The Sun.
London, England, 1831-04-19 00:00:00

CIVIL LIST.

Earl GREY said that it would be more convenient if
the discussion on the Civil List Bill could be taken on a
future stage of the Bill. He would, therefore, propose
that the Bill should be read a second time then, and com-
mitted to-morrow (this day), with the understanding that
the discussion should come on them.

This arrangement being agreed to, the Bill was read a
second time, and ordered to be committed this day.
REFORM.

Lord DURHAM prepented a petition from the Ward o
Bridge, in favour of Reform.

Mr. Crater, from the Treasury, presented the Treasury
Minute respecting the reduction of the salaries of official
persons holding seats in either House of Parliament. To
be printed.—Adjourned at Half-past Seven.

HO USE OF OMM() N,c
/c galleries and every avenue leading-to the House
were crowded at an early hour, and every seat in the
House was labelled with the name of a Member.
Mr. J. SMITH presented a petition in favoar of Re-
form from the merchants, bankers, and tradesmen of the
city of London. The petition was signed by 9,600
persons, and was agreed to at one of the most ex-
traordinary meetings that ever occurred in the city, there
being only two dissenting voices. The petitioners were
of opinion that so far from the proposed measure of Re-
form being revolutioasry, it would give additional security
to the establishments of the coantry.
Mr. PHILLPOTTS presented a petition from Berkeley
in favour of Reform, and another from Gloucester (from
the Magistrates) against the recent alterations in the Beer
Bill.

Mr. PALMER presented a petition from Berkshire
against the Beer Bill. He hoped Ministers would bring
the subject before the House.
Mr. F. PALMER, as a Magistrate, did not think the
Beer Bill had had the least mischievous effect.

Mr. HODGES presented a petition from Hythe and
another place in Kent, in favour of Reform.
Mr. HOWARD supported the petition, and would
vote fur the Bill through all its stages.
Mr. HODGES also presented a petition from Lowe-
stoffe, and another from the freeholdvrs of Sussex, in fa-
vonr of Reform.

Alderman WINCHESTER—As one of the freeholders
' of the county of Sussex, from whom the petition just
now presented by the Hon. Member for the county of
Kent purports to be, I am desirous of ascertaining to
what parts of the Noble Paymaster's Bill for the Re-
form of Parliament its prayer particularly alludes ;
for if I understood the Noble Lord rightly, the
other night, he declared his readiness to abandon a great
part of the principle of the Bill now before the House.—
(" Hear, hear," and " No, no," from many Members.)
Some Hon. Members say "No, no ;" but I beg to state
that such is the fact, awl I am not alone in that impres-
sion, both as regards the opinion in this House and out of
doors. I shall now express my dissent from the prayer of
the petition, that as it mentions freeholders generally, it
might not be understood I was at all concerned in for-
warding, or of being interested in that measure.
Mr. CURTEIS said the measure had his decided sup-
port. Ile was sure the freeholders of Sussex wished for
the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill.
Mr. SHELLEY was present at the meeting, and be-
lieved he was the only opponent to the petition.
He thought he could state that not thirty free-
holders were present.—(Hear.) The petition was only
agreed to by the tact of the Sheriff, and in his opinion the
Bill was not popular with the majority of the freeholders
of Sussex.—(Bear.)

Lord G. LENNOX had been through every town and
village in Sussex, and was convinced that there was not
a single individual but what was in favour of the
plan of Reform.—(Heir, hear.) He begged to state
that the meeting was most numerously, attended, and the
Hon. Member who opposed it could get only himself and
two drunken Lewes men to oppose the petition.—( Exceed-
ing laughter.)

Mr. CURTEIS was convinced the freeholders would
ityport the Bill with their lives and fortunes.

Mr. CRESSET PELHAM had hitherto been an inde-
pendent freeholder, but if this Bill passed into a law he
should no longer remain so.—(Hear, hear.)
The petition was then ordered to be printed.
Mr. COOPER presented a petition from Sligo against
Reform.

Mr. O'CONNELL said the petition was not agreed to
at a public meeting ; if a meeting had been called at all,
the majority would have been in favour of the measure.
Sir J. YORKE and Mr. OWEN O'CONNOR made a few
observations.

