The Sun. — London, England, 1860-04-27 00:00:00

(Continued from our first page.) Ton will say, " It is true we found many persons of respect able means and excellent education, who complained that they were without suffrage ; we did not attend to their com plaint, but where we found persons living in lanes and al leys, at a rent which afforded the fair presumption that they bad little property and less education, we conferred our new franchise exclusively on them. And so we purified and exalted the constituency I" (Hear.) Sir, let me venture to give you an illustration of the manner in which the little Reform Bill will probably work out the amendment of the representation and purify and exalt the constituency. I will first assume that the state of the world renders it likely that for some years to come our party differences will occur upon questions affecting our foreign relations. Let me sup- pose some such question on which Parliament has been dis solved, some question that shall not trespass on what we should now call delicate matters. Let us suppose it only a new quarrel with China. Nothing more likely than that. Suddenly, then, there appear before your new constituency in one of those boroughs which the noble lord reserves as 1 the nursery of rising genius and the refuge of ill-treated statesmen two dignified and imposing persons, whom that new constituency do not know from Adam—(laughter) — but these are rival candidates—Thompson is a rising genius, Brown an ill .treated statesman ; Thompson supports the Government—genius that rises generally does support a Government—(laughter)—Browne sides with the Opposi tion—ill-treated statesmen naturally do that. (Renewed laughter.) They both proceed to canvass Mr. Smith, one of your new electors, a journeyman plasterer—the hon. member for Leeds thinks that plasterers are entitled to a preferential difference—living in a frail tenement much in need of plaster, and struggling hard to pay off a harrassing debt of £3. (Laughter, and Hear.) Thompson, who supports the Government in a naval and military expedition to Pekin, appeals to Smith's patriotism for the chastisement of the Chinese barbarians and the prestige of the Englishname. Browne condemns that criminal and somewhat costly ex pedition, and is eloquent on the rights of humanity and the inoffensive character of an Oriental but industrious popula tion. The more the candidates talk the less interest they excite in the heart of Smith, one way or the other, for the affairs of China. In fact his whole mind is absorbed in the consideration of those £3 which neither of these eloquent strangers help him to pay. (Laughter.) Now there appears a third person on the stage, and he whispers to Smith, " Vote far humanity and Browne ; vote for the preserva tion of the Celestial Empire and its countless millions ; and you shall have 305." Smith indignantly rejects a bribe thus coarsely offered ; nevertheless it cannot but occur to him that 30e. would half pay off his debt, and, for the first time in his life, he begins to conceive an interest in the affairs of China. Now there appears a fourth person, the real Deus ex Machina, a solicitor, or a solicitor's confidential agent, a fellow towns man, a man whose word is as good as his bond and he whis pers to Smith, "You are an honest man, and not to be bribed ; I know all your affairs ; you are tormented by that paltry debt of £3 ; that debt shall never trouble you any further if you vote for Thompson and your country's glory." (Laugh ter.) Well, Smith begins to think of his wife's anxious face, of his children's scanty supper ; thinks what a blessing it would be to rise the next morning free from the incubus of these £3 ; and as he so thinks, can you wonder that he begins to care no more for the Celestial Empire than the Celestial Empire cares for him ? (Laughter and cheers.) The man's heart is tempted, and the elector's vote is bought. This is the origin of corruption, and such corruption soon becomes contagious in proportion as you multiply voters to whose knowledge China is a phantom, and to whose wants L 3 are the Indies. (Cheers.) These instances occur now, but will you tell me that they will not be much more numerous un der your new constituency —ay, and on questions far more vitally important to England than an expedition to Pekin ? But why more numerous ? Because poverty and debt are not the staple of your present constituency. But reduce your franchise to almost the humblest tenements in which poverty can face debt, and I leave the conjecture of the pro bable result to your own indulgent knowledge of human na ture. Are we to be told that the ballot would cure this ? The ballot ! Why, is there a gentleman old enough to sit in this house, and pet young enough to believe that if our friend Smith, who is not a bad man, and who will not break the promise he has given on a consideration, could drop into the ballot-box a vete, perhaps against the inclina tions of his party, he would not have a conscience still more placidly resigned to that chastisement of the Celestial Em pire and that vindication of his country's glory, by which thus, quietly, unobtrusively, and without giving offence to any one, he could pay off his debt of £3, and perhaps by that vote serve to add £3,000,000 more to the debt of England ? (Cheers.) The hon. member for Birmingham has a more speedy and derided cure for this evil. He would get rid altogether of these nurseries of rising genius —these asylums of ill-treated statesmen ; he would have only constituencies so numerous that they are less likely to be bribed in detail than bribed wholesale, by some system of direct taxation which shall reduce the duties on the artieles £6 householders consume, or defray all the expenditure neces sary to the land they inhabit and the freedom they enjoy, at the exclusive cost of persons who are better lodged than themselves. This kind of corruption I hold to be infinitely more dangerous than the other; for a nation may continue great and flourishing even though rich can didates do bribe poor electors, but the greatest nation in the world must become bankrupt and ruined if the poor could carry any system of taxation which embodies a principle that confiscates the property of the rich. Therefore, though I am far from saying that a bolder redistribution of seas is not required for the ultimate settlement of this question, I say that if that redistribution is to be based on a£6 fran chise, without any equipoise, in all the larger urban con stituencies substituted for smaller boroughs you will render the danger of a low franchise immeasurably more formida ble, and, though there may be less individual bribery than among small constituencies, will incur a much greater risk of that general political corruption which ends either in the spoliation of property or the loss of freedom. Yet, if you pass this bill, the member for Birmingham is quite right in thinking that an extensive redistribution of seats, which shall give the same £6 franchise to urban multitudes, must follow. " Give him," he says, " this £6 borough suffrage, and he will then fix a lever that shall lift about a hundred gentlemen round him out of their seats, and launch then, into the abyss of space." (A. laugh.) That is the very next of what he mildly calls " successive steps ;" and, when I heard him thus inhumanly predict the massacre of the con fiding innocents who were then actually grouped around his very knees, I turned towards those unfortunate gentlemen with a thrill of superstitious awe at the despondent resigna tion with which they seemed to hear the executioner an nounce their doom. (Cheers and laughter.) Well, then, I think this change will not make the representative body wiser nor the constituent body purer. An hon. member said in the former debates, that " this was an age of pro gress," and from that fact he argued that, because we had railways and steam, therefore we ought to have a con stituency. I don't see the sequitur. Steam and railways are produced by the science of the learned and the capital of the rich ; and I cannot understand by what principle of logic I am ti call that a progress which places our legis • lation at the mercy of men who are the reverse of learned and the opposite of rich. (Loud cheers.) The Home Se cretary says he supports the bill because the time has dome to snake some further progress in the same direction in -which we made so great an advance in 1331. I agree with him. But by this bill you do not advance ; you go back to the direction from which that great reform so resolutely de parted, you go back by one long stride towards the old scot and lot voters, whom the great Reform Bill was originally designed to get rid of,—go ba c k t o the very constituency which the experience of centuries bad proved to be venal . (Cheers) It seems to me that we thus engender the coarsest vices of democracy without any of its redeeming grandeur. Pure democracy, in the classic sense of the word, has con ferred on the civilised world too many benefits as well as warnings not to have its full share of enthusiastic admirers among the men of cultivated minds and generous hearts. But for pure democracy you must have the elements that preserve its honesty and insure its duration. Those ele ments are net to be found in old societies with vast deposi tories of wealth, of influence, of education ; they belong to the youth of nations, such as colonies, and when any gen tleman cites to us the example of a colony for some demo cratic change that he would recommend to the ancient monarchy of England I can only say that he has not studied the hornbook of legislation. (Hear.) The acute democrats of that sublime republic by which we are all unconsciously instructed whenever we discuss the problems of government, the acute democrats of Athens were well aware of the truth I endeavour before it is yet too late to impress upon you ; they were well aware that democracy cannot long co• exist with great inequalities of wealth and power ; they, there fore, began by ostracising the powerful to end by persecut ing the rich. (Cheers.) And I cannot forget, since I have referred to that noble commonwealth, which may almost be called the England of the ancient