The Sun. — London, England, 1832-05-23 00:00:00

L ion to make a scot and lot right of . election. For i rt, he was unable to conceive any plan of Reform which did not include the enfranchisement of the metropolitan districts—which did not acknowledge the claims of tl e metropolis, founded upon population, wealth, and intelli gence. With respect to its population, the whole of the districts to be enfranchised under the Bill, including the., at present represented, contained a population of 1,474,000 The whole population of Great Britain amounted to 16,000,000—the metropolis then formed one-eleventh part of the whole, yet it was not intended to give it more than one-thirty-fourth part of the representation. So much for the mere matter of population ; but if they took the other elements of representation into account, they must find that the metropolis was entitled to a much larger share of the representation than even one eleventh of the whole number. The Noble Lord then proceeded to contrast the expense of maintaining the poor iti the metropolis with the expense attendant upon their maintenance in certain of the counties of England, con tending, from the difference subsiting between them, that the wealthy and independent classes in the metropolis were much more numerous than in any other part of the empire. He next proceeded to show the great amount of the metropolitan trade, stating that in the year 1829 the mere tntile navy of Grett Britain was formed of no fewer than 19,000 vessels, the tonnage being 219,000. Now one-seventh of the vessels, and one-fourth of the tonnage belonged to London. He then proceeded to compare the revenue of customs in London with that produced in other parts of the country, greatly to the advantage of the me tropolis, showing that the customs in London were sixteen times more productive than the whole of the cuss tones of Ireland, and yet Ireland had 105 Members ; the fact was, that if due weight were given to all the circum stances that should decide the question of representation, the metropolis and the adjoining districts would have no fewer than 200 -Members out of 658. But there were other criterions, even to some of which the Noble Earl himself had adverted. He had said that the intellect and the capital of London ought to be represented, and his mode of doing so was rather curious; for it was in creasing the influence of the freeholders of Mid dleex. There could be no doubt respecting the high intellectual character of the people of London ; he believed there was no city in Europe which contained persons of so.much intelligence, and of such general information; arid the fact was proved by the amount of books sold, and the number of literary and scientific institutions subsisting in •the metropolis. One third of the books published were s )1d in London ; two-thirds of the newspapers of the em pire were published in London, three-fourths of them were read in London, and one-half remained in the metropolis. He had not been much in the habit of attending the scientific institution of the metropolis, but he understood and believed th st many of the lectures deliveredthere would do honour to the Professors of Oxford and Cambridge ; and the Members of those institutions and of the public libraries in London afforded very fair means of estimating the extent of intel ligence to be found in the metropolis. He then called the attention of the House to the generally peaceable and tranquil character of the metropolis, especially that portion of it which possessed representatives, observing that there had been no really serious riots since those of Lord George Gurdon'e time, and thence contrasting the general de meanour of the citizens of London with that of the in habitants of the great manufacturing town•. There was another very important fact to show that the inhabitants of tie metropolis were entitled to an enlarged representa tion, and that there could not be the slightest ground for apprehending that they could be parties to any project for unsettling the present order of things ; it was that out of 85,000 (the average number of dividend warrants) no fewer than 70,000 were issued to inhabitants of the metropolis. He likewise compared the four great metropolitan districts with the four largest o' the provincial boroughs, of course with the same results as in the other in which he bad in stituted comparisons. After going through the several districts—Finsbury, Marylebone, Pancras, and Lambeth —and describing the separate claims that each had to re pre•entation—for example, the high station, great wealth, and general intelligence of one; the commercial and ma nufacturing character of another; the learned institutions contained within a third, as well as its large population, &c. &c.—he came to that which formed the great bone of convention at the present moment—namely, the Tower Hamlets. Those who judged of the Tower Hamlets by the knowledge which they might obtain during a cursory view, obtained when rapidly journeying towards the Con tinent, would form a very erroneous estimate indeed. There was in that district nearly twice as much wealth as in any other. It contained also within itself a separate jurisdiction, which greatly facilitated its being raised to the privileges of representation. He begged Noble Lords to remember that the Tower Hamlets contained within their limits the East India House, the East and West In dia Docks, St. Katharine Docks, the London Docks, and a far grea'er mass of the commercial population and wealth of tie metropolis than any of the other districts: they also contained a large population engaged in the manufac ture of silk. On these grounds, then, he would contend, there was not the slightest danger that those said Tower Hamlets would return demagogues. What he expected, and he was sure all impartial men would join with him in that expectation, was that that district would send to the other House heads of great commercial houses, and ncne other. The 'more he reflected upon the subject, and the more he made himself acquainted with the population of London, the more he became convinced of its vast superi ority over other parts of the kingdom. Could I,e agree with the satirist, that London was " The needy villain's general home, The common sink of Paris and of Rome," theta he might, perhaps, hesitate in imparting to it so large a proportion of the general body of representatives. But when he looked upon it as the great emporium of the commerce of the country, the centre of the moneyed in terests, the general source of information, he could not but feel that if he were to make one more change, it would rather be to extend than to circumscribe the representation of the metropolis. Load IVYNFORD alluded to the riots in London, Nottingham and Bristol, and contended that they proved it was not the want of representation which led to disor der and a breach of the laws. He remarked, too, that in consequence of these riots, many men had given votes in the House against that Bill who otherwise never would have had a seat in it, the votes of their opponents having peen interrupted by the violence of mobs. He maintained, also, that although there might be snore wealth, popula thin and intelligence in the metropolitan districts than any where else in the empire, yet that this did not by any means prove they were entitled to or stood in need of re presentation. It had been said the agricultural districts were much inferior in all the qualities to as hich lie had alluded; fur this very reason it was that they