TOPICS OF THE DAY.

THE " FINALITY " DIVISION ON "FURTHER REFORM."

TrrE hour at which the division after the "grand debate" took place, prevented us from doing more last Saturday than indicate one or two of its points. The subject, however, both in its facts and inferences, is sufficiently important to require further exami. nation.

Mr. T. DONCOMBE'S addition to the Ministerial motion was as moderate and as harmless as any avowal of men's principles can possibly be made : the most prudent Reformer must admit, both in practice and theory, that "it is expedient to effect such further Reforms in the Representation of the People in Parliament, as shall conduce to their contentment, and to the security and wel- fare of the kingdom at large ; " the most ardent Radical cannot demand more. If any common object can "unite Reformers of all shades of opinions," it must be this : it can only be opposed by the worst "Finality" of the worst times of CASTLEREAGH'S Tory. ism—a determination to give nothing to the people, however right in itself; or how clear soever their claim to it, lest they should ask something more. Among those seeking an excuse for desertion, some objected to "the time,"—a pretence never wanting on such occasions : but the time was most appropriate. Without reference to any legislative measure pending or contemplated, the House had been called upon to pass an abstract and gratuitous vote of confidence in the "Executive Government" of Ireland : what more fitting or more logical, than—having resolved "that it is the opinion of this House" that the Mph Administration has produced a ge. neral improvement of one part of the United Kingdom—the resolvers should also affirm an " opinion" as to what would conduce to "the security and welfare of the kingdom at large ?" The time had this further advantage—it presented the largest possible muster of the Liberal party. Such an opportunity can never occur again for the chance of influencing Government by a display of Liberal num- bers, and disposing them, as the phrase is, to "yield something to their supporters:" no set night for a Reform division would ever produce so large a congregation of Liberal Members.

Sixty-eight professing or pledged Reformers—not Ballot-men,* but something more—thought fit, however, to throw away this op- portunity. They voted with Ministers on Saturday morning, or with Mr. Dyscomm: on the first night of the session for the same prin- ciple more strongly put, but shirked the second division of Satur- day by going away, or voted that it was not "expedient to effect further Reforms in the Representation of the People in Parlia- ment." The elaborate Division-lists we published last week, fur- nish the raw materials for a thorough exposition of the deserters; but as few, even if capable, will take the trouble of these investi- gations, and as the vote, and the reasons which are alleged in excuse for it, indicate a fresh and further degradation on the part of " Retbrmers " in Parliament, it will be useful to present the statistics of the

FINALITY MEN.

1. Ireland. The Irish deserters are prealinent in numbers, and in gross departure from oft-avowed principle. They exceed those of Eng- * The division on the Ballot in 1838 is assumed by the Examiner as repre- senting the "Radical strength:" sonic, however, support the Ballot not as a. " further Reform," but as completing the Reform Act, and making the nominal franchise real. The names We exhibit in the text are those of men who either from previous conduct or their representative relations might have been rea- sonahly expected to vote with Mr. DI:NCO:MBE. The Ballot strength, including absences, pairs, and Mr, LWART, lately elected, is 214. If placemen and those who did not vote atAil on Saturday morning be deducted, the 68 FINALITY MEN will be irtelEased to 125. These are fine additional names. A glance will show the fidlacy of the Ballot test, for some are Tories in their hearts, without the courage to avow their

principles. 4..,

ENGLAND Lord Russell ....ii ... Tathtuck.

Sir G. Anson 1 iclgicld. Lord C. Russell BeArd shire.

L. G. Bunivard Breen wick. E. A. Siutiord Somerset, IV. It. Bernal Bochester. G. 1'. Serope Stroud. W. J. Blake Newport. B. Sunlit, 'ostrich. Sir C. Blunt Lewes. .1. A. Smith Chichester. w. II. Brodie Visbory. W. M. Stanley Fordifraet. G. 11. Clive IhrfArd. J. Stewart Huniton. W. Craw I-, ,. d Louth.n. NV Turner . Blackburn. COI. this iv • Ili,rectr r. :11,1jor C. Vivian Bodulin. W..7. Dcidsou Fumy, IV. J. II. V Mini . . Swansea. E. Divot Enter. Sir II. II. Vivian Cornwall, E.