world, that one main cause for the rapid decline and fall of Athens has been traced by those writers, whose authority the scholars I see before me will agree to accept, to the adoption of the very principle you now commend to us—l mean the extension of the suffrage to the class who arc eager for political change and least accustomed to weigh political consequences. (Hear.) That extension would have been then justified by much the same arguments you use now. It could have been truly said that the extension was not very large in itsglf; that it still left the whole suffrage small compared to the wh o l e of the male adult population ; that it did not admit even the majority of the working classes, for the working classes there were chiefly slaves or settlers ; it would have been said, " Care you for your own countrymen ? Can you dispute the intelligence of any class of Athenians?" and, indeed, the huni blest Athe nian had facilities for education that we can't give to our wor king men. All such arguments would have be en very plausible —they are the argument s we boar to-day. But, nev ertheless, that extension did contri ve to give to poverty and passion a preponderatin g power over capital and know ledge. And the results were soon vißild o in a series of "successive steps"-,--in new tamperings with the suffrage in the same direction, in a plen tiful crop of eloq uent denas gogues outbidding Liberal statesm en ; in a system of direct taxation, which was unjust to the rich, and made th e r i ch either indifferent te.. politics or hostile to liberty; in' unwise expeditions called - fer by a brave and haughty population, who called for them the more willingly because the rich paid for them ; in the destruction of the fleets which had secued to the England of the ancient world the empire of the seas; in her subjugation by her nearest formidable rival, who pos sessed a genius mere military than her own, whom her free speaking had seriously offended, and who, under the con • duct of a chief of whom it was said—pause, and think whe ther the same can be said of any foreign chief ow living— " that where the lion's skin fell short he dit out with the fox's," while her or. tors still talked ab ) t " progress," while her factions still wrangled for pow„ sailed into the Piraeus itself, and gave her liberty to the Inds. (Cheers.) But why do we all hastily yet languidly agree to shovel this question away, to accept any measure of reform, though what it is to reform none of us could satisfactorily explain ? Is it not because we all do desire for the next 10 or 12 years to have done with the subject ? And I can well understand that gentlemen on both sides should feel eager this very session to try and effect a compromise which, though not final, will give a new constitution a trial for at least half the term of years which we have given to the constitution of 1832. To attain that object I should myself be pre pared to approve a measure really comprehensive and sub stantial, that shall unite a larger representation of num bers with some such securities for the representation of property as the Economist newspaper has suggested. For it is better, of the two, if we are to alter our house, to alter it so as to get rid of its chief inconveniences, than it is to pass the best part of our lives in the hands of the architects. One may put up with a great deal of alteration if one can say, " Thank Heaven, one is settled at last ;" but thero is no inconvenience equal to that of never being set tled at all. (Cheers.) Now, sir, is there one gentleman who can flatter himself for us that if we pass this bill we aro one jot nearer to settling the question of Parliamentaryßeform? There is not a single inconvenience of which educated men complain that this bill even attempts to mitigate; no at tempt to lessen the expenses of elections in counties—l sus pect that these expenses will be doubled ; no attempt to enfranchise the many enlightened and respectable men who happen not to be householders ; no attempt to lessen the chances of bribery—on the contrary, as we have seen, to increase them., Thus the next general election will not in augurate this Reform Bill, but rather record the dissatis faction of its own supporters at its crudity and incomplete ness, and their solemn pledges that they will continue with increased ardour to struggle—what for ? 'Why, for a new Reform Bill. (Cheers.) So that this measure is only the shoeing-horn to some fresh miracle of cobbling, in which, with weary feet and in " successive steps," we shall plod the same dull road, sure to pass our nights again under the same old sign of the Blue Boar. (Cheers and laughter.) I say then, as men of business, we do not get our considera tion; that when we have paid the bill we do not get that acquittance and receipt which can alone reconcile our doubts as to the justice and propriety of the demand. The mem ber for Birmingham says persua , ively, " Take this or you will get something worse." But if we take this do we not strengthen his hands to give us something worse into the bargain ? (Cheers.) Thus we go into committee on this bill with the conviction beforehand that it pleases no one and settles nothing—that, do what we can:with it, it will remedy no evil, produce no benefit, satisfy no class—not even the working men ; all we shall have done, if we pass this bill, is to place an empire, which rests its wealth and greatness upon causes so artificial and delicate that once destroyed, that wealth and greatness could no more return to England than they could ever again return to Venice, in the hands of men whose means of existence and facilities for education are —if a household test be any test at all—nearly one-half below the lowest standard of the existing suffrage in our towns. (Cheers.) So much for the Bill itself. A word now as to the time in which we are called upon to pass it. The Home Secretary says he hopes there is to be no ignoble re course to the Fabian policy of delay, while at the same time he rejoices that there is to be a committee of the House of Lords to consider whether that Fabian policy in England may not be entltled to receive the same praise that it received in Rome, where it was called, in classical expressions that have passed into proverbs, " The salvation of the State and the shield of the Commonwealth." And it does seem to me the height of inconsistency to concede a committee of the other House of Parliament upon thevery points that we are called upon to take for granted (great cheering), so that this house may stamp its approval on the Bill simultaneously with the publication of evidence which may show that if we had waited for three months we should have found that we had been legislating for remote generations upon data on which the Home Secretary would not have filled up the humblest office in his public department, or accepted a tenant on a seven years' lease for the smallest farm on his private estate. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) But, even if no such committee had been conceded, I would ask if there be not two very evident causes which render this special time peculiarly unfortunate for discarding a legislative body with which the nation has become familiar, and choosing another of which it can know nothing. Those causes are, first, the state of affairs abroad ; secondly, the state of our finances at home. (Hear, hear.) On the ono side all the signs and omens that indicate storms, on the other the gulf of an enormous deficit which this Parliament first sanctions and widens, and then, like many a private speculator, commits suicide rather than face the day of reckoning. (Cheers and laughter.) But let us first glance at the state of affairs abroad. The Chancellor of the Duchy said in the debate before Easter, " Affairs abroad were critical when you (Lord Derby's Government) introduced a Reform Bill. War in Europe was then imminent ; you did your best to prevent it, but that war soon broke out." Perfectly true ; and, as an ad captandum argument addressed to a £6 con stituency, the right hon. baronet's answer would be very clever and telling. But addressed to this house, as at pre sent constituted, it seems to me to be a poor resort to what schoolboys call the tea quoque kind of logic, and not quite worthy the fight hon. baronet's just reputation for ability and candour. The difference between the two pe riods of time is immense. The difference has become infi nitely more marked since the commencement of the season. The noble lord who is at once the introducer of this bill and the responsible Minister for Foreign Affairs has not only acknowledged but enforced that difference in speeches in the house and despatches to Foreign Ministers, which have been equally worthy of himself and faithful to the senti ment of the country; and I am sure there is not a loyal gentleman on this side the house who will not pardon and perhaps even sympathise with me when I say that, looking towards the chief under whom I once served as a private soldier, I rejoice to think that here at least I can equally defend my country's honour and renown. (Hear.) Well, then, I say to the Chancellor of the Duchy that his col league, the noble Secretary, will tell him the difference between the two periods of time—between the time when Lord Derby's Government introduced a Reform Bill and the time in which we now are—is immense. In a war un dertaken by France for the independence of Italy there was nothing that threatened England ; in the peace concluded by France can we say the same ? We see before us, as we saw then, a neighbour of gigantic power. He said then to us, " This power I will not use for one selfish object." We had no right to disbelieve him. Now we not only see the power but the use that is made of it, and events have shown that our neighbour says ono thing and means another. You now know the character and conditions of the French Em pire ; you now know that the peace of the world and the se curity of England hang on the nod of a single man, whose thoughts none of us penetrate, whose ambition none of us can measure. At the stroke of his pen the existing geo graphy of Europe cm. be ehanged as rapidly as in his own country a republic that vied with