The Express. — London, England, 1866-04-28 00:00:00

~i ; ~~ Is 1 I 11 I 4 ). I ; k ; r I e l l i 1 • THE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, APRIL 28, 1866. UNDAY• GAZETTE. —A SPECIAL 11.3 ANALYSIS of the DIVION on the BILL appear with the potitical h ews of this day REYORM 'SUN in the DAY SAUTIrit of TO-MORSOW.—Order of all news agents and ra vel stations, and at the aka, 16, Wellingtonatreet, Strand , W.C. JOHN BROGDEN. O RIGINA L GOLD CHAIN MANU FACTORY, 16, HENRIETTA,STIZET, COVENT-GARDEN. _ . JOHN BROODER'S 1)3-carat GOLD CHAINS. JOHN BROGDEN'S GOLD GUARD CHAINS. --._:------- JOHN BROGDEN'S GOLD ALBERT CHAINS. t i --------- OHN BROGDEN'S GOLD BROOCH CHAINS. PRIZE MEDAL AWARDED . ALLEN'S EPENT PORTMANTEAUS rneopenings. and TRAVLIN AT G BAGS vrith niu LADIM' W AR DROBE TRUNKS, DRESSING BAGS, with aver fittings . DE:MATCH BOXES, WRITING and DRESSING CASES, and SOO other articles forborne or continental travelling. Illustrated catalogues post free . Also Allena Barrack Furniture Catalogue of Portable Bed steads, Drawers, Easy Chain, Washhaud stands, Canteens, . _ post fiat. J. W. ALLEN, Manufacturer and Patentee 37. Went Strand, London, WA'. TURTLE, TURTLE, TURTLE. ow, Thick, and Invalid TURTLE SOUPS always ready. ST. HALERJAIIISS'S-ROENTSTREET, PICCADILLY. ALD, Proprietor. nit erproso. HAYMARKET TAI! Evinego, A ROMANTIC ATTACHMENT. Manna Oinspwo dW. Ferran Mien AdaCavendiah.—THE FAVORITE SM' FORTUNE Mews. Buekstone, Chippendale, and *Ahern; thlppendale, dc—And A DACOHTn. TO MARRY. PRINCESS'S. THIS Irsmrso, A OH4MT IN SPITE OF HIMSELF.—After which THE STREETS OF LONDON. Hews. Vining, T. Mead, It Murray, Shore, and Villiers ; Mn 11. Marston, and Mime' F. Illarnett and K. lodgers. LYCEUM. Tan EYVcrwes. A DAY AYrK& Till, WEDDING. Messrs. larsman, Fitzpatrick, sad Clifford ; Mrs. klorsisan, Ac . —And NAMLAT. Meer► Fechter, Mmery, Addison, Widoicomb, Yule, Jordan, Fitzpatrick, Ac. ; Mesdames Elsworthy and C. Leclercq. BRITANNIA. TRISEVIDiroI, THE SAILOR'S RET U RN. —Thuiramecliraady —CLOUD AND SUNSHINE Mr. James Anderson.—To con clude with THE DARK KING OF THE BLACK MOUNTALNIL Min Oars 8L Cases Mn S. Lane. TO CORIMPONDENTS. Advertisements intended for "The Express," Lnrulon Evening rimer, must be at the Office, 10, Bouverie street, by Two o'clock on the day of publication. MGR-WATER AT LONDON-liftliNir- THLk DAY —Morning, IA. 13m Afternoon, 1K 33m. ihk-MottaOw—hiorning, 1k.61m Afternoon, 2h. km. LONDON, SATURDAY, APRIL 28. IN the House of LORDS the Marquis of CLAN ZICADE presented a petition relating to the fees payable in Ireland upon the registration of titles to estates ; and moved for copies of the annual returns made to the Home-office by Landed Es tates Court of Ireland of the business done during the year by that court, in pursuance of the 25th mod. of the Act 22nd and 23rd Vict., cap. 72, from the year 1860 to the last year ; and also, return of the duty paid upon declarations of title made and registered in each year up to the present. In answer to the Earl of Bri.monn, Lord DuFFERIN said that the subject was under the consideration of the government. The returns were granted. The Public Offices Site Bill was passed through committee. The house then adjourned. Is the Hors?. of COMMONS, the adjourned de bate on the Franchise Bill was resumed by Viscount CKANBOURNE, who, together with Mr. B. JOHNSTONE Mr. A. GRANT, and Mr. NEWDE -13,..TE, supported the amendment. Captain GROSVENOR observed that all the argu ments of the opposition had been directed, not to the support of the amendment, but against the principle of the bill. The issue involved was a judicious extension of the franchise on the one band, and a monopoly of electoral privilege on the other ; and he contended that the class which it was sought to exclude had earned its claim to the franchise, whether it was a trust or a right, by their patience, their culture, and integrity. The O'Dolvotiiirs defined reform to be an exten sion of political power to a class now excluded from that privilege, and, believing that such an object might be obtained by means of the present bill, he should support it. After observations from Mr. HILBERT, Sir M. BEACH, Mr. BAINES, and Mr. P. A. TAYLOR in support of the bill, Mr. R. J. HARVEY, who spoke from the opposi tim side, stated that having pledged himself to his constituents to support every measure that he be lieved was for their benefit, he felt it to be his duty to support the bill. Mr. W. E. DUNCOMBE succeeded and was fol lowed by Mr. L KING, who almost reproached Lord Gros venor for the course he had taken, and signified that he was content to accept the proposed bill. Mr. DISRAELI commenced by asserting that privilege of parliament which he termed the liberty of legislation, and contended that no par liament could be bound by pledges given by its predecessors ; nor in the present case could a casual vote in a single parliament bind the legis lature now to any particular course with regard to any measure which might not be expedient, asking if this parliament was pledged to reform, and said that there never was a parliament elected which was less pledged on that question ; for the late ministry did not go to the country in any way upon that policy. The house, therefore, was per fectly free to act in this matter in the manner which it deemed best for the country. Pointing to the different attempts made by Lord Russell to in troduce reform bills, he said that noble lord had broken no vows on that subject ; for he had been ob structed and defeated by the liberal party and the indifference of the country, while Lord Derby and Lis party had equally fulfilled any pledge that might have existed in reg9rd to that question. He laid down that the real origin of the movement in regard to reform was the speech of Mr. Gladstone, in which he declared that the franchise should be based on the rights of man, and that cry was caught up by an able and active, but small section of the house, and since then that party bad been