The Sun.
London, England, 1832-02-03 00:00:00

LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 3, 1832.

SECOND EDITION.
SUN OFFICE, Seven &Clock.

IM PERIAL PARLIAMENT

OF THIS EVENING.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool-
sack about a Quarter past Five o'clock.
Mr. WEYLAND and others, from the Commons,
brought up the Exchequer Court (Scotland) Bill, and
two private Bills, which were severally read a first time,
013 the motion of the Earl of SHAFTESBURY.

The Earl of RADNOR presented a petition from the
county of Roscommon in favour of Reform, and one from
IttilireW.tea the sane effect.
The Earl of SHEFFIELD presented petitions from
Shipley, and another place in Kent, against the present
System of poor laws.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition
from tLe Physicians and Surgeons of Leeds, praying that
some plan might be adopted for supplying the dissecting
rooms; also one from the inhabitants of the same place,
to the same effect.
Viscount STRANGFORD moved for aseries of re-
turns,,, relative to the foreign shipping which had arrived in
this country for the last three years ; also for a return of
all sums paid by the Treasury to Corporations as a
`1
cA"'Pensation for their loss of dues under the Reciprocity
from the Ist of Jan. 1826 to the the Ist of Jan.
1,832. The Noble Lord said be did not mean to blame
tne Government for paying these sums. They had only
atcted in this respect as their predecessors had done, but
both had acted illegally in so disposing of the public money.
Lord AUCKLAND said it had only come to his know-
ledge a few days ago that such payments were illegal. A
Bill of Indemnity was in preparation, and would soon be
before the House.
Lord TENTERDEN moved the third reading of the
Arbitration Bill.
The Marquis of WESTMEATH was perhaps irregular
in making any remarks on the third reading of a Bill, but
he was very anxious to see this Bill extended to Ireland.
Lord TENTERDEN observed, such an amendment
Might he introduced in the other House of Parliament.
He could not now do it.
The Bill was then read a third time, and passed.
The Embezzlement of Public Money Bill went through
a Committee, and was reported without amendments.
Their Lordships then adjourned till Monday.

:herein.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
At Four o'clock the SPEAKNIC took his seat.
Mr. HODGSON brought in a Bill for making a rail-
Way front South Shields to Monkwearmouth, which was
read the first time.
Mr. CHAYTOR obtained leave to bring in a Bill for
constructing some wet docks in the port of Sunderland.
Mr. BLAMIRE presented a petition from the owners
'and occupiers of customary lands in Brampton and its
neighbourhood, in the county of Cumberland, against the
General Registry Bill. The Hon. Member contended
the Bill made an invidious distinction between customary
tenants and copyhold tenants. He also presented three
similar petitions from different parts of Cumberland, in one
of which, so great was the feeling against the Bill, the
petitioners suppressed their willingness even to forego the
benefits to be derived front the great measure of Reform
rather than be compelled to receive and adopt a general
°Patna of registration.
Mr. CAMPBELL presented a petition from the no-
clergy, &e. of the county of Argyle against certAin
Parts of the Scotch Reform Bill.
Sir G. MURRAY was extremely happy that he hap-
pened to be in the House when the Hon. Member pre-
sented the petition, because he was sure the Honourable
Aleinber and himself would entirely concur in the respect-
ability of the parties from whom it came. He agreed
with the observation made by the Hon. Member, that the
dpersons signing the petition were not Anti• Reformers, in-
eed he thought very few entitled to that appellation
Were resident in Scotland. He was not absolutely
opposed to Reform, but joined hand and heart with
the Petitioners in praying for moderate Reform. He per-
te, el petitioners
coincided with the petitioners in considering that
ne clause which threw the great mass of the constituency
into the hands of the 101. householders was ex-
ceedingly objectionable in that part of the country from
Whence the petition came ; it would be the means of over-
Whsinting the landed interest.
t. After a few observations from Mr. CAMPBELL, the pe-
Itinn was ordered to be printed.
The HON. Minima. then presented a petition to a simi-
ar effect from a borough in Argyle.
f 'lll° petitions from Fifeshire, Augleshire, and the Island
dYla, praying that a Reform as extensive as the one
"Oat forward by Ministers, might be passed into a law.
1,01%-r; MORRISON thought the petitions which
; Just been presented, shewed the great neces-
l'tY there was for a Reform in Scotland.
,„tiAlkt.• CAMPBELL then presented a memorial from the
idi.„‘,itatata of Argyle, praying for no alteration on the
ii;ueck on Malt.
id; t• HODGES presented a petition from a person re-
Ittzig in Kent, complaining of the mal-operation of the poor
The Hen. Member also presented a petition

.No. 12,291.

from the solicitors of Kent, signed by upwards of 100
persons against the general Registry Bill. It bad been
stated, that gentlemen in the situation of the petitioners,
had a private interest in opposing this Bill. He was
however quite satisfied that no motives of a selfish na-
ture cuuld be attributed to that respectable body of which
the petitioners formed a part.
Sir F. BLAKE presented a petition from Berwick-
upon-Tweed, signed by the Mayor and several Magistrates,
against the General Registry Bill, and praying that it
might not pass into a law. The Hon. Member entirely
concurred with the prayer of the petition, believ-
ing tbat the most injurious effects were likely to en-
sue if the Bill should become the law of the land.
It was a great hardship that such a measure should be

forced upon the country against the wishes and inclinations
of the landed interest. He gave every credit to the Hon.
and Learned Member who introduced the Bill, but it was
an injudicious measure—it was an innovation amounting
almost to an invasion of the right of property. If
that Honourable and Learned Gentleman would still
persevere, he might expect the determined opposition
of every Member in that House, who, in the true English
spirit, might be led, but would not be driven.
Mr. CAMPBELL said, that if, after the Bill was dis-
cussed and understood, it did not meet the public approba-
tion, he would most willingly withdraw it.—(Hear.) At
present, however, it was wholly misunderstood, or rather
misrepresented. He felt it his duty still to press the Bill
into Committee ; for he was certainly most anxious that
it should be discussed in that House, and understood out
of doors. His own private opinion was that it would be
beneficial in its operation ; but if, after its merits were
known, it met the public disapprobation, be would most
willingly withdraw it.—(Hear.)
Sir F. BLAKE also presented a petition from the
Justices of Peace and Grand Jury of the General Quarter
Session of Berwick-upon-Tweed, against the General
Register Bill ; and stated that landowners were more com-
petent to judge of what was for their own interest than the
promoters of this Bill ; and while the general opinion of
the country was so unequivocally opposed to the measure,
he hoped the House would pause before it allowed it to pass
into a I,IW.

