The Sun. — London, England, 1860-03-23 00:00:00

IMPERIAL HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at the usual hour. THE GREAT TASMANIA. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH asked a question of the noble lord the First Lord of the Admiralty relative to stores on board the Great Tasmania transport ; he should also like to know whether stores had been sent to India for the troops going to China. The Duke of SOMERSET said the Admiralty were no way responsible for the stores on board the Great 'Tasmania. With respect to the stores for the troops g6ing from India to China, there was great difficulty in providing stores that would stand so long a voyage. There was, however, a large store of provisions at Hong Kong that would supply the troops up to October next. The Government were sending out stores every month, and, from the steps the Govern • meat had taken he assured the noble earl there was no need of anxiety. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said the noble lord had not stated the number of troops for which stores had been calculated; The Duke of SOMERSET said about 10,000, PRIVATE BUSINESS. On the motion of Lord REDESDALE, the Eau Brink Drainage Bill was read a third time and passed. TILE EASTER HOLIDAYS. The Earl of DERBY begged to ask the noble duke the question he had given notice of, with respect to the ad journment of the house for the Easter holidays. The Duke of NEWCASTLE said it had been found that it would be absolutely necessary for their lordships to sit for the first two days of Passion week, on account of two important money bills coming down from the other house, hut after Tuesday he proposed that the house should adjourn until Tuesday, the 17th of April. QUALIFICATION FOR OFFICE ABOLITION BILL. Lord TEYNHAM moved the second reading of this bill, which proposed to do away with the declaration at present enforced upon persons about to enter the public ser vice and corporation office. The declaration at pre sent required was to the effect that " I, A B, in the` presence of God, do solemnly profess, testify, and declare, on the true faith of a Christian, that I will do nothing in the office of to injure the Protestant Church, as established by law in England." By this declaration a person holding office, however much he might wish for the abolition of church rates, which were thought by some likely to weaken the Church,was not at liberty consisteitly to sign a petition with such a prayer. Lord CHELMSFORD opposed the bill. It had been observed that the bill had passed the House of Commons without opposition, but he should say it had rather slipped through the house unobserved. Several hon. members with whom he was acquainted were totally ignorant of the nature of the measure. The declaration had been in troduced by the late Sir R. Peel, when Secretary of State for the Home Department, and the object of it was to ob• tain from every Dissenter taking office a formal recognition of the predominance of the Ch urc h o f England. The declaration had been introduced into the Test and Corporation Act, and it was the opinion at that time that, had it not been done, there would have been an overpowering majority against it. He objected to this bill on three grounds ; first, that it disturb a settled question; secondly, that the noble lord had not pointed out any grievance that required a remedy ; and thirdly, that it would remove a stumblingblock out of the way of certain dissenters who wished to injure the Church of England as by law established. He moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months. The Duke of NEWCASTLE supported the bill, as the law was in a most confused and anomalous state at the pre sent moment. At present numbers of persons entering the public service did not make this declaration, but with re. spect to corporate offices it - was different, because each can didate was compelled to go before a magistrate and make the required declaration. The mode of making the declaration was most irreverent, and he thought that the time had come for its abolition. The Earl of DERBY said it was intended by the declara tion, introduced at the time of the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, that there should be on the part of per sons taking office under the Crown -a recognition of the Established Church being a national institution. He thought the proposed alterations should not .be lightly or carelessly made. The annual act of indemnity only applied to some of these offices, and to others only under certain circum stances. His objection was this, that this was one of a aeries of measures industriously brought forward by parties anxious to destroy the power and influence of the Church, and to place the Establishment upon the same footing as dissenting sects. He hoped their lordships would never smell= such a measure by their authority. (Hear.) The LORD CHANCELLOR thought that all oaths and declarations that were , unnecessary ought to be repealed. So far from there being more hostility to the Church of England than formerly, he believed that it never stood higher in the hearts and affections of 'the people of Eng land, and that was accounted for by the greater liberality of the Church at the present day, and the expressed desire of eminent and distinguished Churchmen to free Dissenters from all civil and religious disabilities. He wished to return to ancient times, when no oath was required but the oath of allegiance. He thought the object of this bill was commen dable, and trusted it would have their lordships' support. After a few words from Lord REDESDALE, Lord TEYNHAM briefly replied. He called upon their lordships as patriots to free them from this declaration, and pass the bill. Their lordships then divided, when the numbers were— Content Not Content Majority The bill was accordingly rejected. The Medical Acts Amendment Bill was read a third time. The Packet Service (Transfer of Contracts) Bill and the Consolidated Fund (£4,500,000) Bill were severally read a third time and passed. Their lordships then adjourned. ' HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. NEW MEMBER. Sir W. HEATHCOTE took the oaths and his seat for the University of Oxford. - PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a third time and passed:— Cheshire Midland Railway; Glossop and Marple Bridge Road • London and North-Western Railway (No. 1) ; MarpleNewMills and Hayfield Junction Railway; Midland Railway (Burton-upon-Trent Branches and Deviations ; Midland Railway (Rowsley and Buxton lines) ; Mirfield Gas; North British and Peebles and Jedburgh Railway Companies ; Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton, Newport, Abergavenny, and Hereford, and Worcester and Hereford Railways; Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhamp - ton and Severn Valley Railways; Stockport and Woodley Junction Railway. The Bourton on the Water Railway, the Scottish Drain age and Improvement Company, and the Manchester and Buxton Road Bills were read a second time. Mr. FORSTER moved that the minutes of the 'evidence taken before the committee on the Chester and Holyhead Railway Bill in session 1844, and the -reports of the Ad miralty, including tho report of Mr. Rendel, their engineer, on that bill, b 3 referred to the committee on the Vale of Clwyd Extension Bill.—Agreed to: PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS. Mr. BO WYER gave notice that on Thursday next he would move for leave to bring in a bill to amend the law relating to privileged communications in certain cases. THE INDIAN ARMY. Colonel SYKES gave notice that he would ask the Sec retary of State for India whether it was intended to abolish the regular army in India ; and that ho would also ask for certain returns in respect to the Indian army. SHIP BUILDING. Mr. JACKSON inquired if the Government would lay on the table the report of the commission on the subject of ship building for the navy and in the dockyards? Lord C. PAGET stated that he was prepared to lay on the table the report in question. THE FRANCHISE. - .• Mr. GRIFFTH asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether it was intended that the voters at £6 rent and upwards, whose rates are now compounded for by their landlords, should have the opportunity at the next registration of qualifying themselves as voters, by taking on themselves the payment of rates for the past year, or otherwise as may be arranged to effect such object ? • Lord J. RUSSELL said he would consider whether a clause to meet the views of the hon. member could not be introduced into the - Reform Bill. PAUPER REMOVALS. Mr. LANIGAN asked the President of the Poor -law Board whether, he had any objection to produce (and, if not, when he would lay upon the table of the house) copies of the order . of removal made, and the examinations tak en by the magiatiate; and of the notice served or sent by the poor-law officials of St. - Pancras to the Thurles Board of Guardians previous to the removal of the poor woman Mary Carter to Ireland ? Mr. VILLIERS said that the matter did not properly come within his province. He had no official report on the subject, and was obliged to rely on the accounts which ap peared in the newspapers ; but, acting on these, he com municated with the Poor-law authorities of St. Pancras, and it appeared that the ease alluded to was of a very unusual. kind. A commission had been directed to proceed to the place where the unfortunate woman resided, and it appeared that she made the same statement that she had previously done. He had called on the Poer-law authorities to make an official statement, and the , hon. member could inspect the documents relating to the matter. ; or, if he preferred, he would be furnished with copies of the same. STAMPS ON NEWSPAPERS. Mr. WESTERN asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether ',le proposal to abolish the stamps on newspapers would apply to newspapers to be sent abroad ; and, if so, whether such newspaper can be sent with a penny adhesive stamp, or would be liable to the book rate of fourpence ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that on Monday next he would make a statement on the subject. THE TIMBER DUTIES. Mt. ADAM asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in consequence of the repeal of the timber duties, any drawback would be allowed on ships in the builders' hands, either finished or in process of building ? And, fur ther,whether any drawback would be allowed on timber whiekt had paid the duty but had not yet passed into con- Fonption ? Th e - CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied in the negative. SAVINGS' BANKS. Mr. S. ESTCOURT asked the Chancellor of the Ex chequer whenhaend observed to bring i n th e bill respec ti ng savings bank s , that th e su bj ec t was one th a t excited much interest the minds of a large portion of the community. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the bill in question would not to a ri) j u e ght before the house without due notice being given PUBLIC BUILDINGS, members,. - Mr. PAULL moved that Government orders of the day shall take precedence of notices of mot i ons upon Thursdays instead of Fridays. Mr. BOUVERIE strongly objected to the motion, and expressed a hope that the hon. member would not press his motion to a division._ After some discussion, Mr. PAULL said that ho would yield, though reluc tantly, to the opinion of the house, and not press hi s notion. Lord PALMERSTON said that neither on the Minis terial nor on the other side of the house was there any de sire but to promote the progress of public business. He would suggest that any motion on this subject should be confined to the session in. which it was made. He agreed With those who thought it would be unjust to Aterfere with the right of bon, members to bring forward ...; -!'.:::•.- !;_t.. any question for the adjournment of the house on Friday. (Hear, hear.) norshire spoke of the inconsistency and eelfcontradiction into which public men were drawn by the pressure of events, he (e it J. Pakington) asked whether, in the con duct of the noble lord with respect to the commercial treaty, and in that of the right, hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer with respect to the income tax, they might not at that very moment see before them a confirmation of that inconsistency into which public men might be pressed. Those opinions had been expressed by men of opposite `sides with respect to politics, but the only advantage he wished to draw from them was to appeal to the noble lord whether, having to deal with the great question before them, it was worthy of his name and his connection with this'great subject, that he should place before them that meagre bill containing nothing but that one proposal, which he trusted the house would not con sent to, overwhelming intelligence and property merely by the force of numbers. (Hear, hear.) He (Sir J. Paking ton) did not object to the addition of large numbers to the constituencies ; indeed, having been a party to a bill di rected to that very object, he could have no objection to the principle of the numerical increase of the constituen cies ; nor did he object to the extension of the franchise to working men. He had seen working men to whom he would as readily gave the franchise as to any gentleman in that house. At the same time, he must say that he was not there to be the patron of the working classes ; but while he was quite willing that they should have the fran chise, he contended that they were not entitled to a mono poly of the representation. (Conservative cheers.) Nor would he give the monopoly of the representation to the wealthy class. He would give that monopoly to no class. (Cheers.) And here he would call to his aid witnesses to whose evidence he would take the liberty to refer. In cer tain speeches delivered by the hon. member for Birming ham and the hon. member for Rochdale, there were pas sages which gave him the right to call them to his support when he maintained that to no class should a monopoly of the representation be given. (Hear.) The first speech of the hon. member for Birmingham was one which ho deli vered at Liverpool on the Ist of December last, and in which, so far as the expression of opinion went to which he was about to refer, he quite agreed with him, and only asked him how it was that he was now ready to give his support to a measure which proposed to transfer the monopoly of the representation to a single class of the community. The hon. member on that occasion declared, in the strongest possible manner, against the impropriety of such a policy ; and again, on the Gth of January last, he said at Birmingham, that he wanted the industry of the country to be represented. (Hear, hear.) How, then, could the hon. member, if he still adhered to that sentiment, stand up in his place and support a bill which would virtually place the representation in the hands of a class ? (Conservative cheers.) And now he would call to his aid the hon. member :for Rochdale, who, he found, not only expressed an opinion in complete conformity with that of the hon. member for' Birmingham, but went on to propose a plan by which a re me dy might be devised for the evil of which he complained. It was in the month of August last, on the hon. gentleman's landing from America, and being informed that a seat in the present Cabinet was awaiting his decision, that, in addressing a meeting in Liver pool, he said, in reference to a redistribution of seats, that he thought it would be the fairest and most convenient course to portion out the larger towns into wards, assigning to each ward a member. He remarked that the aristocracy and wealthy class generally lived in one ward, and the in dustrious class in another and in that way there would be no danger of any particular class obtaining an ascendancy in the representation. Here, then, was a plan for the purpose of remedying the evils of which they complained in the bill before the house; and let him whilst on that point, ask the noble lord how it was that in the year 1854 he enunciated a plan for giving representation to the minority ? The plan, undoubtedly, was not popular, but he (Sir. J. Pakington) had always given the noble lord credit for great good sense and correct judgment in making that proposition, the object of which, as he apprehended, was to prevent the re presentation being thrown into the hands of one class, and the other class being inspired with feelings of [discontent. (Hear, hear.) He (Sir J. ?akington) wished now to state to the house a plan which had been brought to his notice in an anonymous communication from Manchester, and which, though he by no means meant to recommend its adoption to the house as entirely eligible, was at any rate well worthy the consideration of the Government and of the house. It was a plan which was said to be in opera tion in the town of Frankfort, and had evidently been de • vised for the express purpose of guarding against the great evil of any one class monopolising political power. The pro posal was, that each class should elect its representatives. Such a plan could not, of course, be carried out in this country without the consideration of a great many details. Thus, for example, if it should be decided that Manchester should return three members, the plan would be something like this, that householders to the value of £lO and down wards should return one member ; that householders be tween £lO and £25 should return the second; and that householders above £25 should return the third. If Man chester should return only two members a different line would have to bo drawn. As he had already remarked, it was a plan which would be attended with great difficulty in its execution in this country, but he asked the house to bear in mind that it was evident any such plan would com bine two great advantages—namely, that each class would be represented, and that the franchise might be made as low as they pleased, without any danger of a particular class obtaining a preponderance in the representation. (Hear, hear.) He had now mentioned several different plans —those of the hon. member for Rochdale, the noble lord's, and that in operation at Frankfort and others which showed how very generally the object was recognised of giving re presentation to all classes, and monopoly to none. And new he could not help reminding the house of Lord Grey's sug gestion, that, rather than act hastily, it would be well to ap point a committee of Privy Council, consisting of men of all parties, to consider the whole subject, with a view of ascer taining what might be conceded on the one hand and what ought to be withheld on the other. Ho did not know how far the noble lord might have considered the suggestion of Lord Grey, but he might be permitted to remind him that there was a precedent for the course which-that noble lord re.;ommended, in the case of the AustralianiColonies Act of 1850, when a committee of Privy Council, composed of men of the most different political principles, was appointed to inquire into the subject. Their recommendations were immediately received by the house, and he thought the precedent was one well worthy the attention of the noble lord. They wanted the great question of the representation ' to be placed on a fair and substantial footing, and nothing could more powerfully conduce to such an end than that they should endeavour to forget that there were two sides of that house, and to regard themselves as a body of Eng lish gentlemen anxious only for the just and judicious settlement of this question. (Hear, hear.) If such an in quiry as he had suggested were instituted, he did not think 10 men could be found in that house who would oppose the recommendations ' and the alarm would be- remove d w hi c h was founded, not on any objection to the working classes, but on the bare fact that this was a bill to throw a mono poly of the representation into the hands of a class. He hoped they would now hear no more of that absurd expres sion "fancy franchisee' —(Conservative cheers)—used by persons who nevertheless declared that the lodgerfranchise was not a fancy franehise. (Continued cheering.) They all knew how that expression arose. It arose last year when hon, gentlemen opposite were praising their (Mr. Dis raeli's) bill in private and speaking against it in public. (Ironical cheers.) It was true that, driven to find fault with something, that expression was invented. The bill to which he referred contained some broad principles of Re form, one of which was a lodger franchise ; and he (Sir John Pakington) entertained the opinion that the best and boldest measure of reform ever introduced into that house was that proposal to extend the franchise to the respect able lodger. (Conservative cheers.) That would give them no addition of men belonging only to one class, and they would be men, also, who would exercise the franehise with caution and deliberation. There was one rnore'subject on which he wished to say a few words, and that was the question of adopting the rating as the basis of the franchise. He thought himself that a rating woul.l be the best basis for it; and as the Government had adopted it in the case of Ireland, and also in that of Scotland, he kne v no good reason why it should not also be adopted in the English bill. The noble lord said, however, that he had a bill to correct the • inequalities incidental to the rating in. England and Wales, and that being so, he hoped this diffi culty would not much longer affect this part of the question. He wished to guard both sides of the house against the error of supposing that a £6 rating franchise would be equi valent to a rental one of D. The inequalities between the rental and rating values ranged from a minimum of 4 per cent. at Tamworth and Shrewsbury, to a maximum of 31 per cent. at Plymouth. With those objections, or rather that particular one upon which he bad so much dwelt, he might be asked how it was that he did not object to the second reading of the bill. He felt that he was not open to that re mark. He quite agreed with his hon. friend near him that they could not oppose the second reading of the bill, under standing the principle of it to be an extension of the fran chise. To that principle he made no objection. They might, certainly, have moved an abstract resolution as an amend ment to the question of the second reading, but they were unwilling to follow a bad example. (Conservative cheers and laughter.) They would not do as they had been done by—(cheers)—but they took the wiser course of awaiting the discussion of the bill in committee. (Hear.) 