H R I T A I N. 



OH,. -in 



I'l'll Of 



Pon- 

 bv. 



tech of 



Hutch- 

 on. 



ciliated ? If the House of Commons (said Mr Pon- 

 sonhy, in supporting the motion) expected great 

 concessions from the Catholics, they should atleast 

 begin by making small ones themselves. But it was 

 evident, that veto or no veto, arrangement or no ar- 

 raHgement, the p:uty in power were determined to 

 concede nothing. To insinuate tint concessions were 

 ', because no distinct offer had been made by 

 the Catholics, was dissimulation and hypocrisy. Those 

 who siid so, had the words on their lips, but not the 

 meaning in their hearts. All that was demanded was, 

 to go into a committee on the subject. Would it be 

 said, that the house ought never to go into the con- 

 sideration of a petition like that of the Catholics, 

 unless they were prepared to go the whole length of 

 the claims of the petitioners? Let us contemplate 

 the situation of Europe. The greatest warrior and 

 politician who had ever lived, a man whose ambition 

 is as gigantic as his views, sways against us the sub- 

 servient energies of a people, ambitious like himself, 

 and whose ruling national passion is to put England 

 down, that they may reign the masters of the world. 

 With this power to contend with, would it not be 

 sound discretion to look to our own resources ? and 

 when a committee is required to inquire into the 

 grievances of so great a share of our population, is 

 it the answer of statesmen, to say to those who plead 

 for the petition, " you are not empowered to make 

 certain arrangements, and we will therefore not in- 

 quire into the propriety of conceding any thing ?" 

 Is it wise to tell the Catholics that they are to make 

 all the advances, and then to sit silently and sullenly 

 to receive them ? The legislature ought to make the 

 advances, for they possess the power of doing so ; 

 and, viewing the matter not as a theologian and a re- 

 ligionist, but as a statesman, it would be wire to do 

 so. Force can never secure [reland : It had been 

 tried for centuries ; and, at this very time, Great 

 Britain is not more secure of Ireland than in the most 

 troublesome times. To render her tranquil, her de- 

 mands ought at least to be listened to. 



Another parliamentary advocate for the Catholics, 

 declared, in still stronger terms, his opinion, that the 

 veto was not a necessary stipulation. This veto, said 

 Mr C. Hutchinson, is a mere stalking horse, the 

 plea of desertion from the Catholic cause. On what 

 ground was it required ? Was the loyalty of the 

 Catholic hierarchy impeached, or impeachable ? He 

 would challenge any man to produce a single instance 

 of disaffection among the Catholic bishops ; an in- 

 stance in which they had acted, or attempted to act, 

 against the government. On the contrary, their fi- 

 delity to the state was so conspicuous, their exer- 

 tion in support of the government so signal, during 

 the trying period of the insurrection, that they were 



denounced, among the leaders < ' ;lion, asthe Br< 



Orange bishop ;IH strenuous advocates f , '- "" ~J 



of government. Why then demand any additional f; " 

 pledge of loyalty from such men? Mr ( ',r.it> -,\'i 1*1* 

 motion was negatived by a majority of 213 against 

 109. 



The friends of parliamentary reform were not dis- Mr Brand'* 

 defeat which Mr Guru 



couraged by the 



I'l bill had ">''" 



received in the preceding year. On the 21st of May, '" 

 ie a motion in the house for a commit- 



Mr Brand made ; 

 tee to consider of measures proper to be adopted re- 

 specting a reform in the representation of the people. 

 In a summary statement of his plan, he stated his ob- 

 jects to be, that parliament should exercise a right, 

 which it certainly could constitutionally exercise, of 

 disfranchising those boroughs in which the members 

 were returned by the nomination of individuals, and, 

 as the members of the house would be diminished in 

 that proportion, to tranfer the right of returning such 

 members to populous towns. In counties, he would 

 leave the elective franchise as it now stands, with thr 

 freeholders, merely adding the copyholders to Ine- 

 rt umber of the electors. He proposed to assimilate 

 the mode of voting in Scotland to that in England 

 As to the state of representation in Ireland, he wtt 

 not disposed to propose any change. He should, 

 however, bring that subject under the consideration 

 of the committee, if his motion should be successful. 

 He proposed triennial parliaments, and although the 

 disfranchised boroughs had, in point of right, no 

 claim to compensation, he should, however, vote for 

 their receiving it. In changing the duration of par- 

 liament, he foresaw immense difficulties, unless a con- 

 current change were to be made in making the re- 

 turns. He proposed, therefore, that the votes should 

 be taken by districts, f instead of the return* being 

 made by districts. There was one remaining point 

 to which it was necessary to call the attention of the 

 house. The number of persons holding places and 

 seats in that house, was an evil which required a re- 

 medy. He would not propose to exclude all persons 

 who held offices, but all who held them without re- 

 sponsibility. The people, said Mr Brand, wish for 

 a moderate reform ; it is their right, and if it is refu- 

 sed, they will endeavour to assert it. There must 

 be either a reform, or a military government. 



The points and the facts so often asserted and de- 

 nied, were largely discussed in this new trial of the 

 question. The accustomed argument of the fate ot 

 France was not forgotten on this occasion, by the 

 enemies of reform. In answer to this admonition, Mr 

 Whitbread said, what has been the fate of other na- 

 tions who neglected the means of national safety 

 Did Prussia reform ? Did Austria redress the peo- 

 ple's grievances ? Why has Spain, been the theatre o 



form. 



f- To exemplify this opinion, Mr Brand referred to the county which he represented (Hertfordshire). If thc-rc were fourmerr. 

 bers to be returned, and if they weve to be returned by districts, that would throw the whole of the representation into the four 

 principal towns of the county. The freeholders of the town would uniformly prevail over the freeholder* of the county, 1 

 they would almost always outnumber them at an election. This would be to commute the county for the borough i 

 But if the votes were taken by districts, it would save much expence, and favour thi pretensions of many, who at pn 

 deterred, by a consideration of the expence, from offering themselves as candidates. Nothing need prevent the 

 taking the votes throughout the different districts, without subjecting the candidate to the exprncc of bringing iij> the free- 

 holders from the extremities of the county to the place of election. The votes irijihi also be collected throughout the di!fi : 

 cnt parishes in populous towns. Unless some such arrangements should be mode, Mr Brand conceived that it would N iu'.j'C - - 

 sible to establish triennial parliaments, without producing mischiefs of the most dangerous tcne 1 - 



