The Sun.
London, England, 1838-06-12 00:00:00

population. In Dungannon there were only 197, in Lisburn
144, and in Tralee 174, together with similarly limited num-
bers in several other towns, and yet Hon. Gentlemen opposite
said that they must adhere to a proposition which would have
the effect of restricting the Parliamentary franchise still fur-
ther. He did think, then, that on the very grounds on which
the Right llonourable Gentleman had placed the question he
( Sir R. Peel) ought to have been prepared to agree to some
modification of his opinion. I?ut if the Right Honourable
Gentleman now came down to the House, and professed that
his adherence to the 101. franchise was immoveable, it was of
no use for him (Lord J. Russell) to make any further proposi-
tion.—( Hear.) lie should have been content, so anxious was
he to come to an amicable adjustment of this question—( Hear)
—either with some diminution of the proposed 101. franchise,
or some modification of the 51. franchise, but merely to rise and
make a proposition with the certainty of having it rejected
by the Honourable Gentlemen at the other side of the House
would be idle on his part—(Cheers from the Ministerial side)
—and he must therefore content himself with simply opposing
the 10/. franchise of the Hon. Gentleman. With respect to
those who used the language that municipal rights ought to
be restricted within these narrow limits, because to extend
them beyond these would endanger the safety of the Protestant
Church---(such we understood to be the purport of the Noble
Lord's observations)—he must again repeat that, by using
such language, not only would the bond of the Union be
weakened, but the Established Church itself be endangered,
rather than strengthened.—(Cheers.) His firm belief was,
that if they wished the people of Ireland to form an united, an
affectionate, and a loyal portion of these kingdoms, but at the
same time to concede nothing with respect to the Church,
their wisest plan would have been not to tell the people of Ire-
land that the Church stocd in the way of all Irish improvement
and amelioration, but that their burthens would be so light, their
condition so happy, and their welfare so great, that they should
have no temptation to injure that Church.—( Cheers.) Let the
House recollect that they were now arriving towards the
end of a long period of privations and penalties suffered by the
Irish people.—( Hear.) He did not say that those people
might not be too sensitive in some respects. But it should not
be forgotten, as had been said by an eminent writer, that
" confidence was a plant of but slow growth in the human
bosom," and that still more slow must be its growth in the
.breasts of a people that had long been suffering wrongs and
injustice. Differing, as he did, from the policy of this pro-
posed franchise, he must still say that he would not have
thought it of any material importance, or an essential point in
legislating with regard to any towns either in England or
Scotland; but, considering the past condition and the present
state and prospects of Ireland, and that the wish of the great
majority of the people of that country was to see Mr. Pitt's
intentions with respect to the Union carried out and fulfilled,
he must assure the Committee that they would but he disap-
pointed if they expected he could accede to the proposition of
the Right Hon. Baronet.—( Cheers. )
Sir E. SLT GDE N then rose, but the Right Hon. and
Learned Gentleman was assailed with such a storm of impa-
tient cries of " Divide" at the commencement of his speech,
and his remaining observations were so inaudible, owing to the
constant conversation which prevailed in the House, that we
found it utterly impossible to catch two consecutive sentences
of his speech. We believe, however, that the Right Hon. and
Learned Gentleman commenced with an expression of regret
that the Noble Lord, in spite of the moderate tone and manner
in which lie had begun his speech, had ended by an endeavour
to make the present question a religious one, and in a way
calculated to inflame the minds of the Irish people upon the
subject.—( Hear.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL contended that the effect
of the proposition of his Right Honourable Friend would be
to raise the franchise higher in Ireland than in Scotland and
in England. He agreed that it was highly important to have
a test of value, and he also agreed that perjury had existed
at both sides where the oath of a tenant was taken as a test of
the value of his tenement. He had seen much of that in the
course of his professional career, and, he was sorry to say,
that it was not peculiar to Ireland, but prevailed in every part
of the United Kingdom. He quite agreed in the advantage
of having a test of value, and -would be glad to have any test
which, whilst it did not raise the franchise, would disiranchise
all who were not entitled to the franchise. An attempt similar
