rose to present a petition from the Insurance Offices of London and Westminster. It was signed by two chartered companies—the Royal Exchange and the London Assurance—and by fifteen other bodies of the same kind, which had been established with a capital of many millions. They contended, that the rate of duty on Fire Insurances had sensibly affected their progress, and lessened the amount of property that would otherwise have been insured; they confidently believed that a reduction of the duty would increase the practice of Insurance, and thus indemnify the country from any loss in the revenue. The duty amounted to a tax in some cases of one hundred per cent. The subject was of vast importance, not only to the petitioners but to the public at large; and when it was stated that an insurer to the extent of 20s. paid 40s. duty upon his policy, it would be obvious how much it must obstruct insurances, and the effect was, to increase the destruction of property and the loss to individuals, especially in the middle classes of society. The duty first imposed in 1782, amounted to 1s. 6d. per cent.; in 1798, it was increased to 2s.; in 1804, to 2s. 6d.; and in 1816, to 3s. According to returns before the House, the number of inhabited houses in England, Wales, and Scotland in 1801, was one million five hundred and seventy-five thousand two hundred and thirty; in 1811, it had increased to two million one hundred and one thousand houses; and in 1821, to two million four hundred and twenty nine thousand six hundred and thirty houses. The amount of duty paid in England, Wales, and Scotland upon insurances from fire, was 547,845l., which covered property to the extent of about 400,000,000l. sterling. This sum might appear large, yet it was, in fact, small, compared with the real amount of capital invested. According to the best calculation, 400,000,000l. sterling was not more than one third, or one fourth of the property in England, Wales, and Scotland, liable to be destroyed by fire. The petitioners were unanimously of opinion, therefore, that if the duty were reduced to one half, insurances would be greatly multiplied, and the revenue increased; that it would be followed, in short, by the same results that had attended the reduction of duty upon wine, coffee, and other articles; while private losses and distress would thereby be greatly avoided. The Royal Exchange and London Assurance Companies also dealt in marine risks, the duty upon which, in 1814, amounted to not less than 485,066l., which had been gradually reduced, until, in 1826, it had fallen to 219,629l. The cause of this diminution was very obvious—that Insurance Offices had been established on various parts of the continent, and in the United States of America. The premium in London upon a policy from London to Calais, was 5s. per 100l., and upon 10,000l. the amount of premium would be 25l., and the duty upon it no less than 12l. 10s. Bullion was the great article of commerce between London and Calais, and as there was no corresponding duty in France, what cost here 37l. 10s. for the insurance, might there be done for 25l. The same proportions were kept in the insurances to Holland; the premium being 7s. 6d. per cent and the duty as before 12l. 10s. On a voyage to the United States, the duty was 21s. per 100l., and the duty upon it twenty per cent. The hon. member then read a letter from a large manufacturer of Birmingham, complaining that the heavy duty operated most grievously upon all shipments to the United States, and was a sufficient inducement to merchants in America to effect insurances at home instead of ordering them to be made in England. The writer added, that two thirds of the shipments now making for the United States were insured there. The hon. alderman also stated, that a house in London, which formerly effected insurances in London for a mercantile establishment in Amsterdam to the extent of 6,000l. per annum, now did no business of the kind for it, all the insurances being effected in Holland. The merchants in London were thus deprived of a considerable branch of business, and government of a large amount of revenue. He hoped he had stated enough to induce the Chancellor of the Exchequer to turn his serious attention to the subject.

supported the prayer of the petition, and expressed his hope that ministers would find themselves warranted in reducing the duty.

