On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
Enm ity—points on which he wouldnot now eater ; but above all , be waa satisfied that tne subversion of all the great establishments of the country must inevitably gusne , and that to grant the prayer of these petitioners ttouIcI in itself tend more particularly to the disadvantage , poverty , and Buffering of this class more than any other remedy that could be proposed . Entertaining these opinions—fa&vmg expressed them by his Tote on a former eTening—seeing that nothing had since occurred to induce him to doabt the soundness of the conclu sions to which he had then arriTed—differing from the Hon- Member for Leicester , he should to-night adhere
to the course he had then taken , and , however , relnctantlv , firmly but decidedly resist the motion of the Hon- ' Member for Finsbury . He ( Sir J . Graham ) was satisfied the concession would produce the most disastrous results to the working peoplB ; one of which would be the muting them believe that doubt and hesitation existed within those wails with respect to the remedies they in their petition proposed . He was satisfied , that so &r from affording a remedy , they would be fcund to be disastrous in the extreme ; and , entertaining that opiaion , it would be bis duty certainly to resist the motion of the Hon . Member for Rnsbnry . ¦ _ ¦ _ . _ . . .
Sir J . EASTHOPE rose t « explain . He had been quite misunderstood by the Right Hon . Baronet the Secretary of the Home Department . He ( Sir J . Easthope ) thought that he had guarded himself against misconception by stating , that on a former occasion he had felt that if he voted with the Hon . Member for Koch dale he should have approved those propositions in the Charter to -which he was opposed , but that on the present occasion he considered that he was asked to permit the petitioners to expound their own prayer , and to show its relevancy to their own distress . If he were called upon , as the Right Hon . Baronet assumed , now to afgnn ary of the sentiments contained in the Charter , he should h 3 ve adhered to the course which he had taken before .
Hr . MACATLAY said , he was anxious to offer a few words on the present occasion , as he was not present in bis place when a simi ar motion had come before Ihe House , when he was aware that the absence of many gentlemen connected with the late Administration had teen stated to be the result of design . Now , he could insurer for himself that he was absent on thkt occasion in consequence of indisposition- His Noble Friend , TfhoseabscDce he now again deplored , was , by accident , not in his place ; and he ( Mr . Mecaulay ) thought he could with confidence say that not a single member of the Ute Government , who was present , withheld the expression of their sentiments from any unworthy motive whatever—( hear , hear . ) He should attempt to imitate , as far as be could , the proper temper shewn
by the Right Hon . Gemueman who bad just sat down ; sad if he ( Mr . Macanlsy ) should b « betrayed for a moment into any departure from that temper , no person who knew him would , he was sure , attribute it to any want of kindness or good feeling towards those millions whose petition was now under the considera tion of the Hoase . He could not sanction , by his vote , the motion of the Hon . Member for Finsbury—{ hear , hear . ) The Hon . Member had shaped his motion with very considerable Bkill , he had shaped it in such a manner as to give him ( Mr . Macaulay ) a very fair plea so to vote for it , if he wished to evade the discharge of his duty ) , and yet to be able to say to his Conservative constituents , "I never said a word in favour of Universal Suffrage , or those other changes for
vhich the petitioners called ;* and at the same time the Hoe . Member for Finsbury had so ahaped his motion as to offer him ( Mr . Macaulay ) an opporunity cf saying to a large assembly of Chartists , " On that occasion , when your petition was before the House of Commons , and the motion was made that you be called in and be heard at the bar , and when that motion was opposed by the Government , I voted with you . " But be ( Mr . Macaulay ) thought this question so important fh&t he should not discharge his duty if he had recourse fco any such evasion , and therefore he felt compelled to meet the motion with a direct negative—shear , hear . ) For it seemed to him , if the House departed from its ordinary , and general rule of not hearing persons at the bar , that the petitioners might -understand , in all
reasonable acceptation of feucb a concession , that though the House was not decidedly favourable te , yet Hon . Members had not fully made up their mindB to resist what they asked . Now , his ( Mr . Macaalay " s ) mind » as so made up , and he conceived that the petitioners would have a right to complain of him if he were to elude this question by Toting for the motion of his Hon . Friend , and then on any future occasion he gave a distinct negative to every one of the clauses of any bill which might be framed upon the basia of this petition . He did think , if he adopted such a course , they would have some reason to complain of disingenousness and unfairness on his part . That accusation , if he could avoid it , they should not have an opportunity of bringing against him
—( hear , hear . ) He was sure it was very far from his imagination to criticise with any severity or malignity the language contained in this petition , but to the essence of it he must refer when the question was , whether or not the persons from whom it had emanated should be called in to be heard in support of it The petition demanded that this House "Do immediately , wiihoutalteration , deduction , or addition , passintos law the document entitled the People ' s Charter ;'" and he couceived he should not deal fairly with the house if he consented to call the petitioners in only to fee heard , as had been soggested , on the subject of the existing public distress . If any Hon . Member moved for an inquiry into that distress and the means of remedying it—if any Hon . Member thenght the heart-rending statements
which had been made - to-night ought to be substantiated and proved before the House , he for one would not oppose it ; nay , be would vote for it . Bnt he contended , that when hB found a petition demanding a particular law to be passed , immediately " without alteration , deduction , or addition , " and then to represent it as merely desiring an inquiry into the public distress , vas really paltering with the question—( heari Kow he might , much more easily than any other gentleman in the House , consent to give his snpport to the motion of the Hon . Member for Finsbury , for there were parts of the Charter to which he was favourable ; in truth , out of all its six points there was only ece to which he had an extreme and unmitigated hostility . He had . already Toted in favour of the ballot , and as to
the prcDerty qualification of members -to serve in Parliament , he most cordially concurred with the petitioners . He had always thought , that while there was a property qualification required to form a constituent body , a property qualification for a representative was Eupeifluous . He could not understand why it was that the members for Edinburgh and G-lasgow were not required to have a property qualification , and those for Marylebone aud Manchester were required to have a property qualification ; if the principle were sound , it ought to be universal—if unsound , it onght to b * abandoned . — ( hear , hear . ) Neither did he think any Hon . Member could E ^ nd up in favour of that on Conservative grounds . It was no part of the old constitution—it was
not a part of the reforms made at the tune of the Rt-TolutioD , but loEg after the Revolution it had been introduced by a bad Government , and passed by a bad Parliamtnt , for the distinct purpose of defeating the Revolution , and for the exclusion of the Protestant succession to the throne—ihear , hear . ) He was against annual Parliaments , but at the same time he was reany to agree , to a certain extent , to meet the wishes of the people by limiting the duration cf Parliaments . He did not go to the minor puints contained in the petition , t-scause there was one point so important—a point "which , in his jadgment formed the very essence cf the Charter—which , if withheld , -would have the effect cf creating agitation , and which , if grant-d , matured not oae strrrw whether the others were
granted or not ; and that point was Universal Suffrage , "Without any qualification of property at alL Having a decided opinion that such a change as tte concession of "Universal Suffrage would be utterly fatal to the best interests cf the cor : ntry-at large , he felt it his duty manfully to declare he conid not consent to hold ont the least hope that he ccnld ever , under any circumstances , support snch a change—Ihear , hear . ?—The reasons -upon which he entertained that opinion he would state aa shortly as he could . He thonght , in the first place , that the proposed inquiry , constituted a presumption against the chacge which was profinced by the Beforaf Bil ]—he did not say this on the ground of finality—he entertained no opinion of that sort H- admitted that violent and frequent changes Were net desirable ; bnt at the same time he nmst say , that every change proposed must be judged hy ita own merits . He was bound by no tie , and he was ready to pass any legislative reform which he- believed would