Captain A. Ellice Barwick. It. Walker Bury.

E. Ellice Corentry. W. A. Willianet Monmouthshire. NV. IL Erle Oxfiird. Lord Worsley I incolnshire. Sir R. Ferguson Nottingham, J. Fort Clitheror.

Sir J. Guest Merthyr. R. Archbold Kildare. J . II. lIawkius Netrp/ot. lt. M. Bellew Louth.

Sir It. Heron PeLrborough. Sir D. I. Nessus . Mallow. T. It. I toblinuse Rochester. W. V. Stuart Waterford CO.

W. James Cumberland, E. J. 11. Talbot New Boss.

C. Lushington Ashburton. Lord Melgund Hythe. F. Puget Beaumaris. W. G. Craig Edinburghe/dre.

C. F. Palmer Reading. F. Dundas Orkney. . J. Moe Durham, S. .1. E. Elliott Boxburohshwe.

E. W. Pendurvcs Cornwall, IV. It. Ferguson Eirhcaidy.

J. Ponsonby Derby. R. Macleod hymen. G. Pryme Cambridge. R. Steuart Iladdington.

E. R. Rice Dotter. Lord J. Stuart Ayr Buryht.

IRELAND.

SCOTLAND.

land and Scotland put together: they form one-third of the whole re- presentation of their country ; exhibiting the same proportionate rela- tion to those of Great Britain as 1 does to 6: every third man of Ire- land's 105 Members withholding his vote for "further Reform ; " whilst in Great Britain only 1 in 19 was a Reform deserter. Here are the thirty-five--thirteen against further reform, twenty-two absent.

VOTED AGAINST FURTHER REFORM.

Mr. J. O'Connell Kerry.

G. Barry Cork County. F. B. Beamish Cork City. Lord Brabazon Dublin Co. D. Callaghan Cork. F. French Roscommon. H. Grattan Meath. It. Hutton Dublin. J. Maher Wetrjbrti Co. T. Martin Galway Co. J. Power Wexford. T. Redington Dundalk. D. Roche Limerick.

SKULKED FROM THE DIVISION.

Daniel O'Connell ...Dublin.

Morgan O'Connell -.Meath. Maurice O'Connell ...Tralee.

H. W. Barron Waterford. H. Bridgman Ennis. R. 0. Cave Tipperary. H. Chester Loath.

Col. Fitzgibbon Limerick Co. N. Fitzsimon King's Co.

J. Grattan Wicklow.

Sir It. Nagle Westmeath. C. O'Brien Clare.

The O'Connor Don Roscommon.

R. L. Shell Tipperary. J. P. Somers chem. Sir W. Somerville ...Drogheda.

C. A. Walker Wextbrd.

H. N. Westenra lIonaghan. J. Westenra King's (7o. Col. White Longford Co.

L. White Longford Co.

A. Yates Carlow.

2. England exhibits fifteen deserters, and twelve votes against "the expediency of farther Reform."

VOTED AGAINST FURTHER REFORM. SKULKED FROM TUE DIVISION.

E. Baines Leeds. Sir E. Bulwer Lincoln.

J. Bowes Durham, S. J. Brotherton Salfiwd. C. Buller Liskeard. J. Brocklehurst llacclesfield.

W. Clay T. Hamlets. Lord A. Conyngham.. Canterbury. B. Hawes I ambeth. C. T. D'Eyncourt ... Lambeth. C. Hindley Ashton. Earl Euston Thettbrd. E. Horsman Cockermouth. J. Hmnphery Southwark. Dr. Lushington T. Hamlets. H. Lambton Durham, N. W. Marshall Carlisle. W. Ord Vorcostle-u.-7'.

