The Sun. — London, England, 1822-02-21 00:00:00

• FUndi and the mode in which the contributioni to that Rind I had been applied for the discharge of its debt: O win g to the I • innovations which had been made upon the Fund from time • to time, when the' Ministers of the Second Charles and James put their hands into. the City's purse, the accounts had. got a • good deal into disorder. There were balances lying over, but he had no doubt that a/5 inquiry into the management of the Fund would reflect credit upon the attention paid to it by the City of London. He concluded by moving, " That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the present state of the Orphan Fund, and how far the surplus of its pro duce had been applied to the discharge of its debt. , ' Mr. Sergeant said, that as far as he was able to ' learn, the surplus was applied to every purpose but those fur which it was originally intended. After some words from Mr. C. SMITH, Mr. IT. SUMNER said he would not oppose the motion, bnt he ventured to predict, that an inquiry into the manage • vent of the Orphan Fund, instead of reflecting credit upon • th.e. City of London, would be a disgrace to it. It had been lung his inntion to bring in a Bill for regulating this Fund. There waoo less than 700,0001. of which no account could ' bereroduced. The Court of Aldermen were the guardians of the !Fund, but they appointed the collectors from their own body. The Honourable Member then went into a history of this Fund from its commencement, and then proceeded to ' read at length a Report made by a Committee of the Court • of Common Council upon the subject. By that Report it ap peared, that whilst the Worthy Alderman was in charge of this Fund, in ten years time there had accrued a floating ba lance of 11,7781., which remained in his hands unaccounted for. The .Honourable Member was proceeding with the Re - •pert, when Sir W. CURTIS rose to order. He said the Hon. Member . iens-now'reading a document which he had no right to use.— • The Report of the Common Council had no more to do with . • •this question, than it had with the affairs of France.—(Hear.) • Mr. H. SUMNER contended that this Report was not irre levant; as the estates of the Common Council were pledged to pay the interest of this Fund. The Hon. Member then pro ceeded with reading the Report; but coming, again to some al lusions to the conduct of a Worthy Alderman who was in-. trusted with the management of this Fund, Sir W. CURTIS again rose to order. He protested against • using thii document, which, he contended, was irrelevant and irregulez. He. was astonished that any lion. Gentleman, to • serve his own private ends, should have the temerity to make allusions to any Member of that House.—(Hear.)—He was astonished at his temerity.—(Order, order !) The SPEAKER interposed. He was convinced the Hon. Member's own reflection would teach him that the expressions • which he used could not be justified. lie (Mr. Speaker) did not think. the Hon. Member for Surrey was irregular in using the document of which the lion. Member complained. The Hon. Member for London did not take a correct view of the proceedings in that House, for he should know, that upon any motion, it was competent to any Hon. Member of the House to state his opinion ; and, if he was induced to form that opinion from reading any documents, it was competent to him to state these documents to the House, with a view of inducing them to concur with him in his views of the subject.—(Hear!) Mr. H. SUMNER then resumed reading the Report, and concluded by saying that he would not oppose the appoint ment of the Committee, but he should move an extension of the plan upon which it was to be formed. Sir W. CURTIS explained. Mr- H. SUMNER moved an amendment to the effect, that representatives of other contributors be admitted on the Com mittee. Mr. HUME wished to know if the Hon. Member meant by " other Contributors," Members of Parliament. . Mr. H. SUMNER replied in the affirmative. • Straeneers were then ordered to withdraw, but we understand that (there not being forty Members to form a House for di. viding) the original motion was agreed to. SCOTTISH BURGHS. 14 , : - .1 ARCHIBALD HAMILTON rose to move, that the reports of the Select Committees upon Scotch Burghs should be nforred to a Committee of the whole House. After the length. of time that the subject had been before Parliament, and after the part which he had constantly taken in discussing it, he felt it a duty to the Petitioners, to the House, and to himself, to make and to support . the present motion. The number of the petitioners exceeded 500,000 ; the amount of the revenue concerned was at least 100,0001. per annum : such matter was of ae light interest for the consideration of the couetry ; and he should endeavour to obtain the acquiescence of the House by stating what its own Committees had discovered and reported. It would be remembered by the Noble and Learned Lord op p‘Ate, end by many other Members who were present, that it wee row three years since he had first applied- for a Committee upon the state of the Royal Burghs of Scotland. When in TBl9 he had first introduced the subject, petitions were on the tabl from all the Burghs—petitions unanimous in' complain ing of evil, and nearly, unanimous as to the remedy which they prayed ; and the answer of Ministers to his motion for inquiry fled been, that the petitioners had no real grievances —that, in fact, there was no case to make out, and that the petitions pre sented were riot bona fide, but mere cloaks for introducing the geteetion of Parliamentary Reform. The motion had been lost to which Ministers applied that answer ; about a month after, a similar motion, however, had been carried in defiance of 11 - li= roisters, and of the Law Officers of Scotland; from that pe riod (1819) to the present time, investigation by Corn - - zaitte.es had been constantly going on ; and whatever might he the course of Ministers 'as to the present -mo tic:l, they would scarcely repeat their original denial of the existence of grievances. Three Committees, as Members were aware; had sat upon the subject now before the House. The first (that of 1819); had made a report of 500 pages; the se cend, in 1820, had confirmed the report orthe first, stating that the grievances of the Petitioners were substantially made oat, and that they were entitled to expect redress ; as to the third Committee, he (the Noble Lord) took blame to himself • for having submitted to such a nomination as left his friends and himself in a minority ; but the report of that Committee ocrneritel the previous reports; and every paper now upon the table admitted subStantial ground of complaint. It would be matter of curiosity now to hear the language of Ministers as opposed to their declaration of 1819—to hear what they would say to the grievances fully proved, of which they three yearS since denied the existence. The question of the present night was the referring of the three - reports already alluded to to inves tigation by a Committee composed of the whole House. In any other form of-discussion, it was impossible that the necessary ' detail should be gone through. He was aware that it was con tended by the Committee, that they were fully competent to advise what measures should be adopted, but he appealed to the house against the Committee and their. judgment; not that he wished to put his opinion against theirs, or theirs against his, but he wished that full justice should be done to tee Petitioners by an examination, by the House'. of the Re ports and the evidence on which they were founded ; and he did not think it was too much to inquire into those grounds, in order to ascertain what were the grievances which really did exist. It was impossible that he could urge this question with . any thing like the weight its, importance deserved, unless he detailed some of the evidence taken before the Committees ; I but before he:did - this, he wished to state,. that before the re cent Committees, another had been appointed on the same sub ject ;'a-Committee was appointed in'l793, which though it did not sieggest any specific remedy, yet admitted the existence of the sane grievances, the same mismanagement of the funds by the Magistratee, and the same results arising from their self -elect:en, as had been 'pointed out in the -. Reports of the 'years . 18t9 and 18‘21. It was there stated; that for these • .grievances no remedy was applicable by the Scottish law, that the Courts of Sessions could, give no relief, and that some of the Judges of Scotland regretted their inability to afford it; and yet with those evils so manifest, there was no • remedy. to be applied, according to the Learned Lord (the : Lord Advocate of Scotland), but a bill which would en able the bnegessee of - Scotland to bring a suit at law. - Now he protested against a measure of that nature being introdhced, because he considered it wholly inefficient. The next point to which he would wish to call the attention of the House, was one which he considered much more important than any opinion of his, than that of the Learned Lord, or than those of the Com mittees—it was the opinion of some of the Magistrates them selves, who in the- interval between the CoMmittees had ad -I-flitted that a great "portion of the grievances complained of were well founded, and they came to a: resolution that the sys - tam of self-election (the chief evil complained of) was one which required serious alteration. Several Burghs had come to 'theresolution that the evils were so great, that nothing but the abolition of ieMelection could remedy them.• This opinion was expressed by above thirty Burghs. He. would now take the liberty of stating the opinion of the elagistrates of the Burgh of Aberdeen on the system, and lie thought it contained an un answerable argument on the subject. He would previously ob serve, that when first he brought this subject to the notice of the House, the Burgh of Aberdeen had no member. It had de-' clared itself bankrupt, after exhibiting its debts as amounting to between 6,0001. and 7,0001., and that at a time when their debts really amounted to upwards of 130,0001.—(Hear opinion of those Magistrates who had so mismanaged and mis conducted their accounts was decisive against self-election ; and - Was a proof that a Bill enabling burgesses to go to law • would not be an effectual remedy. What had those persons who - were parties to the bankruptcy of the•burgh, and who had catised it, said when they had- retired from office ?—whether their re marks arose from shame at their own misconduct, or with a view to benefit their successors, we know not—but they came to a conclusion which must strike the Learned Lord as very im portant. Before, however, he read that, he would state some of th evidence given before the Committee by one (we believe) of the Magistrates themselves. He had stated, that though in . making up the account of the burgh the debt was made to appear only 6,0001., yet in reality it was bet Ween 130,0001. and 140,0001. ; that the accounts were kept quite a secret from the burgesses, who were not allowed access to the books ; and he added, what would perhaps appear extraordinary, that his reason for making the debt appear only 6,0001, or 7,0001., and not its real amount, was—that it had been done so from year to year, and that as it was not intended . to tell the truth, he might as well conceal the real debt; and give the 6,0001. as well as any other sum. Now, after such conduct as was here noticed, what was the opinion of those very Magistrates, when they had re tired from office ? Why, they came to a resolution, in which it was stated, that in justice to themselves, and to those who might succeed them, they desired to place on record their sen timents in reference to the various topics arising out of the situation of the Burgh ; they therefore gave it as their opinion, that the , mode of self-election was radically bad and improvi dent—that it led to a system of secrecy and concealment, under which the persons most interested could not know the situa tion of the Burgh's affairs, and that it held out an induce- . ment to mismanage the funds. Now he would ask, after this, after the bankruptcy of the Burgh, which had involved the in firmaries and other charitable institutions in Aberdeen, whether a remedy could be expected from a bill which would only enable burgesses to go to law ? The allegations of the Petitioners were fully borne out by the reports of the Committees of 1818 and 1819. The whole of them were declared to be substantially true ; and he would ask, if the Noble Lord did not go into an inquiry into grievances so admitted, what he intended to do with the reports, or was he right in assuming that the intended Bill would be the only remedy ? If he was right in this assump tion, he hoped he should be found correct in another, namely, that the House would not'consent to such a dereliction of its duties as to let so many Petitioners go without redress.