The Sun.
London, England, 1831-03-24 00:00:00

IRISH REFORM BILL.

Mr. STANLEY rose to bring in the Irish Reform
Bill, and in doing so the Hon. Member observed,
the course I am now about to pursue is somewhat
unusual in not offering some observations at length on the
reading of the first Bill, yet the House will do me the jus-
tice to recollect, that I said if leave be given for me to bring
in this Bill after what had passed, I should not enter
into the minutiae of this Bill. I shall confine myself to the
main objects of the Bill, for I think every gentleman will
agree with me that, after the very long discussions—
' may say, after three very long discussions on
the general principles of Reform—any observations
from me now on those general principles would be mis-
placed, I shall therefore go into the principles of the
Bill as it affects Ireland only. There is one
circumstance to be observed in bringing forward this Bill,
that from the first to the concluding paragraph in it
there is not one disfranchising sentence.—(Cheers.)—
So far as the Bill goes, it is confined only to
the extension of the franchise. There is no taking
away of franchise, excepting as regards a few
non-resident freemen. As regards the county representa-
tion, it is proposed by this Bill to follow the principle
that has been adopted in reference to English county
representations, that is leaving the right of voting
in freeholders, and adding to them a most respectable and
independent class of people. I mean leaseholders for 21
years to the amount of 50/. a year. In this step
;we have deviated in one point from the practice
to be observed in England, inasmach as we have ex-
cluded the clause which require: that the leases should
not have been renewed within two years previous
to the election. I think any gentleman acquainted with
a large proportion of the property in Ireland will
at once perceive the reason that has induced us to do this,

because there is a very large class of p o setts who hold
, leases for twenty-one years, renewable every year, and who
would otherwise be excluded from exercising their vote.
I allude to that large class of persons who hold land
either under Corporations or under the Church. We have
thought it right in this Bill not to introduce that restrictive
clause, therefore the leaseholders to the amount of
501. a year for twenty-one years, will not be excluded
' if they should have had their lease renewed within
two years of the election taking place. With regard to
copyholders, I believe that there is only one copy-
hold estate in Ireland ; and therefore it was consi-
, tiered unnecessary to make any provision as to them.
There is one alteration, which is this, that the Clergy
shall vote, not as beneficed Clergy, but in right of their
freeholders, and be registered like any other freeholder—
Mr. O'CONNELL—To what amount ?
Mr. STANLEY-501. Then will regard to householders
renting houses to the amount of 10/. a year, or occupying
a honse which, if let to a solvent tenant, would
rentfairly anbdrintgaxels shall have
01. a
year,lleen paid up,
sinEngland,theyif their
be entitled to vote in their boroughs. We have not
thought it right to interfere with the freeholders
in cities, towns, and boroughs, but to leave all who
have sow a single vote to continue in full posses-
sion of that right. We hive provided that upon the
extinction of 40s. freeholders in towns their right of voting
I shall be assimilated to that of householders in towns.—
. There will be by this mode three classes of voters in cities
. and boroughs in Ireland, namely, freeholders of 201., 101.,
and 40s. Leaseholders for 21 years of 50/. and house-
holders paying a rent of 10/. or occupying a house which
would let for that sum to a solvent tenant. With regard
to that part of the English Bill, against which the greatest
objections have been urged—l mean the power granted
to a Committee of the Privy Council, we have
not thought fit, however, to grant to the Pi ivy
Council of Ireland the same extensive powers as those
granted to a Committee of the English Privy Council,
and therefore the powers of the Irish Privy Council will
be confined to the right of deciding what has been and
what shall be for the future the limits of Irish boroughs.
