Star.
London, England, 1823-06-03 00:00:00

Kit .of Sct,tlaud,
the Nome Lord. Thatllluitsketts
James I. • ,
rge got, in laitAet sanctioned. the
.sy stem
row known by equal reptetetAitlon. The expression
ef equal representation meant nothing more than that
tee larger counties should have a proportionably
greater number of represencativrs than the smaller
representation, as it was never wader-
...lot equAl
stood. The principles of the Noble• Lord, if adopted,
Id subvert all the practical regulations of Scot-
wou
lend; and they would not serve the Scotch peeple,
as they were even subversive of the Act of Union's.—
me souk! maintai tr that the peasantry of Scotlaud were
the best people of E;rrope; but he did not, therefore,
wish to throw the hone of dissention among them.—
lie had not any attachment for the present system of
usptesentation in Scotland; in theory, he could not
support it; but in practice, it was defensible ; it had
existed long, and it ought not to be changed, because
fee Noble Lord came forward and stated something
which he thooF t would betlreoretically ad vantageous.
He had adverted to the inconveniences that would
practically result from the measure, and he would
contend, that the proposed changes would be pro-
Juctive of great practical inconveniences; in the first
'stance, all that land which was held under the 33d
of Charles IL 16td, must be re-valued, which would
.I.itsey: be productive of rro trifling inconvenience.—
le entnii.ained that the Noble Lord wished to pledge
the Iloteeteenter upon an inquiry into the subject
next Session, without proving that such inquiry was
eecessary or called for. He entreated that the terms
of the Act of Union should be attended
.to. The
words of that Act were direct and decisive, and lie
called upon the House to respect them. • Ile wished
to impress that consideration the more upon the
House, because it was not at the call of the people
of Scotland that the Noble Lord had brought for-
am the question. He Crusted, therefore, that the
Nouse would neat =teed to the call of the Noble Lord,
e any other theuri t whatever, if in opposition to the
desires of the people.
greI.P.GR ANT supported the motion, contending;
the the question was quite independent of the gene-
ral one of Reform. Gentlemen who held opinions•
hostile to the general question might, with. perfect
consistency, support the motion of his Noble Friend.
But he could not conceive how any person could
maintain, that in a portion of the empire containing
tue millions of inhabitants there should not be per-
mitted anything like representation. Now, although
the property on which the twenty electors resided sent
Member to Parliament, yet it could not be main-
tained that the county itself was represented. If we
looked to England, he would ask, what was that
which made her what she was but the nature of her
Representation ? How strong was the contrast with
respect to Scotland ? There was no comparison what-
ever between a general election in England and a ge.
seral election in Scottand;' in the latter country, the
detions tot counties created less bustle, and were of
iafraitely less importance, than one for parish officers
in the former. The question for the House to decide
was—whether there was or was not anything in the
County Representation of Scotland which 'demanded
from the House inquiry into the subject. •
The LORD ADVOCATE of SCOTLAND *mid
seat that late hour detain the House .by going at
peat length into the subject. He was quite sore that
the House would think well.before it attempted to,
interfere with the Representation of Scotland, which
bas continued in its present state from. the time of
Charles the First. The Learned Lorelthen proteeded
to refute the argument of the lion. Member. for
Knaresborough, and said, that. with respect to the
articlesofUnion, he would go farthee thee the Leataed.
Gent. or even the Noble Lord who had lately. spoken.
At the period of the Union the religion ofScotlend was
solemnly promised to be maintained ; and' lie would
contend, that before any change could be attempted,
enn in her Representation, the House should require
proof that the people demanded such alteration. For
three years the Noble Lord had been endeavouring
to bring forward his present motion, and yet for that
whole period he had never been able to procure a
single Petition to the House, even frbm an individual,
in support of his motion. Now when we saw with
what wisdom various matters were conducted ire
Scotland—her system of Poor Laws-that by which
the Bank Was governed—even her laws respecting
game, a subject that was about toaaceupy the atten-
tron of the House that night--ewould it be stated that
thepeople of Scotland were incapable of forming an
gam -upon that more important subject, the Re-
presentation of the country ? and if they formed such
an opinion, was it to be supposed: that they:would
as express it if they were dissatisfied with its present
state? He should conclude by calling upon the
Rouse to look attentively at the motion, which.would,
if carried, be one step towards Parliamentary Re-
form; and he thought that was sufficiently obvious
from the langmage of the Noble Lord himself..
Lord MILTON denied that the quettion.before.the
House was interesting to Scotland alone ; he would
maintain that it affected the country at large. It had
been pretty fairly admitted on all hands that the pre-
tent Representation of Scotland was not what it ought
to be; yet it courd not he doubted that the electors
of Scotland, indeed the mass of the people of that
country, were amongst the most moral and religious
is Europe ; and teething had been adduced to prove
that they were not as Worthy of possessing the eleeel
file franchise as the people of England. kit had often
beard a late Noble Marietta ILondonderreelteunted
with having been, when a Member of the Irish -Muse
of Commons, in favour of Parliehtentary Reform,
add that he opposed. a similar measure in.Eugland ;
to 'illicit he thought that Nolshrtetteretanseil alri-
gletphant answernametf, that ahltOtethise art
have a• ti •
nutted that. their/ triter:indite recjairitd re-
yet be held a different opinions respecting-the
imperial Parliament. the same wirftf many-Hon.
Hembers might mabstaln. tiiitßeftrishi wilfrel4nifite
in Scotland, even though 'dell. neces-
sity in this teethe,' "Si-eilen—d WWI 'a -system.
IPMentftlbli 'totally tribtlnitiell. with propety,
attaAtitticklog iy n
such and .woord
it bt conit ad aa dfelthat" •
. •a system should fOr even
*c°ll6ase?.fir ell )•
r tar the argualeitt that the-state
therelle peitieratimlicod ofilfliell7Seatittiritde6'4l.thde'aosrelre;l:ttrireastliet:a•e'
was no analogy fietwein
the two periods. the-state cif that eoirefry at
Scotland now no more' resembled'
the. , IrAt'betb' tk.,e Union, than-A•eletica tit the'
radaT)eitiabd whei, aegi w6en-ditenvereal
anbas: lig. tannage , he Anose..not
d • "'
.1
Consider the subject as one at; whisk Scisteh Mellibers