The Sun.
London, England, 1827-03-16 00:00:00

NAVIGATION LAWS.

Mr. LINDSAY presented a Petition from the Ship-
owners of Dundee,
_complaining of the present state of tke Navi-
gation Laws.

CORN LAWS.

Alderman THOMPSON presented a petition
from Mr. James Williamson, an indigo-broker, praying that the
duties on the importation of foreign corn may be regulated by the
price which grain may bear at the time.
Mr. CUR WEN moved for a Return of all Corn,
Flour, Barley, and Peas import4d into Great Britain from Ire-
land, between the 10th of October, 1825, and the 10th of Octo-
ber, 1826; and also for a Return of all Grain of the same de-
scription, exported from Great Britain and Ireland, during the
same time.
Sir J. SHELLEY presented a petition from Rush-
manden, in Sussex, against any alteration in the Corn Laws.

WAKEFIELD AND FERRYBRIDGE CANAL.
A great number of petitions were presented from towns in
Yorkshire and Lancashire, in favour of the Canal to be con-
structed between the Calder and Hebble Navigation, at Wake-
field ; and the river Air, at Ferrybridge.
Lord 'MILTON, in moving the second reading of
the Bill for carrying the projected Canal into effect, observed, that
the unusual number of Members in attendance at that early hour,
must be ascribed to canvassing which had been resorted to by the
opponents of a very necessary and salutary improvement in the in-
tercourse between the inhabitants of the North of England. That
canvassing had been carried to a great extent with both sexes ;
but when he informed the House, that the length of the whole
Canal was only twelve:miles, and that the owners of the land of ten of
those miles were favourable to the measure, and subscribers to the
undertaking ; that all the opponents were proprietors of the Air
and Calder Navigation Company, whose interests, it was said, the
Canal would affect, except one individual, and that person was of
that sex the most likely to be easily influenced by representations.
The yearly income of the Air and Calder Company was 120,0001.,
and after paying a large dividend they were enabled last year to
invest 25,0001. in the funds by way of Stock. Looking at this
fact, he did not think that the alarm raised by the opposers of the
Canal, with respect to the injuries likely to be done to those who
held settlements or other obligations on the faith of the Air Navi-
gation property, was well founded. The Canal would, he was con-
vinced, be a ' great benefit, without injuring the profits of the
Calder Company, and he therefore hoped the House would permit
the Bill to be read a second time, in order that the plan might be
thoroughly examined in a Committee.
Mr. RIDLEY COLBORNE opposed the motion,
and moved that the Bill be read that day six months. He declared
that the Calder Company were about to make alterations and im-
provements in the navigation of the river, which would render
the Canal wholly unnecessary.
Mr. STUART WORTLEYsupported the amend-
ment under the faith of the promise held out by the Hon. Mem-
ber. If, however, that promise of improvement was not fulfilled
be would feel himself next year bound to support the proposition
for a Canal.
Sir JOSEPH YORKE thought the Calder Com-
pany were not to be much depended upon for any improvement.
He perceived they had, in a few years, received 1,200,000/., and
they could not, therefore, complain they had no funds for purposes
which they now declared necessary.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM strongly supported the
second reading of the Bill, and the Inquiry in a Committee.
Mr. AVILMOT HORTON opposed it.
Mr. WY `'ILL supported the proposition for going into a
Committee.
Mr. SYKES approved of going into a Committee,
where the practicability of the measure proposed by the Bill could
be best discussed and determined upon. The pledge that had
been given, that the enterprize would be taken up by those in
whose hands it was, was no satisfactory pledge to the House, as
the House had no power to enforce those persona to carry it into
effect.
Lord NORM ANBY concurred in the opinion, that
the practicability and propriety of the plan would be best ascer-
tained in a Committee.
Mr. G. BANKES said, that he was induced to vote
against going into a Committee, for, on the face of the proposition
itself, there was a reason why the Bill should not be committed,
namely, the interference which the Bill would have in its ope-
ration with the Air and Calder Navigation. It would interfere
in most important points too ; viz. in diminishing the waters re-
quisite for that Navigation.—(Cries of no, no.)—The Honoura-
ble Member proceeded to contend, that from a passage in the Bill,
it appeared, that such would be its effect. He was therefore
