The Sun.
London, England, 1831-07-21 00:00:00

LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, JULY 21, 1831.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF L ORDS, Jur,v_2o:

The Master of the Mint's Salary Bill, the Irish Tobacco
Bill, and several private Bills, were hi ought up from th.,
Commons by Mr. Bernal and others, and read a first time.
The Assessed Taxes' Composition Bill was committed.
The other Bills on the table were forwarded in their
respective at ges.

and Brighton in 1831 ; but all the old boroughs were t..
he taken by the census of 1821. He contended that the
supporters of the Bill must meet their opponents with ar-
gument, or they would not satisfy the public. The Bill
%vas losing ground in the public opinion, the newspipers
were beginning to call out against the majorities falline
sway—(A laugh)—and unless the Ministers came forward
with arguments, the senseless cry of " The Bill, the wliol
Bill, and nothing but the Bill," would not drag the Par-
liament through thedirt, togive its sanction to the measure.
Mr. PRAED thought it was wrong to take away the
llembers from boroughs that were increasing in popula-
'ion, and allow them to be retained by boroughs that were
lecreasine in population.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought the point a good one,
.nd would attend to it whenever the Hon. Member pointed
out such boroughs in the schedules.
The question was then put and carried, and the name
of the borough of Great Bedwin accordingly stands part of
the first clause.
The next question was, that the name of the borough of
Beeralston stand part of the first clause.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose to explain the circum-
stances of this borough. By the population returns of
1821, it appeared to contain not less than three thousand
inhabitants, but that was by including the parish of Be,r-
ferris, near which it was situated, but with which it was
not connected. According to a return which had been
kid on the table, the borough of Beeralston contained
only ten acres of land, and one hundred and nine houses,
and four hundred and eight male inhabitants. By the re-

turas under the assessed taxes it appeared that in the whole
borough there was only one house rated higher than ten
pounds a year. The taxes paid by it during the last year
only amounted to 31. 9s. The right of voting in the bo-
rough was by burgage tenure. The voters were not resi-
dent in the borough, and not otherwise connected with it
—and still less were they connected with the populous pa-
rish. It was a most decayed borough, which could not be
cured by letting in the neighbouring householders ; and,
therefore, he had no hesitation in placing it in schedule A.
Sir CHARLES WETHERELL proposed to call the
attention of the House to the question of burgage tenures
when they reached the borough of Bletchingley, and he
should then he happy to assist a Learned Friend of his
to save that borough.—(A laugh.) He would not,
therefore, be led into that discussion then, but would reserve
what he had to say till Bletchingley came to be discussed.
Sir ROBERT PEEL reminded the Noble Lord that
the case of Beeralston came precisely within the line
which lie proposed to adopt with regard to the other lee
roughs which were allowed to count the population of tie
parish. Beeralston was in one parish, and therefore not
open to the distinction wich the Noble Lord had taken in
the case of Appleby last night, when he refused to allow
its claim to be placed in schedule A, because it happened
to extend into two parishes.—(Hear, hear.) How did the
Noble Lord reconcile this contradiction ? Ile thought,
however, that it would be fair to take but one discussion
on the principle involved in the question connected with
these boroughs, and contenting himself with protesting
against the course pursued towards Bee:alston and the pa-
rish of Beerferi ie, he should propose that - the case of
Downtoo be argued as for the whole of them.—(Hear.)
The Hon. Members on his side of the House were fre-
frequently taunted with favouritism and partiality in the
selection of the boroughs which were made the subject of
discussion. Now, without making any ob'ervations on
the propriety or impropriety of that accusation, he would
say, let them take the borough of Downton, the nomina-
tion of which was in the power of a Noble Lord, a sup-
porter of Ministers.—( Hear, hear.) On that borough,
which was precisely in the same state as Beeralston, and
several others, he proposed, therefore, to take the general
debate, with the understanding that the fate of Beeralston
and all the others was to be decided by the vote on Down-
ton—(Hear)—and without, at the same time, precluding
himself from adopting any further proceedings he thought
necessary on bringing up the report.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL was quite willing to accede to
the proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman, and took
occasion to compliment him on the fairness of his conduct
throughout the debates on the Bill. The Right Him.