'When that time came, he hoped, and indeed he confidently anti cipated, that the common sense of the house would come to the rescue. (Hear.) In the meanwhile he was anxious that the question should be settled on broad, sound, and liberal principles. He was willing to see the franchise ex tended ; but let it be extended with prudence and safety. Seeing, then, the spirit in which they and th a t ( t h e O ppo • sition) side of the house ware desirous of approaching the subject, he did hope the noble lord would devote the inter • vening time to the consideration of the question, whether it might not be well to have some inquiry previous to pro ceeding further in a question of such magnitude. If the noble lord, however, should be unwilling to consider th e fairness of an inquiry, he (Sir J. Pakington) would only express his hope that when they did go into committeci i , they would do so in a calm, fair, and dispassionate spirit, and he trusted the result would be the passing of a measure worthy of the British Parliament, and beneficial to the Bri tith people. (Cheers.) DARTMOUTH ELECTION. Mr. LYGON moved that the minutes of the evidence taken before the select committee on the Dartmouth elec tion petition, in session 1859, be laid before the house.— Ordered. REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE BILL. Mr. STANFELD, who commenced his remarks by alluding to a speech of Mr. Disiaeli, and complaining that the right hon. gentleman, after stating strong objections to the measure, had declined to take the sense of the house upon it, leaving the responsibility of passing, what he con sidered a bad measure, upon the noble lord who prepared it. He (Mr. Stanfeld) believed, that so far as the extension of the franchise was concerned, and with - regard to its effects upon the working classes, the calculations of the hon. mem ber for Birminghaniwould prove more correct than the cal culations of the right hon. gentleman the member for Bucks. In his opinion the returns before the house showed that in large manufacturing towns the propositions of the noble lord would have but little effect on the representation, and yet he cordially supported the bill, not because it met the advanced opinions which he entertained, but as an instal ment of reform. This was a step, though cautious and hesitating, towards the admission of the working classes to the franchise—it was the initiation of a new era, and an acknowledgment of the fact that all classes were entitled to a share in the representation. Regarding fitness to exercise the franchise, he thought that desire was a sufficient test, and looked upon apathy as the worst evil they could have to encounter, as it struck at they prin ciple of independence, He utterly disbelieved that danger would result from the representation of any class, and he looked forward with hope and confidence to the time when all classes would have their share in it. He denied that there was apathy in the country upon the question of re form, and attributed the absence now of such excitement and organisation as prevailed in 1832 to a change in the position and in the habits of thought of the people, and to the influence of the cheap press. Still, however that question might be solved in the minds of honourable membns, he believed it was those who were most hostile to all such changes that ought to feel it was especially fortunate that the question came on to be settled when the tide of popular feeling was at the lowest, and when it was possible to pass the minimum of reform—a bill of little real concessions gained by political diplomacy. He believed in the progress of opinion upon that as upon all other questions. He desired not to defeat their enemies, but to convert their opponents. And therefore he supported the bill, because, while it made converts, it, would disarm suspicion and dispel false alarms. (Hear, hear.) Sir JOHN PAKINGTON said the progress of the de bate up to the present time on this question hau been most curious and instructive. They were considering one of the most important subjects that could possibly be submitted for their consideration by her Majesty's Ministers. They were now in the second night of the debate, and up to the present moment he had waited to hear some member of her Majesty's Government speak in favour of the bill. The hon. member for Huddersfield, in speaking of the measure, said it was only to be" a step in the right direction." (Hear, hear.) He was followed by an hon. member who com plained that the bill did not contain any provision for the ballot, and all the speakers in support of the measure urged the necessity for a still larger measure. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Birmingham addressed the house, and he held precisely the same language. That hon. gentleman, who thought himself a sort of English O'Connell, gave his support to the Government, and said he was'inclined to tolerate the bill in consideration of the position in which the Government was placed, and that he was content to obtain his object step by step. (Hear, hear.) Now, he would remind the hon. member of what was said by him in a building well known in Manchester as Watts' Building—a building which, no doubt, was one of the attractive sights of England. He (Sir J. Pakington) had seen that building, and in thee place the hon. member, after addressing a large body of working men, who were assembled to hear him, was addressed by them in the language of complaint and dissatisfaction that the measure did not contain that " lodger franchise" which was proposed in the bill of the late Government last year. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member made a speech of very considerable ability—(hear, hear)—but the hon. gentleman told them, just as every one .else had told them on his side of the house, that he could only regard the measure as a step in the right direction. But his (Sir J. Pakington's) opinion was that it was a miserable bill—(hear, hear)—and he could only suppose the Government proposed such a bill as the result of some compromise between a divided Cabinet, or a compromise under the political influence of foreign affairs. But his belief was that the bill was most contemptible, because it was impotent for good and power ful for harm. (Hear, hear.) He was sorry the noble lord the member for the city of London had thrown away the opportunity which he had. The noble lord had, during the last thirty years, had an opportunity of watching the measure of which he was the introducer, although perhaps not the author; and he (Sir John Pakington) hoped that the noble lord would have now dealt with the question in a large statesmanlike way, and not produced a mea sure abounding with so many faults. He (Sir John Pakington) entirely agreed with the hon. , gentleman who had just spoken, that the bill- only - contained one proposal, and that they ought to discuss it. He agreed with him that the extent of the franchise which it con tained differed so little from that which was proposed by the late Government, that it was not worth while to dis pute over it. But the proposal of the late Government was founded on principle, and he believed the proposal of the present Government was destitute of principle. (Hear, hear.) He - believed the bill contained only one principle, and that that principle was an intention to overwhelm the property and influence of the country by numbers (hear, hear), and he further believed that a more objectionable bill than it was in that respect, it was impos sible to imagine. (Hear, hear.) He now begged to call the attention of the house to, the returns of the boroughs and towns, on which the noble lord seemed to have framed that part of his measure ; and if they were to trust to those re turns to convey to them what might be the effects of the bill, he believed they were altogether delusive. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord in his opening statement, evidently trusted to the numbers in his columns as the basis in his calcula tion, and the hon. member for Birmingham also did se. Now he (Sir 'John Pakington) believed that those returns, especially as related to the larger boroughs and great manu facturing places, were most erroneous. The limn would observe that the number of voters in those boroughs were much smaller than the number of £lO houses, and it was alleged that many were disfranchised on account of the non-payment of taxes. Now that was an anomaly ; but it was, he thought, easily explained by supposing that the rating of numbers of those houses had been increased, in order to increase the number of voters on the register. There was in no, less than 44 of those boroughs a considerably smaller number of voters than of £lO houses. In the borough of Pontefract, for instan'e, there were '689 £lO houses, and only 411 voters. In Newark there were 763 £lO houses, and only 551 voters, and in Midhurst there were 429 £lO houses, and only 224 voters. He believed he could satisfy the house that those returns were not, as given in the figures, to be depended up= 'as correct, and that they were wholly inaccurate as to the number of voters who ought to be placed upon the register. He believed that those cases eyould not amount to less than 25 per cent. of the whole amount of houses, and it was upon those grounds that the noble lord was going to lower the franchise to a £6 rental. But the fact was they were going to add a very considerable number to the electors of the country—a num ber that would have an overwhelming influence over the property of the country. (Hear.) He believed the number of voters would be very considerably greater than the noble lord contemplated—(heer, - hear)—and he believed that that would apply to every one of the boroughs. Having made that explanation to the house, let him now ask her Majesty's Government was it wise and prudent to create that dissatis faction and discontent in the minds of the middle and the upper classes of society which this measure could not fail tp cause—(hear, hear)—and it must, in his opinion, appear to any man plain that if the'house pass this bill as it now stood, it could. not fail• to have a most injurious effect. (Hear, hear.) Let him advert to the language of the pre sent Lord Grey, as expressed in a very able published pamphlet on the subject of Reform. That noble lord said he wasipersuaded that the present measure was founded upon wrong and unsound principles. Ho believed it would not be denied that those words of Lord Grey were prophetic. He (Sir John Pakington) was very much struck with that example. Let him now give them a warning. Let him re mind them of the warning of De Tocqueville in his writings on the United States. What did De Tocqueville tell them ? Did he not say that the most eminent men —men of talent and of virtue—were compelled to withdraw from taking any part in public affairs, or in elections in America, be ,cause of the overwhelming influence of the large masses who were