TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE WHOLE BILL, OR ANOTHER BILL.
ifotni-nuts months have elapsed since the cry of The Bill, the whole Bill, a;.,-,1 nothing but the fill, was raised by this journal. It would be dam:It to cite another political phrase which had been so generally and ns: _artily adopted. This cry became so po- plar, and was so often repeatet, by the Press, in Parliament, at public meetings, and under every root, because it expressed in ten words the national feeling on a subject of vast importance and universal excitement. Never were ten words more full of mean- ing. All the popular phrases of the day were embodied in this one. It signified " Reform to prevent Revolution ;" it signified approval of the provisions as well as the piinciples of Lord Gazy's measure—of the Schedules entire and the 10/. qualification, as well as of " disfranchisement" and " extension of suffrage ;" it signified that this Bill would be accepted as a " final measure:" uttered by -11 whole people, it signified the national resolution to obtain a fur- ther Reform in case less than this Bill should be given.
Lord. GREY, hosi ever, is mistaken if he suppose that any but his immediate partisans ever intended, by calling for " nothing but the Bill," to express indiscriminate approbation of every part of his measure. We, who first uttered the cry, have never been blind to the defects of the',Bill ; but, looking at the measure as a whole— weighing what was good in it against the bad—the balance of good was obvious; and we accepted the bad Jbr the sake of the good. It was just so with all classes of the Reformers. The Bill was no sooner understood, than every Reformer divided its provisions into two parts,—those which tended to preserve the old system of mock representation, and those which tended to promote a real re- presentation of property and intelligence. The Bill gave as many representatives to poor towns like Buckingham and Tavistock, as to Birmingham or one of the great Metropolitan divisions. Why were • not the Reformers dissatisfied with so unfair, and indeed irrational a partition of representatives ?—Because of Schedule A; because of the representatives bestowed on flourishing towns, including the populous, wealthy, and enlightened Metropolis; and, especially, because of the 10/. qualification. When, therefore, the Reformers adopted our cry, they accepted a compact, which Lord GREY proffered to them by solemnly pledging himself to stand or fall with the Bill. They agreed to be content with " nothing but the Bill," provided they obtained the whole of it. This is what we and the People meant by "the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill.'
The compact has been religiously observed by the People. Lord GREY has not strictly observed the compaCt. As yet, in- deed, he has not permitted any of the good provisions of the Bill to be destroyed; but he has allowed the number of bad ones to be increased. The new provisions, for example, which give the franchise to the Duke of BUCKINGHAM and the Duke of BEAUFORT and the Duke of NEWCASTLE'S " own " tenants-at- will, and which preserve the right of being bribed or oppressed to certain poor freemen of corporations, strengthen that division of the Bill of which the tendency is to maintain sham representation. As a counterbalance against these additions to the Bill, the People might in fairness have required a further addition—that of voting by ballot. They have not even uttered a complaint. Notwith- standing Lord GREY'S departure from the compact, to please the enemies of both the parties to it,—notwithstanding delays on the side of Ministers, which would have justified the People in de- claring the compact void, and looking to the attainment of their object through other- means,—notwithstanding that Lord GREY has once allowed the Bill to "fall," he not falling with it,—in spite of all these inducements to a departure from the bargain on the part of the People, they have always been content with " le:thing but the Bill," provided they should obtain the whole of it. " The whole Bill," as well as "nothing but the Bill," is still their cry. At the present crisis, " the whole Bill" means, being addressed to Lord GREY—" We have performed our part of the agreement 'which you proposed to us; we have not asked for any thing but the Bill. Now fulfil the obligation into which you entered—give us the Schedules entire, and the 101. qualification."
