GRAMPOUND DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL. (Hansard, 24 May 1821)

§ The Earl of Harrowby
objected to the arrangement by which four members were to be elected for the county of York. He thought it would be much better to give the two members taken from Grampound to a district of the county, including certain towns, as Leeds, Huddersfield, Wakefield, &c. This would obviate the great inconvenience that would arise in taking the poll at once for the whole county.

The Earl of Liverpool
was of opinion, that if it was not thought fit to create a new borough, the members ought to be added to some place which already possessed the right of election. With regard to the inconvenience of taking a poll for the whole county of York, he should have no objection to a proposition for allowing polls to be taken in different parts of the county. But that could only be done by a separate measure.

§ The Earl of Harewood
said, that the measure was a departure from every principle by which parliament had been guided in former cases. The county of York was, indeed, completely thrown off its guard with respect to it; for, as the other House had refused to transfer the representation to Yorkshire, no expectation could have been entertained of such an alteration in the bill as that which had been made. As to taking the poll in different parts of the county, that was a scheme to which he objected, chiefly on account of the difficulty of executing it. Who was to be the superintending officer? Would persons be found willing to do the duties of sheriff only for a fortnight? If they did, it was likely they would be electioneering partisans, and therefore not the 974 fittest persons to perform such a duty. The House of Commons had already resolved, that the representation of Grampound should not be transferred to the county of York. How, then, could their lordships expect that that Mouse should now agree to an arrangement which it had so recently decided against?