The Express.
London, England, 1866-06-05 00:00:00

THE REFORM BILL.

Lord ELCHO—I wish toask the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer the queatiou which rput to him on Friday night. I
wish to know whether, in the event of the amendment of
the hon. and gallant member for Wells being rejected, it
is the intention of the government to proceed with the bill
MOM before the house, by which I mean the united bill
for the redistribution of seats and the extension of the
franchise, aad to endeavour with their whole power to
carry it through parliament during the present session.
((ries of " Oh, oh," and cheers.)

Mr. HADFIELD—May I ask whether the Chancellor of
the Exchequer has received notice from the hon. and gal-
lant gentleman the member for Wells that he does not in-
tend to press his amendment ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—In answer
to my hon. friend the member for Sheffield, I must aay
that I have not had the honour to receive any communi-
cation, either official or unofficial, from my hon. and gal-
lant friend the member for Wells. The question of my
noble friend is no doubt founded upon the rumours which
be alleged were in circulation on Friday last, that in the
event of the rejection of the amendment of my hon. and
gallant friend the government intended to abandon their
united bill, and I understand Lim to ask whether there is
any foundation for those rumours. Her Majesty's
government havo neither said nor done anything
whatever which could afford a foundation for those
reports, or warrant their circulation, and they have formed
no such intention as is suggested. As to anything beyond
that, referring to proceedings in the latter portion of the
session, that is a matter which can hardly be made the
subject of a specific inquiry at the present moment, be-
cause in great political struggles of this kind there are
always stele to be taken which cannot be made the sub-
ject of anticipatory decision, and with regard to which we
must be guided by the consideration of the public interest
and the circumstances of the time as we make progress.
We have fanned no such intentions as the rumours re-
ferred to by the noble lord appear to suggest. (Cheers.)
Sir H. CAlRNS—Although we have no right to rim
the government for fresh explanations upon the subg
already referred to, I think I may ask whether
adhere to the resolution already announced, that they •
not advise the crown to prorogue rairlianient—r Oh, oh,"
td cheers)—until this bill has been either rejected or

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Consider-
ing the nature of the issue which has been raised on the
debate which is now going on ' • considering that it is an
issue which involves at once the fate of the government
and the fate of the bill ; and considering the answer that I
have given to my noble Mend, I do not think I ought to
proceed further in reply to the hon. and learned gentle-
man. (Cheers.)
Mr. HADFIELD asked the hon. and gallant gentleman
the member for Wells whether he intended to press his
amendment to a division?

Captain 1111 TER —lt is impossible for me to form any
decision until we receive from the leader of the govern-
ment in this house the statement which we shall probably
hear later in the evening.
Sir T. BATESON—I wish to ask the hon. and gallant
member for Wells whether any communication has been
made to him either directly or indirectly that, in the event
of the government getting a majority at this stage of the
bill, there will be any manipulation of the Redistribution
Billtandahy re-arrangement which may make things more

comfortable.
Captain HAYTER—Certainly not. (Cheers.)
Mr. HORSIIAN—We ought to have a distinct under-
standing as to the position which we now occupy with re-
gard to this subject, and I therefore wish to ask the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer whether he adheres to the state-
ment which he made a short time ago, in answer to a ques-
tion asked by the hon. member for Brighton, that the go-
vernment intend to stand or fall by the bill, and that what
he means by that is, that as long as the bill stands the go-
vernment stands, and when the bill falls the government