said, that as the hon. alderman had confined himself to requesting the full consideration of the subject, he had no hesitation in assuring him, not only that he would do so, but that he had already taken measures to ascertain the facts of the case as far as regarded marine insurances, in order to decide whether the duty could be reduced without injury to the revenue. The income derived from the duty on insurances exceeded a million, and it would be the height of imprudence to give the House or individuals an expectation that it would be possible to make any arrangement which might put in hazard that amount of revenue. As to fire assurances, when the hon. member stated, that the amount of duty at present was such as to impede the insurance of property, the data before the House did not warrant such a position. The amount of duty on fire assurances had been regularly progressive; and whatever the check might have been on the ordinary principles governing financial arrangements, it had not been sufficient to put a stop to the increase. In one year it was 600,000l.; in the next, 613,000l.; in the next, 620,000l.; in the next, 627,000l.; in the next, 659,000l.; in the next, 692,000l.; and in the last instance, 727,000l.;—without a single intermission of progress, or any thing like a decrease. He must deny that the amount had not considerably increased with the extension of property; for instance, in three years after the 3s. duty had been imposed, there had been an increase of 100,000l., showing that 60,000,000l. or 70,000,000l. of additional property must have been insured at the offices during that period. Although he agreed that the increase of capital had been great within the time mentioned, the increase of insurances to which he had alluded was great also. With respect to marine insurances, he believed they had in some degree decreased; in the comparison between the years 1826 and 1814; but if his hon. friend took the average of the last six years, with those of the preceding six, and then referred further back, pursuing the same relative scale of average, he would find that the declension had not occurred in the degree he had supposed. It was quite evident that in a time of peace this business could not be carried to the same extent as during a war. Now, in the last year, insurances had been effected upon 92,000,000l. of property; in 1812, the last year of the war, insurances had been only effected upon 93,000,000l.; thus showing only a difference of one million in the amount covered during these relative periods. He was here speaking of the London business; for they had no other returns before them. He would turn his best attention to the subject, to see if any new arrangement could be made for the satisfaction of the parties; but when his hon. friend said that British insurances would be transferred abroad, if the duty were not lowered, he seemed to forget the superior security which was assigned to the character of the British merchant, and the greater facility for the recovery of these losses in the tribunals of this country. He believed that, in many instances, insurances had been effected abroad, but not to the extent which had been supposed.

remarked upon the want of the relative proportion of property insured, to the general increase of property. Before the year 1814, the insurance duty amounted to 514,000l.; and in 1824 it was 631,000l. [The Chancellor of the Exchequer here said, that it had afterwards increased to 727,000l.] He called upon the right hon. gentleman to bear in mind, that houses were the principal property insured, and it was obvious that, when the rate became so high, the owners of them preferred incurring their own risk, and they therefore generally omitted the rebuilding clause in their leases; by which they put into their pockets, as landlords, three times the amount of their risk. That was the main reason why the amount of the fair insurances had diminished. With reference to the impolicy of these high duties, he rather thought that while the insurance offices were proceeding in this way, they were also engaged in a sort of juggle with the government, to introduce compulsory clauses in the bill for marking policies. With respect to the foreign insurance companies, they were of the highest character.

called, the attention of the government to the marine insurances, from their manifest operation upon the shipping interest, which was already so seriously, and he feared dangerously, restricted.

said, he could not agree with the chancellor of the Exchequer in the propriety of this tax, which he had always looked upon as a grievance. It was a tax upon the prudence and providence of persons in trade, and as objectionable an impost as could well have been introduced. He believed that the amount of the rate imposed diminished the desire to insure. He, for instance, would never himself insure his own property on any large scale, because the price to be paid greatly exceeded the ratio of the risk. He wished to suggest to the chancellor of the Exchequer the risk he ran of having this business transferred to Ostend, or some of the opposite ports, where, through British capital and agents, it might be done so as materially to affect the revenue here.

