The Sun. — London, England, 1831-08-05 00:00:00

the whole of Scotland possessed had excited in his breast ' :as a Scottish Member, he had never once expressed any such fear, or any such alarm, with regard to those b roughs in Cornwall which returned forty-four Members. being within one as many Members as were returned from the whole of Scotland.—(Hear, hear.) It was quite true that at the period of the Union Scotland treated with England upon equal terms, and the only complaint that could be made on the part of Scotland with regard to that measure to which she was indebted for so much eif her present prosperity, was, that it did not give to her sufficient degree of representation. The reason that jus. tine had not been done to Scotland in that respect was, Scotland had been sold to that aristocracy which was now the object of the Hon. Member's eulogy.—(llear ) hear.) The whole of the objections which were urged against giv ing a representation to the metropolitan districts had arisen from one circumstance, namely, that one of the Members for the city of London hid been taken to task by his con stituents for a certain vote he had given. That such a thing had happened in the city of London was not the fault of the constituents there, but was the fault of the Hon. Member who had been called to account, When Hon. Members pledged themselves at their election to follow u particular line of conduct, it Was no fault on the part of their constituents to bind them to their promitess. Wha' had happened in this instance was not peculiar to the cite of London, and would not be peculiarly characteristic of the metropolitan districts ; and it was only what would have happened, under similar circumstances, in any other part of the kingdom.—( Hear, hear.) Such an occurrence might be urged as an objection to the system of pledge giving on the part of Hon. Members, but it could net be 11 fairly offered as an objection to the giving a more ex tended representation to the city of London.—(Hear.) The fact was, that if they did not give this representation to those districts in London to which it was proposed to give it, they would be deprived under the new saatem of all representation whatever. They had been told that such districts as the one whose claims were at present under consideration would not select tit and proper per sons to represent them in Parliament ; but he denied that such would he the ease. He would contend for it that they would pitch upon persons of wealth, of respectability, and of character, to represent them. It had, indeed, been truly and eloquently said by Mr. Cobbett, a writer who was well acquainted with the matter, that although they might give an extended representation to large classes of the people, it was as natural as that sparks rise upwards that the people would prefer their superiors when a great and im portant trust was to be reposed in them. Now that they were new-modelling the representation, and he would not deny that this Bill was a new-modelling of it, it was their bounden duty to give representatives to those wealthy, in. telligent, and populous districts of the metropolis. If they did not do so, they would have left still in existence one of the most glaring of those defects in the existing system of representation which it was the object of this Bill to remedy. The real fact was, that the share of representa tion which this Bill proposed to give to the metropolis, was not at all proportionate to the extent of its wealth and population ; and if they had given 100 new Members in stead of 10 to it, the proportion would have been juster. It was, therefore, absurd to argue that the metropolitan districts were not entitled to the extended representation which it was proposed to give to them. Mr. J. SMITH said that he hail resided for twenty years in the district to which it was proposed by the present motion to give two Members, and that he could testify that the wealth, the intelligence, and the talent which existed there, entit!ed its population to a share in the representation. By giving representatives to this dis trict, they would afford to its population a safety valve, through which they would give vent to their feelings and opinions in a conditional way, whereas to omit such a district,when they were now new-modelling the system of representation, would excite great discontent. A great number of individuals of wealth, of high cha racter, and of undoubted independence, resided in this dis trict, and some of the most splendid, useful, and extraor dinary charities of which the city of London could boast, had had their origin in this district. They should not give the population of such a district reason to say that they had been forgotten in the new system of representation. lie would say that he had heard with no common degree of indignation the charge which had been made against the Livery of London for having called one of their Mem bers to account for the vote which he had given. In doing so, they only exercised an undoubted right which all constituents possessed, and one which, he begged to add, if it had been more frequently exercised in former times, would have saved this country from an infinite quantity of evils..--(Hear, hear.) Their constituents who had sent them to that House had a perfect right to call upon them to explain any part of their conduct, and if they happened to differ from their constituents, they had the remedy in their own hands—namely, to retire. Ile gave his cordial support to the present motion. Sir J. WALSH said that it was quite obvious that one of the effects of the Bill would be to localize the constitu ency and the representation all over the kingdom, and in no instance would that be more especially the case than in that of those metropolitan districts, the Members for which would certainly not be representatives for the country at large. It had been justly remarked that they were about to give nearly half as many Members to the metropolitan districts as the whole of Scotland possessed, and it was no answer to that statement to say that Cornwall sent to that House within one of as many Members as Scotland. The Members who were sent from the boroughs in Cornwall were not the representatives of local and particular dis tricts, but representatives for the country at large, and Scotland always had had its share in that close borough representation. !According to the new system, it was plain that the representation of the metropolis would bear an undue proportion to the representation of the country at large. Mr. C. DOUGLAS thought that Scotland was en titled to a much greater proportion of representatives than she already possessed, and he hoped, after what had fallen from the Hon. and Learned Member for Kirkcudbright, that he would have his support hereafter for the proposi tion to give its due share of representition to Scotland. Mr. HUNT said, that the Won. and Learned Member for Kirkcudbright anticipated that those districts would return men of rank and wealth. It was very probable that such would be the case, but it was equally probable that they would nut return any representatives but men of talent. The statement of the writer who had been quoted by the Hon. and Learned Member might be quite true, but it should be recollected that the write: in question had written for, and against, every single subject that he had ever touched upon. Mr. GOULBURN said, that after the decision which had been come to last night, it was an understanding that they should not further debate this schedule, and that was the reason why those who acted with him on that