Commons Sitting of 9 August 1832

MINUTES.
Papers ordered. On the Motion of Mr. SPRING RICE, an Account of the Revenue derived from the Post office in Downpatrick, Killyleagh, &c., for the last three years—On the Motion of Mr. HUME, a List of Persons now receiving Pensions for Diplomatic Services, the Date of the Commissions of every Officer now in Command of a Regiment of Cavalry, and Accounts of the Sums levied by the Commissioners of Sewers in the different Metropolitan Parishes.—On the Motion of Mr. COURTENAY, a General Statement of the Exports and Imports of the United Kingdom, for the year 1831, ending January 5th, 1832; and a Copy of the Frankfort Tariff referred to in the Treaty of Commerce and Navigation with that Free City, signed at London, May 13th, 1832; and also a Copy of the Convention signed at Mayence, on 31st March, 1831.—On the Motion of Mr. BURGE, Copies of Papers relating to Jamaica and Antigua.—On the Motion of Mr. HARVEY, an Account of the Number of Causes pending before each Master in Chancery in Trinity Term 1825, and each succeeding year; and of the Number of Causes standing for Trial on the 1st of August, 1832, in the Courts of King's Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer, at Westminster.
Bill. Read a second time:—Land Revenues (Scotland).
Petitions presented. By Mr. VERNON SMITH, from Dissenters of Chester,—for the Abolition of Slavery,—in favour of the Ministerial Plan of Education (Ireland),—and for the Abolition of Hindoo Infanticide.—By Mr. SHAW, from the Attornies and Solicitors of Ireland, for the Repeal of the Stamp Duties on Attornies Certificates; and from three Places in Ireland,—against the Ministerial Plan of Education (Ireland).—By Mr. SADLER, from Salford, in favour of the Factories Regulation Bill.—By Mr. HUGHES HUGHES, from the Tradesmen of the Metropolis, for the better Observance of the Sabbath.—By Mr. RYDER, from

1285
Cranbrook, for an Inquiry into the Case of Private somerville.—By Mr. SPRING RICE, from Chorley, against the Vagrants' (Scotland and Ireland) Removal Bill; from Lisburne, against the Punishment of Death; and from Moycullen, for an Amendment of the Grand Jury Laws (Ireland).

REFORM—PAYMENT OF RATES.
Colonel Evansmoved for Returns, showing the number of houses assessed to the Poor-rates and Assessed-taxes, and the number of persons who had paid those rates in each of the parishes of the forty new boroughs, up to the 31st of July, 1832.
Mr. Humeregretted that the noble Lord had given up his intention of extending the time to the 20th August, as he knew that many of the voters had been taken by surprise. The number of voters would be very small in almost every place, and it would not give satisfaction to the country except some remedy were provided.
Lord John Russellstated, with respect to scot-and-lot voters, that to secure their elective franchise they must have paid their rates before the day of registration, just as if that had been the day of election. He had no objection to the Returns.
Lord Althorpsaid, that he had had no resource, for, after the opposition that had been offered to the Bill, what would liave been the use of allowing an extension to the 20th August, when the Bill could not have become law till after that time?
Mr. Hume: Then why not extend the time to the 20th of September?
Lord Althorp: The effect of that would have been to have prevented our having a new Parliament this year. I know that a gallant friend of mine has a motion for an address, praying for the re-assembling of the present Parliament; but that is an arrangement to which I can by no means agree.
Colonel Sibthorpsaid, that the Reform Bill was worse than the cholera morbus: the people could not get it up or down. He was very glad to hear that king of Reformers, the hon. member for Middlesex, say, that the detestable Bill (with which, thank God, he had had nothing to do) would not give satisfaction to the country. The present difficulty was only the commencement of dilemmas which would result from disturbing the ancient Constitution of the country. These proofs of the detestable character of the detestable Bill ought not to surprise any body—they did not surprise him.
Motion agreed to.
Colonel Evansthen moved for a return,
1286
from the city and liberties of Westminster, of the number of persons who had paid Poor rates up to July 31st.
Mr. Alderman Venablessupported the Motion. The Returns would be most useful, if the Government were not already persuaded of the immense numbers of persons who were disqualified, in consequence of not having paid within the specified time. There were many boroughs now with a much less constituency than they had possessed previously to the passing of the Reform Bill; and there was great dissatisfaction throughout the country, in consequence of the limited time given for the payment of the rates. The regulation requiring such payment caused great complaint. He hoped the Government would see the necessity of adopting some remedial measure.
Lord Althorpsaid, that he had not heard of many such cases; he had, indeed, heard it rumoured that many of the electors objected to the payment of a shilling for registration: but if that were true, he suspected that they could not set much value on the elective franchise which was within their reach.
Mr. Robinsonadmitted, that an immense number of voters had been disqualified in consequence of not having paid the rates within the time named. Many might have wilfully neglected, and others omitted from mistake; but as the Reform Bill had passed, he thought it highly desirable that there should be a Parliament elected on the full, fair, and free operation of its principles. He, however, doubted not that many had been taken by surprise, and he therefore thought some remedy ought to be afforded.
Lord Althorpreminded the House that one of the conditions of the Reform Bill—a test by which the right to vote in certain cases should be tried and proved—was the payment of rates and taxes within a given period. As to the surprise, he could hardly see how it could have occurred. Great publicity had been given to the measure. This clause had been in the Bill since December; it had been much discussed, and it had been frequently published in almost every possible way. He thought the fullest notice had been given, so as to guard against, and to leave no room for, a charge on the ground of surprise. One principle or condition of the Act being what he had described, it was not fitting that Parliament should be called upon to

