The Sun.
London, England, 1852-02-10 00:00:00

• question of small boroughs. The evil was edmit,ed by
t Noble Lose in tenses, but 11)0 Nocl Lord del net
• apple the adeileete remreiy. Tne existence ot small
initiation bereuelis was admitted to bo a disgrace to the
eystem of Pwliameetary representatiou. The Re-
: farm Act of 1332 pi•ofee ied to ex -Anguish the
rotten borough v}Btt ID, but it failea to DC00213-
, plish that olsj: en A het) wee drawn which F. great
' number of these small boroughs had been re-rained,
and the country had by this means the scandal—
for it was nothing else—of a great number of Members
of Pardee:lent being nominated by Peers. There was
' the borough of Marlborough, the Member of which was
nominated by the Marquis of Ailesbury ; the borough of
Mahon, by Earl Fitz witliain ; the borough of Richmond,
by the Earl of Zeeland; the borough of Ripon, by Earl
do Grey ; the borough of Tavistock, by the Duke of
Bedford—(No, no)—the borough of Calne, by the Mar-
cpis of Tavistock. There were many other boroughs
nominated in the same way, but he would not go through
with them. It was quite obvious that there could be no
proper Reform "Bill unless it was one that dealt with
this question. The Noble Lord had dealt with it in a
very imperfect manner. By joining two or throe toge-
ther as proposed, you would throw power into the
hands of a few persons, and some such practice as oc-
warred in Scotland would soon take place in those
new boroughs, by
the parties agreeing alternately to
make the return. The only way of dealing with the
question was by abolishing these boroughs altogether.
qe
ruee sdteioenp
deeply
n nwtheircehs
ttehde,
wpeaos ptloe
wohfo
mI rtehl
ea npdo and
Swrcahos°tltgaonrebdaewttransferred. In the Reform Bill of 1832, Scot-
land and Ireland were unfairly treated. Scotland, with
3w,iotoho6o,ooooop,oopouol,athioand, hiaodsornelyprbeslemnteamtivbeesrs;,
wanhdiliereElnengd.
laud, with not more than a three times larger popula-
tion, had five times the number of representatives. The
people of Scotland were well able to appreciate the ad-
vantages they enjoyed under the British constitution,
and they had not asked the House to make any change
in the representation. They felt it was easier to pull
up with evils they had than" to fly to others they knew
not of." But when the Prime Minister, with the sanc-
tion of the Cro ran, brought in a new Reform Bill, and
took the responsibility on himself, the Scotch would be
wanting in duty to themselves did they not demand a more
equitable distribution of the power of Government and
tee representative system. He was satisfied the people
of Scotland would be unanimous on this point. Scot-
land was united in feeling and interests; and few though
they were comparatively in that House, they had often
succeeded in arresting the hand of the Minister, and they
would do the same on this occasion. The people of Ire-
land also would come forward with a demand for equal
justice; and, if they did so, he should not despair of mak-
ing their united voices heard and respected on this ques-
tion. He would ask the English Members to look at
the position in which they would be placed if a Prime
Minister was always to have a little Reform Bill to
launch before the public in order to create for their own
purposes a popular ferment, The House ought to have
a pretended Reform Bill which would enable Govern-
ment to get up an excitement year after year; they must
gave final and full reform, not a progressive system of
reform. If to maintain themselves in office Government
chose to keep up oit system of agitation, on their heads
must the consequences that would ensue be solely vi-
sited,—(Hear.)
Mr. ROCHE congratulated the Hon. Gentleman who had
just sat down upon the liberal speech he had made in favour
of reform.—( Hear, hear.) Nobody could doubt the march
of intellect and the progress of opinion when we heard
sentiments so liberal coming from that . part of the House
which used to be called the " Tory camp"—(Hear, and a
laugh)—and he confessed he greatly desired to see the mea-
sure of reform which was apparently to be brought in by
lion. Members sitting on the Opposition benches. The
people of England and Ireland would, he thought, be greatly
satisfied with the success of this debate, as far as regarded
the speech made by the Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr.
Baillie), whose views went far beyond those of the Noble
Lord on the subject of reform, and the speech of his Hon.
