The Sun. — London, England, 1859-03-01 00:00:00

LATEST NEWS. The following telegrams have been received at Mr. Reuter's office : LISBON, MARCH 1. The Royal mail steam ship Tamar has arrived With the Brazil mails, and leaves this morning for Southampton. She brings 94 passengers, diamonds to the value of £47,64:5, and £43,300 in gold. VIENNA, FEB. 28. Lord Cowley presented his credentials this morning;. TURIN, FEB. 28. Adviees have been received from Milan to the 27th inst. In consequence of the popular demonstrations at the funeral of Signor Dandolo numerous arrests and domiciliary visits have taken place, but several persons whom it was intended to arrest succeeded in escapb lg. The prisoners were conducted to the Castle an d delivered over to a military commission. MILAN, FEB. 24. Last evening a disturbance among the lower classes broke out before the doors of the " Alla Scala" Theatre. The mob endeavoured to prevent the entrance of the masks into the theatre, about eleven o'clock, by hissing, whistling, and throwing Stones, but order was quickly restored. A second duel has been recently fought here. The combatants were an Austrian officer and an engineer from Cream, - Among the persons who have lately emigrated to Piedmont are included the son of the Podesta of our town, two functionaries (attaches of the Arch duke Governor), several employes in the financial department, and even an officer of police. It is expected that the Archduke will return to this town in the course of a few days. Very many persons here are of opinion that the line of policy adopted by - the Government of Eng land tends t o neutrality ; they think at all events that England desires peace ; and with this object in view she , may persuade Austria to go great lengths in yielding to the pressure from without. FRANCE. PARIS, MONDAY. The chawies of peace or war with Austria still continue the same. The great, perhaps the greatest, chance for peace is in the decided disinclination for War which exists throughout France in all classes except, perhaps, the army, and there principally among the regimental officers, who naturally want promotion. Among the higher officers there is very little or no desire for war. It is certain that this feeling among the population at large sur prises, irritates, and embarrasses the Emperor. It la a pity his Majesty has not taken the pains to learn something of the 'popular feeling before he allowed matters to go so far. The debate of Friday in the English Parliament, and particularly the speeches of Lord Palmerston and Mr. Disraeli, have produced the best possible effect here. Persons attached to the Imperial Go vernment, some of them in the highest class of func tionaries, speak of that debate in terms of admi ration, and some who were lukewarm about the English alliance seem now taken with a strong affection for it, as in some measure the best gua rantee against a disastrous policy. A demand is to be addressed to the Legislative Corps for a supplementary credit, applicable to the extraordinary expenses of the Minister of Marine. These expenses refer, perhaps, to the 60 new vessels af war, of various dimensions, which are said to have been prepared for sea within the last six months. BOURSE, Feb. 28.—The following were the last quotations : 4} per Cents. .... 95 I Credit Fowler 645 Do. end mon th .. 97 50 Belgian 4f .— 3 per Cents. 6B Piedmontese (5) Do. end month.... 68 Roman — Bank Shares...... 2895 Austrian Credit Mobilier .. 770 Spanish Threes Do. Account — Home Debt — RAILWAYS. Cash. Orleans Northern 920 Account. New ditto. .. Lyons and Mediterranean B3O .. 830 New ditto — .. Geneva 535 -- • • Midi . — . • Southern Western 595 . • Eastern — .. Grand Central — .. Sardinia's Austrian - -- Exchange on London, at sight, paper, 25f. 15c. ; money, 25f. 10c. ; three months, paper, 25f. ; money, 24f. 95c. Letters received at Frankfort from Kehl an nounce that the continuation of the works at the Standing bridge over the Rhine between Kehl and Strasburg have been stopped, and the workmen paid off. THIS DAY'S MARKETS. HAY MARKETS. SMITHFIELD.—Meadow hay, £2 15s to £4 10s ; clover, do., £4 Os to £5 Os; and straw, £1 4s to 108 per load. A steady trade, at fully late rates. CUMBERLAND.—Meadow hay, £2lss to £4 103 ; clover do., £4 Os to £5 Os ; and straw, £1 53 to £1 8s per lead. A heavy demand, but prices firm. WHITECHAPEL.—Meadow hay, £2 15s to £4 88 ; clover do., £4 Os to £5 Os ; and straw, £1 38 to £1 8s per load. Both hay and straw sold slowly, at our quotations. COLONIAL. TEA.—The market continues exceedingly firm, owing to the advises by the overland mail. Common congon is quoted 131 d to 131 d per lb. SUGAR.—There has been very little activity exhibited in the market, and the few dealings reported have been at about former quotations. In the refined market a moderate busi ness has been done, and prices generally are a shade firmer. COFFEE.—The market remains firm, but little business has been transacted, and no change of importance can be noticed in prices. Rica.—Soft-grain descriptions have been in good de mand; at fully late rates, but other qualities have shown little alteration. SALTPETRE.—At public sale prices went rather higher ; and in the private market there is a fair inquiry for the better qualities. TAnnow.—The market is dull, and the demand for con sumption has been limited. P.Y.C. on the spot is quoted 52a 6d ; March, 52s 3d to 62s 6d ; and last three months, 52s 6d per cwt. COAL MARK (Prices of Coal per Ton at .ET—FEB . 28. the close of the market.) S. d. Burnhope 11 6 Byass's Bebside West Hartley .14 6 Lambert's West Hart ley 14 6 Tanfield Moor 11 6 Tanfield Moor Butes . ll 6 Haswell Gas. ll 6 Walker Primrose 12 0 Wylam l4 6 Davison's West Hart -11 6 ley Walla End. s. d. Byron 15 6 Northumberland 14 6 Wharncliffe 15 0 Braddyll's Hetton 16 6 Heugh Hall 16 0 Whitworth 14 6 Haswell l7 6 Kepler Grange...... _l6 9 Hetton l7 6 Tees l7 6 Shineliffe l5 3 Thorpe Fothergill's Aberdare 21 0 Kelloe l6 9 Framwellgate l5 3 Walls End. Gosforth Harton l4 9 Hartlepool. l7 3 Ships at marker A,l4B—Sold, 75. THIS DAY'S SHIPPING. LONDON, March I.—Wind this day at noon W. S.W. ; light breeze, and fine clear weather. (BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH SOUTHAMPTON, Tuesday Morning, Wind IV. Arrived—Wonder, steamer, from Jersey. LIVERPOOL, Tuesday Morning. Wind W.S.W. Arrived, Feb. 28.—Lord Elgin, from Demerara. (BY SUBMARINE AND BRITISH TELEGRAPH.) GRAVESEND, Tuesday Morning. Wind W; tide two hours' flood ; fine. Arrived ; Feb. 28—John Bull, from Hambro. DDAL, Tuesday Morning. Wind W.N.W., Passed, Feb. 28.—Kensington, from Calcutta; Mel bourne, screw steamer, from Bermuda; Monteagle, from Moulmein ; Janet, from Melbourne ; Thomas Blyth , from Madras—all for London. Her Majesty and his Royal Highness the Prince Consort, accompanied by the Princess Alice, honoured the performance at the Olympic Theatre with their presence last evening. Her Majesty the Queen will hold a Privy Council on Thursday next, the 3d inst., at Buckingham Palace. ~'`~ Victoria 45 2 of the in circu !th day of .. L 9,626 ;o. 10,657 .. 22,220 .. 25,286 .. 6,445 .. 20,845 . 29,513 :0. 10,765 Lk, .. 15,946 b, .. 23,085 , .. 62,375 .. 14,399 ly. 8,760 . 29,721 as at, .. 16,713 Ell, .. 23,759 R- at, . 61,137 .. 31,484 .. 24;540 ton , . 36,291 Co. 25,727 tTis ... 11,251 .. 46,123 ,st, . 15,511 rd- ... 10,935 ~. 2,564 Co. 14,335 to ... 39,654 Co: 29;911 end ... 21,411 2,705 Co. 14,124 'sex ... 32,143 ... 38;833 ock 6,428 .. 17,420 Co. 66,763 ,uth and ... 7,039 . .. 12,406 ... 31,869 'eak ~.. 25,724 and 7,557 10,398 er— •• • 61,562 -on .... 78,957 .... 7,694 Dor- 49,271 ster, 85,257 .... 49,643 Ims- 41,264 .. 26,635 ing- 6,906 light 9,529 5,752 Ceen 5,253 .... 13,485 . 24,631 •• . • 14,682 ull- 18,607 43,368 Co. 4,000 rples 34,062 Ross )0... 20,282 .... 21,052 Elad- , Co.. 67,871 and .... 14,950 avies .... 24,930 rank, 18,996 &Co 43,398 irvey .... 5,175 ..... 51,352 own, 38,096 ;et.. 30,158 24,261 :J0... 76,835 udilo 14,707 Teton St. 6,430 • • 4,392 •. . 32,45 5 s 10,086 t and ........... • .. 14,4 30 C 0... 2,042 1 Son 4,27 3 _ _ 15,313 Bank, 28,820 recon and ath— 7,442 1 21,762 and :, and 47,622 id Co 17,627 nond, 16,902 Bank, 48,937 Nor• _ 93,871 8,048 ). 3,619 22,523 11,344 smith 29,592 restry 9,71 4 . _ 34,349 -- --. 8,506 )finch _ •• • . 11,637 raid 43,534 5,930 8,666 d W _ 10,170 24,744 Sc Co 29,932 • • 6,012 S Co. 3,015 ,ter— -- 6,544 12,106 9,397 10,150 yid , iffron ...,....._ • 28,630 m 00... 11,946 23,100 .... 32,247 me- _ __ amp- 2,352 11,689 ..... 3,128 0. .. 12,656 atop, •• • . 25,856 try— 20,306 E.... 25,07 8 ,o. 7,899 J 0,.. 9,679 11,834 ;hire, 11,03 9 teher 12,340 dCo. 7,791 wood Sous 8,805 Co.. 13,00 5 kCo 12 , 514 rolls, 6,872 22,24 0 Fox, .... 3,150 fract 44,10 5 .an, .... 13,984 ;hes- 17,6 45 - 15,518 36,70 41,28 6 ►ton.. W.- ing- • and midge idge- C. -11. 'eter • rodall Idlow ek— Vey- L k-. lur- 5,750 rick° 9,5 31 ank„ .... 60,94 d 9 / 987 • • • and eck, 42,3-15 IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY). The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. MANNING THE NAVY. The Earl of HARDWICKE laid on the table the rea sons of Mr. Lindsay for not signing the report of the Com mission on Manning the Navy. THE PAPAL STATES The Earl of CLARENDON begged to draw the atten tion of his noble friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs to a discrepancy in a statement he had made in that house on one made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the other house of Parliament on Friday last. The Chancellor of the Exchequer stated that the French and Austrian Govern ments were willing to evacuate the Papal States, and that the Papal Government was anxious that such a movement should be made. His noble friend on Friday stated that at no distant date the French and Austrian troops would be withdrawn at the request of the Papal Government. He thought that although both parties might wish to with draw their troops, they would be restrained from so doing by neither being aware of the exact wish of the other, nor of their line of conduct. He wished, therefore, to know the exact information in the possession of the Government, that no discrepancy might mar the effect of the discussion. Lord MALMESBURY said he was very glad to give all the information in his power, but the noble earl's observa tions with respect to what ho tensed discrepancy, seemed to assume a distinction without a differ ence. (Hear, hear.) . His honourable friend and himself meant the same thing. The knowledge they ball possessed was that the Papal Government requested, of its own accord, the evacuation of its territory by the French .and Austrian troops, and he could not see any excuse for the French and Austrian troops remaining for a single day after such an announcement. He had seen the French ambassador since the discussion on Friday, and he stated that his Government were quite willing to evacuate the Italian territory. Lord BROUGHAM asked the noble earl if he could in form him as to the object of the immense warlike prepara tions which were being made by a neighbouring power, and which f as was well known to most of their lordships, was the real cause of