unwilling to saddle the parties with the expences of the Com-
mittee, when there was not a prospect of the Bill being ulti-
mately passed.
Sir THOMAS LETHBRIDGE, Lord MIL-
TON, and several other Members, approved of going into the Com-
mittee, reserving to themselves perfect freedom as to what ulterior
proceedings should be adopted ; but contradictory statements
could be explained and reconciled by a Committee, and would be
the most satisfactory course both to the public, and the parties
more immediately affected by the Bill. The House tiaen divided,
and continued in discussion for nearly half an hour with closed
doors.
For the Bill I3o—Against it 139—Majority against it 3.
On the suggestion of an Hon. Member, whose name we could
not learn, Mc. MARTIN withdrew his motion, for the present,
which stood for to-night, relative to the proceedings of the Mar-
quis of Clanricarde, at the last Galway Election.
Mr. MAURICE FITZGERALD postponed his
motion recommending the adoption of measures to carry into ef-
fect the policy of the Union, until Tuesday, May 8.
Mr. CALCRAFT gave notice that, in consequence
of the indisposition of his Right Hon. Friend (sir John Newport),
the motion respecting the state of the law for rebuilding and re-
pairing churches in Ireland, which stood for to-night, woiild not
be brought forward until the 20th inst.
Mr. ROBERT SMITH presented a petition from
the thread-lace manufacturers of Buckingham, praying for a re-
peal of the law respecting the duties imposed on the sale of thread-
lace. The Hon. Member seeing the Right Hon. the Chancellor
of the Exchequer in his place, begged leave to call his attention
to the petition, and hoped that the prayer of it would be com-
plied with. The revenue, he said, arising from the duty, was
exceedingly small, yet it pressed heavily upon the petitioners.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said, that he had no desire whatever to retain the duties which were
impoael on the sellers of thread-lace, and that he would look into
the details of the Act. The grounds upon which the duties were
imposed he apprehended were, to prevent the fraudulent sale of
foreign lace. If, on examining the detail?, he should discover
that they pressed on the petitioners, and were not beneficial, he
would himself bring in a J3ill to repeal the law, as the duties now
obtained from the measure were very rinall.--(Hear.)
POLLS AT COUNTY ELECTIONS.
Lord ALTHORP rose pursuant to notice, to sub-
mit to the House a motion for the appointment of a Select C 011:..
mitten to consider the mode of taking polls at County Elections.
The inconveniences which his isizition sought to remove would re-
quire the intervention of the Legislattn.:, He need hardly call to
the mind of the House, bow great were the expenses attending
county elections :--those expenses were, he bad na, hesitation in
declaring, a great grievance.—(Hear.)—No man even sfter he
was elected for a county, in which there was a contested election,
could feel assured that he should retain his seat in that House,
for it was impossible, and the fact was universally admitted, that
a person elected for a county, could avoid infringing on the
'Treating Act.—(Hear.)—For how could it be expected that
forty-shilling freeholders \residing at a distance from the county
town, where the election was carried on, wottld go thither
entirely at their own expense, and without having refreshment
when they arrived? He would now state one instance in
which a county Member lost his seat by an infringement of
that Act to which he had alluded. At a Middlesex election,
Mr. Mainwaring was deprived of his seat for the county, be-
cause it was proved before a Committee of that House on an
election petition, that he had provided meat and drink, not in
any extravagant degree, for his voters at the Castle Tavern,
Brentford. He (Lord Althorp) was aware that arrangements
were frequently entered into between candidates that they wonld
not take advantage of any thing that each might do, in respect of
refreshments given to the voters ; nevertheless, it might happen,
that although the rival candidates did not proceed by petition,
complaining of the law being violated—yet, some freeholders
might, and thus displace a Member because he had paid for the
refreshments of his voters. Just such a case as this occurred in
the Norfolk election in 1806, when Mr. Coke and Mr. Windham
were candidates. In consequence of the expenses attending
county elections, he knew that many gentlemen were deterred
from coming forward, although solicited by a vast body of free-
holders. He begged permission to call the attention of the House
to a recent instance of the enormous expense attending the pre-
sent mode attached to an election in an extensive county, he

