Star. — London, England, 1831-03-25 00:00:00

FERIAL LIAM FNT. HOUSE 1)F LORDS, 3/ ARCH 24. VIZARD, fron the &et,...) e t Batkrupts, refentua a re tut. f the het, received by the Celt missioncrs of Bankrupts during the 1..%t three years. The Earl of KI N NOUI, rresenttd a petition from Perth, praying 1.0 the right to seed one re, 1 , bee t.. Parliament. elm PtER DILLS. The Bishop of 18A Tll and WELLS said tie held a petition which ss IT •itied •r •rr^a. consideration. ii was from the Clergy of Bath, t.m.:lst tits ltesr bill. The pt thinners complained that beer houses had met. ased in the neiehhuurhoed of Bsth to an alarming extent, and the eight rt. ventral prelate was sorry to say that vice and immorality had it:crt•.t.ed in prrportion. He did not think there ever had been upon the statute.book an act more disgraceful in its operation than the beer will. The petitioners prayed that some legislative check might pia upon the immoral scenes which occurred under the operation et tot said bill. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, he had heard various com plaints from the wee ..nd north of England of the operation of Ibis hill. He could not avoid observing, that the bill now In force differed from that he formerly adopted. The measures he supported previous to and in 1823, were framed to restrict the drinking of beer on the pre reti,rs. The object was, to enable persons to send for beer to be drunk .t home. and to avoid as much as possible scenes of intoxica tion and sice,but that feature of the measure was changed. He believed the disorder occasioned by the present bill was worse in the west of England titan in the nor h. He was convinced many outrages in various parts of the country had commenced in these beer-houses Whether the legis. lA , tire could turn its attention to any alteration of the bill must be the subject of inquiry. If it should appear that these scenes of disorder were temporary, and one of those mischiefs expected .1 arise on a change of tie law, it must be left to time to produce a favourable change. The bishop of BATH and WELLS could not say what the bill was originally intended to be ; he could only say what it was, and he knew that it had a tendency to demoralize the people. The Earl of Essitx presented a petition from the county of Essex irrfaveur of Parliamentary Reform. Lard DURHAM presented a petition from the operatives of Glas gow, praying:for repeal of the duties on newspapers, and all other pub. bastions for the diffusion of knowledge. •F.FOBY BILL. Earl GREY said he was Intrusted with the petition of the freeholders of the county Down. It was signed by 1.300 persons, oho were In fa vour of Parliamentary Reform. The petitioners suggeced. as an im provement of the hill then before Parliament, that every member of the ouse of Commons be required, before he t akes his seat, to make oath l:;at he has not been elected by bribery. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY did not wish to break in upon the rule which had been laid down, with respect to avoiding untimely discussion on the question of reform which then agitated the whole country, but as he knew how the petition had been got up, he should say a few words. There was a radical party in Down which had arranged this petition, end not one respectable freeholder had signed it. .11 was got up in a private room, and signed by the lowest rabble— They had obtained only thirteen hundred signatures out of the free. holders of the county, who amounted to twenty-five thousand. The petition did not express the feeling of I)own. It might be said, why was there not a counter-petition ? The fact was, there hod been spa. thy on the part of the people, because they never expected a measure of leform like that before Parliament. The noble earl had said on a for. mer day. that hit plan would be efficient and moderate. Ile admitted it was efficient, but it was not moderate ; he was sorry to say that un due influence had been exercised out of that house. Whatever might have been the plan of the noble earl and the learned lord on the wool. sack, the mention of a sacred name should have been avoided. To create an influence in favour of the Bill, by mentioning the opinion of the highest estate in the realm, was highly unconstitutional. (Hear, hear.) He should maintain that the people of England had been ap pealed to in that respect. They had been told to support the Bill, be cause the King was favourable to it—and that was what he considered undue influence. The measure ought to have stood on its own merits. Ile considered the measure a revolutionary one, and his opinion was, that it would bring ruin on the aristocracy. If that aristocracy did not Tally round themselves, that house would be shook to the foundation. Esel GREY.—In the first place, with respect to the petition I bare had the honour to present, the Noble Lord says it does not speak the sense of the county. It is sent to me as the result of a county meeting at which the High Sheriff presided. It is stated to me that no opposi tion was expressed. It is stated to me that this is signed by thirteen hundred respectable freeholders ; but the Noble Lord Rays it is not signed by any respectable person, but by the lowest rabble. One signature is Michael Charles White, the High Sheriff; standing not at the top or bottom, but amongst the signatures. Another signature is that of an Individual who is known as a physician, Dr. Alexander Mac donald. I also find the name of Mr. }ores. who has represented the county, and is known to be a gentleman of large fortune and respecta bility. (Hear.) Those names are sufficient to contradict the assertion of the Noble Lord, when he says " there is only rabble." The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said a few words in explana tion. _ _ _ Earl GREY, in continuation, observed, that he knew it was often the practice to run down