govern its proceedings. The Right Honorable Gentleman then brought forward his measure, and at once met the objection to which I have referred, and in a few words :-"I admit at once," said he, "the full force of the objection which will be urged against that part of the measure I propose, by which the existing right of voting is taken away from the freeholder. No doubt it is a vested right, but it is a right that differs in its character from the rights of property, and other strictly private rights. It is a public trust given for public purposes, to be touched, no doubt, with great caution and reluctance; but still which we are competent to touch, if the public interest manifestly demands the sacrifice." Such were the sentiments of the Right Honorable Gentleman-sentiments, be it observed, in which the House agreed; and never was any measure carried through the House with more general approbation. Shall we say, then, that this principle is to be maintained when the poor peasantry of Ireland are concerned; but that when it touches the great and the wealthy, we are not to venture to treat the question as the public interest demands? (cheers). Shall we at once deprive the freeholder of Ireland of that right which he merely exercised as the Constitution gave it to him, and shall we be afraid to touch the right of the noble proprietor of Gatton, who returns two Members to Parliament, although he derived no such power from the Constitution? Shall we say that a strictly constitutional, a strictly legal right shall be abolished, because the convenience, the necessity of the country demands it-and that a right which is mere usurpation, with no sanction of law, and supported only by usage, shall be respected and left untouched, though the public interest requires, and the public voice demands its abolition?

Shall we make this glaring distinction between rich and poor, disfranchise the peasant, and prop the fortunes of the peer? Are we to disfranchise the one of a legal and constitutional right, while we allow the other to remain in undisturbed possession of an illegal and unconstitutional privilege (cheers). The House cannot hold this language, nor pursue this course. The plan we propose is, therefore, to meet the difficulty in point as the Duke of Wellington and his colleagues met that of 1829; only our measure will have the effect of disfranchising a number of boroughs, instead of a number of voters (hear, hear). It would be a task of extreme difficulty, if not of utter impossibility, to ascertain the exact proportion of the wealth, trade, extent, and population of a given number of places, and we have, therefore, been governed by a public record—the Population Returns of 1821, and we propose that every borough which in that year had less than 2000 inhabitants, should altogether lose the right of sending Members to Parliament (loud cheering for some minutes). The effect of this will be utterly to disfranchise sixty boroughs (cheers and laughter). But we do not stop here (continued cheers). As the Honorable Member for Boroughbridge would say, we go plus ultra. We find that there are forty seven boroughs, of only 4000 inhabitants, and these we shall deprive of the right of sending more than one Member to Parliament (cheers). We likewise intend that Weymouth, which at present sends four Members, shall, in future, only send two. The abolition of sixty boroughs will occasion 119 vacancies, to which are to be added 47 for the boroughs allowed to send only one Member, and two of which Weymouth will be deprived; making in the whole 168 vacancies-that, I believe, is the

whole extent to which Ministers propose to go in disfranchisement, (cheers). But, as I have already said, we do not mean to allow that the remaining boroughs should be in the hands of select corporations that is to say, of a small number of persons to the exclusion of the great body of the inhabitants, who have property and interest in the place. It has been a point of great difficulty to decide how and to whom the franchise should be extended. Although it is a muchdisputed question, yet I believe it will be found, that in ancient times every inhabitant householder resident in a borough was competent to vote for Members of Parliament. As, however, this arrangement excluded villains and strangers, the franchise always belonged to a particular body in every town; that the voters were persons of property, is obvious from the fact that they were called upon to pay subsidies and taxes. Two different courses seem to have prevailed in different places. In some, every person having a house, and being free, was admitted to a general participation in the privileges formerly possessed by burgesses in others the bur. gesses became a select body, and were converted into a kind of corporation, more or less distinctmore or less exclusive of the rest of the inhabitants. These differences, the House will be aware, have led to those complicated questions of right which we are every week called upon to decide. I think no one will deny that our Election Committees often have before them the most vexatious, the most difficult, and, at the same time, the most useless questions that men can be called upon to decide (hear, hear). Originally these points were decided in this House by the prevalence of one party or of another: they are now determined more fairly by committees, but still the determinations