Baronet had, with great fairness and candour, contented
himself with applying his arguments to the question im-
mediately before the House, and that only, without taking
up their time by any further discussion of the principle;
and while he (Lord J. Russell) felt bound to express his
acknowledgments for that course of conduct, he might also
say that he wished the Right Hon. Baronet would give a
hint to his Learned Friend (Sir C. Wetherell) who sat be-
side him.—(Hear, and a laugh.)
After a few words from Lord MILTON, in favour of the
course pursued towards Beeralston,
Mr. PRAED should like much to know what was the
principle which the Government proposed to adhere to?
Last night they would not give the franchise to a borough
which was situated in two parishes, and on this night they
would not listen to the claims of Beeralston, although it was
all in one parish.
Mr. STANLEY denied that there was any chance of
Prince,
bi.i.siwpler and
ererntln
iiiiduegdhttiiit wattoiiiield be
parish
sel
'ol
fi f Hon. ilm-
Beerierris,lefor
whose right they were contending, was not in a condition
to lay claim to exception from disfranchisement; for it
would be found that at that moment it had but 1840 in-
habitants. --(Hear.)
Mr. CROKER begged to ask who it was now raised
anew the questions which had been already decided by a
vote of the House ?—(Cheers.) Who was it now reverted
to points which had been already agreed and determined?
—(Hear, hear ?) His Right Hon. Friend (Sir R. Peel)
had, in all candour and fairness, abstained from adverting
to this point.—(Cheers from the Ministerialista.) He
understood that cheer, but he repeated, that his Right Hon.
Friend, with a candour and fairness which had but the
moment before been complimented by the Noble Lord, ab-
stained from touching on this point, because, as the House
had already decided they were not to take into considera-
tion the increase, so also he thought they were not called
on to mention the diminutions in the population ; and yet
it was on that ground that the Right Hon. Gentleman,
one of the most prominent of his Majesty's Ministers, now
stood up and justified the course pursued towards Beeral-
ston.—(Cheers.)
Mr. PRARD would not say anything more at that
moment on the subject of the defence of principle made by
the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stanlsy), than that he
had escaped by an inconsistency from falling into an ab-
surdity.—(Hear and a laugh.)
The question, " That Beeralston stand part of the
clause," was then put and agreed to.
(ha the question, " That Bishop's Castle stand part
of the clause,"
Mr. KNIGHT said, that after the decision which the
House bad come to with respect 'to Appleby, lie should
content himself with protesting against the course adopted
towards Bishop's Castle. Ile begged, however, to re-
mind them, that the right of voting was not by burgage
artiestiencnue sroteo: rbas ,lul tanidy
classestt ina!t'aentrhdi inheritance,
eo
professions,eter d eorfi (filsr
odfmer description
ei :noggeslti comprisedn e
downef
to the humble artisan. Of these there voted at the last
election 190, while more than 200 more were absent
either from minority or on account of their residence else-
where. The population of the place, too, was 1,800 or
1,900 in 1821. He believed it was now much above
2,000, and lie could say with truth and sincerity, that the
electors exercised their privileges as free from any improper
bias as any body of men in the kingdom. The only in-
fluence they acknowledged was that of kindness, and the
affection kindled by the exercise of those virtues which the
Noble Lord dwelt on as one of the consequences of his Bill.
Ise should, however, content himself with protesting
against the decision of the question at that moment, and
reserve the right of moving hereafter that Bishcp's Castle
betaken out of schedule A, either by a -..'on with some
initsiner he found 'it convenient toI
optrloiLep:o,•
:11:io..iroot(iHgEliNie,ao RUSSELL Hear.
); e ) s
se iIELi
L said that there were two classes
of boroughs which it was proposed to disfranchise ; one
the pure nomination boronghs, and the other nomination
except that aid
of giving
boroughs, which were never opened, except by a system
of bribery. Bishop's Castle was one of the latter class,
and therefore they thought it right to disfranchise it. L
Mr. CRESSET Ptbeßdl conferred
two
addnio.
tii e,
he county; but if Rishop's Castle was
iii()osonfrnaalnoCniheilsDSedblierr°;Pl fortse ly'it ts.vould lose the two in one way which
they gained in the other. He denied that Bishop's Castle
was influenced by the porrupt practices of any man, and
expressed his opinion that the virtues of the Noble Peer
who was said to have the power of nomination, made him
reign in the hearts, and not in the pockets of the inhabitants.
