The Sun. — London, England, 1859-03-22 00:00:00

LATEST NEWS. The following telegram has been received alp Mr. Reuter's office PARIS, MARCH 22. The 2lfoniteur of this morning contains the fol lowing : " Russia has proposed the assembling of a Con gress with a view to prevent the complications to which the condition of Italy might give rise, and which would naturally disturb the peace of Europe. " The Congress is proposed to be constituted of the Plenipotentiaries from France, Austria, Eng land, Prussia, and Russia, and to be summoned to meet in some neutral town. " The French Government has given its assent to the proposal of the Russian Cabinet. " The Cabinets of London, Vienna, and Berlin have not yet returned official replies." DRESDEN, INIARCH 21. The Dresden Journal of to-day states that the prospect of peace is now more reasonable, and that Austria has, under certain conditions, accepted the inposal of France to convoke a Congress in some neutral town for the purpose of discussing Italian affairs. FRANCE. PARIS, MONDAY EVENING. The Patric of this evening very much doubts of any solution of the Italian question, because Austria up to the present moment has not given any signs of consenting to a revision of treaties, beyond a de ceptive language, intended to insure the good-will of the British Government, and invite the sym pathy of the English people in her favour. " De spite the favourable reports of diplomacy," adds the semi-official journal in question, " war prepara tions continue ; Trieste is no longer a, city for commerce, but a place d' armes." BOURSE, March 21.—The receipt of a telegram from London announcing that Austria had con sented to a congress on the subject of Italy has given steadiness to the funds. Threes, after having been done at 68f. 50c., improved to 68f. 75c., and are now at 68f. 65c. Mobilier varied from 800 f. to 725 f. ; Orleans, 1,360 f. to 1,355 f.; Lyons, 847 f. 50c. to 845 f. ; Northern, 937 f. 50c. to 935 f. ; Aus trian, 550 f. to 547 f. 50c. ; Lombado-Venetian, 521 f. 25c. to 518 f. 75c. A further rise took place to wards the close of the market, when the following Were the last quotations : 41. per Cents. .... 94 90 Credit Fonder DO. end month .. 94 t 5 I Belgian 4 3 per Cents 6B 85 I Piedmontese (5) .. 78 Do. end month 6B 85 !Roman B5 Bank Shares ... ... 2820 I Austrian Credit Mobilier .. 800 Spanish Threes Do. Account ..... 798 75 Home Debt RAILWAYS. Cash. Account. Orleans Northern 937 60 .. 937 50 New ditto. BO3 75 .. 805 Lyons and Mediterranean 847 50 .. 848 75 New ditto Geneva • • 540 ---- Diidi — .. Southern Western 6OO 595 Eastern Grand Central Sardinian Austrian Exchange on London, at sight, paper, 25f. 12c. ; money 25f. 10c. ; three months, paper, 25f. 21c.; money, 24f. 971 c. A letter from Alexandria of the 11th says : " M. de Lesseps, with the assistance of some of the directors of the Suez Canal who accompanied him to Egypt, has engaged a number of persons at Alexandria and Cairo for the service of the com pany. The engineers and the principal officers of the company have left this place in order to verify the correctness of the first surveys. The directors are to visit Suez and the chain of mountains from which it is proposed to obtain the stone required. They will also traverse the desert, and ascertain the extent of the port of Pclusium." A Vienna letter, in the Nord, says :—" It is aFain stated on good authority that the Emperor or Austria is to shortly leave for Italy. His Ma jesty is to be accompanied by Field Marshal Baron Hess, by his first aide-de-camp Count Gunne, and a numerous military suite." THE BOMBAY MAIL. We have received, in anticipation of the overland mail, our letters and papers from Bombay to the 25th ult. The Commander-in-Chief remains at Lucknow and it is now said purposes to remain in India for the remainder of this year. Mr. Wingfield has arrived and taken charge of the Chief Commis sionership in Mr. Montgomery's place. The disar • • mament of the country co- linues. 400 pieces of cannon, besides those taken in action, have been brought in, with a corresponding number of muskets, swords, and matchlocks. The amnesty interpreted under the latest instructions from Lord Canning, has produced remarkable results : 7,000 men have surrendered in Bareilly alone ; 4,000 in Budaon, and 1,700 in Shahjehanpore, Moradabad, and Bij nour. March Khan, of Nugeena, has given him self up. The Nawab of Furruckabad is under trial at Futtehgur ; the witnesses all determined appa rently to screen him from participation in the mur der of the Christian women and children in July, 1857. Mr. Edmonstone has settled himself in his saddle as Lieutenant Governor of the North-west Pro vinces, and the chiefs of his empire, who a year ago would gladly have helped to hang him, have thronged to offer their homage at his recent Durbar. Jung Bahadoor, according to the Delhi Gazette of the Bth of February, has given permission to our brigades to cross his frontier in pursuit of the Nana and his confederates, so we may hope ere long that the greatest criminal whom the world has produced will one of these days meet his deserts. Of the sepoys who came in and sur rendered there is not one in a hundred who brings his musket with him to give up his arms to the authorities. When questioned on the subject the invariable answer is, that he was in hospital at the time of the mutiny. With some of the softer magistrates these men are allowed to pass without hindrance to their homes. There are still a few rebels hanging about the Shahabad district and on the borders of Bundelcund. The Ajeeghur rebels, under Fussoond Ali and his proteges the young pretender, Lopal Sing, with re inforcements from the defeated remnant of Radho Govind's army, still keep a large tract of country in a state of agitation. In the west Feroze Shah and Tantia Topee ap pear still to be uncaged, and to baffle their hunters. The following is from the Bombay Standard of Feb. 26 : OUDE. The campaign on the borders of Nepaul has noty et made any considerable progress. It was on the Bth of February that Brigadier Horsford, in obedience to Lord Clyde's orders, crossedthe Raptee in the neigh bourhood of Bankee. He was reinforce(l previous to making his movement by the Ist Bengal Euro peans from Bey-ram Ghaut and the Kurnaon batta lions, both regiments having been diverted from the destination assigned to them by the late relief. On the 10th, after a short march up the defile through which the Raptee falls into the plains, the enemy's advanced position was attacked and cap tured without loss on our side, the rebels taking flight at our approach, and leaving in our hands 14 guns and a mortar, which have since been blown up. . _ BERAR. The forts of Buswuntnuggur and Digrus have been taken without a blow by a detachment from Brigadier Hill's force on duty in North Berar. The Rohilla war is consideredto be at an end, and Sir Hugh Rose has nothing more to do but to re call his troops and distribute them into quarters as Lord Clyde has done in Oude. The state of the Nizam's territories is, as we have frequently stated, anything but satisfactory, and the supreme Government seem inclined to do some thing toward remedying that state of things, as it has ordered Colonel Davison, the resident at Hyder abad, to proceed forthwith to Calcutta. KHANDEISH. In Khandeish the remnants of the Bheels under Bheema Naik have been punished. Several fugitives, discovered to be sepoys, have come in starving and given themselves up to Lieut. Atkins at Shadah. Leineis )ene. usiness Done. asinese Done. Ines@ done CENTRAL INDIA. Maun Sing still holds out in the jungles west of Narghur in Gwalior, and defies Sir Robert Napier. General Whitlock has made a triumphant entry with his division into Rcwa, whose wavering Rajah came out in state to meet him. The 3d Bengal Native Infantry, the only regiment which not only did not join the mutiny but rendered important services, is ordered to Rohilcund from Saugor. It is pertinently inquired whether some rewards ought not to be given to that regiment and some promotion to its officers. MADRAS. Lord Harris has issued a minute on the Tinne velly riot, in which his lordship starts by affirming his belief that the results of this unfortunate occur rence were unavoidable ; yet he proceeds shortly after to express his conviction that much might have been done to prevent the plot had Mr. Levinge, the acting magistrate, proceeded to the spot in per son on the 22d of December, and assured the head men of his resolution to vindicate the right of all to the public highway. The value of Lord Harris's minute lies in this, however—it affirms that exclu siveness of caste cannot be tolerated, and that the public highway is the property of the whole corn munity. Directions has been given for the prosecu tion of the rioters, and the continued suspension of the authorities suspected of connivance with them. PUNJAUB. The Sikh artillery corps have been abolished, as well as the Towannah levies. The gunners have been offered the option of serving in the police corps, and some of them have accepted the offer. The disarmed 33d Bengal Native Infantry was re armed on the 17th of January. We refer elsewhere to the turning of the first sod on the Mooltan and Umritsur Railway. Public improvements are the order of the day. Barracks are to be built at Rawul Pindee, which will cost a lac of rupees. BENGAL. FRIDAY, Feb. 25, 5 P.M.—By the last accounts Tantia Topee was at Karowke on the lower Cham bul. Feroze Shah with the Rao at Chindwassah, south-east of Neemuch. On the 9th inst., Brigadier Horsford marched from Sudherea Ghat, on the Rap tee, into Nepaul. He with his force advanced up the Raptee about 15 miles, when the piquet of the enemy was taken by surprise. A portion of the force under Col. Hill here made a detour, and crossed the Raptee below the enemy's position, and then attacked his right. The enemy then opened a hasty fire upon our troops, and then fled. The main body came up in time to witness the rebels in their flight and pursued by Col. Hill's men. It is believed that the Nana himself was in command. Thirteen guns were captured by us, and the whole rebel force routed. The ground was so broken and jungly, that it was impossible for our men to take full ad vantage of their success. They had marched, too, about 40 miles, so that they were quite exhausted. The Nawab of Banda has been pardoned, no doubt in consideration of his having saved the fugi tives from Nagode at the outbreak of June, 1857. The Nawab of Furruckabad is under trial at Fut tehghur for the murder of the Christians at that place. Her Majesty's steamer Cyclops has arrived here from Aden, after surveying and sounding for the Red Sea telegraph cable. The Minnesota has left us for Zanzibar. Lord Elphinstone and the Com mander-in-Chief, Sir H. Somerset, are at the pre sidency. COMMERCIAL. BOMBAY, FEB. 25. Since our advices of the 9th hist. the only change notice able in our money market has been its increasing strin gency, so that the difficulty of obtaining the most ordinary facilities has become greater than we have known for many years past. The Bank of Bombay now discounts no private bills, and their largest customers can only obtain accom modation on the security of government paper to a very limited amount at 11 per cent. The result of this has been that we have witnessed the unusual feature of English houses resorting to the native shroffs for loans at the hirh rate of 14 per cent., while bazaar orders have in some in stances had to borrow at 18 per cent. EXCHANGE.