The Sun.
London, England, 1831-08-25 00:00:00

price paid by t,e tenant to the landlord at once showed
the value, he did not anticipate any difficulty in three of
the cases commented on by the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman. In the fourth case, where the tenant did not
probably pay ten pounds, but where he c'aimed to have
his house considered of the yearly value of ten pounds,
there might be some necessity for inquiry ; but the cases
of that kind would, he believed, he very few; and it was
impossible, in fairness, to exclude those who had a house
of much more than the value of ten pounds, hut who had
perhaps, paid a fine to reduce the rent, from the privilege
of voting granted to others.
After a few words in explanation from Sit E. SeGUEN,
and Lord Ammar.

Mr. WILLIAM PEEL said, he considered the clause
now under consideration at once the most important and
the most objectionable of all the clauses in the Bill, and
one which went more than any other to increase demo-
cratic influence in this country. The clause was intended
to give a vote to all householders of 101. a year ; and the
consequence would be, that in all tbe great commercial
and manufacturing towns, the loatieholders of that kind
would overwhelm all the other portions of the constituency.
In the inland county towns, there might be one thousand
houses, and perhaps not more than one hundred 101. houses
among them ; but in the great commercial towns there
were perhaps ten thousand houses, every one of which is
rated at 101. a year. What would be the consequence of
this? Why that the occupiers of the small houses would
command all the influence of every election. Did they,
therefore, suppose, that with such a constituency the Bill
would put a stop to bribery, or improve the character of
the representation? It was said, however, that the country
called for this kind of Reform. He answered at once that

it did riot ; and although they were told that there was a
general:Call for it, and that it would satisfy all classes, be
put it to the House whether it had not heard Reformers
frequently declare that they would not be satisfied, and
that they merely took this now in order that they might
be able to command more hereafter ? They were told,
h.thvever, that there was a miraculous unanimity on the
question throughout the country. He denied that there
was any such unanimity.---(Hear, hear.) He was satis-
fied,' on the contrary, that a great change had taken place
On the subject. Could the Noble Lord opposite (Althorp)
say there was this marvellous unanimity in Northampton.
shire?—(Hear, hear)--or was it to be found in the late
elections in Buckinghamshire, or Shropshire, or Wey-
mouth, or Great Gtimshy?—(Hear.) It was notorious that
a number of the advocates of the Bill supported it, not
because it was desired by the people, hut because they con-
sidered it the commencement of a series of revolutionary
and democratic operations, which would terminate in the
overthrow of all the established institutions of the country.
—(Hear.) They were told, that if they rejected the Bill,
the consequence would be civil war. He confessed he did
not envy the feelings of those who had, roost unnecessarily,
brought the country to such a crisis. He said most unne-
cessarily, for at the time the Government proposed their
plan of Reform, all the various branches of public industry
were prosperous, and the people both contented and happy.
—(Hear, hear, and a slight laugh.) He was one of those
prejudiced and narrow-minded people who thought that
this plan of Reform, brought forth with so little reason
and sis little necessity, would, if carried into effect, pro.
duce the overthrow of all the institutions which were the
object of their veneration and regard.—(Hear.) For this
reason, because he thought the Bill neither gave security to
any class nor freedom from future contention, he would
oppose the clause then before the House, as one of the most
dangerous and injurious which that Bill contained.
Captain POLHILL read a list of towns and boroughs,
the elective franchise in which, he contended, would be in-
juriously limited by the adoption of the clause as proposed
by the Noble Lord. He, therefore, moved, as an amend-
ment, to fill up the blank, with the words " five pounds"
instead of the words " ten pounds."
Lord MILTON opposed the amendment proposed by
the Hon. Member for Bedford. He supported the clause
because it was an adherence to that ancient right of fran-
chise, the violation of which lie had complained of in
other parts of the measure. By the clause the right of
franchise was advantageously removed from the pay-
ment of parochial to the payment of national
taxes. The Honourable Gentleman opposite wanted
a uniformity of franchise. Now if there was anything
which, in his (Lord Milton's) opinion, it was desirab'e to
preserve, it was a variety of franchise. It was desirable
that in some places the franchise should be extended al-
most to universal suffrage. That variety the clause would
secure under a nominal uniformity. While human na-
ture was constituted as it now was, and as it ever had
been, the poorer classes would be liable to be corrupted
by the higher. The only guard against that corruption
was, that where the poorer classes were numerous, they
should vote in great numbers. He bad no such appre-
hensions from an extensive exercise of the franchise as
were entertained by the Hon. Member. The Hon. Mem-
ber doubted if the feeling in favour of Reform were una-
nimous in the country. In answer to that observation,
he would refer the Hon. Gentleman to the late election.