side of the Hons., did not go into any discussion regarding the different places embraced in it. _ Lord XLTHORP said, that the same reasen had pre vented him from taking any part in this discussion. The question was then put and carried. The next question was, that " Mai ylehone, including the parishes of St. Marylehone, St. Pincras, and Paddington, Middlesex, stand part of schedule C." Mr. C. FERGUSSON rose amidst much confusion, .7riea of " Oh, oh," and " question, question." The Hon. Member said he had promised to state the case which the inhabitants of Pancras had requested him to state on their part to the House, and he was determined to do so. No cry of " question" should prevent him from discharging his duty. The inhabitants of St. Pancras were of opinion that they should not be included in Marylebone and Pad dington, for that in that case their constituency would be overwhelmed and borne down by the more numerous con stituency of those places, but that their parish should be erected into a separate district, and that one Member should be given to them. To show that they were entitled to a representative for themselves, they stated that their parish paid in assessed taxes three time more than Manchester, four times more than Leeds, four times more than Shef field, nine times more than Devonport, fourteen times more than Wolverhampton, and eighteen times more than Sun derland, to each of which two Members were to be given. They stated further that there were 10,000 houses for the parish the ishwhich avera ge d 40/. a - year eac h, an d th a t th e par i s h was i residen ce o f a wea l t h y, en li g h tene d, an d most respectable population. They asserted that if their pariah should he united to Marylebone and Paddington, which did not pay mor e t axes than the parish of Pancras they would be overwh e l me d by o of those two places. These where the'e greater population grounds on which they rested their claims for a rep r esentative for their parish by itself. Sir J. MALCOLM said a few words, the purportof which was not heard in the gallery. Lord ALTNORP said that the lion. and Learned Gentleman had stated the grounds on which the pariah of Pancras claimed a Member for itself, namely, that the amount of its population was so small in proportion to that of the two districts to which it was to be united, that it would be borne down by their larger constituency.— Now, looking at the extent of the parish of Pancras, and seeing the number of voters which it was likely to produce, he did not think it at all probable that they would be overwhelmed by the voters of Marylebone and Paddington. The population of Marylebone was 96,000, and that of Pancras 71,000. It was not at all likely, therefore, that the voters of Pancras would be borne down by the consti- tuency of Marylebone, and for that reason he did not think that Pancras should have a Member for itself. The question was then put and carried. The CIeAtRMAN then put the question " that Lambeth stand part of schedule C," which was carried. Lord MILTON said that he had given notice on Thurs day evening that he should, in the discussion of the details of schedule C, submit that the boroughs in schedule D be transferred to schedule C. He had since made up his mind to take a different course. He should suffer the clause D to be read till it came to the part where the blank was to be filled up, and he should move by way of amendment, that the word tWo be inserted instead of one. Mr. LITTLETON said, that the Noble Lord's motion I went to preclude his bringing forward his proposition re specting the borough of Stoke-upon-Trenl; hut, neverthe-, less, he must submit to the tlouse the very peculiar cis- . cumstances of that borough. This borough had not been included in Ihe original Reform Bill of the last Parllament ; hut it consisted of a cluster of four town, containing, in the whole, a population of 5;3,000 persons. The inhabitants of this very populous district were principally employed in the mantsfactUre of earthenware and chisaa, and from their numbers, and from the extensive and important nature of their trade, with the cepltal it employed, and the interests it involved, they were fully entitled to have two represen tatives in that House. If Hen. Members would examine into the subject, they would find that the cotton manufac turers had their interests represented in Parliament by fifteen Members, the colonial interests by seven, and the silk trade by three, whilst the china manufacturer was very inadequately represented. The trade of the people of, Stoke-upon-Trent was hot only large and extensive, but itt was on the inerease, and in its nature more likely to be' permanent than many which were to be better represented in that House. He should therefore move that the borough of Stoke-upon-Trent be inaerted in schedule C. Sir J. WROT'I'ESLEY would detain the Committee by a very few words. He had been forcibly impressed by some striking facts which were manifest in comparing schedules C. and D. Whilst schedule C contained towns, having a population of 43,000 and 44,000 inhabitants, Stoke-upon-Trent, with a population of 53,000, was in eluded in schedule D. When the House considered this striking discrepancy, he was persuaded it would not refuse what his Hon. Friend had moved for. He would only add that Stoke was a district of continuous houses, and it therefore came within the principles of the Bill. Mr. EDMUND PEEL had no hesitation in expressing his approbation of the plan of giving representatives to populous towns and districts. The statement which had been just made by the Hon. Member for Staffordshire af forded a convincing proof that the Potteries had a just claitn to send two representatives into that House. When he (Mr. Peel) considered the great respectability of the people of Stoke, their commercial importance, and the ingenuity and utility of their manufacture, lie was con vinced that they were deserving of a full representation in that House. Stoke had a greater population than any place in schedule B, and a population superior to most places in schedule C. He would only further observe that machinery could not be applied to the manufacture of this place, and therefore the trade of Stoke was likely to be permanent. Lord ALTHORP agreed that the Staffordshire Pot teries were most important to the commerce of the country. If the question were whether the Potteries should be re , . presented at all, he should entertain no doubt upon which side to vote ; but the question was, whether the repre sentation of the district would be sufficient with one Member, or whether it was fair and right in the Govern ment to give it two representatives. He would admit that the amount of the population was very great, but from the information which Ile had received, this was not a case of town representation, but of a district uncon nected, although in appearance it might resemble a large town. In omitting Stoke from schedule C, Ministers had therefore done what they thought justifiable after due in quiries into the case. He was convinced that in giving it one Member it obtained its fair share in the representation of the country. It was difficult to determine whether one or two representatives were more proper, but after every inquiry be had made, and after all the consideration he could give the subject, his opinion was in favour of in cluding Stoke in the schedule of one Member. Lord INGESTRIE supported the motion. Sir ROBERT PEEL preferred the giving of two Mem bers instead of one, in every case. He preferred taking 12 large towns, and giving each of them two