agitating the question until the result was the piecemeal measure now in consideration, and -which lie was unable to consider without a know ledge of its concomitants. Turning to that provi sion of the bill which gives county votes to certain parsons in towns, he contended that it was calcu lated to swamp the county voters. He was pre pared to consider a reduction of the county fran chise, but it must be a real county franchise, and not one had made up of urban populations; and as yet he had no security that that this anomaly would be remedied by the undisclosed measure of the government. He pro tested against the notion which had been going about of - disfranchishe , boroughs in the south for the purpose of enfranchising constituencies in the north. It was impossible to proceed to deal with this question without further information, and to obtain that information was the object of the amendment. The reduction of the borough fran chise was the real cause of the introduction of this bill, the real object of which was to extend the franchise to the working classes. He wished to see the working class element in the legislature ; but he desired to bee that legislature, as a whole, so constituted as to be responsible. He urged that before legislating the house should in quire into the results likely to be produced by edianges in the constitution of the representative Commons of the country. In 'lndignant terms he denounced Mr. Knight's attacks on the tory party and the House of Commons. The CHANCELLOR Of the EY.c.neQuEn said that it was now clearly known, on the authority of the leader of the tory party, that a measure giving the franchise to 200,000 of the middle class and 200,000 of the working classes, was intended to revolutionise the constitution of this country. He declared that Lord Palmerston was in favour of a reduction of the borough franchise, and that there never was any difference between him and his colleagues on that point; it was therefore no compliment to that noble lord to say that he was opposed to all reform. It was the opinion of the cabinet that no step should be taken in re to reform until the country pronounced in its favour, and it was the feeling evinced at the last election on that subject which eventually led to the proposing of the present bill. He denied, though he admitted that in certain circumstances it would have been fully justified, that the government had con sulted or been influenced by Mr. Brie-ht in deter mining on bringing inareformbill, anditsprovisions and its conduct were their own. He vindicated himself from the charges which had been made against him of delivering inflammatory speeclie3 in the provinces, and inflammatory sentences in to the the workingpaling classes in the house. In with Mr. Lowe's last speech , he ex p lained that when he spoke of " knowing with whom he had to deal," he was not alluding to the house, but to certain crooked little politicians belonging to it, and he declared that what the government was contending for was the extension of the franchise in principle without absolute reference to derails. The remainder of his speech was a searching review of the arguments for and against the measure as indi cated m speeches delivered in the debate. On a division the amendment was rejected by 318 to 313. The bill was read a second time. The Criarrcamort of the EXCHEQUER fixed the committee for Monday, when he would state the order of business. The remaining business was disposed of, and the house adjourned. THE excitement of an impending division did not quicken the debate of last night into any degree of animation, until its closing hours. Then the encounter of the two great party leaders— rivals in eloquence, in finance, and in claims on popular confidence--communicated to it an energy worthy of the old days of Parlia mentary warfare. But until Mr. I:4B)yard rose, the discussion of yesterday ever ing dragged wearily on, being confined chiefly to members whose claims to speak at such an hour and on such a theme would scarcely bear very se rious criticism. The tediousness of the entire dis cussion, which has extended over so many days, has been the subject of general complaint. It has, indeed, been relieved by speeches which would have done credit to any Legislative Assembly at any period. The masterly argumer of Lord STANLEY, Mr. MILL, and Mr. Lows, the skilful pleading of Sir HUGH CAIRNS and lir. COLERIDGE, the elaborate rhetoric of Sir BuLwza Lvrrott, the purer and more earnest eloquence of Mr. BRIGHT, and the wonderful examples of de bating power with which Mr. Disr-.ELI and Mr. GLADSTONE wound up the discussion, will live among the traditions of Parliament, long after the occa sion of them has ceased to possess more than anti quarian interest. But they are imbedded in a dull mass of irrelevant nonsense or trite truism. The languor which pervaded the debate during the greater part of yesterday evening may be attri buted in a large degree to the feeble and in effectual speech with which Lord CRANCORNE opened the discussion. Much was expected from the member for Stamford. But he justified anti cipation only on those points in which it was most painful. In spite of considerable abilities, Lord CRANBORNE never fails to drag down every sub ject which he touches to a lower level of thought and feeling than it had occupied before. The chief impression left upon his hearers yesterday night was that, if he disliked the Reform Bill much, he disliked the CHANCELLOR of the Ex- CHEQUER more. The angry words which are occasionally uttered in the heat of debate contrast favourably with the cold malignity - , the dexterously contrived insinuations, and the elaborate vitupe ration of Lord CRANBORNE. The language in which he gives expression to these feelings is as worthy of them as it is unworthy of his cha racter and of that of the House of Commons. lit pretending to resent dishonourable impu tations, Lord CRANDORNE does not hesitate to throw out thinly-veiled accusations yet more odious, nor