The Sun. — London, England, 1831-07-27 00:00:00

pr.;4te a question. It had been announced in that document 1 which was stated to be the Speech of the King of the French, that an arrangement had been made, under which the forts erected in Belgium subsequent to the general peace in IEIIS were to be destroyed, the whole or in part; he begged to ask whether it was the intention of his Ma jesty's Government to 14y before the House a copy of the convention or document by which such an arrangement bad been made. Lord ALTHORP vas understood to say that he was afraid he could not fully answer the question, and he would feel obliged if the Hon. Baronet would postpone the enquiry until his Noble Friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs should he in his place. Colonel EVANS rose to call the attention of the House to what he considered the most vexatious delay on the part of those who were opposers to the passing of the Reform Bill, in the course they took. He knew that the Birmingham Political Union, the Manchester Political Union, the Glasgow Political Union, and ether somewhat similar bodies were holding conferences for the purpose of deciding upon what should appear to them to be the best course to be adopted, should those who were opposed to the Bill continue their opposition fur the purpose of delay. Al to the in eligibility of passing such a measure in baste, he knew that other measures considered of great importance— great importance as to the personal liberty of in dividuals, as well as the atrocious Six Acts, were passed without the least delay, and without the House having what might be considered any thing like an explanation of their nature. Should a different course of proceeding not take place to-night or to-morrow, he should feel it his duty to give notice of a motion that persons should be examined at the bar who were entitled to credit and capable of understanding the state of the country, for the purpose of informing the House of the state of agitation of the country, occasioned by the delay, and the abhorrence the public felt at tl:e cause of it. Mr. JOHN SMITH confirmed all that the Gallen, and Hon. Member had just stated. He knew that the !louse stood charged with the most unjustifiable delay on this subject. That part of the House which was opposed to the Bill was charged by the public with reiterating their ten times told stories in the speeches which they favoured the House with from night to night. He was satisfied that the feeling of the middling classes through out England, and also that the feeling of the Scotch—nay, he would say, that the anger of the Scotch—would soon move them in a way that perhaps was not expected by many persons, should this improper delay be continued for any length of time. If Ministers were to decide that the House should sit at twelve o'clock every day, whilst that order remained unrescinded he for one should attend, unless sickness prevented him. Mr. HUNT rose to say that he should be very glad to have the opportunity of seconding some such motion as had just been referred to. For his own part he cared not if the house should decide upon sitting at ten o'clock in the morning, but he did object, as he always had objected, to the late hours to which the sittings were continued. Mr. 11. L. BULWER could not but express his convic tion that the time of the House had been too much wasted by personal allusions, ill-tinted jokes, and very fatiguing recapitulations. The moment of putilic breathless expectation was not the time when Hon. Mem bers should indulge in rhetorical flourishes or ingenious witticisms. Whatever did not affect the general interests of good Government, and of the country generally, they should consider as frivolous and vexatious. It could not, he was sure, be either gratifying to:their feelings or creditable to their character, for the opposition to know that the country out of doors felt that instead of occupying themselves with those subjects more particularly connected with their welfare, the House continued disputing night after night about what was connected only with individual, partial interests. Mr. POLHILL gave notice that it was his intention, in the Committee of the House, to move that in all boroughs in which the right of voting was vested in the house holders generally, the qualification to vote should be 51., and that in all the boroughs of schedule C the qualification Le 201. Lord ALTHORP would be happy to accede to any ar rangement for the purpose of expediting the Bill through Committee. He did not see, however, that the pro posed arrangement of meeting at an earlier hour would at all facilitate the business. Nothing could be more improper than to endeavour to stifle dis cussion on the details of the Bill—(Hear, hear)—and according to the present arrangement, the House haring eight hours devoted to the subject, he did net see how, consistently with the other necessary business of the House, any other arrangement could be adopted. He could see no superior convenience in meeting in the morning at ten, rather than in the afternoon, and commencing the business of the Committee at five o'clock. Sir R. PEEL said it would be impossible, with the private business of the House and Election Committees particularly, to meet at an earlier hour. He wan very sorry twat the Honourable and Gallant Officer who brought forward the proposition before the House had referred to the pressure of numerical force. That he could assure the House woolel have no influence with Members on his side the House, in the statement of their opi nions. The deliberations of that House, he hoped, would no longer be fettered by sue', appeals. The details of the Bill were matters o f the greatest importance, and the circumstances which had already occurred, the different views taken by Government in this Session from that taken last year, with respect to Downton and other places, stowed the impossibility and the great danger of precipi tancy in the discussion of the details. He thought that Government Lad partly misled the Home in the delay that had occurred. The House was unacquainted with all the matters of detail, and it would have been better if all matters of detail with respect to the parishes and 1)eal pecu liarities had been referred to a Committee to report to the House, not upon matters of principle, but merely of loe cality and of fact. He thought that meeting at an earlier hour was altogether impracticable, sod would only refer to the state of the House at five o'clock, for the purpose of showing that there seas little chance of better attend ance at a much earlier hour. Colonel 'I'ORRENS presented a petition from Dr, Andrew Tucker, praying that the borough of Ashburton may be removed to schedule B in the Reform Bill.