The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-18 00:00:00

THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS' BILL.

The Earl of H ADDINGTON said that their Lordships
must recollect that during this discussion dip Noble and
Learned Lord opposite had, in a good-hum red tone, and
with an air of courteous exultation, referred to the manner in
which he carried, two years ago, the Scotch Burgh Bill
through the House. He (the Earl of Haddington) believed
that during the greater part of the Committee on that Bill,
the Noble Earl near him, and the Noble Marquis below
him, and himself, were the only three Peers who appeared
to oppose that Bill. The Noble and Learned Lord en-
countered them, and achieved an easy triumph ; but he be-
lieved that during the whole course of that debate, the House
never contained, taking both sides, more than thirty of their
Lordships. The grounds upon which the Bill was opposed
were shortly these :—lt was principally contended that his
Majesty's Ministers had issued a Commission of Inquiry into
the state and condition of the Scotch Corporations, as prepa-
ratory to legislation ; but during that session it appeared to his
Majesty's Government, that, as far as the Scotch Corporations
were concerned, it would be better to legislate first and to in-
quire afterwards, and consequently they issued a Commission
of Inquiry. He (the Earl of Haddington), and those who
acted with him, being old fashioned people, suggested to the
Government that it would be rather more convenient to inquire
first and to legislate afterwards. However, the Bill passed,
and the Scotch corporations were now reaping all the benefits
of that measure. The Commission of Inquiry was issued
more than two years ago, and be believed that the Commis-
sioners had now made their Report, andethat that Report would
furnish a strong example that in future it would be rather better
for their Lordships to inquire before they acted. lie ought
to state that many of the Scotch Corporations possessed very
important patronage. The Corporation of Edinburgh ap-
pointed all the Clergy of the Established Church in Edin-
burgh. Three-fourths of the Professors of the University of
Edinburgh were appointed by the same body. The COrpora-
tion of Glasgow also possessed very considerable patronage.
The Commission appointed consisted of most respectable gen-
tlemen ; all of them Whigs, the greater part of them Whig
lawyers at the Scotch Bar. He wished to see their Report, or
the evidence on which it was founded, or both ; but that Re-
port, he understood, set forth that the powers, jurisdiction, and
patronage vested by the Scotch Burgh Act in these annually
and popularly-elected bodies was too extensive, and not safe in
institutions over which the town council exercised so complete
a controul. He therefore thought that it was extremely desir-
able that this document should be laid befoi e their Lordships;
and he rose for the purpose of receiving from the Noble Vis-
count an official assurance that the Report had been made, and
that it should forthwith be laid on the table of the House.

Viscount MELBOURNE begged leave to state to their
Lordships that the Report had undoubtedly been received. It
was received about the Bth of the present month, and it would
be laid on the table of the House as speedily as possible.
Lord BROUGHAM thought he should be able to show the
Noble Earl that he had been wrong in the charges he had
brought against those who had introduced the Scotch Burghs
Bill. It was said that the Report of the Commissioners would
show that the House had taken an erroneous view of the sub-
ject. At one time it had boen considered fortunate to be a
Scotchman ; now, if a man was a Scotch Commissioner all
was right. A Scotch Commission was considered absolute
perfection—its authority was without appeal, and the House
was now called upon to say that it had done wrung because a
Scotch Commission in its Report said that they ought to have
done otherwise. He would only in addition say that he regret-
ted that this deference was confined to the Scotch and not ex-
tended to the English Commissioners.
After an observation from a Noble LORD, whose name we
could not learn—

The Earl of ABERDEEN said a great feeling of disatis-
faction now prevailed in Scotland, with respect to the Church
Commission—a dissatisfaction and discontent which was only
beginning, and it was impossible to say where it would end.
He hoped that the Report, to which his Noble Friend had
alluded, would speedily be laid on the table—and, with res-
pect to the Church Commission, he hoped that the Noble Vis-
count would adept such a course, as would give satisfaction to
the country.

