The Sun.
London, England, 1832-02-17 00:00:00

REFORM.-DIVISION OF COUNTIES.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved for leave to introduce
a Bill to settle and describe the divisions of counties, and the
limits of cities and boroughs, in England and Wales, in so
far as respected the election of Members to serve in Par.
liament. It was, he presumead, in the recollection of the
House that during the last Session certain Commissioners
were named and sent to different parts of the country,
with a view to investigate and ascertain the boundaries of
certain borough., the constituencies of which it was in-
tended under the Reform Bill to alter. In the course of
this investigation a vast deal of most important and useful
information had been collected, which it was the intention
of Government should be made use of in the settlement
of boundaries under the measure which he proposed to in-
troduce. The information derived from the Commis-
sioners had been transmitted to Government in the form
of reports, which were received, considered, and con-
densed by a Committee of three gentlemen, whose sole
object, be begged to remark, was to lay before Govern-
ment such information, founded of course on the reports
of the Commissioner., as was most likely to give the en-
tire country the benefit of the measure which Govern-
ment bad introduced for effecting Parliamentary Reform.
The names of these gentlemen were Mr. Littleton, Cap-
tain Beaufort, and Lieutenant Drummond. These gen-
tlemen, in forming their calculations, had received no
directions whatever from his Majesty's Ministers, further
than that it was the opinion of Government that with re-
spect to those boroughs which contained less than 300 ten-
pound houses it would he advisable to take in the parish,
and in such case that portions of such parishes might be
aided so as to make up the required number of houses. Then
with respect to boroughs containing between 300 and under
500 ten-pound houses, the direction given by Government
was, that in all cases where the boundaries were not distinctly
laid down, or in cases where their slight extension might
improve the constituency, they might take portions of the
adjacent county as they might deem requisite to effect that
object. But in all the cases where the boundaries of the
old boroughs were found ample and sufficient, the ancient
and well-known bounds should be retained. Such were
the sole instructions of the Government, and it would be
found that in the labours of the three Commissioners whom
he had named these instructions had been invariably kept
in view. With regard to the counties, the original object
of Government had been to divide them into two, con-
taining as nearly as possible an equal population and num-
ber of voters. But this was found objectionable in beve-
NI cases ; for in some counties divisions were found
already made; and it was considered as likely to produce
confusion if fresh bounds were created. It was, there-
fore, resolved, in all possible cases, to .adopt
existiag di-
visions ; consequently, where a county was found
divided
into north and south, such division would be
c;ii, however, the general understanding that
ant that
lation in both was altogether or neaer,lyveeqounal
juries was
the number of persons liable
sure he then propose&
possession of the
guldedhe full and more satisfactorily
and as this principle would
to the 11:1101eif, he would riot 'liter
.weioped by a reference
emqauianll
principley di v d e
hiTchhe House.
ra u: n

.0110(_515
111rther inta;the subject. Having articled to the Commis.-
.. •
Ai, - sinners appointed last session to carry on the necessary hives •
tigation of the boundaries, he felt bound to say that both the
country and, tine Government owed much to the inde-
(
t IV fathlahlc zeal and assiduity of those gentlemen. In the
perforinance of their duties they were called upon to visit
no less than 21.7 boroughs, with a view to ascertaining the
~..
2T obi and settling the new bounds, and they had lik,nvise to
obtain information respecting those places which it was
intended to disfranchise. This duty, arduous and difficult
as it "vas, had been performed in a ni inner which he felt
confident would ensure the thanks of Parliament. Hints
had been frequently thrown out that the Commissioners,
in their inquiries, had considered how alteration in boun-
daries might affect particular interests. On this point he
(Lord John Russell) felt hound to assert that no such con.
siderationa had guided their operations. In no case, he
was confiden', could it he proved that they had coesdeted
whether the interests of particular properties or particular
individuals would gain or lose by any alteration which ap-
peared to them requisite. This assertion he felt justified
in making ; for be had no doubt that if proof of such a
fact could be obtained, it would have been long since !aid
before Government. After a few more observations, com-
plimentary of the conduct of the Commissioners, the Noble
Lord concluded by formally repeating the terms of his
motion, and expressing a hope that the House would allow
the Bill to be introduced and printed without a discussion
00 its principle.
On the question, being put,
Mr. GOULBURN agreed with the Noble Lord that it
would be better to defer all discussion until the Bill was
souse little time before the House, and for this tenon lie
would not himself say one word in refereett to its prin-
ciple. He had merely risen to say hetutertained no doubt
that the gentlemen who had acted as Commissioners had,
in the discharge of their office, rigorously attended to the
instructions of Government ; and that in all reports tehlch
bad been presented from them the facts wbieli had been
just mentioned by the Noble Lord had been attended to.
Whether the suggestions of Government were advisable or
not formed another questiott, which he would not then
consider. As to the hints respecting the conduct of the
Commissioners to which the Noble Lord had alluded, be
(Mr. Goulburn) could assure him that nothing watt farther
from his intention, and he though the could speak for his
colleigues in opposition, than to impute any wilful error
to the gentlemen who acted upon the Commission. Such
hints or assertions might have been male, hut they were
purely incidental to the discussion, and were not used for
the purpose of casting imputations on the Commissioners.
In reply to some observations from Sir E. SUGDEN
which did not reach the gallery,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that the Bill which he
then introduced solely referred to Parliamentary repreaen-
tattoo, and did not touch upon the boundaries or limits of
disfranchised boroughs.
The motion was then agreed to, and the mil was ordered
to be brought in by the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
and Lord JtniN RUSSELL.