feel it beneath hint to endeavour to find in anticipated changes of ministerial tactics means of aspersion upon personal honour. The argument of Lord CRANBORNE'S speech was self-confuting. He anticipates from the Reform Bill contradictory effects. The working classes, whom in one sentence he represents as venal through poverty, and therefore ready to sell their franchise to the highest bidder, he depicts in another as earnest politicians, steadily bent upon ends of their own which they will patiently pursue, by bombinations and agitation, until they have succeeded in putting every other order in society, and all the interests of England which do not coincide with their own, beneath their feet. Boat of these descriptions cannot be true. The work ing men of England cannot be at one and the mine time a rabble, indifferent to politics, and caring only for the money value of their votes, and an ambitious class, cherishing dangerous pro jects, and eager for the suffrage as a means of giving effect to their favourite ideas. Lord Casir BORNE will, perhaps, say that his inconsistent descriptions apply to different portions of the labouring classes. Eut this explanation will not serve him. For, in cal culating their future strength in the representa tion, he assumes that they will all act together for their sectional interests, in other words, that they will not be bribed ; while, in estimating the effect of their inclusion upon the morale of politics, he assumes that they care nothing at all for public questions, and will simply sell themselves to the I highest bidders. Both of these dangers cannot be real. Lord CitianioswE's confession of faith, as he called it, in regard to the working man, seems to imply that he believes rather in the corruptibility of the labouring class than in their dangerous designs. He is kind enough so far to give in to Mr. GLADSTONeB desh-and-blood doctrines as to admit that the English working man is made of the same stuff as his betters, and has the virtues and vices of his race and nation. But Lord CRAN BORNE distinguishes between the artisan's nature and his temptations. ' His trials are special to him ; and his poverty almost necessarily makes ' him venal. All this is very plausible, and may be oti very sagacious ; but Lord CRANBORNE does not push his philosophy far enough. Poverty is comparative. It is relative t) the standard of comfort and the means of livelihood. The embar rassed peer or country gentleman, the younger son or brother, the adventurer of professional and political life, may often be practically poorer than the artisan or labourer, who, on Lord CRAY BORNE'S theory, must of necessity be venal. But we protest against this doctrine of the special purity of the working classes in political matters. In so far as they can he truly charged with this fault, they only share the common reproach of Englishmen. It is vain to say that the corrupted are many and the corrupters are few ; that the former are a class, and the latter are merely indi viduals. The fact is notorious, that corruption is a part of the political organisation of England, and that the general public sentiment only faintly re bukes it. Taking the other view of the working classes, as political conspirators with secret designs, which are only now and then incautiously dis closed, and to which Mr. Balmer and Mr. J. S. MILL are parties, Lord CB.ANBORNE is not ashamed to quote the socialist nonsense occasionally talked at Reform meetings, as evidence of the projects which aCT suffrage will be used to effect. The folly which can attach weight to this idle talk seems to us more extravagant than that which indulges in it. Lord CRANBORNE'S conflicting fears refute each other. They rest on a defiance alike of arithmetic and of experience. Figures prove that a£7 franchise will not give to the working classes predominant power in the State. Facts show that in constituencies where they outnumber electors of all other classes, they do not act together as a class. One thing is quite clear. They cannot at the same time be the ab solute lords and the purchased slaves of the rich. Nothing has been more remarkable in the course of this eight nights' debate than the monstrous disproportion between the terms of the Amend ment and the language of its supporters. Never, we are almost tempted to believe, in the whole course of our Parliamentary history, was the manceuvre of a party, or die jealousy of a privi leged class, aided by the personal rancour of a few restless malcontents, wrapped in tawdrier fine.y, to cover, and to cover badly, more beggarly rags. Take die leader of the Tory party, for example. Mr. DISRAELI, who, as all parties have remarked with regret, has scarcely opened his line this sea s'on, was, of course, expected to make an extra ordinary effort last night. And the House was not disappointed. There was much of hie speech, the beat, though perhaps the driest part of it, which might stimulate the impatience of a weary assembly, but could not possibly offend the one side of the House or excite the enthusiasm of the other. Mr. DISRAELI began with along and careful statement on the subject of the county franchise and the boundaries of parliamentary boroughs ; arguing with force and clearness, and with perfect temper and moderation, the propositon that in many pal is of the country, north an south, the voters who should properly be'ong to the borough were beyond its parliamentary limits, and swamped the county suffrage : in order to justi7y his reluc tance to assent to the second reading of a Bill for the reduction of the Frenchifse in counties aid boroughs, which leA the question of boundai:cs in darkness. Such an objection as this, we may take the liberty to estimate in some degree according to the objector ; but it was at least plausible, and quite legiti mately introduced into the diLcuss'on of the Bill or of the Amendment by any mem ber of the Opposition. Wnat are you going to do for the counties, is not an aggressive, a factious, or