rose to present a petition of which he had given notice, from the British, native, and other inhabitants of Calcutta, respecting the law of Real Property within that settlement, and particularly respecting the liability of such property in the hands of executors and administrators to the payment of the debts of the deceased. This petition, which was signed, he believed, by almost every person of respectability and opulence in Calcutta, complained of the imperfect and unsettled state of the law in that particular, arising chiefly from some late decisions of the Supreme Court, affecting property to the amount of many millions sterling.—The petition stated, that previously to the granting by his majesty Of the charter of the Supreme Court, in 1774, houses and lands of British subjects were liable to be seized and sold for the payment of debts, as well in the hands of the owner in his life-time, as of his executor or administrator after his decease. The letters patent or charter of justice, of 1774, recognized this to be the law; for after giving to the Supreme Court the power to try and determine actions and suits of a personal nature, and "all rights, titles, claims and demands, of, in, and to, any houses, lands, or other things, real or personal," within the provinces of Bengal, Bahar, and Orissa, against his majesty's subjects, and against the executors and administrators of such his subjects, it authorizes the same court to give judgment in such actions, and thereupon to award and issue writs of execution, commanding the sheriff to seize, and deliver possession of houses, lands, and other things recovered by such judgment; or to levy any sums of money recovered by such judgment, by seizing and selling so much of the houses, lands, debts, or other effects, of the party against whom such writs shall have been awarded, as shall be sufficient to satisfy such judgment. The petition stated that it was the meaning and intention of this provision in the letters patent, to place houses and lands on the same footing with personality as to liability for debts, either in the life-time or after the death of the debtor, and that such had always been considered to be the law, and never had been doubted until lately, when in a case decided in the Supreme Court, sir Charles Grey, the chief justice, had declared it to be his opinion, that such estates being of inheritance, which he thought British subjects might hold in Calcutta, were no assets in the hands of an executor or administrator for the payment of debts; and that, if liable for the debts of the deceased at all, they were liable in the hands of the heir, who was the person to be sued, and not the executor or administrator. The other two judges, however, sir Anthony Buller and sir John Franks, were of opinion that such estates were liable to the payment of such debts, and were assets for that purpose in the hands of the executor or administrator, who might lawfully sell and convey the same.—The judgment of the court was given in favour of such power, but the petition stated, that such was the alarm created by the effect of the opinion given by the chief justice, joined to a decision which had subsequently taken place respecting a claim of dower, that the sale of houses and lands by executors and administrators had been wholly suspended, and that all titles to houses and lands which had ever been conveyed by an executor or administrator were rendered liable to objections and doubts. He (Mr. Fergusson) could well conceive this, for he had no hesitation in saying that if the law was, as laid down by the chief justice, of whose talents and learning he could not speak otherwise than with respect, it would go to shake almost every title in Calcutta. In the course of a long practice, in which numerous tales had come under his (Mr. Fergusson's) consideration, he scarcely remembered one in which some link in the chain of title did not consist of a conveyance from an executor or administrator. He (Mr. Fergusson) could safely say, that during a practice of seventeen years, he had never heard either at the bar or from the bench, a doubt thrown upon the law, that an executor or administrator had a power to sell an estate in lands or houses, whether of inheritance or not, for the payment of the debts generally of the deceased, and that such estate was assets in his hands for that purpose. The case of dower referred to in that petition, was one in which the chief justice and sir John Franks, the only two judges who then constituted the court, concurred in holding, that the lands of a British subject in Calcutta could not be sold, either in his life-time or after his death, for the payment of his debts, unless subject to the right of dower. This was, certainly, the first decision that had been given in the Supreme Court in favour of dower, as a claim preferable to debts; and the petitioners contended that by the law and practice which had at all times obtained, lands had been seized, and sold by the sheriff under writ of fieri facias, as well in the lifetime of the owner as (after his death) in the hands of his executors or administrators for the payment of debts, and that no reservation had ever been made or claimed to be made on account of dower.—Whatever might be the law on this point, it would seem that, for the future at least, it would be most desirable that in a commercial community like Calcutta, the transfer of landed property, particularly for the payment of debts, should be entirely freed from this charge, and the rather as by the bankrupt law, the real estate of a bankrupt situate in any part of the dominions of the Crown passed by the assignment and became liable to the payment of the bankrupt's debts discharged from all claim of dower. There was another judgment of the Supreme Court mentioned in the petition, which was the unanimous judgment of the three judges, but in which the point was decided for the first time, that an alien could not take lands by descent in Calcutta. From the protection afforded by the British government to persons residing within its territories it was certain the subjects of foreign states had been induced to resort to and settle in Calcutta, and had purchased lands and houses which had descended to their heirs, as the petition stated, without let or hindrance. In the two first charters, which were granted in the reigns of George 1st and 2nd it was recited, that the "United Company had, by strict and equal distribution of justice, very much encouraged not only his Majesty's subjects, but likewise the subjects of other countries, and the natives of the adjacent countries, to resort to and settle in Calcutta." This was a point of great importance, and which involved questions of general consideration; and he (Mr. Fergusson) was sensible that if any thing was to be done to alter or affect the law on this subject, it must be under an express sanction of the Crown. There was one remaining point noticed in this petition, which was also of great interest, he meant the want of a proper law respecting insolvent debtors, whereby many persons were imprisoned for a great length of years in the gaol of Calcutta, although they had no means of discharging their debts, and had delivered up all they possessed. He (Mr. F.) understood that a bill for the purpose of remedying this evil was now in preparation, under the sanction of the Court of Directors and the Board of Control. This subject he did not therefore mean to include in the bill, which it was his intention, after presenting this petition, to move the House for leave to bring in. He thought he had said enough to satisfy the House that the law, and the very important subject to which he had called their attention, ought not to be suffered to remain in its present unsettled and imperfect state; he did not, therefore, anticipate any objection to the motion of which he had given notice for that evening. In the mean time he would content himself with moving for leave to bring up the petition.