~, :-

FLOGGING IN THE ARMY,

Mr. HUNT, according to notice, moved for a return
of the number of Courts-martial that have been held on
private soldiers in the army, in Great Britain and Ireland,
between the Ist of January, 1831, and theist of January,
1832, stating the nature of each charge, the sentence
passed, and specifying the number of lashes endured by
each individual. The Hon. Member expressed his regret
that the Secretary at War (Sir John Hobhouse) was not
present, as that Hon. Member, when he (Mr. Hunt) con-
sulted hint on the subject, said he had no objection to pro-
duce the papers; hut he wished the matter to be discussed
in the House. It was his (Mr. hunt's) intention, when
the papers wore before the House, to move that flogging be
abolished in the army, in time of peace at all events. In
time of war, he believed, it could not at all times he dis-
pensed with.

11r. 11 [;ME briefly seconded the motion, and expressed
a hope that it would have the effect which the Hon. Mem-
ber anticipated, Fkgging bad been alrep?y advanragt-ously
abolished, as he bad b•en informed, in several regiment,: ;
and he had no doubt that the service could be carried on
fully as well without having recourse to such an inhuman
syFrem of puni.hment,

Lord ALTHURP having apologised for the absence of
the Secretary at War, who had been presect in the course
of the evening, said he regretted] as much as any man
the infliction of corporal punishment ; but he was afraid
it was impossible for the Government to consent, whatever
displeasure the declaration might excite, to its total aboli-
tion in the army. He had lately had many communications
with military men on the subject, and they agreed on that
point ; but at the same time he was happy to say, that the
practice of flogging was much diminished, although it was
found impossible in all cases to substitute for it a more I ffi-
cient punishment, and one which would tend more to pre-
♦ent the commission of offences. With respect to the
motion of the Hon. Member for papers, he could only say
it was one to which the House had never acceded in former
years, and as there was nothing during the present which
demanded peculiar attention, nor as the Hon. Member had
stated no extraordinary grounds for his motion, he must he
compelled to resist it.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, hut
Mr. HUNT replied, and observed that, with a Secre-
tar!, at War pledged by many speeches and declarations,
in and out of the House, to a reformation of this abuse in
the army, and under a liberal and reforming A,lministra-
tion, he certainly had not expected any opposition to his
motion. The Noble Lord said that the punishments had
diminished—why then did he refuse the papers which
would satisfy the public that it was so ? He did not wish
to accuse the Noble Lord of inconsistency, or to make any
rifensive allusion to the former votes and motions of the
Noble Lord ; but this he would say, that when they
changed their sichs of the House they changed their opi-
nions, and advocated measures when out of office which
they would not support when they obtained the power to
execute thein.—( Hear.)
After a few words from Mr. JEPH,ON, in support of
the motion,

Mr. SHELL said, that if the abolition of the punish-
ment of flogging was the question at issue, he could un-
'let stand the Noble Lord's objection ; but whe❑ the motion
was merely for the production of papers, in order to as-
certain if the practice was diminishing, he felt called on to
support it.

The House then divided—
For Mr. Hunt's motion . 2B
Against it 6l
Majority for Ministers —4ll
THE REFORM BILL.

The House then went into Committee on the Reform Bill.

