The Sun.
London, England, 1832-01-20 00:00:00

to be the proportion ; and he need scarcely add, that the
three millions contained much of the property and intelli-
gence of the country. Even, however, if the proportion
was not so great, this was not the time nor the place, nor
was the Right Hou. Gentleman the man to say, in pre-
paring his arrangements, that the Government were anx-
ious to get rid of the Protestant freemen of Ireland. The
effect of this part of the Bill would be, he was confident,
to destroy the only remaining link that connected the Pro-
testants of Ireland with the people of England.
Mr. JAMES GRATTAN contended that the Hon.
Member for Oxford had mistaken the expressions of the
Right Hon. Secretary. What had been said was, that he
wished to eet rid of the freemen because the system under
which they were created perpetuated the system of exclu-
sion. The Hon. Member for Oxford had probably not
enjoyed the advantage of having visited Ireland, or he
would at elections, and particularly in the city of Dublin,
have seen scores of Protestant freemen made for no other
purpose than to exclude the Catholics. He had thought
it right to my thus much, because the proposition of the
Right Hon. Gentleman seemed to him fair and reasonable,
although he admitted it would not prove quite satisfactory.
In his opinion the proportions of representation should be
so far preserved, that if Scotland got eight new Members,
Ireland should have seventeen. As to the plan of taking
the polls by Baronies, he apprehended it would prove still
more expensive than the practice of holding the election
in the county town ; but he hoped that there would be a
better system of registration introduced, as the assistant
Barrister's had so much power in rejecting votes, that if
they were permitted to retain it, all the advantage of the
Bill would be lost.
Sir GEORGE WARRENDER, so far from agreeing
with the Hon. Member, that if Scotland got eight Mem-
bers Ireland should have seventeen, could scarcely believe
the Irish Members were capable of making out a case for
the additional five which they were to receive. If any
one could prove that the interests of Ireland were inade-
quately represented, he might change his opinion ; but
when lie found that the eloquent pleadings of the Member
for Waterford (Sir John Newport) had power, when
backed by the Members for Preload, to procure the ad-
mission of Irish grain and Irish agricultural produce duty
free, during the whole of the time the landed interests of
England were burthened with the property tsx, he did
not think it could be said that the interests of Ireland
were not fmirly represented and supported. The question
of a proportion was not between Ireland and Scotland, but
between Ireland and Great Britain. That proportion had
been solemnly settled at the Union, and he thought that it
was too soon (at the end of only thirty years) to disturb it.
The case of Scotland stood on different grounds. That
settlement had existed for 130 years, and he had listened
with great pleasure to the eloquent speech of the Lord Ad.
vocate, which proved how unjust were the principles on
which it had been concluded. The Hon. Member then
proceeded to mention Dundee, Paisley, Aberdeen, and va-
rious other places of rising wealth and population, which
were entitled to more than one Member according to the
principles of the Hon. Members opposite ; and observed,
that the debate of that night would afford a great stimulus
to all patriotic Scotehmen to urge with tenfold ardour
their claims for additional representation. As to Ireland,
' there was nothing in its compact with England, or in the
circumstances of the case, which gave it the slightest pre-
tensions even to the five additional Members now about to
be bestowed on it.
Mr. SHELL said that the Hon. Baronet (Sir G. War-
render) had compared Ireland with Scotland, while Ire-
land compared herself with England. The comparison
should he between the two countries with England. The
Hon. Baronet had intimated that Ireland was concluded
or estopped by the Union. Pray was there not an estoppel
of his own country, of Scotland, by her Union in 1706 ?
--(Hear.) His argument was exceedingly Irish in favour
of Scotland. He concluded that because Scotland had got
eight Members, Ireland ought to have no additional Mem-
bers ; and he in the same breath relied upon the Union,
which applied to one country as well as to the other. But
he (Mr. Sheil) would reserve his observations on this
part of the case for the motion which he should give notice
of for to-morrow, which would bring the rights of Ireland
distinctly before the House. One word respecting the
Hon. Member for Oxford (Sir R. Inglis.) The Member
for Wicklow had stated that he had never been in Ireland.
What a mistake ! Why, the Hon. Baronet (though few
people were aware of it in Dundalk) had once been Mem-

her for Dundalk—(Laughter)—of course he must needs
have had a very close connection with that important
town. By the way, the representatives of Dundalk stood