expressed his satisfaction at seeing the subject taken up by the learned gentleman, and proceeded to comment upon the want of attention towards the affairs of India in general. They had a Board of Control; but he was at a loss to discover in what respect that Board devoted their attention to India. The members of it were often turned out in the course of a year, not because they were unfit for the office, but because they belonged to one or other political party. His majesty's government, in looking back for a series of years, should take shame to themselves for the manner in which they had conducted the government of India, and for the way in which that Board of Control, which presided over a hundred million of men, had been constituted and maintained. He condemned the restrictions which existed upon the commerce and intercourse between this country and our Indian possessions. Those possessions were full of wealth, and abounded in large tracts of rich and unoccupied land. Why not remove these absurd restrictions, encourage emigration thither, and, instead of sending English capital to the various countries of South America, allow it to be employed freely and advantageously in India? He trusted that the learned gentleman would go on with the subject which he had taken up. He might look for the support of that House, and of public opinion out of doors.

said, that so far as he had communicated with the Board of Control, he had found on the part of its members, and particularly on the part of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Wynn), its late president, the greatest facility and attention afforded to him. Indeed, the right hon. gentleman had upon all occasions exhibited the most sincere intentions and assiduous zeal for the promotion of the interests of India.

agreed with the hon. member in the propriety of the measure he wished to introduce. In his opinion there ought to be a discussion every year in the affairs of India, similar to that introduced by the late lord Melville when he brought forward his yearly Budget. Such discussions tended greatly to enlighten public opinion upon the subject of India.

defended the Board of Control from the reflections of the hon. member (for Aberdeen), and de- clared, that he never recollected any man who had attended with more assiduity, he might even say affection, to the concerns of the people of India, than the late right hon. president. After observing that there had always been an understanding that the law of India was such as the hon. gentleman stated it to be, although it was not supported by the strict form of expression in the charter, the hon. gentleman expressed a hope that the member for Aberdeen would bring his charge against the Board of Control before the House in the form of a motion. Nothing could give him more pleasure than to meet the charge.

said, that, during the time he had been connected with the Board of Control, he had commissioned a chief justice who was sent out from this country to collect information respecting the propriety of introducing the Insolvent Debtors' laws there. That learned judge, however, fell a victim to disease in about six months after his arrival in India, and consequently the desired information was not collected. Great difference of opinion existed on the subject in India. If it could be done, he was of opinion that it would be better effected by some species of regulations respecting debtors there, than by any legislative enactment here. The draught of a bill upon the subject had arrived in this country a few days previous to his leaving office, and he recommended to the noble lord, now at the head of the Board of Control, to have the matter laid before the law officers of the Crown. Perhaps it might be supposed that he (Mr. Wynn) would be most competent to introduce the subject to the consideration of the House; and if that were the case, he should be very happy to do so. The petition was ordered to lie on the table; and Mr. Fergusson obtained leave to bring in a bill "to explain and amend the Law respecting Real Property belonging to British Subjects and others within the jurisdiction of His Majesty's Courts in India, and the liability of such property as assets (in the hands of Executors and Administrators) to the payment of the debts of deceased persons."

