The Express.
London, England, 1867-04-27 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, APRIL 27, 1867.

THE LODGER FRA.VCHISE.

A ktrge public meeting, convened by the lo•ndon
Working Men's Association, was held last 'swung in tit•
" in support of a liberal lodger franchise.•'
Shortly after the proceedings commenced Mr. Torrens,
came epee the platforn, and was loudly sheered. A
little later Mr. T. Chambers, also appeared, and no
sooner was he recognised than strong disapprobation was
expressed by the entire audience. There were hisses,
groans. cat-calla, and cries of •' How about the tea•
roomr " Turn him out," and "`Send him home." The
chairman had to demand fair play before the disturbance
ceased.

Mr. Geoeo F. Puns (the chairman) said the demonstra-
tions that had taken place during the Easter recess
had been made to show the government that their
bill was regarded with dissatisfaction by the entire
country. When Lord Derby declared that his ministry
would not deal with the question of reform
the people lifted up their voice so unanimously in repro-
bation of such an intention, that the ministry saw the
necessity of bringing in • bill. Various alteratiorui had
been made, and an amendment was proposed by Mr.
Gladstone that would have introduced at least 400,000
new voters instead of the 100,000, and 110,000 that would
have been added by the personal payment of rates, as pro-
posed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The honesty
of Mr. Gladstone's amendment, and the dishonesty of the
government proposal, were shown by the following com-
pariion:—The government bill would give to Finsbury 4 d 7
additional electors, the amendment 1,1404 ; to the City of
London the bill would give 8, the amendment 121; to
Lambeth the bill would give none, the amendment 4,2'.24 ;
to the Tower Hamlets the bill would give Y 9., the amend-
ment 15,640. The same comparisons might be made with
respect to all our large provincial towns. The speaker then
proceeded to condemn the course of the government. His
references to Bright, Gladstone, and Mill were re-
ceived with enthusiastic cheeeni ; to " she great
trickster" with equally enthusiastic hissing. The
government (Mr. Potter continued) went in triumph
to the Easter holidays, but the country bad told them the
reform bill was not passed yet, and that as it now stood it
could never be accepted by the people. The government
had insulted Mr. Gladstone, and his own party had grossly
deceived him— (hiaseid— and ho now called upon the
people of the country to rally round hiin. (Cheers.) Mr.
Gladstone had done wisely in telling the liberal party in
the manner be had that they had deceived him. (Loud
cheers.) The duty of the liberal party was to decide at
once upon measures that would retrieve their position,
and that could best be done by insisting upon pure and
simple household suffrage with • large lodger franchise.
(Pre.ewed cheers.) If this was not done, there must be
more demonstrations in London, where the working then,
if they chose, could get up a demonstration that would
startle the government. (Cries of " Hyde-park," and
loud cheering.) The next time they met they should meet
outside London and march in, instead of marching out. If
they could bring in 150,000 or more men, they could oc-
cupy the streets for the remainder of the day. (Cheers.)
The speaker concluded by declaring that them could be
no rest until Mr. Gladstone was restored to his proper
position at the head of the House of Commons.
Mr. Cormottv proposed, and Mr. Scorr seconded, the
first resolution, which was carrie4 unanimously :—" That
this meeting regards the limitation of the borough fran-
chise in the government bills' wholly inconsistent with an
honest and sufficient extension of the franchise, and de-
clares its opinion that the measure now before parliament,
ivalmuch as it requires the personal payment of rates by
every occupier, and • residence of two years, and does not
include any clause for the enfranchisement of lodgers, is •
virtual denial of the claims of the working classes to their
rightful share of political power."
The CHAIRMAN here said he haul to state with deep re-
gret that Mr. Locke was unable to be present as he had
promised. ("Shame," and hisses.)
Mr. Torten's, M.P., who was received with loud cheer-
ing, said the first time he made • speech in St. Martin's-
hall stood beside the late Joseph Hume to fight • battle
for household suffrage, and was prepared, after a lapse of
eighteen years, to fight that battle again. He was ready,
as before, to sacrifice his seat for his principles
and he reminded the audience that a manilas;
*as not worth his salt who was not able to
endure unpopularity because he was in a minority. He
was bound to say he did not agree with those gentlemen
present who had expreseed their adverse feelings with
reference to Mr. Locke, who was as honest a loan as any
of them. (Cheers, and "No.") He had often seen him
baited without flinching rather thanabandonhis principles,
and although he might not agree with him in everything,
he would never consent to remain in •• public meeting :dad{
hear his name smiled without protesting strongly
against it. (Cheers.) The bill as it now stood before the
House of Commons would never be worth supporting on
the third reading. His interpretation of household suf-
frage was not that the knocker of the hall-door should
have a vote, but that every man who, by himself or family,
occupied a separate portion of • house was as much a
householder as the man who had an entire house to him-
self. The government had offered the people household
suffrage: let the people take the government at theirword
and keep them to it, and if the working men were the
people he took them to be, they would never relax
their grasp of this offer until household suffrage
was obtained. Household suffrage with • two years'
residence was household suffrage with • gag in
its month ; and household suffrage that did not
enfranchise the compound householder was half emas-
culated. If the tones had trifled with a word that awoke
feelings next the heart of English labour, on their
heads be the blame and responsibility. If their household
suffrage had been offered by the government, it became
his duty as a metropolitan representative, to insist upon
the addition of a lodger franchise (which in London meant
household suffrage), and his views were accordingly
embodied in the amendment which stood upon the
notice paper of the House of Commons in his
name. (Cheers.) The proposition of the government was
