The Sun. — London, England, 1831-08-03 00:00:00

Act, ; and there was an especial reason why the ham let of Ballingdon should be omitted. It lay in the county of Suffolk, wherein the Magistrates of Es , ex had no juris diction ; there were, therefore, cogent legal reasons why Ballingdon should not be included in the Act. In con clusion, he insisted that no claim could be more satisfac• tory, or more clearly established, than that which had been set forth for the borough of Sudbury; and he consi dered the Ministers need not hesitate to do justice in this ease, because it was one essentially peculiar, and could not be possibly drawn into a precedent. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that by the Act of Par liament referred to, it appeared that Ballingdon was not in 1525 a recognized part of the town of Sudbury ; nor was it, in his opinion, part of the pariah of All Saints.__ In the " Topographical Dictionary," Ballingdon was de eribed as a chapelry within half a mile of SurThUry. Mr. WRANGHAM ssid, it was ate surd to call it a ehapelry when there was no chapel ; and he pledged hi s honour that there was not a distance of twenty yards be tween the nearest house in Ballingdon and the Nearest house in Sudbury..-4Cheers.) The places were divided only by a small rivulet, over which there was a bridge. Mr: C. PELHAM bore witness, that in the Act for lighting and paving the borough of Sudbury many parts of the borough had not been included. The House then divided— Aye; 157 Noes Majority l9 Sudbury, therefore, remains in schedule B The next question was, that Totness remain part of schedule B. Mr. BALDWIN was of opinion trait Totness might to be removed from schedule B, bemuse, if Bridgetown were joined to it, it would have a population of .1 1 389, atul 375 ten pound houses; and Bridgetown war in all respects, excepting ecclesiastically, part of that town. Mr. P. COURTENAY seconded the argumesete of his lion. Colleague ; declared he had knows, the borough for twenty years, and believed it to be pure. He thought it ought to be removed from schedule B, as it well might by the addition of Bridgewater, which was, to ell intents and purposes, ,part of the town of Totness; and he con, sidered that Ministers, by the present plan, would create a worse constituency than there coeld possibly exist under other circumstances. He disi feel mortified at time being sent about his business, when he was not awere bf the ex istence of any charge whatever against either himself or his constituents. He was sure that corruption could not be charged against them, and he was equally certain that he, on his part, had never been. guilty of it, so 'het on neither side was there any ground for an aceesetion of the abuse of the elective franchise. He bed said thus much, because he did not think any reason had been given for depriving Totness of one of its Members ; and he could not surfer it to undergo this partial loss of its elective franchise without saying one word in its favour. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, if the Right Hon. Gen tleman saw no reason for the borough of Totness being placed in schedule 8., lie (Lord 3. Russell) could not see any that would justify the Committee in removing it from the schedule. It was acknowledged that the borough stood in the same situation es that of Sudbury. Now as the Committee had decided that that borough ought to remain in schedule B, and as the two cescs were admitted to re semble eaole other, the decision in the one case must be taken to decide the other. In the present instance there was no allegation that the town belonged to the borough, and unless it did so, its population did not come up to the required number. The Right Hen. Gentleman seemed to anticipate that, in future, bribery and corruption would be resorted to, but it was more probable, under the ope ration of this Bill, that that anticipation would prove un founded. The question was then agreed to without a division. On the question " That the schedule B do stand part of the Bill," Mr. CROKER observed, he could not let this schedule pass without entering his protest against it, and without saying that, objectionable as the whole Bill was, this par ticular part of it was the most objectionable. Having thus eapreeteed, in general terms, his disapprobation of this schedule, he should say nothing further on the subject. The House having, when the schedule was first introduced, discussed the whole principle involved in it under the ques tion whether the word ene or two should fill up the blank in the first line of it ; and having subsequently, on the questions relating to Sudbury and other boroughs, dis cussed the application of that schedule to particular cases, he thought it would be a deviation from the voluntary en gagement into which be had entered, if he were to do more at present than declare be protested most strongly against this particular part of the Bill. Sir C. WETHERELL said, that on this occasion he should take the liberty of summing up the proceedings that had taken place with regard to the Bill, and especially with respect to this particular schedule. The Hon. and Learned Member then went into a brief summary of the objections that had been made to the Bill, and of the an swers give to those objections. In the course of doing this lie observed, that the supporters of the Bill differed among each other, so that those Siamese twins, the Noble Lords, the Members for Northamptonshire—(A laugh)—could not agree about all the boroughs ; and he had, therefore, had the benefit of the vote of one of those Noble Lords upon some of the boroughs in the schedule. In his opi nion, this Bill was a.Jacubinical insult towards the towns and boroughs it disfranchised. It committed an injustice towards them in depriving them of their franchise, and it insulted them by the manner in which it did so. Ile had referred to the division of opinion between the two Noble Lords, the Members for Northamptonshire, and he should only now add, that he hoped to see one of those Noble Lords, whom ability and experience gave to his opinion considerable weight, become the leader of the Opposition on the schedule C, on the ground that a greater number of towns ought to be put into that schedule. Colonel WOOD wished to enter his protest against this schedule, which, as it was now framed, contained boroughs that could not be inserted in it without a manifest violation of the principle of the Bill. He thought there was a dis position on the part of his Majesty's Ministers to force this Bill, and the whole of this Bill, with all its blunders and inconsistences, through that House ; and if, when it had passed there, any indisposition to pass it in that state should be exhibited in another place, whatever might be the con sequences of that indisposition, his Majesty's Ministers would be responsible for them. Lord MILTON said, that if the Hon. and Learned Gentleman congratulated himself on having his (Lord Milton's) assistance with respect to some of the boroughs, he should expect the assistance of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman in the propositions he should make in a few (Jaye. An HON. MEMBER, whose name we could not learn, complained of the special pleading that had been resorted to for the purpose of omitting some of the boroughs that were at first inserted in the schedule, and for the purpose of adding others that ought never to have been there. He hoped that some opportunity would be taken to reconsider the schedule B. Mr. KEITH DOUGLAS took that opportunity of en tering his protest against this schedule. In his opinion the Governmeftt had proceeded most inconsistently, and had not acted upon any settled principle. Mr. STUART WORTLEY said, there were one or two points on which he wished for information. There were some cases which Hon. 