Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

15 articles on this Page

lmrl;AI.LL PIILR-Vl-lml:sw.…

News
Cite
Share

lmrl;AI.LL PIILR-Vl-lml:sw. I i HOUSE OF COMMONS.-THURSDAY. ApRtHl. I REFORM OF THE RerORM AcT.-Mr. SHARMA\ CR&WFOILD proceeded to brmp forward the motion of which he had gneo notice and after ctaiminx indulgence and a patient hearing frolD the House, he comphiiued of the influence exercised ovur etectiona by the aristocracy aod the inndiordt, nnd said that the people justly co'n- ptained that their voice was unt heard in thtt H')n-<e. He eootendfd that the promised cSects ffthe Reform Bill had not been reatizcd. The bxitot had been rej';cted. extension of suffrage had been refused, aod cq'tn) franchise to Iretand had been denied. Tha pco?'ie comp)tined th?t c)ass lee:¡s-I tation stiU prevaHe([, nnd monopotx'a were uphe)d. Whilst he (Mr. Crawford) was an advocate for the extension of the franchise to all mate adu)t9, he was fully aware that certain hmitations must be imposed. For instance, ait rLinor' !unatics, vagrants, and paupers must be excluded from the right of vatine and he was further of that every man who ctaimed to voteshnutd be registered as having been resident for some certain specified time in the district or borough for which his vote wai to be civen. It w:<s objected to such an t-xtcns-ion of the franchise as he tha, it would the of property. Property wouid be in no danger fro'n the people, fxeept where property raised itsctf gainst the rights of the people. The bext prote<;tio<! to the rights of property was to do justice to the rights of the people. (Hear.) The sec.,r,(i point was that of cqtlfiJisiog the representation, so as to make it accord with the amount of the population. Nothit'g could be more inconeruons than the existing law upon that point. The third point t* which be hedged to tcffrwasthe battot. Hfadmittfd that the hattotcoutd nut be regarded as a certain guard against bribery, but he was sati-fied that it would ten') in a very great decree to diminish it. One of the great objects that the law should bfive i" view wns the protection of the honest voter. He hetievfd that the ballot wou)d he efTrctua) f"r that purpose. The bai)ot atone n'ilrht uct be sumcientto present bribery; but extend the suffrage, shorten the duration of Parha- .nents, eud add to these the baUot.and hr.bery.hehetieved, wlluld cease. The fourth point involved in his proposition was the dispensinc with the property q'lahncation of members of Partiamcht. The Scotch members were not required '<! quaiify by property, and yet no man wouid say that the Scotch members were inferior to the Engtish or (rih. Nfl property qUltlitication required in the House f)f Lords. Let the legislature b<* consistent, there- fore, and do away with the property quatincatinn for Entftand and lrc!and. The only proper 11'1.1lification of the representative WitS ion and selection of the constituency. The fifth {joint he wished to urge was, that the of the people should reason- "ble he knew (If no other l11r.anll by which they be OIlIde ttrnrllutrhly responsible to con stitue!'eies. Whatever difference of opinion mit:ht exist as to the extent to which P-trtiamfnt! sho'i)d be shortened, ati Reformers were at teast agreed that the present dura- tioQ of much too lonlr. The hou. member pressed the subject on the øf the Houe, and hy resolutiun for 1111 inquiry into the six pOlDt lie to. Mr. Wattaee. Dr. Howring. Mr. WiHiams. and Mr. Ward, supported the motiun, and were of opinion that the Reform Bill was a failure. Sir J. GRAHAM said that he wou!d say a few words, in older that ttJe overnlllent not, hy its silence, expoe itse.fto the suspiemn of disrespect to the numerous cusses wi.o did not possess the elective franchise. The rea) practical question was neither more nor !ess than whether the constitution of Engtand shoutd continue to be a monarchy. Thf fra<nfrs of the Reform Bill had gone a" far as they thought it possihte to go in the admission of popular influence, consistently with the preservation of our institutions. Mr. O'CoXMEH. said. that though he had supported the Retorm Biii. he now desired utterior measures, because he bad been disappointel in it, bec;iuse ref'-rm had not reached the people. There were.. now two c)fnse!