The Sun.
London, England, 1831-07-23 00:00:00

A,1LT05119 Tr JO

within the line laid down by the Noble Lord. That line
was most arbitrary and unjust. Ile submitted only to
that necessity to which others had submitted in similar
instances. He should only observe, that the borough had
possessed the franchise above 800 years, and had over
been charged with abuse in the exercise of it. The only
offence of the borough was that it was inconsiderable.
The motion was agreed to.
The question " that the borough of Newtown, Lanca-
shire, do form part of schedule A," was also agreed to.
On the same question being put with regard to the
borough of Newton, Isle of Wight,
Mr. GURNEY rose, amidst general laughter, in which
he himself could not help joining. He was understood to
say, that he was astonished the Hon. and Learned Soli-
citor-General was not in his place to say something in
favour of this borough.—(A laugh.) This borough never
had possessed a population on account of which it was
allowed to send Members to Parliament. It had returned
Members to that House in the right of its burgage tenure;
and for rears it bad been in the hands of one branch of the
Royal Family. It afterwards came into the hands of a
privive family, and the patronage thus possessed had al-
ways been exercised io the most proper and constitutional
manner. This was a case of spoliation, and in yielding
the franchise of this borough, he only submitted to that ne-
cessity under which the weak always were obliged to sub-
mit to those who for the time had the strength in their
hands.—(Cheers.) For himself, he had long represented
this horoarair—he had always been independent, and that
independence had neva r been touched upon by the advice
of constituents.—(Hear, and a laugh.) if he saw
the extinction of the borough of Newtown, he should
have the consolation of knowing, that he had never
seen a Member of that borough make himself such
a spectacle for men and angels as the four Members for
Lo )(lon had been.—(Loud and continued cheering.)
Mr. O'CONNELL said that the people would under-
stand that cheer, but it was but a small still voice com-
pared to that cheer of joy which the introduction of this
Bill had produced from the people of England, Ireland,
and Scotland. Their cheer bad in a voice of thunder
announced the death-warrant of these boroughs.
Mr. ATTWOOD asserted, that the constituency of this
borough had always been respectable, and so had been the
character of its representatives. After such a borough
was marked out for disfranchisement, and was denounced
as worthy of a death.warratit, he should expect that the
Peerage would be denounced, and finally, the House itself
denounced.—(Heir, hear,) Really the decisions of this
Committee appeared to him to be only suited to the revo-
lutionary assembly of France.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL could not sit still, and hear,
night alter night, those attacks upon Members of that
House, and upon the Members of the city of London in
particular, without saying that these attacks had no foun-
dation whatever in reason or justice ; and that thus con-
tinually repeated, they were most offensive to the House.
One lion. Member had said, that the decisions of the Com-
mittee were founded in iniquity ;and another Hon. Gentle-
man had asserted, that their decisions were only suited to
the revolutionary assembly of France. When he beard
these assertions made, he could not sit silent ; but
must say, that in the House of Commons, so long as
he had sat there, he never had before heard such
langtnge used towards the majority, as those Hon. Gentle-
men had thought fit, night after night, to indulge in.—
With respect to the Members for the city of London, the
plain truth of the matter was this—The last Parliament
was dissolved en the question of Reform ; and when
the candidates presented themselves to the notice of their
constituents, they were naturally asked what were their
opinions on the question of Parliamentary Reform.—
Having seated their opinions, and their constituents' opi-
nions and their own being found to agree together, they
were elected. When, after having thus expressed their
opinion, they gave a vote which appeared contrary to the
opiniena they had stated, it was very fair on the part of
their constituents to ask how they could prove that that
vote was consistent with the opinions they had declared
upon the hustings.—(Hear, hear, and No, no.) They
had heard much of the excellence of nomination boroughs,
and those who defended them seemed to think that there
was nothing so independent aed so pure us a nomination
borough. Now, he should like to know whether Noble
Lords, who were borough proprietors, never asked the per-
sons whom they were about to return what were their
opinions with respect to this Bill—(Hear, hear)—and
whether, if one of these persons should say, " I am an
enemy to the Bill, I think it hostile to the best interests
of the country, and I will oppose it to the full extent of
my power ;" arid if, on that understanding, that person
should of tain a seat ; and if within one month afterwards,
that person should give Iris vote for the second reading of
the Bill, the Noble Lord would not ask him how he could