in singular order; there was Mr. Barclay, the brewer,
whose name appeared so conspicuous on so many posts,
in the splendid intimation of " Barclay's Entire ;" there
was a Colonel Cradock, who, he believed, never had
seen Dundalk in his life ; and there was, though last
not least, the present Honourable Member, who cer-
tainly had seen it, because there was scarcely a part of
Ireland with which he was not familiar. The Honour-
Ale Baronet said there were 3,000,00 A of Protestant, in
Ireland. Where did he find them ? Did he see them in
the town of Dundalk, when he was its Member, the data

from which this inference was to be drawn ?—(Laugh-
ter.) He suspected that he must have seen it in the ga-
zette of orthodoxy and of loyalty, the Dublin Evening

Mail. He saw some calculation of this kind of these
3,000,000 in buckram in that journal, which is certainly
the organ of a strong party in Ireland. But the Hon.
Baronet should take courage from his own statement, and
not be so readily cast down by the mere proposition of
admitting the Catholics to the rights of citizenship in
Ireland. With his 3,000,000 at his back, what need he
fear ? He told them that the Protestants constituted the
wealth and intelligence of Ireland ; if so, why dread so
much the poor and ignorant Catholics?—(Hear, hear.)
Aye, says the Hon. Baronet, but we must keep up the
Protestant ascendancy in Ireland, and that can only be
done by shutting out the Catholics from civil power ; for
such was the only meaning which his words bore. Did
the Hon. Baronet fear for the Protestant interest in the
House of Commons? Surely he did not stand in need
of the Protestant freemen, with his millions at his back.
The case of the freemen is simply this : the 40s. free-
holders were to counterpoise the freemen, and the one
being removed, the other must pass away. A little
nursery of faction was not to be maintained in every
corporation. Who are the men who call on the
Government to maintain this offensive ascendancy ?
Men, who sleep on in their dreams of domina-
tion with the broad day-light about them—(Loud
cheers)—men who conceive that Ireland should be
governed in 1832 on the same principles of misrule as
half a century ago. What claim have they on the Eng-
lish people? They are arrayed in hostility to their rights.
—(Cheers.) But even if he admitted that Catholic in-
fluence was to be increased, what inference unfavourable
to Reform could be deduced from that hypothesis ? Had
the fourteen Roman Catholics in the House (there were
no morel acted such a part, as to justify the imputation on
them ? Had they proved that slavery was a part of their
religion ? Why should they commit a trespass on the
estate of which they were joint tenants? Here I stiud
(said the /lon. Gentleman), a Roman Catholic before
you, once, indeed, banned and degraded, with the doors of
this House closed ignominiously against me ; but now
(and I speak it with equal gratitude and exultation),
though inferior in station and in faculty to most of those
around me, I feel that I stand on the m ijestic and
lofty level of British citizenship—(Loud cheers)—to
all constitutional intents, and for all political pur-
poses, the equal of the best and proudest of you all ;
and shall I, madly and perversely, all Roman Catholic
as I am, commit upon my own rights an insane suicide?—
(Cheers.) Bot, away with these distinctions ! let the words
Catholic and Protestant be heard no more ; and if it be wise
and well to commit the sacred rancours of theology to ob-
livion, shall we Hot bury in the same profound forgetful•
ness those jealousies which we lay to provinciality for
more than to genuine patriotism ? Or, if we must re.
member on which side of the Channel we were born, let
it be in order to do complete justice between countries, and
build the common greatness upon the imperishable fabric
of their everlasting concord.--(Cheers.) But has this
injunction been followed? Has justice been done to Ire •
land ? He thought not. On what principle did the
G wernment go ? They had stated none. Taxes and
houses were to regulate the borough representation;
population the county representation ; by what stan-
dard did they mean to regulate the proportions be•
tween the two countries ? But he would reserve re-
marks on this head until to-morrow. The Hon. Member
went on to contend, that the forty-shilling tenants in fee
in Ireland should be allowed to vote ; and he reprobated
the notion of giving two Members to the University of
Dublin, which is only famed for its taciturnity, and was
known as the silent sister in the family of science. It
was a mere sacerdotal corporation, and it was monstrous
to give it two Members, while Kilkenny had only one.
Mr. CROKER said, that although he perfectly agreed
with those Hon. Members, that to the details of this
treasure the most attentive consideration must be given in
the Committee, yet he saw, in the very denunciation of
thsotserondgetaailnsdbycotgheen Rightcogent
argumentHonourable
againstthe whole the Chief
principleSeLretary,
a
of the proposed Reform. The details of the Bill moved
for by the Right Hon. Gentleman would,ercompa.ratlively
speaking, be of little consideration, if it
an insulated measure. But they were goingetoa sshlanifeetre
whole fabric of the Constitution of the Empire ; they were
going to leave nothing in England, nothing in Scotland,