meant the county of York. That election, although it never
went to a poll, cost the enormous sum of from 120,0001.
to 150,000/.—(Loud cries of hear, hear, hear). Was not this
a case under the existing law which required a remedy ?
If that election had gone to the extent prescribed liy AsA of Par-
liament, it would have cost the parties an immense sum. Had the
election lasted fifteen days, half a million of money would not have
covered the expences of the parties. It was said, but he thought
not with much reason, that the Members for the counties should
be men of higher rank and larger fortune, than those representing
cities and boroughs. He saw no particular obligation in such a
distinction. He need not say, however, that no one ought to be
elected a Member of that House, for a county or a city, or
borough, who was not highly respectable. But it was carrying
the thing too far if a man could not be elected for a county unless
he expended 100,000/. in his election. Without intending any
thing irksome to the feelings of his Noble Friend (Lord Milton)
or the other Hon. Members for the county of York, for all of
whom he entertained the highest respect, he yet might be per-
mitted to state a fact connected with the last election for that
county. A gentleman of great respectability, one who stood
high in the estimation of a vast number of the freeholders of
that rich and populous county, on the day of nomination was
named among the other candidates to represent Yorkshire, and
had actually a show of hands in his favour, yet from
motives of prudence, determined not to offer himself,
solely on account of the enormous expences which must
have followed had a contest been carried on. The free-
holders of the county of York had thus been deprived of a
Gentleman whom they had selected to represent them in
Parliament. He (Lord Althorp) thought that he had now sub-
mitted to the House such grounds, to prove that a Committee
ought to be appointed to see whether or not a remedy could be de-
vised to remove the great evil of expenses attached to county elec-
tions on the present mode of taking polls. The principle, or
something like it, upon which he founded his motion, had been
acknowledged in the House of Commons so long ago as 1774.
On the Journals of Parliament of that year, he found a resolution
framed by a Committee to the effect that, with a view of obviat-
ing the inconveniences attending polling at county elections, dif-
ferent places in the county might be appointed to which the free-
holders should resort to give their votes, besides the county town.
The Bill, he found, was brought into the House on the following
Session, and read a first and second time and committed ; what
became of it afterwards he had not discovered, but he believed that
it was lost, owing probably to some difficulties in the detail.
His motion for a Committee he hoped would be carried : and
he well knew that when a Committee of that House ap-
plied themselves to any measure, they always succeeded.—
There was one objection made against having polls taken in dif-
ferent parts of the county, which was this :—it was said that
such a system would tend to destroy those feelings and spirit
which gave an influence to the whole transaction. His answer to
this objection was, that on the day of nomination at the county
town, the freeholders should be all invited who chose to attend
free of expence, and on the conclusion of the election at the chair-
ing of the Members, the same thing might take place. He
would now very shortly state the two modes which he intended
to submit to the Committee for their selection. The one was to
have inferior officers to the Sheriff appointed at different places in
the county to take the votes of the freeholders ; and the other to
have the Sheriff go the circuit of the county to receive the free-
holders' votes. Having stated his view of the subject, and the re-
medy to the evil, he would not trouble the House further than
submitting his motion, which was, " That it is the opinion of
this House, that a Select Committee be appointed to take into
consideration, and report to the House, whether any measure
can be devised to diminish the expences incurred by county
elections."
The SPEAKER having put the question, _ _ _

Mr. BATLEY said a few words, condemning the
mode of taking the poll in cities and boroughs.