It is proposed that they shall, in the first place, take
a list of all at present claiming a right to vote,
and that that list should he subsequently subjected to the
inquiry of a hsrrister of a certain standing at law, of
whom eight should be nominated for the whole of Ireland ;
and with regard to registration, following the English plan,
we propose that every year there shall be a registration of all
persons having a right to vote. That part of the business
shall be entrusted to assistant barristers. With regard to
the duration of the poll, we propose that in towns it
should be kept open two days and no more—that in coun-
ties there shall be fifteen polling places--and that not
more than 600 electors be polled at each. In no
inconsiderable number of boroughs, although there
are no boroughs to be disfranchised, there must
be a complete destruction, not of the right of ex-
isting electors; but of the exclusiveness of their rights.
—(Applause.)—They did not mean to go according to
the mathematical ratio of population, but they did not
wish unnecessarily to interfere with existing rights, in-
asmuch as there were none of the towns which did not
carry with it sufficient weight and respectability to send
Members to this House. We do not think it right to
adopt a plan which might be more perfect in theory, but
which would interfere with and destroy existing rights.
With regard to taking away the exclusive right of the
corporations, there cannot be taken any fair ground of ob-
jection. It will not be imputed us that keeping within the
same persons who now exercise the right of sending
Members to Parliament, we are guilty of following no se-
volutionary system by extending that franchise which has so
long been monopolized by a few, to persons of respectability
that did not before possess that right.—(Hear.) • Sir, in
looking to the list now before me, the first place mentioned
is Armagh, with a population of between eight and nine
thousand, the number of voters being only thirteen. In
Belfast, with a population of 37,237, the number of
voters are only thirteen. In Carlow, with a population
of eight thousand persons, still the same mystical num-
ber of only thirteen voters is there to be found. In
Dublin, with a population of 185,000, the number of
electors is proportion itely small. In Ennis, with a po-
pulation of 6,500, we have again only 13 voters. In
Kilkenny, with 23,000 inhabitants, only 600 voters ;
in Sligo, with 9,000, the right of voting rests with
only 13 ; and in Tralee, with 7,517, we find the
same number of thirteen, who are qualified according to
the existing system, to elect a member of Parliament.
Sir, I do not think that there is any thing extravagant
in the proportion which we now advance, that the
favourite number of thirteen should no longer
continue to monopolize the elective franchises of
such places as Belfast, even if no larger than Armagh.--
But, Sir, while we propose thus not to destroy existing
rights, but to extend their rights and privileges of elec-
tive franchise, there are other places which stand forward so
prominently, not only with regard to their population, but
their wealth, commerce, and increasing prosperity, that I
am persuaded we exceed not the fair limits of moderation,
when we propose to give to four of the principal towns
that now send Members to Parliament, each one addi-
tional representative. Sir, I propose to give to Belfast,
to Limerick, to Waterford, and to the county of Gal-
way, upon this principle, one additional Member each.
It is proposed to assimilate the constituency of the Uni-
versity of Dublin to that of the Universities of Oxford and
Cambridge, and for that purpose the right of voting for the
University of Dublin, which is now enjoyed solely by the
Provost, Fellows, and seventy Junior Scholars, is proposed
by this Bill to extend the right of voting to all those who
at any time have been Scholars, and who shall at any time
within six months from the passing of the proposed Bill
place their names on the University books. In doing
this, Sir, we cannot be charged with innovation, be.
