country. What England is now Ireland was in 1791: what was faid of the few they had now applied to the many; and as there were discontents in this nation, which we could neither diffemble nor deny, let us not, by an unwife and criminal difdain irritate and fret them into violence and diforder, nor leave to the operation of chance what we might more certainly obtain by the exercife of reafon. It had been affirmed that the minifters poffeffed the confidence of the country in the fame degree as ever, fince the majority of the houfe fupported the meafures of the government, and gave their countenance to all the evils we were doomed to endure. He was surprised to hear the noble lord advance a propofition fo unaccountable, when a number of petitions had been prefented to his majefty for a difmiffal of his minifters. Why was the queftion of reform agitated, but because a general election did not afford the people the means of expreffing their voice, because this houfe was not a fufficient reprefentation of them? When we contend (faid he) that minifters have not their confidence, they tell us that parliament is their faithful reprefentative; and when we prove that the houfe does not fpeak their fentiments, from the petitions to the throne, we are defired to obferve the general election, as, at this period, they had an opportunity of choofing faithful organs of their opinion. Lord North had made ufe of the fame argument in the American war: "What! can you contend it is "unpopular, after the declarati66 on in its favour which the peo"ple have made by their choice of "reprefentatives? The general "election is the proof that it conti"nues to be the war of the people

"of England." So fpoke lord North; and yet it was notoriously otherwife-fo notoriously, that the prefent chancellor of the exchequer made a juft and ftriking use of this fallacious argument to demonstrate the neceffity of a parliamentary reform. "You fee (faid he) that to "defective, fo inadequate is the "prefent practice, at leaft, of an "elective franchife, that no im"preffion of national calamity, no "conviction of minifterial error, "no abhorrence of difaftrous war "is fufficient to ftand against the "corrupt influence which has "mixed itself with elections, and "drowns and ftitles the popular "voice." Upon this statement he acted in 1782, and repeated this warning in 1783 and 1785: it was the leading principle of his conduct: "Without a reform (these "were the words) the nation cannot "be fafe; this war may be ended, "but what will protect us against

another? As certainly as the fpi"rit which engendered the prefent "actuates the fecret councils of the " crown, we fhall, under the in"fluence of a defective reprefenta"tion, be involved in new wars "and fimilar calamities." This was the right honourable gentleman's prophecy (continued Mr. Fox), and it has been fully accomplifhed-another war did take place, equal in difafter, and at least equal in difgrace! In what a state of whimfical contradiction did he now ftand! After having complained of "the defect of reprefentation being the national difeafe, and unlefs we applied our remedies here, we must fubmit to the inevitable ill confequences;" after having affirmed,

that without a parliamentary reform we could not be fafe against bad minifters, nor could any good minifters be of ufe ;" it feems as if

his whole life, from that period, had been deftined by Providence for the illuftration of the warning! During the whole courfe of the prefent war every prediction which the chancellor of the exchequer had made, every hope that he had held out, every prophecy he had hazarded had failed; he had difappointed the expectations he had raifed, and all the promises he had given had proved fallacious. Yet, for thofe very declarations, and notwithstanding their failure, we had called him a wife minifter; though no event he had foretold had been verified, we had continued to behold him as the oracle of wifdom; but in the only inftance in which he really predicted what had come to pass, we had treated him with ftubborn incredulity! But the gentlemen on the oppofite fide of the houfe tell us that a reform in the reprefentation of the people is not called for by the country; and though petitions have come up for the difmiffal of minifters, they have not expreffed a wifh for reform. In anfwer to this argument it was on ly neceffary to obferve, that the refrictions recently laid on meetings of the people, and on popular difcuffions, accounted for the queftion of reform not being mixed with that which was the fubject of their immediate confideration. The pur. pofe of the meeting was necellarily Specified in the requifition to the fheriff; and if any other bufinefs was attempted to be brought forward, the fheriff would have the power of difperfing the meetingThis had actually been experienced; for at a meeting of a refpectable county in Ireland (Antrim), after the bufinefs for which they had affembled was tranfacted, that a petition for the dismislal of the minifter, and Catholic emancipation