admitted to the exercise of the suffrage under the American numerical system ; and in another-passage, De Tocqueville, speaking of the democratic Govern.. meat, as he saw it in operation, in America, that in their extreme liberty there was but and again, protecti on says,teetin to be found against tyranny ; an " There is no country in which there is less of liberty of speech than in America." (Hear, hear.) He (Sir John Pakington) therefore trusted that the house and her Majesty's Government would take warning by those state ments. (Hear.) Let him now draw the attention of the house to a fact. Was it not the fact that there were not a few places in England where, in consequence of the high rents, the property and rank were now thrown into the hands of one class? (Hear.) And here he begged, with permission of the house, to refer to another contribution on this subject—namely, by tho hon. member for Radnor (Sir J. Walsh). It was a passage which, in his opinion, was well worthy the attention of the house. That hon. member, detailing a conversation which he• had had with two per sons of influence and position in society, said that they had informed him that, in consequence of the manner in which the elections in their districts were now carried on, and the inkuence which was exercised by a low class of voters, in their numbers, over men in station, they had determined to Withdraw from taking any part in those elections, and the Sir G. GREY said this was one of the most singular de. bates he had ever heard. When his noble friend (Lord J. Russell) introduced the bill, he entered fully into its prin ciples, but no 'sooner had he moved the second reading than up rose the right hon. gentleman the member for Bucking hamshire and announced that it was not his intention to offer any opposition to the second reading of the bill, and he expressed a doubt as to whether it would be his duty to propose any amendment. Notwithstanding this he used hard language of the bill. lie said it was a bad bill, and uncalled for. The right hon. gentleman who had just sat down said it was a contemptible bill, a miserable and a meagre bill, and yet those right hon, gentlemen thought it consistent with the principles they professed to abstain from all opposition to the second reading. This course was pru dent and expedient on their part, for if they brought their opinions to the test of a division, an immense majority against them would have exposed their weakness. (Hear, hear.) Though " Willing to wound, bat yet afraid to strike." The real reason for their conduct was that they would not have dared themselves 'to propose a measure that contained a less change. (Hear, hear.) If the Government had gone much further in the way of diSfranchisement and re-distribution, they might have gained popularity, but they would not have submitted a measure that would lead to a satisfactory and safe settlement of this question. The right hon. gentleman (Sir J.' Pakington) said there was but one principle in the bill, and that was the overwhelming of property and intelligence bythe mere force of numbers, and he quoted with apparent triumph the speech of the hon. member for Birmingham, to show that no predominance should be given to any class. Ile (Sir J. Pakington) then suggested that the bill should be referred to a judicial com mittee of the Privy Council (a suggestion first via& by a Conservative interest was altogether swamped by those parties. (Hear.) Lord Grey had strongly observed that there was a deterioration in the character. of public men in the House of Commons to such an extent, that moticns ware often carried against the decided opinion of those who voted them, and who did not scruple to express their re gret at finding themselves in a majority. Now, if rumour spoke true, a confirmation of that opinion of Lord Grey was to be found in the circumstances of the present moment ; and when the right hon. gentleman the member fur Rad- IRE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 23, 1860. noble friend); and observed that when the measure came from their hands it would pass without opposition. He (Sir G. Grey) believed that to be one of the most Utopian ideas The right hon. gentleman said that if the committee were appointed by different sides of the house their bill would be a paragon of perfection, and would be passed at once by the house. Was it not singular that this bright idea had not struck him last year, before the bill of Lord Derby's Go vernment had been introduced ? (Hear.) Had he adopted that suggestion it might have saved his party from the dis cemfiture they experienced last session. (Hear.) On the other hand, the righthon. gentleman the member for Buck inghamshire fairly admitted that the bill contained three principles, viz., the extension of the franchise in boroughs, the extension of the franchise in counties, and the redis tribution of seats. He objected to the simplicity of the bill, and said a great deal about "fancy franchises," a phrase used four years ago, and therefore in use before his bill came before Parliament. The term was not used as one of reproach, but as descriptive of franchises previously un known to the constitution. On full consideration of the matter the Government thought it better to adhere to the principle of representation already in existence, and to ex tend it so as to bring within the pale of the constitution a large number of electors at present excluded. The Govern ment thought they might accomplish this object in a more direct way, and therefore they did not think it their duty to adopt those fancy franchises. With regard to polling places, which had been alluded to, he thought furtherprovision might be made in that respect, but that was matter of detail. But the most important provision of the bill was the extension of the borough franchise, and it was to that the right hon. gentlemen (Sir J. Pakington) ehiqy addressed himself. He (Sir G. Grey) would remind the right hon. gentleman that the late Government, of which he was a member, adopted in their bill the very principle which he now con demned. (Hear, hear.) It was quite true they stood by the £lO household qualification, and insisted that it should not be lowered ; but the House of Commons decided that they would not adopt any bill in which that qualification was not lowered. When the address to tho Crown was moved, the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli), wishing to obtain the confidence of the house, confessed his error, and pro mised to amend the bill in committee ; but fr o m the speeches made on the bill now before the house, he (Sir G. Grey) was bound to assume that hon. gentlemen opposite had a great distrust in the working classes. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire said in introducing his measure last year that it was the opinion of Parliament and the country that there should be a large extension of the suffrage to the working classes, an4l observed that he had no prejudice against that opinion. " All that we want," said he, "is that any measure we bring forward shall be entitled to public approbation. We are willing to ensure the introduction of a' large number of the working classes by lowering. the borough franchise." He (Sir G. Grey) understood from that declaration, that the Government of Lord Derby were prepared to lower the franchise. The present Government had .acted upon that prinsiple, and yet they were told that it was dangenjus and mischievous. The Government had not shrunk from pro posing an extension of the franchise to a considerable amount, because t hey feit that no bill would produce a per manent and stable—he did not mean an everlasting—set tlement of the question that did not extend the suffrage to a large number of the working classes. Was no account to be taken of the increased and increasing intelligence of the working classes ? The late Mr. Robert Stephenson, when called upon at a public meeting to do honour to Sir William Armstrong, in referring to the struggles of his own father, observed that this difficulty was not in overcoming matter, but in directing mind. The working men of his days bad not sufficient intelligence to compreheml, his ideas. This wa , not the case at present. Sir William Armstrong found no difficulty in obtaining workmen to make his gun. This was owing to the increased intelligence of the working men. Were these the men whose numbers were to overpower the electoral body ? He (Sir G. Grey) anticipated no danger from the admission of such men within the pale of the con stitution He did not think the proposed lowering of the borough franchise would create an essential change in the character of our constituencies. The right hon. gentleman (Sir J. Pakington) had impugned the accuracy of returns laid before the house as to the number of £lO electors. Al though he (Sir G. Grey) would not vouch for their exact accuracy, still he believed they were prepared with great care, and might be relied upon as an approximate estimate of the numbers that would be added to the electoral roll by the bill before the house. It was his belief that any bill which did not contain the principle of extending the suffrage to the working classes would fail to command the support of more than a trilling minority in that house. He defended; against the objections raised by the right hon. gentlemen the members for Droitwich and Buckinghamshire, the ad dition to the £lO qualification in counties of the payment of poor rate, and he justified the distribution of seats in the manner proposed by the Government. The right hon. gentleman the member for Droitwich expressed his regret that the extension of the borough franchise had been based on rental instead of rating. No doubt, if the rating were the actual value of the property, then that would be the more preferable basis, but while the rating was rude and unequal, they could not in justice or fairness adopt it, and to wait till the hilt for improving the valuation introduced by the Home Secretary became law, would be to delay the progress of the Reform Bill to another session. Never was there a period more desirable or opportune for taking into calm and dispassionate consideration the question of Reform, for the country was happy, tranquil, and prosperous. He hoped the bill would receive that consideration which it deserved; and if it met, as he had every confidence it would, the sanction of Parliament, he, believed that it would afford satisfaction and contentment to a large portion of the intelligence of the country hitherto without the pri vilege of the franchise, and that it would tend to the strength and stability of our institutions. (Hear.) Mr. ADDERLEY said the right hon. gentleman who last addressed the house seemed to forget that a bill might be right in principle, and yet mischievous by the manner in which that principle was applied ; and he quite overlooked those details which made the Reform Bill introduced last year by his right hon. friend the member for Bu hamshire a safe and Conservative measure. lt was the wholesale absence of those det a ils w hi c h rendered the bill of the Government a mischievous and dangerous measure. He felt the greatest commiseration for the Government