— Now, in the Committee of last year there was much dissen sion among the Members, and he would maintain that that Committee had not executed the duties for which it was ap pointed, or done justice to the Petitioners. They refused to do what had been done by the former Committees—to examine parole evidence, though the most important facts could only be got at in that way ; ye: they refused it except in one instance, in the reference to the burgh of Inverary. Though, as he was prepared to show, the Committee of last year had not fairly executed the duties for which it was appointed, yet it could not avoid coming to the same conclusion as the former com mittees—that great evils did exist, and that they required a remedy. They in substance admitted that the eight alle gations of the petitioners were well founded, and in this they admitted what he would contend was sufficient to warrant his motion for an inquiry by the House to ascertain the best remedy. He hoped that, when speaking of the miscon duct and' mismanagement of the Magistrates, he would be understood as referring to the office, and not to the men— for the moment those individuals had laid aside their official character, they gave their opinion as to the mischie vous tendency of the system, and that it was itself calcu lated to produce a waste and mismanagement of the funds. The principal grounds of complaint on the part of the peti tioners were these--self-election (that was, that a Magistrate on going out appointed his successor, and he his, and so on); a want of due representation of the guildries; a want of sufficient control over the burgh expenditure (and this was an evil for which, as was shewn in the case of the Burgh of Inverary, in which gross corruption was proved on the part of the Magis trates, and yet there was no remedy for the burgesses at law) : the next grounds of complaint were the want of such a law by which they (the Magistrates) could be called to account ; the wasteful expenditure of the public mosey ; the gross mismanagement of charities ; and the want of sufficient means by which these could be ascertained by the Burgesses, and of course of their power to correct them. The Noble Lord again referred to the Report of the Com mittee which sat in 1793, by which, he observed, the whole of those allegations were admitted to be subStantially true; that Report also condemned the system of election and its conse quent mismanagement ; it also noticed and disapproved of an opinion which seemed to prevail among the Magistrates in the Burghs, that 40 years of local usage was sufficient to give any custom the force of a law,- and that any law which might exist against a custom so established would be considered to have fallen into disuetude. The Committee also noticed the gross exactions which were committed in half of the Royal Burghs, and which amounted to 12,3351. of illegal exaction ; and that in some few years these exactions amounted to ten times the suns received into the treasury. The Noble Lord, after allud ing to another evil, the improper alienation of lands, observed, that the Committees of 1818 and 1519 found the same evils to exist, and admitted that some remedy ought to be applied. lie would admit that he made the present motion in despots, dency of any good result, if it should be opposed by Mini sters, as he had reason to suppose it would, for'they had an utter aversion to sanction any measure which originated at that (the Opposition) side of the House. However, he would say, that he was prepared to make out a case which any tribunal on earth would admit ought to be remedied ; but whether he could make such a one as would command a vote of that House, was quite another question. There was, however, no kind of corruption or mismanagement which the taste of any . Member of that House might select, of which lie was not pre pared to prove an instance in the government of the Royal Burghs. The Noble Lord, after commenting on the careless system in which the accounts of the several burghs had been kept before the Committee of 1819 was appointed, observed that in one of the reports, it was stated, that in Cupar seats in the Council were regularly bought and sold, and such other instances of corruption were constantly exhibited, as made the neglect of the accounts a matter of minor consideration. In one Burgh, a person was appointed as Clerk of the Council, who was proved to be wholly incompetent to the duties of his office ; and when an action was raised on the subject, it was decided at law, that if the Magistrates wilfully appointed him, he could not be removed, however incompetent. The report of 1821 recom mended that Magistrates of Burghs should reside in them, and stated the non-residence of the Magistrates to be productive of many inconveniences. Now he would ask, if the Learned Lord wrote the whole or any part of that report, or if he assented to it, how could he, by the proposed Bill, which would only enable parties to bring an action at law, remedy this evil ? But he begged pardon for anticipating the Learned Lord's Bill ; it was possible it might be different from what he had stated ; and if so, his remarks would not apply. Having thus gone through a few of the details, and they were only a few com pared with what he might have adduced, he would ask whether, with such evidence before it, the House would decline devising some remedy which would apply to the evils he had pointed out ? For his own part, he held that a total abolition of the system of self-election was necessary, and he would consent to no measure which had not that for its foundation. But, said the Learned Lord opposite, " would you destroy the chartered rights of these'boroughs, and infringe the 26th article of Union ?" To that question he would answer, in the language of one of the Committees to which he had before had occasion to refer, that if it appeared impossible to administer a re medy to _the grievances 'complained of, without making a fundamental change -in the constitution of the burghs, then he would recommend even such a remedy to be adopted : for even supposing that such a change would be an infringe ment on chartered rights, and a violation of the articles of Union, would it be the first instance of such a violation being put upon record ? Bad not the heritable jurisdictions been abolished, and that, too, in direct opposition of an article im- ' mediately preceding that to which the Learned Lord had him self referred ? (Hear !)