Lords Sitting of 11 May 1832

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By Lord KENYON, from the Counties of Flint and Denbigh,—against the Ministerial Plan of Education (Ireland).—By Lord BELHAVEN, from Selkirk;—by the Earl of CAWDOR, from Banbury;—by Lord NAPIER, from Morpeth;—by Lord DURHAM, from Dumbarton;—by the Duke of HAMILTON, from Glasgow and Lanark; and by Earl GOWER, from Denny and Malton; with a great many others,—in favour of Reform.

REFORM—PETITIONS.
The Earl of Camperdownpresented twenty Petitions from various places in Scotland, in favour of Reform, and in supporting their prayer he begged the attention of the House for a few moments. He was anxious to do so, in consequence of what had fallen from a noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Buccleugh) on a former evening, while presenting the petition from Edinburgh against Reform. Considering, that anything which fell from that noble Duke, with respect to Scotland, ought to be received with the greatest possible attention and consideration, he had heard him state with considerable regret that the feeling with respect to Reform was confined to only a certain class in that country, that it was only kept up by excitement, and that when that excitement ceased, the feeling in

869
favour of Reform would pass away. He entirely differed from the noble Duke on that point. He was sure the noble Duke would not intentionally deceive the House by making such a statement, but the noble Duke was himself deceived; for it was certain that in no part of the United Kingdom was there such a determined, anxious, and decided desire for Reform as among the people of Scotland; it pervaded every class of the community, from the highest to the lowest, and was only opposed by those who possessed the monopoly of the elective franchise in that country. The mass of the people of Scotland were fully aware of the inestimable value resulting from the enjoyment of political rights; from the enjoyment of those rights they had been excluded, and he trusted they would not cease, firmly, but temperately, to assert the claim which they had to possess those rights until they were conceded to them. That this feeling existed, and that his representation of it was true, was to be found in the fact of the number of petitions which had been presented to their Lordships from Scotland in favour of this measure, and the petition which was agreed to in Edinburgh, must be conclusive on the subject. A more numerous, more respectable, more orderly, or better regulated meeting was never held; indeed, nothing coming near it was ever witnessed in Scotland for any public purpose whatever. As a Scotchman he was proud of that meeting—proud of the talents displayed at it—proud of the resolutions which emanated from, and were adopted by, that meeting—proud of the whole conduct of the persons assembled. The sentiments of that meeting were before their Lordships, and they were echoed in every one of the petitions which he would now lay upon their Lordships' Table. The petitioners wished him to state, that no reaction had taken place in Scotland on the subject of Reform; on the contrary, the desire and anxiety, as regarded that question, was greater and more intense than ever. They had further instructed him to pray on their behalf, that their Lordships would pass the Bill unmutilated and unaltered; and state, that the suspense in which the nation had been kept with respect to this measure, had been productive of the most disastrous consequences; and they looked forward to the healing measure of Reform as alone calculated to bring about a return of confidence in the country, and as the means of placing the institutions of the country on the firmest foundation. In these sentiments he perfectly and entirely
870
concurred. England had now arrived at a crisis, with respect to this momentous question, when it was incumbent on every individual who had the welfare of his country at heart, to come forward and declare his opinion; for himself, he the more particularly felt a pride and pleasure in doing so, when that opinion was in unison with that of the large mass of the people of that part of the country with which he was more particularly connected; they considering, as he considered, that upon the passing of this Bill depended the stability, while, on the contrary, the rejection of it would be destructive of the best interests of the empire. The first petition which he had to present, was from the inhabitants of the city of Aberdeen, signed by 8,000 persons, and as upon a former occasion, when he had presented a petition from the same city, a noble Duke, whom he did not then see in his place, seemed to doubt the respectability of some of the persons who had signed it, he was anxious to call the attention of the House to the fact, that upon the present occasion, every person who had signed it had also attached his description to his signature. This petition, as indeed all the others he now offered to their Lordships, pointed out that, with respect to the 10 l. franchise, they considered that clause the most essential and important part of the Bill; and the petitioners stated, that they had heard with surprise that some of their Lordships considered that the 10 l. clause would throw the franchise into the hands of the lowest classes; and they stated that, although the city of Aberdeen contained 60,000 inhabitants, the 10 l. clause would not extend the right of voting to above 1,000 persons.
The Duke of Buccleughdid not mean to object to any of the petitions referred to by the noble Earl being received by their Lordships. With respect to the observations which had fallen from him on a former occasion, he was not aware whether they were such as they were stated to have been by the noble Earl, as, not having had any intimation from the noble Earl that he intended to refer to the subject, he had had no opportunity of refreshing his recollection on this point. It certainly was the furthest from his intention to mislead the House. The statement he had made was on the authority of persons, on the correctness of whose opinions he could place the firmest reliance, and, therefore, he had felt himself called upon to assert it fairly and openly. Some discredit had been thrown on the

