The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-20 00:00:00

MORNING EDITIONi

give jurisdiction in those matters to the Judges proposed
who would have nothing else to decide upon. If the
Judge of the land, who heard twenty cases, was likely
to be affected by political bias, what would be the effect
upon the Judge who decided upon no other description
of case ? Would he not decide according to political
bias ? He would next draw the attention of the House
to a most important part of the subject under conside-
ration ; namely, the ailthority by which those Judges
were to be constituted, and what would be the effect
of that constitution. What was at present proposed
was that 15 Judges be selected out of forty.five barris-
ters, of a certain standing, by the Speaker of the Hoiee
of Commons, to constitute a tribunal, to register votes
throughout the couotry. The Court of Appeal was to
consist of three Judges, also selected by the Speaker of
that House—not out of a rst furnished, but out of any
portion of the Bin he chose. The Right Hon. and
Learned Gentleman next proceeded at some length to j
point out the inconvenience arising from that arrange-
ment, and the impropriety of putting, in the present
case, so much power in the hands of the Speaker of
the House, who was generally nominated on the ground
of his a;reeing in political opinions with the majority of
the Meruliers of that House, which majority
was always supposed to entertain the same
politi al opinions as the existing Government.
TEIO3Z duties require the greatest impattiality, and
although he hail no doubt that any Speaker who was
called to fill that chair would me in to net impa
yet as they a'l had a very strong poll tieal bias, and as
thei
r bias would, in spite of the greatest honesty ofin-
tention, lead them to do acts which their cooler judg•
merit would condemn, he could not but foresee that the
ease might arise in which the Speaker, thinking that
there were as good men on one side of the House as
the other, would choose men of the political opinions
which he himself professed. The Court of Appeal was
left entirely to the See zker. When they considered
the duties which that Court had to perform they would
see at once how important it was that no possible
doubt should exist as to the motives which led to the
appointments. He believed that the independence of
the Speaker, the position which he enjoyed, and that
honourable station which was assigned to him on both
sides of the House, would be considerably lowered and
damaged if such power were placed in his hands.
Every appointment by him would be rigorously can-
vassed on both sides of the House, exceptions would
be t zken to the exercise of his power, however honestly
and conscientiously he might perform the duties, and
he would be exposed to temptations which by the
constitution of the House he had never been exposed to
before. He (Sir E. Sugden) considered himself (if he
would give him leave to say so) the advocate of the Speak er
on this occasion. He desired that the Speaker should
not be placed in a situation is which none of his prede-
cessors had stood. You yourself, Sir, (continued the
Hon. Gentleman) can scarcely be aware of the dangers
to which you will be exposed in the execution of these
duties. What were the duties of the Court of Ap-
peal? It would have to perform duties which at pre-
sent there were no means of performing. The Court of
Appeal which would have to decide these great ques-
tions, would virtually have to decide, in a great mea-
sure, which of the two great parties should have the
predominance at the ensuing election. Who in that
House was prepared to say that they would leave the
decision of that question to such a tribunal when they
theinsels es would not undertake to do so?—(Hear.)
Would they leave to other parties the power of decid-
ing this question, which might, in so great a degree,
influence the ensuing elections ? No party would con-
sent to such a sacrifice ; he would not ask Hon. Gen-
tlemen on the other side to do so, and he would not
consent to such a sacrifice on his own part. If they
looked to the Irish Registration and the Scotch Re-
gistra ion Bills, and found that the Speaker was to
have the nomination of the Court of Appeal in both
those countries, in the same wanner as in England,
then it would be evident that it was the intention
of the Government to alter altogether the character
of the Speaker of that House.—(Hear, hear.) Speaker
Lenton, in the time of Charles I. had said to that
Monarch, that he had neither eyes to see, nor tongue to
speak, except in obedience to the orders of the House,
whose servant he was. Now that was perfectly true,
but if these powers were given to the Speaker, instead
'of being the servant of that House, the most honourable
situation a commoner could fill, he would be the master
of that House.—(Cheers.) The House would abdi-
cate its functions. The more he looked at the se ap-
pointments the more objectionable did the plan appear.
At present the registrations throughout the country
went on simultaneously throughout England. When
the new Judges should be appointed, they would take
nearly the whole year in their perambulations. The
time at which they should hold their Ceurts would de-
pend upon themselves. They would break into the
htivsst—they would break into the Quarter Sessions
—they would break into the Assizes—they would in-
terfere with the times of the sittings of the House.
Instead of going at any given and fixed period,
they would go when it best suited themselves. They
weiuld have to give notice of the time at which they
intezeded to register any particular district, and the pay-
ment 0 4. the woold depend upon the
time wheem they might fix for holding their Courts, and
thus insteeed of the payment of rates taking place at a
particular fix-ed period in all parts of the country, it
would depend upon the times when these Registration
Courts should be held ; the consequence would be that
in different parts of the same county there would be dif-
ferent rights of voting, not iu consequence of any
direct legislative enactment, but in consequence
of the operation of these newfangled clauses.
But independently of that, the right to the franchise
was greatly altered by the Bill. He certainly wished,
deem the respect he bore to t. e Noble Lord opposite,
that, in altering the franchise in England, he ha I acted
in a more reatly and straightforward manner than he had
done. The franchise uasto be altered by the Bill, but
the dteration war to be effee t d iu a war which he (Sir
E. Sugden) would take the liberty of ceiling a skulk-
ing manner. It was not fairly stated that the franchise
should be altered, but it was intimated indirectly, and
in clauses which had other objects. He would not then
discuss the question, whether the elective franchise
ought to be altered or not. But, at all events, that
was not the manner in which such a work should be
pt rformetl, and that was not tire manner in which such
a proposition should be brought before the House. He
had used strong expressions, in designating the con-
duct .of the Government on the occasion, but he
wished" to show the House that it was not without pro-
vocation.. The Bill proposed to alter the Reform Act,
by render ing it no longer necessary that a party, in
order to bet enabled to vote, should pay taxes. But
when the Noll! Lord intended to make such a pro-
po.zal, he ought fairly to have stated it to the House
and to the public. Lie (Sir E. Sugden) had tiken the
advice of Lyttleter, and not read extracts when he could

