« ZurückWeiter »
sure for placing English Catholics from being elected to parliament, on an equal footing with those of although they possessed, or might Ireland, by giving them the elec- possess, the elective franchise. As tive franchise, and admitting them for danger in the present measure, to hold certain offices. At the he saw none; and he denied that suggestion of Mr. Canning, it was it bound its advocates to support divided into two bills; the first of any ulterior measure. The Cathowhich was confined to the grant of lics of England were few in num. the elective franchise by repealing ber; and even in Lancashire, the so much of the statute of William county in which their party was III, as related to the administra- strongest, he did not believe that tion of the oath of supremacy to they would have influence enough persons voting for members of to return a single member to par- ! parliament. This concession, being liament. The law of exclusion at supported by Mr. Peel, passed the present was one of the very worst Commons without much difficul- character. Its enforcement dety. The objection relied on, es- pended upon the pleasure of indipecially by Mr. Bankes, was, that viduals, who would never make this was the first step to further use of it upon public grounds, or encroachment, and that it was in- upon principle; because the indiconsistent to give Catholics the vidual who barred the Catholic right of voting for members of par- from voting, was always the party liament, and yet exclude them from against whom he was going to sitting there themselves. Mr. Peel vote. If the exclusion were to declared that he could not see, how, continue, he would prefer seeing upon granting the elective fran- the veto made absolute, to leaving chise to the Catholics, he was at the law in its present state ; but, all bound to grant them the further as he thought that admission could ! right of sitting in parliament. In do no possible mischief, and that fact, the two things had no connexion much advantage would accrue out with each other. The hon. mem- of that community of feeling beber for Corfe Castle had said- tween Catholic and Protestant, “ This measure gives us a class of which the bustle of an election men who may make members of would produce, he gave his hearty parliament, but who cannot be support to the measure. come members of parliament them- The principal division on the selves.” Why, what was there new bill took place in the Committee, in this ? From the different rights where it was carried by a majority attaching to different kinds of pro- of 89 to 30. perty, there were already thousands On the 9th of July, lord Lansof men in the country who could downe moved the second reading of vote for members of parliament, it in the House of Lords. It was and yet could not sit in parliament supported by the bishop of Northemselves; and vice versâ, there wich, lord Westmoreland, lord were many, who were competent Liverpool, lord Melville, and lord to sit in the House, but who had not Harrowby; but it was vehemently not qualification for voting. There opposed by lord Redesdale, and the were, for instauce, the clergy of Lord Chancellor. The result of a England, a whole body of indivi- division was a majority of 7 duals who were excluded by law against the bill; the numbers
being as follows: Contents, 48; signatures. This was considerProxies, 30-73: Not-contents, ably more than two-thirds of all 41; Proxies, 39-80.
the free-holders of the county ; for, The second bill-that for making at the contested election sixteen Catholics eligible to certain offices years before, when every part of in England also passed the House Yorkshire was ransacked for voters, of Commons, but it was not in- only 23,070 came to the poll. Lord troduced into the Lords; the mar. Milton, in presenting the petition, quis of Lansdowne having, even stated, that the utmost pains had before the rejection of its comrade, been taken to exclude the names expressed his willingness to defer of persons who were not bona fide the consideration of it till the fol- freeholders; and he did not believe, lowing session, in order to give haying gone over the whole of time for its full discussion. them, that there were fifty to
On the 3rd of July, leave was which an exception could bereasonasked and obtained in the House ably made. One or two had signof Commons for sir Henry Parnell, ed as trustees, a few more as freeand sir John Newport, to bring holders of Hull, and of York, who in a bill to enable Roman Ca- ought properly not to have been tholics to make and execute gifts included, and he believed that the and grants for pious and charitable names of five females would be purposes; but nothing was done found upon the list. in pursuance of this permission. On the 24th of April, lord John The only effect of it was, to excité Russell moved, that the present the vigilance of the opponents of state of parliamentary representa the Catholic cause; and, in parti. ation required the most serious cular, to induce lord Colchester to consideration of the house; lord move for returns of the number of Normanby seconded the motion, Roman Catholic Chapels, Schools, which was supported by Mr. RiAcademies, Colleges, and religious cardo, sir J. Newport, and sir F. houses in England, and also of the Blake, and opposed by sir H. number of persons belonging to East and Mr. R. Martin. The such monastic establishments, or house divided for the motion, bound by monastic or religious 169-against it, 280,-majority, vows. This motion was reprobated ul. T'he discussion was exceedby lord Rosslynas inquisitorial, and, ingly languid and did not excite at the recommendation of the lord much interest. Lord J. Russell's chancellor, it was withdrawn by plan of reform was, to have a hunthe noble mover, who stated, howa dred members, to be taken from ever, that he would renew it, if the quota now furnished by the any step should be taken towards boroughs, added to the representasuch a bill as that which had been tion of the counties and populous mentioned in the House of Com- towns. The only circumstance, in mons.
which it differed from the scheme A number of petitions in favour proposed by him in the preceding of parliamentary reform were pre- year, was, that he now professed sented; among which, that of his willingness to acknowledge the Yorkshire was the most conspicu- right of the boroughs, which should ous. It boasted of being 380 feet be disfranchised, to have compenin length, and of having 17,083 sation for the loss of their privilege. VOL. LXV.