reconcile that vote with the previous statement of his
opinion.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He must say that those
who talked of time M ml.ers for London being degraded,
and being in a state of depethnce, spoke in the most
irrational manner, and as long as he had a seat in that
House, and as long as he continued to be a citizen of
London—for citizen he was—he should feel it was his
duty to defend the city from the imputations thus cast
upon it by the minority.—(Hear, hear.)
S r J. SCA 11,LETT and Mr. SADLYR rose at the same
moment. The CHAIRNIA N declared that the former had
the right of precedence, and he addressed the House. He
had been not a little surprised at the zeal of the Noble
Lord on this subject, until he heard the Noble Lord's
peroration, when he found that the Noble Lord spoke with
the feelings of a citiz nof London.—(Hear, hear.) He
rose only in cons quence of what the Noble Lord had
said, and in order to express his &sag's ement from time
statement of the Noble Lord, e-iat the citizens of London
had done no more than their duty in calling the Hon.
Alderman, one of their representatives, to account. That
act of theirs seemed to him to be an illustration of the
inconvenience of multiplying very much the number of
representatives who were to come from places in the im-
mediate neighbourhood of the metropolis.—( Hear, hear.)
As to the quest on put by tire Noble Lord with respect to
tHirceilic.eodct of Noble
,niu,ewouldnut say what
iu sending
at‘l.as tiieAcle.ma,sebewrs into
itha that
lithe
Members for boroughs; but he could answer with respect
to some Alembera in the negative. It was true that con-
stituents did require to know the general sentiments of
those whom they elected as their representatives ; but there
was a vast difference between the sort of jurisdiction lately
exercised by the city of London, and th it sort of dissatis-
faction which was felt at men who were found deviating
from their pledges.—(Hear.) The Hon. Alderman whom
they had called to account, hail not broken his pledge
to them—he had only done what was his duty as a
Member of that House. Ile was acquainted with certain
facts relating to tl e borough of Appleby, anil he had
given the House the benefit of his infotniation. He
must say that the jurisdiction thus exercised was a popu-
lar jurisdiction of a most inconvenient kind, when a sub-
ject was actually under time consideration of that II
hear.) If he required a proof of the inconvenience
and mischief of the sort of representation which this Bib
prooosed to introduce, he could not expect a stronger proof
of it than the one to which he now alluded. Could that
be a deliberative assembly—an assembly of men sent there
to exercise an honest opinion, where those sent were thus
liable to be called to daily account for their conduct ; and
if, at any time, a vote was given by their Member, to send
a notice to him to attend iris constituents and explain Lis
vote to them ? If such a representation was to exist, it
would no longer be a deliberative assembly. Ile never was
disposed to consider the people as the sovereign in the sense
of the sentiment that was always employed to express that
sovereignty. The Members of that House were sent there
by the people.—(Loud cheers from the Ministerial
' benches.) He did not call the people either entirely tire
mob or the ten-pound householders.—(Hear, hear.)
There could be no deliberation if all they were to do was
to know what was the will of the people and to execute
it.—(llear, hear.) Ile could not avoid making these
observations, for he thought that au recent and so
strong an example could not be passed over. He could
not agree with the Noble Lord, that no allusion ought
io i.e made to the subject. 0 r the contrary, he
thought it ought to be alluded to as a warning to
that II ,use against giving more than sixteen Members
to the places in the neighbourhood of the Metropols,
1 every one of whom, during the time that any great qu,:stion
was depending in that House, would be liable to be
petually called to account before another deliberative
assetuhly.—(Hear.) Every parish, at least every p Irish
within tire reach of the Moaning Journals, weuld contain
one of these deliberative assemblies, which would daily sit
for the purpose of every morning calling the Member to
recount fur the vote lie had given the night before.—
(Hear, hear.) Ije asked whee her coils was the represen-
tation that men could wish for at least, whether it
could be desired by those who wished to preserve the safety
had never
ngi. f:iv,,,(ce
of time Throne, or of the Constitution ?--(Hear, hear.)
Alr. Alderman WAITHAIAN hal never heard a more
unjust, and
ar t o
tht t.l re
T ir
e ,u lion.
e might almost say a more malevolent
conductallu-
ion. G
of hisenoceomnastnitoupenpotssittheaLd spoken
had been
ira favour of rotten boroughs, and had said much in favour
of
his own independence; but he (Alderman Waithmau)
rof heard
thei thatigh It
sl oann.d
libertiesetrtiern of the
ie people.--
(Cheers.) utter
eoonpel
es.c_
(Cheers.)n •
Ile would tearlessly declare that the law
A/embers for the City of London came into Parliament in
3 more honourable way than any other four Members in
that iiouse.—(Oh ! hear.) Candidates for time honour

