+ 1818 Oct. 21 Reasons §.1 Art 4

Parl Reform Bill

Reasons

§.1 Seats and Districts

Art 4 Seat one only

10

2

2. Avoidance of nullity of the Electors’ influence, in every District in which the two Members take opposite sides.

{Question 2. Seats – why no more than one to a District?

Reasons

1. If while the whole number of seats being as at present not less than 658, two seats were in all instances as at present in most instances allotted to a /an Election/ District, the number 668 already but too large would be swelled to 1336.

2. If while one set of Districts filled each of them but one seat, another set districts not twice as populous as those of the former filled each of them two seats, here would be inequality, and no use in it or reason for it.}

Under the existing system, though with the exception of the City of London no more than two seats are in any instance filled by one District, considerable is the inconvenience produced even by this lowest degree of plurality. When, in one and the same district, the two seats are filled by two Members, who, in respect of the general scheme of government, are, with relation to one another, guided by opposite opinions or moved by opposite interests, they in so far nullify one another: the district which they represent is without influence: with two such Representatives it is no better served than if it had none. Even under the proposed Reform, but for the arrangement here proposed, the case would in this respect be the same.

3. Securing the freedom of Election against partition-treaties between rival Candidates.

2. Under the existing system two proposed Members, who, if the district had but one seat would enter into competition, and thus allow to the several Electors the faculty of giving their votes to the worthiest, enter into a compact with one another, and by terrorism, in one or more of its shapes, exclude competitors, share the two seats between them, and thus for that time deprive the whole body of the Electors of the faculty of giving /exercise of their franchise/. Under the proposed system, no such terrorism could have place: not but that by combination, after every thing that could be done, emulation and competition might, in cases in which they would have been useful, be incidentally excluded. But the instances would be comparatively rare.