The Express.
London, England, 1851-02-21 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, FRIDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 21, 1851.

i late the working classes to embark their savings In (specu-
lative enterprises.
The committee was then agreed to.
' EXTENSION OF THE FRANCHISE IN COUNTIES.
Mr. ItYLING, in moring fur lemma to tiring in a "bill
'to InakeThe frinchise in counties in England and Wales the
some as that in boroughs, by giving the right of voting
to all occupiers of tenements of the annual value oflol. " said
that in aria asking the leave of the house to introduce a
bill of duo description, he had been fortunate in being able
to bring the subject forward at this early period of the ses-
sion, and thus he had overcome the chief, and he believed
the nnly, objection which had been mind to his measure
during the last s' ssion. It had then bees said that bills of
this 'kind should be brought in early, and that to lay them
on the table late in the eession was a sufficient reason to in-
duce the government to reject them. By being in a posi-
tion,
therefore, to bring forward the present bill in the ,
middle of February, instead of the middle of July, he had
overcome the chief objection. (Hear.) The noble lord at
the head of the government had frequently said that the
Reform Act required certain amendments to be mule
in it, and that it might be desirable still fur-
ther to extend the franchise. Now, his (Mr. King's)
present proposal would not interfere with any plan
meditated by the noble lord. It was a proposal simple in
its terms, moderate in its requirements, and practical in its
operation. (Hear, hear.) It might pave the way for thou
great, and, be trusted, comprehensive measures of reform,
with which the house and the country were to be favoured
whenever the proper time arrived. His hill did nut inter-
ft.re with any principle of the Reform Bill. It did not pro-
pose, for instance, to disfranchise any borough, or to add a
single additional representative to the number consti-
tuting the house. It only proposed to do away with a
great anomaly as regarded the representation—to place'
the inhabitants of one locality on the same footing as
those of another, and to confer the same rights and advan-
tages on those who resided in one place as were enjoyed by
others, under similar circumstances, who resided in ;
another. (Hear.) He hoped the discussion would not di-
verge
into extraneous topics : for the measure was simple,
it really was so simple that the most moderate and cautious
reformer might with safety adopt it. (Hear, hear.) There '
was nothing in it to interfere with those opinions which
were said to he essential to the due progress of reform ;
for the noble lord had said that " he had always considered
it a condition in every reform—a condition happily com-
plied with—that the representation of that house, the mode
in which it was constituted, in the representatives who were
. elected, should he consistent with the monarchy and the
House of Lords." Now, his (Mr. King's) comparatively
• insignificant measure, if it had any effect whatever, would
stretheat both the monarchy and the House of Lords. lie
hoped, therefore, that the noble lord, who had made the
greatest, the best, and the most important social reform
ever effected in this country iu modern times, would not
object to removing those gnat anomalies which now existed
with regard to our representation, when it could be shown
to he done without incurring any risk. (" Mar, hear,"
and cheers.) Ile might also state that his measure
• was perfectly sound in polity. It had often been
said that the house ought to extend the franchise to
' the greatest possible extent they could with matete—that,
• by so doing, the legislature became respected, the law be-
. came popular, and property became secure. (Hear, hear.)
Now, could there be any doubt as to the respectability of
t that sat and numerous claw of the community who would
be affected by this bill? Wu it not to that very class who
• happened to reside in parts of the country—not in
counties—that the greater part of her Majesty s govern-
• ment owed their swats in that house? (Hear, hear.) And
wa. a man a better citizen herons(' he happened to reside in'
one locality rather than in another? (Hear, hear.) He
might quote. from a paper which had been put
a into his hands that day, showing that tens of.
thousande of persons scattered over the country were, by
means of a distinction in the law without a difference,
and which was invidiously and manifestly unfair, deprived
. of the franchise. Ile might bring forward a vast number
of eases to prove the gnat anomaly which existesl. He
might take his own county, for instance, and there he
• found that in the borough of Reigate—the smallest borough
in the county—the del. householder was r‘'presenttsl in
parliament ; whereas, in the large town of Cniyilon—the
• capital, as it might be called, of Surrey—a man might
rent a house of 50/. a year, and transact business daily in
the metropolis, and yet not be represented at all. (Illear,
bear.) lie would not, however, go into details of that kind.
