The Express.
London, England, 1851-04-03 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, THURSDAY EVENING, APRIL 3, 1851.

tbionneesee of the second reading would be dangerous to
the Moe of general reform in the representation, he should
MO whist his hon. friend. eHear, hear.)
/11;11. BERLELET and Mr. noon spoke against the
esisad reading, and Mr. UZYWORTR in its favour.
Mr. OSBORNE maintained that this was a sham motion,
not meant to be carried out. He had more confidence in
the ability of the noble lord to carry reform measures than
the small party to which he (Mr. Osborne) belonged. He
would not distrust the noble lord, and should give him no
factious opposition. He called upon Mr. King, andel' who
were in favour of practical and efficient reform, to give up
this bill.
Mr. M'CULLACiII reproached thaw members who were
going to act in the teeth of their former vote with flying
front their principles.
Lord J. it USSELL said he had bat very little to add to the
speech of his right hon. friend the Secretary at War, at the
commencement of the discussion. His right'hon. friend had
stated that he (Lord J. Russell) assured the house on a pre-
vious occasion that he had no objection that these classes
should be admitted to the privilege of the franchise ; but
the ground on which he wished to argue this question was,
that their being admitted to vote for county purposes would
not be au improvemeet of the representative .}stem. (Hear,
hear.) In the same way, if it were proposed that the furty-
shilling freeholders, who were not redolent, should vote in
Manchester and Leeds. without questioning their fitness, he
should view such a proceeding as not calculated to improve
the representation in that house. Some hon. gentle-
men, in giving their reasons as to why they,
should vote in favour of the bill, required that
he should give the house some explanation. But be- ,
fore he said a word on that subject he wished to put it to
the house whether or not it was desirable to vote for a pro-,
position on the grounds stated by the hon. gentleman the
member for East Surety ? (Hear, hear.) The hon. gen-
tleman said there was but one alteration in reepect to the
elective franchise required, namely, giving Ice. voters the
power of voting in etounties•' and with that change the
representation would Ise such as they could eately stand
upon. But that was not the hon. gentleman's propoeitiou;
it was only one of those changes which he wished to see
effected. Ile (Lord J. Russell) therefore asked the house,
considering the importance, the gravity of this suhjeet,—
considering that all the laws and measures adopted
depended on the electoral body,—he asked whe.
they it would be wiser to adopt a measure of I
this kind now, limited as it was, or to wait
till the whole scheme for the alteration and ex-
tension of the franchise should he brought before the house ?I
(Ikar, hear.) lie gave that as a reason for not adopting
the proposition. (Hear, hear.) The hon. memo eefor Man-
chester
(Mr. Bright) expressed a wish that he (Lord J.
Rusitelt) should state what were his general views, what
would he his proposition, and how far his stews would go.
Now, he thought that would be the very worst course be
could pursue. (Ilear, hear.) There might he many rea-
sons for nut bringing forward an extension of the franchise
at press nt ; there might be many good riftroll• fur pest-
pouing it till next session; but he could not see any !grounds
now fur going into the details and general nature of a mesa. I
sure juts-ailed to he proposed in a future session, as his'
doing se would have the effect of sending the I
scheme to the country unexplained and unde-
fended, there to be canvassed in the interim that
must elapse before its being brought before the legista- '
ture. (Hear, hear.) Ile should therefore adhere to the
declaration made on a previous occasion, namely, on the
bringing forward of this bill, that he was of opinion, eery
much rat. the reasons given by the hon. member for Call-
terbury, on the grounds of improved intelligence and
geueral spread of information since the period of 1831, like-
wise for other reasons, such as the defects neceeetrilv hi-
st parable from any great measure ouch as the Reform bill,
that it would be wise if that house should, at the commence-
ment of the next session, consider a measure for the extension
of the franchise. (Hear, hear.) Ile had stated so fee-
quently his general views as to the representation of the
country., and the basis on which it. now etood, that
be did not think it necessary or expedient to
go into that question at present. (Hear, hear.) With these
few obeereatione he would leave the question in the hands
of the 'mete, at the same time expressing his determination
to vote against it. (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.")