that every male person of full age, and unconvicted
of crime, who should occupy a house as tenant or owner,
should possess the franchise. To the words " tenant or
owner" he proposed to add "or lodger." (Cheers.) He
had thought proper to bring forward the amendment at
once, fearing that if the matter was delayed that fasci-
nating gentleman, Mr. Disraeli—(laughter}—might say,
" It is true there is • peat deal to be said in favour of
lodgers, but the time is up, we want to go grouse shoot-
ing, and you had better adjourn the lodger question for a
more convenient semen." In recent conversation with
Mr. Gladstone, who had asked him (Mr. Torrens) what he
intended to do with regard to the lodger franchise
amendment, he (Mr. Torrens) bad replied, " I have put
the lodger franchise into the very first clause of the
bill, because if that is not accepted at the threshold, and
if Mr. Hibbert's amendment for the compound house-
holders is not accepted also as a rider to that clause, then
Mr. Hibbert and I are exonerated from any further com-
plicity in the matter. We shall vote against the third
reading of the bilL (Lend cheers.) One of two things
must happen—either, prevailing upon the government to
exercise prudence, there would be • good bill ; or else upon
cross-examination in committee the government would
stand convicted of insincerity and fraud, and then let
them go to the country at their peril. (Cheers.) Although
the bill in its present state was said to contain everything
that was required, there were a few plain require-
ments that bad not yet been disposed of. The
firm discussion would arise probably upon the two years'
residence. If Mr. Gladstone did not move the omission of
the qualification be bad good reason to know that some
one else would, sad there was not the remotest reason to
doubt that its omission would be carried, because it rested
upon the absurdity of creating two constituencies in Eng-
land. One of these would be qualified under the act of
1832 by a twelve mouths' residence, while upon others
a two years' qualification would be imposed. If one year's
residence was wrong two years' was right, and via term
either way the bill was wrong. (Cheers.) The next
question for consideration was his own amendment in
favour of a lodger franchise, which, he was happy to say,
had the support of the metropolitan members. Unfortu-
I nately there were not houses enough in London for one half
of those who lived by labour, and until the legislaturemade
some provision for adequate accommodation for the poor,
so that every man might have • separate house for
pelf. the government was hound not to quibble about the
accident that made a lodger franchise necessary. (Cheers.)
It would no doubt be said in the House of Commons both
by write and whip that • lodger franchise was impracti-
cable, but after a careful consultation with the rate col-
lectors, be could pledge himself there was no ground for
such an allegation. The same facilities ought to be given
to lodgers to claim to be put upon the register as to ordi-
nary householders. There were in London some 3,000,000
of people, and if his amendment enfranchised only half a
dozen lodgers he should glory is carrying it ; but if from
150.000 to 300,000 were added, how great would be the
gain to the country. One answer to the charge of imprac-
ticability with regard to the lodger franchise, was that Mr.
Disraeli himself, in 1859, had • similar clause in his reform
bill, and no doubt the plan of registration which accom-
panied it was in the pigeon-hole at the present time. The
same might be said of the bill of last year, and it was
therefore the duty of Mr. Disraeli as well as
Mr. Gladstone (who of course would require no
asking) to support this amendment. He (Mr.
Torrens) should vote, as on • previous occasion,
against the payment of rates question, believing that it
VMS a delusion on the part of the conservatives to rest
the safety of the constitution upon so beggarly a distine-
tion. But even if it were a good local test it ought to be
abandoned when public opinion was so strongly against it.
The compound householders' question did not much affect
the metropolis, but it touched three-fourths of the great
towns in the kingdom, and unless Mr. Hibbert's amend-
ment were carried, or some other amendment by which
the compound householder was placed on a footing
et real, substantial, actual, social, and moral
equality, with the man who happened to be by the ac-
cident of vestrybood a direct payer of rates, no bill was
likely to pass. (Cheers.) In conclusion, the hon. gentle-
man called upon the working men of London in their
several districts to petition the legislature, to remonstrate
in public meetings, and to urge without an hour's delay,
until their great right was secured, taking encouragement
from the fact that what had already been done had led
to the abandonment of the 5/. line. (Loud cheers.)
During the concluding portion of the hon. members
speech, Mr. T. Chamber, left the platform to a laud and
long accompaniment of groans end hisses.

The following resolutiias were then pampa unanimously:

—"That this ; .leciares that no reform bill can be
accepted! y the people. Which does not give a liberal and
comprehsive lodger franchise, and hereby calls upon
the House of Coninio,s, if it is sincere in ita desire
to enfrauchike the people, to support the introduction of
a lodger clause into the bill now before parliament ;" and
" This meeting desires to express its high appreMation of
the valuable services rendered to this country by the Hon.
W. E. Gladstone, M.P., on the important subject of par-
liamentary reform, and its full and entire oonfidence in
him as the chosen and able leader of the liberal members of
the House of Commons on this great question, and it
encourages him to continue his exertions in opposing the
objectionable features of the Reform Bill introduced by
the present government, and most earnestly trusts he will
continue to labour Al the champion of the people's cause."
A vote of thanks was pained to Mr. Torrens for his
attendance, and to the chairman for his presidency.
The meeting separated after 11 o'clock.

Rift intentstate.

COURT OF PROBATE.—Areuc26.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
°MARTI r. GOTHAM,.
The court pronounced for the will, but declined to con-
demn the defendant in the meta.

811TTH r. TZ8131175‘.
This warn also a testamentary suit, and it involved a very
large amount of property; but it bad made very little pro-
gress when the court ram