§ Viscount Melbournepresented a Petition from Manchester, signed by 22,832 persons His noble Friend had already stated why it would be unwise now to go at length into observations upon petitions, and he should therefore, confine himself to mentioning that as soon as the news was received at Manchester of the determination to hear Counsel, and the people thought that the Bill would be delayed, they at once convened a public meeting on the subject.
Lord Broughamhad been requested by the highly respectable individuals who had forwarded the petition to his noble Friend, to second its prayer. He did not understand that his noble Friend had stated the period of time within which the 23,000 signatures were affixed—they were all obtained within twelve hours. He was desired to add another observation. The reason—and he had received this information from highly respectable individuals whom he had long known in that part of the country—the reason why the petitioners had not adopted that other, and in his idea that best mode of expressing their opinions, not only to that House but to every other body and every other quarter—he meant by public meeting, publicly called and publicly announced—was, that there really was not time to call it, and to give the necessary notice to the inhabitants of Manchester of the intention to hold it.
§ On the Question that the petition do lie upon the Table,
The Duke of Newcastlethought it right to make their Lordships acquainted with the contents of a letter he had received that morning respecting the petition. The letter stated that it had been got up in the way in which such petitions very frequently were—by obtaining the signatures of persons who were perfectly incompetent to affix their signatures to it. He 190 would read the letter, which, as their Lordships might suppose, was from a very good Conservative. The noble Duke then proceeded to read the letter. It stated that the Radicals of Manchester had been getting up a petition in support of the Corporation Bill, in consequence of the Lords still being in a majority against the Bill, which the Commons had sent up to it. The writer begged to state how the petition was getting up. It was by placing tables at the corners of the public streets, and getting all such persons as could just scribble their names to put them down; as the boys came out at their dinner-hour from the factories they were called to sign their names: not one of them knowing what they were signing. "I hope," added the writer, "I hope you will explain to the House this trick, carrying on by the Whig-Radicals—the representative party of our blessed House of Commons. If the qualification were higher, we would not have such Members as we now have. You may rely upon it that the property and prosperity of this borough are Conservatives." Now the writer of this letter certainly was not a very great scholar—but it contained matter worthy their Lordships' consideration notwithstanding. He (the Duke of Newcastle) would only say, in conclusion, that he was astonished at the Commissioners making such a Report as they had done, upon the most partial and false statements. He thought their conduct deserving of the severest reprehension of that House, and if any proposition to that effect were brought forward, he, for one, would cheerfully vote in its favour. He did not believe that the majority of the people advocated the Bill, but that the excitement in its favour was fomented and encouraged by his Majesty's Government.
Lord BroughamMy Lords, I hope the noble Duke, if he means to punish these Commissioners, does not, at all events, mean to punish them without first hearing what they have to say in their own behalf. Why, the noble Duke's mind is so far made up, that he is prepared to punish one side without hearing a word in its defence; he is ready not only to pass sentence, but to execute it immediately upon these Commissioners. Now, my Lords, I have no objection to rise in my place in defence of these Commissioners—not now though, but when the time comes—and I pledge myself to show 191 your Lordships, not on their own showing, but on the statement against them, without adducing any one word in their favour, that there is not one thing in which the slightest objection can be taken to them or the slightest impropriety laid to their charge. The noble Duke has anticipated the decision of your Lordships on a main point of the inquiry, with which we are not at this time entitled to deal, the evidence not yet being weighed, or even printed, if I understand truly. He not only anticipates the decision of your Lordships, but enters into a discussion upon the subject. I do not mean, I can assure you, my Lords, to follow the noble Duke's example further than to say, that I suppose his anonymous correspondent, who, as he says with considerable justice, has not had much of the benefit of the schoolmaster, can at least sign his name. Now, I want to see a specimen of his handwriting; of course I shall be better able to judge of the fact, if the noble Duke will have the kindness to hand over to me that letter with the name signed to it; but