A.D. 1831.] ATTACKS UPON THE GOVERNMENT. 191 that visionary expectations should prevail with regard to connection with them referred to the dissolution, and the the blessings of parliamentary reform. The rhetorical exaggerations of excited orators were taken by the multitude as literally true. The nation was to be enriched by a fair representation of the people in parliament, and every one expected that a stream from the great fountain of wealth would bring extraordinary prosperity to his own home, while all the grievous burdens that now pressed on the springs of industry would be lightened or removed. Rack-rents would be reduced, oppressive taxes would be abolished, the demand for shop goods would be doubled or trebled, wages would be raised, and the general sum of human happiness would be vastly increased. "All young ladies imagine," said Sydney Smith, "that as soon as this bill is carried, they will be instantly married; schoolboys believe that gerunds and supines will be abolished, and that currant tarts must ultimately come down in price; the corporal and the sergeant are sure of double pay; bad poets expect a demand for their epics; and fools will be disappointed, as they always are." circumstances under which it occurred. The opposition denounced it as an impolitic proceeding, bearing the appearance of a revolutionary coup d'état. They charged the lord chancellor with making a false statement, in alleging that the commons had stopped the supplies, which, if true, was not the real cause of the dissolution, the cabinet having previously resolved upon that measure. Some of the ministers also, in their addresses to their constituenciesSir James Graham, for example-conveyed the same injurious impression, stating that "the last division, which had the effect of delaying the supplies, left no alternative but that of abandoning the bill, or of appealing to the people." With this "factious" conduct the tory candidates were taunted at the elections, and they complained that they suffered in consequence much unmerited odium. The chancellor denied the imputation. Not only had the ministers decided upon the measure of dissolution, but the requisite commission had been actually prepared; and lord Brougham said, "Knowing this, I must have been the veriest dolt and idiot in the creation, if I had said what has been attributed to me. I stated a fact that the dissolution being resolved upon, if there were wanting any justification for the step, the conduct of the house of commons the night before furnished ample justification for that proceeding." But the truth is, the opposition were smarting under the sense of defeat; they had been out-manoeuvred by lord Grey, and defeated by the use of their own tactics. Another ground of attack upon the government at the opening of the session was their conduct in not bringing The general election brought a large accession of strength to the reform party. The new parliament met on the 21st of June, and Mr. Manners Sutton was again elected speaker. In the speech from the throne, the king said, "Having had recourse to the dissolution of parliament, for the purpose of ascertaining the sense of my people on the expediency of a reform in the representation, I have now to recommend that important question to your earliest and most attentive consideration, confident that, in any measures which you may prepare for its adjustment, you will adhere to the acknowledged principles of the con-up Mr. O'Connell for judgment. It was alleged that they stitution, by which the rights of the crown, the authority of both houses of parliament, and the rights and liberties of the people are equally secured." The usual assurances were then given of the friendly disposition of all foreign powers; reference was made to the contest then going on in Poland, to the Belgian revolution, and the right of its people to regulate their own affairs, so long as the exercise of it did not endanger the security of neighbouring states. A paragraph was devoted to Portugal, lamenting that diplomatic relations with its government could not be reestablished, though a fleet had been sent to enforce our demands of satisfaction. Strict economy was recommended, in the stereotype phraseology of royal speeches. Having referred to reduction of taxation, the state of the revenue, and to his desire to assist the industry of the country, by legislation on sound principles, the speech described the appearance of Asiatic cholera, and the precautions that had been taken to prevent its introduction into this country. The remainder of the speech was devoted to Ireland, where "local disturbances, unconnected with political causes," had taken place in various districts, especially in Clare, Galway, and Roscommon, for the repression of which the constitutional authority of the law had been vigorously and successfully applied; and thus the necessity of enacting new laws to strengthen the executive had been avoided, to avert which, the king said, would ever be his most earnest desire. Addresses were agreed to in both houses without a division. The only discussion of interest that took place in had entered into a corrupt compromise with the great Irish agitator, in order to avert his hostility and secure his support at the elections. This was indignantly denied both by Mr. Stanley and lord Plunket. They contended that as the act expired with the parliament, so did the conviction, and that Mr. O'Connell could not be legally punished. This was the opinion of the law officers of the crown in Ireland, an opinion in which the English law officers concurred. Mr. Stanley said :-"Not