petitions which contained opposing sentiments, and that might be the feeling on the part of the Noble Marquis, who thought the desire for Reform was not general. The noble Earl de clared his opinion was, that there never did prevail in this country a sentiment so unanimous as that which had been expressed in favour of the plan introduced by his Majesty's Government. But it seemed, ac cording to the noble Marquis that apathy ptevailed, and indifference with respect to that plan. leso, there could not be the danger which induced the noble Marquis to call upon their Lordships to rally and support their own dignity. With respect to the bill, he should not be seduced on the occasion to follow the inegularity of the noble Lord, by entering into argument upon the merits. The noble Lord had confined himself, u others had done, to mere assertions, but he would tell him that the principle of the bill was Reform, and that the present state of the country required Reform. (Hear. hear.) No one could deny that fact. (Hear, hear.) I can refer, said the Noble Earl, to the Lite de. cision in the House of Commons. We may be told there was but a majority of one, but he looked to the principle. How was that majority obtained, but upon an acknowledgment of the principle of the mea sure. (A cry of no, no, from the Marquis of Londonderry.) I say yea, yes. The opposition to the measure was accompanied by an ad. mission that Retorm was necessary, and if the measure was rejected, another ought to be brought in. Not only is it admitted by the pee. ph, but the House of Commons say Reform is necessary. A noble lord who spoke last night, is also for Reform, bit-by-bit. A Reform that would satisfy nobody, but sow the seeds of disappointment and, perpetual discontent . The noble marquis considers the measure • step to universal suffrage, tut it is not. On the first day of thesession I stated to the house, that one of the most important measures they could adopt was the measure of Parliamentary reform. I did not know at that time l should be in the situation I now fill. Itihen I was called by our Gracious Sovereign to till the situation, I urged strongly that I could not 'suet• him faithfully unless I was at liberty to bring about a measure for reform in Parliament. (Hear.) Then, the Noble Lord says, the sacred name of the first estate of the realm has been used to give undue weight to the measure. Your Lordships, lam sure, will acquit me of having made any improper use of that.sacred name, nor do I know that any one has done inure than any person might be expected to do under the circumstances. When a measure is brought in by the Ministers of the Crown, it must be notorious that that measure cannot be btought In by them without the sanction of authority. (Hear.) Beyond the inference drawn. fairly front that proceeding I do not know that any thing has been done. The noble lord says it was unconstitu tional in a minister of the crown to use that sacred name. I have done nu such tiling, but as a minister of the crown, in concert with my col )..agues, have submitted such a proposition as the servants of the crown might submit. In proposing the measure which has excited so much alarm in the noble lord, I have no intention to support annual parlia. Bents or universal suffrage. Under these cirmmstances I leave the house to judge whether the noble lord has made out his charge of an im proper use having been made of the sacred name ? But threats have been held out ef the consequences of revolution if he did not abandon the measure. I will make no promise. I will stand or fall by tine measure. I will not calculate upon defeat, and nothing shall detract from it. I do not say that slight alteration may not occur, but by the measure, as it is in substance, I will stand or fall. I will not shrink from pub lic duty ; and I now think 1 have answered the noble lord." The noble earl then observed, that the measure would support the dignity of the aristocracy. He was one of the aristocracy by birth and station.— He considered the aristocracy a branch of the constitution, combined with others for the general advantage. If it ceased to have that cha racter, he should no longer wish to be one of the aristocracy. It should bt !he meditator between the crown and the people. The proposed bill would keep up the respectability of the aristocracy, by throwing from them that power which made them odious to the people. (Hear.) TLe Marquis of DOiri - NSHIRE spoke to the respectability of some of the petitioners. Tte Marquis of LONDONDERRY explained. The Duke of WELLINGTON thought the proposed measure would throw down all the established institutions of the country, and' there would be no confidence in parliament. He repeated his termer assertion, namely, that there was no reason whatever for alteration of the constitution of parliament. The parliament had well served the country, and was entitled to public gratitude. His Grace had served his sovereign 45 years in the field, in embassies and councils, during the most eventful periods, and his experience enabled him to say he could nut look at the measure for Reform without considering the day ' on which it should pass as the moment front which they might date the downthe country. of try The Marquis of CLAN RICA RDR did not think that there was any well-grounded Qum for the Noble Doke's apprehensions. Th e Noble Duke had said that the measureof Reform, brought into the other House of Parliannot by his Majesty's Ministers, might please a nuijorily of the people, for that very reason he (the Marquis of Clanricarde) should give the museum his entire support when it awe bifore their Lordship. Lord FARNHAM would pietist lipiost the msjelfvf of saY Pe. potation being considered the most respectable portion of it ; of one thing he was certain that those persons in Ireland, who were for Re form, were also advocates for a repeal of the legislative union which existed between the tc -Ariel. Carnaivon s pill at , num.'s of Apse to. EMI GREY pawned email petitions for Reform in Parliament, and strppesdng dm measure °lnform in the other house; one of Mese WAS from the county of Nottingham. The Duke of NEWCASTLE impugned the respectability of the panics who signed the petition ; be um pomaded it was not the peti tion of a county meeting. Earl GREY . without spealdng to every name which was affixed to the petition said, that it was signed by many of the 'resident gentry in the county of Nottingham. The Duke of NEWCASTLE was sorry fcr that circumstance ; be was certain that the great body of the yeomanry of Nouinghamshite were opposed to the measure of Reform. Earl GREY.