The Sun. — London, England, 1867-04-13 00:00:00

PARLIALIENT HOUSE OF LORDS.-LAST EVENING. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Duke of Cleveland's Estate, Worcester County and City Gaols, and Swansea Vale Railway Bills were read a second time. PETITION. Earl RUSSELL presented a petition against the Clerical Vestment Bill. THE REFORM LEAGUE. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY said that he had to pre sent a petitioa which ho thought was important. It was a petition from the Reform League, signed by Mr. Beales and others, praying that their lordships would take the great question of Reform into their kindly and enlightened consideration, and would also protect the rights of regis tered householders and lodgers, and take into considera tion their right to the franchise. THE JUDGES' CHAMBERS BILL. The LORD CHANCELLOR proposed the third reading of this bill, and it was carried. THE VICE-ADMIRALTY COURTS BILL. The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the third reading of this bill, and it was carried. - THE TORNADO. Lord RUSSELL asked if any answer had boon received from Spain witb reference to this matter ? The Duke of MARLBOROUGH replied that up to that morning there had not. The house then adjourned till the 2d May. HOUSE OF COMMONS-LAST EVENING. The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Gateshead Improvement and the Wooltan Gas Bills were read a third time and passed. THE ESCAPE OF KIRWAN. Mr. DAWSON asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he could give to the house any additional infor mation relative to the escape from the Meath Hospital in Dublin of John Kirwan, a reputed head centre of the Fenian organisation, and whether any of the police force who had the care of the prisoner were in custody under the charge of complicity in the escape ? Lord NAAS said the statement that had appeared in the Irish papers was correct; the constables had been com mitted for complicity in the escape. The strictest inquiry was taking place into the whole of the circumstances con nected with the escape. He could not say whether Kirwan was the same person who had twice previously escaped from the police. GREENWICH HOSPITAL. lir. LIDDELL asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention had been directed fo a public let ter on the subject of the assignment of a portion of Greenwich Hospital to the use of the " Seamen's Hospi tal ;" and whether he had any objection to state the rea sons which have induced the Admiralty to select a quarter described to be the most unsuitable, upon sanitary grounds and general convenience, for the accommodation of sick and infirm sailors. Mr. CORRY said he was glad to have the opportunity of saying that there was not the slightest truth iu the letter referred to. (Hear, hear.) The portion allotted to the Seamen's Hospital was a very commodious and convenient portion of the building. It was known as Queen Mary's guar ter. TENANTS IMPROVEMENT BILL, Sir F. HEYGATE asked the Chancellor of the Exche quer whether,: considering the serious inconvenience to Irish members of being present in the house on Monday, the 29th instant, the first day after the recess, he would not consent to postpone the Tenants Improvements (Ireland) Bill to a more convenient day ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said ho re gretted that the arrangement he had made was inconve nient to Irish members, hut unless there was a general expression of opinion on the subject, he should feel bound to adhere to it. AFFAIRS OF SPAIN. Colonel SYKES asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in the case of a rupture with Spain, sufficient previous notice would be given to British shipping to enable thorn to leave Spanish ports. Lord STANLEY said he hoped that the contingency he alluded to would not arise. If unfortunately it should arise the Government would give the earliest information on the subject. THE EASTER RECESS—THE ADJOURNED DEBATE. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in moving that the house at its rising adjourn until the 29th inst., said with respect to the termination of the adjourned de bate, all he could say was that the question on which the debate arose did not arise from his side of the hous3. It was, however, the wish of her Majesiy's Government tha t the division should take place that evening. Mr. OSBORNE said he wished to interpose a question to the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exche quer. He bad seen a document of a very extraordinary nature, which two members of that house, the hon. mem ber for Swansea. (Mr. Dillvryn) and the hon. and gallant member for Dublin county. The document was to the effect that certain propositions hadbeen made by some mem bers of his side of the house to Col. Taylor. (Hear.) The document stated that Colonel Taylor had accepted the amendment of Mr. Hibbert, and that Mr. Disraeli and Lord Derby had also agreed to it. What he wanted to know was whether the matter had been submitted to the Cabinet. Mr. DILLWYN said it was quite true that he had had a conversation with the hon. member for Dublin county. It was with respect to the adjournment, and he had thought some compromise might yet be effected. He thought that without something of the kind was done the labour of passing the Reform Bill would be almost insur mountable. He had jotted down • certain matter very hurricaly in the lobby and shown it to Colonel Taylor, and he had not thought he was precluded from showing it to his friends. Colonel EDWARDS thought it was a most unfair attack upon Colonel Taylor, and he should like to know whether the hon. member for Notts had had the common courtesy to give that hon. and gallant gentleman notice of his intention to ask the question. Mr. OSBORNE said he had had the common courtesy to inform Colonel Taylor that he intended to bring the matter forward. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the motion to which reference had been made was quite un known to him. With respect to his having consulted with the Earl of Derby on the subject it was absurdly erroneous. (Cheers.) The noble earl, he was happy to say, was improving in health, yet he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had not thought it right to trouble him with any public business at pre sent. He very much regretted his gallant friend, Col. Taylor, who bad met with an accident that day, was not in his place, because, doubtless, he would be able to satisfy the house as to the part he had taken in the matter. He could not say how deep would be his regret if any word uttered in a private and friendly conversation was to be made the subject of a solemn point of inquiry. He thought the whole matter was nothing more than a mare's nest. (Hear, hear, and loud laughter.) Sir G. GREY said if the document was shown to mem bers with the view of influencing their votes, it was a matter that demanded the serious attention of the house. - Lord ELCHO said he should like to know why the hon. member for Anglesey, who-had been one of those who had seen the document, had not brought forward the matter instead of the hon. member for Marlborough Mr. 0. STANLEY said he was asked whether, in the event of its becoming necessary, he would rise in his place in Parliament, and say that he had seen the document. He said he would. (Hear, hear.) He was not shown the paper as a private document, and he considered it was used for the r urpose of influencing votes. (Hear, hear, and ironical cheers.) _ Lord STANLEY said her Majesty's Government en tered into the debate on the Representation of the People's Bill free and unpledged. (Hear, hear, and loud cheers). There was no understanding direct or implied with any member as to concessions. (Loud cheers.) The Govern ment remained perfectly steadfast to the main purposes of the bill, and he begged to assure the house would do so to the last. (Loud cheers.) Mr. GLADSTONE said the speech of the noble lord was quite worthy of him. (Cheers.) It was an open and can did expression of opinion that did him honour, and ad mitted of no mistake. (Hear, hear.) He hoped hon. gentlemen on his (the Opposition side) of the house would fall in with the general wish, that the vote on the question of prompt payment of rates should betaken that evening. (Hear, hear.) The subject then dropped, t a h n e d 2t h i e t wmasotioangrefoodr to.t REPRESENTATION the adjournment of the house to OF THE PEOPLE'S BILL. The house then went into committee o Mr. ROEBUCK, on rasuna:n.. the debate on cause 3, supported the clause as i,testooi4,llpiin the bill. His ()Neel. in doing so was to get for to es pion, which f ie E h he l w d as Reform Bill during the present s certain was not the object of brought forward the amendment to the thou R'i'o did not know the bitterness of Toss of office, b e t r i to us ` bi l m had never been in that position, but it scenic by to be the desire of those out of office to regain it jumping over the heads of those who at presentenjoyed the enviable distincti on . T o show that he was sincere in his desire for the passing of the bill, he should vote for the clause of the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Mr. BERESFORD-HOPE looked upon the bill as dangerous and democratic in principle, and predicted that the moment it received the royal assent it would crush out the middle class and Americanise