'Members on this side of the House had pressed upon the Ministry, and had recom mended that a certain course should be adopted. This re commendation had been refused, and yet, when certain other cases occurred, the course which they had recom mended, and which had been before refused, was then adopted. He wished to know on what ground it was that the Ministry had pursued such a course ? Some bo roughs had been taken from schedule B, and had been left with a double representation; but to effect this change in their favour, townships, parishes, and ehapelries had been added to boroughs. He wished to know on what principle this had been done in some cases, and refused in others? Lord J. RUSSELL said that he was quite ready to give the explanation required by the Hon. Gentleman opposite. The rules which had been laid down were adopted upon full consideration, and in the belief that they were calcu lated to produce the most extensive advantage. The lion. Gentleman must be aware that these rules, though excellent in themselves, could not be exactly applied in all cases, and there were of course particular cases which would depend only on their particular circumstances. In some instances, if the limits of boroughs as fixed by the decisions of that House had been taken as the in variable rule, much injustice would have been the conse quence. Many of these decisions had been capriciously given by that House before Committees appointed to ex amine the matter. As an instance of this, h e might men tion the case of Shrewsbury, where a considerable part of the town was pu t out of the ex ercise of the elective fran chise, because that part was considered under the in fluence of a proprietor whose family happened to be ad. verse to the Minister of the day. The legal limits of the boroughs, therefore, were not in all cases to be taken as an unchangeable rule. It wag true that they bad put some boroughs out of the sch nt edul bu e, and left them t in every one of with two Members as at p rese, those cases there was sufficient g round of distinction for them to make those bor ou g hs exceptions from the rule, and also not to induce them to carry those exceptions a%ni further. Ile defended the M inisters for not length. g pushed the principle of exception to its extreme h He could out but remark ) that eves the COVe94IOIIB they ht ti made were made matter of renroAch against them, and the reproaches were always thrown by those at whose instance they had made the concessions: If the 111inis- gees had committed Any fault, it MS that they had shown too great a readiness to listen to the objections of those who desired to show that they could establish exceptions in their own favour. After all the special pleading pro. ccsses that had been resorted to, and after all the inge nuity that had been displayed on this subject, be thought that no case of exception had been fairly established ; and 11', believed, that after the fulle't and most impartial ex: amination, must be tdmitted that Schedules A and B were fairly dratvn according to the population returns. Sir E.'SUGDEN said that the Noble Lord had com plained of being reproached for th concessions he had made, and had reprettal that those who asked for con ce•sions were tht first to reproach him for making them. The Noble Lord spoke as if these concessions were asked fill- their private benefit—(Hear, hear)—and not on public grounds. He declared that the Opposition had only urged those concessions, withotq 1%/hicti, in their opinion, the Ball would hats? hued a mass of injustice. The Noble Lard bed ttnt gone far enough in his concessions, that was the teal rault, and it was for that fault that reproaches tykyre directed against them. The Noble Lord represented that Ministers had done as well as they could, taking all things togetliek. - ; out the statement that they could not protfed strictly upon any of the rules they had laid down was, in fact, an acknowledgment that they did not well know what were the rules on which they proposed to act, or at least they had adopted these rules without due con .dileratiert, a cotitended that the Minister. were hound to make theinselVes acquainted with the peculi arities of the population and localities in each particular borough bcfnre they brought in a Bill on such principles. The aThitrary rule which they had adopted operated with great unfairness respecting the county towns ; and i❑ several instances that was so obvious that the Noble Lord had been compelled to abandon his own principles. (Cheers.) He referred to the discourtesy with which he .ind other gentlemen on that side had been sometimes re ceived; but, he admitted, that it was not so great as had been represented by one of the publications which in formed the public of what occurred in that House. In that paper it was said, that his ob4ervations, for some evenings past, were foflowed by roars of laughter. He knew that this was an over-charged description of the discourtesy, and that the slight I:ugh which might be heard cn that occasion was not directed against him per _ . souaily, but was excited by the case which he had been describing. He the more regretted that such a statement had been made, because the man who made it must be aware that it was untrue. Such statements were to be attributed to an unfair disposition to give a triumph to one party and to crush the other.—(Hear.) Lord ALTHORP was sure that the House had always listened with respect and attention to the observations of the lion. and Learned Gentleman.—(llear, heir, hear.) But that gentleman must be aware that it was exceed ingly irregular to refer to reports which might have appeared in public newspaper, purporting to be the proceedings of the House. As to the objec tions of the lion. and Learned Gemtleman to the prin ciples of the Bill, it must be conceded that some rule must have been adopted, and that none could be devised which should not be attended with some disadvantages. He did not think that his Majesty's Government could hare chosen a better test than that which was afforded by the • population and the number of ten-pound householders, taken together, and he was sure the Committee would see that, on the whole, this rule did not operate unfairly. The average amount of taxation in the fifty-seven bo roughs included in the first schedule, was 2011. The average taxation of the boroughs and towns in the second schedule (13) was 7831. —(Hear, hear)—which showed clearly that the average prosperity was greater in propor tion to the larger population. This was still further shown by the fact, that the average taxation of the bo roughs that were altogether above the line of disfranchise ment amounted to 1,2001. He repeated, that he thought the rule the best that could have been adopted. Mr. GOULBURN only complained that the Noble Lord opposite had laid down a rule before he had made himself acquainted with its probable effects —(Cheers.) When the Noble Lord referred to the average taxation of the disfranchised boroughs, he seemed to overlook the in justice which was done (by taking the average) to the boroughs in that schedule, which paid a high amount of taxes. He had no doubt that the rule which had been adopted would, sooner or later, raise a cry throughout the country against the Ministry and their Bill. Mr. STUART WORTLEY said, that his question had not been satisfactorily answered. Ile was not one of those who had ever taunted his Majesty's Ministers for any con cessions which . tli;.y might have made. On the contrary, he had always he'es much pleased, when he saw them give way to justice.