The Statesman.
London, England, 1818-02-14 00:00:00

THE STATESMAN

had not beendooe justly, because the Crown bad, in
lifteer oflontrAse,
.taken upon Itself to alter the
sed of tbollergN so as to: affect lanais*
tstate of the Hinireaentation of that place.ln Per-
inent. "Weever, this alteration (which be could
not deny created so extension of the franchise) might
have been- unattended with dangerous matins to the
public interest in the late case, its very extension
might be productive of the worst consequences, bad
Ministry made a more constitutional use of the fa.
cility which it might have afforded them. lie should
call the attention of the House to this question on a
more extended scale after. Easter, but for the present
ha should, in reference to the existing case, endea-
vostr to supply that information to the House, which
it was expedient they should have, by moving,
Thatlt copy of the Act and Warrant of his Majesty's Coun-
cil, dated September, 1817, authorising the Guild of Brethren
sad Borrows of Montrose to elect a set or Magistretes and
Tows Oicers, and she far permitting them to alter theses of
the Constituter's of that Bergh in all time to come, should be
laid before the Hoare.

The motion being pot and seconded—
Lord CASTLEREAGH contended, that if the
question of Reform, as to a number of Scots Burghs,
were now entertained, and the Papers required
granted, although it might not be the Noble Lord's
wish to introduce the question of Parliamentary
Reform, yet it would thus be incidentally entertain-
ed upon inadequate and fallacious grounds. That
there were no grounds for the immediate interference
of the House, might be inferred from the satisfaction
the Burgesses themselves, of Montrose and ether
places, felt at the change, and the general peace-
able and tranquil disposition of the inhabitants
of all the Royal Scots Burghs. All that' could
be said on the subject now *as, that lie, in
common with the Noble Lord, regretted there
was that defect in the Constitution of the Scots
Bombe, which rendered it difficult for the Bur.
gesses to inspect and controul its accounts and ex-
penditure. But sorely an application to Parlia-
ment, of this nature, was not the way to obtain ade-
quate redress. The papers sought for could not
afford adequate information to be of any practical
utility, and the Lord Advocate had that evening
given notice of his intention to bring in a Bill to meet
the grievance complained of, and grant to a com-
petent Court a right to enquire into end examine
such accounts. He could not help thinking that a
Court might even now be applied to which would
quash any illegal and extravagant assessment by aoch
Magistrates. But the fact was, the Noble Lord did
not appear to think the Burgesses had not an ade-
quate defence whereby to defend themselves from
illegal assessments, so much as their inability to
superintend and restrain their officers in any attempt
to misapply their funds. He thought the question might
be determined in the. Courts of Law, particularly if
the Learned Lord Advocate should pass his Bill.—
Indeed the question might incidentally he brought
before a Committee of the )louse under the Gren-
ville Act ; and he could not help thinking t►e House
itself the lust adapted to discuss and determine upon
an intricate and complicated
,question of Scotch law.
laugh.]—Under the', cirbumstances, be felt
disposed to resist the production of the papers; as in-