—That will be the best tried and known at the next several election. (A laugh.) Petitions for Reform and for a commutation of tithes were presented XLord KING, Lord SUFFIELD, and Lord C ALIDOEFE , after which Jr Lordships Adjourned at a Quarter to Seven o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, 314tacu 24. Mr. HOWARD presented a petition from the county of Wicklow, against the system of agitation in Ireland for the repeal of the Union. He was so convinced of the necessity of suppressing it, that he was ready to support ministers in an extension of the duration of the law its the prevention of illegal rosociations in Ireland. Sir JAMES SCA RLETT presented a petition front Melton, ap. roving of the plan of Reform proposed by ministers. He was sorry he could not agree with his constituents in their approbation of the bill, but be was ready to resign the trust they had committed to his hands. stand for next Tuesday.— Mr. HUNT approved of what was said by the honourable and learned gentleman, that he was ready to resign his seat, as he could not agree with his consituents. It was what every member ought to do. No mem ber should vote against the opinion of those who sent him to that house. (Hear, hear.) He was happy to live to see the day when there was not a man in that house bold enough to deny that Reform was necessary. He never found any, even amongst the humblest classes in this country who desired a republic; they were all sadsfied with a House of Com mons freely chosen by the people. D Mr. G. AWSON said, he had with his own ears heard the hon ourable member say that he preferred a Republic to any other form of Government. Now that the extensive plan of Reform proposed by Ministers was known, and went so much farther than even the hon ourable gentleman could have hoped, he thought proper to forget his former declaration; but he (Mr. Dawson) well recollected having heard the honourable member for Middlesex suggest to the honour able member for Preston not to proceed in expressing his preference of a Republic. Mr. HINT positively denied that hi had ever :expressed himself in preference of a Republic to the British Constitution. He had only said that if the people of England were driven to a revolution for the reco very of their rights, they would then probably prefer a Republic and cheap Government, as in that case he should do. He called upon the honourable member for Middlesex, to say whether he had ever heard him express his preference of a Republic, or suggested to him not to proceed, when he was addressing the house. Mr. HUME said, that being appealed to he must say that the hon. member below (Mr. Dawson) must be mistaken; be had never heard the honourable member for Preston express his opinion in preference of a Republic to the British Constitution, and had never given him any suggestion not to proceed in any manlier in which he thought proper to address the house. Lord STANLEY moved the order of the day for the third reading of the Preston and Wigan Railway Bill. The SPEAKER said, the di ffi culty on which the third reading was adjourned arose from a clause in the conclusion of the bill. The stand ing orders required that all such bills should contain a clause rendering all the original subsctibers liable to the full amount of their subscrip tions. The bill contained such a clause in its commencement : but towards its conclusion it contained a clause by which a subscriber who sold and transferred his share should for ever after be released from any liability respecting it. That clause was a complete repeal of the former. Mr. HUME and Mr. LITTLETON expressed their disapproba tion of any provisions in such acts that should impede the transfer of shares in such companies. Mr. CHARLES DUNDAS suggested, that the liability of the original subscribers should contin ue t ill t h e com pl et i on o f the under taking, after which they should be enabled to transfer their shares with lout being longer subject to any liability. After sonic further conversation, it was agreed that the latter clause in the Bill should be struck out, and the Bill was then read a third time and passed. Captain M AITLAND presented a petition from the county of Ber wick, against the bill of reform brought in. by ministers. 31r.KEN HEDY said, but 33 persons attended the meeting, and the petition was signed by no more than 40 or SO persons. A petition was to be presented from Edinburgh against the bill of reform proposed by about SOO persons, at a meeting, from which all r.formers were ex cluded, some of whom also signed the present petition from Bernick. Lord E. SOMERSET presented a petition from the county of Gloucester In favour of the bill of reform brought in by ministers. He had felt it his duty to vote against the bill, and was sorry he could not agree with his constituents. Sir W. GUISE supported the petitioners, and would continue to support the bill. The whole country owed a debt of gratitude to the ministers for its introduction. Mr. CRIPPS said, he thought there were some things In the bill which he could not support, but he bad voted for the second reading of the bill because some reform was called for, and must take place. Sir E. ..U431 DEN said, that if the honourable gentleman had at.. tended to the concluding speech of the noble lord who brought in the bill, be would not have voted for the second reading, u the noble lord distinctly stated that be would not consent to any alteration in the bill. Colonel DAVIES said he must contradict the learned gentleman on the point of fact. The noble lord only said he would not consent to any change of the principle of the bill, nor any essential change in its de tails.