laves; a motion which, he said, had no connexion with
the emancipation of the negroes; and was directed not so much to the
conceding of civil rights, as to the preventing of criminal wrong. The
same topic was brought before the commons by Mr. W. Smith on the 20th of
April; but the resolutions thereon were negatived in both houses. At
the close of the session, indeed, the colonial legislatures were allowed
further opportunity of showing how far they were inclined by timely
concessions and purposes of good faith to avert the direct interference
of the mother country in their internal regulations.

MODE FOR AMENDING THE REPRESENTATION OF EDINBURGH, ETC.

During this session Mr. Abercromby moved leave to bring in a bill to
alter and amend the representation of the city of Edinburgh, which, he
said, contained a population of more than 100,000 inhabitants, while the
elective franchise was in the hands of a town-council of thirty-three
members, self-elected, and what were called the vested rights of that
body were generally the principal obstacles thrown in the way of a
better system. This motion was strongly opposed by the members for the
town and county of Edinburgh, on the ground that no corruption had been
charged against the corporation of Edinburgh; and by Mr. Canning, who
considered it was intended to undermine the barriers which resisted the
inroads of a more wide and sweeping innovation. Mr. Canning also brought
forward the unexampled prosperity of Edinburgh, and the contentment
which pervaded its population, as a convincing proof of the excellence
of the old system. After expatiating on the advantages connected with
the Scotch representation, he remarked that his objection to the present
motion was its application, as a single instance of reform in a borough,
to the general question. It was not unusual, he said, to bring forward
an attack on a single borough by an allegation of the prevalence of
abuses; but it was quite new to institute a charge against it because
its elective was not in proportion to its actual population. This
principle, if once admitted, would let in the general question of
reform, which would lead to endless squabbles. At the same time he
expressed a hope, that the motion might be repeated annually; but it
was to this end, for the innocent gratification of Lord John Russell and
those who advocated reform! On a division the motion was lost. About the
same time that this question was discusse