the anxiety which was felt in Europe? He did not soppose there was any just reason for alarm, since the noble earl and his colleagues, notwithstanding these war like preparatims, had found time for the preparation of a measure for Parliamentary Reform. The Earl of 11/ALMESBURY said the information he had received was to the effect that there was no real ground for alarm on account t. , f the warlike preparations alluded to by his noble and learned friend. The preparations were on to be carried on to a g olater extent than was actually necessary for the preservation of peace. Lord BROUGHAM said ti2e answer was perfectly satis factory. DEBTOR AND CREDITOR BILL. The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the second reading of this bill. Lord ST. LEONARDS objected to the bill on the ground that consolidation was not carried out so fully as it ought to be. He thought that the bill he had introduced last session was far better than the one at present under consi deration. Lord CAMPBELL considered that as there was another bill introduced in the other house of Parliament upon the same subject (Lord J. Russell's bill), it would be desirable that they should have both bills before them when they came to consider this question of the law of bankruptcy and insol vency, and he would suggest to his noble and learned friend the desirability of reading the bill a second time and refer ring it to a select committee with that view. The LORD CHANCELLOR, though anxious to do all in his power to facilitate the most complete investigation of the subject, must decline to accede to the suggestion of re ferring the bill to a select committee, because he believed the result of such reference would be that no bankruptcy bill would pass during the present session. With regard to the bill now before the other house, they did not know that it would over come up to their lordships • at all events, it could not come up until so late a period if the consi deration of the subject were deferred till then, legislation this year would be impossible. Nor was there any necessity for sending the bill to a select committee to discuss it clause by clause. The bill was one of principle rather than one of detail. Its great leading features were the abolition of im prisonment for debt; the getting rid of the distinction be tween traders and non-traders, and bringing the adminis tration of bankruptcy and insolvency into the same court ; and the providing for the liquidation of debtors' effects by private arrangement or public inquiry. That was all that their lordships were called upon to affirm by the second reading of this bill, and beyond this there was nothing more than the details applicable to those principles. Ho must, therefore, with all respect for his noble and learned friend, decline to accede to his suggestion for sending the bill to a select committee, from which, as it appeared to him, no advantage could be gained, but which might occasion great disadvantage in the delay which would in all probability result. , After a few words from several noble lords, The motion was then put and agreed to, and the bill was read a second time. Their lordships adjourned at half-past /seven, HOUSE OF COMMONS-(YESTERDAY. ) The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. A short time previously a number of members assembled, and the house was nearly filled by the time the business commenced, in consequence of the anxiety felt to learn the details of the Chancellor of the Exchequer's Bill on Par liamentary Reform. The strangers' gallery was also crowded, and the house presented a very animated appear ance. NEW MEMBER. Mr. EDWIN JAMES took the oaths and his seat for Mary- Lebone. PRIVATE BUSINESS. TRAVELLERS' AND MARINE INSURANCE AND ACCIDENTAL DEATH INSURANCE COM PANIES' AMALGAMATION (No. 2) BILL. This bill was read a second time and ordered to be com mitted. PETITIONS. Sir J. GRAHAM presented a petition in favour of the £lO county franchise. Gen. THOMPSON presented petitions in support of the adoption of manhood suffrage, vote by ballot, &c. The hon. and gallant member said that his petitions were founded on the principle that " A man's a man for a' that." (Laughter.) Several petitions were also presented on behalf of the let ter carriers and others employed in the provincial post-offices, praying to be placed on the same footing as those con nected with the London, Dublin, and Edinburgh offices. ARMY ESTIMATES. In reply to Capt. VIVIAN, General PEEL said that he proposed to bring forward the army estimates next Friday. TRANSIT OF BATTERIES TO INDIA. Sir De L. EVANS asked the Secretary of State for India whether it was the fact that 12 field batteries of ar tillery were ordered or intended to be sent to India ; and whether the transit of troops to India by way of Egypt was ordered to be totally discontinued ? Lord STANLEY said the batteries were ordered, but would not be sent out at present; and with regard to the second question, the practice would be discontinued. PARLIAMENTARY REFORM. The orders of the day having been postponed till after the notice of motion on the representation of the people, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER rose and said—Sir, it is my duty to-night to draw the attention of the house to a subject than which nothing more important can be submitted to their consideration. Those which are called most important political questions—those questions, for example, of peace or war, which now occupy and agitate the public mild—are, in fact, inferior. In either of those cases an erroneous policy may be retraced, and there are no disasters which cannot be sucessfully encountered by the energies of a free people; but the principles upon which the distribution of power depend in a community when once adopted can rarely be changed. An error in that direction may permanently affect the fortunes of a State or the character of a people. But, grave as is the duty, and difficult as is the task which have devolved upon her Ma jesty's Government in undertaking to prepare a measure to amend the . representation of the people in this house, these, I admit, and cheerfully admit, are considerably miti gated by two circumstances—the absence of all passion on the subject, and the advantage of experience. Whatever may be the causes, on which I care not to dwell, I believe that on this subject and on this occasion I appeal to as im partial a tribunal as is compatible with a popular form of government. (Hear, hear.) I believe there is a general wish among all men of light and reason in this country that the solution of this long-controverted question should be arrived at, and that if public men occupying the position which we now occupy feel it their duty to come forward to offer that solution—one which I trust in our case will not be based upon any mean concession or any temporary com promise, but which will be consistent with the principles and spirit of our constitution, which will bear the scrutiny of debate, and which, I trust, may obtain the sympathy of public opinion—l feel persuaded that in the present conjuncture of our political world such an attempt will meet from this house a candid though discriminating support. (Hear, hear.) Equally so, it may also be ob served that the public mind of this country has for the last quarter of a century, and especially during its latter portion, been so habituated to the consideration of all questions connected with the popular representation, the period itself has been so prolific of political phenomena in the contem plation and study, and I may also say the judgment of the people of this country, of this subject, that weshould have felt it our duty to undertake this task. We are in a much more favourable position, I admit, than the statesmen who in 1832 undertook the great office which then devolved upon them, because we address not only the Parliament but those in the country who by their knowledge have be come competent to consider this subject, and all will agree that this fact will greatly facilitate the discussion upon it. Although some of those who took a leading part in the transactions of 1832, h app il y f or us , s till sit in both Houses of Parliament, yet so long is the space of time that has elapsed since those occurrences, I think it not impossible to speak of them with something of the candour of history. I do not doubt the future records of this country will acknowledge that during some of the most important poli tical events of modern history those events were treated with the energy and ability becoming British statesmen. If we look at the circumstances under which the measure of 1831 was introduced, the proceedings of this house at the time, and the character of its members, it must be ad mitted that that measure was equal to the emergency it controlled and directed. I cannot, indeed, agree with those who attribute to the legislation of 1832 every measure of public benefit that has been passed by this house during the last twenty - five ye ars ; know well tha t before the reform of this house too k p lace the adminis trations of this country were distinguished by their efficiency ; I believe, indeed, that especially in the latter part of the administration of Lord Liverpool, this house was rather in advance of the opinion of the country at large. But I think that the reform of the House of Commons in 1832 . greatly added to the energy and public spirit in which we had then become somewhat deficient. Sir, it must be remembered that the labours of the statesmen who took part in the transactions of 1832 were eminently experi- THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 1, 1859 mental. They had to solve certain problems with a great want of data on which nice and accurate conclusions could be arrived at ; in many respects they had to treat the sub j ect empirically, and it is not to be wondered at if in the course of time it was found that some errors were com mitted in that settlement, and if as time rolled on that some, if not many, deficiencies were discovered. I beg the house to consider well these effects of time, and to consider well also what has been the character of the 25 years that have elapsed since the Reform of 1832. Those years form no ordinary period. In a progressive country and a progressive age progress has been not only rapid, but perhaps precipitate. There is no instance in the history Of Europe of such a vast increase of population as has taken place in this country during this period. There is no ex ample in the ancient or modern history-of Europe, or of America, of the creation and accumulation of capital so vast as has occurred in this country in those 25 years. And I believe a general diffusion of intelligence has kept pace with that increase of population and wealth. .In that period you have brought science to bear on social life in a manner no philosopher in his dreams could ever have anticipated. In that space of time you have, in a manner, annihilated both time and space. The influence of the discovery of print ing is really only beginning to work on the multitude. It is therefore not surprising that in a measure passed 25 years ago, in a spirit necessarily