falls.
'The CHANCELLOR of tire -EXCHEQUER—I appre-
hend that it is perfectly clear that in a case of this nature,
when the government has expressly informed the house of
its intentions and determination, it is their duty, if they
subsequently alter that determination, to inform the house
of the change—(hear, hear)—without waiting for such •
question as has been put by my right hon. friend. That I
apprehend to be absolutely required by the most elemen-
tary of their obligations to this branch of the legislature.
Under these circumstances I need not say that, if we had
changed any intentions which we have announced to the
house, we should ourselves have been the parties to an-
nounce that change, and should not have waited for in-
quiries from any member of this house. (Cheers.)
THE REFORM BILL •
The adjourned debate upon the Representation of the
People and Redistribution of Seats Bill was resumed by
Lord J. MANNERS, who said that he objected to
the measure, because it was introduced under circum-
stances which excited the gravest suspicion ; because
there had been so much indecision on the part of the
government; because it would create far more anomalies
than it would destroy abuses; and further, because it would
destroy the existing character of the county constituencies.
(Hear, bear.) If it were true that the government never
considered the questioe of reform till after the death of
Lord Palmerston, they were certainly open to the charge
of precipitancy and haste for the manner in which they
bad brought the bills forward. (Hear, hear.) The ques-
tion which hon. gentlemen on his side of the house had to
ask was, whether, as they appreciated the blessings of •
constitution under which they had lived, as they had acted
under no compulsion, as they had been unconvinced by
any argument and unconverted by figures, they should
support this measure. (Hear, hear.) On the contrary, he
might say that if the issue rested with the party on the op-
position side of the house the bill would never becomelsw ;
but it was notorious that it rested with the independent
members of the great whig party. He would appeal to
those hon. gentlemen to interpose, and prevent the
further progress of a measure which must prove subversive
of the best institutions of the country. (Cheers.)
Earl GROSVENOR said that as he could not give a
allent vote upon this occasion, he rose to state why he
should give his vote in favour of the government—(minis-
terial cheers)—and against the resolution of the hon. and
gallant member for Wells. (Hear.) The question with
him was, whether by voting against the resolution,
and thus keeping the government where they were, they
would be doing anything else than defeating the measure
of the government, for if they allowed the bill to go into
committee he should hold himself perfectly free to oppose
many parts of it tooth and nail, if he might use the ex-
pression, as in his opinion there were many por-
tions of the bill which were highly objectionable. (Hear.)
Though he had little confidence in the government on the
question of reform, when he reflected on the state of the
affairs of Europe, and on their financial crisis, which had
not yet subsided, and which, he was afraid, would not
subside for some time, he held it to be of the greatest con-
sequence that the government should not resign office at
the present time. Without in the least intending to re-
flect on the ability of gentlemen opposite he hoped he
might be permitted to say that he had great confidence
in Lord Clarendon, who had oonducted the foreign
affairs of the country with great credit to himself
and with great advantage to the nation. (Hear, hear.)
He should be sorry to see him vacate office at the present
time. (Hear, hear.) His own impression was that the
chance of the bill passing that session was very remote in-
deed. (Hear, hear.) He would venture to appeal to his
right hon. friend whether, as the feeling in the house and
in the country—for the house was but a reflex of the opi-
nion of the country—was against the measure of the go-
vernment, he would not defer to that feeling, and ward
off that opposition and disaster which would be fatal to
him and to the government if he did not postpone until a
more favourable opportunity and after more mature haves-
gation legislation on this subject? (Hear, hear.)
Mr. OSBORNE, describing himself as "an inde-
pendent member," congratulated Earl Grosvenor on his
return to his political allegiance to the whigs, and ob-
served that the desertion of so distinguished an Adullam-
ite had made the cave shrink into the dimensions of a
grotto. The question of reform had not, he thought, been
fairly treated in the house, especially by the liberal party,
and he for one was ready to do penance in a white shirt
if necessary for having opposed the excellent measure
introduced by Lord Derby. He advocated the ex-
tension of the suffrage because he considered that
the people were not adequately represented. As for the
electoral returns which had been laid upon the table, be
believed them to be false, because he knew that many of
the electors of Nottingham who were put down as " work-
ing men" were in reality publicans—end sinners. It
would, he thought, diminish that flunkeyism which was
so fast spreading over the house if a healthy admixture of
the working classes were brought into it. Referring to
the speech of Mr. Lowe, the hon. gentleman read extracts
from an oration of that right bon. gentleman delivered at
Kidderminster in 1858, in which he expressed himself hos-
tile to the maintenance of small boroughs, and took credit
for baring advocated a 10/. franchise in Australia. The
astounding energy which the right hon. gentleman now
exhibited in advocating diametrically opposite principles
remindol him of the observation of Sheridan when he
saw a Highlander in a very large pair of breeches, that
" converts were always enthusiastic." He recommended
the house to go into committee, at once upon the bill ;
and he adjured the government not to do anything so
pusillanimous as to adopt the dangerous advice of Sir J.
l'akington, and refer the British constitution to • royal
commission or to the Privy Council.
Mr. ADDERLEYpressed the government to say whether
they intended to take Lord Groeveuor's advice, for if they
did, it was deceiving the house to go on with the debate
merely to get a sham majority to enable them to retain
office. He argued against the bill, as adverse to the prin-
ciples of 1832, and as involving the entire suppression of
the county interest, and, denying that the Opposition had
taken up the position of obstructives, he fixed the blame of
delay on the tactics of the government.
Mr. GRENFELL contrasted the moderation of the ex-
treme liberals with the obstinacy of the conservative oppo-
sition, and urged an united attempt to settle the question.
Lord R. MONTAGU, in endeavouring to discover some
common ground of agreement between all parties, pointed
out various matters on which both sides were of one mind,
and after examining the various theories of representation
by numbers and by taxation, argued that some system of
plurality of votn was the only mode of adequately repre-
senting all the social forces of the country.
The discussion was continued in a very thin house by
Mr. Pim, who, though not approving all the details of the
bill, recommended the house to go into committee and
make the beat of it ; by Mr. Walrond, who advocated •
compromise founded on a 201. county and en 81. borough
francize ; by Mr. Wyld, who defended his borough (Bod-
min) from some aspersions cast on its purity by Mr. Os-
borne, and complained of the injustice threatened to East
Cornwall by the bill ; by Mr. H. Seymour, who defended
the 71. franchise as a point on which • permanent stand
could be made, and thought the small boroughs had room
to be thankful that I. :y were grouped, and not extin-
guished ; by Mr. Mitft...l and Sir T. Beeson, both of
whom opposed the bill.
Mr. COLERIDGE, fearing lest the country should
come to the opinion that they were trying to strangle the
bill, exhorted the house to go into committee by such •
majority as would enable the government to retain office
with dignity, and to pass at least the important portions of
the bill this session. The rest of Mr. Coleridge's speech
consisted of a bitter criticism on Mr. Lowe and his recent
speeches, the opinions of which, he said, were detestable,
marked by a tone of cynical materialism, and utterly irre-
levant as applied to a measure which had been accepted by
some part of the liberal party with great reluctance on
account of its moderation. Alluding to Mr. Lowe's dis-
quisition on " honour," he maintained that the honour of
the government was pledged to persevere with the bill,
and the liberal party was pledged in honour to support
them.
Mr. WHITESIDE, after vindicating Mr. Lowe from the
criticism of the previous speaker, proceeded to quote from
Mr. Mill's works arguments which he contended went to
show that the extension of the franchise tended to put
the intellectual few beneath the feet of the ignorant many.
He saved that in fact no pledge had been given by the
government to the introduction and furtherance of reform.
Mr. MARSH argued in favour of postponement of
the bills, in order that the commissions of inquiry into
corrupt practices in certain boroughs might report ; when
mote might be found for places it was desirable to en-
franchise.
After some observations against the measures by Mr.
A. EOSSTON,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in re-
ference to the real intentions of the government in regard
to reform, which had been questioned, traced the history
of these measures since the introduction of the Franchise
Bill in March last, contending that its introduction then
was sufficiently early. Then, as to the consultation by
the government of political supporters, in one mom