nothing in Ireland, nothing in Wales, unchanged. And
yet Ireland and Scotland had the mortification of finding
that although everything was to be changed, the changes
would be unproductive to thou of any important advan-
tages. It was impossible to deny the validity of the argu-
ment of the Hon. Members for Irel ind, that, taken with
reference to the English Bill, the Irish Bill did not pro-
pose to do anything for Ireland. They asserted, justly,
that his Majesty's Ministers had employed the best mathe-
matician', the ablest philosophers of the new light to ap.
portion the representation of England ; that they were
going to give to some counties in England two, to some
three, to some four representatives ; that the whole Eng-
lish measure was to proceed on the principle of popula-
tion ; and that, nevertheless, many counties in Scotland
and in Ireland, the population of which was larger
than the population of counties in England to
which it was proposed to give an increase of Members,
were to have no increase whatever. The county of
Cork, for instance, had a population which, he be-
lieved, exceeded a million ; he had never heard it esti-
mated at less than six or seven hundred thousand. The
county of Cork, however, was to have but two Members.
While the county of Cumberland, the whole population
of which did not exceed one hundred and sixty thousand,
was to have four Members. Undoubtedly, the refusal to
give the county of Cork an additional number of Members
was contrary to the principle of the English Bill ; and
the Hon. Members for Ireland had a right to complain of
it, and to say, " Let us be treated equally and fairly ; let
the principle which you apply to Cumberland and other
English counties be applied to Cork and other Irish coun
ties." It was true, unfortunately, there was no Member
for Cork in the Cabinet, or the interests of that county
would probably have been better attended to. But although
there was no Member for Cork in the Cabinet, there were
Irish Members in that House who showed they were per-
fectly able to plead the cause of their country, with a force
of argument which he (Mr. Croker) considered to be un-
answerable. The Hon. and Learned Member for Milborne-
port had, in speaking of the University of Dublin, rather
ungratefully sneered at the taciturnity of " the silent sis-
ter." But however silent, she had certainly done much to
remove from herself the reproach, by the education of in-
dividuals she had sent forth, and who, in that House,
had by no means retained that character. The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman himself had derived all his earlier
knowledge from that University. He (Mr. Croker) re-
mensbered the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's making his
debut as an orator in that University, when he gave the
promise of ability which he had since so completely made
good. He undoubtedly, however, agreed with the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman, that if the University of Dublin
was to have an additional Member, there could be no
reason for confining the elective franchise to the Fellows
and Scholars. He did not see why the same rule as in
England ought not to he followed; and why Masters of
Arts should not be qualified to rote. Adverting to the
population as the proposed basis of the Reform, he (Mr.
Croker) was of opinion, that before entering into the de-
tails of the measure, the House ought to be in possession
of full and accurate statements of the fact ; and it was
therefore his intention to move, before the second reading
of the Bill, fur returns of the population of Ireland as
compared with the population of England and Scotland.
Mr. STANLEY observed across the table that returns
of that nature were in preparation, and should be laid on
the table of the House.
Mr. CROKER was glad to hear it, and had no doubt
that the returns would be laid on the table of the House,
the day after the debate on the Bill. That, however'
would be better than in the last Session, when there were
two or three debates on the measure without any return
at all. If the returns arrived in time, be should not make
his motion. The House and the country ought to follow
the advice which had been given by an Hon. Member, and
to look at the subject as an imperial question; but he was
sure that the mere declaration of Ministers, that no addi-
tional Members were necessary for Ireland or Scotland
would not be considered satisfactory by those countries.
He could not in his conscience (enemy as he was to the
principle of change which pervaded the proposed Reform)
say that it ought to be so. When, by the English Bill, a
new and interminable scene of claims of right had been
opened to the people, it was not to be expected that any
portion of the people would allow those claims and de-
mands of right to be limited or rejected merely by the sic
volo of a Minister. It would be much more statesman-
like, and much more satisfactory, if Ministers, on the motion
for the Speaker's leaving the chair on the English Bill,
were to state at once what was their final resolution with
respect to the representation of Ireland and Scotland. If
he (Mr. Croker) understood that the vote with respect to
the English Bill was to be conclusive with respect to
the claims of Ireland and Scotland, he should certainly
give that vote with very different sentiments and with
very different expectations from those which he should
entertain if he understood that those claims were still left
open to consideration. In his opinion, it behoved every
Scotch and every Iri.h Member, before he consented to
disfranchise a single English borough, or to enfranchise a
single English town, or to divide a single English county,
distinctly to understand that satifactory justice would be
done to Scotland and Ireland. It was impossible nut to
be sensible, from the great disquietude which the general
proposition of his Majesty's Government had created in
the country, that if their plan with respect to England
were carried into effect, it would be indispensable to in-
crease the number of Members for the other parts of the
empire.