conduce to the public interest He thought it was a misstated argument against a ttange of this Boit on the part of those who contented themselves with saying that they considered the change would be inconsistent with the conti-ned existence of the monarchy and the House of Lords . Although a faithful and loyal subject ofher Majesty , and favourable to admixture of the aristocratic element in the constitution of the country still he must consider that the monarchy and the aristocracy were not the ends , but the means of government — -iheir , hear ; . He had known governments in countries where neither the monarchy was hereditary nor the aristocracy hereditary , and yet those countries had prospered ; but he believed that Universal Suffrage would be fatal to all the objects for which a monarchy existed , cr even a well-ordered republic existed , and that it was incapable of coexisting with the extension of civilization . He conceived that civilization rested upon the security of the Government . It eonld not be
necessary in an assembly like that for him to go" through arguments in support of that xrroposition , or to allude to the vast experience which led to that result . Everybody well knew , that where property was insecure is was not in the power of the finest soil , of the finest t&uate , of the most moral and intellectual constitn-Son of tke people , to prevent a country Binking into « rbarism—while , on the other hand , where property 'Us secure , it was scarcely in the power of any Go-¦ fcnunent to prevent a nation going on prosperously "these evils had been found in the Government of the fcmtry , the stronger was the argument made out ^ « progress which this country had made in the midst ^• lil the mis government to which she had from time to **« a exposed , showed how irresistible was the power P | the great principle of security , to property . ¦* M * ever the Minister might have squandered the P ^ -ic revennes , still with security to property , tte "& £ & , industry , and enterprise of the country found res ° 5 i 8 cs . "fiThatevfci might be tte cost of war , the
Untitled Article
same means with security to property repaired faster than war could destroy , and if that were the fact , all classes had the deepest interest in the security of property , and the labouring classes had that interest in the highest degree . Following that principle , he conceived the supreme government of the country could never be intrusted to any class , with regard to which there did not € xist the moral certainty that they never would commit any great or systematic violation of the sanctity of property—( hear , hear ) . Had he that assurance ' with respect to the petitioners was the question he ( Mi . - Macaulay ) now asked ? Had he the assurance that if the Government were placed in the hands of the majority of the people of this country , without pecuniary qualification , they would respect the sanctity of property ?— , 'hear , hear ) . He thought not : and if
he were compelled to give a reason , he would , without noticing with , any severity the indecorous language it contained , take the petition which his Hon . Friend the Member-for FinBbury had caused to be printed with the votes . And what was that petition ? It was signed by nearly 3 , 500 , 000 of the people , and must be considered aa the declaration of the intentions of that vast body which , if the Charter were passed , would become the sovereign ef the country—as a declaration of the intention of those who would then , in all probability , return the majority of the representatives sent to that House . Now , if he was so to consider this petition , it was impossible to look without considerable anxiety on snch passages as these : — "Your petitioners complain that they are enormously taxed to pay the interest of what is termed the National Debt— a debt
amounting at present to £ 880 , 000 , 009 , being only a portion of the enermons amount expended in cruel and expeiisive wars , for the suppression of all liberty , by men not authorised by the people , and whe , conse quently , had no right to tax posterity for the outrages committed , by them upoii mankind . " ( " Hear , hear , " from Mr . Hume , Mr . Duncombe , and others . ) Was he jMr . Macaulay ) really to understand that cheer as an indication of an opinion that there was no right in the national creditor ? Was he to take it as an expression of opinion that national bankruptcy would be juBt and politic ? If he was not so to understand it , h © was utterly at a loss to comprehend what the passage meant . For his own part , he conceived it was impossible to make a distinction between the right of the fundholder
in dividends and the right of the landed proprietors in the land . . It . appeared , however , that the petitioners made no such distinction , for they declared against the monopoly of . land . It was impossible to misunderstand the meaning of Ihese wordB in the petition— " That your petitioners deeply deplore the existence of any kind of monopoly in this nation ; and , whilst they unequivocally condemn the levying of any tax upon the neces saries of life , and upon those articles principally required by the labouring classes , they are also sensible that the abolition ol any one monopoly will never unshackle labour from its misery , until the people possess that - power under which all monopoly and oppression must' cease . The petitioners respectfully mention the existing monopolies of land . " Was
that , or was it sot , intended to mean landed property ; was it not , in fact , following -up the declaration before made as to-the funds by a declaration that land property ought to cease to exist ? They then went on to complain of the monopolies of patents , and the monopolies which they conceived to arise from the fixed capital of a man in the machinery of his mill , or in a machine of his' own invention . Tfeey then mentioned the monopolies in travelling and transit ; and he firmly believed their meaning to be the confiscation of all railways and canals . It was hardly necessary for him to go further , for , if he understood the petition right , he believed it to be a deslaration that the remedies for every evil under which this country suffered were to be found in a great and sweeping confiscation of all
property— ihear , hear . ) Now , believing that to be the case , he was firmly convinced that the effect of any such measure would be not only to ruin the rich , bnt to make the poor still poorer ; and that such a result would press more heavily on the labouring than upon any other class in the community . While he censured the , doctrines contained in the petition , he had no charge to bring against the great body of persons who had signed it : ' so far from speaking or thinking ill of their conduct , he did not blame them in any degreethey had acted as it was natural they should act . The petition was a sort of cry of . existing distress , which designing men had put into a bad and pernicious form —( hear . ) If so , was the House to go out of its ordinary course of-proceeding , in order to give this petition a
reception of peculiar distinction ? Let it be remembered , that Hon . Members of that House had all the advantages of education , and were very seldom tried by calamities half as Bevere as the petitioners had , it was admitted , undergone . That Hon . Members had hardly observed the operations -of their own minds , when they had suffered from sickness , from vexations of any kind , from pecuniary difficulties , or other forms of adversity which happened to everybody , and they failed to remember how unreasonable such things made them , and how ready they were to catch at what they could hardly hope would relieve , and to incur a greater evil for the Bake of present
and immediate indulgence ; therefore , he could not consider it a strange thing that the poor man , whe saw irs wife grow thinner every day—who heard his children cry for food he could not give them , should embrace that which he was taught to believe would give him relief . Such a man would easily be imposed upon from the want of education , owing partly to bis own condition , and partly to the neglect , he ( Mr . Macaulay ) must say , of the Government of this country . ( Hear , hear . ) To those gentlemenwho cried Hear , " he would say , " Granting that education would remedy these evils , shall we cot wait until education i 3 given—shall we not wait until we see -whether education will make them