Clause 69 being read,

Lord ALTIIORP proposed an amendment in the word-
ing, to the effect that the cost of the hustings sh,ll not
exceed 401., and that of the expence of the polling-booth
for each parish, the cost to be defrayed by the candidates.
This amendment, after some conver,ation, was agreed to.
The clause, with some verbal amendments, was then
agreed to; as were also clauses 70, 71, and 72.
fhe question having been put on clause 73,

Mr. GODSON recommended that the consideration of
it be postponed till the other clauses of the Bill should
have been gone through.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed it would be im-
possible fur them in that Committee to go into an exanii-
nation of the various individual statutes or usiges affect-
ing particular boroughs. If they adopted such a course of
proceeding they would never arrive at a conclusion.

Sir E. SUGDEN said, that it would be impossible to
collect the law of election from the Bill then before them.
In his opinion all the laws relating to elections should
have been ascertained and condensed by the present mea-
sure, but in truth it only increased the existing uncertainty.
Lord ALTHURP observed, that though the Bill had
not been drawn up with that view, yet it was prepared by
a gentleman possessing great experience in that branch of
our law.

After some further conversation, in which Sir C. WE-
THES.ELL, Mr. C. FERGUSSON, Mr. Serjeant WILDE, &C.,
took a part, the clause was agreed to. On clause 74,
Mr. KNIGHT objected, on the ground that it would
be putting barristers into a situatien in which they ought
not to he placed. Another objection that he had to it
was, that it did not sufficiently define the punishment.—
The barrister was laid open to be proceeded against in
three ways. He might be tried for a misdemeanour for
violation of an Act of Parliament, or he might be sued for
a penalty by any hod. y--eten a beggar, or he might have an
action brought against him by any party who could prove
himself injured. In his opinion, all this was much too
vague and general.

Sir C. WETHERELL complained that the barrister
was to be one day an ermined Judge, and the next a cri-
minal at the bar; besides which, he objected to its being
in the power of a Jury to impose a penalty from 11 to
300/. It was holding out a bonus to political feeling.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL remarked that Judges
were liable to actions for refusing the habeas corpus, or
for refusing a bill of exceptions; and he, therefore, did
not see why Hon. Gentlemen should object that barristers
were similary situated in the event of their wilfully con-
travening the law.
Sir E. SUGDEN contended that this clause would cast
a slur on the whole bar of England ; besides which, it was
contrary to justice to expose the barrister to so many modes
of vexatious proceedings.
Lord ALTHORP had no objection to introduc,-

ainendment, making it iawini for tie Judges to stay pro-
ceedings in certain cases.
Mr, NOZNN complained of the clause, because it intro-
!'iced such confusion into the duties of Juries.

Mr. O'CONNELL thought the clause one of the best in
the Bill, both in form and substance. A simil sr clause
was very much wanted in Ireland, where some strange
things were done by the assistant-barristers.
Mr. BURGE objected to the thuse.

Lord JOHN ReSSELL said, only one pen City would
not he sufficient for the various faults which might be
committed. It was quite obvious that responsibility
rest somewhere and this clause wa.c necessary, as in a pre-
vious clause the appointment of the barristers was vested
wholly in the Judges. He should not, however, have any
objectiot to the words proposed by the Hen. and Learned
Gentleman.

Mr. C. W. WYNN again contetpie4 tht.t tile clause
was not just to the barriatrrs,

Mr. J. CAMPBELL justified the limitation placed in
the power of the Jury, and also to the giving them power
to inpose a penalty at discretion between Si. and 5001. for
the benefit of the p frty aggrieved.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL thought the pecuniary
damage and the wrong, together ought to form the esti-
mate of the sum to be given, and it should be left open
to the Jury to dacide both on the pecuniary damage and the
spirit in which it was inflicted.

The blanks were then tilled up with 5001. The pro-
viso confining the power of instituting prosecutions to
electors and Members, or persons injured, wan agreed
to ; a* was also a proviso, suggested, we believe by Sir
Charles Wetherell, not to take from any parties aggrieved
any right they might now ponseas to prosecute the offend-
ing returning officer or barrister at common law. The
rerriaind7er or the clause was left out.

On the question that the clause stand part of the Bill,
Sir E. B. SCGDEN protested agiinst it, and the question
was then agreed to.

Clause 75. was then read. It relates to the penalties to
be imposed on those who Contravene the law, and was
omitted as unnecessary,
Clausei76 was read and omitted, as was also clause '77,
both being said to b! unnecessary.
(ha the 78th clause being read,
Sir C. WETHERELL movv.d, as an amendment, to
introduce the words---" And that all such write and pre-
cepts, and ether instruments, be made out in the manner
anti form at present prescribed by law, or as near thereto
as possible."

