The Sun.
London, England, 1832-02-02 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS.

The Loan CuaNcELLon, did not take his seat till
twenty minutes past Five o'clock.
Lord TEYNITAIII wished to ask the Noble and Learned
Lord on the Woolsack, whether it was correct that the
Government was about to issue a Commission for the pur-
pose of enquiring into the operations of the poor laws.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the Govern-
ment had thought it proper to issue such Commission for
enquiring into the operation of those laws in dif-
ferent parts of the kingdom. He might as well say
that he entirely agreed with his colleagues in the present
plan, he had had some doubts on the subject, but they
were entirely removed, and he thought no time would be
lost by the adoption of the present mode.
Lord ELLENBOROITGH hoped that the present
Session would not be permitted to pass without some mea-
sure hieing introduced for the settlement of that question.
The Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack had pledged
himself that he would bring forward a plan of his own
with regard to these laws.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that he had not
pledged himself to bring forward any particular measure
on the subject. He certainly had the intention of having
that subject brought before the House, but the recess, which
he had enjoyed had been so very short, extending to not more
than 10 or 12 days ; that it hal been out of his power to
give the subject that consideration which he considered it
necessary that it should have.
The Marquis of SALISBURY observed, that the
Noble and Learned Lord had correctly stated the answer
which be.had given him during the sitting of Parliament
before the recess. He wished that the Commission was
now appointed, for the country certainly wanted and
looked forward to a relief from them.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH hoped that in the appoint-
ment of a Commission upon such a vital subject to a great
mass of the population of the country, Government would
not for a small saving want such men as were well acquainted
with the subject. It was not a question on which
money ought to be an object.
Lord TEYNIIAIII gave notice that on Monday he
would move for returns, relative to the importation of
hemp and flax for the use of the navy.
Earl GREY by command of his Majesty, laid upo❑ the
table of the House papers relative to the ratification of the
Belgian treaty.

The Earl of ABERDEEN asked if the Noble Earl
had an intention to make a motion on the subject of those
papers.
Earl GREY had no such intention.
Lord CLONCURRY presented a petition against the
tithe Laws.—Referrerl to the Committee.

The Arbitration Bill went through Committee and was
reported, without amendments.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH wished to ask the Noble
Secretary for the Colonies whether there would be any ob-
jection to the production of papers relative to emigration
fur the last two years.
Lord GODERICH apprehended there could be no
objection to the production of such Papers. He would
enquire how far such Papers could be made up, and inform
the Noble Lord.

Lord GODERICII, in answer to a question by the
Earl of Carnarvon, that it was not his intention to bring
forward the same Bill as was introduced last session relative
to emigration—could inform the House that emigration
from Great Britain and Ireland during the last Sear
had been to our own colonies more than double
that of any former year. He was happy, however,
to say that notwithstanding such emigration the price of
labour in Upper Canada had not fallen.
(LEFT SITTING.)

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FrmitrAny I.

( Continued from our Second Edition of yesterday.)
After a few words from Sir C. WETHERELL, Mr. IVEY-
LAND, and Lord Mir.rom,
The House then went into Committee on the Reform
Bill.

On clause 16, which gives one Member to the Isle of
Wight, being read,
Mr. CROKER should not oppose this, as the Isle of
Wight lost four borough Members, and this one was to be
taken as a compensation given out of the Noble Lord's re-
presentative patronage.
The clause was then agreed to.
On the suggestio❑ of Mr. PRAEH, the consideration of
the 17th clause was postponed.
On the 18th clause, which enacts " that no person
shall be entitled to vote in the election of a Knight or
Knights of the Shire to serve in any future Parliament in
respect of any freehold lands or tenements whereof he may
be seised for his own life, or for the life of another, or for
any lives whatsoever, unless the same shall be to him of
the clear yearly value of ten pounds above all rents and
charges payable out of or in respect of the same," &c., a
legal discussion of considerable length took place, in which
Lord Milton, Sir R. Vyvyan, Mr. Jones, Lord Althorp,
Mr. O'Connell, Sir C. Wetherell, Mr. D. Gilbert, Colonel
Wood, Mr. Knight, Mr. Campbell, Lord John Russell, &c.
participated.

