The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1883-11-24 00:00:00

WORK FOR NEXT SESSION.

The November Cabinet Councils are now fol-
lowing each other in quick succession, and is the
confidential advisers of the Crown are all men of
superior intellectu.:l power they will not fail to
take note of public opinion as to the measures to
he introduced and in what particular order. It
is of course rot easy to say in November what
shall certainly be done in February, as many
things might unexpectedly happen; and even
the British Cabinet is unable to lay down an nu-
alterable programme which shall be like unto
the laws of the ledes and Persians. But in the
absence of anything very serious now unforseen,
it is not diftilult ta say even at this early date
what is likely to be the courso of business next
session.

Ever since the Parliamentary Reform Confer-
ence met at Leeds in the middle of October,
there has been a kind of antagonism between the
capital and the provinces as to which should
have preced,nce in the coming Parliamentary
year. The case of London is: certainly a very
strong one for consideration. When the Muni-
cipal Corporations' Reform Act of 1835 was
passed, the Metropolis was excluded from
thc schedules, on the ground that as the question
was of so much importanca it should be dealt
vih in a separate measure. At that time the
Government of Lord Melbourne hoped t) take
the matter in hand, and to extend to London
those municipal rights which they were confer-
'jog upon the most obscure irovincial town.
Nearly half a century has waned away, and stili
is the capital without those rights. It is now
!wenty years ago that a very small measure
which seemed to affect the privileges of the City
of London was introduced by Lord Palmerstone's
G .vernment, but even that tied to be withdrawn.
Ulson the entry of the Princess of Wales into the
metropolis the City police failed to maintain
that order in the streets which ought to have
been preserved, and the ministry brought in a
Bill to transfer its care from the Corpora:ion to
the Home Secretary. But the Lord Mayor of
that day, the late Alderman Rose, was a member
of the House of Commons and with the assistance
of other sympathisers with civic rights and pri-
vileges, managed to procure the withdrawal of
the Bill. From that time until tho beginning of
he session of 1882 no MinistEv'al action was
taken, although the question was prominently
brought before the notice of the late Government.
In the sessions of both 1882 end 1883 a measure
of municipal reform for London was promised in
the Speech from the Throne; but the Home
Secretary has not yet found an opportunity even
to explain its provisions. The Leeds Conference
assembled on the 17th and 18th October, and one
of its prominent speakers laid down the dictum
that London could wait while the Ministry took
up the queetion of the county franchise with the
inevitable redistribution of seats. This, how-
ever, is a very thorny subject, as previous Ad-
miuistrations have found to their costs.

London, on the other hand, is asking for
priority; but there really seems no reason why
there should be any antagonism between the
metropolis and the country upon such a point.
Mr. Forster has had some experience of Cabinet
offices, and many years ago piloted successfully
through the House of Commons such a difficult
measure as the Ballot Act. In coming to the aid
of the London Reformers he has told them that
in hie opinion the County Franchise Bill will
stand first next session for the consideration of
Parliament, and that the London Government
Bill, fall as it must be of intricate and complex
de:ail, will be at once referred to a grand com-
tnittee. There can be not the slightest obP.ction
to this course. One of the Grand Committees
last year passed the Bankruptcy -Bill and the
Patents Bill, under the skilful guidance of Mr.
Ch imberlain. In the Grand Committee spoken
of by Mr. Forster' the measure would be in
oh trge of Sir W. Harcourt, who would require
all his tact and prudence to achieve th 3 BUCC,!33
of his colleague at the Board of Trade. To
those outside the walls of Parliament it seems
as though there ought to be room in one session
of Parliament for dealing with two such great
topics as the county franchise and local Govern-
ment. It ought not to take six months to pass
either. The truth is that so much has the
capacity for talk increased in Parliament of late
years, that the public now take it for grantel
that there is a maximum of talk and a minimum
of work. Business men like Mr. Samuel Mor
ley, who does not intend to offer himself for re
election at Bristol, have lost all patience with
the flood of loquacity poured forth in the House
of Commons. They believe they can be doing
far better work outside that historic assembly.
The development of this fondness for talk in tha
Legislature is becoming a national misfortune,
It sickens many of our best business men, aud
will if continued lead to an apathetic indifference
to Parliamentary affairs. The Briish are a
business people, and they expect business how
their representatives in the House of Commons.