wished to offer a very few words upon this bill, because he thought that, in the discussion which had taken place last night, Mr. Finlayson had been rather hardly dealt with. All the statement about the country losing 100,000l. a-week was a great exaggeration of Mr. Finlayson's reckoning; and he therefore wished to explain the principle upon which Mr. Finlayson's calculation had proceeded. Mr. Finlayson, on looking to the annuities which were outstanding on the 5th Jan., 1827, and the 5th of Jan., 1828, conceived, upon a comparison of the two periods, that the public would lose about 95,000l. per annum, which sum would be equivalent to a loss of about 8,000l. per month. Now, the mode in which this gentleman arrived at his deductions was this:—He assumed the amount of the existing annuities, and calculated that the whole amount of them would not be extinguished until about sixty years from the present time; that is, that the last or longest life would, in all probability, subsist for sixty years to come. His calculation, therefore, respected the final result of this financial operation at the end of such period of sixty years. He assumed the average duration of each life to be so many years, and the interest of money at four and a half per cent. Working his calculation upon these data, from the 5th of January, Mr. Finlayson assumed that at the end of sixty years there would be redeemed 32,000,000l. less of the national debt, through the operation of this measure for granting life annuities, than would have been redeemed if all the stock which had been given for effecting this measure had been accumulating during the whole of the same period under the working of the Sinking-fund. Upon a similar calculation, as to the 5th of April, he reckoned that in sixty years from that day the public would be still the worse by 95,000l.; that is to say, that there would be 95,000l. less redeemed of annuities; that an aggregate sum of 32,000,000l. plus this 95,000l. would be redeemed less at the close of that period, than would have been redeemed by the Sinking-fund. With regard to another point which supplied a sort of test of the degree of accuracy with which this calculation had been made; namely, what had been the result of the first year in which these life annuities had been granted, an hon. friend of his had charged Mr. Finlayson, last night, with having omitted to give credit for the interest on the accumulation of the stock. Now, in this respect, his hon. friend must have misunderstood Mr. Finlayson; for Mr. Finlayson had taken into calculation the whole of the interest on the accumulations of stock, which had taken place during the last two years, and he found that a sum equal to 10,579l. three and a half per cents was the amount of the diminution of the debt beyond that which this operation would effect.

said, it was quite apparent, from the statement of the noble lord, that Mr. Finlayson, like all other calculators, assumed something which experience taught us never happened, and which, in the end, invariably proved, that all their calculations were not worth a straw; and the greatest of all their assumptions had perpetually been, that by tricks with figures, they could reduce a debt which had gone on constantly increasing, and which, it was idle to hope, would ever be redeemed.

said, that no person could purchase an annuity who was under thirty-five years of age. It had been insinuated, that he had attacked the professional character of Mr. Finlayson; but he had done no such thing. On the contrary, he had borne his humble testimony to the merits of Mr. Finlayson. There was one important point connected with this subject, which was worthy the attention of the House. He alluded to the fact, that a very material and gratifying change had taken place in this country, with respect to the average duration of human life. The tables published by order of the House exhibited this in a remarkable degree. These tables proved the extraordinary fact, that, in the course of the last forty years, such a change had taken place in the condition of the people, that the decrease of mortality in Great Britain was from one in forty to one in fifty-six. This was one of the strongest proofs that could be adduced to show the improvement in the state of the country. No proposition to which statesmen or philosophers could have recourse could more decidedly manifest progressive improvement than an increase of the population, and a decrease of human mortality. He thought it right to bring this under the consideration of the House, because it was connected intimately with the formation of tables to which allusion had been made. The increased longevity of the people, so far as these annuities went, might in some degree interfere with the public interest, but still it must be a source of gratification to all who took a correct view of the subject. It might also be proper to observe, that, from all the data which had been examined, for the purpose of ascertaining the difference between the value of male and female life, it was found to be one-tenth in favour of female life.

said, it was true that a change had taken place in the duration of life during the last thirty years; but the right hon. gentleman seemed to have forgotten, that much of that was owing to the introduction of vaccination, and other modern improvements in medicine. But if they looked back to the forty years that preceded 1790, they would find, that there had always been some epidemic or other. In the year 1782, an epidemic had occurred, which spread itself throughout Europe, and had been felt most severely. For the last thirty years they had been free from such scourges; but that was no reason why such an event should not occur again. He hoped ministers would not allow much time to intervene without reviewing the tables upon which this, bill was founded. With the assistance of proper tables, the annuities' system would be a most effective mode of reducing a national debt.

deprecated the system of annuities, as acted upon up to the present time, and called the attention of the House to the Irish Tontine of 1773, 1775, and 1777; of which, owing to the bad system pursued, not one class was yet extinct; which shewed how guarded government ought to be in taking a step of this kind.

said, that the chief error of the government in granting those annuities had been in following the Northampton tables; which certainly were those used by the Equitable Insurance office, but for a very different purpose from that in which they were employed by the state. That office used them for granting payments at the end of life, while the government used them for granting annuities during life; it therefore was clear, that whatever was gain to the Insurance office was loss to the country. He agreed, that it was quite necessary that new tables should be calculated; but at the same time trusted that the annuity system would not be abandoned.