Mr. BAYNTUN presented a petition to the same effect
from the city of York. Instead of facilitating, the General
Registry Bill would greatly obstruct the borrowing of money
upon mortgage ; while the deposit of deeds would be inju-
rious, and might promote litigation.
Mr. CROKER highly approved of the principle of
the Bill, but would not be thereby precluded from ob-
jecting to some of its details in Committee.

Mr. CAMPBELL would feel proud of the Right Hon.
Gentleman's assistance in amending the Bill in Committee.
In answer to the objection made by the Hon. Member for
York, he would only say that the effect of the Bill would
be greatly to facilitate the borrowing of money on mort-
gage, and the objection proved only that the Hon. Member
and his constituents who objected to it had not sufficiently
considered the Bill.

Mr. FRENCH presented a petition from Roscommon
for an additional number of representatives for Ireland.
O'CONNER DON supported the prayer of the petition.
Mr. (RATTAN regretted that the Irish Reform 13,11
was so different from the English one, and contended that
as far as the machinery of the measure was concerned the
Irish Bill should be the same as the English Bill.
Mr. HUNT presented a petition from the Reformed
Association of Paisley against the Anatomy Bill now before
the House ; the petitioners stated that they viewed that
Bill with horror and disgust. The petition being signed
only by the chairman and secretary, although agreed to at
a public meeting, could only be received as from those two
individuals.

~,After a few words from Mr. WasoN it was ordered to

le on the table.

Mr. HUNT next presented a petition from the Political
Union at Manchester, praying for Annual Parliaments,
Vote by Ballot, and Universal Suffrage ; also a petition
from the same parties, praying for an investigation into
the outrages committed at Manchester in the year
1819. The petitioners stated that their recollection of
those outrages bad been revived by the recent correspond-
ence between Mr. Hulton, a Magistrate, and the Noble
Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Hon. Mem •
her, in conclusion, stated that he should, on the 23d of
February, move for the appointment of a Select Committee
to inquire into these transactions.

Dir. CHOKER moved for a return of the population of
every town in Great Britain, sending Members to Parlia-
ment above 3,000, and the number of houses contained

Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice that on Thursday next
he would present a petition from St. John's, Grenada, on
the subject of the quitrents due to the Crown.
The Lunatic Asylum Bill was forwarded a stage.
Lord J. RUSSELL gave notice, that on Friday next
be should move for leave to bring in a Bill to settle the
limits of cities and boroughs in England and Wales, hav-
ing the privilege of sending Members to Parliament.
In answer to a questio❑ from Mr. Wv}tN, Lord J.
RUSSELL said, he did not consider the enquiry so
closely connected with the subject of which he had given
notice, as to be considered uncourteous in refusing a
reply to the Right Hon. Gentleman.
Sir G. CLERK requested to know whether the infor
mation communicated by the Commissioners sent to
Scotland to ascertain the limits of cities and boroughs
there, was to be laid before the House to-night, as
this was the night on which the Scotch Reform Bill was
to be read a second time, or when Hon. Members might
receive that information ?

Lord ALTIIORP did not think it would be long before
lie should be able to lay the information before the House.

Lord G. SOMERSET w►shed to know whether it was
the intention of Ministers to bring in a Bill, and when, for
the purpose of amending the defects of the Beer Bill ?
Lord ALTHORP said, whatever regulations might be
thought of with respect to that Bill, he trusted none would
ever be adopted, calculated to alter the main principle of
the Bill. At present he was unprepared to say he would
bring in any Bill on the subject.
Lord G. SOMERSET was of opinion that some altera-
tion should be made in the enactments of the Bill. And
unless some abler person than himself took up the subject,
he should himselt set about preparing a measure for
the consideration of the House.

Col. DAVIES did not conceive there conld be a more
misehievota Bill than the Beer Bill, as it at present
stood. There was not a Magistrate who did not complain
of it.--(" Hear," from Mr. Hume.) The Gallant
Colonel did not understand that cheer from hie Hon. Fiend
the Member for Middlesex, who he believed from one year's
end to the other, though a county Member, never left Lon-
don, and knew as muck of the effects of the Bill, as the
table before the Speaker.—(A laugh.)
Mr. HUME protested against the evidence of Magistrates
on this subject—the evidence of men from whom by the
Beer Bill a monopoly had been taken away—(Hear and
cheers)—and who, no doubt, were anxious to get
that monopoly restored. With regard to his ignorance,
on this subject, he would assert that he knew just as much,
and probably more, about the effects of the Beer Bill
in its present shape, than the Hon. Member who had
taken upon himself to pretend to so much knowledge. He
had a great deal to do throughout the county which he
represented, and both from his personal observation, and
from all that he had heard, lie could assure the House, in
Middlesex at least, the Beer Bill was extremely beneficial.
Colonel DAVIES said, it was not with a view of
keeping up the desire of a monopoly that he had al-
luded to the Magistrates at all. The Magistrates did
not object to the Bill, because it deprived them of a mono-
poly—it was only against the clause permitting tippling
on the premises that they objected to.

Mr. \VEYLAND put a question to the Chancellor of
the Exchequer respecting the poor laws, upon which
Lord ALTHORP could only say, as he had said last
❑ight, that the inquiry was now going on on the sub-
ject of the Poor Laws—that inquiry could not take a
long time time, and as soon as possible after it was eon_
eluded, he intended to bring in a Bill.
The House then resolved itself into a Committee on the
REFORM BILL.
Mr. BERNAL in the Chair.