the American collapsed into a sovereignty as imperial as that of the Roman Cmsars— a sovereignty, like theirs, preserving the forms while it de stroys the substance Of liberty, and more dangerous to its neighbours than the ancient monarchies around it, because it is as little bound by their scruples as it is by their treaties. (Hear.) It has the young blood of the Revolution out of which it sprang, and inherits both the license and the force of the multitudes who feel themselves crowned in its coro nation. Thus it combines in a terrible union the arts and necessities of a brilliant demagogue with the armies and ob jects of a military chief. Such a combination is rare; it has never hitherto oc curre d i n th e hi story of the world without threatening the landmarks of its neighbours, and woe to the nation that it finds unprepared to cope with its twofold of with Ch the no elve, French e s l n . g ) ca hr tyrant,haa And t t L h o e sneo hi danger gh ItEw we dp i e ee l ar d l o s r l ( power over the multit u d e th at i t dazzles and the armies th i petty a titaridissimulator.b greater tte3o f geniusbecau se 'l'h " e which render even his defects popular and majestic with ' a the people that he govern s . H e h as capacities for organisation not inferior to those of his illu s t r i ous unc l e, and he n consoli datest.on both his ambition and his i n t e ll ec t b y an inflexible singleness of purpose, by a mixture of secrecy in design and p ro mptitude in action, which give the vi gour of Richelieu and the astuteness of Mazzarin to the l ea d er of 600,000 i. sol diers. Such are the character and conditions of the French Empire, involving nothing that would justify our taking one step either to court hostility or forfeit alliance, nothing that should make us depart from our position as an insular commercial population by seeking to excite a counter leagu e among the Powers of the Continent before they themselves invoked our assistance, but involving much that requir es unrelaxing vigilance as well as disciplined judgment on the part even less of Ministers than of the House of Commons. (Cheers.) And therefore it does seem to me a wanton imprudence to discard at this moment a legislative body whose fidelity to English interests and English hon our has been proved and tested, which certainly cannot be called worn out and effete, which is actually younger than most of the youngest members amongst us, which has not spent thirty years in acquiring some familiar acquaintance with its arduous duties, for a now and national legislative body, chosen by the minimum of political experience to meet times that may require the maximum of political knowledge. (Cheers.) Tho Homo Secretary says this trans fer of political power will be a security against invasion, and that Napoleon T. fell because ho was unpopular. Whet is meant by that argument and that historical illustration ? Is the Queen of England unpopular ? (Hear, hear.) Has the nation shown that it requires a £6 constituency to teach it the virtue of self-defence? (Hear, bear.) Or is it implied that the House of Commons needs amendment in one simplo respect to render it more disposed and more re solved to resist an invader ? (Hear, hear.) I deny the ungrateful imputation. (Cheers.) This poor house, as at present constituted, has borne us gallantly through a war which has tasked all our national virtues and showed us all our administrative defects. With an energy which had no signs of decrepitude it has adapted our armaments to the improved science of the age, and placed this country, in a state of defence which will need • • steady patience and self- Bacrifieo to maintain. Are we sure that that patience and NINO' APRIL 27, 1860. against the budget or the treaty, on which I have refrained from all other opposition than that of a silent, and, I will add, a reluctant vote, partly because of the sincere, and, may I say, in his absence, the affectionate admiration in which I hold not more the talents than the character of the Chancellor of the Exchequer ; partly be cause, though I doubt the prudence of both those measures, I fully recognise the generous and enlightened hopes upon which, whatever the issue, they may rest their vindication. (Hear, hear.) I say nothing, then, against the financial scheme of the Government ; but I do say to this house, which has sanctioned that scheme by so large a majority, that if we, the Parliament of Lord Grey's Reform Bill, have been the trustees of this infant constituency, it would surely be well if we could render accounts to the 'wed whose year of attaining majority we so impatiently advance, without presenting to its earliest consideration a debt or deficiency of £10,000,000 or £12,000,000, which we leave its inexpe rience to settle without an effort on our part to lessen its embarrassment or to warn its councils. (Cheers.) If we are to assemble this new tiers etat, it is a sinister coinci • dente with a very dark page in history that the appeal to numbers should be simultaneous with a deficit which ire have not the happiness to supply,and a problem in the science of taxation which we have not the courage to solve. But all this is for consideration, the consideration of the Queen's responsible advisers, and of the majority by whom the late Government were displaced, rather than for any exclusive or obstinate resistance on our part, which, if unavailing, would be obviously unwise. (Hear.) The Chancellor of the Duchy somewhat scornfully asked us " Why don't you divide ?" and answered his own question in the breath " Because you know you would have a majority against you I" In return, I ask him, not scornfully, but in a sober appeal to his love of truth, " Granting the fact of that alleged majority, does it not contain members more than enough to turn the scale in our favour if they voted according to the opinions they express in private ?" (Prolonged cheers.) As the member for Leominster said truly, if members in this house could drop their votes into that blessed ballot-box of which we hear so much, I think we might go to a division with the tranquil certainty that we should see no more of this Re form Bill. (Laughter.) Now, it is because there is at pre sent to be no division, because we would not, if possible, make that strict demarcation of parties which would not faithfully represent a real difference of opinions, that I hope I may, without presumption, solicit the serious reflection of those enlightened reformers who do not desire change for the mere sake of change. (Hear, hear.) I know, indeed, that there are some persons who believe that progress consists in always stopping on the road to alter the springs of the carriage in which we travel. (Laughter.) I know that there are some who think that man was made for no thing better than to pass his whole existence in the ecstatic contemplation of interminable Reform Bills. (Laughter.) " For that alone Hope spreads from goal to goal, And opens still and opens on the soul." But let us flatter ourselves that such amiable enthusiasts are to be found chiefly out of doors and not among us, to whom education and knowledge of the world may fairly be sup posed to have given the ordinary attributes of common sense. (Hear.) We cannot disguise from ourselves that, from the reasons I have stated, both at home and abroad, this is a somewhat critical moment in the destinies of our country ; one in which we would rather summon the highest wisdom, the ripest experience we could cbtain for our guid ance, than merge such wisdom as we do possess, such expe rience as we have acquired, in the arbitration of men who have never been hitherto called upon to judge of questions so complicated and grave, and from whom, if you once ap appoint them, you can never have a court of appeal. (Hear.) I do not say that the reasons I have urged as to the state of Europe or as to our own financial deficit are reasons that the Government could openly put forward for openly withdraw ing this bill; but they are reasons which their own sup porters might privately urge upon them, and they are rea sons which might satisfy their own good sense and justify them before the public if, having honourably fulfilled their pledge to introduce a Reform Bill, the bill was withdrawn on the obvious and unanswerable ground that it failed to give general satisfaction. (Laughter.) Nor do I consider that failure a serious reproach to this or to any Government. A Reform Bill, so easy to the theorist, is very difficult to the practical statesman. The hand of the true artist may well tremble when he applies the hammer and the chisel to the palladium of his country's laws. (Hear, hear.) I do not presume to think that anything I can say will have the least influence upon the Government, but they would be wrong indeed if they did not respect what may be said, or if not said, what they know is thought by their own temperate and tried supporters. (Hear, hear.) If however, you tell us that be the bill good or bad, you are resolved to persevere in it; that what we think its defects you hold to be its main principles; that you will not wait for the report of the committee you have conceded to the other house; that you will avail yourselves of the natural reluctance which the members for boroughs may feel openly to declare against those new constituents to whom, next December, you would condemn them to appeal—if that be the course which, as the Queen's advisers, you deem it your duty to pursue, then I can only express a fervent hope that the result may justify your reversal of all the rules by which the statesmen, even of republics, would rather seek in simi lar times to strength the hands of the executive rather than transfer to the wide circle of an unaccustomed multitude the nice and permanent adjustment of national finances, and the cautious preparation against perils which already alarm the boldest statesmen and menace the strongest thrones. (The right hon. gentleman resumed his seat amid prolonged cheering.) Mr. MARSH said ho had no hesitation in saying that he would not support the bill in its present shape. (Cheers.) Unless there was an £8 franchise introduced in committee instead of he would not give his vote in its favour. Sir J. FERGUSSON said