. . -
On clause 19—
Colonel WOOD said, that last session he had suggested
the propriety of inserting 40s. instead of 101., because be
thought that there ought to be no difference between the
freeholder and the copyholder. The Committee, however,
had then overruled him, and he should not, therefore,
make a motion on the subject; bat contented himself
with stating that his opinion was still unaltered.—Clanse
agreed to.

On clause 20—
Sir R. HERON, with reference to the clause giving the
right of voting to tenants at ‘s ill of lands or tenements of
the clear yearly value of .50/,, should certainly object to
the clause. It appeared to him quite impossible that a
tenant who held lands at the will of another conld ever
give an independent vote if that other desired to influence
him. The object of this Bill was to get rid of the nomi-
nation boroughs, but it the clause to give the vote to
tenants at will was adopted, the counties would beconverted
into so many close boroughs. He was sure that the

Lord MILTON accused the Hon. Member for Lincoln
of inconsistency in his arguments. On the question about
the division of the county of Lincoln, that Hon. Member
had said, that if the proposed division took place, the
whole of the northern part of that county would he thrown
into the hands of one individual ; yet, upon the present
question, he stood forth to declare the perfect indepen-
dence of those very persona whom, on a former occasion,
he had represented to be so completely under the influence
of one individual. The effect of the clause would be to
make the elections in at least half the counties of England
oligarchical.—(Hear, hear.) It would throw the power
of returning Members into the hands of the Quarter Ses-
sions, or of a few potent individuals. Landed gentlemen
would be induced to cut their estates into annual tenancies
of fifty pounds a year each, in order that they might pos-
sess influence over more votes, introducing a system
something like that which had prevailed so injuriously in
Ireland. It was net disputable that tenants-at-will would
be entirely under the controul of their landlords.
Sir ROBERT PEEL thanked the Noble Lord for
the speech be had just made in favour of the clause.
If he had been inclined to vote against it, that speech
would have convinced him that he ought to support it.—
(Cheers.) The Noble Lord had talked of landed gentlemen
dividing their property for the sake of creating votes ;
hut it was impossible. Suppose, for instance, he (Sir R.
Peel) had an estate of six hundred Founds a year let to six
tenants, would he, or any man in his senses, be induced to
alter it to holdings of fifty pounds a year, merely for the
purpose of making six more electors, when, too, according
to the Noble Lord's own showing, the franchise would b
so comparatively worthless? if the feelings of humanity
and honour belonging to the landed proprietors did not
lead them to a contrary course, their interest would compel
it. Looking at the principle of the Bill, nothing could
be more conformable to it and to common sense than the
insertion of this clause ; he therefore heartily concurred
in it, and thanked Ministers for introducing it.
. _ . . _

Mr. ADEANE did not think that 50/. tenants at will
would be, at all events, more open to influence by land-
lords than the owners of 101. houses in boroughs. It,
indeed, they were so liable to be swayed by dictation, they
ought to be omitted entirely.
Mr. HUNT was of opinion that 50/. tenants at will
would be quite as free as tenants under leases for seven or
fourteen years ; and he referred t,, the last election for
Dorsetshire, asserting that no farmer in that instance had
voted against the wish of his landlord, whether that land-
lord were Whig or Tory. Once adept his system of an-
nual Parliaments, universal suffrage, and vote by ballot,
and property and character would only influence electors,
and the same Members would be returned as at present.—
(Cheers and laughter.) He should vote for the clause,
because it was a clause of enfranchisement, sod had he had
his way, he would not have disfranchised a single elector,
however corrupt; he would have disfranchised only the
nomination Peers.--( Hear.)
Mr. HODGES having been always in favour of the
extension of the elective franchise, so as to include a class
of men upon which the burdens of the country chiefly fell,
should heartily support the clause.
Mr. BERKLEY (we believe) referred to what had
been said by the Hon. Member for Preston, touching the
last Dorsetshire election. He (Mr. B.) had a brother,
who through life had been a Whig, and who had ex-
pressed a wish that his tenants in Dorsetshire should vote
for Mr. Ponsonby. Nevertheless, these tenants at will had
voted for Lord Ashley; and he was happy to he able to
add, that they were still in the enjoyment of their farms.
Sir R. HERON, with some warmth, repelled the
statement of the Noble Marquis, that he had calumniated
the farmers of England, and especially those of Lincoln-
shire. He defied the Noble Marquis to point out a land-
lord who was on better terms with his tenants.
The Committee then divided—
For the clause
Against it
Majority -240

