The Sun.
London, England, 1832-05-26 00:00:00

REFORM.

The House then resolved itself into a Committee on the
Reform Bill in Parliament (England) Bill.
The question having been put on the 27th clause, that
relating to the 101. franchise,

The Earl of HADDINGTON intended to have sub-
mitted a motio❑ to the Committee on this clause, hut cir-
cumstances had occurred which left him unprepared, and
he should therefore defer his intention till the consideration

of the report.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE, when he first turned his atten-
tion to the subject of the 101. franchise, thought that it
had been fixed too low ; but upon reflection, he thought
that if it were really rendered a bona fide franchise, it
might yet be rendered unobjectionable. The Noble Lotd
then went on to urge objections to the qualification by
rent, observing that it had been tried and rejected. That
which the present Bill went to establish was, he thought,
equAlly objectionable, as leading to interminable confusion
and litigation ; whereas, it was his opinion that the most
advantageous plan for ascertaining the value would be, the
amount at which the houses were estimated for the pur-
poses of the pnors-rates. If the qualification could be
made a bona fide qualification, he should have no objec.
tion to it.

The LORD CHANCELLOR admitted that there was
some difficulty with respect to ascertaining the qualifies-
tion, but contended that nothing had yet been proposed bet-
ter than the plan which the Bill provided. The 40a. free-
holds were, as to the mode of ascertaining their value, open
to the same objection. It was not practicable to devise
any plan which at the outset would work with the same
facility that, after a short time, might he expected. Ac-
cording to the mode of proceeding established by the Bill,
a very simple practice would prevail at elections, for all
that would be required was that the elector should esta-
blish his identity. The mode of ascertaining value by
means of the poor-rate valuation, would be open to this
amongst many objections, that the mode of making the
poor-rate valuation varied exceedingly in different places;
again, such an arrangement would have the effect of dis

franchisim; no fewer than 107,000 electors. He approved
of that provision of the Bill which continued to a man
the right of voting, even if he did not continue to reside
in the same house, provided he did not remove to a house
of less than 101. value.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH maintained, that, as the
clause stood, the overseer had the power of disfranchising
any man to whom he objected.
The Earl of MALMESBURY insisted on the same
objection.

The LORD CHANCELLOR contended the objection
was unfounded, and that the clause would work well.
The Earl of MALIIIESBURY thought that, in conse-
quence of the trouble imposed on overseers, respectable
persons would decline the office of overseers. It would
be sought after by electioneering demagogues, and the poor
would be neglected, and he took occasion to observe, that
if there were to be one happy corner in this country after
this Bill was passed, it would be that i❑ which there was
no local representation, no extensive manufacture, and no
political union.—(Cheers.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR contended the overseer
was the only proper officer by whom the registry could
he made.

_
Lord WY FORD tvas of opinion that this arrange-
ment would lead to false swearing as to the value of
property.
The Marquess of BUTE supported the amendment, and
the Marquess of LA ssoowNE opposed it.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH recommended the postpone-
ment of the clause.
After a few words from Lord WHARNCLIFFE, the
Ain•endment was negatived.

Several verbal amendments were then introduced into

file clause, which, so amended, was ordered to stand par,
if the Bill.

The 28th and 29th clauses were then ordered to stain
parts of the Bill.

Lord ELLENBOROUG H, adverting to the 28th clause
observed that it was in direct opposition to a clause whicl
had appeared in the first Bill.
The clause was then agreed to after a few words from
the Lord CHANCELLOR.

Clauses 29 and 30 were also agreed to.—No opposition
On clause 31 being read,
Lord WYNFORD said it had been his intention to
move an Amendment, excepting voters for burgage te-
nures from its operation ; but after what he had seen of
the opposition to improvements on the part of the Go-
vernment, he should reserve his objections for another