are all founded upon the iniquity of some party (hear, hear, and no, no). I contend that it is important to get rid of these complicated rights -- of these vexatious questions, and to give to the real property and to the real respectability of the different cities and towns the right of voting for Members of Parliament. The first distinction that naturally occurred as forming a proper class of voters was that pointed out by the Bill of the Right Honorable Baronet opposite (Sir Robert Peel), for persons qualified to serve on juries. But, upon looking into this qualification, we found that in Edinburgh, Liverpool, Manchester, and other important places, although it certainly would give an extended constituency, it would still be too limited for the number of the inhabitants. On the other hand, in small boroughs, it would have the evil of confining the elective franchise to a very few persons indeed. According to the returns from the Tax Office, which, I admit, are not entirely to be depended upon, - ten, seven, and three, and even one, would be the number of persons in some towns rated for a house of 201. a-year. Therefore we saw, if we took this qualification, we should be creating new close boroughs, and confining the elective franchise, instead of enlarging it; we therefore propose that the right of voting should be given to householders paying rates for houses of the yearly value of 10l. and upwards. Whether he be the proprietor, or whether he only rent the house, the person rated will have the franchise upon certain conditions hereafter to be named. At the same time it is not intended to deprive the present electors of their privilege to vote, provided they be resident. With regard to non-residents, we are of opinion, that they introduce so much expense, are the cause of so mi ch bribery, and occasion such manifold

and manifest evils, that they ought not to be permitted to retain their votes (cheers). At the same time, I do not believe that we are inflicting even upon this class any injury, for nearly all, either in one place or in another, will possess a franchise in the great mass of householders (hear, hear). With regard to resident voters, we propose that they should retain their right during life, but that no vote should be allowed hereafter, excepting on the condition that the person claiming the right be a householder to the extent of £10 a-year. Such is the plan as regards cities and towns. I shall now proceed to the manner in which we propose to extend the franchise in counties. The Bill I wish to introduce will give all copyholders to the value of £10 a-year, qualified under the Right Honorable Gentleman's Bill to serve on juries, a right to vote for the return of Knights of the Shire (cheers); it also provides that leaseholders for not less than twentyone years, whose leases have not been renewed within two years, shall enjoy the same privilege-

Sir R. PEEL.-What amount of rent will be necessary to give the right?

LORD JOHN RUSSELL.The right will depend upon a lease for twenty-one years, where the annual rent is £50. (cheers). It will be recollected, that when speaking of the numbers disfranchised, I said that 168 vacancies would be created. We are of opinion, that it would not be wise or expedient to fill up the whole number of those vacancies. After mature deliberation we have arrived at the conclusion that the number of Members at present in the House is inconveniently large (cheers, mixed with hear, hear, and laughter from the opposition). I believe there is no Honorable Gentleman, who was a Member of the House, before the Union with IreLand, who will not agree that the

facility of getting through business has since been greatly diminished, in consequence of the addition of 100 to the number of members (no, no, and cheers.) Besides, it is to be considered when this Parliament is reformed, as I trust it will before long, there will not be such a number of Members who enter Parliament merely for the sake of the name, and as a matter of style and fashion (oh! and cheers). It is not to be disputed that some Members spend their money in foreign countries, and never attend the House at all, to a certain degree, to the inconvenience of those who do attend to their public duties. A few, I know, for two or three years together, have never attended in their places; and, at the end of a Parliament, I believe there is generally found an instance or two of individuals, who, having been elected, have never appeared at the Table, even to take the oaths (cheers). But, it is obvious, that whenever a Member has a certain number of constituents watching his actions, and looking to his votes, in order that the people's money be not given for purposes inconsistent with the people's interests, his attendance will be much more regular. Therefore, when we are proposing a great change, by cutting off a number of Members, the effect will be to facilitate public business, to the manifest advantage of the country (cheers, and no, no). We propose, then, to fill up a certain number of the va cancies, but not the whole of them. We intend that seven large towns should send two Members each, and that twenty other towns should send one Member each. The seven towns which are to send two Members each, are the following:Manchester & Salford Birmingham & Aston Leeds Greenwich, Deptford, & Woolwich, forining a district

Wolverhampton, Bilston, & Sedgeley, combined Sheffield Sunderland & the Wearmouths