that was impracticable, but they had, by the
moderate demands of the Franchise Bill, endeavoured
to anticipate the objections to a still lower franchise than
that, proposed entertained by some of their friends. As
some suspicion had been hinted with regard to the distri-
bution of seats, the government felt it necessary to lay
this measure before the house. Then came the demand
for the amalgamation of the bills, and again this was con-
ceded ; and thus, as in all the other steps taken, the go-
vernment desired to conciliate the house. It was a die-
couraging circumstance that a majority of the house
engrafted on the measures the subject of corrupt prac-
tices, contrary to all precedent, and in opposition to the
distinctly expressed opinion of Lord Derby. Next, the
government bad to meet the amendment of the member
for Wells, which bore about it the marks of concert
with the opposition ; and if, as bad been said,
there was want of reality in the debate, it

was not the fault of the government? but arose' out
of the break-down of certain combinations. He showed
. . .......

-- -
that in the Reform Bill of 1854, when Sir William Rayter
was a member of the government, Wells was altogether
disfranchised. He did not complain of the recalcitrance
of members for grouped boroughs, for it was their
duty to carry out on their behalf that principle of
advocacy which Lord Brougham had laid down, and
which might even throw a country into con-
fusion for the protection of • client. The prin.
ciple of grouping was adopted in no other spirit of hos-
tility to small boroughs • but it might often operate to
prevent total disfranchisement. As to the charge of preci-
pitancy in the preparation of the Reform Bill, it was
deliberately prepared by experienced constructors of such
bills in a period of forty-five days. As regarded anomalies,
the measure mitigated anomalies, just as the first Reform
Bill did, but it did not create any. Referring to Mr.
Lowe's speech, he hinted that that gentleman was one of
those who, if the honour of the government was implicated,
shared in the responsibility. As to the principle of the bill,
which Mr. Lowe professed not to comprehend, it was pa-
tent inthepropositionsof its enactmenta. The right honour-
able gentleman proceeded to examine and criticise the
plan for distribution of seats laid down on the second
reading of the bill by Mr. Disraeli, and went on to vindi-
cate his own Distribution Bill against the objections which
had been taken to it • as that 8,000 was not the proper
limit of population :that some of the groups were not
convenient to the representation of minorities by means
of unicorn membership • to the giving seven members to
Scotland, and so on, ill of which were open to dis-
cussion in committee, which would be patiently
accepted by the government. I confess that to me
(continued the right hon. gentleman) it has
always appeared that, after all, the great subject
is that of the enfranchisement of our fellow-countrmen
-(cheera)- although perhaps I may be open to the charge
of inconsistency. I have been a party to the large plans
of distribution of Lord Aberdeen, and I have been a party
to the small plans in the bill under Lord Palmerston's
government; but I look on the whole subject of redistribu-
tion necessarily as controlled by certain leading principles,
but as to its details as part of a subject which
we ought to approach in a spirit of conciliation,
with a view of settling it in such a manner as
to give the greatest general satisfaction. (Cheers.) It is
the enfranchisement of our countrymen in regard to
which we have • most serious and solemn duty to perform,

and it is there we may best show our adherence to our
leading principles. (Cheers.) These are the principles of
the bill, and we ask from the house its fair consideration.
I am bound to say I do not think that this
amendment is compatible with a fair considera-
tion of the bill. The amendment is perfectly
definite and clear. I admit, aa far u regards
the objects of my hon. and gallant friend—that is to say,
it condemns in terms perfectly explicit the system of
grouping proposed by the government. This is not an
unfair issue to raise ; but while it raises this issue fairly,
my answer is that we might admit that, and still go into
committee on the bill, when you will be free to deal with
the bill as you think fit. But the rest of the amendment
asserts that the scheme is otherwise not sufficiently matured
to form the basis of a satisfactory measure.
There is really, even grammatically, the utmost difficulty
in determining what is meant by the " scheme," and the
mention of the subjectof the franchise, which my hon. and
gallant friend inserted into his own original edition of the
amendment, having been by some careful expurgator
struck out from the revised edition, the amendment is in
point of fact very little better than unintelligible, and
looks as if it had been framed with a view of