—There have been few China bills in the market, and the business has been chiefly in local drafts. The banks have not been willing buyers, being short of cash, and unable to sell many of their own drafts. We quote first-class paper at 2s. 2d., and documents 2s. 2td. per rupee. By telegraph from Calcutta we have commercial quota tions from China of a later date than those brought by the regular mail : CALCUTTA, FEB. 21. _ _ The James Hartley, from Hong Kong, Feb. 1; Shan - hai, Jan. 22.—At Hong Kong, opium Patna dole. 7621; Benares, 810 ; Malwa, 600 to 605. Exchange on ,London, 4s. 50. to 4s. 6d. ; on India, 216.—At Shanghai, Patna 500 ; Malwa, 454 to 480. Exchange on London, 6s. ld. to 6s. 2d. ; on India, 296.—Pekin and Pioneer arrived. THE MEDITERRANEAN. (BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.) SOUTHAMPTON, TUESDAY MORNING. The Euxine has come home from Marseilles station to be repaired. On the 17th of March, when 20 miles north of Cape St. Vincent, she spoke her Majesty's ship Orion, all well, nine days from Bantry ,Bay. The Orion parted company with her Majesty's ship Victor Emmanuel two days after leaving the above place. Attempts to float the American ship Hope, ashore in Gibraltar Bay, failed on the 15th, and she was to be lightened of part of her cargo (marble), when it was expected sho would be got off. CENTRAL AMERICA. GREYTOWN, MOSQUITO, FEB. 16. The Nicaragua Legislature has ratified the treaty made by Sir W. Gore Ouseley on the part of her M ajesty's Government. The same mail from Gra nada contradicts the previous report that the United States treaty had been signed. The Vandycke charter is not to be signed ; but the five Central American States will form a grand transit company--at least so they say. Our harbour has put a veto on any transit com pany yet awhile, as the sand pit known as Punta Arenas has so contracted the entrance that it is extremely difficult for any vessel either to come in or go out. Some portion of the old Transit Company's buildings are daily washed away by the sea. The mail steamer is now anchored outside; the Valorous remained inside until there was danger of her being land-locked, and left last week, to keep company with the Caesar and Diadem, and the United States sloop of war Jamestown. The Diadem leaves to-day for Port Royal for provisions, and the Valorous goes on a cruise to the northward. The report which you copied from an American paper, that the English Consul here interfered in our munipal election, and that there was great dis satisfaction, &c., is an entire fabrication. AUSTRALIA. LIVERPOOL, MARCH 20. The passenger ship, Sir William Eyre, which left Melbourne on the 25th December, has arrived with twenty passengers and 11,741 ounces of gold. Her news is only to the 22d, Business was very dull owing to the Christmas holidays. A great storm, with loss of life, had oc curred at some of the diggings. ' An examination was going on at Sydneyrespect ing the alleged customs frauds. The Sussex, Wm. F. Fothergill, Augusta Amelia, Forest, and Monarch, all from London, and the Tasmania, from Liverpool, had arrived at Mel bourne. The Sussex spoke with the Aurora, Australis, Clontarf, and W. Lloyd. The Wooloo mooloo left Sydney for London on the 19th Jan. The Thames had also left Geelong for London. The Russian journals state that it is proposed to enlarge the military and mercantile po r t s o f R eve l, so as to render them accessible to vessels for the greater part of the year. The extension of the mercantile port would be advantageous, th e y assert, to the commerce w ith St. Petersburg. A fire broke out last week in the military store house at Debreezin (Upper Hungary), which, with all it contained, was completely destroyed. Advices from Vienna state that the walls of Vienna are covered over with the vowels A, E, I, 0, U, signifying " Austrim est imperare orbi uni verse." (It falls to the lot of Austria to rule over the whole world.) IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT fcrdshire, Wolverhampton, 2,383; in WarWickshire, Bii mingham, 1,910; In Yorkshire, Bradford, 2,194; Leeds, 3,089; Sheffield, 1,991." It appears to me to be a great public injury to take these men away from the counties, thus to deprive the eoturtiee ttf that liberal and commercial chttratter Wilibli they wotild otherwise have, ord . to Chailgt their social and, perhaps, political bias: Sirth is the first consequence of the present bill, yet there is another of still greater importance,—viz., you thereby enable persons of landed property to obtain a power by which the small boroughs mad bb flOoded with fagot votes. (Hear, beer%) Let rile here notice the change which Mile Made in 1832. In many of the small boroughs previous to that time the right of voting was by burgage tenure or freeholds, and those freeholds were entirely dependent upon, or, at all events, attached to, the patrons of the boroughs. By such means grew up that state of things which existed before the Reform Bill, when there were so many boroughs properly called nomi nation. What has been the character of many of those boroughs since 1833 ? In some of them there has been great influence exercised, and the landowners have had much to say in the election of members; but, at the same time, the right of voting being in £lO occupi ers h as been eve r ywhere a check to the former power of the great proprietors, and the electors have given their votes with a certain degree of regard, no doubt, to those who re comme nded candidates to them, but also with a determination to know what the opinions of those candidates were. (Hear, hear.) The gallant general the Min niter for War told us the other day that in Huntingdon he was qUite sure an hon. friend of mine (the member for Finsbury) would have no chance of being elected. There are many other boroughs in the country where the gallant general himself would have no chance of being elected—(a laugh)—because his politics are not the politics of the inhabitants of those places ; but im mediately you say . that 40s. freeholds may be formed to any extent in small boroughs you at once destroy what re mains of their independence, and you restore to them their old character of nomination boroughs. (Hear, her.r.) You would not only have that which prevailed before the Reform Bill, when in many instances the entire com mand of the boroughs belonged to the landowners, but you would have those contests which used to go on in many places, when two great proprietors —peers, perhaps—fought for Parliamentary influence, when one made 100 fagot votes and the other 120, and so the battle was continued until the fate of the borough was decided. I think, therefore, that the first proposition of the bill is to a great extent a repeal of the Reform Act. (Cheers.) It provides for the revival of abuses which the Reform Act was intended to extin guish. (Hear, hear.) But it is not true that the whole of the smaller boroughs are under the influence of persons like Lord Sandwich and others, who happen to have pro perty in the neighbourhood. Many of them are entirely in dependent. I might name as one the borough of Liskeard. It is a very small borough. It was former?y under the in • finence of a noble family ; but it has returned since the Reform Act Mr. Charles Buller, one of the most distin guished members of the house. (Hear, hear.) He was re turned by the free voice of the electors, and I believe the present member was also returned by the free election of the constituency. But immediately you pass the present bill—which I hope will never be the case—(cheers)—you will enable the gentlemen who have land in that neighbour hood to create a number of freehold votes, and thereby en tirely extinguish the free choice of the comparatively small number of independent electors. I believe the borough is seven miles in length, and therefore there would be ample room and opportunity to create freeholds of that kind. (Hear, hear.) Hence, I say, the first proposition of the bill is a great injustice. It is not an extension of the suffrage. It is an act of violence by which you deprive men of votes which they and their family have held, perhaps, for hun dreds of years—rights which they have exercised since the reign of Henry VI., except during the short period of the usurpation of Cromwell—for I believe that in modern times no Parliament has sat to which members have not been re turned by the 40s. freeholders in counties. Such being the case, you are now asked to do that which is unjust in itself, which is very impolitic in itself, by attempting in these days to revive those nomination boroughs that have been changed in character by the Reform Act. B u t I s h a ll b e told tat Parliament will interfere with the revival of these unjust and predominating influences. I believe that is quite true, but then it is only a step to a further change. What will that change be ? It will clearly be one to electoral dis tricts, for you will have already taken away that which is the great impediment to a division of the country into elec toral districts, the difference between counties and boroughs. (Hear, hear.) You will have small boroughs of 5,000 or 6,000 inhabitants returning members entirely at the beck of the landed proprietors, the creators of borough freeholds, and you will have, on the other hand, divisions of counties with a population of 95,030. The boroughs will be called nomination and corrupt, and it will be said " Let us join 5,000 to the 95,000, and divide the whole into two districts of 50,000 each, and thus obtain a fair and equitable division of electoral