Sitting of 8 March 1838

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By Mr. F. J. HOWARD, from Youghal, by Sir G. STRICKLAND, from Gomersal, by Mr. C. LUSHINGTON, from the male and female inhabitants of Ashburton, by Mr. BAINES, from Maldon, Bishop's Stortford, and from the county of Cambridge, by Mr. C. SHAW LEFEFRE, from a place in the county of Southampton, by Mr. W. D. GILLON, and by Mr. WODEHOUSE, for the abolition of Negro Slavery.—By Mr. MAUNSELL, from Kettering, for the establishment of Local Courts.—By Mr. LASCELLES, from Wakefield, and by Lord W. BENTINCK, from the Manufacturers of Glasgow, for the total abolition of the Soap Duty.—By Mr. PRIME, from various places, for the repeal of the duties on Post-horses.—By Lord W. BENTINCK, from Glasgow, for a repeal of the duties on Marine Insurances; and from the Corporation of Bakers in Glasgow, for protection against Trades' Unions.—By Mr. Sergeant JACKSON, from the Clergy of the Diocese of Ardagh, to relieve the Clergy from the repayment of the Loans advanced to build Glebe-houses.—By Mr. VILLIERS, from Wolverhampton, for the abolition of the duty on Soap.—By Lord INGESTRE, from the Guardians of the poor of a Union in the county of Stafford, for the repeal of certain clauses in the New Poor-law.—By Mr. HAWKERS, from Dudley, for an alteration in the dietary system under the New Poor-law.

CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.
Sir Robert Peelwished to remind Lord John Russell that the time had now elapsed within which
702
he had promised to make a declaration as to the course which the Government intended to pursue with reference to the question of increased accommodation in the Church of Scotland. Perhaps, therefore, the noble Lord would now state whether it was the intention of the Government to make any proposition on the subject, and if so, at what period it would be made.
Lord John Russellsaid, that it was the intention of the Government to make a proposition on that subject, but he did not think that he should be able to propose any vote on the matter before Easter. He would, however, state before that time arrived the general nature of the measure which the Government intended to bring forward: indeed he might state now, that with respect to the Act passed in 1707, relating to unexhausted teinds, it was proposed to give an authority to divide the parishes so as to apply a portion of those unexhausted teinds to the purposes of spiritual instruction in the large parishes in the highlands where the teinds were exhausted, but the Government did not mean to propose any endowment from any public fund for parishes in Edinburgh or Glasgow.
Subject dropped.

HERIOTS.
Sir Robert Peelhoped the hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney-General would state whether he proposed to bring forward any measure with reference to the law of heriots.
The Attorney-Generalwas ashamed to confess that the subject was so difficult that he had found himself unable to grapple with it. In the course of the last Session he did introduce a Bill for the abolition of heriots, but the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Cambridge had pointed out several objections to it, which upon an after-consideration he had found insuperable. He had used his best endeavours to find out some other plan, hut without success, and he could now therefore only hope, that by the enfranchisement of copyhold, heriots would gradually cease.
Sir Robert Peelmust say, that the law relating to heriots was one of the most ridiculous blots that ever existed in any system of civil jurisprudence. If it were left in its present state, it would be the greatest reflection on the Legislature that could be cast upon it.
The Attorney-Generalentirely concurred in what the right hon. Baronet had said with respect to the law of heriots, which was the barbarous remnant of a barbarous

703
age. If the right hon. Baronet would allow him to put his name on the Committee, if he would not consider it a degradation, he should feel himself highly honoured and flattered by the permission, and he had no doubt that some suggestions would be thrown out which would enable him to prepare a measure by which this blot upon our system of jurisprudence might be wiped out of the statute-book.
Sir E. Sugdenremarked, that he had not had an opportunity of looking at the Bills introduced by the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite, and, therefore, he was not in a situation to say whether he could agree to a second reading of them without a discussion. He would, however, look at them, and if he thought that it would be necessary to discuss them first, he would state his opinion to-morrow. With regard to the law of heriots, he thought that it ought to be abolished, but the question was a difficult one to deal with. The House, however, ought to be aware that it was not copyholds only which were subject to heriots, but that, as many Gentlemen knew, heriots were due in many instances in respect of freeholds. If heriots, therefore, were to be abolished, they could not be abolished by the gradual enfranchisement of copyholds, and it would be necessary to pass a general law for that purpose.
Subject dropped.