understand that the preservation of the sanctity of property was just as important to them as to the richest man in the country , or shall we put into their hands-the power not only to ruin ourselves bnt themselves V ( Hear , hear , hear . ) Nothing could be more natural than that , when , looking a . t the inequality of Btations in this country , their minds should be . excited , and that when they were told by designing men that if they had the power in their own hands they might at any time save themselves from all the calamities to which they were now exposed by going to the lands , to the funds , to machinery , to railroads , and to all those things which they call monopoly , but which he ( Mr . Macaulay ) called property , it was natural they should be
deceived . He bore to them no more unkind feeling than he did to a sick man , who in the height of fever might ask him for a draught of cold water , which would be fatal to him at the outset—he had no more ill-feeling towards them than he bad to those who , when he was in India during a scarcity , desired the granaries to Se thrown open to them . However great the suffering in the one case or the distress in the other , he would not administer the cold water , neither would" he give the key of the granaries to the half-starved population , because in the first case it would be fatal , and in the other it would only give temporary and delusive relief , to be followed by an enormous increase of evil . No person here could seriously entertain a doubt that such a spoliation of
property as that to which the petition pointed would be a serious evil to the people , and an addition to all then * other calamities . ( Hear , hear ) Wei ' , then , if these were the thing 3 for the sake of which they asked for the Charter , upon what principle was it that he should consent to put into their hands the power to effect all these evils to the country and to themselves ? The only arguments to be used in favour of the House entertaining the proposition would be , that really when the power came in ; o their hands they would use it with greater caution . Surely that would be , in the first place , a very strange reason for treating this petition with peculiar respect , because it did not contain the deliberate views of those who sent it ; and , in the secoud place ,
it was contrary to human nature that persons asking for great concessions should put their demand in terms kss acceptable to those who had the power to grant or withhold it ; ibat they made their demand more odious than , if Jhey obtained it , their practice would be found to be ; that they pointed out to us the evil consequences tbat would follow from granting their demand , which evil consequences would not follow in reality , and which tbev never meditated . But , it might be said , their power would not be so used . How was it possible to doubt that power in the hands of such men would be used for evil ? See what had been held out to them . Every person who bf ard him must be aware of the kind of means which had been used . There bad been a
systematic attempt made to represent the Government as able to do for the working classes that which no Government ever had been or would be able to do ; that winch no wise Government ever would attempt to do ; that whieh if any Government did attempt to do , they would do less than their duty ; the working classes bad been reasoned with as if the Government wassosituated that insieadofthepeople supporting the Government , the Government were bound to rapport the people ; as if the Government had Eome means of never-failing supply at their commandsome vast fund of wealth with which to dispel poverty from tne land ; as if , like the rulers of ancient times , the Government could compel waters from the rocks and call down bread from heaven , or as if they could perform over again at pleasure the miraculous phenomenon of the self-multiplying loaves—( hear , hear ) . Informed as the people were in these doctrines , was
it possible to believe that the moment Parliament gave them absolute supreme power—for let it be observed this was what was asked for—that moment the people would forsake and forget their doctrines and principles ! The petitioners and those who supported their views in the House of Commons talked of class legislation at the very time they were for giving to one class exclusive absolute power . The effeet of granting the petition would be to put all property in every city , in every village , in every part of the country at tbe feet of the labouring class . Look at the effect , in this point of view , of agreeing to the proposition for Universal Suffrage . The Hon . Members for Bath and Monrrose , ( Mr . Roebnck and Mr . Hume ) , though they agreed on the principle of Universal Suffrage , would oppose , he was confident , firmly as should himself , a national bankruptcy or the spoliation of-national property , if it should be proposed . What . would be the effect of that ? People talked of the disappointment . that had arisen
Untitled Article
out of the Reform Bm ; what would be the disappointment of tbe petitioners with the first Parliament wbicb should assemble after tbe concession of Universal Suffrage , if they were to be told by Hon . Members and others in answer to their demands , " No , the interest of the National Debt must be paid . You shall lay your bands on no portion of the land ; the railways must not be touched , machinery shall remain in the hands of those who hold it . " Then with respect to the demands as to wages ; he ventured to Bay that if there were any notion among the petitioners that the wages of labour could be increased by means of measures to be adopted contemporaneously with the points of their petition , the delusion was most gross , because the moment of the
adoption of those points would be the very moment when they were frightening from the country all that by which alone the wages of labour could exist . But was it possible that the 3 , 000 , 000 of petitioners should think of this when they had got power in their hands ? No ; they would complain bitterly that they had been deluded by those who taught the working classes to consider them as their friends . Ever since the passing of the Reform Bill the House had heard from a great many persons who had expected to derive greater fruits from it , "Yousaid that we should have the' the bill , the whole bill , and nothing but the bill , ' and , in fact , we have got ' nothing but the bill' by reform , " and did they think that these persons upon getting power into
their own bands would allow the same result to occur again \ But if the people were not to be disappointed , and the £ 700 , 000 , 000 or £ 800 , 000 , 000 of capital in this country were to be taken from the present holders—if , in short , they could imagine this country given up to spoliation , he defied any man from any acquaintance with ancient or modern history to picture to himself any thing like the amount of misery that would be caused . But would it end with one spoliation ? How should it ? The distress caused by the first spoliation would be doubled and trebled by the still stronger measures of spoliation which must come on after the first ; and where would be the bulwarks to resist ? The very Government would stand by spoliation . Now , how was it
possible to' believe that the people who tad once broken through such a prescription as that with which the rights of property and all our institutions were surrounded in this country , would be found favourable to the principle of appropriation ! How this would operate , they had no experience to enable tftem to guess ; the only way in which he could conceive a parallel to the condition the country would be in was by imagining that it would be something more cruel and harder than the condition of a besieged city , only extending over a greater space and embracing a greater community—a community of 26 , 000 , 000 or 27 , 000 , 000 , a large portion of them depending upon a trade with all the ends of the world . Was it not possible that famine—such a
famine as had never been known in Europefamine joined with pestilence—would come in the train of all this ? It was sad to look beyond this ; but he must say that the further one looked forward through such a scene as this , the very best thing that he couJd expect—the House wonld think what it must be for any English publio man to say so—would be , that a strong military despotism—( hear)—should be established , which might give some sort of security to the fragments of property which might be left ub . But if the country should think that after this they would ever again see those institutions under which we are now living they would be mistaken . ( Hear , hear . ) They would never see them again , and they would deserve nerer
to see them again ( hear , hear ) , and foreign nations would ask with interest , what had been the conduct of this country to her people with respect to those institutions , and the story told them would be , "Englandhad institutions which were great and glorious—institutions which were certainly not free from imperfections , but which contained within themselves all the means of legally and constitution ally remedying those imperfections—institutions which , with but little alteration , had continued for 150 years together ; those institutions she threw wantonly away , for no other reason but that she was told to do so by persons who told her at the same time that they would use the power she gave them to ruin her . She gave that power ; she has been