—(Hear.) In every instance in which lie had resisted the clause before the House, be felt that he - was fighting the battle of the people.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. A. BARING assured the gentlemen connected with what was called the country interest, that if, in sup porting this measure of the Ministers, they supposed that a few Squires front the country would be able (when the day of battle should come) to contend with the active, in telligent, pushing men, who world be returned from the manufacturing towns, they would be sadly disappointed. —(Cheers.) He said this only to call the attention of country gentlemen to what would be the consequence of :be altered state of the representation.—(Cheers.) The gentlemen who would be returned from the manufactur ing districts would be active men, who would read ev_ry paper which should come into the House : and could the country gentleman suppose that in contending with such men they should not be overmatched?—(Cheers.) Against such a representation the country interest could have no chance of maintaining itself ; and lie would ask, how was the Church, then, to he supported against the Noble Paymaster's friends ?—(Cheers.) But looking even to the effects of the measure, as it would affect the mob courting Ministry themselves—(Cheers) —he would ask how they were to return to that House an Attorney or Solicitor-General who had instituted an unpopular prosecu tion, or supported an unpopular tax ? He thought that a Government ought not to lose sight of local, in their at tention to general, interests, and he reminded them of the strength which former Governments derived from having some of their Members closely connected with commercial and agricultural interests, as was the case of Mr. Hus k.sson, who represented Liverpool, and Mr. Lushington, who, representing Canterbury, invariably supported the interests of the hop-growers.—(A laugh.) He concluded by declaring his opinion that the people, who were the most eager in the support of that Bill, would be the greatest sufferers. Mr. STANLEY would readily answer that there was no intention on the part of his Majesty's Ministers to in troduce in the Bill any such provision as that which had been referred to by the Hon. Gentleman opposite. He assured the Hon. Gentleman, that it was not through want of deference when he reminded hint, that this was not the time to discuss the expediency of such a clause.—(Hear.) The question before the House applied to . schedule B only —(Hear)—and in the midst of the consideration of that question, the Hon. Gentleman asks his Majesty's Minis ters, how are Governments in future to bring into that House any individual who should have accepted office— not being, as the Honourable Gentleman rather uncour teously expressed it, a mob-courting Minister—if they were to have no corrupt boroughs—(Vehement cries of " No, no," from the Opposition, replied to by loud cheers from the Ministerial benches.) Now, if that were a question which had really anything to do with the Bill before them, it was certainly one which, like the rest of the Honourable Gentleman's remarks, would apply equally well to schedule A as to schedule B. There was no place excepted from those schedules which could be a nomination borough.—(Cries from the Oppo sition, " Yes—Caine.") He heard somebody say, Caine; but he would assure that gentleman, that he was not to be induced then to discuss the principle of the Bill.— (Hear, hear, hesr, hear.)—He would repeat his determi• nation riot to enter into the question, whether it might or might not be expedient to preserve places for securing ad mission to the House of Commons of the officers of the Crown, without imposing upon them the necessity of court ing a mob. It was a question to which the Bill did not naturally give rise, and it was not the intention of the authors of the measure to include in it that alteration in the existing system of our representation. His Hon. Friend had paid the country gentlemen but a very poor compli ment, in saying that, in a Reformsd Parliament, they in curred the hazard of being overpowered by the represen tatives of the manufacturing districts;—that, in fact, the country gentlemen generally were riot of that pushing and ac live turn of mind, and of those habits which would qualify them for competin7, with the formidable rivals to them which the great towns would send into that House. He confessed that he listened to that assertion with no little surprise,for his experience of the House warranted him in affirming that no Members were more attentive, more re gular in their attendance, or more diligent in the per formance of their duties, than were the country gentlemen —that very class of Members whom his Hon. Friend blamed f or th e i r i ne ffi c i ency. On Committees, and iu the business of the House, they proved themselves as active and as int e lli gent as any w h o could find their way into that house ; and he f e lt p er f ec tl y assure d , that those who a t in be e -from the barley field, a s it h a d b een stated, would not overpowered by those who came from the coal field ; and were those to be blamed for doing that in the Houle which they wire expressly sent to do—were they to be blamed because they formed a class of men who would know what j was going forward in that House? It would seem that his Hon. Friend wished to have the agricultural Members so circumstanced that they might come down to the House for an hour or two, then go to dinner, to an even ing party, or where they pleased, rind in the latter end of the evening give such time or attention to their Parlia mentary duties as might suit their convenience; but was such known from etperienee to be the conduct of the country gentlemen, or ought it to be their conduct ? was it to be accepted as a sound argument in a discussion like the present, that there should be two Members from the barley-field for one from the cod-field, thot they might releve each other, and take the work in turns of opposing the Members from the towns? Those were really argu .• . . ments which ought not to be offered on a question of that nature. It was one on which the framers of the Bill had endeavoured to do substantial justice, on the whole as well as on each individual case. Before he sat down, he wished to notice one topic respecting which some misapprehension seemed to have arisen. It was . st ttcd that the assessed taxes in the boroughs to be disfranchised gave an average of 2001., and in those having one Member an average of 700/., and it was assumed that taxation was to form the rule,—whereas it had been merely mentioned for the 'tor pose of reinforcing the arguments founded upon population. Mr. A. BARING said, that under the Bill the Crown would lose its free choice of Ministers. If the people were to have the initiative upon such appointment, and the Crown merely the veto in the appointment of the ser vants of the Crown, it was evident that the Royal prero gative was at an end. He would most unhesitatingly as sert that the argument he had just used yet remained un answered. There were in the wolkhl ortocracies and oli garchies ; but he trusted the House would remember that there were anarchies and democracies in the world. Mr. CROKER observed, that the Noble Lord and his supporters had spoken much of the line which they pte , scribed to themselves—a line which they did anything but ' observe. His object, and that of his Hon. Friends, was, if possible, to ascertain from the Noble Lord