The Sun.
London, England, 1830-07-21 00:00:00

EAST RETFORD.

• The Marquis of SALISBURY, having moved
j the order of the day for the House to go into u
I Committee on the East Rertsrd Disfanchiaement
Bill, •
Lord WHARNCLIFFE stated, that he could by
r no meant, concur in the principle of the proposed
measure. In the case of Grampound, they had re•
f moved the franehiselrom that borough altogether,
and transferred it to the county of York, although
I he at the time, being then in the House of Corn-
' moray, had recommended that it should rather be
. given to the borough of Leeds, which was hitherto
. unrepresented. What he should now suggest
would be that they should abide by the principle its
, that instance acted on, but lint take that precise
. mode of removing the franchise. He had not him-
self taken the trouble to read the evidence adduced
to establish the charge of corruption against East
Retford, but it appeared to hove been of a nature
abundantly sufficient to satisfy their Lordship's
minds that that borough had been habitually guilty
of corrupt practices for a long period, and that there-
fore it deserved to be constitutionally punished by
an immediate change of franchise. His opinion on
these premises:wae, that:they oiled not to deal by the
delinquent borough as was now intended, but that
they should convey the franchise entirely away front
this borough, and give it to some of those great
towns which bud not at present the advantage of
representation. One of the resolutions, therefore,
which it was his-intention to move on the bringing
up of the report was, in favour of the transfer of the
franchise to the town of Birmingham : not that he
did not think a transfer toLceds or Manchester equally
eligible in point of principle, but he particularized Bir-
mingham solely because its claims to representation had
been already submitted, during the present session,
to the attention of Parliament. He was quite at a
loss to perceive what useful object was sought to be
obtained by a conveyance of the franchise to Basset-
law, which was apparently sufficiently represented
in Parliament already. What could have been dis-
covered in its loctrlity or intrinsic pretensions to en-
title it to this distinction he confessed himself unable
to conjecture, es it seemed to him that the share ie
county representation which it had hitherto enjoyed,
was all to which the hundred could possess any
reasonable claim. Birmingham, ou the other hand,
a place of immense population, of enormous wealth,
enjoying all the other important advantuges contin-
gent on commercial prosperity, and having a deep
interest in every question which could tome before
Parliament, whether relating to general policy, of
appertaining exclusively to mercantile affairs,--this
great town, he repeated, with such numerous claims
on their consideration, was constrained to intrust
its multifarious concerns to the Members for War-
wick. It was well understood, however, thut as the
House of Commons worked at present, all interests
were virtually represented, although it would appear
that theoretically they were not. He might be told
that the transfer he recommended went to deprive
the landed interest of two Members out of the eight
which were sent to Parliament by Nottingham, but
he thought that the state of the corn Laws was
sufficient of itself to show that that interest was tot,
powerful in Parliament to dread so small an app..
rent curtailment of its strength. Besides, it wa,
rather the monied interest which the Members fut
East itetford might rather be supposed IQ Tire-
sent, as it was notorious, generally speaking, that
those 'persons who were eeturned by that borough
had no connexion whatever with the counts
of Nottinghem. It ought, moreover, to be recol.
!mid that the House of Lords was all in ab,
or at least, for the most part, compesed pt` those
who Were chiell, connected wffle peoperty of that
description. NI ith reeptee to Birmingham, and
those other tewee eintilarlz eircum,tanced, he might
observe that many of the important questions to be
agitated in the next Pat liAnent—that relating to the
Bank of England, for example»---were of a molar.
which rendered it particularly deeleztolo to collect
the practical informatiep, wbieh was only to be de-
rived from sash Beams. With a recent strung
illuetret4rn of 'the fact so fresh in their recollection,
it was unnecessary for him to remind their Lord-
ships that individuals were frequentity ten time,
more dangerous unrepresented eV home than the)
woulsl be found whoa kglisametely, returned as u
component part Of ilia Legislature from, which they
ken' 'been excluded. The proposal %Odell- he sub-
mitted to their consideration they 41 doubtless
taNlsteo'biCtlerohtt(tiltra‘bveheetthilleiliti:
tpkf):ol-16rjemsolvueiivtadaasZ1,37,1:: °t4 41Oiohlic all another to rt
alluded to the fate of Lord John 4tiroem
~,s
rnotiott
relati, siemingliam iti the 11,eskse.of 00111111 Obs,
observing that the :41Stieet the times was Stich tt
to teach Parliament the wisdom of giving
‘ra
public opinion to a certain eNtent
)rather rhea t 4,