ruined , and she deserved to be ruined . " ( Hear , hear ) These were the reasons which had determined him to vote against the motion of his Hon . Friend , and he must say , that if any Hon . Gentleman was disposed to grant Universal Suffrage , he ( Mr . Macaulay ) thought that gentleman would do quite consistently to vote for the inquiry , but he must Bay that he found with some pain that his Hon . Friend , the member for Leicester , ( Sir J . Easthope ) though agreeing with him ( Mr . Macaulay ) as the Hon . Baronet seemed to do in a great degree , nevertheless was about to . vote tor the petitioners coming
to the bar to advance tbe principles of this petition . Sir J . EASTHOPE . —To expound them . Mr . MACAULAY resumed . —He could find those principles quite enough expounded in the petition itself ; but , however that might be , he was so much opposed to several of those principles that he could not so far violate truth a 3 to pretend to feel any great respect for the petition . Ho should therefore vote against it , and in doing so he should give the petitioners much more reason for content than those who voted for them now with the determination to vote against them hereafter . ( Hear , hear . )
Mr . ROEBUCK said , that the Right Hon . Gentleman had begun by professing great kindness for the working classes , but he had ended with a description of the results which he said would follow , if Parliament gave power to those laborious , industrious , pains-taking , long suffering classes , which showed that the Right Hon . Gentleman at bottom entertained no great kindness for those classes . There was one grand proposition on which the Right Hon . Gentleman ' s speech was based , and tbat proposition he ( Mr . Roebuck ) had seen elsewhere ; he bad seen it elaborated in a form which left no doubt of its parentage in the shape of a discussion of Parliamentary Reform in the Edinburgh Rcvieic . ( Hear , hear . ) The proposition of the Right Hon . Gentleman was this , — " I am not willing
to give the people power till I am assured that they will not misuse it . " ( Hear . ) And the Right Hon . Gentleman appealed to the petition itself to prove that he sought not to grant the prayer of it . Now , he ( Mr . Roebuck ) might answer this in various ways , and first , he might deny the Right Hon . Gentleman ' s premises altogether—( hear , hear)—but , mounting much higher up , and asking on what principle the House of Commons was formed , he was prepared to maintain that the same principle , if carried , would bring together the whole body of the people to confer on public affairs in that place . There was a natural desire ia every man to profit by another's labour . The object of Government was to prevent that desire from breaking out
into action . In a state of nature , if he ( Mr . Tloebuck ) was strong , be obtained that which he detired ; as men advanced they met together and formed societies . In this country the people had hit upon the principle of deputation to a few to do that which in former times was done in the market-place by the whole body of the people . The House of Commons then sat there to prevent the desire that each man has of profiting by another ' s labour from coming into action ; they were put over the people to watch for them ; but , then , that being the case , who was to watch them—to watch the watchers \—( hear . ) That could only be done with effect by making the Hou ? e of Commons responsible to the people ; and the charge against the House of
Commons on the part of the people was , that they delegated to a small section the power of enforcing this responsibility , and that that small section had joined wiih the House of Commons to oppress the remainder of tbe people , and that they did oppress the remainder of tbe people— ( hear , hear . ) The Right Hon . Gentleman , holding the petition in his hands , had said , that the petitioners made a demand for the establishment of a minimum of wages ; if this were so , then he ( Mr . Roebuck ) asked Hon . Gentlemen on the other side of the House whether they did not make a demand of exactly the same principle in the Corn Laws 2—( hear ) The Right Hon . Gentleman said , " I am not willing to give the people power because they demand a minimum of
wages ; " but he ( Mr . Roebuck ) said to the House " remember , you have given power to the landed interest , and given them that power notwithstanding they asked for a maximum of prices . '' In principle where was the difference ? But all this was bad political economy , said some Hon Member ; this was bad economy , said the Edinburgh Review . But , be it bad political economy or good , the poor mau would come forward and say , " You have ^ iven me power , now I demand a minimum of wages "—( htar , hear ) How often , wheu the Poor Laws were before the House , had they been told that there were very many of the miseries of the people that were entiiely beyond the control of the House ? he agreed that at present it was so ; but if the people had a voice
there , would it long be so \ The Right Hon . Gentleman said that parts of the petition contained propositions adverse to the security of property . Let him ( Mr . Roebuck ) point to the great organ of the Conservative party—The Times newspaper—and ask did it not every day bring out projects and assert principles quite as extravagant , quite as fierce , quite as directly asd pointedly against the security of property as those contained in that extremely unwise , and , he would say , extremely foolish , petitiont —( hear , hear ) . Bui were those who signed this petition really unfit to govern themselves ? Separate the people of this country into classes , and they
would see which of them were against property ; the classes who had a share in education were not against—the enlightened machanics , they were not against property . The Right Hon . Gentleman had said , that if any one class was dependent upon property and the security of property , that class was the labouring class , and yet he wished to make out that this class was so blind to their real interests and to all that prudence would dictate , that it wa 3 that class of all others which would be willing to reduce the country to the condition of a desert . Now , he ( Mr . Roebuck ) judged the people of England otherwise ; he did not judge by the words of the foolish , malignant cowardly
Untitled Article
demagogue who had yntitten that petition . He ( Mr . Roebuck ) knew where to put his finger upon the man , and he was convinced it was not that man who was entitled to stand forward aB the representative of tbe labouring classes . He would aek thoBe Hon . Members who Bad borne witness to the long-suffering of the industrious classes , amidst the privations and distresses to which they had been , exposed , and which they were yet ; daily suffering , what was the character of his fellow-couatrymen t Yes , it was from those Bufferings that he judged of his fellowcountry men , and not from the trashy doctrine contained in the petition , which would be of itself ridir culous but for the grandeur of the multitude of names appended to it . What thev asked was . for
the power which , they saw their ieUow-citixenB enjoying . What they complained of was , that their fellow-citizens , whom they knew to be made by nature no better than themselves , were selected as the repositories of power . ; . Thai was a distinction which was peculiarly galling to them . But he did not believe , speaking from the knowledge which he bad of his fellow-citizens , and 'it ' - had ' been his fortune to mix much with them , that their belief was general that the great accidents that regulate the happiness of their lives were within the power of the Government . In fact , he believed that the class to which be referred was as enlightened , as the present electoral body —( hear . ) Well then , if they were as enlightened as the present electoral body , let the
House consider that this country had wealth , and had security for property under the present electoral body . Why then should the country not have the same under the labouring classes I If they were as worthy to be electors as the present body , why was be ( Mr . Roebuck ) to conclude that under them the country would be involved in that anarchy which had been painted by the somewhat terrifio pencil of the Right Hon . Gentleman "i That was not his ( Mr . Roebuck's ) judgment of the people of England . If he was wrong , what kept them from displaying their real character ! He affirmed that the Government had not physical force adequate to keep them down . If they were to rise as one maa , as they might do , the Executive had nothing but what was but as a rush to keep them down with .
