The Sun. — London, England, 1831-06-25 00:00:00

t an cnd to ms and re- and now it his own !cover Por luty of the difficulties g Portugal tva l tble far Re recom eknowledge her Powers st ne of the nh , ss some- Ake., there urope. He 'nal length, the station !In for their ble a report Ireland, and ay next, for the appoint- E 2.1. t, at which gallery was e important ught on this er which the ceiving pri e Bills. mending and le the river time; also a dre railway, ing disputed by the pay time. !nd and en and Leigh )r erecting a :ding nem- Inty of Wor. 3111 for erect - The Church nsoiidate and in England, printed. .rented to his ased to order to be laid be- from son • rights might The ralte aglinst he pc•itioners vn, in which sly. on from the borough of petition was lon. Member to have been he had beer ly hive felt instruptions finer in which !i ng pri-sentei lie had been ition was got to the Cor ontaining the 1, it was di ard that there fie controul of !re threltencil I not sign the inhabitants at f Reform, and a Nob:c Land, borough, were !ref ire justified the sentiments ceive why the by the 1-1:m. :onfess that he y that had been of the Noble {qn. Member's iris themselves fled by 140 of inhabitants Member had begged to ask aware tbat at ;reed to, it was with the loss • did not sign was the bead igh, was not krealened. Ile ainst the Noble k! her side ; in (Mr. XV.) had kan calumny in a story was in t was entirely he Honourable charges be did p: iuted. from the Chan raity of Oxford, ent considerable if the proposed inward last ses many of its pro- They stated that rom the House of vise to alter the tte manner they e of opinion that abate the cor lembers to serve •m the reduction' pis house. They to such a • liuge :trties, and they ition might be the petition en from a highly , who were not or prejudices. d to be printed. in a Bill to pre ( to the expente§ )ent, which was address be pre ay be graciously. use copies of all .4 been received nfeetions discioe of the east of vas highly neces intbrmation, and ge of a general lotion. He con !winded the copy Board of Health and that it would ;is composing the ledge of the die ing it. overnment could tetion. He was more to allay the lay. He hoped, objection to alter' lies to extracte/ e copies of a vast which were act it all the opinions dse relating to the very desirous e i re te sions of those might be perso s ieen the disease' either in this rr this town froal 6 fly to sixty persons of great experience in the treatment 0; the disease, and who had been many years abroad, Who may not have had the opportunity of communicating t) eir information t 9 the public. Mr.. ROBINSON hoped that Government would t relax in any of those sanatory mea.ures which they hail been so lauiblily adopting, for the purpose id preventing the introduction of so dreadful a s c our g e into this country. After a few words in expl , nation from Mr. BARING, tie motion was put and carried, but whether in the original terms or not we could not collect from the noise at that moment in the Hou.e COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, moved that the whole House eo into a Committee of Supply. The SPEAKER having left the chair, and the motion for the Supply having he-en granted, Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the Or irr of the Day on the . _ 11,EVORM BILL. The Chief Clerk having read the terms of his Ma jesty's Speech relating to the subject, Lord JOHN RUSSELL said—l rise, Sir, for the purpose •of proposing in the name of the Govern meut a measure which, in their opinion, is cal culated to maintain unimpaired the prerogatives of the Crown, the authorities of both Houses of Parliament, and the tights and liberties of the people. Sir, in rising to propose this measure, I cannot but a k, recollecting what took place on a late occasion, that I may have the bstiefit of a patient attention, a patient hearing of the ex- Planation which I shall endeavour to give to the general Principle of the measure which his Majesty's Ministers have thought it expedient to introduce. I trust, Sir, that °lt this occasion gentlemen will so far favour me as not to repe a t those gestures and contortions with which they thought, during the late Parliament, this measure was at once to be driven out of this House, and scouted by the ridicule of a great party who were banded together for thst purpose. Sir, however peat those sneers may hive been, I feel perfectly confident of this, that his Majesty's Ministers have neither yielded nor abated in Consequence of the oppOsition they have met with—(lleer, hear, hear)—nor have the jeers with which the first pro- Petition of the measure was received—nor the misrepre sentation and libels with which the measure was sought to be disfigured—nor the fair and able op position, which was made in this House by men of great ta`ent and long experience; nor 'those more dange rous weapons with which the enemies of the measure night impute to the Sovereign an intention different from that of his constituted Ministers—none of those ob-taeles, powerful as they have been, or powerful as they may he, Lave prevented' the Sovereign, his Ministers, and the people from pursuing that which has been an object at once to those who love the ancient forms of the Constitution, and to all who are attached to the rights and liberties of t he people.—(Loud cheering.) Of the conduct of the Sovereign to his Ministers, it most certainly does not become me in this place to speak, but Sir, I cannot proceed any further without saying, in few words, how much I admire, and how muck 1 think is worthy a all praise and glory, the conduct of the people of Erglend.—(Louti cheers.) I say this, Sir, without tetetence to any merits of-the measure which, has been 50 highly sanctioned by the great zeal and universal appro bation of his Majesty's subjects.—(Hear.) I say inde pendently, that what has been sacrificed by the perfect devotedness of the humblest class of people to what they thought was their duty to their country, is an example which England may well be proud of to the latest generation.--(Loud and long•continued cheers.) Sir, it has been said that the late elections were elections governed not by reason hut by passions. —(Hear, bear, hear hear.) If you mean by impassioned feelings, love to their couttry, 1 will not deny it—(Hear, hear)—because, out of love to their country, they came forward with a zeal unequalled. Nothing but passionate maim hlastn, which leads most men to overlook all their own petty interests ; nothing but a true spirit of patriotism could have persuaded men who are Only in the receipt of a few shillings a day to give up all the price, all the temptations, that were offered to thetn—(Cheers)—to give up, after all that has been insinuated, I boldly assert it—to give up in many Instances the continuance of themselves and their children in the enjoyment of some permanent privilege for the sake of—for the sake of what ? why, for the sake of a measure which was not for their benefit, but Which they conceived to be calculated for the future be nefitn4 _.( il zdwelfare of the millions who p..:ople these k Immense app'a'ls:.) And Sir, I think it tray be well for some who ere disposed never to speak of the multitude without certain expressions of divaragement and contempt,—it may be a lesson to them (and I should have thought they would have bene fited by it sooner) not to speak in future of any 'lt's of his Majesty*s subjects, in a manner from Which I am sure his Majesty himself would at once recoil.—(Loud cheering.) Because whatever may be the station of a man—whatever may be his calling if he , in the pursuit of an honest —in dustry, acts independently and c onscientiously, I know not why that man's zeal, be he ever so poor, even if he he mistaken, is not worth as much of our respect as that of the proudest and noblest member of this House, who conscientiously o ffers his opinion in op position to the treasure which I have now the honour to bring for ward.