On returning to the gallery, we found
Mr. BARING referring, as we understood, to the 26th
clause, stating that it was the last which had for object
the regulation of votes and voters for counties, not includ-
ing, however, the subject of registration. He thought,
therefore, that this was the proper time for looking back
with a brief regard to what had been already done. He
considered the whole proceeding futile, and that there was
not the slightest chance by this new system of effecting the
object Ministers appeared to have in view. At the late
Dorsetshire election a striking illustration was supplied of
the position for which he was contending, namely—that
the machinery of the present Bill was in the highest de-
gree confused, intricate, and ineffective. The candidates
had nearly polled out the whole county—the contest
lasted for fifteen days, and after all there were 400 rotes
upon which the assessor could not come to any deci-
sion, at least time enough for the purposes of the election.
Well, it was clear enough that the system already exist-
ing, was in itself, abundantly complex to render any at-
tempt at simplification extremely acceptable ; but yet,
in the Bill then before the House, they were presented
with a system which went to aggravate the evils which
had long formed the subject of universal complaint—to
the numerous classes of voters already possessing the elec-
tive franchise, the Bill added copyholders, tenants for long
terms, and tenants at will, and raised a variety of questions,
increasing the complicacy of a mode of voting and of qua-
.!
lifications, the great want of which was not increased, but
diminished machinery. It passed his comprehension to
imagine how it could be possible for a set of reasonable and
intelligent gentlemen to adopt a plan for county elections—
perhaps the most absurd which the perverted wit of man
could devise. The effect of the franchise established by
the Bill would virtually be to occasion county elections
once a year, and though the actual expences might not be
so great at what would be called the election, yet, from
there being a constant annual charge, it would render the
real expences of the candidate greater than before—it
would, in fact, produce an enormous increase in that ex-
penditure, for there would never be a cessation to the scru-
tinies and the contests in every county in England.
He confessed he thought voting by rate would be
not only more simple, but more just and equitable
than voting under and according to certain specified
tenures. There was a suggestion on this subject
he thought not unworthy of attention—which at least
was infinitely preferable to anything which the Bill
contained ; namely, that a certain number of the rate-
payers in a county should be invested with elective fran-
chise. Thus, the county of Dorset at the late election
polled 4,000 electors. He would suppose that 5,000
might have been polled. Now, if for that county 5,000
of the highest rate-payers had been selected to vote for the
Knights of the shire, he thought it would answer all rea-
sonable purposes, and be vastly more simple, convenient,
and efficacious, than any thing for which they were in-
debted to the present reforming Administration. He
need scarcely observe, that the principle thus applied to
Dorsetshire might, with perfect ease, be applied to any
other county, according to its population and circumstances.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that, in meeting the
Members of the House in a Committee upon the Reform
Bill, he of course expected to find them agreeing to the
principle of the measure, and proceeding throughout as
Reformers ; but the Hon. Gentleman who had spoken last
went far beyond anything which could have been expected
from him—far beyond any thing which could have been
anticipated from one who, at the introduction of the mea-
sure, appeared so adverse even to those changes which the
Bill proposed. The Hon. Member was nothing less than

Lord ALTHORP eald that it was intended by the C;o-
-vernment to adhere to the present practice.--(Hear.)
After a discussion, in whicli sir E. Sugden, Lord 1.
Russell, Lord Althorp, and Mr. Shed took part, respect-
ing the wording of the clause, it was agreed to as at first
proposed.
The question was then put upon the 24th clause.
Mr. PRAED objected to the Committee's proceeding
upon the clause, because he had given notice of a motion
for which he was unprepared in consequence of the ab•-
sence of an Hon. Friend, one of the Members for the
University of Cambridge.
Lord ALTHORP did not think that there was au,'
reason for the postponement of the dame.

