HL Deb 09 July 1832 vol 14 cc170-2

Order of the Day for the Third Reading of this Bill read.

The Duke of Richmond

moved that the Bill be then read a third time.

The Marquess of Clanricarde

stated, that by the Bill as it stood, the town of Thorn-bury was made the place of nomination for the western division of the county of (Gloucester, but it was well known that the town of Dursley would be much more convenient to the great majority of the electors of that division of the county. He, therefore, would move as an Amendment, that the town of Thornbury be omitted for the purpose of substituting Dursley.

The Duke of Richmond

would not object to the proposed alteration. When the subject was brought under the notice of the Government a few days ago, one of the Commissioners was sent down to make inquiries on the spot. He did so, and from his report it appeared, that in point of distance Dursley was more convenient to the adjoining district than Thornbury, but the latter town had this advantage, that being in the midst of an agricultural district, it was a more quiet place for a nomination than the former, which was in the centre of a manufacturing district. How-over, as Dursley was said to be more convenient as to distance to the majority of voters, he would not oppose the Amendment of his noble friend.

Lord Ellenborough

said, that Thornbury had been substituted for Wootton-under-Edge in the House of Commons, because of the likelihood that the large manufacturing population there would cause riot at the election. Dursley was only three miles and a half from Wootton-under-Edge, and the same objection existed to its being the place of election. He opposed the Amendment.

The Marquess of Clanricarde

thought that the reason assigned by the noble Baron could not be justly maintained.

The House divided on the Amendment:—Contents 46; Not Contents 27—Majority 19.

The Duke of Richmond

said, that many applications had been made by the inhabitants of the western division of the county of Sussex to have Arundel added to the polling places in that county, and he under- stood that several of their Lordships were anxious that that addition should be made. He had received a letter from the Mayor of Arundel, threatening that if this alteration were not made, his brother should hear of it at the next election. If any noble Lord wished to move for the addition of Arundel as a polling place he should not oppose it, but he was desirous that the Gentleman who had written so improper a letter should know that he had not succeeded by moans of his threat, but that, if he (the Duke of Richmond) did not resist the proposition, it was simply because he thought it a matter of no importance whether there were four polling places or five.

Earl Gower

moved, that Arundel should be inserted as one of the polling places of the western division of Sussex.—Motion agreed to.

The Earl of Abingdon

moved an Amendment to the passage relating to the borough of Abingdon, confining the boundary to the old borough.—Agreed to.

The Duke of Richmond

moved, that the alteration he had formerly proposed, extending the boundaries of the city of Gloucester, be omitted. He was convinced so extensive au alteration ought not to have been made without more notice than was given of his intention—Motion agreed to.

The Duke of Richmond

moved that the Bill do pass.

Lord Wynford

could not allow the Bill to pass without again complaining of the manner in which the boundaries of some boroughs had been adjusted. He certainly was still of opinion that Cudlip Town, to quote one instance, should be included in the borough of Tavistock.

The Duke of Richmond

said, Cudlip Town was five miles from Tavistock, it had never been included in the borough and contained about twelve 10l. houses.

Earl Grey

took that opportunity of bearing testimony to the valuable services of the Commissioners, and the deep debt which the public owed them for their labours. The diligence, accuracy, and impartiality with which those Gentlemen had executed the task assigned them were beyond any praise that he could bestow upon them, and fully entitled them to the approbation and gratitude of the public.

The Lord Chancellor

begged to add his humble testimony to the notice which had been so justly taken by his noble friend of the very great services performed by the Commissioners. Certainly, no duty could have been discharged with more zeal, talent, and industry, and, above all, with more strict impartiality, than had been proved in the course of the unremitting and assiduous labours of those gentlemen. Their decisions, in many instances, furnished unquestionable proofs that they had not suffered themselves to be influenced by any particular interest, or by any bias in favour of the Government, but acted with perfect independence and impartiality.

Bill passed.