—(lmmense cheering.) Sir, with these observations, I shall venture to go on to speak of the mea sure which I am about to introduce. With regard to th e general features, and also as to the details of that measure I shall not enter this day, particularly into them, because, as they are the same as the Bill which was before the late Parliament—(llear, hear)—and as the slight im provements which have been made—(Hear, hear)—are improvements solely intended to carry into effect the principles of that Bill—(Much cheering)--I think it will be quite sufficient if I leave the consideration of all the details of this great measure till the period when this House shall have sanctioned the first and second reading, and the Bill is about to go into a Committee.—(Cheers.) Hut, Sir, although I should not feel it necessary to explain the particulars of the Bill, yet, I do think, when this House has been called together for the ex press purpose of debating this great question—a question affecting deeply and entirely the construction of this House, I do think it respectful to this Honourable House to perform the duty of endeavouri : g to la y before them in some measure wbat the principle of our ancient representation has been, what the representation is under our present laws, and what i•;, will he generally, anti largely speaking under the measure which we purpose to introduce.—(Cheers.) Sir, if we go back to the origin of our re; resentative Constitution, we shall find without entering into the circumstances of Europe, what at that titre were the cause of the changes—we shall find, I say, that about . the same time the towns and cities of other parts of Europe hail representative Constitutions ; that in some Countries, as in France and Spain, the people Were represented by assetnblies that were formed from cities at certain parts; that in other parts Such as in Germany and Italy the towns had indepen dent constitutions. With respect to our own country, for a long period there was no regular or defined representation of certain cities and boroughs in this House. The sheriffs of the different counties were direct ed to send two citizens from every city, and two burgesses from every borough, and this comusand they obeyed, • just as they found that the cities and boroughs were able to hear the expence of the return of those Members. I have got a statement of the state of the returns about the period to which 1 refer. In Henry the Sixth's time, the sheriff • for the county of York returned Menthe's from York and ' Scarborough, and stated that there were no other cities or boroughs from which members could be sent. The most remarkable county, perhaps, was the county of Lancaster, in which Lancaster was the only borough declared competent to send a Member. In the Ist of Elward 111. Lancaster and Freston sent Members ; and in the 38th of the same: reign the sheriff returned that there was not any citizen in that borough from ma hich a Member could come to Parliament by reason of inability from poverty. This was the manner for 250 years this House Was constituted ; about 110 or 120 boroughs sent "nem hers constantly, and some 30 ; others sent them from tim e to time, the sheriff taking il i um himself to enforce or dispense with the attendance of the burgesses of the co unty over which be presided, according to the expence to send them and their ability to bear it. It will, there fore, be seen during this first period of our Constitution, that nothing could be much more irregular —nothing less systematic than the right to send Members to Parliament. However, a second period commenced about the time of Henry the Sixth, and which goes to the end of the Tudors. u Pon looking over the list of boroughs enumerated in schedule A, the larger proportion of them are not places which have become enlarged in the course of time; but, on the cor.trary, the greater number of boroughs in Cornwall, for instance, and in other parts of the country, were enabled during the reign of the Tu "rig to send burgesses to serve in Parliament. ' I con- F e lied it necessary, and have looked at some of these, and it -is proved that out of fifty-five boroughs which we pro- Pose to disfranchise in schedule A, there are 45 of them included i n b orou ghs created or restored in these seisms. No I do not pretend to argue that these boroughs are more in our power for disfranchisement, because they are more Iter aneirot. but I mention it as a remediable fai t showing that a power of sending Members to Parliament eiven by the Princes of the Tudor Family, was rather with the intention of having dependants of the Crown on this House, than with a view of etrengtbening the represen t:6:m of the country. Now, Sir, during the whole of that time this power of enabling burgesses to send Members to Parliament was undisputed, and I will only mention the instance of Esst-Lone to confirm the fret. So that, during the second period, front the cemmencement of the reign of Henry VI. to that of the Tudors, there was likewise irreeularitv, and a Constitution unsettled. and a power of enabling burgesses to send Mem bers to Pariia'nent, re sting entirely with the Crown. — wish, Sir, to argue tnis question on the principle that the Constitution of this Ileuse, instead of being that settled, invariable Constitution, which we are to ld can never be changed, and that we are n ,w, for the first time in the course of history, attempting with u nhallowed hands to violate, has never been for any fi f ty Yea" anything but subject to the changes required, or which the power of these heLes in the State which at tie time had most ;duet-we were able to alter or vary according as circum stances arose. Well, Sir, if the representation of this Hous.' was not settled during this period, it will hardly be main tained that during those long civil %%errs which occurred during the reigns of the Stuart., comptising a period, to use an expression of an e loquent writer—" the revolution of a century," that the representation of this nurse was its any means enchanged. Dming these times, those prece dents occurred which are mentioned with such abhorrence —changes effected by Cromwell,—changes which, though mentioned with horror by the Anti-Reformers of this day, did not so affect the mind of Lord Clarendon, who, al though a man not fond of Revolutions, but rather an ad mirer of Monarchied power and hereditary Government, did yet think fit to say that these alterations were fit to he made " with more warrantable authority, and in better times," If we were to propose changes lame, they would not be altogether liable to the blame thrown upon Crom well ler making them, but toe might take Clarendon for our bride, and say that these changes are made " with inore warrant of authority and in better times." We ate authorised by his tioctrine and opinion in making the at• tempt to eff!ct these changes in the representa tion, change., which will mike it Imre consonant with the state and condition of the reoplc. Sir, dating the rtign of Charles the &cowl, whatever may have been the state of our represeatetion, I think we are justified in saying it was not what it now is. For, on a memorable occasion, namely, the Exclusion Bill, there was a difference between the Lords and the Commons. The Commons were generally in favour of that measure, but it was rejected by a majority of two to one in the Lords. Tee King, in consequence, had recourse to his Royal Prerogative of sending bur gesses to serve in Parlinnent, and 150 or 200 Members would have found their way into the House against the people, had such an event occurred at a period like time present. But did it so happen in the time of Chides 11. ? No such thing. A Secretary of State proposed an amendment to the Exclusion Bill, and be could net find a Member to second him. What happened in those days, shows the disadvantage of con tests between the two branches of the Legislature, but it is a fact that the Commons in that day were nut constituted exactly as the Commons of this day are. For although we have the same name, we hive net the same influence, or even the same popular character which evidently existed during that r eign. ( (fear.) But now, Sir, we come to the glorious period of the Revolution. That memorable period from which many gentlemen date our Constitution, denying that the time of political memory ought to be extended beyond it. What took place at the Revolution? Tae first declaration of Podia tnent at that time was that elections should be free.