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. W. WY NN said he bad voted for the second reading of the bill with the intention of proposing considerable alterations in the ahrimittee. If the noble lord who introduced the bill would not consent to altera tions, that was not to bind the house. Sir J. WROTTESLEY would rather see the bill abandoned al together than see any of the rotten boroughs it proposed to cut off taken out of its operation. The whole country looked with exultation to the bilL.--(Hear.) Mr. GORDON hoped the bill would he so amended in the committee as to give general satisfaction to the country. He was for twenty years a reformer, and gave credit to his Majesty's ministers for bringiog in such an excellent bill.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. BENETT said, all Reformers, and the whole people, were sa tisfied with the bill as it stood, and If any important alteration were made, the people might turn round and say, we must have the whole bill ; and it were better grant it now freely, than have it forced on them with many additions which !hey would not choose, and which might be avoided. REFORM IN lIIELAND. Mr. STANLEY brought in a bill to reform the representation of the people in Ireland, and observed, that in pursuance of the under standing that bad been come to when leave was given to bring in the bill, he should now briefly state the details of the bill. After the very long discussions that had taken place on the general principle of reforin, he deemed it wholly unnecessary to enter on that part of the subject. The Hon. Gentleman proceeded as follows :—There is one circumstance to be observed in bringing forward this bill, that front the first to the concluding paragraph in it, there is not one disfranchising sentence. — (Cheers.) So far as the bill goes, it is confined only to the extension of the franchise. There is no taking away of franchise, excepting as regards a few non-resident freemen. As regards the county represen tation, it is proposed by this bill to follow the principle that bas been adopted in reference to English county representations, that is leaving the right of voting in freeholders, and adding to them a most respecta ble and independent class of people, I mean leaseholders for 21 years to the amount of 501. a-year. In this step we have deviated in one point from the practice to be observed in England, inasmuch as we have ex cluded the clause which requir a that the leases should not have been re newed within two years previous to the election. I think any , gentleman acquainted with a large portion of the property in Ireland, will at once perceive the reaon that has induced us to do this, because there is a very Urge class of persons who bold leases for 21 years, renewable every year, and who would otherwise be exclud e d from exercising th e i r vote . I allude to that large class of persons who bold land either under corpo rations or under the church. We have thought it right in this bill not to introduce that restrictive clause, therefore the leaseholders to the amount of 501. a-year for 21 years will not be excluded if they should have had their lease renewed within two years of the election taking place. With regard to copyholders, I believe that there is only one co pyhold estate in Ireland ; and therefore it was considered unnessary to make any provision as to them. There is one alteration, which is this, that the clergy shall vote, not as beneficed clergy, but in right of their freeholds, and be registered like any other fteeholder-- Mr. o'. ONNELL—To what amount? hlr. STANLEY—Fifty pounds. Then with regard to householders renting houses to the amount of 101. a year, or occupying a house which, if let to a solvent tenant, would fairly bring in 101. a year, u in England, if their rent and taxes shall have been paid up, they shall be entitled to vote in their boroughs. We have not thought it right to interfere wsth the freeholders in chin, towns, sod boroughs, but to leave all who have now a vote to continue in full possession of that right. We have provided, that upon the extinction of 40s. freeholders in towns, their right of voting shall be assimilated to that of house_ holders in towns. There will be, by this mode, three classes of voter s in cities and boroughs in Ireland—namely, freeholders of 201. 101. and 40e. Leaseholders of 21 years of 601. and household( es paying rent of 101. or occupying a house which would let f r that sum to a solveet tenant. With regard to that part of the English bill, against which the greatest objections have been urged—lMeM the power gtesitall to s coin. mince of time privy council, we have not thought fly bevetwer, to grant to the privy council of Ireland the urns extensive musses those punted to a committee of the English prier council, and therefore the powers of the Irish privy council will be confined to the right of deciding what has been, and what shall be for the future, the limits of Irish boroughs. It is proposed that they shall, in the first place, take a list of all at present claiming a right to note, and that that list Amid be subse. quently subjected to the inquiry of a barrister of a certain standing at law, of whom eight should be nominated for the whole of Ireland ; and with regard to registration, following the English plan, we propose that every year there should be a registration