what his line was, and having done that, to induce him to stick to his line. Let the House only take notice of the single case of Sudbury, wherein the Noble Lord took the title of a Pri vate Act of Parliament, confined his view to Sudbury, in Suffolk, and though the complete and continued town con tained a population of 4,000, yet the Noble Lord would have nothing to do with it because a part of the parish was in another county. Neither to Appleby would he apply his rule, because it contained two parishes—St. Michael and St. Lawrence ; and as to Bridport, he repelled it to an equal distance, because, forsooth, a stream divided-- which, if the Commissioners of Examination looked for at a certain season of the year, they would find to have dis appeared altogether, and its bed remaining dry. That was the line, and tbat was the Noble Lord's observance of it, which, he took for granted, had proved generally satis factory. Satisfactory ! to whom ? Not, surely, to that side of the House—neither did it appear to be so to the other side of the House, or to the Noble Lord himself ; for schedule B was reduced from 53 or 54 names to 47, and then to 40 ; and of that number changes had been made in two-and-twenty. Then again amongst other inconsistencies, reliance seemed to be placed upon the average amount of assessed taxes paid by the different closers of the boroughs —thus they were taken at 2001., 7001., and 1,200/. Then in the favoured boroughs the parishes were thrown in, but from those not partially regarded the population of theparishes were taken away. Northallerton, after all the shifts and changes, retained two Members, though its assessed taxes were only 8281. He would mention Caine, though it was not in the schedule—but it ought to be in the sche dule, and he had, therefore, a right to mention it. The return stated that the population of the borough and the parish could not be distinguished from each other, but the papers laid upon the table of the House by the Noble Lord, i❑ the month of March last, show that the population of the borough and the parish were distinguished from each other, and the male population of Caine was a , certained to be 996, therefore it was possible to distinguish between the borough and the parish ; its assessed taxes were6sol , those of Mahon were 9501., those of Horsham 9741. Now, as so much had been said about taxation, in the large Chancellor of the Exchequer-like way in which the Noble Lord was accustomed view it, he would just call the attention of the House to the amount of taxation paid by some of the towns in schedule B:—Huntingdon paid 1,7721. ; Dorchester, 2,1001. ; Guildford, 1,9601. ; Chip penharn, 2,2301. ; Sudbury, 1,1311. Then there was a parish, sixteen miles in length, which paid but 2271. taxes, hut it was to have its representative ; while Sud bury, which within one half mile square, paid 1,1271. Lord ALTHORP said, that the Right lion. Gentle man had assumed the exception to be the rule. They did not refer to taxation as a means of bearing them out, they took population as the rule—as a species of auxiliary. ' Mr. CROKER said, that he had not alluded to taxa tion, till the Noble Lord had himself used it as a make weight. Mr. C. W. WYNN said, that the Noble Lord had de parted from his own rule ;--he had scarcely, in any case, adhered to the rule of population. There was the metro polis, which afforded a most striking illustration of the truth, that nothing could be more unstable than popula tion ; for that which properly could be called London, was now less populous than formerly ; for the population had spread itself outwards to the adjoining districts. After a few words from Mr. C. PELHAM, The question that " the clause do stand part of the Bill" was agreed to without a division. After a few words from several Hon. Members, as to the most judicious way of proceeding with clause C, the ques tion that the blank in the said clause be filled up with the word " Two" was agreed to without a division. [The effect of this vote is the giving two Members to all the places contained in schedule C, subject to confir mation or rejection, with respect to any individual ho.- rough or boroughs, as the name of each place is submitted to the Committee.] On the question that Manchester (including the town ships of Manchester, Chorlton-row, Ardwick, Beswick, Hulme, Cheetham, Bradford, and Newton and Harpur bery, in the hundred of Salford, Lancashire) stand part of schedule C, Mr. S. WORTLEY could not understand why it was necessary to give two representatives to both Manchester and Salford ; and he should therefore move, as an amend ment, that the townships of Salford, Pendleton, and Broughton, be added to the townships already given to Manchester. The Hon. Gentleman continued to make several observations in support of the amendment, but, owing to the unwillingness of the Committee to listen, his remarks were scarcely audible in the gallery. We under stood him to contend that society was so constituted in Manchester and Salford, that he thought the right of re presentation would fall into the hands of the lowest orders, and that therefore two Members were quite as many a s they were entitled to. On the score of population also, he thought that their claim ought to be limited to two representatives ; and on this view of the subject the Hon. Gentleman proceeded to contrast the population of Man. cheater and Salford with the population of Middlesex. As the Bill had been originally proposed by the Noble Lord, Salford and Manchester had been kined, and he could not at all understand the principle upon which they now were separated. Mr. HUNT said that there was a great distinction be tween Manchester and Salford, even more than there was between London and Southwark ; for in the latter case the Corporation of London had jurisdiction in Southwark, while in the former the two towns had entirely separate ju risdictions. He therefore trusted that die Ministers would not for one moment listen to the proposition which the Hon. Gentleman had made. While the question was the disfranchisement of boroughs, he had not been always able to agree with the Government—(Laughter)—but now that they had come to the enfranchising part of the Bill, he could assure the Ministers that they would meet with no opposition from hint. Mr. HEYWOOD said, that as one of the representa tives of the county in which Manchester and Salford were situated, he begged to express his hope that the amend ment of the Hon. Gentleman would be lost ; for, in his opinion, the giving these four Members to the two towns was but an act of justice, which had been too long de layed —(Cheers.) Manchester had increased its popu lation two hundred and thirty thousand within sixty years —that was, from forty-four thousand in 1774, to two hundred and seventy-four thousand in 1831 . He thought, therefore, it ought to he placed, as it deserved, in the first rank. The parish of Manchester, in fact, now contained as many inhabitants as the whole of Lancashire contained within the memory of some of the living inhabitants. Salford was totally distinct from Manchester, and contained a population of fifty-four thousand. It would be most unjust to deprive it of the Member now proposed to be given to it. The Hon. Member referred to a number of o ther towns in the neighbourhood , each of which was a hive of- intel ligence. Lancashire, however, though populous, had only fourteen Members, and of these six only were returned by the people. He trusted he could convey to the House the deep-felt desire which prevailed throughout that county for the measure of Reform. He hail become a candidate with