• What was conceded to Ireland, he claimed on the part of
those who resided in the counties of England. (" Hear, ' and
cheep.) For, if they tank the whole length and breadth of
this country they would find that the people of England
• were not on the same footing as regarded the representation

as the 'people of Ireland were.'(llcar7) And this mi. a great act
of injustice on the part of the house—it was adding insult
to injury hy saying that the people of Ireland were more to
be trusted than the people of England. (" Hear, hear,•'
and cheers.) But during the discussion on the Irish Fran-
chise Bill it was frequently !QM, as a reason why the hill
should he adopted, that the constituencies in that country
had actually decrtased. If he could show that the county
constituencies in England had decreased also, he would

make out a very strong claim in favour of hi• measure. By
comparing the nvister of 11536 with that of 1849-10, he
found a decrease in the county of Berkshire of 1,030 voters;
in Devonshire, of 1,123 ; in burretshire, 488 ; in Hereford-
shire. of 319 ; in Shropshire. of 50.1 ; in Westmoreland,
of 747 ; in Wiltshire, of :1145 ; and in Worcestershire,
of 475. But it might he said that this was going tai far
hack. Ile would therefore contrast 1813 with 18.50; and
here he found that then• had been a decrease itt the ronstis

tueney in Bedfordshire ut 415 ; in Berkshire, of 7119; in
Devonshire. of 1,7.33; in Dorsetsbire, of 813; in Hereford-
shire, of 1,0$8; in Shropshire, of 998 ; in StilifOrdAhirl., of
1,577 ; in Suffolk, of 811 ; in West Surrey, of 304; in West-
moreland, of 210; in Wiltshire, of 584 ; and in Worcester-
shire, of 1,3;9. (Hear, hear.) The whole number of county
electors in 1813 was 484,073; in 1850 it was 161,413, show-
ing a decrease in the county electors, in the short period of
seven years, of 22,690; while the borough electors
meanwhile had increased by upward. of .50,000. (Hear,
hear, and cheers.) 'These facts proved that if the principle
laid down for Ireland was a sound one—that with a popu-
lation which, he regretted to say, might be proved to he
either stn ary or decreasing, the constituency was also
decreasing, and therefore required an extension of the fran-
chise ; if this were a sound principle, and if in England it
could be shown that the population was increasing and that
the county electors had decreased, he then believed he had
made out a strong case in favour of having the franchise ex-
tended in the English counties. (Loud cheers.) Ile ad-
mitted that an objection might he raised, and very pmperly
so, that his bill did not go near far enough. (hear, hear.)
Ile remembered hearing the noble lord xtx that " no opi-
nion he had ever held, and that no opinion he hehrthen,
would debar him front seeing with satisfaction any plan for e a-
tending advantages to the working rinses on a basis widened
on what the representation at jimx.nt rested." Now, he
(Mr. King) hoped his measure would be taken to he goal as
Lie as it stunt, and that the noble lord would support it on the
same ground on which it had been brought forward—namely,
. . . .

on thrS principle that half a loaf was better for a hunt
man than no loaf at all. (4. Hear, hear," and laughter.
The honourable mover concluded by elpressing a hope
that his measure, which was of ouch sound policy and
perfect justice, would not be refused by the house. lie
tru‘ted the day would us ver come w hen the people would
fiad that only a particular clays could obtain a hearing in
that house, when the laws should cease to be a refuge for
the oppressed, and when we should only have false keys
and false balances instead of equal keys and equal balances.
(Loud cheers.)
Mr. HUME seconded the motion.

Lord J. It USSE LL the hon. gentleman who has made
this motion has done it cert Only in a most temperate manner.
(Hear, hear.) He has laid it of ore the house with as little
of undue exaggeration, either as to its merits or its nature,
as any member of this house could possibly desire. (Hear,
hear.) I must likewise say, as he stated at the commence-
ment of his speech, that there can be no objection to his
making the motion at this period of the session ; and that
that reason which be says, and says truly, was the only
reason I urged last year to the adoption of the motion he
then submitted, will not now apply, and that it is not the
reason I shall now assign. I think this motion differs very
much from several motions which the house has considered of
late years, inasmuch as I do not think any reasonable objection
can be alleged against the class of persons whom he proposes
to introduce into the county constituencies. (Bear.) I
admit at once they are a class of persons who, if entrusted
with the elective franchise, would probably use it with in-
telligence and integrity. (Hear, hear.) I certainly do not
pretend that there is such a superiority in the inhabitants
of towns over those in the country as to enable me, or any
one, to say that the inhabitants of a town, when invested
with the franchise, are distinguished by their superior quali-
ties over those residing Mother parts of the country. (hear.)
