The Sun.
London, England, 1831-07-30 00:00:00

that case there was a river that separated Torkington
from Dorchester, but here there was none. The line of
distinction between the borough and the outskirts'svas too
finely marked. The boundary line actually divided some
of the houses in the borough, so that they must be in-
cluded or excluded together.
Mr. HUGHES HUGHES expressed his regret that so
respectable a constituency as that of Guildford should be
partially disfranchised, and that his Majesty's Ministers
did not see something to take it out of the general rule.
But, at the same time, he could not adopt in this case ar-
guments which he had refused to acknowledge in the case
of others.
Sir J. BRYDGES should support the amendment, and
said that cases of this kind would open the eyes of the
people, though perhaps not of the House.
Mr. HUNT said that the eternal Caine had been refer-
red to. He agreed that they were not to be named toge-
ther in the same day. If Caine was to have two Mem-
bers, Guildford ought to have six.—( Hear, hear, hear.)
Caine ought to be altogether disfranchised, but at least he
should move at the proper time to put it in schedule B.
On this present question lie must say, that lie did not
think Guildford entitled to two Members like Westmin-
ster or Manchester, and therefore he should oppose the
amendment.
Mr. PUSEY said a few words in support of the
amendment.
The Committee then divided, and the following were
the numbers :
Ayes (for the disfranchisement)
Noes
Majority -67
On our re-admission we found the Committee on the
case of the borough of Helstone, and Mr. Knox on his
legs, speaking inaudibly. He was replied to by Lord J.
Russell ; but not a syllable reached the gallery.
The Committee then proceeded to the case of Honiton,
and on the question being put from the Chair, that it be
included in schedule B,
Sir G. WARRENDER rose and was received with
much cheering from both sides of the House. His object
was only to pronounce a short funeral oration over the
departed Honiton—(Hear, hear)—and not to take the
ssnse of the House on a case which had, in fact, been de-
cided by that of Dorchester. Honiton was a flourishing
town, with 600 inhabited houses, more than 300 of
which were of above the annual value of 10/. The resi-
dents were highly respectable, and not only pure from cor-
ruption, but most intelligent and well educated, and, at
the same time, property was so equally divided that no
individual in the borough could command five votes. In
the revolutionary times of France a Court had been esta-
blished called Le Lit de Justice; but it seemed to him
that the House of Commons had erected itself into a Court
of Injustice, in order to convict the innocent and un-
offending.—(Loud cheers.) The House would have
only, on the present occasion, to register the edicts of Mi-
nisters, although several Members who had voted in the
majority against Dorchester last night had admitted to him
that like Appleby and several others, it was a very hard
case ; they had added that they would not have voted
against it, but that they were ob'iged to support the Bill, the
whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill.—(Cries of name,
name.) He would not name, for although it was not un-
worthy of a gentleman to state a fact, it was unworthy of
a gentleman to name those who could corroborate it. He
had said last night, that schedule A would be the death of
the Bill; and to-night he would assert, that notwith-
standing the so often-heard hustings jargon of the Bill,
the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill, schedule B would
not be preserved by Ministers. Elsewhere (he would not
more distinctly spec:fy the place) individual injustice com-
mitted by the House of Commons, had been remedied, and
lie felt satisfied that the same legislative body would not
fail of its duty in this case of general and public wrong.
--(Cheers from the Opposition.) Such conduct would
rescue Parliament from the scandal of passing such a mea-
sure as the present.—(Cheers.) He conclude d by express-
ing his gratitude to the electors of Honiton for the pure and
honourable support they had given him at the lest election.
Mr. GISBORNE spoke from the side gallery, and con-
tended that the edicts of which the Hon, Baronet had
talked were not those of the Ministers, but of the country.
--(Hear.) Nevertheless, even staunch Reformers did not
implicitly follow the advisers of the Crown, unless it were,
as the King was said to have followed Madam Blaise.
The King himself has followed her,
When she has walked before."
On a few nights since 150 firm friends of the Bill opposed
the decision of Ministers with regard to a particulir bo-
rough. He contended that it was most unfair for any
Member to make public use of private conversations.
Sir G. WARRENDER added, that he had not alluded
to the Hon. Gentleman, who was unquestionably an out-
and•out reformer.
