The Sun.
London, England, 1832-06-16 00:00:00

SCOTCH REFORM BILL.

Mr. BERNAL in the Chair.
Clause 48, as amended, was ordered to stand part of the
Bill.

Clause 49 was omitted, having been otherwise provided
for.

The CHAIRMAN then read schedule A, containing a
list of counties to return one Member each; and upon
arriving at the county of Perth,
Sir GEORGE MURRAY rose to move, according to
previous notice, that the county of Perth be not die.
membered for the purpose of adding to the constituency
of any other county. It was not necessary for him to
trouble the Howe relative to the diemembermeut of the

cc unty of Argyle, as he tvaderstood that had been
abandoned by his Majesty's Ministers. But it appeared
to him that a great injustice waa about to be done
to the county of Perth by this part of the Bill. And he
felt it his duty to resist it, not only as representative for
that county, but on a broader ground—that of opposing a
principle which was for the first time introduced. This
was the only instance in the measure of Reform
either for England, Ireland, or Scotland; in which a part
of a county had been cut off for the purpose of annexing
it to and adding to the constituency of two adjoining
counties —(Bean) If any such proposal had been
made in the case of the English Bill, he ventured to affirm
it would have been objected to, and effectually resisted in
the strongest manner. He could not, therefore, under-
stand why a principle should be applied to Scotland which
would have been rejected, if attempted to be applied to Eng-
land. It was a principle which, if adopted, would lead to
dangerous consequences, and might alter and destroy all the
original boundaries of counties throughout the kingdom.
its could not understand why addition should be made to
one county at the expense of another ; and by the present
chose it was proposed to take from the county of Perth,
fur the purpose of adding Kinross to Clackmannan. If it
had been proposed to detach from all counties whatever
portions should be disconnected,heshould have no objection.
He hoped the Noble Lord opposite would take this sub-
ject into his serious consideration, and would ultimately
abandon the objectionable parts of the claim.
Lord ALTHORP said, that the only real grievance of
which the Right Hon. and Gallant Gentleman had com-
plained was, the diminution of the constituency of the
county of Perth, would only he a grievance if the predic-
tions as to futurity of the Right Hon. Gentleman should
he realisod, which he (Lord Althorp) much doubted. On
the other hand, it should be borne in mind, that Perth,
under the Bill, would have its influence increased by its
constituency being diminished.
Sir GEORGE CLERK said, that as the feelings of
the inhabitants of a county were attached to it and to its
interests, it would be difficult to estrange them, even by
preserving to them the same rights elsewhere. He could
suppose many cases in which great confusion would arise
from this dismemberment, and he thought to prevent that,
it would be much better if his Majesty's Government
would accede to the amendment of his (Sir G. Clerk's)
Right Hon. Friend.
The LORD ADVOCATE said, that when it was pro•
posed by the Government to consolidate the counties of
Clackmannan and Kinrosahire for the purposes of this
Bill, it was found that they were intersected by a strip of
the county of Perth, which it had been thought conve-
nient and proper to include in the proposed consolidation.
Therefore the dismemberment, as it was termed, of the
county of Perth, had originated from its geographical po-
sition.

Sir. W. RAE thought that the interests of the parishes,
which would, under the proposed arrangement, be se-
parated from the county of Pertb, would be materially
affected by the division.
Mr. ADAM defended the proposed division ; and he
hoped that a distinct Bill would soon be introduced to
consolidate these portions of the county into one for all
possible purposes.
After a few words in reply from Sir G. MURRAY, the
Committee divided, and the numbers appeared—
For the amendment l2t
Against it 54
Majority —3o

After the division, and during the exclusion of strangers,
we understood that the following counties, completing the
who'e number enumerated in schedule A, were agreed to :
Renfrew, Roxburgh, Selkirk, Stirling (exclusive of the
parish of Alva, annexed to Kinross, &c., by schedule B),
Sutherland, and Wigton.
Upon returning to the gallery, we found the Committee
considering schedule B, which contains the list of com-
bined counties, each to return one Member to Parliament.
On the question being put that Elgin and Nairn stand
part of the schedule,

Mr. DAVIDSON complained of the annexation of tbose
counties, and contended that Elgin ought to send a Member
of itself.

Mr. MACKENZIE considered that no hardship was
done to Elgin by its annexation to Nairn.
Sir W. RAE objected to the proposed annexation as
being unjust towards Elgin.
Sir G. CLERK also said that he should oppose the an-
nexation.

After some further discussion, the House divided--_
Ayes 5O
Noes 26
Majority against the motion —24

On our re-admission to the gallery, we found the CHAIR.
MAI{ putting the question on the towns contained in sche-
dule C.—Agreed to.
The first part of schedule D was agreed to without dis-
cussion.

On the question that Greenock stand part of the clause,
Mr. C. FERGUSSON said Port Glasgow was united
with Greenock in the former Bill, and he considered it
entitled to be combined with it now, and jointly to return
one Member. He should therefore move that Greenock
he omitted in schedule D, with a view to its insertion con-
jointly with Port Glasgow in schedule E.
Sir N. STEWART and Mr. DixoN opposed the amend-
ment.