— (Loud cheers.) One of the first ac's in the second Session in which the first Parliament of Wil liam sat, was a law that the Lords of the Cinque Ports had no right to nominate memaers, as they bad unlawfully assumed to themselves. In the period after the Revolution, there never was at arty time any long period of years in which this House did not, by some Act of Parliament, declare and enact that the elections to this House trueht to he by the people, and that they' ought to he free. I will now read the preamtle of the Act of the S;11 Geo. 11., which is framed in the same spirit :—" Whereas by the ancient Common Law of this land, all elections ought to he free; and whereas by an At't passed in the third year of the reign of King Edward the First, of fatuous memory" —on a former oe 'anion it was thought pedantry in me to quote a Statute of Edward I. ; but I see that the Legisla ture of George 11. did not disdain that pedantry—" it is commanded, upon great forfeiture, that no man, by force of arms, nor by ma:ice or menacing, shall distu , b any to make free elections—(Cheers from both sides of the House) —forasmuch as the freedom of elections of Members to serve in Pediment is of the utmost consequ-nee to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the kingdom."— (Loud cheering.) I have no hesitation in saying that I think the elections ought to be free from force ; and that ! when Parliament spoke of free elections, they dil not mean elections by a gentleman's gardener, who followed the will and plea t ore of his master, whether one man or another should be elected into this House.—(Hear, hear.) That was not their meaning; and it never can have been the meaning of those who passed this Act : but we are now told by a great authority, that such was the meauing, and a petition was presented to this House during the last Parliament which went upon this ground, that a certain number of Members of this House ought to be nominated by individuals, and a certain number of others ought to sit here by virtue of 1,0001. or 1,200/. a year paid by them to a person on whose authority they are returned as Mem bers —(Hear, hear, hear.) A Right Hon. Friend of mine, the Judge Advocate, argued with great force and ability on this circumstance, that be the Constitution of this House as excellent as it might, it would be im possible to pet suede the people of this country to think it right, so long - as they soy it existing in such a manner in defiance of all the laws and :statutes now existing upon the subject. That argument, Sir, I think it utterly im possible to controvert. If you mean to say it is right that a certain number of Members should sit by no:nination, and certain other Members by means of money. —I say then fur what purpose have your laws been passed since the Revolution to the present eime, and for what purpose is it that you declare you will pur sue to the utmost and punish bribery and corruption? Either one way or other you must, be wrong. Is it to be said that the acople are not enlightened, and that they must be taught to do this ? How are you, under such in congruous circumstances, to teach people to maintain the dans ? To do that you must set one part of the Constitu tion which you admire in direct contradiction to the other —you umet say that you will never alter the practice or the laws, and that the more violence that is done to the understanding, the more dark the mystery—the more worthy is it for admiration.—(lmmense cheering.) The Hon. Member for Oxford may think this enlightened doctrine, but as long, Sir, as his Majesty's Ministers have any influence in Parliament they will never be led away by such feelings; but their endeavours will he to make the law anti the practice harmonise together.— (Hear.) Sir, during this period, however, when the I rws were made for the freedom of election, there took place that which will always take place in every Constitution, the introduction of abuse to that free election which the laws and statutes of Parliament aim at. Sir, If I understand anything of the history of the Restoration, I should say, that a little more than a century ago, although there were elections by a small number of individuals, yet genetally speaking, that small number really represented the feelings and opinions of the towns from which the burgesses were to be sent. But as it was discovered in the course of time that it was a very valuable property to have influence in the election of Members, men who wished to establish au influence of this kind by means of their great property, contrived so to pervert and alter the spirit of our institutions, that the election by few persons, corporations, and freeholders, became in effect an election solely by individuals.—(Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, I have been looking at a very excellent work, written by Mr. Brown Willis on this sub j ect, and on th e point I am now upnil, I will take one of his instances, and to do this it will not be unfair to take the borough of Tavistock. In 1'716 there were 110 voters for this borough. At some pe riod, I cannot tell when, the Duke of Bedford having great property in the neighbourhood, bought up the freeholders, and in the course of time the voters became diminished, and are at the present time, I believe, from 27 to 35. So small a number of voters, it must be evident, Sir, are mere under the power of a great proprietor, than the number of 110 would be, and thus Parliamentary influence bad been obtained.—(Loud cheers.) Th e next instance I shall refer to is the borough of Cam bridge. In 1716 there were about 200 voters, and these seem to have been persons entirely belonging to the town ; and the Members they sent to Parliament were persons, it' we may judge from their names . (Cotton and Bacon) country gentlem en of the coueni‘tylemotbrs of tbe of Cambridge. Sir, I do not know whether t h en _University of Cambridge have at what has taken all attended in placeth . speculations on Refortu to believe the fact t o in: that! borough ; but considerable influence with his fell ow ands of the tit tt townsmen,totvn ga h v a e vi t t h ig be this :—That a banker of e whole power of the Cor p oration i nto the h he received a Duke of Rutlan d, reward quite satisfa ctor y to him --namely the for which ,fi s p u ..J.l great pationagc tinder Government. "Die Rutland i. in fact, die person who held the powtr over the repr...entatlon for the borough o f Cambridge, and sends two Aletriers to this Ihm,e, a gentleman Iron Ireland, an I another a Noble Lorl from this country. My mal - ive, Sir, for mentioninz the names of these gt-ntlemea is, because it was stated that his Maj,sty's Government meant to des!roy part of the representation of England.—(ll„„,.. ) That, Sir, is a, fallacy; the re,u;t of our Idlionrs will have a eintrary effect, ani instead of a person being sent from Ireland and ano:livr fr.m Scotlind to represent an Eng ... _ . . ish county, we n-store the powtr of choosing representativ e s IA the towns who are to semi 111,mbers to Parliament ; ::11:! ,ve shall destroy that system of usurpation, which for the last sixty years has deprived them of that tight. A similar 4rgumeot was made use of by an Hon. Baronet i n a pamphlet which has been published, in which he says, the cfre..tt of one measure would be to deprive the small country gmtlemen cf their influence in the country, :ml to give the whole to great landed proprietors, . . and to persons connected with trade and manufactures, Now, Sir, I will ventale to say, that the person who . . . . . . could put forward a statement like tkat must be en tirely ignorant of last history and present tint ,s; fir if lie will take the pains to look at the return, made to Parliatnent in piss times, lie will finil through a long courie t.f hiltory, that various Fina i 1 Iroroug'ls were accustomed to send small country gentle .. men Parliament connected with them. Th it practice, Sir, bas seised and diminished, by the eff ct of the changes that have taken place ; so that whatever maybe the result oar Bill, thryast thing that can be imputed to it, is that it tends to diminish the fair influence of the country gtn tleman. N Sir, Plymouth ia 796 hal 200 voter, —it has not near Sj many now. Portsmouth for merly lid 400—it is now dimini•hed to 59, and, Sir, there are various other places in which the constituency, even a century ago, was larger than it is at present, and while the towns have been in creasing—while the tracL has increased—while trade and we•o-ilth have increase !, the number of voters, incon4ruous as it may appear, has So that though there had been an increase iu those who ought tt.) eleot, an actual diminution has taken place in those who do elect. This at length ex- cited the att.