The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-03-20 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.---YEsTERDAt.

The Speaker took the chair at four o'clock.
In reply to Mr. Kinglake,
-Lord Y. RUSSELL stated that no note had been
fecei,yed from the Swiss Government containing a notifi-
catioß
xll4 that Government intended to. appeal to the
great Powers on the subject of the annexation. Since
lffi TPPoiPt pf the dispatch of M. Thouvenel he under-
steed that' tte Swiss government ppoeTplated such an
appeal. It was a matter of earnest and deliberate eon?
sideration as to the terms in which her Majesty's govern-
ment should reply to the dispatch of M. Thouvenel ;
and under those circumstances he entreated the indul-
gence of the House to forbear from further demands for
??Arnitation• at the present moment.
On pkc miition for the second reading of the English.
Acfma
Mr, Plaiti.ET4 objected to the limited character, and
the many omissions of the bill actiye effects. It
might be' divided into three partsF-.,:the extension of the
borough franChise, that of county franchises, and that
Pflbe re-distribution-of seats. With regard to the first,
4o Omit() fault withthe principle adopted by the Govern-
Plea of considering merely the number Of electors
Bich could heititrodueed tinder any particular franchise.
1.144, hp contended, was an erroneous way of looking at
the qmisti,o, It was the fitness of any class, not its
number, tyllich ought to be considered ; merely to regard
namberi was an unsafe and shallow proceeding. Ex-
chiding the metropolis, he contended that the proposed
extension of the franchise would throw the whole power
into the hands of one particular class. Bound together
by the samesentiments and the same habits, the working
classes in this country had shown a remarkable aptitude
for organisation, which could not be said of the middle
classes. It ira.s said of the working classes that they
were intelligent and well informed ; so much the
more reason for hesitating before entrusting
them with too much power, and establishing a class
legislation. The bill of last year attempted a counter-
Poise. Its proposals were called fancy franchises, which
Was an "alliteration," but not an argument against
them. :He' defended in detail the lodging-house and
other enfranchising clauses of his own bill. At a time
When they were extending the franchise to, those who
did not pay direct taxation they ought to include those
whet-did • pay Aired-taxation: He- did not therefore-
think the proposal of the bill safe as regards the borough
franChise, with Out introducing more varied suffrages and
a counterpoise to the predominance of the working
classes. Could they justify throwing the control of the

overnment. of the country into ;the hands of the working,
c asses. He would not say on the ground of poli-
tical expediency but of political justice. Coming to
tl e county• frsiichise, he• admitted that the counties
ought to possess a large and ample constituency, but
there was one coniiition to be observed, that the consti-
tuency should be:connected. with the•ehief prosperity, of
the chief industry of the country. There were consti-
tuencies without any sympathy, with'. that industry
or prospelity, and those were to, be found in • county
towns. Disconnected with the general interests of
the county,, yet, tinder the bill, these towns would
send forth their hordes of voters, altogether over-
whelming the rest of the electors ; thus the influence
of the landed interests, and proprietors would be
greatly reduced. The'ipfluenee and tenure of our land
had been the means Of kiying,to his country that liberty
which was denied tO all others, of the great countries. of
Europe. With regard to the distribution of seats, the
bill went either too far or it did not go far enough. It
went too far in the English' principle of representation,
and not far enough on the American principle. He
objected to the, proposals of the bill for creating accumu-
lative constituencies ; giving additional members to
places already represented. They gave a wealtliyindi-
vidual no more votes than his less wealthy neighbour
Why should they give Manchester, more members than
other boroughs. They gave Mancliestei representatives
of her opinion, not of her power. If they must give
additional members to counties they ought to divide
those counties. Fre pretested against the unconstitu-
tional'thietrine that minorities ought to be 'represented.
Next came the question, _ what were they to do, with the
bill. It was a. very bad bill s he never knew, nworse.
There were but two men who cordially approved Of the
bill, and those were Lord J, Russell *nd lfr, Bright.
But if they rejected the bill on the second reading, it
would be &dared that they were against' all Reform.
For himself lie was not against the professed principles
.of the bill—the• egtension of , the franchise,
,and
.the
re-distribution of seats, however. badly they might he
carried •out—and therefore be was not prepared to
vote against the second reading of the bill. In a party
view he. could -not object to a bill vrhieh would hand
over ,to democrats some seats now occupied by Whigs,
although he should lenient to see the Constitutional
Whig influence destroyed, in that House, , Ile should
not oppose, the second reading of the bill, trusting that
it might in committee be formed into a measure less,
injurious and dangerous to the country. The present
time was Most inopportune for perilous experiments.
When a great military nation of niszlialled organisation
and, insatiable thirst for fame no longer concealed its
desire for universal eonquest--at a moment what/. gurope
was prostrate and England was lulled by a false friend-
ship, it was not at such a time that we should endanger
that old free and aristocratic Constitution which had
made the greatness and the prosperity a
.Bngland. 'He
yet trusted, in regard to the safety of the Anipire, that.
this uncalled-for, this unnecessary, this mischdevous
measure 'would be withdrawn.
Mr. LEA.TIIAK said that the bill had excited uni-
versal approbation, and was better than any of these
which had been laid on the table during previous
sessions

Mr. IL BAILLIE contended that no just line could' be
drawn between workmen paying £6 a year for their
houses as workmen paying £5 or £4. different test
ought to be adopted, and the proposals of Nit% Wight,
that all houses rated to the poor should be entitled to
•tlie franchise, was at least intelligible and consistent,
and wasuot liable to eoustant fluctuation. Further, a
£lO franchise in counties would have the practical effect
of establishing the principle so, much reprobated last
year—namely. identity of suffrage. With regard to the
,distribution of. seats„.hekauld not consent to any system
.which left untouched the small nomination boroughs.
He tiusted that the reform agitation would be Avally
put a stop to, and that a satisfactory measure would be
passed in the present session, under the auspices of her
-Majesty's ministers.
Mt. 13.4.-.x.-TER, said that the present forbearance of the

country was not only a tribute to the old reform bill.
but showed.that they were really to join in measures of
national and progressive' reform. fie did not join- in
any dread of combination. of the working orders, and did
not believe that it was the habit of the county to vote
in class.es at all.