—The argument of the Noble Lord was therefore not worth much, even allowing the facts, on which he founded it, to be correctly stated. The Learned Lord took it for granted, that the rights of the Burghs were chartered rights; but he would ask the House, whether they now were 'so ? Originally, he allowed, that they had been so ; but since the first concession of them, they had been repeatedly altered, on some occasions by a convention of the burghs—at others, by the mandate of the Crown; in both cases, as he was prepared to con tend, illegally. To say, then, that the rights of the burghs were—after the many alterations which they had undergone— chartered rights, was about as ludicrous as to say that a ship was still the same ship after its timbers had been so often patched up and repaired, that scarce a plank of the original ship was left. Before he concluded the observations which he felt it his duty to make, he wished to say a few words regarding the remedy to be applied to the evils of•which he complained. He appre hended that the first business of the House was to take into consideration the reports which had already been submitted to it. Then they would see that no remedy could be effectual which did not subvert the whole present system of self-election, and which did not create a sympathy between the governors and the governed. He was of opinion that the trades should elect one part of the council, and the burgesses (we think the Noble Lord said) another : and also that part of the Magistrates should regularly go out by rotation, but should still be capable of be ing immediately re-elected. In the Committee he would detail the changes which he wished to have made at greater length ; but at present he should say no more about them, as it was not the proper occasion for debating the remedies which he had pro posed. After apologizing for the length at which he had tres passed on their attention, the Noble Lord concluded by moving, That the House do resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House to take into consideration the state of the Royal Burghs of Scotland. - The LORD ADVOCATE said, that he had expected Vint the Noble Lord on the present occasion would have followed either one or two of these courses—that he would have stated a remedy against the evils which he had supposed, or that Le would have waited for the Bill of which he had given notice. He contended that the notions of the Noble Lord were those which be could not sanction be would make no scruple in saying that his (the Lord Advocate's) plans would not go to adopt any alteration in the constitution of the Burghs of Scotland.—(Hear, hear !)—lt appeared to him that the at tempt of the Noble Lord went to nothing else than a reform of representation.—(Hear, hear, hear I) If reform, as con.. netted with the Scotch Burghs, were to be advocated, let it be done openly and fairly—let it form a part of the subject of the motion which was now upon their books, but let them not dispose of the subject by a side wind. The Noble Lord might have recollected, that there were other Burghs in Scot land besides those to which he had alluded; there were Re gality Burghs and Burghs of Barony; why did not the Noble Lord inquire into those ? Why were they not brought be fore the House ? because they had no voice in that House. Amongst those, the populous towns of Paisley and Hamilton, near to the residence of the Noble Lord, were to be found, and he would say, that the latter place in particular called fur investigation. Abuses prevailed there, particularly as connected with the gaols—the prisoners were exposed to the inmost misery and privation—he knew the fact of his own knowledge. He was surprised that in his zeal fur improve ment those things escaped the vigilance of the Noble Lord ; for he was sure they loudly called for inquiry and for amend ment. With the exception of Edinburgh, there was no burgh in Scotland which gave its voice directly in the elec tion of Members of Parliament. Fourlor five persons, chosen by the respective councils of the district, met together in a room, and settled who should be the Member of Parliament ; and talking of self-election, he might remark, that the Hon. Member for Aberdeen was chosen in this manner. There were two deputies for him, and two against him and he, by his own casting vote, determined his election.—(Hear!)— ' An alteration, therefore, in the election of the councils which chose the electors, would be in effect an alteration in the mode of electing the Members to that House, which, if it were fit to do at all, should be done openly. As to the mode of proceeding in the Committee, they had classified the griev ances complained of, anzl selected six of the principal towns in Scotland to inquire into their concerns under those heads of grievance. As to the general charge of cor ruption, he denied it. There had assuredly been much mismanagement—the Magistrates had spent more of the public money than perhaps was wise ; but yet the ex penditure should not be judged of by mere figures, when it was intended to promote the good of the towns. So Aberdeen the money had been expended in great and impor tant works, which had promoted the prosperity of the place and though the burgh had been said to be bankrupt, it was going on well. The same Magistrates who had been com plained of were now acting, (hear, hear, bear,) and under their management the town was prospering.—(Hear hear ! from Mr. Hume.) The Hon;Gentleman seemed to dissent ; —he understood this to be the case, but the Hon'. Member for Malmesbury (Mr. C. Forbes) was present, who could speak to this better than himself. The same was the case as to Edinburgh. The expenditure might not have been wise, but it had been applied to purposes of which Scotsmen were proud—to improvements so great, that a man who had left Edinburgh fur ten years would not know it again. The Ma gistrates had spent 80 or 100,0001. on half a mile of road, On one of the entrances to the city of Edinburgh. The Commit tee had gone through the cases of the six Burghs they had a lected, and they had put the question on each of the allega tions of grievance,—was it proved or no ? and they decided in each instance that it was proved, su thattlie Committee thought it would be mere waste of time to inquire into the case of the other Burghs, as the full proof of the allegations of the Pe titioners could only support the