I have not much doubt that it will be found to be that of an individual very well known in Manchester, who has been—I will not say slandering—I will not say misrepresenting—I will not say calumniating—but speaking on all occasions, with reference to this subject, in a very unreserved and somewhat violent manner. He may be a very good Conservative, as the noble Duke says, but he has been a very bad speaker, on every occasion, and at every turn, for a very considerable time. As to only Radicals having got up this petition and signing it, I can only say, that I know one or two persons very well indeed, who have come up with it, and they are just as little Radicals as the noble Duke himself—which is perhaps saying very much. One of these gentlemen is one of the most respectable individuals in Manchester—a country banker, second to none in this country—of such wealth as I do not know whether many of your Lordships envy, but as I do very much—a very sensible man on all points—and one of the most quiet, most moderate, and most temperate politicians of any sort or kind that I ever have known in my experience; and he never was thought to be a Radical. Mr. George William Wood is, but Mr. Heywood is not, a Member of this—what is it?—good-for-nothing Parltament, that 192 this anonymous gentleman talks of? Precious Parliament, was it not? [The Duke of Newcastle: Blessed.] Oh, aye—blessed. We have heard of various Parliaments the Parliamentum indoctum among others; but I, for one, never heard of the Parliamentum benedictum; nevertheless, if the present Parliament pass this wholesome and blessed measure of Corporation Reform I think the name the noble Duke has given it may well belong to it, and that it may well and justly be called "the Blessed Parliament" ever afterwards. Mr. George William Woods, I was about to say, my Lords, has been elected since the Reform Bill; but Mr. Heywood was a representative under the old system, and before the passing of the Bill of 1832, of blessed memory.
§ Lord Ashburtondeprecated the introduction of a system of universal suffrage, the effect of the annual exercise of which, in towns like Manchester, Birmingham and Sheffield, could not be too strongly dreaded. He could not conceive how malevolence itself could introduce into any place which was the resort of manufacturing industry a greater curse than the Corporation Reform Bill must inevitably prove. If he were an inhabitant of Manchester, his first object would be, to exempt that town from the operation of the Bill; indeed, he had heard that many of the respectable inhabitants had intended to petition for a Charter of their own. On reference to the petition before the House even, he was at a loss to find that the extension of the provisions of the Bill to Manchester formed any part of its prayer.
Lord Broughamthe noble Baron had said that if he belonged to Manchester his first wish would be that the Corporation Bill should pass over that great and flourishing town, and he had the satisfaction of finding that the inhabitants of that town differed totally and entirely from the noble Baron. They strongly desired, he knew, that the Bill might extend its benefits to them. One of the bodies of the greatest interest among them had met and consulted upon the very point to which the noble Baron had adverted; but the idea suggested itself to them—it ought to have suggested itself to the more accurate mind of the noble Baron, who had read the petition and not the Bill—that it would have been a most preposterous thing for them to have 193 applied to Parliament for a Charter, when the provisions of the Bill gave them the power of applying for that Charter elsewhere. They, therefore, postponed their application until the happy and long-wished-for period of its passing arrived, when they would apply for it—not to Parliament—but under the provisions of the Bill to the Executive Government. They had, in fact, no Corporation at present, possessing merely the remains of a manor Court, which might have suited Manchester very well as a small hamlet, but was totally inapplicable to a great, populous, and flourishing town.
Lord Ellenboroughconfessed that on reading the prayer of the petition he came exactly to the same conclusion as his noble Friend below him (Lord Ashburton) had done. If it really was the desire of the inhabitants of Manchester that the provisions of the Bill should extend to them, they must have changed their opinions very materially within the last six or eight years, inasmuch as about eight years ago they applied to Parliament for a Bill which gave them, in fact, a local corporation for purposes of police; but a Corporation under local Acts was as different as possible from those proposed to be established by the Bill. If they desired the Bill to extend to them, they practically petitioned against 240 gentlemen elected annually under that system, one-third going out in three years. They had a stipendiary Magistrate; they enjoyed at present all the means of a good and quiet Government; and, above all, there was a limitation to the tax that could be imposed on them for maintaining it.