power." (Hear, hear.) lam not going to argue for electoral divisions—l own I love the old divisions of counties, cities, and boroughs. (Hoar, hear.) For my part, I have no wish that places like Winchester, Salisbury, Guildford, and Chichester should only be made parts of counties, instead of towns returning represontatives. (Hear, hear.) But I say, if that is your wish—if the present Conservative Government wish to have electoral divisions, which the hon. member for Birmingham denied that it was his object to have, being afraid of being thought too great an innovator if he proposed such a thing —(laughter)—but if such is the object of the Government, then let us arrive at that end at once ; and do not, in re spect to these small boroughs, let us go through this pro cess of nomination, corruption, and degradation, which must excite complaint and agitation in the country some eight or ten years hence, only to end in some violent process, or by then making electoral districts. (Hear, hear.) Let us, I repeat, rather have them proposed at once, and to give to London 50 or 60 members, to which the metropolis would be entitled under such a system. (Hear, and laughter.) Do not leave us to arrive at that end by a process which must create general agitation and discontent. (Cheers.) In stating this argument, which appears to me decisive against the proposal now before the house, and having adverted to the process, which I think is sure to happen, if such a bill as the present be carried, I cannot but strengthen my argu ment by a very high authority, the same as was quoted the other evening by the right hon. gentleman the member for the University of Cambridge. Some five years ago the Government of that day proposed to introduce a bill to .reform the representation of the people. The Earl of Derby immediately took the alarm ; he thought that some dreadful project was in contemplation—something dangerous to the institutions of the country, and I will venture to read to the house what was stated by that noble lord, as the authority is so high, the expression so clear, and the argument, as I think, so conclusive. Lord Derby said : " I beg that your lordships will not lose sight of this, that from the earliest periods of the Parliamentary history of this country there have been two great divisions of consti tuencies, and it is upon due weight being given to each of these two that the whole balance of the constitution in the House of Commons depends." Then, after stating the distinction, he says : " That distinction is as old as the earliest period of our historY. It is not a new distinction introduced at the time of the Reform Bill ; but it is a distinction which at the time of the Reform Bill in 1831 and 1832 was recognised, and to a certain extent was even extended ; because one of the main alterations with regard to the franchise, in addi tion to extending it beyond the corporations, which had in some boroughs usurped the place of the inhabitants at large, was, that it was given to a great mass of rated house holders ; and, at the same time, in order to draw more clearly the distinction between the two classes of represen tation, the non-resident freemen were disfranchised in re gard to boroughs; while residence was not considered ne cessary with regard to the county franchise. Property was then made the basis of representation, number and resi dence were the basis of representation with regard to boroughs. • • • Ido fillet that the Government in the measures they are about to introduce will not attempt to break down this old, well-founded, and most ithportant dis tinction. If they do so for the purpose of removing any apparent anomaly, and diminishing the inequality of num bers,, or of introducing any fanciful regularity, they will entail much more serious consequences in the total altera tion and subversion of the principles of the representation of this country, and the alteration of the distribution of powers, and they will derive n o a d van t age from any pos sible establishment of a system apparently more symme trical, but not containing the elements of real power and real convenience which are comprised in the present system, and which form one of the main balances of the consti tution " HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY). The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition from Bath, in favour of allowing Protestant Dissenters to administer trust funds of endowed grammar schools. Viscount DUNGANNON presented several petitions against the Marriage_Law Amendment Bill. - Lord OVERSTONE pmented several petitions in fax our of legalising the marriage with a deceased wife's sister. The noble lord said he had already presented seve ral petitions from the City of London, signed by the mem bers of the corporation, bankers, merchants, and other in fluential persons, to a similar effect; and now the petition he held in his hand was from the united body of Protestant Dissenters of the three denominations. The Bishop of RIPON presented — Petitions against the unconditional repeal of church rates. LEASES IN IRELAND. The Earl of BANDON asked whether it was the in tention of the Government to introduce any bill for facili tating- the granting of leases in Ireland ? The Earl of DONOUGHMORE said the Attorney- General for Ireland was at present engaged in framing a bill en the subject referred to by the noble lord. INDICTABLE OFFENCES BILL. This bill passed through committee without amendments' and was ordered to be reported on Thursday next. Lord LYNDHURST thought that the bill ought not to be forwarded so hastily. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he had no objection to postpone the third reading of the bill until his noble friend the Lord Chief Justice was in his place, although he knew his noble friend entirely approved of all its provisions. He did not see any objection to the bill being reported on Thursday, and he would not move the third reading until Lord Campbell was present. MUTINY BILL. This bill was read a second time. MARINE MUTINY BILL. This bill was also read a second time. COUNTY COURTS BILL. This bill was read a second time. CONVICT PRISONS ABROAD BILL, This bill passed through committee. . _ _ MANOR COURTS (IRELAND) BILL. This bill was reperted with amendments. Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a third time, and passed : East Suffolk Railway ; Lands Improvement Company ; and Weymouth and Melcombe Regis Markets and Pier. Tho following private bills were considered and ordered for third reading :—Glasgow Corporation Water; Lynn Borough and Port and Harbour Improvement ; Lianidlocs and Newtown Railway; Londonderry Bridge; and the Chichester Harbour Embankment. (Hear, hear.) I ask, then, how it is, Lord Derby being now in office and having to introduce a Reform Bill, that one of the first things he does is to frame his bill on the entire destruction of that distinction which he said was necessary for the balance of the constitution ? (Cheers.) How is it that he tells us now, through his organs in this house, that while professing to improve our representative system, he intends to subvert that which he thought neces sary for the constitution in 1854 ? (Hear, hear.) It is quite obvious, as the right hon. member for Cambridge University said in his letter to Lord Derby, that if I or the noble lord the member for Tiverton had introduced such a plan no man would have been steadier in his opposition to it than the Earl of Derby, who would have told you that it was an utter subversion of the institutions of the country. (Hear, hear.) Therefore I think that the first clause of the bill contains that which will be injurious, and not an improvement to our institutions. I think it contains that which will lead, in the first place, to great discontent on the part of the inhabitants of towns now being freeholders, but who, according to the bill, are to be transferred from the counties to the boroughs. In the next place, I think it will lead to the creation of a great power of nomination in many of the boroughs which it is proposed to preserve, and in which no such power absolutely exists at present ; and, in the third place, it will, in my opini9n, lead to such dis content that the only remedy for the evils you have inflicted —the only resource from the mischief you have done—will be to resort to electoral districts, which no man is now pre pared to . propose, and which I consider a total subversion of the existinr , re presentative system. (Hea r , h ea r.) Ido not wish to detain' the house longer than necessary, and I come now to the second part of the amendment which I have taken the liberty to place on the notice paper. While there is a total alteration in the basis of our representative system, such as no one ever proposed, and such as Lord Grey and his colleagues were praised for not attempting in 1831, no change is made in regard to that which, I own, appears to me to be a necessary provision in any reform bill. (Hear, hear.) You destroy what is ancient, but you do not make provision for what is new. By no means. Every man will admit that since the Reform Bill, which, with great and not overdue caution, placed the franchise for boroughs and cities in the occupants of £lO houses, great progress in knowledge and capacity has been made by the working classes. (Hear, hear,) Let us con sider a little what it is that is the real basis on;which you should rest the representation of the cities and boroughs. It is the custom in this country, different from that of some ancient Stales—and I think a very wise usage—to place powpr in hands which are thought fitted to hold it. You do not say that every man that might come into a room where a trial is [going on should have a vote on the question ' whether the persons under trial should be condemned or not. On the contrary, you say that there are certain per sons occupying houses of a certain value, who will be fitted as a jury to condemn or acquit their countrymen. You do not allow a man brought up for trial, perhaps for his life, to say, " I require to be tried by my fellows and equals, and these men are above my fortune." On the contrary, you say that you must have persons fitted for the duty, with capacity to understand what the case is, and, after hearing the evidence and charge of the judge, to give a fair verdict. So with regard to the judge himself and almost every functionary in this country, you decide what are the conditions and qualifications which make men fitted for certain functions. For this reason, and in conformity with this spirit