What then kept them down ! They kept quiet from knowing that the advantages which they and their ancestors had derived from obedience to the law were not to be thrown away slightly , and that was their only feeling in the matter . ' And if he were to beasked by what his countrymen were peculiarly distinguished from other nations of Europe , and from the people of all other countries that he knew of , he should say the distinguishing feature in their character was obedience to the law . —( hear , hear . ) It had happened to himself and many other Hon . Members to travel in other countries ; he asked those Hon . Members what was the case there ? On the Continent it was said la force was everywhere——here it was obedienoe ; to the law . The feeble
constable without any question took the offender into custody solely from the moral feeling of the people . It was not physical force , but law , that bore sway here , and this it was that made him believe that if the whole body of the people ruled the country he should walk home just as quietly as he should that eveningr- ( hear . ) Such was his confidence in his fellow countrymen—( hear , hear . ) He believed that if ever there had been a libel spoken —he did not say so in any sense that could be painful to the right Hon . Gentlemani—i'but / if . ever there was a libel spoken upon his patient ^ his forbearing , bis industrious fellow-countrymen , it was that idle declaiming whichi said that they were unable -to govern themselves . Why , it waa they who have
done everything for this country—upon them reBted the whole fabric of English prosperity and greatness , and now the very fact of this peaceful organization for the attainment of what they believed to be their natural and political rights was a lesson which the world had never seen before . The Right Hon . Gentleman himself waB learned in the history of the world—could he point his finger to a single event in history , tbat in its nature was like that which they bad seen yesterday upon the floor of that house ? What was that event of yesterday ? It was the peaceful act of 3 , 500 , 000 people , who had all joined together throughout the length , and breadth of the land—in the open markets and in the crowded towns —in the by-ways and in the highways—who had assembled in peace , and fully relied on the
security of the law , and had signed the document which was then laid before the House , in which they asked by petition for the indulgence of a right whioh they in their hearts believed to belong to them . ( Hear . ) They had not risen up as an armed man ; they hadnot banded together against the law ; they had conducted themselves peacefully , calmly , prudently , forbearingly ; they hau come and called upon the House to hear them ; and yet , with that document to point at , the Right Hon . Gentleman concluded that so striking an example and so extraordinary an incident in the history of man was to be thrown aside as nothing , and that he was justified in fixing his critically acrimonious eye upon the turning of sentences , his almost grammarianlike sagacity
in insight into language , while he altogether forgot the larger and more striking features of an act by which 3 , 000 , 000 of his fellow-countrymen who were not now admitted within the pale of the constitution had come to that House , and in so entirely peaceable a manner petitioned for that as an indulgence which they fully believed to be their own as a right . ( Hear . ) Nowj let it not be supposed that he ( Mr . Roebuck ) agreed with one hundredth part of the propositions contained in that petition . ( Hear . ) What he did ask for the petitioners was , simply that they should be heard . ( Hear ) He wanted no quibble to help him out of the difficulty . The Hon . Member for Rochdale had , on a former evening , asked for the very same tning , and how had he
been met by the Hon . Baronet the Member for Leicester ? He now 6 aw something that he did not see before . ' ( Hear . ) What that something might be it was not for him ( Mr , Roebuck ) to say —( a laugh from the Opposition benches)—but now , forsooth , though the demand was precisely the same as that made by the Hon . Member for Rochdale—( hear)—the Hon . Member for Leicester took a different course . Inquiry ! "To propound their opinions ; to state why they thought tneiT evils arose from bad legislation , " said the Hon . Member for Leicester ; why , that was exactlyithe proposition of the Hon . Member for Rochdale on the former night , and yet , though the Hon . Baronet then voted against the motion , he now came down , and , having some
special light on tho subject , said he should vote for the 3 , 000 , 000 of petitioners . ( Hear , hear . ) He ( Mr . Roebuck ) did not want to do that sort of thing . He wanted no excuse for the vote which he should give on tho present occasion . jHe had voted for the Hon . Member for Rochdale on the former occasion , and he should vute with the Hon . Member for Finsbury now , not for the petition as a whole , not for everything contained in the petition , but for what was called the Charter—for that was the way to put it . He should vote for the Charter , because he believed that the people ought ; to be admitted into the pale of the constitution , and because , from what study he had been ablo to give to the hktory of mankind , and from what consideration he had had
of man's nature , he believed that the best government that could be got for iany people , whether looking to the necessities of instruction , the interests of wealth , or to any of the , peculiar circumstances affecting particular nations—that the best government that could be got was that which proceeded from the whole ; and it did strike him , that if tomorrow they could transform , by legislative means , not "by" any violent revolution , that Housb into a complete representation of the people of England ^ there would not be one iota of difference as to all the interests and tendencies of property in this country —with this simple , peculiar , and advantageous exception , that every man in that case would haye the proceeds of his own labour , with only so much taken
from it as would form his fair share of contribution to the btate—( hear ) . That was not the case now , and that ift was not was the evil of which the people complained . They did not assert that all the evils with which they were afflicted were attributable to the government under which they had lived , but that a large portion of the evils they were labouring under might fairly be attributed to the mode in which that House was constituted . They declared that , being unrepresented , they paid more largely towards the expences of the , state than they ought to do with reference to their condition and numbers . The caase of this they asserted to bo their want of power in that House , and , reasoning from the acts of tho majority of that House
as at present constituted , they felt that they had been , and were , unfairly dealt ( with . Therefore they , the long-suffering , patient people , now at last asked for a share in the government of the country —( hear ) . Now , compare the picture that had been drawn by the Right Hon . Gentleman with the events that had occurred in that House during the present year . They bad been told of the necessity of placing the government in the hands of the aristocracy only ; now , what had been their experience of a few months working of that description of government ? The people being in a state of distress , finding food scanty and dear , asked the governing body of the country , when they met , to lessen that distress by lowering the price of food . What was tho answer ? Why , the aristocracy most vehemently , most decisively , most completely , declared that they would do no such thing . Upon the