to the present had been made in the 10th year of the reign of
Queen Anne, when an Act was passed providing that no one
should be entitled to vote out of any freehold unless such as
had been rated to the full value of forty shillings or upwards
for more than one year before the election. So inconvenient,
however, was this found to be, that this Act of the 10th of
Anne was repealed in two years afterwards. From that time
to this rating had not been adopted as a test with respect either
to the Parliamentary or Municipal franchise. The payment
of ten pounds per annum rent was the amount adopted, in
order to make the Municipal identical with the Parliamentary
franchise.—( Hear, hear ) According to the Parliamentary
franchise, a ten-pound householder had a right to vote without
reference to any deduction for public or Parliamentary rates,
insurance,
&c. rates, church or porochial rates, repairs or
&c. The Reform Act distinctly provided that there should
be no deduction with respect to those charges, which were
specifically enumerated. The Irish Reform Act contained a
similar exemption. In England this was generally acted upon
without any exception respecting boroughs. There was, he
believed, only one instance in which an exception occurred,
and that was in the case of Coventry, where two revising bar-
risters who went down made deductions for repairs. In En ,g-
-land and in Ireland, under the Reform Acts, tenants of the
amount of ten younds a year were entitled to vote without re-
gard to any bargain existing between tenant aid landlord as
to repairs. Every occupier of a house who paid 10/. rent was
entitled to vote. To the Irish Poor Law Bill the Bill before
the House referred as a test of value. In the Irish Poor Law
Bill a deduction was made for all outgoings for repairs and
insurances, and though 10/. a year was the Parliamentary
franchise if the proposed test was adopted it would not be the
municipal franchise. He contended that 101. value and lot.
assessment were different, and that if they adopted a 101. as-
sessment in Ireland as a test of value they would give that
country a higher franchise than existed in any other part of
the United Kingdom.

Sir W. FOLLETT said, however they differed in other
points, all were agreed in the wish to apply some test of value.
—( Hear.) The Government, in the Bill which they had
introduced, had fixed the value at 101. All were anxious to
apply a test of that value, and his Honourable and Learned
Friend had said he had no objection to adopt the assessment
of the poor rate as a test, provided he could be satisfied
that such a test would not have the effect of raising the
amount of the franchise. His Hon. and Learned Friend had
expressed himself anxious to apply a test, and though he ob-
jected to that which was proposed, yet he had omitted to point
out any other test that could possibly be applied with the ex-
ception of the test of rating. He did not see that there
was much force in the reference which his Hon. and Learned
Friend had made to the Act passed iN the tenth year of the
reign of Queen Anne, providing for an assessment as evidence
of the right of voting. That Act, it appeared, had not been
continued for more than two years. Why it had not been
continued the House were left at a loss to know, for his Hon.
and Learned Friend had not pointed out any inconveniences
that had arisen from the passing of that Act. That Act pro-
vided that all persons entitled to vote should be persons rated
at forty shillings or upwards for one year previous to voting
Now that Act merely fixed the assessment as a test of value,
and he saw no inconvenience that could necessarily arise from
it. He (Sir William Follett) had no desire that any test
they might adopt should have the effect of raising the fran-
chise beyond the bone fide amount of qualification. All he
and those with whom he acted wanted was a sure and
safe test of that qualification, and if he could be satisfied that
the test proposed would have that object he was willing to
concur in any alteration which might be introduced so that he
was satisfied that they would be enabled to ascertain correctly
that the house in respect to which the franchise was claimed
was of the value of 101. But what was the course pursued by
the Noble Lord and his Hon. and Learned Friend ? They
said, because you propose a test which we say will have the
effect of raising the franchise above 101. we will not ask you
to modify that test, but we will at once reduce the franchise to
51.—( Cheers.) What he took to be the clear mode of ascer-
taining the value of a house was, what it would let for, subject
to the usual burthens. If a tenant paid certain rates and
taxes he would take the rent which the tenant paid, subject to
these ordinary burthens of a tenant. What they wanted was
to ascertain the tenant's burthens, and with one exception con-
nected with Ireland this was the clear way to ascertain them.