Sir R. INGLIs and Mr. SHELL explained.

Lord ALTHORP observed, that the present was not a
fit time for discussing the details of the Bill which his
Right Hon. Friend had moved for leave to bring in. He
could not help, however, remarking, that when the Right
lion. Gentleman who had just spoken attributed the
various claims and demands of increased representation to
the measure which had been brought in by his Majesty's
Government, and stated that those claims and demands
had no previous existence, he was in a great error. The
wish for Parliamentary Reform was very far from arising
for the first time when Ministers submitted the subject
to the consideration of Parliament; it existed and had
frequently been manifested long before. The Right
Hon. Gentleman said that Ministers, in moving
the Committee on the English Bill, should state unequivo-
cally the number of Mern'iers which it was their intention
ultimately to propose for Scotland and Ireland. He (Lord
Althorp) would again state, that it was the determina- ,
tion of Ministers to abide by the number of Members
which they had already proposed for Scotland and Ireland ;
and that they would endeavour to persuade the House to
agree to that proposition. It had been asserted that his
Right Hon. Friend had said something against the Pro-
testant interest in Ireland. He (Lord Althorp) was not
aware of anything of the kind. All that his Right Hon.
Friend had said was, that the system of perpetuating free-
men in Ireland—they being in general sectaries—was a
vicious one. The Hon. Member for Downpatrick had
also laboured under a misapprehension, in supposing that
iu what had fallen from his Right Hon. Friend he meant
to allude to the part which that Hon. Gentleman had
taken on the subject. He could assure the Hon. Mem-
ber for Downpatrick that that was not the case ; and he
(Lord Althorp) would add, that from what he had seen
of the conduct of the Hon. Member for Downpatrick in
that House, if any observations derogatory to him hail
been made, they would have been much misplaced. He
would not then go into the question of the fit number of
Members for Ireland. But he certainly did not think
that because the representation of England was apportioned
by one rule, the same rule must necessarily be observed
with respect to the other portions of the empire.
Other circumstances ought to be taken into considera-
tion. The general state of each country ought to be re-
garded ; and it ought to be ascertained whether that country
was so represented that its interests did not suffer in that
House. Now, on looking back, he must say that
Irish questions had been most ably supported in
that House. The population was in a very different state
in many parts of Ireland from that in which it area in
former
Ireland
mightcountry.
b 0 c
o Indeednsid e
r e
d the a s
having nutnbe r
be
e ofn
England ; and there were other circumstances which did
not recommend any great increase of the number of for
for
the
settled so short a time ago as thirty-two years ; and any
change was unnecessary, and uncalled for by justice. He
hail always felt the strongest interest for the prosperity of
Ireland, although in no way whatever connected with that
country ; and he had always felt that no Member of that
House did his duty unless he considered the prosperity of
Ireland as inseparably associated with the prosperity of the
empire at large. At the present moment, he was happy
to say, that however they might lament the disturbed
feel-
ing which existed in Ireland, the wealth of that country
was evidently increasing. In England, the Excise duties
during the last year had fallen off; in Ireland they had in-
creased. This was a proof of the improved condition of
the middle and lower classes ; and another proof was,
that there had been a considerable augmentation of de-
posits in the Savings' Banks in Ireland. With respect to
other circumstances by which the tranquillity of Ireland
was threatened, he trusted that they would he put down ;
and he was persuaded that to so intelligent and active a
many
want-
other
materialspeoPlep of prosperity,ossessedof aso
tranquillityso
fe rt ile,waansd
allofthat
so
ing for the improvement of their state.
Mr. GOULBURN observed, that when the Noble
Lord adverted to the question why the same proportion
was not observed in the proposed represeatation for Ireland