- trion of this House, so that for nearly 50 ye.trs debates have taken pl;ce, whether the n mi uation or sale of seats, and the limited state of the f; an- chise, should he continued. In the conzse of those divus• ions, great wen had taken one side or the other. The pirt of Reform has been taken by the great and yii;orcus mind of Lord Chatham ; and Pitt, not in his boy hood, but after being six years before the public, said that if the French revolution were not raging, it would be desirable to acopt better measures for securing the rights and liberties of the people. Great no n have also taken the o - her side of the question. I will not enter into the history of these debates ; but I think I may say, that usual as it is to allow questions in this country to he many years under di.eussion, bofm e any measure is ad •pttd, a period of 50 years is surely sufficient; and now that his Majesty has called Parliauaent together to consider a subject so ripe for it, we may discuss it without the imputation that it is rashly brought forward, or that we are at- I tempting that which is a novelty in Parliamentary hi s t o ry. . But; sir, t! , ough a Reform in the repreientation has 1)::e.n so many years under discussion without progress being made, yet the sane c.innot be said with regard to the repre sentatian of the two sister countries, Scotland and It eland. With regard to those countries no respect for vested rights had been shown such as was now contended fog with respect to the English representation.—(Hear.) As re • specs Scotland, Lorl Somers, whose authority had been used on former nights, was the person who had swept to- gether knights, citizens, and burgesses to the number of forty-five. He was one of tho,e persons whom the admirers of antiquity professf d to hold up, and who is quoted as one of the great light.. Let us see the course of the political life of Lord Somers. He began by writing a work regarding the construction of Parliament; his first act was to as‘ist iu exchuling one King from the throne, and recalling another. His next act — was to call the House of Hanover to these realms ; and in another act he took part in the union of Scotland with England. - So that, whatever may be said of Loid Somers, he cannot reasonably be quoted but as the friend to innovation, and as a man prepared to put himself forward to make those changes which he thought necessary for the welfare and the rights of this count , y. It was said on the occasion of the Scotch Union, why make such a great change? and I have here a protest of certain Peers eif that time, which contains words similar to those used upon this occasion. Those Peers say that because the Con stitution of the country was so good, they did not think it prudent to change it ; and it was signed B. aufort, Buckingham, and Stawell.—( Hear.) But was Lord Somers deterred from his purpose, because those au thorities said the Constitution could not be altered but for the worse ? On the contrary, he left a note behind him, in which he states the first objection—" that too sudden alterations are dangerous." Lord Somers, in his note, saes, "This is true, unless tnanifest danger arises from d e lay itself."—(He .r. ) I say then, Sir, we are following in the footsteps of this great man. I say there is more danger to be apprehended from delaying Reform than from ailoi)t ing our measure. I call on the House not to be influenced by any fear of touching the Constitution, seeing that it is a fear which prevailed on a former occasion, but which shortly after disappeared, and the Constitution derived great benefit from a change which those ignorant worshippers of antiquity were fearful of. The Scotch had a certain number of Members (45) granted them, and in this practical and sensible manlier was this great qu anion of Scotland settled. Now, Sir, let me turn to Ireland. I ask has the repre sentation of that country never been touched ?—(llear, hear.) And by whom? by some audeciens 'Whig, or Radical in the House of Commons ?—No : the b troughs and cities were parcelled out by the heed of Mr. Pitt, whose memory gentlemen meet to celebrate, and whose name they consider as the talisman by which they hope to oppose Reform. But there is another change I touched upon in thediscussion in the late House of Couninens. I say upon what ground was the House of Comments called upon by large majorities to disfranchise the forty_ shilling freeholders el Ireland, while Beeralston and such other places returned Members. I never had an answer to that question—and the Right Hon. Baronet opposite said very fairly, " Make out as good a case for the destruction of these franchises as for the abolition of :he Irish forty-shilling freeholders, and I will not refuse to support R-form." I hope I do not misrepresent his state ment, end I ask what was the ground upon which the House of Commons was called to disfranchise the forty shilling freeholders ? Was it not that they were dependent upon their • landlords ?—(" Not no," from the Opposition side.) Was it not that they could not exercise a free choice?—(" No, no.) Was it not that they were driven to the poll like cattle—(" No, I:0 !" " hear, hear.")-- that they were carried there in crowds by the agents of estates, without knowing for whom they were to vote ? Hence the sacred trust was most improperly left in their hands., Then I maintain that those who vote in nomina tion boroughs are more completely dependent on the nod and beck of the proprietors than even the Irish forty_ shilling freeholders who were driven to the poll.—(l;ear.) But there was another reason for their disfranchisement.— It was: said that even where they were not dependent, they were men so bigotted and ignorant that they were guided and governed by:their Priests, and that they voted as the Priests directed, because they thought it was necessary for their salvation. Therefore the position was, either that they were so dependent upon the landlord, or so controuled by the Priest, that they were not in a condition to retain and exercise the franchise. I say, that in al these bo roughs the voters arc &seer under the direct influence and absolute dominion of the proprietor, or they are what is called independent, which means voting for a particular candidate on consideration of a bribe, the acceptance of which violates Acts of Parliament, and is an offence punishable in the Courts below. My position, then, is this—that all the boroughs we introduce into the schedules afford causes of disfranchisement as strong as thi).e which convinced Parliament in the instance cf the forty-shilling freeholders of lreland. I contend that they do not exer ise a choice, because they are either not independent or corrupt; and I call upon you to destroy their franchise, to purify their corruptions, and to restore the Constitution to its word, letter, and spirit, and to what I hope before long will be its practice.