of this agitation; I say, sir, when the country at large shall know our motives, and when it shall see the grounds on which I have brought this measure forward, I say I hope, sir, that if any petitions do come in upon us from the country, those petitions will not be in favour of an elective Upper House, but in favour of a British Constitution, in all its plenitude, as far as the circumstances of the colony will admit of its application. (Loud cheering.) I hope this concession, which is much larger than the concession asked for, will satisfy the country at large that my hon. friends and myself have no sinister motive in bringing forward this great measure, that we have no intention of purloining the liberties of the country-that we have no personal or private views to forward, no mean and selfish end to attain ; but that we have brought forward this measure believing, in our conscience, that it will be conducive to placing the public weal on a firm and a solid basis. With these observations, sir, I now beg to move that this Bill be read a second time. [The hon. and learned gentleman resumed his seat amid loud and prolonged cheering, and was warmly greeted by his friends.] ments of those who are at the head | to your indulgence while I endeavour to put before you my own views on the question we have now to deal with. I will first say that I should approach this subject with despair if I believed that the final determination of the measure rested with this House as at present constituted. I rejoice to know that this is not the case; and I further rejoice to believe that, however earnestly the promoters of this bill may desire to force this measure upon the country, that their attempt will be met with the hearty and unanimous opposition of every constituency in the land (hear, hear, and cheers); and that the united expression of public opinion will be backed up by a liberal and enlightened Government at home. Weighty as may have been the arguments of my hon. and learned friend, I have no hesitation in accepting the challenge offered, and taking up the gage. And I cannot but look with regret at a portion of my hon. friend's speech, which, while it is calculated to damage the reputation of the speaker, could never have advanced the object it proposed in any society or community, even in a comparative state of barbarism-I allude to those forcible but ill-timed expressions which he felt himself justified in making in allusion to the conduct of hon. members of this House. (Hear, hear.) Had that castigation been confined to myself personally, I would have submitted in silence. I would not have presumed to occupy the time of the House to relieve myself from a groundless charge; but when I find that those aspersions attack not only myself, but all public free discussion, I feel it both my right and my duty to answer the accusation. In a community of this kind everything will be conceded to argument, to reason, to precedents Mr. JAMES MACARTHUR seconded the motion. Mr. DARVALL moved the adjournment of the debate to the following Tuesday. Carried. Mr. DARVALL: Having moved the adjournment of the debate on a former occasion, it is my duty now to address the House on the very import ant matter under discussion. And in doing so I feel that I labour under great disadvantage in addressing hon. mem--but nothing to violence; and it cerbers who are, to some extent, pledged to a course diametrically opposite to that which I now take, and under the further disadvantage of following after one of the most able and eloquent speeches to which this House has ever listened. I feel that, under these circumstances, I shall not appeal in vain | tainly argues a feeling of weakness in my hon. friend to seek to aid his own arguments, not by information, by logic, by precedent, or by reason, but by endeavouring to degrade the characters of those who differ from him, whose rights are as valuable, as legitimate, as his own-rights which he should be the last to tamper with, having been the first in | from all intercourse with his fellow-citi former years to assert them. I shall not follow such an example; I shall not attempt to deprecate the public services of my hon. friend, who even now has great claims on the gratitude of the colonists; but believing that my hon. friend has been mistaken, I shall endeavour to refute his propositions. The hon. and learned member has thought it necessary to stigmatise as conduct unbecoming a representative of the people, and lowering and degrading to the legislative dignity, for a member of this House to give to the public his opinion on the matter now under discussion. But in making this assertion he has displayed his want of knowledge of what has always been the custom in free countries. The hon. member should have recollected that in all the popular struggles on great constitutional questions in England, members of Parliament, of the highest character and influence, have habitually mixed themselves up with large gatherings of the people, when it became necessary that those who had well considered the questions should be heard. I cannot understand that because I am sent to this House by a constituency of the colony, therefore I am to forfeit my rights as a citizen; I will never shrink from giving a public opinion when I think I shall be able to guide others in forming their judgment in a reasonable manner; I will always mix freely with those who have sent me here, though, at the same time, I will not be controlled by them in contravention of the dictates of my own reason. (Hear, hear.) It is right and proper that a member should cherish after election that free communication with his constituents that he did before. It may be very well for my hon. friend, who contemplates the creation of irresponsible authority, and who considers himself neither responsible to the present generation, nor amenable to posterity, whom he would endanger by the proposed unwise measure, and by all the attendant evils of class legislation (ironical cheers)-it may be very well for him to shut himself up within his own impenetrable dignity, and shrink zens. But I feel too highly the honour and distinction of popular election ever to shrink from a full and perfect understanding with my constituents on all matters of public importance, and more particularly on a question of this importance now for the first time agitated. For though it is to some extent true that this Council was formed with a view of preparing a Constitution for the colony, still at the time that the present members were elected the particular form which this Constitution should assume was not submitted to any constituency. Neither I nor any other hon. member stated on the hustings that we were favourable to a nominee Upper House. This question was not raised. Certainly the hon. and learned member for Sydney did not then