1287
alter that principle of it, even though the enforcing of it led to disfranchisement. The parties had possessed the opportunity to complete their qualification. If they neglected to comply with the condition, theirs was the fault; they had only themselves to blame. He could not bring himself to think it possible that there had been surprise to that extent which some would have them believe. He, however, had been willing to extend the period for paying the taxes and rates (in certain cases) to August 20th; but it would have been impossible to extend it to September, without causing great delay in the registration, and altering all the dates of the proceedings—delay that would have rendered dissolution of the Parliament this year impossible.
Mr. Harveyconsidered that the apprehension which had, on previous occasions, been mooted as to the probability of our having a Parliament returned by a constituency so confined as to numbers as to render the returns something very like those of rotten boroughs was decidedly an overcharged apprehension. The cherishing any such notion would leave the House to infer that the people, the friends and supporters of Reform of Parliament, had been most supine in the matter. Now, granting this to be the case, still it was the duty of the Government to correct, as far as lay in its power, any such anomaly. But it was impossible to suppose men so apathetic. The great advantage of the Reform measure was this, that it threw upon the people the great responsibility of choosing their own Representatives; and though he regretted the inadvertency which had allowed so little time for voters to pay up their rates, and which had thus incapacitated an immence mass of them from voting, he still believed, that, throughout the kingdom, there was a sufficient aggregate constituency, and that the active exertions of that constituency only was required to realize all the benefits which were contemplated from the Reform Bill. He thought that the Returns which had been moved for, for the purpose of ascertaining what amount of Assessed-taxes was due in July last, and what arrears there were in April last, would have the effect of showing whether the non-payment of these taxes, on the 20th July last, did or did not arise from an indisposition on the part of the rate-payers to qualify themselves for voting.
Mr. C. W. Wynnthought, that a very great portion of the new constituency would be disqualified, in consequence of not having paid up their rates. It was a subject of regret that a longer period had not been allowed to make up the lists when the Bill was in the House. It might be argued that this Bill was a considerable time under discussion, and that the period for paying up the rates must have been generally known. But the truth was, that although this and other points were under discussion in this House, that degree of publicity was not given to the discussion of the details which was desirable. That was particularly the case in the distant parts of the country, where the persons entitled to vote would, probably, only see a weekly newspaper, which contained none of these discussions on the details. He was aware of the reasons which would make his Majesty's Government unwilling to re-assemble this Parliament; and it was desirable, he admitted, that the new Parliament should assemble at as early a period as possible; but if a very large portion of the new constituency had not qualified, it would be advantageous to have a short Session of the present Parliament. It should be recollected that the old custom was to pay up the rates immediately before an election, and even on the hustings, and that practice was likely to influence the conduct of many in abstaining from paying their rates. It was the duty of this House to induce every one qualified to place his name on the register; though it was extremely difficult to induce many to do so, and rather than take any trouble, they would give up their right to the franchise. Tradesmen very often said, that they had no wish to possess the franchise, and that, if they placed their names on the register, they must disoblige some of their customers. Such persons had no right to complain; but, at least, every facility should be offered to those who chose to qualify, to place their names on the register. He was quite sure, however, that not one-third of this class of persons would take the trouble to qualify themselves. The only attempt that had been made at a registration in England was by Lord Stanhope's Act of 1787, by which it was enacted that no person should be entitled to vote whose name was not in the register. He was a boy at the time, but he remembered to have heard, that in the county of Lancaster, there was not above 100 per-