Mr. PRAED could not refrain from expressing his
deep regret that the amendment which had been suggested
during the progress of the Bill in the last Session had not
Been made a part of the present Bill. He was disposed to
press its adoption, because he was of opinion that the agri-
cultural interest, to which it was meant to give additional
strength, had been unfairly treated by the Ministers in
framing this Bill ; and in proof of this assertion he must
lieg to recal to the recollection of the House the fact that
the Bill proposed in schedule A to disfranchise 56 boroughs,
and in schedule B SO, taking away from those places 142
Members, which, it was impossible for the supporters of
the Bill to deny, chiefly represented the agricultural inte-
rests. On the other hand, in schedule (, it was proposed
to establish 22 new boroughs, and in schedule D 19, giv-
ing in all 63 new representatives to the commercial and
manufacturing interests—a change which it was impossible
to deny would greatly affect the agricultural interests,
and which would place them, under the new Lou.
stitution, in a condition entirely strengthless. His
amendment would be found to have a basis as well in
equity and reason as in the ancient law of the land, which,
According to Blackstone, lays it down that the Knights of
the Shire are the representatives of the landed interests,
and that the citizens, burgesses, and traders, are' repre-
sented by the Members for boroughs. Whitelock els°
says on this subject that the Knights of the Shire are the
proper representatives of the inhabitants of the counts
the hamlets, and parishes ; and he says he has little doubt
that they were called to Parliament long before any Mem-
bers were required from towns or boroughs. His propo-
sition :was founded on the very principle on which the
Noble Lord opposite (Lord John Russell) had formerly
advocated the addition of Members for the towns of Bir-
mingham, Manchester, and Leeds. He had been told
that by the operation of the first part of his amendment
he wished to shut out from the constituency of the
Knights of the Shire all the intelligence of the towns; hut
he denied that such would be its effect. The Hon. Member
concluded by moving that after the words " In respect to
estates," &c., in line 13 of clause 24, be left out, and the
following inserted in their place :—" That no title to vote
for the election of a Knight of the Shire be conferred by
any property situate within the limits of a borough which
shall, by the provisions of this Bill or otherwise, return a
Member or Members to serve in Parliament :—That every
man seised of freehold lands or tenements, of the clear
yearly value to him of 401. above all rents and charges, si-
tuate within the limits of a borough returning a Member
or Members to Parliament, shall have the right to vote in
the election of Members for such borough."
The CHAIRMAN put the amendment.
The amendment was, that no freehold within the ho--
rough should give a right of voting for Knights of the Shire.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL admitted that the principle on
which the Hon. Member had attempted to found some of
his arguments was that which was to be discovered in both
Blackstone and Whitelock. Yet, practically, the Mem-
ber for a rural borougk represented the agricultural inte-
rest to a very considerable extent. He would not con-
sent to sever interests which happily were, even at present,
united and blended in the present House of Commons.
With all its faults, it had this one important redeeming
advantage. He foresaw that the proposition of the Hon.
and Learned Member would, if adopted, go a great way
to deteriorate the constituency for the boroughs of Eng-
land, and in the end would produce too great a pre-
ponderancy on the side of the landed 'interest. He must
therefore oppose the amendment.
Colonel DAVIES had before opposed the clause, which
it was now intended by the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber should be altered by this amendment. He hoped the
Noble Lord would reconsider the subject, and adopt the
amendment.

Mr. HUME objected strongly to the amendment, be-
cause of its object, which was neither more nor less than
disfranchisement.--(No, no.) Certainly it was—namely,
the disfranchisement of voters in borouAis, having free-
holds in the county contiguous to the borough. So far
it was a disfranchisement, as respected the franchise of
such voters fur the county. If this amendment were to
be introduced, as he had heard it would be in another
place hereafter, he trusted the Noble Lord would stand
firm ; for in his mind it would be preferable to reject the
Bill altogether than clog it with such a* inconsistency.
Sir E. SUGDEN contended that this was not a ques-
tion of disfranchisement at all, but whether the voters sv
circumstanced tiers to retain their votes for the borough
or for the county. Indeed the amendment of the Hon.
Member was only a revival of a clause out of the Noble
Lord's former Bill. How then could the Hon. Member
for Middlesex affect to say that he would rather give up
the Bill altogether than let this amendment be introduced ?
Had he not already said " Take the Bill, with all its im-
perfections, as a boon ?" Was it consistent then in that
Hon. Member to reject the Bill for having introduced into
it a clause similar to that which was to be found in the
very Bill he advocated the last session ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that
the present law was, that every freeholder had a right to
vot,, for the county. This Bill would diminish the influ-
ence of towns in the county. The proposition of the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman excluded freehold property
which was not of a sufficient amount. The Bill would
diminish the influence of towns and give an advantage to
the agricultural interest. The landed interest had a
greater advantage than they had when the former propo-
sition was brought forward. Such a clause must increase
the number of votes in the agricultural parts. He did not
think that the Hon. Gentleman had a right to complain
of this clause as increasing too much the influence of the
atsovint.
atrlp'lrteesgenrotunsdtou.pio,nwawshtihcaht htehesugpipvoinrd
gtethtehe clause,
as
certain degree of influence in the election of Members for
counties, was an advantage to the 'counties.
Sir ROBERT PEEL would support the amendment,
to be barristers. for
nimaPpliptidntetdheteladwetermi:noer
tt th,ee because
rfirstg h tl
timofe
thought
voting.
oligr ite greatly
readr
te
h a
et !try:,
were
the borough than
of interest—part to bedrterrained by
na•laisrbeotitterottcousrurbiniegctinto examination be-
foresh taicvhe the
certain
purpose,aa
classbarrister,
a county barrister, and part by the borough. He would