our institutions. Mr. W. E. FORSTER a d m itt e d that, being a Radical reformer, and having been in favour of household suffrage at a time when it had few friends, he would have been compelled to separate himself from his former colleagues and to vote for the bill of the Government if it was in reality based upon household suffrage ; on the contrary, it would set up a rating suffrage. Mr. LOCKE defended the meeting in the tea-room (now called the " Tea Party' f ), and urged that if it had not been for the action taken by the 52 gentlemen who attended on that occasion the bill might never have got into com- mil tee. Mr. HUBBARD expressed the regret he felt at being compelled to vote against the Government, because he considered their bill meant household suffrage, and to that _ _ . he had an invincible objection. Mr. HORSMAN (who spoke from the front bench of the Opposition) owned that he was in favour of fixing the line at a £5 rental, and that in his opinion five-sixths of the house (including the vast majority of the Opposition) would be better pleased with it than with the plan of the Government. gr. HARDY, in an able speech, defended the measure of t& Government, contending that it would admit every man to the ;:anchise who cared to possess it, and who worthy of it by bearing the burden s prov ed himself to hd of citizenship. Mr. BRIGHT — Mr. Dodson , I a!" 1 1.1 not keep the house to a very late hour, but I should like to make a few obser vations before the debate concludes. The right a f,f`n• gen tleman made himself merry with the fact that last night the noble lord the member for Stamford and I rose toga ther, and that I was willing to give way to him, and ho was willing to give way to me, because we were engaged inthe same cause. If the noble lord has made any advance to my opinions—and I suspect since last year he has honestly and honourably made some—l can only say that I should wel come him not to this cause only, but to any good cause, as one of the most powerful of advocates that it could pos sibly receive. The noble lord and I have never exchanged a word in private ; but I take this opportunity cf saying that I listened when he was in office to a speech on a sub ject very foreign to this night's debate—on a subject con nected with his own office, the annexation of the territory of Mysore— and I say I have never heard a speech in this house which contained nobler sentiments, delivered in better language, and in a manner more calculated to im press the house. I regretted the noble lord felt it his duty to leave the Treasury bench. But if I may bo satisfied that the noble lord has approached me by a very little, I may be as much gratified, not by the small steps, but the large pro gress, that the right hon. gentleman has made since last year. If it were worth while to refer to the pages of Han sard, it would b 3 possible to show that there was scarcely a member of this house who on that occasion felt, or pre tended to feel, a greater terror at the admission of the £7 householder than was felt by the right hon. gentleman himself. But I will not reproach him or his colleague, the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I am only too happy to find they are willing to proceed even to the length of the measure which they have introduced, and 1 shall not break my heart if the measure, as it comes out of this house, should not take precisely the shape I should like; but I shall console myself that the past barriers against a just representation are broken down, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer and his colleagues have utterly repudiated the whole of the past with which they have been connected. (Cheers.) Now I shall ask the attention of the house to the precise point before us, be cause I am not about to disc uss this question as a matter of party. (Oh, oh, and cheers.) The Chancellor of the Ex chequer made a bargain with us at the beginning of the session, that it was not to be a party question for the over throw of Ministers. I shall treat it in that sense. Last night I was surprised at the speech of the right hon. gen tleman the member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley), because it was only three or four weeks ago when the right hon. gentleman threw out a hint to the house that it would be desirable possibly to alter the law of rating, and draw a low line excluding some and admitting great numbers. The right hon. gentleman (the Chancellor of te Exch al e quer) seized upon that hi nt, and gave a certain h c ordi ap proval of it; and 1 am not sure that my right hon. friend (Mr. Gladstone) has not been in some degree induced to take the step he has taken in .3onsequenee of the powerful support of the right hon. gentlem an opposite. (Cheers oh.) Now, sir, what is the amendment before the house, and ? It is simply this : It affects the borough franchise only, it proposes a very reasonalsle proposition —that every per son to whom you offer that borough franchise should be pl a ced on exactly the same terms, with the same facilities for obtaining it, and with t he same powers of enjoying it, that every other person shall have. It means that the present householder from £lO and upwards, and the house holder from £lO and as low dosvn as the house may go, shall be exactly on the same footing, and that the poundcorn o ve over t householderhe compound abovehoosehtlidershbelloiwh7lo. advantagen o ltmeans, in fact, that you shall not select from amongst your consti tuencies special classes for special privileges; but that, having determined who are the persons on whom you will confer the franchise, you will deal honestly, fairly, gene rously, and equally with them all. (Cheers.) But at this moment that is the state of the law, with scarcely any ex ception. Tho Reform Act deals in a certain way with the £lO occupier. There has been a difficulty with regard to the compound householder ; but that difference does not exist by law, but it esists:byahe practice of the overs:ers of the poor. I was told to -da y by a ge ntleman who was very profoundly versedin these matters that it was the law at present that all occupiers' names should be upan the rate book. If that be so, of course the instructions which I believe some time ago went out from the Poor-law board, that the rate book should be so formed, will be in accord ance with the law, and henceforth all occupiers will find their names upon the rate book, whether they aro payers of rates directly or of a composition rate. Well, what will happen ? I believe that the Reform Act intended that all those persons' names should be upon the rate book and upon the register, and that it was not Parliament which has kept them off, but lawyers' law and the decisions of revising barristers, and for a time the decisions of the courts. But note, the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Hardy) in his able speech never attempted to point out any real ground why the compound householder below £lO should be treated differently from his brother above £lO. I wish that to be explained to the house. I see no reason shown for any such exclusion, and I venture to say, in opposition to what he has said, that that exclusion and that differ ence must be held to be a direct violation of the principle of the law as it now stands. Does he deny that at the present moment the landlord's payment is, for the purpose of the franchise, the tenant's payment ? If there were any doubt on this matter, it maybe set at rest by my reading to the house an extract from a letter in which is quoted the opinion of two very eminent judges on the matter, judges who are especially eminent• on all questions con nected with appeals on the registration law. The writer of this letter is himself a registration agent in the north of England. The hon. gentleman here quoted the rulings of Mr. Justice Tindall and Mr. Justice Maule in the Court of Common Pleas, most emphatically laying down the doctrine that for the purposes of the franchise the landlord's payment of rates was the tenant's payment. Tho hon. gentleman went on to say : Well, I think that quotation from three eminent judges clearly settles what is the law now with regard to the matter, and I wish now to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer why he proposes to change it ? Has the law been found to be a bad law ? It was passed through both Houses of Parliament without any division, and it has remained uncomplained of and uncon tested in both Houses of Parliament for the last sixteen years. I wish to know then why, merely for the purpose of a large disfranchisement and exclusion, the present ab solutely satisfactory condition of the law is to be objected to and interfered with. Now, the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Hardy) tells us this measure will allow people to come in. I shall tell him how it keeps them out. He blames the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) for a bill with a line which makes no moral selection whatever. What will the bill of the right hon. gentleman do? It will give a vote to a man who lives in a hovel worth not more than £3 a year, if that man by any means pays his own rates in his own name—(hear, hear) —and it will exclude every man whose rental may be £8 or £9 value if he pays his rates through his landlord. (Hear.) Well, I think there is a capriciousness in that which will