Mr. ROGERS called on the Noble Lord (Russell) to

PRICE 7D.

'ay before the House some proofs of that bribery which
ae charged against the voters of Bishop's Castle. There
had been but one attempt of this kind, and that was m nle
in 1821 by a Whig gentleman—(Cheers)—who was after-
wards unseated by petition. He denied that it was in the
:tower of the Noble Lord to mention ancther instance of
the kind. But supposing it had been so, did the Noble
Lord mean to say that bribery was to he the test of dis-
Sranchisensent?—(Hear, hear, hear.) If so, he called
on him to place in schedule A the boroughs of Evesham,
Stafford, Liverpool, and all those where bribery hail taken
place.—( Hear; hear.) If he did not do so, then let hint
withdraw his articles of impeachment against Bishop's
Castle.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir JOHN I3RYDGES condemned the Reform Bill as
mischievous and absurd, and stigmatised it as a dangerout
measure, supported by a delegated majority.—(Hear, hear,
and no.) It was, he repeated, supported by a delegated
majority, returned under a delusion by the people, and
compelled to abandon their judgment and their feelings to
a minority, whose only reasoa was, sic volo sic jaeo.
(A laugh, and bear.) Those who laughed would do better
if they tried to answer him.—(Hear.) The majority thus
returned to support the Bill—the whole Bill—. and nothing
but the Bill—sere supporting anything but the Bill; for
that Bill was now so changed, and the Noble Lord had
made so many alterations in it, that be had almost stulti •
fled his own measure.—(Hear.) He thought he saw
symptoms of a better feeling throughout the country; and
lie was satisfied, if that House and the Legislature did its
duty manfully and fearlessly, that the Bill could not, nor
would not be carried.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. KNIGHT thought that the inhabitants of Bishop's
Cottle had good ground of complaint against the Noble
Paymaster of the Force*. When the Members on the
Opposition side of the House contested the propriety of
disfranchising a borough, they were called factious; and
when they yielded to the sense of the majority, and to de-
cisions on the same principle, then the Noble Lord took
an opportunity to vituperate their constituents, and accuse
them of brib,ry.—(Hear.) Either the accusation of the
Noble Lord was material or immaterial to the case. If it
was material, he called upon hint to prove it, and demanded
inquit). If immaterial, and the Noble Lord did nut
mean to place the disfranchisement on the question of
bribery, then he would ask only, did the Noble Lord vo-
lunteer such a course of vituperation? This was time
course pursued by the Government. When they were
driven from population, they fled to nomination ; and when
they were beaten from the charge of nomination, they took
refuge in accusations of bribery.—(Cheers.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL had already stated more than
once, that the principle of the Bill was population, and on
that he rested the question. When, however, the Hon.
Member thought proper to go into a lengthened defence of
the purity of the electors of Bishop's Castle, he had
thought it hut fair to say, that they had not been altogether
so pure and so disinterested as the Hon. Gentleman repre-
sented them to be ; and the borough was not altogether
removed front the general z tile of the Bill, which deprived
of the right of representation either those which were
directly nemination•boroughs, or in which the nomination
was only broken in upon by the influence of bribery-. As
to bringing proofs of the fact, the Hon. and Learned
Member, and the House, well knew from experience, that
if they were to attempt to do so, their whole plan of Re-
form would be arrested at once. It would be like sending
suitors in the Court of Chancery before the Master.
There Would be reports from the Master ; there would be
references, exceptions, anti further directions. The matter
would occupy ten or twelve years ; during the whole of
which period the people of England would suffer like un-
fortunate suitors in the Court to which he had alluded.
It was necessary, therefore, that those by whom the Bill
had been introduced should take some clear awl unequi-
vocal test. That test was population, and by that test
they would abide. He had considered it necessary to say
thus much in answer to the funeral oration with which the
Hon. and Learned Member had thought proper to deck
the obsequies of the borough of Bishop's Castle.