that no one had risen to sup port the bill, or answer the objections to it. He complained that small boroughs in many parts of the country were re presented by two members, while towns having a large population, and possessing greater influence, had only one. Then, again, there was the inequality of representation. Take the West Riding of Yorkshire, to which it was pro posed to give two members. At the last election no less than 11,000 voters were polled, and yet in the present bill no attempt was made to have the large minority represented. Here an HON. MEMBER moved that the house be counted, and several hon. members stationed themselves outside the door to prevent the ingress of the absentees, but it was ineffectual. Forty made their appearance, hav ing left their dinners to take care of themselves, and the debate was resumed. Sir J. FERGUSSON proceeded—He thought the bill was an utter failure in its attempts to grapple with the present registration system. As they extended the fran chise, unless they protected the people from bribery and corruption, it would have been much batter to have left them as they wore. Mr. DENMAN said he cordially, fn the main, approved of the bill, and thanked the Government for bringing it forward. lie hoped that if the bill passed, and he believed it would pass, it would prove eminently conservative of their constitution in every sense of the word. Sir J. WALSH was of opinion that it was a proper course not to divide en the second reading, inasmuch as, if the bill were carried, it would at least have the effect of nailing certain hon. gentlemen to principles which they disliked in their hearts. Lord J. RUSSELL—It is agreeable to be reminded by the hon. baronet of a time when we were younger than we now are. The prophecies of ruin to the country in which he gentleman m a shouldd made to defeathv ereferred the bill of h i 83 has indul ge d, an d t h e attempts to show that wild democracy have is abo u t t o overspread the land, are exactly those which I w 2 satisfaction ow h surprises i rp t o r the I iee efforts a heard m a d e 30 years ago. (Hear, hear.) But that the hon. h me, for it is notorious that, since the passing that bill, the most use f u l measur • • es of legislation have from time to time been adopted. (Hear.) Our municipal corporations have been subjected to legitimate popular control • the question, which l e d t o continual bickering b tithe s clergy and their con grega ti ons, has been sa7tisfa e e t t wee riLl n s the e tied ; we have utterly abolish e d s l avery i n the Wesetiest we have completely altered the t enure o f ourlndian empire; wo have by the adoption of free-t ra d e measures, which am persuaded an unreformed Parliament would never have passed—(h ear)—inereased the wealth of the country. I will riot refer to statistical returns to allow how unparalleled that increase has Bean, and the flourishing condition of England, whether with regard to manufactures, commerce, or shipping. And while all this has been done the state of alarm in which the Government of this country was On stantly kept has been removed. Tn 1817 the Governmene of the day proposed the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, in consequence of the prevalence of dangerous conspiracies. In 1819 they proposed six different measures of severe Co ercion to suppress the people, who were then believed to be aiming at the destruction of the Crown and the institu tions of the country. (Hear, hear.) In 1830, not long be fore the Reform Bill was introduced, any one who travelled through the country at night might have seen fires blazing in the etackyards and houses of the farmers, and the pea- sentry were in such a state of discontent and insubordina tion that the Government were _kept in a state of perpetual apprehension. (Hear, hear.) And what has been the case since that time, especially durirg thz last few years? Have there been disloyalty and conspiracy, or general discontent with the laws? (Hear, hear.) On the contrary, the general feeling of the country has been the it of loyalty and content ment ; and the people, whether it lac the artisans of our ma nufacturing cities, or whether it be s the farmers and their labourers, have been enjoying a degree of comfort and pros perity not known to them before the passing of the Reform Bill. (Hear.) Therefore it was with surprise that I heard the observations of the hon. baronet who spoke last relative to the first Reform Bill. It .seems the hon. baronet and others believed, at the time that bill passed, that the settle ment it made could not be final. But has that prophecy been fulfilled ? Does the hon. gentleman mean to say that we are even now, 28 years a fter the passing of the bill, again in the midst of agitation? for if we are not again in the midst of agitation what becomes of the prophecy ? And if we are again in the midst of agitation, what becomes of the statement about the total apathy of the country ? (Hear, hear.) The prophecy was wholly misplaced—it was a mis take; it has not been fulfilled, and is not likely to be ful - filled. (Hear.) In listening to this debate, while I have heard many expressions of alarm and much eloquent de clamation, especially to-night, from the right hon. baronet who spoke early in the evening, it has appeared to me very singular that the gentlemen who have spoken with so much dislike of this bill, and with so much alarm, havenever taken the pains to reconcile the provisions of the bill with their alarm, or to show that their arguments followed naturally from the contents of the bill. (Hear, hear.) They seemed to think it sufficient to say that it is a bill which admits the poorest classes of the community to the franchise, and not only so, but that it gives into their hands the -whole repre sentation of the country. (Opposition cheers.) They have a perfect right to say so ; but what I have to complain of is that not one of them has attempted to prove it. (Hear.) We have had eloquent declarations to the effect that the poorest classes of the community will entirely overbear the other classes ; that the institutions of the country will in some degree be impaired ; that our finances will be injured, and that a great deal of mischief will be done ; but what has never been attempted from the beginning of the debate till now is to show that we have really done what is alleged against us—that we have either, in the first place, proposed to put the power of voting into the hands of the poorest class of the community ; or, secondly, that we have given the entire representation into their hands. (Hear.) Now, it is worth while to consider a little, which I shall endeavour to do, some of the facts connected with this point. The hon. bart. (Sir J. Walsh) seems to be persuaded of the accuracy of the statistics produced by the hon. and learned member for Marylebone, and I cannot say I am surprised at it, for probably he has not examined the grounds on which they rest; but to any one who has looked into the returns made by the Poor Law officers and to the facts must see that the blunders made by the hon. and learned gentleman were per fectly ludicrous. (Hear.) The hon. and learned gentleman says that in the Tower Hamlets there are 67,000 persons who live in houses above the value of £lO, and that there are only 28,000 who have the right of voting; and that in Liverpool there are 39,000 who live in houses above £lO, and that only 18,000 have the right of voting. But if you pass this bill you would suppose, from what the hon. and learned gentleman says, that every one of these persons will possess the franchise. Now, in order to have it happen that all these persons should immediately become voters, there must be some alteration in the state of the law which this bill does not make. (Hear.) The law of registration that now exists is continued in the present bill, the only exception, as I am reminded, being in the case of the assessed taxes. (Opposition cheers and laughter.) In all other respects the state of the law remains the same. (Hear.) There is a deduction of 50 per cent. to be made for the persons living in £lO houses, and who do not enjoy the right of voting, and the reason is that there are various re strictions by which the £lO franchise is bound and confined. If any gentleman will take the pains to go through the re turns from the largest boroughs, including the metropoli tan boroughs, he will find what these restrictions are. In the first place, there are many men who at the time of registration have not been in occupation for 12 months, and who, therefore, cannot be put on the register. Such a man may remain in the house for a year, but in the meantime if an election takes place he will have no right to vote. There are many others who have not paid their rates—some from negligence, many from poverty, and immediately the registration takes place their names are struck off the roll. There is another class of a very numerous description whose rates are compounded for by the landlord. The landlord compounds because he then pays a diminished rate, but the consequence is that, the names of the occupiers not being in the rate-book, they are not included in the register. (Hear, hear.) But it may said, though it would be a most extraor dinary thing to say, that though not above 50 in a hundred LlO householders have the right to vote, yet between £6 and £lO a much larger number will be placed on the roll. The very contrary, however, will be the case. There will be fewer, for those living in houses between £6 and £lO arc a poorer class of people. (Hear, hear.) Many of them will not pay their rates, and they are much more likely to go from one town to another, and so be often changing their residences. (Hear, hear.) All these were left out by the hon. and learned member for Marylebone. He does not seem to have taken them at all into his consideration. It was our endea vour at the time of the Reform Act to give the right of voting to householders who might represent the ancient right of voting. I heard the hon. and learned member for Dorsetshire—to whom the hon. baronet gave the palm of having struck the heaviest blow at the bill—l heard that hon. gentleman say that we were endeavouring still more to