But the question really is, whether this proposal will be an
improvement of our representation. Because I have always
considered that this was the important question which the
house had to decide in any proposal of this kind. The view I
have taken has been this : seeing the power which this house
possesses, observing that this house is the representative of
the country, and finding that succeeding parties have in-
creased its means of controlling all the other branches of the
legislature—that what was really important to discuss was
not if any particular persons should he entitled to vote at
electiqns, but what is the general result which would be ad-
vantageous to the country, so that this house should fairly
represent the intelligence and the genuine wishes of the
nation. Now, sir, if we consider this proposal with a view,
first, to what has hitherto been the ease with regard to the
franchise in this country, it will be obvious that this pro.
posal is in direct opposition to
it. There has always been,
to a late period, this distinction in principle between the
representation of counties and the representation of boroughs
—though it has certainly not been uniformly carried out in
every instance:—that the representation of counties was a
representation of tenure, of persons who voted in conse-
quence of their tenure, and that the representation of
boroughs has been a representation of persons who voted
according to the variety of their occupations ; the one class
being usually denominated freeholile
whom,rs according , an the
oothter
elms being known as householders, by
a particular charter or particular rules, decided by very
ancient authorities, the right of voting in towns and
boroughs was possessed. In the course of the expe-
rience which I have hail of the votes of electors of
counties. I have found that when a candidate seeks the vote
of a farmer who, perhaps, is paying considerable rent, he is
often met with the answer, 1 cannot enter into the matter
with you. for I mast consider the opinions of my landlord."
Oa the other hand, at county elections, I have seen among
the smallest and poorest fret:holders a feeling of independ-
ence, a spirit of integrity, and a resolution to give their
votes only in accordance with their own opinions, which is.
I think, highly honourable to them. and which dues show
that they are in a position of far more independence than
tthh:thoisotlie. rscela-Dtssi.to hprol
ro.haveirsislerrito.d...4lltpacartii.,otohsna.re..)..Noloeswdi
such a very km_ number of s.nt crs by
seriously diminish the just influence of the valuable class of

1 freeholders. In glancing over the various counties of Eng-
, land, 1 find that the 501. occupiers are at present in a
minority certainly as compared to all other voters, the
greater part of those other voters being forty shilling
freeholder., and all of them being voters by tenure
of some descriptiOn. In Berkshire there are 971
voters with the 401. occupation franchise, and 4,270
' other voters In Cheshire there arc 4,022 0411. occupation
voters, and 11,901 other voters. In Derbyshire there are
2,883 501. occupation voters, and 10,208 voters who have
other description of votes. In Devonshire there are 4,920
of the former, and 14.088 of the latter clam. I need not
quote any more of these particular instances; but I may
state generally that in the whole of England them or.,
about 100,000 persons who vote in virtue of their holdings
of 301., and 37a,034 of all other voters, comprehending the
great mass of the forty shilling freeholders Now, it vim
admit in round numbers 350,000 persons who would have
the right of voting as 101. occupiers, it is very obvious
that you would deluge these forty shilling freeholaers, and
destroy their importance in county elections. I hold, con-
sidering the value of these 40.. freeholders, considering the
antiquity of that tenure, considering that importance which
they still preserve, that it would be a circumstance to be re-
gretted if we took any course the result of which would be
to diminish their power or to affect their condition. But,
sir, beyond this, I own I think that our object should out
be to introduce the uniformity which the holt'. gentleman
recommend.. Hi. argument is very shortly, and little
more, than this : You have 101. householders who
have the right of voting in boroughs, and it is
only fair that they should have the right of
voting in counties. I have rather considered, on all oc-
casions when this subject has been brought before me, that
it was a decided advantage that there should be various
rights of voting, and that the class of persons entitled to
vote in one place should not be the clefts of peraons to whom
is accorded the right of voting in a different place. I have
come to the conclusion, therefore, that we should be effect-
ing no improvement by the introduction of this new fran-
chise. The hon gentleman says—and the argument has struck
me—and it arises, I think, from a want of proper observa-
tion, but many persona have said, and the honourable
