The Sun.
London, England, 1821-03-20 00:00:00

The County Courts Bill went through a Com-
mittee-. Report on Monday se'nnight.'
GII.ANIPoUND DISFILINCHISENIENT BILL.
Mr. VironTLty moved the third reading of the
Grampound Disfranchisement Bill.
Mr. SYK ES opposed the Bill as not providing
sufficient popular Election. The town of Leeds
contained about 80,000 persons, but by this Bill
not more than 1,000 out of 80,000 would have a
right to vote., He considered it would be better
to leave the right of election to the Borough of
'.Grampound, than to send it to Lt->eds under such
circumstances. He wished this Bill to be ivith-
rtlrawn, and a new Bill brought in, giving the
right to the County of York to send four Mem-
bers instead of two, as it did at present. He
concluded by moving, that the Bill be read a
third time this day six months.
Lord J. RUSSELL defended himself against the
charge to which he had been stinjectecl, of having
abandoned thell3ill, Ile first proposed to make
Leeds a scot-and-lot Borough ; but this being
opposed, he then prOposed to limit the right. of
voting to persons pa)ing rents of 51. a year. He
afterwards proposed to raise the sum to 101. ; but
an Hon. Gentleman proposed, as an amendment,'
20/. This took away, in his mind, the popular
character of the Bill,
.and destroYed the object
of it ; aud under these circumstances, he had
given up the conduct of the Bill. Ile still, how-
ever, cousidered.it so valuable a measure, ,that,
should the Hon. Member persist iu dividing the
House, he would vote for the Bill.
C. CALVERT supported the motion.

Mr. Mikartx opposed it.; and contended that
the majority of the Electors of Grampound were
innocent. . The Noble Lord who brought forward
this Bill considered. them as innocent, and pro-
,posed to. give them au equivalent somewhere.
.That equivalent had not been given, to them, and
therefore the Noble Lord was bound to give the
Bill a negative, and place
,Grampound in the.
situation in which it originally was, especially as
no complaint had recently been preferred against
that Borough.
Mr. S. WoturcEY defended tine Bill. lie'
acknowledged that at present
.there were
only 1690 houses on the. Rate-bcok above
twenty pounds, a year r but no new . Rate-
book had been made for the last 30 years. When.
a fair Rate-hook' should be made, which would
be done immediately after.. passing this Bill, he
was convinced the number of. voters' would. not
be less than soop; to which. would be added
persons who, not holding houses worth 201. held
land making up
.that sum ; and altogether they
Would
'Constitute a popular Election.±
Mr. SYKES explained.

M_S r.Ny ANN said, that nt of 57 voters c 7 only
had been convicted of bribery. No instance had,
occurred before of the majority being punished
for the conduct of the. minority. Gratnpound
had. been laid hold of because it was protected
by..no aristocratical_ was, from
principle, against the Bill ;:t.m.t, preferred the
qualification of 201. to 10f.

Sir M. W.RIDLEY was in favour of the Bill.—
The Bill.was then read a third time.
Mr. TESYSON moved to leave out the words in
the preamble, " the number of Burgesses serving
in that part of the United Kifigdona called Eng-
land would thereby be incomplete.:'
Mr. Twiss opposed this. mhtion. 'Lord" 'J.
Russcr:r. supported it. Mr. F. l'Ar.lisn had
great doubts as to the efficacy of the Bill.
Mr: S. WonIA:EY had no objection to omit the
words. The words were then ordered to be
struck out, and the Bill passed. The other
Orders were then disposed of, and at Two
o'.!Locx the House Adjourned.