1289
sons who had placed their names on the register; and it was said at the time, that, if a dissolution had then taken place, not above thirty persons would have been qualified to vote. In the next Session after the Act was past, petitions came up from every part of the country, and the Registration. Act was repealed. He regretted with the noble Lord, that Parliament did not provide for this; and he should have been glad if the whole of the subject of registration had been considered with greater attention. It was most desirable that the ground of complaint in this case should be removed, and that every inducement should be given to persons entitled to place themselves on the register. The question now for consideration was, whether the inconvenience of a short Session was not a less evil than general dissatisfaction. According to the present state of things, a new election would take place in December; a new experiment was then to be made; all the elections were to take place in two days, and he therefore would put it to the noble Lord whether it was not desirable that the experiment should be tried at a period of the year when there was not much difficulty in conveying voters to the poll. At Christmas, and especially in the distant parts of the country, a fall of snow might cut off all communication with the polling place. It would be better, under all the circumstances of the case, to put off the election of the new Parliament to the month of March, than have it in December.
Lord Althorpbegged to explain that he had only said he had a dislike or objection to the re-assembling of the present Parliament; but every one must be aware that he only expressed his opinion as an individual. He could give no decision in the matter.
Sir John Hobhousesaid, that he found a very general feeling of discontent had manifested itself in Westminster, on the subject of registration, and he wished the noble Lord would give him some information concerning it. The doubts as to the interpretation of the new law lately put forth, were not confined to those who were in the habit of studying the Reform Bill in its details; for he had referred the matter to an eminent Chancery Barrister in that House, who told him, upon his asking his opinion on behalf of the committee of gentlemen of the electors of St. Marylebene, that he might consider himself
1290
quite safe in telling the gentlemen that, if parties had paid their rates previous to the time prescribed by the Order in Council it would be sufficient. He thought that it was hard voters should be disqualified from an omission not arising from their wilful neglect, or from their own laches. He wished to know how the votes of the scot and lot voters of Westminster were to be saved?
Lord Althorpsaid, that, by the old law, all scot-and-lot voters were required to have paid up all arrears of taxes on the day of election; whereas the Reform Act stated, as the House was aware, that they must be registered, and that such day of registration should be considered as the day of election.
Sir Charles Wetherellsaid, he had anticipated the evil now complained of, though he had not been a particeps criminis. This, then, was one of the fruits of that Reform Bill, by opposing which Gentlemen on that side had been told they would shake the very foundation of the empire. He felt a triumph, but not an unworthy one, in thus finding that the opinion which he had formed in respect to this measure was thus borne out.
Motion agreed to.

BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION AT ELECTIONS.
Lord John Russellrose to move the Resolution of which he had given notice. It would be of no use, he was aware, during the present Session of Parliament, but he would move it as a notice of his intention the next Session of Parliament. His Lordship accordingly moved the following Resolution:—"That all persons who will question any future return of Members to serve in Parliament, upon any allegation of bribery or corruption, and who shall, in their petition, specifically allege any payment of money or other reward to have been made by any Member, or on his account, or with his privity, since the time of such Return, in pursuance or in furtherance of such bribery or corruption, may question the same at any time within twenty-eight days after the date of such payment; or if this House be not sitting at the expiration of the said twenty-eight days, then within fourteen days after the day when the House shall next meet."
Sir Charles Wetherelladmitted that the object proposed by the noble Lord was a fair one as the subject of an experiment, but he doubted its success. As the proposition