conclusion that the Commit tee had already come to, But, in addition to the allegations of grievance, there were others that were matters of inference. The Noble Lord (Lord A• Hamilton) and his friends found the cause of the grievances in the mode.of election ; the Commit tee found it in the want of the old checks on Burgh Expen diture. The revenues of the Burghs of Scotland were grants of the Kings of Scotland ; and there Was anciently a controul over the expenditure or then, in the Court of the Chamber lain of Scotland, and afterwards in the Old Court of Ex chequer. At the time of the Union, the New Court of EX chequer- was established in Scotland on the model of the English one; and there was a doubt whether this new. Court possessed the power exercised by the old one, and they de cided that they had not. He extremely doubted of the va lidity of that judgment, the more so because of an elaborate judgment delivered by the Lord Chief Baron in the last Session, in which he affirmed, that in addition to the powers similar to those of the English Court, the Court of Exchequer in Scotland inherited the power of the ancient Court in that country. It was better, however, to avoid a law suit;- the object of his (the Lord Advocate's) Bill was, to make this clear, mid to give the power to the Court of Exchequer. This check the Committee had thought would he effectual, and they had thought that the remedy proposed by the Noble Lord would not be effec tual. They should recollect that there had been an instance of the constitution of a Burghs, that of Stirling, to which, whether properly or no, the Crown granted the right of elect ing the Magistracy. But was that now better than other Burghs ?—(Hear !)—They should recollect that a motion was made in the Committee, to report to the House the complaints from Stirling, where there was as much crimination and re crimination as to the, funds as in ally other Burgh. - With this before their eyes, they should not adopt a measure *bleb would chane . e.the : mode of returning Members to that House, and thus infringe one of the articles , of Union. Not that he contended that the articles of Union could not be changed by Parliament, but he contended that they should not be touched before all other remedies for the.evil had been tried, and es. pecially that remedy which a Committee of the House had conceived would he effectual. _ . . Mr. HUME said, that as the Learned Lord had observed that the Cowniittee was unanimous that all the allega tions of the Petitioners against the abuses in the Scots Burghs were fully proved, it was well that the House should know what those allegations were. The Petitioners alleged that the Magistrates were irresponsible ; that the public pro perty had been wasted and sold by them; that the funds of Charities had been seized and destroyed ; and all these points the Committee unanimously agreed were fully proved. And it also appeared, though on that point there was some diffe rence of opinion, that the Burgesses at large were answerable for the debts of the Magistrates, who were not responsible to them,and who thus had been in the habit of conducting them selves. As to the assertion of the Learned Lord,that there was no misconduct in money matters, had he forgotten the case of the Provost of Inverary, who had been prosecuted for selling jus tice? He (Mr. H.) had no doubt that if they had inquired into all the sixty Burghs, instead of six, that they would have found abuses in fifty of them. These allegations had been thus admitted to be proved by a Committee most hostile to all reform. As to the Committee itself, after sitting, and debating, and trifling its time, they decided that it was enough for them to affirm the allegations to be proved, without in quiring into wore than the six cases; yet now having ad mitted that the whole of the allegations were proved, and re• losing to take evidence as superfluous, the Lord Advocate now took advantage of that fact to assert that the case was not proved. .But they had a right to take advantage of the extent of the admission, as if it had been proof. He would state an instance of the disposition of the Committee in their conduct to his Noble Friend (Lord A. Hamilton) who was the Chair man. It was usual in all Committees for the Chairman to draw up the Report. His Noble Friend had gone to the N.,rth to exercise his elective franchise, and the Lord Advo cate and Lord Binning had drawn up a Report. This was on the 31st of May, and his Noble Friend had declared, that he should hart his Report ready by the sth of June. He (Mr. Hume) proposed, that the decision on the Report should be adjourned to the next day of sitting, but it was objected, that the Session was corning to a termination (though it had then six weeks to sit) and the result was seven to one against the postponement. He did not believe that any other seven Members in the House would have acted thus, and the value of their opinion in favour of the Lord Advocate's plan might be gathered from this fact.—(Hearl)—He (Mi. Hume) lug proposed in the Committee a Resolution, that as under tire present system such abuses had prevailed, it was expedient that the burgesses should hare a power of electing a portion of the Magistrates, as they were accustomed to have before the year 1469. His Noble Friend (Lord A. Hamilton) had stated that his object was not a change in the mode of returning Members to Parliament. He (Mr. f-I.) had ad mitted from the first that leis end was to give the people of the burghs a share in the election of Members of the House. —(1-tear, bear !)—Why, if they would not begin in this small way, what would they say to the cry of Reform that was re sounding through England ? . He would refer the House to t he Protest of the Scots Parliament on religious toleration, which admonished the oppressors not to strain the strings till they broke. Whether it would be in his time of no, whether in his quiet way or by some sudden emergency, he was sure that reform would be effected.