no other support but his promised support to this measure of the Government, and he had been every where received with such enthusiasm as he could not de scribe, but could never forget. It was not to him, how- ever, that it was directed, but to the principles he professed. Mr. C. FERGUSON said, that Manchester had a greater population than all the boroughs to be disfran chised. So the parish of St. Pancras paid more assessed taxes than all the boroughs in schedules A. and B. It teas impossible that the Hon. Member's amendment could be carried. Mr. SLANEY, in answer to an observation of Sir Robert Peel on a former occasion, showed that the popu lation of the northern districts of the country had increased upwar,ls of 50 per cent. during the last twenty years, while the increase of the whole population was only 24 per cent. The same fact was observable in the outskirts of the metropolis. Birmingham, too, had increased 40 per cent.: Liverpool, 50 per cent. ; the out-parishes of London, 50 per cent. ; and Glasgow, 100 per cent. The towns which were to receive the franchise paid 262 times more taxes than the boroughs to he dislranchised. Mr. E\VART said, that Liverpool and Manchester were now, by the rapid communication between them, converted almost into one Sown. He must, therefore, cancer with the Hon. Member for Lancashire, in the propriety of giving Members exclusively to Manchester. Lord J. RUSSELL objected to the amendment, that there was always groat jealousy between Salford and Man chester. It was, therefore, thought better, as Salford had a population of 50,000 souls, and paid 80,0001. a year in taxes, to give it a Member independently of Manchester. Mr. CRESSET PELHAM adverted to the increase of population mentioned by the Hon. Member for Shrews bury, who seemed to regard manufactures and commerce as the road to wealth, and population and agriculture as the road to ruin. He could, however, tell the Hon. Member, that the county of Sussex had increased in population fast as Lancashire itself. Mr. STUART WORTLEY admitted the force of the arguments of the lion. Member for Lancashire. At the same time, he regarded the giving a Member to Salford as giving three Members to Manchester. He would not divide the House on his amendment. Sir ROBERT PEEL thought that his Hon. Friend was quite right in the observations he made, and the view he took in proposing that Salford should be united to Man chester. That was the case in the Bill brought in by the Noble lord for giving the franchise to Manchester when it was taken from Penrhyn; it was also the case when this Bill was brought in last session, and therefore his Hon. Friend was justified in proposing that Salford should he united to Manchester. Since, however, it was otherwise decided, he was bound to say, from his local knowledge, that Manchester and Salford were different towns, had dif fereist feelings, were governed by different authorities, and could on no account be regarded as the same town. His lion. Friend was quite right, however, in thinking that the question was open for consideration. For his own part he thought that giving one Member to Salford might tend to encourage contests, and would not promote the tran- quillity of the towns. The amendment was then withdrawn, and the question put on the original motion. Sir R. PEEL said they had now disposed of the clauses relative to the disfranchisement, and were prepared to go on with what had been called the constructive clauses. He would consider this question on the prin ciples of justice ; and should object to the proposed en franchisement as part of the measure. It was disposing of spoil that was not their property to dispose of.— (Heir, hear.) On that ground he objected to the en franchisement ; it was taking the property and privilege from some, and transferring them to others. He had also to observe that the disfranchisement of schedules A and B was not sufficient to enfranchise all the towns in schedule C. He objected then to the extent of the en franchisement, and lie objected to the principle of dis franchisement to ensure enfranchisement. Looking at all the circumstances of the country, at what had taken place previous to the dissolution, at the difficulty of con. stituting any Government not prepared to concede the principle of Reform, he had stated before, that acting for himself, and not in concert with others, forming his own judgment ; he for one, having yielded his own opinion in deference to the majority of the House; looking, he said, to all the circumstances of the country, to the formation of a Government—the perhaps necessary formation of a Go vernment pledged to Reform—he had stated at an earlier period, that rather than hazard the displacing of the Govern ment,not seeing how any Government could be formed hostile to Reform, he had professed himself ready to consider the question of Reform, and what Reform should be granted. As a member of the Government, though lie did not object to enfranchise single towns, lie was afraid of letting loose the question of Reform, and would have been satis frtd with a more limited enfranchisement than that now proposed. lie was at the same time aware, that such a limited enfranchisement proposed by the late Government, professing itself hostile to Reform, would not have satis fied the people, and would not have been a permanent measure.—(Hear, hear.) He should, however, proceed to the consideration of Schedule C, forgetting what had passed as to schedules A and B. He should consider it for itself, and as part of a new Bill, and should consider himself at liberty to make any objections he might think proper, however those clauses had determined what places should receive new Members. He should regulate his conduct by considerations connected with the place to be enfranchised. Though lie consented to enfranchisement in some cases, he did not consent to it as a necessary con sequence of disfranchisement. lie did not consent to a de crease of the number of Members in that House in order to make room for the new ones. The first place in the enfran: chising clause was Manchester, which he did not deny was properly and justly placed first, and he did not deny that it ought to be enfranchised ; hut that any other place should be disfranchised for it was most unjust, and the rule on which the Bill proceeded was most absurd. He was not prepared to say that he would not yield enfranchisement to Manchester ; he would not contend against it ; and he was not willing to diminish the grace of concession by any captious objections. But if he were proposing enfran chisement, he should say that in all cases he would give the enfranchised place two Members, not one. That was, if he had fifty Members to give, he would select twenty-five places, and give each two Members, rather than select fifty places and give to each one Member. He certainly thought that the enfranchisement proposed was much too extensive ; but as it was, if priority were given to any place, Manchester certainly deserved to be the first place enfranchised. Birmingham also was fairly entitled to the same advantage ; and then followed Leeds, which ought to have the same privilege. On former occasions these were the towns to which it was proposed to give the forfeited franchises; then the franchise of Penryn was to be given to Manchester; that of Grampound to Leeds; and that of East Retford to Birmingham.