After some discussion, this amendment was put by the
CHAIRMAN ; and the Opposition side of the House inti-
mating their intention to divide, strangers were ordered
to Withdraw. When the gallery was nearly cleared, how-
ever, the Opposition declined to persevere, and the amend-
ment was ❑egatived without a division. At that instant
the rush of Members into the House, front the lobbies and
elsewhere, was very great ; and their entrance was hailed
by the Opposition with vociferous cries of " H..ar, hear;"
" Bar, bar." When the tumult had somewhat subsided
Sir E. B. SUGDEN rose, and observed that it was
evident all argument was thrown away upon the great
majority of that House.--(01i, oh.) Where was the Hon.
Gentleman who called out " Oh?" No doubt he was one
of those who had just entered. In his (Sir E. Sugden's)
op;nion, it would be as well if Hon. Members would at
lea.t liste❑ to the arguments by which they were predeter-
mined not to be convinced. It appeared, however, they
considered themselves not bound to hear, but at liberty to
v ,re.

Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE was at a loss to understand
the cause of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's warmth.
There hail been, if net a very full, a very respectable audi-
en,e, during the discussion of the clause; and great atten-
tito had been paid to the observations which the Hon.
soil Learned Gentleman had made respecting it. What
was more surprising in the case was, that the censure of
tie Hun. and Learned Gentleman fell on Members dis-
,
thiguished by their habits of regular attendance. There
was the Hon. Member for Tamworth—no Member of the
Opposition side of the House was more steady in his ad-
herence to their benches; and yet that Hon. Gentleman
h:id entered only ab int five minutes before the Hon. and
Learned Member's exhortation. And was the Right Hon
Alcuib.r for Tani worth to be charged wi h inattention to
this important discussion, because he was nor present when
the question was put from the Chair.—(Loud cries of
heir, hear.) Those Hon. Members, however, wh,.
Were not present, had, in his (Sir J. Habhouse's) opi-
nion, a very excellent excuse to their constituents for their
absence. For he could assure the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman that there were many persons in the country
who believed that the discussiona got up on the measure
under the consideration of the House, were not of a very
important character, and hail no very fair object.—( Hear,
hear, hear.) The Committee had been occupied for an
hour and a half in discussing the point of the non-attend-
ance, at the discussion of which the Hon. and Learned
Member complained. What he (Sir .J. Hobhouse) espe-
cially protested against, however, was, that it should go
forth to the country that what had just ocourred was a
novel practice in that House, that it was only on this oc-
ca ‘ion that the appearance of proceeding to a division had oc-
casioned a crowd of Members to enter the House. Unfortu-
na,ely this practice had always prevailed ; but he must say,
if ever there were circumstances which justified it, these
circumstances were of present occurrence. In vain did
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman and his friends appeal to
the country on the question of Parliamentary Reform. On
that question the country had completely m ide up its mind. '
He did not mean to deny that those who were hostile to
the Bill were conscientious in their opposition ; hut he
maintained ail their opposition was in vain. The country
well knew that in such circumstances the great majority of
the House must give some credit to his Majesty's Govern-
ment, and to the authors and supporters of the Bill ; and

tl e country must also fie!, that when an hour and half had
been expended in the discussion of a clause, acknowkiged
to be not very important, it was rather too much to honk
upon so important a question a charge against the majority
,)1. that House. for that which had long been a practice ;
and which, if ever excusable, was so in the present in-
stance.--( Hear, hear.)

Sir C. WETHERELL observf d, that the Right Hon.
Secretary at War, in his first appearance in that character,
had thought props r to read a lecture to his (Sir C. 'Wethe-
rell's) side of the Honse. The Right Hon. Baronet had
told them that they did not know what they were about.
The appearance of the Right Hon. Baronet just now was
fortunate for his party ; but how did it happen that the
Right [lon. Baronet was absent when the ques-
tion respecting flogging the army was under consideration.
—(Hear, hear.) S'utor ad crepidant. Let the Secre-
tary at War deal with military matters. —(A I tugh.) Let
those who w►re dealing with a gre it constitutional ques.
tion be supposed to know what they were doing.--
( Hear, hear.) The Right Fin. Baronet said that they
bad been wasting the last hour and a half in discussion.—
[Sir J. C. tioatiousz, across the table, denied that he had
used the weed " wasting."] Well, then, the Right lion.
Baronet had insinuated—no man was mere classical, or
more correct in his language than the Right lion. Baronet
—the Right Hon. Baronet had insinuated that he (Sir
C. Wetherell) and those who thought with him, had un-
profitably employed the last hour and a half. The clause
which they had heeu discussing, however, was by no
means a subordinate clause. It involved a great constitu-
tional principle.
The clause was then agreed to.