—(Much cheering on all sides.) I pass now to consider what is the general state of the representation. —(Hear, hear.) A certain number of boroughs return Members by the influence of Peers. The elections at other places are conducted by shameful bribery—some cities and large towns have open and honest elections- - In some large towns, where the elections are open, the expenses are so heavy as to deter men of moderate fortune from contesting them. Let the House recollect the elec tions of 1826, during which. every kind of bribery and corruption -prevailed ; when men were brought in masses tee vote in . a state of drunkenness, noise, and con fusion, and received 'their price fur their vote.-- It shocks me to see that a majority of Members may b e returned by a few individuals—it offends me to see elec tions an excuse for every species of immorality ; an d as regards p u bli c policy, I regret to see places in which 'arge masses of intelligence and worth 'are gathered to 'settler, which have no vote in returning representative s. We propose to alter this system, and to substitute a better • !n place, altering as little a 3 poasib'e.—(La,ughter, and hear, bear.) We propose about 150 Members to be sent IT th e counties which, by being divided, will give to each division as touch population as a whole county possessed a ‘mndred years ago. I have gone through documents; and find such to be the case, I find it nearly in every eistanee from 70 to 120,000 persons. We then say that there shall be about 180 members cent from the great eitie7l and towns, not omitting Manchester, L •eds, or S. T flield, but giving members to those great towns, anl giving also to the woollen, cotton, and coed efttery, and other manufacturing districts, a share art the representation which they have not hitherto rule—(Lend cries of hear, hear.) Potting polbies aside —I mean putting aside the immediate contests of politics —will anv man deny that it will be a great advantage, in= , toad of deputations waiting upon my Noble Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, from places of ereat wealth , nd trade, to have Members in this place capable to watch ever the interests committed to their ciharg,e, and capab'e !f guarding them from any encroachment or injery ? It true the effect will be to displace a certain number of Nlembers (representatives I cannot call them), well quali. 'led to make speeches of great amusement, and sometimes et great eloquence. but whose presence does not, in my mind, compensate for the absence of those who are imtne di itely connected with our commerce anl manufactures. in the representation, as we propose to leave it, there will still be a cliss which some m think a Vot on our sys tem, but the e xistence, I think, will add to the perma nence of Parliament and to the welfare of the people-1 - . neon that there will he a hundred or mare Members from ;daces w t i s l f ln three,utfour,; five, or six thousand inhabitants, o perhaps, imtnediately represent any parti ealar int-rest, and who may, therefore, be better qualified to speak and inform the House on great questions of ge ;lent interest to the community.—( Hear, hear.) U we had proceeded, as some persons recommended, vie.—t o destroy the existing system, and to allow none but Members from counties, and large cities anti towns, although it would have been a represents tino of the landed, commercial, and manufacturing in terest, something would still have been wanting to its to impleteness. That something I find in a number of per sons not connected either with the land, cemmerce, or ma nufactures, but uho are certainly well worthy to enter these walls, and able to give advice and advance opinions important to the welfare of the cummunity. When I say that the smaller boroughs will have an opportunity of choosing such Members, I do not of course mean that they will return at all in the way of nomination. By fair and free mean-, candidates may obtain the suffrages of sail constituents without any infringement of the Constitution. Thus time will be an immense extension of suffrages in counties and in large towns, and that ixtension will in part be accomplished by the admission of copyholders and leaseholdeis. The latter species of qualification we pro pose to extend, and in the original state of the 811 some were omitted—l mean those who had leases for a long term of years. I also propose now, that instead of four teen years, seven years shall be sufficient for leaseholds paying 501. a year. Such will be the constituency—the respectable constituency sent from counties. With regard to towns, the suflaage will be vested in householders in dwellings of 10/. a year rent or value.—(Hear.) This, al though not perlrape, the ancient right, I must hold to be in the spirit of our representative system, and during the last half century towns have so increased, that all !house holders are not to be consideied in the same light as house holders in the reign of James I. I apprehend that we arc acting in the spirit of the Constitution and of the well-known Resolution of the House of Commons in the reign of James 1., when I say that householders of 101. a year will form an excellent constituency in cities and boroughs.—(Cheers.) I need not now explain that the Bill contains every provision for the registry of voters, which will tend to prevent the bribery that takes place at elections, and the insertion of false votes, a practice known to be frequent in the heel of contest. The regulation for taking the pull in two days, I apprehend, will also prevent disgraceful scenes we have so frequently witnessed, and les sen the possibility as well as the inducement to corruption. But, I dunk, we are hound, if possible, to go even farther, and the attention of Government has been most seriously directed to those laws on our Statute-book which have for object the prevention of bribesy and treating. Although no plan is yet mature, yet I trust that, in the course of the present session, I shall he enabled to present a Bill to the House, which will make the existing laws more effec tual and executive.—(Cheers.) Let' me, however, remark how much the measure I now propose to intro lute will tend to the prevention of crimes of that description. One mode in which the due punishment of bribery and cm rup tion under the existing law was interfered with was by that argument often put in this House, but never so strongly as by Mr. Fox, when he said, " How can you call to the bar a wretched man, a poor labourer, earning only 10s. a week and send him to Newgate for receiving a bribe of ten gui neas, when you know that there are Members sitting in every p irt of this House who have been guilty of bribery on the largest scale, by giving three or four thousand poun 's fur the places they occupy among us?"--(Hear, hear.) I trust that hereafter that forcible rejoinder, quoted as a screen for bribery and corruption, will be taken away, and that we shall find reformers of all degrees ready to prevent and punish ibery, whether in the House or out of it. I know that some persons still think that such a Referm as would correct mid punish this iniquitous practice would be suffici-nt to satisfy the nation ; anti upon this point I have seen a declaration by a Noble Lord, who, among others, started as a reformer in a northern county. He saes that he shall be ready to. disfranchise all boroughs convicted of bribery; but let me ask, is that the only cor ruption that ought to be punished—(Hear, hear)—or could we fairly and honestly stop short there while we allow men to sit here who have made a traffic of seats in Parliament, or for other objects , not computable, perhaps, in n m P a (i t u t n er of barter'd''shilling s hillings, and exchange?—(Hear, pence, have made repre s e n tati on a xchange?