JOINT STOCK BANKS.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerrose, to postpone his motion relative to the re-appointment of the Committee on Joint Stock Banks till Monday.
Mr. Humewished to know how it was possible that this motion could be brought forward on Monday? He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would fix some day when the motion might be fully discussed, as he intended to move an amendment to the motion, extending the inquiry to the Bank of England.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerwas not aware that there would be any opposition to the re-appointment of the Committee. As, however, his hon. Friend intended to move an amendment, he would select an open day on which they could have a full discussion.
Sir R. Peelwould suggest, before the right hon. Gentleman committed himself to a renewal of the Committee, that it was a subject for his consideration whether its re-appointment was absolutely necessary. The evidence, if not complete, was pretty
704
nearly complete, and there would be an immense advantage in drawing the proceedings of the Committee to a close. At present, the banking interest was in a state of great uncertainty, and an advantage was given to the weaker establishments at the expense of the more wealthy and respectable. If, however, the Committee should be re-appointed, he should advise the immediate completion of certain branches of the evidence, in order that her Majesty's Government might be enabled to state at once how they were prepared to act.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerthanked the right hon. Baronet for his suggestion, and observed, that that was the very course which he intended to pursue. The points which remained for inquiry were two—namely, what was the effect of the Bank of England's local circulation and country branches, and of the connexion between those branches and certain Joint-stock banks. There was, also, a question as to the Bank of Ireland, into which no inquiry had been made at all. He believed that these were the points which were still unnoticed. If they went over the points on which they had already taken evidence, they would not only undertake a very needless task but one full of inconvenience. Gentlemen would, therefore, understand that in proposing the revival of the Committee, it was only to consider those points on which no evidence had been taken, and not for the purpose of going over the grounds on which so much evidence had already been laid before the House.
Motion postponed.

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By Lord WINFORD, from Rye, signed by 4,000 s persons, against the Poor-law Amendment Bill; and from a place in Devonshire, for a reduction of Postage.—By Lord REDESDALE, from the Guardians of the poor of the Chesterfield Union, for a discretionary power to grant Out-door Relief; and from the Mayor, Alderman, and Burgesses, of Norwich, for the repeal of the duty on Fire Insurances.—By Earl STANHOPE; from Huddersfield, for the protection of Children In Factories; from a place in Yorkshire, from Bewdley, and
690
from St. Pancras, against the New Poor-law.—By Lord BROUGHAM, from Wadsworth, from places in the North Riding of Yorkshire, from Amsley, Montgomery, Chepstow, Walton, places in Glamorganshire, Presteign, Barnstaple, New Lanark, Arbroath, Huddersfield, Doncaster, Caerfilly, Macclesfield, Maldon, Northampton, and many other places, for the abolition of Negro Apprenticeship; and from the Operative Carpenters Meeting in Little Marylebone-street, for the remission of the sentence on the Glasgow Cotton-spinners.—By the Marquess of BUTS, from Glasgow, for additional Church Accommodation; from Leeds, and from Luton (Bedfordshire), for the abolition of Negro Apprenticeship.

