The Sun.
London, England, 1831-07-27 00:00:00

venient distance, to get the required number of electors, and
that in the amount of assessed taxes it WWI much below it.
Now St. Germains was not in a poor and thinly inhabited
district—it was i❑ one of the richest parishes in Cornwall ;
it contained in the borough alone 100 houses, and it would
be easy to make up the required *umber of 300 in the
neighbourhood. It paid 3411. in assessed taxes, which
was more than that paid by St. Ives or Malmesbnry, as
much as Oakhampton, and treble the amount paid by
Dowuton. As to the returns, the Hun. Member con-
tended that all the information they contained was known
to Ministers in the last session. One of the returns,
which stated that there was no house in the parish, ex-
clusive of the borough, rated to the poor rates at ten-pound
a year, was erroneous. There were many respectable houses
in the parish, exclusive of the borough, which were worth
more than ten pounds, and many others might be found
in the place which would make up the required constitu-
ency-. He thought this a fair claim on the part of the bo-
rough not to be included in schedule A, and he put it to
the Committee as a case which did not at all affect the
principle of the Bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL said, the reason why St. Germains
was taken from schedule B of the last Bill was, that there'
were only thirteen houses in the town and parish assessed
at 101. and upwards. The population of the town and
burongh was under '7OO ; the town was only fifty acres ;
the whole parish exceeding 9,000 acres. If the borough
was as the Hon. Gentleman represented, it might not be
proper to make it an exception to the rule ; but they had
no evidence before them which would lead them to that
conclusion, and from all that had reached him on the
subject, he had reason to believe that a constituency could
not be made out without going a distance of seven or
eight miles, and in that ease it might be said that it would
be transferring the franchise to the next town, for St.
Germains was of itself too small and insignificant to bear
a part in the representation. There were only eight
houses in the borough, and four in the parish, rated to
the house duty at 101. and upwards, and this at two-thirds
of their annual value, and only fifteen houses in the bo-
rough of the annual value, of 10/. and upwards. In such
a town and neighbourhood, then, it would be impassible
to get a constituency, and on these grounds he did not
see why it should be omitted from schedule A. Ile must
hear more than be bad yet heard to induce him to change
his opinion.
Mr. PRAED said, that when the hearing of the

Counsel was objected to, it was said that it was competent
for Members to state the condition of their respective
boroughs, though the Learned Lord Advocate had inti-
mated that the representatives of the boroughs about to be
disfranchised either had no right to vote, or at least that
they ought not to exercise it; but after what had passed,
be supposed it would nut be objected that they should
perform the two duties of advocates and witnesses. He
owned he was surprised to find that the Noble Lord (J.
Russell) had not the candour to admit a case which, if it
were made out, could in no way affect the principle of the
Bill. The Hon. Member, after defending the independ-
ence of his connexion with this borough, to the notice of
which he was introduced by a noble and influential person,
without any pledge on his part, or any thing to bind him
but the principles to which he had always adhered, said
that he would take the case of Downton to be an excep-

ion which did not desk oy the general rule laid down by

the Noble Lord (J. Russell), but, would he say that St.
Germaine *as in the same circumstances as Downtwn?

If so, let him bring his proofs; for until those proofs were
satisfactorily before the House, he thought the statements
of Hon. Members in their places were as much entitled to
consideration as those of the anonymous informant to
whom the Noble Lord so often referred ; but if there was
a difference in the statements made by Hon. Members and

