The Sun.
London, England, 1831-08-06 00:00:00

would be only nine Wry-hrs. Tie would ask how werel
the interests of the iron manufacture to find a due share
in the representation under these new enactments ? Al-
though the population of Merthyr Tydvil appeared, by
the returns of 1821, to he no more than between 17,000
and 18,000 (but if the suburbs were taken in, the whole'
amount would be nearly 20,000), the population, accord-
ing to the returns of 1831, amounted to 26,000. In-
stead of giving that place a representative, his Majesty's
Ministers threw it in as a paltry addition to a distant sea-
port, which had already its representatives. It was un-
necessary to speak of the injustice done to Cardiff itself by
the new arrangement.—(Hear, heir.) For these reasons
he could not consent to give a Member to the suburb of

Newcastle.
Mr. WOOD did not wish to prolong the discussion,
hut he wished to state one or two facts to correct the

stitements of Hon. Gentlemen opposite respecting Gates
head and Newcastle. Those places were in different
parishes, were under different jurisdictions, and were even
situated in different counties.—(Hear, hear.) But no
one could say respecting Hull and Sculceates, where the
one ended and the other began—(Hear, hear)--and more-
over (what was still more important), the assessment for
the poor-rates was the same in the two places. As to
what the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said respecting the
deficient representation of Glamorganshire, he would en'y
remark that Durham would have only one Member foi

~...-....
every 34,000 inhabitants, whilst Glamorgan would have

one for every 29,000.
Sir H. lIARDINGE rose reluctantly on that (pet-
tion, on account of predilections for the county of Dur-
ham. He had represented the city for several years in
that House, and he would be anxious, in the present struggle
for representatives, to obtain a large share for that
county. He was glad that two Members had been given
to Sunderland. That was no more than the fair distri-
bution. No one could doubt that the town of Durham
ought to retain its two Members. He thought it was
only reasonable that South Shields should have one repre-
sentative. But although be had as strong a desire to in-
' crease the representation of Durham as an Hon. Member
opposite showed on the preceding night to add to that of
Staffordshire, he must say, that Gateshead was no more
than a suburb, and that it had no right to send a Member
to that House.—(Hear.)
Mr. SADLER did not know upon what system of cal-
culation the Hon. Member opposite proceeded.
An HoN. AIEMBER, said that Gateshead was in a se-
parate parish and county, and under a separate jurisdiction
front Newcastle. It had a very large population, its
manufactures were considerable, and it was wholly inde-
pendent of Newcastle. The statements made respecting
that manor by the Right Hon. Baronet opposite were taken
from hearsay only.
Sir H. HARDINGE happened to know the circum-
stances of Gateshead front his own observation, as he had
canvassed the whole manor several times. He had not
_

had indeed the advantage of dining there in public with the
Hon. Member who spoke last, and of making a most re-
markable speech there. lie was sure he would consult
the good taste of the House more by not alluding par-
ticularly to a speech which was made there at a public
dinner. He was sure, however, that if he chose to refer

to that speech, he should s tti,fy the Committee as to what
was the sort of respectability which Gateshead possessed.
He repeated that the place was a suburb of an inferior class.
The Hors. AlEmurn (to whom the last speaker had re-
plied) said that the statements of the Hon. and Gallant
Baronet sufficiently proved that he knew very little about
the place. The experience of the Gallant Baronet had
been confined to the three or four times when he can-
vassed there. But in estimating the value of his obser-
vation on those three or four occasions, the Committee
would bear in mind that be canvassed, not the great body
of the inhabitants or the freeholders, but the few freemen
of the city of Durham who resided there, and were very
little connected with Gateshead. _

