The Sun.
London, England, 1835-08-04 00:00:00

form, because it comprehended a revolutionary crintiple. The
country had gone a vast deal too far, in these treasures of
Reform. To pass the Bill, would be a violation of Magna
Charts. He objected to the measure altogether. He would
wait to, see what course was taken by other Noble Lords ; but
Unless sonic (me else did so, he should move that the Bill be
read a second time that day six months.
Lord MONSON understood Mr. Parkes was secretary to
the Birmingham Political Union.
Viscount DUNCANNON said that Mr. Parkes not only
was not the Secretary, as had been represented, of the Bir-
mingham Political anion, but he never held any official situa-
tion connected with the Union, nor was he ever a member of
the Colo-refl. When he joined the Union, almost all the in
habitants of the town were connected with it.--( Cries of
" No," from the Opposition Lords.) He entered it late—a
considerable time after its formation.
Lord MONSON believed that Mr. Parkes was an active
cent of the Union. He wrote letters, and was personal!)
Rath,: for them for a iota" period. Whether he held office,
and aetet: ostensibly for them, :;!..a Lordship did not know.
Lord HA.T!IERTON said that, oia pre occasion, Mr.
Parkes was consitlteal. Professionally by the onion.
The Earl of HARE WOOD contended ahat their Lord-
ships ought not to be satisfied, without calling evidence.—
(Crics of " Question.")
Lord PLUNKETT thought it his duty to address a fee
observati:ns to their Lordships, notwithstanding that this was
a question with which he was not so well acquainted as some
others. It was very satisfactory to the public mind, that it
should be ascertained by a solemn inquiry—(laughter)—by a
solemn inquiry—he should repeat his words, until the inter-
ruption which had been offered, not by their Lordships, but
by certain persons in the House should cease—what the na-
ture of these Municipal institutions was. It was not, he be-
lieved, questioeed at any side of the House, that extensive and
substantial reform cras necessary. Suppose everything which
had been said by counsel could be proved at the bar, would
it alter the nature of the real question which they were now
called upon to decide ? The question before the House did
not turn on the contemptible points mooted by Counsel ; it
every Commissioner had been aWhig, or more than Whig,
and committed acts much even more reprehensible, than the
most serious of those charged against them, would there be
any grounds for refusing the reasonable and determined wish
of the people of this country?—(Cheers.) There were two
courses which they might pursue. If they thought that the
principle of this measure were unjust, and that the demands
of the country as expressed through the Commons of Eng-
land ought not to be complied with, it was their duty to say
so, and to say so manfully.—( Hear, hear.) But if they were
of opinion that the feelings of the people could not be abused,
and that their wishes ought not to be resisted, he for one
could not venture (he spoke advisedly) to expose himself to
the consequences of such an opinion being acted on.—( Hear.)
"Do not, my Lords, disgrace yourselves in your own minds
--(loud cheers)—do not lessen the character and dignity
of this House by having recourse to a contemptible expedi-
• ent, which if you consider objectionable, you are bound to
meet in the first instance, by fair discussion.—( Cheers.) I
have a perfect right, my Lords, to warn you against the adop-
tion of a course, which in my mind, will have the effect of
impairing your self estimation, and losing your character with
the public."—( Loud cheers.) What prospect was there, if
evidence were allowed to be taken ? There would be no end
to their proceedings. The Crown had no right to withdraw
charters once granted to corporations ; and if Ministers had
so advised the King to adopt the course pursued by Henry
VIII., when he procured the voluntary surrender of several
charities, what criticism the conduct of those who should au-
thorize such an inquisition would call forth? If the only ob-
ection to this measure was, that it tended to introduce a de-
mocratic principle iuto the constitution of these bodies—that
so far from constituting any objection, would form with him a
ground of approval of the measure.:—( Cheers.) It was to
the fact that the Crown was in this country based upon the
perfect favour of the people that its safety and honour was
to be attributed.—( Cheers.) The experience of the last four
or five years should, he thought, weigh with their Lordships
on this decision. He did not think that the course pursued
for some years past by that House, was calculated to raise its
character in the judgment of the country.—( Hear, hear.) He
could not help expressing it as his conviction, that most of
those now engaged in opposition to this measure, had not
(when they first warmly opposed emancipation and reform,
and then turned round and proclaimed themselves the advo-
cates of these measures) done much to raise that House in the
estimation of the country.—( Cheers.)
The Duke of WELLINGTON said, that at first he felt
disposed to go into Committee on the Bill, and endeavour to
make such alterations in its provisions as he hoped would
take from it many of its objectionable qualities ; but he felt at
the same time that counsel should previously be heard, and
baying heard those Learned Gentlemen, and taking their ob-
servations in connexion with the appendix to the Report of the
Commissioners, he found it impossible to avoid arriving at
the conclusion that the evidence which they tendered at the
bar of their Lordships' House ought to be received. And
further, he. could not think it possible to adopt a general and
sweeping measure of Corporate Reform without that examina-
tion of evidence for which the Learned Gentleman had con-
tended at the bar. After noticing in terms of strong appro-
bation the conduct of several Corporations throughout the
kingdom, and especially that of Liverpool, he declared him-
self surprised to find any Bill founded upon the Reports of
the Commissioners to which such frequent reference had been
made ; but, apart from the imperfect foundation upon which
they rested, he entertained a strong and decided objection to
