The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1861-03-19 00:00:00

WEDNDWAY.

Mr. L. King, in •Mi;;liAig—tii;Ctlie County Franchise
Bill he read a second time. observed that it was a very
14tople measure, the principle of which had been °nil,
discussed, and Mid been affirmed by the House. Ile
noticed and replied to objections, and urged reasons
why, in his opinion, there ought to be an extension of
the franchise in counties, and why the House should
not assent to Lord Palmerston's suggestion, that this
was not • time for action on this question, but fur
waiting.
Mr. A. Smith moved the ',melons questhm, explain•
ing his reasons for taking this course, instead of muting
to defer the second reading for six months. The
measure, he remarked, could not be considered by
itself, apart from its consequences, one of which must
be the div.sion of the country, with reference to the
county representation, into electoral districts.
This motion was seconded by Mr. Du Cane, who
thought the measure inure Inopportune and un-called
for than at any former period, and noticed the absence
of agitation and indignation meetings on the subject of
reform, notwithstanding the provocetive contained in
the mimic if Lord J. Russell upon the apathy of the
country.
Lord Henley drew attention to some effects which
the Bill would produce. It would, he said, increase the
already enormous and ruinous expense of county
elections, which practically limited the olioice of the
counties while it saddled families with debt and
encumbrances ; and it would increase the power of the
great freeholders and destroy the influence of the 1
smaller. He should, however, vote for the Bill.
Mr. Adderley argued that the question of reform
must be treated as • edible or not at all ; that the deal-
ing with it in this manner by isolated niesesures was
playing with this great question and with tte interests
of the country. Time Bill contained no principle un-
connected with the entire question. He admitted that
the present county franchise was too high, but this
question, which would be a very fair element in a
general Reform Bill, would not justify him in voting
for this measure.
Mr. Bristow insisted that the feelings of the people
on this subject had been mist k.ui; that there was •
strong fueling of dissatisfaction and distrust among
them, and that it was spreasling. He supported the
Bill.

Sir L. Palk urged, aa reasons for not proceeding
further with this Hill, that the time was inoppor-
tune ; and there was very little hope of its auccess
and that the country did not desire the lowering of
the county franchise as an isolated measure of
reform.

Lord Enfield observed that both sides of the House
were pledged to %011ie x tent to • re Met' of the
to noty franditse , tho limit 1,1.15 s a iine•tion open to con-
sideration. He gave his cordial and hearty assent to
the second reading id the Bill.
Mr. Hunt opposed the Bill, which, lie said, would in.
trmluce a town element into counties. Tie question
was too important to be dealt with in a fragmentary
manner, and by the irresponsible hands of a prhate
member. lie objected to the Bill, noneuver, on the
ground of his intrinsic demerits.
Mr. l'ainin,:hain considered that this treatnunt of the
great question of reform was trifling with it. The
bringing forward petty measures of details was bringing
the great Liberal party into contempt. Ile should give
no vote upon the question before the flour.
Mr. A. Egerton opposed the Bill. Among his main
objections to it was that it would destroy the in-
terests connected with the land and the cultivation of
! the soil.
Sir G. Lewis observed that the House had, on the
first slight of the Scission, confirmed by a large majority
the decision of the Government, that it was not advis-
able that they should introduce this Session an exten-
sive measure for lowering the franchise in counties and
boroughs. The " previous question" would not dispose
of the Bill. His vote would be given for its second
reading ; at the same time lie was of opinion that the
present was uot a favourable opportunity for bringing
the subject under the consideration of the House.
Mr. Barrow opposed the Bill, which, lie contended,
would swamp a valuable constituency—the lower class
of freeholders. .

Mr. oAborne said he should vote for the Bill, though
he believed there 11&111 uo better time for • moderate
and well-conaldered measure of comprebrusive Ketone,
by a comprou3ise which the country would accept and

approve.
Mr. Beach and Mr. W. Egerton spoke in opposition
to the Bill.
Lord J. Russell, after explaining the motives which
had led him to advocate l'arliamentary Reform, said he
was dispostd to concur with Mr. Disraeli, that any
further amendment of the Constitution would be better
done by Koine comprebensise measures. But it seemed
to him that it was not necessary for the House to wait
for a comprehensive measure in the preamble el this
Bill, that it is expedient to extend the franchise to
certain of lee Majesty's subjects who had not hitherto
enjoyed it. This did n-it bind the Howie to any
particular amount to which the (rancid*e should be
lowered, sod lie considered it to be his duty to give his
vote in fas our of the second reading of this Bill.
Mr. Disraeli said Lord John, after admitting the
general prim ij.le that this great question could be
properly dealt with only by a complete and compre-
-1 hetisive measure, had made an exception in favour of
the county franchbe, but hail not stated on what ground
he justified the exception. Ile denied that this Bill
was in any degree in harmony with the Bill of the late
Administration, which provided for local government