—a tnaster e!a<s. with votes and contrn!; a s)ave-e)a-t9, with- out tither the former cttfis a smatt, the tatter a numerous one. It was not true that property w:<s the principte of the present franchise. The freemen and the leaseholders were not possessed of their votes ia reject of property. Compare the numbers and property ot the Harwich and Thetford voters with the numbers and property of the voters in Tipperary and the W<-st Riding yet Tipperary and the West Riding had no more members than Harwich and Thetf<tfd. He claimed the right of the peop)e to trienniat Par)i*ments, and dfnounced the extent of the now existing bribery, fhe baitot won)d remedy this latter evil .at !eastio the more numerous constituencies. He !s,kw no necessity fur a property quatiSeation in members of Par'ian<ent. Mr. WAKLEY snpporteJ the motion, and shoutd like to "ee it brought torward, not once a session, but once a month. Mr. H. R. YoRKE referre d to the bribery and perjury connected with the tate etection to prove the necessity of a revision of the Reform Bit!. Fifty or sixty seats were soaght to be obtained in consequence of charts ot bribery and corruption most disgusting to the individuatt. and to the morai state of the country. E*en last week some cittnmstttnces had transpired which required especiat notice. An ejection committee had ?at upon the Sudbury eft'ction. and thuy had unanimousty reported not only that the tast election Was bad, and the conduct pursued infamous, but thMt the place itself was wholly unworthy of repre- sented, and they, therefore, unanimously recommended that it ehouid be disfranchised. This was what took place unde- the preseot system. Thel1, there was even now a committee sitting to try the (or the borough of Ipswich, and what werc the cirCllmf>tI\nces reported th:it very day ? Two individuals h;id been committed to New- gate for penury, and three who had voted were admitted and ackoowlldged knpives, rogues, and That was the preent system. (Cheers.) Was that system perfect* Mr. PROTMEKOE defended the Reform Em, but would support the motion for Mr. BEllS AL helievetl that the penpte had never been so steeped in corruption as since the Reform bi)). That &rme, probaidy. from the near equaiity of parties. Sir JoH-i EASTHOPE opposed the motion, regarding it as substantiaHy a proposat for the adoption of the chf! rter. Sir C. and VtLLIR3 5pokc in fa-eour of Mr. Crawford's resolutio..s. Sir ROBERT PKML, .licll1iming 1111 disrespect, either to the petitioners of the House or -0 Mr. Crawford, who had t0 fairly and temperateiy stntcd his case, woutd state his grounds for a decided opposition to the motion. He haft prophesied, at the passing of the Reform Bii). that it woutd be his fate to defend it from its warmest supporters. Itwascouttuded that representation shotted be coequa) with taxation; but that principte, based, as was alleged, on the "iaws of nature," was met by these very iaws. and rendered inappticabte, a'! in the case of women. One of theargurncnta for annua) partiaments was buitd on great &ttroco'n:cal and commercia) principles, such as that the earth uerforms its aoouat revolution round the sun, nnd that merchant! annual' StUie their account*. Reviewiniz the diBft-rfnt ptnpoeitions involved in the tnotioo, be declared that what he now beard of the Rtfo'mActdi:'inc<tne<t him to entertain any new change,and affiril,ci that, though our representative systera wris not free from Offsets, be Tft betievtd that sympathy with the people wou)d be better hOWD by income tax and fioandltl measurcs, its hein better to benefit them. The ahltence of Lord John Rnd the late ministers hRd been commented on; manners opposite eoutd retaliate by flaying a" "y next night on the second reading of the Income Tax Bit). Mr. MuNTZ supported the motion for inqniry. Mr. E. TcHNEBr opposed the principte nfannna) par!ia- ments. which he viewed M being titteiy to be pecutiaWy dfttructive of the interests of the pcopte. He thought abundant evidence of this fact had been afforded by the procefdinga in the municipal ttecdom in the boroughs throughout the kiogdnta. Mr. CoaoEM and Mr. HoMUCx were to favoar of Mr. Crawford's mntioa. Lord STANLtY. as one of those who had been a party to the Reform B'ti. denied that the franchise had ever heen considered f;t an inherent right. It was a (;reat potiticat phvit€f:e. which bad heeu largely extended, from a convic- tion that the thne waa COme" hen it wa: !3fc to do so. He had joined with Lord John Russell and the Whics of those days. <n declaritig that it was not safe to have a n.vnintion every tenyearB: he was sorry that the oobte tord and his cottengues were not present to aid hhn in eay ng to now. He fe!t it to be his duty to resist this crude motion, which uoMttted everything and settled nothing. Sir Thomas WUde opposed the motion, and Sir R. Peet vinnicatcd bitntftffrotn the charge of levity brought against iiiin by Mr. Roebuck. After a scene of much confusinn and boi"tt'rous hUanty, occasioned by a motion for adjourn- ment by Mr. Biewitt.the house divided on Mr. Crawford's motion, when there appeared— For it, 67 against it, 226. The TifO'tcr Ships' bin was considered in committee, and reported to the House with amendments. The report on the Copyricht Bill was brought up, ordered to be reprinted with the amendments, and to be recommitted on TuesdRy. The remailling orders of the day were then ditpoeed of. and the Houle adjourned. FRIDAY. APRIL M. I THE IseoME TAX.