by whom such a bill was introduced, and he attributed its au thorship to the hon. member for Birmingham. [There were only 24 members present when Mr. Adder ley had proceeded thus far with his statement, and an hon. member moved that the house be counted. During the period that elapsed between the motion and the count about 20 members, Lord J. Russell among the number, rushed in from the dining room, and the "house " was thus made. When the Speaker counted "40," those who assisted to make the house immediately took their departure.] Mr. ADDERLEY resumed, and said that what had just occurred indicated what was the state of the feeling of that house on the subject under their consideration. (Opposition cheers.) A similar display, he understood, took place in the house, but with more success, on the last evening that the subject was intended to be brought before it. Ho (Mr. Adderley) was favourable to an extension of the franchise, but he cautioned the house that they were making a most hazardous experiment in reducing the borough franchise from £lO to B. (Hear, hear.) As they were agreed upon the second reading of this bill, he yet hoped in committee they would make such arrangements as would provide against any serious innovation on the -present system of the representation of the people. He especially objected to that provision of the bill by which it was proposed to accumulate members in connection with populous places, instead of scattering those members over the country. (Hear.) The principle of the Constitution was, that every portion of the country and every class should be represented, and therefore he objected to accumulating mem bers in populous districts. He hoped the bill would be care fully considered in committee. Mr. MASSEY said the state of the house was not sucheis to encourage discussion, but notwithstanding the apathy which prey tiled, the bill was of some iseportance, and would be attended with great results. (Hear.) He trusted this measure would settle the question of Reform for a consider- able number of years. When he entered Parliament ho found this measure of a revision of the Reform Bill was a public and an agitated question, and therefore he was obliged, however reluctantly, to form some opinion upon it. There might be some question as to details, but there was none to the principle of this bill. The first objection to the last Reform Bill was, that the franchise was not sufficiently extended to the enlightened and intelligent classes, and another objection was, that representation did not bear a fair proportion to the population in many places. However, in a community like ours• there must be some anomalies,' and they could not, in any case, arrive at perfection. It was said that the great commercial centres of industry were not adequately represented. But had they suffered from that fact ? Had not the entire course of legislation during late years been in their favour ? Then if that was so, where was the practical necessity for, reform of Parliament so far as they were concerned ? (Hear, hear.) Well, then, why was this question now to take precedence of all other questions of immediate exigency ? It was simply because it was a vexed and an irritated question; 'and although the prac tical necessity, for reforming Parliament was not very urgent, he was prepared to settle it this session. There ,were certai4 anomalies to be removed, and desirable amend ments to make. There were also theoretical objections to be redressed. There were little boroughs sending two members to that house, and there were, on the other hand large hives of industry who had but the same voice in that house. These inconsistencies should bo redressed, but if that was to bo done, the measure should be well considered, and not conceived in a lassitude indicative of a desiro to satisfy a promise hastily made. The measure of disfran chisement was well conceived, and, from his acquaintance with the working classes, ho did not apprehend any danger from the new constituencies that were to be called into ex istence. They might occasionally be misled, but there was no fear to the property of the country, which appeared to be the danger apprehended by the Conservative party. As far as the franchise went the bill was ample. But would the bill settle the question ? (Hear, hear.) That was the point. (Hear, hear.) The object of the noble lord was to. redress anomalies, but he really thought that the bill created greater anomalies than it removed. Looking at one of the great objects of the Refqm_movement, which was the re distribution of seats, he thought the bill a failure. It doubled the great constituencies. The extension of the franchise was greater than in the bill of 1832. The new electors under this bill would be numerically superior to all the others, and they could return their own members in the great seats of commerce and industry. The measure was most extensive and fearless in that direction, and if it had been accompanied with an extensive measure of disfran chisement he would have said it was consistent. But if they were to consider this bill as a settlement of the Reform question, it must, besides extending the fran chise wisely, be accompanied by a corresponding re-dis tribution of seats. But there was the defect of this mea sure. He could not understand how any English gen- I tleman who based his desire for Reform upon a re-distribution of seats could be satisfied with this measure.. Indeed, the hon. member for Birmingham admitted he was not satisfied on that point. The noble lord drew a line, and said all places below five thousand returning two members shall henceforth return but one member to Par liament. That gave him just 25 seat.; for distribution. Did the noble lord suppose that would satisfy the advocates for re-distribution? (Hear.) Why, he must be sanguine in deed if Ye thought that could by any possibility settle the question. (Hear.) Ho now came to the constituency which he had the honour to represent, the borough of Salford, which was the largest borough in England represented by a single member. He was not coming to the house to sue in forma pauperis for a second member, but ho was only bringing forward this as an illustration. If they were to bring in a Reform Bill not demanded by any, practical grie vanco, but introduced to adjust and scale theoretical and speculative anomalies, let them have a measure which would effect their object. Salford had 100,000 inhabitants an d 4;5130 - electors. Its claim to a second member had been al ready recognised by the-noble lord in his bill of 1854, and another member was awarded. It was now to be left in its existing state. It had now 4,500 electors, and would have 10,500 under this bill, and could he be expected to go down to such a place—teeming with population, full of energy and enterprise, commercial power and wealth, and increas ing beyond any borough in Lancashire in its commercial prosperity—could he be expected to go down to such a place with this bill in his hand, and say, " This is the measure which is to settle the reform question for you." (Hear and latfghter.) He laid no claim to being what was called an " advanced Reformer." (Laughter.). He was a moderate man. He liked to keep pace with the necessities of the age; but, considering the momentous results of these orga nic changes, he preferred rather to progress gradually than to make these hazardous plunges in the dark. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord might say that this bill was but a compromise, and that all our measures now were com promises ; but what would his constituents say when they found that small market towns were left with their full complement of members, and the claims of this great borough of Salford, occupying a position almost unique in its character, were ignored? The borough of Salford, in three years, had added to the register a number nearly equal to the united constituencies of Cockermoul 11, Buck ingham, Tavistock, and Wycombe. (Hear.) Yet these were spared in their integrity by this bill. (Hear.) There were points in the measure which it was impossible far him to defend. Ho must look at the question as a man of busi nesS. If the noble lord had adhered to his former measure and excluded the consideration of the re-distribution of seats, it would have been a prudent measure • but the noble lord had not chosen to do that, which had placed him (Mr. Massey) under the very disagreeable necessity of going down to his constituents and becoming an agitator for another Reform Bill. (Hear.) That was a position which he could only accept with great reluctance. These were solemn and serious questions which ought not to be inconsiderately opened. We were not, like our opposite neighbours, one day under a republic, the next under a mongrel monarchy, and after that a despotism. (Hear.) We lived under a constitution which had lasted 800 years and he touched that venerable fabric with diffidence and reluctance. If, however, he were asked, after thirty years, to take part in amending the measure which was then a great measure, he would say, let the proposals be consistent with that mea sure, and carried out in the same spirit, and th en h e wou ld help them to amend it. In the noble lord's former bills he attempted to provide for the representation of minorities; but he was very glad that he had now abandoned that idea. The English people understood a fight and a victory, but they knew nothing of the representation of minorities. The measure of the noble lord had been praised for its simplicity. (Hear.) It was simple even to rudeness. (Laughter.) He thought simplicity might be carried too far. (Laughter.) It was easy to devise simple modes of escaping from our serious difficulties ; but he did not think such rude modes as these of cutting the Gordian knot would entitle persons to be regarded as great statesmen, or to claim credit for having conquered difficulties. The groat evil was, that they took these enormous areas and flooded them with a great number of voters, and thus they created monster constituencies. Now, all who were ac quainted with the working of our representative system in this country would bear him out in saying that in proportion as-they increased the number of voters beyond a certain limit, they diminished the value which each voter attached to the franchise. He found himself a unit in the midst of a vast mob, and did not attach a proper importance to his vote. With these huge constituencies it was impossible that a member could make himself ac quainted with them. People returned a member whom they knew little or nothing about. His nomination often fell into the hands of some self-constituted "association" or "club," and they elected themselves into a sort of electoral college, found the candi date, prescribed his political creed, corresponded' with him on public - subjects, and became a species of middlemen be tween the member and his constituents. (Hear, hear.) This was one of the most pernicious features of our electoral system, and it was of the utmost importance that such a state of things should be put an end to. (Hear, hear.) In great boroughs they would find one district Conservative and another district