Star.
London, England, 1831-07-14 00:00:00

pEroax.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that the order of the day
be read for the home to revolve itself into a committee on the
reform bill.

)Ir. CROKER said, the noble lord had on a former oc•
cation made a statement that he had removed the borough
of D .canton from Schedule B to Schedule A, in consequence
of information he had received. He now wished to ask the
twills lord from whom he.had received that information.

Lord J. RUSSELL said from Lord Radnor. (Hear.)
Sir K. PEEL said, the house decided last night that they
would not hear counsel ; but he believed it bad not decided
that it would exclude evidenc, ; and he thought many cues
might arise in which it would be proper to receive evidence,
and the Committee would not have the power to receive evi.
dime unless the house gave it that power. The bill pro.
vided that commissioners should divide counties ; if it were
known bow counties were to be divided he could make up
his mind more satisfactorily on many parts of the details of
the bill. If Birmingham and Coventry were included in the
same division of Warwickshire, they would return the
members for that division, not the landed interest.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought it not Impossible that
a ease might arise in which it would be expedient that the
Committee should receive evidence ; and in that case the
Committee might apply to the House for liberty to do so.
With respect to the division of counties, Government did
not wish to take that matter on themselves, but when the
Commissioners should be named, it would b: seen that they
were not selected for any party purpose. The division
would be made by them in, a manner more satisfactory than
it could be dune by Government.
Sir CH ARLES WETHERELL said, it would enable
Commissioners to divide counties in such a manner as to
make the mercantile Interest, in many districts, overpower
the latided interest.

Mr. C. WYNN said, the power to be given to Commis-
sioners was an arbitrary power, without any principle for its
government.
Loid ALTHORP admitted it was a difficult part of the
arrangement ; and if any practicable improvement could be
suggested, Government would be happy to agree to it.—
(Hear.)
The order of the day being read,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that the Speaker now
leave the Chair.

Captain GORDON said he was anxious to explain, that
ahhough he had been the occasion of the motions for adjourn-
ment on the previous evening, the proceedings, as far as he
was concerned, were entirely destitute of design, or with a
view to factious opposition. He stated that he had, during
the early part of the evening, made several attempts to be
heard, and had been disappointed, and he then ventured to
move the adjournment to have an opportunity of expressing
his opinions. But when he did move the adjournment it was
without any concerted plan, further than that when he had
done so, some one or two honourable members who sat
near him, had intimated that they hoped he would perse-
vere, and not consent to withdraw his motion. He would
never degrade himself in maintaining hie opinions by fac-
tious means ; whatever were his sentiments, he would always
freely express them, and his conduct Would at all times be
open and above-board. He also thought that those hon.
gentleman who had afterwards supported the several motions
were alike incapable of any such motives u had been ascribed
to them ; theirs had only been the manifestation of an uncom.
promising, but manly opposition. The hon. member went
on to state that although be was ready to afford redress for
every abuse of whatever dt.scription, whether in church, state,
or law, he was nevertheless still convinced, notwithstanding
all that had been advanced to Impress an opposite opinion,
that the term revolution was much more applicable to the
measure that had been proposed than the term reform. The
hon. member then entered on an elaborate and eloquent dis-
quisition on the merits of the bill and the consequences
he anticipated that it would produce on the institutions of the
country. (Hear.) He conceived that a different estimate

