The Sun.
London, England, 1836-04-30 00:00:00

SEE OF DURHAM.

The los. MEmaEn also present a petition from Durham,
pray tug, that in the event of the revenues of the see of Our-
ham
being curtailed, the surp!us might be applied to the reli-
gious and moral education of the people of that county.
Mr. 13 11 OTH E RION had been requested to support the
prayer of the petition from Durham. In doing so he would merely
take occasion to remark that in that county where the eccle-
siastical revenues were the largest, the condition of the people
with regard to education was the most deplorable.
Mr. TREVOR was obliged to protest against the s'ate-,
ment just made in the strongest manner. Hr would be on!.
worthy of the situation which he held, the representative of a
large clerical constituency, if he sat still and• hea-d such a
charge made without giving it a decided contradiction.
Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition from Worcester in
favour of the Manchester and Chester Railway Bill.
Mr. ANG EIZ STE IN brought up the Report of the Green-
wich Improvement Bill.
Sir R. FERGUSON moved the 3d Reading of the Not-
tingham Cemetery Bill. Read a third time and passed.
COUNTY RATES.

Mr. ESTCOURTwished to know from the llon. Gentle-
man opposite (Mr. Shaw Lelovre) when he expected the
Report of the Commissioners on County Rates would he pre-
sented ?

Mr. S. LEFEVRE said that he expected the Report
would be made shortly. •
REGISTRATION OF VOTERS' BILL.

On the motion of the ATTORNE Y-GENER AL, the
House went into Committee on this Bal. Mr. BERNAL. in
the Chair. .

Clauses 49 and 50 were then agreed to.
On clause 51 being read,
Mr. DUNCOMBE wished to add the clause of which he
had given notice, the object being that no tenant should be
deprived of his vote in consequence of his landlord having
cesrapounded with the parish for the parochial rate.
The ATTORNE Y-G ENE RAL objected to the clause on
the ground of irregularity.
Mr. DUNCOM BE said the object of the clause was to
place the electors of boroughs on the footing of those of coun-
ties. He hoped his Majesty's Attorney-General would give
some reason for his objection besides the grounds which he
had stated. He (Mr. Duncombe) maintained that his
amendment was perfectly regular.
The amendment having been put from the chair,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL would feel it his duty to
oppose the motion. In the first place it was quite irregular,
and the Hon. Member was endeavouring to do indirectly
what he could not do directly. The present was quite a dis-
tinct and specific clause, and had no relation to that to which
it was said to be an amendment. He objected to it further,
inasmuch as the present Bill did not seek to make any change in
the qualification in the franchise, it was mere)), a Bill to facilitate
the registration of voters. He was not bound, he thought, to
enter upon the merits of the question, but he apprehended it
would open the door to much fraud.
Mr. KEMP totally differed from the view taken by his
Right Hon. Friend the Attorney-General. He thought the
amendment would be highly advantageous.
After a few words from Captain PaCUELL,
Mr. ROBINSON said he supposed the Hon. Member for
Finsbury would be satisfied if the Attorney-General would re-
cognize the principle embodied in his resolution. He (Mr.
R.) warmly supported the principle.
Mr. DUNCOMBE thought the Attorney-General was
rendering the Bill as vexations as it was possible. He would
divide the House.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said his only object was
to preserve the franchise as it was before.
The Gallery was then cleared for a division, when there
appeared—
For the clause as it stood
For the amendment

Majority .

~.. 97

The clause was then-agreed to.
On the 52d clause being put, Mr. PEMBERTON said he
had heard with the greatest pleasure what had fallen from the
Attorney-General, because unquestionably on the same prin-
ciples his Hon. and Learned Friend must support him (Mr.
Pemberton) in his opposition to the present clause.—( Hear.)
He (the Attorney-General) had stated that it was no part of
the object or principle of their Bill to alter the right of vot-
ing, and that its object was to provide a more convenient re-
gistration, and to remove any doubts that existed as to the
present right of voting. If, therefore, he found that this clause
was-one which beyond all doubt altered the right of voting,
and destroyed existing qualifications, and made new ones, he
called upon him (the Attorney-General), in common consist-
ency, whether he approved of this clause or not, to concur with
him (Mr. Pemberton) in throwing this clause out of the Bill.
The clause stated that doubts existed upon the subject. Now
no doubts did exist, and if they did, the clause would not
remove them. Ile wished that either land alone or houses
alone should give the right of voting.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said the clause was intended to
remove doubts which existed, and for the better registration of
voters. The framers of the Reform Act were aware that it
would become necessary, from time to time, to take measures
for the purpose of explaining parts of the Act, and that it would
be requisite to apply to Parliament to make amendments in it.
The object of the clause was to entitle any person occupying
a house or shed-or tenement with land attached, to have the
value of that land included in the valuation.—(Hear, hear.)
He could net agree to omit the clause altogether, but he had
no objection to put the other one to the sense of the House.
Mr. PEMBERTON hoped if the Noble Lord brought in
a Bill to disfranchise these voters, he would also bring in a
Bill to disfranchise the forty-shilling voters of Dewsbury.
Mr. W. PRAED said he would oppose the clause decidedly,
and would divide the House upon it.
Mr. E\VART would cordially support the clause of the
Hon. Member opposite (Mr. Pemberton).
Mr. M.LE AN also supported the clause.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL opposed it.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL opposed the clause.
Mr. S. WORTLEY said that the effect of not inserting
the proposed clause would be the means of disfranchising 18
or 20 persons.
After a few words from Mr. C. Woon,