—After the Hon. W. T. L?ce!!t's had taken his seat fur Wakefield. nnd several petitions were presented sgaiast the income tax, on the order of the day for the second reading of the Property.tax Bill being moved t'y theChaoceifor ufthe Exchequer, Mr. C. BuLLEK rose to move thst the bill be read. second txne that dRY six months. Having had an oppor- tunity of perusing the bill as prioted, be was, be Sttid, now Mtbted to point out the inquisitorial character of !0)ne of the aectiooft; and he argued that a bit) to which such machinery was requisite cou)d not be one which the House of Commons ought to pasf. The amount of revenue to be raised by it was too sma)t to be worth raising at such a price. The bi)). however, was counted with a taritf. hotdiog out a hope of free trade. He wished he cnutd be sure that any matpria) freedom of trade woutd be obtained J by it; but Sir Robert Feet wat "upportiog it with the mnat contradictory arguments. When members of the I opposition Mere to be concihated, the right hoo. bart. told them that provisions would be cheapened but when the alhimed agricultllrists were to be appeased, the right hoo. I baronet a.surM) them there won!d be no materia) redttctioo in price!. Mr. Roebuck must not dehjde himself with the hope that he woutd be able in the committee to reduce the tax on professionat incomes frotn 7d. in the pound to 31d. fndeed, that woutd be a most unjust amend fnent. la order to br just, it ouht to include incoutes for life, Rod all other incumes from sources not permanent. The just tat was that which affectfd e'joymfntandexpendHure.not that wlich affected tnere income; and you oujtbt Dot to tax « beavity the father of a fmnity, who WKs obtigcd tc tay by t part of his income in order to a<ff<rd them a provhiou as the bachetor, who could t'X{'end hii< whole income Ul'no hia own eujoymenta. He waa not onf of those who thought every Rudicat must cceda be an advocate for the direct taxation of the rich and the total immunity of the ('cor. He tuight be charged with ficti-in, but he would do bis duty by Opposing this b,t); and it. by eo doi"p. he dctayfd the tautf. the fnutt waa not with him, but with the government, who piared the tariti posterior to the t'iH. A discussion foHowed, in \vhi<:h Mr. Ewart. Sir John Wal-ib, Sir W. Cta;, Mr. Wahiev, Mr. D'lsraefi, Mr. Christie. Mr. Smythe, ELad Mr. Scntt took purt. and the House tiivided. whtti there appeared For the second relldin of the bill, 156; for tite hmetidtneot, 76. MMCEt.LAMKOua.-Oo the motion of Sir G. Clerk, the Houne then w<-6t into committee t'f ways aud means, when Sir UtOi4gC mowtd that Xg,[QQ,UUO ht rxiaed hy Excotqtler BiU< to mttte gocd ttf euppty voted to her Mije3ty. Thf reeotation was agrted to, the House resumfd, autj the repctt VM Otdered to t!< feeeived 00 Mooday, On the m..tt 'u of Sit d CItfk. the r..xiic BiH vrai read a second time M<t crdered to be commttted (>0 MUÐday. The Routed Ma)t EiM and the SoKp Dut.et Drawback Bill were read a tccoad time, tad ordered to be cotnmitte(I 00 The R)u)wny Bill wM then considered in committee. A division occurred oa a mfitioa by Sir W;n. JuUiffe. for omitting the t Hh clause, the debate turning OD thcquestioa in whose hands shoutd be vested the care of ):«te<) l,ading ncros!j rail witys- the occupier. of the adjoining tanda, or the rxHway eompaoes. The result of the division was— For the ctituse, 103; for the &meudt0eut, Im. majority itgainst the ciauae, 1. Mr. BaOTHERTONthen moved that the chairman should report progress, which was agreed to. The Houae resumed, and immediatety adjourned, at a quarttr-pMt one u'cfock.

- - - - - - THE REJECTED SUITOR'S…

VERSED FOR MUSIC. I

-G.It.r -n -E $a11 - -::-…

f!j (.; II .8 8 .

ILW COURT3 AND POLICE OFFICES.

MINORITY OF SEVE\TEEN AGAINST…

--THE INCOME -TAX BILL.I

LODON GAZEl-rE. I

A ex M A c u ILI n n I

[No title]

FAtRS --I

TIDE TABLE.-I

GARDKNtXn OPERATtOKS FOR THE…

AKALANLJBTA.