only was there no collusion or compromise, but I should have been most glad if Mr. O'Connell could have been brought up for judgment; but then we have been told that we ought not to have dissolved parliament, because by so doing Mr. O'Connell had escaped. Now, no man can be more sensible than I am of the importance of showing to the people of Ireland that if Mr. O'Connell chooses to go beyond the law, he is not above the law; but, without meaning the slightest disrespect to Mr. O'Connell, I must say that if I put on the one hand the success of a great and important measure like the reform bill, and on the other the confinement of Mr. O'Connell in his majesty's gaol of Kilmainham for three, six, or nine months, I must say that what became of Mr. O'Connell was as the dust in the balance. Besides, the impression of the supremacy of the law was made upon the people by the fact of the verdict having been obtained against him, and an immediate change was wrought in the system of agitation, which, indeed, ceased. Such being the case, the question of what might be the personal consequences to any individual by the dissolution became of still less importance than it was before." On this speech Mr. Roebuck makes some judicious reflections, which apply equally to other passages of Mr. O'Connell's life:-"Mr. Stanley knew well when he launched this barbed and poisoned shaft the pain he was about to inflict, the anger he would inevitably create. The pleasure of giving this offence to Mr. O'Connell was too great a temptation for Mr. Stanley's small stock of prudence and forbearance. The immediate enjoyment and triumph were all his own; the mischief that followed was felt by his colleagues and his country. Had this favourable opportunity been taken advantage of, had the ministry conciliated Mr. O'Connell, the peace of Ireland might have been secured, the coercion bill would never have been called for, or thought necessary, and the whig administration would have escaped the disastrous consequences of that fatal measure-fatal alike to the stability of their cabinet and the welfare of the United Kingdom." They had another excellent opportunity of conciliation, without any violation of consistency, when Mr. O'Connell was lord mayor of Dublin. During his year of office, the viceregal court was completely estranged from the chief magistrate of the city, which he no doubt keenly felt; but when it lavished its attentions upon his successor, Mr. George Roe, he could no longer control his vexation, feeling that the slight was not only put upon him personally, but upon the church and people of which he was the champion. He accordingly introduced the repeal agitation into the Dublin corporation, and commenced a monster debate, which lasted several days, in defiance of the earnest remonstrances of the lord mayor, one of the most enlightened liberals and steady friends of the Roman catholics to be found in the ranks of the Irish protestants. On the 24th of June, lord John Russell proposed his cecond edition of the reform bill. His speech on this occasion was a perfect contrast to the one with which he introduced the measure at first. There was no longer any hesitation or timidity. He was no longer feeling his way doubtfully in an untried path, or navigating without compass along a dangerous coast. He boldly launched out to sea, with his eye steadily fixed on the north star, certain of his course, and confident of the issue. The discussions of the previous session had thrown a flood of light upon the whole question. Sustained by the enthusiasm of the people, and animated by the sympathy of the majority around him on the ministerial benches, he spoke as if a greater and more vigorous mind had taken possession of his frame. He was strong in argument, cutting in sarcasm, defiant in tone, powerful in declamation. Borne by the power of public opinion to a higher and more commanding position, and proudly conscious of the elevation, he seemed ashamed of the petty proposals of former years, and felt his heart as well as his intellect expanding to the greatness of the new position. The bill was read a first time without opposition, the discussion being expressly reserved by Sir Robert Peel for the second reading, which was fixed for the 4th of July. In the meantime, the Irish bill was brought in by Mr. Stanley on the 30th of June, Messrs. O'Connell and Sheil complaining bitterly of the difference existing, to the disadvantage of Ireland, between the proposed plans of reform for the two countries. On the following day the lord advocate brought in the bill relating to Scotland. On the 4th of July, lord John Russell moved the second reading of the English reform bill. A debate of three nights followed, containing little or no novelty in the argument, nothing but a wearisome repetition of points that had been discussed all over the country, hundreds of times, during the last few months. The most interesting feature was the position of Sir Robert Peel, who unfortunately placed himself in the front of the battle against reform, in which he proved himself so able a general, that all enlightened friends of the country must have lamented his false position. Mr. Roebuck, writing in 1849, says :-"Sir Robert Peel, for the first time in his life, met a really hostile house of commons, and showed, by the dexterity with which he managed the prejudices and conciliated the good will of his opponents, that seldom in that house had there been seen any one more skilful in that curious species of disputative warfare which occurs in deliberative assemblies. To wise forethought, to large and