Star.
London, England, 1822-02-21 00:00:00

ROYAL BURGHS OF SCOTLAND.

Lord ARCHIBALD HAMILTON said, he rose
for the purpose of moving, in pnrsuante of his notice,
that the several Reports of the Select Committee ap-
pointed at different periods by that House to report
on the Royal Burghs of Scotland be referred to a
Committee of the whole House. After such a length
of time since those Reports were laid on the table, it
should not be a matter of surprise to any one that
the subject was to be brought before the considera-
tion of the House. Ile felt it his duty, in consequence
of the share he had in those Reports, and also en ac-
count of the relation in which he stood to the Burghs,
to submit a specific motion to the House on the sub-
ject. The petitioners on whose statements the Select
Committees were appointed, and did report, were
most respectable, and in number amounted to five
hundred thousand persons. The abuses and dilapi-
dations complained of were of an enormous extent,
and all the Reports concurred in the opinion of their
exiatence. The revenue of those Burghs amounted
anniially to the sum of £lOO,OOO, which became the
subject of the grossest abuse. The course which he
meant to pursue, in order to induce the House to
agree to the motion which he intended to make, was
to state to them the progress made in the inquiry
which was instituted at their direction, and the con-
clusrms to which the Committees had come. The
Learned Lord opposite (the Lord Advocate) knew
that it was then three years since he (Lord Archibald
Hamilton) moved for the appointment of a Commit-
tee to consider the Reports of former Committees,
and to inquire into the statements in the petitions
from the sixty-six Royal Burghs. The petitioners
' were unanimous in their representation of the evils
which they had suffered. They were also unanimous
as to the remedy to be applied to those evils. What
was then the line of conduct pursued by his Majesty's
Ministers and by the Learned Lord Advocate? They
did oppose his motion, and did it with success,
which he hoped they would not do that night. They
said that there was no case made out ; they said that
the statements in the Petitions and Reports were par-
tial statements, and were only a cloak to the intro-
duction of Parliamentary Reform. Would they still
pretend to say that the grievances of which the peti-
tioners complained were not real? Would they still
maintain that the evils and corruptions stated did not
exist? In 1819 he had made a motion, but was un-
fortunate enough to have it opposed, and conse-
quently lost. Month after month he continued to
bring forward new motions, but was equally op-
posed; not, however, with equal success. He was
fortunate enough, at length, to obtain n Committee
against his Majesty's Ministers, and against the Law
Officers of the Crown. That Committee of 1819
made a Report, and was dissolved soon after, it being
near the close of the Session when it was appointed.
Another Committee was appointed the next Session,
consisting, for the most part, of the same Members
w!..0 were on the former Committee, and they re-
ported also that the petitioners had much cause of
complaint, and that the evils stated in the petitions
existed. The great agitation into which the country
and the Parliament were thrown by the question re-
specting her late Majesty prevented that Committee
from making any great progress. He blamed himself
for having gone into that Committee, under the cir-
cumstances. The Reports which were on the table
have repeated the opinion of the petitioners, and hate
said that the grievances complained of did exist. His
object was, then, to refer the Reports of those three
Committees to a Committee of die whole House. It
would be impossible while the Speaker was in the
Chair, and while the forms of the House were pre-
served, to discuss' and examine those Reports. He
entreated the House to grant him a Committee of
the whole House, for, by so doing, they would
do justice to themselves and to the petitioners, by
examining into the Reports on their table. He would
ask the Noble Lord (Binning), and the Learned Lord
Advocate, if he was demanding too Much, after the
expiration of three years since it seemed resolved to
take the subject 'into consideration? •It was impos-
sible for him to urge the fintite;:with any effect, -to
assent to his motion, without *first' explaining' What
had been done by the different Committeet. So long
since as the year 17931 a Report was made to the