Mr. COOPER could assure the House that the petition
was in accordance with the feeling of the immense majo-
rity of the people of Sligo.
Mr. G. DAWSON said, if the Bill was carried, it
would overthrow the Protestant Establishment in Ireland.
He denied that Sligo was a corrupt borough.
An HON. MEMBER said the borough was regularly
bought and sold.
Mr. G. DAWSON —Can the Hon. Member say that
he ever knew the borough was bought and sold 1—( Hear. )
Sir J. NEWPORT, if necessary, could prove at
the bar of the House, that the borough was sold
to the highest bidder ; and if a Jew bid the most money,
so matter, he would have it.—(Laughter.)
Mr. C. FERGUSON-4f it Were pot a fact that

bortrighs were bought and sold, where was the tree
of the seven days' debate on the Reform Bill ?
After a few word§ from Mr. O'Costeiehi., the petition
was ordered to be printed.
Major MACNAMABA presented two petitions from
the parishes of Tulle and Quin, in the county of Clare, in
favour rf Reform, both of which were numerously and
respectably signed. Amongst the gentlemen who had
signed the petition were, Mr. O'Callaghan, of Maryport ;
Mr. Creagli, of Dangan ; and Mr. Singleton, of Quinvill.
Mr. M. O'CONNELL seconded the nio'ion for layine
the petitions on the table.
Major MACNAMARA presented a petition from Gal-
way, praying for the extension of the elective franchise.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented four petitions from parishes
in Monaghan, Cork, Tipperary, and Wexford, in favour of
Parliamentary Reform.
Mr. PEARSE presented a petition from the corpora-
tion of Devizes, against the Parliamentary Reform Bill.
Mr. WATSON TAYLOR supported the petition, and
said that although he was aware that le risked popularity
by opposing the Bill, he had opposed it, and should con•
tinue to oppose it.
Mr. LONG WELLESLEY expressed his conviction
that the petition which he had presented from Devizes
*peke the real sense of the corporation. It appea,ed that
the patronage of Lord Sidmouth had been very successfully
used in that borough.
Mr. WATSON TAYLOR observed, that the petition
which had been presented by his Hon. Colleague was una-
nimously agreed to. It was signed by every Member of the
corporation.
Mr. LONG WELLESLEY stated that nine members
of the corporation had signed the former petition.
Mr. ESTCOURT denied that Devizes was under the
patronage of any human being. It was true that it had
been formerly represented by Lord Sidmoutli, whose vir-
tues and merits would never be forgotten ; but no undue
influence of any description was exercised in the borough.
Mr. BAYNTUN had no intention of addressing the
House upon the petition which had been presented from
Devizes, had not an observation been made by one of the
Hon. Members that it had been unanimously signed and
agreed upon. Now he felt himself in a particular posi-
tion ; he had the honour of belonging to that corporation,
and although he had received no intimation of the meet-
ing—much more, had not attended it, he had heard, and
heard with satisfaction, that many of that very corporate
body were friendly to the Reform brought forward by his
Majesty's Government; and that in the very corporation
itself he might be borne out in stating, that a very strong
feeling excited in its favour. With reference to the town,
he knew that the measure was hailed with the greatest
satisfaction by all its inhabitants, and as a member of
that corporate body, he should be very unwilling to with-
hold the elective franchise from his fellow-townsmen,
mmy of whom were of the highest respectability, though
unconnected with the corporation. The petition, there-
fore, could not be considered a unanimous one.
Mr. FLUME said he did net rise to make any observa-
tions on the petition that Led just been presented, but to
make a statement which he considered of great import-
ance. It had been intimated to that House publicly that
a great many of the lower class of people in Lancashire
were opposed to the present measure of Reform. So far
from this being the fact, he was authorised from most
respectable quarters to state that the lower class of people
were almost unanimous throughout that county in favour
of the measure—that they hailed it as a great and
important boon from one end of the county to
the other. Also, that at every one of the meetings
and dinners that the honourable Member for Pres-
ton had attended, the health of his Majesty's Ministers,
and success to their proposed measure of Reform, had been
given and drank with the utmost enthusiasm ; and if
at those meetings there appeared to be any one
single individual opposed to the measure, it pro-
bably was the Hon. Member for Preston himself.—
(Cheers.) Attempts, indeed, were made to raise dis-
approbation of the measure, and questions were
asked, such as would they not prefer universal
suffrage to the proposed measure ?—(Cries of hear,
hear.)—Why put it to any man ?—Put it to himself
(Mr. H.), and be would say he would rather have
universal suffrage.—(Loud cheers.)— This was his
candid opinion, and why should hr disguise it ?
(Cries of hear, hear, hear.) —But becanse he entertained
an opinion that universal suffrage would be better, was
he to set up that opinion against his Majesty's Ministers and
against the country ?—(Cheers.) The measure now pro-
posed was so important, and fraeght with such immense