propound this principle; it would have clashed too violently with his former oftrepeated exclamations - "Gentlemen, the nominees are intolerable--an intolerable nuisance-they must be got rid of." (Cheers and laughter.) I look back with some astonishment at the career of my hon. friend; I can recollect the period when he was a nominee member of this House, and on hearing the threats of his hon. friend that he would drive the nominee members out of the House, I shrunk behind the larger proportions of my hon. friend, the Colonial Secretary (a laugh), lest that threat should be carried into execution. The hard words then uttered against nominee members by my hon. friend are fresh in my recollection; how we were told that we had no right to interfere-that we were sent here by no constituency, but were merely the creatures of a tyrannical government. With these anathemas in my remembrance I much wonder how the hon. and learned gentleman can now propose to construct an Upper House of the materials he once so heartily despised. (Cheers and laughter.) In those days, when the colonists had no power to shake off the nominees, I opposed the unreasonable suggestions of my hon. friend; but now the times are changed, and the colony is in different circumstances. I feel great pleasure in giving that course my hearty though feeble support. But what a change has come over the sentiments of the hon. and learned member! Forgetting all his former protestations, he now complains that I withdrew the support I once gave, and was the first to prefer the charge of inconsistency. It is right that I should give an account of this presumed change; it is right, if I deserve it, that I should suffer. But this is the actual case :-Impressed with the conviction, some four or five years ago, that the retention of nominees in this House would be detrimentary to the interests of legislation, and agreeing with those who desired the removal of the nominees from the Lower House, and conceiving that any larger concession by the home Government would not be granted, I did concur, in the year 1849, in a memorial to the English Minister —a memorial which was only disfigured by one proposition-namely, that for making the second house a nominee house. But I find great satisfaction in the recollection that this memorial, imperfect as it was, was the first embodiment of those righteous demands which became irresistible by their inherent justice. The demands we then made were declared to be but as a step in the progress of constitutional reform; and it would be doing injustice to any one who signed that memorial to say that it was considered a final measure of reform. I did sign that memorial, having assisted in its preparation; and I am now satisfied, after the best consideration that years of interval has enabled me to bestow on the subject, that the course then suggested was not such as could now be safely pursued. The circumstances on which that memorial was founded had entirely changed, and I now feel that it would be dangerous and unwise to impose on this country a nominee house; and I am the more satisfied in arriving at this conclusion, because I believe that the Government at home are as willing to concede the privileges we claim on our framing an elective Upper House, as they would on our agreeing to a nominee Council. I see clearly that, by yielding to these modifications of opinion which the advancing circumstances of the colony necessitated, I have subjected myself to a charge of inconsistency; but if I must submit to a charge of misconduct, I must feel glad that the charge can be so easily explained; if I am to be condemned, I will take care that it shall not be for doing anything discreditable, or for adhering obstinately to opinions after I have satisfied myself that they are unsound. (Hear, hear.) Not that I undervalue consistency in political principles, when once deliberately formed; but I have a higher duty to perform than to adhere unhesitatingly to all that I have said and done throughout my life; I have always suggested what I believe best to be done under the circumstances of the time, and which of my opponents can safely taunt me with any change that the altered condition of political affairs may have occasioned in my political opinions? Why, in the progress of the committee on the present measure, I have heard various schemes propounded by the hon. and learned member for Sydney— at some times with approval, at others with disapproval-his mind having experienced a number of revolutions before arriving at his present conclusions. (Hear, hear.) But I should not dream of taunting my hon. friend with inconsistency-whose simple object, and I hope, also, the simple object of this House, was to erect a form of government that should be the most conducive to public stability and happiness. I hope we shall cordially join in this one object, even if those who support my hon. friend should have to work with the prospect of being beaten-for beaten they will be (laughter), if not in this House, yet by the public sense out of doors. It might be necessary, in that event, for his Excellency to send hon. members to their constituencies (ironical cheers); but without that alternative, I hope that the services and great talents of my hon. friend may be retained, to remodel the Constitution now brought up in a manner that would be more suitable to us, and more creditable to himself. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) My Saxon courage, integrity, and wisdom, and belief in their power of good selfgovernment, that whatever form of government they may adopt, they will acquit themselves well. I will appeal to the histories of the two greatest and most enlightened powers of the AngloSaxon race-the one retaining a monarchial, the other adopting a republican form of government-and from these precedents I feel justified in predicting that the Anglo-Saxon race will, if left to themselves, always come safely out of any difficulties in which they may be involved. And, so far am I from desiring that republican institutions should supersede the power of the Queen, that I hope the Crown of England will long maintain and protect the various colonies of the British Empire. I will say no more on the personal bearings of this discussion. I shall studiously avoid saying anything in the least discourteous to or disparaging of my hon. friend; but I shall not show disrespect to the arguments adduced; and, though I do not wish to possess my hon. friend's scalp, or raise the hair of his head, unless in a fair debate (a laugh), I will proclaim war to the knife against a principle which condemns free public discussion of public measures. (Hear, hear.) It will now be my duty to enter more closely into the consideration of the measure before the House, and in doing so I will chiefly confine myself to the