—(Hear, hear.) I come now to speak of some few, awl but few, of the objections urged to this measure in the various writings that have appe ired from time to time. The first of these objections and the most general is, that it is a plan far more exten - sive than is necessary or proper fur the occasion. It is, of course, impossible to answer a position of that kind to the conviction of those , who take it ; but I beg to re mat k, that those who introd uced this measure were n by any previous declaration with regard to the na t ure and degree of their plan of Reform. Neither . o u t pledged banal any previous promise—they w e re not L oa d G re y, nor the Lord Chancellor, nor other Members of the Ca bi ne t who were formerly advocates for Ref arm, have laid down expres-ly to what point they would or would nit gut; and I think it fair to argue, that having been bound by no promise or pledge, arid the course being evidently much easier to do es than to do more, elta amuvieiction that they have brought forward this they are satisfied it is necessary, in et - der • hmnesahissr to lay a lasting foundation on which to erect the repre sentation of the people, to support the Prerogatives of the Crown, and to preserve the authority of bath Houses ot Parliament. The House may remember that I myself have been an advocate for a less extensive and thorough Reform. I have said on former occasions, that if one Member were taken from each of the small boroughs, it would be a Reform sufficient and satisfactory ; but when e I cane to a consideration of this kind—attached to T w e e t void belonging to a Government, I was obliged to ask myself whether, if I propounded that the plan should go no farther , I could say that the change would not only be effectual but permanent. If upon my former plan of Reform, Gatton and Sarum preserved one Mem ber each, would not the first motion in the Reformed Parliament have been to do away with the remain ing representatives of those places? Had I wished it, it would have been impossible for me to have resisted such a motion, and what then would have been the state of things? We should have proposed and propounded a measure, as a satisfactory measure of Reform, when in fact it would be only laying the ground for fresh dissensien.-;-- (Cheers and counter-cheers from both sides.) It would b e exposing the country to a discussion on the minimum or maximum of Reform, at a tune, perhaps, when her affairs could ill bear such disputes—(Hear, hear)—and we s hould hive lest the opportunity, which we hoped to have embraced, of giving a measure at once which ex posed us, as it may and as it has, to the risk of obloquy a nd opposition ; but which, if carried, will give such sta. bility and security to the system, that we may then pro ceed to the discussion of other great and pressing interests without fear that the people will reproach us of not having done what was sufficient for the protection of their rialits and interests, or reproach ourselves with having brought forward a scheme of Reform which could not be final, or concealing or disguising that we thought other measures intuit be its necessary consequence. But if this Bill be not too extensive, it is found, as the next argu ment against it, that it is very unequal—that, after all, it leaves such places as Halifax and Bradford svith fewer Members than Tavistock or K b mares orough --(Cheers from the Opposition.) Our opinion is that anomalies of this kind ate • not grievances that excite dis content..—(Hear, hear.) It is the practical evil which the country has felt, which calls for redress, and by reme dying that practical evil we trust that we shall be able to defend anomaly, and stand out against those who wish to see a complete model of symmetrical representation (Cheers.) But do they who object to the inequality of our Reform object in the hope that the plan they advocate will be equal and perfect? On the contrary, they say— God forbid that Tavistoels rtr Kna.teshotoughi with e.OOO or 6,000 inhabitants, should send -as many Mem linli as Halifax or Bradford ;" and I ask them how they i!1 reconcile with that mode of reasbriing their determi ration that Cattail or Sarum, or tiny other place Frith 700 (le 800 inlethitents, shoeld send as tirtey Members to Par :iement ss Halifax or Pratiford ?—( Hsar, hear.) So that the defenders of the C mstitutioti hate match more to an swerfor en the score ef inequality than we have ; they would preserve a systsm more anomalous, mere irregular, and still sa agreeable to the correct measure of- proportion. en I speak of the defenders of tt - e Constitution, I am eepposing that they mean themselves to adopt some kind Reform, they at at once lose the benefit of the emu ;trent of inequality. Mr. Catining's argument was, that e we found representation an anomaly so we should the it.—(Hear, hear.) But the strong pent rel taken by Alr. Canning mid the Duke of Wellington is ab twinned by eir less skilful associates. they h rye adopted a Reform —they admit its necessity, and their lieforne is more mot es:ll,ms and irregular than our's; so that the We'rtreent teainst inequality is that which destroys the very system they would erect, and et once convicts them of inconsis tency and ahsurdity.—( Hear, beef, hear.) We can wish for nothioe better than that they sheulti sd e'otstinue to reason ; and we telly say with Cro7nwell, when he flaw :he Scotch army descending from the hill into the plain, The Loed has delivered our enemies into our hunds."-o- Long and loud cheering re •etimed from each side of the !louse.) Bat, besides the charge of irietplality interfering ..eith symmetrical proportion, we are charged with !teeing taken an unfair basis, and with having thus endeavoured, ;iv undue means, to favour particular interests. Our an ;wee is, that we took our measure front a well-known sta.. ti,tical book, as free from error and doubt as could be ex pected. Our advetoaries say, " What an incoiiistency you are guilty of when you take population as a test of the right to enjoy the franchise. and yet tit rice the right of voting depend upon_ holding a house of 10/. a year ;" eut I will call your attentien for a few moments or the consequence of whetting a different course. We thought that there was an unfairness in the returns to the Tax-office of the number of !mits which were of 101. a year value, hnd we iestituted S9IIF,Pe in rpeirice with a view to correct those returns, by sending into the neighbourhood of some of the b troughs person+ who could inform us as to the real numberof houses which, according- to our plan, would entitle the holder to the ight of voting. The results vary so excessively from the returns to the Tax-office, as to establish that we were justified in suspecting that they ought not to be taken a= the criterion. I will mention a few. At Chippenham (we think that was the place aimed by the Noble Lord), according to the Tax-office, there are only 25 houses of he rent of 101. a year, yet the fact is, that there are 126 such houses. At. Ashburton, the Tax-office returns gives 52 when there are upwards of 300. At Christchurch SO, when there are certainly 300. At Grinstead 26, when there are perhaps 150. At Shaftesbury 75, when there arc at least 150. At Thirsk 75, when the real number is 110. At Wilton 31, when there are 151. At Wycomb 206, whenthere are 446. And at Westbury only 14, when there are no less than 318. Now, in Tavistock, although, according to the tax-return the number is 281, the real nurnb-r is found to be at pre sent no more than 277. Let me show what might be s rid if we had taken the Stamp•office returns as our guide. We should be told that we had adopted estimates which are well known to vary according to the ceplice of the tax-collectots—(Hear)—who have each their partial f r i e nds, with whom they make arrangements that, the taxes upon those persons shall not be too heavy.—(Hear, hear.) It would be said that, dhreg riling population, which would have furnished a safe rule, and adopting those estimat s which we ought to know, if we under stood the task upon which we had entered, were inaccu .rate and not to be relied on—(Cheers) —we had disfran chised Tamworth, a town having six or seven thousand inhabitants, and presetseed Tavistock, which has no more than two thousand six hundred and ninety-two inha bitants—we should be told dust we had chosen those esti mates, lux :use, they favoured our own partialities, although we could know nothing of their correctness. — (Hear.) For those reasons, Sr, we have not taken so in- secure a basis ; which would have merle us liable to such objections.