generous views, to philosophy, to eloquence, the right honourable gentleman could lay no claim on this occasion. Astuteness, quickness, dexterity, and a certain plausibility that appeared like wisdom-all these were his. But looking at his conduct as that of a statesman, whose aim and purpose in life was the good of his country, his whole course of conduct was a glaring error. All his anticipations of evil have been signally belied, and he now stands a living witness of his own grievous mistake, both as regards his own position and the future destinies of his country. The convulsions with which he threatened us, as the necessary consequence of the reform bill, have not occurred. The internal condition of this country and its external relations have received no shock from the change which he so vehemently deprecated. The obedience of the people to the law is as great as ever; the wisdom and intelligence of the more instructed among us still guide and direct us. We are, in short, still a peaceful, enlightened, and improving people. If, then, the threatening denunciations of Sir Robert Peel were really believed by himself, certain it is he was most completely mistaken; if they were the mere artifice of an unscrupulous rhetorician, they have received a most signal rebuke." In a note, Mr. Roebuck adds the expression of an opinion from which few men will now be found to dissent-"There is not a shadow of reason for believing that Sir Robert Peer was not really in earnest. Being a man he was subject to error, and this was the capital mistake of his life." * The division on the second reading took place on the 6th of July, when the numbers were-for the bill, 367; against it, 231; majority, 136. This result was a sufficient vindication of the appeal made to the country. The nation had now spoken constitutionally as to the evils of the old system of representation, and unmistakably expressed its determination to have it reformed. The measure might be delayed in the commons by vexatious opposition. But if it were to be defeated it must be by the house of lords, "Roebuck," vol. il, p. 182. A.D. 1831.1 THE REFORM BILL IN COMMITTEE. and it required some boldness in the majority of that assembly to take upon itself to hinder the other branch of the legislature from effecting its own reform. The bill now went into committee, when the case of each borough which it was proposed to disfranchise came under separate consideration. In schedule A were placed, alphabetically, all the boroughs which had less than 2,000 of population, and these were to be disfranchised. When Appleby, the first on the list, came under consideration, there was a keen contest as to the actual numbers then in the town, and the question turned upon the census, by which the committee were to be guided. By the census of 1821 the place would 193 are aware of the event which is casting its shadow before namely, that the boroughs will be overtaken by the population returns of 1831. In another fortnight these returns would be laid before the house; and though his majesty's ministers now proceed expressly on the doctrine of a population of 2,000 and 4,000, they are guilty of the inconceivable absurdity of proceeding on the returns of 1821, when they can so soon be in possession of the census of 1831." The house, however, determined, by a majority of 118, to proceed upon the old census. A series of wearisome debates upon the details of each particular borough proceeded from day to day, and lasted for two months, the be disfranchised, but the inhabitants affirmed that by the census of 1831, then in progress, they were shown to have more than the requisite number; and Sir Robert Peel contended strenuously that they should wait for the more correct information. Mr. Wynn having moved a general resolution that the consideration of the schedules should be postponed till the result of the census was published, Sir Robert Peel said, with great show of reason, "After having obtained so large a majority as 136 on the principle of the bill, government would have acted wisely, even for the interests of the measure itself, to have postponed going into details, till they were in possession of better documents on which to proceed. They know what is coming; they VOL. VII.-No. 329. ministry invariably carrying their points by triumphant majorities. The tone of the discussion was often acrimonious, as might naturally be expected, from the weighty personal interests involved. Sir Edward Sugden solemnly declared that he considered the tone and manner, as well as the argument, of the attorney-general as indicating that they were to be dragooned into the measure. In the opinion of Sir Charles Wetherell, all this was "too capricious, too trifling, too tyrannical, and too insulting to the British public, to carry with it the acquiescence either of the majority within or the majority without the house." The ill-temper and factious obstruction of the opposition greatly damaged the tory party out of doors and exasperated the people against them. Indignant and impatient, the public began to cry out, "Are we bound to await the pleasure of these interested and factious opponents? Are we tamely to suffer them to employ the forms of the constitution thus unjustly as a means of delay? and shall we not quicken their tedious pace, by a significant exhibition of our power and our impatience?" of lords, and handed the English reform bill to the lord chancellor, praying the concurrence of their lordships. This scene has been made the subject of a great historical painting. The bill, without any opposition or remark from any conservative