be found most unsatisfactory. (Hear, hear.) But let us leave for a moment the capriciousness with regard to individuals, and see how it affects towns. The honourable and learned member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck) made a speech the other night on this bill. Taking the gross numbers, be will find that in the town of Sheffield this bill would immediately give the chance of getting on the register no less than 28,334 persons—(hear, hear) — which I believe is 11 or 12 per cent. of the whole number —that is, immediately ander this bill in the first year of its operation, that is the number it would give a chance of being on the register. But what does it do now for the= in this respect—unfortunate town which I am permitted, in conjunction with my colleague, to represent in this house ? Birmingham is a town, as the house knows, con siderably larger than Sheffield. It is concerned chiefly in the same manufacture as Sheffield. I would say no more for Birmingham now than I have said for it before I repre sented it ; but I say there is not in this kingdom a town whose population is more industrious and, as connected with their industry, more intelligent than the population of Birmingham. (Cheers.) What does the bill do for the town of Birmingham ? It gives a chance of admission to 2,384 persons—(hear, hear) —and it excludes, under the Small Tenements Act—(no, no) —wait till I have finished my sentence—(hear) —it excludes, under the Small Tene ments Act, and under the various local rating acts, no fewer than 36,177. (No, no, hear, hear.) "No." I know very well what hon. gentlemen mean. They mean, of course, that to accommodate the capricious measure of the Government—(hear, hear, ode s oh) -• and the caprice of that measure is in no degree essential to a sound measure of re form—(hear, hear) —that in Birmingham they are to get rid of the Small Tenements Act, if they can make up their miud to that, and they are to come here in order to get Parliament to consent to a bill to repeal their local rating act. (Cheers.) I am not surprised that the member for Sheffield or the member for Old ham should think that, as regards that particular spot with which they are principally connected, there is something useful in this bill. (Hear, bear.) But I have a higher opinion of the people of Sheffield—(hear, hear)—and of the people of Oldham—(hear, hear)—than to believe that, for the sake of a special advantage to them in this respect, they would prefer that a bill should be passed which would do such grievous injustice to Birmingham, and the great majority of the boroughs of the kingdom. (Hear, hear.) Not longer ago than last night, when this matter was under discussion, I had an opportunity of speaking to three gen tlemen from Birmingham, who were here on a matter TI g SUN, I,OiWON, SATURDAY kV,E.LSING I w APRIL 13, 1867 not at all connected with this debate ; and one of them was an eminent officer of the Chamber of Commerce, and another equally eminent in connection with the adminis tration of poor law affairs. I asked them—for I didn't want to suggest to them any difficulties—" Would it not be possible for you in Birmingham so to alter your position with regard to the question of compounding for rates that you could put yourselves very soon in as satisfactory a position as is the town of Sheffield 2" They said they h - lieved it to be absolutely impossible. In that town the great majority of these 36,000 have never paid this poer rate at ;all directly. It has not been the custom of the town. And to ask them, for the sake of putting some of I them upon the register, in accordance with the require ments of this capricious bill, to destroy the whole fabric of the economic system connected with their poor rates, is to ask what the house has no right to ask --(cheers)—and we have no reason to expect it will be complied with if we do ask it. I think the house, and the .nembers for all the boroughs thus ad versely affected, have a right to complain that a bill has Neon introduced having this essential quality, that it must cause confusion in every borough when it has not been shown, and never can be shown, that the cause of ilia confusion is in the suiallest degree necessary to the satisfactory settlement of the question of reform. (Cheers.) Now, the house fa many cases proceeds very much upon precedent. It likes what is old, and when things are 30 years old they have got a sort of respectability about them. I have a great regard for the Reform Act, and the Chan cellor of the Exchequer sometimes speaks of it as if ho had a great respect for it. lam not sure that he is not ac tuated in his present Pours° in this session by a sort of envy of Lord Russell. As Lord Russell is the great historic authority on the Reform Act of 1832, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)hopesto become the vest laistoria name con nected with the Reform Act of 1867. (Hear, hear.) But the principle of the Reform Act is extremely simple— household suffrage, building occupation in towns, limited by the value of £lO, That defines exactly what is in tended to be done ; and nearly all the bills that have been introduced since that time have been based upon 0444 the same principle. That of the right hon. gentleman the member for South Lancashire last year was based upon the principle of a £7 rental. Nothing could be more simple ; and, as far as it went, it was felt in all parts of the country to be entirely clear and honest. (Hear, hear.) But while that bill did definitely, clearly state what it was intended to do, and could by no possibility deceive any body, this bill, capriciously proposing greatly to extend the franchise, does actually exclude multitudes of those who, if you touch this question at all, have a right to ex pect that their demand should be conceded. (Cheers.) The remedy that the right honourable gentleman the member for Lancashire proposes is ver y . much accord ance with the bill of 1832, and also with the bill of last year. He wants to establish a definite ground and a definite line, and to include the multitude, or a con siderable portion of them, that your bill must necessarily exclude. (Cheers.) Now suppose-1 put this to the mem bers of the Government who are really anxious, as I am, that this matter should be settled within the framework of this bill—suppose that this p oint were settled which now we are discussing—suppose that the personal rating were abandoned, and that this g reat exclusion were said to be unjust and were given up, and it was thought better to offer something distinct and definite to the approbation and acceptance of the people - well, then wo should have to determine what the franchise should be. And it must be one of two things. If the personal rating was given up, it must be either household suffrage—(hear, hear) — household suffrage pure and simple, or it must be some line—it does not follow that it must be the line of the right hon. gentleman the member for South Lancashire—but it must be some line above which, at present, tho franchise should be given to everybody, and below which, at present and may be, for aught I know, for another thirty years, the franchise should not be extended. The right hon. gentleman the member for South Lancashire has proposed in his clause a £5 rating franchise ; and the President of the Poor-law Board has made very merry, and expressed astonishment at that part of the clause by which he pro poses really to say that, wherever the variations in the rating are so great as to be manifestly defeating the object of the house in the bill—that where the real annual value is £6 or £6 55., in that case the suffrage should be given. (Hear, hear.) The proposal of the right hon. gentleman really comes to this—that it would have, as near as I can judge, the same effect in extending the franchise as if the house were to adopt the proposition of the bill of 18G0, and give to the country a£6 rental franchise. (Cheers.) Now, I am not going to chaffer about this matter. I believe honestly that, whether the line of rating was drawn at £4, with the rental at £5, or the lino of rating was drawn at £5 with the rental at £6, either of these measures would be a better measure for the country and far more satisfactory, and far more a settlement of this question, than the bill as it is now before the Houie. (Cheers.) I believe it because it would be honest and equal. This bill is not equal ; and if it is not equal it cannot be called- honest. And I believe more, that the proposition of the right hon. gentleman the member for Lancashire would include within the electoral list more completely and fully all that the Rouse proposes to take in, which is the best paid and most intelligent of the working classes of the kingdom. (Hear.) Now, the Chancellor of the Esc:limner, when he was making a speech in favour of his bill on the second reading in 1959, made use of an observation or two which I think he has now been putting into practice. fie said, "I am perfectly aware of all the tricks of management by which you can deal with the borough franchise." (Hear.) He said, " How you can manage to bo doing a vary liberal act, and yet keep out of the franchise the very class for which so many persons ex press so much sympathy." (Cheers.) And he added, " have all these plans in my pigeon-hole--(great cheers and laughter)—and could have availed