Liberal; there was just as much differ ence often between two parts of the same borough as there were between two different boroughs. (Hear.) He thought that they ought to adopt the principle of the Reform Act of 1832, and as they divided the large counties, so they ought to divide these monster borough constituencies. If this were done no one need fear the flooding of these vast electoral areas with a number of new voters, fur they would find in division a compensating circumstance. (Hear.) He thought it a great disadvantage to members to be sent to that house who did not know their constituents. (Hear, hear.) Yet this must be the case while the electoral districts were so enormous. (Hear.) He was averse to novelty in such mat ters, but this was not a novel principle, seeing that it was recognised in the act of 1832. This division would interest the voter in the franchise, it would familiarise the candi date with his constituents, and it would avoid the middle men to whom he had referred. He would be glad if some hon. gentleman would take up these ideas and develope them. They were not his ideas, but were the matured opinions of the member for Rochdale. , ; (Hear, hear, and cheers.) As the servant of the house, it would be his (Mr. Massey's) duty to sit in the chair when the details of this measure were being discussed (hear, hear), and in that posi tion it would not be decent in him to urge upon the house those matters of detail. (Hear, hear.) He hoped some hon. gentleman, therefore, would consider the suggestions he had made, and would throw them into shape. (Hear, hear.) There wore also certain additions to the franchise which might be usefully introduced into the bill. He did not ap prove of ." fancy franchises," but he could not regard the " lodger franchise" as being " fancy" or sentimental. It was anomalous to give to the occupier of a house a vote which was denied to his lodgers, from whom his sole income was perhaps derived. He believed that from a lodger fran chise they would get a valuable addition to the constituency if they did not carry it too low. The measure, as it now stood, was bald, naked, and repulsive. It was a dreary, monotonous desert, which would be agreeably varied by a lodger franchise (hear, hear)—by an educational franchise of some sort. (Hear, hear.) He hoped that the noble lord would condescend to consider the suggestions which had been made, and which might be thrown out during the course of the debate, and that he would revise his bill accordingly; and that, if not, he would lend a willing ear in committee to those suggestions, the object of which was to improve the bill which he had introduced—to make it worthy of his distinguished name, and a becoming settle ment to that great measure of 1832 which regenerated the constitution of this country, and which conferred upon the people the blessings of good government and of enlightened laws. (Cheers.) N - r. STEUART believed if this bill passed it would have the effect-of placing the right hon. gentleman th.e Chancel lor of the Exchequer in the position of a democratic leader —a position in which he would be backed by the hon. member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright) ; and bearing in mind how very versatile the right honourable gentleman was, and how frequently and easily ho had changed his opinions, he should not be at all surprised to see him, per haps at no distant time, in that position. (Laughter.) Mr. C ROSSLEY did not think there was any ground for apprehension, because the bill would extend the franchise to a large number of the working classes. Were they afraid of the working classes ? (Nc.) Certainly not. The right hon. baronet the member for Droitwich had that evening called the bill a miserable bill; and another right hon. gen tleman of his party had designated it as a pitiful Budget Bill. Now, in his opinion, it was a bill which contained much that was worthy of adoption by the house. Looking at the various interests of the country, its shipping, its farming, and, above all, its manufactures, they saw great compact masses. Ho denied, too, that they were slaves in the sense which had been implied in the assertion. The hon. member for Birmingham did not like county constitu encies, because there was a strong Conservative feeling among the yeomanry, who sent him (Mr. K. Soymer) and other hon. gentlemen like him, to oppose the hon. member, and to tell him that, with all his ability and honesty of purpose, he was a dangerous politician. That was why the hon. gentlemen did not like the county constituencies. The hon. gentleman said, "Why are you afraid to trust the people ?"- The hon. gentleman evidently trusted them, and trusted their ignorance, too, or else he would surely not venture to repeat in an assembly of educated men the language he had sometimes held out of doors, when he infsrmed his hearers that the landed gentry of the country kept up large armaments because they de sired to make them- the means - of providing their brothers and sons with - emolument. Why, the fact was that they paid much more as their share of income-tax than the scanty pay doled out to those who received it. Now, one reason why he and others were alarmed at this bill was, that the class of men who were to be admitted to an exer cise of the franchise would be very likely, after having been thus excited against them and made to believe that they had been robbed in the taxation that had fallen upon them, to turn round upon their supposed oppressors and adopt measures which they (the gentry) would consider unjust. He contended that the expense of representation lay, after all, not in nutnbers or in wealth, but in the character of the members themselves. The Government had ,a majority in the house, but he still had such confid ence i n it s goo d sense that he did not doubt that in the further course of the dis cussion on the subject they might be enabled to make the bill what it was not now, a bill for the better representation of the people. Mr. E. BAINES said, though he was about to support the measure of the Government, he hoped that in doing so he should not subject himself to the taunt just uttered against the hen. member for the West Riding (Mr. Cross ley), namely, that he was influenced in favour of the bill by the fact that an additional vote was given to the place which he represented. It was true that an ad .itional member was given to Leeds—(Opposition laughter)—but it was well known to many members of that house that he had for years entertained the opinions which he had risen to ex press. For years he had believed that it would be safe, wise, and right to lower the borough franchise to £5. That was the great distinguishing feature of the bill before the house, and he hoped that the figures ho was about to give by way of illustration, with regard to Leeds, would tend to dispel the alarm which was felt on the other side with regard to the probable effect of the measure. He would, however, 'first notice the objection of the right honourable gentleman the member for Bucks, that in this bill there was no principle ; that though the franchise was brought down from £lO to £6, there was nothing to indicate the fitness of the voter. There was the same prin ciple involved in a £6 as in a £lO franchise, or in 40s. free holds, and the objection of the right hon. gentleman ap plied just as much to the existing system as to that which was about to be established. £6 was a very much higher rental than that of most of the houses occupied by the work ing classes, and as the occupation of a house with such a rental indicated sobriety, industry, good morals, and good habits, it included, in his opinion, those moral and social qualifications, which the right hon. gentleman summed up in the one word " fitness." The " fancy franchises" of the right hon. gentleman were objested to, he believed, chiefly because they were proposed as a substitute for the extension of the franchise to the working classes. Indeed, the right hon. baronet the member for Hertford (Sir E. B. Lytton) advocated the bill of the late Government expressly on the ground that it kept the representation in the hands of the middle classes. Another objection, however, to the present bill was that it enfranchised a great number of persons who, being a vast homogeneous mass, would exercise a prepon derating influence in the borough constituencies to which they belostged. Now, he was convinced that that was a great mistake. At present the borough constituencies num bered 400,000; only 200,000 at the utmost would be added by the bill; and how could the 200,000 exercise a prepon derating influence over the 400,000 ? He had taken some pains to ascertain what effect the bill was likely to produce in that respect in the borough which he represented. At present the constituency was 6 1 000, by the bill 4,000 would be added, making a total of 10,000. The treasurer of the council of Leeds, who had to do with the collection of rates and other business' of the same kind all his life had collected statistics with regard to the new elections, being assisted in so doing by an experienced ratepayer. After stating that the total number of new electors would be 4,000 persons, they estimated the number of those who were strictly operatives at 2,500, who were among the most iitelligent and best skilled working men of their class. Three schedules relating to these persons were furnished. The first included those who occupied houses of from £6 to £7. The trades to which the persons included in it belonged indicated that there would be extreme difficulty in their organisation for any political purpose. There were cloth dressers, dyers, and mechanics of various kinds; masons, bricklayers, plasterers, and joiners. The second schedule included persons who paid from £7 to £3, and there were to be found cloth pressers, warehousemen, iron and brass moulders, brush makers, wood-turners, carriers, and leather-dressers, and so on. In the third schedule, which comprised houses of from £8 to £lO, were retail shopkeepers of all kinds, book keepers and assistant clerks, and printers. These facts would, he hoped, satisfy those who thought that the new electors were such a homogeneous class that they might be combined for any political purpose., The whole number of electors under this bill, including both the old and the new voters, was estimated at only 607,000. The population of the boroughs, which in the year 1851 amounted to 7,432,000, at the present day must amount to about 9,000,000. The adult males would be about one fourth of the whole number, that was to say, 2,225,000, so that the voters could only be about one fourth of the adult male population. The popu lation of the upper and middle classes was about one-fourth of the whole, and the lower classes about three-fourths, and inasmuch as the whole number of electors was little more than a fourth of the whole adult population, he believed the hen. member for Birmingham was far wrong when he said that only about 100,000 of the voters in boroughs would be long to the working class. He thought the number might be 150,000, and assuming the maximum nurnber,what was there to alarm them so greatly that the working classes, who were three-fourths of the population, should torm one-fourth of the number of electors ? Allow him to ask what proportion of the working classes they thought it right and just, and reasonable and safe, should have the franchise. Because if 150,000 of them were admitted to it, look at the enormous number who were excluded, They did not bring in more than about one in ten. In many boroughs they brought in oae in five, but in many others not more than one in ten. He believed that those occupying houses of the value of be tween £6 and £lO, who would novi be admitted to the fran chise for the first time, represented an amount of moral and intellectual fitness so great for the exercise of the franchise, that it could not with safety be withheld from them. The noble lord who introduced this bill first appeared as a Par liamentary Reformer in 1820, when he proposed to take the f anchise from Grantham and confer it upon Leeds, and it was then said in that house that, the leading banker of Leeds had written to say that if the franchise were given to the £lO householders of Leeds he should be obliged to shut up his bank. Contrast the social condition of that borough in the present day with what it was in 1820. Her Majesty went down t 9 honour the town of Leeds by opening the Town-hall about a year and a half ago, and on that occa • sion she passed in her carriage along many miles of streets, through half a million of people, without one syllable of rudeness being uttered, and amid the heartiest expressions of loyalty. 