Sitting of 9 February 1831

MINUTES.
A new Writ was ordered to be issued for the Borough of Newark-on-Trent, in the room of HENRY
342
WILLOUGHBY, Esq., who had accepted the Stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds.
Returns ordered. On the Motion of Mr. W. WHITMORE, several respecting the trade with the East Indies and China:—On the Motion of Lord LOWTHER, of the quantity of Tobacco imported into the United Kingdom in 1828, 1829, and 1850, stating the places whence it is imported:—On the Motion of Mr. NORTH, the number of Protestant Tradesmen admitted to the Freedom of the Town of Galway, during the last ten years.
Petitions presented. In favour of Reform, by Mr. STRUTT, three from Belper, Duffield, and Holbrook, in the County of Derby:—By Mr. PHILLPOTTS, from the City of Gloucester, signed by 800 Householders:—By Mr. HUNT, three from Stockport; and from Bullock Smithy, in Cheshire: —By Lord F. OSBORNE, from Little Shelford; from Great Shelford; and other parishes in the County of Cambridge: —By Mr. WRIGHTSON, from Hull:—By Mr. WARBURTON, from Burton Bridstock, in the County of Dorset:— By Mr. PORTMAN, from Sherbourne:—By Lord EBRINGTON, several from Leominster, Bea, Ashburton, and other places in the County of Dorset:—By the Marquis of BLANDFORD, from the Political Union of Kidderminster: By Mr. CURST, from Swindon:—By Sir W. GUISE, from Chipping Sudbury:—By Mr. PENDARVIS, from Bodmin, Launceston, Truro, and various parishes in the County of Cornwall:—By Lord W. POWLETT, from Durham (County). For a Repeal of the Duties on Sea-borne Coal, by the same noble lord, from the same place:—By lord J. STUART, from a parish in Glamorganshire:—By Mr. RUMBOLD from North Yarmouth:—By Mr. PORTMAN, from Blandford. By Lord E. SOMERSET, from Northleach, for the Repeal of the Malt Duty. For an Amelioration of the Criminal Code, by Lord W. POWLETT, from Stockton. For a general Fast, by General O'NEIL, from Antrim:—By Mr. CURTEIS, from West- ham, in Sussex:—

The hon. Gentleman took the opportunity of expressing his approbation of the conduct of his Majesty's present Government in respect to Ireland, and his hope that their measures would be attended with success.
By Lord MORPETH, from Horslcy:—By Mr. J. SMITH, from Slindon, Sussex. For the Repeal of the Duty on Printed Cottons, by Lord STANLEY, three from different bodies of Calico Printers in Lancashire, and from a body of Bleachers in Manchester:—By Mr. W. PATTEN, from Sunnyside and Burnley. By Mr. B. CARTER, from Colonel De Lacy Evans, and Benjamin Smith, Esq., who, on the 17th of November, had presented a Petition, complaining of an undue Return for the Borough of Rye, praying for leave to withdraw the Petition.—The order for taking it into consideration discharged. For a reduction of Taxation, by Lord MORPETH, from Stanfield, Yorkshire. For a Repeal of the Assessed Taxes, by the same noble Lord, from Sheply:—By sir W. GUISE, from Stroud:—By Mr. HART DAVIS, from St. Stephens, Bristol. For the Repeal of the Stamp Duties on Newspapers, by Sir J. GRAHAM, from Carlisle.

PRINTING OF PETITIONS.
Mr. Hughes Hughespresented a Petition, praying the Abolition of Slavery, from an Episcopal Chapel in London-street, Fitzroysquare, and moved that it be printed.
General Gascoynesaid, he believed it was now a rule of the House, that petitions of this nature, of which the House had already received a great number, should not be printed.
Mr. Hughesobserved, that he every evening heard an order passed for the

343
printing of the petitions presented to the House, and he did not know why the petitions he was intrusted with should not have the same privilege.
The Speakerthought it necessary to say, that both the hon. Members laboured under some misapprehension of the course pursued with respect to petitions. There was no rule of the House which forbade the printing of petitions of this description; but there was a general understanding, that the Members were not to require the printing of petitions which contained nothing in statement or in prayer different from the many which had been already presented, and a number of which, having been printed, were in the knowledge of the House. The understanding was, that petitions on subjects of this kind were not to be printed when there were so many others, on matters of great importance, which it was necessary should be printed.
Mr. Hughes Hughessaid, he had a great number of these petitions to present. He had been asked that day how many of 2,000 he could take charge of; and if they were not to be printed, he must read them to the House.
The Speakersaid, he was sure the hon. Member would not persist in that course, when he was told it would be very irregular. The hon. Member might read extracts of the petitions if they contained new matter, but he could not, without leave of the House, read the petition itself.
Mr. Hughes Hughesthought, the petition he had now presented contained sentiments which should be made known, and he therefore moved that it be printed.
General Gascoynesaid, he must oppose that Motion.
The Speakerasked, who seconded the Motion.
No Member answered, and the Motion was not put.