At 9J,

ni baud]. d • ~t-Ana-s;s3
• • . .
of representing the City stated the sentiments they en-
tertained upon the Bill, and the people had a right to
see that those sentiments had been acted up to by
the Members. • The Members for the City came into
Parliament free of expence. Had that Hon. Gentleman
done the same? If not, would the Hon. Gentleman get
up and tell the House what sum he had paid.--!Hear,
and no,•no, no.) One of those who had attacked the
city representa'ives was himself a citizen. Now they had
heard much of the superior intellect and information of
the 'Members for boroughs. If that was true, and if those
Members were on the right side, and were convinced that
they were so, why did net they attend the public meeting
in the city, and show that the citizens of London were
wrong.—(Hear, hear.) One Hon. Member opposite
often met them at city dinners.—(Hear, hear, and laugh-
ter.) Why did he not take advantage of those oppor-
t inities to tell the citizens what he thought, and to set
them right on the subject —( Hear, hear.) The doctrine
put forth by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite
,-•xeited his astonishment, and would have excited the as-
tonishment of all the constitutional lawyers that ever
existed if they had heard it. The Hon. and Learned Gen-
tieman denied the right Of constituents to call their res
oresentatives to account for votes given in that House.
Why, the opposite doctrine was supported, not only by all
.he great constitutional lawyers, but by Mr. Pitt, Mr.
Fox, and Mr. Burke, the last of whom had said, that the
wildest enthusiasm would be better than the want of sym-
pathy between that House and the people.—(Cheers.)
Hon. Members who represented patrons in the House
might say, they were not bound to obey the wishes of those
patrons by their votes in that Honse; but he mast say,
that if an understanding upon the subject of their votes
existed between them and their patron, they would be
dishonest if they did not act up to it.—(Bear, hear,
hear.) There were some Honourable Members, who
denied the existence of any such understanding ; but then
there were some men who could turn, and " turn, and turn
again, and yet go on" as before.—(Loud cheers.) A Noble
Lord, in another place, a patron of a borough, had said,
when a question was put to him on this subject, that if he
sent a Member into that House, and that Member should
vote against him, he should expect that. Member, if he was
an •hOnest man, to resign his seat.—(Hear, bear.) He
was astonished that any gentleman should stand up, and
give a solitary and disgraceful precedent to the contrary.
The eyes of the public were upon the House, and it would
be seen by the public that these discussions were kept up,
night after night, merely for delay. The argument on the
other side was, that with a fair and free House of Com-
mons the Monarchy and Aristocracy could not stand. If
they could not stand honestly they ought not to stand.—
(Cheers.) lie knew well what he had said ; but the
King and House of Lords were but trustees for the people,
and were paid for doing the business of the people. The
National Debt, the Pension List, the Army, and Navy,
in which appointments were given away from private
and party motives, all arose out of the evil influence of
the Aristocracy, and excited the public indignation.
Every debate tended tn ire and more to open the eyes
of the people.—(Hear, hear, hear.) They were aware of
the motives of those who resisted the progress of the Bill ;
aor could the Hon. and Learned Member for Borough-
bridge, with all his talents, and all his contortions, mislead
them. He varied his style, " from grave to gay, from
lively to severe," or, in the words of another poet, "'Twas
sad by fits, by starts 'twas wild."—(Laughter.) But all
in vain, for the nation saw how the boroughmongers were
weeping and wailing and gnashing their teeth at the woe-
ful prospect before them.—(Cheers and laughter.) They
were mingling their tears with the waters of Babylon, but
excited no compassion out of doors; for, in the words of
Lord Chatham, " the people will perish in this glorious
struggle, rather than abate one iota of the Constitution."
—(llear.) The state of the country, until the late change,
was appalling: it might be said to be on the eve of a re-
volution, but it was saved by a popular Sovereign and an
honest Ministry, whir brought forward this (by no means
sweeping in its provisions) as the best method of restoring
confidence and re-est ablishing the Constitution.—(Cheers.)
lie (Mr. Alderman Waithman) had been quite sorry to
see the desperate condition to which the Right Hon. Ba-
ronet had been reduced last night ; he had absolutely found
himself in the melancholy plight of being the only I wither
at his own stale joke. That he laughed at his own joke.
was not perhaps so new ; but that he should be the only
laugher on this occasion was to be accounted for on the
score of its frequent repetition.—(Cheers.) Yet if talent
could do any thing against Reform, there were no less than
thirty or forty lawyers who were introduced into the
House—not to represent the people, but to continue the
