PROTEST AGAINST TIIE SECOND READING OF THE REFORM BILL, (ENGLAND.)
DISSENTIENT,-1. Because in providing for the correction of abuses in the election of members to serve in the Commons House of Parliament. we are bound, above all things, to bear in mind that the Government of this country is, what from the earliest period of our history, it has ever been, a monarchy; that this monarchy, limited by the laws and customs of the realm, and by the necessity imposed on the Sovereign of having constant recourse to the advice and aid of Parliament, is the form of government best adapted to the habits. wants, and wishes of the .people ; and consequently that uo changes, however specious. can be worthy of adoption which would either strike at the principles of the monarchy itself, or would leave the Sovereign without the power of performing the high duties required from him, without the free and independent exercise of his hiwful premgatives in guarding the general interests of the State, in upholding its an cleat institutions, and affording due protection to the rights, liberties, property, and lives of all his subjects. We feel it, therefore, to be the duty of. Parliament, more especially of this House, to refuse to consign the country to so vast an untried change as is em- bodied in the present Bill,—a change, of which it has been justly said by one of the most distinguished advocates for the second reading, that it is in truth " a new form of government, of which no one has ever pronounced that it would be practicable, and Which, if practicable, would be pernicious." -2. Because, admitting it to be expedient to correct abuses which may have grown up under the present system of Parliamentary election, and to extend to large, popu. Ions, and wealthy towns the privilege of returning members to Parliament, we are bound to bear in mind, that it has been also admitted by the authors of the Bill, that, not- withstanding any abuses and any deficiencies. "the House of Commons, as at present
i
constituted, is, above all other institutions, of all other countries in the world, the in
stitution best calculated for. the general protection of the subject"
3. Because by this Bill, that scrupulous regard to the sacredness of chartered rights and vested interests, which has always hitherto been deemed part of the essential policy of the British Constitution, and a fundamental principle of British justice, is now, for the first time, utterly abandoned. The most ancient charters and the most valued in- terests are treated with a reckless indifference, which, whilst it is unnecessary to the at- tainment of the proposed objects, the correction of abuses, and the improvement of the existing system, shocks every feeling of justice, and cannot fail to be made a precedent tbr still more fatal violations of those principles in future. 4. Because, in contemplating the violence done by this Bill to the great principle of prescription, we cannot disguise from ourselves the dangers which must arise to the most venerable of our institutions, which mainly rest on that principle ; above all, to the highest of all, to that one on which all others depend. 5. Because, even if the principles of the Bill were consistent with the stability of the Monarchy, and with the safety of our most -valued instiutions, yet the provisions by which it seeks to carry those principles into effect, are for the most part unjust in them- seives..partial in their operation, and anomalous in their character, ill-adapted to their avowed purpose, and still more to the extensive and complicated interests of this mighty empire.
A preponderating influence in the election of the House of Commons is conferred upon the lowest class of inhabitants in towns ; tuns virtually closing the doors of the House of Commons to the vast monied and colonial interests, and leaving but few op- portunities of ;ulmission to the heads of the great commercial body. The landed interest, notwithstanding the professed intention of giving to it an in- crease of representation commensurate with that given to the great towns, is left exposed, even in the elections for counties, to the influence of the trading and manufacturing classes of the very places which are themselves to return members to Parliament—an influence so great as must leave in many instances the representation of counties and divisions of counties in the power of voters from the towns. The populous suburbs of the metropolis have been subjected to the same innovating spirit which marks the operation of thus Bill in every other particular. Though it is manifest that this vast district, being connected iu interests with the metropolis itself, and being the seat of Government and of Parliament, must command attention whether immediately represented or nut, and equally manifest that the only real danger must be, lest the influence of the popular voice of the metropolis should be too powerful ; yet it has been thought fit to aggravate this danger in an incalculable degree, by creating new districts for representation, and virtually consigning the elections to universal suf- frage, thus insuring a perpetual recurrence of popular excitement in a quarter where, above all others, it is most to be deprecated, as injurious to the best interests of the in- dustrious orders of the people, dangerous to the public peace, and hardly compatible with the free and independent exercise of the high functions of Parliament itself. 6. Because the exorbitant increase of the democratic element of the British Consti- tution designed by this Bill must give additional strength and impetus to a principle which, while .duly restrained and tempered by the checks provided in the existing con- stitution of Parliament, is the source of that genuine spirit of disciplined and en. lightened freedom which is the proudest distinction of our national character ; but which, without those cheeks, or other equivalent restraints, could not fail to advance with augmented and accelerated three till, all other powers being drawn within its vor- tex, the Government would become a mere democracy; or if the name and form of a monarchy were preserved, all that could give independence to the Sovereign or protec- tion to the subject would be really excluded. April 16. a (Signed) Wzmmtvrore. In the course of' Monday evening the following signatures were added to this Pro- test—Ernest. William Frederick. Malmesbury, Beverley, Kenyon, Gascoignc Salisbury, Oriel, Bayning, De La Warr, Penshurst, Bute. Cowley, Wallace, Newcastle, Marv- borough, Delamere, Limerick, Jersey, Dartmouth, Caledon, Colville of Culre,:s, Cluil- roondeley, G. Rochester, Lansdale, Falmouth, Retlesdalc, Abingdon, Norwich,
Mel-
druni. Mayo. Rutland, Doncaster, Feversham, Montagu, Winehilsea am! Nottingham,
De Dunstanville, Selkirk, Sidmouth, Manners, Brownlow, Howe, Lorton, Wilton, R. Bristol, II. Exeter. II. Carlisle, Beresford, Ker, Clanwilliam, Saltoun, Guilford, Clanbrassill, Home, Camden, Vane, Longford, Douglas, Wynford, Forester, Eldon, Sydney, George Kilmer°, Bexley, Northumberland, Mansfield, Verularn, .Abercorn, Beauchamp, Bathurst, J. II. Gloucester, Combermere, John George Armagh, Rosslyit In all 74.
Previous page
