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

Sir, to state that I propose an extension of the frau-
wit'tnilt the limits of certain small borough 9,

La.vo airoady :AtaLe,% tLink un priiiciplo we Wei'

4ht at the time of the Reform Bill in maintaining a

certain number of boroughs of that kind; and I do nut

finl that any of those whom I have mentioned—Mr.

Pitt, Mr. Fox, or any of those who brought forward

measures of reform—have agreed to the total dostruc-
ti:m of small boroughs. I find there is at this time an
outcry against them, but that outcry, with the exception

of cortain cases, is founded on the mistaken notion that
all the smaller boroughs of the country are infected with
bribery and corruption.—(Elear.) I believe that is a
great mistake.—(Hear, and a langb.) I believe that
while bribery exists in many of the smaller
boroughs, the same thing may be said, and
to as large an extent may be said, of many of the
larger boroughs.—(ttenr, hear.) Ido not believe it
13 at ail peculiar to those smaller boroughs ; I be-
lieve, on the other hand, that there are many of those
boroughs in which bribery is not known, and where
elections have been conducted with perfect purity. But
it is said, and said certainly with great truth, that with
regard to many of those smaller boroughs, not only does
the influence of property prevail, and not only does pro-
perty influence the elections, but that the property of
individuals is so overwhelming in many of them that

...
they approach the character of those boroughs in which
direct nomination prevailed.—(Hsar, hear.) Now, Sir,
I think it desirable to take away that reproach—

(Cheers)—because, although we may leave them totally
undisturbed, yet I cannot but think tbe continuance
that reproach and the odium into which they would fall
would render it doubtful ut some future time whether

they could be maintained. We propose, therefore, with
regard to a certain number of those boroughs, to diffuse
the influence, as it were, and to add some of the neigh-
Dour ing towns in the same county, or towns
in the neighbouring counties, and give them
the right of sending representatives to Parlia-
ment. The line which we take is not founded
,:n that which was taken in the time of the Reform Bill,
viz., the number of houses assessed to the assessed taxes,
because we have now at hand better and more convenient
tests for the point under consideration. At the time of
the Reform Bill I stated that in my opinion nearly all the
boroughs could not have less than 300 voters each. While
this has been proved to be the case generally, there are
14 smaller boroughs which have less than the number I
have stated; there are upwards of 30 more with less than
400 electors. When I speak now of electors lam speak
tog of permanent electors—namely, those who are 101.
householders and those who are Freemen bolding the
right to vote, which was maintained and guaranteed to
them at the time when the Reform Bill passed. We pro-
pose to go up to the number of 500 of those permanent
electors, and to add places to all boroughs which have
less than 500 of such electors, consisting of 101. house-

holders. The number of boroughs to which this prin-
ciple will apply is 67.—(Hear, hear, and some mur-
muring.) I am speaking now only of Euzland and Wales
I do not wish at present to enter into any details oo this
subject, because I think those details will be tar better

discussed when the Bill is before the House, and when it
will be seen in what manner this principle will operate.
—(Hear, hear.) There is an observation which I must
make, which is an observation certainly founded on