'He beliNed in the loyalty of the working classes, and that there was amongst them a conservative feeling of the best kind, and he believed that if they wanted to make them conservative in the best manner they would accom plish the object by admitting them to the privileges of the constitution. He wished to call the attention of those who took an interest in the social condition of the community to a few facts with regard to the borough of Leeds. First, with regard to savings banks, there were 12,873 open accounts, . and £338,000 invested. Of the West Riding penny savings bank, there were eleven branches in the borough, which were receiving at the rate of £BO a week, and there wore numerous savings banks connected with Sunday schools, mechanics' institutions, and other institutions of the town. The friendly societies com prised 22,543 members ; the benefit building societi es 7 , 58 1 members ; and he might mention the remarkable fact that they had invested a sum of no less than £900,000. The me chanics' institutions, and similar institutions, were no les s than 26 in number, and their members amounted to 5,556. There were 133 Sunday schools, taught by 5,274 teachers, and comprising 35,000 . scholars. There were 371 day schools —that was in the year 1801—of which 76 were public and 295 were private, and they included 21,831 scholars. There was a town mission employing 16 agents; the Temper ance Society numbered 3,000 persons, and there were two co-operative flour mills, one of which had 3,200 members, shareholders, and they had a capital of £11,795. There was one point more, showing the amount of intelligence which existed in the town; and here he would institute a compa rison as well as he could between the year 1820 and the year 1860. He had endeavoured to ascertain what was the num ber of newspapers circulated in Leeds daily and weekly in those two periels. He believed that in 1820 the number of daily papers circulated in Leeds did not exceed 1,000, the number now was 3,800. In 1820 the number of weekly papers was not more than 3,000, the number now was 17,300. The number of literary, scientific, and religious weekly periodicals sold in Leeds at a former period he was certain, at a liberal estimate, did not exceed 500. The number now was 21,742 per week. Then, of monthly publications he would assume that at the former period there were 500 cir culated, which was a liberal estimate, whereas the number now sold in Leeds was 12,603. Those facts, which indicated so great an amount of social progress in Leeds, were only a sample of what had taken place in other boroughs. The general educational statistics he would not allude to furtive, than to say that between 1818 and 1851 the day schools in - creased 218 per cent., while the population increased only 54 per cent. That was surely an indication of that great social progress which was the greatest justification of, nay had rendered necessary, the bill of the noble lord. It would be unsafe for Parliament to shut out men who had such intelligence and such laudable habits as he had proved the people of our large boroughs possessed. He believed there was truth in the statement that the elite of the working classes were more independent than those who were higher in the social scale. He admitted that there was much to regret among them. Out of 50,000 adult males they were still only giving the franchise to 10,000 in the borough of Leeds. Forty thousand were still left out of the pale of the constitution.. If they did not extend the franchise social progress ; and was it not, therefore, desirable that they should move with the times, and extend the franchise ? He had given notice that every male adult who raid 40s. a year in direct taxes ought to have a vote. (Hear; hear.) And here he should read a letter which he received from one of his constituents. The hon. gentleman here read the letter, which described his correspondent as a clerk in a re spectable establishment, paying £lO a year rent and all taxes,land yet he had no vote. He (Mr. Crossley) thought it would be well if the noble lord had introduced a clause in his bill, to extend the franchise to lodgers. (Hear, hear.) Then, again, there was a fault in the bill which ought to be amended—namely, that clause which said that the voter must pay his assessed taxes by a particular day. He hap pened to visit America, and althoagh he did not like or ap prove of all their institutions, he must yet say that he saw much there to approve of and that recommended itself to him. In New York, for instance, ho did not during his residence there see a single beggar in the streets, and he did not think there was that danger to the States whi c h some h on. mem bers apprehended rom the vast numbers who were there entrusted with thefranchise. Then, as to the working classes of this country, he had much intercourse with then), and he had every reason to - speak in the highest terms of their merits and their worth. In sickness and in distress, there were no better friends, no better neighbours. (Hear, hear.) Why, then, should they not be entrusted with the fran chise ? They said, "We only want a fair share of the suf frage—we don't want any overwhelming influence—we don't want a monopoly—all we want is to have a voice in the representation of thepeople, and in those matters which concern the great in4erests of the country." (Hear, hear.) For those reasons, then, he should give his vote for the se cond reading of the bill, calculated as it was to give the working classes a share in the elective franchise. (Hear.) Mr. KER SE YMER said that hon. gentlemen above and below the gangway on the opposite side of the house who had spoken, expressed themselves favourable to a £0 franchise, and among them was the hon. gentleman who had spoken last. That hon. gentleman spoke of the'rnea sure even more favourably than any of the hon. members who preceded him. Now, seeing that the hon. gentleman was connected with the West Riding of Yorkshire, and that the West Riding, by the provision of the bill, would, if the measure passed, have four members in future, the hon. gen tleman seemed greatly pleased with the bill ; but as far as he could understand the meaning of the hon. gentleman, it was that we travelled very fast by sea and land, and there - fore we should have a very large Reform Bill. (Laughter.) But thoughtful men, both on that and the other side of the house, and thoughtful men, also, out of the house, viewed the bill with very great alarm—(hear, hear)—and the house would remember that the bill of 1832 was also viewed with very great alarm. That bill effected great changes in the actual constitution of the House of Commons. An hon. member used the argument that because the bill of 1832 did not do harm, therefore another Reform Bill would not do harm. Now, he thought that argument was a very unfair one. (Hear, hear.) It had been said out of doors that this bill, in giving votes to the work ing-classes, would but expose them to the influences of corrupt practices at elections. Now, ho would never give to the working-classes a vote with one hand, and, on the other, expose them with their votes to the influences of cor• rupt practices at elections. The hon. member for Birming ham said the other day, alluding to this bill, that it would unsettle the whole question. Now, what did the noble lord himself think of that ? Mr. BRIGHT—I did not say any such thing. I said, so far as the disfranchisement of seats it did not settle the question. I did not say as so related to the franchise. Mr. KER SEYMER could not quite understand the hen. member for Birmingham. He would ; however, read the passage from the hon. member's speech to which he referred. The hon. gentleman said, " You unsettle every thing, and you disfranchise in the distribution of seats. (Laughter, and cries of Hear, hear.) The hon. member looked only at numbers, but he (Mr. K. Seymer) looked at fitness. He did not care how many wore rejected if they were unfit, nor how many were admitted if they were fit. No one could more deplore the existence of bribery than. ho did, but it was certainly to be observed that there was much hiss of it in counties than there wasin boroughs. And the reason was very obvious. The county constituencies were spread over an extensive surface of country, and it was impossible for corrupt agencies to work u thorn in as far as was proposed by thr r bill, he thought they had better not attempt to legislate at all. No measure short of that of the noble lord would at all meet the exigencies of the case. (Hear, hear.) Mr. WIIITESIDE observed that in 1782 Pitt said he could not venture to touch the ark of the constitution with unhallowed hands, and Mr. Fox remarked that if all the wise men in the world met in solemn conclave they could. not frame a perfect constitution. He (Mr. Whiteside) was inclined to that opinion. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Halifax said there was an apathy on the subject of the Reform Bill, and accounted for it on this principle—that the English people had become "rigid philosophers." But he (Mr. Whiteside) believed that whenever the English people felt deeply they expressed themselves strongly. (Hear, hear.). ,Tf they approved of this Reform Bill they would speak out unmistakeably on the subject. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Birmingham said the bill was intro-. duced in accordance with a promise made by the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) when he sat on the Opposition side of the house. ➢lr. BRIGHT—I did not say he introduced the bill on that account. (Order.) Mr. WHITESIDE said the words of the hon. gentle men were, that the bill was introduced in redemption of a pledge given by the noble lord when he was on the Opposi— tion side of the house. That was substantially the state ment made by the hon. member. (Hear, hear.) Now, a worse argument than that could not be adduced. He (Mr. Whiteside) admitted it to be a fact that the noble lord, when on the Opposition side of the house, threw out a hint as to what a reform bill ought to be; but now the hon. member for Birmingham had informed the house that they bill was brought forward in redemption of a pledge. Was that an argument to justify the introduction of the bill ? The right hon. member the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster said the Government could not succeed in re- taining the confidence of their Supporters if they brought in a bill which conferred a lesser extension of the franchise. (Hear, hear.) Now, the confidence of the house meant the confidence of the majority. But did this prove that the bill was a good one ? It Was the duty of enlightened statesmen. not to pander to the prejudices of the majority, but to intro duce such measures as would be conducive to the permanent welfare of the country. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentle man who spoke last gave the house a specimen of statistical rhetoric, from which it might be inferred that, in his opinion, the interests of the whole of Great Britain and Ireland were concentrated in Leeds. (Laughter.) When the right hon. gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire spoke of the homogeneous mass of persons that were to be added to the electoral body, the hon. member who spoke last imagined that they would be' all plasterers. (Laughter.) The hon. member for Carlisle —who was a chip of the old block—(a laugh)—said- the ballot was said to be unfit for small boroughs, and was cet tainly not so applicable to them as to large ones, 'but in the supplementary Reform Bill which must follow, the small boroughs would be extinguished. The lion. member for Birmingham said that the transfer of seats was the pith and marrow of every Reform Bill, but that the measure before the house did not settle, but unsettled that question. According to high Parliamentary authority, then, they were about to unsettle everything and to settle nothing—a piece of statesmanship that did . infinite credit to these hon. gentlemen who occupied seats on the Treasury bench. The hon. member - for Bir mingham went further, and declared that it was impos sible the question of reform could remain permanently where it, was about to be placed by this bill. The old doctrine, then, of finality was exploded, and one Reform Bill was only regarded as valuable because it led further change. Would the hon. member for Birmingham permit him to ask was his principle to reform the constitution or to reconstruct it ? If he desired to reconstruct, then his task was not one or reform, but of revolution, and he (Mr. Whiteside) declined to argue the question with him. (Hear, hear.) When the hon. member announced that the population of England was six or seven millions, and that only one million were voters, what did he mean by that argument ? Did he .mean by that to infer that the rest should be admitted to Ile enjoyment and exercise of the franchise? At what time did the English constitution re cognise the sovereignty of the people? At no time. To argue that the masses should be admitted to the franchise was to argue against law, against the history of England, and the principles of the constitution. They had made improvements in steamboats and' railways, but they were !surpassed in political wisdom by the abnormis sayentia of their ancestors. He should like to know whether a£B voter, such as was now proposed, could discharge the duties which the elector discharged in former times. There was no instance on record of men being repreiented because of their numbers. Were hon. gentlemen opposite going to ad mit the working classes to the franchise because they were working classes? The only ground, for admitting them waa that of their having an independent will, sufficient property, loyalty, and political capacity. It did not matter in that case how numerous they were. The more the better. No proof, not an iota, had been adduced to show that those bodies of the working classes possessed that political capa city. The hon. member for Birmingham had spoken of the admirable workmanship of the artisans of Manchester, but at present they were net seeking for a good stonemason or plasterer, but for persons who had politi ca l ca p ac ity. As a proof of the state of feeling among the working classes of the metropolis, be referred to a pamphlet by Mr. Potter, secretary to the trades unions. He did not think that the employers of these men would got their votes if they had them. In the pamphlet iu question the writer spoke of the want of courtesy on the part of the masters to the men whcP waited on them, cf their conduct as being tyrannical o v er individuals and insulting to the whole body. It they went on to speak of the conduct of the masters during the strike, and that nothing remained for the workmen but the right of combination in order to compel the masters to give them the same pay for nine as for ten hours' work. (Hear, hear.) That, the workmen said, was their political economy. The writer went on to attribute the soul and body crushing effect of toil to the failure of mechanics' in stitutes, as well as the small number of workmen who had risen to a better poSition, compared with those who had given no more proof of spiritiml or political capacity than the brutes that perished. Ought they to give political power to such men ? In mercy to the men , themselves, they should refuse them a power which they admitted they wore not qualified to exercise. In another pamphlet, en titled " Trades' Union Strikes; their Philosophy and In tentions," from which he read several extracts, it was con tended that labour might be stolen by the predatory capi talist, and several false ideas of the relationship between master and workmen were put forward. These men said that they would persevere until they succeeded in obtain ing the nine hours movement. This was the result of this great organisation amongst the working classes. The right hon. gentleman then went on to quote further extracts from the work, to show that the best men of the workingclasses were identified in the views to which he had already ad verted ? The theory of these views was this—that they did not seem to sympathise with the hon. members for Bir mingham (Mr. Bright) or Rochdale (Mr. Cobden), and he (Mr. Whiteside) wished to ask the house how it was justi fied in transferring so much political power to a class of men who entertained the notions which were here enun ciated. Did hon. members read the proceedings which had taken place in the American Assembly, and which had appeared in the journals that day ? There an eminent orator showed that a minority of slave owners had suc ceeded.in getting rid of every law of the country to pro mote their - own selfish object. If such had been done in that country, the institotions of which were so much ad mired by the hon. member for Birmingham, what might not be effieted by an organised minority in this country having the same purposel'in view ? (Hear.) He was sorry the hon. member for Birmingham was not in his place to hear this. He was seldom so at the right time. (Laughter.) Looking then at the measure before the house as it stood, he asked why was it that they were asked to make this jump in the dark ? (Hear.) The late Sir Robert Peel, in legislating en the Catholic question, said they could not gbvern a country with a large body of free holders. The Irish . 4oB. freeholders were not an immoral body of men, but they were ignorant, and in their ignorance ' they would have got rid of church, law, and property. He then got rid of the 40s. freehold system, and raised the franchise to .ElO. That franchise was subsequently altered to a £l2 rating clause in counties, and an £8 rating clause in boroughs and cities. The Attorney-General for Ireland, however, proposed now to change that rating to a lower sum, although the alteration was not asked for by a "tra velling, tinker or a loquacious barber." (Laughter.) He could not comprehend what was the nature of the bill be fore them; but he trusted the house would consider it calmly ; and he was sure that Parliament would listen to any suggestions that could be made for its improvement, by which the constitution of England would be secured to • the people in all its purity and integrity. Mr. EDWIN JAMES moved the adjournment of the debate. Lord J. RUSSELL said he was ready to go or. with the debate, but as the house seemed disposed to adjourn it, h• would not interfere with the wishes of the house. Lord PALMERSTON, in'reply to Mr. DISRAELI, said that in all probability it would be better at once to move that the debate bo'adfourned until Monday. It was accordingly adjourned to that day. ENDOWED SCHOOLS (No. 3) BILL (LORDS). This bill passed through committee. __ The Con;olidated Fund (£850,000) Bill was read a second time. The house then adjourned at half-past twelve o'clock. .- BIRTHS. CusT.—On the 22d inst. at 13, Eccleston-square, the Lady Elizabeth Cust, of a daughter. FORDYCE.—On the 21st inst., at 7, Dacre-park-terrace, Blackheath, the wife of Colonel Fordyce ; Bengal H.A., of a son. PAGET.—On the 20th inst., at Stuston Rectory, Scole, the Hon. Mrs. Edward Paget, of a son. TYSSEN.—On the 15th inst.. at Yarmouth, the wife of Com mander Tyssen, R.N., of a daughter. MARRIAGES. GOLDSMITH—BULLEN.—On the 20th - inst., at Charlton ' Kent, Henry P! Goldsmith, Esq., t o Ell en , th e e ld es t daughter of Richard Bullen, Esq., and niece of the late Admiral Sir Chas. Bullen, G.C.8., G.C.H. SYnEs—COOPER.—On the 20th inst., at All Saints', Nor wood, Nicholas Richard Sykes, Esq., to Catherine Eliza beth, second daughter of the late Richard W. Cooper, Esq., of Longford Ledge, Kingstown, co. Dublin. DEATHS. BALFOITR.—On the 20th inst., at Pilrig House, Edinburgh James Balfour, Esq., W.S., aged 87. BoucliEn.--On the 20th inst., John Boucher, Esq., of Bel ford Lefl7e, Clapham-road. CAMPBELL —On the 20th inst., at 10, Houghton-place , Ampthill-square, Robert Campbell, Esq., aged 82. FOTHERINGHAM.—On the 19th inst., at Kingsbridgo House, Southampton, Lieut.-Col. Robert 11. Fothering ham, aged 82. ;.( PHILLIPS.—On the 19th inst., at 67, Oakley-square, N.W., William Lovell Phillips, R.A.M., aged 43. TYSSEN.—On the 21st inst., at Yarmouth, Eleanor Mar- garet, wife of Commander Tyssen, R.N., aged 39. LONDUN Printei and Punished by MURDO YOUNG of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the mat/ ° f 511641e5a, Friday, March 23, 1860. - AP progn for idl produl AG . . RUE a Charge for De CO, Mo, Card Note pt atampe forwar G L IND PI r pm Tl] and Dic of VAS] heautift ter, lila: inanufa Ifitiost3 Mr. MINE! the int, and Glk PRA RALoi Just P V l,i. c SPEW, DMA SYSTE W I P iE gang an Why th( they ca together feetion. iii a Medical street, ] Itoster-i Prefect the re 47.121 : Waltha indigesl Cure IsTc ~. -,- ‘... I dor 3 0' fro] Jan Mr. and One twe Car TiTIE eleg EVI I Tia pact EMI o'clo tr ol or TH. Or JOB