go to originals ; and he accordingly looked from the mar-
gin of a clause in the Act to the clause itself; and he

iound in the margin that the voter should have paid

rates and taxes ; while it appeared from the eialse
self, that it was only necessary to have paid ratee. He
wished to know where was the mistake.—(Hear.)

Lord J. RUSSELL said that the mistake was in the
margin.

Sir E. SUGDEN sa;d that the word taxes was
linwover in the body of the claate ; and be would ask

whether that were the way in which a Bill might be in-
troduced ? When the Noble Lord brought in the Re-
torm BA! he required, as a condition of voting, not only
that the party should pay his rates and taxes, but also
all his rents. Now, he (Sir E. Sugden) at that time
.objected to the rents, because he considered that would
thave the erect of making that 811 a landlord's
Bil!, and would create discord between land-
lords and tenants. Sir.ce the introduction of the
Noble Lord's last Bill, be (Sir Edward Sugdcn)
wished to know what he had seen to induce him to
lake off the taxes. Was the franchise, he wooll ask,
too low ? Why, the tact was, that other 8111 had
been introduced, in which there nes no withdrawal of
the taxes ; and it was only in the present yc ar that this
new light had broke in upon the Noble Lord. Another
objection he had to the Bill was, the introduction of
voters, to be called established voters : no provision
was, in his opinion, snore calculated to produce fraud.
The effect of the provision would be to make three
classes of voters, having different rights ; the rich man
would become an established voter, and thereby a dif-
derence would be made bettvcea the rich and the poor
man. These were his various objections to the B 111;
and, in snaking these objections, be trusted the House
would ben- in mind that they bad at present a tribunal
that was working well, and with which he thought the
country was satisfied.—(Cries of " No, no.") He
',believed the country was satisfied with the Revising

Barristers.—(Cries of " No, no.") There were some
men that were satisfied with nothing, but when Hon.
Members expressed their dissatisfaction in that respect,

all that be would ask theme raj, that they should point
out a system that would work better.—(Hear, hear.)
The whole machinery of the present Bid was not what
31 ought to be, and therefore it was that he objected to
it in the respects to which he had adverted. Now,
what were the amendments he proposed? Why, he
was willing to take the Noble Lord's Bill of 1838

and 1839, with a slight modification of ti,;;tgistration:
How, he would ask, could the Nnb!e Lord reconcile his
conduct last year with that he was now pursuing ? Last
year the Noble Lord brought in a Bill to define the
franchise, but on the present measure the Noble Lord
left all the difficulty on which the franchise depended
to be decided by the Court of Appeal. In conclusion,
he would give notice to the Noble Lord, that it was his
intention, in Committee, to move the expulsion of such
parts of the Bill as he had referred to, and he should
ask leave to introduce other clauses, which would have
.