— Referred to the Committee. Mr. C. PELHAM begged to ask the Noble Lord opposite whether it was his intention to make any commueicaatiun to the Uouse relative to the Bank of England. Lord ALTHORP said, it was not his intention to do so a' present. On the motion of Lord JoiiN RI:SMELL, the Speaker left the chair, and the House resolved itself into Coin. mittee on the Reform Bill. The CHAIRMAN then put the first question, which was that the borough of Queenborough stand part of schedule A. Mr. CAPEL made some observations which were wholly inaudible iu the gallery. Sir C. GRANT, as one of the Members for Queen borough, was aware that any thing be could say would not impede the progress of the Bill—the principle of which was unjust and arbitrary. If it passed, the Constitution of the country would be subverted, and the liberty of the people be destroyed. This borough was increasing in wealth and population. In 1775 it had only 85 voters, and at present the number was from 300 to 400, and he defied any Hon. Memler to say this was a rotten or a nominatiGu borough. It was true that the Ordnance Board used to return the Members, but this was the third Parliament to which the free burgesses returned pen of tsar own choice. The question was then put Rod carried that the borough ctiail part of schedule A. The next question was that New Romosy stand part of schedule A. Sir EDWARD DERING called the attention tef the Noble Lord opposite to the arrangements with regard to adding Sandwich to some other plac e s in the neighbourhood , and he wished, on the same principle, that New Romney and Old Romney, and Lydd, should be added together. The population of Lydd, in 1821, was 1,437 ; of Old Romney, .169 ; amid of Nov Romney, 967, making a population consider ably over 2,600. The connection, however, between i Lydd and New Romney was of long standing , for n the reign of bleary VII. Lydd agreed to pay a certain sum to assist New Romney. By the same deed, the Barons of Lydd agreed to pay to New Romney 3/. yearly, to stover certain expesyses, and which was regularly paid from that time to the yese 1508 ; he thought, therefore, the connectirk7 between New red Old Romney and Lydd was g stronger 4.1. m than that between Sandwich, Deal, and other places, and :,try ought to be uniteg, and allowed to return 402 Member. Colonel EV=ENS denied that this case was to be c ox„ pared to Sandwich ; Sew and Oid R:oroney and Lydd were mat sea-ports, and there . was no ground Ix believing that were now ; they would ever be more Delependent than l they - dill. , r 1 they were so poor that any gentlemen of . arge prop the neighbourhood might .cocuman...'l .thei.r votes, and kt had in fact for many years been a nommati.on borough. Sir JOHN BRIDGES said that Romney was situated in the midst of a large tract of fine land, and he hoPed that it would be allowed to return one Member, at a small counterpoise in the favour of the landed interest. Lord J. RUSSELL. looked upon the cases of Sand rich and New Romney, as totally dissimilar. Sir C. WETHERELL alluded to " the pressure out of doom," which he busted the Nohle Lord would entirely disregard, and rather abide by his owu arrangement for the disposal of public business, as already determined on. 'lheie was no municipal distinction between the cases of Sandwich and Romney, and he trusted, therefore, that the latter borough would not be disfranchised, since the prin. cipl• by which it would be saved had been already recog nizei in the case of Sandwich. Caine, and several other boroughs in schedule B, it should be remembered, were boroughs of nomination as well as Romney. With respect to the Bill generally, he would merely remark, that its provisions must be examined elsewhere, if they should not he sufficiently investigated in the House of Commons. Lord J. RUSSELL repeated his explanation of the rule under which New Romney was disfranchised. Fal mouth had been united with Penryn, and Deal with Sandwich, because Falmouth and Deal Isere populous and flourishing towns, making, in both cases, a population tit 10,000 inhabitants. This was not the case with Romney, and that borough, accordingly, had been left to its fate. Mr. CROKER was proceeding to observe, that it wa4 rather strange that a Gallant Officer should have proposed a rather summary and unheard-of mode of shortening the discussions on the Reform Bill, when Colonel EVANS, in explanation, had only recom mended that the House should sit at an early hour in the morning. Mr. CROKER repeated that it was rather extraordi nary that that Gallant Member should have been obliged to rise, in the discussion on the disfranchisement of the very next borough on the list, after having voluntarily animadverted oa the delay of the Bill in consequence of similar discussions. That Romney was a nomination bo rough, be submitted, could hardly be objected to it, seeing that Arundel, Amersham, and several others in schedule B, were equally nomination boroughs ; and as to the allegation that Romney was not a thriving or maritime place, that could hardly be in itself a sufficient reason for its disfranchisement, as Fowey'e being both a sea-port and a rising town had not been held sufficient to save it front being included in schedule A. The people of Deal and Sandwich had petitioned to be united, as being limbs of the same port, and subject to the same regulations, and Sandwich was saved for that reason, which the House would see was equally applicable to the case now under consideration. Great complaints had been made respect ing the delays which bad already retarded the progress of the Bill, and yet they bad now for the first time been made acquainted with one of the principles on which it was based, for the Noble Lord had declined to disfran chise Penryn on the ground that Falmouth, an important town in its neighbourhood, was entitled to be united to it. (Hear, bear.) To such an enlargement of the prin ciples of the Bill, he certainly could not have any objec tion. Having said this, he must add that it would take away the ground of the necessity of any forcible appeal to the Noble Lord with respect to New Romney. What, he asked, was the ground of the distinction made between New Romney as connected with Old Romney and Lydd, and Sandwich as connected with Deal and Walmer? But he would beg to ask the Noble Lord at what time did it occur to the Government to adopt the principle of uniting Sandwich with Deal and Walmer? Lord JOHN RUSSELL dtolined to answer. Mr. CROKER—The Noble Lord introduced his Re- form 13i11 last session, every part of which was considered of such importance that Parliament was d , svolved for not passing:it. In that Bill Sandwich stood in schedule B. It was now in another schedule, and was to send two Mem bers in conjunction with Deal and Walmer. He had asked the Noble Lord when it had occurred to the Government to make that alteration, and the Noble Lord refused to answer. Now that refusal induced him to state what he supposed would oblige the Noble Lord to give some ex planation on the subject. Ile would mention, not a matter of which he bad himself any knowledge, but a report which had been circulated in one of the newspapers. Sandwich is a corporation, most of the voters of which are pilots and seamen, many of whom live along the coast, and several in Deal and Widmer. It was stated that when the Mini sterial candidate went down to canvass the voters, some of them said to him, what was very natural for men in their situation, " Why you ask us to give a vote for our own disfranchisement. You are for the Bill which is to take from us one Member. Now Deal, and Sandwich, and Walmer, would make a borough if united, and if you were to give us such a Reform as that, we would vote for you with pleasure." What effect this had on the change made in the Bill with respect to Sandwich and Deal, he would not say. If the change had been made before the dissolution of the last Parliament, he would not occupy the time of the House by mentioning it; but such a re port having gone abroad, the people of New Romney and Lydd would like to hear some explanation why the dis tinction was made between their case and that of Sand wich and Deal. They had heard the statement, and the silence of the Noble Lord would give it currency. Sir T. TROUBRIDGE said he bad listened attentively to the circumstances just mentioned by the Right Hon. Gentleman, and be could say that they were totally un founded.