THE ROTUNDA MEETINGS, AND MR. O'CONNELL.
Mr. Huntpresented a Petition from a person named Hetherington, the Chairman of one of the Rotunda meetings, who, in behalf of the persons assembled, expressed the conviction, that the persecution of Mr. O'Connell by the Government would increase, rather than allay, the disturbances of Ireland. The hon. Member, in supporting the petition, took occasion to disclaim all connection
344
with the meetings held by Mr. Taylor, Mr. Carlile, and Mr. Jones; and having condemned the cold-blooded policy which the noble Lord (Althorp) had expressed himself willing to adopt towards Ireland, when he uttered the threat, that he was ready to support a civil war rather than suffer the dismemberment of the empire, he declared, he was satisfied that no jury, except a jury packed by the Government, could ever pronounce a verdict of guilty against the patriot Daniel O'Connell.
Mr. North Mr. North, although unwilling to raise a discussion on a petition of this kind, could not allow the observations of the hon. Member, with respect to the Government juries in Ireland, to pass without notice. He (Mr. North) had twice, in his professional life, had occasion to form a judgment of the merits of those juries. Once, when Dr. Sheridan was tried and acquitted, and a second time, when certain persons, in 1822, were charged with a conspiracy, and the jury could not agree in their verdict; on these occasions, as well as on many others, the juries of Ireland had proved themselves as honest, independent, and virtuous, as any number of men who could be collected; and he trusted that such instances would satisfy the hon. Member, as well as those to whose attention such suggestions were directed out of doors, that it was not so easy to pack juries in Ireland as some were led to imagine.
Mr. Leaderlamented the occurrences which had given rise to the prosecutions, but expressed his pleasure to hear that the question was not to be determined by a tribunal which united judge and jury in itself.
Lord Stanley Lord Stanley, adverting to the language of the member for Preston, with reference to the expressions used by the noble Lord (Althorp) last night, said, that in the absence of that noble Lord, he, as one of those present most closely connected with him and the Government, felt bound to express his surprise that any one could interpret the expression of the noble Lord into a threat of having recourse to civil war. On the contrary, he distinctly understood the noble Lord to say, that, much as he abhorred civil war, he preferred the dreadful chance of civil war to the dismemberment of the empire.
Mr. Huntsaid, he had been called on to explain or to apologise for an expression he had used with reference to the lan-

345
guage of the noble Lord (Althorp) last night. Now, he recollected these expressions well, and he knew, and had said so at the time that they, as well as those used by the other noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) bore the construction which he had put on them. It was true that the member for Clare had held out a threat, that if this country refused to suffer the question of a separation to he discussed, the people of Ireland would plunge into a civil war. Well, the member for Clare had asserted, that if they did not agree to a separation, they would have civil war. The noble Lord had probably put forward his threat in reply to that; but he repeated, that he regretted the use of such threats, and he regretted it the more, as he said at the time, because the right hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel), and the hon. member for Borough bridge (Sir Charles Wetherell), had both hallooed the Ministers on to let slip the dogs of war. He cautioned the Ministers against being misled by these cheers, and he repeated that caution now; but he begged to say, with all his desire to respect the House and its forms, that he could not withdraw what he had said. As to the petition before the House, although it bore the signature of but one person, it was as good as if it had ten thousand, for, from what he had seen, all the petitions appeared to go into that gentleman's bag [pointing to the Clerk] under the Table, and were out of sight in an instant.
Lord Stanleysaid, he could not abstain from repeating his conviction, that the noble Lord (Lord Althorp) merely alluded to his being willing to prefer the dreadful chances of civil war in Ireland to the dismemberment of the empire. This was his recollection of the noble Lord's expressions; and although he was present during the whole of the evening, he did not recollect that the member for Preston accused him of using a threat.

DISSECTIONS.
Colonel Lygonpresented a Petition from the Surgical and Medical Society of Westminster, praying for the removal of all difficulties in the way of obtaining Subjects for Dissection.
Mr. Warburtonsaid, that it was not his intention to renew his bill in the present Session, but that he had not relinquished the subject, and would probably bring in a bill respecting it in the next Session of Parliament.
Mr. Huntobserved, that if he should
346
continue to have the honour of a seat in the House when the hon. Gentleman introduced his bill, he would, if a clause were proposed to devote the bodies of poor persons to dissection, move, that every young surgeon, before he was allowed to touch a dissecting-knife, should sign an instrument, giving up his own body after death to the same operation. If it should be proposed to devote the bodies of poor paupers to dissection, he should move to add the bodies of those rich paupers, the pensioners on the Civil List.

