reason to believe the whole account to be correct. The boundaries of the town, without any reference to circumstances, might not the country be dissatisfied that some pet number should not also be before- as taken by the returning-officer, appear hand fixed upon for schedule C, which Mi-to be quite correct; but, in his statement, nisters left to be determined by circum- he has considered the whole town as instances? He should like to hear these ques-included in the borough, which is not the tions answered. The right hon. Baronetcase, there being twenty-seven houses or concluded with saying, that he would cottages contiguous to, and forming part move at a future time, either that the pre-of, the town, which are not in the bosent clause be omitted altogether, or, what rough. Perhaps I may be pardoned for would practically be the same, that each borough in schedule B should be permitted to retain its two Members. mentioning a fact relative to Beeralston; which is, that no person exercising the 'elective franchise there resides in the Lord John Russell said, that the ques-borough, nor even in the parish in which tion in the present case, with regard to schedule B, was just the same as in the former case, as respected schedule A; and he saw no reason why they should be anxious for information as to the specific cases of particular boroughs, in order to arrive at the conclusion that thirty of the smaller boroughs should be partially disfranchised. If they had said, that thirty boroughs, with less than 2,000 inhabitants or 500 houses each, were to lose each one of their Members, then the right hon. Baronet might have some plea to object to the specific cases in the absence of information. But when, after the information obtained last Session, it was known there were upwards of 100 boroughs which came so close together in the scale of importance, that there was but a very trifling difference between some of the lowest and the highest, then he apprehended there could be little difficulty in coming to the determination that it was adviseable, that a certain number should be wholly or partially disfranchised. They had resolved, therefore, to take fifty-six of the one class, and thirty of the other, in order that the House might become, what it had not been for some time past-a real Representation of the feelings and opinions of the people. On this broad principle, it was of no importance as regarded the general Representation of the people of England, whether the right of returning Members was to be preserved by Midhurst or Milborne Port, although undoubtedly it was of considerable consequence to the inhabitants of these respective places. In many of the boroughs which at present returned Members, there was no returningofficer, no resident electors, nor any known or well-defined boundaries. Of Beeralston, for instance, which had been frequently mentioned in the course of the debates. the Surveyor of Taxes said- I have had 'considerable trouble to ascertain the exact boundaries of this borough, but have now it is situate; nor could I learn who was 'the returning-officer from any one in the place.' The right hon. Baronet had repeated the question of the right hon. Baronet (Sir G. Warrender), and asked, why the supporters of the Bill did not get rid at once of all nomination boroughs? But the right hon. Baronet seemed to forget, that Bath and Cambridge, although populous and important towns, were strictly nomination boroughs under the present system. Those towns, with places similarly circumstanced, were to retain their Members, because the means of free election and of forming a respectable constituency could be had within them. They were only to be freed from the manifold corruptions and abuses which at present prevailed, by restoring to the legitimate electors the rights which they had been deprived of, or which were in abeyance. If he were asked why he could not consent to allow the boroughs in schedule B to retain two Members, he would answer at once-because it would give them too much weight in the scale of Representation. It had been observed, that the possession of the power to return two Members prevented party animosities. He believed the very reverse to be the consequence of that power, and that where there were two parties, of which one constituted a small minority, the bitterest contests always took place for the return of one of the two Members, and that those engaged in it frequently observed they would not have minded it, if there had been but one Member to be returned. For instance, who ever heard of this bitter animosity at Abingdon or in Monmouth? On the contrary, the people of the county of Monmouth had requested that the number of places in that county sending one Member should be increased. The object of the Government was, to make the Representation speak the real feelings and opinions the people. By the present system, it was I to the object of extirpating the principle of only during times of great excitement, such nomination: it was therefore enough, and as prevailed during the No Popery cry in 1780 or 1807, when a dissolution happened to take place, that a majority was returned to the House of Commons who truly represented and who would give utterance to the feelings of the people. The consequence was, that the passions of the people were occasionally represented, their sober sense and sound judgment never. When the frenzy of some great popular excitement was to be gratified, the House could be made to represent the opinions of the people; but, in ordinary times, when the great object ought to be to return Members to control the public expenditure, and to return men who would keep a watchful eye over the public purse, or improve the national institutions, then a dissolution produced no change. The system of Representation at the present moment was, he conceived, the very worst that could be invented for giving effect to the real wishes of the people. The object of the Ministers was to improve it; and they hoped, by a removal of the abuses which had been flourishing for nearly a century, to procure the return of honest and enlightened Representatives, who would give effect to the wishes of the people, in their portion of the great Council of the Nation. Lord Sandon said, he had given his cordial support to the proposition to include fifty-six boroughs in schedule A, without waiting for an examination into the cases of the particular boroughs which were to be placed in that schedule. He regretted that he felt himself compelled to withhold the same support from the present proposition. He was