Mr. C. RUSSELL (as we understood the lion. Gen-
tleman who spoke from under the gallery) doubted the
possibility of ascertaining the real qualification required by
the clause.

Lord LOUGHBOROUGH thought that the clause
would operate in a manner contrary to every principle of
law and equity. The persons in the borough which he
had the honour to represent, who lived in houses of 5/. a
year, Were equal in property and re+pectability to the per•
sons who at Hull (not above an hour's sail) lived in houses
of 151. a year. The Bill would therefore work a mani-
fest injustice. Would it not be advisable to introduce a
proviso that the qualification in all the boroughs in sche-
dule B should be Si. instead of 10/. ? In his opinion
that would give a more fair and equal participation of the
franchise.

Mr. TREVOR said that if the proposi'ion ba,l been to
raise the qualification from 10/. to 201. he would have
supported it. He objected to the present clause, and ex-
pressed his opinion, derived from communications he had
received, that the strong feeling in favour of the Bill, the
whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill, had been consider•
ably altered.
Mr. S. WORTLEY asked if the decision now to be
made upon this important question, respecting the filling
up with the words " ten pounds," was to be considered
as final ?

Lord ALTHORP replied, that it would be competent
to any Member to propose the mention of any other sum.
Mr. BERNAL explained, that the Hon. Member la-
boured under a mistake in supposing the decision respecting
the larger sum would affect all smaller sums. It was only
in the Committee of Supply that it was necessary to put
the question respecting the smaller sum first.
Captain POLHILL withdrew his amendment.
The original question was then put, that the blank
should be filled up with the words ten pounds, and carried.
Captain POLHILL then moved, as an amendment, that
an exception of the conferring of the 101. franchise should
prevail with respect to all householders in schedule E.
Lord ALTHORP objected to the amendment. The
great object of the Bill was to extend the constituency as
much as was consistent with the interests of the State.
The persons renting 15/. houses in large towns for a period
of twelve months must be men of industrious habits, and
of intelligence, and therefore well qualified to:ewcise the
elective franchise.
Colonel DAVIES remarked, that the principle advocated
by the Hon. Member for Bedford should he extended to
many towns not included in schedule C, and he thought it
would be well to propose it.
Mr. HUNT said that that he would object most stre-
nuously to any rise in the franchise. It would create in-
finite dissatisfaction amongst the people.
Mr. GILLON—I have hitherto purposely abstained
from offering any remarks to the Committee, from a de-
sire to avoid any thing that might tend to delay, in any
degree, the passing of this most important measure ; and
because in the previous details much local information was
required, with which lion. Members were so much more
conversant than myself. On this, however, one of the
most general and important provisions in the Bill, which
marks out what shall be the future constituency of the
cities of this kingdom, I beg to offer a few remarks; and
I trust for that indulgence 1 so much require, from my
inexperience in the forms and usages of the House.
observe among the notices of motions a very great number
which refer to this clause : some proposing that all resi-
dent freemen should permanently retain their right—some
that non-resident freemen shoult retain them during life—
some that there should be a scale of representation—and
some that the right of voting should be extended to all
paying taxes. Sir, on a prima
.facie view of this provi-
sion, I own it did strike me that taking the 101. medium
as a qualification to entitle to the elective franchise, it
ought to have been higher in some of the large towns—as
London, Manchester, &c., and that it should have been
reduced even lower in some of the remote districts. In
fact I thought that, for the sake of establishing uniformity
in the right of voting, a scale of representation would have
beender necessary. I have, however, had reason, on mature
those
theritotino.n,
ietmoeba:lfrt:irty
ditoheiaiiavvoienpgirnati
johsened,loaawnn.droblciletaersttstisotonftltvloaottteahrlesl
ißsiltlhoenirthreigseohte,
will yet see reason to support this clause.
IR fact, the apparent or nominal uniformity of Y
of voting establishes that variety in franchise, that
aentation of different classes and interests, which I tiara%

