The Sun.
London, England, 1832-05-22 00:00:00

REFORM BILL.

The Order of the Day was then read, and the House
resolved into Committee on the Bill.

That part of Clause 3, relating to Schedule C, was then
read by the Clerk.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH said it would be in the re-
collection of their Lordships that upon the last discussion
on the postponement of the consideration of the Reform
Bill, he had taken the liberty of stating that he should in-
troduce the names of such places as he thought ought to
be enfranchised. He had done this because he wished to
prove his sincerity in declaring in favour of Reform. He
rejoiced the moment was arrived when he could explain
the nature of the amendments which he had intended to
propose. He had been of opinion, and was still of opi-
nion, that the course which he had struck out for himself
was the best. In stating these amendments he wished
their Lordships to recollect that whatever might have been
their opinions previous to the second reading of the Bill,
they were now placed in a totally different situation. Toey
had by that vote sanctioned the principles of the Bill, and
it was also to be recollected that the Bill itself came up to
their Lordships' House supported by a large majority of
the Commons. Under these and other circumstances it
was imposteble not to see that at extensive m. asure had
become inevitable. Standing in that position, it was the
duty of their Lordships to pass, if possible, such a Bill as
would be not only safe but permanent. That was tle,
object which he and the Noble Lords who acted with him
had in view, and he confessed that re looked with more
anxiety to the permanency of the measure than even that
it should at first be a safe one. Nothing was more ruinous
to the best interests of this country than change. Nothing
tended snore to create insecurity, to destroy pr sperit), and
to affect the comforts of the people, as frequent changes.
In order to effect his object he proposed that enfranchise-
ment should precede disfranchisement ; and this be did
because he could thus best give security to the possession
of the franchise. The next question which he and his
friends had to consider was upon what principle they
should grant enfranchisement. They knew that popula-
tion and taxes would not afford a criterion that would
give permanency to their plan, because in a country
like this new towns were continually rising. Upon
these principles they would be entitled to representa-
tion, and then demands would always give rise to
changes. They then took certain plats wishin fixed
limits, having a certain population, paying a certain
amount of taxes, and having a certain claim besides for
representation, such as their manufacturing importance.
This brought him to the selection of twenty places, to each
of which be proposed to give two Representatives, and he
also proposed to give one Member to each of two places in
Wales; and he did not think that any inconvenience
would be felt by this arrangement for Wales, because the
towns of that part of the country had only one Repre-
sentative. Having thus disposed of forty-two Members to
the manufacturing town?, which was eleven more than
were given to them by the Reform Bill, be next proposed
to do away with schedule B ; and he did so b-c tuse he
did not approve of a single representation, which always
left the minority, however respctable, as wholly unrepre-
sented. Under the present Bill there would be no end of
changes, a; he could readily show their Lordships. It
was curious to see, upon reference to the list, what a num-
ber of places remained unrepresented which were not in-
ferior in importance to places that were to be enfranchised
by the Bill on the table. As an instance he should merely
mention Croydon as contrasted with Whitby, and he could
point out twenty-five other places which stood in a similar
situation. With regard to the county Members there
could be no doubt that they spoke wi-h more authority in
the House of Commons than the Members for small bo-

roughs; and, upon looking to the extreme danger of mak-
ing further changes, he and other Noble Lords had cer-
tainly thought it expedient to secure the interests of the
Conservatives, while they deemed it proper to insure a re-

spectable representation in the division of counties rather
than to admit certain boroughs with extended !inti.s.
Upon these grounds the Noble Baron said he hat: been
disposed to accede to an increase of the number of Mem-
bers to counties particularly placed. But he begged to
state that seven of those counties had received an addition
of one Member each under circumstances which he and
others did not think expedient. It was deemed by them a
novelty to give three Members to a county, and they
considered it better not to admit such novelties, but to
spare seven Members thus obtained, with a view to give
them as representatives for certain boroughs noted in
schedule B. The Noble Baron having entered into some
further details, he proceeded to read the n,mes of the
towns to which be and other Noble Lords had considered
it advisable that two Members should be g ven. The
names of those towns, which he would then specify,
would be contained in the motion he was about to make ;
they were as follows ;—Manchester, Bit minghana, Leeds,
Sheffield, Sunderland, Wolverhampton, Bradford, Bolton,
Blackburn, Halifax, Macclesfield, Stoke-uiwn-Trent,
Stockport, Stroud, Huddersfield, Kidderminster, Whitby,
Warrington, Frome, and Tynemouth. Now amongst
these towns it happened that, with regard to not less than
six of them, it had not occurred to his Majesty's Ministers
that it was desirable to give the right of the elective
franchise. So far then be objected to the measure. It
was proposed by the Bill, too, to give in fret three Mem-
bers to Manchester, being two fur tie town of Manchester
and 'one for Salford. Now it did appear to him that the
hundred of Salford had no right to any such orotiortion of
representation. On the other hand, looking to the
population and wealth of the county of Lat:caster, he
conceived it expedient that that county should return as
many Members as the county of York. Now the per-
sons most interested in this questi, n in the towns to
which he had referred were nut the operativts, hut the
capitalists, whose property was situated therein; and he
maintained that they were by the Bill now before ti,e
House overwhelmed by their journ ymen, who would have
the right of voting, and who were often, as their ord-
ships were aware of, in a state of insuhordinati ,n, or
combined against their employers. Hence arose tire de-
sire of maay Noble Lords that there should be such a
representation in the division of counties as sh,,uld iff c-
tually protect the property of capitalists, and which
should not confine Asell only to the workmen. In all
these manufacturing towns they gave a vote to the
labourer, labourer, but the operation of this Bill henceforth would
lie had heard much--
Ire this, that there would not be a single labourer in agri-
hliieehtvould asset t that it was
culture who would have a vote. The next point to
which the Noble Lord referred was that of thenepA
,iistrict Members. This was a 'natter up which he
—upon
to the public
ii,,,,pddroftrph.o:uigtihohtninEwheinh,
He objected to allowing the franchise in this case, because
tie held that the division of counties did away with the
abjection of those districts not having the right of reprt-
•entation. He would Teter their Lordships to what had