an unreasonable question to be put by the Tot} , chief, though it is one to which any natural supporter of the principle of the present Bill would be prepared to wait a day or even a week for an answer. No Liberal can pretend to be indignant or surprised that the Tory lerder should take up the cause of the counties, and appear painfully anxious to rescue them from the threatened irruption of a population divorced by lot and habit from territorial interests and feel ings. But the representative of the helpless and inj tired county electors became transformed in a moment into a champion of the British Constitu tion. After vindicating the independence of the House of parliamentary pledges, and chivalrously releasing Lord RUssELL and Lord DERBY from the burden of ministerial promises on the subject of Reform, Mr. DISRAELI threw off the modest and humble cloak of a statistical inqr, irer, and burst into all the splendour of a great constitutional defender, in solemn and saddened tones re p roving the member for Birmingham for his at tacks on the House out of doors, and then falling foul, in the good old slashing style, of the CHAN CELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, for his celebrated Wed nesday declaration in favour of some sort of natural and personal right to the suffrage, but especially fur his " flesh and blood " orations at Liverpool the other day before an audience of " provincial fanatics," as Mr. DISRAELI politely describes Mr. GLADSTONE'S constituer ts in that famous city. By the way (for even Mr. Dim- RAELI was unable to avoid the beaten tracks) he took Mr. MILL to task for what he chose to assume as the inconsistency of his sup port to the Government Reform Bill, and his published opinions in favour of a system of checks and counterpoises to universal suffrage. Here we must do Mr. Disr.AELI the justice to record that he was much more fair than most of Mr. MILL'S assailants. He owned that Mr. MILL had written as an advocate of universal suffrage, which is a very different thing from the present bill ; and he even went so far as to admit that he could see no danger even in universal suffrage, on Mr. MILL'S terms. But mark the disproportion between all this part of his speech for the Amendment and the portentous defence of the balanced order of the British Constitu tion, with which he strangely prefaced a vehe ment and undoubtedly ingenious apology for the Tory party, the party of peace in foreign policy and of tender care for the working classes at home, as instanced by his own reticence during the American war, by Lord MALMESBURY'S Blue book during the Italian war, and by Lo'd JOHN MANNERS'S Short Time Bills, which Mr. BRIGHT, as a manufacturer, had opposed. It was not Lord PALMERSTON, according to Mr. DISRAELI, that could have saved the unfortunate British Constitution, had ho lived, but Sir Coax-- WALL LEWIS, whom he lamented as if Sir CORNE WALL LEWIS had been Mr. GLADSTONE'S inti mate enemy. And the upshot of all this mild and moderate appeal for information as to the county franchise as a plea for supporting Lord GROSVENOR'S amendment, was nothing leas than a declared resolve to rescue the constitution of the country—King, Lords, and " the Estate of the " Commons" (into which he is willing to admit the choicest of the " handicraftsmen," on the old PLAN TAGENET principle)—from the parricidal hands of Mr. BRIGHT, and Mr. BRIOHT'S " confederates" on the Treasury Bench, who are conspiring, it seems, "to reconstruct the British constitution on the American model." No wonder that as soon as the furious attempt of the Opposition to silence Mr. csnwroNE yielded to the calm appeal—" Am I "to be permitted to proceed r'—the Cass em.toa of the EXCHEQUER uttered an excla mation of relief at the discovery that a Bill for the admission of 200,000 of the middle class and an equal number of the working class to the electoral franchise in counties and boroughs was interpreted by the leader of the Tory party as a conspiracy to reconstruct the British constitution on the American model ! His masterly speech worthily concluded this great debate, and was immediately followed by the critical division for which the whole country has been eagerly waiting. OUR CONTEMPORARIES. (THIS DAY.) THE DIVISION. The division on the second reading of the Reform Bill not taking place till nearly half-put 3 this morning, the comments of the daily journals are necessarily scant and hurried. The Times regards the result as • practical defeat of the government, and a vote of censure on the line of conduct they adopted. It compliments Mr. Disraeli upon the justness of his arguments. What ever else may happen, it says, no administration will henceforth hope to persuade the House of Commons to consider proposals of Reform without laying the whole of their scheme before it. Whether those who persisted in forcing upon their re luctant followers, and, if report be true, their reluctant colleagues, a plan so disrespectful to parliament and so full of danger to themselves, can survive the vote of this morning, remains to be seen. It may be that they will accept the rebuff ; it may be that they will expiate their error in retirement. Something must depend upon their own self-respect ; something, perhaps, on the tem per of the House of Commons ; something upon the spirit of colleagues who have hitherto been so culpably obse quious. The Poet goes so far as to say that the defeat is fatal and that nothing remains for ministers but to resign. Mr. Gladstone 's speech, as a defence of reform, as • reply to the arguments and the apprehensions of those who avowed their hostility to the ministerial measure, and as an answer to much that was personal in the attacks made upon him self in the course of the debate, and especially in the speech of Mr. Disraeli, was unrivalled as a display of par liamentary eloquence. But it did not furnish what im partial individuals will consider • justification of the policy pursued by the government in introducing their