—(Cheers from the Ministerial side.) Lord D. STUART was a Reformer, and so was the Noble Lord alluded to ; but if his opinion had been the other way, he would go over to that of the other aide with out any reference to that of that Noble Person. Colonel EVANS said that two or three of the state ments of the Right Hon, Gentleman Lad already received contradiction, He had accused him (Colonel Evans) of having used language which he never held : but he hoped that before he made such a charge again lie would make himself acquainted with what he did say. He had only spoken once on the subject, but be was within the mark when he said that the Right Hon. Gentleman had ad dressed the House forty-five times on this subject, and had gone round the world for topics, not ou all occasions having any very close connection with the question before them. He (Colonel Evans) did not accuse the Right. Hon. Gen tleman of that versatility of talent which he displayed on these occasions. If he were not aware of the Right lion. Gentleman's candid and straightforward manner, he might say that some of his objections were made to gain time ; but he did not make that charge, for he would pass no judgment on the motive of the Hon. Member. With re spect to New Romney, he would observe that it was in the centre, not of a populous district, but of an extensive inar4ll, and that it would require to go a circuit of some forty mites to get such a constituency as would be required under the Bill ; Litt even then the question remained, was it nut a nomination borough ? for the influence of the gen tleman who now had the patronage of it would remain nearly in the same hands as at present. Mr. 1. L. BODGES said the population in the vicinity of New Itonmey were as staunch advocates for Reform as any in Ken'. He had received the most cordial support ft ow them on his canvass. Mr. CROKER said he bad not intended any rebuke to the Gallant Officer for his speech; on the contrary, he ad mitted his full. right, and that it was not only a right but a duty to offer any argument that occurred to him on the subject. The Gallant Offieer had said, that two or three of his (Mr, Croker's) statements had been contradicted. He begged to contradict that statement in the most direct and unequivocal manner which the forms of Parliamentary language admitted. No statement of his had been con tradicted. What he stated was a report which he had seen ire a Newspaper, and which lie mentioned only as a report. lie would bow to the House, or to any lion. Member, in a correction of an error if he fell into one, but he would not suffer the Galiaet Dicer, or any other Hon. Member, to tell him his statements were c4ntradicted, when the fact , was not so. Sir E. DERING denied that his interest wouid b pro.. muted by an extension of the franchise to Lydd. lie had uo Foperty in that place. After arew words from Colonel EvANs, Mr. CRESSET 1 1 4 HAM said that the farmers and others in the neighbourhood of New Romney and Lydd • were opulent and independent, and as 4 - gly to make an independent constituency as those in any oti.cr F. - ..Tts of the cot:tatry. They were likely to be more independent. than the inhabitants of Sandwich and Deal, which would , be as much under tl.;.e influence of the Treasury as here , tofore. The motion was then put and carried, that " New Rom ney stand pert of schedule A." The next moti.o was that " the borough of St. Ger mains stand part of schedule A." Mr. C. ROSS expressed a 14;pe that the Committee would give its attention to the case of this borough. In calling attention to it he w as not disposed to controvert any of the principles laid down by the Right Hon. Gentleman oppo site; but ha would b eg the House to consider what was the proposition of the Bill of last S ess i o n with respect to this measure. In the first Bill the borough of gt. Ger mains was in schedule B, and the House assented to the proposition that where the population exceeded 2,000 it should send one Member. It was true the borough itself had net that population, but then it came under another principle of Lord's, that where the borough and the parish were of the szi.me name, and where the borough was included in the parish, the vGpulittion of both should be included. It was admitted, that if thi s pL ii h a d not been adopted, many boroughs would be disfranchised which were now allow: to send Members. By the population returns of 1821, St. Gertdisins had a population of 2,400, and at present it was rather more. lie mentioned this fact to ;how that the borough was not declining. 41 thi. return the population of the parish was Included : In the question of population it resembled Dawnton, but it differed from it in these respects—that it was impossible, is any eon- venient distance, to get the required number of electors, and that in the amount of assessed taxes it WWI much below it. Now St. Germains was not in a poor and thinly inhabited district—it was i❑ one of the richest parishes in Cornwall ; it contained in the borough alone 100 houses, and it would be easy to make up the required *umber of 300 in the neighbourhood. It paid 3411. in assessed taxes, which was more than that paid by St. Ives or Malmesbnry, as much as Oakhampton, and treble the amount paid by Dowuton. As to the returns, the Hun. Member con tended that all the information they contained was known to Ministers in the last session. One of the returns, which stated that there was no house in the parish, ex clusive of the borough, rated to the poor rates at ten-pound a year, was erroneous. There were many respectable houses in the parish, exclusive of the borough, which were worth more than ten pounds, and many others might be found in the place which would make up the required constitu ency-. He thought this a fair claim on the part of the bo rough not to be included in schedule A, and he put it to the Committee as a case which did not at all affect the principle of the Bill. Lord J. RUSSELL said, the reason why St. Germains was taken from schedule B of the last Bill was, that there' were only thirteen houses in the town and parish assessed at 101. and upwards. The population of the town and burongh was under '7OO ; the town was only fifty acres ; the whole parish exceeding 9,000 acres. If the borough was as the Hon. Gentleman represented, it might not be proper to make it an exception to the rule ; but they had no evidence before them which would lead them to that conclusion, and from all that had reached him on the subject, he had reason to believe that a constituency could not be made out without going a distance of seven or eight miles, and in that ease it might be said that it would be transferring the franchise to the next town, for St. Germains was of itself too small and insignificant to bear a part in the representation. There were only eight houses in the borough, and four in the parish, rated to the house duty at 101. and upwards, and this at two-thirds of their annual value, and only fifteen houses in the bo rough of the annual value, of 10/. and upwards. In such a town and neighbourhood, then, it would be impassible to get a constituency, and on these grounds he did not see why it should be omitted from schedule A. Ile must hear more than be bad yet heard to induce him to change his opinion. Mr. PRAED said, that when the hearing of the Counsel was objected to, it was said that it was competent for Members to state the condition of their respective boroughs, though the Learned Lord Advocate had inti mated that the representatives of the boroughs about to be disfranchised either had no right to vote, or at least that they ought not to exercise it; but after what had passed, be