The Sun.
London, England, 1831-07-29 00:00:00

however, with the Hon. Member for .Sta.eiverdsitire that it
was necessary that the resolutions of the House should al-
ways be couched in terms plain and precise.
Mr. MABERLY thought the petitioners had complied
with the rules of the House to the very utmost of their
ability. They weme not aw ire, till the l I st, that they
were to appeal; on the 23,1 they entered into their t•e-
cognizances, and, in his opinion, the House ought to
grant the prayer of the petition.
Mr. PITTNIAN said the petition was, in truth, neither
more nor less than a petition pray lug the House to review
-its former decision. Their former petition had beets fully
heard, and the House considered it a petition that ought
to be rejected ; the question therefore at present simply
was, whether the petition should now be received of
h
ntptprhoaaeetirMltt:oieetl
bstyl attention
eewn inexpedient,civloooannss'estei°l:difee ttirhinilos ittinielonlieiiiial sea' eitnl tbtlavea'n'atte.dt,' a,ti.bhibLee:ei fn:toigcrireneroejrifee
seursumtuteil)ci'
fdtville 4;a:
(I(Fil•l'lerisi:tji'liii;°l2(l!‘:‘x.'l:)l-tit
The SPEAKER ordered strangers to withdraw.—
(Cries of " No, no !"—" Wail, read !')
Mr. STRICKLAND said the petitioners had been
placed under great difficulty. They hail, thereferme
entered into their bond as speedily as they could, and they
had done all in their power to conform to the rules of the
aHogatii,sme As, however,
t.
entertaining
gthe
it,
he
ebreuale h
begged leave
te 1-tfoou,sveitsieoeit,atewd
it.ur _ler
Petition withdrawn.
Mr. R. DUNDAS brought up the report of the Com-
mittee on the Edinburgh Improvement Bill.—Agreed to.
CORN LAWS.
Mr. HUNT, in consequence of the request of the Noble
Lord opposite (Lord Althnrp), observed that it wasnot
his intention to bring forward his mention for the
repeal of the corn laws to-night. But he trusted the
Noble Lord would offer no opposition to his bringing
forward so important a question the first open day aft, r
the Reform Bill had pissed that House. He felt that it
was vain for hint to ask the Noble Lord when lie thought
that would Ime.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord ALTHORP felt obliged to the Hon. Member fur
postponing his motion. He admitted the importance of
the subject, but could not-bind tinimielf as to any precise
day when it could come on.
Mr. HUNT then said that he would postpone the mo-
tion until Thursday, the 11th of August.
Mr. O'CONNELL postponed his three notices' of mo-
tions, which stood for this day, till Monday week.
REFORM BILL.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved that the House go into
Committee on the English Reform Bill.
Lord BELGRAVE rose and presented a petition from
Congleton, in Cheshire, praying to be allowed to have
representatives.
On the motion of Lord J. Resseee, the House then
resolved itself into a Committee on the Reform Bill, Mr.
BERNAL in the Chair.
Toe CHAIRMAN then stated that the question wag, that
the borough of Clitheroe stand part of schedule B.
Mr. LES'I'ER then rose, he trusted that Ministers would
allow the adjo'ning parishes in this place to he taken
into consideration. That borough was an increasing
borough, and contained 4,052 inhabitants. It was situ-
ated in a district in which a great many boroughs centred
and in a circle of fourteen or fifteen miles by the present
Bill there would be upwards of fourteen new Mem-
bers.—(Hear, hear.) He admitted that the number
of ten-pound householders was small—not more than one
hundred and twenty. These might appear arguments
against himself ; but still, however, as a ',limber
l'or that berough, he felt it his duty to state those facts to
the Comini.tee, leaving it to deal with it as they thought fit,
On the question being again put,
Mr. CHOKER remin,'ed Ministers, that altheugh he
had been an opponent of the 13111, lie had nevee, since the
second reading, mooted any point whatever which did not
arise out of the principle of the Bill. The Noble Lord
had at first stated, that where the population of a borough
and parish united exceeded two thousand in the one in-
stance and four thousand in the other, such borough should
be exempted. On that principle the borough now under
consideration should be merged in tile parish ; but tile
Noble Lord, it appeared, on account of the extent of the
parish connected with this borough, had subsequently
shifted his position altogether, and determined that in cases
where the town and palish were not of the same name., then the town should be considered by itself. Nothing,
however, could well be more absurd or preposterous than
a principle which made the fate of a borough dependent
not on facts but on names, particularly as it was well
known that many parishes so situated throughout the west
and south of England were called after the name of the
Saint to whotn the parochial church happened to be detile
cated. Clitheroe stood in au extensive parish of a dif-
ferent name, and titerefiire it was that the Noble Lord had resorted to this monstrous nistinction ; but the larger the
parish, in his opinion, the stronger the case ; and in the
present instance, the parish in which Clitheroe was situ.