BRITISH LEGION.
Lord Wynfordasked the noble Viscount at the head of her Majesty's Government whether any steps had been taken for the purpose of obtaining justice for those poor men who were now wandering naked and in a state of starvation about the streets, and who lately belonged to the British Legion in Spain?
Viscount Melbournesaid, their Lordships were aware that there had been two legions; one of which the time of service expired in June, 1837, and the other consisting of those men of the first legion, who had chosen to re-enter into the Spanish army. The men of the first legion who chose to come home, had all been brought home, and received their pay up to the day when they were discharged; they had received marching-money likewise, according to the rates of the British service, but they had not yet received their gratuity, consisting of certain months' pay which was due to them. They had, however, received certificates of what was owing to them, which would be discharged as soon as the Spanish Government possessed the means of discharging them. All pensions to the widows of those who had been killed (except the officers), and payments due to the wounded, had been paid up to the periods to which they were due. This all related to the private men. With respect to the officers of the first legion, a to them; he believed their claims amounted to nearly 90,000 l. Their accounts, however, had not been very clearly kept, and there was a difference between them and the Spanish Government with respect to the amount really due to them. But the Spanish Government had agreed to appoint a Commissioner, who, in conjunction with certain British officers conversant with the British army, would sit in London, in order to investigate and facilitate an adjustment of these claims; and the Spanish Government, in the mean time, had promised to make certain payments on account. The men of the second legion had not returned

691
home, though that legion might be considered as broken up, with the exception of one or two small corps; and it was expected they would be settled with, both in reference to their pay and marching-money, in the same way as the others had been. He could assure the noble and learned Lord that the best efforts of her Majesty's Ministers had been incessantly exerted with the Spanish Government to obtain for those men that which was their due, and that those exertions should be continued till their claims were liquidated. But everybody knew the unfortunate circumstances under which that Government laboured; that the pay of the army was extremely in arrear: indeed, that the whole of the operations of the war had been crippled from want of money, and therefore it was not to be wondered at that some delay should have taken place in the settlement of the claims of those men.
The Earl of Riponsaid, there was one inference to be drawn from the statement made by the noble Viscount which was highly satisfactory; namely, that it was quite impossible that the order in council, under which the legion was established, could be renewed; but still he did not think that the arrangement was so satisfactory with regard to the manner in which these poor men were to be paid, considering the way in which they had been decoyed into that legion by the ingenious contrivance of the Government. It did not appear that they had anything to rely upon but the promises of the Spanish Government, which was quite incompetent to perform those promises. It was true the men of the first legion had got something better than promises, for they had received certificates, which he supposed were an acknowledgment on the part of the Spanish Government, that there was a gratuity due to them; but that could not be paid, it seemed, on account of the miserable state of the Spanish Government. Perhaps the noble Viscount would state what was the amount of the gratuity which was due to the men belonging to the small remnant of the second legion still in Spain; because from that their Lordships would be enabled to judge more accurately what was the state of the finances of the Spanish Government, on behalf of which we were now carrying on a quasi war.
Conversation ended.

CHURCH ENDOWMENTS (SCOTLAND).
Lord Broughamsaid, that he had a petition
692
to present on a subject which was of the very highest importance to the people of the northern part of this island, and to which he begged to call the attention of her Majesty's Government. The petition was signed by 41,000 inhabitants of Glasgow and its vicinity, one of the most numerously-signed that had been presented to either House of Parliament of late years on any subject. The petitioners represented the injustice and impolicy of all civil distinctions on religious grounds, and especially the injustice of taxing people of one religious persuasion to pay for the religious instruction of those of a different faith. They stated that they had heard that applications had been made to the House for the grant of increased endowments to the Established Church in Scotland, and they most humbly prayed the House to reject such proposal, from whatever quarter it proceeded, and from whatever source the additional endowment was proposed to be derived.—The noble and learned Lord presented a similar petition from Paisley, signed by upwards of 2,000 persons, and agreed to at a meeting at which the Provost presided. The fact that these two petitions had been signed by upwards of 43,000 individuals was, he thought, a proof that the great community of the industrious Scotch manufacturers, that highly religious and intelligent body of men, were not suffering themselves to look on with indifference and in a lukewarm manner at this great and important subject; a subject respecting which he (Lord Brougham) on several occasions had been strongly urged to ascertain what were the intentions of her Majesty's Government; and he now wished to have an explanation from the noble Viscount on that point, as the deputies from the dissenting congregations in that part of the kingdom (Scotland) were in town, and were desirous of obtaining information upon the subject. He therefore called upon her Majesty's Government explicitly to state what they meant to do, in order to quiet the alarm existing in the minds of their fellow-subjects in Scotland, which were more excited on this than on any other subject. As four months of the Session had already passed away, and nothing had been done respecting it, or indeed anything else, except to discourage the people of Canada, and to encourage slavery, he supposed that nothing would be done on the subject this Session.
Viscount Melbournesaid, that he saw no particular reason why the noble and learned