gentleman among others, " You have given the right
of Toting to occupiers in Ireland to the value of 121. a year;
surely occupier. in England to the value of 10/. a year arc
as worthy; and to them at least you ought to extend the
Treacles.." But the hon. gentleman does not remember
that in Ireland we have destroyed that old class of voters
to whom I have alluded a. being so valuable in England,
the forty shilling freeholder.; and when I said last year, in
supporting the bill fur the extension of the franchise in
Ireland, that I thought it most desirable to place Ireland
on a footing with England and Scotland in this respect, it
was because I took into consideration the extinction of the
forty shilling freeholder.; and my object then was; to be-
stow some tranchbe which would be in the hands of per-
sons well qualified to hold it, and not to revive the abuses
which formerly attended the tenure of forty shilling free-
holds in Ireland, and which would, at the same time, satisfy
the people of Ire-laud that they were being treated with as
much fairness as the people of England or Scotland. Now
that consequence, 1 think, has been to a great degree at-
tained': for judging from the various returns IA to the num-
ber of persons now qualified to vote in Irish counties, I
should conjecture that something like a fair proportion to
the voters in English counties is being introduced into the
counties of Ireland. But if you say, because we have
aecomplished this, we must create a similar franchise in
England, then you propose a new inequality, because, then,
you would have in England the 40a. freeholders and other
tenures and the BM occupier, whereas, in Ireland, you
would have but the 121. occupiers without the 40..
freeholders,. That would be an inequality by far too great;
and we should then have to propose the forty shilling free-
hold franchise, or otherwise to add to the number of Irish
county elector* in order to re store the equality which we
luul hoped to establish by the bill of last year. I cannot
think, then, that this proposed measure is a measure the
tendency of which would be to improve our representation.
1 would much rather continue the ancient distinction and
maintain this difference—that whilst householders shall
have the right of voting in boroughs and cities, freeholders
alone shall have the right of voting iu counties. The hon.
gentleman has observed that I cannot say that this is a
revolutionary project, or that it would accomplish
any great and violent democratic change. Undoubtedly, I
make no charge of that kind against the hon. gentlemen.
I have stated that I do not consider his proptiaal would be
an improvement on the existing state of things; but let it
lie undenitood that I am very far from saying that the large
clan, of persons whom it would admit to the right of voting
in elections fur counties is a class of persons from whom our
existing institutions have anything to fear. (Heins) There
is, hosteler, another quoin tttt to which the hon. gentleman
has alluded, and on which I think it right to say a few
words before 1 conclude. I have stated that 1 do not
think it advisable to adopt this proposition. On another
occasion I have stated, that I thought that some extension
of the franchise was ele.irable. At the same time, or the
house will recollect, I said I did not at all agree that it was
an evil to have county, large city, and small borough con-
stituencies, hut, on the contrary, that if we merely had a
repriseutation of numbers, this being an intelligent and a
wealthy country, would not he so well represented a. at the
present moment. With these opinions I certainly could
not be a party to that which I,ollle members of this house
seem to wish, namely, a revolution in our ancient
and the sweeping away of the
• Blttfo"nrenoletn3ongt7iti.r with all the other acts on which the
present state of the representation is founded. But, at the
14311 e . ~ 1 do think it is desirable to intrialitee a measure
for some further extension of the suffrage—(cheers)—and
by which, in particular, we should off nal to the working
till-sea greater opportunities of Wit: • • g votes than they at
present 'woes.. (Cheers.) I answered to an bon. gentle-
man (Sir Jiehua Walnialey), who put the question to me
the other night whether the government were about to in-
troduce any measure for the extension of the suffrage in
the courte of the present wesion, that the govern•
ment had not that intention. There are reasons, peculiar
to the present time, and general reasons of policy, why, in
my opinion, such a course would be inadvisable. !tut,
while believing all this, I can ace no reason why, after
this session ha. passed, and ut the commeneement of the
next session, there should not he laid before this house by the
government a prapisail in nopect to this qui sti .... of parlia-
mentary reform. (Cheers.) Certainly, if I um a member of the
goverment at that time I shall deem it my duty to lay my
views on this subject lwfore the House of Commons.
