The Sun.
London, England, 1831-04-14 00:00:00

4ed that that ci;';'rection would tend to restore to England
some portitri of that representation of which, by the ori-
ginal pion, she was to hare been deprived. Still, thenc-
forte, according to the construction of the Bill, there would
bey not indeed sixty or seventy Members deducted from
the representation of England, but perhaps about forty
Was it intended to call upon the House to pronounce, by
a division, their opinion whether or not that reduction of
forty Members in the English representation should talcs,
place? If so, was it possible that the House could be pre-
pared to come to such a decision on Monday ? In conee_
quence of the corrections which had been received, several
material alterations would be made in the BM, and on
those alterations the House was to be called upon to pro-
nounce on Monday I. Let it be recollected that, on a Mat-
ter of such extreme importance, no decision would be !ix-
tisfactory to the people of England unless it trzsi the result
of the most deliberate consideration.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord ALTHORP said, with reference to one of the
questions of the Right Hon. Baronet, that it was not in-
tended to take the population of parishes as the test of
disfranchisement where those parishes were principally in
the county, but only where they wetT principally in the
town. With respect to the other points, he had not
heard his Noble Friend's statement last night. Althengh
it would be necessary to make some alterations in the
schedule A. and 8., those alterations tvonitt be very small.
Th-y were principally occasioned only by the corrections
which had been obtained of the population returns. Bct,
besides those, it was intended tss rectify other errors, arising
from the omission of latexes in which them was a large
population ; and from the necessity of adding a certain
number of county Members to preserve the balance. There
would, therefore, be an increase, to a certain extent, the
number of representatis-es originally contemplated in the
Bill ; and the actual reduction propose& neould be about
teat which the Right Hon. Baronet had supposed. That
was the proposition which his Majesty's Ministers meant
to make, and from which they did not mean On l';'epart
unless; the decision ef tlee House should Its; aainst it; in
which case, not conceiving that the alt nine would affect the
main principle of the measure, they would acquiesce in it.
Sir R. PEEL said it wts now quite clear that the Bill
which the House were to be called upon to consider on
Monday was a new Bill—(Hear, hear, hear),-,s-and yet it
was not the principle, but the details of this new Bill
which they were then to be called upon to consider.
They were to be called upon on Monday to determine
whether a parish in which a town was situated. was more
a town parish than a county parish. They were to be
called upon Monday to determine tnhether the elective
franchise should be conferred on a certain number of
places not hitherto mentioned. Surely it was consistent
with the strictest reins of justice that the House should
have time to toreider these propositions, His Majesty's
Government bad had four months to consider the
subject, and yet had found it necessary to change their
Plans. 'Was the House of Commons to be denied the
upportainity of fair consideration?
Lord ALTHORP could assure the Right Hon. Baronet
that there was no intention on the part of his Majesty's
Government to take the House by surprise. A full state-
ment would be made by his Noble Friend on Monday of
Rho alterations proposed in the measure, and in his (Lord
Althorn's) opinion there would be nothing in that state-
ment which ought to lead to any postponement.
General GASCOYNE seeing the Noble Member for
Tavistock now in his place, wished to ask whether there
was any thing in the propositions which that -.seine Lord
intended to make on Monday that wottL tinder unneces-
sary the instruction to the Comir,:atee which he (General
Gascoyne) had given notice of his intention to move, to
preserve the existing proportion in the representation of
the three kingdoms? Would the Noble Lord inform the
House what o.:e proposition was which he meant to pro-
pose ? It n-a 3 really impossible to go satisfactorily into
the consideration of these questions on so sudden a notice.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the Gallant General
appeared to have misunderstoenl his (Lord John Russell's)
statement. When the Gallant General moved his instruc-
tion to the Committee, he (Lord John Russell) would
/Submit to the House his sentiments upon it.
The petition was then read. On the motion that the
petition do lie on the table,

Sir E. B. SUGDEN could hardly have conceived it
possible that the Hon. and Learned Member for Water.
ford would have made the indirect attack which he had
made upon him in consequence of what had appeared in
the public prints, attributing to him acts of which he had
no cognizance whatever, and all participation in which he
Lad explicitly and publicly denied. Why did not the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman manfully come forward with a
charge, instead of covertly -44 sailing him in consequence of
passages in the papers, which had been basely and scan-
dalously directed against him ?—(Hear, hear ) He had
been cbareed by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman not only
with paying the expenses of one election out of the pro-
ceeds of another, but also with a wish to obtain a judicial
muation in which the lives and properties of numbers
'Would be rendered a matter of profit. He was not sur-
prised at such imputation from the Hon. and Learned
Member for Waterford ; they were not new from that
Hon. and Learned Member—that Hon and Learned Mem-
ber had cast them upon others; hut he (Sir E. Sugden)
threw them back with the utmost disdain and contempt.
All who knew him knew he was content with his present
station, and that he had no desire for advancement lie
might have been appointed to a judicial station over and
ever main; hut he had rejected the offer because he was de-
sirous to win his own way to independence. Was it right
or fair to take these indirect means of assailing him? In
a paper of th it day there Was an answer to his (Sir E.
Sugden's) letter on the subject in question, which we
would not condescend to notice otherwise than by declar-
ing that nine-tenths of the statements in that answer were
erandalous falsehoods. Whoever attacked any one in that
House ought to do so in an open and manly manner, and
not in the way which had been adopted by the Hon. and
Learned Member for Waterford.