experimental, however distin guished were its authors, and however remarkable for their ability, some omissions have been found that ought to be supplied, and some defects that ought to be remedied. In this state of things a question in England becomes what is called a public question ; Parliamentary Reform, in our present circumstances, has become a public question—a pub lic question in due course of time becomes a Parliamentary question ; and then, as it were, shedding its last skin, it becomes a Ministerial question. (Cheers and laughter.) Reform has been for 15 years a Parliamentary question ; for 10 years it has been a Ministerial question. It is 10 ' years since the Minister of that day, who sat in this house, after a series of motions, the object of which was to change the settlement of 1832, after resisting those motions for some time, declared it to be the opinion of himself and his colleagues that some alteration ought to be made in it. Public events prevented that Minister from immediately acting on that public declaration. But in 1852, 1 believe in this very month of February, the Prime Minister coun selled her Majesty to address Parliament from the Throne in these terms : "It appears to me that this is a fitting time for calmly considering whether it may not be advisable to make such amendments in the Act of the late reign relating to the re presentation of the Commons in Parliament as may be deemed calculated to carry into more complete effect the principles on which that law is founded. I have the fullest. confidence that in any such consideration you will firmly adhere to the acknowledged principles of the Consti tution by which the prerogative of the Crown, the authority of both Houses of Parliament, and the rights and liberties of the people are equally secured." In consequence of that announcement from the Throne a measure of Parliamentary Reform was brought forward by the Ministry of the day. It was not pressed, in consequence of a change of Government which then took place. But two years afterwards, another Minister being at the head of affairs, a Minister who, in the general tenor of his politics, afforded a contrast to the one who introduced the measure of 1852—a Minister born and bred in what is termed the Tory camp, as his predecessor was born and bred in the Whig camp,—(hear, hear)—this Ministe )eing called on to form a Government, had to consider the equirements of the country, as every individual with that responsibility is bound to consider them—felt it his duty to counsel her Majesty in February, 1854, to address to Parliament this language from the Throne : " Recent experience has shown that it is necessary to take more effectual precautions against the evils of bribery and corrupt practices at elections. It will also be your duty to consider whether more complete effect may not be given to the principles of the Act of the last reign, whereby reforms were made in the representation of the people in Parlia ment. In recommending this subject to your consideration my desire is to remove every cause of just complaint, to in crease general confidence in the Legislature, and to give ad ditional stability to the settled institutions of the State." In consequence of that announcement another measure was brought forward by the Ministry of Lord Aberdeen, which was considered stronger than the measure of 1852, pro posed by Lord J. Russell, if it is not against order so to men tion that distinguished name. But circumstances again changed, and prevented the Legislature from proceeding with that measure of Reform. The countrybecame involved in a war with a first-rate Power—a war that might be de scribed as European. Before it terminated a change of Go- vernment again occurred. Another statesman, who may well be compared with the two distinguished men who pre ceded him, a statesman renowned not only for his ability, but his great experience, ap.d whose political prejudices-•.if he has any (laughter and cheers)—l will say, then, from whose superiority to prejudice (cheers) was considered a statesman who had no morbid sympathy with advanced opinions. (Renewed cheers and laughter). Then what did the noble lord deem it to be his first civil duty to accom- plish when he accepted the responsibility of office, and peace had been concluded ? In the same solemn and impressive manner adopted by the noble lord the member for the city, and by the Earl of Aberdeen, the noble lord in 1857, on the termination of the war, counselled his Sovereign to address Parliament in these words:— " Your attention will be called to the laws which regulate the representation of the people in Parliament with a view to consider what amendments may be safely and beneficially made therein." The house will, therefore, see that during three Ministries the subject of Parliamentary Reform has been formally brought before the attention of the Legislature. And let me remind hon. gentlemen that, although circumstances have prevented the Ministers preceding us from either proceed ing with the measures which they introduced, or with the measures whichthey proposed, the house has shown during that interval no disposition to wait and no reluctance to deal with it. The consequence is, that you have had, up to the end of the last session of Parliament, independent members of this assembly continuing that course which was pursued before any of those messages from the Throne were delivered to the Legislature—namely, that of carrying a re form of Parliament by measures of detail instead of taking a general view and bringing forward a comprehensive plan which should effect a fair adjustment of all the points in controversy. This, sir, was the state of the question when a change of Government again occurring Lord Derby be came responsible for the administration of this country. Let me now ask the house what in their opinion was our duty under these circumstances ? That, from the peculiar position at which this question bad arrived, it might have been practicable by evasion for a time to stave off a solution which had become, in our mind, a public duty, I do not say is impossible ; but that is a course which, speaking for my colleagues and myself, I may respectfully observe, is not at all congenial with our tastes. (Hear.) Were you to allow this question, which the• Sovereign had three times announced was one that ought to be dealt with—which three Prime Ministers, among the most skilful and authoritative of our statesmen, had declared it was their intention to deal with —to remain in abeyance ? Was it to be left as a means of re-organizing an opposition ? Is that the opinion of either side of this house ? Is it the judgment of this house that that is a wholesome position for political questions of the highest quality to occupy ? Was Parliamentary Reform —a subject which touches the interests of all classes and all individuals, and in the wise and proper settlement of which the very destiny of this country is concerned—to be suffered to remain as a desperate resource of faction ; or was it a matter to be grappled with only at a moment of great po pular excitement, and settled, not by the reason, but by the passion of the people ? (Cheers.) Were weto establish, as it were, a chronic irritation in the public mind upon this sub ject, which of all others should not form the staple of our party contests ? Were the energies of this country—an ancient country of complicated civilisation—were they at this time of day, boasting as we do of a Throne that has endured for a thousand years, to be distracted and diverted from their proper objects, the increase of the wealth and welfare of the community, and wasted in a discussion of the principles of our constitution, and of what should be the fundamental base of our political institutions ? I can not for a moment believe that this house would think that a posture of affairs which would be free from danger to the empire, or which it would be honourable for any public man to sanction. (Cheers.) Having, then, to consider the state of the country with reference to this question, and re calling all those details which on this occasion I feel it in cumbent on me to place before the house, the Government of Lord Derby on their accession to power had to inquire what it was their duty to fulfil. And, Sir, it was the opinion —the unanimous opinion of the Cabinet of Lord Derby, that this subject must be dealt with, and dealt with in an earnest and since spirit. (Cheers.) But I am told that, although it might be necessary that a solution should be effected, although three Prime Ministers who had made the attempt had withdrawn from the effort, yet it was not for Lord Derby—even if he deemed it for the interests of his country, and held it to be his paramount duty in the posi tion that he occupied—to undertake such it task. Sir, I dispute that statement. (Cheers.) I say it is not a just statement, and cannot in discussion be at all maintained. What is there in the previous career of the noble earl at the head of her Majesty's Government which should preclude him from taking this course ? (Cheers.) Tho noble lord the member for the City of London has connected his name with the question of Parliamentary Reform to his enduring honour. I do not grudge the well. earned celebrity which he enjoys. But the noble lord can remember the day when Lord Grey summoned him and Mr. Stanley to his Cabi net in 1832, and the noble lord knows well that, had it not been for their high ability and energy, probably the Reform Bill, and certainly not in its present shape, would never have been passed into law. I think, therefore, it cannot for a moment be contended that there is anything in the position or antecedents of the head of the Government that should preclude him from dealing with this question. What is there in the position of hon. gentlemen who sit on this side of the house to render it an inconsistent act on their part to adopt the course which I shall recommend to-night ? Why, when the noble lord in troduced his measure, and also when the measure of the Earl of Aberdeen was introduced into this house, I, acting with the complete sanction and at the personal request of many now sitting behind and around me on these benches, expressed our views upon the course pursued by the Govern ment of that day. I stated then, on their behalf, that we should offer no opposition to any measure which might be brought in the object of which was to effect a reconstruction of this house. I said that we were prepared to adhere to the Conservative compact which was wrung from the Con servative party in 1835, by taunts and reproaches as to their insincerity in professing to be bound by the Act of 1832. I said that by that Conservative compact, which was made by those who then represented the Conservative party in this house, we were ready to stand ; but that if those who them selves made the settlement questioned its propriety and pro posed to amend it, we should offer no opposition, but would give to those proposed amendments our candid consideration, making every effort on our part to improve the representation of the people. (Cheers.) Therefore I cannot understand the justness of the taunts which have