of our institutions, I have always opposed any proposition for universal or, as it is now called, manhood suffrage. With respect to a great portion of the working people, though many are well fitted to take part in the poli tical questions of the day, they are liable to be misled by delusions, and if they should be totally indifferent, that circumstance would give rise to great venality in our elec tions. There are men among that body, perhaps, who would consider it not of much importance to themselves whether there existed protection or free trade, religious liberty or ptrsecution, and they would give their votes ac cording to their own immediate interests. Therefore it is of the utmost importance to the State that you should and THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 22, 1859. men fitted by their station and capacity to give their votes for members of Parliament, for in the right choice of the members "of this house depends the right conduct "of affairs.' (Hear, hear,) But when you say this, can you stijf that ainee the period of the Reform Act, there are not persons below the class of £lO householders thoroughly fitted for the suffrage ? (Cheers.) Are there not numbers of persons who are perfectly capable of judging and in circumstances sufficiently independent' to qualify th.eiti to vote at elections f For my own part I have no hesitation in answering that question in the affirmative and I confess it has appeared to me for some years that such is the growth of intelligence, such the improvement of the people, that you ought not to confine yourselves to the limit of £lO. (Hear, hear.) A right hon. gentleman in address ing his constituents,. I believe, told them that in 1851, find ing the Administration of which I was the head not so popular as it had been, I bethought myself of extending the franchise by way of acquiring a little popularity. (Hear, and laughter.) A very kind suggestion this! (A laugh.) But gwill explain to the house what were my real views on that occasion. I considered that there were thousands of persons who were every year becoming fit to exercise the franchise, and that if they were not admitted to that fran chise discontent would arise among them. (Hear, hear.) I had seen two questions settled by Governments, but settled, as I thought, under untoward circumstances. The Roman Catholics of Ireland had been barred out from their rights until their discontent came to the verge of civil war, and then their petitionwas granted. (Cheers.) The agita tion against the corn laws went on, and the petitions of the people were entirely refused, until at last, in a year almost of famine—in a year of great scarcity—the meetings in favour of the repeal of those laws became much more numerous, the discontent became much more loud, and then that which had been previously refused was granted. These I Consider were bad things, for the authority of Government and of Parliament is sure to suffer if, when questions are discussed year by year with calraness and patience on the part of those who are petitioning for the removal of any grievance, you always end with a refusal of their petition, while when instead of fresh reasons you have noise, and clamour, and agitation, and even threats of force and resistance, you grant the demands which are made. (Cheers.) It struck me, I must own, that although there was no great cry, no vehement demand, for admission to the elective franchise, yet that there were many persons who wished to possess it, that those numbers would increase, and that if you went on refusing their request until at last they made their demands in a loud tone, and you then granted them, instead of increasing the peace, the quiet; and the contentment of the country, you would only teach the great masses to rely upon force and not upon reason. These were the grounds upon which in 1851 I proposed an extension of the suffrage. In 1851 I propoSed a certain franchise ; iri 1854 I proposed a modification of that fran ch;se. I will not say now what that franchise ought to be at the present day. (Laughter and loud cheering from the Ministerial benches.) I hold that it is for the Government of the day to propose the franchise they may think right. (Loud cheers.) When I sat on the bench on which the Chancellor of the Exchequer now sits I did not hesitate to propose what I thought right—(hear, hear)—and I was ready to discuss the question in this house. On the first occasion to which I have referred the dissolution of the Government, and on the second, the occurrence of war pre vented my proposals front being discussed ; but I held then, as I hold now, that it is the business of the Government to make such propositions-(cheers)—and let us amend these propositions if we think fit. It is, however, for the Govern *ant to take the initiative, and the question now to be con sidered is simply this, whether her Majesty's Government are right in refusing any reduction whatever of the franchise 1 in towns so for as the occupation franchise, by value or rating, is concerned. I will say this much, that I doubt whether the propositions I formerly made, founded upon rating, were based upon a very sound foundation, for I have certainly found that rating varies very much (hear, hear) — that although the Poor Law Board say that £6 of gross rental may be always taken as £5 of poor-law rating, yet that rule does not hold constantly; and, therefore, I believe that any change you make in the £lO franchise should be of the same nature as the franchise established by the Reform Act—viz., based upon annual value. (Cheers.) The Govern ment refuse any change of that kind, and the right hon.mem ber for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley) told us he was afraid if you established an uniform franchise, whatever it might be, and if you had no variety in the franchise, that one day or other there would be an ugly rush in order to get over the line. Well, sir, I believe that to be the case, and therefore I ask the house to declare that so far as the borough fran chise is concerned some further extension is required. (Hear, hear.) I have now dealt with the two points to which the amendment I have to propose refers, but while hardly anybody stands up to say that it is right to merge the freeholders in the boroughs and to make one uniform franchise, or to refuse any reduction of the occupation fran chise in boroughs, various modes of evading the argument rather than of answering it are resorted to, which it is sought to avoid the conclusion at which I have arrived in the amendment lam submitting to the house. Some per sons say that it is irregular to prefer such an amendment as this on the second reading of the bill. Now, I think this objection can hardly be entertained by those hon. gentlemen who last year supported the resolution of my right hon. friend the member for Ashton•nnder-Lyne (Mr. M. Gib son), because they then voted not only for a resolution that was an amendment to a bill, but a resolution which had very little reference to that bill, and a resolution likewise, which was put in the place of a bill which they approved. (Cheers.) Everybody will recollect how very highly they approved the Conspiracy Bill—(laughter and cheers)—how much they applauded it on its first introduc tion, and how strongly the Government of my noble frien.l was urged in another place to introduce a bill of that kind. Yet, instead of reading that bill a second time, they sup ported a resolution which was interposed between the bill and the proceedings of the house. My right hon. friend the member for Ashton-under-Lyne said to me on that occasion, " If you dislike the bill, you may depend upon it that if my resolution is carried you will hear very little more of the bill." That was to me a good reason for supporting the re solution. What reason the right hon. gentlemen opposite had for voting for that resolution] I don't know, but at all events their conduct was not actuated by dislike of the bill. (Cheers.) Now, I say at once with regard to the bill before the house, that I consider it to be a measure of a most noxious, injurious, and dangerous character. (Prolonged cheering.) I may be asked then why, instead of moving the amendment I have proposed, I did not move that the bill be read a second time this day six months ? Well, sir, I will explain the reason why I did not take that course. This bill con tains, no doubt, some proposals which are to bo aporovsd and supported. (Cheers.) For instance, it admits £lO oc cupiers to the franchise in counties. It may notdo so in the most convenient form, because instead of the proposition with respect to a £lO franchise made by Lord Aberdeen's Government in 1851, it provides that the qualification shall be lands and tenements. [An hon. member—" Or tene ments."] Well, I will speak as that part of the question presently. It is obvious, however, that if lor any one else, instead of opposing such a resolution as I ant submitting to the house, had moved that the second reading of the bill should be rejected, it would have been said directly in this house, but much more out of doors, "You have rejected a bill, the chief feature ofowhich is the admission to the fran chise of the £lO occupiers in counties, who you were last year so anxious to enfranchise." Now, that is not the chief feature of the bill, and I wish to mark by this resolution what is the principle of upon which the bill stands. It rests upon that first clause which I have read, and therefore I think it is necessary that, before proceeding to the second reading, this house should take care to express its opinion with regard to the character of that provision, which, as I have said, is the chief principle of the bill. What course the Government would take if this amendment were carried it is not for me to say. Undoubtedly they might change the whole character of the bill. It would be impossible for me or any one else to do so in committee, because I have shown you that the first clause of the bill con tains the whole principle of the measure, and if we were to negative that first clause in committee after having agreed to the second reading of the bill, I think the Government might justly say to us, "You have agreed to the second reading of a bill the chief—the great—principle of which is the uniformity of the franchise, and now you strike out in committee the clause by which that uniformity is estab lished." I hold that the proper course to pursue is that this house should record its opinion first with regard to the pro posed mode of treatment of the