871
Edinburgh petition in favour of Reform, by the fact, that many of the persons who called, and who attended that meeting of the inhabitants of Edinburgh, were not themselves inhabitants of, or immediately connected with, that city. He would refer particularly to Sir John Dalrymple, who was convenor, as it was termed, in a different district, and who was at the present moment one of the Commissioners appointed by Government for determining the extent of the districts of boroughs and counties. There were also several other persons, no doubt, highly respectable; but they were persons who were not actually citizens of Edinburgh, but living in the neighbourhood. With regard to the number of persons who attended the meeting in the King's Park, including the procession of the trades, with their banners and music, he had stated, and he believed the fact, that it did not exceed 8,000. He had reason to know that very few of the workshops were left unoccupied on that day—that hardly a man left his work, and in one manufactory where 100 persons were employed, not one person was absent during the whole of the day. When the trades returned from the meeting, there was a crowd collected of about 15,000 persons on the North Bridge, opposite the Register-office, but they were attracted there by curiosity, and had not attended the meeting. He was aware that very great exertions had been made for getting up that meeting, and some extraordinary placards were stuck up in every part of the city, well calculated to mislead the lower orders of society. The placards were headed with the King's arms and initials, a circumstance which had very great weight with ignorant persons; and, as regarded the respectability of the meeting, he was informed that there was only one of the principal tradesmen of Edinburgh present at it. He was not aware that he had said, on the occasion alluded to by the noble Earl, that the feeling in favour of Reform was confined to certain classes; he, however, would now say, that he thought it was, and that there was a very strong feeling throughout the country against it.
The Earl of Camperdowncould assure the noble Duke, that he was anxious he should be informed of his (the Earl of Camperdown's) intention to mention this subject, and he had endeavoured to communicate with him previous to the meeting of the House, but could not succeed. With respect to the statement of the noble Duke, that certain persons who assisted in calling
872
and attending the meeting were not persons belonging to Edinburgh, not inhabitants of that city, he had heard that remark with some degree of surprise, because he very much doubted whether the petition which was agreed to at the meeting which was held by the conservative party in Edinburgh, and which petition, with 1,700 signatures, was presented by the noble Duke, and was described as the petition of the inhabitants of Edinburgh—whether more than half those persons were actually citizens of Edinburgh. With respect to his worthy relative, Sir John Dalrymple, if he was not a resident at Edinburgh, he at least had a very large property there, as he had also in its immediate neighbourhood; and, if he recollected rightly, the petition was described as being the petition of the inhabitants of Edinburgh and its vicinity. Now, as to the number of persons who attended that meeting; it was stated by those who were capable of forming a proper estimate, that it amounted nearer to 60,000 than to 40,000. That there was a number of persons assembled on the Calton Hill, and in other places, who were mere spectators, attracted by curiosity, he believed to be the fact. As a conclusive argument to prove the respectable character of the meeting, and the order and decorum which were preserved, he would merely state the fact, that not one single police charge resulted from that meeting.
The Earl of Roseberydid not wish to prolong this discussion, or to give rise to any party feeling on either side of the question. He wished to observe, however, that he had been informed, on the best authority, that the number of persons present at the meeting in question could not be less than 60,000; and, therefore, the information on which the noble Duke had made his statement could not be relied on. The noble Duke had said, on a former occasion, that the amount of property possessed by the 1,700 persons whose petition he presented, was 28,000,000 l.: the noble Duke had not said pounds sterling, and he (the Earl of Rosebery) was, therefore, inclined to presume he meant pounds Scots. The number of 8,000, at which he fixed the meeting in favour of Reform, could not possibly be correct, which might be seen by referring to the public papers on either side of the question. He could not refrain from expressing the high sense which he entertained of the character of that meeting, and of the peaceable manner in which the persons who composed it conducted