cause, by the original charters of the three Uni•
versities, the right of voting for the University of
Dublin was confined to the Provost, Fellows, and Scholars
during their lives, whilst the right to vote for the repre-
sentatives of Oxford and Cambridge was extended to all
the Masters of Arts, and by the original Charter of the
Dublin University it was provided that the election
should take place according to the usages of the
Universities of Oxford and Cambridge ; hut, besides re-
verting to the original Charter, there is another reason for
extending the right of voting to the Members of that Uni-
versity ; and that reason I shall shortly state to the
House. Sir, in order to become a scholar of the
University of Dublin it is necessary to pass through a
very severe examination, and no young man who is not of
distinguished talents can obtain a scholarship. By ex-
tending the right of voting we do away with an anomaly;
for according to the present system, a young man
of the age of eighteen might obtain a scholarship, and
therefore a vote for the University, but at the end of five
years that right is lost. Now, Sir, this ap. -1 to me
deserving of remedy; for I think a young mao who ob-
tained a Scholarship at the age of eighteen is more
capable at the end of five years, when he is deprived of
the right of voting, of exercising a sound judgment as to
the fittest person to represent the University, than
whilst he had enjoyed that privilege, because at
that age he acts upon his own judgment, uninfluenced
by and disengaged from the trammels of his tutor, who is
generally a junior fellow, and which juniors have a great
influence in the election. This limitation is not ac-
cording to the original Charter, for by that Charter
the right of the scholars to vote for the University
terminated only with their lives ; but by a subsequent
chatter it was provided that the scholars should, after five
years' enjoyment, forfeit the stipendia which they en-
joyed as scholars; by a coarse, and, in my opinion, an un-
constitutional construction of that clause which took away
the stipendia, it was held that the right of voting
was also taken away. 1 know that this subject was dis-
cussed before a Committee of the House of Commons, and
that the decision of the Committee was in favour of that
construction; but I also know, that some of the highest
law authorities in Ireland, and among them I nay mention
the present Lord Chancellor of Ireland, were of opi-
nion that taking away the stipendia by the latter
charter did not take away the right of voting granted
by the original charter, and for these reasons it is
thought fit to restore the right granted by the original
charter. Sir, as I said befo;e, it is intended to assimi-
late, as far as is possible, the state of the Universities
ofEngland and Ireland, and when I take into consideration
that the Scholar, of the University of Dublin were a
body of men who had distinguished themselves in
youthful days, and who had afterwards filled some
of the highest institutions in the law, in the church,
and in other professions, I think it is not going
too far to say that, whilst each of the English
Universities is represented by two Members, the
Irish Universities should also have the privilege
of sending two Members to Parliament. These, Sir, are
the only increase which we mean to make to the repre-
sentation of Ireland,—namely, four representatives
from the large cities, and one from that enlightened
body, the University of Dublin. But we propose to make
a large increase in the number of the constituent body. I
have gone through all the parts of the Bill, with one or two
exceptions, which I shall now beg leave to mention. An
Lion, and Gallant Member introduced a Bill this Session,
providing that where a man possessed two freeholds,
neither one or the other of which was of the value of
10/., but which together were equal to that sum, should

Pitarilsiamcetnistt,:nvarey pfr:rpo
have a vote as a 101. freeholder. Sir, as different
terpretations have been put by the Barons as
the right of a person so situated to vote for Mernii
ratory of that right. In that Bill there was alaL,!,
relative to the cautionary notice which . r
in Ireland, and we propose to do away wi,
bower?!
the necessity of that notice. I have,
fully seated the measure' which it is proposed to bri
in with regard to Ireland, and I shall be re';
to explain the re isons of any difference between t,
provisions of this Bill and the Roform Bill of Englini
ing of the Bill sh ill take place until! give
ge r
as I do not intend to propose that the second rea(
cseandtiodati:trotdouce a clause ded,
in order that the people of Ireland may have 6
opportunity of judging of its provisions, offer
, mere;
shali have been printed. I, therefore, shall no.
move this tl:e Bill he brought in and read a first time.
Colonel ERENCII objected to the Bill.
of Atif,er.BoiT, (h)oNtNhoEpLe(Li
thatsa ld.
tliiecotai:irdeeerdatsivointlithtleie
ip.roipn:siTyhl
. f
at
the e 1 ereectie3,l
of it would think there ought to be an extension o'
Members to the Irish counties.
Mr. LEADER followed, and was left speaking•

HOUSE OF LORDS.
the
Sir A. GRANT, Mr. R. TREVOR, and others from
House of Commons, brought up several private Bill°ola-
Mr. Vizard, the Lord Chancellor's secretary of
by
the
ruptcies, brought up a return of the fees receive
Comsnissioners of 13ankrupts for the last three Yeats' eti-
The Bishop of BATH and WELLS presented 3,fered
Lion from Bath against the Beer Bill, which be con
as having a tendency to demoralize the people. to the
The LORD CHANCELLOR bore testimony
bad effects of the Bill, particularly in the Northern sO.