and for that protectiosi to the land which was necessary
to public libeity.
Frio a division, the previous question that is
" that tile question be How put'— wa, negatived by 248
to 2:k.); in, the motion that the 'till be read a second
time was hod. put.
Sir J. Trelawny moved the second reading of the
Affirmationsltill. explainiug the object of the Nil,
Which was to allow persons who objected to take an
oath to tnaku • form"( affirmation in lieu elan oath.
G. 'Lady opposed the bill, which would tend.
. be rani, to abrogate oaths alt-gether in courts of jos-
tee. lie moved to defer the. second reading for six
The terunded by Mr. Malins.
; Sir I:. Lewis concurred in the ohjittions offered
to the ml,. which.. wide AA it was ii its operations,
I wait, he remarked, founded upon a very narrow
basis.
Mr. Craufurd moved the adjournment of the debate.
but the motion was negatived Uliou a division by lfra to
SO.
The time allotted for debate having now arrived, no
further diseu•sion could take place, smil the Ileum; ad-
! jourucd at 8 o'clock.

On the order for going into Conimittel of Supply.
General l'eel inquired of the Chancellor of the Ex-
cheyser what portion of the /WU Of }:854,01*. granted
by Paiilenent tu cover the entire expenditem on ats-
count of the China war during the financial.yma 1859-
had been appropriated to, or was reeerved fuss, the
liquidation of the claims of the Indian Governmeott on
account of advances made or cxpenses incarregli in
Tim Chancellor of fAe Eacbequer replied in deteildta
the inquiry, stating thob the great bulk of the vete cdh
4.1550,i..5id !mil been absorbed by the at-fly expenditure..
and iliac no portion of this rote had boon applied to.
the purposes of any other vote.
Mr. T. Deucumbe inquired what instructions wersi
given to Sir Rickard Itsyne in reference to the alleged.
manufacture of notes in this country in the name of
Hungary; what course Sir Richard took open those:
instructions ; by what authority he required Messrs—
Day to suspend the manufacture of the notes; and by
whom the expenses of Ile proceedings taken were to
be defrayed, lie prefaced his inquiry by a statement
of the particulars of the case.
Sir G. C. Lewis said Sir Richard Maylie had called
his attention to the existence of there nuke, and Sir
lin:Lard, under his direction, had cement:treated with
Messrs. Day, and gave them notion not to anent Ole
mina to leavl their preunse-s. No expense had Sem
incurred by the Government, who were no partieute
legal proceedings.
'file House then went into a Committee of Supply
upon the Army Eatimates, when
Mr. T. G Baring made the usual introductory state—
ment, accompanied by details, of the numbers and',
several heads of expenditure of this Army. The mon—
ivr of men proposed for the current year was 146,044,.
ex elusive of the force in the East Indies, which would .
rah e the aggregate number to 212.,173. The man to be
demo teal was £14,606,751, which WY less than time &ti-
ns."... of 1860-61 by £185,705. This was, however, Le
sykrws rile explained, less than the teal decrease, which
WAS 1..210,795. lie moved the first vista tor £146,044

Very u,•tfavourable criticisms were passed upon the
Esti,asiss by Ur. Williams and Colonel Dickson, the
the latter 44 whom, cotnparing the amount of the
E.,tiassks, la :chasm' to numbers, with those of tumor
y eami, d•C lared it to be enormous.
Mr. Baring ewlained the muses of this disproportion.
Lord ralumrstea observed that every one seemed tie
feel that the uutubt.r of men was not greater titan the.
ieterests of the country required. The great bulk of
the incremm in the Estimate* was caused, first, by tbe•
augmented number of taco; and, secondly, by the•
changes in the taisairiri of war. The members suggested
improvements lie Isarracks, clothing, and other changes,.
wlticl, good is they were, all added UMW or less to the,
expenditure, mid tended to swell the Estimates.
After some further debate, the vote was agreed to.
On the fleet vote, of .E4,7110,U0U for the pag and'
allowsases of ii. e land forces, an objection wastuade
to protemling fin titer; but, after 10410 debate, meets,
rotto.ogo was sakso on account, and the Chairman was
then ordered to report Proffrvos-
Lcass was given to citrodece other Bills, and., after
some further Main..., the Thome adjourned a 1 o'clock.