means of carrying on their trade—to purchase seats, and
to obtain places. In the House, and out of the House,
he would do his duty by contributing all in his power to
the passing of the Bull, and to the removal of trifling
ficulties so easily seized on the other side. He would
maintain his post, division after division, as long as health
and strength permitted, in order that the great objects of
the measure might not be defeated by a factious Opposi-
tion.—(Cheers. )
Mr. SADLER denied that any promise or pledge bad
ever been exacted from hint ; even his opinion had not
been previously asked in order to entitle him to his seat
in Parliament. Supposing, however, he had been re-
quired to state how he intended to vote on the Refortn Bill,
would it not be much better that a man should bow down
his conscience before a high-minded and single hearted in-
dividual, than before ten thousand tradesmen and artificers.
crime of the sale of seats, but, on reading Oldfielirs
—(Cheers.) A great deal had been said about the heinous
History of Boroughs," he saw that no longer ago than
1812 a Noble Duke (with whom the Noble Lord might
be acquainted) had sold Camelford for 32.,000/.—(llear.)
Surely it would have been but fair, now that the place was
to be disfranchised, if the Noble Duke, imitating Judas
(to whom the factious Opposition, as it was called, had
been likened), hail thrown down the thirty pieces. It
would be very well for a West India Proprietor to vapour
on the inhumanity of slavery, and on the impossibility of
granting compensation, just after he had sold his own es-
tate.--(Hear, hear.) The value of the boroughs retained
would be enhanced by the diafr.nchisernent of so many ;
it, therefore, became doubly imperative upon Ministers to
be just in their selection, lest their conduct should be liable
to the imputation that they had favoured their friends at
ow
ne qua
4.s4bihnholie, :aredsdte.9lulg:ettidPo:vii':oeescv.vnynetteacjil
himself
ogur
re
saet,
the expence of their enemies. When the franchise was
n)
d
e same
given only to ten-pound househol lersi, would the Noble
Lord venture to assert that the lower and more industrious
classes paid no tiles, although they were the very source
of all property, and were entitled to no representatives?
He denied that the resistance to the progress of the measuse
was factious, or that it Wa4 illtellded to defeat it by delay ;
but the impatience of the House prevented the lion. Aleut-
ber from b -in. distinctly le rril.
Mr. C. ANDERSON PELHAM said, that although
the borough of Newtown bad not corninitted any offence,
yet lie Was of opinion that it ought not to be allowed two
Members when so many large towns were unrepresented.
Sir R. PEEL recalled the attention of the House to the
question before it, which had been lust sight of in the
blaze of the Hon. Alderman's eloquence. He as well as
the Noble Lord (J. Russ,ll) was a Member of the Livery
of London, and it was not fair to the great body of their
fellow-citiz..ns that the Hon. Alderman should make such
apeeches. Ile protested as a Liveryman that lie did not
Cheers front the Minist:_tial side.)
ilitkteiostucohnlyVacielvcebreted—to( the principle of the Ell, but to tile
and he hope 1 that tht lion: Alder-
National Debt, the Pension List, the array and navv, and
in short ever y topic di•cussed for the last fifty years.—
eNample in older to
(Hear, lwar.) These were not specimens of oratoiv which
nanimous, and it affo
one admired,
ve°gnOod citi;ens that their Members
hLfno'rs • not folksy
I,'t•-'4i4 in sentiment, It was a
rded a specimen of what
• u
:irsrteept
ruoeusf
na
tnAadt
pviietessi.) vicinitye
Thirty
h( s:ltiryo
RI
orh
.1
pe, I) thought that his Hon. Friend (Alderman Thily-
in tl:a
y.
he had
the ri rends of
aipl.pcji,telet
at d
If:
oCt
forty of 4 the principle of the Bill
honourl)
h e b trustedvotetl t
amid
they wonld again swell the minority when the Committee
Commissioners, and Iran: cmoet:rtiiii,itig-
eame to the clauses which r. hated to the division of coun-
ties,
the
„igation of the franchise to the ten-pound householders.
where his Hon. Friend the Alderman had been called to
account fur his vote upon Appleby ; but he would venture
iie(tshier
to assert, that if the lion. Alderman had"
ermansaid at once, I
will not obey your instructions, and I nil' not resign my
seat, I pledged myself to Reform, but not to the details of
the Bill," the Livery of London, at the next election,
would hate placed him at the head of the poll.—(Cheers
and laugr.)
Colo1ie) SIBTIIORPE contended that the public were
opening their eyes more and
more to the objectionable na-
ture of the Bill.
Mr. GILLON submitted to the Committee, that the
speech of the lion. and Gallant Member who hail just sat
down ryas a continuation of that fruitless and vexatious
delay which had been already so much complained of.
The question was then put and carried, that Newtown
stand part of the Schedule.
•
The next question was, that Orford (Suffolk) stLrel
part of the Schedule.
- Mr. CROKER—(Hear, hear,)—Considered the case of
that borough far too important to allow it to he passed
over without drawing the attention of the Comm:tee to