arguments that had been used against the claims of the working classes by the Right Hon . Gentleman he ( Mr . Roebuck ) would be entitled at once to say , that a spirit of rapine prevailed with that aristocratical body . Taking this inBtance , not of wild language ( hear ) , but of determined resistance to the cry of the whola suffering population ^ he was entitled to say , on the principle laid down by the Right Hon . Gentleman , that the aristocracy in that House were actuated by a spirit of rapine . (" No . " ) Let him notbe misunderstood . He had borne very patiently with the counter argument , and he hoped they would listen patiently to him—( hear . ) He maintained that he would be fairly entitled , in accordance with the argument of the Right Hon . Gentleman , to say that the Government which could act so was actuated by a spirit of rapine and plunder , and only kept the people down by the power they possessed
Untitled Article
by haying the arms in their hands . Going a little further , however , he would Bay that the existing majority in that House , haTing the power in their hands , aad not feeling the pressure of miBery upon them , had no means of knowing what that distress was , and that j therefore , they would be doing , not only the poor , but the rich , a benefit by : Bending into that House those who would be elected by the people themselves , and would be able to shew them what the evils were that had been created b y their class legislation . And let them not suppose that by admitting the labouring classes to a share in the representation of the country the power of electing representatives would not be borne still by the whole population . Were they to suppose that wealth and
intelligence would cease to exercise their natural influence V Did they imagine thai only the wild , the unintelligent , would govern the country in that case ? No ; it would be the rich and the intelligent who would 8 tiU , by force of th « ir position and their education , govern the country . No people were ever yet governed by the ignorant , or by any but those which might be called the thinking and leisure classes . The only effect of creating such a Government as the petitioners deBired would be , that they would still have wealth exercising its due and legimate influence with the aid of intellect , whereas the influence now exercised was a malign influence , doing mischief and working out evil instead of good . The difference between the
Right Hon . Gentleman and himself was , that he had great faith itithe good feeling , patience , and virtue of his fellow-countrymen , which the Right Honourable Gentleman seemed to doubt , believing as he did that they ought not to be trusted with power ; forming his opinion , as he did , from the petition that had been laid upon the table of the House , and shutting his eyes to the experience whioh he ought to have had while : journeying through this large country , he must have had of the constant forbearance of his fellow-countrymen;—the Right Hon . Gentleman , shutting his eyes to all this experience , and judging only by the paper on the table , declared that the labouring classes were un-worthy of the trust whioh it was sought to repose in them—that they
would be cruel and take delight in rapine and wanton spoil and bloodshed—that when they found peace they would make war , that of this cultivated land they would make a desert , and that that great country which they themselves had almost entirely raised to its present prosperity and greatness , they , if in power , would be the first to reduce to one wild Scene of bloodshed , anarchy , and confusion ; for this reason it was that the Right Hon . ' Gentleman declared that as long as he held aseat in that House he would resist the demand of the people for a share in the representation . He ( Mr . Roebuck ) could hot follow the Eight Hon . Geatleman ia that course . For his own part , what little ability he had should be devoted to the service of those classes upon whom
the opinion of the Right Hon . Gentleman oast such a stigma . He believed that he should be best doing them service by speaking of them with calmness , consideration , and affection , and by endeavouring to do for them that which they had a right to expect at his hands . He would endeavour to the best of his power to render them equal in point of political privileges with any of those who now sent members to that House , by not allowing any servile cla ? s to remain , believing as he did that property would be most secure when hAs labouring fellow-countrymen had the most power in the country —( hear ); Lord F . EGERTON said , ably and ingeniously as the Hon . and Learned Member for Bath usually conducted his arguments , he had on the present
occasion more than ever applied the ingenuity of the debater to ihe question at issue . The Hon . and Learned Member had carefully avoided the real question before the House . The Right Hon Gentleman the member for Edinburgh had , with his usual ability and manliness , made a declaration of his opinion on certain points , for which he was pefectly justified in looking to the petition itself . For from that petition , which the Hon . and Learned Member had designated as trashy and contemptible , he was enabled to show what were the opinions of the 3 , 500 , 000 of petitioners on the subject of Universal Suffrage and of the use they would make of the power it would give them . They had no reason whatever for believing that the petitioners were not
sincere , or that the Right Hon . Gentleman , drawing his inferences from the statements in their petition , had over-estimated the consequences which might be expected to follow such an extension of the suffrage as was contemplated by the petitioners . It was , therefore , not quite fair in the Hon . and Learned Member for Bath to drawy as he had done , their attention away from tht petition itself , which formed the question before them , to those abstract political subjects which he had brought under their consideration . The Hon . Member for Bath seemed to expect some new Atlantvca or Utopia to arise , in which everything would be conducted upon principles of the strictest justice ; but he ( Lord Lord F . Egerton ) agreed with the Right Hon . Gentleman in
thinking" that it was much more probable that the armed man would arise . They had never seen an Utopia in any country , but they had seen a Cromwell in this country , and that too under circun ? - stances of less urgent necessity than those which would doubtless arise were the state of things contemplated by this petition to take place . Agreeing as he did in almost all that had fallen from the Right Hon . Gentlemn the member for Edinburgh , and feeling that the Hon . and Learned Member had not fairly met the question , throwing aside the petition as he had done altogether , he preferred to give a vote which he had no doubt would expose him to unpopularity , but the consequences of which he was iuily prepared to mtet .
