HC Deb 26 April 1819 vol 39 cc1476-8

The Lord Advocate moved the order of the day for the second reading of this bill for the purpose of postponing it to Thursday next.

Mr. J. P. Grant

suggested the propriety of postponing the second reading to a later period. The bill introduced by the learned lord last session, to which the present bill was similar, had been almost universally disapproved of in Scotland. He wished that those who were interested in the measure might have time to consider it.

The Lord Advocate

said, he had withdrawn the measure last session for the purpose of giving time to take it into consideration, and early in the present session he had given notice that he would bring it forward again. In all the petitions from the burghs of Scotland the principal grievance complained of was, the want of a check on the expenditure of the magistrates. A notice of a motion had been given for referring these petitions to a committee. Now, if this bill should pass into a law, one of the principal grievances of the petitioners would be removed. This was ostensibly the great object which they wished, but the true object was parliamentary reform.

Lord A. Hamilton

said, that in every one of the petitions, it was not the impossibility of forcing the magistrates to account, but the self-election of the ma- gistrates, of which they principally complained; If the learned lord's bill were as effectual as it would be the reverse for controlling the expenditure of the magistrates, he should still say, that the petitioners would not be satisfied. There never was a bill brought into that House more universally reprobated by those affected by it than the one in question.

Mr. Primrose

said, he had received an application for the printed bill from the magistrates of Stirling, which he had sent down to them, but no answer had yet been returned to him. In that burgh auditors were appointed by the guildery and incorporated trades; the funds of the burgh were in a flourishing state, and they conceived the appointing auditors under the control of the persons interested in the expenditure the best remedy For the evil which it was the object of the learned lord's bill to guard against. He concluded with moving, as an amendment, that the bill be read a second time on the 10th of May.

Mr. Hume

said, he had also sent down the bill to his constituents, who had not had time to consider it,

Mr. W. Douglas

agreed that the bill of last year was not considered in Scotland a sufficient remedy for the evil, and hoped that an opportunity would now be given to the persons interested to peruse the bill as rectified by the learned lord.

The Lord Advocate

said, that the persons interested in this measure, after being enlightened by the discussion on the second reading, would be better able to judge of the alterations which might be necessary and which might be proposed in the committee.

Sir James Mackintosh

observed, that the object of the learned lord, in hurrying on the second reading, seemed to be, to deliver political lectures in that House for the benefit of the people of Scotland. He, for one, was not desirous of instructing the inhabitants of Stirling and Aberdeen in the best method of controlling their magistrates; he was desirous of receiving information from them, and not of conveying information to them.

Lord Castlereagh

thought the information from Scotland might be more advantageously considered in the committee.

Mr. Forbes

observed, that this bill was a minor point with the burgesses of Scotland; their object was a certain reform of the burghs. He would not say whether such a reform might not be de- sirable; but if the burghs of Scotland obtained all they desired, the burghs of England would also have a good right to come forward. The House ought not to excite hopes which could not be realized.

Mr. Finlay

said, that no measure had been received in Scotland with more reprobation than the bill of the learned lord. The bill of last session was extremely unnecessary. The accounts of the Scots burghs were extremely correct.

The bill was ordered to be read a second time on the 10th of May.