The Sun.
London, England, 1831-10-04 00:00:00

ruption that is exhibited on all sides, the open sale of seats,
the return of Members in the open face of day, under the
nomination of the proprietors of boroughs, while the
people look on and see that which all writers on the Con-
stitution, all eminent English lawyers have stated to be
incompatatible with the rights of representation, daily
made the subject of profit to nominees, in defiance both
of justice and of law ? On these grounds, therefore, we
proceeded to consider what boroughs ought to be abolished,
and in so doing we found that many were so situated as to
he incapable, under any circumstances, of possessing the
elective franchise, it being impossible to extend the con-
stituency in those boroughs that only possessed the name
and ancient site of places which formerly sent representa-
tives to Parliament. Under these circumstances, we
thought that they could only be considered as gangrenes.
which defied all cure hut that of excision ; and we, there-
fore, determined to disfranchise entirely the boroughs men-
tioned in schedule A, taking as our criterion a certain
rate of population, as found in the census of 1821—not
that we supposed that there was any particular virtue in
the number we selected, but because it enabled us
to draw what might be deemed a fair and impartial line,
and help us to conclude what boroughs existed into which
it was impossible to diffuse a new or vigorous constituency.
These boroughs, therefore, we determined to propose to
Parliament to abolish altogether. There then presented
itself toour notice another class of boroughs, having a higher
population, and which we thought might be allowed, to a
certain extent, to return their franchise, by the admission
of regulations, which will be found in the Bill, for the pur-
pose of raising their constituency, after depriving each
borough of this class, of one of its Members. I know
that it will be alleged against this measure that there ar,
anomalies in this Bill ; and I admit that if it was altoge-
ther new scheme such an accusation would be a just
one ; but still it certainly does appear to be a little incon-
sistent that such a change should be urged by those who
think that the measure is already too extensive—(Hear,
hear)—more especially after I am fain to admit that this
second class of boroughs has boen retained for the purpose
of conciliating those who are most ready to deprecate too
extensive a change ; but, at all events, it will be well for
your Lordships to consider that these anomalies could only
be remediable by a general division of the population and
the counties into districts, and so establishing a more
equable partition. The framers of the Bill then proceeded
with the disfranchisement of the boroughs contained in
schedule A, and to limit those contained in schedule B t,
the return of one Member each. The extent, then, to
which the House of Commons was reduced by the dis-
franchisement of the boroughs in the first class, was 111 ;
those in Vie second class amounted to 41, and with tao
taken from the borough of Weymouth, made the total
number t .ken from the House of Commons 154. That
having been done--the work of disfranchisement having
been to that extent completed—the next step to be taker
was, to see what means were necessary and practicable fo,
the purpose of supplying the deficiency in the numbers of
the House of Commons whic!, those proposed disfranchise
ments had created. The Bill, with those disfranchising
clauses, was proposed to the House of Commons, and by
that House adopted, and also clauses were adopted for the
purpose of bringing back the numbers of the representa-
tive portion of the Legislature to pretty near the satin
amount, in point of numbers, that it had previously been.
Sixty-five new Members were given to counties, twenty-
four additional Members were given to the the House as re-
presentatives for twelve large towns not before sending
Members to the House, and which, under the Bill now
before the House, are each to have Members ; and then
there are twenty-eight towns with one Member each ad-
ditionil, which, with the Member left to Weymouth,
make 118, which, taken from 154, leave a remainder 01
36, being the number which the House of Commons wa-
to lose. Having thus removed the rotten portion of the
Constitution, our next duty was to consider how we
should beat impart fresh health and vigour to the whole
body of the Constitution—having removed the rotten and
decayed branches, our object was to ascertain how we
should best infuse new vigour and freshness to the parent
stern and the remaining branches, so that fair fruit should
be borne, and permanent health and energy established.
‘. Inutilisque false ramos amputans

Feliciores inserit."