—(Hear, hear I)—As to a point mentioned by the Lord Advocate, he should say a few words. On the 27th September, 1815, the Council of Aberdeen, on leaving office, put on their records a declaration, that honest men could not go on under the present Burgh system ; but though they had thus declared themselves knaves (for they had gone on ten years under the system under which honest men could not act), his Majesty's Ministers reinstated them. It was said by the Learned Lord that the town was not now a bankrupt. How did the Noble Lord bear himself out? The Magistrates, on being reinstated, had delivered over the whole property of the town to trustees, for the benefit of the creditors. What was this but a bankruptcy? What did a bankrupt do ? He delivered over his property to others to administer it for the benefit of his creditors. The trustees, it was true, had acted very judiciously, and .had been able t pay 4 per cent. (instead of 5) on the debts. The inhabitants would not endure that the Magistrates should administer the property. Yet this was the example which the Learned Lord gave of a Magistracy perfectly competent to manage th eir own affairs. If any of the improvements which the Noble Lord had talked of were visible, he should pardon the waste of property. But when he was at Aberdeen be had seen none of the magnificent improvements ; nothing but a quay run out into the sea, which every day was in Gan g er of de struction, and which the best informed persons imagined threatened the destruction of the navigation of the harbour. But this was not all, they had got the funds of all the Hos pitals and other Charities into their hands, to the amount of 75,0001. and had squandered them away with the test. He be- lieved in truth that if the whole of the property of the Burgh could be sold, it might just pay the debts.—(Hear !)—But was it nothing that the whole of the property of that richly endowed Burgh had been squandered, and that it was handed over to trustees for the benefit of the creditors? If the pro perty had been really expended in improvement, it should be recollected that improvements should be proportioned to their means, whether in a corporation or a state. But the Magistrates of Aberdeen were like his Majesty's Ministers, or rather the better of the two, for the property of Aberdeen would perhaps, if brought to the hammer, pay off"the debts; but the fee-simple of this country certain ly should not equal the capital of the public debt.—(Hear, hear, hear!)—" Birds of a feather flocked together"—(A laugh)—so that the Ma gistrates of Aberdeen aright calculate on the able support of his Majesty's Ministers. As to Edinburgh, the case was pretty nearly the same;—the property was probably about equal to the payment of the debts. This was the sample of the eco nomy of the Burghs which the Learned Lord had adduced. Now, what remedy had his Noble Friend asked ? Merely to give the Burgesses the right which they had enjoyed for time immemorial previously to 1469. It was to be recollected that in the claim of rights in the reign of William and Mary, the abdi cated family, among t heir other crimes, were charged with hav ing deprived the Burgesses of the right of electing Magistrates. It was not to be wondered that the people of the Burghs were anxiouion t his point; for, in addition to the administration elan the property, the Magistrates administered justice, for the Baillies had separate Courts. He had no doubt his Ma jesty's Ministers would oppose such achange, for if the people had any share in the elections in Scotland, their majorities would not be so large. If the powers of election were given to the burgesses, he (Mr. Hume) was an example what they would do.—(Laughter and hear !)—This was ominous to his Majesty's Ministers. —(A laugh.)—True it was that his pre decessor• sat for 25 years behind the Ministers, having been made Proctor at the Commons, and picking up the odds and ends, was their most constant adherent. But no sooner was the power of election given to the burgesses in Montrose (for which he thanked his Majesty's Ministers), than they put that gentleman out of the saddle. It was said, that since the Committee had sat, some of the Burghs had a little mended their manners; but before that time in Edinburgh, not a single account was made public. Of the publication of ac counts, Glasgow had, much to its credit, set the example. Mr. Fume concluded by saying, that what the people of Scotland wanted was to have the power of appointing their Magistrates, and that without that concession there would neither be harmony nor peace, nor good management in that country. What the Learned Lord gave them was the power. of going to law; but who was the burgess in a burgh that had an individual interest to go to Wet expensive remedy ? He should therefore support the motion of his Noble Friend. Lord BINNING taking a very different view of the subject from the Hon. Gentleman, had heard the Hon. Gentleman with much satisfaction, as he had manfully stated the real object of the present motion was not to correct a specific griev ance, but to pave the way fora Parliamentary Reform. He now therefore called upon those who were opposed to Parlia mentary Reform, who were unwilling to open a door to inno vations on the Constitution, to oppose the present motion. It had been admitted on a ll hands that grievances existed. The only difference among them was as to what were the real causes, and what would be the proper remedy ? The Commit tees of 1821 bad availed themselves of the labours of the pre ceding Committees, and having stated what theythotight would be the proper remedies, the Lord Advocate at this early period of the Session was Prepared to bring forward a Bill founded on their recnnmendations. But no sooner had be given no tice of this than the Noble Lord refused to wait till he could see what the measure was, and brought forward his present motion. He should be much disappointed if the Bill (which he had not yet seen) did not apply to all the grievances ad mitted to exist, and, in fairness, the House ought to have the Bill before them previous to their deciding on its merits. The difference between himself and the Noble Lord might be narrowed to this. The Noble Lord said all your remedies are worth nothing, unless you alter the constitution of the Scotch Burghs.