were more entitled to representation, to remedy their poverty and dis icr,2ss, than were the other districts who were in such a flipurshing condition. He agreed with the Noble Lord, that in the Tower Hamlets there was more wealth than in Any district in the world, but it did not all belong to the inhabitants. It was the property of merchants, whose residences were scattered throughout the empire. As to intellect, he believed it was generally in proportion to the number of inhabitants, and sa were the reading-rooms of which the Noble Lord spoke. Representation, he main tained, too, was always to be decided on as a matter of ex pediency, and not to be set up as a matter of right. But he did not like the word expediency in the preamble as re ferring to the taking away of rights—rights should never be taken away except from necessity. But enfranchise ment was to he governed by expediency ; he considered that it was most inexpedient to enfranchise the metropoli tan districts. He had no otjection to give Members to the Tower Hamlets, if the constituency was to consist of that class of its inhabitants in whom the wealth and in telligence resided ; nor would he object to giving the whole sight additional Members to London if they were to be returned by the present constituency. In a commercial place the ancient practice was to confer the elective fran chise on the corporation ; in an agricultural district on the land-owners and farmers, not the labourers ; in a manufacturing place, on the masters and proprietors, not the operative+ ; and he wished not to dissent from this practice until he saw good reason for so doing. Ten pounds he believed to be too low a qualification, and such, not excepting the large towns, it was considered to be by the great majority of the Reformers. The Bill he ob jected to, because it granted to poverty and indigence what it denied to wealth and respectability. Besides, the change would be a source of perpetu el irritation and bribery, as a similar s j Atem was in America. The members for these districts, likewise, he maintained would be no better than delegates. For these reasons, he was going to say lie would vote against the clause ; but he recollected the hu miliating situation in which he was. A few weeks ago he was an independent Member in an independent delibera tive assembly. He was not in that condition now, there tOre he would not call for a division, nor never should, until this state of things was altered. He never should think it right to call for a division under the existing cir cumstances. He had rather again be an advocate ad. dressing Judges than addressing his brother Members, as he was at present; for although he did not doubt the in tegrity or talents of the Noble Lords opposite, \Oleo he consider e d their prejudices, he had no hope of persuading thew to adopt his views. He still, however, thought it his duty to state his objections to the measure ; but, as their Lordahips had no power of deciding, lie would not call 00 them to divide.—(Chet-re.) Ltd ELLENBOROUGII was sorry t t hear tic last observation made by the Noble and Learned Lord. should consider himself an independent Member, althougl alone, and would, if it so pleased him, go below the bot alone. He admitted all the Noble Baron had urged re specting the wealth, population, and intelligence of ti manufactut ing districts, but contended that they did no. need representation, that represent ition would be uaeles to them and mischievous to the public. They were al ready, for all beneficial and practical purposes, represents" by the number of Members resident in them and interested in their prosperity ; and he opposed their enfranchise. ment, because he conceived it would be most detrimental to the interests of the country. The LORD CHANCELLOR could not imagine how the Noble Baron could make out, in a Parliamentar sense, either theoretically or practically, how those dis tricts were represented by Members happening to reside within them. The very name of representative meant that he should he under some control. He received a rust from his constituents, and for this he was account able to them. One great reason, which weighed with him was, that he wished the measure to be final. Now who could suppose that this would be the case it the metropo litan districts were not enfranchised? The Earl of HARROWBY thought the doctrine of the Noble and Learned Lord was even more subversive of the Government and the Constitution than this Reform Bill. He always understood that a Member, when once elected, was not simply the representative of his own particular place, but of the country at large. The Noble and Learned Lord seemed to say, that he should be under the absolute control of his constituents. If this were the case, these Members would be the daily and Lowly slaves of public meetings. Look to Westminster and London ; see how they deal with their Members, and consider what injunc tions would be fulminated over the beads of a metropoli tan Member. Consider what would then be the influence of Political Unions and public meetings. For himself, without disrespect to the class it was proposed to enfran chise (for in these Meetings the Members would have no means of distinguishing them from the mere rabble) lie would say, that he had rather live under any Government in the world, than under the rule of the slaves of a vile democracy. The LORD CHANCELLOR expressed his astonish ment at the extraordinary misapprehension under which the Noble Earl appeared to labour with respect to the observations which had fallen from him. The Noble Eat I seemed t,) tl ink that he (the Lord Chancellor) had said, that when an individual is returned to the House of Commons, he was a Member for his particular constituents only. Now he had never said anything of the kind. He had never said that the Members for the metropolitan dis. tricts, for instance, were not to consult and to act for what they cot ceived to be the b n fit oF the whole country. What he had said was—and ha had never heard the doctrine doubted—that every Member of Parliament had constituents to whom he was accountable ; from whom he had received a trust, and to whom that trust was to be surrendere 1, being accountable for the manner in which he had executed it. Was that saving that he was to attend only to their particular interests, and to no other? When, however, he said that every Member when he surrendered his trust to his constituents was accountable to them for the manner in which he had executed it, he begged not to be understood to cast the slightest doubt on the right of the constituents of any Member, from time to time, to meet for the purpose of communicating to such Member their opinions and wishes. How far he might be bound to attend to those opinions and wishes was another question, which must, of course, depend upon the circumstances of every particular case. The Earl of HARROWBY, in explanation, repeated, that it was an unconstitutional doctrine that it was the duty of a Member to change his general views of what was beneficial, in consequence of the orders of his constituents. The Earl of CARNARVON, adverting to the case of Sir Robert Wilson, observed, that in that case the Hon. Member was not only under the control of hisconstituenta, but felt himself actually obliged to relinquish his seat. This control would be more dangerous in the metropolitan dis tricts than anywhere else. In his opinion, a Member for St. Mawes, or any other small place, was as touch a Mem ber for the wl.ole country, as a Member for