The Sun.
London, England, 1835-09-01 00:00:00

~•~
`~
ti

the pace for the bor.t:glis. We are of th,t it ,v,,111
add much to the iatisfactioJ of th se towns if the council hat
the power of appointing those pery,!,l on worn they thou2lit
it right that the functions of just ttet f!odferred
It. has been, however, represented—and iri tUt f'Ht tai to
which I have alluded as having been made at the bar of the
House of Lords—that the prcirosition which we made, in this
respect, involved an infringement of ti.v2, prerogati-..e of
the CroWit. The fact is directly the reserve. ;11 most
places, Ai tire ;justices of the peace, by any coy-
'sorate rights, derive it front v ecflHil, made without reference
it is true, under the royal tf?.-ter; but
to the Crown, tn.
i;.-orosed that the
rtiql!!er wc rnight have
council
for the boroughs should have nominated certain per-
sons from themselves to be justices, wltlo..\l! 4ny reference to
tbe. Crown. It the latter case the justices would only be
dei.P..!de t✓-.;to Parliamentary enactments, with the assent of
the Crown, what at preSJit IPey 4,?!..ive from royal chatters.
We proposed to give to the Crown the i;ist.:!' ;,pproving or
disapproving of the nominations made by the council, tht se-
eltring fo tilt' prtteFative what I think to be a right and whole-
some control respecting till rt!,c.,), who are to act as justices
in the country—but at the same time, tfe did not deprive the
kidiinol.ar of towns of the power of recommending' tech persons
as they gliodi fit to be entrusted with the magisterial
functions. I confess did j sjd ttot see on what ground the
amendment has been made by the t otsoo sef Lords. On full
reflection, I see no reason for abandoning tlio original propo-
jitiOn j tiletztfort., I shall propose that we disagree to their
amendment. With reged to _another alteration, relating to
the boundaries of towns, and the rildiattr of their divizion into
wards, I think it to be inconvenient, but nothing more. it
Oriziltlany provided, that upon a Report made by certain
Comtilfssiotiers the King in Council should have power to settle
the boundaries of those not being Parliamentary boroughs.
An amendment was proposed, though not adopted, in this
House, that that settlement should be arranged only by Act
of Parliament: The House of Lords scents to have adopted
the principle Of that atricadrrient and the consequence will
be, that in those towns for which the Parliamentary boun-
daries are not taken, considerable inconvenience will be felt
at the first election, and those places and parts of towns
which ought to form portions of the municipal borough will
be for a time excluded. I think, however, that we ought not
to meet this amendment in any thing like a captious spirit ; and
I shall, therefore, propose that we agree to it. :With respect to
the division into wards—there was at one period a propo-
sition introduced into the Bill in the House of Lords that the
division slionld be effected by the county justices ; that
would be, in my opinion, ti most unfortunate arrangement
leading—one to nothing but confusion; And which the county
justices would necessarily be most unwilling to undertake the
working or, ti 4 it must expose them to great obloquy: It
is proposed, however, by the Bill now sent down, that the
duty should be performed by the revising barristers. To
that proposition I have no objection ; but as some of these
individuals are young and inexperienced men, I should be
unwilling to leave a final decision in their hands, more es.
pecially as there is a power conferred on them of altering in
a certain measure the number of wards and the number of
councillors to each ward. I should propose, therefore, that
these reports should be made to the King in Council, and
if confirmed should then have the force of law. I now
conic to another portion of the alteration, and it is that por-
tion in which I own that I have had more doubts than I have
felt respecting any amendments made in the other House of
Parliament— I mean that relating to the question of qua-
lifications for councillors. It will be remembered that that
was a question very much debated in this House, and that the
Right Hon Baronet opposite—the Member for Tamworth
(Sir R. Peel)—whom I will take this opportunity of saying
am most rejoiced to see here this night--( Hear)—proposed a
qualification not differing materially from the average of those
qualifications which he found in local acts, giving at the same
time the alternative, that' there should be a certain amount of
rating and a certain amount of property in some boroughs,
and a superior degree of rating and a higher degree of pro-
perty in others. I think that his proposition was not liable
to more objection than any qualification is liable to. I stated
to the House at the time, and my friends around me stated,
the grounds on which we thought it better that no qualifica-
tion should be required ; and the principle for which we then
contended, is one which I think must sooner or later be adopt-
ed by the Legislature in respect to elections of this kind, and
which is so sound in itself, that it may be left to work its
way. If you leave it to the elector to choose a person of suffi-
cient abilities and character, you leave it to him also to choose
a person of sufficient property, when property is required ;
and in many places abilities and character supply the place
of property. But at the same time lam quite aware of the
truth of what the Right Honourable Baronet stated at the
time, that qualification has been in a great many Acts of Par-
liament the rule laid down, and that there are still a great
many persons who think that some qualification ought to be
taken. Feeling, however, as I do, that the principle which
I have already spoken of must ultimately be adopted, and yet
seeing what has been the course of the Legislature hitherto
upon this subject, I certainly have made up my mind not
to resist an amendment which shall contain a qualification.
The amendments made in the House of Lords have them-
selves varied considerably on this point. The first alteration
provided that no person should be qualified to act as coun-
cillors, unless they were contained in a list comprising only
one-sixth of the rate-payers. This is obviously liable to the
objection of its pointing out a certain number of persons, and
distinguishing them from the rest of their fellow-citizens--
that is, in point of fact, saying to a man, " You must be rated
at a certain amount to be eligible—but here is an aristocracy,
and unless you belong to it, it is impossible for you to hope to
be a councillor." I think that there is something invidious in
such a proposition, and coming as it did from an " hereditary
tribune "of the poor.—(Cheers and laughter.) It is to me
somewhat extraordinary that such a rule as it establishes
should have been adopted.—( Hear, hear.) But since the Bill
was printed in the form in which it contained this amendment,
it went again through a Committee of the House of Lords •
and in the form in which it was afterwards printed it contained
another provision for qualification, to which I must fairly say
the same objection does not apply. It is this—that there
should be possession of a certain amount of property, in some
boroughs 1,0001., and in others 500/. If this qualification
were proposed in the same manner as suggested by the Right
Hon. Baronet, being taken as an alternative to the other qua-
lification which he mentioned, it would, in my opinion, be a
fair matter for consideration, and I am prepared to say that I
should give it every favourable consideration. But in looking
into the Bill, and reflecting on this part of it, I find that it was
introduced in a particular manner.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir R. PE EL asked what was the clause in question ?