should be formed of what might be viewed as an abuse in the
constitution taken as a general matter, from that which might
be formed if viewed detachedly; and that the nature of the
means for the prevention of such abuse should be considered
In some degree according to the source from which it was
proposed. Where disease existed, every one allowed that
medical skill was desirable; but if a remedy was proposed
by a party that Wall his life been endeavouring to dissemi-
nate an opinion that the constitution of the patient was in-
curable that nothing could save his life, and that he was in
a galloping consumption,then they ought to look more closely
and examine the remedy he recommended. In this light he
contemplated the present measure. As far as it bore upon
the institutions of the country, he held it not as a measure of
reform, but as a measure of annihilation. It was to oblite-
rate all traces of the substantial existence of institutions,
and to introduce the dictates of expediency and mob faction.
It was the essence of all radical bills and revolutionary
principles. In viewing its effects on the Institutions of the
country, he would first consider how it would affect the
church, of which that House was bound to be the conservator
and supporter. By the present measure franchise would be
given to at least 250,000 dissenters. Ile did not mean to
attach any odium to, or to hold lightly dissenters, as he was
convinced that there were among them men of mind and vast
acquirements, and he had no doubt that they were dissenter*
from principle, that they had become dissenters because they
conceived that it was more consonant to religion in its pu-
rity ! and consequently that it became their bounden duty
not only to further the precepts and interests of their peculiar
tenets, hut that by the same rule it became their duty
to use their utmost endeavour to subvert the Church esta-
blished. The measure, in like manner, franchised a vast
numb, r of Roman Catholics, %Anse feelings and sentiments
must be as regarded by the Established Church in the same
position as those of Dissenters. In making these remarks
he did not mean to attribute any thing inconsistent or im-
proper on their part ; but, on the contrary, he would give
them every credit, because he believed them to be sincere.
If these effects which he anticipated were dottlated,he would
recal to their recollection the petitions that had been presented
to the !louse, to show how far short the bill came of all that
was asked by niob dictation. The hon. member for Preston
had presented ',taunts from places signed by 20,000 and
7.000, some declaring that the bill did not give then,
all they wanted and all that they had a right to ; but
praying for annual parliaments and universal suffrage.
(Hear, from Mr. Hunt.) The same honourable member
hid presented a petition, signed by thonsands, decrying
tithes. and stigmatising the clergy as bloated objects.
He did not mean to make any personal al!usions, nor
to point to individuals, but he would ask how it came
' that infidelity, and all that was infected was in support of the
bill ? He had weighed in his mind the effects of the French
Revolution in 1793 and 1794, and the effects of the French
Revolution in France, about a twelvemonth ago, on the
people of this country, and be had come to the conclusion
that the effects of the present were precisely the same as
those of the French Revolution of 1794. At that time
there 'were in every city and town in England, associations
and corresponding societies, who styled themselves the
" Friends of the People ;" and such was the cane at present.
There were associations of trades' union, a kind of inter-
mediate Parliaments, and corresponding societies, who
acted in concert, and who sent delegates to different places.
(No, so, front Mr. Hunt.) lie would prove it.—(No, no,
from Mr. Hunt). If the Honourable Member for Pres-
ton meant to deny this assertion he (Captain Gordon)
could name where they held their mecings.—(Where,
where? from Mr. Hunt). Somewhere in Oxford-market.
(No, no, from Mr. blunt). He was not in the habit of
travelling for such information; but be could produce
his authority although his knowledge was not so good of
the localities. Tire Honourable Member here produced some
papers, from which he read extracts giving reports of meet-
legs in Oxford-market, Manchester, and Glasgow, and in
some of which it was asserted that if the bill was refused
there were numbers ready to resent it equal to double the
army that had fought at Waterloo; and at Glasgow that
there had been a telegraphic line of communication fixed,
and black banners provided to rally round. The Gallant
Captain proceeded to state the contents of the printed papers
orjournals which he held in his hand, which praised the
arrangements that had taken place in France, where tithes
had been abolished • adducing America as an instance
of the good effects Of that order of things, and pro-
posing that Christianity should be rid of these encum-
brances, and that tithes should be abolished in this country,
and the Church property seized and appropriated to the
liquidation of the national debt. The gallant captain after
a few more observations, said that it had been the effects of
radical petitions. (Hear, hear, from Mr. Hunt.) And
these were the classes that had principally effected this bill ;
and he considered, under the circumstances, that they would
be great fools if they would remain contented with the mea-
sure should it pass.
Colonel LINDSEY spoke against the bill. He repro.
bated ministers for the haste with which they were pressing
It ; and said that he considered the measure would be highly
prejudicial.
On the SPEAKER putting the question that he now
leave the Chair,

Mr. C. WYSIN moved that all petitions tibia had been
presented to the House relating to the details of the measure,
should be laid before the committee.

