PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION
From a Parliamentary Paper (No. 69) just published by order of the House of Commons, containing an account of the Assessed Taxes for the last three years, ending April 5, 1831, paid by places sending Members to Parliament, we have the following conclusive and almost startling facts, grounded on the high authority of Parliament. The first column contains the names of the Boroughs, the other the amount of Assessed Taxes paid in the year, ending April 5, 1831 :— (57 Boroughs - selected entries shown)
| SCHEDULE A | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| £ | s. | d. | £ | s. | d. | ||
| Haslemere | 136 | 14 | 4 | Stockbridge | 252 | 0 | 2 |
| Midhurst | 677 | 16 | 0 | Wendover | 129 | 15 | 6 |
| Newport | 100 | 8 | 0 | Whitchurch | 343 | 7 | 1 |
| Newton (Hants) | 0 | 0 | 0 | Yarmouth | 172 | 8 | 5 |
| Petersfield | 513 | 6 | 11 | ||||
| Total | 6,452 | 10 | 8 | ||||
Thus 57 boroughs return not less than 113 Members, while during the last year, they paid to the assessed taxes the sum of 11,217l. 11s. 10¾d.—an average of not 100l, for each Member, and, altogether, not one twenty-seventh part of the amount of assessed taxes paid by the constituents of the two Members for Westminster, which is 303,420l. 15s. 9d. Thus, if the latter city were proportionately represented in numbers relative to its property, when compared with the average of these boroughs, it ought to have NOT LESS THAN THREE THOUSAND Representatives.
...