Lord Broughamsaid, that if he were not much misinformed, those very 240 respectable persons to whom the noble Baron had referred had actually met on this very point, and had only postponed the presentation of a petition on the subject for the very reason he had himself stated when he had addressed the House.
§ Petition to lie on the Table.
§ On the presentation of a petition from Coventry by Lord Melbourne,
Viscount Strangfordsaid, that on Monday last the ancient town of Coventry was thrown into a state of greater excitement than it had ever been since the time of the celebrated exhibition of the Lady Godiva, a paper with the heading 'Most Alarming Crisis,' was extensively circulated, and the public were informed 194 that papers were left for their signature at the Prince's Head, the Woolpack, the Rose and Crown, the Hand and Mace, and other public houses therein named. He had received a letter on the subject from a most respectable correspondent, in which the following passage occurred:—"Several of our friends went late last night to the different public-houses where the petition was represented as lying for signature, and there only saw blank sheets, which they were requested to sign. They were elected, it was true, by what was now considered a high qualification, but the government of Manchester was a popular one. They were shortly told the purport of the petition, but were not permitted to have a sight of it. No doubt many of the signatures will be forged, and it is of the utmost importance to the public that the truth should be exposed." It then went on to state that the petition presented against the Bill had the residence of each of the petitioners affixed to it. Would the noble Viscount inform the House whether the places of residence of the petitioners were affixed to the present petition?
§ Viscount MelbourneIt is not usual to affix the residences of the petitioners to any petition.
§ Viscount MelbourneIt was not evidence that was usually furnished. The noble Lord's correspondent stated, that there was no doubt many signatures would be—not had been—forged; and that it was necessary the truth should appear. He agreed with the writer of the letter. It was necessary that it should appear, and be established too. The petition was very temperately worded: it was short, and its contents might easily have come to the knowledge of those who signed it.
§ On the motion that the petitions lie upon the Table,
The Duke of Newcastlehad never intended to charge his Majesty's Government with fomenting those dissensions or the agitation in the country. He put it, however, to the noble Viscount whether such assertions as had issued from a newspaper, which on the authority of the noble and learned Lord opposite might be called a Ministerial paper (he meant the Morning Chronicle) had not that tendency. The article to which he referred contained 195 the following sentiments;—"We will not so far libel the character of our countrymen as for a moment to suppose that when victory is about to crown their efforts, they will weakly turn their backs on the foe and submit to be trampled on by infuriated oligarchs. Throughout city, town, and village, we expect to see the people once more at their posts, prepared to crown the work which added so much to the national glory in 1832. Repose from incessant and most harassing agitation they never can expect till they humble the oligarchy in the dust; for submission would only make these tyrants more insolent in their exactions. With a hostile Court and a hostile Peerage, they must have no truce till they have deprived both of the power of doing mischief." He (the Duke of Newcastle) called upon the noble Viscount to state, whether he intended to direct the Attorney-General to prosecute the publishers of this most villainous article, affecting, as it did, the dignity and safety of the Crown. He quoted this article from the Standard of the 5th of August, but this article was all of a piece with those emanating from the publication (The Morning Chronicle) He contended that it was the duty of the Government to prosecute such diabolical observations as these—observations calculated to deprive the Crown of all favour in the minds of the people.
§ Viscount Melbournesaid, he was not responsible for that or any other article which might be sent forth to the public through the medium of the public press; nor was he called upon to pronounce any opinion upon the article which had been quoted by the noble Duke. It was unnecessary that he should now go into any details as to the principles on which the Government would act; he would merely say, that he had heard of many articles sent forth to the public of which he did not approve, and that with respect to that quoted by the noble Duke it was not his intention to institute any prosecution.
The Duke of Newcastlesaid, that he had only asked the question of the noble Viscount in order that he might show by his reply his anxiety to save the name of the King, being so much polluted as it was in the article to which he had adverted.
§ Petition to lie on the table.