myself of them with par feet impunity." I dare say the noble lord the member for Stamford (Lord Cranborne), if he were at liberty to explain his explanation, might tell us how many of these curiosi ties from the pigeon-holes of the right hon. gentleman had been laid before the Cabinet. But I suppose, afteefinger ing them all over, and weighing which would be the like liest to suit his purpose, the right hon. gentleman said that this, after all, was the cleverest dodge. (Cheers.) And he had a not altogether absurd vision that there were gentle men on this side of the House—enthusiasiic reformers who would be caught by a proposition of this kind. (Hear, hear.) There are gentlemen here who think that through this bill they will get household suffrage. I understand that the member for.Glasgew and some of his friends aro of that opinion ; and they think they may gat it, not now, but that this bill is so unpleasant, so unjust, and so insulting to those whom it excludes, that it would be what is called such a raw upon the public feeling and the public con science —(hear, hear)—that from the hour when the first register is made up under this bill, there will be incessant and irritating agitation in every one of the boroughs in which it does not now confer household suffrage. (Hear, hear.) That is the opinion of some of my 'friends on this side of the house. (Hear, hear.) Well, these gentlemen have n ot been remarkaNe for their acti v ity i n th e reform agitati▪ on. (Hear, hear.) I know not whether the member for Glasgow and some others would be intending to take what in ▪ America is called the stump, an d t o fi g ht thi s ques tion at great public meetings throughthe country. (Laugh ter.) If they are, all I hope is that they may find pro gross on this question requiring very much less labour than I have found it to demand from me during the last ten years. But now let me ask th ese h on . gen tlemen a question on household suffrage. lam for it--have always since I have discussed this question of reform, been in favour of that basis of borough franchise, but I am bound to admit that I believe three-fourths of the members of this house are not in favour of household suffrage. (Cheers.) I doubt extremely, if all the gentlemen on the other side were to leave the house, and the proposition were put only to members on this side, whether it would be carrried. (Cheers.) If that be so, I loan to the opinion that it is not wise or statesmanlike policy to take a measure partly because it is bad, and because that bad ness will be so unpleasant to the public that you hope the public will rise against it, and in the very next Parliament will batter at these doors, and ask this house again to obstruct its business and course of legislation to deal with the question you now leave unsettled. (Cheers.) And let mo tell these hon. gentlemen that when that tim does come these restrictions can no longer be maintained. (Hear.) That that day will come I shall take no pains to deny or to question. And when that time does come, the House of Commons will take the very step then which the right hon. member for South Lancashire asks it to take now. (Rear.) It will not g rant household suffra g e p ule and simple; it will say, as I have said before and with reason—because don't suppose that I have no sense— (laughter)—of what is good, and honest, and independent in a constituency. (Cheers.) The house will say then, as as I repeat now, that is not for the advantage of the con stituencies, and not for the advantage of the poorest and most dependent people, but greatly to their disadvantage, that they should be placed in the condition of constant temptation by being added to the electors. (Cheers.) Therefore, though I have ever been, and still am, in favour of household suffrage as the basis of your franchise, still I believe it would be wise now—and I am afraid that our population will not have vary much improved in the mean while as to make it unwise then—to draw a line a little above the pure and simple household suffrage—(An lion. member: No, no) —with the view of getting a better con stituency. Ido not know who the gentleman is who calls out "No, no." I have discussed this question as much as any man in England—(a laugh)—l have thought as much about it; I have a larger interest in its being settled now, and settled well, than any other man to whom I am speak ing—(oh, oh)--unless you put in the balance the interest which the Chancellor of Exchequer has in being histori cally connected with this question ; and, sir, I might speak of my historical connection with it. (Cheers and laugh ter.) Well, though the hon. gentleman calls "No, no," I believe that you might now settle the question by a low line. I would recommend a line somewhat lower than that of the right hon. gentleman. (Laughter and cheers from the Ministerial benches.) In my own bill of 1858 1 proposed that the line should be drawn at the £3 rate or the £4 rental. In speaking on this subject two or three weeks ago, I said I thought it was not necessary, if the house could come to any almost unani mous or general conclusion, that we should make a fight for the sake of a pound in this matter. But Ido believe now that you may settle it on principle, removing all that irritation on which hon. gentlemen near me are relying for coming down to pure and simple household suffrage, and you might give such a large and generous franchise to the inhabitants of the towns that in the lifetime of the youngest man in this house no further demand for the extension of he suffrage in boroughs would be made. (Cheers.) _ I know nothing at all, I have not an idea, of what is to be the result of the division to-night. 1 wish we could have no division—(hear, hear) —and that the Government could put their bill into a shape that would meet the wishes of the vast majoity of the nation. (Hear, hear.) But what ever the division may lead to, I state this with the utmost •uth and conscientiousness, that I have not taken a step in regard to this bill, or said one single word in connection with it, but what was prompted by an honest and most earnest wish—(cheers, and ob, oh)—that now at this mo ment —at this supreme hour of this question—it should be grappled with with the wisdom of statesmanship, and should be offered to the great body of the poople with that generosity which belongs, I hope, at bottom to all the great statesmen of this country. (Loud cheers.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then rose, and was received with cheers from his party. He said : Although, sir, wo aro in committee upon this bill for the representation of the people, there are two policies before the House to-night upon tho most important portion of the measure. (Hear, hear.) Though we shall be formally called upon to amend the principle of the bill w hich I have h ad the honour to and a counter proposition. the member for South introduce, we really are to con sider, upon the borough (Cheers.) The policy T a h c e o r n i gtrahtryhon.gentleman Lancashire proposes to draw a hard and f a st li ne , b e l ow which no person is to obtain the privilege or aim at the franchise. On the other hand, we have proposed a measure under which every inhabitant of a house, subj ec t t o condi tions which are in harmony with the habits and manners of the country—which I think are approved of by the ra tional discrimination of thepeople—should obtain the fran chise; and at the same time, instead of drawing this hard and fast line, we have said to all who aro not now in a position to avail themselves of the privilege w hi c h i s o ff ere d by the proposed 014 uses, we wi . ll take care th a t y ou s h a ll have the opportunity, if you &melt, of acquiring the right and enjoying the right. (Cheers.) Now,`sir, there are two schemes for the settlement of the borough franchise which are before the consideration of the committee to-night; for it would be worse than idle to limit our discussion to the few and scanty words which formally will be put, by you, Mr. Dodson, for the opinion of the committee. Now to the proposition which wo have made for the settlement of. the borough franchise upon a rating household franchise, to ba enjoyed by the occupier personally paying rates after a duo residence—to that scheme the right hon. gentleman has offered two main objections. He tolls us, in the first place that the principle of rating is new-fangled and alien I thought the principle of rating was one which was con sonant with the manners and customs of this country. It is recognised by the common law, it is recognised by the sta tute law of the past generation, and in theage in which we live it has been made part and portion of one of the most famous laws connected with our political history— the Re form Act of 1832. And therefore, sir, I was somewhat asto nished that the law of rating or the priuciplo of rating should be described by the right hon, gentleman as alien and new fangled. Tho s econ d o bj e cti o n to the proposi tion of the Government was that it was of too ex treme a character. That objection was scarcely consistent with many ob ser v a ti on s s ub sequen tly ma d e by him, with many inf erences w hi c h h e a ft erwar d s d rew, and with many conclusions which his friends approved and cheered, all of which seemed to express that the mea sure was of a very revolutionary and dangerous character ; but now, according to the ri g ht hon. gentleman, its prin cipal of jection is that it is too exclusive. Well, sir, if these are the objections which are made to our scheme, there are also objections which are offered to the scheme of the right hon. gentleman, w hi c h i s f oun d e d upon a hard limi tation; and a great objection to that scheme, I think, is, that it offers no settlement of the question. (Hear.) In 1859 we had to consider the question of parliamentary re form, and the result of our consideration of the subject was that it was impossible, with any prospect of satisfac tion, to disturb the £lO franchise established in 1832. We could not rely upon any such stand-point as £B, £7, or £6 ; and in that state of things it was absolutely necessary to leave the matter untouched. I am speaking of 1859—0 r to proceed to the point we aro now offering to the house ; we took the opportunity of ascertaining the opinion of the country, and we wore convinced that any attempt which would considerably diminish the bo rough franchise would be rendered impossible on account of the determined opposition of the borough constituen cies, and we felt the only caurs3 to pursue was to recom mend to il a rliament not to deal with the b orou g h fran chise ; but wo attempted to introduce a p ortion of the workin g classes by other means. We were, however, met by a great opposition, which seven years hav e accura tely ful filled. The right hon. gentleman the membe r for Cainewas one of the most busy managers in organising a party for reducing the franchise, and a resolution was passed which destroyed our Government, and did more injury to the Liberal cause than anyting before. The right hon. gentleman, who was not right hon. then. [Mr. Lowe—l bog pardon, I was right houourablel -(laughter) —the right hon. gentleman preferred to a high office—[Dlr. Low-1 was Vice-President of the Board of Trade in the former Government, and Vice-President of the Council of Elucation in the next] —we do not impute any improper conduct to the right hen. gentleman for the part ho took on that occasion. But the other eveni ng , w h en the Secre tary for India expressed views which were w or th y o f t h e i n tegrity of his character, .the right hon. me m b er f or C a i ne jumped up and imputed his change of opinion to prefer ment to high office—(cheers) — and therefore I am right in reminding the hon. gentleman, who is a re a d y cr i t i c, b ut not apt to bear criticism, that ho ou g ht t o cast some remin i scences over his own past car eer . (Ch eers. ) It is said that th e small rating Acts a re th e creations of the civilisation of the a g e ; but nothing has been s a id about jobbing vestries, rapacious landlords, a n d indi gent 'utbetn not e a ; i phtaesstegivingtheinrise to those Acts. Th ey were, how ever, n mego remarkable f or p u bli c sp i r i t, and Small Tenements Act would be passed i n this age. (Hear, hear.) But I cann o t b e li eve, w h en we are laying do wn principles and giving p r i v il eges w i t h in .the spi r it w hi c h h reference to electoral rights, that we oug ht to b e sca red from such a constitutional cours e by the shadows and ph antoms of those rating Acts. (Cheers.) I cannot believeif we legislate recommend in this bill, th a t many of the inconveniences will disappe ar . If th e principleste ru s n we n et e'pnropose be sound, they will asser t th e i r sway and overco me the difficulties which have been so much dwelt on. (Hear, hear.) If under the arr angemen t s made and attempted there are inconvenient and injurious consequences, why should they not be equally expressed by the multitude w ho would come in under the fixed scheme of the right hon. ge ntleman ? Surely there would be many more t h ousan ds of compoun d or q ua si-compound house holders than could be introduced by the arrangement we propose. Under our proposal you could have all the men you wish to get ; an d if there are men who do not take an interest in politics, and will not exert themselves to obtain the right, it is not desirable that they should do so. (Cheers.) It is assumed that the . bulk would be men en gaged in the honegt pursuits of !de who . do not aspire to political rights or to improve their .. condition ; but I do not believe that to be a just description of the majority of our countrymen. If we d o not keep out individuals of a wan dering character, who may be wanting in the civic virtues of method, regularity, and order, what is the harm of it ? Your object is to obtain the worthy, and there is no harm done in the unworthy not being able to enter. (Cheers.) Then it is asked, What is the value of these securities? and it is said that there will be a great agitation against them, and that they will be disposed of in a few years. It is a mistake to call them checks and securities ; but I will tell you why they will not be impugned, but kept in vigorous exercise. It is the persons who by submitting to these conditions will guard them as the conditions through which the privileges ought to be obtained. (Cheers.) When they find that by personally paying rates they have obtained the right to vote, they will look with extreme jealousy on the claims that may be pre ferred by persons who do not pay rates, and who do not lead the same regular life. Ratepaying is a condi tion of the Reform Act, and you have had agitation against rates by demagogues to excite the multitude, and organisations against them; but they have never been abrogated, because the common sense of the people has resolved to maintain them. Therefore, I think that the charges against what are called securities are perfectly fallacious, and made in ignorance of the character of our countrymen ; and there need be no apprehension that these conditions will be otherwise than observed and guarded by the very persons who by submitting to the conditions ob tain these privileges. The hon. and learned member for Exeter made some rather remarkable observations. He said he was entirely in favour of household suffrage, but that the country was not yet prepared for it; and having favoured us with his creed, he favoured us also with a cri ticism of our scheme of household franchise. He said that all these restrictions can't last, and that it will resolve itself into household suffrage. But how inconsistent this criticism with the hon. gentleman's creed. (Laughter.) If ho looks on a household suffrago as perfeA, and regrets that the country is not prepared, if we submit a scheme of household suffrage with restrictions which he is sure will break down, then surely he ought to congratulate us on our wise and consummate policy. (Cheers.) There was one objection made by the noble lord the member for Stamford, which was very severe on the measure which ho opposed. But it seemed to me that he proved too much. It might be a very good argument against the measure, but it was also an argument against all constitutional government. I will not notice some remarks made by the lion. member for Stoke-upon-Trent (I.lr.:Beiesford-Hope) for he evidently expected that I was going to make an elaborate reply to him. (Laughter.) I can aesure him I listened with the greatest pleasure to the invectives he delivered against me. Invective is a great ornament to our debates, but it re quires practice—(a laugh)—and, so . far as my honour able friend displayed his talents to-Right, I listened with the greatest satisfaction. All his exhibitions in this house aro distinguished by a drollery which charms me, and when he talks of Asian mysteries I may tell him that there is a Vathekian charm about his exer citations. (Laughter.) The right hon. gentleman opposite (Kr. Gladstone) is a candidate for power: and I know nothing more legitimate than the ambition of such a man. I can perfectly understand that under ordinary circum- stances he should be emulous of the honour of dealing with the question. But the present are not ordinary cir __.. . . . cumstances. Tho right hon. gentleman has had his innings. (Cheers.) He has dealt with the subject of Par- liamentary reform very recently, in a Parliament elected under the auspices of a Government of which ho was a member, and with the support of a large majority. Under these circumstances we have a right to expect that there should be no eagerness in making party attacks. Now 1 cannot but consider the amendments that have been placed on the table a party attack, because they aro not amend ments to our bill, but a counter proposition. The right hon. gentleman is justified in attacking the Government, and I was justified in parrying it. I attempted to do so by the letter which I addressed to my supporters, and which has been so much misconstrued. The letter was not ad- dressed to the louse of Commons. As to the house, gone rally speaking, I wish on the part of the Government to say that so far as they are concerned, the Government have never swerved from the sentiments that, with the full concurrence of my colleagues, I expressed to them that as we desire to co-operate with the house in bringing the question of parliamentary reform to a settlement, and that although we could not swerve in regard to the borough franchise from the personal payment of rate, yet, with re- gard to almost every other point, we were anxious, in com mittee afterfair deliberation, to adopt the course which the house in its wisdom might deem expedient