measure. The government, says the Herald, which boasted of • clear liberal majority of from 70 to 80, has contrived to vary the second reading of the Reform Lill by five ; the numbers being for Lord Grosvenor's amendment 313, for the second reading of the bill 318. It is obvious that the bill is lost. But whether the government will abide by its pledges, and fall with its bill, we are to learn on Monday. The Star cannot congratulate either the house or the country on the result of last night's momentous division. A ministerial majority of no more than five bodes ill for the early and tranquil settlement of the reform question. We must look forward to new delays, fresh difficul ties, prolonged intervals of complication and confusion. Mr. Gladstone's speech was a most triumphant vindication of the conduct of the government, not merely on technical grounds, but on principles which will at once commend themselves to the mind and the heart of the country. The great question of reform has rarely received zo vivid and so ardent an elucidation. When the great objects now being striven for have long been gained, this noble oration, deli vered with masterly power and self-possession at a moment of remarkable criths, will be treasured as a manual of popu lar progress and hope. Our weekly contemporaries have been compelled to write before the result of the division was known, and this fact deprives their criticisms of most of their points. The Sulurday Amino hopes that whatever happens the government will remain in office, or that no large amount of precious time may ke lost in constructing a new one. It will be well if Mr. Gladstone at the last moment gets himself out of the difficulty he has created, and makes a concession that will i'i•orm a loge portion o: the opposition, or if he does not go out of office mere') in pique and from an obstinate pi:de, but accept s what is the real wish of pall-Aleut and the country, that a liberal ministry should remain in office, and that, after having well matured and considered the whole scheme, it should bring in a comprehensive mea sure. Mr. Bright is probably quite right in ....yin that, whatever may be the fate of this bill, and whatever may b. 3 the effect of the division on the winistry, a reform bill w:11 be carried before long ; but we do not think he is a: all right in pronouncing that the bill which is inevitable must also inevitably be less moderate than any that have been proposed. To the Examiner it seems that in case the further pro :,ress of the bill seems impossible parliament should l dissolved. For what would be the position of a conserva ‘2ve government in the face of an opposition of more then half the house? The combination that helped them to victory would not survive the occasion, and would begin to crumble away from the time that the purpose was served. The conservative government would then soon find itself at the head of about 290 staunch followers, opposed to about 340 or 350 liberals. Is this, or any thing like this, a state of things that Lord Derby and Lord Stanley would brook, not to mention °ther high-spirited members of their party? The first ini portant division would compel the conservative ministry to dissolve ; and would the appeal to the country be more favourable to the liberal party under an adverse government than it would have been under Lord Russell's administration ? To state the question is to answer it. If, then, to this complexion we must come at last, if dissolution there must be either in the hands of friends or enemies, surely there should be no doubt about the choice. It may seem good party tactics to resign , and leave a conservative ministry face to face with an overwhelming opposition ; but the conservatives will not be so simple r to accept that situation of difficulty, and for fear o making matters worse they will not shrink from the only expedient to make them better. And they would pro bably not only hold their own, but get something to bout. Thus they would have all the advanta3e which the liberal ministry would have foregone in declining an appeal to the country. It is due to the country to let its voice be distinctly heard as to the great question affecting its dearest interests, and by no other way can the desirA settlement be had. The Siertatur thinks that if the majority is a minute one, or such that Mr. Gladstone will not, or cannot, remain in power, a coalition of which Lord Stanley would be the leading spirit would be nearly inevitable. Many liberals have confidence in Lord &Ailey, the bulk of the tory party would follow him as their bent alternative, and the mass of the undecided would be pretty sure to ap prc.e his administrative measures. He would be as little likely to plunge us into a war with America as Earl Rus sell, and might by dint of audacity and painstaking prepare a reform which both parties could accept as a settlement of the question, a reform which, admitting the workmen to a hundred seats and redreuing the balance as between North and South, should not establish a precedent leading directly to numerical rule. If he could but rid himself of Mr. Disraeli either by sending him to the Peers or to Paris, or to both, he might found an administration which could really work, which would at intervals hold power for considerable periods, and which would in the end re. model the platform of the great Conservative party. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION, HOUSE OF COMMONS.