franchisement Bill which should ho introduced
would be disposed of in n different manner.—
(Hear, hear, hear.)--iie should then trove t
the Bill be committed on Friday, intending tee
pose two resolutions to the effect he had dimly
stated, on the bringing up of the report with 3
View to their being communicated to the econnion
at a conference. The Noble Lord added, tlair Iu
should wish to empower thos,, who had not let
convicted of corruption, to vote at the (Imam) a
representatives for liirrningism.
The Earl of JERSEY then moved the adjourn.
.
merit of the debate, for the purpose of moving that
the House should send a message to the Commons,
expressive of the concurrence of the House in en
address to the Crown respecting Sir Jonah Bar-
rington.'
On this it was sought to be contended that the
Bill was lost according to the forms of the Hous,,,
inasmuch as the terms of the motion wero 11A
" an adjournment of the debate during pleasure?'
After a abort conversation on the print of Pin
liamentary form so involved,

Lord HOLLAND observed that it was certainly
competent for any Peer in the House to move 'tle
resumption of the debate immediately, if he thought
proper, although the terms of the Noble Emil*
motion were not in Parliamentary acceptation
Ilk-
rally correct. The motion relative to Sir Jonah
Barrington having been acceded to,
The Marquis of SALISBURY accordingly
moved the resumption of the debater and proveeded
to say that it was unnecessary now to go further
than the case required, the object being to purity
the representation, which would be sufficiently lit-
rained by the BM as it at present stood. Tito only
question was, whether they should transfer the
franchiee at once to a great town, or merely extend
it to Bassetlaw, and he thought it would,' be an
act of great injustice to East Retford to deprive it
of its franchise altogether.
The Earl of DUDLEY, however, felt strongly
in favour of the measure proposed by the Noble
Lord near him, and thought that to forego the prs-
sent opportunity of carrying sucha principle into
effect, Uould be to throw away a great advantege
which slid not often present itself, lje,had no doubt
but those great towns sustained considerable Mem.-
venience in consequence of not being represented,
and wished to see a remedy applied us soon as pos.
,ible to what he could not help considering u een-
stitutionul evil.
Lord DACRE said, that as a reformer he was
glad of the admission made by his Noble Riot
(Earl Dudley) that some reform was necessary.
With such an ally he would gladly act ; and though
he did not think the measure a remedy for the evil.=
which he believed to exist in the represcututioni y t
it would be an important point gained. The Noble
Lard' then proceeded to contend that the question
of vested rights of electors was one which could not
be entertained for a moment by their Lordships. Ir
was one which had never been ndmitted its any kg '•
%Wive measure respecting the franchise, and bed
never beets thought of ut those periods when the
crown used to issue writs to place* aceording to the
numbers and circumstances of the inhabitants. A
case of gross corruption, he maintained, had 1,V(91
made out with respect to this borough, and the evil
would not be met by a measure which would stilt
Mow to the same ,voters a corrupt influence, mate!;
diluted, no .doubt, by the admission of so ruany
new voters„,but still au influence which they ought
not to have !After what their Lordships had heord
from the evidence at the bar. The most efft crush
remedy for this sort of corruption would be, to tisk,
away the franchise altogether, and give it to one at
those large and populous towns now unrepresented,
but which none of their Lordships could , doubt
would, if they had existed in ancient times', have
had a writ issued to them to return Members to Par-
liament.
Lord ELLENBOROUOH contended that it
would be un act of great injustice to those voters id
East Retfurd who were not guilty of corruption t,t
deprive them of their franchise. flu admitted it
,vas an inconvenience that such a town as 1.1 h..
minghatn should not he represented, and whenever
a ease of general and hopeless corruption occurred
in n borough, and that the franchise wee declared
forfeited, he would not object to its transfer to such
it large town; but the present case he did not con-
sider as one calling for a total forfeiture of the
franchise.