and reform, fhould be prefented, a motion was made for thanks to earl Moira and himself, on account of the fteps taken to induce government to attend to the critical ftate of that kingdom, but the sheriff declared he could not put the queftion, not becaufe he perfonally objected to it, but becaufe it did not make part of the business mentioned in the requifition. Mr. Fox faid he did not mean to complain of this refufal as wrong, but to thow the power of the flieriff in fuch a cafe; and it was an example to prove, that, however well the people might be difpofed to parliamen tary reform, they could not iotroduce the matter into petitions agreed upon by meetings called for a different purpose: but granting that the people did not yet call for a reform, was it not probable that the univerfal demand for it, which had just burft from the people of Ireland, would be fpeedily communicated to England? The nearness of the two countries, the fympathetic intereft, the fimilarity of language, of conftitution, almoft of fuffering, made it likely that one nation would catch the difeafe of the other, unlefs we interpofed a feifonable cure, or rather a preventative, of the malady. France was the phantom that was continually held out to terrify us from our purpofe; let us then look at France; it would not be denied that the ftood upon the broad basis of free reprefentation: whatever other views its government might exhibit, and whichi might afford juft alarm to other nations, it could not be denied that her reprefentative fyftem had proved itfelf capable of vigorous exertion that it had given her, in truth, gigantic ftrength. Europe felt it too fenfibly for denial. Mr. Fox avowed, that he had no with we should

imitate

imitate France: yet we ought to take example of what was good in it, and if it was demonftrated beyond the power of fubterfuge to queftion, that genuine reprefentation alone conferred folid power, and that, in order to make government ftrong, the people muft make the government; we ought then to act on this grand maxim of political wifdom thus demonftrated, and call in the people, according, to the original principles of our fyftem, to the ftrength of our government. In doing this we were not innovating, we did not imitate, we only fhould recur to the genuine conftitution of England. When we looked at the democracies of the antient world, we were compelled to acknowledge their oppreffions to their dependencies, their horrible acts of injuftice and ingratitude to their own citizens; but they compelled us to admiration by their vigour, their conftancy, their fpirit, and their exertions in every great emergency in which they were called to act*. We could not deny that it gave a power of which no other form of government was capable. Why? Because it incorporated every man with the ftate; because it aroufed every thing which belonged to the foul as well as to the body of man; because it made every individual creature feel that he was fighting for himself and not another; that it was his own caufe, his own fafety, his own concern, and his own dignity on the face of the earth, and his own intereft on the identical foil, which he had to maintain, and accordingly we find, that whatever may be afcribed, whatever be objected to the turbulence of the paf

fions which they engender, their fhort duration, and their difguft ing vices, they have exacted from the common fuffrage of mankind the palm of ftrength and vigour. Ought Britons to refufe to take advantage of this invigorating principle? refufe to accept the benefit which the wisdom of our ancestors had refolved it fhould confer upon our conftitution ?-with the knowledge too, that it could be re-infufed into our fyftem without violence, and without difturbing any of its parts? Without difguifing the vices of France, without overlooking the horrors that had been committed, it could not be denied that they had exemplified the doctrine, that if you wish for power you must look to liberty. Let us then try the people, faid Mr. Fox, by the only means which experience demonftrates to be invincible; let us addrefs ourselves to their love; let us identify them with ourselves; let us make it their own caufe as well as ours. To induce them to come forward in fupport of the ftate, let us incorporate them in it; and when we have given them a houfe of commons, which fhall be the faithful organs of their willwhen we have made them feel and believe that there can be but one intereft in the country, we never fhould call upon them in vain for exertion. Could this be the cafe as the houfe was now conftituted? Could they review the adminiftration of the right honourable gentleman, without being convinced that the prefent reprefentation was a fhadow and a mockery? He then took a review of the circumstances under which the minister came in

to

to power; it was against the fenfe of the majority of the then houfe of commons, and armed with the corrupt power of the crow, he ftood, and fuccessfully refifted the houfe of commons. He then declared it was not the reprefentative of the people-that it did not (for it oppofed him) fpeak the fenfe of the nation. What was the doctrine here promulgated? That the houfe of commons, fo long as it obeyed the will of the minifter, was the genuine reprefentative of the country, but the moment it prefumed to be the cenfor of government, it became nothing! Minifters had affirmed that the prefent war was popular at the commencement; the fame had been faid of the American war; nor would he deny, that through the artful macinations of minifters, a clamour had been raised, which they called the voice of the nation but whatever had been the cafe in the outfet of both, the progrefs in the public opinion had been the fame in each; it had indifputably changed, though no change had been produced by the general election in the American war, and the prefent war had been unpopular for the two laft years in England, though its voice had not been heard in the choice of reprefentatives. Mr. Fox then pointed out the conduct of the candidates in populous places, on both fides, during the elections. The oppofition boafted of having reprobated this war, and refifted every one of the measures by which government had brought the country into their prefent firuation. The minifterial party apologised for their, paft offence in fupporting it, they used whining canting explanations, they described alarms, and misreprefent