been so freely used against our undertaking a task which, in my mind, no one who occu pies these benches can av oid or ought to shrink from. (Cheers.) Sir, it is in the pursuance of the pledge which we gave when Iwe acceded to office that, on the part of the Government of Lord Derby, I am, with your permission, to-night to call your attention to the measure which we now think it politic that this house should adopt. Now, Sir, it ap pears to me that those who are called Parliamentary Reformers may be divided into two classes. The first are those whose object I will attempt to describe in a sentence. They are those who would adapt the settlement of 1832 to the England of 1859, and would act in the spirit and according to the genius of the existing constitution. Among these Reformers I may be permitted to observe may be classed her Majesty's Ministers. (Hear, hear.) But, Sir, it would not be candid, and it would be impolitic in me not to acknowledge that there is another school of Re formers having objects very different from those which I have named. The new school, if I may so describe them, would avowedly effect a Parliamentary Reform on prin ciples different from those which have hitherto been acknow ledged as forming the proper foundations for this house. The now school of Reformers are of opinion that the chief, if not the solo object of representation is to realise the opinion of the numerical majority of the country. Their standard is population; and I admit that their views have been clearly and efficiently placed before the country. (Hear.) Now, Sir, there is no doubt population is, and must always be, one of the elements of our representative system. (Hear, hear.) There is also such a thing as property, and that, too, must be considered. (Cheers.) lam ready to admit that the ne* school have not on any occasion limited the elements of their representative system solely to population. (Hear, hear.) They have, with a murmur, admitted that property has an equal claim to consideration ; but, then, they have said that property and population go together. (Hear, hear.) Well, Sir, population and property do go together —in statistics, but in nothing else. (A laugh.) Popula tion and property do not go together in politics and practice. I cannot agree with the principles of the new school, either if population or property is their sole, or if both together constitute a double, standard. I think the function of this house is something more than merely to represent the population and property of the country. This house, in my opinion, ought to represent all the interests of the country. • (Cheers.) Now, those interests are sometimes antagonistic, they are compet ing, they are always independent and jealous; yet they all demand a distinctive representation in this house, and how can that be effected, under such circumstances, by the simple representation of the voice of the majority, or even of the preponderance of property ? If the function of this house is to represent all the interests of the country, you must of course have a representation scattered over the country, because interests are necessarily local. An illustra- tion is always worth two arguments ; permit me, therefore, so to explain my meaning, if it requires explanation. Let me take the two cases of the metropolis and of that kingdom of Scotland to the representation of which the hon. gentle man opposite (Mr. Baxter) is so much afraid that I should not do justice. The population of the metropolis and that of the kingdom of Scotland are, at this time, about equal. The wealth of the metropolis and the wealth of the king dom of Scotland are very unequal. The wealth of the metropolis yields a yearly income of £44,000,000, upon which the assessment under the great schedules of the income-tax is levied ; while the amount upon which assessment is levied under those schedules in Scotland is only £30,060,000. (Hear.) There is, therefore, the differ ence between £44,000,000 and £30,000,000 ; yet, who would for a moment pretend that the various classes and interests of that country could be adequately represented by the same number of members as represent the metropo lis? (Loud cheers.) So much for the population test; let us now take the property test. Let us take one portion of that very metropolis to which I have this moment referred. This is an age of statistics ; I do not place more value upon them than they deserve, but this is, I believe, at least an accurate memorandum. Let us look to the wealth of the city of London. The wealth of the city of London is more than equivalent to that of 25 English and Welsh counties, returning 40 members, and of 140 boroughs, returning 232 members. The city of London—the city proper—is richer than Liverpool, Manchester, and Birmingham put together. (Cheers and a laugh.) Or take another and even more pregnant formula. The city of London is richer than Bris tol, Leeds, Newcastle, Sheffield, Hull, Wolverhampton, Bradford, Brighton, Stoke-upon-Trent, Nottingham, Greenwich, Preston, East Retford, Sunderland, York, and Salford combined, towns which return among them no less than 31 members. (Hear, hear.) The City of London has not asked me to insert it in the bill which I am asking leave to introduce for 31 members. I have heard that there is another measure of reform in hands, probably more able to deal with the subject than myself, and in hands which, perhaps, are much interested in ascertaining the claims of the City of London. Whether the noble lord has made his arrangements accordiig to the statistical return we shall probably know some day or other; but the citizens of Lon don have anted with great modesty and propriety. They seem to be satisfied with their representation, and to cor.- sider that, probably, no place requires a greater number of members than the City of London at present possesses. Perhaps they have some suspicion that, if they had more members, they would find some difficulty in obtaining men who were competent to discharge that office. So much for the population test, and so much for the property test, if you are to reconstruct the house on either of those principles; but the truth is that men are sent to this house to represent the opinions of a place, and not its power. (Hear, hear.) We know very well what takes place at a Parliamentary election in this country. The man of prineely fortune has, when he comes to the poll, no more votes than the humble dweller in a £lO house, because we know very well that his wealth, his station, and his character will give him the influence which will adequately represent big pro perty, and the constitution shrinks from a plurality of votes in such a case. The constitution also shrinks from the en joyment of a plurality of votes by large towns by means of seats in this house. (Cheers.) It wants the large towns and cities of England to be completely represented. It wishes to see the members for Liverpool, MancheAer, and Birmingham, iu their places, ready to express the views of those powerful and influential communities, and it recog nises them as the representatives of the opinions of those places, but not as the representatives of their power and in fluence. (Hear, hear.) Because what happens to the rich man at a contested election will happen to those places. Why, sir, the power of the City of London or that of the city of Manchester in this house is not to be measured by the honour able and respectable individuals whom they send here to represent their opinions. I will be bound to say that there is a score—nay, that there are three score— members in this house who are as much and more inte rested, perhaps, in the city of Manchester than those who are in this house its authoritative and authentic represen tatives ; and when a question arises in which the interests of Manchester, Liverpool, or Birmingham are concerned, the influence of those places is shown by the votes of per sons so interested in their welfare as well as by those of the respectable and respected individuals who are sent here to represent them. Look at the metropolis itself, not s p ea king merely of the City of London. Is the influence of the metropolis in this house to be measured by the 16 members who represent it—ca laugh)—and who re present it, I have no doubt, in a manner perfectly satis factory to their constituents, or they would not be here ? No I we all of us live in the metropolis ; some of the members of this house have property, a few of them im mense property, in it ; and, therefore, the indirect influence of the metropolis in this house is not to be measured merely by the number of members which it returns to Parliament. So much for that principle of population, or that principle of property, which has been adopted by some, or that prin ciple of population and property combined, which seems to be the more favoured form. It appears to me that the prin ciple, as one upon which the representation of the people in this house ought to be founded, is fallacious and erroneous. (Hear.) There is one remarkable circumstance connected with the new school who would build up our representation on the basis of a numerical majority, and who take popula tion as their standard. It is this, that none of their prin ciples apply except in cases where population is concen trated. (Hear.) The principle of population is, although I cannot say a favourite doctrine, because I do not think it is so, a very notorious doctrine at the present moment, but it is not novel, although introduced at a comparatively re cent period into our politics. It was broached in the dis cussions which took place when the former Reform Bills were brought in by preceding Governments. It was the favourite argument of the late Mr. Hume. His argument for Parliamentary Reform—a subject which he frequently brought before the house—was generally this :—He took some unfortunate borough in the west of England ; he de scribed it as borough with a very small population and with very little business, and he said, " This borough returns two members to Parliament, while the great city of Man chester, with its population of hundreds of thousands and with half the business of the world concentrated in its circle, only returns the same number. Can anything be more monstrous ? Disfranchise the small borough, and give its members to the city of Manchester." Such was the argument which for several years passed in this house un challenged. Mr. Hume brought forward his motion for Par liamentary Reform in 1852, when, by a somewhat curious co indence, I was occupying the same seat I now fill, and it fell to my lot to make a reply to him. I stated then what I had long felt, that although I entirely rejected the principle of population, still, admitting it for the sake of argument to be a right principle, we must arrive at conclusions exactly the reverse of those which Mr. Hume and the school which he founded were perpetually impressing upon the public mind. The principle, in my opinion, is false, and would produce results dangerous to the country and fatal to the House of Commons. But if it be true—if it be our duty to form the representation upon it—then I say you must arrive at conclusions entirely