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

situation as Caine, only three returned Members in the
Whig interest.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. CROKER said that the Noble Lord had not con-
tradicted any of the facts which he had stated.
Mr. STANLEY repelled with indignation the charge
that Ministers had framed the Bill with a reference to
p 'it, and corrupt purposes.—(Hear, hear.) With respect
to the allusion that had been made to Aldborough, he had
only to say, that it stood on a very different footing from
St. Germains. In the former ease, the borough was so
situated, that a proper constituency could not be found in
its neighbourhood ; but that was not the fact with respect
to St. Germains.

Mr. CHOKER observed, that the Noble Lord had not
answered a single point which he had advanced ; and the
Right Hon. Gentleman (another great gun of the party)
who had followed him, had left the question in nearly the
same state. The two lion. Members, in their exertions,
reminded him of the old story, where a master called out
to his servant, " Jack, what are you doing ?" and the an-
swer was, " Nothing, Sir." " And," continued the mas-
ter, " what are you doing, Tom ?" " Why,- Sir, I'm
helping Jack."--(Laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh !")
The Hon. Member then defended the view which he had
previously taken of the case.
Mr. PRAED complained of the decision of the Noble
Lord, who had declared that in the case of a town he
would admit the conjoined population of a parish and
borough, but that he would not do so when the agricul-
tural interest alone was affected. It had been said that in
the course of his observations he had charged the Mini-
sters with having acted upon a principle of partiality in
selecting boroughs for disfranchisement. He denied posi-
tively that he had ever done so, and all that he bad said
was in the recollection of the Committee. The conduct
of Ministers, with respect to Downton and'St. Germains,
reminded him of the Scotch steward, who having been di-
rected to hang up a malefactor at one side of an avenue,
thought proper to hang up an innocent person at the
other side, merely for the sake of uniformity
The Committee then divided, when there appeared,
For the disfranchisement 260
Against it
Majority -48

The CHAIRMAN, on our re-entering the gallery-, was
putting the question, " That the borough of St. Mawe's
stand part of schedule A."
Mr. W. PIGOTT (we believe) spoke against the dis-
franchisement of the borough.
Mr. CRESSET PELHAM protested against the dis-
franchisement of St. Mawe's. He felt that it was due to

the memory of a deceased relative of his (the late Lord
Chichester) to say, that when an endeavour was made to
convert St. Mawe's into a mere Ministerial borough, that
Noble Lord had defeated it. He maintained that it was
an independent borough, and ought not to be classed in
schedule A.

The question was then put, and St. Mawes was diafran•

ciiikted.

The CHAIRMAN then put the question, " That the
borough of St. Michael, or Midshall, Cornwall, stand part
of schedule A."

The motion was carried in the affirmative, without ob-
servation.

The CHAIRMAN next pnt the question, " That the bo-
rough of Saltash, Cornwall, stand part of schedule A."
Mr. CROKER argued, that in this case the borough
and parish ought to be taken together. The borough was
nearly connected with the parish of St. Stephen, in the
church of which parish the inhabitants of Saltash were
christened, and married, and buried. The borough had a
population of 1,500, and with the parish the population
would be nearly 2,800. This being the case, he could not
conceive why the borough of Saltash should not be trans-

ferred to schedule B.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER admitted
that the case of Saltash was one of the weakest that had i
come under the cognizance of Ministers.—( Hear, bear.)
It should, however, be observed, that in all the official re.-
cords, a distinction was made between the parish of St.
Stephen, and the borough of Saltasb. The parish was
spoken of as " St. Stephen's juxta Saltash." Ministers
had, therefore, considered this as a case where the borough
and parish were distinct and separate. Saltash, be ad-
mitted, contained no inconsiderable portion of the popula-
tion, and he believed that much of the wealth connected
with the neighbourhood was to be found there. Whether,
under all the circumstances, the borough should be left in
schedule A, was a matter that must be decided by the
House ; unquestionably the case was •ne of considerable
doubt and difficulty.
Mr. CHOKER did not deem it necessary, after the very
candid statement of the Noble Lord, to make any farther
observations. He would merely put it to the Noble Lord,
whether, on his own showing, it was not proper that
Saltash should be taken out of schedule A ?
Mr. F. VILLIERS (as we understood) stated that the
borough of Saltash was in the centre of the parish or town
of St. Stephen's ; and, as the conjoint population amounted
to snore than 2,000 persons, he contended that the borough
ought to be placed in schedule B.
Lord MILTON said, that it was most desirable that they
should not needlessly, and without just and fair grounds,
abandon the rule which had been originally laid down with
respect to the disfranchisement of boroughs. In his opi-
nion, nothing which had been advanced in favour of this
borough was of sufficient weight to justify its exemption
from disfranchisement. When mention was made of the

