Hide Articles List

12 articles on this Page



jHierrllatiB. -


MINING.—Sold August 18, at…





HOUSE OF COMMONS. THURSDAY, AUGUST 25.— Mr. Herries moved for a return of all sums contributed by Great Britain for the erection of forti- fications in the Netherlands, in pursuance of the convention of the 13th of August, 1819. The Chancellor of the Exchequer stated that he had no objec- tion to granting the return called for. Sir R. Vyvyan, not seeing the noble lord (Palmerston), the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, in his place, took occasion to ask the noble lord (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) whether his Majesty's government had received any confirmation of the as- surances previously made to it from the government of France, as to the withdrawal of the French troops from Belgium or whether his Majesty's government understood that any orders had been sent to the individual commanding the French troops, directing him to withdraw ? The Chancellor of the Exchequer was glad to be able to state, in answer to the hon. baronet's question, that his Majesty's go- vernment had received accounts from Brussels, that orders had been given to the French troops, now in Belgium, to withdraw from that country. (Cheers.) He begged leave also to add, that after his Majesty's government received the assurances from the French government, so often alluded to, they had never any reason for a moment to doubt the good faith and sincerity of the French government. (Hear, hear.) On the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the house then resolved itself into committee on the Reform Bill. After a short conversation across the table between Mr. S. Wortley and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, The Chairman read that part of clause 21 giving the right to vote in cities and boroughs to all persons occupying houses worth £10. Sir C. IVetherell said that this clause would introduce into the country as pure a democratical right of voting as if the system of universal suffrage were to be at once adopted. Owing to the various alterations made in the bill, it was almost impossible ac- curately to understand any one of its clauses-and this one, perhaps, least of any. According to this clause, if an election took place within three or four months after the 1st of August, a man might vote even though he was in arrear for his taxes, though the clause appeared to declare that it was necessary that they should be paid in order to entitle him to his vote. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said that the principal alter- ations made in the clause were, that which made the payment of rates and taxes sufficient to qualifv a person to vote, instead of rent, rates, and taxes, as in the bill as it originally stood, and that alteration which related to the registering. It was felt that every person whose name was placed on the register ought to be allowed to vote, in order to save as much as possible all discus- cussion upon the right of voting at the time of the election. By the clause as it now stood, it was clear that, if he paid his rent up to July, he would have a right to be placed on the register on the 31&t of August, which would entitle him to vote. It was true that he might subsequently get a little in arrear, and that he would not thereby be disqualified from voting according to the terms of the clause but it was thought that a year's occupancy of one house was a sufficient security that he would pay, even though he might be in arrear. In reply to a question from Sir Robert Peel, Lord J. Russeil said, as the clause now stood, the tenant was not called upon to prove that he had paid his rent, unless he claimed to vote entirely upon the amount of his rent. If he could shew that rates and taxes to the amount of £10 had been paid previously to the 1st of of Julv, that would be enough but if he could not do that, and claimed to vote as a £ 10 renter, he was called upon to shew in that case that the amount of his rent was £ 10, and that he had paid it, as well as poor rates and taxes. Sir R. Peel-The clause as amended will open a wide door to bribery and fraud. For the candidate will only have to pay up the poor rates and taxes of an insolvent tenant who is in arrear to his landlord, to entitle him to vote. The Chancellor of the Exchequer— The right hon. baronet must observe that whatever is done by a candidate in the way of pay- ing up rates and taxes under this bill, must be done every year to enable the voter to be entered in the registry. Under the pre- sent system, if the rates are paid up at the moment of election, it is enough but under the Reform Bill, if a candidate wishes to keep a voter on the registry, he must pay up his rates and taxes twice every year, even though he may not want him, and there may be no election during the year. I do not say that it is im- possible that any man will do this but I will say, that the temptation to do it is much lessened. I therefore am of opinion that the objection of the right hon. baronet does not apply to the present arrangement. The Chairman then put the first part of the question, that all the words after £10 in line seven of the old print of the bill, down to the words "rent as aforesaid," be omitted.—This was carried without a division. He then put the second part of the question, which relates to the insertion of the amended clause, in lieu of the words omitted. Mr. Hunt said he should move that the word rent" be left out, as he considered that the clause as now constituted would very much aggrieve the £10 householders by its operation. He had so great an objection to making the payment of rent a quali- fication, that he should persist in dividing the house upon it, as the principle had never hitherto been recognised in representation. The gallery was cleared for a division, and the numbers were, For the original question. o53 For the amendment. 10 Maioritv against the amendment.343 On returning to the gallery, Mr. J. Campbell was moving his amendment, "That no person shall acquire a vote in the elec- tion for any city or borough by occupying premises as a tenant at a yearly rent, if such rent shall be payable more fiequently than four times in a year." After some discussion the committee divided, when there ap- peared- For the amendment. 