and desirable. We are conscious of the heavy task we have undertaken, and how much we must depend upon the assistance of the house to bring the question of Reform to a happy oon clusion. But I really am a loss to know what are the con- cessions of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone). I have been adcused ono night of givinglup everything, and the next night of having given up nothing at all. But there was an important point in our original proposition which I reluctantly, at the desire of both sides of the _ _ house, and particularly of my own friends, gave up. But I am not conscious of any concessions having been made in return. Whatever may be the course of the division, I must repeat that the borough franchise in our bill is founded ipon a principle groin which we cannot swerve. There is nothing novel in saying that personal payment of rates and adequate residence are the only conditions on which we can consent to any arrangement of the borough franchise. There aro many amendments on the paper on which it requires a considerable time to form an opinion ; and if we had an opportunity, we should be most happy to con- Sider thorn during the holidays. We are most anxious to change, modify, and adapt them in any practical mode consistent with the general principles of our. measure. It has been said that I pledged myself to introduce a lodger franchise. I did not do so, for the very good lesson that to introduce a lodger franchise that would be satisfactory to the house and to the country is one of the most difficult things in the world. All that I did say was that if a sen sible, well-considered proposition for a lodger franchise was brought forward, we would candidly meet it, and if it were established by argument, it might be adopted by the house. The difficulty of dealing with this question, which is by no means so easy as the right non. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) made out last year, may be illustrated by my experience with the deputation of a society very much under the patronage of the hon. member for Birmingham. 1 mean the Reform League. They insisted on having a lodger franchise ; but distinctly gave warning that if any qualification, either in regard to the residence or value, was attempted, they should look upon it as an insult. (Laughter.) That is not an encouragement to anticipate carrying a lodger franchise as easily as some honourable members seem to imagine it may be carried ; but let it be brought forward by any gentleman who has thoroughly mastered the subject, and he will find from me a candid reception of the matter. This is very much our position with regard to all the questions about which I have been asked. I consider the question of the county franchise is one which will have to be settled by this house after ample discussion. In fact, it is impossible to settle any of these matters by question and answer, apart from discussion. The question of the compound householders is one which requires great debating in committee before it can be settled. Let it be discussed there. Then, again, with re gard to voting papers ;on this matter we wished to con sult the feelings of the House of Commons. If the House declares against this and other points, I shall, on the part of my colleagues, give to their decisions all the considera tion they deserve. But let us have fair discussion and do liberation. This is the spirit in which her Majesty's Go vernment wish to treat this question in regard to the House of Commons. It is a disagreeable thing to distinguish be tween the house generally and the right hon. gentleman to whom, as the head of his party, I wish to pay every honour; but I am obliged to make that distinction—(cries of " oh, oh")—because, between her Majesty's Government and the House of Commons on this subject of reform there was an understanding that we wore mutually to co-ope rate, and by mutual confidence and co-operation to bring about and carry a fair measure of reform. This is au understanding which I, on'the part of my colleagues, am perfectly ready to fulfil ; and there is no suggestion which has been made by hon. gentlemen, and which appears on the papers, which will not receive from us all the conside ration which it deserves, with a desire to adopt it and modify our measure to meet it. (Hear.) But when the right hon. gentleman comes upon us suddenly with a counter proposition to the main proposition of our bill, it is im possible for the to close my eyes to tho nature of the move ment. (Cheers.) I have said of the right hon. gentleman that I cannot see any way to agree to the propositions he has made. They would entirely oppose and interfere with the policy we recommend to the Louse ; and I trust that the right hon. gentleman will clearly understand that the distinction I have made I have not made in the heat of de bate—because there is no heat, or at least I do not feel any heat at this 'moment—(laughter)—but I wish, on an important division, that there should be a clear and honest understanding between her Majesty's Government and the House of Commons on this matter of the Reform Bill. (Cheers.) We have acted entirely in accordance with our representations to the house. We believed we had expe rienced from the house a true candour and a generous con sideration ; and we are anxious at this moment - cordially to co-operate with the House of Commons in the settlement of this question. (Great cheering from the Ministerial, and cheers and laughterfrom the Opposition benches.) Mr. GLADSTONE said he held his position as leader o f the Opposition by the free choice of the members of the Opposition, and if the Chancellor of the Exchequer would accept no proposition from him, he could not understand how he would consult the house. He thought the late Government —who left office in June last, when the majo rity of the house wished them to remain in it—wore not amenable to the charge now made against them, that they wished to turn out the Government. Referring to the arguments, he urged that if it were right to compound, the occupier should not be deprived of his franchise because he lived in a compound house ; and if it were wrong to compound let them alter the law. The principle which he asked the house to adopt was one, of permanent ap plication, and was one which never could be wrong. It was that those whom Parliament admitted to the fran chise should be admitted on equal terms. No bill laying down the principle of personal rating could be satisfac tory; and, limit or no limit to the suffrage, Ins' objection was the same. Sir H. EDWARDS rose amidst loud cries of " Order" and "Divide," to ask a question of the member for Not tingham, and hoped to have a straightforward answer. He wished to know whether that hon.. gentleman, before bringing forward the matter discussed earlier in the even ing, had given notice to Colonel Taylor—(order)—he meant the hon. and gallant member for Dublin; and how and when it was given. Mr. BRAND, whose voice was drowned for some minutes in a storm of cries for " Osborne," explained that he had been asked by the member for Nottingham to give the member for Dublin notice that the matter would be brought forward. He (Mr. Brand) had endeavoured to find the hon. and gallant gentleman. (Laughter.) He was not aware of the accident till the member for Nottingham sat down. Sir H. EDWARDS, amidst loud cries of "Order," asked whether the member for Nottingham had ascertained if his notice had been delivered. Mr. B. OSBORNE—I am much obliged to the hon. gen tleman —I don't know whether ho is gallant or not—(l augh ter) - for the courtesy with which he has addressed this question, and I will endeavour to give him a straightfor ward answer as he desires. On entering the house, about five minutes after four, a statement was put into my hands. [Sir H. EDWARDS : Who by ?] If the hon. gentleman is so inquisitive, I will satisfy him privately. Not being able to see the hon. and gallant member for Dublin, I went to the hon. member for Lewes and begged him to communicate the notice, expecting that they would meet in their com mon duties in the lobby. I did not know then that an accident had happened, or I should not have brought for ward the matter. (Hear, hear.) Mr. DILLWYN attempted, amidst loud cries of "Order," to address the committee. The CHAIRMAN interposed, and reminded the com mittee that the question was the amendment on clause 3 of the Reform Bill. The committee then divided, when the numbers were— Ayes 289 Noes 3lO Majority against the amendment —2l The division occupied about a quarter of an hour, and as the benches gradually filled with the hon. gentlemen returning from the lobbies, the most in tense anxiety was displayed respecting the result. The Tellers for the Ayes were the first to arrive, and amid breathless suspense they banded in their return to the clerk at the table. The nature of the return was immediately communicated from one member to another with almost electric rapidity, and it was whispered that the Government had commanded a majority. Every face on the Minis terial side beamed with excitement and delight as the tidings spread. So overpowering, indeed, was the enthusiasm enkindled that hon. members evidently experienced great difficulty in restraining their emotions, and a slight clapping of hands was audible. The Tellers for the Noes made their ap pearance in