With that exception which he should presently point out, the
Poor-rate would be an assessment on the actual value of that
property. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman now went into
some details of the different orders of assessment. In point of
fact the assessment on the annual value of 101. could not raise
the franchise more at the utmost than five shillings a-year,
and yet it was upon this ground, and with no stronger case
than this, that the Noble Lord proposed to lower the
franchise to 51.—( Loud cheers.) Because in some in-
stances it was possible that the franchise might be raised
in its amount five shillings beyond 101., the Noble Lord
to avoid this bare possibility, proposed, as a safe and cer-
tain remedy, to reduce the franchise to 51.—(Cheers.) If
the public were to judge between the parties in that House
it would now be seen that the sole desire of those on that
side of the House was to have the question settled on
this basis that the 101. franchise should be a real
bone fide franchise. He would take this opportunity of
saying that lie did not feel the force of the observation
which the Noble Lord had thought fit to apply to what had
fallen from him on a former occasion with reference to the
abuses that prevailed in the Parliamentary franchise in Ire-
land. Ho (Sir W. Follett) had referred to the subject for
the purpose of showing that whilst they had a test of value in
England and Scotland a vicious mode prevailed in respect to
Parliamentary franchise in that country, which made it unsafe
to extend the municipal franchise without the security of some
test of value. They wanted a test of the poor rates, which
could not, at the outside, raise the ten pounds value to a
greater extent than five shillings. He only expressed the
sentiments of those with whom he acted when he stated that
their only desire in proposing this test was to setae this ques-
tion on a basis of security.—(Cheers.) They were willing to
agree to any alteration of this test, provided it could be shown
which he contended it could not, that it would have the effect
of raising the qualification beyond 10/. He was not anxious
to increase the qualification, but he would not consent to its
diminution.—(Cheers.)
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL contended that, acc:-rd-
ing to the customary made of rating, a person who occupied a
house of the value of 101. would he only rated to the amount of
8/., so that in the same proportion a parson who was rated at
101. would be the occupier of a house of the yearly value of
121. 10s. The effect, he repeated, of adopting the proposed
test, would be to raise the qualification in Ireland 25 per cent.,
and give a higher fraechise to that country than existed in
England and Scotland.
Mr. P. SC ROPE said that the practice under the Bill
referred to by the Solicitor-General was to make a deduction
of twenty-five per cent. from the actual rental of houses in

towns, and in a great number of cases one-third of the amount
was deducted.
Mr. EMERSON TENNENT rose amidst considerable
confusion, and loud cries of " Divide !" As to the amount,
he could not possibly conceive that for any popular purpose
requiring at once an exercise of intelligence and an interest
in property it was prudent to go below the lot. franchise in
the towns of Ireland.—(lnterruption.) This was the mini-
mum at which the judgment as well as the experience of the
framers of the Reform Bill had fixed its amount, and he be-
lieved that if any change whatsoever had been wrought in the
minds of the supporters by the experience of the last six years,
the inclination of their opinion was that a somewhat higher
amount would have at least given a better security against the
evasion and abuse of the law, and that in Ireland the consti-
tuencies as at present registered had fallen considerably
below the standard which it had been their intention to
maintain as a limit.—( Cries of " Divide !" and cheers.)
Concurring, as he did, in the abstract opinion as to the
proprie • ty of fixing 101. as the minimum qualification for the
exercise of political rights, he (Mr. E. Tennent) could not,
with any consistency, assent to fixing a lower ratio for muni-
cipal. In the schedule to the present Bill which contained
the names of the towns to which it was proposed to give a
51. franchise there were seventeen towns that now returned
Members to serve in Parliament. Anil was it to be antici-
pated or believed that the 51. householders of these seventeen
towns, after having once been admitted to exercise popular
municipal rights, after becoming accustomed to all the forms
and excitements of popular elections, canvassings, polling,s,
and contests—after selecting and returning officers to tax and
govern their several towns—would not look with anxious
jealousy on those who exercised the only right from which
they were excluded ; and, finally, demand to be admitted
to the Parliamentary franchise also? Nor did he (Mr. E.
Tennent) see by what argument or answer that demand could
be successfully met if they were now to be invested with
other functions not one whit less dignified and important.
The advantage of a rating test in a political point of view, as
a self-acting regulator by which the law would be enabled to
work itself, and to enforce its own provisions, would not be
less gratifying than its operation in a moral point of view in
putting an end to fraud and false swearing before the regis-
tering officer. If the House entertained any such apprehension
or opinion as had been stated by the Hon. Member for Dublin,
that this test would represent the holdings as below their
actual value, that the official valuators would estimate houses
ten or twenty per cent. below their actual worth, in order to
lower the amount of taxation, or from other corrupt motives ;
or that they would make such unjust deductions for repairs,
insurance, or taxes, as would deprive the occupant of his fran-
chise, it was within their power to provide against this now.