the Bill. He objected to it as not being a general, but a
partial measure, and directed against 180 out of 300 Corpo-
rations. He would put it to the House to say was it fair or
equitable to repeal all the old charters ? Should such a sweep-
ing proceeding as that be founded upon such a Report from
Commissioners as it was then proposed to make the basis
of their proceedings ? If individual Corporations had miscon-
ducted themselves, the proper mode of dealing with them
was by proceeding in the Court of King's Bench. The
King was the proper visitor of all such bodies, and-the place
wherein be visited was the Court of King's Bench. If they
were resolved to proceed with a Bill thus partial in its cha-
racter, they must proceed by enquiry at their bar. Feel-
ing convinced of this, he was resolved to support the mo-
tion of the Noble Earl, and his vote should be given from
a strong conviction of the necessity of enquiry before they
proceeded to deprive those Corporations of their charters.
He would contend that those Corporations had a right to
bold their privileges in the fullest extent, till deprived by
due course cf law. For_ all these reasons, then, he should
vote for the enquiry, and therefore support the motion of
the Noble Earl. .
The Earl of RIPON had arrived at the conclusion of the
necessity of Reform in Corporations, not from the Report
of Commissioners, but from a general view of the subject.—
(Cheers.) He must confess he was not disposed to pass
this Bill upon the Report of the Commissioners, in which
Report lie had detected many errors. The Noble Lord in-
stanced some trifling errors in the Report upon the Corpo-
ration of Ripon, of which he and the Noble and Learned
Lord on the Woolsack were Aldermen. The Corporation
of Ripon was a burgage tenure Corporation, and had nothing
whatever to do with the election of Members of Parliament;
yet the Commissioners laboured throughout their Report to
connect the Corporation influence wiai political objects. At
the same time, he did not see his way clearly through the
profound enquiry at the bar, which it appeareJ to him would
be endless. He thought there were adequate grounds for
some measure of Reform similar to that before the 'imuse ;..
anal feeling that although that measure was not exactly one Cf
justic:, it was one of expediency, he should vote against the
motion of his Noble Friend, Lord Winchilsea.
The Marquis of BUTE rose amidst cries of " Question."
He could only say for himself, that if he were to entertain this
Bill without hearing the parties whose interests and characters
were affected lav it, he should expect a Bill of pains and penal-
ties to be brought in against himself, confiscating his property,
and should deserve to fall unpitied,
Lord MELBOURNE said, at this late' hour of the night,
I shall detain your Lordships with but very few observations
upon the course which this debate has taken. The Noble and
Learned Lord, a late Lord Chancellor (Lord Lyndhurst) has
thought fit to condemn the precedents quoted by my Noble
and Learned Friend, against the motion of the Noble Earl
opposite. lie has told us that his precedent of the course
taken by this House upon the Slave Trade was not in point,
because, upon that occasion, the evidence offered was evidence
of opinion, not evidence of fact. Now, my Lords, I think
there is some reason to doubt the accuracy of the Noble and
Learned Lord's statement ; anti although he represents that he
has taken it from the reports of the proceedings, it is to be
observed that the reports of those days were not taken with
that accuracy which distinguishes those of the present time.
But, my Lords, the Noble and Learned Lord, not content with
this manner of getting over the difficulty presented by my
Noble and Learned Friend, goes further back in Parliamentary
history, and finds out that in the year 1793, this House
did hear evidence at the Bar, upon a Bill for the Aboli-
tion of the Slave Trade.—( Hear, hear.) They did so,
indeed, my Loi ds ; but that was when the House
swamped the Bill sent up from the Commons.—(Loud
cheers from the Ministerial benches.) When they wanted to
Oestroy the Bill, they took the course now proposed with re-
garJ, to the Bill on your Lordships' table, of hearing evi-
dence against it. But in 18io when they wanted to pass the
meastwe for the abolition of the Slave Trade, they refused to
hear evicic-nce, as has been already stated by my Noble and
Learned Friend.—( Loud cheers.) - I must say, my Lords,
that I cannot lo,* upon the means taken to perpetuate the ne-
farious traffic in hu,:lan flesh as a fit and proper precedent for
your Lordships to folls..w with regard to the alleged abuses
in Corporations. The NoNe and Learned Lord had also gone
into a general argument agai,:st the whole Bill, describing it
as of such a nature, so affecting property, and so fraught with
evils of various descriptions, that in his opinion your Lordships
ought not to pass it without hearing evidence. The Noble
Duke also took the same objections to the measure, which he
described as partial in its operation. This, my Lords, I say
is unfounded, as the general character of that measure,
which includes, fairly and impartially, every Corporation
having a certain amount of inhabitants—all above '41,190.
The Noble Duke says that this measure ought to have
originated in the Court of King's Bench. Indeed, I could
not out marvel at the murderous objections urged by the
Noble Duke after lie had declared himself friendly to the
principle: of the measure. But if I had cause to he
surprised at any thing in the conduct of that Noble
Duke and she Noble and Learned Lord, it was at the
time taken by Them for the statement of their objections.—
(Cheers.) I ceKainly, my Lords, should not the other night
AthayakCkallikted to t;:e postponement of the discussion, if I
tact-not:
,been misled 31:d deceived as to the intention of the
'c*--, '. opponents of this measure.--(Loud Cheers.) I ask if there
,trp , was not a clear understanding; whether, if not in precise
I' ''
''' terms, there was a distinct feeling amounting to an irnpli-
•
(2.
ett understanding that no advantage was to be taken for the
ir
I"' purposes of delay ? I state, my Lords, that I so understood
Ve fits and tint such Ivo the fooling of tb. Hew ; and I beg
, ,