—(Near, hear.) That was proposed by those gentlemen who were favourable to the transfer. To the three towns which stood first, he had no objection ; to the fourth town upon the list he should object. He never could have supposed, when he heard of a Reform Bill, that Deptford, and Greenwich, anti Woolwich, were to send Metnbers to Parliament. He believed, too, they dreamed as little of it themselves as he did. If it was the great object of the Bill to get rid of influence, be must express his surprise that one great nomination borough should have been created.—(Cheers.) He objected also to the enfranchisement proposed for the parts of the metropolis. They might have added two Members to Middlesex as they had added two Members to Kent; but be objected to giving more Members to the metropolis. He hoped the enfranchisement to which he was disposed to consent would promote the prosperity of those towns, though be confessed be had his doubts.— (Hear, hear.) He could not believe that the prosperity of 'Manchester had been delayed from wanting representative., or that it would be promoted by having them The re marks made by the Hon Member for Lancashire, as to the increase of its population, its accumulation of capital, its improvements in the arts, were the most powerful ar guments he had heard urged to prove the present system was net injurious to the welfare of Manchester. The Lion. Member stated, ton, that with the increase of wealth and the improvement in the arts, the sciences had been studied, and successfully cultivated. While he admitted the propriety of giving representatives to Manchester, he did not place that right merely on its wealth and popula tion. The town, it was true, had grown in population and wealth, and ought no longer to be excluded, but its prosperity sheaved that representation was not necessary to prosperity. It was a great community of men having a common interest, and therefore proper to be invited within the walls of the temple of the Constitution. Communi ties in like manner had been continually enfranchised, pa t '. titularly before the revolution ; but when they were en franchised, no vacancies were made to allow them to find it place in Parliament. He admitted the propriety of en franchising the three first towns, and therefore he would not waste the time of the House in discussing them. On other points he should consider himself at liberty to offer any opinions ; and when it came to Greenwich he should propose to omit that from schedule C. He objected to giving it the franchise because it was under the influence of the Government. He objected, also, to giving the franchise to the places forming part of the metropolis. He thought they did not need additional representatives, and the nature of their constituency was not such as to recommend them. The means they had of hacking their opinions—(Hvar, hear)—bringing both physical and moral force to kiir on the resolutions of that House —would g iv e the metrrpolis more influence than it ought to have over the deliberations of that House. The Right Hon. Baronet concluded by again declaring that he should take the sense of the House on the question of giving Members to Greenwich. Lord JOIIN RUSSELL was happy to end, from the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet, that there was one part of this Bill at least which was likely to receive his approbation and support. He could not, however, avoid thinking that the conduct and principles of the Right Hon. Baronet were a little inconsistent. Some years ago the Right Hon. Baronet declared, when a proposal teas brought forward to give representatives to the great towns, that he could not agree to it, because it would open a field for much more extended changes, to which he was not prepared to assent.—(Hear.) The Right Hon. Ba ronet was now, however, of opinion, from what they haul heard that night, that the large towns might. be en franchised with safety, and without too affecting the rights or interests of the Amalie'. boroughs. Now, -with out entering into the question of the manner in which the Right Hon. Baronet proposed, on the present state of pub lic opinion, to render these changes satisfictory without giving to them other changes, through the dread of which he resisted Reform at other times, he (Lord J. R.) would merely oh.!erve that he believed it as impos,ible to c.rry on the Government of this country ihrough the means of a House of Commons as at present constituted, as not to allow Manchester and the other great towns to send Members to that House.--(Cheers ) He believed that the people of this country were as much de cided on requiring the alteration of the system of no ruination and of corrupt influence, as that the great places remarkable for their wealth, their commerce, and their intelligence, should be fully and adequately , represented.--(Hear, bear, hear.) The Right Ho nourable Baronet had opened to the House a plan, new in many respects, but the main object of which appeared to be, that those large towns might be enfran chised without taking away the privileges of the smaller ones. Oa that subject he (Lord J. Russell) would not enter at that moment, further than to say, that when the fitting time came, he hoped to be able to prove that Green wich, Deptford, and the other places mentioned in the Bill, had as good a right to claim the privilege of sending Mem bers to that House as any of those to which the Right Hon. Baronet was disposed to concede it. The Right Hon. Baronet was, indeed, wrong i❑ one part of his state- rent, where he said that the people of Greenwich never dreamed of requiring Members until the Reform Bill was promised by the Government. Now, it happened that the people of Greenwich actually petitioned the House to have the right of returning Members, which they had once possessed, to be restored to them, and long before the Reform Bill was promised by the Government.—(Cheers.) As to the question of allowing these places, Greenwich and the rest, to return Members, he would not, as he said before, enter on it at that moment; but he might say that possessing, as it was acknowledged they did, a large popu lation, and paying a rental of millions of pounds a year, he did not see why their proximity to the' metropolis— the seat, or the great centre of all the wealth and intelli gence of the country—should debar them from the privi lege of possessing representatives; nor why that prox imity should render their claims less allowable in the opinion of the Right Hon. Gentleman, than those of Manchester and the other places which he was willing to accede to.—(Cheers.) Sir ROBERT PEEL begged to say a few words in reply to the Noble Lord. He had stated, he believed very plainly, that the disfranchisement and the enfranchise ment were founded on two very different principles— (Cheers) —that the one was founded on justice, and the other on expediency ; and that they might he still justified in proposing alterations in places originally founded on in justice.—(Hear.) The Noble Lord had taunted him with change of opinions.—( Hear.) But was he the only Member of that House—or was that the only side of the House on which Members were not to be allowed to change their opinions. —(Hear, hear, hear.) Was it to them that the Noble Lord was to say that nothing could be conceded for a change of opinions founded on the altered state of the country and of opinion —(1-tear)—altered because one Gentleman had been compelled to leave office for being op posed to Reform, and another had been supported purely on the ground of embracing it—(Hear, hear)—altered because that which was partial and limited had be come general—( Hear, hear)—altered because his Majesty had been induced to give it his countenance— (Hear)—altered, above all, because, under the express sanction of the Government, the King's name, and all the weight and influence of the Royal authority had been taken away from the Constitution, as it existed for ages, and brought to the support of a proposition for a mast exten sive system of Reform.