Mr. GOULI3URN observed, that if he understood the
objsct of the supporters of the Bill, it was that in a Re-
formed Parliament the 'Members should faithfully repre-
sent the sentiments, and warmly defend the interests, of
the places by which they were sent to that House ; and
yet the Noble Lord taunted his Hon. and Learned Friend
for doing precisely that which the supporters of the Rill
contended it was the duty of every Member to do. He
admitted that the principal basis of the Bill was popula-
tion ; but what right bad he to bring a charge of bribery
against the borough ?—(No, no.) It was the very
case in which no charge of that kind ought to have passed
the lips of the Noble Lord ; who ought to have recollected
that when an election petition, complaining of an undue
return far Bishop's Castle, haul some years ago been re-
ferred to the consideration of a Committee, the Com-
mittee determined against the sitting Member ;—on the
ground of bribery ? No ; but because, there being an equa-
lity of votes, one of his voters was proved to have been a
minor at the time of the election. He was not at all sur-
prised that his Hon. and Learned Friend should have
shown some warmth in the defence of tits rights and
character of the place which he represented, attacked as
they had been by the Noble Lord.
S r E. SUGDEN reprobated the manner in which the
Noble Lord had spoken of the highest Coma of Judicatwe
in the country. The Noble Lord presumed on his majo-
rity in that House to insult those who differed from hint
on the subject under consideration. In his reformed Para
liatnent, the Noble Lord would find himself in a different
situation, for be would find auditors of a different character
from those over whom lie now lorded it, The Noble
Lord's observations on the Court of Chancery were ex-
ceedingly improper. It was a Court in which property
to the amount of many millions was depending ; a Court
in the decisions of which hundreds of individaabt had the
deepest interest. Yet the Noble Lanai, in a tone of de-
preciation, had said, that if the supporters of the Bill gave
way to the requisition of a delay of a day or two for the pur-
pose of obtaining necessary information, the rights oi the
people of England would be placed in the same aisuation as the
claims of suitors in the Court of Chancery. He would
tell the Noble Lord that lie was utterly ignorant of what
had passed and of what was passing in that Court; and
he wished to know how it was practicable to inculcate in
the people of England a love of the laws and a respect for
the dodicature of their country, if those laws and that yu-
diaature were to he spoken of thus lightly by a Cabinet Mi-
nister ? The Noble Lord seemed to think a delay of thane
weeks would be too much for the purpose of g'aeing the
best means of deciding the alterations to be made in a
Constitution which for a hundrecl and fifty years had been
the glory and honour of England. Would the Noble Lord
deny that the greater part of the alterations which had
hitherto bean made in the Bill had por,aeded from sug-
gestions on that (the Opposition) side of the House?
Ought not the Noble Lord, therefore, to treat those by
whom those suggestions had been made with courtesy;
and not to conduct himself towards them as if :Ley were
no longer representatives of the people? Such indecen-
cies had been indulged in at the '...eginning of these pro-
ceedings ; but he had entertained a hope that by this time
they were entirely relinquished.
Lord ALTHORP wits astonished at tht attack which
had been made on his Noble Friend, without the slightest
provocation. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had at-
tacked his Noble Friend on two grounds. First, that he
had alluded to the Court of Chancery. Now every body
knew that, rightly or wrongly, allusions had been re-
peatedly made in that House and elsewhere on the ;laity
.to which proceedings in the Court of Charaaery were
liable. Secondly, the Hon. and Leans"; Centleman had,
to his great surprise, charged 11;s :a'oble Friend with dis-
courtesy; for really he visa not sensible of anvtlaiaa4
had fallen from his Noble Friend :. uiGh justly waposed
him 14-, ouch an imputation. 11‘; perfeatly admitted that
it was most essential in thes,,l dizousaions to avoid personal
attack; but lie maintei.ard that his Noble Friend had not
been guilty of r,ny,
Mr. ROBINSON would just advert to two indefensible
attacks wh'ch had been made on all those Hort, Members
who were supporters of the Reform Bill. Those who,
like himself, supported the Bill, without any motive but a
conviction of its justice and expediency, could not, with-
out pain and indignation, hear it said by an Hon.
Baronet that they were a delegated majority, awl by an
Hon. and Learned Gentleman that they were a majority
dragged through the dirt of that House, If night after
night, they sat silent under such charges, they were then
taunted with being uasable to reply to them. If they re-
plied, then they were attacked with virulence. For -him-
self, he had no particular preference for either sides of the
!douse; but speaking of both sides of the House, he could
not say that either was strictly exempt front blame. Bur
the country could not help feeling great indignation when