representa tives, to taking 24 smaller places, and giving each but one. Of the 12 most important places in schedule D, Stoke was one ; and it was a place which he would wish to see retained for the right of possessing two representatives, and for that reason he should certainly support the motion. In his opinion, in every case there ought to be two Mem bers instead of one; for with one Member, every place would present a scene of perpetual division and contest, and he would prefer the system of two Members, if it were only for the sake of preserving peace. Mr. HODGSON denied that Stoke had a population double that of other towns that had been alluded to in schedule B. Stoke had a population of 53,000 souls, Old ham of 50,000, Salford 51,000, and Stockton 52,000. He thought that one representative was sufficient, and should oppose the motion. Mr, ROBINSON thought the motion would much em barrass the Committee, and if it were carried, consistency would require that Bradford, Wakefield, and several other places, should be changed from their schedule. Lord MILTON said that there were several places in schedule D of greater importance than Stoke. Mr. C. W. W. WYNN could not support the motion without he was prepared to give two Members to other places in schedule D. Mr. GISBORNE supported the motion. Mr. E. J. STANLEY maintained that Staffordshire already gave more than the due proportion of Members to that House, and if the motion were carried, two Members must be given to several places in Lancashire and York shioe, which had now only one. Staffordshire, with a population of only 340,000 persons, had already received six new Members, and would, in all, return sixteen Members to that House, or fifteen if Tamworth were con sidered in Warwickshire, whilst Lancashire, with a popu lation of 1,221,000 souls, had only fourteen representatives. Mr. PROTHEROE would support the motion, with out considering that in so doing he abandoned the general principle of the Bill. Mr. PERCEVAL thought the giving of representatives to particular interests would only lead to perpetual changes. Mr. WARBURTON denied that a representation of pat ticular interests was consistent with good government. In forming the corporation or government of a town, the object was not to represent the interests of the butcher, baker, and other trades, but to select a body of competent persons without any reference to particular interests. If two Members were to be given to Stoke, why should they not give two to Ashton-under-Line, and to Chelsea. Here some ME3IBER, exclaimed, " And why not give two Msmbera to Chelsea ?"---(A laugh.) The Hots. MEMBEa continued—That was not a question for him to answer.—(A laugh.) He was not the framer of the Bill. He believed that the Bill would effect great good, and on that account he was willing to wave all minor objects. Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought the motion useless, as that which was to be made by the Noble Lord (Lord Milton) would include Stoke with the other places in schedule D. He could not conceive that one Member was not sufficient for this district. The question was to be considered in its relation to the general interests of the country, and not in reference to any interests purely local. If the motion were carried, it would create great jealousies in other places, and so far injure the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) Although the motion of his Noble Friend (Lord Milton) did not proceed from a person hostile to Ministers, it was nevertheless a proposition totally in opposition to the Bill. He should certainly oppose the Noble Lord's motion, and:he would be better able to do so if the present question were negatived. Lord STANLEY approved of the proposition for giving two Members to the Potteries. Sir R. PEEL said he had come down to the House expecting that the motion of the Noble Lord would be the same as it appeared on the paper, and he bad intended to oppose the motion, and now he made a totally different proposal. His (Sir R. Peel's) intention was to make the Bill as perfect as possible, not to take advantage of its imperfections.—( lkar.) Lord J. RUSSELL did not accuse the Right Hon. Baronet ofany intention to embarrass the Bill, but be wished to propose a plan totally at variance with its principle. Sir R. PEEL repeated, that, as it was proposed to give twenty-four or twenty-six Members to Parliament, his plan was, that it was preferable to give two Members to each place rather than one. Mr. J. WOOD preferred one Member to two, because the having t wo Members led to compromises injurious to the public interests. Mr. LITTLETON observed, that Stoke had large ma nufactures, carried on with a capital of 1,300,0001. The Committee then divided, when there appeared— For the motion Against it On our I r l e a - jo ad ri n ty lis fo si r on l'l t ln o is t t h e e Lord •1. Ru " gallery, f:A6 —l s O s l E Lt, was addressing the Committee, but not one word could be heard. The CHAIRMAN put the question, " That the clause ' as amended, stand patt of the Bill ;" which wa s agree d to , The CHAIRMAN then read the next clause,.." Be i enacted, that each of the places named in the first clause 1 of schedule D shall be a borough, and entitled to send - Member to serve in Parliament." The question he pat was, that the blank be filled up with the word "one." Lard MILTON rose and said, that the period had ar rived when, in compliance with what he considered to be his duty to the country, he might bring forward the ma ' tion of which he had given notiee. In making it he wished it to it: distinctly understood, that he Was not ac tuated by the slightest hostility to the Bill, or to these friends who had brought it forvt-ardi With o horn be had been long united in public principles and private friend. ship, which was the best cement of public principle. Nor was it through any want of confidence in them that he had taken a different view of the questio❑ from that which they had propounded to the House. It appeared to hith that by adopting the ptinciple Of having one Member Only, they were departing from the ancient practice of the Consti tution, whereas, in his 'opinion, they ought to base them selves as much as possible on ancient foundations._ (Cheers from the Opposition.) Wherever repre , entatiom existed, it seemed to have been a rule that it should be confided to two representatives.—( Hear.) There were, doubtless, some exceptions ; but these were exceptions merely. Abingdon, Banbury, Newbury, and Higham Ferrers, had had but one Member each ; but Abingdon and Higham Ferrers owed their right to the elective franchise to Queen Mary, and that of Banbury and Newbury was not to he traced beyond the same period— a period not remarkable for legislative wisdom or for a regard for civil liberty. It had been said by his lion. Friend the Member for Preston, that where there wer e t wo Members to be elected, there was sometimes a sacrifice of public principle. This might be the case, but the system of compromise led to the avoidance of contests, and, as he thought, to a more accurate representation of the people in Parliament.—(Hear, hear.) If every representative acted with the purest feelings, without any reference to private or local interests, there would be no ground for his present objection ; but it was not to be denied, that for an accurate representation of the people in Parliament, the minority out of doors should find a minority in the House. --(Hear, bear, from the Opposition.) Suppose there were one hundred electors for a borough, and fifty-one voted on on eside, arid forty-nine on the other, if there were but one Member, a majority of two would engross the re presentation, and the borough would not be fairly repre sented in Parliament —(Hear, hear.) The necessary re sult of this system would be, that in periods of popular ex citement, the minority might be entirely excluded from the walls of that House. He considered it to be desirable, on the contrary, that the minority should find a way into the House.