Mr. DENISON, in reference to the 27th clause, would
adduce an adjudged case to prove the endless litigation and
general confusion which would arise under its present
form. It had been decided at the General Quarter g,-
sion, that a person inhabiting a house and paying 4s. a
week had a settlement under the clause, hut when brou
before the King's Bench, it was decided that although
the payment of 4s. a week was a larger sum than 101.
a year, yet it did not give a settlement. That left the

question where it was, and, in the same way, endless liti-
gation and squabbling would be occasioned without com-
ing to any satisfactory conclusion. The decision left
it open to what weekly amount would give a settlement.
His proposition, however, which was indeed substantially
that of his Hon. Friend, would he founded on the simple
rate, and not upon the value. The question of rate was
preferable to the question of value; he would, therefore, fix
the franchise upon the former. It might be objected that
a new assessment would be occasioned all over the coun-
try, which being so universal, might admit of much job-
bing. He was anxious, therefore, to avoid the necessity
of a new Reform, and he should propose that reference be
made to the Conuni•sioners to the rate as it stood at present.
If the 10/. clause were sent forth in Cumberlandv, by
the objection arising from value, it would be a very
fruitful source of litigation, which under his proposi-
tion might be prevented.—( Hear, hear.) He should
therefore move as an amendment to leave out the words in
clause 27, iehich followed the word " occupy" in line 28,
down to the words 101. in line 33, for the purpose of in-
serting the following words, " Any premises answering
to the description hereinafter mentioned."

Lord JOHN RUSSELL understod his Hon. Friend to
propose that the franchise should be attached to the house,
rather than the persons inhabiting it, and that houses having
been ascertained to he of the value of 101., a settlement
under the clause should belong to it. But the difficulty,
if it existed, did not to his mind appear to be at all les-
sened by the effect of this proposition. The difficulty would
be at that, to ascertain whether the house was of that value.
It would not he necessary to enquire into the subject of
the value again, for as a point of practice, occupier of
a house would be admitted to rate as the the occupier of a
house of 101. a year. The difficulty with respect to
those houses to which an additional value had been
affixed, and to which the Honourable Member who
had just sat down had proposes! should not be
placed in the register till after the lapse of three
or five years. With regard to that difficulty which he felt,
he (Lord J. Russell) slid not think that it was
just to act as he had pointed out, because, how-
ever, persons who had built houses of considerable
value ought to derive the same advantage and the same
privilege which was enjoyed by persons inhabiting a house
of 101. a year. With respect, however, to what
the Honourable Member had stated with reference
to houses rated at 101. a year, as to the difficulty of as-
certaining their value, on which a good deal of discussion
had taken place last night, there was only one fact to which
he (Lord John Russell) had tried to put aside that
difficulty, namely, that in the city of Norwich there
sal been for some length of time very serious disputes
with respect to the appointment of the guardians of the
poor by the Corporation, and at length an inhabitant of
Norwich applied to Parliament for a Bill, by which
the right of voting for guardians of the poor was
placed in persons occupying lands or tenements of the
value of 101., and who should be rated to the relief
of the poor.—( Hear.) That Act bad been in operation
for some time in the city of Warwick, and a year or two
ago, that act requiring an amendment, certain parties
brought in a new Bill, which was the subject of much dis-
cussion in that House, but the clause which enabled passions
occupying tenements of 101. a year to vote at Alit
election of guardians for the poor, had been found
so efficient in practice, that it was introduced into
the new Bill without any alteration. The Noble
Lord then read a letter from a gentleman residing in
Norwich, strongly advocating the good effects which
had resulted from that clause to the city of Norwich.
The Noble Lord referred to the Act of 1827, and read the
clause in it relating to the 101. qualification, and stated
that it had been found easy in practice, and was carried
on now without difficulty. The application for a franchise
would be tried with a kind of favour on one side, viz., on
the side of those claiming the franchise, and therefore the
persons claiming to vote in virtue of a 10. qualification
would have but little difficulty in having that claim decided.
Mr. W.WYNNE thought the election of guardian of
the poor was very different from that of a Member of Par-
liament. It would be impossible to lay down in this Act
a set of rules by which all the assistant barristers and
committees in election-petitions should be guided. As tea
the claim for the franchise being decided with some
favour to the claimant, he thought that the investigatio❑
of such claims would be attended with great inconvenience.
After a few words from Lord ALTHORP, which were
inaudible in the Gallery,
Sir. R. PEEL said that the Ast alluded to regarding
Norwich was passed in party spiri:, running very ghhg is
thst town ; but whether the Act was applicable to the case
or afforded every proof of the benefits to be derived from
the clause in theßeform gill under discussion. The Norwich
Act was passed solely with a view of assessing the houses
to the poor rate, and lie had not heard the Noble Lord
opposite say that the inhabitants of Norwich voted ac-
cording to their contribution to the poor or county rate.
If there was to be one criterion for the franchise and
another for the contribution to the rates, and if
they agreed it would be well, but if they did not, in
what state would the qualification be. He advised
the Noble Lord to get rid of these annual rates, and fix it
for three or fire years, and for God's sake to gee rid of the
difference of value.—(Hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL would be gird to take the assess-
ment to the poor or county rate, as a criterion, if he
possibly could ; but it was so irregular, that it would be
impossible to adopt it. The question to decide was, whether
the House would take one side a rule for the franchse that
would lead to many inconviences, or whether they would
exclude from the franchise a great many householders. The
Government preferred insuring those inconveniences which
would exist but for a time, and to give to the constitu-
ency a large proportion of respectable householders.

Lord ALTHORP rose, and was left speaking.

rHE LONDON GAZETTE

THIS EVENING.