—(Cheers.) And was it from the Noble Lord and the Right Hon. and Noble Persons opposite that these taunts came ? and had no change taken place in their opinions ?—(Cheers.) Had he (Sir R. Peel) ever taunted the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Palmerston) in the course of the discussions for the change of his opinions on Reform ? Had he ever taunted that Noble Lord, or the Right lion. Gentleman beside bins (Mr. C. Grant), although for full sixteen years of their lives they had been chiefly distinguished for their resistance to all Reform whatever—(Cheers)—distinguished too, for their adherence to Mr. Canning, the main feature of whose domestic policy was resistance to all Reform, in whatever shape it might clothe itself.—(Cheers.) Did he deny to them the privilege of taking whatever course the altered circumstances of the time might point out to them to he expedient, and why was the same privilege to be refused to him ?—(Hear.) In the year 1826, when the question of giving the franchise of Grampound to one of the large towns was brought under the notice of the House, did the Noble Lord or the Right Hon. Gentleman rise in their places then, and say that the time was come when they must yield to their deep sense of the propriety of trans• (erring the privileges of decayed, corrupt, or small boroughs to large unrepresented towns? No. So far were they from being convinced of this imperious necessity, that they voted for the transfer of the franchise to the hundred.— (Hear, hear.) Had he insisted on those Right Honour able Persons preserving their opiuions or their consistency, and why was he then to be debarred from proposing that which he now considered most expedient ? What, too, was the situation of the Noble Lord (Russell) ? After the able speeches they once heard in that House—after the able and erudite treatises they had read out of it—(Cheers)—the Noble Lord, the author of the Bill—the proposer of the plan of Reform, flanked as he was, right and left, by his Noble and Right Hon. Friends, ought to be the very last men in that House to taunt him with a change of opinion. —(Cheers.) Ile knew not what advantage the Noble Lord proposed to draw front his former declarations, but this he would repeat, that having seen one Government driven from office for opposing Reform—having felt that from whatever cause, whether from the conduct of the Government or any other, the demand for Retlirm was become more general—and having seen no less than five Governments within a very short period of time, he had declared his intention, rather than risk the chance of another change of Government, to support a measure of Reform, if it could he made consistent with reason and with justice.—(Heir, hear.) In compliance with that pledge, and in obedience to that principle, he was now supporting the Reform Bill (the House having already de cided on the principle of the measure) as far as he could support it consistently with his sense of justice and fair dealing, without any compromise of his priuciples or with out the perpetration of injustice ; and he would continue to do so in spite of all the taunts of the Noble Lord or his adherents.—(Cheers.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in explanation, denied that he intended to taunt the Right Hon. Gentleman for the course he had pursued in former years. What he had said was this, that the Right Hon. Gentleman, having last year de clared that he could not consent to give representatives to the large towns of Birmingham, Manchester, and Leeds, because if they did they must go further, was a little in consistent in proposing to give them representatives now, hoping or expressing an opinion that they might do so without going further, the meaning, as he clearly admitted, to resist all further changes.—(Hear, hear.) In his opi nion, and he now repeated it, the Right Hon. Baronet would not find himself secure from those further changes if lie made the concession to the large towns, and he would find himself unable to maintain power unless he went to that extent to which lie was at present so much opposed. He repeated, that the Right Hon. Baronet would find it impossible to coutinue to govern England with the mere execution of that plan which lie proposed.—(Cheers.) Sir R. PEEL said, the Noble Lord had threatened him with the difficulty he would find as a Member of the Go vernment if the Reform Bill was not carried. Now he (Sir R. Peel) was content to take the penalty of his con duct. He was content to resign all hopes of office, and 'cave England to be governed by the Noble Lord— (Cheers) —provided he was not made a party to the hazard which he believed would be incurred by the (Cheers.) If the consequences of the course he now took were to be perpetual exclusion from office, he was content CO incur them rather than share in the dangerous responsi bility of the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) He had but one word to say in reply to the observations of the Noble Lord, and that was, that the plan he now proposed was the same the Noble Lord had recommended a few years age, except that the the Noble Lord lavdiviiieshedwtehree toH obuosediaos. give compensatk , ri franchised. — (Hea r.) Mr. HUNT reminded the Right Hon. Baronet that ten years ago, at Manchester, sixteen persons were killed, and 6113 badly wounded, for demanding that very Reform which he now admitted to be desirable.—(Cries of" Oh': „, Some of those who now cried " Oh," would have cried it l° good earliest, and in another tone, if they had been the r ' Oh, and laughter.) It was a vet y amusing thing, , killing of 16 and the wounding of 618 ; but he could test them that if the Right Hon. Baronet's principle s° adopted, the yeomanry would be obliged to kill t hee people of Manchester again. —(Again, said a Member i ° the gallery, amidst loud laughter.) He could assure th that the yeomanry , would have to sharpen their swords kill the people in other plrces than Manchester; but tie, were altered since the people of Manchester were for meeting to petition f i r Reform. Mr. COLLEY defended the yeomanry, and remind' th e I-lon. 'Member fur Preston that lie had at one tilt been a yeoman himself. Mr. uNT congratulated the Hon. Member on there'. (livery of his memory, and was happy to hear him e xpre° himself so much more clearly than he had been able to d' the other e vening.--(A laugh.) He admitted that 1 1 been a yeoman, but it was thirty years ago; and he wo ni ,j odmit more, that the corps of which he was a member di run away.—(Laughter.) Sir C. WETHERELL contended that Members rnig ft l be given to Manchester without the spoliation of the 11 perty of others ; but he objected to the qualification 101. householders in such cases, which would in fact, It a large mantiftcturing - town, he a kind of universal snf frage. He could not, while he said this, avoid o b se rving' that he should like much to know something more of ' l4 plan of the Government with respect to the divisions luM districts, before he gave his ass nt to a proposition whi c looked very like admitting that population was to be tak e° ;is the principle of representation—a principle never 7 e , 1 , acted on in this country, and certainly not recognised „ l the 8 . 