—(Hear, from the Opposition.) He (Lo`rd Mil ton) did not view schedule A with peculiar favour, though lie voted for it as the means of removing the corrupt parts of the representation ; but he would ask the House, he would ask his Hon. Friends who sat on the benches beside him, whether, if they adopted schedule D in its present state, in the remodelling of the Constitution they were now making, the arrangement could by possibility be ' final ?—(Cheers from the Opposition.) There would be perpetual claims from populous and wealthy places having one Member, which would consider themselves equally en titled with othi r places to have two. It was impossible it could be final, unless they departed from the principle of schedule D, and he (Lord Milton) was prepared to give to each of the towns an additional Member. He had heard much of the representation of particular interests in that House; but they were not delegates.—(Loud cheers from the Opposition.) The Members for Stoke-upon- Trent were not to come there as representatives for the Staffordshire Potteries, hut for the general good. He had been in the House long enough to have discovered that the representatives of these peculiar interests looked to sonic protection to their own branches of trade. The great masses of population had none of these local and pe culiar interests. lie had performed a painful duty, but one which be felt he owed to the country. He was a friend to the Bill ; he would support it totis viribus, and had not the slightest wish to distract it. But this subject had pressed greatly on his mind, and be did not see that the principle of his Hon. Friends, which pro fessed to be founded on population, was adhered to in this schedule.—(Hear, hear.) There was nothing of it.— (Hear.) The principle of the schedule was a principle mischievous in its effects on the Constitution, and which, when its character was calmly considered by the constitu ency of the country, would lead to considerations of a most painful nature. He had lately had an interview with per sons from one of these towns (the Noble Lord did not state the name), including Tories, Reformers, and Anti-Re formers, who concurred in stating that they would rather have no representative at all than one.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord concluded in a particularly low tone of voice, with moving that the blank in clause three be filled up with the word " two." Sir F. BURDETT said he must differ altogether from his Noble Friend, much as he respected his motives, and rather concurred in the opinion of the Hon. Member for Preston. The Noble Lord's proposition seemed to proceed from a wish that the present measure of Reform should be permanent and final, but that was absolutely impossible and incompatible with the conditions to which the Divine will had unalterably subjected all human affairs. H e imagined under existing circumstances that it would be much better for the friends of Reform to forego their own wishes, however reasonable, with respect to mere matters of detail, rather than in any degree endanger the success of the great measure before them, which the Right Hon. Baronet had owned that he had not the fortitude to intro. duce, although lie was sensible that some Reform in the representation had now become indispensable.—(Hear, hear, hear.) His Noble Friend appeared to advocate a double representation, whereas he considered single re presentation, if attainable consistently with the interests of the people, to be more convenient and advantageous for all practical purposes ; and for his part he should desire rather to see the number of representatives diminished than in creased, as his Noble Friend would propose. The present Bill, it ought to be borne in mind, would abundantly em brace all the interests of the country, and no one could fail to perceive that they could never arrive at practical results on any question, the success of which required combina tion, if they all insisted on pressing their own specific opi nions on the legislature, to the prejudice of the general measure on which they were, for the most part, agreed. The Members who had been returned by a popular con stituency bad been taunted with having come into the House under pledges that they would vote in support of the Ministerial Bill ; but he would ask, must not the opi nions of the nominees opposite revolve on the same axis with those of the borough patrons by whom they had he n returned ?—( Hear.) The popular Members, it was true, were liable to be called to account by their constituents ; but the existing excitement, he had no doubt, would die away altogether after the passing of the Reform Bill, when the public generally would acquiesce in the good sense and intelligence of Parliament. He did not believe that double representation would be attended with the advantages wh;eh the No'de Member for Northamptonshire a nticipated, but at all events it could not be deemed of that paramount im portance which would justify the Noble Lord in pressing his motion to a division.—(Hear.) Mr. HUNT confessed that he had been a disciple of the lion. Baronet for a great number of years, during which the Hon. Baronet's opinions had undergone a few variations undeniably; but he could remember none so remarkable as that which the House had witnessed in his particular person that evening.—(" Hear, hear," from the Opposition.) The Hon. Baronet, it was apparent, had shown himself the best thick-and-thin supporter of Minis ters that the most zealous amongst them could possibly have desired. In his opinion the Noble Lord's arguments were well deserving of the most serious attention, and he cer tainly felt himself bound to support his proposition, which, as far as lie could judge, was by no means calcu lated to destroy the measure lay which Government meant to abide. The Hon. Baronet, it would be remembered, had supported with all his might the Ministry of Mr. Canning, who declared himself adverse to all kinds of Re form, no matter what shape it assumed, and yet he now came forward to lend his aid in favour of this Bill as the very best that true statesmanship could devise.—("Hear," from the Opposition.) The present Bill was, then, to have all the support which it was in the Hon. Baronet's power to render it, although it embraced neither short Parliaments nor universal suffrage, which he (Mr. Hunt) and the Honourable Baronet had so long advocated in comnion. Truly, the Hon. Baronet had given up not a little for the sake of unanimity.—(Cries of "hear," and laughter, from the Opposition.) Much had been said on the subject of pledges, but he " would rather be a dog and bay the moon" than come into that House with shackles about his arms—(Laughter)—like thelMembers of the city of London.—(Laughter, and cries of " Hear.") He would at once resign his seat if he could not concur with his constituents; but as to their calling hint to account, forsooth, he would take good care that the first time of their doing so should also be the last.