The Sun.
London, England, 1861-02-14 00:00:00

ENFRANCHISEMENT OF KENSINGTON.

Last night a public meetiag of the inhabitants of
Kensington and the surrunding district was held
at the Vestry-room, Kensington, for the purpose of
supporting the bill for the enfranchisement of
Chelsea and Kensington—Hr. Greenway, church-
warden, in the chair.

The CIIAIRMAN briefly stated the object for which
the meeting was called, and read a letter from Mr.
Whalley, M.P., expressing regret that he was not
able to attend.

Captain SHUTTLEWORTII moved the following
resolution :—" That this meeting hereby records its
conviction of the indisputable claim of this district,
arising from the population, extent, and large
amount paid by it to the taxation of the State, to a
direct representation in the Commons House of
Parliament." He was so sure that the resolution
carried with it its own recommendation that he
should do no more than simply propose it.
Mr. WALKER, chairman of the Chelsea board of
guardians, seconded the resolution.
Mr. FIELDE moved the following addendum :
" That this meeting, having no confidence in her
Majesty's Government, is of opinion that the best
way of securing two representatives for the new
borough is to request Mr. Bright to bring in his
Reform Bill without delay." (Oh, oh.)
Mr. PRIEST seconded the amendment, for which
only the proposer and seconder held up their hands.
The original resolution was then put and adopted
unanimously.
Mr. WILKINs proposed the following resolution :
That the meeting approves of the bill brought
in by Lord Enfield for
,giving two members to
Kensington and Chelsea."
Mr. ARCIIBUTT seconded the motion.

Mr. SEARLE said he felt, as an old inhabitant of

the district, that he ought to say a few words on
the question before them. When he looked at the
meeting before him, which was attended by scores
when it ought to be attended by thousands he could
not help feeling that the inhabitants were not doing
their duty. Of course he did not blame those who
performed their duty by attending; but those who
kept away. He confessed that the condition of
England generally presented a very sorry spectacle
at that moment. It was not to be expected, when

the people exhibited so much apathy, that the Go-
vernment would come forward and do for them
what they seemed so little to care about themselves.
(Hear, hear.) He was sure, if they showed them-
selves anxious for reform, that the Government
would be obliged to give it to them. (Hear, hear.)
He hoped and believed that, if this district obtained

its enfranchisement, it would prove a model con-
stituency, and return members who would be an
honour to the borough and to the country. (Hear,
hear.)
The resolution was carried unanimously.
Mr. FREEMAN proposed the next resolution,
which was that a committee be appointed to carry
out the object of the meeting. He believed that
there was no borough in the kingdom which had
an equal title to two out of the four representatives
which were in abeyance. (Hear.)
Mr. BLORE said he was not accustomed to see
such large meetings in the district as the one before
him, and he took that to be a sign of the interest
that was felt in the subject. He was rejoiced to
say that they had now a prospect of seeing their
wishes accomplished. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. MCCULLAGH said it had been remarked that
the masses of the people in the parish were not
present in the room. The population of the district
was about 120,000 or 130,000, and it would be very
difficult for that room to hold them. But he be-
lieved the intelligence and the respectability of the
parish were very fairly represented there, and that
fact would weigh considerably with Parliament and
the Government when they_ came to consider this
question. (Hear, hear.) He believed that no town
in England could compete with them in their claim
for represehtation. What were the facts on which
they relied ? Putting aside the 130,000 inhabi-
tants of the district altogether, he could make such

a claim as regarded property as no honest man
could refuse to acknowledge. He held in his hands
a return which was made two years ago to the
House of 'Commons. This return contained the
amount of property and income rated under sche-
dule A in the 255 boroughs and cities of the United
Kingdom. He had also the return of Mr. Laing,
which contained the amount of property rated
under the same schedule in Chelsea and Kensing-
ton. How many of these 255 boroughs were rated
higher than Chelsea and Kensington ? Only 15.
(Hear.) It followed as a consequence that 240
cities and towns sent members to Parliament which
did not equal them in wealth. (Hear.) They were
rated under schedule A to the amount of £693,000,
and if to that they added, as he contended they
had a right to add, the property rated under
schedules B and C, they had, with a population of
130,000, a taxed property of £1,000,000. (Hear,
hear.) There was nothing in England, Scotland,
or Ireland, to be compared with that. (Hear, hear.)
At the time of the Reform Bill, 22 towns were
declared to be worthy of two seats each, and
of these 22 but three had a population equal to
that which they had ten years ago. There were
only six towns that had crept up to the popula-
tion they had ten years ago. (Hear, hear.) In
fact, whether the basis of representation was to
be population; property, or intelligence, or all of
these combined, they had anindisputable and uncle-