Star.
London, England, 1821-03-03 00:00:00

Mv, PEElrpreferred the 4:20 as a reasosable
limi-
tation on the elective franchise. That limitation
would give from 2000 to 5000 voters, which was a
ifair expression of public opinion. The objections to
the scot and lot plan were strong, and he lamented
' that the right of voting had not been extended to the
East Riding of Yorkshire. To introduce the !wind-
,ple of scot and lot into a manufacturing t,wit like
Leeds, would be a great disadvantage to it, and
might cause the removal of somebranct es of industry.
Mr. AIIERCROMBIE had, in the first instance,
been 'desirous that the Representation should have
been extended to Yorkshire, and would vote for the
Amendment of the Noble Lord, the Member for that
County, as more analogous to the Constitution.
Mr. PEEL explained.
Mr. AIONCK thought, that all were agreed as to
the principle of the Bill. He should support the
Amendment of the Noble Lord, as he was a friend
to established usages. If the 'Amendment tended to
give the elective franchise to a considerable portion
of the poorer classes, on that account it was entitled
to support.
Lord CASTLEREAGII was a sincere friend to
the principle of the Bill, though he should have pre-
ferred a District Reform, as the safer principle. But
as the House had decided otherwise, the question
was, which was the more expedient, as to the place
that had keen selected. He looked with considerable
apprehenstonlo the Scot and Lot System,• especially
in the case or•stlarge population.. But wiry should
Scot and Lot be
,preferred to Burgage Tenure, or
either to the ancient exercise by Charter of the power
of the Crown. Of the sums he preferred the £2O.
Mr. ABERCI4O)II3I2 Ind Lord CASTLERBAGH
plained.
Mr. MARTIN said, that a m. ra4eo force would
be necessary at the poll, to preserve vanquillity
of Leeds. He would ask if the Noble Lord had taken
the opinion'ef the principal inhabitants of that town?
Mr. DENMAN said, it must ex,cite alarm in the
minds of the friends of Reform, to find the question
treated as one of mere expediency. He was of opi-
nion that the extension of the elective franchise would
tend to the tranquillity of the place. He bad sonic
experience on the subject in the town that he repre-
ented; and no discontent had appeared in the town
of Nottingham, from its having Members in Parlia-
ment ; and bad that been the case with Manchester
and Huddersfield, much of the discontent would
have been removed. The House should adhere to
the established usage of the Constitution, in extend-
ing the elective franchise.
-Mr. W. COLUITENAY was in favour of limiting
the qualification to £2O.

Mr. SCARLETT asked who was to judge of the
value of the tenement P Such a regulation would
cause much discontent in the town, and an acciden-
tal fall in the rent of houses would disqualify a large
number of voters. The simple mode would be to
leave it to the scot and lot rents.

Lord J. RUSSELL replied.' The amendment of
the Noble Member for Yorkshire had a captivating
appearance; but he thought the spirit, rather than
the mete form, of our ancestors should be imitated.
The principles of making the qualification £lO was,
in fact the same as that of scot and lot. The limit-
ation of £2O would narrow extremely the right of
voting, and extend it to little•more than 2,000 per-
sons, and most of them freeholders of the county
of York.--The Committee divided—.
For the original motif* . - 182
For Lord Aiiition's amendment - 66
Another division took place on the amendment of
Mr. S. Wortley, limiting the qualification to £2o.
For the original motion, 94—For the amendment, 148
—Majority in favour of the amendment, .54..

On the clause for allowing such Burgesses of Gram-
pound as had not been convicted of bribery to vote
fur the county of Cornwall,
MP. D. GILBERT opposed the clause as unjust
towards the electors•of Cornwall. He thought it
would be better to transfer these Burgesses
gony. He should, at all events, oppose their being
thrown on the county, and with that view he should
move that this clause be omitted.
Mr. TIERNEY defended the. clause. If it was
omitted 40 persons, who had been convicted of no
crime, would be deprived of their franchise. This
would not recommend the Bill in another place.
Mr. W. WYNN defended the clause; the Act of
the Corporation must be taken to attach to all the
Burgesses, though some of them might be innocent;
he should support the clause, as by it he thought
the rights of these persons would be preserved.
Mr. MARTIN thought the measure unjustifiable;
the individuals in question were as honourable men
as any in the County ; to transfer them to the County
would be to deal out justice and compensation in the
same manner as would he done by reducing a Colonel
or a Major in the army, and then by way of compen.
sation, making them drummers--(Hear, Lear).—lf
this clause were to stand, these individuals would be
deprived of their valuable franchise for the Borough,
and be thrown amongst a body of three or 4000
voters; there could he no comparison as to the value
of the franchise.
Lord J. RILSSELL had no objection to transfer
them to a neighbouring Borough, if it could be done.
Mr. WORTI.Ey would support the amendment,
w render the Bill less objectionable to the Lords. He
sincerely hoped this-Bill would pass this House, and
that it would also be adopted by the other House.

The Clause was then rejected.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL then propo,ed a Clause
for limiting the duration of Electinns at Lteds to five
days.--This Clause, after some observations from
Lord LOWTHER, MT. W. WYNst, Mr. TIERNEY, atc.
WAs agreed to.
The other Classes were then agreed to, an 4
Report was ordered to be received on I,lsnaday next.
alNes RENCII BUJ..
The King's. Bench Bill was read a second time.
On the question fen- its being commiited,
A. TAYLOR expressed his approbation of
a bill, and declared, he wished to aee the principle of
the Bill carried further.
The Bill was committed for Thursday uext.
- -

SALVAGE.
On the Repast of the Salvage Act being brought •p,
Dr. LUSIiiNGTON wialutd to know *hilt was tit,
object of these who supported this Itaselition? was ix
intended to bring in a Bill to continue cm Lain Acts,
the expiration.of-which would be a public benefit?
Mr, LiiIkIWGTON. Said, !t viii) kneaded td brims