It was in their power to make special provision that the valu-
ation should be at a rack-rent estimate, giving credit for
the utmost item of enhancement, and all this was perfectly
compatible with the proposition of the Right Honourable
Baronet, for the establishment of an honest bona fide valua-
tion of the property in dispute.—(lnterruption and cries of
" Hear, hear.") In order to show the utter fallacy of fixing
any nominal limit to the franchise so long as the mere opinion
of the interested owner was to be th test of its virtual
amount, he (Mr. E. Tennent) would give them one example
of the practical evasion of a test similar to that proposed by
the Right Hanourable Baronet, only with this one deficiency,
that its application was to depend on the statement of the
claimant, and not on the oath of a third party. At present
the practice of granting excise licenses for the sale of spirits
in Ireland was to charge for each according to a graduated
scale, all houses below the value of 10/. obtaining their license
for a sum, if he (Mr. E. Tennent) recollected, of 3/. or 4/. a-
year lower than those whose annual value was above 101., so
that practically the proof that a man's rent was under 101.
availed him from 31. to 4/. a-)ear in obtaining his license.
Now he (Mr. E. T.) had recently moved for and obtained a re-
turn of all excise licenses granted in Ireland to houses under 101.
In that return he was astonished to find no less than 313
houses included as licensed in Belfast alone ; but on coming
to scrutinize that list be was still more astonished to find th it
of these at least 200 had been duly registered as bona fide
10/. householders, and as such had voted at the last election.
Now in this case there seas a manifest fraud, either upon the
excise in evading the payment of the duty, or upon the regis-
tering barrister in obtaining the franchise, or perhaps upon
both, and to obviate it, there was but one simple and obvious
remedy, namely, to refer the valuation of these premises to a
third party, who would have no interest in falsifying his return.
He hoped that the House would see the equity as well as the
expediency of conforming to both these proposals of the Right
Hon. Baronet ; and for nie (Mr. E. Tennent's) part, so vi-
tally essential did be regard both the one and the other that
he should consider the surrender or defeat of either one or the
other as a virtual discomfiture of the entire plan for the ad-
justment of Municipal Corporations in Ireland.----( Hear.)
Mr, WOULFE attempted to address the House, but from
the very great noise and confusion, we heard but indistinctly
in the Gallery. When we were able to hear, he was ob.erv-
ing that the rating clause in the Poor Relief Bill had made a
marked distinction between permanent and perishable pro-
perty ; and he insisted that, when a man's income arose from
perishable property, the rate should be proportioned accord-
ingly. What, then, was the difference between income de-
rived from houses and that which was derived from land.
Would any man tell him that a House in Dublin, rented at
ten pounds a year, was worth ten pounds to the landlord ?
Could any man deny that the loss of a single slate, the wages
of a single day's carpenter's work, would come to more than
the few shillings mentioned by the Right Hon. Baronet ? No
man in that House, who was himself' a proprietor of houses,
would assert the contrary.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon.
Gentleman made one or two further observations, but, Lore
the increasing impatience of the House, they were quite
inaudible.

Mr. SHEIL rose amidst loud cries of " Divide." He
wished lion. Members to note the course the question had
taken. The Right Hon. Baronet now appeared to feel him-
self wrong to a certain extent in point of fact.—(No, no.) lie
(Mr. Shell) contended that the proposition of his Hon. and
Learned Friend the Member fur Dublin, which had been at
first so warmly resisted by the lion. and Learned Member for
Exeter, was now acknowledged to have had foundation.—
( Hear, hear, hear.) When the Hon. and Learned Member
for Exeter rose to reply, he contended that there was no
difference between the actual and rated value—net a frac-
tion ; and the Right Hon. Member fer Tamworth asserted
his unalterable intention to adhere to a 101. rate. He (Mr.
Sheil) was sure, however, that if those Right Hon. Gentle-.
men found reason to change their opinions they would have
virtue enough to change their conduct.—(Ministerial cheers )
Concession had certainly been made to a considerable ex-
tent.. ( Expressions of dissent from the Opposition benches.)