Viscount MELBOURNE was extremely desirous of doing
all in his power to satisfy the country, and he greatly regret
ted that dissatisfaction should prevail with respect to the
Church Commission. But he thought that that discontent
arose rather from the violence of feeling between the two
parties in Scotland, than from any defect in the constitution
of the Coynntission itself. The late Ministry, he conceived,
had acted very imprudently in recommending any grant from
the Throne. With respect to the Commissioners, he would
say that they were not hostile to the Established Church of
Scotland. No general expression of opinion in favour of
the voluntary principle, ought to he sufficient to prevent a
re-in from sitting on such a Commission as this. If he could
adopt any means which would give satisfaction •••ithout im-
pairing the efficacy or altering the nature of the Commission,
he could assure the flo:Fe he should ever be most willing to
adopt them.
The House then proceeded to the discussion of the Muni-
cipal Corporation Bill.
On Clause 24 being put, . . .

Lord L YND El URST rose and said that it was his inten-
tion to propose some amendments to this clause; but as those
amendment were connected with each other, perhaps it might
be more convenient to their Lordships if he stated the whole
together, and took the discussion in that form, rather than
take them individually, and in succession, which might very
much tend to protract the debate. Before he proceeded to
state the nature of the amendments which he was about to
submit to their Lordships' consideration, he could not forbear
adverting to an observation which had been made during the
evening by a Noble Duke on the other side of the House.
That Noble Duke had charged them (the Opposition) with
having wasted time.—( Hear, hear.) Perhaps never, in the
history of Parliament, had a more difficult question—ernbrac-
kg a. greater variety of details, or requiring more considera-
tion and caution—presented itself to the attention of their
Lordships. It was now, he believed, fourteen days since the
Bill had been proposed to be read a second time. Their
Lordships were already far advanced in the Committee ; and,
when he (Lord Lyndhurst) found from the votes of the other
House that that House had been employed six weeks in the
discussion of this measure, he must protest against the charge
of the Noble Duke as a charge utterly destitute of foundation,
and one which ought not to have been preferred until the
Noble Duke had maturely considered whether it had any
real foundation. The Noble Duke also charged them with
havinc, made great and essential alterations in the Bill,
which he seemed to consider wholly unjustifiable. He (Lord
Lyndhurst) was not aware that any alterations had been
made which affected the principle of the Bill ; he was not
aware of any which, at least, had made any such alteration up
to the present time. What was the nature of the amend-
ments proposed, and those which had been adopted ? In
fact only three had been adopted, exclusive of matters of
mere detail, which, of course, had not occupied the attention
of the Noblo Duke. The first was an amendment only carry-
ing further the principle laid down by the Noble Viscount
himself in this Bill—that relating to the property of freemen.
The Noble Viscount's Bill protected the property of the free-
men up to a certain point. Those with whom he acted would
protect it to the full extent to which it was entitled to pro-
tection.—( Hear, hear.) Was that any alteration at variance
with the Bill in this respect ? Again, as to the second amend-
ment. The Noble Viscount had protected the elective fran-
chise of the freemen up to a certain point. This they (the
Opposition) carried farther, for they would protect the rights
of the freemen to the extent to which they were carried by the
Reform Bill. Was this adopted on any principle at all incon-
sistent with the principle of the Bill as laid down by the Noble
Viscount in its very frame and form? The only other sub-
stantial amendment was that which related to the qualification
of the councillors. The Noble Viscount required a qualifica-
tion himself. The burgesses were required to be rate payers
—they must be residents for three years—they must have paid
their rates for three years; but he (Lord Lyndhurst) had
thought some further qualification necessary, and in adopting
his amendment, the House had done nothing inconsistent with
the principles laid down by the Noble Viscount Thus much
for the charges of delay, and the charge of having mutilated
the Bill. And now he would address their Lordships with re-
spect to the amendments which he intended to propose. He
would first state it was in reference to the governing body of
Corporations that his amendments would be directed. What,
he asked, according to the Bill, was the present shape of the
governments of Corporations ? The members of Corporations
were to be elected by the rate payers ; they were to hold office
for three years ; and no qualifications were to be required.
But their Lordships had thought that a qualification was
necessary ; but still the precise nature of that qualification
had not been determined. Now he asked in what way were
these bodies of corporators to act? They were to be elected
by the whole body of rate-payers, and for the period of three
years. They would be required to give pledges to their con-
stituents as to the nature of their conduct. They would be
obliged to render an account of the manner in which they
had discharged their duties, and, looking always forward to
the period of re-election, they would be obliged to flatter the
prejudices and yield to the feelings of those by whom they
were to be re-appointed. Their Lordships had seen so much
of this of late, that they would not shut their eyes to the fact