supposed it would nut be objected that they should perform the two duties of advocates and witnesses. He owned he was surprised to find that the Noble Lord (J. Russell) had not the candour to admit a case which, if it were made out, could in no way affect the principle of the Bill. The Hon. Member, after defending the independ ence of his connexion with this borough, to the notice of which he was introduced by a noble and influential person, without any pledge on his part, or any thing to bind him but the principles to which he had always adhered, said that he would take the case of Downton to be an excep- ion which did not desk oy the general rule laid down by the Noble Lord (J. Russell), but, would he say that St. Germaine *as in the same circumstances as Downtwn? If so, let him bring his proofs; for until those proofs were satisfactorily before the House, he thought the statements of Hon. Members in their places were as much entitled to consideration as those of the anonymous informant to whom the Noble Lord so often referred ; but if there was a difference in the statements made by Hon. Members and :hose of the anonymous informant, that was a reason why the matter should be examined. It was said, that where small constituencies were destroyed, they woul I, where it could be done, be replaced by a larger body, where the neighbourhood could afford it. That he could under stand ; but he could not understand the justice of disfran chising a small body because their predecessors may have at some former period abused their franchise. He had heard, in the case of the Greek loan, in which the Hon. Member for Middlesex took an active part, that on appli cation being made to an individual to subscribe in aid of the Greeks, he declined it, alleging as his reason that he would have nothing to do with them, as he understood they had once behaved very ill to the Trojans.—(A laugh.) With as much justice might it be urged, that we should disfranchise these small boroughs in order to ♦isit on them the sins of their ancestors. The Hon. Member then went on to contend that the non-extension of the franchise of small places to the larger bodies in their vicinity would be an injustice to those so left out ; that it would be also unjust and impolitic as excluding so large a portion of the agricultural population. It would not be a fulfilment of the promise that had been held out to them. He con tended that the Noble Lord had not made out a case for the disfranchisement of this borough. By refusing the means of inquiry into the disputed facts connected with this borough, he might do much wrong; but by giving that inquiry, no injury could be done, for the truth must be elicited, and in proportio❑ as the Noble Lord thought he was erecting a great work, which would go down t o posterity, it ought to be his care that it was built upon a sure foundation.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. STANLEY said, that he was not disposed to deny to Hon. Members the representatives of these boroughs, if representatives they could be called, the right of exercising the two duties of advocates sod witnesses; unless he w as also prepared to deny to them the still more inconsistent duties of witnesses, advocates, and judges. He certainly thought that, if professional counsel were called in to argue upon the case of each borough, it would be entirely imprac ticable to come to the consideration of the Bill within any reasonable time. The representative of the boroughs were their fittest advocates. 'With respect to the borough of St. Germains, if he needed any proof of its being a nomination borough, that proof had been afforded by the Hon. Gen tleman himself, who stated that lie was introduced by Noble and influential persons to the notice—a delicate way of putting the case—of the borough.—(Laughter.) The object of Ministers was to disfranchise nomination boroughs as a system ; and though there might be a departure in some instances from the strict letter of the Bill, Ministers justified themselves by their adherence to the principle. He would state to the House the population and extent of the borough of St. Germains, taking for his authority the returns made by the portresve of that borough in January, 1831, at which time that officer had no knowledge of the purpose for which those returns were wanted. It appeared that the borough of St. Ger mains, and the parish in which it was situated, were not co-extensive. The borough contained 40 acres, the town of St. Germains 50 acres, and the parish into which it was proposed to swamp the borough contained no lese than 9,029 acres; nor was the population of the place concentrated in the borough. By the population re turns of 1821, which were correct, with the exception that the town and borough were considered as coexten sive, it appeared that the number of houses in the town was 99, and the number of male inhabitants 247, so that the male and female population might be taken as being under 500. But what was the population of the remain ing part of the parish ? The remainder of the pari-b, in cluding the village of Hessenford, contained no less than 1,800 or 1,900 inhabitants. The same difference of po pulation was apparent in the returns for the present year. According to them, the town contained 672 inhabitants , and the other part of the parish I,9l4.—(Hear.) —Now , if this borough were to be thrown into the parish, whit was to prevent such a principle being carried to an ab surdity ? According to the same rule, why should not a circle La drawn round Old Sarum, which did not contain one inhabitant, and the elective franchise distributed in the surrounding district ? The Hon. Gentleman concluded by stating his opinion that the House had already disposed of this case by its decision on the question of the borough of Downton. PRAED said that the Ministers had laid down a rule, the: all boroughs containing less than 2,000 inha bitants should be disfranchised ; and he thought therefore that these places, together with the surrounding districts, had some cause to complain, which were above the line, and yet were placed in schedule A. He also c onsidered that Ministers had proceeded upon erroneous information. The first returns were grossly incorrect, and the new one' were anonymous.—(Dear.) Lord J. RUSSELL said that he always supposed that the returns respecting the number of 10/. houses were in correct in many instances; but the further information which bad been given to the House, with respect to the case of St. Germains, was not of such a nature as to make him doubt the general accuracy of the returns. Sir C. WETIIERELL stated that an arbitrary line bad been laid down by Ministers, and as arbitrarily departed from by them. He thought that the pretensions of this borough to retain its franchise were entirely unanswered. The Right lion. Gentleman (Mr. Stanley) said that Ire would not consent to swamp the borough of St. Germains, containing only fifty acres, into the parish containing 1,914 acres. Why, then, was Horsham swamped into a n ewly-enclosed common ? Another statement made by e . n ge t);rz re tat ig w ll as, ,, pat the principle of the Why, then, was Knaresborough, ;t e ll Righ t Nvent li to on 'th ° e both of which were nomination boroughs, preserved ? n4 d nin w a i t i i y on wa b s ori c m a g i l n i e s; The Right Hon. Gentleman had likewise mentioned Ohl Sarum, in connection with St. Germains. What they had to do with each other he was at a loss to discover; Ind the coupling of them together reminded him of the information which the Right Hon. Gentleman had com municated to the House on a former evening, that there .vac a river in Macedon and a river in Monmouth. He thought that Macedon and Old Sarum had as much con nection as Old Sarum and St. Germaine. Mr. LAMBERT (Wexford) said it was impossible that, when a general rule was laid down, there should not he some exceptions to it. The real question was, whether or not the principle was a sound and a wise oae, and whe ther it was applied in a fair and honest manner. He be lieved that the principle was applied in the present instance in a fair and honest manner. Sir IL PEEL said, he supposed that the Hon. Member for Rye would report the Hon. Member who had just sat dow n to those members of the Political Union of Man chester, who were becoming exasperated at the delay which the Reform Bill had experienced, and who had determined to denounce such Members of that House, who, when the details of the Bill came under consideration, chose to touch on perfectly irrelevant topics.