693
Lord should come to the conclusion which he had done. He remembered being asked in a former Session of Parliament, what it was the intention of the Government to do upon this great and important question—a question which, according to the noble and learned Lord's own showing, was neither postponed nor abandoned, but was pari positione with all others. At that time the noble and learned Lord was sitting on the woolsack, and he recollected that a petition was presented by the noble and learned Lord from members of the Church of Scotland on the subject. He did not know whether the noble and learned Lord actually supported the prayer of that petition, but he certainly very strongly recommended that it should be taken into the serious consideration of the Government. With respect to the question which had been put to him, he was not prepared to give any other answer to it at the present moment than that which he gave before to his noble Friend (Lord Aberdeen), namely, that the matter was now under the consideration of the Government.
Lord Broughamwas truly happy to hear that among various other important subjects, along with the recommendations of the noble Duke (the Duke of Wellington) on the slave trade, the subject of Scotch Church Accommodation was "under the consideration of the Government," and about the time, perhaps, of the Greek kalends the decision of the Government would be announced. As to the petition which he had presented from the Church of Scotland, he had expressed no opinion upon it; neither had he on the present occasion expressed any positive opinion. He thought it due, however, to the petitioners that they should receive the attention of the Government.
The Earl of Aberdeensaid, that last year petitions without number were presented upon this subject, but in a very different sense from that expressed in the petition presented by the noble and learned Lord. He had presented many himself, and petitions would have been presented this year, but that the people of Scotland had reason to believe that the subject was not only under the consideration of her Majesty's Government, but under their favourable consideration.
The Earl of Haddingtonwas of opinion, that there could not be a more inconvenient moment for discussing this subject than on the presentation of petitions; but he would take the liberty of saying, that if their
694
Lordships were led to suppose, from the absence of petitions in favour of Church-endowment in Scotland, that the feelings of the people were all on one side, and that in opposition to such endowments, they were led into a great error indeed. He believed if the feelings of the people of Scotland were to be ascertained by polling them, a great majority of those attached to the Established Church would be in favour of those endowments to which the Voluntaries and the Dissenters were naturally opposed.
Petitions laid on the table.

PARLIAMENTARY ELECTORS.
The Marquess of Lansdowne, in moving the order of the day for the second reading of the Parliamentary Electors and Freemen Bill, said, it consisted of two provisions of a very plain and intelligible character, which, though somewhat different in form, were the same in their tendency. Their Lordships were aware, that by the Reform Act, a 10 l. household constituency had been established, and that to render an elector eligible to vote, it was necessary that he should pay up all rates and taxes clue by him on the 5th of April before the 20th of July in each year. One object of the present Bill was to extend the time for the payment of those rates and taxes to the 11th day of October in each year. It was not intended to introduce a new class of electors, but to leave the body of voters in the country as they were constituted under the Reform Act. The other object of the Bill was to remove the stamp duty payable by freemen on their admission.
The Duke of Wellingtonsaid, he should follow the example of the noble Marquess by occupying very little of their Lordships time on this subject. He should confine his opposition solely to the objects of this Bill. But he must claim for that House a right to consider the whole of this subject equally with the other House of Parliament; indeed, the noble Lord had not attempted to deny their Lordships that right. It was the duty of their Lordships, in considering the subject, to view a little what had been the working of the Reform Act in general, and whether it would be expedient at that particular moment to relax those provisions which had for their object rather the limitation, than otherwise of the democratical operations of that measure. The noble Marquess had stated that the object was solely to remedy the inconveniences which might be felt in cones-

