The Sun.
London, England, 1832-03-06 00:00:00

talamorgatt was increaeing at the rate of 19 per cent.,
and Durham. at the rate of 17. The Noble Lord
had objected to including Gillingham within the bounds of
Chatham, which was only one mile from Chatham ; while
Cardiff was united with Tydvil, which was six miles away.
Merthyr Tydvil, with 22,000 inhabitants, was only to
have the sixth part of a Member, while Bradford, Oldham,
Halifax, and several other towns, with a few thousand more
people, were each to have two Members. There was a
similar anomaly with regard to Deal, which was added to
Sandwich to preserve its two Members, while Tydvil,
with nearly four times as much population, was refused
one. Again, there were several towns which were to
receive one Member, each of which had less than 20,000
people. The Noble Lord enumerated several places with
ten, and eleven, and twelve thou.and people, which were
to receive one Member, particularly Walsall, which was
surrounded with representatives. The Noble Lord also
referred to several of the boroughs, such as Caine, Tavie-
tock, and Horsham, which, not having above 3,000
people, were allowed to retain one Member. He contended
that allowing such anomalies to remain in the Bill made
it a measure of injustice. He had shown, he trusted, that
Merthyr Tydvil had better claims than Gateshead to a
Member, and could not see on what grounds its claim.
should he resisted, unless on the original ground, that
Wales was not to be treated equally to England. Merthyr
Tydvil was a place which stood alone in interest and in
geographical position, amid altogether had stronger claims
on a Member than any unrepresented place in the king-
dom. It would he an act of injustice not to grant a Mem-
ber to Merthyr Tydvil._ (Hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL expected that the Noble Lord would
have laid down some better rule than that adopted by
Ministers, when he reproached them with following a
varied rule. The Noble Lord, however, to make out his
case, hod referred to some boroughs placed in schedule
B. Did the Noble Lord then wish to extend disfranchise-
ment ?—(Hear, hear.) When the Noble Lord brought
forward any proposition of that kind, he would not find
him (I.ord J. Russell) backward in supporting him.—
(Hear, hear.) According to the Noble Lord's own show-
ing there were other towns with a smaller population than
Gateshead, such as Whitby, which ought not to be enfran-
chised. and the Noble Lord ought to move to substitute
Merthyr Tydvil for one of them. Gateshead contained
15,000 inhabitants, was increasing in population, and Lad
a flourishing manufacture. If, therefore, Merthyr Tydvil
was to have a Member, it ought to have that Member at
the expense of some other place than Gateshead. If the
Noble Lord were to carry the general principles into effect
into Wake, he must disfranchise a number of the old
and small boroughs in Wales.—(Hear, hear.) Ministers,
however, finding that it would be more satisfactory to
the inhabitants of Wales to preserve their old boroughs,
had prsterved them. , They found ore of these close to
Merthyr Tydvil, and they thought it was quite consistent
wi, h the principles of representation which already existed
in Wales to unite Merthyr Tydvil with that borough. It
would have been more handsome of the Noble Lord if he
had offered to resign the third Member which Monmouth
had received, and give him to Merthyr Tydvil, instead of
taking one from Gateshead. It was said that Durham
was better represented than any other county. But how
was this proved? The Noble Lord then referred to the
population returns of eight or ten counties, for the purpose
of proving that the South had a great advantage in point
of representation, and that, if they were to take population
as their criterion. they would find that many of those
counties had one Member for every ten or fifteen thousand,
while Durham had only one in twenty-eight. The coun-
ties of the South had obtained representation in the first
instance because they were rich and populous, and the
counties in the North were then neglected because they
were poor. Now the counties of the North were become
also rich and flourishing, and, therefore, they were to have
their due proportion of the representation.
Sir R. PEEL was anxious to bring the question at
issue within the smallest possible compass, and he should
therefore confine himself to but one test of the propriety
of the Noble Lord's argument when he preferred giving
a member to Gateshead instead of Merthyr Tydvil. He
would take as his test the town of Toxteth Park, and he
believed he should be able to show the Noble Lord that,
according to his own argument, and according to the prin
niples of the Bill, Toxteth Park was better entitled to a
Member than Gateshead. Applying, indeed, the Noble
Lord's argument with respect merely to representation in
connection with comparative population, what d:d the
Noble Lord say to the fact that the county of Durham,
with a population of 253,000, has four Members, and
the county of Lancaster, with a population of 1,335,900
was to have only four Members?—(Hear, hear.) Why,
even taking away the million, still Lancashire was not so
fully represented as Durham, for there was no Member
for 80,000 people.—(Hear, hear.) But, returning to
the question of Toxteth Park. The lion. Member for
Livci pool 'had, 111 e 6 former Aiscuseion, etekt...l tl..t tit pco-
p'e of Toxteth Park were not at all anxious to have a
separate representative, or to be severed from the political
connection with the town of Liverpool. Now, he
held in his hand the copy of a letter, addressed to the
Secretary for the Home Depirtment by the chairman of a
public meeting held at Toxteth Park, in which an
urgent claim is preferred for one Member in
the distribution of the representation. (The Right Hon.