--(Cheers and laughter from the Opposition.) The Hon. Member (Mr. Lambert) had called upon the different Reformers in that House to come forward and defend their opinions, and had laid the foun dation of almost interminable debates ; and whenever delay and factious opposition should be again charged against the gentlemen on the Opposition side of the House, he would always refer to the example of the Hon. 'Mem ber, who had given provocation to debate, which required the utmost forbearance to resist.—(Hear, hear.) It would therefore be but fair, for the vengeance of the members of the Political Union to fall solely and singly on the head of the Hon. Member himself.—(Hear, and laughter.) The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Stanley) slid that the disfranchisement of the borough of St. Germains might be a departure from the letter of the Bill, but it was an adherence to its principle. Then he (Sir R. Peel ) was at a loss to know what the principle was ; and he thought that the Right Hon. Gentleman was bound to show that this borough would continue to be a nomina tion borough, when the new constituency of 10/. voters was thrown in. He doubted the policy of disfranchise ment of the kind proposed. By it that portion of the agricultural pepulation, not being freeholders or copy holders, but inhabitants of 10/. houses, would be de prived of the right of voting; while, on the other hand, if the franchise of boroughs was extended into the surrounding districts, that particular class of persons would be admitted into the franchise, and form a more in dependent set of voters than the householders in towns, because, being more scattered, they would be less likely to be acted upon by political clubs and unions. —(Hear.) But the Right Hon. Gentleman had stated that the object of the Bill was to prevent small towns being swamped by country constituencies. Now he (Sir R. Peel) had always understood that the object of the Bill was to de stroy the unity and individuality of every town, and admit a new class of voters from agricultural parishes.—(Hear, hear.) In fact, how had Ministers acted with respect to the borough of Christchurch? The area of Christchurch was 27 square miles, or 1,700 statute acres. The total number of ten-pound houses in the borough of Christ church was eight; and therefore the surrounding district was to be included, in order to make up the requisite number of 300. Then how could the Right Hon. Gen tletnan contend that the spirit of the Bill was not to swamp small towns into country districts?—(Hear.) He therefore was of opinion that the spirit of the Bill would not be violated by allowing St. Germaine to retain the elective franchise.—(Hear.) Mr. LAMBERT stated, in reference to what hod fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet respecting the Political Union of Manchester, that the indignation of any indivi dual or society was perfectly indifferent to him.--(" Hear, hear," from the Opposition.) Sir R. PEEL applauded the sentiments of the Hon. Member, but informed him, that at an early period of the evening, during the progress of the Bill, they were threatened with the enmity of the members of the Political Union if any delay with respect to the Reform Bill took place ; aad he certainly thought that the Hon. Member ought to be the first person against whom their enmity should be directed.—(Hear.) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL did not by any means ;pink that the impatience expressed out of doors on the subject of the Reform Bill was a matter to be thrown out of consideration by any part of the House. I 3 pro posing disfranchisement it was necessary for Goveenment to draw some line, and it was surprising that gentlemen on the other aide of the House had not been able to make out the appearance of more anomalies than they had as yet.—(Hear hear.) The Bill had not been brought in fur the purpose of removing anomalies ; its object was to remove the gross and disgraceful abuses of the system of nomination boroughs, alike dishonourable to the nomi nators and nominees, —(Hear, hear.) Therefore, in pro posing to take St. Germaine out of schedule A, it was not enough for lion. Gentlemen to shew him that there were some boroughs omitted which ought to have been inserted in the sebedule—they had to prove that St. Ger mains was not a nomination borough. The only question for the House to consider was, whether the line adopted by Ministers had not been fairly and honestly acted upon? In fact, the only difficulty which Ministers had experienced in applying their principle, arose out of the circumstance of having paid too much consideration to those boroughs which were under the influence of persons opposed to the Government. Take, for instance, the cases of Aldborough and Buckingham. —(Hear, hear.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had coupled Macedon and Old Sarum together, fur what purpose he could not imagine. Macedon was under the sway of Alexander; under whose sway Old Sarum was, perhaps the Hon. and Learned Gentleman could tell.—( Laughter.) Mr. CROKER might observe of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's oration " that nothing in his speech became him like the end of it." In justification of the course which he and those with whom he acted were pursuing with regard to the borough under consideration, he begged to remind the Committee that they had displayed equal zeal on behalf of Downton. They were equally zealous to ( n H ot ea n r o , w he p a o r i ..) ting G o en u - t t h i a e v n e ie j u us o t n ic his e tsmiteleoonf the ohcfcoaussieonws.e—re the anomalies which existed in the Bill. There were and Westminster on lin equal fociting. It was an plenty of them if they cilosoi.sehtoousreeifieorldteorsthienrn. Westmoreland was san anomaly to place the anomaly to give Mahon two representatives, and the great only f on tl e te . upon by Minis ters . e n complainedofT i o es l t e o nowocoiant caoinfn.ivnhig,adda4tObi violations O ns O i n or fe sot e a e b d it it principles , in order to save Caine from disfranchisement, and he thought he should be able to establish that proposition to the satisfaction of the Committee. It would he necessary to refer to some papers upon the table of the House, which Ministers had referred to as auxiliary of the population returns of 1821. The information contained in these t h the developed,intentio intentions and Ministers papers Reforma time were e n no t when consequently there could have been no inducement to vla i s Vit fu h r r n e i s s p h :C d t a to t deceive. This information would prove that if Govern ment had been true to their intentions, Caine ought to have