'ather that the freeholder shentld vote for the town in
which his freehold vise sittiate than that he should be
called to rote for the county. It appeared to be the more
consistent conese that the freehold tight s'hould be ex-
ercised in the boroughs and cities% The Hon. Member
for Middlesex was himself e. VOA example of county re-
presentation.—(Langheet. ) He called himself a county
Member, and yet made it a boast that he was completely
returned by the freehold interest of the towns. He
(Sir R. Peel) asserted that it was a mockery that an agti-
rultstral Member should be returned by the toWns. The
Noble Lord was not able to deny that the amendment
would simplify the operations of the Bill. His single
:argument was that, by adopting the clause, the commercial
and mannfactering interest would be amalgamated%
Mr. RAAISDEN, we understood, objected tz the amend-
ment, because it tended to separate the agricultural and
commercial classes.

Mr. PRAED denied that the object of his motion was
t effect diafranchisement. He contended that the public
opinion generally was in favour of the view which he had
taken.

Lnrd MILTON said that the Clause as it now stood
was exceedingly disliked in 'borough towns.
Sir G. CLERK observed that every one who resided in
a borough would be in future deprived of his vote for the
county, and vote oaf! Tor the borough. If that were a
good principle as to freeholders, he could not see what
injury would be done by extending the same rule to fret-
holds under I pt.
After a few words from the LORD-ADVOCATE and Sir
R. Nat, the gallery was cleared for a division.
The numbers were—
For the amendment 9l
Avtinst it
Majority -90
BELGIUM.

Sir RICHARD VYVYAN begged to abk whether the
treaty for the constitution of Belgium as a separate king-
dom had been ratified, and, if so, when it would be pro-
duced?

Lord ALTHORP sail that the treaty had been ratified
by England, Prance, and Belgium, and that it would be
laid on the table to-morrow (this day).
Sir RICHARD VYVYAN—Then I beg leave to post-
pone my motion relative to the affairs of Belgium, which
stands for to-morrow, until Tuesday. It would, of course,
he impossible for the subject to be properly discussed, if
the papers which relate to it cannot b.:. produced until a
few hours before Members were called upon to to take it
into consideration.

DECCAN PRIZE MONEY.
Sir C. FORBES begged to withdraw his motion upon
this subject, understanding that there had already been a
memorial with respect to it laid before the Treasury.
Sir H. HARDINGE begged to ask the Noble Lord
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) whether the delay
which had exis'ed in retarding the claimants for the Dec-
ran prize-money bad arisen from the conduct of the trus-
tees, or from that of the claimants themselves?
Lord ALTHORP was glad to have the opportunity of
stating that the delay was not in any degree attributable
to the trustees.

The motion wal then withdrawn.
The other 0,1-ders of the Day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at Two o'clock.

7-T WO MEMBERS

VV ill
of 501. and upwards having
'ote.
Howard, P. H.—Carlisle
Hawkins, J. ll.—Tavistock
Heywood, n.—Lancashire
Marthall, W.—Bevarley
Visc.—Northamptoush.
Paget, T.—Leicestershire
Pepys, C. C.—Malt ti
RamsdenJ, Cs—Yorkshire
Shell, R. L.—Co. of Louth
Strutt, E.—Derby
Thlcknesse, R.—Wigan
Williamson, Sir H —Durham
Williams, W.—Monmouthshire
Wyse, T., jun.-.. Tipperary Co.
Whitmore„ W.--Bridgenorth