it, and that such was the feeling of the House; and I beg
:'or once to declare that I will not again enter into any such
.nderstandings with those who afterwards may riot have the
yin,- or may want the power, to give effect to them.—
Cheers.) Observations have been made against the preamble
of this Bill, and much stress laid upon the fact that certain
words in it have been taken from the Report of the Commis-
zioners. I beg to state that the words which arc identical in
she preamble and the Report, were taken from the Report of
Cie Committee of the House of Commons, in which Report
the whole proceedings have bad their foundation. Your
Lordships should know that a Committee of the [louse of
Commons was originally appointed to consider the state of the
Corporations. They were convinced of the necessity of
Corporate Reform, but considered that they could not enter
into the investigation by taking evidence here or in Lon-
lon. Upon this ground a Commission was recommended
—and I must say that the opinion of the Committee of the
ether House, against taking that evidence, which your Lord-
•hips arc recommended to take, ought to weigh with your Lord-
ships as en argument against such a proceeding. 1 have many
idler observations to make upon what has passed in the dis-
cussion this night, but I will not now trouble your L0rd-
...,;;;;,.1 with them. I think you did wrong in hearing counsel.—.
( Hear.) :ou will do further wrong in hearing evi-
fence. This Bill has keen eaiLd a Bill of Pains and Penaties.
It is neither in form nor in substance such a Bill. It has nothing
in common with a measure of that description. It is a Bill of
general legislation ; and I tell you that by the course you are
now pursuing you ai e tearing up your own legislative powers
by the roots.—(Cheers.) No Bill can be presented
to your Lordships, against which some persons may not allege,
and with truth, that ho has rights and interests involved in
the issue of it ; and if you are never to pass any Bill without
following the course fur which you now propose to establish a
precedent, you will destroy your own legislative power, and
most effectually tear up your own authority in the State by the
roots.—( Cheers.) I know not, my Lords, to what facts we
are called upon to hear evidence. If counsel are to he con-
fined to the proof of those facts set forth in their speeches, I
am quite sure that we need not waste our time by hearing their
witnesses. Those facts will not affect the Bill, but the prov-
ing of them will be productive of interminable delay. It is
eroposed, however, by the counsel, that a copy of this Bill
shall be served upon every Corporation in the kingdom. The
object of this is clear ; but I beg leave to state to those who
are the abettors of this proceeding, that I am not to be beaten
by delay.--( Prolonged cheers from the Ministerial benches.)
The Noble Lords who are the abettors of this proceeding will
take upon themselves the conduct and marshalling of the evi-
dence. I, for my part, will attend in my place, and do the
best in my power to advance the progress of the Bill, and pro-
mote the interests of the country.—( Hear.) My Lords, the
Learned Counsel at your bar has told you that this Bill will
prove the destruction of this House. I think, my Lords, that
it may.