adequate to their professed purpose.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE said, that the subject
brought forward by the Noble Lord had no con-
nection with that of Parliamentary Reform. The
state of the Scfrtch Boroughs, however, was such as,
in the opinion of those who were most competent to
form an opinion on the subject, called imperiously
for enquiry. He could not indeed see any connection
between such an enquiry and the subject of Parlia-
mentary Reform, excepting iu as tar as any regale.
Lions respecting those who had a right to vote in the
election of a Member of Parliament was connected
with that subject. It was said, that it was only when
the rights of the Borough were suspended, that the
Crown interfered to reanimate them. But in the
case alluded to it went farther, it altered the set
altogether. If thi, was wrong, it was, an usurpation
on the part of the Crown ; and though in the present
instance it might have been exercised beneficially, yet
it went to establish a precedent which, in the bands
of bad Ministers, might be made use of to justify the
worst encroachments. He thought no subject more
suitable for Parliamentary enquiry. He thought that
copies of the old and new set should be produced,
that they might be able to see the alteration, to find
whether the Crow• has improperly interfered, or
whether in such manner as demands Parliamentary
enquiry. If the Crown has improperly interfered,
and no notice be taken of it, the measure will be
acquiesced in and established into precedent. He
thought the course adopted by the Noble Lord a very
proper one. It was not connected with any wild
theories of Parliamentary Reform, and if it were he
should have been silent ; but being of a different
opinion, and finding that in the course of this year five
or six other Boroughs were likely to be •placed in a
similar situation to that in which Montrose lately
stood, he thought it of very great importance that
the subject should be fully discussed. He thought
the circumstances of the ease completely relieved his
Noble Friend from any ',spiciest; of beiog desirous
of agitating the question of Parliamentary itefores ,•
' he wished only to resist a precidbat which; though
now beneficial, may be improperly applied• After
some further observations to the sante effect, and
some compliments to the Magistrates of Scotland, the
Honourable Gentleman concluded by supporting the
motion.
The LORD ADVOCATE said, that. be never on.
derstood that it was in the power of the Council of
any Borough to tax the inhabitants. If they bad the
power of contracting debt, they most have power to
levy money from the burgesses to cover those debts ;
but to levy money 'without the authority of Parlia-
ment is contrary to law. The Borough of Aberdeen
was insolvent, yet there were no actions against them
who were liable: and the fact of there being no se&
actions showed there was no power to tea. From
the Revolution downwards, the argument was never
maintained, that the Magistracy could contract debt
to which the Burgesses were liable. At any rate,
there was no suit yet raised of that kind. It was,
contrary to the principles of the Constitution,
Miry to the Declaration of Grievances, to levy mo-
ssy without the authority of Parliament. It had bees
attempted by the Magistrates of Aberdeen to impose
'petty customs by their own act, but both the Court
of Session end the House of Peers had decided against
the Magistracy. All this went clearly to show that no