—(Hear, hear.) It is quite clear to one, Sir, that there are two places which, ac cording to the increase of their population, can. not be comprehended in thedist on the score of population, and yet, as we cannot make up 300 voters, to leave the franchise with them would be giving the nomination to a few individuals.—(Heir.) One of those places is Down ton—and it is but justice to Eatl Radnor to say that Cie Noble Lord himself was the first to call our attention to the circumstances with regard to that town.—(H ar. hear.) Upon making the inquiry according to his sug gestion, we found it to be our duty to except Downton from the rule which we had laid down, and to include it in the Schedule of Disfranchisement. The other of those towns—Sr. Germain's—is merely a straggling village principally inhabited by fishermen, and comes under the same exception as Downton.—(Cheers, and some laugh ter.) We shall, no doubt, be told that, in including those two boroughs in the list of the dis'ranchised, we are in some measure departing from our own rules.—(Cheers.) I grant, Sir, that in these eases we have done so. But I think it is impossible to devise any rule to which, upon investigation, some necess try exception must tint be made. I believe, Sir, that I have now done with the exposition of our elan, and with the principal objections which may be brought against it.—(Hear, from both sides.) There is, indeed, one objection, Sir, and that a very cotnprehensive one, to which I have not yet alluded—(A laugh)—that is, the question which may be put to us, as to what benefit we hope to confer upon the people by our plan of Reform. —(Hear, bear.) We may be asked, " Will you relieve the distresses of the people by Reform, or will you leave them precisely as they are."—(Cheers.) But, Sir, I say that such a question is totally irrelevant to the matter— (Hear, hear, and much laughter on the Opposition side,) — Sir, it might just as well be objected to toy Noble Friend's intentions to relieve the pe ;plc by taking off the duty on coals, " 011, what signifies your reduction? it does nothit g whatever towards improving the Constitution."—(Laugh ter.) Any gontlemen might just as well arraign my Noble Friend in this way as tell me that this Bill wou'd not im prove the condition or increase the comforts of the people. Nor am I one of those who would debate the theory on which such exceptions are founded. I am not one of these, Sir, who would hull out, t t tie !Ret i tle vain hopes of imme diate benefit from this measure, which it coull net realise. —(CI eets.) Neither am I one of those who maintain the opposite theory, such as it is expressed in a well-known couplet, which I remember to have been once quoted by the late Lord Liverpoel-- o How small, cf all that human hearts endure, That part which laws or Kings can cause or cure." Far am I from agreeing in the opinion which the poet has so well expressed in those lines. When I look to one country and another in the different epochs of their history, I ant forced to believe that it is upon Kings and Lords —or, upon law and Government—that the happiness prosterity, power, and intelligence of a station di pen;l. (Cheers). When I compare Spain (in which the traveller is met by the stiletto in the streets, and by the carbine in the high roads) with England, in the pocrest parts of which the traveller passes without fear, I think the dif ference is occasioned by the diffeteut Governments under which the people live.—(Cheers). Therefore, Sir, when I propose that the people of England shall be allowed to send into this House real representatives--(Hear)—to deliberate respecting their wants and interests, to inquire into their grievances, and to consider their desires, we put into their hands that which will be the protection and the safeguard of the Monarchy. Let what will be done, the laws of such an assembly will not be voted by men hur rying from the country, almost ignorant for what purpose, and arriving in this House at twelve o'clock at night, in time to give a vote upon a subject of which they have scarcely heard, and which they have never consi dered. In such an assembly, the representatives of the people will consider, not with whom they are voting. but for wlsat measure do they vote ?—(Cheers.) The measures of such an assembly would be deliberately weigned—would be carefully eieeigned to remedy the evils which may have be n brought upon the country by bad laws, and to rescue it from their operation.--(lease) When lam told that the Government of a country does not affect the condition of its people, I say, look to Ire land.—(Cheers.) What has caused the state of that country to be such as it now is ? What, but the want of due, kind, parental attention on the part of its Govetntnent—a want of fellow feeling in the Legislature with the great mass of the people?—(Cheers.) Therefore, i would again assert, that if we identify this House with Aire people of the three countries—England, Ireland, and Scot land—however slow may be our progress—however we tnay be reproached by the factious for the tardiness of our advance, in giving to the people the right of appointing their representatives, we provide for carrying into effect the acknowledged princip'es of the Constitution, preserv ing undiminished the prerogatives of the Crown, the au thority of Parliament, and the rights and liberties of the people—guarded by the faithful representatives of a flee people, anal the loyal subjects of a generous King.— (Much cheering.) Sir ROBERT PEEL said that his object in rising at that iaoment was to make a very few observations, and which, in his opinion, would tend to the convenience of all parties; and he trusted that, if he did limit himself to those observations, he should not be precluded from enter- 1100 the 3ublect on a future occasion, on the ground of is having sp. , i , .en before. The Noble Lord who had le aught forweel the motion was entirely wrong in sup for a moment that so important a measure would ii, permitted to go to a Committee without an anxious and i!ngthened discussion.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) T Seble Lord had concluded his speech by saying that le. had summed up the arguments in favour of the Bill, as it as the main objections that bad been made to it, but ae I Sir Robert Peel) trusted that the Noble Lord would emit him and his friends to state for themselves their ob i -etions, though, it the same time, he had no further wish o the present moment than to advance his claim to a full, ee, and fair discussion upon the principles of the Bill, and ii e en the manner and the degree in which it involved ell the permanent and essential interests of the country. :le was willing to take the discussion, if it should ap dear to be the general sense of the House, on the se reading.—( Hear, hear.) In the last session of Par a iment leave was given to introduce the Bill without aily division of the House. Although he did perceive inos eesential alteration in the character of the Bill, he ii ;old not bet recollect that there were in the present Parliament many Meinoere who had not been present it the discussion of the former Bill in the last Parliament. Vita House could not but bear in mind that his Majesty'a .ecoonovndation from the throne had produced from them et answer that they would give an early and attentive con sideration to this subject. This, with the affairs of the 'reuse combined, did induce him to wave any opposition anon the first stage of the. Bill, and permit it to be iheinght in without any division. If this should be the opinion of ether gentlemen, he should say that he did 'pink that to commence a debate which was not to end in e division was a most inconvenient proceeding. He did ant wish the House again to be betrayed into a debate of al or seven ni e his, which was to terminate without any' aivision. He would permit the Bill to be read a first :One, and he was even ready to forego the great tempta :ien which the Noble Lord had given to reply to some parts of his speech.