Mr. PERCEVAL observed, that if the majority were
led by Ministers, Ministers themselves were driven by a
popular cry : the moment that cry ceased their strength
would fade.
The question was put and carried.
The CHAIRMAN then put the question, that the bo-
rough of Huntingdon stand part of schedule B.
Colonel PEEL was so convinced that whatever might
be tire case, or whoever the advocate, the majority would
divide against a borough, that he should not give the
House the trouble of dividing. The case of Huntingdon
was precisely similar to that of Dorchester, with this ex-
ception, that it paid more to the Assessed Taxes than
any place included in the cecond schedule. He con-
tended that it might, without the slightest inconvenience,
be united to Godinanchester, which would give it more
than the requisite number of inhabitants arid 101. houses ;
and he adverted to the expence which had been in vain
incurred before two Committees, in settling the right of
voting in Huntingdon. lie also trusted that, in another
place, justice would be done to some of the disfranchised
boroughs, as there the Members were not pledged to the
Bill, the whole Bill, arid nothing but the Bill.
eMr. JAMES observed, that the question really was,
whether Lord Sandwich should in future. continue to re-
turn two Members, or whether the independent electors of
Huntingdon should return one?
Lord J. RUSSELL and Sir E. B. SCGPEN each made a
single remark, which was not heard.
Lord MILTON addressed some observations to the
Committee, which we did not hear.
The motion was then carried.
The next question, that Hythe stand part of schedule
13, was; carried without opposition.
It wag then put that Launceston stand part of the schedule.
Sir J. MALCOLM in future discussions, would say no
mere respecting the principle of the Bill than the particu-
lar case under discussion might require.—(llear, hear.)
Launceston was a county town, in which the Assizes were
held; and it was situated, from accidental localities, in
five different parisitell. The borough itself included the
whole of two of those parishes, and 3 part of each of the
other three. Including those portions of the three pa-
rishes, the population of the whole town would be four
thousand one hundred and forty, Now, as Newport,
which might be regarded es forming, continuous street
with Launceston, had been put into schedule A, he thought
that the disfranchisement of the former was an additional
reason for the preservation of two representatives to the
latter, in conjunction with Newpoie --(Hear, hear.)
Taking the two places together they had, atatooding to the
returns of 1831, a population of 5,117 persons.,..--!Hear,
hear.) He knew that it was useless to state those fleets
to the Committee, after the little attention which he had
seen paid to the claims and rights of the county towns of
England.—(Cheers.) He had examined the list of Priem-
bers sent into that House by the borough of Launceston,
and he found that it included the names of the highest, and I
best, and wisest families in the country.—(Hear, hear.)
He knew that argument was useless on the present ques-
tion, as the Ministers were adopting the system which
was followed formerly on the borders of his (Sir J. 11,,,t1-
colm's) own county, and were administering Jedburgh jus-
tice to those boroughs. He should not, however, press the
question to a division, but would leave that to the judg-
ment of his Hon. and Gallant Colleague.
Sir If. lIARDINGE, being called on by his Hon.
Friend, would recommend him not to divide the House, as
he, and every Member on that side, must have been con-
vinced before now that it was useless to appeal to the
justice of :a pledged majority.—(Cheers.) Having gone
over the often-discussed case of Truro, he concluded by
stating, that there were not twelve Members of the House
who rightly understood the Bill, the principles of which
were so elastic, that the Noble Lord who had introduced it
could make them fit any cage, in whatever way he chose
to apply them.
The question was then carried.
On the question being put that the borough of Liskeard
stand part of the schedule,
Lord ELLIOT said, that the borough which be repre-
sented was prosperous and thriving. The population was
now more than 4,000, although, he admittedthat it was
below the number in 1821.
The question was carried without further opposition.
The same question being put respecting the borough of
Lytne Regis, was carried.
It was then put that Lymington stand part of schedule B.
Mr. CHOKER said, that the case of this borough was
similar to that of Cockermouth, and having taken the
sense of .tlip House when that was uncle! discussion, be
would- ke4tie pledge tvbieli he had given the House
tkAltunittee—not to renew the discussion
tee 110**Li
or :icktbe House had decided.
Mi;BUIVAOI);t9cI that the popolatlon of Lymingtoo
t„,,4 •
ss •
st,/

;ail.