695
quence of the inattention of some of those who were likely to be called on to pay those rates and taxes which were required to be paid. If their Lordships would be pleased to advert to the provisions of the Reform Act, they would see that they provided, first, that a person should be in possession of the premises for which he claimed to vote for twelve months; next, that he should have paid his rates and taxes up to the 5th of April, and that he should have resided six months in the premises: complying with these provisions, he would be put on the register from the month of November, and have a vote. But what was the object of this Bill? It did not say that the elector was to have an additional notice from the overseers to let him know that he must take care and pay up his rates and taxes in time, but that he should be registered again, and put on the list of voters in the following November, if he would pay up his rates and taxes before the 11th of November. Thus it extended the time for the payment of rates and taxes, due on or before the 5th of April, for three months, and made a grant of six months in favour of persons whose names were on the registry. What would be the consequence? Of course, the effect of the measure would be to add largely to the number of voters throughout the country, and those voters would be of a different description to those at present on the registries. They would not be required to pay their rates and taxes up to the time they were required to pay them as the law stood at present; and that law had been framed after the most mature deliberation. It might therefore happen that many might be registered, and actually exercise the franchise, who were, in fact, unable to pay their rates and taxes, as required by the existing law. It was said, that at present many who were able to pay their rates and taxes were prevented from having their names placed on the registries on account of not knowing when those rates and taxes ought to be paid, and this measure was proposed as a remedy for that inconvenience. But no proof had been tendered showing that any inconvenience actually existed, and before such a measure was adopted, he thought the fullest proof of inconvenience should be required. It was also argued that for want of notice of the time when the payment of rates and taxes was required by the law, many neglected to make payment till the time appointed for payment was past, and in consequence were disqualified from being
696
placed on the registry; and it was therefore concluded that the payment of taxes at the time required by the law as it stood should be remitted, and that persons wishing to exercise the franchise should only be required to make payment in the October of the year preceding that in which they claimed to be placed on the registry, But that was a proposal which he thought their Lordships ought not to adopt, as if such a proposition was carried, a door would be opened for the admission to the registries of those who were in reality unable to pay the rates and taxes required by the law. Their Lordships ought also to recollect, that since the passing of the Reform Bill the taxes payable by householders paying 10 l. of yearly rent had been greatly reduced, and he believed, that the poor-rates had also been diminished. These reductions had afforded great relief to that particular class of persons, more than had been given to any other portion of society; and he thought that under the circumstances the amount of qualification ought not to be further diminished, for if it were, a worse description of electors would be the inevitable consequence. He perfectly recollected that a noble Friend of his, whom he did not then see in his place, had warned their Lordships, on a former occasion, of the danger of making any approach to democracy in a measure like this, and he told them if once such a measure was adopted, they could never return back. If it was found, when carried into operation, to act injuriously,—if its tendency was found to be destructive to the peace and well-being of society, still they could not step back to the place from which they started, for, if once granted, the measure must be permanent. Seeing no necessity for a measure like the present, and fearing the consequences which might result from its operation, he, for one, could not consent to its being read a second time. He recommended their Lordships not to pass this Bill, and, convinced that it could be productive of no good, that its adoption would only encourage further demands for other changes in the existing law, he begged leave to move, as an amendment, that the Bill be read a second time that day six months.
The Earl of Radnorsaid, that the noble Duke seemed to think that the respectability of the voter depended on the payment of rates. Such, however, was not the case, for his respectability was tested by the sort of house he occupied, the law requiring that that house should be of the value of 10 l.