Lord A LTII OR P said that he had no objection.
Mr. HUNT, at considerable length, replied to the speech
of Captain Gordon.
The house then resolved itself into a committee on the
reform bill.

NVYNN rose to move the postponement of the con-
sideration of the first clause. He said the evil of the pre-
sent system was not the representation of decayed boroughs,
but the non-representation of certain rich and populous com-
munities. He considered the first question should be, What
were the places to be enfranchised ? secondly, What room
was to be made for them ?--The proposition they had now
under consideration was, that all the boroughs in schedule
A should cease to be represented. Were any grounds stated
for their re-election? (lieu.) The principle that boroughs
under 2,000 inhabitants were dislanchiscable should have
been introduced into the bill. But was 2,000 the smallest
nucleus rcund which could be collected 300 101. hou-ehold-
ers ? Be it so, at least take not the returns of 1821. (Hear.)
The last returns might have been had long ago, had circular
letters been sent by ministers : as it was, they would be be-
fore the house in a fortnight. (Hear.) Had they taken in
1821 the census of 1811, eleven of the boroughs which were
r.ow to return the full number of members, would not have
returned one. (Hear.) He was averse to an arbitrary line of
demarcation. Reference at least should be had to the num-
ber of 101. householders. In fact, Government had disfran-1
chised Duncan and Sr. Germains, though possessing more
than 2,000 inliebitants, because the 101. householders were
so few. Why, then, disfranchise those places which had a
safficient number of these householders, though not quite
2,000 inhabitants ? He knew places where mills and other
manufacturing establishments attracted, temporarily, hun-
dreds of children and destitute persons, who added nothing to
the wealth of the places, but often increased their burdens.
lie proposed waiting until Commissioners had investigated
and reported, nut only on the amount of population, but on
the number of 101. and 201. householders in every place.---
To the disfranclifsement of certain boroughs there would nut
be one dissentient voice, but with respect to others much
doubt and diversity of opinion must still exist. Under
these circumstances he would propose proceeding to the
dissuasion of the third clause, postponing the two first
clauses until more information had been received. After
a few observations on the increased representation, and on
the division of counties (to which last he was not partial,
because it would subject them to the influence of indivi.
duals,)—he said he was disposed to a considerable addition
to the representation by enfranchisement, and also that
room should be made for that increase, because the present
number of members he considered sufficient. To supply
this room, he would by preference unite boroughs into dis-
tricts, as they were now united in Wales and Scotland;
but this could not be effected until the number of enfran.
chisemcnts had been decided on. He should move the post-
ponement of the consideration of the first clause, and would
subsequently move a similar postponement with respect to
the second.

Sir E. SUGDEN said now the principle was carried be
would touch on no irritating matter. The present was a
departure from the first bill, in all its important features.—
This proved that to change a constitution advantageously
and permanently, the talents and eloquence of the Govern.
ment were not enough, but that time was also necessary.
(Hear,e hear.) Sixty-two members were cut off by the
Bill. And, first, he would ask, when they were
told of the people demanding changes, where was, not
the body, but the individual, who had asked for diminish.
ing by one the number of representatives ? But now, it
appeared, the fit number to be reduced was thirty-one. Was
the representation of England thus to depend on the waver.'
ing will of ministers ? The schedules had been altered, and
upon the most loose authority. Out of schedule A five bo-
roughs, doomed at first to utter destruction, had been trans-
(erred to schedule B. Out of schedule B nine had been