M. Phillips Ilanchester. G. R. Peehell Brighton. C. Standish fl'iyan. Sir C. Style `carborough. W. Stansfiehl Haddersfiehl. Sir M. Wood London. . E. Strutt Derby. T. N. Talfourd Reading. T. Wilde Newark

3. Scotland. The proportion of Scottish deserters to the whole re- presentation of the country is only one-ninth, their absolute number is only six : but of these the affirmers against Reform are in the ratio of two to one. Some of the Glasgow folks were right in their forebodings of Lord WILLIAM BENTINCK, and we were too confiding.

VOTED AGAINST reierneu REFORM.

SKULKED PROM THE DIVISION.

G. Abercromby Stirlineshire. Lord W. Bentinck ... Glasgow.

E. Ellice junior St. Andrew's. P. Chalmers lioutrose.

A. Hastie Paisley.

A. Kinnaird Perth.

Excuses are never wanting fo • ill deeds, and a few are urged upon the present occasion ; but their weakness is their exposure.

The objections as to the " time," and the " want of connexion with the subject before the House," we have already disposed of Some say, Mr. DUNCOMISE gave " no details." It was not the stage for details. Others object, that he declined "the statement of his own particular views." But Mr. DuNCOMISE did not call upon Re- formers to affirm "his own particular views : " the amendment asked them to express an " opinion" in favour of' " ffirther Reform,' and against Finality. It is argued that he " barred discussion by the step he took." The lateness of the hour, and the weariness of the House might bar discussion ; but what discussion was needed ? Surely " Reformers" had made up their own minds as to whether they desired any "further Reform ;" and what harm to the cause could have ensued from voting upon their opinion ? Dr. LusttiNGTON, the Iago of the conspiracy, affirmed that " he was favourable to the spirit of the amendment," and voted against it. The Doctor claimed for himself a right of disbelief when Sir Ronmer Pcm., as leader of his party, declared that no censure was intended by the vote of' the Lords : other men will be incredulous, and with more reason, when they see the Doctor's "favourable spirit" prompting lain to do the " amendment" all the injury he could. Mr. ulnas- MAN, in aintblished letter intended to serve fbr a speech, says- " I voted against Mr. Duncombes amendment, not because I dis- sented from its truth, but because I did not wish to impair or qua- lify my vote in favour of Lord Normanby and against the pro- ceeding of the Lords." Oh the logic !—I affirm that in lily" nion" a certain course has " tended to the general improvement of one part of the kingdom," and that another course will " conduce to the welfare of the kingdom at large ;" and the last affirmation will "impair or qualify" the first. What will they " say at Cocker- mouth" to this logic of the old Ballot-counter-out ?

But the most extraordinary, and the most significant motive, is let out by the Examiner. That organ of official Whigs and " wise" Radicals announces, that

"The wily and dishonest policy of the Tories, who are understood to have left the House en masse after the rejection of Sir Robert Peel's amendment, left no alternative but this to those rational Reformers who, holding their own just views, can discern seine little difference between the prospects that await them under a Whig or a Tory Administration." Is "rational Reform," then, conic to this—not to vote for "further Reform" when it can be carried ? Do the votes of the "rational Reformers" depend upon the will of Sir Rom= PEEL and the Tories? Suppose that Mr. GROTE or some other "indiscreet" person brings forward the Ballot, or any thing in the shape of "further Re- form;" and that, matters being riper, the Tories as a party absent themselves, leaving the Liberals to fight it out. The Examiner constantly adduces the "two hundred supporters of the Ballot" as a proof of the Reform strength. How will the two hundred act in a House of 320 or 330 Members ? Under this last new morality, they will have " no alternative left " but to vote against the Ballot, because the Tories do not choose to attend to support illinisters against "further Reform." The present plight of the Whigs does not surprise us, who, reckless of misrepresentation, predicted in the autumn of 1837, government by a Conservative Opposition, as the precursor of a Tory Ministry ; and we know some pseudo Liberals have shaped their Reform votes according to the probable support the Tories would lend the Ministry upon the particular occasion : but we never expected to see it declared that men were not to vote according to their promises, their pledges, or their convictions, but to support sham motions "for rejec- tion," which, their enemies so ruling, they were to negative by their own votes. Justly may far-seeing Conservatives eschew office for the present, when, in addition to their gradually grow- ing strength, they can coerce the Ministry and control the " ra- tional Reformers,"—defeating " Reform" by their votes when present ; when absent, compelling "Reformers" to defeat them- selves. They want but one stage more to complete the triumph, if it be not approached already—to suppress the motions and seal the lips of " further Reformers." Wonderfully is the "cause "