been in schedule A. In a paper dated the 24th Ja nuary, 1831, the following passage was to be found—" The borough of Caine is only part of the parish in which it stands, but the parish includes 8,000 acres." He begged the Committee to observe that this very same number of acres in the ease of poor St. Germains, was to exclude that borough from the representative system. The same paper stated the male population of Caine at 996 ; therefore, taking the females to be in equal number, the gross popu lation would be under 2,000, and the borough should have been placed in schedule A. " Oh," said the farmers of the Bill, " that must never be ; we must proceed upon some other principle. Let us put the borough and the parish together, and make 8,000 acres of it, and give it a popu lation of 4,500 members, so that it may return two Meta. bers." " But," said some friend of Ministers, "if you put the pariah and borough together in the case of St. Germains, that will return two Members." Ministers, however, disregarded that suggestion, trusting doubtless that some lucky accident would allow them to escape front tiolnti,ch in the was their inconsistencies. In the ca s e of Downton their excuse was , that the Earl of Radnor met the Noble Lord oppo s i te in the library , and told him D ownton ought to go into schedule A ; and so because two Lords suet in the lib rary of the House of Commons , the new constitution of Eng land inconsiderable lielr. ) in Aldborough,population, v preserved, am ount of taxes, and in every point, than St. G erma i ne. was changed.—(Hear.) way ang moree d. The population of disfranchised St. Germains was 2,400, whilst the population of enfranchised Aldborough was 2,129. The number of male inhabitants in despicable St. Germains was 217, and the number in the flourishin g an d dignified borough of Aldborough was 236. T h n umber of houses in St. Germains typal 446, and in Alit borough 409. Thus it appeared, that Aldborough was in every respect inferior to Sr. Germains, and yet the former was preserved, whilst the latter was destroyed,--(Hear). When the proper time should arrive, he would propose to remedy these cases of injustice. For the present, he would content himself with having shown that Ministers had not honestly adhered to the rule which they had laid down.—(Hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL said that Ministers Lad dealt with other boroughs in precisely the same manner as 'hey had dealt with Caine. To show that they could not have been influenced by any desire to promote the political influence ' of the Whig party, he might observe, that out of fifteen preserved boroughs in schedule B, which were in the same situation as Caine, only three returned Members in the Whig interest.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. CROKER said that the Noble Lord had not con tradicted any of the facts which he had stated. Mr. STANLEY repelled with indignation the charge that Ministers had framed the Bill with a reference to p 'it, and corrupt purposes.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to the allusion that had been made to Aldborough, he had only to say, that it stood on a very different footing from St. Germains. In the former ease, the borough was so situated, that a proper constituency could not be found in its neighbourhood ; but that was not the fact with respect to St. Germains. Mr. CHOKER observed, that the Noble Lord had not answered a single point which he had advanced ; and the Right Hon. Gentleman (another great gun of the party) who had followed him, had left the question in nearly the same state. The two lion. Members, in their exertions, reminded him of the old story, where a master called out to his servant, " Jack, what are you doing ?" and the an swer was, " Nothing, Sir." " And," continued the mas ter, " what are you doing, Tom ?" " Why,- Sir, I'm helping Jack."--(Laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh !") The Hon. Member then defended the view which he had previously taken of the case. Mr. PRAED complained of the decision of the Noble Lord, who had declared that in the case of a town he would admit the conjoined population of a parish and borough, but that he would not do so when the agricul tural interest alone was affected. It had been said that in the course of his observations he had charged the Mini sters with having acted upon a principle of partiality in selecting boroughs for disfranchisement. He denied posi tively that he had ever done so, and all that he bad said was in the recollection of the Committee. The conduct of Ministers, with respect to Downton and'St. Germains, reminded him of the Scotch steward, who having been di rected to hang up a malefactor at one side of an avenue, thought proper to hang up an innocent person at the other side, merely for the sake of uniformity The Committee then divided, when there appeared, For the disfranchisement 260 Against it Majority -48 The CHAIRMAN, on our re-entering the gallery-, was putting the question, " That the borough of St. Mawe's stand part of schedule A." Mr. W. PIGOTT (we believe) spoke against the dis franchisement of the borough. Mr. CRESSET PELHAM protested against the dis franchisement of St. Mawe's. He felt that it was due to the memory of a deceased relative of his (the late Lord Chichester) to say, that when an endeavour was made to convert St. Mawe's into a mere Ministerial borough, that Noble Lord had defeated it. He maintained that it was an independent borough, and ought not to be classed in schedule A. The question was then put, and St. Mawes was diafran• ciiikted. The CHAIRMAN then put the question, " That the borough of St. Michael, or Midshall, Cornwall, stand part of schedule A." The motion was carried in the affirmative, without ob servation. The CHAIRMAN next pnt the question, " That the bo rough of Saltash, Cornwall, stand part of schedule A." Mr. CROKER argued, that in this case the borough and parish ought to be taken together. The borough was nearly connected with the parish of St. Stephen, in the church of which parish the inhabitants of Saltash were christened, and married, and buried. The borough had a population of 1,500, and with the parish the population would be nearly 2,800. This being the case, he could not conceive why the borough of Saltash should not be trans- ferred to schedule B. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER admitted that the case of Saltash was one of the weakest that had i come under the cognizance of Ministers.—( Hear, bear.) It should, however, be observed, that in all the official re.