restored to their former state of representation, salvo others
bad been transferred to schedule A. It Ira thus Govern-
ment trifled with the feelings of many electors, exciting
alternately their hopes and fears. He warned Ministers
against teaching the people what they were but too prone to
learn--that a constitution could be changed thus frequendy.ln
the counties, the novel experiment of what might be termed
a triangle in representation, was proposed; certain counties
were so be represented by three members. This change, toge-
ther with the division of counties, would do away with all
compromise in elections, and large minorities mew remain
unrepresented. (Cheers, and interruption at the bar.) lie
hoped for an attentive listening when speaking on a measure
which affected the existence of their country.
Sir J. WROTTESLEY rose to order. He hoped the
house would listen with the greatest attention to the lion.
and learned member, who, he knew, was suffering under a
late indisposition. He claimed silence at the bar. (Hear.)
Sir E. SUDDEN proceeded. In the franchise qualifica-
tion repeated changes had been made. The change respect.
ing leaseholders wits particularly Important, as affecting agri.
cultural relations. (Hear, hear.) The counties were cut up
in a manner that would place many a county division in the
situation of small boroughs (Hear.) Their franchise qualifi-
cation had been altered four times. (A voice—Four times ?)
Yes, four times. How, he-asked, was he to know that the
last alteration was the best possible ? He came to the clause
said to have been inadvertently worded, and requiring the
rent to be payable not less than once in every halt' year. The
language of the clause was clear, technical, and explicit ; it
was repeated in another page of the bill. It was not the effect
of inadvertency. Let ministers deny him ; they had found
they had gone too far, and had started front their own act.
(No! no!) In the first bill the constituents of Preston
were not saved, nor the children of existing freeholders. The
clauses respecting Privy Councillors had been altered. The
Welch representation, by dint of shifting and carvir.g the
borough:; and districts, was no longer the same. In the Scotch
and Irish representations,he would,wlren the time came, show
most material changes. And was there, then, no ground for
time and reflection? (Hear, bear.) Were they not con-
sidering a plan than which a vaster had never been submitted
to a deliberate body ? (Hear, hear, hear.) But not
only did ministers take upon themselves to make changes,
they were to nominate, together with their majority,
Commissioners to make additions and alterations in coun-
ties, &c. at their pleasure. Was this clause a mistake,
or a wilful alteration in the Constitution ? In either case
it must shake public confidence, and rendered it imperative
on the house to make these alterations itself. How would
Members like to have their own property disposed of by
third persons ? The disfranchisementa could not be discus.
eed until the enfranchisements had been fixed. In fourteen
short days the actual and real state of the population would
be known. But not even fourteen days could Ministers
wait ! The nomination boroughs were destroyed, while the
freemen remained electors, thereby doing away with the in-
fluence of property and knowledge, while retaining the lowest
scale of constituents. He maintained that the nomination
boroughs worked well in conjuction with the rest of the con.
stitutional machinery. Suppose them struck out while the
rest of the old system was retained, and what opposition or
improvement could be offered to any great question while
members stood pledged to adopt a particular course ? The
majority of the present House stood pledged. (No, no.) The
passage in the King's speech, calling for deliberation on the
Reform Bill, could only be addressed to the Lords,who were
unfettered. He then described the present system of
representation as expanding with the wealth and
population of the kingdom. Copyhold tenures, which were
inconvenient, and should be converted into freehold tenures,
were, by the present bill, entrusted with the franchise, and
thus the tempation for the conversion taken away. After
a few other observations, the hon. and learned member
concluded by thanking the opposite side for the attentive
and very handsome manner in which he had been heard, and
by saying he should strongly support the motion of his right
hon. friend.