willing to fix the number of schedule A, because he was anxious to give at once a pledge to the country that he was honest and sincere in his desire to unite with them in abolishing the system of nomination. He was satisfied, that the choice of any number for that purpose must be arbitrary, and that no subsequent examination of details would assist the House in coming to a decision as to which borough was, and which was not, capable of being liberated from nomination by an alteration in the franchise. He was glad, therefore, to be assisted in placing his finger upon a given number, and he thought the reasons assigned by his noble friend for specifying fifty-six amply sufficient for the purpose. It was that number which had been finally adopted by the House in a former Session, and approved of by the country, as adequate it was certainly desirable, not to do more than fenough, considering the feelings of the other House of Parliament as to the extent of disfranchisement already proposed. Again, it was natural not to propose a smaller number than before, because at least that number of vacant seats would be required to represent other important interests. But which of all these reasons pressed them to fix, before examination, the number of schedule B? What principle of the Bill was involved in this schedule? Not the principle of destroying nomination; for if nomination were still likely to linger in these boroughs, they ought to be inserted in schedule A at once. The only principle which he could detect in such a schedule was one which had never hitherto been laid down as such by the proposers of the Bill-one not hitherto, in spite of the casual instances of Abingdon and Higham Ferrers, admitted into the Constitution, he feared it would be found most inconvenient at present and dangerous in its future consequences-it was that of proportioning Representation to population. He would not enter at large into the dangers and disadvantages of such a principle, nor into the inconveniences of a minor kind, not however inconsiderable, of leaving many towns with only a single Member. He would at least affirm, that it was their duty not to deprive any town of the advantage of a double Representation, until they were satisfied, by an examination of the subsequent schedules, that more important objects compelled them to that necessity. In fact, schedule B should consist of that residue which would be left, after a consideration and adjustment of schedules C and D-any alteration in them-the refusal of additional Members to the metropolis, to the suburbs of some other towns to which Members were therein assigned--the assignment of additional Members to any towns now in schedule Dadditional Members assigned to or withheld from Scotland or Ireland-any alteration would affect the numbers in schedule B, provided they were agreed, as he understood they were, to maintain the original numbers of the House, and, therefore, until these points were decided, it was unreasonable and preposterous to fix the numbers to be contained in that residuary schedule. Neither could he share in the apprehensions apparently entertained by his noble friend, of the dangerous preponderance which would be gained in the Representation by the small rural towns, if each of the towns of schedule B retained its double Representation. He had heard complaints of the influence of nomination, and of the mischiefs arising from that influence in the hands of a few great men but neither had he ever heard of, nor did he apprehend any dangerous results from the free elections of moderately-sized county towns, with a population of interests partly agricultural, partly of trade, and influenced by the calm, enlightened, and virtuous feelings of what was commonly considered the little aristocracy of such places and their neighbourhoods. So far from it, that he thought they would be found a desirable element in the new Representation. The Ministers had struck out, as obsolete, and at length mischievous, some existing elements of stability in the existing state of the Representation; but he hoped also they would take care and provide others as effectual and less obnoxious to public odium. He perfectly acquiesced in the proposition, that every Member of that House ought to have some effective body of constituents to which he should be responsible; but, at the same time, he did not desire to see the whole House consist entirely of Representatives of large popular bodies, exercising, as they would do, a constant and vigilant superintendance over every vote and action of their Representatives, and thereby depriving the House of that great advantage to every legislative assembly, a certain proportion of Members who relied on their own individual judgment; and thus formed, as it were, a sort of tribunal of opinion within the House of unimpassioned and uninfluenced judges. Desiring, therefore, rather to increase than diminish the number of these small but free constituencies, not, however, by any means denying but that they might find themselves driven by the necessity of providing Members for very important places to that of having a schedule B at last, possibly as numerous as that proposed; and seeing no advantage whatever, but much inconvenience, in clogging the subsequent parts of the Bill by this premature decision as to the precise numbers to be assigned to this schedule, he should feel himself compelled to vote for the Amendment proposed by the right hon. Gentleman, that the word "thirty" be omitted from the clause. Mr. Adeane expressed his determination to vote against the Motion, as he would not be pledged to disfranchise the exact number VOL. IX. {T} Series} of boroughs which had been introduced into the schedule, in the absence of all precise information concerning them. He was glad, however, to find, that the number of the Members of the House was not to be diminished. By the present Motion, if it were adopted, the Committee would be precluded from making any alteration in the number of boroughs included in the schedule, whatever might be the evidence which was brought forward in their favour; and, it might so happen, that this evidence would be of so satisfactory a nature that they could not disfranchise them with justice, in which case they must disappoint some place that now expected Representatives. He should not depart from the principle of the Bill, but, on the contrary, follow it up by voting for the Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman. Lord Althorp considered that the objection of the hon. Gentleman who had spoken last would apply