The Sun.
London, England, 1831-07-13 00:00:00

tie House. it was absutd to sill Counsel before them to
prove at the bar what any of the inhabitants of Appleby
could prove. What was there doubtful in fact, or what
was there doubtful in law, relating to Appleby, which
Counsel could prove at she bar? The question of Ap-
pleby might be the question of all the boroughs in the
• kingdom. If they allowed Counsel to be heard far Ap-
pleby, they must allow it for every other borough ; then
tl ese would he 150 boroughs, each to be heard by Counsel ;
and suppose the Counsel were to be contented each with
one day, there would be 150 days before the House could
go into a Committee.—(Hear, and a laugh.) The only
question was, if the borough could redeem itself by show-
ing that the amount of its population was alcnetio2n,,ooaom:
and if the Noble Lord could prove that tact, the House
would be very ready to give bias every attention,
allow the borough either to seal its extinction or secure
its perpetuity.—(lleac, hear.)
Sir E. B. SUGDEN was surprised at the Noble Lord
(Milton) declaring that his mind was mole up not to hear
Counsel, the only means by which information could he
properly and legally obtained, and yet asking for informa-
tion.—(Hear, hear.) If they did not bear those who ob-
jected to be disfranchised, they would not do justice to
the people. —(llear. ) Ills Mai' sty's Ministers were
the only persons who could take a borough out of schedule
Aor out of schedule B, without explaining why it was
done. They could alter the Bill, but no person else was
to touch it. There was not one essential part of the Bill
which had not been altered over and osor again ; every
clause had been altered, and the Bill was a different Bill.
He cautioned the House that it was acting judicially as
well as legislatively, and they ought not to act except on
the best evidence. It was the duty of the Ministers to get
the best information—and what had they done ? They
had not, during the three months that they Lad the sub-
ject in hand, obtained information even to satisfy them.
selves.--(Hear.) They were prepared, however, to carry
the Bill through, not to support it by argument. Let the
majority then at once declare that they would has? it so ;
and let the people of England know how the thing was
carried.—(Hear, hear.) Certainly, as the princip'e of
the Bill was carried, if the gentlemen on the opposite side
would receive his advice in good part, and would listen to
arguments, he would endeavour to make the Bill as per-
fect as possible in Committee; but if they were deter-
mined to bear down all argument by their majority, he for
one would retire from the discussion—would give a silent
vote—and would let the people of England know why it
was he did so. He did not care if his time were occupied
ten, fifty, or hundred days; he would rather be so occu-
pied than not do jnstice ; and justice would not be done if
Counsel were not heard for the petitioners.--(Hear.)
Sir. B. GRANT defended the course adopted by the
Ministers. He contended that it was not unusual to refuse
the prayer of such petitioners, and he instanced the case
of the Catholic Association, which petitioned to be
heard by Counsel, but was refused. In this case there
was no question of fact, no question of law, to make it
necessary to bear Counsel. There was certainly no ques-
tion of law, except that which was stated in the Bill
brought in by Mr. Curwen, which declared that it. was
contrary to ancient usage, and to the real purpose of It-
presentation, when populous places which were represented
in Parliament had their Meinbeis elected by the influence
of individuals. The question would be fully and conve-
niently discussed in the Committee, and he, therefore,
should support the views taken by his Noble Friend.
Sir CHARLES WETHERELL had heard no argu-
ments from the other side, which convinced him that
Counsel ought not to he heard, but many which seemed to
him explicitly to prove that they ought. There was the
case of Appleby, and the case of Wareham ; both were the
same, and both required inquiry and information. He
wished to know who it was that had an uncontrolled
license to make mistakes, and set them right?—(A laugh)
—That was his question, and he would answer it himself.
It was the King's Government which could make mistakes
ad libitum, and which had a power of curing them ad
libitum. They shambled one borough out of Schedule A,
and they shambled another into Schedule B, just as they
liked.—(Cheers.) He must say, that on this subject his
Learned Friend, the Attorney-General, seemed to have
forgotten that amenity which usually distinguished him,
and spoke with somewhat of that asperity he had lately
been accustomed to use in certain Courts, where be had
not been very successful.—(Cheers.) But whether his
Learned Ftiend had arguments or not to support his views,
he was sure to succeed in that House with the large ma-
jority possessed by the Ministers. He repeated his con-
viction, that the Bill was a Bill of Pains and Penalties,
and he called on the Government to disclaim the assertion
of the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell), that it was not so,
and to proclaim it himself to that House and the country.