—He would say, that if that constitution were, given which the Noble Lord wished to bestow, it would not cure the existing evils, unless it were accompanied by a mea sure like that which the Learned Lord proposed to introduce. He was one of those that believed such corruptions ; for it was notorious corruptions existed, might continue under a more popular constitution. He then would oppose this motion, becausete did not see that the change would be likely to prove beneficial; and because. unless the necessity for it were made out as clear as neon-day, he would not consent to violate a chartered tight, or ao 'abrogate one of the articles of the Union. Such a necessity was not made out in the present case, and therefore he would say, " Do not begin by abroga ting one of the articles of the , Union, but first endeavour to correct, by other means, the evils which were the subject of complaint." The conduct of the Committee, last year, when they framed their report, he begged to say, for himself and others, was in no way disrespectful to the Noble Lord. The Noble Lord having gone to exercise his elective franchise (as he had a right to do) at the Stirling election, was absent from the Committee a. fortnight. Time was valuable, and therefore they had framed the Report, as had been done in the Agricultural Committee and in other cases, notwithstanding their Chairman was absent. The Noble Lord then comment ed on the improvements in Aberdeen and Edinburgh, which he conceived to he highly creditable to those with whom they had originated, and the individuals by whom they were con ducted ; and it was incomprehensible to him that these would prove other than beneficial to those places. Under all the circumstances he had never given a more anxious vote than he should give this night against the motion of the Noble Lord, considering it to open a plan of Parliamentary Reform ; and whether it did this or not, regarding it as one that was certain to rake up the embers of civil discord in every Bo rough in Scotland. Mr. KENNEDY rose to reply to some of the observations which had just fallen from the Noble Lord. The Noble Lord appeared to be much alarmed upon the subject of Parliamen tary Reform; but he would ask, was it fair that individuals, seeking redress for particulvr grievances, should be refused the relief they sought, because the granting it might indi rectly tend to further the cause of Parliamentary Reform ? He should vote for the motion of his Hon. Friend ; and he should do so because he believed that the time was come when Parliamentary interference was necessary. Was it con sistent that Edinburgh, a city containing a population of 120,000 inhabitants, should be regulated as a close Borough, and that its worthy Representative should be returned to that House by the influence of 19 individuals? He had attended the Committee which had sat to inquire into this subject, an»! he had felt sorrow at the result of its labours. He thought it would be rather bard were the House to refuse the Committee moved for by the Noble Lord who bad originated the subject. He thought it would he conceding too much to the Learned Lord to say, that his Bill, and his only,: should lie entertained. The House ought to hear from his Noble Friend (Lord Archibald Hamilton) in a Committee, those p ro p o sitions which his experience and information enabled him to offer to their consideration. Mr. C. FOKBES spwke against the motion, and contra dicted the statement of the Hon. Member on the other side (Mr. Home), that the Corporation of Aberdeen had become bankrupt, as well as the Hon. Member's general strictures upon the conduct and character of that respectable body. This Corporation he (Mr. F.) was prepared to shew owed no money whatever which it was not fully enabled to discharge; and this he stated upon the authority of some respectable .Magistrates of Aberdeen, who were well known to the Hon. Member as among his best supporters at the last election. How that election was conducted the Hon. Member must be quite aware, and that for 24 hours his return was in a state of great doubt, in consequence of the indecision of one voter belonging to one of the burghs which he represented, and the Hon. Member could tell how that voter was ultimately conciliated.—Thus much he felt it necessary to state, because he would never allow any absent man to be censured, where lie had the power to answer that cen. , •are".—(Hear, hear, hear !)—Such a proceeding, indeed, he thought due to com mon justice, as well as to the dignified character of that House. Mr. HUME, in explanation,dmaied that he had ever charg ed any of the Magistrates of Aberdeen with corruption, or attempted to cast the slightest imputation upon their charac ter. All, indeed, which he bad said with respect to these Gentlemen was founded upon a letter written by one of these Gentlemen themselves to his Noble Friend on the floor, with whom the present motion originated, in which letter the writer went the length of stating, that under the present cor rupt administration of the burgh alluded to, as well as of the other Scots burghs, it was impossible for any man concerned in that administration to act any other than a knavish part; —(cries of " Spoke, spoke !")—amidst which the Hon. Mem ber resumed his seat. Sir It..FERGUSSON observed, that the town of Aberdeen was so far in a state of bankruptcy, as to have its affairs pla ced in the ham's of trustees, which would, in the case of any individual, be considered a case of bankruptcy. The Hun. Mtinher for Rochester had said, that he would wait to see what the Lord - Advocate's Bill was He (Sir R. - Ferguson) could not agree in that determination ; for the Lord Advocate had said, that he would take no cognizance of self-election, which was the greatest grievance to be complained of. His Hon. Friend had expressed great admiration of old parch ments and chalks. He had no objection to old customs: but 111;: old custom which he would prefer, was that which called upon them to attend to the grievances of the people. Unle:s Parliament took cognizance of the principle of self-election, they would do nothing. Upwards of 50 Burghs had petition ed on the subject, and but one bad sent in a counter-petition, which was under an influence that would account for the course which it took. For those reasons he could not con sent to wait for the Lord Advocate's Bill, and, therefore, would rote for the motion of his Noble Friend. Mr. MABERLEY said, that the affairs of Aberdeen were once in such a state as must have led to bankruptcy, if they had not been put into the hands of trustees • but they could not he said at present to be in a state of bankruptcy.. Lord A. HAMILTON, in reply, observed that all the alle gations of the Petitioners had been proved by the Reports of the different Committees. The consequence of this ought to be an immediate inquiry, but it appeared from what had occurred in the debate, that none was to be granted. The opponents of the motion had mixed up with it the. general question of Parliamentary Reform, with which it had no con nection. This was in