The large and populous parish of Marylebone, which, no doubt, is entitled to be represented,—at least, as much entitled to it as Boroughbridge, is included in one of the districts I have named. Next we propose an addition to the Members for the larger counties—a species of reform always recommended, and which, I believe Lord Chatham was among the first to advocate. Those counties contain a variety of interests, and form an admirable constituency; in some, as in Staffordshire, there is a large manufacturing population better represented in this way than perhaps in any other; and as county Members have unquestionably the most excellent class of constituents, they form, of themselves, a most valuable class of Representatives. The Bill I shall beg leave to introduce will give two additional Members to each of the twenty-seven counties, where the

It is proposed also that the Isle of Wight should return one Member.

I now proceed to another part of the measure. I spoke at first of the evils connected in the minds of the people with the power of nomination by individuals, and with the power of election by a few persons in very small and close corporations. The remedies I have detailed are pointed against these defects. I now beg leave to direct the attention of the House to a leading feature in the plan of reform, that which relates to the expense of long protracted polls, and which, while it removes that evil, also greatly facilitates the collection of the sense of the elective body. The names of electors are to be enrolled, and the disputes regarding qualification will, in a great measure, be avoided (hear, hear). We propose that all electors in counties, cities, towns, or boroughs, shall be registered, (cheers), and for this purpose machinery will be put in motion very similar to that in the Jury Act-that is to say, at a certain period of the year (I now speak of boroughs), the parish officers and churchwardens are to make a list of the persons who occupy houses of the yearly value of £10. This list

of names will be placed on the church doors, we will suppose in September; and in the following month, October, the returning officer will hold a sort of trial of votes, where claims made, and objections stated, will be considered and decided. Any one seeing the list may, of course, challenge the validity of any person's vote. When this process has been gone through, the returning officer will declare the list complete, and on the 1st of December in every year the list will be published; every person who chooses will obtain a copy of it, and it will be the rule to govern electors and elections for the ensuing year. We intend that, during that ensuing year, every person shall be entitled to vote whose name is in the list, and that no question shall be asked but as to his identity, and whether he has polled before at the same election (cheers). These regulations are extremely simple, and will prevent all those contentious, vexatious, and noisy scenes, now so often witnessed, regarding disputed votes (hear). The means of ascertaining who are electors being thus easy, there is no reason why the poll should be kept open for a week, or for eight days, or, as in some places, for a longer period. It is proposed that, nearly according to the present law, booths shall be erected in the different parishes, so that the whole poll may be taken in two days (cheers). For my own part, I would say that the time may come when the machinery will be found so simple that every vote may be given in a single day; but, in introducing a new measure, it is necessary to allow for possible defects in the working of the machinery attempts might be made to obstruct the polling, and we, therefore, recommend two days, in order that no voter may be deprived of the opportunity of offering his suffrage. I think the sense of the electors in any town may be taken in

two days. As to counties, however, the matter may be somewhat more difficult: we propose, in the same manner as in towns and boroughs, that the churchwardens should make out a list of all persons claiming the right to vote in the several parishes,› and that these lists shall be affixed to the church doors. A person to be appointed (say a Barrister of a certain standing) by the Judge of Assize, shall go an annual circuit within a certain time after the lists have been published, and he will hear all claims to vote, and objections to voters. Having decided who are entitled to exercise the privilege, he shall sign his name at the bottom of the list, and transmit it to the Clerk of the Peace. The list will then be enrolled as the roll of all the freeholders of the county for the ensuing year. With respect to the manner of proceeding at elections, we have it in view to introduce a measure which can hardly fail to be an improvement of the present system. Everybody knows, and must have lamented the enormous expense to which candidates are put in bringing voters to the poll. It is well known, that in Yorkshire, without a contest, it has cost upwards of 100,000l. to bring the electors to the poll. In Devonshire the electors are obliged to travel forty miles over hard crossroads, which occupies one day; the next is consumed in polling, and the third in returning home; the whole a manifest source of great expense and most inconvenient delay. We propose, therefore, that the poll shall be taken in separate districts, those districts to be arranged according to circumstances by the magistrates at quarter-sessions (cheers). The counties will be divided into districts, which shall not be changed for two years. The formation of those districts will give an opportunity of more readily taking the votes when

F

an election occurs. The