!dr. STANLEY observed that the only question then
really before them was, whether they should consider the die-
franchisirg or the enfranchising part of the bill. It was, to
be sure, some satisfaction, and he was only surprised at the
fact, after the almost unprecedented pertinacity with which
the question bad tor seven hours and a half been resisted on
the former night, that they had at last got into the committee.
(Hear.) On the former night, the adjournment was pressed,
because the hon. member for Brecknockshire (Col. Wood)
had desired to enter into what he termed the general details
of the bill; but now, when the opportunity presented
itself, the speech had evaporated. So much tbr some of
the reasons urged for that adjournment. Now they
had got into the Committee, and approached the first
clause • but even that, it seemed, was not to exempt
members from going into the general question. The hon.
and learned gentleman who had just spoken (Sir E. Sugden)
had done so ; and certainly he had, in addition to having
spoke very largely on the general question, contrived to en-
cumber it with much incomprehensible involution. Amongst
the charges preferred against the ministers one was that the
debates with them were a mockery, for that they had settled
the question by the King's speech, and had brought forward
the bill cut and dry, and then asked the house to de-
liberate upon it. What was done in the year 18'29, re-
specting the Catholic question ? That was recommended
in the King's speech, and the bill was afterwards
brought forward cut and dry for the consideration of the
Parliament; yet he had never heard any one venture to call
the deliberations on that bill a mockery (hear, hear, hear).
Now, mutat s mulatulis, the proceeding respecting the re-
form was precisely similar to that adopted respecting the
Catholic question.—(Cbeers). Then the pledges were at.
tacked. It was said that the pledges were for the destruc-
tion of the nomination boroughs, which would lead to the
destruction of the peerage. and Heaven knew what else.
He did not accuse the Learned Gentleman of having any
overwhelming anxiety for the people; bat he ( Mr. Stanley),
who did desire that the people might net bewhoUyforgotten,
did think that, after the Sovereign had desired to take the
sense of the people respecting a particular measure, and when
they came to vote, that the people should ask the candidate
what might be his opinion on that question. What more
had been done? But the Learned Gentleman said that the
Bill resulted from the love of change, and nothing else.—
Now, was he prepared to say that there ought to be no
change ; and if he was so prepared, did he expect to find
that the people would be of the same opinion ? The late
Ministers had decided against Reform, the present Minis-
ters had come into power pledged to Reform ; the question
had been referred to the people, and they had decided in
favour of those who said that the representation ought to
be reformed. Then what became of the charge about mere
I love of change ? But it was averred that there had been
great baste, and that in fact the Ministers had produced
three different bills. He denied that such was the fact ;
the present bill did nut differ in its principles and main
features from the original Loud cries of hear, hear.)
Oh ! but it would give a new Constitution. He admitted
that It would effect great changes ; but their tendency would
be to bring back the Constitution, instead of creating a
new one. (Hear.) The principles of the measure, in spite
of all that was said about new France and old England, were
those that were not at variance with, but applicable to the
feelings of the people of this country. Yes, and with (lon's
blessing, they were such as would keep pace with the im-
proved state and views of the country. But, it was said,
that time had given &certain mellowness to existing intl.
unions. True, and had not time given something more
than mellowness to parts of those institutions ? (Cheers.)
The Ministers had endeavoured to keep pace with time,
and had deliberated and inquired with the greatest anxiety.
The ministers did not pretend to be infallible. It was asked
why cut off sixty or sixty-two members ? He did not know
that there was any thing in the particular number, and cer.
tain places were proposed to be disfranchised because the
ministers said that they were subject to certain influence,
and that the exertion of such influence was detrimental. The
number was not taken to suit the fickle minds of the minis.
ten, but it happened that the places which came within such
description amounted to such number. (Hear.) if the mi-
Dieters bad altered the bill, or could alter it to suit their
caprices, instead of being backed by large majorities, they
would justly deserve to be scouted with contempt out of
of that house. The disfranchisement& went on the principle
that certain places were unworthy, from their limited num.
bers and other reasons, to return members ; and the enfran.
chisement, on the principle that other places, on account of
their great population and extensive interests, ot to re-
turn members. But if the proposition of the r h tit hon.
member for .Montgomeryshire (Mr. C. Wynn) was
adopted, what became of their love of abstract justice ?
Boroughs would not then be disfranchised en account
of their delinquency, oe the thinness of the population,
but in order to make roan for other boroughs and
towns. That might be the line of convenience, but
could it be Ask to be the line of justice also I,—.
Now, as the Minisisia thought that the nomination and rot.
ten beeengha ought in be minded, and that the Imp towns
Win hafelfall ibllll Soaks members, he con.
Wised_ :dal din Ildresehial!cdetele Lee =egmedd
first Isom mol domed the Dalt and thought
that IN eiliehbealis truest to take the preeetkom As to