parish of St. Stephen, it ought to be recollected that that
parish was spoken of not as a part of the borough of
Saltash, but as " the parish of St. Stephen juxta Saltash,"
which was a clear and manifest distinction. If they took
Saltash out of schedule A, they would be evidently acting
on a principle different from that which they adopted in
the case of Beeralaton.
Sir A. BULLEIt opposed the disfranchisement.
Lord J. RUSSELL thought, that as in this case there
was not a separate chapelry, St. Stephen's appearing to
be intimately connected with Saltash, it would, perhaps,
be the most just course to exclude the borough front sche-
dule A.—(Hear.)
The Committee then divided upon the question, " That
the borough of Saltash stand part of schedule A," when
there appeared--
A yes l5O
Noes
Majority in favour of excluding the bo-
rough from schedule A Bl
The next question was, " That the borough of Old
Sarum stand part of schedule A."—(Much laughter.)
Sir C. FORBES ruse amidst laughter, arid cries of
" Oh," and " Question." He said he could not allow
this borough to be disfranchised without saying that the
two Hon. Members who represented it were as indepen-
dent as any Hon. Members in that House. The Noble
Lord who had introduced this Bill had said, in a publica-
tion of his, that he should no more think of touching Old
Sarum, than of touching the ground on which Old Sarum
stood.—(Loud cries of " Hear," from the Opposition.)
The Noble Lord now, not only touched, but annihilated
Old Sarum. He begged to ask the Noble Lord what he
intended to do next?
Mr. O'CONNELL was apprehensive, when the Hon.
Member rose, that the Hon. Member had made a dicovery
of some place to which Old Sarutn could be united, and
thatt(iet Lret they
tel
dls%c•hsaapoiluil.ileudeigfr
a,
re. i old of a parish justa Old Sarum.—
himself,
a wd put
tr NtVaisni
et
edr regard to
advertisement
etNniltiosbilbleiot
or
LO borough
n
newspapers, in whichlial
pledged himself that if he lived till the next election, be
would send his negro servant into the House as Member
for Old Sarnm.—(Cries of" No, no.") He had read this
and no one could doubt the
right of his Lordship to have redeemed his pledge if lie
pleased, and if the negro were burn under the British flag,
his Lordship would oaly have had to give the negro a
qualification, and then he might have sent him in his
livery. Other Members had been sent into that House
often enough for rotten boroughs, who, if they had not
worn livery, had been quite as much under the controul
of their patrons as this negro could possibly have been
under the controul of Lord Catrielford ;—ay, and there had
also been Members enough for rotten boroughs who had
been quite as black inside as the swarthiest negro could be
outside.—(Hear, hear.) He spoke, of course, of former
Parliaments, not of the present Parliament.—(Hear.)
Mr. C. W. WYNN had only to say, that there was
not the slightest foundation for the story which the Hon.
end Learned Member had narrated.
Mr. R. C. FERGUSON thought there was no occa-
siono ne couldfor an
by
eoinoeu
ntod stop e:pke
ask ,f
f(o)rl
t.S_a rcuLi no,u
des crieshe believed
from the opposition.)
Mr. O'CONNELL would not have risen again but for
the contradiction he had received from the Right Hon.
Gentleman (Mr. Wynn), He had said, and he now re-
peated, that he read the story in the Newspapers. Did
the Right lion. Gentleman mean to contradict that? And
farther, did the Right lion. Gentleman, who was so well
versed in Parliamentary law, mean to deny that Lord
Cainelford might have returned his negro servant if he
had pleased.
Mr. C. W. WYNN thought he had heard the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman say that he had read such an ad-
vertisement of Lord Catnelford's in the Newspapers. Now,
the fact was, that what Lord Canielford did advertise in
the newspaper, was an unqualified contradiction of the
story, and a declaration that he had never entertained the
intention which that story imputed to him.--(Hear.)
Sir J. MALCOLM said a few words which were not
audible in the Gallery.
Mr. HUNT would assert that the Members for Old