" illa dies utramque,
Ducet ruinani."
Why, my Lords, every -one who knows the passage thus
quoted by the Learned Counsel knoWs that it alludes to a case
of self-immolation—( Cheers)—of self-destruction---( Cheers)
—of suicide, my Lords—( Loud cheers)—and so, my Lords, I
can agree with the Learned Counsel, in thinking that if you
follow the advice offered to you with respect to this Bill, it
may indeed prove the destruction of your House.—( Loud and
continued cheering.)
The gallery was then cleared, and their Lordships divided,
when there appeared—

For ilie amendment 124
For the original motion 54
Majority against Ministers —7O
Upon our return we found
Lord BROUGHAM protesting against Couniel being, al-
lowed again to speak on the introduction of evidence after
being already heard. For his own part he was resolved,
after what had already taken place, not to permit Counsel fo
address one word more to the House. So determined was
he on this point, that he would divide the House continually,
even if he stood alone, rather than have the business and the
wishes_ of the country defeated by the insidious delays pro-
posed by the other side.—(Cheers.)
Lord ELLENBOROUGH moved that Counsel be
called in.

Lord BRO UG HAM, in reference to their future proceed-
ings, proposed that they should go on with the evidence from
eleven o'clock until seven.—(No.) They should proceed in
this case, not like holiday work, but as men of business.

The Duke of WELLINGTON said he was ready to si
until twelve o'clock.

The Earl of WINCHILSE A reminded their Lordships
that he had concluded his observations in the early part of the
discussion, by expressing his opinions of the illegality and the
unconstitutional character of the Commission, and he could not
therefore vote to go on with evidence founded on that Com-
mission.

The Noble Lord's resolution against the principle of the Bill
was then put.
Lord KENYON begged his Noble Friend not to press the
amendment, at that moment, after the division which had taken
place and the decision to which the House had come.
Lord WINCHIL SE A said he would, at the suggestion of
his Noble Friend, withdraw his amendment, with the deter-
mination, however, of proposing it hereafter.
The amendment was accordingly withdrawn.
Lord L YNDHURST—Sir Charles Wetherell, the House
has decided on hearing evidence, and Counsel are to attend for
that purpose at 11 o'clock to-morrow.
Lord BROUGHAM—That is, at eleven this day, Sir
Charles, and the House will probably sit till twelve o'clock at
night.—( Laughter. )
Their Lordships then adjourned at twenty minutes past
three o'clock.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT,