the motion that had been proposed, to change the
in whish the clauses of the bill should be considered, if
meant any thing it was its delay and defeat ; and he shoo)
therefore vote against the proposed transfer of the pres,:.
clause. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. CHOKER complained of the sarcasm that had hs,i;
applied to the speech of the hon. member for Duntla,:„.„
(Cries of adjourn). No, he should not propose adjourn:nett,
but he could not help observing that there was to be a nit
mode of shortening the debates ; the hon. gentleman oppotit,
would not answer. But though the minority mig•it
small, it was great in power, as would be found. ft teas
and laughter.) The silent course might be complim..%•asy
to the fidelity of the ministerial adherents, but it
very decorous to the house. However, what was to be tv,
pected, when many were returned with such pledges, for flat
they were pledged the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Stail.yi
had admitted. (No, No) Why, yes. he had. (No,
No, no !)—Yes— (No—tiluch laughter) That right h.
gentleman had said, what was so proper as to ask nieniltet,..
pledge themselves to the bill. (Loud cries of No.)
Mr. STANLEY.-1 said, when a great question is at:.
siting the country, what could be more proper than ta
candidates, what is your opinion on such question ?
Mr. CKOKER contended that the truth of what he I,a!
said was thus proved. (Oh, oh! cheers and laughter.) II
then maintained that those who had pledged therusthes t
the bill now found a bill changed in every every essentisl
part of it. (Loud cries of No.) He said yes, yes. It
also incongruous, insulting, and exasperating. Stockport,
with its 44,000 inhabitants, was to have one member; al
Melton, with 4,500 population, was to have two member.;
would that measly the country ? Would it not exasperate it?
Then as to the celebrated half-yearly clause—it was said tl.lr
it should be retained. (No, no.) Why, it was declared ti
it would he for the house to dispose of it. (Hear.) A:Ill
that, what became of the inadvertency ? In truth, the nn.
&sten had done that themselves for which they had dissolve I
the late Parliament ; they in the cabinet had voted against
every part of their own bill? (Much laughter.) They
would be dissolved—he trembled for their dissolution—let
them beware. (Loud laughter.) However property was to
be the standard of the newly created franchise, and the 10,,•
house was to have the vote, and yet there was a bill (Mt.
Nancy's) on their table exempting 101. houses item the
poor's rates, thereby declaring such houses to be the residence
of pauperism, yet the noble lord declared by his bill that the
101. householders contained the most independent legisla.
tors. ( Loud cheers and laughter.) In conclusion, he begged
to state, that he thought the motion of& Noble Lord (Milton)
respecting Leaseholders ought first to be settled, before
they proceeded with any other part of the bill. (Hear.)
Lord A LTIIO RP observed that the learned gentlemar.
(Sir E. Sugden) had somewhat diverged from the question,
hut the right hon. gentleman tali.) had just sat down had
gone far beyond him. They had heretofore talked of coaling
to the details, but in reality they had discussed the genera',
principles of the bill. With respect to the refusal to answer.
lie had not replied to the speeches delivered on the previous
evening, because in reality they had not contained, in his
estimation, any thing very novel, or that required an answer.
As to another statement, and that involved the principle of
the motion before the house, strain boroughs were not to be
disfranchised in order to make room for others, but because
they were evils in themselves; and it was proposed toextend
the franchise to other boroughs and place. because it was sub-
mitted that the extent of their population and interests en.
Udell them to participate in the representation. ( lieu, hear.)
The noble lord concluded by observing that the elective
franchise ought to be extended to the lowest point of pro.
property. If there was any danger it would arise from a res.
triction of the franchise. It had been asked who called for
a reduction of the number of members of that house ; he did
not say there had been any such all. There had been aloud
demand, however, for the disfranchisement of the rotten
boroughs, and it was the duty of his Majesty's Ministers in
the measure before the house to attend to that call (Hear.)
Colonel WOOD was of opinion, that in dealing with the
great measure before the House, it was necessary that the
House should nor do too much. With respect to Schedule
B, he contended that its spirit went to spoliate certain other
boroughs, in order to give an additional number of Members
to Ireland ; he should, therefore, feel no hesitation in sup-
porting the proposition of the Hon. Member: for Mont-
gomeryshire, that the two Schedules A and B, should be