peer, was read a first time on the motion of earl Grey, and ordered to be read a second time on Monday week. On a subsequent day, a petition in favour During the passage of the bill through committee, three of the bill having been presented, the marquis of Westimportant proposals were made-the first by lord Chandos minster asserted that the bill having passed the commons, —that tenants paying fifty pounds per annum for their to which it peculiarly belonged, the peers ought not to inholdings should have a vote in the counties. This was terfere with it. For this he was rebuked by lord Eldon, known as "The Chandos clause of the reform bill," which who said, "The proposition that the peers of England had was carried on the 18th of August, by a majority of 84, no interest in this question, was the most absurd one that the numbers being 232 and 148. Mr. Hume proposed that ever had been uttered or propounded, there or elsewhere. the colonies should be represented in the house of commons; He hoped and believed that, when the question came to be but the motion was negatived without a division. Mr. discussed by their lordships, they would do their duty, Hunt, the celebrated radical reformer, moved that all fearlessly and manfully, and at the hazard of all the conhouseholders paying rates and taxes should have votes; but, sequences. He should be utterly ashamed of himself if strange to say, household suffrage had in the committee but he gave way to the imputation of being prevented by fear a single supporter, Mr. Hunt himself, who upon a division from doing his duty. Bred as he had been in loyalty, constituted the minority. Mr. Hume asked only nineteen living under the law, and revering the constitution of his members to represent 100,000,000 of inhabitants, including country-now that he had arrived at the age of fourscore our Indian empire, to which he would give four representa-years, he would rather die in his place than suppress his tives. It was certainly a small demand, but as a repre- indignation at such sentiments." "It is difficult," says lord sentation of our colonies and dependencies it was ludicrously Campbell, "to imagine the consternation now felt by him inadequate. Those who consider the present state of our who had successfully resisted such mild reforms as taking Australian colonies, governing themselves by means of away the punishment of death for the offence of stealing to their own effective legislatures, and consuming manifold the value of forty shillings in a dwelling-house, or five more British produce than all the American colonies, will shillings in a shop, when he regarded the triumphant be amused to read that when Australia was mentioned progress of a measure which was to operate a revolution, as a place entitled to send a member to the imperial parlia- by the transference of political power, under the form of a ment, there was a loud laugh. legislative act, to be passed by king, lords, and commons." At length, after every clause of the bill, and every word and every place in each of the schedules had been the subjects of all possible motions and discussions--after a warfare which, for animosity and duration, is unparalleled in our parliamentary history, the bill was read a third time on the 21st of September, and passed by a majority of 109, the numbers being 345 to 236. The result was received with loud and long-continued cheering by the reformers in the house. The anxious and impatient multitude in the streets caught up the sounds of triumph with exultant enthusiasm; the acclamations of all classes of the people rang throughout the agitated metropolis. The news spread like wildfire through the country, and was everywhere received with ringing of bells, and other demonstrations of joy. As soon as the bill passed, an illumination of London was proposed, and an application was made to the lord mayor, in order to obtain his sanction, which was granted. The illumination was extensive, and those who refused to comply had their windows broken by the populace. In many places the people, whose patience had been so severely tested, began to lose their self-control, and were betrayed into riotous conduct. Mr. Macaulay, and other leading reformers in parliament, had warned the opposition of this danger, and it turned out that their apprehensions were not altogether visionary. At length, on the 22nd of September, lord John Russell, attended by lord Althorp, and a great body of the most distinguished reformers, appeared at the bar of the house The debate lasted a week, and was conducted with extraordinary ability, with a freshness of interest and eloquence which seemed hardly possible on so worn a subject. During its progress there was a skirmish between the lord chancellor and lord Eldon on the legality of public meetings. A peer stated that at a meeting of the Birmingham Political Union, attended by many thousands, an orator advised them, if the reform bill should be rejected by the lords, to refuse to pay taxes any more; that he called upon those present who supported his motion to hold up their hands; and that thereupon a forest of hands was held up, amidst immense cheering. The lord chancellor expressed disapprobation of the proceedings; nevertheless, he could not say, as a lawyer, that there was any breach of the king's peace, or any offence that the law knows how to punish. Lord Eldon took fire at this opinion. As a lawyer, he declared that every man who held up his hand was responsible for the language of the speaker, and he begged to tell the noble and learned lord that his seat on the wool. sack could not be maintained by any one for six months, "if the doctrines now circulated through the country, and placed every morning under the review of every one, are suffered to be promulgated any longer.” The debate on the second reading commenced on the 3rd of October, with a speech from lord Grey-grave, elaborate, earnest, and impressive; simple, yet dignified. He described his own efforts in regard to parliamentary reform, spoke of the changes which had of necessity attended his opinions A.D. 1831.] THE BILL THROWN OUT BY THE LORDS. 