Manchester, or any other large place enfranchised by tho Bill would be. The LORD CHANCELLOR observed, that a Member of Parliament must always be under a certain control of his constituents. They had no power, however, to force a Member out of his place. They were only entitled, from time to time, to offer their instructions to their represen tative ; and if, at the end of the period for which he was required, they were not satisfied with his conduct, they might refuse to return him a second time. With refe rence to the case of Southwark, it ought to be recollected that Sir Robert Wilson had given a pledge to his consti tuents on his election. The Earl of ('ARNARVON said a few words in ex planation. It was not the Members of the House of Com mons alone- who were under control. Were they (the House of Lords) under no control? What prevented them at that moment from following their own judgment, but the very dictation of the Political Unions which had been alluded to ? The Marquess of SALISBURY observed that it would be of no use to press questions to a division in the Com mittee, as the opinions of those who divided would not be recorded on the Journals ; but he reserved to himself the only lower left him—that of dividing the House %%hen the report was brought up, upon every material point that it contained. On the heads of the authors and supporters of the Bill would rest all the evil that would result from it, and he prayed God to grant that that evil might not be so great as he apprehended. On the Earl of SHAFTESBURY putting the question, however, Lord WHARNCLIFFE demanded a division, The nuinhers were:— For the motion 9l Against. it 3i Majority for Ministers' —3s Finsbury was then added to the clause. O❑ the motion to add Marylebone, The Duke of NEWCASTLE observed, that they had two plans of Reform to discuss ; that of the Noble Earl, and that of the Noble Baron ; the latter, in his opinion was as ob jectionable as the former ; the only difference between them bring, that the one was genuine, and the other not so. He felt that the character of their Lordships was deeply affected by what was going on. He did not quarrel with the Noble Lords opposite, for they were consistent, although most pernicious in their opinions ; but he quarrelled with the Noble Lords on his side of the House who turned round upon them in a harlequin kind of fashion.—(A laugh.) Of this he was persuaded, that no earthly good could re sult from the course which they were at present adopting. Fur himself he would give nu farther opposition to the measure; and he thought it would save a great deal of their Lordships' time to terminate this solemn mockery, and to allow Lord Shaftesbury as once to read to the end of the Bill.—(A laugh.) Lord WHARNCLIFFE could not agree with the Noble Duke, but must do his duty in the Committee, when cer tain parts of the Bill, of which he disapproved, came under discussion. He should do his duty as an independent Member of that House. From the beginning of the agita tion of the question of Reform, he had always been of opinion that to a considerable measure of Reform they must concede. It was true that he had last year voted against the second reading of the Bill fur the reasons which lie had stated on the occasion. But he had voted for it this year, it being in his opinion a paramount necessity to read the Bill a second time after it had been twice sent up to them by the House of Commons. He had agreed to the second reading, however, with the view of endeavouring to amend the Bill i❑ the best manner he could in the Committee; and he should fail in his duty if he did not do so. It might be advantageous to express an opinion by a vote in the Committee, and it was for that purpose he had re quired the recent division. It was his intention to divide the Committee whenever he might consider it beneficial to do so. The motion was then agreed to. Lambeth, Bolton, Bradford, and Blackburn, were then ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Os the question for adding Brighton, The Earl of HADDINGTON said, that if Brighton were enfranchised, it appeared to him that Margate, and the other places from which petitions had last night been presented, ought to be enfranchised. The population of Brighton, like that of every other watering place, was fluctuating : he was not aware that there was any manu facture carried on in it, and be believed that it bad great influence on the representation for the county of Sussex. flie same observations were, indeed, applicable to Chel tenham. He had never heard of any claim which Brigh ton possessed, that was not possessed by the places hum which he had last night presented petitions. The Duke of RICHMOND observed, that Brighton was a place of considerable importance. Its population amounted to 40,6:34 soul*, and it paid in assessed taxes the enormous sum of 35,5801. They had already given the tight of representation to towns which paid vouch smaller sums :—to Leeds, which paid only 18,0001. ; to Bolton, which paid only 4,1351. ; to Sheffield, which pail only 12,6 051 . ; and it was proposed to give it to Dartmouth, which paid only 6751. Brighton paid more in assessed taxes than nine large towns (the names of which the Noble Duke mentioned). Ile was quite surprised, therefore, to hear tEe objections of the Noble Eirl. Was the Noble Earl aware what a constituency the Members for Brighton would have ? It would be composed princi pally of persons who, having accumulated fortunes by ho uest industry, had settled there. The Members for Brigh lon would be always found the advocates of peace an l 4001 order, and must, therefore, be regarded with favou. by those who took what were called conservative views He had no personal interest in the question, for be hid n property there. He only hoped that the House would not in consequence of its being a watering place, take an et roneous view of its importance. The Noble Duke cob chided by observing, that Brighton had a still stronge: claim to representation than any be had yet mentioned. There were more houses in that town rated at forty pound• a year than in all the rest of the boroughs contained in •lie Schedule. He confessed, indeed, that he felt much surprise to hear the Noble Baron object to enfranchise any place possessed of so much wealth, intelligence, and re spectability. The Eail of MALMSBURY complained that no par. ticular interest was to he repr,sented in the town of Brighton, and that the Government were, therefore, in• consistent i❑ proposing to give it Members purely bee Luse there were a number of residents of respectability. Dart. mouth, a place of great importance, carrying on an ex tenstve trade, and requiring a representative for its pecu liar interests, was to have one of its Members taken away ; while Brighton, a place without any trade, manufacture, or peculiar interests whatever, was, on the contrary, to have two representatives..