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) On the question of giving Members to po pulous places, he voted with Ministers, merely because their proposition came nearer to his own principles than any other which had hitherto been submitted ; and on the other details of the Bill he had stated his sentiments frankly and fairly, in spite of the taunts not only of the House itself, but of the whole newspaper press in the country. He would now add that, in the event of the passing of this Bill, the table would be forthwith crowded with petitions for a further extension of the suffrage. Mr. STRICKLAND said he rose to support the amend ment of the Noble Lord, although not on the abstract principles which the Noble Lord himself had stated as the grounds of his proposition. He would support the pro position of the Noble Lord, because it was the only chance of adding a few more Members to that county with which he was more particularly connected. Long before he had a seat in that House, he was of opinion that no measure of Reform would be final if we excluded from representa tion such towns as Bradford, Halifa, Huddersfield, and Wakefield, and admitted to it such towns as Northallerton and Ripon. It was said there had been such a change of the balance of Members from the south to the north as would give the preponderance to the latter. Those who used that argument forgot that Yorkshire, with all its in dustry, all its wealth, and poptilation of 1,250,000, had t lily gained two additional Members, whilst Stafford shire, with only 315,000, gained six, Yorkshire having 30, and Staffordshire 15. According to the proportion which ought t• exist between the two counties, when Stafford had 15 Members, Yorkshire ought to have 60. He contended that it was a shallow principle to maintain that there was any hostile difference between agriculture and commerce : for where could the wool-grower dispose of his commodity if he did not find a purchaser in the manufacturer ? It was absurd, then, to suppose these new Members would give a preponderance to the commer cial interest which would be destructive of the agricultural interest. On these general principles be should support the amendment of the Noble Lord, the Member for Nor thamptonshire. Lord MORPETH agreed with hie Noble Friend in the abstract proposition, that two Members were better than one ; but his reason for not supporting his Noble Friend's amendment was, that he believed that the Bill was founded ❑pon an adjustment of the two great interests of agricul ture and commerce, which had been agreed to in the dif ferent counties. Now a departure from that principle to the extent of giving 26 additional Members to the com mercial interest might be made a ground on the other side for departing from the principle of the measure alto gether. Sir R. PEEL expressed his surprise that the Hon. Member for Yorkshire should have contended that the interests of agriculture were one and the same, and yet at the same time complain that Yorkshire was not sufficiently represented. If he had such confidence in the identity of the interests, why be ao anxious to increase the numbers on one side, and not rely on the moderation of the other ? The present was one of those difficult cases in which a man found it hard to give a vote either way. He owned that if he thought the Noble Lord likely to carry his amend ment, he should be afraid to vote with him, because he should then expect that the same majority would transfer the whole of schedule Dto schedule C. In the abstract question he agreed that it would be better to have two Members for each place, and, looking at the whole as an abstract question, he was disposA to vote for the amendment of the Noble Lord, reserving to himself the power of saying to what number of boroughs this should be extended—that was, of saying whether 12 or 21 boroughs should be included in the schedule. He owned he was surprised at the argument of the Hon. Baronet in favour of single representation ; taking, as he did, the principle that the minority should not be represented at all. To that he was prepared to give his dissent. Would it be wise or politic to say that where any great difference of opinion existed on perhaps a most important public question, that the minority— which might be a very large minority—should be wholly excluded from all share in the representation ? In times of peace and quiet there might be little danger of such a principle; but times of storm and difficulty might arise. Would the Hon. Baronet's principle be then applicable ? It reminded him of that beautiful simile of Horace— Cum pace delabentis Etruseum " In mare;" but the time might come, --" Cum fera deluvies quietos " Irritat amnes." A time of a question of peace or war might arise, would it be then wise to exclude the whole of the minority ? Suppose that a constituency of 1,000 were divided, so as to have 501 at one side, and 499 at the other, ought the 499 to remain unrepresented ? Should there be no op portunity left for the influence of reason ? The Hon. Baronet would tell them at once that there was no hope left to the minority in any case ; and yet at the same time he said that this would put an end to petitions. But what became of the principle of taxation and representation being co-extensive, if the minority were in all cases to be excluded ? Looking at the question as an abstract one, he would have the old principle of two Memb..rs, for he would have no anomalies not necessary to the furtherance of the general object in view. On these grounds he would ' support the proposition of the Noble Lord (Milton). Lord ALTHORP admitted that the exclusion of the minority from a share in the representation would be un fair and unconstitutional. He admitted, as a general pro position, that two Members were better than one, but the question in this case was, would the evils that had been predicted, arise from having the one Member instead of two in the cases of those twenty-six boroughs ? Let it be recollected that the largest number of places would be represented by two instead of one, and that in that way the minority in the kingdom would be represented. But could it be supposed that public opinion would ever be so united, as that it would be the same in every part of the kingdom ? This was a circumstance which could not be expected, or, if it should happen, the minority in the country would be so very small, that no danger could oc cur from its not being represented in those places. The argument of the Hon. Member for York was so fully an swered by the Right Hon Baronet, that it was not necessary to go to it. He did not admit that the balance between agriculture and commerce was destroyed. Looking at the manner in which the small boroughs had been represented, he did not think that the power of the landed interest was lessened in any degree to create alarm ; but as had been said, if they considered the sort of agreement that had been made as to the principle of the Bill, he thought it would be considered as a breach of faith to the agricultu rists to add 26 to the commercial towns, and on these grounds he would oppose the motion of his Noble Friend. Mr. R. WASON supported the propositi o n o f t h e Noble Lord, who proposed to give two Members to each of the boroughs in schedule D. Lord MILTON briefly replied; after which the Com mittee divided, when there appeared— For the amendment Against it Majority for Ministers The Chairm in then reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again to-morrow. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Quarter before Two. hnoaef tsitLelhecoeomßnlptti standing orders, when HOUSE OF LORDS, Auoun 4. LEFEVRE DIVORCE BILL. Mr. Lefcvre was examined this day at the bar, in order to clear up several doubts that were entertained by the Lord Chancellor on this Bill, after which it was read a second time. AFFIDAVITS IN CHANCERY BILL. r a 3 ,r d motion of the Loan CHANCELLOR the Bill was CHANCELLOR then moved the suspen sion The Earl of ELDON rose, observing that he had great objections to the passing of this Bill, having no more doubt of the Lord Chancellor's power to do that which the Bill was to enable him to do, than that he was now in exis tence. Affidavits of the nature referred to can lie read at the Court of Chancery, sitting from the first day of Janu • ary to the last day of December. He trusted, there fore, the Noble Lord on the Woolsack would considi r the opinion he had thus given, and withdraw the Bill on account of its uselessness. The LORD CHANCELLOR felt deeply the kindness of the Noble Earl in stating what he had done, and was most happy to hear from the mouth of the greatest autho rity in the country, that he entertained no doubt of the jurisdiction of the Lord Chancellor in this matter. As, however, he (the Lord Chancellor) had introduced this Bill, he thought it due to their Lordships that lie should state the grounds on which he had done „,. Objections being taken yesterday to the reading of a ffidavits, he had asked the opinion of the most eminent men at the bar, whether any doubt could be entertained as to the reading of the affidavits, and the bar had come to the conclusion that it could not be done, naturally looking forward to vacation as more agreeable than a long sitting. On application to the Registrars, they bore out the opinions expressed by the bar ; s eeing that unless something was done the Court roust close its doors, he (the Lord Chancellor) con sulted one of the Registrars as to whether an order could not be made by the Court by giving notice. The Registrar thought that could be done, and an order was immediately drawn up. The Noble Lord after pay ing a high compliment to the great talents of the Noble Earl, expressed his intention of withdrawing the Bill, reserving to himself the right, if any doubts should be entertained upon the point, of introducing it again. He trusted after what hail had transpired in that House that no attempt would again be made by suitors to delay despatch in the Court of Chancery. The Earl of ELDON said a few words in reply, but the Noble Earl spoke with his back to the liar, and in such a low tone of voice as to render what he said totally inaudible to us. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that be had only a few words to address to his Noble and Learned Friend. La,t night in introducing the Bill he had ❑ot said a word as to any doubts he had. L.-he had none, but it was in deference to others, and to prevent any dispute, that he had thought it is duty to bring forward the Bill. He again said, his own opinion being strengthened by the highest authority, he had no fear of being further interrupted in the discharge of his duty according to his own idea o' despatch. DONNA MARIA. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY—He had, the other day, asked a question of the Noble Earl at the head of his Majesty's Government, relative to the reception at Portsmouth of little Donna Maria ; and it was with pain that he felt himself justified in complaining of the want of candour in the Noble Earl's answer to that question. Ile had asked the Noble Earl what orders had heen sent to the authorities at Portsmouth to receive Donna Maria as Queen of Portugal ? and the Noble Earl had answered that he did not know what orders had been sent as to her reception, and that he did not know whether any orders at all had been given on the subject; and with that answer he (the Marquis of Londonderry) was hound to be satis fied. But after having received this answer, he was sur prised to see in the Evening Papers a statement, appa rently founded on good authority, that orders had been sent to the proper official persons at Portsmouth to receive the Emperor Don Pedro, and his daughter, the little Pre tender, Donna Maria, with all the honours usually paid to crowned heads ; and then there was a detitled account of what these honours were to be. Now lie really did think it very extraordinary, that if the Noble Earl was apprised of the intended arrival of the little Pretender—(Hear) — and had made preparations for that arrival, no orders should have been sent respecting her reception, or that, if any orders were sent, they should have been sent without the knowledge of the Noble E al at the head of the administra tion. It appeared then, that the Noble Earl was so little in the confidence of some Members of his own Cabinet, that they really did not think it worth while to apprise him of what steps they were taking in matters of high im portance. They sent the order', it appeared, without thinking it necessary to consult the Noble Earl at all about the matter, so that there was a want of confidence between the Noble Earl and some of his colleagues on other sub jects besides the Reform Bill. Since then it appeared that orders hail been sent to receive the little Donna Maria with all the honours usually paid to crowned heads, he wished to know whether the Noble Earl had any objection to produce the orders, or to lay copies of them on the table ? Earl GREY—He really did not know that there was any want of candour in the answer which he had given the Noble Marquis's question. The Noble Marquis had asked what orders had been sent to the proper authorities at Portsmouth to receive Donna Maria as Queen of Portu gal, and his answer was simply that he did not know what orders had been given for her reception, or whether any orders at all had been given on the subject. That was the fact. It might be culpable in him to be ignorant of what had done about the reception of the Emperor Don Fedi° and his daughter, Donna Maria; but at the same time, when the Noble Marquis put the question, lie was not aware what orders had been given, or whether any orders had been given on the subject. In consequence of the Noble Marquis's question, however, he had male inquiries; and the result was, that be found that no letter, or written direction had been sent by the Secretary of State on the subject, but that some verbal conference had taken place between the Secretary of State and the Commander-in- Chief of the Army, and the First Lord of the Admiralty, relative to the reception of the Emperor Don Pedro and his daughter. But the orders went to her reception with the honours generally paid to Royalty, without the least reference to her title as Queen of Portugal. The honours directed to be paid were merely honours usually accorded to the Royal station, without any political recognition or reference to the title of Donna Maria as Queen of Portugal. The Noble Marquis had thought proper to designate her as a Pretender. But the Noble Marquis could scarcely have forgotten that Donna Maria had been received and recognised by his late Majesty as Queen of Portugal—(Hear, hear)--and had been treated as such with Royal honours. But her late reception at Portsmouth bad nothing to do with her title as Queen of Portugal, but was merely the usual reception afforded to all persons who held the Royal station. Not withstanding, then, the solemn questions and threatening denunciations of the Noble Marquis with regard to this re ception, the Noble Marquis had only, after all, discovered what was vulgarly called a mare's nest.