at once getting rid of the bill, and yet escaping
from the responsibility of rejecting it on account of any
particular provisions it contained, and being in come-
quence called to account by his constituency for having
done so. (Cheers.) Nevertheless, I am afraid that was
the intention. At all events, I shall be glad if the storm
of those " no, noes " that not unfrequently arise from the
opposite benches would greet me now when I state I am
afraid it was the intention of the party opposite to give
their support to the amendment with that object.
(Cheers.) The hon. member for Belfast spoke of it in terms of
high advocacy, and it was understood through all the usual
channels of parliamentary information that the strength
of that party was to be tasked in carrying it. (Cheers.)
Sir, I pioteet in the name of the government, in the name
of the character and the credit of parliament, and on be-
half of my countrymen against your dealing with measures
of great importance in this house—especially measures of
such solemn and capital importance as this--notin the good
old English manner of ayes and noes—(cheers)—but by de-
clarations which nobody can understand—declarations that
the scheme of her Majesty's government is not sufficiently
matured—(cheers from the opposition)—to fonn the basis
of a satisfactory measure. (Renewed opposition cheers).
Why, do not hon. gentlemen see that any man who
wanted to shuffle out of a controversy would use such
language? Is it not to these generalities that ambition re-
sorts for the prosecution of its wicked purposes? (Laughter
from the opposition and cheers from the ministerial benches. )
Do not let any gentleman suppose that I am at this mo-
ment speaking of political parties in this house. I am
speaking of those who, on vague and general grounds,
have opposed those who took a definite line of policy,
whether in politics or theology. (Hear, hear.) I expressed
a hope, I confess, that on this occasion there would be
more sympathy with me, but I have been disappointed.
But this I will say, that we had a right to expect it. It
was promised to us, it was gratuitously promised to us, it
was ostentatiously promised to us. On the 6th of Feb., 1866,
Lord Derby used these words—" I promise the noble earl
another thing, that is, that his bill shall have fair play—
(cheers and counter cheers)—that it will not be thrust
aside by any underhand method—that there shall be no
factious movement—(cheers and counter cheers)—or com-
bination against it—(cheers from ministerial side}—on the
part of those who can combine for nothing else, but that
it will be dealt with on its merits." (Cheers
from the opposition.) Is it dealing with a measure
on its merits to say that it is not sufficiently matured?
(Cheers and counter cheers.) When in a long course
of party warfare was that courseadopted? What instance,
what precedent is there for a great party resorting to
that mode of warfare ? (Opposition cries of " 1859.")
In 1800 7 Is 1559 your instance ? In 1859 the 101 l was
condemned because it did not reduce the borough fran-
chise. (Cheers.) Act as my noble friend acted in 1859,
and my complaint falls to the ground. (Cheers,) Con-
demn the bill because it does reduce the borough
franchise. (Cheers from the ministerial benches.)
You stated your objections to it in your speeches.
My right honourable friend (Mr. Lowe) objected to it
in his speech ; the member for North Devon objected to it
in his speech ; the right hon. gentleman the member for
Bucks objected to it in his speech. Let him embody his
opinion in a motion—(cheers)--or if he does not choose to
do that—for he is not bound to do so—let him then take
the usual course, the known and established course of op-
thepos bill, and the country will know what he means.
(Lou4eheers.) But it is; useless to fall back on those
large, vague, and unmeaning words. (Hear, hear.) You
may by such means succeed for the moment, but do not
,suppose that you can thus lay a solid foundation
for the fortunes of yourselves and your friends. (Cheers.)
Do not let us be drawn into these broad, vague, and
wild denunciations as to the fall of the constitution.
Every time my right hon. friend speaks we hear prophe-
cies about the constitution. In his first speech my right
hon. friend, certainly from no poverty of his own imagina-
tion, had recourse to a peroration of Mr. Canning's ; and in
every speech since, though he has not foraged amongst the
epeeches of Mr. Canning, he has drawn darker and yet
darker predictions of the downfall of the constitution.
A 101. franchise has been tried, and it succeeded ; a 7f.
franchise has not succeeded, but it has never been tried.
(Hear.) But there was a time when the 101. franchise had
been denounced with no lees energy and ability than
the 71. franchise is now denounced by my right hon.
friend. (Hear, hear.) My noble friend the member for
Leicestershire to-night described England—and truly de-
scribed her —ae