Gentleman read the letter.) Having said so much with
respect to the wishes of the people of Toxteth-park, he
was also enabled to add, that they were not in the same
per;ah as Liverpool, and that the Magistrates of Liverpool
exercise no jurisdiction in any part of the town. Having
thus disposed of the three objections mainly relied on—
namely, the wishes of the people, the question of being
extra parochial (though that was not of much importance),
and the jurisdiction of the Magistrates—lie would now
proceed to consider the equality of the claims of Toxteth
Park and Gateshead, premising that Liverpool, with
which it was proposed to leave Toxteth connected, had
only two Members fur 165,000 persons, while Newcas-
tle, from which they wished to separate Gateshead, had
two Members for 49,000. What, in the first place, was
the relative value of property in Gateshead and Newcastle?
In 1815, the annual value of propertyassessed was 25,0001.
in Gateshead, and 27,000/. in Toxteth ; but on the last
annual valuation, the property of Toxteth was 94,000/.
([[ear.) Then, if they looked at the amount of popula-
tion, they would find that Gateshead had 15,000, and
Toxteth Park 26,000, the population of Gateshead having
risen from 11,000 to 15,000 since 1621, while Toxteth
had doubled itself in the same period, and had at the same
time 2,617 ten-pound houses.—(Hear.) He could add
hut little to a statement of this kind in the way of argu-
ment. It was, he thought, most important, that in dis-
erabuting the representation they should draw a dis-
tinction between places which were nearly stationary, or
increasing slowly, and those which were increasing with
the rapidity of Tuxteth Park.—( Hear.) All he would say,
therefore, was, that if there was anything in figures, or if
any conclusions could be drawn from plain statements of
facts, Toxteth Park was entitled to a Member in prefer-
ence to Gateshead.--(Hear, hear.)
Mr. EWART admitted that he had not been aware of
the fact of the public meeting being held at Toxteth, and
that the inhabitants were so anxious to have a represen-
tative; but this he would say, that admitting Toxteth to
have 24,000 people, how were they, if they gave it one
Member, to pass over the claims of the 170,000 inhabi-
t sots of the other suburbs of Liverpool ? He could not,
indeed, understand how those who resisted the clause for
giving representatives to the suburbs of the metropolis
had the inconistency to propose a Member for Toxteth.
Lord ALTHORY would allow that the Right Hon.
Baronet's statements might show good reason for giving a
representative to Toxteth, but none for refusing to enfran-
chise Gateshead. As the Right Hon. Baronet had not
touched tbe question of Merthyr Tydvil, he (Lord Althorp)
would not follow him through these statetnenss, but merely
observe, that they might be applied with success to the
disfranchising one of the smallest boroughs in schedule B,
in seder to give a representative to Toxteth or Merthyr
Tydvil.
.sir. LABOUCHERE said he thought he should best
discharge his duty, and at the same time follow up the
principal of true representation, and promote the interests
of the Bill, by voting to give a Member to Merthyr
Tydvil instead of to Gateshead, as that place would, under '
any circumstances, be sufficiently represented by the
Members for Newcastle.—(Hear, hear.) He had supported
Alinisters to the utmost of his humble abilities throughout
the discussions on the Bill. This was the only instance
in which he had differed with them, or separated from
them fur a moment ; but be thought that, as a matter of
justice, it was his duty to vote for Merthyr Tydvil obtain-
ing a Member instead of Gateshead, which was already
so closely connected with, and might be fully represented by
the Members for Newcastle.—(Hear, heir, hear.)
Sir M. W. RIDLEY argued at some length that the
interests of Gateshead were so different from Newcastle,
that it could not he adequately represented by the Mem.
bers for that place.
Sir R. VY V YAN bad never heard a clearer or more
convincing statement than that of the Right Hon. Baronet
(Sir R. Peel). The question was purely, were they pre-
pared to give a Member to Gateshead, connected as it
was with Newcastle, instead of giving it to Toxteth or
Merthyr Tydvil, which, with much greater population,
wealth, and importance, were wholly unrepresented?
l. Mr. CROKER also considered the statement of the
I'S Right Hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) most decisive. It
4- had been stated by an Hon. Gentleman that there were
if.. wenty places wore entitled to be represented than Gab 9"
\ .