..... .....
Mr. CHATOR was understood to express surprise that
any one who knew Gateshead would say that it was a
mere subui b.
Mr. PRAED opposed the giving a Member to that
suburb. He considered the case of I-lull and Sculcoates
quite parallel.
Mr. STUART WORTLEY said, that although I e
had a deep interest in the coal trade, from which was de-
rived all the importance which Hon. Gentlemen attributed
to Gateshead, yet he would maintain that it had not always
been independent of Newcastle, and that it was not en-
titled to a separate representation. Rochester the Ministers
bad united to Chatham, though these places had separate
jurisdictions ; and, therefore, that Gateshead had a sepa-
rate jurisdiction from Newcastle could not be argued by
the Ministers as a reason for not uniting them. Portsmouth
and Portsea were similarly situated. The population of
Portsmouth was to be overwhelmed by the population of
Portsea—the latter having 35,000, and the former only
19,000. This argument, therefore, would apply to
Gateshead as well as to Portsmouth ; Gateshead and New-
castle had the same trade and the same interests. There
was no difference between them, and they ought not to have
separate Members.
Sir C. WETHERELL said, that there was a determi-
nation laid down that Gateshead should have a Member ;
and coute qui coute Gateshead was to have a Member.—
They were retaining Gateshead in the Bill in direct oppo-
sition to their own principles; and such Ministerial and
Parliamentary audacity, such numerical boldness, he had
never before witnessed. Gateshead was the violet of the
Bill, to borrow a phrase of an Hon. Friend of his, but he
meant to say nothing of its perfume ; for it was non re-
dolet see! °let --(A laugh.) It was either a case of par-
tiality or gross ignorance. He would allow the gentle
men ,opposite to take their choice between these two,
but in either cal/4e they were to blame. It would be of
little consequence if this Bill were to be only a prospectus
of a Constitution, anti not that final measure which it was

described to be. It was said that Gateshead was a srnal

place, but the inns were probably good, as he remembered
something of a speech delivered there, which was not de-
livered at the King's Head, or the Crown, or Sceptre, or
the Mitre, or any one with a similar symbol. There were
parts of the Bill which the majority regarded as unjust,
but which they resolved to support, unjust though they
were, because it was the Ministerial measure. Even the
Hon. Baronet (the Member for Westminster), who had
been 35 years in Parliament, and boasted of his inde-
pendence, even be had declared that he would support the
Bill, though he disapproved of part of it. It was useless
to divide against the clause when the majority predestined
them to defeat.
Capt. STANHOPE supported the motion, and thought
he was warranted in doing so, by Gateshead having 11,000
inhabitants.
Mr. WEYLAND was not pledged one way or another,
:rod he had heard nothing which could justify him in
voting for Gateshead, and he would, therefore, give his
cordial support to the motion for excluding it. Those gen-
tlemen who were pledged to support the Bill would not,
he was sure, give their support to those parts of it which
were not just.
Lord GRA.NVILLE SOMERSET said Glamorgan,
and the county he represented, had made complaints to
the Minister of not being safilciently represented under the
Bill. They were not so fortunate as the county of Dur-
ham. He hoped the coal-fields of the south and west would
receive as much from the Noble Lord's opponents as the
coal-fields to the north.
Sir 11. lIARDINGE said lie had heard no reason why
Gateshead should receive an additional Member, and should
riot be united to Newcastle, while Cardiff was to be united
to Alerthyr-Tidvil, at twenty-five miles distance, and had
a population of 30,000. Around this seat of our manu-
factures, there were 180,000 people, as lie was informed,
unrepresented. He did not understand, therefore, why an
additional Member was to be given to Gateshead, while an
additional Member could not be given to that part of the
country. TiliLze was no part of the Bill so objectionable,
as this of giving a Idanber to Gateshead.
Lord ALTH0111) thought he bail already given suffi-
cient IT:lion for including Gateshead in the schedule ; and,
if they were pot satisfactory to the Hon. Baronet, he could
not help that.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY stated, that the two towns were
separate; and he could assure the House, that the people
of Newcastle would not begrudg.e the power it was pro-
posed to give to Gateshead. There was not any other
town in Durham so well entitled to have a Member as
Gateshead. Itz thought the importance of the town de-
manded a representative; ,-,epd if it acquired one, he would
be returned independent of any improper influence, and
he would be the representative of the inhabitants.
Sir ROBERT FEEL did not suppose that the people
of Newcastle would object to having three Members.—
'Hear, hear.) Newcastle would be the last place to
complain of this additional honour. What did the Hon.
Baronet tell them ? Why that be represented Gateshead,
and that he would be shorn of part of his beams if he no
longer represented Newcastle. Tire lion. Baronet was
the representative of Gateshead.—(Hear, hear.) There
leunitedwas no pretence whatever for giving a new Member to
Gateshead. Ne:vcastle had only 33,000 inhabitants, and
Gateshead only 11,000. They were close together ; 7
they
Ss ell in trade,
e systemtradbalandtlierefooref tlieyiglitl)e
included in
irepresentation.
When they were about to disfranchise half the boroughs
monstrous in the kingdom, it was most strange and
hear the Noble Lord talk of the ancient rights of New-
castle as a reason fur preserving its franchise unaltered
and unimpaired. When they were about to sluice all tire