not to the debate generally, which would be irregular—but in the course of that debate, some doctrines had been maintained by certain of their Lordships, in which he could not concur, and against which he protested. One of the topics, which some of their Lordships had dwelt upon, and endeavoured to enforce, was, that certain parts of the Bill, if passed, would militate against the Coronation Oath. He had often heard that point alluded to in the debates in that House, but he had really thought that it was one which had been some time ago settled. It had been admitted by a noble Earl (Liverpool) some time ago at the head of his Majesty's Government, but now deceased, that with these matters the Coronation Oath had nothing to do. He wished, therefore, that such topics had been omitted, as they had a tendency to excite scruples in some tender consciences which might be productive of evils of which the extent could not easily be calculated. As to the merits of the Bill now before their Lordships, they were all aware that he was a decided friend to Reform, and they would not, therefore, be astonished to learn, that he assented to the Bill in its full extent. In doing so, he was satisfied that he best consulted the interests of the country; and, although he did not rest his approval of the measure entirely on the point of expediency, yet he was of opinion that it would be attended with great advantage to the community. Perhaps at a former period it might not have been necessary to have gone to so great an extent, but now it was necessary to go further than it might before have been, and, therefore, no time ought to be lost in passing his measure, which was so generally satisfactory, and yet so safe, lest, by a longer 671 delay, more might be required, which it might not be so expedient nor so safe to grant. On looking at the Constitution, and considering its nature and operation, it struck him that the objections to this Bill were grounded in error. The Crown had the power of making Peers, but it had not the power of nominating Members to the House of Commons to represent the people. Now, if the first branch of the Legislature had not this power, he could not see that Members of the second branch of the Legislature ought to possess it. If the Crown had it not, he could not see how Peers and other individuals could constitutionally possess it. He could not see it, because he knew that Acts of Parliament had been passed which were manifestly inconsistent with the notion that Members might be returned to the House of Commons by individual Peers, or by other individuals. Acts of Parliament had been passed, by which it was provided, that, when Members of the House of Commons accepted office under the Crown, they should resign their seats, and return to their constituents. Now, if Members of the House of Commons were so to be returned to their constituents, in order to ascertain whether these constituents should approve the course of policy which they would be likely to follow, it could never be meant that they were to be thrown back upon a Peer, or any other individual, to know whether that individual would choose to return them again as Representatives to Parliament. The interests and opinions of the country could never be consulted by such a course. On the other hand, he did not think that the danger from popular election was so great as some of their Lordships appeared to apprehend. In other countries, where the people had not been accustomed to possess and exercise this power, there might be some danger in throwing the power suddenly into the hands of the people. Where the power did not exist before in the people, it might certainly be productive of a great deal of mischief suddenly to intrust them with it. But here, where the people had the power, and had been accustomed to exercise it, there was no danger, in extending, in a moderate degree, the power which the people had long possessed, and such only was the effect of the Bill now before their Lordships. The power so placed would not be, generally speaking, so mischievously exercised as if it were placed in the 672 hands of individuals. He thought it right to state this much, as he considered it his duty to support the Bill as it stood, and it had his full and complete support. Schedules A and B he considered of vital importance. As to the 10l. clause, it was not going further than had been done in the case of Ireland: 10l. had been fixed upon as the lowest qualification for a freeholder in that country, and he did not think that a 10l. householder was too low a qualification for England. As to the clause respecting the metropolitan districts, that too had his full assent and support. Considering the matter on the principle of population and property, he found, from Parliamentary Returns, that the people of London and Southwark paid one-third of the Assessed Taxes of the whole of the kingdom of England and Wales; so that, looking to population or property, patriotism and intellect, the metropolitan districts were fully entitled to the portion of the elective franchise placed in their hands by this Bill. He had been anxious to say this much, and he had said it in general terms, as it had been his wish to follow the example set him by the noble Earl at the head of the Administration, who had supported the measure in the most conciliatory manner, and with an anxiety to avoid giving personal offence to any one. He now moved, that the petition be laid on the Table.
The Marquis of SalisburyAs the petition had not the Corporation seal to it, it could only be received as the petition of the clerk who signed it.
§ Earl GreyIt was quite common for the petitions and acts of the Corporation to be so authenticated. He was informed that it had been so from a very early period.
§ The Earl of Eldonadmitted that the petition should be received, but it could be only as the petition of the clerk.
Lord Ellenboroughrefused to receive any petition as that of the Corporation that had not the Corporation seal affixed to it: they were consulting not only the privileges of that House, but also those of the Corporation of London.
§ The Duke of SussexIt was the petition of the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council of London.
§ Petition laid on the Table.
The Lord Chancellorhad to present to their Lordships a petition in favour of the measure of Reform now before them, from 673 the inhabitants of the city of Edinburgh; and although he admitted that the petition was signed only by the Chairman, the Secretary, and twelve persons chosen out of the meeting, in behalf of the whole meeting, and could only be received as their petition, yet there never was a petition which better than this deserved the name of the petition of the inhabitants of Edinburgh. The meeting was attended by a vast concourse of the population of Edinburgh and its vicinity; and he believed that he was much under the mark, when he stated the numbers who attended to be 40,000. He had very good reason to believe that it was considerably beyond that number—and no meeting was ever more zealous in support of the cause for which it was assembled; and no meeting, even of a small number, was ever conducted in a more temperate and peaceful manner. Neither in coming to the meeting, at the meeting, nor in departing from the meeting, was there the least appearance or manifestation of violence, but all was conducted with the utmost decorum, and he had only to state what was the prayer of the petition—observing that, although the petition was signed only by fourteen names, the prayer was most thoroughly and cordially joined in by the whole body of this most numerous and most respectable meeting, and also by the vast majority of the whole body of the country. The petitioners expressed their high satisfaction that their Lordships had agreed to the second reading of the Bill, and they earnestly prayed their Lordships speedily to pass it into a law. They stated that such was not only their wish, but that of the vast majority of the country, and prayed that it might pass without any alteration at all affecting its principle. Such was the petition, and such were the petitioners; and he now moved, that the petition be laid on the Table.