the effect of carrying out the objects he had in view:—
Mr. GISBORNE was happy to find that there was
so large a portion of the present Bill which was not
likely to be opposed by the other side. He was sur-
prised to hear the Right Hor. and Learned Gentle-
man state that very little evil had arisen from the con-
flicting decisions of the Revising Barristeis under thl
present system. The Right Hon. Gentleman had not
%ad so much experience in the Barristers' Courts as
be had, but he remembered an instance in which two

Barristere, sitting in the same room, with only a par-
tition between, were deciding one one way and the
other another ; one Barrister was admitting the trus-
tees of all chapels, and the other was rejecting them.
He recollected another instance, where in one part of
a county two Quakers were admitted to vet-, and in
another part were struck out. The Hon. and Learned
Gentleman particularly objected to the Speaker having
political appointments, or appointments having a poli-
tical tendency. He beeeed to remind the House that
a proposal somewhat simil it to the present had been
made by the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for
Tamworth, when he introduced his plan for the ap-
pointment of the Committee of selection for election
petitions.—( Hear, hear.) There was some part of the
remarks of the Right Hon. Gentleman on the subject
of established voters in which he entirely concurred.
This Bill gave great encouragement to persons. to
establish their votes. That was undoubtedly a privi-
lege ; but the extent of the benefit conferred would de-
pend entirely upon what the voter was called upon to
establish before he could be admitted to vote. The
words of the Reform Bid were, that the claim of the
party waste be proved to the satisfaction of the Barrister ;
words giving the Barrister very extensive powers, and
leaving a great deal in his hands. He believed, how-
ever, that the usual custom of the Barristers bad been,
not to call upon him technically to prove his title, but,
if he was in the receipt of the rents and profits, to hold
that that was sufficient proof of title. He (Mr. Gis-
borne) considered that that was the true mode.
If a person was unlawfully in possession or
property, it t the law be applied, but the Court of
Revising Barristers should not try the question
of the title of persons to the property for which they
claimed. The 56th clause of this 1341 read thus :
Nor shall any objection to the title of any established
voter to held any land or tenements be allowed." That
was the case of a person objected to as an established
Toter. The plain inference from that err, that if the
party was not an established voter the Revising Bar-
rister should have posses of inquiry into his title. If
not, why were those words introduced ? Why was it
said that the title of an established voter should not be
inquire f into unless it was open to the Revising Barris-
ter to inquire into the title of those who were not C3ta •
as:id ? His view was that possession should be taken
as a sufficient title, and that would remove one of the
great objections which he should otherwise have to the
system of making a distinction between established
voters and voters not established. There was another
provision which he thought ought to be introduced, in
order to make the Bill consistent. If a person wire ob-
jected to, it was now for the first time required that the
grounds of objection should be stated. It would be
going too fur to say that when a person had been
brought up upon one ground of objection only, and that
had been decided in his favour, he should be considered
as an established voter ; but having sustained his vote
upon that ground, he thought he ought not to be ob-
jected to upon that ground again. Doubtless, there
would remain great objections to the dividing voters
into two classes—the established, and the non-esta-
blished. To the person of property it would be a mat-
ter of little consequence, but to the poorer voter it
would occasion great inconvenience.—(Hear, hear.)
Let them take the case of a poor man pos-
sessed of a 51. house, who had mortgaged it for W.
He would have to procure the attendance of the mort-
gagee and of the lawyer, so that there would be con-
siderable difficulty and expense in the way of his esta-
blishing his right to vote, which the rich man would not
experience ; in fact, he would be left as a mark to be
shot at by any person who chose to object to him. He
did not say that this was a sufficient objection to the
making two distinct classes of voters, but he mentioned
it as an illustration of the disadvantages under which
the non-established voter would labour, and also with a
view of showing that when once one ground of objec-
tion had been established to be untenable, the voter
should not again be liable to objection on that ground.
He thought there was something in the objections
taken by the Right Hon. Gentleman to the ambulatory
character of the Commissioners for the revision of the
lists, but on the whole great advantage would accrue
from the establishment of a Court of Appeal, without
which there was no prospect of their obtaining anything
like a uniformity of decisions. He thought, however,
on the whole, notwithstanding the objections that might
he urged against some of its details, that the Bill pro-
ceeded on an equitable principle, and that it would cor-
rect many of the abuses of the old system. The objec-
tions were to the minor points, and he felt great satis-
faction in witnessing the introduction of the measure.
Mr. W ARBURTON said that as there was to be no
division on the second reading of the Bill, it was not
his intention to enlarge on the objection urged against
it. He should observe, however, that lie thought it
was a settled point that the present constitution of the
Courts of the Revising Barristers was highly objection-
able, and had been found exceedingly inconvenient by
the electors, as well as by the House, in consequence
of the great number of disputed points that came be-
fore Election Committees. He -believed he might al-
lude to the negotiations which had taken place between
both sides of the House in 1838, on the constitution of
the Courts of the Revising Barristers. by which many
of those points were chcided, to which the Right Hon.
Baronet opposite bad objected. The Right Hon. Ba-
ronet had complained of that provision of the Bill which
took away from the Revising Barristers the opportunity
of again returning to Westminster Hall ; but he (Mr.
Warburton) did not think that such a provision would
operate unfavourably. The Commissioners of the
Court of Bankruptcy were placed in the same position ;
and be, whatever might be the other defects of that
Court, believed that no complaint had ever been made
upon that head. The fact was, that cases of the most
complicated nature in law and equity would come be-
fore the Revising Courts : and these would be sufficient
to occupy their entire attention. lie would reserve any
other observatons he might have to make on this sub-
ject till the House went into Committee on the Bill.
Mr. HUME said that he thought it would be easy
to avoid many of the inconveniences which it was urged
would follow from the Bill. The Gros ernment might
get rid of the objections to the measure by defining the
franchise a; they had done for Ireland.—( Hear, hear,
from the Opposition Benches.) Ho had always under-
stood that what was good for England was good for
Ireland, and what was good for Ireland was good for
England.—(Hsa-, hear.) As far, however, as the Bill
went, he thought it was a great improvement in the pre-
sent system.