Friend the Member for Manchester, showing a qualified
approval of the Bill. It was quite evident that a Reform
Bill the country must have, because both sides of the
House seemed to consider it necessary; and, notwith-
standing the shortcomings of the Government Bill, he was
glad that, as he understood, it was the Noble Lord's inten-
tion to extend it, in all its integrity, to Ireland. He had
understood the Noble Lord to say he intended to extend
this Bill in its integrity to Ireland. Now he agreed
with the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down that a
great injury was done to Scotland by the present apportion-
ment ot the representation, but a greater injustice to Ireland.
Nothing could be more monstrous or unjust than the prin-
ciple upon which the representation of Ireland was settled
by the Reform Bill. If population alone were taken as the
basis of representation, Ireland, instead of possessing only
105 representatives, would have 207. But if the represen-
tation were based upon population and property combined
the number of the representatives for Ireland in that
House would be 150. The Noble Lord proposed, wherever
the number of electors for a borough in England or
Scotland fell short of 500, to group other towns with
them and to extend the constituency. Would the Noble
Lord apply that principle to Ireland? If a borough in
Ireland had less than 500 electors would he join that to
other towns? (Several Hon. Members: "Yes, yes; he
said he would.") There were 24 boroughs in Ireland with
less than 500 electors, and, omitting Belfast, there was only
one borough out of the remaining 23 which had a constitu-
ency exceeding 500. There were 16 or 17 boroughs where
the constituencies numbered less than 200.—(Hear, hear.)
In many other boroughs where the constituencies were re-
turned as over 200, the actual number of the constituency
did not exceed 200. He was informed by his Hon. Friend
(Mr. C. Anstey) that the constituency of Youghal, which
was returned as 261, did not actually exceed 200. When the
repeal agitation was rife, and a great desire existed in Ire-
land for a legislative separation between the two countries,
the Irish Members were asked why they did not attend the
House of Commons and state their grievances there? But
when they did, they found themselves unjustly outnumbered.
The present House of Commons was packed against them by
the Reform Bill, and it was useless for them to attend at
that time. The same evil still existed. He wished the
Noble Lord would take into consideration the propriety of
throwing some of the Irish boroughs into the counties. The
representation might be taken from some of the boroughs
and given to the counties, without altering the balance of
conflicting interests in that country. He called upon the
Noble Lord (J. Russell) to consider the justice due to Ire-
land in the matter of the representation, which had been so
forcibly brought under his notice by the Hon. Gentleman
opposite (Ms. Baillie).
Mr. NIEWDIGATE wished to be informed when the Noble
Lord proposed to take the second reading, because in a Bill
of such magnitude sufficient time ought to be given for the
consideration of the details. He had not risen with the in-
tention of entering upon the general question, but he must
express his regret that the Noble Lord seemed determined
not to add the sanction of Christianity to his measure.—
( Hear, hear.) He regretted that he had added that alien
element to his Bill, with the title ot which it had no osten-
sible connexion. He would express no opinion at present on
the first principle of the Bill, which proposed to extend the
franchise by lowering the qualification for counties and bo-
roughs ; but he had great doubts relative to the novel element
proposed to be introduced of a floating constituency, con-
nected with no ties of property or residence, and qualified by
the payment of a certain amount of direct taxes. But then
they found a Jew Bill tacked on to the end of the Noble
Lord's measure, for no purpose, as it seemed, but to conciliate
the support of that small section of the community and to
offend the House of Commons.—(Hear.)
Mr. TRELAWNY thought it unfair in the lion. Member
(Mr. Baillie) to call the borough which he (Mr. Trelawny)
had the honour to represent (Tavistock) a nomination bo-
rough, and he trusted the Hon. Gentleman would retract
that assertion.—(A laugh.) The Hon. Member, following
the tactics of his leader (Mr. Disraeli), who reserved to him-
self the opportunity to outbid the *sent Government by a
further extension of the suffrage, wished to catch the Irish
Members, by pointing out the greater proportion of English
as compared with Irish Members; and sought probably
to defeat the Government by combining two warring ele-
ments. He (Mr. Trelawny) only wished to caution the
Liberal party how they suffered others to introduce division
into their camp. The experience of other countries was
such as to induce the hope that the institutions of the
country would not be perilled by the measure now pro-
posed by the Noble Lord. It might hereafter be extended,
if it were thought desirable to go any further, and he trusted
the Liberal party in the House would accept the Bill as it
stood at present. He repeated that he trusted the Hon.