benefit to the public at large, that he felt he should be un-
worthy of the confidence of any person, did he not give it
his warmest support. In the course often days the House
\you'd be fully satisfied by the petitions which would come
from the working and lower classes of society in Lanca-
shire, that the representation which had been tirade of their
feeling of opposition to the measure, had been a most ex-
awe improper representation. (Loud
cheers, and hear.)—This he was anxious to state
in the most distinct terms, as the Hon. Member for Pres-
ton's speech misrepresenting the feeling of Lanca-
shire had undergone two or three editions, and been very
abundantly circulated throughont the country.
Mr. LITTLETON had also been desired to give the
flattest contradiction to the statement of the Hon. Member
for Preston that the working class of people were not in
favour of the present measure.—(Hear.) He believed that
no measure had ever been proposed to any Parliament
in hich there had been such unanimity of feeling in its
favour on the part of the working class of people through-
out this country. He held in his hand a letter from
a highly respectable clergyman in the neighbourhood
of Durlaston, an extract of which he begged leave to
read. The writer stated " I saw veeterday by ap-
pointment several very respectable individuals of Dur-
laston, who went out of curiosity to a meeting that
took place there to hear what Mr. Hunt had to say.
They assure me they did not hear any thing from any one
individual in opposition to the Bill, nor do they believe there
is one to he found there who is opposed to it; on the con-
trary, the Political Union, who are supporters of him (I beg
pardon for mentioning the name) are disgusted with him."
In another part of the letter be says—" Mr. hunt said, do
you return any Members here for Parliamee t? A man said
no. He said how far are you from Cover try ? A man said,
30 miles. He said to another, how far are you from Tam-
worth?—A man said, 20 miles. Then, said Hurt, go in
a body at the next election, and don't let those pieces send
such Members to Parliament as they have hitherto done—
lay hold of the electors—persuade them as you can ; if that
will not do, squeeze them pretty hard ; if that will not do,
put a tourniquet round them, and screw that pretty hard."
Now, until this was flatly contradicted, he (Mr. L.)
should believe that the whole of it was true. It had been
communicated to him from a most respectable source--
he had no lea than three or four and twenty letters on the
same subject, received on Saturday, and io the course of
to-day.e•-•( Hear. ) One of the letters stated that a petition
from the working class of Durlaston would be imme-
diately sent up to that House in favour of the
measure. A meeting, for the purpose of agreeing
upon the terms of the petition, and of signing it,
had been called. One of the placards calling it he held
in his hand, and it stated that the object was, among other
things, " to celebrate the triumph of the glorious cause in
the hands of our belOved Sovereign and his enlightened
Ministers."—(Lond cheers.)
Mr. HUNT said that in the first place, as to what had
fallen from the Hon. Member for Middlesex, he should
perhaps in some measure confirm his statement. In
regard to what had fallen from the Honourable Member
respecting Durlaston, he had to say that he had been at
a meeting that took place there. He was at Birming-
ham on his way to Preston, and at Birmingham
was invited to attend a meeting in Warwickshire. In reply,
he said he had no property there, and he should not go,
but would spend the day in Birmingham. Two members
of the Birmingham Union (one a Mr. Western, a most
respectable man) waited on him, and invited him to at-
tend a meeting at Durlaston, saying, if he would go
he should have a seat there and hack in their,
carriage, and this was the way in which be hail got among
the Hon. Member's constituents opposite. In consequence
lie (Mr. H.) believed of his being present on that occasion,
instead of there being 50 to dine when dinner had been
prepared, there were nearly 300.—(111uch laughter.)
He was invited to address the persons assembled, sad the
discussion arose upon the present measure of Reform.
He certainly did put two or three questions to them.
They were mostly working men, and not of the class which
he should call 101. freeholders. In answer to what was
stated in the House the other day with respect to
putting leading questions, he admitted that he had
put leading questions ; and he would appeal to any
Hon. and Learned Member in that House whether, in a
Court of Justice, leading questions were not permitted for
the purpose of eliciting truth, and the whole truth.
(Hear.) He asked those present whether they would be
likely to come within the class of those who would have
a vote in the representation? A great portion of them
said they were not. He then asked them whether they
would choose to delegate to the 101. inhabitants,
the Bill, their right to vote,
and rYoom was, certainly not. After
j awasnrs" proposedenrvin te' b
itedltio go to a multitude, no doubt partly
'inctsouhLar their
e w
hear the leaders of the Birmingham Union, and partly
that he might be heard himself. He was told that he then
addressed 10,000 people, and to whom he repeated his
questions, and from whom he got !similar answers., The