heard en warmly contended fot the other side of the House,
I have nu doubt 1 shall be told by the Hon. Member fur
Preston that his constituents—the potwallopper voters—
are to be disfranchised, at least prospectively so, and I own
the Bill does press a little hardly upon them. But what
is thus lost on one ground is gained on another ; that is to
say, that in some of the larger towns the franchise will
descend very low in the scale—will reach all possessed of
anything like property and respectability, and will at length
approach to what is called universal suffrage. I rejoice
sincerely at this, as I look on it as affording that vent for
popular feeling so much desiderated, and properly, by gen-
tlemen on the other side, without which the Bill would be
defective. We find at present, th it in the places where
there is the largest constituency—where it most nearly
approaches to universal suffrage, that the least corruption
prevails. I may mention Westminster, the Borough, and
Preston ; therefore, on every account, it is desirable that
an infusion of this sort should be found in the Bill, both
in order press the sentiments of a very large portion
of the car unity, and for the very valuable Members who
must be returned to this House. This varying of the no-
minally uniform scale will in other places operate in a ra-
ther exclusive manner ; and in those boroughs which are
partly made tip of agricultural districts the cons•ituency
will consist of what I may term the aristocratic part of the
community, that is, it will consist of men very fir removed
indeed from what will be termed the lower orders, of men
closely connected with the landed interest, of men strongly
interested in securing a permanency and stability for pro-
perty and the existing order of things. In fact they will
consist of men as far from democratic in their views or
pursuits as is consistent with anything like a full and free
representation of the people. The ten-pound franchise
generally will comprise the respectable and intelligent
middle classes of society. It will give to them, now justly
disgusted with the anomalies of our representation, with
the impost of taxes, with the payment of which alone
they have now to do—it will give to all these an inte-
rest and a desire to rally round the Throne and Constitu-
tion, and will induce them to look with an eye of venera-
tion upon institutions which they have perhaps been in-
clined to despise, from observing the many and glaring im-
perfections of our representative system. Sir, I cannot
agree with those Hon. Members who have declared their
anticipation that the great body of our countrymen are to
become universally corrupt. I little envy the feelings or
the hearts of those Hon. Gentlemen ; and I know not
with whom they had their transactions, to form so
bad an tstimate of human nature. But night after,
night have I listened with indignation in this House td
annunciations of this sort, and have heard the great body
of my countrymen thus scandalously libelled. Sir, I
think more highly of my countrymen than this ; and
from the many magnanimous sacrifices I have seen nu-
merous classes of them ready to make to promote the suc-
cess of this great measure, from the enthusiasm and loyalty
I have witnessed everywhere, I cannot believe that sordid
motives will be the ones that are hereafter to regulate their
conduct. But to pause one moment to show the incon-
sistency of the arguments used on the other side of the
House. They have been loudly complaining that money
and personal property will not be duly represented. They
now turn round, and say that our new constituency are to
be swayed solely by selfish and sordid motives. Surely, if
it were so, which I say it is not, here would be a mode
for money at least to be represented in this House. Perhaps
they will tell us they would not condescend to such means
to procure their return ; but I cannot believe that he who
will give a sum to secure the right of sending here two
nominees in defiance of the laws and the Constitution, will
hesitate to offer to the frail the wages of corruption. Sir,
this clause shall, for these reasons, have my warmest sup-
port ; and I fondly look to this Bill and to its provisions
—I look to the time when we may fairly call ourselves the
representatives of the people of this country, for that union
among ourselves, and respect from without, so essential to
our deliberations, but so long denied to this anomalous,
and I fear it may be added corrupt assembly.
Mr. WYNN considered this the most important, and
the most objectionable part of the Bill.
The amendment was negatived without a division.
Mr. HODGSON proposed that tenants from year to
year, who paid a rent of 201. a year for two tenements,
should have a right of voting for the borough in which the
tenement was situated. In consequence of the confusion
which prevailed, the Hon. Member was understood not to
press his motion, and on a question afterwards put to him
on the subject, he said he never intended to press it to a
division, but merely to introduce it to the notice of the
Ministers.
A long conversation then ensued as to the legal effect of
the word " house" in the clause.
The motion for filling up the blank with 10/. was then
agreed to.
On the motion of Lord Arsrrioisr, the Chairman re-
ported progress, and asked leave to sit again to-morrow
(this day).
Lord PALMERSTON requested an Hon. Member to
postpone bis motion, which stood for to-morrow, until a
future day. At present he could only grant half the pa-
pers required, but hereafter he might be in a condition to
give the whole.
Mr. COURTENAY consented to defer his motion until
Tuesday.
DUCHESS OF KENT'S ANNUITY.
Lord ALTHORP moved the third reading of the
Duchess of Kent's Annuity Bill.
The Order of the Day having been read,
Lord ALTHORP proposed an amendment, providing,
that in case of the death of the Princess Victoria, only
1,000/. of the 10,000/. should be applied to the purposes
of the Duchess of Kent, and that the remaining 6,0001.
should revert to the public.
The amendment was inserted by way of rider, and the
Bill was read a third time and passed.
The other Orders of the Day were then gone through,
and the House adjourned at Two o'clock.