142 Against it 210 Majority for ministers 68 The Chairman reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again next day. FRIDAY, AUGUST 26.-Sir TV. Guise presented a petition from a parish in Gloucestershire, against the proposed alteration of the law of settlement. Mr. Lambert presented two petitions from the county of Wex- ford-the one from Protestants, and the other from Catholics— praying that the yeomanry may be disarmed and remodelled, which occasioned a long discussion on the Newtownbarry affair. The petition was laid on the table. Colonel Sibthorpe wished to put a question to the Secretary of State, relative to the Rothsay Castle steamer bearing the title of a War Office packet. His object was to ascertain if the vessel in question bore the title of a War Office packet by authority. Mr. Lamb said that the vessel in question was not a War Office packet, and certainly the practice of a steamer being al- lowed to place such a title on her stern was one that required to be looked into. REFORM BILL. The house resolved itself into a committee on the Reform Bill. Mr. Hunt proposed that all persons who should not be en- titled to a vote, should be exempt from taxes and rates, and from being impressed into the navy. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said a few words against the amendment, which was negatived without a division. On the motion that the 21st clause, as amended, stand part of the bill, Mr. Fane opposed it, because it would make a dangerous change in the constituency of this country. Mr. S. TVortley observed that of all the clauses entertained in this measure, none manifested more rashness or recklessness than this, and there was none respecting which his Majesty's ministers were worse informed. Ministers were not justified in proposing this clause, for they were not in possessipn of documents to give them the necessary information. It was absurd to imagine that the £10 householders would make a respectable constituency. Sitting there as senators, they must look on the proposed change with serious apprehension. The Chancellor of the Exchequer admitted that this was one of the most important clauses in the bill. He therefore could not object to any member who was opposed to it to state his ob- jections generally. He could not deny that in a few small towns there would be some difficulty in making up the necessary constituency, but such towns were very few. He did not think they would give satisfaction to the country generally, if they did not extend the franchise as widely as they proposed indeed, it was asserted by many that they had not gone far enough. Those who introduced a measure of reform would act wrongly, if they did not bring forward such a measure as they thought would give satisfaction. He considered that the best safeguard against corruption was to extend the franchise so widely that no man's purse could influence it. In the large towns, he admitted, tJle manufacturers and persons in extensive business would eAn con- siderable influence. To this he had no objection. He thought that that class had as good a right to have the indirect influence of property as land proprietors. Lord Loughborough said that he regarded the bill as a mere stepping stone to something else. (Cries of hear, hear, hear.) The noble lord thought that limiting the franchise to ten pound houses would have the effect of giving a fictitious value to this species of property, and thereby infringe upon the comforts of the poor. If this clause were to remain, the result would be that, in a very short time, all rates and taxes would be paid by the candidates so that, instead of doing away with corruption, they would continue it in its worst shape. He could not sit down without entering his protest to this revolutionary and republican bill. (Cries of hear, hear, question, question.) The motion was agreed to without a division.-Adjourned. SATURDAY, AUGUST 27.—A petition from certain clergy- men (magistrates) of the county of Cornwall, against the New Beer Bill, was ordered to be printed. FEMALE PRIVILEGES IN REGARD TO VOTERS. Mr. Wilkes presented a petition from Mr. Charles Pearson, a solicitor and a common councilman of the city, complaining that in the part of the Reform Bill which confirmed to the present freemen their existing privileges, the existing privileges of free- men's widows and daughters were not retained to them, and they prayed that in the fifty-second clause a provision to that effect might be introduced. In Bristol, Grimsby, and several other places, the daughters of widows of freemen conferred the freedom of the corporation on persons whom they might marry, and that privilege ought still to be retained in the same manner as the present freemen would retain their right of voting. Mr. Lennard supported the prayer of the petition, and although he would be sorry to do any thing which should be supposed to delay the progress of the bill, he should move that the existing rights of the widows and daughters of freemen be retained to them. Sir E. Sugden would not be so ungallant as to oppose a pro- position which operated as a marriage portion for young ladies. (Laughter.) Lord Althorp was understood to say, that he could not consent to the proposition contended for upon an individual petition.— The petition was laid on the table and ordered to be printed. Mr. Hume, in rising to make the motion of which he had given notice, that the order of the day should have precedence of notices of motion on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, and that the house should proceed to business every day at twel-ve o'clock, felt anxious, as shortly as possible, to bring the subject under the consideration of the house. Having entered into a detail of the present rules with regard to motions and orders of the day, the hon. member said he would ask the house whether, knowing the time that the Reform Bill had already taken in dis- cussion, and the anxiety that existed in the public mind with respect to it, it was fit some measures should be adopted more expeditiously to press that important measure through the house. Almost all other public business was at a stand, the wine duties, the stamps, the excise, and other most important business had been delayed, and it was quite apparent no public business could proceed till the Reform Bill was disposed of. The house might meet from twelve till six in committee, the