§ The Earl of Eldonsaid, there could be no objection to receive it as the petition of those who signed it. But he could not help observing, that the Bill, in which the petitioners were more particularly concerned, was not before the House.
The Duke of Buccleughhad no doubt but there was a numerous meeting of the people of Edinburgh and its vicinity in the King's Park, but he was informed that a very great proportion of those who attended were attracted to it merely by curiosity. He admitted, however, that it was conducted with great propriety and 674 decorum, as that object had been particularly attended to by those who had got up the meeting with great anxiety and trouble. But he denied that the great majority of the meeting consisted of the most respectable and intelligent people of Edinburgh and its vicinity; for a petition of a contrary tendency had been presented to the King from the most respectable and intelligent of the inhabitants of Edinburgh and its vicinity, signed by 1,700 names, representing 27,000,000l. of property; and this petition (this was the first opportunity that he had of noticing the fact) was inserted in The Gazette as a petition in favour of Reform. Something out of the middle of the petition was inserted in The Gazette, leaving out some of its most important terms and statements. This petition, therefore, was not that of the majority of the most respectable and intelligent of the inhabitants of Edinburgh and its vicinity.
The Earl of Camperdowndid not by any means intend to deny the respectability and intelligence of the 1,700 petitioners mentioned by the noble Duke; but, at the same time, he must observe, that it was a petition agreed to at a meeting which was completely exclusive. No one was allowed to attend it, who did not profess to hold certain political opinions; and he would ask, whether the opinion of 1,700 persons, out of a population of about 150,000, was to be considered as any indication that the majority of the population and intelligence, or the weight of property of Edinburgh and its vicinity, was averse to the present measure of Reform? On the contrary, the very circumstance that such a comparatively small number could alone be procured to sign the adverse petition, was a conclusive proof that the vast majority of the respectability and intelligence of Edinburgh and its vicinity, represented by the immense body which formed the meeting where the present petition was adopted was decidedly favourable to the measure. Notwithstanding what had been said by the noble Duke, who had great property and influence, and was highly respected for his generous and liberal character in that country, he differed entirely from the noble Duke as to his estimate and opinion of the meeting at which this petition was agreed to. That meeting was attended by many persons of large property and of high respectability, intelligence, and talent; and speeches were delivered at it which would not have disgraced any assembly 675 whatever. The Preses or Chairman of the meeting was well known in Edinburgh to be a person of the highest talent and character. The general feature of the meeting was that of a meeting of the middle classes; and he hoped that the admirable decorum and temperance with which it had been conducted would for ever put an end to the false imputations that had sometimes been thrown out, that such persons could not meet for political purposes without violence and outrage. He knew how highly the noble Duke's character was estimated in Scotland, but, notwithstanding the opinion pronounced by the noble Duke, he must say, that this meeting was most respectably as well as most numerously attended, and any one that chose was admitted to it without distinction—a very different mode of proceeding from that which had been adopted at the meeting whose petition the noble Duke had presented to the King. He was sorry to have troubled their Lordships even with these few observations, but, after the statements of the noble Duke, he felt it his duty not to allow them to pass without notice.
The Earl of Roseberrywas very sorry to intrude on their Lordships' attention, but, as the subject was of the greatest importance, he hoped they would indulge him with their attention for a few moments. From the information which he had received, and which was likely to be correct owing to the relation in which he stood to that part of the country, he could fully confirm everything that had been said by his noble friend who spoke last. He knew the influence of the noble Duke in Scotland, where he was highly and deservedly esteemed, and he was most happy to hear from him, that this was a large and respectable meeting, and that it had been conducted with the utmost regularity and decorum that could have been exhibited even at the smallest meeting. As to the meeting of the 1,700, he would say that it was not only exclusive, and called purposely and exclusively of those who were opposed to the measure, but that, in order to catch votes and signatures, it was studiously circulated that the petition was opposed only to a part of the present plan, and went to support a very considerable measure of Reform, and this was the explanation of the statement in The Gazette, as to the nature and object of that Petition. So much was said in it in favour of 676 Reform, that the conductor of The Gazette or whoever had the charge of that department, was led to suppose that it was a petition in favour of the Reform Bill. This was the way in which so many signatures had been gained to the petition which had been presented to the King by the noble Duke, and if it had been fairly stated that it was an Anti-Reform petition, the result would have been very different. He thought it his duty to make these few observations. The present petition, in his opinion, did express the sentiments of the vast majority of the respectability and intelligence of Edinburgh and its vicinity.
The Duke of Buccleughobserved, that the reason of the exclusion to which the noble Earl had alluded was the very evident one of preventing the attempt to introduce a large body of persons hostile to the purpose for which the Meeting was expressly called, and who would have endeavoured to defeat that purpose.
§ Petition to lie on the Table.
The Lord Chancellorpresented a number of other petitions to the same effect; and, adverting to the petition which he had already presented, observed that although curiosity might perhaps have been the motive of some of those who attended the meeting at which that petition originated, the deepest interest in the subject was felt by the great mass of the persons present. It had been computed that of those persons there were 1,600 whose incomes averaged 1,700l.; and if the amount of the average incomes under the income tax were remembered, it must be allowed that that indicated a condition of high comparative property.