Mr. WM. SMITH was conscious that the objec-
tions urged by the Hon. Gentleman who had just spoken did lie
against cities and boroughs, but in them the system could be
more easily altered than in the case of counties. He was convin-
ced, that the shortening the time during which the poll should
be kept open, and some new regulation of the out-voters, would
get rid of all the inconveniences. He had no doubt that great
reformation was practicable in the system of regulating elections.
He (Mr. Smith) had the honour to represent a city (Norwich) in
which there were 4,000 voters, and yet the poll was always over

(for all the purposes of ascertaining the successful candidate) in a
single day. He was therefore anxious to see the same improvement
extended. He had no doubt but the Committee would be able
to devise some means to remedy the defects of the existing system,
and he thought it would be highly expedient that a similar reform
should be introduced into cities and boroughs.

Mr. LEADER MABERLY could speak to an
instance of a very opposite nature to that mentioned by the Hon.
Member for Norwich, with regard to the polling of 4,000 31( a:-
hers in one day. He (Mr. Maberly) had the honour to represent
a town (Northampton) in which there was not half that number
of voters, and yet he did not recollect a single instance in which
the poll had been finished in less than eight or nine days, and on
one occasion it was known to have been kept open for 41 days.
He was sure that every Gentleman who represented a popular
Borough would be glad to concur in the measure of the Noble
Lord.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
observed, that he did not see any insuperable objection to a plan

. .
for shortening the time of elections in Boroughs and Counties.—
There was, however, one part of the Noble Lord's proposition
which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) considered liable to
a very serious objection—he meant the suggestion as to taking the
poll in differeit parts of the same county at the same time. It
had always been considered, and no doubt justly considered, of
great advantage to the purity of election, that candidates should
bear to be badgered about (if he might use the phrase) by the
electors.—(A laugh.)— Now if the poll were to be taken in dif-
ferent places at the same time, the candidate would be deprived of
the opp.ortunity of answering the questions of the freeholders in
those parts where he should not be personally present. How-
ever, as he before stitte4, he had no objection to the appointment
of a Committee. _ _

Lord MILTON was of opinion that it would not
be advisable to engraft upon the measure of his Noble Friend any
ulterior mea§ure.
Sir JOHN WROTTESLEY said that there were
two points of eittrerne importance. The first, the time during
which the poll was to be taken, and the other, whether the poll
should be aajoutTed from one district to another, or be proceeded
with in various hundreds, at the same time, fle (Sir John
Wrottesley) would vote for the Committee without pledging
himself to any particular line of conduct, when the report should
be received.
Mr. DICKINSON said a few words, which were
inaudible in the gallery.
Mr. WYNN expressed himself anxious to promote
an object which be considered most desirable ; namely, the dimi-
nution of the expense of elections. But he would recommend
that the question should not be canvassed at present, inasmuch as
it would be likely to affect the question of several Irish county
elections, the merits of which were still under discussion. He
did not deny that the subject of the Noble Lord's motion was a
very important one. He also felt the mode of taking the poll in
cities and boroughs to be a matter well worthy of consideration.
Sir T. LETHBRIDGE thought there could be
no obje,ction to a Committee.
Lord NUGENT considered that nothing could be

more desirable than the proposed measure, but he would be glad
to see it confined to counties, for he thought that the Committee
would have quite enough to employ them in that sipgle inquiry.
Lord LOWTHER supported the motion' for a
Committee, and hoped that their labours would be successful.
Sir W. W. WYNN spoke a few words, in which
he gave his cordial support to the motion.
Mr. C. PALLMER congratulated the House upon
the auspicious spirit which had Manifested itself in this first Ses.
sion ,of a new Parliament. It was highly desirable that the ex-
pence of elections should be diminished, and that the elector should
be able to give his vote unbiassed, and free from the influence of
any pecuniary consideration.
Lord ALTHORP replied.--,His object was to
have the votes taken at different places. With respect to the qua-
lification of voters, he agreed that the land-tax as a criterion was
daily diminishing in excellence, and that some other mode ought
to be adopted. Great expences arose from bringing all voters to
the county-town ; for instance, at the last Yorkshire election one-
‘,l-,,i;•4 of the expense arose from the carrying of voters to the
county-10w.m.:--The motion was then agreed to.