Mr. O'CONNELL observed, that if he had taken notice
in that House of any part of the conduct of the Hen. and
Learned Member fur Weymouth, it was because he found
that Hon. and Learned Gentleman the advocate of Par-
liamentary corruption. He had merely used the expres-
sions which occurred in letters that had appeared in the
public prints, and which had not been denied. A person
of the name of (we believe) Northcute, had called upon
him (Mr. O'Connell), had shown Lim certain documents,
and had asked him if a loan who was guilty of the prac-
tices there described ought to be a member of the pro-
fession to which he (Mr. O'Connell) belonged. He (Mr.
O'Connell) said not. He had not used a word contained
in those documents. It was of the documents which had
been published that he spoke when he talked of the traffic
in meats, and of paying the expences of an election out of
the produce of seats. Was such a system of swindling
to be tolerated ? The documents by which those practices
had been established were before the public, and there had
been no denial of them. With respect to the language in
which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman bad indulged, he,
as well as others who had used similar expressions, knew
that they were perfectly safe; protected by the peculiar
circumstances in which he (Mr. O'Connell) was placed.
The expressions used by him (Mr. O'Connell) had been
used because he found the Hon. end Learned Gentleman
advocating the boroughmongeling system in that House.
The coneluct of the Hun. and Learned Gentleman showed
the way in which the business of the public was done in
that House. It was fitting that one who looked for in-
demnity fur his own expences out of the produce of an
elect on should oppose Reform. But should he (Mr.
O'Connell) have been worthy the station of a representa-
tive of the people, if he had not reprobated the conduct of
a man who took up opposition to Reform on a principle of
low chicanery ? Would the Hon. ant: Learned Gentle-
man call for inquiry on the subject ? Would he ask fur a
Special Committee to investigate it ? Or would he se-
cond his (Mr. O'Connell's) motion for such a Committee?
Rao, he would gratify the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
and make the motion.
Sir E. SUGDEN said the Hon. and Learned Member
had increased the offence of which he complained. It
nowappeared that in the attack which the Hon. and
Learned Member had [made up on him, he had not been led
away by the beat of the debate, but had
dresolved upon it,
because he was what ha was pleased to call the advocate of
a corrupt system. If the House were content to have
such language addressed to one of its Members, who Lad
quite as deep a stake in the country as the individual who
made use of it, it was indeed quite time that a Retbrin
should take place, hut net of
anal Learned Member advocated. hch ahneathuire as the Hon.
"and Learned
Member had repeated his attack
after he had heard
e t
him,e
declare that he had no copies of the letters
Ftro,,mtl
which
Hon. and Learned Member had alluded.
pressure of his business, nineteen-twentieths of the lettersgreat
which he wrote were written in Court. lie had not, to I
hie kn iwledge, kept copies of half a directs letters in the
course of Ina life. lie challenged the Hun. Member to
produce the originals, and to bring forward any charge
agatus t him in a direct and manly way. lie begged the
House to observe that the Hon. and Learned Member
now said he would bring the., subject before the House,
not from a sense of duty, but only because he felt
that he had acted unjustly on the present occasion,
and that it was necessary he should do something to m-
alt-ate his character. He was extremely sorry to see Mem-
bers of that House leaguing themselves with persons out
of doors: Tle charge which had been brought against
}mini with respect to the payment of the,expenses of his