county freeholders whose property may he situated in boroughs, and secondly, with regard to the occupation franchise in boroughs. his said . . th;t in committee-Land the right hon. gentleman himself seemed rather to invite this course—all sorts of opinions may be expressed, and all kinds of clauses may be proposed ; but, considering what this question is, what is its gravity and importance, and how much the right hon. gentleman dwelt upon that gravity and importance, the proposal of throwing the whole representation of the country into hotch-potch as it were, inviting every one to make his amendment and to bring forward his clauses, is a proposal unworthy of a Go vernment, degrading to the character of this house, and likely in the end to produce a bill which will not be condu • vivo to the public interest. (Cheers) I remember very well what were our proceedings on the Reform Bill, and I know that it was the entire confidence which a great majority of the house reposed in Lord Althorp, it was the steadfastness and firmness with which they supported any proposition . of his, which alone enabled the house to deal with subjects of such vast weight and importance. But if we are to go from the first clause down to the last, amending every word, ex eluding, the boroughs from the first clause, and waiting until the end of the committee in order to bring up a clause which will suit the boroughs,—if we are to be chan ging and chopping upon every clause —I am sure that the house cannot hope successfully to get through a bill of this kind. And, then, recollect the manner in which a bill is often treated in committee. At a certain hour in the even ing three-fourths of the house go away, and then perhaps members will come back and say, " I did not know the committee was going to divide so soon ; you have disfran chised all these freeholders without allowing me an oppor tunity of recording my vote or of expressing my opinion on the subject." Our only security against these inconve niences is, that there should be before the house some great question which can be properly debated, and upon which the house can come to a solemn decision. Now, I will ven- ture to read to you what is the character of the phrase " lands and tenements." As I have said, the authors of the Reform Bill took very great care on all these subjects, and when they provided for the franchise of boroughs they made use of the words "house, shop, office, warehouse, or other buildings," and so with regard to other details. Here, however, in the very beginning of this bill, we have "qua lifications arising out of lands or tenements," and then any person " who shall be beneficially entitled . . . . to an estate of inheritance in lands or tenements of freehold tenure" of not less than 40s. clear annual value is to have a vote in boroughs. Now, I have looked into an authority to whom unlearned people go to find their law—l mean " Blackstone's Commentaries"—where the phrase is thus explained : ' Land' comprehends all things of a permanent, sub stantial nature, being a word of a very extensive significa tion, as will presently appear more at large. Tenement' is a word of still greater extent, and though in its vulgar ' asce . ptation it is only applied to h o uses and other buildings, yet m its original, proper, and legal sense it signifies every thing that may be holden, provided it be of a permanent nature, whether it be of a substantial and sensible or of an unsubtantili, ideal kind. Thus libeirtin tenemention, frank ' tenement ot freehold, is applicable not only to land and other solid objects, but also to offices, rents, commons . , and the like ; and, as lands and houses are tenements, so is an advowson a tenement ; and a, franchise, an office, a right of common, a peerage, or other property of the like unsubstan tial kind are all of them, legally speaking, tenements." So, when they say that "land or tenements" is to give a vote in boroughs, you see how wide a door is open to every kind of abuse, to every kind of fictitious vote which may be created not.by the possession of land, and what is usually understood as a tenement, but by anything which will boar this construction. Now , in la w, I hold, for my part, that it is useless to go into a bill which in its first page and in its main provision contains so disastrous a change in the law and constitution of this country - v (hear, hear)—and I con fess I am not deterred from taking the course which I pro pose by the observations made the other evening by anhea friend near me (Mr. Roebuck), that if we should venture to interfere with the course of the Government bill we may have a dissolution of Parliament. I hold that it would be quite unworthy of us to pause on a question which is to affect ourselves and our descendants through fear either of a dissolution or of sow threatened danger to our foreign PETITIONS. _ - Several petitions were presented against the Government Reform Bill ; in favour of vote by ballot ; and for the recall of Sir John Bowring, &c. NEW ➢IEMBER. Captain JERVIS took the oaths and his seat for Harwich, THE DIVORCE COURT. Mr. EDWIN JAMES gave notice that he would put a question to Government oa the subject of the increase of business in this court, with a view to its facilitation. DESPATCHES TO LORD CANNING. Mr. SALISBURY asked the Secretary of State for India, whether the despatch, No. 5, 1858, dated the 9th December, had been submitted to the Indian Council for consideration before its transmission to Lord Canning; also, if any reply had been received from Lord Canning to the despatch in question ; and whether the Government were prepared to lay such reply on the table of the house ? Lord STANLEY said he was not in a position to lay on the table of the house the document referred to. CONSOLIDATED FUND (1'1,222,388 Bs. 9d.) BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. CONSOLIDATED FUND (X 11,000,000) BILL. This bill was also read a third time and passed. PARLIAMENTARY REFORM. The Strangers' Gallery was filled immediately prayers were oN er, and the stream of petitions that flowed inces santly against the Government measure, and the applause with which they were received evinced, in the clearest manner, the feeling of the house and the country. Mr. BERKELEY was entrusted with a number of these petitions, and excited considerable amusement by shouldering the voluminous documents, and bending under their weight, depositing them on the usual receptacle. Mr. GARNETT presented a petition from the inhabitants of Hamersham, praying for the adoption of the Government Bill ; and this solitary demonstrcktion in favour of the obnoxious measure elicited considerable laughter. THE REFORM BILL. On the order of the day for the second reading of the Representation of the People Bill, Mr. DISRAELI moved that the bill should be road a second time. Lord J. RUSSELL—I rise, sir, to move the amendment of which I have given notice, and I believe I shall best consult the convenience of the house by saying as little as possible by way of preface to the arguments which I wish to urge upon their attention. I shall be the more ready to do this because I quite agree with the right hon. gen tleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer that it was the duty of her Majesty's Ministers to propose a bill to amend the representation of the people in this house. It might be a question whether the Ministers, upon taking office, being in a decided minority, were justified in presenting themselves to this house ; it might be a question whether it was right to hold out expectations that they would present a Reform Bill to the house ; but I think there can be no doubt that, having held out those expectations, they were right in fulfilling their pledge and bringing their propositions before Parlia ment in the shape of a bill. The right hon. gentleman spoke much of the importance of this question, and I do not wish to weaken what he said by attempting to add any • thing to it. There can be no question of graver importance to us, our children, and our posterity, than that which is now before the house. And, sir, if it is a question of so much importance, I think it cannot be wrong to urge this house to consider every step which they take—not to be blind to the importance of any movement which they make, and to consider well before they advance in what may turn out in a wrong direction. In the argwnents which lam about to address to the house I am encouraged by the fact that two of the colleagues of the right hun. gentleman— one the member for the University of Cambridge (Mr. Walpole), distinguished among his colleagues for his great constitutional knowledge and the calmness and temper ance of his views upon all subjects—(hear, hear) —and the other the right hon. gentleman the member for Ox fordshire, than whom no man is better acquainted with tho population of this country, or a better judge of their character—have felt objections in a great degree similar to that which I myself entertain against the bill which the rest of the Government have introduced. I think it will save much misconception if I read what is contained in the beginning of the first clause of this bill, which, in fact, contains the whole principle of the measure. (Hear, hear.) I hear gentlemen saying, and I have observed the same re marks in public journals, " Exclude the clause which dis franchises freeholders in boroughs ; amend the clause with ' respect to borough franchises," and various other phrases, implying, in the first place, that they think this bad bill can be easily amended, and, in the second, that they have not read the measure of which they speak. The bill con tains, in the first eight lines, the following proposition : "Every male person of full age, and not subject to any legal incapacity, who shall have any one of the several qualifications hereinafter specified, shall be e n titl e d t o be registered as a voter, and to vote in the election of a mem ber or members for the county, or if within the limits of a borough, then in the election of a member or members for the borough, where,,in the case of qualifications arising out of lands or tenements, such lands or tenements shall be situated, and where, in all other cases, such person shall reside." This lays down, as I imagine, the principle of the bill, which is, that the suffrage throughout the country in coun ties and boroughs shall be uniform, or, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer expresses it, identical. Now, sir, let tho house observe the consequences of this proposition. I will