11 He would support his Right Hon. Friend's p re ' posal to give representatives to these great towns, Misers' ing at the same time, that he thought it might be da l° , without taking away the franchise of the smaller borouoh g ,' and recommending the Government to make the qua 1' tleation 201. Lord ALTHORP said the Hon. and Learned Gentlr• man had taken objections to the proposition before t he House on several points—Ahe qualification, the division into districts, and whether it was not possible to give tilt franchise to these large towns without despoiling tilt smaller ones. With respect to the first point, this O s ' he apprehended, not the time for discussing it. On ti t second, the question of the districts, he would recomm en d him to look into the subsequent clauses of the Bill ; au with respect to the last, he would merely say that Gover r ment had found it impossible to give the elective franeld'' that extension they thought necessary, without disfran' chising the smaller boroughs. This, however, was 001 the main principle of the Bill. They had availed died; selves of the necessity which existed of finding a means 4 , satisfying the claims of Manchester and Birmingham U , cut off those boroughs, whose system of corruption or,! . nomination had in their opinion rendered them unfit the exercise of the power to send Members to the Leg gy l lature.—(Hear.) Having said thus much he would mere,' observe, that as the Right Hon. Baronet made no ope' tion to the proposition for giving Members to hlanches ter , Leeds, and Birmingham, he would put it to him whet i l it might not be expedient to allow that part of the schedUL to pass, and tike the discussion on the ()tlers to-tnorrovv• , Sir R. PEEL said that, after what had occurred 00. recent occasion, he really felt considerable difficulty coming to any agreement with the Noble Lord. 1 0 !, ever, he would make no opposition to give the dee:, franchise to Manch e st e r, Birmingham, and L e eds, ana l ', Guninittee might proceed to-morrow with the *onside° tion of the metropolitan districts. Sir R. INGLIS had no objection to see Alanche e ' possessed of the elective franchise, but remonstrated it: obtaining it by the spoliation of other places, and ags l ; the system pursued t o s o i n j ur i ous an e xt e nt o f weake'i r ' the aristocratic for the purpose of strengthening the mocratie interest. 1 1 ' After a few words from Sir C. WETHERELL , motion respecting Manchester and its townships was i" agrerd to. On the motion for - granting the elective franchise to , ' minghato and its townships, b Lord J. RUSSELL moved the ashlition of ant ' township, the name of which, we belie'e, w a s Mitch"' . _ _ Mr. CROKEK and Mr. S. WORTLEY having served to themselves the right of subsequently irii! lr i ; into the various town•hips, the addition and the orsg motion were both agreed to. The motion for granting the elective franchise to I/ 6 its borough, and liberty, was also agreed to. Tilt! CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and ob tsi° leave to Hit again this day. The other orders of the day were then disysad oft at One o'clock this morning the House adjourned. COURT CIRCULAR. His MAJESTY went yesterday in state to the Hou se il Peers, to give his assent to the Queen's Annuity Bill. MAJESTY also went, to be present at the ceremony, ac c° , parried by the Duchesses of CUMBERLAND, GLOITCO, and CAMBRIDGE. Their MAJESTIES and the Family - lunched at two o'clock. At,out three O'CIOCI",, QUEEN and her suite left the Palace, by the gindete•gr, in four carriages (the servants in state liveries), o°l by a detachment of the Royal Horse Guards. 0 Duchess of CUMBERLAND, attended by Lady 5 ° 1 :0 Lr.stszox and Baron LINsINGEN, preceded the (2 11 7 - 1 In the first carriage w e r e two M a id s o f H ono ur, and s Page of Honour. In th e secon d carr i age were Mr. , LEI - , her Majesty's Vice-Chamberlain, two Maids of h : nour, and the Gentleman IJ'her in waiting. The carriage contained Earl HowE, the Lord Chamberh Or , the QUEEN, and Baroness AHLETELDT, the Lady in °I O ing on the Duchess of CAMBRIDGE. Her MAJEsfr accompanied by the Duchesses of CAMBRIDGE and 0 0 1 ' cEsTER, and was attended by her Lady in waiting, CLINTON. The procession for the KING to go in state was PA direct'y aft,rwards in the principal Court-yard o' 1 ,1 Palace,, where the King's Guard was on duty. 16 11 first carriage, which was drawn by six greys, wete c i HANCOCK', the Exon in waiting, and Mr. LEWIS, the 1 ) i tleruan Usher in waiting. The second carriage, li e was drawn by six bays, contain e d Lord AucusTus CLARENCE, the Groom of the Robes, the Clerk DIV and the Page of H o n o ur. In the third carriage, Li a / by six white horses, were the Comptroller of the 11, 1 : 1 hold, and the Silver Stick in waiting. The fourt h ti riage, drawn by six black horses, contained Lord 11 0 ,01i1 Gold Stick in waiting, the Earl of FIFE, Lord in tvs',4 and the Master of the Robes. The State carriage, ' h by eight cream•colour e d horses, was preceded bf o t. King's Marshalmen two and two, and the King's fl' men two and two, in their State dresses. A party ° to Yeomen Guard, in their Coronation dresses, wept it fore and at the sides of the c irriage. The 1( - .1 4 'a f t was habited in an Admiral's uniform, descended the t yt Staircase, preceded by his Grace the Lord Chanabe, and entered the carriage at ten minutes past three ° c le f / The Master of the Horse and the Groom of the S t y opposite to his AIAJEsTr. The escort was composed First Life Guards. The procession entered St. ir Park by the gates ailf,ining to Harrington-house. f i?j The QUEEN and suite returned to the Palace Soc ° j,PI four o'clock, and were soon after followed by b l6 ll JESTY, who wore the same robes of ermine and velvet as on the occasion of opening or closing the of Parliament. pO P The Duchess of SAXE WEIMAR, accompanied by o P„ WILLIAM of Saxe Weimar, took leave of their 111P lie l yesterday, on her return to the Continent, and left lace at St. James's about half.past one o'clock, i n , 0 1 '`,. the QUEEN'S carriages, and proixeded to Deptfor o t e te , her serene Highness embarked on board the Come t packet far Rotterdam. 4/ of') Earl GREY had an audience yesterday with the ritl,,, Summonses were issued on Monday to upward s ° I hundred Members of the House of Commons fr° lll o ,,, ALTHORI', to attend a meeting respecting the ea° s 00 4 , Reform now before Parliament. A very numero°o,,at ing of Members took place yesterday in censeti ne the The reign ott -offi C ce. H ter vi‘ Lo ANCELLOR of Ireland had an ill yesterday with Earl GREY. %lei/ A Cabinet Council was held at ten o'clock en,:olii night at the F o r e ign -office, which was attend e ' ift whole of the Cabinet Ministers. The Council ea liberation till hall-past twelve o'clock. 4t • 0 The Court of Claims held a meeting yesterJ4 of Council- office, and heard and decided on the cla im {ot~ Dean of \VESTMINSTER, and other functionaries, j vices to be rendered at the approaching Coronatiliorro Lords present were, the Duke of Nonyowc, ° L . e cp,,o 1 of LANSDOWNE, Earl G RE Y, the Marquis ot CA RDE, GODERICII, Lord PLUNKETT , l'' °f LAND, and :Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. GREVILLE attended as Clerk to their Lord'Ut Oti r The Cha r leston Courier says-- - “ c i f nister at London is reported, in a letterdfrorn a it that city, to have said, in speaking of the lat e 0 0 tiwn of the Parli a ment by WILLIAM that 118 40 ,0 i almost rather have had the feelings of that P',,r6'e the day that he dissolved Parliament than lb' other loan that has ever lieed." of 8 and (tet Lo a ti le Putti " Pa, T, bau retie th at wi t h man e liervi, th„ t erda the r ti t l es h ou , Th, Lish( aliat s oU r I; fr om Itioy ( You t tltio th ey bo n leo, Ol e 4 rriv, more re n 110 t t force cor rn bon' end accoi met e of Di been °Perl 21 st , rc ußs Tlies Nth '4tltl