873
themselves. He had thought it necessary to say thus much, but was most anxious not to excite any angry feelings on the subject.
The Earl of Haddingtonhad also heard the meeting estimated at 60,000, but others declared that there were not more than 700 persons present. There was no arguing upon such conflicting statements. He assured the noble Earl (Camperdown) that from his own actual knowledge he could undertake to say, it was an egregious mistake to state that every body in Scotland, except the monopolisers of the elective franchise, was in favour of the Reform Bill. There were many, and very respectable persons, who had no interest in the return of Members, and were yet apprehensive of the danger that would result from carrying the measure. They thought that, there must be some Reform, but their minds were not made up as to its amount.
The Earl of Mintosaid, that in no part of the kingdom did there exist a stronger feeling in favour of Reform, no where were the friends of the Bill more numerous than in Scotland. A voice was now arising on the subject, which would soon be distinctly heard, and which it would be impossible to mistake.
Petitions laid on the Table.
The Earl of Roseberyrose to present several Petitions from various parts of Scotland in favour of Reform, and asserted, that there could be no greater fallacy than to talk of reaction in Scotland. If any difference existed between the past and present feeling on the subject of Reform, it consisted in this, that the desire which was originally mixed up with some passion and excitement, had become more calm, more deep and determined, as the Scottish people perceived their right to a real Representation with greater force and clearness, and also saw the power which they possessed of attaining it. He congratulated their Lordships on having read the Reform Bill a second time—and hoped that there was nothing irregular on his part, as a Peer of Parliament, in expressing his concurrence in the sentiments of the petitioners whose petitions he had presented.
Earl Greypresented a Petition from the town of Cambridge, to which the signatures of 1,834 persons had been affixed in the course of two days, praying their Lordships to pass the Reform Bill without any alteration of the disfranchising schedules, or of the 10 l. qualification, and without any alteration in any other part of the Bill that
874
might be calculated to impair its efficiency and utility. The next petition which he had to present to their Lordships was, from the Merchants, Traders, and other Inhabitants of the town of Huddersfield, assembled in public meeting on Tuesday, the 8th of May, in consequence of hearing of the division in that House on the 7th. The petition prayed their Lordships to pass the Bill immediately, and though the petition was prepared and sent off at once on the receipt of the news, it was signed by 500 persons.
Petition laid on the Table.
The Lord Chancellorpresented several Petitions from Scotland, in favour of the Reform Bill now on their Lordships' Table, and thanking their Lordships for having read that Bill a second time. He believed that there could be no doubt as to the respect ability and intelligence of the petitioners. If he might venture to take this opportunity to make a suggestion to their Lordships, it would be, that if they did not wish to agitate the country—that if they really and sincerely desired that the excitement which now prevailed should not go further than it had done—they would, for the future, abstain from those remarks which had latterly too frequently fallen from some noble Lords as to petitions of this kind. He would defy the wit of man to devise a more effectual means of continuing the agitation which existed, and gathering together those immense assemblages of which they now heard in the present alarming crisis, than, as often as petitions were presented from public meetings, to take occasion to underrate the zeal of the persons attending such meetings—to represent that either curiosity had attracted them thither, or the desire of seeing the sights to be there seen, and of joining in the games incidental to such an occasion. An equally effectual means to produce such mischievous results was, to pronounce those immense assemblages, which were at present of frequent occurrence, as considerably overrated in their numbers, their amount, and their importance. While the attempt was thus made to underrate and depreciate the importance of those meetings, there might be exaggeration on the other side in describing the numbers assembled at them, and it might, therefore, be exaggeration to say that the late Edinburgh meeting was attended by 60,000 or 70,000 persons, but he had been informed by persons of military experience, and of habits which led them to calculate with much precision the num-

875
bers that would cover a certain space, the there could not possibly have been so few as 40,000 persons at the late meeting in Edinburgh. Such was the information which he had received. He did not himself vouch for the fact, he only vouched for the respectability and the zeal of the persons assembled at the meeting in question, and for the habits of accuracy in matters of calculation possessed by those from whom he had derived his information. But it might be that they were wrong; it might be that there were not 40,000 or 50,000 persons at this meeting; it might be that the entire numbers of the whole meeting were so few as 8,000, but admitting that it might be so, he took it to be one of the barest and most remote possibilities that had ever been imagined, only to be exceeded by the still more absurd statement (for there was nothing so absurd that something still more absurd might not be found), that the whole meeting consisted of but 700 persons. Of this he was quite certain, that if their Lordships should continue to decry meetings of this description in this manner, and should endeavour to diminish their amount and importance by such statements—statements which they no doubt had received from individuals on whose accuracy they relied, but statements which they should know themselves to be well-founded before they made them—if their Lordships should continue to act in that way, they might depend upon it that they ran the risk of having a very alarming contradiction given to their representations. He had a petition now to present to their Lordships, which would prevent the possibility of any such statements being hazarded with regard to it, on account of the number of signatures attached to it. It was a petition from the town and neighbourhood of Sheffield. It could not be said that it had been adopted or signed by 700, or by 8,000 persons, though no doubt such assertions would have been made were not the signatures to the petition so numerous as to prevent the possibility of such a statement being for a moment hazarded. The petition, which was in favour of the Reform Bill, was signed by 29,200 persons. He would make no further comment on that petition, but let it speak for itself. He was one of those who did not wish to see such immense assemblages as had lately been witnessed in this country, but as long as such meetings continued to be held, he hoped that the business of them would be carried on, as the business of those hitherto held had
876
been, peaceably, quietly, and without the slightest approach to disturbance of any kind. He was able to corroborate the statement of a noble friend opposite, as to the peaceable manner in which the great meeting at Edinburgh had been conducted, by mentioning the fact, that there was not, on the day on which it met, a single police case in the city of Edinburgh connected with that meeting. His hope, therefore, was, that if such meetings should continue to be holden, that they would be holden with the same moderation, quietness, and peace, that they had hitherto been carried on; and the most certain way to promote the holding of such meetings was, to endeavour to underrate the numbers assembled at them, and to describe those who congregated there as scarcely connected with the business of the meeting.
Petition laid on the Table.