—(Hear, hear.) The question that Brighton stand part of the schedule was then put and agreed to. Halifax and Macclesfield were also ordered to stand part of the schedule. . . • _ _ On the question that Oldham stand part of the schedule, Lord ELLENBOROUGH complained that Oldham was not a town, but a township of ten miles square. He recommended the Government to abandon the idea of giving representatives to it and Rochdale, and other places in Lancashire, and to revert to the plan in the farmer Bill, giving two Members to Manchester and Salford united, and two to Bolton, while they might, at the same time, most advantageously increase t` le representation of that great manufacturing district, by conferring six Mem bers on the county of Lancaster. He thought that course would be infinitely preferable, and form a much fairer method of giving expression to the opinions of the pecu• liar interests of Lancashire. Lord DURHAM observed, that the recommendations of the Noble Lord, in the present instance, afforded little encouragement to the Government to adopt any future suggestions from their opponents. The change in the Bill had been introduced at the desire of the Noble Baron's friends in the other House ; and he (Lord Durham) saw no advantages to be obtained by departing from the plan now, at the suggestion of the Noble Baron in that [louse. Lord ELLENBOROUG II defended his consistency in proposing these Amendments ; and observed, that he adopted now the course he had originally declared he would take—namely, to propose such alterations as he thought expedient in the Committee; and if they were not agreed to, he reserved to himself the right of taking the sense of the House on the third reading of the Bill. After a few observations from Lord Suffield, Lord Holland, Lord Haddington, and Lord Radnor, on the sub ject of the rising importance of Oldham, Lord ELLENBOROUGH took occasion to remind their Lordships that they were proceeding in that House on a totally different principle from that which was adopted in the Commons. Iu the Lower House, they began by disfranchising a large number of boroughs. In that House they were, on the con trary, inquiring to what number of boroughs and towns they could extend the franchise, and if they could not bear in mind that in every cue they were robbing some place of its right in order to confer it on another, which perhaps had very little higher claims on their attention, they would, he was sat.sfied, in volve themselves and the country in endless trouble and contention. This, lie repeated, was the question. They were in every case cal, d on to draw a comparison between a place which had possessed the right of returning Members for ages, and some other place of a perhaps not much greater importance, which it had obtained in the course of later years. This it was necessary they should hear in mind when they proposed t o give representation to Oldham, which hail not much greater wealth or importance than some of the places they proposed to disfranchise.—(hear.) The Earl of WINC HILSEA, after protesting against the division to which their Lordships had come during hie absence, and after restating his opinions on the subject of Reform, took that opportunity to ask the Noble Eirl at the head of his Majesty's Government whether he was prepared to consent to any modifications whatever in the Bill then before the House. He slid not speak of amend ments with respect to the franchise, or to the 101. right of voting, although to them lie entertained objections ; but he wished to know whether individuals were still to enjoy the right of voting for both counties and boroughs on the faith of the same property ? He asked the que•tion, that he might know what course it became his duty to pursue, if the Noble Earl persisted in trampling on the character of that House, and on the liberties of his country. Earl GREY could not object to any protest the Noble Earl might think proper to make for the purpose ofmain taining his principles, or supporting his reputation in the eyes of the country ; but he objected to the questions of the Noble Earl, repeated as they were night after night in the same words, as a trespass on the time of the House, and as calculated to be of no good to their discussions. With regard to the course which the Noble Earl had inti mated it to be his intention to pursue, he (Earl Grey) re membered a time when the Noble Eael left that House with a declaration that he would never again return to take a part in their deliberations.—(Hear, and a laugh.) The Noble Earl had, however, returned ; and he (Earl Grey,) notwithstanding the differences of opinion of the present hour, looked forward to the time when the Noble Etrl would be found discharging tile important duties of his station with credit to himself, with advantage to his coun try, and with that sincere and honest desire to act up rightly and conscientiously, which he believed actuated all the Noble Earl's movements and declarations. With reference now to what had fallen from the Noble B iron, (Lind Ellenborough) on the subject of the importance of the duties which now devolved on that House, compared with the Commons, in the consideration of this schedule, he would ask the Noble Baron how that declaration was to be reconciled with the argument of the Noble Baron and his friends, that the alteration in the placing of the clauses was merely formal, and of no possible importance.— (Hear, hear, hear.) He bad contended, and be thought justly, that the vote which bound him to take the enfranchisement clause before the disfranchisement, was a departure from the principle of the Bill, although he had been taunted by the Noble Baron's friends, as attaching unnecessary importance to a decision, which was so trivial and unimportant, that it could not throw any difficulties in the way of their future proceedings.—(Hear, hear.) The declaration of the Noble Baron had, however, shown them the importance of that vote, and convinced the house of the propriety of adhering to the arrangement of the House of Cotnnions for the preservation of the principle of the Bill. Applying himself to the question of the Noble Earl (Winchilsea), he could only say that he should feel happy to hear the arguments of the Noble Eat!, when they came to the decision of the question of voting for cc unties and towns; and if he was convinced by them, he certainly should not hesitate to give his support to the Noble Earl's amendments. He was not so much wedded to any particular clause as to be unable to see the ad vantage of judicious amendments if they were offered; but at present his prejudices were in favour of the Bill as it stood. The Earl of WINCHILSEA, from these observation , ' saw plainly that there was nothing to hope from the Noble Earl with respect to recommendations for the improve ment of the Bill, and he thought, therefore, it would be much better for the clerk to read the clauses over, and let their Lordships pass it at ouce.—(llear, hear, and a laugh.) Reference had been made to his conduct during the discussions on another question ; but that measure, much as he objected to it, was not carried by any unwar rantable and unconstitutional exercise of power, such as that which was exercised now ; for it made no difference whether one hundred new Peers walked in at one door, or one hundred old Peers walked out at the other, the inde pendence of that House was equally destroyed. (The Noble Earl was proceeding to vindicate the vote he gave on the Catholic Bill, when a Peer cried " Question.") Question !