I L 34 tittsaciimi ,/firoN ts 96 .tmo
. . .

sib a Lvitteft-

its peculiar circumstance,. He thought that the prin-
ciple proposed by the Hon. Member for Montgomeryshire
ought to be applied to this borough and to Aldeburgh.
He admitted that neither contained the number of inha-
bitants which the Bill stipulated as the qual fica-
tion for representation ; but, as a matter of good
policy, he thought it expedient to unite them so
as to constitute one borough. Orford contained
upwards of 1,700 inhabitants, and Aldeburgh more
than 1,300 ; and the two towns were eituated within
three miles of each other, being separated ouly by an
arm of the sea, which at low water was for the most part
dry. Besides, the ofii.ads of the Revenue and of other
departments of the public business were in both towns the
same persons. He thought the continuation of the repre-
sentation to these towns particularly expedient, in ennse-
quence of one important feature of the Bill, which he
'Nought had not yet been sufficiently attended to. On
examining the Bill, it appeared to him that the Noble
Lord bad laid a hand peculiarly heavy upon the represen-
tation of the agricultural districts.—(Hear.) He by no
weans said that the partiality was intended, but in effect
it was exceedingly injurious to the agricultural interests.
—(llear, hear.) The number of the representatives to
be returned by the counties south of the Trent was
-0 be, by the Bill, ninety less than those counties
returned at present ; whereas the counties north of
that river would gain by the Bill 20 or 30 representatives.
So that the preponderance of the manufacturing counties,
in the representation would he increased by 110 'Members.
The county of Buckingham would lose five of the present
wieldier of its representatives. Devonshire, which at pre-
sent returned 24 Members, would, under the Bill, send
but 16. Darsetehire would have its representation re-
duced from 18 to 8 Members; Kent, from 16 to about 12;
Lincoln, from 10 to 9 ; Hampshire, from 24 to 13 ;
Northamptonshire, from 7 to 4 ; Somersetshire, from 14
to 9 ; Surrey, from 12 to 5 ; Sussex, from 26 to 11 ;
Suffolk. from 14 to 5 ; and Wilts, from 22 to 13. Whilst
this substracred ninety Member. from the southern
counties, he found that the northern counties gained con-
siderably, as the following statement (which he would
read) would show :—Staffordshire, having at present 8 '
representatives, would have 9 ; Warwick would have 6,
instead of 4 the present number ; Durham- would have
7, instead of 2 ; Cheshire 5, instead of 2 (he begged the
Committee to bear in mind, that he spoke only of the
borough representation in the several counties) ; York-
shire, having now 28 Members, would retain that number
without augmentation. Now, he mentioned these par-
ticulars to show, that the fu 1 tide of the measure
was set northwards. But, while the representation was
thus carried from the southern to the northern counties, the
increase of the representation in the oneand its diminution
in the other were unaccompanied with a corressonding in-
crease and diminution of their population. He was desirous
that it should be clearly understood that iu advocating
Orford, his object was, not to support that borough itse.t,
but to defend the landed interest.—(Hear ) He would
compare the population of two or three of the counties
with the alteration in their representation, to show that
the changes were altogether in favour of the manufac-
turing counties. According to the census of 1821, the
county of Suffolk contained 270,000 inhabitants, and re-
turned t i Parliament 14 Members for boroughs. Of