- cords, a distinction was made between the parish of St. Stephen, and the borough of Saltasb. The parish was spoken of as " St. Stephen's juxta Saltash." Ministers had, therefore, considered this as a case where the borough and parish were distinct and separate. Saltash, be ad mitted, contained no inconsiderable portion of the popula tion, and he believed that much of the wealth connected with the neighbourhood was to be found there. Whether, under all the circumstances, the borough should be left in schedule A, was a matter that must be decided by the House ; unquestionably the case was •ne of considerable doubt and difficulty. Mr. CHOKER did not deem it necessary, after the very candid statement of the Noble Lord, to make any farther observations. He would merely put it to the Noble Lord, whether, on his own showing, it was not proper that Saltash should be taken out of schedule A ? Mr. F. VILLIERS (as we understood) stated that the borough of Saltash was in the centre of the parish or town of St. Stephen's ; and, as the conjoint population amounted to snore than 2,000 persons, he contended that the borough ought to be placed in schedule B. Lord MILTON said, that it was most desirable that they should not needlessly, and without just and fair grounds, abandon the rule which had been originally laid down with respect to the disfranchisement of boroughs. In his opi nion, nothing which had been advanced in favour of this borough was of sufficient weight to justify its exemption from disfranchisement. When mention was made of the parish of St. Stephen, it ought to be recollected that that parish was spoken of not as a part of the borough of Saltash, but as " the parish of St. Stephen juxta Saltash," which was a clear and manifest distinction. If they took Saltash out of schedule A, they would be evidently acting on a principle different from that which they adopted in the case of Beeralaton. Sir A. BULLEIt opposed the disfranchisement. Lord J. RUSSELL thought, that as in this case there was not a separate chapelry, St. Stephen's appearing to be intimately connected with Saltash, it would, perhaps, be the most just course to exclude the borough front sche dule A.—(Hear.) The Committee then divided upon the question, " That the borough of Saltash stand part of schedule A," when there appeared-- A yes l5O Noes Majority in favour of excluding the bo rough from schedule A Bl The next question was, " That the borough of Old Sarum stand part of schedule A."—(Much laughter.) Sir C. FORBES ruse amidst laughter, arid cries of " Oh," and " Question." He said he could not allow this borough to be disfranchised without saying that the two Hon. Members who represented it were as indepen dent as any Hon. Members in that House. The Noble Lord who had introduced this Bill had said, in a publica tion of his, that he should no more think of touching Old Sarum, than of touching the ground on which Old Sarum stood.—(Loud cries of " Hear," from the Opposition.) The Noble Lord now, not only touched, but annihilated Old Sarum. He begged to ask the Noble Lord what he intended to do next? Mr. O'CONNELL was apprehensive, when the Hon. Member rose, that the Hon. Member had made a dicovery of some place to which Old Sarutn could be united, and that t(iet Lre t they tel dl s %c• h saap o il u il.i l eu d eigfr a, r e . i old of a parish justa Old Sarum.— himself, a wd put tr N t V aisn i e t ed r regard to advertisement e t Nn il t i o s bil b lei o t o r L O borough n newspapers, in whic h li al pledged himself that if he lived till the next election, be would send his negro servant into the House as Member for Old Sarnm.—(Cries of" No, no.") He had read this and no one could doubt the right of his Lordship to have redeemed his pledge if lie pleased, and if the negro were burn under the British flag, his Lordship would oaly have had to give the negro a qualification, and then he might have sent him in his livery. Other Members had been sent into that House often enough for rotten boroughs, who, if they had not worn livery, had been quite as much under the controul of their patrons as this negro could possibly have been under the controul of Lord Catrielford ;—ay, and there had also been Members enough for rotten boroughs who had been quite as black inside as the swarthiest negro could be outside.—(Hear, hear.) He spoke, of course, of former Parliaments, not of the present Parliament.—(Hear.) Mr. C. W. WYNN had only to say, that there was not the slightest foundation for the story which the Hon. end Learned Member had narrated. Mr. R. C. FERGUSON thought there was no occa siono ne couldfor an b y e o i n o e u n to d s to p e: p k e a s k ,f f ( o ) r l t. S_a r c u L i n o , u des crieshe believed from the opposition.) Mr. O'CONNELL would not have risen again but for the contradiction he had received from the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Wynn), He had said, and he now re peated, that he read the story in the Newspapers. Did the Right lion. Gentleman mean to contradict that? And farther, did the Right lion. Gentleman, who was so well versed in Parliamentary law, mean to deny that Lord Cainelford might have returned his negro servant if he had pleased. Mr. C. W. WYNN thought he had heard the Hon. and Learned Gentleman say that he had read such an ad vertisement of Lord Catnelford's in the Newspapers. Now, the fact was, that what Lord Canielford did advertise in the newspaper, was an unqualified contradiction of the story, and a declaration that he had never entertained the intention which that story imputed to him.--(Hear.) Sir J. MALCOLM said a few words which were not audible in the Gallery. Mr. HUNT would assert that the Members for Old Sarum were just as much the representatives of the people as the future Members for Saltash would be. Sir C. WETHERELL said, that the Hon. Member for Kirkcudbright (Mr. C. Fergusson) was very much in error in supposing that no one was inclined to say a word in favour of Old Sarum, for Old Sarum was a bur gage tenure borough, and he certainly was opposed to the disfranchisement of it on the grounds which he had stated when the borough of Bletchingley was before the Committee. Mr. ATTWOOD said, that as they had been told that a negro might have been returned for Old Sarum, they ought to be told who had been returned for it. Old Sarum had returned Lord Chatham.--(Hear, hear, from the Op position.) The Noble Lord who introduced this Bill hid s 6(1, not in the heat of debate, but in print, that Old Sa sum ought not to be touched except upon grounds as strong as those which expelled King James from the throne.— (Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Ilecelled upon the House to observe bow the principles of the Noble Lord had changed. The question " that Old Sarum stand pact of schedule A" was then put and agreed to. The next was, " that the borough of Seaford stand part of schedte A." Mr. W. LYON said that Members were constantly in the habit of abusing what they called rotten boroughs, and of talking of the improper means by which Members were returned for them. Now he was Member for this bo rough, which had been classed among the rotten boroughs, and he challenged any Hon. Member to rise in his place and sty by what improper means—either of controul or purchase—he had obtained his seat.—( Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) He did not rise for the purpose of asking that the borough of Seaford should he taken out of schedule A ; but he was induced, from the fair and honour able conduct of Ministers with regard to Saltash, to make a suggestion, which he hoped would be attended to. Sea ford stood precisely in the same situation with Sandwich, Weimer, and Deal ; and he submitted, that if Seaford were joined with Hastings, for the purposes of representa tion, the principle of the Bill would not be infringed. • Lord J. RUSSELL said a few words across the table, which were wholly inaudible. Mr. C. PELHAM said, that Seaford ought to be joined with the rape of Pevensey. After a few words from Sir C. WETHERELL, the ques tion was agreed to. The next question was " That the borough of Steyning stand part of schedule A,"—which question was nearly disposed of without discussion, when Sir C. WETHERELL rose amidst much laughter. lie was surprised that while Sussex was thus cruelly shorn Of its boroughs, neither of the Hon. Members for that county had risen to say a syllable upon any one of them. One would almost suppose that Sussex had already been de prived of its two county Members.