speak first of the particular consequences, and then of the general principle which is here affirmed. The first princi ciple, then, is that all the freeholders resident in boroughs who have hitherto voted for the counties in which those bo roughs are situated are hereafter to vote for the boroughs in which are their freeholds. This is a complete change in the constitution of this country. (Hear.) These rights have been enjoyed for an immense length of time. When there was recently int his house a discussion upon the right of primogeniture, I stated that I had heard a freeholder of Devonshire, when asked by the poll-clerk, " Have you had this freehold more than a year ?" reply " More than a year we have had it since William the Conqueror." (Hear.) That shows, among a thousand other instances, what value the smaller freeholders place- upon the antiquity of their franchise. It is now proposed to deprive them of their votes for counties and to compel them hereafter to exercise their suffrage only in boroughs. Is that proposal made on account of any delinquency or any crime on their part? Have they shown themselves unworthy of the trust which has hitherto been reposed in them ? It is evident that such is not the case, because, otherwise, the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have proceeded, as the late Sir H. Peel proceeded in the case of the 40s. freeholders in Ireland, to propose their immediate disfranchisement. Instead of that, the right hon. gentleman has brought in a special clause by which he proposes that they shall retain their franchise for life, thereby entirely negativing the supposition that they are unworthy to exercise the right of voting which they have so long possessed. With the exception, indeed, of a hint that the Freehold Land Societies have increased the num ber of such freeholds to an injurious extent, there is not a word to be said against the 100,000 freeholders who have hitherto exercised the right of voting in counties. But by the first proposition of the bill, although they themselves are acquitted of all crime, their children for ever are de prived of their votes for counties, and compelled to vote for the boroughs in which their qualifications exist. Now, many of them, as I have said, have had their existing rights handed down to them from a long line of ancestors. Others have purchased their freeholds with the special view of voting for counties. What injustice, then, to say you will deprive them of their rights without any fault on their part, and hereafter compel them to vote where they do not wish to exercise their franchise. Therefore, I think it is esta blished that the first proposition of the bill is unjust. It is unjust because there is no public necessity for it. (Hear, hear.) But, in the next place, lam not afraid to maintain that those persons who now vote for counties in virtue of freeholds do give a character to the representation of those counties which it would not otherwise possess. (Hear, hear.) I hesitate not to say that they add to the liberal element of the counties to which they belong. (Hear, hear.) I find that "In Devonshire, Plymouth, there are 797 freeholders; in Gloucestershire, Stroud, 1,334; in Kent, Canterbury, 583 ; Dover, 1,037 ; in Lancashire, Liverpool, 3,300 ; Man chester, 3,043 ; in Middlesex, Tower Hamlets, 3,064 ; in Northumberland, Neweastle•upon-Tyne, 1,687 i in bfaf.. relations. (Hear hear.) It is for the Mini s t ers o f th e C row n if we come to a vote adverse to their measure, to take the course which th e y ma ythink most advisable. If thcy :should think proper to recommend the Crown to dissolve Parlia ment, in order to subMit this question to the people at large, I for one should not be afraid of that appeal. (Cheers.) Let them hold this bill up on every hustings in England, and await the response which will be made: (Hear, hear.) But if agitation should thereby be increased—if a general chic tion should give rise to demands which now have not beek thought of by popular bodies, upon the Government and not upon us will rest theresponsibility. (Cheers.) As to the danger of a foreign wor, I see with surprise in print and elsewhere that the presence of Lord Malmesbury at the Fo reign -office is a security for peace. (Laughter.) Now, I have never behaved unfairly towards Lord Malmesbury, and when he took office last year, and on a former occasion, I was disposed to look with favour on many of his proceed ings. I leave differed as to his conduct recently respecting Portugal ; still, making no charge against Lord Malmes bury, when I hear that his presence at the Foreign-office is a security for peace I wonder who will be the dupes of any such assertion. (Hear, and a laugh.) Well, then, when no arguments can be advanced to overthrow the reasons given by the two right hon.. gentlemen who have seceded from office, and the reasons given over and over again at public meeting's against the proposals in this bill, it is said as a last resource that I must have some party or personal object in view --(Ministerial cries of "Hear," and counter cheers)—and that accusation comes amongst others from a person from whom I should have expected more charity, if not more candour. (Hear, hear.) But, Sir, it is my duty not to attend to such charges, but to pursue the course which I think best adapted for the welfare of the country. (Hear, hear.) It cannot be denied that for many years I have taken a deep interest in this question. (Hear, hear.) Very long ago—so long ago, lam sorry to say, as the year 1819—I was occupied in this house in a laborious and irk some investigation into the bribery and corruption which prevailed in the borough of Grampound, with the view of disfranchising that borough and of conferring members on Leeds, which at that time had no representation, and I ven tured even to propose that the £lO householders of Leeds should be entitled to votes, a proposition which, as ray hon. friend the member for Birmingham reminds me, excited great alarm at that time, as much alarm as is now created by the proposal to give the franchise to householders below £lO. From that time to the present I have constantly taken the deepest interest in this question, and have promoted all measures which 3 thought tended to the free, fair, and pure representation of the people in Parliament. (Hear, hear.) I am bound to take that course—l may be allowed, I may be privileged to do so by my deep convictions on the subject. I have the satisfaction of knowing that the act in the passing of which I took part in 1831 and 1832 has been productive, not of those calamitous consequences which were predicted by our opponents, but of great benefits --benefits obtained not through bloodshed, not through civil war, but by peace able and tranquil discussion, and by the legitimate influence of public opinion. (Hear.) Since that time slavery has been abolished; we have had the question of tithes, Nv hich was a vexatious question between the clergy and their pa.. rishioners, amicably arranged ; we have had free Munici pal corporations established; there has been a great reduc tion in the duties on Customs and in those Excise duties which pressed heavily on the masses ; Protection has been given up, and Free Trade sanctioned by Parliament. These and many other benefits have flowed from the reformed Parliament, which we were told would be so fruitful in calamity and disaster, and which was to take the crown off the King's head and shake the balance of the State: (Hear, hear.) Sir, entertaining these convictions, seeing what has been done, I cannot view without alarm the proposition which is now before the house. I have endeavoured to call the attention of the house to two of the main demerits of this bill. If it should continue on the table of the house, the measure ought to be discussed in every shape until at length, if not immediately, it is totally rejected. (Hear, hear.) I shall take this course, careless of any imputations which may be cast upon me. (Cheers) With regard to this great question of reform, I may ray that I defended it when I was young, and I will not desert it now that I am old. (Loud cheers.) Lord STANLEY, who was loudly cheered on rising, said—ln the month of April, 1835, a resolution was moved by a noble lord, then and now a distinguished member of this hou'se, t., the effect " That no settlement of the Irish tithe question would be satisfactory that did not appropriate to the purposes of general education any surplus which may remain after providing for the wants of the Irish church." (Cheers.) That resolution was brought forward with the view of defeating a measure about to be introduced by the Government of the day. It succeeded in its object. It drove the Government from office. It placed the mover and his political friends in the possession of power, and, having served that purpose, the principle which had been so triumphantly asserted by a majority of the House of Commons was suffered at once to fall into abey ance. (Cheers, and cries of " No, no.") It never was affirmed, and although nearly a quarter of a century has since elapsed no practical action whatsoever has followed upon its adoption. (Cheers.) Now, sir, I do not allude to this historic incident of which the noble lord the member for the City of London was the hero—(hear, hear)—with the view of throwing any discredit upon him. He acted, I have no doubt—as statesmen in this country generally act —in con.forrnity with the political exigenciea of the day, and I refer to the circumstance which I have just mentioned, because I am da3irous of cautianinz the members of this house—and, above all, the liberal members—that to reject a moderate measure of reform does not necessarily insure the passing of one of a more ex tended character. (Cheers.) It is well to remember that in politics a lost opportunity does not always recur—(cheers) —and although those whose sole object is the triumph of a. party may be, anxious to see this bill thrown out, without even considering what the result, so far as reform is con cerned, may be, yelndependent and moderate men, in whatever part of the house they may sit, will, I feel per suaded, think twice before they reject an opportunity of dealing with this great question, inure favourable in many respects than any which hereafter is likely to be afforded. (Cheers.) There has, I believe, never been a time when within the House of Commons great public questions were discussed with less acrimony, and with less regard to per sonal and party interests than has for the last few years been the