Si; R. PEEL enforced the claim of Port Glasgow to be
united with Greenock, on the ground of its vicinity and
common interest with that place. A rivalry was supposed
to exist between the two towns; if such were the case, the
best way to conciliate their differences and reconcile their
animosities was by uniting them in the bond of a common
representation.
The LORD-ADVOCTE defended the clause. Gree-
nock was entitled to repre.,entation, per se, on the ground
of its population and importance. He denied that Port
Glasgow had any claim to be united with it.
Mr. KEITH DOUGLAS thought the Learned Lord
would do well to assent to the amendment. _

Lord ALTHORP said the objection to being united
with Port Glasgow was so strong on the part of Greenock
that it was thought better to avoid an attempt to bring toge-
ther such clashing interests, and the combination was aban-
doned. If the places were united, the interests of Port
Glasgow must be sunk in the preponderrting and opposing
influence of Greenock, to which the union would be most
distasteful, at the same time that it could hardly prove bene-
ficial to Port Glasgow. On these grounds, the idea of
combining the two places had been abandoned.
Mr. HORATIO ROSS supported the amendment.
Mr. P 4 STEWART said he should v4te fur the original
resolution. _

Lord J. RUSSELL thought Greenock entitled to one
Member, and that it ought not be embarrassed, by being
united to another place, especially as the combination would
be unpalatable, and was not required in order give a suffi-
cient constituency.
Sir R. PEEL thought there existed at least as good
reasoas for combining Port Glasgow and Greenock, as for
adding NI usselburgh to Leith, the elector alhouses of which
were more numerous than in Greenock.

Mr. DIXON contended that the commercial import-
ance of Port Glasgow rendered it highly expedient that
it should be separated from Greenock and annexed to
Dumbarton.

On the motion there appeared—
For the original motion 73
Against it
Majority

Mr. R. DUNDAS (on our re-admission to the gallery)
moved that Stonehaven be added to the Inverbervie, Mon-
trose, and Forfar district of boroughs. Stonehaven was
the only manufacturing town in the agricultural county of
Kincardine, and unless it was added to the Forfar district,
Kincardine would have no voice in the manufacturing re-
presentation.
The LORD ADVOCATE would resit the Hon. Mem.
ber's motion, as he conceived that it was highly inexpe-
dient that the voters in Kincardine should be exclusively
agricultural, as they would be if the Hon. Member's pro-
position was adopted.

The Committee divided—
For the motion 4°
Against it
Majority —2o
On the 9th district, including Renfrew, Rutherglen,
Dumbarton, and Kilmarnock,
Sir M. S. STEWART moved that Kilmarnock be
placed with its immediate county neighbours, Ayr and
Irvine, instead of being placed with the three small towns
of Renfrew, Rutherglen, and Dumbarton, in three sepa-
rate counties. As this was a matter of pure detail and
arrangement, and of new arrangement of old districts by
the Bill itself, he felt himself at perfect liberty, as a
zealous supporter of the Bill, to make and to press his
motion, comprising, as he was confident it did, a fairer,
a better, and a more liberal enfranchisement.—(Hear.)
He assured the Committee that he did not presume to
make this motion upon his own opinion and feeling, how-
ever strong they might be; but he felt himself compelled
to renew a notice he gave more than nine months ago, on
going into Committee on the late Scotch Bill, (and lie
trusted, therefore, he should hear nothing to-night of any
sudden and unexpected proposition of his to disturb the
circulated arrangements of the Bill)—he said he felt com-
pelled to persevere in his motion, from a strong and gene-
ral call for him to do so, from every one of the five counties
connected with those boroughs, awl from a in jority of the
boroughs themselves included in these arrangements.-..
( Hear, bear.) Ile wished at once to disembarrass the
case, and free himself from the sligLitest suspicion of self-
interest in the arrangement he now proposed. For he
allured the Committee, that of 411 the arrozemati utter