THIS DAY, TUESDAY, Atm. 4.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

The VICE-CHANCELLOR took his seat before the Table of the
House at eleven o'clock.
Mr. Carter, Town Clerk of the city of Coventry, was then
brought to the bar, and sworn.
Examined by Mr. KNIGHT—I am Town Clerk of the city of
Coventry, and have been so for the last twenty-two years. The
office is for life. The Town Council consists of a Mayor, ten
Aldermen, and twenty-two Common Councilmen. They are all
elected for life. Besides the former, there are a few persons who
have the right of turning their cattle upon the common belonging to
the Corporation. All these have the right of voting for Members
of Parliament. I sin not aware of any persons besides the mem-
bers of the Corporation who claim the right of voting. There is
another class of persons who have the right of turning one head of
cattle on the common—they are the licensed victuallers. They
purchase that right. The proportion of freemen to the rest of the
inhabitants is about twenty to one. The right is enjoyed for life,
and is considered a very great privilege. Their commons are close
to the city, and their superficial extent is about 2,300 acres. The
property is very valuable, and the lands, in my opinion, would let
for more than one pound per acre. I consider that these rights
operate advantageously upon the morals and conduct of the young
men of Coventry. The Judges have frequently complimented the
Grand Juries on the paucity of crime, and which, in my opinion,
arises from the rights which the freemen enjoy. I have the popu-
lation returns for the city of Coventry for the year 1831.
Are they similar to those made by the Corporation Commissioners?
—They differ materially from the Commissioners' returns. I should
wish to refer to them.
In what points do they differ?
Lord BROUGHAM thought that was rather a clumsy way of
proving discrepancies. He had no objections to its being done once
in a way; but the proper course would be to hand in the returns to
Housi., and let their Lordships compare them.
Mr !KNIGHT replied that he was not going far into that question,
and should _not persevere in it.—[The witness here went rapidly
over the returns of the population of Coventry, pointing out the dis-
crepancies between them and the returns made by the Commissioners.l
What is the duty of the Chamberlain ?—He had the care of the
Lammas funds.
Did the Chamberlains formerly collect that revenue ?—They did.
Is there a Recorder for the city of Coventry ?—There
For what period are they elected ?—They are elected annually.
Under Sir Thos. Whyte s estate do the. Aldermen take anything?
—Yes, under a decree of the Court of Chancery.
A decree of-the Court of Chancery affirmed by this House?—
No, upon appeal the House reversed the judgment of the Court
below and confirmed the right of the Aldermen.
Then I am to understand that the Aldermen of Coventry take
under the decree of the Court of Chancery. In what proportion do
they take ?—Four-sevenths are divided between the Mayor, Re-
corder, and Aldermen.
Is the Mayor an annual officer ?—Yes.
The Aldermen arc for life ?—They are.
And of course have a life interest in the charity ?—Yes.
By whom are they elected ?--By the thirty-one persons forming
the great Leet.
Who are the persons that form that great Leet—from what class
are they taken ?—By persons who have served the offices of She-
riff, Chamberlain, and Wardens, according to seniority.
From whom are the aldermen chosen ?—From freemen, and tha
class called free-citizens

What is the difference between the two terms?—Tho free-citi-
zens are persons who are free of the incorporated companies of
the city.

Must a free-citizen be a freeman also ?---He must be a freeman,
but not seven years' roan, as they are called.
Do any of the incorporated companies interfere with trade in
Coventry?—The butchers and bakers sometimes do, but very
seldom ; the others never do. Few of the people free of the com-
panies belong to the trade designated by it.
In point of practice, up to this time, from what class of men
have the aldermen and governing officers been chosen ?—Most re-
spectable tradesmen.
Are they men of property ?—lnvariably. There have been in-
stances of a man being overtaken by misfortune after his election,
but those are always first chosen from the most respectable class ;

men who contribute to the burdens of the town, more than any
other individuals in it. I believe, now, that there are not to be
found more then twenty individuals who pay more in rates than the
present aldermen do.
Then, am Ito understand, that they have not only the interest
of duty, but also a personal interest in keeping the burdens of the
town as low as possible ? Certainly, it is the invariable practice.
In whose hands is placed the general administration of justice in
Coventry ?—ln the hands of the Aldermen, who are Justices of the
Peace in the county of the city of Coventry.
You, as an old inhabitant, and having much experience, will be
enabled to say what has been the administration of justice by
them F...--Fair and upright.
Has there .ver been any well-founded charge brought against
them ?—I think not; but others were of a different opinion re-
. • .

specting the election of 1826.
That was an election matter—l mean as to the administration of
justice?—l have never heard of any complaint, and there has never
been any attack upon them in any of the Courts. There was a re-
port against the mayor in 18'26.
A report by a Committee of the other House ?—Yes.
Was there a Bill founded upon that report ?—There was; that
Bill passed the House of Commons. An application was made
to this House, that we might appear by counsel and witnesses
at the bar.

You were not heard, I believe ? Were you ready, or how was
it that vou were not heard ?—We were prepared, but the Noble
Lord who had charge of the Bill gavo it up.
What was the nature of the 5i11..-was it like the Nottingham