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that it was the fifteenth, and
then continued—lf the Right Hon. Baronet will look at that
clause, he will perceive that this is the manner in which the
system of qualification there laid down is to be carried into
effect :—that the overseers are to make out a list of persons
qualified for councillors, comprehending one-sixth of the whole
number of rate-payers, those selected being the highest rated
in the burgess-lists, and comprehending also all those having
a certain amount of property—either one thousand pounds, or
five hundred pounds—that those claiming to be placed on the
lists, on the ground of possessing that amount of property,
should send in a claim to the overseer to have their names so
inserted, and that their claims might be objected to before the
Revising Barrister or the Mayor, when the qualification and
the right of voting should be examined. We certainly cannot
say that the other House of Parliament arc enemies to inno-
vation—( Hear, hear)—for certainly this and the other propo-
sition respecting the sixth class of rate-payers are certainly as
great innovations as ever were attempted.—(Cheers.) It is
perfectly fair and intelligible to say that a man who possesses
a freehold of the annual value of forty shillings, or who rents a
tenement rated at fifty pounds a-year shall be eligible ; but to
say that he must be possessed of a real or personal estate to the
amount of one thousand pounds or five hundred pounds, that
he must bring forward his name as one claiming to be
enrolled on the ground of possessing that estate, and that his
claim so preferred shall be liable to objection and examina-
tion before the Revising Barrister is, in my opinion, applying
a principle totally new, and one which, in its application to
persons in trade, in corporate towns of some considerable ex-
tent, cannot fail to be productive of an investigation most
odious in its character—(Loud cheers)—and most pregnant
with /evil consequences. I can suppose a case in which a
man coming before the revising barrister to substantiate his
claim, might be exposed to an interrogation of the most un-
pleasant Character. Have you 500/. clear?—do you not.
owe 1501. to Mr. Thomas ?—have you not bestowed some por-
tion of your property on such an one? " and other questions
of the like kind, would constitute an examination to which
many persons might not be disposed to submit. And then, if
they did not come forward to prefer their claim--if they said
that they would rather abandon their pretensions than undergo
such an examination, and if the lists were then put up in the
borough, purporting to be of all persons worth 5001.—what
then would be their situation ? Men would say to each of
them, " Oh, Mr. Williams I " or " Mr. Tomkins ! " as it
might be—" I find that you are not worth 5001., your name is
not in the lists." In short, Sir, it seems to me, that the objec-
tions are strong in the highest degree to the introduction of
this species of qualification—that it is, indeed a very im-
proper ono—and one which, in our country, would not
fail to produce the greatest evils. Ido not say that it
may not be possible so to amend this proposition as to
make it work without producing evil ; and I should wish,
therefore, to reserve the consideration of the question in-
volved in this particular amendment till to-morrow. For
my own part, I am quite ready—whether it may be a
proper or an improper declaration, that I should yield on the
principle of qualification—to consider and deliberate as to
the admission of a property qualification ; but I wish to re-
serve the question now as to the manner in which that prin-
ciple can be best introduced. I hope, therefore, that those
Gentlemen who are not prepared to object to all qualification
will seriously consider the point as it now stands, that we may
be enabled to offer some amendments to the present provi-
sions in that respect. The other questions relating to the
future government of the boroughs are not of so much im-
portance as those which I have noticed, and I pass over to
two or three other points. There is an amendment proposed
respecting property held by freemen, and there has been, I
must say, a most unnecessary assertion introduced into the
preamble of the Bill on that subject. Our Bill was sent up
to the House of Lords with a general concurrence on the
subject of everything relating to the inchoate rights of free-
men, a subject which had excited much debate. The Right
Hon. Baronet had said on that occasion—" He knew it was
difficult to suggest anything in which it might not be pos-
sible to show that some part of it was not in strict con-
formity with a general principle. But it seemed to be
agreed by all parties, that it. was very desirable to get this
corporate property available for the benefit of the common-
alty at large. There might be special cases in which the
property had been given to particular individuals; but as-
suming-that, by the oriednal intention of the donors, the pro-
perty was for the benefitt of the inhabitants of the boroughs..