A !and of old and wide renown,
A land of settled government,
Where freedom slowly broadens down
From precedent to precedent.
But my noble friend ought not to have stopped short at
these lines of the Poet Laureate's dedication to the Queen.
It would not have suited his purpose to continue. But
Mr. Tennyson goes on to add these lines :
statesmen at her council meet,
Who know the seasons when to take occasion by the hand,
And make the bonds of freedom wider yet
By shaping some august decree
Which keeps her throne unshaken stilt,
Broadly hated upon her people's will,
And compassed by the inviolate sea.
(Loud cheers.) Sir we claim to love the constitution, we
claim to value the constitution, we claim to revere the
constitution an sincerely and as earnestly as any of those
who .it opposite. (Cheers.) My right hon. friend the
member for Caine looks back with something like contempt
on those who opposed the reform bill of 1831. We have
beard him denounce in terms of the utmost severity the
party system which prevailed before the date of that great
measure. He denounced the course pursued by such men
as Peel and Wellington, and he 'pins with those who offer
us a similar opposition now. (" Hear, hear," and cheers).
The very converse of that appears to me to be far more
just. The opponents of the Reform Bill of 1831, though I
can now see they were wrong, had much to say for the
course they pursued. They had to deal with a system the
most complicated in the world. Its springs and move-
ments were hardly traceable to the common or even philo-
sophic eye. It was like some wonderful creation that had
descended from above of the utmost delicacy and conform-
ation, and which you • ht well fear to touch lest by de-
ranging its springs you mar its effect. And so 1,1,12
had this Om* ad things invaded that even