Your Lordships will see that these arrangements consti-
tute the plan upon which we now propose to take the
sense of this branch of the Legislature ; and I hesitate
not to say that it will not only be unattended witl,
danger, but that it will effect the best purposes of
permanent security. This plan, I hope, will obtain the
consent of your Lordships. Your Lordships will further
see that in counties, all the present rights of voting are re-
served—that all freeholders in counties remain precisely
as they were—that every man in possession of a freehold
retains his right of voting ; but rie franchise can be com-
municated with a freehold Inc life, unless it be of the
value of ten pounds. 'thus, then, will that manufacture
of votes be prevented, which in practice worked so mis-
chievously. To those rights so already existent or ere•
tloife t
hreiglh.atl
value
of
of
fotitnegn
dill, wecusptor(m)paorsye totenaudid•e-s
aced
pounds—to lessees for sixty years, acid to other lessees, as
frombcyoptyhleolßd
the printed Bill will toore particularly exhibit to Noble
Lords. In this part of the arrangemot I have now to
call your Lordships' attention to a clause which was in-
troduced into the Hill during its passage through the
other houso—it was nut recommended by any one eon•
nected with his Majesty's Government, yet I nevertheless
sincere!y hope that its operation will be beneficial, though
I am not without fear that a contrary result ;nay ensue,
The privilege of which I speak is tit'at at the right of
voting given to persooa heOding lands a a certain value
without leaees. It must be obvious to your Lordships,
that in this ease there exists a considerable danger that the
power given to landed proprietors may be used in a man-
ner such as it has been in places that I will ns,t name :
and if so used, it will probably lead to ; g,-eneral detnand
for that regulation formerly treo;io,oed in reference to this
subject, but not one word' rospeotio,g which has found its
way ioto the pettions reeently presented to this or the
other House of Parliatnent—the regulation I allude to is
the right of voting by ballot. It is one whli,h,qt not
been taken up by petitioners from the kipmeckt Oae tnea-
sure of Reform was taken by the eesp,ooaible advisers of
the Crown as a Gor!nrufut• measure, and which will
probably not l e ries:ailed to again unless the power im- •
-hi the ol,use I have just mentioned should be
abused in the manlier so recently and so justly censurecL.
At all events, this clause in the Bill cannot bat t:toopaniendi
it to the adoption of every min in the toer4;.y 6ncerely
desires to increae the urivilNeq io(htetwe of the
landed At istocrac!,:--w4l; themthis clause can but form an
arrmivent Yn i,ayoUr of the measure. But before it was
introduced into the Ili.l there was not even a plausible
ground for saying that the landed interest was net suf-
ficiently provided for and protected. Will not the eist;-
five additional county Members increase their in4uere and
power ? In fact there was no part ct which did
not show a tendency rather to, increase than to lessen or
destroy that Having thus laid before your
outline of the principles of this important.,
measure, I shill not trouble you with those tletei!s which
will more prop-rly form the subject cf tlisztission in the
Committee. The object of ',;l.n.ge details chiefly was to
guard against escpen.a4 at elections—taking it as a fit=
rtrinc:,ple, that the return of Members to the c:oinmens
house of Parliament should be free eari onshackled, 'the
division of counties is thk-ne-at subject to. which I shall
call the attention of the house and that ;,-I.y very briefly,
observing as I pass, thai o;B,t,:clivr,sosi ought to form one of
the strongest recornitlenfiations of the Bill to that portion
of the landed Aristocracy who limit their views to the n?r..
rust' objects of private and personal int!rest, i hikow
that this portion of the Bi!1 is open to tltt ok favour-
ing those combinations and oe:-.--?keomises by which parti•
cular persons have Lein, enabla'to retin n Members to the
other !louse of Al.rhanient ; but my persuasion is, tli,a'c
re ectiin and experience of its operation will erizee: its
warmest opponents that such will ultimate re-
sults, and sure I am that i
'c=sins ntbing which ough;
to render it tr;ac.9einiable to your Lordships, ilping
forth the&tails'of the measure, Not; till, fenttethat
if contains fresh provisions fur reg;kleting the polling
at elections, and forsse_aringevery freedom and
facility for eitors. It providi s that the ;acne
property shall not yield two votes—that, in .\i-ovo;;,gh, no
Man shall vote for the town and the county ; if he be a
resident he votes for the town, a non-re „lent for the
county, and no iote7r;ediatetenant shall possess a right of
voting, neither shall qualifications be derived from the
payment of land-tax; and to all at present possessing the
right of voting for towns, as freeholders, it is still conti-
nued, provided they do not live at a greater distance from
the place represented than seven miles. This, I need not,