The Express.
London, England, 1867-03-16 00:00:00

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM.

Earl GREY, in presenting a petition on the subject of
parliamentary reform, seized the comaion to expound his
views of what would constitute a just settlement of the
question. In the first place, he held that there mast be •
wider redistribution of seats than had yet been proposed
in any scheme hitherto submitted to the legislature. If a
rating franchise were adopted, he thought it 'meld be un-
desirable to allow parties who compounded for their rates
to have • vote, and admitting the necessity for reducing
the franchise to a considerable extent, be objected to
giving a monopoly to the most numerous class of persons,
whose interests, ()pinions, and circumstances were so
much alike. Plurality of voting would, in his jud7ment,
be offensive, on the ground that it had the appearance of
conferring • privilege upon mere wealth ; on the other
hand. he regarded cumulative voting with much favour,
as • mew of restraining the power of majorities in
boroughs to cor.trul the whole representation, and so to
check bribery to some extent. He should regard the
situation with great alarm if another session were wasted
without a satisfactory settlement of the question ; but a
satisfactory measure could only be one that was
well balanced and complete in all its details, espe-
cially as regarded the distribution of sesta. In conclu-
sion he deprecated the adoption of any scheme of reform
which was merely calculated to appease temporary de-
mands ; for there was another and higher object, and that
was the improvement of the constitution of the House of
Commons, making it a faithful but independent reflex of
the nation, and enabling it the better to discharge its im-
portant functions.
The speech of the noble earl elicited no response, and the
petition was ordered to lie upon the table.
The Traffic Regulation (Metropolis) Bill passed through
committee.

fheSliiiping Local Dues Bill was read a second time.
Their lordships rose at twenty minutes to d o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—FRIDAY, DlARcif 15.
The SPEAKER took the chair shortly before four o'clock.
NEW MEMBERS.
Lord NRwyoRY took the oath and his oast for North
Shropshire in the room of Mr. A. W. Cud, who has suc-
ceeded to the title of Lord Brownlow.
Sir J. PAKINGTON took the oath and his seat for Droll.-
wich on his re-election after his appointment as Secretary
for War.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The following bills were read a third time and passed :
London City Municipal Elections ; Northumberland
Central Railway ; and the St. Mary Magdalene Hospital
(Newcastle-upon-Tyne) Bill'. The Seabrook Harbour and
Docks Bill was read a second time.
NOTICES.

BONRILL-FIELDO BURIAL GROUND.—Mr. CRAWFORD to
ask for leave on Tuesday, the 2nd of April, to bring in a
bill to make this burial ground one of the open apnoea of
the metropolis.
MRTROPOLITAN RATINO.—Mr. CRAWFORD to !worse
clause in the Metropolitan Improvement Bill, limiting the
rating powers of the Metropolitan Board of Works to 4d.
in the pound in any one year.
MR. CHURCHWARD.

Mr. TAYLOR asked the Secretary of State for the
Home Department whether the Mr. Churohward who had
lately been nominated to the magistracy at Dover was the
same gentleman of whom a committee of this house re-
marked in their report in 1859, that ho had " resorted to
corrupt expedients affecting injuriously the character of
the representation of the people in parliament ;" and of
whom likewise it was reported by a select committee of
this house, in 1833, that he had been guilty of bribery ?
(Cheers:)._—_ . .

Mr. WALPOLE—Since the hon. member placed his
notice on the paper I have communicated with my noble
friend the Lord Chancellor. I have alsoreferred to the
report, to which I presume the question alludes, as im-
puting bribery to Mr. Churchward. I will read the exact
words of that report, which are contained in two distinct
In, and I think the house will see that it is not a
thingfair r
to say that Mr. Churchward was charged with
bribery in the sense which the question implies. (Oh,
oh.) The first charge relates to the election at Plymouth
in UM, and the report says—" That it was proved that
George Knapmen was bribed by C. J. Mare, Esq., and
Joseph George Churchward, by the promise to use their
influence to obtain a situation in the excise." (Cheers.)
The house will see that the charge was one of promising
to procure a place, and not one of bribery by giving
money. (" Oh, oh," and " Order.") There was, at all
events, a very material distinction between the two things
in the view of the committee ; and their opinion has never
been challenged. Ina farther report they say—" That a gene-
ral belief appears to have prevailed at Plymouth, both pre-
vious to andat the election in 1852, that it was not illegal for
a candidate or his agent to obtain, or promise to obtain,
situations or employment for elector who had previously
pledged their votes. (Oh, oh.) That the circumstances of
the case are not such as to induce the committee to recom-
mend a further inquiry by a commission." (Ministerial
cheers.) These being the facts of the case, I will now com-
municate to the house the answer which my noble friend
the Lord Chancellor has given relative to his appointment
of Mr. Churchward as a magistrate. Lord Chelmsford
says :—" Mr. Churchward was a stranger to me. In the
application for new magistrates for Dover he was recom-
mended by gentlemen upon whom I felt myself justified in
relying, and I was utterly ignorant until I was shown the
notice of the question that he had ever been suspected of
being concerned in any irregular transactions connected
with elections" (Hear, hear.)
. .

Serjeant CIASELEEL I wish to ask the right hon. gen-
tleman whether the noble lord, now that the facto have
come to his knowledge, has rescinded the appointment.
(Cheer,.)

Mr. WALPOLE—The hon. gentleman, if he asks me
such a question, ought to give me notice of it. (Hear.)
Serjeant t;A.E.LEE—Very well ; then I beg to give the
right hon. gentleman notice that I shall ask the question
of Min on Monday next. (Cheers.)
Mr. TAYLOR—The right hon. gentleman has omitted
to answer one part of my question—namely, whether Mr.
Churchward is the gentleman of whom • committee of
this house remarked in a report in NM that he had "re-
sorted to corrupt expedients affecting injuriously the
character of the representation of the people in parlia-
ment." (Cheers.),