Western parts of England, and thought it extremelYt.'on to
nary for his Majesty's Ministers to give their attenii
the effects produced by it. bolderi
Earl GREY presented a petition from the free
30,10
of Down, signed by upwards of 1,300 persons, in f
of Reform. er
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY did not °ol,s,,ldert
the petition as expressing the sentiments of the free"blity,
of Down, it was not signed by one person of resnect,' rton,
it had been got up in a private room in Dum°7be
and though signed by 1,300 persons, yet it lloljers
remembered there were upwards of 25,000 free to-
in Down, and it would not therefore be taken a 5 cart he
ing the feelings of the county. With all the re'rAll-
felt for the Noble Earl at the head of bts that
jesty, s Government, he must say however, goof,
whenever lie introduced his measure to this se•
he said it was to he an efficient and moderate Ll'
form. It certainly was efficient, but where to
deration was to be found he could not iliacc'fd vote
It was only a resting place toainiversal suffrage antyoel,i
by ballot. If the measure even passed, it 4.001
certainly do nothing more than turn our tin. 1141,1
Constitution, into all that anarchy and misery wh'e there
deluged foreign countries. He asserted that, jety'l•
had been an undue influence exercised by his its`A'd the
Government in stating that the measure had receipt beta
royal apprubation. The people of England hartoitled
deceived by such insinuation, and he M3in, tt
that the threats of dissolving Parliament which ilsu t•tae
hell out should the me sure not pass was unworthy °oat
Noble Earl at the Lead of his Majesty's Gover°loarf.
The principle of the measure had been termed revolnt'°
—(Hear, hear, hear.)—lle, however, was pot
,tai,
posed to give it that epithet. He, however,
dered that it would be the ruin of the AristoeracYtios
Minister of the Crown could form an Adoliniaitr-tbo
if the Bill was carried into effect. He belieou Mites
if the Aristocracy did not rally round theo:n to
they would soon find that the House would be shailii be
its foundation, and that the power of the Crown ri'oo
every day ditninished.—(Hear, hear.) Wialch
Earl GREY said, that with respect to the petition
etsalc
the Noble Lord had stated was signed by no one resPe,ost'
individual, lie had received it as a petition
ing from a county meeting, and held under the
rity of the High Sheriff. No opposition Wilateveiti'tti
been made at this meeting, and the P-0180'
was agreed to by upwards of 1,300 persons, every todo'
whom was registered as a freeholder of ten P°ooo,
The Noble and Learned Lord had asserted that 11° Pit tie:
had signed the petition, but those of the very i°Wie-yor°
scription. He would at once contradict the Nob
signed
in that assertion, by stating that it vissol":
by the High Sheriff, by Mr. Alexander Nr'toos'
a physician of great eminence, and by Mr. Ford,
inset'
time represented the county of Down in Parlial
The noble Marquis had stated that the measure h$ 'loo'
met with the universal approbation of the country' noble
he most positively asserted in the presence of the ,f he
Lords who were capable of contradicting bin( , ;Mr
stated that which was not the fact, he stsie°,',aera,
there never did prevail in this country e°
a sentiment in favour of any measure --(Hear, lieseotsr/
that which had been expressed in favour of Parlisir h tit
Reform. With respect to the principle on 'Ili!: aes,
measure proceeded, he would not be induced On t"to-reePt°
sion to follow the Noble Lord through his at,' Or
on the merits of the Bill, as these arguments
sisted merely in. stating assertions of opinicWthat the
without foundation. He however, would state fInY
""totallY,
principle of the measure was a principle of II.; %arnelY
thing which the present state of things requireoo