' as in the proposed representation for England, he asked
the affairs of Ireland bad been badly attended to in that
House. Why, was not that the argument of those who
opposed any meddling with the representation of England ?
And how had their argument been met? By a reference
to population, to the number of houses, to the amount of
taxation. Yet, when the Irish gentlemen appealed to
the same principles, the Noble Lord took refuge in the
argument resorted to by the opponents of the English Bill,
and expected that the Irish gentlemen would be satisfied
with it ! There could be no doubt that, upon the principle
of the English Bill, Cork and Galway were entitled to an
increase of representation. The argument to that effect
was unanswerable. If the House agreed to the English
Bill, they could not justly resist the claims of Ireland ;
and if they did resist those claims, they would be brought
forward, year after year, with additional force. He dis-
claimed the opinion that the representation of Ireland
ought to be increased ; but Government had opened
the subject, and the Irish had a right to complain if they
were not treated with equal justice. If the English Bill
might be justly characterised as leading to revolution, might
not the Irish Bill be justly characterised as leading to im-
mediate discord, and to the ultimate separation of the two
countries? Into the details of the measure he would not
then enter, reserving himself for a future occasion.
Mr. F. W. MULLINS said he had neither the wish
nor intention to trespass on the attention of the House at
any length, but he felt he would be doing an injustice to
his country, to his constituents, and to his own convic-
tions, were he to refrain from expressing his decided
dissatisfaction with the measure of Reform proposed for
Ireland by the Right Honourable Secretary. He (Mr.
Mullins) was well aware that it would not satisfy
the people of Ireland. they had reason to hope that many
important alterations and improvements would be made in
their Reform Bill, and that England would at length see
the policy of conciliating feelings, which force could never
conquer, by giving Ireland its due proportion of the advan-
tages about to be conferred by Reform on Great Britain.—
(Hear, hear.) Bat such, he regretted to find, was not
the case, and the consequences, he feared, would be most
serious. He (Mr. Mullins) well knery how great would
be the disappointment of the people of Ireland, and he
would venture to assert that no individual who considered
the present convulsed state of that country—east, west,
north, and south—with the calmness, deliberation, and
impartiality which the importance of the subject demanded,
differed from him in the anticipation of the frightful re-
sults which the insufficiency of the proposed measure
paved the way for.—" Hear, hear.) The people of Ire-
land naturally expected a further increase in the repre-
sentation—a greater extension of the elective fran-
chise in counties, and an alteration of the present much-
faulted system of registry.—(Hear.) They were not
unreasonable—they sought not more than they were
justly entitled to—but not one of these important conces-
stuns and improvements had been made ; however, there
was still time for amendment, and be called upon the
Right Hon. Secretary, as he valued the permanence of
the Legislative Union, as he valued that which is at
all times the characteristic of a good Government—
justice, to revise the measure of Reform for Irel !rid, about
to be introduced to-night, before it went into Committee;
otherwise, no person acquainted with the present state of
Ireland could avoid foreseeing the commencement of a reign
of terror in that unhappy country, which in the end might
possibly lead to results equally disastrous and irremediable.
He again called upon his Majesty's Ministers to re-consider
the measure, and sincerely trusted they would see the ex-
pediency of making those alterations which justice de-
manded, and the people of Ireland looked to, as the only
means of securing the happiness, tranquillity, and pro-
sperity of that country.—(Hear, bear.)
After an explanation from Lord ALTHORP, leave was
given to bring in the Bill.
REFORM BILL—SCOTLAND.

The LORD ADVOCATE slid that in rising, pursuant
to his notice, to move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend
the representation of the people of Scotland, it was not
his intention, nor, he was sure, would the House expect
him, to enter into any detail on the subject ; because it
must he in the recollection of every one that towards the
close of the last Session, and on the second reading of the

then measure, he had summed up all that it had ap-
peared to him to be necessary to say on that which
was almost identically the same Bill as the Bill for
which he was about to have the honour of moving.