of all persons having a right to vote. That part of the business shall be entrusted to assistant barristers. With regard to the duration of the poll, we propose that in towns it should be kept open two days, and no more—that in counties there shall be lb polling places—and that not more than 800 electors be polled at any one place. In no itieonsideirate numbs! or.borongits, al though there are no boroughs to be disfranchised, them must be a com plete destruction, not of the right of existing electors, but of the exclu siveness of their rights. (Cheers.) They did not mean to go ac cording to the mathematical ratio of 'population, but they did not wish unnecessarily to interfere with misting rights, inasmuch as there were none of the towns which did not carry with it sufficient weight and respectabilky to send members to this house. We do not think it right to adopt a plan which might be more perfect in theory, but which would interfere with and destroy existing rights. With re gard to taking away the exclusive right of the corporations, there cannot be taken any fair ground of objection. It will not be impu ted to us, that keeping within the sans* class of persons who now exercise the right of sending members to Parliament, we are guilty of following a revolu tionary system by extending that franchise which has so long been monopolized by a few, to persons of respectability that did not before possess that right. (Hear.) Sir, in looking to the list now before me, the first place mentioned is Armagh, with a population of between eight and nine thousand, the number of voters being only thirteen. In Bel fast, with a population of 37,237, the number of voters is only thirteen. In Carlow, with a population of eight Mowed persons, still the same mystical number of only thirteen voters is there to be found. In Dublin, with a population of 185,000, the number of electors was' but 2,500. [An hoc. member, we believe Mr. Moore, said it was treble.) In Ennis, with a population of 6,500, we have again only 13 voters. In Kilkenny, wish 23,000 inhabitants, only 000 voters ; in Sligo, with 9,000, the right of voting rests with only 13; and in Traiee with 7,547, we find the same number of 13. who are qualified, according to the existing system, to elect a Member of Parliament. Sir, Ido not think there is any thing extravagant is the proposition which we now advance, that the favourite number of thirteen should no longer continue to monopolize the elective franchisee of such places as Belfast, or even if no larger than Ar magh. But, Sir, while we propose thus not to destroy existing rights, but to extend their rights and privileges of the elective franchise, there are other places which stand forward so prominently, not only with regard to their population, but their wealth, commerce,and increasing prosperity, that I ant persuaded we exceed not the fair limits of moderation, when we propose to give to four of the principal towns that now send members to Parliament, each one additional representative. Sir, I propose to give to Belfast, to Limerick, to Waterford, and to the town of Galway, upon this principle, one additional member each. It is proposed to as similate the constituency of the University of Dublin to that of the Uni versities of Oxford and Cambridge, and for that purpose the right of vot ing for the University of Dublin, which is now enjoyed solely by the Provost, Fellows, and seventy Junior Scholars, is proposed by this bill to extend the right of voting to all those who at any time have been scholars, and who shall at any time within six months from the passing of the proposed Bill place their names on the University books. In doing this, Sir, we cannot be charged with innova tion, because, by the original charters of the three Universities, the right of voting for the University of Dublin was confined to the Provost, Fellows, and Scholars during their liver, whilst the right to vote for the representatives of Oxford and Cambridge was extended to all the masters of arts, and by the original charter of the Dublin University it was provided that the election should take place according to the usages of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge; but, besides reverting to the original charter, there is another reason for extending the right of voting to the members of that University ; anti that reason I shall shortly state to the house. Sir, in order to become a scholar of the University of Dublin, it is necessary to pass through a very severe examination ; an d no young man who is not of distinguished talents can obtain a scho larship.. (Hear.) By extending the tight of voting, we do away with an anomaly, for according to the present system, a young man of the age of eighteen might obtain a scholarship, and therefore a vote for the University, but at the end of five years that right is lust. —Now, Sir, this appears to me deserving of remedy ; for I think a young man who obtained a scholarship at the age of eighteen is more capable at the end of five years, when he is deprived of right of voting, of exercising a sound judgment as to the fitteseserson to represent the University, than whilst he had enjoyed that privilege, because at that age he acts upon his own judgment, uninfluenced by and disengaged from the trammels of his tutor, who is generally a junior fellow, and which juniors have a great influence in the electioo, this limitation is not according to the original Charter, for by that Charter the right of the scholars to vote for the University terminated only with their lives ; but by a subsequent charter it was provided that the scholars should, after five years's enjoyment, forfeit the stipendia which they enjoyed as scholars; by. in my opinion, an unconstitutional construc tion of that clause, which took away the stipendia, it was held that the right of voting was also taken away. I know that this