697
yearly. The noble Duke was afraid of lowering the respectability of the electors by such a measure as the present; but that respectability depended, not on the payment of rates and taxes, but upon the position in society of the individuals claiming to be placed upon the registry; and therefore the respectability of the voter could not be affected by any alteration in the time appointed for the payment of rates and taxes. The present measure tended only to relieve the voter from a great inconvenience, and did not operate to lower the standard of respectability or intelligence. Great difficulties arose from the parish officers giving no notice of the time when the rates and taxes were payable, and frequently, when persons came to pay, the parish officers were not to be found, and many persons fully entitled to the franchise were, in consequence, disqualified. To remedy that inconvenience, the present measure was proposed, and he contended that it would not have the effect of lowering the standard of respectability of those persons who had to vote for Members of the other House of Parliament. Persuaded that the measure would be productive of the most beneficial consequences, he would cordially support the second reading of the Bill.
The Earl of Haddingtonsaid, the noble Earl who had last addressed their Lordships seemed to think that it was a sufficient test of respectability that the person claiming to be placed upon the registry occupied a house of 10 l. yearly value. He, however, differed essentially from the noble Lord, and if the noble Lord would look back to the discussions on the Reform Bill, he would find that, even at that period, great difference of opinion existed on the subject. The qualification which was settled at that time was a mixed one. The claimant was required to have paid his rates and taxes up to a certain time, and he was also required to live in a house of the value of 10 l. The object of the Reform Bill was, by this combination, to ascertain the respectability of the voter, and the effect of this measure was to do away with one of the tests of respectability required by the existing law; and the consequence would be, that a number of persons, by no means so respectable as the present electors were, would be admitted to vote. Their Lordships should recollect that a desire widely existed to increase the number of voters, and the present measure was one of the most moderate that had been proposed for the purpose of effecting that object. But their
698
Lordships might be assured that the present measure would not satisfy those who were more zealous for an extension of the suffrage than were the framers of the present Bill, and if this measure were allowed to pass, those more violent supporters of a more extended suffrage would have good grounds for urging their Lordships to make still further concession to their demands. He told them that this measure was materially connected with the question of the ballot; it was materially connected with the question of universal suffrage, and with the question of short Parliaments; it was materially connected with all those Radical theories, and he therefore trusted that the Bill would not be read a second time. He hoped their Lordships would take their stand upon the Reform Act, and while they maintained the Bill, and the whole Bill, that they would grant nothing but the Bill.
The Lord Chancellorobserved, that the noble Earl who had just sat down rested his opposition to the present measure on the ground that it was a violation of the Reform Act; and if the provisions of the Bill really made a departure from the principles of the Reform Act, he would allow the noble Lord's argument to be a good one. If, however, the present measure did not violate the principles of the Reform Act, then the noble Lord's argument had no force. What then was the object of the Reform Act? It gave the 10 l. householder the right of voting, provided he was not in arrear as regarded the payment of rates and taxes. The question then was, what was to be understood by "being in arrear," According to the law as it at present stood, if the householder did not pay his rates and taxes due on the 6th of April before the 20th of July, his right to be placed on the registry was lost. If that fact was universally known, and if there was no neglect and no inability on the part of the claimant, but if, in point of fact, the taxes due on the 6th of April were not paid till the 20th of July, merely from not knowing that the law required them to be paid before that day, it certainly could not be argued that there was any deterioration of respectability so far as the claimant to be registered was concerned. Now it was the practice in some places not to demand payment of taxes till the expiration of the three months intervening between the two periods he had mentioned, and a person was not considered to be in arrear till after that period had expired. The householder had no notice,