The Members of that side of the House had been charged
with going into a premature discussior on this petition.
The Attorney-General had, indeed, complained openly
that they had done so, and entreated them, fur
God's sake, ta keep to the question. It was, how-
ever, that lion. and Learned Gentleman and his friends
who had travelled out of the record.—(Hear.) The At-
torney-General said, keep to the petition. The House is
agreed on the principle of the Bill, as well as on its details,
and you need not argue them,—(Heir, hear, from the
Opposition.) The Hon. and Learned Member hail been
much occupied of late.—(Hear, and a laugh.) His time
had been employed much on other matters—(A laugh)—
and lee probably had not looked into the journals and or.
ders of that House, or he would have found that the Mem-
bers were anything but unanimous on the subject of the
details of the Bill—(Hear, hear)—and there were not a
few of them who had given notice of their intention to
modify or oppose them.—(Hear.) There was the Hon.
Member for Northamptonshire—he had a motion on the
subject of one of the details; and although one might
suppose the two Noble Lords were so well agreed on the
Bill as to make but one—(A laugh)—yet it seemed they
differed on the details which the Attorney-General called
on them not to discuss. The Learned Gentleman, how-
ever, said, and he was supported by his friends—do keep
to the question, we are all agreed. Yes, they were pro-
bably as much agreed as twelve Jurors who had not given
their verdict.—(Hear, and a laugh.) That was their state
of unanimity.—(Heir.) Some one said, however, wait
until we go into the Committee, and see how the case
stands. Why that was just what he wanted. He wished
to see how the case stood, and he demanded inquiry for
that very purpose. He wished to hear witnesses on the
facts, and therefore he supported the prayer of the peti-
tioners. He knew that the Parliament which was to
succeed them, when the Reform Bill passed, would adopt
a new course ; and that they would say to those who
brought their prayers for redress or inquiry, "No;
we can't hear you ; we are a Parliament strong in
numbers—(llear, hear)—we are come here delegated to
fulfil a particular trust, and we will not listen to you."--
(Cheers.) If it were possible to look with a telescopic
vision into futurity, they would probably find that such
would be the language of their successors; but, as that
time was not yet come, he implored them to support the
character for justice and impartiality which had belonged
to that House for so many centuries; and, by agreeing to
the prayer of the petitioners, fulfil even their own declass.
tions with respect to the principle of the Bill. The Noble
Lord says, that the rotten boroughs should not be heard
by their representatives in that House, for they are inte-
rested. Well, then, if they were not to be heard by their
representatives, nor by counsel, on their petition, be
would ask the Noble Lord how they were to be heard
—(Cheers.) In what way were they to be heard against
that act of injustice of which they had complained? Did
the Noble Lord mean to say that the arguments of the
two Members for Appleby, wh ch are pronounced partial
and unworthy of attention, would be sufficient to induce
the House to take the borough out of Schedule A and to
put it in Schedule B.—(Hear.) The question was not a
matter of argument; all that was to be decided was a mere
fact to be gathered from evidence; and he implored them
to hear it, and not lay themselves under the aspersion of
declaring all discussion unnecessary when they were able
to carry their point by numbers.—(Bear.)
Lord ALTHORP said the Hon. and Learned Member
bad, as usual, allowed his imagination to lead him into
much exaggeration. The Hon. Member had charged the
Government with a desire to overbear all argument by
numbers, and to stop all necessary discussion by force.
Was there any evidence of such au intention in the course
they had pursued ? Had not his Noble Friend distinctly
declared that the whole question would undergo discussion
in the Committee ? and he would say now, in God's name,
let the House go into a Committee, and then let the case of
each particular borough be taken on its own merits, and
fully discussed. The Hon. Member had charged the
Government with partiality. Now the Government had
laboured by every means in their power to deprive them-
selves even of the means of being partial, and in order to
do so they had bound themselves by a fixed rule, front
which they were determined never to swerve.—(Hear.)
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had called the Bill a
Bill of Pains and Penalties, and he had called on the
Government to acknowledge that it was. Now he had no
hesitation in saying that it was not a Bill of Pains and
Penalties, but a Bill which, he was satisfied, would prove
most beneficial to the whole country._(llear.) The
Hon. and Learned Member asked how they were to know
the population of the borough of Appleby unless they
agreed to the amendment of the Noble Lord? He an-
swered, by the population returns ; he would add that
no other information could be procured, even if wit-
nesses were sidled. They could not take the evidence