subject was dis cussed before a Committee of the House of Commons, and that the de sion of the Committee was in favour of that construction ; but I also know, that some of the highest law authorities in Ireland, and among them I may mention the present Lord Chancellor of Ireland, were of opinion that taking away the stipendia by the latter charter did not take away the tight of voting granted by the original charter, and for these reasons it is thought fit to restore the right granted by the origi nal charter. Sir, as I said before, it is intended to assimilate, as far as is possible, the state of the Universities of England and Ireland; and when I take into consideration that the scholars of the University of Dublin were a body of men who had distinguished themselves in youthful days, and who had afterwards filled some of the highest stations in the lestr in the Church, and in other profes sions. (Hear, hear.) I think it is not going too far to say, that, whilst e ach of the English Universities is represented by two mem bers, the Irish University should also have the privilege of sending two members to Parliament. These, sir, are the only increase which we mean to make to the rept/saltation of Ireland, namely—four repre. sentatives from the large cities, and one from that enlightened body, the University of Dublin. But we propose to make rolarge increase in the number of the constituent body. I have gone through all the parts of the Bill with one or two exceptions, which I shall now beg least to mention. An honourable and gallant member introduced a bill this session, providing that where a man possessed two free holds, neither one or the other of which was of the value of 101. but which together were equal to that sum, he should have a vote as a 101. freeholder. Sir, as different interpretations have been put by the Ba ron. as to the right as person so situated to vote for 31embers of Par. Bement, we propose to introduce edam declaratory of the- right. In that bill there was a clause relative to the cautionary notice which it is cus tomary for candidates to give at elections in Ireland, and we propose to do away with the necessity of that notice. I have, however, fully stated the measure which it is proposed to bring in with regard to Ireland, and I shall be ready to explain the reasons of any difference between the pro. visions of this bill and the Reform Bill of England, as I do not intend to propose that the second reading of the bill shall take place until after the recess, in order that the people of Ireland may have an opportunity of judging of its provisions, after it shall have been printed. I, there. fore, shall now merely move that the bill be brought in and read a first time. Colonel TRENCH said Int should oppose the bin, which he con sidered subversive of vested rights, and he hoped it never would be. come a law. Mr. O'CONNELL said he moat heartily accepted the bill. as a great boon to Ireland. (Hear, hear.) He thought it a great boon in its present form, but he hoped it might be made srill better in the cord mittee. He rejoiced in the disfranchisement of holt resident electors, a species of franchise that was the means of the greatest possible cotrup. non. The inhabitants of 101. houses was a very reasonable franchise. The boroughs that had constituents of 13 eae.h had, in fact, but a eon. stituency of one who nominated all the rest. Surely it must be a great boon to get rid of that mockery of representation, by which seats in that house were set up to auction in Ireland. It did not seem con. sistent to give Ireland but five new members, and Scotland the same addition. Scotland had 2,500,000 inhabitants. Ireland, 6,800,000. The population of Kilkenny was equal to that of Waterford, or Oal. way, and that city ought to get two representatives. Dublin, including its vicinage. had a population of 250,000 and ought to get at least one additional member. Was It not preposterous to give to Dublin Uni. versity the miserable addition of constituency which would continue the principle of exclusion ? According to the proposed plan, not a single Catholic could be an elector. Was that desirable ?—it would prevent the union of the Protestant and Catholic gentry of Ireland. Should not the example of Cambridge be followed, and the free. chise be given to all Masters of Arts ? which would increase the constituency of the University, and the union of the people. The distinction that at present existed between the Catholic and Protes tant of talent. but without proper y, In that University, was frightful. It produced bypocr sy and infidelity. He had known many instances in which the Catholic sc h o l ar was a Protestant during his five years, and became again a Catholic when he left the University. The proposed plan of giving the franchise to householders *l5Ol. a year f o r 2 ears , would be extensively evaded. Lenses of 501. a year weed be made of a hovel. He would propose that a profit of 101. a year should be the qualification. In Ireland there were twelve mantles, with a greater population than ems of the I_Bnglish enundas, which were to get additional members, and yet no Melt county was to get any addition. The hen . member for Bristol, on a tWener motion, objected to the increase of Irish members, because be said ministers bad formerly objected to him, that they could not do what be re deed for his constituents, because the Irish members would resist it. m g gentleman, as a Bristol man. contended for Bristol, though not for Bog. land ; he, uan Irishman, contended for the interests of both co uou i, He approved of the principle of the bill, and of the spirit in which i t was introduced, and if it should pass, those of Ireland who sought for change for the sake of change, would find themselves niiierahty no t,. taken. He hoped the bill would receive such improvement in the co rn . mittee as would mai& It a solid