separate representation from property. There was once in this house a very learned gentleman, as learned a person probably as the hon. and learned gentleman, though that is saying a great deal—that gentleman who was at the head of a famous commtttee in this house—l mean Serjeant Glanville ; and the report oithat committee was, that where ever there was not a right of voting settled by law or char ter of the place the common law right of England entitled every person paying scot and lot to vote. Did Sergeant Glanville think that he was separating representation from property ? Did he, or those who acted with him, believe that they were injuring property or its representation by what they, so did ? On the contrary, these men were the founders of the liberties of England. These were men who thoroughly understood our institutions, and they said that scot and lot was the common law right of this country. But not only was this the plan of Sergeant Glanville two centuries ago, but at the end of the last century the Reform Bill proposed this plan that 400 me ushers should be elected in different electoral divisions of the country by all house holders paying scot and lot. Thus after so long a time the principle of householders paying scot and lot was acknow ledged by the authority of Lord Grey. When we were en gaged in framing the Reform Bill it seemed to us that there had been that change in the manners and habits of the country that it could not be said that every man paying scot and lot was entitled to the frauchise—that great numbers of them were not substantial householders as householders were two centuries ago—that many of them were in a state of poverty, and more especially as the payment of scot and lot, which was the payment of the poor-rate, taking place at the time of the election gave room to a great deal of abuse, the candidates generally paying the rates at that time. We therefore proposed that this household suffrage should be accompanied as of old by the obligation to pay poor-rates, that that obligation to pay poor -rates should be ascertained at the time of the registration fixed in July, and that no person should be entitled to the franchise unless ke occu pied a house of the value of £lO. Well, we sometime after wards—at least I, as a member of the Government—con sidered that there were many reasons why we should reduce the money-value of the franchise. In the first place I think the committee who framed the Reform Bill were very prudent and cautious not to place the franchise too low. We considered that if we placed it too high it might not be very difficult, or at least not impossible to reduce it ; but if we fixed it toy low that would be an error which could net easily be redressed. We therefore placed the franchise high in fixing £lO as the qualification—perhaps it was un reasonably high ; but, in the next place, there had been a very considerable change in the condition of the house holders of this country. By various measures that had been introduced they were placed in a state of great comfort, education had made great progress, the taxes which immediately fell on them had been very much reduced. There were, therefore, persons with houses much under £lO who were entitled to the franchise by their property and their intelligence. Now I have heard much said—indeed the greater part of this debate on the other side of the home, has been conducted on the principle—that no extension of the franchise should be allowed to reach the working classes. (No, no.) I think the- representation generally has been that the working classes are entitled to all our respect, but they are very poor—the working classes are persons whose good qualities we exceedingly esteem, but they are very ignorant—the working classes deserve all our care and our affection, but they are very corrupt; and, being poor, igno rant, and corrupt, they are not entitled to the franchise. (No, no.) Gentlemen say "No," but I really have heard one speech after another to this effect, and that speech which on this point most excited my surprise was that of the right hon, gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire. The speech of the right hon. and learned gentleman the member for the University of Dublin, and many speeches since, have all gone to that point. They have none of them said that the working classes, having a very great share of the £lO franchise, ought to be more largely admitted to the right of voting—they did not propose an £8 er £7 franchise; but they objected to this particular franchise which does in troduce a great number of the working classes. Therefore I soy—and I can come to no other conclusion, and that is a power l f c tfeir‘ vfoe f el alrattilsahlhmsultiyeelsseistvhs(l were classes? TieatolebhirNorirokt(ee members. snni di 'Theye. apparent. odoes g Tr c iat‘boo l_ hanhe a pnul eddi s eloirno s rsnge:faNletini Edinburgh eeliheoin idweee a t ae s (iblinretlsse. shmti h trnho: et; o enf, iger, eiecd,errhibGontEsmefuaoptgs, Edinburgh speeches eelt a nohficci n sebhsothe : auire ' obtypi rssanoel p ginnatid. very serious conclusion to come to—that a spirit of distrust t t n t ie t daih( h e ' teco‘ that yr N lhht eoi aseseouvptesor; speeches impres sion. ought cf)bghi ruhetlre fuge in which the working classes might be allowed to vote some thing of that kind might be allowed, although he did not not to trust the franchise to the working classes—(cheers, ihsscerso, oeersatsfliayhwio gentlemen of l' oppo site.ca and no, no)—and that they ought not to be generally ad mitted to it. Well, let us look at what the right hon. gen tle-in-an the membe - r for Bucks said upon this question last year.. After saying that the bill they had introduced would admit about 500,000 persons to the franchise, speaking on the 7th of June, 1859, on the subject of another Reform __— Bill which might have been introduced by her Majesty's then Government, the right hon. gentleman then said— "The question of the borough franchise, howeveT, must be dealt with, and it must be dealt with, t oo , w i t h re f erence to . . . . _ the introduction of the working classes. (Cheers.) We admit that that has been the opinion of Parliament, and that it has been the opinion of the country as shown by the hon. gentlemen who have been returned to this house. We can not be blind to that result. We do not wish to be blind to it. We have no prejudice against t'2e proposition. All we want is to assure ourselves that any measure that we bring forward is one required by the public necessities and will be sanctioned by public approbation and support, and there. fore we are perfectly prepared to deal with that question o the borough franchise and the introduction of the workini classes by lowering the franchise in boroughs, and by actim_ in that direction with sincerity; because, as I ventured to observe in the debate upon our measure, if you intend to admit the working classes to the franchise by lowering the suffrage in boroughs, you must not keep the promise to the ear and break it to the hope." (Hear.) I must say that the right hon. gentleman went on to argue most fairly on the subject. He said you might contrive a franchise so that it would ap pear to allow a great admission of the working classes, but, in fact, rather restrict than extend the qualification. He said, if you deal with the question, deal with it fairly, and provide for the admission of the working classes. But, al though that was his opinion last year—although, speaking with the confidence of Lord Derby and the whole Govern ment he represented, as well as the great party of which he was the lealer in this house, he laid it down as a sub stantial proposition that in any Reform Bill to be intro duced you must have a reduction of the borough franchise, and by that reduction of the borough franchise he meant the admission of the working classes, how, I ask, is this to be done ? Let hon. gentlemen opposite, if they don't ap prove this £6 franchise, frame some other proposition by which the working classes would otherwise come in. (Hear, hear.) Some gentlemen, indeed, have said what I remember I suggested in 1837, that the proof of frugality, by a considerable deposit in the savings -book, might form a claim to the franchise ; but, although that would admit some, the numbers admitted would be so small it could not be said to be a substantial admission of the working classes to the franchise. What other propositions have they made, and in what other way do they mean to admit the working classes ? Depend on it, much as gentlemen have talked of the danger of passing this bill, suppose their anticipations were realised and no such bill as this were passed, if no other measure were introduced by which the working classes were to be admitted, whatever might be the feeling now, all that expectation which has endured for the last five or six years being then disappointed, the working classes considering themselves as the mark of stigma, as the objects of the distrust of this house, would be in a Very different temper from that in which they have been for the last few years. (Hear, hear.) Successive Governments have pro posed measures on this subject. The Government of which I had the honour to be the head, the Government of Lord Aberdeen, the Government of my noble friend near me ; and, lastly, the Government of Lord Derby, although they did not propose to alter the £lO franchise, have all intro duced bills on this subject of reform, and I own it is my opinion that, if you have a Reform Bill without a reduction of the franchise, that will be more perilous than passing this bill. Now, so far as thy; character of the working classes is con • cerned, it needs no eulogium from me, and I am of opinion that every gentleman in this house, although he may not wish that they should be the recipients of political power, will admit that so far as their conduct and intelligence are concerned they are deserving of the highest praise. My hon. friend the member for Edinburgh seems, it is true, to have a great distrust of them, and contends that they are not good judges of difficult political questions. (Hear.) But let me remind my hon. friend that one of the greatest political philosophers who ever wrote has said that