Mr. DISRAELI could not allow the house to come to a
division without briefly expressing his %kW,. The right
hon. gentleman, the Secretary at War, with an almost con-
vulsive effort to reconstruct the reform party, had described
Lon. gentlemen on his (Mr. Disraeli's) side of the house as
handed iteuinst every species of parlinmentary reform.
Now, he was at a loss to understand what authority the
right lion. gentleman had for so doing. (Ilear, liter, with
e No, no,' from Mr. Fox Maule.) The right hon. gentle-
man informed hint that he del nut make use of these obser-
vations, which, nut having taken them down, he would re-
call. ()Hear, hear.) But, at least, if the right hon. gentle-
men did not make nee of thee; words, they unfortunately
conveyed that impression. (Hear, hear.) Last year
a measure widely extending the franchise in Ire-
land was brought forward and carried without the
least opposition. The Right Hon. Secretary at War,
with remarkable consistency, next advocated the
principle of the measure of the hon. member fir East Sur-
rey, on the ground that it would Mere:see the franchise now
enjoyed by the county tenants. But he should have re-
membered it was not from hint or from his friends that that
detest, of the Reform Bill emanated. (Hear, hear.) When
he (Mr. Disraeli) heard the tief. tenants is counties described
as nut worthy of the franchise that was about to be confer-
red on an interior class of individuals, he could not help
'saying it was the opinion of all that that class had exercised
the franchise, in a manner must creditable to themeelvere as
well as advantageous to the constitution. (Hear, hear.) lie
begged to remind the house when the Reform Bill was pro-
posed that hon. gentlemen who proposed and supported
it were in the habit of saying that noo sincere
adhesion would he given thu bill by gentlemen
who sat on that (Mr. Disraeli'i) side of the (muse; and it
was in vain those loin. gentlemen declared that, if it passed
into law, they would give it their culheeion. They had been
told, in thet, that the retention of their seats depended on
the adhedon they gave " the bill, the whole bill, and ut,thing
but the hill." Well, they gave it their adherence ; and
they supported it. (War.) Ile admitted that there was, if
not au actual, at least a virtual, compact that that was to
be consiolenelfor it time a settlement of the great tpeetims
and it, hug a, the political party who introduced it upheld
it, he admitted it would nut be wise or politic to sanction
any alteration in it, as such would only tend to encourage
au agitation fatal, perhaps, to the iutereste of the commu-
nity. (Hear, hear.) But when not only the political
party who, introduced the Habra' Bill, hut the very
statesman who framed, and moulded, sod introduced it hitt.'
the house, gave up his own handy work, then he mnsidered
they were quite free to deal with the question without re-
ference to its antecedents. (Beer, hear.) lie thought they
were perfectly right in considering the franchise of the
comm •y w about reference to the past, and only with re-
ference to those conisideratieus that affected the public wel-
fate. (Hear, hear.) lie entirely protested against being
considered an advocate of that doctrine popularly known as
" finality," but objected to nominal reforms, designed in
I reality to promote party interests.
Mr. W. G. STAN LIS was underetotod to say he would
support the sieves of the noble lord the first miuister of the
crown. (Loud trite, of " Divide.")
Mr. L. KING was anxious to explain the course he
wished to adopt at pre' rut. (Cries of "Go on.") Several
appeals having been mottle by hon. gentlemen and friends
with a view to have the bill withdrawn and not pressed to
a division, he could only say that the hill was then in the
hands of the house, and that he sits unwilling to undertake
the responsibility of pressing it toe divieon. ("Goon, go on.")
However, the bill was iu the hands of the house. (" Divide.
divide.")
The house then divided—
}'or the bill
Against it
The bill was accordingly negatived.
AUDIT OF RAILWAY ACCOUNTS BILL.

