§ SIR CHARLES DOUGLAS,referring to a Return moved for by the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, and ordered to be printed on the 5th day of March [showing the comparative increase or diminution of Electors, and number of Members, for the periods 1832–3 and 1859–60], said, he wished to call the attention of the House to the inaccuracy of the Return (No. 129). His object was to point out certain important 1166 inaccuracies in the return affecting the town which he had the honour to represent (Banbury). In a scheme published in The Times Newspaper more than a year ago, for the Representation of England and Wales, "equitably adjusted with reference to population and assessment of property," Banbury was set down for disfranchisement, as a borough having 8,715 inhabitants, and an income tax assessment of only £16,998. Now, the fact was, that at the period in question, Banbury was assessed to the income and property tax at no less a sum than £41,000. In the Return to which he had referred, it was stated that the number of electors in Banbury in 1832–3 was 329, and in 1859–60 was 361; showing a difference of only 32. Now, the increase had been six fold as great as that stated; for, instead of 361 electors being the present number, the correct number was 561. It was obviously most essential, when the House ordered returns to be prepared, which were afterwards taken as supplying the data for important proposals, that every possible care should be bestowed to secure their accuracy.