—(exclaimed the Noble Earl)—Let the indi vidual speak out and show himself who calls question. — (Loud calls to order). Lord LITTLETON, as the individual alluded to, said that he, sitting as he did beside the Earl Marshal, the Premier Peer of England, felt himself justified in calling Question ! when he thought the N o bl e E ar l was a lluding in terms su ffi ciently strong to matters not connecte d with the sub.) , et before the House, Lord KENYON was of opinion, th a t th e Noble E trl had not violated order in attempting to vindicate his con duct from the allus ions of the Noble Earl (Grey). Ea.! GREY said, the Noble Bar on (K enyon ) who ruse to order had a little infringed the order of the House him self. Nothing could be further from his intention than any offensive allusion to the conduct of the Noble Earl. The Earl of WINCHILSE said, that his feelings had been strong on the question, and they were not changed ; for religion was, in his opinion, a question of no slight im ce. put tan • He would be ready to th e last hour of his ex istence to justify the course which 1e pursued on the passing of the Catholic Emancipation Bill. He had de terniined on that occasion never again to set foot in that House ; but he had since been induced to depart from that resolution by the advice of friends to whose opinions L. felt bound to defer. Lord LITTLETON begged to apologize to their Lord ships for his, perhaps, irregular interruption of the Noblt Earl's (Winchilsea) speech. But if the irrelevancy of th. Noble Lord's arguments was not a sufficient excuse for tl e interruption, the manner in which those arguments wet, delivered would be, he hoped, taken by the House as his apology.—( Hear, hear.) Lord SUFFIELD wished to remind Noble Lords that the real question before the House was, that Oldham stand part of the clause.—( Hear, hear.) Lord WHARNCLIFFE denied that the proposition of the Noble Lord near him was an interference with the dis franchisement part of the Bill; neither was that question upon which some days ago the Noble Lords opposite were left in a minority an interference, as bad been pretended, with that part of the Bill.—(Hear.) The Marquess of LONDONDERRY must say, that he entirely concurred in the observations of a Noble Duke upon that (Opposition) side of the House, that it would be better to pass the Bill at once without discussion.— (Hear, and a laugh.) But he had still some hope that their Lordships might by assiduity effect some mitigatio❑ of the mischievous tendency of the Bill—he did not mean that he should put Ministers to the necessity of a journey to Windsor.—(Hear, and a laugh.) As the Noble Earl opposite at present stood, be (Lord Londonderry) did not envy him, and would rather have (as we understood) the little honour which he himself possessed, than the power of the Noble Earl.—(Laughter. ) The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the question before the House was simply this, whether the word " Oldham" should be inserted in the part of the clause to which they had arrived?—(Hear, hear.) With respect to that borough, it was to be considered, that indepen dently of the country parts which were to be included with it, there was a large town, of which:the population could not be less than 20,000; and the inhabitant house holders of the suburb were for the most part engaged in the same trade with those of the town.—(Hear.) Lord KENYON said that if their Lordships would ex amine schedule C, they would find that the cotton trade, which was the trade of Oldham, would be sufficiently re. presented without giving Members to that place. The schedule already contained Manchester, Bolton, Salford, and Blackburn, of all which the staple trade was the cotton manufacture. Earl GREY was understood to say that the principal trade of Blackburn was not the cotton trade. Lord KENYON begged that the Noble Earl would not interrupt him.—(Hear, hear ; Order, order.) He should not permit the Noble Earl to interrupt him.— (Cheers, and cries of " Order.") He was an independent Member of that House, and he would not allow herself to be in terrupted. If he could allow any Noble Lord to interrupt, it should not be the Noble Lord who had endeavoured to subvert and destroy the privileges of that House.—(Hear.) Eail GREY rose merely to say, that he bad not in tended to interrupt th e N o bl e L or d, b u t o n ly to set him right by stating that the trade of Blackburn was not as the Noble Baron supposed—the cotton-trade.—(Hear.) Lord KENYON :was satisfied with the explanation of the Noble Earl, and he was sorry he bad mistaken the Noble Earl's intention.—(Hear, hear.) When be saw that, by the enfranchisement of Manchester, and the other places which he had mentioned, sufficient representation was given to the particular interests with which those places were connected, he could not admit that there was any reason for giving Members to Oldham, which, com pared to the other towns, was au insignificant place.— (Hear.) The consequence of the Bill would be the de struction of the Monarchy.—(Hear, bear, hear.) By forcing that measure upon their reluctant Sovereign, the Noble Earl , pposite had placed the King in a situation in which he could make no choice of a Minister; and the advice the Noble Earl had given his Sovereign to exercise his prerogative in so unconstitutional a manner as to de stroy the independence of that House, was abandoned and roost atrocious— Earl GREY—Atrocious, my Lords !--(Vehement cheering.) I put it to your Lordships, is it consistent with the usages of this House, or with ordinary propriety, that the Noble Lord should apply such words to me ? For my part, I can only reject the words with contempt and scorn.—( Hear, hear, awl Order.) Lord KENYON—In the words of the Noble Lord, I say, that I repel this attack upon me with contempt and scorn.—(Hear, hear.) I repeat, that I think the conduct of a Minister of the Crown, in advising the most unconsti tutional exercise of the King's highest privilege, fur the purpose of destroying the independence of this House, was abandoned and atrocious.—(Vehement cries of Order, and Hear, hear.) Whether the Noble Earl be pleased or not with my using the word atrocious, the privileges of this House have not yet been abrogated to such an extent— (Cheers)—that the Noble Earl can prevent me from saying that I thall always feel, that it was a most atrocious act of the Minister to give such advice to the King.—(Cheers, and cries of Order.) Earl GREY—Anything more unparliamentary, disor. derly, and atrocious—(Cheers, and loud cries of Order) —than the applying of such words to me, I never heard in this House.—(Cheers ) It is for the House to act as may seem befitting its own dignity ; but for me, all that remains to me is to throw back those words with the utmost scorn, contempt, and indignation.—(Hear, hear, order.) When, on a question having no relation to such a topic, the Noble Baron thought proper to arraign my conduct, I can only say, let the Noble Baron arraign me in a regular mariner, and I am ready to vindicate my con duct. —(Cheers. ) On this occasion I shall say no more than that I have never done anything inconsistent with my duty to my Sovereign, to my country, or with that debt of gratitude which I owe his Majesty, from whom I have on all occasions received as great kindness as any Minister of the Crown ever received at the hands of his Sovereign. —(Hear, hear.) I repeat, then, that I throw back with scorn and contempt the charge that my conduct has been abandoned and atrocious.—(Repeated cries of Order, and hear.) But, my Lords, this is not the time to argue those topics ; and I shall therefore say no more than this, that if his Majesty was left alone, that was done by my fault.—(Cheers from both sides.) I resigned my situation when I found that I could not fill it with honour to myself, or with advantage to the :country—(Hear, hear) —and I returned to office when I found that my services could be useful to the King and to my country, and not derogatory to my own honour.—(Much cheering.) The Noble Lord has thought proper to make upon me an at tack which was improper and indecent.