case. (Hear, hear.) There never was a period when the extreme views of political parties were more strongly discountenanced than at present. Europe is at peace. No other great question besides that of reform forces itself upon the attention of Parliament. There is little distress in the country, and no discontent. These aie all circumstances which, in my opinion, this house would do well seriously to consider before it decides upon sanc tioning a resolution which, if carried, will lead to thisprac tical result, that no legislation on the subject of reform can take place during the present session. (Hear, hear.) In saying this, I am well aware that there may be those who do not desire to see this question settled, who think the time is not ripe for large changes, and who despise all changes which are not large. They know that in the present temper of Parliament and of the country whit is called a large measure of reform could not pass, and they are not inclined to accept any measure which does not meet their views in that respect. [At this point in the noble lord's speech some interruption was caused and some laughter excited by the circumstancq that the cry of a child (understood to be Lord John's son) was heard to proceed from the ladies' gallery. The interruption lasted, however, but for a few moments, and the noble lord continued.] To such politicians as those to whore I was alluding there is nothing more distasteful than the fact that every political party stands pledged to reform. They know that popular passions can be roused only by decided opposition to popular demands, and they do not like concession, because in it they see security against agitation. (Hear.) That, however, is nut a Conservative policy — (cheers)—nor do I believe it can be described as a liberal policy in the true sense of that word, while it is likely to prove, if successful, fraught with danger to the public peace. If it fails —as, in the present temper of public opinion, will probably be the case—it can only had to an indefinite postponement of an important question of politi cal improvement, and to a waste of the public time. (Hear, hear.) I cannot, under these circumstances, think the prin ciple which it involves is one to which this house is likely to give its assent. I assume, indeed, that it is the general feeling and wish of the hou se th a t some measure of reform should, during the present session, be passed into a law. The noble lord who has 'just spoken, it is true, has asked—although I must say he merely adverted to the subject in passine•—whatbusiness thepresent Ministry have to bring in a Reform Bill. The answer to that ques tion is the plain and the obvious one that if it be a political necessity that such a measure should be passed--if it be for the interests of the country that it should be no longer postponed—then it becomes the duty of those who happen for the time being to be charged with the conduct of the Administration not to shrink from introducing and doing their utmost to pass such a measure. (Hear.) And, apart from that consideration, I say that if we find any class which is excluded from the franchise, which is in consequence dis satisfied, and which we think may wisely and safely be en trusted with it, the admission of such a class to its exercise is not only a wise but a Conservative policy in the best and truest sense of the word. (Cheers.) But we are asked if it be pos sible that those who are now charged with the duty of con ducting the Government of the country are sincere in their endeavours to effect a settlement of this question? My reply is, that I know of nothing in their antecedents which could justifytho impression that the contrary is the case. (Cheers.) I appeal in support of that view not to professions, but to acts. Eight years have elapsed since this subject was brought under the notice of Parliament subsequent to 1832. In the year 18.51 a reform bill was framed. In 1852 it was brought into this house, and immediately afterwards disap peared altogether. (Hear, hear.) In 1854 the same course . was adopted, and with the same result. It is only under the auspices of the present Government, therefore, after eight years of promises premeditately ma de and evaded that an issue upon this great question is about to be taken, and that you aro asked to give a vote on the second reading of a Re form Bill. (Cheers.) Ido not think it necessary to deal with the charges of inconsistency and insincerity by which our efforts in this direction are assailed. [Lord J. Russell was understood to intimate that he had made no such charges.] I have heard them from other quarters, and it is difficult, in dealing with topics of this nature, to refrain from alluding to objections which have been urged against the passing of the present measure, although they may not j have been put forward i n th e speec h t o w hi c h we have ust listened. But what the noble lord did say was, that the Go vernment were in a minority in this house, and were there fore not in a position to deal with a question of this import ance. (Hear, hear.) Now, it seems to me to be a very difficult thing indeed to know what at the present clay is meant by saying that a Government has not a majority in this house. (Cheers.) The state of things which has prevailed during the last few years has tended—and I do not complain that it is so— to cause Government in this countryto rely less and less upon pledged and unqualified s upporters, and more - and more upon the Character of the measures which they bring for ward. (Cheers.) The political features of our day, there ' - fare satisfactorily dispose , in my opinion, of the doctrine • that the present Ministry have no right to deal with this question of reform. (Hear, hear.) Well, that being so, what, let me ask, are the objections which the noble lord and others urge against the bill? The principal.objections urged against the bill are that it excludes the working classes from its operation, inasmuch as it retains the borough franchise at £lO ; that it does not deal compre hensively with the case of the small boroughs, that it re stores outvoters in boroughs, by doing away with the obli gation to reside ; and that it establishes identity of fran chise in town and country by transferring prospectively the freeholders in boroughs to the borough from the county. But before entering on these questions I must remark on the manner in which the opposition of the noble lord to this bill is conducted. The object of the resolution is ob viously to prevent the house from expressing an opinion as to the second reading of the bill. (Hear, hear.), I can_ well understand that the noble lord and those whonct with.. hite . should object to a vote being taken upon the second. read:ng. .I dare say they have good reasons - 'for their ob- : jeptioa, and this resolution is framed-and very ingeniously framed I must say it is—in such a manner as to secure the support of those who,, while disapprovin g of some 'par- - tioular portions of the Measure, are still not prepared to reject it as a whole, and to place those who defend it in false position, by calling upon theM to consider exclusively those parts of the measure against which, rightly or wrongly, it is thought that popular opinion may be strongly diteeted, and by preventing - them from dealing with any other part of the measure. (Hear, hear.) If it is desired to obtain from the house an unbiassed verdict inn u the merits of the bill, I think reasonable objection may be made to the course which it is pro posed to take, as being contrary to justice and fairness. We might say, if a vote is to be taken upon this bill, " Form your judgment upon it as a whole ; accept the second reading or condemn it, but if you accept it you can consider the details in committee." When the noble lord compares the resolution which he is now moving With that which last year led to a change of Administration, I must say I think the analogy is in one respect at least quite accu rate. The motion of February last year was brought for ward avowedly and expressly as a vote of censure upon the Government of the day. (Cries of " No," and " Hear.") I am told that was not the case ; but if it was not proposed as a vote of censure, I must ask was it not accepted as such? (Hear, hear.) Ido not complain that a similar course has. been taken now, but I state that which we all know, that in this debate the merits of the bill before us will not be the only question discussed ; we all know that the question is not whether this bill shall pass into law, but whether poli tical power shall pass into other hands. (Loud cheers ) That is the challenge which I, upon the part of the Govern ment, am ready to accept. That is the issue which, un doubtedly, must be decided. Looking upon it in that light, I am not disposed to criticise the manner in which the vote will be taken. True it is, we are told that the adoption of the resolution is not necessarily fatal to the bill, and that even if the resolution be carried the bill may be brought to a second reading. I know that that suggestion collies front one who is a v er y c om p e t en t j u d ge o f such points of Parlia mentary tactics, but the noble lord must allow us—we rho sit upon these benches—to be the best judges of what wo may consider to be due to our self-respect and our own honour. (Cheers.) No doubt the India Bill of last year was proceeded with after resolutions, and sonic say, Why not pursue the same course now ? I say that the circum stances of last year in connection with the India Bill were of a purely exceptional character. The Home Government of India hat before the entry into office of the present Go vernment been condemned by the Ministers who preceded them. A bill was proposed for the transference of the go vernment of India without check or control to the Crown, which was equally condemned by public opinion. Another bill upon the same subject was brought in by the ea event Government, which do doubt failed to command the support of this house. Unie: those circumstances, feeling that it was important that the Home Government of India should not be allowed to remain in abeyance at a time when civil war was raging in India, we accepted what we felt was a necessity in that emergency, and adopted the method of proceeding by resolution, which resulted in the passing of a measure. I think that in adopting that course, in order to avoid great public embarrassment, the Government were perfectly justified; but there are many things that may he done once —many steps taken under the pressure