The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-02-21 00:00:00

tlisT were to call for the charters of the boroughs, they
next, and with as much justice, go to private is,-
ritls and call for the title deeds of their estates.r

•
(Cheers on the Ministerial Benches.) It ought to be
berm in ruled, that upon thre charters depended other
Uhts which the Noble Lord would wish to ascertain.
on the charters depended the rights of the borosibs,
their • patronages, adrowsons, and all other privileges,
and woakl it be fair to espose them to the gas* of the
'Wig? Would it be fair to put these charters into the
sands of every attorney who, haring no Weill's, and a
ghat deal of curiosity and desire of interoseddling.
Might be disposed to find fault with thew.—(Cluten from
the Ministers.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL, _u his not proposed to or-
der the boroughs to produce their charters."

• Mr. Secretary CANNING reserved. Then if that was
tie Noble Lord's meaning, be (Mr. Secretary Canning)
Mae ate loss to know bow be was to obtain his object.
ht the motion itself; as it stood recorded. the examination
ett the charters was put forward as a matter of import-
Meet. He would point to the Noble Lord's notice as it
Isy upon the table of the house, and be was sore that in
it the examination of the charters nes se much a portion
ads, object as the ascertaining the number of voters;
sad if the charters were not to be examined, then bow
Would the information be acquired? With regard to the
information as to the small number of voters in some of
es boroughs, it was not required, as the facts had never
leen denied. It had never been alleged by the most
otreenone opposers of Reform.that they were greater than
was JteurrelY supposed. There bad been no disposition
to object to this, not only during the time that the Noble
Lord had taken Parltamentary Reform under his protec-
tion, but during the last thirty or forty years, no speech,
even of those who had differed the most from those

principles which the Noble Lord advocated, had objected
lo these number,. What then was the use of appoint-
leg a Committee foi• the establishment of a fact which
had not been contested? He (Hr. Secretary Canning)
*as ready to take the case of Old Sarum with its two
voters. The number of vo'ets made no part of the case
with those who had objected to the question; they made
no point and founded no objection upon that. The objec-
tion to the reform was, that with all these the house of
Commons was completely adequate to the purpose for
which it was intended, and that they were contented
with it to remain as it was. The object of this Com-
mittee could not, therefore,be the obtaining of that which
was never objected to—it must have come bearing upon
the greater question, and it was this which had put tom
to die pain of differing from the Noble Lord. If the
Noble Lord had stated fairly the object of his motion, if
he bad owed fairly why he wished fur the information,
lie (Mr. Secretary Canning) would not lame been put to
the pain of oppo-ing him. Every thing which had been
asked In that way he would have granted, but he did
not see his way in the appointinent of the Committee
without viol sting greater and snore sacred principles.—
The Noble Lord, too, omitted to call for the same infor-
mation with regard to the Counties, the information
with regard to which would be as important with regard
to the question of Reform as that respecting the
Boroughs ; be did noe if the Noble Lord was not to call
for the charters see what he was to call for—would he
have the returns of notices at the last Election? This
would, in all cases where there had been no opposition,
be null. In those which had been partially contested,
it could be imperfect, and it would be correct in those
only which lead been disputed to the very last vote.—
In the rise of Liverpool. for instance, if the return had
been male from some former Elections, it might have
come near the number of voters; whereas, in the very last
case, it would have sown only about two hundred. Such
information would be of oo use for popular purpose.
in the plan of Reform, already brought forward by the
Lord—and I e had declared, that the plan of which
he bad given notice for this Session was the same—he
had not proposed to des•roy all the small boroughs; be
was only to cut off the more percent parts of this id-
led/rally corrupt part of oar Constitution, and preserve.
the remainder. No man bad ever argued that there
to ere no clo.e Boroughs, and few had argued in favour of
them as taken in themselves. It was allowed Vat they
were small, limited in population and importance., but
still he d:d not wish that they should be deprived of throw
privileges which were secured to thorn by their charters.
He did not man to deprive the Noble Lord of any in-
formation which would be necessary for his,purpose, and
when the notice of this was first given be wished there
1.6 d been some 'tulle of obtaining it, without the den-
ge-s in which that proposed by the Noble Lord would
inaolve even Ilia own question. He hail now stated his
ground et objection to the motion of the Nob's Lord.—
They were briefly these t—le, Because it would expose
the charters and rights of the boroughs in a way which
wee not only unrecessary, but tyrannical. 2dly. It
`would ia'se a prejudice on the general question of Re-
f ,rtd, would prevent that question from meeting
with that fair and dispassionate hearing with which he
was anxious that it shoull be met with every 'HT wsition
to meet the motion for reform when it came f wrward; a
motion which was interesting,—if but for ite magnitude
only, he would oppose the present one as improper.—
(Gheere.)

Mr. ABERCROM BY confessed that be bad felt a contd.
*treble degree of curiosity to know what could possibly
le the grounds npon which the Right Honourable Gen-
tleman would oppose the motion of his Noble Friend;
as the motion was in itself so simple, the information
required was eo perfectly harmless, and the motion it-
setf was in reality so drtatelied from all other subjects.
He had thought that there could be no rational op; osi.
tion ; and the result had .hewed him that this opinion
sas correct. The Right Honourable Gentleman had
brought forward two ohjections,—the one of which ex-
isted wholly in the imagination of the Right Honour.
able Gentleman; and the other proceeded upon an ex-
aggeration, or rather, lie would say, upon a misrepre.
sentation, unintentional he was. very willing to grant,
but still it nay, if not a misrepresentation, at least a
very gross exaggeration. The Right Honourable Gen-
tleman had been at some pains to persuade his Noble
Friend that the information which he sought could not
be obtained, and that though it could be obtained, it
would not be useful; bat surely his Noble Friend aas
the best judge of what information would hest suit his
own purpose. The Right Hononrable Gentleman inn,
gined that if this motion was acceded to the world would
believe that the House was ripe for some great conces-
sion on the subject of Reform. lint surely if the pas-
sing of such a motion would impress the public, that the
house were so ripe, it would only be a proof that there
is, on the-part of the public, a wish that the house should
be ripe for inch a concession. He would ask the Right
litemeorable Gentleman, whether upon his own showing,
each an lrnagirtatien could be entertained, if the public
were not strongly impressed sith the idea that it is the
duty of the house? But he should like to knot- how far
in the judgment of reason it would produce this effect?
lie would like to know whether in consequence of its
beinr carried or given up the Member for Lanai k
(Lord A. Hamilton) would have a greater majority on
his question of the Scottish Representation [cheers] ?
The fact was, that the public were not so easily alarmed
by the dread of a Reform originating in th of house; and,
though the motion were carried, they would not expect
to find soy great improvement in the general votes. It
would make no improvement in the result on the llth of
March, when his Noble Friend would bring for-
ward the great question of Reform. Would the people
without be alarmed lest that motion should be car-
ried? The thing was not upon any principle of rea-
son, or any judgment of experience, to be believed. It
was a thing of the imagination—a mere chimera—child.