said, he had sufficient experience in that House to know, that if he put off the second reading until after the holydays, he could not carry the bill through afterwards. The most suitable way would be for those who objected to the bill, to let it pass the present stage, and take the discussion on the motion for going into a committee.

confessed he had not yet been able to give the bill all the attention it deserved. From what he had seen of it, however, he thought that many of its regulations would disappoint the expectations of the noble lord. Instead of saving expense he thought it would effect a perpetual system of taxation. In the present state of the House, he wished the merits of the bill not to be brought under discussion.

expressed his determination to oppose the bill, because it was a most impolitic measure, and would make the law more complicated and expensive than it now was. He was also greatly afraid of the noble lord's committee, when he saw the hon. baronet (sir J. Graham), the great reprehender of committees, upon it. Words had been put into the mouth of an eminent solicitor which he had never uttered. That gentleman was represented to have said, that, in a great contest, one third of the votes sent to the assessor were objected to, on the ground of the land-tax. Now he believed that the proportion of votes disputed was never even one tenth, and he had found that there was no instance in which one-tenth of the votes had been questioned. The only case that approximated to this calculation was that of his own election for Westmoreland, in which every vexatious objection that the ingenuity of man could devise was urged, and yet, in that case the proportion was only one twelfth; and in that of Devonshire, the next in degree, one twenty-eighth. The effect of this bill would be, to establish throughout the year one continued election contest. It would exclude all minor voters, and throw the representation into the hands of the wealthy freeholders. The bill was only a copy of Mr. Bearcroft's bill in 1788, which was just as complicated a measure as this. The payment of the land-tax had been found by experience to be the best criterion of the possession of the property qualifying a man to vote as a freeholder. For these reasons, and for others with which he would not detain the House, he would move, that the second reading be postponed for six months.

denied that he had ever treated committees with contempt. He thought no measure could be rendered perfect without the labours of a committee. The noble lord had referred to the evidence of an eminent solicitor. Now, he knew that solicitor to be a gentleman of unimpeachable veracity, and he had said, that one third of the votes that went to the assessor in the contest at Glocester arose out of the land-tax. At Westmoreland, that gentleman had said that one out of eleven were objected to on the same score. He must contend that this bill was much less complicated than the present law. Serjeant Heywood, a good authority, had said, that the land-tax bill had raised more doubts upon the law of election than all the other enactments put together. The noble lord had expressed the most fastidious jealousy lest this bill should increase the expense of election. He was bound to believe the noble lord sincere, but he was quite sure he was wrong. His noble friend, the member for York, had expended 120,000l., without polling a single vote. As to the effect which the noble lord contended the bill would have, of throwing the influence into the hands of powerful families, and excluding the 40s. voters, he was sure that no such principle would be listened to by that House. The effect of the bill would be to give extension to the elective franchise.

objected to the bill, though he admitted it was strongly recommended, as coming from the noble lord. But the principle was, that the constituent body should not be exposed to expense and litigation in defence of their rights. He admitted that, if any steps for that purpose could be taken preliminary to an election, much might be done to reduce expenses; but this bill did not profess any such intention. It established an operose course of inquiry into the validity of voters, which was to be repeated every year. No person was to be allowed to vote, unless his name was in the register. If à priori, any elector could know whether a contest would take place, he might decide whe- ther he would put himself to the trouble and expense of going through the ordeal of this bill but not otherwise. He objected to the enormous expense and inconvenience which the complicated provisions of the bill would impose upon the constituent body. To the principle of the bill he was favourable. He was satisfied of the intention of the noble lord to accomplish a practical good; and, if it were divested of the cumbrous machinery with which it was at present embarrassed, he should be glad to co-operate with the noble lord in the object he had in view. The practice of serving a summons on non-resident voters, the power which the bill proposed to invest in under-sheriffs, and the various and intricate modes proposed for procuring the requisite tests of qualification, as freeholders, constituted the objectionable parts of the bill.

maintained that the bill, by lessening the duration of the poll at county elections, would materially lessen their expense. This was a result no less desirable to voters than to candidates, for at present the enormous expense of standing for a county often left the freeholders scarcely any choice as to their representative.