the Bill, those that would give him the greatest political
influence would be the annexation of Port-Glasgow to
Greenock, and next to that the keeping Port-Glasgow in
the county of Renfrew. He had opposed the one from a
sense of public duty; and for the same reason, and because
he believed the inhabitants of Port-Glasgow desired it, be
should support the Junction of Port-Glasgow with the
Dumbarton district of horoughs.--(Hear.) However
clumsily, therefore, or inapt'y he might state the strong
case committed to his charge, he trusted, nay, more, be
called upon hie Nola'e and Right Hon. Friends on the
Treasury bench; for the sake of the opinions and senti-
ments of the great body of Reformers throughout the west
of Scotland, whose sincere and deeply-impressed represen•
tative he in this matter was, not only to give to this case
an impartial reconsideration, but he called upon them to
stand aloof as a Government, and to allow the facts he
should adduce to make their own way in the Committee,
and especially upon the unbiassed minds of his fdlow-
reformers on his side of the House. Representing, as he
did, a very general opinion of the supporters cf the Bill
and of the Government, throughout the west of Scotland,
he was sure he should not be met with any mere technical
objections by his Learned Friend the Lord Advocate, such
as—that it was now too late to make these alterations—
(bat the parties interested might complain of such late
changes. It w,s never too late to correct a palpable and
injurious error. A late arrangement and a Lager altera-
tion bad been made in the English Bill, and he begged to
remind the Government, that the majority of the parties
interested petitioned for these very alterations that he now
proposed.---( Hear.) He begged especially to state, that
he touched no principle of the on the con-
trary, the direct.effect of his motion would be to am-
plify ana enforce the great leading principles of
the Bill, by extending the franchise to a greater
number of 101. householders, and by giving to live, if
❑ot six, of the eight boroughs concerned ; and that
they will not have, under the present arrangement, an
effective and independent exercise of their new-given
right.—(Hear.) He begged to remind the Government,
that he (lid not attempt to touch any district that had not
been already touched by the Bill. He did not presume to
meddle—he only sought to improve what had already been
disturbed by the Bill. It was a fair case of detail, and
therefore open to the best and most liberal allotment of
boroughs that could be made. He wished to ask his No-
ble Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if it was
really his intention to give three Members to the county of
Ayr. He understood it was not. Then he would assure
him, that the inevitable and only result of the present ar-
rangement, was to give it exclusively, in effact, three
Members, and he would prove this incontestibly to the
House. The Hon. Member then went into the details of
the case, and of both districts and boroughs, sheaving how
imperfact and limited the present returns were—that the
overwhelming votes of Ayr and Kilmarnock, were kept
quite of view by all the documents now before the House,
while the smaller places, therefore Nottingham, &c. were,
by special reports, put upon full stretch. The Honour-
able Member proved, incontrovertibly, that, by the present
arrangement, Kilmarnock would, in this one district, com-
pletely outnumber and outvote the remaining boroughs—
as would Ayr in the other district. The Hon. Member
argued that, in proof of this, the House would, no doubt,
immediately bear his Hon. and Learned Friend the Mem-
ber for Ayr, protesting on the part of both Ayr and Kil-
marnock, against touchinE the present arrangement ; and
this, surely, would be to the House the strongest con-
firma.ion of all that he (Sir Michael Shaw,) had argued.
It was obviously the interest of these two great towns to
keep matters as they were, so that each might command,
by its receding population and influence, their respective
districts. But would the Hon. Gentlemen sanction this ?
He was sure they would not ; and the present arrange-
ment was, when closely examined, so ill advised—partial
—and unjust in its operation on the smaller boroughs, that
it was quite impossible it would be persisted in. The
Hon. Member apologised to the House for taking up so
much of their time, and concluded by enforcing on their
consideration—first, on the one hand, they had the two
great towns of Ayr and Kilmarnock—the lords para-
mount inevitably to be—of their respective districts—re-
sisting, as a matter of course, his motion. On the
other hand, they had all the smaller boroughs of both dis•
tricts, asking them to sanction his motion, and the
ar-
rangement it involved; and so to rescue them from the
political domination of these two overwhelming places.
In the name, therefore, of the weaker and the oppressed,
he called upon the House and the Government to inter-
pose. He called on the Government in the name of that
great body of Reformers. Throughout the west of Scot-
land were the sentiments he faithfully represented. He
called on the House, in the name of every one be ever
spoke to on the subject, be his political opinions what they
may, and who was acquainted with the local circum-
stances. In other words—in the name of public opinion,
which is generally based on common sense and common
justice, he called upon the House earnestly and respect-
fully to sanction and adopt the motion he had then rose to
propose.

Lord ALTHORP observed, that it was fit that the large
towns should have a larger influence in the elections. The
smaller towns were entitled to a share in the representa.
tion, and they had a share.
After a few observations from Mr. Dixon, Mr. Ken-
nedy, Mr. Stewart, Sir George Murray, Mr. Pringle,
Sir G. Clerk, the Lord Advocate, Lord G. Bentinck, and
Sir M. S. Stewart in reply, the Committee divided.

The numbers were— - -
For the Amendment B5
Against it 67
Majority

On our return to the gallery we found the committee
discussing the amendment, that " Port Glasgow be added
to the list No. 9, of Schedule E."
After some discussion this was agreed to.
List No. 10 was next agreed to ; and list No. 11, with
the addition of Haddington.
Lists Nos. 12 and 13 in schedule E, were then agreed
to, and the schedule so amended was agreed to.
Schedules F, G, and 11, and parts of 1 and 2, were
postponed.
Schedules J and K were agreed to.
Schedules L and M, after some conversation, and the
insertion of some verbal amendments, were agreed to.
The LORD ADVOCATE proposed the insertion of a
clause regulating the qualification of members to serve :or
counties, cities, and boroughs, in Scotland.
After a short conversation, in which Sir G. CLERX,
the LORD ADVOCATS, and Mr. GouLnuftx, took part,
the clause was postponed.
The preamble of the Bill was then agreed to, and the
House having resumed, the Chairman reported progress,
and the report was ordered to be received on Monday next.