of emer gency, which ought not to be drawn into a general prece dent, which it would be most inconvenient to adopt. (Hear, hear.) I say, then, .1 am expressing the feelings of my colleagues, and of those who support this measure when I declare that the adoption of the resolution proposed by the noble lord must necessarily be fatal to the bill. (Loud cheers.) Now, referring to the noble lord's objection that . by this bill the working- classes are excluded, 1 might ask two questions—first, what does the noble lord mean by the working classes ; and next, what does he mean by " ex clusion t" (Hear, hear.) There is nothing in England so impossible to define as a class, and the term " the working class" is the vaguest of all, because it may be confined to the very humblest grade of society, or it may extend almost indefinitely upwards. But, taking the term in its ordinary sense, and considering it as applying to those who live by the labour of their hands. I say there are many belonging to that class who will conic within the scope of the princi ple laid down in this bill—(hear, hear)—by the property qualification, by the lodger franchise, and by the franchise in respect to deposits in savings banks which we propese. One of the chief defects of the present state of the law is, I apprehend, not soernueh that the 40s. freeholds are above the reach of the working classes, because those feceholda be pur chased for £5O, and have been bought for less, bUt because by conferring the franchise in that form alone yen compel a man to invest his savings in a mining sometimes unattainable, and when attainable often inconvenient. In respect of qualification I am not unwilling to compare the provisions of this bill with those of the bill proposed by the noble lord in 18.51. What did the bill of the noble lord in 1854 propose to do ? It did not touch the case of loigers, but it dealt with the franchise connected with per sonal property, and I admit it only required £5O in a savingsebank, whereas we require £6O. But there was a provision in the noble lord's bill that the voter must have had the sum of £5O for three years before he should ho allowed to vote. We know that it would take two years to invest that amount in a savings-bank, and there was a pro vision that in the event of a change of residence to another locality an additional 12 months was required, so that a man would be five years without a vote, and might possibly be more. (hear.) Under the provisions of this bill the franchise will be panted not in five years, but in two years. (!fear, hear.) Objections have been taken to this form of giving the franchise, and it has been said that it is a hard thing if a man is compelled by the wents of his family or other circumstances to withdraw his money front the savings-bank, that therefore he should lose his vote, although he would be just as worthy a m em b er o f soc i e t y . Now, I reply that, whatever may be the value of that ob jection, it is one that applies e inany to every kind of pro perty qualification. (Hear, hear.) If a man is compelled to sell his freehold he loses his vote in respect of it; if ho leaves his £lO house he also loses his vote ; and therefore the objection applies to all pr sporty qualification whatever; and if we get rid of property qualification we are practically thrown hack upon universal suffrage. Then something has been said of the danger of the creation of fictitious deposits, but I think it can be shown—perhaps better in committee than just now=thet whatever danger there may be in that respect exists equally in the case of the immemorial fran chise conferred by the 40s. freeholds. It is possible, ::o doubt, that a wealthy man who desires to create votes may lend money to another for investment in a savings-bank in order to obtain the franchise for him ; but so it is in tho case of 40s. freeholds, and it is much easier to be done in, their case, because then the title-deeds remain in the hands ,of the person who creates the vote, whereas if the money is lent to create a savings-bank franchise, it is necessarily invested in the name of the per son who is to give the vote, and can only be drawn out by him. (Hear.) While I agree with the principle of that quali fication I may say at once that I lay no particular stress upon £6O as the sum to be invested. I think the value of the qualification consists not in the amount the voter may have, but in the evidence which it gives of his industry and fru gality. (Hear, hear.) The principle is, I apprehend, not to put the amount too high, so as to be beyond the retch of the working man, and at the same time nut to put it so low that it can be gained without the exercise of prudence and industry. (Hear.) That is the principle which is laid down in this bill; that is the object we have aimed at. If there be any objections as to the machinery which is proposed, that is a proper subject for consideration in committee. When it is said that by retaining the borough franchise at £lO the working classes are excluded, what is int e nded is that. they are not admitted in a body. It is not a question whether they should be shut out altogether—no one wishes that— but whether they should be admitted indiscriminately—the ignorant with the educated, the man who spends as well as the man who saves ? (Hear, hear.) Now, I think and speak with all respect of those whose lot it is to live by labour, and if a large minority of those who are styled the working classes cannot read or write, I ain willing to admit that the fault is less theirs than that of the classes above them. (Hear, hear.) But although the inability to read and write may not be a fault, it may be a disqualification --(hear, hear)—and the difficulty of admitting the working classes is that if you admit ;hem in a body you must do it to such an extent that. by their numbers they will overbear every other class. The difficulty therefore is—and it presses upon those who bring forward a measure of reform—that with regard to the working classes you should hit the medium between giving them an overpowering share in the representation and excluding them altogether. I have seen some ingenious speculations put forth that certain members should he returned by the working classes', while others have recommended that in certain large towns the franchise should be exceptionally lowered, so as to have a representation of the working classes in those towns. But we cannot help feeling instinctively that these are ingenious speculations merely, which cannot be put into practice. They do not meet the real difficulty of the case ; and that is, how to admit the working classes on any principle of selection without admitting them indiscriminately as a body. (Hear, hear.) Are these illiberal or retaograde views ? Are they the views of the Conservatives alone ? If there be in this country one 111111 more than another who has laboured in the cause of human thought and human progress--if there be one man more than another who believes in the future of mankind, and who is not inclined to look back to the past with any superstitious feeling of veneration that man is John Stuart Mill. (Cheers.) Now, Mr. Mill has written a pamphlet within the Last few weeks, in which he expresses the view that it would be more satisfactory if every man had a vote, but that it would be only possible or expedient en condition that educated men, acconling to the measure of their position . and requirements, should have five or six; and Mr. Mill says that without some qualifica tion of that kind he believes that any general admission of the working cla sses i s i mposs ibl e. I run not fond of substi tuting authorities for arguments, and there is only one other witness I will call. There arc many members of this house, and many more of the working classes who are familiar with the name of Mr. Holyoake. (Murmurs and Hear, hear.) He is chiefly known in connexion with philosophical speculations of an unpopular character, and also as warmly and earnestly sympathising with the cause of democratic institutions in Europe. No one is a mere fitting representative in that respect of the feelings of that section of the working class which interests itself most strongly in politics. (Cries of Oh, oh!) Mr. Holyoake may fairly be taken to represent the feelings of persons of ex treme political opinions, and it is with his political-opinions alone with which I have to do. Well, what is it that Mr. Holyoake says in a pamphlet published within the last few Hooks ? Who cares," he asks, " to give votes to the selfish, the ignorant, the apathetic? Not more than one man in 100 in this country gives time, money, serious thought, or takes an earnest part in public affairs. Why should any one die of exhaustion in endeavouring to enfranchise so many as comprise a mere apathetic mob, who put no value on a vote ? At the same time many would work hard and long that even a limited number of men, intelligent and earnest, who desire to take part in securing the well-being of their country, should be enabled to do so. Now, any mere mechanical suffrage founded on rating, or rent, or eupation, will,, as the existing suffrage does, i nc l u d e many utterly worthless persons, and exclude numerous deserving, intelligent, but pour men, who might by a s i mp l e expedient be included. What is wanted is an expansive suffrage wldch shall be open to the worthy and shut out the unfit." Mr. Holyoake then proposes an educational test. I agree with him in the general tenour of his remarks, and he fairly expresses the principle that I have endeavoured to establish, admission of the working class by selection and net in mass. There are two tests by applying which that principle may be carried out. The educational test is now no Government has yet ventured •to aiipiptllyfi,site,ostmo fartry an t a he working class are concerned, and we therefore come to the other—a law of personal property qualification. Now we think that the possession of some property in the hands of a man who has earned it by his labour is a test of industry, of self-control, of good moral character. With the details of the machinery employed you are now dealing. If the machinery we have adopted is good, employ it ; if defective, amend it ; but the princi ple is one upon which we ask the verdict of this house.— namely, the admission of the working classes by the prin ciple of selection, and not indiscriminately and at hazard. (Hear, hear.) I coue now to the question that has been. so often put relative to the disfraneWeement of the area I t I k i# it 1.1 I i 3O