699
nothing to call his attention to the fact, that the law required him to pay his rates and taxes by a particular day, and he was only made aware of the fact when he found on application that he had no right to be registered. Certainly under such circumstances the non-payment of taxes before July did not detract from the respectability of any individual. He had, however, no doubt that from want of knowledge of what the law required, and from want of notice of the time of payment, many individuals were prevented from exercising the franchise to which they had a just right. Taking all these circumstances into consideration, he thought the present measure would be of great advantage to the country, as it would give more certainty to the existing law, and afford greater security for the exercise of the elective franchise by those who had au undoubted right to vote
The Earl of Harrowbythought this measure went a great deal further than its supporters were willing to allow, and if it was adopted, he thought they might at once introduce a bill rendering the payment of rates and taxes altogether unnecessary. By the Reform Bill, as it was originally framed, the payment of rates and taxes was not only rendered necessary, but the payment of rents was also required, as well as the occupation of a house of 10 l. yearly rent. The test of respectability required by that bill was a mixed one—namely, the punctual payment of rates am taxes, and the punctual payment of rent joined to the occupation of a 10 l. house The payment of rent was not persevered in, but the payment of rates and taxes was an essential feature of the bill. During six years that provision of the bill hat been rigidly enforced; but it seemed that the experience of those six years had beet lost, and that the people of England were ignorant of the actual state of the law, although at the registration courts they were every year afforded an opportunity of knowing what the law required from them before they were allowed to exercise the elective franchise. He certainly did not expect to have heard such an argument advanced by any one; but that it should have been brought forward by the noble and learned Lord on the woolsack, was to him a matter of astonishment. He had hitherto thought that the constitutional maxim was, that every man was bound to know what the law was. That doctrine was perhaps strict, but in the present case the law was every year brought under the
700
notice of every one claiming to exercise the elective franchise, so that there could be no valid plea of want of knowledge. It was stated that this measure would make no alteration as far as regarded the pecuniary respectability of the voters. The effect of the Bill would, however, be to insure a continuance on the register of persons whom friends might have enabled to qualify for the first time, after they had ceased to have any valid claim to be registered. It did therefore appear to him that the measure would affect the pecuniary respectability of the electors of England, and he was determined to oppose the second reading, as he considered the bill as the first of a series of innovations on the law which had been framed after the most ample consideration.
The Duke of Richmondsaid he would be a party to no measure which would infringe upon the principles of the Reform Act; but he conceived that the present bill had no such tendency, and that its object simply was to prevent persons from being deprived of their rights either by their own laches, or by the neglect or fraud of any other party. He knew that many persons who did not happen to belong to a political club in the borough where they resided frequently received no notice that their rates were due, and were consequently deprived of their rights as electors. With regard to the argument that the payment of debts when due was a proof of respectability, all he could say was, though he did not know what was the practice at the Conservative Club, that at White's and Boodle's it was not the rule to call for a payment of the subscriptions until a whole year after they had become due. He should certainly vote in favour of the second reading.
Lord Alvanleysaid, that in all parts of the country where the Poor-law unions prevailed, the rate-payers were obliged, by the rules of the commissioners, to pay their rates three months after they became due. He considered the present bill as the commencement of a series of invasions on the Reform Act, and should accordingly vote against it.
The Duke of Richmondobserved, that the Reform Act required the payment of other rates besides the poor-rates.
The House divided on the original motion.—Content—Present 45; Proxies 37–82.—Not Content—Present 67; Proxies 80–147:—Majority 65.

List of the CONTENTS.

Lord Chancellor

Montford

DUKES.

Fingall

Somerset

Leitrim

Devonshire

Uxbridge

Richmond

VISCOUNTS.

Cleveland

Bolingbroke

Sutherland

Torrington

Argyle

Melbourne

Hamilton

BARONS.

MARQUESSES.

Dacre

Lansdowne

Say and Sele

Breadalbane

Foley

Clanricarde

Hill

Headford

Lynedoch

Sligo

Seaford

Conyngham

Plunket

EARLS.

Glenelg

Huntingdon

Lilford

Thanet

BISHOPS.

Albemarle

Chichester

Radnor

Derry

Chichester

Durham

Minto

Ely

Durham

Hereford

Burlington

Lichfield

Paired Off.

FOR.

AGAINST.

Duke of Norfolk

Lord Reay

Marquess of Anglesey

Earl of Coventry

Earl of Roseberry

Earl of Cawdor

Earl of Carlisle

Earl of Clare

Lord Byron

Earl of Winchilsea