In principle there was no alteration whatever ; nor was
there any change in the details calculated to raise a dif-
ference of opinion on the two propositions. In the for-
mer Bill the town of Port Glasgow had been united to
Greenock ; it was now intended that it should be sepa-
rate. The way in which the other boroughs were
grouped remained the same. With regard to the qualifi.
cation for franchise, there was no difference whatever in

tke new Bill with respect to counties ; and hardly any
with respect to boroughs—merely such as to render the
measure in some degree conformable to that for Eng-
land. There was another little difference with respect to
the working part of the Bill. Instead of the former mode
of adjudication, a new tribunal was to he formed of three
Sheriffs, who were to visit the various counties with the
least possible delay, in order to review the registration of
votes. Such were the slight points in which the proposed
differed from the last Bill. The Learned Lord concluded
by moving for leave to bring in the Bill.
Sir C. FORBES observed that the purpose professed
by the Bill was to amend the representation of the
people of Scotland; while its real object seemed to be
to pull that representation to pieces. They were like
tinkers, who in mending one hole made six. The
former Bill was so hurried through the House, that the
people of Scot! Ind did not understand it ; but they
had afterwards come to understand it, and they had
most serious objections to it. They had shown this
by petitions to Parliament, and by Addresses to the Throne.
In Particular they objected to the manner in which the
county representation was regulated. They objected to the
franchise for counties; they would not have cared if it had
been carried much lower, so that the present principle had
been preserved, instead of the uniform plan of the Learned
Lord. That plan would give rise to much trouble, diffi-
culty, and dissatisfaction. Besides, it was a positive rub-
bery of the just and legal rights of the proprietors. 'The
freeholders held their qualifications by a title t hat was as
good as that by which the landlords of England owned
their land. It was a gross injustice to take that from
them without compensation, and they had as good a right
to compensation for their superiorities as if their land were
taken away to form a road or a canal. The Bill was a
revolutionary measure, which would ruin the country.
Captain GORDON did not wish to discuss the Bill,
but to ask the Learned Lord on what principle it was
founded. He saw small boroughs in England preserving
their two Members, while large counties in Scotland had
only one. He wished the Learned Lord would tell him
why the same principles were not applied to Scotland as to
England ?

Sir G. WARRENDER bad experienced great disap-
pointment at learning that no addition was to be made to
the number of Scotch representatives ; with respect to
compensation, that was out of the question, and the only
compensation that be would ask for or wish, was an in-
crease in the number of Members, to defend the interests
of Scotland. To that Scotland had a right. Looking to
the great increase in her wealth, her commerce, and her
population since the Union—looking at the great commu.
nities which had grown up there, he thought they had
right to representatives. He was a Member for an English
borough, yet had he been often obliged to get Bills through
the House fur those communities. He thought Scotland
had a right to additional Members for the great revenue
she gave to the State, and the small expence she caused.
She yelded five millions to the Crown, and cost only a few
hundred thousands. Such was her state of peace and
prosperity, that she was governed at a very small expence.
In England there are several small boroughs which were
allowed to return two Members, while in Scotland there
were counties with a population of 200,000 that had only
one. That was not fair. He made these remarks out of
no spirit of hostility to Reform, and certainly out of no
spirit of hostility to his Majesty's Ministers.
Mr. CUMMING BRUCE regretted to see that this
Bill contained the same principles of spoliation as the last
Bill, and the same principle of uniform franchise. He
would not, however, then discuss its provisions, but only
declare that he agreed with other Hon. Members i❑ saying
that Scotland was not fairly treated, and had not got a due
portion of Members.
Mr. GILLON entered his protest against the claim for
compensation put in by the Hon. Baronet. He was not
aware that any freeholders of Scotland had made such a
claim, except a few in Argylesiiirc, who were inimical to
the Bill. He had heard of no such claims except from
persons interested in keeping up the present system. Those
persons who purchased superiorities purchased them to
job with there, and they had jobbed with them in a most
disgraceful manner. He could not agree that Scotland
was dissatisfied, and he appealed to the meetings which had
taken place there, at which such feelings were not ex-
pressed. He would not enter into any defence of the mea-
sure, but must repeat his protest against the claim for
compensation.
Sir G. MURRAY could not remain wholly silent when
a measure of so much importance was brought forward
affecting his country. The feeling of alarm and apprehen-
sion had increased in Scotland, and great danger, it was
conceived, would result from the introduction of the Inea-