Viscount GODERICU said, he should be tli,
posed to deal with each case of this kind us it arose
recording to circumstances, but he could net roncur
that this was not a case deserving the total loss of
the franchise. Ile denied that the''doctrine of vested
rights had ever been admitted by Parliament. It
could not, therefore, he said to be an act of injustie
to transfer the franchise from a small town to one of
great wealth and extent. Ile was not a friend to
speculative reform, but whenever a COO like the
present was made out, he should he disposed to aet
upon it by transferring the franoWe altogether.
The Marquis of BUTU had great doubts as tt,
the guilt of this borough being satisfactorily prove,!,
Aul if not so, it would be injustice to 1;410 from it
the franchise altogether. lie thought% under all the
circumstances, it would be better tta deal with it us
vas proposed by the Bill. •
Lord CALTHORPE contended that when their
Lordships had, as in the present case, the franchise
at their dispose!, they would not be acting in the;
?kit of the Constitution if they refused to grant it
to a town of such wealth and population as
Birmingham. Their Lordships could do nathing
whieh would tend more to promote the spirit of
visionary reform than the rejection t 4 the proposition
for giving this franchise to llitin4ightun or some
other great town.

The Duke of WeLLINGTON Intid be had
listened to the argument as to the inconvenience or
not hnving snob towns as Blrtninghtua represented*
but he differed from the Noblt; Lord as to the ex_
tent of that inconvenience, Ite admitted there wag
qoam, but be eueteudt4 that Other and much .areater
Inconvenience wok result from adopting the pro.
posed nuicrtimout. Opinions were lay Ho means
nuttlihtotti us to the inconvenience front the want cf
representatives for several greet. towns, but trimly
held opinions that elections in such towns would be
still more inconvenient, and that the fart of
''ePresentutiVoa would not mid to their weight ei“t
imPortAnw, Complaint* of the %Vara of represetan.
tires had 'often been math, but it did not appen,
that the towns in any degree suffered by it. Tory
had gone on incten4g in Ivoulth and itupurtsne,..
lie admitted, with the Noble Lail opposite, thin
,trictiv sl,oo,:jog 'hero were no such thinglali vv•ted
rights la the elective franchise; b Le defied any
acre to show that the franchise had evvr been tILL,ti,
East Itetford were nut dc.orived of their rights, bite
their impot•teneo • ar.4 value were redueed, at,
+nil which had been found tiro t salutary itr its c;w
iiii.ttioinociialUidptobr:tthifuti%ivelywitiwenkt retulrlot short of it they :ghttliat wto, he wort of measure hest adapted to the ease; that
oultl ttu less than
Its they woul Ido
njtptiee.

Tt;aoirr
1111..uo4rdiuteilliitioin4
Lord WiIARNCLIVM replied.
V 3 IA 1:11 11,1: ~, -
peered.-..
Against it ....,... f,li
:11ajority itgairon the anieitinivnt ,—",:,-Z,.:
entittleil Ilividej .h.
~,
The reaolosions of Lot 1! WIIMINCI.III,II v..-vsitl,c
moved, and negutived tvAtotit n divki",'.
On our rotoro to the I lon4eove lonort jrO4- 1,1,4,`-
,!iiint in Committee on the Bid. Tin' vi"""' I''''''
seVerany agreed to witlioq, dik.oition.-,Aiiii ft.