about a minute after those on the other side, and amid a hush of expectation handed in their return. The figures were quickly entered, and the clerk handed the paper to the Government Teller, Mr. Whitmore. A vociferous cheer at once broke out from the Ministerial ranks, the swell of acclamation rising to a full diapason of jubilation, and then slowly falling with music-like cadence. Meanwhile, the four Tellers had retired a few paces, had again advanced to the table, and, as SO3ll as a sufficient lull was reatored, Mr. Whitmore an nounced the numbers. Another, and even more fervid, outburst of enthusiasm succeeded, the Minis terialists cheering with almost frantic energy, and many of them waiving their hats, and giving other unusual manifestations of delight. A number of hon. members pressed forward to the Treasury Bench, and shaking hands with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who was radiant with smiles, con gratulated him with great warmth on the victory which the Government had achieved. The Oppo sition had all this while preserved an unbroken silence, and only showed by their countenances the disappointment which they experienced. In a few minutes there was a rush to the doors, and the Chairman having been ordered to report progress, the house resumed. MR OSBORNE AND MR. DILLWYN. Mr. DILLWYN, in reference to a statement made by the hon. member for Nottingham early in the evening, about a memorandum of a conversation between some members of the house, gave notice that, on the first op portunity after the holidays, he would call the attention of the house to the subject, and ask the hon. member a question as to the mode in which he obtained possession of the paper. The house adjourned at ton minutes past two o'clock. SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. TIMES.—The Government Reform Bill has escaped a mortal blow. The adjourned debate on Mr. Gladstone's Amendment was resumed last night, and terminated at half-past 1 o'clock this morning with a majority of 21 in favour of the Ministry. Never in our time has there been such a " shaking of the nations" as preceded the Division ; 599 voted, ex clusive of tellers. The supporters of the Govern ment were found upon the Opposition benches ; their opponents sat beside and behind them. Mr. Roebuck recommended the debate with a short but effective speech against Mr. Gladstone's alternative scheme, and in the course of the even i ng many stout Liberals expressed their preference of the Rating Franchise proposed by the Government to the fixed barrier advocated by the leader of the Opposition even in cases where they supported his ambiguous amendment. On the other hand, Mr. Hubbard was alarmed at the democratic results of the Ministerial measure ; and Mr. Beresford Hope gave his " rich and grotesque rhetoric" free play, in following at a modest distance the line of argument of Lord Cranborne. The committee was excited, and at times almost tumultuous, as men will be when their landmarks seems disappearing, and it is perhaps true that the final result must be attributed to " unerring instinct" rather to an exercise of judi cial reason. The temper of the house had, indeed, been moved by an incident of little credit to any of the parties concerned before the adjourned debate was resumed. Mr. Osborne produced a document purporting to record an assurance by Col. Taylor that Lord Derby and Mr. Disraeli were personally in favour of accepting Mr. Hibbert's amendment, relieving the compound householder of anything in the shape of a fine in consequence of au application to be rated, and pledging Col. Taylor to press upon the Cabinet the necessity of allowing this modifica tion of the bill. The document had strayed into Mr. Osborne's hands through Mr. Owen Stanley, who had somehow obtained it from'Mr. Dillwyn, and, though the latter gentleman naturally enough pro tested against Mr. Osborne's conduct in bringing it before the house without informing him of his in tention, it is plain that the proper conduct of public business required that it should be mentioned, and that an inquiry should be addressed to the Chancel lor of the Exchequer whether he had authorised Col. Taylor to give the assurance he had apparently con veyed. If any doubt existed as to the propriety of bringing the matter before the house it must have been dispelled by the result. Col. Taylor was unfor tunately absent, having met with a severe accident, but Mr. Disraeli said the alleged negotiation was quite unknown to him, and the whole thing was a mare's nest, and Lord Stanley, in abrief speech, justly characterised by Mr. Gladstone as every way worthy of him, and heard with unusual satisfaction on both sides of the house, declared that the Ministry desired to carry on the debate perfectly free and unpledged, without any understanding of any kind, and chal lenged a vote on the merits of the question at issue and upon its merits alone. We do not doubt that the subsequentdivision was entirely uninfluenced by the negotiations, real or imaginary, which Mr. Os borne dragged to light, and thatthe majority against Mr. Gladstone's amendment was neither increased nor diminished by it ; but it was not so easy to allay the excitement it had occasioned. There was a re current ground swell after the storm, and the cheer ing which greeted the declaration of the result per haps exceeded in vehemence all former displays. We cannot pretend to regret the rejection of Mr. Glad stone's amendment. It was framed so as to catch votes from all corners of the house. If the Govern ment tactics were a specimen of " cross-fishing," Air. Gladstone's amendment was a ground-net with which to drag the stream. It mattered not whether a member was terrified at the prospect of household suffrage, like Sir W. Heathcote, Mr. Hubbard, and Mr. Gladstone himself, or whether he looked for ward to it with subdued eagerness like Mr. Cole ridge and Mr. W. E. Foster —he could in any case take shelter behind Mr. Gladstone's elastic formula. It had been altered and re-altered till at last it simply amounted to a repudiation of the criterion of personal rating, and was thus made acceptable to those who objected to any criterion and to those who thought the criterion in. question not sufficiently stringent. It was a triumph in the manipulation of amendments to have caught Lord Cranborne and Mr. Bright by the same line. Such devices are, however, rarely successful, and the one in ques tion was no exception to the general rule. It has met a fate it richly deserved. It could not be concealed that the real issue lay between the rival plans of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Mr. Gladstone, or if not between these two then between Mr. Disraeli's proposal and some fresh scheme to be drawn up after revived and prolonged agitation, to be introduced no one knows when, to be carried no one knows how. Mr. Dalglish showed his appreciation of the real object of the Amend ment in the inquiry he addressed to Mr. Gladstone as to its purpose. But, whatever version of the point in debate be accepted, the decision could not be doubtful. The comparative merits of Mr. Dis raeli's proposal to enfranchise all ratepayers and Mr. Gladstone's condition of occupying a house of £5 rating value were succinctly but admirably stated by Mr: Roebuck. The one qualification avoids class dis tinctions, and opens to each householder a way to get his name inscribed on the Parliamentary Regis ter ; the other would draw a fixed line very much at hazard, involving such injustices of exclusion and of admission that a reversion of the line would in stantly become a matter of agitation. All Mr. Bright's reasoning could not conceal the glaring demerits of a definite money qualification. The ob jection that the enfranchisement on personal condi tions would tend to increase bribery was, in truth, an argument against all Reform ; and Mr. Hardy was justified in his retort that Mr. Gladstone's scheme would open a door to bribery at least as wide as any that could be opened by the Government Bill. The truth is that bribery depends on the voters rather than on the machinery, and if the ad mission to the Franchise of those who are now out side it must intensify this evil we had better all con fess the error of our ways, and decide against any change in our electoral system. The objection, how ever, betrayed the real character of the opposition to the Government Bill. We are driven to the con clusion that the majority of Mr. Gladstone's sup porters were bent either on throwing overboard Re form altogether to another season, or sought with Mr. Gladstone himself a refuge from imaginary ter rors in a £5 rating Franchise. A few, like Mr. Forster, who declared his dissent from his leader's arguments, and Mr. Locke, who protested that he still held the principles which made him prominent in the tea-room, were simple enough to suppose that by striking away the condition affixed to the Fran chise by the Government proposal they wo tt u t l ee d u se ii c i u te r d e influenceunqnali fi e o d f thhoeu Ministry t r y suffrage and t h the bulkga n st of Oppo sition ; but we must congratulate them on the failure of their design. Their success, had they achieved it, would have been fatal to their hopes and ours, and by grasping at what is impossible they would have . let slip the considerable measure open for their ac ceptance, The