it is re markable that while persons in general are not good judges of political questions in the abstract, they are able to form a very correct opinion with regard to the men in whom it is desirable that their confidence should be placed. Sup pose, for instance, that Mr. Huskisson had presented him self to the freemen of Liverpool, and had delivered a lecture on thehullion question, it is doubtful, although he was right in the views which he held on the subject, whether he would be able to get his audience to concur with him. The probability is, indeed, that they would have regarded his views as unsound, and that it was expedient that paper money should be abundantly issued ; but when the question was put to them whether it was likely Mr. Huskisson would make a good representative for Liverpool they had no dif ficulty in replying in the affimative, being aware of his eminent qualities, his perseveringindustry, and the general estimation in which he was held. I admit therefore, that if you seek to make people in general, be they £6 or £lO, or even £2O householders, judges of difficult questions, either of political economy or constitutional right, it is not impro bable you may find that they will come to a wrong decision on those points ; but if the question submitted to them be to whom they should intrust the privilege of being their representative, although they may sometimes make a bad choice—(hear, and a laugh—yet I believe they will, as a general rule, be found to make a good selection. I cannot, I may add, agree with my hon . friend the member far Edinburgh in thinking the cllnsfituency of that city the most enlightened in the kingdom, because I am of opinion that there are few counties or , boroughs in the country which would have rejected such a man as Lord Macaulay ; but, be that as it may, there is another point connected with the working classes which is well worthy of attention. It is a common error to suppose that they are always in a state of discontent, either with the in stitutions of the country or with the circumstances by which they are surrounded, and that they therefore seek to pull down to their own level those who are above them in station and wealth. For my own part, I believe that the poem of Burns called " The Twa Dogs" contains more philosophy on the subject than most of the speeches to which I have listened. After describing the poverty of the poor labourer in Scotland, he says,— "But how it comes, I never kend yet They're moistly wonderfu' contented." Indeed I cannot help thinking that the working classes take things more as they come than either the upper or middle classes, and that they are, whether from a spirit of philo sophy or a true Christian feeling, as a general rule more satisfied with their lot in life. It is not, therefore, I main tain, because they are discontented that we ought to refuse them the privilege of exercising the franchise. I now come to another part of the subject—l allude to the allegations wnich have been over and over again made without proof, that we are about to intrust to this class the whole repre sentation of the country. In answer to that charge let me take the representation as proposed by the present bill. It must] be borne in mind that there are a great number of boroughs and also a great number of counties which send members to this house, which are not at all likely to be swamped by that flood of £6 householders of which some hon. members seem to be so apprehensive. On referring to the returns, I find that boroughs, having a population of 20,000 return 137 member s ; and those having from 20,000 $ to 8,000 return 109, and that boroughs having less than 8,000, return not less than 87. Taking also the smaller boroughs having a population of less than 1,000, I find that no fewer than 111 return 172 members, which added to the 159 members which are returned for counties constitute a majority in the list of returns. No one, I may remark, can fairly contend that with regard to those smaller boroughs any very great change will be accomplished, or that property, so far as they are concerned, will be less adequately represented than at present ; for there can be no doubt that in them property rather than population is the prevailing influence, whether that influence be exercised through the medium of the landlord or the neighbouring squires. lof course quite concur with those who think that property and intelligence, as well as popu lation, should be represented ; but if any one were to attempt to frame a scheme by which the three should each be duly represented, I believe he must fail in the endeavour. The right hon. gentleman (Sir E. B. Lytton) who spoke with so much ability and eloquence this evening referred to the proposition of Mr. Mills, to the effect that a man of a cer tain degree of intelligence should have five votes and that another of greater intelligence should have seven or eight votes, as the case might be, and the right hon. gentleman very properly set aside that plan as one which it was not desirable to adopt. In the sentiments of the right hon gentleman on the subject I entirely concur. Mr. Fox said and I believe with truth, that if the wisest man who ever lived were to set about framing a constitution he could not invent one which would be even of a tolerable character. Concurring in that view, I, for one, while I am a reformer, and while I am desirous to improve our present political system so as to render it suited to the changing circum stances of the times, am prepared to stand by the old con stitution of the country. (Opposition laughter.) Hon gentlemen have been talking for so many nights of a new constitution that one might really think that this is a bill to introduce a new constitution to that house. (Cheers.) The Reform Rill of 1832 did so to a certain degree, because at one blow it struck off 157 seats. This bill takes away 25 seats, and of these 15 are taken from small county towns and given to counties. This is a change that makes N ery little alteration in the character of the representation. (A Voice—" Bravo 1" ) The general frame of tho represeno tation will remain very much what it has been. (Hear, hear.) Then we are asked, "But will you be able to stand there, and will not other changes be intro duced ?" For my part I think that the question leads to two very difficult problems, and I cannot say which is the more difficult. One is—Should we attempt to induce this house again to disfranchise a very large number of boroughs ? Any one who tries that task would find, as we found in 31854, that those boroughs, being no'. merely nomi nationboreughs and having a certain number of elpctors, and often vdiy independent electors, there would be such a resist ance on the part of the representatives of those boroughs as, joined to the objections of the Censer - at:dive party, would create an opposition to such a proposition that would be irresistible. (Hear.) Then comes another question, on which the hen. member for Birmingham and I very much differ. That question is, supposing you obtain the disfran- Okkeineftt of 60 or 70 seats, ad proposed in 1854, how are they to he distributed ? We proposed in 1844, that a great number—l think 47 or 48—should bo given to counties. We likewise proposed, both with regard to counties and cities, that where a third member was given the minority should have the power of electing him. lam not going to argue that question ; but that was a representation perfectly safe, and there was, at all events, in that proposition no ex cess in the line of democracy. But that would have caused _ a great struggle, and if any one should now propose to give those seats to the counties all those hon. members who re• present the great industrial centres of the north of England would propose that the greater proportion of those seats should be given to towns. Ido not wonder that they should make that proposal; but it would 'cause a very great struggle, and would be very difficult to carry. For these reasons we have not attempted any such changes in the present bill. But we do not disguise from ourselves that if this bill should pass, there would remain, wit!! retard to the greater proportion of the boroughs, and the whole of the counties, very much the representation that at present exists. With regard to the counties, we have not done much more than the house has already decided. The House of Commons has decided in favour of extending the right 'of voting for counties to houses of the yearly value of £lO. Ido not say whether that is exactly the best limit, but we found it already decided by the house, and no one will say that occupiers of £lO will form any very dangerous element in the representation of the country. (Hear, hear.) I think I have now shown that so far from giving the whole representation of the country into the hands of the poorer classes, the class of householders we propose to enfranchise are very much above the poorest class, inhabiting houses for which they pay rents and rates, and in which they have had certain length of residence. A proportion of these are not working then, and a great pro portion of the inhabitant householders will be excluded from this bill. With regard to Edinburgh, I have seen returns, from which it appears that the present:constituency is about 8,000, and that by a bill of this kind the number will be raised to 12,000. With regard to many places the increase will not be so large. In Edinburgh there will remain about 12,000 houses for which no votes will be given. I cannot conceive that this will be so dangerous an extension of the franchise as hon. gentlemen on both sides think. [An Op position Member—" Both sides 1" and cheers.] If it is found that we were right in choosing that franchise jor boroughs, let the house affirm it. If, on the contrary, hon. members do not agree with us, let some variation be pro posed. But I own I cannot look with any satisfaction upon the prospect of this house declining to legislate en this subject altogethei. (Cheers.) In committee any new clauses can be proposed, and that question of the lodger franchise may be very fairly taken. But do not be induced now by the absence of agitation to suppose that you can take this question up at