195 house in order, and prepare for the coming storm. I on the subject, and of the circumstances which, at the close of his long career, when the conservative spirit is naturally strongest in every man, had led him to endeavour to put in practice the theories and speculations of his youth and manhood. And with the matured wisdom which a fine intellect and upright nature like his enabled him to acquire, he said—“I felt that the most prudent and the most safe measure I could propose would be a bold one; and this the more especially, because I felt that looking to the safety of the country as our true policy, I could effect what would satisfy the feelings and reasonable desires of the people, which would thus give me a position on which I could make a firm stand for the defence of the true principles of the constitution." Towards the close of his speech, he said—" Brave, I know your lordships to be, and angrily susceptible when approached with a menace. I fling aside all ideas of menace or intimidation; but I conjure you, as you value your rights and dignities, and as you wish to transmit them unimpaired to your posterity, to lend a willing ear to the representations of the people. Do not take up a position which will show that you will not attend to the voice of nine-tenths of the people, who call upon you in a tone too loud not to be heard, and too decisive to be misunderstood. The people are all but unanimous in support of the bill; the immense preponderance of county members, and members for populous places which have voted for it, is a sufficient proof of that. If this measure be refused, none other will be accepted-none less would, if accepted, be satisfactory. Do not, I beg, flatter yourselves that it is possible by a less effective measure than this to A speaker at the great meeting of the Birmingham quiet the storm which will rage, and to govern the agita- Political Union, anticipating this conduct of the bishops, tion which will have been produced. I certainly deprecate expressed the popular feeling in the following terms:popular violence. As a citizen of a free state, and feeling "It is said the reverend fathers in God, the bishops, will that freedom is essentially connected with order, I deprecate oppose this bill; if they do, their fate, which even now is it. As a member of the government, it is my duty to exceedingly doubtful, will be irrevocably sealed. The maintain tranquillity; but as a citizen, as a member of the haughty remnants of the establishment will be buried in government, as a man and a sṭātesman, I am bound to look the dust, with a nation's execration for their epitaph: the at the consequences which may flow from rejecting the splendid mitre will fall from the heads of the bishops; their measure. And although I do not say, as the noble duke crosses will fall as if from a palsied hand; their robes of (Wellington) did on another occasion, that the rejection of lawn will be turned into garments of mourning; and my this measure will lead to civil war-I trust it will not pro-lord bishop of London may shut up his episcopal palace, duce any such effect-yet I see such consequences likely to arise from it, as make me tremble for the security of this house and of this country. Upon your lordships, then, as you value the tranquillity and prosperity of the country, I earnestly call to consider well before you reject this measure." The most impressive part of this memorable oration was the appeal to the bishops. He said "Let me respectfully entreat the right reverend prelates to consider that, if this bill be rejected by a narrow majority of the lay peers, and its fate should thus be decided, within a few votes, by the votes of the heads of the church, what will then be their situation with the country? You have shown that you are not indifferent to the signs of the times. You have introduced, in the way in which all such measures ought to be introduced by the heads of the church, measures of melioration. In this you have acted with a prudent forethought. You appear to have felt that the eyes of the country were upon you; that it is necessary to put your and take out a licence for a beer-shop!"* Lord Eldon described the progress of the debate from day to day in letters to members of his family. Lord Dudley and lord Haddington quite surprised and delighted the zealous old man—they spoke so admirably against the bill. Lord Carnarvon delivered a most excellent speech; but lord Plunket's speaking disappointed him. The fifth night of the debate was occupied by the lawyers. Lord Eldon following lord Wynford and lord Plunket-solemnly delivered his conscience on this momentous occasion. He was ill and weak, and being an octogenarian, he might be said to be speaking on the edge of the grave. He expressed his horror of the new doctrines which had been laid down, with respect to the law of the country and its institutions. He could not consent to have all rights arising out of charters, and all the rights of close boroughs, swept away. Boroughs, he contended, were both property and trust. * "Annual Register," 1831, p. 282. |