Mr . HAWi , S thought the representatives of larger constituencies were bound to express their opinion on a question of this sort , in order that there might be no doubt as to their views . Any difficulty which he ( Mr . Hawes ) might have in voting on this occasion had been removed by the speeoh of the "Hon . and Learned Gentleman the member for Bath , who , with the manliness and straightforwardness that had always distinguished him in that House , had declared that it was not for tho petition that he was about to vote , but for the Charter . On that sole ground he ( Mr . Hawesy differed with his Hon . Friend . " . 'He'did not concur with him in supposing thatto grant universal suffrage would be either safe or prudent , but
on the other hand he utterly disclaimed any want of trust , regard , respect , or affection for the people . He thought he was at least in a position to resist the general and abstract views of reform contained in the Charter , for when had he ever resisted any measure of practical reform or the gradual and progressive extension of the political rights of the people ? He believed that the adoption of the measures claimed by this petition would aggravate the evils complained of . For all practical projects of improvement he was , as he ever had been , disposed sincerely to vote ; but , as to the present proposal , he could not fesl it consistent with a due regard for the public interest to lend it his support . ( Hear . )
Mr . HUME regretted the course taken by some of his Hon . Friends . Nor did he deem their reasoning at all valid . It was said , for instance , that the Chartist petition contained intemperate expressions . But was it fair to brand a whole body—and now immensely large body—of fellow-countrymen with such sentiments as the imprudence of a few might give expression to I Would it be fair to apply this rule to the party opposite , and to charge them with the responsibility pt the language used in one ef their great periodicals— " that England would flourish to-morrow if the manufactures were all engulfed ! " [ Sir R , Peel here said , " I know nothing of that language . " ] Then the Right Hon Gentleman knew nothing of the expression of public
opinion . ( Laughter , ) But the substance of the Chartist case was well stated in their petition , the aigumenta of which no one could controvert . ( "ph , " and laughter . ) No honest man could deny them . ( Renewed laughter , and a cry of , "The national faith . " ) It was very unfair to charge the Chartitts with an intention to destroy the debt , or injure the credit of the nation . ( " Read the petition . " ) Read it yourself ( said the Hon . Member , amidst great laughter . ) Let the arguments of the petition be examined . ( The Hon . Member went through them one by one . ) Were not they all founded in truth and justice ? The mode of avoiding revolution was to look to and apply themselves to the well-founded complaints of the people . Their
patience aud forbearance had been already sufficiently manifested , and the more especially so when it was considered that many of their claims were most ju&t and reasonable . ( Hear , and cries of " Oh , oh I'" ) Who could deny the truth of some of the propositions in the petition ! If , like himself , they differed from the petitioners on one or two points if , for examplb , they differed from them in opiaion as to tho character of the New Poor Law—was that any reason why they should neglect to satisfy claims which were based on every principle of justice and reason ? They might depend upon it that the peace of the country depended upon their listening patiently and altqntively to those claims . The petitioners deplored the existence of any kind of monopoly , and urged that the abolition of any one monopoly would never unshackle labour until the people possessed that power under which all monopoly and oppression must cease . Was not this a reasonable proposition ? ( Cries of "Read on . ")
He had no objection to read on . The petitioners in the next paragraph mentioned the monopolies of machinery and land as monopolies which ought to be abolished . ( Cries of " Hear , hear . " ) Well , and if they complained of these monopolies , so did he ( Mr . Hume . ) (" Oh , oh 1 ' ^ and ironical cheers ) He said , that the law of entail heaped every sort of misery upon : this country . (" Oh 1 " and laughter . ) Why , entail and primogeniture produced the monopoly of land . ( ShoutQ of laughter . ) Why , said the Hon . Member , why do you laugh ? ( Renewed laughter . ) I am giving you an explanation of all this—( " Oh ! " and laughter)—as well as I can give an explanation . ( Cries of " Hear , " and laughter . ) Yes , or" course , you laugh at the misfortunes of your fellow-men , - ( o ' rie ' B of , 'Oh , oh !") that is the only way of interpreting your laugh , (* Oh * oh V ) or else I am a very imperfect expounder of your feelint s . ( Loud laughter and ironical cheers . ) Well , laugh away ! I am obliged to you for revealing your real
Untitled Article
opinions ( Renewed laughter . ) Ecce signum ( A shout of laughter . ) The Hon . Member then proceeded to read a letter from a correspondent at Manchester , detailing the distress iii that town and in the adjoin ing borough of Salford . These were the scenes , he said , which were horrifying the country ; and yet , these were the scenes the details of which ehoited laughter m that house , and for which they , neglected to apply any remedial measure of legislation . -Uaf after day , session after session , they frittered ^ away in party disputes without doing anything for the benefit of the people . They did not attempt to deny the extent of the public Buffering , bat yet the course of their legislation only tended to increase the evila under which the public laboured . Considering that
justice and policy demanded that these claims should be conceded , and also considering that it was a calumny oa the people of England to say that if in possession of their rights they would commence the bad work of spoliation and robbery , he should most decidedly give bis vote in favour of the proposition before the House . Mr , WAKLEY had heard with extreme surprise and regret the speech delivered that evening by the Hon . Member for Lambeth , and he mu 6 t say that he was sorry to find any single Member pf one of the newly-enfranchised metropolitan boroughs prepared to vote against bo reasonable and just a proposition as that under consideration —{ " oh ! on ! " ) When the metropolitan boroughs were enfranchised ,
it was feared that through their means some very troublesome Members would obtain admission into that House- ' ( hear , hear)—Members wfeose principles were as objectionable to the majority opposite , as the sentiments contained in the petitioa on the table . He thought , however , that the House had little reason to complain of such annoyance , and certainly they would have still less if all the Members for those boroughs were to take a political lesson from the book of reform as it was read by the Hon . Member of for Lambeth . That book was a large volume , but he thought he might search it through in vain to find the . page which contained the Bpeciuci principles ; ' df that Hoii . Gentleman . If , however , he was surprised at his speech , he Was
equally , if not more surprised , at the silence preserved by Members on the Ministerial Benches . Ha had expected on a question affecting the rights and interests of the working classes , that the eloquence of Hon . Gentlemen opposite , which had been 80 kindly exerted on the subject in other places , and which had been followed by successive rounds of KentiBh fire , would have been heard in their favour on the present occasion —( hear , hear . ) He had entertained some hope that those who were so loud in their denunciations of the Whigs for neglecting the interests of the people , would notj in this instance , have forgotten their former advocacy Though no voice on the other side has yet been raised for that purpose , he hoped that before the
debate concluded , they wonld come to the aid of the people , and never could they do so with better effect—( cheers and laughter . ) The discussion of this question had in his opinion taken too wide a range . The proposition before the House was a simple one , and its statement might be comprised in a / . . nutshell .-It was merely tbis ^ -3 , 300 , 000 of their fellow-countrymen asked permission to state their grievances at the Bar of the Hoase , and the reply to be given to It was " yes , " or " no . " That was the simple question stripped of all disguise , and the anawer to be given , would show whether the people were still to entertain a hope of justice from that House , or whether the reply would' fill With disappointment and indignation upwardsi-. bf 3 , 000 , 000 of their
fellow-countrymen . Even the very hesitation of the House to anawer in the affirmative showed the justice of the request made by the-petitioners—( hear , hear , hear . ) 3 , 300 , 000 petitioners Bought an opportunity of stating their grievances at the bar of the House , and the House hesitated to answer their just demand . The petitioners at the outset alleged that they were unrepresented in that assembly . Then why not yield to theirrequest , and allow them in their own way to make their candid and honest statement 1—( hear ) . Could thai be considered a land of liberty or justice where so fair a request was refused !—( hear , hear ) . Was it not only fair , after what had fallen from an eminent Whig leader , to see these men , to hear their statements , and permit them to show that they \ vexo
not the turbulent and sanguinary beings that they had been represented ?—( cheers ) . For his own part , he was surprised , to hear a gentleman of such lively imagination , of such comprehensive judgment , and euch extensive intellectual powers , give such an appalling description of the character of the people of England—( loud cheers ) . Why , where did the Right Hon . Gentleman reside ?—how did he pass his time 1 —( cheers )^ With whom did he associate !—( hear , hear)—what books had he read ! -r- ( cheera and laughter)—or where could he find aught which would warrant or justify the description which he had given of upwards of 3 , 000 , 000 of Englishmen 1 Where would the Right Hon . Gentleman select his specimens to prove the truth . of ; his description ?