any time and settle it when you please. (Hear, hear.) I have seen an exemplification of a similar faith on the part of this house, but in which they were cruelly disappointed. Every one thought that the Catholic question could be settled at any time. It was thought very well that there should be a majority of five one year in favour of the Catholics, and the next year a majority of four against their claims. But there came a time when the country was close on the borders of civil war, and when yielding the Catholic claims was capitulating to a superior force—(hear, hear)—and many of those benefits which Mr. Pitt desired to derive from the settlement of this ques tion were entirely lost to the country in consequence of the delay. Well, it was thought that the corn laws could be settled in the same way. It was thought, too, that the first Reform Rill could be settled at any time, and the cense quente was it was settled in the midst of agitation. Who will assure you that events not now foreseen and that cannot be foreseen may not happen to make this a question most difficult to settle ? (Hear.) I remember that when, before the first . Reform Bill, I proposed that Manchester, Bir mingham, and Leeds should have members, that motion was rejected by a considerable majority. This house and the Government of the day thought that they could settle any such claims at any time, ani that Manchester, Bir mingham, and Leeds might continue without members for 20 or 30 years more. But there was a revolution in France that contributed, not to cause the opinion in favour of Parliamentary reform, but the agitation ori the subject, and which fed the flame of that agitation until it got to a dangerous height. If you put this bill off to next year or the year after; for the sake of the census, who will tell us what the circumstances may be under which we shall have, to legislate upon this question ? (Oh I oh I) The hon. member treats this suggestion with great ridicule and con tempt, but I remember saying'at a quiet time, in 1825—the metaphor was not a very good one, but it expressed my feel ing—" that if Parliamentary Reform did not flow on with the majesty of the river it would come on you with the madness of the torrent." Then came the riots at Bristol, and the Castle at Nottingham was fired, and you began to think that the time had really come to settle this question. History will tell you, and may you reflect on that history. that it would have been better if ten years before or five years before these events, the question of Reform had been settled. It would have been better if prudent mea sures had been taken, if the franchise had been gradually ' enlarged, and if that measure of Reform had been carried by general consent, instead of being an object of such hostility and violent agitation. (Hear, hear) In the belief that we can now legislate safely on this question her Majesty's Government has introduced this Reform Bill. The right hon. gentleman the member for Bucking hamshire told you last year that it wo.a right to admit the working classes to the franchise; that you should not attempt to hold them in a state of dependence ; that, with regard to them, you should not " keep the word of promise to the ear and break it to the hope. (Hear, hear.) Mr. DISRAELI—You have not read the extract cor rectly. Lord J. RUSSELL—I have read every word of the pas sage. DISRA.ELI—No ; read what follows " hope." Lord J. RUSSELL—" When lowering the suffrage, it should be done in such a manner as completely to effect the object consistently with the maintenance of the institu tions of the country." (Cheers from the Opposition.) Well, I say that xe l in proposing to lower the suffrage, believe that we shall satisfactorily and completely effect our object; that is our opinion ; the right hon. gentleman has another way of maintaining the institutions of the country; but I think we are as well entitled to be thought anxious to maintain those institutions as Lord Derby or the right hon. gentleman. (Cheers.) We proposed the Reform Billin 1831, and Lord Grey advised his Majesty to declare in the speech from the throne that a measure of Reform was proposed with regard to the House of Commons that would respect and preserve every portion of the Constitution. Was not that promise kept ? (Hear.) I have shown how well it was kept. I have shown that the institutions of the country are stronger now than they were in 1831; does the right hon. gentleman deny that ? Then, if we have kept that promise and have maintained those institutions, examine this Bill ; examine it as much as you please, and if you find anything dangerous in it alter that part of the measure. But my belief is that the Bill tends to preserve our institutions; and this I think above all, that if you find there is a numerous class that has advanced in in telligence, wellbeing, and comfort, and is fitted to possess the electoral franchise, it is an injury, not so much to them as to yourselves and the institutions of the country, if you exclude them from it. (Hear, hear.) I remember well the homely and forcible expression of the hon. mem ber for Oxfordshire last year; if you draw a " hard line," and will have a £lO franchise and nothing below it, I think the "ugly rush" he spoke of may very possibly come to pass. I hope, therefore, that you will, by • enlarging the franchise, strengthen the institutions of the country, and, by admitting a larger class to the exercise of the suffrage, give those institutions an increased safety. (Cheers.) On the motim of Mr. BENTINCK the debate was then adjourned. THE SUN, LONDON, self-sacrifice will equally characterise the new constituency and their new representatives? (Hear, hear.) No doubt we shall have members just as anxious for what is called the honour of the country, who will make high sounding speeches against truckling to absolute sovereigns, and insist on the right of the House of Commons to become the gar rulous confident of every secret which cabinets would keep to themselves. (Laughter.) But will the new represen tatives of the new constituency be as provident of practical defences as they may be lavish of verbal provocatives ? I (Cheers and laughter.) Will they as readily submit to the taxation which is necessary to self-defence, so long as the world shall see wars commenced for the propagation of ideas and peace concluded by the acquisition of domains (Loud cheers.) Sir, it is possible that they may possess all such requisite qualities in a higher degree than ourselves and our constituents ; bui; at least there is a doubt the other way, and, seeing that doubt, it would be no such great in felicity if at a juncture so critical we could be contented to let well alone—if we ceuld defer putting this great nation into the lottery of chance until we could see more distinctly whether the goddess who presides at the wheel be indeed the Fortune who smiles upon peace and commerce, "domi- na cequoris," or rather that more terrible deity, " cuncos man is gestans aena," whose attributes are calamity and war. (Hear) But still mere do I think it would have become this Parliament to remit to its successor a less formidable balance-sheet of deficit and revenue. I say nothing here PAPER DUTY. The debate on the third reading of the Paper Duty B: was postponed till to-morrow (this day.) SIR J. BARNARD'S ACT. The adjourned debate on the second reading of this b] was also postponed. CUSTOMS BILL. This bill went through committee with some verba' amendments. The Common Lodging-houses (Ireland) Bill wen, through committee. _ _ _ Mr. ADDERLEY also obtained leave to bring in a bill to provide for the eduoat!on of children in manufactories, or other regular labour. The hound adjourned at half-past twelve o'clock. [ADVERTISEMENT.] —Holloway's Ointment and Pills.— Female Complaints.—Climate, fashion, and neglect hurry thousands of our daughters prematurely to the tomb, each and all of whom would still have been their parents' pride had Holloway's remedies been applied without delay. On them all may rely for restoring health when natural functions are suspended or morbidly sluggish. Under the genial influ-: ence of Holloway's preparations beauty, vigour, and vivacity are rekindled. The ointment should be well rubbed over the kidneys and bottom of the stomach every night on going to bed. The effect will be marvellous. Eight or ten pills should be taken nightly for some little time while using the ointment, in order to purify the blood, cleanse the system, and correct all obstructions. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—It is ever a pleasing duty for a journalist to introduce to his readers some discovery calcu lated to benefit that vast portion of our fellow creatures which has the strongest claims upon our sympathies. It is with this feeling that we call the attention of invalids to the following extracts from Du Barry's interesting report of cures without medicine of indigestion (dys pepsia), flatulency, constipation, nervous, bilious, and liver complaints, cough, asthma, consumption, and debility by Du Barry's Revalenta Arabica Food : Cure No. 52,422—Bridgehouse, Frimley, 3d April, 1E54. I have suffered these 33 years continually from diseased lungs, spitting of blood, liver derangement, deafness, sing ing in the ears, constipation, debility, shortness of breath and cough, which ave been removed by your RevalentaiArat, Arabica. My-lungs, liver, stomach, head, and ears are al to o gh all y hearing perfect, ' and my recovery is a marvelbe merchant. my acquaintances. James Roberts, En tins, at ls. 6d. ; Ilb., 3s. ; 21b., ss. 9d ti . al ; 51 r b r e . oe l p 2s t . o ; f 1 p 2 o l s b t ._, 265. The 101 b. and 121 b. tins carriage free, t cf office order. Du Barry and Co., 77, FOrtnum, Mason, and Co., 18,, 3 9 P iccadilly;Alibis,6o, Regentreet, London; Gracechurch-street ; 4, Ches.pside ; b dA a 6l r os i:l o B l a s ita o h , 0 1: 1 ) )p x sug.a f ti ci . Oxford street; ; 330 and 451, Strand ; g ad. street ; 85, Tottenham-court- Edinburgh, Bewley and Draper ;at Edmb Raimes and C at Liverpool, Nixon and Thew; at I ‘..lan a : a .. ti hetr, Sharp a c n . : Scott; at York Rahnes Blanchard, Cu.; at.boutk smpton, Randal) and Boil THE ATTEMPTED COURT OUT. The