—Pairmv, Aram 27. REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE BILL. Order read, for resuming Adjourned Debate on Amend ment proposed to Question (April 12), " That the Bill be now read a second time ;" and which Amendment was, to leave out from the word " That " to the end of the Question, in order to add the words " this House, while ready to consider, with a view to its settlement, the question of Parliamentary Reform, is of opinion that it is inexpedient to discuss a Bill for the reduction of the franchise in England and Wales, until the house has before it the entire scheme contemplated by the government, for the amendment of the representation of the people " (Earl Grosvenor), instead thereof : Question again proposed, " That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the question." Debate resumed — Question put. The house divided. Ayes, 318 ; Noes, 313. AYES. Arland, T. D. Fort. it. Adair, H. E. Fortescue, C. P. Norwood, C. Si. Agnew, Sir A. Fortescue, D. F. O'Beirne, J. L. Akroyd, E. French, Col. O'Brien, Sir P. Allen, W. 8. Gaselee, fierj. O'Conor Don, The Anstruther_, Sir R. Gavin, Major O'Donoghue, The Antrobus, E. Cahoon, T. M. Ogilvy. Mr J. Armstrong, R. Gilpin, C. Oliphant, L. Ayrton, A. S. Gladstone, W. E. trLoghlen, Sir C. aytoun, R. S. Glad ;tone, W. H. Maslow, G. Bagwell, J. Glyn, G. C. O'Reilly, M. W. Baines, E. Glyn, O. G. Otway, A. J. Barclay, A. C. Guldamid, Sir F. Owen, Sir H. Baring, T. G. Goldsmid, J. Padmore, R. Bc.rinis, T. . Goschen, G. J. Paget, Lord C. Barron, Sir H. Gower, F. L Palmer. Sir B. Barry, C. R. Graham, W. Pease, J. W. Barry, G. R. Grentell, H. R. Peel, Sir R. Bass, A. Greville, Col. Peel, A. W. Bass, M. T. Gray, Sir J. Peel, J. Baxter, W. E. Grey, Sir G. Pelham, lord Braley, T. Gridley, Capt. Pete, Sir 8. M. Beaumont, B. F. Grosvenor, Capt. Philip', B. N. B. rkeley. H. F. Grove, . Ti. Platt, J. Riddulph, Col. Gurney, 8. Pollard-L'ronhart,W Biddulph, M. Hadfield, G. Portman, W. H. Blake, J. A. Hamilton, Z. W. Potter, Z. Blennerhassett,BlrlL. Hanbury, R. C. Potter, T. B. Bonham-tarter, J. Hankey, T. Power, Sir J. Bouverie, Z. P. 31111raer, Mr J. Price, R. G. Brady,Bowver Sir 0. Hardcastle, J. A. Price, W. P. hr. Barris, 3. D. L. Bright, Sir C. T. Harlington, Maru.of Pritchard, J. Brlxht, J. Harvey, R. J. Proby, Lord Br,.coe, J. L' Hay, Lord J. Bawihnon, Sir H. Breklehurst, J. Hay, Lord W. Bearden, D. J. Brown, J. Hayter, Capt. Babow, J. G. Browne, Lord J. T. Headlam, T. K. Roberta', T. J. Bruce, Lord C. Henderson, J. Robertson. D. Bruce, H. A. Henesge, E. Rothschild, Bar.L de Bryan, G. L Henley, Lord Bothschild,Baron M. Buller, Sir A. W. Herbert, H. A. Rothschild, *lath. M. Buller, /Mr E. IL Hibbert, J. T. Buren, A. Butler, C. 8. Hodgkinson, 0. Russell, H. Buxton, C. Hodgson, K. D. Russell, F. W. Buxton. Sir T. F. Holden, I. Itu_sell, Sir W. Calcraft, J. H. Holland, E. St. Aubyn. J. Celt:iorpe, F. H. Howard, C. W. Salomon*, Ald. Candlish, J. Ho,eard, Lord IL Sammie, J. C..rdwcll, E. Hughes, T. Samuelson, B. Cr aegie, C. Hughes, W. B. Schoktleld, W. Castleraw, Visct. Hurst, R. H. Scutt, Sir W. Cave, T. Hutt, Sir W. &rope, G. P. Cavendish, Lord K. Ingham, R. Caly, C. Cavendish, Lord F. Jackson, W. Seymour, A. Caverdleh, Lord G. James, E. Seymour, H. D. Chambers, T. Jardine, B. Shaft°. It. D. Cheatham, J. Jerrolse, Sir J. BhericLus, L. B. , Childers, H. C. Johnstone, Sir J. Sheridan, R. B. Chohneley, Sir M. Keersicy, Capt. Sherrlff, A. C. Clay, J. Kennedy, T. Simeon, Sir J. Clement, W. J. King, P. J. (Sahli, J. A. Cilnton. Lord F. Kinglake, A. W. Smith, J. B. Clive, G. Kinglake, J. A. Spdrs, A. A. Co mn, W. X ingscote, Col. Bpoole, W. Co'elwooke, 8!r T. Kinnaird, A. F. Staniland, M. Col %;dze, J. Knatchbull . Hugo- Stanley, W. 0. Collier, Sir R. sen, E. Stanfie ld, J. Colthund, Sir G. Layr.rd, A. H. Sled, J. Colvile, C. R. Lamont, J. Stone, W. H. Cowen, J. Lawrence, W. Stuart, CoL Cowper, H. F. Lawson, J. A. Sullivan, E. Cowper, W. F. Leathern, W. H. Sykes, Col. Craufurd, E. H. Lee, W. Synan, E. J. Crawford, R. W. Leeman, O. Talbot, C. B. Crossley, :.Ir F. Lefevre, G. J. Taylor, P. A. Iralglish, B. Lewis, 11. The, W. Davey, R. Locke, J. Torrens, W. T. Davie, S!r H. F. Lusk, A. Trarc l yan G. O. Dawson, Capt. MacEvoy, K Vet ay, Sir H. D..mman, G. Mackinnon, Capt. Vrrnon, H. F. Dent. J. D. Mackinnon, W. A. Villiers, C. P. Daring, Bir E. Wlsten, B. VIT. in, H. H. lievereur, R. J. Maguire, J. F. Vivian, Cap.:. Mike, Sir W. Marjoribenks, D. C. Waldegrave-Lealleo. Dillon, J. B. Marshall, W. Warinj, C. Dillwyn, L. L. Martin, C. W. Warner, E. Dodson. J. Q. Martin, P. W. Watidn, E. W. Duff, IL E. Matheson, Sir J. Wegaelin, T. M. Dundav, F. Merry, J. West 'Am, Sir T. B. Dundas, Sir D. Milbank, F. A. Whalley, G. H. Dunlop. A. M. Mill, J. S. Whatinan. J. Ellice. E. Miller. W. Whlbreal, 8. Enfield, Visa. Mills, J. R. White, J. Erskine. Vice-Adm. Milton, Vi.ct. Whitworth, B. K monde, J. Mitchell, A. Wickhr.n, H. W. Evans. T. W. Mitchell, T. A Will'aimon, Sir H. Ewart, W. Moff , tt, G. Winnhigton,S4r T.E. Ewing, 11. E. 3lorcrieff J. Woods, H. Fawcett, H. Monk, C. J. Wyld, J. Tildes, J. Monsen, W. Wyvill, M. Fitdierald,Lordo. A. Moo a, C. • Yount, G. FitxPetrick, J. W. Moe. R. J. Young, R. Foley, H. W. Morris, M. Foljambe, F. J. Morrir, W. Forster, C. Morrison, W. Forster, W. Z. Murphy, N. D. Foster, W. 0. Nate, C. NOIR. TZLLER9 Briuld. H. B. Adams, W. P. Adderley, C. B. Tweeter, Ten. Agar-El'ia, L. 0. FreshOeld, C. K. Andover, Viact. Gallwey, Sir W.F. Ann:7ley, Col. Galway, Matt. Anson, Major Gaskell, J. IL A -chdall, Capt. George, J. Arkwright, IL Getty, S. G. liaggidlay, R. Gilpin, CoL ltagge, W. Goddard, A. L. Ha all. C. Coldney, 0. Bailey, C. Gooch, D. Bailey, Sir J. R. Goodson, J. Mille, H. J. Gore, J. IL Baring, H. B. Gore, W. R. Baring, A. H. Gorst, J. E. Baring, T. Grant, A. Barnett, H. Graves, S. R. Ba 'TOW, W. H. Greenall. G. Barttelot, Col. Greene, E. &Afton, Sir T. Gregory, W. H. Bathurst, A. A. Gray, Lieut..CoL Beach, Sir M. H. Grey, T. de Beach, W. W. Griffith, C. D. Beaumont, W. B. Grsvenor, Lord R. Bective, Earl of Guinness, B. L. Beecroft, G. 8. Hamilton, Lord C. ii.nitinck, G. C. Hamilton, Lord C.J. Benyon, R. Hamilton, I. T. Bereaford, Capt. Hamilton, \lent. Bernard, Col. Ilanly,o Lingham, Lord Hardy, J. Booth, Sir R. G. Hariey, J. Bourne, Col. Hartopp, E. B. &will, W. Harvey, R. B. Brecknock, Earl of Hervey, Lord A. IL Bridges, Sir B. W. Heathcote, G. H. Bromley, W. D. Heatheote, Sir W. Brooks, R. Hznley, J. W. Bruce, Lord E. Henniker, Lord Bruce, Major Herbert, P. E. Bruce, Sir H. If. Heaketh, Sir T. O. Hi uen, H. Ileygate, Sir Y. W. Buckley, H. Hodgson, W. N. Bulkeley, Sir IL Hogg. Lieut.