—(Cheers, and cries of Order.) My Lords, as the Noble Baron has made this attack upon me at a time when the question before the House is whether the word Oldham shall be inserted in the clause—if the Noble Lord does not think proper to retract the expressions which he has used, my only answer to the attack made upon me is, that I repel it with scorn and contempt.—(Cheers, and cries of Order.) The Earl of WINCHILSEA thought that the Noble Err! was exceedingly sensitive to-night.—(Cheers, arid Order, order.) On a former occ ision the same words had been used by a Noble Earl on that (the Opposition) side of the House—not once, but twice.—(Hear, bear.) , Addressee to the Crown had been, he might say, in a degree sanctioned by the Noble Earl, which were se ditious, unparliamentary, and treasonable.—(Order.) Eirl GREY asked, did the Noble Earl charge him with bringing forward or encouraging treasonable addresses to his Majesty?—(Hear, hear.) The E;rl of WINCHILSEN did not accuse the Noble Earl of directly sanctioning and encouraging those attacks upon the Sovereign ; but he said that the most seditious calumnies and treasonable publications had been put forth in every part of the country under the name of Addresses to the Crown, and the Government of the Noble Earl had done nothing to check them. In that way it was (as the Noble Earl was understood) that he had accused the Earl of sactiuning those publications.—(Hear.) The Duke of CUMBERLAND assured the House that he did not intend to occupy much of their Lordships' time, and be trusted and hoped that no Peer would suppose that anything which he should say was intended to irri tate the House more than it seemed to be irritated at present.--(Hear, hear.) His only object in rising was to implore Noble Lords to tranquillize themselves, and to carry on their debates temperately in the present state of the country.—(Hear, hear.) Surely the way in which the debate was conducted that evening was not the way either to oppose the Bill or carry it—(Hear, hear) and with neither the opposing or the carrying of the Bill would he have any thing to do, if the course adopted that evening should be persevered in. He trusted that any op position which any of their Lordships might think proper to give to the Bill would be pursued calmly, and that their Lordships would not allow their passion to get the better of their sense.—(Hear. ) The question was then put, and Oldham was voted part of the clause. Stockton, Stoke-upon Trent, and Stroud, were then severally voted part of the clause. . . The question was then put upon the fourth clause, which respects the places included in schedule D. Lord WYNFORD sail, that the clause differed from the corresponding one in the two former Reform Bills, and wished an amendment to be made which would restore it to the same form. His objection was, that the clause, as it now stood, rendered the operation of the Reform Bill dependent upon the passing of another, the Boundaries' Bill, which might not pass that Session or the next, so that if a dissolution should take place in the mean time, the Bill would be inoperative as respected the place in that chose. If the r turns were perfect, the House could settle the boundaries, and send back the Bill perfect to tfii other House. There was no precedent for making th , operation of one Bill dependent upon another to be pa , st at a future time. Such a proceeding was contrary to ever principle of legislation. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the Act cf . Union furnished a precedent for the clause to which the Noble and Learned Lord objected. The Earl of RADNOR could not concur in the appre hension of the Noble and Learned Lord that there was any danger that Parliament would stultify itself so far as not to pass the Boundaries' Bill. The Noble and Learned Lord said, that in case of a dissolution taking place be fore the Boundaries' Bill should have been passed, then the places contained in the schedule would not be able to send Members to Parliament. But the fact was that even supposing that the Boundaries Bill should never pass, there was in the Reform Bill itself a schedule L, which provided for the boundaries of those towns.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble and Learned Lord, therefore, had found a mare's nest. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the clause to which his Noble Friend (Lord Radnor) had alluded was a temporary provision, guarding against the inconvenience which might arise if a dissolution should take place after the passing of the Reform Bill, and before the passing of the Boundaries' Bill. Lord HOWARD of EFFINGHAM thought that two much stress was laid upon the importance of precedent. He would ask them to look to the state of the country, and to say whether they were not bound to do the best they could for their country, whether they could find precedents for their measures or not.—(Cheers.) Lord ELLENBOROUGH asked, did the Noble Lord know, that, until after the passing of the Boundaries' Bill, all the boroughs in schedule B should remain untouched? He thought that the most convenient course would be to carry the Boundaries' Bill, and the Reform Bill through Parliament pani passu.—(Questiun, question.) The clause was then agreed to. Lord ELLENBOROUGH said, that nothing which be had heard tended to diminish his objections to the schedule (D). On the question that Ashton•under-Lyne stand part of the schedule, Lord ELLENBOROUGH objected to the enfranchise ment of that place. It had not appeared on the first or second Bill, and he had heard no reason wherefore it ap peared now in that Schedule. He knew that the people of Staley-bridge did not wish to be enfranchised as a part of the constituency of Agit ; but there was no reason why 2V.hton should not be united to Oldham, with which it was connected. The LORD CHANCELLOR said. that Ashton-under- Lyne was a place of considerable importance, containing fourteen thousand inhabitants. Its interests were quite distinct from those of Oldham, and he saw no reason why the latter place should be swamped.—(A laugh.) The objection on the part of the people of Staley-bridge to be enfranchised was not so much that they did not wish to be represented, but they did not wish to be united with Ashton. The affections of the two places were not in direct proportion with their proximity.—(A laugh.) The objection of the parties themselves to the union was a sufficient reason why they should not be united.—(A laugh.) As to the difference between this clause and the former Bill, be (the Lord Chancellor) considered it an improvement. Ashton-under-Lyne was then voted part of the schedule. The question that Bury stand part of the schedule was agreed to without opposition. On the question that Chatham stand part of the schedule, Lord ELLENBOROUGH could see no reason why this place should be united to Rochester, on the principle on which such large additions had been made to the con stituency of Bristol, Liverpool, and other places. By this Bill Chatharn would become like Greenwich, a Govern ment nomination borough. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that it hail been found that Rochester itself could furnish an adequate con stituency, and Chatham was of sufficent importance to be represented. After a few words from the Marquess of LANSDOWN, Lord ELLENBOROUGH, and the Earl of DARNLEY, Chat ham was voted part of the clause. On the question that Cheltenham be included in the schedule, Lord ELLENBOROUGH intimated that he would not oppose the enfranchisement of this place, as it would furnish a most respectable constituency. The question having been agreed to, the CHAIRMAN reported progress, and the House adjourned at Twelve, to Wednesday, Ten o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, MAY 22. was ordered to be printed. LO V r A d s ß o ß n E the br S o t u . g L h e t o n u a p rd a 's r l e rn o p r r t o o v f em th e n e t a ß m i e l n l, d w in h e i n c t h s of the Lords Mr. HALIBURTON brought up the Report of the in Lord ou r S n T f A t hNeLBEi Birmingham presenteda p and Lonet it ino Warrington donu Railway way Bli. Committee on the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway Bill. The Committee reported that the Orders of the House relating to Railway Bills had not been complied with. Mr. SPEAKER said he had wished that the report had been differently worded, but it was not brought under his notice until it was too late to remedy it. According to the standing orders of the House, no petition could be re ceived or complaint made of a non-compliance with the standing orders after the second reading of a private Bill, but those orders did not refer to Road or Enclosure Bills. The terms of this report were calculated to mislead.—(Hear, hear.) There was a standing order especially relating to Railroad Bills, and stating that a certain portion of subscribers should be obtained who had pledged them selves, their heirs, or successors, to complete the under taking, before the Bill could be proceeded in. It was the duty of the Committee to see that that list was lona fide, and in this case the Committee had ascertained that a suf ficient number of subscribers had not been obtained. There were two alternatives ; one, to lay the report on the table, and the other was to refer it to a Select Committee, upon the petition of any parties who might desire to proceed in it. The report was then ordered to lie on the table. On the motion of Mr. HUME, the Bill to alter and amend the 23d George 11., and 19th George 111., for the more speedy recovery of small debts in the Tower Hamlets, was read a third time and passed. Mr. TENNYSON presented a petition from George Harris, of York•chanibers, St. James's, Westminster, praying to be heard by Counsel against the Hull Docks Bill.—Referred to the Committee. RESTRICTION ON THE DRAMA. Mr. LYTTON— BULWER presented petitions from Mr. %V. H. Hale, a Magistrate, for an alteration in the law of arrest, from the Trades Union of Perth, for a repeal of the taxes on knowledge, and a very large peti tion from London and the suburbs, for a repeal of all re strictions on dramatic performances. The Hon. Member spoke at some length in support of the latter petition, but in so low a tone that it was impossible to catch what he said. Mr. HUNT could not refrain from expressing his ap probation of the presentation of that petition by the Hon. Member, and was glad to hear it was that Hon. Member's intention to bring in a Bill to repeal all restrictions on the drama. According to the present system there was a complete monopoly of talent; and when it was considered giventt hh highaa t t tiniCoclen performers,s e forp consequence u rf e o It:L3 visitinge of that the t ar h ne a cd t l monopoly eaitv.tgeiede tiap,seua public theatres, it h m i t wereonw r s a s e oscahllheimga night's h i sums g w e t hi d m e t r , li e e s they were done away with. It was a well-known fact employment as was received by many clergymen of the Church of England for a whole year's duty.—(llear.) Mr. HUME thought the plan suggested of having a Committee to inquire into the privileges of the large theatres was the best way of doing justice to all parties, and the sooner that was brought forward the better. lie hoped the lion. Member would not delay his motion till the time lie bad stated. Mr. BULWER observed that it would take some time to arrange the preliminaries for the motion, but he would bring it forward iu ten days. Mr. E. PEEL presented a petition from Newcastle. under-Lyme, which had been agreed to at a meeting which took place between the period of the resignation of his Majesty's Ministers and their re-appointment, praying the House not to grant supplies till the Reform Bill became law. The Hon. Member thought it would be much better that the care of the Bill should be intrusted tothose handswho h o a b of those t ho r s o e u h b t o t a d f s w t a r v e a n r u d 0 , u than b p po a . e placed d it . in the Mr. HUME would take that opportunity of adverting to what fell from himself and the Hon. Member for Stam ford on a late occasion, which seemed to have been very much misunderstood. Wnat he had real:) , stated was, that lie thought it would be for the interest of the country if those persons who held situations in public offices, and who were opposed to Reform, were discharged. The Hon. Member for Stamford had understood him to recommend an immediate creation of Peers, and upon that assumption he had made some observations which had been very much misunderstood. He (Mr. Hume) therefore felt anxious to eive the Hon. Gentleman an opportunity of explaining what he really did state. Mr. TENNYSON felt himself under great obliga tions to the lion. Member for giving him an opportunity of setting himself right with the country and the House. He had certainly understood the Hon. Member for Mid• dlesex to recommend an immediate creation of Peers. When he stated that he trusted means would be adopted for carrying the Reform Bill, lie certainly meant those means which the Crown had been understood to re ject. Now it had been stated in the public Press that be had had the honour of an interview with his Ma jesty, and that at that time be had given advice to his Sovereign directly contrary to the whole tenour of his past life. Such a charge was altogether inconsistent and unfounded.—(Cheers.) With respect to the senti ment that had fallen from him he had really nothing to retract : he stated then, and he repeated it now, that if the Reform Bill could be carried with out doing that which every man must feel was a course to be avoided, as it would create a gre at shock to the Constitution, it would be most desirable.--- He had stated then, and he stated it now, that had he been a Minister of the King he should have given the Rune advice to his Majesty a 9 his present Ministers bad done, and if that had not been acceded to he should have thought it his duty to tender his resignation. But it did not follow from that that the Crown was to be ca lumniated, when it was desirous, if possible, of avoiding such a course. He trusted, however, the means were now found to carry the Bill through.—(Hear, hear, hear.) With respect to giving his advice to his Ma jesty not to create Peers, it must be perfectly well known to the House that he was one of those who had blamed Ministers for not creating them long ere this. He felt that he had been most improperly calumniated, r he had never expressed any public, private, or any other opinion on the subject than this, that it was impossible for his Majesty to form a Go vernment without bringing forward a strong measure of Reform. He had never given any advice inconsistent with the opinions he had always held. It had been said that he had been in treaty with the Duke of Wellington for the pur pose of getting into office, and that boroughs, in which be and his friends had an interest, advocated Anti-Refornl principles. All these assertions he treated as they deserved, and could hardly bring himself to believe it neceasary to mention the statements he had done, when the principles which he had always advocated had been for so long I time known to every body. He would, however, say, that with no human being had be had any communication either directly or indirectly, for the formation of a MI nistry. He retracted nothing he had previously stated, feeling convinced what he had said was perfectly consistent with the opinions he had ever held.