1291
was of so wide a nature, he should certainly enter more into it in the next Session of Parliament.
Mr. C. W. Wynnsaid, the distribution of money in the way of bribe, long after the election took place, was more common than some supposed. He recollected seeing public advertisements calling on electors to attend and receive 5l. or 10 l. for their votes. He approved of the course pursued by the noble Lord, though he did not think he went far enough. With respect to election petitions, it would be better in future if Committees reported that there was or was not probable ground, in place of the usual mode of finding not frivolous or vexatious. He could see no real difficulty in what was urged upon a former occasion by his hon. and learned friend (Sir Charles Wetherell) respecting acts done merely. A Committee would of course declare such grounds of petition vexatious.
Colonel Sibthorpwished to know what the noble Lord (Lord John Russell) meant precisely by the word "reward." Were Members, on account of some act of charity, to remain from one election to another, for six whole years or more, with a charge of bribery hanging over them.
Lord John Russellsaid, this Resolution would apply only to future elections. He thought it right that Members should be in some degree protected from vexatious petitions, by the difficulty and expense of disturbing the return. It was desirable, at the same time, to open the House as widely as possible to complaints. He thought the Resolution might render voters less liable to accept bribes, seeing that the distribution might be so long deferred. He feared, however, that charging the unsuccessful petitioners with costs might produce a disinclination to petition.
Mr. Hudson Gurneyfeared that when these two Bills were passed they would have the effect of inundating the House with petitions. It would be better to bring in a Bill defining accurately what bribery was. All they could hope in the present state of human nature was to prevent gross bribery.
Resolution agreed to.

REFORM—RE-ASSEMBLING OF PARLIAMENT.
Colonel Evansrose to call the attention pf the noble Lords opposite again to the subject of the scot-and-lot voters, who, as he had before stated, would
1292
be disfranchised by the operation of the Reform Bill, if they had not paid their rates. This subject was of such importance, and it was so imperfectly understood even in the metropolis, that he must solicit the attention of the noble Lords to the subject. He had before stated, and he understood, that the rule of disfranchising people, unless they had paid their rates, would be extensive, and injurious in its operation. All the people who had not paid their rates up to the 20th of July would be disfranchised [LORD John Russell said, if the rates had been demanded]. That required explanation. With respect to the Resolution the noble Lord had just moved, he would inform him that the two restrictive clauses of the Bill would operate very favourably for bribery. There were two places, in one of which 1,100 l., and in the other of which 900 l. had been already advanced, to pay up the rates of the people. Something then should be done to counteract this, and make the Reform Bill understood. According to the papers on the Table, the number of persons disfranchised in Westminster and other places would be very great. He had received some information from Lancashire, which showed how the Bill was expected to work there. For example, he understood that Manchester would have no more than 750 voters; Blackburn, 78; Ashton, 75; Bolton, 84; Bury, 82; Oldham, 40; Rochdale, 40; Salford, 66; and Warrington, 38. That was rather an alarming result, and it would be so fatal that it would be enough to endanger the present Administration. He hoped that something would be done to remedy it, and that a short Session of Parliament would be called to pass a new law, if that was necessary All he knew of the restrictions he had learned only within a few days, and it was not to be supposed that the great mass of the people engaged in their pursuits could have obtained similar information. That might account for their not having troubled themselves about it. Now that they were aware of it, they were much disappointed. The Bill would, positively, convert many large towns into close boroughs. The Tories would not suffer from it, and he did not wonder that they opposed any alteration. The next Parliament, instead of being a Reformed Parliament, would be—he did not say it offensively—a Tory Parliament, if the evils of the Bill were not remedied. He thought this matter of great importance, because the people who