—(A loud laugh.) The Earl of ABERDEEN was glad that his Majesty's Ministers had not given any orders which implied a politi cal recognition of the title of Donna Maria as Queen of Portugal; and he agreed with the Noble Earl, that the directions given as to the reception really did not amount to more than that Donna Maria was to be received with the honours usually, in courtesy, paid to persons holding the Royal station. The Noble Earl had remarked, that his late Majesty had acknowledged Donna Maria as the heiress of the Portuguese Crown, and had received her as Queen of Portugal. He did not mean to give any opinion as to the validity of the title of Donna Maria to the throne of Portugal ; but he did say that the question as to whe ther her title was valid or not, was one beyond our juris diction. It was a question for the Portuguese, and for them only to decide. If we were to interfere and take upon ourselves to say that Donna Maria was Queen of Portugal, we might just as well take upon ourselves to say that Henry the Fifth should be King of France to-morrow. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY was much gratified to find that the orders given as to the reception of Donna Maria did not imply any acquiescence in the assumed title of Queen of Portugal. As to what the Noble Earl had said relative to the recognition of Donna Maria as Queen of Por tugal by his late Majesty, it ought to be kept in view that three years had elapsed since that time, and that circum stances were entirely altered. The Portuguese, with whom the matter rested, had chosen their own Sovereign. He did not mean to say any thing thing as to the character of that Sovereign. On that point there was much difference of opinion. But it was sufficient that lie was recognised by the Portuguese nation as their Sovereign, and received by them as such with as much obedience, affection, and attachment, as ever Sovereign was received in any country. It was impossible, then, that a Ministry which laid so much weight on the principle of non-interference, could attempt to set up a Sovereign of Portugal contrary to the one whom the Portuguese had chosen. The Noble Earl (Grey) had some time ago made a speech in favour of the the principle of non-inttzference, to which speech he would have the opportunity of adverting in a few days ; but in the mean time he was glad that he had forced the Noble Earl to give a satisfactory answer to his question. The Duke of RICHMOND moved that a Select Com mittee be appointed to make some arrangements respect ing the library belonging to their Lordships' House. The Committee was accordingly appointed. Lord TEYNHAM postponed the second reading of his Overseers of the Poor's all till this day week. COAL DUTIES. Earl GREY moved the second reading of the Coal Duties' Bill. The Earl of ABERDEEN stated that a Noble Friend of his intended to make some observation on this Bill, but could not attend to-day. His Noble Friend, however, did not mean to oppose the Bill, and had no objection that it should proceed, as he would have an opportunity of making his observation at the time of the third reading. The Billwas then read a second time, committed, and reported, and ordered to be read a third time on Monday, IRISH TOBACCO BILL. Lord AUCKLAND moved the second reading of the Irish Tobacco Bill. The object of it was to extend the prohibition which akeady existed in England and Scotland as to the growth of tobacco, to Ireland. The Bill could do no serious injury to Ireland ; and yet, with a view to the revenue, it was highly expedient, if not necessary, that the Bill should pass. Lord TEYNHAAI did not mean to oppose the Bill but he wished that the revenue had been protected by same other method. The Earl of WICKLOW thought that the Bill was contrary to the principles of free trade, on which the Ali nislers professed to act. He had lately, by way of experi ment, put three acres under tobacco, and the experiment succeeded beyond his expectation. He found that in cul tivating this artcle, he could give a great deal of employ. ment to the poor. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE observed that the growth of tobacco in Ireland could not be carried on in competition with other countries without a bounty of 1,200 per cent. The permission to grow tobacco in Ire land was granted by Lord North during the American war, not for the sake of Ireland, but out of hostility to Virginia. It was found, however, that the extension of its cultivation in Ireland would be very injurious to the revenue, without being of any thing like corresponding advantage to Ireland, and it was better to prohibit its growth in li , nine. A culture which could not be sup ported without such an enormous bounty, was clearly con trary to the principle of free trade and cultivation. Lord FARNHAM was sorry that the first Act brought forward by the present Secretary for Ireland should be one of prohibition. He did not mean to say that the provision made by the Bill was a bad one, but it ought to have been accompanied by other enactments, favourable to Ireland. The B ill was r e ad a second time, committed, and ordered to he read a third time on Monday. THE O'CONNELL INDICTMENT. The Earl of ELDON rose to meve, pursuant to notice, " That an humble address be presented to his Ma;esty, praying that his Majesty would be graciou.ly pleased Olaf on the table a copy of the indictment lately preferred ir t the Court of King's Bench in Ireland against alniel, O'Connell, and others, on which indictment the accuse d had been convicted." He begged leave distinctly to stag that in making this motion he did not mean to cast tb e slightest imputation on the conduct of the Irish law office o He could say from his own observation that the Irish b° was eminent for ability, and that the Irish law officer, generally did their duty well. • His motion had regard 5 0 to the past, but to the future, and his purpose was t ` bring in a Bill, providing that when a temporary law 0 4 enacted, any prosecution commenced while the law was tai fbree should not lie abated by the expiration of the 101 but should be carried on to its ftli teithititticn, in tit, same manner as if the law had remained in force. I . certainly was not a proper state of things, that perse most property prosecuted and convicted under such ten'' porary Act, should be allowed to escape punishmen t ' merely owing to the expiration of the Acts before th e '. punishment could be inflicted. In the indictment question, counts might have been inserted, as he conceived'' on the common law ; but, however, his only o bject present was to lay the foundation for a Bill to the etlec t i wl,ich he had stated. He was not aware that there % 54/ ' any objection to the motion. The motion was agreed to without opposition , ' Adjourned. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, AuG. 4. KINSMAN V. KINSMAN. alio Itduc char g A • in 4 on th Th up on irnpri; Th e and a This was an appeal case, the argument in which OW menced yesterday. On the conclusion of the argumen t ' Sir E. SUGDEN intiLnated that it would not be safe WI the decree of the Court to be pronounced in this causer e j ,:l some of the parties had not appeared on the hearing. had been the practice of the Court not to hear appeals afte`, l the last Seal, and according to that practice an a ffi davit ell the service of the subpoena to hear judgment could Ot nlw be put in. The subpoena had in this case been serve': in due time; but as the dry on which the appeal o °l heard was after that usually employed by the Court fo r such business, the fact of the service could not be praye d with such certainty as would justify the parties in taking a decree which might afterwards be subject to be set aside On account of this irregularity. His LOlLllsllle said he did not understand the groun d of any such practice, if it existed. Due notice had been given of the Court's intention to proceed with the appeal s ' and not only could no party complain of being taken bi surprise, but the sittings for the purpose of despatchiog the appeals had been resolved upon for the benefit of t he suitors, who had derived great advantage from them. n it Lordship said he would not now decide the point, but h e should inquire into the practice. Another appeal having been called on, and the opal* being concluded, Sir E. Suoneti expressed his fear that there would be the same diffic u lty in oth e r cases . H e h a d h ear d that t.O r the cause of Kill ic k v. Killick, which stood in his par for to-day, some of the parties had notified their into" . tion to withdraw from the hearing. Some time afterwards, His Loansuir said, the case which Sir Edward Segel el ; had mentioned had been put in the paper for the expe e '' accommodation w . the parties ; and it was not to bee d tiered that the progress of the Court should be obstruct s by parties who withdrew from the hearing under preteaci of some rule of practice hardly to be understood, a nd t he , existence of which wa s by no means c l ear . If any attair, was made to baffle the Court, the parti e s who made t b ; attempt would find th at hi s arm was strong enough'; defeat them. H e w as reso lved not to be beaten, or ui; verted from the duty which was imposed upon hint. b was indifferent to hi m w h e th er h e sat d ur i ng t hi s meg% „ and September, and O c tob er ; an d if th e p u bli c seri) required it, he was q u it e p re p are d t o d o so . H e shoo', try whether he had nut pow er eno u g h t o car ry the ordeL of the Court into effect; and if he had not—which r did not believe—he w.ntld apply to the Legislature 4% 0 1 further powers, and he did not doubt that his applicati ° would be successful. at the Lo g y( in • 'p t ( At the rising of the Court, His LORDSHIP hmded a paper to the Registrar, W I ; read it aloud as a rule of the Court ; it stated that sev e f appeals were now pending, and had been set down ' ll ° e bearing ; and it provided that if, in future, any of t ir parties to such appeals who had been served with the pcena to hear judgment, did not attend at the time vib e ° , the appeals Were called on, the Court would, on the pl i duction of an affidavit of the service of the subpoena, prones to hear the causes in the ahsence of such parties, and The such decree as the justice of the case might require. order was directed to be entered with the Registrar, 0 stuck up in the offices of the Court. TITHE PROSECUTION. (Abridged from the Kilkenny Journal.) On Thursday Mr. Blanchfield and Mr. Byrne, twog e ; tlemen of Kilkenny, were tried before Judge JouNsori.„ They were charged, Ist, for conspiring with others compel the Rev. Dr. Butler, Vicar of Burnchurch, to 5 duce the amount or rate of tithes payable out of O p union ; 2d, for conspiring with o th e rs to injur e Dr. Bo t e j in his property; and 3(1, for tumultuously assembling s causing an affray. All the Catholics were objected to as Jurors on the Par' of the Crown. _ 13RUS Us ItinE t 4 11 f AVOU Tint 1 h! am Whitworth Butler, Esq., sworn.—ls son to Dr. 13r 0 ler, who holds the parish of Burnchurch ; wai home on the 20th of December; about two o'clock 0 : 0 4l a number of people proceeding from Bennet's-bridge Ao wards his father's residence : a short time after saw $C or eight persons going to a ards the house from his fatb c ' e f' entrance gate; they went up to the house; when a' l , ' reached the house his rather asked what they wantet!, could not hear their reply; he went down to admit th ec his father asked them in; they declined, and he was 30 0 4 1 inquiring what they wanted, when witness saw a ec c i ,o l , going down the avenue, which made him draw in father, and fasten the door ; saw the traverser Blancb o, who was one of the seven or eight who first went doss cannot say he saw Mr. Byrne ; the crowd might cony of 1,000 or 1,500 p e rsons ; his father asked them a sec; time from the window what they wanted ; after s re time a reply was given that they came to demand a 11 1 duction of tithe fr o m witne s s's father. During this " 11 ,' the crowd wa s s h ou ti ng an d fl ou ri s hing sticks and bc f r 4 and calling out " No tithes." Mr. Blanchfield was cr ib the crowd at th e ti me; h e was one s t e p o ff his fat'ell door, and o ne o f th e seven or e i g ht w h o ma d e the anlei to witness's fath e r. Th e rep ly o f hi s f a th e r t o that o%d was, he bad not power to ma k e th e laws, neither those who made the demand; and that he never bady, would oppress any person in the coll ec ti on o f his t i g l. This was received with a groan. Th e p eo pl e s aid V O 4 would have an answer. I said they had one, and that, lo ,- father would exact tithe as long as the law allowed 1 5 I then closed the windows, thinking the people ° v : 4 s go away. Shortly after I heard some person addr o 7l o /1 them, when I looked out and saw Mr. Blanchfield statrori on the window-stool, in front of the house, addressia people; could hear what he said; it was to the folio purport—that as my father would not give any sati' o , tion, he would propose a resolution to them ; the rc 9° ,4' tion was that they should not pay tithes to Dr. Butlertd, any other parson, until distrained for them. He boo! " Whoever is of this opinion will say ' aye,' and t a , who were not would say no.' " Five or six said `;,,J , ' I said I was glad to see some honest persons in the e r° 10 0; The leaders seemed not by any means satisfied with I believe none of those, at least the traversers, were e , rishioners. Mr. Blanchfield said there must have t ird some mistake as to the noes. 11e said he would Put" question again, and that not to pay was what they king, they had all before agreed to, and what he would do self. The question was then put a second time, - was received with acclamation ; nobody said thinks they were there more than an hour. John Butler, Esq., brother to the last w itnes 9, o ,o ll'anchfield and By rne at his fath e r's house on the 30 s itf December last ; the two traversers were in the firs t that came t o th e h ouse ; a ll th e c rowd hail hurls or s p pv in their hands ; sonic had ribbons in their hands; there was one flag. ddr d t Mr. Dixosr, counsel for the traversera, in his r iOr i i to the Jury, said it was not surprising that t hose g e d felt the paym e nt of ti t h e s a s an oppression who ( 11 10 1 1 ' 7 , commune with the clergy to whom they were cornrc'eiar., ply them. Mr. Blanchfield or Mr. Ilyt ne did not t er any disposition to riot or disturbance, but did their to preserve peace amongst the people. e The Rev. Theobedd Butler awl John Power, E'V time prisoners a good character. The JUDGE, in charging the Jury, read over the v ' Oo rt" , ment, and, before commenting on the evidence , fa In t` d the Court with his opinions on the tithe systems b oi l , capitulating the evidence, he said that " u., man w 1)° 1 ,0 1° it could doubt there bad been a tumultuous and Li% pi' :tssembly," but that " the guilt of the prisoners w i l o i.ll, l timer question." Their well-supported defence t"" ic e I I the fact that they possessed influence. It was fair t" c e °1 0 00: 4 1 that that influence was used for the prevention of oil A violence; and, in that respect, they behaved 51:iitiee. highly creditable to themselves ; but was that I 4e l) , eA kti Ay • Ity . lin- let t e , 4o tin g 1 , 'th r , Cf 4j, ,sti t