XXIII. 1832. 93. The new duced. Dec. 12. CHAP. and stormy recess, and the first thing done, of course, was to bring in a new Reform Bill. It was introduced on the 12th by Lord John Russell in the Lower House, and though the leading principles of the former bill were Bill intro- preserved entire, several alterations in matters of detail were introduced, which afforded a just though transient subject for congratulation and triumph to the Conservative opposition. Lord Chandos's fifty-pound clause for voters in counties was retained; and as this was done with the secret approbation of the Whig leaders, it could not justly be considered as a triumph to their political opponents. But other changes, which had been resisted with the whole influence of Government in the former Parliament, were adopted. The House was restored to its original number of 658, though the former House had been dissolved on the success of General Gascoigne's motion, that no reduction should take place in the members for England and Wales. The census of 1831 was adopted as the basis of the disfranchisement, notwithstanding the strenuous efforts made to retain that of 1821; and very considerable alterations were made in the distribution of boroughs in the schedule. A change, important in principle, though not very material in its present results, was introduced also in the calculations on which the rule for disfranchising boroughs was framed. This was no longer done by mere numbers, but by numbers compounded with the amount of assessed taxes paid, an obvious improvement, as letting in at least some consideration of property, and which was industriously and correctly worked out by Lieutenant Drummond. 1 Ann. Reg. Sir Robert Peel made a skilful use of the advantage 18; Parl. thus afforded him, and ironically congratulated the new Parliament upon the tribute paid to the names of the old one, by adopting General Gascoigne's amendment.1 1832, 17, Deb. xi. 407, 413. In truth, however, the new bill, though it adopted some of the amendments for which the Opposition had contended in the discussion of the former one, was in reality The CHAP. 1832. 94. democratic the new more democratic than its predecessor had been. ten-pound clause, which enfranchised the middle class, and the Schedules A and B, which disfranchised property and the colonies, were retained. The first of these sche- Increased dules, being that containing boroughs which were to be character of entirely disfranchised, was kept up at its original amount bill." of fifty-six, and there was no addition to the one hundred and forty-four county members, as proposed by the first bill. Eleven towns were taken from Schedule B, and placed in Schedule C, containing new towns returning two members each. The general result was, that the borough members for England amounted to three hundred and twenty-eight, and the county to one hundred and fortyfour, or considerably less than a half! Yet did Government still persist in the belief that the landed interest would not be impaired by the change. "The House," said Earl Grey, on introducing the bill into the House of Ann. Reg. Peers, "know how unfounded must be the alarm of those 104; Parl. who thought that the present measure would be fatal to 22, 23. the influence of the landed interest."1 1 1832, 16, Deb. xii. the bill, R. Peel's The second reading of the bill was carried in the Com- 95. mons by a majority of 161; the numbers being 322 to Division on 161. This was a much larger majority than had yet and Sir been obtained on the subject, and demonstrated the pro- speech gress which the question was making in the public mind. against it. It was strenuously and firmly, though temperately, opposed by Sir R. Peel. "I shall oppose this bill," said he, "to the last, believing as I do that the people are grossly deluded as to the practical benefits to be derived from it; that it is the first step, not directly, to revolution, but to a series of changes which will affect the property and alter the mixed constitution of the country; that it will be fatal to the authority of the House of Lords, and that it will force on a series of further concessions. I will oppose it to the last, convinced that, though my opposition will be unavailing, it will not be fruitless, because it will in some degree oppose a bar to future con XXIII. 1832. CHAP. cessions. If the whole House were now to join in giving way, it would have less power to resist future concessions. On this ground I take my stand, not opposed to any well-considered reform of any of our institutions which the wellbeing of the country demands, but opposed to this reform in our constitution, because it tends to root up the feelings of respect towards it which are founded in prejudice perhaps, as well as in higher sources of veneration for all our institutions. I believe that reform will do this, and I will wield all the power that I possess to oppose the gradual progress of that spirit of democracy to which others think we ought gradually to yield; for if we make these concessions, it will only lead to establish the supremacy of that principle. We may, I know, make it supreme; we may be enabled to establish a republic, full, I have no doubt, of energy-not wanting, I have no doubt, in talent-but fatal, in my conscience I believe, to our mixed form of government, and ultimately destructive Ann. Reg. of all those usages and practices which have long insured 44; Parl. to us a large share of peace and prosperity, and which have made and preserved this the proudest kingdom in the annals of the world."1 1832, 43, Deb. xi. 729, 780. 