1797.

ed facts: fuch was the fentiment conveyed by the general election, affording conviction to every candid mind, that if the representative fyftem had been perfect, or the practice pure, the new parliament would decidedly have voted against the continuance of the war. How could the people have confidence in the houfe that had countenanced mifreprefentation through the whole courfe of it! He gave it as his opinion, that however averfe gentlemen might be to any specific propofition of reform, if they were friendly to the principle they ought to vote for the queftion, that it might be freely difcuffed in the committee, in hopes that the united wifdom of the house might hape out fomething which might be generally acceptable. There was enough of enterprife and vigour in the plan to restore order, and not enough to produce confufion. Mr. Fox thought the best and most advifeable plan of reform was to extend the right of election to houfekeepers; it was the most perfe& . recurrence to the first known and recorded principles in our conftitution, according to the celebrated Glanville, in all cafes where no particular right intervened. The common law right of paying foot and lot was the right of election in the land; but it had been faid, extending the right of voting to houfekeepers, might in fome refpects be compared to univerfal fuffrage; he himself had always deprecated univerfal fuffrage, not fo much on account of any confufion to which it might lead, as because we fhould in reality lofe the object we defired to obtain: it would embarrafs and prevent the deliberate voice of the country from being heard, and would draw forth numbers who,

without

for the empire, they ought not altogether to be guided by inftructions dictated by local interefts-yet he cou not approve of the ungracious manner in which he fometimes had heard expreffions of contempt for the fentiments of constituents; they were made with a bad grace in the first feffion of a feptennial parliament, efpecially if they fhould come from individuals who had not fcrupled to court the favour of the very fame conftituents, by declaring that they voted against their confcience in compliance with their defire, as was the cafe of an alderman of the city of London. There was one clafs of conftituents, indeed, whofe inftructions it was confidered as the implicit duty of members to obey. When gentlemen reprefented populous towns and cities, then it was difputable whether they ought to obey their voice, or follow the dictates of their own confcience; but if they reprefented a noble lord, or duke, it be came no longer a question of doubt; he was not a man of honour who would not obey the orders of a fingle conftituent, he was to have no confcience, no liberty, no difcretion of his own; he was fent here by a lord or duke, and if he would not follow the inftructions he had received, he could be no gentleman. Mr. Fox warinly reprobated this conduct-Is a gentleman (faid he) to act in oppofition to the fentiments of the city of Westminster, or London, or Bristol, with impunity, and if he ventures to difagree with a nobleman, whofe representative he is, muft he be regarded as unfit for the fociety of men of honour? It was, he obferved, the tyranay of corruption, the confequence of a number of peers poffelling an overweening intereft in

without deliberation, would impli. citly act on the will of others. The best plan of reprefentation was that which fhould bring into activity the greatest number of inde pendent voters-it would be a defective fyftem which would bring in regiments of foldiers, of fervants, and of perfons whofe low condition neceffarily curbed the independence of their minds; univerfal fuffrage would extend the right to three millions of men, but there were not more than feven hundred thousand houfes which would come within the plan propofed, and he begged that gentlemen would decide whether it would not be futh. ciently extenfive for deliberation on the one hand, and fufficiently limitted for order on the other. But would this reform protect us against bribery and corruption? He dared not fay that it would; we had alas! for a course of years, habi-tuated the people to that fordid vice, -and we certainly could not wonder that a poor man fhould not fcruple to take five guineas for his vote, when he knows that the noble lord -in his neighbourhood took four or five hundred; but it might be hoped, that when this baneful encouragement, was removed, thefe regulations would tend to diminifh, if not remove, the evil. Contracting the duration of parliament would be one trong connective, and this would be eafy by the fcheme on which elections would be made. Mr. Fox then adverted to a question often difcuffed both within and without those walls, how far reprefentatives ought to be bound by the inftructions of their confiituents." He acknowJedged that he inclined to the opinion. (though he did not entirely efpoufe it), that having to legiflate

the