sense and moderation of all parties will mutually yield, when all exclusive systems will be blotted out from our constitution, and the union of the two countries will not be found merely to exist in an act of parliament, but to dwell in the hearts of every Englishman and Irishman, under whatever civil or religious denomination it may be at present.

The other speakers on this question were, for the committee, the marquises of Wellesley and Downshire; and the lords Byron, Moira, and Grenville: against it, lord Redesdale, lord Liverpool, and the

MA

AY 5.-Mr.secretary Ryder, in the house of commons, rose to move for leave to bring in a bill more effectually to prevent the administering and taking of unlawful oaths. He said, that notorious as were all the facts connected with the melancholy disturbances in the manufacturing districts, he did not feel it necessary to trouble the house at any length. It would be almost sufficient for him to state, that notwithstanding the laws in force, in a vast number of instances unlawful oaths of a most terrible nature were administered to those who were concerned, not merely in breach of the public

peace, but in the destruction of all kinds of private property, and even in the assassination of peaceable and industrious inhabitants. The house could scarcely form a distant idea of the horrible nature of the oaths prescribed by these lawless depredators; he would therefore read one of them, found upon the person of a man who had been killed in an attack upon the manufactory of Mr. Burton, which the rioters succeeded in burning to the ground. It was couched in nearly these terms:

"I, A. B., of my own voluntary will do declare, and solemnly swear, that I never will reveal to

any

any person or persons, in any place or places under the canopy of heaven, the names of any of the persons composing the secret committee, either by word, deed, sign, or by address, marks, complexion, or any other thing leading to the discovery of the same, under the penalty of being put out of the world by the first brother whom I may meet, and of having my name and character blotted out of existence, or never remembered but with contempt and ignominy: and I do further swear, that I will use my utmost endeavours to punish with death any traitor or traitors who may rise up against us: though he should fly to the verge of existence, I will pursue with unceasing vengeance. So help me God to keep this oath inviolate."

Such was the dreadful oath these deluded beings had taken, in the counties of York, Lancaster, and Chester; and it was with heartfelt regret, the right honourable gentleman added, that the consequence had been frequent assassinations in districts where this heinous crime was before wholly unknown. As the former statute was passed in total ignorance of the extent to which this offence would in future be carried, he should move that it be amended by making the administering or taking of the oath a capital felony without benefit of clergy, with a provision, however, that if an individual who had taken the oath voluntarily confessed his guilt, previous to his being charged before a magistrate, and swore allegiance to the sovereign, he should be exempted from the punishment imposed. He concluded by moving for leave to bring in a bill to amend the 37 Geo. III. c. 103.

Mr. W. Wynne felt it necessary to state his objections to this bill. The first was, that it was a viola

tion of the known and admired principle of the English law to distinguish between the intention to commit, and the actual perpetration of the crime. His next objection was, that a law was now in existence which had not been carried into effect, but which he believed would be found adequate to the object in view, which made the administration of an unlawful oath a transportable offence. If the man were to be hanged for taking the oath to commit murder, he could, without subjecting himself to any greater punishment, actually carry his designed assassination into effect, and he had no inducement not to complete the most diabolical purposes. With respect to the proposal, that the offender should not be punished if he confessed his guilt, and consented to swear himself back again by taking the oath of allegiance, he thought that the public would have very little security that such a person would continue a good subject: his opinion was, that all political paths were generally inefficacious.

Mr. Horner warmly contended against this new attempt to provide by a special enactment against a political emergency. He acknowledged and regretted the prevalent distresses; a great part of them no policy could remove, but a large portion, he was convinced, was owing to the system of commerce, both domestic and foreign, pursued by the present servants of the crown. It was the imperative duty of parliament, as soon as possible, to remedy the latter. His objections to this new measure were two-fold: 1st, that it was creating a new capital punishment, which painful experience had shown to be wholly insufficient; 2dly, that it was destroying a fundamental prin. ciple of English law. The present

was

was only another instance in which this government, and governments like this, thought they could cure an evil of enormous and increasing magnitude by a few feet of parch ment, instead of striking at the root from whence it sprung. He had heard that it was intended to issue a special commission for the purpose of suppressing the alarming disturbances. He thought that such a measure was extremely fit to be adopted; but why, he inquired, was the act of 1798 laid aside? Why was not the commission to be issued on the foundation of that statute? Why were not the effects it would produce ascertained, before a new and sanguinary enactment were resorted to? Until he obtained some satisfactory information on these points, he should feel it his duty to oppose the bill even in its first stage.

A long debate ensued: the motion was carried; and the bill being brought in, was in due course passed into a law.

May 8,-Mr. Brand rose, pursuant to his notice, to submit to the house a motion upon the present defective state of the representation of the country. For him self, he wished to declare, that it was not as the friend of innovation or of speculation that he offered himself then to the attention of the house, but as the zealous and strenuous assertor of the rights and privileges of his countrymen, and therefore he relied confidently on its support. All questions that pointed at reform were, he knew, viewed by many with a certain degree of apprehension; and when such questions were agitated, the people were commonly alarmed, by being told to look at the countries on the continent now prostrate at the feet of a military despot. But, in his opinion, we might pro