Speaker might then take the chair for an hour or two, and the committee might after- wards resume. Mr. O'Connell seconded the motion. After an alteration in its phraseology, suggested by the Speaker, the motion was then put, that in this present session of parliament all orders of the day set down in the order book for Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, should be disposed of be- fore the house proceeded with any motion. Lord Althorp wished to take the feeling of the house upon the motion, as he would most cheerfully undergo any individual in- convenience or labour, if it were the wish of the house that the motion should be adopted. He thought that, looking at what had already been done by sitting early on Saturday, it afforded no evidence of being able to get through business more expedi- tiously by sitting earlier every day. He now begged to state that he thought it better to commence the Reform Bill, in future? at five o'clock he, therefore, would suggest to his hon. friend (Mr. Hume) to withdraw the motion, upon the understanding that, in the discretion of hon. members, they would, in present- ing petitions, enable them to proceed at five o'clock with the Reform Bill. Some further conversation took place relative to the motion, during which Mr. Hume remarked that ministers were slack- ening" in their efforts to pass the bill. Lord Althorp indignantly denied this assertion. Mr. Hume explained, and ultimately withdrew his motion. THE nEFORM BILL. Lord Althorp moved the order of the day for the house re- solving into a committee on this bill, and the Speaker having left the chair, Mr. Bernal read the 22d clause, and two amendments having been disposed of, Mr. Estcourt moved that all the present rights of voting in elections of citizens and burgesses to serve in parliament (except such rights as appertain to boroughs enumerated in schedule A) be permanently preserved. Sir C. Weiherell considered the present clause a most ob- noxious one, and he should therefore vote against it. The amendment, however, of his hon. friend he would most cordially support, with, the exception of the latter part. Lord John Russell replied at great length to Mr. Estcourt and Sir C. Wetherell. Sir J. Malcolm attacked the Reform Bill generally. Mr. Baynton and Mr. Trevor spoke of the injustice of disfranchising freemen, and after some additional discussion, the committee divided, when there appeared— For the amendment 17 Against the amendment 89 Majority —72 The Chairman then obtained leave to report progress, and sit again on Tuesday. The house adjourned at a quarter to seven o'clock. MONDAY, AUG. 29.-After the presentation of some peti- tions, the house resolved itself into a conimittee of supply, when the following sums were voted £ 5500 to the Royal Society of Dublin for the year 1831 £300 for the Royal Irish Academy; £ 700 for the Board of Charitable Bequests il500 for the Bel- fast Academical Institution £ 12,900 for the Board of Works; and £30,419 for paying the salaries and expenses of the Chief and Under Secretaries, and other offices in Dublin. The house resumed. POOR LAWS-IRELAND. Mr. Sadler rose to redeem his pledge to bring under the consi- deration of the house the important subject of the expediency of establishing some permanent provision for the poor of Ireland. Mr. Locke (he said), in his Treatise on Government," laid it down that the right of the poor, like that of property, was founded on the nature of things," that God never left one man at the mercy of another to starve or perish as he pleased, but that the poor man had a pressing right to demand the rich man's surplus." (Hear.) Such also was the doctrine of Lord Hale and Black- stone, and above all of Mr. Burke. What was the lesson which history taught them on that Why, that where there was no legislative provision for the poor, there was man immersed in barbarism. Such a provision to be effective, must be universal and permanent; for with all due respect for the good intentions of the parties, it was a mockery to consider that now and then going about with a begging-box, or the usual fashionable mode of eleemosynary contribution, could confer any real advantage on the poor of Ireland. The hon. gentleman then proceeded to shew the evils which resulted from the want of such a provision and concluded by moving That it is the opinion of this house that it is expedient and necessary to institute a legal provision for the poor of Ireland." Mr. Strickland seconded the motion. Colonel Torrens admitted that a proper system of poor laws applied to Ireland might do good, but having long considered the subject in all its details, he could not get rid of the difficul- ties which occurred. Those difficulties were, in his opinion, insurmountable. It had been argued that distress might be re- lieved in Ireland by making assessments to increase the wages of labourers. He should contend, if those assessments were made, they would not do good to the people, but bring the better classes to the level of misery, hopeless and extreme. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, the question was one of great difficulty, one that deserved the most serious consideration. The hon. gentleman who made the motion had, he was afraid, given too true an account of the distress in Ireland. The hon. gentleman had stated that periodical distress had almost brought pestilence in that country. It was impossible for him to contra- dict the hon. gentleman, but he could not avoid thinking that something like exaggeration marked the statements of distress.- The proposition before the house was one which they could not adopt without a plan to carry relief into effect. If they enter- tained it without a prospect of affording relief, they would do one of the most dangerous things they could well imagine. Feeling that without some plan before the house they could not effect the object of such a resolution, he should move the previous question. Mr. Western seconded the amendment. After a few words from Mr. S. Rice, Mr. Farrell, Mr. Ben- nett, Mr. Mullens, Mr. Smith, Colonel O'Grady, Mr. Grattan, Mr. D. Browne, Mr. Ruthven, and Mr. Sadler, the gallery was cleared for a division for the motion 52 Against it 64 Majority for Ministers -—12 The other orders of the day were then disposed of; and the house adjourned at half-past two o'clock.



[No title]