\VAR-OFFICE, FEB. 3.
3d Regiment of Light Dragoons—Lieut. T. Richardson to be
Captain, by purchase, vice Jebb, who retires; Cornet W. S.
Conway, to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Richardson, Feb. 3.
4th Light Dragoons—Lieut. It. Fawkes, from the Ceylon
Regiment, to be Lieutenant, vice Bharpin, who exchanges,
Feb. 3.

Coldstream Regiment of Guards—Lieut.-Colonel J. G. Peters,
from half-pay, to be Captain and Lientenant-Colonel, vice F. T.
Buller, who exchanges, Feb. 3.
a Regiment of Foot, C. L. Bennett; Gent, to be Ensgn, by
purchase, vice Faulkner, who retiaes, tebrnry
4th Eoot, Lieutenant C. J. Otter, from half-pay of the 14th
Regiment, to be Lieutenant, vice C. Cameron, who exchanges,
February a
sth Foot—Lieut. C. Greaves, from the 14th Regiment, to be
Lieutenant, vice It. Foot, who exchanges, Feb. 3.
lith Foot—Lieut. H. A. Dalton, from half-pay of the Ist Foot,
to be Lieutenant, vice G. S. Baker, who exchanges; and lt. S.
Grady, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Leslie, appointed
to the 59th Regiment, Feb. 3.

Foot.—Licut. T. Egar, from 48th Regiment, to be Lieu-
tenant, without purchase, vice Hill promoted.
.„.

13th.Foot.—Lfeut. D. Campbell, from half-pay, to be Lieu-
tenant, vice Edwards appointed to the 65th Regiment.

I.9th'Foot.—C. J. Freeman, Gent. to be En's'ign, by purchase,
vice Deacon promoted to 49th Regiment. Feb. at, 1832.
list Foot—Lint. E. H. Plunkett, from half-pay of the 84th Re-
giment, to be First Lieutenant, vice H. Brade, who exchanges;
Feb. 3.

-
38th loot—Gentleman Cadet J. W. S. Smith, from the Royal
Military College, to be Eniign, without purchase, vice Whitten,
promoted ; Feb. 3.
59th Foot—Ensign de W. Richardson to be Lieutenant by
purchase, vice KirKaldy, who retires, Feb. 3.
76th Foot—Ensign It. Bruce to be Lieutenant, by purchase,
vice Thompson, who retires, Feb. 3.
90th Foot—Lieut. R. G. Daunt to be Captain, without pur-
chase, vice Laing, deceased, Jan. '2l; Ensign Geale to be
Lieutenant, vice Daunt; Gent. Cadet J. F. Doxat, from the
Royal Military College, to be Ensign, vice Geale, Feb. 3.
95th Foot—Lieut. P. Collis to be Captain, by purchase, vice
Hall, who retires ; Ensign J. Wardle to be Lieutenant, by pur-
chase, vice Collis; Ensign H. F. Scobell, from 54th Regiment,
to be Ensign, vice Wardle, Feb. 3.
Ist West India Regiment—Ensign J. I). Blythe, from 57th
Regiment, to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Waddell, who re-
tires, Feb. 3.

DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY.
WILLIAM MORGAN, Livsrpool-street, London, merchant.

BANKRUPTS.

PETER YOUNG, Fenchurch-street, sailmaker.
JAMES CROW EASLING, Chandos-street, Covent-garden,
victualler.

--14-11R-RY BRISTOW WILSON, Lawrence Pountney-hill,
boarding-house-keeper.
EDW AR D ALLFORD, Bishopsgate-street Without, up-
holsterer.
HENRY WILSON, Sun-street, woollen-draper.
JAMES PESTELL, Stotfold, Bedfordshire, miller.
JAMES CHAMBERLAIN, Aldermanburv, warehouseman.
HENRY BENNS, Norwich, cordwainer.
JOHN CARELESS and SOHI A CARELESS, Bristol, bakers.
SAMUEL HATTERSLEY, GEORGE HATTERSLEY, and
I,EV I II ATTERSLEY, Bradford, York, machine-makers.
THOMAS PEA EKES, Great Shelsley,Worcestershiretgrocer.
WILLIAM STEAD, Shrewsbury, mercer.
JOSEPH LAWTON, Saddleworth, Yorkshire, grocer.
NATHANIEL THOMAS, Manchester, upholsterer.
WILLIAM LAWTON, B rkinhead Cheshir:. limeburner.
JOHN HATRO, Wigton, Cumberlang, c n-faatar.
HENRY and JAMES CA ZENOVE, Broad-street-buildings,
merchants.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FRDRUARY 2.

( Continued from our Second Edition of yesterday.)

BELGIUM.

Lord PALMERSTON laid on the table a copy of the
treaty relating to the Netherlands, with the ratification of
Great Britain, France, and Belgium, of the 31st Jan.
Lord MILTON would appeal to the Learned Member
for Kerry not to persist in his motion for placing the name
of a Noble Friend of his (Lord Killeen) on the Select Com-
mittee appointed to inquire as to tithes in Ireland. A.
the Committee stood, he (Lord Milton) was disposed to
place every confidence in it ; at the .ame time that he could
not but regret the exclusive nature of the Committee, and
lie must add, that if the Hon. Member's motion should
come to the vote, he should feel it his duty to vote for it.
Mr. O'CONNELL being anxious, as a zealous Re-
former, ' not to place the least bar i❑ the progress of the
Reform Bill, which had already lost a night this week,
begged leave, in accordance with the request of the Noble
Lord, to withdraw his motion.—(Hear.)
Mr. O'CONNELL obtained leave to bring in a Bill to
extend the jurisdiction of Civil Bill Courts in Ireland from
the late Irish currency to the present currency of the realm ;
and also leave to bring in a Bill for the regulation of the
service of writs issuing from the superior Courts in Ireland.
Mr. R. GORDON moved for leave, as the existing Bill
would expire this session, to bring in a Bill to regulate the
care of insane persons in England.
After a few words from Lord G. Somxitsvr, leave was
given to bring in the Bill.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Sir G. CLERK rsoved to add the Lord Advocate, Mr.
C. Fergusson, Mr. C. Bruce, Sir G. Warrender, Mr.
Pringle, and Mr. Dixon, to the Committee on the Court
of Exchequer (Scotland) Bill.
Lord ALTHORP opposed it, on the ground of any ad-
dition being unnecessary.
After a few words from Mr. C. Fergusson, Sir W. Rae,
Mr. C. Bruce, the Lord Advocate, Sir C. Wetherell, Mr.
K. Douglas, and Mr. Croker, the House divided, when
the [lumbers were—
For the motion
Against it lO6
Majority —4-1