Would he find them in the navy ? Were the sailors of Great Britain mutinous , cowardly , or treacherous I —( hear , hear ) . Were the soldiers of this country mutinous , pusillanimous , or disobedient ?—( hear , heai ) . What was-the character of our merchants , of our professionBi of our trades ?—( hear , hear )» Was it not too-bad . to make such sweeping assertions , and condemn a whole people in the mass . Let the Right Hon . Gentleman , if he could , point oat a single class to whom the description would apply . Would he say the carpenters ! Would he say the smiths \~ Would he say the shoemakers * The circumstances Were suoh as to demand something more tangible and specific than the Right Hon . Gentleman had favoured the House
with—( hear , hear ) . H . e ( Mr . Wakley ) was not so favourable to the petition as the Hon . Member for Edinburgh had represented himself to be . On the contrary , there Were many points in it in which he did not concur ^ and , if auy member in the House was bound more than ; another for supporting the motion that the petitioners should be heard at the bar , it was the Right Hon . Member for Edinburgh , seeing what an aptitude and readiness he exhibited in showing his progress as a scholar in the school of reform—( cheers and laughter ) . It was onlyteu years since that he was opposed to such an extension of the suffrage , and he was still opposed to that point ; but he ; had' since then come round to the five other points of theCharter— ( hear ) . It was to be
presumed , therefore , that when the Right Hon . Geiitleman had heard the arguments which might be urged in its favour , it would be possible to bring him to a favourable reception of the sixth . Though the Right Hon . Gentleman has declared his determination to resist Universal Suffrage , yet as he had made no finality resolution , it might be possible to induce him to make some approach to it . He ( Mr . Wakley ) hoped the House would not , by deciding against the motion , excite dissatisfaction and discontent amongst upwards of 3 , 000 , 000 people . He was aware it might be urged th ' at the vote upon the question would be construed into saying "Aye" or "No" as to the Charter , but he denied in - 'Mo' that ; it was capable of such construction . He , for his part , was
not an advocate for Annual Parliaments , being of opinion that Triennial Parliaments would work much better . He disclaimed the question as being one which involved the adoption or rejection of the Charter . It was simply whether , as lie had said before , 3 , 300 , 000 of their fellow-countrymen would or would not be permitted , with their own tongues , to state their grievances , in their own language , at the bar of the House—( hear , hear . ) Was the House , he would ask , determined , at all hazard , to stand by the present system of representation 1 Was the £ 10 constituency so pure and incorruptible as to be the bett which could be selected ? Look to the disclosures made in the Committees respecting , the gross corruption which characterised the last
election . Was that corruption practised by the working people—by thosenjechanics who had been so described by the Right Hon . Gentleman I No ; it was the work of the very electors whom that House had choBen as the very basis of a constituency— ( bear , . hear . ) Nothing could be more dangerous to the constitution of the country than the practices which had been exposed in the late inquiry . They unhinged all reliance upon our social institutions , and created aa astonishment in the public mind to think that such abuses and corruptions should be so openly practised . The working people attributed the fault to the legislature . They demanded to be admitted within the pale of the constitution , that they might endeavour to cleanse the foul stream of corruption :
and , in his opinion * their request was a reasonable one . He had seen much of the working people of this country—indeed , few had seen more . He had also seen much of-the working people in other countries , and he could confidently say , that he never witnessed more honest sincerity , or more real and sterling worth , than the working men of England exhibited—( loud cheers ) . He was glad to hear that opinion cheered by Hon . Gentlemen opposite . Howthen could they reconcile it to themselves to retain those people in the position of a servile class ! How could they say that the inhabitant of a £ 10 house was better or morfe trustworthy than he who inhabited a ¦' . £$ ¦ ' house ? In what did the superiority exist ? Was it in . the brick and mortar —was it in the furniture or attire—or was it in feeling and intellect—in head and heart !—( hear . J Before the New Poor Law was enacted there was little necessity in the country for bolt or bar : no
rural police were required ; but now the people felt the injustice of the enactments levelled against them ; and when the Right Hon . Gentleman the member for Edinburgh asked what would be the character of the lawsjif they were enacted by the people ! he should remember that none could be more cruel or sanguinary than the New Poor Law . When it was considered how it pressed upon the widow and the orphan and the aged octogenarian , he would fearlessly ask what law could be more cruel in its operation , and he would add that the working people could never enact a law against the aristocracy of a more severe nature . Under the circumstances in which this country waa placed , and considering the distress which prevailed , he thought it incumbent on the Hbuse to listen tothe taleof the petitiouersand hear the statement of their grievances ; and he " should therefore , considering that they were unrepresented in the House , give his most cordial support to the motion . ( Hear , hear . ) ( Continued in our eighth pags . J
Untitled Article
' THE NO RTHERN STA R . _____________ - ¦ - \ ¦ ¦ ¦ :, \ . .: ; . : . : ' --: --- : - ' ^
-
-
Citation
-
Northern Star (1837-1852), May 7, 1842, page 5, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/ns/issues/vm2-ncseproduct889/page/5/
-