The Sun.
London, England, 1841-04-27 00:00:00

valuations hitherto made had not been altogether satis—
factory ; but for other purposes, for the purpose of the•
administration of the Poor-laws it was necessary th it t hat
valuation should be correct. He was convinced that tie
machinery to accomplish this object wa: already
in existence. Under all circumstances this valuatltsa
would be one which had no reference to the claim so
vote. The parties would have a direct pecuniJry in—
terest in avoiding too high a valuation, and this would.
always be stronger than the desire to obtain the fran-
chise ; if wrong in any respect, it wnutel. he
that the property would generally he emeulatcd
upon rather a low scale. But then the im-
portant question arose, what amount of interest,.
so ascertained, should confer the right of voting ?
If they were to take so high an amount as 10/. excess
of value, as shown by the assessment to the Poor-
rates above the rent paid, they would practically raise
tie franchise even higher than was contended for by
those Gentlemen who had taken the solvent tenant t

He (Lord Howick) thought that in adopting mea-
sure of this kind they should look a little furthi r. If
they looked back to the history of what had
occurred in 1832, they would see that it w, ,s
the intention of Parliament to make sltne

extension of the right of voting as it then existed. That
such was the intention of those who introduced the.
Reform Act, seemed to him perfectly obvious front
their recorded speeches. He should propose, there!orc,
that in adopting the principles to which he referred.
they should take a lower amount of excess beyond the
rent than 101. In applying a test of increase di
severity, they were bound to make a con-
siderable abatement in the . amount of interest

constituting the right to vote. In the amend-
ment which he was about to move, Le should pro-

pose that a sun of 5/. excess of value beyond tho
rent and charges to which the person who laid cl tiirr
to vote was liable, should be sufficient to qualify
him to enjoy the franchise. He thought the
Honourable Gentlemen on that side of thc