different from those which the new school has adopted. If population is to be the standard, and you choose to disfranchise small boroughs and small constituencies, it is not to the great towns you can, accord ing to your own principle, transfer their members. (Hear.) Perhaps the house will allow me to refer to a note of some returns which I quoted in 1852, because they aro perfectly germane to the argument which I am now offering to the house. When Mr. Hume used the illustrations a sample of which I have just cited, I asked him to look to the case of North Cheshire, a county with a population 249,000, with two great towns—Macclesfleld and Stockport—together possessing a population of 93,000, and returning four mem bers to Parliament ; while the residue of the county popu lation (156,000) returned only two members. (Hear.) I asked him to look to the case of South Cheshire, a county with 206,000 inhabitants , wi th one town of 28,000, return ing two members to Parliament, but with the rest of the county population (178,000) returning only the same num ber, I brought before him the remarkable case of South Derbyshire. The population of that county was 166,000 ; it had only got one town—Derby itself—with 40,000 inha , bitants, who returned two members to Parliament, whil.e the residue of the county population (126,000) had only two members. (Hear.) I called his attention to the case of North Durham, with a population of 272,000. There are four great towns—Durham, Gateshead, South Shields, and Sunderland—with a conjoint population of 136,000, return ing six members to Parliament, while the county popula tion of identically the same number (136,000) return only two members. (Hear.) I referred him to the case of West Kent. That county has a population of 400,000. There are four great towns—Maidstone, Chatham, Rochester, and Green wich—with a joint population o f 172,000, returning seven members, while the remaining inhabitants (228,000) return only two. (Hear.) I likewise cited the case of East Norfolk, with a population of 250,000. Two towns—Norwich and Yarmouth—with a population of 100,000, return four mem bers ; but the county residue of 150,000 only two. I asked him to take the case of the East Riding with a population of 220,000. Hull and another town return four members; the residue of the county population (126,000) return only two. I told him to look at the West Riding, with its popu lation of 1,300,000, reduced by nine considerable towns to 800,000. Those 800,000 return only two members ; whereas the nine considerable towns, representing a population of 500,000, return 16 members. (Hear, hear.) Finally, I re ferred him to the case of South Lancashire, with a popula tion of 1,500,000. Ten great towns in South Lancashire, with a joint population of 1,000,000, return 15 members to Parliament, but the county residue of 500,000 return only two. (Hear, hear.) Why, sir, it is notorious that, if you come to population in round numbers, 10,500,000 o f t h e people of England return only 150 or 160 county members, while the boroughs, representing 7,500,000, return more than 330 members. (Cheers.) Admitting, then, the prin ciple of populain which is the principle of the new sc h oo l , I say you musr aisfranchise your boroughs and give their members to the counties. (Cheers, and a laugh.) Sir, I never heard an answer to this argument. (Cheers.) It cannot have been misunderstood, because it was not offered in a corner, but in this house, and I repeat that although seven years have elapsed since it was advanced in 1852, I never heard an answer given to it. I have watched the re cent agitation, when I was told that a new English consti tution was to be created on the principle of population, to see if that argument was answered. It has, indeed, been said that through a great many of the boroughs the landed interests are represented in this house. (Hear, hear, from Mr. White, followed by a general laugh.) That may or may not be a sufficient answer to the demand of the landed interests to be more represented in this house, but it is no answer to the inhabitants of the counties. (Cheers.) What proves that my argument is sound, and enters into the public mind, and is accepted as authentic, is that the noble lord the member for the city in 1854 acknowledged, with generous candour, that it had influenced him in the ar rangements which he had made, and a large proportion of the seats—certainly two-thirds--which formerly belonged to the small constituencies that he proposed to disfran chise he transferred to the county representation. (Hear, hear.) Let us now see, sir, what will be the conse quence if the population principle is adopted. You would have a house, generally .speaking, formed partly of great landowners and partly of manufacturers. I have no doubt that, whether we look to their property or to their character, there would be no country in the world which could rival in respectability such an assembly. (A laugh.) But would it be a House of C'ommons—would it represent the country —would it represent the various interests of England ? (Cheers.) Why, sir, after all, the suffrage and the seat re specting which there is so much controversy and contest are only means to an end. They are means by which you may create a representative assembly that is a mirror of the mind as well as the interests of England, (Cheers.) You want in this house every element that obtains the respect and engages the interest of the country. You must have lineage and great territorial property ; you must have ma nufacturing enterprise of the highest character and com mercial weight ; you must have professional ability in all its forms ; but you want something more—you want a body of mon not too intimatelyconnected either with agriculture or with manufactures, or with commerce—not too much wedded to professional thought and professional habits—you want a body of men representing the vast variety of the English character—men who would arbitrate between the claims of those great predominant interests—men who would temper the acerbity of those huge conflicting interests. (Cheers.) You want a body of men to represent that immense portion of the community who cannot be ranked under any of those striking and powerful classes to which I have referred, but who are in their aggregate equally important and valuable, and perhaps as numerous. (Cheers.) Hitherto you have been able to effect this object. You have effected it by the existing borough system, which has given you a number of constituencies of various dimensions distributed over the country. No one for a moment pretends that the borough system of representation in England was originally framed that it should represent all the classes and interests of the country ; but it has been kept and cherished besause the people found that, although not directly intended for such a purpose, yet indirectly it has accomplished that object; and hence I lay it down as a principle which ought to be adopted, that if you subvert that system you are bound to substitute for it machinery equally effective. (Cheers.) That is all I ask. I am not wedded to arrangements merely because they are arrangements ; but what I hope this house will not sanction is that we should remove a ma chinery which performs the office we desire unless we are certain that we can substitute for it a machinery equally effective. (Cheers.) Now, there is one remarkable feature in the agitation of the new school ; it is, not that they offer for the system they would subvert a substitute ; it is, not that they offer us a new machinery for the old machinery they would abrogate; but it is a remarkable circumstance that they oiler no substitute whatever. (Hear.) They lay down their inexorable principle ; they carry it to its logical consequences, and the logical consequences would be that to this house in the present state of the population, no doubt, you would have men returned by large constituen cies, who would in most instances represent great wealth. I will make that concession,—but when this house is as- sembled, how will it perforni the duties of a House of Com mons? (Hear, hear.) I will tell you what must be the natural consequence of such a state of things :—The house would lose, as a matter of course, its hold on the executive. The house will assemble ; it will have men sent to it, no doubt, of character and wealth ; the great majority of them matured and advanced in life ; and having met here, they will be unable to carry on the executive of the count*. [An Hon. Member—" Why ?"] Why P asks an hon. mem ber. Because the experiment has been tried in every coun try, and the same result has occurred ; because it is not in the power of one or two classes to give that variety of cha racter and acquirement by which the administration ofthis country can be carried on. (Cheers.) Well then, if this house loses its hold over the executive of the country, what happens ? We fall back on a bureaucratic system, and we should find ourselves, after all our struggles, even in the same position which in 1640 we had to extricate ourselves from. Your administration would be carried on by a Minister, a Court favourite. It might not be in these times, but in some future time. The result of that system would be to create an assembly where the members of Par liament, though chosen by great constituencies, would be chosen from limited classes, and perhaps only one class of the community. (Cheers.) There is a new school of philosophers, who are of oppinion that there is no such thing as progress; that nations move in a cycle, and that after a certain cycle they arrive at exactly the same place, and stand in precisely the same circum stances which they quitted two or three centuries before ; and I am quite sure that if this house were reformed and reconstructed on the new principle of population that will occur. I have no time now to solve a problem of that depth. Such metaphysical subjects require the study and retirement of the Opposition benches. (Laughter.) But if the new system were adopted I feel quite persuaded that the House of Commons, after all its reform and reconstruc tion, would find itself in the same comparatively ignomi nious position from which the spirit and energy of the old English gentry emancinated it more than two centuries ago. (Hear, hear.) Tlierefore, I need not informthe house that it is no part of my duty to recommend it to adopt that new system. We cannot acknowledge the validity of those principles to which I have adverted, and which would make population, or property : or even property and population I joined together, the principle on which the legislative sys tem should be constructed. (Hear.) But before I refer to that part of the subject, there appears to mete be one branch of the utmost interest, and which it is my duty rather to touch on before I advert to any other ; and that is the state of the franchise. (Hear,lear.) If there be one subject connected with this general topic more than another, on which public feeling has been most shown, it has been in the desire to exercise the suffrage. That was the first claim that was made when the settlement of 1832 began to engage the critical