:hose of the anonymous informant, that was a reason why

the matter should be examined. It was said, that where
small constituencies were destroyed, they woul I, where
it could be done, be replaced by a larger body, where
the neighbourhood could afford it. That he could under-
stand ; but he could not understand the justice of disfran-
chising a small body because their predecessors may have
at some former period abused their franchise. He had
heard, in the case of the Greek loan, in which the Hon.
Member for Middlesex took an active part, that on appli-
cation being made to an individual to subscribe in aid of
the Greeks, he declined it, alleging as his reason that he
would have nothing to do with them, as he understood
they had once behaved very ill to the Trojans.—(A laugh.)
With as much justice might it be urged, that we should
disfranchise these small boroughs in order to ♦isit on them
the sins of their ancestors. The Hon. Member then
went on to contend that the non-extension of the franchise
of small places to the larger bodies in their vicinity would
be an injustice to those so left out ; that it would be also
unjust and impolitic as excluding so large a portion of the
agricultural population. It would not be a fulfilment of
the promise that had been held out to them. He con-
tended that the Noble Lord had not made out a case for
the disfranchisement of this borough. By refusing the
means of inquiry into the disputed facts connected with
this borough, he might do much wrong; but by giving
that inquiry, no injury could be done, for the truth must
be elicited, and in proportio❑ as the Noble Lord thought
he was erecting a great work, which would go down to
posterity, it ought to be his care that it was built upon a
sure foundation.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. STANLEY said, that he was not disposed to deny
to Hon. Members the representatives of these boroughs, if
representatives they could be called, the right of exercising
the two duties of advocates sod witnesses; unless he was
also prepared to deny to them the still more inconsistent
duties of witnesses, advocates, and judges. He certainly
thought that, if professional counsel were called in to argue
upon the case of each borough, it would be entirely imprac-
ticable to come to the consideration of the Bill within any
reasonable time. The representative of the boroughs were
their fittest advocates. 'With respect to the borough of St.
Germains, if he needed any proof of its being a nomination
borough, that proof had been afforded by the Hon. Gen-
tleman himself, who stated that lie was introduced by
Noble and influential persons to the notice—a delicate way
of putting the case—of the borough.—(Laughter.) The
object of Ministers was to disfranchise nomination boroughs
as a system ; and though there might be a departure in
some instances from the strict letter of the Bill, Ministers
justified themselves by their adherence to the principle.
He would state to the House the population and extent of
the borough of St. Germains, taking for his authority
the returns made by the portresve of that borough in
January, 1831, at which time that officer had no
knowledge of the purpose for which those returns were
wanted. It appeared that the borough of St. Ger-
mains, and the parish in which it was situated,
were not co-extensive. The borough contained 40 acres,
the town of St. Germains 50 acres, and the parish into
which it was proposed to swamp the borough contained
no lese than 9,029 acres; nor was the population of the
place concentrated in the borough. By the population re-
turns of 1821, which were correct, with the exception
that the town and borough were considered as coexten-
sive, it appeared that the number of houses in the town
was 99, and the number of male inhabitants 247, so that
the male and female population might be taken as being
under 500. But what was the population of the remain-
ing part of the parish ? The remainder of the pari-b, in-
cluding the village of Hessenford, contained no less than
1,800 or 1,900 inhabitants. The same difference of po-
pulation was apparent in the returns for the present year.
According to them, the town contained 672 inhabitants,
and the other part of the parish I,9l4.—(Hear.)—Now,
if this borough were to be thrown into the parish, whit
was to prevent such a principle being carried to an ab-
surdity ? According to the same rule, why should not a
circle La drawn round Old Sarum, which did not contain
one inhabitant, and the elective franchise distributed in the
surrounding district ? The Hon. Gentleman concluded
by stating his opinion that the House had already disposed
of this case by its decision on the question of the borough
of Downton.
PRAED said that the Ministers had laid down a
rule, the: all boroughs containing less than 2,000 inha-
bitants should be disfranchised ; and he thought therefore
that these places, together with the surrounding districts,
had some cause to complain, which were above the line,
and yet were placed in schedule A. He also considered
that Ministers had proceeded upon erroneous information.
The first returns were grossly incorrect, and the new one'
were anonymous.—(Dear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said that he always supposed that
the returns respecting the number of 10/. houses were in-
correct in many instances; but the further information
which bad been given to the House, with respect to the
case of St. Germains, was not of such a nature as to
make him doubt the general accuracy of the returns.
Sir C. WETIIERELL stated that an arbitrary line bad
been laid down by Ministers, and as arbitrarily departed
from by them. He thought that the pretensions of this
borough to retain its franchise were entirely unanswered.
The Right lion. Gentleman (Mr. Stanley) said that Ire
would not consent to swamp the borough of St. Germains,
containing only fifty acres, into the parish containing
1,914 acres. Why, then, was Horsham swamped into a
newly-enclosed common ? Another statement made by
e.nget);rzretatigwllas,,,pat the principle of the
Why, then, was Knaresborough,
;tell Right
Nvent litoon'th°e
both of which were nomination boroughs, preserved ?
n4dninwaitiiyonwabsoricmagilnies;
The Right Hon. Gentleman had likewise mentioned Ohl
Sarum, in connection with St. Germains. What they
had to do with each other he was at a loss to discover;