1293
had lately obtained the Reform itself by their own exertions, might have recourse to the same means. In fact, he had heard that the disappointment was so great that the people were again talking of not paying the taxes, and of commencing a run upon the bank for gold. This circumstance would have the most disastrous effects, and might even, from its unpopularity, destroy the present Administration. The hon. and gallant Member concluded by moving an Address to his Majesty, "that he will be graciously pleased to prorogue the present, and convene another short Session of Parliament, with as little delay as possible, to take into consideration the unexpected disfranchisement produced by certain restrictive clauses of the Act for Amending the Representation of the People in Parliament."
Mr. Humeseconded the Motion. He wished to state, that he believed that the statements of his hon. and gallant friend were correct. He had heard the statements from the same persons as his hon. friend. He had no doubt, that as this was not what his Majesty's Government intended, it would take measures to remedy the evil. If the population of the large towns were disfranchised to the extent of three fourths or four-fifths, it would be a most serious evil, and would produce nothing else but dissatisfaction. He was sure, if his Majesty's Government found that this was the case, it would not hesitate to grant relief, and would be careful not to proceed, to a new election, which would disappoint those hopes which had made the people give their most anxious support to the noble Lord.
Lord Althorpsaid, it could not be expected that he should agree to the Address. He could not think that the operation of the clause would be so extensive as the hon. and gallant Member represented. He himself knew nothing certain of the matter; and nothing could be certainly known till after the 20th of August. Not believing in the extent of the disfranchisement, he could not believe in the extent of the dissatisfaction. He had always admitted, that the registration clauses might, at first, present some difficulty in the working. It should be remembered, that the period fixed by the Bill allowed three months to be in arrears; and he could not think, according to the custom of parishes, that so many people would be disfranchised.
The Motion negatived.

EXPENSE OF THE REFORM BILLS.
Colonel Sibthorprose to move for a Return, of which he had given notice. The Reform Bill had been now two years before Parliament, to the total exclusion of all other business. They had been told, it would conduce to the happiness of England, Ireland, and Scotland; that taxes would be lowered, trade revived, and prosperity fill the land; and all by reason of the Reform Bill. They had, as yet, reaped none of these golden fruits; but, to a certainty, it appeared that they had made a golden payment for the sake of obtaining them. The machinery of the Bill had been most expensive, including the twenty travelling Commissioners, the draftsmen, and clerks attendant upon them. Volume after volume had issued from the labours of those who were engaged upon the Reform Bill, and he believed that his share of them would fill a waggon. The charge for printing, for the year 1832, amounted to 56,000 l.; for stationery, 119,612 l. Of course there had been a great consumption of pen, ink, and paper in this tremendous undertaking. In his opinion the Reform measure, so far from benefitting, had robbed the people of this country, from north to south, and from east to west. It had robbed them of every privilege, and all else it had promised. He hoped the noble Lord would grant all he asked, and that nothing would be hid. The hon. Member concluded by moving for "A Return of the expenses incurred relative to the Reform of Parliament Bills previous to the passing of the same; distinguishing the sums already paid, and remaining to be paid, as far as these can be ascertained, namely, for travelling and other expenses of the Commissioners, and individuals employed in the necessary information with regard to boundaries and other Returns; also, for stationery, printing, maps, plans, and the various incidental matters connected with the said Acts."
Lord Althorpseconded the Motion. He was opposed to everything like concealment, and thought, with the hon. and gallant Member, that it was very desirable to have the expenses of the measure all brought under one point of view, and included in one Return.
Motion agreed to.

WEST-INDIA ISLANDS RELIEF BILL.
On the motion of Lord Althorp, the House resolved itself into a Committee on the West-India Islands' Relief Bill.
Various clauses agreed to, with verbal amendments.
Mr. Humethen urged upon the noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the necessity of taking some security for the repayment of any portion of the public money which might be advanced to the colonies. If security were not given, the advance would be a total loss to the public, who would, by and by, be under the necessity of looking to the Government for relief.
Mr. Wilkssaid, it would be in the power of the Commissioners not to make advances without sufficient securities.
Lord Althorpwas understood to concur in the opinion of the last speaker.
Mr. Humecomplained, that our policy was not consistent towards the colonies. He did not think that security upon property in the West-Indies would be sufficient for the proposed advances.
Mr. Spring Riceobserved, that the real point which had been suggested by the hon. member for Middlesex was this—whether or not the security upon the colonies themselves was sufficient for the amount of the money lent. He could only say, that the Commissioners who had been appointed were of the most highly respectable character, and that their services would be gratuitous, and he was satisfied that if the security which might be offered to them was not good, the money would not be advanced.
Mr. Fowell Buxtoninquired of his Majesty's Government whether, if the mortgagees, in the case of the proposed loan to the colonies, did not redeem the slave population on the estate mortgaged to the Crown, it would become the property of the Crown?
Lord Althorpanswered in the affirmative.
Mr. Fowell Buxtonthen begged to inquire, whether the Government, in such a case, would pursue the same course which had been formerly adopted and followed, and would, on such an event, liberate the slave population.
Lord Althorpsaid, he was not at present prepared to answer that question.
Remainder of the clauses read, and agreed to.
Mr. Humeobjected to the preamble of
1296
the Bill as unintelligible, and wished to have the object specified for which the grant was made to the Crown colonies.
The preamble agreed to.
The House resumed.

