The Sun.
London, England, 1831-03-10 00:00:00

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.

Mr. BAYLEY presented a petition from the city of
Bristol upon the subject of Parliamentary Reform. As
his constituents were exceedingly sensitive and anxious
upon this .great question of Reform, lie hoped the good
humour of the House would be extended towards him in
affording him an opportunity of stating to what extent he
concurred in the player of the petition, and with his Ma-
jesty's proposed measure of Reform. He was extremely
glad to have this opportunity, as he had not spoken in the
course of the important debate that had al-
ready taken place, and his constituents were
no doubt desirous of knowing to what extent
he concurred with the measure. The petition lie now pre-
sented was only signed by the chairman on behalf
of the whole of the meeting, as the persons coin-
posing the meeting were desirous that their sense of the
measure should be conveyed to the Legislature with the
least possible delay. He was aware that the petition could
only be received as the petition of the individual signing it,
but he wished the House to understand and believe that it
was signed by that individual on behalf of a most nume-
rous, meat res pectable, and very numerous meeting._
He perfectly agreed,, he must say, with the principle of
the Bill—(Hear, hear, from the Ministerial side)—as
far as the disfranchisement of a large number of com-
pletely rotten boroughs went. He completely concurred
with it as far as regarded giving to the close corporations of
large towns votes, such as Bath. He likewise agreed with it
in the endowing, as it were, of great and new commnni-
ties—such as Birmingham and Manchester. •He
could not agree with the proposed Bill in respect to
its giving an addition to the county Members. Hate Bill
was passed, as it stood in this respect, the county Members
would carry every thing their own way; and he should
have hereafter to call on Hon. Members who had raised
their voices against the corn laws to support him in hie
moat unqualified opposition to this part of the Bill, inasmuch
as it it were passed in the shape in which it now was, it
would be impossible to obtain an alteration in the Corn Laws.
He had had commvnicatious with his constituents, and he
found that by the proposed measure, no less than between
3,000 and 4,000 of them would be disfranchised, and the
part of the Bill which went to the taking• away of their
votes he should likewise u•e every possible means in his
power to oppose.

Mr. H;bAVIES said he had had the honour of pre.
renting a petition from a very large portion of the inha-
tants of Bristol expressing sentiments directly opposed to
the proposed measure. There was one part of the Hou.
Gentleman's statement who had just addressed the House,
in which be cordially agreed, that was the part in which
he had expressed his surprise, in which a large body of
voters was proposed to be disfranchised. He knew that
the three great branches of the Legislature might de-
prive every subject of the realm of rights, but that
was sot the principle on which the present measure had
been brought forward. He had stated his opinions at
length upon the Bill, therefore he should not go over
the arguments now again ; but whenever the Bill should
come to be read a second time be should give it his oppo-
sition. At the same time he was far from saying there
were not parts of the representation requiring amendment,
and whenever what he should consider a proper measure was
brought forward in that House for that purpose it should
have his support, hut he was directly opposed to the
sweeping and revolutionary Bill that had been introduced
by the Noble Lord.

The petition was ordered to be brought up and laid on
the table. It cordially approved of the measure of Re.
form proposed by his Majesty's Ministers.
On the motion of Lord ALTHOBr, the Calico Duties
Bill was read a third time.
Mr. WARBURTON, in support of his Bill to prohibit
the growth of tobacco in Ireland, needed only to re-.
fer to the circumstances attending the measure in order
to induce the House to support it. Previous to
Easter last year, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer
gave notice of a Bill for Promoting the growth of to-
on foreign imported tobacco
:lei'. eddu.typer pound.
tithufeeict°di.onty But certain Members ofthe United Kingdom to be permitted on paying
continuing as it was at Ss. a pound, and the cultivation
whom he (Mr. W.) was one, having expressed their
opposition, the Chancellor of the Exchequer was induced to
reconcile the matter, and proposed that a Select Committee
should be appointed to take the subject into their conside-
ration. After a minute investigation of the subject, that
Committee bad come to the following conclusion :—That
uoo
fatoht revenuea
t commodity
so
it was expedient to extend to Ireland the prohibi-
tion which already existed as to England and
by a protecting duty of 600 or '7OO
Scotland. Indeed the
ocouolotirvdaitoigontoofthesurcehp
proposition, therefore, was too mon-
strous representations
n articletati o s
surd for a moment to be elver-
.pciurotludb
cent.
nt
tained by
oilya.n a witnesses,bT
the House. The revenue now collected
imported was about 20,000,000 lbs.
on tobacco was nearly three millions sterling, while
uitlyd not, he wai sure, endanger so large
easilyin permittinglcroellleacntde,d,onlatysernpro teot_
whilegreat
extensionthe cultivation
of Ex totifsei t wou l
officers.d
attTl hni
The
e accountg
wholeHo wo House
growth
Lord ALTHORP agreed in thinking it was awes_
sary for protecting the revenue to abolish the
ai protect-
ing
g thedu Leo time cause monstrous,
growth of tobacco in Ireland. It was indeed contraty to
any general principle to prohibit the cultivation of every
article, but it was a question of revenues and of