96. ing carried mons by Lord J. Russell's closing de claration. March 23. The third reading of the bill was carried, on 23d Third read- March, in the Commons, after a very long discussion in in the Com- committee, by a majority of 116, in a House of 594, 116, and being less than the majority on the second reading, but larger by 7 than the final division on the first bill. Lord John Russell closed his arduous task with these remarkable words, which, without doubt, expressed in good faith the opinion of Government regarding the measure: "With respect to the expectations of the Government, I will say that, in proposing this measure, they have not acted lightly; but, after much consideration, they were induced to think, a year ago, that a measure of this kind was necessary, if they would stand between the abuses which they wished to correct and the convulsions they desired to avoid. I am convinced that, if Parliament should refuse to entertain a measure of this nature, they would XXIII. 1832. place in collision that party which, on the one hand, op- CHAP. posed all reform in the Commons House of Parliament, and that which, on the other, desired a reform extending to universal suffrage. The consequence of this would be, that much blood would be shed in the struggle between the contending parties; and I am perfectly convinced 1 Parl. Deb. that the British constitution would perish in the conflict. xi. 780. I move, sir, that this bill do now pass." tress in the and Mr garding it. Before following the bill to its next stage, and record- 97. ing the momentous conflict between the Crown and the General disdemocracy which ensued in the Upper House, it is neces- country, sary to mention two circumstances occurring at this period, Hunt's which threw an important light both on the causes that motion rehad produced the reform passion, and the effect its gratification was likely to have on the prosperity and welfare of the nation. During the first half of the year 1831 all branches of industry in the country had come to be sensibly affected by the consternation which generally prevailed, and the feeling of danger which existed on the part of the holders of property in regard to the security of their possessions. Before the end of the year this feeling had become so strong that enterprise and speculations of all sorts were paralysed, expenditure was generally contracted, and industry of every kind in consequence became depressed to a most alarming degree. Mr Hunt, the Radical member for Preston, brought this under the notice of the House of Commons, by an amendment on the Address, which expressed the feeling of the democratic classes in regard to the remote causes of their distresses.* No one seconded his amendment, and it was "That by the present critical and alarming state of our country, when trade and manufactures are reduced to such difficulties by the withdrawing of and narrowing the circulation, without a proportionate reduction of taxation by which the incomes of all those classes but those who lived upon the taxes are reduced one-half in value, the greatest distresses existed; that these were aggravated by the baleful system called Free Trade, by which a competition of foreign silks, gloves, and other articles is permitted with our own manufactures; that by these means the people have been driven to desperation and frenzy ; and that to these causes are to be attributed those incendiary proceedings going on in the country."—Ann. Reg. 1831, p. 13. XXIII. 1832. CHAP. negatived without a division. Posterity will probably reverse the sentence, as it has already done the unanimous vote of the National Assembly finding Louis XVI. guilty, and come to regard the contraction of the currency, and introduction of Free Trade, to which he referred the whole existing distress, as the real cause of all the convulsions into which the nation had been thrown.1 1 Ann. Reg. 1832, 31. 98. state of the venue. 2 Ante, c. xxii. §§ 103, 104. But how insensible soever the House of Commons, Declining during the heat of the reform contest, might be to the public re- real causes which had induced the general distress, and with it the desire for change, its effects were soon brought to light in a form which could neither be overlooked nor mistaken. The revenue exhibited a falling-off to a most alarming extent. On October 3d, the Chancellor of the Exchequer brought forward his second budget for the year, the first having been abandoned, as already stated,2 and he was obliged to admit a very considerable defalcation in the principal articles of revenue. The Customs, in the preceding quarter, had fallen £644,000 below the corresponding quarter in the preceding year, and the 3 Ann. Reg. Excise, in the same period, no less than £1,909,000. Upon the whole, the Chancellor of the Exchequer esti229, 230; mated the revenue at £47,250,000, and the expenditure at £46,756,000, leaving an apparent excess of income of £500,000 a-year.3* But so far were these expectations 1831, 289, 290, and App. to *The income and expenditure for the year 1831, as actually realised, stood as follows:: |