iin alteration of the representation of the pelle Its e'er,'
liament. Among the most strenuous opposition's ow'
had not been found a single individual wh°„t ths
deny that proposition for the purpose of bearing °t- br
argument he would refer to the division 63 pet
taken place in the House of Commons the otberoeie
How had that division been obtained hut by tbefiefor'd
sion of every cne present of the necessity of sotrie
It had been stated in that House, that if the eta
reading was not carried, that acting upon t'txrii, I's
ciple which had been now proposed by 3fint 11,°,°,re
other measure of Reform—though not the sa,"-t'berrat
he brought forward in favour of that principle; by
he had not only the declarations of the pelnr:s
the unanimous vote of the House of Comul-Itos'ii,
both sides, and that too in one of the fulleapiolao
that ever was assembled. The Noble
La; 0,0;0
was an advocate for a bit by bit Reforrn--tu.totieev
satisfy nobody and disappoint the people. InA.j,, oft :he
himself, he must say, that on the first `',01:00
session ; so strong was he convinced of the Po:l7opin; e
measure, that he there stated it to be 4.be
that it was one of the best measure,' that t aad_'of
could adopt to conciliate the people of the cotintris't, gress,
store ;hat confidence in Parliament which waso his P 6,
wanted. Acting upon that principle, he had
jests, when he was pleased to honour him With ro
'fence, that he could not serve him unless be if3!o,
to propose to the Parliament that measure 14;j
which had been brought forward. The Nu eferite,
quis had said that undue influence had beellal
by his Majesty's Ministers in the use of theß°y fettrhat
On reflection he had no doubt he ss'r+tlioes tog
that observation for it must be n°t°r; 'Otters,
when a measure was introduced as a rneati-e/klilli°4oo
with the approbation of his Majesty sent
it could not be introduced without t° vrere. the
of the Monarch, whose servants theY.„iji 0, re-
such effect would be produced by the P 04%0,
which was apprehended by the Noble I.°r, t aOY to
spect to the ballot. He denied in tot() tP. •ster'
)ll°'
due influence had been used by /gear, , to
procure the votes of the other House.---t. v
Ctrs °n
hear.) The Noble Marquis had also oiled Ile
threats which had been held out, and tibject.
him to make some declaration upon thee sc,,q.,tionbeat.,)
should at one say, he would make no such d '"t
ears tract
this measure he would either stand or de
lots
Ile would not consent to anything that 7:ll°llfeae ?dip;
from its expediency. There might be
_sooo,:itbstaeS ths°,
that required correction, but osertiorts'
from its efficiency would do for him. "%onstio_rael
it was not a revolutionary measure, but
the arietoti the
measureohat so far from being subversive 0111'100er of Ass
i
it would be its best support. He was a log arose °
aristocracy, but should only remain so
ossr pot the
cAo
itn connected Aristocracy
a cayld"bv,iyatlnittaakaglieln.ganidrTotiihnneitttendeemawsuitarhpeoawwlleofrtisuroppo rootts
to the people.
(LEFT SITTING.)
60.
r -
On the 2lld inst. Mrs. Wright,BnlT HoPEust,°"ql,qut:sgare'''°°f j3°
On the 01st inst. the lady of T. T• sir" Dr.
';‘f`litrt's, tract, of a son.
MARRIED. rte. ,roo,
On the lCth inst. at Edinburgh, by the`,,;,, of gal°
James Gregory Voe, eldest son of Dr.
Mary, second daughter of Robert Purdie, yotiapicna,
E.tinburgh. rY, 11" On the thld inst. at St. George's, piste,BloomsbU.guac;_
eldest son of W. Young, Esq., otllighbV.burj
eldest daughter of John Hardy, Ey+, mrie,
sell-square. „iaryieat.
On the _2d inst. at All Souls Church, civi " t
of
eorge Turner, of Cambridge. to Mary, et
Francis Calder. k Mr. A
M(a)rnkeitl:tionn,t.t:tEli4z7t,rsgeec'so'nrculatuhgle-r' °I rah
or Newington, surrey. ra
r
ylptloo Y°'
PRINTED IND f'usug,,, yr
SUN OFFICE, 1112, STRAND,