Mr. ROLT warned the house that the change proposed
by the bill was a very large one, and that indulgence in
the appetite for change was very dangerous, He pro-
tested against the cutting off of our old traditions and
Americanising our institutions. He entered into various
details to show the mischievous working of the American
system, and declared his alarm at the danger incurred
if our Government was tinctured by the seekings of a
population lower in education and intelligence than the
actual constituency,

Mr. CAMBELL said that the bill offered no protection
to the voter; and left them iu doubt as to the county
constituency ; it had no guarautec for permanency, and
perpetuated the defects of the Reform Mt.
Mr. LinpELL asked why they did not adopt the
intelligible basis of direct taxation in the distribution of
of their suffrage. He called upon them to pause before
they removed the landmarks raised by the wisdom of
theirincestors,
Mr. Bniaiar accepted the bill as the fulfilment of the
pledge given last year by Lord J. Russell. With
regard to the distribution of goats he admitted that they
ought to proceed by progressive steps. The question of
the suffrage should be first settled, and they then might
come to the question of the small boronglis. He
regarded the bill as simply one of extension of the fran-
chise:---it "Only touched "the outside of the disfranchise=
ment question.. It settled nothing ; it rather unsettled,
as adding another precedent to that of 1832. He
adduced the small comparative number of electors in the

kingdom, and said alit in the counties the represer'-
tation was as good as deed, There was no bribery,
becau,se the electors had not even the liberty to sell

themselyee. He advised the House to wept the bill,
not as one which he himself would have liked, but as

the most prudent and fitted to be brought forward at
the present monient. /le quoted a variety of figures to
show the fallacy of supposing the constituency to be
introduced under the bill would swamp the old consti-
tuencies. They could not refuse the evasion proposed
by the bill without grossly libelling the gre4 body of
their countrymen. Was the voter a pestilent being
whom they were to put out of the way, or one whom

they were to take by the hand and lead on to the
great work of administering through Parliament
the Government of a great nation. He calculated
that by this bill they would not add to the
constituency more than 150,000 etebtorS. It was
said that there was no alarm for Reform but let
the chiefs of the Tory party now get up as they did in
1832, and declare that there should be no reform, and

there would very soon be whirlwind enough. Not more
than 100,000 of the working classes would be en-
franchised by the bill, and to reject it would be to invite
them to the door and there to slain it in their faces.

The great majority of those constituencies whom it was
said, were to be swamped had declared in favour of the
bill. The same argument of swamping the old con-
stituencies was used in 1831, yet what places had been ab-
solutely swamped, and where was there any such complaint.
Gentlemen opposite ought to be the last to talk about
swamping. Two or three landowners would swamps a
county, but he never heard of a class swamping or
constituencies of great towns, and complained of 9;ie
parsimony of the House in distributing the franchise
when•the state of the country warranted them hi being
far mere liberal ; but he would not refuse a measure
which gave a large amount of satisfaction, and added
considerably to the constituency of the country. But
twenty-two millions and a half of the population yet
remained unrepresented, and the time 'must come when
they would have to open their door to a portion at least
,of those persons. The question could not remain per-
manently where it was fixed by the bill. In defence
of the small boroughs, they talked of the representation
of interests. Were interests only to be found in small
places where there were no men, and not in the great
centres of population ? The bill, be fArther remarked,
would render yet more necessary the protection of the
ballot and less resistable the demand for it. ' Those who

contributed so largely to the wealth and glory of the
country were now looked upon as persons only fit to be
governed and taxed ; and let them beware how they
rejected demand which would only lead to a measure
far less palatable, and which would turn the calm tide
of public opinion into a tempest.
Mr. KNIGHTLEY opposed the bill as of an illiberal
and retrograde tendency, which kept the word of pro-
mise to the ear and broke it to the hope.
On the motion of Mr. Stansdeld the debate was
adjourned.
On the bringing up the report of the committee of
supply,
Mr. PEEL objected to the sum voted for the Ohinese
expedition as founded upon false calculations. The
results of the expenditure would leave us at the end of
the year, with other measures of the Government, an
enormous deficit, which it was vain to expect would be
met by a decreased expenditure. He thought it his
duty to point out the insufficiency of the estimate, which
he belieyed would not pay for one-half of the costs for
which it was intended.

Mr. S. REJIBERT entered into a variety of details to
prove that the estimate was amply sufficient to cover the
deinands of the preseiAt financial year..
After sonic further discussion, in the course of iihich
Sir-C: Wool) explained that the vote was intended to
cover the deficiency of the financial year ending with the
present month, and that it was, of course, itupopsible to
say what would be the estimates for the cumin yedit,
The report was agreed to. •
The house adjourned at 1.15.