In Scotch counties, the right of one who is possessed of a single voting is annexed, not to the proacre of land within the county; prietorship, but to the feudal su- while the whole of the land may periority, of the land. On the belong to, and be the property of, 2nd of June, lord Archibald Hame persons who have not a single vote ilton, who had in former sessions for the representative: 5. That called the attention of the legis- the house would, early in the next lature to this subject, after unfold- session of parliament, take into ing the evils of a system, which its most serious consideration the excluded the great mass of the state of the representation of property as well as of the popula- counties in Scotland, with a view tion of the country, from political to effect some extension of the power, moved five resolutions, in number of votes, and to establish which were embodied the facts and some connexion between the right the principles which showed the of voting and the landed property necessity of an alteration. These of that country. resolutions were to the following The remedy, which lord A. effect: 1. That it appeared by à Hamilton recommended in his certified copy of the roll of free speech, was, to leave existing holders of every county in Scot- rights untouched, but to increase land, laid before Parliament in the number of electors by giving 1820, that the total number of votes to those to whom the do persons having a right to vote, in minium utile of the land belonged. all those counties together, did not These principles and resolutions exceed 2,889: 2. That, by the were opposed by sir George Clerk, same return, it appeared that the Mr. H. Twiss, lord Binning, and greatest number of persons having a the Lord Advocate.
Their only right to vote in any one county, did arguments were, that the people not exceed 240, viz., for the county of Scotland did not complain, and of Fife; and that the smallest num- that, in fact, the electors were ber did not exceed 9, viz., for the nearly all land-owners. The first county of Cromarty: 3. That it topic was obviously one of declafurther appeared from the same mation and not of argument; and return, that many of the same the other tendered an issue altopersons had a right to vote in gether erroneous : for the gravaseveral counties, and consequently men of the charge made by lord that the total number of voters for A. Hamilton was not that the all the counties of Scotland was con- actual electors had no connection siderably less than 2,889: 4. That with the landbut, that it was the right of voting for a represen- not their property in land which tative for a Scotch
county depends, gave them their vote that the not on the possession of the domi- vote might be separated totally nium utile of any real landed from substantial property-and estate in such county, but on hold- that, in point of fact, only a very ing superiority over such estate, few of the land-holders of Scotwhich superiority might be, and land had any share in the elections. frequently is, disjoined from the The resolutions were supported by property, insomuch that of all the lord Milton, lord Glenorchy, sir persons qualified to vote for a James Macintosh, and Mr. KenScotch county, there may not be nedy.
The previous question being in it the inhabitants of Scotland, put on the first resolution, the who took an interest in the state House divided: the Ayes, 117; of their representation, would see the Noes, 152; which gave against a much nearer prospect of their lord A. Hamilton's motion, a ma- wishes being accomplished than jority of only 35.* The announce- some gentlemen who spoke, had ment of the numbers was received anticipated. with loud cheers from the opposi- The magistrates of the Borough tion benches: and lord Milton ex- of Inverness having been removed pressed a hope, that the result of from their office by process of law, the division would be well considere in consequence of a legal infored by the whole country; and that mality, the crown had in 1822
• The following is a list of the minority on this occasion. Abereromby, hon. J. Guise, sir B. W.
Rice, T. S.
Ridley, sir M. W.
Robarts, A. W.
Rumbold, C. E.
Russell lord J.
Russell, R. G.
Robinson, sir G.
Sefton, earl of
Smith, hon. R.
Taylor, M. A.
Titchfield, marq. of
Townshend, lord C.
Tulk, C. A.
Whitmore, W. W.
Hamilton, lord A.
Kennedy, T. F.
Grattan, J. Grenfell, P.
granted a warrant, empowering and, in point of discretion, the certain persons, therein named, to propriety of this mode of proelect counsellors for the Borough; ceeding : contending that the and under this warrant, the same warrants ought to have directed persons were restored to office, who the election to be by the open vote had been previously fdisplaced as of the burgesses. His motion on unduly elected. Lord A. Hamile the subject was rejected by a maton questioned both the legality, jority of 49 to 31.