Hon. Members for Staffordshire and Middlesex stated that
Meetings had been held all over the country, and that
the people were unanimous on the measure. lie (Mr.
H.) had stated the same thing, and that the people
were running mad for it. The Hon. Member for
Boroughbridge had called it 6' Russell's Purge Bill." It
might be entitleno that epithet from those who were to be
scoured out of Parliament by its operations, but he should
apply some other term to it. It was a Bill to disfran-
chise 60 boroughs and to knock off 120 Members.—
Now it seemed the Noble Lord had put them all together
into an oven ; he had pounded them, and blinded the eyes
of the people of England with the powder in the shape of
" Love's powder, or horoughmonger's powder." People
had begun now to see the effect of it. They were
recovering from their blindness. The House had
been lustily told that all people approved of the measure
Why so they did approve of it—they approved of it
so far as it went, but many, and particularly those
in Lancashire, did not approve of it in consequence
of its not going far enough. lie (Mr. H.) for
his own part, approved of the knocking off system—
he approved of the measure, and he should give it his
support. At the same time he had always c ntended for
the right of the whole people, and this was certainly not
a measure calculated to give to the whole the right
of voting. He had stated on a former occasion
what he relocated now, that when the Bill was in the
Committee he should move that those who were
to be exempted from the right of voting should be
excused from paying taxes and serving in the mi-
litia. He had stated this too to the persons at the
meetings that be had attended, and asked them if
they expected any thing from the measure? They
then stated that they expected nothing whatever.
The Hon. Member for Middlesex had stated that at the
dinners he (Mr. H.) had attended, certain toasts had been
drunk. Now that Hen. Member must have been entirely
mistaken, because he had dined with no one ! lie knew
what the Hon. Member meant ; it was this, that lie (Mr.
IL) had been invited to an evening party—(Laughter)—
at which there was nothing to eat.—(Repeated laughter.)
—At that meeting the health of his Majesty's Ministers
certainly was drank. Here, continued the lion. Member,
is a petition signed by 4,000 cut of the 7,000 electors of
Preston in three days, and this confirms every part of my
statement. He then stated he had letters from all parts of
the country, as well as the lion. Member for Stafford-
shire, and all these letters denounced the measure. Of
these he would read ene, which came from Paisley, not-
withstanding the assertion of the Hon. Member fer Kirk-
cudbright, that all Scotland was in favour of the Bill.
This letter came from the Chairman of a Reform meeting
held in Paisley, and stated the feeling of the country
might be appreciated from the fact of the proportion be-
tween the number of qualified and unqualified house-
holders. Throughout Scotland the proportion of the qua-
lified to the unqualified was as 1 to 104 or 11; in Edin-
burgh it was as 1 to 3 ; in Glasgow as 1 to 44 ; in Aber-
deen as 1 to 7 ; in Paisley as 1 to 14 ; in Dundee as 1
to 6; and in Leith as Ito 44. Was this, he asked, the
free and equal representation which they were told the
people was to have? For the Hon. Member for Middle-
sex he entertained a very great respect; but he did not
consider him half so useful as he was formerly, since he
bad become a Ministerial Member.—(Hear, and laughter.)
• —lle was now content with recording his objection to a
vote, whereas, formerly, he would have insisted upon a
division.—(Hear, and laughter.)—ln fact he was much
better as an Opposition than as a Ministerial Member.—
(Hear, and laughter.)—Still, however, he thought the
Ministry had gained a great deal in having so industrious,
and laborious, and honest a supporter.—(Hear, and laugh-
ter.)—There was a speech of his to which allusion had
been made—he meant that which had given so much dis-
pleasure at one side of the House, and given such satisfac-
tion at another—that he understood the Hon. Members on
his side had had it printed.—(Cheers from the Treasury
benches.) This speech, too, had been received with great
disapprobation by the Press. He had got a great trounc-
ing from the Press.—(Hear, and laughter.)—And what
he would call the politicians of London were very much
displeased with him. It was, he was well informed, up
to the last fortnight, the custom at all the public-houses,
smoking-rooms, and other places of nigh'ly meeting, fre-
quently to drink his health ; but since he made that
speech, in every instance, and in every house, a vote of cen-
sure had been passed against him. But though these
votes had been recorded against him, and although the
Press had attacked him, should he, as the representative
of a free people, be afraid to express his conscientious opi-
nion?—No.—(Cheers.)—As for the Press, he asserted
there bad been a conspiracy of the Papers in favour of the
Bill. lie hoped the lion. Members and the Press would
understand him. He said there was a conspiracy—not of
the Papers with the Ministry—hut of the Papers amongst
themselves. Such was the popularity of the measure
among the buyers of newspapers. that they would not
have sold their papers if they had not advocated it.—
(Cheers from the Treasury benches.)—Now he received
cheers from the other side of the House.—(Hear, and
laughter.)—lt was said that he had sold himself—and this
not to him who was i❑ favour and place. He should be
glad to know to whom it was said he did sell himself!
And he could tell the House and all the Hon. Members
of it, there was but one price by which he could be
bought—! here was that one, and but that one way of
gaining him—it was by giving representation to the
whole people. He hoped more time would have been al-
lowed for the presentation of petitions ; and as he could
not present it, he begged leave to read a short extract from
one in his possession.—(Oh, oh.) There was in this pe-
tition authority which would bear him out.—(Oh, oh.)
He wished the House and the Press to understand that
when he spoke of the people he spoke of the whole people,
and not of those merely whe were to be represented ; and
he had no hesitation in declaring it to he his honest and
decided opinion, that the unrepresented portion of the com-
munity were dissatisfied, and would be still more so when
they had time for reflection. He would read au extract
from the Leeds Patriot, which afforded an honourable
exception to the conduct of the Press in general towards
him.—(oh; question, question.) The Hon. Member
then reverted to Preston, and said he was bound to admit
that another petition had been got up in Preston, and was
in the hands of his colleague; but the meeting from which