REGISTRATION OF DEEDS BILL.
Lord W. Powlettpresented a Petition from certain landholders in the neighbourhood of Stockton, praying that the Registration of Deeds Bill might not pass into a law.
Mr. John Campbellsaid, that gross misrepresentations had gone forth respecting the nature of his Bill. It was opposed by those who had an interest in defeating it; and to attain their object, they represented it to have a retrospective effect, and as calculated to give to many persons great inconvenience, and cause them great trouble. It had no retrospective operation whatever; and its prospective operation would be unattended with the slightest inconvenience.
Lord Morpethcould assure the hon. Member, that the measure was opposed by a great many parties who had no sinister interest to serve by the opposition.
Sir M. W. Ridleysaid, that he objected to the Bill and should certainly oppose it.
Sir J. Wrottesleythought the hon. and learned Gentleman deserved the thanks of all landed proprietors for His endeavours to lessen the cost of conveyancing.
Petition to lie on the Table.

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.
Sir James Grahampresented a Petition from the rate-payers of Carlisle for Reform in Parliament.
Mr. Philip Henry Howardsupported the Petition. Though the prayer of the householders might appear to militate against the interests of those he represented, yet he was sure that the freemen of Carlisle would never wish to stand in the way of the general good. He looked anxiously forward to Reform, because all orders of the State would reap advantages from it; but he looked forward to its being proposed by the Sovereign, for, unless it came from him, it was not likely to be con-

347
ducted to a happy issue. Without a Reform there could be no equality among the Peers, who ought not to interfere with the elections of that House, and without Reform the Commons could not be an integral part of the British empire. He dissented from the petitioners on the subject of Ballot, because that mode of election had often been a cloak to injustice. It was introduced into the elective and judicial proceedings in Greece, and had fostered there intrigue and duplicity. It was known in Rome in the year 614, having been then first introduced, by the Tribune Gabinus, into the leges tabellariœfor the election of Magistrates. Cassius adopted it, of whom Cicero said, that he was fond of following every fashionable whim of the day. Papirius Carbo extended it to legislation, and he was accustomed, says Cicero, to aver "Se ut Popilium condemnaret no-cuisse Reipublicœ." Such was the history of the Ballot in Rome, it begun in turbulence, and was consummated in revenge. Corruption thickened under its influence till Cæsar trampled on the liberties of his country. Gibbon remarked, "that a new method of secret ballot abolished the influence of fear and shame, of honour and interest, and the abuse of freedom accelerated the progress of anarchy and despotism. The Romans had aspired to be equal, and they were levelled by the equality of servitude." He doubted if the Ballot were known to the free States of Italy, or in the free constitution of the Saxon ancestors of our countrymen. In Germany, certainly, the Emperors, and in Poland, the Kings, were long elected by open voting:, and he believed, with the hon. member for South-wark, that the use of the Ballot in America had led to much corruption. He saw much to admire in France, and something to envy, but what he admired and envied was mingled with so much of levity, impiety, and profaneness, that he wished not to borrow even what he admired, for fear of importing what he dreaded. He looked to the improvement of our own institutions to place liberty on a secure basis, and it was not in their spirit to adopt the principle of secret voting. He had confidence in the Administration, and he trusted that they would neither embroil the nation in unnecessary conflicts, nor suffer its honour to be tarnished.
Mr. Warburtonreminded the hon. Member, that the passage he had quoted from Cicero was part of a dialogue, and
348
therefore, perhaps, it did not express the real sentiments of that great man.
Sir Charles Wetherellconfirmed the hon. member for Carlisle's (Mr. Howard's) statements, and added, that in Sparta, at first, the Ballot did not exist, and was only introduced when the government became corrupt.
Mr. Huntcordially supported the petition, and was sure, whatever the hon. and learned Member might think, that the Ballot was necessary to satisfy the people.
Petition to lie on the Table.

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By the Earl of ROSSLYN from the Procurators of Perth, complaining of losses they suffered by an alteration of the law, and praying for the Repeat of the Stamp Duties on their Indentures and other documents. By Lord BOSTON, from Carnarvon, complaining of an unjust Tax imposed on Slates- By Lord WHANCLIFFE, from the Ward of Bridge, for the Repeal of the Duty on Sea-borne Coals:—By Lord FARNHAM, from the City of Bristol, with a similar prayer; also complaining of the privileges granted to the Port of Newport.