sure. The greater part of4he people of property there,
Who from their intelligence were capable of judging of the
effects of a complicated measure, were decidedly of opinion
that this measure would be very dangerous. The measure
was one of innovation ; it was upsetting and altering the
Constitution of the country, and in doing that, at least all
parts of the empire ought to be fairly treated. According
to the principles of the Bill, however, Scotland was not
fairly treated, and was not adequately represented. He
concurred in opinion with those gentlemen from Ireland,
who complained that Ireland was unjustly dealt with ; and
so was Scotland. Why were the principles which were
applied to England, not applied to Scotland and Ireland 7
He did not approve of those principles; he thought it
dangerous to legislate on general principles; but in adopt-
ing them, they ought to he carried fully into effect, and be
extended equally to all places. Small boroughs were en-
franchised in England, while two representatives were
denied in Scotland to counties containing a large popu-
lation. Ireland and Scotland had both ample cause for
complaint that the number of their representatives was not
increased. The Noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, said be did not see why the same principle should
he applied to Scotland and Ireland as to England ; but he
asked why they should not? The people of those parts of
the empire were not conscious of any inferiority, and
claimed that the same principles should be applied to them
as to England. Would the Noble Lord point out in what
the difference consisted, that different principles should be
applied to them ? The new Members that were given to
Scotland, too, were all given to the commercial interests;
but were the agricultural interests of Scotland deserving
no increase? There was no part of the empire where
agriculture had made greater progress, or wars conducted
with more skill and more science than in Scotland. The
agriculturists, then, had as good a claim to an increased
representation as the commercial classes. He objected,
also, to the mutilation of counties. Why were the boun-
daries of Scotch counties to be altered ? Why was a piece
to be cut off from Perth to add to Clackmannan ? At
present Perth was a perfectly independent couuty. Was
a piece of it, then, to he cut off to make it dependent on
some great family, or on some oligarchy. He agreed with
those Hon. Members who said that they could not
look upon these three Bills as distinct measures, but
all as forming parts of one whole measure. He regretted
that the discussion was taken on three Bills ; for that led
last session to the neglect of the Scotch Bill. Gentlemen
attended at divisions; but they did not attend to hear the
arguments that were advanced in favour of Scotland, and
in support of her interests. On this account he could not
wait to express his opposition till the second reading of the
Bill. He must oppose it—beginning at the very first
step, because the second step would be an act of injustice
towards Scotland, and the third step an act of injustice to-
wards Ireland.—(Hear.)
Mr. CUTLAR FERGUSSON agreed with the Right
Hon. Gentleman, that Scotland ought to receive a greater
number of Members, and he disagreed with the Hon.
Member (Mr. Gillon), who said that Scotland was satis-
fied. Scotland was not bound to he satisfied ; it was not
just that she should be satisfied. He complained that this
Bill increased the number of Members for England
twenty.three more than the last Bill, while it gave no
increase whatever to Scotland. He did not grudge Eng-
land her number of Members, but lie claimed for Scotland
an equal proportionable share. The present measure was
to effect a great, a complete change in the representation,
and Scotland, as a part of Great Britain, was entitled to
laann de
Members now reserved for the English small boroughs,
qwuaolusldharoenloyf
inrejuprreesetrahteatimone.aurTeh. e pTahrteiatlwit)etnttyo-Ethnrge;
would have been more appropriately given to represent
counties of Scotland and Ireland. Scotland was not satis-
fied with her share of representation at the Union. That
was brought about by corrupting the Nobles, and Scot-
land was unjustly treated. That injustice might now be
repaired. Admitting that justice was done to Scotland at
the Union, which he denied, the great alteration which
had since taken place in her condition would make a great
increase in her representation necessary. At the period
of the Union, the account of her revenue to that of Eng-
land was only as 1 to 35 ; but she now paid as much as
Ito7or 8. On the very lowest calculation, she might
at least claim to have sixty representatives under this Bill.
He objected to giving two representatives to small bo-
roughs, while only one was given to the largest and wealthiest
county of Scotland. One additional representative also
had been given to Wales, without any sufficient reason.
Wales, with 700,000 people, was to have as great an ad-
dition of llembers as Ireland, with nearly eight millions.
It was said that there were many advantages in giving two
Members to the boroughs ; but why, then, not allow the
counties to have those advantages? If it were thought
advisible to give such a place as Brighton two Members,
why not give to Lanark, with 250,000 people, a similar
share in the representation ? He was not of opinion that
two Members should be given to each place ; he thought
in many cases one enough ; but as the Bill gave more than
one to small and unimportant boroughs, why not give two
to all places of greater wealth and importance? He did
not object to England having five hundred Members, but
he roust say, while England had five hundred, and Scot-
land only the number allowed by this Bill, Scotland ought
not to be satisfied. He objected to any compensation for
superioritiea. In his opinion, however, representation
should be based on property or means, or property which
would insure independence, or on means, by the exercise
of industry, of insuring subsistence and independence.
He approved of that part of the English Bill which con-
firmed to freemen all the rights which they inherited as
their birth-right. Freemen were allowed to retain their
votes, though they had no property; there were no supe-
riorities in Scotland, altogether without property, and
therefore he would suggest to the Learned Lord, and
strongly recommend, that the principle adopted with re-
gard to the freemen should be extended to the superiority
holders in Scotland. The superiority was not wholly di-
vided from property ; he denied, as the Learned Lord had
formerly stated, that there were any such things as needy
superiority holders in Scotland. Certainly he would take
care no superiorities should be separated to make votes
hereafter; but preserving those now in existence would,
he thought, do no harm, if he thought preserving them
would preserve the present right of voting, which was the
most abominable system that ever existed. But as the
situation of the freemen would render their votes of little
importance, so would the extension of the franchise in
Scotland so dilute the superiority holders as to render
them no longer mischievous. He would not allow the
superiority to be separated from property—he would con-
fine the franchise to the superiority united to property,
but, preserving that union, he would preserve the rights
of the present holders of superiorities. lie was satisfied
with the principles of the Bill ; he would give them his
most cordial support; but he hoped, at the same time, the
Learned Lord would take into consideration the suggestion
he had thrown out, which would only make the principles
of the Bill more efficacious.