—(Hsar, hear.) He would forbear answering the satirical allusions of the Noble Lord, foe ence to las& a discussion would lead to a protraction of a debate, which he very much wished to avoid ; ,,t if he abstained from malting any reply to the Noble Lord's taunts or satire, he trusted that no inference would be drawn that he abandoned the right ef answering those allusions which were applicable to himself and to others who were united with him in his opposition to the measure. For his purpose, he wished but for one effectual discussion on the principles of the Bill, ereviously to its going into the Committee • He spoke, however, merely as an individual. He wished but for one full and fair discussion, but he also declared, that when that discussion did take place, nothing should pre vent his taking the sense of the House upon the question. _(Cheers from the Opposition.) It was most conform able to the usage of Parliament that both the discussion and the division should take place on the second reading. He trusted that the Nettle Lord would give the new Par liament an opportunity of a full consideration, previous to the division. He wanted no unnecessary delay, and when he said this, he hoped he might appeal with confidence to the course he ha l pursued on other occasions. He wished for a reasonable time, and only that lie might have a free discussion, for lie did not seek it for any unfair purpose. Toe Noble Lord should recollect that be had made a speech of two hours long. From this he (Sir Robert Peel) lead a right to conclude that the Noble Lord considered that the subject was entitled to and deserving of a full and fair discussion, and that his Bill was to undergo a real con sideration. He hoped that before the House was called to the discussion, it would, in fairness=, be put in pos session of the intention of his Majesty's Government with respect to the Bills of Reform for Ireland and Scotland.—(Hear, hear.) In his speech the Noble Lord had said nothing of these Bills. In the last Session he believed that the Irish Reform Bill was not brought in until after the main discussion, but yet the Marie was aware of what really were the intehtiera of his Majesty's Government with respect to the Reform in Ireland. Without insisting on all the technical details of a 811 in a matter of such immense importance, it was material that before the House discussed the Eoehisb Bill, it should know what his Majesty's Ministers proposed with respect to the Reform of the representation of Scotland. The King's Speech had recommended the House to consi der the general question of Reform with reference to Ire land an I to Scotland, as well as to England ; and if the liou-e proceeded to fulfil the promises they had given in the Address, that they would proceed immediately to take ' into consideration the question of Refortn, they were bound in compliance with that Address not certainly to proceed with the Balls pari passu, but still to seek to know what was to be done with respect to Ireland anti S.oland. Ile trusted that he had fulfilled the promises with which he had commenced addressing the House, and had coafided himself within the proposed order of pro ceeding. He had only to express his hope that the Noble L- ri! would name a day for the second reading so distant, as to afferd a fair interval for the consideration of the Bill, and yet not so long as to prove of any inconvenience to pantie business. He trusted that in the interval the Noble Lord would put the House in possession of the in tentions of his Majesty's Ministers with respect to Ireland and Scotland. Lord JOHN RUSSELL was desirous of doing w'ert was most generally convenient to the House. He intended to bring in the Bill that night or to-morrow, and be wished to fix the secant reading for Thursday next.—(Cries of, " No, no no," front the Opp isition Benches.) With reference to Scotland and Ireland, lie did not think, in the present state of Parliamentary business, that it would be for the convenience of Ireland to bring the Irish Bill in at the same time as the English. The Right lion. G.lt tlenaan, the Secretary for Ireland, and the Lord Advocate of Scotland, were charged with the Bills of those coun tries respectively, and whenever his Majesty's Minister were of opinion that it would be expedient to produce those Bi ls, in course of the Session, they would give due notice of their intentions. Sir ROBERT PEEL was very far from wishing to coun teance a discussion likely to provoke any difference of opi nion ; all he wished fur was an amicable arrangement. He thought that whit he had proposed was perfectly reason able, an I the common practice in bills of this nature. 'To make such great and important changes in the Constitu tion of the country so precipitately, he thought hardly con sisten with al- practice, and he put it to the Noble Lord whether he would not postpone the second reading of the 811 to Monday week. The reading, moreover, in that ca-e might go on to its close, without the interruption of Saturday or Sunday.--(Laughter). He would ask the Noble Lord how it was possible to discuss the question of English Reform without the House knowing something of what was intended to be effected by the Irish Bill. The Noble Lord bad said, draw what inference they might, they must come to a conclusion that a reduction must be made in the numberof Members in that House ; but really, to determine the reductions for England without know g what was to be done in the other parts of the United Kingdom, was not consistent with the fair usages of Par liamoat. He, for one, was most anxious that the Hou-e should come to the discussion of the question without any preliminary acerbity of feeling. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought the interval between that night and Thursday next quite sufficient, but if the Right Hon. Baronet really wished for a longer delay, lie should not persevere in his objection.— With respect to the Bills for Scotland and Ireland, he thought the experience of the last Session fully proved the . inconvenience of attempting to make them pass pan passu, and that it was much better that the tlwee Bilis should not be brought in together, as the Right Hon. Baronet had said that he saw no change in the English Bill. He could assure him that his Majesty's Ministers did not Furpose to make any alteration in the Irish or Scotch Bills. Mr. STANLEY sai t that with respect to the Irish Bill, with which lie was more intimately acquainted, he should not have the smallest objection to lay it upon the table of the House previously to the second reading of the English Bill. Ile hoped, however, it was not asking too much of the spirit of compromise (ot a compromise not dishonour able, or entered into for any unworthy purpose), especially as the Right Hon. Baronet had threatened the House with a seven nights' discussion, if he begged that the Irish and Scotch Bills might be treated in the same manner as the English. The Irish Members must recollect that they were treated very ill when the Irish Bill was debated.— Upon the English Bill Irish Reform was discussed, but when the Irish Bill was before the House, Members took that opportunity not to discuss Irish Reform, but to make long speeches upon Reform in general. Sir ROBERT PEEL said, that the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman answered every thing be had to desire. lie had only to hope that the Lord Advocate of Scotland was likewise to lay hie Bill on the table.—(A laugh.) The SrEAKER now put the question, that leave be given to bring in the Bill, and which was carried, one solitary voice crying out " No." On the motion of Mr. WYNN, the Lord Steware's Oaths' Abolition Bill went through Committee. Repot t this day week. Mr. F. LEWIS brought in a B ll for regulating - the livery of coals in the metropolir. Re id a first tim ;to he rea L d o a rd se N co U n Ft ß, ad wo ad reading on Mon da y . from Mr. HUNT p r e sented a petition f • useless oaths by revenu e officers. - Gd time e T o luai‘(%l'eodnnethsde4ranbelext.a ill for l) dis.l.ing I