House ought to agree to this proposal.
The words of the clause, which was introduced last
year into the Bill by the Right Hon. and Learned
Gentleman the Attorney-General for Ireland, were—
" That the beneficial interest should be defined the
profit or advantage derived or derivable by surds
claimant from such premises, after deducting the
tithes-rent charge, and their expenses, it any, of
cultivating the same." Tne Right Honour-
able and Learned Gentleman admitted that 10!.
profit beyond all these charges ought to constitute the
right to vote. In the recent debate, when he (Lord
Howick) contended that the occupant's own labour way
not to be deducted in calculating the beneficial interest,
the Hon. and Learned Gentlemen, the Member for Dub-
lin, himself corrected him (Lord Howick), and said that
it was never contended that any such ,construction
should be put on the law—that a fair deduction was
to be made for the value of the occupant's own
labour. If, then, those deductions were to bet
made, he (Lord Howick) could not clear's•
understand what line of distinction could be drawn by
Hon. Gentlemen between the clause proposed and that.
course suggested on the opposite side. He was really
at a loss to discover, speaking only technically and
legally, what could be tie difference between the con-
struction of the beneficial interest contended for by the
Hon. and Learned Member !or Dublin, and that by
the gentlemen on the other side of the House.—(Hear.)
interest than 101., would not be vary unfairly repre-
sented by .5/. excess of value beyond the rent, as in
the manner he (Lord H.) professed. If the Hoo. and
Learned Gentleman's construction of the existing law
was to be taken, his (Lord H.'s) proposition might be
considered a fair substitute and equivalent for the ex-
isting law. If that were granted that 51. excesses of
value beyond the amount of rent payable was the bene-
ficial interest, as contemplated by Parliamea when the
existing law was passed—if such would be the effect
of the clause, he could see no good reason for rejecting
the amendment he proposed. Taking the admission
of the Hon. Gentlemen on the other side of the House
during the recent debate, that it was necessary to form
some easily ascertained test, Le thought they could
hardly consistently reject his proposal. Neither,
be thought, could Hon. Gentlemen on that side reject it.
The effect of adopting the amendment he proposed
would be to continue a class of voters to whom he was
sure no plausible objection could be made. All those
voters who claimed a right to vote in respect of a free-
hold in fee, not for a mere technical freehold hut
one consisting of a freehold for lives, all these voters
would receive gre it advantage from adopting the
amendment he (Lord Howick) proposed, and in the
same manner it was perfectly obvious that all persons
who paid a low rent for their property accordine to the
clause as proposed by the Noble Lord (Lord itlorpeth)
could not claim a right of voting unless their property
was actually rated at 8/. Perhaps now a person
voted for property that was not worth more
than 5/.—why was such a man to be disfran-
chised ? In the SPITItt manner persons who weir!
1/. rent 'or land, and had greatly improved it,
basing perhaps reclaimed it teem some bog or niourtsia
land, might have made it worth something less than el.
These persons would have a right to vote under his (Lord
Hooiek's) clause, but would be excluded from that right
by the clause of his Noble Faiend. Surely he (Lord
Howick) was not called upon to argue that it was desirable
these men should not have votes. He found in a Report
on the table of the House that electors who were rated at
small sums, so far as they were ascertained, paid an ex-
ceedingly low rent. In the Bandon ULion there were
two of these persons, one of them had fifteen acres, being-
subject to no rent, and was rated at 71. 10,- and the
other had ten acres, and was rated at 4/. These persons
would vote under his clause, but would he excluded by
that of his Noble Friend. This clause as it stood would
exclude some of the best and most intelligent persons
who enjoyed the right of voting under the exsting low.
He was aware that he should be told that the amendm. ent
he was about to propose would admit some voters on the
franchise who would be excluded by the clause of its
Hon. Friend, and on the other hand if might be said that
leaving the law as it stood would have the effect of greatly
restricting the constituency of Ireland. Many Hon.
Members might be inclined to resist his amendment and
support the clause of his Noble Friend, because they
thought it absolutely necessary to supply the deficiency in.
the constituent body in Ireland. lie agreed with them
in that necessity, and he certainly did not propose that
that should be the only change adopted: On the coo-
teary, it appeared to him that it was necessary that setae
further measures should be adopted, in order to prevent.
the franchise front Icing confined to very much fewer
hands than was desirable. But the question was how that
was to be accomplished ? His Noble Friend proposed
that it should be done by giving the right of voting to all
persons rated so low as 8/. who had a lease for not less
than fourteen years. The proposition which he would
submit was (and he thought it right to explain his two•
propositions at the same time. although there was no ne-
cessary connection between them) aed it would be for toe
House to adopt or reject it as they thought pro-
per. The difference between his Noble Friend
and himself was this—that his Noble Friend proposed to'
have a very low amount of ratirg as conferring the fran-
chise, but that such persons should have a lease for not
less than fourteen years. He (Lord Howiek) wished to
propose to the House that a very considerably higher
amount of rating should be insisted upon as the qualifica-
tion, hut that no lease should be insisted on—that the
yearly tenant should be admitted to the franchise in corn--
mon with
the tenant for fourteen years. One of the.
motives which induced him to propose those changes was
that, in his opinion, supposing some additional franchise to
Le requisite in Ireland, it was of the utmost importance
that it should be so firmed as net to give rise to further
demands of the same kind in future. He strongly held
the oninion so frequently and so ably insisted nn by his
Noble Friend the Secretary
of State for the Colonies,
that time recurrence cf political changes was in itself an
evil of the oreatest magnitude.—(Hear, hear.) lie'
wished to avoid as far as was practicable any attempt to dis-.
turb the distribution of power established by the Reform
Act; but he could not help thinking that the clause,
as proposed, would be very objectionable on that
head. (Hear.) He thought it would be so,
both inasmuch as it would produce a totally new class of
voters, a class of voters unliae any other which at this nioo
talent was to be foond, he believed,d in anyotheirtt)mortioof the
kingdom ; whom lowertitst Reform)os Act had.c-
(sass of voters h
eiety than any trar the proposition
extended the franchise. On t e con
ii y
and also a class hotloinga
1 of the Reform Act. He found that
l strictly on the ana,ogy
a lease was entitled to the
which he wished to submit to the ouse was founded
in England a 501. tenant without
of Ireland. By doing
so similar right to the people
grant a simi
could lye rise to
it did not appear to hint that they wo . g
113,
franchise ; and it would be but a natural proceeding to
sfesh claims on the part of the people of this country ; but
perceetly•
When he said a similar right he did not mean to say that he
thought the payment of a rent of 501. would form a desire..
well as the very great subdivision,
obvious
Ireland.compared Ftabrefrdomiffeirte;beite wo•fas
wealth
in
the two couu ~
of landed property in Ireland, that if they were to
• the same value as in England, they would
require
only which
be giving a franchise would be almost illusory.
qualificationwhen t
rti ehiseny a s
But more than that, they had, for reasons which he thought
perfectly valid, refused to Ireland a 40s. franchise—a cir-
cumstance for which he thought they should make some
allowance in fixing the amount of the value to be required
of the occupying tenant. He was not prepared to give a po-
sitive opinion as to the amount of value which should be
required ; for, from the very late period at which the r=.-
turns had teen placed in their hands—the most important
having only reached them that morning—it was utterly im-
possible for him to give that close consideration to them
subject which its importance deserved. The object, how-
ever, which they should have in view might, he thought,,
be easily fixed. r Ties should endeavour to give to Ireland
as la ge a number at least of voters, as enjoyed the_ fran-
chise there immediately after the passing of the Reform
number he should bra
With that
Act.---( Hear, bear.)
not ask Hon. Gentlemen oppositesw.isfied, and he would
to decide atwhat
a: give more. It. was no easy matter
d. .
franchise should be fixes, in cr et- to attain,
amount the . that the subject would re-
t that end ; end he felt persuaded
quireorr•
e further consideration. All he then asked
time [Fuse to do was to consent to the principle,
than instead of a.loptieg a very low amount of rating,
with a lease, they she uld diF.pelise with the lease; and
take a considerably higher amount of rating than that
which had been proposed by the Government. He did
not think the galliticatien should be determined by time
amount of rent, but on the amount of toting ; for, if they
were to adopt a contrary prir,..ciplc, they would give a
premium on high rents, which, be believed, was already
o.c of the greatest grievances pf Ireland. In proposing
his amendment, ho was aware opal; he might be met by the