following letter appears in a contemporary : Sir,—An attempt to count the house out this evening deserves an explanation and exposure. At the close of an hour and a half of declamation from Sir Bulwer Lytton, the house thinned, and the majority who had listened to him went to dinner, some to their homes or club; and others to the dining-room of the house. The members pi e sent were reduced to about or below forty, the number required to make a house. The Tory benches were deserted for the purpose of making a " count-out" possible. When the bell rang to an nounce that the house was being counted, there was of course a rush from the dining-room, where some forty or fifty members were at dinner. But it was not easy to get into the house. A party of Tory members, lords not noble, and members in this not bonourf.ble, were in the lobby, and not only shut the outer door, but forcibly kept it shut: It required the utmost force and violence to obtain an entrance, and members who succeeded in getting inside were assailed in the most offensive manner. One member was struck with great force in the side, and a member of the Government was for some time jammed in -the doorway in immi nent danger of personal injury. Among the members of the Tory party engaged in these disgraceful proceedings, I noticed Mr Baillie Cochrane, one of the members' for Honiton, Lord Robert Montagu, member for Huntingdon- shire, and others. icir. Baillie Cochrane may con sider himself as one of the members doomed by the Reform" Bill under discussion ; and Lord. Robert Montagu, in bis speech the other night against the bill, spoke of the bill as a measure that would give power to the scum of the country, and the words " clown" and " boor" were on his lips, when dis cussing the claims of the working men of England to a share in the Parliamentary franchise. , If the middle clases of England, and those of the working classes who are:to be enfranchised by this bill, could see the means taken by the Tories in the house to prevent the passing of this bill, they would be more than ever convinced of the necessity of a thorough reform of the House of . Commons. — Yours respectfully, M.P. House of Commons, April 26, 1860. AQUA TICS. GREAT PAIR-OARED RACE FOR MR. BEL FOUR'S PRIZES. ' The final heat of the great pair -oared race, for a pair of silver goblets, given by Mr. Belfour, came off yesterday afternoon, and was umpired by Messrs. Playford, Casa major, and several other members of the London Rowing Club, under whose management the race was conducted. The Venus accompanied the race, and was well filled with company, besides whom a large number of spectators assembled along the towing path, Hammersmith-bridge, and in draft of various descriptions on the river. The dis tance was from Putney to Hammersmith, and the following was the result : Messrs. Shirreff and Burgess (London Rowing Club) 1 Messrs. Bryant and Bucknall (West London Rowing Club) Messrs. Jervis and Wilson (Kingston Rowing Club) West London took the lead, Kingston going on second, but at Craven Cottage Messrs. Shirreff and Burgess gained the lead, and ultimately won by two lengths. There was A foul opposite Finch's, but it was over-ruled. COUNTRY MARKETS. MANCHESTER-Arßii 26. Little business doing in wheat, at late rates. Flour WAS steadily inquired for, and in some cases easier. Oats ld to 2d per 451bs dearer, but oatmeal sold slowly at last week's currencies. Indian corn and beans 6d to is dearer. BIRMINGHAM-APRIL 26. At to-day's market barley was at no advance in value, but less in request. Oats 6d per qr dearer. Beans firm. Peas is dearer. LOUTH-APRIL 25. There was a fair business doing in grain to-day, wad prices were generally about last week's quotations, via., wheat, red and mixed, old and new, 49s to 53s per qr. ; white, 575. Oats, 21s to 245; beans, 42s to 455; barley, 33s to Ms. BOSTON-APRIL 25. We had a fair supply y of wheat from the growers t 5 day, the demand for which was less active, at a decline of Gd to is on late prices. Barley a small show, and demand slow. Beans a short show; and prices tending upwards• Oats at a trifle more money, and peas unaltered. MARKET HARBOROUGH—APRIL 24. There was a very large show of wheat, which met $ slow demand, at barely late rates. White wheat, 52s to 56s ; red, 403 to 48s per 36 stone. Barley, old, 36s to 405; new 26s to 32 5 . Oats were less sought after, at 24s to 340 per ' 24 stone. Beans (old), at 36s to 40s ; new, 34s to 4 01 per 38 stone. PLYMOUTH—APRIL 23. The busine s was slow to-day. Prices for wheat firm; barley scarce, and at late prices ; eats unchanged. A fair attendance at market.. The quotations are—English white wheat, 65s to 56s ;. red, 53s to 64s per qr ; French do., 460 to 46s ; grinding barley, 30s to 32s ; oats, 24s to 26s ; iUld flour, fine, 39s to 40s ; seconds, 37s to 38s. EDINBURGH GRAIN-APRIL 24. Wheat on the top le Od down average 2s Id up. Barley on the top 2s Od . dovrn average Os 3d up. Oats on the top Os 6d up ... average Os ld up.' Beans on the top le Gd down average Os 4d does• Averages per Impgrial quarter. Wheat.... Barley . 2 0 7 10-12ths Oats .l 11 6 5-12ths Beans .. 2 8:, 0 7-12th. Total Supply and Sales. Wheat ... 753 qrs Sold 718 qrs 8ar1ey........ 479 qrs Sold 258 qrs Oats .1708 qrs Sold 971 qrs Beaus 152 qrs Sold 104 qrs DERBY SMITHFIELD—APRIL 23. There was a better supply of fat beasts to-day, witil a full attendance of buyers; the demand was good, at 1 0 advance in prices. Sheep were badly represented, but the sale was animated. Fat and store calves were plentifu l. Fat pigs in small supply. Beef Mutton ... Bd to 9d Pork Lamb Od to Od Rough fat, is Od per dto stone. Hides, 31d to 51d; 7a to Od. FOREIGN MAIL PACKET LIST. In the following table E signifies that letters are despatched by evening mails from London, and M by morning mad!• 1 4 1911 g DESTINATIONS. . Despatch Port of • Mail of Mails. Despatch. due. ---- Australia and Mauritius, via Southampton May 12, M Southamp. May 10 Ditto, via Marseilles Bahamas and Havana via New York May 12, B Liverpool.. May 10 C ca a p na e d o a t , &Geo. Goode, C H a o n p a e ln A . pckt) scen April2s, E Liverpool.. April 2 5 sion, and St. Helena May 5, E Devohport May 3 China, Penang, and Singa pore, via Southampton May 4. 11l Southamp. MaY 2 „, Ditto, via Marseilles ,April26, E April .1 Gibraltar, via Southampton.. April 27 ,M Southamp. April ~." Honduras and Blewilelds .... May 17, M Southamp. April xl , India (Calcutta) and Ceylon, via Southampton May 4, M Southamp. May 2 ) Ditto, via Marseilles Ditto, via Marseille s India (Bombay), via South ampton May 4 Lisbon, Brazils,Bue nos A yres, and F. Islands A m p a r yil 2 3 7; /1 Southamp. Apri l s May 9, M Southamp. Mlii 6 Malta, Lisbon, Vigo, and O por t o Ap r il 27 .M Sauthamp. MO 1 Egypt, and Aden, via ril 25 Southampton April l 7,M Southamp. AP , ‘,6 Ditto, via Marseilles Mexico and Havana Newfoundland April27, E Liverpool.. United States and British N ir . 2 America (by British packet) April2B, E Liverpool.. iiia , Ditto (by U. S. packet) —.. April.2s ,E Southamp. --- West Coast of Africa, Ma deira, and Teneriffe April 23 B Liverpool.. West India, California, Vene zuela, Chili, Peru, Grey- Ma l 4 town, New Granada. dm ,May 2 , M Sou th amp. IMay 2, M 1 • w WOMEN AND WATCHWORX.—Mrs. GrUtiu.7 „ would doubtless turn up her nose at intelligent and edn cated Englishwomen directing their attention to a m ach" . nical nical trade, forgetting that shirt-making also is a inecu'h nical trade, and that the needle and thimble are as roe: tools as the fine implements used in watchmaking; rut i : and much coarser tools too. In Switzerland 20,000 ivol:%; in this trade earn on an average 15s. a week, which go" far in their country as double that sum would in L ondon. Here, then, is an occupation that, to intelligent womf!lif would prove a perfect mine of wealth, and most heartily: we trust that Mr. Bennett will be successful in his atterai l to .open it to the intelligence of women. It is in vain dr.. we sing the Song of the Shirt and get up annual subscrlP_ tions for down-stricken sempstresses. It is in vai n that tie ° hold midnight tea meetings to tempt Lorettes from tho_ evil courses; as long as we shut young women out fr honourable means of employment, so long will their bibT "" , be a drug in the market, and their d e g radation but facile a matter to the tempter.—Once a Wick. BIRTHS. Byrio.—On the 25th inst., at 7, Hamilton-place, Picca dilly, the wife of the Hon. and Rey. Francis Byng, of I/ son. a 2 lough i ns t t e . r , at 14, Hereford .street, the S A L L a T d O y U N s a . AiAltlt 1 AGES. de B BRE SFORD-lIARCOURT. - On the 24th inst., Georg e la Poor B e resford, eldest son of th e Bi s h o p of l'iltno7: rto O u n n, th of e to Mary Annabelle, youngest daughter of the Rev. Vernon. Harcourt. SCOTT---MAGINN.—At T r i n ity Ch urc h, Padding 4 ..- -„., ' Scott, Esq., H.E.1.C.5,, t o Ell en on ly daughter o f late William Ma g i nn , LL . D . the - DEATHS. BALFOUR.—On the 24th inst, at Collinton Manse, 11831. Edinburgh, the Rev. L. Balfour, D.D., aged 83. CAMERON.—On the 20th inst., at St. Leonard's -on-Se!' Lieut.-Col. N. Cameron, late of the 79th Highla ndem aged 72. GRAHAM.—On the 23d inst., at Fareham, Hants" Co lonel W. D. Graham, late Bombay Engineers, aged LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO Y 017141112: of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sus Office, No. of Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in th e Q°21171 Middlesex. Friday, April 21, 1860. and t from and Hiatt( -from To th verti: Elam: TI( May : for is Thi on all when Five price of Ha The ft, Shill The FORI Frida The June The The of FR day, 2 Oth lingo Seal be iss Tic] be ha Exete The Sect tc CH don. — lo clo .rom 1 James Mr. J. AB candia perm added missio TH This I elegan with tl EVEN directi tion o Doors punctt the Cc meuts, RUE ekarg - e ter De nO, Ma Card note p stamp , forwar T Barrel Cases Ca showiT valuab of too Ave] appoin JOSE E, 6 1) 11 0 thecar above, Lees o of botl genes 111 Spiv The Also, 1 ments The (Gone] the Ui The regula Their Remo' ton— Offspr Their and a *prim Tiieir Cure 1 Cc CR A PI FOR I DEI D' Certif to app chron diarrl bility —Dr. land, In Enp4 21lb. tan nun) Stre4 pide,