it emanated was held in a room that could not hold more
than 600 persons, and not one-fifth of the electors were
present. He added, that the chairman refused to put a
motion adverse to the Bill. He then read the extract from
the Leeds Patriot, which stated that the Hon. Member

for Preston had done honour to himself and his consti-
tuents—(Hear, and great laughter)—by expressing the
genuine opinion of the working classes, now that they had
had time to consider that the Bill was decidedly not popu-
lar amongst the producers of the country's wealth, and
that it was evident the Press had combined to misrepresent
or suppress the opinion of the Hon. Member for Preston,
in the same manner formerly complained of upon the part
of Mr. O'Connell.—(Laughter.) He (Mr. Hunt) did
not complain of the Press. Every thing could not be
printed, and he had his fair share. But it was not the
first time he had the whole Press against him, even with-
out one bare exception, because he advocated the same
principles which he did then. In conclusion, he repeated
his assertions respecting the unpopularity of the Bill with
the working-classes, adding at the same time he had no
doubt it would be carried.

Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN stated, that he had been
entrusted with a petition from the Spitalfields weavers in
favour of that Bill, and that he had received a deputation
from them, by which he was informed that they had held
such an opinion of Mr. Hunt, that it was their intention
to have confided the petition to his charge, but that his
speech upon the Reform question, delivered some time
since, had filled them with indignation. The petitioners,
he remarked, were all operatives, and not entitled to enjoy
the franchise under the Bill. As to the Hon. Member for
Preston himself, he considered him the best friend to Re-
form, with no good intention however on his own part,
but from his misrepresentations of that House and of his
Majesty's Ministers, the fact was, the Hon. Member had
opened the eyes of the people.
Lord STANLEY said, he rose to remark that the lion.
'Member for Preston bad returned no answer to the ques-
tion put by the Hon. Member for Staffordshire. He had
himself asked the question in private to-day, whether Mr.
Hunt had at Manchester used the language attributed to
him respecting the Wigan election, and he was Vold that
Mr. Hunt had not used exactly the words printed in the
papers, but he had something very like it. The words
attributed to the Hon. Member about the Wigan election
were as follows:—'" The first day of the Wigan election
let every man in Manchester, between the ages of 15 and
45, march over to Wigan, to accompany Mr. Potter, to
the number of 20,000 or 30,000 men, and he would
hem go a
al influencend exercise
oveexrthis what he
eelectoraofcalled a
Wigan. c,„nif
you meet a voter (said Mr. Hunt), say to some ten
or twelve of you, take care of him, and see if you can't
persuade him to vote for Potter. Use kind entreaties ; and
if these fail, I would advise them to take him by the arm,
aiid give him a gentle squeeze, and let one take hold of his
other arm (and I know you Lancashire men give some-
thing like a feeling squeeze when you and if he still
refuses, I would not say I would pull his arms off, but 1
would very near do it. That is what you are called upon
to do, and my opinion is that if you don't do it, you will
never get this
.Reform or any other.'"--He asked if this or
anything like it was fit language to be used by a Member