such field debited. The Noble Lord seated,
many gOonalte existed under the most degrading
tem of self-election. In this respect they
worn than any Boroughs in England,
Magistrates continue for life. With respect _
trose, the Honourable Gentleman who spoke last
esis-stated the eau. The Boroegh lost the right to
elect by neglect. Such a case had 'listed in Eng-
land ; and when the case was brought before Lord
Mansfield, the decision of the Court of King's Bench
was, that the Borough was not dissolved. Their
right was only dormant or quiescent till restored.—
The situation was precisely the same u of the English
Boroughs. And as to the several cases, each case most
stand on its own circumstances. There was no ge-
neral commotion In Scotland on this subject.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE and the LORD ADVO-
CATE mutually explained.
. Sir J. MACINTOSH said, he should not enter
into the question of Parliamentary Reform, nor that
of dry law, which was connected with the present
motion, because the present was an unfit time to die-
cuss the
.one, and the House of Commons was an
improper tribunal to decide the other. He thought
the motion of his Noble Friend had been hardly
dealt with, in being considered a motion subservient
to Parliamentary Reform; it was strange that a sets.
tine, which called in question the legality of a chap
in any one Burgh, should be viewed as leading to
universal change. This seemed a paradox, which tell'
Learned Lord had chosen for the purpose-of display.
ing his ingenuity ; but in supporting it be bad for-
gotten his arguments. The Learned Lord bad used
an argument, connected with the question of Perlis-
mentary deform, which he could not help noticing.
He had said, that it was strange that thine who
should blame the Scotch Burghs, did not blame the
close Boroughs in England. There were some close
Boroughs, and some in which there were rights of
popular election ; but in Scotland there were none
of the latter description ; so that, *whoever support.
ed the English Constitution could not like the Con.
stitatiou of Scotland. In England, though the sys-
tem might be, in some respects, improved, there was
a variety of modes of election, which had been false-
ly blamed, as producing an inadequate Representa-
tion ; but which, on the whole, produced a Repre-
sentation more complete than any mode which should
proceed on the basis of uniformity.—(!year, hear!)
---But in Scotland there was the must perfect uni-
formity on an oligarchical principle. Ile contended
that any uniform Representation was bad. Univer-
sal Suffrage was, indeed, the worst of all—(Hcar,
hear!)—if not a monstrous inconsistency will,
all forms of human society.— ( near, hear, hear!)
—lt never existed in this country, and if it had,
he should have thought its abolition the best plan of
Reform.--(Hcor !)—But in Scotland theta was in
uniformity of the opposite kind. There was no po-
pular election, or pretence of popular election. So
that Scotland, though it by the. Union enjoyed the
protection of the free Constitution of England, did
not in the nobler sense participate in it. It was a
gross fallacy, therefore, to compare oho state of the
Representation in Scotland to that of England.. He
did not wish. to speak to the dry legal question, but
legal questions affecting the Constitutioo, and parti-
cularly the rights of election, were peculiarly sub-
jects for dm consideration of that House. The ques-
tion now was, whether the Crown possessed, not
the power of reviving a Burgh, the charter of which
bad been lost by intermission of elections, but *he.
ther it possessed the power of altering the conslitu-14
Lion of it ? This was a qoestion over . which great
doubt hung. He did not mean to give an opinion on
it. The right rested on a single case, that of Stir-
ling, which bad never been decided on in a Court of
Law, or in Parliament. In such a case it was the
duty of the House to reqeire information, and he
should therefore vote for the motion.
Mr. J. P. GRANT said, that after the able
speech of his Hon. Friend who sat down he would
not go at length into the subject. It was certainly
worthy the attention of Parliament to introduce
some specific regulation. He would ask if, when
elections fail, the Crown had power to alter, to what
extent would such a power go ? If the matter were
regarded in this light, Ministers themselves would
come to Parliament for some regulation on the sub-
ject. No question ever agitated Scotland more than
this question. There was no probability of redress
from the Courts of Law ; because any application to.
the Court of Session must be by a constitutional
member of the body whose election was complained
of. This is a reason why the House should inter-
fere; and the proper mode of doing so was to adopt'
the course pointed out by the Noble Lord whi
mowed the subject.
The LORD ADVOCATE explained.
Sir R. FERGUSSON said, that the Represeete.
lien of the Scotch Boroughs was in a deplorable state
et present; they bad been represented as in a -state
of
fermentation, but there was no ferment except
aeincese and ardent desire to get rid of the vexations
system of grievances which galled them so much. He
saw no objection to the Reform in the Borough of
Montrose, but to the mode.
Lord A. HAMILTON shortly replied.
Mr. FORBES bad no doubt that in a few years
the state of the Scotch Boroughs would be greatly
alnytiorated.
Mr. W. SMITH observed, that one of the Boroughs
was 1,4001. short of the sum which would enable it
to pay the interest of its debts. lie hoped no such
alteration would take place as would debar creditors
from their right of recovering their debts.
Mr. DOUGLAS stated, that after providing for
the debt of the Borough, a sinking fund would re-
main of 3001. a gear. The debts of the Borough
were 20,0001. •

The question was negatived without a division.
Sir J. MACINTOSH moved for an account of all
Prizes of War, otherwise called Droll. of the Crown,
Or Droits of Admiralty, together with such Prizes as
have been adjudicated to the captors since 1793, with
the date, amount, resource, apd application of each
receipt.
The CHANCELLOR, of the EXCHEQUER
suggested, that inch an eccount would be attended
with great difficulty and expeoce, and the motion
was withdrawn.
The Surgeons' Bills was read a first time, and or.
dered to be read a second time on Thursday.
On the toothy+ of Mr. J. P. GRANT, it was
ordered ta, be Anted.—Adjourned to Monday.