Sarum were just as much the representatives of the people
as the future Members for Saltash would be.
Sir C. WETHERELL said, that the Hon. Member
for Kirkcudbright (Mr. C. Fergusson) was very much
in error in supposing that no one was inclined to say a
word in favour of Old Sarum, for Old Sarum was a bur-
gage tenure borough, and he certainly was opposed to the
disfranchisement of it on the grounds which he had
stated when the borough of Bletchingley was before the
Committee.
Mr. ATTWOOD said, that as they had been told that
a negro might have been returned for Old Sarum, they
ought to be told who had been returned for it. Old Sarum
had returned Lord Chatham.--(Hear, hear, from the Op-
position.) The Noble Lord who introduced this Bill hid
s 6(1, not in the heat of debate, but in print, that Old Sa-
sum ought not to be touched except upon grounds as strong
as those which expelled King James from the throne.—
(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Ilecelled upon the
House to observe bow the principles of the Noble Lord
had changed.
The question " that Old Sarum stand pact of schedule
A" was then put and agreed to.
The next was, " that the borough of Seaford stand part
of schedte A."
Mr. W. LYON said that Members were constantly in
the habit of abusing what they called rotten boroughs, and
of talking of the improper means by which Members were
returned for them. Now he was Member for this bo-
rough, which had been classed among the rotten boroughs,
and he challenged any Hon. Member to rise in his place
and sty by what improper means—either of controul or
purchase—he had obtained his seat.—( Hear, hear, from
the Opposition.) He did not rise for the purpose of
asking that the borough of Seaford should he taken out of
schedule A ; but he was induced, from the fair and honour-
able conduct of Ministers with regard to Saltash, to make
a suggestion, which he hoped would be attended to. Sea-
ford stood precisely in the same situation with Sandwich,
Weimer, and Deal ; and he submitted, that if Seaford
were joined with Hastings, for the purposes of representa-
tion, the principle of the Bill would not be infringed. •
Lord J. RUSSELL said a few words across the table,
which were wholly inaudible.
Mr. C. PELHAM said, that Seaford ought to be joined
with the rape of Pevensey.
After a few words from Sir C. WETHERELL, the ques-
tion was agreed to.
The next question was " That the borough of Steyning
stand part of schedule A,"—which question was nearly
disposed of without discussion, when
Sir C. WETHERELL rose amidst much laughter. lie
was surprised that while Sussex was thus cruelly shorn Of
its boroughs, neither of the Hon. Members for that county
had risen to say a syllable upon any one of them. One
would almost suppose that Sussex had already been de-
prived of its two county Members.—(Hear, hear, from the
Opposition.) Ile had been considering where all these
boroughs would go to, but, upon looking farther into the
Bill, he saw that most of them would travel northwards►
and, perhaps, be buried in the collieries of Durham.
--.(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Indeed, if he had
to give this Bill a name, he should be very much disposed
to call it the Durham Act.—(Cheers from the Opposition.)
Lord G. LENNOX begged to inform the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman that he was one of the Members fat
the county of Sussex, and that he had never been absent
from his place on any one occasion when the Reform Bill
had been discusse I. True it was, that he had not risen
to say a word with regard to any of these boroughs, and
he would tell the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the reason'
The fact was, that he had not confidence enough to rifle
in the defence of a bad cause—(Cheers)—and he was guise
sure that his constituents would not wish him to acquirej
courage for such a task.—(Cheers.) The Hon. an
Learned Gentleman, however, need not complain that tne
Members for the county had not spoken upon these b°.
roughs, for the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was hint-
self one of the constituency of Sussex, and he had take'`
care that these boroughs should not pass without one free 7,
holder of the county, at least, having a speech upon eat"
of them.—(Cheers and laughter.)
Mr. CURTEIS (who excited much amusement 1):,
speaking from the gallery) said, that although it was
usual for Members to speak from the gallery, yet he could
not help rising to tell the Hon. and Learned Gentlensan
that the other Member for Sussex was in his place t00._.,
(Cheers.) • The Hon. and Learned Gentleman wondered
that the Members for Sussex had not spoken upon theo
boroughs. He would tell the lion. and Learned Geo
tleman why lie had suffered them to pass without any oh'
servation. It was because he thought there boroughs.
disgrace to the county.—(Cheers.) Let him also tell ttiej