lelection was seant'ialous)y false. It lt,.:'ett -said that he
tilt not pay his election expences in 1829 and 1839. lie
i'tleclared upon his honour that he had paid them all. There-
' fore the statement in th'-:?; papers on this point was about as
well founded is the staternents of the Hon. and Learned
Membr. He had denied the Whelt statement which had
?ppeared in the newspapet'a is every leading particular.
The Hon. and Le?,rntd Member said that he had seen the
'original letters. lie could not give the Hon', ami Learned
Member credit for speaking correctly on this point. The
Hon. and Learned Memlnt- had attacked him merely be-
cause the mode in t'hien he had performed his duty to the
country and the House did not please him, If tt a future
perioti Ministers should propose universal surfrage and vote
by ballot, the Hon. anti Ltd `Member would tre it them
as he had treated and state that they were not de•
serving of tbe'tomidence of the country. Before he re-
sume' Ii seat, he felt it necessary to say, that whilst, on
the one hand, he never courted a personal quart 11, sa, on
the other, he hoped that he should °ever tip found d'efi'cient
in that respect which wta ',toe to society and the feelings
of gentlemen,._! Mar, hear.)
Mr. tit.!Al. thought, that the HMI. and Darned Mem-
ber Who last spoke had violated -the regulations of the
House, by declaring that h'e did not believe the lion.
Member for Wa"..-nrti had seen certain letters, after the
Hon. Aft7-.11(:-,er fe. Waterford had stated that he hal seen
firm. lie wished the Speaker to declare hit opinion on
this point.

The SPEAKER has! !•..nrd nothing in the second
speech of the Hoa. sild Learned Member for Weymouth.
He understood the Hon. and Learned Member for Wey-
mouth to say, tat he did not believe e'te Hon. and Learned
Member for Waterford hod certain letters. He was
' not certiin, hove" r::•, that the hint riven by the Hon.
Member for: i.tiddiesex micht not he useful : he only wished
that i,laad been given at an eariier period.—(Hear, hear.)
The Hon. Member for Middlesex must have observed, on
other occasions, that when any thing was stated which
affected the character of a Member, great latltticle was and
ought to be allowed to the injured Member in making his
defence. if, after what he had said, the Hon. Member
for Middlesex should ask him whether there had been dis-
order in the con'Tasation, he would say yes ; but if lie
should farrier ask where the disorder was most apparent,
he would say in the Hon. and Learned Member for Water.
lord.—( Hear, hear.)

Lord J. RUSSELL felt that for the character of the House
some further inquiry was neccastry With respect to the
statements A'hicit had been laid before the public. He
would not say That he was satisfied that the Hon. and
Lear t.l Member was justly charged with the offences im-
peril to him, but, on the other hand, he could not say
that the denials which those statements bad hitherto re-
ceived had been such as to remove from the public mind
the impression of improper conduct on the part of the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman. He therefore hoped that
the Hon, Member for Waterford would bring forward a
motion on the subject, and that on that occasion the Hon.
and Learned Member for Weymouth would make such an
explanation as would relieve the House from any imputa-
tion on its general character.
. _

Sir E. SUGDEN had already declared his willingness
to meet any charge which could he brought against him.
Since the Noble Lord was so sensitive with respect to the
character of the House, he hoped he would not be satisfied
with the case of Weymouth, but would carry his inquiry
further, and investigate the abuses which prevailed with
respect to other boroughs, to which Government were
necessarily partite. For example, the Noble Lou! might
institute an inquiry into the state of the representation of
Bletchingley.—(Hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL hid made no charge against the
Hon. and Learne I Member, but had only expressed a wish
to have a charge investigated which affected the charac-
ter of the House. He wished the laws of the House to
be observed, and one of those laws was that the sale of
seats should not he permitted.—(Hear, hear.)—The Hon.
and Learned Member called upon him to carry his prin-
ciple into effect generally. He was doing so. With me-
spect to Bletchinglev, if the Hon. and Learned Member
would look at schedule A. of a certain Bill, be would find
that in future there would be no opportunity of selling
seats for that pbire.—( Hear.)
Mr. HUDSON GURNEY said, that as the Noble
Lord had himself contested a county, then sat fur an open
borough, and now sat for a nomination borough, he might,
perhaps, be able to give the House some valuable informa-
tion respecting the system of patronage.
The petition wa■ then ordered to lie on the table.
ABOLITION OF OATHS.

Lord NUGENT moved fur leave to bring in a Bill to
abolish certain oaths taken in the Customs and Excise.
He said that great inconvenience had been found to result
from the large number of oaths taken before the Boards.
In one year 101,590 oaths were taken in the Customs,
and 194,612 in the Excise. In answer to an application
from the Treasury, the Boards of Customs and Excise had
reported, that out of 94 classes of oaths, 92 might be
abolished, without injury to the public service. In place
of the oaths, it was proposed to substitute a declaration,
the breach of which would subject the offender to a
penalty of 1001.
Mr. O'CONNELL congratulated the country on the
present ;notion, as the first step for the abolition of all un-
necessary oaths, whether in Universities or Custom-houses.
He should therefore support the Noble Lord to the utmost
extent of his ability.
I,,ave was then gives to bring in the Bill accordingly.