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Ile had been considering where all these boroughs would go to, but, upon looking farther into the Bill, he saw that most of them would travel northwards► and, perhaps, be buried in the collieries of Durham. --.(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Indeed, if he had to give this Bill a name, he should be very much disposed to call it the Durham Act.—(Cheers from the Opposition. ) Lord G. LENNOX begged to inform the Hon. an d Learned Gentleman that he was one of the Members fat the county of Sussex, and that he had never been absen t from his place on any one o ccas i on w h en th e R e f orm Bill had been discusse I. True it was, that he had not risen to say a word with regard to any of these boroughs, and he would tell the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the reason' The fact was, that he had not confidence enough to ri f l e in the defence of a bad cause—(Cheers)—and he was gui se sure that his constituents would not wish him to acqui re j courage for such a task.—(Cheers.) The Hon. an Learned Gentleman, howev e r, nee d no t com pl a i n that tn e Members for the county had not spoken upon these b °. roughs, for the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was hint self one of the constituency of Sussex, and he had take'` care that these boroughs should not pass without one fre e 7, holder of the county, at least, having a speech upon ea t " of them.—(Cheers and laughter.) Mr. CURTEIS (who excited much amusement 1 ):, speaking from the gallery) said, that although it was usual for Members to speak from the gallery, yet he could not help rising to tell the Hon. and Learned Gentlensan that the other Member for Sussex was in his place t0 0._., (Cheers.) • The Hon. and Learned Gentleman wondered that the Members for S ussex h a d no t spoken upon th eo boroughs. He would t e ll t h e lion. and Learned Geo tleman why lie had suffered them to pass without any oh' servation. It was because he thought there boroughs . disgrace to the county.—(Ch ee r s .) L et hi m a l so te ll tti e j Hon, and Learned Gentleman that the Members who ha been returned for these boroughs had seldom had any O il ; flexion with the county, and that they had seldom done a s l . , good to the county, so that the county was not likely suffer much from the loss of the boroughs.—(Hear, hear:) While be was on his legs, allow him to notice what 0. , Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said, somewhat di: j , court e ously on a former occasion. The Hon. amid Lel r ,' Gentleman had said that he would never give him ('led Curteis) his vote. He thanked the Hon. and Learn ti Gentleman for that--(Hear, and laughter)—and in rettiTij! he assured the Hon. and Learned Gentleman that he w° ll 6 ! never condescend to ask him for his vote. He would 0 3 a further return to the Hon. and Learned Gentleanit h (Hear, and laughter.) If ever the Hon. and Learned G e i r , tleman started again for the university of Oxford, he r Curteis) promised th e H on . an d L earne d Gentleman, t'; he would never ag a i n g i ve hi m hi s vote, thoug h be 1 1 given it him before. Sir C. WETHERELL said that the Hon. 141 61:1 ' / ' (Mr. Curteis) had at least one advantage over namely, that of looking down on him. He could, h ° p ever, assure both th e H on . M em b ers f or S ussex that o , had mea n t not hi ng di scourteous towards either o f Ole o What he had sa id was sa id b ecause h e fi rm l y believed chi if the county o f S ussex were polle d , i t would be PI. that the freeholders were not in favour of Reform. ;€• Lord G. LENNOX said that it was his firm en n ` e ff tion that th r o ug h ou t S ussex , n i nety-n i ne out of e'o,/ hundred of the freeholders were in favour of Refor o (Cheers.) He had for some length of time been eng l d„ in canvas s in g every town an d v ill age i n t h e county'. oli he thought, therefore, that he had had better I neal: io o , i ascertaining th e o pi n ions of th e fr ee h o ld ers th an the P and Learned Gentleman could have had.—(Hear.) 6 0 Captain BERKELEY said that he happened to estate in the county of Sussex, and he begged to ° li ii that every tenant he had was ready to go to the lo v i favour of the Reform can did ates , w i t h out putt ing t candidates to a farthing expense.—(Hear, hear.) p. ; Mr. C. PELHAM said a few words which we re audible in the gallery. Mr. HUNT said it had been complained that 13° 00 I would say a word in favour of Steyning. Now he ‘ . ,,te say this in favour of it,— name l y, t h at i t h a d con trill , to make him a Reformer. He would tell the dlous e / story.--(Cries of " Oh, oh.") It was only a short", —(Cries of " Oh," and question.") A gentleman $ lO l William Bryant, who was an agent of the late 1 : 1$ Norfolk, had dined with him—(" Oh, oh !")_-some ago—(Hear, hear)—and afterwards invited him down to the House of Commons. He did go, and up and down the lobby with Mr. •Bryant for some „pi At last a gentleman, one of the Members for Steq came out. " Where are you going to?" said Alr• fr o. t , i ant. " I am going to pair off," said th e ge°. l 4 " Oh," said Mr. Bryant, " there must be no pait' o ts!, to night ; the Duke says you must all s t o p h ere and ` s e and with this Mr. B r y an t p us h e d th e gent l eman bacl o into the House.—(Cries of " Oh.") This gave h l l idea of \situ 14$ nomination boroughs were. Ile : 1 1,! f ; repeatedly ask e d l a tt er ly w h a t h a d b ecome o f t he 1 3 though he had said it appeared to him that in 1 140% stances the Oppo s iti on seeme d t o fi g ht w i t h mu ffle' r rel!', he must acknowledge that the battle that night, if / ence to Salta s h, was th e ran k es t cross h e b a d e'' tl, nessed.—(A laugh.) , Mr. N. COLBORNE ( as w e un d ers t oo d) stet t je, the last time the present Members for Steyning n the alb' to stand for th a t b oro u g h, t h e y di s ti nct l y told t t"' tors there what would be the effect of the Bill, $ the electors voted for them unanimously, knowing would be time last vote they would have to g ive. fo ci Mr. G. PHILLIPS, one of the Members tip bot T ; ll r ou bh g ee li qi , ,oe c xe o st r t r ig fi ou r o m eNsv e t i a l os t n i t :e he a n ta l t , e uh l t e a ll tn t idi rl e l eb a ao d r e rro b teu y the Hon.' do stand part of schedule A," was put (gl' a li nd of cal te ; ffl 'ilb r 'r( o t'ill:' out observation ; was also the question that of Tregony should stand part of the said scheded e ' s .,ol , On the questi on , " Th at t h e b oroug h of l stand part of schedule A," being put, td Mr. G. BANKES would give an opportun e t f ol v t Membersa Ma jes t y's was not one of f o this those e bo b r o o r u o g o l g m, it amid to ° 31'5 it for W are h am to d raw t h e a ttenti o v n biclr ipe 1' time line of disfranchisement adopted in the bor ° ,l rid had b een presente d i n April last from tb s o s I ,or to one of his lajesty's Ministers, in which it t , that a petition had been presen , ed to Parlianilshe by two hundred i n h a bit an t s o f th a t place, w hi t e () Ire that it possessed a population which entit ed Font o mm. out of th e list of disfranchised berougLa• boy petition it app e a re d th a t th e popu l a tion of even according to the return of 1821, ain° uo persons, and the petitioners stat e d that if th e K 4 Fe a parish in the borough which amounted to 13 4 /1 4 wit b„ POPU :learly ir trichis, I t° be tc Slr bad an Lord ea u L' r ne lake ] the that inelu 44d 18; Nlr, ne ti o tlt x i t an, ute lnbe On this w hich hOt Qu Sir 41 ent of Mr. h ad alr f thi h ate th q e a r The It -, M r , Lord t ureen 1 4 n4 th i qould * all a N Pte Co u l d 1 1141 ce k i bi e gage 1 .0 co uld tn ea4t Th, Th, of th, 11 . w Th 4t14:::1:t Nir