ate eor ywineidgliy might
principlefcol au inmdoeandn. --..‘i:h(siierolcPLl:iele, aenplrdoh,:epsii:xieltltaaleitel•ii.lno;
in:tnifobeiTftillerhfseoe,foiNiiNrrnoothitihtimlslleoeeeulliaL,pa( olo.rriddlitis 1 had
to
Nt oogr
toi,
ato
ll earntoenx, tetiot t
goeft
hundred. Why, not, then, go to this bee-hive of a parish
in which Clitheroe was situated, with en industrious popit-
lotion of eighty-seven thousand inhabitants? This bo-
rough was in the parish of Whalley ; in that respect
it came within one of the rules laid down by the
promoters of this Bill, that when the borough, hieing
situated in one parish, and not containing in it-
self a sufficient population to form a constituency, the
franchise was to he extended to the parish. Why not
apply that rule in the present seise? He would admit, for
• he did not want to entrap the Noble Lord into admiss;mn
of a principle without stating the whole length to which
he proposed to carry it, that this case of Clitheroe;, if de-
cided as he contended it ought, would involve this case of
three other boroughs—Cockermouth, Ilelston, and Ly-
iningtort ; but it would not go to move than to those
three. Now what were the cases of those boroughs e
Cockermouth contained a population of 3,790, not a
greater number below the: require] to send a Member to
Parliament under this Bill; but the parish of Brigham—
a corruption of the ancient name of Ilridget's Hato—
contained 6,030. On the Noble Lord's own showing-,
he could not see the ground why this case should be ex-
cepted from the rule, The next was the hutough of Hele stop, with a population of 2,671. This was in the pa-
rish of Vireiedron, containing a papelation of 6,814.; and
the borough of Lymingteni with a population of 3,164,
ton was in the parish of St. Mary, which conteiteed a popula-
of 5,3k1. Now if the parishes bole. the same names
as tilt% boroughs, there could be no doit'ot that they would
be included. Why should the name make the differ-
ence? The boroughs !lett he hail named involved the
principle for whiela be contended in the case of Clitheroe,
and here he thought he had the Noble Lord in a sort
of dileetesta. It the parish of Whalley was too large to
have the franchise extended to it, the parish in which
Lyniington was, was not too large. If Lymington
wag too small, the name rejection dirt not apply to
Whalley. Whichever way the Noble Lord viewer: it, he
thought it ;evolved an inconsistency, if the principle for
whietsi he contended was not adopted. The course which
he proposed would do good to the Bill : it would justify
the cases of Caine, of Milton, of Knaresborough, if they
adopted this principle which had been extended to twenty
other boroughs bearing the name of the imatiehes in which
they were, by accident and not by low, he (Mr. Croker)
would not object to the other boroughs being in schedule
13. His only objectimeo weneld then he to the general prin-
ciple of the olastsese--(Hear, hear, from the Ministerial
side.) lie did rug know whether the cheers were at the
fact that the Noble Lord did not need his support. He
knew he did not need his support ; but though it was
little for the Noble Lord to receive, it was much for hint
(Mr. Croker) to givo,-....eit was his little all, and his poverty
ought rather to excite the pity than the sneers of Hon.
Gentlemen on the other side.—(Hear, hear.) Would it
wit, he asked, be better even to divide this parish of Whal-
ley, and to give Men:hers to each half, than to establish
a principle which would create heart•burnings and dis-
contsot in three corners of England,—in Cockermouth in
the. north, Helston in the west, and Lymington in the
south ? lie would again say, let the Nob'e Lord adhere
to the original principle of the Bill, anil the necessity Li-
the worse he pointed out was so obvious, teat he would
not believe the Noble Lord would refuse to adopt it, until
he heard from himself that Le was opposed to that which
must be so benefteial lie the principle of his Bill.
Lord J, RIT&SELL said lie would answer the Rigid
Hon. Dentleman in a few words. Time separation of the
beroughs by different nausea from the parishes was a proof
that they had separate jurisdiction, and where the name of
time borough waa iiifferent from that of the parish, a dis-
tini,tioi, was made in the population returns. He thought
the better course egsreidelata 1 AKlitteeeo the principle OIL
lyTtoo ex' .
t‘c:
j,el)..3l,Zt.lilleilitefillaptz:':illyttad ;rade
i"t.;a1;011:r,,i4..
:014,.-4...1/4:4l.9iii.r4iitic he the
~.i.an;
rule. To
only
sufficientg.
_b t H
co:
tend the eeoe6iine-itill ' feet Zia ,
account of the
ground. ski{ 4.7-tigiGh,•...azi"dre,to -cajole) the parish in
iiri:e'ltltillL:sglin,t,gti;,W,,:4l7,S,:;:pi74::trif-:::;a:;11"-:',„.11#7:„.'web:r4.1f*44ii:
.',—;;ll.l;leieldtioit,ll:iuesrine:taiin.gahtlio'ri:t.o
:iiiirlitgt: ~i iiii its Mendiera, huteik ' tiling were the i Ima-
bitamos to interfere with the Bill that it ties negatived by
men to one. The principle of re ti niiinkr, to a large preset
4uvi