LITERATURE.

A MANUAL OF MEDICAL JURISPR U.

DENCE. ONE VOL.—Lexpos, 1831.

This is a very useful treatise on a subject
little appreciated and less understood. It is a
compilation, digested with evident care and skill,
from the most approved legal and medical works,
and comprises an account of the ethics of the
medical profession, of the charters and statutes
relating to the faculty, and of all medico-legal
questions, with the latest decisions upon them.
The work is intended as a compendium for the
use of Barristers, Solicitors, Alagistrates, Coro-
ners, and Medical Practitioners, and does credit
to the research and diligence of its author, Dr.
Ryan, who has made it a complete text-book.
We extract the following passage from a neatly-
written preface, in which Dr. Ryan explains the
main object of his publication :
r
"In exposing the absurd distinctions, the defective to
of the laws relating to the profession, and the gross abuses
of its constituted authorities, the love of freedom and of
equality, with an ardent desire to promote the interests of
his favourite science, and of humanity, have impelled
him to declare the truth, however unpalatable that may be
in certain quarters, or to the different orders of the faculty.
His motto has been, amicus Socrates, amicus Plato, sed
magis amica veritas.' He has not been the advocate of
any party, of any order, of any corporation, but the a -
vocate of the whole profession. He has examined the
whole of the charters and statutes relating to the practice
of medicine in these countries, and has found Them defec-
tive, contradictory, oppressive, and, since the legislative
Union between England, Scotland, and Ireland, highly
unjust and impolitic. In proof of this statement, we have
only to recollect the fact, that a Scotch physician, surgeon,
or apothecary cannot legally practise in England; an Eng-
lish member of the faculty cannot practise in Ireland;
and an Irish member can neither practise in England nor
in Scotland. Such is the state of the law, which was
just and right when the three countries were distinct na-
tions, but is unjust and preposterous since they have
formed one united empire. The author has, therefore,
considered that there never was a more auspicious period
than the present for exposing the absurd state of the laws
relating to the faculty in the United Kingdom, when the
propriety of constitutional, ecclesiastical, and legal Re-
forms, is the subject of national discussion; and when me-
dical Reform is loudly demande,i by the whole profession,
with the exception of the few sordid monopolists. It need
scarcely be stated that the principles and practice of me-
dicine and therapeutical agents are identically the same
in every part of these countries."

CURIOUS CAUSE OF EXEMPTION FROM
CIIOLERA.-The Medical Gazette contains a communi-
cation from a Spanish physician, giving u the result of his
experience, " that cholera always spares a certain number
of persons, and of these invariably, are those individua's
who have the itch."