principal objections to it; first, to the proposal of a nominee Upper House; and secondly, to the revision (or rather the un-revision) of the Electoral Act. It is with the first of these that it will be my duty chiefly to deal. In listening to the eloquent speech of my hon. friend in introducing this measure, I looked in vain for the enunciation of any one principle of government. Remote analogies were attempted, quotations without end were made, and propositions were affirmed, apparently without foundation; but no fixed principle of government was attempted to be laid down. And before he (Mr. Wentworth) could claim the adhesion of the country, or the concurrence of this House, he hon. friend has charged me with the desire of supplanting him in the honours of the metropolitan representation. I never for one moment entertained the thought of contesting an election with my hon. friend. I deem the representation of the county of Cumberland amply sufficient for my ambition in elective matters, and I have no more earnest wish than that the country may still enjoy the assistance in this House of my hon. friend, whom I would rather now see changing his opinions than deserting the service of his country. (Hear, hear.) Another charge that has been made against me is that I have publicly expressed a preference for a republican form of government. Such a charge demands a full explanation. I venerate, above all forms of government of which I have ever read, the Constitution under which I have the happiness to live, and under which I hope to live and die. But looking to the far future to the period when this country might cease to have any connexion with Great Britain-which may God long avert (hear, hear)—our task is to secure such a Constitution for this empire as shall then make her transition safe and prosperous. And in looking back through the past history of nations, to aid us in considering our present course, we have no instance of a free people settling down by their spontaneous choice into a limited hereditary monarchy. We have instances without end of countries adopting wild republics, which were succeeded by general anarchy, and terminated in despotic governments (hear, hear); and after years of civil strife, they may regain their llberties, bit by bit, and may at length reduce a military despotism to a limited monarchy. But there is no precedent in the political annals of the past, of an enlightened nation arriving at that period of its history when it had to choose its own form of government, arriving at such a consummation without going through the first stages of confusion and disorder. But I will say that, at whatever conclusion these deliberations should arrive, I have so much reliance on Anglo must show in what manner are to be laid the foundations of that veneration and respect which alone can secure the stability of the Constitution he proposed. The hon. gentleman seemed to feel that a great deal of obloquy had attached to his name for his connexion with this measure, and therefore attempted a laboured justification of his conduct. And it could well be understood that he should be impressed with this feeling; for he must have felt that the course he was now taking was diametrically opposed to the consistent desire he formerly manifested in his arguments and speeches in that House. It is impossible for anyone to look back on the hon. member's career and not admit the truth of this-that his denunciations of the nominees in that House, up to the most recent period, were unceasing and most violent; and yet he had not told the House why it was probable that an element which, when limited as it then was, was deemed so mischievous, should, when uncontrolled, prove advantageous and satisfactory. The only supposition could be that the hon. gentleman had thought the analogy between a nominee Upper House and the British House of Lords so completely made out, that because the latter obtained a certain influence at home, therefore a House of nominees here would possess the same influence. In arguing this point the hon. member made frequent quotations from the celebrated writers Tocqueville and Calhoun. Now the opinions of the French author were entitled to just as much weight as those of any well educated French gentleman would be, as to how far the institutions of the United States attracted his notice favourably or unfavourably. But if the hon. gentleman relied on the political bias of the French traveller for any support in his views, he must feel himself leaning on a very feeble prop. I believe that this gentleman did not hesitate to take office under a government remarkable for its despotic tendency. The hon. and learned member also alluded to an American writer of great eminence; but it happened that the arguments throughout that book were strongly in favour of the American Senate-an elective Senate. (Hear, hear.) It is very true that when that writer drew a comparison between the Upper and the Lower House of America, he spoke disparagingly of the Lower House; but did the hon. member mean to infer from this that the same author would necessarily speak disparagingly of this Council, if it were composed of men of character and ability, and fairly represented the whole community, simply because it was a popular House? And would it then deserve the remarks that were quoted of the vulgar demeanour and discourteous conduct of the American House of Representatives? But if not so, of what value is the quotation? It is all in favour of an elective Senate, which we desire to have, and not in favour of a nominated Upper House, which we do not desire to have. My hon. friend either throws dirt at the embodiment of popular representation in this Council, or throws overboard his principle of a nominee Upper House altogether. (Hear, hear.) But I would remind the House that Mr. Calhoun was the proprietor of large slave plantations, and would naturally dread the power that might make that organic change in the government of the United States, and would speak favourably of a proviso which required a majority of three-fourths of the Senate to make any alteration in the constitution. I believe that these opinions of Mr. Calhoun were the only blots on that great man's character, and that the sentiments he enunciated were those which his own countrymen disowned. (Hear, hear.) The hon. and learned member next appealed to the early charters of the colonies which now formed the United States. But to what purpose were these quoted? Does not the hon. gentleman know how these colonies came to be founded-that it was to avoid civil and religious persecution that the unhappy settlers first left their own country? Was it to be believed that a large measure of civil liberty would be dealt out to these early colonists by the same oppressors who had crushed them at home? And are we to look for |