and substantial boon to Ireland ( lieu.) Mr. LIMBER said, be highly approved of the principle of the Bill and would go Otto in comatoseßill, without any other feeling than that of the benefit of the whole country. He was confident that no small pan of the Attest of the north-west part of Ireland was owin g to th ,, want of rellielentition. On the north and east roast of Ireland there were, exclusive of cottaty Mambo% tweetiNate vimmentatives ; on t h e south and west coast there wore hot fives and till this inequality was corrected, and till an increased mpreeentation from Ireland was sent to thatinatte, thh interests of Ireland would not be sufficiently attended to. The number now allotted to Ireland would not give %misfi t . ties to the whole of that wintry. The counties in Ireland wer e not sufficiently represented. The county of Cork, to which he be. longed, contaWW 700,000 inhabitants, and was certainly entitled t o additional members. The city he represented (Kith. nnv) has 27,00 0 inhabitants, is the largest and wealthiest inland city in Ireland, and had, before the oaten, four representatives i not to give a accord representative now, was not, in his opinion, consistent with the spirit of reform, as applied to Ireland. If the representation was fairly spre a d over Ireland, the result would be that the people of Ireland would feel such confidence la the integrity and honour of that house, that no at tempt to shake the cosnexion could soured. Ireland had half the size and half the population of Great Britain, and if her resources were add voted would have her wealth. Show the people that you confide in them, anal they will firmly adhere to British connexion. He lived in a part of the country where he saw the ravages of absenteeism desolating the land. He had for thirty years endeavoured to comprehend t h e causes of Irish distress, and the remedies by which they might be re lieved ; and as far as the present measure was concerned, he was confi. dent that increasing the number of the represewatives would be highly beneficial to the iatereets of Ireland. Mr. BANKES said he was not competent to discuss the details of the measure, but ht thought them OM a fundamental error that called for attention. He doubted the competence of Parliament to pass the present bill. There was a compact entered into with Scotland, and a similar compact had been entered into with Ireland, and every thing that human prudence could devise had been done to render them per manent and inviolable. One principal part of these compacts wag the relative proportions of the representatives in Parliament. The present bills went to alter that proportion—they made an addition to the repre sentatives of Scotland and Ireland, and made a diminution in the repre sentation of &viand. This was entirely a revolutionary measure, and broke the most solemn pan of the contract by which the constituent pans of the United Kingdom were bound together. He did not mean to go farther at present, but the more he considered the subject, the more he was convinced that the proposed measure was one of the few things that was beyond the competence of Parliament. The SOLIC ITORDEN ER A L for Ireland, (Mr. Crampton,) said, in answer to the objections of the honourable gentleman who had last en, upon the abridgement of the n u mb er o f R e p resen t at i ves for England, and increasing the number for Ireland, he (Mr. Crampton) would refer to the Act of Union itself, which had expressly provided that the number of Representatives for Ireland should be made special subject of future consideration. He denied that the mea. sure was revolutionary—it was, he said, a constitutional measure, it was a returning to the primitive character of the institutions, it was one of justice and equity, which the people had a right to, and it was what they demanded. And it would save the country from that very revolution with which the honourable gentlemen, on the opposition side threatened us with, or that they tether used u an argument. The hon. members particularised all the objections, and briefly replied to them. He approved of the provision of the bill that was to restore the franchise of the College of Dublin to those for whom it was originally intended by the charter, which would make a constituency of from 300 to 400, instead of as it was confined to 90 of a gross number ; but on account of so many being under age, the number was much more li mited. If the franchise had been extended to the more unlimited range, the constituency would exceed 5,000. The voters for the College ought all to be Protestants, because it was a church instituted to propagate the Protestant religion ; and so long as the conscription remained, Ca. cholla could not with propriety vote. He highly approved of the mea sure, and said it would hand down- to perpetuity the name of the noble I lord who bad introduced it.—(Hear, hear, from both sides.) Mr. O'CONNELL explained. Sir C. W e.THERELL could not refrain front remarking the par tiality of so many gentlemen on the other aide to the phrase " perpe tuity." He (Sir C. Wetherell) would bring to their recollection a his. tonal fact, with which they were all, no doubt, sufficiently well ac quainted, of an individual who had set fire to Ephesus, for the purpose of obtaining perpetuity ; but What sort of perpetuity he had obtained he would leave the hon. gent/vines to decide for themselves. He did not know what they could think of the hon. member who had spoken so much in favour of this conflagration system ; and he not an Irish member, but the hon. number for &hash. The combined Cabinet, it would seem, upon the principle of this Ephesian condagratioc, bad brought over the honouvable Solicitor-General for Ireland to assist at the burning down of Baltash. (laughter.) As an accompaniment to this conflagration system, it would seem that a number of the Scotch boroughs were to