Member for Inverness-shire would apologize to him and to
the borough he reprssented for his presumptuous remark.—
(A laugh.) He did not know what the Hon. Gentleman
represented—whether his pocket or his brains; but, if the
latter, he must have a rather narrow constituency.
Sir JOSHUA WALMSLEY thanked the Hon. Member
for Inverness-shire for making the proposal he had done
with reference to the increase of Scotch and Irish Members.
lie might contrast this proposal with some observations
that had fallen from Gentlemen calling themselves Liberal
Members on that side of the House—(Hear)—and he could
not bat feel surprised that those Gentlemen should have ex-
pressed themselves in favour of a measure, which, in his
opinion, deserved anything but that. He was confident it
would not meet with approval out of doors.—(Hear, hear.)
It was indeed a small measure, and would be regarded by
the country as unworthy of the Noble Lord and his col-
leagues. The Noble Lord had referred to some fifty or sixty
boroughs returning two representatives each, with a smaller
constituency than 500. Was the Noble Lord aware that
itnheeor
len
ew- et raex6t2o7
tlhaer gaemtoonwnnt s ionf hli
,30070ridneti. y ,
which
eehs s e
wd e tothe
re
to_
rseumppsoinsesothnendinehrallevihtaanttws
sosf
those
e uat on wrt ehnpesr ewns eeonwu tl
eddßb;eet aos
rnamdt i s dfißiediduht? oe
And yet this would be the
case, except such representation as they might find through
the county constituencies. He was persuaded that this
Bill, or any other, which did not recognise the rights of the
tax-paying and industrial classes—the wealth-producing
classes—would not, and ought not, to give satisfaction to the
country. Another most important point was wanting in
this Bill—the ballot.— ( Hear, hear.) He had had some ex-
perience at various public meetings in this country in the
last few years, and he had never attended any where the
ballot had not been unanimously supported.—(Hear, hear.)
The employers of labour, as well as the employed, concurred
that any extension of the franchise without the ballot would
actabaonneln:di lyaioithrnrtudilecnseao
J.wdnb colleaguesose
inconsistencies
ttt;ern eithanef tf:rmt oh. cekseereyo .n— (Hear, . hear.) As this
.was
merely the introduction of the Bill, he would not enter into
its details, but would reserve any remarks on its anomalies
called a Refortyn Bill, and totallyjurnewaodrinthgy ofirthheeßill
Noblew a Ls
Lord J. RUSSELL •
gd:t t
siei,onunsieg, h
t.totally
otord-
Member (Mr. Nemwdone
Mr. HERRIES asked when unworthy of' being
D v to the question of the Hon.
):'es.ali'd he proposed to take the se-
inilgUoSnSELL—On Wednesday or Thursday.
in the hands of Members? when the Bill would be printed and
Lord J. MANNERS thought that a fortnight was not long
enough for the consideration of a Bill affecting such vast in-
terests. The House were called upon
ttht! Noble Lord ought
to sanction the whole
tpor
givenci principle I et
haenmd
adetailse or fp
et
rhieo d
than Bill,
afortnight.
and
Lord J. RUSSELL—I do not
attach great importance to
that meek (the 27t se'nnight, h
a insnd have no objection to name Friday in
t.)
Mr. HUME—The sooner the better.
Lord H. VANE could not agree with what had been said
by the Hon. Member (Sir J. Walmsley) with regard to the
shortcomings of the Bill. So far as his experience and in-
formation went—not derived, he admitted, from Lancashire
or Yorkshire, but from other parts of the country—he be-
lieved that the measure would be considered extremely sa-
tisfactory. He did not speak of its details, but of its prin-
ciples. The Noble Lord might have transferred one repre-
sentative of the small boroughs to some -manufacturing
town ; but the arrangement proposed involved as little in-
terference as possible with hostile influences.
Mr. G. ANSTEY—It was not proposed dap Members fa-