The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-07-29 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-TUESDAY

The opposition to the recent return for Merionethshire was
abandoned, consequently no ballot for an election committee
took place.
Dr. BowaING presented a petition from Baillie Craig, of
Kilmarnock, complaining of having been removed from the
office of elder in his church, for having presided at a public
meeting.
Sir G. Clerk, Mr. F. Maul, Sir J. Graham, &c., resisted the
reception of the petition, on the ground that the Church of
Scotland was independent of all external authority—that it had
the power over its members, and that its decisions could not be
questioned by parliament.
The petition was eventually withdrawn.
After a question from Mr. M'Clean, respecting the number
of seamen and marines in Spain, which produced an incom-
plete concession to his request from Mr. C. Wood, the house
went into committee on the
CHARITABLE TRUSTEES' BILL.

On clause 1 being read,
Mr. V. SMITH said that he was willing to substitute biennial,
in place of triennial election.
Mr. PR AED moved an amendment, giving to the freemen of
corporate towns the right of voting jointly with the burgesses
at the election of charitable trustees.

Mr. V. SMITH objected to the amendment, which he thought
came with a very bad grace from the hon. member who pro-
posed it, inasmuch as he had, in a former stage of Site bill, op-
posed the principle of popular election altogether.
Mr. WILLIAMS supported the amendment, by reason that it
extended the constituency. Besides, he considered the free-
men of corporate towns were justly entitled to some contest in
the management of corporate charities.
Mr. SCARLETT supported the amendment. He considered it
very hard to deprive freemen of a right which had been con-
conceded to burgesses.
Mr. MACLEAN sup ported the amendment also.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL opposed it.
Mr, HuME did not see why any distinction should be made in
favour of freemen.

Sir R. PEEL could not see why those who were thought fit to
be entrusted with political rights should be debarred on the
ground of unfitness from exercising one purely civil.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the real question at issue was,
whether the freemen were fitting persons to be intrusted with
any controul over the charitable funds, and whether they could
properly be trusted with the right of voting for commissioners.
He, for one, did not think that they were, and he should, there-
fore, oppose the amendment.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY could not understand how it happened
that the advocates for popular rights were on all occasions so
strenuous in narrowing them, or on what ground it was that the
burgesses in the different towns of the kingdom were in such
bad odour with those who are called the friends of the people.
It was not true that the freemen had no interest in the property
in question • they were very much interested, and the estates
which by the bill were to be committed to the charge of these
new trustees had been given in the first instance, in many cases,
either to be divided annually among the freemen themselves, or
to be applicable to the education of the poor of these freemen.
In his opinion, neither the town council nor the inhabitants
were fit bodies to administer these trusts • they were trusts which
required the stern constant supervision of an unconnected inde-
pendent party. He thought that the best course would be to
let the bill stdnd over until it had received a more mature con-
sideration; but he must own that he could not understand on
what ground the parties in question were to be excluded. The
noble lord, indeed, had said that they were paupers; but still
the noble lord himself had already declared that they were the
fit elements to return members to that house. The noble lord
admitted them to be fit trustees of the nation's interest; but the
moment they were called upon to protect their own property
they were denounced as paupers—worthless—the mere refuse of
the earth.
The committee then divided. and the numbers were—For the
amendment, 48; Against it, 65 ; Majority, 17.
The clause was then agreed to.
After several other divisions on subsequent clauses, the report
was ordered to be received.