men. and even brave men shrank from the
responsibility of attempting such a task. How different
is the Wane we.. We have seen the risk of the experi-
ment run. We have seen the dangers, if ever there were
any, of enfranchisement. We have heard prophecies
uttered with all solemnity and collapsing almost as soon us
they were delivered. We have witnessed the happy and
blessed fruit of that constitutional change. We have found
ourselves launched on a career where everything before u
iscomparatively plain and open, and we have to deal, I will
not say with the alteration, so much as the growth of dr-
cumstanoes—with the growth of numbers, with the growth
of wealth, with the growth of intelligence, with the
growth of loyalty to the throne, with the growth
of confidence in the parliament, with the growth
of attachment and love amongst all classes of the com-
munity. (Cheers.) And our view is, that under these
circumstances we say now again has the time arrived to
apply, with circumspection, yet with firmness and decision,
those principles from the operation of which we have
reaped such blessed fruits ; and it is in the prosecution of
that work that we are confronted with the hostility that
has met us in the various stages of this bill—hostility
which may be formidable indeed, and, I will not even now
presume to predict whether it will or not achieve a momen-
tary success, but with regard to which any triumph
achieved will recoil with tenfold force upon the heads of
those who had brought it about. (Laughter and cheers.)
And to be the chief sufferers in such a cause
as that we have in hand is, indeed, to be
preferred to success achieved in no ordinary cause, for we
are well convinced that in the discharge of our duty in re-
deeming our pledges we are consulting alike and at once
the honour and the dignity of this house, the stability of
the throne on which her Majesty eits,the contentment and
happiness of the people, and the strength andendurance of
our institutions. (Loud and prolonged cheering.)
Mr. DISRAELI, vindicating the opposition from the
charge of factious obstruction, pointed out that of the
three motions by which the progress of the bill had been
delayed, two had been shade from the ministerial benches,
that the principles of two of them had been accepted by
the government—Mr. Gladstone having just abandoned
grouping—and the principle of the third (Sir R. Knight-
ley 's) bad been accepted by Lord S. Russell at the last
Reform Bill in 1860. Without going further into a de-
fence of small boroughs, he repeated that they afforded to
many valuable members • means of entering the house,
and afforded some compensation for the inadequate repre-
sentation of the counties. He calculated that 84
of these small borough seats might be said to
be supplementary to the representation of the landed
interest, and, added to the present number of county
members, 162, they made the county members 246
and the borough members 250. Of these 84 seats, 42
were disfranchised by the bill. As to the charge of
wishing to eliminate the urban elements from the counties,
he pointed out that that of the 11,500,000 of the county
inhabitants, only 1,000,000 lived in the unenfranehised
towns, so that there would still remain • tion of
10,000,000 to be dealt with of which only 2,000,000 were
farmers and farmers' labourers. As the government
seemed entirely ignorant of these and other similar facts,
he agreed with Lord Grosvenor that they ought to with-
draw the bill, to afford themselves time for obtaining
further information, and in commenting on Lord Gros-
venor's chief reason for not supporting the amendments—
confidence in Lord Clarendon—he criticised with great
severity Lord Clarendon's conduct before and during the
Crimean war and at the conference of Paris.
Captain HAYTEIt—Sir, I rise in answer to the direct
appeal which has been made to me by the noble lord the
member for Chester. That appeal is the more deserving of
attention from me because it was made in a speech con-
demnatory of the scheme of the government. (Opposi-
tion cheers.) Asrr.atters now stand the amendment I moved
has been entirely deprived of its object, by the entire
concession of the whole point. (Cries of " No," " Hear,
bear," and " Divide.") And, sir, I say that whether
there be grounds for them or not, there are rumours
abroad—outside the walls of this house—in the press—
rumours which, I believe, have got within the walls of the
house. I do not say her Majesty's government
has given the slightest reason for it, but as con-
firmation of the existence of which I appeal to
the speech of the noble lord the member for
Chester. Sir, because I feel certain that this measure
will not be passed in its present form during the present
session, I beg to withdraw my amendment. (Cheers, and
cries of" Oh, oh.")
Lord ELCHO—As one of the aboriginal Adullamites I
claim the indulgence of the house for a few moments.
(Cries of "Divide.") I ask it because the position of
the aboriginal Adullamites is somewhat peculiar.
(Divide.) Our David has left our cave, and has made
friends with Saul. (Cheers and laughter.) I listened
with great pleasure to the speech of the noble lord ; and
I believe that although his body will go into the lobby
with the government his soul will remain in the cave, for
be has denounced the government bill, prophe-
sied that it would never pass, and stated
that he would oppose it tooth and nail in committee.
The only reason he has given is that he does not wish a
change in the government ; not that he has any confidence
in the conduct of the government on the question of re-
form. Now I feel as an Adullamite that if a division
takes place under these circumstances, it will be practically
a division under a false issue. (Cheers.) It will be no
indication of the real feeling of this house—(opposition
cheers)—upon this question. I rejoice, therefore, that
my hon. and gallant friend the member for Wells has
withdrawn his amendment, for I have no wish to embarrass
her Majesty's government. (Loud cries of "Oh !") I am
not aware that I have differed so much from the course
of my noble friend the member for Chester. He moved
an amendment which I supported, and I was prepared if
there had been a division now to vote against the govern-
ment. (Interruption and cries of " Divide.") It is not be-
cause I ion hostile to the government that I am opposed to
this bill ; it is because I am opposed to legislation
on so vital a question on incomplete information and
untrustworthy data, and I therefore hope that the go-
vernment will see that the recommendation of my hon.
friend is a wise one, that they should withdraw their bill
—(loud cries of "No ")--and that they will retreat, while
there it yet time, from an impossible position. I hope my
hon. and gallant friend will persevere in his intention to
withdraw the amendment.
The SPEAKER then put the question that the amend-
ment be by leave withdrawn. (Loud cries of " No.")
The amendment was then put, whereupon Lord Elebo,
followed by a number of members near him, and
nearly all the members of the opposition, rose and
left the house in a body. After some difficulty
in closing the outer doors, in consequence of
the rush of conservative members from the house
to the lobby, the Speeker read the question and the
amendment, and put the original question, in response to
which the " ayes" were loud and numerous, and not a
single " no."
The SPEAKER declared the amendment negatived.
(Loud cheers.) He then put the question, that " I do now
leave the chair," which was declared to be carried, there
not being a single dissentient voice. (Loud cheers.)
The SPEAKER left the chair, and Mr. DODSON, the
Chairman of Committees, took his seat at the table.
The preamble of the bill having been postponed,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that
the chairman do report progress, and ask leave to sit again.
Mr. WALPOLE was understood to ask the next day for
proceeding with the bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Thursday
next.
The CHAIRMAN then put the question that he do re-
port program, but there being great opposition to the mo-
tion 'by some hon. members below the gangway on the
ministerial aide of the house, a division was called for.
During the time that the sand was running through the
glaas before the division could be proceeded with, Mr.
Lowe, Sir E. L. B. Lytton, and many other hon. mem-
bers, returned to their Beata and were received with loud
ironical cheers from the ministerial side of the house.
Ultimately the question was again put, and the house
divided:
The numbers were :
For reporting progress
Against 2