Mr. HUNT could not avoid congratulating the Noble
Lord and Hon. Gentlemen opposite, particularly the Right
Hon. Gentleman (the Secretary for Ireland,) and the
Learned Lind who had brought forward the present mo-
tion, at the great unanimity which prevailed amongst the
Scotch and Irish Members against their respective'Bills.
Not one Member, he believed, from Scotland or Ireland
had spoken, who had expressed himself satisfied with
these Bills. One Member, indeed, said the people of Scot-
land were satisfied, but even he wanted one Member more.
Ho could not also avoid reminding the Hon. Member for
Kirkcudbright that he was not now satisfied with the
Bill, tbough the Hon. Member, when he had formerly
stated, from his own sources of information, that
the people' of Scotland were not satisfied with the
Bill, assured the House that there were not three persons
iu all Scotland not favourable to the Bill.—(A laugh.)
The Hon. Member for Middlesex said the same.—(A
laugh,) (Mr. HUME would say so now.) Then the
Hon. Member would contradict all the statements made
t:-night by the Members for Scotland, which he heard
with satisfaction, because they confirmed the statement he
had formerly made to the House. lie asserted that Ire-
land would be dissatisfied, and that Ministers must he
aware that do what they would they could not give satis-
faction to certain parties there. Unless they gave a place
of some sort to the Hon. and Learnel Member for Kerry
they must have a separation.—(Hear, and a laugh.) As
for himself he had always been for separation, and was con-
vinced they would have it if they did not give something
to the Hon. and Learned Member for Kerry.
Mr. KENNEDY denied that the people of Scotland
were dissatisfied and disappointed with this Bill. On the
contrary, he could assure the House that the people of
Scotland not only were satisfied with the Bill, but that
they were impatient, if lie might so say, for the enact-
ment of it.--(Hear, hear.) Those who said that the
people of Scotland were dissatisfied with the Bill, were
those who would be dissatisfied with any Bill of Reform,
and who were opposed to Reform altogether.—(Hear,
hear.) Believing this, he looked with distrust, and be
might almost say, with indignation, at the clamour that
had been raised by Hon. Gentlemen on the other side for
an additional number of Members for Scotland. He
cautioned the supporters of the Bill against this cry, for
he was sure that those who raised it would not pledge
themselves to vote for the Bill if the additional Members

were given. Indeed, be was certain that the giving of
these additional Members would embarrass the Govern.

ment, and would be made the means of embarrassing
them, as there must then be a remodelling of the propsied