that House? Again, about the expected election at
Manchester, the Hon. Member bud been reported to say—.
He had been asked, supposing the Reform Bill should
pass, who were the people of Manchester going to send ?
[A voice from the crowd : Hugh Birley, accompanied by
groans and cries of ‘No,no.l He had been told of hiin.
before; but on his expressing a desire to know who he
was, ' don't you know,' said some one, that's Captain.
Birley, who came up to the hustings in August, 1819.'
What !' exclaimed Mr. Hunt,' will the people of Man-
chewer send a master butcher of Peterloo to represent
them in Parliament ?'—(No, never.) Those who were Dot
ten-pounders would, he thought, take care of that. If
they caul(' be guilty of such an atrocity, he would retire
from public life, and never enter Lancashire again ;
and he would tell them that, were he a Manchester
man, rather than submit to it, he would lay half Man•
chester in ruins. Instead of having fourteen lives lost,.
he would have half the blood in Manchester spilt
before be would sulimit to such a degradation."—(Cries
of " Oh, oh !") He had asked the Hon. Member if
he had used this language, and he replied that, generally
speaking, it was much exaggerated; be, in answer to a
particular question, respecting the portion of his speech
which referred to Manchester, he acknowledged that he
had said something very like it. He (Lord Stanley) de-
clared that if the Hon. Member had said anything like it,
he had disgraced himself and his country.—(Hear, hear.)
He begged pardon for wasting the time of the House with
reference to a speech delivered out of doors, but he felt it
his ditty to do so. He then proceeded to allude to the
Turnpike Bill, upon the conduct of which Mr. Hunt had
commented in his speech. and affirmed, that, upon a small
foundation of truth, the lion. Member had raised a strange
structure, which he could not attribute either to mistake
or misrepresentation. He farther stated that he was in-
formed, that when a person asked in the crowd where was
Wood, Mr. Hunt, shrugging his shoulders, replied, " Ay,
indeed, where was Wood when he ought to be attending
to your interests," when the Hon. Member well knew that
Mr. Wood had attended on the Committee.

After a few words from Mr. PEARSE, which is ere not
audible in the gallery--
Mr. HUNT stated, that he bad told the Noble Lord
the express:ow in the paper from which he had quoted
were much exaggerated, but that he might see something
very like what he should say in the Manchester Times.
He had omitted to answer the Hon. Member for Stafford-
shire's question. He had now to say that the statement
in the Clergyman's letter was a gross exaggeration. He
did astc e people if they would not go in great bodies and
exercise a constitutional influeoc --(Loud laughter)—by
endeavouring to prevail on the electors to vote for the friend
of the people, anti he had spoken of a genCe squeeze—.
(Continued laughter)—but all that about the tourniquet
and taking off their arms, was gross exaggeration. He
denied that he had ever spoken of Me. Wood except in
terms of the utmost respect.
Mr. LITTLETON affirmed that he was authorised by
the gentleman who wrote to him to state, that a number
of respectable tradesmen were willing to verify the state-
ment on oath.—The petition was then laid on the table.
Mr. SPEAKER then called on Lord John Russell—
his Lordship rose ; but
Mr. W. DUNCOMBE presented himself, and claimed
the attention of the House, stating that he had four peti-
tions, which he had been particularly requested to present
before the Bill proceeded further.

Mr. SPEAKER said, that the time for presenting
petitions being passed by, unless the Hon. Member was
quite sure the c9urse he was pursuing was perfectly con-
sonant widt the feeling of the House, he was not in a sita-
tion to make a motion.

After some moment•, during which there were laud
cries of " Chair, chair :" the Hon. Member at length
gave way.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that at that time of
the ex', ning he felt it impossible, if he consulted his
duty, to accede to the request of the Hon. Member.—
(Hear, hear.) If, indeed, that Hon. Member alone had
been desirous of presenting petitions he should certainly.
yield to the Hon. Member's wishes ; but he felt that if
at that moment he gave way, and consented to the further
presentation and discussion of petitions, considerable time
would be employed, which had better be devoted to the
discussion of the measure itself.—(Hear, hear, hear.)