those Members every one was connected with the land.
But nosy the lauded interest of that great county was to
be deprived of nine Members, retaining only five Membeis
for the boroughs of Bury St. Edmunds, and the half-
borough (as the Bill made it) of Sudbury. What, then,
was the case of Durham ? That county was not by any
means so populous as Suffolk—having, indeed, only 207,700,
that is, nearly 60,000 less than the letter county—and
yes, whereas Suffolk was to lose nine Members, Durham
was to gain five.—(Hear, hear.) In the same way, the
great, indeed he might say the metropolitan, county of
Surrey--having a population of 338,900, and being one
of the largest counties of England—was to be reduced in
its representation from twelve to five Members; whilst,
on the contrary, the county of Warwick, being inferior
in population to Surrey by more than 100,000, was to
have one Member more than the latter county. Now if that
disproportion were accidental—were referable to ancient'
prescription—or were the result of a long-continued course,
it might be less objectionable. But when they were told
that this B:11 was davieed for the purpose of setting the
represent ition right, and of restoring it in a due propor-
tion to the population, he thought it tight to draw the
attention of the Committee to those inconsistencies. Nor-
folk had a population of 344,000, and Stafford, as nearly
as possible, 311,000—that is a few thousand less than the
other. Under the old system of representation they re-
turned each eight Members. In that respect they were
exactly alike. Bit the arrangement was now to be
changed, so that one Member should be taken from Nor •
folk, and bestowed upon Stafford, which should therefore
have•two Members more than the county which always
exceeded it in population, arid was before equal to it in
representation.—(Hear, hear.) Although that was not a
very large change, it yet served, with the other cases he
had mentioned, to chew that the tide of the new repre-
sentation was against the agricultural counties.—(Hear. )
Sir H. I3UNBURY did not think that there could be
shown any sufficient reasons fur the union of the two bo-
rougris (Orford and Aldeburgh). There was no close com-
munication, and there was very little intercourse between
them. They were separated, at full tide, by a broad ex-
panse of sea, and at low water, by a broad expanse of mud.
A great part of that expanse might sometimes he dry, but
he (Sir H. B.) had many a time attempted to cross from
one town to the other, and never had found the passage
practicable. As to the population, they were troth declin-
ing fishing towns, but yet much frequented in the season
fur sea bathing. In sunitner, therefore, there might be
found a very respectable and numerous constituency, which
he feared would be reduced to a very small one at an elec•
tion in winter time.—( A taught.) The Right Hon.
Gentleman (Mr. Croker) had said that the boroughs of
Suffolk were necessary to repro-cut the apiculturel in-
terests of that county. But he (Sir H. B.) believed that
the Members for the boroughs of Ipswich and Sudbury
had never been persons connected with tie landed interest.
—(Year, hear. ) As to Aldeburgh, he could not say
whether its representatives had ever been other than per-
sons connected with manufactures or commerce. To
show that the people themselves did rot set touch value
upon the representation which those boroughs afforded
them, it was sufficient to say, that he had presented a
petition from the borough now under discussion, praying
that the present Reform Bill might be passed by that
House.—(Chcers.)