REFORM (ENGLAND) BILL.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved the Order of the Day for the
House resolving itself into a Committee on the Reform Bill.
Lord EBRINGTON wished to know from the Noble
Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it was his in-
tention to move that the House should sit on Saturdays, for
the purpose of expediting the progress of the Reform Bill ?
Lord ALTHORP saw no reason at present for adding
Saturday to the Committee days.—(Hear.) The Bill was
then advancing at a more rapid pace through its Committee
stage than it did last session, so that the same urgent ne-
cessity did not exist for adopting the course pursued on
that occasion. Should it, however, become necessary to
take the Committee on Wednesdays or Saturdays, he
would of course submit a proposition to the House for
adding those days to the other four already devoted to the
Bill.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord STORAIONT thought Wednesday would be a
preferable day to Saturday.
Mr. WYNN contended for the necessity of devoting We-
dnesday to the consideration of the miscellaneous public
business.

Alderman WAITHMAN, as one well acquainted with
the feeling of dissatisfaction at the slow progress of the
Bill entertained out of doors, begged leave to urge upon
Ministers the necessity of pres.ing the Bill forward
through its stages with more energy than they had hi-
therto evinced.

Lord ALTHORP begged leave to give notice, that a
motion stood for Tuesday which was likely to occupy the
time of the House till it would be too late for the Com-
mittee on the Reform Bill, He would move that the
Committee should sit o❑ Wednesday, on the understand-
ing, however, that the arrangement was to be for that par-
ticular occasion only.
Mr. CROKER begged leave, for the information of the
Hon. Alderman, whose only knowledge of the Reform Bill
was evidently gleaned east of Temple-bar, to state that
the delay in the progress of the Bill originated wholly in
the bunglings, and postponements, and alterations of its
framers and supporters.

Alderman WAITHMAN—I beg leave, my Lord Mayor.
—(Great laughter, which lasted a couple of minutes.)
The Hon. Alderman was proceeding to et ite that the
delay was owing to the endless speeches of the opposition
Members, when he was interrupted by cries of " Spoke,
spoke."

Lord EBRINGTON agreed with the Hon. Alderman
that great discontent existed out of doors with reference to
the slaw progress of the Bill through that House—a
House especially convoked to promote its speedy settle-
ment by every constitutional means in its power. The
public saw with much dissatisfaction that much
valuable time was wasted by the needless speeches
of the opponents of the Bill, rendering it incum-
bent on Ministers and the friends of Reform to employ
their best energies to defeat the artifices of delay nightly
resorted to by its enemies.—(Hear.) Indeed, so impressed
was he with the necessity of this, and with the conviction
of the mischievous consequences out of doors of unnecessary
delay, that should the Bill not advance more rapidly than
it had done, he would move that the House sit every Satur-
day, from twelve to six o'clock, till the Bill shall have
passed through its Committee stage.
Sir H. HARDINGE begged leave in the most em-
phatic manner to deny that the Opposition side of the
Home had endeavoured to occasion any unnecessary delay
in the progress of the Bill. " What !" continued the
Right Hon. and Gallant Gentleman, " are we already
arrived at that period in which our proceedings are to be
dictated to out of doors ?_(Hear, hear.) Are we already
arrived at the period when the House of Commons shall
have no rule of its own, but must implicitly obey the dic-
tates of the sections of London ?—(Cheers from the Oppo-
sition.) I, for one, will never submit to be so dictated
to.—(Continued cheers.) I know full well that Ministers
can only hope to carry their Bill by the aid of the mob.
—(" No, no," and " hear, hear.") I say yes ; they court
the mob ; and the sections of London, speaking through
their organ, the Noble Lord who has just sat down"
Lord EBRINGTON—" I rise, Sir, to repel with in-
dignation the assertion of the Right Hon. and Gallant
General—(Vehement cheers from the Ministerial benches)
—in terms as positive as is consistent with the forms of
this House. I declare the statement to be a misrepresen-
tation—l presume unintentionally so—but a misrepresen-
tation of fact.—(Continued cheering.) I distinctly stated
that I thought that a great waste of time and words was
the result of the course pursued by Hon. Gentlemen oppo-
site, and that the country felt justly dissatisfied with the
unnecessary delay to the progress of the Reform Bill which
was thereby occasioned. That statement I repeat, and I
repeat it that I repel with indignation the assertion of the
Right Hon. and Gallant General, that I am the organ of
a mob or section.—(Load cheers.) I scorn the insinua-
tion of being the organ of sentiments or opinions of any
man or party differing from my own. I stand here the
representative of a large and flourishing county, as inde-
pendent in my opinions and in my expressions of them as
any man who hears me._(Hear, bear.) And I beg leave
also to state that these opinions are as honestly enter-
tained, and as fearlessly avowed, as any ever entertained or
expressed by the Right Hon. and Gallant General."—
(Loud cheers.)