CHANCERY SINECURES.
On the Motion of Lord Althorp, the House went into a Committee on the Chancery Sinecure Offices' Bill.
Lord Althorpbrought up a Clause, increasing the Lord Chancellor's retiring allowance to 5,000 l
Mr. Humestrongly objected to the Chancellor receiving an additional 1,000 l. a-year on account of retiring salary more than any of his predecessors. He did not, as yet, comprehend why that retiring allowance should be fixed at 5,000 l. a-year. The Chancellor might, for aught he knew, be able to prove he was entitled to 6,000 l. or 7,000 l. a-year, as well as this lesser allowance. He should be glad to hear on what scale of remuneration, or upon what calculation, this estimate of the Lord Chancellor's services above others was founded.
Lord Althorpsaid, the reason of the proposed increase was, that the Lord Chancellor had consented to give up these sinecures, amounting to 24,000 l., when they all fell in, of which he possessed the patronage, which was generally considered as the means of providing for the Lord Chancellor's family. Not only had he done this as to future patronage, but having already appointed his younger brother to a post of 2,000 l. a-year, that gentleman was to give it up as soon as this Bill was brought into operation. In respect, therefore, of this 2,000 l., the public would find a saving of one-half by giving to the noble Lord the additional 1,000 l. a-year on retiring, which sum he (Lord Althorp) thought would be about an equivalent to what the noble and learned Lord gave up.
Mr. Humewas sorry to find the pledge given to Parliament and the country, that these very obnoxious places and sinecures should be all abolished, without suffering the possessors to raise thereupon a claim for compensation, was not redeemed. These were sinecures which, by a vote of the House, and by general concurrence, it was admitted ought to be abolished; and the more especially was he sorry the pledge was not redeemed, as this Government was avowedly a retrenching Government. On

1297
what ground stood this claim of the Lord Chancellor, which might not be advanced by the actual possessors of any other of these sinecures proposed to be abolished; or were they to mete out one measure of justice towards these parties, and another more indulgent one to the Lord Chancellor, when he lost only the chance of having a sinecure to dispose of? If this Ministry thought it right to recommend such a sum, by way of compensation, in despite of their distinct pledges as to the abolition of sinecures, he was satisfied that the people would not put a similar construction on those pledges, and would not hold them guiltless in voting compensation to the Lord Chancellor. He must, on principle, resist the increase of allowance in this case, because, in the first instance, it was understood, when this Government took office, it was not to be a Government of patronage; and next, because he thought they could not increase the retiring allowance to the Lord Chancellor without violating their solemn pledge to the country.
Lord Althorphad no recollection of ever having given a pledge that the retiring pension of the Lord Chancellor, or any other officer, should not be increased. The Lord Chancellor's income had always hitherto consisted of salary and patronage. Both were the inducements held out to the profession, in order to get the best and highest men in law to fill the situation. If patronage were to be taken away, it was only fair and just that some addition should be made to the retiring allowance, or else the country would lose the chance hereafter of securing the first-rate talent in the profession to preside in the Court of Chancery. He, on the whole, could not consider the allowance to be made for the future Chancellor extravagant.
Mr. Hunthad never heard the noble Lord labour so as he had done in attempting to justify this grant. As a retrenching Government, and coming into office on that pledge, it was monstrous to see them set this example of profuse waste of the public money. Had the Tories done so while in office, how loudly would that noble Lord have denounced it as an act of shameful extravagance! He had been lately chidden in the country, at a public meeting, for having voted 4,000 l. a-year to the Speaker on his retirement; but that he had no difficulty in defending, to the satisfaction of those who heard him.
1298
This grant he never could defend; and therefore he was opposed to it. The surrender of these sinecures was the result of a pledge given before Lord Brougham came into office. Had the noble Lord himself not been an active instrument in obtaining that pledge? He had, and the noble Lord had accepted office, knowing right well that these sinecures were to continue no longer part of his patronage. But they were said to be given to him to provide for his family. Now, the present Chancellor had no family. This was a strong reason against giving any increase in this instance. Indeed, it might be wise that, in order to avoid that plea hereafter, Chancellors should be chosen only who were not likely to have any family. He would, under these circumstances, though he entertained a high respect for the noble and learned Lord's talents and virtues, move as an Amendment, that the usual sum of 4,000 l. be inserted, instead of 5,000 l., in the Bill.
Lord Althorpobserved, that the noble and learned Lord had abolished no less than twelve sinecure offices which had hitherto been part of the patronage of the Chancellor, and that that circumstance ought to be taken into account as a justification for this increase in the retiring allowance.
Mr. C. W. Wynnthought the sum now proposed was only a fair compensation for the patronage which other Chancellors had enjoyed, and of which the present Chancellor was deprived. They should recollect, too, that the Lord Chancellor had to sustain with becoming dignity the honours of the Peerage. That the Lord Chancellor should accept the Peerage was not a matter of choice; for it was necessary, for the due execution of many of the duties of his office, that he should be a Peer, and that circumstance ought also to be taken into account. He should support the grant.
Lord Ingestredefended the grant, and expressed his conviction that the great abilities possessed by the present Chancellor for the discharge of the duties of his office entitled him to the reward.
Colonel Sibthorpthought 4,000 l. a-year enough for a retiring allowance, but would gladly have voted a larger salary than he now had to the noble Lord, so long as he continued in office.
Mr. Humeobserved, that if the abolition of sinecures in his Court was to give the