fit by the example of other nations, in the same manner as we profited by their sufferings. Perhaps he should be asked also, why press a measure like that upon the house, when it was notorious that the people at large were indifferent about it? He denied however, that the people were indifferent. Were there not petitions upon their table from the city of London, from the city of Westminster, from the county of Essex, and from other places, praying for a reform in the representation of the country? The necessity of some reformation had been also, in various ways, uniformly and strongly pressed upon their attention. But if such were not the case, if there existed no such expressions of public opinion upon the subject,-yet certain statements had been made to that house, which loudly called upon it to enter upon the discussion, which in his opinion should make the desire of that reform a natural impulse of patriotism in the bosom of every member, and which rendered it a duty imperative upon the present house of commons, beyond what it had been in any former period. He alluded to what had been stated by a member of that house in his place, that ministers openly and avowedly adopted the most corrupt practices, in order to obtain seats in parliament for those who would vote in support of their measures. At that time statements were made, so notoriously disgraceful, that their speaker himself, with all his great constitutional knowledge, pronounced them to be such, that "our ancestors would have startled with indignation" at them. And yet, notwithstanding these statements, that house had gone on, withou effecting any salutary regulation, and leaving the people to form the dan gerous opinion, that their represen

tatives

tatives were attentive to their own interests, but utterly regardless of the rights of their constituents. Here the honourable member entered much into detail, as to the defective nature of the representa tion as it now existed; and having stated the evil, he came to the remedy. Here it was natural to expect that there must be doubt and difficulty: however, he had only to state what, in his humble judgement, appeared to be the measures best calculated to remedy the mischiefs of which he had been complaining. He would say, that generally the leading steps to such measures would be, first, granting to copyholders a right to vote and, secondly, abolishing the right of nomination so as to generalize the right of voting, and thereby more fairly proportionate the number of representatives to the extent of the population of each place represented. He need not remind the house of the preposterous disproportion which at present existed, where many depopulated, desolate boroughs returned as many members to that house as the whole county of York, while Manchester, Birmingham, and other opulent towns returned not one member to parliament. Great as was his sense of the evils resulting from the present inadequate system of representation, he should yet rather submit to their continuance than propose for them a remedy not to be found in the ancient constitution of this country. The remedy he had suggested was, he contended, to be found in that constitution, and would be rather a restoration than a change. It was idle to say that the extension of the right of suffrage would weaken the influence of property: whether that right was or was not spread out upon

the surface of the population, still property would, must have its natural influence. He would propose then to get rid of nomination, and to throw the representation of the close boroughs into a more enlarged representation of the more populous counties. These boroughs, which Mr. Pitt, in the earlier and purer part of his political life, made such efforts to abolish, were said to amount at that time to thirty-six in number. These, it was well known, were made mere articles of commerce, common conveyances for the transfer of the rights of Englishmen from one boroughmonger to another. It had been suggested that these boroughs might be thrown into the hundreds; and as to the objection that the poor voter would be more accessible to corruption than the rich boroughholder, he would wish to know the difference between the poor man taking a bribe of five guineas for his single vote, and the rich man accepting as many thousands for nominating to a seat in that house, unless it was, that in the former case the corruption went no further than the abuse of a single vote, and that in the latter the nominator had for his money a power to dictate to the crown, to the minister, and to the people. One part, therefore, of the plan he had in view was, to bring in a bill for the abolition of those boroughs which were now known to be as common articles of trade as the woollen of which the coats they wore were made. From the abolition of these boroughs, and the consequent appropriation of a more extensive suffrage to the more populous counties, would arise an equalization of members to the different parts of the empire. As to the other part of his proposed remedy, that of

admitting

admitting copyholders to the elective franchise, this question had been strongly mooted in the middle of the last century. It was in the course of this controversy that sir William Blackstone wrote his able Treatise on Copyhold 'T'enures, and that eminent authority was clear as to the constitutional right of copyholders to vote. He (Mr. B.) therefore, in proposing that they should be admitted to the elective franchise, was proposing nothing foreign to the ancient constitution. Nomination, however, was the great evil he wished to remedy. Speaking of the conduct of that house historically; there could be no doubt that on many great questions within the last few years it did not speak the sentiments of the people. To give but one instance, that of the Walcheren expedition. The decision of that house had certainly very far from sympathized with the real opinion of the country. He had now stated his plan, and the house would perceive that it was in no way different from that he had submitted two years before. He did not wish to make any innovation, but rather to restore to the constitution what the great innovator, time, had taken from it. As that house was then organised, parties had their respective interest in every contest; but what interest had the people? The spirit of the general contests in that house had little to do with the people. It was, in fact, a struggle between an ancient aristocracy on the one hand, and an opulent borough faction on the other. He wished to give the people the shure in constituting that house which the constitution originally meant they should have As the system at present stood, it could only increase that suspicion and distrust on the part of the

people which was already but too prevalent, and which nothing would more effectually remove than agreeing to the motion he should now have the honour to submit. He again regretted that such a question was to be discussed before such empty benches, and concluded with moving, That leave be given to bring in a bill to amend the 31st of Geo. II. as it related to copyhold

tenures.

The marquis of Tavistock seconded the motion, which was most ably supported by sir F. Burdett, sir Sam. Romilly, Mr. Whitbread, and sir John Newport. It was opposed by Mr. Elliott, Mr. Lyttleton, Mr. W. Ward, lord Milton, Mr. D. Giddy, Mr. Gooch, lord Castlereagh, and Mr. Perceval, on the general ground that the house of commons, as at present constituted, represented the whole people already, and that innovation might lead to incalculable evils. Mr.Ward said, that the house spoke the sense of the people, not from day to day, but from period to period; -on the aggregate, and not as momentarily inflamed by ignorance or passion;

and lord Milton entreated the house to pause before they should lay sacrilegious hands on the respectable fabric raised by their ancestors, and to respect in it the work of God, who had inspired the idea for the good of mankind. Mr. D. Giddy, too, maintained that close boroughs were absolutely necessary to the safety of the constitution!

Mr. Perceval observed that much had been said that night upon the increasing influence of the crown, and the present administration were supposed to be the peculiar instruments of that influence. Yet, was it not a little singular, if the influence of the crown was so great as

was