Sir H. HARDINGE—" When the intemperate cheers
of certain Hon. Gentlemen, whom I have in my eye, shall
have ceased, I will reply to the Noble Lord. The Noble
Lord's chief argument for his intended motion was founded
on the opinion entertained by persons out of doors, with
respect to what he and they called the unnecessary delay to
the progress of the Reform Bill, occasioned by the Opposi-
tion aide of the House. The Noble Lord did not, I admit,
use the word ' section,' but I say that whea many Hon.
Members of this House permit themselves to be dictated to
by the mob out of doors—(' Name, name.')—l do not feel
myself called upon to name any particular person, and will
only refer to what has already been stated, among others
by myself in this House, with respect to the conduct of
two Noble Lords opposite,—Cabinet Ministers,—in their
correspondence with the Birmingham Union, in which
they described, I would say libelled the decision of the
House of Lords as the ' whisper of a faction.'—(Cheers
from the Opposition.) The Noble Lord avows that his
chief argument for his intended motion for the House to
sit on Saturdays is founded on the complaints out of doors
at the slow progress of the Bill, and I felt and feel that I
was warranted in considering it in the light of mob dicta-
tion.—(Cheers.) It was to this my observations ►ere

PRICE 7D.

directed. The Noble Lord slys he repels with indignation
my statement. I know not what meaning the Noble Lerd
attaches to hie words, hut I tell him that if he repels with
indignation what I may address to him, I am ready to meet
him in any way and any place he pleases.—(Cheers, and
cries of chair.') I have only to add, that whenever I
shall hear Hon. Members make out-of-door statements the
rule of their conduct in this House, I wil—recollecting the
indignation of the Noble Lord, or any other Noble Lord—
express my indignation ; and that I see no reason to retract
a syllable or iota of what I have uttered."—(Cheers from
the Opposition.)

Lord EBRINGTON—" The Right Hon. and Gallant
General stated that I was here the organ of the sections'
of Londen—that they 'spoke through me as their organ.
—(Hear.) To that assertion I gave, and again give, a
a positive denial, a flat contradietien.—(Cheers.) No
gentleman has a right to state what is unfounded in fact ;
far less when the assertion is calculated to convey an un-
just insinuation.—(Hear, hear ) I repeat that the asser-
tion of the Right Hon. and Gallant General is perfectly
unfounded in fact."—(Cheers.)

After a few words from Mr. Gsulburn, Lnrd Althorp,
Sir G. Murray, and Sir C. Wetherell, the discussion
dropped, and the House went into Committee.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved the 17th clause, to the
effect that towns which are in counties in themselves should
he included in adjoining counties for the county elections.
The clause had been postponed till the 24th had been dis-
posed of, on the understanding that the decision on the
latter should be final with respect to the former, both in-
volving a common principle.

. .
Mr. CROKER admitted that such was the understand-
ing-, and therefore would not divide the Committee on the
17th clause.

Colonel SIBTHORPE moved, as an amendment to that
part of the clause which applied to Lincoln, that " all
freeholders whose freeholds in the county of the city of
Lincoln are situated on the northern side of the river Wi-
tham shall vote in future for the representatives in Parlia-
ment for the diviaiun of Lindsey, in the county of Lin-
coln ; and all the freeholders whose freeholds are situated
on the southern side of the aforesaid river in the same
city, including the four parishes annexed by charter to the
same county-city, shall vote for representatives in Par-
liament for the division of Kesteven and Holland." He
would not take the sense of the Committee in the then
state of the House, but would reserve the division till the
report was brought up. The Gallant Gentleman then re-
peated one of his usual statements with respect to the in-
creasing unpopularity of the Reform Bill in the county of
Lincoln, and of a " re-action in the country at large, and
with respect to his obligations to the reporters.
Sir H. INGILBY would let the Gallant Gentleman
misrepresent the city of Lincoln as much as he pleased,
but would not permit his so grossly misrepresenting the
county of Lincoln as to assert uncontradicted that a re-

action had taken place in its inhabitants with respect to
Reform. No such re-action had taken place. Indeed,
the Gallant Gentleman's assertion on this head could only
be paralleled by those of a veracious German writer of the
name of Munchausen.—(Hear and laughter.)
Colonel SIBTHORPE would repeat that a re-action had
taken place in the county of Lincoln with respect to the
Reform Bill, and would maintain that the contrary state-
ment of the Hon. Baronet was wholly unfounded in fdct.
The amendment was then negatived without a division,
and the clause agreed to.
The 25th clause, enacting that no person shall be en-
titled to vote for a county in respect of certain copyholds
and leaseholds in a borough, was then agreed to.
On the 26th clause, enacting that possession for a cer-
tain time and registration are essential to the right of vot-
ing fora county,

Lord ALTHORP, under the circumstances of the pre-
sent Bill, which was not likely to pass so early as to render
it necessary to make a specific enactment for the regibtra-
tion of the present year, would move that the blank be
tilled up with " the 20th of June."

Mr. C. W. WYNN would take this opportunity of
repeating the suggestion he had made last session, that for
the purpose of expediting the Bill, and to afford time fer
deliberation upon other subjects, it would he highly deli.
rable to divide the Bill, after the 34th or 35th clause, when
the rights of voting were all determined, and to leave the
question of registration and subordinate details for a sepa-
rate discussion. These, he thought, might be much bet-
ter discussed in a Committee up stairs.
Lord ALTHORP objected to this proposition, as far as
we could collect amidst the noise.

The clause, as amended, was agreed to.
On the 27th clause being read, which enacts that the
right of voting in boroughs shall be enjoyed by occupiers
of houses, &c., of the annual value of 101.,
Mr. HUNT moved to substitute the following :—" That
all householders paying taxes shall have a vote for the re-
spective Members to be chosen in the next and every suc-
ceeding Parliament." He should not have condescended
to move his amendment if he had not intended to follow it
up, if lost, with a motion that " all persons who shall be
excluded from voting shall be exempt from taxes and rates,
and from serving in the militia, and be protected from
being impressed to serve in the navy."
Mr. C. FERGUSSON observed, that the present Bill
was undoubtedly better than the last in respect to the 10/.
clause, but there were still opportunities afforded for abuse
and erasion. A fixed qualification of even 5/. a•year was
better than a shifting and fugitive one, whereby a class of
voters might be let in without respectability or character.
A general registry of the whole kingdom, for the qualifi •
cation of voters, was a desirable object.
Sir R. PEEL denied that there was any necessity for a
specific sum applicable to every place. His objection to
the clause was, that it took a certain standard, and applied
it to every elector in any part of the kingdom. So far