1299
present Chancellor a right to a larger retiring allowance, the principle of compensation for sinecures would be established, and then no sinecure could be abolished without giving the holder a compensation. He highly respected the noble Lord whose office was in question; but, looking to the Resolution of that House in 1810, that all sinecures performed by deputy should be abolished; and looking to the Act of 57th Geo. 3rd, which stated, "That whereas the abolition of sinecures will take from his Majesty the power of rewarding important services; it is therefore enacted, that he shall have the power to grant pensions to the amount of 35,000 l;" and looking to the fact that the pensions granted in consequence of that Resolution and that Act now amounted to, he believed, 17,000 l., he could not consent to the Motion. He was extremely unwilling to divide on a measure of this kind; but, in accordance with the principles on which he had always acted, he must support the Amendment.
Mr. Courtenaycould give an answer to the hon. Gentleman out of the document to which he had referred. The hon. Gentleman quoted the resolution of 1810, which was embodied in the Bill of 1812, and that Bill was afterwards rejected by the House. The opinion then of one Parliament, quoted by the hon. Member as an authority, was rejected, after further consideration. The hon. Gentleman quoted the Act of 1817, which also abolishes sinecures in the gift of the Crown, and gives the King the power of granting pensions in lieu of them. That Act, however, did not abolish all sinecures. Quite the contrary, because, while it expressly took away those which were in the gift of the Crown, it left untouched those belonging to the Lord Chancellor. It must be admitted, that the proposed compensation, as compared with the amount of patronage given up by the Lord Chancellor, was extremely inadequate. There was no Lord chancellor for many years back, who had not been enabled to provide for his family. Lord Thurlow provided for his family handsomely, and so had other Chancellors; whereas Lord Brougham gave up all these sinecures, one of which, worth 2,000 l. a-year, had actually already fallen in, for which he was to get as a compensation 1,000 l. a-year for life. The compensation was so inadequate, that it might hereafter become necessary to
1300
make some provision for the descendants of future Lord Chancellors.
The Committee divided on the Amendment: Ayes 2; Noes 60—Majority 58.
Clause agreed to—House resumed.