itself a proof of the weakness of their cause. The Learned Lord opposite was pleased to say, that there were other Burghs in which similar abuses were stated to exist; if the Learned Lord could chew one half the grie vances in those Burghs which he had shewn to prevail in the Royal Burghs, he would agree with them in -any mea sure which might be productive of their correction. The Learned Lord had also stated, that the gaols of the Burgh of Hamilton were in a most inefficient state. • He believed it was so, as well as most of the gaols in Scotland, and having sat on the Committee which inquired into those matters, he could state that it was found to be owing to the scandalous misuse of the funds. The Learned Lord had said there was no corruption in those Burghs; but be himself had made no charge of peculation : but he would say, that the Magistrates of Aberdeen had sanctioned the representation of their debt at 60001., although it was proved to be 130,0001.; was that, or was it not, corruption ? His Lordship then entered into a de fence of his conduct in the Committee, and concluded by ap pealing to the sense of the House, whether, after the lapse of three Sessions, they could adopt the recommendation of the Reports of three several Committees, or content themselves with adopting the Bill of the Learned Lord, which intre!y gave the Burgesses of those Royal Burghs the power of en tailing on themselves a law-suit with their Magistrates The House then diVided— For the Motion - - - 46 Against it - - - - - 81 Majority - - —3 s —3s Mr. GOULBURN, seeing the Honourable Member for Aberdeen in his place, asked him to postpone his motion rela tive to Irish Tithes. Mr. HUME said, that in the hope of seeing ss important a measure taken up by his Majesty's Ministers, he had no ob jection to postpone it for a week. Mr. BROUGHAM requested, that his Honourable Friend wound not, under any circumstances, postpone it beyond the Ist of March. After a few words from Lord Londonderry and Mr. Hume, the motion was fixed for Friday next. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Twelve o'Clock. MINORITY ON LORD ARCHIBALD HAMILTON'S MOTION. Abercromby, Hn.J. Fitzgeralcl,Lordlir. Monck, - J. Barrett, S. B. M. Guise, Sir W. Newman, R. W. Bury, Viscount Heathcote,-J: G. Normanby;• Visct. Brougham, Henry Heron, Sir Robert O'Callaghan, Jas. Chaloner, Robert Honeywood, W. P. Price, R. Chamberlayne, W. Hutchinson, Hon. Rice, T. S. Caagbton, Thomas C. H. Robarti, A. W. Crespigny, Sir W. Hume, J. Robinson, Sir (leo. Creevey, T. James, W. Scarlett, J. Davies, Col. Johnson, Col. Smith, Wm. Denison, W. J. Lambton, J. G. Webb, Col. Denman T. Langston, G. 'Williams, Wm. Dundas, , T, H. Lockhart, W. E. Wilson, Sir R. Ellice, Ed. Moberly, J. Wood, Ald. Ebrington, Visct. Moberly, W. L. Wyvill, Fergusson, SirR.C. Maxwell, J. TELLERS—Hamilton, Lord. A. ; Kennedy, T. F. DUKE DE RocLonE.—The - Duke de ROCLORE. the favourite wit and buffoon of Louis XIV., was in his person far from being agreeable; his countenance was rather forbidding, and his per son ill-formed. Another nobleman, whose per son was even inferior to that of ROCLORE, having killed his antagonist in a duel, applied fo . the Duke for his interest and•protection, knowing it was the only channel through which he could obtain a pardon. The Duke readily engaged in his friend's interest, and fairly rallied the KING into a compliance. After the KING had finished a fit of laughter, and given his royal promise, he inquired of ROCLORE, what could possibly in duce him to be so strenuous in his intercession ? " I will tell your Majesty," said the facetious Duke ; " if he had suffered, I should then have been the ugliest man in France." A serious disturbance took place last , week in the county of Norfolk. On ThurSday a number of idle and disorderly persons assembled at Shimpling, near Diss, for the purpose of break ing a thrashing machine, the property of Mr. J. SPARIIAM, at Shimpling-place, which they utterly demolished. Warrants were immediately issued by GEORGE LEE, Esq. one of the acting Magis trates for that Hundred, for bringing six of the offenders to the King's Head, Diss. O n Satur day mo6ing they arrived in the Market-place, in that town, about ten o'clock, accompanied by about two hundred labourers from the neighbour hood, who were determined the offenders should not be taken into the Magistrates' Room, and considerable resistance was made to the first man being taken into custody. Mr. LEE then read the Riot Act, after which the remainder of the six surrendered without giving any further trouble. They were admitted to bail, to appear at the adjourned Sessions at Norwich, on the 6th of March, for trial. ACCIDENT.--The wife and son of the mate of a vessel lately arrived from India, having taken a boat to go to the ship, were upset by running foul of a packet in the river, and unfortunately drowned. COAL-MARKET, FEB. 20. Ships at Market. Ships sold 681 Newcastle 22 - Sunderland Price. 34s Od tia 41s 9L 36s Od to 43s 3d BIRTHS On Sunday, the 17th instant, the Lady of the Honourable James Stewart, of a son. Yesterday, in Portland-place, the Lady of Sandford Graham, Esq. 111. P., of a son. On the 19th inst., in Upper Seymour-street, the Lady of Thos. Wm. Blornefield, Esq. of a son. MARRIED. On the 14th inst., at St. Dunstan's, Stepney, Wm. Irish,'Esc , .., of Cannon-street-road, to Mary Phoebe, eldest daughter of Mr. Joshua Foster, of Queen-street, Rateliff: On Saturday se nnight, at Ashbury, Cheshire, Mr. T. Clay ton, of Kerridge, a blooming youth of 74, led to the hymeneal altar a brisk damsel of 17. DIED. On Wednesday se'nnight, at his seat at Dunkettle; Cork, at an advanced age,,Abraham Morris, Esq., formerly M.P. for the County of Cork. At Newland, in the County of Gloucester, on Monday the 18th inst. Elizabeth, the widow of G. G. Ducarel, Esq., late of Exmouth, in the County of Devon, aged 64. At Dum Dum, near Calcutta, on the sth of September last, John Forrest Tod, M.D. Assistant-sUrgeon in the Honourable the East India Company's service, second of the late James Tod, Esq. of Deanstoun. Yesterday morning, at his hcu3e in Vauxhall-place, T. Bell, Esq., one of the Senior Clerks to the Board of Commissioners for the Affairs of India. On the 19th inst., at the Upper Trinity Ground, Deptford, in his 61st year, Mr. Thos. Howe, late of Yarmouth, Norfolk, shipmaster. Printed and Published, for the PROPILIET9BS, at the SUN.. OFFICE, 112, Strand, by J. B. CARSTAIRS. :), ~,~ ~4~ '}` 7 '