Hon, and Learned Gentleman that the Members who ha
been returned for these boroughs had seldom had any Oil;
flexion with the county, and that they had seldom done asl.,
good to the county, so that the county was not likely
suffer much from the loss of the boroughs.—(Hear, hear:)
While be was on his legs, allow him to notice what 0.,
Hon. and Learned Gentleman had said, somewhat di:j,
courteously on a former occasion. The Hon. amid Lelr,'
Gentleman had said that he would never give him ('led
Curteis) his vote. He thanked the Hon. and Learn ti
Gentleman for that--(Hear, and laughter)—and in rettiTij!
he assured the Hon. and Learned Gentleman that he w°ll6!
never condescend to ask him for his vote. He would 03
a further return to the Hon. and Learned Gentleanith
(Hear, and laughter.) If ever the Hon. and Learned Geir,
tleman started again for the university of Oxford, he r
Curteis) promised the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, t';
he would never again give him his vote, though be 11
given it him before.
Sir C. WETHERELL said that the Hon. 14161:1'/'
(Mr. Curteis) had at least one advantage over
namely, that of looking down on him. He could, h°p
ever, assure both the Hon. Members for Sussex thato,
had meant nothing discourteous towards either of Oleo
What he had said was said because he firmly believed chi
if the county of Sussex were polled, it would be PI.
that the freeholders were not in favour of Reform. ;€•
Lord G. LENNOX said that it was his firm enn`eff
tion that throughout Sussex, ninety-nine out of e'o,/
hundred of the freeholders were in favour of Reforo
(Cheers.) He had for some length of time been engld„
in canvassing every town and village in the county'. oli
he thought, therefore, that he had had better Ineal:ioo,i
ascertaining the opinions of the freeholders than the P
and Learned Gentleman could have had.—(Hear.) 60
Captain BERKELEY said that he happened to
estate in the county of Sussex, and he begged to °li
ii
that every tenant he had was ready to go to the lo vi
favour of the Reform candidates, without putting t
candidates to a farthing expense.—(Hear, hear.) p.;
Mr. C. PELHAM said a few words which were
audible in the gallery.
Mr. HUNT said it had been complained that 13°00I
would say a word in favour of Steyning. Now he ‘.,,te
say this in favour of it,—namely, that it had contrill ,
to make him a Reformer. He would tell the dlouse/
story.--(Cries of " Oh, oh.") It was only a short",
—(Cries of " Oh," and question.") A gentleman $lOl
William Bryant, who was an agent of the late 1:1$
Norfolk, had dined with him—(" Oh, oh !")_-some
ago—(Hear, hear)—and afterwards invited him
down to the House of Commons. He did go, and
up and down the lobby with Mr. •Bryant for some
„pi
At last a gentleman, one of the Members for Steq
came out. " Where are you going to?" said Alr•fro.t,i
ant. " I am going to pair off," said the ge°.l4
" Oh," said Mr. Bryant, " there must be no pait'ots!,
to night ; the Duke says you must all stop here and `
se
and with this Mr. Bryant pushed the gentleman baclo
into the House.—(Cries of " Oh.") This gave hl
l
idea of \situ 14$
nomination boroughs were. Ile :11,!f;
repeatedly asked latterly what had become of the 13
though he had said it appeared to him that in 1140%
stances the Opposition seemed to fight with muffle' rrel!',
he must acknowledge that the battle that night, if/
ence to Saltash, was the rankest cross he bad e''tl,
nessed.—(A laugh.) ,
Mr. N. COLBORNE (as we understood) stet tje,
the last time the present Members for Steyning n the alb'
to stand for that borough, they distinctly told t t"'
tors there what would be the effect of the Bill, $
the electors voted for them unanimously, knowing
would be time last vote they would have to give. foci
Mr. G. PHILLIPS, one of the Members tip
botT;ll
roubhgeeliqi,,oecxeostrtrigfiouromeNsvetialostnit:eheantalt,euhltealltntidirlelebaaodrerrobteuy the Hon.'
do stand part of schedule A," was put(gl'alindofcalte;ffl'ilbr'r(ot'ill:'
out observation ; was also the question that
of Tregony should stand part of the said schedede's.,ol,
On the question, " That the borough of l
stand part of schedule A," being put, td
Mr. G. BANKES would give an opportune tf olv
t Membersa Majesty's
was
not
one
of fo this
those
ebobrooruogolgm,it amid to °
31'5
it for Wareham to draw the attentiovn
biclr
ipe
1'
time line of disfranchisement adopted in the bor°,l
rid had been presented in April last from tbsos I,or
to one of his lajesty's Ministers, in which it t,
that a petition had been presen,ed to Parlianilshe
by two hundred inhabitants of that place, white() Ire
that it possessed a population which entit ed Font omm.
out of the list of disfranchised berougLa• boy
petition it appeared that the population of
even according to the return of 1821, ain°uo
persons, and the petitioners stated that if the K 4 Fe
a parish in the borough which amounted to 13