be pulled down, and with the concurrence of the learned member opposite, the Lord Advocate, who in so doing was lending his aid to close the avenues for all Lord Advocates in future, or to men of genius and learning, as soon as their talents were discovered, to gain admission into that house. The learned gent. (Sir C. Wetherell) enutuaated a number of men of genius who had been thus introduced through the means of what were designated the rotten boroughs. He said the members who supported this measure had come into the house to destroy themselves, and were doing so by declaring that that was eor ruptisn by which they bad been admitted. (Hear, from the opposition.) The same sentiments had been strenuously reiterated by the Irish lawyers—he did not mean to say with the confidence of an Irish lawyer—he would only say that the lawyers of that country (be sup posed it might arise from some peculiar advantage that they de rived in their practice) acquired the power of expressing them. selves with a degree of confidence which few English lawyers had any pretensions to;—(a laugh, and hear hear,)—but be admired the talents of those gentlemen, anti he thought that they themselves were a suffi cient confutation of all their own arguments against the borough system. He eulogized the learned member for &lath, and he hoped that it would long continue to send as able and learned members. And he thought that the honourable member when he had disfranchised himself, in his retirement in his own country, would think of his conduct, and upbraid himself that he had been brought so far from his own land w an English borough only for.the purpose of declaring that it'.4hould no longer send a member to that House. The learned gentleman said be missed se veral hon. members from their places, to whom he would have been de sirous to have addressed himself. The hon. Attorney-General was not in his place, or he would have asked the Attorney-General. [At this mo ment the Attorney-General who was entering the House by the gallery, on the opposition side, called out " here ; • and increased his speed almost to running to gain his seat. The learned gentleman was na -1 prised at the quarter from whence the sound came, and the circum stance occasioned a loud peal of laughter.] • Sir C. Wetherell after indulging in a joke on the occasion, proceeded to say that the honour. able Attorney-General in his advocation of the measure, declared un qualifiedly, that the country was unanimously in its favours now he (Sir C. Wetherell) would ask, had the Cambridge petition against reform been presented. (Some one answered No.) It had however been published in the journals of the day, and every one was acquainted with us contents, and he would ask the Hon. Attorney-Genera, if when he made that eloquent speech in which he had said, that the country was unanimous, that he meant to leave out of his consideration the petition of Cambridge. He (Sir C. Wetherell) had nor the hamar to be a member of that University, but the Hon. Attorney General was, and he ought to know that they bad never been precocious In their suspicions on the political affairs of the country. Yet they, as a part of that pabik whom the Honourable Attorney General had declared to be so uaaelmous, had petitioned against is.— (Hear, bear, from the Opposition.) What bad become of the petition from Cambridge, he (Sir C. Wetherell) could nes tell. whether or Oct the each had broken down that was to base brought it, and caused a delay:—but, however, the two members for Cambridge bad taken care that it should not be presented till after the second reading of the bill. It might perhaps be found some day like a lost letter in the Dead-letter offlce—(bear)—and then the hon. Attorney-General, as a member of the University of Cambridge. might say, as a member Of Cambridge, whether or not this revoludes ary Reform Bill had the unanimous approbation of the public. He (Sir C. Wetherell) would use his own vocabulary; it had been called by the hon. gent, on the opposite side a restorative measure, he would call it a revolutionary measure. (Hear.) With regard to the Act of Union, he would say that it was not merely an Act of Parliament, but it was • federal Treaty. (Hear.) The learned gentlemen then proceeded to state, that the provision in the Acts of Union, both with Scotland and Ireland, had been adjusted with strict regard to their telative proportions to that of England as related to the number of re presentatives of the respective counties; and in all his experieoce and research he did not know of a poodent that would, allow of coming down or altering the peovieloas of such treaties. But by the bill pro. E , there was to be a reduction of 02 members, and all these were to taken from England. Did the house recollect what had been 'awl by Mr. Pitt and Mr. lox on ffiffilsent occasions on this point. The nay argument used by Mr. Pitt was, that the proportion of Mem. hers in Ireland to that of England was such, that the introdecdon of Catholic Members from' that country would never be injurieest bogus the majority of Prominent members would always being taken effeeta. (Rest, bor.) But now, bottles 62 members Ifolpil from Ik4: 4 , sa ter n e were to be addition") members given * Indeed, who f'be of the Catholic Oppeekiew, and might ending" the safety of the. i Chards in that country. He hoped thee the honourable getwJamen would meet their argonaut,. He had merely noticed this sobjeat at proe t. me point it oat, bat at the er , stage he bee t 4 to maim it the subject of a reselation. (ika' ) The obis led who heil 'bronght in the bill bed not, nor had say other IPbdulasa ail' 01111 My teems why the sixtrtwo members Ste I. twomunt 1111 E gm witimsodlAS if is; iYsWA The Marquis of BL as two,. risperMst we notice. in the name of a noble relative it were convenient the noble in connexion with the ( 1~ (il I • 1111 d 1 Ml' ~;