Let them leave off those ingenious subtleties for which the
House had no relish, because it had no capacity for them_
( A loud laugh)—and go to the broad facts of the case. It
was now admitted that there was a difference between the
amount of rent rated and that actually paid, the clause for
rating was framed after that in the English Poor Relief Bill •
and there was the framer of that Act ( Mr. P. Scrope) a wit-
ness to prove its intention.---( Hear, hear.) They had now
got this fact. Would Hon. Gentlemen opposite avow them.
selves in the wrong ? Would they then come forward with a
proposal founded on their increase of knowledge ?—( Hear.)
There was one more fact on which he must trouble the
House with a few words. The Right Hon. Baronet had e
patiated on the Scotch Bill, and had quoted the Lord Advo_
cate Jeffrey ; but he (Mr. Shiel) could quote a speech of the
Right Hon. Baronet—( Hear, hear)—on the English Bill, in
which that Rght Hon. Gentleman contended that the Scotch
franchise should not be so high as the English ; and also re-
ferred to a speech of the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley)
in which it was asserted that a 101. franchise was too high.
(The lion. and Learned Gentleman here read an extract from
a speech of Lord Stanley, in which was expressed an opinion
that the 101. franchise was too high for Scotland.) Let the
Right Hon. Baronet, then, deal with Ireland as he had dealt
with the sister country.—(Hear.) That was all he would
ask.—_( Ministerial cheers.) He did not like to use the term
" Justice to Ireland"—it might be considered a kind of cant
phrase.--( Hear, hear)—but he would say, " Equity for Ire-
land ;" and equity for Ireland meant equality with England.
--(Ministerial cheers.) That was what they asked, and for
that they would insist —( Hear, hear.) But he had another
point for the consideration of the Right Honourable Baronet.
When the Right Hon. Baronet was in office in 1828, he intro-
duced a Bill for Ireland, in which powers were given to the
ratepayers analogous to those proposed to be given by the
intended Bill. What was the qualification then proposed by
the Right Honourable Baronet ? He took the 51. rate—.
( Hear, hear)—and the Act was the of Gco. IV., cap. 82.
—( Hear, hear.) He ( Mr. Sheil) referred bin' to that Act,
and asked him why in the small town of Clonmel he had for-
merly been satisfied with a 5/. municipal franchise, and now
insisted on one of double that amount. Why was con orate
reform now conceded ? Gentlemen opposite had done all
they could to withhold it, and now it was reluctantly conceded
to public opinion.—( Hear.) He should end now with an in-
terrogatory. Why did they ask to make a distinction between
England and Ireland? The Noble Lord (J. Russell), in re-
plying to the Right Hon. Baronet, had touched upon the true
hinge, the cardinal cause of the objection. He said, " You ask
for a different qualification in Ireland, because the majority of
the people in that country are Roman Catholics." Was not
that the fact ?—(No, no.) Not one of the Hon. Gentlemen
who had spoken on the Opposition side could deny it. They
had not endeavoured to do so. They had kept studiously silent
on the subject. That was the principle acted upon ; let them
candidly confess that in Ireland religion was to be made a
motive for disfranchisement.—(Cries of " Oh, oh," from the
Opposition benches.)
Mr. BROT E RTON rose to make some observation, but
from the loud and incessant cries of " Divide," it was impos-
sible to catch a word.

Sir ROBERT PEEL said--I am not going to make any
reply to the Honourable and Learned Gentleman, but it is of
the utmost importance that my real intention should not be
misunderstood. What I wish for is a 10/. franchise—a bona
fide franchise.—( Hear, hear. ) I wish it to be represented
by what we call in England clear annual value.. Ido not ask,
under the pretext of a 10/. franchise, to establish a greater.
I do not expect that, if by your Poor-law additional burthens
are thrown on the tenants, to do without some modification ;
but I expect that the exercise of the franchise in Ireland shall
depend on the bona fide possession of property ; to quote the
words of the English Act, " clear annual value," and of the
present " true and real value." But if, on the other hand, you
have adopted any principle of rating by which the franchise
would be raised from 10/. to 121., I shall not insist on the in-
creased amount, but be content with the bona fide amount of
my original proposition.—( Hear.)
Mr. O'CONNELL was satisfied to have the franchise fixed
at 101. provided it was ascertained in the manner directed by
the Scotch Bill. Why would they not give a Bill to Ireland
similar to that of Scotland ?—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon.
Baronet denied any wish to insult Ireland ; but would he assert
that the people of Ireland were prone to peg jury ?—(No, no.)
The Right Hen. Baronet had quoted Cork ; but he bad