ings of the manufactures of the country? When such measures as the renewal of the Charter of the East-India Company, and that of the Bank of England, are in progress, is it to be said, that the people of a town like Birmingham have no greater interest in the result than those who reside in the hundred of Bassetlaw? Are they, at a time of such general and momentous considerations, to be consigned to a mere virtual representation, and refused the benefit of a just and seasonable opportunity of having a direct presence in the legislature ? No class, in fact, more directly requires this aid than the people of Birmingham; who are now to be refused it, notwithstanding the eminent advantages which the country could not fail to derive from the pursuit of a different course. Indeed, when I survey those weighty interests, and the incalculable benefits that would result from the concession now called for, I cannot help appealing to my right honourable friends on the Treasury Bench, and recalling to them the apposite and beautiful quotation lately made by a noble friend in the other House,* at the head of the law, who repeated it as it was used by a great luminary of this House -Mr. Burke-when describing the benign effects which had resulted from the adjustment of the ill-proportioned representation of Wales,-" From that moment, as by a charm, the tumults subsided--obedience was restored; peace, order, and civilization followed in the train of liberty -when the day-star of the English Constitution had arisen in their hearts, all was harmony within and without." By pursuing the policy of the act of Henry VIII. in the present case, the same happy consequences would followthe same guarantee would be obtained for the loyalty of a patient and enduring people. These great advantages are now within your reach. Never before have you had an equal opportunity of effecting so desirable an object, so readily, and so quietly. Lord Lyndhurst. My honourable friend, the member for Hertfordshire, alluded to the boroughs in the west of England, and remarked how well they worked. Upon this point, I will offer nothing more than that I know enough of these matters to wish to avoid discussing them in detail. After all, Sir, the question is-has, in the particular instance before us, that degree of forfeiture been incurred by bribery, which justifies the total disfranchisement of the borough? It is not necessary, in the fulfilment of the principle which governs these transactions, that each individual shall, in the pursuit of what he conceived to be his private interest, have violated his public trust ;-it is enough to show, that the general corruption is so notorious in the body exercising the franchise, that they do not deserve to be invested with public rights. Their franchise becomes, in such a case, vitiated. In fact, there is no other way of dealing with the principle. We must act upon the general condition of the place. I know, Sir, that in enforcing these opinions I am exposing myself to the repetition of the imputation of having been of late governed very much by revolutionary theories. I have been charged by some, whose esteem and goodwill I greatly value, as having, in matters of commerce, as well as in those of the general policy of the country, been too prone to alterations, and as being the author, in some instances, and the promoter in others, of innova tions of a rash and dangerous nature. I deny the charge. I dare the authors of it to the proof. I am ready to join issue with them, whenever it is brought forward in a substantive, tangible, and intelligible shape. For the present, I will content myself with reminding those gentlemen, when they talk of the dangers of innovation, that they ought to remember, with Lord Bacon, "that Time has been and is the great Innovator." Upon that Innovator, I have felt it my duty cautiously to wait, at a becoming distance, and with proper circumspection; but not arrogantly and presumptuously to go before him, and endeavour to outstrip his course. Time has raised these great interests; and it is the business of a statesman to move onwards with the new combinations which have grown around him. This, Sir, is the principle by which my feelings have been constantly regulated during a long public life, and by which I shall continue to be governed, so long as I take any part in the public affairs of this country. It is well said, by the most poetical genius, perhaps, of our own times "A thousand years scarce serve to form a state, This is the feeling which has regulated-which will continue to regulate my conduct. It was by a reference to it, that I governed myself in the great measure which has recently occupied the attention of Parliament ; verily believing that if, in an evil hour, the Government had resolved upon a permanent, uncompromising system of resistance to the Catholic claims, they would have gone far to illustrate in this country the last words of the quotation-" An hour may lay it in the dust." I claim therefore for myself, that I have never been one of those who think that, in order to warrant any change in the established policy of the state, it is sufficient to show that the change is in accordance with natural rights, or founded upon some general principle, the abstract truth of which cannot be denied. At the same time, I do not mean to deny, that when we come to that which is the practical duty of statesmen,-to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of one course of proceeding against another, and to make our choice between them,-it will generally be found, that the balance will incline on the side of justice and of sound principle. But I go no further. I am no advocate for changes upon mere abstract theory. I know not, indeed, which is the greatest folly-that of resisting all improvement, because improvement implies innovationor that of referring every thing to first principles, and to abstract doctrines. The business of the practical man is to make himself acquainted with facts-to watch events— to understand the actual situation of affairs, and the course of time and circumstances, as bearing upon the present state of his own country and the world. These are the grounds, by a reference to which his reason and judgment must be formed-according to which, without losing sight of first principles, he must know how to apply them, and to temper their inflexibility. This is the task of practical legislation. We cannot frame new laws, or change those under which we have hitherto lived, without a reference to the situation of the country, and to all the circumstances in which we are placed. But neither, as some appear to imagine, can we stand still, whilst those circumstances are changing, and every thing around us is in motion. Now, Sir, the surest way to prevent rash and dangerous innovation is to stop that course of vacillation, which temporising and incomplete measures are sure to create. In every thing which I have said, I beg the House to bear in mind, that I am not pressing for the adoption of any theory, unknown to the constitution; but, on the contrary, enforcing the practical application of a very old principle, and endeavouring to show how completely it is in unison with it, that means should be taken, safely and without forcing the occasion, to provide for the wants of those great towns, which have grown up under peculiar circumstances, and which call for a course of treatment, more consistent with their exigencies, than the one now provided for them. The House divided. For the motion, 111; against it 197. Majority against bringing in the bill, 86. Mr. Huskisson voted with the minority. POOR LAWS IN IRELAND. May 7. Mr. Villiers Stuart moved, "that this House is of opinion that it will be expedient to take into early consideration, in the next session of parliament, the condition of the Poor of Ireland, with a view to consider the propriety of introducing a system of Poor Laws into Ireland, subject to such modifications as Parliament may deem applicable to the peculiar circumstances of that country." Upon which, Lord Francis Levison Gower moved, and Mr. Secretary Peel supported the previous question; not meaning thereby to express any hostility to the motion, nor intending to pledge the government upon it, either one way or the other. Mr. HUSKISSON said, he should also vote for the previous question, because he agreed with his right honourable friend, that it would be most inexpedient for the Government to pledge itself to any course on this subject; since it might create unfounded expectations, both in the minds of the landlords and of the poor. Until the details of a plan had been prepared, after a full consideration of all the difficulties, he thought it would be premature for the Government to make any pledge whatever. And even when those difficulties had been fully considered, he should say of this as of the Catholic question, that it could not be better left than in the hands of the Government. The evils of the present state of Ireland, as they affected England, were greater than they had been represented to be. Not only did the influx of Irish labourers diminish the price of labour in this country, but the children of Irish parents, by their birth in this country, acquired a settlement, and thus added to the burden of the poor-rates. Not only the west and north-west, but every other part of the country, was affected more or less by these evils, and the true remedy for them would not be found merely in the introduction of poor-laws into Ireland, but in the introduc |