.

e felt it
e to the
ant had

a small

strange
mistake
was in-

ere was
"Ay,
tending
ew that

ere not

a Lord
quoted
netbing
Times.
tafford-
itement
He
lies and
.r)--4)y
e friend
ietze—

rniquet
3. He

cept in

feed by
lumber
e Rtate-
table.
I seen—

Maimed
it peti-
prestnt

6enting
er was
ly con-

a situ-

re laud
length

time of
ted his
iber.—
ne had
irtaialy
that if
further
de time
to the
r.)

I feel,
er cau-
! upon
people
ere are

3 im-
stand
easure,
impos-
and a
umber
nt up
a the

He
only
ken,
that
t it.

Among these towns were London, Westminster, Southwark,
Liverpool, Bristol, Norwich, Nottinsehatn, Leicester, Pres-
ilton, Exeter, and Colchester. Of 81 Members to whose
opinion the Right Hon. Gentleman, with somewhat of a
reforming eye, had looked for protection as expressing the
sense of the people, 66 had voted in favour of the
measure, and only 15 against it. I take up these very
places referred to by the Right Honourable Baronet, and
from the feelings I have seen displayed in them I cannot but
,
i consider that these are signal proofs that the voice of the
country is decidedly not in favour merely of Reform, not
merely in favour of the vague word Reform, which
all gentlemen it appears are now in favour of
(Hear)—so long as they are not called upon to determine
in what sense they understand it, but it is a signal proof that
the people are in favour of a thorough Reform, in short, that
they are in favour of this Bill ; tisat they think the nomi-
nation of seats ought to be put an end to, and the franchise
extended to large, commercial, and manufacturing towns,
which at present are wholly unrepresented. I derive
(continued the Nohle Lord) my information not merely
from this, but I infer it likewise from the division which
now appears among those who represent the various
boroughs, which it is the object of this Bill to de-
prive of their Members. It is no wonder they
should say, we will not vote for this Bill ; it deprive;
us of the rights which we at present enjoy ;
but when we find that persons whose interests are against
the question, having no external force applied to them,
are exceedingly divided, and that perhaps one-third of
them are in favour of relinquishing the power and privilege
which they enjoy, from a sense that such power and pri-
vilege ought not to continue, I say it is a very strong proof
of what the opinion of the people is, and the impression
that is made on men of cultivated understandings
by the arguments and reasons which have been adduced to
their minds during the course of the past years on
the great question of Reform. I shall now, Sir, refer
to the manner in which this Bill has been considered by
his Majesty's Ministers during the recess, and in doing
so: I find myself obliged, from the misunderstanding
that has prevailed, to refer to the way in which the mea-
sure was originally brought forward. It was difficult
properly to estimate a stand ird on which we should proceed
with reference to persons who should have the right to vote.
There were various means by which this might have been
ascertained, pointed out. It was said that those paying
the smallest taxes, were those rated at :10/. ; but on
looking at the case in that view, it was found that those taxes
were extremely irregular, and that in many places they took
them at the value of the houses rated. Therefore if we bad
taken that test, we should have taken a test liable to error,
if we had taken the test of the 10/. householders.—
It was also said we might take an examination into
the boroughs—their limits, and so on ; but that
inquiry would have led to great doubts and difficulties.
There would have been probably partialities shown by the
persons sent out to make the enquiry, and we should have
il
got such a mass of details as would have rendered
it impossible for us to bring forward any effective mea-
sure for a year or more, and yet after all we should
not have arrived at a proper criterion of the places
which ought to be disfranchised. If we
had confined ourselves to the limits of a particular bo-
rough we should not have done justice, for in Bridge-
water, for instance, it is stated that the parish is divided
into three parts, its jurisdiction extending over the whole,
but there is only one part that sends Members to
Parliament. It was thought, therefore, better at
once to take that well known Parliamentary docu-
ment, the population register, which certainly was
not drawn up with a view to favour any interest, with a
view to befriend any party, but was made out for the
purpose of ascertaining the population of the country. We
obtained, therefore, the returns as they were drawn up in the
office of the Secretary of State for the Home Department.
Sir, in doing this, we were taking not only what
seems to me to be a fair line, but we were tak-
ing the only practical line that could be adopted,
because with regard to many of those boroughs, the only
statement to be found in the book of the returns
of population is time borough and parish ; and when, by our
desire, letters were written by the Secretary of State
to the returning officers for their returns, time answer
of many of them was, that it was impossible to
know what the population was in 1821. Therefore, if we
had taken those letters as our guide in framing this measure,
we should have taken that line which would not only not
have been fair, but a line from which it would have
been absolutely impracticable, at least from any known