spirit of the nation; and as the prosperity of this country increased, and as its wealth, population, and intelligence increased—as new interests arose, and as new classes were, as it were, called into social existence, that desire became stronger ; and it is, I think, hardly necessary to declare that it was founded on a natural feeling, and one which we should by no means infer is entertained by those only who arc disaffected to the institutions of the country. On the contrary, in most instances that desire arises, no doubt from a desire to participate in benefits which are ap preciated. In considering this question, I Would make first of all one general observation, as to the object which the Ministry have had in view in preparing their measure of reform. We have never in any of the arrangements which we shall propose to Parliament to adopt, con sidered for a moment whether they would increase or whether they would diminish the constituent body. Our sole object has been to confer the franchise on all of those to whom we thought that . privilege might be safely intrusted, and who would exercise it for the general welfare of the country. (Cheers.) I will, with the permis sion of the house, address myself first to the borough fran chise. The Reform Act of 1832, acknowledging to a certain degree some of the old franchises of the boroughs, which exist but to a very limited extent at present, established the franchise in boroughs en the occupation of a house of £lO value. There is a wish—l would once have said a very general wish—that instead of the household suffrage being founded on that value, it shoud be founded by preference on rating. (Hear, hear.) lam not at all surprised that more than one gentleman has received this observation with marks of assent and sympathy. I confess myself that I was always much biassed in favour of that idea. It appears to me that if you could make—to use a common phrase—the rate-book the register, you very much simplify the business of election— (hear)—but, when you come to examine this matter in detail in order to see how it will act, you will find that it is involved in difficulties—great, all acknowledge—and I am sorry to be obliged to confess, to my mind insurmountable. For the purpose of securing the advantage of having the rate-book for the register, you must, of course, leave perfect discretion to the overseer. The overseer has an interest in raising rates, people may say ; or he may be a very hot poli tical partisan. Are you prepared to leave to the overseer the absolute discretion of appointing those who are to exer cise the suffrage ? Some will say we must have some check. But what is a check but an appeal? And, if you appeal, you cannot do better than appeal to the revising barrister. If you have an appeal to some other parochial officer, you appeal to an inferior tribunal ; and, indeed, unless you per mitted the overseer to be unchallenged you could not m ake the rate-book the register. But even beyond this t heic are other difficulties which you will find most perplexing. Not withstanding the Parochial Assessment Act , the rating of this country is most unequal, and it is only those whose business it has been to examine into this subject in its very minute details .who can be aware of the preposterous conse quences which would arise from adopting a rating instead of a value qualification. Take the present qualification instance of Boston, represented by my hon. and learned friend behin d me (Mr.n £8 rating, nce of £lO value, which it is very ge nerall y and p o p ular ly supposed might be supplied by an £8 ratin g . N ow, let us see what would be the conse q uence upon itnliseteapdreosf a ent£lcoovnasltuit:. I constituency of take f the in adopting Adams.) The borough of Boston consists of two parishes; the rating of one of them is upon one-half the value, and of the other upon two-thirds of the value. The practical con sequence of having an £8 rating in Boston would be to dis franchise 400 of the electors of that borough, who may or may not be supporters of my hon. friend. (" Hear," and a laugh.) Then, taking the case of another borough—Dover —if you had in that borough a franchise based upon £8 rating, instead of £lO value, you would exactly double the constituency. (Hear, hear.) I have taken these two in rtances from a great number of others, and the house will see that the idea spf establishing a frauchise based upon rating, instead of occupation value, is by no means the simple task it is by some persons supposed to be. (Hear, hear.) The great objection to such a measure, which led me entirely to re linquish all idea of adopting it, is that its tendency must be directly to disfranchise many of the constituencies. I will now proceed to consider the franchise of boroughs based upon a value qualification. The £lO qualification has been very severely assailed, and I think the objections to it may be ranged under two heads. First, it is said that there is no principle in a franchise founded on a £lO qualification ; and secondly, it is said that a constituency based upon such a qualification is extremely monotonous. (" Hear," and a laugh.) It is said that there is such an identity of interest in a constituency so founded, when we ought to seek for variety of character, that that alone is an objection; and it has really become almost a phrase of contumely to speak of a constituency as " only ten-pounders." (A laugh.) I will in the first place touch upon th e o bj ection that a £lO borough qualification is one founded upon norinciple. Now, I demur to that objection. It app ears to me that that qualification p is founded on a principle. It is said, "Why should a man who lives in a £lO house be more fitted for the suffra g e than a man who lives in a£9 house ?" Th at appears to me to be no argument. It a mere sophism and cavil. If it be an argument it is an argument against all tests, and not in favour of a£9 qualification. But the £lO qualification was intended as a test ; and the question is— is it a test that is effective ? (Hear, hear.) It is a test very easily accessible; it is a test which, if adopted, is universal in its application; and it is a test which affords a fair pre sumption that the holder possesses those qualities which entitle him to perform the acts of citizenship. It is therefore founded upon a principle ; and the objection urged against it appears to me to be a sophism. The other objection to the £lO qualification is, that it gives a monotonous character to a constituency ; that from extending the suffrage only to men who live in £lO houses you have merely one sentiment and one class of ideas represented. That appears to me to be altogether a fallacy, and it rests upon the fallacious assump tion that every man who votes under a £lO qualification necessarily lives in a £lO house. But that is not the case. On the contrary, under 'that £lO qualification all orders of men exercise the suffrage—the most affluent and the most humble. A man who lives in a house worth £4OO a year yet votes under the £lO qualification—(hear, hear)—and instead of rendering a constituency monotonous, it secures within its range a great variety of interests, of feelings, and of opinions. (Hear, hear.) But, Sir, lam ready to admit that there are many persons quite capable of exercising the suffrage who do not live in £lO houses—(hear, hear)—and whom I should wish to see possessing the suffrage. (Cheers.) But should we obtain that result by' —I won't call it the vulgar expe dient, because the epithet might be misinterpreted, though I should not use it; in an offensive sense—but by the coarse and common expedient which is recommended of what is called " lowering the franchise in towns." Now, I beg the house to consider for a m oment what must be the effect of lowering the franchise in towns. Suppose that, instead de. £lO borough qualification, you had a £5 borough qualifica tion. Well, the moment that you hada f 5 borough qualifica tion, you would realise all those inconvenient results which are erroneously ascribed to the £lO qualification. You would then have a monotonous constituency. You would then have a constituency whose predominant opinions would be identical. You would then have a constituency who would return to Parliament members holding the same ideas, the same opinions, the same sentiments and all that variety which represents the English character would be entirely lost. (Hear, hear.) You would then have in your borough constituency a predominant class, and certainly the spirit and genius of our constitution are adverse to the predominance of any daze in this house. (Cheers.) It certainly would be most injudicious, not to say intolerable, when we are guarding ourselves against the predominance of a manufacturing and commercial oligarchy, that we should reform Parliament by securing the predominance of a household democracy. (Cheers.) lam convinced that that is not the mode in which you must improve and vary the elements of the present borough constituency. We think, sir, that there are modes by which that object can be ade quately and efficiently attained, and if the house will per mit me I will now proceed to describe them. (Cheers.) We propose to introduce into these borough constituencies new franchises. In the first place we shall introduce, as the foun dation of the suffrage, a class of property which hitherto has not formed an element out of which voters have been created—l mean personal property. We shall propose to allow persons who have funded property—property in Bank Stock or in East India Stock and bonds, to the amount of £lO per annum, to exercise the suffrage. I know the ob jection which may be urged by some persons against the introduction of this qualification. They will point out the difficulties there will be in securing the due exercise of the suffrage if that element is introduced. Tho house will par don me on this occasion, when I have to travel over a vast field, and when I must confine myself to the chief features of the measure I am recommending to their notice, if I Ab stain from entering into that question. (Hear, hear.) Enough for me now to say, that the bill which I have here, and which, with the permission of the house, I shall intro duce, provides, in our opinion, a satisfactory and secure machinery by which this and all other similar franchises to which I am about to advert may be exercised. Now, sir, there is another franchise which we shall also recom- mend the house to adopt, and that is one which depends upon the possession of a certain sum in the savings banks. (Hear, hear.) A man who has had £6O for a year in a savings bank will, under this bill, if it becomes law, be an elector for the borough in which he resides. (Cheers.) Again, a man who has a pension for public service, but who has ceased to be employed in that service, whether it be her Majesty's naval, military, or civil service, to the amount of £2O a year, will under this bill, if it become law, be entitled to a vote wherever he may reside. (Hear, hear.) Then, again, sir, the occupant of a portion of a house s the aggre gate rent of which amounts to £2O a year—whtch would b 3 Bs. a week—will also be entitled to a vote. (Hear.) The house has heard much of late years of what is called an educational franchise. lam bound to say that no plan for the creation of an educational franchise, in the very precise sense of that word, which in their opinion would work satis factorily, has been brought under the consideration of the Government. It has, indeed, been proposed that the basis of such a franchise should be sought for among the mem bers of the various learned societies. But, as it has been very accurately observed, it does not follow that the mem bers of learned societies should be learned. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) In these days we frequently see names fol lowed by an amount of alphabetical combinations which is almost appalling ; yet though we associate the highest learn ing, the greatest antiquarian and scientific acquirements, with those persons, it sometimes turns out that they only possess a respectable character and pay ten guineas a year. (Renewed laughter.) An educational franchise, according to that high empyrean of imagination which some have at tempted to reach, has baffled all our practical efforts. But it will be our duty to recommend to the house that the pri vilege of a vote, irrespective of the more formal qualification arising from property, should be conferred upon those classes whose education has involved some considerable invest ment, many of them, no doubt, exercising the franchise under the previous qualifications which I have described. We have thought it advisable that the suffrage should be conferred upon graduates of all universities—(hear, hear) —upon the ministers of religion—whether ministers and deacons of the church or ministers of denominations — under regulations which the house will find in the bill ; upon the members of the legal profession in all its branches, whether barristers, members of the inns of court, solicitors, or proctors ; and upon all members of the medical body who are registered under the late Medical Act. (Hear, hear.) To these we have added such school masters as possess a certificate from the Council. (Hear, hoar.) Sir, there are some other franchises which it is our intention to give the borough constituencies; but before I touch upon them it will be convenient that I should call the attention of the house to the subject of the county fran chise. (Hear.) Previous to the Reform Act of 1832, the general franchise of England may be described popularly — though technically perhaps such a description is not quite correct—as a franchise which in the counties arose from property and in the boroughs from occupation. When the measure passed in 1832 was first introduced that distinction was recognised by the statesmen who had the preparation and conduct of the bill. I have no doubt they deeply consi dered that question at the time ; nor can it be denied that if the constituencies had remained as they proposed them, the principle thus set up would have been a distinct and a clear one. Whether, however, the distinction could have been long maintained, I may with great humility be per mitted to doubt. Looking at the immense expansion of the country, at its vast increase in wealth and population, and not only in wealth and population, but in those distinc tive interests which seek representation in this house—re membering the 10,500,000 inhabitants of counties to whom I have already alluded—l venture humbly to doubt whether that distinction could have been long kept up. That its maintenance was convenient to the statesmen of 1832, who had immense difficulties to contend with, I can easily con ceive ; but whatever was their intention they were disap pointed in the plan which they had prepared, and circum stances occurred in this house which changed the cha racter of the franchise and destroyed the distinction between property and occupation which the Ministry of Lord Grey had sought to establish. Now, the indi - vidual responsible for that change was the noble duke who was my predecessor in the seat which I now un worthily fill, and as his conduct in this respect has often been challenged, and as there are many who now deplore the course which he then took, perhaps the house will for a moment permit me, who am well aware of the motives which influenced him, to state the reasons which induced Lord Chandos to move successfully in this house the celebrated clause that bears his name. When the Reform Bill was introduced in 1831 it was generally avowed that the object of that measure was to give a I€ls- n itimat_ . e position in the Legislature to the middle classes of and its England. "'hat was the object avowed by the Ministry, pro priety was generally acknowledged by the country. Now, when the principle that the middle classes should be v b lh e. o was repro. seated in this house was laid down, Lord Chandos, then the member for the county of Buclnngham, being a man who lived much among his n eighbours, and who was familiar with the character and the interests of rural society, naturally felt what he considered the great absurdity that the most important portion of the middle classes—the most important even at this day, because they are the greatest employers of labour—l mean the farmers of England-- should not possess the s uffrage—(hear)—and it was with that view that Lord Chandos moved the clause. The sym. pathy of the house was so great in its favour (a symp a th y not confined to party ; Mr. Hume was a supporter of the Chandos clause) that the noble lord who then led thi s house, Lord Althorp, felt it his duty to yield to it. But that happened then ,which sometimes does happen when great measures are brought forward by a Ministry and an important amendment is introduced successfully by an eager Opposition. Those who have had the preparation of great and important measures —and I see present many upon whom that task has devolved —know the great diffi culty, the long anxiety, the c ons t ant hesitation which are involved in such a task, and know how hard it is to a dapt one part to another, and to obtain that general har mony which will meet public wants, and which will give you a chance of carrying your measure successfully through. (Hear.) But when a leader of Opposition car ries an amendment which he believes to be necessary, he thinks only of the proposal which he is making to the house, and if the Ministry are obliged to adopt it it very often does not fit in with their previous design ;it does not display the harmony and unison which would perhaps have been the case had they themselves devised it with a due regard for the other details of the measure. (Hear.) I have no doubt that had the Government thought lit in 1831-2 to introduce the principle of occupation in the county fran chise they might have rendered it so homogeneous with their general scheme that it would have worked with per fcct facility, that we should long ere this have been quite accustomed to its operation, and then those distinctions and difficulties which have since arisen might never have been heard of. (Hear, hear.) But there is no doubt that from the moment, or shortly after, this £5O occupation clause was put into operation, feelings of dissatisfaction and suspicion were excited in the minds of the cow/ 011 Occupiers in the county of less than £so—say of £4OIP or' X2o—who, if the principle had not been admitted, naturally na probably never have thought themselves injured, t looked with great soreness on the man who had voted in a borough because he had an occupation of £lO. That feeling •f dissatisfaction was unfortunately followed by those indus trial controversies, respecting the origin or end of which it prolonged, is unnecessary to say anything, but which were bitterness among and which undoubtedly occasioned great all clams. That feeling of dissatisfaction bccatue a feeling of distrust. It was said that commercial changes were Pre. vented in this country chiefly by this £5O tenancy clause. The men who acted under that clause—and take them alto gether I do not believe that a more valuable class to whom to intrust the franchise could be found—(hear, hear)—were described in this house as men void of all patriotism and public spirit, exercising the suffrage without the slightest effort of intelligence, merely at the beck of their landlords. Nothing can be more exaggerated or groundless than the sentiments which have been expressed in this house on the effect of the Chandos clause and on the influence which it has on popular elections. (Hear.) In the first place, voters under the Chandos clause at no time ever exceeded one fifth of the constituent bodies of counties. Therefore, had they all voted the same way they never could have exercised that influence upon public events which has been ascribed to them. (Hear, hear.) But the proprietary of the soil does not rest with the Tories and Conservatives. There are Whig landlords and very considerable Whig landlords. (Hear.) The proprietary of the soil is distributed among proprietors of all opinions, and the consequence is, that if you look at the elections you will find that those who voted under this Chandos clause were much divided—often equally divided. (Hear, hear.) It is not true, therefore, that those who vote under this qualification have exercised any very great influence upon the legislation of this coup • intent or that they are a class who have acted always without or meaning. (Hear, hear.) There is no doubt that dissatisfaction, followed by mistrust and misrepresentation, did ratio in the country an idea that the county representa tion was an exclusive representation, that it was animated only by one object, that it had a selfish interest always be fore it, and that it had not thatsympathy with the commu nity which we desire in that chosen body to whom the pri vilege of election —the highest privilege in the State—is in trusted. An effort was made by means of the 40s. freehold, which was retained in counties, to counteract the exagge rated influence of the £5O tenancy voters. A manufacture of votes—from the facts before me I am entitled so to call it—was carried on in the boroughs, by which it was sup posed that the injurious influence of the tenants living upon the land, dwelling in the counties, might be counter acted: For the last 15 years—for the last ten years at a very great rate—this has been going on, until it has really arrived at this point, that the number of county voters who do not dwell in the counties now exceeds the number of those who vote under the £5O clause. It was proclaimed with great triumph that when a gentleman stood for a county his neighbours who dwelt in the county might vote for him, but some large town in the district would pour out its legions by railway, and on the nomination of some club in the town would elect the representative for the county. The dwellers in the county found themselves not represented in many in stances by those who lived among them. A sort of civil war was raised in this manner, and if hon. gentlemen look into the statistics on this point they will see that what I may call an unnatural state of things was brought about,—be cause there is no doubt that what we seek is that a man should vote for the place where