Majority

Mr. LOWE called the attention of the members of the
house to the scene which bad just taken place. He had
left, being anxious to avoid a division, and on his return
he was unable to get into the house. When he did enter,
he found the house in committee, and that the preamble
had been postponed. Was it right that such • precedent
should be tolerated? Ought hon. members, without any
fault of their own, to beactaally prevented byphysical vio-
lence from discharging their duty. (" Oh oh," and
" Hear, hear.") _ . -

Mr. B. HOPE, in corroboration of the right hon. gentle-
man, said that when be himself tried to come back into
the bouae he was prevented by such a rush as could only
be seen at a theatre.
Mr. HADFIELD observed that what was now com-
plained of was the fault of hon. members who ran away to
avoid a division.

Mr. ONSLOW said that in trying to enter the house he
was carried away by the members who were rushing out.
Sir J. FERGUSSON thought that the unseemly scene
which had taken place was creditable to neither side of
the house.

Mr. D. GRIFFITH said he had a very important
amendment to move on going into committee. (Laughter.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
bon. member (Mr. Griffith) was entirely in error with
regard to his having lost an opportunity of addressing
the house. He might observe that the main question of
the evening was read by Mr. Speaker with great
deliberation and after • pause. There were •
considerable number of gentlemen present on the oppo-
sition benches. and among them the right hon. gentleman
the member for Cambridge, and therefore he thought the
interests of the opposition were in good hands.
The SPEAKER said that with record to what was
stated by the hon. member for Devises, if there bad
been no disturbance in the house and every bon. member
Lad remained in his place it would not have been coin.
petent for him to move his amendment under the cir-
cumstances.

The other business was disposed of, and the home ad.
journsd at • quarter past 2 o'clock.

Mr. Kenyon Parker, Q.C. whose death was
prematurely minimised on Saturday, is (says an evening
contemporary) really dead. The bell of Lincoln's- nn was
tolled-tor him 7eMerday Earaiss.