stronger to the late than the present Bill, with respect to the number of boroughs introduced into the schedule now under the consideration of the Committee. The reason of partially disfranchising those places was, that it was thought that leaving them with two Representatives would give them too much influence. The House having consented in the last Session to forty-one boroughs being included in the schedule B, the hon. Member need be under no apprehension as to the present number being too large. They had increased the number of Representatives for large constituencies, and therefore it was right to diminish the number of those who were to lose one Member. His noble friend, the member for Liverpool, remarked, that the constituency furnished by such small country places were of a valuable description, but its utility must depend on its comparative amount, for, as his noble friend said, he disapproved of a Representation wholly formed of large popular constituencies, so, no doubt, he would equally object to a Representation entirely derived from the small towns. The whole was, then, a question of degree, and he trusted that the Committee would think with him, that the thirty boroughs in the schedule would be fully represented by having each one Member, and would give its sanction to the proposition. Mr. Croker said, that the noble Lord, the member for Liverpool, had given an unanswerable answer to the noble Lord, the Paymaster of the Forces, for that noble Lord had concluded his speech by stating, 2 B itself, at the command, "quick, presto, pass," in the fatal list. What was the difference between these two towns, that they should make so great a change with respect to them. He entreated hon. Gentlemen who were about to vote for the insertion of the number of thirty in this clause, to consider whether they could, in their conscience, even in the confined view of the question he thus brought before them, vote for more than twenty-nine, when his Majesty's Ministers themselves were so doubtful upon the point, that they had changed their minds upon it once or twice, or oftener, already. Look at the relative value of these places; Totness contained 502 houses, and paid 1,0587. to the assessed taxes, which, added together, gave 1,560 as the aggregate value of Totness. Wallingford contained 489 houses, and paid 1,0731. to the assessed taxes, and the aggregate of those two sums, which Ministers said was to decide the question, was 1,562, so that Wallingford was in its right place in the Bill, and in a wrong place in the new list, if considered only relatively to Totness. The hon. Gentlemen opposite said, indeed, that by Lieutenant Drummond's calculation, Wallingford was made inferior to Totness; but that was the very reason why he complained of those calculations; for it was made so by the influence of another part of the list-by a third element being brought into the calculation, with which those two boroughs had nothing to do. No impartial person could say, he thought, that Wallingford ought to be one of the thirty; for if a microscopic eye could discover any difference between it and Totness, it was in favour of Wallingford, and Ministers told them that Totness ought to be saved; so that here, at the very outset, they had not only reason, but the admission of Ministers, to prove that the number of thirty was practically erroneous. that the measure was to restore the boroughs | lingford, which was to have escaped, found to that state which the Constitution intended, but of which they had been deprived by corruption and bribery for a century; and the noble Lord's proposition was, to place these thirty boroughs in a situation in which none of them had ever been before. It was not his intention to detain the Committee by re-arguing the general principle of this schedule; he rested his objections upon the able arguments of his right hon. friend (Sir Robert Peel), and the noble Lord, the member for Liverpool, who had so clearly shown the injustice and the inexpediency of this clause of the measure. By the very Bill now before the Committee, it would be impossible to carry into effect the proposition submitted without some alteration. He should be able to prove, if Gentlemen would be good enough to lend | him their attention for a few moments, that thirty was a greater number than, upon any principle of justice and fairness, or even of rationality, could be maintained. Let the House suppose the clause carried, and thirty the number fixed upon as that of the boroughs which should be included in schedule B. The next thing to be done would be, to alter the Bill; for, by a curious fatality, there stood in the schedule, as liable to disfranchisement, the borough of Totness, which it was the intention of Ministers to remove from that situation, and to place Wallingford in its stead. If the arguments of the noble Lords opposite, drawn from the inconvenience of disappointing hopes and expectations which have once been raised, be worth anything, would they not consider the hopes and expectations of the town of Wallingford, which, in the printed Bill, was excluded from the number of the thirty which were to be partially disfranchised? But, by one of those legerdemain operations they had seen in the course of these proceedings, Totness, which stood 86 in the list, and was to have been disfranchised, now stood 87, and escaped disfranchisement; whereas Wal ENGLAND. The Committee divided on the original Motion. Ayes210; Noes 112-Majority 98. List of the AYES. BENETT, John Southampton Portsmouth BROUGHAM, William Maidstone BUXTON, Thos. Fowell York ByNG, George CAVENDISH, lord EVANS, William B. FOLEY, John H. H. Hampshire Cornwall Wareham LEFEVRE, Charles S. Camelford MACDONALD, Sir James, bt... Hampshire Milborne Port Leicester MILTON, lord Andover MORPETH, viscount Rye MORRISON, James FOLKES, Sir W. J. H. B., bt... Norfolk PALMER, C. F. Rochester Northamptonshire Yorkshire GRAHAM, rt. hon. sir J. R.G. Cumberland PENLEAZE, John S. Norwich PENRILYN, Edward.. .. Norwich PHILLIPPS, Sir R. B., bt... Haverfordwest Rutlandshire POYNTZ, W. S. HODGSON, John .. Newcastle-upon-Tyne RICKFORD, William Ashburton Herefordshire Windsor Yorkshire Aylesbury Kent Northampton Huntingdonshire Somersetshire Reading Lichfield Yorkshire SEERIGHT, Sir J. S., bt... Hertfordshire JERNINGHAM, hon. Hen. V... Pontefract SKIPWITH, sir Gray KNIGHT, Henry G. KNIGHT, Robert LEIGH, T. C. Malton SMITH, Vernon Wallingford SMITH, George R. Oxford SPENCER, hon. F. Wallingford STANLEY, hon. Edw. G. S. Warwickshire Chichester Northampton Midhurst Ripon Worcestershire |