-CoL Burghley. Lord Holford, R. 8. Burrell. Sir P. Hobnesdale, Visct. ; Butler-Johnstone,A. Hood, Sir A. A. Cairn.. Sir H. Hope, A. B. : Campbell, A. H. Hornby, W. H. Carington, If. C. Horafal l, T. B. I Cartwright, Col. Horsman, E. Cave, S. Howes. E. I Cecil, Lord K. Hubbard, J. G. I Clinton, Lord A. P. Huddleston, J. W. (live, Capt. Humphrey, W. H. Cobbold, J. C. Hunt, G. W. Cochrane, A. IL limes, A. C. , Cole, H. Jervis, Capt. . Cole, J. L. Jolllffe, Sir W. Conolly, T. Jolliffe, H. H. Corry, H. 1 Jones, D. C'ourtenay, Lord E Kekewich, S. T. Cooper, S. H. Kelk, J. Cox, W. T. Kelly, Sir F. Cranborne, Visct. Kendall, N. Crosland, Col. Kennard, R. W. Cubitt, G. Ker, D. S. Curzon, Visa. Kerrkson, Sir E. Cost, C. H. King, J. K. Dalkeith, Earl of King. J. 0. Dawson, K. P. Knight, F. W. Dick, F. Knightley, Sir R. Dickson, Major Knox, Col. Disraeli, B. Knox, Major Doulton, F. Lacon, Sir K. Dowdeswell, W. E. Laing, 8. ' Du Cam: ' C. Lair& .1. ! Duff, R W. Langton, W. G. Buncombe, A. Leader, N. P. Buncombe, W. E. Lechmere, Sir E. Dunkellin, Lord I.h, Major I Dunne, Gen. Le y, A. I Du Pre, C. G. Lennox, Lord 0. ' Dutton, R. H. Lennox, Lord H. Dyke, W. H. Leslie. C. P. ; llyott, Col. Leslie, W. Earle, R. A. Liddell, 11. G. ! Eaton, H. W. Lindsay, Col. C. I Eckersley, N. Lindsay, CoL R. • Edwards, Gel. Long, R. P. I Egerton, Sir P. G. Lopes, Sir M. I Egerton, A. F. Lowe, R. Egerton, K. C. Lowther, Col. I,, , erton, W. Lowther, (' apt. I Echo, Lord Lowther, J. 1 lane, Lt.-Col. Lytton, Sir E. L. Pane, Col. M•Kenna, J. N. Farquhar. Sir M. Mackie, J. I Heiden, J. M'Lagan, P. Fellowes, E. Mainwaring, T. " Ferguson. 81r J. Malcolm. I. W. Ferranti. W. Manners, Lord J. Fitzwilliam,C. W. Manners, Lord G. J. Fleming, J. Marsh, M. H. ' , Myer, J. Metier, W. , Fonda, Col. Miller, S. B. Miller, T. Milford, W. T. Montam, Lord R. Montgomery 8h G. Mordaunt, Sir C. Morgan, 0. Morgan, Major Mowbray, J. IL .Naas, Lord Need, 81.• J. Neville-Grimville, R. Newdegate, C. N. Noel, G. J. North, Col. Nurthcote, Sir S. O'Neill, K Packe. C. W. Parke, Col. Paget, & H. Pakiwton, Sir J. Palk, Sir L. Parker, Major Patten, C. W. H . Peel Oen. Pennant. Col. Percy, Major-Gen. PhilBps,ao. L Pim, J. Powell. F. S. Pugh, D. Read, C. 8. Repton, G. W. Ridley, Sir M. W. Robertson, P. F. Holt, J. Royston, Vise. Russell, Sir C. Sandford, G. M. ilauuderson, E. Schreiber, C. Sclater-booth, G. Scott, Lord H. ticourfleld, J. H. Selwyn, H. J. Selwyn, C. J. Se /erne, J. K. Seymour, G. H. Simonds, W. B. Smith, S. fitnollett. P. B. bomerset, Col. Stanhope, J. B. Stanhope. Lord St_nley, K Sir W. Stock, 0. Strange, Sir J. Stuart, Lent -Col. Stucky, Sir O. 8. /Murk H. 0. Start, 11ent.CoL Burton, F. Surtees, H. & Sykes, C. Taylor, Col. Thorold, J. H. Thyune, Lord H. F. Tollemache, J. Tonillne, G. Torres, B. Tottenham, Lt.-Col. Tracy, C. 8.. Treeby, J. W. Trevor, Lord A. Trollope, Sir J. Turner, C. Tyrone, Earl of Vandeleur, Col. Verner, K W. Verner, Sir W. Walcott, Adm. Walker, Major Walpole. 8. H. Werond, J. W. Walsh, A. Walsh, Sir J. Waterhouse S. Welhy, W. R. Whiteside, J. Whitmore. H. Williams, Col. K 11. Wise. H. C. Woodd, B. T. Wyndham, H. Wyndham, P. Wynn. Sir W. Wynn, C. W. Wynne, W. W. Yorke, J. R. Ornevenor. Marl Stanley, Lord THY ADULLAMITZB. The following is a list of the nominally liberal members who voted last night against the second reading of the Representation of the People Bill, PRUSSIA AND ITALY. The Saturday Retitle thinks it hijhly improbable that the Prussian government should have hampered itself by any final engagement to a contingent ally, but the reported movement of Italian troops to the Venetian frontier might, if it had actually taken place, involve serious complications. If peaceable relations with Prussia are renewed, Austria may perhaps take the opportunity to resent the diversion which has been meditated by an irreconcileable enemy; and if war once broke out, Count Bismarck's policy would immediately become still more violent and exact ing. The readiness of Italy to seize any favourable occa sion for an attack on Venetia is at least intelligible and consistent. The government is not unwilling to undertake a patriotic enterprise which would silence internal dissen sion ; nor is a course of policy less acceptable because it implies a temporary independent* of French patronage and protection. It can never be doubtful whether the aid o: any foreign ally would promote the establishment of Prussian supremacy in Germany. To Italy, as to France, the whole nation would feel the instinctive anta gonism which was conspicuously displayed in the war of 1859. Although the medieval relations of the Western Empire with Rome and with Italy have for centuries been obsolete, many Germans still retain a vague belief that the Austrian dominion in Lombardy was a relic of an old imperial right. It is true that the Venetian territory ! never owned a German master before the convention of Campo Formic., but the national agitation when the Quadrilateral was threatened found an excuse or a pre ' text in the doubtful nature of the boundary between German and Italian Tyrol. The modem passion for ! national unity is almost always one-sided, and the deter mination to seize Schleswig is perfectly compatible with an obstinate hold upon Venice. On the whole, it is pro bable that the Italian government will abandon any hos ! tile intentions which it may have entertained against Aus tria, as the disarmament of both the original parties to the quarrel is now o ffi cially announced. France will not I at present eupport Italy in an aggressive policy, and a single-handed contest with Austria would be altogether hopeless. with the names of the borough s or they represent: Viscount Andover Mahnesbury. Major Anion Lihfield. W. B. Beaumont N orthumberland( Earl of Brecknock Breckneck. Lord Ernest Bruce Marlborough. Sir R. Bulkeley Angle's.. Hon. C. R. Carington Wycombe. Lord A. Clinton Newark, T. P. Crosland