suspended ; nothing should induce him to vote for three
members for a county, or one member for a town.
Mr. C. PELH Ahi addressed the House, but In so low
tone of voice that it was not possible to catch a sentence in
the gallery.
Sir ft. PEEL rose and said he should confine himself to
the question immediately before the house; he meant that
clause of the bill which had reference to schedules A and B,
and he should fellow the example of the noble lord opposite
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) and make a very short
speech. His Majesty's ministers, after they had obtained a
majority of 136, ought to have abstained from going into the
details of the bill until they had obtained correct returns of
the population : the fact was, that the bill was framed on the
returns of 1821, when, perhaps, in another fortnight new and
totally different returns would be made. The right bon.
gentleman then went on to show, that there had not been suf.
ficient time for the returning ()deer to make up his tetanus
of the population, and especially alluded to the report front
Rochdale, which stated that if he (the returning officer) did
not transmit his return by a certain day, he would be mulcted
in a cry min fine. He was prepared to vote against Schedules
A and B, at whatever period they were to be discussed..._
His first reason for objecting to them was, that he never yet
had heard a sufficient reason assigned for such a whole.
sale disfranchisement. He also objected to them on
another ground, namely, because they excluded all those
individuals whose opinions in the deliberations of that House
were of the utmost consequence, but who would never submit
to the toil of obtaining the suffrages of the vest body of 101.
huusenolders to whom the franchise would be opened. With
respect to our colonial interests, he was also afraid that local
feelings would prevail over the former. The whole bill went
on the principle of direct representation ; and if so, he was
at a loss to guess why our colonies were not to be provided
for on the same plan : another objection he had was,that the
bill afforded no cheek to popular excitement. He contended,
before Ministers acted upon the principle of disfranchise.
went, they ought to have adopted the opposite mune of en-
franchisement ; he saw great advantage in the adoption of
the proposal of his hon.tfriend the Member for Montgomery-
shire, viz. that the disfranchising clause should be suspended
until the question of enfranchisement were disposed of.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL denied that the representation
of the town of Rochdale was founded upon the return quoted
by the hon. baronet, (Sir R. Peel.) With reepect to what
fell from the right hon. baronet, regarding the Colonial In.
terests of England, he did not apprehend that those interests
would be overlooked, should the nomination boroughs, be
done away ; there were numerous towns connected with the
trade and commerce of the colonies, which would on all
occasions send members able and ready to stand forwui in
support of the Colonial interest. (Cheers.)
Colonel SIBTHORPE supported the proposal of the
hon. member for Montgomeryshire.
Mr. HUNT said if it were absolutely necessary that his
Majesty's Ministers should be elected to seats in that house,
he perfectly agreed with the Right Hon. Bart. that the time
might arrive when they would not get them. But he was of
opinion that after this measure had passed, the time would
soon come when the Ministers would have seats in that house
in a manner mote agreeable to the Constitution. As be was
a reformer all his life he should vote for this measure as it
I began a reform ; but he could not forget that after the bill
should pass that no poor man in the kingdom who could not
live in a IUL house would have a vote.

Mr. JOHNSTONE supported the bin, but the cries of
" Question " were so loud and incessant, that it was impos-
sible to collect his observations. The boo. gentleman began
so many sentences with, *"The hon. member for Tainwmth,"
that the bursts of laughter prevented our hearing more, and
we believe prevented the honourable gentleman concluding
his sentences.
The committee divided—

Ayes
Noes
Majority against postponement 118
The House resumed.
Mr. BERNAL reported progress, and asked leave to sit
again this day..—Leave given.
The Report of the Committee of Supply was brought up
and agreed to.
The other orders of the day were disposed of, and the
House adjourned at Hasr.pasr Two o'Ctoec.

.. 174

THE GIG ANTIC WHALE.—Within the last few
days, His Ro_yal Highness the Duke of Gloucester
honoured the Pavilion with his presence; together with
many persons of distinction; namely : Lord Adolphus
Pluck:ewe, Lord Morley, Marchioness of Winchester,
Earl Pomfret, Lord Elphinsteos, Ls Counter* Worousow,
His Grace the Duke of Weelliogtcn, Lord Louth, Viscount
Colo, Lord sad Lady Bathurst, Lord Gafford; besides
many abets too numerous to mention.