he resides, or for the locality in which he is really and substantially interested. (Hear, hear.) That is a state of affairs which is much to be deprecated. It is of the greatest importance that those who vote, whether in a borough or minty constituency, should sympathise with the commnnity in which they ex ercise that important right. (Haar, hear.) A man who votes for a place where he resides or in which he has an interest, votes with a greater sense of responsibility than what I may call a mere stranger. (Hear.) Where, then, when we are considering the condition and the elements of the constituency of the country, when we are endeavour ing to rec ons t ruc t it on a broad basis which admits within its pale all th ose w h o are trus tworthy, shall we look for means by which we may terminate these heartburnings and restore the constituencies of England to what I will venture to call their natural elements ? No doubt, it is a labour of great difficulty. Can it be done by reconstruction —can it be done by rearrangement ? It may be possible to pass a law which would remove these strangers from the sphere of their political power. Perhaps it may not be possible to pass such a law, but whether it be or not, who would be rash enough to propose it ? How should we ter minate these misunderstandings, how restore that good feeling—that which Lord Clarendon called the "good nature of the English people "—if we took a course which would give occasion to a perpetual agitation for the re moval of the restrictions which we had succeeded in esta blishing? Her Majesty's Government have given to this subject the most anxious consideration. I may say that if labour, if thought could assist us to arrive at a proper solution, neither labour nor thought has been spared' (Hear, hear.) Is there any principle on which we can restore the county constituency to its natural state, and bring about that general and constant sympathy between the two portions of the constituent body which ought to exist ? Her Majesty's Government are of opinion that some such solution does exist. We think there is a principle the justness of which will be at once acknowledged, the logical consequences of which will be at once remedial, and which, if applied with due discretion, will effect all those objects which we anxiously desire with respect to the county con stituency. We find that principle m recognising the iden tity of suffrage between county and town. (Cheers.) I will proceed to show the house what, in our opinion, would be the practical consequences of recognising that identity. If the suffrages of the town are transferred to the county, and the suffrages of the county transferred to the town, all those voters who, dwelling in a town, exercise their suf frage in the county in virtue of a county suffrage, will re cord their votes in the town, and the 40s. freeholder resi dent in a town—subject to provisions in the bill which would prevent this constitutional instrument being turned; to an improper use—will have a right to vote fot. r the borough in which he resides. (Hear, hear.) This; as well as the franchise founded on savings banks, will open another avenue to the mechanic whose virtue, prudence, intelligence, and frugality entitle him to ente r i n t o th e pri vileged pale of the constituent body of the country. (Cheers.) If this principle be adopted a man will vote for the place where he resides, and with which he is substan tially connected. (Hear, hear.) Therefore the first mea sure would embody this logical consequence—that it would transfer the freeholders of the town from the county to the town. But if this principle be adopted there are other measures which in our opinion it would be the duty of Parliament in this respect to adopt. Since the year 1832 there has been an immense increase in the population of this country irrespective of the ratio of increase with which we are acquainted. The creation of railways in particular districts has stimulated that increase, and this has come to pass in England, that in a great many of the boroughs there is a population residing who for all social and municipal purposes are part and parcel of the community, but who for Parliamentary purposes are pariahs. (Cheers.) A man votes for a municipality, he pays his parochial rates and taxes, he is called upon to con tribute to all purposes of charity and philanthropy in the borough, but, because he lives in a part of the borough which exceeds the boundary that was formed in 1832, he is not, though he lives in a £lO house, permitted to vote for members of Parliament. Now, all this extramural popula tion in fact and in spirit consists of persons who ought to be electors in the boroughs in which they reside, and we therefore propose that boundary commissioners should visit all the boroughs of England and re-arrange them accord ing to the altered circumstances of the time. (Cheers.) I know that these boundary commissioners may cause some alarm in this country. (Hear, hear.) I know there are traditions of party arrangements effected by that machinery which, whether true or not, left an unpopular recollection in the House of Commons. (Hear, hear.) I believe that in the present state of public feeling on this subject, so mo derate as it is, and in the present balanced state of parties, no partial or improper conduct of that character, if it ever did take place, could be repeated. (Hear, hear.) But it is quite unnecessary for me to dwell upon this point, because her Majesty's Ministers are so circumstanced that they can in that respect make a proposition to the house which will at once divest it of all suspicion. Since the reform of 1832 machinery has arisen inthis country perfectly competent to effect that which wo believe to be so necessary—l mean the Inclosure Commissioners. There is a body of men totally in dependent dell party ; and we propose to delegate to them the fulfilment of this office. (Hear, hear.) They willappoint deputy commissioners, who will visit the boroughs. The deputy commissioners will make their reports to the Secre tary of State, and the Secretary of State will embody . them in a bill, and that bill will be subjected to criticism in this house. (Laughter and cheers). After that no one can for a moment suspect that there willbeanyopportunity of making arrangements favourable to any party. The house hasa right to ask me whether her Majesty's Government have formed any estimate of what may be the consequence e of the change which we propose in the numbers which one must speak with some degree c . county constituencies. That is, no doubt o he a sit p a o ti i o n n t ; upo hu n t a o re the f rs urn w is h h ic ed h th y e t r h e e a p re ap s e o r m s e he in f teri th a e lse ou e s x e i , s a te n. n d e . e th a er t ic ar i c This morning there . was put into my well known examinedk.n ow:n to are at our command. the most eminent is by a gentleman who ran hand a pamphlet—probablyksa, proof— ev p e u m blished to-day.. It ams'leofte isn been gentlemen s tatisticala i u n tl t i l o ii r s it h y o i u n se t , h a e n e d o un wh t o r y i l before our committees —Mr. Newmarch. Mr. Newmarch sti e ma t e s that the gross increase that would; be occ as i one d ins the county voters by a £lO county franchise would be 103,000. I have no time to ascertain what are the data on which Mr. Newmarch makes his calculation, but I should be disingenuous if I did not acknowledge to the house that the estimate formed by her Majesty's Mini s t ers i s muc h mor e considerable. (Cheers.) I should suppose the addi tion to the county constituency would be not less than 200,000, one-half of which would be furnished by what sta ticians call the north-western and the north-eastern groups of counties—that is to say, Cheshire, Lancashire, and the West Riding on th e one h and, and Kent, Sussex, and part of Surrey on the other. With reference to those gentlemen who have on various occasions expressed their opinion that the £2O occupation franchize is one which they should pre fer to see adopted, I would observethat the number between a £2O and a £lO franchise would, I think, be described by the figure 100,000. But, with reference to the change of the county constituency from £5O to £2O, I would observe that, having given to this subject very considerable pains, so far as I can form an opinion, there is nothing in an ad ditional £lO house in a county which would make me trust the loyalty and respectability of one who lived in a £2O house, in preference to one who lived in a £lO house. (Cheers.) I am also bound to be candid, and say that the estimate of 200,000 voters has been made irre spective of what the effects of the labours of the Boundary Commissioners may be. I have heard many arguments against the proposition, but only to one of them its would I attach much weight, and to that not for strength, but for the phrase which is used to clothe it. allude to the objection that the identity which this proposi tion would introduce between the county and town tr consti tuencies may lead to what are called electoral districts. om Now, if the only protection of the English peopl e franchise between the county and thetown, then I electoral districts is a difference of £lO in an _oc a cup a to i n d in this country I do that there is nothing more unpopular that electoral districts cannot be resisted. But, belie ni vingas ofthe pe ople. I to all the customs, manners, and assoc 'than electoral districts—(cheers)—and. t. that they are alien I have no fear whatever that that . scheme m will be adopted their majority all fondness for the localities in until Englishmen have lost all pri w de hit i c n htheyehvrveb country e lived. d and (Cheers.) ta blished until you recognise representation • this 'Why, Sir, e lect t o h ni e l vo th ic s e tri o c i . a s h c u an me n riesi as the right principle of house. which it is my duty to introduce on the part the measures (Cheers.) They can be formed upon no other principle, of the Government to the house to-night have no other •ht • • object but to assert those rig principles upon wl the representation in this . house has always been based. I h ave now, very imperfectly, and omitting many points, placed before the house a gener a l v i ew of what we pro pose to do with the constituent b o d y o f the country. l ea r, hear.) Our object is to reconstruct that body, with no mere view of increasing its numerical amount, but solely with the object of improving it, by the addition of various classes and individuals to whom the privilege of the franchise may be trusted, with safety to the State and benefit to the community. (Cheers.) If the measure we recommend be adopted, you will have a great homo geneous constituency, with a great variety of character, for variety in the franchise is perfectly consistent with the identity of the suffrage ; youwill have a great homogeneous body, between the different sections of which there will no longer exist feelings of dissatisfaction and distrust. The elector will elect a man of the community in which he lives, and he will exercise the right under the high sense of duty tb iat ißl ll 4Cfla liglistaue4 in perform; — n --D fr ; 44y , awog • t.