STAGE-COACHES BILL.
The House resolved itself into Committee on this Bill.
Mr. Dixonmoved an Amendment to one of the clauses, that no tax be imposed on steam-carriages used upon common roads. He decidedly objected to levying any tax upon this new propelling power; and though the owners of such carriages might consent to such a tax, he would oppose it on principle.
Mr. Spring Ricethought he could satisfy the Committee that the adoption of the Amendment would be an act of great injustice to the proprietors of stage-coaches. Government was disposed to afford every facility to improvements in machinery; and if it were now a question whether any tax whatever should be levied on locomotion, he should have nothing to say; but he did not think they were called upon to give to steam-carriages the unfair advantage over old modes of conveyance, which they would have if the latter were to be exclusively taxed. The Manchester Rail-road Company had caused a loss to the revenue of 8,384 l. by the duty on post-horses and stage-coaches, which, however, was in some degree made up by an increased communication of stage-coaches on other branches of the roads leading to Manchester and Liverpool.
Mr. Ewartthought that the revenue must have been benefited by the Manchester rail-way. Trade and manufactures had been promoted, and barren land brought into cultivation to a wonderful extent by the conveyance of manure. He could not consent to any taxation on railways. Taxation on conveyance of commercial products was in itself bad policy, and productive of great evil. America, and even Austria, were making rail-ways, by which they would be enabled to compete with this country in the production and sale of a variety of articles. His hope was, there might be a gradual reduction of taxation on all kinds of communication.
Colonel Sibthorpcould not be forgetful of the interests of his agricultural constituents, suffering severely under the pressure of poor-rates. The use of vehicles impelled by steam would injure those

1301
constituents. It would throw greater obstacles than at present in the way of the landed interest.
Mr. Humewas desirous of taking off the tax upon horses, but he could not allow that rail-roads or steam-coaches would injure the landholders of Lincoln or any other county. The plan of the noble Lord for taxing steam was a lamentable departure from sound policy. Would the noble Lord put an end to all the advantages derived from steam-beats and rail-roads? Why not tax machinery? If a principle was good, they ought to follow it up. The advantages of quick conveyances were most extensive; and if the noble Lord taxed steam and rail-roads, he was imposing a tax on improvement, and increasing the poor-rates. It was a tax on time and industry. Instead of putting a tax on steam, we should take off the tax on coaches in every line where a parallel rail-road was established. He entreated the noble Lord to postpone the plan for another year. What was the paltry loss of 7,000 l. a-year compared with the mighty advantages which accrued to the community? He hoped that the noble Lord would suffer the loss of some taxes on coaches rather than discourage those great improvements which ought to be fostered.
Lord Althorpconcurred with the hon. member for Middlesex in thinking that the country would gain by taking off the tax on coaches, instead of laying a tax on rail-roads; but, at the same time, the tax on coaches brought in a considerable revenue. As to exempting coaches on roads parallel to rail-ways, it would not be just to coaches on other roads, nor would it be easily practicable. The Government felt every disposition to favour improvements in steam-conveyance, and steam-carriages on roads would not be more heavily taxed than on rail-ways. They had agreed, for example, with the proprietors of the Manchester rail-road for a certain payment, which would not interfere with the success of that undertaking. He confessed he was not very sanguine that steam-carriages could be introduced on common roads, but, if they were, the tax would not operate as an obstacle.
Sir Charles Burrellsupported the stage coach interest. It was injustice to ruin one class of proprietors to promote the views of another class.
Mr. Huntsaid, the people of England
1302
could not stand in comparison with America, where they had no taxes. The tax on corn in this country justified taxing every thing. If they taxed corn, they ought to tax steam.
Lord George Bentincksaid, he had lately sat on a Committee upon the plan for making a rail-road from London to Birmingham, and it was proved that the loss to the revenue in the abolition of stage-coaches would be 78,000 l. annually. The noble Lord could not consider it a violation of principle to tax steam where it injured the interest of stage-coach property.
The Committee divided on the Amendment: Ayes 2; Noes 48—Majority 46.
Original Clause agreed to, as were the remaining Clauses.
The House resumed.

BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS BILL.
On the Motion of Lord John Russell, this Bill was read a third time.
On the motion that it do pass,
Mr. Weylandproposed a Clause to be added by way of rider, declaring that every Candidate who should pay any part of the expense of registration of voters should be hold guilty of bribery.
Lord John Russellsaid, the clause was merely applied to another description of bribery, and he was unwilling to clog the Bill with any further provisions to guard against its effects.
Mr. Humesupported the clause. The practice it sought to prevent was already beginning to prevail, and an enactment against it might check it at once.
Mr. C. W. Wynnwas opposed to the clause, because it made bribery that which was never bribery before.
Mr. Courtenaysaid, the question now mooted was of so much importance, that the noble Lord ought to take at least twenty-four hours to consider of it, and the Bill ought to be postponed.
The Clause negatived; and the Bill passed.