advancing in Parliament I An honest Opposition of even fifty voices would be fitr more advantageous than " this alternative." " Restore to us our legions," the Examiner told us, is to be the " cry of an indignant people." When a little longer persistence in this " rational Reform" course has unfolded the true character of the legionaries, an indignant people will be more apt to punish at any cost the mercenaries who have assumed. the popular uniform for their own purposes, or more surely to betray the popular cause to Conservatism.

Such is the result of " the bombardment policy." Very success- ful is the threico-tragedy at which the " wise Radical Reformers" have been assisting since May 1836! After various discreditable incidents, the first act landed the Ministers in a majority of 5 on their defunct Church-rate Bill, and reduced them to a state of helpless distress, from which the King's death alone relieved them. "Elections" formed the interest of the second act; which ended in cutting down a firm majority of SO to a fluctu- ating one of less than 30, upon such measures as the Ministry dared to propose. The third act opened with the " Finality" speech of Lord JOHN, and the worse than Tory Civil List ; it closed, after sundry variations on " Jump Jim Crow," by the abandonment of the Appropriation-clause and the vote of a million of British money to the Irish parsons, at the instigation of the Irish " Liberals." The fourth act shows one of the dramatis personte, represented by Dr. LUSHINGTON and supported by a chorus of base voices, engaged in a mental conflict touching the old dilemma—whether the convenient should be preferred to the honest ; ended by the Doctor deciding against honesty, with the full approbation of the chorus. The incidents of tile remainder, the length of the piece, and the mode of the catastrophe, mainly depend upon the " wily policy " of " Sir RonEur PEEL aud the Tories ;.' but we limey. at all events, that a poetical justice is iii store for the de- Seriously, does this shuffling and unprincipled course even seem to answer its sole end—that of " keeping out the Tories I." We speak not altogether of large ett■mts—of the total shipwreck of character amongst public men—of the induced distrust of the pro- fessions of all politicians, which may not wear out in the present ge- neration—of the tanger of the people—of the apathy and disgust of eonstituencies—of the corruption " Liberal" example is sow- ing, we fear, in many minds—or of the total destruction of the Re- form party, which must ensue, under the present system, at the next election, whether precipitated by a demise of the Crown, or a Tory advent, or the satisfied Tories wait a few years for a con- stitutional di s..1 tion : we are content to banish such consi- d era tim s, and to aek. Can the " black-white keepers-out of Tories " hold their gm mnd ? Let the result of tbe late division answer. In March I S3. Lon?. SA.N rox, net n tla- Sir ROBERT PEEL, moved an americium: t tel exclude Radical ati, on Sir WIL- 13 um MoLnswoaTit's motion : in a House of eo.i Members the Ministers brought tip 316 voters. 1nel got a majority of 29. In April 1839, Sir HOBERT is VOPTI'lled to light on ground of the Ministers' own choosing,, and he likewise IA.:tines his amendment to exclude Radical aid : the Ministers bring. up 318 men ; but the Tories have grown from 2N7 to 296, and the Government majority drops from 29 to 22. Verily, a " pear " is " ripening.," but it is not the Lords.