—(Cheers). Mr. BEAU:IIOYr thought the House would derive very little advantage from entering into an abstract dig cussion on the creation or non-creation of Peers. How' ever touch the constitution might be shaken by the crest' Lion of Peers for a particular purpose, it would receive 11 , much greater shock if Lord Grey did not create a suffi-' cient number of Peers to carry the Reform Bill. Mr. VERNON presented a petition from a place is Derby, in favour of Reform. Mr. ATHERLEY presented a petition from South' atripton, praying the House to withhold the supplies untl the Reform Bill should become law. The HoN. AIEMBEIt also presented a similar petitiol from Cheltenham. Mr. SANFORD presented a like petition from So' mersetshire. Mr. BRISCOE concurred entirely with the prayer 0 the petition, and trusted Lord Grey would immediate) create Peers, for the purpose of carrying the Bill. Mr. TENNYSON said he would join most heartill with the wish of the Hon. Member, if he thought it pos9i; We to anticipate the failure of the measure, but he believe , the means had now been found for carrying the Bill. Mr. E. A. SANFORD then presented a petition foil Chan], praying the House nut to grant any supplies til the Reform Bill was passed. Lord MORPETH said, lie rose to present a number 0 petitions from the county of York, all of which arose 0 0 of the circumstances in which the country was lately placed but out of which he was happy to say we had so gl' riously emerged. He would shortly state the objet of the petitioners by saying, that they all concur'' , in praying that House to take all constitutional means i its power to procure the passing of the Reform Bill safer to its end, viz., the receiving of the Royal assent. Mr. RAaISDEN, Mr. STRICKLAND, and Sir J. JONI' STONE, severally supported the prayer of the petitions. The NOBLE LORD then presented petitions from Deo 4 bury, Huddersfield, and Halifax, signed by 13,000 pefl sons ; Hepton•bridge, Pudsey, Murfield, Bradford, Leed' Addingley, Wakefield, Whitby, Armly, Cleckheat& Dingley, and Oatley, all in Yorkshire, and one fro . " King's Lynn, Norfolk, to the same effect. Mr. HUNT had a petition from his constituents whi' l had been in his hands for ten days, during which he h $ had no opportunity of presenting it. He hoped that 11 , ) . Noble Lord (Altho r p) wou ld a ll ow h i m to get rid of IP burden at that time. Lord ALTHORP could not comply with the IT' Member's request, because there were so many notic i upon the book. However, to-morrow the Hon. MernlS would have an opportunity of presenting his petitii when he would have no objection to extend the time (' presenting petitions till seven o'clock. Mr. HUNT said it was very seldom that he had bee absent from his duty since he had had the honour 0 1 seat in that House, b u t one o f hi s family was ill in tt country, and he would not have it in his power to be hia place to-morrow. Lord ALTHORP, under those circumstances, could fl have the slightest objection to the Hon. Member then pr stinting his petition. Mr. HUNT then presented the petition, which e from Preston, signed by upwards of 3,000 persons is 11 , than three hours. On he ar i ng o f th e res i gnat i on o f I‘ l nisters, his constituents had immediately held a meetitl at which the p e titi on was agree d to ; t h ey , t hi n ki n g matter was one of life and death, had sent it off iinlS diately, otherwise it would have been more oumerool signed. It prayed for Reform, universal suffrage, ea° ponied with the protection of the ballot, and annual P. liaments, and prayed that House to stop all supplies t ' that was granted. Mr. BARING said, tlatinconseq consequence privilege ceofalter thethe title of his Bill for t abolition of h joyed by Members of the Legislature, he moved that t ,, order for it should be di t charged.—Leave was th e n gly to bring in a Bill fur vacating the seat of insole s Members. in favour ROBINSON fnfan inquiry pre presented a into the petition state from of the e trade NcVor of etetil country. FREE TRADE. Mr. G. ROBINSON, in pursuance of notice, metre for a Select Committee to inquire into the p e lle' . adhering to the system of free trade. He began by aofi c , ing the indulgence of the House, and proceeded to de i , the origin of the system o f f ree tra d e, wh i ch, he conte nd arose out of the change in the currency in 1819. Ile e verted to the presentation, by Mr. Baring, of the pet', from the merchants, &c. of London, in the following Y e ., and after eulogising the late Mr. Huskisson,: com pl° that those who succeeded him in office had carried principles farther than he ever meant them to exls r , What he desired most was, to press upon the House fitness of encouraging our own manufactures, and of ploying our own population, for which the enriching e few commercial speculators could be but poor come, :ion. order rßteo T p s( h ) i ito H wo f o t n ht . ahte t Member tenrdps:i t n l cc i then nl e r a oi d tnt e e v w a r hn i o inc u i s ic e ni x tm t pn a r c eo t r s cee e,J I°; was mistaken ; and he w e nt on to s h ow, that no fore nb whileth e they y se h n a t d Ministers , opened ite with trade s;s i W nation had followed the e x amp l e of l i berality we hal; them. He observed up on t h e extraordinary steps 'l,' setkbienra n kind adopted wine, e, y Indies to the U n i te d States, which had adop t most most rigorous m easures i n opposition to our 800) liberality. Their conduct with regard to p o rtsg and French wines showed that Ministers Wet s willing to g i ve advantages to the most hostile S, the most favoured nations. He again reverted t ° l ' conduct of the United States, and to the tariff °; creased duties established in 1824, while the King of 13 ;H and the Emperor of Russia had also counterac ted , object o f G reat Britain in every way. He notic ed establishment of the Navigation Laws in the re's Charles 11., and the appointment of a Committee Lord Wallace, in 1819, in order to ascertain WI, they ought not to b e relaxed. He contended, t h at the 06, returns showed that we had been in error from t he u and that the endeavours of the shipping interest to ° D I an inquiry h a d a l ways b een d e f ea t e d — not b y stre d l i t t facts, but by plausibility of stitement. If a ConOgi were appointed, he could establish from document s ' without parole evidence, that whatever increa 9 taken place in our shipping, was owing t ° tt i colonial trade, and that the ship p i ng em pl o y e d t with foreign couotties, bad lo ng b een d ec li n i ng . TV tries outward and inward afforded no fair test, as tb s i" eluded many short voyages made by the same vessel. .(,) true test was, the increase or decrease in our coins o ,? marine ; and h ere h e would show, that between 113 0 i: 1831, there h a d b een a decline of 680 in the nuol ships built i n t hi s country, and of tonnage, to the e f t' of 103,000 tons. What had been the effect of this • system? Why, that the commerce of this c ountd, started a material deterioration. Between iele 1831, the d ecrease i n t h e amount o f tonnage wa s I if and in the number of men employed 16,517. l ie that many perso ns th oug h t our co l on i es we re War d