truth, although it may have different effects on gentle-
man who t ,ke different views on this subject; it is that
those smaller boroughs are, generally spcakieg, with the
exception of Yorkshire, in the south and west of the
kingdom. They are, therefore, boroughs situated rather
in the agricultural than in the manufacturing and com-
mercial parts of the country. It follows that the places
hich we can join to those smaller boroughs, Meg places
in the neighbourhood of towns of somewhat the same
character, are not towns bearing the character of or likely
to rise to manufacturing or commercial prosperity. The
effect, therefore, of this he whether it be right or wrong,
whether it be judged politic or impolitic, to maintain the
same general balance established at the time of the Re-
form Bill. It is obvious, if we had disfranchised those bo-
roughs, and if we had given the right of voting to towns in
the north of England, there would have been a disturbance
of that balance, and that the agricultural interest would
have been depressed and the manufacturing raised in its
stead. That might be a right thing to do; that might
be what many gentlemen would wish; but I will frankly
say it is not what we are prepared to do. We are pre-
pared to extend the franchise; but while we make large
additions to boroughs, we propose to leave general in-
terests as we find them, and not to disturb there; feelieg,
if we did so, we should only raise a fierce struggle,
which would inflame the minds of Members of this
House, while it would cause our measure to be strongly
opposed in the other House of Parliament.—(Hear,
hear.) I have now stated the general purport of the
measure with regard to the franchise. There are other
provisions in the Bill which I propose to introduce,
which I will shortly state. In answer to a speech of a
Right Honourable Friend of mine last year, I stated
that no good end was attained in retaining the present
I property qualification of Members of Parliament, seeing
that it was so capable of being evaded—(hear);—that I
thought it had been introduced contrary to the general
principles of representation, and that for my part I
should willingly see it altered. I avail myself
of this opportunity of repealing all those Acts,
beginning with the Act of Anne, by which those various
qualifications were introduced.—(Cheers.) In so doing,
I shall propose that Members for places in England and
Ireland shall be in the same position as those represent-
places in Scotland--(Hear, hear)—and I think that in
point of property no one will say the Scotch Members
of this House are in any way interior to those of Eng-
land and Ireland.--(Cheers.) Sir, there is another pro-
vision which I propose to introduce into this Bill, but
which I cannot introduce at first without going into a
Committee of the whole House. It appears to me that
the state of the oaths required to be taken at the table
of this House are not such as can be consistent with the
Bill.—(Loud cheers, mingled with murmurs.) In the
first place, we make it necessary to abjure James
and his descendants, and to enter into various parti-
culars with respect to that family, in regard to which it
is not now necessary to say what it was necessary to say
in the reign of the first Prince of Hanover. In the next
place, I think there is an invidious distinction made in
the oath between Protestant and Roman Catholic Mem-
bers.—(Cheers.) It appears to ma that there ought to be
an oath which Protestants and Roman Catholics can alike
take. I cannot see what is the advantage of making ihe Pro-
testant abjure the ecclesiastical and spiritual supremacy of
the Pope, if you think the Roman Catholic, of whom alone
you could be afraid in this respect, abjures only the
temporal and civil supremacy—(Hear)—nor do I think
that there is any advantage in the provision which leads
a Roman Catholic to declare that he will maintain the
established laws of property, that he will not attempt to
subvert the Protestant religion, or to interfere with the
settlement of the Chinch as established in this realm.ll
It appears to me that an oath for these purposes is totally
useless.—(Hear, hear.) If a Member admit ono
g
histhe seatE Established
sthtis Housechurc
Church
the
oh
oathe
then
wish to tdisturbhao
t if
have provided is, generally
~ o
n t
he speaking,intrthr (e uactieht
introduced
hCola Church, On the other
,e
ands hero
to determinedd o a
lall
that
he
to o doiasot u
to
obei nt
ink
r o
t, Protestantth n
say an oath will not prevent him doingaonpcpoarthtuonlito.tsiewsi,ohn
acevriotalaintioonecac-f
shinoinids,
tiott merelytsua ttotszffoßrodz
their oaths. (Hear, hear.) It will therefore not sur-
prise the House to learn that the new form of oath
Rwhomichan ICatholic oath, with certain omissions, and that
I have not re-enacted the words,
of a caristien."—(Leud cheers.) It is ahuhdai,44
clear that those words were not originally
in order to confine the right of silting in this House to
Christians, but for another purpose; and it is also well
known that the judges of the land are not quite ready to
decide unanimously as to the bearing of these words,
and as to whether any penalty has been incurred in a
recent instance. It appears to me to be far better
to make a simple oath, which all the Members of this
House could take, and which should pledge them to
allegitincelo the Throne and fidelity to the succession.
(Cheers.) There is another provision of the Bill which
I contrive will net be objected to,
and which the ex-
isting state of the law seems to render necessary. At
preterit, if a Member accepts an office under the Crowe,
it is well known that he vacates his seat. Whether that
was originally a wise provision I will not say; but it is
quite clear that it gives the electoral body an opportu-
nity of saying whether they choose to have a Alember
who is in office, and will therefore be expected to give
his vote with the Government of the day, or whether
they require that their Member should be independent.
But there is another provision which appears to me tole
totally unnecessary. It, is that when a Member changes
his office—for example, having been Solicitor-
General, be becomes Attorney-General—he cannot take
his seat without going again to the electors. It appears
to me that, the electors having once had an opportunity
of deciding when their representative accepted an office
under the Crown, he should not again be culled upon to
appear before them on changing his office. I propose,
therefore, to alter the law to that extent.—(Cheers.)
Sir, I believe that I have gone through all the main
provisions of the Bill which I propose to introduce. It
appears to me to be nonsistent wif h that which I have
frequently said we should endeavour to attain, namely,
to have a supplement to the Reform Bill, and not a sub-
stitute ff.a. it.—(Hear, ) I have now fur thirty years de-