from assuming that 10/. was fit to be the fixed invariable
rate for the elective franchise, be should be in favour of
lowering the rate in certain taxes. He could not see a reason
why, in the smaller towns in the kingdom, the Noble Lord
did not retain some nearly on a level with the scot and
lot voters.—(Hear, bear.) The Noble Lord said this
was liable to abuse. That might be the case in large
towns, bat in small towns the scot and lot voters were
more creditable than the 10/. householders. He (Sir R.
Peel) would admit a more extensive right of voting. He
did not believe that if they were to give a constituency of
400 to 500 leaseholders, paying church-rate, and poor-
rate, and assessed taxes, a more discreditable constituency
would be created than by the present Bill ; but, on the
contrary, it would continue that link of connexion which
united the lower class of householders with the higher.
With respect to the large towns, which were to be en-
franchised for the first time, he was not prepared to say
that 101. or lb/. or 20!. was a proper qualification ; but he
bitterly lamented that Government did not take snore time
than six weeks to consider the measure—(Hear)—they
ought to hare taken six months to consider the nature of
the Reform they were about to introduce. In the cases of
Birmingham and Leeds, for example, he saw no objection
to the proposal of the Hon. Member for Thetford (Mr.
Baring), of taking 4,000 or 5,000 of the highest rated
persons as voters ; because Parliament was about to create
something de noro, and was, therefore, at liberty to create
a new qualification. So much for the principle. But he
had an equal objection to the manner of determining the
right of voting of the 10/. electors. They were going
to give a direct interest to the landlord, to take away had
from tenants in order to make 20/. qualifications.
The difficulty of determining the right of voting
would be found to be so great, that he was convinced it
would be necessary to reconsider the qualification and to
appoint some other. He held in his hand a return of

the numbers of 10/. houses, and he referred to the place
he represented, Tamworth. His Majesty's Ministers had
asked the number of 101. houses in that small borough,
the circumstances of which were well-known. They bad
applied to two persons, the town clerk and the church-
warden ; and in that small borough the variation of these
two authorities was amusing. The churchwarden, said
the number was 202, and the town-clerk said the number
was 325.—(Laughter and cheers from the Opposition.)
In this small borough, containing 729 houses, after ample
time had been given to make the return, and both the in-
dividuals he had mentioned being intelligent persons, here
Akan this discrepancy. The fact was, the town clerk had
returned from the poors' rat•; the churchwarden from the
church rate. But consider the difficulty of a stranger
going down and making a return after two days' residence.
--(Hear.) He would stake his reputation that the case he
was about to mention occurred within a fortnight, and
without any reference to the subject of Reform. A ques
tion arose whether or not a certain party had gained a
settlement by inhabiting a 101. house, and the point was
whether it was a 101. house or not. The inquiry lasted
two days; witnesses were examined, fourteen Magis-

t•
) 'niter
•
•I • ..
:rates were present, and after 1‘ ..eanogr t?
.;,...044. A
Counsel, seven Magistrates were of "*l4;rll.i. 1
house was worth 101., and seven were or .
it was not.—(Laughter and cheers.) No- 4111!..,.
claimed a right of voting, was it likely ther, 71,
less litigation? The Jury Bill raised another qQal-0,,.
Under this Bill there were two qualifications: that of a
householder paying poor rates, orloccupying a house with
15 windows. There was a difference between the quali-
fication under the Jury Bill and under this Bill. If the
value of a 101. house were to be determined, the case must
be brought before the barrister, and evidence must be beard.
Here it was quite plain that the encouragement to incur
expence was enormous.—(Hear, hear.) Power was given
to summon, as a witness, any individual at any distance,
and that individual was to receive his viaticum. Suppose
that the claimant was in Cornwall, and the witness in
London, this viaticum must be tendered to him, in order,
if he refused, that his refusal might be made the ground
for legal proceedings. This was not the only source of
complaint. The expenses thus incurred were not small ;
but let it be observed above all, that they were annual ex-
penses.—(Hear, hear.) And by whom were they to be
defrayed? By the small oligarchy of 101. householders,
who wished to establish the right of suffrage? No, nt,t
by them, but by all the inhabitants—(Hear, hear)—even
by the poor common scot-and-lot voters.—(Hear, hear.)
He earnestly implored the House to pause before they
consented to throw such a heavy burden on the poor-
rates.—(" Hear, hear. )

Lord J. RUSSELL said, the principal ohjcc:ion of the
Right Hon. Baronet was, that there was too great a va-
riety, instead of there being a general uniformity, of suf-
frage ; and that the right of suffrage, instead of being
low in the small towns and higher in the large towns, was
on the contrary, too high i❑ the small towns and too Law
in the large towns. This the Right Hon. Gentleman con-
sidered to be a great defect. Now he (Lord J. Russell)
contended, on the other hand, that if they had made the
right low i❑ the small boroughs, and higher in the large
towns, the system would be much worse, and must of
necessity be mischievous to the principles of practical Re-
form. Let the House, in the first place, take the smaller
boroughs. There was no one acquainted with the elec-
tions in this country who would nut admit, that boroughs
where the system of voting by scot and lot prevailed were
exceedingly corrupt, and were the most disgraceful blots
that existed in the representation.—(Hear, bear.) In two
or three of these boroughs a constituency was to be found
of so wretched a character, that they were always ready
to receive 20 or 25 guineas, as the price of their suffrages.
—(Bear, hear.) Therefore, when they were allowed to
send representatives to Parliament, it was deemed neces-
sary that their suffrages should be founded en something
above that which was merely nominal.—(Hear, hear.) It
was considered just and wise, that men possessing the elec-
tive franchise should be above the temptation of a bribe.
—(Hear, hear.) Then let them take the larger towns,
and consider whether any good reason existed for raising
the right of suffrage higher with respect to them. The
Right lion. Baronet stated, and stated truly, that the
scot and lot system brought a great number of the lower
sort of voters more immediately in contact with the Const-
itution, which he viewed as a circumstance of great impor-
tance. But he thought that the Right Hon. Baronet was
mistaken in his application of the just and equitable prin-
ciple on which his argument was founded. This lower
description of voters had little knowledge of political tights
and paid not much attentioq to them ; but those who
really considered these subjects were to he found in that
great and numerous class of tradesmen and artisans who