Mr. CROKER would not insist that those boroughs
should I e united.

Lord John RUSSELL (lid not see any good grounds
w: erefore those two boroughs should be united. The
arguments of the /tight lion. Genileman opposite (Air.
Croker) took rather a partial view of the counties, which
he had set one against another, than a general and compre-
hensive view of the representation of the whole nation.—
( Hear, hear.) 'With regird to the representation of the
agricultural districts, the flight lion. Gentleman, in l'
argument, had entirely overlooked the additional
which were given to the counties ; anri i-nis fact also—
that in counties • where there ';ere large manufacturing
towns, the m inufacturee: were deprived of their prepen-
before posses-rd in the county elec-
dtieurnavnet,
eicissi.t4fleceillio.lY
freeholders in those towns which were to re-
ceive Members were precluded by the Bill horn voting for
the county Meruliers.—(llear.) The Ili, ht Hon. Gently-
man opposite appeared to contend tat the small boroughs
were generally represented by persons connected with the
agricultural interest, and therefore gave the means of a
virtual representation to that body. Now such an argu-
ment could scarcely be consistent with the objection,
which was founded upon the notion that the disfranchise-
ment of those boroughs would leave the commercial inte-
rests without the opportunity of obtaining a sufficient
number of seats in Pardatnent.

An Hots. Alintscit who had represented both place.,
was enabled to inform the Home that thy were within
three miles of each other, and that Vie communications
might be kept up at all states of the tile.
Alter a few words from Mr. CROKEIt, the question was
put and carried.
The next was Petersfield, upon whi 'h

Colonel JOLLIFFE adiressed a few obsery .tions to the
House, almost the whole of which were inaudible. He
was understood to propose that it he ma disfranchised, but
that the right of election he extended so as to include the
whole of the parish of Beriton. He contended, that if
thrown into Betiton, it would serve to deprive the present
patron of all power whatever.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL was coot klly difficult to be
heard, but was understood to say he could not assent to
any such proposition.

Mr. GOULBURN observed, that if the 111ayor made a
mistake, it was no reason why the electors should .ulcer.
Mr. CARTER opposed the proposition for preserving
the franchise to Petersfield.

The questio❑ on Ntersfield was then put, and agreed to.
The next was Plympton.

Mr. HUN I' hoped that the House would then adjourn,
it being past twelve c'clock.—(Cries of " No, no.") ll
had understood it to have been arranged that they shoul“
adjourn at twelve o'clock.

Lird ALTHORP did certainly not pledge himself to
any such arrangement; hut, on the emtrary, choeght thty
ought to go on to one o'clock atleast.

Sir C.WETHERELL thought it was rather too tutu h