Huddersfield, F. Doulton Lambeth, R. W. Duff Banffshire. Lord Dunkellin Galway Dowdy. Lord Elcbo Haddiufilonehire. Hon. C. W. Fit.swilliam Malton. W. H. Gregory Galway County. Lord R. Grosvenor Flintshire. Right Hon. R. Honman Stroud. S. Laing Wick Burghs. Right Hon. R. Lowe Caine. J. N. firlienna VoughsL J. Mackie Kirkeudbeighial t * M. H. Marsh Salisbury. Colonel Packe Dub C iAin av winl an lin* Caustsy hirs (B°4* . J. Pim E. Saunderson • 0. Stock Carlow. Hon. C. Tracy Montgomery ' • Including Lord Grosvenor, the author 4 amendment, and one of the tellers, th e • liberals voting against the government to 28. Only one conservative voted with the ment, namely, Mr. R. J. Harvey, ne e Thetford. commt l The total number of members who toe p„, the division, including tellers, was 635. Tea are vacant by the decisions a election • eight of which were represent e d by Mende larger number voted in June, 11359, when Derby's government was d r i ven from effiee i division of 323 to 310, exclusive of the • Two more, therefore, voted on the forma on this occasion. THE REFORM DEBATE AND DIVISION. (BY AN BYE WITNEf3B.) Possibly many of the 11111101111 and int strangers who were fortunate enough to °Wail mission into the House of Commons last may have thought that many of ths viva symptoms of the closing of a great psety dd were wanting. For at the moment of esti the house was thin, indeed so ; nor did it thicken as in ordinary at half-past four, the reason rin being that the notice paper was scant ; sad ie two questions of little import were set down. consequence, such demonstrations as are developed on occasions when great perffirmate .vents are imminent were not to be observed. Fe instance, no cheer greeted Mr. Disraeli vies walked up the floor, somewhat ostentatioudy c . hibiting a roll of petitions, which he theme presented, and on one of which he dilated with, little unction, as it came from Rochdale 01 professed to dispute some statement of Mr. hip in regard to the number of working men in de borough possessing the franchise, whisk he k put at a very minimum point. Then Mr. Gin stone came in almost, if not entirely, tMobterat and he too had to discharge himself ef ado burden which has been cast upon him &Aligs reform debate—that of presenting petitions ew night in favour of the Franchise Bill. The prela nary matters were being rapidly cleared off, and el there was no evidence of a " show how ;" tit members' galleries were nearly vacant, sod the peers' boxes, and the diplomatic gallery wet scarcely inhabited at all. It was palpable the though the reopening of the debate was in tie hands of a member - of no mean mark, for out e rather for this time, he did not " draw." hint it has been of late observed that Lord Cranban since he has attained to a position proximate a Marquisate, has lost much of that also which distinguished him as a yomv brother in the peerage, and that the Lord Rote Cecil of former days has been considerably toe down. Rising from the midst of a grey of 10 friends, his advent was of course cheered, and fre time to time, in the course of his speech, tie symbol of sympathy was renewed, but with special heartiness or spontaneity. His first mato met with a check, for some one on tie ministerial side uttered the unpleasant sti ungainly parliamentary word, " Spoke!" in tilt aim to the little controversy which bad mesa the night before as to whether he had not forfeited his right to speak again by delivering himself of sentence or two cognate to the matter in had when he made the motion for the adjournment ei the debate. However, this trifling obstruction me soon removed, and he set out in a style which smacked of " Lord Robert," but yet rather diluted. for he'spoke of defamation of himself and 10* of his congeners uttered by Mr. Gladstone as he alleged ; and while be se dwelling on this he had the dimatafsefice of hearing very distinct denials more than nil tered by the right hon. gentleman, and O r strongly still signified by the expression of le countenance. Rather laboriously, and, plillieelt and vocally, with a certain slowness, the noble los went on with what people might be exceed* thinking a rather cumbrous argument. o*** l very even tenor of his speech was relieve by loud applause from the ministerial helak e which followed some fine and genial "" timents with regard to the working elleee powerfully put ; but it seemed as if they wens" tended as a rhetorical device, for he immediate, drew from what he had said deductions more 0 0 proportionally damaging and depreciating *ti ll class. Again his lighter, which is also his caps bitter manner wale brought into play when he bit tered Mr. Milner Gibson, and drew a rade ludicrous picture of the President of the Boss of Trade as the agent for carrying on a "sew ranean" communication between the goseeni pe ! and Mr. Bright. But on the whole his sPee ° was measured—almost cold, his peroration le quietest part of all ; and though he only 'Poke fl an hour, somehow a much longer time seemed have elapsed. By this time the House of Loos had adjourned, and what may be called the " elae e of distinction" had become full ; and B '4' l° peers and diploivatista evidently settled thews° down to listen to a set debate conducted by magnates of each party. They were deserv e to be disappointed, for when lord Cel e borne ceased ; only two gallant officers, k i members of, say the third rank,' , Capra° Vivian and Captain Grosvenor, rose toffetk ei The house demanded Captain Greev eDs probably because they wished to see a represeew tive of the younger branch of a great whig fles ill pronounce against the heir of the elder branch the author of the amendment. A little wh ile j et s fore Mr. Bright had ceded his seat—a sloe' coigne of vantage to a speaker—to the y eeg ! member for Westminster, who proceeded at firstra I rather a broken style, but afterwards In l ' lg°6 , and well-balanced sentences to make a speech, '' quality of which may be indicated by the ate ment that it was listened to with watchful ate'