or precise data, to have distinguished the boroughs
in all cases from parishes. For instance, with respect to
the first borough, Amersham, the return made of it was,
that the houses of the inhabitants covered the
whole parish. Well then, in speaking of Caine,
(which I shall have occasion to advert to shortly)
a Right Honourable Gentleman accused us the
other night impropete. by saying that this was a
corrected return. He ought, himself, undoubtedly, to
have taken good care to have been correct before
he had made that statement. So far from this being
a corrected return, it is, in reality, only a return in
part from the letters sent to the Secretary of State's
office by the returning officers in the course of last
week, and which was laid before the House as col-
lateral to going into a Committee. Wherever there is
a borough to which there is a parish attached, we have
endeavoured to do that which I think is most equitable.
With respect to the borough of Aldborough, in Yorkshire, it
is stated that the borough and township contain 7:35 inha-
bitants; but on examining the memorials that have been
sent to the Secretary of State's office, it appears
that it and Boroughbridge, and several other places,
make altogether two thousand inhabitants.—(Hear, hear,
from Sir C. Wetherell.) In considering the claims of
these boroughs, he was not disposed to say that because
they now returned four Members—a number exceeding
that to which they were properly entitled—he would treat
f. them as separate places, and in that manner prevent them
from returning any Member at all ; for that would be ex-
ercising a severe mode of justice. He would unite the
population of all these places as in one, and would give
them the right of returning one Member. Ile should
therefore propose that they should be placed in schedule B.
He next came to the borough of Buckingham, the parish
! of which contained 2,485 inhabitants, and which for that
reason he should propose to put also in the list of boroughs
in Schedule B. In the same manner Malmnesbury, the
population of which was 2,145, and Oakhampton, the
Population of which was only 1,807 within the borough,
but which by the union of the places immediately adjoining
it possessed a population of more than 2,000, were now
proposed to be placed in Schedule B. Reigate was one
of those places that was in a somewhat doubtful situation.
The borough itself contained only 1,928 inhabitants;
but the foreigners amounted to 1,633, making together
2,961. That number would entitle it to be placed in
Schedule B ; but at the same time that he said this, it was
but fair that he should read to the House what the return-
ing-officer had said, and when he bad done so he thought
he should have shown that if they did grant a Member to
Reigate, they must be considered to have done complete
and ample justice to that borough. The returning-officer
said that the borough itself and the adjoining town were in
all respects whatever as distinct as two several parishes.
These were the boroughs that he proposed to take from
Schedule A, and transfer to Schedule B. There was a
great number which he proposed to strike out of Schedule
B, and to permit them to retain their present number of
Members. Time first of these was the borough of Leo-
Minster, which possessed a population of 4,646 ;
the borough of Morpetb, the population of which was
4,291 ; the borough of Northallerton, with a population of
4,431 ; and the borough of Tamworth, having a population
of nearly 7,000. That borough was like Reigate. The
returning officer stated that the parish of Tamworth was
very extensive, consisting of towns and hamlets distinct
from each other, all maintaining their own poor separately,
but all united in the assessment of the church-rates. This
separation, in particular points, had not been deemed suf-
ficient ground for legislating upon, and therefore the
borough was proposed to be permitted to retain its present
number of Members. The borough of Truro, according
.to the population returns, possessed a large number of
Inhabitants. The town was larger than the borough.
Looking at all the petitions and memorials that had been
!ant into that House, it clearly appeared that in 1821 the
borough contained more than 6,000 inhabitants. It ought
The borough of 'Westbury' contained a population of 2,846,
and Chipping Wycombe had 2,559 inhabitants. These two
amounted together to a population sufficiently large to
Justify them in transferring those boroughs bare schedule
13•, and allowing them to return their present number of
Members. In all thes
e qtnstions there must be alimit of
ankle sort, and whatever might be the line adopted, there
Would be persons who would
discover that there were
places just on one side of the limit. to which in literal
strictness the rule might be
applmed, b
be more favourably treated.. The
liueutthshil
evybcaidouadgl,m,pttet,ol
was one which they had, f
1111
from that line they would nroon't necessity, adopted, and
d
boroughs, they had determined that
where rt. With respect to
gh
and
depended
on
the township
was part of the boron
form but one place for the return of itr: both ought to
representatives.
tatives.
Where, however, the nature of these relations
two places was in doubt, they could not
be )expected
to amend these returns. The case of I3eeralston was one
involved in some degree of doubt. It was not properly
stated in the population returns. It bad been said that Burr-,