success of Mr. Gladstone's amend ment must have been followed by the withdrawal of the bill, and we rejoice that the good sense of the House of Commons has saved the country from such a disaster. It is, indeed, time to recognise the truth that no bill can, under any circumstances, be passed which will not have some one or more of its fea tures distasteful to separate sections of the house, and if all the discontented groups persist in uniting upon an amendment so drawn as to ex press nothing but the fact of this partial dissatisfaction, legislationmust be impossible. This is the course mrGlad stone offered to the committee. His amendment en- listed both reactionary and progressive memberat and might, but fur the wisdom of some independent men, have been fatally successful. Had it suc ceeded we should have had to lament a similar event to that of 1859. It has failed, and we trust that the fact of its failure will not seriously dimi nish the influence of the Opposition in the further conduct of the bill. That it must to some extent take away from their power is inevitable, and the consideration of such a consequence ought to have prevented a division ou a misleading issue. There are provisions in the bill which require careful scrn tiny, and some which must be considerably modi fied. Let the Liberal party unite in securing the changes which are thus necessary, but let them net again waste their powers in struggles which can only detract from their just influence, if they d o not en' in adding another t o th e t oo numerous shipwreck -3 which have already befallen Reform. Naval and Military Intelligence. The naval court-martial at Woolwich announced in The Sun of yesterday. was held on board the Fisgard, under the presidency of Commodore- Superintendent William Edmonstone, C.B. The members of the Court were as follows:—Commander John M. Jackson, Fisgard ; W. W. B. Bridget Chanticleer ; Hamilton E. E. G. Earle and Lieut. C. J. Wise, of the Royalist. The proceedings coo' menced at 10 o'clock. The prisoner, Quartermaste r Richard Weatherly, serving on board her Majesty's troopship Dee, was arraigned on charges of break' ing out of her Majesty's ship Dee ou the sth of March last, absenting himself from duty without leave, and misappropriating the sum of £2, the pro' ceeds of a Post-office order belonging to a comrade, named Richard Holmes. The prisoner voluntarily returned to his ship on Monday last, and the accu sation was forwarded to the Admiralty. The busi" ness of the Court was of short duration, as the pri soner immediately pleaded guilty, and alleged in, extenuation that having become into x icated and absented himself for some time he was ashamed t° return. He threw himself on the mercy of the Court. A written certificate froth Staff-Commande r George Raymond, Captain of the Dee, that the prisoner had served three years and a half, an d attesting his general good conduct, operated in b' favour, and the Court, after a short deliberatio n, sentenced him to be imprisoned at Lewes for 18 months, half the term with hard labour, to be re duced to the grade of able seamen, to forfeit his good-conduct badges, and to be reduced to second' class for conduct. The following appointments have been made at the Admiralty :—Edward T. Mortimer, surgeon, to th e Virago; John P. Way, assist.-surg., to the Asia ; George Treness, chief engineer to the Janina Thomas A. Clarke, engineer, to the Jumna; an Charles G. Muller, first-class assist.-engineer, t° the Jumna. STATE OF TRADE. MANCHESTER, April 12.—Yarns of all coup and qualities continue dull of sale, and prices ar e low and irregular. The decline is id. to id. per l b i The advices from most of the foreign markets are of a nature to discourage operations. The cloth' market has undergone but little change since Tiles" day, when business was not only difficult, but pric e° had undergone a marked decline. There seems t° be but little prospect at present of a revival of eon; fidence, and in many cases prices are somewh at lower than at the commencement of the week. r f a great extent business people seem bewilde red about the prospects for the future, and are t°: timid to operate for goods to any considerable amount. No doubt the reports of failures is causil a good deal of uneasiness. Not only are a numb er of failures spoken of in Liverpool, but there are acs counts of the stoppage of small manufacturers . 1 : various parts of the country. A suspension 0 rumoured to have taken place in - this city, but 0 0 to an amount which excites much attention. the unpleasant impression created by these o° l must be added the decline in the Liverpool cotton' market, and the consequence is that we have a T er / 0 small business doing in all kinds of cloth to -day' 9 depressed prices. The idea o f b u y ers and selle r generally at prese n t seems t o b e to avo id busiar' as much as possible. COUNTRY MARKETS. WAKEFIELD.—FRIDAY. 11. Wheat trade steady at, last Friday's prices. Barley au Beans and oats unaltered, LINCOLN.—PRIDAY. J eat , Our market to-day was sparingly supplied with w and fine samples f u lly as d ear. B ar l ey unc h ange d. `! u s Be'met with a firm d eman d , an d ma i nta i ne d th e i r va l u e. at extreme quotations. Peas not in request. 1 46 New white wheat 69s to 72s ; new red, 54s to 6 4 s stone. Barley f or malting 49s to 54s per qr ; griorto 32s to 36s per 30 stone. Oats, 24s to 365. Beans, 4 " 50s per 38 stone. DBY—FRIDAY. frl4c l° There was not much wheat on offer to-day ; the - ruled tolerably active at last week's prices. Barley scarce, fine sampl es a t f ormer quotat i ons. A ra°"-n,,e05 the demand for oa t s; b est sorts rather higher. rather higher. New white wheat, Gss to 68s ; old red, 60s to G5 B Il i a, stone. Barley for ma lti ng , 40s to 50s per qr. ; g rili o ( 9s t ° 33s to 34s per 30. stone. Oats, new, 27 s t o 29 5; old, ",„ 51 5 34s per 24 stone. Be ans , o ld, 58 s t o 60 s; new, 418 per 38 stone. . LIVERPOOL.--FRIDAY. A f bel 4 We had a good attenda nce a t t o -d a y' s mar k e t, anu - o co was a good demand for wheat, white realising an a u , ' c iiia l of 4d to 5d on the week. Fl our a t p rev i ous ra tes. ~ ,ur• corn advanced 6d per qr. Barley unaltered. Peas St e Oatmeal and Egyptian beans rather dearer. RIPON—FRIDAY. ,d White wheat, 8s 6d to 9s 3d per bushel ; red, Gs v 9d; beans,.7s 3d to 7s 9d ; oa f s , 250 3. s l 3 s qr ; _ ,4 bar i 35s to 44s Od. S T AF I DAY. With a middling sho M w ORD—FR of wheat the demand vrtl - ,,„. v in° active, and best qualities sold a t ex t reme rates. pal'''. recent currencies. Oats a fair trade. Beans limitect• Su New white wheat, 64s to 668 ; red do., 58s to 6313138 stone. Barley, malting, 50s to b3s ' • gr i n di ng , 27s owe , per. qr. Oats, new, 24s to 28 s; old, 28s to 32s per 24 0 Beans, 52s to 54s per 38 stone. Peas as of late. r MACKEREL.—According to th e W es t e rn .0.0• 11 News, the value of the catch of mackerel 0 0 3 ' l , fishermen at Mounts Bay, on Thursday , .I ,;fig and Saturday of last week, was about iv , re , Prices ranged from 12s. 6d. to 15s. per six s e° The fish are very large and of excellent quality Plymouth (East Massachusetts) has sixty fi 8 " 0 00 schooners, which last year landed nearly 4 , 00 1,ich pounds of fish, worth $308,693, and for vi $10,865 in bounties was received. 0 0 , Zebulon Clary, o f W es t B roo kfield, caught, in a pond in that town, 33 poutl' a cii, pickerel, three of whi c h we i g h e d f our p o unds e v il and none of the others less than two and pounds. The schooner Gertrude Hones left New Hos — t Monday, Mar c h 11, to fish for cod on the coa l et Africa—the first vessel fro m A mer i ca that visited that quarter for that purpose. WO: The Sandusky . (Ohio) Register says :"" 4 10 - fishermen of this vicinity are now ready to r e e - ea cli, operations. Their boats, poles, and nets are ' a ge°' for the spring business. Coopers have been eng ia rge all the winter, making kegs and barrels, and supply is now ready for the packers. The PaTIP, houses have all been put in order, and not lOv now wanting but the exit of the ice from the 101 f commence operations." Births. f CRAIK—On the 11th inst., at 2a, King-street, St. the wife of Andrew Uraik, of a daughter. r FISIIER —On the 12th inst., at D agma ll P a rk, Sou t h , wood, the wife of Mr. R o b er t Fi s h er , o f a datighte ri cei NOBLE—On the 12th inst., at 50, Westbourne -O Zr. Hyde-park, the wife of J. Noble, Esq., of a ( lane ) " Marriages. 11A , PENTICOST —BECKET —On the 11th inst., Ealing, Mr. Win. Penticost, of Ealing to Sarah , ter of the late C. Becket, of High-street,. Islington- 00,1 i le RONALDS GREG—On the 11th inst., at •King ° street Chapel, Maccsfield, Hugh Ronalds, E d e4' Edinburgh, toßertha, second daughter of S. Web' The Mount, Macclesfield. Deaths. ;(180 1 / eit ' ef ALLOWAY —On the 11th inst., at Castle Hill, g a.-- Mr. John Alloway, aged 89. rte ALLEN—On the 12th inst., at Albion-road, So° ington, Hannah Allen, agod 84. fe d GORDON On the 9th inst., at Ivy Bank, Nairn , C 913 Gordon, late of Ilevack, Strathspey, aged 9L .O,JACM VARDON—On the 12th inst., Thos. Vardon, a t the A Westminster. E' ' s of London: Printed and Published by WILLIAM AisT9 /sToi l of of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at THE StiN aftle e ' o Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the Gun. Middlesex.—Saturday, April 13, 1867.