The coming week must decide whether Lord GREY will attempt to cheat the Nation of the price which he agreed to pay for their support. We do not suspect him of intending to make so foul and dangerous an experiment : yet what lie does intend to do, it is impossible to conjecture, seeing that he places the popular pro- visions of the Bill in the greatest danger. His partisans uphold him, saying—"Wait: Lord GREY is neither a rogue nor a fool." So be it: but, therefore, his present conduct is all the more in- comprehensible. However, the mystery will soon be cleared up. Meanwhile, there is a point to discuss. What would be the state of the Reform question, in case the popular provisions of the Bill should be destroyed or curtailed? The answer is plain : THE QUESTION OF REFORM WOULD STILL BE OPEN. A measure of Reform might have passed, but most assuredly it would not he a " final measure." • The Metropolitan districts, if defrauded of the price which Lord GREY engaged to pay for their powerful support, would call for another Bill; and in this cry they would be joined by the .101. householders, who had been cheated of the consideration promised for their support of this Bill, as well as by the great body of Reformersin all parts of the _kingdom, who consider the whole Bill as the least measure of Reform to which the Nation is entitled. It must not be concealed that there exists a numerous party who would even rejoice at.the necessity for a new Bill, as an opportunity for obtaining a moss equal suffrage and the ballot. Another party, not so numerous indeed, but very powerful, who for the sake of peace, and in order that the national prosperity may no longer be stayed by agitation, are willing to take the whole of this Bill as a final measure, would seize such an occasion to get rid of those bad provisions of this Bill, which, unless counterbalanced by the Schedules entire and the 10/. qualification, amount, not to a reform, but to a perpetua- tion of abuses. These two parties comprise the whole nation, ex- cepting only the Whig and Tory factions. Thus, supposing the bad provisions of this Bill passed as they stand, and the good ones destroyed or docked by the Lords, the first session of the present or of a new Parliament would. be occupied with another measure of Reform. Every observant titul reflecting man is convinced, that this would be the inevitable result of mutilating Lord. GREY'S Bill to gratify the Tories.
But is it not equally certain, that if ever another measure of Reform should be demanded by the People, it would comprise provisions far more DEMOCRATIC than any that this Bill contains? At a great meeting the other day in Scotland, a speaker was loudly applauded for talking of "the sunshine of Democracy." Twelve months ago, such an expression would not have been well received in any part of the United Kingdom ; but, such is the irri- tation of the People, such their anger at the prospect of a second defeat of their hopes by the Lords, that Democratic opinions are making rapid progress. This is the fruit of Lord GREY'S procras- tination, and his anxiety to conciliate the implacable Tories. Another measure of Reform may not be confined to improving the House of Commons, but may be extended to some improve- ment of the House of Lords,—that is, it may amount to a revo- lution. Many months ago, the suggestion of Colonel TORRE NS, that the case might arise in which it would be expedient to place the Lords in Schedule A, was received, though with applause, still with laughter and good-humour. How would such a pro- posal be received at this moment? How would it be received a few months hence, in case the bad parts only of the present Bill should pass' entire? We put the question, not to those shallow opponents of the national will whose pride renders them blind to the national anger and power, but to the more sagacious Anti-Reformers, such as Lord WHARNCLIFFE and the Bishop of LONDON, who would give much rather than risk all. Looking merely to an early and effectual Reform, there might be little to regret in the mutilation of this Bill by the Lords; for such is the intensity and steadiness of public feeling on the sub- ject, that another measure, containing far more " venom," that is, efficiency, must speedily follow the passing of this Bill, any one of its popular provisions being curtailed. Why, then, do we implore the Lords to pass the whole Bill Y—In order that a question which agitates the country—which locks up capital, and produces the most injurious stagnation of industry—which diminishes the re- venue, which excites angry passions, and which at this moment (such is the reckless pride of the Tories) threatens to bring on us the experiment of a fierce Democracy—in order that this disturbing and most dangerous question may be at once and finally settled. This was our object when we. raised the cry of "The Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill." This is our object in pray- ing the Lords to spare us the necessity of calling for " ANOTHER B I LL." That necessity must arise, if the price which was promised to the People for their support of this Bill be not paid to them quickly and in full.
Previous page