inhabited large towns. They took an interest in political
questions, and they would select men to represent their in-
terests and to support the interests of the country in Par-
liament. Now if the Right lion. Baronet's suggestion
were followed, it would let in the suffrages of voters in
small boroughs, who took no interest, or scarcely any in-
terest, in political matters, and it would keep out the suf-
frages of those who really did take an interest in them.—
(Hear, hear.) In both respects, by making the right of
suffrage lower in the small boroughs, and higher in the
great towns, they would injure the Bill; and in both re-
spects they would injure the constituency of the country.
—(Hear, hear.) The Right lion. Baronet had stated
fairly the objections which might be raised against taking
value as the criterion of the right of suffrage. On that
point he should only say, that if any mode could be
devised by which the right of suffrage could be ascer-
tained without trouble, inconvenience, or expense, he
would moat readily adopt it ; but until such a mode
was discovered, he would adhere to that which the
Bill contained as being, under all circumstances, meet
decidedly the best. If the right of voting were to be
decided by rate, it would not answer : because rating was
very different in different places. In some places, a house
was rated on the value of 101. a-year, which was barely
worth that amount; whilst in others the same rate was
affixed to a house worth 501. or 601. a-year. But it was
perfectly evident that there was no way of framing a clause
free from objection if they admitted value at all as the
criterion. He, however, saw no mode less objectionable
than that which was proposed. With respect to the pro-
ceedings before the barrister, he believed the Right lion.
Baronet would find that they were not to be defrayed out
of the poor-rate.
Sir C. WETHERELL said there was no part of the
Bill which, in his (Sir C. Wetherell's) opinion was more
objectionable than this clause, and neither the taunts of
the worthy Alderman, nor the sneers of all the Aldermanic
body of the city of London, should prevent him from
doing his duty.
Sir R. PEEL, in explanation as to what he had said
as to the expense which would be produced by the Bill,
referred to clause 55, which he said showed that a great
annual expense would be occasioned by it, and which ex-
pense he apprehended would be thrown altogether in the
• poor rates• He should like to know who was to bear the
expense in the case of summoning witnesses, and whether
it would not fall on the county rates ?
Lord ALTIIORP said that the expense of summoning
witnesses would not be thrown on the country or the poor
rates, but that the intention of the Bill was that it should
be borne by the parties themselves for whose benefit they
were summoned, and who would hare to tender the viati-
cum, as was the case under similar circumstances at present.
In the course of this discussion the motion which had been
made by the Hon. Member for Preston appeared to be
altogether lost sight of. Now he thought that it would be
better and mere convenient to dispose of that motion in
the first instance, before they should proceed further with
the discussion on this clause.--(Hear, hear.) With regard
to that Hon. Member's motion, he might observe that it
was not one that the Committee were at all likely to ac-
cede to, and he therefore hoped that the Hon. Member
would excuse him from going into any of the arguments
which might be offered against such a motion, as such
arguments were not necessary, seeing that the Members
had made up their minds on the subject. The Hon. and
Learned Gentleman opposite had said that there was four
tests of value in the last Bill, and there was only one to
be found in the present. But though there was only one
particular specific in the present Bill, the others still re-
mained, and could be had recourse to for the purpose of
testing value where they should be deemed necessary.
Mr. SADLER rose amid cries of " Divide, divide."
nfoi
fromrinbad i principlefra :c h. ;rub
een
i saido of the
in this B
people illo f,
and The rteh awtaws aosnetheunui
England. According to calculations which he bad made,
20,000,000 of the people of England—such were the
words of the Hon. Member—.would, under this Bill, be
left without an actual or a virtual representation. lie
would maintain that the 101. clause would not satisfy the
people of England.
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN said that the Hon. and
Learned Member for Borougbbridge was always exceed-
ingly ready to be facetious at the expense of the Aldermen
of the city of London. He (Alderman Weidman) did
not know whether the Recorder of Bristol was an Alder-
man, but of this, at all events, he was quite certain, that
the Aldermen of the city of London maintained their
ground as well as the Aldermen of Bristol—(Much laugh-
ter)—and that some of them, at least, were as skilled in
horsemanship as any amongst the civic dignitaries of that
now unfortunately too celebrated place.—(Roars of laugh-
ter.) He had always done his duty towards the large
body of constituents that he represented, and be should be
always ready to defend his conduct against the uncalled for
attacks of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, who, though
he talked to him (Alderman Waithman) about his facing
his constituents at the hustings, had probably never seen
the semblance of a hustings, and yet who took up more
time of that House than any other Hon. Member in it,
in talking absolute and downright nonsense.—(Great
laughter.)
Mr. ARTHUR TREVOR said, that the more he saw
of this Bill, the more he was convinced that the effects of
it would be to engender the deepest disappointment
throughout the country.
The Committee then divided, when the numbers were—
For the amendment
Against it
Majority -279
andO'n'
s
On their partially subsiding,
Gouorornet,,u,renontotinthuede gallery the
etehreycreioeLodfera"blAed3.lo,eurriond,".
Mr.:EVELYN DENISON mats, but, from the buzz and
conversation in the House, was scarcelyderetood him to say, that although it
tnig audible.
to decide on the merits of the whole clause that night, yet
that perhaps the motion of which he had given notice
ahntt sh.
he
p ‘tore s,:ib n
ie
-
might be discussed. It was "to introduce provisions by