occasion.
The clause was then agreed to.
Clause 32, being read,
The Marquess of LONDONDERRY objected to that
part of it which limited the right of voting in boroughs
to those persons who resided within a circuit of seven miles.
The effect of the clause would be to deprive many of his
tenants of a vote for the city of Durham, while it gave
new votes to the Noble Baro❑ opposite (Lord Durham),
and added to that alarming preponderance which other
p irts of the Bill conferred on that Noble Lord in the re-
presentation of the county. He had already alluded to
this most disgusting partiality displayed towards the pro-
perty of the Noble Baron in the county of Durham, and
although the Noble Baro❑ had attempted a reply to his
objections, its flimsiness was obvious to the House. It
was said, that the arrangement was the result of the un-
biassed judgment of Commissioners, but those Commis-
sioners, it should be borne in mind, were appointed by the
Government.
The Marquess of CLANRICARDE thought the Noble
Baron should not condescend to reply to such allusions. As
to the charge brought by the Noble Marquess against the
Commissioners, it was equally unworthy of refutation,
and he believed there was not an assembly in the country,
in which an individual could be found, who would throw
out such insinuations against his fellow-labourers, or im-
pute to them such motives.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord DURHAM did not recognise the right of the
Noble Marquess to ask such questions, nor, but for
its being mixed up with other matters, would he have
noticed them. The Noble Marquess, presuming, pro-
bably, on what would have been bis own course, had
he had taken leave to suppose that he (Lord Dur-
ham) had turned the power of the situation in which
he was placed, to the purposes of private jobbing—
he trusted it was not necessary for him to say that he was
not one of those.—(Hear, hear.) Everyone was not of the
same frame of mind on such subjects, and he had never felt
an inclination to traffic with the liberties of his country.—
( Hear.) With respect to the boundary of seven miles, lie
knew nothing of it till long after it was fixed ; but lie cared
so little for it, that if the Noble Marquess moved that it
should be only one or two miles, he might command his
vote; for he had ❑o desire to drive his voters to the poll,
whatever might be the practice or the wishes of other
Noble Lords on such subjects.
The Earl of RADNOR observed that the Noble Mar-
quess had quarrelled with a number which was generally
considered peculiarly fortunate. There were seven days
in the week, and there were seven wonders of the world—
(Hear, and a laugh)—and there were seven wise men—
(laughter)—and seven was the favourite hour for dinner—
(lauahter)—and it was now three hours after dinner_
(continued laughter.)
The Marquess of LONDONDERRY, after the expla-
nation of the Noble Baron (Durham), would not say
more on the subject, although he still thought it very ex-
traordinary. The Noble Earl had been very facetious at
his expense ; and he had, as usual, been supported by the
cheers and yells of the Noble Lords opposite.—(Order,
order)—whenever fault was found with a colon or semi-
colon of the Bill. He had not the ability to answer them ;
but if the unconstitutional exercise of power had not driven
from his side the phalanx that could have put them down,
there would nat have been so many shouts of triumph.
He, however, was determined to hold out to the last.
The Duke of RICHMOND felt himself called on to say,
that he was the person who proposed the boundary of
seven miles; and he could add that the Noble Baron (Dur-
ham) was utterly ignorant of it, for he was not at that
time in England. The Noble and Gallant Marquess
(Londonderry) had said that he, at least, would hold out
courageously to the last. He (the Duke of Richmond)
had never doubted the courage and gallantry of the Noble
Marquess ; but he certainly must say, that he had some
doubts of his discretion.
The Marquess of LONDONDERRY could also say to
the Gallant Duke that he bad no doubts of that Noble
Lord's courage, but he had some doubts which would pre-
ponderate if the Noble Duke's gallantry and his indiscre-
tion were put into opposite scales.
The Duke of RICHMOND said that the Gallant Mar-
quess was unable to challenge him with indiscretion.
The Marquess of LONDONDERRY—I deny it.—(A
laugh.)
The Duke of RICHMOND challenged the Noble Mar-
quess to point out an act of his life in which he had been
guilty of indiscretion.
The clause was then agreed to.
The 33d clause was next agreed to, after a short conver
station.

The question having been put upon the 34th clause,
Lord WYNFORD suggested an Amendment, the
purpose of which could not be collected below the Bar.
A conversation was then carried on across the table, in
the course of which,
The Duke of RICHMOND did not think the Marquess
of Londonderry could be, in the question respecting Sea-
ham, quite an unbiassed judge, as he had a considerable
interest in that place.
The Marquess of LONDONDERRY spurned with
contempt the Noble Duke's attack upon him.
The Duke of RICHMOND thought that such language
ought not to be used in the House of Lords. Their
Lordships could scarcely wonder that people out of doors
should say that the Lords were guilty of atrocious acts,
when, in that House, one Lord was heard to charge
another, in the face of their Lordships, with atrocious
conduct ; nor could they blame people out of doors for
saying that their Lordships were worthy of contempt,
when a Noble Marquis spurned with contempt another
Member of that Hou-e.—(Hear, hear.)—The Noble Mar-
quees was one of the last persons whom he should choose
to insult at any time ; but if he had any wish to insult
him, he should certainly not do so in that House, where
I their Lordships' rules would prevent him from repelling an
insult.—(Hear.)
The Marquess of LONDONDERRY acquitted the
Noble Duke of any wish to insult him, and he apologized
to the House if he had fallen into any error.—(Hear.)
The 34th, 35th, Stith, 37th, 38th, 39th, and 40th
clauses were then agreed to without dissent.
The question having been put upon the 41st clause,
Lord ELLENBOROUGH objected to the appointment
of the Barristers being vested in the Judges.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, that the power must
be vested somewhere, and be thought that the Judges were
the persons best fitted to exercise it.
That clause, and the 42d, were then agreed to.
All the other clauses up to 80, were then agreed to.
Lord WYNFORD gave notice that, on bringing up the
Report he should move certain clauses against bribery and
corruption.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said there was a separate
Bill for that object.
The Marquess of SALISBURY gave notice that on
entering in schedules A and B, he should move that the
electors for those places should have the right of voting
for the adjoining town or county.
The CHAIRMAN then moved that schedules C, D, E,
and F, should stand part of the Bill, which were agreed
to, and
to
ndth\evedHonuessdeayaelnjenxtit.rned at a quarter past Twelve
o'clock,