Mr. ROWLAND ALSTON supported the Bill,
as he thought it high time that the present system
should be a:te-ed.

Cclonel SIBITIORP begged to ask what the salary
of the Barrister would be. Perhaps that subject was
below the Noble Lord's consideration ; but he should
certainly take tl:e sense of the House on it in Com-
mittee.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL was not prepared until
they went into Committee to state the exact amount of
the salary. But as the Hon. and Gallant Member's views
were so much in favour of economy, he begged to inform
him that there would be a raving probably of 15,0001.
under the proposed system. At present the cost was
35,000/. or 36,0001., and it would be about half that sum
under the new system. Now when the Hon. and Gal
_ _

lant Member would see the reduction of expense, he
would perhaps give his support to the measure, but of
course when they went into Committee it would be for
him to propose any further reduction if he thought
proper. The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite had
made a great many observations on the details of that

measure, but be (Lord John Russell) would not follow
him. It was said that there was some unfairness in the
omission of the test of the payment of taxes. Ile
had tlaomzht it very inexpedient to keep up the test of
the payment of taxe3 and rates, as each had often di!-

franchised a number of vet :Ts who were otherwise fully
entitled to vote.—( Hear, Lear.) It was certainly his
intention lo make some alteration in the clause with
respect to the payment of rates and taxes and the change
of occupetidn. When his Hon. Friend the Member
For Kilkenny had asked why not make tire franchise
the same in England as in Ireland? he had been cheered
by the Hon. Gentlemen opposite ; but he did not know
whether they meant by that to abolish the 405.. free-
holders, or to introduce again the freeholders to
Ireland. He certainly was not inclined to agree to
any proposition for abolishing the 40s. freeholders in
England, because he thought them a most useful and
important class of voters.
The Bill was then read a second time, and oidered
to be committee that day se'nnight.
EAST INDIA RUM BILL.
On the mot'on of Mr. LABOUCHE RE, the Esst
India Rum Bill was read a second time, and ordered to
be committed on Monday.
IRELAND.
The Tithe Compositions (Ireland) Bill was read a
third time and passed.

The Committee on the Turnpike Acts Continuance
(Ireland) Bill was postponed to Friday.
MACHINERY.
Mr. BROTHERTON moved that the followina• be
nominated the Select Committee on Machinery :—Mr.
Mark Philips, Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Labouchme, Lord
Francis Egertry, Mr. Home, Lord Viscount Sander,
Sir George Strickland, Mr. Emcrscn Tearent, Mr.
Morrison, Mr. Bolling, Mr. Villiers, Mr. Townley Par-
ker, Mr. John Hcathcoat, Mr. Colqnhoun, and Mr.
Obwald.