(Cheers.) I know perfectly, well that those views would
not altogether meet with the approbation of the honourable
member for Montrose and of other gentlemen who agree
with him. But I have so often stated the ilifferenre of
opinion which exist, between us that it ought to create tin
surprise in his mind at finding that I have come to a prac-
tical conclusion, essentially distinct from that proposal Nhich
lie hen laid from time to time before the house. I do nit, how-
ever, think it is desirable, considering that bynext session 20
years will have elapsed since the passing of the Ititforen
Bill—that we should then consider whether there are not
great numbers of our people not possessed by that act of the
franchise, who are nut only fully qualified to exercise the
suffrage, but whore exercise of the suffrage would tend to
the improvement of the character of this how*. (Cheers.)
I am, myself, perfectly satisfied with the experience we
have had of that act. I believe that the representation
sine 1832 has been such as to give confidence to the people
at large—(hear)—which confidence they would nit have
had in a House of Commons in which were members
for 01,1 Sarum and fur Gatton, and in which were not mem-
bees for Manchester, and Leeds, and Birm.ngham. (Cheers.)
I am therefore perfectly aatisticel that the influence of that
Reform Bill, loudly as it was denied at the time that it
could be so, 144 been salutary; and therefore, in any
changes we may make, we ought to consult the spirit of that
Reform Act—we ought to commit the temper and the
genius of the people of thew United Kingdom. and not at-
tempt to construct any fanciful edifice based upon any
new theory of our own, but, building upon the old fuunda-
tion, continually endeavour to improve- the symmetry and
add to the convenience of the ancient habitation. (Loud
cheers.)
Mr. IIUME was glad that at last they hail obtained a
definite promise from the noble lord, although it was not
very pleasant to be told, after all, that if they would wait
till next session, they might then get something. The
noble lord did nut seem to be aware that he hail 'wen tardy,
or that he was to blame for having passed twenty years
without an effort to:remedy the over and over again acknow-
ledged defect. of the Iteform Bill. The same reasons which
existed now, fur a movement in this direction had existed
during thew 20 years; and what he (Mr. Hume) asked
now, and would continue to ask, he had asked all along,
that having taken a wise step in passing the Reform Bill,
they should carefully awl calmly continue in the same
course, and admit the whole of their fellow-countrymen
within the pale of the constitution.
Mr. CO BD E N said— 1 has e heard with very great pleasure,
and I am sure the country will receive with much satisfaction
the declaration made this evening by the noble lord, that he
propessed to bring in next session a measure of parliamentary
reform. I only hope that in the interval the country will give
that attention to the subject which will enable it to secure
a real and substantial measure of reform in one present
most faulty system (Cheers.) I think—and I should nut
have said a word on this motion if the noble lord had not
addressed himself to the larger question—that some of the
scene., we have witness el in one or two of our smaller
liewough•—such as the Falkirk district, Set Alhana, or take
Wareham as the most recent example—are utterly disgrace-
ful to us. I have witnessed set•nes in some of these small
1 places, where perhaps there are but two, three, or four hun-
' dred elector., exceeding anything that ha occurred on the
coutinent of Europe at general electionain which six millions
of people have taken part. There has frequently been
I more. drunkenness, violence, bloodshed, and even mortal
combats, in the course of an election contest at one of these
little boroughs than could be found throughout an election
. ' in France, where some six millions of men have had to go
r to the poll. (Hear, hear.) I trust the noble lord will bear
I 1 this in mind in his scheme, and that he will come to one
1 conclusion, and one conclusion only, that the constituen-
, cies in which there are only two, or three, or four
II hundred totem, where there is open voting, and where,
, 1 as the necessary consequence iu such a constituency,
1 , there is bribery, intimidation, and corruption of every kind,
. involve evils which ought to he extirpated altogether front
111 any electoral system. Meer, hear.) I hope that the noble
lord will direct himself to this great task with the comic-
'l
timi that the country has for a very long time been looking
for some measure of reform. Everything has up to this
' time, been refused . • and I do believe- that after the declare-
, tine of the noble lord to-night, he will be greatly mistaking
• I the sense of the country unless he, or some one else holding
. his responsible situation' be prepared to bring in a measure
. commensurate with the evils of the exalting system and
, properly calculated to meet the wants and convictions of
I the people. (Heer, bear.) I will say one word upon
the argument offered by the noble lord in reference to
I the motion which is before 49. The noble lord has said
l that the proposal of my hon. friend would admit to the
C franchise a clan of men altogether unobjectionable in point

of circumstances, character, and integrity. It hail been said,
and said truly, that the man who rents a house of the value
of 101. in a rural district, is as good a man as ho who lives
in a similar house in a large town. Now, I think if we
take property as the test of character, which we are pro-
bably a little too prone to do in this country, that the man
who rents a 101. house in a villageor in amarket town which
is not an enfranchised borough, is, generally speaking, a
man in superior circumstances to the person renting a 101.