... 299-216

Mr. LOCKE, in moving the second reading of this
hill, having referred to the measures on this subject which
had been brought forward and afterwards withdrawn,
said the shareholders were left at the end of last
session without any bill. They met, however, and instructed
him to move for leave to bring in the bill which had been
presented last year to the House of Lords by Lord
Stanley. In pursuance of these instructions, he moved
for and obtained leave to introduce the bill of which
he now moved the second reading. Ile hoped that it
would not be maintained that men who had spent
120,000,000/. in great public enterprises were not fit to
manage their own attain. Ile admitted there were some
ditierencei of opinion as regarded the provisions of the bill,
but he hoped they might be so improved in committee as to
give satisfaction to all parties. they were fully considered
by 10 gentlemen who represented the railway interest, and
h.aving the best professional assistance he felt %tinkled that
the provisions of the bill would bear the fullest examina•
tion of the house. (Hear.)
Mr. HEY' WORTH seconded the motion.
Mr. LABOUCHEKE said that he did not rise to oppose
the motion of his hon. friend: but, at the same time, he
could not allow the motion to pass without making a few
observations upon the subject.lle deeply felt the importance of
having some efficient system of railway audit, but he could
not disguise front himself, or from the house, that he was at
variance with his hon. friend as to the principle which he
thought should animate the house on this subject. His
opinion was, that do what they might, they would never
enable the railway shareholders of this country to es-
tablish a real and effective control over the amounts
' in cases where the boards of directors were not trustworthy
or where they wished to deceive the public and the share-
holders. He came, therefore, to the conclusion that the
audit of railway accounts should be founded on some prin-
ciple beyond the railway companies. lle thought that there
should be an independent audit; he did not say a govern-
ment audit, for he agreed in the position that government
should not interfere in matters of this d scription. (Hear,
hear.) And he always moot anxiously recommended the
I house to disentangle the goventineut from any such t,
nexion. But he thought that the bill of his
I honourable friend, founded as it was on a differ-
ent principle from that which he had stated, would
not defend the shareholders or the public in those gross
sad &grant cases where the board of directors were either
dishonest or incapable, and where they desired to deceive
the public and the company as to the rent state and position
a its affairs. And it was to be recollected that it was fur
One extreme cases they were bound to provide. (Hear,
Mar.) He therefore would never be a party to the bring-
ing forward of any measure for the establishment of a
nalwa7 accounts audit which was not founded on some-
thine independent of the railway company itself. He was
afraid that the present measure would be found to be a
delusion—more plausible, perhaps, in appearance than the
existing system—but which would not wore. in the wsy
intended by his hon. friend, and would not give the public
or the shareholders any real protection in the supposed case of
a fraudulent, incapable, or dishonest board of directors.
(Hear, hem.) lie thought that there were some defect*

In the details of the bill, which lie would not then enter
upon, but he might mention that the system of railway
accounts which his hon. friend proposed in the schedules
was extremely defective, and in that respect the bill
differed from the measure introduced by Lord Stanley in
the House of Lords.
Mr. HUME thought the bill would have a different
effect from what the right hon. gentleman seemed to anti-
cipate. He had nut a railway share in the world and he
was therefore in a position to give a candid opinion.
Mr. H. BROWN said that he should move the addition
of certain clauses in committee and the omission of others,
with a view of affording greater protection to proprietors.
Mr.O.C. GLYN should vote for the second reading of the
bill. At the same time he wished to state that he reserved to
himself the right of objecting to several clauses as they
now SIO.KI in the bill. Ile considered that the effi-
ciency of the measure was destroyed by the word-
ing
of some of the clauses. Ile supported the bill
because it proceeded on a different principle from that
which the right hon. gentleman laid down as the proper
one to be applied to the audit of railway accounts. (Hear,
hear.) He was greatly surprised when the right hon. gen-
tleman said that in the measures he proposed he avoided
the introduction of the principle of government inter-
ference.
Ile would appeal to hon. gentlemen who attended
to these matters whether those hills were founded on any
other principle than that of government interference in the
details of railway concerns. (Hear, hear.)
The bill was then read a second time.
EXPENSES OF PROSECUTIONS BILL.
On the motion of Sir G. GREY, this bill was committed
pro fused, for the purpose of printing some additional
clauses.
MARINE MUTINY BILL AND MUTINY BILL.
The reports on thew two hills were received.
The other orders were then postponed, and the house ad
journed at ten minutes to six to.i:lock.