Sir J. GRAHAM objected to the clause as it stood, on ac-
count of the inequality to which it gave rise. It gave an
advantage to the voters in boroughs and towns over these in
the agricultural districts. If the Noble Lord (Lord J„ Rus-
sell) would consent to the omission of the words " not being a
house, warehouse, counting-house, or shop," he thought that
it would remedy this inequality.
Mr. C. BULLEIt thought the proposition of the Hon.
Bart. very fair, except as it applied to the word Dwelling
House.
After a few words from Mr. C. BULLER 'and Lord JOHN
Russ6.l.l„
Sir ROBERT PEEL wished to put on record his objec-
tion to the clause altogether, inasmuch as it was a dangerous
precedent in a Bill professing to facilitate the registry, to
introduce a clause changing the qualification itself.
The clause, as amended, was then agreed to.
After a few words from Mr. G. F. YOUNG, Mr. PRAM
and Sir I'. FRE MANTLE, which, together with the r.st of the
debate, was uttered in a broken, colloquial, and inaueible tone,
the House divided.

“S, /V ••• • • v
On our re:urn to the gallery, it was understood that the
amendment had been agreed to without a division.
Clauses 53, 54, and 55 were agreed to.
Clause 56 was struck out.

And on dlause 57 being proposed,
The ATTORNRY-GENERAL moved as an amendment
that the third question to be put to the voter, as to the pro.
perty for which he proposed to vote being the same for which
he was registered, be left out, and also to insert words to make
the register conclusive evidence on the point of continued qua-
lification.

On Clan:o 57, the ATTORNEY-GENERAL proposed
as an amendment that in all eases the registry shall taken as
conclusive evidence of the right of voting of all electors whose
names are therein contained. _

Sir J. GRA lI A M opposed the amendment, and after some
discu:ision, in which several Members took part, the Clause as
amended was agreed to.
Clause 53 was also agreed to, with a verbal amendment.
The remaining clauses of the Bill, together with the sche-
dules, were then agreed to.
Mr. E. DENISON moved an additional clause, to the
effect of increasing the number of polling-places in counties
where it might he necessary to do so.
Lord E B IN GTO N supported the motion.
The clause was then agreed to.
Several other clauses were also amended and agreed to, and
the chairman reported the Bill to the House.

The House tlien resumed.
The Bankruptcy (Scotland) Bill went through committee.
The Cessio Bonorum (Scotland) Bill also went through
committee.

Mr. Bernal brought up the Reports on the Bastards' Testa-
ments (Scotland) Bill, and the Commissary Courts (Edin-
burgh) Bill.

INSTRUMENT OF SAS!NE (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The LORD ADVOCATE moved that the House resolve
into committee on the Instrument of Sasine (Scotland) Bill.
Mr. A. JOHNSTONE wished the further proceeding with
the Bill tobeyostporied.

Mr. WALLACE opposed the postponement.
Captain GORDON wished to know if this Bill differed
froni the Bill of last year, which was rejected by the House
on the ground that it did not affect eases upon which actions
had been brought, which were still pending.
The LORD ADVOCATE said that the present Bill did
differ in that respect from the Bill of last year, for it embraced
all cases, as well those under litigation as those which were
not, for it went to bar all actions pending or in contemplation.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the Bill would
not have done sufficient justice or service if it did not put a
stop to all litigation.
The Bill then went through Committee, and was ordered to
he reported.
The Court of Session (Scotland) Bill was read a second
time.