house in a great town. The noble lord, therefore, cannot,
and does not, offer any objection to the motion of my hon.
friend on the score of the character or position of those pro-
posed to he enfranchised. The noble lord, however, objects
to the innovation, by the SW. tenant at will clause, upon
the old system of the freeholds in counties; and, on the
same ground, now objects to the creation of a 10/. eoustitu-
nig. But, taking the tenant at will clause as a fact,
which he is not prepared to get rid of, the noble
lord does not show us what possible mischief could arise
from extending the la franchise to counties. It is not a
question of innovation at all ; hut the question is, having
the 501. tenants at will in existence and affecting elections,
will you give the people of the counties a fair representa-
tion, tor that is all we have in view, by awarding them a
101. franchise to balance the .50/. franchise which is already
established? The noWe lord remarks that he has found, in
eanr, kr counties, that the .50/. tenant at will is
not en independent a man as the forty shilling
freeholder. lam inclined to say that the noble lord is un-
doubtedly right in that ; but it hyl3o means follows that the
Toter, voting in virtue of n 10/. house, may not also he more
independent than the 501. tenant-at-will. (Hear, hear.)
There is every reason, as I think the noble lord will find, if
he will follow up his argument, why the 501. tenant-at-will
cannot exercise the franchise so independently as the. forty
shilling freeholder. The reason it obvious. The tenant
who rents a farm of 50 acres or upwards, is a man who
depends for his subsistence on the application of his capital
to the land which he holds from a landlord, by whom that
land may at any time be withdrawn from him. Land is
limited ; the farmer is accustomed to no pursuit but fann-
ing ; it would be a serious thing to him were he removed
from his farm ; Anil, naturally, the landlord thus exercises
an immunise control over that class of tenants in all cases
where their rotes arc of value. But if you go to the la
householder in a market town or village, you find a man
who need nut care for the threats of a landlord. He
is a man in business, a greengrocer, a butcher,
'or a shoemaker, and if he gets notice to quit,
he ran leave his house without being ruined; for he can
very soon get another house, and his business is independent
of his landlord. It would. therefore, be quite compatible
with the view of the noble lord, with regard to maintaining
the independence of counties, to extend the innovation on
the ancient system adopted in the Reform Bill, by creating
kit. tenant-at-will voters to the occupiers in rural districts
of 101. houses. l'assing over the fact that the ministry
were lately saved from a minority by only 14 votes, I must
ask the house what is the state of the county representation
as presented to us lately ? Take the representation of Here-
fordshire Glamorgansliire, Nottinghamshire, Montgomery-
shire—take the elections now going on for North Staf-
fordshire and for Bedfordshire. Here I have men-
tioned six counties or divisions of counties. No doubt
the mass of the people in those counties are deter-
mined to maintain free trade, but then n free trade
candidate would not have a chance of succeeding in any of
them. (Hear. hear.) Why you have only two classes,
landlords and tenants, to send the county members to par-
liament; but the voters are only a small fraction of the
population of those counties. I say that it is a great peril
to your institutions, and a reproach to the country, if you
allow such discrepancies to exist as this —that all the coun-
ties, although the inhabitants may firm a free trade majo-
rity„ send up nien to vote in parliament for dear his ad,
against the free export of the products of industry, and
fur high living, and all that appertains to it,
and then they are said to represent the county. (Hear,
hear.) I consider that my hon. friend has dune great ser-
vire by bringing forward this motion—(hear, hear)—for the
country will he glad to hear that it has elicited front the
noble lord the assurance that we shall have a very large,
extensive, and complete modification and improvement of
our representative system.
Mr. I'. IHSWARD spoke shortly in support of the
motion; but the house was impatient, and the hon. mem-
ber was interrupted by calls for a division.
The question was then put and the house divided. The
numbers were :
For the motion
Against it 52--II
The announcement of the result was hailed with much
cheering.